The Wicker Man

Join Kelli as she goes over the history of the Wicker Man!

The Wicker Man was popularized first by the Christopher Lee movie from 1973, and later with Nicholas Cage's remake. The first was folk horror, the second more action suspense. But was the Wicker Man a real thing?

Let's go back into the primary sources to read the first ever mention of a Wicker Man in the historical record - Julius Caesar's Commentary of the Gallic Wars. Once we get all the facts, analyze the sources, and take note of the context, we'll figure out if the Wicker Man was a real, Celtic/Gallic method of human sacrifice, or if it's simply just fiction.

Support me on my Patreon - your support helps keep this podcast going!
http://www.patreon.com/APHOUT

Follow the APHOUT YouTube channel!

Intro and Outro music credit:  @nedricmusic
Find him on all streaming services and YouTube!
http://www.nedricmusic.com 

Transcript

The Wicker Man
Intro
Welcome to A Popular History of Unpopular Things, a mostly scripted podcast that makes history more fun and accessible. My kind of history is the unpopular stuff - disease, death, and destruction. I like learning about all things bloody, gross, mysterious, and weird. 

THE WICKER MAN. Depending on which generation you’re in, and if you’ve seen The Wicker Man, you’re picturing one of two things right now - either the iconic Christopher Lee with a really creepy smile sacrificing Howie - OR - Nicholas Cage screaming. <sound bite/clip here> NOT THE BEES! NOT THE BEES! AHHHHH!

Or how about Nicholas Cage in a bear suit punching a woman in the face? Claaaassic Nicholas Cage!

Or both films. Maybe you love them both. They have the same basic story and plot, but two completely different vibes.

And if you’ve never seen the Wicker Man movies, then you have to. You absolutely must. You have to watch them both. The first is a classic piece of folk horror, with heavy emphasis on the folk part of that - and the second is Nicholas Cage at the end of his action-man era and the beginning of his eccentric era. Both versions are worthy of your time in their own ways 🙂

But did you know that there is a real-life history behind the Wicker Man? And I don’t mean a secretive and slightly “off” group of islanders sacrificing people. But could there be some truth to the idea of trapping someone inside a giant, wicker figure of a man and setting them on fire?

So for today’s story, we’re traveling back to the classical world, because according to none other than Julius Caesar himself in his Commentary on the Gallic War, written in the mid-1st century BCE, the Celtic Gauls did just that.

First, we’ll go through the historical context of the time - why was Caesar fighting against the Gauls? After we’ve established that, we’ll take a look at the source in question. Then, once we’ve got all the information we need, we’ll decide whether or not we can trust this source, whether it was corroborated by anyone else, and if there’s been any archaeological evidence proving the existence of the Wicker Man, and therefore proving if the Wicker Man was actually a real thing. Outside of the film industry. And Nicholas Cage’s nightmares.

So, let’s get started!
Historical Context
So first, let’s understand the context of today’s history - why was Caesar in Gaul, where he claims the Celts there performed human sacrifice with a wicker man? Well, to do this, we need a short-ish history lesson on the Roman Republic. Not Empire. This all happened before Rome transitioned officially to an Empire.

Rome became a Republic in 509 BCE when a group of nobles rebelled against the last Etruscan King, Tarquin the Proud. The Etruscans, to keep it as brief as possible, were the group that ruled central Italy before the Romans. And once the Roman nobles defeated the Etruscans and chased them out of power, they formed a new government built on checks and balances. There was a Senate, some citizen assemblies, and two elected executives - the consuls. 

Now over time, Rome sought to expand its territory; this is, like, step two for building a prosperous civilization. First you build legitimacy because there needs to be a buy-in for why people should live and peacefully exist in your civ. Once that’s squared away you engage in territorial expansion. Why? Well, expanding your civ means access to more laborers, more natural resources, and even greater political legitimacy. Countries still engage in territorial expansion to this day. By invading and going to war.

Rome fought in a bunch of wars to expand their territory in these Republic days, perhaps the most famous being the Punic Wars, where the Romans absolutely destroyed their neighboring North African rivals, Carthage, in three different wars spanning from 264-146 BCE. These are the ones with the Carthaginian General Hannibal and his war elephants against the Roman General Scipio Africanus… all that good stuff. And by the end of these wars, Carthage was destroyed, its people enslaved, and Rome became the de facto power in the Mediterranean.

And I’m grossly simplifying and shortening all this, of course, because I want to get to why Caesar ends up in Gaul. I’m just trying to establish the idea that the Romans engage in territorial expansion through warfare. And they’re very good at it.

