Talk:Samhain

A Harvest Festival?!

Often we hear how Samhain marks the end of the Harvest or, more to the point that this Holiday marks the Third and final Harvest. However, what evidence *is* there that Samhain was ever regarded in antiquity as a Harvest Festival? Sources, please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.39.20.68 (talk) 13:49, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

More than just "new year" questioned.

Given the reference to Hutton's book Stations of the Sun, I'm a little surprised that the most important academic objection to the story of Samhain is whether it was really the Celtic new year. Hutton also pointed out that the tradition of relighting hearth fires from a single bonfire was written by Keating without a reference, that no other evidence exists for it, and that it would require an unlikely degree of political and religious centralization.

He also explained that the notion that it was a festival of the dead came from Sir James Frazer, who had no evidence but reasoned that (1) festivals of the dead are common in other cultures, (2) other pagan holidays have been Christianized, (3) All Hallow's Eve involved a festival of the dead, so it must be a Christianized pagan festival of the dead. But Christians have had celebrations of the martyrs since the fourth century. By the 5th it was celebrated on Easter Week in Syria, the Sunday after Pentecost by the Greeks, and May 13 by the Romans. By 800 Germany and England celebrated a festival to all the saints on November 1, but the Irish on April 20. The dead didn't come into it until 998 when Odilo of Cluny ordered his congregation to celebrate a mass for the dead in February, and only later was that adopted throughout Christiandom and moved to November 2. In short, the festival for the dead originated with the Catholics.

There is the further theory (one among several) that All Saints' Day began as a yearly mass in an oratory in St. Peter's Basilica, dedicated by Pope Gregory III in 732, the November 1 date suggested by Irish monks but the mass celebrated only in Rome for a hundred years. (See the entry in the New Catholic Encyclopedia, and The Pagan Mysteries of Halloween by Jean Markale (2000, English translation 2001), p88 in the English translation. Unfortunately his references are in French. But that makes it a problem to connect All Saints' or its customs to Samhain.

It might also be mentioned that until the middle of the 20th century anthropologists pretty much assumed that any festival, however new it actually was, had ancient pagan roots, even if the people celebrating it gave a different story and were therefore thought to be ignorant of its origins. There was a romantization of rural cultures such that it was thought the rural folk were holders of ancient wisdom, but simultaneously ignorant that they held wisdom or that it was ancient, so they needed academics to explain it to them, based on theories that have long been discredited. Which results in the confusing state of affairs that there's a lot about the pagan past that we don't know, but a lot that people say as if they do know.

64.61.220.143 (talk) 22:46, 5 September 2008 (UTC)Greg

I've tried to fix it, but feel free to help, since you clearly have the relevant sources. --dab (𒁳) 10:34, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

read the article about Lemuria festival in the ancient Rome; during the Christianization of Rome, the Pantheon temple was consecrated to Virgin Mary and all Saints and the holiday was established on May 13/14. The consecration and the holiday were clearly to replace the old Pagan custom by the new Christian one. Both events (Lemuria and All Saints) were dedicated to The Dead, only Romans wanted to expel them, while Catholics seem to give some respect to the Departed Souls, what reminds a bit some older traditions based in Ancestor Worship (though Christianity itself is not based on AW, of course; neither is its precedessor, Judaism). Another good article is about Festival of the Dead Critto (talk) 22:52, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

The Lemuria was considered an especially in-auspicious time of year to begin any endeavor or dedicate anything. It was so unlucky that it affected the whole month of May. Malae maio nubent, "bad girls marry in May", went the ancient Roman saying. Its unlikely that Lemuria was still celebrated in Rome when the Pantheon was dedicated. If it was, then the Pantheon was dedicated despite the Lemuria, rather than because of it. On the other hand, there is evidence for All Saints celebrations in Syria on May 13th long before the dedication of the Pantheon; such celebrations may have influenced Rome's choice of the date. Rwflammang (talk) 03:32, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

There's some misunderstanding between us two, I think this comes from the English language which, at least for me, is not a mother tongue. Polish, which I speak daily, is a Slavic language with a totally different structure and grammar (disregarding that both languages are Indo-European, of course). Anyway, I didn't claim that The Pope dedicated the Pantheon because of Lemuria; obviously the supreme Catholic priest wouldn't observe the Pagan rites, whether obsolete or contemporary to him. What I think is that it may be possible that he wanted to eradicate the old Pagan Roman customs and replace them with the new Christian ones, as people, especially from the lower strata, are very strongly attached to old customs.

It is widely known that in Christianized countries around the Globe, a lot of older customs were preserved. We may call then thet The Pope dedicated Pantheon _despite_ the Lemuria, to lower their meaning. Also, any dating of Christian festivals, even if of genuine Christian origin, doesn't preclude blending with other traditions. For example, while death of Jesus on the cross is probably a historical fact that took place in April around year 33 CE, it doesn't mean that a lot of Spring-related and fertility-related holidays and festivals weren't observed around this time in Europe, Middle East, Northern Africa and elsewhere.

They naturally were observed (and still are, eg. Nowruz in Iran and Holi in India) and this way a lot of pre-Christian customs as egg painting (observed eg. in Zoroastrian Persia and probaably pre-Christian Slavs and Balts) were blended into the Easter customs. The same went for at least some of Christmas customs, which were blended with the ones observed on Saturnalia, Winterblot, Yule (if such a holiday existed), etc. This doesn't mean, of course, that Christmas is an extension of Pagan holiday, only that Christians borrowed some customs from Pagans. Not to mention the death of St. John the Baptist which could have taken place on June 24rd, however this doesn't mean that the Summer-related festivals didn't take place around this time, as they did and some customs might have been blended again.

And, in most cases, rather than being ordered by the Church, such a borrowing and blending was a natural process of the people. Finally, the fact that Christian missionaries planted a holiday in some country and it was later blended with local tradition s doesn't mean, that the planted holiday wasn't borrowed from another Pagan holiday in another country. A lot was (and still is) common not only in the Indo-European cultures, but in agrarian cultures in many parts of the world. Cheers, Critto (talk) 17:01, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

In reference to "Hutton also pointed out that the tradition of relighting hearth fires from a single bonfire was written by Keating without a reference,", there is a source that sheds light of Keating statement, except it related to Beltaine and not Samhain.

Here is the passage from Keating’s 17th century book ‘Foras Feasa ar Éirinn’: Tuathal, by these repeated victories, put an end to the usurpation, redeemed the nobility and gentry from the oppression of the commons, and restored happiness and tranquillity to the kingdom. When he had fixed himself in the government, he convened the general assembly of Tara, after the example of his royal predecessors in the throne of Ireland, who always summoned a parliament in the beginning of their reigns, to debate upon the affaire of the state, and to consult the welfare and peace of the public. The nobility and gentry of the island joyfully met him, and in this convention recognised his title to the crown, confessed him to be their lawful and rightful monarch, and promised to support his government against all foreign and domestic enemies; and, as a farther testimony of their loyalty, engaged to continue the succession in his family for ever; in the very same manner as they promised to Ugaine More, one of predecessors. In this Assembly it was, that Tuathal separated a Tract of Land from each of the four Provinces, which met together at a certain Place,- and of that Part which he took he made the Country of Meath, as it appears at this Day. For though the Territory of Land, that is adjacent to Uisneach, was known by the name of Meath, from the Time of the Sons of Nemedius, till the Reign of this Monarch Tuathal, yet the Proportion that was thus separated .and divided from the rest was not so called till the death this Prince, who established it as a distinct Part of the Country from every one of the Provinces,' as before mentioned. In each Portion taken out of the Provinces Tuathal erected a magnificent Palace,- in: the Tract he divided from Munster, and added to Meath, he built the royal Seat, of Tlachtga, where the Fire Tlachtga was ordained to be kindled. The Use of this sacred Fire was to summon the Priests, the Augurs and Druids of Ireland, to repair thither, and assemble upon the Eve of All Saints [Samain], in order to consume the Sacrifices that were offered to their Pagan Gods and it was established under the Penalty of a great Fine, that no other Fire mould be kindled upon that Night throughout the Kingdom; so that the Fire, that was to be used in the Country, was to be derived from this holy Fire; for which Privilege the People were to pay a Scraball, which amounts to three Pence every Year, as an Acknowledgment to the King of Munster, because the Palace of Tlachtga, where this. Fire burn'd, was the Proportion taken from the Province of Munster, and added to the Country of Meath.

