Indo-European history and expansion is a deep and critical element of global history. Europeans were an ancient ethnic and tribal group dating to the Neolithic period (5500-7500 B.C.), their group had the largest population in the world in its respective period. 

Their culture and expansion (6000 B.C.) across the globe has been debated by many (History Files, 2022). Historians all commonly believe in the monogenesis theory, or the idea that the cultures, languages and religions from the Indo European tribe spread to modern cultures and religions of the modern world. For instance, that modern day Asia, Middle East, Northern Europe, and Scandinavia all stemmed from the same original indo european nomadic tribe (Wikipedia, 2022). This theory is not debated, and is known to be the central theory of human origin and evolution. The theory applies to anthropology at large. In addition to the Migration theory, separate theories relating specifically to the spread of language and Indo european language spread include the migration theory and the polygenesis theories. The migration theory is essentially arguing that Indo European individuals initially started from one tribe, yet they diverged quickly. In other words, the core Indo-european language of tribes was the same, but through migration, these languages became different. Cultural and Linguistic similarities came later on from migration patterns and cultural interaction across time. The polygenesis theory, on the other hand, suggests that distinct Indo-European languages were formed by distinct ethnic groups unrelated to each other (Wikipedia, 2022). The theory believes that multiple cultures formed multiple languages. While there may be a few subtle similarities in principle, the theory believes that the languages of Indo-European culture were formed separately and have distinct differences between them. While there is still frequent debate about how these cultures and religions spread out, I believe that mythology and literary techniques in mythology reflect key takeaways about Indo-European spread and expansion. Over the course of this paper, I will assert that there are both similarities and differences in Dragon slaying myth across Norse, Hindu, and Hittite Mythologies. All three narratives reflect the same core storyline, plotline, and theme. All three narratives also maintain forms of repetition. However, each narrative has subtle distinctions in story and character choice. Ultimately, the combination of similarities and differences could be due to all three theories, Monogenesis, Polygenesis, and Migration. I believe that Indo European expansion was a product of mainly monogenesis theory, as well as migration and polygenesis theories. Understanding how these mythologies and how Indo-European tribes expanded is critical to understanding modern cultures and differences in modern culture.

Indo-European Expansion History and Theory:

Indo European tribal history supposedly starts around the years 6000-4000 B.C (History Files, 2022).  During this period, however, historians still debate what happened. Some researchers, believers in the Monogenesis theory, assert fundamentally that cultures originated from one central Indo-european tribe and spread out across the world to form distinct varieties (Wikipedia, 2022). Around 3,000 BC, these groups expanded out of these regions from modern southeastern Europe all the way through the Middle East, Asia, and a major portion of Europe. Languages and mythology split through different groups of tribes: the Graeco-Aryan (Armenian, Greek, and Indo-Iranian cultures), the North Central (Germanic, Baltic, and Slavic ( and Scandinavian)) and finally the western group (Celtic, Italic) (West, 2007). The theory also links Uralic, Altaic, and Kartvelian languages to the Graeco-Aryan, North Central, and Western groups, stating that the languages were formed in conjunction with each other (West, 2007). Evidence in the field has grown since the 17th century. The Kurgan Hypothesis, developed by historians and researchers more recently, has found and estimated that mountainous isolation around the regions of Modern-Day Georgia led to the separation between groups within the Indo-European tribe, who then spread out and migrated across the globe (West, 2007). Keith Whinom (1927-1986) found corollary evidence supporting Creole languages in India, suggesting common connections between the two nations and their language origins (Wikipedia, 2022). One additional prominent theory within monogenesis is the The Pontic Caspian Steppe Hypothesis, stating that Indo European culture expansion rose due to the domestication of the horse in roughly 3000 B.C. It is critical to recognize that monogenesis is a hypothesis. Supporters of the theory see it as fundamental within its historical context (Wikipedia, 2022). Ultimately, while the specifics are unknown, theorists supporting monogenesis point to language, writing, and historical evidence as grounding in their arguments.

While the separation of these tribal groups seems reasonable, the diversion and spread of language, poetry, mythology, and culture across different regions is debated. Another theory on cultural and anthropological theory is The Migration Theory, which ultimately asserts that humans from ancient periods may have originated from an original tribe and source, but their spread and divergence was rapid and led to distinction among cultures. It was the migration and tribal cultural exchanges later on that ultimately created some forms of cultural interaction and influence across tribes and ethnic groups. 

Finally, others, who are proponents of the Polygenesis theory, believe that religions and cultures of the ancient world were in fact separate (Wikipedia, 2022). Tribal and ethnic groups existed across different regions of the world and each formed their own belief systems, religions, traditions, and languages separately (Wikipedia, 2022). Polygenesis and its theories evolved and became popular especially in the 17th-19th centuries. David Hume (1711-1776) and Voltaire (1694-1778) were two prominent figures in the rise of such theories. Ultimately, understanding the differences and nuances between the myths and  languages within these cultures can serve as a major source of support for research and understanding (Wikipedia, 2022).

