"Using Old Irish 'Brehon' Law in Pendragon" Copyright (c) 1997, Mike Maxwell Excerpted from the work in progress "The Courts of King Arthur", Peter Corless, Editor. (Written for future publication by the Chaosium) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Revision History v1.0 - 16 Sep 1997 - Initial version - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ============================================================= Author's Notes: This is a guide to provide GMs with background material and some simple rules for playing out old Irish law in Pendragon. I start with a discussion of salient features of old Irish society, followed by information on actual offenses and descriptions of the various methods of resolving legal disputes. These methods include settling cases in and out of court. I attempt to stay consistent with "Pagan Shore," Pendragon's supplement for adventuring in Ireland. In a few places, however, I note my disagreement with Pagan Shore's presentation of Irish law. For the sake of readability, I avoid excessive use of legal terms and Irish words. When writing Irish words, I denote long vowels by a slash after the vowel (e.g., "a/"). This guide's format is loosely patterned after Fergus Kelly's outstanding book "A guide to early Irish law" (1988, Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies). The presented material draws upon Kelly, as well as Kim McCone's thoughtful "Pagan past and Christian present in early Irish literature" (1991, An Sagart, Kildare). Other sources include Nerys Patterson's "Cattle-lords and clansmen: kinship and rank in early Ireland" (1991, Garland Publishing, New York), Eoin MacNeill's "Celtic Ireland" (1981 revised printing of the 1921 original, Academy Press, Dublin), Donnchadh O/ Corra/in's chapter entitled "Prehistoric and early Christian Ireland" in "The Oxford history of Ireland" (edited by R.F. Foster, 1989, Oxford University Press), Gearo/id Mac Niocaill's "Ireland before the Vikings" (1972, Gill and MacMillan, Dublin), and "The Celtic realms" by Myles Dillon and Nora Chadwick (1973 reprinting of 1967 original, Sphere Books, London). ============================================================= Using Old Irish "Brehon" Law in Pendragon ----------------------------------------- I. Irish law and society A. What is "brehon law"? "Brehon" is the anglicization of the Old Irish "brithem," meaning "maker of judgements"; that is, a judge or arbitrator. Historically, the brithem was clearly distinguished from the aigne, the professional lawyer or barrister. In the 16th century, however, the term "brehon" was used to refer to both the judge and the lawyer. Pagan Shore uses the Modern Irish "breitheamh", and I adopt this spelling throughout. "Brehon law" refers collectively to Irish legal customs first written down in the 7th and 8th centuries and preserved in manuscripts of the 14th to 16th centuries. In Pendragon, the E/rainn, Gaels, and Feudal Irish employ breitheamhs and abide by their decisions. The Cruithni are not listed in Pagan Shore's Character Generation section as having breitheamhs among their ranks. I favor the inclusion of breitheamhs in Cruithni tribes. Alternatively, a GM may wish to have Cruithni chieftains subsume the duties of the breitheamh, or have Cruithni tribes eschew formal cases and rely solely upon "out of court" methods described in Section III. The Lochlannachs and British follow their own judicial systems, though they also use "out of court" methods. In particular, it seems appropriate to have Lochlannachs resort to duels and to have British litigants appeal to the local lord. Historically, brehon law was practiced until the Elizabethan Wars, culminating in the Flight of the Earls in 1607. Thereafter, the lords that had employed the legal families were banished, dispossessed, or adopted English law. For the next two centuries, the law texts were perused primarily by antiquarians. Translation of the texts into English began in earnest with the appearance of the first volume of "Ancient Laws of Ireland" in 1865. Over 70 legal texts are known to have existed, treating matters as diverse as the structure of society to criminal offenses to beekeeping. Most of these texts are translated in the "Ancient Laws of Ireland" (1865-1901) Vols. 1-5, although Kelly cautions that these translations are often inaccurate. D.A. Binchy edited the "Corpus Iuris Hibernici" (1978) Vols. 1-6, a collection of the legal material in the original Irish and Latin. Roughly half of the law texts belong to the collection known as Senchus Ma/r ("great tradition"). Traditionally, King Laoghaire mac Niall summoned a commission to harmonize Irish native law with Christianity in 438. The commission consisted of three rulers (headed by Laoghaire), three bishops (headed by Saint Patrick), and three poets (headed by Dubthach maccu Lugair). In actuality, the Senchus Ma/r was most likely compiled in northern Brega (in The Pale), possibly at the monastery of Slane (Sla/ine). Another important group of texts, apart from the Senchus Ma/r, might have been produced in Munster, at the monasteries of Cork (Corcach), Emly (Imlech Ibair), and Cloyne (Clu/ain U/ama). The law texts were presumably written by Ireland's legal intelligentsia, which included those who actually practised law, the judges and lawyers, as well as legal scholars and teachers. Opinions differ on the social position and motivation of these authors. One school of thought, represented by D.A. Binchy and Thomas Charles-Edwards, argues that the authors were professional lay jurists who preserved traditional law in the face of the encroachment of Christian ideas and organization. Alternatively, scholars such as Donnchadh O/ Corra/in, Liam Breatnach, and Kim McCone maintain that the authors were tied closely to the Church, and integrated native law with that prescribed in the Bible. In apparent support of this theory, the law texts use the same spelling, script, punctuation, abbreviations and illuminated capitals as monastic writings. These similarities, however, might reflect similar scholastic training rather than professional affiliation. Another question concerns the historical basis of brehon law. Some have argued that the law texts are glimpses of pre-Christian social codes, as they contain several customs, such as polygamy and provisions for female inheritance of property, that are found in other Indo-European societies. For many of these supposedly primal customs, however, there are Biblical parallels, often even exact instances in the Old Testament. This raises the possibility of Biblical influence on the composition of the law texts. To be sure, the Irish authors were not simply spouting dogma direct from the Church of Rome, as secular and Church law differ on several important points. This is seen with regard to the death penalty. In secular law, the death penalty is only one alternative when a criminal cannot meet the payment prescribed as punishment for his crime. In contrast, Church law advocates execution as the only form of punishment for a wide range of offenses. B. Honor price. A key concept running throughout the law texts is honor price (lo/g n-enech, "the price of one's face"), given as "eineach" in Pagan Shore. One's honor price is reckoned in calves and heifers for young or poor men, and in dairy cows and slaves for independent farmers, lords, and the learned class (aos da/na). Much attention is given to compensating wronged parties in order to ensure that they do not lose face. One receives his honor price for any major offense against him (e.g., murder, satire, serious injury, refusal of hospitality), and a fractional value for lesser offenses (e.g., minor injury, trespass by a neighbor's animal, minor damage to property). Furthermore, one's legal capacity is defined by honor price: honor price limits the amount of a contract that one can enter into and quantifies the value of one's oath and evidence. As a side note, a GM may wish to divide the eineach values on page 54 of Pagan Shore by three in order to make these values more compatible with the law texts. C. The tu/ath and the family. As Pagan Shore illustrates, Dark Age and medieval Ireland was dotted with numerous tu/aths -- petty kingdoms or tribes. It has been estimated