Read Ebook: On The Structure of Greek Tribal Society: An Essay by Seebohm Hugh E Hugh Exton

Font size: 10 px 15 px 20 px 25 px 30 px 35 px

Background color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Text color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Apply/Save settings

Ebook has 437 lines and 49729 words, and 9 pages

The functions and duties of the individual towards his family and relations thus find their explanation in his position as link, between the past and the future, in the transmission to eternity of his family blood.

His duties to his ancestors began with the death of his father. He had at Athens to carry out the corpse, provide for the cremation, gather the remains of the burnt bones, with the assistance of the rest of the kindred, and show respect to the dead by the usual form of shaving the head, wearing mourning clothes, and so on. Nine days after the funeral he must perform certain sacrifices and periodically after that visit the tombs and altars of his family in the family burying-place. If he had occasion to perform military service, he must serve in the tribe and the deme of his parent . Before he can enter into his inheritance he must fulfil all the ordinances incumbent on one in his position, and in the Gortyn Laws it is stated that an adopted heir cannot partake of the property of his adoptive father unless he undertakes the sacred duties of the house of the deceased. Thus the right of ownership of the family estate rested always with the possession of the blood of the former owners; and such a representative demonstrated his right by stepping into his predecessor's shoes and by taking upon himself all responsibility for the fulfilment of the rites, thereafter to be performed to him also when he shall have been gathered to the majority of his family.

? 2. The Duty Of Providing Male Succession.

But however piously and carefully he performed his many duties to his ancestors, his work was only transitory and incomplete, unless he provided a successor to continue them after him into further generations.

Hector is made to use this idea in somewhat similar manner. He encourages his soldiers with:--

"If a man fall fighting for his fatherland, it is no dishonourable thing: and his wife and his children left behind, and his ????? and ?????? are unharmed, if the Achaians go but back to their own country."

If the enemy are driven out, though he be killed himself, yet if he leave children behind, his household and their property will remain unharmed.

All about to die, says Isaeus, take thought not to leave their ????? desolate , but that there shall be some one to carry the name of their house down to posterity, who shall perform all the customary rites at the tomb due to them also when they shall have joined the ranks of ancestors.

Where children were reckoned of the tribe of their father and not of their mother, and where a woman was incapable of performing sacred rites, a male heir was necessary for the direct transmission of blood and property. Sons entered upon their inheritance immediately on the death of their father, nor had he the power to dispossess them in favour of others, whilst brothers, cousins, legatees, had always to prove their title and procure judgment from the court in their favour.

Failing sons however, the next descent lay through a daughter. Nor were her qualifications in herself complete or sufficient in theory to form the necessary link in the chain of succession. The next of kin male had to marry her with the property of which she was ?????????; but neither she nor he really possessed the property, and the sons born from the marriage succeeded thereto directly on attaining a certain age. The next of kin had in the meantime of course to represent his wife's father in all the religious observances, and was said to have power to live with the woman , but not to dispose of the property ; the sons becoming ?????? ??? ???????? at sixteen years old, and owing thence only maintenance to their mother from the property. The heiress was compelled to marry at a certain age and was adjudicated by law to the proper kinsman.

If she die without a son, her husband would take . But this would be perfectly natural, if, as in Greece, her husband was bound to be the next of kin and therefore heir failing issue from her.

At Athens it was part of the office of the archon to see that no ????? failed for want of representatives, to constrain a reluctant heiress to marry or to compel the next of kin to perform his duty. Plato asks pardon for his imaginary legislator, if he shall be found to give the daughter of a man in marriage having regard only to the two conditions--nearness of kin, and the preservation of the property; disregarding, in his zeal for these, the further considerations, which the father himself might be expected to have had, with regard to the suitability of the match.

A certain leniency was however allowed to the heiress who was unwilling to marry an obnoxious kinsman, and to the kinsman who had counterclaims upon him in his own house. Nevertheless the rules remained very strict. Isaeus states emphatically, "Often have men been compelled by law to give up their properly wedded wives, owing to their becoming ????????? through the death of their brother to their father's property and having to marry the next of kin ," to prevent the extinction of their father's house.

Manu warns those about to marry to be careful that their children shall not be required to continue their wives' father's family, to the desolation of their own.

"She who has not a brother ... let not a wise man marry her, through fear of the law about a daughter's son."

Again Isaeus:--

In the laws of Gortyn very clear rules are laid down to be followed where there were difficulties in the way of the heiress marrying the next of kin.

"The heiress shall marry the eldest brother of her father that is alive. If there are more heiresses and uncles, they shall ever marry the eldest. If there are no uncles but sons of uncles, she shall marry the son of her father's eldest brother. If there are more than one heiress and sons of uncles, they shall ever marry the son of the eldest in order: but a man shall not marry more than one heiress"

The law of Gortyn goes on:--

"If the man will not marry her, though of age and wishing to marry, the guardians of the heiress shall sue, and the judge shall condemn him to marry her in two months. If he will not marry her, according to the law, she shall have all the property and shall marry the next of kin if there is one....

"If she is of age and does not wish to marry the next of kin or if he is a minor and she does not wish to wait, she ... can marry whom she will of those who claim her of the tribe. But she shall apportion off his share of the property to the first of kin.

"If there are no kin to her, she shall have all the property and marry whom she will of the tribe.

"If no one of the tribe will marry her, her guardians shall ask throughout the tribe, ' Will any marry her?' And if any one then marries her, he shall do it in thirty days after the 'asking.' But if there is still no one, she shall marry any one else she can."

The same questions seem to have arisen amongst the Israelites in the time of Moses.

