Esus

← Encyclopedia

Four blocks of carved limestone came up out of the ground beneath the choir of Notre-Dame de Paris in the spring of 1711, set into a late Roman wall where some later builder had reused them as rubble. On one of the faces a bearded man in a short tunic stands against a tree, his weight forward, one hand gripping the trunk and the other raised to the boughs with a curved blade — a billhook, or a small axe — caught in the act of cutting. Above him, cut into the stone, are four letters: ESVS. It is one of only two places in the world where the name is written, and the figure beneath it is doing the one thing every image of this god agrees that he does. He is cutting at a tree.

What the cutting means, no one now can say.

The god named twice and seen at his work

Esus belongs to a small company of deities for whom the evidence is almost entirely material — two carved monuments and a single line of Latin verse, and very little else. The line is the older claim on him but the harder to trust, and the carvings, though mute, are the surer ground; the distinction matters, and this entry keeps it.

The first monument is the one from Paris, the pillar raised in Lutetia in the reign of Tiberius — between 14 and 37 of the common era — by the corporation of Seine boatmen, the nautae Parisiaci, who set it up in honor of Jupiter and, in the manner of the age, of the imperial house. It is among the earliest dated works of Gallo-Roman sculpture, and it is a meeting-place of two pantheons: across its four reused blocks, Roman gods stand beside the gods of the Gauls — Jupiter and Vulcan and Castor next to Esus, the antlered lord named here as Cernunnos, the bull with three cranes, and others whose names the worn stone half-keeps. It survives today in the cold vaulted frigidarium of the Musée de Cluny, the old Roman bath in Paris that holds the medieval museum, where the blocks were cleaned of three centuries of grime in 2001. On the face that carries his name, Esus is the bearded woodcutter, billhook in hand, reaching into the branches.

He is not alone on the pillar. On an adjacent face stands a heavy bull with three cranes upon him — two birds on his back and one between the horns — and over this beast bends a tree whose foliage seems to continue, leaf for leaf, from the tree that Esus is cutting on the neighboring block. The bull is named in the inscription: TARVOS TRIGARANVS, which is good Gaulish for what the carving shows. Taruos is the bull, the word that gives Old Irish tarb and Welsh tarw; tri- is the number three and garanus is the crane. The bull with three cranes. Two faces of one monument, a man at a tree and a bull beneath a tree, and the leaves running across the join between them: it looks, powerfully, like a single scene broken into panels — like two frames of a story.

The second monument confirms the impression and deepens the puzzle. At Trier, on the Moselle, in the country of the Treveri, a relief shows the same act — a man in a tunic swinging an axe at a tree — but here the tree itself holds the rest of the imagery within its branches. Among the boughs sit three birds, and the head of a bull. What is shared out across two faces at Paris is gathered into one image at Trier: the woodcutter, the tree, the birds, the bull. The figure differs in the particulars — at Paris he is bearded, at Trier beardless, and the cutting tool is a billhook in the one and an axe in the other — but the assembly of elements is too exact to be chance. Two monuments, raised perhaps a generation or more apart and a long day’s travel north of each other, that seem to be telling the same tale.

The relation of the two is itself a matter of careful inference, not of record. Nothing on either stone says that the Trier woodcutter is Esus; only the Paris pillar carries the name, and only because its blocks happened to survive with the inscription legible. The identification of the Trier god with the Paris god rests on the shared imagery alone — the same act, the same tree, the same bull and birds — and it is strong precisely because the combination is so specific and so otherwise unparalleled. But it remains a reading laid over the stone by modern eyes, and the same is true of the bond between the woodcutter and the bull. That the two faces of the Paris pillar belong to one scene is suggested by the foliage that runs across the join; it is not stated anywhere, and it cannot be.

The trouble is that the tale is gone. There is no narrative attached to these carvings, no surviving Gaulish myth, no Greek or Latin author who explains what the god is felling or why the bull and the cranes attend it. The scene is legible as iconography — a god, an act, a beast, three birds — and illegible as story. Scholars have read it as a myth of which only the pictures remain, and the reading of the two reliefs together as fragments of one lost narrative is the central, and unfinished, work of anyone who studies him.

