Avalon Questions

[Blackbird]

I thought these would be better placed here. Morgaine, I hope you don't mind the questions being asked, I understand that as part of a mystery tradition, you will perhaps be oathbound to silence on some subjects.

Firstly - Singers and Dreamers. In my experience, bards are likely to be both singers and dreamers. It is often that I have had music or words flash into my head while sleeping, whether that be normal, or a trance-sleep. Equally, ovates can employ singing for healing or divinatory purposes. So I'm curious about your choice of terms - and as Brochfael asked of the Manda Scott books, why you chose to use those terms rather than the more familiar bard and ovate.

Secondly - the Gods. I am female, yet I honour and work with both male and female (and some ambiguous, lol!) deities. So I'm curious about the gender roles within your organisation, about how masculine and feminine are defined. Some men and women feel much more at home with roles and behaviours which are traditionally ascribed to the opposite sex. Would there be any mechanism for accomodating this?

[morgaine]

Greetings,

These are interesting questions (though I am not sure whether the answers will mean much to those outside of an Avalonian worldview). I do thank you for your sensitivity to the nature of our work and what I can say, I will...

It is true that the skills of Dreamers, Singers, and Pathwalkers are interwoven, for we are whole beings whose nature cannot be compartmentalized; however, the uses to which these skills are put are specific to the role of each of these disciplines within a tribal (community) structure. There is also the issue of spiritual calling (the principle task I am given in this life). So... I may have skill and training in all of these areas, but I am a Dreamer because I choose to employ these abilities in ways, ways that are defined traditionally as tasks of a Dreamer.

Thus, being a Dreamer (for example) does not mean one cannot heal, sing, or defend; it merely means that Dreaming is one's main task, and that this skill is used in specific ways and for specific purposes which are defined by tradition.

As to the terms "Pathwalker, Singer, Dreamer," the concepts they represent have a long history in our tradition. (As I mentioned, this assertion may be verified, though rarely, in the Celtic literature.) The "true titles" were lost with their pre-Celtic languages, but these English terms lie much "closer to the bone" in intent and feeling than are those used by most Druids today.

This is especially true for those familiar with early Avalonian methods of oracular seercraft and prophecy, for there are significant differences between the ways of this time and that of the later Celts.

"Pathwalker," for instance, has never fallen out of use as an English "translation" of a "lost term." The concept evoked by the spoken term predates the later Celtic warrior cultures and it remains in use within those few Scottish and Welsh families that hold and pass down these wisdoms still. This is known beyond the boundaries of our Order. Indeed, this particular bit of oral lore we verified with the help of Druids of other Welsh Orders...

Why then, do not more modern Avalonian and/or Brythonic groups avail themselves of these terms?... I am almost shamed to tell you...

First, the modern definitions and concepts of these terms are not the same as those held by the ancestors. To modern ears, making modern assumptions, these terms will seem inadequate and inappropriate. Neither do they fit with the methods employed by later cultures and times. But they are an excellent fit for at least some traditions within the pre-Celtic -- and for Druids of Avalon specifically -- where one is able, by training and experience, to enter into something close to an ancestral worldview.

Next, and most embarrassing... There are certain questions one grows too weary to answer. They wear you down and it begins to feel that it would just be better to abandon them. Did it not seem sacrilege, many would already have cast aside the name "Avalon" to avoid the MZB question. To cast aside "mere titles" seems easier and many (perhaps most) have done so. Until recently, we were among them.

We did so in the past, however words have power precisely because of their resonance; and the titles and names by which we choose to identify ourselves will eventually come to define us. We found that using Celtic/modern terms bound us more to Celtic and later resonances, which in term expressed themselves in later ways of thinking and being -- which did not serve our intention in the least. Thus we have shifted back to simpler terms once again.

For us, feminine and masculine divine energies are aspects of the same thing. In brief and over-simplified form: Feminine energy is inward-directed, "reflective," "magnetic" energy -- it draws to itself what it seeks. Masculine energy is outward-directed, "radiant" energy -- it goes forth to what it seeks.

We begin our studies with those energies that are most like the energy with which our physical forms (in this life) correspond (i.e. females-feminine; males-masculine). This may or may not be what we are most "comfortable" with, but to be whole we must learn to work with both. We assume that there are no mistakes; we are in this form for a reason, to learn certain lessons -- and we see in this way of working an opportunity to work through and heal such discomforts with a goal of becoming more integrated and balanced beings.

When we have "mastered" working with "like energies," we shift to working with the exalted opposite (or polar opposite). We also believe that the lessons inherent in this process are a necessary part of developing true tolerance within an egalitarian setting. (In other words as we would see it, if you have all kinds of issues with one polarity, it's pretty hard to see those aligned with it objectively.)

So in our system, in order to progress from the community of Tribes to what most modern groups would call "the Druid grades," one must learn how to work with both polarities -- in fact, with all kinds of energy.

