INDITE
proper
is
not
named,
there
is
little
doubt
that
from
ancient
times
Israel
had
relations
with
the
country,
by
means
of
the
caravan
trade
through
Arabia.
Many
of
the
articles
of
commerce
in
the
account
given
of
this
trade
are
of
Indian
origin:
e.g.
'ivory
and
ebony,'
'cassia
and
calamus,'
'broidered
work,'
and
'rich
apparel'
(Ezk
27«-
"■
^).
W.
Ewing.
INDITE.
—
This
Eng.
verb
is
now
somewhat
old-
fashioned.
When
it
is
used,
it
means
to
write.
But
formerly,
and
as
found
in
AV,
it
meant
to
inspire
or
dictate
to
the
writer.
Thus
St.
Paul
indited
and
Tertius
wrote
(Ro
le^^).
The
word
occurs
in
the
Preface
to
the
AV
and
in
Ps
45'
'
My
heart
is
inditing
a
good
matter.'
In
the
Douai
version
(though
this
word
Is
not
used)
there
is
a
note:
'I
have
received
by
divine
inspiration
in
my
hart
and
cogitation
a
most
high
Mysterie.'
INFIDEL.
—
This
word
has
more
force
now
than
formerly.
In
AV
it
signifies
no
more
than
'
unbeliever.'
It
occurs
in
2
Co
6",
1
Ti
5^
(RV
'unbeUever'
in
both).
So
'infidelity'
in
2
Es
7«
is
simply
'unbelief
(Lat.
incredvlitas).
INGATHERING-.—
See
Tabebnacles
[Feast
of].
INHERITANCE.
—
It
is
a
remarkable
fact
that
the
Hebrew
language
fails
to
discriminate
between
the
inheritance
of
property
and
its
possession
or
acquisition
in
any
other
manner.
The
two
words
most
constantly
used
in
this
connejdon
denote
the
idea
of
settled
pos-session,
but
are
quite
indeterminate
as
to
the
manner
in
which
that
possession
has
been
acquired.
As
might
easily
be
inferred,
from
the
historical
circumstances
of
Israel's
evolution,
the
words
became
largely
restricted
to
the
holding
of
land,
obviously
the
most
important
of
all
kinds
of
property
among
a
pastoral
or
agricultural
people.
i.
Inheritance
in
Law
and
Custom.
—
1.
Property.
—
While
land
was
the
most
Important
part
of
an
inheri-tance,
the
rules
for
succession
show
that
it
was
regarded
as
belonging
properly
to
the
family
or
elan,
and
to
the
individual
heir
only
as
representing
family
or
tribal
rights.
Cattle,
household
goods,
and
slaves
would
be
more
personal
possessions,
which
a
man
could
divide
among
his
sons
(Dt
21'»).
Originally
wives,
too,
as
part
of
the
property
of
the
deceased,
would
tall
to
the
possession
of
the
heir-in-chief
(cf.
2
S
16M-28,
1
K
21!B).
2.
Heirs.
—
(a)
The
firstborn
son,
as
the
new
head
of
the
family,
responsible
for
providing
for
the
rest,
in-herited
the
land
and
had
also
his
claim
to
a
double
portion
of
other
kinds
of
wealth
(Dt
21").
To
be
the
son
of
a
concubine
or
inferior
wife
was
not
a
bar
to
heirship
(Gn
21i",
1
Ch
SO;
though
a
jealous
wife
might
prevail
on
her
husband
to
deprive
such
a
son
of
the
right
of
succession
(Gn
21i").
That
a
father
had
power
to
transfer
the
birthright
from
the
firstborn
to
another
is
implied
in
the
cases
of
Ishmael
and
Isaac
(Gn
21'"),
Esau
and
Jacob
(27"),
Reuben
and
Joseph
(1
Ch
5'),
Adonijah
and
Solomon
(1
K
l"").
But
this
was
contrary
to
social
usage,
and
is
prohibited
in
Dt
21"-".
Moreover,
the
exceptions
to
the
rule
are
presented
as
examples
of
a
Divine
election
rather
than
a
human
preference
(Isaac,
Gn
2V;
Jacob,
Mai
l^^-
',
Ro
9";
Joseph,
Gn
492™-;
Solomon,
1
Ch
22'-
i»),
and
can
hardly
be
adduced
as
sur-vivals
of
the
ancient
custom
of
'Junior
Right.'
(6)
At
first
a
daughter
could
not
succeed
(the
inheritance
of
the
daughters
of
Job
[Job
42"!
is
noted
as
exceptional)
—
an
arrangement
that
has
been
referred
either
to
the
influence
of
ancestor-
worship,
in
which
a
male
heir
was
necessary
as
priest
of
the
family
cult,
or
to
the
connexion
between
in-heritance
and
the
duty
of
blood
revenge.
For
unmarried
daughters,
however,
husbands
would
almost
invariably
be
found.
