[65] Seebohm, _op. cit._ pp. 43-5. [66] See _supra_, p. 11; Seebohm, _op. cit._ pp. 328, 356. [67] See _supra_, p. 7. [68] λαοὶ δ’ ἀμφοτέροισιν ἐπήπυον. [69] ἀμφὶς ἀρωγοί. [70] κήρυκες δ’ ἄρα λαὸν ἐφήτυον. [71] Seebohm, _op. cit._ p. 356. [72] Leaf, edition of _Iliad_ (1902) p. 611; Glotz, _op. cit._ p. 118 ff. [73] _Op. cit._ p. 118. [74] Seebohm, _op. cit._ pp. 203-5; 409-11. [75] _Il._ ix. 634. [76] _Op. cit._ p. 129. [77] Glotz, _op. cit._ p. 118. [78] _Cf._ also _Il._ xxi. 41; _Od._ xv. 388, 452. [79] _Il._ ii. 666. [80] _Op. cit._ p. 162. [81] _Op. cit._ p. 163. [82] _Op. cit._ p. 29, and Plutarch, _Solon_, 23. [83] P. 130. [84] Pp. 164, 173. [85] iii. 4. 2. [86] Hesiod, _Theog._ 937. [87] P. 173. [88] Apollod. iii. 10. 4. _Cf._ Euripides, _Alcestis_, 1-10. [89] Apollod. ii. 6. 2. [90] _Il._ xxi. 442 ff. [91] The same remark applies to _Od._ xv. 388, 452, where the ‘ransom’ and temporary bondage are connected with kidnapping by pirates. [92] A murderer’s children are condemned to bondage for two or three generations in the Salic Law. Seebohm, _op. cit._ p. 164. [93] _Cf._ the Chrenecruda of Salic Law by which poorer members throw the burden on the richer. Seebohm, p. 141. [94] Seebohm, p. 328. [95] Seebohm, p. 323. [96] Seebohm, pp. 93-4. [97] P. 42. [98] P. 71. [99] P. 129. [100] P. 19. [101] P. 22. [102] _Op. cit._ pp. 125-126. [103] Coulanges, _loc. cit._ [104] _Op. cit._ p. 24. [105] See Bk. II. chap. iii. [106] Seebohm, _op. cit._ p. 129. [107] _Il._ ii. 662 ff. [108] Müller, _Dorians_, i. pp. 411-46. [109] _Il._ xix. 99 ff. [110] P. 64. [111] P. 170. [112] Glotz, p. 170. See also p. 51. [113] See Coulanges, _Ancient City_, pp. 169 ff. [114] For the exile of Amphitryon, father of Hercules, who had slain Electryon, father of Likymnius, see Euripides, _Her. Fur._ 15 ff. For the slaying by Hercules of Iphitus, his guest, an act which appears to bring no punishment save the vengeance of the gods, _cf._ _Od._ xxi. 27. [115] _Il._ ix. 632 ff. [116] _Supra_, pp. 32-3. [117] Seebohm, p. 356. [118] _Ib._ p. 109; _supra_, p. 9. [119] _Od._ xxiii. 118-120. [120] _Od._ xxiii. 133 ff. [121] _Od._ xxiv. 421 ff. [122] _Ib._ 526. [123] _Ib._ 533. [124] _Ib._ 483. [125] _Il._ xxiv. 480 ff. [126] Reading ἀφνειοῦ. [127] _H. and H._ p. 253. [128] _Eumenides_, pp. 104-5. [129] See _infra_, pp. 111 ff., 139 ff. [130] We should perhaps also add the ‘reminiscence’ in _Il._ ix. 63, where the lover of domestic strife is said to be a lawless wretch without home or phratry. It is possible but not necessary to suppose that the wretch in question was outlawed because of homicidal tendencies which continued to manifest themselves afterwards. See Leaf, _H. and H._ p. 251. For a possible reference in the phrase ἀτίμηντος μετανάστης (_Il._ ix. 648), see Ridgeway, _J.H.S._ vol. vi.