Out of Curiosity...

[Twilight Garden]

Out of curiosity...
What in your opinion makes one a druid. I have met many who call themselves druid and don't quite have an understanding of what a druid is. :huh:

[Twig]

What in your opinion makes one a druid. I have met many who call themselves druid and don't quite have an understanding of what a druid is.

:nonono: :boing: :loveduv: :crylaugh: Wow....I REALLY can't answer that without hard thought.!:eek: :) :cool: (Puts on cheap sunglasses)......... Like ANY "religious" path, it's as individual as the person following it

Ok, personally what identifies me with the druid path vs others is my connection with the Gods that the ancient celts related to and the way I worship them. In particular, Andrasta-the Goddess of the Iceni tribe. :D As with Bodica, she has guided me through many tough scrapes and pulled my ashes ;) out of the fire.

(To me) The Druids are seperated from other faiths by their unique relationship with the Earth and the God(esses) that run it. Unlike Wicca, druidism is more patriarchial than matriarchial in structure. Many a theological debate are waged on this but, some say that wicca is derived from druidism (loosely) and that MANY of the christian holidays are based on druidic festivals. So far my research on the latter fact shows this to be true. It all comes down to how you worship youre God I guess. (remember...THEY'RE ALL ONE GOD!!!) Sorry, some people just WON'T get that point!! ;)

You know, I could sit and write a 10 page essay on this but it boils down to the fact that I KNOW that is what I am or, what I aspire to be. I am a steward of the Earth and All within Her. I see the trees as brothers and through them communicate to my Higher Power. My spirit Guide is a druid, son of a Druid. And by the Gods it feels RIGHT! :thumbsup: :huh:

So what about the rest of you? What do YOU think denotes a druid?? Am I wrong? We are All trying to answer this I think so let's hear what you think.

Peace,
Twig
:elf:

[The preceding was a personal opinion and not the YADA,YADA, you know!:D :D :p )

[MystyPines]

This is interesting. I guess I consider myself a Pagan Witch that follows the celtic pantheon. Does that mean I am a Druid? I am a bit confused. Help!

[Maggie]

Originally posted by MystyPines
This is interesting. I guess I consider myself a Pagan Witch that follows the celtic pantheon. Does that mean I am a Druid? I am a bit confused. Help!

I am a bad person to ask about this--I'm sorta bare-bones druid type!!!!!

FROM MY VIEWPOINT.............doesn't say anything about anyone else's remember.........

As far as can be determined from what writings have survived.......


Druids did not seem to do what we now call witchcraft. There is a book out called Druid Magic that has gotten mixed reviews among the ivory tower types, but in the main it's considered good for beginners as to what type of magic they performed.

The 'celtic' pantheon differs a bit from nation to nation and since so many of their deities were very local, we really don't know exactly who or how many were actually worshipped from nation to nation. Cernunnos, for instance, isn't known from the islands, only continental Europe. There really isn't a pantheon known, in the sense that word is used for the Roman and Greek deities, the celts don't seem have had such a hard and fast heirarchy. The equivalencies that are popular between the celtic deities and the Roman ones are a bit forced, and we really only know of them from foreign writings and some amulets etc found in and around Roman shrines in England and some continental sites. The analogies may not give the entire picture as to what the celts themselves thought about the deities.

I tend not to call myself a druid--I'm too literal minded! :)
To me a druid was a member of a particular society with a particular function within that society and the way we use the term 'druid' today isn't exactly equivalent. There are a lot of people who do, and who do have an idea of what they mean by the term--you've got Twig, and I'm sure there are others here who can give you an idea of what the term means to them....

Regards,

Maggie

[MystyPines]

Maggie,

I have a few questions. :D So if druids do not practice Witchcraft, do they use magick at all? Do they cast circles? Do they work with the elements? Do they celebrate sabbats and esbats? Are they solitary or do they have groups? :)

[Mairwen]

> do they use magick at all?

Yes, but you probably wouldn't recognize it - it's not the type of magicK you see in your everydayrunofthemill BoS.

> Do they cast circles?

Well, you have to remember (and everyone would be wise to, really) that circle casting is something that came along with the 20th century. Somehow it became the wise and popular thing to do. My views and opinions and confusion about circle casting are scattered all through the circle casting thread in magic and rituals - so I'm not going to get into that here. Having said that, there's a lot to be said about permanent sacred space - which is where most ancients did their ritual magic.

> Do they work with the elements?

Sure. Depending on whom you ask what, of course, because everyone (solitary or not) works within different systems - and different systems have different ideals and confines. The most "popular" "Druidic" (ie, Celtic, really) elemental system is the Earth-Sky-and-Sea elements - which represent the Three Realms (Ceugant, Abred and Annwn). Of course, I know others who use a five-element system, and yet others who use a nine-element system. So, it's all in who you speak with, and what feels comfortable to you.

> Do they celebrate sabbats and esbats?

Yes, but they don't call them that. Rather, most don't.

> Are they solitary or do they have groups?

Yes! ;)

[Twilight Garden]

Hmm Interesting. Still a little confused, I think. I am kind of getting the idea. I'm thinking of Druids as similar to Wiccans, only for some reason I have a more (iso a better word) Earthy feeling about Druidism and they're specific to Celtic. Also..
do they use magick at all?

Yes, but you probably wouldn't recognize it - it's not the type of magicK you see in your everydayrunofthemill BoS. What kind of magick is it? I always thought magick was magick.

[MystyPines]

I would also be interested to know what kind of magick druids use?

[Maggie]

Originally posted by LunarMist
Hmm Interesting. Still a little confused, I think. I am kind of getting the idea. I'm thinking of Druids as similar to Wiccans, only for some reason I have a more (iso a better word) Earthy feeling about Druidism and they're specific to Celtic. Also.. What kind of magick is it? I always thought magick was magick.

It's a little hard to me to get an answer here, because I came at this historically first......

Druids aren't any 'earthier' than any other indigenous religion, they were all tied to the landscape and to the natural cycles. As I've said before, I'm not a Wiccan, but my general impression has always been that Wicca is not place-tied to anywhere in particular, whereas druidism is, in that it was a religion of the people and for their relationship with that place. That might account for the 'earthy' feeling--the origins and purpose of the two religions are slightly different.

