It seems the most logical, natural thing in the world – and certainly, we have amply attested acknowledgement for this in and about multiple Indo-European spheres. Yet somehow , the situation of the Thunderbolt has become something of a ‘cudgel’ with which some have sought to ‘beat’ deifics such as Odin and Shiva out of the position within Their respective Indo-European pantheonic perspectives.

The claim goes that as They allegedly ‘do not’ wield the Thunder, They cannot therefore be expressions of the Sky Father deific complex. And it is often followed up in fairly short order by a subsequent statement of the more prominently identified Thunder-wielder – Thor, Indra – being the ‘real’ Sky Father of the relevant sphere. Something idiotic, especially, as applies the Vedic, wherein Dyaus Pitar quite literally means Sky Father, and is Indra’s Father and has an array of pointed co-identifications with Rudra within the Shruti, but I digress. People believe that which they want and never mind the facts.

Now, as it happens, there are an array of perfectly good supports for the notion of these deific figures – Odin and Rudra – wielding Thunderbolts. We have examined some of these upon occasion in other works [with frequent mention for Rudra per RV II 33 3 wielding just such a Vajra]. But for this one, I want to start with something rather unorthodox … and that is a rather remarkable Dutch folk-element known as the ‘Donderbezem’ (literally – ‘Thunder Broom’) [illustrated, fig.1] that my attention was directed towards by a certain ‘Sagnamaðr Stark’ on twitter.

My supposition had been that the various runes at the head of each of the three Aettir [‘Rows’ – more literally, ‘Clans’] of the Elder Futhark, pertained to Men, Demons, and Gods, respectively; and in relation to my speculation viz. *Hagalaz ( ᚺ ) potentially corresponding to ‘Demons’, he had asked if I was aware of the aforementioned ‘Donderbezem’ (described by him as a “protective stave”) as it bore some resemblance to the shape of the Hagal ( ᚼ ) rune of the Younger Futhark described rather memorably in the Icelandic Rune Poem as being a “sickness for serpents” (he had also noted that the Anglo-Saxon rune poem contained an ‘Ior’ ( ᛡ ) which had the same shape and meant ‘serpent’).

Now, that was something which fairly instantly made sense to me. Why?

Well, consider this. The ‘Broom’, it fulfils two functions. First, and most obviously, it looks like the diffusion of a thunder-cast. Many twiggy, branching projections outwards and down, I mean.

And certainly, speaking of such visual symbolism, the Donderbezem / Thunderbroom escutcheon bears fairly instantaneously-resemblant shape to the ‘Roman-style’ Thunderbolt visual [illustrated at fig. 2 with a Roman shield bearing the emblem; and fig. 3 with the decidedly ‘Vajra-‘ resembling device within the right hand of a statue of the enigmatic Vejovis / Vediovis [‘Raging Jove’] ].

However, second – it is, in a sense, ‘apotropaic’, the Broom. It serves to ‘protect’ from the contaminations of dust and grime and debris, by sweeping them away. It expurgates its environment where it is deployed of that which we do not wish to be there.

The Thunderbolt, in Divine – or in ritually resonant – utilization is just similar.

As applies the second, the ritual resonation, we are well-informed via the Yajurveda in both its Taittiriya Samhita and Shatapatha Brahmana clades of just such a style of operation. There are, quite literally, too many sections for us to quote nor even cite all of these in a single breath.

However, usually the way it works is that a particular ritual instrument – often a Sphya (a ‘Wooden Sword’, although it is also a bit of a trowel), although also Sacrificial Stakes, Ghee, particular plant elements, etc. – will be identified via ‘imbuement’ with the relevant Divine Weapon … and the ritual space (which has become mesocosmically identified with the Worlds, the inhabitable space(s) of the Universe, under accordant Divine Dominion) shall become expurgated (‘exorcised’, if you prefer) of potential demonic disruptors through its judicious and vigorous employment. Naturally, one might think of the Priest wielding such as ‘stepping into’ the role of a God …

One example for this , from TS II 1 7 8 , reads in the Keith translation as:

“He who practises witchcraft should offer a red (cow) to Rudra; verily he has recourse to Rudra with his own share; verily he cuts him down to him; swiftly he reaches destruction; it is red, for it has Rudra as its deity; (verily it serves) for prosperity. The sacrificial post is shaped like the wooden sword, the wooden sword is a thunderbolt; verily he hurls a thunderbolt against him; the strew is made of Çara grass; verily he crushes him; the kindling-wood is of Vibhidaka; verily he splits him.”

