Druidism and paganism are two distinct belief systems that have historical roots in ancient Europe. While there are some similarities between the two, such as a reverence for nature and a focus on spiritual rituals, they also differ in several key aspects. Druidism, or the religion practiced by the ancient Celtic Druids, was a pagan tradition that existed primarily in the British Isles and Gaul (modern-day France) prior to the rise of Christianity. The Druids were religious leaders and practitioners who held significant influence in Celtic society, serving as priests, judges, scholars, and healers. The Druids believed in the existence of multiple deities and spirits, with various gods associated with different aspects of nature such as the sun, moon, and earth. They held sacred groves and stone circles as places of worship, and their religious ceremonies often involved nature-based rituals, divination, and sacrifices.
They held sacred groves and stone circles as places of worship, and their religious ceremonies often involved nature-based rituals, divination, and sacrifices. Paganism, on the other hand, is a broader term used to refer to any non-Abrahamic, polytheistic belief system. While Druidism falls under the umbrella of paganism, paganism encompasses a wide range of spiritual and religious practices from different cultures and time periods.
Paganism, part 2: how does one become a druid? You ask nicely
W hat do pagans actually believe in? GK Chesterton's famous quote is frequently invoked: "When a man stops believing in God, he doesn't then believe in nothing – he believes anything." Unfortunately for easy analysis, the issue with pagans is more that they believe in lots of anythings, but what those anythings consist of is open to substantial debate.
I remarked in my previous article that currently pagans are realising that they don't really have much in common with one another. You'd think this would have been apparent from the get-go, and I'm sure in ancient times it was, but both wicca and, to a lesser extent, modern druidry, were set up in part as a reaction to prevailing Christianity and culture, and thus you have alliances that are somewhat artificial: more of a question of defining something by what it is not, rather than what it is. The demographic is changing these days, but a number of pagans came out of repressive Christian upbringings and fled as far as they could towards one of the principal opposites available to them.
Many pagans do believe in deities, or figures from mythology that are now treated as deities with little or no theological justification. The Welsh magician/trickster Gwydion is a case in point: mentioned in the Mabinogion, he's a dodgy anti-hero figure, now treated as a minor deity, whereas his rapist brother Gilfaethwy (happily) is not, and nor is his uncle the master magician Math. Why choose one and not the other? There's a randomness to the current Celtic pantheon, which is best explained by reference to cultural and literary factors – WB Yeats, we're looking at you – than to any theological underpinning.
Lacking much direct reference from the ancient Celts themselves – Roman reference to Celtic gods is patchy and many deities have dropped out of contemporary worship entirely – the history of current Celtic paganism emerges from the Celtic twilight of the late-19th century onwards. In wicca, the "goddess" Aradia stems from Charles Leland's 1899 novel, The Gospel of the Witches; whether Leland took her practices from old Tuscan folklore, or simply made much of it up, is in some question, but scholarly opinion tends towards the latter. Followers of Egyptian, classical or Norse pantheons are in a slightly more secure position as regards names and natures, but not necessarily where authentic practices of worship are concerned.
But it isn't necessary to worship any deity in order to be a pagan. It isn't really a set of theisms per se; rather, a way of interacting with the cosmos via a varied set of practices: following the ritual year, for example. We do count agnostics and atheists among our number, and there are a lot of people who regard deities as Jungian archetypes – facets of an entirely human psychology – rather than as anything real and "out there". There is debate about this, but it tends not to slide into anything recognisable as fundamentalism: we're not text-based; don't have a set dogma; and thus any argument is dependent on factors that are opinion-based and aesthetically or socially dictated.
What you don't tend to find in paganism are arguments as to whose god is more powerful – or more existent. Ontologically, the movements and organisations beneath this very broad banner are fluid and hyper-eclectic. You might be a follower of Horus, but that doesn't mean you're going to declare all-out war on worshippers of Baphomet. Nor do there tend to be the "angels on a pinhead" kind of disputes that arise between members of religions that have a text that is open to multiple interpretations.