Numbers xxxvi. 8. "And every daughter that possesseth an inheritance in any tribe of the children of Israel, shall be wife unto one of the family of the tribe of her father , that the children of Israel may enjoy every man the inheritance of his fathers.

"Even as the Lord commanded Moses, so did the daughters of Zelophehad.

"For Mahlah, Tirzah and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Noah, the daughters of Zelophehad, were married unto their father's brother's sons ."

? 3. The Position Of The Widow Without Child And The Duties Of An Only Daughter.

The childless widow on the death of her husband had to return to her own family or whoever of her kindred was guardian of her, and if she wished, be given again in marriage by him.

The woman at Athens even after marriage always retained her ?????? or guardian, who was at once her protector and trustee. He was probably the head of the ????? to which she originally belonged--her next of kin--and had great power over her.

A case there is where the heir to the property also takes the wife of the previous owner; but in this case the husband may have been ?????? of his own wife, and so could bequeath, or give her away to whomever he liked.

The laws of Manu otherwise are strict against the marriage of close relations; a restriction not found in Greece.

Isaeus mentions that it was thought quite natural for a man to marry his first cousin in order to concentrate the family blood, and prevent her dowry or whatever property might come to her from going outside his ?????, and we know that even marriage with a half-sister was not forbidden.

There are more instances than one in Homer of a man marrying his aunt, or niece.

The nearest resemblance to the levirate in Greece is the occasional custom at Sparta, mentioned already, of a wife being "commissioned" to bear children by another man into the family of her husband. But this exists in Manu, side by side with the above-mentioned custom of levirate proper.

Among the Israelites, the levirate was in full force; the craving for continuance was the same as among the followers of Manu and the Greeks; and the custom with regard to heiresses is so vividly told that it is worth quoting at some length.

Deut. xxv. 5. "If brethren dwell together and one of them die and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother shall go in unto her and take her to him to wife and perform the duty of an husband's brother to her.

"And if the man like not to take his brother's wife, then let his brother's wife go up to the gate unto the elders and say, 'My husband's brother refuseth to raise up unto his brother a name in Israel, he will not perform the duty of my husband's brother.'

"Then the elders of his city shall call him and speak unto him: and if he stand to it and say, 'I like not to take her,' then shall his brother's wife come unto him in the presence of the elders, and loose his shoe from off his foot, and spit in his face, and shall answer and say: 'So shall it be done unto that man that will not build up his brother's house .'

"And his name shall be called in Israel, 'The house of him that hath his shoe loosed.' "

The statement of the customary procedure in Deuteronomy is very picturesquely illustrated and fulfilled in detail in the story of Ruth, who though only a daughter-in-law takes the position of heiress through a sort of adoption by her mother-in-law Naomi, on her refusal to go back to her own people. "Where thou goest, I will go: where thou lodgest, I will lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God, my God. Where thou diest will I die, and there will I be buried." She accepts Naomi's hearth her kin, her religion, and finally her tomb.

Elimelech and his two sons dying in Moab, Naomi and both her daughters-in-law are left widows in a strange land. If Naomi had other sons, upon them would have devolved the duty of taking Orpah and Ruth to wife. But Naomi declares herself too old to marry again and be the mother of sons, and implores her daughters-in-law to return to their own people in Moab, where she hopes they will start afresh with new husbands, a course which seems always to have been open to wives in tribal communities. Orpah does so, but Ruth elects to remain with Naomi, and returning with her to Bethlehem takes her chance among the kindred of Elimelech. Happening to arrive at Bethlehem at the beginning of the barley harvest, it so chances that Ruth goes forth to glean upon that part of the open field which belonged to Boaz--a rich man of the ???????? of Elimelech, who, having heard of her devotion to Naomi and the house of his late kinsmen, protects her from possible insult from strangers and treats her richly. On her return home Naomi informs her that Boaz is of their next of kin whose place it was to redeem property sold or lost by a kinsman. This duty is thus set forth in Leviticus:--

Lev. xxv. 25. "And if thy brother be waxen poor and sell some of his possession, then shall his kinsman that is next to him come and shall redeem that which his brother hath sold."

An instance of it in practice is given in Jeremiah.

Jerem. xxxii. 8. "So Hanameel mine uncle's son came to me in the court of the guard according to the word of the Lord and said unto me, 'Buy my field, I pray thee, that is in Anathoth which is in the land of Bethlehem: for the right of inheritance is thine, and the redemption is thine: buy it for thyself.' "

The rendering of the Vulgate of the kinsman's reply is more easily understood:--"I yield up my right of near kinship: for neither ought I to blot out the continuance of my family: do thou use my privilege, which I declare that I freely renounce."

Now Boaz was sixth in descent from this Perez whose mother Tamar, as quoted above, had been in much the same position as Ruth.

? 4. Succession Through A Married Daughter: Growth Of Adoption: Introduction Of New Member To Kinsmen.

But if the heiress was already married and had sons, she need not be divorced and marry the next of kin, though that still lay in her power. It was considered sufficient if she set apart one of her sons to be heir to her father's house. But she must do this absolutely: her son must entirely leave her husband's house and be enfranchised into the house of her father. If she did not do this with all the necessary ceremonies, the house of her father would become extinct, which would be a lasting shame upon her.

Isaeus mentions a case where a wife inherits from her deceased brother a farm and persuades her husband to emancipate their second son in order that he may carry on the family of her brother and take the property.

In another passage the conduct of married sisters in not appointing one of their own sons to take his place as son in the house of their deceased brother, and in absorbing the property into that of their husbands, whereby the ????? of their brother became ??????, is described as shameful .

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet