Gaelic Polytheism is typically described as a reconstructionist religion. As a reconstructionist religion, this means that Gaelic Polytheism is mainly concerned with trying to understand what the pre-Christian Gaels believed, and how they expressed those beliefs in practice, so we can make our best effort to revive or re-establish them (in as far as we’re able) in a modern setting.
The Gaels, in this context, are the people of Ireland, Scotland, and the Isle of Man. They can all be grouped together when we’re talking about pre-Christian religion because they all share a common heritage.
In reconstructing or reviving these beliefs and practices Gaelic Polytheists will try to look at as many different kinds of evidence as we possibly can, so we can build as complete a picture as possible. Like any reconstructionist religion, our approach tends to involve quite a bit of research, taking into account the sort of details we might be able to glean from:
- Archaeology
- Historical Sources
- Linguistics
- Comparative Studies
- Folklore, Folk Customs, and Survivals
Each of these topics are discussed in more detail in their own sections on this website. They were initially only going to be one page each, but as they got longer I decided to split them up into slightly smaller sections. There’s a link to the next part of the section at the bottom of each page, or click through via the drop-down menu at the top of the site.
Each of those sections will give you an idea about what each area of study can tell us, and how they can help inform our understanding of the pre-Christian beliefs and practices of the Gaels, and (or) help in shaping our practices, our prayers, and liturgy in general. The order I’ve put it all in – from the Archaeology through to the Folklore, Folk Customs, and Survivals – is intended to follow a general order. Some topics will be introduced in one section, before returning to it to consider it from another angle in a different section.
Some of these areas of study are more helpful than others, obviously, and each of them has their own strengths and weaknesses. If we think of our approach as painting a picture, then some of these areas of study will give us the broad brushstrokes, filling in the background details. Other subjects will help us fill in the foreground – the more important or relevant details, the minutiae that really help bring things into focus. Then, when we take a step back, we can see every as a coherent and colourful whole.
Before You Click On Those Pages, Though
Unlike some of the other reconstructionist religions (like Greek/Hellenic, Roman or Kemetic/Egyptian traditions), Gaelic Polytheism doesn’t have any written sources from the pre-Christian Gaels themselves that we can work with: We don’t have any evidence straight from the horse’s mouth, so to speak. There are no descriptions of rituals or ceremonies that people took part in (or may have witnessed), there isn’t any kind of Anciente Druide Handbook, and we don’t have any myths that were written down by Actual Pagans Back In The Day. This puts us at a bit of a disadvantage, comparatively speaking; the Greeks, Romans and Kemetics have quite a bit more to go on in that respect, for one, but that doesn’t mean we have nothing to go on at all. It just means we have to work a bit harder.
Being realistic, no matter how detailed or explicit the evidence may be, any reconstructionist will inevitably run up against some gaps in knowledge. Nobody writes everything down (even if it’s just because some things are taken for granted), and the very nature of the amount of time that’s elapsed, the changes in our societies, technologies, and cultures, all mean that even if we did have all the evidence we could ever hope for, a modern practice would never be the same as how a religion used to be all those thousands of years ago. If it had survived all these centuries, unbroken by Christianity or anything else that might have come along, it would have changed. If it hadn’t, but that druid manual was left behind and we were just picking things up, wholesale, our modern perspectives, our own interpretation of it would still inevitably change things.
At the very least, there are always going to be certain areas or elements of belief and practice that just aren’t compatible with the present day – things like human sacrifice are the most obvious examples here, because obviously that’s not something anyone can revive, and nor would anyone want to. There is no going back.
Our aim, therefore, is not to slavishly re-create an entire belief system (that’s impossible) or opt out of the modern world to establish our own ‘authentic’ society, proclaiming ourselves kings or queens of our own domain. Instead, reconstructionists want to established a practice that could easily be recognised as a modern expression of a pre-Christian religion – something that has obviously ancient roots in a direct and tangible sense, while it also meets our needs in the present day.
