According to Brehon's concepts - how the ancient Irish lived

39
One of the first Brehon law schools - Redwood Castle
One of the first Brehon law schools - Redwood Castle


There are many ideas on the Internet about Brehon's Laws and how advanced they were, although in my opinion only some of them can be called that way. The system was based on compensation, unlike our modern prison system. That is, instead of imprisonment or exile for your crime, you simply had to make reparations. And all this depended on your social status and rank.



Medieval Ireland was far from the egalitarian utopian society that can be found on English-language sites. The society was hierarchical and unequal. The laws clearly reflect this and show that rank was important. Therefore, a crime against a person of higher rank carries greater punishment than the same attack against a person of lower rank. Local law was never the same as Roman law, where all citizens were equal.

Who are the Brehons?


The laws were spread by the Brehons - ancient Irish traveling judges who were a privileged class. Their task was to preserve and interpret laws. The first brekhons appeared back in the 3rd – 4th centuries. n. e., and the first set of laws dates back to approximately the 7th century. It was then that judges began to write them down in volumes and treatises, which later became the basis of the legislation of many countries.

Brehons were wise people in ancient Ireland, people came to them to resolve disputes between family members. Sometimes kings turned to them as advisers on a controversial issue. Some judges lived in a certain clan and decided only its cases. The Brehon profession was largely inherited. I found information that you had to study for about 20 years to become a quality judge. Therefore, they had a great responsibility. If the brehon made a wrong or unfair verdict, he had to compensate for the damage caused by his decision.

General view


We can glean many details of ancient Irish law from the book “The Lost Laws of Ireland” by Katherine Duggan.

"The laws reveal the culture in which modern concepts such as equality, social mobility, negligence, impartial witnesses, fair and open trials, and women's rights were developed."

But a lot of work in interpreting and bringing to us the ancient Irish code was carried out by scientists O'Curry and O'Donovan. The first, having spent years at Trinity College Dublin, the Royal Irish Academy, the British Museum, Oxford, rewrote 8 volumes of ancient laws, and his colleague - 9 volumes. But this is only part of Brehon’s laws, because in the same libraries there are still untranslated volumes.

The first two volumes contain a preface, laws on education, property ownership, social connections, and hostages. The third volume is devoted to the law of torts. Most of the laws come from the sayings of King Cormac Mac Airt and the warrior Senfaelad. Books 4 and 5 treat the laws of ownership, tenancy, water rights, division of territory, social ranks, churches, leaders, promises, professions. For the most part, the volumes published by scholars include interpretations of the laws of the ancient Irish, notes and commentaries.

Ancient Ireland was divided into more than 100 kingdoms - tauts. Connections were established between the subjects of each taut. If there was a treaty of friendship, then the subjects of both kingdoms had the same status. If the tauts were not friends with each other, then a person entering another kingdom had a “legal” or “outsider” status. That's if you're lucky. There was also a lower rank - “non-human”. If a representative of this rank was harmed, then legally this was not considered a crime. And such a person, with the exception of his taut, had no rights anywhere.

Also in Brehon's laws there are people with the status of "Grey Dog". As a rule, they came from abroad. Such men did not have any rights. They could marry a girl of the highest rank, then their status would change, but they had few rights. For example, contracts could only be concluded with the permission of the wife. Her primacy was also in raising children.

There are also statuses denoting monks and pilgrims, shipwrecked, exiles. If a crime was committed against the latter, then the retribution was low or completely absent. Thus, we see that the class system was clearly distributed, and there was no point in talking about any equality. But people could change their status - raise it if they became richer or received a new position, lower it if they went bankrupt, committed misconduct, etc.

Contents of Brehon's Law


For their crimes, people were punished with payment for honor - a certain amount that the criminal pays for murder, satire, beatings, and denial of hospitality. No torture, etc. In a couple of sources I came across an example of punishment for a person of higher rank adding porridge to the honey of a person of lower rank. This was interpreted as providing the wrong food. Apparently, they had to maintain some kind of subordination in this regard.

Even the king of the province was not exempt from punishment. If he insulted someone, he must pay off for it with 42 milk cows. An ordinary man paid one cow for this. It was equal to one ounce of silver (a little more than 28 grams). The higher the rank, the higher the pay. There was great demand from the clergy and upper classes.

