Pre-Christian Slavic values

The morality of pre-Christian Slavs is perhaps not the most popular topic of research, nevertheless many are keen to preach about Slavic ethics, typically from the high horse of zhrets’s (priest’s) authority, highlighted with the whiteness of a ritual, linen robe. Modern Rodnovers are lectured about honour and righteousness, are told to build stable, traditional families and heterosexual marriages (because, apparently, our ancestors knew only that). On top of it we are taught that the only goal of those marriages is to have children, so we can bring them up to be righteous Slavic men and women, who will pass the Slavic traditions on the next generations. Generations, obviously, of appropriate ethnicity. After all, as zhrets are telling us, Rodnovery is the religion of Slavs and Slavs only.

It’s hard to understand where from the modern Slavic preachers take their confidence in honourable attitude of pre-Christian Slavs. The historical sources do not portrait our ancestors as particularly honourable (in the popular meaning of this word), and speak even less about Slavic ethic, than about Slavic religion. Let’s try to figure out then if the “official” rules of Slavic ethics aren’t by any chance another heavily Christianised element of the religion of our ancestors.

The relativity of honour

The idea of honourable conduct originates from Latin and indicates an attitude of self-assurance combined with a strong belief into what is considered morally right or due. Considering the definition of honourable conduct, it becomes obvious that such conduct has a very relative meaning and depends on moral principles followed by the honourable individual. Those principles are different for a thief and, for example, a monk. Within the Judaeo-Christian culture “being honourable” pertains to honesty, integrity, absence of deceit or fraud, but other cultures can (and do) see honourable conduct differently. Some consider honourable a father who kills his own daughter, after she was raped. Some see female genital mutilations as highly honourable and moral tradition. So, using words like “honour” or “honourable” to describe Slavic ethics is not as much confusing as completely pointless – because of the lack of reference. In order to be honourable one has to know the moral code which has to be followed. If the moral code is unknown, the word “honour” means about as much as “beauty”. After all both words need a point of reference: for “honour” the point of reference is the moral code, and for “beauty” the reference are current beauty standards.

Similarly, being “righteous” is not a very clear and defined way to be. A righteous person is characterised by uprightness and morality – values that are different for different cultures, times, societies etc. So, in order to be righteous one has to know the moral code, the laws and social norms, which – in the case of pre-Christian Slavs – are not known to us, the modern Rodnovers.

Family values

The value of stable, heterosexual and fertile marriages is another “truth” taught to us by the modern Rodnovery preachers. As with honour, so it is with monogamous heterosexuality – it is very hard to figure out why and how modern “teachers” of Slavic lore came up with those ideas.

We know only two things about pre-Christian Slavic marriages: we know that they were not unbreakable (divorces were possible) and that polygamy was not uncommon. I use the form “not uncommon” (instead of “common”) because in order to get married our ancestors had to produce a very valuable wedding gift. This gift was given to the bride by the groom, his family or, for example, a duke (like in the case of warriors serving in drużyna of Duke Mieszko I of Poland). So, although polygamy was allowed among pre-Christian Slavs, only the most rich and affluent could afford to have many wives. The not-so-rich ones had to live in monogamy or even, like the poorest, share his wife with a brother or other family member, who contributed to the wedding gift. It was also possible to inherit a wife (most commonly from brother to brother, but it was also possible for a father to inherit a wife after his son), but entering into a wedlock through inheritance did not require making a wedding gift.

It is worth noting that the historical sources do not mention women who choose their husbands, had/provided for many husbands or paid a wedding gift to marry their beloved. Although polyandry (having many husbands) was known to pre-Christian Slavs, it seems that it wasn’t a result of a conscious decision of a wife, but rather a consequence of husband’s poverty, who could not afford the wedding gift himself and had to seek a financial help from his brother or father. Of course it is also possible that a girl/woman on purpose chose a poor fiancée (fiancées?), in order to marry two husbands, but the sources do not mention an event like that, so considering such option is pure speculation.

