Azhrets[a] is apriest in theSlavic religion whose name is reconstructed to mean "one who makes sacrifices". The name appears mainly in theEast andSouth Slavic vocabulary, while in theWest Slavs it is attested only inPolish. Most information about the Slavic priesthood comes from Latin texts about the paganism of thePolabian Slavs. The descriptions show that they were engaged in offering sacrifices to the gods,divination and determining the dates of festivals. They possessed cosmological knowledge and were a major source of resistance againstChristianity.
The earliest attestation of the word isOld Church Slavonic жьрьцьžĭrĭcĭ "priest".[1][2] In otherSlavic languages it occurs asRussian жрецzhrets,[1]Belarusian жрэцzhrets,[2] andUkrainian жрецьzhrets,[3] all derived fromOld East Slavic жрецъžrecŭ,[2] andBulgarian andMacedonian жрецzhrets andSlovenežréc and all meaning "pagan priest".[2]Czechžrec was borrowed from Old East Slavic,[b] as was Croatian žreczhrets.[2] The exception here is thePolish attestationżerca, which historically means "matchmaker". TheProto-Slavic form is reconstructed as*žьrьcь, which is anagent noun from the verb*žьrti "to consecrate, sacrifice", which is continued by OCS жрьти, жрѣтиžrěti and Old East Slavic жеретиžereti and it literally means "one who makes sacrifices". This verb is derived from theProto-Indo-European root*gʷerH- "to praise" and iscognate toLithuaniangìrt,Latviandzir̃t,Old Prussiangirtwei,Sanskrit गृणातिgṛṇā́ti "to praise",[4] orLatin grātēs "gratitude".[1] From this verb is also derived*žьrtva "sacrifice" continued by OCS жрьтва, ⰶⱃⱐⱅⰲⰰžrĭtva,[4][c] and other related words.
InOld Polish,zhrets appears in the formsżyrzec,żerzec,żyrca,żerca since the early 15th century to the 16th century inPolish translations of the New Testament[d] as the equivalent of the Latin wordarchitriclinus and means "matchmaker"; later it appears only in dictionaries, where it appears as a synonym of the Latin wordspronubus andparanymphus, and the Polishswat,dziewosłąb,hochmistrz,marszałek weselny. In only one attestation wordżyrcowie (plural fromżyrca) was used to call all wedding guests.[e] In addition to these words,Samuel Linde'sDictionary also mentions the wordsżerecki from Budny,żertownik "sacrificial table" intserkov from Pimina and Sakowicz,żertwa orżertwa andżertować, however, these words are considered to be loanwords from the Old Church Slavonic. For this reason, however, the wordżyrzec should not be considered a borrowing from OCS, since in OCS texts the Latin wordarchitriclinus wasSlavicized asarchitriklinĭ or replaced by another word. In contrast to words in East Slavic languages, Polish words never meant "priest" but "matchmaker", which is explained by the fact that pagan priests, in addition to offering sacrifices to the gods, were also engaged in matchmaking. Marriage was out of the control of the ChristianChurches for a long time and they used severe punishments before they were able to force church weddings on people. Research into the history of Polish marriages also suggests that the matchmaker had priestly qualities.[5]
The basic form of the Polish word is considered to beżyrzec, because it is the oldest and most frequent, although on the basis of the Old Church Slavonic formžĭrĭcĭ one should expect the formżrzec,żerca. For this reason,Jan Łoś included this word in the group of wordsłyżka,dźwirze,chrzybiet, whereь waslengthened toi. The disruption of the word development may also have been caused by the words i.e.żyr,pożyrać "to devour":żerca turned intożyrca, and then when in all Polish words-ir- and-yr- turned into-er-,żerzec andżerca were formed.[5]
The main informations on the Slavic priesthood concerns the priesthood of thePolabian Slavs. The genesis of the developed Polabian priesthood is unclear: Kazimierz Wachowski attributed to the rulers of theVeleti (Lutici) tribe the simultaneous position of high priests, and Leszek Paweł Słupecki, who expresses a similar view, adds that originally the prince-priest combined the spheres ofsacrum andprofanum, which later, among the Veleti, was separated. Many other researchers point to the connections between chieftainship and priesthood.Henryk Łowmiański expressed a different stance – he believed that the development of the West Slavic religion in the main points was modeled onChristianity. Ultimately, however, these views are speculation, because medieval sources do not indicate how the selection of priests proceeded.[6]
Priests, unlike most Slavic men, had long hair and beards and wore long robes.[7]
According to the descriptions, the Polabian priests were mainly engaged indivination. They divined mainly with the help ofhorses:Saxo Grammaticus states that among theRani, a horse was led three times between a series of lances driven into the ground at an angle and connected to each other, and if the horse started walking with its right leg each time, it meant a good omen. According toThietmar a similar divination, only in two stages, was carried out inRethra, and Herbord describes that among thePomeranians a priest led an armed horse three or four times over nine spears, and if the horse did not touch the lance with its foot, it meant a good omen.Henry of Latvia describes how the Slavs wanted to sacrifice a monk to the gods – whether the pagans should do so was to be decided by the behavior of the horse, and the end of the matter was to leave the monk alive, which clearly indicates the unpredictability of the oracle. The ruler of fate here is supposed to be thegod, the horse is merely the transmitter, and the priest is the executor of the oracle.[8]
