Funeral Rites in the Russian-Belarusian Borderland: Traditions and Innovations

1 Introduction

As is well known, funeral rites are among the most enduring practices preserving traditional forms of existence. Even in modern urban communities, funerals remain one of the most ritualized moments in social life. Slavic funeral rites used to be considered to be deeply connected with archaic beliefs about death and the otherworld, and the primary aim of these rituals is “to restore the balance disturbed by the event of death” (Tolstoy 2009, 88). The reconstructed semantics of this rite consists of two main components: first, “to ensure the deceased’s proper transition from the realm of the living to the space of postmortem existence,” and second, “to protect the living from the world of the dead” (Tolstoy 2009, 88). Both objectives are sometimes explicitly stated in descriptions of funeral rites, such as: “so that he would live well there”, or “so that no one else in the village would die”. However, in contemporary practice, these rituals are often performed without explicit explanation. People may not associate their actions with any specific ideas, nor can they explain why they perform them.

Field trip data from 2018–2019,^[1] reflecting both the current situation and traditions preserved in the memory of the older generation, indicate a strong preservation of funeral rites in the Khislavichshky district of the Smolensk region, which is part of the Belarusian-Russian ethno-cultural border zone. The preserved archaic features reflect not only the local tradition described in numerous works, but also a general one that is widespread in many Slavic regions. The purpose of our article is to provide a description of the funeral rite as it is preserved in the memory of the older generation living in this region. We base this on the words of the informants, with particular attention given to the innovations that transform its elements.

2 The Funeral as a Practice of the Whole Community

As a rule, the entire village participated in the funeral rites: pr’ixad’íl’i, xəran’íl’i, u̯s’é təbunóm [they came and buried together like a herd].^[2] Instances of individuals burying their relatives without involving neighbors were met with condemnation. Anyone who wished could attend the memorial meal on the day of the funeral, while only those specifically invited attended the wake on the 40th day: nu pr’ixad’íl’i xto žyláu̯, nu a nъ pam’ínki kədá u̯ sórəg dn’éj – kaɣó xəz’ain xóčyc’, to zav’óc’ [well, whoever wanted came, but to the wake held on the fortieth day – whoever the householder wanted, he invited].^[3] The involvement of the whole village in funerals is typical for traditional communities because the event of death disrupts the balance between the world of the living and the world of the dead.

3 The “Unclean” Deceased

Given that the semantics of the funeral rites focuses on ensuring the safe transition of the deceased to another state, an improper transition results in the deceased becoming “unclean” (“založnyj”) (Zelenin [1916] 1995, 39–73), posing a danger to the living. In the Khislavichsky district, only remnants of old beliefs about the “unclean” dead have survived. No one now claims that certain categories of the dead can “return” and harm the living. However, this old belief is reflected in the former prohibition against burying those who hanged or drowned themselves in a common cemetery. This ban no longer applies in current practice but is still remembered by the older generation. For instance, informants born in the 1930s told us, xtó zъtap’íu̯s’a, xtó zъdav’íu̯s’a, tóɣa nъ kládb’išča n’i v’azl’í [those who drowned themselves, those who strangled themselves were not taken to the cemetery].^[4] However, younger people claim that they know nothing about this practice and that drowned persons were buried in the common cemetery. Unbaptized infants were not classified as “unclean” dead – they were buried in the common cemetery.^[5]

4 Preparing the Body for Burial

5 The Funeral Lamentation (Mourning)

To some extent, the tradition of funeral lamentation is still preserved in the Khislavichisky district. In the past, not only the closest relatives but also specially invited women, who were skilled in this practice, lamented for the deceased. Various verbs describe this practice: pričýtyvac’ ‘to wail’, výc’, ‘to howl’, γalas’íc’ ‘to cry’, γúkac’ ‘to call’.

