The Tripartite Ideology: Functions, Methods and Applications

Vincent P. Mejia

In fulfillment of the Honors Thesis presented before Rutgers, The State University of

New Jersey, Department of Classics, April 22, 2009.

Dr. Thomas J. Figuiera, Academic Advisor

 

 

2  

I. Abstract

A cursory overview of the evolving structure of Western Civilization from its

earliest known recorded inception some six millennia ago: its heritage of social norms,

ethical values, traditional customs, religious beliefs, and political systems, will reveal a

three-tiered trend originally carried within a migratory Indo-European tradition. First

proposed by the French philologist Georges Dumézil in the early 1930’s L'Idéologie

tripartite, The Tripartite Ideology although remaining highly controversial, proposes a

model setting Indo-European culture within a framework where individual societies and

religions follow distinct structural patterns, apart from all others, divided into three

distinct tiers: those of the sacred, the warrior, and fecundity. Compelling is Dumézil

argument, as well as the exploration of his theory that is inextricably based in the myth

and history of the Indo-European heritage.1 An anthropological assessment of his work

will reveal possibilities, yet it is a deeper examination of his belief in significant trends

occurring well beyond the realm of chance in areas of religion and warfare that yields the

most thought-provoking results. Although much of his conjecture remains simply to be

proven, the purpose at hand is one of making a clear assessment of the value of his work

in cross-cultural comparisons, as well as examining whether his theories can be proven

and ultimately hold contemporary relevance.

                                                                                                               1 C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 11.

 

 

3  

II. The Indo-European Tradition

Indo-European is a geographic name given for the large and well-defined linguistic

family that includes most of the languages of past and present Europe, as well as those

found in a vast area extending across Iran and Afghanistan to the northern half of the

Indian subcontinent.2 Through the introduction of the study of Sanskrit in the 18th century

by such notable European scholars as the English Orientalist and jurist Sir William Jones,

and German linguist Franz Brugmann Bopp – who was the first to coin the term Indo-

European – features were discovered between Sanskrit and Latin and Greek. The

subsequent comparison of the classical language of India with the two classical languages

of Europe revolutionized the perception of linguistic relationships.3

Formalized in the 19th century, careful examination of common material in IE

languages developed. By the later part of that same century, a general consensus held that

IE languages appeared to have a point of common development beginning sometime in

the mid- to late Bronze Age of the 2nd millennium. As populations began to migrate

westward across Europe and south into the upper Indian subcontinent, common

characteristics were transmitted linguistically. Economically and technologically, there

appeared to be a state of transition for Proto-Indo-Europeans around the end of the

Neolithic and early Bronze Age. At this time, it is held, a mass series of migrations

occurred within a close proximity of 2500 B.C.4 As a result, it seemed only natural that

                                                                                                               2 Ibid. 23. 3 Wouter W Belier, Decayed Gods: Facts, Faults, and Fables in George Dumézil’s Tripartite Ideology (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991) 1. 4 C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 24.

 

 

4  

cross-pollination took place as much of the cultural heritage of these communities was

invariably shared either directly or indirectly among each other.

Of the many regions proposed as possible IE homelands, only two were then

considered seriously: (1) Eastern Europe, from the Baltic to the Black Sea, and (2) the

Kazakh-Kirghiz steppes of Kazakhstan. Through comparative archaeology – based

primarily on the tendency for singular inhumation of burial tombs of the Kurgan

communities compared with the collective burial graves of south western Russia – the

latter of these was most commonly accepted. “Beginning sometime around 2500 B.C. the

“Kurgan culture” … began to expand westward across the Volga… at the same time,

other Kurgan groups were pushing south into the Caucasus.”5 Remaining constant

through to approximately 1800 B.C., a steady tide of migration westward into the Black

Sea and Anatolia, and a southward trend passed the Aral Sea, eventually reaching

Northern India in 1450 B.C. Westward expansion would continue along the northern

shore of the Black Sea where varying tribes would either settle locally in the Balkans and

eventually Greece, or push upward along the Danube Valley to eventually disperse into

Western Europe assimilating with the local population to become the ancestors of the

Celts, Italians, Germans, and Illyrians. In the south a branch of the Kurgan, the

Andronovo culture would push into India. This prevailing group is believed to be

responsible for the destruction of the Indus Valley civilization, and, critical for

discussion, it provided the authors of the Rig Veda.6

                                                                                                               5 Ibid, 29. 6 Ibid, 30.

 

 

5  

III Comparative Mythology

“A land that has no more legends is condemned to die of the cold.”7

Georges Dumézil

For the greater part of the 19th century, the early history of the study of Indo-

European patterns had been centered in the realm of philology. Since the focus in this

area fell between Sanskrit and the European Classical languages of Latin and Greek, an

analysis of the ancient texts provided a wealth of evidence to support the evolution of

linguistic commonalities. Consequently, theorization began to develop in the area of

sociology, anthropology, and the early beginnings of religious customs. Among the most

influential scholars of the early 20th century, Antoine Meillet, Marcel Mauss, and Emile

Durkheim would pioneer the comparative method in their respective fields. Author of the

Oral Formulaic Hypothesis, Meillet contributed significant scholarship to the oral

tradition and the heroic epic cycle of Homeric myth. Durkheim, a sociologist, would

become, in 1895, a founding member of his field at the University of Bordeaux, and

through his publication of The Origin of Beliefs, established the theory of social

solidarity, that examined the effects of religion on society as the basis for social

cohesion.8 Mauss, nephew of Durkheim, through his publication of The Gift, would

develop the area of anthropology and his theories of social reciprocity, where every

exchange between, and within societies, in terms of commodities, labor, and even

religious devotion, had a reciprocating value. The collective influence of these scholars

would not only strike a powerful chord within the academic world, but would resonate

                                                                                                               7 Georges Dumézil, The Destiny of the Warrior (Berkeley: University of California, 1970) 67. 8 Ibid. 35.

 

 

6  

through the succeeding works of their students such as Claude Lévi-Strauss, and Georges

Dumézil.9

In large measure Dumézil’s work represents a dramatic shift for the comparative

method in mythology primarily because of his synthesis of the allied disciplines. The

advent of his approach to mythology has now left a legacy where no longer is it possible

for a student of any one of the IE religions to view the character of that religion as wholly

unique.10 Whether or not his theories are accepted or rejected, the divergent perspectives

through which the process of research is conducted must always be considered. As much

as Lévi-Strauss, who first applied the term as an academic movement, Dumézil

contributed to the structuralism method. An additional aspect that is supported by

Dumézil approach is his support of structuralism. For Dumézil, “The concern is not with

isolated events or episodes, but rather with, as he puts it, ‘le systeme, explicite ou

implicite’.”11 The implications of this sentiment express the central theme behind the

Dumézilian revolution. The result, as conveyed through comparative mythology, has

been to foster a greater appreciation for the elements contained within the myths, sagas,

and IE social organization in terms of the degree which they reflect a common underlying

ideology, an expression of which remains to be examined.

The method by which to test his theories may be found within his own

framework of design. Four principles are basic to the methodology that he himself has

used in developing his theory: (1) when similarities are found they are to be interpreted as

pointing to a common origin. (2) Myths are to be studied as wholes, gods in their relation                                                                                                                9 Ibid. 36. 10 Ibid. 43. 11 Ibid. 44.

 

 

7  

to one another; both myths and gods, in turn, form parts of the comprehensible systems

that the religions represent. (3) Considering the sheer expanse of the topic matter, it is

important to grasp the essential, central function or activity of the god being studied and

avoid the marginal as much as possible. (4) The aim of the work at hand is to define the

ideology or “worldview implicit in the theology, mythology, and historical narratives –

which may be pseudo-historical – of the cultures studied.”12

III B The Theory

The advent of the comparative method, as developed by Lévi-Strauss and Dumézil

would place the work of individual specialists such as linguists, classicists, folklorists,

mythologists, sociologist, anthropologists, and even historians of religions, within a

single scope of examination. Although the centrally focused research of these specialists

would yield significant findings in the particular context of the society being observed,

the larger issues of etymology, origin, and proliferation would only become solvable,

perhaps, by viewing the data against a broad background where a common set of myths

are functionally interrelated to an equally common set of social institutions. Dumézil first

began, as most in distinct areas of personal interests. As his findings developed, so too

did his recognition of common social representations. It would then become necessary to

address these commonalities; these shared mythological and sociological forms in a

logically comparative manner. In doing so, the result of his concluding research would

define his theory as: (1) that the parent or Proto-IE society, before it broke up, was

characterized by a tripartite ideology; (2) that the elements of this ideology were carried

                                                                                                               12 Wouter W Belier, Decayed Gods: Facts, Faults, and Fables in George Dumézil’s Tripartite Ideology (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991) 59.

 

 

8  

by the inheritors of that society across the length and breadth of what was to become the

historic IE domain; and (3) that these elements can be discovered in most, but by no

means all, of the early IE mythical and epic literature. Additionally, and importantly, he

would propose this ideology, whether expressed through myth, epic, or social

organization, being uniquely IE, having no parallels among the Near East, the Nile

Valley, China, or any other region of the Old World prior to the second millennium

B.C.13

                                                                                                               13 Ibid. 61.

 

 

9  

IV Development of Theory

Although it seems Dumézil did not intentionally set out to form a unified system

through which to categorize all IE cultures, it is clear from his early work, mostly a series

of explorations in varying areas of comparative mythology, that there remained common

themes that held his interest which would eventually form a unified whole. From his

propensity for the universal as foreshadowing of a future completed design is apparent in

three major areas. Beginning with his dissertation entitled Le festin d’immortalite, The

Feast of Immortality, published in 1924, his proposal was still rather radical in that all IE

speaking peoples shared a common set of myths in regard to the origin of immortality.14

Through presenting evidence ranging from Greek and Vedic myth, to medieval Christian

legends of the Holy Grail, and even modern Ossetic folklore, The Ambrosia Cycle would

be so named through the personification of immortality revisited through the

consumption of a sacred alcoholic beverage. Poised within this cycle is the trickster

figure, such as Prometheus, or Loki, who served as benefactors for a fallen mortal race,

thus instructing them on the manufacturing the intoxicant as well as ritual inebriation.

Significant is the notion that the beverage, or even substance, is considered to be a god

and its consumption a ritual sacrifice. The priest assumes the role of the preferred

trickster god as the faithful enter into communion with the divine.15

As Dumézil would rework his analysis years later eventually to repudiate the

ambrosia cycle as being a distinctly IE characteristic, this initial exploration remains

important in many areas. His research yielded considerable data in regard to early ritual                                                                                                                14C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 55. 15 Ibid. 57.

 

 

10  

and customs, the primitive architecture of religious practice, and most importantly, the

role of the priest/shaman as a point of transition, transcendence, and seemingly irrational

aspects between the mortal and the divine. Much of his refined thinking in the regard to

the 2nd function of tripartite system would surface in the form of the Plight of the

Sorcerer to be discussed later.

