1 files changed, 6337 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/26341-0.txt b/26341-0.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..218eaa2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/26341-0.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,6337 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of On The Structure of Greek Tribal Society:
+An Essay by Hugh E. Seebohm
+
+
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no
+restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under
+the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or
+online at http://www.gutenberg.org/license
+
+
+
+Title: On The Structure of Greek Tribal Society: An Essay
+
+Author: Hugh E. Seebohm
+
+Release Date: August 18, 2008 [Ebook #26341]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: UTF-8
+
+
+***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ON THE STRUCTURE OF GREEK TRIBAL SOCIETY: AN ESSAY***
+
+
+
+
+
+                             ON THE STRUCTURE
+
+                                    OF
+
+                           GREEK TRIBAL SOCIETY
+
+                                 AN ESSAY
+
+                                    by
+
+                             Hugh E. Seebohm
+
+                                  London
+
+                            MacMillan And Co.
+
+                               And New York
+
+                                  1895.
+
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+
+Preface
+Chapter I. Introductory.
+Chapter II. The Meaning Of The Bond Of Kinship.
+   § 1. The Duty Of Maintenance Of Parents During Life, And After Death At
+   Their Tomb.
+   § 2. The Duty Of Providing Male Succession.
+   § 3. The Position Of The Widow Without Child And The Duties Of An Only
+   Daughter.
+   § 4. Succession Through A Married Daughter: Growth Of Adoption:
+   Introduction Of New Member To Kinsmen.
+   § 5. The Liability For Bloodshed.
+Chapter III. The Extent Of The Bond Of Kinship.
+   § 1. Degrees Of Blood-Relationship; The Ἀγχιστεία.
+   § 2. Limitations In Respect Of Succession Outside The Direct Line Of
+   Descent.
+   § 3. Division Amongst Heirs.
+   § 4. Qualifications For The Recognition Of Tribal Blood.
+   § 5. Limitations Of Liability For Bloodshed.
+Chapter IV. The Relation Of The Family To The Land.
+   § 1. The Κλῆρος And Its Form.
+   § 2. The Relation Of The Κλῆρος To The Οἶκος.
+   § 3. The Householder In India: The Guest.
+   § 4. Tenure Of Land In Homer: The Κλῆρος And The Τέμενος.
+   § 5. Early Evidence _continued_: The Κλῆρος And The Maintenance Of The
+   οἶκος.
+   § 6. Early Evidence _continued_: The Τέμενος And The Maintenance Of The
+   Chieftain.
+   § 7. Summary Of The Early Evidence.
+   § 8. Hesiod And His Κλήρος.
+   § 9. Survivals Of Family Land In Later Times.
+   § 10. The Idea Of Family Land Applied Also To Leasehold And
+   Semi-Servile Tenure.
+Chapter V. Conclusion.
+Index.
+Footnotes
+
+
+
+
+
+
+PREFACE
+
+
+These notes, brief as they are, owe more than can be told to my father’s
+researches into the structure and methods of the Tribal System. They owe
+their existence to his inspiration and encouragement. A suitable place for
+them might possibly be found in an Appendix to his recently published
+volume on the Structure of the Tribal System in Wales.
+
+In ascribing to the structure of Athenian Society a direct parentage
+amongst tribal institutions, I am dealing with a subject which I feel to
+be open to considerable criticism. And I am anxious that the matters
+considered in this essay should be judged on their own merits, even
+though, in pursuing the method adopted herein, I may have quite
+inadequately laid the case before the reader.
+
+My thanks are due, for their ready help, to Professor W. Ridgeway, Mr.
+James W. Headlam, and Mr. Henry Lee Warner, by means of whose kind
+suggestions the following pages have been weeded of several of their
+faults.
+
+It is impossible to say how much I have consciously or unconsciously
+absorbed from the works of the late M. Fustel de Coulanges. His _La Cité
+Antique_ and his _Nouvelles Recherches sur quelques Problèmes d’Histoire_
+(1891) are stores of suggestive material for the student of Greek and
+Roman customs. They are rendered all the more instructive by the charm of
+his style and method. I have merely dipped a bucket into his well.
+
+In quoting from Homer, I have made free use of the translations of Messrs.
+Lang, Leaf, and Myers of the _Iliad_, and of Messrs. Butcher and Lang of
+the _Odyssey_; and I wish to make full acknowledgment here of the debt
+that I owe to them.
+
+Some explanation seems to be needful of the method pursued in this essay
+with regard to the comparison of Greek customs with those of other
+countries. The selection for comparison has been entirely arbitrary.
+
+Wales has been chosen to bear the brunt of illustration, partly, as I have
+said, because of my father’s work on the Welsh Tribal System, partly
+because the _Ancient Laws of Wales_ afford a peculiarly vivid glimpse into
+the inner organisation of a tribal people, such as cannot be obtained
+elsewhere.
+
+The _Ordinances of Manu_, on the other hand, are constantly quoted by
+writers on Greek institutions; and, I suppose, in spite of the uncertainty
+of their date, they can be taken as affording a very fair account of the
+customs of a highly developed Eastern people. It would be hard, moreover,
+to say where the connection of the Greeks with the East began or ended.
+
+The use made of the _Old Testament_ in these notes hardly needs further
+remark. Of no people, in their true tribal condition before their
+settlement, have we a more graphic account than of the Israelites. Their
+proximity geographically to the Phœnicians, and the accounts of the
+widespread fame of Solomon and the range of his commerce, at once suggest
+comparison with the parallel and contemporaneous period of Achaian
+history, immediately preceding the Dorian invasion, when, if we may trust
+the accounts of Homer, the intercourse between the shores of the
+Mediterranean must have been considerable.
+
+All reference to records of Roman customs has been omitted, not because
+they are not related or analogous to the Greek, but because they could not
+reasonably be brought within the scope of this essay. The ancestor-worship
+among the Romans was so complete, and the organisation of their kindreds
+so highly developed, that they deserve treatment on their own basis, and
+are sufficient to form the subject of a separate volume.
+
+H. E. S.
+
+THE HERMITAGE, HITCHIN.
+_July, 1895._
+
+[Transcriber’s Note: This e-book contains much Greek text which is often
+relevant to the point of the book.  In the ASCII versions of the e-book,
+the Greek is transliterated into Roman letters, which do not perfectly
+represent the Greek original; especially, accent and breathing marks do
+not transliterate. The HTML and PDF versions contain the true Greek text
+of the original book. In the ASCII e-book, the markings such as (M1)
+indicate marginal notes, which were printed in the margins of the original
+book, but in the e-book are transcribed at the end with the footnotes.]
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTORY.
+
+
+(M1) In trying to ascertain the course of social development among the
+Greeks, the inquirer is met by an initial difficulty. The Greeks were not
+one great people like the Israelites, migrating into and settling in a new
+country, flowing with milk and honey. Their movements were erratic and
+various, and took place at very different times. Several partial
+migrations are described in Homer, and others are referred to as having
+taken place only a few generations back. The continuation of unsettled
+life must have had the effect of giving cohesion to the individual
+sections into which the Greeks were divided, in proportion as the process
+of settlement was protracted and difficult.
+
+But in spite of divergencies caused by natural surroundings, by the
+hostility or subservience of previous occupants of the soil, there are
+some features of the tribal system, wherever it is examined, so inherent
+in its structure as to seem almost indelible. A new civilisation was not
+formed to fit into the angles of city walls. Even modification could take
+place only of those customs whose roots did not strike too deeply into the
+essence of the composition of tribal society.
+
+(M2) It is the object of these notes to try to put back in their true
+setting some of the conditions prevailing, sometimes incongruously with
+city life, among the Greeks in historical times, and by comparison with
+analogous survivals in known tribal communities, of whose condition we
+have fuller records, to establish their real historical continuity from an
+earlier stage of habit and belief.
+
+(M3) There were three important public places necessary to every Greek
+community and symbolical to the Greek mind of the very foundations of
+their institutions. These were:—the _Agora_ or place of assembly, the
+place of justice, and the place of religious sacrifice. From these three
+sacred precincts the man who stirred up civil strife, who was at war with
+his own people, cut himself off. Such an one is described in Homer as
+being, by his very act, “clanless” (ἀφρήτωρ), “out-law” (ἀθέμιστος), and
+“hearthless” (ἀνέστιος).(1) In the camp of the Greeks before Troy the
+ships and huts of his followers were congregated by the hut of their chief
+or leader. Each sacrificed or poured libation to his favourite or familiar
+god at his own hut door.(2) But in front of Odysseus’ ships, which, we are
+told, were drawn up at the very centre of the camp, stood the great altar
+of Zeus Panomphaios—lord of _all_ oracles—“exceeding fair.”(3) “Here,”
+says the poet, “were _Agora_, _Themis_, and the altars of the gods.”
+
+The Trojans held _agora_ at Priam’s doors,(4) and it is noticeable that
+the space in front of the chief’s hut or palace was generally considered
+available for such purposes as assembly, games, and so forth, just as it
+was with the ancient Irish.
+
+(M4) In the centre of most towns of Greece(5) stood the Prytaneum or
+magistrates’ hall, and in the Prytaneum was the sacred hearth to which
+attached such reverence that in the most solemn oaths the name of Hestia
+was invoked even before that of Zeus.(6) Thucydides states that each κώμη
+or village of Attica had its hearth or Prytaneum of its own, but looked up
+to the Hestia and Prytaneum in the city of Athens as the great centre of
+their larger polity. In just the same way the lesser kindreds of a tribe
+would have their sacred hearths and rites, but would look to the hearth
+and person of their chief as symbolical of their tribal unity. Thucydides
+also mentions how great a wrench it seemed to the Athenians to be
+compelled to leave their “sacred” homes, to take refuge within the walls
+of Athens from the impending invasion by the Spartans.(7)
+
+The word _Prytanis_ means “chieftain.” It is probable that, as the duties
+sacred and magisterial of the chief became disseminated among the other
+officers of later civilisation, the chief’s dwelling, called the
+Prytaneum, acquiring vitality from the indelible superstition attaching to
+the hearth within its precincts, maintained thereby its political
+importance, when nothing but certain religious functions remained to its
+lord and master in the office of Archon Basileus.
+
+(M5) Mr. Frazer, in his article in the _Journal of Philology_(8) upon the
+resemblance of the Prytaneum in Greece to the Temple of Vesta in Rome,
+shows that both had a direct connection with, if not an absolute origin in
+the domestic hearth of the chieftain. The Lares and Penates worshipped in
+the Temple of Vesta, he says, were originally the Lares and Penates of the
+king, and were worshipped at his hearth, the only difference between the
+hearth in the temple and the hearth in the king’s house being the absence
+of the royal householder.(9)
+
+Mr. Frazer also maintains that the reverence for the hearth and the
+concentration of such reverence on the hearth of the chieftain was the
+result of the difficulty of kindling a fire from rubbing sticks together,
+and of the responsibility thus devolving upon the chieftain unfailingly to
+provide fire for his people. Whether this was the origin or not, before
+the times that come within the scope of this inquiry, the hearth had
+acquired a real sanctity which had become involved in the larger idea of
+it as the centre of a kindred, including on occasion the mysterious
+presence also of long dead ancestors.
+
+(M6) The basis of tribal coherence was community of blood, actual or
+supposed; the visible evidence of the possession of tribal blood was the
+undisputed participation, as _one of a kindred_, in the common religious
+ceremonies, from which the blood-polluted and the stranger-in-blood were
+so strictly shut out.(10) It is therefore in the incidence of religious
+duties, and in the qualifications of the participants, that it is
+reasonable to seek survivals of true tribal sentiment.
+
+Although the religious life of the Greeks was always complex, there is not
+to be found in Homer the broad distinction drawn afterwards between public
+and private gods. It is noticeable that the later Greeks sought to draw
+into their homes the beneficent influence of one or other of the greater
+gods, whose protection and guidance were claimed in times of need by all
+members of the household. Secondary influences, though none the less
+strongly felt, were those of the past heroes of the house, sometimes only
+just dead, to be propitiated at the family tombs or hearth. Anxiety on
+this head, and the deeply-rooted belief in the real need to the dead of
+attentions from the living, were, it will be seen, most powerful factors
+in the development of Greek society.
+
+(M7) The worship of ancestors or household gods as such is not evident in
+the visible religious exercises of the Homeric poems. But this can hardly
+be a matter of surprise. The Greek chieftains mentioned in the poems are
+so nearly descended from the gods themselves, are in such immediate
+relation each with his guardian deity, and are so indefatigable in their
+attentions thereto, that it would surely be extremely irrelevant if any of
+the libations or hecatombs were perverted to any intermediate, however
+heroic, ancestor from the all-powerful and ever ready divinity who was so
+often also himself the boasted founder of the family.(11)
+
+(M8) The libations and hecatombs themselves, however, seem to serve much
+the same purpose as the offerings to the _manes_ or household gods, and
+relieved the luxurious craving for sustenance in the immortals, left
+unsatisfied by their ethereal diet of nectar and ambrosia.(12)
+
+(M9) Yet it is strange that if libations and sacrifices were paid to the
+dead _periodically_ at their tombs, no mention of the occurrence is to be
+found in Homer. That the dead were believed to appreciate such attentions
+may be gathered from the directions given by Circe to Odysseus.
+
+
+    “Then pour a drink-offering to all the dead, first with mead
+    (μελικρήτῳ), and thereafter with sweet wine, and for the third
+    time with water, and sprinkle white meal thereon.... and promise
+    thou wilt offer _in thy halls_(13) a barren heifer, the best thou
+    hast, and fill the pyre with treasure, and wilt sacrifice apart to
+    Teiresias alone a black sheep without spot, the fairest of your
+    flock.”
+
+
+(M10) This done, the ghosts flock up to drink of the blood of the victim.
+But the ghost of Elpenor, who met his death at the house of Circe by
+falling from the roof in his drunken haste to join his already departed
+comrades, and who had therefore received no burial at their hands, demands
+no libations or sacrifices for the refreshment of his thirsty soul, but
+merely burial with tears and a barrow upon the shore of the gray sea, that
+his name may be remembered by men to come.
+
+Nestor’s son elsewhere is made to remark that one must not grudge the dead
+their meed of tears; for the times are so out of joint, “this is now the
+only due we pay to miserable men, to cut the hair and let the tear fall
+from the cheek.”(14)
+
+Is the right conclusion then that the Homeric Greeks did not sacrifice at
+the tombs of their fathers, and that the so-called ancestor-worship
+prevalent later was introduced or revived under their successors? Or is it
+that the aristocratic tone of the poet did not permit him to bear witness
+to the intercourse with any deity besides the one great family of Olympic
+gods, less venerable than a river or other personification of nature?(15)
+
+There exists such close family relationship amongst Homer’s gods, extended
+as it is also to most of his chieftains, that taking into account the
+conspicuous reverence displayed towards the hearth and the respect for
+seniority in age, it may perhaps be justifiable to suppose that domestic
+religious observances, other than those directed to the Olympic gods, were
+thought by the poet to be as much beneath his notice as the swarms of
+common tribesmen who shrink and shudder in the background of the poems.
+
+(M11) Ancestor-worship would be as much out of place in the Old Testament;
+and yet there are references in the Bible to offerings to the dead which,
+unless they are held to refer only to importations from outside religions
+and not to relapses in the Israelites themselves to former superstitions
+of their own people, imply that the great tribal religion of the
+Israelites had superseded pre-existing ceremonies of ancestor-worship.
+
+
+    Deut. xxvi. 13. “And thou shalt say before the Lord thy God, I
+    have brought away the hallowed things out of mine house, and also
+    have given them unto the Levite and the stranger, to the
+    fatherless and to the widow, according to all thy commandments
+    which thou hast commanded me: I have not transgressed thy
+    commandments, neither have I forgotten them: I have not eaten
+    thereof in my mourning, neither have I taken away ought thereof
+    for any unclean use, nor _given ought thereof for the dead_.”
+
+
+The transgressions of the Israelites in the wilderness are described in
+the Psalms:—“They joined themselves also unto Baalpeor and _ate the
+sacrifices of the dead_.”(16)
+
+It was not necessary for an ancestor to become a god to be worthy of
+worship, or to need the attentions of the living. If he was thought to
+haunt tomb or hearth, and to keep his connection thus with his family in
+the upper world, he required nourishment on his visits. He was also
+considered to keep a jealous watch on the continuance of his fair fame
+among the living.
+
+(M12) A close resemblance in this point lies between the Homeric poems and
+the Old Testament. Though actual food and drink is not provided for the
+dead, yet the stress laid on the permanence of the family, _lest the name
+of the dead be cut off from his place_, is quite in keeping with the
+request of Elpenor to Odysseus to insure the continuance of his name in
+the memory of living men.
+
+It is quite possible that, as the story of the interview of Odysseus with
+the dead reveals that the idea of the dead enjoying sacrifices of food and
+drink was familiar at that time, even though the periodical supply of such
+is not mentioned, so the existence of Laban’s household gods and the
+gathering of the kindred of Jesse to their family ceremony(17) may bear
+witness to the presence of a survival of ancestor-worship in some
+equivalent form, underlying the all-absorbing religion of the Israelites.
+At this day the spirits of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are considered by the
+Mohammedans of Hebron actually to inhabit the cave of Machpelah, and, in
+the case of Isaac at any rate, to be extremely angered by any negligence
+shown to their altars, either by omission of the customary ceremonies or
+by admission within the sacred precinct of any stranger of alien faith.
+
+It must not therefore be inferred altogether that the regular
+ancestor-worship so-called was of later origin amongst the Greeks, but
+rather that the constitution of society did not afford it the same
+prominence to the mind of Homer and perhaps his contemporaries, as it
+acquired later.
+
+(M13) M. Fustel de Coulanges, in _La Cité Antique_, has so well
+established the prevalence of ancestor-worship among the Greeks, drawing
+illustration both from Indian and Roman sources, that no further instances
+of its existence are needed here.
+
+The ceremonies however and offerings at the tombs of their fathers did not
+supersede, amongst the Athenians at any rate, their worship of the Olympic
+gods. The Olympic gods themselves moreover were clearly connected with
+their family life. The protection of Zeus was specially claimed under the
+title of γενέθλιος or even σύναιμος(18) and as ἑρκεῖος he received worship
+upon the altar that stood in the court-yard of nearly every house in
+Attica.(19) The permanent place of these gods in the homes of the people
+is further denoted by the use of such epithets as ἐγγενεῖς(20) and
+πατρῷοι.(21)
+
+(M14) The tombs, on the other hand, were not approached with the purpose
+of invoking powerful aid, but rather with the intent of soothing a
+troubled spirit with care and attention, and of providing it with such
+nourishing refreshment as could not be procured in the regions of the
+starving dead.
+
+
+    “I come, bringing to my son’s sire propitiating libations, such as
+    are soothing to the dead, from hallowed cow white milk, sweet to
+    drink; the flower distiller’s dew—clear honey; the virgin spring’s
+    refreshing draught; and undefiled from its wild mother, the liquid
+    gladness of the time-honoured vine; also from the ever-leafy
+    growth of the pale green olive fragrant fruit is here, and twined
+    flowers, children of the teeming earth.”(22)
+
+
+(M15) The same idea of nourishment of the dead, though shared with the
+other gods, determines the offerings in the Egyptian _Book of the
+Dead_.(23)
+
+
+    “I live upon loaves, white wheat, beer, red wheat.... Place me
+    with vases of milk and wine, with cakes and loaves, and plenty of
+    meat in the dwelling of Anubis.”(24)
+
+
+    “Grant to me the funereal food, the drinks, the oxen, the geese,
+    the fabrics, the incense, the oil, and all the good and pure
+    things upon which the gods live.”(25)
+
+
+There is one passage that almost implies that the dead retained in idea a
+claim upon the produce of the land which nourished them whilst alive, or
+that they had a special allotment even in the other world:—
+
+
+    “I sit down among the very great gods of Nut. A field extends for
+    me; the products of the ground are for me. I eat them; I am
+    favoured with them; I live in plenty by them.... I am given corn
+    and wheat for my mouth.”(26)
+
+
+Chapter cxliv. of the _Book of the Dead_ is to be said,
+
+
+    “at the gate of every room while offering to each of them thighs
+    and heads of red cows, the value of seven vases; while offering
+    blood extracted from the heart, the value of a hundred vases;
+    sixteen loaves of white bread, eight round cakes, eight oval
+    cakes, eight broad thin cakes, eight measures of beer, and eight
+    of wheat, a perfumed oil-basin full of milk from a white cow,
+    green grass, green figs, mestem and beads of incense to be burnt.”
+
+
+Chapter cxlviii. ordains that there
+
+
+    “shall be placed offerings before them of loaves, beer, meat,
+    incense, funereal dishes, bringing into favour with Râ and making
+    that the _deceased is fed in the netherworld_.”
+
+
+(M16) In the next chapters frequent reference will be made to the
+offerings to ancestors, or _manes_, among the ancient Hindoos. With them
+the cake-offering to the dead became a most important symbol, uniting in a
+common duty all descendants from certain ancestors within fixed degrees,
+and marking them off in the matter of responsibility thereto from more
+distant relations, who owed similar duty elsewhere.
+
+(M17) Being thus surrounded by nations that believed intensely in the need
+in the dead of nourishment at the hands of their relatives on earth, it
+would indeed be surprising if the Greeks were found not to share in the
+belief. But the fact remains that in the earliest Greek literature it is
+least conspicuous, and the gulf seems widest between the living and the
+dead. Can this be laid to the charge of the artificial superstitions of a
+philosophical class of poets? Or is it due to the true evolution of such
+beliefs, that as long as our search touches upon the unsettled periods of
+semi-migratory life, the tombs of individual members of a family being
+scattered here or there wherever they meet their deaths, the offering to
+the dead takes a special form, inasmuch as the solidarity of the tribe
+eclipses the importance of the family as a unit, and the religious
+ceremonies of the chieftain absorb the attention of the lesser members of
+the tribe?
+
+M. de Coulanges points out that the meaning of the Latin word _Lar_ is
+lord, prince or master, and that _Hestia_ was sometimes designated by the
+Greeks with the similar title of mistress of the house, or princess.(27)
+
+If, as long as the tribe was felt to be a real unit, the religious
+instincts of the tribesmen were concentrated upon the worship of their
+tribal deities—the great ancestors of the tribe, and more emphatically and
+directly the ancestors of their chieftain—it would be quite natural, in
+the weakening of the central worship, for the titles of honour and respect
+to be used equally towards those meaner ancestors who henceforth occupied
+the religious energies of the head of each family or household. In
+fulfilment of a similar sentiment, the later Greeks commonly used the word
+ἥρως in speaking of a dead friend, deeming that any one who departed this
+life passed to the ranks of those princes of the community from whom all
+were proud to trace descent.
+
+(M18) M. de Coulanges considers that the sacred rites of the family at the
+hearth formed a more real tie than the belief in a common blood; and that
+upon this religious basis was built up the greater hearth of the Prytaneum
+as the centre of city life, to bind together the several families
+composing the community. But without pretending to come to a final
+decision on this the main tendency of social development, surely something
+may yet be said in favour of the contrary theory; that the reverence that
+centred in the hearth was in effect the expression of the sanctity of the
+tie of blood, as felt by all members of the house, and that this feeling
+drew its real importance for the community, not from the founding of the
+city by the amalgamation of several families, but as a survival from an
+earlier stage of life, when society circled round what was then in more
+than name the Prytaneum of the tribal chieftain.
+
+Facts are wanting to justify a conclusion as to which of these theories
+bears the closest resemblance to the truth, but it is easy to imagine what
+might be the line of development if the latter hypothesis be maintained.
+
+(M19) During the wanderings and migrations of peoples in the search for
+greener pastures or broader lands, each community or tribe would be
+constantly under arms and subject to attack from the enemies they were
+passing through or subjugating. This constant sojourning in a strange
+land, surrounded by foes, would be a source of much solidarity to the
+tribe itself, drawing its members closely together for mutual defence and
+subsistence.
+
+But when once the tribe had found a country to its taste, and had made a
+settlement with borders comparatively permanently established, emphasis
+would be transferred to the petty quarrels and internal dissensions
+arising between different sections within the community itself. The tie of
+common blood, uniting all members of the tribe, would be gradually
+disregarded and displaced by the less homely and more political relation
+of fellow-citizenship, which, though retaining many of the characteristics
+of the tribal bond, would necessarily be felt in a very different manner.
+
+In this disintegration of the larger unit, the existence of kinship by
+blood would be acknowledged only where the relationship was obvious and
+well known. And it would no longer be sufficient merely to prove
+membership of a kindred; as those outside certain limits would claim
+exemption from the responsibilities entailed by closer relationship.
+
+(M20) So, too, in the matter of religious observance: the reverence of the
+individual for the Prytaneum and common hearth of the state would undergo
+a change into a less personal sentiment; the rites connected therewith
+would be delegated to an official priest; and it is with the head of each
+family, surrounded by those who are really conscious of their connection
+by blood in common descent from much more immediate ancestors, that the
+true tribal feeling would longest survive, though, of course, on much
+narrower lines.
+
+The privileges of citizenship were, it will be seen, as carefully guarded
+as those of the tribe, but in a more perfunctory and arbitrary manner;
+whilst the intimate connection of the members of the family with the
+hearth and the graves of their ancestors stands out in strong relief.
+
+By the time of Hesiod, besides the violation of the universal sanctity of
+a guest or suppliant, the chief sins are against members of the same
+household, defrauding orphans, or insulting an aged parent.(28) Behaviour
+to other than blood-relations is regulated by expediency, by what you may
+expect in return from your neighbours.(29)
+
+Whether the family is to be regarded as the chief factor in the
+composition of the city, or how much of its composition the city owes to
+direct inheritance from the tribal system, must, as has been said, be left
+unsolved. Some small light may perhaps be shed upon the problem as this
+inquiry proceeds.
+
+(M21) At any rate, if the true basis of the organisation of the family and
+the kindred, as found in historic times in Greece, could once be
+established, material assistance ought to have been gained for rightly
+understanding the structure of that earlier society, whatever it was, from
+which the rules, that govern those within the bond of kinship, were
+survivals.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER II. THE MEANING OF THE BOND OF KINSHIP.
+
+
+παῖδες γὰρ ἀνδρὶ κληδόνες σωτήριοι
+θανόντι: φελλοὶ δ᾽ ὥς ἄγουσι δίκτυον,
+τὸν ἐκ βυθοῦ κλωστῆρα σώζοντες λίνου.
+          _Aeschylus._
+
+
+
+
+§ 1. The Duty Of Maintenance Of Parents During Life, And After Death At
+Their Tomb.
+
+
+(M22) As the hearth was the centre of the sanctity and reverence of the
+family, so the word οἶκος was the customary term to signify the smaller
+group of the composite γένος, consisting of a man and his immediate
+descendants. In the first place, the individual was absolutely committed
+to sacrifice all his personal feelings for the sake of the continuity of
+his οἶκος, and this was his supreme duty. But whereas several οἶκοι traced
+their descent from a common ancestor, a group of gradually diverging lines
+of descent were formed, sharing mutually the responsibility of the
+maintenance of continuity, and the privilege of inheritance and
+protection.
+
+Before examining how far these parallel lines remained within the reach of
+claims of kinship, or how soon the reverence for the more immediate
+predecessors absorbed the memory of the more remote ancestor, it will be
+well to have a clear understanding of what the claims of kindred were, and
+how they affected the member of the οἶκος, in respect of his duties
+thereto.
+
+(M23) Plato(30) declares that honour should be given to:—
+
+1. Olympian Gods.
+
+2. Gods of the State.
+
+3. Gods below.
+
+4. Demons and Spirits.
+
+5. Heroes.
+
+6. Ancestral Gods.
+
+7. _Living Parents_, “to whom we have to pay the greatest and oldest of
+all debts: in property, in person, in soul; paying the debts due to them
+for the care and travail which they bestowed on us of old in the days of
+our infancy, and which we are now to pay back to them when they are old
+and in the extremity of their need.”
+
+(M24) The candidates for the archonship were asked, among other things,
+whether they treated their parents properly.(31) It was only in case of
+some indelible stain, such as wife-murder, that the debt of maintenance of
+the parent was cancelled.(32) Yet even when the father had lost his right
+of maintenance by crime or foul treatment, the son was still bound to bury
+him when he died and to perform all the customary rites at his tomb.(33)
+
+“Is it not,” says Isaeus, “a most unholy thing, if a man, without having
+done any of the customary rites due to the dead, yet expects to take the
+inheritance of the dead man’s property?”(34)
+
+(M25) The duty of maintenance of the parent thus extended even beyond the
+tomb, and this retrospective attitude of the individual gives us the clue
+to his position of responsibility also with regard to posterity.
+
+The strongest representation possible of this attitude is given in the
+_Ordinances of Manu_, where it is stated that a man “goes to hell” who has
+no son to offer at his death the funeral cake.
+
+(M26) “No world of heaven exists for one not possessed of a son.” The
+debt, owed by the living member of a family to his _manes_, was to provide
+a successor to perform the rites necessary to them after his own death.
+
+
+    “By means of the eldest son, as soon as he is born, a man becomes
+    possessed of a son and is thus cleared of his debt to the _manes_”
+
+
+    “A husband is born again on earth in his son.”
+
+
+    “If among many brothers born of one father, _one_ should have a
+    son, Manu said all those brothers would be possessed of sons by
+    means of that son.”
+
+
+_i.e._ one representative was sufficient as regards the duties to the
+_manes_ in the house of the grandfather.
+
+
+    “Thro’ a son one conquers worlds, thro’ a son’s son one attains
+    endlessness, and through the son’s son of a son one attains the
+    world of the Sun.”
+
+
+    “The sort of reward one gets on crossing the water by means of bad
+    boats is the sort of reward one gets on crossing the darkness (to
+    the next world) by means of bad sons.”(35)
+
+
+(M27) Plato expresses the same feeling in the _Laws_:(36)
+
+
+    “After a sort the human race naturally partakes of immortality, of
+    which all men have the greatest desire implanted in them; for the
+    desire of every man that he may become famous, and not lie in the
+    grave without a name, is only the love of continuance ... In this
+    way they are immortal leaving [children’s] children behind them,
+    with whom they are one in the unity of generation. And for a man
+    voluntarily to deprive himself of this gift of immortality, as he
+    deliberately does who will not have a wife and children, is
+    _impiety_.”
+
+
+The functions and duties of the individual towards his family and
+relations thus find their explanation in his position as link, between the
+past and the future, in the transmission to eternity of his family blood.
+
+His duties to his ancestors began with the death of his father. He had at
+Athens to carry out the corpse, provide for the cremation, gather the
+remains of the burnt bones, with the assistance of the rest of the
+kindred,(37) and show respect to the dead by the usual form of shaving the
+head, wearing mourning clothes, and so on. Nine days after the funeral he
+must perform certain sacrifices and periodically after that visit the
+tombs and altars of his family in the family burying-place.(38) If he had
+occasion to perform military service, he must serve in the tribe and the
+deme of his parent (στρατεύειν ἐν τῇ φυλῇ καὶ ἐν τῷ δήμῳ).(39) Before he
+can enter into his inheritance he must fulfil all the ordinances incumbent
+on one in his position, and in the Gortyn Laws it is stated that an
+adopted heir cannot partake of the property of his adoptive father unless
+he undertakes the sacred duties of the house of the deceased.(40) Thus the
+right of ownership of the family estate rested always with the possession
+of the blood of the former owners; and such a representative demonstrated
+his right by stepping into his predecessor’s shoes and by taking upon
+himself all responsibility for the fulfilment of the rites, thereafter to
+be performed to him also when he shall have been gathered to the majority
+of his family.
+
+
+
+
+§ 2. The Duty Of Providing Male Succession.
+
+
+But however piously and carefully he performed his many duties to his
+ancestors, his work was only transitory and incomplete, unless he provided
+a successor to continue them after him into further generations.
+
+(M28) The procreation of children was held to be of such importance at
+Sparta(41) that if a wife had no children, with the full knowledge of her
+husband she admitted some other citizen to her, and children born from
+such a union were reckoned as born to the continuation of her husband’s
+family, without breach of the former relations of husband and wife.(42)
+This is the exact custom stated in the _Ordinances of Manu_ (ix. 59),
+where it is laid down that a wife can be “commissioned” by her husband to
+bear him a son, but she must only take a kinsman within certain degrees,
+whose connection with her ceases on the birth of one son.(43) Otherwise it
+was a man’s duty to divorce a barren wife and take another. But he must
+divorce the first, and could not have two hearths or two wives.(44)
+
+A curious instance of how this sentiment worked in practice in directly
+the opposite direction to our modern ideas, is mentioned in Herodotus.
