Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T02:35:43.919Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dumézil's Tripartite Ideology: Some Critical Observations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2011

J. Gonda
Get access

Extract

In a long series of important and stimulating publications Georges Dumézil has for almost half a century not only re-established a complex of theories with regard to the comparative study of ancient Indo-European mythology, but also applied a modernized comparative method. In investigating the foundations of the Indo-European socio-religious conceptions he bases his arguments and conclusions, it is true, to a certain extent on linguistic data, but these are always amplified and corroborated by a thorough consideration of the social structure, religious beliefs and ritual institutions of the ancient Indians, Romans, Germans, Celts and Greeks. Especially these last thirty-five years his work is of great originality in that he has founded and developed the theory of the trois fonctions, of the “three fundamental activities which the groups of priests, warriors and producers must fulfil and assure in order to maintain their community”. In this theory it is not the tripartite social organization of the prehistoric Indo-Europeans that is emphasized, but the principle of classification, the ideology to which, in Dumézil's opinion, this organization has given rise. Being reflected in the groupings of, and mutual relations between, the divine powers and in the very structure of Indo-European mythology and view of the world it is here again the ideological rather than the strictly sociological aspects that invite the reader's attention.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , November 1974 , pp. 139 - 149
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For a definition, Dumézil, G., L'idéologie tripartie des Indo-Européens (Brussels, 1958), p. 18. Since in writing this article the author has not re-read all of Professor Dumézil's books—which on one hand are often repetitive and on the other, with the exception of Mythe et –pop–e, regrettably devoid of indexes—it is always possible to amplify or supplement the references in the following footnotes.Google Scholar

2 The reality of social distinctions, and particularly of the three ‘orders’ among the ancient Indo-European peoples, and the probability of their prehistoric existence has long been recognized, One wonders not to find, in Dumézil's historical survey, other names beside those of Spiegel and Benveniste (L'ideologie tripartie, p. 18): see e.g., the data collected in Schrader, O. and Nehring, A., Reallexikon der indogermanischen Altertumskunde, II (Berlin-Leipzig 1929), p. 456 ff.Google Scholar

3 For instance, in discussing Vṛtrahan, Indra, “the slayer of the demoniac snake Vṛtra” (Heur et malheur du guerrier [Paris 1969], p.Google Scholar 4; 104 f.), the important article by Brown, W. Norman (“The creation of myth of the Rgveda,” J.A.O.S. 62 (1952), p.Google Scholar 85) is not considered. While the conclusions of Renou, L. and Benveniste, E., Vrtra et Vrthagna (Paris 1934)Google Scholar are subscribed to—not integrally, but the divergence is not indicated—no mention is made of different opinions. For the Zoroastrian reformation see the most important article by M. Boyce, in B.S.O.A.S. 32 (1969), p. 10 ff.

4 Dumézil, , Tarpeia (Paris 1947)1 P.Google Scholar 228; MitraVaruṇa, (Paris 1948), p. 210; L'idéologie tripartie, p. 19.Google Scholar

5 Dumézil, L'idéologie tripartie, p. n ; 32.

6 See e.g., Dumézil, , L'idéologie tripartie, p. 34 f,; Les dieux des indo-européens (Paris 1952), p.Google Scholar 9 ff.; Mitra-Varuṇa, , passim; Mythe et épopée (Paris 1968), p. 147.Google Scholar

7 I refer to my recent publications The Dual Deities in the Religion of the Veda (Amsterdam Acad. 1974)Google Scholar and “Duality in Indian Thought,” in the periodical Thèta-Pi 2 (Leiden, 1973), p. 1 ff. It may be noticed in passing that Dumézil, in Mitra-Varuṇa, p. 211 (and L'idéologie tripartie, p. 34) misunderstood and underestimated the significance of Vedic dual deities such as Indra-Vāyu (for this pair see Mythe et épopée, p. 51; Heur et malheur du guerrier, p. 2; 70).Google Scholar

