Alternative readings of the Saxo Grammaticus’ account on Slavic pagan religion, and their implications on its reconstruction


Abstract

Commentaries to a new translation of the Saxo Grammaticus’ account on Slavic pagan religion are presented. Grammatical and contextual reasons are offered to support new readings which differ from the traditional translations. Alternative reconstructions of the Slavic rituals are suggested, and their meanings are analysed in the context of other Indo-European religions and mythological traditions, especially in the Indo-Iranian context.

Introduction

Saxo Grammaticus’ account on Slavic pre-christian religion, being one of the most detailed and definitely the least ideologically biased one, is an important source for our knowledge and understanding of the pagan religion of the Slavs. Still, translators and translations of the original Latin text, which is obscure and ambiguous sometimes, may ignore interesting fragments, may lose accents, moods, vivacity and full meanings of the original, and thus may make a fragment bleak and seemingly unimportant for the religion reconstruction, or may be simply incorrect.

Goals of the author’s translation of the fragments of Gesta Danorum related to the Slavic pagan religion (Sielicki 2015), and goals of this paper is to present possible alternative translations of some fragments, and attract attention to implications of these alternative readings, and other recent textual rediscoveries in Gesta Danorum, to our understanding and interpretation of the personages, rituals, and contents of the Slavic pre-christian religion and myth. Reasons for these alternative readings may be either purely grammar or vocabulary based (and, sometimes punctuation accents, which differ from one publication of the original text to another), or dictated by the logic and the meaning of the surrounding textual context, or contextual in terms of Saxo’s individuality, style, time and circumstances of his work, also they may be supported by the parallels in other medieval accounts. Out of all, may be a bit stretched, but still reasonably acceptable different readings of a fragment, a reading differentiating mostly from the “standard” translations was chosen consciously and deliberately, to refresh anew our understanding of the pagan Slavic religion and myth.

For a baseline publication of the original text the Holder’s text was selected, for a baseline translation the Peter Fisher’s one was chosen, and, when it seemed beneficial for the discussion, translations of O. Elton, Fr. W. Horn (wonderfully illustrated by L. Moe), Al. S. Famincin, (unfortunately the author was not able to get hold on translation of E. Christiansen), and fragments from other publications of the original medieval Latin accounts on Slavic religion were presented and juxtaposed to each other.

The Texts

(14.25.2.3-4)

[3] A quo oblationem suam liquida fide prosequi rogatus, pignoris loco lapillum se aquae iniecturum asseruit. [4] Siquidem icturis foedus barbaris religioni erat calculum in undas conicere seque, si pacto obviam issent, mersi lapidis exemplo perituros orare (Holder 1886 517.25-30).

[3] When the bishop requested that he should back up his proposal with a clear assurance, Dombor declared that he would pledge himself by throwing a pebble into the water. [4] If barbarians intended to make a covenant, they followed the ritual of casting a pebble into the waters and prayed that if they went against the agreed, they would be lost, like the sunken stone (Fisher 2015 1157).

Da Bispen spurgte ham, hvilken Borgen han vilde stille for, at han mente det ærligt, svarede han, at han som Borgen vilde kaste en Sten i Vandet; det var nemlig disse Barbarers hedenske Skik, naar de indgik en Overenskomst, at kaste en Sten i Vandet med Bøn til Gilderne om, at de maatte gaa til Bunds som Stenen, i Fald de brød deres Ord (When the bishop asked him what guaranty he would put forth that he meant that sincerely, he replied that for the assurance he would throw a stone in the water; because that was the pagan custom of these barbarians, when they signed a treaty to throw a stone in the water with a pledge to the signees that they must go to the bottom like the stone in case they broken their word – all translations to English, if not specifically noted, are done by the author, S.S.) (Horn 1898 168).

[3] Being asked a confirmation in the sincerity of his requests’ aims, he offered to conduct a local pledge, in which a stone was thrown into a body of water to be consumed by it. [4] The barbarians’ superstitious rite, [which Dombor] offered to perform, was to contemplate over the prophecy of the waves; if a treaty is [to be] forgotten, the sinking of the stone will foretell the doom [of the violator] (Sielicki 2015 4).

(Indo-Iranian parallels of the Slavic water and fire rites of the oath and guilt confirmation, and possibly related to them deities, attested in Saxo Grammaticus’ and other Latin authors’ accounts and Slavic law codices)

This fragment is not presented neither in the well-known C. H. Mayer’s collection, nor in Elton’s or Famincin’s translations, and it was recently rediscovered as an important account on Slavic rituals and beliefs (Marinas 2013). The author’s translation does not differ significantly from the baseline Fisher’s translation, however it is still presented here as one more important argument to the thesis of R. Jakobson (1950 1025-6), M. Gimbutas (1967 739), and J. Puhvel (1987 230-1), that Slavic pre-christian religion should have had very strong similarities with the Indo-Iranian one. In the fragment above we see association of such categories as trust, being true to one’s own word, especially in kingly matters, with the aquatic nature element (possibly, there could have been also a personification of that element).

In Zoroastrian sources Apam Napat, “Son of the Waters”, was such an aquatic personification (Yt 8 (Tishtar).4, 34; Darmesteter 1882 72, 77), who, also, was an overseer, keeper and distributor of Khvarenah, the “royal glory”, which is given to worthy kings, who maintain aša, the “right”, the “true” world order (Boyce 1975 41-3; Gershevitch 1959 6-7). If they do not stay true to their obligations, like happened to Yima, who allowed a “lying, untrue word” into his mind, Khvarenah leaves them in a sorry state, and, in a form of a bird, goes to the bottom of the sea, where Apam Napat seizes it (Yt 19  (Zam).34, 51; Darmesteter 1882 219, 222). Apam Napat maintains aša not alone, but in pair with Mithra, however, if the latter do it by “pacifying” councils of the lands in turmoil, the former “restrains” them (Yt 13 (Fravardin).95; Gershevitch 1959 27 (Darmesteter’s translation is inadequate here)), which establishes parallel to the Vedic Varuna the Binder (RV 1.24.12-15, 1.25.21, 2.28.5; Griffith 1889 13,14, 152; AV 4.16.7-9; Bloomfield 1897 74), who also has another-name Apam Napat, and that parallel M. Boyce pushes to the limits of proposing a common Indo-Iranian deity *Vouruna, who was associated to the abstract category of truth, oath, and aquatic elements, as well as who is young and created all things in the world (Boyce 1975 44-8; Macdonell 1897 25) (RV 2.27.2, 2.28.4, 2.35.2,4,8, 7.49.2-3, 10.8.5-6, 1.2.8, 1.23.5, 1.152.1, 7.60.5, 7.66.12-3; Griffith 1889 150, 151-2, 157, 363, 540, 1, 12, 103, 368, 371; AV 4.16.3; Bloomfield 1897 74; AV 4.29.1, 5.11.3, 20.123.2; Chand 1982 137, 171, 900).

An aquatic ordeal related to Varuna and concerned about verifying denial of the broken word, which M. Boyce cites by legal texts of Yājñavalkya (YDh 2.108-9; Röer & Montriou 1859 36; Mandlik 1880 211-2), is more dramatic than the one described by Saxo. The man accused of breaking his oath gets submerged in water, asking Varuna for protection, and at that moment an archer shoots an arrow, which a swift runner should retrieve. If, by the time the runner returns, the accused man is found alive, he gets cleared from the accusation. If not, – well, he shares the destiny of the stone in Saxo’s account (Boyce 1979 8). The similar account we find in other law books, though not so vividly described (ViDh 12.7-8; Olivelle 2009 70; NSm 20.25-7; Lariviere 2003 450).

The expression “to drink brimstone water” survived in contemporary Persian, meaning “to take an oath”; Vidēvdāt mentions oath by water and blazing fire, and ordeals by the “truth-knowing” water (Vid 4.46, .54-5; Darmesteter 1880 131-2; Duchesne-Guillemin 1973 71)H. Lüders cites Āpastamba Dharmasūtra  (ADh II.11.29.7; Bühler 1879 170), which states that the witness in the court of law should be telling the truth, standing before the kindled fire and the vessel of water, in presence of the king, and warned by the judge that he should be fair to both sides of the dispute (also Arthasastra of Kautilya iii.11;) (Kane 1946 342). Vaiṣṇava Dharmaśāstra instructs the witness to take an oath by truth of the fire and the water, along with other nature elements, as representation of truth of the gods (ViDh 8.19-39; Olivelle 2009 66). Mānava Dharmaśāstra says that a witness who lies will be bound by Varuna, and he, helpless, spend 100 his lifetimes, however, witness’ lie is acceptable if it saves defendant’s life, still the false-testifying witness should excuse himself before Varuna giving him oblation with the formula: “Untie, Varuna” (RV 1.24.15; Griffith 1889 13) (Kane 1946 353), three such formulas addressed to water (RV 10.9.1-3; Griffith 1889 541) (MDh viii.82, .103-6; Olivelle 2004 129-31). Nārada-smṛti agrees that the false testifying person will be tied by Varuna, and clarifies there will be one hundred ties, and each one will be released once a thousand years (NSm 1.186-7; Lariviere 2003 325)Aitareya Brahmana, describing the rite of Soma sacrifice Tānūnaptra, states that the priests swear that they will not intentionally spoil the sacrifice touching the water (Keith 327). W. Crooke describes a rite of taking oath, which survived up till nineteenth century in Northern India, when the person taking the oath enters a circle made of calf manure with the vessel of water in the center, and if money are the matter of the oath, they are put in the vessel (1896 42-3; ii 271).

The typologically earlier, among the post-vedic legal literature, Laws of Manu (Mānava Dharmaśāstra) knew two original, apparently, more ancient, ordeals: by water and by fire, which were administered as confirmations of the oaths, and were not distinguished from the oaths by heads of person’s wives and children (MDh 8.111-6; Olivelle 2004 131). The later Yājñavalkya-smṛti extended number of ordeals, suitable to resolve important matters and clear defendant from acquisitions, by the ones of balance, holy water, and poison. The balance ordeal was suited for the weak: women, ill, elderly, Brahmins, by fire – for Kshatriyas, by water – for Vaishyas, and by poison – for Shudras (YDh 2.95, .98; Röer & Montriou 1859 34; Mandlik 1880 210). In the holy water oath verification rite the person taking the oath should have drunk the water in which weapons of the deity, the defendant believes in, were immersed. In case of the false oath he was expected to fall ill from the water, or other dire consequences coming from the water should have followed (Jolly 1896 145) (BSm 10.23-4; Jolly 1889 318; ViDh 14.4-5; Olivelle 2009 71; NSm 20.43-4; Lariviere 2003 452; YDh 2.112-3; Mandlik 1880 212) (Rocher 391). The Laws of Manu describe similar consequences happen not with the person taking an ordeal, but to the false-testifying witness (MDh viii.108; Olivelle 2004 131).  The later minor law books were adding more and more ordeals, multiplying them to 7 and 9 (Hastings 1917 523), also extending list of the exceptions, for example ordeal by fire is not suitable to blacksmith, or ordeal by water – to fisherman, or ordeal by holy water is not suitable for nonbelievers or conscious evil-doers, as well as making exceptions for times of the year and weather conditions (ViDh 9.18, .25, .29-31; Olivelle 2009 67-8; NSm 20.42, .45, .47-8; Lariviere 2003 452-3) (Jolly 1896 146; Rocher 393). 

Additional ordeals to the original water and fire ones, and more exceptions and clarifications on their use were added, apparently, to fine-tune the legal system to the changing social structure of the society, making the ordeals more like mere utilitarian judicial tools, rather than manifestations of the social rules of behaviour blessed by the divine authority. Still, the understanding that these procedures are not ordeals per se, which would verify particular actions, but rather means of verifications of the oaths, persisted, that can be easily seen in the ritual verbal formulas prescribed for the defendants undergoing the ordeals: “I have not done this” or similar, referring to the “invisible spies” of Mitra and Varuna (or Varuna, as a King of Waters, himself) from Vedas who can witness innocence of the defendant (ViDh 11.11-2, 12.7-8, 14.3; Olivelle 2009 69-71; NSm 20.22-4, 20.31; Lariviere 2003 449-50; YDh 2.104; Mandlik 1880 211). Nārada-smṛti explicitly elaborates that the purpose of these ordeals is to distinguish truth and lie, and primarily in interests of the defendant, to clear out him from the accusation, and the best ones for that purpose are of the fire and water, and the latter one is even better, because fire originates from water (NSm 20.5-7, .30; Lariviere 2003 447-8, 450). Kane points out that some Dharmashastras do not distinguish oaths and ordeals at all (MDh 8.109-14; Olivelle 2004 131; NSm 1.218; Lariviere 2003 330), while the later commentaries on them do recognise the distinction in a rather technical sense, when one or another is applicable to accused in crimes of different degree of aggravation, or by the time a decision can be made (Kane 1946 358). 

There were also other procedures, less obviously connecting water and contractual relationships, such as renouncing proprietorship touching the water when giving a gift (YDh 1.229-35; Mandlik 1880 189), casting money in the water if the creditor deceased (NSm 1.113; Lariviere 2003 309), or breaking a vessel with water and sprinkling the head of a slave when the master releases him free (NSm 5.40-1; Lariviere 2003 351). During the adoption procedure, in presence of the fire and water vessels, parent release the dominion over his son with the verbal formula: “I give (him to you)”, and the adopter confirms the contract of acceptance with the words: “I take thee for the fulfillment of my religious duties”, declares Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra (BDh 8.5.9-12; Bühler 1882 335), while Vāsiṣṭha Dharmasūtra adds that the adoptee, or the person who has been banished from the family, can be readmitted after the water from the vessels get poured onto his head, and the same formula addressed to waters, which is used to forgive the false witness (RV 10.9.1-3; Griffith 1889 541), was recited (VaDh 15.20; Bühler 1882 78). G. Sarkar point out that similarly the contractual relationships between parents and daughter are transferred to the groom during the wedding ceremony with the same water rite (MDh iii.35; Olivelle 2004 45) (Sarkar 368, 379-80, Jolly 1896 112). Because the king answers to nobody among men, punishment for his unjust deeds is a business of Varuna the chastiser of the kings (MDh ix.245; Olivelle 2004 173), who gives them the crowns. During the coronation procedure the king, who is expected to take on the duty to support the law (BrUp I.4.14; Madhavananda 1950 178), a priest sprinkles the king with water and recites mantras addressed to the waters and Varuna. If the king has collected unjustly high additional tax he had to throw it into water, invoking Varuna’s name (YDh 2.307; Mandlik 1880 244) (Kane 1946 97, 77, 176).

Xuanzang (Hiuen Tsiang), a Chinese buddhist monk, after traveling to India in seventh century, describes an ordeal of throwing a defendant in a sack into a deep water, and expecting him to float, and an ordeal by the hot piece metal that is expected not to harm the defendant if  placed on his hands, feet or tongue, as well he describes ordeals by balance and poison (Xuanzang II.13;). Persian scholar Al-Beruni, in eleventh century, after he traveled in India, wrote, that in the indian court, if there is not enough written and witness account, defendant may take an oath that he is innocent. Depending on the importance of the suit, it may be a simple oath, or one supported by the ordeal verification via drinking holy water, with the expectation it will not harm the defendant in case he is telling the truth, or throwing him into a deep well or a river, after the defendant pronounced the formula: “Water, you know the secret and public, kill me if I lie, and preserve me if I speak the truth”, or a kettle is boiled and a piece of gold is thrown into it, and defendant must fetch it from the water, or a hot, near the melting point, piece of metal should be carried in hands for some distance, as well as an ordeal of balance is mentioned (Al-Beruni II.LXX; Sachu 1971 158-61).

M. Boyce suggests that pre-Zoroastrian Indo-Iranian *Vouruna-Apam Napat, to whom, apparently, the above mentioned rites were dedicated, gave up the most of his traits to Ahura Mazda during Zoroastrian reform (Boyce 1975 48-51), which follows observation of I. Gershevitch (1959 45-8), while G. Dumezil (1988 92-4) proposes a full conversion/assimilation of Varuna of pagan times into Ahura Mazda. Considering a quite significant possible influence of Zoroastrianism on theology of Judaism, and, then, Christianity (Grabbe 2004 361-4; Duchesne-Guillemin 1973 178-83), and possible Indo-Iranian influence on the Slavic deities, Saxo’s account is quite ironic, when Dombor suggests a pledge, technically speaking, in the name of the same deity Bishop Absalon, himself, is a devoted servant of.

There is no mention in Saxo’s account of a personified figure of the waters or fire, however, we may find such ones in Adam of Bremen’s description of the city of Wolin:

Ibi est Olla Vulcani, quod incolae Grecum ignem vocant (vocans; vocant ignem in other manuscripts), de quo etiam meminit Solinus. Ibi cernitur Neptunus triplicis naturae (here and below, important to the argument words and grammatical categories are highlighted by the author, S.S.): tribus (Tribus) enim fretis alluitur illa insula, quorum (quor. unum virid. aiunt esse) aiunt unum esse viridissimae speciei, alterum subalbidae, tertium  (tercius vero) motu furibundo perpetuis saevit tempestatibus (There is a Vulcan’s Cauldron, which is called a Greek fire by the locals, [and] which was mentioned by Solinus.  There is known a Neptune of the triple temperament: for three seas/estuaries surround this [pen]insula, which, it’s said, on one [side] is of freshest quality, on another whitish [muddy], and on third – continuously franticly stirred by raging storms) (Adam II.XXII, Schmeidler 1917 79.18-80.2).

Especially interesting here is that the Slavic analog of *Vouruna-Apam Napat, described here as a certain Neptune (H.Lüders also calls Varuna an Indian Neptune (1951 9)), is accompanied by a certain Vulcan (or his attribute cauldron) – possibly the Slavic analog of *Vouruna‘s companion Mit(h)ra, who, in Indo-Iranian tradition, is the fiery figure (Yt 10 (Mihir).3, 127; Gershevitch 1959 75, 137; Yt 19 (Zam).49; Darmesteter 1882 222; RV 7.66.10; Griffith 1889 371). One of the three sacred fires of Bundahishn bears name of Mithra (Burzin-Mitro) (Bd 7.8; West 1860 98), as well as the Zoroastrian fire temples dar-e mehr (Duchesne-Guillemin 1973 72). In Younger Avesta these two nature elements, the fire and the water, are associated with two, out of six, “aspects” of Ahura Mazda: Aša Vahišta (Best Truth, or the Right Order), and Haurvatāt (Wholeness, or the Youthful/Perfect Health) (Boyce 1979 22-3; Gershevitch 1959 10), and the same association may have been present in artifacts of Wolin.

H. Lüders points out that Varuna and Mitra were the oath gods, and that Indo-Iranians swore their oaths addressed to Varuna before the waters, and to Mitra – before the fire (Gershevitch 1959 7, Lüders 1951 28-9, 37; Keith 395; Jolly 1896 144). Still, on top of the differences between rituals dedicated either to Mit(h)ra or *Vouruna, there could be seen a difference in their oath specialization: while Mit(h)ra is a patron of contracts between two or more parties, *Vouruna is rather a figure of the individual integrity and staying true to the own principles. For the role of Mithra the keeper of contractual oaths, I. Gershevitch cites Sogdian Buddhist text Vessantara Jātaka (Benveniste 1946 1201-10), in which prince Sudāšan is tested by the Supreme God in appearance of a brahmin, who, to test the prince’s commitment to Buddhaship, strikes a contract in which the prince gives him up his wife Madri, with the ritual words: “in the presence of Mithra, the Judge of Creation” (1959 35). Avestan Yasht dedicated to Mithra is quite explicit on the contractual specialization of Mithra (Yt 10 (Mihir) .23, .26, .37-8, .104, .133, .62, .80, .82, .7, .45; Gershevitch 1959  85, 87, 91-3, 125, 141, 103, 111, 113, 77, 97).

Apam Napat, being a creator and fashioner of men (Yt 19 (Zamyad) .52; Darmesteter 1882 222), in his Zarathushtrian reincarnation as Ahura Mazda, or his creating device Spenta Mainyu, provided them with the fully available free will. The well known “Persian Dualism”, is an idea of the later Zoroastrianism, especially its Zurvanian heresy, result of the borrowing and reborrowing of the Babylonian and Jewish thought, while the original Gathas of Zarathushtra are decisively monistic, and with no trace of the innate, primordial predestination, and equality of the God and the Evil, argue M. L. West (2010 12-14), M. Boyce (2007 61-3, 67-70) and G. G. Scholem (1965 5).  The antagonist spirits, Spenta Mainyu and Angra Mainyu, are absolute twins in their beginnings, and it was only their choice which put them on opposite sides, and that own choice defined their destiny, and the latter, destructive choice of Angry Spirit is not self sufficient and self supporting, it only can prey on the Good Things as a Corrupting Agent, and will disappear when the Age of Separation comes, which will come through the multiplication of the Good Though, Speech and Deeds of the Ahura Mazda followers by their free will decision (Y 29.4, 45.2, 30.3-5, 31.12, 30.6, 28.3, 30.9, 33.12, 31.19, 44.16, 34.13, 46.3, 48.9,12, 53.2; West 2010 45, 115, 52-3, 61, 53, 39, 55, 73, 65, 111, 93, 121, 139, 165). In this context, Haurvatāt, Wholeness, associated with the water element, is not simply a long and healthy life, but rather a long life the aim of which is to “reach realm of Good Thought, the path to Right where Ahura Mazda dwells” (Y 33.5, 43.2, .13; West 2010 81, 95, 101) (West 2010 15-6).