In that respect, ‘reconstructionism’ maybe isn’t the most accurate term for what it is we’re doing here, because we don’t mean it in a literal, wholesale sense, really. To be fair that’s probably why ‘Gaelic Polytheism’ became a more popular label for what we do than something like ‘Gaelic Reconstructionism’ did (though that does sound more like an attempt at reconstructing a language that still exists than a religion, so it would be a bit silly). Still, some people do reject the reconstructionist label, even if their aims are basically the same as those who embrace it.
Either way, this is something that takes a bit of work, not to mention time and effort. Even though a lot of the basic legwork has been done by other people there’s still a long way to go. There are few easy answers when it comes to this sort of thing, and it’s a very different approach from the more eclectic-yet-structured one that’s so prevalent in neopagan religious traditions.
A Note on Labels and Confusing Terminology, Which isn’t at all Confusing
It’s not enough that all of this might seem a bit complicated. It can get a bit confusing, too, because a lot of the words we use might be familiar to most people, but not everyone can give an immediate and accurate definition of them – especially when it comes to the words like ‘Gaelic’ or ‘Celtic.’
Let’s start with ‘Celtic.’ This is a word that can be used in a number of different ways – referring to either a group of languages, or the cultures that are associated with the people who speak a Celtic language. It’s not a racial identity. Genes have nothing to do with it.
‘Celtic’ is simply a word that encompasses a number of different languages or cultures who all share a common origin. These origins are usually traced back to the very beginnings of the Iron Age (or possibly the very late Bronze Age). We don’t know how or where or really why it all began, but at some point, somewhere, a bunch of people started to speak a definitively Celtic language. This first, original, Celtic language may be called Proto-Celtic or Common Celtic, and it’s the ultimate ancestor of every other Celtic language that’s ever been spoken.
At one time, the Celts – the speakers of a Celtic language – occupied a huge swathe of Europe, from Ireland and Britain, into France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland, into parts of Germany and Austria up north, and parts of northern Italy further south, along with Spain and Portugal, and even spanning into Turkey. Different Celtic languages were spoken in different parts of the Celtic world, at different times. Today, there are six surviving Celtic languages that are still spoken – Irish, Scottish Gaelic, Manx, Welsh, Cornish, and Breton. These six languages can be divided into two distinct groups, being traced back to a slightly more recent form of a Celtic language than Common Celtic. So Welsh, Cornish, and Breton can be grouped together as the surviving descendants of Common Brittonic (or Brythonic), while Irish, Scottish Gaelic, and Manx are the surviving descendants of an older form of Irish.
A form of Brittonic/Brythonic was once spoken in what we now call Scotland and the Isle of Man. In Scotland, in fact, a number of different Brittonic languages were ultimately spoken in certain parts of the country, and these include Pictish (spoken by the Picts, obviously), and Cumbric (spanning the north-west of England, into the Borders and central belt of Scotland). Both of these languages are believed to have died out by (or at some point in) the twelfth century.
An early form of Irish was introduced into Scotland and the Isle of Man because they were colonised by certain Irish kingdoms, at some point in the Late Iron Age. In Scotland, the colony that was established there was called Dál Riata, and it initially covered an area that’s now known as Argyll. Over time, however, their territory expanded, and by the tenth century they had united with the Picts to form the kingdom of Alba (what would eventually become known as Scotland). While Pictish and Cumbric died out, Irish came to dominate. For a while, at least.
The form of Irish that was being spoken in Scotland – and Ireland and the Isle of Man – wasn’t the same form of Irish that was spoken at the time the kingdom of Alba was formed. Like any language, Irish evolved over time, and because Ireland, Scotland, and the Isle of Man still had a close relationship with one another in the tenth century, these changes kept pace with one another. Regardless of which country you were in, everyone could understand one another, then. Eventually, however, the relationships between the three countries loosened, and the languages began to evolve in different directions in different places. This is why we now have three modern languages – Irish (Gaeilge), Scottish Gaelic (Gàidhlig), and Manx (Gaelg).