It is unclear whether the tradition of lamenting for the dead still exists in the Khislavichisky district. One woman^[21] says that nowadays at funerals women only cry, and no one performs special lamentations (involving also reciting a ritual text) because it requires specific knowledge. Another^[22] claims that those who know how to do it still continue the practice. However, from her account it is unclear at which moment in the funeral rite the lamentations are timed, while it is known that all Slavic traditions have strict regulations and restrictions on the timing of lamentations during the funeral rite (Tolstaya 1999).

Dək i c’ap’ér’a ž γəlas’ác’, mn’é u̯ot táγ γóləs xaróšyj, a jak u̯ót rastrójus’a, n’i staíd’ γóləs, ja n’i maγú pa sýnu pavýc’.

[And now they cry. I have a good voice. But when I get upset, I can’t raise my voice, and I can’t cry for my son.]^[23]

There are also memories of the tradition of inviting professional mourners to funerals, which is widespread in the territory of the Russian-Belarusian border region (Razumovskaya 2012).

Býl’i xto móx, tak’íja služýt’il’i, nu n’a tó štə tam bác’uška, jéz’ žə tak’íja žénššyny, katóryi znájut mal’ítvy pə-carkóu̯nəmu, téi ətp’ivál’i.

[There were those who could, such servants note that there is a priest; there are such women who know the prayers in the church way; they were singing.]^[24]

It is also mentioned that women who knew the prayers would come to read them over the deceased at night after death or on the eve of burial.

An’í sám’i pr’ixód’uc’, jésl’i uslýšəl’i u d’ar’éu̯n’i, nəpr’im’ér, štə pakójn’ik, úm’ir, asób’inna kədá nóč. Ná nəč umr’óc’, pós’l’i ab’éda, nu jaγó ž n’a búd’iš xəran’íc’, to saséd’i, róctv’in’ik’i idúc’ v’éčirəm, tám i nəčuvál’i kələ pakójn’ika. Úžyn d’éləl’i, tam paúžynəjuc’, pr’iγatóv’uc’ užé pəm’inál’nyj takój, v’ačér’a təkája, étə nəzyváləs’a pa-kn’ížnəmu, pə-car’kóvnəmu, étə tájnəja v’ačér’a. Nú, i nəčuvál’i də záu̯tra, a užé nəzáu̯tra tədá idúd damój rána. Pəzavút pakójn’ika, róctv’inn’ik tam, žəná il’i xtó, výjd’it na úl’icu, paγúkəic’ jaγó, pavýic’, γóləsəm pavýic’. Nú, a jétyja rasxód’uca, tədá užé idúc’ maγílu kəpác’, v ab’ét xarón’uc’.

[They themselves come if they heard in the village, for example, that someone had died, especially if it was at night. If he died at night, after dinner, you would not bury him then. Then neighbors, relatives would go in the evening; They would spend the night near the deceased. They would prepare dinner, have dinner; they would prepare a memorial table, such a supper; it’s called in the book, in the church; it’s a Last Supper. Well, they would stay the night until the next day, and early the following day they would go home. They would call the deceased. A relative, a wife or someone, would go out into the street, call him, howl, howl with their voice. And they would go out, dig a grave; and at lunchtime, they would bury the deceased.]^[25]

One woman told us that it is customary to address the dead every time one comes to the cemetery. One of our respondents, who claims that the tradition of lamentations is still preserved today, even agreed to perform a sample lamentation at our request. However, she reproduced the lyrics of the well-known romance, “Tam v sadu pri doline gromko pel solovej” [“There in the Garden by the Valley the Nightingale Sang Loudly”], asserting that it is typically performed during funeral rites. This song, a classic urban romance, was widespread in the first half of the 20th century and is considered a “classic song of street children” (Lurie 1994, 72–3). The song is nearly universally known in Russian villages.

In this case, we can speak of a transformation of tradition, where more archaic elements are displaced by more modern ones. Although the woman performed a completely different text, before this, she apologized to her dead son, saying: n’ixáj užó synók pras’c’íc’ m’in’á [Let my son forgive me already]. Thus, the idea that the performance of ritual texts outside of a funeral or memorial context is inappropriate persists. S. Adonyeva (2018) states that when lamentation occurs outside of a funeral or memorial ritual, the switch from the ordinary speech code to this form of speaking takes place with the help of a special formula. The words addressed to her son, spoken by our informant, can apparently be considered such a formula.

