Talk:Early Irish law

message: This article appears to be written from a rather Christian oriented POV. Shouldn't articles be neutral in the POV? Brehon Law predates Christianity, and certainly predates the arrival of Christianity in Ireland. Yet the article claims "Early Irish law was often mixed with Christian influence and juristic innovation". There appear to be other such comments in the text. There are no surviving texts of Brehon Law prior to the Christianization of Ireland. The earliest surviving text being around the 600s. It is true that Brehon Law was changed in the Christian period, but we may not be able to decipher all the changes and additions made to the law by Christianity. There may be some clues in some oral histories of the Seanchaí which the scholars of Early Ireland wrote down. Columcille (St. Columba), is known to have recorded some, but none of those original manuscripts survive, but they are referenced in later manuscripts. But even then one must attempt to extract the Christian influence. Perhaps that is what the author was trying to say here, but if so it's isn't clear. --Celtic hackr (talk) 14:23, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article lacks Neutral POV? 

message: The Celtic law article covers exactly the same ground as this article. I suggest that the contents of that article should be merged here provided the information there is reliable. There may be room for an article with a title like "Celtic law" comparing the Brehon Laws with the Welsh laws and adding what little information might be available about pre-Roman law in Gaul etc. Rhion 21:23, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds reasonable, and I agree with that.  Having Brehon Law references as representative of all Celtic laws at the time is inaccurate, and the relevant bits should be moved here.  There's a lot of ground that this article doesn't cover, also.  I'll try to make time to round it out. Damask Rose 06:11, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Also agree, given the current nature of that article.  The Jade Knight 02:02, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I think it would be better to improve the Celtic law article as User:Rhion suggested - are there any sources on Gaulish laws ? I assume not, but you never know - rather than doing a merge. Even if it's very short, there must be something useful that could be combined from Brehon and Welsh law articles into a Celtic law piece. And what of Medieval Scots law ? It has Gaelic features too. Angus McLellan  (Talk) 23:37, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

text: A decent "Celtic law" article would be a good idea, but the existing one isn't a good article. It's lifted almost verbatim from the website of a music group, is otherwise unreferenced, contains a fair amount of romantic nonsense (no concept of land ownership? queens?), and presents this romantic view of Irish law as representative of all Celtic law in all periods. There's an extensive article on Welsh law which should be the model for expanding this article and creating articles on Gaulish, Breton, Cornish, Scottish etc laws. The Celtic law article should have its content removed, with anything that can be referenced moved here, and converted into a disambiguation page until a general introduction linked to the detailed pages can be written.--Nicknack009 18:48, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  The Jade Knight 06:44, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I just tried to do that, but the edit was instantly reverted by Tawkerbot2. Rhion 18:20, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Now been done and the merge tag removed. I've started a paragraph or two in the Celtic law article. Rhion 19:30, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested merge 

message: I was recently reminded by an administrator that 'Wikipedia does not make presumptions' []. That being the case, why does the current article state: 'The laws were written in the Old Irish period (ca. 600–900 AD) and probably reflect the traditional laws of pre-Christian Ireland' - without supporting references? Etaonsh 08:16, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Wikipedia does not make presumptions' 

message: did it occur prior to the Norman invasion?  i don't think that's clear from the article. Streamless 15:35, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a degree in Irish history and I did not know this, it clearly needs to be mentioned here.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.141.61.64 (talk) 02:54, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Canon law was applied, often in a partial way. For example, abbots were discouraged from owning female slaves, but female slavery itself was not abolished.Red Hurley (talk) 13:15, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  when did Canon Law (Christianity) spread to Ireland 

message: There is a request for a photo at the top of this page and I'm wondering what might be feasible.
I've considered manuscript images, but I haven't found any that aren't copyrighted (the photos of the ms, obviously the ms themselves are beyond copyright). I've also considered Cahermacnaghten, in the Burren, Co. Clare which was the sight of the O'Davoren law school in the late middle ages (it's featured on the cover of Liam Breatnach's A Companion to the Corpus Iuris Hibernici and while I haven't found a good photo not under copyright (though one might be found), it would also be an easier image to take (although not by me, any time soon).
I'm wondering if any one else has any suggestions of what sort of images might be used?
--Buirechain 15:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image? 

