Guy G.


Georges Dumezil, Ancient German Myths,
and Modern Demons
The article deals with Arnaldo Momigliano '.I' accusation, in the early 1980's, that Georges Dumezil had harbored pro-Nazi sympathies in the 1930's, and with the ensuing polemics. It is mainly between French and Italian scholars that this polemics took place, throughout the 80 '.I' and beyond. With few exceptions, North American and Ge rman scholars seem to have taken little interest in the discussion. It involves, however, problems of the highest importance for the epistemology of the contemporary history of religion and the study of mythology, and their close, although often hidden, relationships with rightist ideologies. The purpose of the article was not to unveil new facts, but rather to present what is known as succintly and fairly as possible, in order to launch a broader discussion ofsome the issues at stake among historians of religion. The main findings do not corroborate Momigliano '.I' (and Carlo Ginzburg '.1') accusations. Various troubling elements in Dumeril's attitudes and sympathies are better understood in the context of their time. It is perhaps significant that -Momigliano, who repeatedly said he knew from experience what a totalitarian regime meant, never refered to his own membership in the Fascist party.

More than tell years afterhis death, in 1986, Georges Dumezil remains a puzzling figure. His name is associated with fields of study as broad and diverse as Caucasian languages on the one hand, and religion and mythology as reflected in Sanskrit, Roman or Norse literatures on the other. He was an immensely prolific writer, whose works remain almost always highly technical, and whose theory on the »three functions« as expressed in various literatures written in Indo-European languages has received huge attention in wide milieus, although mainly in the French speaking world. It has been applied to various later societies, in particular to the western medieval, feudal world.' A recent book even argues for its applicability to


For a good synthetic presentation o( Dumezil' s .oeuvre, see D. Dubuisson, Mythologies du siecle (Dumeril. Levi-Strauss, Eliade}, Lille 1993. Cf. the review of Ph. Borgeaud in Revue d' Histoire des Religions 212, 1995, 499-503. In the preparation of these pages, I have greatly benefited from the friendly help of Cristiano Grottanelli and Steven Wasserstrom. I have also benefited from conversations with Riccardo Di Donato, Carlo Ginzburg, Anthony Grafton, Charles Malamoud, Maurice Oleneler, John Scheid, anel Mark Silk. I also wish to express my thanks to Bruce Linclon, who, upon receiving (from the editors of the ZfR) the penultimate version of this article, took the initiative of a very fruitful correspondance with

ZfR 6,1998,125-136

Cerbu. came to Dumezil's help and rejected the accusation as nothing but slander. 195-205. in: Rivista di Storia della Storiografia Moderna 15. published me. See Th. First. Dumezil. »Un lettore 'supplente' e i trabochetti della polernica«. Stroumsa the »semitic« world. probably too much. in: Quaderni di Storia 39.' The historian Carlo Ginzburg soon joined the battle. on the other hand. It must be pointed out that Dumezil usually succeeded in withstanding the pressures often exerted upon well-known intellectuals by Parisian media. the fact that Durnezil is almost ignored in Germany today. 391-404. Paris 1995. and that his works have not been translated into German. »Georges Dumezil. but believe that the affair sheds some light on the broader cultural context and ideological implications of contemporary scholarship. According to him. Grottanelli's answer. however. and much that was written was of a polemical nature. organized jointly by the Hebrew University and Ttibingen University. of having harbored pro-Nazi sympathies. even considering the deep impact of structuralism as promoted by Claude Levi-Strauss on French intellectual life in the sixties and seventies. and was eventually received into the Academic Francaise by his former colleague of the Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes. 1994. Zambrini. and the Perils of Comparative Mythology. Much was written. similarities between Momigliano's and Dumezil's apparently fairly distant scholarly methods and attitudes. In a highly interesting piece. In the last two decades of his long life. then. »Ancora Dumezil: addenda et corrigenda«. although hidden. this created a turmoil on both sides of the Alps.> I do not have any new facts to add to the dossier. unfortunately still unpublished. In January 1983. The last relevant publications of which I am aware are A. at a Workshop on ideological aspects of the study of religion. one may even speak of a »fad« of Dumezil) is not easily explained. 2 3 4 5 . the promotion of a few central ideas to this kind of »relevance. Lambert. the facts. the quarrel seems to have evoked little interest elsewhere. According to Hubert Cancik. he became one of the recognized luminaries in the Parisian firmament. to some degree. the leading German histori~n of Roman religon. See also C. I am sadly aware that some of the views expressed here might anger friends on both sides of the Alps. 1994. Thomas Cerbu. that when this towering figure was accused by another giant of scholarship. not only in the ancient past. Le Dieu distribue. and C. often using rhetorical rather than factual argumentation. these similarities are reflected in their feud.126 Guy G. Momigliano organized a workshop on Dumezil at the Scuola Normale Superiore in Pisa. but also in the present. Dumezil himself seems to have encouraged. Grottanelli. the ancient historian Arnaldo Momigliano. It comes as no surprise. from the University of Georgia. »The Scandal of the Antiquarian: Momigliano. and perhaps on both sides of the Atlantic. Une anthropologie comparee des monotheismes. una polemica«. 1994. The proceedings of the workshop. J. and almost never expressed opinions on political or other current affairs. Levi-Strauss. in: Rivista di Storia della Storiografia Moderna 15. has much to do with his ambiguous beliefs in the thirties (oral communication). A first draft of this paper was read in October 1996 in Jerusalem.« I thank Professor Cerbu for sending me his article ahead of publication. French scholars and intellectuals. has pointed out some striking.' Except for some isolated splashes in the United States. and forcefully sought to substantiate Momigliano's accusation.? Dumezil's trifunctionalism was perceived as reflecting »deep structures« of various societies.« The influence exerted by Dumezil (in some cases.317-389. whatever this expression may mean. in particular when this scholarship deals with ancient religions and mythologies.

