Brython website: core values review

[Lee]

An important part of any successful spirituality is the ability to create the form with which users can relate to their chosen path. As with any method of understanding, the basics need to be defined at an early stage to create the foundations for further experience and growth. These core values are fundamental as they represent the very essence of what is trying to be achieved. The following outlines core values for Brython in no particular order.

Beliefs
These are usually arrived at through study, experience or interaction. Firstly, the belief in the Gods. The Gods are central to Brythonic beliefs. As polytheists, we accept their existence as independent functioning entities, with the capability to interact with us of their own choosing. Their names may, or at this time, may not, be known to us. For some, their name is an irrelevance as it is the message or information passed to us, that is at the crux of this interaction. Rather than submitting to the perceived “will” of any external entity, we seek to interact with the gods in a reciprocal relationship. We accept that there are things that, as humans, we may not be in a position to make a full or even correct judgement on, but rather than abdicate responsibility to a higher force, we choose to make our own decisions with the information available to us. This then leads to growth from both sides, for not only are we, as humans, learning from others; those others may be learning from us how to better communicate with through the changing events of time.

Our focus is on the entities that are connected either spiritually or physically with these lands. If the inclusion of other Gods can be shown to be of direct relevance in the correct context of what we are trying to achieve, then we are open to their influence and interaction. Evidence from primarily Romano-British times, consisting of inscriptions and any literal or even local knowledge, forms the basis for our consideration and thinking though these have echoes in the literature of later times.

The accepted belief in the existence of external entities leads into the belief of existence of some form of continuation after the end of physicality. Most religions use the archetype as a metaphor for building interaction between humanity and the non physical. By building our knowledge of our local Gods, we hope to better understand our place within this scheme, placing us in a position to better understand the experiences of our ancestors that continue to contribute to our experiences of the non physical world. Unlike the major religions, we do not accept the reward system of afterlife offered as the “goal” but instead seek to improve our lives in the present. We choose to develop our relationships with deities and ancestors, both individually and collectively, developing rituals and practices that are shown to have had some results, thus engaging with external entities in mutual interaction.

Methods
We aim to use methods available to us at this time, to create the framework with which to develop our understanding. Our preference is to use a multi-disciplinary approach drawing upon recent research in archaeology, anthropology, linguistics, academic-led Celtic studies and other fields as well as on the personal experiences of members to develop our theology. It is this multi-disciplinary approach combined with critical thinking and drawing as it does on the knowledge and experience of the group and not just a few individuals, that we consider to be one of our greatest strengths.

For any spirituality, one of the main objectives must be to create the means by which to understand any Unsubstantiated Personal Gnosis (UPG). We choose to interpret UPG using commonly arrived at rituals and then applying any relevant proven practice to the subject matter, to create a basis for further development, if possible at this time. We accept that the development of a method of interaction is ongoing and that we are engaged in a progressive process which may require some changes of approach over time . Thus, we create a theological foundation shown to have its basis in proven methodology, meaning it is more robust for the advancement of our objectives.

One method of connection to ancestors and other spirits is the use of ritual. Use of modern resources enhance our perceptions of the lives of those who have gone before us and give us a better opportunity of creating ritual that is relevant and appropriate for recognition by our ancestors. This is an important aspect of experiential methodology for us.

Community
It is our belief that the development of any meaningful spiritual path is not arrived at in haste. We have a finite amount of time in our current conscious lives and there has not been shown to be any spirituality that has fully developed within one lifetime of a single individual, even if that individual was the main contributor of knowledge of that spirituality. Therefore, the logical conclusion must be that for a “fuller” and meaningful spirituality to emerge, it must be the result of the interactions of a committed community of like minded individuals. For an individual to make meaningful contributions, they must be in a position of knowing the aims and objectives of the community. This can only be arrived at through a period of interaction with measurable results. Thus, the community benefits from proven committed individuals and, hopefully, the aims and objectives advance successfully. Therefore, Brython, using our public face of Caer Feddwyd invite individuals to contribute to ongoing discussions and projects.

The Landscape
We see the landscape as key to our belief and practice. We see people as intricately entwined with the landscape on which they live. Communities are the products of the land on which they live and their culture reflects this relationship. This relationship is strengthened with the use of myth and legend which acts as the glue, bonding together the community, the gods and the landscape within which they live.

The Brythonic landscape includes all of mainland Great Britain and some of the smaller associated islands. As such it is not restricted only to Wales, it covers Norwich to Yeovil, Aberdeen to Dover; all are part of the Brythonic land.

The Gods
We see the gods as distinct entities in their own right.

Our primary source of information regarding the gods should be from archaeological and literary sources extending from the Iron Age right up to the Medieval period. We recognise that the further from the Iron Age we move and the closer to the medieval literature we get the more diluted and corrupted the sources become. Therefore the ideal resource is with Romano-British archaeology and Roman historical writing.

Our secondary and perhaps most important understanding of the gods should come from direct experience of them, our interaction with them and the sharing of these experiences with others. We recognise that our own personal interaction with the gods is regarded as unsubstantiated personal gnosis (UPG), however a core practice within Brython is the sharing of this UPG with others in order to seek corroboration between those who also have a relationship with that same god. In this way we seek to turn UPG into substantiated personal gnosis (SPG). By using these two methods, we seek to construct a working spirituality that both acknowledges the work of the ancestors whilst at the same time, creating a framework for use in 21st century reality.

Those gods we seek to develop a relationship with are primarily those who emerge from the Brythonic peoples of the British Isles, such as; Brigantia, Taranis, Rigantona, Belenus, Maponos and Nodens. This is not an exclusive situation and as such we may develop a relationship with god who came here with migrating cultures such as the Anglo-Saxon and Goedelic deities.

Spirits of Place
We see the land as being inhabited by a myriad spirits of that place; the genus locii as referred to by the Romans. These entities may be seen as distinct beings in their own right and our relationships with them are as individual as we are.
We recognise that many of the beings we regard as gods are derived from spirits of place, as reflected by the localisation within the overall landscape.
We recognise that in some cases the terms ‘god’ and ‘spirit of place’ may be used interchangeably depending on the perception of those interacting with the god/spirit of place.

