Good books to read for Celtic history etc.

[echoe]

I'll start this off!

http://www.celticconnection.com/detail. ... nt&r=cr2fd

[wolf560]

Anything by Miranda Green

[mwyalchen]

I second the Miranda Green suggestion; if you're looking for her books, some of them will be indexed Miranda Aldhouse-Green. Her recent 'Caesar's Druids - story of an ancient priesthood' is probably of interest to people here; ignore the title, she's simply emphasising that she's dealing with the druids of Caesar's time, not the revivalists. Some may find her too optimistic about her evidence; try Ronald Huttopn's two books on this, but be aware that the sections on ancient druids are very short, as he is equally interested in the revivals.

But straight away we're begging a question - who were the "Celts" - and does the term even refer to anything useful in the ancient period?

The very best thing on this is John Collis, "The Celts - origins, myths & inventions." He lists all the ancient sources, and reviews the important ones; he discusses the invention of "Celtic" as a language term from the seventeenth century, and the nineteenth century development of migration theories, and reviews the European archaeology, give overviews of many issues and a detailed discussion of differences in funeral practise between European areas. It's a fairly academic treatment, but readable and very worthwhile.

[leaves]

The CR FAQ (Celtic Reconstructionist FAQ) has a good reading list and guidelines depending on what you're interested in. http://paganachd.com/faq/readinglist.html

They include qualified recommendations of certain authors (including the aforementioned Miranda Green - http://paganachd.com/faq/qualrec.html#green).

Another link referenced on the FAQ which includes book reviews is The Celtic Studies Resources: http://digitalmedievalist.com/Reading-Lists/

Happy reading!

[DJ Droood]

The CR FAQ (Celtic Reconstructionist FAQ) has a good reading list and guidelines depending on what you're interested in. http://paganachd.com/faq/readinglist.html

In the context of `Skeptical Druids`, though, I would say the CR FAQ (etc.) is a `serious study`of Celtic fairy tales by theists who say things like

Our lives are filled with offerings to the spirits, songs and poetry in Gaelic or Welsh, and an existence which is fully permeated by our contact with the Celtic Deities

I guess if your aim is reading about Celtic history while riding on the back of their very serious and authentic unicorn, that would be a place to start. If you like your coffee black, without liberal dollops of Bailey`s however, maybe something by Peter Berresford Ellis

[leaves]

In the context of `Skeptical Druids`, though, I would say the CR FAQ (etc.) is a `serious study`of Celtic fairy tales by theists who say things like

"Our lives are filled with offerings to the spirits, songs and poetry in Gaelic or Welsh, and an existence which is fully permeated by our contact with the Celtic Deities"

I guess if your aim is reading about Celtic history while riding on the back of their very serious and authentic unicorn, that would be a place to start. If you like your coffee black, without liberal dollops of Bailey`s however, maybe something by Peter Berresford Ellis

I'm not sure I follow your meaning. First, the topic of the thread is Celtic history, so I offered a source with of books that have have been researched by a community of people who are interested in historical accuracy - reconstructionists greatly value historical accuracy - maybe you are not aware of that? I'm assuming that people interested in Celtic history, especially skeptics, are interested in accurate history, i.e. "coffee black".

Yes most Celtic recons are theists - actually polytheists to be exact. Just because someone is a polytheist does not mean that they base their religion on inauthentic history; quite the contrary - the reconstructionist discussions I've followed emphasize the importance of an accurate historical basis. How they interpret that into a modern context is another matter - and this is also discussed in the FAQ. I'm not making any claims about the practices of Celtic recons; what they do in their practice is of course subjective. I'm saying they've done a lot of scholarly homework and provide good sources for accurate information... which I think is of value to "Skeptical Druids".

[DJ Droood]

reconstructionists greatly value historical accuracy - maybe you are not aware of that?

I had heard rumours.

the reconstructionist discussions I've followed emphasize the importance of an accurate historical basis.

yet they still manage to come to such irrational..perhaps even delusional...conclusions such as describing their existence as "fully permeated by our contact with the Celtic Deities"

I'm saying they've done a lot of scholarly homework and provide good sources for accurate information... which I think is of value to "Skeptical Druids".

I am not saying the reconstructionists don't own a lot of books and compile good reading lists, I'm just saying their conclusions are wacky.