As such. in: History and Theory 23. the strange similarities noticed by Dumezil between the contemporary Allemands and the ancient Germalns: »Avouons que c'est precisement cette sorte daccord preerabli entre lc passe prehistorique et Ie present qui nous inquiete. »Georges Dumezil and the Trifunctional Approach . Moreover. A. »Prerncsse per una discussione su Georges Dumezil«. complaining about »Dumezil's increasing emphasis on mentality rather than institutions. Momigliano. writing: »Any unbiased reader of the first edition of the book by Dumezil. he was close to the royalist movement Action Francoise. «. 1939.«? Twenty years before the beginning of the polemics. A. he wrote (under the nom de plume Georges Marcenay) regular chronicles and editorials in Le Jour. These 6 7 A. A careful reading of Grenier's short but quite positive review shows that what worries its author is. Momigliano. supposed by Momigliano (s-Dumezil.«? Momigliano feels that »scattered traces of trifunctionalism in various Indo-European cultures [are not] a sufficient argument for postulating an original all-pervasive Indo-European trifunctional mentality. which appeared in 1939. The following year. Momigliano already considered Dumezil's theories to be »useless. 329-341. Momigliano. A. 1963. Georges Dumezil. 8 9 10 11 12 13 . .«!' Or rather. This article is reprinted in: A. Middletown 1987.«12 More precisely. Ancient German Myths. that such traces appear in an author whose methodology is already suspect.. in: Opus 2.«!? Problems of method counted much for Momigliano. »Premcsse «. A. and in his On Pagans. Momigliano. 317. A. Rome 1987... 1984. Durnezils sympathies for the French extreme right. precisely. »Premesse «. a book published in 1939. A. This is however not the case. Momigliano. this article represents the English verison of Momigliano's main argument in »Prcmesse. 315.v who does not hide his great difficulties with various aspects of Dumezils method in approaching Roman religion. the book was explicitely criticized by Albert Grenier in the Revue des Etudes Anciennes 14.. 331. to which he may originally have belongedj' '. [=MDG]. «. 312-330. MDG reflects sympathy for the »type de societe magico-militaire specifiquement Gerrnanique« (p. »Georges Durnezil and the Trifunctional Approach . 329-342.« at least in some »political matters of the highest irnportance. »Prernesse «. To a great extent. 289314. esp. Momigliano. Momigliano. 330. Momigliano. and Christians. but what seems to have counted even more for him is the fact that Dumezil's Mythes et dieux des Germains. a daily newspapaer identified with the extreme right. A. (379). while remaining the darling of the extreme right. 1983.. retains »clear traces of sympathy for Nazi culture (porta chiare tracce di simpatia per la cultura nazista). Mythes et dieux des Germains. Momigliano. are introduced by Momigliano. are indeed a fact: before the second world war.ef More precisely. in: Journal ofRoman Studies 53. here 316. Momigliano. Momigliano emits some doubts over the legitimacy of this method. 378-379. Ottavo Contributo alla storia degli studi classici e del mondo antico. 1939. 135-159. and Modern Demons 127 in a special issue of Opus entitled Aspetti dell' opera di Georges Dumeril. not 14. is bound to find in it sympathy with Nazi ideologies. Momigliano means of course to REA 41. from 1933 to 1935. »Georges Durnezil and the Trifunctional Approach to Roman Civilization«. 312. 155 of MDG). Jews. 113-114. Mornigliano returned to the same accusation. adding that Durnezil strikes him as having had too much »esprit de systerne. It is the combination of both facts that seems to ring the alarm bell.---_. goes on.