The use of non-ritual texts in the course of archaic rites is not surprising. Researchers have long observed that the texts of funeral lamentations, although an integral part of the funeral rite, are much less archaic. Since one of the primary goals of the funeral rite is “to restore the boundary between the world of the living and the world of the dead”, numerous actions are performed to ensure that the deceased (or death) does not return. In contrast, lamentations lack this motif: common questions “in lamentations include” “When should we expect you?” and “From where will you” “come to us?”, etc. (Tolstaya 2019, 294). Thus, if we consider lamentations not merely as a “verbal code” of the funeral rite (Nevskaya 1993, 3), but as a distinct genre with its own structure (as demonstrated in Tolstaya 2019), then the replacement of the traditional text with a modern one, suitable to the situation “in terms of meaning” and emotional mood appears not only permissible but also logical. The repertoire of funeral and memorial songs is quite general (including different subjects related to death). Moreover, it is noted that in the funeral practice of the Russian-Belarusian borderland, along with the traditional melodies of lamentations, “there are religious songs of a new, romance type” (Razumovskaya 2012, 92–3). This indicates the adaptation of the archaic rite to contemporary conditions.

6 Coffin Removal and the Path to the Cemetery

The removal of the coffin from the house is the key moment of the funeral rite, as it marks the beginning of the deceased’s journey from one world to another (Tolstoy 1990). During the time between the coffin’s removal and the actual burial, all participants in the funeral procession find themselves in this liminal space, which is perceived as particularly dangerous (Tolstoy 2009). In modern times, specially hired personnel from the funeral bureau carry the coffin and dig the grave in the cemetery. In the past, they used to invite villagers to do this. The coffin is carried on towels, and at each doorstep, it is lowered and raised three times so that the deceased would farewell the house.

On the way to the cemetery, the funeral procession pauses for a few minutes at crossroads. According to Slavic beliefs, crossroads are dangerous and “unclean” places, often used for burying “unclean” deceased. In the funeral rite, crossroads serve as both a boundary and a link to the other world (Tolstoy 2004). Stopping at crossroads on the way to the cemetery was meant to prevent the deceased from finding their way back home (to “confuse the tracks”) (Kremleva 1999, 521).

When a coffin is carried or driven to the cemetery, spruce branches are not only thrown at crossroads, but also the entire road from the deceased’s home to the cemetery is covered with them. This tradition continues to this day – we have personally seen spruce branches lying on the road to the cemetery after a funeral.^[26] As it is known from literature, this tradition is prevalent throughout the Slavic world and has various interpretations (Tolstaya 2015).

7 Ransoming the Grave

The tradition of “buying back the grave” is widely known throughout Belarus and among other Slavic populations. It consists in the fact that during the burial, before lowering the coffin into the grave, people throw money there to “buy” a place for the deceased. This is only done if the remains of previously buried people are found while digging the grave (Auseychyk 2016). This practice is also linked to the idea of giving the deceased their “share” to ensure they do not claim the property of the living, thus securing the well-being of the survivors (Auseychyk 2016, 454; Listova 2014, 140–1; Uspensky 1982, 149–50).

We were also told in the Khislavichsky district that it is customary to throw money into a grave in order to “buy out the grave”. Apparently, it is assumed that it is necessary to buy out a place in the cemetery from its previous “owner”.

D’én’ušku k’idájuc’. Pr’éžy čém əpus’t’íd’ γróp k’idájuc’, tudá na dnó d’én’ušku. Nu móžə tam rán’šy býl pakójn’ik, nu štób jón tab’é m’éstə ustup’íu̯, šób n’i ruγál’is’, vykúpl’ivəicə m’ésta.

