What idols are silent about: how archaeology helps study Belarusian mythology
Stone and wooden idols, ancient sanctuaries, and hundreds of sacred boulders preserve traces of the beliefs of people who lived in Belarusian lands centuries and millennia ago. However, an archaeological find rarely gives researchers a definitive answer as to which god was worshipped in a particular place and what rituals were performed there. In a new episode of the "MifoVlogiya Rodnaga Krayu" (Mythology of the Native Land) project, historian Dmitry Skvarchevsky revealed what archaeology can tell us about the religious beliefs of our ancestors and where the realm of scientific hypotheses begins.
Vierhaŭliany sanctuary. Photo: berest-lib.blogspot.com
Archaeological materials remain one of the main sources for reconstructing the mythological and religious beliefs of the ancestors of Belarusians. Very few written records about them have survived, so researchers compare archaeological finds with ethnographic and written sources and build their hypotheses on this basis. However, archaeological materials have their own peculiarity – they are "silent".
Even when scientists find a stone idol, Skvarchevsky argues, they can rarely say with certainty which god it is dedicated to and what rituals were performed nearby. All that remains for researchers is to create hypotheses based on the images and attributes of the discovered artifacts.
Vierhaŭliany: A Sanctuary That Lived for Centuries
One of the most interesting finds in the history of Belarusian archaeology is considered to be the Vierhaŭliany sanctuary (Bierastavitsa district), which was studied by archaeologist Edward Zaykouski. Its main platform was excavated, so scientists can quite thoroughly imagine the structure of the sanctuary. It was surrounded by ramparts and moats, the area was paved, fire was maintained there, and in the center, archaeologists discovered a posthole. It is believed that a wooden idol might have stood in this place.
The Vierhaŭliany sanctuary was not unique in its construction. It belongs to the type of so-called small fortified settlements-sanctuaries – circular platforms about ten meters in diameter, surrounded by a moat and a rampart. Postholes are often found in the center of such objects, which suggests the existence of wooden structures or idols there.
As Skvarchevsky notes, the archaeological materials discovered at the fortified settlement date back to the 11th century, i.e., immediately after the official Christianization of the Krivichians and Dregovichians. But, nevertheless, this pagan sanctuary continued to operate. Two options are possible: either the Christianization of this remote territory did not happen instantly, or non-Slavic Balts, whom the Ruthenian princes did not Christianize, lived there at that time.
Archaeologist Edward Zaykouski found items there dating back even to the 17th century. Skvarchevsky points out that written sources of that time mention a population called "old Litva" (старая літва) in this area, in the territory of the modern Bierastavitsa district. According to the historian, written sources explicitly state that this was essentially a pagan population. Therefore, he suggests that later activity on the sanctuary's territory might have been connected precisely with them.
As Skvarchevsky notes, the 17th-century memoirs of Antoni Khrapavitski mention a hill near the Vierhaŭliany sanctuary where a "covered stone" (камень затулены) stood. People came to it hoping to get rid of illnesses. During an archaeological survey in 2009, an object similar to the Vierhaŭliany sanctuary, but smaller in size, was found in that area. It has not yet been investigated.
Photo: berest-lib.blogspot.com
The Mystery of Halšany
Vierhaŭliany is not the only example where archaeological finds resonate with written evidence about the preservation of ancient cults through centuries. Skvarchevsky tells a similar story about Halšany, where he participated in an archaeological expedition for over ten years. During this time, researchers made many interesting discoveries there, including those related to the spiritual culture of the local population.
One of these was an unusual object at the Halšany settlement, which, according to Skvarchevsky, could have been part of a manorial altar. Archaeologists found a paved area on which a stone stood. The paving itself was filled with charcoal – evidently, a fire was burned near the stone. Many burnt ceramics and bones were also found there. All of this gives reason to believe that the area might not have just had an economic purpose, but rather been used for certain ritual actions.
Interestingly, in this case too, the archaeological find gains additional context thanks to written sources. Skvarchevsky reminds that in the Iron Age and later, the territory of Halšany belonged to the cultural area of East Lithuanian kurgans, associated with the Baltic tradition. And centuries later, some local cult practices already found their way into written documents.
In the 16th century, Jesuits who traveled through villages spreading Catholicism left written testimonies about the local population's continued adherence to earlier cults.
Jesuit reports, in particular, mentioned manorial stone altars. From these testimonies, it follows that in the 16th century, such a tradition was still alive. Therefore, Skvarchevsky suggests that the object discovered by archaeologists at the Halšany settlement could also have been a similar manorial altar.
Old and New Discoveries
Among other important finds, Skvarchevsky highlights the Shkloŭ and Vaŭkavysk idols. The problem with the Shkloŭ idol is that it was a chance find outside of an archaeological context. Researchers cannot precisely determine where it originally stood and with what complex it was associated. The Vaŭkavysk idol, on the other hand, was found near a fortified settlement. It was broken, thrown down, and later buried. Now it can be seen in the courtyard of the Hrodna Museum of the History of Religion.
It is currently impossible to accurately count the number of ancient sanctuaries in Belarus. According to the researcher, there must have been many sacred places: individual settlements might have had their own shrines, and besides them, there were more significant places visited by residents of a wider territory.
