[146\5: The limits of those qualified to inherit extends in Athenian law ~me/chri **anepsiadô=n pai/dôn~ (Law ap. D. 43, 51; cf. § 27) as did the duty of avenging murder ~mechri\ anepsiadô=n~: D. 47, 72 (~ento\s anepsio/têtos~, which must mean the same thing, Law ap. D. 43, 57). The circle of persons thus united in the right of inheritance and the duty of taking vengeance for murder constituted the ~_agchistei/a_~, the body of kinsfolk tracing their descent (in the male line only) from the same man, the father, grandfather, or great-grandfather of them all. This is the limit to which the ~gonei=s~ are traced: Is. 8, 32; cf. above, note 123. Many nations of the earth are familiar with a similar limitation of the narrower body of kinsfolk composing a "house": as to the underlying reasons for the practice many conjectures are made by H. E. Seebohm, _On the Structure of Greek Tribal Society_ (1895).] [147\5: As to the restless wandering of the ~biaiotha/natoi~ more details will be given below [Append. vii]. In the meantime it will be enough to refer to A., _Eum._ 98, where the still unavenged soul of the murdered Klytaimnestra complains ~aischrô=s _alô=mai_~. A later authority uses words that correspond well with ancient belief: Porph., _Abst._ ii, 47, ~tô=n anthrô/pôn hai tô=n bi/a| apothano/ntôn (psuchai\) kate/chontai pro\s tô=| sô/mati~, like the souls of the ~a/taphoi~.] [148\5: In Homeric times the injured dead becomes a ~_theô=n_ mê/nima~ to the evil-doer (~Ch~ 358, ~l~ 73). Later times believed that the soul of the dead man himself angrily pursued the murderer with its terrors till it drove him beyond its own boundaries: ~ho thanatôthei\s thumou=tai tô=| dra/santi ktl.~, Pl., _Lg._ 865 DE, appealing to ~palaio/n tina tô=n archai/ôn mu/thôn lego/menon~; cf. X., _Cyr._ 8, 7, 18: A., _Cho._ 39 ff., 323 ff. If the next-of-kin whose duty it is to avenge the death of his relative shirks the duty incumbent on him the anger of the dead man is turned upon the latter: Pl., _Leg._ 9, 866 B--~tou= patho/ntos prostrepome/nou tê\n pa/thên~. The indignant soul becomes _~prostro/paios~_. ~prostro/paios~ probably {211} applies only in a derivative sense to a ~dai/môn~ who takes the part of the dead man (esp. ~Zeu\s prostro/paios~); it is strictly speaking an epithet of the soul itself in its longing for vengeance. Thus in Antiphon _Tetral._ 1, ~g~ 10, ~hêmi=n me\n prostro/paios ho apothanô\n ouk e/stai~. 3, ~d~ 10, ~ho apoktei/nas~ (or rather ~ho tethnêkô\s~) ~toi=s aiti/ois prostro/paios e/stai~. So, too, A., _Cho._ 287, ~ek prostropai/ôn en ge/nei peptôko/tôn~. _EM._ 42, 7, ~Êrigo/nên, anartê/sasan heautê/n, prostro/paion toi=s Athênai/ois gene/sthai~. We can, however, see particularly well from this case how easily the change came about from a soul in a special condition to a similar _daimonic_ being which takes the place of the soul of the dead. The same Antiphon speaks also of ~hoi tô=n apothano/ntôn prostro/paioi, ho