JULIUS CÆSAR, B.C. 99-44.

IT IS NECESSARY THAT WE should, at the outset, bear in mind the following observation made by Cæsar, as to the comparative merits of the Continental and British systems:

“The institution is thought to have originated in Britain, and to have been thence introduced into Gaul; and even now those who wish to become more accurately acquainted with it, generally repair thither, for the sake of learning it.”

It is clear from this statement that Druidism, in Cæsar’s time, was not considered as pure and as well understood on the Continent as it was in the British isle, its genuine home; an hypothesis, moreover,exactly in accordance with the traditions of the Bards:—"Bardism originated in the Isle of Britain—no other country ever obtained a proper comprehension of Bardism. Three nations corrupted what they had learned of the Bardism of the Isle of Britain, blending with it heterogeneous principles, by which means they lost it: the Irish; the Cymry of Armorica; and the Germans.”1

According to this view, we must not expect that the two systems should agree in all matters of detail, but only in principle and substance.

Cæsar’s description refers solely to the Druidism of Gaul. How he acquired his information, he does not tell us; it might have been in part from personal observation, and in part, if not wholly, from his friend Divitiacus, who was a Druid among the Ædui. It is possible that his narrative in this respect is correct; still his general character for veracity does not bind us to believe implicitly every word that he says. Suetonius tells us, that Asinius Pollio, who was a contemporary of Cæsar, was of opinion that his assertions are not altogether worthy of credit;—"Asinius