Although they share a common ancestor, and are still quite similar to one another, the languages are no longer mutually intelligible. All together, you might see them being referred to as the ‘Gaelic languages,’ or perhaps the ‘Goidelic languages,’ and this is where things start to get complicated and confusing. Before we get into that, though, here’s a family tree that outlines how the languages relate to one another, tracing all the way back to their earliest origins:
So the first confusing thing you might be wondering about here is why I’ve used ‘Goidelic’ instead of ‘Gaelic’ languages here.2 This is basically down to a matter of preference, but also clarity. In this context, Goidelic and Gaelic can be used as synonyms – to refer to the same thing. Sometimes, however, some people prefer to make a subtle distinction between the two words, where ‘the Goidelic languages’ may be used to describe the entire continuum of languages – from the very earliest form of Irish (Early Goidelic) right through to the surviving modern languages. ‘The Gaelic languages,’ meanwhile, can refer to just those three surviving, modern languages. This can be useful, especially in discussions like the one we’re having here.
Unfortunately, however, things are about to get even more complicated. Today, the word ‘Gaelic’ can have a number of different meanings. On the one hand, it can be used in the ways we’ve just seen: referring to the entire continuum of languages, from the earliest to the most recent, or referring to the modern forms – Irish, Scottish Gaelic, and Manx – alone. On the other hand, ‘Gaelic’ may also be used as a way of referring to only one of these modern languages: Scottish Gaelic.
Confused? You’re about to be even more so…
To complicate things even further, ‘Gaelic’ is usually pronounced differently, depending on the way it’s being used. In the group sense – where ‘Gaelic’ is being used to refer to Irish, Scottish Gaelic, and Manx all together (or all those and their common ancestors, too) – it’s typically pronounced Gayl-ik. In the more specific sense, where it only refers to Scottish Gaelic (Gàidhlig), it’s typically pronounced Gal-ik (where ‘Gal-‘ rhymes with pal, not call). This is based on how Gàidhlig is itself pronounced in… well. Gàidhlig. Or Gaelic.
There is a good reason for Scottish Gaelic being treated in a slightly different way than its Irish and Manx siblings. You might think it would be a lot easier if we just called it ‘Scottish’ instead of Scottish Gaelic or Gaelic – it would make things a lot neater, and more balanced too, right? Unfortunately, we can’t do this. Because of Scotland’s rather complex history, there’s more than one ‘native’ language that’s spoken in there, besides Gaelic itself. There’s also the Scots language, which is classed as a Germanic language (so it has nothing to do with any of the Gaelic/Goidelic languages), and although you might see people insisting is just a dialect of English, that’s not the case.
Sticking with Irish, Manx, and ‘Scottish Gaelic’ might ensure clarity on this matter, but it’s not very neat or consistent, and it’s a bit of a mouthful. Nobody wants to use more syllables than is really necessary, so people tend to just drop the ‘Scottish’ part and they will simply refer to Scottish Gaelic (Gàidhlig) as ‘Gaelic.’ Together, then, ‘Scots’ and ‘Gaelic’ offer a bit more of a distinction than ‘Scots’ and ‘Scottish’ does, at least.
But wait! There’s more!
Just to be extra confusing, ‘Gaelic’ has also been used as a way of referring to Irish, as well, and in this instance it’s pronounced Gayl-ik again, not Gal-ik. The Gaelic League, for example, is an organisation that was established in the nineteenth century with the aim of promoting the Irish language, and there’s also the Gaelic Athletic Association, which is an Irish organisation that’s dedicated to promoting Irish sports (such as hurling, Gaelic football, and camogie). This is more to do with the historical way in which the word has been used: you won’t typically find modern Irish speakers referring to the language as ‘Gaelic’ – it’s just ‘Irish’. People who refer to Irish as ‘Gaelic’ tend not to be native speakers. It’s not wrong, per se, but it does make all of this exponentially more complicated for no good reason.
One final addition here: the term ‘Gaels’ is typically used in the group sense – it may be defined as referring to an ‘ethno-linguistic group’ encompassing the people of Ireland, Scotland and the Isle of Man – and so it’s pronounced along the same line as ‘the Gaelic languages’: it’s Gayl-z, not Gal-z, that is.