Now the Dublin university magazine, in 1850, publish an article called ‘May-Day Festivals in Ireland’ which includes O’Donovan opinions of Tlachgta: "I never could discover," writes Mr. O'Donovan, in answer to a query of ours on the subject, "where Keating found authority for lighting this fire at Uisneach; and I have been long of opinion that this fire was lighted at Tlachtgha, a hill near Athboy, in East Meath, where the same King Tuathal is said to have erected another palace. I ground this opinion upon a passage in a MS. in the library of Trinity College, Dublin, which runs thus:-- "The fair of Tlachtgha (which belongs to that part of Meath taken from the province of Munster) was celebrated by the youths of Munster; and a fire was lighted thereat, from which all the fires lighted in Erin were kindled, which were purchased from them (the youths of Munster); and a screpall of gold was paid them out of every territory in Erin for the fire, and a sack of wheat, and a hog from every chief hearth in Erin, were given to the Comharha of Meath, i.e., O'Kindellan, for this fire."--H. 3, 17, p. 732.”

The manuscript is dated as 16th century makes no mention of Samain. However note the sack of wheat and a hog plus its celebration by the youths of Munster. Now compare O’Donovan older version to the Metrical Dindshenchas poems from the 12th century Book of Leinster:

“Mide … Mide it was, the ardent son of Brath the host-leading son of Deaith; for he kindled a mystic fire above the race of Nemed, seizer of hostages. Seven years good ablaze was the fire, it was a sure truce: so that he shed the fierceness of the fire for a time over the four quarters of Erin. So that it is in return for this fire in truth (it is not a rash saying, it is not a falsehood) that he (Mide and his descendants) has a right by a perpetual bargain over every chief hearth of Erin. So the right belongs to the gentle heir of the plain of Mide mirthful and bright; even a measure of fine meal with a white pig for every rooftreee in Erin. “

There is a strong analogy with O’Donovan older version of Tlachtga. Dindshenchas poem goes on to tell that Mide is buried under Uisnech. (Uisnech was the capital of the Southern Ui Neill kingdom of Mide, themselves called the Kings of Uisnech in the Book of Leinster.) From the same 12th century Metrical Dindshenchas , were is a description that matches the older O’Donovan manuscript and the reference to the youths of Munster and lighting of a scared fire:

LOCH LUGBORTA [near Uisnech] “Loch Lugborta, whence the name? Not hard to say. A great meeting was held at Caendruim (which is called Usnech) … Or else the lake was named after Lugaid mac Táil, who was called Delbaeth. For that territory was the place that Delbaeth mac Táil took possession of, when he came northwards out of Munster with his five sons, after being warned by his own daughter to give up his land to her and her husband, Trad mac Tassaig. Then Delbaeth lit a magic fire, and five streams burst forth from it; and he set one of his sons to watch each of the streams, namely, two of his sons to the west of Loch Oirbsen, Gno beg and Gno mór: Baetan at Bethra, Andiled at Delbna Mór, Anlenn at Delbna Bethra, Andiled at Nuadat. He himself stayed at that spot, and it may be from him that the lake and the place had their name, Loch Lugborta, for till then his name was Lugaid, but thenceforth Delbaeth, that is Dolb-aed, from the enchanted fire.”

Also John T. Koch (like others) says in his ‘Celtic culture: a historical encyclopedia: Volumes 1-5’: “According to LEBAR GABALA ERENN ('The Book of Invasions'), Mide was the creation of the DRUID Mide of the people of Nemed, and he is credited with lighting the first fire at Uisnech.” (I personally haven’t found such a description in the Lebor Gabala Erenn.)

Yet it seem for me the events of Uinsech (and so Beltaine/Cet Samain), i.e. the scared fire, have been transferred to Tlachtga and Samain? Muireagain (talk) 22:32, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Pagan Thought Police

Wow, that didn't take long. I posted a question about a pov revert to the intro of the Samhain article and within 30 minutes it was deleted. This article used to lead with the npov statement that Samhain was the word as Gaeilge for the month of November and gave it's etymology. It now leads with unsourced POV neo-pagan claptrap about their festival. I even mentioned in my comment that of course it was appropriate to discuss the modern neo-pagan festival of Samhain but that it should first be noted that it has a more generic meaning. That would be the encyclopedic thing to do. I suppose whomever deleted my post didn't like the fact that I pointed out that neo-pagans have essentially stolen Samhain from celtic culture and have made it in to something it never was. Ye love to point out how christians did that to "your" festivals but the goddess forbid that anyone point out that ye are doing the same thing with celtic culture and tradition. About 90% of the information in the current article is unsourced and reflects the typical overly romanticized concept of samhain popular among neo-pagans. Alas, I'm sure this comment too will be deleted. So much for the true meaning of wikipedia. --Dliodoir (talk) 14:16, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Your comment was removed because it was an insult-filled rant, not a constructive comment about improving the article. (And I say that as a Christian, not a pagan.) The article begins with a discussion of Samhain in ancient pagan Celtic culture, not with its significance in neo-Paganism. That doesn't come until two-thirds of the way down the page. If you care about "the true meaning of Wikipedia", read the article first without preconceived notions of what you expect to find, then read WP:CIVIL and WP:TALK, then come back here to discuss improvements to the article without name-calling. —Angr 14:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Samhain translating to... Burning Man?

I am not an expert in the subject, but there does seem to be a rather large parallel here; a translation of an ancient spiritual ritual into modern times? Has this been discussed, or is it just ridiculous conjecture on my part?... (Pterantula (talk) 17:22, 31 December 2008 (UTC))

Burning Man has absolutely nothing to do with Samhain.BoyintheMachine (talk) 01:20, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Pop Culture

I've added in a reference to the inclusion of Samhain in the Halloween series of movies, specifically with regards to Michael Myers himself. To be honest, I'm surprised there wasn't already any mention of the connection as the Halloween movies are more high profile than the other two examples. HDC7777 (talk) 19:05, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Take it to Irish mythology in popular culture. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 23:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Historic Date

