sign in sign up
<<
Home , Amban, Amin (Qing dynasty), Baturu, Batu Khan, Bijia, Cheong Chia Chieh

THE SHAMANIC AND THE HEAVENLY ASTUTE : ANALYSIS OF

THE SHAMANIC EMPIRE OF THE EARLY QING, ITS ROLE IN INNER ASIAN

HEGEMONY, THE NATURE OF SHAMANIC KHANSHIP, AND IMPLICATIONS FOR

MANCHU IDENTITY

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI’I AT MANOA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS

IN

HISTORY

May 2020

By

Stephen Garrett

Thesis Committee:

Shana Brown, Chairperson Edward Davis Wensheng Wang

Keywords: Qing , Manchu, Mongol, Inner , , and Empire

Acknowledgments:

I would like to first and foremost show my deepest gratitude to my master’s thesis advisor, Dr. Shana Brown, whose ongoing uplifting support and instrumental advice were central to my academic success, without which I couldn’t have reached the finish line. I would also like to extend deepest thanks to my master’s thesis committee members Dr. Edward Davis and Dr.

Wensheng Wang, who freely offered their time, efforts, and expertise to support me during this thesis project. Additionally, I would like to extend thanks to Dr. Mathew Lauzon and Dr.

Matthew Romaniello, who both offered a great deal of academic and career advice, for which I am greatly appreciative. Special thanks to my peers: Ryan Fleming, Reed Riggs, Sun Yunhe,

Wong Wengpok, and the many other friends and colleagues I have made during my time at the

University of at Manoa. They have always been a wellspring of academic advice, discussion, and support. While writing my master’s thesis, I have had the pleasure of working with the wonderful professional staff and faculty of the University of Hawaii at Manoa, whose instruction and support were invaluable to my academic success.

I would like to gratefully acknowledge several organizations for their financial support in the pursuit of my foreign language training and master’s degree. Firstly, the University of Hawaii at Manoa’s School of Pacific and Asian Studies, which through its FLAS fellowship provided me with financial support for the study of throughout my degree. As well as to the Hamilton Lugar School of Global and International Studies at Indiana University

Bloomington for its FLAS fellowship support of my study of . Secondly, I would like to thank the Eu Sen Memorial fellowship for its financial support of my exchange study at the Chinese University of . I am deeply grateful to American

Councils, which through its Critical Language Scholarship Program allowed me the opportunity

ii to spend a summer immersed in the Chinese language at University of Technology. I

would also like to extend my sincere thanks to the United States Alliance Global

Ambassador Scholarship Program for supporting my summer study of Chinese language at

National Kung University. Lastly, I would like to thank the East-West Center for allowing me to present my thesis research at the 19th East-West Center International Graduate Student

Conference.

In conclusion, I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to my parents and two sisters for their constant encouragement, motivation, and moral support. During this greatly rewarding but also challenging journey, were always just a phone call away.

iii

ABSTRACT

The Manchu-ruled currently exists as one of ’s most successful but simultaneously controversial historical periods. The Qing’s territorial expansion, ethnic diversity, and cultural production have long been lauded by contemporary Chinese scholars. Contemporaneous to these points of pride has been a disagreement over the nature of the Manchu-ruled dynasty. The dominant narrative argues, that the Manchus, even before placing the young Shunzhi on the , had succumbed to the siren’s call of thousands of years of and thus were not truly distinct but the latest ethnic minority group to assimilate into the Chinese tradition. This study, however, seeks to problematize this narrative by examining the nature of Manchu rule through the lens of Inner Asian traditions, Manchu Shamanic practices, and Shamanic . This study focusing on the first six

Qing rulers argues that within the early dynasty existed a conceptual inner empire through which inherently Shamanic institutions, relationships, and shared concepts of legitimacy not only bound the

Manchu with the Bannermen peoples garrisoned throughout the empire but also created the foundation of Manchu sovereignty over the Siberian and Mongol allies. These institutional relationships were established by the dynastic founder (1559-1626) and perfected under the ingenious leadership of Hong . This study examines the process of unprecedented state centralization which stripped both political and spiritual authority from the Manchu shaman and saw the Manchu rulers become the masters of and the arbiters of heterodoxy. It also counters the tautological Buddhist explanations of Manchu leadership in and proposes a reframing of the issue in to highlight the sustained significance of Shamanic concepts and institutions in Qing Inner Asia. Ultimately, this study, in conjunction with the of the and utilizing a wide range of primary and secondary sources, restores the Manchu perspective to the study of Qing history.

iv

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments: .………………………………………………………………………………ii Abstract:…………………………………………………………………………………………..iv List of Figures:..………………………………………………………………...... vi List of Abbreviations:……………………………………………………………………………vii INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW: …………………………………………….1 • and Analysis………………………………………………………………...6 CHAPTER I: THE ROLE OF SHAMANISM IN THE RISE OF THE MANCHU EMPIRE:…11

