If you’ve just joined us … a brief catch-up on The Story So Far. 

A few days ago, an associate asked about the relationship of the Goddess to the coronation of a King in comparative Indo-European terms. Me being me, this lead to … the dedicated need for an (A)Arti-cle upon the subject. Several, in fact! 

The previous (first) installment introduced the concept. We took a brief look at two prominent exemplars for the theology ‘in motion’ – that of King Arthur and Excalibur from the Lady of the Lake; and ShivaJi of the Marathas being granted the Bhavani Tulwar by Devi.

The effective idea was that a Goddess, hailing from the Waters (a liminal sphere for the world of men – and even the universe entire – in Indo-European terms), would ‘choose’ and thusly ’empower’ a given human figure. Often granting him a weapon (indeed, in certain cases and senses, it may even seem to be Her *in* the Weapon ! After all, ‘Ultima Ratio Regum’ foremost in mind, ‘Speech’ (and ‘Force’ – particularly in Sanskrit, where this is ‘Shakti’) can indeed be a most formidable Weapon or Instrument of the Rulership) as externally visible signifier as to this process. 

We then explored some of the associated theology to further demonstrate (and, for that matter, directly attest) what was going on ‘beneath the hood’ in those two major narrative examples aforementioned. 
These detailings included Vak bestowing the Vajra (as a congealed ‘spark’ of Rta – Cosmic Law), Athena ‘unlocking’ the Thunderbolt of Zeus, and part of the role for The Waters in all of this.
Which, to save you going back and reading it all again – included the notion of the Waters housing both Goddess and that ultimate Cosmic Order (Herself); and with particular exemplars including Vak hailing from Samudra (whence, also, that aforementioned Vajra), Athena Tritogeneia, Frigg in Fensalir, and Sága in Sökkvabekkr, etc.

We closed off Part One with the following:

“But how can we assert an intrinsic connection with ‘sovereignty’ for Her ?

Well, the simple answer is … *we* don’t have to.

We can let the texts speak for themselves upon such a score.”

It is to those self-same texts which we shall now begin to turn. 

Now, I have written quite voluminously (even by my rather loquacious standards) upon the intrinsic, innate, endogenous connexion between the Goddess and Divine Law. I shall not repeat that work here. 

But it is rather important to observe this manifest fact (the connection, I mean, not my extended discursions upon the subject existing, nor being extensive) precisely because it helps to establish the theoreteic-theological basis upon which one expect that Sovereignty is to be apportioned out to a hopeful human ruler by Her. She *has* It, indeed She *is* It – in the overarching, cosmological sense – and so therefore She *shares* It … choosing to bestow upon the worthy some sliver thereof to rule (or to conquer) as She sees fit (and ‘fit’ is rather apt here given ऋत – Rta – itself descends from PIE h₂er- … ‘to fit’. But onward!).

Parallels immediately invite themselves with the situation of the ‘Divine Right of Kings’ – however while it IS an element held in common that the Auctoritas (to use a rather useful Latin term – although we should, perhaps, observe that the *other* forms of ‘power’ encountered in the upper echelons of Rome as both Republic and Empire, ‘Potestas’ and more especially ‘Imperium’, *also* have their saliency here as well) derives from a Heavenly source, a ‘Divine Mandate’ that is God(s) Given … there are some rather *important* points of distinction to these approaches, too. 

Chiefly amongst these, the actual nature of the relationship between the mortal (would-be) monarch and the Divine – specifically the Divine *Mother*. 

The best way to approach the concept of Coronation in the Indo-European world-view is perhaps less as a dry ‘occasion of state’, or even a public ‘celebration’ or spectacle. And more of an active Initiation. One in which certain qualities are to become ‘imparted’ into the aspirant in question. Both that he may hold the aegis of authority – but also that he may do so *well* in various regards in train. He becomes more than a man through so doing – and, so it is hoped, an ’embodiment’ of righteousness, piety, sagacity, strength, and courage, that may correspondingly ‘shine’ it out upon his nation. 