The Ancestors
The ancestors are those people, generally dead, who have in some way contributed towards making us the people we are today. They may be of three types:

Blood ancestors: those people who we can trace back as being part of our bloodline. Our genetic heritage.
Stone Ancestors: those people who have shared the landscape with our blood ancestors but who are of doubtful or no genetic heritage. Those people whose culture lineage we share and are involved with. Our landscape and cultural heritage.
Spirit Ancestors: those people who share no genetic heritage with us and only a tenuous cultural heritage. Those people whose presence in the landscape continues to inspire us in some way.

We recognise that the actions and lives of those who have died and gone before us contribute towards who we are today and are accountable for our very existence in the first place. As such we honour and remember these ancestors at appropriate times and with appropriate actions.

The Tylwyth and the Aelwyd
The toutā/tylwyth refers to the people of Brython. We are the Toutā Rīgantonās; the Tribe of Rigantona. She is the goddess of the Grey Mare, our matron and the one who protects our family. If Brython is a place of protection, then She guards its walls and those within. At present there is only one toutā forming Brython. As the concept of the teguloktos is rooted with the idea of a deity of large landscape area, it is likely all British Aelwydydd will fall under the Toutā Rīgantonās. In time we forsee others joining Brython from other lands and therefore a new toutā may appear.
Within the fortress are many huts, some with several inhabitants, others with only one. Each of these is the Aelwyd, the hearth, and each may be guarded by additional gods of that Aelwyd

The Nyfed and Ritual
The ritual takes place in the Nyfed; the space set aside for that purpose and time.
We recognise ritual as a useful tool in connecting with the gods, the ancestors and spirits of place.
We recognize the potential for both individual and group oriented ritual. Most start with individual ritual and with the building of commonality, trust and physical contact amongst the group. This leads to further opportunities with which to develop direction and enhance further our understanding of, and contact with, our Gods.

Experience and Evidence
Key to the ethos of Brython are evidence, experience and the sharing of this experience.
We regard historical, archaeological and literature evidence to be extremely useful in the search to understand the relationship of our ancestors with their gods.
Key to the development of Brython is the sharing of personal experience. Through this sharing we aim to build a common understanding of the gods. By this means we aim to turn UPG into Shared or Substantiated Personal Gnosis (SPG).
At times, experience will clash with evidence. This is not to say that evidence supercedes experience though, as SPG may offer glimpses of the development of our relationships with the gods. Things change and we should expect the gods to have done so too. What was true of 2000 years ago may not be true for the 21st century.

Evidence is the foundation on which we will build our fortress, but it will be the combination of this with current experience that shall be the walls and the roof over our heads. We might tell the same story as our ancestors, but the words will be our own.

[lorna]

I'd agree with your decision on the site that the definition of 'Brythonic Polytheism' should include and incorporate the 'Core Values.'

I think Greg's definition of 'Brythonic Polytheism' has covered 'Beliefs', 'The Gods' and said a little about 'Methods' in reference to experiencing deities through landscape and myth.

Maybe we need a bit more on methods - combining the academic side with the experiential. 'Research in archaeology, anthropology, linguistics, academic-led Celtic studies' plus ritual, meditation, journeywork, trancework, dreamwork, myth-entry. I'm personally growing to be less of a fan of the term UPG - really doesn't capture lived experience of deities. How do others feel?

I'm wondering whether by drawing on this we could include:

The Landscape
Ancestors
Spirits of Place
Community

Does anyone active here now use the terms Tylwyth, Aelwyd and Nyfed day-to-day?

[Francis]

Jan 12, 2016 9:48:34 GMT -1 lorna said:

I'm personally growing to be less of a fan of the term UPG - really doesn't capture lived experience of deities. How do others feel?

I agree Lorna - UPG has fallen in to disrepute in my opinion - for too many people now it's just confused with wishful thinking, or used as incontrovertible evidence for any nonsense they wish to declare - any questions after the point at which the trump card of UPG has been trotted out are often fended off by claims they're being personally attacked. IT only works where there is absolute trust - by which I mean not particularly of those being asked to accept a position being evidenced by UPG - but on the part of the person declaring it, that they must have absolute trust in the best intentions of those consequently questioning them about it - and perhaps helping them to perceive any possible misunderstandings they might have. I appreciate that might not be quite the same reason for your own disenchantment Lorna!

Jan 12, 2016 9:48:34 GMT -1 lorna said:

I'm wondering whether by drawing on this we could include:

The Landscape
Ancestors
Spirits of Place
Community

Absolutely vital from my perspective.

Jan 12, 2016 9:48:34 GMT -1 lorna said:

Does anyone active here now use the terms Tylwyth, Aelwyd and Nyfed day-to-day?

Aelwyd and Tylwyth (Teg) are words/terms of key importance in my work. Although I've never really thought of them as terms as such!

[Lee]

I think leave Heron's piece up and develop something based on:

The Landscape
Ancestors
Spirits of Place
Community

The 'terminology' can be left out i think, much of how this was originally set up was somewhat dependant on us meeting more often and forming something of a dispersed community meeting for ritual etc. as that largely hasnt happened i think those terms can be left aside - we simply dont need them.

I will have a go tomorrow some time

[Heron]

Jan 12, 2016 0:06:08 GMT -1 Lee said:

An important part of any successful spirituality is the ability to create the form with which users can relate to their chosen path. As with any method of understanding, the basics need to be defined at an early stage to create the foundations for further experience and growth. These core values are fundamental as they represent the very essence of what is trying to be achieved. The following outlines core values for Brython in no particular order.

Beliefs
These are usually arrived at through study, experience or interaction. Firstly, the belief in the Gods. The Gods are central to Brythonic beliefs. As polytheists, we accept their existence as independent functioning entities, with the capability to interact with us of their own choosing. Their names may, or at this time, may not, be known to us. For some, their name is an irrelevance as it is the message or information passed to us, that is at the crux of this interaction. Rather than submitting to the perceived “will” of any external entity, we seek to interact with the gods in a reciprocal relationship. We accept that there are things that, as humans, we may not be in a position to make a full or even correct judgement on, but rather than abdicate responsibility to a higher force, we choose to make our own decisions with the information available to us. This then leads to growth from both sides, for not only are we, as humans, learning from others; those others may be learning from us how to better communicate with through the changing events of time.