While a later part of the article discusses the tendency of many ancient groups to celebrate Samhain based on frost and harvest and land conditions, the first paragraph simply gives the date as October 31/November 1. I was under the impression that the October 31/November 1 date was largely a modern adaptation, whereas any ancient people who used a set annual date for the festival would have timed their events by the sun (such as those who built Stonehenge.) The midway point between the solstice and equinox is roughly a week later. This year it is November 6/7. Perhaps the initial paragraph could be changed to make the questionable or approximate date more clear. 68.146.28.195 (talk) 05:39, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Early Christians, with their Jewish origins, started the day at sunset on what for us would be the previous day. So the night of October 31st is already the start of All Saints day. November 1st had be an important date for Christians long before it became All Saints day: It appears in the St Columban’s (540-615 AD) “Regula Monachorum”: Rule 7: “But concerning the synaxis, that is, the office of psalms and prayers in canonical manner, some distinctions must be drawn, since its observance has been variously bequeathed to our remembrance by different authorities. Thus, in accordance with the nature of man's life and the succession of the seasons, the same will be variously suggested by myself also in writing. For it should not be stereotyped in view of the mutual changes of the seasons; for it is fitting that it be longer on the long nights and shorter on the short ones. Hence, in agreement with our predecessors, from the twenty-fourth of June, while the night increases, the office begins to grow gradually from twelve chants of the shortest measure on the night of the Sabbath or the Lord's Day, up to the beginning of winter, that is, the first of November. Then they sing twenty-five antiphonal psalms [of twice the same number] which always follow third after two chanted, in such a way that within the two aforesaid nights they sing the entire total of the psalter, while they modify the remaining nights for the whole winter with twelve chants. At winter's end, gradually each week throughout the spring, three psalms are always dropped, so that only twelve antiphons remain on the holy nights, that is, the thirty-six psalms of the daily winter office, but it is twenty-four throughout the whole spring and summer and up to the autumn equinox, that is, the twenty-fourth of September. Then the fashion of the synaxis is like that on the spring equinox, that is, the twenty-fifth of March, while by mutual changes it slowly grows and lessens.” [Columban’s words are a little confusing, however “Rule of Donatus” (of Luxeuil), a former monk of Columban clarities the scheme: winter from November 1 to March 25. Summer is split into two halves: March 25th to June 24th (mid-summer day) and June 24th to November 1st.]

St Columban’s work reflects the same seasonal timeframe as found in an earlier Italian work “the Rule of Benedict”. St Benedict (480-547) on the same topic defines winter as from November 1 to Easter, and summer from Easter to November 1. “8. Concerning the Divine Offices at Night. In the winter time, that is from the Calends of November until Easter,” http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/rul-benedict.html

A work attributed to St Augustine (354-430 AD) mentions four time periods of: November to February, March to April, May to August, and September to October]

I have no answer to why November 1 appears in the 6th century as the beginning of winter for Christian writers. However Saint Isidore (560-636 AD) of Seville identifies November 1 as one of the four Christian fasts of the year. He quotes the bible as his source: Jer 36:2-9, “in the ninth month [i.e. taken as November], that they proclaimed a fast before the LORD“. While further on Jer 36:22 says “Now the king sat in the winterhouse in the ninth month: and there was a fire on the hearth burning before him.” Muireagain (talk) 12:04, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Loreena McKennitt's song

Is the Loreena McKennitt's All Souls' Night about All Souls' Day or Samhain?

I've posted this in here and in Talk:All Souls' Day.Civic Cat (talk) 00:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

All Souls' Night is literally the evening of All Souls' Day, November 2. So therefore the answer would be no.BoyintheMachine (talk) 01:22, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

songs about Samhain

If we can have
[[Category:Christmas songs]]
List of Christmas hit singles
List of non-religious Christmas songs
Then what about List of songs about Samhaim?
Civic Cat (talk) 00:28, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Question regarding entry 6 The Spirit of Halloween

In looking over the entry on Samhain, this particular section seems somewhat out of place, as it is located between Celtic Reconstructionism and Wicca but does not seem to have anything to do with either of them or the previous section of Neopaganism. It is also put in as a top level headline, rather than a subheader; the implication is that Wicca falls under this heading. I would also like to note there are no references of any sort in regards to the information posted under The Spirit of Halloween. My main concern is for the accuracy of this information, as well as its correct location within the article. Thank you. 64.85.228.72 (talk) 08:50, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

If I recall correctly...

This holiday was originally named after a spirit of the same name. I'll look it up, but it seems like an oversight without mentioning that (if true). And I was going to mention Glen Danzig's band -- but I see there's a page for that already. :) --valerie (talk) 02:50, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

If you are referring to "Samhain" the god or spirit of the dead then you would be mistaken. Samhain is not the name of a deity.BoyintheMachine (talk) 01:24, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

References

This:

<ref name="Danaher"/><ref name="McNeill"/><ref name="O'Driscoll"/>

is not acceptable. We don't call for "references" because we like the look of these little footnote numerals. References are supposed to clarify which information is taken from where. Just a liberal sprinkling of the article with generic references that amount to a hundred pages does not do that job. The fact that statements are attributed to all three of these (doubtlessly valid) references, summarily, makes it clear that whoever added these footnotes did not have the sources in front of them. --dab (𒁳) 10:15, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I have looked at the article history, and it turns out that the edit in question is User:Kathryn NicDhàna's, from January 2007.

I respect Kathryn for the work she does on Celtic topics, and the edit was certainly a great improvement to the article as it stood in 2006, but now (2010) it becomes apparent that the "virtual referencing" (summarily slapping references on an existing paragraph written by somebody else) created a problem: the paragraph remained unverified for more than three years because editors assumed it had been based on reliable sources.

My present concern is the claim that the English term bonfire originates as a loan translation of 'tine cnámh. This piece of information has since Samhain 2006 made its way from Wikipedia to the internet at large. The question is, is it true? After Kathryn's edit, the claim was implied that this theory was found in "Danaher", "McNeill" and/or "O'Driscoll". Is this the case? If so, in which of the three? The point is that this claim was originally added by an anonymous IP with no reference whatsoever, but has now survived without challenge for three years because of the "pseudo-referencing". Such problems are extremely difficult to spot, and it would be better to leave information unreferenced than to create a false impression of backing in academic sources. --dab (𒁳) 10:31, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I've sourced the tine cnámh to O'Donaill, Focloir Gaeilge-Bearla/Irish-English Dictionary. Although, due to some spelling variation because of Irish spelling reforms in the 20th century, the actual spelling given in O'Donaill is tine chnámh. But my understanding is these are equivalent spellings for the same word.

As to the rather broad sourcing of whole paras to, as you say, a hundred pages in three sources, I'll see if I can address some of it since I believe I have all those texts available to me. But I'd like to note that I believe the citations can be refined exceedingly fine from these three sources, including multiple sources for multiple individual words in many of the sentences. Would you agree that seems an excessive approach to the citations? These are often dense sentences and perfect specificity of citation would inevitably lead to "citation drift" when other people edit the article, inserting phrases or rewriting sentences but very often moving the citation to an incorrect place or leaving it to cite the wrong info. I've seen this often on WP. I'm not saying the citations here shouldn't be more specific, only that it requires more ongoing attention by editors familiar with the sources.

I'm really not arguing with your basic point, only some practical considerations on limits in my opinion. --Pigman☿/talk 16:08, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

of course you can compile entire paragraphs or even articles summarizing a source. Without needing to attach a footnote to every punctuation mark. The problem begins when you attach a "reference" to an existing paragraph, written by other people.

also, my issue is not with tine cnámh literally translating to "bone fire". The question is, did the English term bonfire, attested from about 1500, originate as a Gaelic loan translation and not, for example, vice versa. --dab (𒁳) 16:34, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

You're right; this needs work. I can't recall who added the whole "bone fire" thing. I haven't had a chance to go back through the history but, IIRC, it was removed, then re-added a few times by persistent editors, and never with a good source. The over-general sourcing in other places was probably me trying to put in something basic, intending to come back and make it more specific. Looking in the notes, we do have page numbers for each of those references, though often to an entire chapter or series of pages in the respective books (say, the Samhain chapter in Danaher). But it looks like since I added those refs others have inserted additional content in those sections, or rearranged the paragraphs, implying the sources still apply to all the content now it's been altered. I have the books at hand here, and can make the page refs more specific when I get a chance. But I imagine other stuff here will need to go. I won't get to it today, though. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:35, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Just to clarify on the page numbers referenced in the abbreviated/repeated ref format:

