TrendsinContemporaryResearchonShamanism

ThomasA.DuBois,UniversityofWisconsin‐Madison

Notforcitationwithoutpermission

Nearlytwodecadesandago,JaneAtkinson(1992)couldexpresssurpriseandcertainsatisfactionatthereinvigoratedresearchonshamanismthatshenotedinherreviewofthefield.ScholarslikeAtkinsonherselfhadbreathednewlifeinatermthatmanyscholarshadconsideredarelicofthehistoryofthedisciplinealone,findingnewcommunitiesandcontextsinwhichtoexploretheintricaciesandnuancesoflocalizedshamanictraditions.Today,attheoutsetof2010,onecanseethatthetrendsAtkinsonnotedhaveonlycontinuedtogrowinimportance,withvaluableresearchongoingwithinanumberofdifferenttheoreticalframeworksandamarkedincreaseinscholarlyandpopularpublicationvenues,includingnewpressesandjournalsandabourgeoninginternetpresenceforshamanictopics.Thefieldhaswitnessedanunabatedethnographicexplorationof“shamanisms”(atermintendedtoreflecttheparticularizingethnographictrendsAtkinsonnoted),withnewandfascinatingresearchonvariousaspectsofshamanichealing,music,materialculture,gender,revitalization,andrelationswiththestate,andincreasingresearchthatattemptstoreconstructpastshamanismsthroughhistorical,ethnographicand/orarchaeologicalevidence.NewtrendswhichwereonlynascentatthetimeofAtkinson’sreviewhavenowblossomedintofull‐fledgedscholarlyenterprises,suchastheveinofresearchIshalltermbelowthe“rhetoricalapproach,”i.e.,thescholarlyexaminationofthedevelopmentofshamanismitselfasascholarlytermandacademicconstruct,particularlyasareflectionofbroadertrendswithintheacademicstudyofreligionandanthropology.Thescholarlystudyofthecognitivescienceofreligion,novelandappealinginAtkinson’searly1990s,hassteadilygrownininfluenceandacceptanceintheacademicexaminationofshamanism.Finally,anareawhichAtkinsoncoveredliterallyasapostscripttoherreview—thestudyofneoshamanismasareligiousmovementandasareflectionoftheroleofethnographicliteratureintheWesternromanticengagementwiththe“primitive”—hasbecomeamajorareaofscholaryinquiry,withinsightfulstudiesbyscholarsbothcriticalofneoshamanicphenomenaand(increasingly)byscholarssympathetictoitsgoalsormotivations.Inthelastdecadeparticularly,scholarsofreligionhavebeguntoexploreneoshamanism’suseofethnographicdata,itsunderlyingphilosophicalpremises,andthepracticesandcommunitiesconstitutedordrawntogetherbyneoshamanicactivities.ThepresentpapersurveysvarioustrendsinshamanicresearchsincethepublicationofAtkinson’sreviewandhighlightssomeoftheproductivedirectionsscholarsaremovingintheirinvestigationofpastorpresentshamanisms,neoshamanisms,andtherelationofsuchphenomenatostateandintellectualinstitutions.

ItshouldbenotedthatpartofwhatIshalldiscussbelowisdrawnfrommyrecentoverviewofpastandpresentstudiesofshamanismAnIntroductiontoShamanism(DuBois2009).Whereasthatvolume,however,presentsthefieldasitdevelopedfromthemedievalperiodtothepresent,withastrongfocusontheevolutionofscholarlyunderstandingsofshamanictraditionsovertime,thecurrentreviewfocusesonlyonthemostrecentdevelopments,someofwhichweretooneworprovisionalforinclusioninavolumedesignedtoserveasanintroductiontothefield.

Particularizedethnographicapproaches

ByadoptingHolmberg’s(1983)useoftheterm“shamanisms”inherreview,Atkinsonsoughttounderscoreakeycomponentoftherenewedanthropologicalinterestinshamanictraditionsinthe1990s:aturningawayfrombroaderexaminationsofshamanismasanoverarching,superorganicphenomenon(Eliade’s“archaictechnique”orvariousotheratemporalandculture‐transcendentapproaches)infavorofcloseethnographicexaminationsoftheexperiencesandperceptionsofparticularshamansinparticularculturalsettings.Bypluralizingtheterm,Atkinsonremindedreadersofthismoredelimitedethnographicfocusandthetheoreticalanddisciplinarydispositionsitreflected.Suchresearchwastoberegardedasa“corrective”toearliersynthetictheories.

Animpressivenumberofculture‐specificethnographieshavethusemergedinthelasttwodecades,aimedatdescribingshamanismwithinparticularculturalsettings.ManyofthesehavefocusedonAsiancommunities(Her2005,Lardinois2007,Nicoletti2004,Omar2006,Ortner1995,Peters2004,PurevandPurvee2004,Riboli2000,Smyers1999);ChilsonandKnecht’santhologyShamansinAsia(2003)isaparticularlyfinepresentationofspecifichistorically‐inflectedethnographiccasestudiesinthisarea.LauraKendall’s(1995)casestudyofasingleKoreanwoman’sinitiationintoashamanicroleprovidesafascinatingglimpseoftheindividualexperiencesandsocialdynamicstoooftenobscuredinbroaderstudies.TheworkShamansandElders:Experience,KnowledgeandPoweramongtheDaurMongols(1996),writtenbyCarolineHumphreywithherDaurMongolcollaboratorUrgungeOnonrepresentsamodelforengaged,complexexaminationofshamanictraditionswithinagivenculturalmilieu.Italsoservesasausefulillustrationofthewaysinwhichscholarsfromoutsideashamanictraditioncanworkwithnativeauthoritiesfromwithintoproduceworksrichinethnographicdetailandhistoricalnuance.Together,thesevariousworksdepicttraditionalshamanismsgrippedinprocessesofchange,asAsiansocietiesnegotiateabalancebetweentraditionalmodesofspiritualityandhealingandthealluresorpressuresofanincreasinglyglobalized,technologicallyadvancedworld.

SpecificorcomparativeethnographiesofshamanisminNorthandSouthAmericahavealsocontinuedtoappearinthelasttwodecadesaswell,althoughtheseareoftenmorefocusedonasingleresearchquestion(e.g.,Cayon2008,

Crepeau2007,Furst2006,Lenaerts2006).AnaMariellaBacigalupo’svariousworks(1998,2001,2004)exploreMapuchemachishamansinChile,attendingtosimilarquestionsofculturalchangeanditseffectsonshamanictraditions.Her2004studyofgendertransgressionrepresentsausefulandevocativecontributiontothediscussionofshamanicgenderdiscussedbelow.SchaeferandFurst’s(1996)volumeonHuicholcultureprovidesafine‐grainedoverviewofHuicholpeyoteritualsandtheroleofthemara’akámeinpastandpresentMexico.NeilWhitehead’s(2002)ethnographyofkanaimàandWhiteheadandWright’s(2004)anthologyofworksonAmazonianassaultsorceryexploreshamanicaggressioninspecificculturaltraditions,tyingsuchritualassaulttothecomplexitiesofAmazonia’scolonialandpostcolonialhistory.AnumberofotherexcellentethnographiesofNorthandSouthAmericanshamanismsarediscussedbelow.

Giventheplethoraofspecificexaminations,anumberofscholarshavesoughttocreateoverarchingworksthathelpreadersaccesstheburgeoningscholarshipinthefield.GrahamHarvey’sIndigenousReligions:ACompanion(2000),Harvey’sShamanism:AReader(2002),NormanBancroftHunt’sShamanisminNorthAmerica(2002),andNambaandFridman’sShamanism:AnEncyclopediaofWorldBeliefs,Practices,andCultureallseektohelpthereadernegotiatethebewilderingarrayofstudiesthathaveappearedinrecentyears.Naturally,suchoverarchingtextscanseldomconveythefullrichnessoftheparticularistresearchdescribedabove;nonetheless,theycanserveasvaluableworksoffirstresorttoresearchersandgeneralistsinterestedinexploringanewtopic.

Particularistsubfields

Inconnectionwiththeethnographicshifttowardsituatedspecificcasestudieshascomeafocusonparticulartopicswithinshamanism,suchashealing,narrative,music,materialculture,gender,andethnobotany.Whilesuchstudiesmaybepublishedinjournalsofreligionoranthropology,theymayalsoappearinthejournalsofotherdisciplines,andreflectthewidenedscholarlydiscussionofshamanismtoday.

Someofthemostexcitingresearchintheparticularistveininthelasttwodecadeshasoccurredintheethnographyofhealing.Althoughscholarsofshamanismhavelongrecognizedtheimportanceofhealingasacontextandpurposeofshamanicrituals,earlierresearchwasoftentingedbyscholarlyskepticismregardingtheefficacyofshamanicritualsandsometimesanopenhostilitytowardpractitionersascharlatansorself‐deludedneurotics.Ashifttowardtheexplorationofshamanichealingasasocially‐negotiatedprocesswithinashaman’swidercommunitywaswellunderwayatthetimeofAtkinson’s1992review,findingexpressioninstudiesofshamanicritualsastherapeuticactsor,inthecognitivesciencevein,exploringthepossiblepsychologicalorphysiologicalmechanismsofsucheventsasinstancesofsymbolichealing,socialbonding,endorphinrelease,orcatharsis(forsummary,seeDuBois2009,133‐150).Inthe

lasttwodecades,theexplorationofshamanichealingastherapyhascontinuedtoattractresearchers,withmanynewstudiesappearinginthefieldofmedicalanthropologyandrelateddisciplines(e.g.,Sasamori1997,Scherberger2005,Sidky2009).ParticularlyenlighteningareLadermanandRoseman’santhologyThePerformanceofHealing(1995)andConnorandSamuel’s(2001)HealingPowersandModernity,bothofwhichcanserveasexcellentintroductionsintotheethnographiccomplexitiesof(shamanic)healingevents.