I suggest altering the word 'irrelevance'(which sounds negative) in the above to 'epithet' and add 'like Divine Queen' or 'Divine Son', the words for which have become names and so confer identity'.

Our focus is on the entities that are connected either spiritually or physically with these lands. If the inclusion of other Gods can be shown to be of direct relevance in the correct context of what we are trying to achieve, then we are open to their influence and interaction. Evidence from primarily Romano-British times, consisting of inscriptions and any literal or even local knowledge, forms the basis for our consideration and thinking though these have echoes in the literature of later times.

Replace 'though' in the last line with 'and' which has a more positive resonance.

The accepted belief in the existence of external entities leads into the belief of existence of some form of continuation after the end of physicality. Most religions use the archetype as a metaphor for building interaction between humanity and the non physical. By building our knowledge of our local Gods, we hope to better understand our place within this scheme, placing us in a position to better understand the experiences of our ancestors that continue to contribute to our experiences of the non physical world. Unlike the major religions, we do not accept the reward system of afterlife offered as the “goal” but instead seek to improve our lives in the present. We choose to develop our relationships with deities and ancestors, both individually and collectively, developing rituals and practices that are shown to have had some results, thus engaging with external entities in mutual interaction.

after the words ' "goal" but' add 'think in terms of continuity and'

and in the last line change 'external entities' to 'our deities'?

Methods
We aim to use methods available to us at this time, to create the framework with which to develop our understanding. Our preference is to use a multi-disciplinary approach drawing upon recent research in archaeology, anthropology, linguistics, academic-led Celtic studies and other fields as well as on the personal experiences of members to develop our theology. It is this multi-disciplinary approach combined with critical thinking and drawing as it does on the knowledge and experience of the group and not just a few individuals, that we consider to be one of our greatest strengths.

For any spirituality, one of the main objectives must be to create the means by which to understand any Unsubstantiated Personal Gnosis (UPG). We choose to interpret UPG using commonly arrived at rituals and then applying any relevant proven practice to the subject matter, to create a basis for further development, if possible at this time. We accept that the development of a method of interaction is ongoing and that we are engaged in a progressive process which may require some changes of approach over time . Thus, we create a theological foundation shown to have its basis in proven methodology, meaning it is more robust for the advancement of our objectives.

I agree with the comments already made about UPG and wonder if we need to re-write this bit (as in my 'Definition' piece on experience) as suggested by Lorna?

One method of connection to ancestors and other spirits is the use of ritual. Use of modern resources enhance our perceptions of the lives of those who have gone before us and give us a better opportunity of creating ritual that is relevant and appropriate for recognition by our ancestors. This is an important aspect of experiential methodology for us.

Community
It is our belief that the development of any meaningful spiritual path is not arrived at in haste. We have a finite amount of time in our current conscious lives and there has not been shown to be any spirituality that has fully developed within one lifetime of a single individual, even if that individual was the main contributor of knowledge of that spirituality. Therefore, the logical conclusion must be that for a “fuller” and meaningful spirituality to emerge, it must be the result of the interactions of a committed community of like minded individuals. For an individual to make meaningful contributions, they must be in a position of knowing the aims and objectives of the community. This can only be arrived at through a period of interaction with measurable results. Thus, the community benefits from proven committed individuals and, hopefully, the aims and objectives advance successfully. Therefore, Brython, using our public face of Caer Feddwyd invite individuals to contribute to ongoing discussions and projects.

'invite > 'invites' in last line.

The Landscape
We see the landscape as key to our belief and practice. We see people as intricately entwined with the landscape on which they live. Communities are the products of the land on which they live and their culture reflects this relationship. This relationship is strengthened with the use of myth and legend which acts as the glue, bonding together the community, the gods and the landscape within which they live.

The Brythonic landscape includes all of mainland Great Britain and some of the smaller associated islands. As such it is not restricted only to Wales, it covers Norwich to Yeovil, Aberdeen to Dover; all are part of the Brythonic land.

'land' > 'lands' in the last line? Are we claiming the whole island or should we recognise that the northern part of Scotland was Goidelic?

The Gods
We see the gods as distinct entities in their own right.

Our primary source of information regarding the gods should be from archaeological and literary sources extending from the Iron Age right up to the Medieval period. We recognise that the further from the Iron Age we move and the closer to the medieval literature we get the more diluted and corrupted the sources become. Therefore the ideal resource is with Romano-British archaeology and Roman historical writing.

I have some sympathy with this view of Romano-British research, but does this ignore the ability of the gods to re-create themselves and write themselves into stories for each new age?

Our secondary and perhaps most important understanding of the gods should come from direct experience of them, our interaction with them and the sharing of these experiences with others. We recognise that our own personal interaction with the gods is regarded as unsubstantiated personal gnosis (UPG), however a core practice within Brython is the sharing of this UPG with others in order to seek corroboration between those who also have a relationship with that same god. In this way we seek to turn UPG into substantiated personal gnosis (SPG). By using these two methods, we seek to construct a working spirituality that both acknowledges the work of the ancestors whilst at the same time, creating a framework for use in 21st century reality.

Change refs to UPG and SPG to 'individual experience' and 'shared experience'. Do we also need something about us being hard-wired to respond to the gods if we open ourselves to them?

Those gods we seek to develop a relationship with are primarily those who emerge from the Brythonic peoples of the British Isles, such as; Brigantia, Taranis, Rigantona, Belenus, Maponos and Nodens. This is not an exclusive situation and as such we may develop a relationship with god who came here with migrating cultures such as the Anglo-Saxon and Goedelic deities.

'situation' > 'list'?