[Money is thrown. Before the coffin is lowered, there is money at the bottom. Well, maybe there was a deceased person there before, so that he gives you a place, so that they don’t swear, to buy a place.]^[27]

8 The Funeral Repast and Memorial Days

In East Slavic culture, memorial meals are considered an essential and obligatory component of funeral rites. Two types of funeral meals are typically discussed: the ritual meal served on the day of the deceased’s burial and subsequent ritual meals held on memorial days (Navahrodski 2010). Memorial meals can be interpreted as a form of contact between the living and the dead, which are strictly regulated in the Slavic tradition. “These contacts, by their purposes and contents, serve the interests of living people more than the interests of the deceased. They are made primarily to placate the ancestors and confirm their favor and patronage for the living” (Tolstaya 2024, 6).

As an obligatory memorial dish, they prepare kanun (some informants use the word kutya in this context) – boiled wheat (nowadays rice is used instead of wheat) with honey or sugar. The kanun begins the meal and should be tasted three times. It is important that all participants of the memorial meal taste the kanun/kutya. A total of twelve memorial dishes should be served. Another obligatory memorial dish is dumplings (kliotski). These are pieces of dough whitened with milk, sometimes now replaced with buckwheat porridge with honey. Kliotski are served last. It is essential that there are enough special ritual dishes for all participants and that they are eaten completely.

The deceased is commemorated with a memorial meal on the 9th and 40th days after death, as well as after six months, a year, three years, and six years. On the 40th day and anniversary, two meals are held. The night before, a family gathering is held to commemorate the deceased and call their soul to the meal. The next day, people go to the cemetery and then hold a larger commemoration, inviting numerous guests.

Common memorial days, when people visit the cemetery and remember all deceased ancestors, are Radunitsa and Dmitrovka (Demetrius Saturday). Every time they visit the cemetery on memorial days, the kanun is brought and left on the grave. The kanun (and other food and drinks) should not be placed “on the head” of the deceased, only at their feet.

Throughout the Russian-Belarusian-Ukrainian borderland, Radunitsa (the Tuesday of the second week after Easter) is the main memorial day, when all deceased ancestors are commemorated. A wide range of memorial actions on Radunitsa include not only remembering the deceased at the cemetery, but also dyeing eggs, rolling them on graves (christening the dead), replacing old crosses with new ones, replacing embroidered towels on crosses, etc. (Tolstoy 2009). Many of these elements of the rite are preserved in the Khislavichsky district: Graves are covered with embroidered tablecloths, candles are lit, a dyed egg is rolled on the grave, and new towels are tied on the crosses.

Na Rádən’icu xad’íl’i nə kládb’išša. Nə Pásxu tóka xad’íl’i v’éčyrəm, n’asúc’ jaíčyk, táma pəzavúc’ rad’íc’il’ij svaíx. Nu a nə Rádən’icu tədá γatóv’uc’ súmk’i, mnóγə nəγətávl’ivəjuc’ i s’id’ác’ pólnyj d’én’. V d’v’inácəc’ pajdúc’ i da v’éčyra s’id’ác’ táma. <A jajca katali?> Nu pə məγíləčk’i pəkətájuc’ i palóžuc’ patóm nə káždəγa róctv’in’ika, xto úm’ir, nə káždəγa palóžuc’. <A zachem eto delali?> Nu xtó jéj znáic’? Bác’uškə tak pr’ikázyvəu̯ d’éləc’ – klás’ pə jaíčku. Nu ták, γəvər’íc’, s jadý n’ičóγa n’il’z’a brəsác’. Pšónk’i pasýpəc’, a ták n’i nəkládyvəc’ kanf’ét, p’ačén’n’a. Nu a mý u̯s’ó rau̯nó tóγa bác’ušku n’a slúšəim, u̯s’ó rau̯nó klad’óm i kanf’éty, i p’ačén’n’a. Us’ó nə məγíku.

