[INDOLOGY] Georges Dumezil's Tripartite Ideology text

Dipak Bhattacharya dipak.d2004 at gmail.com
Mon Dec 5 02:44:20 UTC 2016

Just for the sake of information: the number four as a mythologicsl
number was extensively treated by the present writer between 1977 and
1980. 'The orrigin of the catuskaaya doctrine' Journal of research,
Visva Bharati University, 1976; 'Catuskaaya in the Mantranaya'' ibid
1977; 'The doctrine of four in the early Upanisads and some connected
problems' Journal of Indian Philosophy,Dordrecht 1978, 'The scheme of
four in early Buddhism' Bharati Bhanam  (VIJ) Panjab University, 1980.
The occurrence of mythological numbers was also treated in 'The Hotr
formulae in the Agnyadheya and the model myth of the Vedic sacrifice'
VIJMarch 1978

On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Nick Allen <nick.allen at anthro.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
> As one of the relatively small number of would-be continuators of Dumézil’s
> work, I am always delighted when an eminent Indologist such as Jan Houben
> expresses interest in the great comparativist. But, in my view, things have
> moved on since the days when Dumézil was arguing with Brough (and others).
> While he established, I think, that our sources contain a great deal of
> seldom-recognised Indo-European cultural heritage (complementing the
> well-recognised linguistic heritage), his theory of IE ideology, as
> expressed in trifunctionalism, is increasingly recognised as too narrow. He
> himself explicitly denied that the three functions exhausted the ideology,
> but he did not succeed in systematising what lies outside them.
> Dumézil saw his mature work as starting in 1938 with a paper comparing the
> hierarchy of the three twice-born varṇas with that of three Roman priests,
> the flamines maiores.  But the comparison could have been more inclusive.
> The triad of flamens stands in the middle of the five-member ordo
> sacerdotum, which opens with the rex sacrorum and ends with the pontifex
> maximus. The myth of origin of Hindu society in RV 10.90 opens with the
> undivided body of Puruṣa and, after dealing with the twice-born categories,
> ends with the Śūdras. Comparison of the two pentads suggests an alternative
> view of IE ideology: if one omits sovereignty from the definition of the
> first function, one glimpses the possibility of developing a systematic
> approach to IE ideology that subsumes Dumézil’s and circumvents some of the
> objections to it.
> This is what I have been attempting over the last 25 or 30 years.
> Nick
> Dr N.J. Allen
> ISCA, 51 Banbury Road,
> Oxford OX2 6PE, UK
> http://www.anthro.ox.ac.uk/?id=1130
> _______________________________________________
> INDOLOGY mailing list
> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
> indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing
> committee)
> http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or
> unsubscribe)

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list