And I think any topic that provides fodder for the stated purpose of this forum is of value, so thank you.

In this room, every controversial topic in any way related to druidry is fair game, as long as you remain rational. Less than rational interjections will be challenged ruthlessly

[leaves]

I am not saying the reconstructionists don't own a lot of books and compile good reading lists, I'm just saying their conclusions are wacky.

Glad to hear about the compiling good reading lists. That's all I was trying to say.

And I think any topic that provides fodder for the stated purpose of this forum is of value, so thank you.

You're welcome.

[wolf560]

I guess I'm missing something here...
...I see nothing inherently wrong with anything CR is trying to accomplish...

On one of the Celtic Recontructionists (CR) websites I saw the following and I think it is a very good set of guidelines that perhaps even a 'Skeptical Druid' might follow.

When considering whether someone’s UPG or SPG may be worthy of inclusion in your spiritual practice, these “Laws of UPG” may serve as a useful guide:

1. No UPG should contradict known facts about the associated culture, and no practices based only on UPG should stand as more than modern inventions.

2. If a belief or practice based on UPG does not contradict known facts, but cannot be verified within the same body of knowledge, it remains a modern invention.

3. If an instance of UPG fits rule 2 and also fills a gap in known tradition, it is probably worth pursuing further, through experimentation and research, to see if it can become SPG or CG.

4. If an instance of UPG that meets the second law is arrived at by people who have had no real contact with each other, it remains modern but is Shared (SPG). This means the group just may be getting somewhere interesting.

5. If an instance of UPG becomes SPG, and said SPG is then incorporated into the practices of those outside of the groups who first experienced it, it becomes a modern tradition.

6. There is no way for UPG to become ancient lore unless it becomes generally accepted and then is kept mostly intact for at least 1,000 years.

UPG- Unverified Personal Gnosis
SPG- Shared Personal Gnosis
CG- Confirmed Gnosis

If these were to be followed, I would suggest that anyone also following this would have a fairly accurate (or at least not wholly inaccurate) way of viewing the present through the practices and customs of the past.

From what I can tell many of the CR's attempt to follow this ....
What seems to irritate and cause conflicts is #1, #2, and most likely #6.

[DJ Droood]

So if enough people believe something long enough (1000 years, apparently), it is acceptable? What if they have forgotten all about it for 1000 years?...Ahhh yes, it becomes CR research material!

Anyway, to nudge the thread back on track, since I derailed it, you can also get the CR FAQ in book form, if you don' want to scroll through it...I think i got mine from Lulu.com....let me tell you, I find it about as druidically inspiring as a bowl of cold oatmeal (brown sugar and microwaves not being Iron Age Celtic), but it *is* well documented.

(whereas if it were coffee...it would be spiked with Bailey's...my metaphors make about as much sense as the Mabinogion.)

[Jake]

my metaphors make about as much sense as the Mabinogion.

Your metaphors make way more sense than the Mabinogion. Plus they don't have as many w's in them. So they're easier to read.

let me tell you, I find it about as druidically inspiring as a bowl of cold oatmeal

Me too. Does this mean we have an SPG? Yay!

[DJ Droood]

Me too. Does this mean we have an SPG? Yay!

We will have to ask a CR if we have a CG in about 1K.

[Ghostrider]

I guess I'm missing something here...
...I see nothing inherently wrong with anything CR is trying to accomplish...

On one of the Celtic Recontructionists (CR) websites I saw the following and I think it is a very good set of guidelines that perhaps even a 'Skeptical Druid' might follow.

When considering whether someone’s UPG or SPG may be worthy of inclusion in your spiritual practice, these “Laws of UPG” may serve as a useful guide:

1. No UPG should contradict known facts about the associated culture, and no practices based only on UPG should stand as more than modern inventions.

2. If a belief or practice based on UPG does not contradict known facts, but cannot be verified within the same body of knowledge, it remains a modern invention.

3. If an instance of UPG fits rule 2 and also fills a gap in known tradition, it is probably worth pursuing further, through experimentation and research, to see if it can become SPG or CG.

4. If an instance of UPG that meets the second law is arrived at by people who have had no real contact with each other, it remains modern but is Shared (SPG). This means the group just may be getting somewhere interesting.