The act of cutting and the meanings hung upon it

What the images give, with a plainness that survives the loss of everything around it, is the god at his labor. He is not enthroned, not crowned, not shown receiving worship. He is at work, his body bent into the effort, the blade in motion. Of the whole shadowed figure this is the one fixed point: Esus cuts the tree.

The act has drawn interpretation the way a wound draws iron. The tree on the Paris pillar has been read as a willow; the cutting has been read as pruning that the tree may grow, or as felling that brings it down, as a deed of renewal or a deed of destruction, and the same cut will not hold both at once. The bull and the cranes have been folded into the reading — the felled tree releasing the bull, or the bull bound somehow to the tree, the cranes as messengers or as the souls of the dead or simply as the birds that the carver saw on the riverbank — and none of these readings has carried the field. Some have reached toward the Irish material for a key, toward the cattle-driving sagas where a bull and birds and a hero meet, and the reach has been more suggestive than conclusive. The honest description stops where the stone stops: a god, cutting, beside a bull and three cranes, in a story now unrecoverable.

Even the name withholds itself. Esus — written so on the pillar, given by ancient authors also as Hesus — has been carried back to more than one root. One line of etymology takes it to an Indo-European word for reverence or worship, the awe owed to a power; another takes it to a Gaulish esu- meaning “good” or “able,” which would make him the good god, the capable one, and by extension perhaps “the lord” or “the master.” The second sense reads oddly against the company he keeps in the one literary source, where he is anything but kindly, and that friction is itself part of the long argument. The name’s meaning, like the meaning of the act, is contested ground.

It is here that the single line of verse enters. The poet Lucan, writing his epic of the Roman civil war under Nero in the middle of the first century, set three Gaulish gods into a passage on the savage rites of the peoples beyond Rome’s settled order. The Latin names them in a single breath — Teutates, then horrensque feris altaribus Esus, “and Esus, dreadful with his savage altars,” then Taranis, whose altar the poet calls no gentler than that of the Scythian Diana, the goddess of the Tauric shore who was fed with the blood of strangers. The English of an older translation gives the same three: those who placate “savage Teutates, Hesus’ horrid shrines, and Taranis’ altars cruel.” It is the earliest written mention of the god, and it is the seed of his dark reputation.

Two cautions belong to that line, and they pull in different directions. The first is that Lucan is not a witness to Gaulish religion but a Roman poet building an effect: the catalog of fearful foreign gods is a literary set-piece, meant to throw the light of civilization back upon Rome by setting beside it the rites of the outer dark. The three names stand together in his verse because the meter and the rhetoric set them there, not because anyone in Gaul worshiped them as a fixed trinity. There is no other evidence that Teutates, Esus, and Taranis formed a worshiped triad; the better reading is that a poet placed three Gaulish names in a line, and later readers, finding them so arranged, mistook an arrangement for a creed. The “triad” of Lucan is a verse, not a temple.

The second caution concerns the cruelty itself. To Lucan’s three lines later commentators added explanations — the Berne scholia, marginal notes preserved in a manuscript of the poem, set down centuries after Lucan and at a long remove from any living Gaulish practice. These notes assign to each god a mode of killing, and to Esus they give a victim suspended from a tree and torn until the loss of blood divides the limbs. The Latin of the note is cramped and obscure; readers have disputed whether the man was hanged or fixed to the trunk, and the whole notice has the character of a late, second-hand attempt to make sense of a god already half-forgotten by reaching for the most lurid available image. That this report has fastened a reputation for tree-hung sacrifice upon Esus says more about the afterlife of Lucan’s poem than about the god the boatmen carved. It is given here for what it is: a late and hostile word, uncertain in its own text, standing at the furthest distance from the silent monuments that are the real evidence. The human-sacrifice charge was a Greco-Roman commonplace laid upon the gods of the Gauls as a class; it should be neither suppressed nor believed on the strength of a scholiast’s gloss.