Each person had his own so-called price of honor. And she corresponded to his status. If someone of higher status accuses you of something, then they believe him more, because his price of honor is more significant. Evidence is considered from both sides, but a person with a higher value of honor has a higher chance of being right in court.

Consider murder. A man kills someone, the Brehon court gives him a fine, which is paid by his immediate family. The punishment fell on several people, which forced the criminal to think several times before doing something. For unintentional murder, the fine was halved. If the criminal died before trial, then responsibility was removed from his relatives, and they did not pay anything to the family of the murdered person. The Irish believed that “crime dies with the criminal.” If the criminal and his entourage did not pay the fine, then he could be killed. The murder of a woman was punished severely. They could cut off an arm or leg for him and even kill him. But if the woman herself killed, then she was given an oar, a boat, a bowl of porridge and sent along the river. This is equality.

If you injure a person, then relatives look after him for 9 days. After this period, the doctor examines the victim. If he is better, but continues to be treated, then you continue to pay for sick leave. Fools, crazy people, and weak-minded people are not allowed into a sick person’s house. Also, you can’t play cards there, make noise, or announce news, fight. Peace and quiet in every sense. To the point that pigs are not allowed to squeal and dogs are not allowed to bark. Yes, they had it written down.

The early Brehon Laws define two types of rape - common and drunken. In the first case, the fine was always paid. For a married woman he must pay the full price, for a concubine - half the fine. In the second case there were exceptions. If a married, drunk woman was left alone in a tavern and was raped while drunk, then she was not paid any money. Historians also write that 8 types of women did not receive compensation for drunken rape. I found only two types - prostitutes and adulterers. There are also prices for sexual harassment. Kissed against your will - you pay a fine. Lifting up your skirt, disgracing a woman, is also a fine. 10 ounces (280 grams) of silver for the hands under the dress, touching the married woman.

There were also interesting disputes regarding divorce. Firstly, on February 1, husband and wife could officially divorce. Secondly, the wife has the right to file for divorce if the husband has a mistress, he spreads slander about his wife, cannot support her, or deceived her into marrying him. You can also get a divorce if the man is impotent, very fat, infertile, or loves men. The last two points may be grounds for him to become a priest. A man can get a divorce if his wife cheated on him, has an abortion, steals, spoils her husband’s reputation, or cannot feed her child milk. These are completely different and sometimes strange reasons for divorce.

Women in Ireland at this time fared slightly better than in other parts of Europe. Yes, the ladies had the right to divorce, they could get money for violence, and sometimes owned real estate. But in general, women were considered partially capable and could not enter into any transactions without the permission of a guardian - father, husband, son. Although there were rare exceptions when women owned lands, they even were queens.

In ancient Ireland, it was customary to send children to other families to be raised. And adoptive parents often became closer to their relatives. The foster family was involved in education. Parents paid for their children - more for girls, who are harder to raise and have less benefit in the future. Children of lower ranks were taught to cook, chop wood, and care for animals. Children of higher status were taught archery, horse riding, and swimming.

Let's look at a few interesting, in my opinion, laws:

• If a criminal hit someone and the victim got a lump without blood, then the fine was equal to two cows.
• Slaves = prosperity for masters. Freeing slaves was seen as an immoral and antisocial act that could lead to supernatural retribution.
• The groom pays the bride's father a ransom in the form of land, cows, horses or money. Each spouse has rights only to the thing that he brought into the house.
• A man who does not feed a pregnant woman pays a fine.
• If a husband does not have sex with his wife due to apathy, he must pay a fine.
• If a woman invited a man to her home for sex, but at the same time began to shout that she was suddenly against it, then he can rape her with impunity. If there was no agreement, then the man is considered a criminal.
• The children provide the elderly with a can of milk and an oatcake every day. They are required to wash their hair every Saturday and bathe them every three weeks.
• If the doctor’s actions make the patient worse, he returns the money and compensates for the damage.
• A layman is allowed to drink six pints (3 liters) of ale for dinner, a monk only three pints so that he can say a prayer.
• The owner is obliged to feed any guest.
• If you have pledged a piece of jewelry to a lender, he is obliged to temporarily give it to you for a special event. If you go out without jewelry due to the fault of the creditor, then this is considered humiliation, and he pays a fine.
• Harpers were considered musicians of noble birth. But trumpeters, timpani players, flutists, jugglers, magicians, and horse riders do not have their own status.