<ref name="Danaher"/> links to Danaher, Kevin (1972) The Year in Ireland: Irish Calendar Customs Dublin, Mercier. ISBN 1-85635-093-2 pp.190-232,

<ref name="McNeill"/> goes to McNeill, F. Marian (1961, 1990) The Silver Bough, Vol. 3. William MacLellan, Glasgow ISBN 0-948474-04-1 pp.11-46,

<ref name="O'Driscoll"/> goes to O'Driscoll, Robert (ed.) (1981) The Celtic Consciousness New York, Braziller ISBN 0-8076-1136-0 pp.197-216: Ross, Anne "Material Culture, Myth and Folk Memory" (on modern survivals); pp.217-242: Danaher, Kevin "Irish Folk Tradition and the Celtic Calendar" (on specific customs and rituals)

btw, Pigman, if you have time to get to the more specific pages today or tomorrow, go for it. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:52, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

dab: Apparently, I am stupid. I missed your point entirely about "bonfire". My (English) dictionary says "bonfire" comes from Middle English. Technically, the sentence "The word 'bonfire', or 'bonefire' is a direct translation of the Gaelic tine cnámh" is basically correct but very misleading. The translation of tine cnámh is indeed "bonfire" but the English word "bonfire" is not derived etymologically from tine cnámh as far as I can tell. I'm removing the sentence entirely; it's unnecessary and obviously confusing. --Pigman☿/talk 16:26, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Also,

"A harvest festival with ancient roots in Celtic polytheism, 

it was linked to festivals held around the same time in other Celtic cultures, and continued to be celebrated in late medieval times. Due to its date it became associated with the Christian festival All Saints' Day, and greatly influenced modern celebration of Halloween."

No citation...

Evidence of Pagan origin

Maybe I'm missing something, but I see no discussion in this article of the primary sources that provide evidence of a pagan origin for this holiday. It seems clear to me that this holiday can be traced back to the middle ages, but what makes anyone think that it had a pre-Christian origin? Rwflammang (talk) 16:09, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

everything has pre-Christian roots, including the word "roots" and Christianity itself. That's a null statement.

It is part of Wikipedia's fate that people will always keep re-inserting misconceptions that are already debunked in the article, simply because you cannot expect people to read more than the lead section (if even that) before clicking the "edit" button. --dab (𒁳) 16:10, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

The german WP article mentions Samhain as predominantly neoceltic holiday +- invented by John Rhys around 1890. This can be based on quality sources as e.g. Bernhard Maier (Die Religionen der Kelten. Götter - Mythen. Weltbild, 2. Aufl., München 2004, S. 174ff) and others see more of a link between early christianity in Ireland and Caltic revival reconstruction than the other wayround. BTW Most things I am aware of have no prechristian roots, e.g. Wikipedia itself. ;) Bakulan (talk) 05:00, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

of course Wikipedia has pre-Christian roots. See e.g. Nabnitu, Old Italic alphabets.

in other words, the problem is not in the term "pre-Christian", it is in your exact understanding of term "roots".

frankly, I don't see what you want. The article doesn't allege that Samhain has "pre-Christian roots" beyond a sober discussion of the etymology of the word and its occurrence in the Coligny calendar. The remaining discussion of the festival's early history concerns the medieval period, i.e. the Christian period. The article is also aware that the notion of the "Celtic New Year" associated with Samhain dates to the 18th century. If you want to add further material concerning the modern-era popularisation of the festival, you are welcome to do that. --dab (𒁳) 11:38, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what "null statement" means, but I think a discussion of the primary sources regarding Samhain's origin would improve the article. I don't think that discussing the origin of wikipedia here would improve the article. Rwflammang (talk) 11:44, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

unless you provide us with a strong sources, preferrably the early Medieval or even Roman chronicles, not much will change. A scourge of all Paganism- and Early Christianity- related articles, maybe with an exception of Roman holidays which are well-documented, is the scarcity of the sources, which in addition in most cases represent a very strong POV. There are a lot of discussions on the Slavic holidays, too, though Slavic Paganism was preserved much longer than Celtic one (some peoples were officially Pagan even in XII century CE).

For example, the Harvest festival of Plony or Dożynki is described with details in Saxo Grammaticus chronicle "Gesta Danorum". Still, in Polish wikipedia there's no mention on the source, which may lead to accusations that it's a Romantic invention, which it clearly isn't (if anything, Saxo or his patron, bishop Absalon, could have invented or changed some facts in XII century).

Article about the Springtime festival Jare Gody was removed altogether, despite many references in the folklore and similiarities with other cultures (eg. Nowruz or Holi, which share a lot of customs similiar both with Easter and Jare Gody, despite the geographical distance). Again, there were no sources. In the case oc Celtic holidays, I am curious what about other holidays as Imbolc, Beltaine, Lughnasadh, etc? If they are historically confirmed, then this would be strange if Samhain was not observed, as most European cultures _did have_ the season-related festivals, and the time of these other holidays clearly indicates the preferrence for cross-quarter holidays (around the halves between Equinox and Solstice dates; of course I don't claim these peoples observed Solstices and Equinoxes as such, dating was rather based on Lunisolar calendar), rather than quarter ones (around, though probably not directly related to, the Solstices and Equinoxes).

And if Celts observed cross-quarters, then it becomes obvious: Imbolc (February), Beltaine (May), Lugnasadh (August), Samhain (November). Also, what's wrong with the sources as books by Nora Chadwick, who was a respected Medievalist for most of her life? Does anybody here have such an expertise in the topics of ancient/medieval holidays, that he/she may claim something is "naive", "serious", "true", "untrue"? Lack of the sources and too bold claims by the people who may or may not be experts in the themes they comment, whether as skeptics or apologists, is a serious threat to the reliability of Wikipedia and makes this project not much reliable one. Critto (talk) 17:20, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip about Chadwick. I'll look into it. I too am curious about the origins of the other holidays as well. Unfortunately, Google turns up very little that is useful, mostly just assertions and human interest stories of the "did you know" or "it's a little known fact" type, none citing believable sources. I think this article, (and the others as well) can benefit from a discussion of the evidence for the origins of these feasts. Rwflammang (talk) 20:19, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Yep, Google doesn't help much here, with exception of Google books. I've been searching for attested festivals of Northern Europe, using the phrases like "attested Celtic festival", "attested Celtic holiday", "Celtic holiday" & attestation, etc., later replacing Celtic with European, Pagan, Norse, Germanic, Nordic, Slavic, Baltic; None of the results were satisfactory, most were related to the wikipedia pages, often reproduced on answers.com and many other sites, both with and without a citation. I don't believe there is no skilled scholar interested in the topic, it's rather a plight of Google type of indexing and searching. There were a lot articles in Pagan, Catholic and Skeptical sites, most of them seemed to be derivative works from Wikipedia articles. Greetings Critto (talk) 01:14, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Do you think so indeed. Then I would kindly ask you to review the edit history of this article and try to figure out who has tended to collect such decent references as this article currently does have.

Regarding Bakulan's complaint, I must say that the article still cites to many shoddy references. Citing the naive claim that Samhain was "the Celtic New Year" from Chadwick (1970) does not establish that this idea was popularised in the 18th century. It seems to be correct that John Rhys was the first to come up with this expression, apparently in the 1880s. Literature in the 18th century still discussed Samhain in the context of the yearly ritual of the druids, I might add based on medieval Irish sources. In this sense, the idea that the Samhain festival has pre-Christian roots is due to medieval Ireland, such as the 9th-century Sanas Cormaic. I am adding information from Hutton. We can lose inferior references such as Chadwick as far as I am concerned. --dab (𒁳) 11:52, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I think we have established the following:

• Samhain was the beginning of the winter season in medieval Ireland, attested from about the 10th century.
• the earliest claim of a pagan ritual celebrated at Samhain dates to the 17th century
• 18th century scholarship mostly took the pagan associations of Samhain for granted
• the theory that the festival did not just mark the beginning of the winter season but the "Celtic New Year" is due to Rhys and Frazer, and dates to the late 19th century.