So Caesar ends up coming to power in 60 BCE as part of the first triumvirate - a ruling group of three consuls instead of the normal two - with Pompey and Crassus. Why? Well, in short, it was an alliance of sorts made to counter the growing power and influence of the Senate. They felt that despite the system of checks and balances, the power was skewed too far to the Senators. So, the three men came together as consuls to try and rebalance things. But in reality, they just wanted power for themselves - not to support the dream that was the Roman Republic. Caesar and Pompey were powerful Generals, and Crassus was very wealthy. They were all very popular men, too, which rubbed the Senate the wrong way. And most of you already know how that all eventually ends for Caesar on March 15, 44 BCE.

But once Caesar came to power, he decided to go to war against the Gauls, in today’s France, Belgium, Netherlands, and chunks of Germany. Rome’s northwestern neighbors. Why? Well, like I said before - political legitimacy and territorial expansion. Conquering the Gauls would make Caesar even more powerful, popular, and prestigious - all things that would help him eventually take full control of Rome.

So in 58 BCE, he set off to Gaul for 8 years, where he encountered and defeated them. His return to Rome was epic too; the First Triumvirate had fallen apart, Pompey tried to prevent his return, there was the physical and metaphorical “crossing the rubicon” as he marched his troops into Rome, declaring war. He took power… it was good stuff. But that’s not why we’re here. We’re here to pinpoint where exactly the wicker man first appeared in the historical record. And if the source is to be believed, it happened during Caesar’s campaign in Gaul.
Primary Source Analysis
So let’s first take a look at the primary source, then we’ll dissect it and go over any extra information we need to get a more complete picture of the wicker man. In Book VI of Caesar’s Commentaries of the Gallic War, we get the following passage. Quote:

The nation of all the Gauls is extremely devoted to superstitious rites; and on that account they who are troubled with unusually severe diseases and they who are engaged in battles and dangers either sacrifice men as victims, or vow that they will sacrifice them, and employ the Druids as the performers of those sacrifices; because they think that unless the life of a man be offered for the life of a man, the mind of the immortal gods cannot be rendered propitious, and they have sacrifices of that kind ordained for national purposes.

Others have figures of vast size, the limbs of which formed of osiers they fill with living men, which being set on fire, the men perish enveloped in flames. They consider that the oblation of such as have been taken in theft, or in robbery, or any other offense, is more acceptable to the immortal gods; but when a supply of that class is wanting, they have recourse to the oblation of even the innocent.

End quote.

That’s it. That’s the source that mentions the Wicker Man. But before we try to corroborate it, let’s break it down so we’re all on the same page with what it’s telling us.

So Caesar, or his writer at least, is telling us here that the Gauls are superstitious folk. When someone is sick, or is about to go to battle or if there is some other kind of danger, they give a human sacrifice to their gods. They feel like unless they give their gods a sacrifice, the gods won’t protect them. So they do this regularly to keep the gods happy, so the Gauls can steer clear of disease and death in battle.

To perform this ritual, they use Druids. More on them in a bit.

One way sacrifice could happen, according to this source, is with a, quote, “figure of vast size.” The thing is made with osiers, which are small willow trees that provide fibers used for things like basket weaving. Hence the later connotation of “Wicker Man.” The sacrifice victims are put inside the limbs, the whole thing is set on fire, and the ritual is complete. They try to use criminals for the sacrifice but if there aren’t any robbers or thieves available, they will also sacrifice the innocent.

So now what I want to know, after reading that passage, is more about the Druids, the Gaul’s belief in human sacrifice, and where all of this comes from - Celtic culture. So let’s dive even deeper to explore the Celts.
The Celts
The term “Celts” refers to a collection of people who came from areas throughout Western Europe. One might initially assume just Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and parts of England - but the earliest known evidence of the Celts comes from around 700 BCE from an excavated grave in Austria. We have sources that place Celts from areas near the Danube River over to France, and a Greek source even recounts a meeting between the Celts and Alexander the Great in the Balkans in 335 BCE. 

So “Celts” is the term we give to that collection of people because they share a similar language, culture, and belief system. They weren’t just one group of people, but a whole bunch of different tribes. We don’t know what they might have called themselves, but the Roman word “Celt” is what stuck. And before anyone comes for me in the comments, I know that the Romans took the word Celt from the Greek Keltoi. But we use the Roman spelling. And in fact, before the 18th century, we didn’t even really call them Celts. For example, the Celts from the British Isles were known as the Britons. And today, of course, we’re talking about the Gauls, a Celtic group from, mainly, France.

I will reiterate that the Greeks were the first to write about them going back to 540 BCE. But much of what we know about the classical era Celts and Gauls and Druids comes from the Romans, sources like the one I read from earlier.