As a result, the Brehon Code of Laws lasted until about the 17th century, when the English completely eradicated it. They didn't like that ordinary people had such extensive rights. The Crown tried to destroy documents, any mention of laws. But still, enough materials have reached our time from which we can partially reproduce the life of the ancient Irish.
39 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    23 January 2024 03: 21
    Parents paid for their children - more for girls, who are harder to raise and have less benefit in the future.


    I wonder if this is the personal opinion of the author of the article or is it written down in the laws? laughing
    1. 0
      24 January 2024 00: 41
      I found this opinion in a foreign source. It seems to refer to the research of the scientists I mentioned. But this is also logical. Although girls were respected more than in other countries, in fact they were only useful in childbearing. They valued guys more because they could work, fight, etc.
      1. 0
        25 January 2024 12: 24
        Took a wife from the outback. Vegetable garden, cattle, all that... And then I noticed a difference in the attitude of what was allowed to her brother and her. There is a difference, because, as I understand, without his work (physical), the farm cannot be pulled out. Those. people live in the old way of life and I suggested that if we discard all the achievements of modern civilization, then this difference in attitude would be even more obvious and perhaps fixed in some way.
  2. +3
    23 January 2024 04: 11
    You can't play cards there either.

    At the time the author describes, there were no playing cards yet...
    1. +3
      23 January 2024 07: 17
      Quote: Luminman
      You can't play cards there either.

      At the time the author describes, there were no playing cards yet...

      That's why you can't - you can't play a game that doesn't exist? wink

      Good morning, Nikolai! hi
  3. +2
    23 January 2024 05: 40
    As a result, the Brehon Code of Laws lasted until about the 17th century, when the English completely eradicated it.
    And this is natural, Ireland is occupied by the British, the laws of the occupiers apply in the occupied territory
  4. +3
    23 January 2024 06: 48
    I'm kind of upset about this article...

    Why is there so little chronology, author? And the century, by the way, is written in Roman numerals, not Arabic. It's kind of sad...
    1. 0
      24 January 2024 00: 46
      What kind of chronology would you like to see here? I just decided to describe some interesting laws, to find in them something special for those times. There is no date for the release of laws; they were formed over the years orally, then in writing. The British burned many originals. And the Irish lived according to them both in the 9th century and in the 14th. They didn’t change much
      1. +1
        24 January 2024 06: 56
        Quote: LOKOmen93
        What kind of chronology would you like to see here? I just decided to describe some interesting laws, to find in them something special for those times. There is no date for the release of laws; they were formed over the years orally, then in writing. The British burned many originals. And the Irish lived according to them both in the 9th century and in the 14th. They didn’t change much

        However, a story without a chronology = a wedding night without a bride, keep that in mind for the future. And, yes, the century is written in Roman numerals: XVII, not 17. And one more thing: when you wrote the provisions of some laws, it was better to use quotations - it’s more reliable. And it’s better not to take basic information from Wikipedia - they will bite you, because here at VO they don’t like Wikipedia.
  5. +2
    23 January 2024 07: 06
    Yes, ladies had rights to divorce

    Ireland is a Catholic country, and Catholics can only divorce for very good reasons. wink
    1. +4
      24 January 2024 05: 38
      These Irish laws date back to pagan times when Ireland was free. Catholicism was planted there by the British with fire and sword during the conquest. And then Henry VIII led England out of Catholicism, but the Irish remained firm in the Catholic faith. History sometimes brings such surprises.
      1. +3
        24 January 2024 07: 29
        Quote: Nagan
        Catholicism was planted there by the British

        Catholicism has been there since the 7th century, when the English, or rather the Saxons and Angles, were still converted to Christianity
        1. +2
          24 January 2024 07: 48
          Quote: Dutchman Michel
          Catholicism has been there since the 7th century

          Present, but not the official religion of the state. The English conquest made it such, as well as the only permitted and obligatory one.
  6. +7
    23 January 2024 08: 48
    You can also get a divorce if the man is impotent, very fat, infertile, or loves men. The last two points may be grounds for him to become a priest.

