IthinkImaylaydownthat，whereverwehaveanyknowledgeofabodyofAryancustom，eitheranteriortoorbutslightlyaffectedbytheRomanEmpire，itwillbefoundtoexhibitsomestrongpointsofresemblancetotheinstitutionswhicharethebasisoftheBrehonlaw。Thedepthtowhichtheempirehasstampeditselfonthepoliticalarrangementsofthemodernworldhasbeenillustratedoflateyearswithmuchlearning；butI
repeatmyassertionthatthegreatdifferencebetweentheRomanEmpireandallothersovereigntiesoftheancientworldlayintheactivityofitslegislation，throughtheEdictsofthePraetorandtheConstitutionoftheEmperors。Formanyraces，itactuallyrepealedtheircustomsandreplacedthembynewones。
Forothers，theresultsofitslegislationmixedthemselvesindistinguishablywiththeirlaw。Withothers，itintroducedorimmenselystimulatedthehabitoflegislation；andthisisoneofthewaysinwhichithasinfluencedthestubbornbodyofGermaniccustomprevailinginGreatBritain。ButwherevertheinstitutionsofanyAryanracehavebeenuntouchedbyit，orslightlytouchedbyit，thecommonbasisofAryanusageisperfectlydiscernible；
andthusitisthattheseBrehonlaw-tractsenableustoconnecttheracesattheeasternandwesternextremitiesofalaterAryanworld，theHindoosandtheIrish。
TheLectureswhichfollowwillhelp，Itrust，toshowwhatusethestudentofcomparativejurisprudencemaymakeofthisnoveladditiontoourknowledgeofancientlaw。Meantime，thereissomeinterestincontrastingtheviewofitsnature，origin，andgrowth，whichweareobligedtotakehere，withthattowhichtheancientIrishpractitionersoccasionallystrovehardtogivecurrency。TheSenchusMor，theGreatBookoftheAncientLaw，wasdoubtlessamostpreciouspossessionofthelaw-schoolorfamilytowhichitbelonged；anditsownershavejoinedittoaprefaceinwhichasemi-divineauthorshipisboldlyclaimedforit。
Odhran，thecharioteerofStPatrick——sosaysthispreface——
hadbeenkilled，andthequestionarosewhetherNuada，theslayer，shoulddie，orwhetherthesaintwasboundbyhisownprinciplestounconditionalforgiveness。StPatrickdidnotdecidethepointhimself；thenarrator，intrueprofessionalspirit，tellsusthathesettheprecedentaccordingtowhichastrangerfrombeyondtheseaalwaysselectsalegaladviser。Hechose’togoaccordingtothejudgmentoftheroyalpoetofthemenofErin，DubhthachMacuaLugair，’andhe’blessedthemouth’
ofDubhthach。Apoem，doubtlessofmuchantiquityandcelebrity，isthenputintothemouthofthearbitrator，andbythejudgmentembodiedinitNuadaistodie；butheascendsstraighttoheaventhroughtheintercessionofStPatrick。“ThenKingLaeghairesaid，“Itisnecessaryforyou，OmenofErin，thateveryotherlawshouldbesettledandarrangedbyusaswellasthis。““Itisbettertodoso，“saidPatrick。ItwasthenthatalltheprofessorsofthesciencesinErinwereassembled，andeachofthemexhibitedhisartbeforePatrick，inthepresenceofeverychiefinErin。ItwasthenDubhthachwasorderedtoexhibitallthejudgmentsandallthepoetryofErin，andeverylawwhichprevailedamongthemenofErin……ThisistheCainPatraic，andnohumanBrehonoftheGaedhilisabletoabrogateanythingthatisfoundintheSenchusMor。’
TheinspiredawardofDubhthachthatNuadamustdiesuggeststothecommentatorthefollowingremark：“WhatisunderstoodfromtheabovedecisionwhichGodrevealedtoDubhthachis，thatitwasamiddlecoursebetweenforgivenessandretaliation；forretaliationprevailedinErinbeforePatrick，andPatrickbroughtforgivenesswithhim；thatis，Nuadawasputtodeathforhiscrime，andPatrickobtainedheavenforhim。Atthisdaywekeepbetweenforgivenessandretaliation；forasatpresentnoonehasthepowerofbestowingheaven，asPatrickhadatthatday，sonooneisputtodeathforhisintentionalcrimes，solongas’eric’
fineisobtained；andwhenever’eric’fineisnotobtained，heisputtodeathforhisintentionalcrime，andplacedontheseaforhisunintentionalcrimes。“Itisimpossible，ofcourse，toacceptthestatementthatthiswide-spreadancientinstitution，thepecuniaryfineleviedontribesorfamiliesforthewrongsdonebytheirmembers，haditsorigininChristianinfluences；butthatitsucceededsimpleretaliationisinthehighestdegreeprobable，andnodoubtinitsdayitwasatleastasgreatanadvantagetothecommunitiesamongwhomitprevailedaswasthatsternadministrationofcriminaljusticetowhichtheEnglishmenofthesixteenthcenturywereaccustomed，andonwhichtheysosingularlypridedthemselves。butbythesixteenthcenturyitmaywellhaveoutliveditsusefulness，andsomayhavepartiallyjustifiedtheinvectivesofitsEnglishcensors，whogenerallyhavethe’eric’-fineforhomicideinviewwhentheydenouncetheBrehonlawas’contrarytoGod’slawandman’s。’