+Leaders of forlorn hopes nowadays would be inclined to pick out as
+comrades the unmarried men, as having least to sacrifice and fewest duties
+to forego. Whereas Leonidas, in choosing the 300 men to make their famous
+and fatal stand at Thermopylae, is stated to have selected all _fathers
+with sons living_.(45)
+
+Hector is made to use this idea in somewhat similar manner. He encourages
+his soldiers with:—
+
+
+    “If a man fall fighting for his fatherland, it is no dishonourable
+    thing: and his wife and his children left behind, and his οἶκος
+    and κλῆρος are unharmed, if the Achaians go but back to their own
+    country.”(46)
+
+
+If the enemy are driven out, though he be killed himself, yet if he leave
+children behind, his household and their property will remain unharmed.
+
+All about to die, says Isaeus, take thought not to leave their οἶκος
+desolate (ἔρημος),(47) but that there shall be some one to carry the name
+of their house down to posterity, who shall perform all the customary
+rites at the tomb due to them also when they shall have joined the ranks
+of ancestors.(48)
+
+Where children were reckoned of the tribe of their father and not of their
+mother, and where a woman was incapable of performing sacred rites, a male
+heir was necessary for the direct transmission of blood and property. Sons
+entered upon their inheritance immediately on the death of their father,
+nor had he the power to dispossess them in favour of others, whilst
+brothers, cousins, legatees, had always to prove their title and procure
+judgment from the court in their favour.(49)
+
+(M29) Failing sons however, the next descent lay through a daughter. Nor
+were her qualifications in herself complete or sufficient in theory to
+form the necessary link in the chain of succession. The next of kin male
+had to marry her with the property of which she was ἐπίκληρος;(50) but
+neither she nor he really possessed the property, and the sons born from
+the marriage succeeded thereto directly on attaining a certain age. The
+next of kin had in the meantime of course to represent his wife’s father
+in all the religious observances, and was said to have power to live with
+the woman (κύριος συνοικῆσαι τῇ γυναικί), but not to dispose of the
+property (κύριος τῶν χρημάτων);(51) the sons becoming κύριοι τῶν χρημάτων
+at sixteen years old, and owing thence only maintenance (τρέφειν) to their
+mother from the property.(52) The heiress was compelled to marry at a
+certain age and was adjudicated by law to the proper kinsman.(53)
+
+Again an exact parallel is to be found in the _Ordinances of Manu_:—
+
+
+    “One who is without a son should, by the following rule, make his
+    daughter provide him a son:—‘The offspring which may be hers shall
+    be for me the giver of offerings to the _manes_.’ ”
+
+
+The whole property of a man is taken by this daughter’s son,(54) and, by
+her bearing a son, _her father_ “becomes possessed of a son, who should
+give the funeral cake and take the property.”(55)
+
+If she die without a son, her husband would take (presumably by a sort of
+adoption).(56) But this would be perfectly natural, if, as in Greece, her
+husband was bound to be the next of kin and therefore heir failing issue
+from her.
+
+(M30) At Athens it was part of the office of the archon to see that no
+οἶκος failed for want of representatives, to constrain a reluctant heiress
+to marry or to compel the next of kin to perform his duty. Plato(57) asks
+pardon for his imaginary legislator, if he shall be found to give the
+daughter of a man in marriage having regard only to the two
+conditions—nearness of kin, and the preservation of the property;
+disregarding, in his zeal for these, the further considerations, which the
+father himself might be expected to have had, with regard to the
+suitability of the match.(58)
+
+(M31) A certain leniency was however allowed to the heiress who was
+unwilling to marry an obnoxious kinsman, and to the kinsman who had
+counterclaims upon him in his own house. Nevertheless the rules remained
+very strict. Isaeus states emphatically,(59) “Often have men been
+compelled by law to give up their properly wedded wives, owing to their
+becoming ἐπίκληροι through the death of their brother to their father’s
+property and having to marry the next of kin (τοῖς ἐγγυτάτα γένους),” to
+prevent the extinction of their father’s house.
+
+Manu warns those about to marry to be careful that their children shall
+not be required to continue their wives’ father’s family, to the
+desolation of their own.
+
+
+    “She who has not a brother ... let not a wise man marry her,
+    through fear of the law about a daughter’s son.”(60)
+
+
+Again Isaeus:—
+
+
+    “We, because of our nearness of kin, would have been compelled to
+    maintain (γηροτροφεῖν) our aged grandfather and either ourselves
+    marry Cleonymos’ (our uncle’s) daughters or give them away with
+    their portions to others and all this our kinship, the laws, and
+    _our shame_ would have compelled us to perform or incur the
+    greatest penalties and the _utmost disgrace_.”(61)
+
+
+(M32) In the laws of Gortyn very clear rules are laid down to be followed
+where there were difficulties in the way of the heiress marrying the next
+of kin.
+
+
+    “The heiress shall marry the eldest brother of her father that is
+    alive. If there are more heiresses and uncles, they shall ever
+    marry the eldest. If there are no uncles but sons of uncles, she
+    shall marry the son of her father’s eldest brother. If there are
+    more than one heiress and sons of uncles, they shall ever marry
+    the son of the eldest in order: but a man shall not marry more
+    than one heiress”(62)
+
+
+There is also a statement made by Demosthenes(63) that sounds as if it
+might have come from the _Ordinances of Manu_. It is there stated that if
+there were more than one heiress, _only one_ need be dealt with in respect
+to _providing succession_, though all shared in the property.
+
+The law of Gortyn goes on:—
+
+
+    “If the man will not marry her, though of age and wishing to
+    marry, the guardians of the heiress shall sue, and the judge shall
+    condemn him to marry her in two months. If he will not marry her,
+    according to the law, she shall have all the property and shall
+    marry the next of kin (after him) if there is one....
+
+
+    “If she is of age and does not wish to marry the next of kin or if
+    he is a minor and she does not wish to wait, she ... can marry
+    whom she will of those who claim her of the tribe. But she shall
+    apportion off his share of the property to the first of kin.
+
+
+    “If there are no kin to her, she shall have all the property and
+    marry whom she will of the tribe.
+
+
+    “If no one of the tribe will marry her, her guardians shall ask
+    throughout the tribe, ‘ Will any marry her?’ And if any one then
+    marries her, he shall do it in thirty days after the ‘asking.’ But
+    if there is still no one, she shall marry any one else she can.”
+
+
+Such pains were taken to find a representative for the deceased in his
+family, or at any rate in his _tribe_.(64)
+
+(M33) The same questions seem to have arisen amongst the Israelites in the
+time of Moses.
+
+
+    Numbers xxxvi. 8. “And every daughter that possesseth an
+    inheritance (LXX. ἀγχιστεύουσα κληρονομίαν) in any tribe of the
+    children of Israel, shall be wife unto one of the family of the
+    tribe of her father (ἐνὶ τῶν ἐκ τοῦ δήμου τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτῆς), that
+    the children of Israel may enjoy (ἀγχιστεύειν) every man the
+    inheritance of his fathers.
+
+
+    “Even as the Lord commanded Moses, so did the daughters of
+    Zelophehad.
+
+
+    “For Mahlah, Tirzah and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Noah, the
+    daughters of Zelophehad, were married unto their father’s
+    brother’s sons (LXX. τοῖς ἀνεψιοῖς αὐτῶν).”
+
+
+
+
+§ 3. The Position Of The Widow Without Child And The Duties Of An Only
+Daughter.
+
+
+(M34) The _levirate_, or marriage with deceased husband’s brother, seems
+to have had no place in Greek family law. The wife was of no _kin_
+necessarily to the husband; and so it would not tend to strengthen the
+transmission of blood if the next of kin married the widow on taking the
+inheritance of his relative deceased without issue. The wife in Greek law
+could not inherit from her husband, whose property went to his father’s or
+mother’s relations; and only when it became a question of finding an heir
+to her _son_, and failing all near paternal kinsmen, could the inheritance
+pass through her, and then as the mother of her dead son, not as widow of
+her dead husband. Even then, being a woman, she had no right of enjoyment,
+only of transmission. She could only inherit on behalf of her issue by a
+second husband, and failing her issue the inheritance would pass to her
+brothers and so on. In Greece the claim upon the δαήρ (Latin _levir_) for
+marriage seems to have begun with his brother’s daughter, not his
+brother’s widow.
+
+(M35) The childless widow on the death of her husband had to return to her
+own family or whoever of her kindred was guardian (κύριος) of her, and if
+she wished, be given again in marriage by him.(65)
+
+The woman at Athens even after marriage always retained her κύριος or
+guardian,(66) who was at once her protector and trustee. He was probably
+the head of the οἶκος to which she originally belonged—her next of kin—and
+had great power over her.(67)
+
+A case there is(68) where the heir to the property also takes the wife of
+the previous owner; but in this case the husband may have been κύριος of
+his own wife, and so could bequeath, or give her away to whomever he
+liked.(69)
+
+In the _Ordinances of Manu_, the limitations of the levirate are very
+strictly defined.(70) In the case of a man leaving a widow, she must not
+marry again, or she lost her place in heaven by his side.
+
+But if she was childless, the next of kin of her husband must beget one
+son by her; he did not _marry_ her, and his connection with her _ceased on
+the birth of a son_.
+
+(M36) The laws of Manu otherwise are strict against the marriage of close
+relations; a restriction not found in Greece.
+
+Isaeus(71) mentions that it was thought quite natural for a man to marry
+his first cousin in order to concentrate the family blood, and prevent her
+dowry or whatever property might come to her from going outside his οἶκος,
+and we know that even marriage with a half-sister (not born of the same
+mother) was not forbidden.
+
+There are more instances than one in Homer of a man marrying his aunt, or
+niece.
+
+The nearest resemblance to the levirate in Greece is the occasional custom
+at Sparta, mentioned already, of a wife being “commissioned” to bear
+children by another man into the family of her husband. But this exists in
+Manu, side by side with the above-mentioned custom of levirate proper.
+
+(M37) Among the Israelites, the levirate was in full force; the craving
+for continuance was the same as among the followers of Manu and the
+Greeks; and the custom with regard to heiresses is so vividly told that it
+is worth quoting at some length.
+
+
+    Deut. xxv. 5. “If brethren dwell together and one of them die and
+    have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a
+    stranger: her husband’s brother [_i.e._ next of kin] shall go in
+    unto her and take her to him to wife and perform the duty of an
+    husband’s brother to her.
+
+
+    “And it shall be that the firstborn which she beareth shall
+    _succeed in the name of his brother that is dead_, that his name
+    be not put out of Israel.
+
+
+    “And if the man like not to take his brother’s wife, then let his
+    brother’s wife go up to the gate unto the elders and say, ‘My
+    husband’s brother refuseth to raise up unto his brother a name in
+    Israel, he will not perform the duty of my husband’s brother.’
+
+
+    “Then the elders of his city shall call him and speak unto him:
+    and if he stand to it and say, ‘I like not to take her,’ then
+    shall his brother’s wife come unto him in the presence of the
+    elders, and loose his shoe from off his foot, and spit in his
+    face, and shall answer and say: ‘So shall it be done unto that man
+    that will not build up his brother’s house (LXX. οἶκος).’
+
+
+    “And his name shall be called in Israel, ‘The house (οἶκος) of him
+    that hath his shoe loosed.’ ”
+
+
+(M38) Such was the scorn felt for the man who refused to perform the
+duties of nearest kinsman. In the thirty-eighth chapter of Genesis is told
+the story of Tamar, the wife of Judah’s eldest son who died childless. The
+second son’s refusal to raise up seed to his brother because he knows that
+_his own name will not be perpetuated thereby, but his brother’s_, meets
+with summary punishment. “And the thing that he did was evil in the sight
+of the Lord, and He slew him also.”(72) Afterwards, when it was reported
+to her father-in-law that Tamar had a child by some one not of his family,
+he was exceedingly wroth, and said, “Bring her forth and let her be
+burnt.” Accordingly, after he had received his own “tokens” from her hand,
+his approval of her action, in her desire to perpetuate the name of her
+dead husband, is all the more striking, and shows how real such a claim as
+Tamar’s was in the practice of those days, extreme though her action was
+felt to be. And Judah acknowledged his tokens and said, “She hath been
+more righteous than I: because that I gave her not to Shelah my [youngest]
+son.”
+
+(M39) The statement of the customary procedure in Deuteronomy is very
+picturesquely illustrated and fulfilled in detail in the story of Ruth,
+who though only a daughter-in-law takes the position of heiress through a
+sort of adoption by her mother-in-law Naomi, on her refusal to go back to
+her own people. “Where thou goest, I will go: where thou lodgest, I will
+lodge: thy people shall be my people, and thy God, my God. Where thou
+diest will I die, and there will I be buried.” She accepts Naomi’s hearth
+her kin, her religion, and finally her tomb.
+
+Elimelech and his two sons dying in Moab, Naomi and both her
+daughters-in-law are left widows in a strange land. If Naomi had other
+sons, upon them would have devolved the duty of taking Orpah and Ruth to
+wife. But Naomi declares herself(73) too old to marry again and be the
+mother of sons, and implores her daughters-in-law to return to their own
+people in Moab, where she hopes they will start afresh with new husbands,
+a course which seems always to have been open to wives in tribal
+communities. Orpah does so, but Ruth elects to remain with Naomi, and
+returning with her to Bethlehem takes her chance among the kindred of
+Elimelech. Happening to arrive at Bethlehem at the beginning of the barley
+harvest, it so chances that Ruth goes forth to glean upon that part of the
+open field which belonged to Boaz—a rich man of the συγγενία of Elimelech,
+who, having heard of her devotion to Naomi and the house of his late
+kinsmen, protects her from possible insult from strangers and treats her
+richly. On her return home Naomi informs her that Boaz is of their next of
+kin (τῶν ἀγχιστευόντων)(74) whose place it was to redeem property sold or
+lost by a kinsman. This duty is thus set forth in Leviticus:—
+
+
+    (M40) Lev. xxv. 25. “And if thy brother be waxen poor and sell
+    some of his possession, then shall his kinsman (ἀγχιστεύων) that
+    is next to him come and shall redeem that which his brother hath
+    sold.”
+
+
+An instance of it in practice is given in Jeremiah.
+
+
+    Jerem. xxxii. 8. “So Hanameel mine uncle’s son came to me in the
+    court of the guard according to the word of the Lord and said unto
+    me, ‘Buy my field, I pray thee, that is in Anathoth which is in
+    the land of Bethlehem: for the right of inheritance is thine, and
+    the redemption is thine: buy it for thyself.’ ”
+
+
+But on Ruth’s applying to Boaz, he informs her that though he is
+ἀγχιστεύς, _i.e._ within the reach of the claim on the next of kin, yet is
+there one ἀγχιστεύς who is nearer than he, and who must first be asked.
+
+
+    “Now Boaz went up to the gate and sat down there, and behold the
+    near kinsman of whom Boaz spake came by, unto whom he said, ‘Ho,
+    such an one! turn, aside, sit down here,’ and he turned aside and
+    sat down. And he took ten men of the elders of the city and said,
+    ‘Sit ye down here,’ and they sat down. And he said unto the near
+    kinsman, ‘Naomi that is come again out of the country of Moab
+    selleth the parcel of land which was our brother Ehmelech’s: and I
+    thought to disclose it to thee, saying, “Buy it before them that
+    sit here and before the elders of my people.” If thou wilt redeem
+    it, redeem it; but if thou wilt not redeem it, tell me that I may
+    know; for there is none to redeem it beside thee, and I am after
+    thee.’ And he said, ‘I will redeem it.’ Then said Boaz, ‘What day
+    thou buyest the field of the hand of Naomi thou must buy it also
+    of Ruth the Moabitess, _the wife of the dead, to raise up the name
+    of the dead upon his inheritance_.’ And the near kinsman said, ‘I
+    cannot redeem it for myself _lest I mar my own inheritance_; take
+    thou my right of redemption on thee; for I cannot redeem it.’ ”
+
+
+The rendering of the Vulgate of the kinsman’s reply is more easily
+understood:—“I yield up my right of near kinship: for neither ought I to
+blot out the continuance (_posteritas_) of my family: do thou use my
+privilege, which I declare that I freely renounce.”
+
+
+    “And he drew off his shoe. And Boaz said unto the elders and unto
+    all the people, ‘Ye are witnesses this day that I have bought all
+    that was Elimelech’s ... Chilion’s and Mahlon’s of the hand of
+    Naomi. Moreover Ruth, the wife of Mahlon, have I purchased to be
+    my wife to _raise up the name of the dead_ upon his inheritance,
+    that the name of the dead be not cut off from among his brethren
+    and from the gate of his place: ye are witnesses this day.’ And
+    all the people that were in the gate and the elders said, ‘We are
+    witnesses ... May thy house be like the house of Perez whom Tamar
+    bare unto Judah’ &c.”
+
+
+Now Boaz was sixth in descent from this Perez whose mother Tamar, as
+quoted above, had been in much the same position as Ruth.
+
+It is interesting to read further that the son born of this marriage of
+Ruth and Boaz is taken by the women of Bethlehem to Naomi, saying, “_There
+is a son born to Naomi_,” emphasising the duty of the heiress to bear a
+son, not into her husband’s family, but to that of her father.
+
+The story of Ruth is not, therefore, an exact example of the custom of
+levirate. But it illustrates incidentally the unity of the family. The
+sons of Elimelech died before the family division had taken place, and the
+house of Elimelech their father was thus in jeopardy of extinction. If
+Naomi had come within the proper operation of the levirate, the next of
+kin ought to have married _her_, but by her adoption of Ruth as her
+daughter, she gave Ruth the position of heiress or ἐπίκληρος, whilst the
+heir born to Ruth was called son, not of Ruth’s former or present husband,
+but of Elimelech and (by courtesy) of Naomi, Elimelech’s widow, through
+whom the issue ought otherwise to have been found.
+
+
+
+
+§ 4. Succession Through A Married Daughter: Growth Of Adoption:
+Introduction Of New Member To Kinsmen.
+
+
+(M41) But if the heiress was already married and had sons, she need not be
+divorced and marry the next of kin, though that still lay in her power. It
+was considered sufficient if she set apart one of her sons to be heir to
+her father’s house. But she must do this absolutely: her son must entirely
+leave her husband’s house and be enfranchised into the house of her
+father. If she did not do this with all the necessary ceremonies, the
+house of her father would become extinct, which would be a lasting shame
+upon her.
+
+Isaeus(75) mentions a case where a wife inherits from her deceased brother
+a farm and persuades her husband to emancipate their second son in order
+that he may carry on the family of her brother and take the property.
+
+(M42) In another passage(76) the conduct of married sisters in not
+appointing one of their own sons to take his place as son in the house of
+their deceased brother, and in absorbing the property into that of their
+husbands, whereby the οἶκος of their brother became ἔρημος, is described
+as shameful (αἰσχρῶς).
+
+In Demosthenes(77) a man behaving in similar wise is stigmatised as
+ὑβριστής.
+
+(M43) Herein lay the reason that adoption became so favourite a means in
+classical times of securing an heir. It became almost a habit among the
+Athenians who had no sons, to adopt an heir—often even the next of kin who
+would naturally have succeeded to the inheritance.(78)
+
+The transfer of the adopted son from the οἶκος of his father to the οἶκος
+he was chosen to represent was so real that he lost all claim to
+inheritance in his original family, and henceforth based his relationship
+and rights of kinship from his new position as son of his adoptive father.
+This absolutely insured the childless man that his successor would not
+merge the inheritance in that of another οἶκος, and made it extremely
+unlikely that he would neglect his religious duties as they would be
+henceforth his own ancestral rites.
+
+Sometimes, it seems,(79) sons of an unfortunate father were adopted into
+another οἶκος so as not to share in the disgrace brought upon their
+family. In such a case presumably their father’s house would be allowed to
+become extinct.
+
+(M44) The inheritance of property being only an accessory to the
+heirship,(80) the ceremony of adoption consisted of an introduction to the
+kindred and to the ancestral altars, and an assumption of the
+responsibilities connected therewith.
+
+(M45) The process was the same as for the proclamation of the true blood
+of a son, and was exactly in accordance with tribal instincts.
+
+Whatever the history of the φρατρία at Athens, in it seems to have been
+accumulated a great number of the survivals of tribal sentiment.
+
+(M46) The adoption at Athens took place at the gathering of the phratores
+in order that all the kin might be present (παρόντων τῶν συγγενῶν).(81)
+The adopter must lead his son to the sacrifices on the altars(82) and must
+show him to the kinsmen (συγγενεῖς or γεννῆται) and phratores: he must
+give assurance on the sacrifices that the young man was born in lawful
+wedlock from free citizens. This done, and no one questioning his rights,
+the assembly proceeded to vote(83) and if the vote was in his favour, then
+and not till then he was enrolled in the common register (εἰς τὸ κοινὸν
+γραμματεῖον) of the phratria in the name of son of his adopted father. As
+a father could not without reason disinherit his true-born sons, so the
+phratores could not without reason refuse to accept them to the
+kinship.(84)
+
+If any of the phratores objected to the admission of the new kinsman, he
+must stop the sacrifices and remove the victim from the altar.(85) He
+would have to state the grounds of his objection, and if he could not
+produce good reasons, he incurred a fine. If there was no objection, the
+unsacrificial parts of the victim were divided up and each member took
+home with him his share,(86) or joined in a feast provided by the father
+of the admitted son.(87)
+
+(M47) The ceremonial given in the Gortyn laws is similar:—
+
+
+    x. 33. “The adoption shall take place in the agora when all the
+    citizens have assembled, from the stone from which speeches are
+    made. And the adopter shall give to his own brotherhood (ἑταιρεία)
+    a victim-for-sacrifice and a vessel of wine (πρόκοος).”
+
+
+The adopted son gets all the property and shall fulfil the divine and
+human duties of his adoptive father(88) and shall inherit as in the law
+for true-born sons. But if he does not fulfil them according to law, the
+next of kin shall take the property. He can only renounce his adoption by
+paying a fine.
+
+The adopted son thus introduced was considered to have become of the blood
+of his adoptive father, and was unable to leave his new family and return
+to his original home unless he left in the adoptive house a son to carry
+on the name to posterity. As long as he remained in the other οἶκος,
+_i.e._ had not provided for his succession and by certain legal ceremonies
+been readmitted to his former family, he was considered of no relationship
+to them and had no right of inheritance in their goods.(89)
+
+An adopted son could not adopt or devise by will, and if he did not
+provide for the succession by leaving a son to follow him, the property
+went back into the family and to the next of kin of his adopted
+father.(90)
+
+If he did return to his former οἶκος, leaving a son in his place and that
+son died, he could not return and take the property thus left without heir
+direct.(91)
+
+(M48) Adoption amongst the Hindoos took place in like manner before the
+convened kindred. The adopting father offered a burnt-offering, and with
+recitation of holy words in the middle of his dwelling completed the
+adoption with these words:—
+
+
+    “I take thee for the fulfilment of my religious duties; I take
+    thee to continue the line of my ancestors.”(92)
+
+
+The adopted son should be as near a relation as possible, and when once
+the ceremony had taken place, was considered to have as completely lost
+his position in his former family as if he had never been born
+therein.(93)
+
+(M49) The introduction into the deme which took place at the age of
+eighteen at Athens, including the enrolment in the ληξιαρχικόν
+γραμματεῖον, seems to have been a registration of rights of property and
+an assumption of the full status of citizen. The word ληξιαρχικός is
+defined by Harpocration as meaning “capable of managing the ancestral
+estate (τὰ πατρῷα οἰκονομεῖν).” The word λῆξις is used by Isaeus for the
+application, by others than direct descendants, to the Archon for the
+necessary powers to take their property.
+
+It appears to have been at this period that the young man left the ranks
+of boyhood and dedicated himself to the responsibilities of his life.
+
+(M50) Plutarch(94) states that it was the custom at coming of age to
+tonsure the head and offer the hair to some god, and describes the young
+Theseus as adopting what we know as the Celtic tonsure, thenceforth called
+after his name.
+
+
+    “The custom still being in existence at that time for those
+    quitting childhood to go to Delphi and dedicate(95) their hair to
+    the god, Theseus also went to Delphi (and the place is still
+    called after him the Theseia, so they say) and _shaved the hair of
+    his head in front only_ (ἐκείρατο τὰ πρόσθεν μόνον) Homer says the
+    Abantes do:(96) and this kind of tonsure (κουρά) is called
+    ‘Theseis’ because of him. Now the Abantes first shaved themselves
+    in this manner, not in imitation of the Arabs(97) as some have it,
+    nor even in emulation of the Mysians, but being a warlike people
+    and fighting hand to hand, ... as Archilochos testifies. For this
+    reason Alexander is said to have ordered his Macedonians to shave
+    their beards....”
+
+
+This cutting the hair as token of dedication to any particular object or
+deity was of common occurrence. Achilles’ hair was dedicated as an
+offering to the river Spercheios in case of his safe return.(98) Knowing
+that this is impossible, in his grief at the death of Patroklos, with
+apologies to the god he cuts his flowing locks and lays them in the hand
+of his dead friend.
+
+Pausanias declares that it was the custom with all the Greeks to dedicate
+their hair to rivers.(99)
+
+Theophrastus(100) mentions as a characteristic of the man of Petty
+Ambition that he will “take his son away to Delphi to have his hair cut
+(ἀποκεῖραι),” showing that this venerable custom had by that time become
+pedantic and an object of ridicule.
+
+According to Athenaeus,(101) when the young men cut their hair they
+brought a large cup of wine to Herakles and, pouring a libation, offered
+it to the assembled people to drink.
+
+The age at which the hair was cut seems to have varied. The _Ordinances of
+Manu_(102) give the following instructions:—
+
+
+    “The Keçanta (tonsure-rite) is ordered in the sixteenth year(103)
+    of a Brahman, in the twenty-second of a Ksatriya, and in two years
+    more after that for a Vaiçya.”
+
+
+But whenever the actual tonsure was performed, it seems to have been a
+very widely spread custom, symbolical in some way of devotion to a deity
+or kindred, or to some particular course of life.
+
+Its importance in this place, however, lies in its being one of the
+special acts relating to the admission to tribal status, and to the
+devotion, so to speak, of the services of the individual to the corporate
+needs of his tribe or kindred.
+
+The public introduction to the kindred, combined with publicity of
+marriage and of the birth of children would, it is obvious, be a very
+important protection for the preservation of the jealously guarded purity
+of the tribal blood. Isaeus(104) says that all relations (προσήκοντες),
+all the phratores, and most (οἱ πολλοί) of the demesmen would know whom a
+man married, and what children he had. This, in addition to the oath
+(πίστις) of the father or of the mother(105) of the legitimacy of the son
+introduced to his kin, would seem a very sufficient safeguard.(106)
+
+If a child was not introduced to the phratores, it was considered
+illegitimate,(107) and could have no share in the rites of kindred and
+property.(108)
+
+
+
+
+§ 5. The Liability For Bloodshed.
+
+
+(M51) A notable feature of the tribal system all over the world was the
+_blood-feud_, wiped out only by the death of the manslayer or by the
+payment of a sufficient recompense. The incidence of the responsibility
+for murder and for payment of the recompense upon a group instead of only
+on the guilty individual was of remarkable tenacity, and survived to
+comparatively late days.
+
+In Arabia the whole tribe of the murderer subscribed to the blood-money,
+which went to all the males in the tribe of the murdered man.(109)
+
+But in Greece the responsibility fell upon the next of kin, with the help
+and under the supervision of the rest of the immediate kindred. He had to
+see that a spear was carried in front of the funeral of the slain man and
+planted in his grave, which must be watched for three days.(110) He must
+make proclamation of the foul deed at the tomb, and must undergo
+purificatory rites, himself and his whole house (οἰκία). If the dead body
+be found in the country and no cause of death known, the demarch must
+compel the relatives to bury the corpse and to purify the deme on the same
+day.(111)
+
+The subject is a familiar one in Homer. The wanderer (μετανάστης) is said
+to have no value (he is ἀτίμητος), no fine is exacted for his death.
+
+
+    _Il._ xiv. 483. “That my brother’s price (κασιγνήτοιο ποινή) be
+    not unpaid: even for this it is that a man may well pray to have
+    some kinsman in his halls (γνωτὸν ἐνὶ μεγάροισιν) to avenge
+    (ἀλκτήρ) his fall.”
+
+
+    _Il._ ix. 634. “Yet doth a man accept recompense of his brother’s
+    murderer: or for his dead son: and so the manslayer for a great
+    price abideth in his own land (ἐν δήμῳ) and the other’s heart is
+    appeased and his proud soul, when he hath taken the
+    recompense.”(112)
+
+
+(M52) There are many men told of in the _Iliad_ and _Odyssey_ who were in
+the position of refugees at the court of some chief. As many of them were
+wealthy—chiefs’ sons or even chiefs—and well able to pay large
+recompenses, it seems probable that (as is definitely stated in some
+instances), if the murder was committed on a member of the same family or
+tribe as the murderer, the only way to wipe out the stain was by death or
+perpetual exile, as in the case of the typical fratricide Cain. The
+blood-price was then only between tribe and tribe or city and city. Within
+the kindred there would be no ransom allowed.(113)
+
+Medon had slain the brother of his step-mother and was a fugitive from his
+country.(114)
+
+Epeigeus _ruled_ (ἤνασσε) fairest Boudeion of old, but having slain a good
+man of his kin (ανεψιόν), to Peleus fled, a suppliant.(115)
+
+Tlepolemos slew his own father’s maternal uncle, gathered much folk
+together and fled across the sea, because the other sons and grandsons of
+his father threatened him.(116)
+
+
+    _Il._ xxiv. 479. “And as when a grievous curse cometh upon a man
+    who in his own country (ἐνὶ πάτρη) hath slain another and escapeth
+    to a land of other folk (δῆμον ἄλλων) to the house of some rich
+    man, and wonder possesseth them that look on him....”(117)
+
+
+    _Od._ xv. 272. “Having slain a man of my tribe (ἔμφυλον): and many
+    are his relations (κασίγνητοι) and kinsmen (ἔται) in Argos: at
+    their hands do I shun death and black fate and am in exile.”
+
+
+    _Od._ xxiii. 118. “For whoso hath slain but one man in his country
+    (ἐνὶ δήμῳ) for whom there be not many avengers (ἀοσσητῆρες)
+    behind, he fleeth leaving his kin (πηούς) and his fatherland, how
+    then we who have slain the pillar of the state!”
+
+
+(M53) If ransom there was none for the murderer within the tribe, there
+was equally none for murders between citizen and citizen,—in this point
+also the inheritors of the sentiments of tribesmen. In the law of
+Solon(118) it was forbidden to take payment in compensation from the
+murderer:—
+
+
+    “The murderer can be slain in our land, not tortured, not held to
+    ransom (μηδὲ ἀποινᾷν).”
+
+
+Plato(119) describes the soul of the deceased as troubled with a great
+anger against the murderer, so that even the innocent and unintentional
+homicide must needs flee at any rate for a year. The presence too of a man
+thus denied with bloodshed at the sacred altars was held to be a gross
+impiety and source of divine anger. Plato(120) says:—
+
+
+    “The murderer shall be slain, but not buried in the country (χώρα)
+    of the deceased, which would be a disgrace and impiety.”(121)
+
+
+In the case of a suicide, the hand that committed the crime was to be cut
+off and buried separately.
+
+In Isacus(122) it is related how Euthukrates in a quarrel over a
+boundary-stone was so flogged by his _brother_ Thoudippos that, dying some
+days after, he charged his friends (οἱκεῖοι) not to allow any of
+Thoudippos’ people (τῶν Θουδίππου) to approach his tomb. But if the
+murdered man before his death forgave his murderer, the relatives could
+not proceed against him.
+
+If the murderer escaped fleeing he must go forever: if he returned he
+could be killed at sight by any one and with impunity.(123) The pollution
+rested on the whole kindred of the murdered man.