. cf. with Otto Hofler's Kultische Geheimbiinde der Germanens". by Carlo Ginzburg. but such a specific argumentation was published. in his recent book-length defense of Dumezil. 14 D. the case of Georges Dumezil offers an excellent illustration of the seductive power exerted by this culture in the twentieth century. Eribon. Faut-il briiler Dumezil? Mythologie.t+ This is. 18 A. 1-7 Oct. See for instance F. and a French translation apppeared soon thereafter (Annates ESC. has ever accused Dumezil of antisemitism. spie.« 17 For him. however. in 1939. of a younger generation. Kultische Geheimbiinde del' Germanen. 122 ff. Ginzburg. 1985. P. in: Le Nouvel Observateur. Milan 1993. 17 For obvious historical reasons. science et politique.1984. 695-715).210-238. like Momigliano. emblemi. Faut-il brtiler Dumezll .128 Guy G. obviously besides the point: monarchist sympathies in the thirties might retain unpleasant connotations. M. the parallel between the bersekir and the SA. 1992. Vidal-Naquet. In fact. as i~'he did not realize. in particular. N. S. Stroumsa facts were revealed by Didier Eribon. 176-183. 214. Miti.. Ginzburg deals. the concept of a »cultura di destra« holds a special importance in Italian intellectual life. le succes des corps paramilitaires. incidentally.. parmi les plus recents. on first reading. nor anybody else. quite the same thing as Nazi sympathies. although he refers to racism as one of the main ingredients of such a »culture. «19 [ must say that Dumezils sober language struck me. another Italian historian. 16 The article was published in Quaderni storici. Faut-il bruler Dumczil? Mythologie. . Referring to MDG and to its reception. however. 15 D. Eribon. Cultura di destra.e+> In »Mitologia germanica e nazismo: su un vecchio libro di Georges Dumezil«!" Ginzburg begins by pointing out the new »re-evaluation of rightist culture. In particular. 1934. I am quoting according to the reprint in C. Miti. Hofler. Juifs et centre- Juifs. Frankfurt a. I am indebted to Saviero Marchignolli for sending me this interesting publication. is Jewish. 57. 114. Paris 1992.a distaste then partaken by many intellectuals. science et politique. They were certainly not. also in 1984. quoted by C.« What he means precisely by »cultura di destra« he does not say. as a rather shocking achievement in the art of understatement. 90-91. a book the basic conclusions of which were accepted by Dumezil.857-82. la dura virtus et les droits des Sections d'Assaut. .. 19 MDG. but it should be pointed out here that neither of them. Ginzburg.. Ginzburg. Jesi. and they certainly reflected a profound distaste for democracy .. les formes particulieres de police qu'a parfois ere ten tee d'exercer une jeunesse en un iforme. the initiatie groups of selected warriors of the Norse sagas). was picked up by Durnezil from Hofler: »Les considerations qui precedent (on the bersekir) expliquent peut-etre en partie certains phenomenes sociaux. Torino 1986. Momigliano did not specify what was the basis for his accusation.. before the second world war the rabid antisemite Louis-Ferdinand Celine refered to Dumezil and to various colleagues of his at the Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes as »Juifs . Ginzburg is certainly able to show what can at best be called the ambiguities of the scholarly discourse on Miinnerbunde in the twenties and thirties (a major example is the Swede Stig Wikander and his analysis of the bersekir. de l'Allemagne: le developpement.

.)«22 It seems to me that these are the important words. 24 0 di esal- cr. to the French supporters of the Nazis. in contradistinction to»Nazi« has acquired a generic sense. adds Durnezil. 1993. woven into Dumezils detached discourse. Dumezil starts by pointing out that in the last 150 years. it found them. Ginzburg came back to these accusations. is the »spontaneous movernent« by which the new German leaders »have 20 In an interview in the Nouvel Observateur. one can follow various successful attempts to remythicise the old Germanic legends. To the best of my understanding. a word which. however. and adds: »11 devrait etre inutile de rappeler que Ie nazisme na pas ete en Europe (circonscrire le debar a la France n' aurait pas de sens) un phenornene global.. . understood by »culture«. cest que ce que jentrevois du rnonde indo-europeen maurait fait horreur. did not have to create its foundational myths. Ginzburg. in: Opus 2. To be sure. then. mancano pero anche parole di elogio lazione. See ibidem. Miti. »an ill-hidden ideological sympathy for Nazi culture (una malcelata simpatia ideologica per la cultura nazista. Ancient German Myths.« But it was in 1983 that he pronounced this sentence. Ginzburg is forced to recognize that if Durnezil does not have a single word of moral condemnation for Nazi methods in MDG. i.« So that would mean that »Nazi culture« refers not to what the Nazis. Nine years later. mancano parole di critica 0 di condanna. 352. The Third Reich. for Eribon's response. Ginzburg.s! But Ginzburg's conclusion is a rejoinder to Morniglianos main accusation: one can sometimes see. or even »fascisrn«. Ginzburg also willingly points out that Dumezil cannot be accused of antisemitism.« Wagner is the best example of this re-rnythologization.. myths. since they »justify. e. . says Dumezil. 22 C. »totalitarian right«. quoted by John Scheid. support and encourage individual and collective behaviour which has all the characters of the sacred. it would be more accurate to refer to these phenomena as »extreme right«. Sept. accepte ou refuse en bloc. MDG. neither does he specifically sing their praise. but rather to phenomena which were pervasive throughout Europe in the thirties. even for a short In any case. 21 »". 23 Le Motulc des Debnts. Ginzburg did not accuse Dumezil of having belonged. that Hitler was able to conceive a concept of Sovereignty unknown in Germany since Odinns days. The core' of Momiglianos and Ginzburg's accusation rests on the last three pages of MDG. 214). »Neo-pagan« propaganda in the third Reich is indeed interesting for the historian of religion. and Modern Demons 129 the horrifying dimensions of this kind of dura virtus.v' In this article. Since the romantic period. Durnezil could say: »Quest ce que c 'est que l'fime indo-europeenne? Tout ce que je peux vous dire. the German Nazis. or even a reference to their »values«. More interesting. Oct. 155-157.24 This text is extremely interesting. 1993. in a response to Didier Eribon's polemical book in 1993. une fois pour toutes. It is thanks to Germanic mythology. .« One should be very precise in making such strong accusations..« (C. rediscovered in the 19th century. Miti . I do not know what the oxymoron »Nazi culture« is. 229. . these legends have become. in the true sense of the word. but of having harbored some sympathies for »Nazi culture. and Wagnerian names and music offered powerful support to German soldiers during the first world war._------- Georges Dumezil.

