Some general aspects regarding place

The concept ‘place’ is important when analysing the Sami's relationship to nature. However, the purpose of this paper is not to discuss here all aspects of place and space. Instead, I will outline as a basis for further exploration some general ideas of place as an environment that is shared by humans and non-humans.

A Norwegian architect, Christian Norberg-Schultz writes in Existence, space, and architecture (Reference Norberg-Schultz1971: 9, 11) that the interest of man in space has existential roots, and most of man's actions comprise a spatial aspect. Existential space includes several ‘schemata’ or stable images of a person's environment through which she/he belongs to a cultural or social system. Human activities occur in particular locations (Massey and Jess Reference Massey and Jess2000). These locations or places are constitutional elements of space (Helander Reference Helander1999:9). Places within an existential space can also be understood as centers of meaning and purpose (Relph Reference Relph1976: 22).

Keith Basso (Reference Basso1996) has argued for the importance of analysing the local understanding of environment as he describes how Apache people perceive their lands. The Sami herders’ spatial organisation and overall activity is very much dependent on how reindeer move across lands, and how reindeer dwell and behave in different contexts in time and space (Turi Reference Turi1987; Åhren Reference Åhren and Fjellheim1988). According to Ingvar Åhren (Reference Åhren and Fjellheim1988: 120–121), southern Sami herders tend to place their dwelling spots in the outskirts of the reindeer grazing lands in order to give animals the peace that they need. Also herders’ traditional ecological knowledge is to a notable extent based on their herding relationship with reindeer (Inga Reference Inga2008). For instance, the herders know and can easily identify those plants and lichen that reindeer eat.

The Sami share their places with other beings, such as animals, birds, trees and spirits. Ingold (Reference Ingold, Ellen and Fukui1996: 150, Reference Ingold2000: 186) calls this kind of connection the ‘ontology of dwelling’ meaning a form of being and acting in the real world, in a real world environment in the relational contexts. ‘A dwelling perspective holds that it is because we are, from the very outset, beings-in-a-world, which affords meanings to us in contexts of current action, that we can produce representations of it’ (Willerslev Reference Willerslev2007: 148).

All places and lands have their special character. On their lands the Sami feel themselves safe and experience a continuation of life through generations (Stordahl Reference Stordahl1996; Helander Reference Helander2001). For Sami people the places where they live are linked to activities, experiences, stories, songs, ceremonies, mythic relationships, social interactions, and memories. Those places or lands, to which Sami are traditionally connected constitute a home and an important identity marker for them (Helander Reference Helander1999; Jernsletten Reference Jernsletten and Andersen2002; compare Nuttall Reference Nuttall1992). These places are also home for other than human dwellers (Ingold Reference Ingold2000: 113–114). Home is the territory as a whole (Brody Reference Brody1987: 97).

Humans and non-human animals form their own communities separately from each other, albeit in a shared environment. It is interesting to note also, that non-humans have their own life to live (Ingold Reference Ingold1988: 13). Thus, humans are not alone in building and representing their environment. Inter-subjective involvement and perceptions between humans and animals are based on the fact that both groups have a place in the world (Brody Reference Brody1987: 73), and their environment is commonly shared (Reed Reference Reed and Ingold1988). Communicative dimension is embedded in dwelling (Haila Reference Haila, Haila and Lähde2003: 198) meaning that the human and non-human inhabitants of a particular environment have a need to listen to each other and respect each other (Fienup-Riordan Reference Fienup-Riordan1990: 168–169). Based on this, it can be stated that human activity is not sufficient to guarantee success for a hunter or a herder (Helander Reference Helander1999). Humans are not the only acting subjects in their environment. Reed (Reference Reed and Ingold1988: 116) correctly states that the environment affords things to non-humans as well. Ingold (Reference Ingold2000: 113) explains, that ‘in order to live, every such being must constantly draw upon the vitality of others.’ For Ingold, life in the ontology of animism is ‘forever on the verge of the actual.’

Animism

Animism is one of the oldest concepts of anthropology. Edward Tylor (Reference Tylor1958) was one of the first anthropologists to explore it. He borrowed the concept from Georg Stahl who in the early 18th century theorised that living bodies have a vitalising substance called ‘anima’. Tylor based his discussion on evolutionary theory when he studied religion (Bird-David Reference Bird-David and Harvey2002; Harvey Reference Harvey2006). Thus, he linked animism to early religions and peoples at their ‘primitive’ evolutionary stage. With animism he referred to belief in souls and spirits rather than to life-forces (Harvey Reference Harvey2006: 6–7). For Tylor animism was an error in religious thinking from early ‘childish days’ (Harvey Reference Harvey2006: 8). He thought that primitive people could not see a difference between imagination and reality (Willerslev Reference Willerslev2007: 15). Indeed, the favourite object of earlier anthropological study ‘was not just any man but a specific kind of man: the Primitive’ (Minh-ha Reference Minh-ha1989: 64).

Totemism is one of the key concepts in the theory formation of religion. Émile Durkheim, a French sociologist and anthropologist, established, in early 20th century, a different theory regarding the foundation of religions. He believed that animism is a form of totemic religion. A totemic animal was the signifying emblem of a social group. According to Durkheim the primitive people made abstract society more concrete with totemic animals, and for them the self is dualistic, consisting of body/totemic parts (Bird-David Reference Bird-David and Harvey2002: 79). Claude Lévi-Strauss (Reference Lévi-Strauss1963) was one of those who criticised the theories of totemism. For him, totemism is a mechanism of thought instead of being erroneous epistemology or constitution of social organisation (Bird-David Reference Bird-David and Harvey2002: 80).