His next departure would come in the specific area of philology concerning Centaurs

and the rites of spring. Le problem des Centaures, 1929, presents the analysis of the

Iranian Ganderevas, the Indic Ganharvas, the Roman Faunas and Februus, and the

Greek Kentauroi, as sharing a common linguistic and cultural history as representations

of young virile, partly anthropomorphic divinities who regulate human and animal

fertility.16 Highly controversial, his intellectual dialogue begins with observations about

modern carnivals and ritual behavior. A construction of the names of the deities follows

with a reconstruction wherein Ghe/o(n)dh-r-u-o is established as the most potent Indo-

European root. This linguistic insight indicates a potential Proto-IE designation for this

class of divinities, thus revealing the first hint of a shared pattern. Although the

reconstruction holds weight within the phonetic laws of Proto-IE philology, and serves

Dumézil’s comparative mythological inclination, the theory was plagued with alternative

considerations: “ Here, as well elsewhere…, there is always the possibility that the Proto-

IE form denoted a phenomena quite different from those denoted by the several

derivative forms (Kentouroi, Gondu, etc.).”17 In the manner by which Dumézil makes his

reconstruction, aligned with the similarities noted among the various aspects, may in fact

                                                                                                               16 Ibid. 49. 17 Ibid. 53.

 

 

11  

be successfully argued as a later interpretation in one area which filtered across the IE

world. An area that remains both problematic and fertile ground for thought is the role of

interfamilial borrowing in linguistic reconstruction here. It is no less difficult to precisely

narrow a clear genetic model in myth and lore without further study of the chosen

culture.18 As supported by both Puhvel and Littleton, Dumézil must surely have realized

such. Accordingly, in their estimations the purpose of the work was to underscore a

developing belief in regard to emerging social and religious customs tending to be tied

closely to the mother language. As those cultures splinter and migrate, both the languages

and the myths undergo separate evolutions, but still share common characteristics that

can be systematically categorized and processed.19 The resulting scholarship was a

development of both the third function of the tripartite and a defining characteristic of his

career as an academic.

By 1930, following in the footsteps of Meillet, Dumézil began his trademark

categorization of the mythology and language of the Indo-Iranian peoples of the northern

Caucasus, primarily the Ossetes. Entitled Legendes sur les Nartes, the work is largely a

collection of translations, and critisisms dealing with interpretations of texts and oral

tradition concerned with the Nartes, a band of accompanying heroes akin to those of the

Irish fianna, the Vedic Maruts, and of Jason’s Argonauts.20 If he had not gone further to

contribute to comparative mythology as a whole, Dumézil would still have been regarded

as a specialist in this area as the work is a vast collection of the tales listed within a

framework of geographical distribution and means of transmission. Relevant to the                                                                                                                18Wouter W Belier, Decayed Gods: Facts, Faults, and Fables in George Dumézil’s Tripartite Ideology (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991) 73. 19 Jaan Puhvel, Myth in Indo-European Antiquity, (Berkeley: University of California, 1974) 129. 20 C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 59.

 

 

12  

present discussion, the end of the volume contains a glossary of mythological notes with

contrast the similarities between the customs of the Ossetes and their heroes, against

those of the Scythians and Sauromati as recorded by Herodotus. Delving further, through

literary and romantic means, he makes a distinct comparison of the two figures of

Batradz and Sozryko, heroes of the storm and sun, respectively, with parallels in other

Indo-Iranian areas. Enhancing this line of thought, he makes a dramatic departure from

the more prevalent assertion of the day where a Persian source was held, to that of a

congnate correspondence with the relevant heroes and stories of the Iranians. In his

estimation, the Persian, and even Russian influences on the culture of the Ossetes is

minimal and in fact a later byproduct tracing the origins back to the Shahnameh (1000

CE) of Iran.21

In the same year, a glimmer of tripartite formation began to appear with the

publication of one of his most significant articles to that point “La prehistoire indo-

iranienne des castes.” Largely citing the three social base social classes of the athravan,

rathaestar, and vastriyo from Zoroastrian Avesta, categorizing these as priests, warriors,

and cultivators, he would assert that ancient Iran, along with much of the Indo-Iranian

community, maintained a tripartite caste system which, although it is represented in the

texts as a manner of divine organization of creations, represent distinctly human stations.

Critical for understanding the contemporary significance of this work is his claim that

the wealth of Indo-Iranian myth, in this regard, is a chronicle of IE migratory legend

which would become manifest as myth.22 Further strengthening his claims, he drew upon

                                                                                                               21 Ibid. 61. 22 Ibid. 62.

 

 

13  

Persian, Scyth, as well as Ossetian texts, thereby making a connection through to the

west. In a related work, a contemporary, the structural linguist Emile Benveniste, would,

focus on ancient Iranian social organization. Following a stressed distinction made

between class and caste as two independent developments, Benveniste corroborates

Dumézil’s theory through textual sources. Additionally, Benveniste would assert that at

the moment of creation Yima — literally meaning first man which corresponds

linguistically to the Vedic Yama — created a subterranean kingdom at the behest of

Ahura Mazda; this marked what he labeled as a “mythic moment.”23 Consequently, the

revolution of Zoroaster would in effect, level these mythic class systems in order to

create a unified theological community and social structure. Following the reemergence

of the Sassanid dynasty which would reinstitute the Avestan classes, or more accurately

kinship distinctions, textual evidence reveals that these distinctions were inaccurately

resurrected where their original dynamics were only partly understood and preserved.24

Lastly, Benveniste held that Yima division of men into the classes, as cited from the

Shahnameh, reflects the original structure rather than the Sassinid revival. 25

The inclusion of Benveniste is significant, in part, for the reception of Dumézil’s

work in this area. He would eventually cite the Rig Veda which would expand upon

Dumézil’s ideas. Although he was an independent scholar, and supported Dumézil’s

conclusions, Benveniste would later present an alternative theory citing the myth of

Targitaos and his sons as being representative of the Greek class system as inherited from

                                                                                                               23 Ibid. 64. 24 Jaan Puhvel, Myth in Indo-European Antiquity, (Berkeley: University of California, 1974) 148. 25 C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 63.

 

 

14  

the Scythians.26 As Greece remains an area rarely, if ever, treated by Dumézil, its

inclusion for further exploration remains problematic, but most assuredly provides a

southwestwardly link for the IE heritage. By this point, Dumézil’s outline for tripartition

had become, to a large extent, well established. As an apprentice of Durkheim, it seemed

fitting for his next step to apply his mentor’s concept of collective representation and

treat IE society as a whole through his tripartite hypothesis. Yet, there remained

significant deficiencies that must first be treated before he could move.

In 1934, Dumézil published a brief work entitled Ouranos-Varuna: Etude de

mythologie comparee indo-euro-peene that essentially continued his pre-tripartite

comparative studies in myth. An examination of contractual relationships represented in

the Binder God theory, the aim of the work was to make a comparison between the Greek

Ouranos and the Indic Varuna and prove that both stem from a common IE prototype.

Dumézil’s findings were primarily based on an etymology which would assert that the

Greek and Indic names were both derived from the IE of Uorueno that in turn was

derived from the root uer, meaning to bind. Accordingly, both Ouranos and Varuna are

viewed as gods who are capable of physically binding or in some capacity restraining

those that oppose their interests. 27 In the myth of Tartaros, Ouranos binds his offspring

by consigning them to the deity of the lower depths of the Underworld, and Varuna,

through magical spells, restrains his fellow creatures. In this formative phase that would

become his first treatment of the sovereign function, Dumézil presents both deities as

god-kings, representing the first order of the universe from which all lesser beings were

                                                                                                               26 Ibid. 63. 27 Ibid. 53.

 

 

15  

descended. Expanding upon the linguistic basis, he attempted to present a parallel in

regard to the impotency of Varuna, as cited in Atharna Veda, and the castration of

Ouranos by Kronos as recounted by Hesiod among others.28 As Varuna would seek a

cure, and according to cultural references, would be considered as a significant aspect in

the rajasuya, in the Hindu royal consecration ritual. According to his findings, as the

worship of Varuna slowly began to erode, yet is the only god to be represented in this

ritual in later times, Ouranos is equally a “dieu sans culte,” a god without worship,

holding a direct connection to the early decline of kingship in Greece.29

As Dumézil had done so often, he would reject such broad expanse of conjecture,

however, as previously stated, this work represented the dramatic development in the

arrival of the IE first function sovereignty. Both deities, especially Varuna, represent a

personification of IE sovereignty, defined not by the physical prowess of the warrior, but

on the capacity to command the forces of nature, and most importantly, the ability to

maintain the sanctity of oaths, contracts, and all other aspects of existence which sustains

and emboldens moral order.30 As will be discussed, Dumézil would sub-categorize the

magical and judicial aspects of this function as a dual joint nature. Yet, in spite of

overwhelming criticisms, much of which he agreed concurred, the work represented the

first signs of a unified approach to the IE Diaspora. In this regard the distillation of his

many intellectual excursions was, by this point, well underway where the result would be

the final crystallization of his tripartite theory. However, prior to placing his solidified

                                                                                                               28  Wouter W Belier, Decayed Gods: Facts, Faults, and Fables in George Dumézil’s Tripartite Ideology (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991) 75.  29C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 65. 30 Ibid. 67.

 

 

16  

method into practice, in Flamen-Brahman, 1935, he presented the first full statement of

his Trifuntional Hypotheses.

Although Dumézil had long doubted the extent to which Greece could contribute to

his finding, based on a seemingly heavy ear eastern/Mesopotamian influence that was

believed to be the by-product of two late Bronze era invasions, he shifted his focus

further west towards Rome. In Flamen-Brahman, his first treatment of early Roman

history, Dumézil proposed that the Indic Brahman, the Iranian Baresman, and the Roman

Flamen are cognates and share a common IE category of a sacred priestly class whose

primeval function was to serve as sacrificial victims. Isolating the Bhlagh(s)-men, as a IE

prototype meaning “substitute victim,” for the reg root of king, according to Dumézil, on

those occasions when a human sacrifice was to be offered from the royal class, such

personages as these sufficed on the condition that they were equal to or greater than the

actual ruler. 31 Consequently, Dumézil asserted that the original conception or esteem that

these figures were held was not as priests, but as sacred men. In later Vedic times, as the

caste system solidified, this early distinction became absorbed by the priest class and

enhanced the importance the duties. For the Romans, whose early monarchical history

was just as obscure, the Flamen could be viewed as sharing a parallel pedigree. The

prosperity of the king was directly connected to welfare of the sacred Flamen, just as the

welfare of the state was dependent upon the proper performance of the ritual customs

before their respectively assigned deities. An additional parallel illustrated by Dumézil

was that both were protected by taboos that would prevent them from being executed,

regardless of the severity of the crime, refrain from modest behavior, or associate with

                                                                                                               31 Ibid. 69.

 

 

17  

horses. 32 As was so often the case, the work was met with great criticism in scope and

although his conclusions appeared to be more in the realm of potential possibility, than

probability, its lasting value would be his isolation of the three primary sources for IE

data and the establishment of his model. It would now be logical to begin with India, and

its application.

                                                                                                               32 Jaan Puhvel, Myth in Indo-European Antiquity, (Berkeley: University of California, 1974) 163.

 

 

18  

V Application of the Theory

India

In 1935 Dumézil published Flamen-Brahman, the first full statement of his

trifunctional hypothesis; the idea was repeated in Mitra-Varuna, perhaps his most

accessible work where he laid the foundation of his theory. A tripartite ideology, in

Dumézilian design, originated in the Indian Vedic literary tradition and flowed west as

the people migrated elsewhere. In doing so, the myths and religions of these peoples

naturally went with them. In light of the belief, following migratory routes and arrivals, it

would be best to follow Dumézil’s design vis-à-vis with Rome and dispense with Iran

until inclusion of the Zoroastrian revolution becomes significant. In Proto-Indo-European

societies, most significantly, the caste system of India immediately comes to mind.