One of the Hymnals which expresses this essential precept is AtharvaVeda Shaunakiya III 8. Which, interestingly enough, is also utilized in some of its components for *other* forms of Initiation, potentially – including students having completed particular Vedic instruction. Given that the Hymnal has as one of its primary ‘functions’ the gathering to one and ‘binding’ in of Wisdom, that is perhaps not as surprising as it might otherwise perhaps happen to be. 

We won’t go through the whole hymnal – suffice to say the basic idea is, as we have said, to instill particular Divinely keyed qualities into the reign of the aspirant-ruler in question, and to bring together his kinsmen and compatriots in support of him and his incipient regime. 
Not for nothing does the Griffith translation entitle this Hymnal as: “A charm to secure the submission, love, and fidelity of kinsmen”; whilst the much more recent Dr Tulsi Ram rendition declares its purpose to be ‘Rashtra [i.e. ‘National’] Unity’. Taciturn as ever, Whitney contents himself by labelling the Hymn by both title and purpose as, simply, : “For Authority”. 

Now our interest for the purposes of this series is chiefly concentrated in the second part to Line Two: 

To translate this rather directly – 

“I Call [Huve] Devi Aditi [Devīm Aditiṁ], (She) of Valiant Son [Śūraputrām – Śūra as in ‘Brave’, ‘Heroic’, ‘Valiant’; ‘Putra – ‘Son’; in both the Whitney and Griffith this is, perhaps peculiarly, rendered as ‘Sons’ plural : although since we’d expect putrām to be an accusative singular, perhaps ‘(from Whom) (the quality of) Heroism is descended’ might fit better. Or, simply, a single Son – for reasons we shall make clear in subsequent text] –

(My) Kinsmen / Countrymen [Sajātānāṁ – effectively ‘Born Together’] Among (them) Chief [‘Madhyameṣṭā’ – difficult to translate, but ‘Center’ (‘Madhyam’ – ‘Middle’) + ‘Station’ / ‘Stand’ (‘Stha’) is the frequently encountered proposal (one might also read it as ‘which is depended upon’ – in the sense of the whole wheel being held by the axle-rod about which it turns). We might idly wonder whether the phonetic resonance viz. एष्ट [Eṣṭa – to win or obtain through offerings] was also intended]

May I Be Bestowed As A Boon [Yathāsāni is, again, a difficult one – after discussing the matter with N. Mukhopādhyāyaḥ, we’re taking it as Yathā : ‘As’ or ‘in the proper manner’; and ‘Sani’ as in (per the Shabda-Sagara Sanskrit-English Dictionary) ‘Request, solicitation, respectful solicitation as addressed to a spiritual preceptor’ … although other readings are possible; Whitney suggests it should be Yatha + Sama, and Ram somewhat optimistically takes the same route – going so far as to declare it an exercise in being acclaimed “center of *equals*”].” 

Or, without the Sanskrit and my somewhat haphazard translation-noting:

“I Call Devi Aditi, She of Valiant Son / From Whom Heroism Descends – Amidst My People, The Central / Leadership Role May I Be Bestowed (Divinely)”. 

Now, why have we gone through all of that effort to elucidate more properly the phraseology here, when we could simply have quoted a half-dozen words from this or that pre-existing English translation? 

Because, as ever, no translation we could find really brought out the pertinent aspects that we wish to focus upon here. 

It is quite simple. The aspirant to the Monarchial role is asking Devi Aditi Herself (She of Heroic Son – or From Whom Heroicness Descends) to bestow (as his ‘spiritual preceptor’) this sacred station of kingship. 

And it is quite pointedly being done in a manner that invokes two heavily interrelated things: 

i) Devi Aditi as *Mother* 

ii) Devi Aditi as Mother to either a) that *particular* Heroic Son, or b) to the general Heroic Quality that one should seek to embody and to emulate – That Which Is Bestowed. 

The a) and b) are, here, truly one as we are about to discover. For the core conception of this particular strand of Indo-European coronation is that one ‘becomes’ as Her Heroic Son. 