Spirits of Place
We see the land as being inhabited by a myriad spirits of that place; the genus locii as referred to by the Romans. These entities may be seen as distinct beings in their own right and our relationships with them are as individual as we are.
We recognise that many of the beings we regard as gods are derived from spirits of place, as reflected by the localisation within the overall landscape.
We recognise that in some cases the terms ‘god’ and ‘spirit of place’ may be used interchangeably depending on the perception of those interacting with the god/spirit of place.

The Ancestors
The ancestors are those people, generally dead, who have in some way contributed towards making us the people we are today. They may be of three types:

Blood ancestors: those people who we can trace back as being part of our bloodline. Our genetic heritage.
Stone Ancestors: those people who have shared the landscape with our blood ancestors but who are of doubtful or no genetic heritage. Those people whose culture lineage we share and are involved with. Our landscape and cultural heritage.
Spirit Ancestors: those people who share no genetic heritage with us and only a tenuous cultural heritage. Those people whose presence in the landscape continues to inspire us in some way.

We recognise that the actions and lives of those who have died and gone before us contribute towards who we are today and are accountable for our very existence in the first place. As such we honour and remember these ancestors at appropriate times and with appropriate actions.

The Tylwyth and the Aelwyd
The toutā/tylwyth refers to the people of Brython. We are the Toutā Rīgantonās; the Tribe of Rigantona. She is the goddess of the Grey Mare, our matron and the one who protects our family. If Brython is a place of protection, then She guards its walls and those within. At present there is only one toutā forming Brython. As the concept of the teguloktos is rooted with the idea of a deity of large landscape area, it is likely all British Aelwydydd will fall under the Toutā Rīgantonās. In time we forsee others joining Brython from other lands and therefore a new toutā may appear.
Within the fortress are many huts, some with several inhabitants, others with only one. Each of these is the Aelwyd, the hearth, and each may be guarded by additional gods of that Aelwyd

The Nyfed and Ritual
The ritual takes place in the Nyfed; the space set aside for that purpose and time.
We recognise ritual as a useful tool in connecting with the gods, the ancestors and spirits of place.
We recognize the potential for both individual and group oriented ritual. Most start with individual ritual and with the building of commonality, trust and physical contact amongst the group. This leads to further opportunities with which to develop direction and enhance further our understanding of, and contact with, our Gods.

I'm fine with the use of 'Tylwyth' and 'Aelwyd' as our own terms for what druids might term 'Order' and 'Grove' though we might want to make this clearer as an aspiration rather than a structure that now exists. 'Toutā Rīgantonās' has an esoteric ring to it which I like but I wonder if it is not a little affected? Might we translate it into modern terms as 'Tylwyth Rhiannon' or maybe keep Rigantona as the more formal name but not try to imitate reconstructed Brythonic grammar. Similarly 'Teguloktus' (which sounds Gaulish)might be better as 'Teyrnas'.

'Nyfed' is similarly obscure, though does at least appear in Y Geiradur Mawr as an obsolete word. I suppose 'Nemeton' has been ruined by its usage by others. But what does this describe in terms of our practice, or is it, again, aspirational rather than actual?

Experience and Evidence
Key to the ethos of Brython are evidence, experience and the sharing of this experience.
We regard historical, archaeological and literature evidence to be extremely useful in the search to understand the relationship of our ancestors with their gods.
Key to the development of Brython is the sharing of personal experience. Through this sharing we aim to build a common understanding of the gods. By this means we aim to turn UPG into Shared or Substantiated Personal Gnosis (SPG).
At times, experience will clash with evidence. This is not to say that evidence supercedes experience though, as SPG may offer glimpses of the development of our relationships with the gods. Things change and we should expect the gods to have done so too. What was true of 2000 years ago may not be true for the 21st century.

UPG again! Does this only repeat what was said earlier, and where is it best placed?

Evidence is the foundation on which we will build our fortress, but it will be the combination of this with current experience that shall be the walls and the roof over our heads. We might tell the same story as our ancestors, but the words will be our own.

Yes!

[lorna]

@ Francis - I use Tylwyth Teg for the fay but not Tylwyth in the sense of human tribe. However I do see how we've been brought together by Rigantona and this forms a kind of tribal identity. Can a tribe exist on the internet though? Obviously the Tylwyth Teg are linked by drinking and dancing together regularly! I assume the Aelwyd is each person's hearth. I'm possibly more comfortable with that.

@ Lee - I'll look forward to reading what you come up with.

@ Heron - I assume you don't think we need an overhaul. If that's the case I'm happy to go with the majority of your amendments.

Yes, acknowledge N.Scotland as Goidelic.

I personally trust some of the medieval writers (I love the author of the Black Book of Carmarthen who seems sympathetic) over some of the Roman writers who were massively biased. I'd agree archaeology is probably the best source as it can't lie. I value folklore too, some folklorists over others. I also find poetry up to the present day to provide valuable insights. I'd probably say we combine archaeological, literary and folkloric sources from the Iron Age period (is this the cut off point? Why?) up to today. The Brythonic tradition is alive and indeed the gods re-invent themselves.

I'm happy for UPG and SPG to be changed to 'individual experience' and 'group experience'. I'd possibly leave out the parts about substantiating gnosis. I'm all for sharing to gain a better understanding and perspective on the gods but don't think we should be bound by others' validation.

I'd agree that something on response to the gods, reciprocity and service could be helpful.

'Toutā Rīgantonās' and 'Teguloktus' are a bit affected and may be less jarring with the changes you suggest. I've never used the term 'Nyfed' and am interpreting it as 'sacred space'. Personally I don't differentiate between unsacred and sacred space and am more orientated to connecting with what or whoever is there.

Hope this helps!

As you guys are busy working on this will I'll see where we're at with the deity pages.

[redraven]

Crikey, re-reading that I'd forgotten how much input I put into the original.

[Francis]

Jan 13, 2016 21:18:02 GMT -1 lorna said:

@ Francis - I use Tylwyth Teg for the fay but not Tylwyth in the sense of human tribe. However I do see how we've been brought together by Rigantona and this forms a kind of tribal identity. Can a tribe exist on the internet though? Obviously the Tylwyth Teg are linked by drinking and dancing together regularly! I assume the Aelwyd is each person's hearth. I'm possibly more comfortable with that.