Theareaofnarrativehasattractedanumberofexcellentstudiesinrecentyears,includingGregoryMaskarinec’s(1995)studyofNepaleseshamanicoratory,MalotkiandGary’s(2001)anthologyofHopinarratives,andCesarino’s(2006)studyofpoeticparallelisminSouthAmericanshamanicutterances.KiraVanDeusen’s(1999,2004)collectionsofcontemporaryshamanicnarrativeswithinpost‐SovietSiberiaarealsonoteworthyandtieinwithwiderdiscussionsofshamanicrevitalizationsandneoshamanismdiscussedbelow,particularlywithreferencetothepost‐socialistworld.

Methodologicallydistinctfromthesestudiesofnarrativeareethnomusicologicalexaminationsofshamanicmusicandmusicalequipment(e.g.,Aubert2006,During2006,Lecomte2006,Lee2004,Potapov1999,Walraven1994,Williams1995).ParticularlynoteworthyasexaminationsofshamanicmusicinacontextofmassiveculturalchangeareMarinaRoseman’svariousstudiesofMalaysianTemiarmusic‐making(1995,2001),extensionsandrefinementsofherearlierHealingSoundsfromtheMalaysianRainforest(1991).Whileallofthesestudiesfocusonparticularshamanictraditionsandtheirassociatedmusicalperformances,variousscholarshaveexaminedthepsychologicalorneurophysiolicaleffectsofmusicmoregenerally(e.g.,Becker2001,Jourdain2006,Levitin2006).Thestudyofmusic’semotionalandphysicaleffectsparallelsthewidercognitivescientificexaminationsofshamanismdescribedbelow.

Likewise,materialculturehasattractedanumberofrecentparticulariststudies,includingBarbaraIliff’sexcellentexaminationsofTlingitshamanickits(1994,1997)andPeterFurst’s(2007)examinationofHuicholshamanicyarnpaintings.AteamofscholarsledbyJuhaPentikäinenassembledafascinatinganddiversearrayofSiberianshamanicitemsformuseumdisplay;thecataloguefromtheexhibitionisagoodsourceforthestudyofshamanicart(Pentikäinenetal.1998).BarreToelken(2003)offersinsightsontheethicsofdisplayingNativeAmericanshamanicart.RobinRidingtonandDennisHastings(In’aska)(1997)exploretheissuesofrepatriationinconnectionwithparticularsacredobjectsbelongingtotheOmahapeopleofNebraska.

Whilematerialculturehasreceivedgreaterattentioninrecentyearsthaneverbefore,thescholarlyexaminationofentheogens—psychoactiveorhallucinogenicsubstancesconsumedforsacredpurposes—remainsofperennialinterest,bothamongscholarsandamongpopularreaders.Overviewworksabound,bothinprintandontheInternet(e.g.,Erowid2007,Ott1993,Pinchback2002,Rätsch2005,Schultesetal.2001).Whileattentiontolongfamiliarentheogenssuch

asopiumandtobaccocontinues(e.g.,Booth1998,VonGernet2000,Westmeyer2004),ayahuascahasattractedconsiderableinterestasanelementoftraditionalAmazonianshamanisms(e.g,Bennett1992),andascross‐overentheogensforneoshamanicmovements(Grob1999,LunaandWhite2000,Metzner1999,Shanon2002).ThecontrastsbetweentraditionalshamanicusesofentheogensisillustratednicelyinStaceySchaefer’s(1996)examinationofHuicholpeyoterituals,whiletheeditedvolumeDangerousHarvest:DrugPlantsandtheTransformationofIndigenousLandscapes(Steinbergetal.2004)exploresthesometimesdevastatingeconomiceffectsthatcanaccompanytheshiftofanentheogenfromritualobjecttolucrativecashcrop.Moresothanvirtuallyanyotheraspectofcontemporaryshamanism,thestudyofentheogenstiesshamanictraditionscloselytowiderdiscussionsofcommunity‐staterelations,globalization,andeconomicnetworks.

Afinallong‐standingelementofearlierscholarshiponshamanism—theexaminationofgenderandsexualityinrelationtoshamaniccallings—hasreceivedmuchneededreevaluationinthelasttwodecades.EspeciallynoteworthyisthelongstandingcollaborativeworkofFrançoiseMorinandBernardSaladind’Anglure,whohavecomparedtwodisparateshamanicculturesovertime,combiningtheparticularisttendencyofmodernethnographicresearchwiththecomparativeandgeneralizingaimsofearlierscholarship.TheircomparisonsofPeruvianShipiboshamansandcounterpartsamongCanadianInuitexplorearangeoftopicsrelatedtospiritualmarriage,genderchange,andsexualizedrelationswithspirithelpers(MorinandSaladind’Anglure1998,2003;Morin2007).ExaminationofgenderperformanceamongNativeAmericanpeopleshasalsoreceivedvaluablereappraisals(e.g.,Hollimon2001,Jacobsetal.1997,Roscoe1998,Lang1998).Inarelatedbutslightlydifferentvein,BarbaraTedlock(2004)hasexaminedthegenderbiasesofpastethnographerstosuggestthatscholarlydescriptionsofpastshamanismshavetendedtotrivializeormarginalizefemalepractitioners,obscuringtherolesofwomenasshamansinvarioustraditionsaroundtheworld.

Whileparticularizingscholarshavesucceededinaddingtremendousnuanceandrefinementtotheuniversalizingpronouncementsofearlierscholarship,theyhavenotsucceededinrenderinginductiveapproachesobsolete,ateitherthescholarlyorthepopularlevel.Infact,giventhatmanyofthespecificethnographiccasestudiesgeneratedinthelasttwodecadesconfirminonewayoranothersomedetailsofearlieruniversalizingmodels,newethnographiescansometimesbuttressratherthanunderminesuperorganiccharacterizations.Further,afocusonspecificelementsofaculture’sshamanictradition(e.g.,itshealingmethods,music,materialculture,orgenderperformances)canreinforcetheassumptionthatthereexistspecifictherapeutic,musical,material,orgenderaspectsofshamanismthatoperatecross‐culturally,perhapsderivingfromasinglepasttraditionorfromaneurologicallyconstitutedprimalsource.Inpractice,then,theparticularistenterprisewithinethnographicstudiesofshamanismhasnotputanendtotheconceptofshamanismasanelementofbothscholarlyandpopulardiscourse.

HistoricizedandPoliticizedapproaches

Theparticularistapproachhasalsospawnedawealthofresearchonpastshamanisms,casestudiesreconstructedonthebasisofethnographic,historical,orevenarchaeologicalevidence.Particularlyinthefieldofarchaeology,asweshallnote,thesereconstructionshavesometimesspurredheateddebate.Fromtheperspectiveofthehistoricalexaminationofcolonialism,manyaccountsofpastshamanictraditionsprovideimportantinsightsintothewaysinwhichindigenouscultureswerealteredandrefiguredbyinvadingregimes.StudiesofthefateofshamanswithinparticularhistoricalsettingshavebeenexaminedparticularlyinconnectionwithNativeAmerica,pastandpresentSiberia,andpost‐warKorea.Thesehistorieshavealsosometimesservedasbackdropsforexaminationsofindigenouseffortstorevitalizediscontinuedshamanictraditions.AndinaseriesofstudieswhichIlabelthe“rhetoricalapproach,”scholarshaveturnedtheirhistoricalscrutinyuponthemselves,examiningthedevelopment,spread,andintellectualimplicationsoftheverystudyofshamanismasatopicofresearch.

HistoricalReconstructions

Thelasttwodecadeshaveseenatremendousincreaseinthenumberofexaminationsofpastshamanictraditions.Previously,suchstudieswererelativelyrare,asethnographicresearchfocusedprimarilyonthesynchronicdescriptionoffast‐disappearingindigenouscultures,andscholarsofotherfields—e.g.,Classics,history,andphilology—wereoftenunawareof,oruninterestedin,thenotionofshamanismasawidespreadculturalpractice.Thus,forexample,wherescholarspriortothe1960sproducedonlyahandfulofstudiesexaminingpossibleshamanictraditionsamongVikingAgeScandinavians,thelasttwodecadeshasseennumerouslengthyanddetailedexaminationsofthetopic(e.g.,DuBois1999;Jolly,RaudvereandPeters2002;Price2002;Solli2002;Tolley2009).Partofthisincreasestemsfromtheriseinprominenceandaccessibilityofethnographicresearchonshamanism,leadingtoitsapplicationtohistoricalcontextsstudiedbyscholarsthatformerlyhadnofamiliaritywiththetheoriesorfindingsofethnographers.Partoftheincreasealsolies,however,intheparticularistethnographicinterestinuncoveringanddocumentingasmanyuniquepastreligionsaspossible,evenonesburiedintheremotepastandreflectedbycrypticormisleadingancienttexts.Thus,examinationsofancientGreek(Athanassakis2001),Sámi(Mebius2003,Rydving1995),Finnish(Siikala2002),andvariousotherpastEuropeantraditionshaveappeared,sometimesspurringethno‐neoshamanicrevivals(seebelow).HarveyandWallis’sHistoricalDictionaryofShamanism(2007)servesasareferenceworkforthestudyofsuchscholarlyreconstructions.