5. If an instance of UPG becomes SPG, and said SPG is then incorporated into the practices of those outside of the groups who first experienced it, it becomes a modern tradition.

6. There is no way for UPG to become ancient lore unless it becomes generally accepted and then is kept mostly intact for at least 1,000 years.

UPG- Unverified Personal Gnosis
SPG- Shared Personal Gnosis
CG- Confirmed Gnosis

LOL.. I know this list... I've actually read it in a book on Heathenry... so.. who's copying who ?

Anyways.. a good, critical, book on both Celtic as Germanic history (and beyond) is the book Helrunar, by Jan Fries.
It provides some amazing insights and also wipes the floor with some of the 'mainstream' (but WRONG) teaching we get fed in school. I'm not gonna spoil it for you guys, READ the darn book!!

Oh.. and if you're into Runes, well, then you'll get that as a bonus!

[Huathe]

I have read a number of the books by the late Stewart Piggot and I found them informative and enjoyable.

[Arth Frown]

Anyways.. a good, critical, book on both Celtic as Germanic history (and beyond) is the book Helrunar, by Jan Fries.
It provides some amazing insights and also wipes the floor with some of the 'mainstream' (but WRONG) teaching we get fed in school. I'm not gonna spoil it for you guys, READ the darn book!!

Oh.. and if you're into Runes, well, then you'll get that as a bonus!

Just had a look on Amazon for this book, what put me off was this product description
"Helrunar" is the title of one who "runes" or makes rune magic. Runes derive from pagan Celts and Germans who built stone circles, long barrows and dolmens throughout ancient Europe. This book explains how to become a Helrunar. It is based on the runes' arcane and secret techniques"

Saying the Celts built stone circles is a daft as saying the the Tudors built laser guided missiles.
Good reviews though.

[Ghostrider]

Don't let the product description put you off. That's just AMAZON's version. The author does not attribute the building of nucleair missiles to the Tudors in any way (nor that other example ).
Helruning, or Helrunar, also means HEALING Runes, and the use thereof. So there's more to it. ( Hel = Heil (as in well-being, not the right-wing crap) = Heal or Hail )

Also, the author does not just discuss Norse runes, but the origin of runes throughout the ages, starting even by Neanderthal man.
Part of the book is indeed concenring the use of Runes, but it's the history which is allready VERY interesting.

Anyways.. I'm now giving away things... if you're truly interested, just read it

[mwyalchen]

Helrunar is an excellent book. Though with little to do with "Celtic" history!

Jan Fries' Celtic book is "Cauldron of the Gods", and is worth a look if you like to be realistic and sceptical, yet are still inclined to magic and mysticism.

[leaves]

Jan Fries' Helrunar is not considered historically accurate by Heathen reconstructionists. Now, it may be useful in practical terms, but that is a different benchmark with which to measure it. I have no problems with books like these, but I don't think you will find any scholar who will say it is based on historical proof.

[Ghostrider]

Correct.

But then again.. scholars usually don't like it when you disagree with their dogma's. Even if Fries' theories could be just as valid as theirs.
Guess it's up to the reader to determine what they see as valid and what they do not.

When I read the book and Fries' 'accusations' of some scholars deliberately falsifying results, so THEIR results would be taught.... I did some googling and found out some of those 'scholars' have INDEED been accused and found guilty of just that. But still we get their results fed to us. Because that's what all those 'scholars' 'believe'.

Again.. read the book, decide for yourself. Not all 'truth' is indeed true...
Same of course also applies to Fries. But I believe many Pagans to be able to think for themselves and determine what to believe and what not.
Just because it's written in a book....

[DJ Droood]

Again.. read the book, decide for yourself. Not all 'truth' is indeed true...
Same of course also applies to Fries. But I believe many Pagans to be able to think for themselves and determine what to believe and what not.
Just because it's written in a book....

One of my favourite Celtic history guys, Jean Markale, is accused of not knowing what he writes about (he is not an academically trained historian) and jumping to speculative conclusions, but I find his writing on the topic of druids and Celts to be the the most interesting to read and a good counter-point to the more serious "Piggott" type works. I don't claim to imitate the ancient Celts in my spiritual life, so it is interest reading rather than scanning the texts for theological meaning....takes some of the pressure off.