More recently, animism has become a term to describe ‘a style of worldview that recognizes the personhood of many beings with whom humans share this world’ (Harvey Reference Harvey2006: 205). Irwing Hallowell (Reference Hallowell and Harvey2002: 33) has claimed, based on his studies among the Ojibwa people, that the concept of ‘person’ includes more categories than human persons. Bird-David (Reference Bird-David and Harvey2002: 77, 87) uses the term ‘relational epistemology’ when describing hunter-gatherer animism. For instance, the Nayaka people in south India, Bird-David tells us, interrelate with other beings of their environment, called devaru. These beings are drawn into relationships with people, and made into persons. According to this approach people know as they relate. For Yukaghirs of Siberia, non-humans are regarded as persons because they appear as such ‘within relational contexts of real-life activities’ (Willerslev Reference Willerslev2007: 19–20). Knowing turns ‘attention to “we-ness,” which absorbs differences, rather than to “otherness,” which highlights differences and eclipses commonalities’ (Bird-David Reference Bird-David and Harvey2002: 96). But it is important to keep in mind that animism is based on both a principle of sameness and difference (Willerslew Reference Willerslev2007: 190). And it is about relationships.

Generally speaking, animism credits natural phenomena with spirit and soul, and attributes life to such beings and phenomena as animals, trees and celestial bodies (Bird-David Reference Bird-David and Harvey2002:74). Animism has also been defined ‘as an ontology that postulates a social character to relations between humans and non-humans: the space between nature and society is itself social’ (Viveiros de Castro Reference Viveiros de Castro2004: 481, see also Viveiros de Castro Reference Viveiros de Castro1998). Stewart Guthrie (Reference Guthrie and Glazier1997) has returned to the older position of animism. For him, animism is a helpful strategy in the game of survival. He shares his ideas with Tylor, for instance through his claim that animistic thoughts are mistakes that can be discovered only after the fact (see Bird-David Reference Bird-David and Harvey2002: 81). Guthrie's ideas can also be seen as something constructive regarding animism. If humans and non-humans feel themselves so insecure in their environment that they consciously have to keep themselves away from dangers, this may have impact on how we understand the notion of ‘personhood’ in the new animism (Harvey Reference Harvey2006: 16).

As discussed by Graham Harvey (Reference Harvey2006), many western categories are not self evident. For instance Ingold (Reference Ingold1988, Reference Ingold1995, Reference Ingold2000) and Viveiros de Castro (Reference Viveiros de Castro1998) have shown that the concepts ‘human’ and ‘animal’ are very complex. The Sami people tend to regard animals as related beings (compare Bird-David Reference Bird-David and Harvey2002: 77) and as acting subjects (compare Viveiros de Castro Reference Viveiros de Castro2004). A Sami multi-artist and shaman, Nils-Aslak Valkeapää (Reference Valkeapää1994) explained in a poem that: ‘we have lived here from generation to generation . . . when they come they will find this land, us, and we are stones, plants, animals, fish, water, wind, earth, sky . . .’ (author's emphasis). Thus, according to the Sami views, the deities, stars, planets, animals, spirits and sicknesses can manifest themselves as persons. The last mentioned spirits have names and they are categorised with respect to their age. Also Yup'ik Inuits of Alaska, as well as many other indigenous groups, extend personhood beyond the human domain (Nelson Reference Nelson1983; Fienup-Riordan Reference Fienup-Riordan1990; Bird-David Reference Bird-David and Harvey2002; Hallowell Reference Hallowell and Harvey2002; Harvey Reference Harvey2002). A further example is the Siberian Yukaghir hunters who regard dogs as particularly close to humans and they are sometimes called ‘children’ (Willerslev Reference Willerslev2007: 76). Furthermore, the Achuar Jivaro of the upper Amazon regard animals and plants as persons having their own society (see Descola and Pálsson Reference Descola and Pálsson1996: 7). The Sami people, as we shall see below, also see many similarities between human and non-human persons.

How Sami people perceive their environment

Reindeer herders’ activities have strong links to their ancestral land. Lands are perceived as living entities, and they are active in relation to humans and animals. Lands nurture and sustain human beings. They are ‘intelligent actors in their own right’ (Nadasdy Reference Nadasdy2007: 30). The lands are personified. A Sami herder and writer, Johan Turi (Reference Turi1987: 80) gave expression to this by saying that, ‘lands are so beautiful that they laugh. And when people are sad all land, all stones and trees cry with them’. How the Sami perceive their environment, and what is important for them with respect to the co-dwelling with non-human beings will be described below. The examples provide more insights to some popular concepts used in social sciences, such as ‘social’, ‘relationship’, ‘personhood’ and ‘environment’.