that, between the 5th and 12th centuries, 80 to 150 tu/aths existed at any given time, each with roughly 3000 people. Each tu/ath was headed by a "king" (ri/ tu/aithe), called "chieftain" in Pagan Shore. Some kings ruled over several tu/aths; these were "overkings" (ri/ tu/ath, ruiri). The provincial king (ri/ co/icid, ri/ ruirech) is the highest king recognized in most law texts. The office of king of Ireland (ri/ E/renn, ard ri/) figures prominently in the sagas, but appears only infrequently in the law texts. The concept of a ruler of all of Ireland (totius Scotiae regnator), however, does date to the 7th century "Life of Saint Columba." One's legal rights typically do not extend beyond his native tu/ath, unless certain customs and treaties are established and honored. Outsiders (ambue, "non-person") can be killed or injured with impunity. In Pendragon, Cruithni and E/rainn tribes operate under this worldview. One's king might make a treaty with another king, thereby giving one some rights in the other tu/ath. In Pendragon, it is appropriate to have Gael tribes recognize the legal rights of each other's tribesmen, and the same goes for the Feudal Irish. Historically, the learned class (aos da/na) were able to travel freely, as poets, clergy, and lawyers enjoyed legal rights outside their tu/aths. The kin-group (fine) is the basis of Irish society. Indeed, each tu/ath may be described as a confederation of kin-groups that acknowledge a single king. Membership in the kin-group is determined in various ways. A common division is the derbfine ("true kin"), which includes all descendants through the male line of the same great-grandfather. It is doubtful that members of a given derbfine lived in the same dwelling or even on the same piece of land. Rather, the derbfine was assessed for legal purposes, such as determining inheritance rights. Relatives lived and worked in smaller divisions of the family, such as the nuclear family (spouses and their children) and possibly the gelfine (descendants of a common grandfather). The kin-group collectively owns land (fintiu, "kin-land"), for which every adult male has some degree of responsibility. Each heir works his share of land with his wife (or wives), children, and possibly servants and slaves. He is expected to individually provide for his household, but the kin-group retains some economic control over him. For example, he must first obtain their permission should he desire to sell his land. The kin-group is responsible for paying for the crimes and debts of its members, as well as pursuing offenses against its members. The head of the kin-group (cenn fine) is selected by his relatives by virtue of his superior wealth, status, and wisdom. He represents his kin to the tu/ath, speaking for them publicly at assemblies, representing dependent kin in courts of law, and generally taking responsibility for his kin's behavior. Although the law texts place emphasis on paternal kin, maternal kin also play a role, especially with regard to the children of a marriage. The mother's kin can intervene if a child is being improperly raised. Maternal kin are also entitled to a payment if the child is illegally killed. As for the woman's position in old Irish society, the law texts leave women generally without independent legal capacity. Because my goal is to present the legal texts as they are, the disparate rights of men and women will become obvious to the reader. I leave it up to each GM to interpret this source material. In the interest of gaming (and modern sensibilities), GMs may wish to elevate the status of women in society, affording them all rights available to men. According to the law texts, a woman is under the dominion of a male legal superior throughout her life: her father as a girl, her husband as a wife, her sons as a widow, the Church as a nun, and her kin otherwise. She generally cannot act as a witness in court and cannot make a valid contract without the permission of her legal superior. In some instances, though, women have legal capacity. For example, a sonless man's daughter controls his land upon his death. The land passes to her sons, or, if she does not marry, to her paternal kin. Certain forms of marriage empower women with more legal clout than others. If the marriage is of "joint property", where the husband and wife bring equal amounts of property into the union, then the wife can make some contracts independently of her husband (e.g., concerning the running of the household and farm), and can dissolve a disadvantageous contract that her husband makes with another. If the husband brings less property into the marriage, then the wife can dissolve all of his contracts and presumably retains her limited rights to make contracts. If the wife brings less property into the marriage, then she cannot make any contracts without her husband's permission. If she is the first wife, she can only dissolve disadvantageous contracts that her husband enters. If she is a lower wife or concubine, she can only dissolve disadvantageous contracts involving food, clothes, cattle, or sheep. Children are similarly without legal capacity. A child under 14 years has no legal responsibility and cannot take independent legal action. The child's eineach is half of his/her father's or guardian's; it stays at this level as long as the dependent relationship remains. The murder or injury of children under 7 years, however, commands the same payment as that for a clergyman (i.e., 20-29 dairy cows), most likely reflecting a humanitarian influence from the Church. Young men between 14 and 20 years can make independent contracts and act as witnesses. Their eineach is equal to three-quarters of their fathers'; they are entitled to the full amount of eineach for their social class once they inherit land. At 14 to 17, a girl is expected to become betrothed to a man or to God. In the former case, her eineach is half of her husband's. In the latter, her eineach is that of a nun, which I take to be half of a monk's (i.e., half of 20-29 dairy cows). In the law texts, women of skill or status, such as saints, wrights, and physicians, have honor price based on their dignity and possessions (i.e., more than half of their male superior's honor price). Such women are the stuff of PCs, and GMs should assign them eineach equal to their male counterparts. Furthermore, the mother of a king, bishop or ollaibh has the same eineach as her son; other widowed mothers have eineach equal to half of their sons'. D. Contracts, pledges, and sureties. Pagan Shore describes Irish society with the wonderful phrase "anarchy governed by lawsuits" (page 51). To some extent, this was true. The law texts stress what is to be done after an offense occurs. Furthermore, tribes of pre-Norman Ireland generally lacked centralized mechanisms to formulate laws, to police the populace, to pursue and judge alleged criminals, or to administer justice. The king's role is only generally described (i.e., suppress robbers, crush criminals, prevent lawlessness), although he could issue ordinances in an emergency such as plague or war. Despite the veneer of loose government, the law texts extol the virtue of adherence to the law. How, then, was lawful behavior encouraged and enforced? Triad 200 answers this question with "the three rocks to which lawful behavior is tied: monastery, lord, kin." A possible interpretation of this is that the monastery provides spiritual and moral guidance to the individual, obligations to one's lord ensure that the individual remains an industrious member of society, and that kin exert pressure to meet one's social and economic responsibilities. Contracts between private parties put these obligations and responsibilities in tangible terms. Indeed, the law texts view contracts as vital to the functioning of society. One text says that "the world is frenzied" during famine, war, and the dissolution of contracts. Another holds that "law is founded on contracts and legal recognition." Below, I describe contracts and the attendant importance of pledges and sureties. 