But I want to focus on Gaulish cultural beliefs, which will bring us to the Wicker Man, because otherwise we’d be here all day talking about the classical era 🙂

Now at the heart of Celtic beliefs is the druid, a shaman of sorts that would commune with the spirit world, was connected heavily to the natural world, and used holistic medicines to treat or cause illnesses. But beyond being a spiritual medium, druids were teachers, scientists, and philosophers. They were highly respected and would often be sought out to mediate disputes and maintain order. And of note, male and female druids existed and were considered equal in power and respect. 

Here’s what Caesar tells us of the druids in Gaul. Quote:
Throughout all Gaul there are two orders of …men who are of any rank and dignity… one is that of the Druids, the other that of the knights. The former are engaged in things sacred, conduct the public and private sacrifices, and interpret all matters of religion… 

They determine respecting almost all controversies, public and private; and if any crime has been perpetrated, if murder has been committed, if there be any dispute about an inheritance, if any about boundaries, …[they] decide it.

[They teach] and impart to the youth many things respecting the stars and their motion, respecting the extent of the world and of our earth, respecting the nature of things, respecting the power and majesty of the important gods.

End quote

Then he goes on to say the thing about the giant burning man-shaped effigy filled with men.

So if our image of a druid comes from sources like this, how can we be certain they are true? Indeed much of what we think we know about the Celtic and more specifically Gallic Druids was exaggerated, as we don’t have many Gallic primary sources. Gaulish, their language, was spoken. It was written down in other scripts, like Greek and Latin, but that means that there was heavy Greek and Latin influence on those sources. So, in short, we don’t have a properly Gallic source that confirms any of what Caesar says here.

But we do know a bunch about the Celts, more broadly, because of their traditions that survived - like celebrating the Yule winter solstice, the Litha summer solstice, and the four festivals - Imbolc, Beltane, Lughnasa and Samhain. I talked about all of them in my episode on the history of Halloween, so go check that out when you have a chance.

We also know, from Roman sources, that the Druids were oppressed by the Romans in the 1st century CE, supposedly because of the whole human sacrifices thing. And by the 2nd century, Druidism was more or less over. But again, much of what we know about the Druids and the Gauls and human sacrifices and the wicker man comes from Roman sources.
Was the Wicker Man Real?
So given allll of that information, the next point is - can we trust Caesar’s source? What do we know about this source and it’s purpose? It’s really important to consider that when reading or listening to something. Was there, perhaps, an agenda? Is it biased?

Well first, let’s actually look at a Greek writer named Posidonius. A few decades before Caesar went on his campaign against the Gauls, Posidonius went around the Mediterranean to gather data on non-Greek peoples, as well as to gather scientific data, like tidal heights and how that corresponds to the moon’s orbit. And one of the places Posidonius went was Gaul, where he interacted with the Celts and took note of some of their customs. He wrote about how they would nail skulls to doorways as trophies and how in the past men were given money to have their own throats cut open in public for amusement - actions he labeled barbaric, which I’m sure many agreed with. But he also noted that the Druids were philosophers and well respected in their communities. He apparently wrote a geographic survey of the Celts, but this has been lost to history - instead, that survey has been referenced by others after him, including Caesar. And historians believe that Caesar actually got his information about the wicker man from Posidonius’ survey.

This is strengthened by the fact that Caesar’s only mention of the wicker man is that one line, which I’ll quote again. Quote:

Others have figures of vast size, the limbs of which formed of osiers they fill with living men, which being set on fire, the men perish enveloped in flames.

End quote.

Had Caesar actually witnessed this, I’m sure he would have written much more about it. I can’t imagine he would have seen a giant, hollow, wicker effigy stuffed with bodies and set on fire and been like “ah well, just another Tuesday” and moved on with his life. That probably would have gotten more than just a quick mention in his memoirs on the Gallic Wars, right? I mean sure. The Gallic Wars were full of important, life-altering events for Caesar, like the capture of the Gallic hero and leader Vercingetorix during the Battle of Alesia. 

I did a joint podcast episode on Alesia with the Engineering History Podcast. But that’s audio only and not on YouTube for those of you interested in listening - you can find it wherever you get your podcasts.

But anyways, it’s important to note that not once did Caesar talk about the Britons using a wicker man to do human sacrifices - just the Gauls, and just in that one sentence. That doesn’t necessarily discount it - not all Celts were identical, and living in different regions will yield different cultural practices. So just because the Gauls might have done it doesn’t mean the Britons did too.

Ok then, so maybe this source is a little dubious. But why lie? Why even mention something like this if he didn’t see it?

To answer that question, we can look at biases. This is well before Christianity took off, both in general and in Rome, so in this case, it’s not about slandering them as pagans. But instead, think back to Rome and their desire to gain political legitimacy and territory. By “othering” the Gauls, by making them seem foreign and weird and different from the Romans, it allowed Caesar to gain even more popularity back home while on his crusade against them. It was the same with the capture of Vercingetorix at the Battle of Alesia in 52 BCE. He was held prisoner for almost six years and brought out almost as a trophy when Caesar returned home and had his triumph - or, ceremonial parade. Only after all that was Vercingetorix strangled to death in 46 BCE. 

