Where the Hawthorn Grows

An American Druid’s Reflections

By Morgan Daimler

John Hunt Publishing Ltd.

Copyright © 2012 Morgan Daimler
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-78099-969-2

Contents

Introduction………………………………………………………1Chapter 1 – Beliefs and Practices……………………………………3Chapter 2 – Gods and Spirits………………………………………..53Chapter 3 – Holy Days and Celebrations……………………………….92Chapter 4 – Honoring Life Passages…………………………………..137Chapter 5 – Celtic Magic……………………………………………150Chapter 6 – Community………………………………………………176Chapter 7 – Miscellaneous Thoughts…………………………………..194Conclusion – Living Druidism………………………………………..217Recommended Reading………………………………………………..219Bibliography………………………………………………………223Endnotes………………………………………………………….227

Excerpt

CHAPTER 1

Beliefs and Practices

Why Reconstruction?

The question is asked, sooner or later, when people find out thata person follows a reconstructionist approach, why reconstruction?While I no longer think of myself as a Celtic reconstructionist(or CR) per se, I do feel that reconstruction is a bigpart of my own practice and I enjoyed thinking about thequestion. Reconstructionism is an approach which uses historicalevidence, mythology, folklore, and secondary sources to understandwhat the original pagan faith would have been like. This isthen used to envision what that kind of paganism might havebeen like if it had never ceased to be practiced.

I began in mainstream neopaganism but even at a young agewas drawn to Irish material. Back in the early 1990s the only wayto follow that up available to me was to delve into historic andmythic literature. This gave me at least a basic understanding ofwhat was known about the actual beliefs and practices of thepagan Irish. Why I was drawn to the Irish is a bit of a separatetopic, but suffice to say it was a longstanding interest nurturedby family heritage and stories. Later, when I began to find booksby popular pagan authors that claimed to be genuine or traditionallyIrish or Celtic, I was disappointed to see a decided lackof genuine material. I could never be satisfied following made-upor imagined Irish paganism. I think that quest for Truth iswhat led me into Druidism and I was lucky enough in the late1990s to find a reconstructionist Druid discussion group (whichlater became an Order) and that gave me the concept ofpracticing modern paganism based on reconstructionistprinciples as a viable method. I say lucky because this was still atime when the majority of Druidic groups were solidly revivalistor neopagan; neither of which is bad, necessarily, but both ofwhich include the very romanticism or outside influences Iwas trying to avoid. Finding the Order of the White Oakshowed me not only that I wasn’t alone in seeking to learn aboutthe actual pagan practices but also that it was possible to shapethose historic practices into something modern and fulfilling.In my own way I had been practicing reconstructionismwithout knowing what it was for several years, but finding otherpeople was inspirational.

In the same way, though, I have an inherent need formysticism and magic that pulled me beyond simply studying thematerial or keeping to the surface of practicing it. I was drawn toseek the practical applications of the most esoteric aspects of Irishpaganism and to learn the magics talked about in the myths andstories that I read. In the end I think what drew me into Druidismwas the desire to embody that same pagan magic I was readingabout; at 14 I didn’t want to be like the Driud Fedelm of the UlsterCycle, I wanted to be Fedelm. Of course I was also driven fromearly on to serve my community as what can only be described asclergy. There is a certain inevitability in a person who is so drivenby Irish culture, myth, and magic, and a call to serve, ending upbeing drawn to Druidism. Nonetheless I was never satisfied withthe modern Druid groups who all either lacked something I waslooking for or included something I was trying not to includemyself. Only in finding a reconstructionist Druid Order did I findsomething that seemed to be exactly what I needed.

Being a reconstructionist satisfies my need for a solidhistorical basis while being a Druid satisfies my need formysticism and magic. It probably seems like utter cognitivedissonance to some, but it is the only thing that really works forme, and that is why I am a reconstructionist and that is why I ama Druid as well.

The ‘D’ Word

Nothing is more useful in paganism or can cause more confusionthan labels, and both of those apply in equal measure to the word’Druid’. Labels, of course, serve an important purpose inconnecting to people’s schema and helping to give an instantunderstanding of what you’re talking about or trying to convey;they create a common ground, although sometimes definitionsdiffer and discussion is required to get on the same page.

The best words to describe my spirituality are probablypágánacht and heathen, since the first is specific to Irishpaganism and the second is general for an eclecticNorse/Germanic spirituality. I don’t mix the two together, butrather follow them both separately; four holidays for one, fourfor the other and I am dedicated to a deity in each pantheon.Maybe this is not the ideal solution in some people’s eyes, but itworks for me. I like having nice single words to use asdescriptors in a conversation because sometimes precision is avirtue. When I’m asked what my religion is or what path I followand my answer is a paragraph-long explanation it tends to putpeople off, but a nice simple answer can open up further conversationand a more detailed follow up explanation. So instead ofstarting off with ‘I’m an Irish reconstructionist and heathen whopractices witchcraft’, I generally tell people I am a Druid.

