A Reconstructionist Perspective – an article by Little Raven
When asked to put into words (preferably coherent) a statement of my beliefs, my initial reaction was one of horror. So much of my understanding can be seen as the warp and weft of a tapestry, with very many separate threads weaving in and out of each other. To unpick those individual threads renders the overall picture unreadable, indeed destroys it, yet pull too far out to view the picture in it’s entirety you lose sight of the threads that make it. It has always been my goal to understand how those threads make that picture, that you will be far out or close up at various times. But how to do both at once?
Firstly, I am not a Druid. The Druids were the intelligentsia of some of the so-called ‘Celtic’ peoples of North Western Europe, identified as one of the great groups of natural philosophers of the ancient world. They learnt for up to twenty years, and from Irish sources we know what the filidh, the successors to the Druids in Ireland, learnt and in which year. Consider that modern British education up to degree level takes seventeen years in total (ages 5 -21) and you get some idea of the investment in time these people represented for their communities. There are of course variations in levels and methods of learning today, and no doubt there were then. But I cannot look at myself in the mirror and call myself a Druid, however much I wish I had access to their learning. My education left no tangible mark on the community when I was in school, I was not lost to ploughing the fields, herding the cattle or swinging a sword. My knowledge is no different to many others with the same university degree. The title Druid, it is nothing more than a self appointed modern appellation, it means nothing more than Christian, or Jewish, or Buddhist. So I do not claim it, but I admit I seek it in it’s original sense. And to me, the only way I can justifiable label myself with that is by the recognition of my respected peers and eventually, hopefully, through the recognition of my ancestors.
No, I am not a Druid. I cannot stop armies on the battlefield. I do not counsel kings. I do not conduct the sacrifices for the tribe. The only sacrifice I offer is my time. So what am I and why am I writing this here? Perhaps if I explain a little of what I am it might help.
I am a Brythonic polytheist, and a re-constructionist. The motivation behind this is my ancestors, be they genetic, geographical or mythological.
I follow the Brythonic tradition, inspired by and the successor to the pre-Christian traditions of the British Isles. This is generally taken to mean pre-Germanic also, although those that arrived in Britain either by invasion or immigration depending on your viewpoint, came to the same land as the people before them and their wisdom is not to be ignored. There are many similarities, but a comparative study is beyond the scope of this statement. In the context of Druidry, that being ancient not neo-construction, Britain was the centre of the Druidic ‘cult’. Caesar records that Britain was its origin and was the place to go to learn it. As someone who spoke with the direct information of a Druid named Divitiacus, an ally to Rome, a Gaul of the Aeduian tribe, there is no reason to disbelieve such statements. We well know that the Romans eventually sacked Ynys Mon in 60AD and again in 79AD. These were military moves, originally designed to break the resistance to Roman rule, organised by the Druids. Many had crossed from Gaul in the aftermath of the Gaulish conquest, and in turn the British Druids were pushed back in the face of the legions in Britain. With the sack of Mon came the destruction of the centre of the Druidic power base. It would be akin to the destruction of St. Peters in Rome for Catholics. But did the destruction of these centres signal the destruction of the religions? No, of course not. What we do not see is a re-location of the Druidic power base to Ireland, which is a clear indication of the lack of value of Ireland to the Romans. The invasion was planned, indeed a fort is present on the Irish coast facing Britannia, but it never happened. If the significance of Ireland to Druids was such as many neo-Druidic Tara-philes would state, the Romans would have followed. They didn’t.
So, as the centre of the Druidic cult, Britain is the focus. The lore native to Britain can be studied and its meaning ascertained. No lore is ignored, no period is devalued, for as stated previously the later arrivals can easily incorporate pre-existing lore, in much the same way as the Romans incorporated existing British Gods into their altars, identifying their own with the indigenous. The skill lies in interpreting the origins and relevance of the influences.
I am a polytheist. I recognise many Gods from many parts of the world as unique and individual. I am not interested in arrogant monotheism. I do not perceive Them as Dualistic aspects of the ‘God’ and ‘Goddess’ as many neo-pagans and Wiccans do. As all humans are identifiably ‘human’, they are individuals. A storm over the Atlantic may be formed in the same weather conditions as a storm in the Aegean, the processes involved may be the same, but they are individual natural phenomena. As a polytheist, I frequently consider the nature of the Gods and what they are. As science has evolved and we no longer see Them as natural forces, i.e. we know the Sun is not an eye, we can look in more detail at the Gods in their relationship to humans. The Gods require humans to give them purposeful expression and meaning, they are as much a part of the natural cycle as are we. Without humans, the Gods have no expression beyond the instinctive. Without the Gods, humans are nothing more than simple animals. Does this mean the Gods created humans? No, not at all. The humans and the Gods have a symbiotic relationship, where they developed independently yet require each other to exist as spiritual beings. There is more to Genesis than a man made of clay.
I am a re-constructionist. I look to the ancient sources, be they written, spoken, archaeological, natural. I look to the Gods of my ancestors, if I wish to know them I will need to know the most I can about the ancestors I claim to venerate. If I can understand a little of how they lived, I can begin to understand why they did things in a certain way. Once you come to understand why they did things you begin to see a little of their reasoning, their problem solving and their basic thought processes. For a society where secular and religious intent were intertwined, understanding how they lived can bring us closer to how they approached their Gods. In this way we can approach their Gods as Our Gods, their ways can inform and inspire ours.
The Truth may be forgotten, but Truth exists independent of perception. Their Truth may be hidden, but it only takes one person to uncover that Truth and it becomes known again to all.
We do not need to invent our own from scratch, when we can learn from Theirs. Perhaps then we may be deserving of calling ourselves ‘Druid’.