It’s not our purpose to get into the precise ‘ins-and-outs’ of the verse and its translation there; although we would note that the term rendered as ‘witchcraft’ by Keith [and our thanks to Nyāyaratnasiṃha for assistance with unpicking the verse] , ‘Abhichara’, in fact can have a rather ‘broader’ suite of connotation and meaning. ‘Offensive Magic’ would probably be a reasonable figurative rendering for the moment. I digress.

Another reasonably straightforward exemplar of this sort of conceptry ‘in motion’ is provided via SBr III 7 2, 5, & 32:

“2 He thus draws the outline of the hole (for the stake), with, ‘Herewith I cut off the necks of the Rakshas!’ The spade is the thunderbolt: with the thunderbolt he thus cuts off the necks of the Rakshas.

[…]

5 He sprinkles (the top, middle, and bottom parts) with, ‘For the sky–thee! for the air–thee! for the earth–thee!’ the stake being a thunderbolt (he does so) for the protection of these worlds: ‘I sprinkle thee for the protection of these worlds,’ is what he thereby means to say.

[…]

And in like manner does he now only offer up that chip of the sacrificial stake 2; thereby this (sacrificer) is bid good-speed; and thus the Rakshas do not thereafter sip the sacrifice, thinking, ‘that surely is a raised thunderbolt!’ He offers it with the text (Vâg. S. VI, 21), ‘May thy smoke rise up to the sky, thy light to the heavens! fill the earth with ashes, Hail!'”
[Eggeling translation]

As you can see – a ‘Thunderbolt’ signifer is erected for the purposes of apotropaic warding of the space against Rakshasa infiltration and consequent ritual disruption (i.e. also their hijacking of the fruits thereof intended to go to the Gods).

Think of it like the ‘Caution! High Voltage!’ signs [fig. 4] which show a man being electrocuted by a cartoon lightning bolt which serve to keep people out of areas of electricity danger in our own time, perhaps.

Oh, and it is rather interesting – as we have often noted – that Rakshasa, figuratively renderable as ‘Devourer’ maps up so well viz. Nordic ‘Jotunn’ and its essential underlying meaning; not least given that both of these clades are effectively to be banished to an ‘outside the enclosure’ sphere, in both ritual and cosmological / mythological terms. Again, I digress.

Now, to return to realms both Mythic and Nordic … it is often felt that we have a bit of a ‘gap’ for Odin as applies ‘Thunder’ conceptry. This, I would personally put down to the imperfect state of preservation for the Nordic textual corpus. Others disagree.

We have previously sought to illustrate how Odin’s magical deed of opening up the hills and earth so as to reveal a stolen wealth of Cows, was correlate with Brihaspati doing much the same thing … only with the Brihaspati recollection within the RigVeda featuring the rather more impressive pyrotechnics of a Vajra (in that case, a Meteor, no less) conjured via way of orbital bombardment against the ensorcelling, encircling, and shrouding Vala (demon-dragon) who had sought to steal the wealth of kine in the first place. And contended that the lack of an obvious dragon in the Heimskringla / Ynglinga rendition featuring Odin – was assumedly the result of the garblings, euhemericism (the same text, after all, presents Odin as a human king originally of Asia – and dead) and other assorted trendancies which have sadly bedevilled the Nordic canon of materials.

But we can do better here.

Fig. 5 is a fine 18th century Icelandic depiction of Odin atop Sleipnir. In Odin’s left hand there is a rather electric-blue coloured stave (which, again, looks suspiciously ‘Vajra-like’), the direct saliency of which has never been successfully linked to any (directly) attested mythic occurrence featuring Him that we are aware of. It’s rather interesting that the same three-pointed element is also to be found both upon the rear of Odin’s Steed in burnished metal, and also, it would seem, upon His headgear (and, in another Icelandic illustration from the same period, a similar feature appears alongside two Solar symbols, in a pediment of sorts above the entryway to Odin’s Hall of Valhalla).

