Scottish Reconstructionism

[CromanMacNessa]

:fpoke: Did everyone go to sleep?

[Mòrag Elasaid Ní Dhòmhnaill]

:fpoke: Did everyone go to sleep?

We do that from time to time. Have anything we should like to discuss? _pounce_

[Nantonos]

Wasn't the Scots language referred to as "Inglis" in the same way?

Yes. It was used as the name of the Northumbrian-derived language that formed the basis of both Scots and Northern English. Which is why both have the flat "a" in words like path, bath, etc in contrast to the tortured vowels of Southerners "baaaaarth" etc. :uhhuhuh:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ynglis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ynglis)

[Crystal Raven]

*whew* thats alot of great info!!! ty!

My ancestors were scottish - Barr and Welsh - Powell
and I have always had an interest in Scottish Recon, but where exactly do I start, I am overwhelmed with info...help please, just one or two pointer arrows for us blondes?

[Mòrag Elasaid Ní Dhòmhnaill]

I'm sure Croman will have his own advise, and is much more advanced in all of this than I am, but mine is to start with the history and myths. It will give you a solid base to start from and allow you to more easily figure out which direction you want to go next.

[Sage WindMoon]

I just posted a new thread in the History forum about the Carmina Gadelica now being available for online reading. Check it out here:

http://www.mysticwicks.com/showthread.php?t=113496

[zombi]

At the moment I've been concentrating most of my study on Irish-specific stuff. However, my ancestry is clearly Scotch-Irish, and I think that the blending of the two religions/traditions probably happened along with intermarriage.

Do people do this sort of thing? Blend two cultures religions, I mean? And is that or is that not very historically accurate? I'm just wondering, really, it's something I've been curious about. I know a lot of people choose to focus on a specific culture/people's religion and language, and I feel that pan-Celtic is too broad. Is this what is meant by "Gaelic Polytheism" perhaps? Irish + Scottish only?

[skilly-nilly]

Do people do this sort of thing? Blend two cultures religions, I mean? And is that or is that not very historically accurate? I'm just wondering, really, it's something I've been curious about. I know a lot of people choose to focus on a specific culture/people's religion and language, and I feel that pan-Celtic is too broad. Is this what is meant by "Gaelic Polytheism" perhaps? Irish + Scottish only?

I think it's reasonable if those cultures interacted in Pagan times-- one of the major tribal incursions that affected Scottish culture was from Ireland, after all.

My personal belief is that a mixture of modern and ancient also works, but that 2 ancients that had nothing to do with each other doesn't work. JMO, YMMV.

[_Banbha_]

At the moment I've been concentrating most of my study on Irish-specific stuff. However, my ancestry is clearly Scotch-Irish, and I think that the blending of the two religions/traditions probably happened along with intermarriage.

Do people do this sort of thing? Blend two cultures religions, I mean? And is that or is that not very historically accurate? I'm just wondering, really, it's something I've been curious about. I know a lot of people choose to focus on a specific culture/people's religion and language, and I feel that pan-Celtic is too broad. Is this what is meant by "Gaelic Polytheism" perhaps? Irish + Scottish only?

Just as an historical point, Scotch-Irish a relatively modern term used by immigrant Protestants from Ulster of Scottish origins, who then immigrated to America. The term was invented in the US. 'Scotch' was used to recognize their heritage out of context; and to differentiate themselves from being Irish or of Irish extraction in the US.

I think there are difficulties inherent in blending two cultures inorganically. Cultures evolve and change through spans of time and events that are greater than one single life or desire. Personally, I'd recommend recognizing both as distinct and within themselves in practice and let things sort themselves out through your experiences and explorations. But, this is only an opinion. :p I don't think recognizing two ancestral cultures leads to something akin to pan-Celticism in personal practice.

[zombi]

Just as an historical point, Scotch-Irish a relatively modern term used by immigrant Protestants from Ulster of Scottish origins, who then immigrated to America. The term was invented in the US. 'Scotch' was used to recognize their heritage out of context; and to differentiate themselves from being Irish or of Irish extraction in the US.

Actually, good to know! I used Scotch-Irish because that's the way my grandfather referred to it, but I was unaware of the terms origins. Knowing this, I would say my family isn't actually Scotch-Irish at all, not in that particular context, anyway. This is why I love you guys so much; I always learn something new every time.


I think there are difficulties inherent in blending two cultures inorganically. Cultures evolve and change through spans of time and events that are greater than one single life or desire. Personally, I'd recommend recognizing both as distinct and within themselves in practice and let things sort themselves out through your experiences and explorations. But, this is only an opinion. :p I don't think recognizing two ancestral cultures leads to something akin to pan-Celticism in personal practice.