he expressed his profound distaste for this particular instance of it: »Les Augias tiennent toujours en reserve quelques stalles dans leurs ecuries. Ideologie.« i. e. in a work of scholarship. Dumezil.c-f In his above-mentioned response to Momigliano. To him.. Dumezil. Et puis. suggesting that these had to do with a scholar's jealousy for a more successful colleague. it is hard to imagine that in occupied Paris.130 Guy G. Mars. Entretiens avec Didier Eribon. Grottanelli. Durneezil. «... merne dans le temps de mes debuts. sympathiser?«. « Dumezil himself quotes this passage in his refutation of Momigliano's accusations. Quirinus. this was apparently irrelevant. On dit aussi. sometimes ignoring their conformity with the oldest German organizations and mythologies. was a highly complex figure. 315. 26 27 28 29 30 31 . est-ce approuver. Dumezil.w As to Ginzburg. In a word. massacri. as we shall see. he developed a profound ambivalence toward contemporary realities: 25 G. as pointed out to me by Cristiano Grottanelli.S. such a nonchalant use of »Aryens« could be completely innocent. Hercule se lasserait. Dumezil.. miti. an ontic quality clearer than concrete events. G. »Une idyUe de vingt ans (a propos de A. and the contemporary world. Stroumsa in natural fashion casted their action and reactions in social and mystical moulds. 1985. »Une idylle .?? While admitting to enjoy polemics usually. With a stretch of the imagination.985989. G. Durnezil. the author of a very learned and important study of the sources and implications of Dumezil's thought. Dumezil refuted what he called »un raisonnement par glissades. which belonged to the world of ephemeral phenomena.25 Dumezil' s reaction to the accusation that he had been guilty of covert sympathy for Nazism (or for »Nazi culture«) was virulent. a reality.C. les Aryens ... j'ai dautres Travaux.. Dumezil himself has described how..« 303. avail' jamais employe Ie mot Arya. Dumezil.. Grottanelli intends to deal with the context of this use of »Arycns« in a forthcoming study. Indoeuropei eli Georges Dumezil.10.w In a book published in 1941.. C. »Une idylle . the new masters of Europe. Dumezil said: »Je ne pense pas. ou cela aurait ete sans consequence. Momigliano. -Premesse . »Science et poiitique: reponsea Carlo Ginzburg«. Paris 1941. <)« in his L'oubli de l'homme et l'honneur des dieux: esquisses de mythologie . Jupiter. G. ce sont les Indo-Europeens. Hard. one may perhaps imagine that Durnezil could refer in 1941 to the ancient Aryans without the thought crossing his mind that at that very moment. proceeding through logical errors and by innuendos. politics.e-? Dumezil's memory betrays him here. but perhaps not quite impossible. -Ariens« pour designer les Indo-Europeens. And if this thought crossed his mind. Paris 1985. Dumezil writes: » . Palermo J 993. G. Paris 1987.309. essayer de comprendre. as a young man (he was born in 1898). he sometimes behaved and expressed himself as if the ancient myths he was studying had a presence..299-318. in: Annates E. He questionned Momigliano's hidden reasons for his attack. . were selecting millions of »non-Aryans« for extermination. and adds: »Faire le diagnostic. he did not think it worth a footnote.210. and had a very ambiguous attitude towards history. self-appointed heirs of the ancient Germans. G. esp. «31 From our perspective.