1. Contracts. In a contract, one party agrees to confer some benefit upon another in return for a counter-benefit (Kelly 1988:158). When making a contract, each party swears an oath to uphold his end of the bargain, bound by pledges or sureties (discussed below). Formal witnesses must be present to validate the contract. Some examples of contracts are: * Lord-client. The lord advances animals, land and/or equipment to the client. The lord is also a valuable "reference" for the client, as he can act as a surety in the client's contracts. Furthermore, the lord is expected to deal justly with the client. In return, base clients (serfs, betaghs) give the lord food-rent, winter-hospitality, and services (e.g., manual labor, military). Base clients cannot make contracts without the lord's permission, and the lord can dissolve their contracts. Free clients (bo/ aire) give more food-rent than base clients, as well as ritual homage at assembiles and some services. It was common for clients, base or free, to serve a local church, represented by an abbot, rather than a secular lord. * Co-operative farming: two or more farmers of modest means pool their resources in order to rig up a complete ploughing outfit (from the texts, evidently one plough and four oxen) or to graze their livestock together. * Fosterage: a legal contract of fixed length, where the parents might pay a fee to the fosterparents. The fosterparents are obligated to maintain and educate the child in accordance with the child's social rank. * Neighbors: farmers might exchange pledged items (e.g., tools or equipment) to cover damage caused by animals. For example, after giving a pledge to his neighbor, the farmer gains three years' immunity from damage caused by his animals. In the fourth and fifth years, he gives his neighbor an animal. In the sixth year, the pledged items are returned. * Marriage: the groom pays a bride-price, and the bride may contribute less than the groom's share, same as the groom, or more than the groom. * Church-laity. An implicit contract exists within each tu/ath, where the Church must give good "considerations": devout monks, honest and qualified clergy, services (i.e., baptism, communion, mass, requiem for dead, preaching). The laity must give offerings, tithes, bequests, first-fruits and obediance to the Church. Contracts are typically verbal; indeed, the term for contract is cor be/l, "putting of lips." Written contracts are rare in secular affairs, although more common when the Church is involved. One cannot enter a contract for an amount greater than his eineach; to do so, he must get permission from his kin. Once the contract is made, each party has until sunset to cancel; after this, the contract cannot be rescinded. Due to concealed or unforeseen conditions, however, a contract can be adjusted in court in order to bring about fairness (e.g., rescinding the sale of defective silver). In such cases, the aggrieved party must bring action within 10 days after discovering the defect in the contract. Some contracts are automatically invalid. These include contracts made in fear, duress, ignorance, or drunkeness. Contracts made by minors (i.e., below 14 years of age), lunatics, slaves, captives, outsiders, or contracts involving stolen property are invalid as well. Breaking a contract is breaking one's oath, and often involves the loss of eineach. If one party suspects the other of breaking the contract, then the aggrieved party may keep the pledged item (if any, see below), appeal to the surety (if any, see below), or settle the case in or out of court (Sections IV and III, respectively). 2. Pledges. A pledge (gell) is an object of value delivered by its owner to another for a fixed period. The pledged item is closely tied to its owner's livelihood: a champion's weapon, an embroideress's needle, a king's gold. Pledges are often exchanged when a contract is made. The pledged items act as material "hostages" that ensure that each party fulfills the agreed terms. The pledged items are returned upon the successful conclusion of the contract. If one party defaults, then the other party may keep the pledged item. One can give a pledge on behalf of another, except for outsiders, runaway slaves, those ejected from their kin, or for illegal purposes. The donor gains interest while his item is in pledge. A woman can pledge personal items such as clothes and tools, but not animals or precious metals without her superior's permission. 3. Sureties. A surety is an individual who, for a fee, guarantees that a party involved in a contract will fulfill the terms of the contract; the party for whom one gives surety is the "principal." Suretyship is a main mechanism to ensure the enforcement of contracts and loans, and involves a good deal of trust in the principal's behavior. One can act as a surety for an amount up to his eineach; two or more people can act as joint-sureties. When the other party suspects that the principal has not fulfilled the contract, the other party can either attempt to settle out of court (Section III), take the case to court (Section IV), or inform the surety. If the surety does not think that the contract has been broken, then he pledges an item to the other party as a sign that he and the principal will let the court decide upon the status of the contract (Section IV). The pledged item is returned to the surety upon the conclusion of the case. If the surety agrees that the principal is not fulfilling his obligations, then the surety has certain powers to uphold the contract, described for the three types of sureties below. * Paying-surety (ra/th). This surety charges one dairy cow to guarantee, with his property, that the principal will fulfill the contract. This kind of surety typically involves an enforcing-surety as well (see below). If the surety agrees that the principal is not fulfilling the contract, then the surety pledges an item to the other party which buys three days for the principal to pay up. If the principal pays the owed amount plus one-third within the extra three days, then the pledged item goes back to the surety and the principal pays the surety half of the surety's eineach. If, however, the principal does not pay within the three days, then the other party keeps the pledged item and takes the owed amount plus one-third from the surety's property. The principal must then pay the surety double the owed amount plus the surety's eineach plus any expenses incurred by the surety. The surety may distrain the principal's property to meet these fines (see Section III.D on the procedure of distraint). The surety loses eineach (i.e., eineach is reduced to 10 dairy cows) if he does not take the above steps to fulfill a broken contract. * Enforcing-surety (naidm). This surety charges two dairy cows to stake his honor that the principal will fulfill the contract. Unlike the paying-surety, the enforcing-surety has no financial liability towards the other party. If the principal fails to fulfill the contract, then the enforcing-surety loses eineach (i.e., eineach is reduced to 10 dairy cows). With his honor at risk, the surety has a wide range of powers to force a delinquent principal to fulfill the contract, including the right to distrain the principal's property (Section III.D) or to imprison or attack the principal. Often, two enforcing-sureties act on each side of a contract, one to compel the principal to fulfill the contract, and another to compel the paying-surety to pay in the event of default. Pagan Shore includes this kind of surety under the name "sla/nai/ocht" (page 55). This term is common in Middle and early Modern Irish documents that refer to a tribesman's legal capacity to confer protection from attack upon another. In the Old Irish law texts, this protection is termed sna/dud. * Hostage-surety (aitire). This surety charges three dairy cows to guarantee the performance of the principal with his own person. If the surety agrees that the principal is not fulfilling the contract, then the surety surrenders himself to the other party for 10 days, during which time the surety may be bound or chained. If the principal pays the owed amount plus one-third within the 10 days, then the surety is freed. The principal additionally pays the surety half of the surety's eineach. If the principal does not pay within the 10 days, then the surety becomes a captive (cimbid). The surety must be ransomed, either by his kin or an outside party. Feudal characters