Classical Indian social organization was composed of four main castes: the Brahmans

priests, the Ksatriyas warriors; the Vaisyas cultivators, and the Sudras, best described as

the conquered indigenous people who were obligated to serve the rest. As the upper three

were collectively referred to as Arya, meaning people, the Sudras were essentially

outcastes. Since from antiquity the distinction between Sidras and Vaisyas has blurred to

the point of indifference, its inclusion makes it irrelevant. Dumézil’s textual beginnings

with the oldest of Sanskrit literature, The Rig Veda and Mahabharata, revealed an

identical stratified hierarchical organization among the pantheon of the gods.33

At the three divine levels are the twin gods Mitra and Varuna. Dumézil’s first

assertion was that the characteristics of the two deities made them a collective                                                                                                                33 Georges Dumézil, Mitra-Varuna, D. Coltman, trans., (New York: Zone Books, 1988) 21.

 

 

19  

representation of the Brahman caste that fittingly represents the highest tier of the mortal

counterpart. Collectively, the responsibility of the twins is the management of the

universe. Individually, their supernatural labors are assigned to distinct, but mutually

dependent offices. Mitra’s purview is that of the judiciary and rational aspects of

sovereignty. As Meillet was to make note of in 1907, Mitra could be a perceived as a

personification of the notion of Contract.34 Conversely, Varuna represents the magico-

religious irrational aspects of the same office. For Dumézil this appearance of two

complementary aspects would represent the central function of the Brahman that would

on one hand serve as the arbiter of legal affairs, and on the other serve as the religious

practitioner and custodian of all customs attributed to the sacrifice, observation, and

supplication to the divine. With the arrival of this observation, Dumézil would create the

first function: characterized by the mutually dependent relationship between Mitra and

Varuna, that in his estimation was primarily concerned with the administration of the

affairs of the mysterious divine and the regulation of the world.35

At the second level the Vedic sources presents a collection of virile warlike lesser

deities, known as the Maruts, who are under the dominant charge of Indra representing

the warrior ideal. God of war, thunder and storms, the greatest of all warriors who battled

demons and monsters, the strongest of all beings, Indra was the defender of the gods and

mankind against the forces of evil. Indra thus became the personification of the Ksatriya

caste whose primary role was to protect society from external invasion. The warrior caste

would then be assigned by Dumézil as the representation to the second function defined

                                                                                                               34 Georges Dumézil, Mitra-Varuna, D. Coltman, trans., (New York: Zone Books, 1988) 67. 35 Ibid. 69.

 

 

20  

as, “Le jeu de la vigueur physique, de la force, principalement mais non uniquement

guerriere,” “ The game of physical strength, the force, mainly but not only the warrior.”36

This definition of the second function as the use of force as a social station, one that

through the translation appears not to be uniquely assigned to the warrior, will be

examined in the closing critical observations.

At the third and final level there appear to be numerous lesser deities whose primary

function is the promotion and sustainment of all forms of fertility in plants and animals,

to secure good harvests, and in the greater measure preside over human welfare and well-

being. Chief of these are the Asvins, or Divine Twins, they assume role as the chariot

drivers of Surya, the chief solar deity, as well as being benefactors of man through the

medicinal arts. Additionally important is Saravati, the goddess of all arts: music, painting,

sculpture, dance, and writing. She is credited with presenting the gift of writing to

mankind so that her songs could be written down and preserved. As goddess of

eloquence, words pour from her like a sweetly flowing river thus sustaining physical life

as well as spiritual sustenance. Many others Dumézil would also include assignment of

the third function of fecundity.37

Rome

In a head-to-head comparison with Rome, the first characteristic of the culture that

Dumézil most certainly would have noticed would be where there seems to be an

abundance of ritual, and a disproportional dearth in original myth. As even in the early

                                                                                                               36 C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 107. 37Chritiano Grottanelli, Kings and Prophets, (New York: Oxford Press, 1999) 49.  

 

 

21  

history of Roman society this appears to be the case, such can be easily attributed to

varying sources, predominately Greek. This is further confirmed if one were to begin

with Virgil and Ovid, where, according to Dumézil, in large measure not only is the

Greco-Roman shared mythological heritage most visible, but much of the origin of

Roman society derived from these two sources is clearly historicized.38 Where the early

history was admittedly legendary, even within the first five books of Livy, Dumézil

would nonetheless extract voluminous data that demonstrated precise correlations

between three of the earliest kings of Rome. Romulus and Numa would be assigned to

Varuna and Mitra respectively as the joint gods of sovereignty in the first function, and

the warlike Tullus Hostilius as equaling Indra in the second. The third function was less

clearly visible. Here Dumézil seems to provide a partial solution by focusing on the

Sabines and the war with Rome. In the legendary Sabine War, there is a first glimpse of

mythic theme not viewed before where a struggle ensues between the first two functions

and those of the third. As the war ensued out of a necessity for the preservation of the

Roman society through the abduction of The Sabine women, the fertility and preservation

of Rome would be secured. Dumézil asserts the lowest function is subsequently defeated

by the upper two and thereby absorbed and representing the completion of the Roman tri-

functional process.39 The archaic Roman pantheon is also treated as an expression of the

tripartite system through an analysis of the archaic Capitoline triad. In Jupiter, Dumézil

finds the second half of the religious first function, in Mars, the second, and Quirinus part

of the third. For area that are lacking, the placing of lesser deities such as Didus Fidius

coupled with Jupiter serves to satisfy the Mitra half of the first sovereign function.                                                                                                                38Ibid. 49. 39 Georges Dumézil, The Destiny of the Warrior (Berkeley: University of California, 1970) 112.

 

 

22  

Worthy of considerations in other areas to be discussed, his conclusions in this regard

remain problematic due to a developing tendency to fit the data to the mold.

One such problem is that the culture displays a social tripartion, while the other only

displays a theological tripartion. Clearly, a social tripartite in Rome is not as immediately

evident as it is in India. Nonetheless, through a careful examination of the traditions on

ancient Rome, Dumézil would discover that according to various sources, it was in fact

divided into three tribes, the Ramnes (Ramnenses), the Luceres and the Tities

(Titienses).40 According to Varro, these tribes were the original inhabitants of Rome. The

initial population consisted of three distinct ethnic groups: the Latins, the Sabines, and

the Etruscans. The Ramnes were named after Romulus, the leader of the Latins. The

Tities were named for Titius Tatius, the leaders of the Sabines. Interestingly, it was not

until after the Sabine War, and the ensuing peace between the Latins and the Sabines, the

latter would settle in Rome. It is in this specific regard where the Sabines are considered

the salvation of Rome through fertility and preservation thus supporting the third

function. Nonetheless, the legendary social organization where the Latins, as assisted in

their struggle by the Etruscans led by Lucumo, were socially augmented by those

Etruscans, that stayed in Rome after the war, that would become called the Luceres after

him.41

However, Livy would offer a conflicting version. The Ramnes, Tities, and Luceres

were essentially three squadrons of one-hundred cavalry knights each under the charge of

Tarquinius Priscus, who after doubling them in number, would then subdivide the three                                                                                                                40 Wouter W Belier, Decayed Gods: Facts, Faults, and Fables in George Dumézil’s Tripartite Ideology (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991) 80. 41 Ibid.

 

 

23  

groups into priores and postreriores rankings.42 For Dumézil, this second account seemed

highly suspect as a secondary development in the legendary accounts. He would then

propose that the structure described by Varro is not necessarily ethic, but functional. In an

attempt to justify his view, he would seek out Propertius. As cited by Dumézil, in his first

Roman elegy (I), Propertius praises Rome not only for their steadfast devotions, but for

their ingenuity in organization, “On how many steps the house of Remus has reared

itself…”43 In lines 9-26 Propertius describes the early founding of Rome based on a three

tiered system that began with the men of Romulus and Remus who primary antebellum

activities concerned those of senatorial and religious affairs representing the first

function. Lines 27-29 account for the practice of primitive warfare under Lygmon

(Lucumo), with the final 30-32 devoted to Tatius and the characterization of his wealth

concluding with the mentioning of all the three already mentioned tribes.44 Not

surprisingly, there would be much speculation from his peers about how well such a

comparison could be made, as most classicists viewed these three groups in a more

egalitarian estimation of the founding citizens of Rome, and especially in the later early

period where these groups were of the supposed same social equestrian rankings merely

different duties. This seemed additionally convincing given that the three groups

appeared to be mentioned by other sources but in varying order. Yet, from this specific

stand point Dumézil would make his case for a correspondence to the Indian Brahmansm

Kshatriyas, and Vaishyas.45 Dumézil would defend this position until 1948 when he

                                                                                                               42 Ibid. 43 Vincent Katz, The Complete Elegies of Sextus Propertius. (Princeton, Princeton University Press 2004) 27. 44 Wouter W Belier, Decayed Gods: Facts, Faults, and Fables in George Dumézil’s Tripartite Ideology (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991) 80. 45 Ibid. 83.

 

 

24  

would present a compromise asserting that although the stratification appeared to last

much longer in Roman religion, a leveling out took place in political practice, where the

final victors among the struggle between the plebeians and patricians are the plebeians.46

Undoubtedly, correlations with other cultures must have appeared immediately

apparent to Dumézil. As he would further clarify after isolating the supporting data, in

this evolving Indo-European cultural flow, there existed corresponding deities to all three

tiers. The three critical functions can be assigned to the class systems of priest, warriors,

and farmers representing sovereignty, the military, and productivity respectively.

Subdividing further, Dumézil assigned two distinctive, yet complementary aspects to the

first tier of the sacred. One aspect was formal, judicial, and pragmatic of the earthly

world and was carried out by the priestly caste. The second was one of divination, the

supernatural, and of spiritual transcendence. All subsequent tiers are also subdivided into

subsidiary aspects, as the case may be.

Essential for clarity, where there is a shared purpose as established according to

grade of function, deities’ varied in terms of subdivided aspects. The second tier concerns

the warrior class and the use of force. The two subdivided aspects of this second estate

are illustrated through the polarization of the Vedic gods Mitra-Varuna, against Indra-

Ashvin. One represents warfare conducted among, and for the benefit of the gods

themselves, and the other qualifies a more mortal benefit of survival of the community

when faced with aggression. It also encompasses the auspices of the immortals towards

mankind in the roles of benefactors of new beginnings, and creation from destruction.

                                                                                                               46 Ibid.

 

 

25  

The third and final tier deals specifically with productivity and abundance and the gods

that represent such powers. Once again the aspects are two-fold as seasons and forces of

nature both help and hinder mankind in their efforts. Theses assume the aspects of

herding, farming, and the arts. For Dumézil, such a structure is also generally illustrative

of the Indo-European pantheon with contrasts among Mitra-Varuna, Indra, Ashvins/

Saravati, Jupiter/Mars/Quirinus; the Horatii/Coratii, as well as Odhinn/Thorr, and Freyr.

(1) Mitra-Varuna

Mitra-Varuna is an appropriate departure as it is a work of comparative mythology.