I see! No I don't use Tylwyth in that sense - but yes to Aelwyd.

I really don't believe a tribe can exist on the internet. I know we like to play all kinds of politically correct inclusive games on neo-pagan fora - but ultimately it doesn't work, and I don't buy that it's just because the interaction is culturally novel and that the limits I place on the potential bond are due to a lack of experience with the format. We all joke about the idiots with 400 facebook friends but no real friends. To truly bond you need to meet and spend time spirit to spirit. I remember at the last gathering Lee and I commenting on how we didn't really talk, I had strong emotions and senses of the journey we were re-enacting- really lucid- but was unable to articulate them to the group through a sort of embarrassment with the topic, and the sense of unfamiliarity with the group face to face - despite us having known each other online for years. Had we reached the Dulyn Bothy/Hafod and all popped into separate rooms with a laptop, then no doubt I'd have shared more deeply! - with or without Tracker...(pleasant but touched young man we shared the night with Lorna) Tribe needs face to face. You can play games with the words and claim the definition of tribe has shifted with technology and time - but tribe means tribe - and intense deep familiarity with one another over the intent is either just that. or can find its own neologism.

Jan 13, 2016 21:18:02 GMT -1 lorna said:

I personally trust some of the medieval writers (I love the author of the Black Book of Carmarthen who seems sympathetic) over some of the Roman writers who were massively biased. I'd agree archaeology is probably the best source as it can't lie. I value folklore too, some folklorists over others. I also find poetry up to the present day to provide valuable insights. I'd probably say we combine archaeological, literary and folkloric sources from the Iron Age period (is this the cut off point? Why?) up to today. The Brythonic tradition is alive and indeed the gods re-invent themselves.

The iron-age is absolutely not a cut off point. Language scholars may have a particular sense of the word Brythonic - with its definition in cultural and linguistic terms But Brythonic, in terms of our connection with the Spirits of this island (of which some are considered gods), is a Geographic term. The iron age was a blink of an eye - 800 years or so, perhaps as few as 40 generations of humans. Some Spirits came to prominence during this time and their Sphere of Influence became wide ranging, but most spirits were very local and independent of a particular culture of humans. Many of the Spirits of Place in my Valley were present since before the iron age and many much younger. My sources, as yours, are folklore, archaeology and literature - but including recent literature from the sometimes inaccessible John Clare, through to Yeats (irish yes I know!), Bates, Robert Macfarlane, Monbiot(odd moments!), John Muir, Nan Shepherd, Archie Hill, Mabey, Lewis-Stemple etc. Brythonic is about a place, an island, a real relationship with the Spirits of that Place - that Land, not just some fantasy golden moment in time in that place - however fantastically attractive.

Why the attraction of the Iron Age? I believe it's two fold. It predates the coming of Christianity and the demonising of much that we love. Also it often feels like a time (possibly the last time) when human culture and technology seemed less at odds with our sustainable relationship with the Land.

A key part of my Brythonic Ritual Year is the transhumance of Hafod and Hendre, the cycle of Hay and harvest, the rise and fall of sap in the trees that will become fuel and craft. The iron age, Neolithic, medieval and the best of today all offer equally valid inspiration and insight. The greatest source is what the land around us today evokes in us - often ineffable for the most part- largely because we lack a specific vocabulary to express it. My aspiration for any 'Brythonic path' we might forge is perhaps the creation, and re-creation, of the tools to express that relationship and fluently dialogue within that relationship. I think to fettishise the Iron Age would hamstring us irrevocably, and frankly I believe it to be a real red herring however pretty the imagery...

[Francis]

Jan 14, 2016 15:03:50 GMT -1 redraven said:

Crikey, re-reading that I'd forgotten how much input I put into the original.

:-D

[Heron]

Jan 14, 2016 19:28:30 GMT -1 Francis said:

Jan 13, 2016 21:18:02 GMT -1 lorna said:

I personally trust some of the medieval writers (I love the author of the Black Book of Carmarthen who seems sympathetic) over some of the Roman writers who were massively biased. I'd agree archaeology is probably the best source as it can't lie. I value folklore too, some folklorists over others. I also find poetry up to the present day to provide valuable insights. I'd probably say we combine archaeological, literary and folkloric sources from the Iron Age period (is this the cut off point? Why?) up to today. The Brythonic tradition is alive and indeed the gods re-invent themselves.

The iron-age is absolutely not a cut off point. Language scholars may have a particular sense of the word Brythonic - with its definition in cultural and linguistic terms But Brythonic, in terms of our connection with the Spirits of this island (of which some are considered gods), is a Geographic term. The iron age was a blink of an eye - 800 years or so, perhaps as few as 40 generations of humans. Some Spirits came to prominence during this time and their Sphere of Influence became wide ranging, but most spirits were very local and independent of a particular culture of humans. Many of the Spirits of Place in my Valley were present since before the iron age and many much younger. My sources, as yours, are folklore, archaeology and literature - but including recent literature from the sometimes inaccessible John Clare, through to Yeats (irish yes I know!), Bates, Robert Macfarlane, Monbiot(odd moments!), John Muir, Nan Shepherd, Archie Hill, Mabey, Lewis-Stemple etc. Brythonic is about a place, an island, a real relationship with the Spirits of that Place - that Land, not just some fantasy golden moment in time in that place - however fantastically attractive.

Why the attraction of the Iron Age? I believe it's two fold. It predates the coming of Christianity and the demonising of much that we love. Also it often feels like a time (possibly the last time) when human culture and technology seemed less at odds with our sustainable relationship with the Land.

A key part of my Brythonic Ritual Year is the transhumance of Hafod and Hendre, the cycle of Hay and harvest, the rise and fall of sap in the trees that will become fuel and craft. The iron age, Neolithic, medieval and the best of today all offer equally valid inspiration and insight. The greatest source is what the land around us today evokes in us - often ineffable for the most part- largely because we lack a specific vocabulary to express it. My aspiration for any 'Brythonic path' we might forge is perhaps the creation, and re-creation, of the tools to express that relationship and fluently dialogue within that relationship. I think to fettishise the Iron Age would hamstring us irrevocably, and frankly I believe it to be a real red herring however pretty the imagery...