Now, at this point, I feel like a bit of an excursion – or, rather, putting something out for the not-that-interested-in-Vedic-Ritual/Religion Indo-European sphere people out there. 

Namely … Hercules / Herakles. Because everybody (with one notable exception an array of the time) loves the Striker / Thunderer deific !

But why the Classical figure? And, for that matter, why *that specific* Classical figure when we’re part-way through this discussion? 

Well, for a start – because if we direct our attention back up the page somewhat … we’ll see the invocation in AV-S III 8 2 is to Aditi. Aditi the Mother of the Heroic Son. 

Aditi, as it happens, is Mother of Indra. Indra is, most definitely, one impressively Heroic Son. (Indeed, depending upon which etymology we’re going with, there’s a not-too-improbable cause to speculate that the root to His Theonym might have something to do with PIE *h₂nḗr – which connotes ‘Man’ (‘Andro-‘ is from such a root) but also ‘Strength’, ‘Force’, ‘Virility’. I digress.) 

And, as everybody knows – Indra and Herakles are both expressions of the Indo-European Striker/Thunderer Deific. 

One dimension that is pertinent in ways which may become apparent later on, is the situation recounted in the canon (specifically, in this case, Diodorus Siculus IV 9 6), wherein Hera winds up nursing the infant Hercules. 

“After Alcmenê had brought forth the babe, fearful of Hera’s jealousy she exposed it at a place which to this time is called after him the Field of Heracles. Now at this very time Athena, approaching the spot in the company of Hera and being amazed at the natural vigour of the child, persuaded Hera to offer it the breast.”
[Oldfather Translation]

Now, given the situation we can observe as applies Demeter and Triptolemos and/or Demophon – wherein an infant human mortal, being nursed by the breast of the Goddess, attains superhuman potency through such imbibification … it should seem eminently logical that the same is true viz. Herakles and Hera here. 

The underlying reasoning is co-expressed back in the Vedic sphere – wherein we are quite familiar with the concept of the Mother Goddess, as a Cow, providing Milk … that happens to be, essentially, that mystically Empowering Elixir we have so often mentioned. 

We also appear to observe the ‘completion’ of the process in the Etruscan presentation of Uni (Juno) and Hercle (Hercules) – wherein the Apotheosis of Hercules is rendered complete via Her offering the by now fully grown Hercules Her Breast and its attendant divinely empowering contents, effectively as part of a rather drawn out ‘Adoption’ of the Hero as Her Own Son. 

Diodorus Siculus again (IV 39 2) reports on such an adoption occurring:

“2 We should add to what has been said about Heracles, that after his apotheosis Zeus persuaded Hera to adopt him as her son and henceforth for all time to cherish him with a mother’s love, and this adoption, they say, took place in the following manner. Hera lay upon a bed, and drawing Heracles close to her body then let him fall through her garments to the ground, imitating in this way the actual birth; and this ceremony is observed to this day by the barbarians whenever they wish to adopt a son.” 

Yet why is that of interest to us?

Because mythology is rarely simply ‘just’ mythology. Instead, it oft-contains tangible, trenchant trajectories for human action. The arcening chords via which the ‘mythic’ and ‘sidereal’ spheres may conmingle. At least, for the truly exceptional individuals seemingly able to ‘bridge’ or ‘stand astride’ two worlds – and without being torn apart by the shear-factor of the gravitational forces betwixt them, nor lose themselves (nor their majesty) in either one and consequentially ‘drifting away’, falling swiftly out of the other. 

Thus – while we CAN say that Herakles is a refraction of the Indo-European Striker / Thunderer deific … it has also long seemed to me that various situations of ‘Demigods’ found across the Indo-European mythology are likewise often potentially bearing within them something else as well. The introduction of more ‘human’, ‘mortal’, and quite literally ‘down to Earth’ setting-elements up-to and including half of the requisite parentage may point to the ‘how’ and to the ‘why’. 

In order to have a ‘template for action’, the ‘template’ needs to become ‘accessible’. It needs to be something that a suitably (super)impressive human can actually embark upon, can actually adopt and adorn themselves with. 