Beginning with an inquiry into the first of the functions - religious and political

sovereignty – it is among the first of Dumézil’s texts to implement his revolutionary

theory. Dumézil illustrates, from Vedic India to Ireland, from “Caucasia” to Rome, and

from Iran to Old Germany, how the sovereign gods and heroes always appear in couples:

the creative but violent legislator and his counterpart, the conservative guarantor of world

order. In effect, Mitra-Varuna presents archaeology of representations of religious and

political power that manages to be relevant to political theory.

Dumézil asserts that there is a story common in the mythologies of the ancient

world. Among the many gods, there is a special division of authority between two, a

jurist-priest and a magician-king. This two-fold relationship was called by the Norse

Tyr/Odin and by the Romans Numa/Jupiter, but as an ideal type Dumézil calls them by

their Vedic names, Mitra-Varuna. Mitra the jurist-priest represents juridical sovereignty;

Varuna the magician-king represents political sovereignty. The kings of the world in

governing their cities and states — political orders — reproduced the form of this dual

 

 

26  

sovereignty: the Rex and the Flamen, the Raja and the Brahman. Among flawed gods,

demigods, fallen angels, and certainly frail kings, and political orders, whose

imperfection should never be coupled with omnipotence, the power to make laws and the

power to execute them ought to have been so often separated and configured as such

agonism.47 The figure of Mitra, in secular form, combines legislative and judicial powers;

juridical sovereignty meant employing pacts in peace both as a reasoned judge and as

legislator, preserving society through the validity of contracts and fulfillment of formal

responsibilities. Mitra is patron to the tender-minded idealists: the principled, optimistic,

religious, and dogmatic.

Varuna is by contrast a patron for the tough-minded realists: the pessimistic,

irreligious, fatalistic, flexible, materialistic and skeptical. Varuna rules during times of

war and rebellion, he executes and binds in entirely physical ways. Names meaning

Emergency, Necessity, Security, or Preservation are given to the dangerous struggle for

existence and also to the period that Varuna rules.48 For the rule of Varuna, while

accepted as necessary, carries pains of its own. The questions associated with emergency

governance then are how Mitra should intervene when Varuna oversteps his duties and

curbs the permanence of Varuna's rules, or how Varuna can secure Mitra's blessings. It is

provocative that the systematization of legal thought was frequently promoted by laws

imposed as a result of wars and their uprooting effects. In the time of war the powers of a

leader are much greater than those of a judge, or law prophet, or priest in times of peace.

Unlike the Puranic triumvirate of Brahma/Vishnu/Shiva – the creator, preserver, and

                                                                                                               47 Georges Dumézil, Mitra-Varuna, D. Coltman, trans., (New York: Zone Books, 1988) 83. 48 Ibid. 87.

 

 

27  

destroyer – both Mitra and Varuna are figures of preservation. They differ only in their

methods of attaining preservation: formalism or contingency. The notion of an effective

myth of emergency governance should be considered.

(2) The Destiny of the Warrior

In The Destiny of the Warrior, 1969, dealing with the second function, Dumézil

begins with Indian and Iranian mythology where he finds and describes the warrior gods.

Speaking about the warrior function and its relations to the other two functions, this later

work gives a good idea of Dumézil’s theory of the three functions. The warriors treated at

length are Indra, Starcatherus, and Heracles, and Dumézil describes their three sins, their

functions, and their place in their respective mythologies (Hindu, Germanic, and Greek).

Also described at length are initiative combats with “warriors in animal forms”, the

etymological basis for the warrior gods’ names, and their victims.49 Within The Destiny

of the Warrior is found the next stage for the investigation of the aspects within the three

tiers. In addition to identifying similarities, Dumézil has developed an auxiliary method

to account for differences within the cultures and for the immense cross-referencing of

the estates. He speaks of societies having differing mentalities, champs ideologiques

(ideological fields).50 Romans, for example, tended to think historically, nationally,

practically, relatively/empirically, politically, and juridical, whereas Indians thought

cosmically, philosophically, absolutely/dogmatically, morally, and mystically. This

difference in mentality had the effect that in Rome there was a tendency towards

                                                                                                               49 Georges Dumézil, The Destiny of the Warrior (Berkeley: University of California, 1970) 21. 50 Wouter W Belier, Decayed Gods: Facts, Faults, and Fables in George Dumézil’s Tripartite Ideology (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991) 95.

 

 

28  

historicizing whereby the ideology was expressed in pseudo-historical narratives.51 In the

Germanic-Scandinavian material one finds a militaristic shift affecting the representatives

of the first function of sovereignty, so that in this function the warlike characteristics of

the second function are manifested. In Iran, the reforms of Zoroaster have made a

difference, so that the tripartite gods must be sought among the high god’s attendants—

the Amesta Spentas. Zoroaster’s reforms also explain the demonizing of the gods of the

second and third functions.52

The cross-pollination effect Dumézil presents by examining varied societies

provides one of the most fertile areas of consideration to substantiate his theories. Yet, by

doing so, the waters of organization invariably become muddied a bit. In India, Iran,

Rome, and Germanic Scandinavia, and even Celtic traditions, he goes on to discuss how

these traditions first conceptually divided the first function in to two complementary parts

in order to provide for both cosmic and social order, but also the distinction between light

and darkness, violence and benevolence – the Mitra-Varuna concept. This further

partition in the first function is also expressed in Indo-European myth so that the wild

savage aspect is represented by a one-eyed god (or hero), while the mild, savage aspect is

represented by a one-handed god (hero).53 Yet one of the most challenging obstacles is

his reticence concerning the Greeks, and as such, the lost epic of the Thebaid (now

chiefly known through the identically named Latin epic of Statius) may play a vital role

concerning the warrior/hero function in a strictly mortal sense. Significant mention by

                                                                                                                52 Georges Dumézil, The Destiny of the Warrior (Berkeley: University of California, 1970) 84. 53 Ibid. 85.

 

 

29  

Dumézil is however, made to the Labors of Herakles and to what aspects they are to be

applied. 54

In the aforesaid works, Dumézil leaves India for Iran where these traditions can

be arranged into a number of groups. Using Iranian through Avestan texts and citing the

division of Firdusi – where interestingly Herodotus is the source – Scythian tri-partition

deals with Targitaos as the first human who comes into their land from another place and

has three sons: Lipoxais, Arpoxais, and Kolaxais. At this time four golden objects fall

from the sky: a plough, a yoke, an axe and a cup. None of his sons are able to grab the

objects because they are so hot, while Targitaos is the only one who can. He is

subsequently deemed as sovereign and delegates outward through his sons.55

However, Greece remains problematic. Both Littleton and Belier agree that Dumézil

used very little Greek material to support his theory. It appears he rests on the work by

Plato, Plutarch, and Strabo who have distinguished tripartition in Greek society. Beyond

this, he makes mention of the Hoplites in the four Ionian tribes as representative of the

second function, with the Dorian tripartition represented by the tribes of Hylleis,

Pamphyloi, and Dymanes. The Hylleis, the descendants of Hyllos are associated with

Herakles and serve as the second function. The Pamphyloi, whose name begins with the

prefix pan, are linked with Vishva in meaning and represent the third function. The tri-

partition of Rome remains clearly the most provocative: Jupiter, Mars, and Quirinius,

                                                                                                               54 Ibid. 87. 55 Herodotus. Histories, Robin Waterfield, trans., (New York: Oxford Press. 1998) IV, 5-6.

 

 

30  

with abundant material dealing with the Horatii, as well as mention of Propertius and

Elegy I.56

VI Support, Criticisms, and Considerations

Dumézil’s work spans some five decades with his first systematic treatment

appearing in L'Idéologie Tripartie des Indo-Européens first published in 1958. The

tripartite hypothesis emerged only from the applications and impasses of earlier theories.

As viewed thus far, Dumézil started from the late nineteenth-century work of Friedrich

Max Muller, Sir John Frazer, and Emile Durkheim in anthropology and comparative

mythology. The search for the origins of myth began with an etymological examination

of language and social structure, under the influence of Durkheim. Dumézil eventually

turned to comparative structural analysis of myths and the parallels between social

structure and mythological systems, first, and in a rudimentary form, for Iranian culture,

with connections to India, and later, with confirmation all over the IE world. In

investigating the foundations of the IE socio-religious conceptions Dumézil initially

based his arguments on linguistic data, then to amplify and corroborate the data with

ample consideration of the social structure, religious beliefs and ritual institutions.

Although on first encounter with his work one takes immediate notice of the defining

characteristics of his theory being the establishment of the three fundamental activities

which the groups of priests, warriors and producers must fulfill and assure in order to

                                                                                                               56 Francis Cairns, Sextus Propertius: the Augustan elegist., (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006) 56.

 

 

 

31  

maintain their community, it is not the tripartite social organization that is truly

emphasized, but the principle of classification, the ideology to which, in Dumézil’s own

estimation, this organization has given rise.57

Consequently, as reflected in the groupings of and the mutual relations between the

divine powers and in the very structure of IE mythology and worldview, it is here again

the ideological rather than the strictly sociological aspects that are underscored. Beside

the divine sovereignty that was occupied with the sacred, justice, and the administration

of the world, there are, according to Dumézil, mythological systems of divine

representations of physical force, military power, as well as those divinities which,

performing the functions of the third estate, preside over production, health, and

fecundity. Given an affinity for the groupings of threes, in cultural areas far too numerous

and diverse to mention, it is not this distinction which needs further amplification as a

distinguishing characteristic of his theory, but the prevalence of a complementary duality

that, in the greater view of both critics and supporters alike, is held to set apart the IE

system.58

The arrival of the IE system presented a design divided into three functions, of

which the first has to do with order, the second with action, and the third with

sustenance.59 Usually in practice, and invariably in Dumézil's and Littleton's accounts,

the first function is elevated to a sovereign position, and the third maintains a subservient

position, so that the three departments of society are not only concerned with separate

                                                                                                               57 C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 18. 58 Wouter W Belier, Decayed Gods: Facts, Faults, and Fables in George Dumézil’s Tripartite Ideology (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991) 228. 59 C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 23.

 

 

32  

functions; they are in a hierarchical relation to one another, thus Littleton's denomination

of the functions as sovereignty, force, and nourishment.60 A slight modification of these

terms from the previous sovereign, warrior, and fecundity, is necessary in order to

separate the issue of sovereignty from the question of the proper purpose of the first

function. Without such a distinction, it would not be possible to understand historical

conflicts over sovereignty between the first and second functions. While history exhibits

the first function as sovereign in the early, pure examples, it takes only a little reflection

to see that this need not be the case. Comparative anthropology is necessarily concerned

with the actual particulars of history, but systematic — and even historical— theology

has to focus on the nature of the functions in the broader range of their possible relations.

Presenting an alternative perspective, the sovereignty of the first function is a contingent

historical fact, not something inherent in the logic of the functions. In this sense it is

important to underscore not just sovereignty in the first function, but its embodiment of

legitimacy and order, in the sense which Dumézil elaborates them in Mitra-Varuna,

where the first function is presided over by two coordinate deities, one in charge of

cosmic order, and the other in charge of enforcement of contracts. In the Roman case,

they are Jupiter and Dius Fidius. If the principle of the first function is identified as

legitimacy and order, it will be possible to understand power struggles between the first

and second functions, and to understand the principles of the functions in such a way that

does not necessarily subordinate one to another.