Animals are significant aspects of the land, and the Sami are very anxious to follow what happens to animals in their environment. Animals can be regarded as beings who are ‘alive’ (Ingold Reference Ingold2000: 134). The northern Sami word ealli [animal, game] means ‘alive, living’ (Sammallahti Reference Sammallahti1993). Despite the many similarities between humans and non-humans, and the intimate coexistence between them, they belong to different categories (Fienup-Riordan Reference Fienup-Riordan1990: 169). In northern Sami, there is a term albma-olmmos, which means ‘a real person’ (=human). Albma means ‘real, decent’ and olmmos means ‘a human, a person’. For instance, a spirit called Gufihtar is not albma-olmmos, even if these spirits and their culture are in many ways similar to human ways and are considered as persons.

There are similarities between humans and animals, and there are associations that seem to link them closely to each other. The names that are given to the bear are often associated with the land, forest, and even an old fur coat. These descriptions refer to common interests and ways of humans and bears. Specific names also acknowledge the particular status of the bear in nature (Drake Reference Drake1979: 329). Furthermore, certain names signify intimacy and esteem. Traditionally, the Sami have held their elders and ancestors in high esteem. Sami words such as muodda-áddjá, muedd-aja, and muoddak refer to a bear wearing an old fur coat. Áddjá [grandfather] is used for older men when one wishes to acknowledge them with honour (Tomasson Reference Tomasson1988: 42), thus linking them to the highly respected bear. Muoddá [fur coat] is also connected to words used about Sami elders. The northern Sami also have many names for reindeer that describe their nature, such as láikkan [lazy], gieris [loving], siivu [quiet] and duhkoraddi [playful] (Itkonen Reference Itkonen1948). The same descriptions can, in many instances, be used for people. Other animals are described in a similar way.

Reindeer Sami live or used to live within the same place with reindeer (Ruong Reference Ruong1937). Some of the places in which the Sami herders and their reindeer stay or dwell, are called livvasadji [resting place]. These lands are still today considered sacred to some extent by some people, and one is not allowed to swear at reindeer, lands or humans there (Eira Buljo Reference Eira Buljo and Andersen2002: 141). The proper kind of behaviour is sought after. Through talking and listening to the lands and the spirits who protect them, the lands are acknowledged as socially oriented beings, and there exists a special dialogue with herding lands consisting of prayers, ceremonials, dreaming, talking, and listening (Tomasson Reference Tomasson1988; Oskal Reference Oskal1995; Skott Reference Skott1997; Bornstein Reference Bornstein2002; Nergård Reference Nergård2006). Through songs, place-names, stories and memories, the lands become even more alive than they are thought to be.

The herding lands have protecting spirits and one has to relate to them somehow. The spirits of the land are believed to observe herders, and therefore especially some of the older herders are concerned regarding what they themselves do and say. By using rough language, a herder condemns her/himself, and as a result of this, calamities start taking place to grazing lands, animals and herders. It is also important for the Sami reindeer herders to negotiate with spirits, such as the underground spirits, in order to get permission to use a particular location for herding or to secure permission to stay in a place.

This kind of inter-relationship is seen as having an impact on a human person's character and actions. Nils Oskal (Reference Oskal1995: 132–149) has written about the Sami concept of ‘reindeer luck’ [boazo-lihkku]. He argues that for a Sami reindeer herder to be successful in her/his herding activities, she/he must honour the powers of nature, especially the grazing lands, and the spirits dwelling there. Before using an area, one has to ask spirits for permission to do so. Paul-Anders Simma, member of a Sami reindeer herding family in Sweden, says that offerings are an important element in the acquisition of reindeer luck, as they are linked to a deep respect for, and humble attitude toward all of nature (see Eriksson Reference Eriksson1987: 13).

It is crucial to follow certain rules while moving through landscapes, when attending camping places, walking along paths, and when gathering firewood and medicinal herbs. There are many ways to relate to and show respect to the places and their caretakers. Oskal (Reference Oskal1995: 139, 144–145) writes that when Sami reindeer herders come to the summer lands with their herd, they ask the spirits for the permission to come and have their tents built up in the summer places. And when herders leave their summer camps they give thanks to the lands for their willingness to take care of the reindeer (Bornstein Reference Bornstein2002: 38).

When the Sami meet each other, they will often want to know the latest news by asking: mii gullo? [what do you hear?]. Usually people answer: mis lea ráfi meaning that ‘we have peace’ or they can say: mii leat eallán dearvan meaning that ‘we have been in good health’. Ráfi [peace] is a concept that contains many aspects within the Sami circles. When people say that they have peace, they mean absence of sicknesses, absence of predators, life without troublesome events, existence of favourable herding and weather conditions, healthy lands, good social relations, and so on (Fellman Reference Fellman1978: 122). Lydia Heikkilä in one of her articles (Reference Heikkilä and Andreasen2004: 147) mentions the Sami concept guohtunráfi [grazing peace for reindeer] and its importance for herders' evaluation of the grazing conditions, as sometimes wolves, wolverines or eagles cause uneasiness in the reindeer herd (Turi Reference Turi1987). Also the activities and movements of humans can disturb the peace of the grazing lands and reindeer.

