The Stakes of the Warrior

Georges Dumezil

Translated by David Weeks

Edited, with an Introduction,
by Jaan Puhvel

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS

Berkeley Los Angeles London
 University of California Press
Berkeley and Los Angeles, California

/Jniversity of California Press, Ltd.

London, England

Copyright © 1983 by The Regents of the University of California

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

Dumfeil, Georges, 1898-

The stakes of the warrior.

Translation of: L'enjeu du jeu des dieux—un heros

(which is pt. 1 of v. 2, Types epipues indo-europeens—un
heros, un sorcier, un roi, of Mythe et epopee)
1. Mythology, Indo-European. \. Puhvel, Jaan.
II. Title.
BL660.D793513 1983 291.1'3'809034 82-13384
ISBN 0-520-04834-2

Printed in the United States of America

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
 Contents
EDITOR S PREFACE VU

EDITOR S INTRODUCTION IX

INTRODUCTION

I. Starkadr

1. T h e T e x t s 9
2 . T h e Birth, Fate, and First
C r i m e of S t a r k a 3 r 12
3 . O d i n , T h o r and S t a r k a 3 r in
the Gautrekssaga and in
Saxo 19
4 . T h e F a c i n o r a , Starcatherus
and the Kings 29
5 . T h e end of Starcatherus;
Starcatherus and Hatherus 38
6. H65r 44

II. Sisupala

1. T h e Birth and Destiny of

Sisupala 51
2 . R u d r a , Kr?na a n d
Sisupala 56
, 3 . T h e Offenses 59
4 . Sisupala and the Kings 61
5 . T h e End of Sisupala;
Sisupala and Kr$na 65

III. StarkaAr and Sisupala

1. C o m p a r i s o n of the Legends
of S t a r k a S r and Sisupala 71
 Contents

2 . C o m m o n Inheritance? 74
3 . Rudra and Vi§nu 78
4 . O d i n and T h o r 85
5 . T h e Roles of the G o d s in
the T w o Legends 9 1

IV. Jarasandha

1 . O d i n , R u d r a - S i v a and the
Sacrificed Kings 9 7
2 . J a r a s a n d h a and
Sisupala 100
3 . T h e End of Jarasandha 104
4. Aporia 107

V . T h e W o m a n and the
Ancestors

1. Masculine Rivalries 113

2 . Reincarnated D e m o n and
G r a n d s o n of a Giant 119

V I . Herakles

1 . T h e Failings of
Herakles 123
2 . Hera, A t h e n a and
Herakles 124
3 . T h e End of Herakles;
Herakles and Hera 128
4 . Herakles, S t a r k a 3 r and
Sisupala 131

SUMMARY 135

APPENDIX 145

VI
 Editors Preface

Georges Dumezil's three-volume opus Mythe et epopee (1968,

1 9 7 1 , 1973) has b e c o m e , for better or worse, a kind of q u a r r y , sub-
ject to piecemeal extractions into the English language. A start was
made with The Destiny of a King (University of C h i c a g o Press,
1 9 7 3 ) , covering the last third of ME II. Subsequently the bulk of ME
III has been m a d e available as Camillus by the University of
California Press ( 1 9 8 0 ) . T h e editor of the latter, U d o Strutynski,
anticipated the present undertaking by formulating a desideratum
as follows (p. 2 6 1 ) : " . . . surely the next order of business should be
to m a k e Dumezil's latest—and p r e s u m a b l y f i n a l — w o r d on the war-
rior complex available b y bringing out a translation of the first part
of Mythe et epopee II. . . . T h i s theoretical disquisition on the
heroic predicament constitutes a tightly knit m o n o g r a p h in its o w n
right as it takes the argument begun in Destiny of the Warrior
through uncharted waters and launches a new perspective on the
p r o b l e m . It is self-evident that without a full understanding of the
tensions and contrasts at w o r k between the earlier and later studies
no further progress on the warrior question can o c c u r . "
W i t h the presentation below of "L'enjeu du jeu des dieux; un
h e r o s , " introduced b y a critical essay, all but the central third of
ME II (concerning the Indie sorcerer K a v y a Usanas, of Indo-Iranian
rather than Indo-European relevance) is n o w available in v e r n a c -
ular to what the French are wont to call "le m o n d e a n g l o - s a x o n . "
This leaves in the main only the m o n u m e n t a l first v o l u m e , D u m e -
zil's s u m m a on the Mahabharata, R o m a n " h i s t o r y , " the Ossetic
epic, and "epica m i n o r a , " as a future a g e n d u m .
 Editor's Preface

For m o s t q u o t a t i o n s f r o m S a x o G r a m m a t i c u s the new EngHsh

translation b y Peter Fisher (1979) is used in preference to O l i v e r
Elton's old version, except that the Latin f o r m s of proper names
h a v e been retained. T h e renderings of certain of S a x o ' s quoted
Latin p o e m s , h o w e v e r , as well as all quoted passages f r o m O l d
Icelandic, are of the translator's and editor's m a k i n g and based
directly on the original.
For the Mahabharata Dumezil uses interchangeably the C a l -
cutta and P o o n a editions. W h e n e v e r the latter occurs in extensive
q u o t a t i o n s , the English version given is normally that of J . A . B .
v a n Buitenen's C h i c a g o translation ( 1 9 7 3 - ) ; where the t w o editions
run parallel, with n o or insignificant variations, van Buitenen's ren-
dering (with occasional slight corrections) also serves f o r Dumezil's
use of the C a l c u t t a edition; but in cases of significant divergence or
i n a c c u r a c y , the Calcutta passages are translated directly f r o m the
Sanskrit, and the same is true in glossing all short snatches of S a n -
skrit in the running text.
Q u o t e d passages f r o m D i o d o r u s Siculus are given in the
translation of C . H . O l d f a t h e r (Loeb Classical Library, 1 9 3 5 ) , with
some changes in the spelling of proper n a m e s .
O f the appendices to ME II, only the extracts f r o m de Polier's
Mythologie des Indous which relate to J a r a s a n d h a and Sisupala
(pp. 3 8 1 - 3 8 8 ) have been included; appendix II ( p p . 3 9 2 - 4 0 2 , text
and French translation of S a x o ' s seventy Sapphic stanzas c o n t a i n -
ing Starcatherus's torrent of invective against Ingellus) is un-
necessary in English, given the available renderings b y both Elton
and Fisher.
 Editor's Introduction

W i t h Aspects de la fonction guerriere chez les Indo-europeens

( 1 9 5 6 ; G e r m a n edition 1 9 6 4 ) a n d its revamped version Heur et
malheur du guerrier = The Destiny of the Warrior ( 1 9 7 0 ) , G e o r g e s
Dumezil inaugurated a systematic investigation of the Indo-Euro-
pean w a r r i o r type b y matching the R o m a n " e p i c " of Tullus Hosti-
lius with Vedic m y t h s surrounding Indra, m o r e specifically the
c o m b i n e d "third v s . triple" and killing-of-kin themes (Horatii v s .
Curiatii, T r i t a A p t y a v s . Trisiras) a n d the episode of the treacher-
ous ally ( N a m u c i , Mettius) o v e r w h o m the hero prevails w i t h the
aid of succorous deities (SarasvatT-Asvins, Quirinus-Ops) and
w h o m he slays in the end b y cruel and unusual, thus " s i n f u l "
m e a n s . Dumezil also stressed the "solitude and liberty" c h a r a c t e r -
istics of the Indo-European w a r r i o r , as exemplified b y Indra's
epithet eka-, 'one, a l o n e , unique,' his a v y a y l b h a v a adverb yatha-
vasam, 'as one wills,' and his noun svadha, 'one's own law,
a u t o n o m y . ' T h e latter's cognate relationship with Latin sodalis,
' m e m b e r of a secret society,' pointed up the warrior's ambivalent
role as single c h a m p i o n or part of a self-centered corps or coterie,
b o t h a society's external defender and its potential internal m e n a c e .
A s s y m p t o m a t i c of such a m y t h i c warrior's "life s t o r y " D u -
mezil singled out "negative p e a k s " or perhaps nadir-episodes, a
structured set of misdeeds or failings in which the hero c o m p r o -
mises his career b y offending all three levels of society b y murder-
ous/sacrilegious, c o w a r d l y / u n w a r r i o r l i k e , and venal/adulterous
acts respectively. T h u s Indra, spared censure in Vedic h y m n s f o r

f IX
 Editor's Introduction

the simple reason that one does not dwell on the s e a m y side of one's
object of celebration, has his antisocial proclivities fully aired in
B r a h m a n i c , Epic, and Puranic texts, especially B o o k Five of the
Markandeya-Purana where Indra's killing of his fellow god
Tva^tar's son Trisiras and of Vrtra (replacing N a m u c i ) , and sexual
possession of A h a l y a in the disguise of her husband G a u t a m a ,
cause him to be divested of his splendor, might, and looks {tejas,
balam, rupam) which are transferred to D h a r m a , M a r u t a ( =
V a y u ) , and the N a s a t y a ( = Asvin) twins respectively (and subse-
quently deposited in the w o m b s of the queens K u n t I and MadrT,
engendering the M a h a b h a r a t a heroes Yudhi?thira, B h l m a + Ar-
j u n a , and Nakula + S a h a d e v a ) . Dumezil saw a parallel in the
Avestan "first king" and culture hero Y i m a w h o w h e n sinning lost
his regal glory {x^aranah) in staggered p o r t i o n s which were suc-
cessively reinvested in M i t h r a , T h r a e t a o n a , and K r s a s p a . T h r e e
similar low points in the sagas of Starcatherus in S a x o G r a m -
maticus (regicidal h u m a n sacrifice inspired by O d i n , uncharacter-
istic c o w a r d i c e in battle, " c o n t r a c t " killing f o r gold of a king in his
bath) and of Herakles in D i o d o r u s Siculus (defiance of Zeus lead-
ing to madness resulting in the killing of his own children in
rage brought on by Hera, ruseful defenestration of Iphitus, adul-
tery with lole) supplied G e r m a n i c and G r e e k reinforcements of
the t y p o l o g y .
T h i s w o r k , attractively presented, closely reasoned, a n d full of
intriguing parallelisms, received further substantiation in Mythe et
epopee II (1971) and III (1973). T h e hero as the stakes in a game of
g o d s — s u c h is the title Dumezil bestowed on his treatment of the
"parallel lives" of Starcatherus, Sisupala, and Herakles in ME II,
pp. 1 3 - 1 3 2 = the present b o o k , a w o r k which m a k e s the earlier
study seem a superficial sketch. Y i m a and Indra h a v e been excluded
from the dossier, the former without explanation in loco. In Heur et
malheur p p . 9 4 - 9 5 = Destiny of the Warrior p p . 1 0 3 - 1 0 4 Yima's
n o n - w a r r i o r status was explained via the doctrinal "demilitariza-
t i o n " of the Zoroastrian r e f o r m , whereas n o w ( M E //, p p . 3 5 6 -
 Editor's Introduction

358 = The Destiny of a King p p . 1 1 0 - 1 1 2 [1973]) Y i m a stands

apart altogether, charged rather with a single (albeit triply c o m -
partmentalized), all-encompassing "sin of the sovereign" radically
different in kind f r o m the "three sins of the w a r r i o r . " Indra's evic-
tion is explicit: T h e Markandeya-Purana account is p r o n o u n c e d a
s e c o n d a r y , artificial mythological extension of the epic theme of
the three sins (see b e l o w , pp. 4 - 5 , 140) which latter Dumezil finds
rather tucked a w a y in the figures of Sisupala + Jarasandha in the
Mahabharata. T h e s e refinements started from a realization that
peculiar c o n c o r d a n c e s of the mortal careers of Starcatherus and
Herakles, f r o m the setting of their fates b y antagonistic deities of
the "first two f u n c t i o n s " ( O d i n - T h o r , H e r a - A t h e n a ) to their quasi-
self-immolational death using the services of a y o u n g assistant
(Hatherus, Philoktetes), outweigh the single theme of the three sins.
T h e resulting study of three heroic careers attains i m p o r t a n t
new levels of penetration in the Starcatherus part, giving their due
also to O l d Icelandic sources for S t a r k a 5 r (especially the Gautreks-
saga). It also analyzes in depth for the first time the strange figures
of Sisupala and his supplementary analogue and overking J a r a s a n -
d h a . T h e Herakles part, however, remains as before s o m e w h a t
sketchy and inconclusive. Dumezil nevertheless triangulates the
S c a n d i n a v i a n , Indie, and G r e e k traditions and reaches the startling
conclusion that the S c a n d i n a v i a n - G r e e k isotheme bundle consti-
tutes the strongest axis, with the S c a n d i n a v i a n - l n d i c one a clear
s e c o n d , and the G r e e k - I n d i c one an almost nonexistent third. T h u s
the Starcatherus s t o r y , despite its late attestation, is the c o m m o n
d e n o m i n a t o r and hence the purest reflector of I n d o - E u r o p e a n in-
heritance. R a t h e r than a triangle, the whole is triptych, with S c a n -
dinavia as centerpiece and India and G r e e c e as side panels.
S o m e of the discrepancies and "loose ends" in the Herakles saga
are readily explicable as culturally conditioned i n n o v a t i o n s . Unlike
S t a r c a t h e r u s and Sisupala with their innate enormities (supernum-
erary arms [ + eye in Sisupala]) which are corrected in childhood
by divine intervention, Herakles is " n o r m a l " f o r the simple reason

XI
 Editor's Introduction

that he c o n f o r m s to the Greek n o r m which eschews congenital

m o n s t r o s i t y in O l y m p i a n heroes, reserving hand-related and o c u -
lar irregularities for the f o r m e r gods of the T i t a n generation (Hek-
a t o n k h e i r o i , K y k l o p e s ) . R a t h e r than undergo decapitation in the
m a n n e r of Starcatherus o r Sisupala, Herakles has a mysterious
apotheosis b y fire on a m o u n t a i n , in c o n f o r m i t y with the classical
heroic pattern. In contradistinction to the ultra-royalists S t a r c a -
therus and Sisupala w h o nevertheless b e c o m e regicidally entangled
(counting J a r a s a n d h a as alter ego of Sisupala), Herakles has n o
similar extreme proclivities; apart f r o m his strained service to
Eurystheus, his legend c o n f o r m s to the relative obsoleteness o f
h u m a n sacrifice (or at least the i m m o l a t i o n of kings) in classical
G r e e c e , unlike the persistence o f ritualistic murder in pagan S c a n -
dinavia a n d its vestigial reminiscences in b o t h Vedic legend and
ritual and in the laws of M a n u .
But interest centers on the " g a m e o f g o d s " in which the hero is
the " s t a k e s " (perhaps one might call him rather the p a w n in a divine
tug-of-war), and here, t o o , Herakles is n o t a b l y discrepant. Unlike
Starcatherus buffeted in the tension-field between O d i n and T h o r ,
and Sisupala, h u m a n replica o f R u d r a - S i v a , face to face with
Kr?ria, an a v a t a r o f Vi§nu, Herakles is the victim/ beneficiary of the
attentions o f t w o female deities, Hera and A t h e n a . T h i s feature,
t o o , c a n b e explained as a G r e e k i n n o v a t i o n , attributable to the
role that the O l y m p i a n o f f s h o o t s o f the A e g e a n goddesses typically
play in the careers of individual heroes (e. g., A t h e n a with O d y s -
seus); Zeus is in such cases a b o v e the f r a y , or in this instance w o r k -
ing f o r his son through the p r o x y o f his h e a d - b o r n daughter, with
O l y m p i a n household tensions replacing inherited Indo-European
antagonisms.
Since Indo-European structures are involved in this epic plot,
neither sectarian oppositions between Odin-cult and T h o r - w o r s h i p
in Viking S c a n d i n a v i a , n o r the V a i ? n a v a / S a i v a split of Hinduism,
n o r the absence o f a n y such historical schism in the O l y m p i a n
system are of relevance (the O l y m p i a n : c h t h o n i a n d i c h o t o m y does
not enter). Dumezil is naturally p r o n e to applying the trifunctional
 Editor's Introduction

analysis and to extrapolating from such typecasting. T h u s O d i n is

essentially of the "first f u n c t i o n , " T h o r " s e c o n d f u n c t i o n , " as are
Hera and A t h e n a respectively, chiefly on the basis of the anecdotal
Judgment of Paris, while Rudra and V i j n u are not " f u n c t i o n a l l y in-
tegrated" (still, V a s u s , Rudras, and A d i t y a s sum up the formulaic
roster of the tripartite p a n t h e o n [RV 1 0 . 1 2 8 . 9 ] , and Rudrfiylas =
M a r u t s are clearly warrior deities). Dumezil is of course a w a r e of
the functional shifts and slippages in G e r m a n i c theology, with
Odin's warlike preoccupations and T h o r ' s impingements on the
rain-related c o n c e r n s of the h u s b a n d m e n . He is also quite willing to
admit further complexity in O d i n , latching on to the c o m p a r i s o n s
m a d e b y Jan de Vries and others between O d i n and R u d r a . T h u s a
different, extrafunctional opposition of " d a r k " ( O d i n , Rudra) and
"light" ( T h o r , V i j n u ) deities is set up, one that is m o r e serious for
the tripartite system than was Dumezil's one-time distinction of
"first" and " l a s t " gods, since it cuts across such stalwarts of trifunc-
tionality as O d i n and T h o r . Dumezil realizes that this " d a r k " :
"light" opposition lies at the heart of the antagonisms that vic-
timize the hero, and yet he is unable to find any trace of it in
Hera : A t h e n a , leaving this dn:op(a for others to solve (see b e -
low, p. 132).
For further understanding of this saga w e might expunge all
reference to the "first f u n c t i o n " and treat it as purely internal to the
warrior class, with the " d a r k " : "light" opposition basic to the in-
ner tensions of that class. S u c h distinctions as the " c h i v a l r o u s " v s .
" b r u t e " w a r r i o r (Indra vs. V a y u , A r j u n a v s . BhTma, Achilles vs.
Herakles; cf. e. g.. Destiny of the Warrior xi) should likewise be
deemphasized as superficial: T h o r is called " a kind of V a y u or
BhTma" ( i . e . , a " s o l i t a r y " c h a m p i o n ; see b e l o w , p. 8 6 ) , and yet
V a y u ' s alleged pre-Vedic " b r u t e w a r r i o r " character had supposedly
turned into that of a "first" (or "initial") god b y Vedic times (Des-
tiny of the Warrior, p. 5 9 ) . In short, we should clear the b o a r d s also
of that non-basic differentation.
For " d a r k " and "light" I would rather substitute a " d e m o n i c "
v s . "culture g o d " opposition between deities of the w a r r i o r class. It

xiU
 Editor's Introduction

is the difference between a figure of monstrous a n c e s t r y or at-

tachments and o n e w h o m a k e s the world safe against monsters, a
kind of nature : culture tension in which the warrior is caught up.
Rudra with his three eyes and four a r m s , one-eyed O d i n born of the
giantess Bestla and riding an eight-legged horse, Hera born of
T i t a n s , with one-eyed K y k l o p e s and hundred-armed H e k a t o n k h e i -
roi f o r uncles and herself the parthenogenous m o t h e r of the
monster T y p h o e u s — a l l these fit the " d e m o n i c " slot. T h e hero has
definite onomastic associations with this kind of deity: Sisupala
echoing (Rudra) Pasupati, Starcatherus-StarkaSr being a c o m -
pound of H a t h e r u s - H 6 3 r (name of both the hero's y o u n g deliverer
from life and the fate-god himself, close to O d i n ) , and Herakles
meaning "possessing Hera's KX^O?." T h e contrasting deity is o n e
w h o prunes the wild by holding d o w n the m o n s t r o u s (Indra or
T r i t a A p t y a slaying Trisiras, T h o r cutting b a c k on giants, A t h e n a
Nike with the G o r g o n ' s head on her breastplate) a n d furthering
n o r m a l nature (Indra and T h o r releasing waters, T r i t a A p t y a being
" w a t e r y " in his very c l a n - n a m e , A t h e n a nurturing both plants
[olive] and the young [Erikhthonios]). V a y u m a y well originally
belong on the " w i l d " side, and Indra has b e c o m e too much of an
all-round w a r r i o r god to admit full and sharp polarization; but
Vi§nu is a g o o d candidate for the "culture g o d " type, not only in his
Krsrta-avatar but also in that of R a m a , w h o after all married the
Furrow, S i t a , and whose story is h o m o l o g o u s to the Indra-myths of
the V e d a , as Hermann Jacobi showed almost a century a g o . V i j n u ' s
Norse parallel, Vi3ar, is typically a strong-arm/ foot god second
only to T h o r himself, one w h o will not desist f r o m monster-
extermination even in the last straits of e s c h a t o l o g y , as he forces
apart and shatters the j a w s of the wolf Fenrir w h o has devoured
O d i n . T h e warrior hero is thus s o m e h o w genetically and inherently
demonic, and his career is m a r k e d b y the d r a m a between this
ancestral burden and the rehabilitational and "civilizing" efforts
under the figurative (and in one case literal) aegis of the o p -
posing deity. T h o r performs on S t a r k a 3 r a rough form of plastic
surgery, Kf^na relies on m o r e miraculous instant normalization of

xiv
 Editor's Introduction

the infant Sisupala, A t h e n a ' s services to Herakles range from nur-

ture to a r m a m e n t . In line with European heroic tradition, the Norse
and G r e e k strongmen even acquire the finer skills of poetry and
music, whereas India lays more stress on the purely d e m o n i c .
Herakles shows traits reminiscent of the T h o r type, perhaps pre-
serving some of the features that have been otherwise lost due to
Athena's female gender, such as active monster-killing and the
episodes of transvestitism which also characterize Thor and
Achilles. In the fullness of time, the god O d i n w h o ordained
S t a r k a 3 r ' s three life-spans takes him b a c k unto himself b y the of-
fices of H 6 3 r ; Zeus arranges for Hera to " a d o p t " formally the
deified Herakles on whose begetting he had spent three symbolic
night-spans. Sisupala's end comes instead at the hands of Kj-jna,
upon which he is a b s o r b e d into the godhead of his killer b y a
V i j n u i t e salvation miracle; this thematic reversal is as understand-
able in classical India as is the reclaiming of the hero by O d i n in
Viking Scandinavia; both a c c o u n t s are simply true to their sec-
tarian e n v i r o n m e n t s . T h e hero's career is in all instances tragic, due
to the flaws inherent in his demonic nature or inflicted by the gods
vying for his soul, but the resolutions differ: reconciliation in
Europe, redemption in India.
Ancillary matter to this great tableau has been accumulating
during the 1 9 7 0 s . A k i n to the "three sins" is the theme of the "three
charges against the w a r r i o r , " as w h e n the R o m a n s Camillus
(nia65Tinoq according to Plutarch, like the populace-hating Star-
catherus) and Coriolanus are accused of sacrilege/usurpation, ir-
regularities in the disposal of military spoils, and opposition to
populist measures (ME III, p p . 2 3 1 - 2 3 5 , pp. 2 4 2 - 2 4 8 ) . Dumezil
himself has c o m p a r e d with the three sins the excessive revenge that
the Ossetic hero Batraz exacts for the murder of his father X a e m y c ,
with successive cruelties against the B o r a t a e (third-estate clan), the
/ E x s a e r t a e g k a t a e (warrior estate), and the heavenly powers them-
selves (angels, spirits), until his death reconciles him to God
(Romans de Scythie et d'alentour [ 1 9 7 8 ] , pp. 5 0 - 5 8 ) . Daniel Dubuis-
son (Annales Economies Societes Civilisations 34 [ 1 9 7 9 ] , 4 6 4 - 4 8 9 )
 Editor's Introduction

has tabulated w h a t he considers the "three sins of R a m a " (unethical

slaying of Valin, b r a h m a n i c i d a j killing of R a v a n a , repudiation of
Slta), thereby to a degree affirming J a c o b i ' s thesis of the Indraic
sources of the characters and plot of the Ramayana. Perhaps most
interesting of all, D a v i d J . C o h e n {Celtica 1 2 . 1 1 3 - 1 2 4 [1977]) has
challenged Dumezil's claim (see b e l o w , p. 141) that "of the
numerous great warriors of Irish sagas, n o n e is the subject of a tale
which even remotely recalls those that have been studied" (viz.
S t a r k a S r , Sisupala, Herakles). S u i b h n e Geilt in the Buile Suibhne is
an Irish w a r r i o r whose life of wandering and poetry is dramatically
highlighted b y his u n p r o v o k e d outrages against S t . R o n a n , his
strange c o w a r d l y flight f r o m the battle of M a g h R a t h , and his
violent death in the house of S t . M o l i n g on an accusation—albeit
f a l s e — o f adultery, a c c o m p a n i e d b y last rites administered b y S t .
M o l i n g w h o had long anticipated Suibhne's coming and was thus
fatally foreordained to attend to the final stages of his life. Here
R o n a n , the church-builder and " c o n s t r u c t i v e " figure in association
with kings, clearly occupies the "culture g o d " slot, and Suibhne's
frenetic hatred of him h a s m u c h in c o m m o n with Sisupala's
onslaught on Kfsna- M o l i n g , on the other h a n d , figures as the in-
gatherer of the spent soul of this Sweeney Agonistes in the m a n n e r
in which O d i n arranges f o r the return of his o w n : reconciliation of
the poet-warrior to his god rather than miraculous transfusional
salvation, in line with S c a n d i n a v i a and Greece rather than India.
C o h e n also finds an inverted variant of the theme of the "three sins"
in the Borama Laigen, which details S t . C o l u m b ' s description of
three Irish kings w h o had g o n e to heaven, namely, Daimin
D a m a r g a i t w h o never hassled the church, Ailill w h o in the nick of
time had thought better of fleeing f r o m battle, and Feradach w h o
was beguiled b y gold until he repented of his hoarding on his
deathbed and at last sought divine g r a c e . Here the pitfalls which the
first t w o " s a v e d " rulers avoided m a t c h the first t w o sins of S u i b h n e ,
whereas Feradach's last-minute i m m u n i t y to auri sacra fames looks
rather like the antidote that might have saved S t a r c a t h e r u s f r o m his
third sin, the mercenary murder of King O l o in return f o r gold.

XVl
 Editor's Introduction

T h a n k s to Dumezil we are on the tracks of a truly Indo-

European h e r o - t y p o l o g y , one that mirrors an epic m y t h o n c e cur-
rent in traditions f r o m Iceland and Ireland to Iran and India,
greatly at variance with the ritualistic and p s y c h o a n a l y t i c p r o t o -
types postulated f o r the " a v e r a g e " hero figure b y the likes of Lord
R a g l a n , O t t o Rai\k, and Joseph C a m p b e l l .

xvii
 Introduction

T h e w o r k presented here follows up a study m a d e in a course

at the College de France in M a r c h 1 9 5 3 , published in 1 9 5 6 in As-
pects de la fonction guerriere, and reproduced with few alterations
in 1 9 7 0 in The Destiny of the Warrior, pp. 5 1 - 1 0 7 .
It was in 1 9 5 3 that three examples were assembled of a re-
m a r k a b l e epic thematization of the Indo-European trifunctional
structure which I proposed to call, f o r short, " t h e three sins of the
w a r r i o r . " T h e y concern an Indie g o d , Indra, a S c a n d i n a v i a n hero,
S t a r k a S r (Starcatherus), and a G r e e k h e r o , Herakles. T h e theme
provides the two heroes with the general outline of their careers,
f r o m y o u t h to death, while it a c c o u n t s f o r only a segment of the
god's career, one leading to a t e m p o r a r y but nearly complete
downfall.
A c c o r d i n g to the fifth section of the Markandeya-Purana, in
an act which is necessary f o r the well-being of the w o r l d but in-
herently censurable, Indra kills a demonic being w h o holds the
r a n k of B r a h m a n and w h o is according to some also the priest of
the gods and even their k i n s m a n ; this sacrilegious act causes the
murderer to lose his tejas, his spiritual energy. Later he treacher-
ously slays a second demon of w h o m he, the w a r r i o r , has been
afraid and w h o m , c o n t r a r y to his calling, he has not dared to c o n -
front in a fair fight; as a result of this c o w a r d i c e he loses his bala,
his physical strength. Finally, like Jupiter with A m p h i t r y o n , he
dons the a p p e a r a n c e of a husband w h o s e wife he c o v e t s and thus
gets his w a y ; this sexual villainy m a k e s him lose his riipa, his
 Introduction

beauty. Nothing remains to him except, since this immortal

naturally must hve o n , a small portion of the bala, the strength
which is the essence of his o w n function. C o n s e q u e n t l y he is vir-
tually wiped out, and his situation is the m o r e serious as the tejas,
the bala, and the rupa that have deserted him seem irrecoverable,
e a c h having entered into the god with w h o m it has a natural affini-
t y : his spiritual energy has flowed into D h a r m a , the personification
of right as well as m o r a l i t y ; his physical strength into V a y u , the
brutish W i n d ; his beauty into the t w o h a n d s o m e divine twins, the
A s v i n s . T h e s e four gods, plus w h a t remains of Indra himself, later
beget on Pandu's behalf an equal n u m b e r of sons, w h o finally m a k e
up the f a m o u s trifunctional group of the five Pai^dava brothers (or
half b r o t h e r s , o r near brothers).
In the s u m m a t i o n b y D i o d o r u s Siculus, the long string of
Herakles' feats, so helpful t o men and to the gods, is set off, p u n c -
tuated b y three failings whose effects are serious and which ne-
cessitate, besides a consultation of the priestess of Delphi, some ex-
piation or redress. For having tried to avoid the divine c o m m a n d
which sent him into the service of Eurystheus, he is seized with
madness (XvaGu), kills his children, and o v e r c o m e b y this deed,
must resign himself to perform the labors which Eurystheus dreams
up, with a n u m b e r of s u b - l a b o r s . W i t h this task d o n e , he kills, b y a
shameful trick and not in a fair fight, an e n e m y w h o is next to him;
he is then stricken with a physical illness (voaf|aag) w h i c h he c a n be
rid of only b y b e c o m i n g , on the advice of the P y t h i a , the slave of
O m p h a l e , queen of L y d i a . Finally, after a new series of " f r e e "
deeds, he forgets that he has just formally and legally mar-
ried Deianeira and enters into a culpable relationship, as the direct
consequence of which he is bodily devoured b y the burning ((Sspjoa-
oia) of the tunic s o a k e d in the b l o o d of Nessos, and after a last c o n -
sultation with the Pythia ascends the pyre of O e t a .
In the treatment of S a x o G r a m m a t i c u s , the o n l y complete o n e ,
the n o less lengthy and varied string of exploits of the hero S t a r -
catherus is spread out over three periods, m o r e precisely three
lives, each of which is of necessity and b y preordination marked b y
 Introduction

a facinus, a f e l o n y . H e helps the god O t h i n u s kill a N o r w e g i a n

king, his master and friend, in a simulated h u m a n sacrifice. A f t e r
the death of a n o t h e r master, a Swedish king, he flees shamefully
f r o m the battlefield, contributing to the rout of the a r m y . Finally,
he lets himself be bribed b y conspirators, for a hundred a n d twenty
pounds of gold, and kills a third master, the Danish king O l o .
B r a h m a n i c i d e , c o w a r d i c e instead of v a l o r , b a s e adultery; such
is the criminal record of Indra. Disobedience to Z e u s , c o w a r d i c e in-
stead of b r a v e r y , and neglect of conjugal duty constitute the dossier
of Herakles. A n d that of Starcatherus includes murder of his king
in a h u m a n sacrifice, flight o n the battlefield after the death of his
king, a n d murder of his king f o r cash m o n e y . Each of these three
sets violates in succession the laws of religion, the warrior's ethic,
and o n e o r the other of the t w o most important c o m p o n e n t s — s e x -
uality a n d w e a l t h — o f the m o r a l i t y of the third f u n c t i o n .

T h i s parallelism was certainly no illusion, b u t w h a t lesson did

it offer? Since 1 9 5 3 I had singled out a m o n g the three d o c u m e n t s ,
taken in pairs, further b i n a r y a c c o r d a n c e s in which the third did
not share. T h u s only the sins of Indra and of Herakles, f o r w h i c h
the culprits are fully responsible, entail separate, immediate, a u t o -
matic sanctions, while those of Starcatherus, the results of a curse
against which he is powerless, have n o such effects. Y e t even here
the similarity involves an important difference: while Indra loses
successively, without intervening restoration, the three c o m p o n -
ents of his being (spiritual energy, physical strength, b e a u t y ) , thus
heading continuously and linearly towards his t e m p o r a r y downfall
after the third sin and the third loss, on the c o n t r a r y the " m a d n e s s , "
then the " s i c k n e s s " of Herakles are completely cured, each after an
a t o n e m e n t ; his mental and physical health are restored, and it is the
third sin alone which puts him in a state f o r which there is n o o t h e r
remedy than a v o l u n t a r y death. B y the same t o k e n , the G r e e k
structure is closer to the S c a n d i n a v i a n in which the first t w o faci-
nora h a v e no ill effects, but where Starcatherus, o n c e the third is
c o m m i t t e d , has but one idea, one need: to offer himself willingly to

I
 Introduction

the sword of a killer chosen b y himself. In short, the width of the

divergences imposed the v i e w — h e n c e the title given to the 1 9 5 6
e s s a y — t h a t only the general f r a m e w o r k of the " t h r e e sins of the
w a r r i o r " is to be ascribed to Indo-European inheritance, and that
each of the three societies has made use of it independently and in
an original m a n n e r .
A n d yet, between S t a r k a S r - S t a r c a t h e r u s and Herakles, b e -
sides this general outline, there appeared very specific c o r r e s p o n d -
ences: not only their v o l u n t a r y death, but their type of c h a m p i o n ,
as righters of wrongs wandering throughout the w o r l d ; the paid
help which they seek and get f r o m a young friend for the sort of
death which they h a v e chosen; and a b o v e all, in their beginnings,
the t w o antagonistic divinities w h o set or enjoin their fates, and
w h o turn out to be those of the first two functions on well-known
c a n o n i c a l lists: O d i n and T h o r , Hera and A t h e n a . T h u s one could
glimpse the main features of a c o m m o n plot, where the three sins
were merely one correspondence a m o n g others. But h o w was one
to interpret this b r o a d agreement in which India did not share?

Actually, the c o m p a r a t i v e dossier was s o m e w h a t unbalanced,

b y the simple fact that it entailed two h u m a n heroes in contrast
with a g o d : Indra's sins are m y t h o l o g i c a l , those of S t a r k a S r and of
Herakles are epic. This of course does not preclude c o m p a r i s o n ,
but there was a more troublesome p r o b l e m . Critics h a v e not failed
to n o t e that the Indie document used w a s a P u r a n a , the valuable
Markandeya-Purana to be sure, which has preserved other cer-
tainly archaic material, but which o n e would like t o b a c k up here
with an epic version; as matters stand, although a text of the Ma-
habharata does expound a theory of the downfall of Indra in the
same sense, it lacks precisely w h a t would be i m p o r t a n t , the theme
of the three sins. T h u s one c a n n o t exclude the possibility that a
relatively late a u t h o r had systematized the sins, or at least some of
the sins of I n d r a — a w e l l - k n o w n n o t i o n ever since Vedic prose
literature, as is m o r e o v e r the theme of the god's " l o s s e s " — w i t h i n
the f r a m e of the three functions which w a s suggested to him by the
 Introduction

end of the story, the begetting of the P a n d a v a s by the gods of these

functions.
M o r e generally, the idea that a warrior, man or g o d , succes-
sively c o m m i t s a spectacular sin in each of the three areas (social,
m o r a l , even cosmic) defined by the three functions, is not so unique
that it could not have been reinvented independently in several
places, in several societies where the ideology of the three functions
remained alive and d o m i n a n t . It is all a matter of c o n t e x t . But in
fact, the context of the "sins of I n d r a " in the Markandeya-Purana is
entirely different from that of the sins of S t a r k a 3 r and H e r a k l e s .
T h e third term of the c o m p a r i s o n being thus w e a k e n e d , and
perhaps s e c o n d a r y , there remained face to face only the saga and
Diodorus—with the margin of indeterminacy inherent in any
c o m p a r a t i v e study where the dossier has been reduced to t w o
witnesses.

A n o t h e r section of the 1 9 5 3 study also required additional in-

vestigation. W i t h regard to S t a r k a S r , it had seemed natural and
e a s y , going b e y o n d the theme of the three sins, to interpret his
career as a w h o l e , and to do so b y relying on S a x o G r a m m a t i c u s :
does not he alone present entire, in all its three parts and with great
clarity, the p a n o r a m a of facinora which are merely mentioned by
O l d Icelandic texts? I therefore preferred S a x o ' s account f o r other
points of the saga where it does not agree with the Icelandic
sources, and in particular for a most important point, since it is o n e
of those where, in addition to the theme of the three sins, the legend
of Herakles and that of S t a r k a 3 r manifest a specific a c c o r d a n c e : the
relationships of the hero with two divinities w h o are variously in-
terested in him, Hera and A t h e n a , O d i n and T h o r . C o n s e q u e n t l y , I
categorized S t a r k a 3 r as a " h e r o of T h o r , " a rare specimen in c o n -
trast to the a b u n d a n t l y attested " O d i n i c h e r o . " T h o r , in f a c t , seems
in S a x o ' s account to be completely benevolent towards S t a r c a -
therus, since his o n l y , but decisive, intercession is t o rectify the
hero's m o n s t r o u s birth and give him a human form which is in-
dispensable f o r his prestigious career, whereas O t h i n u s , besides
 Introduction

unarguable benefits, is wholly responsible f o r the imposed f a t e

which sullies this career by three crimes.
T h i s interpretation has encountered m o r e opposition than as-
sent, and constructive critics, such as m y late friend Jan de Vries
and M r . Edward O . G . Turville Petre, have objected that the oldest
d a t u m , the allusion m a d e b y a ninth-century skald to an apparently
c o n t e m p o r a r y tradition, can be understood only if o n e admits, in
agreement with the Gautrekssaga and against S a x o , that T h o r had
well and truly killed a giant n a m e d S t a r k a S r , w h o c a n only b e , as
the saga calls him, a "first S t a r k a S r , " the hero's grandfather.
T h u s it was necessary to revise so debatable a solution, which
w a s , h o w e v e r , reinforced by the case of Herakles; persecuted b y
H e r a , protected b y A t h e n a , in a context where these two goddesses
are in fact, differentially, the Sovereign and the W a r r i o r e s s , is not
the G r e e k hero the b r o t h e r of this Starcatherus w h o m the magical
sovereign O t h i n u s favors only to gain his first crime, and to w h o m
the c h a m p i o n T h o r first g a v e h u m a n form while leaving him the
strength of a giant?

T h e study of the "three sins of the w a r r i o r " thus remained f o r

nearly a decade burdened with a double uncertainty: b o t h as to the
value of the Indie d a t a , and as to the meaning to be given to the fate
of the Scandinavian hero and consequently to the o b v i o u s similar-
ity of his career to that of Herakles. N o new decisive element
appeared, and there w a s no r o o m to pursue debates where n o argu-
ment on either side could be definitive. A s often happens, the solu-
tion was found on the trail of another inquiry altogether.
Since 1 9 4 7 , and Stig W i k a n d e r ' s discovery a b o u t the mythical
basis of the Mahabharata, I h a d continued to explore its numerous
and i m p o r t a n t consequences, for the interpretation of the p o e m
itself as well as for the c o m p a r a t i v e use of the very archaic m y t h o l -
ogy uncovered beneath the epic transposition. Several times the
inquiry revealed r e m a r k a b l e correspondences between this p a r a -
V e d i c , often pre-Vedic, m y t h o l o g y and S c a n d i n a v i a n m y t h o l o g y ;
thus it is that the D y a u h w h o acts indirectly through B h i j m a , with
 Introduction

his extraordinary birth and his role in the dynasty, m a t c h e s the

Heimdallr-Rigr of the Edda, and that the "eschatological b a t t l e "
lurking b e n e a t h the battle of K u r u k j e t r a has no closer parallel than
R a g n a r o k . V e r y soon one character caught m y attention, b o t h b e -
cause he seemed b y nature to belong to a n o t h e r period of Indie
m y t h o l o g y , and because at the s a m e time he lent himself, especially
in his role as savior in extremis, to precise c o m p a r i s o n s with S c a n -
dinavian m y t h o l o g y : n a m e l y K r j n a , and through him V i j n u . T h e
essence of what I think I can offer on this subject is found in Mythe
et Epopee I, in the last chapter of Part O n e ("Annihilation and R e -
b i r t h " ) , but so vast a problem cannot b e exhausted, or even e n c o m -
passed, in the space of a few years. Kf§i:ia, m o r e exactly the Krgna
of the Mahabharata, must be looked at not only in his general role
as adviser and p r o t e c t o r of the Pari(^avas, but in all his individual
interventions. His particularly close relationship with A r j u n a ; the
freedom which he, and he alone, has to authorize and suggest ques-
tionable a c t i o n s , even lies, without tarnishment; his participation
in a battle in which he nevertheless does not fight; the odd pair
which he m a k e s with his brother B a l a r a m a , and m a n y other peculi-
arities invite s o m e thought and undoubtedly reserve h a p p y sur-
prises f o r the comparativist. It was at one point in this investiga-
tion, already long and yet hardly begun, that K f j p a provided
S t a r k a 9 r — a n d through him H e r a k l e s — w i t h the Indie " b r o t h e r "
w h o s e place Indra had filled u n c o m f o r t a b l y .
It is in the second b o o k of the Mahabharata that Krgija first
intervenes significantly in the life of the P a n d a v a s . He persuades
the eldest b r o t h e r Yudhi§thira, w h o is apparently reconciled with
his o b n o x i o u s cousins, the sons of Dhrtara^fra, to celebrate the sac-
rifice of r o y a l enthronement which in this context also takes on im-
perial significance: Y u d h i j t h i r a will be not only king in his o w n
realm, but recognized sovereign o v e r all the kings of India. B y his
advice and b y several deeds, K r j o a actually directs the prepara-
tions a n d the accomplishment of the rites. In particular, he elim-

k
inates t w o ( m o r e o v e r interrelated) obstacles: before the c e r e m o n y ,
a rival king; at the beginning of the c e r e m o n y itself, w h a t might
 Introduction

be called a c o n t e s t a n t . T h i s latter is n a m e d Sisupala, and his bi-

zarre story is recounted in great detail. T h i s was w h a t we were
waiting f o r .

From 2 5 J a n u a r y to 15 M a r c h 1 9 6 2 , in seven seminars at t h e

College de France, I attempted to tame this u n m a n a g e a b l e c h a r -
acter. Since then the study has progressed, and w h a t follows is an
a c c o u n t of its current state.

J
 STARKADR

1. T H E TEXTS

T h e tale of S t a r k a S r is p r e s e r v e d in t w o i m p o r t a n t d o c u m e n t s ,
o n e o f w h i c h is a c c o m p a n i e d b y a small g r o u p of b r i e f a n d frag-
m e n t a r y r e c o r d s w h i c h add n o t h i n g c o n s e q u e n t i a l to it, b u t the
c o n t e n t s of these t w o d o c u m e n t s are v e r y u n e q u a l .
O n e was c o m p o s e d in O l d I c e l a n d i c , b y an a u t h o r well-versed
in ancient t r a d i t i o n , a n d preserves, interspersed with the p r o s e , a
p o e m in which the h e r o himself is supposed to be s p e a k i n g . ' U n f o r -
t u n a t e l y the p e r i o d of life c o v e r e d b y this p o e m a n d s t o r y is lim-
ited, extending o n l y f r o m the b i r t h of S t a r k a S r until s h o r t l y after

' The Gautrekssaga, chaps. 3 - 7 , is cited in the edition of Wilhelm Ranisch,

Palaestra XI (1900), 11-34. On this saga, see Jan de Vries, Altnordische Literatur-
geschichte II (1942), 455-457. The poem, Vikarsbalkr, contains thirty two stanzas,
which are stanzas 6 - 3 7 of the saga; it is found, with critical notes and vocabulary, in
Andreas Heusler and Wilhelm Ranisch, Eddica Minora (1903), 3 8 - 4 3 ; pace these
authors, pp. xxx-xxxi, there is no decisive reason to think that stanzas 1 6 - 2 3
( = saga 21-28) were interpolations. The main connected text is Hervararsaga ok
Heidreks konungs, ed. Jon Helgason (1924), 1:1-2, with variants unimportant for the
story. On the local folklore, or pseudo-folklore, of StarkaSr (tombs, etc.), see the
very interesting article by Valter Jansson, "Medelpadssagnerna om Starkotter,"
Jngermattland-Medelpad, /jrsbok for Vdsternorrlands Lans Hembygdsfdrbund
(1935), 5 7 - 6 9 ; also Arvid Enqvist, "Starkotters grav i Wattjom, Medelpad,"
Folkminnen och Folktankar, XXIX (1942), 1 - 1 1 ; Daniel Aslund, "Tuna Socken," Det
gamla Medelpad III (1946), 3 9 - 4 1 ("Starkodders saga berattad av en 92-arig
blitsman").