ArchaeologicalReconstructions

Closelylinkedtotheinterestinreconstructingpastshamanismsisamovementwithinarchaeologytoexaminepossibletracesofpastshamanismsinthearchaeologicalrecord,particularlyinrockartdepictionsthatmightbeinterpretedasrepresentingshamanicpractitioners,spirithelpers,oreventrancestateperceptions.Althoughsuggestionsofthiskindweremadeoccasionallybyearlierscholars(e.g.Lommel1967)theenterprisereceivednewimpetuswiththeworkof

DavidLewis‐Williams(2001,2002),whousedpresentethnographicdetailsofSanshamanicritualsandconceptualizationsasabasisforreadingandinterpretingpastSanrockart.Thewiderimplicationsofthistheoryforarchaeologywereexploredinafurtherstudyco‐authoredwithJeanClottes(ClottesandLewis‐Williams2001),pushingthetime‐framedeepintothepast.Althoughanumberofotherscholarsbothwithinandoutsideofthefieldofarchaeologyhaveembracedtheseideasenthusiastically(e.g.,Aldhouse‐Green2005,Brady1994,Coeetal.1996,Freideletal.1995,Pearson2002),othershavevoicedstrongcriticismsofthemethodologyorvalidityofsuchinvestigations(FrancfortandHamayon2001,seeespeciallyBahn2001,Francfort2001;Kleinetal.2002).AcarefulweighingofthepotentialandperilsofsuchresearchispresentedinananthologyeditedbyNeilPrice(2001),particularlytheincludedarticlesbyDevlet(2001)andRozwadowski(2001).SeealsothevariousprintedresponsestoKleinetal.(2002)thataccompanythearticleinpublication.Thevigorousdebate(andoccasionalinvective)surroundingthistopicinarchaeologicalliteratureoverthepasttwodecadesstemsinpartfromthestronglymaterialistapproachofearlierarchaeologistsandtheirskepticismconcerningattributionofreligioussignificancetorecoveredartifactsorart.Asarchaeologistsofrecentdecadeshavebeguntointerpretvarious,oftencryptic,objectsordepictionsasevidenceofpossiblepastculticactivities,itisnaturalthatotherscholarswouldrespondwithcautionorevenalarm.Thecomingdecadeislikelytoseeagooddealmorediscussionofarchaeologicalshamanismsandperhapsthedevelopmentofascholarlyconsensusregardingmeaningfulandaccuratewaysofrecognizingpastshamanicactivitiesinarchaeologicalevidence.Aswiththehistoricalreconstructionsdescribedabove,thesearchaeologicalforayshaveprovenofgreatinteresttogeneralistreadersandhavesometimesfoundenthusiasticresponseinvariousneoshamanicmovements.

StateRelations

Thehistoricalpredilectioninmuchrecentresearchonshamanismhasledtoavaluableandfar‐rangingexplorationoftherelationsofpastshamanswithlargerinstitutions,particularlystates.Shamansoftenbecamesymbolsofindigenousresistancetocolonialpowersandworldviews,andtheirauthoritywasoftendirectlychallengedandunderminedbyincomingreligiousauthoritiesaswellasthesocialdisintegrationandoccasionalepidemicdiseasethatoftenaccompaniedcolonization.RebeccaKugel’s(1994)finestudyofanOjibwecommunity,forinstance,employsamissionary’sdiaryandotherhistoricaldocumentsfromthenineteenthcenturytoexplorethereasonsbehindinitialOjibweresistancetomissionization,andtheculturalfactorsthatcombinedtostigmatizeaparticularAnglo‐Americanmissionary.SimilartopicsareexploredvariouslyinaneditedvolumebyNicholasThomasandCarolineHumphrey(1994),withexaminationsthatrangefromantiquitytothenear‐present.Humphrey’s(1994)modeloftherelationsofshamanismtobroaderstate‐supportedcultsinNorthernAsiaisofparticularinterestandvalue.Otherrecentexaminationsexplorefurthershaman‐staterelationsinAsiancontexts(e.g.,Buyandelgeriyn2007,Ortner1995),andparticularlyinKorea,wheretheattitudesofstateregimestoshamanictraditions

havevariedwidelyoverthecourseofthelastcentury(Kendall2001,Tangherlini1998,Yun2008).ParticularscholarlyattentionhasbeenpaidtothecaseofSiberia,fromtheeraofthepre‐revolutionaryRussianempire(Glavatskaya2001)throughthedevelopmentandeventualbreakdownoftheSovietstate(Balzer1997,1999,Basilov1997),totherevitalizationsandneoshamanicexperimentsofthepresent(Grusman2006,Hoppál1992,Hutton2001,Miller1999,Reid2002,Vitebsky2005).IntheAmericancontext,studiesofstatecooptionandcontrolofindigenoussacredspaces(Burton2002)aswellasvariousexaminationsofshamanictraditionsvis‐à‐visthelaw(e.g.,O’Brien2004)examinethedifficultiesofmaintainingindigenoustraditionsinapostcolonialsituation.Allsuchresearchcontributesintegrallytotheparticularistapproachtoshamanictraditionsdescribedabove,andrevealsthecomplexrelationsbetweenshamanic(orbroaderreligious)traditionsandstateorsocietalpoliticsasdescribedbyFitzgerald(2000).

Revitalizations

Giventherapidandsometimesviolentsuppressionofshamanismsinpastcolonialencounters,itisnotsurprisingthatindigenouscommunitiestodayhaveoccasionallysoughttorevivelapsedormoribundshamanictraditions.Scholarshaveexaminedtheserevitalizationmovementsvariouslyinthepasttwodecades,withmanyfineinsightsintotheroleofshamanismasasymbolordeviceofculturalidentity.ParticularlyvaluableintheNorthAmericancontexthasbeentheworkofRobinRidington(Ridington1997,RidingtonandHastings1997)onattemptstorepatriateandrevitalizeshamaniccultobjectsamongOmahapeopleaswellasRobertSullivan’s(2002)journalisticaccountoftherevivalofMakawwhaling.Post‐SovietSiberianrevitalizationsareexploredinanumberoftheworksdescribedabove,whileMongushKenin‐Lopsan(1997)presentsthematerialsandjustificationforTuvanrevitalizationasaleaderofthemovementinhiscountry.AfascinatingethnographybyVirlanaTkaczetal.(2002)presentsBuryatshamanicrevitalizationthroughthelensofacloseethnographyofasingleritualevent,examiningthecomplexitiesoftraining,ritualperformance,andinterpretationinarevivedtradition.

RhetoricalApproach

AsAtkinsonmadeclearinher1992review,theparticularistinterestincloseexaminationofspecificshamanictraditionswenthand‐in‐handwithananthropologicalcritiqueoftheverynotionof“shamanism”asanoverlygeneralized,empericallyflawedrelicofearlieranthropologicaltheorizing.AtkinsonwasabletociteGloriaFlaherty’s(1992)then‐newlypublishedexaminationoftheintellectualdevelopmentoftheconceptofshamanismineighteenth‐centurylettersandscienceasausefulhistoryoftheconstruct.Flaherty’sseminalworkpavedthewayforagreatmanysubsequentexaminationsofshamanismasaproductofWesterntheorizing,oftenframedintermsofaFoucauldeannotionofdiscourseandreferringtoshamanismasa“construct,”“idea,”“notion,”or“metaphor”—termsthatasserttheexistenceofshamanismprimarilyorevensolelyintheimaginationofWesternscholars(e.g.,Hamayon1993,2001;Hultkrantz1998,2001;Hutton2001;Jones

2006;Leete1999;NarbyandHuxley2001;vonSchnurbein2003;Schröder2007;Svanberg2003;Znamenski2004).Atitsmoststrident(e.g.,Kehoe2000,Noel1997),thiscritiqueofthetermshamanismandthescholarlyenterprisethathaslongemployeditrepresentstheconstructasanunconsciousexpressionofWesternracism,awillfuldenialofthecomplexityof“primitive”religionsandthereductionoftheirdiversitytoasimplisticunitythatcanbeeffectivelycontrastedwithmorefavoredconstructslike“Christianity.”Assuch,critiquesofthissortcanbeviewedaspartofalargercriticaldeconstructionofthestudyofanthropology(CliffordandMarcus1986,Clifford1988)aswellasreligion(Fitzgerald2000,Gold2003,JensenandRothstein2000,Kippenberg2002,McCutcheon1997)inWesternacademe.Withintherhetoricalapproachtoshamanism,however,otherscholars(e.g.,vonStuckrad2002,2003;Znamenski2007)haveadoptedamorebenigninterpretationofscholars’imaginings,onewhichtheyapplyaswelltothephenomenonofneoshamanism(seebelow),regardingitasadirectoutgrowthofWesternscholarlyimaginingsofprimitivereligion,nature,andspirituality.

Thecritiqueofscholarlygeneralizationsregardingshamansandshamanismhasreceivedinterestingexaminationsaimedatteasingoutsomeoftheunderlyingculturalorpoliticalassumptionsatworkinpastorrecentscholarship(e.g.,vonSchnurbein1992,2003).TheviewpointsandblindersofMirceaEliadehavebeenmeticulouslyexamined(e.g.,Allen1998,Berger1994,Tedlock2004,Znamenski2007).LyleDick(1995)deconstructsthepopularacademicconstructof“arctichysteria”inconnectionwithInuitpeople,whileAntoniaMillsandRichardSlobodin(1994)revealthewaysinwhichscholars’unfamiliaritywithconceptsofincarnationledthemtounderreportitasanelementofmanyNativeAmericanindigenousreligions.BothTedlock(2001)andWinkelmanandPeek(2004)havesoughttoraisescholarlyrespectfordivination,anelementofshamanictraditionsagainoftenmarginalizedintheoreticalsynthesesafterEliade.Thecombinedweightofsuchstudiesrevealsthedegreetowhichseeminglyobjectivepastscholarshipwasactuallyoftenlacedwithpolitical,cultural,andsocialagendas,oneswhichscholarswerereticentaboutacknowledgingintheirworkorinthewritingsoftheircolleagues.

TranscendentandCognitiveApproaches

Whiletheparticularistinvestigationofspecificshamanismscontinuedatanunprecedentedrateoverthepasttwodecades,acertainnumberofscholarsworkingwithinthehistoryofreligionsparadigmcontinuedtoexamineshamanismasatranscendentphenomenon(e.g.,HoppálandPentikäinen1992;Pentikäinenetal.1998,2001;Ripinsky‐Naxon1993,SiikalaandHoppál1992,Vitebsky1995).Ilabelthisveinofresearch“transcendent”notbecausetheauthorsinanywayportrayshamanismasatemporal;infact,manyofthescholarslaystressonthefactthatshamanismascharacterizedintheirworksresultedfromspecifichistoricalprocessesoccurringinparticularlocalesoverthecenturies.Rather,by“transcendent”Imeantosuggestthatscholarsfocusonaspectsofshamanismrecoverableatalevelofabstractionbeyondthecloseethnographicdetailsof

particularistresearch.Bycomparingdifferentshamanismsastheyarefoundinvarious,sometimesquitedisparate,locales,itbecomespossibletoarriveatinductivesynthesesthatcanberegardedasindicativeofasourceshamanictraditionthathasdiffusedormigratedovertimetodifferentpopulationsandenvironments.Scholarshavesoughttotestandrefinethemodelsofearlierresearchers,examiningcommonalitiesthatoccurwithfrequencycross‐culturally.Althoughmanyparticularistscholarscriticizesuchresearchasconjecturalorabstract,itremainsafactthatmanyparticulariststudiesrelyintheirbasicconceptualizationsandterminologyonpasttranscendentsyntheses.Scholarswhoemploythetermsshamanorshamanismatallintheirresearchbearwitnesstotheutilityofsuchformulationsasconvenientandusefulmeansofdescribingthestableaswellasthevariableelementsofvariousindigenousreligions.