Apart from the truth-concerning water ordeals, the fiery ordeals described in Iranian and Indian sources sound quite Volcanic: Dēnkart tells that among ordeals approved by Zarathushtra himself was the ordeal which involved pouring molten metal on chest of the person in the trial (Dk VII.5.4-5; West 1897 77) (Boyce 1979 9, Duchesne-Guillemin 1973 71), which is not surprising, reading about such an ordeal in Zarathushtra’s Gathas  (Y 32.7; West 2010 71). Zādspram tells that Zarathushtra took such a fiery ordeal by the molten metall to prove that his teaching is true (Zd 21.24; West 1897 172) (Hastings & Selbie 1917 525). Yājñavalkya’s and Nārada’s version of the ordeal by fire involves carrying red-hot iron balls or lumps of metal in bare hands (YDh 2.104-7; Mandlik 1880 211; NSm 20.17-24; Lariviere 2003 449). If Domboro’s water rite concerning the keeping oaths was related to the Slavic “Neptune”, it’s quite possible that there existed, as well, fiery Slavic “Volcanic” rites, and, consecutively, their mythical patrone figure, which and who, though, did not make their way into Saxo’s account.

Usually, in that Adam’s fragment above, the Latin natura is translated as literally “nature”, though the “character” or “temperament” are also legitimate translations, and the latter one is chosen here. Latin viridissimus, usually translated as  “greenest” is also “freshest”/”youngest”, and species is not only an “appearance”, but also is a “quality”/”type”. Another important detail is that Adam not simply describes the geography of Wolin, but he uses the verb aiunt (3rd, pl. pres. act. ind.) – “[they] say”, which indicates he talks about the narrative tradition, perhaps more concerned not with geography, but rather hyperbolically describing qualities of the deity.

That triple character of the Slavic Neptune (which is violent, greenest/freshest/youngest and white/old at the same time), is particularly interesting because *Vouruna-Apam Napat is also a “terrible sovereign” (RV 7.66.13; Griffith 1889 371), a life-giving youthful water patron (RV 2.27.2, 2.28.4, 2.35.2,4,8; Griffith 1889 150, 151-2, 157), and, in company with Mitra, a world truth overseer  (RV 7.49.2-3, 10.8.5-6, 1.2.8, 1.23.5, 1.152.1, 7.60.5, 7.66.12-3; Griffith 1889  363, 540, 1, 12, 103, 368, 371; AV 4.16.3; Bloomfield 1897 74) (Boyce 1975 41-4, Macdonell 1897 25, 26, Dumezil 1988 67, 72, 95, 108, 116).

Although we don’t have a description of such a fiery rite in Saxo’s account on Slavic rituals, we do have an evidence on the easy acceptance of the ordeals by fire among Wendish Slavs of Oldenburg, as well as an account of the connection of the water oaths with some deity or deities manifested by the water (trees or stones), in Helmold’s of Bosau Chronica Slavorum:

Illic inter vetustissimas arbores vidimus sacras quercus, que dicate fuerant deo terre illius Proven, quas ambiebat atrium et sepes accuratior lignis constructa, continens duas portas… llic omni secunda feria populus terre cum reguio et flamine convenire solebant propter iudicia… Iurationes difficillime admittunt, nam iurare apud Sclavos quasi periurare est, ob vindicem deorum iram (chapter 52 Svantovit – oaths)… Hii enim simuiachrorum ymaginarias formas pretendunt de templis, veluti Plunense ydolum, cui nonien Podaga; alii silvas vei lucos inhabitant, ut est Prove deus Aidenburg, quibus nulle sunt effigies expresse…  Inter multiformia vero deorum numina, quibus arva, silvas, tristitias atque voluptates attribuunt, non diffitentur unum deum in celis ceteris imperitantem, illum prepotentem celestia tantum curare, hos vero distributis officiis obsequentes, de sanguine eius processisse et unumquemque eo prestantiorem, quo proximiorem illi deo deorum… Et inhibiti sunt Sclavi de cetero iurare in arboribus, fontibus et lapidibus, sed offerebant criminibus pulsatos sacerdoti, ferro vel vomeribus examinandos (There, among the ancient trees, we saw sacred oaks that were dedicated to the deity of this land – Proven, around which a wooden hall and a fence were carefully constructed, which had two gates… Here, every second day (of the week), people of the land with the king and priest used to gather to have a trial/council… They abstain of committing the oaths, for taking a vow almost [certainly means] breaking it, thus [becoming a subject] of punishing/spearing by anger of the deity… Some pich temples over statues depicting their imaginary [deities], like idol of Plune, which is named Podaga; others inhabit woods or groves, like Prove, deity of Oldenburg, who does not have any statues depicting him…  Among multiple deity-like spirits, with whom they associate fields, forests, sadness, and pleasure, they do not deny one god in the sky also, who omnipotently controls entire heavens, [while] these [spirits] distribute assignments to comply, from his nature originated, and each one the more senior, the more closer [he is] to the god of gods… And since then Slavs restrained themselves from taking oaths before trees, springs and rocks, instead brought being caught criminals to the priest, to execute [ordeals] by iron or plough) (Helmold I.83; 163.3-7, .10-2, .17-9, .22-5, .27-33, 168.22-5).

The last phrase is more one additional explicit evidence, in addition to other germanic and scandinavian legal documents, witnessing survival of the pre-Christian fiery ordeals (Hastings & Selbie 1917 530-3), probably of the Indo-European origin, in the Medieval Christian Europe. Still, also, the easy acceptance of these ordeals by the Slavs may be also an evidence of the survival of the similar rites in culture of the Wendish Slavs, also rooted in the Indo-European past, independently from the german-scandinavian world. In legal documents of the Western, Southern and Eastern Slavs of eleventh and later centuries, we do have references to the fire, water and duel ordeals. (405, 446(53); 320(200,202), 312-4(148,150-158,164,172-173); 221, 124,189(78), 118,186(64))

Cosmas of Prague, in his Chronica Boemorum, writes that Duke Břetislav in 1039, over the tomb of St. Adalbert in Gniezno in Poland, pronouncing his law code, mentioned that those accused in homicides, and who denied the accusations, should be tested by the water and fire ordeals:

Similiter et de his, qui homicidiis infamantur, archipresbiter comiti illius civitatis nomina eorum ascribat, et comes eos conveniat; et si sunt rebelles, in carcerem redigat, donec aut penitenciam dignam agant aut, si negant, ignito ferro sive adiurata aqua, utrum culpabiles sint, examinentur (Similarly, [concerning] those who dishonor [themselves] with homicides, a superior elder of the people’s assembly must write their names, and summon them obligingly to the assembly; and if they are rebellious, put them in jail, [where hold them] either until their proper repentance, or, if they refuse, examine them with hot iron or oath water, whether they could be blamed) (Cosmas II.4; Bretholz 1923 86.82-3-87.1-4).

Czech law code of the first half of the fourteenth century Prava Zeme Ceske/Kniha Starého Pána z Rosenberka (Jus Terrae Boemiae in Latin translation) preserved quite an extensive list of rites of the oath and guilt verification by water and hot metal:

69. Z plena práwo sě zprawiti zemským práwem, jemuž (komuž) winu dáwajú, samému třetiému. Ale byloliby (byloby) prawějšé, aby pówod přisáhl napřed z swé škody: tehdy práwo byloby otpowiédači otpřisiéci sě; (tehdy práwo byloby otpierati neb otpowiedati otpřisiezci sě) potom za wodu dwa pomocnlky otpřisezta, že je newinen, z nehož popřisiéžen (The law of damages may be corrected by municipal law; [therefore] who is accused threefold (i.e. quite likely), however, would be firm that the plaintiff is lying about the damages, he has the right to deny or present a different story, with help of [his] two witnesses who would take an oath on water that he is innocent) (KSPR 69; Palacky 1840 460).

70. Ježto swědky za wodu (zawodié/zawadie), z dluhów, nebo z dědin, nebo což we dsky slušié: též práwo, jako w úředě; ledno woda sešla mezi nimi z toho, ale ledno za wodu wrci hřebě (ale jedné ten kuoň wrci za wodu, na kterémž běžal). Tehda, když swědky postawié před křížem, rciž: swědek, nebo swědci, práwo wezmú (If witnesses testify about debts or inheritance, or who know or oversee the laws, [then therefore] the right[-determining] water divination decides who is right, [or, additionally] the right[-determining] lots are thrown (by the same person who made the water divination), at the time when the witnesses, being placed before the cross speak: “witness (or witnesses) upholds truth” ) (KSPR 70; Palacky 1840 460).

71. Z ohně práwo sě sprawiti, komuž winu dáwajú, samému sedmému. Ale byloliby (byloby/ bylliby prawějši pówod) prawčjšé, pówod popřisez (přísez – s swú  škodú) napřed swú škodu: tehda otpowićdač otpřisiěhá sě také, a za železo šest pomocníków (šest swědków, totiž pomocníków) otpřisezte, že newinen (Fire may correct the law; [therefore] if the sevenfold accused (i. e. beyond the reasonable doubt), would be firm that the plaintiff lies about his damages, then, to confirm his account, six defence witnesses should testify before the hot iron that he is innocent) (KSPR 71; Palacky 1840 460).

73. Ježto sě zprawiti samému swú rukú. Zrady práwo sě otepřiěti samému swú rukú, jemuž winu dáwajú; sirotčié práwo. Pakliby žalowal z toho pówod, a otpowiédač jemu nebránil, na otpowědi pówodowi wésti práwo za wodu; z přiwedenié takéž, z žitié, z přijetié takéž(If the accused accidently told on himself, [which would lead] to his conviction, he has the right to renounce [the being said], by the orphan law. However, if the same was the plaintiff’s complaint, and the accused doesn’t argue, the plaintiff, in his turn, may ask for [verification by] water; the same [law is true] for the foster care and adoption) (KSPR 72; Palacky 1840 460-1).

143. Když pówod žaluje cožkoliwěk, že je wzchowal (budto že je wzchowal) na swém hnoji i žiwo i mrtwo: tehda práwo postihnúti pówodu swědky, jakž draho zceněno; práwo, jako z dluhu na kříži. 144. Pakli proti tej žalobě otpowěď taká, že dié: »ten kóň, nebo cožkoliwěk, jehož sě Mikeš z Unhošče u mne jal (jehožby sě Mikeš neb Jan z Hostiuého jal), ten sě je rodil na mém hnoji i žiw i mrtew, na to jmám prawějšé ludi” (pakli otpowié a dié: tento kóň jest sě urodil u mne na hnoji a zchowán, a jmám na to prawějšie lidi): tehda práwo o to hřebi, čím sě swědkóm práwo dostane, ale woda (úwoda) neslušié (If the plaintiff complains about something [while the accused behaves] like the petrified in his own dung, lifeless, then the court should listen witnesses of the plaintiff with all the importance, like [they are] witnessing on the cross. However, if the response of the accused is such as Mikesh from Unhoshche (or Jan from Hostieho) said: “who, or whatever, made the adversary to stay in his dung lifeless, is the right person”, then the procedure of the witnesses’ trial by lots or water is not needed) (KSPR 143-4; Palacky 1840 469).

155. Pakli chce wše z té pře přihnati k najdalejšému roku, to móž do šesti neděl; cožby rok byl dále jedniem dnem šesti nedel (cožby rok byl dále jedniém dnem šesti neděl, to pře ta ztracena; jestli rok blíže šesti neděl), že nenié méně k roku čtyr neděl, a je s práwem z té pře sehnáno. Práwo woda (However, if one wants to have a court hearing, which will rule on the dispute, to be called at the furthest possible time, it should be no longer than 6 weeks (a day later will be a mistrial), if the hearing of the dispute is sooner than 4 weeks, it will be still according to the law, via the water [ordeal]) (KSPR 155; Palacky 1840 470).

156. Ze zlodějstwa, což pomění (promění), jeden póhon; též práwo pohoniti jako z plena; práwo woda. 157. Z lúpeže jeden póhon; týmž práwem pohoniti jako z plena; práwo woda. 158. Z lesa porubăímie (posěčeniě) jeden póhon; jako z plena; práwo woda. 159. Ze wzebránie úroków jeden póhon; takéž pohoniti jako z plena; práwo woda. 160. Z jetié jeden póhon; práwo pohoniti jako z plena; práwo woda. 161. Ze zlata jeden póhon; práwo pohoniti jako z plena; práwo železo; nemóž (a také móž) pohoniti k malému úřadu. 162. Wěchów zawinutié, násilím požitié, jeden póhon; z ohně jeden póhon; práwo pohoniti jako z plena; o tu při práwo železo. 163. Z wýboje jeden póhon; práwo pohoniti jako z plena; práwo železo. (For the minor crimes, there will be one hearing, by the procedure like for [covering] damages, via the water [ordeal should be used]. For the robbery, there will be one hearing, the same legal procedure as for the damages should be applied, via the water [ordeal]. For the lumbering, one hearing, will be the same procedure like for the damages – the water [ordeal]. For usury, one hearing, by the same procedure like for damages – the water [ordeal]. For stealing, one hearing, by the same procedure like for damages – the water [ordeal]. For the gold [related crimes], one hearing, by the same procedure like for damages – the hot iron [ordeal], if [the accused] incapable [of enduring that], then send him to the local [law-enforcing] office. For the [illegal] hay moving and grain harvesting, and the arseny, one hearing, by the same  procedure like for damages – for that dispute is the hot iron ordeal. For the property destruction, one hearing, by the same procedure like for damages, via the hot iron [ordeal]) (KSPR 156-63; Kucharski 1838 471).

177. Když pohoní ze sweřepic, to je trój póhon sehnati, práwo železo. 178. Ze ščepów uškozenié trój póhon; z toho práwo železo. 179. Ze wčel trój póhon; práwo železo. 180. Z hlawy trój pohon; z chromoty trój póhon, práwo železo (For the horse stealing thee will be three hearings conducted, via the hot iron [ordeal]. For the garden (trees) damages – triple hearing via the hot iron [ordeal]. For the bee [stealing] – triple hearing via the hot iron [ordeal]. For the cattle [stealing] and injuring – triple hearing via the hot iron [ordeal]) (KSPR 177-80; Palacky 1840 472).

210. Opowiédati práwo plen, wýboj, lúpež, zlodějstwo, wzebránié úroków, oheň, i to wše, což práwo woda i železo z toho (Notify about laws on damages, injuries, robbery, lesser crimes, usury, arseny, and those for which water and hot iron [ordeals are used]) (KSPR 210; Palacky 1840 475).

212. Opowiédati práwo chromotu, i wšelikaké ohawy, rány modré i krwawé i wšelikaké. Opowiédati práwo z hlawy i z příhlawného dobytka. Opowíédati práwo sweřepice, wčely, ščepy, a to wše, což jest nárok, trój póhon, práwo woda i železo (Notify about laws on handicapping or other injuries, hematoma, or open, or whatever wounding. Notify about laws on cattle and lesser livestock. Notify about laws on horses, bees, gardens, and all that involves [breaking] contract, [for which will be] a triple hearing via the water an hot iron [ordeals]) (KSPR 212; Palacky 1840 475).

238. Přiwesti komorníka práwo na škodu, když sě škoda stane, wýboj, plen, oheň i wše nároky, což je práwo woda i železo. Takéž práwo komorníka přiwoditi ke wšem ranám (A court officer/bailiff should be invited to the crime scene which involves the property destruction, damage, arseny, and all contract breaching, which are dealt with via the water and hot iron [ordeals]) (KSPR 238; Palacky 1840 478).

The law code of the last half of the fourteenth century Rad Zemskeho Prawa/Ordo Judicii Terrae (here is presented a slightly modified generalized Slavic-Latin transliteration used by Kucharski) still preserved the ordeal clauses, and even was more elaborate on the detailed description of the innocence oath verification via the red hot iron trial procedure:

53. A když ten rok přijde a póhon swiedčen bude. tehdy pówod žalobui má přowésti z toho násilé. a staneli pohnaný má otázati, kdy sie jest stalo a pówod má powiediéti kterého letá ktérý den. tu pohnaný má otázati. máli komornika, jenšto to opatrowal. a ten pówod i hned má mieti podle sebe. aby jemu wyznal co jest widiel a co sie jest ot súsiedów uptal. a uhodil komornik w též tehdy pohnaný káže sobie dsky čisti. a srownáli sie žaloba se dskami a tiém komornikem. tehdy má swietle rozežžené železo před pohnaným položeno býti, aby na niem dwa háky položil, a přisáhl za swú newinu: a to jest ustaweno pro strah aby sie násilé tiém ménie dálo. bojéce sie horkého železa. a kdyžby nezd’ržel p’rstów na tom železe dokudžby přisahy nedokonal, tehdy by tu při ztratil i h’rdlo. ale kdyžby komornik jinak swiedčil nežliby pówod žalowal, aneb sie dsky dielily s žalobú. tehdy pohnaný má toho prázden býti. / (When the time for the process comes, then accused will be summoned to testify, and the plaintiff will present the claim about the crime. If the summoned will ask when that happened, and the plaintiff say the date, then the summoned may ask for the field officer who took care of the case, and who was called by the plaintiff at the time of the event, so he would tell what he saw and what he learned from the neighbours. If the officer stumbled on that, and the accused said that his records are clean [before the law], to straighten the account between the claim, objections, and officer’s story, the red hot iron [bar] should be placed before the accused, so he would put his hands on it and swear he is innocent: to establish whether the crime left the unsettledness [to be caught]. If [the accused] was afraid of the hot iron, and has not been able to hold his fingers on the [bar] while he has been pronouncing the oath, then he lost the case. However, if the officer, in opposite, testifies differently than the plaintiff’s claim [says], or his records are different, then the accused goes free) (RZP 53; Kucharski 1838 405-6).

Of course, it could be argued, similarly to the Helmold’s account, that these mentions of the fire and water ordeals in Czech legal documents were just reminders of the German influence, however, we find similar ordeals also in the Serbian and Old Rus’ legal documents.

Serbian law document Законикь Срьбскыи Цара Стефана Душана Сильнаго, of 1349, talks about ordeals by the boiling water:

64. Соудби ине да нѣсшь за котьль, ни оправе никое. кто се оправи, да не дава соудїамь оправе. роуке на соудоу да неима, и опаданїа, и две. тькмо да се соуде по закону (There should be no other trials after the boiling water cauldron ordeal, and no [other] rulings. Who vindicated himself should not be judged by the court. There should not be bribery, or unfair trial, or gifts, only the law should be [respected] by the court) (ЗС 64; Kucharski 1838 118).

78. Дворане властелсцїи, ако оучини кое зло оть нихь, кто боуде прониiаревикь, да га оправе очина дроужина поротом, аколи есть себрь, да хвати оу котель (If courtiers of nobles committed a crime, those who are landowners should be judged by the jury of elders, otherwise, who are commoners should take the boiling water cauldron ordeal) (ЗС 78; Kucharski 1838 124).

The first known Old Rus’ legal document Правда Роусьская, it could be argued, bears signs of the Scandinavian legal thinking influence, which is not surprising considering close dynastic ties between Vladimir Svyatoslavich and Yaroslav Vladimirovich with Sweden and Norway, however, the first Short Edition of the beginning eleventh century of the Правда Роусьская did not have mentions of the water and fire ordeals, and, by the time when the Extended Edition was created at the end of the eleventh, beginning of the twelfth century, those ties were severed, and the Great Schism did not help cultural exchange between the German and Scandinavian world and Old Rus’, so the direct inheritance of those ordeals from the Indo-Iranian, or Indo-European past is more likely, than the Germano-Scandinavian reborrowing:

12. Искавшие ли послуха и не налѣзоуть, а истьця начьнеть головою клепати, то ти имъ правьдоу желѣзо. Тако же и въ всѣхъ тяжахь, и въ татбѣ и въ поклепѣ; оже не боудеть лиця, то тогда датi iемоу желѣзо изнѣволѣ до полугривны золота. Ажели мьнѣ, то на водоу, оли до двою гривноу; ажели мьнѣ, то ротѣ ити iемоу по своѣ коуны (If witnesses were not found if the plaintiff accuses [somebody] in murder, then use on him the [hot] iron ordeal. The same is for all cases, for the robbery and other accusations; if there will be no evidence, then force to him the [hot] iron ordeal, [for the case worth] less than half a hrivna [of gold]. If the case worth less, and more than the two hrivnas [of silver], than use the water ordeal; if [even] less – then believe in his oath) (ПР 12; Kucharski 1838 6-8).

Apart from the obvious parallels between the Slavic and Indo-Iranian rites of the water and fiery confirmation of oaths and guilts, listed in the law texts, §70 and §144 of Prava Zeme Ceske, which mentions drawing lots in parallel with the oath pronunciation (KSPR 70, 144; 460, 469), apparently with the goal of confirming truthfulness of the witness account, and being a substitution for the water rite, has a parallel with the ordeal by dharma and adharma (lawful and unlawful) lots mentioned in Brihaspati-smṛti (BSm x.5, xi.30; Jolly 1889 315, 319), and Saxo’s narrative on the use of the lots in context of Svantovit’s account, though he does not specify whether it’s related to legal procedures or not:

A bizarre fragment from Thietmar’s of Merseburg chronicle, which has been confusing researchers for a long time, may be one more reference, in addition to the Wolins’ Vulcan, if not to the mythical fiery figure itself, but, at least, to its associate:

Testatur idem antiquitas errore delusa vario (varia), si quando his seva longae rebellionis assperitas immineat, ut e mari predicto aper magnus et candido dente e spumis lucescente exeat seque in volutabro delectatum terribili quassatione multis ostendat (Also, an old story, corrupted by various retellings, testifies, that would the harshness of the [bloody] mess of the long war is imminent, then from the mentioned sea comes out a great boar with bright fangs shining of [the sea] foam, and exposes [itself] to the many, taking pleasure in the frightening wallowing in the dirt) (Thietmar VI.24 (1005), Kurze 1889 148:14-8).

