But Brunner has pointed out that the division into paternal and maternal lines of relationship begins with the slain person’s grandparents; so that the three proximiores on both sides should go back to the descendants of great-great-grandparents. He also points out that, as at each step the nearer group are to take two thirds and those behind it one third, the division between the three groups would be in the proportions of 6:2:1. And he quotes a statement regarding the division of wergelds in Flanders in the year 1300, in which the proportions of the payments of the three groups of relatives were still as 6:2:1. The half falling to the three groups being reckoned as 18/36, the division was as under:-- Rechtzweers (Geschwister Kinder), { paternal 6/36 } _i.e._ first cousins. { maternal 6/36 } } Anderzweers (Ander-geschwister Kinder), { paternal 2/36 } 18/36 _i.e._ second cousins. { maternal 2/36 } } Derdelinghe (Dritt-geschwister Kinder), { paternal 1/36 } _i.e._ third cousins. { maternal 1/36 } We may then safely, I think, follow Brunner’s cautiously expressed conclusion that it is very probable that also in the Lex Salica under the words ‘tres proximiores’ are intended relations belonging to three separate parentillæ.[104] * * * * * [Sidenote: The wergeld from the payer’s point of view]