• Shamanism as Empire?...... 11 • Manchu Sovereignty and the Rise of the Heavenly Astute Khan……………………...…17 • Tanistry and Manchu Politics in the Inner Asian Context………………………………..22 • Manchu Shamanism and the Concept of Khanship………………………………35 • The Role of Shamans in Manchu Khanal Legitimacy…………………………………....40 • Manchu Sovereignty in the Inner Asian Context: The Role of the Shamanic Empire in Manchu Hegemony over the …………………………………………………....47 CHAPTER II: THE SHAMANIC PRACTICE OF THE MANCHUS:………………………....62 • The Shamanic Sites of the Manchus and the Birth of a Shamanic Empire……………….63 • The Esoteric Tools of the Manchu Shaman………………………………………………71 • The Sacred Craft of the Manchu Shaman……………………………………………...…78 • The Great Purge and the Struggle for the Shamanic Empire……………………………..88 • The Legal Mechanisms of the Persecution of Wild Shamanism………………………..100 CHAPTER III: THE NEW QING RITUAL AND THE SHAMANIC EMPIRE:……………..110 • Shamanic Folklorization as a Mechanism of Empire…………………………………...110 • Shamanism Under the New Qing Ritual…………………………………………..115 • Ritual Form as Empire…………………………………………………………………..118 • The Tangse :……………………………………………………………………..119 • The Kuninggong Rituals:……………………………………………………………...... 146 • The Structure of the New Qing Ritual………………………………………………...... 154 CONCLUSION: THE COLLAPSE OF THE SHAMANIC EMPIRE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR MANCHU IDENTITY…………………………………………………………………...166 • The Fall of Qing Shamanic Authority…………………………………………………...166 • Manchu and the Path Forward for Manchu Studies…………………...…...174 BIBLIOGRAPHY:……………………………………………………………………………...182

v

List of Figures

Fig. 1: Sacrificial and implements located within the Tangse.……………………..65

Fig. 2: Diagram of the Tangse grounds.…………………………………………………69

Fig. 3: Photograph of the Tangse………………………………………………..70

Fig. 4: Photograph of the Kunninggong located in the , Beijing………...71

Fig. 5: Shaman drum and drumstick……………………………………………………..72

Fig. 6: The Spirit Pole known as (somo)………………………………………………....75

Fig. 7: The image of the Nisan Shamaness provides excellent depiction of Manchu Shamanic garments……………………………………………………………………....76 Fig. 8.1 and 8.2: Two images of Shamanic tools of invocation………………………….78

Fig. 9.1 and 9.2: Two images depicting Manchu shamans engaging in tiaoshen ritual....80

Fig. 10.1 and 10.2: Manchu shamans engaging in ritual dance………………………….86

Fig. 11: The Emperor the Triumphant Troops Outside of the Capital 1772….137

Fig. 12: The Victory Banquet 1770…………………………………………………….138

Fig. 13: Prisoners Presented to the Emperor 1767–74………………………………….142

Fig. 14.1 and 14.2: Two diagrams of the Praying into Darkness ritual………………...150

Fig. 15.1 and 15.2: Manchu shamans engaging in tiaoshen ritual……………………...156

Fig. 16: Manchu Shamanic taking place in village courtyard in 1980s………164

Fig. 17.1 and 17.2: Invocation of eagle spirit and pork offering on Shamanic altar…...165

vi

Abbreviations

MWLD – Manwen Laodang 滿文老檔 The Old Manchu Chronicles

MZJSJTDL- Manzhou jishen jitian dianli 滿洲祭神祭天典禮 Imperially Commissioned Manchu

Rites for to the Spirits and to Heaven

YZHD - Yongzheng Huidian 雍正会典

vii

INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW

The Manchu-ruled Qing dynasty (1636-1911) has been subject to a great deal of

examination and debate by both Asian and Western scholars. No element of Manchu rule has

been contested as hotly as the question of whether the Manchus were in fact “Sinicized” and if

so, how did this process come about?1 This debate has spawned several theoretical factions, each

purporting a divergent take on the question of Sinicization. The theory of Sinicization stems

from the old Confucian-influenced adage that the Manchus were just the latest in a long legacy

of Inner Asian tribes and ethnic minority groups who triumphed militarily, conquering China

proper, only to succumb culturally to the irresistible siren call of Chinese ( majority) culture.

This forms the foundation of a , which we may call the Sino-centric school, which ignores the poststructuralist perspective on ethnic histories that have become popular in the United States and instead teleologically relies on the consensus that the Han culture is in

effect the pinnacle of cultural development and the end goal of civilization.2 In effect, just as the

great sages called for the commoner to model himself on the example of the Confucian

gentleman, so too did the of Chinese history seek to evolve themselves to a more

sophisticated level of civilization. The Sino-centric model is still almost ubiquitous among PRC

scholars today and in effect was transmitted to the second school, known as the Sinicization

1 This debate often encapsulates the concrete tensions and ambiguity found in both historical and contemporary notions of Chinese identity. While for many thinkers the concept of China has been equivalent to the “Han” cultural tradition and the continuous process of minority acculturation, others scholars have elected to emphasize the idea of China supported by the in his interpretation of （Da Tong 大同) and multiethnic state. 2 These ideas are millennia old and are originally based on the cooked/raw dichotomy. These ideas are still openly expressed, and many cases are built into the language used by PRC scholars in their histories. Interestingly, this perspective is not limited to the PRC nor Marx influenced historians. Most famously, Taiwanese scholar Ch'en Chieh-hsien promoted these ideas in his writings on the Manchus. See Ch'en, Chieh-hsien. “Analysis of the Reasons of Manchu Emperor ’s Restriction of Shamanism,” 34. 1 school. The Sinicization school was a mid-twentieth century school best represented by Ho Ping- ti, Mary Wright, and John Fairbank. These scholars sought to maintain much of this Confucian influence, but instead of emphasizing the culture as the culmination of 5000 years of civilization, they instead focused their argument on the practicality of adopting Han Chinese culture as a means to better govern . From this point of view, it was the exceptional

Manchu ability to become indistinguishable from the Han they governed, as well as the adoption of Chinese institutions which propelled the Qing dynasty in its success and longevity. These ideas have been countered by the still-emerging field of the New Qing History, an American-led school comprised of scholars such as , Pamela Crossley and . This school has sought to paint the Manchus and their regime as a truly distinct Inner Asian and multiethnic entity, in which Manchu identity was throughout the Qing period besieged but unbroken by the allure of the Han cultural sphere. The debate over the Manchus has at times exhibited palpable controversy. For example, one scholar of the New Qing History, Kent Guy, has gone so far as to declare the end of Sinicization as a tool of analysis for Qing history, stating,

“Assimilation as a mode of explanation may well be dead.”3 Claims such as these have in turn elicited a fiery response from Chinese nationalistic scholars claiming that Western scholars are guilty of entering into their analysis with biases born of colonialist and imperialist traditions.4

According to this criticism, Western scholars are unable perceive a process of regime change that does not base itself in notions of one identity subjugating and exploiting another for its capitalistic benefit.