should follow the ransom values as given in Pendragon. Non-feudal characters have a ransom of 7 cumals, the body-price (e/raic) of a freeman. The principal must then pay double the owed amount to the other party. To the surety, the principal pays the 7 cumals plus the surety's eineach. The surety can distrain these amounts from the principal. As with the paying-surety, the hostage-surety loses eineach (i.e., eineach is reduced to 10 dairy cows) if he evades his obligations. The legal texts and annals also speak of hostages (gi/all), which are different from hostage-sureties. A hostage was usually the son of a subordinate king or lord that was taken by an overlord to ensure the father's continued submission. Taking hostages was the mark of kings (e.g., Niall Nine-Hostages), and the practice was amply used by Julius Caesar in his Gallic campaigns. If the underlord flouts the authority of the overlord, then the hostages are forfeited, and they might be killed, blinded, or ransomed. II. Offenses Offenses in Irish law can be grouped into three broad categories: those against another's body, those against another's property, and those that involve a loss of eineach. In secular law, a payment can atone for virtually any offense. In this section, I list offenses under secular law, along with the associated payment and consequences to eineach (when appropriate). The GM should consult the "Dishonor Table" in Pendragon (page 200) to determine the amount of Honor lost. The offenses below can be considered to take place outside of the Church's jurisdiction. The Church can be thought of recognizing these offenses plus others, such as working on Sunday. Church law generally employs the death penalty more often than secular law. The Chuch recognizes three forms of crime and punishment: a crime of lesser value than the culprit, where the culprit makes a payment; a crime that equals the culprit's value, where the culprit is enslaved; a crime of greater value than the culprit, where the culprit is killed and his kin pays a fine. In secular law, the death penalty is an option when the culprit cannot or will not pay. A. Offenses to the body. 1. Illegal injury. To start with, the law texts recognize circumstances under which is it lawful to harm another. These include cases in which the injury is intentional, such as in a duel, during battle, in self-defense, by an enforcing-surety on a delinquent principal, against outlawed individuals, by someone attempting to stop a crime, or a non-fatal fight between women. In other cases, the injury is accidental, such as during a game or during work. When an illegal injury occurs, the victim is brought to his home and tended by his kin and a physician for nine days. If the victim dies, then the culprit must pay the fine for murder (see below). If the victim is alive after nine days, then a physician formally examines him. At this point, the culprit must pay for the injury. The actual payment depends upon the nature of wound and the status of victim, for which the law texts go into great detail (e.g., one heifer for every 20 hairs pulled from the head of a virgin bishop). A simple rule is to have the culprit pay the victim's eineach for each Major or Mortal Wound, and to pay half of the victim's eineach for each Light Wound. If the physician judges that the victim is unlikely to recover from the injury, then the culprit additionally pays the victim's eineach; this fine releases the culprit from further liability for the victim's fate. If the physician judges that the culprit needs further treatment but will recover, then the culprit must take the victim on sick-maintenance (folog n-orthrusa), but only if the injury will detract from the victim's capacity for work, action, or movement. Under sick-maintenance, the victim and his retinue (if any), are brought to the house of a kinsman of the culprit. The culprit's kin and the victim's kin exchange pledges, and a surety guarantees that the culprit's kin will meet the following obligations. First, the culprit's kin must assume any further medical expenses, as well as providing food and proper accomodation (i.e., no noise or fighting in the house). Second, the culprit's kin must provide a substitute to do the victim's work. If the victim is married, then the culprit's kin must pay half of the victim's eineach for "barring procreation." If the victim is an excessively lustful man, then he may have his wife with him on sick-maintenance in order to protect the women of the nursing-house. Third, the victim must be returned home safely. Certain types are not entitled to sick-maintenance. These include members of the aos da/na, as it is considered to be difficult to find proper substitutes for them. Those of high rank, such as chieftains, bishops, and wealthy lords, do not receive sick-maintenance, as their retinues would be excessively burdensome. Dangerous individuals, including lunatics, werewolves, and viragoes, are not entitled to sick-maintenance. 2. Illegal murder. As with injury, the killing of another is lawful under some circumstances: in a duel, in battle, or in self-defense. Thieves in the act of stealing and outlaws may be legally killed. As discussed below, unransomed criminal captives (cimbid) may be killed, as can fugitive murderers in a blood-feud. Under secular law, an illegal killing can be very expensive for the culprit and his kin, as it involves two payments. The first is the body-price (e/raic), which is a fixed fine of 7 cumals for the killing of any landed man within the tu/ath. Six of the cumals go to the victim's derbfine, and the other cumal goes to the victim's mother's kin. The second payment (cro/ di/re) is actually a collection of fines paid out to the male members of the victim's derbfine. For each of the following fines, the payment is based upon the eineach of the kinsman in question, not the victim's eineach: * the victim's sons and brothers receive their full eineach; * the victim's father receives his full eineach; * the victim's grandfather, the victim's paternal first uncles (i.e., father's brothers), and paternal first cousins receive half of their eineach; * the victim's great-uncles (i.e., grandfather's brothers), second uncles (i.e., father's cousins), second cousins (i.e., sons of the second uncles), fosterfather, and fosterbrothers receive one-fourth of their eineach. Two forms of killing carry severe penalties. A secret killing is where the body is concealed and the killer fails to acknowledge the crime. Here, the killer must double all of the fines in the second payment (cro/ di/re). Kin-slaying (fingal) presents a horrific paradox. When the victim and culprit are of the same kin, how can the kin pay itself? Furthermore, if the other kinsmen avenge the victim, then they too will have slain a kinsman, the culprit. Thus, the usual punishment for kin-slaying is banishment from the tu/ath, leaving the culprit an outlaw. If the culprit's kin is unwilling or unable to meet the payment for murder, then the victim's kin takes the culprit into custody. The victim's kin can legally put the culprit to death, enslave him, or hold him as a criminal captive (cimbid) until the payment is made. If a non-paying killer flees from the victim's kin, then the victim's kin and his fosterfather and fosterbrothers are obligated to carry out a blood-feud (di/gail), through which the fugitive may be legally slain. For murder, the Church prescribes the death penalty and a payment of 7 cumals by the culprit's kin to the victim's kin. Merciful churches lay down an alternative penalty of 14 years' penance and a payment of 14 cumals to the victim's kin. Murder by a clergyman entails a 10-year exile, seven of which must be spent in penance and abstinence. Upon completion of this exile, the killer pays the victim's kin 7 cumals and offers himself as a servant to the victim's parents. 