Jens-Ivar Nergård (Reference Nergård2006: 245–246) gives an example from a contemporary herding context in northern Norway of how disordered circumstances can arise on the herding lands. A female herder has two sons, who during several days had been trying to gather their reindeer herd for the autumn round-up. But the reindeer scattered to wide areas, and the sons started feeling uneasy themselves with the situation. Their mother came to rescue her sons and asked what they had been doing to trouble the lands. They had unnecessarily burned some old sledges and other things. However, the destroyed things were a part of experiences of that particular place. They somehow belonged to the land. After discussing the issue with her sons, the mother prayed for the peace for the herding lands and for the beings dwelling there. This gave results and it made the reindeer calm. Indeed, places ‘gather experiences and histories, even languages and thoughts’ (Casey Reference Casey, Feld and Basso1996: 24), and they are aware and sensate (Nelson Reference Nelson1983: 14). As the present text shows, places really gather experiences, and they engage human and non-human persons in various activities. By doing so, they (places) become themselves social beings and actors. It is important to understand that all beings and all things are anchored to each other when living or existing in the relationship with land or places. As Graham Harvey (Reference Harvey2006: 210) claims: ‘Animist relationality is an all-round, all encompassing sociality.’

Sami believe that the lands communicate with people by, for example, giving to them good or bad luck (Jernsletten Reference Jernsletten and Andreassen2004: 56). The lesson of the Nergård's example (Reference Nergård2006: 245–246) is that the right actions bring harmony to the lands, the spirits and animals, and to the herding society. The learning activity, in which lands become understood, is a continuous process. As the example of Nergård shows, the learning takes place in social-ecological contexts, and it is a very subtle activity. One mode of maintaining good contacts with the land and animals in the contemporary Sami society is to give offerings to them or by talking, singing and praying (Oskal Reference Oskal1995; 140–145; Bornstein Reference Bornstein2002: 38–43; Nergård Reference Nergård2006: 124), but these activities must be conducted and emplaced in an integral way. The awareness of the existence of spirits does not mean that they are continuously in a person's mind or company. Many times people become reminded of their existence first when some troublesome events take place, and after having strange dreams or when unusual noises are heard.

For the Sami people, language is the lifeline of their culture. Generally speaking, it is important to be careful with words (Turi Reference Turi1987: 123; Helander-Renvall Reference Helander-Renvall2007: 92). There are many rules to follow in Sami culture with respect to words/language used when talking about animals. Certain terms used to be and still are avoided if deemed disrespectful or dangerous. For example, wolves were said to be dangerous if the wrong words or descriptions were used to refer to them (Drake Reference Drake1979: 329). Southern Sami think, that wolves like to be called vaisje [animal, beast]. Earlier, they used to say that they aim to eat reindeer rather than saying that they are going to slaughter reindeer (Drake Reference Drake1979: 55). My mother used to talk about ‘big meat’ and ‘big reindeer’ when referring to moose during hunting seasons. The intentions of humans were voiced down in order to emphasise that reindeer are highly valued (Oskal Reference Oskal1995). This kind of esteem was, and still is shown through keeping in a reindeer herd such animals that are not needed or that have no economic value. On the other hand, one also cherishes those animals that are productive, such as female reindeer with calves (Fjellström Reference Fjellström1985: 169). In this context, it must be stressed that Sami traditionally keep in a herd many different animals in relation to such aspects as age and gender. This composition makes a herd stronger and more social. As an example it can be mentioned that strong male reindeer oftentimes help the weaker animals to dig through snow to get food. In that way the herd remains gathered and is strong in relation to predators.

Direct subject-to-subject sharing of presence

The Sami do not stand apart from nature; instead, they regard themselves as an integral part of it. As one Sami reindeer herder in Sweden explained to Timm Rochon (Reference Rochon1993: 46): ‘I am part of the forests and the mountains.’ Both human and non-human actors are treated as partners in the network within Sami culture. As we shall see, the Sami people traditionally extend their notions of equality and respect to all aspects of nature, including the spiritual aspects (Rochon Reference Rochon1993: 58). The Sami also communicate with non-human beings in their environment, the communication that shall here be called ‘mythic discourse’.

According to de Quincey (Reference De Quincey2000) strong inter-subjectivity ‘is direct subject-to-subject sharing of presence-when both (or more) subjects either mutually condition each other's sense of self, or, more strongly, mutually co-create each others's sense of self’. Also the actor-network theory (ANT) assumes that the construction of reality is achieved through the interplay of different actors with equal constitutive character (Law Reference Law, Law and Hassard1999). ANT deals with ‘persons, things, artefacts, and events all in the same breath’ (Strathern Reference Strathern, Law and Hassard1999: 156). These entities or actors ‘take their form and acquire their attributes as a result of their relations with other entities’ (Law Reference Law, Law and Hassard1999: 3). Furthermore, social networks (human relations to each other) have no privilege nor prominence (Latour Reference Latour1998).

As emphasised by Tapper (Reference Tapper and Ingold1988: 53), farmers, pastoralists and hunters ‘conduct a variety of relations with animals’. The Sami believe that land, animals, and humans, and the spirits that govern them have a connection to each other. The relationships are reciprocal. For instance, humans give protection to reindeer and reindeer take care of humans (Turi and Turi Reference Turi and Turi1920). Tomasson (Reference Tomasson1988) provides examples, in which reindeer sacrifice themselves for humans, meeting humans’ need for sustenance. Furthermore, Turi (Reference Turi1987: 56–58) is of the opinion that animals have a capacity to affect humans. Turi (Reference Turi1987: 99) claims, for instance, that a wolf can make a Sami herder drowsy when she/he is watching reindeer. Also bears can influence humans in a similar way (Drake Reference Drake1979; Sjulsson Reference Sjulsson1979). It is obvious that animals are capable of conscious decisions and goal-oriented activities. But there is another angle to this; humans also have impact on animals. One Sami hunter stated in an interview that he somehow decided that he would never meet a wolf, even if he did hunting trips to areas with wolves around. These are his words: ‘I knew already then I didn't need the bullets. It was my decision; there will be no more wolves at my sight’ (Mustonen and Salin Reference Mustonen, Salin, Helander and Mustonen2004: 314).