That old story we may also find in Mihir Yasht that tells that in times of international hostilities Mithra comes out on his chariot, over the sea, punishing the wicked nations, in a company of his associate, a wild, aggressive, male boar Verethragna with sharp fangs that can kill in one blow, but who likes, for his passion and manly valor, to knock out and toss his opponent on the ground and smash his every vertebrae, mingling with the dirt every bone, brains, blood and hair of the opponent (Yt 10 (Mihir) .127, .70-2, .67, .47-8; Gershevitch 1959 137, 107-9, 105, 97-9).

Yet another associate of that Mithra’s quest, is the Fire – Kavyan Fortune (Yt 10 (Mihir) .127; Gershevitch 1959 137), which has an interesting personal name parallel in William’s of Malmesbury account:

DE HENRICO IMPERATORE (Henriko imperatori Alemannorum. Henry III, son of Conrad II). § 189. Erat imperator multis et magnis virtutibus praeditus, et omnium pene ante se bellicosissimus, quippe qui etiam Vindelicos et Leuticios subegerit, caeterosque populos Suevis conterminos, qui usque ad hanc diem soli omnium mortalium paganas superstitiones anhelant; nam Saraceni et Turchi Deum Creatorem colunt, Mahumet non Deum, sed ejus prophetam aestimantes. Vindelici vero Fortunam adorant; cujus idolum loco nominatissimo ponentes, cornu dextrae illius componunt plenum potu illo quem Graeco vocabulo, ex aqua et melle, Hydromellum vocamus. Idem sanctus Hieronymus Aegiptios et omnes pene Orientales fecisse, in decimo octavo super Isaiam libro confirmat. Unde ultimo die Novembris mensis, in circuitu sedentes, in commune praegustant; et si cornu plenum invenerint, magno strepitu applaudunt, quod eis futuro anno pleno copia cornu responsura sit in omnibus; si contra, gemunt ([He] was an Emperor possessing many and great virtues, and he was [military] fiercest of all his [male] ancestors, for example he had to conquer Vindelici and Leutici, other people bordering Suevi, who, all the time until this day, alone, were practicing all mortal pagan superstitions; while even Saracens and Turks worship God the Creator, reckoning Mahumet not as God, but his prophet. Vindelici worship specifically Fortuna, putting her idol in a most honorable place, [they] set a horn in its right hand, filled with a drink composed from water and honey, which in Greek we call it a Hydromellum. The same, as St. Jerome confirms in his tenth chapter of the book on Isaiah, the Egyptians and all ancient Oriental cultures did. Back [to describing Vindelici’s rites], on the last day of November, sitting/standing in a circle, [they] publicly taste [the drink]; and if [they] find the horn [satisfactory] filled up, they applaud very wild, because the horn responded in forecasting that their next year would be filled by abundance of everything; in the opposite case they lament) (William of Malmesbury II.§189, Hardy 1840 322:23-323:13).

Of course here we see a very familiar description of the mead divination rite, described also by Saxo, who, as well, adds the mead libation scene:

Postero die, populo prae foribus excubante, detractum simulacro poculum curiosius speculatus, si quid ex inditi liquoris mensura subtractum fuisset, ad sequentis anni inopiam pertinere putabat. Quo annotato, praesentes fruges in posterum tempus asservari iubebat. Si nihil ex consuetae fecunditatis habitu deminutum vidisset, ventura agrorum ubertatis tempora praedicabat. Iuxta quod auspicium instantis anni copiis nunc parcius, nunc profusius utendum monebat. Veteri deinde mero ad pedes simulacri libamenti nomine defuso, vacuefactum poculum recenti imbuit; simulatoque propinandi officio statuam veneratus, tum sibi, tum patriae bona civibusque opum ac victoriarum incrementa sollemnium verborum nuncupatione poscebat. Qua finita, admotum ori poculum nimia bibendi celeritate continuo haustu siccavit repletumque mero simulacri dexterae restituit (The next day, the population [of the island], having gathered before the temple’s gates, was excited to see the horn taken out of the statue’s hand, [for] if the amount of the distilled mead [in the horn] was less than expected value, next year’s [crops] would be scarce. In that case, the current harvest would be prescribed to be conserved for the future. If the recessing of the usual fertility criterion was not seen, then the coming times of prolific crops was predicted.  According to this prediction, either more economic or more liberal use of the yearly supply on-hand was prescribed. Then, after the old mead was poured out to the feet of the statute, as a libation to its divinity, [the priest] washed fresh the emptied horn, and, in similar obligatory toasts, having praised the statue and the people, in solemn oration proclaimed a wish of an annual increase of wealth and victory for [his] good fellow citizens. Having finished [the toasts], [the priest], closing the horn to [his] mouth, with huge, fast, consecutive gulps, drunk it out dry, [and] having replenished the honey drink [in the horn], re-deposited it into the right hand of the statue) (Holder 1886 565.35-566.9).

The honey or mead libations have parallels in the Indian world, where exist two kinds of libations: by milk products (milk, yogurt, ghee butter), and by honey/sugar. In Rig Veda Mitra and Varuna are associated, apart from Ashvins, with honey/mead – Varuna has cattle that yields sweet refreshments, and Mitra’s floods pour water filled with honey, they fill pastures with ghee oil, and air spaces with honey/mead, and send rain and sweet refreshments from heavens (RV 5.69.2, 3.62.16, 7.64.2; Griffith 1889 279, 202, 370), as well as the waters and Apam Napat (RV 1.23.16, 7.47.1, 10.30.4,7; Griffith 1889 12, 362, 555)  (Macdonell 1897 25, 85).

Multi-headedness of the Svantovit statue, as well as the other Wendish statues of the Slavic deities, which was pointed to by many Latin authors, in Saxo’s account has an emphasis on the omniscience of the deity:

Ingens in aede simulacrum, omnem humani corporis habitum granditate transscendens, quattuor capitibus totidemque cervicibus mirandum perstabat, e quibus duo pectus totidemque tergum respicere videbantur. Ceterum tam ante quam retro collocatorum unum dextrorsum, alterum laevorsum contemplationem dirigere videbatur (Inside the temple a giant statue was seen, whose size was greatly exceeding any typical human body, from which, surprisingly, four heads on four necks were erected, from them, two were [looking] ahead, another two – in the opposite [direction]. Also, whatever direction one would look at them: from front or back, from left or right, he would meet their line of sight. (Literally: Also, whatever [was] the placement [of the pairs of heads]: front or back, one [of the pair] – to the right, another – to the left, the line of [their] sight was seen.)) (Holder 1886 565.3-10).

The omniscience, multitude of eyes and ears are, also, quite a particular characteristics of Mit(h)ra and Varuna (Yt 10 (Mihir) .82, .107, .7, .45-6, .91, .141; Gershevitch 1959  113, 127, 77, 117, 145), (RV 1.25.16, 2.27.3, 8.90.2, 1.15.6, 7.34.10, 7.49.3, 7.60.6-7; Griffith 1889 14, 150-1, 466, 8, 356 363, 368), (AV 4.16; Bloomfield 1897 73-4).

Especially that is interesting in the context of the Zoroastrian-like purifications rites that the priest of Svantovit was performing in the temple before the festivities:

Huius sacerdos, praeter communem patriae ritum barbae comaeque prolixitate spectandus, pridie quam rem divinam facere debuisset, sacellum, quod ei soli intrandi fas erat, adhibito scoparum usu, diligentissime purgare solebat, observato, ne intra aedem halitum funderet; quo quoties capessendo vel emittendo opus habebat, toties ad ianuam procurrebat, ne videlicet dei praesentia mortalis spiritus contagio pollueretur (The priest [of the divinity], showing the strict observance of the length of hair and beard according to old traditions of the ancestral community; the day before [the feast] [the priest] had to perform an even more important service to the divinity; the temple, which only he had traditional right to enter, he used to clean most diligently with a broom, making sure he would not breath inside the temple; when he needed to breath in or out, he ran to the doors, to prevent pollution of the pure divine presence by the contact with mortal spirits) (Holder 565.27-35).

Mary Boyce points out that, though, codification of the laws we have only in Vendidād and Pahlavi texts, their similarity to the ones of Indian Brahmins, suggests that similar rites existed not only at prehistoric times of Zarathushtra, but also at pagan times of Indo-Iranians, and even Indo-Europeans overall. Laws of purity in Zoroastrianism comes natural from its key concepts of the opposition of the creation of Ahura Mazda/Spenta Mainyu to destructive influence of Angra Mainyu that includes decay, pollution, illness and, most important, death, therefore duty of an Ashavan, the follower of the Right World Order aša, includes obligation to fight uncleanness of himself and the nature elements that include metal (which is representation of the sky), water, soil, animals and plants (Boyce 1975 285, 6, 310). Breath is considered also polluting the already cleansed objects. Zoroastrian houses, especially if used as places of worship, especially at festival times, have to be dusted, swept, and scrubbed. Closes of the priest performing services indoors are strictly functional, without of flowing pieces that are used for the outdoor ceremonies, to prevent possible contamination of the cleansed objects by the closes. Hair, for the same reason is also concealed under the headdress, and mouth and nose is covered by the surgeon mask style piece of cloth named in Middle Persian padān, to prevent contaminating action of breath (Boyce 1975 300, 9, 10, 11, 22). In Achaemenian times, according to the images that survived, Zoroastrian priests wore Scythian style hats with flaps that covered mouth (Дандамаев 2009 95).

Conclusions

If we establish that particular Indo-Iranian rites have their roots and reasons for existence in association and dedication to particular religious and mythological figures, and we will be able to map Slavic rites, for which we do not have such known and established connections, onto Indo-Iranian ones, then it will be reasonable to suppose that there exist mappings between the known Indo-Iranian personages and the unknown Slavic figures in question, thus making the mapping of one ethnic religio-mythical system onto another homomorphic. I.e. if there exists a rite involving particular objects, actions, verbal formulas a1, b1, c1,… that associate with particular deity d1 through the operation of meaning op1 in one mytho-religious system, and there exists a rite, its objects, actions, formulas a2, b2, c2,…, and a deity d2, associated with that rite, via operation op2 in another mytho-religious system, such that there exist mappings d1->d2, a1->a2, b1->b2, c1->c2, op1->op2, such mapping and mytho-religious system groups will be homomorphic in terms of the theory of groups. Of course, one may hardly expect a strict mathematical isomorphism, when the strict one-to-one relationships in both directions are maintained between elements of two systems, for the mapping of one mytho-religious system into another, however, a simple homomorphism still provides preservation of the structure of those systems’ elements that could be mapped into elements of another system, while those elements that do not have analogs in another system, and are unique to the particular one, could be called the kernel of that mytho-religious system.

For our particular example, if there has existed a hypothetical Slavic water deity to whom the Domboro’s ritual was addressed, similarly to Oldenburg’s oaths to the water stream deities, and the “Neptune” of Wolin was such a deity, then, being a water patron of contracts, also youthful and violent, he, naturally, maps into Indo-Iranian*Vouruna-Apam Napat, the life-giving youthful creator of all things, terrible, yet merciful truth and contract overseer. Ritual attributes of the Domboro’s procedure, such as the objects (stones) that get put into water, which should witness the contract and punish its violators, also, obviously, can be mapped into attributes of the Indo-Iranian rituals of putting objects related to the contracts, hands of the participants, or submerged participants as a whole in the water, or taking the water inside, with the aims of the water being a guarantor of contracts or truth. These Indo-Iranian rituals either directly or indirectly are devoted to *Vouruna-Apam Napat, thus the conditions of the homomorphic, preserving the structure, mapping are satisfied.

Similarly, if Oldenburg’s ordeals by fire are, also, native Wendish Slavic rites, analogous to the similar rites of the Western, Southern and Eastern Slavs, and they are connected and dedicated to a fiery deity or his associates, similar to Wolin’s Vulcan, Rethra’s Boar, Wendish Fortuna and Rugen’s multi-eyed and honey-associated Svantovit, we can map these rites and deities onto Indo-Iranian fire ordeals and Mit(h)ra figure, again, supporting the homomorphic mapping hypothesis.

Having demonstrated that, we can not only give more ground to the thesis of R. Jakobson, M. Gimbutas, and J. Puhvel, but also vindicate some aspects of the approach of the “mythological school” of the Russian folklorists to reconstruction of the sources of Slavic folklore, especially of A. N. Afanasyev, who widely used Indo-Iranian sources for that, and we can point out that such an approach, of course on the new level, still could be a beneficial and useful tool for reconstruction of the Slavic pre-Christian mitho-religious system.

(14.27.2.4)

[4] Ea altercatione per regem sedata, Masco quidam, inter Rugianos natu atque auctoritate praestantissimus, luminibus orbatus, sed ingenii sagacitate perspicuus nec annis quam animo vivacior: ‘Concitatioris’, inquit, ‘petulantiae equis mos est, quo artius retinentur, hoc vehementius habenas tendere. (Holder 1886 533.5-10).

[4] When the king had calmed down this dispute, Maske, a man pre-eminent in birth and influence among the Rugians, blind, but clear-sighted in the keenness of his intellect, and as lively as he was long-lived, said: “It’s usual for rather mettlesome and temperamental horses to pull more strongly at the rein, the more tightly you hold them back (Fisher 2015 1193).

Da Kongen havde faaet gjort Ende paa denne Trætte, sagde en af de ældste og mest ansete blandt Ryg-boerne, en Mand ved Navn Maske, som vel var blind, men overmaade klog og forstandig og lige saa livlig, som han var gammel: ”Med kaade Heste er det gjærne saa, at jo mere man strammer Tøjlerne, des hidsigere rykker de i dem (As the king had been done end to this fight, one of the eldest and most prestigious among the Rugia-born [folks], a man named Maske, who [was] practically blind, but very wise and clear-thinking, and as lively as he was old, said: “With playful horses it is often so, that indeed, the more people tighten reins, the more they reinforce fierceness in them”) (Horn 184).

[4] [After] these disputes were interrupted by the king, a certain Masko—[who was] born between Rugians, highly revered by them, and completely blind, but with the clear vivacity of the mind that his age had not deprived him from—said: “They way mad mares [are] agitated is the [more] tightly [they] are restrained, the [more they] stretch infuriating reins” (Sielicki 2015 6).

This particular fragment is also frequently overlooked, though the baseline translation does not differ much from the author’s one, as well. It is presented here because it demonstrates what kind of people were respected by the Slavs and most likely the kind of people the body of priesthood was consisted of, though the fragment does not explicitly tell us that Masko was a priestly figure. Another source, Helmold’s Chronica Slavorum, still has no direct words that those elderly people were part of the priesthoods:

Narrant seniores Sclavorum, qui omnes barbarorum gestas res in memoria tenent, Aldenburg civitatem populatissimam de cristianis inventam fuisse (Elders of the Slavs, who keep in memory all the things about deeds of the barbarians, say that the Christian population of Oldenburg have been found the greatest) (Helmold I.16, Pertz 1868 40.27-9).

However, in both fragments we see that not the age in itself was revered, but the mental qualities which has been developed and retained by those elderly people, despite of the physical decline of the old age or other physical defects.

(14.30.4.3-4)

[3] Cumque summa cura ac flagrantissimo studio ad eos opprimendos contenderent, daemonem horrendae formae superne verticibus imminentem videre. [4] Quo monstro tamquam divinitus dati ducis adventu firmati, sumptis victoriae auspiciis, ex improviso hostium se castris immergunt eosque imparatos confodiunt (Holder 547.11-16).

[3] While they were on the march to crush their adversaries, striving their utmost and blazing with ardour, they spied a demon, of dreadful appearance, hanging in the air over their heads. [4] Nevertheless, fortified by this apparition as if by the arrival of a heaven-sent leader and taking it as a portent of success, they suddenly plunged into their opponents’ camp and slaughtered them before the Saxons could arm themselves (Fisher 2015 1231).

Medens de nu med største Flid og Iver rykkede frem for at ødelægge den, saa’ de et skrækkeligt Spøgelse svæve over deres Hoveder; dette øgede i høj Grad deres Mod, thi de troede, at det var en Fører, deres Guder havde sendt dem, og visse paa, at de vilde sejre, brød de uventet ind i Fjendens Lejr og nedhuggede Krigsfolkene (Now, as they, with greatest diligence and zeal,  moved forth to destroy them, they saw a horrible ghost hovering over their heads; that, in a great degree, heightened their morale, for they thought of it as a leader their gods had sent them, and certain they would prevail, and broke into the enemy’s’ camp, and slew troops [there]) (Horn 199).

[3] After careful preparation and with flaming zeal, [they] charged onto their enemies, [and a] horrible demonic image of supreme [nature] was seen overhanging them. [4] With arrival [of this] omen, having been strengthened as if it was a divinely given leader, supposedly guaranteeing victory; unexpectedly for their enemies [they] emerged in their camp, and stabbed them unprepared (Sielicki 2015 6-7).

This is an unusual fragment, that poses a difficulty for its understanding and interpretation in the context of whole Saxo’s narrative, because in his history writings Saxo Grammaticus has divorced from the early Medieval tradition of having Bible’s account as a source of the higher authority. Saxo does not interpret historical events through the lense of the biblical prophecies or chronologies, he does not hide his conclusions behind authority of the biblical verses, or he usually does not introduce biblical mysticism of miracles and demons into today’s everyday life of his time. From the translator’s point of view, it’s remarkable that, when one overcame difficulties, ambiguity and obscurity of the original, and come up with the free flowing translation, how close that reads to contemporary texts of journalism and popular narrative history. B. Sawyer asserts that Saxo’s writing was the product of the twelfth century renaissance and the awakened interest to the classical texts, which style Saxo Grammaticus followed, and, in a sense, was looking on the history of Danes thro the Roman’s eyes, being the first Danish history writer who used secular language of the new era (1985 686-7).

Though his patrons and clients may not had the taste for such narrative style, and, as a practical person, Saxo had to accommodate their requests in the style they wanted and expected. That could be easily seen just at the beginning of Gesta Danorum, in preface to which Saxo dedicates it to bishop Anders Sunesen, who becomes his new patron after Absalon’s death. Still Saxo manages to insert his views in the text, too. As one of the examples of Saxo’s double level text B. Sawyer accounts that if Saxo can not directly criticize male’s of a family to be venerated, he condemns them to obscurity in his narrative, and prizes women instead as a hidden reproof (1985 690, 95).

Unlike many of the Medieval authors who did not bother look ridiculous, at least for our contemporary eyes, for example the very Helmold of Bosau, when using biblical prophecies to achieve their petty ideological needs 0f the moment,  Saxo, obviously, was careful about his reputation as an objective historian, and did not strive to overachieve in promoting his patrons’ cause, and counterweighted his own ideological insertions by the scattered factual material which was undermining.  For example his theses, which legitimated the rule of Knud Lavard-Valdemar-Knud line that came up victorious in the civil war, as B. Sawyer (1985 695) and Bysted, A.L. et al (2004 41) suggested, would work only on the “gullible”  and “naive” readers (for example that the 6 year old son of Knud, Valdemar, was regarded by the people as the right hair, while the aristocracy has chosen his relative Erik Lam, or that Knud’s martyrdom would guaranty the glory for his consecutive hairs), while the Saxo’s factual account is pretty unflattering for the Valdemar’s line. At the end, B. Sawyer concludes, Saxo Grammaticus, being a man of independent thought, but depending on his patrons for support and protection, had to conceal his own opinions, elevating ambiguity to a fine art (1985 705).

In the account of fall of the Rugen to Danes, Saxo only twice uses the miracle theme, while in other places he calls such a belief in miracles “superstitious” (Sawyer 1985 697). The second scene concerned with demons, we will discuss later, is clearly driven by the Absalon glorification propaganda. The fragment above is also looks like an apology propaganda explaining why the Christian crusaders we initially defeated by the pagans. Language of the final prizing of those who survived also suggest the propaganda charge:

Ita Saxones, quamquam improvidi bellum tentassent, maiorem cladem gesserint an acceperint, virtute dubium reliquere (So the Saxons, though they recklessly carried on the war [despite] suffering and accepting many casualties, [by] bravery [they] relinquished the disarray) (Holder 547.22-4). 

However, unlike Helmold, who describes the same event, but who can not find the sense of measure, and can not stop before his glorifying propaganda narrative becomes ridiculous: “Precepit igitur dux, corpus Adolfi comitis concidi frustatim et assum condiri opere pigmentarii, quo posset circumferri et patriis inferri monumentis. Et impletum est vaticinium quod cecinit pridie quam pateretur, sepissime reiterans versum : Igne me examinasti, et non est inventa in me iniquitas (Then duke ordered to embalm the corpse of the fallen count Adolf, cut in pieces and dried, so it could be carried [around] and brought to home tomb. And prophecy was satisfied that he recited before he had to suffer, frequently repeating the verse: “In fire you tested me, and nothing unfair you found in me”)” (Helmold II.4,  Pertz 1868 18-23), Saxo asserts that the initial defeat is a wholly responsibility of Adolf and Regnald, thus refuting his very propaganda thesis:

Adolfus et Regnaldus, in ipso castrorum aditu interfecti, neglectae militaris prudentiae poenas sanguine persolverunt (Adolf and Regnald were killed in this attack on the camp, a price paid by their blood for the neglecting of military prudence) (Holder 547.16-8).