I
 StarkaSr

his first c r i m e . It w a s only this period which interested the saga-

madr, for w h o m S t a r k a S r w a s no more than an accessory figure in
a b o o k whose subject was quite different. In fact he is presented to
us, at the beginning of the "long version" of the Gautrekssaga, in
connection with the history of his friend and first victim, the king
V i k a r , himself incidental. T h e redaction which we read dates un-
doubtedly f r o m the thirteenth o r even the fourteenth century, but
all are agreed that it faithfully records ancient material, and in
particular that what it adds to the p o e m which it quotes and expli-
cates, the Vikarsbalkr, is n o gratuitous invention, but knowledge
c o r r e c t l y transmitted.
T h e o t h e r document is f o u n d in the Gesta Danorum of S a x o
Grammaticus^ (born c a . 1 1 5 0 , died after 1 2 1 6 ) . It follows the life, or
rather the three complete lives, of Starcatherus, divided a m o n g
b o o k s VI (chapters 5 to 8), VII (chapter 5 and 11), and VIII (chap-
ters 6 and 8 ) . T h e s e three w e r e , according to the plausible opinion
of Paul Herrmann,^ almost the last to be c o m p o s e d a m o n g the first
nine, o r " m y t h o l o g i c a l b o o k s . " T h e text is b r o k e n up by numerous
p o e m s , s o m e in epic, others in lyric meters, which are all attributed
to the hero and are surely paraphrases of O l d Icelandic p o e m s .
S a x o ' s sources c a n n o t be determined, but there is no doubt that
he w o r k e d f r o m o n e or m o r e sagas, written or oral, of which there
remains no trace. T h e p r o b l e m is to k n o w to what extent he
understood them, and also to what degree he willfully modified
them. In the part corresponding to the episode of the Gautreks-
saga, S a x o is very s u m m a r y , and the two a c c o u n t s diverge on im-
portant p o i n t s .

^ The Gesta Danorum is quoted in the edition of H. R. Ellis Davison, as

translated by Peter Fisher under the title, History of the Danes (Totowa, N.J., 1979).
On Saxo, see the introduction to From Myth to Fiction: The Saga of Hadingus,
trans. Derek Coltman (Chicago and London, 1973).
^ These books, certainly later than the "historical books" X-XVl (from Harald
Bluetooth, 936-986, to Knud VI, 1182-1202), were probably composed between
1202 and 1216 in the order: III, IV, V; VI, VII, II, I, VIII; IX.

10
 StarkaSr

T h e legend has been a b u n d a n t l y c o m m e n t e d u p o n . O n e finds

mention and occasional discussion of w o r k s before 1 9 2 1 in Paul
H e r r m a n n ' s Erlauterungen zu den ersten neun Biichern der ddnis-
chen Geschichte des Saxo Grammaticus, 1. Teil, K o m m e n t a r (1922),
p p . 4 1 7 - 4 6 7 , 4 8 8 (mention of the second facinus), 522-555, 557-
5 6 8 . H e r r m a n n himself m a d e a new and careful commentary,
though marred b y the tendency to deny a priori the unity of the
w h o l e and to dismember the interpretation to an extreme degree.
T h e r e a f t e r , the principal studies have been: H e r r m a n n Schneider,
Germanische Heldensage, II, 1 ( 1 9 3 3 ) , 1 4 3 - 1 8 3 ; Jan de Vries, " D i e
Starkadsage," Germanisch-Romanische Monatsschrift, 36 ( =
N . F. 5 [ 1 9 5 5 ] ) , 2 8 1 - 2 9 7 ; the second part of m y Aspects de la fonc-
tion guerriere ( 1 9 5 6 ) , with, as an appendix, a s u m m a r y of de Vries'
article (repeated, slightly modified and without this discussion, in
The Destiny of the Warrior [ 1 9 7 0 ] , part II); de Vries' clarifica-
tions in his review of Aspects . . . , Beitrdge zur Geschichte der
deutschen Sprache und Literatur, 78 (1957), 4 5 8 - 4 7 1 ; Edward
O.G. Turville Petre, Myth and Religion of the North (1964),
pp. 2 0 5 - 2 1 1 . "
T h e c o m p a r a t i v e study which is presented here, if it is correct,
c o n s i d e r a b l y changes the standing, the very data of the p r o b l e m .
Let us follow first, piece b y piece, the legend of S t a r k a 3 r in its
several v a r i a n t s , and see w h a t can b e suggested, if not d e m o n s t r a -
ted, b y internal criticism.

" Earlier bibliography, of only historical interest, will be found in Hermann

Schneider's book. The old study of Johann Ludwig Uhland, naturalistic as it is,
remains nonetheless one of the most interesting: Der Mythus von Thor nach nor-
dischen Quelten (1836), reprinted in Uhland's Schriften zur Geschichte der Dichtung
und Sage, VI, ed. Adelbert von Keller (1868), 101-110. One may still profitably con-
sider Karl Miillenhoff, Deutsche Altertumskunde V (2d ed. |1907l by Max
Roediger), 301-356; Gustav Neckel, Beitrdge zur Eddaforschung, mit Exkursen zur
Heldensage (1908), 351-358; Axel Olrik, Danmarks Hettedigtning, II, Starkad den
gamle og den yngre Skjoldungrcekke (1910), with Andreas Heusler's very weak
(especially p. 180) review in Anzeiger fur deutsches Attertum und deutsche Litera-
tur, XXXV, 3 (1911), 169-183.

11
 Starkadr

2. THE BIRTH, FATE, AND FIRST CRIME OF STARKADR

T h e a u t h o r responsible f o r the episode inserted in the Gau-

trekssaga k n o w s t w o characters n a m e d S t a r k a S r . T h e first, grand-
father of the h e r o , w a s a monstrous giant, possessed of four pairs of
a r m s . He abducted a certain girl, and her father appealed to the god
T h o r to rescue her. T h o r slew the kidnapper and restored the girl to
her father. But she was pregnant, and b o r e a h a n d s o m e b o y with
b l a c k hair, an entirely h u m a n being w h o inherited f r o m his father
an extraordinary strength, and w h o received the n a m e of S t o r v i r k r .
He married a princess of Halogaland, and h a d b y her a son w h o m
he n a m e d , according to c u s t o m , after his grandfather, S t a r k a S r .
A s the death of King V i k a r is all that the a u t h o r of the episode
intends to recount, he stresses the relationship S t a r k a S r and V i k a r
had f r o m their early y o u t h . S t o r v i r k r was killed b y Haraldr, king
of A g S i r , w h o brought up little S t a r k a S r along with his own son,
V i k a r . Haraldr was defeated and slain in his turn b y Herthjofr, king
of H o r d a l a n d , w h o t o o k hostage the sons of a n u m b e r of important
personages, beginning with the young V i k a r . O n e of Herthjofr's
men, G r a n i , also called Hrossharsgrani (Horse-hair G r a n i ) , w h o
lived in H o r d a l a n d on the island of Fenhring, t o o k a w a y with h i m
as b o o t y S t a r k a S r , aged three. T h e child stayed nine years with
G r a n i and grew big and strong as a giant. He then helped his friend
V i k a r to reconquer his realm, and joined up with h i m , a c c o m p a n y -
ing him on m a n y victorious expeditions and being showered b y
h i m with h o n o r s . '
But s o m e o n e had dark designs on the t w o friends: O d i n , the
sovereign g o d . O d i n in fact destined King V i k a r to be offered to
him as victim in a human sacrifice, a n d he had chosen S t a r k a S r to be
the sacrificer. If, f r o m the point of view of m e n , the act which
S t a r k a S r is to c o m m i t is contemptible and treasonous, one ought to
refrain f r o m being equally harsh from the god's perspective and
should not m o u r n f o r V i k a r . T h e fate of a h u m a n victim offered
' Chap. 3, p. 12; cf. Saga Heidreks konungs ins vitra, ed. Christopher Tolkien
(1960), appendix ("U-Redaktion"), pp. 6 6 - 6 7 .

12
 Starkadr

to O d i n , especially b y hanging and spear-thrust, is not lamentable;

it will h o n o r a b l y increase, in the o t h e r w o r l d , the vast b o d y of Ein-
herjar, w h o do not find the time long either in the mead-halls of
Valhalla where they a r e the guests of the g o d , or on the n e a r b y
fields where between banquets they wage fierce c o m b a t , henceforth
without risk. Sacrifice to O d i n w a s as g o o d as death on the battle-
field, which every well-born G e r m a n wished for. S o true is this that
the S c a n d i n a v i a n s had devised a sort of sacrament designed to save
by a shortcut those w h o had the mischance to meet with a natural
death, b y old age or illness: the historicized account which the
Heimskringla {Ynglingasaga) gives of the reign of " k i n g " Osinn says
that he instituted a " m a r k of the s p e a r , " a scratch that, inflicted on
a dying m a n , would vouchsafe him the eternal happiness which
n o r m a l l y ought to result only f r o m a mortal b l o w received f r o m an
e n e m y . A w a r r i o r or king sacrificed to the g o d , willingly or other-
wise, w a s assured a fortiori of a bountiful and violent afterlife. A s
for the murder which O d i n is going to m a k e S t a r k a S r c o m m i t , not
only will it have no grievous consequences for the h e r o , either in
this world o r the next, but the god vests his c o m m a n d in a series of
such conspicuous benefits that one is tempted to doubt its criminal
c h a r a c t e r , stated though it b e . Here then is h o w he goes a b o u t it, or
rather has long since gone a b o u t i t . '
T h e Hrossh^rsgrani w h o has taken to himself and brought up
S t a r k a 3 r with so much solicitude and success is none other than a
h u m a n f o r m assumed b y the g o d . Patiently, this M e n t o r awaits
f a v o r a b l e circumstances to ask of his T e l e m a c h u s the act for which
he has thus chosen him. T h e m o m e n t arrives in chapter V I I , ' w h e n ,
during a Viking expedition, V i k a r ' s sailing fleet is long becalmed
near a small island, and the duration of this e m b a r r a s s m e n t is such
that the king and his c o m p a n i o n s resort to a magical consultation
to determine the cause of it. T h e answer is that O d i n desires a m a n
of the a r m y to be sacrificed to him b y hanging. Lots are drawn, a n d

' Chaps. 3-6, pp. 13-27.

' Pp. 2 8 - 3 1 .

13
 StarkaSr

it is the king w h o is chosen. T h e a r m y remains silent and postpones

the deliberations to the next d a y . It is indeed n o m i n o r matter to kill
one's king, even in sacrifice, and besides h o w are they to induce
V i k a r , w h o is master of the expedition and free to f o r g o it, to offer
himself as victim to assure a success which will n o longer c o n c e r n
him?
It is at this point that Hrossharsgrani intervenes. In the middle
of the night he a w a k e n s S t a r k a S r , takes him in a b o a t to the shore
of the islet and leads him through the forest to a clearing where a
strange ping, o r assembly, is being held. A c r o w d of beings of
h u m a n appearance are gathered around twelve high seats, eleven of
which are already occupied b y the chief gods. Revealing himself f o r
w h o he is, O d i n ascends the twelfth seat a n d a n n o u n c e s that the
order of business is the determination of the fate of S t a r k a S r . In
fact, the event c o m e s d o w n to a magical-oratorical duel between
O d i n and T h o r . T h o r , taking the f l o o r immediately, declares that
he c a n n o t bear g o o d will t o w a r d a young m a n w h o s e grandfather
was a giant w h o m he h a d had to kill and w h o s e g r a n d m o t h e r , in
her girlhood, had preferred this giant to h i m — t o him, T h o r , the
" T h o r of the / ^ s i r " I C o n c l u d i n g , he imposes a first fate, a b a d o n e :
" S t a r k a 8 r will have n o children. Odin formulates a compensa-
tion: " S t a r k a S r will have three h u m a n life s p a n s . " ' But T h o r re-
j o i n s : " H e will c o m m i t a villainy, a nidingsverk, in each."^° A n d the
duel continues: " H e will a l w a y s , " says O d i n , " h a v e the best a r m s
and the best r a i m e n t s . " " H e will h a v e , " says T h o r , "neither land n o r
real p r o p e r t y . " O d i n : " H e will have fine furnishings." T h o r : " H e
will never feel he has e n o u g h . " O d i n : " H e will h a v e success and vic-
t o r y in every c o m b a t . " T h o r : " H e will receive a grave w o u n d in
every c o m b a t . " O d i n : " H e will h a v e the gift of poetry and i m -
p r o v i s a t i o n . " T h o r : " H e will forget all he has c o m p o s e d . " O d i n :

' "Alfhildr, moSir fodur StarkaSs, kaus fodur at syni sinum hundvisan jotun
heldr enn Asapor ok skapa ek pat Starkadi, at hann skal hvdrki eiga son ne dottur,
ok enda svd cett sina.
' "pat skapa ek honum, at hann skal Ufa prja manzaldra."
'° "Hann skal vinna nidingsverk a hverjum mannzaldri." The theme of the
three nidingsverk was transferred to the sword Tyrfingr and its owner Svafrlami in
the Hervararsaga (2, p. 3 [see above, p. 9 n. I j ) .

14
 Starka3r

" H e will appeal to the well-born and the great." T h o r : " H e will b e
despised b y the c o m m o n f o l k . "
T h e blueprint f o r the future ends here. T h e gods endorse with-
out discussion the propositions of the two debaters, the meeting is
a d j o u r n e d , and Hrossharsgrani brings S t a r k a S r b a c k towards the
ships. In p a y m e n t f o r the aid he has just provided h i m , he demands
of S t a r k a S r bluntly that he " s e n d " him the king, that is arrange f o r
the king to place himself in a position to b e sacrificed: he himself
will take care of the rest. S t a r k a S r , realizing that he must p a y ,
agrees. A n d the god turns o v e r to the m a n , hereafter his a c -
c o m p l i c e , a spear, telling h i m " t h a t it w o u l d appear as a stick of
reed" (reyrsprdti).

T h e next m o r n i n g , the king's counsellors met a n d arrived at

the following decision: they w o u l d c a r r y out a m o c k sacrifice,
a n d it w a s S t a r k a S r w h o proposed the plan. T h e r e s t o o d near
them a fir tree and a high stump near the fir; far d o w n f r o m the
tree stretched a slender b r a n c h , which rose up into the foliage.
T h e servants were preparing f o o d for the m e n , and a calf h a d
been opened and gutted. S t a r k a S r had them take out the calf's
intestine, then he stood up on the stump, bent d o w n the thin
b r a n c h , and k n o t t e d the entrail a r o u n d it. T h e n S t a r k a S r said
to the king, " Y o u r gallows is ready f o r y o u , king, and it does
not seem very dangerous. N o w c o m e hither, a n d I will lay the
rope a r o u n d y o u r n e c k . " T h e king said, "If this apparatus is n o
m o r e dangerous than it l o o k s to m e , then I think it will not
h a r m m e , but if it is otherwise, then it is for fate to decide w h a t
will h a p p e n . " T h e n he stood up on the stump, and S t a r k a S r
laid the n o o s e a r o u n d his neck and stepped d o w n f r o m the
s t u m p . T h e n S t a r k a S r thrust his stick at the king and said,
" N o w I give thee to O d i n . " " T h e n S t a r k a S r released the
b r a n c h . T h e reed-stick suddenly b e c a m e a spear and pierced
the king. T h e stump fell out f r o m beneath his feet, and the
calf's intestine b e c a m e a strong w i t h y , and the b r a n c h sprang
up a n d dragged the king into the leaves, and there he died.
T h e r e a f t e r the place has been called V i k a r s h o l m a r , 'Vikar's

" "Nu gef ek pik OdnW

15
 StarkaSr

Island.' From this deed S t a r k a S r b e c a m e much despised b y the

people, a n d w a s exiled f r o m H o r d a l a n d .

S t a r k a S r then goes to S w e d e n , where he is supposed to h a v e

c o m p o s e d the end of the Vikarsbalkr,^^ and w e hear nothing m o r e
of his life; it w a s of n o further interest to the sagamadr.

From the birth of Starcatherus to the death of W i c a r u s , S a x o ' s

account is brief. Here it is in its entirety (Fisher, p . 1 7 0 ) :

In those days there w a s a man Starcatherus, son of S t o r w e r c u s ,

w h o , w h e n he a n d his comrades were involved in a disastrous
shipwreck, w a s the o n l y one to escape through strength o r
l u c k . O n account of his wonderful pre-eminence of mind and
b o d y he w a s invited b y F r o t h o to be his guest. A f t e r he h a d
been his c o m p a n i o n f o r s o m e while and been treated m o r e
elegantly and h a n d s o m e l y each day, he w a s at length given a
splendid ship and told to pursue the life of an adventurer, at
the s a m e time exercising watch o v e r the seas. N a t u r e h a d
equipped him with a superhuman physique and spiritual en-
d o w m e n t s to m a t c h , s o that men believed that in b r a v e r y he
w a s second to n o n e . S o widespread w a s his conspicuous re-
n o w n that even t o d a y his deeds and n a m e remain distin-
guished in p o p u l a r esteem. T h e roll of his achievements not
o n l y scintillated in our own c o u n t r y but gained him brilliant
repute even through all the provinces of Sweden and S a x o n y .
Certainly it is recorded that he c a m e f r o m the region
which borders eastern Sweden, that which c o n t a i n s the wide-
flung dwellings of the Estlanders and o t h e r numerous savage
hordes. But a c o m m o n tale has been invented a b o u t his origin
which is fictitious, unreasonable and downright incredible. For
s o m e folk tell h o w he was b o r n of giants and revealed his m o n -
ster kind b y a n extraordinary n u m b e r of h a n d s . T h e y assert
that the god T h o r b r o k e the sinews which joined four of these
superfluous extensions of freakish Nature and tore them off,
plucking a w a y the unatural bunches of fingers f r o m the b o d y

Pp. 31-34.

16
 StarkaSr

proper; with only t w o a r m s left, his f r a m e , which before had

run to a gigantic e n o r m i t y and been shaped with a grotesque
c r o w d of limbs, was afterwards corrected according t o a better
model and contained within the m o r e limited dimensions of
men.

T h i s birth is followed in abrupt fashion b y a digression into

m y t h o l o g y , concerning in particular the gods O t h i n u s and T h o r
(pp. 1 7 0 - 7 1 ) . T h e y were of course not " g o d s , " S a x o explains, but
magicians w h o b y their prestige h a d c o n v i n c e d the simple folk that
they were gods, and this deception h a d infected N o r w a y , Sweden
and D e n m a r k . T h i s is w h y their names appear in the days of the
week, just as the ancient R o m a n s had also n a m e d these days after
the gods o r the seven planets.

A n o u t c o m e of this is that the days of the w e e k , in their a p -

pointed series, are thought of under the n a m e s of these " g o d s , "
since the ancient R o m a n s are k n o w n to h a v e given them sepa-
rate titles f r o m the names of their deities or f r o m the seven
planets. O n e gathers plainly f r o m this very n o m e n c l a t u r e of
days that the persons w h o were h o n o r e d b y our people were
not the same as those the early R o m a n s called Jupiter and M e r -
c u r y , or those w h o m Greece and Italy accorded all the h o m a g e
of superstition. W h a t we call T h o r ' s or Odin's day is termed b y
them Jove's or M e r c u r y ' s day. If w e accept that T h o r is Jupiter
a n d O d i n M e r c u r y , following the c h a n g e of the d a y s ' designa-
tions, then it is clear proof that Jupiter w a s the son of M e r c u r y ,
if w e abide b y the assertions of our c o u n t r y m e n , w h o s e c o m -
m o n belief is that T h o r w a s the child of O d i n . A s the R o m a n s
hold to the opposite opinion that M e r c u r y w a s b o r n of Jupiter,
it follows that if their claim is undisputed, we must realize that
T h o r and Jupiter, O d i n and M e r c u r y are different personages.

S a x o then resumes his account as abruptly as he had inter-

rupted it:

A n c i e n t tradition says that Starcatherus, w h o m I introduced

earlier, devoted his initial career to pleasing the gods through
the murder of W i c a r u s , king of N o r w a y . S o m e narrate this

17
 StarkaSr

version of the affair: O t h i n u s once desired that W i c a r u s should

c o m e to a dismal end, but did not wish t o effect this openly.
He therefore m a d e Starcatherus, already r e m a r k a b l e f o r his
unusual size, f a m o u s f o r his courage and his artistry in c o m -
posing spells, so that he could use the m a n ' s energies m o r e
readily to accomplish the king's death. O t h i n u s hoped that
this was h o w Starcatherus would s h o w his thanks f o r the
privileges bestowed on him. T o this end he also gave him three
times the span of mortal life, in order that he might perpetrate
a proportionate number of d a m n a b l e deeds, and crime a c c o m -
p a n y his prolonged existence.
He soon c a m e to W i c a r u s and f o r s o m e time lodged with
him in his p a l a c e , devising a trap during his attendance on the
king.
Eventually they e m b a r k e d together on a pirating expedi-
tion but arrived at a place where they were troubled b y a long
spell of violent storms. T h e gales interrupted their v o y a g e and
m a d e them spend a m a j o r part of the y e a r doing nothing, till
they decided that the gods must be appeased b y h u m a n b l o o d .
Lots cast in an urn showed a demand for a royal victim. S t a r -
catherus then twined round the king's n e c k a n o o s e he had
m a d e of osier, pretending to offer the appearance of an expia-
tion merely f o r a m o m e n t . But the tightness of the knot ful-
filled its function and cut short W i c a r u s ' breathing as he hung
there. W h i l e he was still panting Starcatherus tore out the r e m -
nants of life with his s w o r d , and w h e n he should have lent re-
lief disclosed his treachery. I c a n n o t entertain the view of one
version which relates that the soft osiers hardened as they sud-
denly gripped and acted like a halter of i r o n . "

O n c e this first c r i m e has been c o m m i t t e d , Starcatherus associ-

ates himself with a Danish Viking. A t first with h i m , and later
a l o n e , he travels o v e r a huge area: Russia, Ruthenia, Biarmia, S w e -
den, Ireland, Slavia, Russia again, B y z a n t i u m , P o l a n d , S a x o n y ,
and eventually arrives at the court of the D a n i s h king F r o t h o (pp.
Saxo did not understand the two-staged scenario of the sacrifice; see The
Destiny of the Warrior, trans. Alf Hiltebeitel (Chicago and London, 1970), p. 91,
and nn. 7, 8.

18
 Starka3r

1 7 2 - 1 7 4 ) . Everywhere he performs outstanding exploits, a model of

martial virtue.

3. ODIN, THOR AND STARKADR

IN THE GAUTREKSSAGA AND IN SAXO

T h e t w o tales, the Icelandic and the Latin, follow in the m a i n

the s a m e pattern but manifest significant differences on several
p o i n t s . A n d as happens whenever a c o m p a r i s o n is m a d e on the
basis of only t w o terms, it is difficult t o unravel a single archetype
of which the k n o w n texts w o u l d b e t w o divergent derivatives.
Aside f r o m the fact that it is not even certain that such an archetype
ever existed—folklorisls a r e a c c u s t o m e d to discovering such ir-
reducible doublets—it is inevitable, w h a t e v e r effort the critic m a y
m a k e at o b j e c t i v i t y , that in arguing f r o m one p r o b a b i l i t y to the
next he m a y venture b e y o n d w h a t is justifiable. In this case, h o w -
ever, internal criticism does lead to some conclusions.
T h e presentation of the birth of S t a r k a S r is tighter in S a x o than
in the s a g a . S a x o k n o w s only a single Starcatherus, w h o consoli-
dates w h a t the saga distributes between the t w o S t a r k a S r s , grand-
father a n d grandson: his native monstrosity, the intervention of the
gods, a n d the beginning of his heroic career. T h i s discrepancy,
while at first seeming considerable, is nonetheless reduced b y the
fact that, according to the Vikarsbalkr, the grandson bears heredi-
tary traces of his grandfather's monstrosity, vestigial stumps of
supernumerary a r m s . I k n o w that those critics w h o are quick to
prune the texts, and to reject as later additions w h a t e v e r does not
fit their idea of the " o r i g i n a l " plot, have edited out the stanza of the
p o e m which says this in clear t e r m s ; ' " their reasons a r e very w e a k .
If one avoids mutilating the bdlkr, the Icelandic and Latin versions
are not so different, since even in the f o r m e r S t a r k a S r is not, even

" Stanzas 31-32 ( = 36-37 of tfie saga);

31. Sea pykkjask peir I d sjalfum mer I jotunkumi /atta handa, II
er HlorriSi I fyr hamar nordan I Hergrims bana I hondum rainti.

19
 StarkaSr

at his beginnings, such a h a n d s o m e young m a n as o n e could hardly

believe to h a v e been descended from a m o n s t r o u s giant. O n the
c o n t r a r y , because of this origin he is at birth very like Starcatherus
" r e t o u c h e d " b y T h o r , and like him carries stigmata, jotunkumi:
stumps or vestiges of undeveloped limbs, if not scars of amputated
ones.
Under these circumstances, it is impossible to guess wrhich of
the t w o variants preserves the original state. T h e lectio of S a x o is
hardly difficilior than that of the saga and b o t h , in different w a y s ,
recall the type of the hero relieved of superfluous a r m s (in S a x o b y
direct a m p u t a t i o n ; in the saga a m p u t a t i o n with hereditary trans-
mission of the " a c q u i r e d characteristic," but a trace of the old
state). But this type is without parallel in all the heroic tales of the
N o r t h , and this is undoubtedly the most important fact. O n e is in-
clined at first to think that it is the saga w h i c h , to reduce the
strangeness of the type without eliminating it, divided it into t w o
stages, over t w o separate generations, and that S a x o has preserved
in this instance a purer and simpler d a t u m . H o w e v e r , when one
reflects on the liberties which S a x o o r his immediate source have
taken in m a n y other cases where they are easily discovered, one
hesitates to attribute such fidelity to him here. M o r e o v e r , in a frag-
ment of a p o e m m u c h older (tenth century) than the Gautrekssaga,
f o u r lines of the skald VetrliSi SumarliSason (the o n l y ones pre-

32. Hte/a menn I er m'xk sea I Ijotan skolt I langa trjdnu II

hdr ulfgratt I hangar tjUgur I hriifan h&ls I hiiS jotraSa.
31. ". . . They [i.e. the Swedes, with whom StarkaSr has taken refuge] think
they see upon myself the giant's mark, eight arms, where Hlorri3i [ = Thor]
. . . relieved Hergrim's bane of his arms. 32. Men laugh when they see me,
ugly jaw, long snout, wolf-gray hair, hanging arms, scarred neck, wrinkled
skin."
Cf. Ranisch, in his introduction to the Gautrekssaga (above, p. 9, n. 1), p. xcvii
[translated from German]: 'The men of the Swedish kings still wished to find on
StarkaSr marks of his gigantic descent, traces of eight arms, as that older StarkaSr
had, the killer of Hergrimr"; Paul Herrmann, Kommentar, p. 423: "Like a mark of
Cain he bears the signs of gigantic extraction on his body, the stumps of the eight
arms which Thor removed from his grandfather, the wild look, the wolfish snout."

20
 StarkaSr

served of his w o r k ) , S t a r k a S r is n a m e d in a list of giants w h o c a m e to

grief at the hands of the god T h o r :

Y o u b r o k e the legs of Leikn,

thrashed T h r i v a l d i ,
overthrew StarkaSr,
caused the death of G j o l p . "

T h e violent, hostile act designated b y the v e r b steypa (to t h r o w

[hurl] d o w n , to o v e r t h r o w ) , can scarcely be that b y which the
Thor of S a x o " c o n t a i n s Starcatherus within the m o r e limited
dimensions of m e n . " It is rather that b y which T h o r , in the saga,
slays the first S t a r k a S r .
T h e differences b e c o m e m o r e serious when we consider the
role of the gods in the tales of StarkaSr's birth (the m o n s t e r reduced
to h u m a n limits) and the murder of V i k a r . For here it is the gods
w h o direct the a c t i o n , free to disappear afterward a n d to disinterest
themselves, at least apparently, in the career they h a v e arranged
f o r the h e r o .
Here again, S a x o is simpler a n d seems m o r e c o h e r e n t . T h e t w o
gods step in successively, without interference; and s o b e r l y , each
o n e with a single gift, o r with several, which do not call f o r a n y
response. T h o r first of all brings the y o u n g Starcatherus to h u m a n
f o r m , a n d this act seems to be understood b y S a x o as a g o o d deed,
since out of a horrible giant he has m a d e a m a n , offering h i m the
c h a n c e of a useful and illustrious existence. O n l y thereafter does
O t h i n u s appear. A s he needs to obtain f r o m S t a r c a t h e r u s a service
w h i c h , f r o m the h u m a n point of view, is an a b o m i n a b l e crime, a
facinus, the murder of the king his master and friend, he p a y s
generously: all the physical a n d spiritual qualities that will m a k e an
exceptional hero; poetic skill, b y which the hero will also be the
first great skald; and a life extended to the length of three n o r m a l

Ernst Albin Kock, Den norsk-islandska Skaldedigtningen (1946), I, 71;

leggi brauzt Leiknar,
lamdir privalda,
steypdir StarkeSi,
stett of Gjdlp dauSa.

21
 StarkaSr

h u m a n lives. In this presentation of "gifts," though, there is a p r o b -

l e m : O t h i n u s has need of only the first facinus, the murder of
W i c a r u s , but he burdens the gift of three lives with threefold ser-
vitude: Starcatherus will c o m m i t three facinora, o n e in each life.
W h y ? W e might answer, being modern c o m p a r a t i v i s t s , that the
saga was c o m p o s e d on the traditional theme of the "three func-
tional sins of the w a r r i o r , " and the three facinora h a v e been im-
posed at the cost of a certain ungainliness in c o m p o s i t i o n . " But this
would be t o give little credit to the skill of the sagamenn. O n e is led
to believe rather that on this point S a x o has slightly altered a m o r e
satisfactory original.
M o r e o v e r , if the interventions of T h o r a n d O t h i n u s are suc-
cessive and without any element of rivalry or conflict, one point in
S a x o ' s c o m p o s i t i o n arouses suspicion, namely the parallelism of
the t w o gods, of their natures and their Latin interpretations,
w h i c h , placed as it is between the birth and the career of the h e r o ,
constitutes a parenthesis within the story a n d interrupts it t o no a d -
v a n t a g e . For w h a t a d v a n t a g e is there in defining t w o gods in this
w a y , one in terms of the other, in opposition to e a c h other, when
their interventions are entirely independent and not even c o m -
plementary? But this is a c o m m o n practice of S a x o , well illustrated
and clarified particularly b y the "saga of H a d i n g u s , " in the first
b o o k of the Gesta Danorum.^''
Hadingus is the god N j o r S r transposed into a Viking h e r o .
S u c h transfer requires s o m e fancy f o o t w o r k , granted the essentially
peaceful c h a r a c t e r of N j o r S r in the m y t h o l o g y (such m o r e o v e r is
the fate of all the divinities, including that other "pacifist" Baldr,
w h o m S a x o has enlisted in his first nine b o o k s , the " m y t h o l o g i c a l
b o o k s , " to provide a prehistory for his Danish h i s t o r y ) . But it was
impossible f o r a n y S c a n d i n a v i a n m y t h o g r a p h e r at all to speak of
N j o r S r , his life a n d lineage, without mentioning the distinction and

^' See above, pp. 1 - 8 .

From Myth to Fiction (1973), chap. 6 ("The first mythological digression:
giants, Ase gods and Vane gods") and 7 ("The second mythological digression: the
war between the Ases and the Vanes").

12
 StarkaSr

opposition of the / E s i r and the V a n i r , and even their primeval w a r .

For it is at the conclusion of this w a r , b y virtue of the peace t r e a t y ,
that the great V a n i r g o d s — N j o r S r , Freyr, F r e y j a — b e c o m e the part-
ners of the y ^ s i r , m e m b e r s with them in a joint c o m m u n i t y . M o r e
particularly, this w a r m a r k s a turning point in NjorSr's life:
hitherto purely V a n (with an incestuous marriage), thereafter V a n
retouched according to the " m o r a l i t y " of the /Esir (with a new, non-
incestuous marriage). A s all his characters were h u m a n , S a x o , w h o
in this circumstance seems m o r e o v e r to h a v e understood p o o r l y the
pagan theology of the ancient S c a n d i n a v i a n s , could n o t transpose
as such these divisions of supernatural beings. Nevertheless h e has
not let them slip a w a y . In t w o places, at the beginning where the
m y t h o l o g y imposed a contrastive definition of the / E s i r a n d the
V a n i r , and later, at the turn where the m y t h o l o g y presented the
w a r and the reconciliation of the t w o divine groups, S a x o inserted
t w o disquisitions, one theological, the other m y t h o l o g i c a l , long
a n d ungainly parentheses unrelated to the n a r r a t i v e , ma t ch i n g with
evident awkwardness these t w o fundamental strands of the p r o t o -
narrative.
It is p r o b a b l y likewise in the story of S t a r c a t h e r u s . If S a x o has
inserted here a contrastive definition of T h o r and of O t h i n u s which
is in n o w a y necessary t o the action as he describes it, it is un-
doubtedly b e c a u s e , in the S c a n d i n a v i a n saga of S t a r k a S r which he
used, the character opposition between T h o r and O d i n on the c o n -
trary played at this point a n i m p o r t a n t r o l e . C o n s e q u e n t l y the
Danish " h i s t o r i a n " has here modified and simplified the u n k n o w n
sagamadr's a c c o u n t , eliminating from the plot a specific example of
the rivalry of the two gods and replacing it with a general t h e o r y .
T o be sure, it can b e o b j e c t e d that S a x o ' s a c c o u n t does in fact
present an opposition in the b e h a v i o r s of the t w o gods t o w a r d
the h e r o , and that this is enough to m o t i v a t e their c o n f r o n t a t i o n in
the f o r m of a theological digression. T h o r ' s a c t i o n is w h o l l y g o o d ,
with n o noxious pendant, while that of O t h i n u s is nastily a m -
bivalent and S a x o ' s very wording reveals that it is because he needs
the first crime that h e is so interested in the h e r o . Nonetheless, T h o r

23
 StarkaSr

does not directly o r actively oppose O t h i n u s here, f o r example

he does not intervene to defend his erstwhile protege against this
evil l o t .
T h e r e is a n o t h e r difficulty besides this o n e . ' * T h e role of
O t h i n u s agrees with what Scandinavian tradition says of O d i n . A s "
sovereign g o d , he grants gifts which a m o u n t to " l o t s , " that is, he
determines a destiny. A c o m p l e x , disquieting, maleficent g o d , he
c o m p o u n d s this destiny out of " g o o d " privileges mingled with an
" e v i l " d e m a n d . T h a t he is interested in Starcatherus, a giant b y
birth, a humanized giant, is not surprising either: m o r e than o n e
trait of the a m b i g u o u s O d i n , beginning with his ancestry, c o n n e c t s
him with that race. In contrast the role S a x o has T h o r play is
unique. In every circumstance this god is the irreconcilable e n e m y
of all giants; he slays those w h o venture a m o n g the /Esir and goes
off to kill others in their o w n haunts, the land of the giants being
the n o r m a l stage of his exploits. But on meeting a y o u n g giant w h o ,
to m a k e matters w o r s e , is m a r k e d b y the m o n s t r o s i t y of six a r m s ,
w h i c h m a k e h i m three times as dangerous, he does not kill h i m .
Having him at his m e r c y , not only does he not destroy h i m , but he
performs a series of surgical operations w h i c h m a k e him n o r m a l .
This unique failing of T h o r in his calling remains unexplained; S a x o
is here suspect a priori of having misunderstood o r altered a version
of the story in which T h o r remained faithful to h i m s e l f — w h i c h , it
should be said in passing, seems to indicate that f o r the birth, the
Icelandic version is preferable.
If the a c c o u n t of the saga is m o r e satisfactory with regard to
the theology, h o w e v e r , it still has difficulties of its o w n . T h o r and
O d i n oppose, even c o n f r o n t each other, at the assembly of the
gods, in the conflict in which young S t a r k a S r is the p a w n . T h o r is
consistently hostile, O d i n consistently b e n e v o l e n t . T h o r ' s hostility
has t w o causes, the first of which is completely in line w i t h his
c h a r a c t e r . Because the first S t a r k a S r was of the race of giants,
which he a b h o r s , he has not " t a i l o r e d , " but killed him; a n d he

'* What follows is the revision of my earlier proposals (cf. above, pp. 5 - 6 ) , as
given in The Destiny of the Warrior, p. 83 n. 1 (cf. p. 95 n. 11).

24
 StarkaSr

naturally extends his hatred to the grandson, even though the lat-
ter, apart f r o m the " m a r k s " of the extra a r m s which heredity has
imposed on h i m , is a m a n . T h e second cause is m o r e surprising, at
least in one of the t w o successive descriptions which the Gautreks-
saga provides. C h a p t e r III recounts nothing a b n o r m a l : the giant,
following the c u s t o m of his race, has abducted a young w o m a n , a p -
parently without her c o n s e n t . Her father requests the help of T h o r ,
w h o wipes out the a b d u c t o r and returns the victim to her family,
the victim w h o thereafter carries in her w o m b the father of the
saga's h e r o . W i t h g o o d reason this vengeful action of T h o r has been
c o m p a r e d with certain exploits attributed to him b y the m y t h o l -
o g y ; m o r e than o n e giant has succumbed under his h a m m e r f o r
having abducted o r threatened to abduct a fair goddess. But in
chapter V I I , w h e n T h o r states his grievances in the gods' assembly,
he speaks of something else: the girl has had to " c h o o s e , " kjdsa, as
in an Indian svayaryivara, and she has preferred [kaus . . . heldr
en . . . ) the giant to the g o d . A n d to what a g o d , to h i m , the " T h o r
of the . . ^ s i r " ! If T h o r has killed the giant, it w a s in punishment for
this presumptuousness; he has simply gone about it a little late,
w h e n the girl w a s already, so to speak, with the interpolation of a
son, pregnant with her grandson, the second S t a r k a S r . T h u s T h o r ,
to put a n end to this evil b r o o d , must a b o v e all c o n d e m n the y o u n g
S t a r k a S r , at the fixing of his fate, to have neither son n o r daughter,
hvorki eiga son ne dottur. T h i s r o m a n t i c rivalry between a giant
and T h o r , and generally the notion of "loves of T h o r , " are e x t r a o r -
dinary, even if pride rather than sentiment seems to m o t i v a t e the
god h e r e . Still we should a v o i d the t o o - h a s t y conclusion that this
r o m a n e s q u e element is the late invention of a sagamadr. In any case
let us n o t e that, thus imposed b y T h o r , the curse of the three ni-
dingsverk is comprehensible. Since O d i n has granted the hero three
lives, T h o r , with nothing really specific in mind, ordains three
crimes. T h i s w a s not the case, o n e should r e m e m b e r , in S a x o where
O t h i n u s , w h o needs only one facinus of S t a r c a t h e r u s , nevertheless
foretells and imposes three misdeeds.
T h e relationships between O d i n and S t a r k a S r in the saga are at
o n c e simpler and m o r e c o m p l e x than in S a x o . Simpler because, in

25
 StarkaSr

the scene where the two gods, in a sort of s t i c h o m a c h y , o p p o s e

e a c h other in determining the character and the fate of the h e r o , all
the g o o d is furnished b y O d i n , and all the b a d , as might b e ex-
pected f r o m a steadfast grudge, is imposed b y T h o r . M o r e complex
a n d , all things considered, harder to understand because on the o n e
h a n d , O d i n ' s kindness toward S t a r k a S r leads to his demand on
h i m , forcing S t a r k a S r to c o m m i t a great crime which will dishonor
him, and on the other, this crime is the result o f a strange and
peculiar collusion of the hatred of T h o r and need of O d i n .
W i t h the exception of T h o r ' s curse, in fact, the conduct of
O d i n and the development of the plot a r e logical: O d i n has long
a g o , f r o m StarkaSr's c h i l d h o o d , chosen him to officiate at the
sacrifice of V i k a r . In view of this he has m a d e the y o u t h indebted t o
h i m , at first b y raising h i m and making him a n eminent h e r o , later,
at the time of the c o n t r a d i c t o r y imposition of his fate, b y piling up
in his presence the " g o o d " prescriptions. All that remains for O d i n
is to present his due statement, a n d this is in fact h o w he makes use
of the gifts: Vel muntu nu launa mer, " N o w y o u must repay m e f o r
the education, fostri, a n d the help, lidsemd, that I h a v e given y o u . "
A n d S t a r k a S r is s o indebted, perhaps also so attached to his foster
father, that he makes no o b j e c t i o n . Vel, sagdi Starkadr. . . .
T h e intervention of T h o r disturbs this a r r a n g e m e n t . For if it is
O d i n w h o decides that the hero will live three h u m a n lives, at hava
skal Ufa prja mannzaldra, it is T h o r w h o , rejoining that the hero
will c o m m i t a villainy in each, hann skal vinna nidingsverk a hver-
jum mannzaldri, a n n o u n c e s , authorizes, renders truly inevitable
the criminal act which O d i n will demand of S t a r k a S r , which he has
been arranging f o r so m a n y y e a r s , and whose immediate conditions
he has already gathered just b e f o r e the scene of the assembly of the
gods (lack of wind making sailing impossible, presence of a tree a n d
a stump " n a t u r a l l y " suited for a m o c k hanging). H o w is this a p p a r -
ent contradiction to be understood? Strictly speaking, one might
think that, after O d i n has arranged the material conditions for the
crime in which he will engage S t a r k a S r , he desires to share the re-
sponsibility with others (though this w o u l d not be c u s t o m a r y f o r
him), to be s o m e h o w morally covered b y a collective decision of

26
 StarkaSr

the gods: hence this ping, this general assembly of the highest
deities which is held, miraculously enough, exactly on an islet close
b y the immobilized fleet. But h o w c o m e s it that T h o r gives O d i n
precisely what O d i n has c o m e to seek? Shall we admit a complicity
between these t w o gods w h o seem s o antagonistic? T h e story as a
w h o l e excludes it. Should one suppose that, in his omniscience,
O d i n has foreseen that T h o r would fling the curse of the "three
villainies"? T h e idea is gratuitous. O r rather m o r e subtly, has the
c r a f t y . M a c h i a v e l l i a n O d i n manipulated T h o r , a c h a r a c t e r all of a
piece, a model of u n c o m p r o m i s i n g h o n o r , as the t o r e a d o r " w o r k s "
the bull, a n n o u n c i n g the gift of "three lives" o n l y to draw out the
response "with a dishonor in e a c h " ? But besides the fact that T h o r ' s
response could h a v e been different (three great misfortunes, three
physical setbacks, etc.), it is not in fact O d i n but T h o r w h o at this
point in the debate runs the show and leads the discussion. T h e gift
of the "three lives" b y O d i n is simply the c o m p e n s a t i o n or counter-
part f o r T h o r ' s first curse: T h o r has said that S t a r k a S r will h a v e n o
descendants; s o be it, s a y s O d i n , but he himself will live the span of
three generations. A n d it is only then, to rebut this rebuttal, that
T h o r m a k e s his second curse, that of the three villainies. In fact, n o
explanation is satisfactory, and however one attempts to unravel it,
the tangle is unresolved; perhaps the sagamadr has altered, c o m -
plicated the traditional material?
O n e might h o p e f o r some illumination f r o m the m o r e ancient
p o e m intercalated in the saga, on which the prose a c c o u n t is only a
c o m m e n t a r y . But the elliptical, rhetorical character of this Vikars-
balkr m a k e s even its m o s t precise expressions leave r o o m for d o u b t .
Indeed, in this confession or plea which he m a k e s after the crime
b e f o r e the hostile a n d derisive assembly of the Swedish n o b l e m e n ,
S t a r k a S r expressly imputes to T h o r the responsibility for the m u r -
der of V i k a r , alluding to the curse of the three nidingsverk:^''

Pess eyrindis
at Porr um skop
mer nidings nafn,

" Stanza 26 ( = 31 of the saga).