There are many stories about human beings cohabitating or collaborating with wild animals. During a series of interviews conducted by the author in north Norway during 1998–2000 inquiring about Sami customs (Helander Reference Helander2001), a former Sami reindeer herder from Sirma, told the author that once, when he stayed overnight in a Sami tent, a wolf suddenly appeared and remained with him in the tent throughout that night. This took place before the 1950s when there were still many wolves in the Sami north. The interviewed herder believed that the wolf needed protection because she/he was excluded from a wolf pack. This kind of co-existence gives possibilities for humans and non-humans to learn to know each other. In addition, trust and co-operation between the two will be enhanced. It is interesting to note, that in this context, the specific animal in question relied more on a human person than on animal persons. The author agrees with Rene Willerslev (Reference Willerslev2007: 116) who claims that ‘the different frameworks of perception flourish side by side and the same individual will move in and out of those frameworks dependent on the context.’ The particular context has much to say how an animal will behave or how she/he will be regarded by humans.

Communication between humans and non-humans can in some sense be referred to as ‘mythic discourse’. This communication takes place through dreams, rituals, stories, prayers, activities, performances and discussions (Rochon Reference Rochon1993; Oskal Reference Oskal1995; Myrhaug Reference Myrhaug1997). According to Lee Irwin (Reference Irwin1994), mythic discourse involves processes of interpersonal communication. Mythic discourse is open-ended and multi-voiced (Siikala Reference Siikala1994: 49). In the context of Sami herding and hunting activities, mythic discourse is to a certain extent based on, or combined with, the knowledge that Sami herders and hunters have about their environment and about animal behaviour. Sami have many words to explain the different characteristics of animals. If one is paying attention to a wolf as predator, then one may use the word boraspire [eating beast]. Indeed, a wolf is predator. Based on this, there are ways to make not-to-attack agreements with wolfs, under which they are asked not to kill reindeer (Turi Reference Turi1987: 84; Stoor Reference Stoor2007: 72). The agreements are made through talking or singing.

Mythic discourse helps people in their daily activities. Sami hunter Aslak Aikio explained in an interview that a hunter has a way of knowing things that some may call instinct but might be something else: ‘I don't know what it is. At night I get this feeling that now I must go fast to this place and when I get there, there is an otter of course’ (quoted in Mustonen and Salin Reference Mustonen, Salin, Helander and Mustonen2004: 312). The relationship of a hunter with the game is surely interpersonal (Ridington Reference Ridington1988). In hunting it is important to take into account the will of the hunted animal (Ingold Reference Ingold2000: 126). Once when my father, Áibmijot-Jovnna, went rabbit hunting in the 1960s, he came back without game. As a rabbit stood still in front of him, something intrinsic to the situation asked not to kill the animal. ‘It happened while I looked at the rabbit's eyes. At that moment I realised that this particular animal needed friendship and protection,’ he explained. Other Sami hunters have told similar stories to me.

In old times, when wolves threatened reindeer, a herder could calm the reindeer down by talking to them (Itkonen Reference Itkonen1948: 95). In Jokkmokk, Sweden, a well-known Sami shaman, Nila Pirak (still alive at the beginning of the twentieth century), used to talk to wolves and was said to be able to keep a wolf pack away from reindeer (Eriksson Reference Eriksson1987: 9; see also Pirak Reference Pirak1983; Turi 1978: 84). It is believed that animals like people who communicate with them (Itkonen Reference Itkonen1948: 105; see also Bornstein Reference Bornstein2002: 38). A Sami writer and shaman, Nils-Aslak Valkeapää could discuss things with birds. Referring to his childhood, he told that ‘then I understood the language of the birds better than I understood the language of the human being’ (interview in Helander and Kailo Reference Helander and Kailo1998: 93). Aslakka Siiversen Siiri, also a Sami shaman, used to talk to the dead (Therman Reference Therman1940: 237), but if spirits were evil he had to use ‘rough language’ to communicate with them (238). In the southern Sami language there is a specific verb soedattet [to talk, to discuss with the dead] meaning that some people have an ability to talk to the dead in a way that they answer (Sjulsson Reference Sjulsson1979: 95). Hålet [to talk, to speak] refers to talking with living beings (Sjulsson Reference Sjulsson1979: 92).