Whereassuchtranscendentapproachestoshamanismhavebeengreatlyovershadowedwithinanthropologyandotherethnographicsciencesbyparticularistscholarship,scholarsworkingintheburgeoningfieldofthecognitivescienceofreligion(e.g.,Austin2006,Hubbard2002,McKinney1994,Newbergetal.2001,RamachandranandBlakeslee1998,Rossano2007,Tremlin2006,Walsh1997,Whitehouse2004,WhitehouseandMcCauley2005,Winkelman1992,2000)areoftenquitecomfortablewithapproachingshamanismthroughaninductivelyderivedcross‐culturalmodel.Regardingshamanicalteredstateexperiencesandotherelementsofshamanictraditionsidentifiedwithinpastinductivescholarshipasproductsofbrainfunctionandneuralarchitecture,suchscholarscanposittechniquesorexperiencesthatcouldrecurinvariousculturesorlocalesovertimewithoutneedingtoassumehistoricaldiffusionortransfer.Becauseshamanismastheoreticallydefinedcentersonparticularalteredstatesofconsciousness,itoffersaseeminglyidealtestcasefortheexaminationoftherelationofspiritualexperiencesandbrainfunction.Further,becauseofitsapparentantiquityasinductivelyreconstructed,shamanismhasbeenexaminedasastageintheoverallevolutionofhumanreligiousconsciousness(e.g.,Hayden2003,McClenon2002).Whereasmanyoftheresearcherslistedabovewriteaboutreligiousexperiencesingeneral,MichaelWinkelman(e.g.,1992,2000;WinkelmanandBaker2008)focusesonshamanisminparticular,andisregardedastheleadingauthorityinthisarea.Theinsightsofcognitiveresearchhavebeenmetwithinterestinmayscholarlycircles,although,asBulkeley(2008)notes,the“explanatorygap”betweentheprocessesunderfocusincognitivescientificinvestigationofthe“brain‐mind”andthenuancedcomplexitiesoflivedspiritualexperienceremainsformidable.

Neoshamanism

Transcendentviewsofshamanismarealsofundamentaltomostormanyofthepracticesandwritingsproducedintheneoshamanicmovement.Thetermneoshamanism(oralternativeslike“modernWesternshamanism”—vonStuckrad2002)hasariseninscholarlyliteraturetodescribevariousattemptstoreviveorrecreateshamanictraditionsinthelivesofcontemporaryWesterners.Theterm

impliesadistinctionbetweentraditionalshamanismsthathavebeenpasseddownfromgenerationtogenerationwithinspecificculturaltraditions(asdescribedintheworksofparticularistethnographers)andmoreimprovised,provisionalshamanicritualsandexperiencesoftenbornwithinworkshopsettingsandinformedbypast(orrecent)ethnographicliterature.Althoughmanyoftheleadingexponentsofneoshamanism,suchasMichaelHarner(1990)receivedadvanceddegreesinanthropology,scholarlyviewsofneoshamanicadaptationswereinitiallyquitedismissive(e.g.,Johansen2001andvariousoftheothercontributionstoFrancfortandHamayon2001).Astheabovediscussionofpost‐Sovietshamanicrevitalizationsshows,ofcourse,thelinebetween“traditionalshamanism”and“neoshamanism”isnotalwaysclear,eitherintheexperienceofneoshamanistpractitionersorintheanalysisofobservers.Morerecentscholarlyliteratureconcerningneoshamanismhastendedtoadoptamoreneutraltonewhendescribingthetopic,orevendisplayedmarkedsympathyforthemovementoritspractitioners.

Agoodportionofthescholarlyproductionconcerningneoshamanismgrowsoutoftherhetoricalapproachdescribedabove(e.g.,Hamayon1993,2001;Hoppál1992;Hulkrantz2001;Hutton2001;Jakobsen1999;Jenkins2005;Johansen2001;Jones2006;Leete1999;Noel1997;Schröder2007;Svanberg2003,vonSchnurbein1992,2003).ParticularlyilluminatingisAndreiA.Znamenski’sTheBeautyofthePrimitive(2007),whichcarefullytracestheideasthatbecomeimportantinneoshamanicideologyandexaminestheirfurtherdevelopmentortransformationwithinneoshamanicwritingandactivities.AlsoofgreatvalueareKockuvon Stuckrad’s (2002, 2003) as well as Robert Wallis’s (1991, 2001, 2003) investigations of neoshamanic ideologies from a perspective that includes both American and European examples. Ingeneral,scholarstraceneoshamanism’sphilosophicalrootstotheromanticizingornostalgicsensibilitiesofnineteenth‐andtwentieth‐centuryethnographersconcerningspiritualbelief,imagisticormysticalreligiousexperience,idealism,materialism,nature,hunter‐gatherersocieties,andtheappealofimprovised,personalizedritualsaspowerfulenablingdocumentsfortheeventualdevelopmentofneoshamanicpractices.Inneoshamanism,thesescholarssuggest,themusingsofdisaffectedWesterntheoristsaretransformedintoconcreteactionsforincorporatingshamanicpracticesandunderstandingsintopersonalritualrepertoiresasalternativestoWesternculturalcategoriesandvaluesdeemedinsufficientormisguided.

CertainlyintheworksoffigureslikeMichaelHarner(1980,reprinted1990)—ananthropologistwhobegantoteachneoshamanicworkshopsandeventuallycreatedtheFoundationforShamanicStudies(Harner2008)—suchintellectualcontinuityisamplyevidentandexplicitlystated.Otherwritersvaryinthedegreetowhichtheyfollowapurely“technique”‐basedinterpretationofneoshamanismorincorporatemoreelementsofbelieforworldviewintotheiradaptations.Shamanismaspartofawiderself‐helporpersonalrealizationframeworkisincreasinglycommoninNorthAmericaaswellasEurope,asillustratedbytherangeofrecentworksbyneoshamanicauthors(e.g.,Cowan1996;

Ingerman1991,1993;Scott2002;Weatherup2006).HillaryS.Webb’s(2004)collectionofinterviewswithneoshamanicwritersprovidesausefulstartingplaceforresearcherswantingtochroniclethevaryingandevolvingideasofleadingneoshamanicpractitionerstoday,andPetitmenginandBitbol’s(2009)discussionofintrospectiveexperienceandprocessesofvalidationorappraisalwithinmovementscanserveasavaluabletheoreticalbasisforapproachingsuchissuesethnographically.

Richethnographicpotentialresidesininvestigatingshamanictourismandthedevelopmentofvariousayahuasca‐relatedtouristpackages(see,forexampleSalak2006,Souther,andtheadvertisingoftheWorldShamanicInstitute).Muchethnographicworkisneededaswellontheever‐expandingInternetpresenceofneoshamanicresourcesandcommunication,evidencedbysitessuchastheWorldShamanicInstitute,Amazon.com’sTheShamanicCommunity,thewide‐rangingShamanPortal,andShamanicCirclesandthevariousself‐realizationproductsandprogramsofferedbyneoshamanicwriterMartiSpiegelmanthroughthesiteShaman’sLight(Spiegelman).TheinsightsofPaoloApolito’simportantTheInternetandtheMadonna(2002;Englishtranslation2005)orvariousworksbyRobertG.Howard(e.g.,Howard2009a,2009b)offerusefulmodelsthatcanbeadaptedtothestudyofneoshamanicusesofInternetmedia.

Whilemanyscholarshavethusexaminedtheintellectualmooringsofneoshamanicleaders,theconsciousmotivationsofordinaryneoshamanicpractitionershavealsobeguntoattractresearchattention.ScholarssuchasStjepanMeštrović (1997), Robert J. Wallis (2001, 2003), and Joan Townsend (2005)haveofferedavarietyoftheoriesregardingthemotivationsofparticipantsinvariousNewAgeactivities,butcloseethnographicexaminationsofparticularneoshamaniccommunitiesarestillrelativelyrare(e.g.,Lindquist1997,Blain2001).

AndreiA.Znamenski(2007:273ff.)exploresperceptivelytheoccasionalconflictsbetweenneoshamanicpractitionersandNativeAmericans,particularlywhenneoshamanicwritersadoptorhighlightpersonalNativeAmericanheritageasajustificationorenhancementoftheirviewpoints.AndySmith’s(1993)wryresponsetoAnglo‐AmericancooptionofindigenousreligioustraditionsisagoodencapsulationoftheNativecritiquethateventuallydevelopedintothelabel“plasticshamans”forvariousneoshamanicpractitioners.Perhapsinresponsetosuchcritiques,butalsoasanexpressionofpractitioners’desiretorelateonapersonallevelwiththeshamanictechniquesandtraditionstheyembrace,various“ethno‐neoshamanisms”havedeveloped.Suchmovementsfocusonrecoveringapastshamanismonthebasisofspecifichistoricalevidence,sometimescloselyrelatedtothereconstructionofpastshamanismsdiscussedabove.ExamplesincluderevivalsofCelticshamanism(Cowan1993,Trevarthen2007),Sámishamanism(Gaup2005),Jewishshamanism(Winkler2003,2008),andGermanicshamanism(Blain2000;Wallis2001,2003;vonSchnurbein1992,2003).VonSchnurbeininparticularexploresnotonlythedevelopmentofsuchmovements,butalsotheirculturalandsocialunderpinnings.Such movements illustrate the importance of expanded

ethnographic examinations of neoshamanisms, studies which will create a particularist perspective on neoshamanic activities to match the last two decades’ admirable production of particularist studies of traditional shamanisms.

