Many such divisions occur in the history of Indo-European societies: Supporters of the hypothesis include scholars such as Émile Benveniste, Bernard Sergent and Iaroslav Lebedynsky, the last of whom concludes that "the basic idea seems proven in a convincing way".
[13] The hypothesis was embraced outside the field of Indo-European studies by some mythographers, anthropologists and historians such as Mircea Eliade, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Marshall Sahlins, Rodney Needham, Jean-Pierre Vernant and Georges Duby.
[15] Benjamin W. Fortson reports a sense that Dumézil blurred the lines between the three functions and the examples that he gave often had contradictory characteristics,[16] which had caused his detractors to reject his categories as nonexistent.
[18] Cristiano Grottanelli states that while Dumézilian trifunctionalism may be seen in modern and medieval contexts, its projection onto earlier cultures is mistaken.
[20] The hypothesis has been criticised by the historians Carlo Ginzburg, Arnaldo Momigliano[21] and Bruce Lincoln[22] as being based on Dumézil's sympathies with the political right.