Humans and bears

John Weinstock writes in his article ‘The bear went down the mountain’ (Reference Weinstock2005) that the bear has lost its status among the Sami several hundred years ago, due the colonization of the Sami areas, and due to the depletion of these fur-bearing animals. According to him, the adaptation of reindeer herding ended the ways of old hunting culture. It is true that Sami have ceased to arrange bear ceremonials of the old type. However, in many Sami areas, the bear has kept its status as a sacred animal, helping spirit, and as prey. There are Sami who honour bears and are inspired by the bear (Kailo Reference Kailo2008). For instance, the whistling of a bear is included in some traditional Sami songs, bear teeth are used as amulets and as healing tools, and bearskin can be used as clothing (Helander-Renvall Reference Helander-Renvall and Kailo2008: 321). Some hunters arrange private ceremonials to honour a bear after hunting activities (Bornstein Reference Bornstein2002). Bear blood and parts of the bear were traditionally used as medicine in order to gain the powers of the bear. Many ailments are still cured with bear fat, gall bladder bile and bear teeth. In the contemporary Sami society, there are also some individuals and families who, in order to acquire bear energy, use bear medicine such as chewing on bear penis bones (Bornstein Reference Bornstein2002). Below an explanation is presented of the importance of the bear as a sacred animal and as a person involved in various inter-subjective relationships with humans.

The bear is a symbol of strength, wisdom, and courage. Juha Pentikäinen (Reference Pentikäinen2007: 48) writes that ‘the bear was the most powerful feature of the natural world, with whom men wished to be in a good relationship, but whose powers they at the same time wished to share; in ritual this power of the bear became part of Sámi persons’ own power.’ For the Sami, bear [guovza], is also an animal that according to Louise Bäckman (Reference Bäckman, Svanberg and Túnon2000: 217) belongs to the realm of the sacred, in the southern Sami bissie. The bear thus has strong connections to the realm of gods (Bäckman Reference Bäckman, Svanberg and Túnon2000; Pentikäinen Reference Pentikäinen2007). Traditionally Sami used to organize bear ceremonials after a bear hunt to honour the bear and to convince the bear that it can return safely from the realm of the dead. Detailed information about ancient bear ceremonials can be found in descriptions of bear feasts by Pehr Fjellström (Reference Fjellström1755; see also Schefferus Reference Schefferus1674; Edsman Reference Edsman1994).

Generally speaking, Sami consider the bear a wise animal. According to Sami beliefs, the bear knows everything and can understand the Sami language. Bears are also very much aware of the significant role of men as hunters, as they regard men as prey and predators. Therefore, a pregnant woman carrying a son was earlier believed to be in danger (Åhren Reference Åhrén1963: 140). In some folktales, the bear is described as rather stupid (Weinstock Reference Weinstock2005). But Siv Norlander-Unsgaard (Reference Norlander-Unsgaard, Bäckman and Hultkrantz1985: 198–199) has argued that the ancient Sami regarded bear as ‘a central point of life-giving force for flora, fauna and homo sapiens’ and she has concluded that bear ceremonials were therefore joyful gatherings where people became ‘wise and healthy’.

Bears have a soul that makes them living, thinking, perceiving beings (Bäckman Reference Bäckman1983: 47; see also Fienup-Riordan Reference Fienup-Riordan1990: 167). This is one of the reasons why Sami had a special linguistic code or collection of words that were used when talking about the bear. Indeed, uttering the word guovza (bear) was to be avoided. Instead, words such as grandfather, sacred game, and hill-manure were used when talking about the bear. These alternate words for bears were used in everyday life (a practice that continues today) and not only in the context of bear ceremonials (Gaski Reference Gaski1985: 21). Furthermore, the Sami used symbolic language to describe the bear or bear hunting in order to hinder bears from becoming aware of their hunting intentions, and in order to prevent revenge seeking activities on the part of the bear's kin (Weinstock Reference Weinstock2005). Sami also used to believe that bears have consciousness (Turi Reference Turi1987: 94). If a bear happened to kill a person it was believed that the bear was restless during the coming winter sleep. The Sami, however, did not generally expect bears to be dangerous (Norlander-Unsgaard Reference Norlander-Unsgaard, Bäckman and Hultkrantz1985: 196).

For Sami, there are at least three kinds of bears: an ordinary bear, a transformed human in a bear shape, and a bewitched bear. In addition, spirits may take a bear look. The bear is regarded as strong and fierce, but not necessarily dangerous (Thomassen Reference Thomassen1999: 132). However, a bewitched bear is especially to be treated with caution. These days, Sami normally avoid close encounters with bears. One can have an encounter with bears, for instance, during a fishing trip or while picking berries. Bears seem to avoid physical contact with humans, and often they are loud in order to make their presence noticed. In that way, humans can keep themselves away from the immediate closeness of bears. Also humans make noises while in the wilderness to inform bears about their presence.

It is important to take into account that the bear, and other animals and birds, in Sami tradition, have also an important role as gázzi, a helping spirit. Louise Bäckman (Reference Bäckman1975) has researched Sami assisting and guardian spirits. One task of these spirits is to bring messages to shamans and to other people. They also help people to travel and see things in a sacred way. Many believe, that gázzi are normally invisible but can make themselves visible in dreams and other altered states (Itkonen Reference Itkonen1948: 349). During altered states of mind humans interconnect with animals in order to share perceptions and knowledge. Studies (see Winkelman Reference Winkelman and Glazier1997: 421) show that humans have an innate drive to seek altered states of consciousness. In human society, there are cultural/institutional ways for meeting these needs. The Sami believe that the soul travels when people are in sleep (Eriksson Reference Eriksson2001: 68). The soul travels as an ‘out-of-body being’ (Bäckman Reference Bäckman1975: 160), and it can be called a soul-animal because it can transform itself into an animal (Bäckman Reference Bäckman and Holm1982: 127). The Sami used to believe that the human soul is similar to an animal's soul (Gjessing Reference Gjessing1953: 94). It is suggested that it is specially the soul/spirit that unites a human to an animal (compare Viveiros de Castro Reference Viveiros de Castro2004: 475; Wolf Reference Wolf1992).