Francis, I very much agree with your sentiments here, but the reason the Iron Age is so prominent is that it is as far back as we can go if we are looking for evidence that we can use, and even that is a bit of a stretch in spite of it being, as you say, quite recent in historical terms. The Bronze Age is a period we can look back to as a time of technological development but it's difficult to say a lot about the way those people lived apart from the weapons they used and the pots they made as far as Britain is concerned. Research into ancient DNA and the attempts by archaeologists like Barry Cunliffe to link to that and also to match up the researches of those studying the developments of the Indo-European languages is one way of getting a better picture but judging by a conference I attended recently called for just such a purpose, they haven't quite managed to make it all fit together yet. So for names and identities of deities we can only look back to the Iron Age and see how those deities have remained in the land, in stories and in our contact with them up until now.

[Lee]

The Landscape

The Gods, the spirits of place and ourselves all arise from the landscape. We are products of it, we are shaped by it. It shapes how we see the world around us, it shapes our very language and lives and it shapes how we interact with and develop a relationship with the gods and ungods who form part of the great spiritual ecosystem we are all a part of. 


Gods. People. Landscape; a trinity bound together with myth. 


The gods we come to know and the relationship with them are guided and created by the landscape we encounter them in, having lived relationships with the gods inspires our connection to the landscape and can drive us to act - whether it's by defending our engodded landscapes (and underworlds) from fracking, sharing the stories of our deities in our communities or planting trees or holding rituals. When we engage with with the gods and landscape, it enriches and enlivens all three.



~

Spirits of Place

The Landscape is inhabited by a myriad spirits of that place; the genus locii as referred to by the Romans, to others; andedion, ungods, the fae or wights.  These entities are distinct beings in their own right and our relationships with them are as individual as we are.

Many of the beings we regard as gods are derived from spirits of place, as reflected by the localisation within the overall landscape.

In some cases the terms ‘god’ and ‘spirit of place’ may be used interchangeably depending on the perception of those interacting with the god/spirit of place.

Ok, to get the ball rolling I have done the above.


I wonder if we should roll 'community' and 'ancestors' into one under people or tribe or something? The ancestors part is something we could discuss and see where we all stand on the matter. 

[Francis]

Jan 14, 2016 21:49:21 GMT -1 Heron said:

Francis, I very much agree with your sentiments here, but the reason the Iron Age is so prominent is that it is as far back as we can go if we are looking for evidence that we can use, and even that is a bit of a stretch in spite of it being, as you say, quite recent in historical terms. The Bronze Age is a period we can look back to as a time of technological development but it's difficult to say a lot about the way those people lived apart from the weapons they used and the pots they made as far as Britain is concerned. Research into ancient DNA and the attempts by archaeologists like Barry Cunliffe to link to that and also to match up the researches of those studying the developments of the Indo-European languages is one way of getting a better picture but judging by a conference I attended recently called for just such a purpose, they haven't quite managed to make it all fit together yet. So for names and identities of deities we can only look back to the Iron Age and see how those deities have remained in the land, in stories and in our contact with them up until now.

Hello Herron

I was very specifically saying not that the Iron Age is quite recent in Historical terms, but that it was quite Short! By most definitions not much longer than 800 years and as such possibly not much longer than 40 odd generations.

Insights into the identities of Deities may perhaps come more easily from experience of their presence for example with craft gods - the smiths, the musicians, farmers, warriors etc. than archaeology. Insights into names? This is complicated. Do you believe the Deities communicated their preferred names preferentially in the Iron Age? Were they more deserving then of special consideration? Are we trying to recreate an Iron Age spirituality or a spirituality of viable interaction with the Spirits of the land we live in? What we can learn of the Iron Age and how a pre-Christian British people sought to interact with the Spirits of our Land is very valuable - but do I think their views or interpretations (or worse still interpretations of their interpretations) should trump our interaction with them today?

For example the pastoral people of the West of this country into the late 1940s/early 1950s were still mainly ploughing with horses. They lived a way of life with more in common with that of their Iron age ancestors (whether of Blood or Place) than they did with the plastic life of an Urban Metrosexual working in the City of London watching the price of oil rise and fall on the screen. I appreciate this is a topic where there has been disagreement here before, and I do accept Hutton's position that essentially no explicit pre Christian religious practice has survived - but the emotion of the interaction with those spirits has, the same internal dialogue has - and for all the horror of Chapel Culture and what it did to finish of the spoken names and ancient props where they persisted - the relationships remain the same- albeit that every year the new tv driven aspirations of people make the connection and dialogue weaker and weaker. Discussion with older generations who worked the land or seas - stories behind place names, field names, rocks and other features in the landscape all point to how that relationship persisted. Often in parallel with Christianity - often without any apparent paradox to the individual, or even acknowledgment by the individual either to themselves or others.

I might sound evangelical about this I'm not! If you can convince me why those 40 odd generations who lived through the British Iron Age were better placed to receive the knowledge of the names of the gods and how best to interact with them then I'll about face in a flash.

I do believe the man even from as late as the early twentieth century who was clodhopping behind the horse pulling the plough all day passed those long hours and miles in an almost mild trance like state of reverie - with his imagination and emotional interaction deep in the land. His eyes on the soil, the landscape, the horse and the sky and weather! I'm not a completely idiotic romantic but I think he and the landscape have more to tell me than Barry Cunliffe. I genuinely believe if I'm to look for it in books there's more to be found in John Stewart Collis'"The worm forgives the plough" than many archaeological volumes.

That said of course I'd love to live in a round house and surround myself in the imagery of the iron age! I'm deeply attracted to that period - but now can be just as real and just as reciprocated.

[Heron]

Jan 14, 2016 22:26:13 GMT -1 Lee said:

The Landscape

The Gods, the spirits of place and ourselves all arise from the landscape. We are products of it, we are shaped by it. It shapes how we see the world around us, it shapes our very language and lives and it shapes how we interact with and develop a relationship with the gods and ungods who form part of the great spiritual ecosystem we are all a part of. 