    I don’t understand - they didn’t become priests out of faith? What about infertility and love for men?
    1. +3
      23 January 2024 21: 38
      Here the puzzle is complete: the Pope blessed same-sex marriages. More Catholic priests, good and different)
    2. +1
      24 January 2024 00: 48
      Someone may have walked. I just wrote that such men had the opportunity to become priests out of grief if things didn’t work out with their wife, and the local court declared him a failure in this regard))
      1. 0
        24 January 2024 16: 57
        Quote: LOKOmen93
        such men had the opportunity to become priests out of grief if things didn’t work out with their wife

        Is there even a tuft of wool from a black sheep?)
  7. +7
    23 January 2024 11: 32
    Very interesting article. And the author is growing. Don’t be upset by the criticism, Sergey, it’s just that the contingent here is demanding, although there are those who like to dig in for the sake of the process itself.
    1. +3
      24 January 2024 00: 49
      Thank you) Yes, I already realized that there is criticism on the matter, there is simply out of harm. And it’s good that there is more of it on the case, I try to listen, but I don’t always manage to change myself and the texts right away
  8. 0
    23 January 2024 11: 46
    There are many ideas on the Internet about Brehon's Laws and how advanced they were, although in my opinion only some of them can be called that way.
    The system was based on compensation, unlike our modern prison system. That is, instead of imprisonment or exile for your crime, you simply had to make reparations. And all this depended on your social status and rank.

    Another tub of ignorant zootism. The fact that the author called the Bregons Brehons is half the trouble. The trouble is that the author does not understand at all what he is writing about, so he talks nonsense. For the author's information, ancient Irish law (Bregon law) is civil law, that is, a branch of law regulating property, as well as related and unrelated personal non-property relations that arise between individual citizens.
    And imprisonment is a type of criminal punishment provided for by criminal law for criminal offenses. These are incomparable things.
    1. +3
      23 January 2024 17: 13
      “And imprisonment is a type of criminal punishment provided for by criminal law for criminal offenses. These are incomparable things.”

      Isn't the debt hole a prison? I'm not a lawyer, but it seems that dealing with creditors is part of civil law. I understand that in this case, prison is not so much a punishment as a way to exert pressure, to stimulate, so to speak, the debtor, but still - deprivation of liberty, prison.
      1. +1
        23 January 2024 17: 52
        Isn't the debt hole a prison?

        Placement in a debtor's prison is also a criminal punishment. This is called criminal liability for debts.
        There is such a nuance here. On the one hand, enforcement proceedings are part of civil procedural law. But ways to enforce obligations can be criminal penalties.
        1. +2
          24 January 2024 07: 36
          “There is such a nuance here. On the one hand, enforcement proceedings are part of civil procedural law. But methods of ensuring obligations can be criminal penalties.”

          Thank you for the clarification, I know very little legal subtleties, including the Criminal Code. Fortunately :)
    2. +5
      24 January 2024 01: 07
      I left you for last. I very rarely answer here, but I read all the comments.
      I'm glad that you read my articles, even if you comment negatively. Yes, the specifics of the site are the same; I always wrote in a different way. I'm rebuilding. Judging by the number of your comments on the site, you have plenty of time. So maybe you can learn the rules of reading - brehon is read as brehon. You can even omit x. But definitely not Bregon. This is, if I’m to be meticulous like you)
      And what kind of criminal and civil rights can we talk about, how can we divide them, if everything was mixed up there? Now there is a differentiation, then everything is the same. Well done for adding your legal knowledge. I have a tower myself, so you’re wrong here too.

      I see you like to mention Zotovism everywhere) It’s nice that you came up with a new word, you remember my last name. And I don’t even know your nickname and name. But I don't need that.
      1. -4
        24 January 2024 03: 25
        So maybe you can learn the rules of reading - brehon is read as brehon.

        It turns out that you are not only an ignoramus who has no idea about the rules of practical transcription of proper names, but also an ignoramus who has no idea about the rules of communication.
        I have a tower myself

        Judging by your creativity, not everything is going well with you and the average, let alone with the highest.
        Based on your reaction, you really didn’t like my comment. And you remember the nickname. But I can’t write anything positive about your work. Maybe in the future, for now, alas, only wishes for creative success.
  9. +6
    23 January 2024 12: 47
    Interesting, very interesting)) A kind of “people's law”) Thank you Author!
    1. -5
      23 January 2024 13: 47
      Thanks Author!

