{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024844720496894408, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010093167701863354, 'mean_word_length': 4.304526748971194, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Law of the Hebrew Slave

One of the most frequently discussed laws of the socalled Book of the Covenant (Ex 20,22—23,33) is the law having to do with the Hebrew slave in Ex 21,2—11. It has recently been the subject of a dissertation by G. C. Chirichigno, revised for publication as a monograph, DebtSlavery in Israel and the Ancient Near East. This work, as well as its predecessors, follows the almost universal assumption that the version of the Hebrew slave law in the Book of the Covenant (BC) is the oldest version of this law and therefore antecedent to the parallel versions in Deuteronomy (DC) and the Holiness Code (HC). The law has received prominent treatment in a series of recent monographs on BC, all of which follow the rule of the priority of BC over DC and HC. The conviction that the law of the Hebrew slave in BC is the oldest version of this law has prejudiced the discussion of the law in two major respects. First, the subsequent versions in DC and HC are interpreted as based upon, and modifying, the law of BC and this invariably has a way of making the BC version conform to the later laws. Second, the parallel material from Mesopotamia is used to interpret the BC law in such a way that, as the earliest phase of Israelite law and social ethics, it reflects