Lesson Seven ~ Values, Morals and Ideals
Judaism and Christianity have the Ten Commandments, but there are no comparable rules carved into stone that Druids must follow. If such things ever existed, they have long since been lost to the mists of time. However, this does not mean that our ancient spiritual ancestors lacked in morality ~ far from it.
The ethical standards of the old tribes formed the basis of their law codes. The oldest surviving version of such a code are the Irish Laws of the Fenechus, also called the Brehon Laws (brehon being the name for a judge). Thought to go back to ancient times, the first code was supposed to have been composed by a king called Eochaid, also known as the Ollamh of Fodhla (an old name for Ireland) who is believed to have become king in about 633 BCE. The laws were revamped again about 1000 years later by the 6th century warrior-poet Cennfaelad, whose name suggests he was the head of one of the wolf-warrior bands. These laws continued into the increasingly Christian period, and were gradually adapted to the changing morals of the new religion. Some of these changes are easily identifiable, others we can only guess might have been introduced by the Church.
An example of a known Christian introduction is the Law of Adamnan, or “Law of the Innocents” as it is sometimes called, brought in by the saint of the same name in 697ce. This law put a stop to women being conscripted into warfare (prior to that date they had been expected to serve as warriors). Tradition has it that the saint introduced this change in law at the behest of his mother Ronait, who was horrified to see female warriors hacking each other up on the battlefield. We have no idea how the average woman at the time viewed this change in law ~ wether they were relieved not to have to fight anymore, or if they felt disempowered by this withdrawal of the duty. Clearly the older Pagan culture had seen nothing immoral in the idea of women being warriors.
As said, there is a bit of guesswork in trying to figure out which laws are of Pagan and which of Christian origin. It is probable that those laws which have no obvious origin within biblical teaching may well have already existed in Ireland before the missionaries arrived. However, there might also have been very old laws that were in keeping with Church policy, and so continued long after most of the Druids had died out.
We will examine the laws of marriage in a later lesson, but suffice to say for now that the Fenechus allowed for nine types of marriage. This is not found elsewhere in Christendom (especially not those types of marriage that allow for financial control to reside with the wife), so it seems likely that those styles of marriage stemmed from the Pagan era, and reflect Pagan views of sex, gender, family values, etc.
The Fenechus includes laws that applied across the whole of Ireland (cain) and some that only applied to certain areas (urradas) ~ this can be viewed as similar to the difference between Federal and State law in America. As with any legal system, there would have been plenty of change ~ even during the pre-Christian era new laws would have been introduced, old ones dropped or amended. The different urradas for each province would have reflected different views on the proper way to behave etc. So it is unlikely that there was ever one single stance on what Druids would have constituted ethical behaviour.
The purpose of studying old laws and morals is not so that we can follow them mindlessly like sheep. Merely because a tribesman 2500 years ago thought something was moral does not mean we have to do so today. Rather, our own morals must be reached through reflection and the application of reason. This reflection can be aided by considering the way others have reached their conclusions ~ including how the ancient British and Irish did so.
We know that the old tribes ate a lot of meat. Clearly vegetarianism was not an issue for them. However, a modern Druid should feel free to opt for such a diet if they feel it is right to do so. Modern farming methods are quite different, and so the moral choices are different for us in the 21st century. Modern technology has created ethical choices for us that simply didn’t exist for the old Druids and their tribes. We each have to decide for ourselves where we stand on issues like stem cell research, vivisection, nuclear energy etc.
One of the central themes that crops up again and again in the Fenechus is that of reparation. A person found guilty of breaking the law was expected to pay some form of compensation to his or her victim. The judge deemed that the victim had lost something of worth ~ property stolen, health broken, good named besmirched etc. A value was placed upon the loss (based to an extent on the social class of the victim) and the convict had to pay up. As well as paying the victim, often the guilty party had to give some money towards the family and any influential patrons. In the case of murder, obviously the victim could not be recompensed, so the money went to the family.
Given that compensation underpinned the law, it may be supposed that it was an important ethical value in daily life too. If a person had done wrong it may well have been thought insufficient for them to apologise or to wring their hands with guilt. Instead they should look to a way to set right what they had done wrong. This is the stance we take in our Clan, and encourage new members to reflect on. It cuts in two directions.
Firstly, a member might consider such harm as they have done and try to rectify it. For example, a person cuts down a tree to build a garden wall. The spirits of the garden may feel the loss, so a few extra trees could be planted as compensation. Where it is no longer possible (or welcome) to recompense directly to the individual effected, people can instead think about a more indirect payback to the universe at large. A driver runs over a dog, with no idea who the owner is, and so decides to make a donation of money, time, food etc to a local animal shelter for stray dogs instead.