If you can hear these words being used in conversation it’s pretty easy to distinguish between them all, so long as you know which pronunciation refers to which specific meaning. As complicated as it all is, it can ultimately make things a bit easier – once you’ve got the hang of things. In writing, however, you’re going to have to figure out the specific meaning from the context alone. Again, though, once you get the hang of things it does get a bit easier.
Gayl-ik or Gal-ik Polytheism?
To be really, extra clear, then, Gaelic Polytheism is generally used in the sense that it’s Gayl-ik Polytheism. As we defined it right at the start of this page, Gaelic Polytheism describes the polytheistic beliefs and practices of the people of Ireland, the Isle of Man, and Scotland, so we’re using it in the ‘group’ sense of the word.
Because the Gaels share a common heritage – going all the way back to Iron Age Ireland (c. 700 BCE–400 CE) – it makes sense to group them together because our beliefs and practices are ultimately derived from a common source. In this respect, we could argue that Gaelic Polytheism is ultimately synonymous with ‘Goidelic Polytheism,’ although as far as I’m aware the latter name has never caught on (probably because it’s mostly used by linguists and Celticists, and that’s about it).
Despite these common origins, though, there are obviously some very clear differences between Ireland, Scotland, and the Isle of Man today. They not only speak different languages, but they have their own histories that have helped shaped their own unique identities. As much as we might embrace the value of their shared heritage, then, we have to acknowledge their differences, and this is just one of the reasons that many Gaelic Polytheists might choose to express their beliefs and practices with a specific, modern, linguistic and cultural focus. Not everyone necessarily does, but it’s common.
A Gaelic Polytheist with a primarily Irish focus might learn Irish, for example, so they can pray and perform rituals in that language (as a modern expression of their beliefs and practice). They might concentrate on looking at the sort of survivals in practice that can be found in Ireland, cooking foods that are definitively ‘Irish’ as part of their celebrations (like baking the báirín breac, or ‘barmbrack’ with a coin in it, as part of the festivities for Samain).
Another Gaelic Polytheist might do the same sort of thing, but with a specifically Scottish or Manx focus instead, which may then involve learning Gaelic or Manx.3 In those cases, they might also incorporate specifically Manx or Gaelic survivals into their practices – modern (or more recent) expressions of practices that have ancient, pre-Christian roots, which have an especial relevance to the cultural and linguistic outlook their beliefs are founded upon. This is why ‘Gaelic’ Polytheism is arguably a better name for what we do than ‘Goidelic’ Polytheism might be; it more accurately reflects the fact that we’re aiming for a modern expression of an ancient set of beliefs and practices.
So where an Irish-focused Gaelic Polytheist might put out the May bough (or bush) as part of their Bealtaine celebrations, for example, those of a more Scottish-based focus might choose to make a Bealltainn4 bannock as a centre-piece of their celebrations instead. After baking a special bannock, coated in a caudle (a sort of batter made from milk, eggs, and usually some sugar and flavourings, perhaps thickened with flour or oatmeal), they might break off pieces of it to throw over their shoulder, offering each piece to certain animals (representing threats against the household – spectres of famine, want, and disease, etc.).
As a result, some practitioners might be ‘Gaelic’ Polytheists in both senses of the word, while others aren’t. Some people might choose a more specific cultural label – describing themselves as Irish Polytheists, for example – but (to make a personal observation here) while some people who use these more specific labels might identify as a ‘subset’ of Gaelic Polytheism, still embracing a reconstructionist approach but wanting to describe themselves in a more specific (or perhaps accurate) manner, others might use these kinds of labels to deliberately distance themselves from the more reconstructionist focus that Gaelic Polytheism tends to describe, or else their choice of a different label might not have much to do with any differences in approach, so much as it’s a way of distancing themselves from certain groups or people who’ve embraced the Gaelic Polytheist label.