The same two-level narrative we may discern in the fragment of interest. The key morphosyntactic structure of the fragment, which carries core semantics, “[Sclavi]… videre (3rd pl. prf. act. ind. verb)… daemonem (acc. sng. noun – where it’s not essential, gender is omitted, S.S. ) (direct object) horrendae (gen./dat. sng. adj.)  formae (gen./dat. sng. noun) (adjectival clause)… verticibus (abl. pl. noun) imminentem (acc. sng. pres. part.) (locative adjunct)… tamquam divinitus (adv.) dati (gen. sng. perf. pass. part.) ducis (gen. sng. noun) (adjectival clause)… victoriae (gen./dat. sng. noun) auspiciis (dat./abl. pl. noun)(here, in reconstructed (broken grammar) context, a direct object, but an indirect object in the original context)” can be read “gullibly”, across the lines on Fisher’s translation, as if Saxo tells that Slavs really saw a demon over their heads and decided that is a good sign, or in it a second meaning could be loosely read (with some grammar relaxation and changing context a bit) as Saxo’s explanation of what real event inspired him to come up with this propaganda piece: “[The Slavs]… have assigned to/envisioned in the demon [on their standards depicted as] horrible figure…  overhanging [them from] poles/spearheads… [a meaning] as if [it is] a divinely given leader… [who gives] support in victory“.

Which is quite possible in the context of Thietmar of Merseburg talking about such standards in use of the Slavs:

Sed Liutici redeuntes orati dedecus deae suimet illatum queruntur. Nam haec [in vexillis formata] a quodam Herimanni marchionis socio lapide uno traiecta est; et dum hoc ministri eius imperatori dolenter retulissent, ad emendationem XII telenta perceperunt. Et cum iuxta Vurcin civitatem Mildam nimis effusam transire voluissent, deam cum egregio L militum comitatu alteram perdidere (But Lutichi, returning, vocally complained that a dishonor was carried out to their goddess. For a certain associate of marqise Herman has thrown a rock in her [depicted on a standard]; and when their servants sorrowly carried [the word about it] to their imperator, as a correction they got 12 talents. And when [they] wanted to cross [river] Mildam near the city of Vurcin, which was excessively flooded, [they] lost another goddess with [her] distinguished 50 guardsmen) (Thietmar VIII.64, Kurze 1889 232.1-8).

Later in the text, Saxo himself describes a flag depicting deity Stanicia (we’ll discuss later if it is reasonable to personify that name) on the main tower of Arkona:

…ut turrim, quae supra portam sita fuerat, signis tantum aquilisque protegerent (…for the tower, which was located over the gates, had to be protected by the standards) (Holder 568.39-40). …tantumque superstitioni indultum est, ut exigui panni auctoritas regiae potestatis vires transscenderet (…[this] superstition was so powerful, that the influence of that small piece of canvas [where she was depicted on] would exceed power of the regal authority) (Holder 569.9-10). Ac deinde summa corripiens, singulare simulacri signum aliaque domestice religionis insigna cineri equauit  (After [the fire] crept to the roof, an image of the statue and other standards associated with the local superstitious cult burned to the ashes) (Holder 570.38-9).

(14.39.3.2)

[2] Ceterum tam ante quam retro collocatorum unum dextrorsum, alterum laevorsum contemplationem dirigere videbatur (Holder 565.7-9).

[2] They were so arranged that, before and behind, one head appeared to direct its gaze to the right, the other to the left (Fisher 2015 1277).

Moreover, of those in front as well as those behind, one looked leftwards and the other rightwards (Elton 1894 393).

…saavel af de to Hoveder fortil som af de to bagtil vendte det ene til højre og det andet til venstre (…also, of the two front heads, as well, of the two rear, one [was] turned to the right and another – to the left) (Horn 1898 218).

…но так, что из обеих передних и обеих задних голов одна смотрела направо, а другая налево… (…but so, that from the both forward and both rear heads, one looked to the right, and another to the left…) (Фаминцын 2012 22).

[2] Also, whatever direction one would look at them: from front or back[,] from right or left[,] he would meet their line of sight. (Literally: Also, whatever [was] the placement [of the pairs of heads]: front or back[,] one [of the pair] – to the right, another – to the left[,] the line of [their] sight was seen) (Sielicki 2015 9-10).

What is interesting in the key sentence structure: “Ceterum (nom. sng./gen. pl. neut./masc. adj./noun)… tam… quam (conj.)… collocatorum (gen. pl. masc./neut. part.) unum/alterum (nom./acc. neut./masc. sng. num.) dextrorsum/laevorsum (adv.)  contemplationem (acc. sng. fem. noun) dirigere (pres. act. inf.) videbatur (3rd sng. imprf. pass. ind. verb)” is that we have an implied observer (impersonal passive voice, without subjects, neither patient nor agent) who, when he looked at the statue, met the eyes of either head out of the either pair: ([an observer]… saw… direction of a gaze (direct object) of the right- [or] the other left-directed of whatever (back or front) [situated] previously mentioned [heads] (adjective clause)). Especially, this reading becomes clearer for  the contemporary reader if we assume commas before the unum and after the laevorsum, which would underscore the mutually exclusive enumeration unum dextrorsum, alterum laevorsum as a specifying, an elaborating one to the ante… retro enumeration in a role of a part of the adjectival clause (which/whose sight?) of the direct object, instead of the sentence’s subject in the traditional reading. The commas and other punctuation is not technically needed in Latin texts, although today (since the printing press invention) it could be used as hints, so the punctuation sometimes varies from one publication of the originals to another.

Long since the nineteenth century a commonality of the Indo-Iranian and Greek narrative about All Seeing Eye(s) of the deities responsible for maintaining a just world order was recognized. Similarly to Zeus in Hesiod’s Work and Days (248-55; West 1988 44), who, being all-seeing and all-knowing, was watching for the justice in the world, with the help of ten thousand spies, Avestan Mithra is a punisher of the breakers of contract, of the wicked, all-knowing and all-seeing, with ten thousand eyes and thousand ears, and 10 thousand spies, shining like Sun, Moon or star Sirius, watching the night, too, and riding the stars decorated chariot (Yt 10 (Mihir) .17-18, .23, .26, .37-8, .55, .74-5, .104, .133, .27, .35, .62, .66, .80, .82, .107, .7, .45-6, .91, .141, .24, .60, .69, .142-3; Darmesteter 1882 95, 96, 103, 105, 110, 92, 107, 117, 94, 101, 103, 117; Gershevitch 1959 81-3, 85, 87, 91-3, 101, 109, 125, 141, 87, 91, 105, 111, 113, 127, 77, 117, 145, 85, 97, 101-2, 106, 145), as well as Vedic Varuna and Mitra are cherishers, guardians, lords, and upholders of the right and the order (rta) and are dispellers, haters and punishers of the falsehood (RV 1.23.5, 1.2.8, 1.152.1-4, 2.27.3, 5.62.9, 7.60.2,5, 7.66.13; Griffith 1889 12, 1, 103, 150-1, 277, 368, 371; AV 4.29.1, 5.11.3, 20.123.2; Chand 1982 137, 171, 900), they are farsighted, omniscient, and undeceived (RV 1.25.16, 2.27.3, 8.90.2, 1.15.6, 7.49.3, 7.60.6-7; Griffith 1889 14, 150-1, 466, 8, 363, 368), Sun is their eye, which looks down to men and watches them whether they are doing falsehood (RV 1.50.6, 6.51.1, 7.60.1-4, 7.63.1, 7.66.10, 10.37.1; Griffith 1889 31, 321, 368, 369, 371, 561), also, they have spies who go everywhere, who are wise and undeceived (RV 1.25.13, 7.61.3, 7.87.3, 10.10.8; Griffith 1889 14, 369, 381, 541), or Varuna sometimes is thousand eyed (RV 7.34.10; Griffith 1889 356), who is also omniscient, undetectable, ensnares, by hundred snares, those who lie, thousand eyed, which, likely, are the stars (AV 4.16; Bloomfield 1897 73-4) (Macdonell 1897 22-4).

If the multi-headedness of the Svantovit statue is not a representation of the demonic, with excess of heads, eyes, or hands, figure of the third, fertility Dumezilian function (or rather a joint point of the extreme wings of the first and third functions) (Dumezil 1983 12, 14, 21, 23-4, 54, 57, 71, 79, 81, 84, 87), but only an artistic device for expressing the idea of the all-seeing deity, then we have one more Slavic-Indo-Iranian (and also Greek) parallel.

(14.39.3.5)

[5] Laeva arcum reflexo in latus brachio figurabat (Holder 565.15).

[5] The left arm was bow-shaped, for the artist had shown it bent back into the statue’s side (Fisher 2015 1277).

In the left there was a representation of a bow, the arm being drawn back to the side (Elton 1894 393).

Den venstre Arm holdt Guden bøjet og støttet ind til Siden (The left arm supported the deity’s [figure] bent, and was stuck into the side ) (Horn 1898 218).

...левая рука, которую кумир опирался в бок, подобилась луку (…the left arm, the idol held pushed into its side, was like a bow) (Фаминцын 2012 22).

[5] In the left hand, prostrated aside, was sculpted a stringed [bent back] bow (Sielicki 2015 10).

This fragment causes quite a confusion between translators. While it is perfectly grammatically fine to translate it the way Fisher and Famincin did, considering that if in the key morphosyntactic structure of the sentence (…arcum (acc. sng. noun)… brachio (dat./abl. sng. noun) figurabat (3rd sng. imp. act. ind.))  brachium is in the ablative case, i.e. we can read it as “arc… of the arm was sculpted”, taking into the account preposition in, and suggesting the dative case of the brachium, we can read the fragment as “A… bow [inserted] into the left forearm [was] fashioned”. For the stylistic reasons (for the tautology of the Fisher’s translation, or a simplistic poetic simile of the Famincin’s translation seem out place of Saxo’s other narrative, at least about Arkona’s and Karentia’s realities), and for contextual reasons, because couple sentences later Saxo describes other warrier attributes, such as a sword and a saddle: “Haud procul frenum ac sella simulacri compluraque divinitatis insignia visebantur. Quorum admirationem conspicuae granditatis ensis augebat, cuius vaginam ac capulum praeter excellentem caelaturae decorum, exterior argenti species commendabat (Not far were seen a harness and saddle, and many other symbols of the divinity. [There was hanging] a large sword, of an admirable view, the impression of the more than excellent silver engravings on the exterior of its sheath and handle was quite noticeable)” (Holder 565.20-4), the author would side with the Elton’s translation.

These warrior attributes, even not counting the bow in, pose an interesting problem – the deity of the Svantovit statue is not mono-functional. In addition to the obviously fertility related attribute of the Mead Horn, we have also these militaristic ones, and, considering concern of the Horn divination rituals, which have a goal of forecasting the future of the food security, and planning and adjusting consumption accordingly, these deity appears as an either combined one overseeing all three Dumezilian functions, or a super, higher entity above these functions.

This view on Svantovit as a triple figure has obvious parallels to Triglav (the Triple-headed one), a superior master of the three worlds, master mentioned by Ebbo in Vita Ottonis episcopi Bebenbergensis, and in Brandenburg chronicles:

Stettin vero amplissima civitas et maior Iulin tres montes ambitu suo conclusos habebat, quorum medius, qui et alc[t]ior, summo (deest) paganorum deo Trigelawo dicatus (Trigelaus dictus; Trigelao), tricapitum habebat simulacrum,  quod aurea cidari oculos et labia contegebat, asserentibus idolorum sacerdotibus ideo summum deum tria habere capita, quoniam tria procuraret regna, id est coeli, terrae et inferni, et faciem cidari operiri pro (deest) eo (deest) quod peccata hominum, quasi non videns et tacens, dissimularet (Stettin, a really biggest city, [even] bigger than Julin, had three hills inside its boundaries, the middle one, also the highest, was dedicated to the highest (absent in other manuscripts) pagan god Trigelawo (said Trigelaus; Trigelao i. o. m.), which had a triple-headed statue [there], whose gold tiara was covering up his eyes and forehead, [and according to] priests of the statue, their supreme god [had] to have three heads because [he] had to administer triple reign: on the skies, land, and underworld, and a covering face tiara [is there] because (absent i. o. m.) of the human sins, so [the god] might pretend as if he does not see them, and [pretend as if he] keeps silent) (Ebbo III.1 (1126 March 28), Pertz 1856 859:13-19).

Temporibus fuit in Brandenburg rex Henricus, qui slavice dicebatur Pribezlaus, qui Christianus factus idolum, quod in Brandeburgh fuit cum tribus capitibus, quod Triglav slavice dicebatur, et pro Deo colebatur et alia idola destruxit et idolatriam et ritum gentis suae detestans, cum filium non haberet, Adelbertum Marchionem, dictum Ursum, heredem sui instituit principatus (When king Henry was in Brandenburg, an above mentioned Slavic Christian convert princeps Pribezlaus; who destroyed a statue with three heads, which resided in Brandenburg, and which the Slavs called Triglav, and which was worshiped like a [Supreme] God, as well as [he destroyed] other statues, and cursed [their] idolatry and their pagan rituals; because he did not have a son, proclaimed that Adelbert Marchio, named Bear, will be his heir) ((1136), Raumer 1836 158:17-23).

If we are to believe to authenticity of the Ebbo’s account, that rare shred of the near-primary source, suggests that the name Trigelawo/Triglav (the Three-Headed One) is a descriptive, a profane name of the deity, and its “real”, sacred, and perhaps tabued, name is quite different, and is out of our ability to reconstruct it accurately and literally. Similarly to the author of the Brandenburg chronicle, who writes that it was the statue, the idol, not the deity, that had a name Triglaw, Saxo, as well, stresses that the Svantovit (as well as Rugevit) was the name of the statue, not the deity it represented:

Veteri deinde mero ad pedes simulacri libamenti nomine defuso… (Then, after the old mead was poured out to the feet of the statute, as a libation to its divinity…) (Holder 566.3-4).

In hoc equo opinione Rugiae Suantovitus (id simulacro vocabulum erat)… (The Rugians believed that on this horse Svantovit (such the statue was called)…) (Holder 567.10-1).

Interea fanum ingens oppidanorum frequentia circumstabat, Suantovitum talium iniuriarum auctores infestis numinis sui viribus insecuturum sperantium (Meanwhile, a crowd of local folk gathered around the temple, hoping that the disturbed deity would use its powers against those who conducted such an offence against [the statue of] Svantovit) (Holder 574.27-30).

Dies quoque, quo thesaurus Suantovito votorum nomine consecratus a Rugianis traderetur, praefigitur (As well, a day was scheduled to take care of the [riches] taken from the Rugians’ treasury, which was given to Svantovit as a gift to [his] deity) (Holder 575.32-4).

Quibus amotis, factum quercu simulacrum, quod Rugiaevitum vocabant, ab omni parte magno cum deformitatis ludibrio spectandum patebat (Which, being removed, opened the view on the comedic disfigurement of the statue, made from the oak, which was called Rugievit – the largest one of all [Karentia statues]) (Holder 577.23-5).

For Svantovit we do not have near-primary sources, like we have for Triglav, to decipher the meaning of that, likely, utilitarian, profane name, and, in assumption that Svantovit is also a function descriptive name, an etymological approach was used to reconstruct the meaning, with two main proposals that it is either Святовит (The One Who Creates Holiness), or Световит (The One Who Creates Light). However, if we are to believe Saxo, Helmold, or the author of Knudlinga saga, the name of Svantovit may be not a descriptive, but rather a deceptive name, which has nothing more in it than the means of attempting to preserve the old cult in the face of the christianizing attempts, by masquerading it into a syncretic Christian cult of a Saint. Of course the story about particular Charlemagne’s role in christianisation of Rugen was made up, and Saxo distantiates himself from the storyteller, however, if it was manufactured to give more weight and authority to  christianisation efforts, there were such efforts, and we know that it was the St. Corvey monastery which was performing those efforts to christianize the Wendish Slavs:

…statua, quam venerabantur, retenta, Danis se tradunt. Erat enim simulacrum urbi praecipua civium religione cultum crebrisque finitimorum officiis celebratum, sed falso sancti Viti vocabulo insignitum. Quo asservato, oppidani veterem sacrorum morem penitus abrogari passi non sunt (However, the statue, which they adored, [the people] retained, [because] the Danes let them. For this statue, related to frequently celebrated services of the civic religious rites observed in the particular city, was falsely named after Saint Vit. That preservation [of the statue] caused so that common folk did not completely reject traditional religious mores) (Holder 444.32-7).

Interrogatus, quonam id augurio deprehensum haberet, ex hoc potissimum augurari se dixit, quod Rugiani quondam a Karlo Ceasare expugnati sanctumque Vitum Coruegiensem religiosa nece insignem tributis colere iussi, defuncto victore libertatem reposcere cupientes servitutem superstitione mutarunt, instituto domi simulacro, quod sancti Viti vocabulo censuerunt. Ad cuius cultum contemptis Coruegiensibus pensionis summam transferre coeperunt, affirmantes domestico Vito contentos externo obsequi non oportere (Being questioned, where this sign should come from, he (king Valdemar) said that from the following strongest considerations: once Charlemagne, having conquered Rugians, and having ordered to honor consecrated pious death of Vitus of Corvey with significant tributes, [died]; [then Rugians], wishing to claim liberty after death of their victor, changed [back] to servitude to superstitious [rites], [to theirs’] local habit of [venerating] a statue [they] have chosen to name of St. Vitus. In addition to worship [of the statue], [they] stopped transfer of payments to monastery of Corvey, maintaining that having a local statue of Vitus, the external obligations are no longer required) (Holder 568.10-22).

In addition to the possible deceptive nature of the profane name of the “Svantovit” deity, it may be also underwent a gender change, being initially a feminine “Svantovita”.  In his Gesta Regum Anglorum, William of Malmesbury describes a very similar, to the one of the Rugians, divination rite of the continental Wends that involved a honey drink in a horn put in the statue’s hand, however, in his description the statue was of the feminine character Fortuna:

DE HENRICO IMPERATORE (Henriko imperatori Alemannorum. Henry III, son of Conrad II). § 189. Erat imperator multis et magnis virtutibus praeditus, et omnium pene ante se bellicosissimus, quippe qui etiam Vindelicos et Leuticios subegerit, caeterosque populos Suevis conterminos, qui usque ad hanc diem soli omnium mortalium paganas superstitiones anhelant; nam Saraceni et Turchi Deum Creatorem colunt, Mahumet non Deum, sed ejus prophetam aestimantes. Vindelici vero Fortunam adorant; cujus idolum loco nominatissimo ponentes, cornu dextrae illius componunt plenum potu illo quem Graeco vocabulo, ex aqua et melle, Hydromellum vocamus. Idem sanctus Hieronymus Aegiptios et omnes pene Orientales fecisse, in decimo octavo super Isaiam libro confirmat. Unde ultimo die Novembris mensis, in circuitu sedentes, in commune praegustant; et si cornu plenum invenerint, magno strepitu applaudunt, quod eis futuro anno pleno copia cornu responsura sit in omnibus; si contra, gemunt ([He] was an Emperor possessing many and great virtues, and he was [military] fiercest of all his [male] ancestors, for example he had to conquer Vindelici and Leutici, other people bordering Suevi, who, all the time until this day, alone, were practicing all mortal pagan superstitions; while even Saracens and Turks worship God the Creator, reckoning Mahumet not as God, but his prophet. Vindelici worship specifically Fortuna, putting her idol in a most honorable place, [they] set a horn in its right hand, filled with a drink composed from water and honey, which in Greek we call it a Hydromellum. The same, as St. Jerome confirms in his tenth chapter of the book on Isaiah, the Egyptians and all ancient Oriental cultures did. Back [to describing Vindelici’s rites], on the last day of November, sitting/standing in a circle, [they] publicly taste [the drink]; and if [they] find the horn [satisfactory] filled up, they applaud very wild, because the horn responded in forecasting that their next year would be filled by abundance of everything; in the opposite case they lament) (William of Malmesbury II.§189, Hardy 1840 322:23-323:13).

Of course, Saxo describes the statue in the temple of Arkona as a masculine figure depicted with short hair and beards: “Corrasae barbae, crines attonsi figurabantur, ut artificis industriam Rugianorum ritum in cultu capitum aemulatam putares (Combed beards and clipped hair were curved [on the heads], skillfully depicted after the traditional fashion of the Rugen)” (Holder 565.9-11), however, few sentences later he writes: “Tunica ad tibias prominens fingebatur, quae ex diversa ligni materia creatae, tam arcano nexu genibus iungebantur, ut compaginis locus non nisi curiosiori contemplatione deprehendi potuerit (Tunica, made from different pieces of wood, was sculpted hanging over shank bones, so hidden where they joined to the knees that the place of the joint would not be possible to distinguish without careful investigation)” (Holder 565.15-8), which implies, because the wooden pieces, the tunic (dress?) of the statue was made of, were not bent by the elements in the joints, that the masculine sculpture Saxo describes was made relatively recently, and was younger than the rest of the temple features that were quite weathered: “Praeterea frequens aedem purpura circumpendebat, nitore quidem praedita, sed situ tam putris, ut tactum ferre non posset (Moreover, the purple curtains the temple was decorated with were indeed excellent; however, [they were] so mold-rotten that [they] could not bare a touch)” (Holder 574.36-8). That gives temporal space for the assumption that the original, contemporary to the other temple structures, statue could have been of the feminine nature, and was replaced by the masculine figure later, when a derivative of the masculine name Vitus was attached to it.