Secondly, if you are the victim of someone else’s malice, then rather than just kicking their teeth in, you could think about ways they could recompense you. They may be willing to do this, if they have a change of heart after the event. Often they may not care, and then it becomes harder to see the balance restored. A corollary from this is that one has to be prepared to allow others the chance to pay back, where they are willing to do so. This is not the same as forgiving someone, nor does it mean you have to be bosom buddies ~ just that, if they acknowledge they have done wrong, that they be allowed to perform some service which clears the debt that they owe you. This may be particularly hard if the “crime” was a horrible one, and you genuinely wish to have no further contact with them. Perhaps they could be allowed to redress the balance by giving money to a charity, or helping some third party that you have nominated?
The Fenechus provided guidance on ways of seeking redress from an individual who refused to pay their fines. One of these ways was called troscad, or hunger strike. The victim would sit outside the house of the offender and starve themselves, telling all who passed what they were doing and why. This brought shame on the offender, and often resulted in many people refusing to trade with them because they had lost the trust of the community. A few decades back many Irish prisoners held during the Troubles went on hunger strikes to protest against the British government. Earlier still, many Suffragettes tried the same.
The troscad only really works if the person being protested against (and the community witnessing the act) understand the nature of what is happening. In the case of the prisoners, the British government really didn’t care, many members of the newspaper-reading public didn’t understand what was going on, and so the starvation was less effective than it might have been otherwise.
We wouldn’t recommend people risk their health trying troscad today. However, the underlying theme is important ~ that justice is in the hands of us all. Justice is not something that anonymous people in government make happen. We all make the world a just place (or unjust, if we are so inclined). If someone treated a Gael unfairly, it was her moral duty to do something about it, rather than to just crawl into a corner like a whipped dog. It was also the duty of the wider community to pay attention to such protests and respond accordingly.
This is further reflected with the idea of digal. In a previous lesson we discussed how Gaelic society was once run by flaithe (aristocrats) who had their clients, or ceile. If a ceile were attacked, robbed, raped or whatever, then they could seek support of their flaith in bringing the miscreant to justice. Conversely, if the flaith were the victim, then they could call upon all their ceile to battle against the offender until justice was done. This feud was called a digal, and again was considered a moral duty. If a patron, friend or relative had been victimised by someone who appeared to be getting away with it, then the tribe were expected to rally round and bring the criminal to book. Failure to act would have been considered reprehensible.
In the modern day a great many people get involved in political campaigns to pressure governments, big businesses etc into behaving ethically. This is a similar sort of notion to digal ~ the idea that everyone associated with a cause has to take action to bear down on some wrongdoer until they agree to change their ways.
Implicit in the idea of digal is that there must be an end to it. Those campaigning for justice must have a clear idea of how they want the wrongdoer to act, and be prepared to let bygones be bygones once they have capitulated. To start a feud without any clear way for it to be resolved peacefully would have been considered misguided. The idea wasn’t to seek revenge, but to seek justice.
One myth that reflects this is that of the Sons of Tuirenn. Lugh’s father was killed by Tuirenn’s three sons, and he demanded compensation of them (called eric, or blood-money.) They completed all the impossible tasks which he set them but, at the end, he still contrived to kill them anyway. This, the myth makes clear, was considered a bit of a poor show ~ that Lugh should have accepted their compensation without seeking yet further vengeance.
Another source of information about what the old Celts might have considered ethical can be found in the myths. One particular set of stories concerns the Fianna, a band of Robin Hood-type warriors lead by Fionn Mac Cumhall. Though described as a warrior chief, the myths may well have been based on tales of a god. The name Fionn means holy or sacred, and there are Iron Age altars to gods with names like Vindos and Vindonnus (which may be old names for the same god.) There is also a cognate Welsh figure, Gwynn, who has divine qualities and bears a lot of similarity to the Irish hunter.
The motto of the Fianna, which all the warriors swore by, runs;
Strength in our hands,
Truth in our hearts,
Fulfilment on our lips.
Some translators will give slightly different words, but the underlying meaning is much the same. It is down to the individual to decide what this means, but I will give you the understanding we have come to in our Clan as a starting point.