Hope this helps and look forward to your comments.

Bendithion --

Morgaine

[Blackbird]

Thank you for your replies. They do make sense to me, even if that sense is perhaps different to that which might be reached by someone looking from within your Order.

It is true that the skills of Dreamers, Singers, and Pathwalkers are interwoven... So... I may have skill and training in all of these areas, but I am a Dreamer because I choose to employ these abilities in ways, ways that are defined traditionally as tasks of a Dreamer.

This makes sense to me, given that we are looking at a slightly different definition to 'Dreamer' as usual. Defining 'Dreamer' as a societal role, or set of skills/abilities, is different to what the general public would understand by the word.

As to the terms "Pathwalker, Singer, Dreamer," the concepts they represent have a long history in our tradition. (As I mentioned, this assertion may be verified, though rarely, in the Celtic literature.)

Any examples? (I'm thinking that it would be interesting to look at a variety of sources to look at the various language used)

The "true titles" were lost with their pre-Celtic languages, but these English terms lie much "closer to the bone" in intent and feeling than are those used by most Druids today.

Does your Order use Celtic languages, or just English? Personally, I find that words in the Celtic languages have a different feel, a whole different world-view behind each word which can teach you a great deal.

This is especially true for those familiar with early Avalonian methods of oracular seercraft and prophecy, for there are significant differences between the ways of this time and that of the later Celts.

Now I'm intrigued Oracular seership is one of my preoccupations.

and for Druids of Avalon specifically -- where one is able, by training and experience, to enter into something close to an ancestral worldview.

Forgive my insatiable curiosity... Regarding ancestors, I remember something from your site about bloodlines and such. Are we talking ancestors of the blood here, or cultural ancestors?

Did it not seem sacrilege, many would already have cast aside the name "Avalon" to avoid the MZB question.

lol! I've not actually read them ;D

We begin our studies with those energies that are most like the energy with which our physical forms (in this life) correspond (i.e. females-feminine; males-masculine).

So if a man had a close relationship with a Goddess, would he be required to set that relationship aside for a while?

Hope this helps and look forward to your comments.

Yes, it does, diolch yn fawr

[morgaine]

Dear Blackbird,

I am glad if what I have shared has helped to foster better understanding of our path! That is the general intent, and the basis (I feel) for tolerance across faiths and cultures -- which is actually a part of my purpose here...

Now let me see if I might respond to your additional questions and comments:

Examples of use in Celtic literature of the terms "Dreamer, Singer, Pathwalker": As an oral tradition, our primary reliance is on our own spoken lore. We do some verification mostly to quell personal doubts and fears about the veracity of what is being shared. Since our idea of academia is oral, we seldom keep a written log of our more standardized researches; nor (once we have finished verification) do these seem important to us to retain. Our own lore more than occupies our memories and attentions.

I do recall seeing these terms in the Irish literature at least once, but our focus is really more on the early Welsh and I am sorry to say I do not recall where I saw it. However, it was likely a university website. (We spend only as much time verifying as necessary to get the job done, and this eliminates a lot of extra work verifying the verification!)

After a point, when one has spent thousands of hours verifying only to keep finding verification even for the most outlandish seeming ideas, one reaches a point of trust in the oral lore (or one does not, and one moves on). After 18 years, I've reached the point of trust and only seek now to verify items of our lore that I have never heard before.

In general, we require each Seeker to find her or his own verification from three independent outside sources (academia, science, folklore), rather than sharing out what we've found. We do this for two reasons:

• Because the trust established in the oral lore is greater when one finds the evidence oneself, instead of being asked to trust the research of the very people who are teaching the lore in question to begin with; and
  
• Because the more people hunt, the more sources will be uncovered and the wider the range of "evidence" in support of our teachings.

This research "evidence" tends to be better remembered by newer members. The sources fade with the years and disuse. At present it is not a part of the Singer's job to remember lore outside of our own (which is already considerable) -- and I am not sure they would thank me for adding to their task!... It is there, however. I know I saw it in the Irish, and I feel quite sure I saw it in Scottish... I am less confident of seeing it in the Welsh.

Do we use Celtic languages: We look at them, yes, and most of our Elders study at least one, because we do examine the overlay of Celtic myths on our own lore, and because some Avalonians center their practice on later points in the timeline. But we do not use them ourselves, as an "official language of the Order" in ADO.

The pre-Celtic peoples did not speak Celtic languages, anymore than they spoke English. In fact, on the rare occasions where ancient authorities do mention the Mother-tongue, it is described as an "unpronounceable" cacaphony of clicks, whistles, whirs, gutteral utterances and other typically "aboriginal" sounds.