3 Guy, "Who Were the Manchus?” 163. 4 , “New Qing History,” 11. 2

While scholars of all backgrounds should self-examine what perspectives or biases we

bring into research, it is a misstep to project contemporary perspectives or agendas onto the past.

It is clear, however, upon examining sources, that the Manchu identity was not

lost before it ever began as some Sino-centric and Sinicization scholars have argued, nor did the

Manchus eliminate their differences from the Han majority in totality. Just as in most societies,

cultural interactions cultivated changes which developed both cultures into what we know as

Chinese culture today. Another important issue is that Manchu identity was not formed within a

simple dialectical relationship with the Han but rather also received influences from other

sources, most notably the Mongols and other peoples of Inner Asia, from which their culture is

partially derived. As I will argue in the chapters that follow, the Manchu experience does not fit

cleanly within either side of this historiographical debate. Historians must analyze their identity

based on their own perspectives before we can hope to come to any conclusion on their degree of

assimilation.

Within the discussion of Manchu identity, scholars have sought to discuss the basis of that identity and what it meant for Qing state-making and empire-building. One of the preeminent scholars of this topic is Mark Elliott, who in The Manchu Way: The and Ethnic Identity in Late Imperial China puts forth the idea of ethnic sovereignty. Elliott sees the differentiation of Manchu and Han as the basis of Manchu identity and the Eight-Banner military system as the primary means of maintaining separation and perpetuating Manchu identity. By this metric, Manchu identity was only ever as strong as its privileges and bureaucratic means of enforcement could achieve. Elliott’s work suggests that Manchu identity can be measured through Bannermen adherence to Manchu language and customary .

Thus, Elliott’s framework provides a crucial starting point for understanding two important

3

dynamics of Manchu identity: one, their reliance on a recognized concept of difference from the

Han; and two, their in the necessity of proper incentives to maintain cultural loyalty, such as Bannermen stipends and judicial lenience. However, Elliott perhaps leans too heavily on the post-conquest era as the primary era to define the Manchu identity. While it is true that the

Manchu identity became heavily dependent on its diametric opposition to Chinese identity, this was a result of specific post-conquest dynamics, not only between Manchus and Han Chinese but between Manchus and other Inner Asian allies. The Manchus (then Jurchens) under Nurhaci 努

爾哈赤 (1559 -1626) and most of Hong Taiji’s 皇太極 (1592 -1643) reigns were concerned

primarily with three objectives tribal/clan unity, centralized rule, and the ascension to a status of

a legitimatized great khan in the Inner Asian tradition.

Pamela Crossley in her work A Translucent Mirror: History and Identity in Qing

Imperial seeks to analyze the construction of the Manchu identity by the early Qing

court and follow its path of historical development. She accomplishes this through exploring a

myriad of socio-political and religious themes which firmly demonstrate the variety of influences

which the Qing court harnessed in its project. For Crossley, Manchu identity was less an ethnic

concept in the modern sense, but more a social construction of the Manchu rulers for the purpose

of creating a new society and was guarded by a system of privileges and shared beliefs. Her work

illustrates the complexity and non-teleological nature of Manchu identity. Following the policies

of Nurhaci and Hong Taiji from their origins in Liaodong, Crossley demonstrates the political

acumen of Manchu rulers in the formation of the Manchu identity. It is Crossley’s deep cultural

understanding of the preconquest cultural context and her detailed analysis of the multiethnic

nature of the Qing statue which are the greatest assets to this study.

4

Evelyn Rawski in her study The Last Emperors: A Social History of Qing Imperial

Institutions focuses on Qing imperial institutions as a framework to understand Manchu society.

Her emphasis on the Qing conquest elite provides a key insight into the social demographic by

which the nature of Manchu identity was formulated and enforced. While she does not confront

outrightly the question of what metric should be used for an analysis of Manchu ethnicity, she

does encourage a critical examination of the metrics most commonly used, such as language. It is

rather her deep understanding of the means by which state-sponsored institutions can mold and

maintain identities, rather than their innate origin, that makes Rawski most effective.

Another key work for our understanding of Shamanic empire is Our Great Qing: The

Mongols, , and the State in Late Imperial China by Johan Elverskog. Elverskog

analyzes the basis of the relationship between the Manchu Qing and the numerous Mongol

political entities which over the course of the dynasty joined the great enterprise. Elverskog’s study complicates notions of identity and Qing-orchestrated Buddhist rule in . His study illustrates that it was in fact a number of Shamanic rituals finding their roots in indigenous

Inner-Asian concepts of khanship and the tribe which allowed for the Mongols to be incorporated into the Qing. Elverskog’s use of a sort of latent Shamanic worldview provides my study with a starting point to identify and explain the Inner Asian component of the Manchu ritual order and how it was adapted by the Manchus for the purpose of imperial expansion and centralization.

5

Methodology and Analysis

While conceptually my study will sit on the shoulders of these scholars of the New Qing

History, I will not seek to answer every question within the Manchu identity debate. Instead my work will seek to establish a new perspective for analyzing both the Manchus and the Qing state.

