Juno (mythology) - Theological and Comparative Remarks

Theological and Comparative Remarks

The complexity of the figure of Juno has caused much uncertainty and debate among modern scholars. Some emphasize one aspect or character of the goddess, considering it as primary: the other ones would then be the natural and even necessary development of the first. Palmer and Harmon consider it to be the natural vital force of youthfulness, Latte women's fecundity. These original characters would have led to the formation of the complex theology of Juno as a sovereign and an armed tutelary deity.

G. Dumezil has on the other hand proposed the theory of the irreducibility and interdependence of the three aspects (sovereignty, war, fertility) that he interprets as an original, irreducible structure as hypothesised in his theory of the trifunctional ideology of the Indoeuropean. While Dumezil's refusal of seeing a Greek influence in Italic Junos looks difficult to maintain in the light of the contributions of archaeology, his comparative analysis of the divine structure is supported by many scholars, as M. Renard and J. Poucet. His theory purports that while male gods incarnated one single function, there are female goddesses who make up a synthesis of the three functions, as a reflection of the ideal of woman's role in society. Even though such a deity has a peculiar affinity for one function, generally fertility, i. e. the third, she is nevertheless equally competent in each of the three.

As concrete instances Dumezil makes that of Vedic goddess Sarasvatī and Avestic Anāhīta. Sarasvati as river goddess is first a goddess of the third function, of vitality and fertility associated to the deities of the third function as the Aśvin and of propagation as Sinīvalī. She is the mother and on her rely all vital forces. But at the same time she belongs to the first function as a religious sovereign: she is pure, she is the means of purifications and helps the conceiving and realisation of pious thoughts. Lastly she is also a warrior: allied with the Maruts she annihilates the enemies and, sole among female goddesses, bears the epithet of the warrior god Indra, vṛtraghnỉ, destroyer of oppositions. She is the common spouse of all the heroes of the Mahābhārata, sons and heirs of the Vedic gods Dharma, Vāyu, Indra and of the Aśvin twins. Though in hymns and rites her threefold nature is never expressed conjointly (except in Ṛg Veda VI 61, 12:: triṣadásthā having three seats).

Only in her Avestic equivalent Anahita, the great mythic river, does she bear the same three valences explicitly: her Yašt states she is invoked by warriors, by clerics and by deliverers. She bestows on females an easy delivery and timely milking. She bestowed on heroes the vigour by which they defeated their demonic adversaries. She is the great purifier, "she who puts the worshipper in the ritual, pure condition" (yaož dā). Her complete name too is threefold: The Wet (Arədvī), The Strong (Sūrā), The Immaculate (Anāhitā).

Dumezil remarks these titles match perfectly those of Latin Junos, especially the Juno Seispes Mater Regina of Lanuvium, the only difference being in the religious orientation of the first function. Compare also the epithet Fluonia, Fluviona of Roman Juno, discussed by G. Radke. However D. P. Harmon has remarked that the meaning of Seispes cannot be seen as limited to the warrior aspect, as it implies a more complex, comprehensive function, i. e. of Saviour.

Among Germanic peoples the homologous goddess was bivalent, as a rule the military function was subsumed into the sovereign: goddess *Frīy(y)o- was at the same time sovereign, wife of the great god, and Venus (thence *Friy(y)a-dagaz "Freitag for Veneris dies). However the internal tension of the character led to a duplication in Scandinavian religion: Frigg resulted into a merely sovereign goddess, the spouse of wizard god Óðinn, while from the name of Freyr, typical god of the third function, was extracted a second character, Freyja, confined as a Vani to the sphere of pleasure and wealth.

Dumezil opines that the theologies of ancient Latium could have preserved a composite image of the goddess and this fact, notably her feature of being Regina, would in turn have rendered possible her interpretatio as Hera.