The magic is a bit harder for me to answer specifically because I don't 'do' magic personally. My talents are in runes and with animals and they don't seem to require any 'work' on my part. Might be a problem with definition here too, I'm not sure that the celts would have recognized the tenets of ceremonial magic, for instance. I think it might be a difference in world view, they recognized a world populated by god and goddesses, but I *think* viewed any power there as coming from those gods and goddesses, not as a force that could be tapped into directly.....

Mairwen,,,,,,,,, HELP!!!!!!!!!!

Regards,

Maggie

[Mairwen]

I couldn't have answered that any better. After reading the questin, I was going to post the same thing, until I read your answer, Maggie. :D

[Maggie]

Originally posted by Mairwen
I couldn't have answered that any better. After reading the questin, I was going to post the same thing, until I read your answer, Maggie. :D

Oh good!!!!!! I feel a little handicapped because I really only have a working knowledge of one side of this question! I'm glad to hear that I made sense!

:D

Regards,

Maggie

[Mairwen]

Well, in all honesty, me, too. However, I've been all over the Internet looking form information, talking to people, reading books, etc ~ so that I can have a more complete picture.

[thefluiddruid]

Mind if I put my 5cents (used to be 2 cents, but inflation y'know)
In??

I come from a very unusual family, Celtic (Scott-Irish) and Cherokee, with some members that follow the old ways on both sides.

I consider myself a Druid because I connect best with what my great grandfather taught me when I was very young, and then later in life (late teens) found out that those tales and ways of thinking were Druidic.
I am anseweing these questions as I view them, others may see things differantly. Especially if they came from a differant background.

Do we do magick??
Yes. However we tend not to use rituals for ourselves.
About the only time I do rituals is when I am doing them for others. Like a handfasting for example, this is because most people need a show to believe that something is happening.
For my private use I use something I call Direct Manifestation, kind of like Cerimonial Magick without the cerimony..
Sounds kind of strange when I say it, but I just don't have the words to put any other name to it..
Ritual or cerimony does 2 basic things;
1) it is a prayer to the god(s)
2) it uses a unity of thought, word, and action to focus energy on the purpose of the ritual.

In my pratice instead of taking a short (or in some cases not so short) period of time to focus my energy through unity of thought, word, and action, I strive to live my life in such a way that my thoughts words and actions align with what I want to manifest.

It's really hard to explain in words, that's why Druids don't try to teach through the written word, there are some things you just have to experance.
It's kind of like either using an explosive (ritual) to blow a channel in a piece of land, or channeling a river through it that eventually will wear a much deeper canyon in it.


I hope this doesn't confuse you more, like I said, I don't know of any words that can pin this concept down..

I do work with elements, but as parts of a whole, not as totally seperate and discrete forces.

Druidism is somewhat simnlar to Shamanism or Native American Medicine, in that I believe that everything has a spirit.

[MystyPines]

So most Druids don't use a lot of circle casting or props for magick?

[thefluiddruid]

Like I said, I can't speek for most Druids.

You have to understand, the term Druid is used by so many types of people these days.
Some of them are heriditary, while others may belong to one of the Druidic "orders" (reconstructionst Druids), there are still others that call themselfs Druids because they have read a book or two and feel that the name discribes them, or those that have been fooled by New Age profiteers like Douglas Monroe.

[Mairwen]

Originally posted by MystyPines
So most Druids don't use a lot of circle casting or props for magick?

Well, a lot of Pagans don't. Circles and props are mostly new to the 20th century.

[thefluiddruid]

Originally posted by Mairwen


Well, a lot of Pagans don't. Circles and props are mostly new to the 20th century.

Actally archeological evidence says differantly, as do period documents.

For instance alchemical and cerimonial magick documents from the late medival and renaissance times illistrate both the use of "ritual tools" and the circle.
In fact in Spain there was a form of mysticism that used the Circle in a form of Rapier dueling, very simular to the way many oriental martial arts blended in with mysticism.

The circle is one of the oldest known mystical symbols, and was used in period times by many differant cultures as is evidenced by Stonehenge, as well as many legands.

One of the earliest known religious artifacts is a goddess figure, and there have been many talismens found.

I am not saying that the circle and "ritual tools" were used in exactly the same way was today (in fact many of the rituals we use today are almost wholly modern inventions or interpatations)
but they were used.

[Twilight Garden]

Thank you for your input. I'm felling a little less confused. I had to read some things over again to get it, but (I think) eventually did. (& I think I'm understanding where I get my "earthy" feel from.) I'm still not understanding the difference in Magick, but I may not understand it, unless I were to actually practice the way of the druid.
*LM*

[Mairwen]

Originally posted by thefluiddruid
The circle is one of the oldest known mystical symbols, and was used in period times by many differant cultures as is evidenced by Stonehenge, as well as many legands.

Yeah. But there's a mighty big difference between "circle" and "sacred space". I was talking about the modern usage of the circle. And as a whole, the use and purpose of casting circles for use in various and sundry types of magics is new to the 20th century. The way circles are used today by the biggest magical majority is a new ideal.

[Draeconin]

Originally posted by Mairwen


Yeah. But there's a mighty big difference between "circle" and "sacred space".

Not really, Mairwen. A 'circle' is a temporary sacred and/or magick space in neo-pagan practice, and a protective or restrictive device in High Magic.



I was talking about the modern usage of the circle. And as a whole, the use and purpose of casting circles for use in various and sundry types of magics is new to the 20th century.

Again, nope. It's been around at least as long as Ceremonial Magic (High Magic) has been practiced - and they had to have adopted it from somewhere themselves. Gardner, and from him all following Neo-Pagans, adopted it from the practices of magical Fellowships such as the Golden Dawn, etc. Following it back, we're looking at *at least* 400 years - probably more.

[MystyPines]

You guys are great! Very informative. So Druids celebrate holidays similar to the Pagan holidays, but they are not called Sabbats? Do you celebrate all 8? Are they any in additional holidays?

