My guess is human sacrifice was common in most primitive societies and the people sacrificed were war captives as they didn't had the institutions to maintain slavery so they didn't had much use for them. Stone age farmers brutally killing captives in public ceremonies is something that happened in North America until less than 200 years ago.
Not to sound ungrateful because I do appreciate the reply, but I was really hoping for a *lot* more expansion than that! I don't want to demand too much of you, so maybe you could point me in the direction of where you learned about it?
Many Native American groups, esp around the Great Lakes, had a tradition of subjecting war captives to intense torture - partly as a way for an especially brave captive to prove themselves, and partly as a cathartic outlet of grief and vengeance by the tribe. If the descriptions are accurate the torture was public, lengthy and often conducted by women and children, and might conclude by eating the dead victim.
There's lots of different strands of evidence, from Iroquoian archaeology to Jesuit first hand descriptions, one of which I'll link here so you get an idea:
"He ordered that at first they should burn only his legs, so that he might hold out until daybreak; also for that night they were not to go and amuse themselves in the woods. He had hardly finished when the victim entered. I leave you to imagine the terror that seized him at the sight of these preparations. The cries redoubled at his arrival; he is made to sit down upon a mat, his hands are bound, then he rises and makes a tour of the cabin, singing and dancing; no one burns him this time, but also this is the limit of his rest,—one can hardly tell what he will endure up to the time when they cut off his head"
Just looking at the images of those poor women's skeletons and the position they were placed in was particularly shocking and cruel. What a dreadful way to die, how another human can inflict this suffering never ceases to shock me.
Horror at the obvious pain and weight of doom is inevitable. Yes, progress exists, though evidence indicates it is hard won, fragile and what passes for it can carry perils of its own. The shape and texture of the vast gulf between us and our deepest ancestors remains incompletely charted. That they carried out such gruesome rites but also ultimately rebelled against and extinguished them is one quick way to frame the whole picture.
Horrific and impossible (?) for us to grasp how and why these things took place.
Could the women have been placed there one by one so that time passed in between each ritual?
A while back I wrote a story about a small tribe near the Pontic-Caspian steppe. Based on this new information it sounds like my story would require a lot of editing to match reality.
The beginning of justification for mass murder. When does a murder "look like" self-murder? Anti-civilization.
Isn't this "traditional human sacrifice" bound up in the idea of the "Circle of Life" that justifies human murder because it "results in" agricultural fertility?
Beware of "Circle of Life" rationales. Not the Rule of Law, if it ("Life") justifies human murder.
Human sacrifice was shockingly common in the past. I've been an enthusiast of this era for a long time, but I never bought into the "peaceful matriarchy" theory.
If one goes by what the Aztecs and other Neolithic tribes did, the sacrifices were either to bring back the spring, or bring back the light over the winter solstice. The old woman could represent the crone, thus sacrificing old life for new, and the younger women were possibly sacrifices for fertility of grain, livestock, and tribesmen.
There are mysteries out there, and nobody knows why Gobekle Tepe was built, then suddenly buried.
My guess is human sacrifice was common in most primitive societies and the people sacrificed were war captives as they didn't had the institutions to maintain slavery so they didn't had much use for them. Stone age farmers brutally killing captives in public ceremonies is something that happened in North America until less than 200 years ago.
Could you expand on that last sentence, or point me in the direction of some reading material? That sounds fascinating.
Native Americans often subjected captives, men and women, young and old, indians and whites, to ritual torture until they died.
Not to sound ungrateful because I do appreciate the reply, but I was really hoping for a *lot* more expansion than that! I don't want to demand too much of you, so maybe you could point me in the direction of where you learned about it?
Many Native American groups, esp around the Great Lakes, had a tradition of subjecting war captives to intense torture - partly as a way for an especially brave captive to prove themselves, and partly as a cathartic outlet of grief and vengeance by the tribe. If the descriptions are accurate the torture was public, lengthy and often conducted by women and children, and might conclude by eating the dead victim.
There's lots of different strands of evidence, from Iroquoian archaeology to Jesuit first hand descriptions, one of which I'll link here so you get an idea:
http://moses.creighton.edu/kripke/jesuitrelations/relations_13.html
The passage begins:
"He ordered that at first they should burn only his legs, so that he might hold out until daybreak; also for that night they were not to go and amuse themselves in the woods. He had hardly finished when the victim entered. I leave you to imagine the terror that seized him at the sight of these preparations. The cries redoubled at his arrival; he is made to sit down upon a mat, his hands are bound, then he rises and makes a tour of the cabin, singing and dancing; no one burns him this time, but also this is the limit of his rest,—one can hardly tell what he will endure up to the time when they cut off his head"
Just looking at the images of those poor women's skeletons and the position they were placed in was particularly shocking and cruel. What a dreadful way to die, how another human can inflict this suffering never ceases to shock me.
Horror at the obvious pain and weight of doom is inevitable. Yes, progress exists, though evidence indicates it is hard won, fragile and what passes for it can carry perils of its own. The shape and texture of the vast gulf between us and our deepest ancestors remains incompletely charted. That they carried out such gruesome rites but also ultimately rebelled against and extinguished them is one quick way to frame the whole picture.
Isn’t it interesting that 3500 years later, a preacher came along with the idea of a millstone tied to the neck. Hmm.
Horrific and impossible (?) for us to grasp how and why these things took place.
Could the women have been placed there one by one so that time passed in between each ritual?
A while back I wrote a story about a small tribe near the Pontic-Caspian steppe. Based on this new information it sounds like my story would require a lot of editing to match reality.
https://acabinetofcuriosities.substack.com/p/the-first-rider
The beginning of justification for mass murder. When does a murder "look like" self-murder? Anti-civilization.
Isn't this "traditional human sacrifice" bound up in the idea of the "Circle of Life" that justifies human murder because it "results in" agricultural fertility?
Beware of "Circle of Life" rationales. Not the Rule of Law, if it ("Life") justifies human murder.
Human sacrifice was shockingly common in the past. I've been an enthusiast of this era for a long time, but I never bought into the "peaceful matriarchy" theory.
Now do the January 6th protesters in solidarity
If one goes by what the Aztecs and other Neolithic tribes did, the sacrifices were either to bring back the spring, or bring back the light over the winter solstice. The old woman could represent the crone, thus sacrificing old life for new, and the younger women were possibly sacrifices for fertility of grain, livestock, and tribesmen.
There are mysteries out there, and nobody knows why Gobekle Tepe was built, then suddenly buried.
All we have are cave paintings to go by.