ii. Inheritance. The fact that the terms for heir, etc., for the most part meant originally, and continued to mean, possess, etc., indicates a certain lack of emplKisis on the dili'erence between inherit- ance and other ways of acquiring and holding property. Land, the most important kind of property, belonged to the family and the clan ratlier than to individuals, as is shown by the Jubilee and other land laws. All land was, as it were, entailed. Other property too — cattle, slaves, and, in some instances, wives — was inherited. The heir succeeded to the headship of the family, which included the control of the familj' properly. Moreover, the heir succeeded as a right, according to law and custom ; he t<jok possession of what had become his. Wills were unknown in ancient Israel, though sometimes (cf. below) a father would interfere with the natural course of things to benefit a favourite son. The phrase ' set thy house in order,' ^'j^ 15, shows th.it a dying man would sometimes arrange the disposition of his property, and the future status of the members of his family; but probably in accordance with recognized custom, if not with binding law. The blessing of the dying father would usually confirm the firstborn in his right, but might also, a.s in the blessings of Isaac and Jacob, transfer it to someone else.
iii. KlUIlT OF THE 1'"1H.STB0U.N, BIRTHRIGHT.
The prevailing custom, which is everywhere taken for granted, was that the eldest son succeeded his father as head of the family, and took the largest share of the properly. Thus we have the special terms bikhur, bt'k/mrdh, for ' firstborn,' ' right of the firstborn.' The genealoj^es, Gn 5, etc., mention the firstborn, and him only. 1 Ch 5' speaks of Reuben having an original right of pre-eminence, which he lost by misconduct. In 2Cli '21' Jehoraiii succeeds Jehoshaphat, 'becau.se he was the bikhur.' Probably the eldest son, if an adult, succeeiled to the high priesthood ; but the exceptions were numerous, both in the royal ami sacenlotal dyn- asties. According to Ex I'S', JK, the lirslbi>rn of every mother wa-s sacred to J". In Dt 21" the biklidrdh is a 'double portion,' D:;f "9. The diller- ence of status between the mothers of a man's oUildren, often only loosely defined, was a fruitful
source of discord as to the bikhCrdh. Reuben, the son of an inferior wife, is reckoned as Jacob's bikhor ; he is deposed for misconduct, not on ac- count of his mother's status. On the other hand, Sarah claims that, because Ishmael is the son of a concubine, he shall not even share the inheritance with Isaac, Gn 21'". Evidently, the prior right of the son of the wife over that of the concubine depended upon the feeling of the father towards mother and son, and probably also on the inUuence of the mother's family.
iv. Ca.ses where the Kir-stborn was passed OVER FOR OTHERS — JUNIOR KiGHT. The excep- tions to the rule of the succession of the eldest son are numerous and striking. The line of divine election among the patriarchs usually
f asses through younger sons, Abraham apparently, saac, Jacob. According to 1 Ch o'- -, the bikliordh was transferred from Reuben to Joseph. In Gu 40 Jacob puts Ephraim before his elder brother Manasseh. According to Ex 7' (P), Moses was the junior of Aaron. David was the youngest son of Jesse ; and Solomon, one of the youngest, at any rate, among the many sons of David. We may take the circumstances of the succession of Solomon as typical. The father would often secure the succession for a favourite son by appointing him his successor, or even by associating him with himself in his lifetime. Such arrangements have always been common, especially in the East. The fa\ ourite wife would often be the one last married, and the favourite sou the youngest. Apart from 2 Ch 21^ it is never stated that the eldest -son succeeded his father as a right. Great men with large harems and numerous families would follow the example of the kings. The transference of the bikhurdh from Reuben to Joseph, and from Esau to Jacob, shows that such a change might be made for sufficient cause, and therefore, of course, on any plausible pretext : a cise is mentioned in 1 Ch '26'". A further [)roof of the occasional trans- ference of the heklujrdh at the will of the father is the prohibition of the practice in Dt 21"'".
The frequent succession of youngest sons suggests that the very widespreail custom of 'Junior Right' or succe.ssion by the youngest existed in pre-mon- archical Israel, and survived in some me;isure in later times. J. Jacobs iStudies in JiiUical Archce- v/oi/tj, p. 47), partly following Sir H. Maine, says: ' The custom would naturally arise during the later stages of the pastoral period, when the elder sons would in the ordinarj- course of events have set up for themselves by the time of the father's death. The j'oungest would in these circumstances naturally step into the father's shoes, and acquire the patrui potestas, and with it the right of sacrificing to the family gods by the paternal hearth.' On the other hand, wlien the heir was a minor, the inheritance was probably often seized by adult kinsmen. Witness the con- stant complaints of the wrongs done to orphans.