                                                                                                               60  Ibid.  5.  

 

 

33  

The term function refers less to social stratum or to a class of divinities — though

these are the clearest surface manifestations of functionality — as to the principles

operating in this scheme of analysis. It is true; nonetheless, that the three functions

together analyze what is an underlying Indo-European unity, whether it is in the life of an

individual, of society, of the pantheon, or life in some other context. While no single

three words capture the principles of the three functions, cognition, action, and emotion

serve reasonably well at the level of individual life, and order, action, and sustenance

serve better at a more general level. The ideology extends from triads of classes, castes,

orders, and their collective representations, to triads of calamities, colors, talismans, and

cures, and even to celestial and geographical regions. The ideology forms the core of its

culture: “It provides the basic framework in terms of which phenomena are categorized

and thus rendered meaningful. It is in terms of its ideology that a society structures its

religious beliefs, validates its social organization, and generally conceives its relation to

the phenomena around it.”61

The tripartite social organization is manifested in a system of three social strata, of

priests, warriors, and herders/cultivators. The king can come from the second stratum and

so remains secular; a thoroughly secular monarchy is a uniquely Indo-European

institution.62 There are few if any parallels in pre-Columbian America, the ancient Near

East, the Nile civilizations, China, or India, before Indo-European migrations into those

areas.63 It is secular, in that it does not combine sacred and administrative functions. The

Indo-European gods of the first function regulate the magical-religious and juridical or                                                                                                                61 Jann Puhvel, Myth and Law Among the Indo-Europeans: Studies in Indo-European Comparative Mythology, (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1970) 111. 62 Ibid. 63 C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 11.

 

 

34  

legal legitimacy and order. These gods are sovereign in the system. Generally different

gods, as in the Roman case, supervise the numinous and legal aspects of order. The

second function gods endow physical prowess, and those of the third function,

sustenance, well-being, and fertility.

Ancient pantheons comprise far more than just three deities, but they were grouped

in three departments. The first was subdivided into two parts, usually with two coordinate

gods, one in charge of cosmic order, and the other in charge of juridical order; in the

Roman pantheon, Jupiter and Dius Fidius; in the Indian, Mitra and Varuna. The first

function always enjoyed priority in the attention of researchers, and the second and third

remained comparatively underdeveloped.64

The Indian and Iranian cases were worked out first, and provided the basis for

generalization to other Indo-European mythological systems.65 In India, there are four

social classes known as varnas: Brahmans, Ksatriyas, Vaisyas, and Sudras. Brahmans are

the priest varna or class, Ksatriyas the warrior class, and Vaisyas the economic class. The

last, the Sudras, do not belong to any of the three functions, but serve them all; they were

probably a conquered indigenous people, a later, “ addition . . . to the basement of the

previously tripartite varna structure or caste system.”66 The first three classes are Arya, a

word root originally meaning simply people. In Dumézilian design, the tripartite ideology

appears in the Rig-Veda, the oldest literature of the civilization. Mitra presides over

rational and legal aspects of sovereignty, and is in effect contract personified. Varuna is

                                                                                                               64 C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 227. 65Wouter W Belier, Decayed Gods: Facts, Faults, and Fables in George Dumézil’s Tripartite Ideology (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991) 62. 66 Ibid, 69.

 

 

35  

magico-religious, awesome and terrible, presiding over the numinous. Indra presides over

the second function gods: the Maruts. He fights monsters and so represents power and

prowess. Several gods, here the Asvins and Sarasvati represent the third function in India,

as elsewhere. Fertility, harvests, comfort, health, well-being, are all bestowed by the

third-function deities.67

The three functions are reflected in the early Roman pantheon, where one or two

gods head each of the functions, and there is a sense of distinctness to the functions. In

later Roman mythology, the symmetry of the three functions is distorted, broken, and

obscured.68 At the beginning, Jupiter and Dius Fidius head the first function, but later,

Dius Fidius recedes and their relationships are obscured. Together, they are the gods of

mystery, or the numinous, and contract, or the honoring of promise, the two components

of the first function. Mars is the god of war and physical prowess, in parallel to Indra in

the Indian system. The third function is headed by Quirinus and Ops. Interesting to note,

from Ops we get the word opulent and the stem of Quirinus supplies also the verb curo,

curare, care for, pay attention to, trouble about.69 It appears social classes in Rome follow

the Indian pattern. To the Brahmans, Ksatriyas, and Vaisyas correspond the Roman

Flamines, Milites, and Quirites.70 Both Rome and India have historicized or legendary

versions of the divine or mythical representatives of the three functions.71 Both kings and

gods can be found to correspond to members of the Indian pantheon. Of the early kings,

Romulus and Numa correspond to Varuna and Mitra, Tullus Hostilius to Indra. The third                                                                                                                67 Georges Dumézil, Mitra-Varuna, D. Coltman, trans., (New York: Zone Books, 1988) 119. 68 Wouter W Belier, Decayed Gods: Facts, Faults, and Fables in George Dumézil’s Tripartite Ideology (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991) 79. 69 Ibid. 79. 70 C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 70-71 71 Ibid, 108.

 

 

36  

function is not clear, though Dumézil feels that the Sabine War represents Indo-European

myth in which the classes of the first and second function defeat and integrate the third

function. The pre-Capitoline triad of Jupiter, Mars, and Quirinus preside over the gods;

Dius Fidius and Ops are added in the first and third functions.72 The later Roman

pantheon, the Capitoline triad, is composed of Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva. This represents

a considerable departure from the IE scheme, and it is induced by contact with Etruscan

culture.73 This is an example of the ability of pre-existing non-IE cultures to modify the

ideology of the IE invaders. Yet before an analysis of the transmutation of the IE model

by successive cultures can be discussed, some critical observations of the Dumézilian

model must be observed.

Although a careful study of Dumézil will reveal an immense tradition of exacting

analysis and a disciplined systematic process, there are often moments when it appears

that he is sometimes carried away by his own hypothesis, constructions, and

formulations; that some of his conclusions are only possibilities; that in part of his

arguments his starting points, especially some of his etymologies proposed, are more

often preferred, and where a definitive conclusion cannot be found, a propensity for

elasticity is seemingly applied. Yet, more than any other aspect of Dumézil’s research,

lasting close to half a century, is his impact on the comparative study of ancient Indo-

European mythology through a modernized comparative method; it is in his synthesis of

seemingly divergent fields, returning their varied agendas in interest to a common point

                                                                                                               72 Ibid. 116. 73 Ibid. 141.

 

 

37  

of origin that remains his hallmark of distinction. As such, an analysis of his work cannot

be adequately appreciated without reflecting on a few of his contemporaries.

As an apprentice of Meillet, and himself a structural linguist, Émile Benveniste had

much in common with Dumézil. As already mentioned, Benveniste would provide the

first public support of Dumézil’s early formative work with the Vedic texts. In addition to

this area, Benveniste would corroborate the first example of an IE tripartite in Iran where

the class structure was composed of athravan- priests, rathaestar- warriors, and

vastriyo.fsuyant-cultivators, with an additional class of huitis-artisans.74 The effect of the

parallel findings of an independent researcher would provide significant public

confirmation of Dumézil’s pioneering research in the early 1930’s. Both men would cross

paths again sharing a similarly held contention that the tripartite pattern could be

extended through a comparative analysis of Indic and Scythian societies in addition to

Iran, thus mapping out a visible migratory pattern. Yet shortly thereafter, Benveniste

would criticize Dumézil’s assumption that the representation of the three sons of

Targitaos could, respectively, be categorized as the three IE Scythian strata.75 In his

estimation, these were simply the ancestors of the varied ethnic and tribal divisions.

Benveniste, however, did support Dumézil in the skillful illustration of the golden objects

fallen from the sky as a symbolic tripartite division, and among the first recognitions of a

Pan-Indo-Iranian – weltanschauung – worldview.76

                                                                                                               74 Ibid. 154. 75 Emile Benveniste,. Indo-European Language and Society. Trans. Elizabeth Palmer, (Miami: University of Miami Press, 1973) 43. 76 Ibid.

 

 

38  

A second episode where Benveniste would rally to Dumézil’s support would be

found in the validation of a Roman tripartite as evidenced in the discovery of the Tablets

of Iguvium, seven bronze tablets written in the Etruscan-derived Umbrian script, found at

modern Gubbio, Italy. In spite of conflicting Roman sources which listed the tribes in

varying orders, Dumézil held to the belief in their substantiation of a stratified

hierarchy.77 In examining the tablets, Benveniste would point out that the enumeration

nerf –rulers, arsmo-priests, ueiro-men, pequo-flocks, castro-fields, and frif-fruits, being

listed in canonical order, represented a three function system.78 Further, the Umbrian

divine triad Juu-, Mart-, Vofion, appeared to align itself exactly with the IE luedhyon, and

German Luete, meaning people, which corresponded to the Latin co-uir- ( Quirinus), in

the two-fold interpretation of people and collectivity.79

Where Benveniste remained an independent colleague, Stig Wikander would base

much of his early work directly on Dumézil’s findings. In 1938 Wikander would produce

a major work entitled Der arische Mannerbund, concerning a distinctive feature of IE

communities in possessing a specialized group of warriors under the direct charge of a

chief or king that was distinct from all other strata of society. This classification in

Wikander’s estimation appeared to align itself with the Maruts of the Rig-Veda, and

found additional examples of such in Assyrian and German chariot squads.80Although he

could be considered to be greatly influenced by Dumézil, Wikander was hardly a protégé

since he never studied formally under Dumézil and seems to have arrived at his

                                                                                                               77 Momigliano, Arnaldo. “Georges Dumezil and the Trifunctional Approach to Roman Civilization” History and Theory, Vol. 23, No. 3 (Oct., 1984) 312-330. 78 Ibid. 155. 79 Ibid. 156. 80 Ibid. 157.

 

 

39  

conclusions independently. Nonetheless, his work in this area was considered to be the

product of the first generation of solidified comparative mythologists.

If Dumézil were to have a spoiler, it would found in the German Indologist Paul

Thieme. As an accomplished linguist and Indo-Europeanist, Thieme would clash on

several occasions with Dumézil at the highly relevant and critical point of etymologies.

Of the many heated articles fired back and forth among the two, the issue most presently

relevant concerned the first function relationship between Mitra and Varuna, as well as

the comparison posed with deities from other societies. Beginning from an etymological

standpoint, according to Dumézil, Varuna and Ouranos appear to share a common

heritage where the later is expressed as “the vault of heaven and the god of heaven,” and

the former is believed to represent “the Encloser and the Binder.” Dumézil argues that

Varuna and Ouranos are both heavenly kings and as such binders which he bases upon an

identification of the name Ouranos interpreted in part on a posited proto-IE root -ŭer with

a sense of "binding" drawing a correlation where the Vedic king god Varuna binds the

wicked and the king god Ouranos binds his sons the Cyclopes.81 Yet according to

Thieme, there is an equally strong argument to make for a probable etymology derived

from the proto-Greek worsanos, from a root proto-IE root –wers, meaning "to moisten, to

drip" – referring to the rain.82 Thieme expounded upon Dumézil’s propensity for

elasticity as exhibited by Dumézil’s characterization of the god Varuna. Expressions such

as “Varuna is a disquieting, terrible master, a great magician, an invisible representative

                                                                                                               81 Georges Dumézil, Mitra-Varuna, D. Coltman, trans., (New York: Zone Books, 1988) 31. 82 Thieme, P. “Mitra and Aryaman,” Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, (1951) 60.