Language and Mythology in Indo-European History:

Language and mythology are critical in understanding the spread and history of Indo-european culture. Over the course of the past several centuries, researchers have turned to 

ancient myths, narratives, and poems from across the world to study and find correlations in techniques, writing style and rhetoric. Differences between texts and languages likely suggest and support polygenesis, while similarities support forms of Monogenesis. Perhaps the most well-known myth, common across all mythologies globally, is the Dragon-slaying myth. Over the course of this paper, I will outline and interpret three variations of the myth in order to convey a deeper analysis of indo-european history.

Similarities In The Dragon-Slaying Myth (Hindu, Hittite, and Norse Mythology):

Nearly all mythologies worldwide share a narrative or story of a hero slaying the dragon. Three central myths within the realm of the hero slaying the dragon are the narratives of Norse, Hindu, and Hittite mythologies. In the famous Hindu myth, Indra kills the lord Vritra, a dangerous dragon of Hindu folklore (Rig Veda, 2022). In Hittite, Tarhunz, a well-known lad, slays the serpentine Illuyanka with the help of Hurrian, the sky god (Beckman, 1982). Finally, in Norse mythology, god of storms and thunder Thor uses his strength to destroy the Midgard Serpent, Jormungandr. Of the three myths referenced above, two of which are of Graeco-Aryan origin, and one of which originates from the North Central region (Nordic/Germanic), all share the same core characters, plotline, and outcome (West, 2007). In all three myths, a male hero figure steps up and faces the challenge of a monster. He faces setbacks, but asks for advice from a wise mentor. Finally, in all three, the hero overcomes the monster, leading to a resolution for society. In the Rig Veda, for instance, Vritra takes all water sources from the natural world and swallows it up, leaving humans desolated and without resources (Rig Veda, 2022). As a response Indra fights and destroys Vritra by slashing him with his sword. In this ancient original Rig Veda text, Vritra is described swallowing all the water of the community. It states:

Vritra went to the earth and in one gulp swallowed the waters of one river. The humans were no match for Vritra. They could not even defend themselves, let alone their water. Soon Vritra swallowed all the waters on earth. Without water, earth became a wasteland. Humans, birds and animals were parched from thirst. With no means of fighting Vritra, they prayed to Lord Vishnu. 

As is clear in this excerpt, a challenge has been established as a result of Vritra’s actions. Vritra puts pressure on the human population, leaving them vulnerable through drainage and drought. In response, Indra, who gained insight and advice from a sage named Dadhichi, comes back to fight Vritra for the good of the people. A harsh and lengthy battle scene leads to blows by both parties until finally Indra slashes Vritra’s stomach with his sword, killing the demon once and for all. 

Similarly, the stories of Tarhun killing Illunyasaka and Thor slaying Jormungandr reflect the same characters, plotline, and outcome. In the Hittite legend of Illyuanaka Tarhun, the storm god in Hittite mythology, traps the dragon Illyunasaka by tricking him and filling him with food and drinks, stating, “The storm-god summoned all the gods (saying): Come in! Inara has prepared a feast… She prepared everything in great quantity-vessels of wine, vessels of (the drink)” (lines 6-8).  In this excerpt, the story follows a very similar trajectory to the narrative of Vritra and Indra. Tarhun faces challenges with the evil serpent Illyunasaka, but overcomes these challenges through persistence and effort. Like Vritra going to sage Dadhichi, he goes to the goddess Innaara for advice. Ultimately, it is Tarhun’s wits that lead him to his victory. By poisoning the serpent, he restores peace and order to the community.

In the Prose Edda, the storm god Thor successfully kills the poisonous serpent Jormungandr by baiting him with the head of an ox while on a fishing expedition (Prose Edda, 2022). The serpent rises up and Thor uses his hammer to smash Jormungandr on the head, “The serpent sank back into the sea. Thor flung his hammer after it and people say that this struck its head off in the waves” (pp.1). Thor’s story relates deeply to those of Indra and Tarhun. While he never seeks another god for wisdom or advice, he faces challenges from the serpent when it “belches poison” at him (Prose Edda, 2022). The redundant hero-villian character complex, plotline and story development, and finally the successful outcome in all three of these myths reflects key similarities between all three (Prose Edda, 2022).