      Yes, the site has arrived. They even thank you for such creativity.
    2. +5
      23 January 2024 15: 18
      Something like domostroy or Sharia, isn’t it?
      1. +6
        23 January 2024 15: 28
        Any law is “something like Sharia or Domostroy.” The question is the degree of similarity -)
        In general, “Sharia”, as far as I know, is a form of religious law, and Domostroy is not so much a legal or legislative code as a socially regulating code.

        The problem with modern laws is that they are extremely bloated and there is no need for the legislator to articulately (and in principle) explain the need for this or that element. In the days of folk law and proto-laws, this was much easier because there were clear principles behind many laws.
        Specifically, judging by what the author wrote, there was a principle of “material compensation” with status costs. If now some guy is simply put on trial and he will smoke the air and all this will be justified by some kind of nonsense like social danger (as if it will disappear after the end of the term) or considerations of the inevitability of punishment, spherical in a vacuum - then it was built on much more empirically intelligible foundation.
        On the other hand, a successful life on 30 cows is the same question-raising thing as a successful life on 10 years in prison.
        1. +2
          23 January 2024 15: 35
          Quote: Knell Wardenheart

          The problem with modern laws is that they are extremely bloated and there is no need for the legislator to articulately (and in principle) explain the need for this or that element. In the days of folk law and proto-laws, this was much easier because there were clear principles behind many laws.

          For those times, 9+ volumes that had to be studied for 20 years is also quite a volume)
          1. +3
            23 January 2024 15: 39
            There, probably, most of it is occupied by specific precedents. The general principle was simple - crime is harm in economic and image equivalent. The harm must first of all be compensated - then the rest.

            Everything is quite practical)
            1. +2
              23 January 2024 15: 43
              Not without incidents. Freeing a slave, or adding honey to a servant's porridge - what's the harm?
              1. +2
                23 January 2024 15: 53
                There is not honey in the porridge, but porridge in honey, as written by the author.
                Apparently all these 9 volumes are a dump of case law and, in fact, laws and principles. Now, once and somewhere this story with porridge could have been some kind of veiled insult (or a good excuse for one person to get to the bottom of another). Well, like, for example, because of a cockroach in the soup they can start a scandal and sue the cafe now.

                Image damage (disrespect), whether conscious or unconscious, is also damage. Now, for example, lawsuits for “insulting honor and dignity” are not uncommon; one might say these are echoes of those practices :-)
                1. +2
                  23 January 2024 15: 56
                  So yes, but about the porridge in honey - it seems to me that this is a translation error. A spoonful of porridge in a bowl of honey for the servant? The servant ate quite well)
              2. +1
                24 January 2024 00: 53
                Here, perhaps, I translated incorrectly. But the laws are strange. And I thought that they might get into trouble for unnecessarily sweetening the food of someone who was not entitled to it by status)
    3. 0
      24 January 2024 01: 08
      Thank you, I tried to find something that gets little attention on the domestic Internet)
  10. +2
    23 January 2024 17: 22
    As far as I remember history, “vira”, “wergeld” - this was not only in Ireland, it is generally a common phenomenon - compensation for damage, be it material damage or even murder, is a common phenomenon at a certain stage of development. In Scandinavia, in Germany, it seems even Charles the Great had something similar. Probably even everywhere.

    Prisons generally appeared late, while slavery existed; in general, there was no need for prisons, except for the most noble, who could not be sent to a galley. Yes and expensive.

    Some things are funny, although I read about other laws of other nations - there are also a lot of unusual things. But, as far as I remember, basically all this happened much earlier; Ireland was probably lagging behind in the development of social relations.

    The “supernatural retribution” somehow jarred me.
  11. 0
    26 January 2024 16: 26
    If the brehon made a wrong or unfair verdict, he had to compensate for the damage caused by his decision.

    When will our dear Brehons be introduced to such happiness, complete with immunity?
  12. 0
    8 March 2024 11: 11
    Funny read and the Irish too