Shamanism in Classical Scholarship: Where are We Now?

The idea of shamanism has attracted influential classical scholars, but this interest was limited to those studying anthropology and connections beyond the Mediterranean. This contribution reexamines key figures—Diels, Meuli, Dodds, Burkert—to trace the historiographical development and note problems their solutions raise. It starts with when the shaman became visible in Western Europe, examining the basis from which classical scholars worked and how the concept entered classical scholarship. Recent dissertations clarify the milieu of Western acquaintance with shamanism. The analysis covers Ginzburg's article, classical scholars since the late 19th century, Aristeas of Proconnesus, and concludes with the current status quaestionis.

Study at a glance

Abstract

There can be no doubt that the idea of shamanism has had a powerful attraction for important and influential classical scholars in the last century. Yet this attention to shamanism was always limited to the small group of classicists that were interested in anthropology and the connections of the classical world with areas beyond the Mediterranean. In my contribution I intend to look again at the most interesting representatives of this interest – Diels, Meuli, Dodds, Burkert – in order to better trace the historiographical development but also note the problems that their proposed solutions raise and the answers that have been given so far. The end result should be a new determination of the status quaestionis today. As I look for the genealogies of the study of ancient shamanism, it might be useful to start with the moment when the shaman first became visible in Western Europe. What is the basis from which the classical scholars started to work? How did the concept of “shaman” find its way into classical scholarship? This problem has been treated by several scholars in the last two decades, but not without some confusion. Fortunately, two recent Groningen dissertations enable us to reach a better picture of the milieu in which Western Europeans became acquainted with the fascinating figure of the shaman.1 I will start by looking at a trail-blazing article of Carlo Ginzburg (§ 1), then analyse the classical scholars who have connected Greece with shamanism since the end of the 19th-century (§ 2), take a closer look at Aristeas of Proconnesus, one of the showpieces of the thesis of Greek shamanism (§ 3), and conclude with some considerations as to where we are now (§ 4).