In later times, it is most certainly the case that the Classical sphere begins to see somewhat self-appointed ‘God Kings’ in the purported-alleged ‘Oriental Despot’ style mold. Yet even though the ‘dividing line’ between Divinity and humanity, in the archaic Indo-European mythic consciousness was really more of a ‘spectrum’ (or even ‘semi-permeable membrane’ – consider the situation of Diomedes, for example), there is a rather significant difference between starting as a human and seeking to emulate a God in order to be adjudged worthy of (post-Mortem) Apotheosis (a la the Roman Imperial model in its earlier phases) … and ‘starting’ as already some measure of a God right there from the outset. You already have, so to speak, ‘one foot in the door’, one leg half-over the ontological barrier. 

Now we *know* from the Vedic comparative evidence – detailed most extensively in some of the conceptry around the Asvamedha and other associate rites, and evidently co-occurrent in other archaic Indo-European understandings (c.f the situation of Rerir’s prayer to Odin and its fairly direct resonancy with this aforementioned Vedic evidence, as we have covered in our previous work, to name but one exemplar), that there *was* a standardized ritual formulation whereby a King *would* in fact beget a semi-divine successor. Indeed, it was rather directly ‘hard-baked’ *into* the rites to be performed surrounding such a king (admittedly, the Gharma offering (involving the transmitive resonancy of the ‘MahaVira’ – the ‘Great Hero’) is a component to the Pravargya – however the conceptual resonance with other elements more *directly* of Asvamedha style principle and encountered across the IE sphere from India to Scandinavia and Rome, is difficult to deny).

Yet even this – is, in essence, figures, humans, ‘starting from Down Here’ (even with a ‘leg-up’) and thence becoming empowered in various fashions to attain the status of incarnate embodiments of the ‘Up There’ within our midst. An ‘actualization’, we may say, of the divine essence within the should-be-King. However it may so happen to have gotten into that aspirant-regent in the first place. 

The ‘template’, as we had said, becomes more ‘resonant’ precisely when it is more ‘accessible’. And so what would otherwise seem a ‘parallel’ effort if one were ‘merely’ seeking to emulate a more ‘purely’ mythic trajectory (that of the Son of the Mother Goddess & Sky Father that is ever amidst the Heavenly, Mythic Sphere) attains considerable saliency precisely in those circumstances wherein it is no longer a ‘parallel’ effort betwixt ‘Mythic’ and ‘Sidereal’ Spheres. But rather a more actively ‘Entwined’ one. 

How is this done? As we have said. We see a partial ‘displacement’ of ‘Up There’ to ‘Down Here’. What is, in Nordic or Hindu terms, a full-fledged God of undeniable Divine parentage on both sides (viz. Indra, Thor) … becomes half-Human. Working His Way (Back) Up. And thus ‘opening the way’ also for other (more-than-) Humans to follow suit in train. Humans who, one way or another, have ‘adopted’ the Divine Parentage, Themselves. 

We can trace this via the comparative mythology. We have set out at grander length elsewhere our belief that the *names* and various key details to the mythologies of figures such as Perseus – show precisely such a ‘shift’ as having occurred. We can chart essences from, say, the RigVedic Hymnals of Indra and show how these now *suspiciously* seem resonant with elements from the aforementioned Perseus’ backstory (and see my earlier ‘On The Birth Of Indra And Its Direct Parallel In The Circumstance Of Danae And Perseus, Devaki And Krishna, Pritha And Karna, Etc.‘ and ‘Perseus , Krishna , Karna – Three Perspectives Upon The Origin Myth Of The Indo-European Striker/Thunderer‘ for more details). We can even use exactly this approach to make sense of situations occurrent viz. Krishna, Karna, and … curiously enough, Hanuman. Except whereas in the Hindusphere these ‘Demigodic’ elements exist *alongside* both i) the archaic Vedic ‘full-blooded’ Striker/Thunderer deific perspective ii) emergent religious fervor that would hardly deign to declare Krishna or Hanuman to be ‘Demi’-Gods, with the ‘Human’ level almost becoming ‘retracted’ back up into the major Divine sphere to the Myth … for some reason, the Classical perspectives tended to pointedly emphasize that other understanding instead. 