Details
As we touched on earlier, Gaelic Polytheism, like all reconstructionist religions, embraces a range of different types of evidence so we can build as complete a picture of what the pre-Christian Gaels believed, and how they might have expressed those beliefs, so we can build as complete a picture as possible in figuring out what our own practices might look like. Now you have a better idea of what some of the most important words we’ll be using actually mean, here are the links to each topic again. Each link will take you through to the first page of each section, where you can start to go through some of the need-to-know basics and get a good outline of what each area of study can tell us:
Archaeology
Historical Sources
Linguistics
Comparative Studies
Folklore, Folk Customs, and Survivals
One final point to make before you click through to those pages, though… It’s important to note – if you haven’t noticed already – that neopagan sources aren’t on the list here. This is deliberate, but it isn’t because they’re baaad and awful and neopaganism sucks. Admittedly, reconstructionists often do have a bit of a reputation for that sort of attitude – or they have in the past, perhaps – but to be quite honest that sort of attitude is juvenile and pointless. It really isn’t helpful to anyone and there are better ways to define ourselves and assert our own identities as Gaelic Polytheists than constantly looking down on others, or spending forever and a day talking about all the things we’re not instead of actually talking about what we are.
The reason neopagan sources are missing from the list above is purely to do with the fact that neopaganism has nothing to do with reconstructionism (in a practical and philosophical sense). Neopaganism takes an approach that just isn’t relevant to reconstructionism, because in many ways the two traditions are opposites of one another.5 Even neopagan books that are more historically-minded than others – books that are sold as ‘well-researched’ – aren’t relevant here because they just don’t have the same aims or foundations of belief that Gaelic Polytheism does. For the beginner, in particular, reading neopagan books may offer a quick fix – giving you easy access to some semblance of an answer, or an idea of what you can do – but at the end of the day, what you’ll find in those books is more likely to confuse matters than give you anything solid to build on. Basically, if a reconstructionist approach is what you’re looking for – or if it’s at least what you’re interested in learning more about – you will save yourself an awful lot of hassle if you just avoid neopagan sources.
If you’re coming to Gaelic Polytheism from some sort of neopagan background, it would really help if you put everything you’ve learned from those sources to one side before you start delving deeper into all of this. To be honest, that would probably be good advice for anyone, regardless of their background – we all have some preconceived notions, to some degree or another, and if we let those get in the way then it can become difficult to parse new information. If what we’re learning about doesn’t fit our expectations, it often just doesn’t seem to make sense, and we end up feeling confused instead of informed (though I’m not discounting the possibility that maybe it’s just badly explained…).
It can all be a little bit extra difficult if you’re coming at this from a neopagan background though, because sometimes there’s going to be something of an overlap in terminology. For example, there are going to be certain areas of Gaelic Polytheist belief and practice that might seem familiar – the festival names, for one – but these things are understood in very different ways when we compare what a festival like Beltaine is to us, as Gaelic Polytheists, than it is to a neopagan who follows the Wheel of Year. You’ll save yourself a lot of time if you just start fresh from the beginning, then.
References
1 The language family tree is based on an outline of the languages as described by David Stifter in his chapter on ‘Early Irish’ in The Celtic Languages (2009).
The very earliest known confirmed examples of Irish – from an Irish hand – are written in a form of Primitive Irish. These writings are attested in inscriptions that can be found in Ireland and the places that were colonised by the Irish in the late Iron Age, into the early medieval (Christian) period. These inscriptions were mainly carved onto stone, using an alphabet known as ogam (though it’s worth noting that inscriptions have also been found on various objects, too – on spindle whorls, a sword, a gaming die, beads, and jewellery, for example – but the stones are our main source of information here). The ogam stones have been found in parts of England (e.g. Devon and Cornwall) and Wales, as well as the Isle of Man and Scotland, representing evidence of Irish colonies that were established in these places. Some of these colonies were more influential, or long-lasting than others, of course.