[Maggie]

Originally posted by MystyPines
You guys are great! Very informative. So Druids celebrate holidays similar to the Pagan holidays, but they are not called Sabbats? Do you celebrate all 8? Are they any in additional holidays?

It varies a bit from druid group to druid group. Generally you can count on celebrating Samhain, Imbolc, Beltane, and Lughnasadh. The group I'm in also recognizes the soltices and equinoxes, I don't think all do.

Regards,

Maggie

[AnnaHawk]

Draeconin,
I think you are missing Mairwen's point. Circles as they are practiced currently by Wicca are of 20th century origin. Our own Gwydoon rituals downplay "circles" in favor of sacred spaces, which may also incidentally be circular, or may not be. The old pagan usage of a "circle" when it was used was more like a sacrificial bowl or sphere one would place oneself into. THe Ceremonial "high" magic circle is JUDEO/CHRISTIAN in origin, not pagan. It was designed to keep out all the demons and scary things they chose to create as a part of their maagical pratice. On the rare occasions we use a circle, it is to contain our own energies for a specific purpose, not to keep something out. Modern Wicca has created an amalgam between the two and makes circles for everything. Since the discussionwas about Druidism and other pagan paths, using Ceremonial Magic or Garderner was unfortuate and led to a misunderstanding.

Your friend, always,
AnnaHawk:)

[MystyPines]

I always understood that if you cast a circle it becomes sacred space. How would a Druid make a particular area sacred space if they do not cast a circle? Would it be that using the same area time after time (like an altar area) or garden area or other area set aside for spiritual workings, etc., that the space will become infused with energies after frequent use and become sacred space, that you need not cast a circle. Hmmm, does that make any sense, :D

[Maggie]

Originally posted by MystyPines
I always understood that if you cast a circle it becomes sacred space. How would a Druid make a particular area sacred space if they do not cast a circle? Would it be that using the same area time after time (like an altar area) or garden area or other area set aside for spiritual workings, etc., that the space will become infused with energies after frequent use and become sacred space, that you need not cast a circle. Hmmm, does that make any sense, :D

The term 'sacred space' is a little dicey, not everyone means th same thing by it. In my case--the area becomes 'sacred' once the ritual fire is lit. My kind of druids don't use the term the same way, nor do we actually use a circle in the sense that Wiccans use it. For the ancient celts, the space was often already considered 'sacred' in that the worship often began because the place itself was considered to have power--like a stream, or a mountain, etc. In other words, it didn't need to be 'infused', the already present power is what drew the worshippers......

Regards,

Maggie

[thefluiddruid]

Originally posted by Maggie

.....For the ancient celts, the space was often already considered 'sacred' in that the worship often began because the place itself was considered to have power--like a stream, or a mountain, etc. In other words, it didn't need to be 'infused', the already present power is what drew the worshippers......


That is a good way of explaining it.

To me the world, except for places like cities where man has pretty much ruined it, is Sacred Space.

The reason for casting a circle, for both the Pagan/Neo-Paganss and the CMs, is that it provides a "place between the worlds".

It's kind of like erasing a blackboard before writing on it.
Yyou cast a circle to clear the space of any unwanted energies, and then invoke the energies you want in there.

Metaphysically you are removing that area from the rest of reality
and creating a space that your will controlls.
This functions to both create potential "sacred space" (if you choose to use it that way), and to remove you from the outside world, in essache preventing any outside energies or entities from affecting you.

[Shadowulfe]

i don't call myself a druid. I just started studying Druidism about a month ago.
as to the sabbats... I remember reading in Druid Magic that some refer to the Sabbats as "fire festivals" allthough I do have one question.. What is the difference between Bards Ovates and Druids??? i hear all three used to describe different things similar to a degree system in Wicca. could someone please clarify on this for me please??

[Maggie]

Originally posted by thefluiddruid



To me the world, except for places like cities where man has pretty much ruined it, is Sacred Space.




Um, yes and no. Human beings have lived in cities now for thousands of years--and quite frankly even the worst of our cities are preferable to what a normal medieval city was like, particularly in the hygene and odor department.........

The difference lies in whether or not humans encourage nature, discourage it, or ignore it. Nature is not somewhere 'out there', it's all around us even in the cities. I spent a lot of time with my kids and their friends when they were little, doing just that--showing them where nature was right in their own backyards. I live in a townhouse development; back along one of the common areas is a drainage ditch, very utilitarian but it has a very nice colony of cardinal flowers growing along a good portion of its length.

'Sacred' is a difficult concept--I've even plowed through Eliade's Sacred and Profane and am still not sure I understand it.......

Regards,

Maggie

[Shadowulfe]

i don't call myself a druid. I just started studying Druidism about a month ago.
as to the sabbats... I remember reading in Druid Magic that some refer to the Sabbats as "fire festivals" allthough I do have one question.. What is the difference between Bards Ovates and Druids??? i hear all three used to describe different things similar to a degree system in Wicca. could someone please clarify on this for me please??

[Maggie]

Originally posted by Shadowulfe
i don't call myself a druid. I just started studying Druidism about a month ago.
as to the sabbats... I remember reading in Druid Magic that some refer to the Sabbats as "fire festivals" allthough I do have one question.. What is the difference between Bards Ovates and Druids??? i hear all three used to describe different things similar to a degree system in Wicca. could someone please clarify on this for me please??

Bards were the artists, ovates were the seers and druids had to be both as well as knowing the laws and history. It isn't so much a degree system as types of 'specialization'.

Regards,

Maggie

[Draeconin]

Originally posted by AnnaHawk
Draeconin,
I think you are missing Mairwen's point. Circles as they are practiced currently by Wicca are of 20th century origin. Our own Gwydoon rituals downplay "circles" in favor of sacred spaces, which may also incidentally be circular, or may not be. The old pagan usage of a "circle" when it was used was more like a sacrificial bowl or sphere one would place oneself into. THe Ceremonial "high" magic circle is JUDEO/CHRISTIAN in origin, not pagan. It was designed to keep out all the demons and scary things they chose to create as a part of their maagical pratice. On the rare occasions we use a circle, it is to contain our own energies for a specific purpose, not to keep something out. Modern Wicca has created an amalgam between the two and makes circles for everything. Since the discussionwas about Druidism and other pagan paths, using Ceremonial Magic or Garderner was unfortuate and led to a misunderstanding.