I think there is a little misunderstanding here surrounding the terms "pagan" or "pre-Christian". Often saying "pre-Christian roots" seems to imply some religious significance. In my book, "pre-Christian" would simply mean that the "quarter days" marking the four seasons are a tradition that predate the 5th century, without supposing any religious cult associated with them. --dab (𒁳) 12:35, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

OK. If so, then its allsaints thats influenced our view of Samhain and not vice versa. basically on should clearly state in the entrance paragraph, that Samhain is neoceltic reconstruction without much evidence in the ancient celtic record. Bakulan (talk) 20:50, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it's so simple. I think clearly Samhain is an early (8th century?) medieval holiday, and not just a neo-celtic reconstruction. Its original meaning is shrouded in mystery. I don't know when All Saints Day was first celebrated in November in Ireland, but I do know that All Saints was celebrated in April in 5th century Ireland. I'd be surprised if All Saints was celebrated in November in Ireland before the 9th century, but I could be wrong about that. It's conceivable that Samhain originated as a local variant of All Saints, but it's also conceivable that it had an independent origin. If the latter, it's conceivable that its origins may have been pre-Christian, but far from certain. In fact, I know of no positive evidence to support any of this. Rwflammang (talk) 03:25, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

in my view, thinking about folk customs requires the evolutionary approach. This means, that the traditions, both local and "global", were simply evolving and blending customs from many sources. It was rather a folk-based, natural thing than an agenda eg. of the Church or Pagan priests of yore. For example, Christmas Tree is now popular in most Christian countries, while it originated in 16th century Germany. It might or might not be a remnant of the Pagan tree worship (not exactly in this way, of course), but anyway it was blended into traditions of other countries. :::Similiarly, Samhain might be a holiday that blended a lot of traditions, some of them originating in pre-Christian Celtic times, some maybe coming from the Anglo-Saxons or Vikings, and some being born just in the country, as a form of folk magick (which was a living tradition in most of Europe, not necessarily a continuation of Pagan traditions), folklorized version of Christianity (though I can't find any associations between some of the Samhain customs and Christian message; folk Christianity has usually more profound Christian themes, eg. the figures of Christ or Mary at the crossroads, open air celebration of The Passion of Christ, hanging of Judas, etc. Also, some popular customs are not Pagan, not Christian, not magickal, but just secular, eg. celebration of one's birthday, marriage/town foundation/school foundation anniversary, school year beginning, etc. I think that in a rural, agrarian society, a lot of customs, especially related to fire and fertility, can be explained this way. Greetings, Critto (talk) 20:15, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Bakulan, what is wrong with you? HistoricalSamhain is a medieval Celtic festival. Why do you keep going on about the "ancient Celts"? It may have escaped your notice, but there is a period of time between the ancient Celtic period and neoceltic reconstruction. It only spans about a millennium, the 6th to 16th centuries, and is known as the "Middle Ages". The Gaelic Middle Ages are neither "pagan" nor "neoceltic reconstruction", they are just the Christian Celtic Middle Ages. Your constant focus on paganism and neopaganism in a topic that concerns the Christian Middle Ages is completely beside the point, and also annoying.

I realize that there is much pseudohistorical nonsense flying around concerning the "ancient pagan Celts" and their connection to Samhain etc. But it is precisely the neopagan fallacy to ignore the medieval period, and pretend that the "ancient Celts" were somehow seamlessly followed by the Wiccans. I appreciate that you are trying to dispel such fallacies, but by ignoring the medieval period yourself, you are simply perpetuating the neopagan fallacy. The Gaelic festival did not so much "become associated" with a Catholic festival, it was a Catholic festival, celebrated by Celts who were also Catholics, or Catholics who were also Celts. It is completely undisputed that Samhain was an important festival in medieval (Christian) Gaelic culture. It is correct that the idea that this festival is somehow "pagan" seems to be modern, but that doesn't make the festical itself a modern invention. --dab (𒁳) 07:59, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I have tried to improve the article in this respect. Our earliest references establish that Samhain was a festival in medieval Ireland (say, 10th to 12th century). Any speculation on how the festival may have looked like at an earlier time, say the 7th century, let alone the 4th or 3rd century, are just that: speculation. Our earliest evidence linking All Saints to 1 November date to the 8th century, i.e. they are 200 years older than our earliest references to Samhain. It is therefore pointless to try and postulate a Samhain that was not associated with the Church festival of All Saints. --dab (𒁳) 13:09, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

The entry sounds much better now. Bakulan (talk) 20:52, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

With all due respect, it's not much important what you or me think about this, as everyone can have his or her theories, it's important what the experts think about this. Did you read any of the sources mentioned eg. Stations of the Sun by Hutton? Did anyone of us read the literature for the commented topic? What does Hutton exactly say about Samhain? What do the Medieval sources say? I think it's a good idea to quote the fragments of original text in wikipedia, as not everybody has an access to the referenced books, while a piece of original wording would give the article more credibility.

Being skeptical to ALL theories, let's not forget about skepticism towards wikipedia. Having worked on this project for few yearts, I am very skeptical about its character, where anything may be changed indefinitely by an indefinite number of authors, many of whom might or might not have read the sources they cite. Articles like this one are DOOMED to be a front of war between Christian and Pagan apologists. Unless there is someone who specializes in the topic and who will quote some experts directly, the article will ever be unreliable, at least for me. Besides, a huge pity is that Wikipedia is being quoted on many sites (usually spam-sites), giving an exorbitant SEO popularity of its articles, to the extent of inability to find any other sources on the Internet. Critto (talk) 18:07, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

well, thank god for google books.

yes I did read what Hutton wrote, on google books. As soon as there is any doubt as to whether a particular reference is being misrepresented, it can make sense to give a brief verbatim quote of the salient point along with the citation in the footnote. You are free to add such quotes.

apart from that, it isn't clear what you are criticizing. You are more or less stating the obvious. Of course we should represent what the experts have written, this goes without saying, and this is what I am trying to do.

I criticise exactly what I have told about:

1. adding information without sourcing - this doesn't relate to your work as I am aware of your care of sources and details, this does however relate to work of many editors not only in English wikipedia. Too many articles are being constantly rewritten or have been deleted because of this. Sometimes it's better not to post an info than post one that is doubtful. All of that makes Wikipedia a poor and unreliable resource

2. too obscure sourcing where it exists, a problem mentioned by some other editors here; citing the sources to the paragraphs they don't relate to or not confirm, etc. Quoting the material inside the article text would be a good antidote for this problem

3. too much attachment to one or two selected authors and selective use of their work; about 30 references are being used in the article about Samhain and still it now seems that only Hutton is being seen as reliable, despite the fact that most other sources were written by the experts with academic background, too, employing however a different methods, eg. based on etnography (interpretation of folklore , linguistics or archaelogy. This is unfair for me, as it favours one method of research (historical one preferred by Hutton) at the cost of other _academic_ methods. Of course, I mean today's research, not the one by James Frazer. Hutton,on the other hand, seems to me to confront the historical research with the outdated theses from "The Golden Bough", omitting the current etnography. I am sure that even among the sources mentioned in this article, some espouse the etnographic position, and still Hutton's way is being favoured.