Our lore tells us that it is as unlikely that the pre-Celtic natives gladly abandoned their own language(s) and culture for that of the Celts, as it is that the Celts did so before their own conquerors. The effect is the same whichever we might choose. Celtic language ties one energetically to Celtic ways of thinking, being and doing just as does English -- and our ways focus on a time before.

The pre-Celtic language(s), as far as we can ascertain, were completely wiped out. (Though we will not say this is certain. It is always possible for new evidence to arise that completely refutes the "facts" as we knew them.) It is this "lost" language that would provide a true basis for the path we walk in our Order.

As there is nothing in our lore to suggest that either Celtic or English is appropriate, and as the only viable alternative (short of an invented language) has been eliminated, we have chosen to remain with our birth languages until such time as a viable alternative may be found.

Re: Ancestors: We acknowledge and work with physical, spiritual, and cultural ancestors equally (but differently) on our path.

Re: Putting aside deities that are not aligned with beginning ADO work: We do not forbid anyone studying or following other spiritual paths while walking our own, so long as those paths do not conflict ethically with our own and the ways of Avalon are not mixed into those of other paths. However, in terms of one's study in Avalon, yes, one would be asked to lay aside other ways of working and to work in the traditional manner as established by custom.

Hope this makes sense and I look forward to your comments!

Many blessings,
Morgaine

[Blackbird]

Morgaine said:

Since our idea of academia is oral, we seldom keep a written log of our more standardized researches; nor (once we have finished verification) do these seem important to us to retain. Our own lore more than occupies our memories and attentions.

Interesting - so 'oral' for you is an approach more than a practicality? In practice, I expect that it is impossible to keep your teachings entirely spoken, when you are not geographically close to everyone in the Order.

After a point, when one has spent thousands of hours verifying only to keep finding verification even for the most outlandish seeming ideas, one reaches a point of trust in the oral lore (or one does not, and one moves on).

But surely not simply in the lore itself, but in the speakers of that lore. You learn whom you can trust. Here in Britain there are many people who claim that they are telling you ancient stuff, more often than not, they are either making it up, or have drawn it from other modern sources. While I think the oral tradition has a great deal of hidden treasure, it is equally important to retain some objectivity, imho.

In general, we require each Seeker to find her or his own verification from three independent outside sources (academia, science, folklore), rather than sharing out what we've found.

That seems like a sound approach. No sense in spoon feeding people.

Because the more people hunt, the more sources will be uncovered and the wider the range of "evidence" in support of our teachings.

Ah, but earlier, you said that the evidence of your sources was ultimately unimportant Hence this 'support' can be only useful for your own satisfaction. Whereas I would be wanting to keep good records of these sources, which I feel would be benefical for more advanced research.

At present it is not a part of the Singer's job to remember lore outside of our own (which is already considerable)

Alas, there is just too much information in the modern world ;D I am very grateful for my own gift of memory, which was mostly fostered by my Grandma. Too many people these days are unable to remember much at all, and most people would see the act of remembering to be pointless these days. I see it as a valuable thing, and at the very least, is good exercise for the brain

The pre-Celtic peoples did not speak Celtic languages, anymore than they spoke English.

I beg to differ there - I would say that the pre-Celtic peoples came to speak Celtic languages. In my opinion, the indigenous people of Britain didn't go anywhere, and the Celtic 'invasions' were cultural invasions rather than migrating populations. We see how this is possible in the modern age, with the spread of North American culture taking place without massive population shift. So I think that the original inhabitants came to speak the Celtic languages, and I suspect that a great deal of older lore would have been preserved within the new cultural overlay - hence I see Celtic languages as being much closer conceptually to pre-Celtic peoples than is the Germanic-based language that we are currently talking in

All the best,

Blackbird

[morgaine]

Greetings, Blackbird!...

I am on the fly, but wanted to stop and add a few more clarifications in response to your questions...

The real teachings can only be conveyed in person, unfortunately. The best we can do in writing is to spread misapprehension. People who try to study our path through written correspondence basically end up reinterpreting it as something they're already familiar with -- so teaching in writing doesn't work at all.

Those at a distance must resign themselves to finding someone with whom to study in person, even if that study must be conducted in fits and starts. It's part of why our group remains so small. Most people want it without the travel, but it just isn't possible. It only spreads misinformation and creates more confusion than there already is...

As for lore, it can only be as good as those speaking it. I do not believe there are any objective sources, either within academia or elsewhere. Everyone has their own worldview to protect, even the experts, and the evidence is generally bent and interpreted to support it, whether by intent or conditioning.

And you are quite right in your interpretation of my meaning. Verification has no other value in our tradition except to either reinforce or eradicate personal doubt about what is being taught. It is not a source of the tradition. However, newbies do converse about what they are finding in the course of their own verifications, and in this way they have access to much more for their personal use than if we simply issued a list. It remains of no use to the Order, whatsoever.