It’s not known when Primitive Irish first came about – distinguishing itself from its direct ancestor, Early Goidelic (for which we have no direct evidence, from the Irish themselves, only hints of it from other sources outside of Ireland). At the very least, though, the ogam inscriptions show us that it was certainly being spoken by the fourth century CE. These inscriptions also show us a number of changes that took place (as we’ll talk about in more detail on the Linguistics page) over time – especially during the sixth century – which ultimately resulted in the emergence of a newer form of Irish. This ‘newer’ form of the language is known as Old Irish or Sengoídelc, although it’s worth noting that some linguists like to add a sort of intermediary stage between Primitive Irish and Old Irish, as the language was evolving. This intermediary may be called Archaic Irish, and it represents a specific linguistic development in the evolution of Primitive Irish, as it was on its way to becoming Old Irish. Like Primitive Irish, our only real evidence for Archaic Irish is from the ogam inscriptions themselves.
Old Irish is believed to have been spoken from around 600 – 900 CE., and we have a decent amount of written evidence for Old Irish because it was just as this language emerged that the early medieval people of Ireland began to write things down in manuscripts. At first they wrote things down in Latin, mainly concentrating on Christian topics (copying down the Bible, etc.), but it wasn’t long before they began using their own language to write on more diverse subjects. Although we don’t have a lot of manuscripts that still survive from this early period, some of their contents was preserved in manuscripts that were compiled at a later date (mostly around the twelfth century onwards). As a result, we have a pretty good idea of what Old Irish was like, despite the fact that there are some inevitable difficulties involved here. Ultimately, though, we have a far more comprehensive idea of Old Irish than we do for Primitive Irish. Archaic Irish is mostly only really distinguished from Primitive Irish in linguistic (academic) contexts.
By 900 C.E., Old Irish had evolved to the point that a new form of the language can be seen to have distinguished itself, and linguists call this new form Middle Irish. Middle Irish is usually given a timeframe of around 900 – 1200 CE, and up to this point the linguistic changes we’re talking about were taking place in each of the ‘Gaelic’ countries we’ve been discussing here – not just in Ireland, then, but also in Scotland and the Isle of Man. This means that the people of Ireland, Scotland, and the Isle of Man were all speaking the same language, during the Old Irish period and into the Middle Irish period (although there probably were some local dialects, but we don’t have enough written evidence to give us enough detail for these eras).
At some point in this Middle Irish period, the language as it was spoken in the Isle of Man and Scotland began to evolve in a different direction from the language as it was spoken in Ireland. This led to the emergence of Scottish Gaelic in Scotland, and Manx in the Isle of Man, alongside the emergence of Early Modern Irish in Ireland (in the thirteenth century), as separate and distinct languages from one another. That is to say, the changes weren’t merely some minor differences in the local dialects – they were completely new languages that were now separate and distinct from one another. They shared common roots, of course, and in many respects they were still quite similar to one another, but they were no longer completely mutually intelligible.
Early Modern Irish was spoken in Ireland from around the thirteenth century up until the seventeenth century, which is when we start to see the first modern Irish writings being produced. Within this same timeframe, however, a kinda weird thing happened: despite the fact that the people of Scotland had gone their own way in their everyday speech, they still shared a literary form of the language with Ireland. This literary language can be described as a form of Early Modern Irish, and to make the distinction between the two clear, it’s often referred to as ‘Classical Gaelic.’
The Irish and Scots shared this literary language up until the eighteenth century, mainly because the professional poets of Scotland and Ireland shared the same approach to poetic composition, training in the same professional curriculum. They relied heavily on a set of stock phrases, imagery, motifs – not to mention metres and methods of composition over all – which were best preserved and made use of in this shared language. Although more localised influences crept into Classical Gaelic over time (e.g. peculiarly Scottish Gaelic words cropping up in Classical Gaelic poems, etc.), this literary language remained in use up until the eighteenth century. It all came to an end when the collapse of the clan system in Ireland and Scotland meant the professional poets were essentially out of a job; their stock in trade was writing poems that were an entertaining form of PR or political spin for clan chiefs and other influential people of the day. Without anyone to praise or enhance the reputation of (and, more to the point, pay them handsomely for the honour), the poets had to find another way to earn a living. Without the professional poets holding it all together, there was no real need for Classical Gaelic anymore. As a result, from the eighteenth century onwards, any written works began to be produced in the local vernacular – modern Irish, Gaelic, and Manx.
