Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Pagan Topic => Topic started by: Walt Zingmatilder on April 04, 2021, 11:56:17 AM
-
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/druids-sacrifice-cannibalism
-
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/druids-sacrifice-cannibalism
. . . and the Roman's sacrifice by crucifixion is not so bad? Not so unpleasant? Both Great Britain and Anglesey are islands where changes in religious belief would not be so rapid as in Europe where Romans made a point of imposing their religious beliefs on those they conquered, and that is what the Druids were fighting, in ways that they had probably used for centuries.
Owlswing
)O(
-
. . . and the Roman's sacrifice by crucifixion is not so bad? Not so unpleasant?
I don't believe i've commented on that. What made you think I had?
-
I don't believe I've commented on that. What made you think I had?
Because you posted the article which does it for you?
And NO I am not getting into an extended argument with you on the subject, I am not here for your entertainment.
Bright Blessings, Love, and Light, and may the Old Ones watch over you always.
Owlswing
)O(
-
Because you posted the article which does it for you?
And NO I am not getting into an extended argument with you on the subject, I am not here for your entertainment.
Bright Blessings, Love, and Light, and may the Old Ones watch over you always.
Owlswing
)O(
I find your linking with druidic sacrifice and crucifixion most interesting. Why do you think Crucifixion was a roman sacrifice when it was a means of execution?
-
I find your linking with druidic sacrifice and crucifixion most interesting. Why do you think Crucifixion was a roman sacrifice when it was a means of execution?
Sorry, but I have only just seen this comment.
There were both barbaric ways to have your life ended. The druid way was, to its credit quicker, as I understand that crucifiction could actually take days to kill the victim.
Owlswing
)O(
-
Sorry, but I have only just seen this comment.
There were both barbaric ways to have your life ended. The druid way was, to its credit quicker, as I understand that crucifixion could actually take days to kill the victim.
Owlswing
)O(
Presumably crucifixion, as a means of execution could be administered for secular reasons. Not so Druidic sacrifice. With Human sacrifice their must be a line of thought that determines that only a human will appease the Gods, God, or defeat the powers of evil.
-
. . . and the Roman's sacrifice by crucifixion is not so bad? Not so unpleasant?
I found the quote from Julius Caesar odd.
"[Celts] believe that the gods delight in the slaughter of prisoners and criminals, and when the supply of captives runs short, they sacrifice even the innocent."
The Romans also delighted in the slaughter of prisoners and criminals. Maybe they didn't do it for religious reasons, but they did do it for entertainment.
Both Great Britain and Anglesey are islands where changes in religious belief would not be so rapid as in Europe
That's speculation. We don't know anything much about religious practices of the Britons at the time. except what the Romans tell us.
where Romans made a point of imposing their religious beliefs on those they conquered
This is not true.
and that is what the Druids were fighting, in ways that they had probably used for centuries.
I think they were fighting against being conquered.
-
/the Author of the Month book on the GH forum this month is 'Secrets of the Druids' by Teresa /Cross, if anyone is interested. Not a subject I want to know more about though.
-
I found the quote from Julius Caesar odd.
"[Celts] believe that the gods delight in the slaughter of prisoners and criminals, and when the supply of captives runs short, they sacrifice even the innocent."
The Romans also delighted in the slaughter of prisoners and criminals. Maybe they didn't do it for religious reasons, but they did do it for entertainment.
That's speculation. We don't know anything much about the religious practices of the Britons at the time. except what the Romans tell us.
This is not true.
I think they were fighting against being conquered.
Sorry, but I am a Witch/Pagan. I am not a Druid/Pagan as has already been pointed out above!
Owlswing
)O(
-
Sorry, but I am a Witch/Pagan. I am not a Druid/Pagan as has already been pointed out above!
How is you being a witch rather than a druid in any way relevant to anything being discussed here?
-
I found the quote from Julius Caesar odd.
"[Celts] believe that the gods delight in the slaughter of prisoners and criminals, and when the supply of captives runs short, they sacrifice even the innocent."
The Romans also delighted in the slaughter of prisoners and criminals. Maybe they didn't do it for religious reasons, but they did do it for entertainment.
That's speculation. We don't know anything much about religious practices of the Britons at the time. except what the Romans tell us.
This is not true.
I think they were fighting against being conquered.
And I'd take Roman (and, for that matter, Greek) sources with a side dish of salt.
-
How is you being a witch rather than a druid in any way relevant to anything being discussed here?
Partly because I the mistake of thinking that this is the "Pagan Topic"!
I made a comment that was meant to request differentiation between Druidic sacrificial rituals and Roman's means of execution in the amount of pain and suffering inflicted.
