Druids Committed Human Sacrifice, Cannibalism?

[quantumautumn]

I saw this article on the National Geographic website which talks about how the ancient Druids were supposed to be cannibals.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... alism.html

Has this issue been addressed at all here or has Philip Carr-Gomm or others addressed it anywhere?

Thanks!

John

[Shaun Hayes]

Hello John

Curious first questions for someone who has just joined yesterday.

The detail in the article is scant at best and can be interpreted in many ways. Lindow man has been the subject of many diverse theories.

I am sure there were human sacrifices in most if not all cultures some 2,000 and more years ago. Indeed the christians practised genocide, the romans sacrificed thousands on crucifixes, and one could go on and on ad nauseum. All ancient philosophies grew through times where human life was viewed very differently than today.

I suggest you look to more reliable historical research if you want a balanced view and not just to the sensationalism required to sell a documentary.

Some years ago a body washed up in the bristol channel; It had a fractured skull, was badly burned and drowned. The first article in the local press suggested a triple death, i.e. a ritual murder. The truth however was quite different - A man with a garden that backed onto the severn was mowing his lawn. He stopped to refill the fuel tank with petrol carelessly spilling some and getting some on himself. The hot engine ignited the petrol setting him alight. He dashed to the river and dived in knocking himself out on a large stone and consequently drowning.

One sees what one wants to see.

I hope you find your time here of interest.

Shaun.

[Zylah]

Yes, and did you know that Christians are also cannibals? Their main ritual involves eating the body and drinking the blood of their perpetually dying god, *AT HIS COMMAND*, according to their maybe Holy Book, which may possibly have been written - in letters of fire, which by the way do tend to deteriorate over time, but you know, we can make EDUCATED GUESSES about what it originally might have perhaps said - by the very same alleged angel Gabriel who may have been serving as scribe for Heaven between the 11th and 16th centuries (having replaced the allegedly and horribly disgraced Moroni, who was then as punishment probably (or maybe not, but we'll assume he was for the sake of entertainment) sent on assignment to Joseph Smith, who might or might not have been a con man who to this day has power to make his followers wear magical underwear for specially confidential and extra-important reasons the rest of us can't know (or the magic may possibly be undone, you never know).

They teach journalists to word articles this way to maximize sensationalism by *seeming* to say incredibly outrageous things which are half-historical and half speculation (probably influenced by hallucinogens and neuropsychotics). Was there a man found in a bog, who was murdered? Yes. That's evidentially provable. Was it some kind of ritual? *gasp!* Or, maybe, was it a plain old boring murder? We'll never know! But if we have to guess, by all means let's vilify the ancient people who cannot be defended except by equally ludicrous assertions of possible events.

Maybe the Druids practiced mass human sacrifice in order to get their HORRENDOUSLY un-cooperative gods to get rid of the Romans (which, incidentally, was an epic FAIL). Yes, and maybe pigs will sprout rainbow-colored wings after ingesting psilocybin and carry me away to the Christian heaven where I can play a harp on a pink cloud for all eternity. Bah!

[Zylah]

Oh, and now that my horrific spasm of sarcasm has passed, I meant to say I agree with you Shaun and very well-stated

[wyeuro]

blessings upon your horrible sarcasm, zylah. it matched that of the romans to a tee.

Was there a man found in a bog, who was murdered? Yes. That's evidentially provable.

well, no, not that he was murdered. some people speculate that he may have been executed for a crime of some sort. it's all a matter of guess-work when you go beyond the evidence, which is what they are doing.
if that's their most convincing evidence, they haven't got a case - certainly not one that would stand up in a modern court of law. and the hatred and sarcastic scorn in those roman accounts gets in the way of the truth, which is why scholars normally regard them as hate propaganda, not reliable reportage. so why are they still slandering the old druids like that? surely it's libel to defame the characters of our ancestors?

[Zylah]

LOL Wyeuro - I guess my purpose was accomplished if I successfully imitated the awful Romans, but somehow it's difficult to be pleased with such an achievement!

Excellent point that it was not necessarily murder. And YES, this kind of "reporting" is unwarranted defamation of our ancestors, who have put up with more than enough garbage already!

[Attila]

The Hawaiians and atecs etc ate their enemies, so I suppose it is not beyond the realm of possibility that celts did. Equally I expect justice was harsh in ancient times, though probably on a very small scale, these people had no police or courts so they had to convince people that doing harm was not a good thing etc.

These things are cultural, druids may well have presided over such events, but that doesn’t make it part of their religion. When we consider these [druids] are the same people who the romans also said threw themselves between opposing armies, then it seams a massive contradiction to say peace lovers then went on to murder and eat people.

The crusaders are said to have eaten people [apparently] and I expect many starving armies have resorted to that, Christians also burned and tortured people, and yet this is not part of the christian religion, so I don’t see why we have to think similar cultural things are part of the druidic religion.

Apart from that if it was, we have no dogma, so druidry today is what we want it to be.

[Merlyn]

Shock and awe, to get you to watch the show...
That's all this is.

As for the accounts of the Romans, well... we all know how they treated others now don't we?
The Loins sure enjoyed the tasty treats, and heck, hanging people to die on a cross was "civilized"

Ironic sense of humor, to say the least...

[Nightfalls]

I would go so far as to say even if they did commit these acts, were they wrong? Are they bad? For the time they lived in, it was a perfectly normal practice. Now it has been cast in an "evil light". But really, is it evil? Dogs eat their young, Spiders eat each other, Praying Mantis also, to name a few.

So the point i cast here, is one i have read in a book recently.

If nature makes us have these urges, and they occur naturally in nature, is it bad?

Animals eat each other, and their own kind, are they going to "animal hell"? Are they "Bad Animals"? They are just acting on urges and instincts instilled by nature. Could it not be considered natural for a human to consume his own kind? As a counter argument, Cows can contract mad cow disease by eating their own kind. To that i say, cows are herbivores and do not "naturally" eat their own kind.

So, assuming they did practice it, is it wrong? Should it be cast in a negative light?

I hope this philosophical post can measure up to the great Attila

[Attila]

If nature makes us have these urges, and they occur naturally in nature, is it bad?

Interesting post nightfalls. I think you are right in one respect, in ancient times there was a great need to control crime and populations, these things were simply the way to do it before the police were invented. I don’t think we currently have a strategy on population control, I even heard one scientist say that the first human to potentially live to a thousand has already been born. Strangely he seamed to think that wouldn’t add to the population as people will still have the same amount of children. A little math says that you would get 45 times more humans every thousand years, so I guess he wasn’t a mathematician.

My vision of the otherworld doesn’t include a heaven and hell, it is simply an other-world.

I do think humans have to have different standards to animals, it wouldn’t be right for me to meet a girl and kill her children [to ensure the strongest survive] like a lion would with it’s mate.

I think animals have to live by evolutionary code, whereas we probably don’t have to. Maybe animals wouldn’t do such things if they had a choice? Our pets don’t try to eat us as they may in the wild, and one can form relationships with wild animals, so generally I think creatures act as they must but would otherwise not do so given the choice, they like us are simply spirits who adapt to their worlds.