Gods. People. Landscape; a trinity bound together with myth. 


The gods we come to know and the relationship with them are guided and created by the landscape we encounter them in, having lived relationships with the gods inspires our connection to the landscape and can drive us to act - whether it's by defending our engodded landscapes (and underworlds) from fracking, sharing the stories of our deities in our communities or planting trees or holding rituals. When we engage with with the gods and landscape, it enriches and enlivens all three.



~

Spirits of Place

The Landscape is inhabited by a myriad spirits of that place; the genus locii as referred to by the Romans, to others; andedion, ungods, the fae or wights.  These entities are distinct beings in their own right and our relationships with them are as individual as we are.

Many of the beings we regard as gods are derived from spirits of place, as reflected by the localisation within the overall landscape.

In some cases the terms ‘god’ and ‘spirit of place’ may be used interchangeably depending on the perception of those interacting with the god/spirit of place.

Ok, to get the ball rolling I have done the above.


I wonder if we should roll 'community' and 'ancestors' into one under people or tribe or something? The ancestors part is something we could discuss and see where we all stand on the matter. 

This is excellent Lee, moving towards a good balance of the presentation of gods and spirits of the land and the way they are perceived.

Yes I think we do need some clarity on Ancestors.

[Heron]

Jan 14, 2016 22:43:00 GMT -1 Francis said:

Jan 14, 2016 21:49:21 GMT -1 Heron said:

Francis, I very much agree with your sentiments here, but the reason the Iron Age is so prominent is that it is as far back as we can go if we are looking for evidence that we can use, and even that is a bit of a stretch in spite of it being, as you say, quite recent in historical terms. The Bronze Age is a period we can look back to as a time of technological development but it's difficult to say a lot about the way those people lived apart from the weapons they used and the pots they made as far as Britain is concerned. Research into ancient DNA and the attempts by archaeologists like Barry Cunliffe to link to that and also to match up the researches of those studying the developments of the Indo-European languages is one way of getting a better picture but judging by a conference I attended recently called for just such a purpose, they haven't quite managed to make it all fit together yet. So for names and identities of deities we can only look back to the Iron Age and see how those deities have remained in the land, in stories and in our contact with them up until now.

Hello Herron

I was very specifically saying not that the Iron Age is quite recent in Historical terms, but that it was quite Short! By most definitions not much longer than 800 years and as such possibly not much longer than 40 odd generations.

Insights into the identities of Deities may perhaps come more easily from experience of their presence for example with craft gods - the smiths, the musicians, farmers, warriors etc. than archaeology. Insights into names? This is complicated. Do you believe the Deities communicated their preferred names preferentially in the Iron Age? Were they more deserving then of special consideration? Are we trying to recreate an Iron Age spirituality or a spirituality of viable interaction with the Spirits of the land we live in? What we can learn of the Iron Age and how a pre-Christian British people sought to interact with the Spirits of our Land is very valuable - but do I think their views or interpretations (or worse still interpretations of their interpretations) should trump our interaction with them today?

For example the pastoral people of the West of this country into the late 1940s/early 1950s were still mainly ploughing with horses. They lived a way of life with more in common with that of their Iron age ancestors (whether of Blood or Place) than they did with the plastic life of an Urban Metrosexual working in the City of London watching the price of oil rise and fall on the screen. I appreciate this is a topic where there has been disagreement here before, and I do accept Hutton's position that essentially no explicit pre Christian religious practice has survived - but the emotion of the interaction with those spirits has, the same internal dialogue has - and for all the horror of Chapel Culture and what it did to finish of the spoken names and ancient props where they persisted - the relationships remain the same- albeit that every year the new tv driven aspirations of people make the connection and dialogue weaker and weaker. Discussion with older generations who worked the land or seas - stories behind place names, field names, rocks and other features in the landscape all point to how that relationship persisted. Often in parallel with Christianity - often without any apparent paradox to the individual, or even acknowledgment by the individual either to themselves or others.

I might sound evangelical about this I'm not! If you can convince me why those 40 odd generations who lived through the British Iron Age were better placed to receive the knowledge of the names of the gods and how best to interact with them then I'll about face in a flash.

I do believe the man even from as late as the early twentieth century who was clodhopping behind the horse pulling the plough all day passed those long hours and miles in an almost mild trance like state of reverie - with his imagination and emotional interaction deep in the land. His eyes on the soil, the landscape, the horse and the sky and weather! I'm not a completely idiotic romantic but I think he and the landscape have more to tell me than Barry Cunliffe. I genuinely believe if I'm to look for it in books there's more to be found in John Stewart Collis'"The worm forgives the plough" than many archaeological volumes.

That said of course I'd love to live in a round house and surround myself in the imagery of the iron age! I'm deeply attracted to that period - but now can be just as real and just as reciprocated.

Francis, I’m not sure how best to define the Iron Age. Technologically it could be said to have lasted until the 19th century, but for the purposes of the discussion I suppose it extends up until the introduction of christianity to Roman Britain and beyond this in terms of the survival of the identity of the gods in folklore and literature into the medieval period. But the crucial issue here is how we make the gods a part of our lives and how they might interact with us in our cultural life as well as as presences in the landscape. The point about the Iron Age has got nothing to do with wanting to live in round houses but simply how far back we can go in discovering an identity for the gods. There is no requirement for a continuity of worship in being able to identify them in this way. Simply that these gods still make themselves felt and appear in different guises in stories as well as having a continuity in the landscape. Hence my dictum : ’In nature they are presences; in culture they have form’. If we are only trying to recognise them as presences in nature we may not need to give them a name or identity. Their felt presence and our response to it as a significant experience may be enough. This is the view of many in, for example, The Druid Network who find that their spiritual needs are sufficiently met in this way and don’t recognise gods as named individuals. But if we also allow them to take form in our cultural life, to interact with us as humans, then they do become identified and we will want to trace that identity back as far as we can historically to a time when they were acknowledged as divinities as well as identify ways in which they have continued to manifest themselves in their stories even when they ceased to be recognised as divinities. That is what I think we are about here.

