Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-mhzq2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-06-03T14:11:53.274Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Complexity and possession: Gender and social structure in the variability of shamanic traits

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2018

Connor P. Wood  and
Kate J. Stockly
Connor P. Wood
Affiliation:
Center for Mind and Culture, Boston, MA 02215. connorpw@bu.edu https://bu.academia.edu/ConnorWood
Kate J. Stockly
Affiliation:
Center for Mind and Culture, Boston, MA 02215. connorpw@bu.edu https://bu.academia.edu/ConnorWood Graduate Division of Religious Studies, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215. kstockly@bu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Singh deploys cultural evolution to explain recurrent features of shamanistic trance forms, but fails to substantively address important distinctions between these forms. Possession trance (vs. trance without possession) is disproportionately female-dominated and found in complex societies. The effects of cultural conditions on shamanism thus extend beyond its presence or absence and are vital for modeling its professionalization and spread.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 41 , 2018 , e91
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bourguignon, E. (1968) A cross-cultural study of dissociational states. Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Bourguignon, E. (1973) Religion, altered states of consciousness, and social change. Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Bourguignon, E. & Evascu, T. L. (1977) Altered states of consciousness within a general evolutionary perspective: A holocultural analysis. Behavior Science Research 12(3):197–216.Google Scholar
Callender, C. & Kochems, L. (1986) Men and not-men: Male gender-mixing statuses and homosexuality. In: Anthropology and homosexual behavior, ed. Blackwood, E. E., pp. 165–78. Haworth Press.Google Scholar
Douglas, M. (1970) Natural symbols: Explorations in cosmology. Barrie and Rockliff.Google Scholar
Douglas, M. (1999) Four cultures: The evolution of a parsimonious model. GeoJournal 47(3):411–15.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, L. (1973) Societal correlates of possession trance in sub-Saharan Africa. In: Religion, altered states of consciousness and social change, ed. Bourguignon, E.E., pp. 39–57. Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Hayden, B. (2003) Shamans, sorcerers, and saints: A prehistory of religion. Smithsonian Books.Google Scholar
Huber, B., Linhartova, V. & Cope, D. (2004) Measuring paternal certainty using cross-cultural data. World Cultures 15(1):48–59.Google Scholar
Justinger, J. M. (1978) Reaction to change: A holocultural test of some theories of religious movements. Doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo. University Microfilms, No. 7817047.Google Scholar
Kendall, L. (1987) Shamans, housewives, and other restless spirits. University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Lagacé, R. O., ed. (1977) Sixty cultures: A guide to the HRAF probability sample files (part A). Human Relations Area Files.Google Scholar
Lewis, I. M. (1971) Ecstatic religion: An anthropological study of spirit possession and shamanism (Pelican anthropology library). Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Murdock, G. P. & Provost, C. (1973) Measurement of cultural complexity. Ethnology 12:379–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murdock, G. P. & White, D. R. (1969) Standard cross-cultural sample. Ethnology 8:329–69.Google Scholar
Naroll, R. (1967) The proposed HRAF probability sample. Behavior Science Notes 2:70–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norenzayan, A., Shariff, A. F., Gervais, W. M., Willard, A. K., McNamara, R. A., Slingerland, E. & Henrich, J. (2016) The cultural evolution of prosocial religions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 39:e1:1–65. doi:10.1017/S0140525X14001356.Google Scholar
Purzycki, B. G., Apicella, C., Atkinson, Q. D., Cohen, E., McNamara, R. A., Willard, A. K., Xygalatas, D., Norenzayan, A. & Henrich, J. (2016) Moralistic gods, supernatural punishment and the expansion of human sociality. Nature 530:327–30. doi:10.1038/nature16980.Google Scholar
Sered, S. S. (1994) Priestess, mother, sacred sister: Religions dominated by women. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Snarey, J. (1996) The natural environment's impact upon religious ethics: A cross-cultural study. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 35(2):85–96.Google Scholar
Stockly, K., Arel, S., DeFranza, M. K., Wildman, W. & McNamara, P. (2017) Sex differences in religion dataset. Center for Mind and Culture.Google Scholar
Winkelman, M. (1986a) Trance states: A theoretical model and cross-cultural analysis. Ethos 14(2):174–203.Google Scholar