Rather than viewing Manchu identity through any one metric, I argue instead that we should see

Manchu identity as being multipolar and relying upon a series of institutional pillars to sustain and enforce itself. These pillars, engineered by the Manchu khan Hong Taiji during the Later

(1616-1636) and early Qing, consisted of Shamanic authority, martial prestige, economic privilege, cultural distinction, and ethno-political sovereignty. These pillars were not only practiced on the imperial, aristocratic, and popular levels but also defined the relationship of

Manchu Bannermen with the throne. Thus, these pillars represented the prime means of the imperial system of managing Manchu society. This study will examine the first of these foundational pillars. By utilizing Manchu Shamanism as a focal point of Manchu identity, we can reveal the outline of what I call an inner empire or core political constituency within the

Qing.

My approach is in contrast to many studies of Manchu identity, which emphasize economic, political, and literary elements of Manchu identity vis-a-vis Confucian Han culture. In particular, the area of language has received a great deal of attention as a measure of the strength of Manchu identity. However, the role of Manchu Shamanism in shaping Manchu identity and orienting the nature of Qing rule has been left understudied. Previous analysis by members of the

Sino-centric and Sinicization schools have portrayed Manchu Shamanism in overly simplistic terms, as a primitive religion that was quickly overwhelmed by the more prestigious and well- established within China. This narrative is deeply flawed at its very core. Specifically, it

6

fails to acknowledge the overwhelming evidence of a lingering presence of Manchu Shamanism

in both the liturgical ceremonies of the Qing court as well as the local Clan Shamanism existing

amongst the Eight Banner garrisons. This, of course, is not to say that the Manchus practiced a strict primordial Shamanism but that alongside Daoist and Buddhist , there existed Manchu Shamanic and spirit poles, where Shamanic rituals continued to be practiced and Manchu identity perpetuated. Building on the foundation of scholars of

Shamanism and the New Qing History, my research suggests that Manchu Shamanism never left the but instead adapted to its new-found position as a critical thread in the fabric of the Manchu state.

Many New Qing Historians have in recent years responded to the assimilation theories of both PRC scholars and those of the Sinicization school with their own understandings of the multiethnic state. According to this narrative, the Manchu emperors were all things to all peoples and sought to patronize other as means of solidifying their rule and gaining influence over potential military or political rivals. This narrative, while mostly correct, tends to interpret the religious activities of the Manchu rulers as cynical machinations. While the Manchu rulers undoubtably saw their position as patrons of , for example, as an effective political tool, it is the position of this study that this relationship was not simply about political patronage or the governance of outside ethnic groups but the performance of a Manchu ruler serving as the central figure in a system of religious and political hybridity. This in turn brings us to the need for an examination of the institution of emperor and his roles, not just as the Son of

Heaven but also as sacred khan to an inner empire made up of Manchus, Mongols, and other

Inner-Asian peoples whose underlining relationship with the throne relied on its own separate but equally vital system of legitimacy and authority. As Crossley puts it, “In the case of the

7

Qing, it is clear that while the khan became an emperor, he also remained a khan.”5 This khan of the Qing Empire was lord not only of a civil bureaucracy but as Sugiyama Kiyohiko has put it, a confederation of princes among the Manchu, Mongol, and other Inner Asian peoples.6 This rightly points out the framework and dynamic of the Qing. What is needed is an understanding of what held this confederation or inner empire of the Qing together. It is the view of this study, that among other forces, khanal legitimacy, authority, and ideas of Shamanic empire were central to this enterprise.

This study will thus seek to reorient the study of the Manchus away from its exclusive preoccupation with Sinicization and toward an understanding of the internal Shamanic empire of the Qing. Just as the greater Chinese empire was composed of an inner and outer empire as discussed by Yuanchong Wang,7 so too was there an inner or core Shamanic empire that existed through ritual and determined the relationship between the Manchu throne, the Manchu

Bannermen, and the Shamanic Inner Asian peoples of the empire. This internal Shamanic empire was composed of a complex network of Shamanic or intrinsically shamanic relations between the emperor, the conquest elite, and the ordinary Bannerman households. Each party engaged in a contest for influence over the Manchu state. In this context, the centralization of Manchu

Shamanism was, in fact, just a component of the greater process of state centralization into the hands of the emperor, rather than the indigenous tradition of collegial rule.8 The Manchu

5 Crossley, "The Rulership of China," 1474. 6Sugiyama, "The Ch'ing Empire as a Manchu the Structure of Rule under the Eight Banners," 542. 7Wang, Remaking the Chinese Empire, Introduction. 8 Crossley, “The Rulership of China,” 1474. 8

emperors, in fact, utilized Shamanic ritual and sacrifice as a constant reinforcement of the proper

political hierarchy within their empire. As Peter -main Wang summarizes:

For the common people, sacrifice might be seen as a means to show respect, present requests, and offer thanks to a certain or . However, imperial sacrifice could be much more significant. Through sacrifice, the Emperor or his representative demonstrates his status as head of the state before both and men. While the head of the state is confirmed in the sacrificial ceremony, other attendants are reminded that they are simply subjects of the imperial ruler. This kind of sacrifice is in fact a political statement in which an emperor can pronounce and reiterate his supreme position9

To further this point, it is important that scholars fully appreciate the nuanced relationship between Shamanism and a society’s structure, worldview, and rationale. In much the same way that culture is both tangibly and intangibly linked to a people’s worldview, so too is Shamanism inseparable from a society such as the Manchus. As Guo Shuyun summarizes:

Over the course of their long history, the beliefs of shamanism have become a part of the Manchu’s consciousness. From the very beginning of their history, these beliefs have influenced the Manchu, leaving their mark on the people’s collective psychology, values, and cultural accomplishments…Because of their esteemed position, the Manchu’s shamanic beliefs have influenced their psychology and the organization of their society. These beliefs are passed down in legends, stories, poems, and sacrificial rites, allowing each generation to receive the traditional philosophical, ethical, and practical ideas of the ancient Manchu people.10 It is only from this Shamanic worldview that we can begin to understand how the Manchus perceived both their social structure and imperial enterprise. For Qing rulers, religion, politics,

and culture were different heads of the same hydra, each bearing distinctions but, ultimately,

each necessary to form their societal whole.