Inthelasttwodecades,then,scholarshavesoughttodescribewithaccuracyandinsightthespecificspiritualexperiencesofindividualswithincommunitiesinrelationtopriortraditions,stateinstitutions,andcomplexprocessesofeconomicandculturalexchange.Theroleofscholarsasobservers,purveyors,andshapersofculturehasbeenperceptivelyexamined,whiletheboundarybetweenpurportedlyobjectiveobserversandsubjectiveparticipantshasbeenproductivelyproblematizedandblurred.Inthisrespect,scholarlytrendsinthestudyofshamanism(s)canbeseenassymptomaticofbroadershiftsinthestudyofreligionasawhole.

Bibliography

Aldhouse‐Green,MirandaandStephen.2005.TheQuestfortheShaman.London:ThamesandHudson.

Allen,Douglas.1998.MythandReligioninMirceaEliade.NewYorkandLondon:Routledge.

Amazon.com.TheShamanicCommunityhttp://www.amazon.com/tag/shamanism/ref=tag_dpp_ct_itdp,accessedDecember18,2009.

Apolito,Paolo.2002.InternetelaMadonna:ReligiousVisionaryExperienceontheWeb.Milano:GiangiacomoFeltrinelliEditore.

_____.2005.TheInternetandtheMadonna.Trans.AnthonyShugaar.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Athanassakis,ApostolosN.2001.“ShamanismandAmberinGreece:TheNorthernConnection.”In:Shamanhood,SymbolismandEpic.Ed.JuhaPentikäinen,LasseSaressaloandChunerTaksami.Budapest:AkadémiaiKiadó.207‐220.

Atkinson, Jane. 1992. “Shamanisms Today.” Annual Review of Anthropology 21: 307-330.

Aubert,Laurent.2006.“Chamanisme,possessionetmusique:quelquesréflexionspréliminaires”CahiersdeMusiquesTraditionnelles19:11‐20.

Austin,JamesH.2006.Zen­BrainReflections:ReviewingRecentDevelopmentsinMeditationandStatesofConsciousness.Cambridge,MA:MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology.

Bacigalupo,AnaMariella.1998.“TheExorcizingSoundsofWarfare:ThePerformanceofShamanicHealingandtheStruggletoRemainMapucheAnthropologyofConsciousness9/2(1998):1‐16.

_____.2001.LaVozdelKultrunenlaModernidad:Tradición,CambioenlaTerapeuticadeSieteMachiMapuche.Santiago:EdicionesUniversidadCatolicadeChile.

_____.2004.“TheMapucheManWhoBecameaWoman:Selfhood,GenderTransgression,andCompetingCulturalNorms.”AmericanEthnologist31(3):440‐457.

Bahn,PaulC.2001.“SavetheLastTranceforMe:AnAssessmentoftheMisuseofShamanisminRockArtStudies.”In:TheConceptofShamanism:UsesandAbuses.Ed.Henri‐PaulFrancfortandRoberteN.Hamayon.Budapest:AkadémiaiKiadó.51‐94.

Balzer,MarjorieMandelstaum(ed.)1997.ShamanicWorlds:RitualsandLoreofSiberiaandCentralAsia.Armonk,NYandLondon:NewCastleBooks.

______.1999.TheTenacityofEthnicity:ASiberianSagainGlobalPerspective.Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress.

Basilov,VladimirN.1997.“ChosenbytheSpirits.”In:ShamanicWorlds:RitualsandLoreofSiberiaandCentralAsia.Ed.MarjorieMandelstaumBalzer.Armonk,NYandLondon:NewCastleBooks.3‐45.

Becker,Judith.2001.“AnthropologicalPerspectivesonMusicandEmotion.”In:MusicandEmotion:TheoryandResearch.Ed.PatrickN.JuslinandJohnA.Sloboda.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.135‐160.

Bennett,BradleyC.1992.“HallucinogenicPlantsoftheShuarandRelationIndigenousGroupsinAmazonianEcuadorandPeru”Brittonia44:483‐93.

Berger,Adriana.1994.“MirceaEliade:RomanianFascismandtheHistoryofReligionsintheUnitedStates”InTaintedGreatness:AntisemitismandCulturalHeroes.Ed.NancyHurrowitz.Philadelphia:TempleUniversityPress.

Blain,Jenny.2001.NineWorldsofSeid­Magic:EcstasyandNeo­ShamanisminNorthEuropeanPaganism.London:Routledge.

Booth,Martin.1998Opium:AHistory.London:SimonandSchuster.

Brady,JamesE.andWendyAshmore.1994.“Mountains,Caves,Water:IdeationalLandscapesoftheAncientMaya.”In:ArchaeologiesofLandscape:ContemporaryPerspectives.Ed.WendyAshmoreandA.BernardKnapp.Oxford:BlackwellPublishers.124‐148.

Bulkeley,Kelly.2008.“TheImpactofCognitiveScienceonReligiousStudies:ARevolutionintheMaking”ReligiousStudiesReview34/4(2008):239‐46.

Burton,Lloyd.2002.WorshipandWilderness:Culture,ReligionandLawinPublicLandsManagement.Madison:UniversityofWisconsinPress.

Buyandelgeriyn,Manduhai.2007.“DealingwithUncertainty:Shamans,MarginalCapitalism,andtheRemakingofHistoryinPost‐SocialistMongolia”AmericanEthnologist34/1(2007):127‐47.

Cayon,Luis.2008.“IdeMa:WaterPath:Space,Shamanism,andPersonhoodamongtheMakuna”Antipoda,RevistadeAntropologíayArqueología7(2008):141‐73.

Cesarino,PedrodeNiemeyer.2006.“Deduploseestereoscópios:paralelismoepersonificaçãonoscantosxamanísticosameríndios”Mana12/1(2006):105‐34.

Chilson,ClarkandPeterKnecht(eds.)2003.ShamansinAsia.NewYork:RutledgeCurzon.

Clifford,James.1988.ThePredicamentofCulture:TwentiethCenturyEthnography,LiteratureandArt.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.

Clifford,JamesandGeorgeE.Marcus(eds.)1986.WritingCulture:ThePoeticsandPoliticsofEthnography.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

Clottes,Jean,andJ.DavidLewis‐Williams.2001.Leschamanesdelapréhistoire:transeetmagiedanslesgrottesornées.Paris:MaisondesRoches.

Coe,Michael,LindaSchele,CarolynE.Tate,RichardA.Diehl,KarlA.Taube.OlmecWorld.Princeton,NJ:TheArtMuseumofPrincetonUniversity.

Connor,LindaH.andGeoffreySamuel.2001.HealingPowersandModernity:TraditionalMedicine,Shamanism,andScienceinAsianSocieties.Westport,CT:BerginandGarvey.

Cowan,ThomasDale.1993.FireintheHead:ShamanismandtheCelticSpirit.NewYork:HarperCollinsPublishers.

_____.1996.ShamanismasaSpiritualPracticeforDailyLife.FreedomCA:TheCrossingPress.

Crepeau,RobertR.2007.“TheSubstancesofShamanism:SouthAmerindians’Perspectives”AnthropologieetSociétés31/3(2007):107‐125.

Devlet,Ekaterina.2001.“RockArtandtheMaterialCultureofSiberianandCentralAsianShamanism.”In:TheArchaeologyofShamanism.Ed.NeilPrice.LondonandNewYork:Routledge.43‐55.

Dick,Lyle.1995.“Pibloktoq(ArcticHysteria):AConstructionofEuropean‐InuitRelations?”ArcticAnthropology32(2):1‐42.

DuBois,ThomasA.1999.NordicReligionsintheVikingAge.Philadelphia:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress.

_____.2009.AnIntroductiontoShamanism.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

During,Jean.2006.“Dusamá’soufiauxpratiqueschamaniques:natureetvaleurd’uneexperience”CahiersdeMusiquesTraditionnelles19:79‐92.

Erowid.2007.TheVaultsofErowid.http://www.erowid.org/,accessedonlineSeptember27,2007.

Fedorova,Natalia.2001.“Shamans,HeroesandAncestorsintheBronzeCastingsofWesternSiberia.”In:TheArchaeologyofShamanism.Ed.NeilPrice.LondonandNewYork:Routledge.56‐64.

Fitzgerald,Timothy.2000.TheIdeologyofReligiousStudies.NewYorkandOxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Flaherty,Gloria.1992.ShamanismandtheEighteenthCentury.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.

Francfort,Henri‐Paul.2001.“PrehistoricSection:AnIntroduction.”In:TheConceptofShamanism:UsesandAbuses.Ed.Henri‐PaulFrancfortandRoberteN.Hamayon.Budapest:AkadémiaiKiadó.31‐50.

Francfort,Henri‐PaulandRoberteN.Hamayon(eds.)2001.TheConceptofShamanism:UsesandAbuses.Budapest:AkadémiaiKiadó.

Freidel,David,LindaSchele,andJoyParker.1995.MayaCosmos:ThreeThousandYearsontheShaman’sPath.NewYork:HarperPaperbacks.

Furst,Peter.2006.RockCrystalsandPeyoteDreams:ExplorationsintheHuicholUniverse.SaltLakeCity,UT:UniversityofUtahPress.

_____.2007.VisionsofaHuicholShaman.Philadelphia,PA:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress.

Gaup,Ailo.2005.Sjamansonen.Oslo:Trebjørnerforlag.

Glavatskaya,Elena.2001.“TheRussianStateandShamanhood:TheBriefHistoryofConfrontation.”In:Shamanhood,SymbolismandEpic.Ed.JuhaPentikäinen,LasseSaressaloandChunerTaksami.Budapest:AkadémiaiKiadó.237‐248.