Druid is a highly controversial term in CR (Celtic reconstructionism)because many people feel the old Druids are dead andgone beyond being brought back. They were the educated classof their society, the doctors, lawyers, advisors, priests, seers, andelite musicians, so there is some weight to the argument thatrecreating them as they were is impossible. In modern usage theword has come to denote a practitioner of a religion, Druidism,although I personally don’t see it as describing a religion but asa title for a position within a religion, like priestess or imam.That’s what it was always supposed to mean, and it was onlyafter the Druids were separated from Celtic paganism during therevival period in the 18th century (to allow Christians to be’Druids’) that it took on an -ism of its own; or a -ry depending onyour viewpoint. I think those of us trying to reconstruct Celticpaganism should include the clergy (not everyone agrees withme) and go back more to the old model of Druids and lay peopleall practicing Celtic polytheism, but it may be that too much timehas passed with Druidism being its own religion for that to everhappen. Things change and evolve.

So, having said that, why do I use the word Druid? Why callmyself a Druid when I practice Irish paganism from a reconstructionistperspective and I know how controversial the word is? Itwould certainly be easier in some contexts not to call myself aDruid. Part of the answer is that I feel it is the best word I knowto describe what I do in a public setting, as someone who acts asclergy to a larger community. Part of the answer is that I belongto a Druid Order and have earned the title through thatOrder. And it is the single word that best encompasses what I doand believe, even with the misconceptions and vagueness aroundthe term, to use when talking to someone who is not a reconstructionist.Realistically, most of the people I talk to about religionhave no idea what reconstructionism is, but everyone has someidea of what a Druid is. It gives me something to work with, aplace to start and build on. So I use it because it does describewho I am and what I do and because it is an effective way to talkabout my spirituality. Controversy and all.

Living Reconstruction

I’ve been talking lately with a couple friends about reconstructionismand, in the course of the conversation, we end up sharingstories of past experiences. Somehow the conversation hadturned to the way that people often misunderstand what reconstructionis and the funny and frustrating discussions that result.That got me thinking about how many people really don’t understandwhat reconstruction is all about. So the following is myattempt to clarify a couple things and my own impression ofwhat reconstructionist religions are.

First off, many people seem to think that being a reconstructionistmeans trying to live like, or have the spirituality of, anancient culture – sorry, no. Reconstruction is about learning asmuch as we can about what the ancient culture was like andwhat the religion was like in order to bring the core of it forwardin a workable modern way. We are not trying to bring ourselvesback or create a backwards looking religion, rather we want toenvision what that ancient paganism would have grown into hadit not been interrupted. By researching and using archaeology,anthropology, history, mythology, and linguistics we can gain abetter understanding of the beliefs and practices that existedthousands of years ago and find the best ways to bring thatforward in a viable modern way.

Secondly, reconstructionism is not a static faith; it is not onlyabout picking out bits and pieces of old pagan practices to use.Achieving a thorough grounding in the ancient culture and theprinciples of modern reconstruction allows people to then createnew material in the spirit of the old material; songs, poems,invocations, rituals, and all the other essentials. No religion cansurvive long if it is not living and growing and that is equallytrue of reconstructionism. Now it is true that new material has tobe in line with the old, because part of reconstruction is not introducingforeign elements, but the world we live in today is verydifferent from the world thousands of years ago – if we can’tcreate a religion that is modern and that is adapted for themodern world, then really, what’s the point?

So to me reconstruction is a viable modern faith that is rootedin an ancient pagan faith, brought forward as we envision it if ithad never stopped being practiced. Each individual and everygroup will have their own ideas on what that would look likedepending on their own views and interpretations of theavailable material, creating a very similar situation to what it waslike back then, when each tribe had its own particular way withinthe larger culture. Nonetheless we all share a common goal and acommon vision that should hold us together as a community. Wekeep the core cultural values, the main religious practices andbeliefs, and we use critical thinking and inspiration, along with adeep understanding of the historical culture, to adapt thesurviving material and to create new material in the spirit of theold. Reconstruction is not just about the book-knowledge or theresearch – it’s about actively living the spirituality we find there.

Who Were the Druids?

Recently a friend asked a question – who were the Druids to theCeltic peoples? It’s an interesting question and it made me thinkabout exactly what role the Druids played within theirsociety. The first hurdle is to decide where to start in looking forclues about who the Druids were. Every possible source of informationhas its flaws, either through the bias of the authors ofsecondary sources, or the bias of people interpreting harderevidence such as archeology. However, these flaws are not insurmountableand do not require that all evidence should be thrownout, especially when evidence from different sources issupportive of the same point. I think in the end we are left withsecondary sources (Greek, Roman, and Christian) and mythologyas well as supposition from archeology and anthropology to forma picture of who the Druids were. Each one offers a little piece ofevidence and requires a certain cynicism.

Personally I have always rejected the common moderndivision of the Druids into ‘bards, ovates, and druids’, although Ican see how this is a convenient way to divide up segments ofstudy. As Dáithí O hÓgain says in his book The Sacred Isle:

Given their similarity in function abroad, and their interchangeabilityin Ireland, it seems best to regard these three terms druis,velitos, and vatis [druid, bard, and seer] as indicating the functionsof the wise man among the ancient Celts. In the world of antiquity,we should not look for a clear distinction between great wisdom inits practical and sacred senses.(O hÓgain, 1999).