Still, we can argue that William of Malmesbury, when establishing the parallel between the Wendish deity and Roman Fortuna, was concerned with their functional, not the gender, similarity, which thins the reasons to suspect the gender change of Svantovit. However, Saxo himself, while implying that the cult of Svantovit was the major one on Rugen when he started description of the city of Arkona (which was the main city on Rugen, and the main structure in it was the temple and all other temples around were not superior: “Alia quoque fana compluribus in locis hoc numen habebat, quae per supparis dignitatis ac minoris potentiae flamines regebantur (As well, this divinity had many temples in the vicinity, which were run by other, almost equally, or less respected, priests) (Holder 567.4-6)), and explicitly stating primacy of the Svantovit cult when he described cults in Karentia: “Iis tantum paene venerationis privatorum deorum dignitas conciliaverat, quantum apud Arkonenses publici numinis auctoritas possidebat (They concentrated almost the same significance in venerating their unofficial deities, as the official cult in Arkona possessed) (Holder 577.4-6),  during the description of the scene of the siege of Arkona, makes an interesting statement which could be interpreted that it was a feminine deity which was revered above all others: “…ut turrim, quae supra portam sita fuerat, signis tantum aquilisque protegerent. Inter quas erat Stanitia (am Rande Stuatira) magnitudine ac colore insignis, cui tantum venerationis a populo Rugiano tributum est, quantum omnium paene deorum maiestas obtinuit. (…for the tower, which was located over the gates, had to be protected by the standards. Among those was a remarkable grandiose and colorful [depiction of] Stanicia (on margins: Stuatira), to whom the population of Rugen paid a tribute of such a great worship, that had almost such a prestige as all [other] deities [had]) (Holder 568.39-569.4).

And later Saxo notes that it was the statue (of the Stanicia-“Svantovita”?) that was depicted on one (the principal?) flag of the tower: “Ac deinde summa corripiens, singulare simulacri signum aliaque domestice religionis insigna cineri equauit  (After [the fire] crept to the roof, an image of the statue and other standards associated with the local superstitious cult burned to the ashes)” (Holder 570.38-9). Also, mentioning religious importance of the flag of Stanicia, Saxo uses the same, very specific, formula which Helmold uses (trice) for the description of importance, comparing to kings, of the priests of Rugen’s Zvantevit(h) statue:

…tantumque superstitioni indultum est, ut exigui panni auctoritas regiae potestatis vires transscenderet (…[this] superstition was so powerful, that the influence of that small piece of canvas [where she was depicted on] would exceed power of the regal authority) (Holder 569.9-10).

Flaminem suum non minus quam regem venerantur ([They] revere their priest no less than the king) (Helmold I.6 Pertz 1868  24:10). Maior flaminis quam regis veneratio apud ipsos est (Among them the veneration of the chief priest was as of the king) (Helmold I.36 Pertz 1868  76:16). Rex apud eos modice estimationis est comparatione flaminis (The king, among them, is of less value comparing to the priest) (Helmold II.12 Pertz 1868 215:28-9).

Of course, one can argue that the term Stanicia (The One Who/Which Stands) is not a personal name, but a word denoting a generic standard, similar to the Polish term for watchtower – stanica, and all the way Saxo was talking about the Svantovit’s standard. However, this reading has number of problems: first, there were multiple insignias on the tower, and only one was called Stanicia (Holder 568.39-569.1, see above), second, prestige of the Stanicia Saxo compares not to the prestige of standards of the other deities, but to the prestige of the deities themselves (Holder 569.3-4), and third, functional description of the deity associated to the term Stanicia quite differs (Holder 569.4-9) from the Svantovit’s descriptions. This description of the functions of Stanicia is quite remarkable, and we will devote a separate chapter to its analysis.

So far, it seems, that the primary sources of Absalon and Saxo were quite unsure how much identical or different the figures of Stanicia and Svantovit were. That suggests that the possible split and gender change, if it happened, happened not during their lifetime, therefore they were not familiar with the details and reasons for that, although not too much earlier to be forgotten completely. Quite interesting, in the context of the source of origination of the deonims Stanicia and Svantovit, are their possible Iranian etymologies *štāna-, “leg”, and spəntō, “holy” (Trubachev 1967 40, 22).

šta (Best Truth, or the Right Order), and Haurvatā

(14.39.4.2)

[2] Huius sacerdos, praeter communem patriae ritum barbae comaeque prolixitate spectandus, pridie quam rem divinam facere debuisset, sacellum, quod ei soli intrandi fas erat, adhibito scoparum usu, diligentissime purgare solebat, observato, ne intra aedem halitum funderet; quo quoties capessendo vel emittendo opus habebat, toties ad ianuam procurrebat, ne videlicet dei praesentia mortalis spiritus contagio pollueretur (Holder 565.27-35).

[2] On the day before he was obliged to perform the sacred ceremony, its prist, conspicuous for his lengthy hair and beard, which went counter to common fashion in that land, used to take a broom and meticulously sweep out the sanctuary, where only he was allowed to enter; yet he had to be careful not to exhale within this part of the temple; each time he needed to breathe in or out he must run to the door, I suppose to avoid contaminating the god’s presence by contact with the air from human lungs (Fisher 2015 1277).

Its priest was conspicuous for his long beard and hair, beyond the common fashion of the country. On the day before that on which he must sacrifice, he used to sweep with brooms the shrine, which he had the sole right of entering. He took heed not to breath within the building. As often as he needed to draw or give breath, he would run out to the door, lest forsooth the divine presence should be tainted with human breath (Elton 1894 393).

Præsten, som i Modsætning til, hvad der ellers var Landsens Skik, havde langt Haar
og Skjæg, plejede. Dagen før han skulde foretage den hellige Handling, at gaa ind i Templet, som han alene havde Lov til at betræde, og feje og omhyggelig rengjøre det, hvorved han maatte passe paa at holde sin Aande, saa at han hver Gang, han var nødt til at trække Vejret, maatte skynde sig hen til Døren, for at Guden ikke skulde besmittes ved, at et Menneske drog Aande i hans Nærværelse (The priest cared to have a long hair and beard, which was in contrast to what for other was a tradition of the land. The day before he had to perform a sacred act, by going into the Temple, which he alone, by the Law, had to enter, and sweep and carefully clean it, where he had to comply holding his breath, so for every time he had to take a breath, [he] would have to rush to the door, for not to contaminate the God in case if a man drew a breath in his presence) 
(Horn 1898 218).

[2] The priest [of the divinity], showing the strict observance of the length of hair and beard according to old traditions of the ancestral community; the day before [the feast] [the priest] had to perform an even more important service to the divinity; the temple, which only he had traditional right to enter, he used to clean most diligently with a broom, making sure he would not breath inside the temple; when he needed to breath in or out, he ran to the doors, to prevent pollution of the pure divine presence by the contact with mortal spirits (Sielicki 2015 11).

It is obvious where the idea of a long hair and beard of the priest comes from in many translations –  from the semantic emphasis on the noun prolixitatus – “extreme length/verbosity”. However, the author suggests an opposite reading of the fragment on the grammatical and contextual bases. First of all, by putting the semantic emphasis on preposition praeter  – “beyond/more than”, and carefully reading the morphosyntactic key structure: “…praeter (prep.) communem (acc. sng. adj.) patriae (voc. pl. noun) ritum (acc. sng. noun) barbae (gen./dat. sng. noun) comaeque (gen./dat. sng. noun) prolixitate (gen./dat. sng. noun.) spectandus (ftr. pass. part.)” we see that the priest demonstrates (spectandus – “which is to be watched”) not the particular length of the beard, but rather following (direct object with its members in accusative case) a more than [usual], i.e. stricter, ancestral communal custom of the (adjectival clause with all its members in genitive case) beard’s and hair’s length.

Second, the very next sentence of the fragment describes purification rites that are very similar to the Zoroastrian ones. Mary Boyce points out that, though, codification of the laws we have only in Vendidād and Pahlavi texts, their similarity to the ones of Indian Brahmins, suggests that similar rites existed not only at prehistoric times of Zarathushtra, but also at pagan times of Indo-Iranians, and even Indo-Europeans overall. Laws of purity in Zoroastrianism comes natural from its key concepts of the opposition of the creation of Ahura Mazda/Spenta Mainyu to destructive influence of Angra Mainyu that includes decay, pollution, illness and, most important, death, therefore duty of an Ashavan, the follower of the Right World Order aša, includes obligation to fight uncleanness of himself and the nature elements that include metal (which is representation of the sky), water, soil, animals and plants (Boyce 1975 285, 6, 310).

The trimmed out or fallen off hair is considered a dead matter and requires utilisation similar to utilisation of other dead objects. Breath is considered also polluting the already cleansed objects. Zoroastrian houses, especially if used as places of worship, especially at festival times, have to be dusted, swept, and scrubbed. Priests, of course, should be more meticulous in following the laws than laity. Closes of the priest performing services indoors are strictly functional, without of flowing pieces that are used for the outdoor ceremonies, to prevent possible contamination of the cleansed objects by the closes. Hair, for the same reason is also concealed under the headdress, and mouth and nose is covered by the surgeon mask style piece of cloth named in Middle Persian padān, to prevent contaminating action of breath (Boyce 1975 300, 9, 10, 11, 22). In Achaemenian times, according to the images that survived, Zoroastrian priests wore Scythian style hats with flaps that covered mouth (Дандамаев 2009 95).

In the context of the similarity of purification rites that were practiced by the Arkona’s chief priest with the Indo-Iranian rites, it seems highly unlikely for the priest to be more ignorant about them than even laity, and to jeopardise results of his tedious purification works by the possible contamination of the Svantovit’s temple by his long hair.

(14.39.10.1-2)

[1] Auspicia quoque per eundem equum huiusmodi sumebantur: Cum bellum adversum aliquam provinciam suscipi placuisset, ante fanum triplex hastarum ordo ministrorum opera disponi solebat, in quorum quolibet binae e transverso iunctae, conversis in terram cuspidibus, figebantur, aequali spatiorum magnitudine ordines disparante. [2] Ad quos equus ductandae expeditionis tempore, sollemni precatione praemissa, a sacerdote e vestibulo cum loramentis productus, si propositos ordines ante dextro quam laevo pede transscenderet, faustum gerendi belli omen accipiebatur; sin laevum vel semel dextro praetulisset, petendae provinciae propositum mutabatur. Nec prius certa navigatio praefigebatur, quam tria continue potioris incessus vestigia cernerentur (Holder 567.16-29).

[1] Auguries of the following nature were also taken from this horse: when they had decided to prosecute war against some region, three sets of spears would be erected in front of the temple by servants;each set consisted of a pair of spears joined crosswise with the points thrust into the earth, and the same amount of space lay between each arrangement. [2] At the time when they were thinking of conducting an enterprise against the enemy, a solemn prayer would first be offered, and then the priest would lead the horse in its trappings out from the forecourt, if it stepped over each formation of spears with the right hoof before the left, this was accepted as a favourable prediction for undertaking the war. Yet if the left even once preceded the right, the plan to attack that territory was altered, and their date of sailing was only fixed properly after they saw the horse take three paces in turn which made the creature’s advise auspicious (Fisher 2015 1281,3).

Omens also where taken by this horse, thus: When war was determined against any district, the servants set out three rows of spears, two joined crosswise, and each row being planted point downwards in the earth; the rows an equal distance apart. When it was time to make the expedition, after a solemn prayer, the horse was led in harness out of the porch by the priest. If he crossed the rows with the right foot before the left it was taken as a lucky omen of warfare; if he put the left first, so much as once, the plan of attacking that district was dropped; neither was any voyage finally fixed, until three paces in succession of the fortunate manner of walking were observed (Elton 1894 395).

Der blev ogsaa taget Varsler af denne Hest paa følgende Maade: naar man fik i Sinde at føre Krig med et eller andet Land, plejede Tempeltjenerne at opstille sex Spyd, to og to korsvis sammen, i lige stor Afstand fra hverandre og med Oddene ned i Jorden. Naar Toget saa skulde gaa for sig, førte Præsten Hesten, efter at have holdt en højtidelig Bøn, optømmet ud af Forhallen og lod den springe over Spydene; hvis den saa hævede højre Ben før end venstre, ansaas det for et Varsel om, at Krigen vilde faa et lykkeligt Udfald, men hævede den blot en Gang venstre Ben først, opgav man det paatænkte Angreb, ja, de bestemte først, hvornaar de vilde lette Anker, naar de havde set den tre Gange i Træk springe over Spydene paa den Maade, de tog for et lykkeligt Varsel (They also were taking foretellings from that horse the following way: when they got a desire to make a war with that or another land, servants of the temple used to set six spears, two and two crosswise together, in equal distance from each other, and with spear points thrust [down] into the ground. So, when the expedition was supposed to go forth, the priest led the horse, after having held a solemn prayer, through the open space from the porch and letting him [the horse] jump over spears; if he [the horse] draw the right leg over the left [over the spears], it was considered an omen that war would have a lucky results, but if it [the horse] draw, even once the left leg first, they postpone that contemplated raid. They don’t lift the anchor [to sail to implement] the determined first [plans], until they have seen he [the horse], three times in succession, jump the spears in particular way they take for a lucky omen) (Horn 1898 220).

[1] As well, divinations with the use of that horse were conducted in such ways: when the undertaking of war against another province was decided, before the temple an attendant would lay out an arrangement of three spears, in which the ends of any two were joined [together] to point to the land of interest, making sure that the third equally crossed/divided the angle between the first two. [2] At the time of a military expedition, the priest, speaking ceremonial words and leading this horse through the court [before the temple] on a long strap, decided whether the omen for waging a war was favorable: if the [spear] arrangement laid out would be stepped over, first by the right feet, then the left; if, even once, the left [foot] would precede the right, the candidate province to be attacked would be changed, and no ships would be sent in the original direction until a favorable way of stepping over would be noticed three [times] in a row (Sielicki 2015 15).

Traditional translations interpret conversis in terram cuspidibus literally as “spear-points turned back into the ground”,  which is lexico-grammatically acceptable, but semantically ridiculous if taken in the context of the paragraph, because walking a horse over the [semi] vertically oriented spears is quite a bizarre endeavor. If Horn feels it, and fights the problem making horse jump, Fisher and Elton leave it as is. This idea of the vertically arranged spears also finds its way into translation of the Thietmar account of the horse divination in Rethra done by Djakonov, while Warmer simply drops complicated details:

…equum, qui maximus inter alios habetur et ut sacer ab his veneratur, super fixas in terram duarum cuspides (cupides) hastilium inter se trans*missarum supplici obsequio ducunt, et premissis sortibus, [quibus id] exploravere prius, per hunc quasi divinum denuo auguriantur. (…a horse, largest of all they have, and therefore venerated as sacred, [they, with] begging obedience, lead over pair of spear-points, fixed at the land [of interest?], of the crossed/connected between each other spears; and the lots’ responses [to the] questions, which they explored before, with help of this supposedly divine [horse], [they] explore again) (Thietmar VI.24 (1005), Kurze 1889 148:8-13).

…воткнув в землю крест-накрест 2 остроконечных копья, со смиренным послушанием проводят сквозь них коня, который считается наибольшим среди прочих и поэтому почитается, как священный; несмотря на брошенный уже жребий, наблюдаемый ими ранее, через это, якобы божественное животное они вторично проводят гадание (…having stuck into the ground, crosswise, 2 sharp-pointed spears, with solemn obedience, [they] guide through them [spears] a horse, which is considered as the biggest among others, and therefore is revered as sacred; despite of the already cast lots observed by them earlier, through that supposedly divine animal, they conduct augury the second time) (Дьяконов 2009 103).

…after placing two spears crosswise on the ground, humbly lead over them a horse which they believe to be the largest of all and venerate as sacred. That which the casting of lots had already revealed to them, should also be foretold by this almost divine beast (Warner 2001 253).

To add insult to injury, interpreting fixas in terram as “fixed in the ground”, suggests that the horse was walked over the vertically arranged spears with spear-points atop, considering the morpho-syntactic key structure of the sentence: “…super (prep.) fixas (acc. pl. part.) in terram (acc. sng. noun)… cuspides (acc. pl. noun)… hastilium (gen. pl. noun)… transmissarum (gen. pl. adg.)… ducunt (3rd pl. pr. act. ind.)“, according to which [they] lead [the horse] over… spear-points (direct object in accusative case) of the intercrossed spears (adjectival clause in genitive case). Though it would be grammatically incorrect to associate locative adjunct fixas in terram with hastilium while it is associated with cuspides, but if spear points were thrust in the ground, how the horse could have been lead over them? However, if we read fixas in terram as “[spear points] fixed at the land”, suggesting that the spears lay on the ground horizontally pointing by their spear point in particular direction, everything starts to have sense. And Herbord writes quite unambiguously that the similar horse divination in Stettin was conducted over the horizontally arranged spears, though he describes a bit different criteria for the favorable prediction:

Quando ergo itinere terrestri contra hostes aut praedatum ire cogitabant, eventum rei hoc modo per illum solebant praediscere: Hastae 9 disponebantur humo, spacio unius cubiti ab invicem disiunctae (separatae). Strato ergo caballo atque frenato, sacredos, ad quem illius pertinebat custodia, tentum (tantum) freno per iacentes hasta (in/absent) transversum ducebat ter atque reducebat. Quod si pedibus inoffensis hastisque indisturbatis, equus transibat, signum habuere (habuit) prosperitatis et securi pergebant; sin autem (minus/absent/attingebat), quiescebant (When then they contemplated about terrestrial expedition against enemies or going for plundering, [they] used to divinate [about] outcome of the expedition the following way, according to their customs: 9 spears were arranged on the ground, separated mutually by space of one foot. A priest would calm and bridle a horse, which belonged to his custody, [and he] holding the bridle, was leading [the horse] across the laying spears, forth and back, three times. If the horse traversed with his legs not disturbing spears, they take it as a sign of success and unconcerned proceed; but if not, they refrain [from action]) (Herbord II.32 (1124), 794:34-9)

Whenever the people contemplated setting out on any expedition by land to attack enemies, or in order to secure booty, they were accustomed to forecast the result this way. Nine spears were placed on the ground separated from one another by the space of a cubit. When then the horse had been made ready and was bridled, the priest, who was in charge of it, led the horse three times backwards and forwards across the spears that were lying on the ground. If the horse crossed without knocking its feet or disturbing the spears, they regarded this as an omen of success and proceeded on their expedition without anxiety, but if the result were otherwise they remained inactive (Robinson 1920 80:2-15).

Similarly, if we suggest that Saxo’s conversis in terram means “directed at the lands” (about expeditions to the divination is requested), and that those spears are arranged in the horizontal plane, description of the spear configuration: “triplex (nom./voc. sng. num.) hastarum (gen. pl. noun) ordo (nom./voc. sng. noun)…, in quorum quolibet binae e transverso iunctae, conversis in terram cuspidibus, figebantur, aequali spatiorum magnitudine ordines disparante” can be interpreted as one arrow-like figure (of -> or >- shape), in which all three spears, which form it, are connected by their ends, and the equal distance between them is not linear, but angular. In the criterion of a success: “si propositos (acc. pl. part.) ordines (acc. pl. noun) ante dextro quam laevo pede transscenderet, faustum gerendi belli omen accipiebatur; sin laevum vel semel dextro praetulisset, petendae provinciae propositum mutabatur”, Saxo, however, contradicts himself by using figures in the plural grammatical number and says that the horse should step over the figure(s) by the right leg first and then by the left all the times, but it makes more sense that there are not many such figures composed from spears, but that the horse has two pair of legs, and steps over a single figure, and the forward right leg should go first, and then the rear right leg should go first, and only then the corresponding left legs follow.

(14.39.11.2)

[2] Nec sortium iis usus ignotus exstitit; siquidem tribus ligni particulis, parte altera albis, altera nigris, in gremium sortium loco coniectis, candidis prospera, furvis adversa signabant (Holder 567.33-6).

[2] The practice of prophesying fate was by no means unfamiliar to them. Three splinters of wood, white on one side, black on the other, were thrown like lots into their laps; the white uppermost enabled them to recognise good fortune, the dark, bad luck (Fisher 2015 1283).

Nor were these people ignorant of the use of lots. Three bits of wood, black on one side, white on the other, were cast into the lap. Fair, meant good luck; dusky, ill (Elton 1894 395).

Lodkastning var de heller ikke ukjendte med. de kastede nemlig tre Træstykker, hvide paa den ene Side og sorte paa den anden, i Skjødet som Lodder, og hvidt varslede saa Lykke, sort Ulykke (Lot casting was rather not unknown by them. They threw exactly three pieces of wood, white on one side and black on the other, on their lap to test [their luck], and white proclaimed luck, black – ill luck) (Horn 1898 220).

[2] A use of lots was not unknown for them; [the lots] consisted of many wooden chips—one side of them was white, another black—being thrown out of a bag. The light [color] meant good, the dark—the opposite (Sielicki 2015 16).

Problem with the standard translations, if we take a look at the morpho-syntactic structure of the adjectival participle phrase:…tribus (nom./gen./voc. sng. noun) …in (prep.) gremium (nom./acc./voc. sng. noun) sortium (gen. pl. noun) loco (dat./abl./ sng. noun) coniectis (dat./abl. pl. perf. pass. part)…”, is that it has an indirect object loco, an unspecified “location” where the lots get thrown, while the locative adjunct – in gremium sortium, “in bossom/bag? of lots”, belongs to the subject.

When in the main phrase: “…tribus (nom./gen./voc. sng. noun) ligni (gen. sng. noun) particulis (dat./abl. pl noun)… candidis (dat./abl. pl adj.) prospera (nom./acc./voc. pl. adj.)… signabant (3rd. pl. imp. act. ind. verb)”, tribus may be not only a dative/ablative case of the cardinal “tree”, which does not fit the structure, but also a “tribe/crowd” in nominative case, which does fit nicely: “A lot (literally) of wood, [consisting] of small pieces of the light [color]” (subject with adjectival clauses) “signified” (verb) “success” (direct object).  

So, together we will get, literally: “A lot of wood of small pieces…, [which were stored] in a bag and thrown to some place, [being] of the light [color] signified success, [while being] of the dark [color] – fault”. 

(14.39.15.3)

[3] Eam enim prae se ferentes in humana divinaque grassandi potestatem habebant, nec quicquam iis, quod libitum foret, illicitum habebatur. Populari urbes, aras demoliri, fas ac nefas in aequo ponere, cunctosque Rugiae penates aut ruinis aut incendiis evertere potuissent… (Holder 569.4-9).

