Hungarian shamanism is discovered through comparative methods in ethnology, designed to analyse and search ethnographic data of Hungarian folktales, songs, language, comparative cultures, and historical sources.

A fastener from the 9th century, unearthed in Kirovohrad Oblast, Ukraine; the finding belongs to the possibly Hungarian "Subotcy find horizon"[1][2][3]

Research

Studies of files of witch trials reveal that some features of Hungarian folklore are remnants of shamanistic beliefs, maintained from the deep past, or possibly borrowed from Turkic peoples with whom Hungarians lived before wandering to the Pannonian Basin;[4] or maybe is an effect of Eastern influence thereafter (Cuman immigration).[5]

These remnants are partly conserved as fragments by some features of customs and beliefs, for example

Characteristics

There were also people who filled similar roles to those performed by shamans among other peoples: fortune-telling, weather magic, finding lost objects. These people are related to shamanism (in contrast to the cunning folk of non-shamanistic cultures), because the former are recorded to go through similar experiences to those of many shamans: being born with physical anomalies such as a surplus amount of bones or teeth, illness, dismemberment by a mythological being and recovering with greater or increased capabilities, or struggle with other shamans or beings.[4]

Related features can be recognized in several examples of shamanism in Siberia. As the Hungarian language belongs to the Uralic family, we can expect to find them among other peoples who speak Uralic languages. Some of them maintained shamanism until modern times; the isolated location of Nganasan people made it possible that shamanism was a living phenomenon among them even at the beginning of 20th century.[7] The last notable Nganasan shaman's seances were recorded on film in the 1970s.[8]

The original location of the Proto-Uralic peoples (and its extent) is debated. The combined results of several sciences suggest that this area was north of Central Ural Mountains and on lower and middle parts of the Ob River. This approach combined ecological, namely phytogeographical and paleobotanic (including palynological[9]) data together with linguistic (phytonymic and comparative) considerations: the distribution of various tree species in Siberia and Eastern Europe (changing over time) was matched against the distribution of the respective tree-names in various Uralic languages (filtered with comparative methods, so that only names of Proto-Uralic relevance be taken into account).[10]

Artifacts

Some artifacts, see online available pictures and descriptions:[11]

Soul dualism

Soul dualism can be observed in several cultures in many variations: people are believed to have more than one soul. Examples can be found in several north Eurasian cultures and in some Inuit groups[17][18][19] as well as Hungarians.[20] Some of the many examples distinguish two souls: a body soul for maintaining bodily functions, and a free soul which can leave the body (even during life), with great variations on this theme among cultures.

In some cultures, it may be related to shamanic concepts.[20][21] In shamanistic beliefs of some Inuit groups, the shaman's "spirit journey", with his helping spirits, to remote places is explained with such soul concepts. It is the shaman's free soul that leaves his body. According to an explanation, this temporal absence of the shaman's free soul is tracked by a substitute: the shaman's body is guarded by one of his/her helping spirits during the spirit journey,[22] also a legend contains this motif while describing a spirit journey undertaken by the shaman's free soul and his helping spirits.[23]

As mentioned, it was also observed among Hungarians. The body soul, lélek was related to breathing (shown by etymology).[24] The shadow soul called íz was related to the roaming soul of the dead. Its feared nature can be seen, as it features also in curse expressions: “Vigyen el az íz!” (= “the shadow soul take you!”).[25] This curse is unknown for most people nowadays, and word "íz" (in this meaning) is also unknown, or felt as an archaism with forgotten meaning.

See also

Notes

  1. ^ Attila Turk, HUNGARIAN ARCHAEOLOGY, The new archaeological research design for early hungarian history, 2012, p. 3
  2. ^ Türk Attila Antal: A szaltovói kultúrkör és a magyar őstörténet régészeti kutatása. In.: Középkortörténeti tanulmányok 6. A VI. Medievisztikai PhD-konferencia (Szeged, 2009. június 4-5.). szerk.: G. Tóth P. –Szabó P. Szeged (2010) 284–285, és 5. kép,
  3. ^ Bokij, N. M. – Pletnyova, Sz. A.: Nomád harcos család 10. századi sírjai az Ingul folyó völgyében. AÉ. 1989, 86–98.
  4. ^ a b c Diószegi 1998
  5. ^ Bartha Júlia: A Kunság népi kultúrájának keleti elemei
  6. ^ Hoppál 1975:216–218,224,229
  7. ^ Hoppál 2005
  8. ^ Hoppál 1994:62
  9. ^ Klima 1998: 29
  10. ^ Hajdú 1975:32–35
  11. ^ Magyar Néprajz, list of figures
  12. ^ Diószegi 1998:291
  13. ^ Magyar Néprajzi Lexikon, item “Világfa” (world tree)
  14. ^ Magyar Néprajz, chapter “Világkép” (world view)
  15. ^ Magyar Néprajz, chapter “Természetfeletti képességű emberek – tudósok és közetítők” (people of supernatural abilities – cunning people and mediators)
  16. ^ Diószegi 1998:345
  17. ^ Merkur 1985: 222–223, 226, 240
  18. ^ Kleivan & Sonne 1985: 17–18
  19. ^ Gabus 1970: 211
  20. ^ a b Hoppál 1975: 225
  21. ^ Hoppál 2005: 27–28
  22. ^ Oosten 1997: 92
  23. ^ Barüske 1969: 24
  24. ^ Vértes 1990: 5
  25. ^ Dienes 1975: 83

References

Further reading

External links

Terebess Ázsia E-Tár:

Magyar Néprajz:

Ortutay Gyula (1977–1982). Magyar Néprajzi Lexikon (in Hungarian). Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. ISBN 963-05-1285-8.:

Categories