Not only do these myths reflect similar frameworks, all three myths utilize repetition as a literary technique. Repetition reinforces the important plot points for the reader. In the Hindu Rig Veda text, this becomes evident when the Vedic word “Yoh,” meaning “Who,” is repeated 6 consecutive times when referring to Indra:

yo janat azim sruuarsm

yoh janat gandar B m...

yo janat hunauuo yat pa Vanaiia nauua 

yo janat. . . hitasp m . . .

yo janat arazo.samanam . ..

yo janat snauuiSkam

Who slew the horned serpent. .

who slew Gandarapa

who slew the nine sons of the Pathana clan

who slew Hitaspa . ..

who slew Arezo.samana

who slew SnauuiSka

(lines 41-44)

In this excerpt here, the repetition of the word “Yo” is clearly a literary, intentional technique done to reinforce Indra and his legendary story.  Repeating the term “Yo” makes Indra’s accomplishments seem extensive and emphasizes their reputability. A similar repetitive technique is used in the Hittite narrative with Tarzun and Illyunasaka:

When he [son of the storm god] went, then he demanded from them the heart, and they gave it to him… When he was again sound in body as of old, he then went once more to the sea for battle. When he gave battle to him and was beginning to smite the serpent, then the son of the storm-god was with the serpent and shouted up to the heaven to his father: “Include me-do not show me any mercy!” (lines 23-26)

Ultimately the use of repetition here comes primarily from the term, “When he,” indicating the importance of the son of the Storm-god’s choices in defeating the serpent (Rig Veda, 2022). The focus is placed on the Storm-god’s son.

Finally, the last instance of repetition in writing comes in Norse mythology with the following excerpt: 

vazram zastaiia draz mno

satafstanam sato.darm

frauuaey m viro.niiancim

zarois aiiarjho frahixtam

amauuato zaraniiehe

amauuast m m zaiianam

Verevrauuastemem Zaiianam

Holding the mace in his hand

with a hundred bosses, a hundred blades,

felling men as it swings forward,

cast in yellow bronze,

strong, gilded,

strongest of weapons,

most irresistible of weapons. (pp. 430-450)

In this excerpt here, Thor is described holding his hammer, Mjollnir (Prose Edda, 2022). Repetition comes primarily in the form of the words “hundred” and “weapons.” (Prose Edda, 2022). Both cases reinforce and emphasize the sheer force of Thor’s weapon. The hammer not only has one hundred bosses, but also one hundred blades. The hammer not only is the strongest of weapons, but also the most irresistible of weapons. The subtle usage of this technique captures the reader’s attention and puts all emphasis on the hammer Thor possesses. Ultimately, all three of these myths use identical techniques of repetition, reflecting potential connections and ties between the mythologies and their origins (Prose Edda, 2022).

Differences in the Dragon Slaying Myth (Hittite, Norse, and Hindu Mythology):

While these three myths reflect similarities in their underlying structure and their use of repetition, they also reflect subtle differences in character decisions, methods of killing the dragon, and ultimate long-term outcome. While both the Hindu and Hittite variations include a sage character (Dadishi and Anara respectively) who provide guidance and support for the hero in his battle against the dragon, the Norse variation does not. It simply includes Thor attacking the serpent individually (Prose Edda, 2022). Additionally, the methods of killing the dragon between the various texts is radically different. While Indra stabs Vritra with his sword, Turzhan uses food and alcohol to fatten the serpent (Beckman, 1982). This distinction is especially meaningful: Indra uses strength and courage, while Turzhan utilizes whit and tactics. Finally, while both the Hindu and Hittite variations result in a positive successful outcome, some researchers have suggested that Thor never actually kills the serpent in the Norse story, he simply makes him disappear in the short run (Wikipedia, 2022). Differences like these are incredibly vast among the three forms of the dragon myth. They imply that the original tribes in these separate regions were not only influenced by the original indo-european tradition, but must have been influenced by the culture, and conditions within their new environment as well.

Illuyanka (Hittite)
Vritra (Hinduu)
Thor (Norse)

Core Similarities:

1.) Core Narrative of Hero Slaying the Dragon

2.) Redundant Hero-Villain Character Complex (Good and Evil) 

3.)Repetitive Literary Technique 

In the Hittite myth, Tarhunz, slays the serpentine Illuyanka

2.)Tarhunz and Illuyanka

(See Paper)

In the Rig Veda, Indra, slays Vritra, an evil serpent, to restore peace and harmony 

Indra and Vritra

(See Paper)

In the Prose Edda, Thor, god of storms and thunder, slays the Midgard Serpent using his hammer, 

Thor and the Midgard Serpent

(See Paper)
Core Differences:

Only two of the three contain a Sage Figure

2.)Method/Strategy of Slaying Differs

1.)Tarhunz goes to sage mentor for wisdom  

2.)Tarhunz bloats Illuyanka with alcohol, then kills him

1.)Indra goes to Dadichi

2.)Indra uses strength to stab Vritra in stomach

1.)Thor attacks Midgard serpent on his own

2.)Thor uses his hammer, Mjonir, to attack the serpent

Figure 1 Demonstrates Similarities and Differences between the Hindu, Hittite, and Norse Dragon-Slaying myths. 