+
+
+    “Whosoever _being related to the deceased_ on the male or female
+    side of those within the cousinship shall not prosecute the
+    murderer when he ought or proclaim him outlaw, he shall _take upon
+    himself __ the pollution_ and the hatred of the gods ... and he
+    shall be in the power of any who is willing to avenge the
+    dead.”(124)
+
+
+The pollution cannot be washed out until the homicidal soul has given life
+for life and has laid to sleep the wrath of the whole family
+(ξυγγένια).(125)
+
+If it is a beast that has killed the man, it shall be slain to propitiate
+the kin and atone for the blood shed.
+
+If it is a lifeless thing that has caused death, it shall solemnly be cast
+out before witnesses to acquit the whole family from guilt.(126)
+
+Amongst the Israelites, treating of homicides _amongst themselves_,
+compensation was forbidden in like manner.
+
+
+    Numbers xxxv. 31. “Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the
+    life of a murderer which is guilty of death: but he shall surely
+    be put to death.
+
+
+    “... The land cannot be cleansed of blood that is shed therein but
+    by the blood of him that shed it.”
+
+
+Let us complete this subject with the following story told by
+Herodotus:(127)—Adrastus, having slain his brother, flees to the court of
+Croesus. There he becomes as a son to Croesus and a brother to Atys,
+Croesus’ son. This Atys Adrastus has the terrible misfortune to slay,
+thereby incurring a three-fold pollution. He has brought down upon himself
+the triple wrath of Zeus Katharsios, Ephestios, and Hetaireios: he has
+violated his own innocence, his protector’s hearth, and the comradeship of
+his friend.
+
+In despair he commits suicide.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER III. THE EXTENT OF THE BOND OF KINSHIP.
+
+
+    Arctior vero colligatio est societatis propinquorum: ab illa enim
+    immensa societate humani generis in exiguam angustumque
+    concluditur.
+
+
+    _Cicero_.
+
+
+
+
+§ 1. Degrees Of Blood-Relationship; The Ἀγχιστεία.
+
+
+(M54) Such being the character of the burden of mutual responsibility
+borne by members of kindred blood, it remains, if possible, to obtain some
+idea of how this responsibility became narrowed and limited to the nearest
+relations, and what was the meaning underlying the distinction drawn
+between certain degrees of relationship.
+
+When examining the more detailed structure of the organisation of the
+kindred, considerable light seems to be thrown upon survivals in Athens by
+comparison with the customs of other communities, which were undergoing
+earlier stages of the same process of crystallisation from the condition
+of semi-nomadic tribes into that of settled provinces or kingdoms.
+
+(M55) In the Gortyn Laws we read:—
+
+
+    iv. 24. “The father shall have power over the children and the
+    property to divide it amongst them.... As long as they (the
+    parents) are alive, _there is no necessity for division_.... If a
+    man or woman die their children, or grandchildren, or
+    great-grandchildren, shall have the property....”
+
+
+The headship of the οἶκος and the ownership of the property vested in the
+parent as long as he lived and wished to maintain his power. Even after
+his death, unless they wished it, the sons need not divide up amongst
+themselves, but could live on with joint ownership in the one οἶκος of
+their deceased father. The eldest son would probably take the house
+itself, _i.e._ the hearth, with the duties to the family altars which
+devolved upon him as head of the family.(128)
+
+An example of this joint ownership occurs in the speech of Demosthenes
+against Leochares.(129) The two sons of Euthumachos after his death gave
+their sister in marriage (no doubt with her proper portion), and lived
+separately but _without dividing_ their inheritance (τὴν οὐσίαν ἀνέμητον).
+Even after the marriage of one brother, they still left the property
+undivided, each living on his share of the income, one in Athens, the
+other in Salamis.
+
+The possibility of thus living in one οἶκος and on an undivided patrimony
+is implied in another passage in Demosthenes, where, however, the exact
+opposite is described as actually having taken place.(130)
+
+Bouselos had five sons. He divided (διένειμεν τὴν οὐσίαν) his substance
+amongst them all as was fair and right, and they married wives and begat
+children and children’s children. Thus _five_ οἶκοι sprang up out of the
+one of Bouselos, and _each brother dwelt apart_, having his own οἶκος and
+bringing up his own offspring (ἔκγονοι) himself (χωρὶς ἕκαστος ᾤκει).
+
+Whilst the parents were alive the family naturally held very closely
+together, and often probably lived in one patriarchal household like
+Priam’s at Troy.
+
+Isaeus declares:—The law commands that we maintain (τρέφειν) our parents
+(γονεῖς): these are—parents, grandparents and _their parents_, if they are
+still alive:
+
+
+    “For they are the beginning (ἀρχή) of the family (γένος) and their
+    estate descends to their offspring (ἔκγονοι): wherefore it is
+    necessary to maintain them even if they leave nothing.”(131)
+
+
+The duty of maintenance (τρέφειν) owed to the ancestor would follow the
+same relationship as the right of inheritance from him, and this common
+debt towards their living forebears could not help further consolidating
+the group of descendants already bound together by common rites at the
+tombs of the dead.
+
+But granted this community of rights and debts, is it possible to
+formulate for the Greeks anything of the same limitations in the incidence
+of responsibility amongst blood-relations that is to be found elsewhere?
+
+(M56) In western Europe, owing perhaps to the influence of Christianity,
+the rites of ancestor-worship have no prominence. Ecclesiastical influence
+however was unable to prevent an exceedingly complex subdivision of the
+kindred existing in Wales and elsewhere. Whether this subdivision finds
+its _raison d’être_ in the worship of ancestors or not, the groups thus
+formed serve as units for sustaining the responsibilities incident to
+tribal life, and being, as will be seen, governed by similar
+considerations to those existing among the Greeks, they afford very
+suitable material for comparison, and throw considerable light upon one
+another.
+
+(M57) As the various departments affected by blood-relationship or purity
+of descent come under notice, it will be seen that the position of
+_great-grandson_ as at once limiting the immediate family of his parents
+and heading a new family of descendants is marked with peculiar emphasis.
+
+(M58) In the ancient laws of Wales it rests with great-grandsons to make
+the final division of their inheritance and start new households.
+
+Second cousins may demand redivision of the heritage descending (and
+perhaps already divided up in each generation between) from their
+great-grandfather. After second cousins no redivision or co-equation can
+be claimed.(132)
+
+In the meanwhile the oldest living parents maintained their influence in
+family matters. In the story of Kilhwch and Olwen, in the _Mabinogion_,
+the father of Olwen, before betrothing her to Kilhwch, declares that “her
+four great-grandmothers and her four great-grandsires are yet alive; it is
+needful that I take counsel of them.”(133)
+
+(M59) Even when feudalism refused to acknowledge other than an individual
+responsibility for a fief, it was unable to overcome the tribal theory of
+the indivisibility of the family, which maintained its unity in some
+places even under a feudal exterior. But as generations proceeded, and the
+relationships within the family diverged beyond the degree of second
+cousin, a natural breaking up seems to have taken place, though in the
+direction of subinfeudation under the feudal enforcement of the rule of
+primogeniture, instead of the practice, more in accordance with tribal
+instincts, of equal division and enfranchisement. It may however be
+surmised that the subdivision and subinfeudation of a holding in the
+occupation of such a group of kinsmen would be carried out by the
+formation of further similar groups.
+
+(M60) In the _Coustumes du Pais de Normandie_ mention is made of such a
+method of land-holding, called _parage_. It consists of an undivided
+tenure of brothers and relations _within the degree of second cousins_.
+
+The eldest does homage to the capital lord for all the _paragers_. The
+younger and their descendants hold of the eldest without homage, until the
+relationship comes to the _sixth degree inclusive_ (_i.e._ second
+cousins). When the lineage is beyond the sixth degree, the heirs of the
+cadets have to do homage to the heirs of the eldest or to whomsoever has
+acquired the fief. Then _parage_ ceases.(134)
+
+The tenure then becomes one of subinfeudation. As long as the _parage_
+continued, the share of a deceased _parager_ would be dealt with by
+redivision of rights, and no question would arise of finding heirs. But
+when it became a question of finding an heir to the group, failing heirs
+in the seventh degree inclusive, that is, son of second cousins—looked
+upon as son to the group—failing such an heir, the estate escheated to the
+lord.
+
+(M61) There is an interesting passage in the Ancient Laws of Wales
+ordaining that the next-of-kin shall not inherit as heir to his deceased
+kinsman, but as heir to the ancestor, who, apart from himself, would be
+without direct heir, _i.e._ presumably their common ancestor.
+
+
+    “No person is to obtain the land of a _co-heir_, as of a brother,
+    or of a cousin, or of a second cousin, by claiming it as heir to
+    that one co-heir who shall have died without leaving an heir of
+    his body: but by claiming it as heir _to one of his own parents_,
+    who had been owner of that land until his death without heir,
+    whether a father, or grandfather, or great-grandfather: that land
+    he is to have, if he be the nearest of kin to the deceased.”(135)
+
+
+This of course refers to inheritance within the group of co-heirs, the
+members of which held their position by virtue of their common
+relationship within certain degrees to the founder. And we may infer that
+emphasis was thus laid on the proof of relationship by _direct descent_,
+in order to prevent shares in the inheritance passing from hand to hand
+unnoticed, beyond the strict limit where subdivision could be claimed _per
+capita_ by the individual representatives of the diverging _stirpes_.
+
+(M62) The kindred in the _Ordinances of Manu_ is divided into two groups:—
+
+1. Sapindas, who owe the _funeral cake_ at the tomb.
+
+2. Samānodakas, who pour the _water libation_ at the tomb.
+
+
+    “To _three ancestors_ the water libation must be made; for _three
+    ancestors_ the funeral cake is prepared; the fourth (descendant or
+    generation) is the giver (of the water and the cake); the _fifth
+    has properly nothing to do_ (with either gift).”(136)
+
+
+This may be put in tabular form:—
+
+Receivers of water.
+
+1. Great-grandfather’s great-grandfather.
+2. Great-grandfather’s grandfather.
+3. Great-grandfather’s father.
+
+Receivers of cake.
+
+1. Great-grandfather.
+2. Grandfather.
+3. Father.
+4. Giver of cake and water
+5. Excluded
+
+Or inversely:—
+
+Givers of cake or _Sapindas_.
+
+Householder
+Brothers
+1st cousins
+2nd cousins
+
+Pourers of water or _Samānodakas_.
+
+3rd cousins
+4th cousins
+5th cousins
+
+Within the _Sapinda_-ship of his mother, a “twice-born” man may not
+marry.(137) Outside the _Sapinda_-ship, a wife or widow, “commissioned” to
+bear children to the name of her husband, must not go.
+
+
+    “Now _Sapinda_-ship ceases with the seventh person, but the
+    relationship of a Samānodaka (ends) with the ignorance of birth
+    and name.”(138)
+
+
+All are Sapindas who offer the cake to the same ancestors.
+
+(M63) The head of the family would himself offer or share with all his
+descendants in the offering of the one cake to his great-grandfather, his
+grandfather, and his father. And if this passage is taken in conjunction
+with the one quoted just above, the number sharing in the cake-offering,
+limited as in the text at the seventh person from the first ancestor who
+receives the cake, is just sufficient to include the great-grandson of the
+head of the family, supposed to be making the offering.
+
+The group, thus sharing the same cake-offering, would in the natural
+course be moving continually downwards, generation by generation as the
+head of the family died, thereby causing the great-grandfather to pass
+from the receivers of the cake-offering to the receivers of the water
+libation, and admitting the great-grandson’s son into the number of
+Sapindas who shared the cake-offering. And at no time would more than four
+generations have a share in the same cake offered to the three nearest
+ancestors of the head of the family.
+
+(M64) The Samānodakas, or pourers of the water libation appear to have
+been similarly grouped.
+
+“Ignorance of birth and name” was in Wales considered to be equivalent to
+_beyond fifth cousins_. According to the Gwentian Code, “there is no
+proper name in kin further than that”—_i.e._ fifth cousins.(139) And this
+tallies exactly with the previous quotation from Manu limiting the water
+libation to three generations of ancestors beyond those to whom the cake
+is due, which, as has been seen, includes fifth cousins.
+
+And it must be borne in mind that fifth cousins are great-grandsons of the
+great-grandsons of their common ancestor, or two generations of groups of
+second cousins.
+
+(M65) It was extremely improbable that a man would see further than his
+great-grandchildren born to him before his death. And it might also
+occasionally occur in times of war or invasion that a man’s sons and
+grandsons might go out to serve as soldiers, leaving the old man and his
+young great-grandchildren at home.
+
+If the fighting members of the family were killed, the great-grandsons
+(who would be second cousins or nearer to each other) would have to
+inherit directly from their great-grandfather: and thus, especially in
+cases where the property was held undivided after the father’s death, we
+can easily see that second cousins (_i.e._ all who traced back to the
+common great-grandfather) might be looked upon as forming a natural limit
+to the immediate descendants in any one οἶκος, and as the furthest removed
+who could claim shares of the ancestral inheritance.
+
+After the death of the great-grandfather or head of the house, his
+descendants would probably wish to divide up the estate and start new
+houses of their own. The eldest son was generally named after his father’s
+father,(140) and would carry on the name of the eldest branch of his
+great-grandfather’s house, and would be responsible for the proper
+maintenance of the rites on that ancestor’s tomb. He would also be
+guardian of any brotherless woman or minor amongst his cousins, each of
+whom would be equally responsible to him and to each other for all the
+duties and privileges entailed upon blood-relationship.
+
+Thus seems naturally to spring up an inner group of blood-relations
+closely drawn together by ties which only indirectly reached other and
+outside members of the γένος.
+
+(M66) In the fourth century B.C. this compact group limited to second
+cousins still survived at Athens, responsible to each other for
+succession, by inheritance or by marriage of a daughter; for vengeance and
+purification after injury received by any member, and for all duties
+shared by kindred blood.
+
+This close relation was called ἀγχιστεία, and all its members were called
+ἀγχιστεῖς _i.e._ any one upon whom the claim upon the next-of-kin might at
+any time fall.
+
+The speech of Demosthenes against Makartatos affords considerable
+information as to the constitution of the family-group or οἶκος. The five
+sons of Bouselos,(141) we are told, on his death divided his substance
+amongst them, and each started a new οἶκος and begat children and
+children’s children.(142) The action, which was the occasion of the
+speech, lay between the great-grandsons of two of these five founders of
+οἶκοι, Stratios and Hagnias, and had reference to the disposal of the
+estate of the grandson of the latter, which had come into the hands of the
+great-grandson of Stratios.
+
+One might have supposed that the descendants of Bouselos, with their
+common burial ground(143) and so forth, would have ranked as all in the
+same οἶκος under their title of Bouselidai. But it is clear from this
+speech of Demosthenes, that too many generations had already passed to
+admit of Bouselos being considered as still head of an unbroken οἶκος, and
+that his _great_-great-grandsons were subdivided into separate οἶκοι under
+the names of their respective great-grandfathers, Stratios, Hagnias, &c.
+(οἵ εἰσιν ἐκ τοῦ Στρατίου οἴκου, ἐκ δὲ τοῦ Ἁγνίου οὐδεπώποτ᾽
+ἐγένοντο).(144)
+
+
+
+
+§ 2. Limitations In Respect Of Succession Outside The Direct Line Of
+Descent.
+
+
+(M67) The Gortyn law quoted above in the previous section goes on:—
+
+
+    v. “If (a man or woman die and) they have no children, the
+    deceased’s brothers and brother’s children or _grandchildren_
+    shall have the property. If there are none of these, the
+    deceased’s sisters, their children or _grandchildren_. If there
+    are none of these, to whom it descends of whatever grade they be,
+    they shall inherit the property.”
+
+
+This clause takes the evidence one step further, and it is noticeable how
+the right of inheritance is determined by the great-grandchild of the
+common ancestor. In the direct line, a man’s descendants down to his
+great-grandchildren inherited his estate. In dealing with inheritance
+through a brother of the deceased the heirship terminates with the
+_grandchild_ of the brother, who would be great-grandchild of the nearest
+common ancestor with the previous owner of the estate. If there is no
+brother, the child of the cousin limits the next branch, as will be seen.
+
+(M68) Isaeus(145) describes the working of the then-existing (c. 350 B.C.)
+law of inheritance at Athens as follows:—
+
+The law gives “brothers’ property” (i.e. property without lineal
+succession) to
+
+
+    1. _Brothers_ by the same father, or brother’s children, for these
+    are related to the deceased in the nearest degree;
+
+
+    2. _Sisters_ by the same father, or sister’s children;
+
+
+    3. _First cousins_ by the father’s side as far as _cousin’s
+    children_ (δίδωσι τὴν ἀγχιστείαν ἀνεψιοῖς πρὸς πατρὸς μέχρι
+    _ἀνεψιῶν παίδων_).
+
+
+    Failing these, recourse is had back again into the family (εἰς τὸ
+    γένος πάλιν ἐπανέρχεται) and the law makes those related through
+    the _mother_ of the deceased, masters (κύριοι) of the family (and
+    inheritance) in the same order as on the father’s side from the
+    beginning.
+
+
+That is to say, failing first cousins once removed, the inheritance goes
+back and begins again at the mother of the deceased, who however, being a
+woman, can only inherit on behalf of her issue, present or
+prospective.(146) If she has married again and has a son (half-brother to
+her deceased son) he would inherit. Failing her issue, her brother and so
+on to first cousin’s children of the deceased, through his mother, would
+have the inheritance.
+
+Failing these, the nearest kinsman to be found on the father’s side, of
+whatsoever degree, is to inherit.
+
+(M69) The law as stated by Demosthenes(147) coincides with this:—
+
+
+    “If there are no sons, brothers by the same father (shall
+    inherit): and their true born children, if there are any, shall
+    have the share of their father: if there are no brothers or
+    brother’s children the issue of the latter in the same way shall
+    partake: males and children of males shall have preference (over
+    females) if they are born of the same (parents), even if they are
+    further off by birth (γένει) [_i.e._ are a generation lower down].
+    If there are none on the father’s side as far as _cousin’s
+    children_ (μέχρι ἀνεψιῶν παίδων), the relations on the mother’s
+    side in the same way shall have possession (κυρίους εἶναι). But if
+    there are none on either side _within these degrees_, the nearest
+    of kin on the father’s side shall have possession.”
+
+
+Whenever this law is quoted the limit of relationship laid down therein
+for the immediate ἀγχιστεία is always that of ἀνεψιῶν παῖδες, or sons of
+first cousins, who inherit from their first cousins once removed (_oncle à
+la Brétagne_, or Welsh uncle as this relation has been called).
+Occasionally the patronymic form ἀνεψιαδοῖ is used, apparently with the
+same signification, though properly ἀνεψιαδοῖ would mean sons of two first
+cousins, _i.e._ second cousins.(148)
+
+(M70) It appears from the evidence reviewed hitherto, that any
+great-grandson could inherit from any grandson of a common ancestor, and
+the conclusion also seems to be justified, that the group of
+great-grandsons were considered to divide up their right to inherit once
+for all, and that having done so, with respect to that inheritance they
+were considered to have begun a new succession. To put it differently, in
+case of the death of one of these second cousins, after the final division
+of their inheritance had taken place, the rest of the second cousins would
+have no right to a share in his portion; an heir would have to be found
+within his nearer relations. Thus, they share responsibilities towards any
+of their relations within the group and higher up in their families, and
+also stand shoulder to shoulder in sharing such burdens as pollution and
+so on, but are outside the immediate ἀγχιστεία with respect to each
+other’s succession. The reason for this will perhaps be more apparent as
+the argument proceeds.
+
+That the grandson of a first cousin was outside the ἀγχιστεία is clear
+from the speech of Demosthenes already mentioned,(149) where the
+plaintiff, who originally stands in that relationship to the deceased
+whose inheritance is in dispute, is adopted as son of his grandfather
+(first cousin of the deceased), in order to come within the legal
+definition of ἀνεψιοῦ παῖς.
+
+That the son of a second cousin was also without the pale is directly
+stated in several passages in Isaeus.
+
+(M71) It must be remembered that by “inheritance” is meant the assumption
+of all the duties incumbent on the ἀγχιστεύς, and that the man who
+“inherited” took his place for the future as son of the deceased in the
+family pedigree, and reckoned his relationship to the rest of the γένος
+thenceforth from his new position, in the house into which he had
+come.(150)
+
+(M72) Now if it is true that to the great-grandson was the lowest in
+degree to which property could directly descend without entering a new
+οἶκος, and if that great-grandson was also looked upon as beginning with
+his acquired property a new portion of the continuous line of descent; any
+one, who “inherited” from him and ranked in the scale of relationship as
+HIS SON, would necessarily fall outside the former group and would be
+considered as forming the nearest relative in the next succeeding group.
+This, it seems, is the meaning of the language of the law which limits the
+ἀγχιστεία to the children of first cousins who could inherit from their
+parent’s first cousins, and still _retain their relationship as
+great-grandsons_ of the same ancestor. Whereas any one taking the place of
+son to his second cousin would be one degree lower down in descent, and
+pass outside the limit of the four generations. The law makes the kinsmen
+therefore exhaust all possible relationships _within the group_ by
+reverting to the mother’s kindred with the same limitation before allowing
+the inheritance to pass outside or lower down.
+
+(M73) In confirmation of this view the following passage may be quoted
+from _Plato’s Laws_:—
+
+
+    “He who in the sad disorder of his soul has a mind, justly or
+    unjustly, to expel from his family a son whom he has begotten and
+    brought up, shall not lightly or at once execute his purpose; but
+    first of all he shall collect together his own kinsmen, extending
+    to (_first_) _cousins_ (μέχρι ἀνεψιῶν), and in like manner his
+    son’s kinsmen by the mother’s side,(151) and in their presence he
+    shall accuse his son, setting forth that he deserves at the hands
+    of them all to be dismissed from the family (γένος).”(152)
+
+
+Before dishonouring one of the family and so bereaving it of a member
+owing duties which, by his disinheritance, may fall into abeyance or be
+neglected, the parent calls together all to whom his son might perhaps
+ultimately become the only living representative and heir, and who might
+at some future time be dependent on him for the performance of ancestral
+rites. That this was in Plato’s mind when he wrote is shown by the next
+sentence, in which he provides for the possibility of some relation
+already having need of the young man and being desirous to adopt him as
+his son, in which case he shall by no means be prevented. The concurrence
+of all relations in such a position was therefore necessary.
+
+In other cases where Plato mentions similar gatherings of the kin but for
+different purposes, he extends the summons to _cousin’s children_. But
+here it can be seen they would have no place. They would be second cousins
+to the disgraced youth; they might have to share privilege or pollution
+with him, but had no claim on him for duties towards themselves. He would
+be “cousin’s son” to his father’s first cousins—the limit of such a claim
+in the ἀγχιστεία.
+
+(M74) In the speech of Isaeus concerning the estate of Hagnias, a real
+second cousin is in possession of the estate. He won the case at the time
+and died in possession, and an action against his son Makartatos for the
+same property is the occasion of one of the speeches of Demosthenes. To
+fully understand the relationships referred to in these cases, the
+accompanying genealogical tree of the descendants of Bouselos may be of
+assistance. It will also serve as an example of how a kindred hung
+together, and how by intermarriage and adoption the name of the head of an
+οἶκος was carried on down a long line of male descendants.
+
+[Illustration: Family tree of Bouselos.]
+
+Theopompos, in the speech of Isaeus, had taken possession of the estate of
+his second cousin Hagnias, as his next of kin and heir. Throughout the
+speech he is styled ἀνεψιοῦ παῖς so as to bring him within the phraseology
+of the law, and he successfully defends himself from the claims of the
+next generation below—viz., his brother’s son. But in the speech of
+Demosthenes against his son Makartatos, who had taken possession at his
+father’s death of the disputed property, it is represented that his father
+had got possession only by defeating another claimant, Phylomache II., by
+“surprise,” as it was called, by stating that her grandmother through whom
+she traced her claim was only half-sister to Hagnias’ father. But
+Phylomache’s husband, having caused their son Euboulides III. to be
+adopted as the son of Euboulides II.—his wife’s father and Hagnias’ first
+cousin, a quite regular course for the grandson inheriting through his
+heiress mother—proved that his wife’s grandmother was whole sister to
+Hagnias father, and brought the action under the guidance of Demosthenes
+against Makartatos. This Euboulides III. sued as true ἀνεψιοῦ παῖς and
+οἰκεῖος ἐκ τοῦ οἴκου of Hagnias.(153) He is described as having “one of
+the titles mentioned in the law _as far as which_ the law bids the
+ἀγχιστεία go, for he is _cousin’s son_ to Hagnias.”
+
+On the other hand, Theopompos, father of Makartatos and second cousin of
+Hagnias, is mentioned(154) as “being of a different οἶκος altogether,” and
+not at all related in such a way as to be heir of Hagnias (μηδὲν
+προσηκόντων ὤστε κληρονομεῖν τῶν Ἁγνίου, ἀλλὰ γένει _ἀπωτέρω_ ὄντων),
+being too far off in the family (or by birth).
+
+That the title of Theopompos (viz., second cousinship) was not valid, may
+be inferred partly by the ruses he adopted to get possession, but more
+especially by the fact(155) that none of the other second cousins on a par
+with him, and with whom he ought to have shared, seem to have believed in
+the validity of their titles, or at any rate taken the trouble to sue for
+part of the estate.
+
+However this may be, there does not seem anything in these speeches other
+than confirmatory of the view stated above of the composition and
+limitation of the ἀγχιστεία.
+
+
+
+
+§ 3. Division Amongst Heirs.
+
+
+(M75) Succession to the inheritance of an estate was ordained by law in
+strict accordance with the ancient conception of the unity of the family.
+On the death of the head of a family, unless the paternal οἶκος was
+voluntarily continued unbroken by his descendants, the natural course was
+for each son ultimately to live apart and found a separate οἶκος
+consisting of himself and his offspring. Equal division amongst heirs was
+therefore the rule in Greece; equal division, that is to say, between all
+of equal grade.
+
+(M76) The Gortyn Laws have already been referred to as enforcing the
+principle.(156) If a man died, his heirs were either his sons, or his
+grandsons, or his greatgrandsons. If he had no children, his brothers, and
+their children, or their grandchildren succeeded.
+
+The Athenian law was conceived in the same spirit, but mentions a further
+point—viz., that in the division amongst sons, the οἶκος of any one of
+their number who had died before the division, could be represented by his
+sons or grandsons, who thus received their father’s share.
+
+This system of representation probably existed also among the Gortynians,
+though no mention of it is made in their laws, for it is inconceivable
+that any of the grandsons could be deprived of all share in their
+grandfather’s estate by the mere death of the intermediate generation.
+
+But the division _per stirpes_ was not maintained throughout. It is
+probable from the words of the Attic orators that equal division amongst
+all of the same grade, such as nephews or cousins, took place _per
+capita_, any deceased member of that grade being represented by his sons.
+Representation, of course, could not take place in the case of a division
+amongst cousins’ sons, owing to the strict limitation of the ἀγχιστεία to
+four generations from the common ancestor; any deceased relation in that
+degree therefore simply dropped out of the succession.
+
+(M77) It has generally been assumed that grandsons inheriting directly
+from their grandfather, all the intermediate generation being already
+dead, inherited none the less the shares of their respective fathers _per
+stirpes_. But if the foregoing account of the unity of the οἶκος and its
+resemblance in its composition to the household of the Welsh tribal system
+be correct, it seems more reasonable to suppose that, all the intermediate
+generation being dead, the grandsons, in virtue of being all equally
+related to their grandfather, would inherit in equal shares _per capita_.
+Any dead grandson would of course be represented, as before, by his son or
+sons.
+
+(M78) The evidence is not sufficient to justify more than a suggestion on
+either side with regard to divisions amongst lineal descendants. With
+regard to successions by relations outside of the direct line of descent,
+such as nephews or cousins, it is almost certain that all of the same
+degree took equal shares _per capita_.
+
+Following the law for daughters, quoted by Demosthenes(157)—viz., that
+though all shared the inheritance of the property, only one need be dealt
+with in view of securing the succession—the assumption can be made that,
+when there were several heirs related in the same degree to the former
+owner of the estate, one of their number would be set apart to continue
+the household of their kinsman as his son, whilst the others merely took
+their shares of the property divided to continue their own οἶκοι
+respectively.
+
+The equal division of inheritance amongst kinsmen of equal degree _per
+capita_, in combination with the system of representation above described,
+is entirely consistent with the tribal conception of the household as
+hanging closely together, its members always looking up to their venerable
+head, in whom the ownership of the property vested, until by the death of
+older generations and the consequent subdivision, each in his turn became
+head of an οἶκος and owner of its share in the ancestral property.
+
+
+
+
+§ 4. Qualifications For The Recognition Of Tribal Blood.
+
+
+(M79) It has been remarked above with what jealousy the purity of the
+blood of the community was guarded. No child was admitted into the kindred
+of its father until all concerned were fully convinced of the
+blamelessness of its pedigree. In such circumstances it was no easy matter
+to acquire the privileges attached to the possession of tribal or citizen
+blood. It seems to have been considered that however great otherwise the
+claims of a stranger might be, time alone could really render the
+qualifications of his family complete.
+
+(M80) Under the ancient Laws of Wales no stranger’s family could acquire
+the full privileges of a Welsh tribesman or Cymro, as regards location on
+land, until after many generations. But if they married Welshwomen, and
+held land from generation to generation, the _greatgrandsons_ became fully
+privileged tribesmen.(158) Similarly if a stranger voluntarily assumed the
+position of serf to a Welshman, and his descendants did not choose to
+depart, but remained in that position to the descendants of the Welshman,
+the _greatgrandsons_ of the Welshman became proprietors of the
+greatgrandsons of the stranger.(159)
+
+(M81) But for the stranger who merely resided in Wales and did not marry
+into any Welsh tribe the period of probation was _three times as
+long_—viz., the greatgrandson of the greatgrandson of his greatgrandson
+was the first to attain to full tribal privilege—
+
+
+    “Strangers and their progeny are adjudged to be aillts; also a
+    reputed son who shall be denied and his progeny, and evildoers of
+    federate country and their progeny, _unto the end of the ninth
+    descent_.”(160)
+
+
+_i.e._, the tenth man would no longer be reckoned an _aillt_ but a free
+Cymro.
+
+The issue of a stranger obtains the privilege of a tribesman _in the
+fourth person_ by legitimate marriages.(161) But the aillt or stranger,
+who dwells in Cymru, does not attain until the _end of the ninth descent_.
+
+So too inversely:—
+
+The title to inherit by kin and descent in the tribal land and rights of
+his ancestors does not become extinct _till the ninth man_. The ninth man
+in descent from a banished tribesman coming home and finding his title as
+representative of his family seemingly extinguished, is to raise an outcry
+that from a proprietor he is becoming a nonproprietor, and the law will
+shelter him and adjudge him an equal share with the occupants he finds on
+the land. This is called the “outcry across the abyss.” The tenth man’s
+outcry cannot be heard. “Others say” that the ninth man is too late to
+raise the cry.(162)
+
+This is exactly parallel to the case of the stranger resident in Cymru.
+For _nine_ generations he is a stranger, and in _the tenth_ a Cymro. Here
+for _nine_ generations is the Cymro abroad a tribesman, and in _the tenth_
+he is a stranger.
+
+(M82) From a passage in Deuteronomy it would appear that the
+qualifications for admission as a full tribesman amongst the Israelites
+were identical with those just mentioned.
+
+The Israelites had purified themselves of the ancestor worship, that so
+long survived in Greece, and had, if one may say so, amalgamated all their
+minor deities and tribal superstitions in their one great monotheistic
+religion. Even then their tribal minds could not carry back their theology
+behind the known history of their own ancestors. Their God was the God of
+Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and was in their conception the greatest of
+Gods—_i.e._, greater than the Gods of other peoples, the existence of
+which their own beliefs did not preclude. Thus where in Attic writers we
+have mention of the religious rites of the family (which a stranger or
+polluted man might not approach), and of the partaking therein as proof of
+the whole admission and pure blood of those present, so in Deuteronomy the
+expression “the Congregation of the Lord,” is used to denote that sacred
+precinct, forbidden to all save pure tribesmen of Israel.
+
+It may be inferred from the following passage that if a stranger resided
+in Israel, and his family continued to do so for nine generations, the
+tenth generation would in any ordinary case be admitted to the
+Congregation of the Lord as full Israelites.
+
+
+    Deut. xxiii. 2 and 3. “A bastard, or an Ammonite, or Moabite shall
+    not enter into the congregation of the Lord _even to their tenth
+    generation_, for ever.”