«32 It is thus that. after 1933 as well as before. writing on political urgencies. what brought Ginzburg to speak of a »feeling of unease hard to define (un sentiment de malaise difficile a definir). i. Dumczil. Octobre 1993. e. le malheur etait deja dans l'air etj'etais sur que notre generation n 'y pouvait rien. and at the same time to he regular contributors to a daily newspaper. Ancient German Myths. il m'a semble vain de me soucier de politique interieure [. in 1936. anti-Nazi (although pro-Mussolini) sentiments and perceptions. in a way worse than 32 G. Et je suis parti pour Istanbul.. had very little sympathy for Germany and the Germans. did not like »les boches« more than the average Frenchman did. To further complicate an already complex picture. 33 C. by identifying more precisely some key characters of the »cultura di destra?« Few French royalists of the thirties.Georges Dumezil. And few scholars are able to devote much of their work to Ossetian epos and Indian myths. ou je me suis laisse penetrer par le sage [atalisme oriental. he had known Charles Maurras.}. Dumezil did not hide his sympathies for a certain kind of right. obviously. the chief ideologue of the Action Francaise. and only after many efforts of various colleagues and friends (including the pro-fascist classicist Jerome Carcopino) could he be reinstated. Eribon was also able to show that they reflected strongly anti-German. and Modern Demons 131 »Tres vite. More precisely. like most of his compatriots. 209. In his response to Momigliano. Eribon has shown that Dumezil did not immerse himself into »Eastern fatalism« as much as he has claimed. The perioci. Not only was he not completely innocent of political interests. . He was also able of a rather intense involvement in worldly affairs. fraught as it was with terrible threats that all came true.. from 1925 to 1931. Under Vichy. and remained through the years a close friend of Pierre Gaxotte. were also masons. or probably. .. the royalist Action Francoise. probably. Dumezil joined a masonic lodge. Dumezil pointed out that favoring a kingly regime did not mean a negation of political decency. This argument.. Dumezil's intellectual and elective affinities with the radical right in the thirties is perhaps. this membership was to cost him his job. In his important monograph (unfortunately impaired by too many polemical overtones). En fait. Ginzburg. Didier Eribon has shown beyond any doubt that the accusations of sympathy toward Nazism stand on a very flimsy basis. des 1924. It is not quite a regime cl I' anglaise that Maurras and his friends sought to establish in France. in: Le Monde des Debuts. at the time of the Front Populaire. indeed. as well as for Mussolini' s fascism. Dumezil taught the history of religions at the University of Istanbul. i.. and that it was after all in a Kingdom that Momigliano himself had found asylum after he had fled fascist Italy.«33 Can one try to understand better the nature of this feeling of unease. . Quoting from some of Durnezils editorials in Le Jour. Most French royalists. is rather glib. e. one of the intellectual royalist leaders. to which he had been recruited through Mustafa Kemal's attempt to secularize Turkish culture. Dumezil. In the twenties. Entretlens . Great scholars are by definition idiosyncratic beings. Eribon reveals that during that same period.

Various highly disturbing pieces written by Eliade himself leave a distinct opprobrium upon his personality.~ . whose links in Romania of the late thirties with the fascist Legion of the Archangel Michael arc indubitable.132 Guy G. Writing about another leading historian of religion. It is apt to colour the present with the colours of ancient myths. see further S.. Unfortunately. Borgeaud. the later Dumezil has depicted himself as having ever been careful not to let his political opinions colour his scholarship. or at least misinterpret concrete realities. 1995.>' After all. Perhaps the very fact of sustaining interest in ancient myths and mythologies risks begetting a perception of reality which tends to neglect. C. he did not really care. and to seek to decipher in contemporary reality the traces of those myths. One might try to go a step further. in: Revue de I' Histoire des Religions 212. »The Lives of Baron Evola«. 1993-94. he said they were bound to change from time to time. Eribon. the volume includes no full-fledged study of their ideological attitudes and beliefs.P« Dumezil. hence. to dissociate Dumezil and Eliade in radical fashion strikes 34 This period in Dumezil's carrccr is well described in D. thanks to some striking revelations. 33-49. and like many colleagues. Mircea Eliade. ignore.w There is no doubt that in Eliade 's case these connections are infinitely more dubious than in Dumezils. were intellectually very intensive and fruitful. 1995. Padova 1994. and it is to scholarship that he devoted his long life. Cosi (ed. the daily behavior of men and women. Philippe Borgeaud can speak of the »inquietantes passerclles (d'ordrc epistemologique) entre Ie platonisme affiche du My the de i'Eternel Retour et Ie militantisme nationaliste des annees trente. he spent the rest of the war years working in his Paris study. he sought his »rehabilitation« by the Vichy regime.). in: Alphabet City 4-5. I should like to thank my colleague Shaul Migron for drawing my attention to this fine article. the war years. is not Eliade. Mircea Eliade was in pre-war Rumania not only a »fellow traveller« of political movements of the far right. On Eliade's intellectual contacts with fascist ideologists. see the articles in D. For Dumezil. The scholarly interests and methods of these two contemporaries and friends were quite different. Wasserstrom. About his political views. As noted above. The attempt of some French scholars.. his momentous discovery of the three functions in Indo-European societies dates of 1938 (of which MDG was its first exposition). Stroumsa anybody could have imagined in his worst dreams. M. . including Jews. 35 P. »Mythe et histoire chez Mircea Eliade. Reflexion d'un ccolicr en histoire des religions«.\ . Faut-il briiler Dumeril . changeantes. And a mind trained to reassemble puzzles from the second millenium B. 501.84-89. and the following years were devoted to fully building and checking the theory. His real passion remained of an intellectual nature. and so were their ideological connections in the thirties. they were »de nature. After all. See also P. indeed.. As has become quite clear in recent years. was not necessarily acute when dealing with immediate realities. in: Institut National Genevois. One may assume that in a sense (only in a sense). exemplified in Dubuisson's study. M. it seems that Dumezil did not guite trust himself on political matters. but also their official ideologist. in occupied Paris. Acres 37. Mircea Ellade e Georges Dumezd. and once he obtained it. 36 On the intellectual and methodological links between Dumezil and Eliade. however. did not encourage clarity even in some of the best minds. Borgeaud.« In other words.