Your friend, always,
AnnaHawk:)

A. The thread was started by a tyro without our background information and could interpret M's vague statements in any number of ways.

B. If what you state was what Mairwen meant, she should have said so, and we could have discussed the subject on that level.

C. I responded to what was written, and will continue to do so - "unfortunate" or not. I do not agree with your judgement on that, however.

[Maggie]

Originally posted by Draeconin


Not really, Mairwen. A 'circle' is a temporary sacred and/or magick space in neo-pagan practice, and a protective or restrictive device in High Magic.



Again, nope. It's been around at least as long as Ceremonial Magic (High Magic) has been practiced - and they had to have adopted it from somewhere themselves. Gardner, and from him all following Neo-Pagans, adopted it from the practices of magical Fellowships such as the Golden Dawn, etc. Following it back, we're looking at *at least* 400 years - probably more.

As I understood the original question it was in relation to druidical practices. In that respect 'casting' a circle does not seem to have been done in ancient times among celtic societies (the stone circles in Britain predate the celtic incursions, BTW). One has to specify what neo-pagan group that is being referred to, since not all groups even today follow that practice.

Regards,

Maggie

[thefluiddruid]

Originally posted by Maggie

...... (the stone circles in Britain predate the celtic incursions, BTW). .....
Now that depends on how you define Celtic.
While they defiantly predate the Indo-Europien Celts (the Brythonic or "new tribes" as some legands call them )
They do not pre-date the Goidelic peoples (the ones that some of the old legands refer to as the "old tribes" or "Fair ones", later called the faeries or the Sidhe. The Picts that Ceaser refers to are one tribe of these peoples.)
However I have never seen any documentation for them casting a circle the way Wiccans do.

[Maggie]

Originally posted by thefluiddruid

Now that depends on how you define Celtic.
While they defiantly predate the Indo-Europien Celts (the Brythonic or "new tribes" as some legands call them )
They do not pre-date the Goidelic peoples (the ones that some of the old legands refer to as the "old tribes" or "Fair ones", later called the faeries or the Sidhe. The Picts that Ceaser refers to are one tribe of these peoples.)
However I have never seen any documentation for them casting a circle the way Wiccans do.

Let's just say that if they were used by druids in the past I don't think they were used in the way that they are being used today by certain druidical groups...........there isn't enough information (that I know of) to assume that these old tribes had what we now call a druid either.....Personally I vote for the 'small dark peoples' to be considered celts since that's the way my celtic background came out physically!!!!!!! :D

I don't believe that the celts looked at sacred space in the same way that Wiccans and others who cast circles do--at least not from what I've read. In my practice the lighting of the ritual fire consecrates the space we're using for the ritual, at the beginning we make an offering both to the unknowns and to the outsiders, simply asking them basically not to disrupt the ritual, there isn't any creation of a barrier. They may also have used (rectalinear) buildings, there was an article in a recent Archeaology about some excavations in northern France. If you're interested I can root around and find the article for you.

Regards,

Maggie

[thefluiddruid]

Originally posted by Maggie


...........there isn't enough information (that I know of) to assume that these old tribes had what we now call a druid either........

....I don't believe that the celts looked at sacred space in the same way that Wiccans and others who cast circles do--at least not from what I've read. ........ They may also have used (rectalinear) buildings, there was an article in a recent Archeaology about some excavations in northern France. If you're interested I can root around and find the article for you.

Regards,

Maggie
Actually there is in the legands, but not what some people call Druids, most of the Druidic groups are more accuratly described as Neo-Druids.
Even those families that still follow the old Druidic ways have has some changes, but I believe that they are much closer to the origanal old ways than most modern groups.

I agree that my ancestors didn't use a circle like ti Wiccans do, in fact none of my family do to this day.

I will, if doing a Public cerimony, but just because people seem to expect it, and I am doing it for them after all. (Like a handfasting.)

[Twig]

What in your opinion makes one a druid

Ok folks, we've gotten a bit off topic (Picking at threads so to say). So I shall summerize by saying that as you can see Mystypines, each persons path is their own!
;) :D

While similar to wicca in some respects ( the festivals for instance), we don't use the trapping and ceremonies common to other faiths. The panthion of God(esses) is different and as varied as the peoples that worshiped them.

Due to the lack of historical reference no one can say for sure exactly how the druids acted but, reading and internet can give you an idea as to how others percieve and follow what they have garnered.

(Personal note to Shadowulfe)- You have great questions my friend. You may want to start a new thread with each one. ;)

Peace,
Twig
:elf:

[Maggie]

Originally posted by thefluiddruid

Actually there is in the legands, but not what some people call Druids, most of the Druidic groups are more accuratly described as Neo-Druids.
Even those families that still follow the old Druidic ways have has some changes, but I believe that they are much closer to the origanal old ways than most modern groups.

I agree that my ancestors didn't use a circle like ti Wiccans do, in fact none of my family do to this day.

I will, if doing a Public cerimony, but just because people seem to expect it, and I am doing it for them after all. (Like a handfasting.)

Actually, I generally call myself a celtic pagan because to me the word 'druid' has a precise meaning that doesn't fit today's druidism. I was using the term in that way in this post in referring to the past peoples also--while they undoubtedly had someone I'm (I I I I I) am not convinced it would have been a druid.......

Regards,

Maggie

[Draeconin]

Originally posted by Maggie


Bards were the artists, ovates were the seers and druids had to be both as well as knowing the laws and history. It isn't so much a degree system as types of 'specialization'.

Regards,

Maggie

In some quarters, it is begining to be questioned whether "druid" was actually a religious title at all. It is beginning to be thought that the word might actually have applied more to a societal level - the intelligentsia. This would include the priests, bards, etc, but would also include the lawyers, judges, healers, advisors, etc. which might not be religiously affiliated at all. As yet there is no real proof one way or the other, but it's an interesting line of inquiry.