Yet let us move forward with a more tangible illustration in earnest. 

In the RigVeda, there are a most curious set of hymnals dedicated to ‘Indra-Varuna’. One might be tempted to read this, rather peculiarly, as being Indra and Varuna as the same Deity. Except this is not the case. Rather, a little background on the Hymns in question (chiefly RV IV 41 & RV IV 42) makes for *enlightening* reading. 

Here we find a rather rare Sanskrit term indeed: ArdhaDeva. Literally: “Demi-God” [‘Half-Deva’, we might say]. Who is this ArdhaDeva? Why, it is the (human) King Who forms the evident main subject (and, curiously enough, Rsi) for the second Hymnal of this pair (RV IV 42). That king being the mighty Trasadasyu Paurukutsya – which, to quote my earlier work upon the subject: “Trasadasyu, the Son of Purukutsa. Trasadasyu, as a point of interest, presumably either means ‘[Re-]Mover of Dasyu’ or ‘Terrorizer [reducing to quivering/flight] of the Dasyu’ – apt for the Indra connotation.”

The effective explanation for why there is a human King being hailed as Indra-Varuna is a simple one. This King has ‘drawn in’ ‘energies’ from both Indra and Varuna in order to rule. He has attained this Divine – indeed, ‘Demigod’ – nature through Sacrifice, per Line Eight.

Either this having taken place as part of the Asvamedha and accompanying fertility investiture for the Queen (i.e. Trasadasyu’s human mother) – in the manner that we had outlined in the course of our earlier ‘The Apple of Odin to Rerir, The Fire-Seed of Agni, The Egg of Nemesis, The Paternity of Alexander, And The Asvamedha of Dasharatha – On The Equine Investiture Of The Divine Essence In A King’s Heir-To-Be In The Indo-European Mytho-Religious Sacro-Political Tradition‘. 

Or, it is an investiture which has taken place via the rites undertaken as part of Trasadasyu’s subsequent elevation to the Kingship. 

To abstract this out into a more general typology – both are, certainly, plausible. Either because it’s a standard element to Vedic Kingship rites (as we shall soon see) even *despite* the Prince having theoretically already received ‘Divine Essence’ right at (and, indeed, *as*) the start to his existence … or because, in the cases of other rulers coming to the throne, the ‘investitures’ associated *with* Coronation specifically may be exactly where this Divine Essence first really enters the picture. Them, that soon-to-be-King, of course, being that aforementioned ‘The Picture’. ‘Chitra’, no doubt, we may also say – to but briefly translate back into Sanskrit ! 

One intriguing support viz. the latter concerns the rather acceptable theory of RV X 124 (a frequently *very* misused hymnal for all *sorts* of academic hand-waving – which we shall resist the temptation to get into at this *particular* point in time) as being a liturgy to be utilized for just such a scenario. Therein, we find three ‘Energies’ (Agni, Varuna, and Soma) being ‘drawn down’ from a certain Father figure (Pitr – and ‘Asura’ .. and we must emphasize this is *not* ‘A’Sura’, but rather the word which means ‘Sire’, ‘Ruler’, and potentially ‘God’) into the young successor. That successor is named Indra. And, of course, despite the lack of actual textual attestation within the hymnal, this has been used for all manner of … things we said we wouldn’t get into at this time … around trying to declare Indra somehow dethrones Dyaus, etc. etc. 

Instead, it is much more plausible that what we are witnessing in this ‘transition’ is something else: the (human) Prince, with ‘Indra’ essence and designation, is ‘inheriting’ these important and empowering qualities from his immediate paternal forebear. Another possibility is that the Prince is being bestowed with these qualities *from* the Heavenly Father (just as said human Prince’s predecessor and progenitor had received as well when *he* became King).

There is, of course, quite a lot more which we can and probably *should* speak about concerning this particular RigVedic Hymn … but we had intended to keep these pieces short ! 

