Druids practiced cannibalism

a reply to: HUMBLEONE

Than the Gods, someone else who reads history Shame about the comment about Scienits (sorry I'm one of those people who "fabricate everything" ...wish I could but I have them pesky morals)

a reply to: Noinden

I believe being open to anything, the ability of critical thinking and to implement deduction on observational factoids is very important.. Otherwise you built yourself a prison of mazes only you understand..

I observe the facts before making any claims.. Anyone can tell a story..

a reply to: tikbalang

See once again you make a statement, with no supporting evidence.

You don't know anything about Masons, Druids, or sigils.

Indeed you like using pop words to seem informed.

Back to your OP. It was the Celts who may have been cannibals, not just the Druids. Do you understand why that distinction is important? Guess what other cultures were too, so why does it matter?

a reply to: tikbalang

If this is news to you OP, apologies...but this is kinda well known stuff to those who are interested.

They used to eat parts of their Kings too...after ritually sacrificing them after a specific period of time. Spirits and or strength being shared among the tribe kinda deal. King burger? Who knows.

Victorians thought it fahionable and health restoring to consume the powdered, mummified corpses brought back from Egyptian digs...scrumptious. 1000 odd year old dead Human, is still eating people..

a reply to: MysterX

could you source this?

a reply to: Noinden

Claims? How to think critical is a claim?

a reply to: tikbalang

You've made a claim that "Druids were cannibalistic". Your implication was that the Druids were the ones doing it. Rather than the greater cultural group they belong too.

There is evidence (biased) that some Celtic speaking groups might have practiced human sacrifice. When the Roman's act all "horrified" over this people forget it was barely a generation since that happened in Rome too, and indeed "executions dedicated to Mars" sort of also count.

So what point exactly do you wish to convey with the "Druids" (and you really mean Celtic speaking peoples of the west) were cannablistic?

originally posted by: tikbalang
a reply to: MysterX

could you source this?

This is knowledge aquired somewhere, at some point, probably long ago..could i lay my hands on specifics or an academic page discussing it? Probably not, no.

I suppose for now, my source will have to be my memory. Sorry.

a reply to: MysterX

And, in your home universe, it's entirely possible that it was a common practice.

(Mandela effect reference)

a reply to: MysterX

So yoursource would be: James George Frazer? Perchance someone who cited him? He's not reliable, much as Robert Graves is not (unless it is Ancient Greek things).

a reply to: Spider879

But were they burn't and sacrificed at least? What's a party without some fire?

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

You forgot Christopher Lee, always need me some Christopher Lee at a party

a reply to: tikbalang

So lets sort this out right here and now.

The Celts may very well have practiced human sacrifice, and the Druids may well have overseen this. The story of the Wickerman is supposed to be an example of this. Though Julius Caesar's journals are propoganda against a foe at the time of war. They can not be trusted. Remember this is the same Julius Caesar, who thought that Moose had no knees In the very same books where he described the Gauls, no less.

So this does not invalidate the idea that the Gauls (and thus the Celtic speaking people) sacrificed people. It does not count as unequivocal evidence either.

The lesson from that? When someone tries to cram in all sorts of things, most of which are unrelated to one another, into an argument. You should doubt them.

Now the OP brings the people of the Indus Valley (aka Indians) up as an apparent source of all that which is good. I've got bad news for him. The Indians sacrificed people too. Quite recently no less.

The OP then wanders off into some unrelated ramble about the venus flower and the ash tree. He seems very confused here. He does not tie it to Druidry in any way, and throws the Sumerians in for good measure.

How did the Druid get to Carnagie Hall?

Practice.

a reply to: Noinden

Great little movie - I reviewed it about 5 months ago.

Too soon?

a reply to: Noinden

You have a lot to learn seabreeze, 25 years of stories is your legacy..

There is nothing to sort out, since you arent a druid, you are a simple man who believes he is a druid with an opinion on things..Blind faith

Druidism is a tough topic for the simple fact that Druids didn't keep written records and the Romans did everything in their power to destroy druidism.

By default, whatever is left is a bastardisation of proper Druidism - no one claiming to be a druid these days can say their interpretation is correct and that others are wrong.

It is inevitable that human sacrifice and cannibalism were practiced at some stage. As others have noted, this was almost a prerequisite for many ancient religions. Was this widespread or saved for significant events? That is a much harder question to answer. Without time travel, i fear we will never know!

a reply to: tikbalang

Aww you are talking into the mirror again, that is cute. BEcause I've said no where "I am a Druid". That would be you mr Goebbels.

You believe in a story that has been told for centuries, yet has no power. Who's the sad one now? Who is the myopic one?

a reply to: Noinden

I believe in what i can see with my own two eyes.. I think maybe the fumes from your lab might be affecting your judgement..