In Haunted by the Archaic Shaman, H. Sidky uses his ethnographic work with Nepalese ritual intercessors, primarily those known as jhãkris, to evaluate the concept of shamanism and the field of shamanic studies. The book hinges on its title’s image, an “archaic shaman” figure that, according to Sidky, Mircea Eliade summoned with the 1951 publication of Shamanism and which, despite the lack of substantiating ethnographic data, subsequent scholars have yet to exorcize. Thus, like the jhãkris he studies, Sidky seeks to banish a troublesome spirit. Unlike them, he uses the tools of science—a term his book also interrogates—to do so.

Sidky’s book serves two explicit purposes. First, it provides an ethnographically-based description of jhãkris and contextualizes that description within the field of shamanic studies, concluding that jhãkris can be considered shamans. Second, it uses the same ethnographic material to contest assumptions found in the shamanic studies literature. Such an approach, in which ethnographic findings function as objects as well as tools of academic inquiry, risks a certain circularity of thought. But Sidky’s book is also a meditation on ethnography, and its larger purpose is to show that ethnographic research is useful only when it works this way, augmenting on-the-ground findings with the broad concepts of a discipline, and refining those concepts with specific insights drawn from the field.

Sidky champions science as a research approach relying on “publicly ascertainable evidence” (133) to “enhance knowledge” (6). Ethnography serves this function when, as described above, it partakes of a dialogue with the broader concepts of its field. Accordingly, Sidky’s work relies on both ethnographic and textual information. In the former case, he draws on more than seven years of fieldwork in Nepal during which he observed ceremonies, interviewed jhãkris from different classes and cultural groups, and, for “comparative purposes,” spoke to other types of ritual intercessors (xii). His textual research is likewise very thorough, covering the Nepalese cultural and religious context as well as the development of shamanic studies.

The book begins by summarizing the history of shamanic studies (chapter 1) and identifying problems involved in defining shamanism (chapter 2). Sidky identifies three strands in contemporary understandings of the term: (1) shamanism as an “historical/ethnographic complex in Siberia” (206); (2) shamanism as humanity’s ancient ur-religion; and (3) shamanism as the use of techniques (such as trance) that appear in culturally unrelated contexts and are similar because of commonalities in human neurophysiology. These strands, which occur in different combinations throughout the shamanic studies literature, are mutually incompatible and require “disentangling” (205).

Each subsequent chapter uses ethnographic material to target a different aspect of jhãkri tradition. From this foundation in the particular, chapters conclude by summarizing the component of tradition under discussion and then considering its implications for shamanic studies.

Chapter 3 considers the origins of the jhãkri in light of Nepalese oral traditions. Sidky suggests that, in contrast to the idea of shamanism as a survival from Paleolithic times, the Nepalese case represents an evolving tradition that draws on a variety of cultural and religious influences, including belief in the ban-jhãkri, a forest deity considered to be the first shaman. While many portions of Nepalese shamanic oral tradition have counterparts in Siberia, the ban-jhãkri seems to be an indigenous, uniquely Nepalese component.

Sidky then considers jhãkri rites of passage (chapter 4) and ritual dress and equipment (chapter 5) as ways of distinguishing jhãkris from other types of Nepalese ritual intercessors. Citing the consistency of jhãkri customary and material culture across classes and ethnic groups, Sidky concludes that shamanism is a “pan-Nepalese phenomenon” (78). Finally, he uses similarities of rites, dress, and equipment between jhãkris and Siberian shamans to suggest a cultural connection between shamanic practice in Nepal and Siberia.

Chapters 6, 7, and 9 address the neurophysiological processes that may underlie aspects of the jhãkri experience; such experiences include trances and spirit possession as well as abduction by the ban-jhãkri. Relying on a variety of medical sources, Sidky proposes the phenomenon of dissociation or “splitting of consciousness” (113), by which “parallel brain modules disengage from each other… and operate independently” (112), to explain shamanic trance and possession. Dissociation as well as sleep paralysis may also cast light on abduction cases (59).

Sidky also identifies similar phenomena among groups of people with no shamanic traditions; his prime example is that of UFO abductees, whose reports parallel Nepalese descriptions of abductions by the ban-jhãkri. Sidky’s point is that the similarities in abduction reports indicate common human neurophysiological processes and are not evidence of a world-encompassing form of shamanism.

This consideration of abduction reports also addresses researchers’ understanding of culturally situated “supernatural” phenomena. According to Sidky, those researchers who accept the reality of such things (or deny a single objective reality) doom their work to “ethnographic particularism,” in which findings are too personal and specific to contribute to any broader discourse (107).

Chapter 8 pursues the question of scholarly belief a step further, citing a case—belief in witches as the opponents of jhãkris—in which an indigenous belief system poses physical danger to members of the community. Sidky states that there is no evidence to support the existence of Nepalese witches; however, those women who are considered witches face a variety of social consequences, ranging from shunning to violence. Researchers who “empower” the jhãkri system by suspending belief in it also, by extension, legitimate the violence done to women accused of witchcraft.

Chapters 10 and 11 offer one way to understand the efficacy of jhãkri ceremonies without resorting to non-“rational” speculation. Approaching ceremonies from a perspective grounded in performance theory, Sidky suggests that ritual efficacy derives from the dramatic use of cultural symbols, as when the jhãkri constructs and interacts with dough figurines that represent various deities (169–70). Thus, many ceremonies are acts of “symbolic healing” and function according to the same logic as placebos (198).

In the final chapter, Sidky proposes a definition of historic/ethnographic shamanism, identifying key traits such as the performance of public ceremonies, the use of trance/altered states of consciousness, spirit embodiment, and the use of particular ritual equipment such as drums. By offering information about jhãkris and using that information to formulate a definition of shamanism that can be applied in other contexts, the book contributes to studies of Nepalese religion and culture as well as to studies of shamanism in general.

At the same time, Sidky’s book raises a number of questions. His attempt to bring anthropological research on shamanism into conversation with medical findings on altered states of consciousness, though fascinating, seems limited by the availability of material: most of the medical sources Sidky uses come from publications dealing with alternative medicine, and it is unclear how such work is received among the communities of medical scholars with whom he seeks to establish a dialogue.

Sidky’s commitment to scientific, verifiable conclusions is, likewise, admirable. But, in the pursuit of such conclusions, the jhãkris themselves—those individuals whose experiences underlie the research—fade. This is unfortunate, as the sections in which Sidky does include their quotations (see pages 58–64) are by far the most engaging and vivid portions of the book.

Haunted by the Archaic Shaman does much to elucidate shamanism and jhãkri practice. And though it does not resolve the knotty questions of how to define and practice ethnography, it offers an instructive example of how one very conscientious scholar has dealt with them.

--------

[Review length: 1223 words • Review posted on October 6, 2010]