We would suggest that it might bear some resonance to that detail for Woden attestively located within the Anglo-Saxon ‘Nine Herbs Charm’ [‘Nigon Wyrta Galdor’ – ‘Galdor’, indeed, a term of great pertinence for reasons that ought prove readily apparent; the aforementioned Brihaspati / Brahmanaspati, we have occasionally sought to translate Odin’s mastery and crafting of Galdra (well, Galdr, but we were being genitive there) utilizing such a theonymic hailing (c.f. the ‘Galdrs föður’ term encountered at Baldrs draumar III, as G.Y.K. kindly found and pointed out for us) ]. To quote in the Old English:

“ðas VIIII magon / wið nygon attrum.
Wyrm com snican, / toslat he man;
ða genam Woden / VIIII wuldortanas,
sloh ða þa næddran, / þæt heo on VIIII tofleah.
þær geændade / æppel and attor,
þæt heo næfre ne wolde / on hus bugan.”

Or, phrased in a language which we might all be more familiar with (less-old English):

“These VIIII [Nine] have Power [Magan – c.f. Sanskrit Magha (मघ), English ‘Might’] /
‘Gainst [wið – ‘with’, but more ‘toward’] Nine Black/Malevolences [often translated as ‘Poisons’; ‘Attrum’ appears to be an introduced Latin term – and, in this case, a form of ‘Ater’ (āter if we are being fancy with macrons), which has such a meaning, and interestingly enough, derives from the same PIE which I tend to believe underpins ‘Atharva-‘ … more upon this some other time].

A Wyrm [Serpent / Dragon] came Sneaking [‘Snican’ is more directly ‘Crawling’, but Sneaking may be a cognate] / in Two Slit he a Man [‘to-‘ is an OE prefix for ‘dividing’ into ‘two’ – often with quite some force involved; ‘slat’, perhaps more ‘tear [asunder]’ than ‘slit’ in terms of its actual intended meaning and understood phrasing at the time];

Then Woden took / VIIII [Nine] WuldorTanas [a term I’ve deliberately left untranslated here for the moment]
Slew [‘Sloh’] then the Adder / that it into Nine [parts] flew [‘to-‘ prefix again for breaking apart]

There brought-to-an-end / Apple ‘gainst [‘and’ – ‘anti’] Venom [‘Attor’ – c.f. Old Norse ‘Eitr’]
That it never [‘næfre’] would [‘ne wolde’ literally ‘not/nor would’ – note, due to relevant OE grammar, not a double-negative as literal word-by-word translation might otherwise erroneously imply] / into the House turn [‘bugan’ – ‘bend’].’

Now, that term I had left untranslated, ‘WuldorTanas’, is often rendered as ‘Twigs of Glory’ or ‘Glory-Twigs’. And to be fair, that is a fairly direct translation for ‘Wuldor’, there, as ‘Glory’. Although personally I think it’s ‘missing’ a certain something – in two directions. First, the quality of reverence as an active verb – that is to say, ‘glorification’, but also something closer to ‘prayer’ (i.e. ‘engagement with the Divine’). Sanskrit, predictably, has a one-word term of a mere four letters in our Anglo-Romanic transcription thereof, which does the job admirably and then some – ‘Arka’ ( अर्क ), which at once connotes a Hymn, a Ray of Light, and Lightning, and thus leading to some rather interesting renderings for, say, RV I 88 1 : wherein a verse often interpreted as having the Maruts’ Chariots characterized and/or correlate with the Lightning … may in fact (also) mean that these are Hymnaic chariots. A most scintillating (in both senses) concept indeed. But we digress.

As applies ‘Tanas’ – the attested meaning is, of course, Twigs, Branches, c.f. the sorts of things one might find as the brush of a stiff archaic Broom; although I might also contemplate whether the PIE ‘*Dhanu’ that becomes ‘Dhanu’ (Bow) in Sanskrit might prove pertinent; not least as it also turns into various Germanic terms for ‘Pine’ or ‘Fir’ (for example – Old High German ‘Tanna’, which Pokorny has as also meaning ‘Oak’; and the rather famous German ‘Tannenbaum’ – ‘Christmas Tree’ (for English) or ‘Fir Tree’), as well as an array of Celtic language terms for ‘Oak’ (Breton ‘Tann’ , etc.), and potentially Hittite ‘[Giš]tanau-‘ / ‘Tnau’ / ‘GIS̆ ta-na-a-ú’ ‘tanāu’ (a rare term that may indicate a sort of tree). The associations of the relevant deific complex with Oak Trees run right back to Ancient Greece (if not further); and even beyond the ‘Bow’ linkages (viz. *Dhanu => Dhanu, etc.), ‘weaponized’ conceptry fairly instantly suggests itself for an array of these woods. But let us return to the other half to the pertinent terminology.