[3] Whenever the citizens displayed this ensign before them, they felt entitled to vent their rage against all things human and divine, and reckoned that in these circumstances they were allowed to do anything they pleased. In this way they would be able to devastate cities, dismantle altars, observe no difference between right and wrong, and destroy any home on Rugen by tearing it down or burning it to the ground (Fisher 2015 1285).

…for, shielded by her, they took leave to assail the laws of God and man, counting nothing unlawful which they liked… (Elton 1894 396)

…thi naar den blev baaret foran dem, mente de, at de havde Magt til at gaa løs baade paa Guder og Mennesker, og at der ikke var den Ting, de fik Lyst til, som de ikke havde Lov til at gjøre, plyndre Byer, nedbryde Altre, gjøre Ret til Uret og forvandle alle Huse paa Rygen til Grus og Aske (…for when it was brought before them, they thought that they had the power to behave unconstrained towards both Gods and men, and that there were nothing they had desire of, which they would not have permission to do: loot cities, breaking down altars, do the right or the wrong, and turn down all houses on Rugen to gravel or ashes) (Horn 1898 221).

Нося его перед собою, они считали себя вправе грабить все человеческое и божеское и все считали себе позволенным. С ним они могли опустошать города, разрушать алтари, неправое делать правым, всех пенатов руянских разрушать и сжигать… (Фаминцын 2012 23)

[3] She represented for them a divine, uncontrolled power, which they had to endure so much from; she would have her pleasure in committing the forbidden: to destroy populated cities and sanctuaries, to bring, equally, the good and the bad. All Rugian homesteads could have been given to fire or destruction;… (Sielicki 2015 16-7).

This fragment has difficulties, both grammatical and, as well, semantical. Apparently, Elton saw the semantic contradictions between the first sentence, if it is translated the traditional way, and the second phrase, and dropped the second one altogether. Indeed, if the Slavs of Rugen did not obey moral laws at all, why did not they unleashed their destructive force against other nations and lands, but, instead, were destroying their own dwellings on the very Rugen?

Let’s analyse morpho-syntactic structure of the first sentence of the fragment: “Eam (acc. fem. sng. pron.) enim prae (prep.) se (acc./abl. refl. pron.) ferentes (nom./acc./voc. pl. pres. part.) in (prep) humana (nom./acc./voc. pl. adj.) divinaque (nom./acc./voc. pl.  adj.) grassandi (gen./sng. nom./voc./pl. ger.) potestatem (acc. sng. noun) habebant (3rd, pl. imp. act. ind. verb), nec quicquam (nom./acc./voc. pron) iis (dat./abl. pl. pron.), quod (nom./acc. neut. sng. pron.) libitum (perf. pas. part.) foret (3rd sng. imp. act. subj verb), illicitum (nom./acc./voc. sng. adj.) habebatur (3rd. sng. imp. pas. ind. verb)”.

The first part tells about the Rugians, with plural verbal forms, while the second about Stanicia, with the singular ones. So, literally, implied by the verb habebant (3rd, pl.), “they” (subject), “had her” (direct object), eam (acc. fem. sng. pron.)… , “in [charge] of the authority” (locative complement), in (prep)… potestatem (acc. sng. noun), of human and divine [affairs to] go about (adjectival clause), humana (nom./acc./voc. pl. adj.) divinaque (nom./acc./voc. pl.  adj.) grassandi (gen./sng. ger.). Also, in the adjectival participle clause, ferentes could be translated to only as “bearing/carrying”, but, as well, as “suffering/enduring”, and preposition prae, in addition to “before”, also, as “because”, so, the Rugians, in addition to having Stanicia as a higher authority, also were “suffering/enduring themselves”,  se (acc. refl. pron.) ferentes (acc. pl. pres. part.), “truly because of her”, eam (acc. fem. sng. pron.) enim prae (prep.).

The next clause of the sentence is negative subjunctive passive: “could not been pleased”, nec… libitum (perf. pas. part.) foret (3rd sng. imp. act. subj. verb), agent-less with the patient subject “whom”, quod (nom. neut. sng. pron.), and direct object “nothing (whatsoever)/at all of them/of theirs” , nec quicquam (acc. proniis (abl. pl. pron.). Conjugation and grammatical number of passive verbs in Latin is driven by the patient subject, or, in case of the completely subjectless clause, plainly, is 3rd person singular, and the latter ones can be translated either as “It is <adjectival form of the verb>”, or “They <active voice of the verb>”. So, the clause above could be translated as: ” There was nothing they could pleased her with”.

Yet, another clause in the sentence, which is also passive and completely impersonal, and consists of the verb habebatur (3rd. sng. imp. pas. ind) and direct object illicitum (acc. sng. adj.), and considering that the verb habeo may mean not only plainly “to have/to possess”, but, also, “to maintain/to preside over/to consider/to accept/to bear/to endure”, can be translated as “they endured the unjust [from her]/it was enduring injustice for them”. This clause is even better to be attached to the second sentence of the fragment (considering, again, that the modern Latin punctuation is an invention of the printing press era, and is quite arbitrary), which clarifies and enumerates these unjust things:

Illicitum habebatur: populari (dat./abl. adj.) urbes (nom./acc./voc. pl. noun), aras (acc. pl. noun) demoliri (pres. pass. inf.), fas (nom. sng. noun) ac nefas in aequo (dat./abl. sng. adj.) ponere (pres. act. inf.), cunctosque (acc. pl. adj.) Rugiae penates (nom./acc./voc. pl noun) aut (conj.) ruinis (dat./abl. pl. noun) aut incendiis (dat./abl. pl. noun) evertere (pres. act. inf.) potuissent (3rd pl. plusperf. act. subj. verb);…

In this context we have, similarly to previous passive clauses, an impersonal, though formally active subjunctive plus perfect verb “would/had have been possible” (etymologically, literally possum=potis+sum means “is possible”), which could be translated without implied subject “they”. With syntax of the rest of the phrase being pretty obvious (number of infinitive predicate clauses with direct and optionally indirect objects), we will get: “They endured the unjust [from Stanicia]: it could have been possible [for her] that the populated cities and temples be destroyed, the forbidden and the allowed equally putting [on them], all Rugian homes to destroy by the ruin or the fire;…”

The feminine pronoun eam (acc. fem. sng.), “her” in the beginning of the sentence is another argument that the name Stanicia is personal (see discussion of the Svantovit possible gender change in comments to (14.39.3.5) above), rather than a term for a flag/standard that are mentioned in other sentences of the fragment as signum or pannus, which are of the neutral or masculine gender. Information that she represented an authority, also, contributes to the “personalization” cause.

Anyway, whichever way one interprets what Stanicia is, and how close she/it related to the statue of Svantovit (14.39.20.5 Holder 570.38-9), and whether by her or on behalf of her, the illicit and forbidden things were committed, functionality of this deity, which is quite indifferent to the people, noticeably differs from the one of Svantovit, whose deity looks quite benevolent. Making Stanicia, possibly, a type of the Rudraic-Shivaic personage. However, such deities, though being destructive, are revered for their other useful traits coming in a package. In case of Stanicia there no much of such traits, with exception of the passage saying that she brings equally both the moral and the immoral, fas ac nefas, which rather suggest (as well as Svantovit’s cultic analog Fortuna described by William of Malmesbury II.§189, see above), that she is not concerned with the moral views of the people, and being a distant deity preoccupied with the matters of Universe.

It was discussed before that Svantovit of Arkona had a tripartite character, similar to the one of the rivaling cult in Karentia which was there even more pronounced. Saxo gives us less details about deities of Karentia, however, it seems each of the three neighboring figures were specialized in on function. Obviously, Rugevit represented the Warrior function. About Porevit he gives us no information except representing him as a weaponless opposition to Rugevit, which may point to the Agricultural/Fertility functionality. While Porenut’s gestures, it seems, have the same symbolic meaning as the crown of Trigelawo in Ebbo’s account:

Haec statua, quattuor facies repraesentans, quintam pectori insertam habebat, cuius frontem laeva, mentum dextera tangebat (That statue, displaying four faces [on the head], had the fifth inserted in its breast, and his left hand reached [for his] forehead, while the right hand, his chin) (Holder 578.11-4).

…quod aurea cidari oculos et labia contegebat, asserentibus idolorum sacerdotibus ideo summum deum … et faciem cidari operiri pro eo quod peccata hominum, quasi non videns et tacens, dissimularet (…whose gold tiara was covering up his eyes and forehead, [and according to] priests of the statue, their supreme god [had]… a covering face tiara because of the human sins, so [the god] might pretend as if he does not see them, and [pretend as if he] keeps silent) (Ebbo III.1 (1126 March 28), Pertz 1856 859:16-19).

Similarly to Triglav, Porenut, perhaps, covers his forehead and chin (with eyes and mouth?) to refrain from judging and acting upon peoples’ mores, and be bothered by them at all. Porenut may had a function of the (potential) Judge, but has chosen not to carry it on, turning himself in a Zurvan-like distant deity, defence against whom is to sew his eyes, or cover them somehow, as make observations Vasilkov & Razauskas (2003 29).

Possibly, proto-Svantovit experienced similar development when one of his tripartite aspects morphed into a distant deity figure, splitting it into a passive, primordial, feminine character, and a younger, offspring, active god.

(14.39.32.6)

[6] Daemon in furvi animalis figura penetralibus excedere visus, subito se circumstantium luminibus abstulit (Holder 574.40-575.2).

A devil was seen departing from the inmost shrine in the guise of  a black animal, until it disappeared abruptly from the gaze of the bystanders. (Fisher 2015 1299-1301).

A demon in the form of dusky animal was seen to quit the inner part and suddenly vanish from the sight of the bystanders (Elton 1894 396)

En Uvætte saas i et sort Dyrs Skikkelse løbe ud af Templet, saa de tilstedeværende pludselig tabte det af Syne (A monster/evil being was seen in a dark beast form running out of the Temple, then those [who were] present suddenly lost it out of sight) (Horn 1898 227).

[6] A demon, seen leaving the internal chambers of the temple in the form of a dark animal, suddenly made the light around him disappear.

There is nothing wrong with the traditional translations, and this fragment is presented here because it’s rare one where the Modern Age style narrative of Saxo Grammaticus is tainted by the Biblical mysticism. As it was discussed before, in comments to the () fragment, Saxo was not immune from satisfying, may be tongue in cheek, ideological needs of his patrons and sponsors. It has been already noticed that Saxo likely knew about Helmold’s chronicle (), and, looking this fragment, and comparing it with Ebbo’s story: “Subito enim, astante populi (populo) frequenta, insolitae magnitudines muscae, quae nunquam in terra illa visae sunt, magno impetu ex delubris idolorum proruperunt, et tanta densitate omnem civitatis ambitum operiebant, ut paene lucem diei tetra caligine obducere viderentur;… invisum monstrum portis apertis evolans, terram barbarorum qui Rutheni dicuntur pernici velocitate peciit” (Suddenly for the standing crowd of people, flies of the unusual size, which were never seen in these lands, burst out of the temple of idols in a huge wave and such a density [that] covered whole vicinity of the city, and it was seen the hideous fog almost shut up the light of the day;…  an unseen monster/evil creature flied out off the opened doors, and with swift speed made it to the barbaric lands which are called Rutheni) (Ebbo III.11, 866:39-43, 45-6), apparently, we may conclude that Saxo knew it, too, and by telling continuation of Ebbo’s story, that the demon that left ruins of the temple destroyed by Otto in Gutzkow, and having found sanctuary on Rugen, finally has been expelled from there by Absalon, was establishing continuity between efforts of Otto of Bamberg and other prior christianizers, and Absalon’s mission, giving him laures of the person who has finally finished these titanic efforts in christianizing the Slavs.

Conclusions

It has been already suggested by R. Jakobson, M. Gimbutas, and J. Puhvel that the pre-christian Slavic religion was closely related to the Indo-Iranian one, with arguments primarily based on similarity of the religious terms. The new readings of Saxo’s account on Slavic religion attract attention to similarity of the rituals Saxo describes, in their material objects, actions and meanings, to number of the Indo-Iranian, as well other Indo-European, ritualistic practices, and narratives and meanings of the, primarily, Indo-Iranian texts. Among those parallels were suggested: Slavic pledge of the trust to a treaty and, associated to Iranian Apam Napat, mastery over trust and water element, and related to his mastery water ordeals; Slavic multi-eyed statues and either multi-eyed, or all-seeing Indo-Iranian Mit(h)ra, Varuna, and Greek Zeus; commonality of the purification rites of the Priest of Arkona’s temple and Zoroastrian priests; general tripartite Indo-European nature of Svantovit and Karentia’s complex of deities, and tendency of turning one of their aspects into a Zurvan-like figure.

The new reading also suggests that the spear arrangement being used in the horse divination ritual was not (semi) vertical, but rather horisontal and had a arrow-shape form, and number of lots in the lot casting ritual was much larger than three. Also, these readings allow to see one more description of the use of flags with images of their deities in Saxo’s account, as well as that the unusual inclusions of the demonic mysticism are likely related to his attempts to accommodate ideological expectations of his patrons.

Names of Svantovit and Stanicia, the last one being the personal name of the deity, are likely profane, and for Svantovit, being opportunistic, has nothing semantically behind it than “The One Whose Name Is Good To Fend Of Invasive Chritianizers Of Corvey”, and for Stanicia, being randomly-descriptive, is not much more than “The One Whose Image Is Depicted On The Main Tower”. Their names, as well as many other authentically Slavic name in the Latin medieval sources, being profane, and its profanity arbitrary, and, perhaps, names of the different aspects and stage of development of the same deity over time, are of the little use in the reconstruction of the pre-christian religion of the Slavs. Description of the rituals associated with those deities, if available, is of more use in reconstruction of their functions, and usage of the “original” names in reconstructions, such as Triglav, makes much sense only if they have some association to the reconstructed functionality, while the medieval (ancient) practice of establishing parallels to the know to the reader deities, such as “Slavic Mitra”, etc., or even making up names, which clearly produce such associations, may be more preferable in reconstructions, of course, clearly keeping in mind that these are only our labels, and the “real” names a likely out of our ability to reconstruct and lost forever.

Abbreviations

AV Atharvāveda
ApDh Āpastamba Dharmasūtra

BDh Baudhāyana Dharmasūtra

BrUp Bṛhadāraṇyakopaniṣat or Brihadaranyaka Upanishad

BSm Brihaspati-smṛti

Dk Dēnkart

KSPR Kniha Starého Pána z Rosenberka
MDh Mānava Dharmaśāstra
NSm Nārada-smṛti
RV ṛgveda or Rigveda

RZP Rad Zemskeho Prawa

VaDh Vāsiṣṭha Dharmasūtra

Vid Vidēvdāt or Vendidad
ViDh Vaiṣṇava Dharmaśāstra or Viṣṇu-smṛti

Y Yasna
YDh Yājñavalkya Dharmaśāstra or Yājñavalkya-smṛti

Yt Yašts

Zd Zādspram

ПР Правда Роусьская

ЗС Законикь Срьбскыи Цара Стефана Душана Сильнаго

Bibliography

Benveniste, E. (1946). Vessantara Jataka. Textes sogdiens edite, traduit et commente, Mission Pelliot en Asie Centrale. Serie in-quarto. IV. Paris: Geuthner

Boyce, M. (1975). A History of Zoroastrianism, v. 1, repr. 1988. Leiden: E. J. Brill

Boyce, M. (1979). Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices, ed. 2001, repr. 2007. Abington: Routledge

Bloomfield, M. (1897). The Atharvaveda, repr. 2008. Lexington: Forgotten books

Bretholtz, B. (1923). Die Chronik der Böhmen des Cosmas von Prag, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores Rerum Germanicarum, Nova Series, tomus II, Cosmae Pragensis Chronica Boemorum. Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, retrieved from http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/bsb00000683/images/index.html?id=00000683&groesser=&fip=193.174.98.30&no=&seite=184 on 11.10.2015

Bühler, G. (1879). The Sacred Laws of the Aryas, As Taught in the School of Apastamba, Gautama, Vasishtha and Baudhayana, part I, Sacred Books of the East, v. 2, repr. 1965, 1969, 1975, 1986, 1992, 2001. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, also retrieved from http://www.srimatham.com/uploads/5/5/4/9/5549439/apastamba__dharma_grihya_sutras.pdf on 10.21.2015

Bühler, G. (1882). The Sacred Laws of the Aryas, As Taught in the School of Apastamba, Gautama, Vasishtha and Baudhayana, part II, Sacred Books of the East, v. 14, repr. 1965, 1969, 1975, 1984, 1991, 2001. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, also retrieved from https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=XydHAQAAMAAJ&rdid=book-XydHAQAAMAAJ&rdot=1 on 11.06.2015

Bysted, A. L. (2004). Jerusalem in the North: Denmark and the Baltic Crusades, 1100-1522, English ed. 2012. Turnhout: Brepols Publishers n.v.

Chand, D. (1982). Atharvaveda, repr. 1997, 1999, 2002, 2007, 2014. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd.

Crooke, W. (1896). The Popular Religion and Folk-lore of Northern India, v.II. Westminster: Archibald Constable & Co

Darmesteter, J. (1880). The Zend-Avesta, part I, The Vendidad, Sacred Books of the East, v. 4. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Darmesteter, J. (1882). The Zend-Avesta, part II, The Sirozahs, Yasts and Nyayis, Sacred Books of the East, v. 23. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Duchesne-Guillemin, J. (1973). Religion of Ancient Iran, translation of the La religion de l’Iran ancien (1962). Bombay: Tata Press Ltd.

Dumezil, G. (1983).The Stakes of the Warrior. Berkeley: University of California Press

Dumezil, G. (1988). Mitra-Varuna: An Essay on Two Indo-European Representations of Sovereignty, repr. 1996. New York: Zone Books

Elton, O. (1894). The First Nine Books of the Danish History of Saxo Grammaticus. London: David Nutt

Gimbutas, M. (1967). Ancient slavic religion: a synopsis, in To Honor Roman Jakobson: Essays on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday, vol. 1. The Hague: Mouton & Co. P.V. Publishers

Grabbe, Lester L. (2004). A History of the Jews and Judaism in the Second Temple Period, v.1, Yehud: A History of the Persian Province of Judah. New York: T&T Clark International

Gershevitch, I. (1959). The Avestan Hymn to Mithra with an introduction translation and commentary, repr. 1967, 2008. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Griffith, R.T.H (1889). The Rig Veda, repr. 2008. Forgotten books

Hardy, T. D. (1840). Willelmi Malmesbiriensis Monachi Gesta Regum Anglorum, Londini, Sumptibus Societatis, retrieved from https://archive.org/download/willelmimalmesb00unkngoog/willelmimalmesb00unkngoog.pdf on Sep 03 2015

Hastings, J. (1917). Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, v.9, Ordeals (Hindu). New York: Charles Scribner’s sons retrieved from https://books.google.com/books/reader?id=f5xAAQAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&output=reader&pg=GBS.PP1 on 10.23.2015

Holder, A. (1886). Saxonis Grammatici Gesta Danorvm. Strassburg: K. J. Trübner, retrieved from http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015030075710;view=1up;seq=538 on 17.01.2015

Horn, Fr. W. (1898). Danmarks krønike; med illustrationer af Louis Moe. Kjøbenhavn : A. Christiansen Kunstforlag, retrieved from http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951d01105944v;view=1up;seq=97 on Sep 03 2015

Jakobson, R. (1950). Slavic mythology, in Funk & Wagnalls Standard Dictionary of Folklore, Mythology and Legend, v. II, ed. M. Leach, New York, Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1025-8

Jolly, J. (1889). The Minor Law Books, The Sacred Books of the East, v. 33, part I, Narada, Brihaspati. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, retrieved from https://play.google.com/books/reader?printsec=frontcover&output=reader&id=rgVHAQAAMAAJ&pg=GBS.PR3 on 10.26.2015

Jolly, J. (1896). Recht und Sitte (einschliesslich Der Einheimischen Litteratur), in Grundriss der Indo-arischen Philologie und Altertumskunde, band II. Strassburg: verlag von Karl J. Trübner

Kane, P. V. (1946). History of Dharmasastra (Ancient and mediaeval Religious and Civil Law), v.3, repr. 1973. Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, retrieved from
https://archive.org/details/HistoryOfDharmasastraancientAndMediaevalReligiousAndCivilLawV.3 on 11.03.2015

Kucharski, A. (1838). Najdawniejsze Pomniki Prawodawstwa Slowianskiego. Warszawa, retrieved at https://play.google.com/store/books/details/Andreas_Kucharski_Najdawniejsze_Pomniki_prawodawst?id=mf9MAAAAcAAJ&hl=en on 11.02.2015

Kurze, F. (1889). Thietmari Merseburgensis episcopi Chronicon, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores, Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum, Hannoverae, Impensis Bibliopoli Hahniani, retrieved from https://ia700402.us.archive.org/19/items/thietmarimersebu00thieuoft/thietmarimersebu00thieuoft.pdf on 08.02.2015

Lariviere, R. W. (2003).  The Nāradasmṛti. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers

Lüders, H. (1951). Varuna, aus dem Nachlass heraus gegeben von Ludvig Alsdorf, I, Varuna und die Wasser. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, retrieved from  http://digi20.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/fs1/object/display/bsb00040609_00001.html?leftTab=mlt on 10.09.2015

Macdonell, A.A. (1897). Vedic Mythology. Strassburg: Verlag von Karl J. Trubner

Madhavananda, S (1950). Brihadaranyaka Upanishad. Mayavati: Advaita Ashrama, retrieved from
https://archive.org/details/Brihadaranyaka.Upanishad.Shankara.Bhashya.by.Swami.Madhavananda on 11.06.2015

Mandlik, V. N. (1880). The Vyavahára Mayúkha, in Original, with an English Translation, Also the Yajñavalkya Sṃriti, Complete in Original, with an English Translation and Notes: Parts 1-2. Byculla: Education Society’s Press, retrieved from https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=3AwYAAAAYAAJ&rdid=book-3AwYAAAAYAAJ&rdot=1 on 10.18.2015

Marinas, E.S. (2013). Reassessment, Unification, and Enlargement of the Sources of Slavic Pre-Christian Religion, in Russian History, v. 40, i. 1, 27-40

Olivelle, P. (2004). The Law Code of Manu, repr. 2009. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Palacky, F (1840). Archiv Česky cili Staré Pjsemné Památky České i Morawské, Kniha Starého Pána z Rosenberka. W Praze: W Kommissj u Kronbergra i Řiwnáče, retrieved at https://play.google.com/store/books/details/Franti%C5%A1ek_Palack%C3%BD_Archiv_%C4%8Desk%C3%BD_%C4%8Dili_Star%C3%A9_pjsemn%C3%A9?id=VqFDAAAAYAAJ&hl=en on 11.12.2015

Pertz, G. H. (1868). Helmoldi Presbyteri Chronica Slavorun, In usum scholarum ex Monumentis Germaniae historicis recudi fecit, Hannoverae, Impensis Bibliopolii Hahniani, retrieved from https://ia802604.us.archive.org/7/items/helmoldipresbyt00pertgoog/helmoldipresbyt00pertgoog.pdf on 07.31.2015

Pertz, G. H. (1856). Monumenta Germaniae Historica inde ab anno Christi quingentesimo ad annum millesimum et quingentesimum, Ottoni Scriptores, Scriptores, Hannoverae, Impensis Bibliopolii Hahniani, retrieved from http://www.dmgh.de/de/fs1/object/display/bsb00001081_00001.html?sortIndex=010%3A050%3A0012%3A010%3A00%3A00 on 09.15.2015

Puhvel, J. (1987). Comparative mythology, repr. 1989. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press

Raumer G.W. (1836). Regesta Historiae Brandenburgensis, Chronologisch geordnete Auszüge aus allen Chroniken und Urkunden zur Geschichte der Mark Brandenburg. Berlin: Nicolai’schen Buchhandlung, retrieved from http://books.google.com/books/about/Regesta_historiae_Brandenburgensis.html?id=s6w-AAAAYAAJ, on 30.12.2014

Robinson, C.H. (1920). The Life of Otto, Apostle of Pomerania, 1060-1139, by Ebo and Herbordus. Suffolk: Richard Clay & Sons

Röer, E., Montriou,W.A (1859). Hindu Law and Judicature from the Dharma-Sástra of Yájnavalkya. London: R.C. Lepage & Co., retrieved from http://www.gutenberg.org/files/21918/21918-0.txt on 10.13.2015

Sachau, E. C. (1971). Alberuni’s India. New York: W. W. Norton & Co. Inc.