Also, Hutton himself warns over any oversimplification, both in favour or against the thesis of pagan remnants in folklore, as what is true for British Isles doesn't have to be true eg. for Slavic or Baltic countries, where, as I am aware, a lot has survived in the rural culture. He also doesn't deny that there existed a pagan festival on Samhain, however it is probably elaborated on the p. 370, which is absent in the digital preview of the book (if you can provide me with a quotatation, I'd be grateful). Similiarly, he supports the idea that there existed Pagan festivals of Imbolc and Beltaine, though he thinks most of the current customs to be later invention. Critto (talk) 01:09, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

4. oversimplification - writing an article based on the single academic method instead of few ones that will complete each other, omitting important things as synchretic character of Celtic Christianity of the age of Saint Patrick and after him, period of Christianization which in every culture has adapted older traditions into Christian ones, etc. Christianity and Paganism seem to be harshly contrasted here, while in the folklore they have coexisted in most of the European cultures. In Slavic cultuer, for example, some myths were re-created based on the folklore, eg. the Creation Myth starring God and The Devil was a Christianized retelling of the popular, not only Indo-European myth of the Divine Combat between two deities: one of Light and one of Darkness; in Slavic setting this was probably a duel between Svarog and Veles or Perun and Veles. It would be impossible to reconstruct this myth from history alone, however it was quite easily reconstructed from folklore. Similiarly, a lot of customs related to Easter, Christmas, Pentecost, St. John's Night, etc were found to be of pre-Christian origin, whether religious or secular (if such a distinction existed at all in Pagan times). A lot of etnographers in Poland elaborated the topic. Why isn't this done in relation with Celtic holidays? Critto (talk) 01:28, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

of course it is irrelevant what you or I may be thinking about Samhain. This should be clear to anyone but freshest newcomers to the project. What is relevant is what you and I are thinking about what the relevant expert literature is, and how it is best represented. This also involves "thinking", and it's what makes us encyclopedic editors, as opposed to web crawling bots.

--dab (𒁳) 20:17, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

yep, surely it does, however this requires expertise in the topic, which is not guaranteed by the character of Wikipedia and evidenced with the lengthy and sometimes hot discussions and debates on each article which last for years. Again, this is not a criticism of your work, which being balanced and sourced is among the best examples of wikipedia input, it's about the people who recklessly start and develop articles that need to be rewritten from scratch then. Cheers, Critto (talk) 01:09, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

sure, I know, but in my experience articles that are written based on solid expertise, with the proper references, are much less likely to deteriorate by naive or misguided additions, because such will stand out much more than if the article was itself poor to begin with. Once an article is really solid, it can also be semiprotected in the long term, because the likelihood of useful additions by passing IPs will decrease to virtually nil. This article isn't quite there yet, but it is improved every time somebody brings up questionable material. Ultimately, the sub-standard additions are the motor that drives Wikipedia, because they annoy people enough to make an effort. --dab (𒁳) 12:33, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Christianization

So we both agree that the Wikipedia articles should be well-sourced. It's good, as this is crucial for Wikipedia to be received as a reliable resource base and not another hobby only. What's very important for me, though, is better sourcing about Samhain and other holidays based on the folklorist/etnographic approach. One should not underestimate this position only because Frazer and some other researchers have overstated their claims about some relations.

Most of what we know today about Slavic, Baltic and Finnish mythology comes from the folklore, including the creation myths, roles od the Deities and Spirits, etc. A lot was recovered about Slavic pagan customs thanks to the numerous analyses of the living folklore, too. I know that the case of Celts is much more complicated, as they were christianised few centuries before Slavs, not to say about the Balts who (in Lithuania) were baptised in XV century, and a lot survived as a live tradition; similiar case is with Finns and Sami people.

Anyway, I have serious doubts, that the customs like passing cattle between bonfires, dressing up as ghosts, goblins and demons could have originated as a Christian custom. What Christian message does it contain? How is it related to the messianic revelation about Christ as the only Saviour of the World? Jews and early Christians despised such things. By contrast, Pagans have venerated and worshipped fire and considered it sacred, protective and healing since the oldest times in most or all cultures, as found by the numerous archeological discoveries, surviving traditions, myths, legends, etc.

That's a good point, and your impression is, I suspect, widely shared. But I have my doubts that passing cattle between bonfires, dressing up as ghosts, etc. are really pagan in origin. Remember that the pagans were really creeped out by widespread Christian practices like veneration of relics, boneyards, sleeping in coffins, and other momento mori practices that were generally more popular among Christians than pagans. A major part of pagan ceremonial had to do with ritual purification after pollution by contact with death. Christians did not share these taboos. In ancient times, Christians were in some respects the subcultural goths of the ancient world. Rwflammang (talk) 03:08, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

If anything, it may be just the secular or "magickal" folk custom; I think this should be researched for and if I find anything, I will add some sources. I have some friends who are into magickal and druidic traditions and are interested in history, so as soon as I know anything, I will share this with you. Anyway, folk magick thrived in Christian countries, too, and it wasn't always a continuation of Pagan customs; a good example is Iceland where a lot in this domain (eg. Icelandic magical staves) was created during the late Middle Ages, Renaissance and later eras. While proving that this or that custom originated in ancient or "very early" medieval Ireland, Scotland or England may be difficult or impossible, I am almost certain this is not Christian custom at all, though Christian community may have tolerated and adopted it. Some customs are simply found in most or all agrarian cultures, despite the lack of contact between some of them (eg. both Aztecs and Romans venerated fire and Sun, though it's obvious they never communicated in ancient times). Insight in the psychology of archetypes (eg. Jungian psychology) could be helpful here as I think.

Anyway, I think we shared our thoughts as for now and as I said, I will provide you with the proper folklorist sources as soon as I get them. I am not skilled enough in Celtic matters as to assess the writers eg. Nora Chadwick or Ronald Hutton. Cheers, Critto (talk) 20:03, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, there is a fallacy in there: "I have serious doubts, that X could have originated as a Christian custom. What Christian message does it contain?" This is because of a dual meaning of "Christian" here: one religious and the other chronological. Assuming that every custon that isn't Christian in the religious sense must logically be pre-Christian in the chronological sense is obviously mistaken. Star Trek conventions are clearly not a Christian custom. After all, what Christian message do they contain? Does it follow, therefore, that Star Trek conventions must be a pre-Christian, ancient pagan custom? Folk customs can originate any time, regardless of mainstream religion. They will also often not be clearly "secular", but expressions of folk religion or myth (just like Star Trek). If that makes them "pagan" is probably a matter of definition, but they certainly aren't pre-Christian chronologically. --dab (𒁳) 08:46, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Medieval References

From “Lives of saints, from the Book of Lismore” [an early 15th century manuscript]: “fo.67 a, i. A piece entitled Scél na samhna (the story of All Saints Day). Begins: [skipping Irish text] A certain emperor, named Phocas, assumed the Roman’s realm. Every year at samáin (All Saints day) a great assembly was held by him in Rome. This was right, for the samain was the chief solemnity of the heathen at that time, for all the gods of the world, from east to west (lit. from sunrise to sunset), were worhsipped on that day.

It then related how the Pantheon (‘dommus omnium deorum, .i.i tegduis na n-uili dhee’) was given to Boniface, and dedicated by him to all the saints. Compare the piece entitled Fagail na Samna in the Bibliotheque Nationale, Celt. Et B.1 fo. 15 b, 2.”