Many of the authors you cite do have a strong sense of the spiritual presence of the landscape without mentioning gods. Macfarlane, for instance has an interesting notion of ‘wild time’ which he illustrates by relating an experience at a loch on the Isle of Skye. I’ve been to that place and know exactly what he means. But ‘wild time’, in his definition of it, is non-human time. It runs at a different pace to human time, both faster and in different ways slower as he defines it. It’s what I have called elsewhere ‘faerie time’. Such experiences are valuable and I wouldn’t do without them. It’s like the gods speaking to us from the Other World. But if we are to develop a relationship with them within our social lives and share that relationship with others as a cultural activity we invite the gods into our world and they have identity in terms of our world. This, as I have suggested elsewhere, is one way we can interpret the story of Rhiannon as it has survived in the Mabinogi. She comes into our world and becomes a part of it. When she goes back into the Other World, the land becomes wild again, undomesticated. When she returns our world and hers fall back into relationship. The gods are part of our world again.

I must admit to being surprised at your enthusiasm for John Stuart Collis. Admittedly it’s a long time since I have read him, but was not impressed when I did. I don’t think the worm ‘forgives’ the plough. I seem to remember him describing a native american running across the plains barefoot for great distances and at great speed, as if he were a god. That ‘noble savage’ view of indigenous people suggests an urban yearning for a wildness that is gone rather than a viable way of re-connecting with it.

[Francis]

I'm not really sure how to reply to that Greg? I can't help but note a didactic tone quite at odds with our discussions in the past. I feel as though you're not reading what I'm actually writing? I'm clearly in agreement with you on most of the points you 'explain' to me. The place there is distance between our views is on whether the gods are less accessible to us now than in the past - Do you think their identities were a secret given up to mankind at one time only back in the pre-Christian past? Do you not think for those individuals today who are truly dedicated to their god - that their names and form are to be withheld - knowable only if some archaeologist happens upon a lead tile? Do you think I can only hope to know the form of my gods if some evidence from the past comes to light? I'm not playing games with uncanny presences in the fields and woods that make the hairs on my neck rise before disappearing into the shadows. My gods and the SoP that I have relationship with have form and identity - and in very large measure this was revealed in the here and now - and whilst we can debate whether or not they're actually gods or SoP and whether that's a spectrum - it is irrelevant - I'm not seeking to recreate something of the past- I'm looking to have relationship with identifiable, individual and knowable Spirits of this land within a contemporary culture. That is what I thought we were about here...

[Francis]

Jan 15, 2016 15:32:14 GMT -1 Heron said:

I must admit to being surprised at your enthusiasm for John Stuart Collis. Admittedly it’s a long time since I have read him, but was not impressed when I did. I don’t think the worm ‘forgives’ the plough. I seem to remember him describing a native american running across the plains barefoot for great distances and at great speed, as if he were a god. That ‘noble savage’ view of indigenous people suggests an urban yearning for a wildness that is gone rather than a viable way of re-connecting with it.

My enthusiasm for JSC doesn't necessarily extend to all his thoughts or all he wrote. What I was alluding to is his insight into the long monotonous actions of many task - the essential form of many stretching back to the late Neolithic and that these long monotonous repetitive activities work in similar fashion to the beat of a drum in terms of altered states of perception. It is his noting of the accessing of such states in this manner that appeals to me - the images his particular mind conjures (from his own cultural heritage and time in history as a British white male, together with personal experience) are irrelevant to the point, and need not all be sympathetic with my own views. Whether it be ploughing, knitting, spinning etc. they are a culturally relevant parallel to the "shamanic Horse"/Drum of other cultures/misappropriated cultures.

His connection with the 'ancestors' of place and craft when coppicing woodland wonderfully expresses what is available to us even today - and it would be valuable to the ends I thought we had even if archaeology were to suggest its irrelevance in the Iron Age.

You may not think the worm forgives the plough - and that could be an interesting discussion....

[redraven]

Jan 15, 2016 17:21:34 GMT -1 Francis said:

The place there is distance between our views is on whether the gods are less accessible to us now than in the past

Personally, I don't believe accessibility to the Gods (or SoP for that matter) has changed between the iron age and now (or any other time come to that). What has changed is that our gazes are more easily diverted and not as fixed on them as they once were, increasingly more through the distractions of the technological age. IMO, the info provided on any site, including this one, is just a starting point and should be treated as such.

[Heron]

Jan 15, 2016 17:21:34 GMT -1 Francis said:

I'm not really sure how to reply to that Greg? I can't help but note a didactic tone quite at odds with our discussions in the past. I feel as though you're not reading what I'm actually writing? I'm clearly in agreement with you on most of the points you 'explain' to me. The place there is distance between our views is on whether the gods are less accessible to us now than in the past - Do you think their identities were a secret given up to mankind at one time only back in the pre-Christian past? Do you not think for those individuals today who are truly dedicated to their god - that their names and form are to be withheld - knowable only if some archaeologist happens upon a lead tile? Do you think I can only hope to know the form of my gods if some evidence from the past comes to light? I'm not playing games with uncanny presences in the fields and woods that make the hairs on my neck rise before disappearing into the shadows. My gods and the SoP that I have relationship with have form and identity - and in very large measure this was revealed in the here and now - and whilst we can debate whether or not they're actually gods or SoP and whether that's a spectrum - it is irrelevant - I'm not seeking to recreate something of the past- I'm looking to have relationship with identifiable, individual and knowable Spirits of this land within a contemporary culture. That is what I thought we were about here...

I'm sorry you found this didactic Stephen. I intended clarity, but obviously I failed as it seems I have given the impression that I hold views which are the opposite of what I wanted to convey. Suffice to say that I certainly don’t believe ‘the gods are less accessible to us now than in the past’ or that ‘ their identities were a secret given up to mankind at one time only’ or ‘that their names and form are to be withheld - knowable only if some archaeologist happens upon a lead tile’ and I honestly can’t see how what I said can be construed in this way.

[Heron]

Heather's Shrine for Rhiannon is now up and running:

www.churchofasphodel.org/shrines/rhiannon/welcome.html

So that makes two!

A link to this from the site?