3. Violation of protection. In the law texts, every man of the tu/ath can provide legal protection (sna/dud) to another for a period of time. This protection includes the protector's house and immediate surroundings (e.g., yard, garden, enclosure). A GM may wish to set the number of days of legal protection equal to the protector's eineach. Whoever injures or kills someone under protection must pay the protector's honor price as well as the appropriate fine for the attack to the victim or his kin. It is illegal to provide protection to absconders (e.g., runaway slave or unfilial son or wife, or a fugitive killer). Protecting a fugitive criminal reduces the protector's eineach to 10 dairy cows. 4. Rape and harassment. Irish law recognizes two forms of rape, forcible rape and unconsenting sex (i.e., seduction of a drunk or sleeping woman). For either form, the culprit must pay the eineach of the victim's legal superior (i.e., husband, father, son, or guardian). If the victim is an unmarried girl of 14 years or older, a chief wife, or a nun, then an additional body-price of 7 cumals must be paid. If the victim is a concubine, then only 3 cumals are additionally paid. In forcible rape, the culprit must provide for the rearing of the resultant child. There are also penalties for harassing or touching a woman against her will. Half of the woman's superior's eineach is paid for kissing or touching her flesh; one-quarter eineach is paid for making contact with her clothes. In some cases, no redress can be sought by an assaulted woman. These include a promiscuous or adulterous woman, a woman who invites a man into a bush or bed, a married woman who goes unaccompanied into an ale-house, or a woman that conceals the fact that she has been raped. B. Offenses to property 1. Trespassing and damage to property. For minor forms of trespassing (e.g., looking into a house unbidden, opening a door without permission, crossing one's courtyard or enclosure without permission), the trespasser pays one heifer to the aggrieved party. If one uses another's property without permission, such as a mill or kiln, then the aggrieved party is paid one dairy cow. There is no penalty if stress or urgency compels one to trespass or to use another's property. When property is damaged, the owner can demand compensation only if he has stored or maintained the property in a safe and appropriate manner (e.g., keeping tools in a shed, upkeeping fences around a garden). Irish law recognizes damages caused by humans and those caused by animals. If a human damages one's property, then the culprit must fix or replace the damaged property and pay the injured party's eineach. Damage by animals typically involves the fouling or eating of a neighbor's crops or the killing of the neighbor's livestock by dogs. Owners of animals are expected to take measures to restrain them properly. A GM may wish to have each landowner make a Stewardship roll against each of his neighbors once per year. If the landowner fails his roll, then one or a group of his animals wanders from his farm. Those neighbors that fail their rolls have inadequate fences, and the escaped animals invade their farms, but the neighbors cannot claim compensation for any damage. If all neighbors make their rolls, then the animals breach some neighbor's fence 50% of the time. In this case, the neighbor can legitimately demand compensation. The owner of the trespassing animals must fix or replace the damaged property and pay half of the injured party's eineach. If it is determined that there was malice or neglect on the part of the owner, then the trespass is counted as an offense "by humans", and the neighbor's full eineach is paid. Owners of animals are not liable for trespasses by animals in heat/rut or by animals that are frightened by another party. In the latter case, he who frightened the animals fixes or replaces the damaged property and pays the injury party's full eineach. 2. Theft. Irish law allows for some theft. For example, anything may be taken from a battlefield, a burning building, or a great depth (lake or sea). Additionally, stress or urgency can exonerate theft: taking a horse, weapon, or vehicle in the face of danger; a hungry wanderer taking a piece of food; taking herbs for the sick; taking a morsel of food for a pregnant woman. For illegal theft, the thief must return or replace the stolen item and pay the victim's eineach. The thief must return or replace three times the value of the item if the theft occurred in the victim's house or immediate surroundings (i.e., yard, garden, enclosure). The habitual thief (e.g., three convictions of theft) has his eineach reduced to 10 dairy cows. Stolen goods cannot be legally sold. One who receives stolen goods is guilty of "middle theft", though only if he is aware that the goods are stolen. A culpable "middleman" is treated as Accessory 1 or 2 (see section D, below). If a thief brings stolen goods into an unknowing party's house or enclosure, then he pays half of the party's eineach. C. Offenses that bring a loss of eineach. The previous offenses, those to the body and those to property, do not necessarily bring shame to the culprit, except in extreme circumstances (e.g., the slaying of a kinsman) or for repeat offenses (theft). Other offenses result in dishonor to the culprit. For gaming purposes, I quantify "dishonor" as the reduction of one's eineach to 10 dairy cows, which is the lowest eineach value given on page 54 of Pagan Shore. All of the following offenses reduce the culprit's eineach to 10 dairy cows. 1. Betraying one's oath. This offense includes perjury: swearing a false oath or giving false testimony in court. Breaking a contract (e.g., lord-client, co-operative farming) is also betraying one's oath. This extends to the implict contract between the Church and the laity: misused offerings and donations can be legally recovered, and churches that become places of sin can be destroyed. Similarly, an immoral populace can be excommunicated. Divorce or the premature termination of fosterage, however, do not involve losses of eineach to either party. 2. Fraud: misrepresenting one's work (e.g., a poet overcharging for a poem, a craftsman overcharging for shoddy goods, a brewer selling adulterated spirits). 3. Degrading oneself: performing tasks contrary to one's rank (e.g., a king doing manual labor, travelling alone, or fleeing battle). 4. Injustice. This especially applies to breitheamhs. A breitheamh can be charged with injustice if he passes a biased judgement, passes judgement after hearing only one side of the case, passes judgement based on bribery, or refuses to give the "judge's pledge" before a case (see Section IV.B). An unjust breitheamh is deprived of his office, a blotch appears on his cheek, and disaster may befall the chieftain who appointed him. Chieftains and lords can be also charged with injustice, as they are expected deal fairly with their clients and to function as ready-made judges on occasion (see Section III.C). Clients can terminate their periods of service with an unjust lord without having to return the loaned goods. Unjust chieftains lose their right to rule. In theory, several signs indicate that a chieftain or lord is unjust: infertility in women and cattle, crop failure, defeat in battle, and disasters (e.g., plague, storms, floods). The GM may want to use these events as plot-hooks. 5. Refusing hospitality. Most members of the tu/ath are expected to provide hospitality to all other tribesmen and members of allied tribes. An exception is the base client (betagh), who, due to his small holding, is required only to provide a feast to his lord (with retinue) during winter. Those who fail to provide hospitality when expected lose eineach and must pay the refused party's eineach. Fugitives and outlaws are not entitled to hospitality. If one shelters a fugitive from the law, one loses eineach and is considered an Accessory 1 or 2 (see below). 6. Unjustified satire. A fili/ can legally use satire to exert pressure upon a wrongdoer to get him to submit to arbitration or to make amends for an offense. Unjustified satire includes publicizing an untrue story, mocking another's appearance, or satirizing the dead. The unjustified satirist loses eineach, and must pay the victim's eineach and give a public retraction. 7. Tolerating satire. In order to avoid this offense in the case of justified satire, one must pay whatever fine he owes or give a pledge to do the proper action (e.g., submit to a legal case). With unjustified satire, one must receive one's eineach and a public retraction from the satirist. Otherwise, one loses eineach for tolerating satire. D. Special considerations. 