9 Wang, "The Significance of State Sacrifice in Early Qing," 141. 10Guo, “ in Manchu Shamanism, as Seen from Jiaowuyun,” 48. 9

Therefore, Manchu Shamanism and culture should be treated as two conjoined entities.

As Kun Shi writes, “Because shamanism is so interwoven with other aspects of Manchu culture, scholars argue that shamanism forms the foundation of the cultural traditions of the Manchu as well as other Tungus groups in Northeastern China.”11 Adherence to Manchu Shamanic ritual was also inexorably tied to identification of membership within the Manchu culture. As the

Yongzheng emperor stated while reprimanding a Manchu Christian convert:

In the empire we have a for honoring Heaven and sacrificing to him. We Manchus have Tiao Tchin. The first day of every year we burn and paper to honor Heaven. We Manchus have our own particular rites for honoring Heaven; the Mongols, Chinese, Russians, and Europeans also have their own particular rites for honoring Heaven. I have never said that he [Urcen, a son of Sunu] could not honor Heaven but that everyone has his way of doing it. As a Manchu, Urcen should do it like us.”12

The concept of Manchu identity and its significance within Qing institutions also offers

opportunities to explore crucial questions surrounding the nature of Shamanism and its viability

as a focal point to understand the foundation of the Qing empire. At the nexus of these debates, a

myriad of subthemes such as gender, state-society relations, and the role of religion in empire

will also emerge.

11 Shi, “Ny Dan The Manchu Shamaness,” 224. 12 Elliot, The Manchu Way, 241.

10

CHAPTER I: THE ROLE OF SHAMANISM IN THE RISE OF THE MANCHU EMPIRE

Shamanism as Empire?

The greatest area of contention surrounding the study of Shamanism in China lies in

defining Shamanism and its relationship to society and the state. Shamanism, unlike Buddhism and Daoism (and arguably ), is said to lack any formal doctrine, defined hierarchy,

or established . Instead, it is characterized by a diverse collection of indigenous beliefs

that vary according to local social organization, relationship to the environment, and way of life.

According to this interpretation, Shamanism is restricted to its societal, ethnic, cultural, and

geographical context, while lacking any greater universal proselytizing motivation or appeal. If

this line of thinking is correct, Shamanism would be largely incompatible with imperial state

structures and religious organizations, which are by definition relevant outside a local context

and seek to aggressively expand their degree of influence.13 This study, however, will argue

instead that Manchu Shamanic practice remained intertwined with the imperial state apparatus

and contained a customary framework which effectively enforced a form of dogmatic

compliance upon the Manchu . According to the findings of this study, during periods of

strong bonds between the Imperial center and the Banner peoples, greater adherence to this state-

sponsored dogma was observed, while in periods of societal fracturing within this most vital of

relationships, heterodoxy returned to the fold. This hierarchal framework, creating a relationship

between ruler-sponsored Shamanism and the Shamanic peoples of the empire and intertwined

13An example of these beliefs is quoted by Caroline Humphrey summarizing Roberte Hamayon’s argument succinctly in stating, “Hamayon argues though from a structuralist point of view, that Siberian shamanism is essentially dualistic, as well as being practical, undogmatic, and individual, and is therefore incompatible with hierarchal ideology. She claims that shamanism in any hierarchal system, let alone a state, becomes marginalized, feminized, and fragmented.” See Thomas and Humphrey, Shamanism, History, and the State, 193. 11

with Inner Asian concepts of legitimacy and sovereignty, are what this study will refer to as the

Shamanic empire of the Qing.

To understand the Shamanic empire, we must first have some understanding of Inner

Asian Shamanism itself, as well as the figure of its chief practitioner, the shaman. The Inner

Asian peoples intricately weaved a divine from their environment and utilized shamans

as spiritual conduits between the earthly realm, the eternal sky above, and the chthonic realm

below. As Rawski explains:

The term shaman (saman in Manchu) is found in every Tunguso-Manchurian and also in some Mongol and . Shamanship operates in a world dominated by nature deities, some of whom are ancestral spirits. The world in which humans live is the middle realm; above in the sky is another world of the deities, which below the earth lies the kingdom of the dead. A river or ‘world- tree’ is the path between upper and lower worlds. With the aid of bird, animal, and ancestral spirits, shamans summon deities to come down the world-tree into their presence. And the tree links realm to the upper world.14

This passage essentially details that at its base Shamanism was the of spirits inhabiting

the surrounding world who both live within and transcend the physical realm.

This framing of so-called classic or Ur Shamanism or Classic Shamanism was put forth by foundational early twentieth century scholars in the study of Shamanism, such as, Mircea

Eliade and Sergei Mikhailovich Shirokogorov. Shirokogorov was perhaps the first formal

anthropologist to embed himself and conduct firsthand research on the Manchus and other

Tungus groups as reflected in his seminal 1935 work Psychomental Complex of the Tungus. In

his research, Shamanism is defined first and foremost by its main practitioner the shaman. The

shaman serves as spirit medium who often with the aid of psychotropic drugs is able to enter or