[Maggie]

Originally posted by Draeconin


In some quarters, it is begining to be questioned whether "druid" was actually a religious title at all. It is beginning to be thought that the word might actually have applied more to a societal level - the intelligentsia. This would include the priests, bards, etc, but would also include the lawyers, judges, healers, advisors, etc. which might not be religiously affiliated at all. As yet there is no real proof one way or the other, but it's an interesting line of inquiry.

Not necessarily questionable at all, I've always been taught that the druids *were* in fact the intelligenstia. It's known that the druids were advisors to the leaders, and I believe brehon law was in fact administered by the learned class, not the king himself. It also depends on how you mean 'religiously' affiliated. There was no separation of church and state, as it were, in the old societies, it was all interwined--there really was no such thing as 'secular' in old societies. There's always been a certain amount of controversy about the word 'druid' itself anyway.


Regards,

Maggie

[Mairwen]

Originally posted by AnnaHawk
I think you are missing Mairwen's point. Circles as they are practiced currently by Wicca are of 20th century origin.

Thank you!:rolleyes:

[Draeconin]

Originally posted by MystyPines
I always understood that if you cast a circle it becomes sacred space. How would a Druid make a particular area sacred space if they do not cast a circle? Would it be that using the same area time after time (like an altar area) or garden area or other area set aside for spiritual workings, etc., that the space will become infused with energies after frequent use and become sacred space, that you need not cast a circle. Hmmm, does that make any sense, :D

The Celtic system starts with the premise that *everything* is sacred - therefore there is no need to create sacred space. However, a special area is usually set aside for worship, when possible - such as a grove, cliff, well, etc.

[Mairwen]

Originally posted by Draeconin
A. The thread was started by a tyro without our background information and could interpret M's vague statements in any number of ways.

Vague? Why do you hate me so much?

[Mairwen]

Originally posted by Maggie
As I understood the original question it was in relation to druidical practices. In that respect 'casting' a circle does not seem to have been done in ancient times among celtic societies (the stone circles in Britain predate the celtic incursions, BTW).

Well, that's what I was answering to. So much for being taken in context.

[Maggie]

Originally posted by Draeconin


The Celtic system starts with the premise that *everything* is sacred - therefore there is no need to create sacred space. However, a special area is usually set aside for worship, when possible - such as a grove, cliff, well, etc.

In what sense? Places that were 'set aside' were generally set aside because they were considered places of power on their own and drew the worshippers, not the other way around.

Maggie

[Draeconin]

Originally posted by Mairwen


Vague? Why do you hate me so much?

How does 'vague' translate into "hate"? I'd treat any other vague post the same way.

[Draeconin]

Originally posted by Maggie


In what sense? Places that were 'set aside' were generally set aside because they were considered places of power on their own and drew the worshippers, not the other way around.

Maggie

Did I say any different? There are such places in many religions.

[Maggie]

Originally posted by Draeconin


Did I say any different? There are such places in many religions.

What you said is: "The Celtic system starts with the premise that *everything* is sacred--therefore there is no need to create sacred space. However, a special area is usually set aside for worship when possible, such as a grove, cliff, well, etc....."

I asked where the premise that the celtic system considers everything sacred came from. That premise does negate the need for casting a circle. However, the special areas such as groves etc were not set aside for worship when possible--why wouldn't it be possible? And the special areas were not set aside simply for a convenient place to worship, they were set aside precisely because they were places of power to begin with, as distinct from the rest of the landscape. That does not indicate convenience, that indicates purpose.

Regards,

Maggie

[thefluiddruid]

It has become obvious that we have once again ran into a place where there are no words in english to accurately describe the concept.
The closest that could be said (at least from my viewpoint) is that in the Druidic belief (at least my families beliefs) there is no dividing line between the sacred and not sacred, or maybe another way to express the concept would be to say that there is no seperation between the physical and material.

[Maggie]

Originally posted by thefluiddruid
It has become obvious that we have once again ran into a place where there are no words in english to accurately describe the concept.
The closest that could be said (at least from my viewpoint) is that in the Druidic belief (at least my families beliefs) there is no dividing line between the sacred and not sacred, or maybe another way to express the concept would be to say that there is no seperation between the physical and material.

Certainly--that's why I have such a problem with the division into 'sacred' and 'profane'. It's all one, and I can't divide it that way. But perversely, that's exactly why I don't use a circle because to me that is actually refuting that belief, in that casting a circle actually constructs an artificial barrier between the sacred and the ordinary that doesn't exist in my Path. When I first started looking along pagan pathways, I learned to cast one because initially I didn't know there were other ways. I found it useful for meditation because in my case a properly cast circle actually did create some kind of barrier. But when I began to find my proper Path, that worked against the ways I was learning. As a celtic pagan, for me lighting the fire opens the ritual and parts of the ritual involve offerings to those either not invited or unknown, but no barrier is created. It is my understanding that the ancient celts recognized a great many local deities, those recognized at places of power. Perhaps I could describe those places of power as places where the Otherworld 'pokes through' more strongly into the physical world than in other places. At such places such as springs, mountains, particular groves etc a diety appears to have been recognized and worshipped--we'll never know the names of most of them because they were so extrememly local. That is what I was trying to get at, perhaps my questions were too blunt. I was simply curious as to what 'sacred' means to a celtic pagan, druid or otherwise, and how particular places of worship could be identified when the whole landscape was sacred.........

Regards,

Maggie

[AnnaHawk]

Draeconin
I am surprised at your tone in this thread. It seems so angry. Since you have never been a person I'd considered to deliberatly pick at people, or to be mean, What's wrong ?
AnnaHawk

[Mairwen]

Originally posted by Maggie
I was simply curious as to what 'sacred' means to a celtic pagan, druid or otherwise, and how particular places of worship could be identified when the whole landscape was sacred.........