+
+
+(M83) In special cases (exactly as was the rule in Wales)—such as the
+Edomite who was partly akin already, and the Egyptian who was united to
+the Israelites by the mysterious bonds of hospitality—a shorter sojourn in
+the land was held to qualify for full tribal privilege.
+
+
+    Deut. xxiii. 7 and 8. “Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite, for he is
+    thy brother: thou shalt not abhor an Egyptian, because thou wast a
+    stranger in his land. The _children_ that are begotten of them
+    shall enter into the congregation of the Lord _in their third
+    generation_.”
+
+
+The third generation of _children_ would be the _greatgrandchildren_ of
+the original settler, and this is just one third of the length of time
+implied as required from the ordinary stranger, who only attained the
+tribal privilege in the third succession of greatgrandchildren.
+
+It is worth notice in this connection that the land of Canaan was divided
+up in the names of the _greatgrandchildren_ of Abraham, to whom the
+promise was made; Ephraim and Manasseh, the sons of Joseph, taking their
+place amongst the others by adoption as sons by their grandfather Jacob,
+on an equality with his other sons.(163)
+
+(M84) These rules are not to be found with the same distinctness surviving
+at Athens, but there is a good deal of evidence showing how jealously the
+introduction of strangers to citizenship—which retained much that made it
+the later equivalent of the tribal bond—was regarded.
+
+Strangers made citizens (formally, ceremoniously, and by public vote) by
+the Athenian people cannot hold office as archon or partake of a holy
+office (ἱεροσύνη); but their _children can_, if they are born from a
+citizen wife duly and lawfully betrothed.(164) That is to say, that the
+Athenians considered it necessary that there should be actually citizen
+blood in the veins of all who held office amongst them.(165)
+
+(M85) The abhorrence in which the introduction of alien blood was held is
+illustrated by the Athenian law concerning marriage with aliens, quoted by
+Demosthenes in his speech against Neaera.
+
+
+    _Law_: “If an alien shall live as husband with an Athenian woman
+    by any device or contrivance whatever, it shall be lawful for any
+    of the Athenians who are possessed of such right, to indict him
+    before the judges. And if he is convicted, he shall be sold for a
+    slave and his property confiscated, and the third part shall
+    belong to the person who has convicted him. And the like
+    proceedings shall be taken if an alien woman live as wife with an
+    Athenian citizen, and the citizen who lives as husband with an
+    alien woman so convicted shall incur the penalty of 1,000
+    drachmæ.”
+
+
+(M86) Citizenship was considered the highest of privileges, and was
+conferred only on persons worthy of great honour. Any citizen could bring
+an action against the newly-admitted stranger to test his real merits, and
+even after formal acceptance by the people of Athens, if he failed to
+justify his claims at such a trial, his new honours were stripped from him
+and he remained an alien. This being so, it cannot be expected in the
+comparison that he should rank with the ordinary resident in Cymru in the
+Welsh Laws, but rather as the chieftain whom the people wished to honour
+by admission to their tribe.
+
+It is stated in the Welsh Laws that the _son_ of a stranger chief, to whom
+honour was to be given, entered the whole privilege of the tribe.
+
+(M87) According to Aristotle,(166) candidates for archonship at Athens
+were asked their father’s name and his deme, their grandfather’s name and
+his deme, their mother’s and her father’s name and his deme;(167) whether
+the candidate had an Apollo Patroïos and Zeus Herkeios, and where these
+shrines were: also if he treated his parents well and paid his taxes.
+
+In order to be perfectly sure that the candidate was of full and pure
+blood, they investigated the condition of both his grandparents, and, as
+further proof, assured themselves that he had a house and property of his
+own, and that too inherited from his ancestors. Furthermore, he must be
+guilty of no impiety towards his parents or the State.
+
+If it were the case at Athens that the fourth generation from a stranger
+was considered as having attained to the rights of a citizen, it mattered
+little what a man’s _greatgrand_father was. He might have been an alien,
+yet if the intermediate ancestors were “in order,” the candidate would
+have acquired the full blood.(168)
+
+(M88) In the _Oedipus Tyrannus_,(169) Sophocles apparently uses the
+expression “slave from the _third_ mother” as implying that three descents
+were considered to confirm the position of the fourth generation as slave
+or citizen, or whatever the case might be. Oedipus assures Jokasta that
+_her_ pedigree and status will remain unimpugned, even though the enquiry
+he is prosecuting establish him thrice-born a slave from slave mother,
+slave grandmother, and slave greatgrandmother.
+
+In elections for sacred offices, which appear to have been about the last
+things laid open to the new citizen, the possession of three generations
+of privileged ancestors was in some places insisted on. There is an
+inscription to this effect belonging to Halikarnassos;(170) and some
+similar rule seems to have held good among the Jews.
+
+
+    “These sought their register among those that were reckoned by
+    genealogy, but it was not found; therefore were they, as polluted,
+    put from the priesthood (_ἠγχιστεύθησαν_ ἀπὸ τῆς ἱερατείας).”(171)
+
+
+The book of Nehemiah closes with the triumphant verse: “Thus I cleansed
+them from all strangers.”
+
+(M89) The rule in the _Ordinances of Manu_ for the recovery of Brahman
+caste is just halfway between the tenth and the fourth generations—namely,
+the seventh, or _greatgrandson of the greatgrandson_ of the first
+halfcaste. This is only the case when each generation marries a Brahman
+wife.
+
+
+    “If (the caste) produced from a Brahman by a Çudra woman keeps
+    reproducing itself by nobler (marriage) this ignoble attains a
+    noble family _at the seventh union_ (Yuga).”(172)
+
+
+Thus:—
+
+
+    If (1) the halfcaste marries a Brahman woman and
+    (2) his son do.
+    (3) his grandson do.
+    (4) his _greatgrandson_ do.
+    (5) _his_ son do.
+    (6) his grandson do.
+    (7) his _greatgrandson_ do.—at last his family is restored to
+    their lost high caste.
+
+
+
+
+§ 5. Limitations Of Liability For Bloodshed.
+
+
+(M90) The ἀγχιστεία, limited to relations within the same degrees as for
+other purposes, seems to be the unit in the case of pollution of the
+kindred by the death—violent or natural—of one of their number.
+
+
+    “Whosoever(173) being related to the deceased on the male or
+    female side of those _within the cousinship_ (ἐντὸς ἀνεψιότητος),
+    shall not prosecute the murderer when he ought and proclaim him
+    outlaw, he shall take _upon himself_ the pollution and the hatred
+    of the gods ... and he shall be in the power of any who is willing
+    to avenge the dead....”(174)
+
+
+    “The pollution cannot be washed out until the homicidal soul which
+    did the deed has given life for life and has propitiated and laid
+    to sleep the wrath of the whole family” (ξυγγένεια).(175)
+
+
+    “If a brother wound a brother (ὁμόγονος) the parents (γεννῆται)
+    and the kinsmen (συγγενεῖς) to _cousins’ children_ on male and
+    female side shall meet and judge the case.”(176)
+
+
+Ransom was forbidden; citizen was bound to citizen with ties that had
+inherited too much of the tribal sanctity to admit of any extenuation of
+the extreme penalty.
+
+It was no doubt a wise policy on the part of the legislators, with the
+view to the preservation of respect for life and property, to make the
+responsibility for murder rest as widely as possible, and include as many
+relations and connections on both sides as might be. In order also that
+the wife, in case her husband was killed, and the daughter, in case her
+father was killed, might be fully protected and represented among the
+prosecuting kindred, the law of Draco seems to lay the necessity for
+action also on the father-in-law and the son-in-law. The _phratria_, being
+such a compact organisation and exacting such formal admission of its
+members, would naturally be concerned to see that justice was dealt to any
+of its number. Though we cannot include the _phratores_ amongst those
+directly responsible equally with the near kinsmen for crimes committed by
+one of their number, they would always have to take a certain part in
+whatever was necessary to bring him to justice, besides being generally
+concerned in all matters relating to kinship, which affected any member of
+their _phratria_.
+
+(M91) “Proclamation shall be made against the murderer in the agora within
+[? his] cousinship and (the degree) of a first cousin, and prosecution
+shall be made jointly by cousins and _cousins’ children and descendants of
+cousins_, and sons-in-law and fathers-in-law and _phratores_.”
+
+That Demosthenes here quotes a genuine law of Draco is proved by an
+inscription found at Athens belonging to the year 409 B.C., recording this
+sentence as part of the law of Draco about murder.(177)
+
+In another place Demosthenes thus refers to the action of this law:—
+
+“The law commands the relations to go forth and prosecute as far as
+descendants of cousins; and in the oath it is defined what the
+relationship actually is, etc.”(178)
+
+The use of ἀνεψιαδοῖ in addition to ἀνεψιῶν παῖδες in Draco’s law above is
+emphatic as implying that as regards pollution the group of relations to
+second cousins were treated _en masse_ as under the stain; they had not
+yet, so to speak, reached the point where they could divide up their
+responsibility.
+
+(M92) If the murder was committed within the narrow limits of the
+ἀγχιστεία itself, the double pollution of the bloodspilling and the blood
+spilled rested upon the whole group with overwhelming force.
+
+Plato(179) treats of such a calamity and prescribes the remedy. If a man
+slay his wife, or she her husband, his children are orphans; their debt of
+maintenance to their parent is cancelled; he must flee; they possess his
+goods. If he is childless, his relations shall meet _to the children of
+his cousins_ on the male and female side (_i.e._ all his possible heirs)
+and shall elect not one of themselves, but a younger son of some other and
+pious family to bring in new blood with better fortune to counteract the
+curse, as heir to the house (κληρονόμος εἰς τὸν οἶκον), introducing him to
+the father of the banished (or deceased) man and to those further back in
+the family (τοῖς ἄνω τοῦ γένους), calling him their _son_, the continuer
+of their family (γεννήτωρ), their hearth-keeper (ἑστιοῦχος), and minister
+of their sacred rites.... But the guilty man they shall “let lie,”
+nameless, childless, portionless for ever.(180)
+
+(M93) In the ancient Laws of Wales the blood-fine takes a very important
+position. But whereas all the relations of the murderer are liable to be
+called upon to pay the “Spearpenny,” as it is called, only the inner
+kindred within fixed degrees contribute proportionally to the payment of
+the price. The group upon which this responsibility falls is twice as
+large in the Welsh Laws as at Athens, and includes _fifth_ cousins, or the
+greatgrandchildren of greatgrandchildren of a common ancestor.
+
+The Dimetian Code describes the relations who pay galanas as follows.(181)
+Those beyond only pay “spearpenny.”
+
+      Father and mother.
+      Grandfather.
+      Greatgrandfather.
+      Brother and sister.
+      First cousins.
+      Second cousins.
+      Third cousins.
+      Fourth cousins.
+      Fifth cousins.
+
+According to the Gwentian Code, _fifth_ cousins share. “There is no proper
+share, no proper name in kin further than that.”(182)
+
+The Venedotian Code states that galanas is paid by the kindred: two parts
+by the relations of the father, one part by the relations of the mother,
+to _sixth cousins_. All kindred after sixth cousins pay spearpenny.(183)
+
+The sixth cousin is also called “kinsman son of a fifth cousin, and then
+_the father (i.e. the fifth cousin) pays it_, because his relationship can
+be fixed, _but the relationship of his son to the murderer cannot_.”
+
+(M94) The defilement of carrying out a corpse and assisting at a funeral
+also covered the same area of relationship at Athens—_i.e._ the ἀγχιστεία.
+The house of the dead man was only to be entered by those naturally
+polluted.
+
+
+    “After the funeral no woman to enter the house save only _those
+    defiled_; to wit—mother, wife, sisters, and daughters; beside
+    these not more than five women and two girls, _daughters of first
+    cousins_: beyond these, none.”(184)
+
+
+Demosthenes quotes the law of Solon to the effect that—
+
+
+    “No woman under sixty years old to enter the house or follow the
+    corpse except those within ἀνεψιαδοῖ (πλὴν ὅσαι ἐντὸς ἀνεψιαδῶν
+    εἰσιν): no woman _at all_ may enter the house after the carrying
+    out of the corpse except _those within_ ἀνεψιαδοῖ.”(185)
+
+
+All those near of kin assist in the funeral.
+
+The payment of the blood-fine by the whole family of the murderer was
+considered necessary to allay the vengeance and anger of the family of the
+murdered man within the same area of relationship. In Wales the members of
+the family who received the galanas, did so in proportion to the
+importance of their position in the transmission of the kindred blood,
+according to a classification identical with their proximity in
+relationship to the dead man, and their expectation of inheritance from
+him or succession to his place.
+
+(M95) The inclusion of the mother’s relatives and their liability in these
+circumstances, in addition to the paternal relations, follow naturally
+enough in Wales as in Greece when once the transmission of inheritance
+through a woman, in default of male heirs, had become a recognised
+possibility. A woman’s sons might always be called upon under certain
+circumstances to take inheritance from _her_ father or next of kin. They
+therefore quite fairly shared in the claims as well as the privileges of
+their position. And _vice versa_, in exchange for the priceless guarantee
+of continuity provided by a woman’s offspring to her relations, they too
+would be prepared to undergo a part of the penalties incurred by any of
+those who might rank some day as their next of kin, or as their sons.
+
+This view of the source of their recognition as members of the kindred
+responsible for the blood-fine in Wales is confirmed by a statement in the
+Venedotian Code.(186) Those women and clerks who can swear that they will
+never have children, and so are useless for the preservation of continuity
+in the families to which they belong, are specially exempted from
+contribution to the galanas, inasmuch as they have forsworn the privilege
+of attaining through posterity a share in the immortality on earth of
+their kindred.
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IV. THE RELATION OF THE FAMILY TO THE LAND.
+
+
+Γαῖαν παμμήτειραν ἀείσομαι, ἠυθέμεθλον,
+πρεσβίστην, ἣ φέρβει ἐπὶ χθονὶ πάνθ᾽, ὁπός᾽ ἐστὶν, ...
+ἐκ σέο δ᾽ εὔπαιδές τε καὶ εὔκαρποι τελέθουσι,
+πότνια, σεῦ δ᾽ ἔχεται δοῦναι βίον ἠδ᾽ ἀφελέσθαι
+θνητοῖς ἀνθρώποισιν.
+
+Homeric Hymn.
+
+
+
+
+§ 1. The Κλῆρος And Its Form.
+
+
+In trying to realise the methods of land tenure amongst the Greeks, we are
+baffled by the indirectness of the evidence available.
+
+(M96) We know that the estate which descended from father to son, and was
+in theory inalienable from the family of its original possessors, was
+called a κλῆρος or “lot,” but the familiarity with which the poets,
+historians, and orators use the word does not afford information as to
+what the κλῆρος really was and how it was made use of in practice. The law
+concerning these family holdings, says Aristotle,(187) and concerning
+their possible transmission through daughters was not written. It was a
+typical example of customary law. This statement gives a hint as to the
+usual treatment of questions arising under this head. Methods of land
+tenure were not of rapid growth, nor were they easily changed; they had
+their source with the slow devotion to agriculture of pastoral tribes, and
+were dependent on a class unaffected by the growth of education and the
+arts.
+
+(M97) The intricate connection of the system of land tenure with the
+composition of the family removed the consideration of questions of
+ownership from the sphere of written law, and delegated them to the most
+conservative department of customary procedure, ranking them on a par with
+questions of family religious observances.(188) The deposit of some
+ancestor’s bones in a certain field was occasionally a valuable link in
+the title to possession of that piece of land as private property;(189)
+and the possession of land at all was in part a guarantee of the pure
+native blood in the veins of the possessor.(190) It is a striking
+illustration of the truth of this that, throughout all the extant speeches
+of Isaeus dealing with the disposal of κλῆροι of dead citizens, not a
+single case turns upon evidence for or against a sale or transfer of
+property. The speeches all deal exclusively with family matters; the line
+of argument always leads to the proof of near kinship by blood or adoption
+to the previous owner; and the right of possession of the inheritance
+seems taken for granted as following incontrovertibly the establishment of
+the required relationship.(191)
+
+
+    “It seems to me that all those who contend for the right of
+    succession to estates, when like us they have shown themselves to
+    be both nearest in blood to the person deceased, and most
+    connected with him in friendship (φιλίᾳ), are dispensed from
+    adding a superfluity of other arguments.”(192)
+
+
+(M98) In the early settlements, as Thucydides tells us, necessity was the
+ruling motive. Each man devoted his attention to providing the necessaries
+of life. There was superfluity neither of chattels nor of tilth. Men
+hesitate to sow when the harvest is to be reaped by their enemies.(193)
+The flocks and herds of the pastoral tribes could be driven for safety
+into the mountain strongholds; yet even they were liable to frequent
+losses. On one occasion Odysseus had to go to Messene “to recover a debt;
+which, to wit, the whole people owed him (πᾶς δῆμος): for the Messenians
+had lifted 300 sheep with their shepherds from Ithaka.”(194) As the
+newcomers increased in numbers and gained a reputation for ability to
+defend their own, sufficient to discourage the attacks of their
+neighbours, they would have leisure to devote some of their energies to
+the cultivation of the plains around them. Troy was founded first up in
+the hills,(195) and afterwards was moved down to a good position on the
+lower ground for the sake no doubt of the better pasture in the river
+meadows, and of the agriculture which had long been carried on over the
+“wheat-bearing plain” around the city,(196) before the ravages of the ten
+years’ war.
+
+It is not proposed to enter in detail into the _methods_ of cultivation of
+the soil in vogue at various times in Greece; but inasmuch as whilst
+studying the kernel, assistance may often be obtained from knowledge of
+the shell, mention may be made in passing of such few points of interest
+in the physical features of agriculture as may be available.
+
+(M99) In the Consular Reports on Land Tenure in Europe made in 1869,
+descriptions are given of the existing methods of tenure and cultivation
+in Greece and the Islands.
+
+In Greece the usual holding of a small proprietor is said to be of fifteen
+to twenty-five acres (or sometimes double that area), and is called a
+_zeugarion_.(197) Many have only a couple of acres.
+
+
+    “The greatest inconvenience and frequent lawsuits arise from the
+    manner in which these properties intersect each other. Moreover
+    none of the usual precautions are adopted to mark the limits of
+    the different properties, which, in the absence of any reliable
+    land survey, are often very vaguely described in the title
+    deeds.”(198)
+
+
+In cases of intestacy real property is divided equally among the children
+or nearest relatives. When there is a will the testator can only reserve
+for his disposal a share of the estate equivalent to that which, after an
+equal division, descends by right to each of the direct heirs.
+
+(M100) Professor Ansted, in his book on the Ionian Islands in the year
+1863, thus describes the management of an estate on the Island of Santa
+Maura:—(199)
+
+
+    “According to Ionian law, all the members of a family share
+    equally in the family property after the death of the father; but
+    it does not follow as a matter of course that the property is
+    divided. It is much more usual that the brothers and sisters, if
+    young, continue to live together till they either marry or
+    undertake some employment or business at a distance. If a sister
+    marries, she is dowered with a sum equivalent to her share. If a
+    brother however earns a separate income, from whatever source,
+    whether he be married or remain single, and whether he live in the
+    same or a different house, or even remove to another town or
+    island, he pays in all his income to a joint fund, _the foundation
+    of which is the income obtained from the paternal estate_. Those
+    who do nothing else manage the estate. One brother, perhaps,
+    remains in the village as cultivator, another lives in the town
+    acting as factor, or merchant to the estate, receiving and selling
+    the produce and managing the proceeds, whatever the case may be;
+    and in addition selling, exporting, and otherwise conducting a
+    general business in the same department. A third may perhaps
+    receive and sell the goods in a foreign country. A fourth may be a
+    member of the legislature, and a fifth a judge. Some marry and
+    have families, others remain single: but the incomes of all are
+    united, each draws out a reasonable share, according to his needs,
+    and a very close account is kept of all transactions. If one
+    brother dies, his children come into the partnership; and as time
+    goes on, these again will grow up and marry, the daughters
+    receiving a proportional and often large dower out of the joint
+    fund, entirely without reference to the special property of their
+    parents. This may go on indefinitely: but as family quarrels will
+    arise, _there are always means of terminating the arrangement_,
+    and closing accounts, either entirely as regards all, or partially
+    as with reference to a _mauvais sujet_, or troublesome member of
+    the partnership.... This curious patriarchal system, though
+    obtaining more perfectly and frequently in Santa Maura than in the
+    other islands, exists in Cephalonia and is said to be not quite
+    unknown in Zante, where the state of society approximates far more
+    to that common in the western countries of Europe. Santa Maura,
+    being the most isolated of all the islands and that which retains
+    all ancient customs most tenaciously, is naturally that in which
+    this sort of communism can exist with smallest risk of
+    interference.”
+
+
+According to the Consular Reports, the relations between landlord and
+tenant are governed more by local usage than by law, and the landlord
+generally takes on an average about 15 per cent. of the produce in kind on
+the threshing-floor, as rent, in cases where he does not supply more than
+the bare use of the land.(200)
+
+(M101) There is little manuring; the light plough barely turns the surface
+of the land. Land is usually allowed to lie fallow every other year,
+sometimes two years out of three. Sheep and goats are the chief stock;
+they of course graze in summer on the mountains; villages sometimes own
+forests and waste lands in common.
+
+(M102) In the islands of the Archipelago,(201) the holdings are frequently
+divided into separate plots consisting of a quarter or half acre apiece or
+even less, intersected by those belonging to other parties. Cattle are
+pastured on the fallow, roadsides, &c., near the village.
+
+In Cephalonia,(202) holdings consist of from five to twenty-five acres,
+seldom in a continuous piece, but “cut up into patches and intersected by
+other properties.”
+
+In Corfu,(203) the holdings are similar—infinitesimally small and
+intermixed pieces of land, especially in the olive groves, where however
+there are no divisions on the land and the “oldest inhabitant” has to be
+asked for evidence of ownership in disputed cases.
+
+Throughout the Greek nation, the peasants live in their houses in villages
+and not on separate estates. They help one another to avoid the expense of
+hired labour, and themselves work for hire on the estates of the large
+proprietors.
+
+(M103) Professor Ridgeway has drawn attention to the knowledge of this
+open field system in the _Iliad_ and _Odyssey_;(204) and indeed the
+division of the land tilled by occupants of villages into small pieces or
+strips, in such a way that the holding of each consists of a number of
+isolated pieces lying promiscuously amongst the strips of others, over the
+whole area under plough, is a world-wide custom and is the habit alike of
+the east as of the west.
+
+Though the assertion cannot yet be made that the κλῆρος was thus arranged
+on the soil, it can do no harm at any rate to bear in mind this ancient
+and still used method of dividing land, whilst considering the question of
+the relation of the ownership of the soil to the rank and status of the
+tribesman.
+
+
+
+
+§ 2. The Relation Of The Κλῆρος To The Οἶκος.
+
+
+(M104) The connection of the possession of land with the headship of the
+family finds its counterpart in the right of maintenance of those who had
+the true blood of that family. And in those countries where the sons
+remained until their father’s death under his _patria potestas_ they had
+to look to him for maintenance derived from the κλῆρος which descended to
+him as the means of sustenance for himself and his family. Where the head
+of the family alone was responsible for the rites to the dead at the
+family altars, the position of a son would always be incomplete if he
+tried to establish during his father’s lifetime a hearth and household of
+his own. And it has been already mentioned that it was necessary to
+emancipate a son from the family of his own father, before he could take
+property, passing on the death of his mother’s relations to her issue, and
+assume his rightful position as their representative and the living head
+of their household.(205)
+
+According to Harpocration, the initiation into the mysteries of the hearth
+only took place on the actual assumption of the inheritance.(206)
+
+(M105) Occasionally a father feeling the weight of years would be glad to
+pass on to his son during his lifetime some of his burden of
+responsibility by making him master of his estate (κύριος τῆς
+οὐσίας).(207) In this case, the son would be responsible for the
+maintenance of his parent, a duty much insisted on by Plato and Isaeus. In
+fact the conclusion is justified that the family, until final subdivision
+into separate οἶκοι, drew its supplies from the common inheritance, and
+that the subdivision of the means of subsistence was contemporaneous and
+co-extensive with the differentiation of the various branches of the
+original οἶκος along the lines of the rising generations.
+
+The same may be inferred from the words of Demosthenes describing the
+division of the property of Bouselos amongst his sons and the foundation
+of their several οἶκοι.
+
+
+    “And all these sons of Bouselos became men, and their father
+    divided his substance amongst them all, with perfect justice. And
+    they having shared the substance, each of them married a wife
+    according to your laws, and there were born children to them all,
+    and children’s children, and there grew up five οἶκοι from the one
+    οἶκος of Bouselos, and each dwelt apart, having his own house and
+    his own offspring.”(208)
+
+
+In the meanwhile, before division, all sons had equal right to participate
+in the family goods after the father’s death, and dowries had to be paid
+therefrom to the daughters. The eldest brother was guardian (κύριος) of
+his sisters and those of his brothers who were minors, inasmuch as he
+succeeded to his father’s position of head of his kindred at the altars of
+their ancestors. But in Greece at any rate his authority over his brothers
+when once a division had taken place seems to have been slight if it
+existed at all.
+
+(M106) Amongst the Gods, the three brothers Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades,
+sons of Rhea, shared their inheritance from their father Kronos. They
+divided everything in three, shaking lots thereover (παλλομένων). Each
+took equal share of honour (ἔμμορε τιμῆς), but earth and Olympos were
+common (ξυνή) to all.(209) But Zeus was the first-born and “knew more
+things”—Ἀλλὰ Ζεὺς πρότερος γεγόνει καὶ πμείονα ᾒδη(210)—and Poseidon
+therefore avoided open strife with him, however unwillingly. Though Zeus
+be the stronger, grumbles the Sea-god, let him keep to his third share and
+not interfere with his brothers’ pleasure on their common ground, the
+earth. Let him threaten his sons and daughters who needs _must_ listen to
+him (ἀκούσονται καὶ ἀνάγκῃ). Yet because the Erinnyes ever take the side
+of the eldest born—ὡς πρεσβυτέροισιν Ἐριννύες αἰὲν ἕπονται—it were good
+counsel to knock under, even though the division was made in perfect
+equality (ἰσόμορον καὶ ὁμῇ πεπρωμένον αἴσῃ).(211)
+
+(M107) This passage contrasts the recognised autocracy of the head of the
+family over his own household with the courteous deference of the younger
+brothers towards the eldest; and it is evidence, so far as it goes, that
+the eldest brother did not succeed to his father’s power over his grown-up
+brothers, but owed what influence he did not obtain from the superior
+advantages of his age and experience, to a superstitious feeling that
+something was due to him in his position of head of the eldest branch of
+the family.
+
+In the _Odyssey_,(212) Zeus gives Poseidon the title of “eldest and
+best”—πρεσβύτατον καὶ ἄριστον—and elsewhere Hera lays claim to the same
+birthright.(213)
+
+The power of the head of a household must have been something much more
+real. Telemachos declares that he is willing that some other _basileus_ in
+Ithaka should take the kingship, but he will be master over his own
+house—ἄναξ οὄκοιο ἡμετέροιο—“and over the slaves that the divine Odysseus
+won for me.”(214)
+
+In the Homeric Hymn to _Hestia_, that deity receives the title of honour
+of firstborn: the poet, by a fanciful blending of ideas, implying that the
+honour paid to the sacred hearth by the eldest of the family, fell to her
+share as the eldest born of the children of Kronos.(215)
+
+Aristotle says that every household is ruled (βασιλεύεται) by its oldest
+member,(216) and gives this prerogative of the household-_basileus_ as the
+type and origin of the kingship in the village and the State. Reference
+has already been made, in the section on the limitations of the ἀγχιστεία,
+to the passage in the Gortyn law, viz.—
+
+
+    “The father shall have power over the children and the property to
+    divide it amongst them.... As long as they (the parents) are alive
+    there is no necessity for division.”(217)
+
+
+(M108) But it must be borne in mind that though the κλῆρος was set apart
+in theory for the use and sustenance of a head of a family with all his
+descendants, and was supposed to be inalienable therefrom, there is no
+reason to suppose that there existed among the Greeks a system of joint
+holding between father and son. The ownership and management of the
+property vested in the head of the family. It is true that brothers did
+not always divide their inheritance on the death of their father, but
+their undivided right to their respective equal shares remained to each
+one and his descendants as an individual property, and they always seem to
+have had the expectation of an ultimate subdivision amongst the separate
+οἶκοι that had sprung into being.(218)
+
+(M109) The Gortyn Laws throw some light on the subject.
+
+As long as the father is alive, no man shall buy or receive in pledge from
+the son any of the father’s property. But what the son himself has earned,
+or inherited, he may sell if he like.
+
+So too the father may not dispose of the goods of the children which they
+have earned or inherited.
+
+Yet may a son’s prospective share in his paternal inheritance be sold to
+pay any legal fine he has incurred.(219)
+
+(M110) There is no joint holding here between father and son. The father
+is in undisputed possession, and nothing the son can do by private
+contract can affect his father’s occupation. But if the son had a right of
+maintenance from his father during the lifetime of both, his expectation
+of succession to an equal share with his brothers would give him, so to
+speak, a value in the public eye. In the event of his incurring a
+blood-fine, his father would presumably be obliged to pay it out of the
+patrimony; and when exaction of such penalties passed into the hands of a
+court, exception would hardly be made for long on behalf of the fine for
+murder over penalties for other crimes coming before the court. Although
+therefore for all ordinary purposes a son had no claim on the paternal
+estate beyond his maintenance, his right of succession might easily grow
+up in the eye of the law as an available asset capable of forfeiture with
+the theoretical assumption that the scapegrace was unfit to hold his
+position in the family.(220) His future portion, thus becoming deprived of
+a representative, might be wholly or in part confiscated to the State.
+There are many inscriptions confiscating to the State the goods of
+criminals who transgressed the laws therein; but Plato evidently
+contemplated the possibility of wiping out the individual without
+depriving his descendants of their inheritance.(221) In such a case as
+wife-murder, he says, the husband’s right of maintenance is extinguished
+from amongst his family, he should be banished and his name wiped out for
+ever, whilst his sons or relations enter upon the inheritance of his
+property _immediately_. No distinction is made by Plato, or in the Gortyn
+Laws in such a case between chattels and land. But inasmuch as all fines
+would be levied in the first instance upon the property of the guilty
+individual, it may be assumed that his own earnings went first, and that
+only in extreme cases would the ancestral land of the family be sold. Even
+then, in Israelite law, it was expected that the land would be _redeemed_
+by the nearest relative,(222) so that the result would be that the land
+would go out of the family only when no relative could be found rich
+enough to pay the fine out of his chattels.
+
+(M111) It is interesting to find analogous provisions in the customs of
+Gavelkind of ancient Kent. Under the system of Gavelkind equal division of
+property amongst sons obstinately held its own against the incursions of
+the right of primogeniture; and the connection of the family with their
+land seems to have been regarded as especially privileged in spite of the
+growth of Feudalism.
+
+
+    “If any tenant in Gauelkinde be attainted of felonie, for which he
+    suffereth execution of death, the king shall have all his _goods_,
+    and his heire forthwith after his death shall be inheritable to
+    all his _landes_ and tenements which he held in Gauelkinde in fee,
+    and in inheritance: and he shall hold them by the same services
+    and customes as his auncestors held them: whereupon, it is said in
+    Kentish:
+
+
+“The father to the boughe,
+“And the sonne to the ploughe.”(223)
+
+(M112) It had become customary to allot to a bastard son who was prevented
+by his birth from ranking with his brothers, and who had no place in the
+kindred, some smaller substance as a means of subsistence.
+
+(M113) Odysseus pretends he was in this position, and relates how his
+proud brothers allotted him but a small _gift_ (παῦρα δόσαν) and a house
+as his portion.(224)
+
+Isaeus mentions that, only on the acquiescence of the true son, was
+admission granted to a bastard into the phratria. Even then he was not
+apparently taken into his father’s family, but allotted a farm (χωρίον ἕν)
+by his brother and, as it were, launched into the world to start a family
+of his own, without any further claim upon the property of his
+father.(225)
+
+His introduction and admission to a phratria and deme, as a descendant of
+an old family, so far removed the stigma of his birth as to give him the
+title of citizen, and thus afforded him the qualification for holding
+land. Yet the knowledge of his real parentage bereft him of the right of
+sharing equally with the rest of his father’s sons, and compelled him to
+be satisfied with the bare means of subsistence wherewith to found and
+continue a house of his own.(226)
+
+(M114) When citizenship was conferred upon a beneficent stranger, it was
+the custom at the same time to assign him and his descendants a house and
+some land. We hear of grants on such occasions consisting of a κλῆρος in
+the plain, a house, and a garden free of taxes; a _half_-κλῆρος in the
+plain, a house and a garden of half the area of the preceding grant, &c.