We do not know how much say had a woman on choosing a husband, but we do know that after marrying her husband, she was not allowed to have sexual relationships with other men. The wife’s adultery was punishable for both the wife and her lover, and the penalties were severe – from amputation of penis or vulva, to death.  It seems then that producing offspring was in fact the purpose of pre-Christian Slavic marriage – but only the offspring of the man, who gave (or contributed to) the wedding gift. Therefore, the purpose of wife’s fidelity was not the purity of the Slavic race, but the purity of the bloodline of the husband’s family. In the historical sources we find many examples of ethnically mixed marriages: Slavs married Germans, Vikings or Celts, so clearly our ancestors were not bothered by such “dilution” of their blood. Why then modern preachers of Slavic Faith are so bothered about Rodnovers’ ethnicity? It is most certainly not a Christian influence, as Christianity is a very ethnically inclusive religion. Maybe it is a Judaic influence – we all know how ethnically exclusive Jewish religion is. It is also possible that the xenophobic outbursts of the Slavic preachers are a result of those preachers’ complexes or lack of education. Whatever is the cause, one can be said for certain: pre-Christian Slavs did not know the concept of ethnic or racial purity. What was important for them was the purity of the bloodline or rather – the certainty of the paternity. As long as the father-patriarch was sure that his children are biologically his, the ethnicity of the mother did not matter in the slightest.

But let’s go back to the Slavic wives, the wedding gift and marital responsibilities. Considering the information found in the historical sources (and rejecting a Judaeo-Christian interpretation of those information), we can conclude that a pre-Christian Slavic woman could (as did Slavic men who signed up to serve in a duke’s drużyna) monetize her physical abilities and, in exchange for an appropriately high wedding gift, sign up to be a wife. With the act of accepting the wedding gift a Slavic woman entered a legal contract which required her to give children only to her husband – as the men enlisting to serve his duke were required to fight (and die) only in defence of their ruler. And as the warriors were punished for treason, the wives had to suffer punishment for infidelity.

So, we can see that faithfulness was a legal responsibility taken on by a woman after accepting the wedding gift (and thus – entering a formal marriage). As long as the wedlock remained unbroken, the wife was not allowed to have sexual relationships with men other than her husband, but also other men were not allowed to have sex with her (and were punished if they did so).

However, we must not forget – apart of wives the pre-Christian Slavic society also “had” unmarried women, which, it seems, were not required to be faithful or have children. If the, let’s call them: free women did not exist, the ritual orgies mentioned in many chronicles, could not have taken place, because there wouldn’t be enough participants. If pre-Christian, unmarried Slavic girls or women were not allowed sexual freedom, if pre- or extramarital sex were not accepted in the society of our ancestors, who would have danced around the Kupala’s bonfires? The duke and his wives? Would the chroniclers, missionaries and medieval preachers have wasted their time, parchments and ink to lecture to husbands and wives to not to look for a fern flower in the forest?

So why then modern Rodnovery preachers expect faithfulness and childbearing from women, who did not receive an appropriate wedding gift (so – according to the Slavic tradition – are not married)? It seems that here, as in many other aspects of the modern teaching of Slavic Faith, a direct copy of Judaeo-Christian doctrine has been applied. A doctrine claiming that a woman can only be either a virgin or a wife. No third option (like a free, independent, unmarried woman in control of her own sexuality and fertility) is given to the female followers of Judaeo-Christian religions.

Vlastimil Hofman “Bread and salt”

Guest at home, God at home (a Polish proverb)

Hospitality is one of the few truly Slavic traditions documented in the chronicles and not questioned by the historians. Our ancestors received guests with style and delight. Refusing to accept a guest was ostracised by the society and sometimes even, according to some chronicles, punished by destruction or loss of property.

Ardent hospitality of Slavs amazed both Christian and not-Christian chroniclers. It is particularly important that Slavs were praised for their hospitality even in sources which were heavily driven by ideology (don’t forget – there media’s objectivity wasn’t known in Medieval Ages) and portrayed Slavs as treacherous barbarians. There can be no doubt that hospitality was very common and typical for Slavs, if it is mentioned even by the most prejudiced sources. It is then quite surprising that modern preachers of the Slavic Faith do not talk much about this very Slavic and very old tradition honoured by our pre-Christian ancestors.

It is impossible to say why exactly Slavs were so hospitable. Maybe there is some truth in the old Polish proverb (Guest at home, God at home). Maybe pre-Christian Slavs did believe that their Gods travel the land and occasionally visit people’s homes. Or perhaps our ancestors received guests in order to protect themselves from the malevolent spirits? Let’s not forget – in the Medieval Ages travelling was an extremely dangerous enterprise (and pretty much only travellers became guests in our ancestor’s houses). It is not beyond the realm of possibility that pre-Christian Slavs eagerly helped out travellers to ensure that, in case the traveller died at a later stage of the journey and turned into a demon, the demon will not seek revenge or attack a person who refused help.

Whatever were the motivations of our ancestors there is no doubt that they went above and beyond to show their guests how welcomed they were. What does it mean to us? How should we, the modern Rodnovers follow this ancient Slavic tradition of hospitality?