1. Accessories. Irish law recognizes three kinds of accessories ("crime of the eye"): * Accessory 1: he who instigates the offense, accompanies the culprit, and exults in the aftermath, but does not act (i.e., does not harm, damage, or steal). This accessory is liable for the full penalty of the offense. * Accessory 2: he who exults or instigates, and may accompany, but does not act. This accessory is liable for half of the penalty of the offense. * Accessory 3 (the onlooker): he who accompanies or witnesses the crime but does not instigate, exult, or act. This accessory is liable for one-fourth of the penalty of the offense. Church law especially penalizes the onlooker; in many cases, the onlooker pays the full penalty of the offense. Several kinds of persons may witness the offense without being liable as accessories. These are those who attempt to stop the offense, as well as those who cannot act to stop the offense (e.g., clergy, women, children, the senseless and the senile). 2. Women and children. If a woman commits an offense, her legal superior pays the penalty. An offense against a woman is considered as an offense against her superior, and her superior is paid his eineach. Similarly, a dependent child's father or guardian pays for any offenses committed by the child. Offenses against young children (i.e., between baptism and 7 years) bring a payment of 20-29 dairy cows to the father or guardian, reflecting the Church's elevation of the status of young children. Offenses against dependent children over 7 years result in a payment of the father's or guardian's eineach. 3. Church. Clergy members that commit secular offenses must pay the same fines that laymen do. The Church additionally imposes penance upon wrongdoing clergymen. Offenses against clergymen or Church property come under Church law. The Church recognizes three basic kinds of crime and punishment, described at the beginning of Section II. When a fine is to be paid, the Church typically charges twice the eineach of the aggrieved clergy and twice the value of its damaged property. III. Resolving a dispute "out of court" An individual may wish to settle a dispute by one of several methods out of court. These methods carry the advantages of quick justice and the avoidance of legal fees, except in the case of distraint (section D, below). On the other hand, the guilty party does not lose eineach by these methods -- loss of eineach for an offense only occurs upon the public announcement of the decision of a court case. A. Appeal to surety. When one party suspects the other of not fulfilling a contract, then the aggrieved party may state his case to the delinquent party's surety. Depending upon the surety's assessment of the dispute, he must either act to ensure that the contract is honored (described in Section I.D.3) or pledge to submit to a legal case. B. Diplomacy between families. A common method of conflict resolution is for the wronged individual to inform the head of his kin-group of his problem. The head kinsman then meets with the head of the culprit's kin, and the two families set about hammering out a settlement. This meeting may be a relaxed affair between friendly families, or may turn into a brawl between antagonistic families. Both families may invite neutral third parties to act as witnesses, or, in the case of aos da/na observers, to act as moderators. C. Appeal to common lord. When both parties are clients of the same lord, they might call upon the lord to arrive at a resolution. This practice occured in pre-Norman as well Norman Ireland, and corresponds to "Low Justice" mentioned in Pendragon. Lords are expected to be just in their decisions affecting their clients. By "just", I refer to Pendragon's definition under the Just Trait (page 194, 4th Edition): "Just means that a character is capable of telling what is right and wrong, and is desirous of making a judgment on that information....Arbitrary means that the character has no concern for what is right or wrong, and uses other information in his decision making." Thus, GMs may wish to have a lord roll against his Just. If he succeeds, then he sticks to the presented evidence or testimony of his clients. If he fails, then other information, such as which client is more generous in giving "gifts", influences his decision. Once a lord arrives at a ruling, he rolls against Folk Lore (if the clients are less than 20 eineach) or Courtesy (if the clients are 20 or more eineach) to impart his decision. If he succeeds, he leaves both parties satisfied that justice has been done, although one will be disappointed with the ruling. If he fails, then the party ruled against is visibly disturbed; if he has also failed his Just roll, then the party ruled against will either bring a charge of injustice against him or will plot revenge. If he fumbles his Folk Lore/Courtesy roll, then unruliness breaks out if he has also failed his Just roll; a strong show of force should keep the gathering under control. If the lord has also fumbled his Just roll, then the party ruled against becomes violent. D. Distraint. Distraint (athgaba/l, "taking back") is a procedure whereby a private individual can seek redress for an offense by formally seizing another's property without recourse to a court of law. Here, I call the distraining party the "plaintiff" and the accused party the "defendant." Two procedures exist, depending upon the defendant's rank. When the defendant is of low rank (i.e., less than 30 eineach), the plaintiff first notifies the defendant that he intends to impound his livestock. The defendant is given three days to either meet the plaintiff's claim, pledge to meet the claim, or pledge to submit to a legal case. If the defendant has not done one of these after three days, then the plaintiff summons a lawayer (aigne) and, in the early morning of the fourth day, removes livestock equal to the value of the offense (e.g., value of a contract or plaintiff's eineach). The plaintiff holds the livestock for another three days, during which time the defendant can do one of the aforementioned options. While holding the animals, the plaintiff must properly maintain them. As each of these three days goes by, the defendant forfeits one-third of the livestock if he does not pursue one of his options. Forfeited livestock cannot be recovered, but the defendant can act to save the remaining portion of livestock. When all is done, the plaintiff's lawyer receives one-third of the distrained amount as his fee. When the defendant is of high rank (i.e., eineach is 30 or more), then the plaintiff conducts a fast outside the defendant's house. Pagan Shore terms this form of distraint "trochlaigh" ("decay"); the legal term for distraint with fasting is "troscud." In this case, the plaintiff fasts from sundown to sunrise (Pagan Shore puts the fast until death or settlement). If the defendant eats during the fast, then he must pay twice the value of the offense. Upon the successful completion of the fast, the defendant has three days to either meet the claim, pledge to meet the claim, or pledge to submit to a legal case. If the plaintiff continues to fast even though the defendant performs one of these actions, then the plaintiff's claim is nullified. If the defendant does not do one of his options after three days, then the plaintiff summons a lawyer and impounds the defendant's livestock. The defendant's eineach is reduced to 10 dairy cows if he blocks the plaintiff's attempt at distraint. As in the above form of distraint, the defendant has three more days to recover his impounded livestock, and gradually loses one-third for every day of inactivity. Chieftains and bishops often have a "substitute churl" that spare them the shame of distraint. In these cases, the plaintiff fasts against the churl and removes the churl's livestock. The plaintiff must pay the defendant's eineach if he removes the defendant's livestock rather than the churl's. As above, the plaintiff's laywer receives one-third of the distrained amount when fasting is involved. Distraint may be postponed due to a death in or an attack upon the defendant's house. Postponement also occurs when the defendant's house holds a woman in labor, a gravely ill person, or newly-arrived