27
 StarkaSr

hlaut ek ohrodigr
Hit at vinna.

" O n such a mission,

when T h o r assigned me
the n a m e of villain . . .
I w a s forced without glory
to do e v i l . "

A n d in the following stanza, it is a pluralis pudicitiae—"the

g o d s " — t h a t m a s k s O d i n , his will and initiative:

Skyllda ek Vikar
i vidi hdfum
Geirpjofsbana
godum um signa;
lagda ek geiri
gram til hjarta
pat er mer harmazt
handaverka.

" V i k a r I had ^
in a high tree,
Geirthjof's b a n e ,
to consign to the gods;
I set the spear
to the hero's heart.
T h a t to me w a s the m o s t grievous
of m y hands' deeds."

T h u s , in the operetta. La Belle Helene indicts fate, forgetting

b o t h her own will and the initiative of the T r o j a n prince. S t a r k a S r
emphasizes the sad " l o t " cast b y T h o r , and glosses o v e r all that has
followed, between the curse and its first result. But this o b v i o u s l y
tendentious presentation does not acquit O d i n any m o r e than it a b -
solves S t a r k a S r himself, and it does not attest, as o n e has s o m e -
times thought, a third variant in which O d i n has nothing at all to
do with the affair and it is solely and directly T h o r w h o has im-
posed and orchestrated the c r i m e . Furthermore the mention m a d e
in an earlier stanza ( 8 , = 3) of Hrossharsgrani does not permit

28
 StarkaSr

such an easy exclusion of the great sovereign g o d . Hrossharsgrani is

certainly O d i n b o t h in the p o e m and in the prose n a r r a t i v e , and his
solicitude for S t a r k a S r there cannot be m o r e disinterested.
Through these difficulties and even contradictions, and
whether one posits at the source a single variant which S a x o would
h a v e very considerably altered and the Scandinavian texts better
preserved, or rather two already perceptibly different variants,
there remains nonetheless a r e a s o n a b l y clear pattern, uniform but
with t w o alternatives.
1. S t a r k a S r is either a giant with m a n y a r m s , reduced b y T h o r
to " h u m a n m e a s u r e , " or the h o m o n y m o u s grandson of a m a n y -
armed giant slain b y T h o r , bearing the physical traces of this m o n -
strous descent.
2 . T w o antagonistic divinities intervene at his beginnings:
a) S a x o ' s plot, w h i c h reduces this a n t a g o n i s m , in excursu,
to a theological discussion with n o effect on the o u t c o m e , also
reduces the intervention of T h o r to the initial b e n e v o l e n t , benefi-
cent operation b y w h i c h he m a k e s a n o r m a l m a n out of this
m o n s t r o u s giant. T h e b e s t o w a l of all " l o t s , " b o t h g o o d and b a d , is
reserved f o r O t h i n u s , m o r e o v e r the evil lots are reduced to o n e ,
that of the three facinora w h i c h e n c u m b e r the three vitae and of
which the first is immediately necessary to O t h i n u s .
b) In the saga, the a n t a g o n i s m is active, and expressed at
length at the fixing of S t a r k a S r ' s f a t e . T h e t w o gods wrangle over
the h e r o , one wishing to m a k e him h a p p y , the other ill-starred, and
then the first crime is c o m m i t t e d , which O d i n needs and h a s pre-
pared long since, but w h i c h , since it involves fatum, is decided on
b y T h o r at the m o m e n t of its implementation.

4. THE FACINORA, STARCATHERUS AND THE KINGS

T h e balance of the s t o r y , f r o m the aftermath of the first

facinus to the perpetration of the third, presents n o difficulty. T h e
essentials have been mentioned a b o v e , and it seems that S a x o , f r o m
here on our only source, has fully understood and respected the

29
 StarkaSr

Scandinavian tradition, which has not c o m e d o w n to us in the ver-

nacular but which certainly existed, since the p r o c l a m a t i o n of the
three nidingsverk in the Gautrekssaga m a k e s sense only if the sec-
ond and third, as well as the first, were eventually carried out. Star-
catherus, then, passes his three h u m a n life spans in a c o n t i n u o u s
aging p r o c e s s — s h o r t l y after the episode of the murder of W i c a r u s
S a x o already calls him senex—but he keeps all his strength, at least
until the third facinus, until the c o m b i n e d effect of his privileged
longevity and the i m m o r a l condition burdening him has run its
course.
T h e terrible, mutilating wounds which he receives in several
c o m b a t s , and the enmity which he displays repeatedly t o w a r d s
c o m m o n folk (except farmers), correspond to t w o items in the curse
which T h o r imposes on S t a r k a S r in the Gautrekssaga, items which
S a x o has not preserved as such but w h o s e existence in his source
material is proven here b y their realization. R o u g h l y , this career is
a series of extraordinary exploits, against the b a r b a r i a n s in the East
a n d the aggressive neighbors of the S c a n d i n a v i a n s . It unfolds in the
service of Swedish and D a n i s h kings t o w a r d w h o m the hero dis-
plays unblemished loyalty and devotion which he readily shifts t o
the sons u p o n the death of the fathers. S i m p l y , just as he o n c e
helped O d i n to kill his first master and childhood friend. King
V i k a r , twice m o r e he fails peculiarly in his duty, impelled by the lot
that has been cast f o r him. T h e second facinus is a shameful flight
when the Swedish a r m y , in w h o s e ranks he is fighting, has been
shaken b y the death of its king; the third, the most vile, is the put-
ting to death, in exchange f o r m o n e y , of a Danish king, w h o
though not very admirable is still n o less his master.
It is r e m a r k a b l e that the three facinora, w h o s e content O t h i n u s
in S a x o a n d T h o r in the Gautrekssaga leave completely undefined,
should all be realized in the same a r e a : the relationships of the hero
with kings, his successive masters. He might have allowed himself
m a n y other dishonorable excesses, but the t w o murders which he
c o m m i t s are those of kings w h o trust him, and his flight on the b a t -
tlefield immediately u p o n the death of his k i n g — a usurper, but n o

30
 StarkaSr

m a t t e r — i s a failure in a very serious posthumous duty to the king,

to ensure the passage of power to the legitimate heir, a duty to
which in other circumstances he adheres, f o r example in returning
f r o m D e n m a r k to Sweden to install on the throne Prince S y w a r d u s ,
son of King Haldanus, "killed b y his rivals" (History of the Danes,
p. 183).
T h i s localization of the facinora is explainable. It m a k e s them
especially heinous, inasmuch as they contradict w h a t , apart f r o m
these three cases, consistently characterizes S t a r c a t h e r u s : an ex-
tremely lofty ideal, a kind of religion of regal w o r t h , a true v o c a -
tion as theoretician, defender, indeed tutor of royal personages and
r o y a l t y per se. T h i s trait is so essential to his character that it b y
itself justifies an episode in three parts, replete with p o e m s and it-
self as long as the rest of the saga, and which if not considered from
this point of view l o o k s like a foreign b o d y : that of the tumultuous
relations of the hero with the children, daughter a n d son, of the
fourth F r o t h o , a D a n i s h king w h o m he served. But much earlier
and m o r e briefly, under King F r o t h o himself, Starcatherus had
already theorized a b o u t his c o n d u c t . ' '
In fact it is with F r o t h o that he had c o m e to live after the first
facinus. But he kept a great freedom of m o v e m e n t , piling up ex-
ploits f r o m Byzantium to the subarctic c o u n t r y of the " B i a r m i a n s . "
From these long journeys he returned b y c h a n c e in the nick of time,
just when the p o o r l y subjugated S a x o n s had personally challenged
and endangered the D a n i s h king (p. 1 7 4 ) :

M e a n w h i l e the S a x o n s were contemplating rebellion and

giving particular thought to h o w they could destroy F r o t h o , so
f a r undefeated, in a w a y which would a v o i d a general conflict.
Because they believed the most suitable m e t h o d w a s individual
c o m b a t they sent emissaries to issue a challenge to the king,
aware that he a l w a y s e m b r a c e d every danger eagerly and that
his high spirit w o u l d certainly never give w a y to a n y a d m o n i -
tion. W h e n they k n e w that Starcatherus, whose b r a v e r y in-
timidated m o s t men, w a s occupied elsewhere, they r e c k o n e d
then w a s the time to accost F r o t h o . But while the king was

31
 StarkaSr

hesitating and saying he w o u l d have to consult his friends

a b o u t a reply, Starcatherus appeared on the scene, b a c k f r o m
his sea-roving; he severely criticized the idea of the challenge
because, as he pointed out, such fights were not appropriate
for kings except against their equals a n d certainly they should
not be undertaken against men of the people; m o r e properly it
devolved on himself, as one b o m in a humbler station, to h a n -
dle this contest.

After this statement, which convinces the king, Starcatherus

goes f o r w a r d , c o n f r o n t s and kills the huge c h a m p i o n H a m a , w h o m
the S a x o n s h a d wished to set up against F r o t h o .
O f course the h e r o , devoted to his king, assessed the danger
and wished to save him. But, S a x o states, this w a s not the most im-
portant thing f o r him; after all, a king as m u c h as and m o r e than
a n y other w a r r i o r should be daring and risk himself, even if it be in
an unequal c o m b a t . But he must not degrade himself. S y m m e t r i -
cally, the principal offense of the S a x o n s w a s not their revolt, n o r
their defiance, but their failure to h o n o r the w o r t h , the transcen-
dence of kingship—there is a royal class, the compares, with its
o w n rights and duties a n d set apart f r o m all the rest. N o m o r e in in-
ternational affairs than in his o w n realm must the king descend to
the level of the populares, be they c o u n t r y m e n or foreigners, and
no popularis m a y aspire to the level of a king, especially not with
the intention of surpassing him.
T h e long episode of the children of F r o t h o (pp. 1 7 5 - 6 ) merely
develops and stages the same precept in the following generation.
Starcatherus is there at o n c e a theoretician a n d a m a n of a c t i o n ; he
teaches authoritatively and imperiously directs, so to speak, field-
w o r k exercises.
Frotho is dead, assassinated b y a D a n e named Suertingus w h o
incidentally also perished on the same occasion, and the son of F r o -
tho has ascended the throne. But this y o u t h , Ingellus (Ingjaldr),
b e h a v e s astonishingly. Instead of seeking to avenge his father, he
weds the daughter of the murderer and m a k e s intimates of his
wife's b r o t h e r s . He devotes himself to pleasures, not only in the

32
 StarkaSr

b e d c h a m b e r to the a b u n d a n t sensual pleasures which his consort le-

gitimately offers h i m , but also in the dining r o o m to gluttony w h i c h
is described graphically and at length, a n d in which appears m o r e -
o v e r his scandalous intimacy with his messmates—his brothers-in-
law, the sons of Suertingus.
Starcatherus c a n n o t endure this spectacle of intemperantia. To
a v o i d seeming to c o n d o n e this dissoluteness, luxuriae assensor, he
leaves D e n m a r k and changes masters, entering the service of the
Swedish king, H a l d a n u s . But f r o m Uppsala, grumbling with in-
dignation, he watches w h a t is happening at the court of D e n m a r k .
A d m i t t e d l y weird goings-on take place there, not very c o m p a t i b l e
with the majesty of royal b l o o d .
T o begin with there is Helga (pp. 1 7 6 f f . ) , the nubile sister of
Ingellus. This unfortunate accedes to the attentions, the familiari-
ties, and soon the demands of a certain goldsmith, ami faber, one
of those low-class people w h o m Starcatherus particularly despises,
respecting only those w h o w o r k the land, and a m o n g the fabri o n l y
those w h o forge w e a p o n s . N o doubt p r o u d of his wealth, this lout
has Helga c o m b his hair, then, opening his pants, invites the y o u n g
lady to delouse him.
S t a r c a t h e r u s sets out, with the swiftness of l o c o m o t i o n w h i c h
seems a gift f r o m his giant ancestry, and appears in the hall where
these disgusting ministrations are taking place. Leaping at o n c e at
the goldsmith he keeps him f r o m fleeing, cuts his b u t t o c k s to pieces
with his sword, and expresses his feelings toward the t w o culprits in
n i n e t y - t w o hexameters which must be the paraphrase of a S c a n -
dinavian p o e m . T o the y o u n g w o m a n he is willing to c o n c e d e cer-
tain extenuating circumstances, but w h a t a s e r m o n ! T h e S c a n i a n
m o n k gives full rein to his penchant f o r amplitudo:

Defer auis, venerare patres, memor esto parentum

et proavos metire tuos, stet gloria cami.

Respect thy forebears, venerate thy ancestors,

be mindful of those w h o b o r e thee, take the measure of
t h y forefathers, let r e n o w n be in thy lineage.

33
 StarkaSr

He showers the mutilated goldsmith with his c o n t e m p t :

Quis furor incessit? Quod te, faber improbe, fatum

impulit ingenuam tentare cupidine stirpem?

W h a t madness got into y o u ? W h a t fate, wicked smith,

propelled y o u to try y o u r lust on a n o b l e breed?

T h e n he returns to the daughter of F r o t h o :

Aut quis te, virgo claris dignissima fulcris,

egit in obscuram Venerem? . . .

A n d y o u , maiden most w o r t h y of an illustrious b e d ,

w h o drove y o u to base love-making? . . .

But this is merely a prelude. O n c e the execution is d o n e , and

Helga rehabilitated, Starcatherus returns to S w e d e n , w h e n c e he c o n -
tinues to observe D e n m a r k uncompromisingly and recrosses the
straits, when he deems it necessary, with his supernatural speed.
A f t e r a second " l e s s o n " given t o a well-intentioned but misguided
y o u n g noble betrothed to another daughter of F r o t h o (pp. 1 7 9 -
1 8 3 ) , there c o m e s the third scene, the main event: Starcatherus takes
o n the king himself, the weakling Ingellus (pp. 1 8 3 ff.).^''
T h e old hero has just installed on the Swedish t h r o n e the
y o u n g S y w a r d u s w h o w a s kept f r o m reigning b y his father's
assassins, when he learns, fama rei crebrescente, that the h o r r o r s at
the Danish court are n o longer tolerable. H e decides to put an end
to them and sets out with a great l o a d of c h a r c o a l on his shoulder.
T o all w h o ask, he replies that with these coals he is going to
sharpen the blunted spirit of King Ingellus, Ingelli regis hebetu-
dinem ad acuminis habitum carbonibus se perducturum.
He arrives in the hall where Ingellus, at first with his wife, then
with her and her b r o t h e r s , indulges in the m o s t incredible excesses
a n d refinements of g a s t r o n o m y . H e is u n k n o w n to a n d treated w i t h
disrespect b y the regina, but is soon recognized b y Ingellus and
f r o m then on surrounded with an excess of deference. But he
refuses to eat, flings at the queen's head the presents w h i c h she

^° An old form of this episode inspired a fine passage in Beowulf, in an entirely

different plot, lines 2009-2069.

34

4v
 StarkaSr

ineptly offers h i m , hurls a b o n e at the musician in charge of molli-

fying h i m , and recites to Ingellus p o e m s of b o t h invective a n d ex-
h o r t a t i o n . T h e source of these lyric pieces is certainly, here again,
o n e o r t w o S c a n d i n a v i a n p o e m s , but the virtuosity and zest of S a x o
h a v e n o less certainly o u t d o n e the originals. In these Sapphic stan-
zas, t w e n t y - o n e in the first p o e m , forty-nine in the second, the hero
takes the y o u n g king to task for fraternizing with the murderers of
his father instead of avenging h i m , f o r being virtute vacuus, aban-
doning himself to l u s t — a n d this in very coarse Latin, which f o l l o w s
f o r example the m o v e m e n t s of Ingellus' hand o v e r the most secret
parts of his wife's b o d y — a n d also f o r the gluttony w h i c h he calls
petulantis stomachi ingluvies; but a b o v e all, overshadowing a n d
outweighing the other ills, f o r not behaving like a king.
In this flood of eloquence, he refers to the y o u t h as king o n l y
o n c e , in the third person a n d with humiliating epithets, while at the
s a m e time he recalls emphatically the c o n d u c t of the rex F r o t h o a n d
the n o r m a l d e m e a n o r of reges and of the assembly of kings, contio
regum. T h u s , in the first p o e m , he blames himself f o r the death of
F r o t h o : " I should never h a v e gone a w a y f r o m y o u , f o r that w a s
y o u r death w a r r a n t , maxime regum" (st. 1 2 ) . " W h y w a s I n o t there
w h e n a treacherous guest butchered the king, regis iugulum pete-
batl" (st. 1 3 ) . " W h y did I not die with the king, or avenging h i m ,
pari gaudens sequerer beatum funere regem . . . 7" In c o n t r a s t , the
n e w king Ingellus (st. 1 9 ) :

Sed probum quaerens adii gulosum

deditum ventri vitioque regem
cuius in luxum studium refudit
foeda voluptas

But seeking a virtuous king, I f o u n d a glutton,

o n e given o v e r to belly and vice,
w h o s e keenness has been perverted to license
b y foul lust.

T h e second p o e m develops boundlessly this theme of the de-

generate king; f o r example, the depiction there of gluttony (st. 1 2 ) :

35
 StarkaSr

Quis prior regum potuit gulosus

viscerum putres agitare sordes
aut manu carptim fodicare foedum
alitis anum?

W h a t king b e f o r e c o u l d be so gluttonous as t o
r u m m a g e in rotten filth of b o w e l s ,
or with his hand pick and dig in
the foul anus of a bird?

A n d the hero-poet cries out in his anguish (st. 3 0 - 3 1 ) :

Unde, cum regum tituli canuntur

et ducum vates memorant triumphos
pallio vultum pudibundus abdo
pectore tristi.

Cum tuis nil eniteat trophaeis

quod stilo digne queat adnotari
nemo Frothonis recitatur heres
inter honestos.

T h e r e f o r e , when the h o n o r s of kings are sung

a n d poets r e m e m b e r the triumphs of leaders,
a s h a m e d , I c o v e r m y f a c e with m y m a n t l e ,
saddened in heart.

Since nothing shines with y o u r trophies

that could b e worthily consigned to writing,
n o heir of Frotho is counted
a m o n g the respectable.

Increasingly violent, he h a m m e r s a w a y at Ingellus, that he

might rediscover the meaning and understand the requirements o f
his royal function (st. 3 7 ) :

Te pudor late comes insequetur

et gravi vultum feriet rubore
quando magnorum sociata ludit
contio regum . . .

Disgrace will dog y o u , y o u r constant c o m p a n i o n ,

a n d m a k e y o u r f a c e heavy with s h a m e ,

36
 StarkaSr

w h e n the c o n v e n e d assembly of great kings

makes merry.

T h e miracle o c c u r s . T h i s time in prose, S a x o describes the

y o u t h ' s metamorphosis (p. 1 9 3 f . ) :

A t first Ingellus' ears were deaf to the song, but soon he w a s

m o v e d b y his guardian's m o r e urgent exhortations and his
spirit, late in the d a y , caught the heat of revenge. He forgot the
part of reveller a n d b e c a m e an a d v e r s a r y . In the end he leapt
f r o m his place a n d unloosed the a v a l a n c h e of his fury on the
guests. Bloodthirsty, ruthless, he bared his sword a n d levelled
its point at the throats of Suertingus' sons, whose palates he
had been tickling with culinary delights.

A n d here is S a x o ' s c o m m e n t a r y , in praise of a hero w h o is o b -

viously close to his heart (p. 1 9 4 ) :

H o w then c a n we value this tireless veteran, w h o h a d stormed

with his eloquent a d m o n i t i o n s the vast corruption of the kir\g's
mind and in its place, after bursting through the barriers of im-
morality, had planted a m o s t effectual seed of valor? A c t i n g in
partnership, he assisted the royal a r m and not only displayed
outstanding b r a v e r y himself, but s u m m o n e d it b a c k where it
had been uprooted f r o m another's b o s o m .

T h e hero recites, and is supposed to h a v e c o m p o s e d f o r the o c -

c a s i o n , fifty-seven hexameters, a last poetic piece, incidentally in-
c o m p l e t e and f r a g m e n t a r y , which ends the sixth b o o k and which
begins with the a c c l a m a t i o n wherein he a c c o r d s Ingellus, in the
v o c a t i v e , the title of rex which he has until n o w refused or given
o n l y derisively:

Rex Ingelle, vale, cuius iam prodidit ausum

plenum animi pectus. . . .

K i n g Ingellus, farewell, whose heart full of courage

has at last produced a daring deed. . . .

A n d he repeats the title further o n , again in the v o c a t i v e , to

persuade the y o u n g king, w h o has just killed his brothers-in-law, t o
rid himself of their sister, his wife:

37
 StarkaSr

Tu quoque, rex, saevam, si quid sapis, effuge nuptam,

ne lupa consimilem sibi fetum gignat et ex te
belua consurgat propria nocitura parenti. . . .

A n d y o u , king, if y o u h a v e a n y sense, rid yourself of y o u r

savage w i f e ,
lest the she-wolf produce offspring like to herself,
a n d a beast arise f r o m y o u to h a r m its own father. . . .

T h u s , in a violent outburst, is expressed the basic " i d e o l o g y "

of Starcatherus. O n e sees that, behind his e m o t i o n a l a t t a c h m e n t to
the person and later the m e m o r y of F r o t h o , he in fact serves king-
ship as such, imperiously a n d didactically, a true educator, who
draws out the y o u n g son of the great king f o r a kingly deed, on the
accomplishment of which he a w a r d s h i m , one might s a y confers on
h i m the title which is the object of his cult a n d which he has refused
h i m only in order to deliver it with all its c o n t e n t and g r a n d e u r .
T h i s impassioned, aggressive defense of kingly w o r t h is truly fun-
damental in his c h a r a c t e r .
W i t h Ingellus set straight, Starcatherus can set out again with
unencumbered mind f o r other battles, which c u l m i n a t e , at the b e -
ginning of the eighth b o o k , in the f a m o u s battle of Bravalla, the a c -
c o u n t of which he is said to have c o m p o s e d himself, in verse.

5. THE END OF STARCATHERUS;

STARCATHERUS AND HATHERUS

Here again S a x o remains, in his B o o k Eight, o u r only author-

ity for the a c c o u n t of the death of Starcatherus. T h e few facts f o r
which one might h a v e l o o k e d to local f o l k l o r e — f o r the Gesta Da-
norum names the place where the event h a p p e n e d — a r e nothing but
folklorizations f r o m S a x o or b o l d , semi-scholarly assimilations
f r o m S a x o ' s hero and giants of local fables. N o excursus in a n y
saga, n o allusion in a skaldic p o e m informs us. T h i s paucity of in-
f o r m a t i o n is regrettable because, as with the childhood, the m o n k ,
e n a m o r e d of national traditions but p o o r l y equipped to understand
them in depth, has clearly been confused at certain points. In a

38
 StarkaSr

w o r d , his a c c o u n t is not entirely comprehensible, w h e t h e r because

he has j u x t a p o s e d several v a r i a n t s , as certain repetitions might sug-
gest, o r because he has a w k w a r d l y rationalized o r simply altered
his material. Let us follow him step b y step.
Starcatherus, having exhausted his three lives, is n o w b u t a
w r e c k . He w h o just b e f o r e , despite his age, w a s still a c h a m p i o n
in active service, in w h o m his master. K i n g O l o , had every c o n -
fidence, w h o m the conspirators hired for m o n e y to put an end to the
reign of this dangerous tyrant, and w h o thereupon punished them
vigorously f o r having bribed him, he is suddenly a l m o s t blind, sup-
ported on crutches, keeping, to be sure, enough strength to strike
d o w n a n y o n e imprudent enough to c o m e near h i m , but unable to
m a n e u v e r or a t t a c k . A n d yet this final episode follows immediately
on the murder of O l o a n d the punishment of the conspirators, n o t
only temporally but logically: it is its direct c o n s e q u e n c e . If one in-
sists o n restoring s o m e verisimilitude to the fictitious, o n e will a d -
mit that after the third a n d last prophesied facinus, the formula b y
which O t h i n u s h a d conferred on him two extensions of life, having
no further o b j e c t , has ceased to operate, and that the hero has been
suddenly m a r k e d with the scars of a n extreme, triple old age.
In a n y case, prolixa iam aetate defessus, he determines that he
will n o t die thus of senium, n o r f r o m illness; egregium fore putavit,
si voluntarium sibi conscisceret exitum, fatumque proprio maturas-
set arbitrio, " h e thought it w o u l d b e h o n o r a b l e to e m b r a c e a v o l u n -
tary end and hasten on death at his own decision." In which, S a x o
r e m a r k s judiciously, he c o n f o r m s to the ancient morality of the
G e r m a n s , so often illustrated a n d implicit in the Ynglingasaga in
the great n a m e of O d i n : adeo quondam rei bellicae deditis morbo
oppetere probrosum existimatum est, " D y i n g through illness w a s
o n c e thought as discreditable as this b y individuals w h o were dedi-
cated t o w a r f a r e . " T h e old m a n has besides this a n o t h e r , m o r e per-
sonal reason to m a k e an end of it: the remorse of his last facinus, or
m o r e deeply, the feeling that with this last facinus his life has lost
the ambiguity which gave it such special meaning. For this reason,
linking his o w n death to that of O l o , he decides to devote the

39
 StarkaSr

m o n e y he has shamefully received, the price of his master's b l o o d ,

to b u y the executioner of his c h o i c e (p. 2 4 7 ) .
C a r r y i n g t w o swords and t w o crutches, he travels slowly and
has several encounters. T h e first raises n o difficulty; it is intended
only to emphasize a feature of his character already illustrated
several times in a previous episode (the mutilated goldsmith; the
repulsed " s a v i o r s " ) , and corresponding to one of the fatal traits
which T h o r , according to the Gautrekssaga, has imposed on h i m ,
n a m e l y the incompatability of temperament which opposes him to
the c o m m o n people. A man of lower class, popularium quidam,
c o m e s near him, and thinking t w o swords t o be t o o m a n y f o r the
hands of an old m a n , geminum gladiorum usum seni supervacuum
ratus, insists that he give one u p . Starcatherus pretends to consent,
lets him c o m e close and shatters his head (ibid.).
T h e difficulty begins with the second, and decisive, e n c o u n t e r .
A y o u n g m a n , Hatherus, w h o is not introduced to us in a d v a n c e , is
returning f r o m the hunt with his dogs and sees the scene f r o m a dis-
t a n c e . He does not recognize the old h e r o , a n d f o r sport o r ridicule,
sends t o w a r d him at a gallop t w o of his c o m p a n i o n s , w h o are of
course received with b l o w s of the crutches and killed. He himself
a p p r o a c h e s , recognizes Starcatherus without being recognized in
turn, and asks whether he wishes t o exchange o n e of his swords f o r
a w a g o n , an gladium vehiculo permutare vellet. M o r e o v e r , nothing
in his attitude is menacing o r even insolent; a w a g o n would cer-
tainly be of m o r e use to a cripple than would a second sword
(ibid). But Starcatherus takes him for an irrisor and recites fifty-
eight hexameters (p. 2 4 8 ) in which he laments the miseries of ad-
vanced age, of senium, and recalls his martial caree? and his past
exploits (11. 4 0 - 5 8 ; at mihi si recolo, nascenti fata dedere I bella se-
qui, belloque mori . . . ) . In the gap between these t w o themes (11.
2 7 - 3 9 ) he expresses a r e m a r k a b l e wish, which suddenly places his
y o u n g partner Hatherus in an unexpected light:

. . . N o o n e takes care of m e , no soldier

brings c o m f o r t to a veteran, unless Hatherus is here
to help his shattered friend. O n c e he h o n o r s

40
 StarkaSr

a n y o n e with his dutiful affection, true

f r o m the start he attends him with the same unflagging
w a r m t h , dreading to snap their initial b o n d s .
Frequently he bestows fitting rewards on w a r
heroes, venerates their spirit, grants his esteem
to the valiant a n d reveres f a m o u s c o m r a d e s with gifts.
He scatters riches, strives to a m a s s glowing
r e n o w n b y his b o u n t y and surpass m a n y of the m i g h t y .
N o r does his strength f o r the fight fall b e l o w his sense
of duty; quick to take arms, slow to w a v e r ,
ready to start the f r a y , yet ignorant h o w to
turn his b a c k on a pressing f o e .

S u c h then is the true nature of this carefree y o u n g hunter

w h o m c h a n c e , apparently at least, has put b e f o r e the old hero, w h o
in his humiliation wished fervently to find him alone of all men f o r
an assist which he does not specify. A n d the praise which he m a k e s
of him as an illustrious person w o u l d b e fitting f o r the greatest V i k -
ing chiefs, as m a g n a n i m o u s t o w a r d their c o m p a n i o n s as they
are courageous in the face of the e n e m y .
But at this point other p o e m s inserted in the prose take us b a c k
again, recreating in verse the scene which has just been recounted
to us in prose (p. 2 4 9 ) . Hatherus m a k e s his offer in twenty-two h e x -
ameters: that the old m a n sell him o n e of his swords for a w a g o n .
In sixty-five hexameters, S t a r c a t h e r u s expresses his indignation to
the stranger:

improbe, verba seris facili temeraria labio

auribus inconcinna pits. . . .

villain, y o u r lips are glib in sowing rash talk,

inharmonious to a g o o d man's e a r . . . .

a n d recapitulates in detail the events of his glorious life.

Finally, there c o m e s a dramatic surprise. From the turn w h i c h
the conversation has taken the old m a n realizes that he has b e f o r e
him Hatherus. But, at the same stroke, w e learn an astonishing
f a c t : this Hatherus w h o m Starcatherus has longed f o r , counting o n

i
41
 StarkaSr

the faithfulness of his affection, is n o n e o t h e r than the son of Len-

nus (or Lenno), o n e of the conspirators w h o had bribed him into
killing O l o , and w h o m he had slain when he c a m e b a c k to his
senses. Right a w a y he sees in Hatherus the ideal executioner, the
one he has been searching for, and he entreats him to kill h i m : is he
not a y o u t h of noble birth? Having a father to be avenged, does not
this service which is asked of h i m m a t c h his o w n duty? Here is the
scene until its conclusion (pp. 2 5 1 - 2 5 2 ) :

T h u s S t a r c a t h e r u s . A t last, in talking w i t h h i m (mutuo

sermone), he b e c a m e a w a r e that Hatherus w a s Lennus' son a n d
realized the young m a n c a m e of a distinguished family (ani-
madvertens iuvenem splendido loco natum); he offered him
his throat to cut, urging him not to shrink f r o m taking satisfac-
tion f o r his father's murder. He promised that if Hatherus c o m -
plied, he w o u l d b e c o m e possessor of that gold w h i c h S t a r -
catherus h a d received f r o m Lennus. T o goad Hatherus into a
fiercer m o o d toward him [et ut eiusdem in se vehementius
animum efferaret), he is said to h a v e egged him on like this:
" A g a i n , H a t h e r u s , I bereaved y o u of L e n n o , y o u r
father;
p a y m e b a c k , I beg, strike d o w n an old m a n
w h o longs to die, seek my gullet with avenging
steel. For my spirit wishes this service f r o m a noble
h e a d s m a n , but shudders to d e m a n d its d o o m f r o m the
right
hand of a c o w a r d . A m a n m a y righteously c h o o s e
to anticipate Destiny's law; what y o u c a n n o t
flee, y o u m a y even take in a d v a n c e . A young
tree must b e nourished, an ancient o n e hewn d o w n .
W h o e v e r o v e r t h r o w s w h a t is close to its fate and fells
what c a n n o t stand is an instrument of Nature
{minister naturae est, quisquis fato confinia fundit. . .).
Death c o m e s best when c r a v e d , life b e c o m e s tedious
w h e n the end is desired; do not let disagreeable
age prolong an insupportable e x i s t e n c e . "

42
 StarkaSr

This sixth-century bronze die, one of four found at Torslunda (island of

O l a n d ) in Sweden, w a s used to make helmet plates. It depicts a y o u n g
Odinic w a r r i o r in the presence of a berserk, not inappropriately f o r the
Hatherus-Starcatherus encounter.

W i t h these w o r d s he drew out his purse and proffered the

m o n e y . Hatherus, excited b y a passion to e n j o y the fee n o less
than take revenge f o r his father, promised he w o u l d not spurn
the p a y m e n t but c a r r y out his wishes. S t a r c a t h e r u s willingly
offered him his s w o r d a n d then bent f o r w a r d his head beneath
it; h e urged Hatherus not to fulfil his task of executioner
squeamishly or handle the blade like a girl, and told him that
if, when he had killed him b u t b e f o r e the b o d y dropped, he
could leap between the t o r s o and its fallen head, he w o u l d be
rendered p r o o f against a n y w e a p o n . It is uncertain whether he
said this to instruct his murderer or to punish him (quod utrum
instruendi percussoris gratia an puniendi dixerit, incertum
est). Possibly the u n c o m m o n b u l k of S t a r c a t h e r u s ' b o d y might

43
 StarkaSr

h a v e o v e r w h e l m e d him as he sprang. Hatherus, then, drove

his sword vigorously a n d lopped off the old man's h e a d . T h e
story tells h o w , severed f r o m the trunk, it snapped at the soil
with its teeth as it hit the ground, the fury of the dying j a w s in-
dicating his savage temper. A f r a i d that there could be treach-
ery underlying the p r o m i s e , his slayer prudently refrained
f r o m leaping, for if he had thoughtlessly done s o , he might
have been crushed under the impact of the descending b o d y
and f>aid for the old man's murder with his o w n life.

Hatherus burned the b o d y on the field of Roling and had the

ashes buried. „,

6. HODR

T h i s ending leaves the reader unsatisfied. T o begin with there

is the diversity, the contradictions in characters successively at-
tributed to Hatherus. T o the one which w e have already taken u p —
the transformation of the y o u n g j o k e s t e r into a renowned w a r l o r d ,
m a g n a n i m o u s and fearsome, w h o on top of this turns out to b e the
son of L e n n u s — y e t another needs to be added. If Starcatherus,
with all his last strength, desires his presence as that of the o n l y
friend w h o c a n help h i m in his despair, if he then recognizes in him
the ideal executioner he seeks, it is because he admires and loves
him, and this excludes a n y baseness or venality in the y o u n g m a n ,
crimes w h i c h the old hero has himself c o m m i t t e d but once in his
life, through fate, and f o r which he does n o t forgive himself. A n d
yet he corrupts, as much as he depends u p o n , this b e l o v e d and ad-
mired y o u t h . T o the noble m o t i v e s — t o render a heroic service to
an old m a n w h o requests it, and to avenge his father's b l o o d — h e
adds an appeal to greed, the offer of the gold pieces that he carries
a b o u t his n e c k . A n d the worst of it is that the y o u n g m a n appears
amenable to this proposition. All of this, f r o m the point of view of
G e r m a n i c w a r r i o r m o r a l i t y , is of a mediocrity which it is hard to
attribute to the original used b y S a x o . T h e r e is m o r e o v e r a m o r e

44
 StarkaSr

o b j e c t i v e reason to see here an adulteration, a debasement. T h i s

contemptible motif is f o u n d only in the p r o s e , whereas the brief
p o e m , which is the last that Starcatherus will recite, a n d , like all
those of the first b o o k s of the Gesta Danorum (of which it is a l s o ,
absolutely, the last) is certainly an adaptation of native stanzas,
m a k e s n o allusion to it, limiting itself to n o b l e exhortations a n d n o
less n o b l e generalities.
T h e reader's uneasiness has a n o t h e r cause, n a m e l y the uncer-
tainty with which S a x o leaves him a b o u t the true last intentions of
Starcatherus with regard to Hatherus, a n d , through this uncer-
tainty, the author's insinuated preference f o r the most unpleasant
alternative. T h r o u g h o u t his life, s a v e f o r the three facinora im-
p o s e d b y O d i n , our hero is a model not o n l y of strength and
c o u r a g e , but of integrity and reliability. F r o m his giant ancestry he
carries certain physical traits, but his soul, apart perhaps f r o m the
harshness and intensity of his w r a t h , o w e s nothing to it; there is no
trace of the excesses, the unbridled desires, the b r a g g a d o c i o , or the
deceptions that characterize the n o r m a l b e h a v i o r of giants. H o w is
o n e to think that, at this last m o m e n t of his life, a deeper nature
should take its revenge on h i m , and that he should with a villainous
lie b e t r a y the y o u t h w h o is only obeying h i m and o n l y kills him in
order to serve him? T h i s w o u l d be a fourth facinus, a supernumer-
ary o n e , that would destroy the sense and the structure of this long
biography. Furthermore, the fear which S a x o ascribes to Hatherus is
n o t justified b y the o u t c o m e : the trunk and head do not clash like
the Symplegades, and if the dying head carries on ferociously on
the ground, it has n o thought for the m a n w h o has severed it. T h u s
the situation is quite different f r o m others with which o n e might at
first be tempted to c o m p a r e it, for example the scene w h i c h the
C a u c a s i a n legends of S o s l a n - S o s r y k o describe in numerous v a r i -
ants.^^ T h e r e the hero has managed with difficulty to defeat a
specific e n e m y , a giant, as stupid as he is strong; reduced to p o w e r -

See my Legendes sur les Nartes (1930), no. 21, pp. 77-83 (six variants); Le
Livre des heros, pp. 8 9 - 9 4 .

45
 StarkaSr

lessness, trapped and unable to escape death, the giant feigns a sud-
den b e n e v o l e n c e : after having beheaded h i m , he says, his c a p t o r
should draw out o f his neck a particular tendon a n d m a k e a belt of
it; thus he will inherit some of his strength. Justifiably suspicious,
S o s r y k o tries out the belt on a tree, which b r e a k s o r crumbles,
burned to ashes. In other versions, once the giant is decapitated, his
head leaps t o w a r d S o s r y k o a n d seizes the s w o r d tight in its j a w s .
S o s r y k o begins to run but the head does not let g o ; finally, though,
it slackens its hold, falls, and S o s r y k o is able to scalp it. In this
case, and in all the analogous cases, the giant or monster is faithful
to his nature, prolongii\g at the m o m e n t of his death a hostility a n d
treachery that have never been contradicted o r c o n c e a l e d . T h e cir-
cumstances of Starcatherus' death are entirely otherwise, and o n e
has the impression that S a x o has g o n e w r o n g in not c h o o s i n g the
" b e t t e r " interpretation, in not admitting that his hero is sincere and
simply reducing the scene to this c o m m o n p l a c e theme of the giant
wreaking p o s t h u m o u s vengeance.^^ Starcatherus has b e f o r e him a
m a n w h o m he admires, respects, loves; he asks of him a n e x c e p -
tional service w h i c h will be in n o w a y a fault, n o r require a n y v e n -
geance. He gives him at the outset (with a disagreeable touch of
venality) all that he possesses materially, but he wishes also to b e -
queath to him a m o r e valuable treasure, not the strength that he
carries within him, but the c o m p o u n d e d sum of this strength which
he himself has not drawn o n , n a m e l y invulnerability. T h i s he c a n
only do b y a sort of crossing of their bodies, an insertion of the
youth's entire b o d y between the still-twitching fragments of his
o w n , at the very m o m e n t when there w o u l d pass, f r o m head to
trunk or f r o m trunk to head, the last mysterious current of his life
f o r c e : a gift a n d also a fusing, a i m i o n .
But w h o exactly is Hatherus, this figure w h o m w e have already
seen to be incoherent even m o r e than c o m p l e x ? It has long been

And to another magical theme: the efficacy of passing between the severed
parts of a corpse (purification; acquiring of privileges); see Olivier Masson, "A pro-
pos d'un rituel hittite pour la lustration d'une arm^e: le rite de purification par le
passage entre les deux parties d'une victime," Revue de I'histoire des religions, CXXXVII
(1950), 1-25.

>4
46
 StarkaSr

thought that S a x o , b y misunderstanding or design, has here debased

and humanized a divine figure, namely HoSr, the son o f O d i n . In
the m y t h o l o g y which survives, H 6 3 r o n l y appears as the blind, un-
witting killer of Baldr, a n d after the destruction a n d restoration o f
the world, in association with Baldr as O d i n ' s successor. But there
are r e a s o n s — H 6 8 r continues a n ancient I n d o - E u r o p e a n w a r r i o r
name^^—to think that he w a s originally a m o r e general figure o f
Fate, in particular the fate o f the fighter, with its long uncertainty
a n d its m o r e than p r o b a b l e o u t c o m e . " T h e phonetic difficulty
—Hatherus transcribes *Hadr rather than H 6 5 r — d o e s not seem in-
soluble; the second element of the c o m p o u n d Stark-(h)adT^^ m a y
h a v e affected the v o w e l c o l o r of the u n c o m p o u n d e d *Hotherus,
a n d this is all the m o r e likely as it is plausible that, having else-
where used H 6 9 r - H o t h e r u s (Hatherus^') with his correct n a m e
f o r m in reducing him to a h u m a n figure, and n o longer understand-
ing the theology of the g o d H 6 5 r , S a x o preferred not to repeat the
same name exactly.
Further efforts h a v e occasionally been m a d e in this direction,
for example b y the late J a n de Vries in his (1955) article o n S t a r -
k a S r . ^ ' A c c o r d i n g to h i m , here as elsewhere in the m y t h o f B a l d r ,
H 6 3 r did not h a v e his o w n separate existence but w a s simply "eine
Erscheinungsform des G o t t e s 0 3 i n n , " a manifestation o f the g o d

^'Jan de Vries, Altnordisches etymologisches Worterbuch (1961), pp. 2 7 8 -

279: Olce. hoS 'battle,' OHG hadu, OE heaSu: Olrish cath 'battle' (Gaulish Catu-
riges), Thracian KaTU-, etc.
" Gods of the Ancient Northmen (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London 1973),
chap. 3 ("The Drama of the World: Balder, Hoder, Loki"); ME / (1968), pp.
222-230.
" Jan de Vries, op. cit., p. 544, s.v. "starkr'', writes: "Dazu PN. Starkadr alt.
Storkudr {<Stark-hodr), vgl. ogot. Starcedius (= Starki-pius . . . ), frank. Sfar-
childis, Starkfrid, ae. Starkwulf, langob. Starcolf." As the second term in com-
pounds, 'haduR gives sometimes -(h)udr (NiduSr 'der grimmige Krieger' = OHG
Nidhad, OE Nidhad; Dorrudr 'der Speerkampfer'), sometimes -(h)adr {Andadr 'der
Gegner', *Anda-haduR beside Andudr, Ondudr). Cf. Birger Nerman, Studier over
Svdrges hedna Litteratur (1913), pp. 108-109.
See "Hotherus et Balderus," Beitrdge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache
und Literatur, 83 (1962), pp. 259-270: reprinted as Appendix 3 in from Myth to Fic-
tion (Chicago, 1973).
Cited above, p. 11; the text quoted here is on p. 296.