message: I am very tempted to move this to "Early Irish Law". "Brehon Law" is a late and anglicized term and perhaps somewhat misleading therefore. Undoubtedly it is unclear just how significant a roll the Brithemain played in creating the law, although they certainly wrote it down. Further, "Early Irish Law" is the term given by most scholars - i.e. Fergus Kelly's "Guide to Early Irish Law" and elsewhere.--Buirechain 01:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds reasonable. I'd support that. --Nicknack009 08:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Same here. Angus McLellan  (Talk) 11:15, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

text: If it is moved, should there be a disambiguation entry? Brian Pearson (talk) 05:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm unclear what you think would need a disambiguation entry, but if you think there is cause, go ahead. Buirechain (talk) 03:48, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move 

message: ..to give students something to compare / contrast with; there was nothing uniquely Irish about female slaves / the eraic principle etc. etc. A great page.Red Hurley (talk) 13:12, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: added Frisian & Anglo-Saxon URLs

message: *From:
"In one exceptional case, vestigial rights have been recognised in recent Irish case law in reference to the survival of Brehon law-governed fishery rights in Tyrconnell, once the last bastion of Gaelic sovereignty until 1601.  The rights survived the end of Tyrconnell's independence, and also survived the Elizabethan conquest." 
*To:
"In one exceptional case, vestigial rights have been recognised in recent Irish case law, in reference to the survival of Brehon law-governed customary local fishery rights in Tyrconnell, as these also amounted to an easement under Common Law." 
Sorry to be so prosaic, but the recent case had nothing to do with sovereignty, though it was anciently granted by the local lords. The Tyrconnell earls c.1550-1600 did not claim sovereignty but had longstanding local authority.Red Hurley (talk) 13:43, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Corrected Tyrconnell fishery entry

message: Dear:
     there are two points, one if the father and the mother died in an accedent,would sons and doughters inhert or the migority would be to the sones and the least would be for douters, on the other hand is it possible in some casess that the doughters whount inhearit nothing.
     second, if they where children wlould they be the same, where would the dougters spend on them self from, would they go to an orphneg or to the church.
     last, i would rather say that articles writen in this mattar are quit misleading,i have spoken to a person, she said she is christian and both gendars inhertie the same, on the other said i sopke to an eygption, he said he is christian and his name is bashay, they inherite in eygep according to islam way and some using the other way but i dident excactly get the propare ansewr.
regards,
civil eng,
fawaz f a a alfahad
u of toledo
277020200917
272988751
0096597767223
0096599126730
mishref,block1,street7,avenu1,house38
kuwait
thursday
5:22pm
19/may/2011
الخميس  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.236.98.232 (talk) 14:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  is it reiality that doughtares dont get any thing from the inhereted father or son 

message: I've restored an earlier version of this section, before changes made by User:2600:1004:b009:5c9b:20f7:6fdb:79b4:f228 in July 2012, because they are largely tendentious. We have no record of any laws written between 200 BC and 400 AD - the earliest laws go back to the 7th century - so we can't say how anyone was treated under the law in that period. The reference to Eoin Mac Neill is not cited, nor is the paragraph about queens, and a cited reference to the Cáin Adomnáin was removed. The one cite given, to "D. A. Binchy, Studies in Early Irish Law", is, I think, probably spurious and certainly inadequate as that book is a book of essays by multiple authors, and which essay is referred to is not specified. I'll have a go at writing a more comprehensive section later, but this earlier version should be reasonably reliable. --Nicknack009 (talk) 08:18, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Women and marriage section 

message: Early Irish law contains a link to Early Medieval Ireland, which redirects to History of Ireland (800–1169).  However, the lede of History of Ireland (400–800) describes that period as "early medieval".  Which period is the Law article refering to, and which should be the redirect for "Early Medieval Ireland"? (Posted in all three talk pages) Iapetus (talk) 12:48, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  When was "Early Medieval Ireland"? 

message: "It should be mentioned that the translation of the last name is uncertain in the Dictionary of the Irish Language." Assuming the "last name" is indfine (end-kin), the eDIL entry does not seem to support the assertion:
:indḟine iā, f. (lit. 'end-kin' GEIL 312 ) the fourth subdivision of the 'fine.' Descendants on the male line of the same great-great-great-grandfather
jnestorius(talk) 20:49, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  translation of the last name is uncertain in the Dictionary of the Irish Language 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Early Irish law. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150714105039/http://www.courts.ie/Courts.ie/library3.nsf/pagecurrent/3CBAE4FE856E917B80256DF800494ED9 to http://www.courts.ie/Courts.ie/library3.nsf/pagecurrent/3CBAE4FE856E917B80256DF800494ED9
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:02, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Aistreóir to me always meant translator. Some words will always offer a source of contention. Post debates below
Shtanto (talk) 00:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The finicky matter of certain translations