Shamanism In Anthropology In The Twentieth Century

Shamanism

Shamanism in Anthropology has been an entity in a constant metamorphosis. It has always been considered exotic and its existence around the globe was never contradicted. However, over the years it did not receive the scholarly attention that it so requires. The age of discovery garnered a multitude of information on shamanism all over the world. The reporters invested a great deal of accuracy in the gathering of the information, but their observational skills were mostly underdeveloped. Furthermore as could be expected, they saw and evaluated things solely on the basis of European religion and social customs
(Flaherty, 1992, pp.3) without having it necessary to view its ramifications to the people who are so imbued by it.
Despite these methodologies which were grave in nature, matters began to shift during the 1940's and 1950's when the social sciences were rapidly coming into their own disciplines. Shamanism, was beginning to be looked upon as a complex religious notions and modes of behaviour (Lommel, 1967, pp.8). Although shamanism was beginning to harness scholarly attention there were still different contradicting theories being laid out in the scientific community. More recently since the notion of tribalism has become more prevalent shamanism is beginning to be recognized as holding the key puzzle in life. Furthermore, it is growing and encompassing many areas such as Psychology, Pharmacology, and even believe it or not Physics. Now before we elaborate on the historical significance of shamaninsm in anthropology it is imperative that a general definition of shamanism is established.

In order to study shamanism the shaman must first be understood. The original word shaman came form the Ural mountains in Russia. It applied to people who acted in several 'non-ordinary' capacities for their tribes. Shamans may be defined as man or a woman who through their ability to enter a trance state in any given moment can influence the course of events, find lost or stolen items and identify the criminal when a crime takes place. Thus in a sense shamanism is the practising of these mechanisms in trying to make sense of the world. As you can see it encompasses various facets of the social life from healing illness to maintaining social order. This definition of shamanism is very brief and really can not be upheld as a precise and accurate definition, however shamanism within these parameters has always been accepted both in the early and late twentieth century. Nevertheless, differences did emerge that transformed the definition of shamanism in anthropology in that it added more to this vague definition.

According to Mircea Eliade the shaman who is an inspired priest, in ecstatic trance ascends to the heavens on'trips'. In the cause of these journeys the shaman persuades or even fights with the gods in order to secure benefits for his fellow men. Here, in the opinion of Eliade, spirit possession is not an essential characteristics and is no always present (Eliade, 1951, pp.434). He goes on by stating that the "specific element of shamanism is not the incorporation of spirits by the shaman but the ecstasy provoked by the ascension to the sky"(pp.434). That is to say that the incorporation of spirit possession does not necessarily belong to shamanism. Therefore, from Eliade's view point we see that there is a wedge between shamanism and spirit possession (Lewis,1971, pp.49). This was a view that was prevalent in the study of shamanism in anthropology at the time. Other writers on the subject clearly accepted this view as expressed by Luc de Heusch. He sought to develop these ideas into an ambitious, formalistic theory of religious phenomena. He states that shamanism and spirit possession are an antithetical process. The first is an ascent of man to the gods, the second the descent of the gods on men (Lewis,1971,pp.50).
So shamanism in de Heusch's view is the movement of pride were man sees himself as an equal to the gods. Possession on the other hand is an incarnation. The distinction between shamanism and possession on the basis of whether spirits were incorporated or not was generally accepted at the time. This differentiation upheld by many anthropologists implied or rather claimed that shamans were not really 'masters of spirits'. The so-called trance state was dubbed unauthentic and a consternation was placed on the credibility of the shaman who is so revered by his people. This notion reinforced the idea among psychiatrists that shamans had in fact some sort of psychological disorder.

Now even much earlier than the cited works of Eliade and de Heusch there was a general notion that shamanism and possession were cultural abnormalities.
In fact, according to the French psychiatrist Levy-Valensi shamanism is not for the psychologically normal people, but only for the disturbed. The shaman was thus portrayed as a conflict torn personality who could be classified either as seriously neurotic or even psychotic (Lewis, pp.179). Although this was a pshyciatric summary and one can argue that it did not represent the anthropological view point; however many of our authorities on shamanism such s
Bogaras (1907) stated that shamans were on the verge of insanity. Krader an ethnographer has classified the Buryat shaman as a highly nervous person, one subject to nervous disorder (Krader,1954,pp322-51). So there was an apparent belief among the anthropological society that shamans were some sort of beings with mental disorders. As Devereux argues, that "there is no reason and no excuse for not considering the shaman as a severe neurotic and even as a psychotic" (Devereux,1956,pp.23).
He goes on by stating that any society where shamanism is rampant as being in a sense anomic. Thus it is quite obvious that shamans were viewed as social and psychological misfits.

So far we have seen how shamanism was viewed in the earlier part and even in the mid twentieth century. The anthropological literature that dominated that period links shamanism to mental disorder and a distinction is also made between possession and shamanism. As a result of these assumptions a negative definition of shamanism is created. Thus, during this period the definition of shamanism can best be described as phenomena practised by mentally disturbed people in trying to make sense of the world.

