CHILDREN. The word children' is some times used in the plural number, when meant to designate only one male issue (comp. t Chron. 31 ; 2 Chron. xxiv. 25 xxxiii. 6). In such places the terms sons,' is equivalent to offspring, all of whom had probably died except the last-mentioned in the text. The more chil dren—especially of male children—a person had among the Hebrews, the more was he honoured, it being considered as a mark of divine favour, while sterile people were, on the contrary, held in contempt (comp. Gen. xi. 3o ; xxx. 1 ; t Sam. ii. 5 ; 2 Sam. vi. 23 ; Ps. cxxvii. 3, sq.; cxxviii. 3; Luke i. 7 ; ii. 5). That children were often taken as bondsmen by a creditor for debts contracted by the father, is evident from 2 Kings iv. 1 ; Is. I. I ; Neh. v. 5. Among the Hebrews, a father had almost unlimited power over his children, nor do we find any law in the Pentateuch restricting that power to a certain age ; it was indeed the parents who even selected wives for their sons (Gen. xxi. 21 ; Exod. xxi. 9, to, rI ; Judg. xiv. 2, 5). It would appear, however, that a father's power over his daughters was still greater than that over his sons, since he might even annul a sacred vow made by a daughter, but not one made by a son (Num. xxx. 4, 16). Children cursing or assaulting their parents were punished by the Mosaical Law with death (Exod. xxi. 15, 17 ; Lev. xx. 9) ; a remark able instance of which is quoted by Christ (Matt. xv. 4, 6 ; Mark vii. 9, 13). Before the time of Moses a father had the right to choose among his male children, and declare one of them (usually the child of his favourite wife) as his first-born though he was perhaps only the youngest. Properly speaking, the first-born' was he who was first begotten by the father, since polygamy excluded all regard in that respect to the mother. Thus Jacob had sons by all his four wives, while only one of them was called the first-born (Gen.
xlix. 3) ; we find, however, instances where that name is applied also to the first-born on the mo ther's side (1 Chron. ii. 5o; comp. v. 42 ; Gen. xxii. 21). The privileges of the first-born were considerable, as shewn in BIRTHRIGHT.
The first-born son was regarded as devoted to God, and had to be redeemed by an offering (Exod. xiii. 13 ; Num. xviii. 15 ; Luke ii. 22). This probably stood connected with the priestly charac ter of the eldest son in patriarchal times. The first born son, if not expressly deprived by the father of his peculiar rights, as was the case with Reuben (Gen. xlix.), was at liberty to sell them to a younger brother, as happened in the case of Esau and Jacob (Gen. xxv. 31, sq.) Considering the many privi leges attached to first-birth, we do not wonder that the Apostle called Esau a thoughtless person (Heb. xii. 16).
Mothers usually nursed their children, but nurses (nprn) were sometimes employed (Gen. xxxv. 8 2 Kings xi. 2). Whether the nurse (ronN) of Mephibosheth (2 Sam. iv. 4) is properly so desig nated may be doubted ; the word rather means governess or cznatrix. Children of both sexes were probably under the care of women for some years after their birth, and in the case of delicate boys this might be continued much longer. There are some allusions in Scripture to the modes in which children were carried. These appear to be ade quately represented by the existing usages, as represented in the cut No. 192, in which fig. i re presents a Nestorian woman bearing her child bundled at her back, and fig. 2, an Egyptian female bearing her child on her shoulder. The fonner mode appears to be alluded to in several places, and the latter in Is. xlix. 22. For other matters regarding children, see ADOPTION; BIRTH;