Gold,Daniel.2003.AestheticsandAnalysisinWritingonReligion:ModernFascinations.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

Grob,CharlesS.1999.“ThePsychologyofAyahuasca.”In:Ayahuasca:HumanConsciousnessandtheSpiritsofNature.Ed.RalphMetzner.NewYork:Thunder’sMouthPress.214‐249.

Grusman,Vladimir,AlexeiKonovalov,andValentinaGorbacheva.2006.BetweenWorlds:ShamanismandthePeoplesofSiberia.Moscow:KhudozhnikiKniga.

Hamayon, Roberte N. 1993.“Are‘Trance,’‘Ecstasy’andSimilarConceptsAppropriateintheStudyofShamanism?”Shaman1(2):3‐25.

_____.2001.“Shamanism,SymbolicSystem,HumanCapabilityandWesternIdeology”In:TheConceptofShamanism:UsesandAbuses.Eds.Henri‐PaulFrancfortandRoberteNHamayon.Budapest:AkadémiaiKiadó.1‐30.

Harner,Michael.1990.TheWayoftheShaman.SanFrancisco:HarperSanFrancisco.

_____.2008.“TheFoundationforShamanicStudies”http://www.shamanism.org,accessedDecember18,2009.

Harvey,Graham(ed.)2000.IndigenousReligions:ACompanion.LondonandNewYork:Cassell.

_____(ed.)2002.Shamanism:AReader.London:Routledge.

Harvey,GrahamandRobertJ.Wallis(eds.)2007.HistoricalDictionaryofShamanism.Lanham,MD:ScarecrowPress.

Hayden,Brian.2003.Shamans,Sorcerers,andSaints:APrehistoryofReligion.Washington,D.C.:SmithsonianBooks.

Her,VincentK.2005.“HmongCosmology:ProposedModel,PreliminaryInsights.”HmongStudiesJournal6:1‐25.

Hollimon,SandraE.2001.“TheGenderedPeoplingofNorthAmerica:AddressingtheAntiquityofSystemsofMultipleGenders.”In:TheArchaeologyofShamanism.Ed.NeilPrice.LondonandNewYork:Routledge.123‐145.

Holmberg,D.1983.“ShamanicSoundings:FemalenessintheTemangRitualStructure”Signs:JournalofWomeninCultureandSociety9/1(1983):40‐58.

Hoppál,Mihály.1992.“UrbanShamans:ACulturalRevival”InStudiesonShamanism.Ed.Anna‐LeenaSiikalaandMihályHoppál.Helsinki:FinnishAnthropologicalSociety.

Hoppál,MihályandJuhaPentikäinen.1992.NorthernReligionsandShamanism.Budapest:AkadémiaiKiadó.

Howard,RobertG.2009a.“EnactingaVirtual‘Ekklesia’:OnlineChristianFundamentalismasVernacularReligion”NewMedia&Society11/8(2009):1‐19.

_____.2009b.“TheVernacularIdeologyofChristianFundamentalismontheWorldWideWeb”InFundamentalismsandtheMedia.Ed.StewartM.HooverandNadiaKaneva.NewYork:ContinuumPublishing.Pp.126‐41.

Hubbard,TimothyL.2002.“SomeCorrespondencesandSimilaritiesofShamanismandCognitiveSciences:Interconnectedness,ExtensionofMeaning,andAttributionofMentalStates”AnthropologyofConsciousness13/2(2002):26‐45.

Hultkrantz,Åke.1998.“OntheHistoryofResearchinShamanism.”In:Shamans.Ed.JuhaPentikäinen,ToimiJaatanen,IldikóLehtinen,andMarjo‐RiittaSaloniemi.TampereMuseums’Publications45.Tampere:TampereMuseums.50‐58.

______.2001.“Shamanism:SomeRecentFindingsfromaComparativePerspective.”In:Shamanhood,SymbolismandEpic.Ed.JuhaPentkäinen,HannaSarresalo,andChunerM.Taksami.Budapest:AkadémiaiKiadó.1‐10.

Humphrey,Caroline.1994.“ShamanicPracticesandtheStateinNorthernAsia:ViewsfromtheCenterandPeriphery”In:Shamanism,History&theState.Eds.NicholasThomasandCarolineHumphrey.AnnArbor:UniversityofMichiganPress.191‐228.

Humphrey,Caroline,andUrgungeOnon(eds.).1996.ShamansandElders:Experience,Knowledge,andPoweramongtheDaurMongols.Oxford:ClarendonPress.

Hunt,NormanBancroft.2002.ShamanisminNorthAmerica.Toronto:KeyPorterBooks.

Hutton,Ronald.2001.Shamans:SiberianSpiritualityandtheWesternImagination.LondonandNewYork:HambledonandLondon.

Iliff,Barbara.1994.“SpiritsLiketheSoundoftheRattleandDrum:GeorgeThorntonEmmons’CollectionofTlingitShamans’Kits.”Seattle:Unpub.Ph.D.dissertation,UniversityofWashington.

_____.1997.“TlingitShamans’Art.”NorthwestFolklore12(1):35‐63.

Ingerman,Sandra.1991.SoulRetrieval:MendingtheFragmentedSelf. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco.

_____. 1993. Welcome Home: Life After Healing. Following Your Soul’s Journey Home. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco.

Jacobs,SueEllen,WilliamThomas,andSusanLang(eds.).1997.Two­SpiritPeople:NativeAmericanGenderIdentity,Sexuality,andSpirituality.Urbana:UniversityofIllinoisPress.

Jakobsen,MereteDemant.1999.Shamanism:TraditionalandContemporaryApproachestotheMasteryofSpiritsandHealing.NewYorkandOxford:BerghahnBooks.

Jenkins, Philip. 2005. Dream Catchers: How Mainstream America Discovered Native Spirituality. New York: Oxford University Press.

Jensen,TimandMikaelRothstein(eds.)2000.SecularTheoriesonReligion:CurrentPerspectives.Copenhagen:MuseumTusculanumPress.

Jolly,Karen,CatharinaRaudvere,andEdwardPeters.2002.WitchcraftandMagicinEurope.TheMiddleAges.Ed.BengtAnkarlooandStuartClark.Philadelphia:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress.

Johansen, Ulla. 2001. “Shamanism and Neoshamanism: What is the Difference?” In:TheConceptofShamanism:UsesandAbuses.Ed.Henri‐PaulFrancfortandRoberteN.Hamayon.Budapest:AkadémiaiKiadó.297-303.

Jones, Peter N. 2006. “Shamanism: An Inquiry into the History of the Scholarly Use of the Term in English-speaking North America” Anthropology of Consciousness 17/2 (2006): 4-32.

Jourdain,Robert.1997.Music,theBrain,andEcstasy.NewYork:AvonBooks.

Kehoe,Alice.2000.ShamansandReligion:AnAnthropologicalExplorationinCriticalThinking.ProspectHeights,IL:WavelandPress.

Kendall,Laurel.1995.“InitiatingPerformance:TheStoryofChini,aKoreanShaman.”In:ThePerformanceofHealing.Ed.CarolLadermanandMarinaRoseman.NewYork:Routledge.17‐58.

_____.2001.“TheCulturalPoliticsof‘Superstition’intheKoreanShamanWorld:ModernityConstructsItsOther.”In:HealingPowersandModernity:TraditionalMedicine,Shamanism,andScienceinAsianSocieties.Ed.LindaH.ConnorandGeoffreySamuel.Westport,CT:BerginandGarvey.25‐41.

Kenin‐Lopsan,MongushB.1997.ShamanicSongsandMythsofTuva.SelectedandeditedbyMihályHoppálwiththeassistanceofChristianaBuckbee.Budapest:ISTOR.

Kippenberg,HansG.2002.DiscoveringReligiousHistoryintheModernAge.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.

Klein,CeceliaF.,EulogioGuzmán,ElisaC.Mandell,andMayaStanfield‐Mazzi.2002.“TheRoleofShamanisminMesoamericanArt:AReassessment.CurrentAnthropology43/3(2002):383‐419.

Kugel,Rebecca.1994.“OfMissionariesandTheirCattle:OjibwaPerceptionsofaMissionaryasEvilShaman.”Ethnohistory41(2):227‐244.

Laderman,Carol,andMarinaRoseman(eds.)1995.ThePerformanceofHealing.NewYork:Routledge.

Lang,Sabine.1998.MenasWomen,WomenasMen:ChangingGenderinNativeAmericanCultures.Austin:UniversityofTexasPress.

Lardinois,OlivierS.J.2007.“TheologicalandPastoralReflectionsonthePracticeofShamanismStillFoundintheCatholicIndigenousCommunitiesofTaiwan”eRenlaiMagazine.Onlinejournalarticle,http://www.erenlai.com/index.php?aid=763&Jan=3,accessedJuly14,2007.

Lecomte,Henri.2006.“ApprochesauthochtonesduchamanismesibérienaudébutdeXXesiècle”CahiersdeMusiquesTraditionnelles19:37‐52.

Lee,Yong‐Shik.2004.ShamanRitualMusicinKorea.KoreanStudiesDissertationSeriesno5.Edison,NJandSeoul:JimoondangInternational.

Leete,Art.1999.“WaysofDescribingNenetsandKhanty‘Character’inNineteenthCenturyRussianEthnographicLiterature.”Folklore12.Onlinejournalarticle,http://www.folklore.ee/folklore/vol12/charactr.htm,accessedJanuary1,2007.

Lenaerts,Marc.2006.“’LejouroùPawa,notrePèreàtous,aabandonnélaTerre’:lebricolagereligieuxchezlesAshéninkadel’Ucayali”Anthropos101/2(2006):541‐58.

Levitin,DanielJ.2006.ThisIsYourBrainonMusic:TheScienceofaHumanObsession.NewYork:Plume(PenguinGroup).

Lewis‐Williams,J.David.2001.“SouthernAfricanShamanisticRockArtinitsSocialandCognitiveContexts.”In:TheArchaeologyofShamanism.Ed.NeilPrice.NewYorkandLondon:RoutledgePress.17‐42.