That's the premise I was going on, too, Maggie ... It's hard to explain. Even harder when other people try to tell you what you're explaining. :rolleyes:

[CromanMacNessa]

Originally posted by Maggie


Certainly--that's why I have such a problem with the division into 'sacred' and 'profane'. It's all one, and I can't divide it that way. But perversely, that's exactly why I don't use a circle because to me that is actually refuting that belief, in that casting a circle actually constructs an artificial barrier between the sacred and the ordinary that doesn't exist in my Path. When I first started looking along pagan pathways, I learned to cast one because initially I didn't know there were other ways. I found it useful for meditation because in my case a properly cast circle actually did create some kind of barrier. But when I began to find my proper Path, that worked against the ways I was learning. As a celtic pagan, for me lighting the fire opens the ritual and parts of the ritual involve offerings to those either not invited or unknown, but no barrier is created. It is my understanding that the ancient celts recognized a great many local deities, those recognized at places of power. Perhaps I could describe those places of power as places where the Otherworld 'pokes through' more strongly into the physical world than in other places. At such places such as springs, mountains, particular groves etc a diety appears to have been recognized and worshipped--we'll never know the names of most of them because they were so extrememly local. That is what I was trying to get at, perhaps my questions were too blunt. I was simply curious as to what 'sacred' means to a celtic pagan, druid or otherwise, and how particular places of worship could be identified when the whole landscape was sacred.........

Regards,

Maggie

/|\
All,

Indeed there was no separation between sacred and secular among the Celts, or at least no evidence survives of such a false dichotomy. As to "profane," however, this word is technically used by many to mean "uninitiated," and it's a safe bet that the Celts did understand the difference between initiated and profane.

Beannachd Nessa leibh,

[Druidess54]

In my opinion, what makes one a Druid is having 1 to several past lives, having the Sight, and practicing herbalism for the good of humanity.
Being a druid also means that you revere God in whatever form you see him whether it is the Sun, Lugh, or Cernunnos, and also revere and have respect for the Mother Goddess. All Gods are one, All goddesses are one. Don't be afraid of the mysteries, celebrate them, but keep them sacred. Being a Druid means you revere the earth and it's elemental spirits, that you are not above the trees or animals but akin to them.
Being a Druid means having great self discipline, and dignity.
Being a Druid means accepting that all is possible in the supernatural elements of life.

I think that's all I can think of for now. - Blessings to everyone- Druidess54

[mucgwyrt]

What about someone who is on their first life?
By your logic a fresh soul cannot become a druid. Why not?

[Myrddyn Emrys]

What about someone who is on their first life?
By your logic a fresh soul cannot become a druid. Why not?
In this Druid's oppinion, (which is what this is all about), there is no such thing as a "fresh" soul. Everyone has had multiple lives, it's a matter of wether or not they remember them or are allowed to remember them into the following incarnation. Now that I can recall my other incarnations, I can distinctly remember ones that I was not "allowed" to remember what transpired before. I see it as the Will of the Gods.

True,though, with Druids not adhering to the restrictions of the concept of time being linear, I do suppose that this could be a soul's first incarnation, but then when you overlay the concept of all things occuring simultaneously with that, this is not only the "first" incarnation, but the "last" as well.

Myrddyn Emrys

[Druidess54]

I suppose one who hasn't had a previous life could be a druid, like you said, why not?
I was just putting forth an opinion based on what I've learned about druids. Most of the Druidic books I've had always put alot of emphasis on reincarnation. But it doesn't stop one from being a druid.
It helps though if one has had a previous life though. One of the reasons why reincarnation is necessary is that The Source gives us life lessons to learn and what you don't finish learning in one life, you may learn in another life. But yes, you can be a druid. And when you die, you can choose to come back into the world. Then you will have had a previous life, and feel honored in the next life of the path you chose (being a Druid), in the last life and the wonderful lessons and wisdom you gained through that path, and possibly be able to use those lessons and the wisdom in the new life.- Blessings to you-Druidess54

[Myrddyn Emrys]

And when you die, you can choose to come back into the world.
You were given a choice?!:huh:

I never was.

Jeez, you must have connections or something...

:hailmol:

[Dave the Druid]

"Out of curiosity...
What in your opinion makes one a druid. I have met many who call themselves druid and don't quite have an understanding of what a druid is. "

I came to Druidry after studying and becomming conversant in a wide variety of subjects including but not limited to; Astronomy, The Physical Sciences, History, literature (much of it the old story cycles), sociology, law, astrology, and magic. I write poetry (not yet published), am into music (but can't carry a tune in a basket), taught a wide variety of subjects, have traveled widely learning different cultures and 'recording' them to be recalled in rememberance, acted in an ambassadorial capacity as I went through those lands. I have looked deeply at the history and culture of pre-christian Britian and come up with theories (off topic here).

What makes a Druid you ask? I had done all of these things before realizied what a druid was. I was in Norwich (GO CANARIES!!!:))) and bought "Celtic Myths and Legends" by T.W. Rolleston. After a most intriguing read I came to realize that I was already doing what Druids do. I have become what I always was, a Druid! I didn't choose this path, I was on it before I knew what it was.

Peace and Harmony to All /|\
ps I'm glad spelling doesn't seem to be a requirement :hehehehe:

[Druidess54]

Myrddyn if one hasn't finished learning the lesssons that The Source had planned for he or she to learn then yes one may be able to come back. Perhaps I phrased my sentence wrong. And don't forget everyone's spiritual journey is different. What do you mean you weren 't given a choice? about what? Coming back? or staying on the other side?
It's just my opinion and educated guess that one may be able to choose to come back if they wish to finish the life lessons that were given them.
Peace be with you, the Dagda and Lugh guide you.- Druidess54 :colorful:

[Myrddyn Emrys]

What do you mean you weren 't given a choice? about what? Coming back? or staying on the other side?
Exactly. Unfortunately, mine's an ongoing task. Sometimes I wonder if it's ever going to be done. I've been in the Halls more times thatn I can count, and always get told "Not yet...you gotta go back again."