Strength in our hands is not about big muscles, but about courage and having the bravery to face up to an enemy. That applies not just to warriors bashing each other with swords, but to facing any kind of fear and overcoming it. It also strikes us as being about emotional courage in the face of rejection, loss, grief etc. There are people in the world who retreat into a shell and seldom come out ~ painfully shy, fearful of being hurt, timid and repressed. Such outlooks are quite alien to the myths, which are full of people who grab life with both hands and live it to the full. For us, this strength is that which comes from living fully, passionately, energetically.
Truth in our hearts is echoed by other maxims about the importance of truth. One Welsh saying is “truth against the world” ~ standing up for what you know to be true even if everyone else thinks you are wrong. Another Irish saying is “three candles illumine every darkness: truth, nature, knowledge.” Truth within the heart suggests that it is most important to know truth, more so than to speak it. Truth can be used to hurt people, if it is blunt and harsh. If someone asks “do I look fat in this dress”, then telling them that they look like a beached whale may be true, but it is unnecessarily cruel. Truth can be put across diplomatically. The Druids often went as diplomats, and so must have been used to putting the truth across in a gentle manner that wouldn’t stir up more trouble.
Fulfilment on our lips seems, to us, to be about eloquence. Language can be a beautiful thing, and can be used to make your own and other peoples lives more pleasurable. Further, the twin duties of the fili (poet) are to praise and satirise. If someone does an honourable deed, the bard sings of it. This is not a matter of brown-nosing. If the deed is done in silence, others will not hear of it, will not be inspired to follow suit, the good (as it were) will not spread. Also, a person who receives praise is far more likely to act well in future than one who is constantly overlooked or ignored. Likewise, a dishonourable act which goes unremarked leaves others ignorant to the nature of the perpetrator and so vulnerable to abuse. Also, others contemplating similar acts may feel emboldened that they can act as abysmally as they wish and get no comeuppance. Satire is a form of justice for the victim, a public acknowledgement that what was done to them was indeed wrong. The fulfilment of the lips is not really about using fancy words, but about speaking out ~ praising what is good, satirising what is bad, having the confidence to ask questions or express ideas. Silence, for the old tribes, was not particularly golden!
One of the major Celtic virtues, spoken of again and again, was hospitality. In early Ireland each household was expected to provide food, warmth and entertainment to any guest that arrived peacefully at their door. As time went by these duties devolved onto particular people, the brugaid, who were awarded farmland with which to sustain and run free hostels for travellers called brugh. Some hostels appear to have been geared for high-class visitors, and others for ordinary travellers. These hostelries were probably developed to avoid crippling financial burdens on ordinary householders whose guests overstayed their welcome. The law specifically stated:
“All members of the tribe are required to offer hospitality to strangers. The only exceptions are minor children, madmen, and old people.”
The reference to old people was primarily to those who had become very frail ~ it was a common practice to distribute the wealth of such a person to their family, rather like an early inheritance. Most tribal cultures value hospitality towards guests, with the offering of food and drink as a matter of course. Many cultures have myths about the Gods disguising themselves as wayfarers in order to test the generosity of people. Hospitality is not just about feeding people, but about making them feel welcome and valued. A poor host is one who does not give his guests a second thought, but largely ignores them. In Irish myth Bres, a chieftain of the Tuatha, was satirised by the poet Cairbre for being stingy and neglectful. A bad host is one who goes out of their way to do or say things to make a guest uncomfortable. As well as there being guidance for hosts, so there was for guests on how to behave properly. Not outstaying their welcome bring one, and not picking fights with their host another.
Hospitality overlapped into generosity generally. A chieftain maintained the loyalty of his warriors by making gifts to them from the spoils of war. One of the biggest insults to a person was to call them mean ~ such as the character from medieval Welsh myth who was known as Bran the niggard. The importance behind the giving of gifts and the entertaining of visitors was to make people feel valued and wanted, to celebrate life, to keep strong ties within the tribe and potential allies. These are just some of the values that shine out of the old laws.
Some questions for you to think about:
Are there any actions which you consider to be always bad or immoral? Are there any actions which are always good or desirable?
Can you think of ways in which the issue of making compensation might effect your own life… either where you were the victim, or the offender?
To what extent do modern people have a responsibility for making justice happen? Is justice now entirely the preserve of the State?
Practical exercise:
Think of a situation in which you have deliberately or accidentally wounded another person by depriving them of something ~ health, material possessions, self-confidence, a relationship etc. Try to find a way to compensate them for this loss. If you cannot think of any such situation, then consider the impact you have on the environment and make a gift back to the Land for whatever it is that you have most recently taken from it.