User blog:Arathorstories/Druids, Celts, and Paganism

Something that I see a lot of - and which saddens me to no end sometimes - is a heavy utilization of Celtic practice for Gilnean druidism, usually with the assumption that it is somehow 'more valid' lore-wise than anything else or the best historical choice. Mostly, this seems to stem from the idea of the druid as being quintessentially Celtic - which is accurate, though the socioreligious class of the Druid has a great many mirrors in other cultures both in and outside of Europe - and that if you have a human druid, he must necessarily be cast from a Celtic mould if you're going to expand beyond what little is known in-game of Harvest Witches and Gilnean Druidism. In and of itself, this isn't a problem, but I see from time to time the same groups casting scorn on groups that don't use Celtic sources - which is pretty shitty.

The unfortunate reality is that we know essentially nothing about Celtic druids. We have some historical records that they existed, and a few accounts of their practices written long after they'd ceased to. The best accounts are those of the Greeks and Romans, but there are big problems with relying on those. The discipline of history didn't exist as we know it now in the ancient world - although things are coming full circle with post-modernist history; the old debate between the styles of Herodotus and Thucydides is relevant again - and by the time both parties were writing about the Druids and celtic practices in general, almost everything was a form of propaganda one way or another. We can still utilize them, but this has to be kept in mind.

The reality of it is that the druids themselves left no records and the archaeological record of them is very, very uncertain. They existed, we can guess at a few of their practices from Greco-Roman writings and from a few sites, but that's about it. The bulk of what we believe about the Druids is supposition and hearsay, and largely the work of the Romantic period's obsession with the Celts. It often bears no relationship at all to the archaeology and is equally often based on very flawed methodologies. Even worse, neopagans have had a huge influence in the writings on the subject - especially Wiccans, the wisest of whom admit they are reconstuctivists but the bulk of whom in the field genuinely believe practice something truly ancient - and this further muddies the waters, just as it does for Germanic paganism.

It's an unfortunate truth that we really know almost nothing of Celtic practice in its authentic and original state. Too much time has elapsed since they ceased for it to be properly remembered, and the little that is has been mingled thoroughly with Christian concepts, philosophies and epistemologies and probably no longer resembles what it once was in any real way. The result of this is that the average book on the druids has no greater historical weight than the average fantasy novel. It can be a lot of fun, but it isn't 'more valid' or 'more authentic' than other sources of inspiration. And, while I'm often accused of having too much of a focus on history in building up fanon, it's important to remember that Warcraft is first and foremost its own world. History can inform and influence how we work with it, but it shouldn't supersede the lore itself except where the lore is so incredibly stupid that it can't be justified.

Moving on from the Druidic archetype, let's take a moment to examine if Celtic culture and myth has any greater reason to be an authority on the Harvest Witches than any other European, African, American, Australian or Asian tradition. There is no reason to believe so other than a handful of practices - the wickerman effigy and the importance of Hallow's End, specifically. Neither is indicative of a particularly close relationship to Celtic druidism other than the usual pop culture linking. Burning effigies is a common practice world-wide, and while Hallow's End is really Halloween, it is more reflective of the modern Halloween than to the traditional Christian or what can be determined of pre-Christian practices of Hallow's Eve and Samhain respectively. Given that most people who celebrate Halloween aren't celts, neopagans or otherwise linked and it's just a cultural holiday, it's a flimsy linkage.

What is missing from both that we're reasonably certain was important to the Celts (especially if you listen to good old Caesar - a master of propaganda, by the way - in his writings) is human and animal sacrifice. We see no evidence for Harvest Witches practicing it, and while I include it in my own fanon, this is pretty significant. Archaeologically, we find evidence of what could be (and probably is, in some cases, though probably not in others!) human sacrifice and certainly of animal sacrifice throughout the British Isles. Animal sacrifice is much easier to show real evidence for than human sacrifice, and it's possible that the Celts were like the Germanics in that human sacrifices were offered up only to answer great distress. Arguably, animal sacrifice is one of the defining characteristics of Celtic pagan practice and that makes its absence from the Harvest Witch lore pretty conspicuous.

The same argument can be, in turn, extended to almost all forms of 'paganism' (which is itself a pretty loaded and difficult term to use!) as animal sacrifice is an extremely common religious and cultural phenomenon. What this means is, in turn, that no particular form of real-life paganism is more or less authoritative or valid when it comes to Gilnean druidism. The lack of known corresponding practices means that any such influence lacks the 'binding authority', so to speak, of actual lore or even of loreology tweets and Ask CDev answers.

Moving on from what's wrong with treating Celtic paganism as an authorative thing for Celtic druidism, I'd like to offer an unusual suggestion for people interested in broadening their Gilnean druidic roleplay a little. Take a look at the practices found in the Ozarks and in Appalachia. These areas attracted an unusual blend of settlers and natives both, resulting in the fusion of Christianized magical practices with native practices, African practices, and an eventual evolution of a magical tradition indigenous to the two regions. Elements of German, Irish, Scottish, English, Welsh (and yes, those are all distinct), Norwegian and even French practices make up part of the stew, along with some Native practices from various tribes, and some even more esoteric influences from cults that grew in the region.

Why I find them interesting from a Gilnean druidism perspective is simple. First, they are much better documented than ancient practice because many of these practices are still carried on in diminished form, and were alive and well in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Second, they represent the co-opting and co-existing of disparate traditions with a dominant religion. Essentially 'heathen' or 'pagan' belief is subsumed into the local religions and regurgitated in a new form, just as can be seen in what we know of Medieval witchcraft. This fits the Gilnean situation nicely: A fringe of heathens co-existing with and around a dominant politico-religious establishment, finding new forms of expression and new ways to exist.

Two good books to begin with are Ozark Magic and Folklore by Vance Randolph and Signs, Cures and Witchery by Gerald C. Milnes.