The O.E. for 'sacrifice' is 'Lac' [see Sweet etc.].Now,interestingly,the word has a range of meanings which give a very different tincture to the post-Christian conception of what sacrifice WAS [we must bear in mind too,that anti-pagan propaganda has coloured our general understanding].So,the O.E. word is glossed as ;Lac;-joyous activity,sport,game;contest,battle/gift,offering,sacrifice.A 'geLac' was a 'commotion'.

Now we see the whole Dionysian,Nietzschean trajectory of meaning;the joy in combat,war,contest;the offering before a battle and after victory.The sport-field as a training ground for battle;the connection between the religious pathos and the art of war.ALL THIS IS MASTER MORALITY.

Also,the vowel in 'Lac' was long,so it's pronunciation was 'lark';and of course it has survived in that dialect word as in 'larking about';Lark (colloq.)-play tricks,frolic,from dialect 'lake',play,sport.Old Norse leika=O.E. lacan,play,sport,Middle High German leichen,Gothic laikan,dance.
When Nietzsche,as a philologist by trade,says,'I can believe only in a god that can dance',we should be aware of his playing with those resonances.

Of course,Christianity sought to trivialise paganism,hence lark means only a piece of tomfoolery now,and not a sacrifice.But let us look at the profound Aryan view of sacrifice;

SACRIFICE. The outer symbol of an inner work,an inner interchange between the gods and men-man giving what he has,the gods giving in return the horses of power,the heroes of Strength to be his retinue,winning for him victory in his battle with the hosts of dissolution..." "The work of the Aryan is a sacrifice which is at once a battle and an ascent and a journey,a battle against the powers of darkness,an ascent to the highest peaks...""The principal features of the sacrifice are the kindling of the divine flame,the offering of the 'ghrta' and the Soma-wine and the chanting of the sacred word...""The object of the sacrifice is to win the higher or divine being and possess with it and make subject to its law and truth the lower or human existence..."[from 'Key To Vedic Symbolism',by Sri Aurobindo]

This is all too uncanny for words!The same emphasis on battle;the same joyousness!Not one scrap of Xtian style importuning-no,'please God,give me more of this and less of that'-pah!Can we not see the mighty tree and roots of our Aryan Master Morality here?And all this from the word 'lark'!And in Nietzsche do we not see Nietzsche as the fruits of this tree...and Zarathustra,the sacrifice?

I'm moved by the relationship between the words 'tree' and 'true' [they are both 'treow'] in O.E.,as they sum up the pagan faith known as 'Asatru' in its ethical and spiritual facets.As to fire,we must recall the Viking practice of cremation [and Hindu sutee] and the Zarathustrian belief in the ever-living fire;-like-wise the same belief is found among pagan Romans.When the fire is extinguished,then the world will end,or at least,the Aryan world.Of course the myth of Prometheus is central here [the latter's eternal torment is just another example of the eternal recurrence].

My view of justice is anti-Platonic,which shouldn't surprise anyone coming from a Nietzschean perspective.Remember how in the Republic Socrates argues against the view of Thrasymachus.The latter claims that 'justice is the interest of the stronger';put even more plainly-'might is right'.Nietzsche sophisticates this view by distinguishing between Master Morality and Slave Morality.In the former Thrasymachan might is exercised over the Slaves,but the Masters between themselves [inter pares] operate a noble code of requitement.The criterion is strong will vs. weak will;pity is rejected.Blood or marriage kinship provides certain grounds,but ultimately strong will,and the mutual respect of strong will is the bottom line.

Not unusually,then,for a theory which sees the will to power as the basic feature of life,Nietzsche adheres to the 'power' theory,rather than the 'rights' theory.In political terms the power position is put succinctly by Machiavelli in 'the Prince'-Nietzsche considers this to be 'perfection in politics' .Nietzsche did not accept any moral 'a priori',believing that morality is an INTERPRETATION of life and not an essence of life.'Natural justice' to Nietzsche would be something of a contradiction in terms,as nature is oblivious to human notions of justice.