Van Vliet was rather interesting (if likely incorrect) in proposing an etymology for ‘Wuldor’ which sought to connect it to ‘Wealdan’ – a term for Rulership, Control (and ‘Wielding’, from which this modern English term fairly directly descends); however the more conventionally accepted view places Old English ‘Wuldor’ as deriving from PIE *Wel- – a term for ‘Seeing’. We would therefore suggest that these ‘Glory-Twigs’ are, in fact, intended to be rather ‘visually apparent’ ones [and, indeed, ‘Gloria’, itself, has such a potential prospect – we shan’t get into the details, but suffice to say it’s from either a PIE term for ‘calling / chanting’ [ref. Old Norse ‘Galdr’, as it happens – or ‘Gala’, which can mean ‘[to] Crow’], and/or from one for ‘Shining’, ‘Golden’, etc. [ref. ‘Gold’, ‘Glow’, etc.] ] .

It would therefore seem rather logical were the ‘Glory-Twigs’ aforementioned actually to have intended some form of quite luminous (amidst the storm-cloud grey and the black) arcening cluster of oft-curved, oft-forking non-straight lines (i.e. ‘twig’ shaped). Rather like, you should have to agree, Lightning.

So, phrased another way – it would appear, then, that we have rather direct attestation from that most useful Anglo-Saxon Galdr for Odin wielding a Thunderbolt (or a barrage of such in terms of the Leaping Lightning strands a-flying) , assumedly congealed via ‘magical’ mechanisms utilizing both enunciated and material / materially configured inputs (i.e. what went into both the ’empowerment’ through metaphysical means of the construct, and also the physical structure and related ‘ingredients’ necessarily required to provide vessel for the ‘imbuement’ in question) ; with the Galdr in question effectively providing, in its appropriate context, a regaling not merely ‘descriptive’ but actually ‘prescriptive’ so as to guide through the active emulation of Him in these regards.

The ‘Thunderbolt’ in question is not only potent to sunder such a serpent[-demon] into multiple, dismembered pieces with near-explosive force when wielded by the God Himself – but also presents sufficient apotropaic resonance that even when emulated by a human practitioner (who is, assumedly, not conjuring bolts of coruscating electricity from the heavens … not literally, at any rate – metaphysics notwithstanding), a demon-serpent shall ‘never’ turn itself toward seeking to infest and torment the House which is under this Nine-Glory-Twig signifer’s warding protection. Rather like, I would surmise, that Donderbezem / Thunderbroom visible upon the outer facings of some Dutch buildings which we had aforementioned earlier.

Now there is, understandably, quite a bit more which can (and should!) be said in relation to both the Nine Herbs Charm – and salient points of Indo-European comparanda that pertain to same. But we shall exercise an uncharacteristic restraint in not delving further into these matters for today and seek to move on rather abruptly – and back to Rudra.

So no in-depth comparative metaphysics of the combat-metaphysics entailed in either Vedic nor Eddic spheres – for today, at any rate.

We have just spent quite some paragraph-inches examining a situation of Odin both a) engaged in an act of Demon/Dragon-Slaying, utilizing a Thunderbolt; and b) assisting mankind via the provision of healing elements – herbal and otherwise metaphysical [c.f. the subsequent lines to the Galdr, wherein the Wise Lord [‘witig drihten’] hanging in Heaven [‘on heofonum […] he hongode’], He set and sent them [‘sette and sænde’] out into the Seven Worlds [‘on VII worulde’].