47
 StarkaSr

O d i n , and the v e r y n a m e of S t a r k a S r m a d e of this character " e i n

P r o t o t y p der odinischen W e i h e n k r i e g e r , " emphasizing " d e n religio-
sen C h a r a k t e r dieser V o r s t e l l u n g . " F o r m y part I a m not inclined t o
accept this reduction o f multiple gods to o n e ; the procedure h a s
done much h a r m in the study, f o r e x a m p l e , of R o m a n religion,
w^here goddesses a s different as M a t e r M a t u t a , Feronia, C a r n a , a n d
so on h a v e been considered as so m a n y specific " n u m i n a " of o n e
vast J u n o . It is n o m o r e t o b e r e c o m m e n d e d f o r the interpretation
of S c a n d i n a v i a n religion. H 6 5 r is o n e of the figures in the orbit o f
the s o v e r e i g n - m a g i c a l - w a r r i o r g o d O d i n , a n d o n e of those closest
to h i m , t o b e sure, but he remains distinct, a n d I a m not resigned t o
admitting that O d i n , in the m y t h of Baldr, openly, under his o w n
n a m e , should at first try t o prevent a n d in the end lament a murder
which he h a s meanwhile c o m m i t t e d under c o v e r of a n o t h e r n a m e .
W i t h this reservation, maintaining the duality of H o S r and O d i n , I
think nonetheless that J a n de Vries is correct when he writes, after
having mentioned the murderer of B a l d r :

T h e r e is yet a second H 6 3 r : the Hatherus w h o appears in

the account of the death o f S t a r k a S r . H e is the son of the
D a n e L e n n o , w h o m S t a r k a S r has killed, a n d he is b o u n d t o
S t a r k a S r b y a loyal friendship; yet it is he w h o gives h i m den
heissersehnten Todesstreich. A c c o r d i n g t o Schneider, H a t -
herus is a late, in no w a y heroic figure. T h i s is b y n o m e a n s s o ;
it is O d i n himself, the divine H o S r , w h o recalls S t a r k a S r t o
him at the end of his life {Starkadr zu sich heimholt). O n e
should take note of the singular f o r m of the killing: there is n o
c o m b a t ; on the c o n t r a r y the decrepit old m a n extends his head
to the y o u t h , as a sacrificial victim, pronam cervicem ap-
plicuit, and Hatherus has only t o strike. . . .

Following the text more closely, w e w o u l d s a y : at the point

w h e n t w o of the facinora of Starcatherus imposed b y O d i n (in
S a x o ) o r b y T h o r (in the Gautrekssaga) h a v e already been c o m -
mitted a n d the third facinus is in the m a k i n g , Hatherus, that is to
say the g o d H o S r , Fate, close to O d i n , strikes up a friendly relation-
ship with the old Starcatherus in the guise of a y o u n g m a n , as (in
the Gautrekssaga) O d i n himself o f o l d , in the appearance of the

48
 StarkaSr

mature m a n Hrossharsgrani, b e c a m e the tutor of the y o u n g S t a r -

k a S r in view of obtaining f r o m h i m , after years o f care, the first
facinus. O n c e the third facinus is accomplished, a n d with it the last
extension of his life is exhausted, Starcatherus, suddenly deterio-
rated a n d wishing t o die, calls in his prayers f o r the presence of this
H 6 3 r , w h o m he finds, providentially rather than b y c h a n c e , a n d
has himself killed b y h i m once h e has recognized h i m . Finally, at
the m o m e n t when he is t o die, he wishes at least to transfer t o his
killer the privilege of invulnerability which he himself has p o s -
sessed only latently. In the reality of theology, this w o u l d b e liter-
ally a transfusion of the hero into the god, but under h u m a n guise it
is n o m o r e than a gift w h i c h the old m a n offers the y o u n g . A n d of
course in the novelistic a c c o u n t , the h u m a n f o r m carries the d a y :
cut off f r o m his origin a n d his theological value, H a t h e r u s is only a
h u m a n individual w h o hesitates, is suspicious of the gift, a n d
finally does not receive it.
Having at our disposal only S a x o ' s a w k w a r d a n d inaccurate
adaptation, it is impossible to b e more affirmative o r m o r e precise
regarding this conclusion. W h a t is essential is a s f o l l o w s :
O u r h e r o — t h i s six-armed giant reduced b y a m p u t a t i o n t o
h u m a n shape, o r this grandson of an eight-armed giant, h u m a n but
m a r k e d with inherited s c a r s — a f t e r having been in his y o u t h the o b -
j e c t , the p a w n o f the opposing attentions o f the gods T h o r a n d
O d i n , a n d after developing his career within the f r a m e w o r k of
three lives granted a n d three facinora imposed b y o n e or the other
of the gods, voluntarily ends his life a n d career b y having himself
slain b y a y o u n g m a n behind w h o m w e glimpse a third g o d , very
close t o O d i n , H o S r . T o this young m a n he declares his affection
a n d wishes, n o doubt sincerely, to transfuse into h i m the best part
of himself. T h e finale of the story, a s w e see, is n o less strange than
the beginning.

N o w the Indie epic k n o w s a hero of the same type, w h o m w e

shall f o l l o w , t o o , f r o m a m o n s t r o u s birth miraculously repaired to
his decapitation a n d absorption b y the g o d percussor.

49
 SISUPALA

1. THE BIRTH AND DESTINY OF SISUPALA

Sisupala is, in the Mahabharata, an incidental c h a r a c t e r . '

Close kinship ties exist a n d hostile relations develop between h i m
and K f ^ n a , b u t h e has n o b l o o d relation n o r alliance with the
Pan<^avas, a n d does n o t h a v e to intervene, o n o n e side o r the o t h e r ,
in the conflict in which all the great names of the epic c o n f r o n t each
other; he is put to death beforehand in B o o k T w o . Still, according
to the rules of the g a m e , this apparently wholly h u m a n being is the
incarnation of a being f r o m the b e y o n d , the powerful demon w h o
in several previous lives has already confronted other incarnations
of Vi^nu; H i r a n y a k a s i p u , w h o m the g o d fought a n d slew in the
guise of the man-lion; later R a v a n a , over w h o m Vijnu-Rama
prevailed with difficulty.^ T h e s e antecedents barely enter into the
plot of the p o e m , simply justifying that Sisupala should b e b y
nature a determined adversary of Kr§na-Vi§nu. B u t , in a c c o r d with

' The episode of Sisupala occupies slokas 1307-1627 of the second book
(Sabhdparvan) in the Calcutta edition (matching van Buitenen pp. 91-104). The late
poem of Magha has nothing to offer for our purposes; see Balamagha, Mdgha's
Sisupalavadha im Auszuge, bearbeitet von Carl Cappeller (1915), and Magha's Siiu-
pdlavadha, ins Deutsche iibertragen von E. Hultzsch (1926). For the Puranic ac-
counts (particularly the Bhdgavata Purana) see V. R. Ramachandra Dikshitar, The
Purdrta Index, III (1955), 423, s.v. "Sisupala."
^ Edward W. Hopkins, Epic Mythology (1915), pp. 51, 211.

51
 Sisupala

a n o t h e r rule of transposition, this deep causality is replicated on

the earthly level b y a n o t h e r , m o r e immediate a n d m o r e novelistic
one.
Sisupala is introduced in the following w a y . A f t e r their
c h i l d h o o d , a n d despite their already serious corvflicts with their
cousins, the hundred sons o f Dhftara§tra ( a n d especially with the
eldest, D u r y o d h a n a ) , the P a n d a v a s h a v e not as yet k n o w n their
great misfortunes, a s it is only at the end of B o o k T w o , the Sabhd-
parvan, that D u r y o d h a n a ' s malice a n d Dhftara^fra's weakness will
arrange the fateful dice-game which, b y fleecing Yudhi§thira a n d
his brothers a n d forcing them into thirteen years of exile, begins a
conflict between the t w o groups o f cousins that will b e settled only
in the b l o o d y battle of the "field of the K u r u s , " Kuruk^etra, from
B o o k Six to B o o k T e n . T o all appearances, at the m o m e n t , things
are o n the w a y to turning out otherwise: Yudhi?thira's rights to
kingship seem to b e recognized b y e v e r y o n e , including the blind
uncle a n d the maniacal D u r y o d h a n a ; h e has received the first visit
f r o m his cousin Kf$i;ia, w h o is n o n e other than Vi^nu incarnate (as
Yudhi?thira himself is either the s o n , o r the incarnation o f a p o r -
tion of Dharma),^ a n d Kr?pa has begun the part which he will play
throughout the p o e m , that of faithful, lucid, discreet a n d resource-
ful counsellor. Yudhi?thira h a s been discussing with h i m the
advisability of celebrating a rdjasuya, the c e r e m o n y of royal c o n -
secration, or "spriiJcling," here curiously conceived as a n imperial
c e r e m o n y , bestowing on the recipient not only r o y a l t y , rd^fra, b u t
sdmrdjya, "universal kingship" a n d pdrthivya, "earthly sover-
e i g n t y , " implying in consequence recognition b y all other kings of a
m o r e o r less effective sort of s u p r e m a c y .

^ This phrase does not pretend to solve the large set of problems posed by the
character of Krjija in the Mahabharata. My feeling is certainly that much of what is
said of him is sufficiently explained as transposition of the mythology of an ancient
Vijiju, a transposition of the same sort and scope as that which has produced the
Paijdavas from an archaic list of the functional gods. But of course, Kf^ija is not
only that. Here, it suffices that the equivalence Kfjija-Visnu is explicitly stated in the
course of the episode.

52
 Sisupala

A first obstacle h a s already been averted, o r rather eliminated.

A n o t h e r prince, J a r a s a n d h a the king o f M a g a d h a , h a d launched the
s a m e claim to sovereignty as Yudhi?thira, a n d h a d begun to b a c k it
up with cruelty a n d indeed b a r b a r i t y , b a c k e d b y the support of the
god R u d r a - S i v a . In the presence of Kr§na- o n his advice a n d almost
on his orders, t w o of Yudhi?thira's brothers h a v e disposed of this
c o m p e t i t o r under dramatic circumstances w h i c h w e will examine
later."
Yudhi§thira has then dispatched his f o u r younger brothers to
the four corners of the world to secure, a n d if need b e to c o m p e l ,
the consent of the kings. W i t h o u t m u c h trouble these missions h a v e
succeeded and the kings h a v e poured into Yudhi?thira's capital to
attend the c e r e m o n y a n d thus to c o n f i r m their allegiance. T h e P a n -
4 a v a s have before them truly a gallery of kings, seemingly well
disposed, a m o n g them V a s u d e v a , a c c o m p a n i e d b y his son Kysna,
that is to s a y again, Vi?nu incarnate.
T h i n g s get off to a g o o d start, with the usual ceremonies of
hospitality, particularly the arghya, the offering presented to the
guests of h o n o r . But very quickly there arises a serious p r o b l e m , a n
unexpected quarrel which remotely recalls the Irish legends, where
the "hero's p o r t i o n " regularly p r o v o k e s competitions a n d battles.
In this case it h a s to do n o t with such a p o r t i o n , but with a sup-
plementary arghya, a n arghya of excellence, which B h i ? m a (the
great-uncle, tutor, a n d counsellor of the w h o l e family of the B h a -
ratas, the sons of D h r t a r a j t r a and those of Panc^u alike) proposes to
offer to the most w o r t h y of those present ( 1 3 3 0 ) . Yudhi?thira agrees
and asks Bhl§ma himself to designate the o n e to be so h o n o r e d .
BhTjma does n o t hesitate and responds, with g o o d reasons: Kr?na
( 1 3 3 2 - 1 3 3 4 ) . T h e assembled kings would surely accede to this
a w a r d without grumbling when o n e of them rises a n d protests
vehemently; it is Sisupala, the king of Cedi. He refuses to accept
that, in a n assembly of kings, a special h o n o r should g o to an in-
dividual w h o is n o t a king.

" See below, chap. IV.

53
 Sisupala

His protest rapidly occasions an ever m o r e lively exchange of

words a n d the old B h i ? m a , w h o has lived through three generations
and harbors much knowledge, is led to explain to B h l m a s e n a , the
second of the P a n d a v a s w h o is n o t exactly well-informed a n d
w h o m Sisupala has taken personally to task, w h o this spoilsport is,
h o w he c a m e into the w o r l d , what fate weighs upon h i m , a n d also
w h y up to this m o m e n t Kr?na has s h o w n so much patience t o -
wards h i m ( 1 4 9 4 - 1 5 2 2 ) . T h e tale of his beginnings follows. :>•>

Sisupala w a s well-born in the r o y a l family of the Cedis, the

son o f the reigning king. But he w a s b o r n m o n s t r o u s : he h a d three
eyes a n d four arms (tryaksah caturbhujah), a n d uttered inarticulate
cries like a n animal (1494). His distraught parents were all set to
a b a n d o n him, tyagaya kurutam matim (1495), when a disembodied
voice, vag asanrini, made itself heard to the king, his wife, a n d his
assembled ministers. T h e voice said ( 1 4 9 7 - 1 4 9 8 ) :

" K i n g , he is b o r n y o u r s o n , illustrious a n d powerful, therefore

be not afraid of h i m , but guard y o u r child anxiously. Y o u a r e
not to b e his death, n o r has this T i m e yet c o m e . His death, his
slayer b y the sword, h a s been b o r n , lord o f m e n . "

Hearing this speech which c a m e f r o m the invisible, vakyam

antarhitam, the m o t h e r speaks, tormented b y the affection she
feels, in spite o f everything, f o r this small monster, her son (putras-
nehabhisantapta) ( 1 5 0 0 - 1 5 0 1 ) :

"I b o w with folded hands to h i m w h o has spoken this w o r d

concerning m y s o n . N o w let h i m also speak further. I want to
hear w h o shall b e the death of this s o n l "

T h e n the invisible being speaks again ( 1 5 0 2 - 1 5 0 3 ) :

" H e upon w h o s e lap his t w o extra arms will b o t h fall o n the

ground like five-headed snakes a n d that third eye in the middle
of the child's forehead will sink a w a y a s he l o o k s at h i m — h e
shall b e his d e a t h . "

T h u s the prophecy is t w o f o l d , but u n a m b i g u o u s : o n e d a y ,

placed in someone's l a p , the m o n s t r o u s child will lose his excesses,

54 •
 Sisupala

two a r m s a n d the central e y e , a n d will b e c o m e n o r m a l ; b u t the

Deliverer w h o will w o r k this a n a t o m i c a l miracle will also later b e
the cause o f his death.
R u m o r o f such a r e m a r k a b l e occurrence travels fast, a n d all
the kings of the earth, drawn b y curiosity, didrkfavah, c o m e to the
c o u n t r y and the palace where it t o o k place. T h e king o f Cedi
receives t h e m all with h o n o r and places his b a b y upon the lap o f
each, ekaikasya nzpasyanke putram aropayat tadd, a n d o n the
knees of every single o n e , pxthak, o f these thousands of kings, rd-
jasahasrdndm, but the spectacle, the expected miracle never o c c u r s ,
sisur anke samdru^ho na tat prdpa nidarsanam.

S o it goes until there arrive f r o m the town o f D v a r a v a t l , at-

tracted b y the reports, t w o princes, w h o h a v e m o r e o v e r excellent
reasons f o r c o m i n g , since the small monster's m o t h e r is their pater-
nal a u n t . T h e s e t w o princes a r e the Y a d a v a s Kr§na a n d his older
b r o t h e r B a l a r a m a . T h e y t o o a r e received with h o n o r , a n d the
queen personally has just placed her son o n Kr§na's knees, putram
ddmoda-rotsange devTsarnvyadadhdt svayam ( 1 5 1 0 ) . T h e n finally,
the miracle o c c u r s ( 1 5 1 1 ) :

" . . . N o sooner was he placed on his lap than the two extra
a r m s fell off a n d the eye in his forehead sank a w a y . "

Seeing this, the m o t h e r is troubled a n d begins to tremble [vya-

thitd, trastd), and understandably: according to the disembodied
V o i c e , the m a n w h o s e touch has w o r k e d this transformation will
also b e the mrtyu, the (cause of) death of the small being restored to
h u m a n f o r m . S h e asks a favor of h e r nephew ( 1 5 1 2 - 1 5 1 3 ) :

" G i v e a b o o n to m e , Kf^^ia, w h o a m sick with fear,

strongarmed o n e , f o r y o u a r e the relief o f the oppressed a n d
grant safety to those that a r e a f e a r e d l "

Kr?ria answers ( 1 5 1 4 - 1 5 1 5 ) :

" D o n o t fear. . . . W h a t b o o n must I give y o u , o r what

should I d o , m y aunt? W h e t h e r it c a n b e done o r n o t , I shall
obey your word]"

55
 Sisupala

Then the queen makes her appeal (1516):

"Pray pardon, strong man, the derelictions of Sisupala!"

Krjna answers (1517):

"I shall forsooth forgive a hundred derelictions of your

son, paternal aunt, even though they may be capital offenses.
Do not sorrow."

Thus the fate of Sisupala was sealed. We shall soon learn that
the account of these hundred offenses, the aparadhah to be tole-
rated, is exhausted and even overdrawn. Released from the promise
to his aunt, Kr$na will in the end be able to punish Sisupala.

2. RUDRA, KRSNA AND SISUPALA

Before proceeding further, let us ponder this monstrous birth,

this correction of shape and this boon lirdcing facinora and longevity.
India is more familiar than Scandinavia with persons with ex-
tra arms, not only among babies, but adults as well, including the
greatest of them—caturbhuja 'four-armed' is a frequent Hindu
epithet of Vi?nu as well as of Siva, and there come immediately to
mind the figures of Indian gods who seem to have more arms, all
gracefully and symmetrically arrayed, than the Hydra of Lerna had
heads. The Mahabharata mentions other births of children, even
quite human ones, with several arms, which occasion no such
alarm nor grief. Here, the fear is immediate: the father and mother
can think only of abandoning the infant, and would do so if the
Voice of an unseen being did not intervene. We are faced with a
peculiar case.
But this is not what is most important. Long ago it was noted
that the second congenital deformity of the "little one," the third
eye in the middle of his forehead, lalafajarri nayanam, clearly
marks him as a human replica of Rudra-Siva. It is this god, and he

56
 Sisupala

a l o n e — a n d very early, if the epithet tryambaka means, at least b y

c o n n o t a t i o n , " h a v i n g three p u p i l s " — w h o enjoys the privilege o f
having three eyes, the third between the t w o n o r m a l ones in the
middle o f the forehead: tricak^us, tryakfa are epithets of Siva.^
A l o n g the s a m e line it has been pointed out that the n a m e of
Sisupala, f o r which the Mahabharata (1497) suggests an obviously
postfabricated e t y m o l o g y , ' is a transposition, to the level o f the
"small" (sisu-), o f the already Vedic epithet of R u d r a , a n d frequently
later of Rudra-Siva, pasupati; pasupati is "lord of animals"; sisupala
is " p r o t e c t o r (and also " k i n g , prince") o f the s m a l l . "
Finally, in a previous episode—which he himself recalls within
the present one—Sisupala manifests a particular a t t a c h m e n t , t o the
extent o f being his " a r m y chief," to King J a r a s a n d h a , w h o will o c -
cupy us later a n d w h o is presented as the favorite of R u d r a - S i v a ,
endowed with the privilege o f seeing R u d r a - S i v a with his o w n eyes,
a n d w h o offers kings in sacrifice to R u d r a - S i v a . '
T h e s e reasons oblige us to conclude, as did John M u i r m o r e
than a century a g o (1864),' that Sisupala is, as solidly b y nature as
he is ephemerally in f o r m , a hero " o n the side of R u d r a - S i v a , " a
transformation o f this Rudra-Siva w h o s e o w n incarnation is a n -
other of the p o e m ' s f e a r s o m e heroes, A s v a t t h a m a n . '
A n d this is of great interest because the o n e w h o delivers h i m
f r o m his superfluous a r m s a n d e y e , a n d with w h o m he will n o n e -
theless remain t o the end in a state o f violent hostility, is K f § n a -
Vignu, a g o d o f a completely different sort. In m o r e than o n e regard
the " o p p o s i t e " o f Rudra-Siva, he will even b e , in the Hindu trinity,
his p o l a r partner. Sisupala is thus f o u n d , f r o m his earliest y o u t h , in
c o n t r a d i c t o r y relationships with the t w o great g o d s .

' Edward W. Hopkins, Epic Mythology, pp. 220, 221.

' §1. 1497 (van Buitenen p. 100).
' See below, chap. IV.
* Original Sanskrit Texts, IV, 170-180.
» M £ / , pp. 213-222.

57
 Sisupala

A t the same time that, miraculously, b y the mere touch of

K r s n a - V i j i j u , he is restored to human shape, Sisupala receives from
the same Kf$na a true " f a t e , " which by defining a postponement
completes what the unknown V o i c e had imposed o n him at birth.
T h e V o i c e h a d said that death would c o m e to him from his very
normalizer, to be precise, that his normalizer "would be his d e a t h . "
W h e n it is discovered that the normalizer is K f s n a - V i j n u , the latter
undertakes to delay this death. H e does not define the reprieve in
terms of absolute or lived time, he does not say, for example, " a
hundred y e a r s " o r "three average human lives"; rather he sets down
a kind of sliding scale which ties the young being's life span to his
behavior: " I will tolerate, without killing him, a hundred offenses,
aparadhasatam, a n y of which would deserve d e a t h . " T h i s number
can reassure the mother; even between people w h o hate each other,
to commit a hundred offenses each of which merits death requires a
certain amount of time, and especially since the interested party
will be forewarned, it will be up to him not to exhaust his credit
and to avoid overstepping the limit by a hundred and first offense.
In fact it comes out in the episode of B o o k T w o that Sisupala has
wasted no time; he has carried o n like a prodigal son, squandering
his store of impunity, and he is still y o u n g when here, before us, he
overdraws his account, by an offense which will bring on his death.
It is n o less remarkable that the b o o n granted him concerning the
length of his life should be limited and conditioned by a counting of
aparadhah, that is, of facinora committed against someone.
A final remark will serve to tie together the t w o preceding
statements. It is at the mother's request that Kj-jna grants this gift
to the baby, and b y asking for it m o r e o v e r in a very general w a y
(to tolerate his offenses, without specifying a number) she shows
that she has n o doubt of the enmity that will prevail between nor-
malizer a n d normalizee, the latter's agressiveness being exerted
consistently at the expense of the former. Has she recognized R u d r a -
S i v a in the one as she knows that the other is V i j o u ? In any case,
one could not wish for a better expression of the "conflict of divini-
ties" which, f r o m the foreordained immunity until the hundredth
offense, will dominate the career of Si§upala.

58
 Sisupala

3. THE OFFENSES ^

Let US return to the b i o g r a p h y o f the h e r o . T h e texts are n o t

prolix either a b o u t his exploits o r his crimes: undoubtedly they
were the subject o f specific, well-known tales, and only allusions
are made to them here. T h e exploits of Sisupala must h a v e been
n u m e r o u s , since he c o m m a n d e d the armies o f a n o t h e r king of
w h o m it is said expressly that h e h a d conquered a large part of the
world (574): • . • ,•, . ' .

The mighty king Sisupala, having indeed g o n e over c o m p e t e l y

to this Jarasandha's side, has b e c o m e his marshal [sendpatih).

Regarding the hundred personal affronts deserving o f death,

vadharha (1517), which K f j i j a has undertaken to forgive, w e d o
not h a v e the complete list either. A t the m o m e n t of the final settling
of accounts, Krsija gives merely a sampling o f them, recalling o n l y
five, in five slokas. A l l h a v e been c o m m i t t e d against m e m b e r s o f
Kfjija's family, the Y a d a v a s , but in view of familial solidarity they
ought t o be considered as in effect directed against him a n d c o n s e -
quently charged to the current account of patience on which the of-
fender keeps drawing (1516). W h a t are these examples (1566-1572)7

1. " K n o w i n g that w e h a d g o n e to the city o f Pragjyoti?a,

this fiend, w h o is o u r cousin, b u r n e d down D v a r a k a ( =
D v a r a v a t l , o u r capital], k i n g s . "
2. " W h i l e the b a r o n s o f the B h o j a s were at play on M o u n t
Raivataka, he slew and captured them, then returned to his city."
3 . " M a l e v o l e n t l y , he stole the horse that w a s set free at
the Horse Sacrifice a n d surrounded b y guards to disrupt m y
father's s a c r i f i c e . "
4. " W h e n she w a s journeying t o the country of the
Sauviras to b e given in marriage, the misguided fool abducted
the unwilling wife-to-be o f the glorious B a b h r u . "
5. "Hiding beneath his wizardry, the fiendish offender o f
his uncle abducted B h a d r a of Visala, the intended bride of the
Karu^al
For the s a k e o f m y father's sister I h a v e endured very
great suffering; but fortunately n o w this is taking place in the

59
 Sisupala

presence of all the kings. For y o u are n o w witnesses of the all-

surpassing offense against m e ; learn also n o w the offenses he
has perpetrated against m e in c o n c e a l m e n t . "

It is easy to verify that these sample offenses are distributed, in

the order II (first and second offenses), I (third offense), and III
(fourth and fifth offenses), across the f r a m e w o r k of the three f u n c -
tions, and constitute a new example of the theme of the "three sins
of the w a r r i o r " :
In 1 and 2 , Sisupala, instead of fairly and openly giving battle,
waits until he k n o w s a king is absent to burn d o w n his capital, and
surprises rajanyas in the midst of disporting themselves to m a s s a c r e
or kidnap them: this cowardice is on the same level as that of the sec-
ond sin of Indra and Herakles slaying an adversary b y a foul trick,
instead of confronting h i m in equal c o m b a t .
In 3 , Sisupala attacks the king in the area of religion b y pre-
venting him f r o m celebrating the most solemri of royal sacrifices.
In 4 and 5 , Sisupala abducts a noble married w o m a n — i n 5 ,
disguising himself as her h u s b a n d — c o m m i t t i n g a sexual sin entirely
similar to the third sin of Indra, a n d as serious as the third sin of
Herakles.
T h e great similarity of the t w o first and the t w o last offenses
m a k e s it p r o b a b l e that this list has been inflated—India has little
taste f o r c o n c i s e n e s s — a n d that m o r e originally each type of sin was
illustrated b y only one e x a m p l e . T a k i n g this t a c k , it is tempting to

f
suppose also that the n u m b e r " o n e h u n d r e d " has been substituted,
for the s a m e reason, f o r the simple n u m b e r " t h r e e , " and that w h a t
is presented here as a sampling of the o f f e n s e s — o r rather w h a t this
sampling was b e f o r e the development of the three crimes into
five—originally constituted their c o m p l e t e i n v e n t o r y .
In any case, directly or indirectly, all these sins are directed
against the king. T h e first three, those of the second and first func-
tion, are direct, attacking the king in his capital, his servants, his
religion; the two sexual sins attack w o m e n belonging to the king's
family or placed under his p r o t e c t i o n . Rhetorically speaking, there-
f o r e , in this final quarrel where Sisupala claims to defend r o y a l

60
 Sisupala

majesty and where he tries, we shall see, t o incite the assembly of

kings against K f j i j a and the P a n d a v a s , this enumeration of crimes
c o m m i t t e d against a king, in the three functional areas of royal a c -
tivity, is very timely, a n d will in the end have on the audience the
effect which Kf?;ia is hoping f o r .

4. SiSuPALA AND THE KINGS

T h e dispute during which at first Bhlgma, then K f § p a himself,

reveal the past a n d unveil the nature of their adversary, develops at
length a n d occasions several speeches b y Sisupala. W h i l e they do
not b e c o m e m o r e and m o r e violent, f o r the first is already extremely
s o , they rather lead gradually up t o the desperate defiance at the
end. T h e i r subject is, f r o m beginning to e n d , the defense of the m a j -
esty of kings, purported to h a v e been violated because the sup-
plementary arghya h a s been accorded n o t t o o n e of t h e m , but to
K f $ n a , w h o is n o king: Sisupala m a k e s himself the c h a m p i o n of this
outraged assembly.
T h e theme is stated f r o m the outset ( 1 3 3 8 ) , when Bhl^ma hears
him s a y :

" T h i s Vargneya does not deserve regal h o n o r as though he

were a king, K a u r a v y a , while great-spirited lords of the earth
are present I"

It is o n dharma that he bases himself, he says quickly, in a

h a u g h t y , didactic tone, to the Panc^avas w h o are astounded at this
effrontery ( 1 3 4 0 ) :

" Y o u are children, y o u don't k n o w ! For the L a w is subtle,

Pan(^avas!"

A n d the f l o o d is loosed ( 1 3 4 2 ) :

" H o w c a n the D a s a r h a , w h o is n o king, merit precedence

over all the kings of the earth so that he should b e honored b y
you?"

61
 Sisupala

G r o w i n g angrier, he lists the kings a n d other heroes w h o are

present, a n d praises their virtues—beginning with this very BhT$ma
w h o m he a t t a c k s as if guilty of lese majesty; h o w , he a s k s , can they
distinguish a n d h o n o r Kr?na when there are present A s v a t t h a -
m a n , D u r y o d h a n a , K f p a , D r u m a , K a r n a , a n d m a n y others ( 1 3 4 7 -
1353)7

"If y o u must h o n o r M a d h u s u d a n a , w h y bring these kings g

h e r e — t o insult them, B h a r a t a ? W
It w a s not out of fear f o r the great-spirited K a u n t e y a that
we all offered him tribute, n o r out of greed or to flatter h i m . I
He wanted the sovereignty a n d proceeded according to L a w ; f'
so we gave him tribute a n d n o w he does not count usl W h a t '
but contempt m o v e s y o u , if in an assembly of kings y o u h o n o r
Kr?na with the guest gift, while he has not attained to the »
title? . . . N o t only is there delivered an insult to these Indras
of kings, the Kurus h a v e also shown y o u up f o r what y o u o b - f
viously a r e , J a n a r d a n a . A s a marriage is to a eunuch, as a
show is to a blind m a n , so is this royal h o n o r to y o u M a d h u -
sudana, w h o are n o k i n g ! " :T

T h e exposition is instructive b y its very m o n o t o n y : it reveals

a dominating concept of the thought and ideology of Sisupala.
BhT§ma's reply is grandiose. H e rejects, without deigning to
discuss it, this limited conception o f dharma, opposing to it the
greater truth: Kr$na is indeed m o r e than a king, he is everything,
he has everything:

"It is in the full knowledge o f his f a m e , his b r a v e r y , a n d

his triumph that we offer the h o n o r . . . . O f b r a h m i n s he is the
elder in knowledge, of b a r o n s the superior in strength, a n d
b o t h these grounds to h o n o r G o v i n d a are found firm. K n o w l -
edge o f the Vedas a n d their b r a n c h e s , and boundless might as
w e l l — w h o in the world of m e n possesses these so distinguish-
edly if not K e s a v a ? " ' "

§1. 1384-1387 (van Buitenen p. 95). The Poona edition, which is quoted
here in translation, rightly omits the first line, which introduces the vaisyas and
sudras into the matter.

62
 Sisupala

But Sisupala does not relent, a n d the assembly of the kings

begins t o react. F o r all of BhT§ma's saying, " L o o k at these m a n y
kings older than y o u a r e : they consent to the honor paid K f s p a ,
and y o u should likewise forbear i t " ( 1 3 7 2 ) , the audience is b e c o m -
ing more a n d m o r e susceptible t o this royalist demagogy which
Sisupala pours forth in eloquent torrents. S a h a d e v a , the young-
est o f the P a n d a v a s , is soon obliged t o threaten t o put his foot on
the head of anyone w h o would challenge the decision, and at the
sight of his foot none of the kings dares utter a word ( 1 4 0 2 - 1 4 0 5 ) .
But when Sisupala leaves the hall, they all follow him, and their
wrath is great. O n e of them, SunTtha, incites them t o attack those
w h o have tried t o humiliate them, and they make ready t o prevent
the sacrifice, yajnopaghdtdya ( 1 4 1 0 - 1 4 1 2 ) , so that, says the poet,
"When they were being restrained by their friends, their ap-
pearance w a s like that of roaring lions that are dragged a w a y from
their r a w meat. Kf§ija then understood that the invincible sea of
kings, surrounded b y billowing troops, w a s making a covenant
for w a r . "

T h i n g s do not c o m e to such a pass, however, a n d B h i j m a , the

N e s t o r o f this epic, has good reason t o say "Let these kings bark
like a pack of dogs around a sleeping lion. . . . " A n d he hints at
something quite interesting, which will lead us quickly towards
the end, the death of Sisupala: this fine devotion to kings, this in-
transigence about the rights of kings, are they genuine? N o , says
Bhl$ma, repeating the image of dogs; K f $ n a is for the moment like
a sleeping lion, and before he wakes, the king o f Cedi makes lions
out of all these dogs. But in reality, unconsciously [acetanah, 1 4 2 7 ) ,

" . . . he desires with all his being to lead them all t o the
abode o f Y a m a . . . 1"

A n d this accusation, which matches one of the well-known

cruelties of Jarasandha, the king w h o m Sisupala has served as
commander-in-chief, must have substance, for Sisupala protests
vigorously ( 1 4 3 3 ) :

63
 Sisupala

" H o w is it y o u are not ashamed o f yourself, decrepit

defiler of y o u r family, while y o u frighten all these kings with
your many threats?"

In the last speech which he will give, in the face of the fate that
awaits h i m , he will take up again the theme o f offended royal dig-
nity, a n d after a n o t h e r catalogue o f kings w h o deserve to be hon-
ored, he will conclude b y repeating the theme in the interrogative
(1540-1541): " W h y , " he will say to BhT?ma,

" W h y d o y o u fail to praise such kings as S a l y a a n d others,

if as a l w a y s y o u r heart is set on praising, B h l j m a ? "

In the m o m e n t s preceding the death of this overreacher, there

occurs in the kings a change, a reversal. Kr$na has presented his
grievances, h a s recalled the hundred offenses of which he has given
five examples and which are affronts to the majesty a n d status of a
king, and has called them all to witness the hundred a n d first which
has been c o m m i t t e d against h i m . T h e o u t c o m e is this (1575):

All the assembled kings, upon hearing this and m o r e f r o m

V a s u d e v a , n o w began to revile the Cedi king.

In fact they w a t c h without serious reaction the execution of

Sisupala—and w e shall see presently the r e m a r k a b l e m o d e of this
death. Immediately after, when the b o d y has been r e m o v e d , Y u -
dhijthira celebrates his rajasuya before the assembly of kings, as if
n o incident h a d marred the festivities. In the e n d , he dismisses his
guests, including Kr?na, with h o n o r , setting d o w n the official v e r -
sion in his final proclamation (1604): " A l l these kings have c o m e to
us in a spirit of friendship."
T h u s , in short, the rights o f kings have been the subject of
Sisupala's protest; afterwards the kings themselves, their loyalty
and their choice h a v e been at stake in the rhetorical debate; a n d
finally, after coming close to a n ill-timed insurrection, the kings
h a v e done what w a s expected o f them, that f o r which they had
been invited: their consenting presence h a s fully validated the rite.

64
 Sisupala

5. THE END OF SISUPALA; SISUPALA A N D KRSNA

W e left Krjija a n d Sisupala, incarnate Vi$nu a n d the "little

S i v a , " at the m o m e n t when Kfgna announces that the present of-
fense, the hundred a n d first, is n o longer covered b y his promise of
f o r b e a r a n c e a n d will n o t be tolerated. Sisupala replies ( 1 5 7 9 ) :

"Forgive m e , if y o u have that m u c h faith, or don't, Kfjija,

w h a t could possibly befall m e f r o m y o u , h o w e v e r angry o r
friendly?"

Defiance of the C o m m a n d e r ? Resignation to fate? T h e e n d of a

g o o d loser? In a n y case, f r o m this m o m e n t o n , Kr?na's mind is
m a d e u p . A c c o r d i n g t o the Calcutta edition, he " t h i n k s " of the
cakra {manasd 'cintayac cakram), the discus, his infallible w e a p o n
that h a s already punished the excesses o f so m a n y d e m o n s . T h e
discus right a w a y appears a n d positions itself in his h a n d . A t this
solemn m o m e n t Kr?na explains the situation once m o r e , justifying
his a c t i o n . T h e n he acts ( 1 5 8 2 - 1 5 8 9 ) : "

["Let the kings hear w h y I have put up with this: I h a v e

h a d t o forgive a hundred o f his offenses, at his m o t h e r ' s r e -
quest. W h a t she asked of m e , I have given, a n d the tally is
c o m p l e t e . N o w I shall slay h i m b e f o r e the eyes o f all y o u earth-
l o r d s . " S o saying, at that m o m e n t the best of the Y a d u s , ]
scourge of his enemies, irately cut off his head with his discus.
T h e strong-armed king fell like a tree that is struck b y a
thunderbolt.
T h e r e u p o n the kings watched a sublime radiance rise
forth f r o m the b o d y of the king of the Cedis, which, great
king, w a s like the sun rising up f r o m the s k y ; a n d that radiance
greeted lotus-eyed K f §na, h o n o r e d b y the world, a n d entered
h i m , O king. W h e n they s a w that, all the kings deemed it a
miracle that that radiance entered the strong-armed m a n , that
greatest of m e n . In a cloudless s k y heaven rained forth a n d
blazing lightning struck and the earth trembled, w h e n Kr?oa

' ' The Poona edition rejects the end of Kr^ija's speech and the following line.

65
 Sisupala

slew the C a i d y a . T h e r e were kings there w h o did not s a y a

w o r d . . . .'^

T h u s , at the m o m e n t o f the death of this m a d m a n w h o h a s

never ceased, throughout his life, to pile u p offenses a n d crimes
against Kr§n3' a n d w h o has just showered h i m once again with
insolence, the best part o f himself, his tejaPi agryam, leaves his
beheaded b o d y in the f o r m of a brilliant light a n d enters into his
executioner, merging with h i m . It is indeed a miraculous spectacle,
adbhutam, as the kings w h o a r e present all agree.
H o w is this miracle to b e explained? T h e editors of the
Mahabharata see n o difficulty here: Kr§na-Vi§nu is the god w h o
encompasses all, o f w h o m all beings, despite appearances, a r e
parts. His e n e m y Sisupala w a s therefore, in spite of himself, a part
of this total Being. T h e total being h a s simply wished to recover the
part, a n d o n e m a y suppose that he h a s attracted h i m b y some sort
of hypnosis. Just before entering into the b o d y of his killer, it seems
that Sisupala h a s understood the meaning o f the a c t : his tejas
salutes the g o d , vavande tat tada tejo vivesa ca. B u t until then he
had n o t been in o n the secret. During the final quarrel, h e h a s been
seized b y a kind of intoxication, a n irresistible need to reenter the
w o m b o f the incarnate A l l , a surprising variation o n the maternal
w o m b o f the psychoanalysts. Consciously, h e h a s rushed to his de-
struction, h a s p r o v o k e d it, discarding all recourse. Unconsciously,
it w a s something else: he w a s obeying the call, the will of Kr§na-
Vi?nu. Bhl§ma, the wise a n d experienced old m a n , h a d made a cor-
rect diagnosis w h e n , some pages earlier, he ended his a c c o u n t of the
birth a n d childhood o f Sisupala with these w o r d s , which attempted
to explain to the Pan«^avas the p a r o x y s m of violence to which the
challenger a b a n d o n e d himself ( 1 5 2 1 - 1 5 2 2 ) :

" H e o f a certainty is a particle of the glory of Hari, strong-

a r m e d prince, a n d widely f a m o u s Hari w a n t s to recover it.
Some of the icings to be sure, the text goes on (1590-1591), do indeed show
their anger, wringing their hands and biting their lips, but they do not act, approval
prevails and everything soon quiets down.

66
 Sisupala

That is why this evil-minded king of Cedis roars fiercely like a

tiger, tiger of the Kurus, without worrying about any of us."

This is in fact why he plunges into the hundred and first

misdeed, which he could easily have avoided or held back. At the
very time when he cries out his indifference to what Kfspa will or
will not do—these, as we saw, are his last words—he is possessed
by an unconscious need to make an end of it, to lose himself in the
being whom he insults.

The Greek tragedians did not have to deal with this type of
drama, but it is on a par with the loftiest situations which they en-
countered: Prometheus standing up to Zeus, Oedipus obstinately
delving into his destiny. Sisupala is not a normal man; only thanks
to Kf§i:ia, to Vif^iu, has he been freed from the bodily monstrosity
that revealed him as a little Siva. But, from the instant of this boon,
the child's mother and Kf?na himself have foreseen the future:
from this humanized Siva to Vi5i;»u incarnate, there will be, by an
irresistible bent of nature—one might readily say, of t h e o l o g y -
nothing but a series of insults, aggressions, and crimes; and Kf^na
has determined, in his generous wisdom, to tolerate one hundred of
them. In fact, there is no other aspect to their relationship: Sisu-
pala—on his own behalf and undoubtedly on that of Jarasandha
whose armies he commands—persecutes Kf?ria and his family, and
Kfjna, the divine Krgpa, until the credit is exhausted, endures,
withdraws, retreats, even abandons his capital before this mad-
man. And, in the end, we see that underneath this evil-minded and
perverse conduct, Sisupala hoped in the depth of his being only to
be reunited with Kf$pa-Vi§nu, only to be one with him, like a Saint
Paul who would have awaited death and the hereafter to find his
road to Damascus.
More mystical than the epic, more willing to meditate on the
sublime absurdities of theology, the Puranas have repeated, ex-
ploited, and clarified its matter. In the Vi^nu Purdna, for example,
the belief in metempsychosis allows the conflict to be prolonged:

67
 Sisupala

f r o m the standpoint o f reincarnation, Sisupala is apparently a re-

peat offender with a checkered past. In previous lives, he has been
the demon Hiranyakasipu, and thereafter the demon R a v a n a , w h o m
Vi^nu killed in t w o of his incarnations. But it is in his new life as
Sisupala that he has nursed against Kr?na, the incarnation of
V i j n u , the most violent hatred. A n d precisely because o f this v i o -
lence, events this time around turn out differently, the routine of
reincarnation h a s stopped, a n d another p h e n o m e n o n o c c u r s . In
fact, all through his mature life Sisupala has only thought, spitefully
to b e sure, but in a n y case exclusively, of Vi^nu; thanks to this
obsession, in the end he is f o u n d ready, not f o r a n o t h e r r a n d o m
transmigration, but f o r the transformation which w e h a v e wit-
nessed. T h e Vi^nu Puratiia e x p l a i n s " that, at the instant w h e n he
was killed b y V i j n u , he was exposed f o r w h o he w a s , in his true
nature; his furious hatred then e v a p o r a t e d , at the same time as the
stock of sins he had a c c u m u l a t e d , as if at will, w a s literally c o n -
sumed b y his venerable adversary. T h i s made possible the h a p p y ,
unexpected denouement: total, definitive union o f Sisupala and
Krsna-Vijnu, the reentry o f the rebellious part into the immensely
benevolent w h o l e .
T h e reader h a s surely felt, granted all the differences imposed
b y divergence in time, place, civilization, and belief systems, h o w
much this complex career, replete with strangeness, parallels that of
S t a r k a S r . W e should n o w give m o r e precision to this impression.

" IV, 15, 1-S.

68
 Sisupala

I?^ ?l

Vijiju as the man-lion ( N a r a s i m h a ) slays the d e m o n Hiranyakasipu, an

earlier incarnation of Sisupala (relief f r o m EUora, India).

69
 ///

STARKADR A N D SISUPALA
1. COMPARISON OF THE LEGENDS OF STARKADR

AND SISUPALA

T h e stories of S t a r k a 3 r - S t a r c a t h e r u s and of Sisupala are read-

ily arranged in parallel tables:

I I

1. Starcatherus himself (in 1 . Sisupala is born outside of

S a x o ) , or else the advance
replica of S t a r k a S r , w h o
is his h o m o n y m o u s grand-
father (in the saga), is born
outside the pale of h u m a n
nature, a six- or eight-armed
giant.
2 . W i t h n o explanation of h o w
o r even w h y , the god T h o r
relieves Starcatherus of his
supernumerary a r m s and re-
duces him to h u m a n shape
( S a x o ) ; or T h o r slays the
grandfather S t a r k a S r , but
the m a r k s of the amputated
a r m s linger on the otherwise
h u m a n nature, with four
arms and three eyes, the
latter trait (as well as his
n a m e ) marking him as b e -
longing to the god R u d r a -
Siva.
2 . He is restored to h u m a n
shape (two arms d r o p a w a y ,
eye vanishes) at the touch of
Kr$i:ia-Vi§nu, w h o , a c c o r d -
ing to a V o i c e heard at his
birth, will also be the agent
of his death.