Firstly, we need to figure out who a guest is, who should we be hospitable to. Our ancestors had it very easy here as they could recognise a guest without any problems. Unfortunately, it is not so straightforward in the XXI century. In the times of globalisation, economical migrations, touristic boom and (or maybe in the first place) increasing social isolation, how can we recognise who is a guest, who is a tourist, who is a criminal, an economic migrant or even our own neighbour. Ever progressing unification of cultures makes recognising a guest even more difficult. Without tribal or clan differences in clothing, hair styles or jewellery, how we are supposed to distinguish who is local and who is foreign?

Who is a guest then? A guest is a person who is unknown and unrelated to us, and who we invite to be our guest, which means living with us for a period of time which might not be set in advance but is nevertheless limited. From this definition we can see that a guest is a person who does not plan to stay with us/on our land for ever. A guest arrives and after a period of time – leaves. From this it follows that an economic migrant is not a guest as he/she arrives into our land to stay permanently, not – as a guest would – just to visit. But how we are supposed to know what are the intention of a person who arrives at our house/land? Well, the truth is we won’t know those intention until we talk to this person, get to know him/her and through his/her words or actions understand the true intention of the newcomer. Hence, if we want to honour our ancestors’ ethics and traditions, we must individually assess and understand every single person who visits our land/home.

As Slavs, as Rodnovers, we must not judge “foreigners” basing on their race, ethnicity or looks. The ethical principles of our ancestors’ religion require that we are hospitable, that we receive guests and treat then with respect and openness. Our ancestors were hosts to Jews, Muslims, Christians, Vikings. They opened their homes to merchants, diplomats and missionaries. Their hospitality knew no limits and no exceptions, regardless of the guest’s ethnicity, skin colour, style of clothing and all other differences. Even vandalising of Slavic temples by Christian missionaries did not stop our ancestors from being hospitable – eventually they forbid Christians from entering Slavic temples, but they were still happy to invite the Christian guests to their own homes. Despite harm done to them by the followers of a different religion, pre-Christian Slavs refused to make generalisation, refused to judge newcomers at a first sight, basing only on the newcomer’s religion, dress or skin colour. Our ancestors remained faithful to their hospitable traditions. Why then we, while reconstructing the religion and ethics of our ancestors, why do we forget about hospitality?

Honour thy father and thy mother

Apart of hospitality the historical sources on pre-Christian Slavs also recorded that our ancestors cared greatly for their parents. This information is mentioned in too many independent chronicles, for us to question or doubt it. So, why the preachers of Rodnovery faith do not tell us to care for our parents?

Well, that’s a tricky one. Caring for, honouring parents is one of the Judaeo-Christian commandments, known to most of modern Rodnovers. Maybe the preachers are worried that they will be accused of contaminating the pagan religion with a Judaeo-Christian commandments? Or maybe they don’t mention the parents because… well… because it is a difficult topic.

Vast majority of modern Rodnovers were brought up in a Judaeo-Christian (most commonly Roman-Catholic of Orthodox) traditions. Which means that most of the parents of modern Rodnovers are followers of a Judaeo-Christian religion and quite often they are very active followers. Which then means that there usually is deep division between the pagan outlook of the child and Judaeo-Christian of the parents, causing misunderstanding, lack of trust, respect and intergenerational conflict. No wonder then that modern preachers of Slavic Faith do not want to talk about honouring or caring for parents – it is likely they are themselves at odds with their own folks. But it doesn’t matter that the topic is difficult. The historical sources are unequivocal: pre-Christian Slavs cared for their parents, particularly in old age or illness. Our ancestors made sure their parents did not go hungry, homeless or forgotten. And we, the heirs of the Slavic tradition, should do the same.

We should stress here that pre-Christian Slavs did not honour their parents in a venerating sense, but “only” in the caring sense – they made sure their parents didn’t go without and treated them with respect. The “venerating” honouring was reserved for the ancestors (the members of family who passed away), which was an extremely important element of Slavic culture. This is why we – the modern followers of the Slavic Faith, should honour our ancestors and do our best to reconstruct their religion and morality in a responsible, thoughtful and most accurate way. We must not let the Slavic preachers to rave about honour, righteousness or monogamic heterosexual marriages, which are not mentioned in any of the known historical sources. If we want to venerate our ancestors, we must stick to what we know for sure. Let’s then care for our parents, particularly in their old age or in illness, regardless of whether we agree with their outlook/religion. Let’s be hospitable and let’s not judge strangers/foreigners without getting to know them first. Following those rules will not only make us better Rodnovers, but also better people.

Slava!