guests. A breitheamh decides the length of the postponement. Distraint cannot be conducted under other circumstances, such as holy days or when the defendant is moving house. Certain animals cannot be distrained, including a cow that has just calved, a pig being fattened, or an animal in need (e.g., a horse needed for racing, oxen needed for ploughing, or a bull while cows are in heat). E. Duels. Pagan Shore gives the method of contests (comhlann) -- from poetry to combat -- for conflict resolution. Irish law recognized trial by combat (ro/e), although the Church was hostile to this activity. In a legal duel, the terms of the contest must be agreed beforehand and confirmed by sureties on both sides. Additionally, witnesses must be present at the duel. Duels cannot be fought on church land, in the fort or green of a chieftain, lord, or poet, or at the time of a festival or assembly. A combatant automatically loses if he fails to appear for the duel. Duels, however, can be postponed due to obligations to attend an assembly, an attack by invaders, the funeral of one's kin or lord, recovering from illness, or a visit by a chieftain, bishop, poet. Wounds inflicted in legal duels are not actionable. Other than the agreed outcome, some duels are decided by minor setbacks, such as: falling down, being seized by illness once the duel starts, fleeing without necessity, one's weapon dropping once the duel starts, one's shield bursting, or pleading for quarter. IV. Legal cases Bringing a dispute to court is a final option available under Irish law. Legal fees typically dig into the amount of the settlement, but a case in court brings some degree of financial hardship upon the accused party and causes the guilty party to lose eineach for an offense. A. Roles. 1. Plaintiff: the aggrieved party that initiates the case. 2. Defendant: the accused party. 3. Lawyer (aigne). Both the plaintiff and defendant must hire a lawyer in order to plead their cases. At the start of the trial, the plaintiff's lawyer chooses the appropriate "path of judgement" (discussed below). The lawyer for both the plaintiff and defendant charge one-third of the amount of the case. 4. Judge (breitheamh). A breitheamh presides over every court case. His fee is one-tenth of the amount involved in the case, paid by the plaintiff. Each tu/ath has at least one breitheamh appointed by the chieftain. This is the breitheamh tu/aithe, who rules upon secular affairs and advises the chieftain on legal matters. Other breitheamhs may live within the tu/ath, and they earn livings through teaching or by acting as "free-lance" arbitrators. Each tu/ath also has a breitheamh eclaso who oversees cases affecting the Church. This judge might be separate from the breitheamh tu/aithe, or the same individual might fill both roles. In Christian tu/aths, breitheamhs interact closely with the Church. The question of judges in non-Christian tuaths is a bit unclear. One is tempted to assign the duties of judge to the druid, as druids acted as judges in pre-Christian Gaul, according to Strabo and Julius Caesar. Scant information exists for pre-Christian Ireland. Saint Patrick, in his "Confessions", wrote of "those who judged among all the regions", who were apart from kings. It is not clear, however, whether these judges were druids or early forms of the fili/ or breitheamh class. The 6th century "First Synod of Saint Patrick" warns that a "Christian must not make an oath before a druid in the pagan manner", suggesting a priestly or judicial role for the druid. Later, the law texts depict the druids as sorcerors who cast spells, concoct love-potions, and perform battlefield magic. By the mid-7th century, the Latin "magus" was a consistent equivalent of the Old Irish "drui/"; druids were also called "incantatores" and "aruspices." The equation of druids with sorcerors and magi is symptomatic of the contempt that the early Christian legal authors had for the druid. This attitude contrasts with the exalted position that the druid enjoys in the sagas that are set in pre-Christian times. In these stories, druids are venerable priests, prophets, astrologers, and teachers. Curiously, the sagas do not indicate that druids acted as judges, and the Senchus Ma/r holds that the breitheamh class existed before the coming of Saint Patrick. McCone argues that the Irish legal authors drew a direct parallel between the mission of Patrick and that of Jesus. The depiction of druids as exalted priests in pre-Patrician times corresponds to the priests of Israel who became the dogmatic Pharisees and Sadducees of the New Testament. The pre-Patrician breitheamhs and fili/s correspond to the Biblical prophets that foretold the coming of the Gospel. The Christian view of Jesus's mission is that he "updated" the law of the Old Testament, just as Patrick is depicted as harmonizing traditional Irish law with that of the Bible. Thus, the Church in Rome supplants the Jewish priesthood as the "true" successor of the laws of Israel, and the Church in Ireland supplants the druids as the "true" successor of Irish traditional law. A GM, then, may wish to have the profession of "breitheamh" exist in non-Christain tu/aths, with the breitheamh being either separate from or fused with the duties of the druid. 5. Back court. In important cases, a back court supports the breitheamh. This consists of the king/chieftain, the bishop, and the chief poet. Whereas the breitheamh formulates the verdict, the back court promulgates it: the king for secular affairs, the bishop for ecclesiastical affairs, and the poet for ill-defined poetical affairs. In addition to his participation in the back court, the king is expected to be versed in legal affairs, although not as thoroughly as the breitheamh. B. Legal procedure. 1. Each legal case begins with the plaintiff or the plaintiff's kin publicly declaring the offense and identifying the accused party. Both the plaintiff and the defendant then hire a lawyer and a date for the hearing is fixed. Ideally, cases are swift. The trial begins three days after the offense has been declared. The actual trial is to be two days long, with the judgement being pronounced at the end of the second day. The fine, if any, is to be paid three days after the judgement. Cases may be postponed due to a religious festival, illness, funeral, or attack by invaders. 2. Choosing the "path of judgement." At the start of the trial, the plaintiff's lawyer must choose a "path of judgement" and must stick to it throughout the case. Depending upon the path chosen, the plaintiff and defendant either give pledges or sureties to ensure that they will abide by the decision of the judge. Thus, the plaintiff and defendant form a contract at the start of the trial. There are five "paths": * Truth (Fi/r): for the offenses of perjury and fraud, and for cases that might be resolved by an ordeal. The plaintiff and defendant each pledge one dairy cow. * Entitlement (Dliged): to enforce contractual rights and to restore broken contracts. The plaintiff and defendant each appoint an enforcing-surety. * Justice (Cert): to adjust unfair contracts (i.e., "emptying the too full" or "filling up the too empty"). The plaintiff and defendant each pledge one calf. * Propriety (Te/chtae): for cases involving lord-client contracts and relationships, and for determining inheritance and rank among kinsmen. The plaintiff and defendant each appoint a paying-surety. * Proper enquiry (Coir n-athchomairc): for all other offenses and matters. The plaintiff and defendant each appoint a hostage-surety. Once the path has been chosen, the breitheamh must pledge five ounces of silver to ensure that his judgement will be based on the proper maxims and will be the truth. If the breitheamh refuses to give his pledge, then his eineach reduces to 10 dairy cows and he cannot serve as a breitheamh within the tu/ath any longer. The case is then referred to the back court. 