TheAncientIrishLawThegreatpeculiarityoftheancientlawsofIreland，sofarastheyareaccessibletous，isdiscussed，withmuchinstructiveillustration，intheGeneralPrefacetotheThirdVolumeoftheofficialtranslations。Theyarenotalegislativestructure，butthecreationofaclassofprofessionallawyers，theBrehons，whoseoccupationbecamehereditary，andwhoonthatgroundhavebeendesignated，thoughnotwithstrictaccuracy，acaste。Thisview，whichisconsistentwithallthatearlyEnglishauthoritiesonIrelandhavetoldusofthesystemtheycalltheBrehonlaw，iscertainlythatwhichwouldbesuggestedbysimpleinspectionofthelawtractsatpresenttranslatedandpublished。TheBookofAicillisprobablytheoldest，anditstextisavowedlycomposedofthedictaoftwofamouslawyers，CormacandCennfeladh。TheSenchusMordoes，indeed，professtohavebeenproducedbyaprocessresemblinglegislation，butthepretensioncannotbesupported；and，evenifitcould，theSenchusMorwouldnotlessconsistoftheopinionsoffamousBrehons。Itdescribesthelegalrulesembodiedinitstextasformedofthe’lawofnature’，andofthe’lawoftheletter’。The’lawoftheletter’
istheScripturallaw，extendedbysomuchofCanonlawastheprimitivemonasticChurchofIrelandcanbesupposedtohavecreatedoradopted。Thereferenceinthemisleadingphrase’lawofnature’，isnottobethememorablecombinationofwordsfamiliartotheRomanlawyers，buttothetextofStPaulintheEpistletotheRomans：’ForwhentheGentiles，whichhavenotthelaw，dobynaturethethingscontainedinthelaw，these，havingnotthelaw，arethelawuntothemselves。’Rom。ii。14The’lawofnature’is，therefore，theancientpre-Christianingredientinthesystem，andthe’SenchusMor’saysofit：’ThejudgmentsoftruenaturewhiletheHolyGhosthadspokenthroughthemouthsoftheBrehonsandjustpoetsofthemenofErin，fromthefirstoccupationofIrelanddowntothereceptionofthefaith，wereallexhibitedbyDubhthachtoPatrick。WhatdidnotclashwiththeWordofGodinthewrittenlawandtheNewTestamentandtheconsciencesofbelievers，wasconfirmedinthelawsoftheBrehonsbyPatrickandbytheecclesiasticsandchieftainsofIreland；forthelawofnaturehadbeenquiterightexceptthefaith，anditsobligations，andtheharmonyoftheChurchandpeople。Andthisisthe“SenchusMor“。’
DrSullivan，ontheotherhand，whoselearnedandexhaustiveIntroductiontoO’Curry’sLecturesformsthefirstvolumeofthe’MannersandCustomsoftheAncientIrish’，affirms，ontheevidenceofancientrecords，thattheinstitutionswhichinsomecommunitiesundoubtedlydevelopedintotruelegislatureshadtheircounterpartsintheIrelandtowhichthelawsbelonged，andhedoesnothesitatetodesignatecertainportionsoftheIrishlegalsystem’statute-law’。InthepresentsateofcriticismonIrishdocumentsitisnotpossibletoholdthebalanceexactlybetweenthewritersoftheIntroductionandoftheGeneralPreface；butthereisnottheinconsistencybetweentheiropinionswhichtheremightappeartobeatfirstsight。Intheinfancyofsocietymanyconceptionsarefoundblendedtogetherwhicharenowdistinct，andmanyassociationswhicharenowinseparablefromparticularprocessesorinstitutionsarenotfoundcoupledwiththem。Thereisabundantproofthatlegislativeandjudicialpowerarenotdistinguishedinprimitivethought；
nor，again，islegislationassociatedwithinnovation。Inourdaythelegislatorisalwayssupposedtoinnovate；thejudgenever。
