rules themselves.

[559] The inference that the rules were found in the
_Libri pontificum_ is inevitable in any case, but seems
proved by the fact that one of them, that relating to
the _spolia opima_, is stated by Festus, p. 189 (_s.v._
"opima"), to have been extracted from those books.

[560] Festus, _s.v._ "pellices" and _s.v._ "plorare,"
which latter word is interpreted as = _inclamare_.

[561] The _divi parentum_ are here generally taken as
those of the particular family, and this may have been
so; but cf. Wissowa, _R.K._ 192.

[562] For the attempts of Pais in Italy and Lambert in
France to date the Tables at the end of the fourth
century or later, see Schanz, _op. cit._ i. 41. In
Germany opinion is universally in favour of the
traditional date.

[563] See _Social Life at Rome in the Age of Cicero_, p.
135.

[564] On the religious character of _confarreatio_ see
De Marchi, _La Religione nella vita privata_, i. p. 145
foll.

[565] Cic. _de Domo_, 12. 14; Gellius, v. 19.

[566] See, _e.g._ Launspach, _State and Family in Early
Rome_, p. 256 foll. The last three chapters of this
little book, on Patria potestas, Marriage, and
Succession, will be found useful by those who cannot
enter into the many disputes and difficulties which have
arisen out of the attempts of writers on Roman law to
adjust legal ideas to the dim early history of Rome.
Binder, in his work _Die Plebs_, starts from the
improbable hypothesis that the plebs was the population
of the Latin part of the city as distinct from that
Sabine part on the Quirinal, which he believes to have
been the only patrician body; and he further believes
that the plebs lived originally under "Mutterrecht," the
patres under "Vaterrecht." Such a condition of society
would, of course, have greatly added to the pontifical
work of religious adjustment; it would have been more
than even the pontifices could have successfully
achieved.

[567] See above, note 7. Binder, _Die Plebs_, p. 488
foll., discusses, and in the main rejects, the arguments
of Pais and Lambert.

[568] So Huvelin, in a paper in _L'Annee sociologique_,
1905-6, p. 1 foll., criticised by Hubert et Mauss,
_Melanges d'histoire des religions_, p. xxiii. foll.

[569] From the religious point of view the _legis