Implications of the Dragon Myth on Indo-European Expansion Theory:

The similarities and differences in dragon myths across Hindu, Hittite, and Norse mythology could be due to all 3 theories. Hence, while the monogenesis theory is known to be true, these myths provide evidence towards the plausibility of the migration and polygenesis theories as well. In all three texts, we see identical character tropes of hero and serpent (villain), similar storylines of hero battling the serpent, and related outcomes of heroes defeating the serpent. Additionally, we see identical uses of repetition technique across all three stories. Norse, Hindu, and Hittite cultures all originated from Indo-european origin. Norse culture falls under the Germanic tribe (modern-day Northern Europe and Scandinavia), while Hindu and Hittite both fall into the Graeco-Aryan tradition (modern-day Asia, Southeast Europe, and Middle East). Both the Graeco Aryan tribe and Germanic tribes originally spread from the Indo-Aryan nomad group (West, 2007). Hence, it is no coincidence that these myths are strikingly similar. These myths support monogenesis theory, a theory known to be true in anthropology at large. The cultural expansion that originated in the Indo-European tribe of 6000 B.C  was an outcome of this (West, 2007).

Simultaneously, the similarities and differences present in these texts could be interpreted as caused by the migration theory. The migration theory argues that cultural exchange resulting from migration patterns led to striking similarities and differences in the modern languages across Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. In many settings across historical periods, it was not the original root similarity, but rather the physical interaction at a later stage, that led to the contemporary connections across the two groups. In this case of Indo-European anthropological history, the migration theory is plausible, and the data from these texts supports its potential.

Finally, the key distinctions among these three mythology stories could have been caused by the polygenesis theory. Variation in character choices, methods of killing the dragon, and long term outcome, imply cultural adjustments among these three different stories. These differences were not random but rather environmental. Cultures and tribes were not just formed from an original Indo-european tribe, but could also have been formed by their own environment and separate entities. Therefore, the dragon myth shows signs of polygenesis. 

Ultimately, these myths reflect and reinforce the commonality of monogenesis as a broader theory on anthropology and demonstrate the plausibility of the migration and polygenesis theories as well. Understanding mythologies of the past, and understanding Indo-european expansion is a critical driver for understanding modern cultures of the modern world. The decisions, communication, and actions we engage in are a direct outcome of the environment we inhabit and the people we surround ourselves with. It is not just the fashion fads, the new slang, or the recent tech innovations, that affect our differences in ethics and ritual, but rather the thousands of years of migration and ethnic development that inform cultural groups’ present and future. Mythologies, poetry, and language of ancient cultures, and theories on Indo-European spread through ancient times, are essential in the study of our world.

Bibliography:

Beckman, G. Illuyanka. (1982). Retrieved June 28, 2022, from deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/77487/Illuyanka.pdf?sequence=1 

History Files. (2022). A History of Indo-Europeans, Migrations and Language.  Retrieved June 28, 2022, from historyfiles.co.uk/FeaturesFarEast/CentralAsia_IndoEuropeans01.htm

Krishnan, S. A. (1970, January 1). Indra and vritra part 2 of 2. Indra and Vritra Part 2 of 2. Retrieved June 28, 2022, from hindumythologyforgennext.blogspot.com/2011/12/indra-and-vritra-part-2.html 

Prose Edda (n.d.)  Thor and the Midgard Serpent.  Retrieved June 28, 2022, from sites.pitt.edu/~dash/thorserpent.html

Wikimedia Foundation. (2022, June 20). Jörmungandr. Wikipedia. Retrieved June 28, 2022, from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B6rmungandr#Stories 

Wikimedia Foundation. (2022). Illuyanka. Wikipedia. Retrieved June 28, 2022, from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illuyanka#Narrative

Wikimedia Foundation. (2022). Polygenism. Wikipedia. Retrieved June 28, 2022, from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygenism#:~:text=Polygenism%20is%20a%20theory%20of,a%20single%20origin%20of%20humanity.

Wikimedia Foundation. (2022).Jormungandr. Wikipedia. Retrieved June 28, 2022, from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B6rmungandr#Stories

Utah State University, The Indo-European history usu.edu/markdamen/1320hist&civ/chapters/07ie.htm

History Files, A History of Indo-Europeans, Migrations and Language 

historyfiles.co.uk/FeaturesFarEast/CentralAsia_IndoEuropeans01.htm

Watkins, C. (1995). How to Kill a Dragon. Shibboleth authentication request. Retrieved June 28, 2022, from web-s-ebscohost-com.dartmouth.idm.oclc.org/ehost/detail?sid=3f45b185-5fe8-4603-80f4-a74477c4b789%40redis&vid=0&format=EB&lpid=lp_439&rid=0#AN=169638&db=e000xna 

West, Martin. Indo European Poetry and Myth (2007)