[On Radunitsa, we went to the cemetery. On Easter, they would go in the evening only, carry eggs, and call their parents there. But on Radunitsa, they prepare bags, make a lot of food and sit there all day long. At twelve o’clock, they go and sit there till evening. <Did they roll eggs?> Well, they roll them on the grave and put them on each relative who died. <And why did they do it?> Well, who knows? That’s what the priest ordered us to do: to put an egg on each of them. Well, he said, you mustn’t put any foodstuffs. Sprinkle some wheat, and don’t put sweets, biscuits. But we still don’t listen to that priest, we still put sweets and biscuits. Everything on the grave.]^[28]

Skác’irc’m’i vyšyványm’i, u̯ót, jés’l’i u kaγó janý jés’c’, vyšyványje; nú, b’arúc’ pakúšəc’, nú, zəžyγájuc’ sv’éčk’i, nu xəc’á “Óččy náš” náda prəčytác’.

[Embroidered tablecloths, here, if anyone has them, embroidered; they take food, light candles, at least the Lord’s Prayer should be recited.]^[29]

<Do they roll eggs on the grave?>

Dá, pə maγílkəm, dá. Xr’istósujucə, s káždəj maγíləčkəj, u̯ót, “Xtós vaskr’és’i!” Nu ón, káγ by pakójn’iγ búic’ ətv’ičác’ “Vaísc’inyj vaskr’és’i!”

[Yes, on the graves, yes. Christ is risen, with each grave, here, “Christ is risen!” Well, and it’s as if the deceased will answer, “Truly risen”!]^[30]

Nu pəlac’éncy v’éšəl’i, nu janý š káždyj γód móžyš v’éšəc’ na éta, na xr’ésc’ik; nu nə kládb’iššə xód’iš nə Rádun’icu.

[Well, they used to hang towels, every year you can hang them on this, on the cross; you go to the cemetery on Radunitsa.]^[31]

Since in the Belarusian tradition Radunitsa is considered the central event in the memorial ritual, visiting the cemetery and organizing a “joint” meal with the deceased is obligatory for everyone. Covering the grave with a tablecloth, turning it into a memorial table, is central to all ritual actions. However, population mobility has led to the following modification of the ritual: The coffin is covered with a tablecloth already during the burial, thus correcting in advance the situation when annual commemoration on Radunitsa is impossible (Andrunina 2015; Listova 2015). This practice is also customary in the Khislavichsky district, especially if the deceased’s closest relatives live far away and cannot perform the memorial ritual on Radunitsa. Thus, putting a tablecloth on the coffin serves as a substitute for regular commemorations.

Zəkəpájuc’ maγílku, zasc’él’ic’ skác’irc’ tóka náda, étyj, ják γrób əpuskájuc’. Jésl’i tý n’a xód’iš káždyj ráz nə kládb’išša, dyk nádə zəkryvác’, skác’irc’ pə γrabú. Ják apús’c’iš γróp tudý, i pə γrabú zakrýiš étu, skác’irc’ túju, a tadý zəkápyvəjuc’.

[They bury the grave; it is only necessary to cover the tablecloth when the coffin is lowered. If you do not go to the cemetery every time, it is necessary to close it, the tablecloth on the coffin. As you lower the coffin there, and on the coffin close this one, the tablecloth that one, yes, and then they bury it.]^[32]

9 Conclusions

Our field materials recorded in 2018–2019 show that the funeral rites of the Khislavichsky district contain a fair amount of traditional archaic features, some of which are typical for the Belarusian-Russian ethno-cultural border region. However, the remaining archaic practices tend to lose their semantics. The motivation of actions performed during the rite is often lost. As a rule, informants cannot explain why this or that action is performed and refer to custom. Sometimes the data received from different informants diverge. The loss of motivation for actions during the ritual eventually leads to the loss of these elements.

The lack of understanding of the meaning of individual ritual elements is apparently linked to the possibility of innovation, where some elements are replaced by others or new combinations emerge from different components.

In general, our material allows us to suggest that those traditional features of funeral rites that are better preserved and comprehended are those oriented to provide the deceased with a propitious way to the other world and existence there, rather than those meant to protect the world of the living from the world of the dead. Whether this trend is an isolated phenomenon or reflects the broader state of rituals and beliefs surrounding death—and how it relates to contemporary culture—are questions for further research, requiring a wider range of comparative material.