+In the fourth century B.C. a similar grant takes the form of so many
+plethra as a patrimony or ever. Sometimes, as at Sparta in the second
+century B.C., the estate was allotted to the newly-made citizen only on
+condition of residence within the borders of the State.(227)
+
+
+
+
+§ 3. The Householder In India: The Guest.
+
+
+(M115) Sir Henry S. Maine in his _Early Law and Custom_(228) quotes Narada
+in illustration of the composition of the early Indian family. A son “is
+of age and independent in case his parents be dead: during their lifetime
+he is dependent, even though he be grown old.”
+
+Further information on this subject is afforded by the Ordinances of Manu,
+where the position of the first-born with regard to his younger brothers
+is given at some length.(229)
+
+
+    (M116) “After both the father and the mother (are dead), the
+    brothers, having come together, should divide the paternal
+    inheritance: for while the two (parents) are alive the (sons) have
+    no power (over the property).
+
+
+    “Now the eldest (or best) alone may take the paternal property
+    without leaving anything, and the remaining (brothers) may live
+    _supported by him_ just as (if he were their) father.”(230)
+
+
+    (M117) “By means of the eldest (son) as soon as he is born a man
+    becomes possessed of a son, and is thus cleared of his debts
+    towards the manes; therefore this (eldest son) deserves the whole
+    (inheritance).”
+
+
+Likewise: “If among brothers born of one father, one should have a son,
+Manu said _all those brothers_ would be possessed of sons by means of that
+son.”(231) But this seems to apply only to the son born to the eldest, for
+if a younger brother married before the eldest and performed the daily
+sacrifices, he sent himself, his brother, and his wife “to Hell.”(232)
+
+The eldest, if he performs his duty, “causes the family to flourish” and
+“is most honoured among men.” He alone is “duty-born,” through him his
+father “pays his debt”; other sons are only “born of desire.” As long as
+his conduct is befitting, he must be honoured “like a father, like a
+mother,” but if not, he only receives the respect of an ordinary
+relative.(233)
+
+The brothers may live together in this way,(234) but if they divide and
+live apart, the separate ceremonies necessitated by their separate
+households will multiply the performance of religious duties, to the
+advantage of all.
+
+(M118) The title of _Householder_, moreover, was more than a name.
+
+
+    “As all beings depend on air, so all orders depend on the
+    householder.”
+
+
+    “Because men of the three (other) orders are daily supported by
+    the householder alone with knowledge and with food, therefore the
+    householder (is) the chief order. That order must be upheld
+    strenuously by one desiring an imperishable heaven, and who here
+    desires perpetual happiness....”
+
+
+    “The seers, manes, gods, beings, and guests also make entreaty to
+    those heads of families for support. (This duty must, therefore,)
+    be done by a man of discernment.”(235)
+
+
+    “As all rivers, ... go to (their) resting-place in the ocean, so
+    men of all orders depend on the householder.”(236)
+
+
+    Let a householder perform the household rites according to rule
+    with the marriage fire and the accomplishment of the five
+    sacrifices and the daily cooking. The sacrifices are:—
+
+
+    Teaching the Veda is the Veda sacrifice:
+    Offering cakes and water is the sacrifice to the manes:
+    An offering to fire (is the sacrifice) to the gods:
+    Offering of food (is the sacrifice) to all beings:
+    Honour to guests is the sacrifice to men.
+
+
+    “Whoever presents not food to those five, the gods, guests,
+    dependents, the manes, and himself, though he breathe, lives
+    not.”(237)
+
+
+(M119) The guest takes a very high place, and his presence is a revered
+addition to the family sacrifices; so much so that it was thought
+necessary to state definitely that “if the guest appears after the
+offering to all the gods is finished, one should give him food as best one
+can, but should not make (another) offering.”(238)
+
+The same virtue seems to have been considered by the Greeks also to lie in
+the presence of the guest. In Euripides’ Elektra, Aigisthos, hearing from
+Orestes that he and his friend are strangers, promptly invites them to
+share as his ξυνέστιοι in his impending sacrifice of a bull to the nymphs,
+promising to send them on their way in the morning.(239)
+
+Earlier in the play during the plotting of Aigisthos’ death, it is taken
+for granted that directly he sees them he will call them thus to join him
+at the sacrifice and the feast.(240)
+
+Alkinoos expresses the feeling of the Homeric age when he says:
+
+
+    “In a brother’s place stand the stranger and the suppliant, to him
+    whose wits have even a little range.”(241)
+
+
+Nestor at Pylos, making sacrifice to Poseidon with his sons and company,
+welcomes the unknown Telemachos and Mentor to the sacrificial feast.(242)
+When the duty of feeding the guests has been satisfactorily accomplished,
+he then asks them whether they are merchants or _pirates_, that “wander
+over the brine at hazard of their own lives bringing bale to alien men!”
+
+It would appear that the virtue lay in the hospitality of the host and not
+in the worthiness of the guest, and that therefore it was worth while to
+run the risk of having invited the presence of a polluted man whose
+impiety in not refusing to partake would doubtless fall on his own head.
+
+(M120) To return to the organisation of the Indian inheritance:—The duty
+of maintenance(243) of the younger members of the family devolves upon the
+eldest son at the death of his father. If the brothers are all “perfect in
+their own occupations,” and they come to an equal division, “some trifle
+should be given to the elder (brother) to indicate an increased respect
+for him.”(244) Also if in division there remains over an odd goat or
+sheep, or animal, it goes to the eldest brother.
+
+If any brother has disgraced himself, he does not deserve a share in the
+property.(245)
+
+Sisters’ portions are allotted out of all the brothers’ shares
+equally.(246)
+
+Property is divided once only.(247) But if “on living together after being
+separated, they divide (the inheritance) a second time, in that case the
+division should be equal, (as) in that case no right of primogeniture
+occurs.”(248)
+
+The father’s wealth acquired during his lifetime is at his own disposal,
+and need not be divided amongst his sons.(249) Likewise with any property
+acquired by the sons.(250) If “any one of the brothers, being able (to
+support himself) by his own occupation, does not desire (his share of the)
+property,” he may be excluded from the division, but “something for his
+support” should be given him to discharge his claim of maintenance from
+the family at any future time.(251)
+
+
+
+
+§ 4. Tenure Of Land In Homer: The Κλῆρος And The Τέμενος.
+
+
+(M121) In the Homeric poems, written, as they are, from an aristocratic or
+heroic point of view, a great gulf always exists between the royal or
+princely class and the ordinary tribesmen.
+
+The βασιλεύς—the lion of his people(252)—has his select estate, his
+τέμενος, with orchards and gardens of considerable extent; while the
+swarms of tribesmen are allotted their κλῆροι in the open field, their
+share in the common pasture, and depend on each other for help in the
+vintage and harvest.
+
+(M122) The possession of large estates and of multitudinous flocks and
+herds was one of the privileges of the chieftain or tribesman of princely
+rank.
+
+
+    “For surely his livelihood (_i.e._ Odysseus’) was great past
+    telling, no lord in the dark mainland had so much, nor any in
+    Ithaka itself; nay, not twenty men together have wealth so great,
+    and I will tell thee the sum thereof. Twelve herds of kine upon
+    the mainland, as many flocks of sheep, as many droves of swine, as
+    many ranging herds of goats, that his own shepherds and strangers
+    pasture. And ranging herds of goats, eleven in all, graze here by
+    the extremity of the island with trusty men to watch them.”(253)
+
+
+Bellerophon migrated from his own country and settled under the patronage
+of the king of Lykia.(254) He married the king’s daughter, and to complete
+his qualification and to confirm his princely status as a βασιλεύς of
+Lykia, he was allotted by the Lykians an estate where the plain was
+fattest on the banks of the river, consisting half of arable, half of
+vineyard, the latter presumably on the slopes of the sides of the
+valley.(255) Besides these no doubt he had flocks and herds on the
+mountains, with steadings and slaves for their protection. It is
+improbable that the fattest of the plain was unoccupied before, and it
+must therefore be supposed that the system of agriculture was such as to
+admit of such a partition and the consequent readjustment, or that the
+dispossessed tribesmen had to compensate themselves with land out of the
+common waste.
+
+In somewhat similar wise Tydeus at Argos wedded one of the daughters of
+Adrastos, and dwelt in a house full of livelihood; and “wheatbearing
+ἄρουραι enough were his, and many were his orchards of trees apart, and
+many sheep were his.”(256)
+
+In the description of the Shield of Achilles in the _Iliad_ a vivid
+contrast is drawn between the rich harvest of the βασιλεύς and the busy
+toil of the tribesmen.
+
+
+    “Furthermore he set therein a τέμενος deep in corn(257) where
+    hinds (ἔριθοι) were reaping with sharp sickles in their hands ...
+    and among them the βασιλεύς in silence was standing at the swathe
+    with his staff, rejoicing in his heart.”
+
+
+Meanwhile henchmen are preparing apart a great feast for himself and his
+friends, and the women are strewing much white barley to be a supper for
+the hinds.(258)
+
+(M123) But in the great common field all was toil and action; many
+ploughers therein drave their yokes to and fro as they wheeled about.(259)
+The holding of the common tribesman was not an estate (τέμενος) cut out of
+the plain, but an allotment (κλῆρος), probably of strips as in Palestine
+to-day, in the open fields that lay around the town. On the wheatbearing
+plain round Troy(260) lay the stones that former men, before the ten
+years’ war, had used to mark the balk or boundary of their strips (οὖρον
+ἀρούρης).(261) One of these Athena uses to hurl against Ares, who, falling
+where he stood, covers seven of the _pelethra_ that the stones were used
+to divide. A pinnacle of stones is the only boundary to be seen to this
+day between the strips of cornland in Palestine. Easily dislodged as these
+landmarks were, they were specially protected by a curse against their
+removal, and were with the Greeks under the awful shadow of a special
+deity of boundaries.(262) They seem however to have been liable to
+considerable violation. The ass, according to Homer, being driven along
+the field-way, if his skin was thick enough, easily disregarded the
+expostulations of his attendants, and made free with the growing
+crop.(263) Homer also describes a fight between two men with measuring
+rods in the common field,(264) and Isaeus(265) relates how an Athenian
+citizen flogged his brother in a quarrel over their boundary so that he
+afterwards died, whilst the neighbours, working on their land around, were
+witnesses of what took place.
+
+Land was brought into cultivation, no doubt, as it was wanted. Achilles
+contemplates that some of the rich fields of his friends may be
+exceedingly remote, so that it would be a great thing to spare the
+ploughman a journey to the nearest blacksmith. And no doubt the powerful
+men of the community would, by means of their slaves or retainers, acquire
+additional wealth by reclaiming lands out of the way and therefore
+requiring a strong hand to protect them, which were profitable by reason
+of their very fatness.(266) Such acquisitions would not be included in the
+τέμενος of the prince, the very word τέμενος implying an area of land cut
+out of the cultivated land of the community, generally described as being
+in the plain (πέδιον).
+
+(M124) Such allotments of land seem only to have been made to princes and
+gods, but when once allotted, remained as far as can be seen the property
+of their descendants. It was a common fancy of the Homeric prince that he
+was worshipped as a god, and they often mistook each other for some deity.
+The godlike Sarpedon asks his cousin Glaukos, wherefore are they two
+honoured in Lykia as gods, with flesh and full cups and a great
+τέμενος.(267)
+
+As the possession of full tribal blood was necessary for the ownership of
+a κλῆρος, so princely blood was the qualification for the enjoyment of a
+τέμενος. The honoured individual need not be a king or overlord, but
+besides his valour he must have in his veins the all-potent blood royal,
+without which his privilege was no greater than that of other rich
+tribesmen.
+
+It was not till the king of Lykia had satisfied himself that Bellerophon
+was “the brave offspring of a god,” that he gave him honour, and the
+Lykians meted him out a τέμενος.(268) This great τέμενος on the banks of
+the Xanthos, half arable and half vineyard, remained in the possession of
+his grandchildren, Sarpedon and Glaukos, apparently still undivided,
+though they were not brothers but first cousins.(269)
+
+The king of the Phæakians had his τέμενος and fruitful orchard near but
+apart from the fields and tilled lands of his townsfolk.(270) Odysseus it
+seems had more than one τέμενος.(271)
+
+(M125) Once in the _Iliad_ the epithet πατρώιος is applied to a chief’s
+τέμενος.(272) According to Hesychius, πατρώιος means “handed down to one’s
+father from his ancestors,”(273) and Homer evidently uses the word in this
+sense.(274)
+
+The kingship itself in Ithaka was considered as part of Telemachos’
+patrimony: “Never may Kronion make thee king in sea-girt Ithaka, which is
+πατρώιον to thee by birth (γενεῇ).”(275)
+
+But though the τέμενος and the kingship were both equally πατρώια, they
+did not together constitute an indivisible inheritance. Any one of the
+blood could enjoy possession of the land, whilst the over-lordship must
+necessarily descend in the eldest or the most able line.
+
+In his answer to the malignant wish quoted above, Telemachos does not
+speak as if he contemplated giving up any tangible property. The bestowal
+of the kingship, though due to him by inheritance (πατρώιον) is in the
+hands of the gods; he means to be master (ἄναξ) of whatsoever Odysseus his
+father won for him.
+
+(M126) It is interesting to compare this choice of Telemachos with the
+exactly opposite choice made by Iason, as told by Pindar, when he came
+back to claim his inheritance which had been seized in the meantime by his
+second cousin, Pelias.
+
+He has come home, he tells Pelias, to seek his father’s ancient honour
+which Zeus had of old bestowed on his great-grandfather Aiolos and his
+sons. It is not for them now, being of the same stock (ὁμόγονοι), to
+divide the great honour of their forefathers with sword and javelin. He
+will give up all the sheep and herds of kine, and all the fields of late
+robbed from his sires, though they make fat beyond measure the house of
+Pelias (τεὸν οἶκον πορσύνοντ᾽ ἄγαν). But the kingly sceptre and throne of
+his father must be his without wrath between them. And Zeus, the ancestral
+god of them both (Ζεὺς ὁ γενέθλιος ἀμφοτέροις), is witness to their
+oath.(276)
+
+(M127) Property in land could also be accumulated in the hands of
+individuals not necessarily of princely station. Odysseus tells a tale of
+how he took a wife of “men with many κλῆροι” (πολυκλήρων ἀνθρώπων) by
+reason of his valour.(277) The κλῆρος must therefore at that time have
+been at any rate roughly of some recognised area. Perhaps the tendency, so
+fatal to Sparta, for the possession of the original shares or allotments
+of many families to accumulate in the hands of the powerful or rich, had
+already set in. In later colonisations and assignments of new land the
+κλῆροι were often equally divided,(278) and the gift of citizenship, as
+has been already mentioned, was sometimes accompanied by a grant of a
+_half-kleros_ (ἡμικλήριον). Did the κλῆρος then represent in theory an
+area of cultivated ground capable of sustaining a single household?
+
+
+
+
+§ 5. Early Evidence _continued_: The Κλῆρος And The Maintenance Of The
+οἶκος.
+
+
+(M128) There are signs in Homer of the existence, already insisted upon
+for later times, of the connection of the ownership of property with the
+headship of a household. It follows that if the head of a family was the
+only owner of land, the desire of establishing a family and thereby
+preserving at the same time the acquired property and the name of the
+possessor, made the acquisition of a wife a real necessity for the owner
+of land.
+
+Eumaios, the swineherd, says that Odysseus would have given him a property
+(κτῆσις), both an οἶκος and a κλῆρος and a shapely wife.(279) And Odysseus
+in one of his many autobiographies speaks of taking a wife as if it were
+the necessary sequel to coming into his inheritance.(280)
+
+Even Hesiod, the son of a poor settler, without much property to keep
+together, if we can take Aristotle’s reading of the line, gives the
+necessary outfit for a peasant farmer in occupation of a small κλῆρος, as
+a house, a wife, and a plough-ox.(281)
+
+Aristotle quotes this line of Hesiod, in his argument that the οἶκος was
+the association formed to supply the wants of each day,(282) its members
+being called by Charondas, he says, ὁμοσίπυοι (sharers in the mealbin),
+and by Epimenides the Cretan ὁμόκαποι (sharers of the same plot of
+ground).(283) And he might have added that Pindar uses the word ὁμόκλαροι
+to mean “twins.”(284)
+
+(M129) A household, according to Aristotle, consisted thus partly of human
+beings, partly of property.(285)
+
+So closely is the idea of livelihood bound up that of the house or οἶκος,
+that Telemachos can say without incongruity that his house is being
+_eaten_ by the wooers:—
+
+
+    ἐσθίεταί μοι οἶκος, ὄλωλε δὲ πίονα ἔργα.(286)
+
+
+The sanctity shared by the hearth and its sustenance may be illustrated by
+Odysseus’ oath, which occurs three times in the _Odyssey_: “Now be Zeus my
+witness before any god, and the hospitable board and the hearth of
+blameless Odysseus whereunto I am come.”(287)
+
+(M130) When once the hospitable board had laid its mysterious spell on the
+relations of host and guest, the bond was not easily dissolved. Glaukos
+and Diomedes meet “in the mid-space of the foes eager to do battle,”
+fighting on opposite sides. Nevertheless because the grandfather of one
+had entertained the grandfather of the other for twenty days and they had
+parted with gifts of friendship, their grandsons refrain from battle with
+each other, pledge their faith, and exchange armour as a witness to others
+that they are guest-friends by inheritance (ὄφρα καὶ οἵδε γνῶσιν, ὅτι
+ξεῖνοι πατρώιοι εὐχόμεθ᾽ εἶναι).(288)
+
+If such force lay in the entertainment of a guest for a few days, some
+idea can be formed of the virtue underlying the meaning of such words as
+ὁμοσίπυοι and ὁμόκαποι, and binding together those habitually nourished at
+the same board.
+
+(M131) If sons married during their father’s lifetime without any
+particular means of livelihood, they could live under his roof and
+authority, forming a great patriarchal household like that of Priam and
+his married sons and daughters at Troy. But when a household dispersed
+before the marriage of the sons and the inheritance was divided amongst
+them, it was deemed indispensable for them to take wives, and each provide
+for the establishment of his house and succession. This necessity is the
+underlying motive of the compulsion over the only daughter left as
+ἐπίκληρος to marry before a certain age, exercised by the Archon at
+Athens. There the idea of the need of a continuous family (as well as for
+other purposes), to keep together the property, had grown up apparently as
+a reflection, so to speak, of the obvious importance of the property to
+the family for the maintenance of itself and its ancestral rites.
+
+Though evidence is wanting for the _raison d’être_ of this sentiment in
+Homer, the existence of the feeling can hardly be denied.
+
+The κλῆρος, at any rate, continued to pass from father to son in the
+family of the tribesman or citizen. Hector encourages his soldiers by
+reminding them that though they themselves fall in the fight, their
+children, their house (οἶκος), and their κλῆρος will be unharmed, provided
+only that the enemy are driven back.(289)
+
+The sentiment that a man was not really “established,” according to the
+estimation of the Homeric Greeks, until the continuity of his house was
+provided for, seems to explain the two references to Telemachos in the
+_Iliad_. Odysseus is twice mentioned, as Mr. Leaf points out in his
+_Companion to the Iliad_,(290) as the father of Telemachos, simply because
+it was considered a title of honour to be named as sire of an established
+house. No other mention of Telemachos occurs in the _Iliad_.
+
+Failure of heirs was, as in later times, the great disintegrating factor
+and danger to the continuity of the family holdings. As long as a direct
+descendant was to be found, the property was safe.
+
+Eurykleia comforts Penelope in her fear for the absent Telemachos,
+saying:—
+
+
+    “For the seed of the son of Arkeisios is not, methinks, utterly
+    hated by the blessed gods, but someone will haply yet remain to
+    possess these lofty halls and the _fat fields_ far away.”(291)
+
+
+Is it by accident that she here chooses the name of Arkeisios to describe
+the head of the family of Laertes and Odysseus? He was Laertes’ father,
+and in Telemachos, if he was preserved alive, he would thus have a
+_great-grandson_ to represent his line in the succession to his property.
+
+(M132) The diversion of inheritance to any property from the direct line
+is spoken of in Homer as a lamentable circumstance greatly intensifying
+the natural grief at the death of the direct heir.
+
+
+    “Then went he after Nanthos and Thoon, sons of Phainops,
+    striplings both; but their father was outworn of grievous age, and
+    begat no other son for his possessions after him. Then Diomedes
+    slew them and bereft the twain of their dear life, and for their
+    father left only lamentation and sore distress, seeing he welcomed
+    them not alive returned from battle: _and kinsmen divided his
+    substance_ (κτῆσις).”(292)
+
+
+In the tumultuous times of the _Odyssey_ the right of succession must
+often have been interrupted by war and violence. Possessions, not only of
+land, had to be defended by the sword even during the lifetime of the
+acquirer. This prompts one of the wishes of Odysseus in his prayer at the
+knees of Arete:—
+
+
+    “And may each one leave to his children after him his possessions
+    in his halls and whatever dues of honour the people have rendered
+    unto him.”(293)
+
+
+The same anxiety prompts his question to his mother in Hades, to which he
+obtains answer:—
+
+
+    “The fair honour (γέρας) that is thine no man hath yet taken, but
+    Telemachos holdeth in safety (thy) demesnes (τεμένεα
+    νέμεται).”(294)
+
+
+(M133) The belief in the inseparability of the ancestral holding and the
+family was strong in Samaria at the time of Ahab. The King offered Naboth
+another vineyard better than his own in exchange for the one at Jezreel
+near the palace, or, should he prefer it, its worth in money. But Naboth
+said to Ahab, “The Lord forbid it me, that I should give _the inheritance
+of my fathers_ unto thee.”(295)
+
+Both the Hebrew narrators and the Greek translators describe Ahab finally
+as taking the vineyard at Naboth’s death _by inheritance_ (LXX.
+κληρονομεῖν), in spite of the violence of the means of acquiring it
+adopted by Jezebel.
+
+The limited right of the prince to alienate from his family any part of
+his possessions is thus alluded to by Ezekiel:—
+
+
+    “Thus saith the Lord God; If the prince give a gift unto any of
+    his sons, the inheritance thereof shall be his sons’; it shall be
+    their possession by inheritance. But if he give a gift of his
+    inheritance to one of his servants, then it shall be his to the
+    year of liberty: after it shall return to the prince: but his
+    inheritance shall be his sons’ for them.”(296)
+
+
+
+
+§ 6. Early Evidence _continued_: The Τέμενος And The Maintenance Of The
+Chieftain.
+
+
+(M134) It must be borne in mind that the tribal idea of the chieftainship
+sanctioned the custom that the maintenance of the chieftain and his
+companions or retainers should be levied at will upon the property of the
+people. This privilege is very wide spread, and had its origin in the
+earliest times.
+
+The levies were claimed under the name of _gifts_, and earned for the
+princes the title of δωροφάγοι. As Telemachos declares, “it is no bad
+thing to be a βασιλεύς, and quickly does his house become rich and he
+himself most honoured.”(297)
+
+The royal family and nobles(298) levied contributions on their own or
+conquered peoples apparently at will in Homer. Agamemnon calls together
+the Greek chiefs:—
+
+
+    “Ye leaders and counsellors of the Argives ... who drink at the
+    public cost (δήμια πίνουσιν) and each command an host (σημαίνουσιν
+    ἕκαστος λαοῖς).”(299)
+
+
+Priam chides his sons:—
+
+
+    “Ye plunderers of your own people’s sheep and kids (ἀρνῶν ἠδ᾽
+    ἐρίφων ἐπιδήμιοι ἁρπακτῆρες).”(300)
+
+
+Telemachos declares that if the wooers eat up all his sheep and substance,
+he will go through the city (κατὰ ἅστυ) claiming chattels until all be
+restored.(301)
+
+Alkinoos proposes to give gifts to Odysseus, and they themselves going
+amongst the people (ἀγειρόμενοι κατὰ δῆμον) will recompense themselves:
+“for hard it were for one man to give without return.”(302)
+
+
+    “Then I led him to the house,” says Odysseus, “and gave him good
+    entertainment ... out of the plenty in my house, and for the rest
+    of his company ... I gathered and gave barley meal and dark wine
+    from the people (δημόθεν) and oxen to sacrifice to his heart’s
+    desire.”(303)
+
+
+(M135) These passages throw light on Agamemnon’s offer to Achilles of
+seven well-peopled towns, whose inhabitants would enrich him with
+plenteous gifts.(304) The proposal of Menelaos to empty a city _of Argos,_
+to accommodate Odysseus and his people, seems to be of quite a different
+order, and betrays to us that the tyranny of the tribal chieftain, so
+conspicuous in other nations, was no less a reality also amongst the
+Greeks under Achaian rule.(305)
+
+(M136) In the Indian society that was regulated in accordance with the
+_Ordinances of Manu_, the king appointed a chief of a town whose duty it
+was to report to the higher officials on any “evil arising in the town.”
+He likewise represented the king, and had the king’s right to receive
+supplies from those under his oversight.
+
+
+    “What food, drink, (and) fuel are to be _daily_ given by the
+    inhabitants of a town to the king let the head of a town
+    take,”(306)
+
+
+the line always being drawn between legitimate demands and tyrannical
+extortion.
+
+
+    “For those servants appointed by the king for protection (are)
+    mostly takers of the property of others (and) cheats; from them he
+    (_i.e._ the king) should protect these people.”(307)
+
+
+(M137) Under the rule of the Persians, all Asia was parcelled out in such
+a way as to supply maintenance (τροφή) for the Great King and his host
+throughout the whole year.(308) The satrap of Assyria kept at one time so
+great a number of Indian hounds, that four large villages of the plain
+were exempted from all other charges on condition of finding them
+food.(309)
+
+(M138) Solomon’s table was provided after the same method.
+
+
+    “And Solomon had twelve officers over all Israel which provided
+    victuals for the king and his household; each man his month in a
+    year made provision.... And Solomon’s provision for one day was
+    thirty measures of fine flour and threescore measures of meal, ten
+    fat oxen and twenty oxen out of the pastures and an hundred sheep,
+    beside harts, and roebucks, and fallowdeer, and fatted fowl....
+    And Solomon reigned over all kingdoms from the river unto the land
+    of the Philistines, and unto the border of Egypt; they brought
+    presents, and served Solomon all the days of his life.... And
+    those officers provided victual for king Solomon, and for all that
+    came unto king Solomon’s table, every man according to his
+    charge.”(310)
+
+
+(M139) Sesostris is said to have obtained his revenue from the holders of
+κλῆροι in Egypt in proportion to the amount of land in each man’s
+occupation;(311) and Pharaoh, having bought all the land at the time of
+the famine in Egypt except that which supported the priests, took
+one-fifth of all the produce, leaving the remainder “for seed of the
+field,” and for the food of the cultivators, and their households and
+little ones. “And Joseph made it a law over the land of Egypt unto this
+day, that Pharaoh should have the fifth part, except the land of the
+priests only, which became not Pharaoh’s.”(312)
+
+In this case Pharaoh became proprietor by purchase of the land in Egypt.
+But it must not be supposed that by exacting a payment from the occupier,
+the overlord as a rule had any power over the ownership of the soil. He no
+doubt had proprietary rights over his own estate, and may or may not have
+had power to regulate any further distribution of the waste. But the right
+of receiving dues, or of appointing another to receive them, gave him no
+power over the actual tillage of the soil.
+
+(M140) The maintenance of the prince was a first charge apparently upon
+the property of his subjects; and it is easy to see how the lion’s share
+would always be allotted to him, alike of booty as of acquired territory.
+As long as the community was pastoral, it is also easy to imagine how the
+chief both increased his own wealth and admitted favoured companions or
+resident strangers to a share in the elastic area of the common pasturage.
+After agriculture had assumed equal importance in the economy of the tribe
+as the tending of flocks and herds, one is apt to forget that for
+centuries—perhaps for thousands of years—the system of agriculture that
+grew up, still possessed much of the elasticity of the old pastoral
+methods. Under the open field system, such a custom as that described by
+Tacitus and in the Welsh Laws, viz. of ploughing up out of the pasture or
+waste sufficient to admit of each tribesman having his due allotment, and
+letting it lie waste again the next year, admitted of considerable
+readjustment to meet the exigencies of declining population, as well as
+providing an easy means whereby any stranger prince, like Bellerophon, who
+might be admitted to the tribe, could be allotted either a τέμενος apart,
+or a κλῆρος in the open plain.
+
+Pindar describes this method of cultivation when he says:—
+
+
+    “Fruitful fields in turn now yield to man his yearly bread upon
+    the plains, and now again they pause and gather back their
+    strength.”(313)
+
+
+(M141) It is noticeable that the Aetolians offered Meleagros a τέμενος in
+the fattest part of the plain, wherever he might choose, as a _gift_
+(δῶρον); and as the τέμενος would certainly be cultivated by slave or
+hired labour, what they really gave him was the right of receiving the
+produce from the 50 _guai_ composing the τέμενος. But this gift was meant
+as a special honour or bribe, and took a special form in being in land as
+a means of permanent enrichment.
+
+In similar wise Ezekiel suggested the capitalisation, as it were, by a
+gift of land of the contributions to the princes, which no doubt were felt
+to be very irksome. In the division of the land, a portion was to be set
+aside first for the use of the temple and priests, then a portion for the
+prince.
+
+
+    “In the land shall be his possession in Israel, and my princes
+    shall no more oppress my people; and the rest of the land shall
+    they give to the house of Israel according to their tribes. Thus
+    saith the Lord God, Let it suffice you, O princes of Israel;
+    remove violence and spoil and execute judgment and justice, and
+    take away your exactions from my people, saith the Lord God.”(314)
+
+
+And again:—
+
+
+    “Moreover the prince shall not take of the people’s inheritance by
+    oppression, to thrust them out of their possession; but he shall
+    give his sons inheritance out of his own possession; that my
+    people be not scattered every man from his possession.”(315)
+
+
+But there can be no doubt, that although the prince may have had no power
+to dislodge any of the free tribesmen of his own people from their
+holdings, yet no one could gainsay him if he chose to enrich himself by
+planting or reclaiming any part of his domains, as Laertes is represented
+as having done.(316)
+
+(M142) The modern usage in Boeotia and in the island of Euboea may very
+well represent the procedure of ancient times, and if it can be imagined
+that some method of the same sort was in vogue in Boeotia in the time of
+Hesiod, it will be understood how possible it was for Hesiod’s father to
+settle at Askra and gradually to acquire possession of a house and κλῆρος.
+
+
+    “There is some cultivation from Plataea to Thebes, but strangely
+    alternating with wilderness. We were told that the people have
+    plenty of spare land, and not caring to labour for its artificial
+    improvement, till a piece of ground once, and then let it lie
+    fallow for a season or two. The natural richness of the Boeotian
+    soil thus supplies them with ample crops. But it is strange to
+    think how impossible it is, even in these rich and favoured
+    plains, to induce a fuller population.”(317)
+
+
+At Achmetaga, in Euboea,
+
+
+    “The folk pay for their houses a nominal rental of a bushel of
+    wheat per annum, in order to secure the owner’s proprietary claim,
+    which would otherwise pass to the occupier by squatter’s right
+    after thirty years of unmolested occupation. They are at liberty
+    to cultivate pretty well as much land as they care to, paying to
+    the landlord one-third in kind.... The produce here is almost
+    exclusively wheat or maize, but every family maintains a plot of
+    vineyard for home consumption.”(318)
+
+
+(M143) Whether the free tribesman ever looked upon the contribution he
+made to the maintenance of the princes, under whose protection he had the
+privilege of living, as a condition of tenure of his land, is open to
+doubt; but from the right to demand indiscriminate gifts, to confiscate or
+eject in case of refusal, it is only one step to the exaction of a regular
+food-rent as a return for the occupation of land.
+
+
+
+
+§ 7. Summary Of The Early Evidence.
+
+
+It may be useful here briefly to summarise the results of the inquiry of
+the last three sections into the relation of the ownership of land to the
+structure of society in Homer and in early times.