 

 

40  

of the other world”83 seem to fall short of a true representation. Equally so the

description of both gods of the first function, “Mitra is the sovereign in his reasonable,

clear, regulated, calm, benevolent, sacerdotal aspect; Varuna is the sovereign in his

aggressive, gloomy, inspired, violent, martial aspect” cannot, according to Thieme be

substantiated by any Vedic text.84 Dumézil’s reply (in French: this is a personal note to

see a translation, as summarized in Littleton 189.) Would allude to the thought

examination of the language, (one that he was still in the process of working out) yet he

believed his interpretations have value, and can only be validated through a meaningful

exchange among scholars. Still, Dumézil would blast Thieme as attempting to bluff him

from a position he held steadfastly. In a return volley, Thieme continued to assert that the

two gods are never confronted with one another so explicitly and at such length. The

“suggestive” formula employed by Dumézil, continues Thieme, where, “Mitra is

brahman, Varuna king of the gandharvas, should be strictly opposed.85 Thieme would

attempt to strengthen his case by stating, “That which is Mitra is not Varuna.”86 That, in

his estimation, the pair of gods represent a complementary two-sided aspect of the idea

they stand for, where Varuna remains a representation of the static aspect of kingship, a

guardian of the rta an untranslatable term which may be approximately described as the

supreme and fundamental order-and-reality conditioning the normal and right, natural

and true structure of cosmos, ritual and human conduct, and as such the punisher of those

                                                                                                               83 Wouter W Belier, Decayed Gods: Facts, Faults, and Fables in George Dumézil’s Tripartite Ideology (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1991) 67. 84 Thieme, P. “Mitra and Aryaman,” Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, (1951) 60. 85 Ibid. 63. 86 Ibid.

 

 

41  

who infringe upon it.87 Mitra, being equally concerned with rta, as its promoter,

maintainer, who preserves, adjusts, restores, stabilizes, and acts as a benevolent force of

regulating mutual contracts between mortals and the divine. As such, it does not warrant

distinguishing Varuna simply as the magical sovereign from Mitra, the priest and jurist. 88

With regard to the relations between this pair of gods, Thieme concluded his

argument that the two higher classes of society, where Mitra is identified with the

brahminical order and Varuna with the nobility, it must be viewed in the light of the

doctrine of the complementary relation between, and cooperation of, these two classes of

society. Varuna is divine king, but he is, just like the human king who needs a Brahmin

priest, only if he is urged by Mitra.89 There also seems to exist a sort of affinity between

Mitra and the nobility.90 A seeming contradiction, an understanding lies in the acceptance

of the dual deity, where their authority – ksatram – is traditionally vested, and if

appearing individually, can represent ksatram. If however, its components are regarded as

each other’s complement, one of them must, be associated with the complement of

ksatram that is with Brahman.91

                                                                                                               87 J. Gonda. Dual Dieties. (Lieden: Brill, 1972) 109. 88 J. Gonda The Vedic God Mitra. (Lieden: Brill, 1972) 30. 89 Ibid. 90 J. Gonda. Dual Dieties. (Lieden: Brill, 1972) 111. 91 J. Gonda The Vedic God Mitra. (Lieden: Brill, 1972) 35.

 

 

42  

VII Greece, Iran, Christianity & Conclusion

The IE system appears more clearly around the edges of the Indo-European world

than in the center, where advanced civilizations existed prior to the Indo-European

immigration, with myths and conceptualities sturdy enough to survive in the resulting

admixtures. Here problems, distortions, and broken symmetries surface, with confusion

of functions. Greek culture offers an example of just such blurring of Indo-European

thinking by an older culture. It was not originally Indo-European, and its later Indo-

European development reflects only broken symmetry and modified features of the

tripartite system. Its interesting to consider that Dumézil, much preferred the Greeks to

the pure IE system; the pure system he likened to a prison, but called Greece la "belle

infidèle à l'idéologie tri-fonctionnelle," because Greece was always willing to look at the

world with new eyes, with criticism and observation, rather than forcing it into a pre-

established pattern.92

Zeus enjoys both first and second function attributes, Mithra in the pre-Zoroastrian

Iranian mythology. The breaking of symmetry and blurring of functions within a system

that is nevertheless tripartite appears in the story of the judgment of Paris. Paris is asked

to choose between regal Hera, warlike Athena, and voluptuous Aphrodite. To his sorrow,

he chooses the third function when he should have chosen the first. But even in this story,

Hera offers sovereignty and wealth, Athena victory, handsomeness, and wisdom,

combining two or even three of the functions.93 Another compelling example provided by

                                                                                                               92Georges Dumézil, "Les festins secrets de Georges Dumézil," Entretiens avec Maurice Olender. (Paris: Editions Gallimard, 1987) 18. 93 Robert Graves, The Greek Myths. (New York: Penguin, 1992) Vol. II. 248.

 

 

43  

Dumézil in blending linguistics, sociology, and ideology in Greece and the tripartite

model is the personification of the Just Man as exemplified in The Republic. Where the

four ancient Ionian tribes, or bioi – meaning types of life – as described by Strabo,

Plutarch, and Plato appear to have rather vague interpretations, their stations in life

correspond to (1) priest and magistrates, (2) warriors or guardians, (3) laborers, and (4)

artisans. Through an amalgamation of the Vedic, Avestan, and monarchal Roman class

structures, they appear to align with the IE functions. Specifically, in reference to The

Republic, these three functions were also reflected in Plato’s concept of the ideal state.

Where the three functionally ordered hierarchical classes of philosophers, soldiers, and

laborers appear, Dumézil contends as representing “au stricte sence, une reminiscence

indo-europeenne.”94 Dumézil further muses upon the possibility of Plato conceiving the

ideal citizen, the Just Man, in terms of these functions, thus indicating the depths in that

the IE ideology penetrated his thinking. As in the estimation of Plato the Just Man should

be a microcosm of the just, or ideal state itself, he should possess all the virtues of the

three classes: wisdom, bravery, and wealth producing skills. What is surprising, in

view of the distortions in the center of the IE world, is the high degree of survival of the

tripartite ideology throughout all of the IE migrations. The system occurs in more or less

this same form throughout the IE world, from Ireland to India, but it does not appear

outside the IE world. It seems to be a conceptuality that is potentially available to all the

IE cultures. Comparatively late in IE history, it is available to the first IE speaking

monotheists, Christians of the first centuries. It would be only natural for them to

interpret their new faith in terms of the — tripartite and only — ideological world they

                                                                                                               94  C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 73.  

 

 

44  

knew. Indeed, it would have been odd if they had not done so. Before a contemporary

examination can be made in the way in which the first IE Christian converts expressed

their new monotheism in old IE categories, it would be necessary to reach some sort of

identification of monotheism apart from tripartition, in order to see the faith-

commitments that are expressed in new form in tri-functional concepts.95 Equally

important in understanding the transition of Christianity, as a non IE Semitic theological

concept placed within an IE domain, it will necessary to present Indo-Iranian

contributions, and specifically the effect of the Zoroastrian revolution on both of theses

paradigms.

As a fringe society, Iran shares much in common with Greece as both are

considered the preservers of their respective cultural traditions. Yet it is with considerable

irony that the legacy of both cultures, not directly placed within the IE or Semitic

paradigms, appear to offer the greatest contributions to ascent of Christianity as well as

the preservation of the IE model. In the third volume of the series entitled Naissancce

d’archanges, 1945, Dumézil would return to reconsider his earlier philological work,

supported by Benveniste, towards a more focused sociological regard. His central theme

would be one of the single most difficult problems in the study of religion to that date:

the role of the Amesa Spentas – archangels – of Zoroastrianism. In Dumézil’s

estimation, it is the theological reforms of Zoroaster during the seventh and sixth

                                                                                                               95  C.  S.  Littleton,  “Georges  Dumézil  and  the  Rebirth  of  the  Genetic  Model:  An  Anthropological  Appreciation,”  Myth  in  Indo-­‐European  Antiquity,  ed.  Gerald  James  Larson,  C.Scott  Littleton,  and  Jaan  Puhvel,  (Berkeley:  University  of  California  Press,  1974)  112.    

 

 

 

45  

centuries B.C. present the clearest expression of the IE system.96 The arrival of

monotheism in Iran during this period was witnessed by a revolutionary shift in ideology

manifested by an ethical and metaphysical dualism. Through the authority of the

revelations from the single true deity, , Zoroaster attempted to reform Iranian polytheism,

one that was held to be strikingly similar to the Vedic pantheon, by substituting a series

of abstract beings as part of the care-taking body of the Good Principle – Ahura Mazda.

Collectively known as the Amesa Spenta. As “Immortal Beneficiaries,” the Amesa

Spentas are the serve the welfare and agendas of the immortals as well as also taking

human form by way of the qualities they represent who, with Ahura Mazda, the Wise

Lord, or within the prophet Zoroaster, or other humans who adhere to divine truth – asha,

contribute to a spiritual pantheon as the Yazata or Venerables, gods created by the single

deity Ahura Mazda. Either minions, pseudo-angelic beings, or more accurately for

purpose of present discussion, ideological constructs, however analyzed, they are crucial

to Zoroastrian thought. Individually, they are Vohu Manah – Good Thought, Asha

Vahishta – Best Truth, Khshathra – Desirable Dominion, Armaïti – Beneficent Devotion,

Haurvatat – Wholeness, and Ameretat – Immortality. Sometimes Ahura Mazda himself is

seen as the first of seven Amesa Spentas. In comparison to Iranian deities, which can be

directly traced, are Hoama, Anahita, Mithra, Vāyu, and Verethraghna, all representing

moral values or natural phenomena.97 Respectively, Asa as Order, and Vohu Manah as

Good Thought, in Dumézilian design, mirror Varuna and Mitra thus representing the first

function; Xsaththra as Physical Force parallels Indra representing the second function;

                                                                                                               96 C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 10. 97 Ibid. 11.

 

 

46  

the pair Haurvatat as Health and Ameretate as Immortality parallels the Asvins thus

constituting the third function.

It is interesting to consider that in so reconstructing the theological paradigm of

Iran, Zoroaster preserved the IE model as derived from Vedic sources. In doing so, irony

is again present as the ideological significances of each Vedic deity, as paralleled in each

corresponding Zoroastrian counterpart, became enhanced. Dumézil would thus review his

own philological work as well as the contributions made by Benveniste in regard to the

Iranian social representation of a tripartite. Dumézil’s conclusions were simple: (1) as

representations of an IE ideology the earlier representations has been replaced by new

ones. These representations essentially remained the same but were only modified

slightly to fit with a monotheistic model. (2) Established with a hierarchical order the

two most important Amesa Spentas, Asa as Order, and Vohu Manah as Good Thought,

are clear administrators of the natural and social universe as such represent the two basic

concepts of sovereignty. (3)The linguistic data would support the assertion as according

to many texts Asa is the patron of fire, and the name corresponds to the Vedic –rta

(cosmic order), thus representative of Varuna, representing the magic-religious half of the

first function.98 In this regard, Asa, like Mitra and Jupiter is also concerned with the

administration of religious order.

