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.