+
+(M144) the princes had their compact estates divided off from the other
+land of the community, so that a passer-by could point and say, “There is
+the king’s τέμενος.”(319) The ordinary tribesman on the other hand had a
+share in the common fields under cultivation, probably consisting of a
+number of scattered pieces of land lying mixed up with those of others,
+and therefore only referred to on the face of the land, under the
+comprehensive terms ἀγροὶ καὶ ἔργα ἀνθρώπων.(320)
+
+This share of the tribesman was, as in later times, called a κλῆρος, it
+being possible for a man to enjoy several such holdings and deserve the
+epithet πολύκληρος, whilst the lowest class of freemen consisted of those
+who possessed no land, under the ignominious title of ἄκληρος.
+
+(M145) The κλῆρος, descending from father to son, was apparently connected
+with the οἶκος or household, and supplied its maintenance. The οἶκος grew
+fat or was consumed in accordance with the capacity of its head, and its
+continuity was regarded as a matter of the utmost importance. Its members
+were bound together at their ancestral hearth by mutual ties of common
+maintenance. The sanctity of thus sharing the same loaf extended also to
+guests, whose relations to their hosts might last for several generations.
+It is the necessity of supplying the οἶκος and its dependents with the
+means of sustenance and hospitality among a pastoral people gradually
+adapting themselves to agriculture, that regulates the tenure of land and
+the duties of the householder.
+
+(M146) The power of the chieftain to draw upon the resources of his people
+for the entertainment of his household and his guests by exactions payable
+in kind, supplemented by the power he also seems to have possessed to
+transfer at will the right of receiving these “gifts” to any one he chose,
+seems to contain the germs of the more complicated system of food-rents as
+a condition of land tenure, which is so important a feature of the Celtic
+tribal arrangements.
+
+(M147) Inasmuch as the prince was a member of the tribe, he was entitled
+to an allotment in the land under cultivation, the very word κλῆρος
+implying the equal right of all members of the tribe to a share in the
+soil. But inasmuch as the prince possessed blood royal and claimed his
+descent from the very gods that the tribesmen worshipped, his dignity was
+above partaking with his tribesmen of a κλῆρος in the common fields. He
+was therefore allotted a τέμενος apart, and worthy of his divine
+parentage. Besides the bare single allotment of the τέμενος, land was set
+apart for him as a gift of honour by the people, from whom honour and
+gifts to their prince were due. Gifts in land formed a special mark of
+honour, and may at the same time have served another purpose from the
+giver’s point of view by way of a permanent source of income or endowment,
+as it were, whereby the continuous exactions towards the maintenance of
+the prince from the lands of the people might tend to be alleviated. Thus
+much of power over the property of his inferiors he undoubtedly retained,
+and he probably cultivated what he liked of the outlying lands under his
+sway.
+
+(M148) But the evidence does not show that he ever had the right of coming
+between the οἶκος of his tribesmen and their κλῆρος: the only means at his
+disposal of severing the link between the family and the land, were those
+employed by Ahab and Jezebel to acquire the “inheritance” of the ancestral
+vineyard of Naboth at Jezreel.
+
+
+
+
+§ 8. Hesiod And His Κλήρος.
+
+
+In the time of Hesiod, the κλῆρος(321) could be sold in case of need and
+added to the possession of another.
+
+(M149) But the case of Hesiod is in itself somewhat exceptional. His
+father had fled from his own country by stress of poverty, and settled on
+the barren land of Askra in Boeotia, where he was allowed to acquire some
+land.(322) He was therefore somewhat of a sojourner (the μετανάστης of
+Homer),(323) and, true to the Homeric doctrine, was unencumbered by the
+claims of kindred. Hesiod contrasts the ready help of the neighbour with
+the perfunctory slowness of the kinsman, duty-bound. The neighbour, he
+says, is prompted by the need of mutual protection of material property,
+the kinsman stays to bind on his sandals and gird his loins for the labour
+he is forbidden to shirk.(324)
+
+Hesiod and his brother Perses had divided the κλῆρος of their father into
+two, and lived apart. Perses had squandered his half, and spent his time
+and his livelihood in the gay life of the town, but none the less seems to
+have expected to be allowed to draw still further on the resources of the
+paternal property, to the distress of his industrious brother.
+
+Hesiod does not contemplate any possible means of making a living other
+than by tilling the soil; and his quaint ideas may be taken as typical of
+the small Boeotian peasant-farmer, allowance being made for the short time
+that his family had held land at Askra.
+
+
+
+
+§ 9. Survivals Of Family Land In Later Times.
+
+
+(M150) In later Greek writers it is several times stated that the κλῆροι
+or ἀρχαῖαι μοῖραι were inalienable. Yet all remark to what a deplorable
+extent the alienation and accumulation of land into few hands had been
+carried. Aristotle comments on the excellence of the ancient law, at one
+time prevalent in many cities, against the sale of the original κλῆροι,
+and the good purpose therein of making every one cultivate his own
+moderate-sized holding.(325)
+
+Innumerable passages could be quoted from the speeches of Isaeus,
+referring to the law that forbade any one to alienate by will his landed
+estate from his lawful sons. Plato warns his friends that buying and
+selling is desecration to the god-given κλῆρος.(326)
+
+
+    “Now I, as the legislator, regard you and your possessions, not as
+    belonging to yourselves, but as belonging to your whole family,
+    both past and present.”(327)
+
+
+Plutarch and Heraclides say that the same law against the sale of the
+κλῆρος existed anciently at Sparta.
+
+(M151) Plutarch’s evidence, late as it is, of the ancient customs among
+the Spartans is worthy of further consideration.
+
+In his _Life of Agis_ he states that the κλῆρος passed in succession from
+father to son—ἐν διαδοχαῖς πατρὸς παιδὶ τὸν κλῆρον ἀπολείποντος—until the
+Peloponnesian war.
+
+In his _Life of Lycurgus_ he says that—
+
+
+    “When a child was born, the father was not entitled to maintain it
+    (τρέφειν), but he took and carried it to a place called ‘lesche,’
+    where the _elders of his tribesmen_ were sitting, who, if they
+    found the child pretty well grown and healthy, ordered its
+    maintenance (τρέφειν), allotting to it one of the 9,000 kleroi
+    (κλήρων αὐτῷ τῶν ἐνακισχιλίων προσνείμαντες).”(328)
+
+
+Elsewhere in Greece at the introduction of the new-born child to the
+relations and friends a few days after its birth, symbolical gifts of food
+were made as the child was carried round the hearth.(329)
+
+(M152) The important part of this ceremony at Sparta, described by
+Plutarch, seems to be the introduction of the infant to the elders of the
+tribe, and the recognition by them of its right to maintenance, if it
+appeared to them physically worthy of admission to the tribe. It cannot be
+supposed that Plutarch believed that vacant κλῆροι escheated, so to speak,
+to the community, because he elsewhere describes the lamentable tendency
+of estates to get into few hands, which the community would in that case
+surely have been able somewhat to prevent. Nor is it likely that a κλῆρος
+was actually set apart for the maintenance of each infant, who was
+apparently still nourished in its father’s house until seven years old,
+when its education and occupations were regulated by the State.
+
+Reading this passage with the other in the _Life of Agis_, a natural
+inference is, that the child’s right to succeed to the property of his
+father only was thereby assured to him by the elders, _i.e._ the right on
+his attaining manhood to enjoy the possession of land. This is the view
+taken by M. de Coulanges;(330) but surely there is more underlying the
+account of the ceremony. What actually took place with regard to the
+allotment of a κλῆρος to the infant member of the tribe, cannot be decided
+here. The State at Sparta undertook to educate all her sons after a
+certain age, and gave the parent no further rights over the child. Is
+there in this ceremony a transfer of the claim for maintenance from
+against the head of the household to the larger unit represented by the
+elders of the tribe, irrespective of the inheritance of the son from his
+father?
+
+It would be necessary for the adult Spartan citizen, of the class of
+ὁμοιοι at any rate, to have a right to the produce of some land, as
+otherwise it is difficult to see how he could contribute the necessary
+provisions that formed his share of maintenance at the joint table of his
+_syssition_; unless indeed he drew his allowance from his father’s estate.
+
+(M153) In any case the idea of the dependence of a member of the tribe for
+sustenance upon his right to a κλῆρος is striking; and at the same time
+the evidence goes to show that his maintenance was a claim upon a group of
+kinsmen at Sparta, comprising more than the nearest relations, and was
+recognised as such by them.
+
+(M154) The link that bound the cultivators to their land was so strong in
+early times at Athens, that mortgages could apparently not be paid off by
+mere transfer of the land itself; but the whole family of the debtor went
+with their mortgaged property and became enslaved to the creditor, having
+in future to work the land for him at a fixed charge.
+
+This was the state of affairs that Solon set himself to mend, and it is
+instructive that the method, he seems to have chosen, was to loosen the
+tie between the owner and his land, and, by facilitating the transfer of
+land from one to another, to obviate the necessity of taking the debtor’s
+person with his family into slavery on account of the debt.(331)
+
+Nevertheless, in spite of the radical legislation of Solon, the sentiment
+that bound the family to the soil remained long after his time.
+
+(M155) Besides the prohibition to sell the family land which Aristotle
+speaks of as prevailing in Lokris, the Hypoknemidian Lokrians insisted on
+actual residence on that land in the case of their colony at Naupaktos.
+Though unable apparently wholly to forbid the participation of the
+colonists in the ancestral rites of their kin in Lokris, they took
+advantage of the prevailing sentiment with regard to the permanence of the
+family, and insisted that the continuance of the hearth of the colonist at
+Naupaktos should at any rate be considered of equal importance.
+
+According to an inscription of the fifth century B.C.:—
+
+
+    “The colonist has the right to return to Lokris and sacrifice with
+    his γένος both in the rites of his δᾶμος and his φοίνανοι for
+    ever. He can only return permanently without paying the
+    re-establishment tax if he has left ἐν τᾷ ἱστίᾳ at Naupaktos a
+    grown-up son or a brother. If a γένος of the colonists is left
+    without a representative (ἐχέπαμον) ἐν τᾷ ἱστίᾳ, the nearest of
+    kin (ἐπάγχιστος) in Lokris shall take the property, provided he go
+    himself, be he man or boy, within three months to Naupaktos. A
+    colonist can inherit his share of his Lokrian father’s or
+    brother’s property....”
+
+
+    “If a magistrate deals unfairly and refuses justice, he shall be
+    ἄτιμος and shall lose his μέρος μετὰ οἰκιατᾶν.”(332)
+
+
+(M156) Though the sale of estates could be effected at Athens in the
+fourth century B.C., yet, when the owner died without having sold, the
+succession was regulated by the ancient custom. If there were legitimate
+children, the inheritance to the land could not be diverted from them,
+even by will;(333) provided only that the children had gone through the
+ceremony of being accepted and enrolled by the phratria. If the descendant
+had neglected this formality, and had failed to be recognised as a legal
+member of the kindred or clan, he or she lost all rights to the property,
+which went to the devisee or next of kin.(334) The right to possess land
+was thus at Athens, as at Sparta, intimately connected with the tribal
+organisation; and the claim for maintenance from the paternal estate could
+only lie, after full acknowledgment of the necessary qualification had
+been granted by the larger unit of relationship.
+
+
+
+
+§ 10. The Idea Of Family Land Applied Also To Leasehold And Semi-Servile
+Tenure.
+
+
+(M157) Attention has been drawn to the reciprocal relations that existed
+between the family and its land, and their inseparability in the minds and
+phraseology of the Greeks at different times. There is a further
+development however arising from this point of view, without some notice
+of which the subject of the tenure of the κλῆρος would be incomplete, and
+which serves to confirm the method with which this subject has been
+treated.
+
+Though alike in their estimation of the possession of land as a means of
+livelihood and for the accumulation of wealth, the Greeks had very
+different views with respect to the place of agriculture as a worthy
+occupation for a citizen. Sparta regarded it as entirely beneath the
+dignity of her sons and forbade their personal application to the
+cultivation of their κλῆροι. There was at Athens, on the other hand, a
+large class of citizens whose energies were entirely devoted to the
+production of fruits of the earth, whilst the life of a country gentleman,
+combined with that of the farmer, was by no means despicable in their
+eyes.
+
+(M158) There were mainly two methods of enjoying the possession of a
+landed estate. Either the land was cultivated by the owner himself with
+the help of bought slaves or hired servants, few or many, as described in
+Hesiod and the _Oeconomics_ of Xenophon;(335) or the owner resided in the
+city or a neighbouring town, and the land was tilled by aliens or serfs
+(called sometimes κλαρῶται), like the Helots of Sparta, who paid an annual
+contribution from the produce to their landlord. The serf was often
+attached hereditarily to the soil in the sense of being unable to give up
+his holding, but also had certain rights as against his master, both in
+the matter of his own possessions and in that he could not be sold out of
+the country.(336)
+
+(M159) There is a passage in the Gortyn Laws that states:—that if there
+are no rightful successors to inherit the property of a deceased
+Gortynian, his household’s κλῆρος, _i.e._ the persons composing it, shall
+inherit his property. That is to say, if a Gortynian family died out and
+no legal representative could be found, their proprietary rights were
+extinguished and the κλαρῶται who lived upon the land took all their
+property. This provision favours the idea that at Gortyn also the
+citizen-population came of a race of conquerors, who were not exactly
+looked upon as ground landlords upon whose land a subject family was
+settled or had been allowed to remain, but that, whilst the relation of
+the κλαρῶται to their land was of the closest if not an absolute bondage
+to the soil, the proprietary rights of their superiors and masters
+consisted of the conqueror’s overlordship and the power to derive their
+maintenance from the joint produce of their serfs’ labour and the
+land.(337)
+
+This comprehensive use of the word κλῆρος, as meaning both the allotment
+of land and the family who were bound to occupy it, whose labour also
+created its value to its lord and master, is quite consistent with the use
+of the word in reference to the holdings of the Spartan citizens. The
+allotment of a κλῆρος at Sparta evidently meant also a transference of
+rights over the Helots that worked it; and even if this further
+implication was not actually included in the meaning of the word, it was
+so inseparable in thought that no explanation was necessary of the
+composite significance of the allotment.
+
+(M160) The Athenians in their κληρουχίαι seem instinctively to have
+combined these two methods of agriculture. The κληροῦχοι were not
+colonists, who became citizens of a new city, but they remained citizens
+of Athens, holding however their κλῆροι in a remote district. But the
+chief feature of this method of landholding was that the owner, though
+remaining a citizen of Athens and liable to the same claims from the
+mother city in respect of military service, &c, as before, was yet
+supposed to reside in the neighbourhood of his new κλῆρος. This was the
+case, even when the land itself was left in the hands of the conquered
+population at a fixed annual charge.
+
+(M161) An inscription found on the Acropolis of Athens, and relating to
+some date about 560 or 570 B.C., defines the legal status of the first
+κληροῦχοι sent to Salamis. They were assimilated to Athenian citizens as
+to taxes and military service; but they must reside on their land under
+pain of an absentee’s tax to the State.(338)
+
+(M162) In the year 427 B.C. the Athenians conquered the island of Lesbos.
+They imposed no tribute on the subjugated islanders, but, making the land
+into three thousand κλῆροι “except the Methymnian land,” they first set
+apart three hundred κλῆροι as sacred to the gods, and on to the others
+they sent off κληροῦχοι chosen by lot from themselves; to these the
+Lesbians paid annually for each κλῆροι two minae, and _themselves worked
+the land_.(339)
+
+According to the account of Aelian, the same method of procedure was
+adopted after the conquest of Euboea in about 510 B.C. The Athenians,
+having conquered the Chalkidians, apportioned their land to κληροῦχοι(340)
+in two thousand κλῆροι, _i.e._ the country called Hippobotos; and, setting
+aside τεμένη to Athena in the place called Lelantos, they let out(341) the
+rest according to the pillars that stand in the King’s Stoa, which thus
+bear record of the leases.(342)
+
+(M163) The holding of each κληροῦχος may have varied in size according to
+the character of the soil and features of the country; but it may safely
+be asserted that it must have been of sufficient dimensions, not only to
+provide subsistence for the native population left on the soil, but also
+to pay a considerable portion towards the keep of the κληροῦχος himself,
+during his enforced residence in the conquered country.
+
+The class of citizen from amongst whom the κληροῦχοι were chosen by lot,
+did not consist of families with much property in Athens.(343) Younger
+sons without occupation, whom their fathers had not been quite callous
+enough to “expose” in infancy,(344) and restless individuals without
+property in the mother country, would be most likely to offer themselves.
+And to such the two minae per annum, paid by the Lesbians from the produce
+of each κλῆρος, would appear a reasonable if not a sumptuous provision of
+livelihood. There were a hundred drachmae in the mina, and if it is true,
+as asserted by Plutarch,(345) that in the time of Solon one drachma was
+the price of a sheep, a yearly income of two hundred sheep, or their
+equivalent, would be forthcoming to each κληροῦχος—surely a considerable
+contribution to the maintenance of his family.(346)
+
+Under these circumstances each κλῆρος served to provide maintenance for
+two households—both of whom had hereditary rights therein, though
+themselves in different strata of society. Both households also were in a
+sort attached to the soil, the one in practical bondage, the other bound
+by law to reside in the country wherein lay its substance, and (if we may
+use the common expression of the Welsh Laws) its privilege.
+
+(M164) This double and continuous ownership was not confined to the
+semi-servile tenure of lands annexed by Athenian conquests.
+
+Leases to be handed down from father to son _for ever_—τὸν πάντα
+χρόνον—subject of course to the regular payment of the rent, seem to have
+been quite usual.
+
+What is said to be the oldest Greek contract we have, is of this
+nature.(347) It was found in Elis at Olympia, and runs as follows:—
+
+
+    “Contract with Theron and Aichmanor with regard to the land in
+    Salamona of eighteen plethra. Rent, twenty-two manasioi of barley
+    in the month Alphioios; if he omits, let them pay double. _They
+    shall hold for ever._”(348)
+
+
+There is an instance of a proprietor of land at Mylasa, in Karia,
+deliberately selling his estates to a sacred community for the benefit of
+the god, and receiving them again (like the Roman _precaria_) from the
+trustees on perpetual lease—εἰς πατρικά—as the patrimonial substance of
+his family, for himself and his issue or whosoever should take inheritance
+from him. He thus obtained a money value down in return for his property,
+but bound himself and his descendants to an annual rent of so many
+drachmae, to form part of the revenues of the god. Moreover his
+“family-land” in this case was apparently more inalienable now than
+before; for he might neither divide the land henceforth, nor share the
+responsibility for the rent with another.(349)
+
+(M165) Do not these instances show that even leases were included in the
+same category with actual ownership of land, being embraced within the
+characteristic idea that the land that contributed to the maintenance of
+the family and had come to be regarded almost as giving that family its
+social if not its political status, should descend unintermittently from
+generation to generation in that family, though its occupation was subject
+to providing support likewise to a superior owner and his family, whose
+descendants in their turn also would demand their share in the produce?
+
+Is the conclusion justified that the basis of this indomitable feeling was
+that the peculiar view of the family, as consisting of a long line of past
+and future representatives, precluded the individual, who happened to be
+the living representative at any given time, from taking an irresponsible
+position as absolute master of the property, upon which his family had
+been, was, and would be dependent?
+
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER V. CONCLUSION.
+
+
+(M166) In weighing the results of this essay, it would be absurd to
+pretend that anything of the nature of a last word can be said on the
+subject. The process of the early development of Greek society cannot be
+ascertained merely from the study of a few survivals in historic times.
+The comparative method must be carried much further than has been
+attempted here, before the secrets of antiquity can be laid bare and an
+authoritative statement made.
+
+There would seem, however, to be at any rate some points, of those that
+have come under notice, worthy of further investigation, in so far as they
+indicate that Greek society was no isolated growth, but must be given a
+place in the general development of the systems of Europe.
+
+(M167) It is suggested that in the continuity of city life from an earlier
+stage of society under some form of the Tribal System, can be found the
+only natural explanation of the structure of the kindred at Athens in the
+fourth and fifth centuries B.C. Comparison with the customs of other
+nations,—the Hindoos, the Welsh, and the Israelites, the last two being
+the most typical examples of peoples of which we have written records
+whilst still living under the tribal system—has shown remarkable analogies
+in the organisation of their inner society.
+
+(M168) The actual similarity in the sentiment which surrounded the
+possession of the privileges of tribal blood and the title to citizenship
+at Athens, can hardly be exaggerated.
+
+(M169) The foundation of the bond in either case has a threefold aspect.
+The bond is one of blood, of religion, and of maintenance.
+
+(M170) The qualification for citizenship, as much as for the tribal
+privilege, was a question of parentage; and the citizen equally inherited,
+with his blood, responsibilities towards the community into which he was
+born, as to a larger kindred.
+
+(M171) Membership of the tribe or of the city was the only qualification,
+that admitted to the privilege and duty of partaking in the public
+religious observances. Tribesmen and citizens, by virtue of their
+privilege, shared in the worship of the greater gods, of Hestia in the
+Prytaneum, of Zeus Agoraios, and of the Heroes or special guardians of
+their community; in like manner as the member of the smaller group of a
+kindred, by virtue of his blood, shared in the worship of the Apollo
+Patroïos, the Zeus Herkeios or Ktesios, and the heroes or ancestors of his
+family. Inasmuch as citizenship depended upon purity of descent, the
+possession of the latter qualification carried with it the right to share
+in the greater ceremonies. But the converse was equally stringent, in that
+the possession of shrines of Apollo Patroïos and Zeus Herkeios was
+impossible, unless the family was one of those who had for many
+generations been recognised as belonging to the true stock of the
+community.
+
+(M172) Inasmuch as the worship of private or public gods consisted mainly
+of offerings of food, of beasts or produce of the earth, and wine, every
+tribesman or citizen must have had the means of providing his share in the
+offerings, besides supporting himself and his family. Those devoted to
+handicraft or merchandise were often despised by the regular tribesman or
+citizen, and sometimes therefore formed separate clans by themselves, like
+the smiths in Arabia. It is not surprising, therefore, to find that the
+membership of the tribe or city should have carried with it the right to
+the possession of some portion of the arable land and of the pasture, upon
+which all were regarded as being dependent. In this way the possession of
+land was intimately related to the status and the duties of the owner. It
+was the visible mark of his full tribal privilege, and was the practical
+means of his fulfilling his duty towards his fellows and the public
+religion, as well as to the needs of his ancestors and household. It seems
+also to have been believed that, in partaking of the hospitality or
+sharing in the sacrificial feast of any family, a bond was for the time
+being created which was in most respects practically equivalent to
+relationship by blood to the members of that family.(350)
+
+(M173) Apart from the tribal character of the qualification for
+citizenship, the most conservative organisation wherein had been
+stereotyped the most precious of tribal customs, was that of the kindred.
+
+It is suggested that the vitality of the customs surrounding the bond of
+family relationship was due to the importance attached to the religious
+and social functions incumbent on all members of a household united by
+kindred blood. The actions of the individual members were constrained by
+their weighty responsibilities towards the continuance and prosperity of
+the composite household, in which they moved, and apart from which their
+existence could not but be altogether incomplete.
+
+The worship of ancestors occupied a prominent place in the needs of the
+Athenian household, and, no doubt, had a corresponding influence in the
+preservation of its unity. The same of course cannot be said for Wales,
+where Christianity had replaced, in the records at any rate, whatever
+religious beliefs may have existed earlier. But the grouping of the
+kindred according to grades of relationship was adhered to by the Welsh as
+an intrinsic part of their very conception of a kindred; and this would
+point to the conclusion that such subdivisions were due to wider needs
+than can be found in any particular form of religious belief or worship.
+
+(M174) If, as has been suggested, in adhering to these customs, the Greeks
+were still treading in the tracks of their tribal ancestors, how is it
+that the most convincing evidence comes from as late as the fifth and
+fourth centuries B.C. and mainly from the most highly civilised of the
+cities of Greece?
+
+The _Iliad_ and the _Odyssey_ may perhaps be trusted as truly portraying,
+so far as they go, the manners and customs of the great period of Achaian
+civilisation, known as Mycenean, which may be said to have culminated just
+before the Dorian invasion. Whence then came the public recognition of
+those household ceremonies of ancestor-worship, which filled such a large
+place in the life of the Athenian citizen, and which, it has been
+suggested, were consciously or unconsciously slurred over by the Homeric
+poets?
+
+(M175) Mr. Walter Leaf has already found an answer to this question,(351)
+viz. that these ceremonies were the long cherished customs of the ancient
+Ionian or Pelasgian inhabitants of Greece, who had formed the substratum
+of society under Achaian rule, and who only came into prominence on the
+removal of their superiors at the time of the Dorian invasion. And this
+continuity, underlying the superficial rule of the Achaians, seems to be
+borne out by recent research and discovery.(352)
+
+The Athenians always boasted their Ionian descent, and may well have
+inherited their habits with the traditions of their origin.
+
+(M176) But the customs reviewed in the foregoing pages seem to have a
+wider parentage than can be attributed to the Pelasgians alone. Spartan
+customs at any rate cannot thus be accounted for.
+
+(M177) In the course of argument reference has often been made to the
+Jewish records in the Books of the Old Testament, and indeed a remarkable
+parallel is presented in the history of the two peoples. Both peoples
+apparently reached their greatest period about the same time. The reign of
+Solomon with its gold and costly workmanship must have resembled that of
+the Mycenean kings in more than similarity of date, and outward splendour.
+Taking Homer again as the courtly chronicler of the Achaian age of gold,
+the Books of the Kings of both peoples are curiously conscious of their
+former tribal conditions, through which they easily trace back to the very
+fountain-head of their race.
+
+(M178) In the period of the decay of the Jewish people under the stress of
+invasion by foreign kings, strenuous efforts were made by their prophet
+leaders to purge them from the alien blood and alien influences contracted
+in the careless days of their prosperity. Their aim was to restore once
+more those strict tribal habits which had served them so well at the time
+of their own victorious invasion, and which still lay dormant in their
+constitution. In similar wise, the period of Achaian prosperity seems to
+have been followed by a rise into prominence at any rate, if not an actual
+resuscitation, of old tribal customs.
+
+(M179) The actual traces of tribal institutions in Homer need not be
+underrated. There is much that is of a tribal character in the Homeric
+chieftain in his relations to his tribesmen and to their gods. Survivals
+of tribal custom may also be seen in the reverence for the guest, and the
+sacredness of the bond of hospitality lasting as it did for generations;
+and in the blood-feud with its deadly consequences, especially when
+occurring within the tribe or kindred. Indeed if only the Pentateuch of
+the Achaians could be found in the ruins of Mycenae and added to the
+Homeric Book of the Kings, would it not then probably be evident that
+there was much more of a tribal nature in the organisation of the kindreds
+of the Achaians and surviving throughout the whole period of their
+splendour than the aristocratic poets of the Homeric schools allowed
+themselves to record?
+
+(M180) Although therefore nearly all our evidence of the internal
+structure of the kindred among the Greeks dates from the fifth century
+B.C., the ἀγχιστεία at Athens must not be put down as belonging merely to
+that period. In the light of the close analogies to be found in the
+structure of other tribal systems, it is probable that such subdivisions
+of the kindred belong to an extremely early period in the history of the
+Greeks, whether as Achaians or Ionians or Dorians. Are they not indeed
+necessary features of tribal society itself wherever it is examined?
+
+
+
+
+
+INDEX.
+
+
+Adoption, object of, 35;
+  out of unfortunate home, 36;
+  ceremony of, 36-7
+
+_Agora_, 2, 3
+
+ἀγχιστεία, 32;
+  its meaning, 55;
+  its limits, 58-9;
+  all within it liable for bloodshed, 75 _et seq._;
+  its tribal origin, 143
+
+Ancestor-worship, 10, 140;
+  in Homer, 5, 7;
+  in Israel, 8, 9;
+  in Egypt, 11;
+  pre-Homeric, 141, _note_
+
+ἀνεψιός see ἀγχιστεία
+
+βασιλεύς, one of a class, 107, 114;
+  honoured like a god, 105-6, 122;
+  owned τέμενος, 102, 106, 122;
+  influenced the seasons, 105, _note_;
+  over-lordship not altogether hereditary, 107;
+  levied maintenance on their people, 115, 122;
+  Solomon, 116;
+  household βασιλεύς 92
+
+Bastard, no place in family, 95-6;
+  allotment or gift for his maintenance, 95-6
+
+Blood, as basis of family, 13;
+  of tribe, &c., 4-5, 138;
+  its purity jealously guarded, 67 _et seq._;
+  acquisition of, 68 _et seq._
+
+Blood-fine, not within the tribe or kindred, 42-4, 77;
+  in Wales, the _galanas_, 78 _et seq._;
+  paid by whole family, 79 _et seq._
+
+Bloodshed, responsibility for, 42;
+  rested on ἀγχιστεία, 75 _et seq._;
+  within the kindred, 44, 77
+
+Citizenship, admission to, 71, 96;
+  qualification for, by three descents, 73;
+  basis of, 138;
+  confirmed to son of stranger, 71, _note_
+
+ἔγκτησις, grant of, to new citizen, 97, _note_; 123, _note_
+
+ἐπίκληρος, succession found through her, 23;
+  she must marry next-of-kin, 23-7;
+  in Gortyn laws, 26;
+  where more than one, 26;
+  inherited for her issue, 28;
+  Ruth as, 31, 34;
+  had right of maintenance from property, 23-4
+
+Family (_see_ οἶκος), bound to the land, 127 _et seq._;
+  family estate in Santa Maura, 86;
+  head of family, 91
+
+Funeral, _see_ Sacrifices
+
+Gavelkind, in Kent, 95
+
+Guest, importance at sacrifice, 99-100;
+  hereditary guestship, 110
+
+Hearth, 3, 4;
+  as basis of the family, 13, 17;
+  in Prytaneum, 4, 15;
+  initiation of heir to, 89
+
+Heir, duties of, 18-19, 20;
+  importance of male heir, 21-3, 98 _et seq._;
+  daughter’s son, 23-7;
+  always ranks as _son_ of deceased, 34 _et seq._, 59 _et seq._;
+  initiated to hearth, 89;
+  introduced to kindred, 36;
+  and to the deme, 38-9;
+  importance of introduction of, 41, 125-8;
+  co-heir in Wales, 51;
+  law of succession, 57 _et seq._;
+  disinheritance, 61;
+  division among heirs, 64 _et seq._, 101;
+  Ahab’s ’inheritance’ of Naboth’s vineyard, 114
+
+Hesiod, his κλῆρος, 123;
+  the needs of a farmer, 109
+
+_Hestia_, 3, 4, 138;
+  called “princess,” 13
+
+Inheritance, see κλῆρος, and Heir
+
+Kinship, grades of, 48 _et seq._;
+  in India, 52;
+  in Wales, 49, 67 _et seq._;
+  the fourth degree, 73, 112;
+  the seventh, 78 et _seq._;
+  the ninth, 68 _et seq._;
+  wife’s relations no kin to husband but are to son, 61, _note_
+
+Kinsmen, duties of, 18, 42;
+  next of kin marries “heiress,” 23-7, 35;
+  his duty to redeem property in Israel, 32, 95;
+  kinsmen accept heir, 36, 41, 125-7;
+  sanction disinheritance, 61;
+  liable for bloodshed, 75 _et seq._;
+  Hesiod’s idea of, 123
+
+κλαρῶται, 130
+
+κλῆρος, its form, 85 _et seq._;
+  supported the οἶκος, 88 _et seq._, 110, 121, 127;
+  need not be divided, 47, 89, 93, 97;
+  no joint holding between father and sons, 93;
+  sold in case of need, 94;
+  in theory inalienable, 94, 113, 124, 127;
+  allotted to new citizen, 96;
+  in Homer, 102;
+  held by tribesmen, 108;
+  of Hesiod, 123
+
+κληροῦχοι, 131 _et seq._
+
+Land, ownership of, proof of civic rights, 83, 96 (_see_ κλῆρος and
+            τέμενος)
+
+_Lar_ = “lord,” 12;
+  _lares_ of king, 4
+
+Leases, for ever, 134-6
+
+Levirate, not in Greece, 27;
+  in India, 29;
+  in Israel, 30 _et seq._
+
+Maintenance of parents (_see_ Parents);
+  of οἶκος, 110;
+  the bond of, 110, 139;
+  of the chief, 114 _et seq._; 122;
+  in Ezekiel, 119;
+  of children at Sparta, 125;
+  gift of food to babe, 125;
+  derived from κλῆρος, 127
+
+_Manes_, duties to, in India, 19
+
+Marriage, of heiress, 23-6;
+  of near relations, 29;
+  of widow (_see_ Levirate)
+
+_Octopus_, 125 _note_
+
+οἶκος, part of γένος, 17;
+  importance of continuity of, 9, 19-20, 30, 35, 111, 128;
+  the unit of ownership of property, 47, 109;
+  extent of, 54-6, 88-9;
+  the householder in India, 99;
+  supported by its land, 110, 113, 121;
+  of Bouselos, 55, 62;
+  power of head of, 91-2
+
+Open field system, in Greece, 85;
+  in the islands, 87;
+  in Homer, 88, 104;
+  its elasticity, 118-9
+
+_Parage_, in Normandy, an undivided tenure, 50
+
+Parents, maintenance of, 18, 48;
+  after death, 19
+
+_Phratria_, enrols legitimate sons, 36-7;
+  partly responsible for bloodshed, 76
+
+Primogeniture, not the rule in Greece, 90;
+  nor in India, 97 _et seq._;
+  eldest son had certain rights or dignity, 90 _et seq._, 97 _et seq._;
+  called ἠθεῖος, 91, _note_
+
+_Prytaneum_, 3, 4, 15, 138
+
+Register, of phratria, 36;
+  of deme, 38
+
+Ruth, as widow and ἐπίκληρος, 31-4
+
+Sacrifices, object of, 6, 139, _note_;
+  to the dead, 8, 9-12;
+  of funeral cake in India, 51 _et seq._;
+  funeral rites at Athens, 20;
+  of householder in India, 99;
+  bond of common religion, 13, 53, 138
+
+Stranger, abhorrence of, 5, 71, 74;
+  as guest, 99 (_see_ Guest);
+  admission to tribe, 67 _et seq._, 96
+
+τέμενος, in Homer, 103, 113;
+  allotted to princes and gods, 102, 106, 118, 122;
+  called πατρώιος, 106;
+  helped to support prince, 118-9
+
+Tonsure, in Greece, 39;
+  in India, 40
+
+Tribe, its basis one of blood, 4-5, 138;
+  possible development of, 14-15;
+  admission to, 68 _et seq._, 96 (_and see_ Citizenship)
+
+Widow, could not inherit from husband, 27-8;
+  returned to her kin or guardian, 28;
+  when allowed to remain, 28, _note_;
+  the case of Tamar, 30;
+  of Ruth, 31 _et seq._
+
+THE END.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+FOOTNOTES
+
+
+   M1 Vitality of the tribal system.