As it happens, these are both rather Roudran approaches, quite directly attested, as well. I mention this, as the situation is thus one wherein at ‘both ends’ of a period some millennia in scope, we find the cognate deifics with these attributes. That is to say – the argument that these ideas might be some form of late-period, even post-Christianization ‘mix-up’ and ‘mis-application’ to Odin … runs rather right smack into the fact that as it’s pervasively attestable for Odin’s Vedic correlate near two millennia or more earlier would appear to quite strongly suggest that these are foundational attributes to the deific complex in question, which have been preserved also amidst the Germanic sphere (even despite incomplete textual & theological conservation) – if you know where and how to look. But let us get back to the direct materials at hand.

To start with the latter one first – Rudra is, per quite the expansive array of Vedic attestations, a Bringer and Bestower of healing elements, particularly of the herbal variety. You can see this in such theonymics as ‘Jalāṣabheṣaja’ [as at RV I 43 4 … inter many alia], which means pretty much exactly that. In various instances, the ‘herb’ in question is referred to using the rather excellent term ‘Oṣadhi’ (ओषधि – anglicized rather variously as Oshadhi or Osadhi, etc.) – and I say that it is an excellent term as it effectively means ‘Light-Bearing’ (Hmm .. ‘WuldorTanas’, perhaps?). A fitting manner in which to hail such a life-giving and positive element [c.f. TS V 5 9 i (and, for good measure, AV-S VII 87), wherein Rudra is the effective energy found within these ‘Plants’, just as He is within Fire and Waters aforementioned in the same verse; and c.f. also SBr VI 1 3 12, wherein Rudra (as Pashupati, as One of the Eight ‘Ashtamurti’ Facings of He) is again extolled as the Osadhi in question, and also implicitly the vital empowerer of life for living beings as the result of same ; ] – although (notwithstanding the interesting prospects for the Anglo-Saxon ‘æppel’ contra poison (attor) in the Nine Herbs Galdr above and some centuries and millennium later) it is perhaps worth noting that it is not necessarily ‘just’ a plant, nor utilized purely in the sense that we may think of as ‘medicinal’ today.

What I mean by that is that one does not ordinarily encounter the (metaphysical) equivalent to high explosive thought of as a medicine – unless, perhaps, as applies the nitroglycerin prescribed for a variety of blood-pressure related symptoms.

If you think I’m joking about this … consider a few verses wherein we observe this phenomenon ‘in motion’. (And, again, I’m going to have to restrain myself from … going through word-by-word and line-by-line a whole suite of Atharvanic Hymnals …

AV-S VI 32 2 has Rudra called upon to pulverize (śṛṇātu) the necks and ribcages of both Pishachas and Yatudhanas (śṛṇātu yātudhānāḥ – a most admirable sentiment indeed, quite literally an imperative !) – with this being presented correlate with the aptly named Vīrudh (वीरुध्) plant, of omnipresent grave and glorious potency (viśvatovīryā), which is declared to ‘unite [the demonic / demon-worshipping foe] with Death’ (Yamena samajīgamat).

AV-S V 14 has the Osadhi enlisted to, per the Bloomfield translation, “Seek thou, O plant, to injure him that seeks to injure (us), strike down him that prepares spells (against us)! / Strike down the wizards, strike down him that prepares spells (against us); slay thou, moreover, O plant, him that seeks to injure us!” ; Griffith renders those verses (the second half of AV-S V 14 1, and the whole of line 2, in case you were wondering): “Harm thou, O Plant, the mischievous, and drive the sorcerer away. / Beat thou the Yātudhānas back, drive thou away the sorcerer; / And chase afar, O Plant, the man who fain would do us injury.”; And, for completeness, Whitney: “seek thou to injure, O herb, him that seeks to injure; smite down the witchcraft-maker. / Smite down the sorcerers, smite down the witchcraft-maker; then, whoever seeks to injure us, him do thou smite, O herb.”

Subsequent verses to the same Hymnal [AV-S V 14] set out some interesting additional details as to the how of these operations – however, we are endeavouring to keep things brief so another suite of stories (by which I mean scriptural exegeses) for another time. And we shall also restrain ourselves similarly viz. AV-S II 27 (and its similarly Roudran hailing of herbaceous, hexer-countering provision) , which I had initially intended to examine in detail here.

Indeed, at the risk of rendering things too truncated by half – I intend to move on in fairly short order to our final element for consideration: AV-S IV 28 , a liturgy oriented in dedication to Bhava and Sarva, those Twin (and, elsewhere, Wolfish) Forms of (The) Rudra(s).

