SURVEY OF LITERATURE 1953—1955 513
the will of t h e l a t t e r , forced or n o t , to liberate a slave. I t was ori-ginally a real dedication to t h e divinity t h r o u g h which the libera-ted slave became in f a c t a slave in t h e t e m p l e : This ownership s u b s e q u e n t l y b e c a m e f i d u c i a r y . The dedication did not imply a physical a t t a c h m e n t t o t h e god, b u t r a t h e r a moral one. The a u t h o r defends his thesis on t h e basis of Greek inscriptions. P a -pyrological m a t e r i a l is n o t used.
T H E LAW GOVERNING DOMESTIC RELATIONS
M. I. F i n l e y , Marriage, Sale and Gift in the Homeric World (Se-minar: Annual Extraordinary Number of the „Jurist", X I I [1954] 7—33).
Although this article deals w i t h the ancient Greek law it will be also of interest for papyrologists, cf. t h e a u t h o r ' s r e m a r k s on εδνα p . 16 f f . ; on t h e verbal exchange of sollemnities — έγγυώ-έγγυώμα;. p. 27; on marriage b y purchase and t h e later έγγύησις p. 33.
J . Č e r n ý , Consanguineous Marriages in Pharaonic Egypt (JEA 40 [1954] 23—29).
Outside t h e royal families, we k n o w of t h e certain occurence of consanguineons marriage in t h e T w e n t y — second D y n a s t y and two practically certain cases in the Middle K i n g d o m . I n all cases the best we can prove is t h a t the m a r r i e d couple were half-brot-her a n d half-sister, t h a i is children cithalf-brot-her of t h e same f a t h e r or of t h e same m o t h e r . We h a v e no certain instance of a marriage betwen full b r o t h e r and sister.
E . G e r n e r , Beiträge zum Recht der Parapherna (Münch. Beitr z. Pap. 38 [1954]).
Besides t h e φερνή (or προίξ), t h a t is besides goods belonging to t h e s. c. dowry existed in Greek and Greco-Egyptian law a special mass of goods called παράφερνα. T h e y used t o be established b y t h e wife a n d in case of her minority by her έπίτροπος, b y her relati-ves (ascendents) or other relatirelati-ves. T h e παράφερνα consist (cf. m y Law2 126) mostly of ιμάτια, jewelry, articles of dress, household
f u r n i t u r e . T h e y are t h e p r o p e r t y of the wife and m u s t be r e t u r n e d
514 JOURNAL OF JURISTIC PAPYROLOGY
t o her a f t e r t h e t e r m i n a t i o n of the marriage. Besides t h e φερνή a n d t h e παράφερνα Greek marriage contracts contain provisions for ad-ditional gifts (προσφορά). As f a r as t h e origin of t h e παράφερνα is concerned t h e y correspond to t h e t h i n g s for women to he f o u n d i n D e m o t i c contracts a n d the a u t h o r assumes t h a t t h e y were t a k e n over f r o m these contracts t o t h e Greek ones.
H . J . W o l f f , Zur Geschichte der Parapherna (Sav.Z. L X X I I [1955] 335—347).
I n this article, being a t t h e same t i m e a criticism of t h e work of E . G e r n e r , the a u t h o r tries t o explain how it came to t h e par-t i c u l a r cuspar-tom of granpar-ting par-t h e h u s b a n d — besides par-the real, espar-ti- esti-m a t e d d o w r y — still another " e x t r a - d o w r y " which at least prin-cipally was n o t e s t i m a t e d . I t consisted of the same kind of objects designed for t h e personal use of t h e wife a n of household f u r n i -t u r e and was ascribed or -to -t h e one mass or -t o -t h e o-ther and even distributed among t h e t w o masses in t h e same d o c u m e n t . T h e a u t h o r comes t o t h e conclusion t h a t t h e legally little sharp con-ception of p a r a p h e r n a arose f r o m t h e p a r t i c u l a r conditions set b y t h e development of the Hellenistic marriage law.
B . C o h e n , Dowry in Jewish and Roman Law (repr. f r o m : An-nuaire de Vinet, de Phil, et d'Hist. Orient, et Slaves X I I I [1953] =
= Mélanges I. Levy, p. 47—85).
The s t u d y of comparisons b e t w e e n Jewish a n d B o m a n law is o f t e n complicated b y the f a c t t h a t in T a l m u d i c law, civil and re-ligious law are f r e q u e n t l y i n e x t r i c a b l y i n t e r t w i n e d , and t h e r a b b i s were in t h e h a b i t of transferring legal principles t h a t were f i r s t developed in civil law into t h e realm of t h e r i t u a l a n d vice ver-sa. However, dowry is an element of h u m a n situation where we m i g h t n a t u r a l l y expect a n u m b e r of spontaneous resemblances in t h e Jewish a n d B o m a n legal systems. I n b o t h systems, d o w r y was originally c u s t o m a r y a n d v o l u n t a r y , a n d in t h e course of t i m e it b e c a m e a sort of legal obligation. T h e concept of onera matri-monii is f o u n d is b o t h systems. On t h e other h a n d , J u s t i n i a n ' s donatio propter nuptias b e t r a y s Jewish influence. E v e n more evident f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h Hellenistic law is b e t r a y e d b y t h e rabbis where t h e y employ such Greek t e r m s as φερνή, παράφερνα a n d γαμικόν.