Many cultures bear witness to acts of human/animal transformation, by which humans transform themselves into bears, or a bear into a human (Rockwell Reference Rockwell1991: 71–73; Pentikäinen Reference Pentikäinen2007: 110–112). Similar transformations occur in relation to wolves, and certain fish and bird species. According to Sami traditions, a shaman, noaidi, or even an ordinary human person, olmmos can transform her/himself into a bear (Itkonen Reference Itkonen1948: 364). Transformations are linked to certain places and times. One has to be careful when in close contact with a bear or when transformation takes place. There is a Sami story (Turi Reference Turi1987: 93) according to which a human female once lived the whole winter with a male bear. The underground spirits gave food to her. She became pregnant and gave birth to a baby boy who had one bear paw in addition to one human hand. There is also a story about an eastern Sami couple who transformed themselves into bears because they thought that then their family did not need so much to eat. Their sons, however, came to their den before they managed to transform themselves back. Something went wrong and the husband was killed and one foot of the wife retained the bear paw (see Aikio and Aikio Reference Aikio and Aikio1978: 108). This can mean that the bear paw of this story symbolises the unclear status of humans vis-à-vis animals and vice-versa, and it, as the author sees it, signifies the inter-subjectivity between human and non-human persons. Perhaps the woman of this story acts ‘in between identities’ (Willerslev Reference Willerslev2007: 95). And she gives expression to her belonging to both human and non-human reality.

The Gufihtar as friends and foes

Underground spirits of the Sami tradition that dwell within the same areas with humans are called Gufihtar. In some Sami areas, they are called Katniha or Ulda. The underground spirits are at least phenomenally real. Below the role of the underground spirits in Sami society will be explained. It will be shown that these spirits have abilities, and a kind of sociability that makes them persons. The relationship between Gufihtar and Sami people is inter-subjective as they mutually condition each other. Thus, they are inter-subjective subjects. Gufihtar act on Sami with economic and social consequences. The Sami contribute to the well being of Gufihtar mainly by avoiding their dwelling places.

The underground spirits are very popular and many still believe in their existence. These spirits possess supernatural powers, and they live in part a similar life to humans. They have their own society and own rules of behaviour. Their homes are nice, and they are regarded as very beautiful and wealthy persons. Gufihtar are also very knowledgeable about weather. A Sami minister, Nilla Outakoski (Reference Outakoski1991: 160) has researched underground spirits in the contemporary religious context. He maintains that Gufihtar have helped the Sami in many ways: they have offered advice, given warnings, protected and comforted. Gufihtar and Sami persons like each other and there are marriages between the two. Earlier, Sami gave money to Gufihtar for their services (Turi Reference Turi1987). For Outakoski these spirits are persons. And Turi (Reference Turi1987) thinks that the Gufihtar spirits have descended from humans.

Sometimes underground spirits share their wealth with people. An elderly Sami woman living in Utsjoki, northern Finland, told the author in an interview in 2004 that she has made an agreement with the underground spirits ‘to live in a proper way and not to disturb these spirits.’ In return, the Gufihtar promised to protect and increase her reindeer. She needed this kind of agreement after her husband passed away. Many people are afraid of Gufihtar because they command humans to follow certain rules. One is not allowed to make unnecessary noise, and one has to avoid building houses on the spots where Gufihtar migrate or dwell. Gufihtar can haunt humans in dreams if they build their homes on spots where Gufihtar are active. They are guardians of sacred places and grazing lands and can be seen there. They are annoyed at those people who herd reindeer near the sacred rocks (Nergård Reference Nergård2006). They show themselves to people they like, or to those to whom they wish to give warnings. Moreover, Gufihtar can carry off Sami children and exchange them for their own sick persons. The Gufihtar are both friends and foes from a human point of view.

These spirits have taught Sami many things, such as singing and shamanic abilities. Anthropologist Carola Skott (Reference Skott1997: 183–193) writes about a Sami person in Jokkmokk in Sweden, who associated and cooperated with Gufihtar. His name is Artur Larson and he passed away in 1990. As a child, when he was 5–6 years old, he met Katniha, as they are called in Jokkmokk, played with their children and visited their dwelling. After that he noticed that he had special powers and later on in his life he had luck with hunting, and he was able to cure people.

When he was 17 years old, he shot with a rifle in the air over the head of a Katniha-boy of his own age. (Sami believe that if one throws an item made of steel over Gufihtar or their animals, one can more easier get control of them or become in possession of their animals.) After the episode the Katniha invited him to their place as a guest and introduced him to their daughter. Artur gave to her the name ‘Star of heaven and earth’ and kept in contact with her as long as he lived. The Katniha spirits helped him to find game. Therefore he always thanked them after he had been hunting wolverines, bears, and other animals. They taught him healing methods, and told him about his future. He kept contacts with Star of heaven and earth, and she visited him in a hospital towards the end of his time.