Fascinating. If I understand what I'm reading, what this medieval Irishman is saying is that samhain is an ancient pagan custom ... from pre-Christian Rome! Rwflammang (talk) 21:30, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I think the 15th century or earlier Irishman was confused. For Phocas was a Christian emperor of Eastern Empire (which included the city of Rome) from 602 to 610. He was praised by Pope Georgry I, and in 609 grants the Pantheon (formerly a pagan temple) to Pope Boniface IV. The following tone of a quote from John the Deacon’s “Monumenta Germaniae Historia” (1848), provides an idea why he a Christian Emperor should be connect to Pagan worship: "Another Pope, Boniface, asked the same [Emperor Phocas, in Constantinople] to order that in the old temple called the Pantheon, after the pagan filth was removed, a church should be made, to the holy virgin Mary and all the martyrs, so that the commemoration of the saints would take place henceforth where not gods but demons were formerly worshiped." Phocas’s character may have become merged with the pagan temple character of the Pantheon, through his association handing it over to the Pope. I read that Phocas never set foot in Rome; so I suspect his year assembly is in realty the May 13th celebration of the consecration of the Pantheon to the Blessed Virgin and all the martyrs, i.e. the proto All Saints (Irish: Samhain) celebration. (The reference to “from sunrise to sunset” reminds me of the Irish analogy of Lugh as the rising sun.)Muireagain (talk) 11:50, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

On the subject of earliest references to Samain: The publish version of "Martyrology of Óengus" has Samain as All Saints' day. The "Martyrology of Óengus" is dated to either 797-808 or 828-833.

And as a pagan feast: the 11th/12 century tale "Birth of Aedh Sláine" in book of the Dun Cow (Scribe H) tells: "For these were the two principal gatherings that they had: Tara's Feast at every samhain (that being the heathens' Easter); and at each lughnasa, ..." Muireagain (talk) 13:17, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I should also mention that Dr Binchy expressed a belief that the Feast of Tara was in spring and not November 1st: From “Fair of Tailtiu and Feast of Tara” by Dr Binchy Eriu XVIII: “[(Eriu XIV. 14 ff.) O’Rahilly] … Professor Carney (Studies in E.I Literature, pp. 334 f.), who argues convincingly that in the light of the evidence collected by O’Rahilly the Feast of Tara as recorded in the annals, was the ancient ritual by which the kings of Tara were inaugurated. He also rightly stress the sexual connotation of the word feis (v.n. of foiad) in this symbolical mating of the king with the goddess; for this is the supreme fertility rite, designed to secure that man and beast and earth shall be fruitful throughout the king’s dominions. Hence, despite the virtually uniform testimony of the later sources, it is unlikely to have has any connexion with the festival of Samain and the dying year; on the contrary, one would expect it to be held, like similar rites the world over, at seed-time.” Muireagain (talk) 13:22, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Forgot to mention Dr Binchy's paper covered Muirchu seventh century Life of St Patrick. Where he tells of Saint Patrick lighting a fire on the Eve of Easter in offense to pre-Christian beliefs. The rival feast of King Loegaire mac Neill is taken by some as the Feast of Tara occuring at Beltaine aka Cet Samhain (beginning of summer). Dr Binchy points out the impossiblity of Easter to occur as late as May day. Yet upto the sixth century Pagans and Christain Gauls who have rival Easter celebration on the Vernal Equinox. The present Pope writes on the pratice of Christain Gauls in “The spirit of the liturgy”. Pope Benedict XVI says “author Tertullian (c.150-c.207), who evidently assumes as a well-known tradition that Christ suffered death on March 25. In Gaul, right up to the sixth century, this was kept as the immovable date of Easter.” http://books.google.com/books?id=-fnH5x5c9pIC&pg=PT82&dq=creation+march-25&hl=en&ei=vVvcTI-8LML88Ab2ssjVBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=creation%20march-25&f=false The heathens would be followers of Attis. Muireagain (talk) 21:18, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for all these references. The traditional Christian date of Good Friday on 25 March I am very familiar with, but what was the rival Gaulish festival on 25 March? There does not seem to have been a Roman festival on that date. Rwflammang (talk) 08:48, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

The feastival seems to have been call Hilaria with March 25th associated by the 6th century as the "resurrection" of Attis, see:

http://books.google.com/books?id=kQFtlva3HaYC&pg=PA38&dq=Attis+resurrected+on+March+25th&hl=en&ei=mUwfTofWLYrf0QGKrYzXAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilaria

Plutarch is quoted in telling that "Phygians believe that their god [Attis] sleeps in the winter but awakes in the summer, and so they perform rites to lull him to sleep in the winter and in the summer ones to arouse him, in the manner of Bacchic rites". http://books.google.com/books?id=RxmqsJKJzX4C&pg=PA192&dq=attis+resurrection&hl=en&ei=PVUfTrCMEPK10AGZr-W1Aw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=attis&f=false

The 8th century Life of Samson reports St Samson stumbling into a Dionysian (Bacchus) stone worship festival in Cornwall (not sure if this England or the area in Brittany). The author of the Life of Samson says he had actual seen the stone Samson had marked with a cross, which is simlar to another author who saw the stone at Tara that Patrick had broken]. Muireagain (talk) 20:37, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I have a belief that Samhain was a spring festival where the sleep god of corn production (Lugh/Angus Og) awakens. Also that his harvest death has become tied into the tales of Martinmass and St. Martin. I am not the first to beleive that Samhain was at the vernal equinox, later moved to outside lent May (Pleiades/start of summer), and then I belive the same relocation of the the traditions of All Martyrs (May 13th to All Saints day (Nov 1st) affected Samain (now at Gamain see Gaullish Samon and Giamon). I just hope I can offer enough proof to be convincing:

The 11th century "Birth of Aedh Sláine" from book of the Dun Cow (Scribe H) descibes Samhain as heathens' Easter "For these were the two principal gatherings that they had: Tara's Feast at every samhain (that being the heathens' Easter); and at each lughnasa, ..."

The 7th century "Life of St Patrick" by Muirchu describes coinciding of Easter with what could be describe as the Feast of Tara. Muirchu description of coinciding Easter with a major pagan festival is factual for Gaul at the time of St Patrick. (It also seems the events Cet Samain (Beltaine) at Uinsech (center of the South Ui Neill), i.e. the lighting of a scared fire, has been transferred to Samain at Tlachtga. See above.)

The 11th century "The banquet of Dun na n-Gedh” a pseudonim for the Feast of Tara have the guests eating Goose eggs that are available in February/March and may as late as June.

The 14th century or earlier version of the "Battle of Maige Rath" tells that Feast of Tara was held c628 in the middle of May (i.e. 15th, Scottish date for Beltaine).

Possible 8th century "The Adventures of Nera" tell that on Samhain the otherworld had the fruits of Summer (i.e. spring foods). This Includes wild garlic, a dish eaten at Easter or Cet Samain (older name for Beltaine and the month of May). This is taken by scholar as a sign of otherworldliness, yet this is not the case in narration of "The banquet of Dun na n-Gedh”.

Possible 8th century “The Boyhood Deeds of Finn mac Cumhaill” also has otherworld figures eating (Spring/Easter) wild garlic at Samain.

Then there is the work of Hutton "The Pagan Religions of the Ancient British Isles: their nature and legacy" which suggests only one feast was important to fellow celts: "The early Welsh literature ascribes no importance to 1 November, 1 February or 1 August, and all the emotional investment made by the Irish writers in Samhain is attached instead to May Day (Calan Mai) and the night before it. ... For the Celts of Scotland there is absolutely no literary evidence upon the matter, and that for Gaul is not very helpful. No Graeco-Roman author says anything about festivals. ….”

OR

From the paper “Fair of Tailtiu and Feast of Tara” by Dr Binchy, Eriu XVIII: “(Eriu XIV. 14 ff.) O’Rahilly … Professor Carney (Studies in E.I Literature, pp. 334 f.), who argues convincingly that in the light of the evidence collected by O’Rahilly the Feast of Tara as recorded in the annals, was the ancient ritual by which the kings of Tara were inaugurated. He also rightly stress the sexual connotation of the word feis (v.n. of foiad) in this symbolical mating of the king with the goddess; for this is the supreme fertility rite, designed to secure that man and beast and earth shall be fruitful throughout the king’s dominions. Hence, despite the virtually uniform testimony of the later sources, it is unlikely to have has any connexion with the festival of Samain and the dying year; on the contrary, one would expect it to be held, like similar rites the world over, at seed-time.”