So that’s a quick background for the Goidelic languages. As we’ve already established, they form their own subset of the Celtic language family, while the Brittonic or Brythonic languages form another group. They are sometimes grouped together as ‘Insular Celtic’ languages – the languages that originate from Britain and Ireland, as opposed to the Continental Celtic languages that originated on the European continent. These Continental Celtic languages include Gaulish (spoken across Gaul, which encompassed a large part of modern-day France, Luxembourg, Belgium, a good portion of Switzerland, and parts of Northern Italy, the Netherlands, and Germany), Lepontic (which may or may not have been a dialect of Gaulish, a descendant of Gaulish, or a sibling of Gaulish, mainly spoken in northern Italy/Cisalpine Gaul), Celtiberian (encompassing the Iberian Peninsula, which is basically modern-day Spain and Portugal, though dipping across the border into southern France), Noric (attested on a few inscriptions from the Roman province of Noricum, which was situated in the area of modern-day Austria, into Slovenia), and Galatian (spoken in parts of modern-day Turkey).
As part of the Celtic family tree, all of these languages can be traced back to a common ancestor, which may be called Common Celtic or Proto-Celtic. We don’t know if the Goidelic languages evolved directly from this common ancestor – i.e. that Common Celtic was introduced to Ireland and it then began to evolve until it became distinctively, identifiably Irish – or if a slightly later Celtic language was introduced by a nearby neighbour, say as a result of the introduction of Gaulish, or a form of Brittonic, perhaps, which then evolved into Early Goidelic, etc. It’s possible, of course, that a number of Celtic languages came to Irish shores, and the unique nature of the environment and the ways in which these languages interacted with one another then led the emergence of the first Irish language. The exact process (and timeline) here remains a mystery.
2 The word ‘Goidelic’ comes from the Old Irish Goídelc. Goídelc had a range of meanings at this time, including ‘speech, utterance,’ but over all it was a term that was used to describe the Irish language itself, as it was spoken then. See: eDIL s.v. Goídelc or dil.ie/26311
3 All of the modern Gaelic languages are under threat, to some degree or another, and so a lot of Gaelic Polytheists feel it’s important to try and learn a modern version of the language as a small contribution to their continued preservation. Technically speaking, for example, Manx is defined as a ‘revived’ language, because the last native speaker of Manx (as a first language), Ned Maddrell, died in the 1974. In linguistic terms this means it ‘went extinct’ in the 1970s, but this sort of label is a bit misleading. Manx has never truly died out – there were still Manx speakers around at the time of Maddrell’s death, they were just taught it as a second language.
4 Bealtaine and Bealltainn are the same festival. The different spellings reflect the name of the festival as it’s given in modern Irish and modern Gaelic (Gàidhlig) respectively. When referring to Irish celebrations, it’s Bealtaine, when referring to Scottish celebrations it’s Bealltainn; in Manx, it’s Boaldyn. We can use the Old Irish form – Beltaine (the earliest known form, in a language that was shared by all nations when Old Irish was being spoken) – as an all-encompassing way of referring to the common elements of the festival that are shared by everyone.
5 Although yes, reconstructionism is technically part of neopaganism (or New Religious Movements) as a whole, reconstructionism came about as a reaction against the more negative aspects of certain neopagan traditions that were most popular back in the 70s or 80s, when the first reconstructionist religions began to emerge. This is certainly true of Celtic Reconstructionism as a whole, and Gaelic Polytheism specifically.
Celtic Reconstructionism is an umbrella term for a number of different religious traditions that maintain a more specific cultural focus. This includes Gaelic Polytheism, but also Britonnic (or Brythonic) Polytheism, Gaulish Polytheist traditions, and any other Celtic cultures.
Eòlas 