serve the
custom of primogeniture among themselves. On the other hand it was laid
down in the judicial committee in 1869, contrary to the collected
opinions of the Pundits of the Sudder court, that, in default of lawful
children, the illegitimate children of the Sudra caste inherit their
putative father's estate, and, even if there be lawful children, are
entitled to maintenance out of the estate. It had previously been
decided by Sir Edward Ryan in 1857 that the illegitimate children of a
Rajput, or of any other member of a superior caste, have no right of
inheritance even under will, but a mere right to maintenance, provided
the children are docile. It seems then that the Kshatriya and Vaisya
castes, though in one sense non-existent, still control Hindu
succession.

With regard to Persia the _Zend Avesta_ speaks of a fourfold division of
the ancient inhabitants of Iran into priests, warriors, agriculturists
and artificers; and also of a sevenfold division corresponding to the
seven amschespands, or servants of Ormuzd. This was no invention of
Zoroaster, but a tradition from the golden age of Jemshid or Diemschid.
The priestly caste of Magi was divided into Herbeds or disciples, Mobeds
or masters, and Destur Mobeds or complete masters. The last-named were
alone entitled to read the liturgies of Ormuzd; they alone predicted the
future and carried the sacred _costi_, or girdle, _havan_, or cup, and
_barsom_, or bunch of twigs. The Zend word _baresma_ is supposed to be
connected with Brahma, or sacred element, of which the symbol was a
bunch of kusa grass, generally called veda. The Persian and Hindu
religions are further connected by the ceremony called Homa in the one
and Soma in the other. Haug, in his _Tract on the Origin of Brahmanism_
(quoted by Muir, _ubi supra_), maintains that the division in the _Zend
Avesta_ of the followers of Ahura Mazda into Atharvas, Rathaesvas, and
Vastrya was precisely equivalent to the three superior Indian castes. He
also asserts that only the sons of priests (Atharvas) could become
priests, a rule still in force among the Parsis. The Book of Daniel
rather suggests that the Magi were an elective body; and as regards the
secular classes there does not seem to be a trace of hereditary
employment or religious subordination. There is a legend in the Dabistan
of a great conqueror, Mahabad, who divided the Abyssinians into the
usual four castes; and Strabo mentions a similar classification of