I found the quote from Julius Caesar odd.
"[Celts] believe that the gods delight in the slaughter of prisoners and criminals, and when the supply of captives runs short, they sacrifice even the innocent."
The Romans also delighted in the slaughter of prisoners and criminals. Maybe they didn't do it for religious reasons, but they did do it for entertainment.
was your response.
I think that the Roman's calling out the Druids for delighting in slaughter is a severe case of the pot and the kettle.
My comment - to which your response was How is you being a witch rather than a druid in any way relevant to anything being discussed here?
was distancing myself and my area of paganism from that of Druidism in ritual content!
Owlswing
)O(
-
Partly because I the mistake of thinking that this is the "Pagan Topic"!
I made a comment that was meant to request differentiation between Druidic sacrificial rituals and Roman's means of execution in the amount of pain and suffering inflicted.
was your response.
I think that the Roman's calling out the Druids for delighting in slaughter is a severe case of the pot and the kettle.
Did you actually read my response? I'm pretty sure it was agreeing with you that the Romans were not exactly paragons.
My comment - to which your response was was distancing myself and my area of paganism from that of Druidism in ritual content!
Why did you think that was necessary? Nobody here believes that you would have anything to do with human sacrifice. Nobody thinks that modern pagans of any stripe have anything to do with the lost religions from before the Roman conquest.
-
Nobody thinks that modern pagans of any stripe have anything to do with the lost religions from before the Roman conquest.
Actually many modern Druids do claim that they attempt to follow the "old ways" of Druidry.
To what extent this is so, where they get the information in order to do so, I have no idea.
I have only met two people, both male, who claim to be Druids and to follow the "old ways".
One is a gentleman from South London who is quite open about the "barbarism" of many of the rituals performed at the time of the Roman invasion. Many sacrifices were, apparently, by way of performing an act to demonstrate to the Gods exactly what the Priests wanted to happen to the enemy (the Romans)!
The other is, or was, about eight years ago, a rather arrogant and unpleasant gentleman who claims, or claimed, to be the High Priest of all the Circles at Avebury they being the work of Druids and thus the witches had no right whatsoever to hold rituals there. Unfortunately, the management of the Avebury Circles is, or possibly was, I'm not sure if the situation still stands, the National Trust who told him in no uncertain terms that the area was open to all who wished to use it for the celebration of the ancient deities.
Owlswing
)O(
-
I found the quote from Julius Caesar odd.
"[Celts] believe that the gods delight in the slaughter of prisoners and criminals, and when the supply of captives runs short, they sacrifice even the innocent."
What have Celts got to do with this? The Celts were a central European people. The idea that Celts occupied the British islands was a late 17th/early 18th century invention.
-
What have Celts got to do with this? The Celts were a central European people. The idea that Celts occupied the British islands was a late 17th/early 18th-century invention.
OK! So the Druids were not Celts, they did, however, apparently, according to historians and the Romans, carry out human sacrifice.
If they were not Celts, who were they? Welsh?
Owlswing
)O(
-
What have Celts got to do with this?
Take it up with Julius Caesar - or the author of the article. I didn't use the word randomly. The full quote from the article is
Julius Caesar, who led the first Roman landing in 55 B.C., said the native Celts "believe that the gods delight in the slaughter of prisoners and criminals, and when the supply of captives runs short, they sacrifice even the innocent."
[my bolding]
The Celts were a central European people. The idea that Celts occupied the British islands was a late 17th/early 18th century invention.
No. The Celts were very definitely in Britain. Or, at least, society and culture in Britain was definitely Celtic, even if there was no physical invasion.
-
And I'd take Roman (and, for that matter, Greek) sources with a side dish of salt.
Aren't Roman sources all we have to refer to about the practices of the Druids?
-
Aren't Roman sources all we have to refer to about the practices of the Druids?
History being written by the victor isn't entirely reliable.
-
History being written by the victor isn't entirely reliable.
That was implicit in my question. And that being the case, we haven't much chance of knowing what the Druids really got up to, have we?
-
That was implicit in my question. And that being the case, we haven't much chance of knowing what the Druids really got up to, have we?
Archaeology suggests that, at best, the Romans may have exaggerated the druidic ceremonies for effect.
Whilst we have evidence of human sacrifice in the Bronze age, for example, whether the same practice was really associated with Iron Age Celtic Druidic practice isn't certain, despite Roman accounts.
-
That was implicit in my question. And that being the case, we haven't much chance of knowing what the Druids really got up to, have we?
hmm, if you sit quietly and meditate, perhaps after a hot herb brew ... it all comes to you. The writers of Britannia have obviously worked it out :)