Did the Celts actually practice human sacrifice?

>>2583713

Unlikely. They did have a cult of head-hunting, but by all accounts the Druids anathematised human sacrifice. Accusing your rivals of hideous crimes is an age-old propaganda technique, one the Romans used all the time. What makes this particular slander so egregious is that the Romans DID practise human sacrifice, only they did so for entertainment, not for religious reasons.

>>2583734
really nigga?

>>2583734
the gladiatorial games were originally an Etruscan funeral rite to mark the death of an important man, so it started as religious

>>2583756

Almost everything we know about the celts is based off of ROMAN writers.

Take it with a grain of salt

>>2583797

Not to mention the English language sources often used them as an allegory to other troublesome Celts.

>>2583797
The Romans didn't lie about the Carthaginians practicing child sacrifice. There is archeological evidence to back it up.

>>2583838
>There is archeological evidence to back it up.

Exactly, there is some evidence that sacrifices took place.

If there was archeological evidence of this at known celtic sites or writings by the celts or even by other peoples it would be a compelling argument. Listening to just Roman sources would be basing everything you know of Russians on Nazi propaganda.

>>2583857
But human sacrifice was practiced everywhere in ancient times. I see no reason why the druids would be exempt from it. Even moses tells the hebrews not to sacrifice their children in the bible.

File: british_museum_lindow_man.jpg (51KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 225x225px

>>2583857
Look what I just found: https://www.digitalmedievalist.com/opinionated-celtic-faqs/human-sacrifice/

The Romans were honest people. Your ancestors were savages like the Aztecs.

>>2583838

But we are talking about the Celts, not the Carthaginians. And one example of not lying doesn't prove that the source doesn't lie; truth is assumed to be a normal state of affairs, lies are applied selectively.

>>2583713
Its possible they did so very rarely

>>2583713

Maybe or maybe not. The English on the other hand burned people at the stake in more modern times. The last victim was a woman accused of counterfeiting coins.

I would have to ask, if the same moral weight is given to immolating a living person because of money, as is given to immolating a person because supernatural beings commanded it. At least one of them has the change of being considered "good" because the gods have the right to determine good and evil.

Human sacrifice is a motif in Irish literature but there's debate as to whether it was just a literary topos or if it actually happened.

all ancient civilizations did until proven otherwise

File: celtic1.jpg (23KB, 244x352px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 244x352px

>>2584256
>It was just a literary device bro

Celtic apologists are the worst.

>be Ganganoi tribesman
>fukken Auteinoi scum
>go on early spring cattle raid
>catch hated Auteinoi unawares
>awwwww yisss
>capture 15 head of cattle for the superior Ganganoi master race
>kill most, capture a few to sacrifice on the spring Equinox
>cut the heads off the corpses
>gonna bring that bitch some heads
>bitches love heads
>get home all excited and shit
>wife is all like 'Oh look... more heads to liven up the dining area...'
>she reluctantly hangs them with the rest of them
>wishes you would bring back blankets instead of more fucking heads
>or maybe some fabric dyes

Such is life in Hibernia