Posted on 03/02/2014 9:13:24 AM PST by ckilmer
Edited on 03/02/2014 3:00:55 PM PST by Jim Robinson. [history]
The scene, discovered by archaeologists in Illinois more than 40 years ago, depicts one of the most extravagant acts of violence ever documented in ancient America: A thousand-year-old pit found under a tall earthen mound, lined from corner to corner with skeletons — 53 in all — neatly arranged two bodies deep, each layer separated by woven fiber mats.
(Excerpt) Read more at westerndigs.org ...
This link (“Ancient Americans Pounded Vomit-Causing ‘Black Drink’ 6 Times Stronger Than Coffee”) messed up my Mozilla so bad I had to uninstall it and re install a new version on Windows 8.
WATCH OUT!
That doesn’t mean they didn’t practice sacrifice, whether those people be captives, slaves (oh, yes, the Indians had slaves), convicts, or other members of society sacrificed for whatever reason.
/////////
The thing is that a reading of ancient history shows that people all over the world including europe at one time or another practiced human sacrifice. the last great human sacrifice civilization was benin in present day Nigeria which the Brits destroyed in the 1880’s. Even today, the english papers will report from time to time badly chopped up nigerian corpses floating down the thames. they appear to be victims of human sacrifice.
Ran across this revisionist claim that Canaanite religion did not specialize in sacred prostitution, etc. So there!
http://tessdawson.blogspot.com/2011/04/orgies-r-us-sex-lies-and-prostitutes-in.html
Interesting, particularly in that there appears to be a group out there dedicated to reviving Canaanite paganism!
Might be revisionist but the amount of documentation for the practices of the Canaanites is pretty overwhelming. The phonecians for example were a caananite people. They put colonies all over the Mediterranean in the 1st & 2nd milleniums BC. The biggest ones were carthiage. Roman historians talked about how the cartheginians practiced child sacrifice—which is what the old testament says the caananites did. Later historians took the roman’s claims as propaganda until recent archaeological digs in Carthage showed thousands of children with burnt bones on one side.
Temple prostitution was pretty standard in the 2nd millenium bc in the middle east. Things began to change in the 1st millenium bc.
Revisionism is easy, it turns out.
Toss out all the Biblical and classical author discussion of such things as bias, then claim there is “no evidence” of such behavior.
http://tessdawson.blogspot.com/2011/04/orgies-r-us-sex-lies-and-prostitutes-in.html
...
btw I looked at her arguments that temple prostitution never happened. She says primary sources like Heroditus and the bible are wrong because...well...they’re wrong. She doesn’t offer any proof.She just dismisses them on her own authority.
looks like you took the time to look into the article like me. If you look at themes of the article and the last paragraph of the article...it becomes clear that this is a pagan site where people are looking to root their polyamory into ancient practices. It appears her point is that its ok to create such things as temple prostitution—just don’t justify it as a continuation of caananite practices.
Eggzackly. Easy, an’t it?
Toss out all the eyewitness testimony and then claim there is not evidence.
LOL
Some North American tribes practiced ritual cannibalism up until European contact and a little bit beyond.
It has been widely speculated that parts of our society will resort to cannibalism in the event there is a TEOTWAWKI occurrence or extreme situation.
However, few cultures on Earth have maintained a steady diet of other humans. With a 15-20 year birth to harvest weight lag, humans would be better supplanted with faster growing meat sources which would be a more sustainable supply.
It is interesting to note, however that the interpretation of data is often colored by the researcher's individual prejudices; it seems one finds what evidence one might to support a pet theory more often than simply keep their eyes open and see what there is to see, systematically eliminating different possibilities rather than jumping to conclusions.
you are much more polite (or PC?) than I would be!
Common Era AD for leftists.
Because the ‘Rat shills in the media knew that Americans were coming to recognize that the ‘Rats ARE Reds.
That is why the switch — to confuse the public.
The fact is, they were killed because, every time they went anywhere in the canoe, they complained nonstop that their husbands should stop and ask directions. And, y’know, it’s the freakin’ Mississippi river.
It means before Clint Eastwood. And that goes back a long way.
Sorry, received a note from the author. Material from this site must be excerpted.
ok.
If you can mention to him that his site causes people’s browsers to freeze up.
It is, however, beyond dispute that the Spanish used sodomy by the natives as one of their justifications for conquest. How accurate this was cannot probably be determined now.
................
However, they were accounts from people who were there at the time and not from people were there generations later.
Consider:
In Hernam Cortez many “sermons,” as recounted by Diaz del Castillo, the Spanish captain tell’s the natives that human sacrifice, “idol” worship, and sodomy are the very practices that the King of Spain sent the conquistadors to stop.
http://bit.ly/ORSF4L
The History of the Conquest of New Spain by Bernal Diaz del Castillo
Correct. Which was my point.
The conquistadores had a great deal of incentive to exaggerate and even invent iniquitous behavior by the natives. It justified their conquest and enslavement of them, in Spanish legal terms.
Which is not to say that we should assume their stories to be false, only that they should be taken with the grain of salt always appropriate when the story-teller has an incentive to exaggerate.
Both Bernal Diaz and Hernando Cortez reported that the Aztec priests practiced homosexuality and human sacrifice. They were there at the time. Their’s are first person accounts.
Everyone agrees the Aztecs practiced human sacrifice. That the Spaniards weren’t just propagandizing about this. Why would the Spaniards need to embellish a human sacrifice story with sodomy. Isn’t human sacrifice bad enough? Why would no one doubt the authenticity of the human sacrifice stories but doubt the homosexuality line.
Please explain.
Possibly because Aztec law prohibited homosexuality under penalty of very harsh (as might be expected of them) punishment.
“Mexica law punished sodomy with the gallows, impalement for the active homosexual, extraction of the entrails through the anal orifice for the passive homosexual, and death by garrote for the lesbians.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alynna_Kasmira/Homosexuality_in_Mexico#The_Mexica
Everybody is agreed on the human sacrifice. Some of the auxiliary activities, such as pedophilia, sodomy and cannibalism, are somewhat more controversial.
My only point was that the Spanish had every incentive to “gild the lily” of Aztec depravity, and very little to portray their lifestyle in an evenhanded and objective manner.
It should also be noted that de las Casas, the great defender of the Indians, denied that homosexuality was widespread, common or legal among the Indians. He was the first to claim (1542) that the reports of the conquistadores were exaggerated in this regard. Though it should also noted that he himself made no pretense of presenting objective anthropological truth. He was arguing a case. As were, to some extent, at least some of the Spanish writers you cite.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.