1991. ? De quelle sorte de vie son! done doues les archetypes?« To this problem. «37 37 Ch. but also elsewhere. »Histoire des religions et comparatisme: la question indo-europeenne« in: Revue d'Histoire des Religions 208. suggests an answer of his own: »on se dit que le chercheur. indeed.« This belief is reflected. Although Dumezil does not speak. in particular. 1980. to some extent. C.« Nowhere does Dumezil offer an intellectual and methodological justification for his deep belief that archetypes detected in pre-historical »Indo-European« societies (in particular.443450. notes Malamoud. . to shape these societies in their most essential structures. of a-temporal archetypes. and this is perhaps what Ginzburg was referring to when he spoke about »a feeling of uneasiness. Ancient German Myths. cf. through radical social and historical changes? In what sense can one speak of modern Germany as reflecting deep structures of ancient' Germanic tribes? Moreover. (According to him. however. Wehrmacht. Similarly. fabrique lui-meme des mythes. rightly to my mind. in the incriminated few paragraphs of MDG. lorsqu'il entreprend d'explorer les rapports entre I' esprit humain et les cultures. trifunctionalisrn) somehow reappear in modern societies. the fundamental structures of the Nazi state (Partei and Gestapo. »Les Indo-Europeens. Malarnoud. in Dumezil' s case. and independently of their will. Dubuisson detects. Indeed. who does not shy from speaking of archetypes Dumezil's as well as in Eliade's thought. incidentally. without the explicit knowledge of Nazi leaders. some of his implicit presuppositions are disturbing. a similar tripartition of functions is to be found in Soviet society). I argue that the »worrying bridges« detected by Borgeaud in Eliade. For Dumezil.. throughout centuries and even millenia." ll1 . It is my claim that one can speak of something rather similar to what Borgeaud called Eliade 's »Platonism. The virulent tone of his criticism of Eliade. Dubuisson does not detect here any such ambiguity. this text represents the introduction to a whole issue devoted to Dumezils indo-european theories. How come that this ideology retains its structuring power. Arbeitsfront) reflect Indo-European tripartite ideology. of course. Malamoud. Malamoud. in: Le Temps de la Reflexion 1. and Modern Demons 133 me as rather unsatisfactory. les femmes et les chemins de la liberte«..115-121. it even seems to reflect some undertones of (perhaps unconscious) cultural chauvinism. disappears completely when he deals with Dumezil. like Eliade. At points. know ledge or will.'s intellectual presuppositions can also be found. why does an ideology which might have informed pre-historic German tribes reappear more clearly in the Third than in the Second Reich? These pertinent and disturbing questions are raised by the Indologist Charles Malamoud in a few powerful pages. where he detects and states better than anyone else this fundamental problem in Dumezil's thought: »Par quelles ruses de la raison mythique un archetype trifonctionnel peut trouver au 20e siecle une »claire reviviscence. as it were.Georges Dumezil. Freud referred to the theory of puis ions as to »our mythology. some connections between Eliades political choices and some fundamentally disturbing ambiguities in his epistemological principles. independently of men's memory.

