[599] Mielziner, op. cit., 75.
[600] Ibid., 78. "As the formality of contracting marriage by money had in the Rabbinical Law merely a symbolical character, a coin of the least value (the peruta, the smallest used in Palestine), and even any other object representing such a value, could be used."—Ibid., 79. The practice may have been derived from the Roman coemptio. "The rabbinical formality differs, however, from the Roman in this, that the act is done by the man only; he gives the money or its value, and he speaks the formula, while her consent is expressed by her silent acceptance of both. This passivity on her side is in consequence of the Talmudic principle based on the expression used in the Mosaic law: 'If A Man Taketh A Wife;' he takes and she is taken; he is the active and she the passive party."—Talm. Kiddushin, 2b and 3b; Mielziner, op. cit., 78 n. 2. During the Middle Ages it became customary to use a plain ring instead of the piece of money: ibid., 79, 80.
[601] Mielziner, The Jewish Law of Marriage and Divorce, 76.
[602] Ibid., 77. "Since the third century it was regarded as improper to effect a betrothment without a previous engagement."—Ibid., 77.
[603] Mass. Col. Rec., I, 104.
[604] Plym. Col. Rec., VII, 101.
[605] Ibid., 109.
[606] Ibid., 101.
[607] For examples see MSS. Records of the County Court of Middlesex (Apr. 2, 1661), I, 185; MSS. Early Court Files of Suffolk (1663), No. 573; MSS. Records of the Superior Court of Judicature (1725-29), fol. 333; ibid. (1725-30), fol. 338; ibid. (1730-33), fol. 196.
[608] Ibid. (1735-36), fol. 243.