[Druidess54]

Wow Myrddyn, sounds like you've had an overly eventful journey,lol. Do you remember them clearly or are they blurry memories? Some people are lucky enough to know exactly who they were and what time period the incarnation took place. I wish I knew who I was. Maybe I should get an appointment with Sylvia Browne to find out. I'm sure you've heard about her? I have a feeling I've had more than one or two previous lives. Well I hope you enjoy this incarnation and that you don't have to go back the next time if you don't wish it. I have this book by Diane Stein, "Stroking the Python, Women's psychic lives" or something to that effect and in one of the last chapters they had some testimonies of people who under hypnosis, remember the birth and remember not really wanting to go thru it sometimes. Some of them could sense how their parents were feeling. It made them sad. Blessings, Druidess54

[Thalias_Smile]

The problem we face when researching the subject, is that we only have the writings based on Julius Caesar's "observations" of their practices, as well as the rather romanticized views of Victorian authors, and only a scattering of some supposed Druidic altars and a few of their sacred rune writings. We have to remember that Julius Caesar (and many if not all Romans of his time) is biased in his opinion due to the fact that he and his armies conquered all of Britain. History is always written by the victor. I think that considering the type of ppl the Celts were at the time, that the Druids would have been more shamanic...blood sacrifices may have in fact played a role in their rituals...that part i do not disagree with. But to say that these Druids even closely resembled the temple priests in Rome, to me is absurd. A grove of trees or a circle of stones would have been their "temple"...and so their wardrobe would have had to be adapted for outdoor ritual---thus they most likely wore a combination of the woven cloth (denoting their connection to the people) and animal skins (denoting their connection to nature). This would certainly make more sense than the black hooded robes that later became the fashion...which would have made sense only at the time when the Druids were being driven from their homeland (by the conquering Romans, and later by the spreading of a new religion called Christianity), and they were forced to adapt to different environments. That's my spin on it.

[Myrddyn Emrys]

Do you remember them clearly or are they blurry memories?
No, I remember them clearly. Some, which weren't related to my ultimate goal, I have to think harder on to recall details, but others stand out as if they were just yesterday.

Oh, and be careful what you wish for, you just might get it. It's not always as good as it may seem to remember so much. One sunset can remind you of a hundred others, and then the preciousness of that single, current moment is gone.

[Myrddyn Emrys]

The problem we face when researching the subject, is that we only have the writings based on Julius Caesar's "observations" of their practices, as well as the rather romanticized views of Victorian authors, and only a scattering of some supposed Druidic altars and a few of their sacred rune writings. We have to remember that Julius Caesar (and many if not all Romans of his time) is biased in his opinion due to the fact that he and his armies conquered all of Britain. History is always written by the victor.
So true.

We do have other minor accounts, and knowledge of Clan structures. Yes, the Druid's garb would have been adapted for outdoor rituals, and there are individual Clan accounts of Druids wearing White, off white, and such cloaks trimmed in fur, featers, or a combination of colours denoting status within the Druid hierarchy. Perhaps even a plaid (tartan) denoting rank.

As to the "blood sacrifices", as you said history is written by the victors. Some of the blood rituals would be as simple as slaughtering a sacrificial animal to later be used in the ritual feast, the blood itself being used to help fertilize the fields to feed the crops, then the animal feeding the tribe.

[Druidess54]

I hated the way that Julius Caesar wrote about the Druids, and Myrddyn you are so right when you say that the victor writes the history. They can make alot of people see their vision of a certain thing or person and the masses won't see the real picture. I also hated it that the Romans made the Druidic sacrifices sound worse then their own bloody rituals and the grossness of the Games they had in Rome. They just liked the sheer cruelty of it. They reveled in it, ugh. Even if the druids did do sacrifices it was for a certain important purpose. (Not that I condone such a thing).

I was reading some of the Fluiddruid's posts and I noticed he mentioned Douglas Monroe, and mentioned him in a disdainful manner, that's not the first time I have observed that kind of attitude toward him. I have two of his books and while I like the triads and the story, I did question his view of Druidism. He's uh....rather misyognistic, isn't he? He kind of paints the feminine side of Druidism as dark. I had thought that the Druids in general respected the rights of women to be treated and thought of as equals. (think Boudicca). But I did like some of the advice I saw in it. Like in one of the last chapters where the old archdruid told Arthur "accept a limit and it becomes yours". And the triads are good to keep in mind, but are they really of Druidic origin or is it just something he made up?. I wonder. Blessings all-Druidess54

[Nantonos]

I feel compelled to comment on a few historical inaccuracies in this post, since others may be misled by them.


The problem we face when researching the subject, is that we only have the writings based on Julius Caesar's "observations" of their practices,

Ceasar was not the only ancient writer to describe the Druids or Celtic religious practices. Sopater, Phylarchus, Scymnus, Nicander of Colophon, Diodorus Siculus, Strabo, Livy, Justin, Diogenes Laertius, Din Chrysostom, Cicero, Ammianus Marcellinus, Suetonius, Pomponius Mela, Pliny, Lucan, Tacitus, Lampridius, Vopiscus, Ausonius, Hippolytus, Clement of Alexandria, Valerius Maximus, and Plutarch all wrote something, if only in passing, on the subject.


as well as the rather romanticized views of Victorian authors,

I agree that these, although influential on modern orders, are best discarded.


and only a scattering of some supposed Druidic altars

I would appreciate a reference to those, as I have seen it asserted that the druids did not use altars so would welcome some contrary evidence.


and a few of their sacred rune writings.

Which rune writings are these that you speak of?

We do have Gaulish magical texts, largely untranslated, but not written in germanic runes.

And of course we have archaerology, which I did not see on your list, which tells us a lot more about religious and magical practices of the time.


We have to remember that Julius Caesar (and many if not all Romans of his time) is biased in his opinion due to the fact that he and his armies conquered all of Britain. History is always written by the victor.

Julius Caesar did not even attempt to conquer all of Britain, and the small parts he attempted to conquer were unsuccessful. So the victors in that case would be in a good position to write history, had they chosen to do so which they did not.


I think that considering the type of ppl the Celts were at the time, that the Druids would have been more shamanic

Do you mean that their practices had something in common wuith Sami and Siberian shamanism, or do you mean something else?


...blood sacrifices may have in fact played a role in their rituals...that part i do not disagree with.

There is no 'may' about it; the archaeological evidence is abundant and clear cut that there was substantial animal sacrifice and ritual use of the bones to create delimited sacred space.