Butofoldthelegislatornomorenecessarilyinnovatedthanthejudge；heonly，forthemostpart，declaredpre-exitinglaworcustom。ItisimpossibletodeterminehowmuchnewlawtherewasintheLawsofSolon，orintheTwelveTablesofRome，orintheLawsofAlfredandCanute，orintheSalicLawwhichistheoldestoftheso-calledLegesBarbarorum，butinallprobabilitythequantitywasextremelysmall。Thus，whenabodyofBrehonjudgmentswaspromulgatedbyanIrishChieftoatribalassembly，itisprobablethanconveniencewastheobjectsoughtratherthananewsanction。Aremarkablepoem，appendedtoO’Curry’sLectures，tellsushowcertainChiefsproceededeverythirdyeartothe’FairofCarman’andthereproclaimed’therightsofeverylawandtherestraints’；butitdoesnotatallfollowthatthispromulgationhadanyaffinityforlegislationinthemodernsense。TheinnovatinglegislaturesofthemodernworldappeartohavegrownupwherecertainconditionswerepresentwhichwereviturallyunknowntoancientIreland——wheretheprimitivegroupsofwhichsocietywasformedwerebrokenupwithsomecompleteness，andwhereacentralgovernmentwasconstitutedactingonindividualsfromadistancecoercivelyandirresistibly。
Thereare，moreover，someindependentreasonsforthinkingthat，amongtheCelticraces，thehalf-judicial，half-legislative，poweroriginallypossessedbythetribalChief，orbythetribalAssembly，orbybothincombination，passedveryearlytoaspecialclassoflearnedpersons。ThePrefacesinIrishfoundatthecommencementofsomeofthelaw-tracts，whichareofmuchinterest，butofuncertainoriginanddate，containseveralreferencetotheorderinCelticsocietywhichhashithertooccupiedmen’sthoughtsmorethananyother，theDruids。
ThewordoccursintheIrishtext。ThewritersoftheprefacesseemtohaveconceivedtheDruidsasaclassofheathenpriestswhohadoncepractisedmagicalarts。TheenchantersofPharaohare，forinstance，calledtheEgyptianDruids，inthePrefacetotheSenchusMor。Thepointofviewseemstobetheonefamiliarenoughtousinmodernliterature，whereanexclusiveprominenceisgiventothepriestlycharacteroftheDruids；nordotheBrehonlawyersappeartoconnectthemselveswithaclassofmenwhomtheyregardashavingbelongedaltogethertotheoldorderoftheworld。Iamquiteawarethat，inaskingwhetherthehistoricaldisconnectionoftheBrehonsandtheDruidscanbeacceptedasafact，Isuggestanenquiryaboutwhichtherehangsacertainairofabsurdity。TherehasbeensomuchwildspeculationandassertionaboutDruidsandDruidicalantiquitiesthatthewholesubjectseemstobeconsideredasalmostbeyondthepaleofseriousdiscussion。YetwearenotatlibertytoforgetthatthefirstgreatobserverofCelticmannersdescribestheCeltsoftheContinentasbeforeallthingsremarkablefortheliteraryclasswhichtheirsocietyincluded。LetmeaddthatinCaesar’saccountoftheDruidsthereisnotawordwhichdoesnotappeartomeperfectlycredible。ThesameremarkmaybemadeofStrabo。ButthesourceofatalleventsapartoftheabsurditieswhichhaveclusteredroundthesubjectItaketobetheNaturalHistoryofPliny，andtheyseemtobelongtothosestoriesaboutplantsandanimalstowhichmaybetracedagreatdealofthenonsensewrittenintheworld。
YoumayrememberthepicturegivenbyCaesaroftheContinentalCelts，astheyappeartohimwhenhefirstusedhisunrivalledopportunitiesofexaminingthem。HetellsusthattheirtribalsocietiesconsistedsubstantiallyofthreeordershecallstheEquites，theDruids，andthePlebeians。SomebodyhassaidthatthiswouldbeanotveryinaccuratedescriptionofFrenchsocietyjustbeforethefirstRevolution，withitsthreeordersofNobles，Clergy，andunprivilegedTiers-蓆at；buttheobservationisagooddealmoreingeniousthantrue。WearenowabletocompareCaesar’saccountoftheGaulswiththeevidenceconcerningaCelticcommunitywhichtheBrehontractssupply；andifweusethisevidenceasatest，weshallsoonmakeupourmindsthat，thoughhisrepresentationisaccurateasfarasitgoes，iterrsinomissionofdetail。TheEquites，orChiefs，thoughtosomeextenttheywereaclassapart，didnotstandinsuchcloserelationtooneanotherastheystoodtothevariousseptsorgroupsoverwhichtheypresided。’Everychief，’saystheBrehonlaw，’rulesoverhisland，whetheritbesmallorwhetheritbelarge。’ThePlebeians，again，sofarfromconstitutingagreatmiscellaneousmultitude，weredistributedintoeverysortofnaturalgroup，basedultimatelyupontheFamily。Themistake，sofarastherewaserror，Iconceivetohavebeenaneffectofmentaldistance。IthadtheimperfectionsoftheviewobtainedbylookingontheGangeticplainsfromtheslopesoftheHimalayas。