71
 StarkaSr and Sisupala
n o r m a l body of the grand-
son S t a r k a S r (saga).
II
1 . T h e r e a f t e r , it is another
g o d , O t h i n u s , and he alone,
w h o concerns himself with
h i m and determines his fate
( S a x o ) ; or else this fate is
fixed, in an antagonistic de-
b a t e , by the two gods O d i n
and T h o r (saga);
2 . In either case, the essential
terms are that the hero will
live three h u m a n lifetimes,
but will c o m m i t a crime in
each.
Ill
T h i s triple life is, accordingly:
1 . filled with martial exploits.
2 . vitiated o n l y b y the three
foreordained crimes.
72
11
1 . A t that m o m e n t w h e n he
makes the small monster
into a m a n , K r ^ n a - V i j n u
declares his destiny:
2 . since it is he, Kr?na, w h o is
called upon to slay him, he
consents to let pass unpun-
ished one hundred offenses,
each of which w o u l d merit
death, thus acknowledging
as inevitable that the hu-
manized monster will c o m -
mit offenses; at the hundred
and first will c o m e the e n d .
III
Sisupala:
1 . b e c o m e s the general of
J a r a s a n d h a , the conquering
king w h o s e armies subdue
nearly the entire w o r l d ; pre-
sumably he is, as general,
the agent of at least several
of these n u m e r o u s
victories;
2 . at the same time, he adds
up and pours on the offenses
against K r j n a and his
family, so that his credit of
impunity is rapidly ex-
 StarkaSr and Sisupala
3 . which are distributed among
the three functions (first,
then second, then third).
IV
1 . The plot of Starcatherus
develops particularly in his
relations with King Frotho
and his descendants, and its
driving force is an uncom-
promising and aggressive
reverence for royal majesty;
imposing his exacting ideal
of this majesty, he repri-
mands kings and their
offspring;
2 . and yet his three crimes,
bad exceptions to a string of
uniformly good deeds, are
committed against kings,
his kings.
Having committed the third
and last of the foreordained
crimes.
73
hausted; in the final indict-
ment, Kr?na cites, as typical
examples, five of these hun-
dred offenses,
3 . which are distributed among
the three functions (two in
the second function, one in
the first, two in the third).
IV
In the final scene of his life,
where Sisupala is presented
at length:
1 . he makes himself the
theorist and the determined,
aggressive defender of royal
majesty;
2 . and yet, an allusion of
Bhl?ma and the animated
reaction of Sisupala himself
lead one to believe that this
attitude is destined only to
plunge to their deaths the
kings who are present;
moreover, the five offenses
enumerated by Kr§na injure,
in various ways, a king.
V
Having reached the number of
one hundred offenses exempted
from punishment because of
the promise,
 Starkaar cind Sisupala

1. Starcatherus wishes to die, 1. Sisupala, in a sort o f m a d -

and to h a v e himself b e - ness, c o n d e m n s himself b y
headed chooses Hatherus, a the hundred a n d first offense
y o u n g n o b l e m a n w h o has to die beheaded at the hand
m o r e o v e r revenge to take of Kr§na-Vi?i;iu;
on h i m , a n d whose n a m e
and characteristics indicate
that he is, in h u m a n f o r m ,
the g o d H o S r , very close to"
Odin;
2 . he heaps his g o o d will upon 2 . at the very m o m e n t when
this y o u t h , a n d just before Kr?na-Vi5nu has just decapi-
having himself killed b y tated h i m , his spiritual en-
him, shows him the means ergy, attracted b y his killer,
(which the other, mistrust- enters into the latter in the
ing, does not use) of gaining f o r m o f light.
invulnerability b y passing
quickly between his trunk
and severed head b e f o r e
they fall to the ground.

H o w are w e to interpret this parallelism?

2. COMMON INHERITANCE?

In principle, accordances observed between the traditions of

t w o human groups historically separate, but sprung f r o m a single
prehistoric g r o u p , c a n b e explained in four w a y s : either b y c h a n c e ,
or b y innate a n d constant characteristics of the h u m a n spirit, o r b y
direct or indirect b o r r o w i n g , o r b y the preservation of a c o m m o n
inheritance. T h e first t w o explanations are here out of the question.
T h e two tales which w e h a v e c o m p a r e d are t o o c o m p l e x , and ar-
ticulate in the same order t o o m a n y peculiar a n d specific ideas, f o r
such a structure plausibly to h a v e been created t w i c e . Furthermore,
no inherent need in the h u m a n mind links themes as clearly in-
dependent as those which are brought together h e r e : . w h a t innate

74
 StarkaSr a n d Sisupala

connection is there between the fact that a monstrous giant, with

too m a n y arms, is restored to h u m a n f o r m (or that the descendant
of a n o t h e r giant has a h u m a n f o r m , but is congenitally m a r k e d
with such scars), and the fact that this giant or his descendant ap-
points himself c h a m p i o n of royal majesty? O r between this m o n -
strosity, corrected or reduced to its hereditary m a r k s , and a life
either m a r k e d off or measured by a predetermined n u m b e r of
crimes? A n d one c a n pose the same question f o r practically all the
episodes, taken t w o b y t w o .
T h e explanation by b o r r o w i n g is equally unlikely: the b o r r o w -
ing could only be indirect, and o n e does not see w h a t intermedi-
aries, peoples o r individuals, could h a v e effected it; neither the
S c y t h i a n s , n o r the Slavs, nor the T u r k s had this lofty ideal of the
"kingly f u n c t i o n , " and geographically, in the vast area which sepa-
rates India and S c a n d i n a v i a , no story has been found which could
pass for a variant, even a very deformed o n e , of one o r the other of
these t w o so similar biographies. Further, we are dealing here not
with a folktale pattern easily introduced into a n y civilization, but
with an original narrative at o n c e heroic and m y t h o l o g i c a l , which
gives rather the impression of being a w o r k of learned literature
— a n d such w o r k s do not travel easily. Finally and a b o v e all,
what w e observe in c o m m o n between the t w o tales is the opposite
of w h a t is preserved, in fact it is exactly what is most easily lost,
in a direct or indirect b o r r o w i n g : save f o r the monstrous birth, no
episode appears exactly the same in the two cases, with the same
picturesque details; nothing in one of the t w o stories c a n be a m e r e
c o p y of what it is in the other. T h u s , the w a y s in which S t a r -
catherus and Sisupala find themselves restored to human shape are
completely different: in o n e case a violent operation, in the other a
spontaneous process; and so with the agents of this miracle: T h o r is
the constant e n e m y of giants, Kr§na is the cousin of the small m o n -
ster. T h e connection established, in b o t h cases, between length of
life and a certain n u m b e r of crimes does not have the same f o r m .
T h e pairs of gods, openly o r implicitly antagonistic, T h o r and
O d i n , R u d r a - S i v a and Kr§na-Vi$nu, cannot be translations one of
the o t h e r . T h e circumstances in which Starcatherus and Sisupala

75
 StarkaSr and Sisupala

give their sermons on the majesty of kings h a v e nothing in c o m -

m o n : the o n e prevents his king f r o m hazarding himself against an
enemy w h o is n o king, then b e c o m e s tutor of the royal children; the
other protests against an h o n o r paid before kings to o n e w h o is not
a king. T o be sure the violent, wounding rhetoric of the two char-
acters finds at times rather similar expressions, but their orienta-
tions are different: Starcatherus inveighs against Ingellus in order
to reform h i m , Sisupala reviles Kr$na to humiliate h i m . Even in the
list of sins according to the three functions, the correspondences of
each sin to its function a r e not congruent: at the third level,
Sisupala's lust is sexual, that of Starcatherus is, so to speak,
m o n e t a r y ; at the second level, Starcatherus flees on the battlefield,
Sisupala profits basely f r o m the absence of a king b y sacking his
town; and at the first level, Sisupala hinders a king f r o m sacrific-
ing, S t a r k a S r - S t a r c a t h e r u s furnishes the king, his master, as the
victim in a h u m a n sacrifice. T h e impulses which drive the t w o
h e r o e s — o n e triply old, the other in full s t r e n g t h — t o their execu-
tioners d o not have the same source: Sisupala acts in a sort of
madness; Starcatherus h a s decided, c a l m l y , to put a n end to what a
M a l l a r m e a n might well describe as " t r o p de v i e " ; if it is indeed the
god H o S r w h o lurks in the person of Hatherus, Starcatherus' killer,
he has nothing in c o m m o n , at first sight, with Vi?i;iu, a n d the
decapitation scene, calm a n d serene in S a x o , is a climax of violence
in the Mahabharata. Finally, the last scenes h a v e undoubtedly
similar values, but only similar: to interpret matters in the best
light, Starcatherus, in a gesture o f benevolence, wishes to transfer
to the friend w h o beheads him something of himself which will
assure him invulnerability; Sisupala, suddenly captivated b y the
enemy w h o beheads h i m , wishes to merge, and in fact does dissolve
into him in the f o r m o f a flame escaping f r o m his b o d y .
T h u s , in every episode, the circumstances, a n d often the rela-
tionships o f the characters, differ f r o m one story to the other. T h e
agreement, palpable a n d striking, is elsewhere: in the c o m m o n
ideas which underpin entirely parallel plots couched in generally
different narratives. Such a situation would suffice to discourage

76
 StarkaSr and Sisupala

the hypothesis of a loan, even if it were geographically c o n c e i v a b l e .

T h e r e remains that of t w o evolutions starting f r o m a c o m m o n
original. A s a first a p p r o x i m a t i o n , we can establish this f r a m e w o r k
as f o l l o w s :

I
1 - 2 . A being, w h o will be a hero, is b o r n outside of h u m a n
f o r m , with monstrosities, superfluous organs, which relate him to
the most disquieting element in m y t h o l o g y ; but this deformity is
corrected, and the infant is restored to h u m a n shape either b y the
act or b y the touch of the god w h o is n o r m a l l y the adversary of
demonical beings. V a r i a n t : a being, w h o will be a h e r o , is b o r n as
the p o s t h u m o u s and h o m o n y m o u s grandson of such a m o n s t e r
w h o has been not " p r u n e d " but slain b y the god inimical to d e m o n s
(giants), and bears the hereditary m a r k s of the limbs cut f r o m his
grandfather.

II
1 . T w o gods explicitly ( T h o r and O d i n , Kr?na-Vi$nu, all in
h u m a n f o r m ) or implicitly (Rudra-Siva), f r o m without (through
decisions) o r within (through his own nature), vie f o r the hero or
c o n f r o n t each other over h i m : the one harboring a weakness f o r the
sort of m o n s t e r which, although c o r r e c t e d , the hero continues to
carry within h i m , and the other whose calling is to subdue or de-
stroy such monsters.
2 . T h e upshot for the hero is the a n n o u n c e m e n t of a fate link-
ing his longevity to the c o m p l e t i o n of a specific number of crimes,
either that he will be allowed to go on living as long as he does not
exceed this n u m b e r , or that he is granted a prolonged but limited
(thrice normal) life span, while being compelled to c o m m i t one
crime in each segment.

Ill
T h e life thus ordained—flexible or multiple—is (1) full of
exploits, (2) highlighted by the predestined crimes, and (3) these

77
 StarkaSr and Sisupala

crimes (or the most characteristic a m o n g them) o c c u r successively

at each of the three functional levels.

W
T h e w a r r i o r on w h o m this ambiguous destiny weighs (1) p r o -
fesses to h o n o r and defend the rights and the m a j e s t y of kings, and
(2) nevertheless offends a king b y each of his crimes.

V
T h e predestined n u m b e r of crimes having b e e n c o m m i t t e d , (1)
the w a r r i o r brings on his o w n death, and b y request or b y c o m m i t -
ting an additional offense, has himself beheaded b y a god w h o is
either identical with the one w h o determined the length of his life or
is theologically v e r y close to h i m . (2) A t the m o m e n t of decapita-
tion, he transfers (or desires to transfer) to his killer an essential
part of his inner being.

3. R U D R A A N D VISNU

T h r o w n b a c k thus u p o n the hypothesis of a c o m m o n inheri-

tance, the interpretation meets with a certain n u m b e r of p r o b l e m s ,
some proposed b y the divergences, others b y the very parallels
themselves. T h e overriding p r o b l e m concerns the Scandinavian
a n d Indian divinities, m o r e precisely the pairs of divinities w h o in-
tervene in the hero's life, O d i n and T h o r , Rudra-Siva and K r s n a -
Vi§nu. T h e s e dyads are, at first glance, far r e m o v e d f r o m each
other: are not the magical sovereign O d i n a n d T h o r the c h a m p i o n
a b o v e all, in contrast to the opulent a n d sensual V a n i r , the first and
second entries on the canonical list of the gods of the three func-
t i o n s ? ' R u d r a and Vi§nu, in contrast, well attested in the R g V e d a ,
neither associate with nor c o n f r o n t each other, and do not f o r m
a n y structure;^ it is only Hinduism that will develop their opposi-

' Gods of the Ancient Northmen (1973), chap. 1; ME I, p. 288 and n. 1.

^ Another component of Siva, Sarva (important hymns in the Atharva-Veda),
is Indo-Iranian. That still other components may have come from the civilization of

78
 StarkaSr and Sisupala

tion as destroyer and savior in the periodical v^forld crises; in a n y

case, at n o time are they defined b y any connection with t w o dif-
ferent levels of the trifunctional structure: the Vedic V i j n u is a b o v e
all an associate of Indra at the second level, a n d the p o l y m o r p h o u s
activity of Rudra does not allow of expression within the
f r a m e w o r k of this structure; as healer, as herbalist, he operates on
the third level, and as archer, alone o r in his plural f o r m Rudrdh,
also on the second, while nothing seems to orient h i m t o w a r d the
sovereign level. H o w is o n e to understand that pairs of such
divergent m a k e u p c a n be injected with equal ease and co-exist c o m -
f o r t a b l y within the same plot? •• • ii- •
Even if we were forced to dwell u p o n this view, the difficulty
w o u l d not be as great as it seems: one w o u l d in fact c o n c e i v e the
plot as having implied only that the hero w a s s o m e h o w spread-
eagled between two opposing rival divinities, the m o t i v e f o r this
opposition mattering little a n d being liable to change, with no h a r m
d o n e , in the course of time. O r i g i n a l l y , f o r example, the two divin-
ities might have been w h a t they still are in S c a n d i n a v i a , those of
the t w o highest functional levels (magical sovereign and warrior),
while in post-Vedic India, where the living theology no longer
thought in terms of the trifunctional f r a m e w o r k , they were re-
placed b y the pair w h o s e conflict w a s at that time the most o b v i o u s
and interesting f o r men, that of Siva and Vi^pu. Sure enough. But
internal criticism would easily raise o b j e c t i o n s : it is clear that T h o r
a n d O d i n — s u p p o s e d l y old in the S c a n d i n a v i a n n a r r a t i v e — d o not
c o n t e n d f o r S t a r k a S r merely as " c h a m p i o n " and "magical s o v e r -
e i g n . " A c c o r d i n g to the saga, each of the t w o gods grants gifts and
determines fates, and Odin's magic hardly has occasion to appear,
save in the m e t a m o r p h o s e s of the c o r d and the w a n d which strangle
and pierce V i k a r on the occasion of the first f e l o n y . A m o n g O d i n ' s

Mohenjo-Daro is possible, although in this case more sanguine assertions than

proofs are presented; see most recently Asko Parpola, Seppo Koskenniemi, Simo
Parpola, and Pentti Aalto, Decipherment of the Proto-Dravidian Inscriptions of the
Indus Civilization (1969), pp. 5 - 6 and nn. 10-21; Progress in the Decipherment of
the Proto-Dravidian Indus Script (1969), pp. 9-11, 15-18 (and 18-20, Krfpal) and
nn. 9-22, 2 3 - 5 0 . Cf. below, p. 84, n. 7.

79
 StarkaSr a n d Sisupala

gifts, only poetry could b e strictly connnected with his magical

function; all the rest, prolonged life, victory in every battle, the
f a v o r o f the great, personal wealth, e t c . , a r e located elsewhere.
Finally, f r o m O d i n as sovereign o n e would expect s o m e p r o m o t i o n
of his protege on the scale o f p o w e r ; on the c o n t r a r y S t a r k a S r
remains constantly and systematically at the second r a n k , a n d
though h e holds to the creed o f royal majesty, he does not himself
pretend to it. H e reforms, avenges, a n d exceptionally, in his three
facinora, slays kings, but he never seeks to replace t h e m .
A s f o r the Indian legend, nothing allows o n e to think that, at
an earlier stage, the t w o g o d s w h o oppose each o t h e r concerning
Sisupala h a d been the canonical patrons o f the first t w o functions,
the Vedic and the pre-Vedic V a r u n a a n d Indra. If Varuna's
development has greatly reduced his importance a n d deprived him
of his functional r a n k , Indra o n the c o n t r a r y has remained alive
and has even extended his p o w e r in epic m y t h o l o g y — w h e r e he is
the king of the g o d s — a n d has not been shorn o f his o w n adven-
tures: w h y , in this particular case, should he h a v e given w a y to
Vi$nu7
Having discarded this simpHstic solution, w e must return to
the texts themselves, to observation o f the modus operandi w h i c h
they attribute to the t w o g o d s .

First, let us consider the Indian tale from the point o f view o f
the ordinary m y t h o l o g y of the epic where it is f o u n d . R u d r a - S i v a ,
we have said, w o r k s implicity, f r o m within Sisupala. T h e child is
b o r n m o n s t r o u s , in the god's image, and he bears a n a m e that is like
the diminutive of pasupati, a distinctive epithet o f the g o d . B y this
affinity, almost possession, he is b o u n d to oppose Kr?na-Vi5nu a n d
to die at his hand, as the V o i c e heard at his birth, a n d the miracle
w o r k e d upon K r j n a ' s knees, interpreted consistently, declare f o r
h i m . T h i s is k n o w n well b y K f § n a , w h o with the b a b y still o n his
lap foresees that he will h a v e to receive a n d tolerate f r o m h i m a
total o f a hundred offenses. Besides these Rudraic traits, Sisupala
carries m o r e o v e r the heredity, o r at least the ancestry o f a d e m o n .

80
 StarkaSr a n d Sisupala

since he is—already in the M a h a b h a r a t a — t h e reincarnation of the

c h a r a c t e r w h o appears successively as H i r a n y a k a s i p u a n d R a v a n a ,
t w o terrible d e m o n s w h o s e destruction necessitated prior i n c a r n a -
tions o f Vi§nu, and the first of w h o m , it has been said, "represents
Sivaism."^
T h i s dual nature, which m a k e s h i m a little Siva a n d at the
s a m e time a demonic being, governs everything else, a n d particu-
larly the actions of the gods in the s t o r y . Siva, w h o is himself not
d e m o n i a c a l , but assumes, in the life o f the universe, the disagree-
able but necessary function of destroyer, liquidator, thus the " p r i -
mus m o t o r " of regeneration, nonetheless h a s a m a r k e d predilection
f o r great d e m o n s . O p p o s i n g h i m , Vi§nu always bides his time, a n d
w h e n it c o m e s , puts an end to the outrage of a victorious d e m o n
w h o m his colleague has put up with, sometimes at the price of b e -
ing the first to suffer f r o m it. Here o n e m a y read with profit the end
of the excellent description c o m p o s e d nearly t w o centuries ago b y a
virtually forgotten observer, the C o l o n e l de Poller, o f the relations
between Siva a n d the d e m o n s , o r as he calls t h e m , Mhadaio [ M a h a -
deva, Siva] a n d the Daints [daityas, d e m o n s ] . "

" M o s t o f the time, according t o the tales, the disciples of

this Deiotas [devata, divinity] n a m e d Can [ganas, t r o o p s o f
spirits] are the Daints.
R a v e n , tyrant of L a n c a , w h o s e crimes and oppression o c -
casioned the seventh incarnation o f Vi?nu, w a s a zealous a d -
mirer of M h a d a i o . H e offered him his head in sacrifice. T h e
D e i o t a s repaid h i m with ten m o r e of t h e m , a n d this D a i n t s
having again sacrificed them to his celestial p a t r o n , the latter,
m o v e d b y gratitude f o r such constant d e v o t i o n , thought h e

^Edward. W. Hopkins, op. cit., p. 211.

" Mythologie des Indous, travaillee par Mme la Chnesse de Polier, sur des
manuscrits authentiques apportes de I'lnde par feu M. le Colonel de Polier, Membre
de la Societe asiatique de Calcutta, Roudolstadt and Paris, 2 vols. (1809) (see below.
Appendix). The colonel had collected the material around 1780 from his informant
the Pundit Ramacandra ("Ramtchund"); his cousin presented it in the form of Ram-
tchund's explanations, set off by judicious questions or remarks from his pupil; see
ME I, pp. 4 2 - 4 4 . The passage quoted here is in I, 221-223.

81
 StarkaSr and Sisupala

could or\ly acquit himself t o w a r d s his devotee b y endowir\g

him with the property such that to w h a t e v e r degree a limb
should be cut from h i m , it w o u l d reappear instantly, and that
he could not be put to death save until nine hundred million
nine hundred thousand heads should be cut f r o m h i m , the
which rendered the defeat of this monster so difficult that it
w a s necessary for Vi?nu himself to be incarnated to purge the
earth of h i m . "
"I had thought until n o w , " said M o n s i e u r de Polier, " t h a t
the multitude of heads and arms with which y o u r great deiotas
are represented was their exclusive a t t r i b u t e . "
" N o , " answered the T e a c h e r , "this is not at all o n e of the
m a r k s of their superiority, for the D a i n t s in the first three
epochs are almost all e n d o w e d with heads and a r m s infinitely,
and nearly all with invulnerability; and although these prerog-
atives are most of the time the gifts of M h a d a i o , nevertheless
their extraordinary strength, the attribute of their gigantic
race, gives them already so much pride, a m b i t i o n , and means
of doing evil that there is n o o n e but Vi?nu w h o could correct
or destroy t h e m .
T h e R a j a h Bhanasser, in his devotions addressed to M h a -
daio, had so often repeated the offering of his head, and the
recompense accorded b y the D e i o t a s had also been so often
renewed, that the wearied M h a d a i o at last entreated his ser-
v a n t to m o d e r a t e his zeal, b y which he h a d acquired such an
excess of strength and pride that after having subjugated the
earth and the heavens, he complained that there n o longer ex-
isted any being against w h o m he could try his strength. T o u c h e d
by his misery, M h a d a i o consoled him b y predicting that Vi^nu
in o n e of his incarnations w o u l d do him the h o n o r of fighting
with h i m . Indeed the battle t o o k place, a n d the Daints, losing
one after another of his heads and arms, also lost his pride and
b e c a m e a sincere devotee of V i § n u . "
" F r o m these tales it s e e m s , " said M . de Polier, "that M h a -
daio is the protector and a v o w e d friend of the D a i n t s . "
" A t least," replied the Pundit, "in n o n e of the generally
admitted tales does o n e see him incarnated as Vi§nu for the
purpose of destroying this evil race. A n d although his votaries

82
 StarkaSr and Sisupala

claim that h e has appeared to his devotees in a thousand and

eight different f o r m s , nonetheless one finds in the tales which
comprise the account of the P u r a n a s n o detailed history of
these appearances, n o r the character which the m y t h o l o g y at-
tributes to a true incarnation a n d which is, as I h a v e told y o u ,
the birth of the D e i o t a s in a h u m a n o r animal b o d y to fulfil a
general aim important t o the well-being of m a n k i n d and di-
rectly influence the events a n d a c t i o n s which restore order a n d
virtue on the earth. In judging in this regard the appearances of
M h a d a i o , o n e sees that they a r e only transitory, restricted t o
his devotees, and that they appear rather transformations o r
m e t a m o r p h o s e s o f a magician than incarnations o f a d i v i n i t y . "

T h i s presentation, consistent with the epic a n d Puraijic m y -

t h o l o g y , expresses the essence a n d sufficiently explains the roles
a n d relationships of the hero a n d the t w o g o d s . But that c a n n o t be
enough f o r u s . W e must g o b a c k further, albeit hypothetically,
since the c o m p a r i s o n with the saga of Starcatherus proves that the
material of the story of Sisupala considerably antedates the version
which w e read in the epic.
Let us note first that it is n o t so certain, at least in settings other
than those where the Vedic h y m n s a n d prose treatises were c o m -
posed, that the opposition o f R u d r a a n d Vi?nu w a s not already
present as a structure. In an earlier w o r k , w e h a v e seen in outline,
beneath the heroic transposition presented b y the Mahabharata, a
m y t h o l o g y which is v e r y old and m o r e complete than the Vedic
one, entaihng f o r example a n e s c h a t o l o g y : the destruction, then
salvaging of the Kuru dynasty h a v e been overlaid on a m y t h of c o s -
mic crisis—the end of o n e world a n d the beginning of a n o t h e r —
w h o s e pre-Vedic character is guaranteed b y Iranian a n d especially
S c a n d i n a v i a n parallels; its agents a r e A s v a t t h a m a n f o r the de-
struction and Kr§na f o r the salvation, that is clearly R u d r a - S i v a
and Vi^pu i n c a r n a t e . ' In the Vedic h y m n s themselves, although
R u d r a ( o n e of the most important future c o m p o n e n t s of Siva) is not
set dramatically in opposition, or theologically in diptych with

= ME I, pp. 208-245.

83
 StarkaSr a n d Sisupala

V i j o u , the functions of the t w o gods a r e nevertheless contradic-

t o r y , and in a w a y which prefigures the epic version. T h e main ser-
vice which Vi?nu renders to Indra, whose assistant he is, a n d also
to other gods and even t o m a n k i n d sprung f r o m M a n u , is, b y steps
beginning with the f a m o u s "three steps" which h e takes in so m a n y
mythological a n d ritual contexts, to give them their w o r k i n g o r liv-
ing space, as if this acreage (root ma-) would add t o their domain,
to the domain of O r d e r , portions of space which at first eluded
them.* In this role, he is quite the opposite of the Vedic Rudra,
w h o s e traits were disentangled b y the careful study of Ernst A r b -
m a n : ' R u d r a is the patron of all that has not yet been domesticated
b y m a n o r society, hence the master all at once of the hazards a n d
risks inherent in the wilderness of the vast unexplored c o u n t r y
which surrounds the little h a u n t s of m e n , their n a r r o w roads a n d
vulnerable crossroads; the master o f the b u s h , with its aberrant
population o f ascetics as well as brigands, an extension of the c h a o s
at the fringe and sometimes even at the heart of civilized lands,
with its monsters, its m y r i a d plants, the powers of poison a n d cure
it holds in store; the master, m o r e generally, o f w h a t at a n y time
and under a n y circumstances o f life is analogous to the wild, o f all
that m e n w a n t to m a k e their o w n but have n o t yet brought to pass,
and which holds the m y s t e r y a n d ambiguity of the un-begun: the
new dish o r linen, the meal that is only barely prepared, the enter-
prise that is only planned. S u c h seems t o h a v e been the original
nature of this Rudra whose n a m e is best explained b y the root o f
the Latin rudis "rough, unpolished," and w h o is easily split up into
an infinity of Rudras each attached to such a r o a d , o b j e c t , e t c . C o n -
cealed in the forest o r on the m o u n t a i n , he is at the same time the
persecutor whose lethal a r r o w arrives f r o m s o m e u n k n o w n direc-
tion, a n d the k n o w e r of remedies, of herbs which destroy illness.
N o t evil, b u t m o r a l l y neutral, at o n c e powerful and undetermined.

*• "Vifpu et les Mar(it a travers la reforme zoroastrienne," Journal asiatique

CCXLII (1953), 1 - 2 5 .
' Rudra, Untersuchungen zum altindischen Glauben und Kultus (1922); cf.
Archaic Roman Religion (1970), pp. 418-419.

84
 S t a r k a 6 r a n d Sisupala

If these characteristics o f V i j i j u and Rudra are valid for the

Vedic texts, it is p r o b a b l e that in m o r e ancient times, during a n d
before the migrations which led bands of Indo-Europeans to the
Five Rivers, the t w o divinities conceived in this w a y were even
m o r e i m p o r t a n t : Ind(a)ra gave v i c t o r y to the c o n q u e r o r s , but it
w a s Vi?nu w h o opened the w a y for h i m , a n d through h i m , opened
the w a y f o r them through the u n k n o w n , b a r b a r o u s realm w h e r e ,
besides d e m o n s , there already lived a god of their tribe, the alarm-
ing and necessary R u d r a . Well before the composition of the Sa-
bhdparvan, before the amplification a n d elevation of R u d r a - S i v a
and Visnu b y the classical m y t h o l o g y , at a time when the epic
material m a y well h a v e been a "fifth V e d a , " the story of Si§upala
could therefore have existed essentially as w e read it, presenting the
same gods. B o m with those superfluous arms a n d eye, Sisupala is
the product of an exuberance, an excess of nature; he reproduces
the figure o f R u d r a - S i v a , and a b o v e all, Rudra-Siva can t a k e
pleasure in h i m : he is of his d o m a i n . Vi?nu tames him b y his mere
touch, that is, he adapts him, at least in physical appearance, to life
in society, making o f him a n o r m a l h u m a n being. But within, he is
not transformed f o r all that, and the conflict goes o n between this
incorrigible outsider and the saving, restoring, regulating god, until
the m o m e n t when it is Vi§nu, the civilized o n e , w h o prevails, and
emerging f r o m his long f o r b e a r a n c e , puts an end to the challenger's
perpetual aggression. But, at this very instant, the challenger is
enlightened, the outsider is converted and b e c o m e s a part of Vi$nu,
as all land wrested f r o m the bush b e c o m e s a portion o f the village
o r the k i n g d o m .

4. ODIN AND THOR

Let us imagine the reverse, an ideology where the disquieting

Rudra would d o m i n a t e this c o n f r o n t a t i o n and would h a v e the last
w o r d in it, where R u d r a would b e m o r e prestigious if not m o r e
powerful than V i $ n u — a n d w e shall b e very close t o the explanation
of the career of S t a r c a t h e r u s .

85
 StarkaSr and Sisupala

Spending m a n y years exploring all o v e r the Indo-European

w o r l d mythological derivatives, as well as d e f o r m a t i o n s , of the tri-
functional structure, I h a v e t o o exclusively defined O d i n as a S c a n -
dinavian V a r u n a . S o he is, t o b e sure, a n d in the Harbardsljdd f o r
example, his opposition to T h o r , with the often offensive sticho-
m a c h y which expresses it, is well illuminated b y the Vedic texts
where V a r u n a a n d Indra boastingly c o n f r o n t each other, the magi-
cal a n d terrible sovereign on o n e side, the prestigious c h a m p i o n on
the other. But the rich nature of O d i n is n o t exhausted b y this
formula.'
Within the trifunctional structure itself, I myself have m a n y
times pointed out the e v o l u t i o n , peculiar t o the G e r m a n i c world,
b y which w a r h a s , so to speak, overflowed f r o m the warrior level
to the sovereign level: m u c h m o r e than T h o r , O d i n concerns
himself with battle a n d c o m b a t a n t s , with the fighting aristocracy at
the very least; T h o r is rather the solitary, irresistible c h a m p i o n , a
sort o f V a y u o r B h i m a whose chief exploit, moreover—storm,
thunder a n d r a i n — a t t r a c t s t o h i m the worship of the peasant, while
O d i n is interested in the people in a r m s (which w a s the n o r m a l state
of m a n y a G e r m a n i c society) a n d in the c o m m a n d e r of the a r m y .
T h e r e is a kind of slippage in the terms of the c a n o n i c a l list of the
S c a n d i n a v i a n gods, c o m p a r e d with those of the Vedic h y m n s a n d
rituals:'

(1) Varuna
Odin (1) a n d (2)
f Indra )
(2)
1 Vayu ^
fThor (2) a n d (3)
(3) fertility g o d s ) \ fertility gods (3)

* Gods of the Ancient Northmen (1973), chap. 2.

' Cf. "The Rigsjjula and Indo-European Social Structure" in Gods of the An-
cient Northmen, pp. 118-125.

86
 StarkaSr a n d Sisupala

But this is not yet a l l . Following J a k o b Wilhelm H a u e r (1927),

Rudolf O t t o (1932) a n d J a n de Vries (1957) h a v e listed an i m -
pressive n u m b e r of traits, physical a n d mental, o f c h a r a c t e r a n d
b e h a v i o r , b y which O d i n is rather h o m o l o g o u s with Rudra.^" N o t
all a r e c o n v i n c i n g , s o m e are not even e x a c t , but important ones re-
m a i n : b o t h a r e tireless wanderers, they like t o appear to m e n only
in disguise, unrecognizable, O d i n with a hat pulled d o w n t o his
eyes, R u d r a with his u?nT?a falling o v e r his face; O d i n is the master
of the runes a s Rudra is kavi; a n d a b o v e all the b a n d s of Rudra's
devotees, b o u n d b y a v o w , endowed with powers a n d privileges,
recall sometimes the berserkir, sometimes the einherjar of O d i n .
T h i s sovereign god, this magician, unarguably has o n e o f his bases
in the mysterious region where the savage borders o n the civilized.
Like R u d r a - S i v a , he is often, in terms of ordinary rules, even im-
m o r a l — a n d T h o r is n o t shy a b o u t so telling him w h e n they trade
charges. Like Rudra-Siva, he has his taste f o r h u m a n sacrifice, par-
ticularly the self-sacrifice of his v o t a r i e s . " M o r e generally, like
R u d r a - S i v a , he has in h i m something almost d e m o n i c : his friend-
ship a n d weakness f o r Loki a r e well k n o w n ; but Loki is the mali-
cious rogue w h o , o n e fine d a y , in arranging the murder o f Baldr,
takes on the dimensions o f a "spirit of evil," of the greatest e v i l . "
A m o n g the N o r t h G e r m a n i c s , d e m o n s primarily appear a s the
giants. W i t h them t o o , O d i n has m o r e than o n e c o n n e c t i o n . O n his
father's side he is descended, through very few intermediate gene-
rations, f r o m a rather singular giant, a s a matter o f fact the pri-
mordial giant, Y m i r , a n d his m o t h e r is the very daughter o f a giant
with the disquieting n a m e B6l{)orn, 'Spine o f w o e . ' M a n y times he
evinces a strangely conciliatory, pacifist feeling regarding the worst
giants, a n d it then requires the intervention of T h o r t o extricate

^° Jakob Wilhelm Hauer, Der Vratya, Untersuchungen iiber nichtbrahman-

ische Religion Altindiens, I (1927), 189-240 ("Die Vratya als sivaitische
Bacchanten"); Rudolf Otto, Gottheit und Gottheiten der Arier {1932), pp. 58-60; Jan
de Vries, Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte' (1957), pp. 9 5 - 9 6 .
Cf. "Hanging and Drowning," appendix I to From Myth to Fiction (1973).
" See Dumezil, Loki (Paris, 1948); German edition, 1959.

87
 Starkadr and Sisupala

h i m , b y killing the giant, f r o m the predicament in which this dispo-

sition has placed h i m , along with the other gods: thus he has led
Hrungnir within the walls of the / E s i r , and the giant threatens to
w a l k off with everything, provisions and the most beautiful god-
desses, and he w o u l d do it did not T h o r , invoked in extremis b y the
gods, i n t e r v e n e . " All this is truly Sivaistic. Let us read again
Poller's d e s c r i p t i o n : "

A f a m o u s D a i n t s , n a m e d Basmagut [ = ? ] , w a s curious to
k n o w which of the three D e i o t a s [ B r a h m a , Vi^nu, Siva] sur-
passed him in greatness and strength. He consulted N a r d m a n
[ N a r a d a m u n i ] , w h o replied that it was M h a d a i o [ M a h a -
deva = R u d r a - S i v a ] . . . .
Basmagut, wishing to profit from the instructions of
N a r d m a n , began his sacrifice [to M h a d a i o , by mutilating him-
self]. T h e D e i o t a s , flattered b y the zeal and earnestness which
the D a i n t s showed in his service, appeared to him a c c o m -
panied b y P a r b u t t y [ParvatT]. A t the mere sight of M h a d a i o ,
not only was the mutilated b o d y of the D a i n t s returned to its
natural state, but he received also f r o m the D e i o t a s the p o w e r
of reducing to ashes any o b j e c t s on which he placed his hands
with the intention of consuming them. M e a n w h i l e the sight
and the charms of P a r b u t t y inspired in the D a i n t s the most
violent passion, and this being, as ungrateful as he was
wicked, s a w n o other m e a n s of ridding himself of an i n c o n v e -
nient spouse than to use against M h a d a i o himself the gift
which he had received f r o m h i m . T h e D e i o t a s , w h o perceives
the intentions of B a s m a g u t , evades him, but the D a i n t s pur-
sues h i m . B y n o w M h a d a i o , nearly being caught, k n o w s n o
m o r e h o w to escape h i m , and in the anguish w h i c h he feels sees
no other recourse than to repair to Vi^nu w h o , immediately
assuming the shape of P a r b u t t y , appears b e f o r e the D a i n t s ;
a n d , pretending to be susceptible to his advances, assures him
that she prefers him to her lout of a h u s b a n d , w h o is forever

Skdldskaparmal, 25 ( = Edda Snorra Sturlusonar, ed. Finnur Jonsson

[1931], pp. 100-103); cf. The Destiny of the Warrior (1970), pp. 157-160.
'" I, 221-223 (see above, p. 81, n. 4)

88
 StarkaSr and Sisupala

drunk, surrounded b y snakes, and apt to inspire disgust rather

than l o v e . "Nevertheless," adds the false P a r b u t t y , " h e has in
his w a y of dancing such an irresistible c h a r m that then all his
ugliness vanishes to m y e y e s . " A t these words B a s m a g u t ,
transported with j o y o v e r the f a v o r a b l e inclination that P a r -
b u t t y showed h i m , w a n t s to win further f a v o r in her eyes and
insists that she teach h i m the dance she is speaking of. S h e
agrees and the lesson begins. But V i j i j u , in the guise of the
D e i o t a n y [goddess], takes c a r e to thicken the M a y a [the mayd]
o r cloud t h r o w n o v e r the D a i n t s ' senses, so that he completely
forgets the deadly gift he received f r o m M h a d a i o , and has no
thought but to follow and imitate the m o v e m e n t s of the f a k e
P a r b u t t y . H e sees her carelessly put a h a n d on her h e a d , does
the s a m e , and instantly reduces himself to ashes.
H o w e v e r satisfied Vi^iju was to have delivered his col-
league f r o m the danger to w h i c h the latter h a d exposed
himself, he reproached him f o r his imprudence. "I a g r e e , "
answered M h a d a i o , "I c a n n o t resist the devotions of m y w o r -
shippers, although I k n o w full well that most of the time they
m a k e very ill use of m y f a v o r s . B u t , " he added, "I place m y
trust in y o u , y o u r indulgence supports m y w e a k n e s s , it does
not permit me to suffer f r o m m y o w n i m p r o v i d e n c e . " A f t e r
doing this h o m a g e to Vi?iju, he intoned a h y m n in praise of him.

A s opposed to O d i n , T h o r , all of a piece, is rigor itself. His

relationships with the giants are summed up in one w o r d : he exter-
minates them b y his extreme strength, aided only occasionally b y
the ruse of a c o m p a n i o n , Loki or T h j a l f i . His constant mission is to
save the gods and the world b y destroying this b r o o d . A Vi?nu
minus the c h a r m , he performs it without subtlety or c o m p r o m i s e .
W e see h o w , though it does not m a t c h the relationship of
R u d r a - S i v a and V i j n u , that of O d i n and T h o r covers to an extent
the same ground. T h e overriding difference is that V i ^ n u — i n the
only sense that matters here—is superior to R u d r a - S i v a , even c o n -
stituting his ultimate recourse, while O d i n , notwithstanding his im-
prudences with the giants, is superior to T h o r , hierarchically speak-

89
 StarkaSr and Sisupala

ing and apparently also in the degree of esteem accorded him b y

h u m a n society. His c o m p l e x i t y , his magical k n o w l e d g e , the post-
h u m o u s happiness he assures his followers in V a l h o l l , all m a k e him
theologically m o r e interesting. T h o r is invoked in present dangers,
h o n o r e d on high-seat pillars as the watchful guardian of dwellings,
given thanks for the rain that fertilizes the fields, but he does not
have at his disposal the large assortment of f a v o r s , especially the |
m o r e mysterious ones, which enable O d i n , with all his s h o r t c o m - |
ings, to remain until R a g n a r o k the highest g o d , the true sovereign. f
T h e s e observations allow us to understand the role of the divine •'
pair in the story of S t a r k a S r . B y the mere fact that S t a r k a S r is a ^;
giant or the grandson of a giant, he has T h o r against h i m . M o r e - |
o v e r , it is natural that the god w h o everywhere reestablishes the *
threatened order does not tolerate his m o n s t r o s i t y . O d i n on the |
other h a n d takes offense neither at membership in the race of giants ;X
n o r at the traces left behind b y extra a r m s : just as he rides an eight- |
legged steed born of a giant's h o r s e , " in the s a m e w a y he can m a k e
use of this disturbing superman, and to this end t a k e s him to a cer-
tain extent under his protection; he relies on him f o r a questionable
deed, a h u m a n sacrifice w h o s e victim, a king, is not consenting,
and he rewards this crime with the gift of three lives.
O u r observations also allow us to specify at w h a t points, re-
garding the role of the gods, a n d consequently that of the h e r o , the
stories of S t a r k a S r and Sisupala agree, and where they diverge. If
for convenience we call O d i n and Rudra-Siva the " d a r k g o d s , " and
T h o r a n d Vi§nu the "light g o d s , " each of the two heroes, b y nature,
belongs entirely to the dark god and is opposed b y the light g o d .
But the structures are almost reversed b y the fact that in S c a n d i n a -
via the d a r k god holds the first place, being m o r e important in this
" Cylfaginning, 26 ( = Edda Snorra, ed. F. Jonsson, pp. 45-47); see Jan de
Vries, Altgermanische Religionsgeschichte', II (1957), 63-64, and Mircea Eliade, Le
Chamanisme^ (1969), pp. 300, 302, 304 n. 3 (on the horse Sleipnir), 364-365 (on
eight-legged horses in Siberia, Japan, etc.). Besides StarkaSr, Sleipnir is the only
example in the Scandinavian myths of a being endowed with an abnormal number
of limbs.

90
 StarkaSr and Sisupala

life and especially in that to c o m e , and that consequently his f a v o r

is the m o r e desirable, the light god having only an immediate and
limited range; whereas in the Indian legend it is the light god w h o is
in the spotlight a n d directs the g a m e , and w h o s e f a v o r in this life
and in the hereafter is m o s t fervently sought, while the d a r k god
acts o n l y implicitly, without showing himself, through the " R u -
d r a i c " nature of the h e r o . T h e result is that S t a r k a S r is, on the
whole, a g o o d h e r o , Sisupala an evil o n e . Obedient to the theology,
the reader gives his s y m p a t h y to S t a r k a S r , and withholds it f r o m
Sisupala. T h i s orientation continues in the conclusion of the t w o
tales. T h e god into w h o m , at the instant of his decapitation, the
h e r o transfuses (or wishes to transfuse) the m o s t valuable part of
himself is in India the light god, in S c a n d i n a v i a , if not the dark god
himself (Odin), then at l e a s t — d o w n g r a d e d to a y o u n g m a n — a god
of his circle, and one of the closest (HoSr); the highest happiness
consists, on one side, in merging with V i i p u , on the other in rejoin-
ing the w o r l d of O d i n .

