Concepts of the “otherworld” in the texts and practices of Mari culture
- Authors: Ustyantsev H.Y.1,2
-
Affiliations:
- Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology RAS
- Lomonosov Moscow State University
- Issue: Vol 15, No 3 (2023)
- Pages: 321-333
- Section: Historical Studies
- Submitted: 11.12.2025
- Accepted: 11.12.2025
- Published: 15.11.2023
- URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/2076-2577/article/view/357399
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.15507/2076-2577.015.2023.03.321-333
- ID: 357399
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
Introduction. The article explores the representation of the juxtaposition between the mundane and the “otherworld” in Mari traditions and rituals.
Materials and Methods. The work is based on the author's fi eld materials collected in areas with a compact Mari population from 2017 to 2022 (Republic of Mari El, Republic of Bashkortostan, Kirov Oblast). The primary scientifi c approach employed by the researcher is the semiotic approach to the study of tradition. The author also draws upon M. Douglas's concept of the “unclean” in culture and the symbolic boundary between the conventionally “normal” and the “unnatural”, as well as E. Durkheim's sociocultural theory of the “sacred” and the “unclean” in myth and religious rituals.
Results and Discussion. Based on interviews, memorial-ritual practices, and non-fi ction prose texts, the author examines the dichotomies “living – non living” and “pure – impure” in contemporary Mari culture. The focus of the study is on the models describing the “otherworld” and the semiotic characteristics of its folkloric inhabitants, as well as the perspectives on the differentiation and liminality of mythological spaces. As indicators marking folkloric characters as “unclean forces”, the author considers their visual characteristics. The researcher is also interested in the tradition bearers' views on the interaction with chthonic space and its consequences.
Conclusion. Contemporary Mari folklore and ritual practices represent notions of the dichotomies “living – non-living” and “pure – impure”. Maintaining differentiation between “pure” and “impure” loci is ensured by the existence of normative prescriptions and restrictions within the local tradition. Violation of this distance, contact with the “otherworld”, marks a person as connected to the demonic, as a source and simultaneously a victim of dark mythological power.
Keywords
Full Text
-
About the authors
Herman Yu. Ustyantsev
Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology RAS; Lomonosov Moscow State University
Author for correspondence.
Email: ustyan-93@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0655-3127
References
- VZ. Folk beliefs of meadow cheremis of Kazan province. Izvestiia po Kazanskoi eparkhii = News from the Kazan diocese.1877;9:243–250. (In Russ.)
- Vasil'ev MG. About kiremets among the Chuvash and Cheremis. Kazan; 1904. (In Russ.)
- Douglas M. Purity and danger: an analysis of concepts of pollution and taboo. Moscow;2000. (In Russ.)
- Durkheim E. The elementary forms of religious life: the totemic system in Australia.Moscow; 2018. (In Russ.)
- Efremova DYu, Ustyantsev GYu. God, Spirit and Devil: The status and image of Keremet in modern Mari folklore. Traditsionnaia kul'tura = Traditional Culture.2020;21;1:114–123. (In Russ.)
- Zelenin DK. Selected works. Essays on Russian mythology: Those who died unnatural deaths and mermaids. Moscow; 1995. (In Russ.)
- Zolotnitskii MI. The invisible world according to the shamanic views of Cheremis: From lectures at the Kazan Missionary Institute by N. I. Zolotnitsky. Kazan; 1877. (In Russ.)
- Kuznetsov SK. Cult of the dead and afterlife beliefs of the Meadow Cheremis. Vyatka;1907. (In Russ.)
- Levkievskaia EE. Ideas about the “other world” among the Eastern Slavs. Slavianskii al'manakh 2004 = Slavic Almanac 2004.Moscow; 2005:342–367. (In Russ.)
- Minvaleev SA. Ludians’ harbingers of impending death and their representations of transition to the underworld. Finno-ugorskii mir = Finno-Ugric World. 2022;14;3:304–314. (In Russ.). doi: 10.15507/2076-2577.014.2022.03.304-314.
- Nekliudov SIu. Images of the other world in folk beliefs and traditional literature. Vostochnaia demonologiia. Ot narodnykh verovanii k literature = Eastern demonology. From folk beliefs to literature. Moscow; 1998:6–43.URL: https://ruthenia.ru/folklore/neckludov8.htm (accessed 19.12.2022). (In Russ.)
- Kamenskii NT. Cheremis and their pagan beliefs.Kazan; 1910. (In Russ.)
- Popov NS. Funeral rites and commemorations.Mariitsy. Istoriko-etnograficheskie ocherki = Mari. Historical and ethnographic essays. Yoshkar-Ola; 2013:248–253. (In Russ.)
- Petrukhin VIa. Myths of the Finno-Ugric peoples. Moscow; 2003. (In Russ.)
- Semenov TS. Cheremis: an ethnographic sketch. Moscow; 1893. (In Russ.)
- Smirnov IN. Cheremis: historical and ethnographic essay. Kazan; 1889. (In Russ.)
- Sokolovskiy SV. Anthropology of the living and the dead: the case of human body and technics (an afterword to the discussion).Antropologicheskii forum = Forum for Anthropology and Culture. 2018;38:83–96. (In Russ.). doi: 10.31250/1815-8870-2018-14-38-83-96.
- Toidybekova LS. Mari pagan faith and ethnic identity. Joensuu; 1997.(In Russ.)
- Ustiantsev GY. Folklore and Trauma: Reflection of personal experience of the narrator (by the example of Mari non-fabulous prose).Vestnik antropologii = Herald of Anthropology.2019;3:235–242. (In Russ.). doi: 10.33876/2311-0546/2019-47-3/235-242.
- Ustiantsev GY. Poro den osal: representation of characters – the antagonists in the modern Mari folklore. Sotsiokul'turnoe mnogoobrazie v sovremennom mire: materialy ezhegod.nauch.-prakt. konf. molodykh uchenykh =Sociocultural diversity in the modern world.Materials of the annual scientific and practical conference of young scientists. Moscow;2019:306–312. (In Russ.)
- Chervaneva VA. On some features of the designations of a mythological character in a bylichka. Afanas'evskii sbornik. Materialy i issledovaniia. Vyp. 12: Narodnaia kul'tura segodnia i problemy ee izucheniia: sb. st.: materialy nauch. region. konf. = Afanasyevsky collection. Materials and research. Collection of articles. Materials of the scientific regional conference. Voronezh; 2012;12:270–277. (In Russ.)
- Shkalina GE. Good and Evil in Mari mythology.Finno-ugorskii mir = Finno-Ugric World. 2009;2:80–83. (In Russ.)
- Shkalina GE. The spiritual foundations of the cultural heritage of the Mari people.Finno-ugorskii mir = Finno-Ugric World. 2018;10;1:110–120. (In Russ.). doi: 10.15507/2076-2577.010.2018.01.110-120.
- Iakovlev G. Religious rites of Cheremis. Kazan;1887. (In Russ.)
- Arukask M. Death and Afterwards. Folklore.Electronic Journal of Folklore. 1998;8:7–20.doi: 10.7592/FEJF1998.08.mds.
- Sebeok TA, Ingemann FJ. Studies in Cheremis:The supernatural. New York; 1956.
- Thomassen B. Liminality and the modern:Living through the In-Between. London;2016. doi: 10.4324/9781315592435.
- Tucker E. Ghost in mirrors: Reflections of the self. The Journal of American Folklore.2005;118;468:186–203. doi: 10.1353/jaf.2005.0028.
Supplementary files


