Dictionary of Greek and Roman antiquities. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

}IEI'ES. HERES. 595f
by whichl on the birth of a son, his title to his hir. ~ 26) respectilng the mother, it may be inferred
father's inheritance, or to a share thereof, imme- that parents could not inherit at Athens. At
diately accrud; if then he died before his father, Athens the maxim, hereditas nunquam ascendit,
but leaving issue, they claimed their grandfather's held only of lineal, not of collateral ascent. For
inheritance as representing him. It was otherwise example, an uncle might inherit. (Isaeus, de Cleon.
with daughters. Their title did not thus accrue; her-. ~ 55.) So also he might marry the heiress, as
and therefore it was the practice for the son of an next of kin. (De Pyrr. her. ~ 90.) On this part
heiress to be adopted into his maternal grand- of the subject the reader is referred to Bunsen, de
father's house, and to become his son in point of jurne lered. A then.; SirWilliam Jones's Conlmmentasry
law. Further (as will presently be shown) the annexed to the translation of Isaeus; and a short
general preference of males to females did not com- sulmmary of the law by Schbbmann, Ant. j. p. Cr.
rmence till the deceased's father's descendants were lib. v. ~ 20. These and other writers are not agreed
exhanu sted. on many of the foregoing points, which are left in
On failure of lineal descendants the collateral much obscurity, owhing to the mutilated state in
branches were resorted to. And first came the which the laws have reached us, and the artifices
issue of the same father with the deceased; viz. used by the orators to misrepresent the truth.
brothers and brothers' children, the children of a It will assist the student to be informed, that
deceased brother taking the share of their father &aveiLos signifies a first cousin.'AVemlamos r is a first
(Isaeus, de HIgyn. er.. ~~ 1, 2; Dein. c. Al(taccrt. cousins son; formed in the same manner as &eAXp. 1067, c. Leech. p. 1083); and after them, sisters yLmo~s from h&EXqd, and vhyaTrpmloDs from hovyaand sisters' children, among whom the principle Tr7p. Thus, my first cousin's son is a/sEta8oas to
of representation also prevailed (Isaeus, (te Apol/. me; but not conversely. Again, though it is true
helr. ~ 23); but whether sisters' children took per that two or more second cousins may be spoken of
s/il-pes or per ccapita, does not appear. collectively as &vc4'maso? (Dem. e. Steph. p. 1 117),
Next come the descendants of the same grand- yet one of them cannot be said to be &vEuLamo0s to
father with the deceased; cousins and cousins' another. I-erein consists the fallacy of those who
children. IHere the law declared, that males anid maintain that second cousins calne within the legal
the issue of males should be preferred to felmales degrees of succession.
anid their issue. (Isacus, de HTayln. her. ~~ 1, 2 KXhpos is the subject-matter of inheritance, or
Dem. c. JAIcart. p. 1067.) Thus, the son of an (iin one sense of the word) the inheritance; tcAnpouncle would exclude the son of an aunt, while the vd,uos the heir.'AyXlo'reia, proximity of blood in
son of an aunt would exclude the daughter of an reference to succession, and sometimes right of sueuncle. On the same principle Isaeus (de Apoll. cession. vTyy'YEela, natural consanguinity. mvyher. ~~ 25, 26) contends that the son of a female first yEVEs, collateral relations, are opposed to E'KyovoL,
cousin prevented his mother's sister from inherit- lineal descendaints.
ing, although he was futrther removed from the de- III. Ofthe power of'Devising. -That the owner
ceased (yE've l 7rorepw) by one degree. This pre- had power to alienate his property during his lifeference, however, was confined to those who were time, and that such alienation was valid in point
descended from the same conmmon ancestor, that is of law, both as against the heir and all the rest of
to say, from the grandfather of the deceased; for the world, is beyond a doubt. There was, however,
the wordls 6c'mvY aes-vr in Demosthenes are to be an ancient law wlhich punished with degradation
explained by the Tp'Ti yeveL of Isaeus. Therefore (sarvqta) a inan who had wasted his patrimony (Ta
a first cousin once removed, claiming through a 7raTrpoa cE aTe87OKIcs). lie was considered an
female, had a better title than a second cousin offender against the state, because he disabled himclaiming through males; for a second cousin is de- self from contributing to the public service. Pro.
scended not from the grandfather, but only from secutiols for such an offence were rare; but the rethe great-granldfather of the deceased, and so is putation of a spendt:iri:t was always prejudicial to
beyond the legal degrees of succession (iwco 7sT a man in a court of justice. (Diog. Laert. Solon,
a-Y/tyorOEaE or o'y'UyeeLas). On this, Eubulides 55; Aeschin. c. Timizlarch. ~~ 97 —105, 154, ed.
founds his pretension to the estate of Haginas; be- Bekk.)
cause he claims as representative (son by adoption) Every man of full age and sound mind, not under
of his maternal grandfather, who was first cousini dcirance or improper influence, was competent to
to H-lagnias; whereas the father of his opponent, clase a will; but if he had a son, he could not
Macartatus, was second cousin to Hagnias, and (as disinherit him; although his will might take effect
Demosthenes expresses it) was not in the smlle on l the contingency of the son not completing his
bramnch of the fa~nlily (eoi eKi -i o'mt/Co fro Anymviou, seventeenth year. (Isaeus, de Arfist. her. ~ 14, de
c. IMacest. p. 1070). Ph~iloct. ~ 10; Demm. c. Steol/. pp. 1133, 1136.) The
On failure of first cousins and their issue, the in- bulk of the estate being left to the son, legacies
heritance went to the half-blood by the mother's might be given to friends amd relations, espeside; brothers and sisters, Inephews and nieces, cially to those who performed the officeof our execousins and their childre, as lbefore. ~But if there cutor or testamentary guardian. (Dem. e. Aphob.
were no maternal kinsmnen within the legal degree, pp. 814, 827.) And in the division of property
it returned to the cync/li, or next of kin on the pa- among sons, the recommendations of the father
ternal side (TOVS mqrpS 7aerpous), whose proximity would be attended to. (Dem. c. Jliacart. p. 1055,
was traced by counting the degrees from the com- prn Phorsn. p. 955.) Also a provision, not exmnon ancestor. (Isaens, de lIC-ps. ies.'~ I-18; ceeding a thousand drachmas, might be assigned to
I)em. e. M1acar't. p. 1 067.) an illegitimate child. (lHarpocr. s. v. NoOsa.)
The succession of parents to their children is A daughter could not be disinherited, though
matter of dispute among the learned. From the the estate might be devised to any person on consilence of the orators, the absence of any example, dition of his marrying her. (Isaeus, de Pyrr. her.
and the express declaration of Isaeus (doe Illan.~~ 82-84.)
~~ 88