When one examines an extinct culture upon which many myths are based it is essential to know that the results of one’s search will be a product not only of one’s state of mind, but a product of the questions asked. This product might be similar to the anagram of the three blind men who were asked to define an elephant by touch. The first, upon touching its leg exclaimed, “it is a tree; the second, exploring its trunk claimed it to be some type of snake, and the third, after feeling its ear said “it’s some type of flying animal.”

To one person a Druid is a fantasy character of magical powers, to another the Druid is a learned Scientist, and to yet another, a Druid is an evil being who practices bloody rituals to false gods and congregates with Daemons. In fact everyone’s perception is different in some way, each a gamble in the wind.
When researching the Celtic culture one must first realize that the Druids did not, for the most part, keep any written records. It is argued that the Druids actually had religious taboos against writing in fear of the information falling into the wrong hands. Yet even despite this idea of writing being forbidden, St Patrick is recorded to have burnt over 180 books of the Druids. This seems to show that even the most concrete beliefs about the Druids are in fact controversial. The majority of information to be found today is based on earlier books which consisted of anti-Celtic propaganda of the Roman Empire. Not to mention, that in later years, they were romanticized as mystical creatures of magical powers. For example, the Dryad (female Druid) is thought to have lured human men into the forests with enchanted music and lustrous dancing, where she fulfilled their sexual fantasies and made them slaves, or killed them.

So, if one should ask ‘who is right in their perception of the Druids?” The answer might be that nobody really knows, yet everybody knows a little bit. Imagine our view of the Native American culture had they been driven to extinction. The surviving propaganda might portray their knowledge of plants and herbs, now used in modern medicine, as witchcraft or magical arts. How then can we accept Roman propaganda as truth? Certainly this propaganda was used to degrade and conquer the druids and must be considered in such a way.

This is not to say that all account of information should be dismissed. Many observations can be cross checked with other sources so as to find possible truths. Also, much Celtic culture has survived to this day, though influenced by Cristianism and Catholicism, which may also provide a reasonable cross-reference.

Much of Celtic history is told by its conquerors. And the conquerors tend to portray themselves as richeous in their acts of aggression. Do not accept as a matter of fact what you hear or read in history books. Time changes, and through the years, stories change with it. These stories change to fit the time in which they exist. When one looks at the information passed down by the conquering people, one should also consider how much of their own stories about heroes of their culture have been changed over the years as well. Are they completely honest in telling how they were prejudice against the other cultures gods, or way of life that they murdered all who refused to accept their god as their own? Hardly. Instead they portray themselves as heroes, saints, and just in their actions.

The truth of the matter is that both the Celts and their conquerors stretched the stories of the past, so much that it is impossible to determine reality from legend. The Celts themselves share the responsibility for the loss of their culture; they felt it was sacrilege to write any of their religious beliefs or personal information down. So even after the Catholics and Christians ceased their torment and the Celts conformed to their ways, there was no record. Only the biased journals of a few Catholics or Christians. Hardly a reliable source considering they were converting, not researching.

When you read about the history of the Celts, consider what you read to be the assumptions of what someone has perceived after visiting a rich archeological site in which only relics exist. And if a different person had come across this site they might tell a different story such as the one which follows. This story was based upon an elaborate study of many, many books of which count was lost. You can find many of them are listed in the Glossary.