Following this design, Vohu Manah, as protector of all sacred animals, the magico-

religious attitudes of the universe corresponds to Mitra and reflects the juridical and

contractual aspects of the Zoroastrian formula. This is further enhanced as the

                                                                                                               98 Ibid.76.

 

 

47  

relationship between mortals and Vohu Manah is much more personal as he presides over

intricate affairs of society; he a promoter and sustainer of god relations and harmony.99

Xsathra is derived from the Vedic ksatram- meaning dominion. His role is portrayed as

Power and is the patron of all metal work, especially those concerned with warfare. As a

personification of physical prowess, he is the image of Indra, and represents the second

function and as the strong right hand Ahura Mazda.100 The third function is much broader

in scope and less clearly defined. Yet its overview is easy to see in that they are varied

representations of those interests most closely associated with the lowest class. Armati,

Haurvatat, and Ameretat, represent Piety, Health, and Immortatility respectively, and

clearly mirrored images of the Vedic Asvins, Quirinus, and Ops.

In the estimation of many contemporary theological scholars the study of the Amesa

Spentas remains one of the most critical links as a possible demonstration that the late

Judaic concept of archangel was a direct outgrowth of the impact of Iranian religion upon

the Jews of the sixth century B.C. Compelling for thought is the assertion that it is among

one of the first points of ideological exchange between IE and Semitic ideology as

opposed to later Greek contact. This transmutation effect of the Zoroastrian revolution

appears to be the central focus of the Iranian contribution to both the IE legacy, as well as

setting the stage for a more conducive ideological and metaphysical opportunity for the

transformation of the Greco-Roman pantheon through the advent of Christianity.

                                                                                                               99 Ibid. 100 Ibid.

 

 

48  

Christianity

Look unto the rock whence ye are hewn,

And to the hole of the pit whence ye are digged.

Isaiah 51:1

As previously stated when the IE migrations moved into older cultures that had

enough vitality to bargain conceptually with the IE system and extract ideological

concessions from the invaders, the IE system appears in distorted form, with broken

symmetry. With this characteristic specifically in mind, the development of Judaic

theology, and the advent of Christianity share a no less fragmented, yet steady evolution.

Consequently, the solidification of the Judeo-Christian heritage would in large measure

come with the direct contact of the IE system in the early centuries of the first millennia

A.D. Before an analysis of how two seeming different ideologies would form a unified

whole, in many respects not only creating an entirely new paradigm, but also preserving

the core aspects of their original forms, an initial treatment of early pre-IE Judeo-

Christian ideology must be provided.

As there were other examples of the appearance of monotheism in the ancient world

outside the IE domain, as in Egypt under Akhenaton, the defining characteristic of

Judaism was the introduction of a social contract between the divine and mortal worlds in

the form of a covenant. As a distinctly unique quid pro quo relationship the single Judaic

god provided all good in life, not just merely aspects, in return for the faithful devotion of

mortals to a prescribed code of ethics and ritual observance. It is interesting to note that

the divine auspices in this benevolent relationship have come to be called providence, a

 

 

49  

characteristically IE word. Further, the development of the early history of Hebrew

monotheism would witness an amalgamation of diverse cults and various gods, but from

this plurality would raise a sense of underlying unity from differing tribal manifestations

ultimately to be unified in the expression of a single deity.101 An additional aspect which

marked the emergent dominate Hebrew god apart from all other cultures was that it not

only affirmed the world and life, but in specific relationship to the legacy of the IE

tripartite system, and also that of the work of Dumézil as a scholar, it affirmed the

experience of life as history, not just as nature. 102

               For the ancients discerning the safe world could be most clearly viewed in nature and

the predictability of the seasons, where the unsafe was left to the unpredictable sufferings

of life, whether warfare, mortal inhumanity, or most prominently the irregularities of

nature. Establishing a world view where history is the realm of freedom and

responsibility, and the realm of risk, contingency, and lack of control is directly

contingent upon trusting that history is also the locus of blessing, but as such remains

supremely difficult unless one comes to history with faith in a covenant as the focus of

one's religious life.103 In this regard it is the acceptance of the Covenant with the Hebrew

God of the Patriarchs that yields the crucial ability to not merely handle the

disappointments of life with a better resolve, but to embrace them as bearing blessings,

even if such is not immediately obvious. In contrast, a nature-focused religion affirms life

as nature, but not as history, and seeks to integrate human life into nature, by ritual                                                                                                                101 Mark S Smith, The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1990). 17. 102 Mircea Eliade, A History of Religious Ideas, Vol. 1, From the Stone Age to the Eleusinian Mysteries; The Journal of Religion, Vol. 60, No. 1 (Jan., 1980), 67-71 Cosmos and History (Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1965. 103Ibid.

 

 

50  

mimesis of nature; known as mimetic religion for this reason.104 Religion which views

human life and the material world as an exile from an other-worldly state of grace is

known as exilic religion; Gnosticism is its most prominent example, and it is

characteristically world-denying.

If the goodness of the Hebrew god is reflected in all creation, as history, then all of

life, even in its disappointments, bears some blessing. No parts are barren. It was a long

struggle to see this as the prophets strove to remind their hearers that disaster was

coming, and that it would bring a blessing from the Lord. Through historic or

historicized accounts, as the case may be, there are many examples of where blessings are

reaped only after disappointments are first endured. As such and additional aspect of

Hebrew monotheism is where an inversion takes place, in which judgment and sentence

are eventually transformed ending in a restoration. This inversion, whereby

disappointments are transformed into blessings, is the single most critical characteristic of

monotheism. 105 In that the goodness of God is the defining mark of monotheism, before

the oneness of God, rests on a question of faith in God and most importantly his design of

universal affairs. Consequently, to have a god is to live for a cause, and the goods it

provides define the cause, implying a separation of life into two parts, the good provided

by the god, and the rest of life rejected as evil. This seems to be a fair characterization of

a type of religion that takes nature as the ultimate locus of meaning, in the way it rejects

history and all parts of life that are irreducibly contingent – the historical, as ultimately

                                                                                                               104 Merold Westphal, God, Guilt, and Death. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1984) 21. 105  Richard  H.  Niebuhr,  Radical  Monotheism.  (New  York:  Harper  and  Row,  1960)  41.    

 

 

51  

barren.106 However, covenantal religion supposedly takes all of life as good, or to be

integrated into a good yet to be consummated. Outside the realm of theological debate for

the discussion at hand it is essential to accept the premise that Judeo-Christian

monotheism is clearly covenantal where all areas of existence, not just nature, nor the

divine as would be categorized as exilic, have value. This acceptance become crucial in

understanding the monotheistic transformations of life, as their articulation changes with

the move from a Hebrew-speaking community into one informed by the IE tripartite

ideology.

As previously stated, the ideological classifications of the strict IE tripartite model

must be modified slightly in order to facilitate this transformation. Where sovereignty,

power, and production serve the three functions of the initial model respectively, order,

action, and sustenance present a more conducive nomenclature.

Judeo-Christian IE Tripartite Transformations: Hermeneutics and Functions

A people that organize the world into order, action, and sustenance will conceive

disappointment in each of the three functions in a characteristic way. When one

encounters disappointment in a situation, that disappointment can come in three ways: (1)

exposure, (2) limitation, (3) encounter with need. The experience of exposure can be

expressed as a degree of disappointment based on individual understanding of the

circumstances of the world, or more aptly, the true character of the individual themselves,

When the individual strives for a desire goal, whatever that may be, and encounters

                                                                                                               106  Ibid.  

 

 

52  

disappointment of action, whether from causes in nature or society, he faces limitation.

When he encounters another who makes demands on his sustenance, he faces another’s

need.107 This hermeneutical Christian adaption of the IE tripartite model, as first applied

by Wesleyan Professor of History and Chairman of the Center for Hermeneutical Studies

in Berkeley, Dr. Edward C. Hobbs, describes the three responses of encounter with

disappointment. “(1) in the face of the situation which exposed or revealed the

discrepancy between one's pretensions and one's actual life-as-lived, one responded with

acknowledgment of the true situation and a "change of understanding" (Greek: metanoia,

poorly translated "repentance"); (2) in the face of the situation which confronted one with

the contingency or limitation of his existence, one responded with creative thankfulness

for the new -- albeit in many cases unwanted and limited -- possibilities presented by the

limiting situation itself; (3) in the face of the encounter with others in their need for help,

one responded with action directed to the benefit or good of those others.”108 As it

specifically relates to the Christian paradigm, exposure in this sense can be viewed as

judgment, and thus the resolution is the redemption from sin. The one who brings the

judgment was known in Judaism as the "anointed" one, Meshiach in Hebrew, Christos in

Greek. In the limiting situation, one discovers one's creatureliness, and a faithful creature

responds to it as possibility offering. It is like meeting the father whose gifts "are not

always what was desired or even understood," but presented opportunities nonetheless.

                                                                                                               107 Edward C. Hobbs, "Pluralism in the Biblical Context," Wilhelm Wuellner and Marvin Brown, eds., Hermeneutics and Pluralism, (Berkeley: Center for Hermeneutical Studies.1983) 17. 108 Ibid.

 

 

53  

Others in need offer relationship, community, the fellowship of the Church and the

sustenance that comes with it: the work of the Holy Spirit.109

What is immediately surprising is that the first function is assigned to the second

Person, the Son, and the second function is assigned to the first Person, the Father. The

order has been changed. The situation is slightly more complicated than this, but an

approximation sufficient to deal with the conflicts posed. God the Son brings redemption

from sin, a first-function problem, and God the Father brings blessing in contingency, a

second-function problem. Moral order is the business of the first function for monotheists

and non-monotheists alike, and the monotheist trusts that disappointment in the first

function is redeemable and not barren, as part of the larger monotheist commitment to the

goodness of all of life. In the second function, action and contingency, arises the problem

of the goodness of creation: is the world, as a given, as limitation, good? It appears, as

this is the department of God the Father. The change of order is the clue which will

unravel the extent to which Patristic reflection on the mystery of God was shaped by the

IE conceptual system, and the extent to which the early Church's inheritance from Second

Temple Jewish monotheism extracted modifications from the IE conceptual system. With

this in mind it is necessary to examine the central part of this conjecture about the Trinity.

                                                                                                               109  Ibid.  

 

 

54  

Christian adaptation of the IE Tripartite System

As Christian monotheism moves into the IE world, the development to be expected

is a little different from that found in comparative IE studies of polytheistic religion. In

the polytheistic cases, the evidence seems to support a genetic hypothesis: a common

ancestor in proto-IE culture underlies all the later mythological developments.110 The

case of monotheism is clearly different. As Jewish religion and IE conceptual structures

converged some necessary adjustments are to be expected. The IE system will not appear

in monotheistic religion as repetition of aboriginal myths so much as a tendency to think

in triples related to one another as order, action, and sustenance. That is, tripartition in

Christianity will appear as a conceptual genre, not a rigid thesis. As was the case, this is

what the history bears out. The general councils that regulated the doctrine of the Trinity

in effect were promulgating genre-rules, or a "grammar" of Trinitarian discourse, more

than permanently fixing the content of the doctrine. Those "grammar" rules have served

not to constrict the doctrine, but, in defining a genre of theological thought, have made

possible a doctrinal development that has been as rich and various as any in Christian

theology.