In
the
case
of
the
daughters
of
Zelophehad
(Nu
271-")
we
see
the
introduction
of
a
change;
but
it
is
to
be
noted
that
this
very
case
is
associated
with
the
provision
(Nu
36'-'')
that
heiresses
should
marry
only
within
their
father's
tribe,
so
that
the
inheritance
INHERITANCE
might
not
be
aUenated
from
it.
(c)
For
the
widow
no
immediate
place
was
found
in
the
succession.
So
far
from
being
eligible
as
an
heir,
she
was
strictly
a
part
of
the
property
belonging
to
the
inheritance.
According
to
the
levirate
law,
however,
when
a
man
died
lea-ving
no
son,
his
brother
or
other
next-of-kin
(go'el)
must
marry
the
widow,
and
her
firstborn
son
by
this
marriage
became
the
heir
of
her
previous
hus-band
(Dt
25").
(d)
For
the
order
of
succession
the
rule
is
laid
down
in
Nu
27*-"
that
if
a
man
die
without
male
issue
the
right
of
inheritance
shall
tall
successively
to
his
daughter,
his
brothers,
his
father's
brothers,
his
next
kinsman
thereafter.
The
pro-vision
for
the
daughter
was
an
innovation,
as
the
context
shows,
but
the
rest
of
the
rule
is
in
harmony
with
the
ancient
laws
of
kinship.
ii.
National
and
Religious
Inheritance.
—
1.
The
possession
of
the
land
of
Canaan
was
commonly
regarded
as
the
inheritance
of
the
whole
people.
In
this
particular
case
the
inheritance
was
won
only
as
the
result
of
conflict
and
effort;
moreover,
theoretically
at
any
rate,
it
involved
the
annihilation
of
the
pre-vious
inhabitants.
Consequently
the
inheritance
of
Canaan
was
not
entirely
devoid
of
the
idea
of
succession.
But
the
extermination
of
the
Canaanites
was
never
effected
;
and
although
the
conquest
was
achieved
only
by
the
most
strenuous
effort,
yet
the
Israelites
were
so
strongly
impressed
with
a
-vi-vid
sense
of
Jehovah's
intervention
on
their
behalf,
that
to
subsequent
generations
it
seemed
as
if
they
had
entered
into
the
labours
of
others,
not
in
any
sense
whatever
by
their
own
power,
but
solely
by
Jehovah's
grace.
The
inheritance
of
Canaan
signified
the
secure
possession
of
the
land,
as
the
gift
of
God
to
His
people.
'The
dominant
Biblical
sense
of
inheritance
is
the
enjoyment
by
a
rightful
title
of
that
which
is
not
the
fruit
of
personal
exertion'
(West-cott,
Heb.
168).
2.
It
is
not
surprising
that
the
idea
of
inheritance
soon
acquired
religious
associations.
The
Hebrew
mind
invested
all
social
and
political
institutions
with
a
religious
significance.
As
Israel
became
increasingly
conscious
of
its
mission
in,
and
began
dimly
to
apprehend
its
mission
to,
the
world,
the
peaceful
and
secure
posses-sion
of
Canaan
seemed
an
indispensable
condition
of
that
self-development
which
was
itself
the
necessary
prelude
to
a
more
universal
mission.
The
threatening
attitude
of
the
great
world
powers
in
the
eighth
and
subsequent
centuries
B.C.
brought
the
question
prom-inently
to
the
front.
Over
and
over
again
it
seemed
as
if
Jerusalem
must
succumb
to
the
hordes
of
barbarian
invaders,
and
as
if
the
last
remnant
of
Canaan
must
be
irretrievably
lost;
but
the
prophets
persistently
declared
that
the
land
should
not
be
lost;
they
realized
the
impossibility
of
Israel's
ever
realizing
her
true
vocation,
unJess,
at
any
rate
for
some
centuries,
she
preserved
her
national
independence;
and
the
latter
would,
of
course,
be
wholly
unthinkable
without
ter-ritorial
security.
The
career
of
Israel,
as
a
nation,
the
influence,
even
the
existence,
of
its
religion,
would
be
endangered
by
the
dispossession
of
Canaan;
more-over,
it
was
recognized
that
as
long
as
the
people
re-mained
true
to
Jehovah,
He
on
His
part
would
remain
true
to
them,
and
would
not
suffer
them
to
be
dis-possessed,
but
would
make
them
dwell
securely
in
their
own
land,
in
order
that
they
might
establish
on
their
side
those
conditions
of
righteousness
and
justice
which
represented
the
national
obligations,
it
Jehovah's
covenant
with
them
was
to
be
maintained.
3.
The
possession
of
the
land,
the
inheritance
of
Canaan,
symbolized
the
people's
living
in
covenant
with
their
God,
and
all
those
spiritual
blessings
which
flowed
from
such
a
covenant.
And
inasmuch
as
the
validity
of
the
covenant
implied
the
continuance
of
Divine
favour,
the
inheritance
of
the
Holy
Land
was
-viewed
as
the
outward
and
-visible
sign
of
God's
presence
and
power
among
His
own.
We
know
how
the
remorseless