Sarkar, G (1891). Hindu Law of Adoption. Calcutta: Thacker, Spink & Co

Sawyer, B. (1985).  Valdemar, Absalon and Saxo : Historiography and Politics in Medieval Denmark, in: Revue belge de philologie et d’histoire. Tome 63 fasc. 4, 1985. Histoire médiévale, moderne et contemporaine. pp. 685-705

Scholem, G. G. (1965). Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition. New York: The Jewish Theological Seminary of America

Sielicki, S. (2015). Saxo Grammaticus on Slavic Pre-Christian Religion: The Relevant Fragments from Book XIV of Gesta Danorum. Stanislaw Sielicki

Schmeidler, B. (1917). Adam von Bremen, Hamburgische Kirchengeschichte, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores, Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum separatim editi, Hannover und Leipzig, Hahnsche Buchhandlung, retrieved from
http://www.dmgh.de/de/fs1/object/display/bsb00000756_meta:titlePage.html?sortIndex=010:070:0002:010:00:00&zoom=0.75 on 07.30.2015

Warmer, D. A. (2001). Ottonian Germany: The Chronicon of Thietmar of Merseburg. Manchester: Manchester University Press

West, M.L. (1988). Hesiod, Theogony and Works and Days, repr. 1999, 2008. Oxford: Oxford University Press

West, M. L. (2010). The Hymns of Zoroaster, A New Translation of the Most Ancient Sacred Texts of Iran. London: J.B. Tauris & Co Ltd

West, W. E. (1897). Pahlavi Texts, part v, Marvels of Zoroastrianism, Sacred Books of the East, v. 47. Oxford: The Clarendon Press

Xuanzang. Buddhist Records of the Western World, retrieved from  http://www.sdstate.edu/projectsouthasia/upload/Xuan-Zang-Book-II.pdf on 10.21.2015

Васильков, Я.В., Разаускас, Д. (2003). Балтийский ключ к проблеме Вия-Вайю, in Scripta Gregoriana. М: Восточная литература

Дандамаев, М. А. (2009). Месопотамия и Иран в VII-IV вв. до н. э.: Социальные институты и идеология. СПб.: Факультет филологии и искусств СПбГУ

Дьяконов, И. В. (2009). Титмар Мерзебургский. Хроника. В 8 книгах. М.:”Русская панорама”

Фаминцын, Ал. С. (2012). Божества древних славян. М: Академический проект, Гаудеамус

 

Ottoni Scriptores, Scriptores
Pertz, Georg Heinrich:
Monumenta Germaniae Historica inde from anno Christi quingentesimo usque ad annum millesimum et quingentesimum
Stuttgart, among others in 1856
http://www.dmgh.de/de/fs1/object/display/bsb00001081_meta:titlePage.html?sortIndex=010:050:0012:010:00:00

http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=osu.32435023677685;view=1up;seq=9

Danmarks krønike / overs. af Fr. Winkel Horn ; med illustrationer af Louis Moe.
Other Authors: Moe, Louis, 1854-1945, Horn, Fr. Winkel.
Published: Kjøbenhavn : A. Christiansen, 1898.
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951d01105944v;view=1up;seq=356
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951d01105944v;view=1up;seq=228
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951d01105944v;view=1up;seq=231
http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951d01105944v;view=1up;seq=240

, illicitum habebatur. Populari urbes, aras demoliri, fas ac nefas in aequo ponere, cunctosque Rugiae penates aut ruinis aut incendiis evertere potuissent; (Muller 1839 831) (Hansen 1644 322)

Master’s Thesis in History of Religions, Revised version, March 2015
Rājyaśrī: Royal Splendour in the Vedas and the Epics
Kristoffer af Edholm (105)

(14.39.38.1-6, Holder 577.3-18)

[1] Insignis hic vicus trium praepollentium fanorum aedificiis erat, ingenuae artis nitore visendis. Iis tantum paene venerationis privatorum deorum dignitas conciliaverat, quantum apud Arkonenses publici numinis auctoritas possidebat. [2] Sed et hic locus, ut pacis tempore desertus, ita tunc frequentibus habitaculis consertus patebat. [3] Quorum altitudinis tres ordines fuere, infimo medii supremique ponderibus sustentamentum praebente. [4] Quin etiam tantae consertionis angustiae fuere, ut, si tormentis in urbem lapides iacerentur, nudam humum, in quam conciderent, non offenderent.

Sed (conj) et (conj)  hic (nom. sng. pron.) locus (nom. sng. pron.), ut (conj.) pacis (gen. sng. noun) tempore (abl. sng. noun) desertus (perf. pass. nom. part/nom.  sng. adj.), ita (adv.) tunc (adv.) frequentibus (dat./abtl. pl. adj.) habitaculis (dat./abl. pl. noun) consertus (perf. pass. nom. part.) patebat (3rd sng. imp. act. ind. verb) .

but though this place, that forfeit recognizance, fail to appear (absent) deserted/lonely solitary in peace/agreement/compact of time, so/thus/therefore then/afterwards crammed dwelling/residence connected extended/stay attended/lay opened/was vulnerable.

Quorum altitudinis tres ordines fuere, infimo (dat./abl. sng. adj.) medii (gen. sng. / nom./voc. pl. adj.) supremique(gen. sng. / nom./voc. pl. adj.)  ponderibus (dat./abl. pl. noun) sustentamentum praebente (dat. sng. part.).

Ea (nom/ac neut pl) altercatione (abl sng) per regem (acc sng) sedata (no/acc/voc, neu pl perf past part), Masco quidam, inter Rugianos natu atque auctoritate praestantissimus, luminibus orbatus, sed ingenii sagacitate perspicuus nec annis quam animo vivacior: ‘Concitatioris (gen sng noun)’, inquit, ‘petulantiae (fem nom pl // fem gen/dat sng noun) equis (dat/abl pl noun fem) mos (nom sng masc noun) est (3rd sng pres act ind verb), quo (abl sng pron//adv) artius (comp nom/acc/voc sng neut adj/adv) retinentur (3rd pl pres pass ind verb), hoc (nom/acc/abl sng neut pron) vehementius (nom/acc/voc sng adj) habenas (fem acc pl) tendere (2nd sng pres/fut pass imp/ind // pres inf act) . Laxentur itaque Saxonibus freni, ne retentationis nimietate rumpantur. Siquidem et nobis ipsorum et ipsis nostra perquam nota est virtus.

Excitement/agitation frakishness/imprudence mares/horse fashion/manner/way/will is/eat, anyone/someone//where/in that situation/in what manner confined/short restrain/hold back, here/this/that is to say violent/infuriating reins [make be] stretched/make tense.

fashion of agitation to freakish mares is to make tense infuriating reins, when tightly they are restrained,

quo/when/in what situation/in what manner monstro/omen (dat./abl. sng noun);

adventu (abl. sng. noun) firmati (gen. sng. perf. pass. part.) as if [they] have been strengthened by the arrival of the divinely given leader; have been selected [for] victory signs

sumptis/assumed/selected (dat./abl. pl. perf. pass. part.) victoriae (gen./dat. sng. noun) auspiciis/sign (dat./abl. pl. noun)

 

Lüders, H. (1951). Varuna, aus dem Nachlass heraus gegeben von Ludvig Alsdorf, I, Varuna und die Wasser. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht

http://digi20.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/fs1/object/display/bsb00040609_00001.html?leftTab=mlt

http://digi20.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/fs1/object/display/bsb00040610_00001.html?leftTab=mlt

The Dharma Sutras : Apastamba Prasna 2, Patala 11, Khanda 29

http://bahairesearch.com/english/Hindu/The_Dharma_Sutras/Apastamba%20Prasna%202,%20Patala%2011,%20Khanda%2029.aspx

http://www.srimatham.com/uploads/5/5/4/9/5549439/apastamba__dharma_grihya_sutras.pdf

7. A person who is possessed of good qualities (may be called as a witness, and) shall answer the questions put to him according to the truth on an auspicious day, in the morning, before a kindled fire, standing near (a jar full of) water, in the presence of the king, and with the consent of all (of both parties and of the assessors), after having been exhorted (by the judge) to be fair to both sides.

Keith, The Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and Upanishads.
Vyavaharacintamani; a digest on Hindu legal procedure, critically edited with introd., annotated translation and appendices, by Ludo Rocher. http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001357208

In his commentaries Vyavahāracintāmaṇi, Vācaspati Miśra wrote that when taking the oath by the water the person had to immerse his hand into the vessel filled with water and say: “Let the water not to attack me” (Rocher 1956 no.13 171). , Mahabharata iii.134.27, Hopkins 275-9,

§34 Form der Verttage.
Feierliche und symbolische Handlungen und certa verba sind Uberhaupt mit den meisten Rechtsgeschäften verknüpft, besonders wenn sie irgendwie einen religiösen Charakter haben. Über die Ceremonien bei der Hochzeit und der Adoption (§§ 16,21). Solche Feierlichkeiten finden bei allen bedeutsamen Lebensabschnitten statt und werden in den Grhyasutras ausführlich beschrieben. Schenkungen jeder Art werden durch eine Wasserspende ratificirt. Daher begleitet eine Wasserspende auch die Übergabe der Braut an den Bräutigam, die Besitzübergabe eines Grundstücks (§ 27). Viele und eingehende Angaben über das Ceremoniell bei der Einweihung von Tempeln, Teichen, Brunnen, Serais u. a. frommen und gemeinnützigen Stiftungen enthalten die Puranas (Mandlik 332-344->Yājñavalkya, Dharmaśāstram, I.2**, pp. 186, 189). … Hat Jemand Geld von einem Brahmanen geliehen und der Brahmane und alle Rechtsnachfolger desselben sind gestorben, so soll er das Geld ins Wasser werfen (Nar 1.113), wie auch der König eine unrechtmässig von ihm erhobene Geldstrafe ins Wasser wirft (M 9,244, Y 2,307).
Die Sklaverei kann u. a. dadurch begründet werden, dass ein freier Mann sich Jemand zu eigen giebt mit den Worten tavaham “Ich bin dein”. Bei der Freilassung eines Sklaven giesst sein Herr einen Topf mit Wasser nebst unenthülstem Getriede und Blumen über dem Kopf des Sklaven aus, wobei er ihn dreimal fur einen freien Mann erklärt; der Krug wird auf die erde geworfen, so dass er zerbricht (Nar 5. 27, 34, 43).
Die Wasserspenden bei Schenkungen werden auch in den Inschriften häufig erwähnt. Nicht minder bekannt und verbreitet ist die Instution des Dharnasitzens der Gläubiger, die sich auch bis auf die Gegenwart erhalten hat (§53).

§52

Man badet ein Götterbuild in Wasser und giebt dem Beschuldigten davon zu trinken;als Schuldbeweis gilt es, wenn ihn oder seinen nächsten Verwandten innerhalb einer gewissen Frist, höchstens drei Wochen, ein Unglück zustösst.

Das Weihwasserordal als das leichteste von allen gilt auch als geeignet zur Zerstreuung von Verdacht, besonders von vermuteter Unterschlagung bei einer Erbteilung, oder zur Gewinnung von Vertrauen bei einer erst beabsichtigten Transaktion (Pitamaha 2,9; Brh 25, 98; Visnu 9, 16).
Einer ähnlichen Billigkeitsrücksicht entspricht es, dass Gallenkranke der Gift-, Mundkranke der Reis-, Blinde der Feuer-, Schweratmige der Wasserprobe nicht unterworfen werden sollen. Andererseits würde es aber auch als eine ungerechte Bevorzugung erscheinen, einem Schmied das Feuer- oder einem Fischer das Wasserordal zu geben. Ebenso wenig darf das Weihwasserordal bei einem Ungläubigen oder Übelthäter oder in Zeiten allgemeiner Not und Pestilenz angewendet werden (vi 9, 25-32).

A Classical Dictionary of India Illustrative of the Mythology Philosophy …
By John Garrett    Adoption water+fire https://books.google.com/books?id=sUn4EXQS6K0C&pg=PA2&lpg=PA2&dq=water+india+son+adoption&source=bl&ots=zv9Il_Lo9b&sig=wKt-mDpiuwuVnD7pjeBgVC6QdoE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCQQ6AEwAWoVChMI95raxobzyAIVRUomCh0hAAOa#v=onepage&q=water%20india%20son%20adoption&f=false

dattahoma+water https://books.google.com/books?id=fbJEAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA160&lpg=PA160&dq=dattahoma+water&source=bl&ots=YLFvMDhFkP&sig=tYEam2aCNnvRUsjwqA5jIhaScYc&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAGoVChMI4NKOpoL0yAIVg2ImCh3lXgaB#v=onepage&q=dattahoma%20water&f=false

Arthasastra_English_Translation
by
R Shamasastry
https://ia902703.us.archive.org/13/items/Arthasastra_English_Translation/Arthashastra_of_Chanakya_-_English.pdf
Legal and Constitutional History of India: Ancient legal, judicial, and …
By Mandagadde Rama Jois    https://books.google.com/books/about/Legal_and_Constitutional_History_of_Indi.html?id=V552bAz5xFAC

Dictionary of the Dharmasastra
By Swami Parmeshwaranand    https://books.google.com/books?id=DwFLB-wbiZAC&pg=PA107&lpg=PA107&dq=vivadacandra&source=bl&ots=Z8Mbu4E7xi&sig=fsLezlpLMAGRA70nlFM6ovt5uP4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CC4Q6AEwBWoVChMIyPHQoP_0yAIVBuwmCh3ZoQWA#v=onepage&q=vivadacandra&f=false

Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics: Volume 9
James Hastings John Alexander Selbie
January 1, 1917
T. & T. Clark    https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=f5xAAQAAIAAJ&rdid=book-f5xAAQAAIAAJ&rdot=1    Ordeals( Hindu 522, Iranian 524, Slavic 529, )

Древнѣйшія памятники Словянскаго Законодательства, изданныя А. Кухарскимъ. Najdawniejsze pomniki Prawodawstwa Słowiańskiego wydał A. K. Antiquissina monumenta Juris Slovenici, edidit A. K. Aelteste Denkmähler der Slovenischen Rechte, etc

https://books.google.com/books/about/%D0%94%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BD%D1%A3%D0%B9%D1%88%D1%96%D1%8F_%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BC%D1%8F%D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B8.html?id=pCdXAAAAcAAJ

https://play.google.com/store/books/details/Andreas_Kucharski_Najdawniejsze_Pomniki_prawodawst?id=mf9MAAAAcAAJ&hl=en

Rerum Mecleburgicarum libri octo, quibus post brevem antiqui provinciae sub Vandalis status expositionem, ea quæ sub divo Carolo Magno, ac eius successoribus, domi forisque usque ad obitum Aldolphi Friderici… gesta sunt : praeterea origo, status et form

pp 87-8, 125-6

https://books.google.com/books?id=NwtAeTyVbdsC&pg=PR108&lpg=PR108&dq=Geroldus+Helmold&source=bl&ots=ZrllpS5a9I&sig=EHI7UBNcFf0OMnNZtJBi3E1BxFQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAWoVChMI2-P_96bpyAIVheAmCh1jJAlj#v=onepage&q=Geroldus%20Helmold&f=false

Helmold 1.83, p. 251 – red-hot iron ordeal Дьяконов

 

(405, 446(53); 320(200,202), 312-4(148,150-158,164,172-173); 221, 124,189(78), 118,186(64))

Cosmas of Prague, in his Chronica Boemorum, writes that Duke Břetislav in 1039, over the tomb of St. Adalbert in Gniezno in Poland, pronouncing his law code, mentioned that those accused in homicides, and who denied the accusations, should be tested by the water and fire ordeals:

Similiter et de his, qui homicidiis infamantur, archipresbiter comiti illius civitatis nomina eorum ascribat, et comes eos conveniat; et si sunt rebelles, in carcerem redigat, donec aut penitenciam dignam agant aut, si negant, ignito ferro sive adiurata aqua, utrum culpabiles sint, examinentur (Similarly, [concerning] those who dishonor [themselves] with homicides, a superior elder of the people’s assembly must write their names, and summon them obligingly to the assembly; and if they are rebellious, put them in jail, [where hold them] either until their proper repentance, or, if they refuse, examine them with hot iron or oath water, whether they could be blamed) (Cosmas II.4; Bretholz 1923 86.82-3-87.1-4).

Czech law code of the first half of the fourteenth century Prava Zeme Ceske/Kniha Starého Pána z Rosenberka (Jus Terrae Boemiae in Latin translation) preserved quite an extensive list of rites of the oath and guilt verification by water and hot metal:

69. Z plena práwo sě zprawiti zemským práwem, jemuž (komuž) winu dáwajú, samému třetiému. Ale byloliby (byloby) prawějšé, aby pówod přisáhl napřed z swé škody: tehdy práwo byloby otpowiédači otpřisiéci sě; (tehdy práwo byloby otpierati neb otpowiedati otpřisiezci sě) potom za wodu dwa pomocnlky otpřisezta, že je newinen, z nehož popřisiéžen (The law of damages may be corrected by municipal law; [therefore] who is accused threefold (i.e. quite likely), however, would be firm that the plaintiff is lying about the damages, he has the right to deny or present a different story, with help of [his] two witnesses who would take an oath on water that he is innocent) (KSPR 69; 460).

68. Z plena práwo sie sprawiti zemským práwem; komuž winu dáwajú samému třetiému, ale byłoliby prawiejše aby pówod přisáhł napřed z swé škody. Tehdy práwo byloby otpiérati neb otpowiedati otpřisieci sie potom zawodu dwa pomocniky otpřisiezta že je newinen, z nehož popřisiežen. / De spolio juris est se emendare terrestri jure, cui culpam tribuunt met tertio, sed si esset rectius ut actor, juret de ejus dampno, tunc esset juris adversario abjurare postea pro aqua duo adjutores abjurent, eum esse innocentem, de quo adjuratur.

70. Ježto swědky za wodu (zawodié/zawadie), z dluhów, nebo z dědin, nebo což we dsky slušié: též práwo, jako w úředě; ledno woda sešla mezi nimi z toho, ale ledno za wodu wrci hřebě (ale jedné ten kuoň wrci za wodu, na kterémž běžal). Tehda, když swědky postawié před křížem, rciž: swědek, nebo swědci, práwo wezmú (If witnesses testify about debts or inheritance, or who know or oversee the laws, [then therefore] the right[-determining] water divination decides who is right, [or, additionally] the right[-determining] lots are thrown (by the same person who made the water divination), at the time when the witnesses, being placed before the cross speak: “witness (or witnesses) upholds truth” ) (KSPR 70; 460).