_____.2002.ACosmosinStone:InterpretingReligionandSocietythroughRockArt.WalnutCreek,Lanham,NewYork,Oxford:AltaMiraPress.

Lindquist,Galina.1997.ShamanicPerformancesontheUrbanScene:Neo­ShamanisminContemporarySweden.StockholmStudiesinSocialAnthropology39.Stockholm:DepartmentofSocialAnthropology.

Lommel,Andreas.1967.Shamanism:TheBeginningsofArt.NewYork:McGraw‐Hill.

Luna,LuisEduardoandStevenF.White(eds.)2000.AyahuascaReader:EncounterswiththeAmazon’sSacredVine.SantaFe,NM:Synergetic.

Malotki,EkkehartandKenGary.2001.HopiStoriesofWitchcraft,Shamanism,andMagic.Lincoln:UniversityofNebraskaPress.

Maskarinec,GregoryC.1995.TheRulingsoftheNight:AnEthnographyofNepaleseShamanOralTexts.Madison:UniversityofWisconsinPress.

McClenon,James.2002.WondrousHealingShamanism:HumanEvolutionandtheOriginofReligion.DeKalb,IL:NorthernIllinoisUniversityPress.

McCutcheon,Russell.1997.ManufacturingReligion:TheDiscourseonSuiGenerisReligionandthePoliticsofNostalgia.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

McKinney,LawrenceO.1994.Neurotheology:VirtualReligioninthe21stCentury.Cambridge,MA:AmericanInstituteforMindfulness.

Mebius,Hans.2003.Bissie:Studierisamiskreligionshistoria.Östersund:FörlagetförJemtlandica.

Meštrović, Stjepan. 1997. Postemotional Society. London: Sage.

Metzner,Ralph(ed.)1999.Ayahuasca:HumanConsciousnessandtheSpiritsofNature.NewYork:Thunder’sMouthPress.

Miller,ThomasR.1999.“MannequinsandSpirits:RepresentationandResistanceofSiberianShamans.”AnthropologyofConsciousness10(4):69‐80.

Mills,AntoniaandRichardSlobodin.1994.AmerindianRebirth:ReincarnationBeliefamongNorthAmericanIndiansandInuit.Toronto:UniversityofTorontoPress.

Morin,FrançoiseandBernardSaladind’Anglure.1998.“MariagemystiqueetpouvoirchamaniquechezlesShipibod’AmazoniepéruvienneetlesInuitduNunavutcanadien”AnthropologieetSociétés22/2(1998):49‐79.

_____.2003.“Enfantsd’espritsetconjointsinvisiblesouladoubleviesocialedeschamanesInuitetShipibo”Parcoursanthropologiques3(2003):39‐45.

Morin,Françoise.2007.“Genre,alliance,etfiliationdanslesrelationschamanes‐espritschezlesShipibo‐Conibo”AnthropologieetSociétés31/3(2007):87‐106.

Naoko,Takiguchi.2003.“MiyakoTheology:Shamans’InterpretationsofTraditionalBeliefs”In:ShamansinAsia.Eds.ClarkChilsonandPeterKnecht.NewYork:RoutledgeCurzon.120‐52.

Narby,Jeremy,andFrancisHuxley.2001.ShamansthroughTime:500YearsonthePathtoKnowledge.NewYork:JeremyP.Tarcher/Putnam.

Newberg,Andrew,EugeneD’Aquili,andVinceRause.2001.WhyGodWon’tGoAway:BrainScienceandtheBiologyofBelief.NewYork:Ballantine.

Nicoletti,Martino.2004.ShamanicSolitudes:Ecstasy,MadnessandSpiritPossessionintheNepalHimalayas.Kathmandu:VajraPublications.

Noel,DanielC.1997.TheSouldofShamanism:WesternFantasies,ImaginedRealities.NewYork:Continuum.

O’Brien,David.2004.AnimalSacrificeandReligiousFreedom:ChurchoftheLukumiBabaluAyev.CityofHialeah.Lawrence:UniversityPressofKansas.

Omar,Dilmurat.2006.“SurvivalofShamanisminChineseCentralAsia:ExamplesofModernSyncretismasaResearchProblemintheAnthropologyofReligion”ZeitschriftfürEthnologie131/2(2006):263‐76.

Ortner,SherryB.1995.“TheCaseoftheDisappearingShamans,orNoIndividualism,NoRelationism.”Ethos23(3):355‐390.

Ott,Jonathan.1993.Pharmacotheon:EntheogenicDrugs,theirPlantSourcesandHistory.Kennewick,WA:NaturalProductsCo.

Pearson,JamesL.2002.ShamanismandtheAncientMind:ACognitiveApproachtoArchaeology.WalnutCreek:AltamiraPress.

Pentikäinen,Juha,ToimiJaatinen,IldikóLehtinen,Marjo‐RiittaSaloniemi(eds.)1998.Shamans.TampereMuseums’Publications45.Tampere:TampereMuseums.

Pentikäinen,Juha,HannaSarresalo,ChunerM.Taksami,eds.2001.Shamanhood,SymbolismandEpic.Budapest:AkadémiaiKiadó.

Peters,LarryG.2004.Trance,Initiation&PsychotherapyinNepaleseShamanism:EssaysonTamangandTibetanShamanism.Delhi:NiralaPublications.

Petitmengin,ClaireandMichelBitbol.2009.“TheValidityofFirst‐PersonDescriptionsasAuthenticityandCoherence”JournalofConsciousnessStudies16/10‐12(2009):363‐404.

Pinchback, Daniel. 2002. Breaking Open the Head: A Psychedelic Journey into the Heart of Contemporary Shamanism. New York: Broadway.

Potapov,LeonidP.1999.“Shaman’sDrum:AUniqueMonumentofSpiritualCultureoftheAltaiTurkPeoples.”AnthropologyofConsciousness10(4):24‐35.

Price,Neil(ed.)2001.TheArchaeologyofShamanism.LondonandNewYork:Routledge.

______.2002.TheVikingWay:ReligionandWarinLateIronAgeScandinavia.Uppsala:UppsalaUniversityPress.

Purev,Otgony,andGurbadaryrnPurvee.2004.MongolianShamanism.3rded.Ulaanbator:AdmonPublishing.

Ramachandran,V.S.andSandraBlakeslee.1998.PhantomsintheBrain.NewYork:Quill.

Rätsch,Christian.2005.TheEncyclopediaofPsychoactivePlants:EthnopharmacologyandItsApplications.Rochester,VT:ParkStreetBooks.

Reid,Anna.2003.TheShaman’sCoat:ANativeHistoryofSiberia.NewYork:Walker&Company.

Riboli,Diana.2000.Tunsuriban:ShamanismintheChepangofSouthernandCentralNepal.Kathmandu:MandalaBookPoint.

Ridington,Robin.1997.“AlltheOldSpiritsHaveComeBacktoGreetHim:RealizingtheSacredPoleoftheOmahaTribe.”In:PresentisPast:SomeUsesofTraditioninNativeSocieties.Ed.MarieMauzé.Lanham:UniversityPressofAmerica.159‐174.

______andDennisHastings(In’aska).1997.BlessingforaLongTime:TheSacredPoleoftheOmahaTribe.Lincoln:UniversityofNebraskaPress.

Ripinsky‐Naxon,Michael.1993.TheNatureofShamanism:SubstanceandFunctionofaReligiousMetaphor.Albany:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress.

Roscoe,Will.1998.ChangingOnes:ThirdandFourthGenderinNativeAmerica.NewYork:St.Martin’sPress.

Roseman,Marina.1991.HealingSoundsfromtheMalaysianRainforest:TemiarMusicandMedicine.LosAngeles:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

_____.1995.DreamSongsandHealingSounds:IntheRainforestsofMalaysia.Washington,D.C.:Smithsonian/FolkwaysRecordings.SFCD40417.CDplusdescriptivenotes.

_____.2001.“EngagingtheSpiritsofModernity:TheTemiars.”In:HealingPowersandModernity:TraditionalMedicine,Shamanism,andScienceinAsianSocieties.Ed.LindaH.ConnorandGeoffreySamuel.Westport,CT:BerginandGarvey.109‐129.

Rossano,MattJ.2007.“SupernaturalizingSocialLife:ReligionandtheEvolutionofHumanCooperation”HumanNature18/3(2007):272‐94.

Rozwadowski,Andrzej.2001.“SunGodsorShamans?InterpretingtheSolar‐HeadedPetroglyphsofWesternSiberia.”In:TheArchaeologyofShamanism.Ed.NeilS.Price.LondonandNewYork:Routledge.65‐86.

Rydving,Håkon.1995.TheEndofDrum­Time:ReligiousChangeamongtheLuleSaami,1670s­1740s.ActaUniversitatisUpsaliensis.HistoriaReligionum12.Uppsala:Alqvist&Wiksell.

Salak, Kira. 2006. “Hell and Back.” National Geographic Adventure (March 2006): 54-58, 88-92.

Sasamori,Takefusa.1997.“TherapeuticRitualsPerformedbyItako(JapaneseBlindFemaleShamans).”TheWorldofMusic39(2):85‐96.

Schaefer,StacyB.1996.“TheCrossingoftheSouls:Peyote,Perception,andMeaningamongtheHuicholIndians.”InPeopleofthePeyote:HuicholIndianHistory,Religion,andSurvival.Ed.StaceyB.SchaeferandPeterR.Furst.Albuquerque:UniversityofNewMexicoPress.136‐168.

Schaefer,StacyB.andPeterT.Furst(eds.)1996.PeopleofthePeyote:HuicholIndianHistory,Religion,andSurvival.Albuquerque:UniversityofNewMexicoPress.

Scherberger,Laura.2005.“TheJanus‐FacedShaman:TheRoleofLaughterinSicknessandHealingamongtheMakushi”AnthropologyandHumanism30/1(2005):55‐69.

vonSchnurbein,Stefanie.1992.ReligionalsKulturkritik.NeugermanischesHeidentumim20.Jahrhundert.Heidelberg:Winter.