I haven't done much/any reading or research in regards to Scottish-specific culture, really. It just seems that as I do more reading I'm more and more fascinated by the points at which the cultures are similar and those at which they are vastly different!

[Faol-chù]

In my readings of history, archaeology, and anthropology, it is clear that the inhabitants of what is now Scotland and the inhabitants of what is now Ireland interacted a great deal....from earliest times.

Also, the Gaelic bardic tradition in Scotland is thoroughly and utterly derived from the bardic tradition in Ireland.
In fact, in some instances, it is clear that there are are ancient things from the bardic tradition that have been preserved better in the Scottish Gaelic culture than in the Irish Gaelic culture.

None of this is to say, though that the two are "exactly alike"...but there are many definite shared ideaologies.


I have to say, though, just FYI...The "Scots-Irish" were more likely to speak English than they were to speak Gaelic, and hold ideals distinctively derived from that experience.

[_Banbha_]

Just curious Faol-chù, why are you putting Scots-Irish in quotes?


Actually, good to know! I used Scotch-Irish because that's the way my grandfather referred to it, but I was unaware of the terms origins. Knowing this, I would say my family isn't actually Scotch-Irish at all, not in that particular context, anyway. This is why I love you guys so much; I always learn something new every time.

I'm glad I mentioned it then, because the Scotch-Irish have a specific history, tradition, and culture in the US. It's not the same as having some Irish and some Scottish ancestry. :)

[zombi]

I'm glad I mentioned it then, because the Scotch-Irish have a specific history, tradition, and culture in the US. It's not the same as having some Irish and some Scottish ancestry. :)

I think I (& my grandfather!) always assumed it simply meant being of both ancestries. Can you plural ancestry like that? Well, either way, I suppose I didn't mean Scotch-Irish at all, I meant something more along the lines of, "most of my bloodline are Irish, and then we have that one Scottish family that came along, too".

I think the best recourse is always more reading (says the English degree -- of course!) and studying; when you say hold the two distinct in practice, can you elaborate on exactly what you mean? Obviously I understand the part which means, recognize that they are not exactly alike, and hmm. I am trying to find a good way to word my question, because there IS something in this that is still, I don't want to say bothering, but.. bothering me, and I'm having difficulty putting it into words.

[Faol-chù]

Just curious Faol-chù, why are you putting Scots-Irish in quotes?

Because the term has been used in so many different ways, it's not even funny.
Some people reject the usage of the term as you've (correctly, as I see it) identified it.
They know to whom it refers, but they don't like it.

[_Banbha_]

I think I (& my grandfather!) always assumed it simply meant being of both ancestries. Can you plural ancestry like that? Well, either way, I suppose I didn't mean Scotch-Irish at all, I meant something more along the lines of, "most of my bloodline are Irish, and then we have that one Scottish family that came along, too".

Sure people can have ancestors from different places; but I think you meant plural in terms of practice?

Is it important to match your bloodline (as in all of it) to your spirituality? What about desire or experience or tradition? Not that I want that can of worms again & in a different thread. :p


I think the best recourse is always more reading (says the English degree -- of course!) and studying; when you say hold the two distinct in practice, can you elaborate on exactly what you mean? Obviously I understand the part which means, recognize that they are not exactly alike, and hmm. I am trying to find a good way to word my question, because there IS something in this that is still, I don't want to say bothering, but.. bothering me, and I'm having difficulty putting it into words.

As someone who is a Reconstructionist, I'd not advise someone to blend practices derived from different cultures (which have a full set and broad spectrum of dynamics each within themselves, respectfully) and particularly when you're at a point of just beginning. Wouldn't you rather learn something of the lore and customs? And perhaps what the people themselves thought these things meant in the larger scheme of things?

I hope I'm making a somewhat of a helpful answer here ...:weirdsmil

[_Banbha_]

Because the term has been used in so many different ways, it's not even funny.
Some people reject the usage of the term as you've (correctly, as I see it) identified it.
They know to whom it refers, but they don't like it.

I imagine there is misuse or simple misunderstanding, which is why I asked to be sure. :)

Why don't they like it? Who are they, btw? It was not a derogatory name thrust upon them as an immigrant group in any sense, it was coined from within.

[zombi]

Sure people can have ancestors from different places; but I think you meant plural in terms of practice?

Is it important to match your bloodline (as in all of it) to your spirituality? What about desire or experience or tradition? Not that I want that can of worms again & in a different thread. :p

As someone who is a Reconstructionist, I'd not advise someone to blend practices derived from different cultures (which have a full set and broad spectrum of dynamics each within themselves, respectfully) and particularly when you're at a point of just beginning. Wouldn't you rather learn something of the lore and customs? And perhaps what the people themselves thought these things meant in the larger scheme of things?