Also see Caer Australis Website for similar opinons: http://caeraustralis.com.au/feastmain.htm

Muireagain (talk) 14:41, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

FWIW, I find your speculations very plausible. I suspect that the movement of the "ancient" spring Samhain to the autumn of "medieval" Samhain likely to be the result of a reform of Ireland's ecclesiastical calendar that moved All Saints Day from spring to autumn. For whatever reason, the "heathen Easter" had (I guess) become associated less with Easter and more with All Saints Day, so that when All Saints Day was moved, Samhain came along for the ride.

Just a thought. Rwflammang (talk) 05:53, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I have read a plausible suggestion that a heathen festival on the vernal equinox would have been required to move; for the vernal equinox falls within lent and such a celebration would have been inappropriate at that time. This leads to the idea that a vernal equinox festival would have been relocated after Easter. I can only speculate on a move from the vernal equinox to May. Though I can show that with the arrival of Christianity and its use of the written word was an information boom in seventh century Ireland, with ideas from the continent circulated in manuscript form. This I believe would have included classical ideas of when summer started. (See “Understanding the universe in seventh-century Ireland” by Marina Smith.) Of course there may be other reasons, such as the movement seen in when the Pleiades rise.

There is another tale "The Expedition of Dathi", O'Curry translation (and also Mary Ferguson), which clearly places “The Feast of Tara” at Beltaine. The tale also mentions Samain (at All Saints), yet places Dathi, the King of Tara, is at Aed Ruad in Co. Donegal.

Now this is problematical for the numerous identification of the “The Feast of Tara” with Samain. A solution would be divorce the two and go with the identification of Samhain with Samfuin (glossed “bas intsamraid” death of summer) and used in Cormac’s glossary for Gamain. Gamain is first day of winter and the month of Mi Gaim (i.e. November/month of winter, the same with other Celtic language) which comes after Samuin. The days of Samain and Gamain occur on the same day in Ireland, yet in the 2th century AD Coligny Calendar where are six months between months of Samonios (from the indo-European roof for summer) and Giamonios (from the indo-European roof for winter). In Ireland the month of May (and Beltaine) was once called Cet Samain, “being of Samhain”. So I believe Samfuin is a later use of a homonym or pun.

Now what would a spring festival be about? As 19th century Irish folklore tells of vegetation death by grinding at Martinmass (Summer’s death as above?). Nineteenth century (primary) Scottish Gaelic folklore tells of the Cailleach (the winter hag) and her transformation into (or release of) the Maiden (some call her Brigit); the tales clearly symbolizes the transformation of the earth from winter to summer. There is also a male actor (some call him Angus Og) that defeats the Cailleach (some say his mother) and brings summer about. The Feis of Tara as mention above has “sexual connotation of the word feis (v.n. of foiad) in this symbolical mating of the king with the goddess”. The “Loathy Lady” tales of the Gaels have a symbolical mating between a young hero and a hag, which rejuvenates the hag into a beautiful maiden. So was this sexual union part of the story of the return of summer? Certainly Samhain is the night famed for Dadga’s (the Good god) multiple sexual unions.

This yearly cycle of the seasons that I present apprears in Slavic reconstruction of their mythology. Perun has twins, Jarilo (boy) and Morena (girl). The twins marry and bring summer, yet Jarilo is later murdered by Morena and his own relatives. Jarilo after his death travels to the otherworld from where he returns from each spring. The Scottish 19th century tales gives us the wintery Morena (the Cailleach) and the summery Morena (the Maiden) who marries Jarilo (Angus) each spring. Now is Lug’s sudden appearance at Tara in “The Second Battle of Mag Tured”, like the return of Angus Og (who has analogies to Lugh) each year and his battle with the Fomorians in the same way 19th century customs that required the men of summer to defeat the forces of winter? Is the life/death/life of Lleu in the Fourth branch of the Mabinogi telling of Lugh’s marriage to a spring goddess, his murder at her hands (as with Jarilo) and his return from the otherworld? Muireagain (talk) 17:43, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

So Beltaine was the time of marriage (per Dr Binchy and Westropp). So could 19th century Scottish tale of 'hero and heroine of spring' marrying be a relfection of religious function of Feis of Tara?

"One-ninth of his (the man's) increase, and of his corn, and of his bacon is due to the woman if she be a great worker; she has a sack every month she is with him to the end of a year, i.e. to the next May-days, for this is mostly the time in which they make their separation." found in "Cáin Lánamna 'The Law of Couples' is an Old Irish law tract dated to the beginning of the eighth century CE which is part of the Senchas Már tradition of legal texts. The only continuous copy of the tract is found in the Trinity College, Dublin MS H.2.15A in a section dated to the beginning of the fourteenth century." http://books.google.com/books?id=aaREAAAAcAAJ&dq=inauthor%3A%22Ireland.+Commissioners+for+Publishing+the+Ancient+Laws+and+Institutes+of+Ireland%22&q=hand#v=onepage&q=beltaine&f=false

Muireagain (talk) 00:23, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Coligny calendar paragraph is incorrect

The paragraph entitled Coligny calendar describes Samonios as October/November lunation and Giamonios as the April/May lunation. Yet comparison with the Irish calender shows this should be fliped. Gamain according Cormac's 10th century glossary is in the month of Gaim (winter/November) and there is the 6th/7th century poem CÉTEMAIN (per James Careney) has Cet Samhain as Maytime.

The Coligny calendar 'three nights of Samonios' would then be in Maytime. Compare this to Hutton's “The Irish pattern of festivals is so often taken as typical of ‘the Celts’, from Ireland to the Alps, that it must be pointed out that the available evidence on the matter is inconclusive. The early Welsh literature ascribes no importance to 1 November, 1 February or 1 August, and all the emotional investment made by the Irish writers in Samhain is attached instead to May Day (Calan Mai) and the night before it." In Ireland Samhain is linked to Feast of Tara, which in it's earliest reference, i.e. Muirthu's 7th century Life of St Patrick, occurs at Easter.

It should also be noted that Cet Samain (Beltaine) according to the 8th Century Irish Laws (Senchas Mor) is start of the Irish marriage year (per Binchy and Westropp). Muireagain (talk) 00:39, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

The information box at the right hand side of the page has a minor but very glaring mistake ... there is NO 31 April in any part of the world - so Samhain cannot start at sunset on 31 April in the Southern Hemisphere. Roseanne74 (talk) 00:42, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Etymology

In regard to the statement "The Irish samain would be etymologically unrelated to 'summer', and derive from 'assembly'." A Professor of Old Irish answering this question on Old-Irish listserver said: https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?S2=OLD-IRISH-L&_charset_=windows-1252&L=OLD-IRISH-L&q=Acc.+to+recent+scholarship%2C+Germanic+&s=&f=&a=&b=

“No, this is not possible. Acc. to recent scholarship, Germanic *sama- and derivatives come from PIE *somHo-, i.e. with the o-grade in the root. OInd. sámana- seems to be a derivative from the more basic stem sam < *sem- (with e-grade), acc. to EWAia II, 702 ff. In any case, for phonetic reasons neither of these can be compared directly with a Proto-Celtic *samVn-“

And in a follow up email confirmed that Samain is from same root of the word summer. 68.196.44.146 (talk) 02:59, 13 November 2011 (UTC)