14 Rawski, The Last Emperors, 231. 12

commune with the spirit world and act on behalf of the clan, whether it be locating lost or warding off baleful spirits.15 His research placed the greatest importance squarely on possession

ritual, without which a practitioner cannot truly be considered a shaman.16 Shirokogorov also

believed Shamanism to be exclusive to the peoples of Northeast Asia. Eliade, in contrast, wrote

his pivotal work Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy, which placed its emphasis on spirit

flight and saw Shamanism as a primordial spiritual practice emerging in all cultures across the

globe during their early stages of development. These definitions, however, are too restrictive, not only in their lack of recognition of historically contingent development but also in their

attempts to both essentialize and universalize diverse indigenous practices into neat categories for the scholarly eye. In truth, the concept of the shaman is as diverse as the beliefs that empower it. Humphrey speaks to this false categorization in stating:

We should try to discover what shamans do and what powers they are thought to have rather than crystallize out a context free model derived from the images they may or may not use (mystic flight, a celestial supreme being, the world mountain, the cosmic tree, the bird , and so on). Following from this, instead of defining only some specialist as true shamans, which is usually done on the basis of the ritual use of such imagery, it is necessary to look at the entire range of inspirational practices, including that of political leaders and ritual practitioners not usually considered to be shaman.17

This argument raises some key points about the discussion of what is Shamanism and what is not. It strikes me that this is debate relies on a false dichotomy and one which too easily clouds discussion of the Shamanic societies themselves. Classic Shamanism succeeds in

15 As Stephen Udry summarizes, “The idea of classical shamanism centered on a shaman, male or female, who would enter into a trance, master spirits, journey to other worlds, and retrieve lost, stolen, or wayward souls. Eliade has been primarily responsible for this view of the shaman as practitioner of ecstatic ascent and descent to both the sky and .” See Udry, Muttering Mystics, 2. 16 , “Two Faces of the Manchu Shaman,” 4. 1717 Thomas and Humphrey, Shamanism, History, and the State, 192. 13

detailing several inherent traits of Shamanic society; such traits are often reductive in nature and should be expanded to encompasses varying forms of Shamanism that not only exist across many cultures but are by their very nature fluid and transformative.

For example, one problem with the classic definition of Shamanism is its fixation on ecstatic ritual. While many Shamanic rituals initially involved ecstatic elements, many did not. In

the case of the Manchus, ecstatic ritual was sidelined and later prohibited by the court as

heterodoxy, replaced by a new state-approved non-ecstatic ritual. Further, the Qing state

marginalized the shaman throughout its rule by allowing heads of households and leaders of clans to preempt the shaman by performing Shamanic ritual themselves. By the definition of

classic Shamanism, these changes would mean that the practices of the Manchus as well any

number of other societies would no longer be recognized as Shamanism. Rawski herself

challenges this limited definition by stating,

Contemporary analyses of Shamanism or what Jane Atkinson calls shamanship have moved a significant distance away from the assumptions and interpretations found in ’s classic 1951 work. Discarding Eliade’s assumption of a unitary model, which he called classic Shamanism and its corollary, that Shamanism was a cultural product of pre-state societies, frees specialists to consider the great diversity of Shamanic practices that are found in an equally bewildering range of political systems, from non-urban groups living a pastoral existence to colonized subjects, for example, and Taiwanese in contemporary times.18 Other scholars such as Roberte Hamayon accept the diversity of ritual practice but still

reject the notion of Shamanism as a state ideology, and instead define it by its anti-authoritative

nature and as composing a psycho-ideological complex.19 This view too, however, is too

18 Rawski, The Last Emperors, 230. 19According to Roberte Hamayon the shamanic worldview is essentially anti-hierarchic and acephalic, and so is naturally incompatible with a centralized social structure. Hence, the activity of the shaman depends on a personal ability to communicate and master that side of life which is, in her definition, aleatory (aleatoire), like fecundity, rain, and the future. In doing so, the shaman 14

restrictive to accurately describe the nuanced nature of Shamanism. While this study will not seek to determine a conclusive answer to all empirical dilemmas contained within this debate, it will seek to cast Manchu Shamanism as containing liturgical or priestly elements while also adhering to recognized Shamanic practices, a “liturgical shamanism” if you will.

While some early forms of Shamanism often lacked a clearly-defined hierarchy composed of essential priests, lamas, or other recognized practitioners, Manchu Shamanism did contain complex networks of authority and recognized access to power, interwoven with the clan structure, such as the clan headmen, who together with the shaman were regarded as leaders in the clan. In the case of the Manchus, it was the Manchu khans over the first six reigns who became central figures of Shamanic belief as they displaced the shaman of traditional Jurchen culture. It was through Heaven’s approval of the khan and the affirmation of shamans that the khan maintained his Shamanic authority. Starting with Hong Taiji, the Manchu khan would not only take part in the central roles within Shamanic state ritual but would also serve as the arbiter of which practices were deemed heterodox. Thus, a shaman’s legitimacy became dependent on the throne’s reciprocal approval. This can be reconciled with traditional ideas of Shamanism by accounting for the fact that Shamanism and Manchu society existed as inseparable concepts; and as the Manchus coalesced into a serviceable state society, so too did their Shamanic practice evolve and adapt to keep pace with their spiritual demands and societal complexity. The role of

bases his action on his own creativity and talents. In this sense he defies rules and authority and his presence under a ‘centralizing ideology’ which acquires a subversive shading the realistic unity of natural and that the shaman creates is linked to and motivated by the specific and real needs of his community. And in this respect, it cannot be forced into standard performances or controlled pattern. Therefore, Hamayon concludes that this shamanic has some limits on the social and institutional plane, as it leads to the rejection of writing, its own codification, and the clericalization of its representatives. See Cosmo, “Manchu Shamanic Ceremonies at the Qing Court,” 362. 15

the shaman would under the direction of the khan transition away from their role as ecstatic

specialist.20As will be discussed in this study, Shamanic centralization existed as a component of political centralization. To put it succinctly, Shamanism for the Manchus was a key facet of state making.