I hope I'm making a somewhat of a helpful answer here ...:weirdsmil

Oh, I meant "can you plural that" as in, is ancestries a plural form of the word ancestry, or did I make that up.

I don't think it's necessarily important match one's bloodline to one's spiritual practice. I know some people feel it necessary to do this, but that's not really where I was going with this -- I was more curious than anything else as to whether or not people do blend practices that way.

I don't have any blending plans, I just have research plans!

[_Banbha_]

I don't think it's necessarily important match one's bloodline to one's spiritual practice. I know some people feel it necessary to do this, but that's not really where I was going with this -- I was more curious than anything else as to whether or not people do blend practices that way.

I think people do in places, but you asked in the Recon forum and safe to say it's a general no. :toofless:

[Faol-chù]

Why don't they like it? Who are they, btw? It was not a derogatory name thrust upon them as an immigrant group in any sense, it was coined from within.

Yes...it was coined from within...but there are some native speakers (and native Scots and native Irish, and people who have one parent from Scotland and one from Ireland) who, though they understand what it typically means, resent the confusion the term has inspired.

[zombi]

I think people do in places, but you asked in the Recon forum and safe to say it's a general no. :toofless:

Right, I realize most every recon is going to be focused on one culture in particular. But I am curious about the historical blending of say, Scottish & Irish culture & religion -- if a historical basis exists for a syncretic religion between the two, does anyone focus on reconstructing that particular thing? I think it's probably BETTER in the interest of both sides' specifics if a person focuses on one or the other, lest either side have ways get even more lost in the ether so to speak, but I am always curious as to where exactly do people draw the line for their reconstruction? Is there are particular & specific timeline where syncretism began and therefore those practices are less studied or something?

I don't think I'm making sense any more.

[_Banbha_]

Yes...it was coined from within...but there are some native speakers (and native Scots and native Irish, and people who have one parent from Scotland and one from Ireland) who, though they understand what it typically means, resent the confusion the term has inspired.


I understand what your saying now but I think by putting quotes around a term that for all extents and purposes is authentic leads to further inaccuracies. Love them or hate them (and there are plenty of reasons), they've their own history and traditions.

If you've mixed Scottish and Irish ancestry, you're simply not Scotch-Irish. I've never heard the term used in Ireland or by Irish people in NY. As you might have noticed, some Irish and Scottish people don't like Americans referring to themselves as Irish or Scottish in any case. :smile:

[_Banbha_]

Right, I realize most every recon is going to be focused on one culture in particular. But I am curious about the historical blending of say, Scottish & Irish culture & religion -- if a historical basis exists for a syncretic religion between the two, does anyone focus on reconstructing that particular thing?

I think this is a question some Reconstructionist's have asked themselves over and again. I think the best answer would come from someone who does. I think Scottish Reconstructionism faces some of these challenges due it's complex history.


I think it's probably BETTER in the interest of both sides' specifics if a person focuses on one or the other, lest either side have ways get even more lost in the ether so to speak, but I am always curious as to where exactly do people draw the line for their reconstruction? Is there are particular & specific timeline where syncretism began and therefore those practices are less studied or something?

I don't think I'm making sense any more.

You are actually....these are just very complex questions when you get down to the brass tacks and the subject(s) covers vast amounts of information to discuss and debate the particulars. There is no set time line for fine the details and not a lot of records discussing them specifically. I don't think anything is less studied in the scheme of things because the more you learn the better you can understand the whole.

[Do you belong to any CR discussion groups? Following some of those discussions could be helpful. If not doing so already, check the resource post Seren_ made for this forum up above if you need some references.]

[Seren_]

Right, I realize most every recon is going to be focused on one culture in particular. But I am curious about the historical blending of say, Scottish & Irish culture & religion -- if a historical basis exists for a syncretic religion between the two, does anyone focus on reconstructing that particular thing? I think it's probably BETTER in the interest of both sides' specifics if a person focuses on one or the other, lest either side have ways get even more lost in the ether so to speak, but I am always curious as to where exactly do people draw the line for their reconstruction? Is there are particular & specific timeline where syncretism began and therefore those practices are less studied or something?

I don't think I'm making sense any more.

I think the general gist is that most Scottish Recons largely focus on the Gaelic heritage of Scotland, so it starts with the arrival of the Dal Riadans from Ireland (around 400AD, but maybe earlier; and the two areas had certainly had a long history of contact before then as well). But as Scotland began to take shape historically, differences in practice, culture and language also happened.