By way of conclusion, it can be successfully stated the challenge for a Judeo-

Christian theology of monotheism is always to express the goodness of God in the

problematic parts of life, transforming disappointments into blessings. In non-IE cultures

one then needs to listen carefully to how the local conceptual system works, and make

                                                                                                               110 C.  S.  Littleton,  “Georges  Dumézil  and  the  Rebirth  of  the  Genetic  Model:  An  Anthropological  Appreciation,”  Myth  in  Indo-­‐European  Antiquity,  ed.  Gerald  James  Larson,  C.Scott  Littleton,  and  Jaan  Puhvel,  (Berkeley:  University  of  California  Press,  1974)    117.

 

 

55  

sure that the challenge of monotheism is met in all its parts, leaving no part

untransformed and thereby able to subvert monotheism apparent in the rest of the parts.

How this process was worked out in the case of monotheism's move into the IE world

was, in the first approximation, the Son appears in the first function, redemption through

exposure, and the Father appears in the second function, redemption through limitation,

and the Holy Spirit appears in the third function, redemption through others' need. Later

Trinitarian thought, as in the cases of the fourth century schisms would deal directly with

the nature of the Father and the Son as dual governing aspects, in much the same regard

as Mitra-Varuna in the first function. Additional issues would ensue as the Son is both

viewed in the subordinate position of “Christ the Warrior”111 in the second function, and

the elevated function of dual aspect of the first function, and the resolution of the Arian

heresy by the Athanasian Creed rectifies this correspondence, and then, in the theory of

appropriations, gives it a flexibility sufficient to handle complex phenomena. At the same

time, there is a move from the tripartite narrative and symbolic ideas conveyed

genetically among the original IE cultures to a three-part system of abstract concepts

suitable for use in philosophical theology.

Parenthetically, it is interesting to consider the further integration, and ultimate

assimilation of the Semitic paradigm with that of the IE system along linguistic lines. As

the Christian notion of the Trinity began to emerge in the 1st century A.D. it appears

worth speculation on the possibility of a monotheism that is tripartite but does not

embody a doctrine of the Incarnation as is reflected in Christianity. Such would confirm

                                                                                                               111C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 273.

 

 

56  

our conjecture that tripartition in monotheism. The history of controversy over the

Incarnation by which the Trinitarian settlement was reached would then appear to be a

contingent path to a tripartite conclusion. The place to look for non-Christian but

monotheist and tripartite thinking would be in a figure such as Philo, a Jew writing in

Alexandria, in an IE language, in conversation with Greek philosophy. If an assertion of a

direct IE & Semitic tripartite link has value, that the IE culture supplies the conceptual

structures in which its members think, Philo, while attempting to express Judaism

through Greek philosophical terminology ought to exhibit tripartite structures at least

occasionally, and in ways that Rabbinic Judaism does not naturally do. Indeed, Philo

foreshadows many of the moves the patristic writers will later make in transposing

Jewish monotheism to a Hellenistic and philosophical – and incidentally IE – world, with

the obvious exceptions about Jesus. One clear example of a linguistic point of departure,

along Dumézilian lines, turns up exactly what one would expect: a Hebrew term that is

not assigned to one of the IE functions in its original usage requires translation by at least

three different terms in Greek, and the Greek terms are function-specific, because IE

speakers characteristically looked for function-specific terms. The term is tsedaqah,

usually translated into English by "righteousness," and in the Old Greek ("Septuagint")

by both dikaiosune (justice) and eleemosune (mercy, alms). Philo here includes

philanthropia (humanity), giving help to those in need of it.112 At this point, the second

and third functions appear to be present, lacking only the first. For Philo it is necessary to

find three virtues in Greek to represent the original Hebrew concept; two of them appear                                                                                                                112  David Robertson, Word and meaning in ancient Alexandria: theories of language from Philo to Plotinus, (Aldershot, England, Ashgate, 2008) 27.

 

 

 

57  

already in the Septuagint. Because concepts tend to be forced into one or another of the

functions, justice is appropriated to right action, a second-function concept. Philo

completes the triad of virtues with metanoia, "repentance," the missing first-function

translation of the concept of tsedaqah; and repentance is just exactly the response to

exposure that has been posited above. Interestingly also, metanoia was considered a vice

in Greek philosophy, but a virtue for Philo Judaeus. Christianity follows Philo's Jewish

monotheistic instinct in regard to metanoia. Thus we have here both a full tripartite

analysis of the virtue of tsedaqah and also the peculiarly monotheistic insistence on

embracing the disappointments that come in each function, because they are not barren,

but bear blessings.113

As the precise categorization of the Christian Trintiy, as well as the nuances of the

individual natures of the three persons would be debated well into the 4th century A.D., it

is clear from the data presented thus far that Semitic monotheism was directed affected

by the IE ideology. As such, the idea of the Trinity, one that has come down through the

ages as being so central to Christianity, could be successfully argued as taking shape only

after the religion had penetrated the Greek and Latin speaking communities. It is also a

testament to the resiliency of both paradigms the neither entirely gave way to the other.

Consequently, the IE tripartion ideology, through the integration effect of Christianity has

been maintained in the legacy of the Medieval structures of the Three Estates, Hegel’s

                                                                                                               113  Ibid.  

 

 

58  

thesis, antithesis, and synthesis; Comte’s “law of three stages”; Morgans’s “Savagery,

Barbarism, and Civilization.”114

Additional attention must be shown towards the European expansion into the

Western Hemisphere with the creation of the United States. In much the same way, at

risk of over simplification, the American experiment that much like the Zoroastrian

revolution, attempted to create an entirely new social structure for the remnants of the

old, preserved the IE ideology on which to build. The new phenomena where the Three

Estates were viewed to be destroyed, has continued in the form of: the American

Judiciary, where the Supreme Court represents the idea of sovereignty; the Executive,

that represents the seat of legitimate force; and the Legislative branch that may suggest

the third function. Although the comparative study of philology, sociology, and

anthropology would come well into the future of the American Revolution, the framers of

the American Constitution could scarcely been aware of maintaining an IE system, this

period of history, as well as many others deserves further inquiry. Equally significant for

further study is the legacy of George Dumézil’s effect on all the independent academic

fields and the subsequent present and future worldview of the IE tradition. He himself

considered his work to be characterized by that of a specialist yet did not shrink from the

importance of comparative study. Where sociological, anthropological, theological, and

philological study may have been previously regarded as best carried out through isolated

examination of specific cultures, and commonalities, however thought provoking, were

considered with less importance, now may be held in higher regard fostering greater

                                                                                                               114  114C. Scott Littleton, New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley: University of California. 1966) 231.  

 

 

59  

intercultural significance for future generations. Dumézil’s work is expansive, and in

many instances sublime, but it is the latter characteristic that imparts the legacy of a

researcher — although whose theories yet deserve further empirical study — as one who

had a leavening effect in comparison to those of his more flat, linear, and even tragically

myopic peers. The last word, however, should be left with Claude Lévi-Strauss who

wrote of his friend and colleague upon the occasion of his death:

“Dumézil the archaeologist discovered a mental architecture, which is one of the great moments of humanity. The famous ideology of the three functions is not the essential: it is rather, a key to bring unity to narratives, beliefs and representations between which no relationship had ever been seen. The specific genius of Georges Dumézil has been to show that apparently disparate phenomena were one. In other words, more than the attribution of such and such an ideology to the Indo-Europeans, it is the intellectual initiative underlying his work that I consider fundamental… This is the great lesson he provides for other researchers.” 115

                                                                                                               115  Jonathan  Bentall,  “Views  of  Dumézil  ,”  Anthropology  Today,  Vol.  2.  (Dec.,  1986)  3-­‐4.  

 

 

60  

The Tripartite Ideology: Functions, Methods and Applications

L'Idéologie tripartite, de Georges Dumézil

“A land that has no legends is condemned to die of the cold.”

Georges Dumézil

Belier, Wouter W. Decayed Gods: Facts, Faults, and Fables in George Dumézil’s “Tripartite Ideology.” E.J. Brill. Leiden. 1991. Bentall, Jonathan, “Views of Dumézil,” Anthropology Today, Vol. 2. (Dec., 1986) 3-4. Benveniste, Emile. Indo-European language and society. Trans. Elizabeth Palmer. University of Miami Press, 1973. Cairns, Francis. Sextus Propertius: the Augustan elegist. Cambridge University Press, New York. 2006. Dumézil, Georges. The Destiny of the Warrior. University of California, Berkeley. 1970 Dumézil, Georges The Destiny of a King, Trans. Alf Hiltebeitel. Chicago, University of Chicago Press. 1973. Dumézil, Georges. Mitra-Varuna. D. Coltman, trans. New York: Zone Books, 1988. Dumézil, Georges. "Les festins secrets de Georges Dumézil," Entretiens avec Maurice Olender. Paris: Editions Gallimard, 1987. Eliade, Mircea. The Myth of the Eternal Return: Cosmos and History, trans.William R. Trask. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2005. Eliade, Mircea A History of Religious Ideas, Vol. 1,” From the Stone Age to the Eleusinian Mysteries”; The Journal of Religion, Vol. 60, No. 1 (Jan., 1980). Forsythe, Gary. Livy and early Rome: a study in historical method and judgment. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1999. Gonda. J. Dual Deities. Leiden, Brill, 1972. The Vedic God Mitra. Leiden, Brill, 1972. Graves, R. The Greek Myths. New York: Penguin, 1972. Vol. II. Grottanelli, Chritiano. Kings and Prophets. Oxford Press. New York. 1999.

 

 

61  

Herodotus. Histories, trans. Robin Waterfield. Oxford Press, New York. 1998. Hobbs, Edward C. "Pluralism in the Biblical Context," Wilhelm Wuellner and Marvin Brown, eds, Hermeneutics and Pluralism. Berkeley: Center for Hermeneutical Studies. 1983. Hymns from the Rig-Veda, trans. Jean Le Mée. New York: Knopf: distributed by Random House, 1975. Katz, Vincent, The Complete Elegies of Sextus Propertius. Princeton, Princeton University Press 2004. Littleton, C. Scott. New Comparative Mythology. University of California. Berkeley. 1966 Littleton, C. Scott. “Georges Dumezil and the Rebirth of the Genetic Model: An Anthropological Appreciation,” Myth in Indo-European Antiquity. Ed. Gerald James Larson, C.Scott Littleton, and Jaan Puhvel, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1974. Momigliano, Arnaldo. “Georges Dumezil and the Trifunctional Approach to Roman Civilization” History and Theory. Vol. 23, No. 3, Oct. 1984. Niebuhr, Richard H. Radical Monotheism. New York: Harper and Row. 1960. Puhvel. Jaan. Myth in Indo-European Antiquity. University of California, Berkeley. 1974. Puhvel, Jann. Myth and Law Among the Indo-Europeans: Studies in Indo-European Comparative Mythology. University of California Press, Berkeley. 1970. Robertson, David. Word and meaning in ancient Alexandria: theories of language from Philo to Plotinus. Aldershot, England, Ashgate, 2008. Smith, Mark S. The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel. San Francisco, Harper and Row, 1990. Thieme, P. “Mitra and Aryaman,” Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences. 41 (1951). Westphal, Merold. God, Guilt, and Death. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 1981.