Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 homicidal_squirrel Aug 15, 2012 23:01:04	www.slate.com/blogs/trending/2012/08/15/...
#2 The_Silversword Aug 15, 2012 23:19:39	Interesting article, but im wondering why they assume that they were all sacrificed, couldnt they have died in battle or something?
#3 sfdragon Aug 15, 2012 23:20:50	they were sacrificed for victory in battle, for the rain, for protection...... and to bring a pox down on their enimeies....
#4 The_Silversword Aug 15, 2012 23:25:17	If victory got you sacrificed I dont think I would ever have won!
#5 sfdragon Aug 16, 2012 7:50:14	no dude they were sacrificed for asking victory from the gods of old
#6 ADHadh Aug 16, 2012 12:32:57	"Fractured skulls" and "hacked human bones" with weaponry and armor does suspiciously sound more like a battle than a sacrifice.
#7 ADHadh Aug 16, 2012 14:45:45	Remains of the fans of the first Euro? Sounds about right.
#8 dirtyfrank Aug 16, 2012 16:33:02	"Fractured skulls" and "hacked human bones" with weaponry and armor does suspiciously sound more like a battle than a sacrifice. hence terms such as "sacrifices of war"
#9 EscherEnigma Aug 16, 2012 23:32:20	/shrug The article doesn't explain why they think it was a sacrifice and not a battle, but I suspect that's on the article's author, not the people actually studying this. A few possible reasons that they think it's a sacrifice and not a battle might be that armor and weapons were left on the bodies (not stripped as loot), that they all appear to be of the same "tribe", so-to-speak, or other things they found that share commonalities with other known sacrifices. But that's all conjecture.  I'm confident that it's an ommission of the article and not a leap of conclusion in the studies.