LrrKRATtJRB.— Maimonides, Moreh. iii. 47 ; K. C.W. F. Bahr, Symbnlik des mosaischen Cultiis, Heidelberg, 1837-39, i. 493 flf.; W. Nowack, LehrbuchderhebrdischenArchdoloqie, Freiburg i. B. and Leipzig, 1894, ii. 288 ; art. 'Red Heifer' in HDB and
JE. James Strahan.
HEIE, HEEITAGE, tN"HERITA:N"CE
HEIE, HERITAGE, INHEEITA^'CE 543
HEIR, HERITAGE, INHERITANCE.— 1. Conno- tation of the terms used. — The words K\T]pov6fj.os, K\i]povo/j.la, K\T]povo/j.eu (derived from KXrjpos, ' a por- tion') have, like the Heb. verbs v-\i, h-j and their derivatives, which they render in the LXX, the idea of a possession rather than of a succession, i.e. of sometliing obtained from another by gift (and not gained by oneself, KTTJfia) rather than of some- tliing that one has become possessed of througli the death of another (see "Westcott, Hebrews, 1889, p. 168). This is especially the case when Israel is regarded as the ' heir ' of the land of Canaan ; suc- cession to the Canaanites is not prominent in the idea of this inheritance, for Israel inherited from God, not from tlie people of the land. In this sense KXripovofiia is nearlj' equivalent to ' the promise' ; it is a free gift from God — a fact emphasized in Ac 7^, where Canaan is spoken of, and 20^', where the Christian promises are in question. We can trace in the OT (see Sanday-Headlam on Ro 8") the tran- sitions of meaning, from the simple possession of Canaan to the permanent and assured possession, then to the secure possession won by Messiah, and so to all Messianic blessings.
On the other hand, the Latin heres with its derivatives, used by the Vulgate, being a weak form of xvpo^j ' bereft,' has the idea of succession ; it means literally 'an orphan,' and so hints at the death of the father. The English ' heir,' derived from heres, usually suggests that the father is alive, and that the son has not yet come into possession ; while the verb ' to inherit ' and its derivative ' inheritor ' usually suggest that the father is dead and that the son has come into possession. In all these English words the idea of ' succession ' is prominent. AVe njust, therefore, be careful to bear in mind that thej' are not quite equivalent to the Gr. and Heb. words, and that their connota- tion is slightly different.
It may, liowever, be noticed that when kXtjpopo/jlo^, etc., are used in the most literal sense (see below, 3 («)), the idea of succession is not altogether absent ; it certainly is present when diaOrjKi] is used in the sense of ' a will,' as in He 9^^'- (it is disputed whether in Gal 3^^^-, etc., it means 'covenant' or ' will ' : for the latter meaning see W. M. Ramsay, Galatians, 1899, p. 349 tf. ; also art. CovEXANT). But it is obvious that where KXrjpovSfxos is used of Israel's inheritance in Canaan, or metaphorically of the Jewish and Christian promises of salvation (below, 3), the idea of succession must pass into the background, for the Heavenly Father does not die ; and this fact causes the difficulty in the other- wise more natural interpretation of diadi^Kr] as a ' testament ' or ' will.'
The word /cX%os in Ac 26^^ and Col P^ is rendered ' inheritance' in the AV and the RV ; and in 1 P 5^ KXrjpoi is in the AV ' [God's] heritage,' which is the same thing. In the latter passage the RV renders ' the charge allotted to you,' i.e. the per- sons who are allotted to your care. It is easy to see how KXrjpos, ' a lot,' came to mean ' that which is obtained by lot' (Ac 1" 8^'), and so 'an inheritance' with the connotation given above. In Col V- the p.€pls Tov kXtjpov is equivalent to the fiepls TYis KXi]povop.ias of Ps IG'. In Eph 1'^ iKXrjpilidrj/xev, which in the AV is rendered ' we have obtained an inheritance' (this appears to have no good justifi- cation), is translated in the RV ' we were made a heritage,' i.e. ' we have been chosen as God's por- tion ' (J. A. Robinson, Ephesians, 1903, p. 34 ; for the metaphor see below, 3 (h)).
2. Laws of inheritance. — («) According to Jewish law each son had an equal share, except that the eldest son had double the portion of the others (Dt 21^''). This law did not ajiply to a posthumous son, or in regard to the mother's property, or to gain that might have accrued since the father's
death (A. Edersheim, i^^ 1887, ii. 243 f. note). Thus the Prodigal Son (Lk W^^-), if he had only one brother, would have received on his father's death one third of the property. The father could not disinherit by will, but in his lifetime he could dispose of his property by gift as he liked, and so disinherit. "\Yills might be made in writing or orally [ib. p. 259). Daughters were excluded if there were sons ; but if there were no sons, the daughter — or, presumably, daughters — inherited, failing whom brothers, failing whom father's brothers, failing whom the next of kin (Nu 27*"''). This is later legislation, for at first daughters could not inherit ; when they were allowed to become heiresses in the absence of sons, they married in their own tribe, so as to keep the inheritance within it (Xu 36-"^^). In the ordinary case, however, wherethere were sons, the daughters would naturally marry into another family, and cease to belong to that of their father.