Now as time progressed especially in the early seventies new ideologies contradicting early and mid twentieth century definitions of shamanism emerged.
Some of these new concepts were upheld by Lewis who refuted many of the earlier works on the basis that the empirical evidence present did not support their theories. Previously we have mentioned that according to Eliade and de Heusch spirit possession and shamanism were two distinct elements and
during shamanistic processions, possessions were absent. Now according to Lewis, primary accounts of Arctic shamanism utilized by Eliade and also by de Heusch shows that the distinction made by the two is in fact untenable (Lewis,pp.51).
The word shamanism in itself which is derived from the Tungus word shaman means literally one who is excited, moved or raised. More specifically a shaman is a person of either sex who has mastered spirits and who at will introduce them into his own body. As Shirokogoroff, the great Russian authority on the Tungus puts it, the shamans body is a placing or receptacle for the spirits. It is in fact by his power over the spirits which he incarnates that the shaman is able to treat and control afflictions caused by pathogenic spirits in others
(Lewis,pg55). The relationship between shamanism and possession is even better illustrated when an old shaman is about to die. When this is the case a new shaman must be found before the old one dies and wreaks havoc in the community by unleashing all the spirits that is within him. The qualification of the new shaman is that he must demonstrate a proof of his command of the ecstatic technique and control over spirits. Moreover, the Tungus distinguish between a person possessed (involuntarily) by a spirit and a spirit possessed
(voluntarily) by a person. The first is an uncontrolled trance interpreted as an illness; the second is a controlled trance, the essential requirement for the exercise of the shamanistic requirement (Lewis,pp.54).

Therefore contrary to Eliade and De Heusch's conclusions regarding shamanism and spirit possession, there is no distinction between the two. The
Tungus form of shamanism in which the two base their assumptions involves controlled spirit possession. The shaman incarnates spirits in both a latent and active form, but always in a controlled fashion (Lewis,pp.55)

Our analysis of shamanism does not end here. In fact earlier it was established that previous works done by anthropologist in the study shamanism attributed it as relative to mental disorder. That is to say that the shaman or rather all shamans are individuals with serious psychological problems similar to those found in western asylums. Again contemporary analyst refute these ideologies. Previous works suggested that shamans must have a history of psychiatric disorder but Jane Murphy reports of the Alaskan Eskimo shamans whose personalities she examined suggested that they were extremely sober individuals of unusual mental health (Lewis,pg.182). Earlier anthropologist based most of their observations during shamanic rituals when the shaman was in a trance state, but Murphy closely observed the shaman's daily routine concluded that shamans were in fact of sound mental state.

So from what we have seen, the study of shamanism went through a metamorphosis over the years. In the early twentieth century it was regarded as some sort of a cult is practised by psychotics and neurotics in a community filled with lunatics. Now these notions hardly did shamanism any justice. The practice was viewed in a rather ethnocentric manner that undermined its richness. Further more fundamental questions such as whether shamanism, despite being different from western modes, assisted the people in question in their daily life was hardly even raised. How then can an anthropologically pragmatic study of shamanism be made if such critical issues are not tackled. Anthropology is not free of ethnocentrism, but objectivity should not be clouded by it.

The new ideologies that surfaced in the late 60's and 70's expressed a much deeper analysis of the concept of shamanism as compared to earlier works.
It was objective and intelligently critical. Furthermore the definition of shamanism was transformed and it did not include psychopathological notions rampant in the early part of the twentieth century.

Shamanism holds a great fascination for the western imagination that much continues to be written about it. This overflow of information has however, given rise to a number of methodological problems (Flaherty, 1992,pp.208).
Shamanism has become some what over-sensationalized that it has become hard to distinguish fact from fiction. There has also been little historical accountability. Most writers uncritically create their own profiles of the shaman from literature that was published long before their time (Flaherty, pp.212). They do so without having it necessary to think about the external pressures that shamansim might have been experiencing over the years. Shamanism has been interpreted as a set of rituals, maybe, it is time to view it as a religion. Just as Islam and Christianity have undergone through external pressures, surely shamanism must have experienced its share of
influences.
Especially those inflicted via centuries of contact with other cultures at different levels of development than their own that would have forced it to device adaptive mechanisms that might have perhaps altered its course.

The implications of these questions go on and on however, one thing is for certain and that the study of shamanism with its recent glorification is rapidly expanding. It is beginning to encompass areas that it never permeated for this reason perhaps it is time that a new discipline is created. One that in its own way will combine the best of humanities with certain aspects of anthropology, medicine and the physical sciences. " Perhaps it is time for a shamanology " (Flaherty, pp.215)

BIBLIGRAPHY

1. Eliade, Mircea. Shamanism And Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy. Paris,
1951.

2. Devereux, G. Normal and Abnormal: Key problems of Psychiatric
Anthropology. Washingtno, 1956.

3. Flaherty, Gloria. Shamanism In The Eighteen Century. Princeton:
Priceton University Press, 1992.

4. Krader, L. `Buryat Religion and Society`, Southwestern Journal of
Anthropology, 10, 1954.

5. Lewis, I.M. Ecstatic Religion. Middlesex: Penguin, 1971.

6. Lommel, Andreas. Shamanism: The Beginnings of Art. New York: McGraw-
-Hill, 1973.