So to a certain extent there are similarities with Ireland, but there are also differences, as a result of the differences in each country's cultural evolution as well as the probable blending of Gaelic practice with Scottish ones. In this respect, looking to the folklore in Scotland helps inform a Scottish Recon's practice, which is inevitably more modern but often there are bits and pieces that are considered to be pagan in origin, rather than Christian. So I'm not sure there's a line; it's more like a thread, continuum (I hope I'm interpreting what you're saying in the right way, otherwise I'm probably not making any sense either :p).

[zombi]

Thanks, guys! I'm sorry if I totally derailed this thread with my inappropriate use of Scotch-Irish, but I am definitely glad I know more about the term itself. ACTually I feel bad for having used it assuming I knew its meaning instead of checking, but hey? What can you do? Can't win 'em all!
I'm also sorry if I totally derailed this thread from its Scottish focus. But thanks very much for all your answers!

That's very interesting re: the timeline used by Scottish Recons. Would you say that Scottish practice is more modern because the timeline begins later than the Irish-specific one, by nature of sticking to Gaelic cultures? I want to make sure I'm following you.

[re: CR lists, I'm in cr_r on LJ, but a lot of times mailing lists confuse me, haha. I have difficulty with their formatting or something?]

[Seren_]

Thanks, guys! I'm sorry if I totally derailed this thread with my inappropriate use of Scotch-Irish, but I am definitely glad I know more about the term itself. ACTually I feel bad for having used it assuming I knew its meaning instead of checking, but hey? What can you do? Can't win 'em all!
I'm also sorry if I totally derailed this thread from its Scottish focus. But thanks very much for all your answers!

That's very interesting re: the timeline used by Scottish Recons. Would you say that Scottish practice is more modern because the timeline begins later than the Irish-specific one, by nature of sticking to Gaelic cultures? I want to make sure I'm following you.

Errrr...Not really. I think...

Both Irish and Scottish Recons take a lot from the more recent folklore that's been recorded, and both flavours of recon have a common heritage. So in terms of practice - like looking at the evidence for how Bealltainn was celebrated (seeing as it's pertinent at this time of year), both recons can look to the earliest evidence like the early Irish literature (because of the common heritage that's shared between the two countries) and even any archaeology that might help, and then look at the more recent folklore to see how the festivities evolved in a more specific cultural context.

The more recent folklore helps to flesh out the bare bones so to speak, and since it's more recent it speaks to a more modern context, too. Neither the folklore nor the early Irish literature is pre-Christian in context, but the pre-Christian threads are what gets picked out to help us. We work with what we can.

I don't think you've derailed the thread at all, by the way, but (speaking as your friendly recon forum guide :p) you're more than welcome to start a different thread if you'd prefer. Anyone is :)

[zombi]

Well, right, I understand the nature of sifting through folklore to find pieces & threads, I guess I am confused still by this: "looking to the folklore in Scotland helps inform a Scottish Recon's practice, which is inevitably more modern" -- why more modern?

[Seren_]

Well, right, I understand the nature of sifting through folklore to find pieces & threads, I guess I am confused still by this: "looking to the folklore in Scotland helps inform a Scottish Recon's practice, which is inevitably more modern" -- why more modern?

Ahhhh! I think you're getting confused by my inability to construct a sentence properly :p The folklore is more modern, seeing as it was mostly collected in the nineteenth century, as it was in Ireland.

[_Banbha_]

Thanks, guys! I'm sorry if I totally derailed this thread with my inappropriate use of Scotch-Irish, but I am definitely glad I know more about the term itself. ACTually I feel bad for having used it assuming I knew its meaning instead of checking, but hey? What can you do? Can't win 'em all!

You didn't derail the thread at all...if anything it was my asking; but still I think clarity is a good thing. If there is confusion or varying opinions on a term that's being used, it's relevant. This appears to be one of those long rambling threads with a life of it's own. I'm glad you bumped it by the way, I hadn't seen it before. :)



<snip>[re: CR lists, I'm in cr_r on LJ, but a lot of times mailing lists confuse me, haha. I have difficulty with their formatting or something?]

Yahoo for one confuses me at times, I only use it for their lists so that might be the reason. But I think it's one of the easier to manage formats and there are a couple discussion groups there that are worth subscribing too.

[Mòrag Elasaid Ní Dhòmhnaill]

Wow, my thread has been rescued from the dusty catacombs of post history.

I think it's definitely taken some interesting turns and I'm enjoying reading it. I don't have much time to post anymore sadly, but great discussion here that I wish I had time to take part in.