Helmold described in hisChronicle that in the grove of the godProue every Monday the people, theknyaz and the priest gathered to dispense justice. The main, separate part of the grove was only accessible to the priest, people who wanted to make a sacrifice, or people who were in danger.[9] Saxo also describes that the horn, which was attached to the idol ofSvetovit inArkona, was also used by the priests for divination.[10] Saxo also describes the ritual celebrated after the harvest: at the climax a large sacrificialkalach was brought, the size of which was similar to that of a man, which the priest placed between himself and the people gathered in front of the temple and asked "do you see me?", and when the answer was affirmative he said: "may you not be able to see me next year", which was supposed to be a wish for a more abundant harvest next year.Aleksander Gieysztor connected this Polabian ritual to an identical one performed by an Orthodox priest inBulgaria.[11]
The priests also knewcosmology (the priests ofSzczecin explained the tripartite nature of the cosmos), determined the dates of holidays, and were a major source of resistance toChristianity.[7]
Information about the Slavic priesthood concerningWest Slavs outside thePolabian group, as well asEast Slavs orSouth Slavs, is more scarce. In Old East Slavic texts, the role of priest-charmers is often played byVolkhvs.
TheLutici, the confederation ofRedarians,Circipanians,Kessinians, andTollensians, inhabited a wide area around the riverPeene. From Thietmar's description of the system of this confederation, it can be inferred that the confederation had no centralized authority, noking orknyaz was recognized, and decisions were made collectively in assemblies. The lack ofmonarchical leadership may have led to the increased influence of the priests. According to Bernhard Guttmann, the political importance of the priesthood was influenced by the principle of unity among the priests ofRethra, which also gave it important political significance. The German historian Wolfgang H. Fritze also notes the significant role of the priests in politics, but points out that power was not constitutionally in the hands of the priests of Rethra. On the other hand, according to the Czech historian Libuša Hrabová, the priests of Rethra gained in importance as a result of Christian pressure, and the town of Rethra itself gained almost princely power, above all in matters of foreign policy. The historian Roderich Schmidt also adds that theuprising of the Polabian Slavs in 983 began with a gathering at Rethra and that the victory celebrations from the1066 uprising were held there. Another historian, Joachim Herrmann, who also referred to these two events expressed the view that no war would have taken place without the initiative and consent of the priests and sees in the Lutici covenant a secret alliance organized by the priests of Rethra, while Manfred Hellmann took the opposite view and believed that the priesthood gained importance only after the victory of the uprising, as a result of which the Slavic people recognized the superiority of theSlavic gods over theChristian one. According toAnthony D. Smith, who divided societies into lateral (lateral-aristocratic), which are open and dynamic, and vertical (vertical-democratic), which emphasize their ethnic ties and separate themselves from the world, the Lutici should be assigned to the vertical group, and this community was created by experiencing wars together. The verticality of the tribe leads to the rejection ofreligious syncretism,cultural assimilation andexogamy. Typical of such societies is the existence of a specialized priestly class. This view is supported byChristian Lübke.[12]
The main sources of information about the priesthood of theRani areSaxo Grammaticus'Gesta Danorum andHelmold'sChronica Slavorum. In the case of this tribe, scholars point even more strongly than in the case of the Veleti to the dominant role of priests in society and politics. They generally point to Helmold's information that the Rani were the only Slavic tribe to have a king, but his authority was weak compared to that of the priest, or Saxo's information that the priests of Svetovit had 300 horses and as many horsemen. According to Sven Wichert, such a categorical interpretation is biased because most scholars in general overlook Helmold's first information about the priesthood, where, according to him, the king and the priest had an equal position. It also points to the fact that Saxo does not mention the role of priests during the negotiations after the surrender ofArkona to theDanes. More moderate views were propounded, for example, by Manfred Hellmann, who recognized the coexistence of princely and priestly power. Joachim Herrmann and Evamaria Engel, on the other hand, recognized that priests influenced political decisions with the help of oracles and their authority. They also point to a situation where a Rani priest, having seen that a Christian priest who had come withSaxon merchants to a market onRügen was holding a Christian devotion there, summoned the king and the people and demanded theextradition of the Christian priest whom he wanted to sacrifice to the gods as reparation for promoting Christianity. This situation according to them proves that the priest had noexecutive power.[13]
.jpg)