_____.“ShamanismintheOldNorseTradition:ATheorybetweenIdeologicalCamps”HistoryofReligions43/2(2003):116‐38.

Schröder,Philipp.2007.“Schauspiel,Ideologie,undSelbstdarstellung.BeschreibungenzumsibirischenSchamanismuszwischendem18.Und21.JarhhundertimKontextderWritingCultureDebatte”Anthropos102/1(2007):135‐56.

Schultes,RichardEvans,AlbertHofmann,andChristianRätsch.2001.PlantsoftheGods:TheirSacred,HealingandHallucinogenicPowers.Rochester,VT:HealingArtsPress.

Scott,GiniGraham.2002.TheCompleteIdiot’sGuidetoShamanism.Indianapolis,IN:AlphaBooks.

ShamanPortalhttp://www.shamanportal.org/,accessedDecember18,2009.

ShamanicCircleshttp://www.shamaniccircles.org/,accessedDecember18,2009.

Shanon,Benny.2002.TheAntipodesoftheMind:ChartingthePhenomenologyoftheAyahuascaExperience.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Sidky,H.2009.“AShaman’sCure:TheRelationshipbetweenAlteredStatesofConsciousnessandShamanicHealing”AnthropologyofConsciousness20/2(2009):171‐97.

Siikala,Anna‐Leena.2002.MythicImagesandShamanism:APerspectiveonKalevalaPoetry.Helsinki:SuomalainenTiedeakatemia.

Siikala,Anna‐Leena,andMihályHoppál.1992.StudiesonShamanism.Helsinki:FinnishAnthropologicalSociety.

Smith,Andy.1993.“ForAllThoseWhoWereIndianInaFormerLife”In:EcofeminismandtheSacred.Ed.C.Adams.NewYork:Continuum.168‐71.

Smyers,KarenA.1999.TheFoxandtheJewel:SharedandPrivateMeaningsinContemporaryJapaneseInariWorship.Honolulu:UniversityofHawai’iPress.

Solli,Britt.2002.Seid:Myther,sjamanismeogkjønnivikingenestid.Oslo:PaxForlag.

Souther,Hamilton.“BlueMorphoCenterforShamanicStudiesandWorkshops.”http://www.bluemorphotours.com/,accessedDecember18,2009.

Spiegelman,Marti.Shaman’sLighthttp://www.martispiegelman.org/home.html,accessedDecember18,2009.

Steinberg,MichaelK.,JosephJ.Hobbs,andKentMathewson(eds.)2004.DangerousHarvest:DrugPlantsandtheTransformationofIndigenousLandscapes.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

vonStuckrad,Kocku.2002.“ReenchantingNature:ModernWesternShamanismandNineteenth‐CenturyThought”JournaloftheAmericanAcademyofReligion70/4(2002):771‐99.

_____. 2003. Schamanismus und Esoterik: Kultur- und wissenschaftsgeschichtliche Betrachtungen. Leuven: Peeters.

Sullivan,Robert.2002.AWhaleHunt:HowaNativeAmericanVillageDidWhatNoOneThoughtItCould.NewYork:Scribner.

Svanberg,Jan.2003.Schamantropologiigränslandetmellanforskningochpraktik.Enstudieavförhållandetmellanschamanism­forskningochneoschamanism.Turku:ÅboAkademisförlag.

Tangherlini,Timothy.1998.“Shamans,Students,andtheState”In:NationalisandtheConstructionofKoreanIdentity.Eds.HyungIlPailandTimothyR.Tangherlini.KoreaResearchMonograph26.Berkeley:InstituteofEastAsianStudies.126‐47.

Tedlock,Barbara.2001.“DivinationasaWayofKnowing:Embodiment,Visualisation,Narrative,andInterpretation.”Folklore112:189‐197.

______.2004.TheWomanintheShaman’sBody:ReclaimingtheFeminineinReligionandMedicine.NewYork:BantamBooks.

Thomas,NicholasandCarolineHumphrey(eds.)1994.Shamanism,History,&theState.AnnArbor:UniversityofMichiganPress.

Tkacz,Virlana,SayanZhambalov,andWandaPhipps.2002.Shanar:DedicationRitualofaBuryatShamaninSiberiaasconductedbyBayirRinchinov.NewYork:ParabolaBooks.

Toelken,Barre.2003.TheAnguishofSnails:NativeAmericanFolkloreintheWest.Logan,UT:UtahStateUniversityPress.

Tolley,Clive.ShamanisminNorseMythandMagic.2Vols.FFCommunications296‐297.Helsinki:AcademiaScientarumFennica,2009.

Townsend, Joan B. 2005. “Individualist Religious Movements: Core and Neo-Shamanism.” Anthropology of Consciousness 15(1): 1-9.

Tremlin,Todd.2006.MindsandGods:TheCognitiveFoundationsofReligion.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

Trevarthen,GeoAthena.2007.CelticShamanism.http://www.celticshamanism.com,accessedonlineDecember16,2007.

VanDeusen,Kira.1999.RavenandtheRock:StorytellinginChukotka.SeattleandLondon:UniversityofWashingtonPress;Edmonton:CanadianCircumpolarInstitutePress.

_____.2004.SingingStory,HealingDrum:ShamansandStorytellersofTurkicSiberia.Montreal&Kingston:McGill‐Queen’sUniversityPress.

Vitebsky,Piers.1995.TheShaman.Boston:Little,BrownandCompany.

_____.2005.TheReindeerPeople.LivingwithAnimalsandSpiritsinSiberia.Boston:HoughtonMifflinCompany.

VonGernet,Alexander.2000.“NorthAmericanIndigenousNicotianaUseandTobaccoShamanism:TheEarlyDocumentaryRecord,1520‐1660.”In:TobaccoUsebyNativeAmericans:SacredSmokeandSilentKiller.Ed.JosephC.Winter.Norman:UniversityofOklahomaPress.59‐80.

WalkingStickFoundation.2008.http://www.walkingstick.org,accessedonlineDecember18,2009.

Wallis,RobertJ.1999.“AlteredStates,ConfictingCultures:Shamans,Neo‐Shamans,andAcademics”AnthropologyofConsciousness10/2(1999):41‐9.

_____.2001.“WakingAncestorSpirits:Neo‐ShamanicEngagementswithArchaeology.”In:TheArchaeologyofShamanism.Ed.NeilPrice.LondonandNewYork:RoutledgePress.213‐230.

_____. 2003. Shamans/Neo-Shamans: Ecstasy, Alternative Archaeologies and Contemporary Pagans. London: Routledge.

Walraven,Boudewijn.1994.SongsoftheShaman:TheRitualChantsoftheKoreanMudang.LondonandNewYork:KeganPaulInternational.

Walsh,Roger.1997.“ThePsychologicalHealthofShamans:AReevaluation”JournaloftheAmericanAcademyofReligion65/1:101‐24.

Walter,MarikoNambaandEvaJaneNeumannFridman(eds.)ShamanismLAnEncyclopediaofWorldBeliefs,Practices,andCulture.SantaBarbara,CA:ABC‐CLIO,2004.

Weatherup,Katie.2006.PracticalShamanism:AGuideforWalkinginBothWorlds.USA:HandsoverHeartPublishing.

Webb,HillaryS.2004.TravelingbetweentheWorlds:ConversationswithContemporaryShamans.Charlottesvilla,VA:HamptonRoadsPublishing.

Westmeyer,Joseph.2004.“OpiumandthePeopleofLaos.”In:DangerousHarvest:DrugPlantsandtheTransformationofIndigenousLandscapes.Ed.MichaelK.Steinberg,JosephJ.Hobbs,andKentMathewson.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.115‐132.

Whitehead,Neil.2002.DarkShamans:KanaimàandthePoeticsofViolentDeath.DurhamandLondon:DukeUniversityPress.

_____andRobinWright(eds.)2004.InDarknessandSecrecy:TheAnthropologyofAssaultSorceryandWitchcraftinAmazonia.DurhamandLondon:DukeUniversityPress.

Whitehouse,Harvey.2004.ModesofReligiosity:ACognitiveTheoryofReligiousTransmission.Lanham,MD:AltaMiraPress.

Whitehouse,HarveyandRobertN.McCauley.2005.MindandReligion:PsychologicalandCognitiveFoundationsofReligiosity.CognitiveScienceofReligionSeries.WalnutCreek,CA:AltamiraPress.

Williams,MariaP.1995.“TheWolfandtheMan/Bear:PublicandPersonalSymbolsinaTlingitDrum.”PacificReviewofEthnomusicology7:79‐92.

Winkelman,Michael.1992.Shamans,PriestsandWitches.ACross­CulturalStudyofMagico­ReligiousPractitioners.AnthropologyResearchPapersno.44.TempeAZ:ArizonaStateUniversityPress.

_____.2000.Shamanism:TheNeuralEcologyofConsciousnessandHealing.Westport,CT:Bergin&Garvey.Buildingonworksalreadypublishedin1980sand90s.

Winkelman,MichaelandPhilipM.Peek.2004.DivinationandHealing:PotentVision.Tucson:UniversityofArizonaPress.

Winkelman,MichaelandJohnBaker.2008.SupernaturalasNatural:ABiologicalTheoryofReligion.UpperSaddleRiver,NJ:PrenticeHall.

Winkler, Gershon. 2003. Magic of the Ordinary: Recovering the Shamanic in Judaism. Berkeley: North Atlantic Books.

_____. Walking Stick Foundation, www.walkingstick.org/, accessed December 18, 2009.

WorldShamanicInstitute.http://www.WorldShamanicInstitute.com,accessedDecember18,2009.

Yun, Kyoim. 2008. “Performing the Sacred: Political Economy and Shamanic Ritual on Cheju Island, South Korea.” Bloomington, IN: Unpub. Dissert. Indiana University.

Znamenski, Andrei. 2004. Shamanism: Critical Concepts in Sociology. London: Routledge.

____. 2007. The Beauty of the Primitive: Shamanism and the Western Imagination. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.