8 Remember also Dumézil's disquisition Le trotsiéme souverain (Paris 1949).Google Scholar

9 I fail to see why the apparently double meaning of the root śams– — which in all probability did not express the idea of “speaking, calling” or “praising” but rather that of “making a qualificatory statement about a person, declaring more or less authoritatively” (see my observations in Acta Orientalia Ludg. 20, p. 187 and Epithets in the Ṛgveda [The Hague, 1959], p. 154)—should point to a definite “état de société” of which this verb, it is added, is practically the only evidence (Dumézil, , Servius et la fortune [Paris 1943], p.s 77 f.).Google Scholar

10 Space forbids discussion of this point to which I purpose to revert in a paper to be published in the Ohio Journal of Religions Studies.

11 For the god's relations to the waters, which Dumézil thinks to be a secondary evolution (Ouranós-Varuṇa [Paris 1934], p. 41 f.) now see Gonda, J., Die Religionen Indiens (Stuttgart 1960), p. 80.Google Scholar

12 See also Thieme, P., Mitra and Aryaman, Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, 41 (1951), p.Google Scholar 60; Frisk, Hj., Griechisches etymologisches Wörterbuch, II (Heidelberg 1965), p.Google Scholar 447; Mayrhofer, M., Kurzgefasstes etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindischen, III (Heidelberg 1967), p. 161.Google Scholar

13 Dumézil, Les dieux des indo-européens. p. 12; L'idéolgie tritpartie, p. 38; 63; Mythe et épopée, p. 148.

14 Thieme, op. cit., p. 6.

15 Dumézil, Mitra-Varuṇa, p. 85.

16 Gonda, Compare, “Mitra in India,” in Proceedings of the International Congress of Mithraic Studies (Manchester 1971). (Article has not yet appeared.)Google Scholar

17 Dumézil, Mitra-Varuṇa, p. 83.

18 See my book Dual Deities, p. 156.

19 Gonda, J., The Vedic Cod Mitra (Leiden 1972),Google Scholar passim, esp. p. 109; Dual Deities, p. 149 ff.; 156 f.

20 Gonda, The Vedic God Mitra, p. 30.

21 Dumézil, Mitra-Varuṇa, p. 79 ff.; L'idéologie tripartie, p. 62; Mythe et épopée, p. 148.

22 For a detailed discussion see Gonda, The Vedic God Mitra, p. !02 ff.

23 See Dumézil, , “La transposition des dieux souverains mineurs en héros dans Ic Mahābhārata,” Indo-lranian Journal 3 (1959), p. 1 ff.Google Scholar

24 Wikancler, S., “Pāṇḍavasagan och Mahābhāratas mytiska förutsättningar,” in Religion och Bibel, Nathan Söderblom-Sällskapets Arsbok 6 (1947), p.Google Scholar 27 ft.; this anicle was translated into French in Dumézil, , Jupiter Mars Quirinus, IV (Paris 1948), p. 37 ff.Google Scholar

25 It may be recalled that the dual deity (Mitra and Varuṇa) is the father of Vasiṣṭha and Agastya.

26 Dumézil, Mythe et épopée, p. 172.

27 Sec Gonda, J., “Mitra and mitra, the Idea of ‘Friendship’ in Ancient India,” Indologica Taurinensia, I (Turin 1973), p. 71 ff.Google Scholar

28 For a longer, documented discussion of these points sec my article “The Vcdic Mitra and the Epic Dharma,” J.R.A.S. 1971, p. 120 ff.