+   M2 Its survivals form the subject of this inquiry.
+   M3 The centres of political and tribal society.
+
+_    1 Il._ ix. 63.
+
+_    2 Il._ ii. 400.
+
+_    3 Il._ xi. 807.
+
+_    4 Il._ ii. 788.
+
+   M4 The Prytaneum and Hestia.
+
+_    5 Journal of Philology_, xiv. 145 (1885), Mr. Frazer on Prytaneum.
+
+    6 Cauer, _Delect. Inser. Graec._ § 121. (Crete, c. 200 B.C.) “I swear
+      by Hestia in the Prytaneum (τὰν ἐμ πρυτανείῳ), by Zeus of the Agora,
+      Zeus Tallaios, Apellon Delphinios, Athanaia Poliouchos, Apellon
+      Poitios, and Lato, and Artemis, and Ares, and Aphordite, and Hermes,
+      and Halios ... and all gods and goddesses.” _Cf._ also § 116, and
+      _Od._ xiv. 158.
+
+      Plato, in _Laws_ § 848, says Hestia, Zeus and Athena shall have
+      temples everywhere.
+
+_    7 Thuc._ ii. 16.
+
+   M5 Their origin.
+
+_    8 Journal of Philol._ xiv. 145.
+
+_    9 Op. cit._ p. 153.
+
+   M6 Qualification for share in religious rites one of blood.
+
+   10 Exception, however, was sometimes made in the case of the stranger
+      as a favoured guest, _v. infra_, p. 99.
+
+   M7 Ancestor-worship not obvious in Homer.
+
+   11 Plato (_Laws_ 948) remarks that at the time of Rhadamanthos the
+      belief in the existence of the gods was a reasonable one, seeing
+      that at that time most men were sons of gods.
+
+   M8 Offerings of food to the gods,
+
+_   12 Il._ xxiii. 206. It is clear from _Il._ i. 466 _et seq._ that the
+      sacrifice was held to be a feast at which the choice portions were
+      devoured by the god by means of the fire on his altar. _Cf._ p. 139,
+      note.
+
+   M9 and to the dead.
+
+   13 It was not therefore only at the mouth of Hades that the dead could
+      benefit by such offerings.
+
+  M10 The continuance of his name quite as important as offerings of food.
+
+_   14 Od._ iv. 197. _Cf._ _Il._ xvi. 455.
+      ἔνδα ἑ ταρχύσουσι κασίγνητοι τε ἔται τε
+      τύμβῳ τε στήλῃ τε: τὸ γὰρ γέρας ἐστὶ θανόντων.
+
+   15 The speculative state of mind displayed in the _Iliad_ may be
+      illustrated from the effect on Achilles of the apparition of
+      Patroklos after death in a dream. As he wakes suddenly the
+      conviction comes upon him:—“Ay me, there remaineth then even in the
+      house of Hades a spirit and phantom of the dead, albeit the life be
+      not anywise therein: for all night long hath the spirit of hapless
+      Patroklos stood over me, wailing and making moan, and charged me
+      everything that I should do, and wondrous like his living self it
+      seemed.” _Il._ xxiii, 113 &c.
+
+  M11 Offerings to the dead in the Old Testament.
+
+   16 Ps. cvi. 28. _v._ Maine’s _Early Law and Custom_, p. 59.
+
+  M12 Resemblance between Homer and the Old Testament.
+
+   17 1 Sam. xx. 6. Θυσία τῶν ἡμερῶν ἐκεῖ ὅλῃ τῇ φυλῇ.
+
+  M13 Ancestor-worship in India and Rome.
+
+   18 Soph. _Antig._ 659.
+
+   19 Coulanges, _Cité Antique_, p. 65.
+
+   20 Soph. _Antig._ 199.
+
+   21 Soph. _Phil._ 933. Soph. _Elekt._ 411.
+
+  M14 The need of food for the dead;
+
+   22 Aesch. _Pers._ 609-618. The speaker in this case is a Persian and a
+      woman; but many passages might be quoted from the Greek poets. _Cf._
+      Lucian, _De Luctu_, 9. Τρέφονται δὲ ἄρα ταῖς παρ᾽ ἡμῖν χοαῖς καὶ
+      τοῖς καθαγιζομένοις ἐπὶ τῶν τάφων: ὡς εἴ τῳ μὴ εἴη καταλελειμμένος
+      ὑπὲρ γῆς φίλος ἥ συγγενὴς, ἄσιτος οὗτος νεκρὸς καὶ λιμώττων ἐν
+      αὐτοῖς πολιτεύεται.
+
+  M15 the same in Egypt,
+
+   23 Edited by C. H. S. Davis (Putnam, 1894).
+
+_   24 Id._ chap. liii.
+
+_   25 Id._ chap. lxxii.
+
+_   26 Id._ chap. lxxvii.
+
+  M16 and in India.
+  M17 Ancestor-worship not necessarily post-Homeric.
+
+_   27 Cité Antique_, p. 93, ἑστία δέσποινα.
+
+  M18 The hearth and the tie of common blood.
+  M19 Possible course of social development.
+  M20 The change of tribesmen into citizens.
+
+_   28 Wks. & Days_, 327-332.
+
+_   29 Id._ 353-5.
+
+  M21 The study of the family introductory to the history of the tribe.
+  M22 The duties of the individual to his οἶκος,
+  M23 began with his living parents;
+
+_   30 Laws_ § 717, Trans. Jowett, _cf._ 729 C and 931 A.
+
+  M24 and extended to their tomb.
+
+   31 Arist, _Ath. Pol._ lv. 3. Isaeus, viii. 32. “The law commands us to
+      maintain (τρέφειν) our parents even if they have nothing to leave
+      us.” _Cf._ Ruth iv. 15 διαθρέψαι τὴν πολιάν σου.
+
+      _Iliad_ iv. 477 and xvii. 302.
+
+      ... οὐδὲ τοκεῦσιν
+      θρέπτα φίλοις ἀπέδωκε...
+
+      Hesiod, _Works and Days_, 118.
+
+      οὐδέ κεν οἵγε
+      γηράντεσσι τοκεῦσιν ἀπὸ θρεπτήρια δοῖεν
+      χειροδίκαι.
+
+   32 Plato, _Laws_, 877 C.
+
+   33 Aeschin. _c. Timarch._ § 13.
+
+   34 Isaeus, iv. 19 (_Nicostrat._).
+
+  M25 Continuity of the family;
+  M26 in the _Ordinances of Manu_;
+
+_   35 Ordinances of Manu_, translated by A. C. Burnell, edited by E. W.
+      Hopkins. London: 1884. Bk. ix. 106, 8, 182, 137, 161.
+
+  M27 and according to Plato.
+
+_   36 Laws_, 721 B, Trans. Jowett, _cf._ 923 A.
+
+   37 Dem. _c. Leoch._ 1090, and _Il._ xxiii. 163, xvi. 455, xxiv. 793.
+
+   38 Dem. _c. Macart._ 1077.
+
+   39 Isaeus, ii. 36 and 42.
+
+   40 Arist. _Pol._ 1, 2, 4, Ἡ κτῆσις μέρος τῆς οἰκίας ἐστί.
+
+  M28 The importance of male succession.
+
+   41 Plut. _Lycurg. and Numa_ 4. Xen. _Rep. Lac._ i. 7 to 9.
+
+   42 From Xen. _Rep. Lac._ i. 9, it would seem that such children, born
+      into a family where there were already children of both father and
+      mother, had no share in the family property.
+
+   43 This was the practice also in Arabia (Rob. Smith, _Kinship &c._, p.
+      110).
+
+   44 Herod. v. 40.
+
+   45 Herod. vii. 205. Quoted by Hearn, _Aryan Household_, p. 71.
+
+_   46 Iliad_ xv. 497.
+
+   47 Is. vii. 30.
+
+   48 Is. ii. 36.
+
+   49 Is. iii. 59 and 60, vi. 28.
+
+  M29 Succession through a daughter.
+
+   50 For want of a better translation implying “going with the property”
+      this word will be rendered by “heiress.”
+
+   51 Is. viii. 31. _Cf._ συνουκεῖν in Dem. _in Neaeram_ 1386.
+
+   52 Demosth. _Steph_. ii. 1134. Son. of ἐπίκληρος inherits (κρατεῖν τῶν
+      χρημάτων) ἐπὶ δίετες; τὸν δὲ σῖτον μετρεῖν τῇ μητρί.
+
+   53 Is. vi. 14. _Cf._ Ar. _Vesp_. 583 _et seq._
+
+_   54 Manu_ ix. 131 and 132.
+
+_   55 Ib._ 136.
+
+_   56 Ib._ 135.
+
+  M30 She must marry the next of kin.
+
+_   57 Laws_, 924.
+
+_   58 Cf._ Terence, _Phormio_ 125-6.
+
+      Lex est ut orbae, qui sunt genere proxumi,
+      Eis nubant, et illos ducere cadem haec lex jubet.
+
+      and Diod. Sic. xii. 18: ὁ δὲ ἀγχιστεὺς πλούσιος ὦν ἠναγκάσθη γῆμαι
+      γυναῖκα πενιχρὰν ἐπίκληρον ἄνευ προικός.
+
+  M31 even though already married.
+
+   59 Isaeus, iii. 64.
+
+_   60 Ordinances_ iii. 11.
+
+   61 Isaeus, i. 39.
+
+  M32 Similar rules in the laws of Gortyn,
+
+   62 vii. 15-ix. 24. We may compare this with _Odyssey_ vii. 60 _et seq._
+      where Alkinoos marries his _niece_, Arete, the only child and
+      therefore ἐπίκληρος of his brother Rhexenor.
+
+_   63 c. Macart._ 1068 (_Law_)
+
+   64 (Plut. _Solon_ 21. ἐν τῷ γένει τοῦ τεθηκότος ἔδει τὰ χρήματα
+      καταμένειν. Plato, _Laws_ 925. A heiress _must_ marry a citizen. In
+      the Gortyn laws, if any one marry the heiress contrary to law, the
+      next of kin shall have the property).
+
+  M33 and amongst the Israelites.
+  M34 The levirate proper not found in Greece.
+  M35 The widow returned to her guardian.
+
+   65 Dem. _c._ _Macart_. 1076. Widow only allowed to remain in her
+      deceased husband’s house on plea of pregnancy and under the
+      guardianship of the archon.
+
+      Dem. _c._ _Boeot_. 1010. Wife leaves her husband’s house and is
+      portioned out again by her brothers.
+
+   66 Cf. _Ord. of Manu_ v. 147-8. “No act is to be done according to
+      (her) own will by a young girl, a young woman, or even by an old
+      woman, though in (their own) houses.
+
+      “In her childhood (a girl) should be under the will of her father;
+      in her youth, of her husband; her husband being dead, of her sons; a
+      woman should never enjoy her own will.”
+
+   67 Dem. _c._ _Spoud_. 1029. Father takes away daughter and gives her to
+      another.
+
+      _Cf._ also Dem. _c._ _Eubulid_. 1311.
+
+      Isaeus, v. 10. By coming into an inheritance from his first cousin,
+      a man also becomes guardian (ἐπίτροπος καὶ κύριος) of his three
+      female first cousins, though all married.
+
+   68 Dem. _pro Phormio._ 953.
+
+   69 As in Isaeus, ii. 7 and 8.
+
+   70 ix. 70. &c.
+
+  M36 Marriage of near relations.
+
+   71 vii. 11 and 12.
+
+  M37 The levirate among the Israelites.
+  M38 The case of Tamar.
+
+   72 Gen. xxxviii. 10.
+
+  M39 The case of Ruth.
+
+   73 Ruth i. 8-12.
+
+   74 For the meaning of ἀγχιστεύς see below p. 55.
+
+  M40 Dependence on the next of kin.
+  M41 The son of the heiress must leave his father’s house,
+
+   75 xi. 49.
+
+  M42 and enter that of the deceased relative
+
+   76 Isaeus, vii. 31.
+
+_   77 c. Macart._ 1077.
+
+  M43 Hence the custom of adoption.
+
+   78 Dem. _c. Leochar._ 1093. ἐκ τῶν κατὰ γένος ἐγγυτάτω εἰσποιεῖν υἱὸν
+      τῷ τετελευτηκότι ὅπως ἄν ὁ οἶκος μὴ ἐξερημωθῇ.
+
+   79 Is. x. 17.
+
+  M44 The introduction of the heir to the kindred.
+
+   80 Arist. _Pol._ 1, 2, 4 Ἡ κτῆσις μέρος τῆς οἰκίας ἐστί.
+
+  M45 The same for true as for adopted son.
+  M46 The ceremony at Athens;
+
+   81 Is. ii. 14.
+
+   82 Is. vii. 1, 16, 13 and 27.
+
+   83 Dem. _c. Eubulid._ 1315.
+
+   84 Is. vi. 25.
+
+   85 Andoc. _de Myst._ 126.
+
+   86 Dem. _c. Macart._ 1054 and 1078.
+
+   87 Dem. _c. Leoch._ 1091. Isaeus iii. 80 and viii. 18.
+
+  M47 and at Gortyn;
+
+   88 Isaeus ix. 7 (_Astyph._) τελευτήσαντι αὐτῷ καὶ τοῖς ἐκείνου
+      προγόνοις τά νομιζόμενα ποισει.
+
+   89 Isaeus vi. 44; ix. 2 and 33; x. 2 and 4. Dem. _c. Leoch._ passim.
+      _Cf. Manu_, ix. 142.
+
+   90 Dem. _c. Leoch._ 1094, 1099, and (_lex Solonis_) 1100.
+
+_   91 Ib._ 1090.
+
+  M48 and also in India.
+
+   92 Mayne on _Hindu Law_ (1892), p. 105 and 162.
+
+_   93 Op. cit._ p. 141-2 and 189. _Manu_ ix. 142. He offers no cake to
+      his original ancestors.
+
+  M49 The introduction to the deme.
+  M50 The custom of tonsure.
+
+_   94 Thes._ 5.
+
+   95 ἀπάρχεσθαι: in Homer to “begin” a sacrifice by offering the _hair_
+      of the victim. Later, to “dedicate.”
+
+_   96 Il._ ii. 542 ὄπιθεν κομόωντες.
+
+   97 Herod, iii. 8. The Arabs cut their hair in a ring away from the
+      temples.
+
+_   98 Il._ xxiii. 141-6.
+
+   99 Paus. i. 37, 3.
+
+_  100 Char._ 21.
+
+_  101 Deipnosoph._ xi. 88.
+
+_  102 Manu_ ii. 65.
+
+_  103 Cf._ ii. 38. This was the last year that a Brahman could receive
+      investiture.
+
+  104 Isaeus, vi. 10.
+
+_  105 Anc. Grk. Inscr._ Brit. Mus. cccxv. cccxvii. and cccxviii. Oath of
+      mother required before legitimacy registered, in the island of
+      Kalymna.
+
+_  106 Cf._ Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ xlii.
+
+  107 Isaeus, iii. 75.
+
+_  108 Ib._ vi. 47. _Cf._ Deuteronomy xxiii. i.
+
+  M51 Liability for bloodshed rested on a group of kinsmen.
+
+  109 Robertson Smith, _Kinship, &c. in Arabia_, p. 262.
+
+  110 Dem. _in Euerg._ and _Mnesib._ 1160.
+
+  111 Dem. _Macart._ 1069. _Cf._ Deut. xxi. 1-9.
+
+_  112 Cf. Od._ iii. 195.
+
+  M52 No ransom for murders within the tribe;
+
+_  113 Il._ ix. 63.
+      ἀφρήτωρ, ἀθέμιστος, ἀνέστιός ἐστιν ἐκεῖνος,
+      ὅς πολέμου ἔραται ἐπιδημίου ὀκρυόεντος.
+
+  114 Il. xiii. 695. _Cf._ xv. 335.
+
+_  115 Il._ xvi. 572.
+
+_  116 Il._ ii. 662.
+
+_  117 Cf. Od._ xiii. 259, xiv. 380.
+
+  M53 or between citizen and citizen.
+
+  118 Quoted in Dem. _c. Aristocrat._ 629.
+
+_  119 Laws_ 865 d.
+
+_  120 Ib._ 871. Soph. O.C. 407. Oedipus could not be buried on Theban
+      soil, because he had shed ἔμφυλον αἷμα.
+
+_  121 Cf_. Aeschines in _Ctesiph._ 244.
+
+  122 ix. 17-19. _Cf._ Dem. _c. Pantaen._ 983, 59.
+
+  123 Plato, _Laws_ 871 D.
+
+  124 Plato, _Laws_ 871 B. _Cf._868.
+
+_  125 Ib._ 872 E. _Cf._ Tacitus, _Germania_, 21. Suscipere tam
+      inimicitias seu patris seu propinqui quam amicitias necesse est. Nec
+      implacabiles durant: luitur enim etiam homicidium certo armentorum
+      ac pecorum numero, _recipitque satisfactionem universa domus_,
+      utiliter in publicum, quia periculosiores sunt inimicitiae juxta
+      libertatem.
+
+_  126 Ib._ 873 E.
+
+  127 Herod. i. 44.
+
+  M54 All kinsmen were not equally responsible.
+  M55 The unity of the οἶκος.
+
+  128 v. _infra_ p. 90 _et seq._
+
+_  129 c. Leoch._ 1083.
+
+  130 Dem. _c. Macart._ 1055-6.
+
+  131 Isaeus, viii. 32.
+
+  M56 Grades of kinship in Western Europe.
+  M57 The position of the great-grandson,
+  M58 in Wales,
+
+_  132 Venedotian Code_, ii. xii.
+
+  133 Lady Charlotte Guest’s _Mabinogion_, p. 234.
+
+  M59 and in feudal Normandy.
+  M60 The custom of _parage_.
+
+  134 cxxviii-cxxxi.
+
+  M61 Co-heritage in Wales.
+
+_  135 Dimetian Code_, ii. xxiii.
+
+  M62 Degrees of relationship in India.
+
+_  136 Manu_, ix. 186.
+
+_  137 Manu_, iii. 5.
+
+_  138 Manu_ v. 60.
+
+  M63 Four generations share in the cake-offering.
+  M64 Similar grouping of the pourers of the water libation.
+
+_  139 Gwentian Code_, ii. viii.
+
+  M65 The οἶκος includes four generations.
+
+  140 Dem. _c. Makart._ 1076.
+
+  M66 The ἀγχιστεία at Athens.
+
+  141 Cf. _infra_, tree on p. 62.
+
+  142 Dem. _c. Makart._ 1055-6.
+
+  143 Dem. _c. Makart._ 1077.
+
+_  144 Id._ 1078 _et seq._
+
+  M67 The right of succession limited to the great-grandchild of the
+      common ancestor.
+  M68 The law according to Isaeus.
+
+  145 Isaeus, vii. 22, and xi. i.
+
+  146 Isaeus, xi. 30.
+
+  M69 The law according to Demosthenes.
+
+_  147 c. Makart._ 1067.
+
+  148 In Dem. _c. Leochar._ 1088. ἀνεψιαδοῦς is used to denote the
+      relationship of a man to the adopted son of his great-uncle, or, as
+      we should say, first cousin once removed.
+
+  M70 No ἀγχιστεία beyond great-grandsons.
+
+_  149 c. Makart._ 1053.
+
+  M71 The heir always ranked as _son_.
+
+  150 Dem. _c. Makart._ and _c. Leoch._ 1100, &c.
+
+  M72 Hence the limit of the inheritance at cousin’s children.
+  M73 Disinheritance must be sanctioned by kinsmen.
+
+  151 The wife’s kin are no kin to her husband, but _are_ to her son.
+
+  152 Plato, _Laws_, 929 c. Trans. Jowett.
+
+  M74 The case of the estate of Hagnias in Isaeus and Demosthenes.
+
+  153 Dem. _c. Makart._ 1058.
+
+_  154 Id._ 1070.
+
+  155 Mentioned in Dem. _c. Makart._ 1056.
+
+  M75 Equal division amongst heirs of the same grade.
+  M76 The share of a dead son taken by his children.
+
+_  156 Supra_, p. 56.
+
+  M77 If sons all dead, grandsons probably divided _per capita_,
+  M78 as in the case of nephews and cousins.
+
+_  157 c. Makart._ 1068, _supra_, p. 26.
+
+  M79 Purity of tribal blood jealously guarded.
+  M80 In Wales, privileges attained in the fourth generation by
+      intermarriages.
+
+_  158 Welsh Laws_, iv. i. and x. vii. Exception is made for the _son of a
+      stranger chieftain_.
+
+_  159 Welsh Laws_, v. ii. and _Vened. Code_, ii. xvi. and elsewhere.
+
+  M81 Otherwise not until the tenth generation.
+
+_  160 Welsh Laws_, v. ii.
+
+_  161 Welsh Laws_, xiii. ii.
+
+_  162 Venedotian Code_, ii. xiv. and _Gwentian Code_, ii. xxx. _Cf._ the
+      Shunammite’s _cry unto the King_ for restoration of her house and
+      fields after an absence of seven years. 2 Kings viii. 3.
+
+  M82 The same rule amongst the Israelites.
+  M83 Shorter time in special cases.
+
+  163 Gen. xlviii. 5. _Cf._ Pindar, _Ol._ viii. 46. Troy to be subdued by
+      children of Aeacus in first and fourth generations.
+
+  M84 The privilege of citizenship jealously guarded at Athens.
+
+  164 Dem. _in Neaer._ 1376.
+
+_  165 Anc. Inscrip._ Brit. Mus. ccxxxviii. Citizenship had to be
+      confirmed on son of foreigner admitted to citizenship.
+
+  M85 Abhorrence of alien blood.
+  M86 Citizenship only conferred as the highest honour.
+  M87 Qualification dependent on ancestry and status of family.
+
+_  166 Ath. Pol._ lv. 3.
+
+_  167 Cf._ Pollux, viii. 85: εἰ Ἀθηναῖοί εἰσιν ἑκατερωθεν ἐκ τριγονίας.
+
+_  168 Cf._ Aristot. _Pol._ iii. 2: ὁρίζονται δὲ πρὸς τὴν χρῆσιν πολίτην
+      τὸν ἔξ ἀμφοτέρων πολιτῶν καὶ μὴ θατέρου μόνον, οἷον πατρὸς ἢ μητρός,
+      οἳ δὲ καὶ τοῦτ᾽ ἐπὶ πλέον ζητοῦσιν, οἷον ἐπὶ πάππους δύο ἢ τρεῖς ἢ
+      πλείους.
+
+  M88 Fourth generation acquired new privilege or status.
+
+_  169 Oed. Tyr._ 742 and 1063 quoted by Hearn, _Aryan Household_, p.
+      206.
+
+      θάρσει; σὺ μὲν γὰρ οὐδ᾽ ἐὰν τρίτης ἐγὼ
+      μητρὸς φανῶ τρίδουλος, ἐκφανεῖ κακή ...
+
+      _Cf._ Demosth. 1327. πονηρὸς ἐκ τριγονίας.
+
+_  170 Handbuch der Griechischen Staatsalterthümer_, von G. Gilbert, ii.
+      p. 298, quotation from Dittenberger 371, 4 ff.:—(ὁ) πριάμε(νος τ)ὴν
+      ἱερητείαν τῆς Ἀρτέμιδος τῆς Περ(γα)ίας π(αρ)έξετα(ι ἱ)έρειαν ἀστὴν
+      ἐξ ἀστῶν ἀμφοτέρων ἐπὶ (τ)ρεῖς γενεὰς γεγενημένην καὶ πρὸς πατρὸς
+      καὶ πρὸς μητρός.
+
+  171 Nehemiah vii. 64.
+
+  M89 Seventh generation in the Ordinances of Manu.
+
+_  172 Manu_, x. 64.
+
+  M90 All within the ἀγχιστεία were liable.
+
+  173 Plato’s _Laws_, ix. 871 B.
+
+_  174 Cf._ 868.
+
+  175 872 E.
+
+  176 878 D.
+
+  M91 The Law of Draco.
+
+  177 Dem. _c. Makart_, 1069.
+
+      There is some uncertainty in the text of this passage, but the
+      following is Blass’ reading adopted by Kohler:—προειπεῖν τῷ
+      κτείναντι ἐν ἀγορᾷ ἐντὸς ἀνεψιότητος καὶ ἀνεψιοῦ συνδίωκειν δὲ καὶ
+      ἀνεψιοὺς καὶ ἀνεψιῶν παῖδας καὶ ἀνεψιαδοῦς καὶ γαμβροὺς καὶ
+      πενθέρους καὶ φράτορας.
+
+      I am indebted to Mr. J. W. Headlam for this information, and also
+      for the fact of the discovery of the confirmatory inscription.
+
+  178 Dem. _c. Euerg. et Mnesib._ 1161. κελεύει ὁ νόμος τοὺς προσήκοντας
+      ἐπεξιέναι μέχρι ἀνεψιαδῶν; καὶ ἐν τῷ ὅρκῳ διορίζεται ὅτι προσήκων
+      ἐστι etc.... _Cf._ Pollux, viii. 118 (obviously quoting this
+      passage).
+
+  M92 The case of murder within the ἀγχιστεία.
+
+_  179 Laws_, 877 c.
+
+_  180 Cf._ 2 Sam. xiv. 7. House extinguished for fratricide.
+
+  M93 The blood-fine or galanas in Wales.
+
+_  181 Dimetian Code_, ii. i.
+
+_  182 Gwentian Code_, ii. viii. _Cf._ Sapinda and Samānodaka: both owe
+      rites at death of kinsman. Manu, ix. 186, and v. 60, quoted above.
+
+_  183 Venedotian Code_, iii. i.
+
+  M94 Defilement rested upon the group of kinsmen.
+
+_  184 Inscript. Jurid. Grecques_ par Dareste, &c., 1891, p. 10.
+      Inscription found at Iulis in Keos. _Fifth century_ B.C. _Cf._
+      Numbers xix. 14.
+
+_  185 c. Makart._ 1071.
+
+  M95 The mother’s relations included in Greece and in Wales.
+
+_  186 Welsh Laws_, vol. i. 229. Cf. _Ord. of Manu_, ix. 201, where list
+      of those incapable of receiving inheritance includes eunuchs.
+
+  M96 The usual holding of a citizen was called a κλῆρος or “lot.”
+
+  187 ὁ περὶ τῶν κλήρων καὶ ἐπικλήρων. _Pol. Ath._ 9.
+
+  M97 The relation of ownership of land to the structure of the family.
+
+  188 Cf. _Cic. de Legibus_ ii. 21. Nam sacra cum pecunia pontificum
+      auctoritate, nulla lege conjuncta sunt.
+
+  189 Dem. _in Calliclem_, 13-14. Coulanges, _Problèmes d’Histoire_, p.
+      19.
+
+  190 Arist. _Pol. Ath._ lv. 3; Harpocration, ὅτι δὲ τούτοις μετῆν τῆς
+      πολιτείας οἷς εἴη Ζεὺς ἑρκεῖος, δεδήλωκε καὶ Ὑπερείδης ...
+
+  191 In other words, the devisee could not possess the property devised
+      to him until his place as heir in the succession by blood or
+      adoption was legally established.
+
+  192 Isaeus, i. 17. The “friendship” insured that his presence and
+      officiating at the tomb would be acceptable to the soul of the
+      deceased—always an important consideration.
+
+  M98 Early semi-pastoral habits.
+
+  193 Thuc. i. 2. Νεμόμενοί τε τὰ αὑτῶν ἔκαστοι ὅσον ἀποζῇν, καὶ
+      περιουσίαν χρημάτων οὐκ ἔχοντες οὐδὲ γῆν φυτεύοντες, ἄδηλον ὃν ὁπότε
+      τις ἐπελθὼν καὶ ἀτειχίστων ἅμα ὄντων ἄλλος ἀφαιρήσεται.
+
+_  194 Od._ 21. 16. Cf. _Il._ xi. 682 _sq._ where the booty consists of 50
+      herds of kine, 50 flocks of sheep, 50 droves of swine, 50 flocks of
+      goats, and 150 chestnut mares, many with foals at foot.
+
+_  195 Il._ xx. 216-8.
+
+_  196 Il._ xxi. 602. Cf. _Od._ iii. 495.
+
+  M99 Modern methods of land-tenure in Greece and the islands.
+
+_  197 Consular Reports_, p. 20.
+
+_  198 Ibid._
+
+ M100 Family-holdings in Santa Maura.
+
+  199 P. 199.
+
+_  200 Consular Reports_, pp. 23 and 30.
+
+ M101 The open field system in Greece,
+ M102 and in the islands.
+
+_  201 Ibid._ p. 26.
+
+_  202 Ibid._ p. 40.
+
+_  203 Ibid._ p. 49.
+
+ M103 The open field system in Homer.
+
+  204 “The Homeric Land System,” _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, 1885.
+
+ M104 Ownership of the κλῆρος vested in the head of the οἶκος.
+
+  205 Isaeus, xi. 49 (Hagnias).
+
+  206 Harp. _s. v._ ἀφ᾽ Ἑστίας μυεῖσθαι; Ἰσαῖος ἐν τῷ πρὸς Καλυδῶνα. ὁ ἀφ᾽
+      Ἑστίας μυούμενος Ἀθηναῖος ἦν πάντως. κλήρῳ δὲ λαχὼν ἐμυεῖτο.
+
+ M105 Dependence of other members of the οἶκος.
+
+  207 Isaeus, vii. 15 and 27, (Apollod.)
+
+  208 1055 _et seq._ _Cf._ 1149 where one brother lives with his father
+      after the division, whilst his brother has a house of his own: and
+      1086 where two brothers live apart but with undivided estate.
+
+ M106 The prerogative of the eldest brother,
+
+_  209 Il._ xv. 187 _sq._
+
+_  210 Ib._ xiii. 355.