This understanding of Manchu Shamanism places a greater emphasis on Shamanic ritual and the important social functions of these rituals, rather than solely on the shaman as its practitioner and the qualifications of its classification as a form of Shamanism. The prioritization of the significance of ritual finds resonance in the scholarly work of many PRC scholars of history, , minority languages, and ethnography, who through their firsthand or culturally-informed research methods (mostly post-reform and opening, i.., 1980s) known as participatory observation, have incorporated a more intimate and near native perspective into their research, rather than a strictly outsider-observer perspective. Many of these scholars such as

Meng Huiying, Heping, Yuguang, Guo Shuyun, Shi Guangwei, and others were given a front row seat to the revival of ethnic minority Shamanism, which corresponded with the relaxing of political tension during this era. Some amongst these scholars such as Fu Yuguang and Shi Guangwei were themselves ethnic Manchus. Shi Guangwei in particular was the nephew of a master shaman of the Shi clan. These ethnic, clan, and familial relations provided an unparalleled access to contemporary Manchu clan culture and oral folklore tradition, allowing for an inside member perspective.21 These scholars have successfully transcribed many elements

of Manchu oral shamanistic and folklore traditions, which provide the core body of work for the

study of Chinese Shamanism today. That being said, the work of these scholars still often

20 Thomas and Humphrey, Shamanism, History, and the State, 194. 21 Qu, “Two Faces of the Manchu Shaman,” 6. 16

conforms to an evolutionary understanding of societal development, which regulates Shamanism

as an artifact or remnant of the past rather than a living tradition of equal merit with the other

more established faiths within China.22 Therefore, it is only through understanding and critiquing

both Western and Chinese perspectives on Manchus Shamanism, that this study can truly

ascertain the role of Shamanism in the Manchu empire.

Manchu Sovereignty and the Rise of the Heavenly Astute Khan

The problem remains of discussing why the centralization of Shamanic power in the

hands of the khan was so vital for the Manchu great enterprise. For this discussion of Shamanic

empire, we must discuss three issues: the Manchu conception of sovereignty; khanal legitimacy

within Inner Asian societies; and tensions between Manchu collegial and khanal rule in the

struggle for control of the Qing state apparatus.

To explain the role of Shamanism as a tool of centralization between the khan and the

Inner Asian peoples of the Qing, I am introducing two concepts—firstly, the Inner Empire, which refers to a constituency of imperial subjects and allies who found their cultural origins in the region of Inner Asia and shared a societal structure based on personal loyalties, relationships, and common Shamanic worldview. These Imperial subjects made up of Manchus, Mongols,

Xibe, Solon, and other peoples, who were led by Eight Banner princes, , and jasaks,

provided the Manchu rulers with a trusted elite of soldier-supporters (bondsmen), who based on

a mutually respected system of khanal authority and Shamanic legitimacy, served the Manchu

regime. This Inner empire was composed of two adjacent administrational structures—firstly the

Eight Banners, who were supervised by the conquest elite, and secondly, the Inner Asian allied

22 Qu, “Two Faces of the Manchu Shaman,” 8-9. 17

peoples, such as the and the Kharchin Mongols, who over the seventieth and eighteenth centuries were composed of banners, leagues, and . This Inner constituency

was supported by a unique system of legitimacy based on a common Inner Asian Shamanic

culture and worldview centered around a khan chosen by Heaven. This system of legitimacy was

perpetuated through participation in Shamanic state rituals. To put it succinctly, the Shamanic

empire was the frequency of the message and the Inner empire the recipient.

The concept of the Shamanic empire at its most fundamental level is rooted in two Inner

Asian concepts, first—the gurun/ulus in Manchu and Mongolian respectively, which is best

translated as tribe, people, or political community, and secondly, doro/ törö which represents

many meanings including sovereignty, the state, a conceptual way or law, and, when

extrapolated, Shamanic legitimacy.23 A gurun was composed of many clans (mukun). Each clan

was bound together and defined by a number of important features—close proximity, real or

imagined ancestry, an accepted common ; and common Shamanic practices.24 The gurun

provided a flexible framework that encompassed the constantly changing collection of group

identities, such as clans, tribes, and , which Nurhaci and Hong Taiji could lay claim.

Both the concept of gurun and doro were supported and perpetuated by Shamanic ritual, which

encourages us to define Shamanism in reference to not only its spiritual qualities but its

centrality to Inner Asian political and military institutions.

This claim, however, necessitated substantiation within the framework of the supra-tribal

polity. That is to say that Manchu khans could not just lay claim to a land or people group; they

23 Di Cosmo, "Nurhaci’s Gambit Sovereignty as Concept and Praxis in the Rise of the Manchus," 119. 24 Crossley, The Manchus, Kindle location 552. 18

had to carefully engineer a prevailing narrative among foreign elites that provided legitimacy and

a rightful claim over the entity they desired. Most notably, the concept of gurun was deeply

malleable and grew beyond Nurhaci’s Jianzhou Jurchens to encompass first all of the Jurchens

tribes and later all of the Mongol tribes via the recognition of the Manchu claim over the

inheritance of Chinggis Khan (1162 -1227). The Manchu Gurun was further extrapolated to encompass all Han peoples within the region as former subjects of the (1115-1234)

and during the final stages of gurun development, all under Heaven.

