Scanned text contains errors.
(See Schol. ad Find. Isthm. viii. 114; M tiller, Aeginet. p. 149.)
The Heraea of Samos, which island also derived the worship of Hera from Argos (Pans. vii. 4. § 4), were perhaps the most "brilliant of all the festivals of this divinity. A magnificent procession, consisting of maidens and married women in splendid attire, and with floating hair (Asius, op. Athen. xii. p. 525), together with men and youths in armour (Polyaen. Strat. i. 23, vi. 45), went to the temple of Hera. After they arrived within the sacred precincts, the men deposited their armour ; and prayers and vows were offered up to the goddess, Her altar consisted of the ashes of the victims which had been burnt to her. (Pans. v. 13. § 5.) The Heraea of Elis were celebrated every fifth year, or in the fourth year of every Olympiad. (Corsini, Dissert, iii. 30.) The festival was chiefly celebrated by maidens, and conducted by sixteen matrons who wove the sacred peplus for the goddess. But before the solemnities commenced, these matrons sacrificed a pig, and purified themselves in the well Piera. (Pans. v. 16. § 5.) One of the principal solemnities was a race of the- maidens in the stadium, for which purpose they were divided into three classes, according to their age. The youngest ran first and the oldest last. Their only dress on this occasion was a xitcoj/, which came down to the knee, and their hair was floating. She who won the prize, received a garland of olive-boughs, together with a part of a cow which was sacrificed to Hera, a.nd might dedicate her own painted likeness in the temple of the goddess. The sixteen matrons were attended by as many female attendants, and performed two dances ; the one called the dance of Physcoa, the other the dance of Hip-podameia. Respecting further particulars, and the history of this solemnity, see Paus. v. 16. § 2, &c. Heraea were celebrated in various other places • e. g. in Cos (Athen. xiv. p. G39, vi. p. 262), at Corinth (Eurip. MecL 1379 ; Philostrat. Her. xix. 14), at Athens (Pint. Quaest. Rom. vii. 168), at Cnossus in Crete (Diod. v. 72), &c. [L. S.] HERE'DITAS. [heres.] HE RES. 1. greek. The Athenian laws of inheritance are to be explained under this title. The subject may be divided into five parts, of which we shall speak: 1st, of personal capacity-to inherit ; 2dly, of the rules of 'descent and succession ; 3dly, of the power of devising ; 4thly, of the remedies of the heir for recovering his rights ; 5thly, of the obligations to which 'lie succeeded.
I. Of Personal Capacity to Inherit.—To obtain the right of inheritance as well as citizenship (ayXl(Tre'ia an(l iroXireia), legitimacy was a necessary qualification. Those children were legitimate who were born in lawful wedlock. (Dem. c. Neaer. p. 1386.) The validity of a marriage depended partly on the capacity of the contracting parties, partly on the nature of the contract. On the first point little needs to be noticed here, except that brother and sister by the same mother were forbidden to many ; but consanguinity in general was so far from being deemed an objection, that marriage between collateral relations was encouraged, in order to keep the property in the family. (Andoc. de Myst. §119, c. Alrib. §33, ed. Bekk. ; Lys. c. Ale. § 41, ed. Bekk. ; Bern. c. Leoch. p. 1083, c. Eubul. p. 1305 ; Pl\it..Cimon, 4, Tliemist. 32.) The contract was made by the
husband with the father, brother, or other legal guardian (tcvpios) of the intended wife: then only was sho properly betrothed (e7yi»7?TT)). An heiress, however, was assigned, or adjudged, to the next of kin (e7rtSi/mcr0e?<ra) by process of law, as explained under epiclerus. (Isaeus, de Cir. her. §26, de Phi'oct. her. § 19, ed. Bekk. ; Dem. pro Phorm. p. 954, c. Steph. p. 1134.) No ceremony was necessary to ratify the contract: but it was usual to betroth the bride in the presence of witnesses, and to give a marriage feast, and invite the friends and relations, for the sake of publicity. (Isaeus, de dr. her. § 18 ; Dem. c. Onet. p. 869, c. Eubul. pp. 1311, 1312.) A marriage without proper espousals was irregular ; but the issue lost their heritable rights only, not their franchise ; and the former, it seems, might be restored, if the members of their father's clan would consent to their being registered. (Isaeus, de Philoct. her. §§ 29—33.) As it was necessary Jor every man to be enrolled in his clan, in order to obtain his full civil rights, so was the registration the best evidence of legitimacy, and the (ppdropes and crvyyc-^e7? were usually called to prove it in courts of justice. (Andoc. de Myst. § 127, ed. Bekk. ; Isaeus, de Cir. her. § 26, de Philoct. § 13 ; Dem. c. Eubul. p. 1305, &c.) For further particulars see Plainer, Beitr'dge, p. 104, &c. ; Schomann, Antiq. juris pullici Graecorum, lib. v. §§19, 21, 88.
II. Of the Rules of Descent cmd Succession.— Here we would premise, that, as the Athenian law made no difference in this respect between real and personal estate, the words heir, inherit, &c., will be applied indiscriminately to both. When an Athenian died leaving sons, they shared the inheritance, like our heirs in gavelkind, and as they now do in France (Isaeus, de Philoct. her. § 32) : a law no less favourable to that balance of property which Solon meant to establish, than the law of primogeniture was suited to the military aristocracies created in the feudal times. The only advantage possessed by the eldest son was the first choice in the division. (Dem. pro Phorm. p. 947.) If there was but one son, he took the whole estate ; but if he had sisters, it was incumbent on him to provide for them, and give them suitable marriage portions ; they were then called €7ri7rpoucot. (Harpocr. s. v. 'ETrt'St/cos.) There was no positive law, making it imperative on a brother to give his sister a portion of a certain amount; but the moral obligation, to assign her a fortune corresponding to his own rank, was strengthened by custom and public opinion, insomuch that if she was given in marriage portionless, it was deemed a slur upon her character, and might even raise a doubt of her legitimacy. (Isaeus, de Pyrr. her. §40; Lys. de Arist. Ion, §16, ed. Bekk. ; Dem. c. Boeot. de dote, p. 1014.)
On failure of sons and their issue, daughters and daughters' children succeeded (as to the law concerning heiresses, see epiclerus) ; and there seems to have been no limit to the succession in the descending line. (Isaeus, de Cir. her. §§ 39—46, de Pyrr. her. § 59, de Philoct. §§ 38, 67 ; Dem. c. Macart. pp. 1057, 1058.) If the deceased left grandsons by different sons, it is clear that they would take the shares of their respective fathers. So if he had a granddaughter by one son, and a grandson by another, the latter would not exclude the former, as a brother would a sister, but both would share alike. Of this there is no direct evidence ; but it follows from a principle of Attic lav?-,