My point is that Caesar was concerned with his own power. So by writing about the Gauls as he did, including small hearsay details like burning their own men in sacrifice, it painted a picture of this backwards, brutal group. So all the better for Caesar to conquer them, right? The more barbaric they seemed, the more popular Caesar was for defeating them in battle. 

Ok, so we can’t really trust this source. And it wasn’t properly corroborated by any other source after Caesar’s. But I have more questions - did the Gauls, or perhaps the Celts more broadly, engage in human sacrifice?

Probably, yes, but even that’s debatable. We have some archaeological evidence to suggest that human sacrifice might have happened, but that evidence could also just be violent death, not one specifically for a sacrifice to the gods. One example sometimes attributed to sacrifice is the Lindow Man, a body found preserved in a peat bog in England. It was discovered in the 1980s in Cheshire, not far from Manchester. 

The Lindow Man clearly died a violent death. They found a V-shaped cut on top of his head caused by a blunt object, ligature marks on his neck, a possible stab wound in the upper right chest, a broken neck, and a broken rib. The force of the blow to the head sent chunks of skull into his brain, and there was evidence of swelling, which means this blow happened before he died. It’s not clear if the other things happened before death or posthumously, and we’re never really going to know. But we know that after his death, he was put in the Lindow Moss peat bog face down, and stayed there for roughly 2000 years, give or take a few centuries. 

Why this one particular bog body raises some interest is that in comparing it with other iron age bog bodies, the Lindow Man’s death was… overkill. So, some attributed it to human sacrifice and ritual death. Celtic scholar Anne Ross figures that he was likely a sacrifice after identifying his stomach contents; they found what looked to be a partially burned barley cake of sorts that was given to the chosen Celtic sacrifice victim. Think of it like drawing straws - a portion of the cake is burnt, and the thing is ripped into pieces and thrown in a bag. Whoever draws out the burnt cake piece is the sacrifice. They theorized that perhaps the Lindow Man was a Druid who was sacrificed to stop a Roman advance on the Celts in 60 CE, after Rome became an empire. They also looked to the state of the body - the Lindow Man was in his mid-20s, but it looked like he had never done a day of hard work in his life, which lines up with him being a Druid rather than a commoner. But apart from some circumstantial evidence, we can’t prove any of that. It’s a cool thought though, and a credible theory. The Lindow Man is a permanent fixture at the British Museum in the Iron Age gallery if you ever find yourself there and are interested in seeing him in person.

So our evidence of Celtic human sacrifice is… spotty. Some archaeological evidence certainly points to it, but we don’t know for certain, because most written sources are dubious and biased. 

Ok then, another question - have we ever found evidence of a wicker man structure? That would certainly prove it, right? Have we found perhaps a charred pit with wicker, bindings, maybe some bones?

Quick answer here - no. There is no archaeological evidence to suggest a wicker man was ever built or used, except as a movie prop. There are also no eyewitness accounts of men being burned in a wicker structure - only hearsay evidence in very old sources.

Alright, well one final question then to fully explore this - if it didn’t exist, then where did the classic image of the wicker man come from?

The modern image of a wicker man, popularized in the original 70s movie, comes from an 18th-century engraving in Thomas Pennant’s book, A Tour in Wales. But to be honest, it’s not exactly… a stable structure. Ignore the movies for a minute. Caesar described a large figure made of osiers with sacrifices stuffed in its limbs, right? That would have to be a monumental structure. And I’m a little doubtful that the Gauls would go to these lengths to burn a handful of men as sacrifices. There are easier ways for the Druids to get the job done in a way that’s not so… cinematic.

So while the Wicker Man is a really cool visual, spawned some memorable movies, and is an icon attributed to the Gauls, and more broadly Celtic druids… it’s not real. It exists as a historical artifact of how the Romans othered the Gauls, but the thing itself is just a story.
Outro
Thanks for joining me for this episode of A Popular History of Unpopular Things. My name is Kelli Beard, and I hope you’ve enjoyed the story of the Wicker Man. Thank you for supporting my podcast, and if you haven’t already checked out my other episodes, go have a listen!

You can also support me and the show on Patreon - just look up a popular history of unpopular things. Subscribe to APHOUT on YouTube and check out my the musician behind my intro and outro, you can find him everywhere as Nedric and Nedric Music. Links are in the description!

Be sure to follow my podcast, available wherever you listen, so you know when new episodes are dropped. And stay tuned to get a popular history of unpopular things.