Let’s go back to RV IV 42. There’s a rather intriguing proposition (as advocated by Herman Lommel) that it in fact represents – at least in part – Trasadasyu’s ‘coronation proclamation’, hence why it’s in his own words and rather notably self-proclaiming. Presuming for the moment (and it seems eminently likely – it’s a RigVedic Hymnal, after all) that the ordering of concepts is pointed and intentional and keyed to a corresponding ritual and/or metaphysical framework … this provides additional insights into the ‘investiture of essence’ typology that evidently lies at the heart of Vedic (and, more broadly, Indo-European) kingship. We may consider all of this at some future time. For now it is enough to observe that it is *Varuna* that is the initial God invoked … and, again, Varuna is the Sovereign, Whose Powers are ‘invested’ (dhārayanta) in Him. The next line (line 3) has this ‘Varuna’ declare that He is also Indra. And the line subsequent to that ( 4 ) has Rta enter the picture as the most important foundation to this Rule. 

Line Four is of particular import for us due to the fascinating situation of a certain ‘Son of Aditi’ (Putro Aditer) interweaving with two salient occurrences for ‘Rta’ upon either side. The effective sense being communicated is that this ‘Son of Aditi’ is able to Reign precisely because it is ‘through Rta’ that They have attained Rta. And thusly, availed by a certain *Three Elements or Essences* (tridhātu), has come to ‘spread’ (prathayad) Their Dominion across (vi) the Earth (bhūma). 

As we had extolled in Part One: our conception of the Indo-European Kingship is that Aditi (the Goddess) that is so closely identified with Cosmic Order ‘delegates’ some share of this to Her Chosen regent, to Rule (and protect and uphold the immanency of Rta within) some swathe of Creation upon Her Divine Behalf. This may come in the direct ‘Rulership’ component we ought expect viz. Lawgiving – the ‘Varuna’ competency, perhaps, extolled toward the opening of this Hymn; or it may come via the more ‘militant’ component construed via the Vajra and Vritra-smiting (‘Vritrahan’ occurs later in this very Hymn) carried out therewith – the ‘Indra’ competency. And we may safely surmise that those ‘Three Essences’ aforementioned may have *something* to do with those ‘Three Essences’ we had just met in RV X 124.

However, there is one unanswered question – and that is *which* Son of Aditi is meant in line Four. There are several possibilities. One of which being Varuna Himself. Another of which being Indra Himself. A third being, of course, the human King (that is to say, in this *particular* case, Trasadasyu) – and therefore, in a sense, potentially even Both. In some ways, it does not quite matter. In any of these options the same basic typology occurs: one is King, one is Mighty, precisely because She Wills It. One Rules only insofar as She Allows It. The Indo-Europeans are, as we have long observed, a people of Law (and, of course, also of Lore – the Two go hand in hand most eminently) . For us … both Devi and Divine Law are Uber Alles. 

There is, as per usual, quite a vast wealth of further verbiage we could bombard the page with. But instead, we’ll cut things short. 

One very emphatic passage from the Shatapatha Brahmana (V 5 2 8-10) helps to bring various of these things together.

“8 Thereupon they seize a reddish-white (cow) which is clearly with calf, (as a victim) for Aditi. The mode of procedure regarding her is the same as that of the eight-footed barren cow. Now, Aditi being this earth, it is her embryo (child) he thereby causes him (the king) to be. The sacrificial fee for this (cow-offering) is just such a reddish-white cow that is clearly with calf.

9 They then seize a dappled one, which is clearly with calf, (as a victim) for the Maruts. The mode of procedure regarding this one is the same. The Maruts being the clans, he thereby makes him the embryo of the clans. The sacrificial fee for this (cow-offering) is just such a dappled (cow) that is clearly with calf.

10 These two animal victims, whilst being such, are seized (by some) in a different way. The one that is seized for Aditi, (some) seize for the Âdityas,–the Âdityas being the All, he (the priest) thereby makes him the embryo of the All (universe). And the one that is seized for the Maruts, (some) seize for the All-gods,–the All-gods being the All, he thereby makes him the embryo of the All.”
[Eggeling Translation] 

We should also add viz. the situation of SBr V 5 2 9, and its description of the nascent (no-longer-*quite*-) human Ruler as being made the ’embryo of the clans’ – per Eggeling’s footnoting: “That is, he causes him to spring forth from the midst of the people, and be protected by them on all sides.”