As for the pre-Celtic people, I agree with you. They did come to speak Celtic languages, but not because they preferred them to their own. And they were eventually forced out, even as were many of the Celts, as other invaders pushed their ways in.

I do agree that the Celts absorbed (and altered to suit their own tastes) aspects of the culture they subsumed. But so did those who followed them. The Mab testifies to that, as it is as much a monastic piece as a Celtic one -- and the Arthur stories even moreso.

And last... the Celts were a patriarchal warrior culture, just as were those who followed them -- and that makes them ultimately completely inappropriate to our Tradition. We hold to a culture following a Motherline in blood, in belief, and in custom. The further off we can stand from re-absorbing the linear patriarchal pattern the better, in terms of keeping true to the intent of our own path.

I realise that these ideas are not currently in academic favor; but neither have they been successfully disproved. The argument about the real nature of the pre-Celtic peoples continues, and shows every sign of continuing for as long as it serves the dominant culture. Our Tradition and Order do not subscribe to mainstream views, it is true. Perhaps we are just as wrong but, if err we must, we would far rather err on the side of peace.

May peace prevail in all the Worlds. Thank you for sharings wisdoms with me.

Bendithion,

Morgaine

[Blackbird]

*bump* for Lee

[Lee]

oooh cheers Blackbyrd.

hmm, well i guess i would have to take issue with the 'invasion' idea of the celts coming into britain. barry Cunliffes Altantci celts book covers it quite well. effectively it was cultural and not racial. there was no such 'race' as the celts other than the Keltoi that the greeks mentioned. the concept of a race of people called the clets is a victorian invention. as i said, Cunliffes book does the subject more justice. to that end id say the change in language if any was a gradual and naturally evolving one.

its interesting that you menion the cloicking and whistling mother tongue - the people who use that nowadasy are the San people of the Kalahari. its beleived they are the closest to out distant Homo sapien ancestors. thier language is unique and if something its unlikely that the pre-celtic people of britain used something resembling it otherwise we would see more of the same in Europe nowadays or something similar. im sure an anthropologist would give a better explanation of that to be honest, or an archaeologist to be fair, theyd be better to utilise the archaeology to trace the movemtns of peoples and cultures and therefore language too.

one last thing before i go (univeristy pagan society meet - el preseidente must attend) the matriarchy thing you mentioned - are you only utilising your own lore to base your history on? its just that the idea of a matriarchal society in the bronze age and before is a bit of a myth, championed by Marija Gimbutas back in the 20thC but largely discounted these days. there is plenty of arcaheologicla evidence that people proir to the iron age were just as warlike.

looking at the mabinogion, the Plentyn llyr have patriarchal lineage and are pushed out and superceeded by the Plentyh Don with thier matriarchal lineage. thats rather the reverse of what supposedly happened during the iron age if your idea of matr. to patr. is correct.

questions...questions... face to face discussion is so much easier.

lee

[Brochfael]

The San tongue is unique but other southern African peoples also use clicks in their language. Th Xhosa (A Bantu people) use clicks too.

I believe it was Simon James rather than Barry Cunliffe who brought the whole Atlantic Celts notion into question. There are opponents to his attack on the idea of British and Irish Celts in academia most notably Ruth and Vincent Megaw. However these people are becoming increasingly marginalised and ahave been accused of being motivated by romantic ideas and political ideology.

[Blackbird]

I think it's swings and roundabouts - we create the past that fits our present

I'm sure that neither camp will be 100% correct for every place and time, but that there is truth in both. Personally, I am more convinced by the arguments that the 'Celts' are a modern invention, which is why I prefer to speak of 'ancient Britons' etc. rather than 'Celts'. In any case, I think it's more helpful to use specific words - the trouble with 'Celts' is that it can refer to an enormous geography and time frame that isn't helpful.

However, I'm not an expert by any means - I can only go on what seem to be the best supported arguments.

[siaron]

You will have to trust when I tell you that I believe I have heard that language 'through the veil' spoken by a medicine woman I knew in America...It was so beautiful it made me cry. I have no doubt that is what it was. The description of "clicks and whirs" does it no justice. It is elemental, like the wind in the trees or the waves on a shore. Sheer beauty.

[beithann]

I have seen Simon James talk on this subject and this and his book, Atlantic Celts, has convinced me that 'Celt' is a modern construct.

We had to laugh when he told us that the word 'Celt' or 'Celtic' in the title of a book sells more copies than any other word except 'Sex' so they came up with a bestselling book title 'The Celtic Sex Secrets from the Court of King Arthur' ;D

There are so many people out there, academics and the like, who have such a vested interest in the idea of Celtia that they can't allow themselves to think in different terms. Simon James has been called a facist, racist and all sorts of other things by his peers.

I have never been comfortable with the idea of Ancient Celts, so I suppose that Simon James has answered a lot of questions for me. He may or may not be right, but I find him convincing

Beith