3. Pleading and counterpleading. The actual trial takes place in court, either in the breitheamh's house or, for large trials, outdoors. Witnesses, sureties, and appropriate dignitaries (e.g., the back court, historians) attend the proceedings. Each lawyer states his case, with the plaintiff's going first. The lawyer may call either litigant as well as witnesses to give testimony. When giving testimony, one takes an oath of truth, and one's eineach determines the maximum value of the oath. Witnesses are of two types, eye-witnesses and "character" witnesses. Eye-witnesses can swear the maximum value of their eineach. Character witnesses did not actually see the events or offense in question, but can support what the litigant or other witnesses say. A character witness's oath is worth one half of his eineach. Thus, a preponderance of character witnesses on one side may swing a trial in favor of that side. Some witnesses are invalid, such as witnesses who are biased or bribed, as well as women, dependent children, the senile, and slaves. When facing death, however, the evidence of the latter types is valid (e.g., woman in danger of death at childbirth, a sick man facing death, an enslaved criminal on the field of combat or about to fight a duel). After each side has pleaded its case, each lawyer is given the opportunity to rebut the other's case. 4. Judgement. A simple way to arrive at a ruling is to add up the eineach values of the oaths of the witnesses on each side and see which side has a higher number. For close cases, however, the GM may wish to allow for some skill rolls, just as the law texts prescribe ordeals for close cases. One option is to only use existing Pendragon skills. For example, when the two sides differ in oath-values by 5 or less, then the lawyers on each side make opposed Orate rolls, which can be viewed as incorporating each lawyer's chances of having one or more witnesses shown to be partial or biased. Success in the trial goes to whichever side wins the opposed roll. If both lawyers make their Orate roll, then the GM may wish to have the case decided by an ordeal (discussed below) if the path is Truth, or by lots (discussed below) otherwise. If a lawyer fumbles his Orate, then he pays one dairy cow to the judge for breaking protocol (e.g., abusive or loud speech, shifting the path of judgement). After the lawyers' Orate rolls, the breitheamh then rolls against Just. If he fumbles, then he has broken some item of protocol and must pay each lawyer one dairy cow. Serious cases of misjustice by breitheamhs should be left up to the GM, not to die rolls. An alternative option is to create a new skill: Industry-Law. Here, the GM might want to widen the margin for what constitutes a "close case" (e.g., a difference in oath-values of 10 or less between the two sides). Similar to above, the lawyers make opposed Law rolls instead of Orate, with the results for success or failure being the same. The breitheamh now rolls against Law to check for a breach of protocol. Lots and ordeals may be used to resolve close cases. Lots were especially used in cases without witnesses, such as animal trespasses. Details on casting lots do not survive, though a piece of wood was evidently used. When casting lots, a GM may have each side roll dice, with the higher roll winning the case. In ordeals, the defendant is generally subjected to some form of violence, such as burning, scalding, immersion, or poisoning. Tradition credits the introduction of ordeals to Saint Patrick. A GM might have ordeals reveal the truth as the GM understands it, or have the defendant roll against Honor or Constitution, whichever is higher. The latter option opens up the possibility of the meek passing an ordeal due to a pure heart, as well as the dastardly passing an ordeal due to a high threshold for pain. Some actual ordeals are: * Proof of the Cauldron. Water is boiled in a cauldron, and the defendant picks up an object at the bottom. His hand is examined after three days; he is innocent if there are no scalding marks. * The Tongue on a Hot Adze. The defendant licks a red-hot adze of bronze or lead; he is innocent if his tongue is not burnt. * Waiting at an Altar. The defendant walks nine times around an altar and then drinks a non-fatal potion that a druid has cast a spell upon. The defendant is innocent if he does not get sick. * Water of Holy Adjudication. Some text from a holy book is soaked in water, and the defendant drinks the water. The defendant is innocent if his intestines do not rot. * Chip of an Old Tree. Three pieces of wood are thrown into water, with one representing the defendant. Unlike other immersion ordeals, the defendant is innocent if his chip floats. * Morann's Ring. Morann was a famous pre-Patrician judge. His "ring" is actually the preserved caul (fetal membrane surrounding the head) that remained around his neck after his birth. The ring is to be placed about a defendant's neck; if the defendant is guilty, then the ring tightens about his neck, killing him. Morann gifted his ring to the kings of Tara; powerful magic ties it to Tara Hill. * Truth Stones. At various locations in Ireland are "truth stones" -- stones that bellow or scream in response to the truth. The Lia Fail at Tara, which screams in the presence of the rightful king, is such a stone. Other stones bellow when a true answer is spoken on them. Truth stones have 5d20 Ambient Life Force, 3d20 Divination. The GM should have the stones reveal truth as he understands it. Because of the potential power of these stones, the GM might want to have only the king/chieftain or an ollaibh (i.e., bishop, arch-druid, arch-poet) request their use in a trial. 5. Promulgation and conclusion. The breitheamh or a dignitary of the back court (if present) publicly announces the ruling at the end of the trial. At this point, the guilty party may lose eineach, depending upon the nature of the offense. The conditions of ruling are expected to be honored by both parties, as they have either exchanged pledges or appointed sureties at the start of the trial. 6. Payment/punishment. Payment is to be made three days after the announcement of the ruling. If the guilty party does not pay the fine, then he loses eineach for breaking the "pre-trial" contract (section 2, above). Furthermore, the victim or the victim's kin may either keep the pledged item (if any) or force payment by appealing to the guilty party's surety (if any). Alternatively, the victim can seize and hold the guilty party captive. For serious offenses (e.g., murder, maiming, satire, or habitual theft), the captive can be killed or enslaved. Before either of these fates, the captive may be ransomed by his kin or non-kin. Kings are urged to make bodyguards out of men that they have ransomed from captivity, as these men owe their lives to the king. For lesser offenses, the culprit is held until the penalty is paid. If the culprit avoids or flees captivity, then he is a fugitive. He is to be hunted down, and may be legally slain by his enforcing-surety for the case (if applicable) or by the aggrieved party's kin. Even when the culprit can pay, the Church advocates the death penalty when the crime exceeds the culprit's eineach value. Forms of execution include hanging, stabbing (by sword, spear, or axe), being chained in a pit to die of exposure, and setting adrift (especially for serious crimes committed by women). The pre-Norman annals give examples of politically motivated mutilations, such as blinding and castration, but there is no mention of them in the law texts until 1224. Flogging is a common punishment for slaves and wrongdoing clergy. 7. Recovering lost eineach. The law texts are explicit about when eineach is to be lost, but are much more silent about how to win it back. The main way to recover eineach is through praise from others, preferably in poem. Praise, however, must be heart-felt, as false praise is equivalent to satire, and the poet might be charged with unjustified satire. A GM may require the player character to earn a certain amount of Glory (e.g., 1000) before a poet will feel justified in composing a praise-poem. A GM may want to have a fili/'s Compose skill equal the amount of eineach that a praise-poem can restore. Successful Orate by the performer restores the eineach; a fumble brings derision upon the player character. Penance at a church or hermitage is another option to restore eineach, especially for clergy. A GM may have the player character roll against Pious after each year of penance. If the roll succeeds, then the character regains eineach equal to his Pious skill.