We are reminded instantaneously of the situation viz. AtharvaVeda Shaunakiya III 8 2, and its vocally stated goal for the invoker to become ‘Sajātānāṁ Madhyameṣṭā’ – the emergent occupant of that station within the midst of his people. 

The earlier Shatapatha Brahmana verse – V 5 2 8 – we find quite clearly *exactly that* which I have been banging on as to throughout the course of this piece. A human soon-to-be-King is, it should seem, ‘adopted’ by the Goddess as Her Son. Śūraputrām – Hero Son. Rather similar to Indra, in that regard – the figure that we repeatedly run into throughout the Coronation Rites (along with, of course, Varuna – and still Others further). With, it should seem, the Maruts invoked precisely to draw in the ‘mythic resonancy’ whereby the Maruts are the loyal warband, retinue, armies of Lord Indra. Brothers and Kinsmen unto Him. Just as one should, one surmises, *hope* that the chieftains of the Clans under one’s rule ought be likewise. 

In any case, perhaps the most fascinating detail to all of this is the most understated one:

What we are witnessing here, overall, is a situation wherein the human ruler is rendered more-than-human … and yet still subject to a greater power still. 

This is no ‘absolutist’ Sun King in the manner of the unvarnished and nuanceless stereotype. He is no entirely self-dependent all-powerful and self-effulgent figure. 

Quite the contrary. He rules at the behest and via the empowerment of a far grander Sovereign, still. He rules at Her Behest. He discharges authority upon Her Behalf. 

To reference that well-known remark of the famed diplomat Talleyrand – ‘Governments Come And Go, Yet I Remain’. 

It is, no doubt, in part why that famed Scythian King Idanthyrsus, who repelled the pretentions of the would-be Zoroastrian World-Emperor, Darius, pointedly declared unto the latter that he would bow only before Two:

Papaios [the Sky Father], his Ancestor – and Tabiti [the Mother Goddess – Aditi], the “Queen of the Scythians” per Herodotus’ reportage of the exchange in question.

We do not consider this an idle remark, nor a mistaken identification. Indeed, if anything it is often *under* interpreted – as Tabiti having been ‘only’ the Queen of the Scythian *Gods*. 

In truth, it should appear that She was (and, in essence, as an Indo-European Goddess still *is*, amidst us – most notably via the Shakta Theology of my own Hindusphere) the Queen also most directly *of* the Scythians as well. 

The human king serving as a Regent of Hers down here upon this Earth amidst the relevant as to Her People. 

In closing for this component to our series, we can do little better than quote (even in English translation – for which I shall spare you the footnoting!) from the Shruti:

AV-S VII 6:
“We call for help the Queen of Law and Order, Great Mother of
   All those whose ways are righteous,
  Far-spread, unwasting strong in Her Dominion, Aditi wisely lead-
   ing, well protecting.
[…]
Earth, our Strong Guard, incomparable Heaven, Aditi wisely lead-
   ing, well protecting.
Let us bring hither, in pursuit of riches, Aditi with Our Word,
   the Mighty Mother,
  Her in Whose Lap the spacious air is lying: may She afford us
   triply-guarding shelter!”
[Griffith Translation]

And, further:

White YV 21:
“5 We call to succour us the mighty Mother of those whose
sway is just, the Queen of Order,
Strong-ruler, far-expanding, ne’er decaying, Aditi gracious
Guide and Good Protectress.
6 Sinless may we ascend, for weal, this vessel rowed with
good oars, divine, that never leaketh,
Earth our Strong Guard, incomparable Heaven. Aditi gracious
guide and Good Protectress.”
[Griffith Translation]

Not for nothing, it should seem, did Jung once opine:

“He who stems from two mothers is the hero: the first birth makes him a mortal man, the second an immortal half-god.”