5. THE ROLES OF THE GODS I N THE TWO LEGENDS

T w o superimposed tables will usefully summarize the f o r e g o -

ing considerations b y assigning to each of the h o m o l o g o u s gods his
corresponding part in the c h a r a c t e r and b e h a v i o r of the h e r o .

A f t e r the gigantic
and m o n s t r o u s
(with supernumer-
ary arms) birth
( S a x o ) or descent
(saga) of the h e r o ,

Odin: *H6Sr: Thor:

I. T h o r restores the
hero t o h u m a n

91
 Starkadr arid Sisupala

Odin: *H63r: Thor:

f o r m either di-
rectly, b y a m p u t a -
tion ( S a x o ) , o r in-
directly, via the
killing of his
homonymous
grandfather (saga).
II. O d i n grants the
hero his three lives
and imposes on
him the three
crimes, with other,
g o o d lots ( S a x o ) ;
or:
O d i n grants the
hero three lives
with o t h e r , g o o d
lots (saga). and T h o r imposes
on the hero the
three crimes, along
with other evil lots
(saga).
III. T h r o u g h one of
his gifts, O d i n is
responsible f o r
the hero's m a n y
victories ( S a x o &
saga). a n d , through o n e
of his lots, T h o r is
responsible f o r the
hero's terrible
w o u n d s (saga).
O d i n is responsible
f o r the three
crimes (distributed
across the three

92
 StarkaSr a n d Sisupala

Odin: *H65r: Thor:

functions) and par-

ticularly the first,
which he orders,
directs and c o m -
pletes ( S a x o ) ;
or: T h o r is responsible
for the three
the first of them crimes.
(the only one re-
counted in the
saga) is ordered,
directed and c o m -
pleted b y O d i n
(saga).
I V . A s god of kings,
O d i n is un-
doubtedly respon-
sible f o r the hero's
royalist ideology,
violated only in
the three crimes (in
S a x o and partly
the saga).
V. T h e third crime
d o n e , the hero
urges Hatherus to
behead h i m , a n d
wishes to transmit
to Hatherus a
p o w e r of his being
by having him
pass between his
head a n d torso
(Saxo)

93
 StarkaSr and Sisupala

[Rudra-Siva, implicitly]:

R . , in his preceding incar-

nations, h a s protected the
d e m o n of w h o m the hero
is the last incarnation.
T h e hero is b o r n in
the monstrous shape of R.
(extra arms and eye) a n d
receives the n a m e Sisupala,
a caique on R.'s epithet
Pasu-pati; Krsi^a, b y his touch,
restores the b a b y to h u m a n
shape.
II. T h e hero's " R u d r a i c " ten-
dency destines him to offend
Kr?na, and K r j n a grants the hero
impunity which will guar-
antee his life up to the hun-
dredth offense.
III. T h r o u g h the protection he
accords to the king w h o s e
general the hero is, R . is
responsible for the hero's
multiple victories, m a n y of
which are w o n at the e x -
pense of Krspa.
T h r o u g h the hero's
" R u d r a i c " orientation, R . is
responsible for the quick
accomplishment of the
hundred offenses against
Krs^ta, particularly the five
characteristic ones
(distributed over the three
functions).

94
 StarkaSr and Sisupala

[ R u d r a - S i v a , implicitly]:

IV. [see the following chapter]

V. T h e hundred offenses
accomplished, the hero b y
a hundred a n d first offense
p r o v o k e s K r j n a into
beheading h i m , a n d ,
emerging f r o m his
decapitated b o d y , the
hero's spiritual energy
flows into K r ? n a in the
f o r m of light.

T h e reader will n o t e that one section of this table, the fourth,

remains obscure. It will be m a d e clear in the next chapter, b y fur-
ther considerations, but h o w e v e r it m a y be explained, and setting
aside the role of the gods, the fact itself is certain: Sisupala and
S t a r k a S r appear as the defenders of the rights and the majesty of
kings, and yet turn their crimes against these rights and this m a j -
esty. If, as we have been led to admit, these t w o figures and their
histories g o b a c k to a time when the ancestors of the G e r m a n i c s and
those of the Indie peoples were neighbors s o m e w h e r e between the
Baltic and the Black S e a , this fact is i m p o r t a n t . It reveals a feature
of the r o y a l ideology of the most ancient Indo-Europeans, or at
least a part of t h e m : the c h a m p i o n ' s a m b i g u o u s attitude toward the
king, o r as T a c i t u s w o u l d h a v e said, of the dux t o w a r d s the rex,
h a d already produced epic tales.
T o be sure, in the versions we read, kingship is adjusted
according to place and time. T h e Frotho w h o m Starcatherus p r o -
tects, whose children he reforms, the W i c a r u s and O l o Vegetus
w h o m he betrays and kills, are modelled either on the Danish kings
of the twelfth and thirteenth c e n t u r i e s , " or on the Viking kings w h o

' * f r o m Myth to Fiction (1973), introduction to Appendix 2 ("Gram").

95
 Starkadr a n d Sisupala

had prospered during the preceding centuries; a n d these f o r m s of

kingship, especially the first, a r e more majestic, m o r e firmly estab-
lished, than those described in the Germania. T h e royalty w h o s e
prestige Sisupala defends is epic kingship, w h i c h w e do not see
taking shape under o u r eyes like that of V a l d e m a r (India has n o
history), but which is certainly quite different, but also more sol-
emn and imperial, than w h a t w e c a n glimpse of Vedic kingships.
But these changes are expected; to survive the course of time, a
mythical o r legendary record of kingship is inevitably a n d c o n -
stantly c o l o r e d b y prevailing tastes, f r o m o n e century a n d one pe-
riod t o a n o t h e r . A l l that the comparison of the t w o stories compels
us to admit is that, from Indo-European times, with a m o r e
archaic a n d undoubtedly fragile, as well as m o r e magical status,
kingship w a s considered the highest value, in n o w a y c o m p a r a b l e
with other levels of society, which latter m a y h a v e been m o r e
powerful and even threatening in practice, but w e r e ideologically
inferior. W h a t is so surprising in this? D i d not every Vedic a n d
Scandinavian petty king, w h a t e v e r his w e a k n e s s , have as his
patron g o d the all-powerful master of the universe, V a r u p a o r
Odin?
A s f o r the fact itself that a complex and subtle royal ideology,
laden with legends, h a d existed a m o n g the Indo-Europeans before
their dispersal a n d had survived in the " d a u g h t e r " societies, this h a s
been established b y previous s t u d i e s ; ' ' the present o n e merely sup-
ports it with a new example. I shall be content with directing the
reader to a n o t h e r study,'* to the astonishing correspondence of the
Indian Y a y a t i , with his sons, his daughter MadhavT and his ephem-
eral sons-in-law, and the Irish Eochaid Feidlech, with his sons, his
daughter M e d b a n d his unstable sons-in-law. If the G e r m a n s h a v e
lost o r n o t k n o w n the w o r d *reg- and given the king a different
n a m e , they have nonetheless preserved, as w e see here, c o m p l e x
legends which illustrate aspects of the kingly function.

' ' T o mention only accordances between the Vedic rdjan and the Roman reg-,
see Archaic Roman Religion (1970), pp. 224-228 (the asvamedha and the October
Horse), pp. 583-585 (the rex, the Brahman, and the flamines maiores).
The Destiny of a King (1973).

96
 • JARASANDHA
•- • v - '. ^ '•

1. ODIN, RUDRA-SIVA AND THE SACRIFICED KINGS "

It is o b v i o u s that the relationships between the hero a n d the

kings a r e the most coherent in the Scandinavian s t o r y .
Starcatherus is not a king himself, he serves kings. His lofty
ideal of the kingly function is that of a high-level servant, equally
c a p a b l e , according to circumstances, of serving as his master's
b o d y g u a r d o r as tutor o f his children. Even in the three crimes
which he is b o u n d to c o m m i t he never evinces the slightest wish to
usurp: in the murder of V i k a r he merely helps O d i n , a n d if he kills
O l o Vegetus, his failing is o n e o f venality, not o f a m b i t i o n . Sisu-
pala, on the c o n t r a r y , is a king, a king a m o n g those gathered
around the son of Pan<^u f o r the rajasuya. From the scene he m a k e s
when Krsna/ w h o is n o king, finds himself singled out f o r special
h o n o r s , o n e h a s the impression that he feels in the first place per-
sonally offended, a n d that he generalizes his grievance, speaking
in the n a m e of all the assembled kings, merely as a device rather
generally used in such situations.
Likewise, if the five exemplary crimes which Kr?na singles out
are aimed against kings, n o n e is the chief crime of regicide. His
"first-function c r i m e " does affect the king in the d o m a i n of the
sacred, o n the occasion of a sacrifice which would h a v e increased
the king's prestige a n d which he m a k e s impossible b y stealing the

97
 Jarasandha

victim, but this victim is only a horse. S t a r c a t h e r u s , in contrast, in

t w o of his crimes, kills a king w h o is his master, a n d the first of the
crimes consists in " s e n d i n g " O d i n , at his insistence. King V i k a r ,
that is, sacrificing the latter b y m e a n s of a deception in which S t a r -
catherus is the god's a c c o m p l i c e .
T h u s w e are led to think that the S c a n d i n a v i a n version, o n
these t w o points, is m o r e c o n s e r v a t i v e — t h e m o r e s o since h u m a n
sacrifice, attested in S c a n d i n a v i a until the c o n v e r s i o n to Christian-
ity, is certainly something archaic, and hence, when it is found in a
s t o r y , there is little chance of its having been added after the f a c t .
But w e h a v e p r o o f that India, o n these same t w o points, has in fact
modified the plot, and w e c a n understand the cause of these changes:
the history of Sisupala must n o t b e considered a l o n e , it f o r m s the
second panel of a diptych of which the first is n o less interesting.
Sisupala's verbal a t t a c k , at the very m o m e n t w h e n Y u d h i j t h i r a is at
last a b o u t to celebrate his rdjasuya, is in fact o n l y the second a n d
last obstacle confronting the c e r e m o n y . T h e r e has been a n o t h e r
one, just before the beginning of the preparations.
When Yudhisthira deems that the m o m e n t has c o m e to
celebrate this sacrifice, understood here, w e recall, a s an imperial
act conferring on the sacrificer primacy over all kings, he consults
K r j n a , w h o approves it, but w a r n s h i m of a p r o b l e m . T h e r e is
a n o t h e r king, namely Jarasandha of M a g a d h a , w h o h a s already
realized in practice, without sacrifice, the object of the rdjasuya,
a n d h a s subjugated most of the kings.' A n d h o w has he gained this
success? Certainly his general has h a d n o small part in it (574):^

" A n o t h e r king, the mighty Sisupala, h a s gone over c o m -

pletely to his side a n d h a s indeed, wise prince, b e c o m e his
marshal."

T h u s , though a king, Sisupala finds here, in the service of

a n o t h e r king, the r a n k a n d function which Starcatherus holds
under several kings.
^Mahabharata, pp. 57-66 (si. 559-767).
^ Reminding one of the words of Marshal Joffre, when some people disputed
his credentials as the victor of the Marne: "They don't know who won the battle? I
know well enough who would have lost it!"
 Jarasandha

Kr§na then resumes the history of these c a m p a i g n s , several of

v^hich have been directed against the Y a d a v a s — K r j n a ' s f a m i l y —
and o n e of which h a s even forced them to leave the c o u n t r y , a n d he
names the great warriors w h o m J a r a s a n d h a has h a d at his c o m -
m a n d ; to this point w e have only the description of a c o n q u e r o r ,
like so m a n y others, w h o m Yudhi$thira must eliminate if he wishes
to b e able to celebrate his imperial sacrifice. But J a r a s a n d h a is
unique. H i s victories, ensured b y his general, h a v e a solemn f o u n -
dation a n d a cruel o u t c o m e ( 6 2 7 - 6 2 9 ) :

" A f t e r he h a d defeated them all, he imprisoned the kings

in his mountain c o r r a l , G i r i v r a j a , as a lion imprisons great
elephants in a c a v e of the H i m a l a y a . King J a r a s a n d h a w a n t s t o
sacrifice the lords of the earth. . . . "

Sacrifice t o what god? T o R u d r a - S i v a , to M a h a d e v a , t o w h o m

he o w e s his victories ( 6 2 9 ) :

" . . . f o r it w a s after he h a d worshiped the G r e a t G o d that

he defeated the kings o n the battlefield."

T h u s , b o t h allies will turn a profit: t o J a r a s a n d h a will g o the

samrajya, supreme kingship; to the g o d , as victims, the kings.
T h e r e f o r e , concludes K r j n a , Yudhigfhira should destroy J a r a s a n -
dha f o r t w o reasons: o n e the personal interest in his o w n rajasuya
which J a r a s a n d h a , while he lives, m a k e s impossible; the other, o n e
of general m o r a l i t y , the deliverance of the kings w h o a w a i t , penned
up like cattle, the time o f their sacrifice.
A s is frequent in the Mahabharata, this revelation occasions
between Y u d h i j t h i r a a n d K r ? n a a lengthy discussion, in which
BhTma gets involved. Kr§na does n o t conceal the fact that the e x -
pedition will be difficult: o n e hundred dynasties h a v e b e e n unable
to withstand this a m b i t i o u s empire-builder; the most sumptuous
gifts have not averted a n y of his a t t a c k s . A n d he supplies; a n impor-
tant piece o f information ( 6 5 8 - 6 5 9 ) :

" W h a t j o y of life is left t o the kings w h o a r e sprinkled

and cleansed in the house of Pasupati [ = Siva] as sacrificial
a n i m a l s , bull of the Bharatas? . . . Eighty-six kings, king,

99
 Jarasandha

have been led to their jail b y J a r a s a n d h a ; king, fourteen are

left, a n d then he will begin his a t r o c i t y ! "

A n d Kr§na concludes ( 6 5 9 ) :

" H e w h o frustrated h i m in this would achieve a blazing

f a m e . A n d he w h o defeats Jarasandha will certainly b e c o m e
Sovereign."

Y u d h i j t h i r a hesitates, A r j u n a encourages h i m , Kr?na insists.

T h e n Y u d h i j f h i r a poses the question w e are waiting f o r . W h o is this
J a r a s a n d h a ? W h a t gives h i m his p o w e r , such p o w e r that he has
been able to take on Krsna himself without perishing? But before
hearing Kr$na's a c c o u n t , let us observe that Jarasandha fills the
e m p t y slot which remained in Sisupala's a c c o r d a n c e s with S t a r k -
aSr. A s does the Scandinavian hero with O d i n , Jarasandha lives at
least implicitly under contract to R u d r a - S i v a - P a s u p a t i . T h e g o d
assures him conquests a n d empire, a n d he will sacrifice to h i m n o t
o n e king but a hundred of them, f o r w e a r e in India which is en-
a m o r e d of large numbers a n d speaks here of h e c a t o m b s , much as
we h a v e heard Kr§na promise to forgive his nephew a hundred o f -
fenses. T h i s is h o w K r j n a satisfies Yudhigfhira's curiosity.

2. JARASANDHA AND S1§UPALA

T h e r e w a s a n erstwhile king of M a g a d h a , n a m e d B f h a d r a t h a ,
a great c h a m p i o n and w a r l o r d . He married twin sisters, the rich
and beautiful daughters of the king of Kasi, a n d in this double pas-
sion c o m m i t t e d a verbal blunder (693):

T h i s bull a m o n g m e n m a d e a c o m p a c t with hiis wives in

their presence, that he would never offend them b y preferring
one to the other.

Yet in vain did the king take his abundant pleasure with his
two wives: he did not succeed in getting himself an heir. H e went
into the forest to find a hermit w h o , like the dervishes in oriental tales.

100
 Jarasandha

gave him a single m a n g o fruit, ekam dmraphalam, a n d dismissed

him saying that his wish would b e fulfilled ( 6 9 8 - 7 0 7 ) . Returning t o
his palace, he recalled the promise h e h a d made t o the t w o queens,
divided the fruit, gave a half to each o n e , a n d waited. T h e t w o half-
fruits accomplished w h a t he h a d b e e n incapable o f : to his great j o y ,
the queens c o n c e i v e d . W h e n their time h a d c o m e , they gave b i r t h -
each t o a live half of a b o y . T h e p o o r w o m e n t o o k counsel, a n d the
teratological specimens were c o n d e m n e d . T h e midwives wrapped
them up carefully, left b y the b a c k d o o r , threw a w a y their unpleas-
ant burdens, a n d c a m e hastily b a c k inside.
A little later, a Rdk^ast, that is, a kind of ogress-demon, n a m e d
J a r a — l i t e r a l l y " O l d A g e " — w h o w a s prowling in the neighbor-
h o o d , f o u n d the t w o half-bodies at a crossroads. It w a s a tempting
m e a l . S h e grabbed t h e m , and in order to carry them off m o r e eas-
ily, j o i n e d the t w o halves. A m a r v e l : they were instantly welded
together, producing a well-formed a n d already prodigiously strong
b o y , w h o rumbled like a cloud full of rain, a n d w o u l d not let h i m -
self b e taken a w a y . Alerted b y the c o m m o t i o n , the king c a m e out
with the w o m e n - f o l k , as well as the queens, their breasts h e a v y
with useless milk. T h e demoness then reflected that, living well in
the d o m a i n of this king w h o s o ardently desired a son, she would be
urigracious to eat this o n e up o n h i m . S h e thus decided to fast this
time a r o u n d a n d , addressing B r h a d r a t h a , recounted the miracle to
h i m , ascribing to herself a f a v o r a b l e part in it. T h e king forthwith
declared a feast in h o n o r o f the Rdk^asi, a n d n a m e d the child
Jardsamdha, because h e h a d been "put together, unified (sam-
dhd-) b y J a r a . " Mysteriously informed of the event, the ascetic w h o
had provided the m a n g o c a m e t o the p a l a c e a n d a n n o u n c e d the
child's future. T h r o u g h a shower o f similes, w e learn that he will
h a v e n o equal in b r a v e r y , strength a n d p o w e r , a n d that all kings
will o b e y h i m . M o r e o v e r , he will b e invulnerable t o w e a p o n s , even
those hurled b y gods, a n d a b o v e all, "transcending all the worlds
with his might, the M a g a d h a n shall with his o w n eyes behold
R u d r a , the G r e a t G o d , the D e s t r o y e r of the T h r e e Cities, he w h o is
Hara" (748-749).

101
 Jarasandha

T h e child g r o w s a n d b e c o m e s a m a n ; his father dies a n d goes

to h e a v e n . H e succeeds h i m a n d the hermit's p r o p h e c y c o m e s true:
n o b o d y c a n withstand his conquests, a n d w e k n o w besides—the
C a l c u t t a text recalls it h e r e — t h a t , his son-in-law having been killed
b y the elder b r o t h e r of Krgna, his wrath is directed preferentially
against that f a m i l y , against the sons of V a s u d e v a , f o r w h o m he
m a k e s life u n b e a r a b l e . A f t e r this a c c o u n t , a n d with some reluc-
tance, Yudhigthira lets himself b e c o n v i n c e d : he must, b y liqui-
dating J a r a s a n d h a , rescue the royal victims a n d m a k e possible the
rajasuya.
Let us pause o n c e m o r e t o observe the great s y m m e t r y that e x -
ists between the t w o heroes, the king a n d his general, b o t h m o n -
strous at birth a n d b o t h restored to h u m a n f o r m at the touch o f a
supernatural being. Sisupala comes into the w o r l d with a super-
abundant b o d y : t w o a r m s t o o m a n y , o n e eye t o o m a n y ; if not t w o
men in o n e , he is at least m o r e than o n e m a n . In order to draw
f r o m h i m a h u m a n like the rest of us, one must m a k e the third e y e
disappear a n d half of the a r m s drop a w a y . Jarasandha c o m e s into
the w o r l d in t w o halves, each with only half the limbs a n d organs
of a n o r m a l h u m a n : a single e y e , a single a r m , a n d so o n down t o
the details of his innards a n d the t w o extremities o f his digestive
system: a h a l f - s t o m a c h , a half-mouth, o n e single b u t t o c k . T o draw
a n o r m a l h u m a n f r o m h i m , w h a t is needed is n o t pruning but
welding. T h e magical surgery is therefore the inverse of, but h a s the
same effect as that which Kr$na performs on Sisupala: in each case
a m o n s t e r — e i t h e r b y surplus o r deficit—is, a s S a x o says, reduced
to h u m a n measure.
T h e miracle o c c u r s . W h a t is its origin, w h o is responsible f o r
it? T h e text names Fate, daiva, the king's l u c k , bhagya, of w h i c h
the ^flfcsasf has been only the m e a n s , the r a n d o m agent, hetumatra.
But behind the screen of Fate? O n e detail is n o t e w o r t h y : it is at the
meeting of four roads that the elements of the synthesis fall into the
hands of the demoness w h o feeds o n flesh a n d b l o o d , a n d it is here,
in o n e o f Rudra's favorite domains, that the marvel occurs. U n -
doubtedly this is the beginning of the relationships w h i c h will unite

102
 Jarasandha

Rudra-Siva and the y o u n g prince, ties more public than those

which unite R u d r a and Sisupala, w h o , marked at birth with the
stigmata of Rudra, was transformed in a place where R u d r a could
not intervene: the lap of Kr$na-Vi?nu.

T h u s we have everything, in the story of Jarasandha, that is

directly useful for understanding the I n d o - S c a n d i n a v i a n problem
we are considering. But the end is interesting as it confirms that the
authors have consciously established an inverted symmetry be-
tween Jarasandha and Sisupala. T h i s symmetry entails c o m m o n
points, between which the action develops in opposite w a y s .
T h e t w o c o m m o n points are: the " R u d r a i c " character of Jara-
sandha and Sisupala and the hostility evinced by both against
Kr$na-Vi$nu, and the decisive intervention of Kr?na in the destruc-
tion of each of them, each time after a debate over the rights of
kings. But just as at their births the "pruning" of one matched the
"welding" of the other, we see between these fixed points only dif-
ferences and contrasts. T h e following list summarizes the princi-
pal ones:
1. K f §na does not himself slay Jarasandha, he has him killed by
B h l m a , while he restrains B h l m a f r o m killing Sisupala, reserving
this execution for himself.
2 . It is K f j n a w h o comes to Jarasandha with B h l m a and A r -
juna, and w h o provokes him and demands a duel, while Sisupala
provokes Kf$ria a m o n g the Pa^idavas.
3 . K r j i j a makes himself, in the name of royal solidarity and
the morality of the k?atriyas, the defender of kings abused by
Jarasandha, while it is Sisupala w h o , in the name of majesty and
rights of kings, defends the kings allegedly offended by the h o m a g e
paid to K f ? i j a .
4 . T h e " R u d r a i c " Jarasandha remains loyal to his god until the
end, upholding and defending the cruel v o w he has m a d e to him,
and after his death has no "Vi?^iuite" enlightenment, while Sisupala
is converted in the instant that follows his death, and merges lov-
ingly with the god w h o executed him.

103
 Jarasandha

Seen in this light, the "death of J a r a s a n d h a " can still b e of in-

terest t o the reader.^

3. T H E END OF J A R A S A N D H A

Yudhi§thira's wavering h a s e n d e d — a n h o n o r a b l e hesitation,

since this " M i t r a i c " king h a s been especially apprehensive of shed-
ding the b l o o d of others. In the end he capitulates a n d leaves t o
ICr§na the task o f organizing the raid b y which, he says, " J a r a s a n -
dha will be slain, the kings saved, the rajasuya secured" (nihatasca
jarasandhah mok$itasca mahik^itah rajasuyasca me labdhah).
Kr$na takes with him BhTma a n d A r j u n a , a n d disguised as " a c -
complished b r a h m i n s " ("graduates," snataka), they go to the c o u n -
try of M a g a d h a a n d arrive b e f o r e its capital, G i r i v r a j a . T h e y get in
not b y the d o o r but b y scaling the walls a n d breaking a venerated
(caitya) m o n u m e n t found there, then they a d v a n c e with haughty
mien toward the p a l a c e . T h e king receives them, but he is n o t
fooled b y their disguises, a n d s o o n he shames them o v e r their de-
ception: w h a t do these jewels m e a n on hands that s h o w the m a r k s
of bowstrings? W h y pretend t o b e brahmins when they radiate the
elan o f k§atriyas? H e calls on them t o reveal themselves f o r what
they a r e . W i t h growing insolence, Kr§na answers. T h e y are in a n y
case authentic snatakas, he says, f o r not o n l y b r a h m i n s , but
ksatriyas a n d vaisyas t o o c a n take the v o w s o f snatakas. T h e n he ill
admits implicitly that they are k j a t r i y a s b y saying that what counts

I
a m o n g k j a t r i y a s is n o t their words but their deeds. Finally he e x -
plains their b e h a v i o r : if they got into the city b y the m o n u m e n t , it
is because o n e gets into a friend's house b y the n o r m a l entrance,
and into a n enemy's b y a deceptive o n e .
Jarasandha is surprised: he has n o recollection of having b e e n
at w a r o r having h a d "hostile relations" with t h e m . W h y d o they
regard h i m , innocent as he is, a s an e n e m y ? K r ? n a has a ready
I
^Mahabharata, pp. 67-75 (si. 768-982).

104
 Jarasandha

a n s w e r . T h e head of a r o y a l line has sent them, with g o o d r e a s o n :

when o n e keeps captive, as he does, princes f r o m the entire w o r l d ,
when o n e has c o m m i t t e d this cruel sin {tad dgah kruram utpddya,
861), h o w can he pretend to be innocent? H o w does a king dare to
mistreat honest kings? But ( 8 6 2 - 8 6 5 , 8 7 8 - 8 7 9 ) ,

" . . . having imprisoned the kings y o u w a n t to sacrifice

them t o R u d r a ! T h e evil y o u have done, B a r h a d r a t h i , might
well affect us; f o r w e follow the L a w a n d are c a p a b l e of e n f o r c -
ing it. N e v e r h a s there been witness t o h u m a n sacrifice: h o w
then can y o u wish to sacrifice m e n to the G o d - W h o - A p p e a s e s
[Rudra-Siva]? A b a r o n yourself, y o u give fellow b a r o n s the
n a m e of beasts! . . ."
" W e w h o want to rescue the kings from y o u a r e n o t self-
styled b r a h m i n s . I a m Sauri Hj-jlkesa, and these c h a m p i o n s are
t w o Paijc^avas. W e a r e challenging y o u , king. S t a n d firm a n d
fight us, M a g a d h a n . Either set free all the kings, o r g o yourself
to Y a m a ' s a b o d e ! "

J a r a s a n d h a does not lose his c o m p o s u r e a n d is n o t without

defense. Never, he says, has he sent to his dungeon a king w h o m he
has not first vanquished; is it not the l a w , the dharma of the
k§atriya to fight, to win a n d then to do with the c o n q u e r e d
w h a t e v e r he pleases, kdmatahl Finally, a n d here is the m a i n point,
(882): , . .

" I h a v e fetched these kings f o r the G o d . Should / n o w ,

K r j i j a , let go o f them, while remembering fully the life-rule of
the b a r o n a g e ? "

His mind is m a d e u p : at the head o f an a r m y against a n a r m y ,

o r m a n against m a n , alone against o n e o r t w o o r three, he is ready
for b a t t l e .
H e has his son S a h a d e v a invested a s king a n d collects himself
b y calling to mind t w o c h a m p i o n s w h o h a v e lately contributed to
his triumphs. O n his side, K r j n a does not forget B r a h m a ' s declara-
tion: not at the hand o f a m e m b e r of his family must J a r a s a n d h a
perish. T h e r e f o r e he will refrain. Besides, a little later, when he asks

105
 I
Jarasandha

Jarasandha which adversary he chooses f o r himself, the king desig-

nates BhTma. T h e court chaplain blesses his king, K r ? n a blesses his
c h a m p i o n , a n d there begins a spectacular duel, which lasts fourteen
d a y s . O n the fourteenth d a y , Jarasandha s h o w s signs of tiring, and
Kr?na urges BhTma t o let loose all his strength ( 9 2 9 - 9 3 1 ) :

T h u s spoken t o , powerful BhTma, e n e m y - t a m e r , lifted

high the mighty Jarasandha and hurled h i m a r o u n d ; when he
h a d hurled h i m a hundred times, bull o f the B h a r a t a s , he threw
him down, b r o k e his b a c k with his knees, pounded h i m a n d
bellowed forth. A s Jarasandha w a s being pounded a n d the
Pan<?ava roared, there w a s a tumultuous din that terrified
all creatures. All the M a g a d h a n s reeled a n d their w o m e n
aborted. . .

But K f j n a loses n o time. H e places his t w o c o m p a n i o n s in the

chariot o f the vanquished king, a n d himself goes to rescue the
kings, his relatives {aropya bhratarau caiva mok^ayam asa ban-
dhavan) ( 9 3 5 ) — t h e last w o r d indicating that the m a j o r i t y of the
eighty-six captive kings c a m e f r o m the clan of the Y a d a v a s , the o b -
ject o f Jarasandha's hatred, o r f r o m allied dynasties. Freed f r o m a
terrible danger, (mok^itah mahato bhaydt), the kings shower their
rescuer with gifts. Kr?na in his turn m o u n t s the king's c h a r i o t — n o
ordinary c o n v e y a n c e , since after using it in a f a m o u s battle against
the d e m o n s , Indra h a d given it to V a s u Uparicara," a n d the latter in
his turn h a d presented it to Jarasandha's father. Seeing Kr?na leav-
ing, the rescued kings request his orders. T h e y receive only o n e : to
repair to the court o f Yudhi?thira and attend the r o y a l sacrifice he is
about to offer. T h e y c o n s e n t — a n d we must thus assume that they
will b e part o f that a m o r p h o u s crowd of royalty which the erst-
while general o f their f o r m e r persecutor will b y his demagoguery
nearly succeed in turning against their rescuer.
W i t h o u t doubt there is n o need to keep the line rejected b y the
P o o n a edition, where BhTma n o t o n l y crushes his exhausted, dazed
adversary under his knees, but also, rending h i m in t w o f r o m head

" The Destiny of a King (1973), pp. 60-62.

106
 Jarasandha

to f o o t , restores h i m to the bipartite state of his birth: this must b e

the ingenious invention o f an interpolator.^ W h a t e v e r it is, J a r a s a n -
dha's end has m o r e nobility than that of Sisupala: without
madness, without intoxication, he foresees his death, consecrates
his s o n , and fights t o the end of his strength. H e does not even call
upon the g o d , in the defense of whose just offerings, as well as his
cruel right to serve them up t o h i m , h e resolutely believes; m o r e -
over, every time Kf5i;ia decides t o h a v e done with a n adversary
w h o has been protected a n d exploited b y Rudra-Siva, the latter,
ungrateful a n d helpless, fails t o intervene.
T h i s story thus replicates that of Sisupala with n o t a b l e inver-
sions. It also completes the Indian accordances with the story of
StarkaSr. H o w is this situation t o b e interpreted? T h e m o s t p r o b a b l e
explanation is that w e are dealing, in India, with a literary process,
an artificial duplication o r reiteration. T h e fertile imagination of
the Indian scholars has p r o b a b l y provided a " c a s t i n g , " a " m i n i a -
t u r e " replica of what the traditional story of the monster entailed
"in excess," "in full"; and it probably built out this replica b y reserv-
ing f o r it, and b y amplifying, the crime which a m o n g the S c a n -
dinavians appears at the head of the three facinora, as the facinus
of the first function: the king taken as victim, f o r a sacrifice offered
to the o n e w e have tagged the " d a r k g o d . " Perhaps it is a result of
this duplication that Sisupala has later been presented himself, in
his o w n s t o r y , a s a king a m o n g kings, remaining like Starcatherus
subordinate, a "general," only in the tale o f Jarasandha.

4. APORIA

W i t h the Indie dossier n o w c o m p l e t e , w e are in a position t o

add a f e w remarks t o the Indo-Scandinavian c o m p a r i s o n which w e
outlined in the last chapter. T w o will b e inconsequential, but the
last will plunge us into a q u a n d a r y which the attentive reader m a y
h a v e noticed before. , ,

= See below, p. 150.

107
 Jarasandha

1 . T h e description o f Jarasandha's crime should be taken liter-

ally. Supported b y the parallel Scandinavian tradition, this crime
attests that h u m a n sacrifices were still practiced in earliest India.
Surely the legend of Sunahsepa, several traditions a b o u t M a n u ,
and the theory of the purusamedha speak in f a v o r of its existence.
But it is generally agreed that, in the f o r m in which it is described,
the puru$amedha is a theoretical construct intended merely as a n
extension of the upper end of the sacrificial roster; and if not the
wretched tale of the y o u n g Sunahsepa, then at least the a c c o u n t s of
the h u m a n sacrifices which M a n u shows himself ready to p e r f o r m
in his obedience c a n also b e pious inventions m e a n t to illustrate his
total absorption in sraddhd;'' hence there h a s been interminable
quibbling on the part of those w h o feel that it disgraces A r y a n India
to h a v e h a d its origins in kriira, in cruelty. T h e parallelism b e -
tween the sacrifices planned b y J a r a s a n d h a — e v e n if he is, under
this n a m e , a late-comer in the s t o r y — a n d the sacrifice procured b y
S t a r k a S r guarantees the former the reality which the latter certainly
h a s : A d a m of Bremen still k n e w , b y eyewitness testimony, that in
Uppsala at festivals every ninth year there were hanged n o t only
dogs a n d horses, but m e n as well, a n d from T a c i t u s ' Germania to
the Ynglingasaga, there a r e numerous attestations of h u m a n vic-
tims, offered particularly to " M e r c u r i u s " (that is, *Wddanaz) o n
the continent, a n d to O d i n in the Swedish U p p l a n d .
2 . In the S c a n d i n a v i a n s t o r y , the initiative f o r the sacrifice in
which V i k a r is the victim comes f r o m the g o d , O d i n . He has waited
patiently, through the years. T h e n , after he has been an undeniable
help to S t a r k a S r in the scene of the setting of fates, a n d this in the
presence of the beneficiary, he demands of h i m , a s p a y m e n t , that
he " d i s p a t c h " his king t o h i m . In the story of J a r a s a n d h a the m a n -
ner of agreement between the g o d and the m a n is not described,
a n d w e c a n n o t s a y whether the initiative c a m e f r o m o n e o r the
other. But n o m a t t e r ; even if J a r a s a n d h a unilaterally resolved t o

' Idees romaines (1969), pp. 56-57.

108
 Jarasandha

promise a hundred kings to R u d r a - S i v a , it w a s because he k n e w

that R u d r a generally pays well. T h e r e w a s at least a tacit under-
standing of the do ut des k i n d , based o n the reliable taste of the god
for the b l o o d of m e n .
3 . T h e victims J a r a s a n d h a destines f o r Rudra a r e n o t just a n y
m e n , b u t , like V i k a r , kings. This very congruence uncovers a dif-
ficulty. In S c a n d i n a v i a , all is clear: the demand expressed b y O d i n
that K i n g V i k a r b e sacrificed to h i m is immediately understandable
since O d i n , in the last analysis, only reclaims what is his, calling to
himself o n e of his o w n . A s the sovereign g o d , m o r e precisely the
king o f the gods, he h a s a n affinity, a natural intimacy with earthly
kings. It is not the same in India. R u d r a has n o special connection
with r o y a l t y , a n d in terms of h u m a n victims has n o reason to prefer
kings. O n e c a n of course suppose that h e is gratified that Jarasan-
dha reserves f o r him the highest level o f society, but his theological
definition entails n o such lofty restriction. O n e even gets the feeling
that the specification of r o y a l victims is forced on Jarasandha only
by the circumstances in which they are promised: since he wishes to
subjugate kingdoms, he offers the actual masters of these realms to
the g o d w h o can help h i m . T h i s is so true that Kr?na/ when he
reproaches the king of M a g a d h a f o r having made this b l o o d y p r o m -
ise, divides his complaint into t w o sections, t w o f o r m u l a e , b e -
tween which the m a t t e r o f r o y a l t y is deemphasized a n d lost in
m o r e general rules: (1) h u m a n sacrifices, he says, a r e criminal
under a n y circumstances; (2) a savanna must n o t h a r m his savarna,
a person o f the same caste. A n d Kf?na does not even h a v e in mind
the possibility that the t w o parts of his complaint might b e in-
separable, and that, sacrificing m e n to R u d r a , o n e should b e
obliged to seize kings a s victims: because in reality n o such obliga-
tion exists and Jarasandha remains entirely responsible f o r the choice.
Nonetheless, given the close similarity of the stories of Jarasan-
dha a n d Sisupala, o n e is forced to admit that the stipulation of
r o y a l t y is essential in the m a t t e r . Sisupala acting as passionate
defender of the majesty o f kings on the o n e h a n d , a n d Jarasandha
 Jarasandha

(whose general Sisupala is) capturing kings as o n e traps animals, to

sacrifice them cruelly to a g o d , jointly piece together the contradic-
t o r y state of affairs which is laid out m o r e simply in the tale of
S t a r k a S r : S t a r k a S r , t o o , is the defender of royal m a j e s t y , and yet it
is against this v e r y m a j e s t y that he c o m m i t s the facinora to w h i c h
he is d o o m e d , beginning with the sacrificial murder of V i k a r . But it
is easily seen that the necessity f o r this situation, o b v i o u s f o r S t a r -
k a S r , is not so for the t w o Indie figures, neither f o r J a r a s a n d h a n o r
for Sisupala. T h e reason f o r this lack of a c c o r d a n c e is undoubtedly
to be sought in the fact that Odin and T h o r are sensed to be included
in the trifunctional structure, while Rudra and Vi?i;iu are outside it.
T h e typological affinity of Rudra and O d i n has been explored in
the previous chapter, but O d i n is n o m o r e reducible to this type
than to the V a r u ^ a - t y p e , a n d the t w o types which he combines in
himself cannot be sundered, so that the divine pair w h o c o n f r o n t
each other over S t a r k a S r is at o n c e the pair of " d a r k g o d " and "light
g o d " (in which it corresponds in fact to the pair Rudra-Vi§nu) a n d
the pair of first-function and second-function g o d s . B o t h at o n c e ,
because, let us reiterate, in the S c a n d i n a v i a n theology the t w o pairs
have been fused into one o r , no doubt m o r e precisely, because the
second has been fused with the first.
In India the same is not the case. If the Vedic Vi?^iu, b y the
service rendered to Indra b y his steps and his assistance, belongs
preferentially to the second function, he spills outside it to the ex-
tent that he also serves M a n u , a n d the sacrificer, and the gods in
general; R u d r a , in the h y m n s and later, eludes still m o r e completely
a n y attempt to fix him in the trifunctional structure. In S c a n -
dinavia, Vi?i:iu's strict counterpart, V i S a r , is very close to T h o r —
"the strongest of the gods after T h o r " — b u t V i S a r is h o m o l o g o u s
with Vi?nu ordy in the e s c h a t o l o g y : ' until the end of the w o r l d , in
every case, the rescuer is simply T h o r , the c a n o n i c a l god of the sec-
o n d function; and the counterpart of S i v a is not so m u c h O d i n as

' "Le dieu scandinave Vifiarr," Revue de I'histoire des religions, CCXVIII
(1965), 1-13; ME I, 230-237.

110
 Jarasandha

one aspect of the complex O d i n , and not the m o s t important as-

pect, since O d i n remains a b o v e all, as sovereign-magician, a figure
of the first function.
If this is indeed the cause of the divergence which detains u s —
and n o other is a p p a r e n t — w e find ourselves in a veritable a p o r i a .
If, setting aside the i m p o r t a n c e of kings (extolled and assassinated),
we h a v e been able to clarify the rest of the tale of S t a r k a S r b y the
related stories of Sisupala and J a r a s a n d h a , it has been on condition
that w e retain f r o m the pair O d i n - T h o r only its aspect of " d a r k
g o d " - " l i g h t g o d , " which a l o n e allows it to be c o m p a r e d with the
pair R u d r a - V i j n u . But we c a n use the S c a n d i n a v i a n story to vin-
dicate the i m p o r t a n c e of kings (exalted and persecuted) in the t w o
Indie stories only b y resorting to the other aspect of the O d i n - T h o r
pair ( " f i r s t - f u n c t i o n " - " s e c o n d - f u n c t i o n g o d " ) , of w h i c h there is no
trace in the pair R u d r a - V i j n u .

Let us state at o n c e that w e are not in a position to reduce this

difficulty, and that the third point of c o m p a r i s o n which remains f o r
us to consider, the story of Herakles, will rather add to it, since the
two divinities we shall see confronting each other over the Greek
hero are themselves defined, in this particular situation, only by their
connection with the first t w o levels of the trifunctional structure.
But b e f o r e thus extending o u r inquiry, we should examine a
last c o m m o n element in the Scandinavian and Indie stories.

111
 THE W O M A N
AND THE ANCESTORS
t

1. MASCULINE RIVALRIES

In a previous study, several examples h a v e been given o f w h a t

o n e might call almost a l a w , o n e of those which the authors o f the
Mahabharata m a d e f o r themselves in their w o r k of transposing
into epic a v e r y old m y t h o l o g y . C o m p o s i n g the character a n d b e -
h a v i o r of their heroes after the image o f the gods w h o s e i n c a r n a -
tions o r sons they a r e , they have preserved between these heroes
the relationships, particularly those o f hierarchy, alliance, a n d en-
m i t y , w h i c h existed a m o n g those g o d s . T h e y h a v e m o r e o v e r s o m e -
times translated these conceptual relationships into terms of king-
ship o r a g e , transforming f o r example the strictly h o m o g e n e o u s
group o f gods o f the three functions into the five P a n ^ a v a b r o t h -
e r s — o n e just sovereign, t w o w a r r i o r s , t w o humble twins k n o w l -
edgeable in matters of husbandry—and giving t o these five
b r o t h e r s a s their c o m m o n spouse D r a u p a d I , the heroine transposed
f r o m the single, multifaceted goddess w h o m the theology tended t o
associate with the entirety o f the gods of the three f u n c t i o n s . '
T h i s blueprint w h i c h guided t h e m , whose principle they stated
but w h o s e details they did n o t reveal, left them the task of supply-
ing, o f inventing h u m a n , novelistic, publishable justifications f o r
' See the discussion of Stig Wikander's discovery in ME I, p. 46 and n. 1; pp.
53-65, 103-109.
 The Woman and the Ancestors

such predetermined relationships. For e x a m p l e , if DraupadT h a s

five husbands, a scandal a m o n g the A r y a n s , it is, n o longer f r o m
the point of view of the transposition but f r o m that of the epic plot,
the nasty consequence of an imprudent w o r d uttered b y the m o t h e r
of the Pariijlavas. A single one of the brothers had w o n the girl in a
svayamvara and had returned with her to the forest, to the spot
where his m o t h e r a n d brothers awaited h i m . W h i l e a p p r o a c h i n g ,
he cried out j o y o u s l y : " H e r e are the a l m s ! " Before seeing h i m , and
believing that he a n n o u n c e d some actually divisible a l m s , the
m o t h e r hastened to remind him of his d u t y : " P o s s e s s it," she said,
"in c o m m o n , y o u r brothers a n d y o u . " A mother's w o r d must b e
d o n e , she herself c a n change nothing: thus the five P a i j ^ a v a s had to
share a single wife a n d give t o their children a single m o t h e r ; to this
end they concluded a scrupulous agreement whcih they o b s e r v e d
and which spared them a n y jealousy.^
T h e enmity w h i c h exists between Kfgna a n d Sisupala o c c a -
sions a description of the s a m e sort. T h e two figures oppose each
o t h e r because o n e is Vi^iju incarnate, while the other is a triply
" R u d r a i c " being, b o t h b y the deformities which disfigure h i m a t
birth (three eyes and four arms) and b y his deeply d e m o n i c nature,
since he is the last of the incarnations of a d e m o n w h o , at least in
the preceding o n e , was the follower and protege of R u d r a - S i v a , a n d
in addition b y the post of general which he takes in the service of
king J a r a s a n d h a , w h o is also a devotee, and a cruel o n e , of R u d r a -
S i v a . Furthermore, as it a l w a y s turns out w h e n Vi?pu c o n f r o n t s
R u d r a - S i v a or a " R u d r a i c " figure, the initiative in the hostilities is
not taken b y Kf?i:ia, but b y Sisupala. O n all these points the
transposition has respected the m a i n lines of the theology of the
t w o divinities.^

^ Ibid., pp. 110-117.

