We Justly Take By Force

While playing Elder Scrolls Online: Tamriel Unlimited with a friend yesterday, I came across a rather poignant bit of dialogue during a quest. It came from the character Ahzirr Traajijazeri during the "We justly take by force" quest, but it smacked of Na Morrígna... It also a reminded me deeply of a conversation I stumbled across on Tumblr a while back.

At Two-Moons Dance, we study the thin line between justice and vengeance. We train so we will always know the difference; enjoy your life, walker. You never know when those you love can slip away.

Of course, I can’t for the life of me find this conversation now a days; its long since disappeared into the depths of the Tumblr sphere. And now when I look, I can’t find any (or can only find a few) overt mentions of these figures and their connections to justice. Still, less overt connections are common- hiding here and there among various organizations and people devoted to these figures.

While not overt, there is an almost unmistakable connection between Badb Catha (or Cathobodua) and the actions of the Coru Cathubodua Priesthood. This is especially evident in their organization’s Statement on Justice and Equality.

Morpheus Ravenna touches on it a bit, too, writing in her article 'She fights for all women: Macha’s Braided Mane' that Macha is:

A woman injured by those in power and who brings justice through the transgressive power of cursing, a power linked to Her gender.

This is a sentiment echoed by the likes of Macha’s Justice, who quotes that same story as their own reasoning behind choosing Macha as the spiritual figurehead of their community (organization?).

The intrinsic linking of Na Morrígna to justice crops up in Ravenna’s other works as well at various times, such as in the case of her article 'Gods with Agency, Continued: The “Fad” Question'. In it she poses a rather thought provoking question concerning the rise of The Morrígan’s devotees in recent years:

Could it be that the Morrígan Herself is an agent in Her own story? That something is happening in our time to which She as a Goddess active in war and sovereignty is especially drawn or which calls Her to action in human affairs? Perhaps the global crises we face, the conflicts over resources, sovereignty, justice, human dignity, freedom, the rights of women?

Overall, the subject of justice does appear to pop up quite frequently in regards to various figures of Na Morrígna– even if it isn’t always overt. So much so, in fact, that during the conversation I witnessed on Tumblr, A. of GtGP once quipped (albeit in a slightly round about way) that that many people with that particular Personal Gnosis about her couldn’t possibly be wrong.

Or could they?

This isn’t intended to be a derogatory quip towards anyone who does view them as Justice figures- nor is it to say they’re wrong in believing it. I do heavily question the idea, however, that Personal Gnosis and interpretation becomes an unquestionable truth that we’re obligated to accept, simply because a large number of people do believe it. It’s something I see all too often concerning Personal Gnosis especially, and quite frankly I think it’s a dangerous precedence to set in any community. And I've spoken about that numerous times- including here on this blog.

Lore and Wisdom Texts tell us that to be just (or morally right and fair) and possess right judgment (or the ability ascertain what is morally right and fair, and then make decisions based on that) are integral functions- especially of being a King… A great example is The Destruction of Da Derga’s Hostel.

In fact, lore is full of examples wherein a lack of right judgment- and / or the participation in unjust action- ultimately leads to ruin. And these events are usually brought up as examples of Na Morrígna’s connection to justice- especially as it pertains to The Morrigan herself.

But since Macha is usually the one who gets the main focus? For brevity’s sake I’m going to focus on her. And the most well known example of Macha’s connection to justice, at least, comes from The Debility of the Ulstermen (mentioned above)… Yet where most people tend to see justice in Macha’s story, I see something very different.

I see a story not about justice, but one of vengeance… And vengeance doesn’t just occur once, but three times during the course of it.

The first instance is on the part of the King, who seeks vengeance against Macha’s Husband, who wounded his pride and questioned his household’s ability. The others are on Macha’s part- first by cursing the people who stood by and did not help her, and second by cursing the King who acted unjustly by being vengeful and forcing her to race despite being heavily pregnant (subsequently forcing her to give birth prematurely).

Put plainly, it is more a case of “an eye for an eye” than it is for doling out true and legitimate justice… But why do I see vengeance when surely we can all agree that Macha’s actions were, in fact, just; when they were morally right, when they were fair, and when we can certainly all agree that the King- and the people who stood by and did nothing- ultimately deserved what they got?

Such a question is definitely valid given that the distinction between justice and vengeance isn’t always as cut and dry as we would like it to be. Indeed, there’s a very thin line which separates the two, and they’ve occasionally been used interchangeably at different points throughout history.

Many calls for justice are inherently also calls for vengeance- the emotionally driven call for the righting of some wrong committed against them, their loved ones, their community, and society at large. And we can’t ignore that righteous vengeance is a thing- nor that justice is not always actually just; as Psychology Today writes about the distinction:

There are instances when revenge can legitimately be understood as a type of justice, and justice a kind of revenge.

And yet as Psychology Today also notes, there is still a tangible distinction between the concepts of justice and vengeance.

In simple terms, justice relies on (what is supposed to be) an impartial, impersonal legal system whose purpose is to dole out (what are also supposed to be) fair, logical, rational punishments for violating the society’s established legal codes. This system is (supposed to be) selfless, and is meant to work for both the benefit of the individual, and the benefit of the society as a whole.

This is in direct contrast to vengeance- which is motivated largely by emotion, is often carried out by an individual (either the victim, or on behalf of a victim), and is largely selfish (usually benefiting only the person seeking it); to rephrase how Psychology Today went on to further put it in the same article:

Revenge is about personal retaliation for a wrongdoing while Justice is about restoring social balance and order.

And in this instance, Macha’s actions (and the actions of many figures of Na Morrígna in lore)- while admittedly just– were not justice, and were not motivated by the purpose of restoring social balance for the greater good of society… Instead they were motivated by a personal, deeply emotional, and selfish desire to inflict equal pain in retaliation for pain caused to her.

In interpreting it this way, Macha (specifically) isn’t just a Goddesses of sovereignty- nor does she really become a Goddess of justice. Instead, if she is to become anything in this relation to justice, she arguably becomes a Goddesses of Just Action, Right Judgment, and Righteous Vengeance… In other words, she becomes the external harbinger of violent and aggressive retaliation for a decisive lack of moral correctness, fairness, and true justice.

Even further, these unjust actions and wrong judgment, when committed by Kings especially, can be considered a violation of the sovereignty she grants as a Goddess with that purview. As a result, I believe that she can additionally be interpreted as the punisher of those who pervert the sovereignty bestowed upon them by Na Morrígna and other sovereignty figures by abusing their authority in these unjust ways.

While that can be interpreted by some as justice, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it is; while doing so is arguably just under certain circumstances, it doesn’t necessarily make it justice.

That being said, I’ve been told quite a few times now that I’m “just being pedantic” by arguing for this distinction. Why? Because there was no distinction between justice and vengeance in earlier eras.

I don’t think I’m being pedantic at all

Yes, that may not have been the case in the past. Many cultures may have viewed the two interchangeably and acted according to those beliefs- though when one examines the evidence I'd start to argue that the contrary was actually true. But ultimately I don’t think that matters in the modern age, because we do have that distinction in the current era.

It’s important that the use of our modern language to talk about them accurately reflects the true nature of the concepts as they were practiced; when viewing ancient practices through modern terminology and lenses, it’s important to call a spade a spade- and not to confuse it with a rake. Otherwise it all just becomes terribly misleading.