[Footnote 99: The statements of the text are probably sustained by _Æthelberht_, 31, 77-83: in HADDAN AND STUBBS, _Councils_, III, 45, 49; THORPE, _Anc. Laws_, I, 11, 33, taking into account the usual effects of wife-purchase. _Cf._ however, JEAFFRESON, _Brides and Bridals_, II, 294-98, who holds that among the pagan Britons and Anglo-Saxons divorce may be described as "simple repudiation of wives at the will of their masters." In the tenth century, he adds, Howell Dha, sovereign of Wales, "decreed that a husband might righteously eject from his home the wife who had given a single kiss to any man but himself." See also GLASSON, _Le mariage et le divorce_, 195, whose references to the laws of Æthelberht do not seem to warrant all his conclusions; also his _Histoire du droit_, I, 120; and POLLOCK AND MAITLAND, _Hist. of Eng. Law_, II, 390. In general see ROSENTHAL, _Rechtsfolgen des Ehebruchs_, 55 ff.] [Footnote 100: HADDAN AND STUBBS, _op. cit._, III, 118. ESMEIN, _op. cit._, II, 57, regards the last clause as merely advising the man not to marry again; and FREISEN, _op. cit._, 782, thinks it not quite certain that it applies to the case of separation for adultery. _Cf._ also LUCKOCK, _Hist. of Marriage_, 167-69; and CIGOI, _Unauflös. der ch. Ehe_, 79.] [Footnote 101: _Law of Northumbrian Priests_, secs. 35, 64, 65: THORPE, _Anc. Laws_, II, 296, 300. _Cf._ LUCKOCK, _op. cit._, 170, 171; JOHNSON, _Canons_, I, 950, 35, 54.] [Footnote 102: JOHNSON, _op. cit._, I, 963, 27.] [Footnote 103: _Ibid._, 1009, 8.]