So instead of seeing the Druids as divided into rigidly differentsegments, I think it more likely there was cross training thatwould have made each Druid able in the basics of each area, butallowed individuals to specialize.

I also don’t agree with the idea some people put forth that anindividual Druid was an expert in all things associated withDruidism. I think that the Druids filled a certain role withinsociety as the educated class, if you will, and religious leaders, butthat just like in today’s professional careers there was specialization.A fair analogy for my view may be of someone in amodern setting who goes through a degree program and attendsall the same basic classes, but also goes to classes in focusedelectives. So this is why, I think, we see Druids referred to as seers,priests, judges, advisors to kings, healers, and astronomers.

So, who do I think the Druids were?

To start, I think the Druids were concerned with any and allreligious matters, both of doctrine and practice – Caesar tells usthat ‘Druids are concerned with religious matters, private andpublic sacrifice, and divination.’ (Freeman, 2002). Diodorus alsomentions the role of Druids:

The Gauls have certain wise men and experts on the Gods calleddruids, as well as a highly respected class of seers … It is a customamong the Gauls to never perform a sacrifice without someoneskilled in divine ways present. They say that those who know aboutthe nature of the Gods should offer thanks to them and makerequests to them, as though these people spoke the same language asthe Gods. The Gauls … obey the rule of the priests and bards …(Freeman, 2002).

From this I gather that public religious ceremony required aDruid to preside. Caesar also mentions that a person broughtbefore the Druids for judgment who ignored the ruling would bebanned by the Druids from attending public ceremonies, and thatthis was viewed as an ‘extremely harsh punishment’ by the Gauls(Freeman, 2002). This reinforces the idea of the pivotal role thatthe Druids played within the society and in religious life.I think the Druids were judges. Caesar, in his Gallic Wars, says,’… the Druids are the judges on all controversies public andprivate.’ Strabo also comments in a similar way, saying, ‘TheGauls consider the Druids the most just of people and so areentrusted with judging both public and private disputes.'(Freeman, 2002). I know it’s common today to refer to them aslawyers, but I don’t feel that’s accurate because the modern ideaof a lawyer carries associations that are simply not what theDruids actually did. In a modern context the word lawyer refersto people who advocate for a particular person or side in adispute, and historically the Druids, as ‘Brehon’, did not do thisbut acted as judges or speakers of the law. The word in Irish’breitheamh’ (Old Irish brithem, plural brithemain) means judge,not lawyer. It’s an issue of semantics in English but using theword lawyer implies action as an advocate, whereas judging iswhat they actually did. In the Old Law texts the Brehon(brithemain) always act as judges. The law texts do have a classificationfor a person who fills the role of an advocate, but thatwould be ‘aigne’ (that’s the Old Irish). Fergus Kelly alsodiscusses, in his book Early Irish Law, that people were oftenrepresented before the king or brithem by a fethem, a non-professionallawyer who was usually the head of the person’s kin group(Kelly, 1988).

I think the Druids were seers. Although many references seemto separate the seers into a different category, it is also clear thatthe boundaries were fluid and that Druids were also seers; so Ithink, rather than three rigid categories, the Druids themselveswere experienced as ritual leaders, seers, and bards. Forexample, in all the following cases the words ‘Druid’ and ‘seer’are used interchangeably or a person identified as one is giventhe attributes/skills of the other:

The practice of divination is not even neglected by barbarians. Iknow there are Druids in Gaul because I met one myself … He wouldpredict the future using augury and other forms of interpretation.Cicero (Freeman, 2002).

Tiberius passed a decree through the senate outlawing their Druidsand these types of diviners and physicians.Pliny (Freeman, 2002).

The Druidess exclaimed to him as he went, ‘Go ahead, but don’thope for victory or put any trust in your soldiers.’

Lamoridius on the emperor Alexander Severus receiving aprophecy when passing by a Druidess (Freeman, 2002).

Another account by Vopiscus relates a similar tale of Diocletianbeing told he would one day be emperor by a Druidess offeringa spontaneous prophecy, and later the same writer says: ‘Oncertain occasions Aurelian would consult Gaulish Druidesses todiscover whether or not his descendants would continue to rule.'(Freeman, 2002).

Indeed, in The Sacred Isle by O hÓgain, the author points outthat, ‘Prophecy and divination are the accomplishments mostfrequently attributed to Druids in Irish literature,’ which clearlyestablishes that there is no way to separate the concepts of seersand Druids from each other, particularly in the Irish (O hÓgain,1999).

So we’ve looked at evidence supporting the roles of theDruids as ritual leaders, judges, and seers, but this is only a smallpiece of who the Druids were. We also have evidence that withintheir societies they were sacred poets, teachers of wisdom, theones who understood the deeper mysteries of the natural world,and magic users. However, discussing the bardic role of Druidsalone is fairly complicated.
(Continues…)Excerpted from Where the Hawthorn Grows by Morgan Daimler. Copyright © 2012 by Morgan Daimler. Excerpted by permission of John Hunt Publishing Ltd..
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.