[Footnote 95: On Gregory's two decisions see ESMEIN, _op. cit._, II, 59, 60; and FREISEN, _op. cit._, 331 ff., 782, who tries to explain away the contradiction, claiming that here is a case of declaring a marriage void _ab initio_. _Cf._ PERRONE, _De mat. christ._, III, 332 ff.; LOENING, _Geschichte des deut. Kirchenrechts_, II, 623.] [Footnote 96: ESMEIN, _op. cit._, II, 57, 58.] [Footnote 97: _Ibid._, 57; FREISEN, _op. cit._, 781.] [Footnote 98: _Decret. Grat._, c. 1 C. 33 qu. 2. _Cf._ FREISEN, _op. cit._, 781; ESMEIN, _op. cit._, II, 57.] At the time of the conversion the old English laws on this subject were probably much the same in character as those of their Teutonic kinsmen across the channel. From the code of Æthelberht it may perhaps be inferred that divorce is allowed at the will of either spouse. Apparently in all cases of arbitrary separation the responsible party suffers a severe penalty. The man loses all claim to repayment of the purchase price of the wife; while the woman or her guardian has to restore the same to the husband or his family.[99] The penitentials, as will presently be seen, afford abundant evidence that in practice the spirit of ancient custom yielded but stubbornly to ecclesiastical influence. But, so far as it could be done by legislation, the century following the conversion of Kent saw the strict doctrine of the Roman see established in the daughter-church of England. At the Council of Hertford in 673 it is decreed that divorce shall not be permitted except on the ground assigned by the "holy evangel;" but should a man "put away the wife united to him in lawful wedlock, if he wish to be rightly a Christian, let him not be joined to another, but remain as he is or else be reconciled to his wife."[100] After nearly two centuries, during which the records are silent on this subject, the same rule is laid down in the so-called _Law of the Northumbrian Priests_, by which anathema is invoked on one in holy orders who shall "forsake a woman and take another;" while the layman guilty of the same offense shall want "God's mercy, unless he make bot;" everyone being required to "lawfully keep his wife, as long as she lives, unless ... they both choose, with the bishop's consent, to separate, and will thenceforth observe chastity."[101] From this time onward, as clearly shown by the canons of Dunstan,[102] those issued under Æthelred at the Council of Eanham (_ca._ 1009),[103] and later decrees, the theory of indissolubility was unswervingly accepted by the English church under sanction of the temporal power.[104]