Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
SensuousVisions:EncounteringtheshamanisticrockartoftheBayanJurek...
27
CentralAsia(e.g.,Mallory1989;Kuzmina2007,2008).Thedefinitionofwhat
theAndronovoarchaeologicalcultureactuallyentails,however,isstillamatter
ofdebateasnumerousclassificationsandexplanationsofitsmaterialculture
havebeenproposedsincethe20thcentury(forahistoricalreviewoftheories
seeIsmagulov1970:7-8andKoryakovaandEpimakhov2007:123-127).The
currentconsensusconsiderstheAndronovotobeasuper-culturethatstarts
fromtheSouthernUralsandmovesdownintoKazakhstan,Kyrgyzstanand
Tajikistan.IthasseveralregionalvariationsknownastheAlakul,Alekseevka,
FedorovoandPetrovkaarchaeologicalcultures,butthereisstillmuchdisagree-
mentamongscholarsabouttheirdatingandinterrelationships(Koryakova&
Epimakhov2007:126).Moreover,thereisgreatdegreeofvariabilityandoverlap
amongtheceramicvessels,materialculturefromsettlementsandarchaeologi-
calevidencefromburialsthatmakethepinningdownoftypologiesforthese
regionalculturesadifficulttask(Frachetti2008:59-69).
ThesecondproblemfocusesaroundhowsupportersoftheIndo-Iranianhy-
pothesisseekfeaturestakenfromancientIndiaandIrantomodelprehistoric
modesofreligioninthearchaeologicalculturesofCentralAsia.Notionsabout
thenatureofBronzeAgereligiosityarebasedinpartonthefactthatpriestly
classesoperatedwithinancientIndianandIraniansocieties(e.g.,Lincoln1981).
Thisisthentakenfurtherbyfollowersofthemonolithicpointofviewandin-
sistsasinglecultureisonlycapableofoperatingonetypeofreligiousinstitution
atonetime(i.e.priests)-thepossibilityofamultiplicityofbeliefsandprac-
ticesinIndo-Iraniansocietiesisrejected.Weknow,however,fromtheethno-
graphicrecordthattheTajikpeople,whospeakanIranianbasedlanguageand
practiceIslam,conductshamanicpracticessimilartoSiberianones,buthave
specialculturalattributeslinkedtothesocio-politicalhistoryofTajikshaman-
ism(Basilov1992).Therefore,theBronzeAgereligionofKazakhstan,likeany
otherreligionfromanyothertimeperiodinhistory,wasundoubtedlyamulti-
facetedphenomenonwithmanycomplexitiesandcontradictionstakingplace
withinthelivesofpeople,whichcannotsolelybereduceddowntosimplistic
typologies(Lymer2010).Moreover,religionislivedthroughthelivesofindi-
vidualsinacommunity.Accordingly,livedreligionisaparticipatoryformofhu-
manactivityrequiringthenegotiationofrelationshipswithother‘persons’,be
ithumanorother-than-human,andtheseformatangledwebinwhichtheyare
experiencedinavarietyofwaysthroughtheexpressionofpeople’sdailylives.
Adifferentperspectivetotheabovemonolithichypothesis,however,has
beenputforwardbyGrigoryBongard-LevinandEdvinGrantovskii(1974,1976).
Theypointout,fromthebasisofcomparativeanalysesbetweenIndo-Iranian
texts,itispossibletoviewspecificculturalelementsashavingshamanisticcon-
notations.Inparticular,someexperiencesfromtheconsumptionoftheritually
