On the Problematic Nature of the Concept of “Greek Shamanism”

Abstract

The notion of ‘shamanism’ began to penetrate into classical studies from the 19th century onwards. Legendary and real-life figures such as Orpheus, Aristeas, and Epimenides began to be declared shamans. Gradually it came to philosophers such as Pythagoras, Parmenides, Empedocles, and Socrates. Then Odysseus, and Jason joined the list, and recently Christ, and Mohammed have been added to it. Today the idea of “Greek shamanism” is so firmly rooted in many works that one might get the impression that it has a sound evidential basis. However, a critical examination of the studi es in which this idea has been actively disseminated for more than a hundred years has revealed the groundlessness of the concept of “Greek shamanism”. Many arguments, due to the authority of their authors, were simply copied from one work to another without being questioned or verified. The present work attempts to look deep into the methodological foundations and intentions of different authors, who liked this concept, and see whether the use of the notion of “Greek shamanism” leads to any positive and productive conclusions. It seems that the transfer of the concept of “shamanism” to the Ancient Greek religious substratum does not bring anything useful to the understanding of religious phenomena of the Ancient Greek religion, and, therefore, it should be abandoned. As an alternative approach it is proposed to clearly define the concept of “shamanism” and its cultural, geographical, and historical framework, which manages to do with the original ethnographic material.