^ [1977) It has been objected that Sisupala's sixth offense against Kf$i;ia is not
homogeneous with the first five. To be sure, and perhaps I should have emphasized
the difference between these treatments of the same theme: Herakles and Star-
catherus perish because of the last of the three sins which they have committed and
which are distributed across the three functions (likewise Indra's progressive decline
is completed with and by his third, third-function sin). The fate that falls upon Sisu-
pala is more complex: one after another he commits the hundred sins which, at his

114
 The Woman and the Ancestors

But this w a s not enough f r o m the standpoint of the plot, in-

sofar a s Kr$na, n o less that Si§upala, is presented as h u m a n . T h e i r
innate opposition, glimpsed in outline, has therefore been rein-
f o r c e d a n d even o v e r s h a d o w e d b y a n e n m i t y w h o s e cause is f o r -
tuitous a n d earthly, a masculine rivalry o v e r a pretty girl. T h e
story will b e often retold in the P u r a n a s , but in the Mahabharata a
precise allusion is made to it in the course o f the very scene where
w e learn that Sisupala is o n his w a y to exceeding, against Kr$na
a n d his f a m i l y , his credit of o n e hundred tolerated offenses, a n d
that consequently Krgna will find himself free to slay h i m . Kf^na
himself, in a next-to-last speech, explains this strange situation t o
the kings t o justify the beheading which is in the offing. But he ends
b y hurling at his prospective victim a n e w shot, and a cruel o n e :

" F o r the s a k e o f m y father's sister I h a v e endured v e r y

great suffering; but fortunately n o w this is taking place in the
presence o f all the kings. F o r y o u a r e n o w witnesses o f the a l l -
surpassing offense against m e ; learn also n o w the offenses he
has perpetrated against m e in concealment (parokfatn). T h i s
present offense I c a n n o longer f o r b e a r , a n d his insolence
amidst the full circle o f kings deserves death. T h i s f o o l , w h o
must want t o die, o n c e proposed himself f o r RukminI, but the
f o o l n o m o r e obtained her than a sQdra a hearing of the V e d a ! "

In the a s s e m b l y , whose opinion is shifting b a c k against the ag-

gressor, the b l o w hits h o m e . Here is the last retort of Sisupala, w h o
k n o w s he is d o o m e d a n d shouts, with a defiant laugh:

" H a v e y o u n o s h a m e at all, Kr^na^ that y o u b r o a d c a s t in

assemblies, particularly before these kings, that y o u r R u k m i n I
w a s a n o t h e r m a n ' s first? F o r w h a t self-respecting m a n but y o u
w o u l d broadcast to the strict that his wife h a d belonged t o

birth, were not imposed on, but granted to, or rather tolerated of him (p. 58), and of
which the five examples excerpted from the total by his accuser are well distributed
across the three functions; but, by the very fact that they have been forgiven in
advance, they call forth no sanctions. Consequently, in order to undo him, a sup-
plemental sin is necessary, outside the series and extra-functional, some act of high
treason directly attacking Kfjija-Visiju. This enrichment of the theme does not alter
its significance, but enhances it with all the mystical power inherent in the figure
of Krwa.

lis
 The Woman and the Ancestors

another, M a d h u s u d a n a ? Forgive m e , if y o u have that much

faith, or don't, K r j n a , what could possibly befall m e f r o m y o u ,
h o w e v e r angry o r friendly?"

T h i s rivalry o f t w o men is well k n o w n to us f r o m elsewhere.

BhT?maka w a s king of K u n d i n a , in the c o u n t r y of the V i d a r b h a s .
H e h a d a son, R u k m i n , and a very beautiful daughter, RukminT.
Kr^pa loved RukminT, a n d RukminT loved h i m . Holding a grudge
against K f § n a , R u k m i n did not wish her to b e given to h i m . H e h a d
him put off, then, urged on b y J a r a s a n d h a , BhTjmaka a n d R u k m i n ,
father a n d s o n , gave RukmiijT to Sisupala. A s if nothing h a d h a p -
pened, K f sna c a m e to attend his rival's wedding, abducted the girl
in the middle of the c e r e m o n y , and married h e r . T h u s RukminT
b e c a m e what she will remain, the wife of Kr$i?a, of w h o m it is said,
b y the c o n v e n t i o n s of transposition, that she w a s the incarnation o f
the goddess LakjmT, the wife of Vijijiu. Such is the conflict of pas-
sions which replicates the antagonism in the theological descrip-
tions a n d which apparently suffices, f r o m the h u m a n point of view,
to explain the inimical relationship of K f j n a a n d Sisupala; m a n y
novels, in all literatures, are made of such stuff. O n e will n o t e that
each of the two men c a n b e considered p r o v o k e d b y the other:
K r j i j a , since her parents have given to his rival the girl w h o m he
loved a n d w h o loved him in return; Sisupala since, having legally
and correctly received the girl, he has seen her spirited a w a y b y his
rival. W i t h o u t pretending to pass judgment in such a delicate affair,
w e will n o t e nevertheless that in sequence, a n d according to the u n -
written l a w of lovers, the first a n d genuinely offended one w a s
Kr§na.
Usually the " s e c o n d c a u s e s , " which the authors of the Maha-
bharata have superimposed o n the deep causes arising f r o m the
translation of a m y t h o l o g y into epic, betray themselves as ad hoc
inventions, often mediocre a n d i n c o m m e n s u r a t e with what is pre-
sented as their c o n s e q u e n c e . T h i s is the case, for example, with the
rash w o r d of the P a n d a v a s ' m o t h e r , w h e r e b y the virtuous D r a u -
padT finds herself committed to a p o l y a n d r o u s marriage. O n e might
think that it is so also for the conflict of Kf?ija a n d Sisupala over

116
 T h e W o m a n a n d the A n c e s t o r s

RukminI, although here the cause h a s the same weight as the

effect, a n d the winning o f R u k m i n I b y abduction corresponds well
to Kr§na's pattern. But the c o m p a r i s o n of the tales of Sisupala
and S t a r k a S r which w e are pursuing adds a n important f a c t o r t o
the p r o b l e m .
W e recall h o w the beginning of the Gautrekssaga, a n d the texts
which repeat o r gloss this passage, report at the same time the birth
of S t a r k a S r and the hostility w h i c h T h o r bears h i m . Let us reread
these important lines:" . , i

S t a r k a S r [Aludrengr, the first S t a r k a S r ] w a s a v e r y c r a f t y

(hundviss) giant w h o h a d eight a r m s . F r o m Alfheim h e t o o k
Alfhildr, the daughter of King A l f r . King A l f r then called u p o n
T h o r , that Alfhildr should c o m e b a c k . T h e n T h o r slew S t a r -
k a S r , a n d carried Alfhildr h o m e t o her father, a n d she w a s
then with child. S h e b o r e a s o n , w h o w a s called S t o r v i r k r ,
w h o h a s been mentioned; he w a s a m a n of h a n d s o m e l o o k s , a l -
though of b l a c k hair, bigger and stronger than other m e n . . . .

T o this S t o r v i r k r a n d his legitimate wife, the daughter o f

an earl of H a l o g a l a n d , w a s b o r n the second S t a r k a S r , the hero of
the saga.
W e recall also that in a later episode, the saga h a s something
m o r e , a n d perhaps different, to s a y : a clear allusion is m a d e to a
m a s c u l i n e — o n e dare n o t say r o m a n t i c — r i v a l r y between the m o n -
strous giant and T h o r . A t the m o m e n t when T h o r a n d O d i n , in the
assembly of the solemnly gathered gods, contradictorily determine
the fate o f the second S t a r k a S r , T h o r declares himself f r o m the
beginning against the b o y , and reveals his g r i e v a n c e s : '

T h e n T h o r began t o speak a n d said: "Alfhildr, the m o t h e r

of S t a r k a S r ' s father, chose as father t o her s o n a very c r a f t y
giant rather than T h o r of the JEsir, a n d I declare this f o r S t a r k -
aSr, that he shall have neither son n o r daughter, a n d so shall
his line e n d . "

"Above, p. 12. ' ''f '•

5
Above, p. 14. V«
 T h e W o m a n a n d the A n c e s t o r s

Is the schematic account of the beginning of the Gautrekssaga

incomplete? D o the t w o passages refer to t w o v a r i a n t s , o n e w h e r e
T h o r intervened, disinterestedly, only at the request o f Alfhildr's
father, the other where he avenged himself on a successful rival? In
a n y case this second text exists, and describes a situation similar t o ,
and partially the converse of, the o n e which opposes Sisupala a n d
Kv?na o v e r RukmiijI: first, the giant a n d the g o d b o t h desire the
girl; second, the giant takes her, with her consent; third, the g o d
kills the giant, retakes the girl and returns h e r to her father; b u t
fourth, the god remains offended that the other h a d been preferred
to him to the point of begetting in his place. T h e revenge he c h o o s e s
is well suited to the nature of this resentment: he punishes the guilty
ones through their grandson, w h o m he c o n d e m n s to h a v e n o p r o -
geny, to b e the last of his race. T h u s in S c a n d i n a v i a as in India a
second cause overlies the deep cause, independent of logic a n d self-
sufficient: it is the generalized, unexceptioned hostility of T h o r
against all that c o m e s f r o m giants. T h e god's attitude toward the
hero is justified b y a novelistic incident, a variation on a theme
which literatures never tire of presenting to a n o less indefatigable
public: t w o men a n d a w o m a n . In b o t h cases, in S c a n d i n a v i a a n d in
India, the g o d ends b y slaying his rival; only in the saga the rival is
not the hero of the story but his grandfather, a n d the killing follows
on the heels of the offense; in the Mahabharata, Krjria's rival
is Sisupala himself a n d the killing is long postponed (but note that
at least it follows immediately the reminder which K f s o a gives of
their rivalry). In both cases, the g o d " r e c o v e r s " the girl; only in
the Scandinavian tale it is f o r her father a n d not f o r himself, a n d
the girl is pregnant; in the Mahabharata it is during the wed-
ding c e r e m o n y , before R u k m i n i has really fallen into Sisupala's
p o w e r , that Kr§ija gets hold of her, still virgin, a n d marries h e r .
T h i s last disparity is m o r e o v e r only the natural consequence of
another, m o r e important o n e : it is the giant, the first S t a r k a S r ,
w h o m Alfhildr h a s chosen, spurning the g o d T h o r , while it is the
incarnate g o d K f j n a w h o m RukmipT prefers t o the " R u d r a i c " a n d
demonical Sisupala.

118
 T h e W o m a n and the A n c e s t o r s

O n e should therefore hesitate to discard the novelistic prelude

of the s a g a — a s I h a v e lately done m y s e l f — f o r the a priori reason
that ' w o m a n t r o u b l e " is alien to T h o r ' s c h a r a c t e r . It m a y be on the
c o n t r a r y that, in this piece of literature, the god w h o is n o r m a l l y
a b o v e h u m a n w e a k n e s s e s — l o v e , desire, j e a l o u s y — s h o w s himself
b y virtue of a very ancient tradition singularly unequal to himself.

2. REINCARNATED DEMON AND GRANDSON OF A GIANT

T h i s consideration constrains us not to reject summarily the

o t h e r strange feature of the saga version: the duality of S t a r k a S r , a
grandfather and a g r a n d s o n . T o be sure, it could be easily imagined
that a sagamadr, bothered b y a tradition which insisted on the birth
in the f o r m of a giant and monster of a hero w h o s e life, apart f r o m
three incidents, is a n d should b e edifying, has split up the c h a r a c -
ter, relegating the repugnant elements to a first S t a r k a S r and reserv-
ing f o r a second o n e , his entirely h u m a n grandson, the reasons the
reader h a s f o r admiring h i m . H o w e v e r , things m a y h a v e gone the
other w a y ; S a x o m a y h a v e simplified a n initially more c o m p l e x
situation. A n d here again it is the saga's version which reinforces,
against S a x o , the c o m p a r i s o n with the Indie a c c o u n t .
T h e hostility which exists between K r j p a a n d Sisupala is n o t
hereditary: K f j n a has had n o quarrel with the father, n o r with a
grandfather, of the little m o n s t e r . B u t , as w e have seen, neither is it
without precedent. T h e Indian notion of reincarnation simply re-
places heredity and gives it a cosmic dimension: Sisupala is but the
latest f o r m taken b y the d e m o n w h o w a s , in the last "crises" in
which Visnu had to intervene, Hiranyakasipu a n d R a v a p a — f i g u r e s
w h o , like J a r a s a n d h a , long enjoyed the protection of R u d r a - S i v a ,
but w h o in the e n d , like J a r a s a n d h a , a n d occasionally f o r having
m a d e themselves intolerable to Rudra-Siva himself, found them-
selves a b a n d o n e d b y their p r o t e c t o r . Let us q u o t e o n c e again

6
The Destiny of the Warrior (1970), p. 9 3 .

119
 T h e W o m a n a n d the A n c e s t o r s

C o l o n e l de Polier, in the pages which open his resume of the Rdmd-

yana, or rather the account of it which his Indian tutor, R a m -
t c h o u n d , is supposed to give h i m . T h u s o n R a v a n a : '

" R a v e n w a s ruler of the isle of L a n c a , o r C e y l o n . Like all

the a m b i t i o u s D a i n t s [ d e m o n s ] , he aspired to the conquest o f
Paradise, a n d to succeed in this he h a d devoted o n e hundred
years o f his long life to worshipping M h a d a i o [ M a h a d e v a ,
R u d r a - S i v a ] a n d h a d obtained f r o m this D e i o t a s , b y sacrific-
ing his head to h i m , n o t only the n o r m a l recompense of ten
more heads a n d as m a n y a r m s , but also the privilege of being
unable to be put to death unless there should b e cut f r o m h i m a
million h e a d s . "
" B u t he h a d only ten of t h e m , " said M . de Polier.
" H e h a d only ten at a t i m e , " replied the teacher, " b u t they
would regrow to the extent that they were cut off, the which
rendered his defeat so difficult that there w a s n o one but V i j n u
w h o could destroy h i m . N o t content with the extraordinary
gifts he had received f r o m M h a d a i o , he coerced B i r m a h , b y
threatening to kill h i m , to b e s t o w on h i m a net a n d a javelin,
miraculous w e a p o n s which the terror-stricken B i r m a h granted
him although he foresaw the evil use which he would m a k e of
these gifts, in addition to which this giant h a d also such p r o -
digious strength that, wishing o n e d a y to a w a k e n M h a d a i o
f r o m o n e of his trances, he transported with o n e hand this
D e i o t a s a n d his residence onto the summit of M o u n t H e r m a n t -
chel, the a b o d e of the father of P a r b u t t y [ParvatT, the wife of
Rudra-Siva).
D r u n k with his p o w e r , his strength a n d the privileges
M h a d a i o h a d granted h i m , the pride a n d ambition of the
Daints grew p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y , a n d he n o longer dreamt o f a n y -
thing but making himself master of the w h o l e universe. H e h a d
already subdued the earth a n d Paradise, he h a d e n c r o a c h e d
upon hell, a n d b y his tyranny he b e c a m e the object of such
universal terror and hatred that B i r m a h a n d M h a d a i o them-
selves, alarmed at the abuse he had m a d e of the supernatural

' Cf. above, p. 81, n. 4. This passage in I, 292-294.

120
 T h e W o m a n a n d the A n c e s t o r s

a n d miraculous gifts they had given him, awaited with as

much impatience as the lesser Deiotas the m o m e n t when the
foretold incarnation of Vi^ou would c o m e to pass. T h e impiety
and the crimes of R a v e n at last fill the term fixed b y the decrees
of fate as the time f o r his punishment, and everything heralds
the great event which must bring to an end the reign of vice,
restore virtue on earth and m a k e manifest the exclusive p o w e r
of V i $ n u . " :-. - 'jj!.... •;• • V ; . ,••>.

It is this R a v a n a w h o , slain b y Vi?nu in the guise of R a m a , will

b e reincarnated as Sisupala and so will for the last time c o n f r o n t
V i ? n u , w h o has b e c o m e K f ^ n a .
It is doubtful, in spite of Celtic evidence, whether one should
trace b a c k to Indo-European times the belief in metempsychosis, in
successive reincarnations. In any case it is alien to the G e r m a n i c
w o r l d . But continuity in family lines, functionally speaking, plays
the same role. It has long been noted that one of the name-giving
patterns observed in certain periods by the S c a n d i n a v i a n s , as well
as b y numerous other peoples, was to n a m e n e w b o r n children after
close ancestors:* n o doubt they thought in this w a y to be doing a
little m o r e than reviving a m e m o r y or an image; even rationalized
to the extreme, such a practice at least charts for the n e w b o r n a life-
plan, an imitation which, if adopted and carried out b y the n a m e -
s a k e , in the last analysis reanimates the deceased himself. Is it not
this belief that has been able to justify the coexistence of S t a r k a S r ,
father of S t o r v i r k r , and S t a r k a S r , son of S t o r v i r k r , and at the s a m e
time, the t w o interventions of T h o r , killing the o n e and persecuting
the other? T h i s diachronic timing of happenings, this prenatal stage
at least gives the hero's life story a scope c o m p a r a b l e with, al-
though less cosmic than, that conferred on Sisupala by his demonic
past and his prior encounters in other lives with the same g o d .
T h e s e last c o m p a r i s o n s to be sure leave with n o ready answer
the p r o b l e m of the relative value of the t w o versions of the birth of
S t a r k a S r . If they restore between them the b a l a n c e of c h a n c e ,
* Mythes et dieux des Germains, pp. 61-62; K. A. Eckhardt, Irdische Unsterb-
lichkeit, germanischer Glaube an die Wiederverkorperung in der Sippe (1937).

121
 T h e W o m a n and the A n c e s t o r s

which until n o w has leaned to the side of S a x o at the expense of the

saga, they do not allow us to decide. Is it necessary to prefer one o r
the other, S a x o or the saga? O r must we suppose that each one c o n -
tinues w h a t were already, from earliest times, " v a r i a n t s " ? For the
first of the two themes we h a v e been e x a m i n i n g — t h e resentment of
a god against the son of a w o m a n w h o has preferred a rival to
h i m — t h e legend of Herakles will, h o w e v e r , r e c o m m e n d a decision
against S a x o , in f a v o r of the sagamadr. B u t , in the G r e e k legend,
the genders of the deities are reversed in relation to their roles: it is
a goddess, H e r a , w h o persecutes the son w h o m her less than faith-
ful spouse, Z e u s , has chosen to obtain through the services of h e r
involuntary rival A l k m e n e , the wife of A m p h i t r y o n .

122
 HERAKLES

1. THE FAILINGS OF HERAKLES

In 1 9 5 6 I gave reasons, which still seem valid, to consider the

life of Herakles, like that of S t a r k a S r - S t a r c a t h e r u s , n o t a s the huge
a n d fortuitous accretion of specific legends, independent and self-
sufficient, each tied to a t o w n , province, l a k e , o r forest, the e x -
ploits o f a s t r o n g m a n , but m o r e as a structure w h o s e general design
is simple and which has only served as a f r a m e w o r k — w e a l t h at-
tracting w e a l t h — f o r a variety of legends, local or otherwise, c o n -
cerning the Strong M a n . '
T h i s general f r a m e w o r k is that of the "three sins of the h e r o , "
and I h a v e recalled at the outset of this study w h a t these sins a r e ,
each o n e c o m m i t t e d against the principle of one o f the three Indo-
European functions:^ since m y Aspects de la fonction guerriere
the dossier has n o t c h a n g e d . Herakles performs his feats in three
groups, each ending with the "functional s i n " a n d the correspond-
ing penalty or consequence, w h i c h affect first the hero's sanity,
next his bodily health, a n d finally his life. M o r e o v e r the penalties
are not cumulative, a n d the first t w o cease to operate o n c e suffi-
cient expiation has been effected. T h e intervals filled with exploits

' The Destiny of the Warrior [1970], pp. 9 6 - 9 7 . For the systematization of the
Library of Apollodorus (II, 4,8-7,7), see ibid. p. 102 n. 6.
^ Cf. above, pp. 1 - 6 .

123
 Herakles

are distributed thus: the first runs f r o m the hero's birth to his
hesitation before the c o m m a n d of Zeus, with madness as p e n a l t y ; '
the second extends f r o m his insubordination to the treacherous
murder of a surprised e n e m y , with physical disease as its penalty;
the third goes f r o m this murder to his scandalous adultery, w i t h
the consequence of an unhealable burn and his voluntary death.
Within the first of these three groups appears, as a sub-group, the
collection of ten o r twelve great L a b o r s , w h i c h has itself served to
lodge sub-labors, and which is the only partial structure that can be
discerned within the large framework. As for the sins, the
biography of Herakles presents m o r e than o n e deed which we
would be inclined, even in G r e e k terms, to classify as such, but the
fact is that only these three h a v e been fastened on b y the gods a n d
had a destructive effect on the guilty p a r t y .
T h e parallel with the three sins of Starcatherus is a c c o m p a n i e d
b y other a c c o r d a n c e s in the careers of the t w o heroes. T h e main
ones were pointed out in 1 9 5 6 , but the investigation of Sisupala
reveals their full importance. T h e y c o n c e r n , on the one h a n d , the
hero's birth and his resulting position in the trifunctional structure,
especially the c o n t r a r y relationships which it establishes between
him and t w o rival divinities; and on the other hand his death.

2. HERA, ATHENA AND HERAKLES

T h e birth of Herakles is recounted b y D i o d o r u s SiculuS (IV, 9 ,

2 - 3 ) after recalling that on b o t h sides the hero " o w e s his birth to the

' [1982] Several writers who have referred to the book seem to have
understood the first fault of Herakles to be the killing of his children in his madness.
This is not quite right: his failing is having disobeyed the command of Zeus by
hesitating to go into Eurystheus' service, and thus compromising the agreement
reached between Zeus and Hera regarding a matter of kingship; the punis^jmefit con-
sisted in a madness whose result, calling for expiation, was the murder of his
children.

124
 Herakles

greatest o f the g o d s " : Zeus is his father, a n d his m o t h e r A l k m e n e

descends f r o m Perseus, the son of Zeus a n d D a n a e :
2. . . . T h e prowess which w a s found in him w a s not only
to be seen in his deeds, but w a s also recognized even before his
birth. For when Zeus l a y with A l k m e n e he m a d e the night
three times its n o r m a l length (xpiTcA-aaiav rfiv VI^KTO i t o i f i a a i )
and b y the magnitude of the time expended on the procreation
(TQ) TtXyjflei ToC npbq rfiv itaiSoTtoifav dvaA,co6^VTOG xp6vo\i)
he presaged the exceptional might of the child which would
b e begotten (TtpOCTtinfjvai TTIV OiteppoXfiv xf\q TOC yevvritJri-
aon^vou {)(ii\ir\q).
3 . A n d , in general, he did n o t effect this union f r o m the
desire of l o v e , as he did in the case of other w o m e n , but rather
only for the s a k e of procreation {zf\q naibonodaq xdpiv). C o n -
sequently, desiring to give legality to his e m b r a c e s , he did n o t
choose to offer violence to A l k m e n e , a n d yet he could n o t hope
to persuade her because of her chastity (oco(ppooi5vr|); a n d s o ,
deciding to use deception, he deceived A l k m e n e b y assuming
in every respect the shape of A m p h i t r y o n .

Herakles is thus neither monster n o r g i a n t — e v e n if specula-

tions on his m o r e than h u m a n size h a v e n o t been l a c k i n g — b u t , like
Starcatherus, h e has in him a certain excess, 6jrepPoA,r|, a surplus of
strength in relation to other m e n , resulting f r o m a watered-down
f o r m of triplicity: Zeus spent three nights begetting h i m , thus
allowing for this single insemination a n a m o u n t of sperm which
seems, even for a g o d , to h a v e been considerable.
T h e position of Herakles in relation to the first a n d second
functions, a n d particularly in relation to the t w o goddesses w h o
preside over them (Diodorus, I V , 9 , 4 - 8 ) :

4. W h e n the natural time of pregnancy h a d passed, Z e u s ,

w h o s e mind w a s fixed on the birth o f Herakles, a n n o u n c e d in
advance in the presence of all the gods that it w a s his intention
to m a k e the child w h o should b e b o r n that day king (rtoifiCTai
^aaikia) over the decendants o f Perseus; whereupon Hera,
w h o w a s filled with jealousy (^riXoTUTCoOaav), using a s her

125
 Herakles

helper Eileithyia her daughter, checked the birth-pains of

Alkmene and brought Eurystheus forth to the light before his
full time.
5 . Zeus, however, though he had been outgeneralled,
wished both to fulfill his promise and to take thought for the
future fame (^7ti9ave{a) of Herakles; consequently, they say,
he persuaded Hera to agree that Eurystheus should be king as
he had promised, but that Herakles should serve Eurystheus
and perform twelve labors, these to be whatever Eurystheus
should prescribe, and that after he had done so he should
receive the gift of immortality (PaaxX^a |j^v 67tdp^ai Koxd rnv
i6{av indaxsaw EupDcnJ^a, T6V 8' 'HpaK>,^a Texayn^vov i)n6
T6V EiipucnS^a xeX^crai 6c&6eKafiiSXouqoui; fiv 6 EdpucnSet)?
TipoCTxd^Ti, Kol xoCxo jipd^ovxa xu%eiv rf\q di&avacslaq).
6. After Alkmene had brought forth the babe, fearful of
Hera's jealousy (^T|Xoxi)7t{av) she exposed it at a place which to
this time is called after him the Field of Herakles. Now at this
very time Athena, approaching the spot in the company of
Hera (Kai9' 6v 8r\ xp6vov 'AiSriva jiexd Tf{q "Hpai; TtpoaioO-
aa) and being amazed at the natural vigor of the child (iSaund-
aaaa xoC naiSiou xf^v (ptSoiv), persuaded Hera to offer it the
breast (duv^Ttexcre XT)V "Hpav xfjv r3r|A,r|v i^TiOCTxeTv). But when
the boy tugged upon her breast with greater violence than
would be expected at his age, Hera was unable to endure the
pain and cast the babe from her (f) n^v °Hpa SiaXyfiaacja x6
Pp^cpo? £ppiv|/ev), whereupon Athena took it to its mother and
urged her to rear it ('Ai9riva 8k K o n i a a a a a0x6 npbq zr\v
HT|T^pa xp^<peiv TtapEKeXsuaaxo).
7. And anyone may well be surprised at the unexpected
turn of the affair (x6 xi]q TiepiTtexela? napdSo^ov); for the
mother whose duty it was to love (ax^pyEiv 6(pe{A.OD<Ta) her
own offspring was trying to destroy it while she who cherished
towards it a stepmother's hatred, in ignorance saved the life of
one who was her natural enemy { 8i' fiyvoiav Saco^e x6 xfj (pi3-
cjei TioX^iaiov).
Various forms are taken, especially during Herakles' youth, by
the enmity of Hera and the solicitude of Athena. If we stick with

126
 Herakles

the text of D i o d o r u s , it is Hera w h o sends the t w o serpents w h i c h

the infant strangles in his cradle, thus, it w a s c l a i m e d , winning his
heroic n a m e : " H e w h o owes his glory (KX^OI;) to H e r a " (10, 1); it is
H e r a t o o w h o strikes h i m with madness b e c a u s e he hesitates t o o
long to enter the service of Eurystheus (11, 1). W h e r e v a r i o u s gods
a r m a n d equip Herakles, it is A t h e n a w h o presents the first gift, a
peplos (14, 3). Later, a c c o r d i n g t o the Library of A p o l l o d o r u s , it is
to h e r , n o doubt as his m o s t trusted friend, that Herakles hands
over t h e apples of the Hesperides, which the goddess immediately
returns t o their place (II, 5, 11).
T h e t w o goddesses clearly h a v e here the contrasting values a t -
tributed t o them also in the legend of the judgment of Paris:^ Hera
is the sovereign, w h o s e first c o n c e r n is t o exclude A l k m e n e ' s son
f r o m r o y a l t y a n d t o reduce h i m — t h i s is the gist of the c o m p r o m i s e
she a c c e p t s — t o the role of c h a m p i o n , obedient t o the king. A t h e n a
immediately takes t h e future hero under her p r o t e c t i o n , rescues
h i m when he is only a n a b a n d o n e d b a b y , sees to his outfitting, a n d
f o l l o w s h i m discreetly in his l a b o r s . T h e t w o goddesses, to b e sure,
d o n o t c o m b a t each o t h e r , they even w a l k together, b u t their h a r -
m o n y is only o u t w a r d . T h i s is no longer the aUiance into w h i c h
they w e r e driven, in the legend of the shepherd prince Paris, b y
their c o m m o n e n m i t y t o w a r d A p h r o d i t e ; they play antagonistic
roles, a n d the virgin A t h e n a does n o t hesitate to trick H e r a , t o get
her t o nurse with her o w n milk the child w h o m the fearful A l k m e n e
h a d exposed in the c o u n t r y s i d e . T h i s scene of the goddess saving
a n d nursing the child w h o m she will thereafter persecute, a n d w h o
begins b y biting her, recalls, functionally speaking, the initially a m -
biguous relationship of Sisupala a n d Kyj^ia: placed on the god's
knees, the little m o n s t e r receives h u m a n f o r m , he is saved; b u t at
the s a m e time the plan of a long hostility is laid.
A s f o r the attitude of the hero himself t o w a r d the t w o higher
f u n c t i o n s — t h e kingship f r o m w h i c h he h a s been excluded, a n d the
" l a b o r s , " that is, essentially, fights, to w h i c h he h a s been c o n -

* ME I, pp. 5 8 0 - 5 8 6 . ,., , i'^...li. y,.

127
 Herakles

signed—it is m o r e d r a m a t i c than that of S t a r k a 3 r - S t a r c a t h e r u s ,

w h o , b o m far f r o m any throne, confines himself (outside of his
three sins, directed against them) to serving kings ostentatiously;
and m o r e pathetic t o o than Sisupala's, a king w h o voluntarily
b e c o m e s the general of a n o t h e r king. Herakles' first sin is precisely
to hesitate, despite the c o m m a n d of Zeus, despite the warning of
Delphi, to b e c o m e the c h a m p i o n of King Eurystheus: he judges him
and k n o w s himself to be superior to h i m . But after his first
punishment he submits, seeks and receives the king's orders, irpoCT-
T d y n o T a , left to e n j o y n o w and then the bitter satisfaction he gets
f r o m the spectacle of his mediocre master: v a s e paintings h a v e p o p -
ularized the scene where he brings b a c k to the king the wild b o a r of
E r y m a n t h u s ; he carries the b o a r alive on his shoulders; panic-
stricken, the king hides in a barrel ((poPrnSelg GKPUYEV tambv eiq
XOXKOCV nWov; D i o d o r u s , I V , 1 2 , 2 ) . But never, either during o r
after the long term of the l a b o r s , does he raise a h a n d against the
king, n o r attempt to replace him; and never, throughout the
journeys where he redresses so m a n y wrongs and punishes so m a n y
evil men, does he propose to b e c o m e king himself: he lends, and if
need be, imposes his services, sometimes gets a reward f o r t h e m ,
then takes his l e a v e .

3. THE END OF H E R A K L E S ; HERAKLES AND HERA

T h e D e a t h of Herakles, Hera reconciled (Diodorus, IV, 3 8 ,

3-5; 39, 2 - 3 ) :
A f t e r his adultery, Herakles is trapped in the c l o a k dipped in
the b l o o d of Nessos. Informed of her husband's passion f o r lole,
Deianeira recalled the present the dying C e n t a u r had given her.
H a d he not told her that, if her h u s b a n d c a m e to neglect her, to
rekindle his passion she need only h a v e him put on a cloth rubbed
in his blood? W h a t she did not k n o w w a s that in the Centaur's
b l o o d lingered the poison of the a r r o w which which Herakles had
pierced h i m . T h u s she sent, saturated with w h a t she thought w a s a

128
 Herakles

love p o t i o n , the sacrificial cloak that Herakles h a d asked for. He

put it on, and activated b y his b o d y ' s heat, the poison began to
devour him. In the grip of the growing, intolerable pain, the hero
sent t w o of his c o m p a n i o n s to consult f o r a third time the oracle of
Delphi, a n d A p o l l o responded, "Let Herakles be taken up to M o u n t
O e t a in all his w a r r i o r gear, and let a pyre be erected next to h i m ;
f o r the rest, Zeus will p r o v i d e . "

4 . N o w w h e n lolaiis had carried out these orders and h a d

withdrawn to a distance to see w h a t w o u l d take place, H e r a -
kles, having a b a n d o n e d hope f o r himself, ascended the pyre
and asked each o n e w h o c a m e up to him to put torch to the
p y r e . A n d when n o one h a d the courage to o b e y h i m P h i l o k t e -
tes alone w a s prevailed upon; and he, having received in
return f o r his c o m p l i a n c e the gift of the b o w a n d a r r o w s of
Herakles, lighted the p y r e . A n d immediately lightning also fell
f r o m the heavens a n d the pyre w a s w h o l l y c o n s u m e d .
5 . A f t e r this, w h e n the c o m p a n i o n s of lolaus c a m e
to gather up the b o n e s of Herakles a n d f o u n d not a single b o n e
a n y w h e r e , they assumed that, in a c c o r d a n c e with the words of
the oracle, he had passed f r o m a m o n g men into the c o m p a n y
of the gods.

A f t e r a few r e m a r k s on the establishment of the first cults

of Herakles ( 3 9 , 1), D i o d o r u s makes us p a r t a k e of the secrets of
Olympus:

2 . W e should add to w h a t has been said a b o u t Herakles,

that after his a p o t h e o s i s Zeus persuaded Hera to adopt him as
her son (uiorcou^CTacnJai) and henceforth f o r all time to cherish
him with a m o t h e r ' s l o v e , and this a d o p t i o n , they say, t o o k
place in the following m a n n e r . Hera lay upon a bed, and draw-
ing Herakles close to her b o d y then let him fall through her
garments to the ground, imitating in this w a y the actual
birth. . . .
3 . H e r a , the m y t h s relate, after she had adopted Herakles
in this fashion, j o i n e d him in marriage to H e b e , regarding
w h o m the poet speaks in the " N e k y i a " :

129
 Herakles

Herakles meets up with G e r a s ( O l d A g e ) , o n e of the m a n y guises in

which death dogged him throughout his heroic career ( c o m p a r e the
premature senex Starcatherus, in spite of his three lives).

130
 Herakles

I s a w the shade of Herakles, b u t f o r

Himself he takes delight of feasts a m o n g
T h e i m m o r t a l gods a n d f o r his wife he h a s
T h e shapely-ankled H e b e . '

4. HERAKLES, STARKADR, AND SISUPALA

T h e r e are immediately perceptible analogies with the end of

Starcatherus, a n d others with the e n d of Sisupala, with the pecu-
liarly G r e e k addition o f the important t h e m e of the p y r e a n d t h e
apotheosis. '^Hr--'. ? : / •
Like the S c a n d i n a v i a n h e r o , the G r e e k o n e determines to die,
seeks a killer, a n d finds h i m in the person of a n innocent w a r r i o r ,
w h o acts, t o b e sure, out of devotion, but w h o s e service h e r e -
w a r d s : Starcatherus returns t o Hatherus the b l o o d price he h a d
received f o r killing h i s father and offers a s well t o ensure his invul-
nerability, b y a m e a n s which the latter finds suspect a n d does n o t
use; Herakles hands o v e r t o Philoktetes a r r o w s t o w h o s e great a n d
f e a r s o m e p o w e r the future, a n d S o p h o c l e s , will testify: they alone
will m a k e possible v i c t o r y over the T r o j a n s , b u t first one of them
will poison its possessor a n d cause the G r e e k s t o a b a n d o n h i m ,
a l o n e , on an island.
A s with the Indian Sisupala, his death completely reconciles
the hero with the divinity w h o h a s been, b y his own fault in India,
in spite of him in G r e e c e , his e n e m y . India goes s o f a r as to h a v e the
very being of Sisupala absorbed into the divinity; the m o r e rational
Greece speaks o f a c o n t r a c t which transforms enmity into adoption
and filiation, with a scenario simulating n o t a fusion but a birth,
and which is f u t h e r m o r e completed immediately b y the wedding to
H e b e , daughter of the inimical goddess, in the sort o f union which
is at o n c e most intimate a n d least miraculous, n a m e l y marriage.
It seems impossible t o attribute to c h a n c e s o m a n y similarities
which appear on b o t h sides in the same order. But this affirmation
' [1982] On Deianeira and the marriages of Herakles in general, see my
Manages indo-europeens (Paris: Payot, 1979), pp. 5 9 - 6 3 .

131
 Herakles

m a r k s the limit of our grasp. T h e divinities w h o c o n f r o n t each

other o v e r Herakles under the fairly passive supervision of Z e u s ,
his protectress and his persecutor, intervene, as in the legend of the
shepherd Paris, strictly as p a t r o n s of the first t w o functions: the
Sovereign w h o withholds from Herakles the expected kingship and
subordinates him to a king, a n d the W a r r i o r e s s w h o in his person
foresees, loves a n d favors the courageous victor of labors and
fights. N o feature sets them in opposition in the guise of w h a t we
have termed, in c o n n e c t i o n with the other t w o heroes, the " d a r k
divinity" and the "light divinity."
T h u s we find ourselves faced with a paradoxical situation,
with S c a n d i n a v i a able to provide only a typologically middle term,
and not a geographically intermediate o n e . W e leave the reader
before this a p o r i a , which will perhaps lead other minds to a m o r e
subtle analysis of one or m o r e of the divine pairs, but which f o r the
present does not a l l o w comparison of the Greek a n d Indie pairs:

GREECE SCANDINAVIA INDIA

H e r a , 1st function ^Ist function

Odin^ 'li
V'dark divinity" Rudra, "dark
divinity"

A t h e n a , 2nd
function 2nd function

! "light divinity" Kf^na-Vi^riu, "light

divinity"

T h e comparativist can only entrust to Hellenists, those w h o

control the vast literary, archeological, and philosophical mass of
data on Herakles, the task not only of resolving this aporia but of
making use of the a c c o r d a n c e s it provides t h e m . It seems that
Herakles, well b e f o r e being torn in his will, courtesy of P r o d i k o s ,
between the attractions of vice and virtue, had f o u n d himself the

132
 Herakles

passive a n d impotent p a w n in another rivalry, this o n e f r o m the

beginning already in his Indo-European p r o t o t y p e . T h i s rivalry of
divine powers secured f o r h i m a happy end, but at first, f r o m deed
to misdeed a n d misdeed to deed, m a d e h i m r o a m throughout the
islands a n d peninsulas of the Mediterranean, while b y similar
fate his "lost b r o t h e r s " traversed other climes, one the vast lands
stretching f r o m the B o s p o r u s to the fjords o f N o r w a y , the other the
m o s a i c of the realms of India. Perhaps, though, we will b e allowed
a c o m m e n t , if n o t a suggestion. D o e s n o t the parable of P r o d i k o s
confer on the conflict which Herakles is embroiled in something o f
the v a l u e , entirely m o r a l a n d not at all functional, which opposes
the implicit Rudra a n d the explicit Kr^na-Vi^nu with respect to
Sisupala? Perhaps this parable, w h i c h M a r c e l Detienne has already
m a n a g e d to push b a c k in t i m e , ' continues an interpretation of the
pathetic son of A l k m e n e which is even older than the P y t h a g o r e a n
Herakles a n d the antecedents that c a n b e postulated f o r h i m .
Perhaps H e r a a n d A t h e n a , interpretationes Graecae of the Indo-
European divinities o f the pre-Heraclean s t o r y , have diluted the
m o r e complex type, closer to the Scandinavian version, of these
divinities, a n d the elements thus lost h a v e run a g r o u n d , o r flour-
ished, under the philosophical rubrics of G o o d a n d Evil, Vice a n d
Virtue.'

' "Heracles, heros pythagoricien," Revue de I'histoire des religions, 158 (1960),
2 1 - 5 3 , with extensive bibliography.
' [1982J Neither in this chapter, nor in The Destiny of the Warrior which it
summarizes, have I maintained that all of Herakles, with his complex character, his
adventures, his posthumous hero-god status, and his cults, fits into the framework
of the "three functional sins of the warrior"; Herakles is neither StarkaSr nor Sisu-
pala, and each of these heroes has his own personality. I wished only to make it
probable that this framework, although attested as such, in full, only in the sum-
maries of Diodorus and the Library, was ancient and Indo-European, and that the
Heraklean material, vast and open-ended, found it ready to be assimilated and in-
tegrated. Indeed I foresaw that there would be Greek specialists who would accuse
me of an imperialism which I do not practice. It was even a pleasant surprise for me
to have so long to wait (Aspects de la fonction guerriire, the first version of The
Destiny of the Warrior, dates from 1956). Finally, after 25 years, my wait is over. In
the article "H^racl^s" which Nicole Loraux compiled for the Dictionnaire des
mythologies (Flammarion, 1981), one reads (1: 497b) that "Herakles cannot be re-
duced either to the Dorian hero of Wilamowitz, or to the vegetation daimon dear to

133
 Herakles

J. Harrison, or to the Dumezilian warrior with his three sins." Where did I make this
distressing "reduction"? Although several passages in her article suggest that she
would be of some help, no one requires Loraux to associate herself with comparative
studies for which she clearly has no taste, but since she feels obliged to pronounce
sentence, should she not keep up with current developments? In 1981 she was still
familiar only with The Destiny of the Warrior ("the book as a whole sheds more
light on the figure of Herakles than the pages explicitly devoted to his three sins,
which, by attempting to prove too much, are not very convincing"), and she was
unaware of Mythe et epopie //—including the present work—with the confirma-
tions and mediations, as well as new problems, added to the dossier by the legend of
Sisupala.

134
 Summary
In the three w o r k s w e have c o m p a r e d , what might be called
the isothemes, or boundaries a m o n g congruences and divergences,
a r e not all drawn in the same w a y .