70. Ježto swiedky zawodié z dluhów nebo z diedin, nebo což we dsky słušie, též práwo jako w uřadie,  ledno woda sešła mezi nimi ztoho, ale ledno za wodu: wyrci hřebie, tehda když swiedky postawie před křižem rciž: swiedek nebo swiedci prâwowezmú. / Qui testes conducunt de debitis aut de haereditatibus, aut de eo quod pertinet in tabulas idem jus ac in officio, tantum aqua praetervenit inter eos de eo, sed tantum pro aqua, projicere sortes, tunc quando testes constituerint ante crucem dic: testis aut testes jus praesument.

71. Z ohně práwo sě sprawiti, komuž winu dáwajú, samému sedmému. Ale byloliby (byloby/ bylliby prawějši pówod) prawčjšé, pówod popřisez (přísez – s swú  škodú) napřed swú škodu: tehda otpowićdač otpřisiěhá sě také, a za železo šest pomocníków (šest swědków, totiž pomocníków) otpřisezte, že newinen (Fire may correct the law; [therefore] if the sevenfold accused (i. e. beyond the reasonable doubt), would be firm that the plaintiff lies about his damages, then, to confirm his account, six defence witnesses should testify before the hot iron that he is innocent) (KSPR 71; 460).

71. Z ohné práwo se sprawiti, komuž winu dáwaju samému sedmému, ale byłoliby prawiešie, pówod zapřisiež napřed swu škodu. tehda otpowiedaj otpřisiehá sie také, a za železo šest swiedków totiž pomocników otpřisieztaže newinen. / De incendio juris est emendare, cui culpan tribuunt, met septimo, sed si esset rectius, actor juret prius suum dampnum; tunc adversarius abjurat, etiam‚ et pro ferro sex adjutores abjurent eum esse innocentem .

73. Ježto sě zprawiti samému swú rukú. Zrady práwo sě otepřiěti samému swú rukú, jemuž winu dáwajú; sirotčié práwo. Pakliby žalowal z toho pówod, a otpowiédač jemu nebránil, na otpowědi pówodowi wésti práwo za wodu; z přiwedenié takéž, z žitié, z přijetié takéž(If the accused accidently told on himself, [which would lead] to his conviction, he has the right to renounce [the being said], by the orphan law. However, if the same was the plaintiff’s complaint, and the accused doesn’t argue, the plaintiff, in his turn, may ask for [verification by] water; the same [law is true] for the foster care and adoption) (KSPR 72; 460-1).

73. Ježto sie sprawiti samému swú rukú zrady, práwo sie otpřisieci samému swú rukú, jemuž winu dáwajú sirotčie práwo. Pakliby žałował z toho pówod, a otpowiedač jemu nebránil, na otpowiedi pówodow westi práwo za wodu, z přiwedenie takéž z žitié, z přijetie takéž. / Cui emendandum erit soli manu sua de proditione, juris est abjurare sua manu, cui culpam tribuunt, jus orphanile. Si autem de ea re accusaret actor, et adversarius non detrectaret, in responsiones actorum juris est duci pro aqua, de adductione eodem modo, de messe, de susceptione eodem modo.

143. Když pówod žaluje cožkoliwěk, že je wzchowal (budto že je wzchowal) na swém hnoji i žiwo i mrtwo: tehda práwo postihnúti pówodu swědky, jakž draho zceněno; práwo, jako z dluhu na kříži (If the plaintiff complains about something [while the accused behaves] like the petrified in his own dung, lifeless, then the court should listen witnesses of the plaintiff with all the importance, like [they are] witnessing on the cross).

144. Pakli proti tej žalobě otpowěď taká, že dié: »ten kóň, nebo cožkoliwěk, jehož sě Mikeš z Unhošče u mne jal (jehožby sě Mikeš neb Jan z Hostiuého jal), ten sě je rodil na mém hnoji i žiw i mrtew, na to jmám prawějšé ludi” (pakli otpowié a dié: tento kóň jest sě urodil u mne na hnoji a zchowán, a jmám na to prawějšie lidi): tehda práwo o to hřebi, čím sě swědkóm práwo dostane, ale woda (úwoda) neslušié (However, if the response of the accused is such as Mikesh from Unhoshche (or Jan from Hostieho) said: “who, or whatever, made the adversary to stay in his dung lifeless, is the right person”, then the procedure of the witnesses’ trial by lots or water is not needed) (KSPR 143-4; 469).

139. Když pówod žaluje cožkoliwiek budto že je wzchowal na swém hnoji i žiwo i myrtwo. tehda práwo postihnúti pówodu swedky jakož draho zcenieno práwo jako z dluhu na křiži. / Quando actor accusat de quocunque, id educasse in suo fimo tam vivum quam mortuum, tunc juris est prehendere actori per testes, quantum hoc taxatum sit; uti de debito in cruce.

140. Pakli proti tej žałobie otpowied’ taká že dié: ten kón nebo cožkoliwiek jehožby sie Mikeš neb Jan z Hostiného jał, ten sie je rodił na mém hnoji i žiw i myrtew, na to imám prawiejšié ludi. pakli otpowié a dié: tento kón jest sie urodil u mne na hnoji a zchowán a imám nato prawiejši lidi. tehda práwo o to hřiebi čiem sie swiedkóm práwo dostane, ale uwoda nesłušie. / Si vero contra illam accusationem responsio talis est eo dicente: iste equus aut quidcunque, quo Nicolaus de Unhosc apud me in se dictum putat, iste natus est in fimo meo tam vivens quam mortuus, ad hoc habeo meliores homines‚ tunc juris est de eo sortes projicere cujus testes jus obtinebunt, sed aqua non decet.

155. Pakli chce wše z té pře přihnati k najdalejšému roku, to móž do šesti neděl; cožby rok byl dále jedniem dnem šesti nedel (cožby rok byl dále jedniém dnem šesti neděl, to pře ta ztracena; jestli rok blíže šesti neděl), že nenié méně k roku čtyr neděl, a je s práwem z té pře sehnáno. Práwo woda (However, if one wants to have a court hearing, which will rule on the dispute, to be called at the furthest possible time, it should be no longer than 6 weeks (a day later will be a mistrial), if the hearing of the dispute is sooner than 4 weeks, it will be still according to the law, via the water [ordeal]) (KSPR 155; 470).

150. Pakli chce wše z té pře ‘přihnati k najdalejšiému roku to móž do šesti nediel cožby rok był dále jedniem dnem šesti nediel že nenié ménie k roku čtyr nediel a je spráwem z té pře sehnáno, práwo woda. / Si autem vult omnia de hac lite citare ad remotissimum terminum, potest ad sex septimanas, quod si esset terminus remotior uno die sex septimanarum, eadem lis perdita esset. si esset terminus propior sex septimanarum, cum non minus spatium esset ad terminum quatuor septimanis, tunc jure de hac lite citatum est. jus est aqua.

156. Ze zlodějstwa, což pomění (promění), jeden póhon; též práwo pohoniti jako z plena; práwo woda. 157. Z lúpeže jeden póhon; týmž práwem pohoniti jako z plena; práwo woda. 158. Z lesa porubăímie (posěčeniě) jeden póhon; jako z plena; práwo woda. 159. Ze wzebránie úroków jeden póhon; takéž pohoniti jako z plena; práwo woda. 160. Z jetié jeden póhon; práwo pohoniti jako z plena; práwo woda. 161. Ze zlata jeden póhon; práwo pohoniti jako z plena; práwo železo; nemóž (a také móž) pohoniti k malému úřadu. 162. Wěchów zawinutié, násilím požitié, jeden póhon; z ohně jeden póhon; práwo pohoniti jako z plena; o tu při práwo železo. 163. Z wýboje jeden póhon; práwo pohoniti jako z plena; práwo železo.

(For the minor crimes, there will be one hearing, by the procedure like for [covering] damages, via the water [ordeal should be used]. For the robbery, there will be one hearing, the same legal procedure as for the damages should be applied, via the water [ordeal]. For the lumbering, one hearing, will be the same procedure like for the damages – the water [ordeal]. For usury, one hearing, by the same procedure like for damages – the water [ordeal]. For stealing, one hearing, by the same procedure like for damages – the water [ordeal]. For the gold [related crimes], one hearing, by the same procedure like for damages – the hot iron [ordeal], if [the accused] incapable [of enduring that], then send him to the local [law-enforcing] office. For the [illegal] hay moving and grain harvesting, and the arseny, one hearing, by the same  procedure like for damages – for that dispute is the hot iron ordeal. For the property destruction, one hearing, by the same procedure like for damages, via the hot iron [ordeal]) (KSPR 156-63; 471).

151. Z zlodjejstwa což pomieni jeden pohon též práwo pohoniti jako z plena. práwo woda. / De furto, quod minus est, una citatione idem jus citare, uti de spolio. jus est aqua.

152.  Z lúpeže jeden póhon týmž práwem pohoniti jako z plena, práwo woda. / De rapina una citatione eodem jure citare uti de spolio, jus est aqua.

153. Z lesa porubánie jeden póhon jako z plena‚ práwo woda. / De succisione silvae una citatione uti de spolio, jus est aqua.

154. Z wzebránié uroków jeden póhon takéž pohoniti jako z plena, práwo woda. / De sublatione census una eitatione eodem modo citare uti de spolio , jus est aqua.

155. Zjetié jeden póhon práwo pohoniti jako z plena, práwo woda. / De arrestatione una citatione jus est citare uti de spolio, jus est aqua.

156. Ze zlata jeden póhon práwo pohoniti jako z plena, práyvo železo, a také móž pohoniti k małému úradu. / De auro una cilatione jus est citare uti de spolio. jus est ferrum, non potest citare ad minus officium.

157. Wiechow zawinutié, násilim požitié jeden póhon. z ohnie, jeden póhon práwo pohoniti jako z plena, otu při práwo železo. / De injectione manipulorum, violenta messi una citatione, de igne una citatione jus est citare uti de spolio, in hoc lite jus est ferrum.

158. Z wyboje jeden póhon, práwo pohoniti jako z plena, práwo zelezo. / De excussione una citatione jus est citare uti de spolio, jus est ferrum.

169. Ze wzoránié dédiny jeden póhon; práwo woda (For the land inheritance is the same procedure via the water ordeal) (KSPR 169; 471).

164. Ze wzoránié diediny jeden póhon, práwo woda. / De aratione haereditatis una citatione, jus est aqua.

177. Když pohoní ze sweřepic, to je trój póhon sehnati, práwo železo. 178. Ze ščepów uškozenié trój póhon; z toho práwo železo. 179. Ze wčel trój póhon; práwo železo. 180. Z hlawy trój pohon; z chromoty trój póhon, práwo železo (For the horse stealing thee will be three hearings conducted, via the hot iron [ordeal]. For the garden (trees) damages – triple hearing via the hot iron [ordeal]. For the bee [stealing] – triple hearing via the hot iron [ordeal]. For the cattle [stealing] and injuring – triple hearing via the hot iron [ordeal]) (KSPR 177-80; 472).

172. Když pohoni z swieřepie to je trój póhon schnati práwo železo. Sčepów uškozenie trój póhon, ztoho prawo železo. Ze wčeł trój póhon, prawo železo. / Si citatur de equaritiis, ergo trina citatione citare, jus est faerrum. De laesione arborum fructiferarum trina citatione, de hoc jus est ferrum. De apibus trina citatione, jus est ferrum.

173. Z hławy trój póhon. z chromoty trój póhon, prawo železo. Z jazyka trój póhon. / De mutilatione trina citatione, de debilitatione trina citatione, jus est ferrum. De oculorum privatione trina citatione. de abscisione linguae trina citatione.

210. Opowiédati práwo plen, wýboj, lúpež, zlodějstwo, wzebránié úroków, oheň, i to wše, což práwo woda i železo z toho (Notify about laws on damages, injuries, robbery, lesser crimes, usury, arseny, and those for which water and hot iron [ordeals are used]) (KSPR 210; 475).

200. Opowiédati práwo plen, wyboj, łúpež, zlodiejstwo, wzebránié uroków ohen i to wše což práwo woda i železo z toho w. §. 149-158, 164, 170, 172, 173. / Pronuntiare jus est spolium, excussionem, rapinam, furtum, subtractíonem census, ignem, et haec oimnia de quo jus est aqua et ferrum. v. § 149-158, 164, 170, 172, 173.

212. Opowiédati práwo chromotu, i wšelikaké ohawy, rány modré i krwawé i wšelikaké. Opowiédati práwo z hlawy i z příhlawného dobytka. Opowíédati práwo sweřepice, wčely, ščepy, a to wše, což jest nárok, trój póhon, práwo woda i železo (Notify about laws on handicapping or other injuries, hematoma, or open, or whatever wounding. Notify about laws on cattle and lesser livestock. Notify about laws on horses, bees, gardens, and all that involves [breaking] contract, [for which will be] a triple hearing via the water an hot iron [ordeals]) (KSPR 212; 475).

202. Opowiedati práwo chromotu i wšelikaké ohawy, rany modré i kyrwawé i wšelikaké w. §. 166-169, 173. Opowiédati práwo z hlawy i z přihlawného dobytka. w. § 175. Opowiédati práwo sweřepice, wčeły, ščepy, oto wše což jest nárok trój póhon práwo woda i železo. w.§ 172. Opowiédati práwo z podáwenie ženy, z unosby, z diewojstwa otjetié. w.§ 174. /  Pronuntiare jus est debilitationem et quascunque mutilationes, vulnera contusiata et cruentata et qualiacunque. Pronuntiare jus est de capite et de capitali pecunia. Pronuntiare jus est equaritias, apes, arbores, fructifieras et omnia quod incusatio est, trina citatio, jus aqua et ferrum. v. § 172. Pronuntiare. jus est de oppressione mulieris, de raptu (virginia), đe devirginatione. w 174

238. Přiwesti komorníka práwo na škodu, když sě škoda stane, wýboj, plen, oheň i wše nároky, což je práwo woda i železo. Takéž práwo komorníka přiwoditi ke wšem ranám (A court officer/bailiff should be invited to the crime scene which involves the property destruction, damage, arseny, and all contract breaching, which are dealt with via the water and hot iron [ordeals]) (KSPR 238; 478).

225. Přiwesti komořnika práwo na škodu když sie škoda stane wýboj, plen, ohen i wše nároky což je práwo woda i železo, takež práwo komornika přiwoditi kej wšem ranám. w.§149-158, 164, 166-170, 172, 173, 200. / Bedallum adducere juris est in dampnum, ubi dampnum accidit, spolium, excussionem, iguem et in omnes incnsationes quid jus est aqua et ferrum. Sic etiam jus est bedallum adducere in omnia vulnera. v. §

(PZC 68, 70-1, 73, 140, 150-8, 164, 172-3, 200, 202, 225; Kucharski 1838 241-2/295-6, 256/310, 257-9/312-4, 264-5/320, 269/324-5)

295(68)?, 242(70)?,296(71,73)?, 310(140)?, 312-4(148,150-158,164,172-173),  264-5,257-9/320(200,202), 269(225)?

The law code of the last half of the fourteenth century Rad Zemskeho Prawa/Ordo Judicii Terrae (here is presented a slightly modified generalized Slavic-Latin transliteration used by Kucharski) still preserved the ordeal clauses, and even was more elaborate on the detailed description of the innocence oath verification via the red hot iron trial procedure:

53. A když ten rok přijde a póhon swiedčen bude. tehdy pówod žalobui má přowésti z toho násilé. a staneli pohnaný má otázati, kdy sie jest stalo a pówod má powiediéti kterého letá ktérý den. tu pohnaný má otázati. máli komornika, jenšto to opatrowal. a ten pówod i hned má mieti podle sebe. aby jemu wyznal co jest widiel a co sie jest ot súsiedów uptal. a uhodil komornik w též tehdy pohnaný káže sobie dsky čisti. a srownáli sie žaloba se dskami a tiém komornikem. tehdy má swietle rozežžené železo před pohnaným položeno býti, aby na niem dwa háky položil, a přisáhl za swú newinu: a to jest ustaweno pro strah aby sie násilé tiém ménie dálo. bojéce sie horkého železa. a kdyžby nezd’ržel p’rstów na tom železe dokudžby přisahy nedokonal, tehdy by tu při ztratil i h’rdlo. ale kdyžby komornik jinak swiedčil nežliby pówod žalowal, aneb sie dsky dielily s žalobú. tehdy pohnaný má toho prázden býti. / (When the time for the process comes, then accused will be summoned to testify, and the plaintiff will present the claim about the crime. If the summoned will ask when that happened, and the plaintiff say the date, then the summoned may ask for the field officer who took care of the case, and who was called by the plaintiff at the time of the event, so he would tell what he saw and what he learned from the neighbours. If the officer stumbled on that, and the accused said that his records are clean [before the law], to straighten the account between the claim, objections, and officer’s story, the red hot iron [bar] should be placed before the accused, so he would put his hands on it and swear he is innocent: to establish whether the crime left the unsettledness [to be caught]. If [the accused] was afraid of the hot iron, and has not been able to hold his fingers on the [bar] while he has been pronouncing the oath, then he lost the case. However, if the officer, in opposite, testifies differently than the plaintiff’s claim [says], or his records are different, then the accused goes free).

quo termine veniente citatione ipsa consueto modo pronuntiata, idem actor querimoniam suam proponet. citatus vero, si praesens fuerit, per se vel per commissarium suum, id est per procuratorem suum de consilio petito prius et praehabito dicet contra, quid sibi videbitur expedire. et si per dicta sua non valebit actorem evadere. tunc queret ab actore, quando eadem excussio sit comnissa. ipseque actor tenetur dicere annum et diem, quando sit facta. deinde quaeret, si idem actor habeat retro se Bedallum, qui illam excussionem conspexit, et de eadem inquisivit. qui eundem Bedallum statim debet producere et juxta se habere, et idem Bedallus, sicut vidit et a vicinis audiv¡t, et quando sit factum, debet confiteri, et si idem Bedallus non discrepaverit in ipsa sua confessione, deinde aliuni diem vel annum quam quae dixit actor interrogatus de praedictis, tum mox idem actor perdet causam eandem. et si non discrepaverint, tunc citatus quaeret, si eadem excussio Beneficiariis fuerit notificata, et eis respondentibus quod sit, tunc legi tabulas mandabit, quibus perlectis, si non discrepąverit tenor earum a querimonia proposita, ad ulteriora procedetur eo modo per omnia sicut superius est expiressmn. ex quo ferrum candens abolitum est, quod prius post juramenta partium in causis talibus per ipsum citatum vel ejus Zastupuikum ad majorem purgationem recipi debebat et hoc credo, quod jus recipiendi candens ferrum plus fuit institutum propter terrorem et poenam. quam propter aliquam templationem Dei, ut a talibus eitcussionibus eo per territi facilius cessarent. (RZP 53; 405-6/445-6).

Of course, it could be argued, similarly to the Helmold’s account, that these mentions of the fire and water ordeals in Czech legal documents were just reminders of the German influence, however, we find similar ordeals also in the Serbian and Old Rus’ legal documents.

Законикь Срьбскыи Цара Стефана Душана Сильнаго, of 1349, talks about ordeals by the boiling water:

64. Соудби ине да нѣсшь за котьль, ни оправе никое. кто се оправи, да не дава соудїамь оправе. роуке на соудоу да неима, и опаданїа, и две. тькмо да се соуде по закону (There should be no other trials after the boiling water cauldron ordeal, and no [other] rulings. Who vindicated himself should not be judged by the court. There should not be bribery, or unfair trial, or gifts, only the law should be [respected] by the court).

64. Sudbi ine da njest za kot’l ni oprawe nikoe. kto se oprawi, da ne dawa sudiam oprawe. ruke na sudu da neima, i opadania, i dawe. t’kmo da se sude po zakonu.

64. Nach dem Kessel soll kein anderes Gericht stattfinden, und keine Rechtfertigung. Wer sich rechtfertigt, der soll den Richtern keine Rechtfertigungsgebühr leisten. Bestechungen und Geschenke sollen beim Gericht nicht seyn, sondern es soll nach dem Gesetz gerichtet werden.

78. Дворане властелсцїи, ако оучини кое зло оть нихь, кто боуде прониiаревикь, да га оправе очина дроужина поротом, аколи есть себрь, да хвати оу котель (If courtiers of nobles committed a crime, those who are landowners should be judged by the jury of elders, otherwise, who are commoners should take the boiling water cauldron ordeal).

78. Dworane wlastelseii, ako učini koe zlo ot nih, kto bude pronijarewik, da ga oprawe očina družina porotom, akoli sebr, da hwati’u kot`l.

78. Wenn von den adeligen Hofleuten‚  jemand etwas Uebles verübt,  wenn er ein Grundherrlein ist, so soll ihn die Genossenschaft seines Vaters durch das Eidgericht richten, wenn er aber ein Gemeiner ist, so soll er in Kessel greifen.

(64, 78; 118/119/186, 124/125/189)

(221, 124,189(78), 118,186(64))

Правда Роусьская

12. Искавшие ли послуха и не налѣзоуть, а истьця начьнеть головою клепати, то ти имъ правьдоу желѣзо. Тако же и въ всѣхъ тяжахь, и въ татбѣ и въ поклепѣ; оже не боудеть лиця, то тогда датi iемоу желѣзо изнѣволѣ до полугривны золота. Ажели мьнѣ, то на водоу, оли до двою гривноу; ажели мьнѣ, то ротѣ ити iемоу по своѣ коуны (If witnesses were not found if the plaintiff accuses [somebody] in murder, then use on him the [hot] iron ordeal. The same is for all cases, for the robbery and other accusations; if there will be no evidence, then force to him the [hot] iron ordeal, [for the case worth] less than half a hrivna [of gold]. If the case worth less, and more than the two hrivnas [of silver], than use the water ordeal; if [even] less – then believe in his oath) (PR 12; 6-8).

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Lost manuscripts and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s