Now, our points of major interest here are quite straightforward. Bhava and Sarva, as Rudra(s) fulfil a situation correlate viz. Odin (although one can also, interestingly, suggest that as the Two Wolves that are as ‘Sons’ to Rudra, per Shankhayana Shrauta Sutra IV 20, that probative value might also, potentially, be sought in relation to Freki and Geri – particularly if the underlying meaning to the latter were reinterpreted in light of the ‘Spear’ term somewhat homophonic with same).

The first verse hails Them as being the … well, translations vary. ‘Controller’ would be one interpretation. However, I suspect that the pertinent term – Pradiśi – is instead intended in another way … namely, ‘Who Point Out’ (Pra + Dish, the latter from our familiar PIE *Deyk; whence also ‘Teach’, etc.), ‘Who Inform’, and so forth. But Who Point Out what, exactly? ‘All that shines’ – ‘Virocate’. Now, what *else* do we know of which prominently ‘shines’, and which we find Rudra(s) in position to be guiding mankind as to the identification and use of … ah yes, ‘Osadhi’, those famously ‘Light-Bearing’ Herbs. So, ‘Lord of All the Herbs’; Director / Educator of us as to the Herbs. In (Under) Whose Direction The Empowering Herbs Be. You get the idea. Ausadhinam Pati, indeed !

In verse 3, They are referred to as ‘vṛtrahaṇā’ – that is to say, as Slayers of Vritra. Which, of course, one could take figuratively to mean ‘adversary’ … and that is not incorrect, especially as applies how these apotropaic hymnals are intended to work. However, the question becomes how far figuratively to take it, in terms of the original deed being referred to. I would suggest that as we can demonstrate that a spot of (Demon-)Dragon-Slaying is something recurrently engaged in by the Sky Father deific complex (ref. Zeus contra Typhon, for instance) … well, the notion of a serpentine / draconic characteristic to the encircling adversary should seem prima facie a plausible one. And, indeed, with a fundamental characteristic of Vritra in particular – the ‘Water’ etc. disruption – also seeming pertinent given the situation of the Persian presentation of Vedic Tishya (Rudra; also identified as the Nakshatra of ‘Pushya’, and linked in this way to Brihaspati), Tishtrya, in relation to Apaosha – Apaosa being the antonym to what in Sanskrit would be ‘Pusa’ ( पुष ), meaning ‘growth / nourishing’ and referring rather directly to the life-force enabled via the waters, the rains (c.f. Ardra nakshatra (Rudra again), with this meaning ‘Moisture’ or ‘Green’ (as in ‘Green Growth of Plants’); and as with Tishtrya etc. being linked to Sirius). We have also related the aforementioned to the Classical sphere in the form of Zeus Icmaeus [Ikmaios – from ἰκμᾰ́ς (Ikmas), likwise pertaining to ‘Moisture’, inferentially ‘Cloudy’; perhaps ref. Zeus Maimaktes for various reasons] and Apollo Hekatos [‘Far-Darter’] , as attested per the ‘Argonautica’ ( II ) of Apollonius of Rhodes.

Verses 6 and 7 then go on to expand the ‘inescapable’ characteristic as to Their Weapon (able to subdue any amidst Gods or Men, no less) of the preceding verse ( 5 ) … by telling us that They wield the Vajra. Quite directly stated – and stated twice, in fact, in these successive lines, as if for emphasis (there are, after all, Two Rudras here – perhaps Lightning followed by Thunder springs to mind … ). Verse Six has the Pair entreated to deploy the Vajra against the Yatudhana [‘Demon-Worshipper’, ‘Sorcerer’] – who is presently himself engaged in the ‘making’ of malicious spells [‘Krtya’ – Nyāyaratnasiṃha informs me that Sayana’s commentary specifies such: “kṛtyayā so that means by the means of kṛtyā”], and … contingent upon translation is either utilizing ‘roots’ [i.e. ‘herbs’] himself [this interpretation found in Griffith, and Bloomfield], or may be conspiring to render one descendant-less [as countenanced by Whitney – the idea being ‘cuts off the root’, he interprets “mūla- as “offspring, the root of increase of a family””; we might also ponder a rather more … immediately operative approach to securing such an outcome, so to speak].