+
+_  211 Cf._ the use of ἠθεῖος (“revered”) as the stock epithet of the
+      _eldest_ brother in Homer _Il._ vi. 518, and elsewhere. Pollux,
+      _On._ 3, 24, states that this is the right use of the word.
+
+ M107 contrasted with the power of the head of the household.
+
+_  212 Od._ xiii. 142.
+
+_  213 Il._ iv. 59 _sq._
+
+      Καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ θεός εἰμι, γένος δὲ μοι ἔνθεν, ὅθεν σοι;
+      καὶ με πρεσβυτάτην τέκετο Κρόνος ἀγκυλομήτης,
+      ἀμφότερον, γενεῇ τε καὶ οὕνεκα σὴ παράκοιτις
+      κέκλημαι; σὺ δὲ πᾶσι μετ᾽ ἀθανάτοισιν ἀνάσσεις.
+
+_  214 Od._ i. 397, _cf._ ix. 115.
+
+  215 xxix. Εἰς Ἑστίαν.
+
+      Ἑστιη, ἣ πάντων ἐν δώμασιν ὑψηλοῖσιν
+      ἀθανάτων τε θεῶν χαμαὶ ἐρχομένων τ᾽ ἀνθρώπων
+      ἕδρην ἀίδιον ἔλαχε, πρεσβηίδα τιμὴν,
+      καλὸν ἔχουσα γέρας καὶ τίμιον; οὐ γὰρ ἄτερ σοῦ
+      εἰλαπίναι θνητοῖσιν, ἵν᾽ οὐ πρώτῃ πυμάτῃ τε
+      Ἑστίῃ ἀρχόμενος σπένδει μελιηδέα οἶνον.
+
+  216 Pol. I. 2, 6. πᾶσα γὰρ οἰκία βασιλεύεται ὑπὸ τοῦ πρεσβυτάτου. _Cf._
+      use of πρεσβεύεσθαι in _Aesch. Ag._ 1300, _Choeph._ 486 and 631.
+
+_  217 Gortyn Law_, iv. 24, _supra_ p. 47.
+
+ M108 No joint holding between a father and his sons.
+
+  218 In the island of Tenos, according to an inscription of the second or
+      third century B.C., the transfer of undivided fractions of houses
+      and property was of exceedingly common occurrence. Sales are
+      recorded of a fourth part of a tower and cistern; half a house,
+      lands, tower, &c. _Inscr. Jurid. Gr._: Dareste, &c. p. 63.
+
+ M109 Confirmatory evidence of the Gortyn Laws.
+
+_  219 Gortyn Laws_, iv. 29-31.
+
+ M110 But the land was in theory inalienable from the family.
+
+  220 Cf. _Ordinances of Manu_, ix. 213-4. “If an eldest (brother),
+      through avarice, commit an injury against his younger (brothers), he
+      should be made a not-eldest and _shareless_, and be put under
+      restraint by kings.”
+
+      “None of the brothers who perform wrong acts _deserve_ (share in)
+      _the property_, ...”
+
+_  221 Laws_, 877 c.
+
+  222 Lev. xxv. 25; Jerem. xxxii. 8.
+
+ M111 Close analogy in the custom of Gavelkind in Kent.
+
+  223 Another version runs:
+      “The fader to the bonde
+      And the son to the londe.”
+
+      Sandys, _History of Gavelkind_, 1851, pp. 5 and 150.
+
+ M112 Allotment or “gift” to a bastard son.
+ M113 But he was not admitted to his father’s family.
+
+_  224 Od._ xiv. 209. _Cf._ Pindar, _Ol._ ix. 95-100. Bastard prince named
+      after his mother’s father and given one πόλιν λαόν τε διαιτᾶν.
+
+  225 Is. vi. 23.
+
+  226 Cf. _Eur. Ion_ 1541.
+
+      ... τοῦ θεοῦ δὲ λεγόμενος
+      οὐκ ἔσχες ἄν ποτ᾽ οὔτε παγκλήρους δόμους
+      οὔτ᾽ ὄνομα πατρός.
+
+ M114 Gifts of land to new citizens.
+
+  227 See inscriptions quoted in _Mittheilungen Athen._ vol. 9, pt. 1, p.
+      60. εὐεργέτῃ γενομενῳ τῆς πόλεως δοῦναι πολιτείαν, κλῆρον ἐν τῷ
+      πεδίῳ, οἰκίην, κῆπον κυάμων διηκοσίων ἀμφορέων, ἀτέλειαν ... αὐτῷ
+      καὶ ἐκγόνοις.
+
+      ... δοῦναι ἡμικλήριον δασείης κτήνειον (?) ἐν τῷ πεδίῳ, οἰκίην,
+      κῆπον κυάμων ἀμφορέων ἑκατὸν, &c. ... αὐτῷ καὶ ἐκγόνοις.
+
+      Cf. _Cauer Delect._ § 221. αὐτοῖ καὶ ἐκγόνοις, καὶ ἔγκτησιν γᾶς καὶ
+      οἰκίας καὶ ἐπινομίας, &c. ... and § 232.
+
+      _Do._ § 395 (4th cent. B.C.). So many plethra each ἔχειν πατρουέαν
+      τὸμ πάντα χρόνον.
+
+      _Do._ § 27. The importance of the grant of ἔγκτησις must lie in its
+      being the evidence of admission to full privilege. _V. infra_, p.
+      139.
+
+ M115 Dependence of sons during their father’s life.
+
+  228 p. 122, note A.
+
+_  229 Manu_, ix. 104-106.
+
+ M116 His property divided amongst them at his death.
+
+  230 iv. 184. “An elder brother is equal to a father.”
+
+ M117 But special respect shown to the eldest son.
+
+  231 ix. 182.
+
+  232 iii. 171-2.
+
+  233 ix. 110 and 213.
+
+  234 ix. 111.
+
+ M118 The duties of the householder.
+
+  235 iii. 77 _et seq._
+
+  236 vi. 90.
+
+  237 iii. 67, 70, and 72.
+
+ M119 Honour paid to the guest.
+
+  238 iii. 108.
+
+_  239 Elektra_, 784.
+
+_  240 Elektra_, 637.
+
+_  241 Od._ viii. 546. ἀντὶ κασιγνήτου ξεῖνός θ᾽ ἱκέτης τε τέτυκται ἀνέρι,
+      ὅς τ᾽ ὀλίγον περ ἐπιψαύῃ πραπίδεσσιν.
+
+_  242 Od._ iii. 30-80.
+
+ M120 Right of maintenance of the younger members of the family.
+
+_  243 Cf. Manu_, ix. 163. “The son of the body is the one and only lord
+      of the paternal wealth: but to do the others no harm he should
+      afford (them something) to support life.”
+
+_  244 Manu_, ix. 115.
+
+  245 ix. 214.
+
+  246 ix. 118.
+
+  247 ix. 47.
+
+  248 ix. 210.
+
+  249 ix. 209.
+
+  250 ix. 208. Though viii. 416 states the contrary. “A wife, _son_, and
+      slave are said to be without property: whatever property they
+      acquire is his to whom they (belong).”
+
+  251 ix. 207.
+
+ M121 The βασιλεύς and his τέμενος contrasted with the tribesman and his
+      κλῆρος.
+
+_  252 Il._ xx. 165.
+
+ M122 The possessions of the βασιλεύς.
+
+_  253 Od._ xiv. 96.
+
+_  254 Il._ vi. 194.
+
+_  255 Il._ ix. 574; _cf._ xx. 184.
+
+_  256 Il._ xiv. 121.
+
+  257 Or “belonging to a _basileus_.”
+
+  258 Cf. _Il._ xi. 67. “As when reapers over against each other drive
+      their swaths through the ploughland of a rich man of wheat and
+      barley, and thick fall the handfuls”...
+
+      This contrast is drawn by Professor Ridgeway: _op. cit._ p. 19
+      _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, 1885.
+
+ M123 The κλῆρος of the tribesman probably in the open fields in the
+      plain.
+
+_  259 Il._ xviii. 541.
+
+_  260 Il._ xxi. 602.
+
+  261 Ridgeway, _op. cit._
+
+  262 Plato, _Laws_, 842. E. Διὸς ὁρίου πρῶτος νόμος ὅδε εἰρήσθω; μὴ
+      κινείτω γῆς ὅρια μηδεὶς ... νομίσας τὸ τἀκίνητα κινεῖν τοῦτο εἶναι
+      ... καταφρονήσας δὲ, διτταῖς δίκαις ἔνοχος ἔστω, μιᾷ μὲν παρὰ θεῶν,
+      δευτέρᾳ δὲ ὑπὸ νόμου.
+
+_  263 Il._ xi. 558.
+
+_  264 Il._ xii. 421; _v._ Ridgeway, _op. cit._
+
+  265 Isaeus, ix. 17-19.
+
+  266 πίονες ἀγροί. _Il._ xxiii. 832. _v._ Ridgeway, _op. cit._ p. 16.
+
+ M124 The βασιλεύς “honoured like a god with gift of a τέμενος.”
+
+_  267 Il._ xii. 313. Cf. _Il._ ix. 297. A good king also has power over
+      the crops, etc., to bring plenty. See _Od._ xix. 110-5. Frazer,
+      Golden Bough, i. 8 _et seq._
+
+_  268 Il._ vi. 191.
+
+_  269 Il._ xii. 313. καὶ τέμενος νεμόμεσθα μέγα (_not_ τεμένεα).
+
+_  270 Od._ vi. 291-3. Xenophon states that choice portions of land in the
+      territory of many neighbouring towns were set apart for the king of
+      Sparta. _Rep. Laced._ xv. 3.
+
+_  271 Od._ xi. 184.
+
+ M125 The τέμενος descended from father to son.
+
+_  272 Il._ xx. 391, ὅθι τοι τέμενος πατρώιόν ἐστιν.
+
+  273 τὸ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ ἀπὸ προγόνων.
+
+  274 Vide _Il._ ii. 46 and 101-8. Agamemnon’s σκῆπτρον πατρῴιον had been
+      handed down to him in succession from Thyestes, Atreus, Pelops,
+      Hermes, and Zeus, for whom it had been made by Hephaistos.
+
+_  275 Od._ i. 386. Cf. _Od._ ii. 22. δύο δ᾽ αἰὲν ἔχον πατρώια ἔργα.
+
+      Cf. _Od._ i. 407. ποῦ δέ νύ οἱ γενεὴ καὶ πατρὶς ἄρουρα?
+
+      Cf. _Od._ xi. 185. Telemachos νέμεται τεμένεα of Odysseus.
+
+      Cf. _Od._ xx. 336. πατρώια πάντα νέμηαι.
+
+ M126 Iason’s claim upon his great-grandfather’s estate.
+
+  276 Pindar, _Pyth._ iv. 255 _et seq._
+
+ M127 Rich tribesman might hold several κλῆροι.
+
+_  277 Od._ xiv. 211.
+
+  278 Cf. _Il._ xii. 421. περὶ ἴσης.
+
+ M128 The κλῆρος was the holding of the head of an οἶκος.
+
+_  279 Od._ xiv. 62.
+
+_  280 Od._ xiv. 211.
+
+  281 Wks. and Dys. 405. The next line which explains that the woman is to
+      be slave and _not_ a wife is evidently a later addition. Aristotle
+      did not know it, and interpreted γυνη as wife.
+
+_  282 Pol._ i. 2, 5-7.
+
+  283 I am indebted to Professor Ridgeway for the right meaning and
+      derivation of this word, which stands for ὁμόκηποι, having the α
+      long and not short as stated in Liddell and Scott’s Dictionary.
+      Another reading is ὁμόκαπνοι which would mean sharers of the smoke
+      or hearth.
+
+  284 Pindar, _Nem._ ix. 11.
+
+ M129 and supplied the maintenance the house.
+
+_  285 Œcon._ i. 2. μέρη δὲ οἰκίας ἄνθρωπός τε καὶ κτῆσίς ἐστιν. Pol. i.
+      4, 1. ἡ κτῆσις μέρος τῆς οἰκίας ἐστί.
+
+_  286 Od._ iv. 318.
+
+_  287 Od._ xiv. 158; xvii. 155; xx 230. ἴστω νῦν Ζεὺς πρῶτα θεῶν ξενίν τε
+      τράπεζα ἱστίν τ᾽ Ὀδυσῆος ἀμύμονος, ἥν ἀφικάνω.
+
+ M130 Force of the bond of food.
+
+_  288 Il._ vi. 230.
+
+ M131 The need of an established household strongly felt.
+
+_  289 Il._ xv. 497.
+
+  290 p. 75. Mr. Leaf mentions other countries where the father takes a
+      new name as father of his eldest son.
+
+_  291 Od._ iv. 754-7
+
+      οὐ γὰρ ὀίω
+      πάγχυ θεοῖς μακάρεσσι γονὴν Ἀρκεισιάδαο
+      ἔχθεσθ᾽, ἀλλ᾽ ἔτι πού τις ἐπέσσεται, ὅς κεν ἔχῃσιν
+      δώματα θ᾽ ὑψερεφέα καὶ ἀπόπροθι πίονας ἀγρούς.
+
+      “Far away” implies width of sway and extent of influence; and the
+      protection of outlying properties would necessitate a great name and
+      a strong hand.
+
+ M132 Diversion of inheritance by death of heir a sore evil.
+
+_  292 Il._ v. 151 _et seq._
+
+_  293 Od._ vii. 150.
+
+_  294 Od._ xi. 184. _Cf._ xx. 336. ὄφρα σὺ μὲν (= Telemachos) χαίρων
+      πατρώια πάντα νέμηαι.
+
+ M133 Naboth’s vineyard bound to his family and heir.
+
+  295 1 Kings xxi 3.
+
+  296 Ezekiel xlvi. 16.
+
+ M134 The maintenance of the chiefs levied upon the people under the name
+      of gifts.
+
+_  297 Od._ i. 392.
+
+  298 βασιλεύς in Homer means “prince” and is applied to a class, not a
+      single chieftain. _Il._ xii. 319 of Sarpedon and Glaukos. _Il._ iv.
+      96 of Paris. _Od._ i. 394 of the Ithakans. _Od._ viii. 41 and 390 of
+      the Phaeakians. _Cf._
+
+_  299 Il._ xvii. 250.
+
+_  300 Il._ xxiv. 262.
+
+_  301 Od._ ii. 74.
+
+_  302 Od._ xiii. 13.
+
+_  303 Od_. xix. 195.
+
+ M135 The right to receive such “gifts” could be transferred to another.
+
+_  304 Il._ ix. 291. Cf. _Il._ ix. 483. Peleus enriched Phoinix, and gave
+      him much people (πολὺν λαόν) to be ἄναξ over.
+
+_  305 Od._ iv. 174.
+
+ M136 In India the chief of a town might receive the king’s supplies.
+
+_  306 Manu_, vii. 118.
+
+  307 vii. 123.
+
+ M137 The maintenance of the Great King,
+
+  308 Herod, i. 192.
+
+_  309 Ibid._
+
+ M138 and of Solomon.
+
+  310 1 Kings iv. 7-27. One of these officers was over “threescore great
+      cities with walls and brazen bars.”
+
+ M139 Revenue from land in ancient Egypt.
+
+  311 Herod. ii. 109.
+
+  312 Genes. xlvii. 26.
+
+ M140 Grants of land to the prince easily made, in their elastic system of
+      agriculture.
+
+  313 Pind. _Nem._ vi. 11 (Trans. Myers), _cf._ Ridgeway, _op. cit._ p.
+      20.
+
+ M141 Such grants were a special honour, and served to relieve other
+      contributions.
+
+  314 Ezekiel xlv. 8, 9.
+
+  315 Ez. xlvi. 18.
+
+_  316 Od._ xxiv. 207.
+
+ M142 Modern specimens of the elasticity of Greek methods.
+
+  317 Mahaffy, _Rambles in Greece_, 3rd ed. p. 200.
+
+  318 Rennell Rodd’s _Customs and Lore of Modern Greece_, p. 58.
+
+ M143 The gifts to the prince not actually food-rents for the land.
+ M144 The chief’s land apart from the tribesmen’s.
+
+_  319 Od._ vi. 293.
+
+_  320 Ib._ 259.
+
+ M145 The land sustained the householder in his duties to other members
+      and guests.
+ M146 The chief had the right to demand gifts from the people;
+ M147 he had tribal right to a τέμενος, as the tribesman to a κλῆρος,
+ M148 but could not deprive the tribesman of his land.
+
+  321 The κλῆρος is spoken of as capable of good cultivation by means of a
+      yoke of oxen.
+
+ M149 Hesiod an immigrant: not a typical case of a family.
+
+_  322 Works and Days_ 637. Possession of land would presuppose admission
+      to full civic rights. _V. supra_, p. 97.
+
+_  323 Il._ ix. 648; xvi. 59.
+
+_  324 W. and D._ 345 &c. γείτονες ἄζωστοι ἔκιον, ζώσαντο δὲ πηοί.
+
+ M150 Land was in theory inalienable from the family.
+
+  325 Arist. _Pol._ VIII. ii. 5. ἦν δὲ τό γε ἀρχαῖον ἐν πολλαῖς πόλεσι
+      νενομοθετημένον μηδὲ πωλεῖν ἐχεῖναι τοὺς πρώτους κλήρους; ἔστι δὲ
+      καὶ ὅν λέγουσι Ὀξύλου νόμον εἶναι τοιοῦτόν τι δυνάμενος, τὸ μὴ
+      δανείζειν εἴς τι μέρος τῆς ὑπαρχούσης ἑκάστῳ γῆς. Cf. _Id._ iv. 4
+      ὥσπερ ἐν Λοκροῖς νόμος ἐστὶ μὴ πωλεῖν.... ἔτι δὲ τοὺς παλαιοὺς
+      κλήρους διασῴζειν.
+
+_  326 Laws_ 741.
+
+_  327 Laws_ 923.
+
+ M151 In Sparta child must be accepted by its father’s tribesmen,
+
+_  328 Lycurg._ xvi.
+
+  329 Suidas; and Harpocration _s.v._ ἀμφιδρόμια:—Λυσίας ἐν τῷ περὶ τῆς
+      ἀμβλώσεωσ, εἰ γνήσιος ὁ λόγος. ἡμέρα τις ἤγετο ἐπὶ τοῖς νεογνοῖς
+      παιδίοις, ἐν ᾗ τὸ βρέφος περὶ τὴν ἑστίαν ἔφερον τρέχοντες, καὶ ὑπὸ
+      τῶν οἰκείων καὶ φίλων πουλύποδας καὶ σηπίας ἐλάμβανον. Octopus is
+      still a staple article of food on the shores of the Mediterranean.
+
+ M152 who decided as to its maintenance.
+
+_  330 Nouvelles Recherches_, 1891, p. 63.
+
+ M153 Maintenance derived from the κλῆρος.
+ M154 The family bound to their land at Athens;
+
+  331 Arist. _Pol. Ath._ 2 and 5.
+
+ M155 and in Lokris.
+
+  332 Dareste, &c, _Recueil des Inscr. Jurid. Gr._ xi.
+
+ M156 But heirs at Athens also must first be accepted by group of kinsmen.
+
+  333 Isaeus, iii. 60 and 42; vi. 48.
+
+  334 Isaeus, iii. 73 and 80.
+
+ M157 Further application of the idea of family land.
+ M158 Two methods of occupation of land: (1) by owner himself; (2) by
+      subject population.
+
+  335 Cf. _Thuc._ ii. 16 for Attica. Such are the numerous small farmers
+      who appear in the plays of Aristophanes.
+
+_  336 Athen._ vi. 85. Βοιωτῶν (φησὶν Ἀρχέμαχος) τῶν τὴν Ἀρναίαν
+      κατοικισάντων οἱ μὴ ἀπάραντες εἰς τὴν Βοιωτίαν, ἀλλ᾽
+      ἐμφιλοχωρήσαντες παρέδωκαν ἑαυτοὺς τοῖς Θετταλοῖς δουλεύειν καθ᾽
+      ὁμολογίας, ἐφ᾽ ῴ οὔτε ἐξάξουσιν αὐτοὺς ἐκ τῆς χώρας οὔτε
+      ἀποκτενοῦσιν, αὐτοὶ δὲ τὴν χώραν αὐτοῖς ἐργαζόμενοι τὰς συντάξεις
+      ἀποδώσουσιν. _Cf._ Strabo, xii. 3, 4.
+
+ M159 At Gortyn on extinction of citizen-family the κλαρῶται inherited.
+
+  337 Gortyn. v. 25. αἱ δὲ μὴ εἶεν ἐπιβάλλοντες τᾶς ϝοικίας οἵτινες κ᾽
+      ἴωντι ὁ κλᾶρος, τούτονς ἔκεν τὰ κρήματα. The words τᾶς ϝοικίας
+      should be taken with οἵτινες, &c, rather than with the preceding
+      words. οἵτινες κ᾽ ἴωντι ὁ κλᾶρος is equivalent to οἱ κλαρῶται.
+
+      See Dareste, &c, _Inscript. Jurid. Gr._ p. 463.
+
+ M160 Similar twofold tenure in the Athenian κληρουχίαι.
+ M161 Examples in Salamis,
+
+_  338 Mittheil. Inst. Ath._ ix. p. 117. The original number of κληροῦχοι
+      in this case was apparently five hundred.
+
+ M162 in Lesbos,
+
+  339 Thuc. iii. 50.
+
+  340 κατεκληρούχησαν.
+
+  341 ἐμίσθωσαν.
+
+  342 Aelian, _V. II._ vi. I. _Cf._ Herod, v. 77 and vi. 100.
+
+ M163 Each κλῆρος therefore supported two families.
+
+  343 Smith’s _Dicty. of Antiquities_, s.v. _colonia_.
+
+  344 Bekker, _Charicles_, p. 218.
+
+  345 Ridgeway, _Origin of Currency_, &c., p. 324.
+
+  346 The ordinary Athenian dicast is supposed to have subsisted largely
+      upon his pay of three obols or a half-drachma _per diem_.
+
+ M164 The same double ownership in leases “for ever.”
+
+  347 Dareste, &c, _Recueil Inscr. Grec._ p. 256 xiii.
+
+  348 Cauer, _Delectus_, § 263.
+
+      Συνθέκα[ι] Θέρον[ι κ]αἰχμάνορι πὰρ τᾶρ γᾶρ τᾶρ ἐν Σαλαμόναι, πλέθρον
+      ὀπτὸ καὶ δέκα. Φάρεν κριθᾶν μανασίος δύο ταὶ ϝίκατι Ἀλφιόιο μενόρ;
+      αἰ δὲ λίποι, λυσάστο τό διφυίο. Πεπάστο τόν πάντα χρόνον.
+
+  349 Dareste, &c, _Inscr. Jurid. Grec._ xiii. quater. (Mylasa in Karia.
+      Second century B.C.) _summarised:_—
+
+      A. The tribe (φυλή) of the Otorkondeis at the advice of their
+      treasurers and led by the priest of Artemis, decide to purchase from
+      Thraseas, son of Polites son of Melas of Grab ... and adopted son of
+      Heracleitos son of Heracleides of Ogonda, lands (γέας) in the Ombian
+      plain with the sixty-two ranks of vines, three olive trees, and all
+      the other trees without reserve, also lands elsewhere with the trees
+      without reserve for 5,000 drachmae of light Rhodian silver, provided
+      that Thraseas has the sale registered with sureties. Moreover,
+      Thraseas coming to the ekklesia declared that he was ready to manage
+      these things: and the sale having taken place of the said
+      (properties) to the trustees in the name of the god. Thraseas
+      himself then and there took on lease all the said (properties) from
+      the treasurers of the tribe: and he shall hold them (εἰς πατρικά)
+      for his patrimony, himself and his issue or those to whomsoever the
+      inheritance of his goods passes, and he shall pay annually to the
+      treasurers of the tribe 100 and ... drachmae, without fail or fraud.
+
+      B. ... all the land and trees which Thraseas has bought from
+      Artemisia, daughter of Hekataios of Ketambissos, without exception
+      in these places either in the matter of the share he took in the
+      division with his brother or of what he bought from Artemisia, all
+      for 7,000 drachmae of light silver of Rhodes, provided that Thraseas
+      register the sale and give sureties. And coming before the ekklesia
+      Thraseas declared that he was prepared to manage this; and the sale
+      of the foregoing having taken place to the trustees in the name of
+      the god, Thraseas himself then and there took on lease all the
+      foregoing from the treasurers of the tribe: and he shall hold them
+      (εἰς πατρικά) for his patrimony, himself and his issue or those to
+      whom the inheritance passes, and he shall pay annually to the
+      treasurers of the tribe 300 drachmae.
+
+      The rent forms part of the revenues of the god. If Thraseas gets
+      more than two years in arrear, the contract is annulled.
+
+      He shall not divide the land or share the rent (οὐ παραχωρήσει δὲ
+      Θρασέας ἑτέρῳ οὐδενὶ.... καταμερίζων τὰς γέας οὐδὲ καταδιελεῖ τὸν
+      φόρον).
+
+ M165 Perhaps due to the prevailing idea of the family as a continuing
+      unit.
+ M166 No final word can yet be said.
+ M167 Explanation of the structure of the kindred to be found in the
+      descent of city life from earlier stage of tribal society.
+ M168 Similarity between the bond of tribal blood and that of citizenship.
+ M169 The threefold bond:—
+ M170 (1) the bond of blood;
+ M171 (2) the bond of religion;
+ M172 (3) the bond of maintenance.
+
+  350 Robertson Smith (_The Religion of the Semites_) holds that the
+      object of sacrifice was thus to maintain this imaginary kinship
+      between the deity and the worshippers.
+
+ M173 Many tribal customs survived in the kindred and the household.
+ M174 But these survivals mostly found in post-Homeric records.
+ M175 They perhaps belonged to the pre-Achaian inhabitants of Greece.
+
+_  351 Companion to the Iliad_, pp. 6-7.
+
+  352 Since the foregoing chapters were in print, I have had the benefit
+      of seeing Herr Erwin Rohde’s admirable work, entitled _Psyche_
+      (Freiburg and Leipsig, 1894). His view is that the worship of Heroes
+      had the complete form of ancestor-worship: that, ancestors being
+      buried at the hearth, or in the family tomb on private ground, death
+      made no break in the membership of the family. And he claims that
+      the _Seelencult_ or ancestor-worship of the later Greeks must have
+      been continuous from pre-Homeric times.
+
+ M176 But many were probably of wider parentage.
+ M177 Comparison with the history of the Jews.
+ M178 Reaction in times of distress to earlier tribal habits by the Jews,
+      and perhaps by the Achaians.
+ M179 These tribal habits probably only dormant throughout and common to
+      all Greeks,
+ M180 if not practically even to all tribal systems.
+
+
+
+
+
+***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ON THE STRUCTURE OF GREEK TRIBAL SOCIETY: AN ESSAY***
+
+
+
+CREDITS
+
+
+August 18, 2008
+
+            Project Gutenberg TEI edition 1
+            Produced by Frank van Drogen, David King, and the Online
+            Distributed Proofreading Team at <http://www.pgdp.net/>. (This
+            file was produced from scans of public domain works at
+            McMaster University’s Archive for the History of Economic
+            Thought.)
+
+
+
+A WORD FROM PROJECT GUTENBERG
+
+
+This file should be named 26341-0.txt or 26341-0.zip.
+
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+
+
+    http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/6/3/4/26341/
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one — the old editions will be
+renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no one
+owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and
+you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission
+and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the
+General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and
+distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the Project
+Gutenberg™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered
+trademark, and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you
+receive specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of
+this eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
+for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
+performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given away
+— you may do practically _anything_ with public domain eBooks.
+Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+
+
+_Please read this before you distribute or use this work._
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
+any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”),
+you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg™
+License (available with this file or online at
+http://www.gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.
+
+
+General Terms of Use & Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
+
+
+1.A.
+
+
+By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic work,
+you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the
+terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright)
+agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this
+agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of
+Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee
+for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work
+and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may
+obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set
+forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+
+1.B.
+
+
+“Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or
+associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be
+bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can
+do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying
+with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are
+a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you
+follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to
+Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+
+1.C.
+
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or
+PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual
+work is in the public domain in the United States and you are located in
+the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying,
+distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on
+the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
+course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of
+promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project
+Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for
+keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can
+easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
+same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you
+share it without charge with others.
+
+
+1.D.
+
+
+The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you
+can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant
+state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of
+your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before
+downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating
+derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work.
+The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of
+any work in any country outside the United States.
+
+
+1.E.
+
+
+Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+
+1.E.1.
+
+
+The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access
+to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever
+any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase
+“Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg”
+is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or
+distributed:
+
+
+    This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+    almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
+    or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
+    included with this eBook or online at http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+1.E.2.
+
+
+If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from the
+public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with
+permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and
+distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or
+charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the
+phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you
+must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7
+or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
+trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+
+1.E.3.
+
+
+If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply
+with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed
+by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project
+Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the
+copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+
+1.E.4.
+
+
+Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License
+terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any
+other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.
+
+
+1.E.5.
+
+
+Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic
+work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying
+the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate
+access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.
+
+
+1.E.6.
+
+
+You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed,
+marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word
+processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than
+“Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted
+on the official Project Gutenberg™ web site (http://www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form.
+Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as
+specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+
+1.E.7.
+
+
+Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing,
+copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply
+with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+
+1.E.8.
+
+
+You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or
+distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that
+
+    - You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+      the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you
+      already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to
+      the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to
+      donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg
+      Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60
+      days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally
+      required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments
+      should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg
+      Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4,
+      “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+      Archive Foundation.”
+
+      You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+      you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+      does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License.
+      You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the
+      works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and
+      all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.
+
+      You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
+      any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+      electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
+      receipt of the work.
+
+      You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+      distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
+
+
+1.E.9.
+
+
+If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic
+work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this
+agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from both the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael Hart, the owner of the
+Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in
+Section 3 below.
+
+
+1.F.
+
+
+1.F.1.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to
+identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread public domain
+works in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these
+efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they
+may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
+incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright
+or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk
+or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot
+be read by your equipment.
+
+
+1.F.2.
+
+
+LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES — Except for the “Right of
+Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™
+trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™
+electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for
+damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE
+NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH
+OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
+FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT
+WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
+PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY
+OF SUCH DAMAGE.
+
+
+1.F.3.
+
+
+LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND — If you discover a defect in this
+electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund
+of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to
+the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a
+physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation.
+The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect
+to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the
+work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose
+to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
+lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a
+refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+
+1.F.4.
+
+
+Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
+paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ’AS-IS,’ WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+
+1.F.5.
+
+
+Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the
+exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or
+limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state
+applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make
+the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state
+law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement
+shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+
+1.F.6.
+
+
+INDEMNITY — You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark
+owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of
+Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and
+any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution
+of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs
+and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from
+any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of
+this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
+additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
+you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.
+
+
+           Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
+
+
+Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic
+works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including
+obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the
+efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks
+of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance
+they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring
+that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for
+generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for
+Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations
+can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation web page at
+http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.
+
+
+   Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of
+Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service.
+The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541.
+Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf. Contributions to the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full
+extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
+
+The Foundation’s principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr.
+S. Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at 809 North
+1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact information
+can be found at the Foundation’s web site and official page at
+http://www.pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+
+
+    Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+    Chief Executive and Director
+    gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.
+
+
+  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+                                Foundation
+
+
+Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without wide spread
+public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the
+number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed
+in machine readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment
+including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are
+particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
+Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable
+effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
+requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not
+received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
+determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
+http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have
+not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against
+accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us
+with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any
+statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the
+United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation methods
+and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including
+checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please
+visit: http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate
+
+
+Section 5.
+
+
+      General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works.
+
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg™
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with
+anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™
+eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions,
+all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. unless a copyright
+notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance
+with any particular paper edition.
+
+Each eBook is in a subdirectory of the same number as the eBook’s eBook
+number, often in several formats including plain vanilla ASCII, compressed
+(zipped), HTML and others.
+
+Corrected _editions_ of our eBooks replace the old file and take over the
+old filename and etext number. The replaced older file is renamed.
+_Versions_ based on separate sources are treated as new eBooks receiving
+new filenames and etext numbers.
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+
+    http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how
+to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
+how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email
+newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+***FINIS***
+
+\ No newline at end of file