What the Romans did with Esus once they had met him points the same way — toward uncertainty. The interpretatio Romana, the habit by which a Roman traveler set the gods of a foreign people against the gods of his own and gave them Latin names, could not settle him. The scholia themselves equate him now with Mars, the war-god, which would suit the bloody altar, and now with Mercury, the god of merchants, who would suit a deity honored by a guild of river-traders such as the boatmen who raised the Paris pillar. The two equations cannot both be governing; a war-god and a trader’s god are not the same office wearing two masks. That a thunderer like Taranis could be matched cleanly to Jupiter, and Esus could not be matched to anyone without contradiction, is itself a measure of how little his nature declared itself even to the people who lived alongside his worshipers. A god the Romans could not decide how to translate is a god whose own office was, to outsiders, opaque.

There is a further weight to the iconography that the interpretatio overlooks. The boatmen who paid for the Paris pillar were rivermen, and a god shown cutting wood — felling, or pruning, or shaping the timber that a willow or any riverside tree provides — sits naturally among the powers a guild of the Seine might honor: the wood of boats and the wood of the bank. Whether this is the heart of his meaning or only the reason these particular worshipers chose him, the carving keeps the god close to the material life of the people who set it up. He is not a sky-god remote above the weather, like Taranis, nor the tribe made divine, like Teutates. He is at ground level, among the trees, with a tool in his hand.

An image without its story

The reception of Esus is, more than for almost any other Gaulish god, the history of an attempt to read two pictures. From the moment the Paris blocks were lifted from beneath Notre-Dame and recognized, the woodcutter and the bull have invited reconstruction. The willow, the cranes, the bull’s head in the Trier tree — each generation of scholars has arranged and rearranged these elements, drawn lines to the Irish sagas and to the seasonal felling of sacred groves, proposed the god as a deity of vegetation cut down and renewed, or of the sacrificial death that feeds the world’s continuance. The proposals are ingenious and they are many, and the plain measure of the case is that none has become the settled account. The story the monuments preserve in their grammar of god-tree-bull-bird they do not preserve in any words, and the words have not been recovered.

His place in the modern study of the Gauls is therefore peculiar. He is one of the most vividly drawn of all the Gaulish gods — there is no abstraction here, no symbol standing in for a power, but a man with a blade caught at a recognizable human task, the most concrete divine image the Gallo-Roman record offers. And he is among the least understood. The very specificity of the carving, which ought to make him knowable, instead frames the size of what has been lost: a deed so particular that it must have had a meaning, performed for reasons no surviving voice supplies.

The contrast that runs through the whole study of the religion of the Gauls falls on Esus with unusual sharpness. What is firm about him the Gauls themselves left — the carved stone, the written name, the bull and the cranes, all of it raised by their own hands and standing today in a museum. What is doubtful about him came from outside: a Roman poet’s line built for its horror, a late commentator’s gloss reaching for blood, an interpretatio that could not choose between the war-god and the trader’s god. The Gaulish evidence shows a god at honest labor; the foreign evidence darkens him. Set side by side, the two leave a figure fully seen and barely known — a deity arrested mid-stroke at the boughs of a tree, the cut forever about to fall, and the reason for it carried off with the people who carved him.

He stands, then, where the monuments left him: the woodcutter of the Gauls, blade lifted to the branches, the bull and the three cranes at the edge of a scene whose other panels are blank. Among the gods that the conquered Gauls handed down to us in stone, Esus is the one whose hands we can watch and whose purpose we cannot follow — the clearest image in the gallery, and the darkest legend, fitted over a silence that the stone has kept.

The god Esus on a relief panel of the Pillar of the Boatmen, a bearded woodcutter cutting at a tree, now in the Musée de Cluny, Paris. No machine-readable author provided. Clio20 assumed (based on copyright claims)., via Wikimedia Commons. CC BY-SA 3.0.

→ Related: Taranis · Teutates · Cernunnos · Sequana · Roquepertuse · Entremont · Gournay Sur Aronde · Fontes Sequanae · The Belgae · The Helvetii · The Galatians · Gaul · Druids · Druidism · Sacrifice Ritual · Mars · Mercury · Jupiter · The Celts · Lugh · The Dagda