Outakoski (Reference Outakoski1991) argues that underground spirits have had a particular role in enhancing Sami identity. He writes as follows. ‘Belief in underground spirits gave the Lapps a special identity of their own: underground spirits appeared to Lapps in traditional Lappish costume and they were fond of raven-haired people who spoke Lapp’ (Outakoski Reference Outakoski1991: 161). Nergård (Reference Nergård2006) claims that underground spirits are some kind of watchers, who take care of the lands making sure that the humans follow certain rules regarding land use and overall behaviour in nature. Also Oskal (Reference Oskal1995) emphasises the last-mentioned characteristics regarding Gufihtar.

Concluding remarks

In this paper, it is argued that the Sami reindeer herders and other Sami subsistence people still live within a frame that can be called animism. Also, examples have been given that show that Sami subsistence people perceive lands, and animals and spirits dwelling on those lands as persons and acting subjects. The aspect of relatedness is important in an outlining of animistic ways. It can be stated, based on this material, that the relationship between different animistic groups is highly context-bound.

From a Sami point of view, bears are prey animals, are predators, and they are sacred, and also play an important role as spirit helpers. Under certain circumstances, these animals can also be treated as close relatives. Furthermore, the relatedness of humans and non-humans within the Sami cultural circles is based on mutual caretaking, respect and conditioning and as has been stated previously, the reindeer give themselves to humans and humans give shelter and food to them.

The Sami underground spirits, Gufihtar, are a good example of persons that are inter-subjective. The inter-subjective character of animistic relationships within the Sami cultural circles unfolds meaning through common experiences of human and non-human persons and mutual conditioning. Viveiros de Castro (Reference Viveiros de Castro2004: 481) has argued that there is a social space between nature and society. In this ‘borderland’ (Willerslev Reference Willerslev2007: 190), according to the principles of ‘the ontology of dwelling’ (Ingold Reference Ingold, Ellen and Fukui1996; Reference Ingold2000), humans and non-humans articulate mutual communication and coexistence. However, the author has doubts about the existence of a particular social space between nature and society. If one for example analyses the Sami shaman drums, and the pictures drawn on them, one will realise that humans and animals are placed within one and the same dimension. They live and meet each other in the same life-world, which is inherently social. The similarity between human and non-human persons creates the common ground for their cooperation (Fienup-Riordan Reference Fienup-Riordan1990: 168). Within the Sami cultural circles there are many similarities between the human and non-human persons.

On the other hand, the animals have many distinctive features as has also been made clear with reference to wolves and bears. Sometimes the bear is a family member, other times a beast. The Sami make use of these kinds of differences when in contact with non-humans. In earlier times, the Sami included all various aspects concerning the non-humans in their dimensions of reality. More specifically, humans and non-humans belong to different categories. When a being is referred to as a person, this depends on the context of that particular being (Viveiros de Castro Reference Viveiros de Castro1998), and from a Sami way of perception, only a human can be a real human person. There are other beings for example, such as the underground spirits, who are not truly humans, but they are persons and subjects with their own will and intelligence, and with intentionality, emotions, activities, goals, and with a capacity to persuade other persons to do certain things.

The personhood of different beings is an unclear notion and the human self has many dimensions from a Sami interpretation because a human person can simultaneously belong both to human and non-human dimensions. An example of this is evident in the hunting context, where she/he must be able to think as an animal does. Moreover, in an altered state of consciousness, some kind of transformation can take place for example from human to animal. For the author it is obvious that Sami people sometimes, consciously or unconsciously, enter the common space with non-humans by navigating through available states of human existence. Shape shifting which is also a phenomenon related to shamanism is one way to enter the common field. In this state, the differences between humans and non-humans can be very small or the differences are temporarily minimised. However, I do not agree with Nurit Bird-David (Reference Bird-David and Harvey2002) in her approach of total minimising of the differences between the humans and non-humans. I think that to be a person in an animistic sense is a very flexible way of existence, and the different persons may have ‘in between identities’ (Willerslev Reference Willerslev2007: 95). There are occasions in the everyday lives of the Sami herders and hunters when the difference/sameness-dimension of the relationship between humans and non-humans is not important or aspired. The perception of an environment however, is open-ended, and it is always possible for a person to turn her/his attention to something else while observing or doing things.

What does it mean to live in an animistic world? Through dwelling in concrete places, people become involved in certain kind of activity in relationship to nature, and because of this they make alliances with its inhabitants. The animistic world is an integral place, in which many animate beings are awake and alert. Acting in the world is sanctioned, and people have to live respectfully in their environment, acknowledging certain obligations towards the sustainability and existence of each particular environment, and this is perceived within the world because they are a part of it. ‘And to see the world is also, at the same time, to experience oneself as visible, to feel oneself seen’ (Abram Reference Abram1996: 68). The overall balance in life can be disturbed if people do not respect nature. Ráfi [peace] is important for the reindeer, reindeer herding lands, and for the herders and even for the spirit beings. When Sami people say that they have peace (a good life), they mean absence of sicknesses, absence of predators, life without troublesome events, existence of favourable herding and weather conditions, respect for lands, and good social relations between different persons in their mutually shared environment. One also has to learn to understand what these different personhoods and relationships are about. It is here that the knowing of, and continued closeness to the land and places is highly significant.