>>5994
>What makes you think our ancestors didn't know anything about Psilocybe semilanceata, probably native to Europe?
I'll definitely agree that there are several species of probably-native psilocybin mushrooms in europe. The reason I can't stand behind the notion of the ancestors using them, though, is because there's no evidence of it at all.
The first reliably documented use of a psilocybin mushroom in europe comes to us from the relatively modern year of 1799, as a suprise case of mushroom "poisoning".
I feel that if the ancestors were using psilocybin species, we'd see not only evidence of it in eddaic and sagaic sources (for instance, we see deliriants poetically described in odin's "death" on the tree + evidence in the form of volvae corpses with henbane, and traditional beer recepies), but also in later medieval medicinal and witch-trial sources (like flying ointments of the middle ages, which were the "modern" descendant of pre-christian deliriant mixtures).
The deliriants are (relatively) well attested, but not so with psilocybin…so, this leads me to believe that although there are definitely psilocybin species native to europe, there is no reason to believe that our people were consciously aware of their uses until after 1799.
>Excavated graves of Völvas in Sweden have even revealed seeds of cannabis.
I personally don't know what to make of this. Not only have volvae been found with seeds, but norse farmsteads have been found with evidence of growing cannabis sativa, bow strings and ship's rigging from the viking age onwards in germanic lands has historically been made of hemp, and it is well attested that cannabis sativa was used as a salad herb in the middle ages (not to mention what those crazy scythians were using the shit for).
So, yeah, it's DEFINITE that the ancestors had access to cannabis sativa. The question becomes whether they were using it as hemp or as "marijuana". Cannabis not cultivated specifically for psychotropic effects tends to be rather underwhelming as a drug, especially without the new world technology of smoking….
>Without going into unprovable McKenna tier bullshit I think the shamanic roots of the proto-religion is showing quite clear in the myths.
no doubt there's shamanism and even drug-induced shamanism clearly portrayed in the myths. We have volvae who work confusion "magic" by touching people on the face (know that scopolomine can be administrated transdermally). We have odin "dying" and the receiving the runes (that is, he went into a deliriant trance, which causes severe ataxia and can last for several days), and we have volvae who go on "spirit journeys" while their body lies appearantly "dead" (again, attestation of deliriant induced ataxia).
Like that other guy is saying: I'm sperging on the difference between general psychoactive drugs vs. psychedelics, which are a specific class of drugs with a specific set of effects that are different from everything I'd have reason to believe our ancestors to have made use of.
>>5992
again, none of these are psychedelics. definitely hallucinogenic drugs, but not psychedelic.
>>5996
>Okay FINE I used the wrong word stop sperging out already.
Well, with drugs, one has to be precise. If I were to describe the christian rite of the eucharist as "a ritual involving the psychoactive drug, alcohol", and then one were to go and telephone-game that into "the early christians used psychedelics", the difference in meaning would be phenomenal and have far-reaching implications.
>Psychedlics are not against Heathenry either, again, IF USED APPROPRIATELY.
I agree. My big point is that our ancestors didn't use them, so we have no real way of definitely knowing their thoughts on them, and their use is something that is beyond the scope of what our ancestors' magical/medicinal practices would have covered.