This page has been validated.

INTRODUCTION

We have seen in the Agamemnon how the law that "The doer must suffer," or that Sin must bring Punishment, is mainly envisaged by the most primitive Greek tradition as a form of the blood-feud. It is blood calling for blood. At its simplest this takes the form of a straightforward vendetta, as when a man kills one of another tribe. There is no "sin" or "pollution" in this, though of course the kindred of the stranger will duly try to avenge him. Suppose, next, that a man kills, not a stranger, but his own kinsman. Then he has shed the "kindred blood," and committed a real sin. He is polluted, and pollutes all who associate with him. If the kinsman has left any children or male representatives, they are bound in honour to take up the blood-feud and do vengeance, even though, if the relationship is very close, it may bring pollution on them. Thus Aegisthus, as son of Thyestes, acted quite correctly in killing Agamemnon, and Orestes in killing him. Similarly, when Clytemnestra killed Agamemnon the eternal law compelled Orestes to avenge him, however reluctantly.

But suppose there is no avenger left, what then? It is one of the fears that torment Orestes in Euripides' Electra, "Who will do justice on me, when she is

v