However, there are not many monuments thoroughly investigated by archaeologists. Besides Vierhaŭliany, Skvarchevsky mentions the Khadosavičy sanctuary in the Rahačoŭ district, which was completely excavated. Only small studies have been conducted on many other supposed sacred objects, so even their interpretation as sanctuaries can remain debatable.
Several dozen stone idols or their fragments are also known. However, this does not mean that all cult sculptures were made of stone. Wooden objects are preserved much worse. A rare example of such a find comes from Asaviec, where a small wooden cult sculpture was discovered. According to the researcher, it had sacred significance and can be classified as an idol.
Accidental Discovery
A particularly significant find for Skvarchevsky himself was made last year. Moreover, it was not discovered by the researcher, but by his six-year-old son – the boy accidentally noticed a stone idol.
Like many other known stone idols, this was a chance find outside an archaeological site, meaning it lacked context that could help researchers more precisely determine its origin. Initially, the boy's attention was drawn to a stone that looked unusual. Upon closer inspection, a clearly artificial, processed line was noticed on it. When the small stone was removed and turned over, it became clear that a face could be discerned on it, and the processed surface defined a head and neck.
According to Skvarchevsky, this find had not been previously described in scientific literature. The researcher has not yet disclosed the location where the idol was found or other details: he plans to publish the find and the story of its discovery for the first time in a book he is currently working on.
Which Gods Were Worshipped in Belarusian Sanctuaries?
Despite the sanctuaries and idol finds known to archaeologists, researchers cannot yet link specific sacred monuments in Belarus to particular pagan gods. As Skvarchevsky explains, even when archaeology confirms the sacred nature of a place, it usually does not provide an answer to the question of who exactly was worshipped there.
A telling example is the aforementioned Vierhaŭliany sanctuary. Archaeologists found a posthole in its center, leading to the assumption that an idol once stood there. Nearby, there is another interesting detail: the field behind the sanctuary is called Piarunova (Perun's field).
However, Skvarchevsky warns against the temptation to immediately link this monument with the cult of Piarun. The name belongs to the field, not the hill itself where the sanctuary is located. Therefore, it cannot be asserted that Piarun was worshipped precisely here.
Moreover, among the sacred monuments of Belarus known today, there is none that researchers could confidently link to a specific deity. But this primarily concerns man-made objects – sanctuaries and other places created or arranged by humans. Alongside them, there is another large category of shrines – natural sacred objects, particularly holy stones.
According to Skvarchevsky, about half a thousand sacred stones are known in Belarus today. Not all of them have survived to the present day: some are known only from written and ethnographic sources, while others were found by researchers during expeditions actively conducted since the 1970s-1980s. Among these boulders, there are some whose names are directly associated with pagan gods. For example, in the Sienno district, two boulders known as Piarun are famous. Stones with this name are also found in other districts of Belarus. Near Minsk, there is a stone named Volas, and another stone with the same name is known in the Braslaŭ district.
Volas Stone near Kryžoŭka village, Minsk district. June 4, 2020. Photo by Dmitry Skvarchevsky. Source: ethnoby.org
However, even the name of a pagan god in the name of a stone does not yet mean that we are dealing with a shrine that has existed since pre-Christian times. Skvarchevsky draws attention to an important distinction for researchers: by no means all so-called objects of sacred geography have a direct historical connection with the cults of ancient paganism.
For example, it is unknown exactly when one of the Piarun stones in the Sienno district began to be venerated. This could have happened in the Bronze Age, but just as easily – only in the 18th century. There is no reliable data that would allow for an accurate dating of the emergence of this cult.
Moreover, written and archival sources show that new sacred places emerged in different historical eras. Such processes can be observed even in our time. People may begin to venerate a spring, a stone, or a tree that previously held no sacred status.
Skvarchevsky connects this with the so-called "sacred precedent" – an event perceived by people as an unusual, miraculous manifestation of the divine in a specific place. It is precisely such an event that can give an ordinary natural object a new status and transform it into a shrine. And this can happen in any epoch.
As a result, a seemingly paradoxical situation arises. By its very nature, such a tradition can be mythological and even pagan in character, but this by no means implies that it is pre-Christian in origin. In other words, "pagan" in this case does not necessarily mean "ancient".
This is well illustrated by the example of the Piarun stones. Information has been preserved about one of the boulders in the Sienno district, stating that Kupalle (Kupala Night) was celebrated near it. At first glance, such a combination – Piarun's name, a sacred stone, and the Kupala celebration – might seem almost direct evidence of an ancient pagan cult. But, as Skvarchevsky emphasizes, even this does not yet allow us to claim that the stone was venerated in the pre-Christian era. Archaeological excavations near it might reveal nothing at all or only yield materials from the Late Middle Ages.
This is why the researcher is critical of the widespread habit of automatically calling such shrines monuments of ancient paganism. With a strict scientific approach, it is necessary to distinguish the age of a specific sacred place from the nature of the tradition associated with it.
Therefore, a stone named Piarun may indeed be part of a mythological tradition, but this does not mean that a sanctuary stood near it and people prayed to Piarun, for example, in the 7th century. Nevertheless, Skvarchevsky emphasizes, the later origin of such a tradition in no way makes the object itself less valuable and significant for the study of Belarusian mythology and folk culture.