Did Queen Elizabeth II undergo any rituals that resemble witchcraft or pagan rites?
Executive summary
Queen Elizabeth II participated in public ceremonies that incorporate ancient, local, or pre‑Christian symbolism—most notably her 1946 investiture with the Welsh Gorsedd of Bards and a coronation that used artifacts of pre‑Christian provenance—but there is no credible evidence in the reporting provided that she underwent rituals that were witchcraft or Luciferian in nature; social‑media claims alleging satanic initiation have been debunked by journalists and fact‑checkers [1] [2] [3] [4] [5].
1. A youthful investiture in Wales that looks ceremonial, not occult
Photographs and newsreel footage show the young Princess Elizabeth taking part in the Gorsedd of the Bards at the National Eisteddfod in 1946—wearing robes and being led through an initiation that is theatrical and symbolic in form—and the Royal Collection lists her as invested as an Honorary Ovate at that event [1] [2]. Experts on the Gorsedd stress that the movement, as institutionalised by Iolo Morganwg and later custodians, functions to honour Welsh literature and culture rather than to worship pagan gods, and some historians emphasise that the Gorsedd’s rituals were framed with overtly cultural and often Christian meanings [4] [2].
2. Where conspiracy narratives diverge from documented context
After photographs of Elizabeth’s Gorsedd participation circulated on social platforms, conspiracy posts described the ceremony as “druidic” or even “Luciferian,” claims that national fact‑checkers and journalists flagged as false and misleading [3] [2]. Fact‑check reporting highlights that visual similarity between colourful robes and occult stereotypes does not establish sorcery, and that civic ritual and folkloric pageantry have repeatedly been miscast online as sinister in origin [2] [3].
3. Coronations and monarchy: a tapestry of Christian, medieval and pre‑Christian elements
Royal ceremonies such as coronations are by nature syncretic pageants: scholars note that modern coronations incorporate objects and gestures with pre‑Christian histories—most famously the Stone of Scone, which has been read as having pre‑Christian investiture uses—and that the ceremony blends sacred, secular and invented tradition to create national meaning [5]. That mixing of ancient symbolism with Christian liturgy or state ritual does not equate to witchcraft; academic work frames these as political and cultural performance rather than occult practice [5].
4. Historical precedent and confusion with Elizabeth I’s milieu
The long history of English monarchy includes rulers who patronised astrologers, alchemists and court magicians—Elizabeth I’s court famously engaged figures like John Dee—so popular imagination often conflates different eras and different Elizabeths when talking about royal “magic” [6] [7]. Reporting supplied here underscores the risk of anachronism: rituals that are civic, literary or heritage‑oriented in the twentieth century are not the same as the courtly occult patronage of the 16th century [6] [7].
5. Conclusion: ceremonial participation versus practicing witchcraft
The evidence in these sources shows Queen Elizabeth II participating in cultural and state rituals embedded with historical symbolism—her Gorsedd investiture and the coronation’s use of ancient objects are documented—but none of the reporting supports the claim that she underwent witchcraft rites or was a Luciferian initiate; mainstream journalists and fact‑checkers explicitly refute such charges and contextualise the events as cultural pageantry rather than occult practice [1] [2] [3] [5]. If a reader seeks proof of active occult practice by Elizabeth II, the sources provided contain no substantiation and instead point to misinterpretation and online misinformation.