in their search for the essence of cultures. and that the case should be dismissed. This fascinating explanation.P To be sure. it comes from times immemorial. or his reading of the latter in the light of the former cannot be completely absolved. that forms the core of »rightist culture. • 191-225.1980. at the end of the cold war and with the return. Svenbro. like many other scholars of his generation. See also M. In 1927. of religious and ethnic identity. les romains et nous: l'ontiquite est-elle moderne 7. postulated the existence of »a soul of nations.lndeed. are bound to create myths? Dumezil. published in the Revue Turque d'Anthropologie an article entitled »De 38 See A.« For such a culture. This explanation. including Nazi para-science. might oversimplify a deeply complex reality: it seems sometimes be the case that it is precisely a crooked view of reality which permits one to develop new intuitions about the distant past. indeed. the study of mythology needs itself mythical' patterns in order to' approach its subject. but it does permit insights about the past. But Dumezil's ontological preference for ancient myths over present events. Repercs sur la pretendue Nouvelle Droite«. I have suggested above that scholars too deeply immerged in the study of ancient myths sometimes seem to develop a distorted perception of present realities. remains unsatisfying. or even evil. 107-117. strikes me as an urgent epistemological desideratum. however. essentially. in ethnic and collective la prehistoire indo-europcenne. I shall give one last example. or of collective identities. here lies the strong seducing power of this attitude. in particular by the so-called »nouvelle ecole. rather than to the individual. esp. Droit (ed. in: R. Dumezil's thought was »discovered« by some French »new right« intellectuals. One can also do interesting science with dubious feelings. identity refers fundamentally to the group. which sometimes escape scholars more liberal in their Weltanschauung. But it certainly points to the kind of thought appreciated in such milieus. Les grecs.).-P. Olender.« which sought to offer an intellectually respectable garb to old themes of the racist right. Stroumsa In other words. Such an approach. this »Platonism. It should be phrased. both before and after the second world war (such as the support given to Stalinism or Maoism). Is it true that all scholars. such as the power of myths.« as it were. Schnapp. In the seventies. all over the world. often ugly and violent. the reception of Dumezil in dubious milieus is in itself no necessary indication as to the nature of his thought. »Du Nazisme it -Nouvelle ecole-.« It is perhaps this kind of postulate. »Georges Dumezil et les usages -politiques. and of the pre-eminence of such. Let us state once more that Momigliano's and Ginzburg's accusations of »syrnpathies for Nazi culture« cannot .134 Guy G. who was then teaching in Istanbul. sug&ests Malamoud. note 22. The understanding of contemporary events offered by the »cultura di destra« might be substantiated. In its core. . of hypostasized collective entities. although one wishes he had dissociated himself faster than he did from such applications of his ideas. Much attention has been devoted to the various seductions and aberrations of Leftist intellectuals in western Europe (and to a lesser extent in North America) in the twentieth century. Focusing on those who fell prey to the evils of the right. still seems to hold sway of many minds and souls. Dumezil.. Paris 1991. however. moreover. J. timeless abstractions over concrete realities. and it remains immutable. in: Quaderni di Storia 6 (11).

as Prima che Hitler venisse (Storia della >SoCie!clThule. Mircea Eliade.. Did such a footnote on the too real and too close massacre of the Armenians impose itself. »Myth and History in the Study of Myth: an Obscure Text of Georges Dumezil.s? In particular." Despite its sophistication and Lincoln's obvious scholarly marshalling of the evidence. In the name of scholarly irrelevance. alias Rudolph von Scbottendorff. Ideologic . in: History of Religions 37. and Modern Demons 135 quelques faux massacres. and Grottanelli has argued plausibly that at least one future »Aryan« leading ideologist. Lincoln's accusation was originally published in Quaderni di Storia 32. »Shaping the Past and the Future«. the Public Television Network was brought to cancel a planned program on the topic. 1986. War and Sacrifice . in: B. and Sacrifice . 189-193. to my shame. might well have read Dumezil's article. October 3. Rudolph Glauer. it was re-baptised Volkischer Beobachter. In 1919. Chicago 1991. Linclon. 41 B. such as the mass murder of the Armenians in 1915 when writing in Istanbul in 1927 .. Lincoln has sought on various occasions to analyze the underlying currents in Dumezil' s thought.. 232-268.). and the Left Hand«. a deep ambivalence with democracy was prevalent among European intellectuals.231-234.--- Georges Dumezil. See R. But one should not forget that the paper was written and published in Istanbul. »Rewriting the German War God: Dumezil. Politics and Scholarship in the Late 1930's«. his argument has failed to convince me. Ancient German Myths. in Israel. in a study of mythical massacres in ancient literatures? Perhaps not. originally published in the Times Literary Supplement.. I thank Cristiano Grottanelli for calling my attennon to this publication. the former editor of the Miinchener Beohachter. its Context and Subtext«.f? The silence soon made about the Armenian genocide was not ignored by everybody. 1998. when it was most serious. The book wa translated into Italian by the Fascist figure Renato del Ponte.. with violent ideologies of the right. in: Death.s? He has accused Dumezil of having written »De quelques faux masacres« in order to offer an intellectual model for the Turkish denial of the genocide of the Armenians. But what remains is Dumezils ability to foster his deep interest for ancient and powerful myths. a few years ago. The American historian of religion Bruce Lincoln. von Sebottendorff. As Hitler said to his 42 43 . See further C. Linclon. or was it even legitimate. where. while at the same time ignoring immediate facts. Lincoln. 187-208. such as that reported in the book of Esther. neither is deemed worth a footnote. in: B.. War. is hardly free from the guilt of having flirted. . he sought to show that these stories do not reflect massacres having actually taken place. Bevor Hitler kam. 5-30. see his most recent piece. where there were very powerful interests seeking to erase from memory all traces of a terrible murder that had been perpetrated by the state authorities twelve years previously. Munich 1933. See further his »Kings. Death. whose work focuses on aspects of Indo-European religion.or the immediate significance of »aryans« in Paris in 1941. Grottanelli. Rebels. a rview of Dumezils L'oubli de l'homme et l'honneur des dieux. Turkish heavy pressures against open discussion of the Armenian genocide are felt to this day. One should add that in the thirties.P 39 Lincoln is well aware of the fact that his own Doktorvater. 244-258. War. 1990. even. Sebottendorff bought the Mitnchener Beobachter in July 1918. .« Dealing with some ancient famous stories of massacres. . 40 See B. and Sacrifice: Studies in Ideology and Practice. Finally. who was staying in Istanbul at the time. Death. Lincoln. Turin 1987. has dedicated many efforts to decipher the implicit and hidden ideological presuppositions and implications of various trends and attitudes in contemporary scholarship.