T h e largest bundle of isothemes joins on o n e side G r e e c e a n d

S c a n d i n a v i a , against India on the other.
1 . T h e divinities w h o oppose one a n o t h e r on the subject of
Herakles and S t a r k a S r are those of the first and second functions,
while K f j o a - V i j i j u a n d R u d r a - S i v a do not fit into the trifunctional
structure and are c o m p a r a b l e with O d i n and T h o r o n l y in other
aspects.
2 . T h e divinity with w h o m Herakles is reconciled after his
death is Hera, the wife of the sovereign Zeus; the o n e w h o lurks
behind Hatherus a n d w h o benefits (or could do so) f r o m Sisupala's
last gift is H o S r , v e r y close to O d i n , the god at once sovereign and
" d a r k " (in the sense w e h a v e given this term). O n the other hand
Sisupala, at the instant of his death, is reconciled with the " l i g h t "
divinity, IQ-5i:ia-Vi§iju, a n d merges with h i m .
3 . Herakles a n d S t a r k a S r are sympathetic heroes, the first
having n o " d e m o n i c " c o m p o n e n t , the second having lost along
with his monstrousness w h a t e v e r " g i g a n t i c " elements resulted f r o m
his birth. Sisupala, on the other h a n d , until the conversion that
takes place at the m o m e n t of his death, remains the being, at o n c e
demonic a n d Sivaistic, w h i c h he h a s been f r o m birth.
4 . Neither Herakles n o r S t a r k a S r has p r o v o k e d the divinity
w h o persecutes h i m : they suffer his e n m i t y , the cause of which

135
 Summary

antedates their birth. Sisupala on the c o n t r a r y never ceases until

the end to try the patience of K r j n a - V i j n u , w h o in fact does n o t
persecute h i m , but finally punishes h i m .
5 . H o w e v e r important the activity o f the divinities w h o are in
conflict o v e r Herakles and S t a r k a S r , still it is the hero himself w h o
is interesting, and o n c e past the beginnings the deities fade into the
b a c k g r o u n d , though they are felt to be present and watchful. It is
Krsna-Vijou on the c o n t r a r y w h o is the main c h a r a c t e r , Sisupala
being only an episodic figure, a sort of incorrigible Indian Loki, in
the only thing that is really important, the career of the incarnate god.
6. Consequently the reader comes out on the side of neither
O d i n n o r T h o r , but of StarkaSr; he is certainly not f o r Hera, rather
for A t h e n a , but a b o v e all f o r Herakles himself, a n d f o r A t h e n a o n -
ly to the extent that she helps him. In contrast, f r o m o n e e n d of the
story to the other w e are f o r a n d with Krsna-Vijnu.
7. In particular, the v o l u n t a r y deaths o f Herakles a n d Star-
kaSr are g o o d a n d serene, despite the ordeals which cause
t h e m — t h e decrepitude o f age a n d his remorse f r o m his third crime
for S t a r k a S r , and the insufferable burning which results f r o m his
third crime f o r Herakles. Sisupala's death is on the c o n t r a r y the
climax of a frenzied delirium.
8 . O n l y the stories of Herakles a n d S t a r k a S r introduce the
figure of the y o u n g m a n w h o m the hero entreats to liberate him
from life—a noble a c t , to b e sure, but o n e which is nonetheless
remunerated.
9 . In these t w o cases alone, the offer o r final gift is a m b i g u o u s :
Hatherus is suspicious, a n d we will never k n o w if he had reason to
be; the poisoned arrows given b y Herakles will w o u n d Philoktetes
incurably.'
1 0 . T h e general type o f Herakles and S t a r k a S r is the same:
redresser of wrongs, wandering h e r o , given to toil, n6voq.
1 1 . Consequently each is an educator: in S a x o , the episode of
Frotho's children restored to virtue b y Starcatherus has n o other

' [ 1 9 7 7 ] On the variants of Philoctetes' wound, see P. Vidal-Naquet,

"Philoct^te et I'^phebie," Annates E.S.C. 26 (1971), 625 (Sophocles) and 630 (Ser-
vius, ad Aen. 3.402).

136
 Summary

meanir\g, a n d Herakles is k n o w n t o h a v e a role in the upbringing,

as well as protection, o f young G r e e k s .
1 2 . S t a r k a S r has a reputation as a great skald, the f o r e m o s t of
the skalds; tradition attributes to h i m p o e m s on his o w n deeds a n d
the mythic battle o f B r a v a l l a , a n d , in the saga as in S a x o , the "gift
of p o e t r y " has been conferred on him b y O d i n . T h e association o f
the Muses and Herakles (noucriKdi; (ivf|p, Hercules Musarum; and al-
ready o n sixth-century vases 'HpOKA-fji; )a)9ap(p66<;, Herakles the
pupil o f Linos) is ancient, undoubtedly older than the iconographic
attestations and the Pythagorean speculations.

But other a c c o r d a n c e s bring together India a n d S c a n d i n a v i a in

contrast t o G r e e c e , a n d sometimes spectacularly s o . T h u s :
1. Sisupala and S t a r k a S r a r e b o r n with monstrosities which
are corrected, before their careers begin, b y one of the t w o divinities
concerned. Herakles has n o birth defects.
2 . India and S c a n d i n a v i a place i m p o r t a n c e on royal ideology,
stressing the attitudes o f the t w o heroes toward kingship a n d
providing emphatic statements o n the subject. T h e G r e e k legend
outlines the theme in the beginning (the opposition o f Eurystheus
and Herakles) but does not dwell on it.
3 . T h e faults o f Sisupala a n d S t a r k a S r are f o r e o r d a i n e d : i m -
posed o n the o n e at birth b y his demonic nature a n d ancestry, o n
the other b y the " l o t s " annunciated, according t o the v a r i a n t s , b y
either O d i n o r T h o r . Herakles c o m m i t s his three crimes freely.
4 . T a k i n g into account that the legend o f Jarasandha c o m -
pletes that o f Sisupala, India a n d S c a n d i n a v i a charge their heroes,
implying criminality, with o n e o r m o r e human sacrifices, the sacri-
fice o f o n e or m o r e kings offered o r promised t o the " d a r k " divinity
w h o demands t h e m . N o t h i n g like this occurs in the long career o f
Herakles.
5 . T h e m a n n e r o f death is the same f o r S t a r k a S r and Sisupala:
e a c h has himself beheaded, o n e with c o m p o s u r e and on his o w n r e -
quest, the other in a giddiness of aggression. Herakles mounts a pyre.
6. S t a r k a S r , like Sisupala, has t o d o with only t w o opposing
divinities ( * H 6 3 r being functionally indistinguishable f r o m O d i n ) ,
 Summary

with n o higher judge: T h i s is natural a n d u n a v o i d a b l e in S c a n -

dinavia, where O d i n is the highest, sovereign g o d ; in India o n e
might have expected, overarching the opposition of Rudra-Siva
and Vi§nu, some intervention, some "plan" of B r a h m a , but there is
n o n e . O n the c o n t r a r y , a b o v e Hera a n d A t h e n a w h o vie f o r Hera-
kles, there is Zeus, w h o s e paternal c o n c e r n , though frustrated,
nonetheless carries the d a y . T h i s complication of the pattern, m a d e
possible in Greece b y the fact that the functional divinities a r e here
goddesses (as in the parallel case of the legend of the shepherd
Paris), adds to the interest a n d p a t h o s of the life of Herakles.

Finally, other correspondences d r a w together India a n d G r e e c e ,

and separate them from S c a n d i n a v i a .
1. Formally, the three functional failings of Sisupala a n d
Herakles a r e close in kind. T h e third is one of sexual libido f o r each
of them, while f o r S t a r k a S r it is auri sacra fames. T h e second
failure consists of a n u n w o r t h y b e t r a y a l of a w a r r i o r b o t h in the
case of Herakles, w h o surprises a n d throws d o w n Iphitos instead of
fighting h i m , a n d in that of Sisupala, w h o twice profits f r o m a
king's absence to harass his t o w n o r his officers, whereas f o r Star-
k a S r it consists of a shameful flight on the battlefield. T h e first fail-
ing offends a g o d in the case of Herakles w h o resists the c o m m a n d
of Zeus, a n d a sacrificer in the case of Sisupala, w h o b y stealing the
horse planned as a n offering b y a king, strikes a b l o w at a n act of
worship, whereas in StarkaSr's case it results f r o m a n excess of
obligingness towards a g o d (it is true that on this point the legend
of J a r a s a n d h a , c o m p l e m e n t a r y to that of Sisupala, juxtaposes c o n -
versely S c a n d i n a v i a a n d India).
2 . In consequence of this first difference, Sisupala a n d H e r a -
kles (in the latter case even though A p h r o d i t e does n o t intervene as
such in a career dedicated to Hera a n d A t h e n a alone) h a v e n o enmi-
ty, quite the c o n t r a r y , against the third function in its sensuous
aspect, while S t a r k a S r , w h o s e entire destiny is fixed b y O d i n and
T h o r , c o n d e m n s this kind of weakness, a n d in S a x o m a k e s clear his
contempt a n d distaste f o r " F r o , " the Freyr of Uppsala, a n d his " e f -
f e m i n a t e " festivals.

138
 Summary

T h i s v a r y i n g distribution of similarities a n d differences, let us

n o t e in passing, is a powerful argument in f a v o r of the hypothesis
of a c o m m o n inheritance f r o m a n Indo-European original. T h e
fact that the Scandinavian f o r m of the tale is, in m a n y respects,
intermediate between the G r e e k a n d Indie f o r m s , should b e b o r n e
in m i n d .
C o m p a r i s o n of the three tales helps in defining the position of
the three heroes in the varying theological f r a m e w o r k s in which
they a r e included.
A s f o r S c a n d i n a v i a , it is n o w clear that I w a s m i s t a k e n , in
1 9 5 6 , in trying t o understand StarkaQr ( o r rather Starcatherus, as
the evidence w a s all drawn f r o m S a x o ) as a " h e r o of T h o r , " c o n -
trastable with the w e l l - k n o w n O d i n i c heroes, SigurSr, Helgi, a n d
the others. It is elsewhere, in the Gesta Danorum, in B o o k V I I , as
has b e e n well s h o w n b y Paul Herrmann,^ that a " h e r o of T h o r " is
to b e f o u n d , in the person of Haldanus B i a r g r a m m u s . S t a r k a S r
himself is a n O d i n i c h e r o , but of a rare type (in fact he is the only
example), linked to the dark aspects of this complex g o d . T h e nobil-
ity o f SigurSr is spotless, while O d i n f r o m the beginning m a k e s
S t a r k a S r his a c c o m p l i c e . H a n d s o m e , brilliant, y o u n g , well-loved,
winning his fame in his natural e n v i r o n m e n t , until his tragic death
SigurSr heaps up exploits, not " l a b o r s , " while S t a r k a S r , a b n o r -
mally laden with y e a r s a n d disfigured b y huge a n d irmumerable
w o u n d s , solitary a n d forbidding, wanders across the w o r l d , in pain
a n d suffering like Herakles. .t.i"- > i . . ,

Regarding G r e e c e , Herakles certainly continues t o appear, in

terms o f this study, a s w h a t he seems t o b e , a second-function h e r o ,
on the order of the Vedic Indra a n d even m o r e , n o d o u b t , on the o r -
der of the other Indo-Iranian p a t r o n of the w a r r i o r function, V a y u ,
and his epic transformation BhTma. But the S c a n d i n a v i a n parallel
compels us t o p a y m o r e attention to his touching relationship with
Zeus, a n d at the s a m e time to emphasize the originality of G r e e c e .
A s e c o n d d r a m a , in the w o r l d of the gods, duplicates the hero's
trying career. Zeus, his father, desires the happiness of a son with

^ Kommentar, pp. 479-481.

139
 Summary

w h o s e begetting he has taken especial pains, a n d yet causes at first,

if n o t his unhappiness, at least his Ttdvog, in a long series of
physical a n d m o r a l trials. Zeus, king of the gods, destines him to a
splendid kingship a m o n g m e n , but is forced to compel him into the
service o f a grotesque king. Zeus, master of the fates, is m a d e to
feel in this m o s t important case the limits of his m a s t e r y , the risk
that lies in setting his decrees into f o r m u l a e : the formula turns
against his intention, against his protege. A n d since every sequence
of tragedies must end with some less weighty d r a m a , the final a p o -
theosis of Herakles is also the e n d — f o r the time b e i n g — o f a n o t h e r
dispute, the eternal conjugal strife of inconstant Z e u s a n d his ill-
resigned spouse.
T h e Indian Sisupala, at least in the f o r m in w h i c h w e k n o w his
legend, is m o r e difficult to place. T h e overriding fact is his c o m -
plete c h a n g e o v e r f r o m g o o d to evil, o r rather the total elimination
of the g o o d elements which f o r m e d the essence o f his p r o t o t y p e
where the sins, the three sins, were only a glaring exception. B u t ,
thanks to the c o n s o l a t o r y philosophy of Vigou, the thinkers a n d
artists of India h a v e m a d e of this very debasement the stuff o f a
sublime " m y s t e r y " : the excess of hatred transformed at the m o m e n t
of death into the fullness o f love; an individual d e m o n i c life losing
itself, with no expiatory stage, in the ocean of the divine life.
A s f o r the three functional sins of Indra in the Markandeya-
Purdna, it n o w seems likely that they have to do with a secondary
realization, a n artificial extension to m y t h o l o g y , o f the epic theme
of the "three sins of the w a r r i o r , " detached f r o m the structure of
which it f o r m e d a part since Indo-European times, a n d whence the
tale of Sisupala is derived directly.

H a v e other Indo-European peoples besides the Indians, S c a n -

dinavians, a n d Greeks preserved, b y transforming it in other w a y s ,
the epic structure w e h a v e been considering? U p to the present,
after quite a few soundings, the a n s w e r remains negative. G i v e n the
c o n s e r v a t i s m of the R o m a n s a n d the mythical origin of the a c -
c o u n t s f r o m which they compiled their oldest h i s t o r y , o n e might

140
 Summary

expect to find a m o n g them a variant attached to the third king,

Tullus Hostihus, w h o characteristically represents the second func-
tion, rei militaris institutor, as his predecessors R o m u l u s and N u m a
do the first function, o n e founding his w h o l e career o n the divine
signa. the other establishing sacra a n d leges. But n o : Tullus t o be
sure is in trouble with Jupiter, w h o ends b y blasting h i m , a n d he
carries m a n y a v i c t o r y , but M a r s does n o t intervene in his life. It is
all the gods, collectively, w h o m he scorns a n d neglects, and M a r s
does n o t contend with Jupiter f o r h i m , n o r f a v o r h i m against
Jupiter. A s f o r the numerous great warriors of the Irish legends,
n o n e is the subject of a tale w h i c h , nearly o r r e m o t e l y , recalls those
which w e h a v e been studying.^

In the story of S t a r k a S r - S t a r c a t h e r u s and in that of Sisupala,

as w e have stressed, the a m b i g u o u s relationship of the hero and
r o y a l t y is o b v i o u s , giving rise n o t only to deeds, but to theoretical
discourses on the m a j e s t y o f kings. T h i s similarity between the G e r -
manics a n d the Indians is n o t e w o r t h y . A d d e d to it is a n o t h e r , m e n -
tioned in the first v o l u m e of Mythe et epopee, in c o n n e c t i o n with
the g o d Heimdallr a n d Bhi§ma, the heroic transposition in the
Mahabharata'^ o f the sky-god D y a u h -
Heimdallr, like BhT?ma, is a " f r a m i n g f i g u r e , " in the sense that
he is the "first" a n d " l a s t " in time: in mythical time in the case of
Heimdallr, w h o is b o r n b e f o r e a n d dies after all the gods; in "histor-
ical" time in that of Bhl§ma, w h o belongs to a n earlier generation

^ [1982] This statement has been brilliantly contradicted by David J. Cohen,

Celtica 12 (1977), 112-124. In the Buile Suibhne, the life of the errant warrior
Suibhne Geilt is punctuated by two actual failings and one false accusation which
leads to his death: he offends St. Ronan; he flees from the battlefield of Magh Rath;
accused of adultery, he dies a violent death in the house of St. Moling, but not
before receiving the last rites from the saint's hands.
The gathering of attestations of this theme goes on. Daniel Dubuisson has
found an inportant one in the structure of the second Indian epic: see "Trois theses
sur le Ramayana," Annales E.S.C. 34 (1979), 464-489 ("the three failings," pp.
466-474; "from three failings to three functions," pp. 474-477). Other versions, in
other Indo-European societies, are presently being analyzed.
* ME I, pp. 182-190.

m
 Summary

than the protagonists of the Mahabharata, but w h o thanks to a

special privilege lives through as m a n y generations a s he wishes
a n d dies after them in the great transposed eschatological b a t t l e — a t
least after those of them (all the " g o o d " ones save the five P a n d a -
v a s , a n d all the " e v i l " ones) w h o must die there. Both o f them, t o o ,
maintain the same kind of relationship with r o y a l t y . BhT^ma, b y his
right of seniority, ought to b e king: he renounces this right a n d
m a k e s himself the guardian o f the dynasty, marrying off the
princes and assuring the c o m i n g of each generation into the w o r l d ,
then the education of the king a n d his b r o t h e r s . Heimdallr, n o t -
withstanding his temporal priority, is not the king of the gods,
which title belongs to O d i n . B u t , in h u m a n f o r m and under the
n a m e of Rigr ("king," not in G e r m a n i c , but in Irish), he ensures
successively through three generations the birth of the ancestors o f
the three social Estates (slaves, peasants, n o b l e warriors), a n d f r o m
the children of the latter—ancestors of the jarlar—he selects a b o y
to w h o m he gives individual tutoring, passes o n particularly a m a g -
ical knowledge, a n d confers the n a m e of Kon-ungr ("king" in O l d
Icelandic, but not in Irish), a n d w h o b e c o m e s indeed the prototype
of kings.
W e see that in these t w o cases, in the tales of the "first" hero
a n d the "second-function h e r o , " the Scandinavians a n d the Indians
bring in royalty in order to describe its relation to what, being
closest to it, could but does n o t enter into conflict with it: Heim-
dallr a n d BhT§ma avail themselves of their priority only to
"prepare" kings; Starcatherus a n d Sisupala theorize about a n d extol
royal p o w e r , a n d , save f o r the sins imposed o n them b y fate o r
their nature, respect a n d defend it a m o n g , before, a n d if need b e
against kings. In other w o r d s , in b o t h cases it is lateral aspects of
kingship which are considered: not its w o r k i n g s , but its c o n n e c -
tions either with what precedes it m y t h i c a l l y — H e a v e n before the
sovereign gods, Janus before Jupiter, e t c . — o r with what actually
follows it in the social o r d e r — o r , a s T a c i t u s says, the dux next to
the rex.

142
 Summary

Let us a v o i d premature conclusions: the c o m p a r a t i v e exploita-

tion of legends h a s only begun. B u t let us note that the I n d o - G e r -
m a n i c isothemes seem t o m a r k off a n o t h e r domain than that a c -
c o m p a n y i n g the Indo-Celto-Italic isolexeme of the n a m e of the king
(Skt. rdj-, Celt, rig-, L a t . reg-): Vi^hether in institutions o r in other
kinds of epic tales ( o n e o f which is the subject o f a separate treat-
m e n t ) ' it is the w o r k i n g s , the c h a n c e s , a n d the internal o r external
risks of kingship which m a k e f o r c o m p a r i s o n a m o n g the "*reg-
societies."
In a n y case it is certainly n o t b y c h a n c e that, on the o n e h a n d ,
the didactic section of the tale of S t a r k a S r (assuredly o l d , a n d c o n -
firmed b y Beowulf), that is, the scene where S t a r c a t h e r u s b y h i s e x -
h o r t a t i o n s transforms the m o c k king Ingellus into a real king, h a s
acquired a length which seems at first inordinate; n o r that, o n the
other h a n d , the story of Sisupala, with its c o m p l e m e n t , the story of
J a r a s a n d h a , h a s been used b y the a u t h o r s of the Mahabharata on
the o c c a s i o n of the rajasuya, o r royal c o n s e c r a t i o n , of Y u d h i j f h i r a ,
these t w o heroes constituting the t w o obstacles to this c o n s e c r a -
tion, o n e a s rival, the other a s o b j e c t o r . P e r h a p s it is even thanks to
its c o n n e c t i o n with royal rituals that this material in b o t h instances
has been preserved since prehistory.

O u r final c o m m e n t will b e to emphasize that a n e w e x a m p l e of

" I n d o - E u r o p e a n literature," specifically Indo-European epic litera-
ture, h a s c o m e t o be added to a n already well-stocked file: it is i m -
possible to believe that t h e three tales w e h a v e considered were
c o m p o s e d independently, starting simply f r o m the s a m e preserved
Indo-European " i d e o l o g y , " a n d that their continued similarity is
the result of s e c o n d a r y c o n v e r g e n c e .
It is a b o v e all the S c a n d i n a v i a n tradition which h a s m a d e this
result possible, reminding us that this same tradition, c o m p a r e d
with those of several other Indo-European peoples, a n d especially

= The Destiny of a King (1973).

143
 Summary

the Indie b r a n e h , has enabled us to glimpse a n u m b e r of aneient

epie-mythieal tales. W e n o w k n o w of a " w o r l d d r a m a " (the death
of Baldr a n d R a g n a r o k and the central plot o f the Mahabharata),^
as well as the " h i s t o r y " o f the f o r m a t i o n of a w h o l e soeiety b y the
w a r a n d subsequent reeonciliation o f the representatives of the first
two functions with those of the third ( y ^ s i r and V a n i r ; P r o t o -
R o m a n s and Sabines; devas and A s v i n s ) / with the latter extending
to the creation and dismemberment of the monster Drunkenness
(Kvasir, M a d a ) . ' A n d a m o n g other m o r e properly epic stories,
there is the o n e whose existence Stig W i k a n d e r established b y j u x -
taposing the antecedents, circumstances, a n d episodes of the S c a n -
dinavian battle of Bravellir (Bravalla) with a series of precise a n d
important features in the Indie battle of K u r u k j e t r a , features o f
which the central plot o f the M a h a b h a r a t a gives n o a c c o u n t . '

* ME I, pp. 208-240.
''Archaic Romarj Religion (1970), pp. 6 6 - 7 3 ; ME I, pp. 288-290.
"Loki (Paris, 1948), pp. 97-106 (German edition [1959], pp. 67-74).
' See "Frin Brivalla till Kurukshetra," Arkiv for Nordisk Filologi 74 (1960),
183-193; cf. ME I, pp. 255-257.

144
 Appendix

Excerpts from the

"Mythology of the Hindus"
by the Canoness de Polier
In the interest o f rescuing f r o m oblivion the " M y t h o l o g y o f the
H i n d u s , " ' I reproduce the pages containing the description of the
deaths of Jarasandha^ a n d of Sisupala.' N o doubt the reader will
prefer to see f o r himself the changes the legends have undergone in
this first presentation of the Mahabharata in a Western language.

1. JARASANDHA

[Yudhijthira has just informed Kr?na that h e intends t o cele-

b r a t e a rajasuya a n d that he needs his help to fulfil the difficult
conditions o f this undertaking.]
" W h a t then," asked M r . de Polier, "is this R a i s o o - y u c [ = raja-
suya]!"
" T h i s c e r e m o n y , " answered the teacher [ R a m t c h u n d , Poller's
instructor], "also called the festival of the R a j a h s , could b e cele-
brated o n l y b y a ruler w h o h a d vanquished and subdued all the

' A b o v e , p. 81, n. 4. 'ViU

^ I, 603-614; cf. above, pp. 97-107.
' I, 614-619; cf. above, chap. 11.

145
 Appendix

o t h e r sovereigns of the w o r l d . It was necessary for all the R a j a h s of

the universe, willingly or by f o r c e , to be gathered together at the
residence of the one w h o held the R a i s o o - y u c . A n d this c e r e m o n y
had so m a n y requirements that Judister [Yudhi?thira], although he
had been reestablished in p o w e r , could never h a v e brought it to
pass without the aid of Chrisnen [Kr§nal- But although the son
of Basdaio [ V a s u d e v a ] , b y reading these letters of his proteges,
already k n e w what he had to d o , he still wished to appear to take
counsel. T h u s , calling u p o n O u d h o [ U d d h a v a ] , he asked him f o r
his advice. 'Since the P a n d o s [ P a n d a v a s ] , ' he told h i m , 'have begun
the preparations f o r the R a i s o o - y u c o n l y in the belief that I would
help them, and since it is time f o r the R a j a h s held in chains, w h o
have claimed m y protection, to be delivered, do y o u think, O u d h o ,
that by yielding to the wish of m y cousins these two objects might
be achieved?'
O u d h o , animated b y a prophetic spirit, knew the intentions
of the head of the Yadus [ Y a d a v a s ] . T h u s he answered, ' T h e dif-
ficulties to be encountered in the celebration of the R a i s o o - y u c can-
not have escaped the insight of s o wise a prince as Judister; he has
certainly realized that b y his forces alone he could not subdue the
R a j a h s of the four quarters of the universe. Nevertheless he is
preparing his c e r e m o n y in the firm belief that with y o u r powerful
aid his undertaking will have a happy o u t c o m e . T h e r e f o r e , O
Chrisnen, I advise you to accede to his invitation, the more so
because, as the time has c o m e to rescue the captives w h o groan
under the chains of Jerashind [Jarasandha], the yuc [yajna
'sacrifice'] a n n o u n c e d by Judister will be the occasion of his punish-
ment because, t o o proud to accept the invitation of the head of the
P a n d o s , it will be necessary to f o r c e him into it, and w h a t e v e r
trust he has hitherto placed in his strength, which surpasses that of
ten thousand elephants, and in his invulnerability, I foresee never-
theless that Bhim [ B h I m a ] , the second of the P a n d o s , his equal in
every respect, supported b y y o u , will inevitably defeat him, and
thus the t w o objectives which concern y o u will be a c h i e v e d . ' "

146
 Appendix

" B u t w h y , " asked M r . de Polier, " h a d Chrisnen spared Jera-

shind until then? C o u l d he not have taken his life as he had so m a n y
others?"
" O f course he c o u l d , " answered the teacher, " b u t Chrisnen, as
a divine being, k n e w the decrees of fate; he k n e w the date set f o r
Jerashind's death, and that he could be killed only by B h i m and at a
time w h e n h e , Chrisnen, w a s present; this is w h y n o t o n l y did he
not kill him himself, but he even prevented Bulhader [ B a l a d e v a , o r
B a l a r a m a , Kfsija's b r o t h e r ] f r o m killing h i m . A n d O u d h o , inspired
as he w a s , w h o also k n e w these facts, could predict the o u t c o m e
with c e r t a i n t y . B e that as it m a y , all the Y a d u s applauded the ad-
vice that he gave to Basdaio's son. A n d so the latter ordered prepa-
rations to be m a d e immediately, a n d on the following day m a d e his
departure with great p o m p and magnificence, a c c o m p a n i e d b y the
noblest chiefs of his tribe a n d a large corps of troops, and followed
b y a multitude of elephants a n d c a m e l s carrying the baggage, and
a n u m b e r of chariots laden with thrones, crowns and all sorts of
a r m s . Messengers preceded Chrisnen, charged with a n n o u n c i n g to
the R a j a h s held captive b y Jerashind that he w a s c o m i n g to their
aid. Crossing in this w a y the m o d e r n kingdom of Soorethe
[ S u r a ? t r a ] , he c a m e u p o n the borders of M e e v a t [ M e e r a t h ? ] , where
he f o u n d the R a j a h Judister advancing to meet h i m , a c c o m p a n i e d
b y M u n i s , B r a h m i n s , and choirs of instrumental a n d vocal music,
w h o preceded a large a n d brilliant procession. A l t h o u g h the son of
Basdaio, being y o u n g e r than Judister, a l w a y s insisted on tendering
him the respect due his age, this R a j a h hastened to anticipate h i m ,
a n d falling d o w n at his feet, he sprinkled his hands with the tears of
j o y that he w a s m a d e to shed b y the f a v o r that the A v a t a r [Kf?^ia,
the incarnation of Vi§nu] had granted h i m . Chrisnen raised h i m
^nd e m b r a c e d h i m , a n d gave a most kindly w e l c o m e to his four
other cousins, a n d then, finishing with the amenities w h i c h he
customarily s h o w e d to the Rishis, M u n i s and B r a h m i n s , he went on
with them to Aindraprest [Indraprastha] or Delhi, the capital of
Judister's c o u n t r y . . . .

147
 Appendix

A few days after Chrisnen's arrival, the head of the P a n d o s

c o n v e n e d an assembly of the four castes, attended b y the most
celebrated B r a h m i n s . Addressing himself to Chrisnen, w h o w a s
presiding, he told him 'that b y his arrival in Aindraprest, he felt
himself already raised to the heavens and c a p a b l e of a n y undertak-
ing; that in daring to c o n c e i v e the grand design of celebrating the
R a i s o o - y u c , he h a d relied on the constant affection which the son
of Basdaio had always deigned to b e s t o w u p o n the P a n d o s ; that,
although he k n e w that in the eyes of the c r e a t o r of the universe all
men were equal in w o r t h , yet he believed that those w h o , feeling
the need which they had for divine assistance, requested it with
faith and humility, w o u l d h a v e the g o o d fortune of o b t a i n i n g it.'
Judister's words seemed to please the A v a t a r . He assured him that
his trust w o u l d not be disappointed and that the c r e a t o r of the
universe w o u l d accord him his protection. 'I see,' he added, 'that
y o u have already prepared the things necessary f o r the sacrifice,
but at present it is necessary to see about assembling here the
m o n a r c h s and warriors of the four corners of the w o r l d , and it is
for y o u r four brothers, w h o s e v a l o r sets them a b o v e all the D e i o t a s
[devatds, divinities], to bring them to Aindraprest. T h e r e f o r e let
Bhim go to the west, A r j o o n [Arjuna] to the n o r t h , Schecdaio
[ S a h a d e v a ] to the south, and N a k u l [Nakula] to the east. A s for
y o u , Judister, awaiting their return, put all in readiness t o begin
your y u c '
T h e victories of the four P a n d o s being as rapid as w a s their
travel, they s o o n returned, followed b y all the rulers w h o m they
h a d defeated, and bringing with them an e n o r m o u s b o o t y and
w e a l t h . But Jerashind had w i t h s t o o d them, he alone could not be
subdued. Judister, dismayed and seeing in this the ruination of his
w h o l e plan, made k n o w n to Chrisnen all the anguish which the
thought produced in h i m . O u d h o , w h o was present at the c o n v e r -
sation of the t w o cousins, began to speak. 'I h a v e a l w a y s been of
the opinion,' said he, 'that Jerashind c a n n o t b e c o n q u e r e d as o t h e r
R a j a h s . T o draw him into a single c o m b a t o n e must use strategy.
T h u s , let Chrisnen, Bhim and A r j o o n call upon him in the guise

148
 Appendix

of Z e n n a d a r s [astrologers]. H e fias n o equal in generosity: o p e n -

handedness, he says, is the p r i m a r y duty of a ruler; all perishes in
this w o r l d , but the n a m e of a free-spending m a n will live f o r e v e r . ' "
" H e could afford to b e , " interrupted M r . de Polier, "since he
had expropriated the wealth of 2 0 , 8 0 0 R a j a s . "
" A l s o , " the teacher went o n , " O u d h o assured them that this
renown l a y so close t o his heart that, b y introducir\g themselves to
him as p o o r B r a h m i n s , they would be sure not only o f being a d -
mitted, but o f obtaining everything they might a s k of h i m .
Chrisnen approved of O u d h o ' s advice, and the three cousins,
in the dress of Z e n n a d a r s , b e t o o k themselves to M o g a h [ M a g a d h a ] .
T h e y were introduced to the R a j a h , w h o knew as s o o n as he s a w
t h e m , b y their speech and b y the distinguishing m a r k s of Kattris
[k^atriyas], that these three strangers were n o B r a h m i n s . Despite
this he w e l c o m e d them as such, and said to them, ' O B r a h m i n s ,
w h a t d o y o u wish o f m e ? W h a t e v e r y o u ask of m e , f r o m the smal-
lest gift t o that of a k i n g d o m , y o u shall not leave here w i t h o u t o b -
taining it, a n d though I a m c o n v i n c e d that y o u are n o Z e n n a d a r s ,
this thought will have n o more influence upon m e than the argu-
ments o f S o u c k e r [Sukra] upon B a l y [ B a l i ] . S o speak fearlessly!'
Chrisnen then stepped f o r w a r d a n d requested a s a m g r a m [sarfi-
grdma], o r single c o m b a t , adding 'Since y o u k n o w that w e a r e not
B r a h m i n s , learn t o o that here is B h i m , the second o f the P a n d o s ,
A r j o o n his b r o t h e r , a n d I their cousin.' A t these w o r d s Jerashind
turned t o his courtiers and smiled c o n t e m p t u o u s l y , exclaiming, 'I
admire the insolence of this churl, w h o m I have often put to flight,
and w h o , t o o h a p p y to save his life, still dares t o p r o v o k e m e into
a n o t h e r b a t t l e . V e r y well, I accept, I grant a s a m g r a m . Y o u have
escaped m y hand only b y abandoning M a t h r a [the town o f M a -
thura], a n d saving yourself in the sea, but where will y o u hide now?
A n d y e t , ' he added, 'it is t o o l o a t h s o m e f o r m e t o d o battle with a
mortal w h o m I h a v e already defeated; A r j o o n is t o o y o u n g and
delicate, n o doubt he does not pretend t o the h o n o r o f fighting with
me; B h i m , w h o is stronger, is the o n l y o n e o f y o u w o r t h y of at-
tempting it, if he h a s the courage. Let h i m b e given other clothing.

149
 Appendix

and c h o o s e arms which he c a n u s e . ' Bhim chose a c l u b , Jerashind

had o n e brought t o h i m , a n d the t w o c h a m p i o n s , followed b y
Chrisnen a n d A r j o o n , went t o the battleground, surrounded b y
the R a j a h ' s troops and a multitude o f o n l o o k e r s .
Before beginning, Jerashind addressed to himself the
N e m e s k a r [namaskdra], o r reverence, that is due G o d , then he
kissed his o w n h a n d . T h e r e u p o n he a d v a n c e d against B h i m , and
the event began, their clubs striking each other with such violence
that the vault of heaven reverberated with the s o u n d they m a d e .
T h e clubs were soon b r o k e n to splinters, a n d they h a d t o t a k e
recourse t o spears, to swords, a n d to axes. W i t h all these a r m s
reduced to pieces, the t w o c o m b a t a n t s resorted to fisticuffs, again
with such an even skill that o n e might have thought they h a d h a d
the same master in the art o f fighting. A f t e r battling in this w a y f o r
the entire d a y without the least advantage o n either side, in the
evening the three cousins and Jerashind ate together a n d slept under
the s a m e r o o f . T w e n t y - s e v e n days h a d already passed in this m a n -
ner, when B h i m gave a signal t o Chrisnen that h e believed he w a s
exposed t o t o o m u c h danger, f o r this fight w a s beginning to exceed
his strength a n d his ribs were b r o k e n a n d bruised f r o m the blows he
was receiving, while he, Chrisnen, a mere s p e c t a t o r , h a d not taken
the least hurt. He added that a s f o r himself, were it n o t f o r the
s h a m e of admitting he w a s b e a t e n , he w o u l d gladly give up this
battle. Arjoon, understanding the silent words o f his b r o t h e r ,
b e c a m e pale with fright, but Chrisnen, replying t o B h i m b y signs
even m o r e expressive than his o w n , reproached h i m f o r his
discouragement a n d lack of faith just when success w a s in his
grasp. T h e n , getting up a n d plucking a blade o f grass, h e t o o k it b y
the stem a n d tore it f r o m b o t t o m t o t o p , showing B h i m h o w on the
next d a y he should split the b o d y o f his a d v e r s a r y . Bhim,
understanding his divine p r o t e c t o r , suddenly felt his strength
renewed. Filled with a n e w vigor, on beginning the battle the next
d a y , he threw Jerashind t o the ground, a n d b e f o r e he could
r e c o v e r , t o o k o n e of his legs in each hand a n d split his b o d y to the
top of his head, a s Chrisnen h a d torn the b l a d e of g r a s s . "

150
 Appendix

" B u t h o w w a s it that Jerashind, until then s o equal in strength,

all of a sudden b e c a m e so inferior?" asked M r . de P o l i e r .
" A c c o r d i n g to the explanations of the B r a h m i n s , " replied the
teacher, "Jerashind, k n o w i n g his h o r o s c o p e , k n e w the o n l y w a y in
which he c o u l d b e slain. He understood that Chrisnen's sign had
indicated it to B h i m . T h i s knowledge m a d e his b l o o d freeze in his
veins, weakening him to the point of a m a n in his last m o m e n t s .
T h u s all the credit for his defeat rests solely with the divine A v a t a r .
But as it w a s Bhim w h o w a s the instrument which he used, in the
eyes of m o r t a l s it w a s he w h o received the h o n o r of the v i c t o r y .
Chrisnen and A r j o o n applauded, the D e i o t a s threw flowers at h i m ,
while the people and the a r m y , astounded at the death of their
sovereign w h o m they had believed invincible, stood motionless.
T h e son of B a s d a i o lost n o time in crowning Jerashind's son king,
and ordered him to release his father's captives. T h e n , a c c o m -
panied b y the new R a j a h of M o g a h and this brilliant e n t o u r a g e , he
t o o k o n c e again the r o a d to Aindraprest where all the B r a h m i n s
a n d the R a j a h s of the world were gathered. T h e lords of the C o r o s
[Kurus, K a u r a v a s ] , Dirtratch [ D h r t a r a s f r a ] , Biskum [BhT?ma], a n d
Durdjohn [Duryodhana] himself had come there; Birmah,
M h a d a i o [ B r a h m a , M a h a d e v a or S i v a ] , all the celestial hierarchies
with their heads, the birds and animals of every species were
gathered there. For save f o r the t w o R a i s o o - y u c celebrated b y King
Ainder [ I n d r a ] , the lord of h e a v e n , a n d b y King Baren [ V a r u n a ] ,
the lord of the seas, n o one had ever seen the like of that w h i c h ;
Judister w a s a b o u t to celebrate. All m a n k i n d w a s in astonishment /i^;,
and a d m i r a t i o n at the profusion of gold a n d riches used in the or-
n a m e n t s , the vessels and the raiments f o r the sacrifice, but a few
sages, seeing Chrisnen presiding over this festival, understood the
reason w h y it surpassed those which had been seen b e f o r e . "

V 2. SISUPXLA J '

" W i t h everything ready, and the various offices to b e fulfilled : ii,-.

during the ceremonies assigned, the rite began with a sacrifice;

151
 Appendix

Judister, dressed in a splendid tunic, placiAg a golden c o r d in the

hands of the Z e n n a d a r s , holding in his o w n the Cusa [kusa] o r
sacred grass, advances t o w a r d the altar, offers the o b l a t i o n , a n d
while p r o n o u n c i n g the n a m e of N a r r e y e [ N a r a y a n a ] , which m e a n s
spirit o r divine breath, his glances turn t o w a r d Chrisnen, with the
smile expressing the gratitude w h i c h , attributing all the success of
his undertaking to the presence of his divine p r o t e c t o r , also regards
him as the p r i m a r y object of his love and his offering; with this
preliminary act accomplished, before c o m m e n c i n g the individual
pujas [non-sanguinary offerings], Judister addresses the heads of
his family, asking them to decide the important question of w h o , in
this august c e r e m o n y , should h a v e the h o n o r of the first of these
sacrifices? N o one answers, then S c h e c d a i o , the fourth of the P a n -
dos, arises a n d observes in a modest and respectful t o n e that in a s k -
ing this question his elder b r o t h e r already k n o w s its answer, f o r , h e
goes o n , 'there can be n o doubt in this respect, and since Chrisnen is
in this assembly, the first puja should be addressed to h i m , as the
V e d s [Vedas] say expressly that an o b l a t i o n presented to him has
the s a m e virtue as a sacrifice offered to all the D e i o t a s , just as in
watering the root of a tree o n e gives life to the smallest of its
leaves.' Chrisnen, the speaker continued, 'is the c r e a t o r , the
preserver, the destroyer of the universe, in his oneness he is all, the
earth and all the creatures are the b o d y of which he alone is the soul
and the spirit. A s f o r m e , ' S c h e c d a i o added, 'I shall a l w a y s worship
only him.' Full of his subject, he was a b o u t t o continue his
discourse, but Chrisnen restrained h i m . Nevertheless, the m a j o r i t y
of the assembly applauded w h a t he had just said, and Judister,
satisfied of the decision which he had wished f o r , washed the feet of
Chrisnen a n d poured this s a m e water o v e r his h e a d and his eyes,
after w h i c h , setting b e f o r e him the splendid raiments, gems,
precious chains and all the paraphernalia of the p u j a , he set a b o u t
the beginning of it b y prostrating himself at the feet of his divine
p r o t e c t o r . But while the lord of the P a n d o s w a s b u s y with these
holy offices, the Deiotas intoned the h y m n s to B h a g a v a t , and the
pious men said their prayers, a loud m u r m u r arose in the a s e m b l y ,
several prideful R a j a h s grumbling at the preeminence accorded to

152
 Appendix

the son of Basdaio. More incensed than the rest, Souspal

[Sisupala], R a j a h of Chanderi, s t o o d out because of his anger. He
had never forgotten the a b d u c t i o n of R o u k m a n i [RukmiijI] and his
shameful defeat, and his only wish w a s to avenge himself. T h e
resentment which he h a r b o r e d m a d e this new triumph of his rival
insufferable to h i m . Rising f r o m his place, with rage in his heart
and fury in his eyes, he interrupted the celebration of the p u j a :
' H o w , ' he cried out a r r o g a n t l y , 'how c a n the B r a h m i n s tolerate such
abuse? W h a t then are the titles, the station, the nobility of Chrisnen
that he merits this preeminence in such an august assembly, filled
with t h e noblest individuals, the m o s t learned Z e n n a d a r s , the
lowest of w h o m is m o r e qualified than he? D o y o u not k n o w , ' he
continued, 'that the Y a d u s are accursed, that they shall never w e a r
the diadem, that n o n o b l e r a n k can be accorded to that c o n t e m p t -
ible creature w h o deserted M a t h r a to seek a refuge in the middle of
the sea, to establish there a den of bandits scattered a n d fled f r o m
all corners of the earth, at w h o s e head he claims to launch a new
religion?'
T h e audacity with which Souspal disturbed the majestic cere-
m o n y , and the outrageous claims he showered u p o n Chrisnen,
began to agitate the spectators. But Basdaio's son stilled them b y
his signals and prevented them f r o m interrupting his e n e m y . Yet his
insolence grew to the point where several members of the assembly,
unable to suffer it any longer and finding it indecent, u n w o r t h y of
themselves, and even criminal to listen to his b l a s p h e m y , left the
enclosure where he w a s speaking, while B h i m and his brothers
l o o k e d for their w e a p o n s in order to punish Souspal, w h o f o r his
part w a s getting ready to fight. T h u s everything f o r e b o d e d a scene
of confusion a n d h o r r o r w h i c h b y interrupting the sacrifice w o u l d
h a v e prevented the celebration of the R a i s o o - y u c itself. But Chris-
nen, n o w intervening m o r e directly, f o r b a d e the P a n d o s all physi-
cal recourse, ordering them to prevent all that might precipitate
it, and addressing Souspal, told h i m that, in view of the c i r c u m -
stances, he w o u l d tolerate f r o m h i m o n e hundred m o r e insults,
with the warning that when this n u m b e r was exhausted he would
punish h i m himself. T h i s m a g n a n i m i t y of Basdaio's son, far f r o m
 Appendix

stopping the prideful R a j a h , incited him all the m o r e , and he

quickly exceeded the prescribed limit. T h e n Chrisnen, giving free
reign to his righteousness, threw at him his ring Sudarsun [Sudar-
sana, the discus of Vignu], w h i c h at one s t r o k e cut off his head,
f r o m which issued a f l a m e w h i c h seemed f o r a few m o m e n t s to
hover in the air, after which it entered at last into the m o u t h of the
A v a t a r , while the servants and troups of Souspal fled in the
greatest disorder."
" T e l l m e then, teacher, w h a t w a s this f l a m e ? " asked M r . de
Polier.
"It w a s , " answered the teacher, " t h e soul of the R a j a h . D y i n g
directly at the h a n d of the A v a t a r , it received his grace and w a s
freed f r o m reincarnations to return to B a i k u n t [ V a i k u p f h a , Vi?nu's
paradise] and take the place it h a d held as the doorkeeper of
Vi?iju."
" T h e n S o u s p a l , " replied M r . de Polier, " w a s one of the m a n i -
festations of those doorkeepers condemned b y the curse of the
Rishis to be reincarnated three times on e a r t h ? "
"Precisely,"said the teacher. " W e h a v e seen them reincarnated
in the bodies of Herncashup [Hiranyakasipu] a n d H e m a c h u s [Hir-
aiiiyak^a], t w o Daints [daityas, demons] w h o were b r o t h e r s , w h o
occasioned t w o a v a t a r s o r incarnations of V i j i j u , o n e as a wild
b o a r and the other as a m a n - l i o n . T h e i r second incarnation w a s
in the bodies of R a v e n [ R a v a n a ] and K u n t c h b e c k a r e n [ K u m b h a -
k a r n a ] ; that necessitated the incarnation of R a m t c h u n d [ R a m a ] .
A n d finally, in the third, they fought against the incarnation of
Vi?riu [as Kf§i:ia] and were freed b y him f r o m the bodies of Souspal
and his brother D e n t h e b e k , in w h i c h they finished the term of their
transmigrations."

154