29 Dumézil, L'idéologie tripartie, p. 64.

30 Dumézil, , l'héritage indo-europeen à Rome (Paris 1949), p. 147.Google Scholar

31 Dumézil, Heur et malheur, p. 48.

32 Dumézil, L'ideologie tripartie, p. 83; Heur et malheur, p. 19 ff.

33 Dumézil, Heur et malheur, p. 19 ff.; 33 ff.; L'idéologie tripartie, p. 83 ff.

34 I cannot dwell any longer on Dumézil's assumption that most important details of Roman and German beliefs and institutions may find their final explanation from a study of the Veda, and sometimes also vice versa. His book Déesses latines et mythes védiques (Brussels 1956), to mention only this, makes excellent reading-matter, but it leaves me unconvinced of the effectiveness and finality of the author's ingenious explanations of all discrepancies between the Roman rite and the Indian myths. By the way, the two words for “night” (op. cit., p. 22) are not synonymous; for this point and the goddess Dawn, see Dual Deities, chapter IV.

35 Dumézil, L'ideologie tripartie, p. 7 ff.

36 Apte, V. M., “Were Castes Formulated in the Age of the Rgveda?” in Bull.Deccan College Res. Inst., 2 (Poona 1940), p. 34 ff.Google Scholar

37 See e.g. Berriedale Keith, A., in The Cambridge History of India, 1 (Cambridge 1922), p.Google Scholar 92 ff.; Apte, V. M., in The History and Culture of the Indian People, I (London 1951), p. 384 ff.Google Scholar

38 Rau, W., Staat und Gesellschaft im alien Indien (Wiesbaden 1957), p. 24; 61 ff.Google Scholar

39 See Horsch, P., Die vedische Gāthā- und Śloka- literatur (Bern 1966), p. 427 ff.Google Scholar

40 Dumézil, l'idéologic tnpartie, p. 25 ff.

41 See Keith, op. cit., p. 92.

42 Hocart, A. M., “Les castes,” in Annales du Musée Guimet (Paris 1938);Google Scholar Hutton, J. H., Caste in India (Cambridge 1946), p.Google Scholar 58; Kirfel, W., Symbolik des Hinduismus und Jinismus (Stuttgart 1959). Similar remarks could be made in con-nexion with other conclusions and contentions: in Flamen-Brahman (Paris 1935), p. 28; 35, discussing the human sacrifice and regarding it as a fact in ancient India, Dumézil refers to an article published in 1864 (A. Weber, “Über Menschenopfer bei den Indern der vedischen Zeit,” Z.D.M.G. 18, p. 262 ff.) without mentioning the more recent literature in which the occurrence of this sacrifice was often and with good reasons questioned. In any case it has no actuality what-ever in the Vedic ritual as we know it from the texts. The story of Śunahśepa (Aitareya-Brāhmana 7, 13-18) which Dumézil regards, not only as his main textual evidence but also as an important argument in favor of his thesis that the brahmin was, as a victim, a substitute for the king (see also Mitra-Varuṇa, p. 26), has been subjected to various other interpretations none of which seems to have compelled general approval. Without any reference to the literature on the history of the great Vedic rites Dumézil, Flamen-Brahman, p. 14 asserts that the function of the special priest found in the later ritual, the brahman, must be old, and that this functionary has given his name to the whole class of the brahmins; no evidence, proof or argument are added.Google Scholar

43 Compare Gonda, J., Notes on brahman (Utrecht 1950) P.Google Scholar 6 f. and trie notes, p. 75 ff. (criticizing Dumézil's, Flamen-Brahman; Servius et la Fortune(Paris 1943), p.Google Scholar 22 f.; L'heritage … ; see also the review of Mitra-Varuna, in Bibliotheca Orientalls 6 [Leiden 1949], p. 123 f.);Google Scholar Dumézil, , in Revue de l'histoire des religions 138, p. 225 ff.; 139, p. 122 ff.Google Scholar

44 See also Dumézil, Mitra-Varuṇa, p. 26 ff.

45 I must of course omit noticing obvious misinterpretatios, such as the statement on Agni in Tarpeia, p. 228.

46 Gonda, Notes on brahman, p. 75.

47 The reader may also be referred to my article “Some observations on Dumézils views of Indo-European mythology,” at Mnemosyne IV-13 (Leiden 1960), p. 1 ff.Google Scholar