Di Donato. Cornell. 1995. What has become common knowledge only recently. 1996. a response by Harris in: TLS. although he does not seem to have been much in sympathy with it at any time. May 10. When launching his allegations about the connection between Dumezil's interest in ancient myths and his infatuation with contemporary demons. had not been a radical opponent to the fascist regime throughout those sixteen years. 7: 1-5). in: TLS. one day and about eighteen hours. 213-244. in: Times Literary Supplement. June 14. not to judge. Bologna 1989. Momigliano insisted that he understood too well the nature of totalitarian regimes. A fact which was probably never ignored by some Italian scholars has recently become public knowledge. That would have made him a sharper. in: Belfagor 52 (1997). Apri112. 243. however.e+' The young Momigliano himself. having lived in such a regime »for sixteen years. as if too much long-span memory had to be paid by the atrophy of short-span memory. esp. It is hard to imagine today the living conditions under a totalitarian regime sixty years ago. May 24. five months.. note 25: »Vi communieo che dalla data odierna avcte cessato di appartenere al PNF perche di razz a ebraica. the role of the scholar is to understand. May 3. Stroumsa As if a concentrated effort to understand ancient myths brought with it an amnesia about the recent past. 1996. See also C. from newly published sources. Last but not least. »Materiali . See letters by O.136 Guy G. »Momigliano e il contesto«. through him the scandal came. he might have recalled his own party membership. esp.45 There is no reason to believe that this membership reflected a deep sympathy for »Fascist culture. and easier to condemn than to understand.V. 219. Like anyone else unwilling to sacrifice his official position (since 1931. more nuanced. Momigliano's membership in the Fascist Party was refered to by W. he swore allegiance to the regime. Murray. only eleven University professors (but also numerous academics of lower rank) refused to take the oath of loyalty to the regime in 1931. 6-7. One should certainly not throw the first stone at Momigliano. is Momigliano's membership in the Fascist Party until his expulsion from it for racial reasons in November 1938. Momigliano was working for the government-financed Enciclopedia Italiana). Dionisotti. Di Donato. Dionisotti's last contribution to the topic. 1996. »Who today remembers the massacre of the Armenians?« 44 See R. 11. but one wishes he had remembered in his old age what another illustrious Jew said long ago about the mote and the beam (Mat. Dionisotti. in: TLS.. and were consequently dismissed. even (or especially?) when dealing with highly delicate problems of personal behaviour in times of upheaval. probably thought that a nominal membership was a price worth paying for decent working conditions. . «. »Materiali per una biografia intellettuale di Arnaldo Momigliano«. 1938 by the secretary of the Fascist Party in Turin. and a letter by C. 633-648. when it was first demanded. 642-643. As is well-known. This publication launced a polemics in the following issues of the Times Literary Supplement (TLS). it appears. See now C. Ricardo di Arnaldo Momigliano. 1. T. officers upon the launching of his conquest of Poland. where Dionisotti explains Momigliano's inscription to the Fascist party as stemming from his desire to devote himself undisturbed to his studies.« reads a letter sent to him on 29. in: TLS. Harris. whose own father held for many years official positions in the Party hierarchy. It was Momigliano who launched the whole case about Dumezils dubious sympathies. and more honest intellectual historian of our dark century. 45 R. in: Athenaeum 83. 1996. 18. 1996. »The silences of Momigliano«.« The young scholar.