But to say that these Druids even closely resembled the temple priests in Rome, to me is absurd. A grove of trees or a circle of stones would have been their "temple"

Since you mentioned that 17th and 18th century druid revival ideas were not to be trusted, why do you assert that they used stone circles?

Why assert that they did not have temples, when again, the archaeological evidence for them is clear cut? Furthermore, there is evidence of continuity of siting of pre-conquest and gallo-roman temples.


...and so their wardrobe would have had to be adapted for outdoor ritual---thus they most likely wore a combination of the woven cloth (denoting their connection to the people) and animal skins (denoting their connection to nature). This would certainly make more sense than the black hooded robes that later became the fashion...which would have made sense only at the time when the Druids were being driven from their homeland (by the conquering Romans, and later by the spreading of a new religion called Christianity), and they were forced to adapt to different environments. That's my spin on it.

I agree that their clothing would have been woven cloth and leather, just like the rest of the people.

[Thalias_Smile]

Ok, let me reply to this last post, point by point. I apologize first of all, for not noting the other authors of "Druid lore,"--Julius Caesar is usually the most obvious and most well known--as his scribes created the 1st popular view of Druids in the so-called "civilized" world. That's why I focus on his views.

The "Druidic" altars and stone circles, are in fact, one and the same...I am not saying they BUILT the stone circles, but they did use them. Not all the time, but the Druids did conduct rituals, and perhaps went on "vision quests" there.

I apologize for mentioning the runic writing...I realize my mistake now that ppl have for so long ASSUMED that these runes were made & used by the Druids, that I did not even look deeper into that.

About Britain being conquered by the Romans--I came across a book called "Gladiatrix" which discusses the world of the Roman Gladiators...who were not all Roman...and not all men. The main character in the book, Camilla is a female gladiator who originally came from Gaul...while the story is fictional, it is based on historical facts discovered in archeological digs in England. I am not disagreeing with your point that Caesar was unsuccessful in his campaigns in Britain...the Celts were, and still are, a VERY stubborn ppl (LOL)...there were some Roman settlements who were successful, for a time. Perhaps, in the beginning,he had hoped to create an empire that spanned Great Britain as well as his native Rome, but due to the amazing resilience of the Celts, that dream became a liability. I have not looked into that particular subject deeply enough to really make a fair assessment as to what he was thinking or planning w/Britain.

The Druids as shamanic healers...if you want to get technical about it...the word shaman is actually Siberian...I do not remember the gaelic word for it. We know that the Celts were very animistic in their beliefs...everything was alive, everything had a soul...whether animal, tree, or stone. And there are basic principles which are found in all forms of shamanism, whether Siberian, Native American, Australian Aboriginal, or Norse/Celtic...the names of the gods and spirits were different, but the underlying principles were the same. That's why shamanic practitioners from many different cultures seem to have such similar experiences.

I am sorry if my information was incorrect or misleading in any way...this is a relatively new subject to me, and I was going by personal observation and personal beliefs. Please let me know if you find anything else wrong...Namaste!

Talame

[Nantonos]

Ok, let me reply to this last post, point by point. I apologize first of all, for not noting the other authors of "Druid lore,"--Julius Caesar is usually the most obvious and most well known--as his scribes created the 1st popular view of Druids in the so-called "civilized" world. That's why I focus on his views.

That's fine. I just didn't want people to get the impression that this was the only source of writing about them.


The "Druidic" altars and stone circles, are in fact, one and the same...I am not saying they BUILT the stone circles, but they did use them. Not all the time, but the Druids did conduct rituals, and perhaps went on "vision quests" there.

Ah, ok. Yes, there is a tendency to call recumbend stones 'druid altars' (or indeed 'sacrifice stones'. This dates to the 18th century romantic druid revival and has no basis in fact. We also have no evidence of druids using stone circles - they may have, or they may have avoided them, we don't know.


I apologize for mentioning the runic writing...I realize my mistake now that ppl have for so long ASSUMED that these runes were made & used by the Druids, that I did not even look deeper into that.

I have never come across anyone assume that runes were Druidic before, so that was a new one to me.


About Britain being conquered by the Romans--I came across a book called "Gladiatrix" which discusses the world of the Roman Gladiators...who were not all Roman...and not all men. The main character in the book, Camilla is a female gladiator who originally came from Gaul...while the story is fictional, it is based on historical facts discovered in archeological digs in England. I am not disagreeing with your point that Caesar was unsuccessful in his campaigns in Britain...the Celts were, and still are, a VERY stubborn ppl (LOL)...there were some Roman settlements who were successful, for a time.

I didn't say Britain was not conquered (it was, clearly); I said that it was not conquered by Julius Caesar.

Nothing odd in a gladiator from Gaul - people from all over the empire went everywhere, so you could find Numidians (from Africa) and Palmyrenes (from Arabia) and so on. Female gladiators were known, but rare.


The Druids as shamanic healers...if you want to get technical about it...the word shaman is actually Siberian...

That was my point exactly.


I do not remember the gaelic word for it.

Is there one?


We know that the Celts were very animistic in their beliefs...everything was alive, everything had a soul...whether animal, tree, or stone. And there are basic principles which are found in all forms of shamanism, whether Siberian, Native American, Australian Aboriginal, or Norse/Celtic...the names of the gods and spirits were different, but the underlying principles were the same. That's why shamanic practitioners from many different cultures seem to have such similar experiences.

I would refer to such beliefs in immanent deity as animistic or numenistic. Shamanism has such beliefs , but others too, which are not necessarily universal.


I am sorry if my information was incorrect or misleading in any way...

Don't be sorry. We all learn by sharing what we know.


this is a relatively new subject to me, and I was going by personal observation and personal beliefs. Please let me know if you find anything else wrong...Namaste!

Sure. And I hope you tell me if I make statements which are incorrect, too.

[Mòrag Elasaid Ní Dhòmhnaill]

Is there one?

Not that I'm aware of. I've not come across one anyhow. And if there is one now, it's very likely to be a modern addition, as there are many words that have been added to the Celtic languages in recent years. Can't remember the technical term for that, but it usually involves a word that is English with a Celtic twist.