This does not mean, of course, that we're an argument-free zone. Principal disagreements tend either to be much more petty (the precise timing of so-and-so's wiccan initiatory lineage, for instance); broadly political (no nice pagan likes a Nazi, and there are a handful of Aryan nation types in some traditions); or deriving from the assumption made by pretty much every practitioner of ceremonial magic that no one amongst one's peers knows what the hell they're talking about. And since pagan clergy tend to be self-appointed, or sanctioned through a usually short initiatory line, there's a dearth of authority to which appeal can be made. In many ways this makes the pagan traditions more transparent than other religions: with recent spiritualities, it's obviously easier to document their emergence and their history, plus the personalities that created them are known to a large number of individuals still living.
A friend of mine once asked a contemporary druid how one might become a druid. "You ask nicely," he replied, which more or less sums up entry into modern paganism.
Now in fairness, I have talked extensively about what Paganism is – Here and Here – and I also teach a class called Decolonising Your Druidry – Here.
Paganism can be traced back to ancient civilizations such as the Greeks and Romans, who worshipped multiple gods and goddesses. Like Druidism, paganism places an emphasis on nature and the cycles of the natural world. However, pagan belief systems can vary greatly depending on the specific traditions and practices followed. One key difference between Druidism and paganism is the specific cultural and regional focus of Druidism. As mentioned earlier, Druidism was primarily practiced by the Celtic peoples, while paganism has been practiced by various cultures throughout history. Additionally, Druidism had a hierarchical structure with the Druids as the religious leaders, whereas paganism is more diverse and lacks a centralized hierarchy. Furthermore, Druidism had a strong association with Celtic society and played an important role in their political and social spheres. In contrast, paganism often existed alongside other religious and cultural systems and was not necessarily tied to a specific civilization. In contemporary times, both Druidism and paganism have experienced a revival, with individuals seeking to reconnect with nature and ancient spiritual practices. These revivals often involve modern interpretations and adaptations of ancient beliefs, making them relevant to modern-day spiritual seekers. In conclusion, while Druidism falls under the umbrella of paganism, it is just one specific tradition within the broader spectrum of pagan belief systems. While Druidism has a specific cultural and regional focus, paganism is a more encompassing term that refers to a variety of polytheistic practices throughout history. Both Druidism and paganism share a reverence for nature and a focus on spiritual rituals, but they also differ in terms of their specific practices and cultural contexts..
Reviews for "The Influence of Druidism and Paganism on Modern Witchcraft Traditions"
1. Melissa - 2/5 stars: I was expecting "Druidism vs Paganism" to be an engaging exploration of these two belief systems and their conflicts. However, I found the book to be quite confusing and lacking in depth. The author seemed to jump from one topic to another without providing enough context or explanation. Additionally, the writing style was dry and uninspiring, making it difficult to stay engaged with the material. Overall, I was disappointed with the book and would not recommend it to others looking for an insightful exploration of Druidism and Paganism.
2. Tom - 1/5 stars: "Druidism vs Paganism" was a complete waste of my time. The author's arguments were weak and largely based on personal opinions rather than well-researched facts. The book lacked any real substance or depth, and I found myself bored and uninterested in the subject matter. Additionally, the author seemed more focused on making derogatory remarks about both Druidism and Paganism rather than providing any meaningful analysis or understanding of these belief systems. I would not recommend this book to anyone seeking a serious exploration of Druidism or Paganism.
3. Rachel - 2/5 stars: I was hoping that "Druidism vs Paganism" would shed some light on the historical context and philosophical differences between these two belief systems. However, I found the book to be overly biased and one-sided. The author clearly had a strong opinion about Druidism and Paganism and seemed determined to portray one as superior to the other. This lack of objectivity made it difficult to take the author's arguments seriously, and I felt that I was not getting a fair understanding of either belief system. Overall, I was disappointed with the book and would not recommend it to others seeking a balanced exploration of Druidism and Paganism.