Weber has a rather fascinating interpretation that it should, in fact, be ‘mūrakṛ́t’ – with ‘Mū’ ( मू ) being understood as ‘binding’, and therefore, we would ponder, ‘Mūra’ ( मूर ) + ‘krt’ rendering similarly as ensorcelling, stupefying, and otherwise charming unto one’s nefarious control. His own (German) translation for the relevant portion(s) of the verse runs “Wer da Zaubergespinnst spinnt, Trug schafft, Nachstellung brütet, […]” – which, per the haphazardness of Google-assisted translate, results in “Whoever weaves magic webs, creates deceit, broods snares, […]” (‘broods snares’ taking ‘brütet’ rather directly, of course – although the actual sense to the German is that of a bird making a nest [‘brooding’], which goes rather handily with the ‘preparatory’ function involved; and, we would, but briefly, note, Rudra’s Hunter epithets as a Stalker of Birds Who Himself may use such ensnaring or restraining mechanisms (in the more ‘actual’ sense – not black magic), given VS XVI 27’s reference to puñjiṣṭhas as amidst the Roudran Clades … well, so to speak, ‘To Use A Thief To Catch A Thief’ – ‘Thief’, here, of course, being ‘Stena’ ( स्तेन ) and/or ‘Taskara’ ( तस्कर ) (etc.), both of these also being Roudran hailings, per VS XVI 21 [with Nyāyaratnasiṃha also informing me that the commentary of Bhaṭṭabhāskaramiṣra has puñjiṣṭhas as “someone who entraps flocks of birds, surrounding them together”]).

And, speaking further to this notion of the Great Hunter Who may make use of the greatest of snares … Nyāyaratnasiṃha pointed out to me a hitherto un-noticed detail pertaining to the final verse – namely, that the ‘Saṃ Vajreṇa Sṛjatam’ component, rather than being the ‘connect the Vajra with [the adversary]’ as interpreted by various translations, should instead be interpreted (as it is in Sāyaṇa’s commentary upon the verse) ‘saṃyojayatam’. That is to say, “You [dual, imperative] bind [the adversary] with the Vajra”. Which, I would have to say, reminds one somewhat of that attestation within the Nine Herbs Galdr for Odin / Woden succeeding with the WuldorTanas [‘Glory-Twigs’ – implicitly the Thunderbolt] in ensuring that the Wyrm which had come crawling had been rendered entirely unable to ‘turn toward’ the house of the invoker. It certainly does seem a rather interesting notion in light of the broader suite of conceptry [as encountered at, for instance, AV-S V 14, etc.] for ‘turning back upon the Yatudhana’ the spells he had sought to unleash via metaphysical bindings.

In any case, it is against both the Yatudhana and the Kimidin that the Vajra is to be visited; the former in line 6, the latter per verse 7. It is not our purpose to examine the potential intricacies of ‘Kimidin’ herein; but suffice to say it is a frequently encountered ‘pairing’ for Yatudhana – RV X 87 23 (a suitably ‘weaponized’ invocation to Agni) even presenting this rather literally with pairs of Yatudhanas and Kimidins; AV-S I 7 simply having the two terms recurrently featured alongside one another.

So, to summarize – we have demonstrated earlier, through various elements including the Nine Herbs Galdr, the notion of Odin as significantly connected with the ‘herbs’ and magic of that nature, with this being utilizable for the purposes of demon-dragon vanquishing … and with a very plausible connexion to ‘Thunderbolt’ conceptry for this (via the ‘WuldorTanas’ thusly specified), which Odin is also portrayed as wielding.

We have also demonstrated that Rudra, too, is seriously linked to magical herbs (viz. Oshadhi, etc.) and their provision and guidance in use, with corresponding and additional points in relation to His wielding of Vajra weaponry and slaying of demon-dragon foe(s).

With all of that in mind (and our thanks also to Nyāyaratnasiṃha for assisting with the translation), we can assumedly do little better in closing than but briefly quote the conclusion to AV-S IV 28:

“Avail Us In Combat, Ye Ugran Ones ; With Vajra Bind The Maleficent Fiend. I Reverently Call Upon Bhava & Sarva ; Imploringly, I Hail These Two – Liberate Us From This Iniquity !”