These more expansive claims to legitimacy required the concept of doro to substantiate

them. The idea of doro or sovereignty, the state, or law was less of an immobile institution and

more of a continuous process that required constant performative legitimizing actions. The most

notable aspect of the concept of doro is its transferable nature. The best example of this is the

Jurchen Jin Dynasty, which attained doro over all of and northern China by way of

defeating their Song and Liao rivals. In line with this concept, the Jin then lost their legitimacy

through their destruction at the hands of the Great . In turn, The Great Mongol

Empire’s doro/ törö was later claimed by Nurhaci and Hong Taiji. Just as Chinggis Khan had

been the legitimate ruler of the subjugated Jurchen territories, Hong Taiji after defeating Ligden

Khan (1588-1634) in theory possessed doro over the Mongols.25 The concept of doro was also

crucial in legitimizing the Manchu attack on the (1368 to 1644). Nurhaci began

his war against the Ming by asserting his in 1618. This pronouncement was

25 Di Cosmo, "Nurhaci’s Gambit Sovereignty as Concept and Praxis in the Rise of the Manchus," 116. This process is a fascinating one. For more on the process of Manchu legitimation over the Mongols see Elverskog, Our Great Qing. It should be noted that while the Manchu claimed over all Mongols, they in fact did not fully attain this until the defeat of the Dzungars at the hands of the Qianlong emperor 19

itself an act of Shamanic khanal sovereignty and was honored with a ceremony at the Shamanic site known as the Tangse, with a record of its contents burned in order to inform Heaven of the khan’s pronouncement.26 With the rituals surrounding the Seven Grievances, they were

effectively an assertion of doro.

This concept of transferability was not simply the invention of Nurhaci but was ingrained

in the Jurchen understanding of sovereignty denoted by the recognition of the Wan Han,

head of the confederation by Nurhaci during the 1570s.27 This particular understanding of sovereignty enhances our understanding of the inner empire of the Qing. Alongside the Chinese notions of Heaven’s mandate over China proper was an Inner Asian internal political structure which placed Manchu khan as the sole proprietors of steppe doro over a constantly expanding and evolving gurun. This concept of a khan graced by Abka Enduri’s will (the for

Heaven) was central to Manchu state formation. For the purpose of this study, we should apply

this concept to our understanding of the Shamanic world. The Shamanism and ritual hierarchy of

the Manchus and Inner Asian allies was thus not the of the Qing empire per say,

but under this lens the empire itself. Examples of this use of narrative are littered throughout

court-compiled records of The Old Manchu Chronicles.

For example, in regard to Nurhaci’s conflict with an early rival, the warlord of the Ula

tribe Bujantai 布占泰 (1575-1618), The Old Manchu Chronicles 滿文老檔 records:

After all, he is the one whom we made ruler, having thus spared his life and dispatched him to the Ula gurun. This Bujantai is someone who has sprung from our own bosom. He has not been in place for long, and he has not changed. Do not think that this [of his] is so great. We have the great majesty that heaven has bestowed on us, and we have the fearsome reputation of the Father-Khan.

26 Waley-Cohen, “Military Ritual and the Qing Empire,” 419. 27 Crossley, A Translucent Mirror, 139. 20

How can we not defeat this army?!..Heaven rebuked the ten-thousand-strong army of Bujantai. Heaven and Earth praised the rectitude of Sure Kundulen Khan’s [Nurhaci] heart, in addition to his mercy and his generosity.28 The Old Manchu Chronicles also portrays Heaven as intervening through nature on

Nurhaci’s behalf. As this source continues:

When Sure Kundulen Khan was forty-nine , on the twentieth day of the third month of the year of the Sheep, the two sons, leading one thousand soldiers, defeated the forces of Bujantai that had ambushed them. They killed the father and son of the army’s leader, Bokdo beile, and they captured alive Cangju beile and his son, along with his younger brother Hūribu beile. They killed three thousand men, obtained five thousand horses, and captured three thousand sets of armor. On the day that army triumphed, the weather was bright and clear. That night after it suddenly snowed and the air became cold, while the men wounded in that battle were fleeing, many of those who, because they were sweating, had removed their armor, froze to death. This is what is known as “Heavenly Assistance.” The bright rays of Heaven having struck the great banner of our army, the advantage was with us. Intent on killing Bujantai of Ula, [we] crushed the ten thousand troops which had lain in ambush.29

This passage further illuminates the context in which the stage was set for the rise of the

Manchus and the internal struggles that would haunt the empire until its final day.

The Qing Shamanic empire was created a by a distinct multistage process of empire building. This process began with the formation or strengthening of kinship, economic, and cultural ties, followed by an expansion of these claims until contacting resistance. This stage ushered in a transformation in the claims to sacred sovereignty to the point of exclusivity and incompatibility with the claims of rivals, which was marked by Manchu overtures to the idea of khanal legitimacy, founded in the notions of gurun and doro over an ever-expanding group of

people. The third stage was inter-group conflict for a solitary claim of khanal legitimacy, which

28MWLD Fascicle One Taizu 1 (Wanli 35, 1607) Translated by Mark Elliott

29 Ibid 21

would see the Manchu khan defeat an opponent through warfare or by other means. The final

stage was one of Manchu politico-shamanic hegemony over this newly-defined gurun. The

Jurchen wars of unification between the Nurhaci’s rising khanate can also be understood through

this framework and set within this Shamanic worldview.

Tanistry and Manchu Politics in the Inner Asian Context

Just as the Shamanic empire was forged through the expansion of its borders, so too was

the Inner empire defined by internal power struggle. The period from the rise of Nurhaci to the of

the reign of the (1678-1735) was defined by the tensions that existed between the khan and both the imperial princes of the beile and the most prominent among the conquest elite.30 These tensions were suppressed during times of strong central rule but exploded

during periods of succession and political disunity. Starting from the first imperial succession,

the Manchus were a deeply divided people, and like the numerous Inner Asian that

proceeded them, power dynamics between the khan and his rivals were in a constant state of

flux. In the Inner Asian tradition, tanistry provided a form of restorative destruction which

cleared away ineffective leadership and political stagnation while also ensuring the strongest

leaders from among a limited lineage pool were elevated and all succession crises resolved

decisively. Compared for example with the blood tanistry of the -Chinese ,

whose power transitions were rife with and fratricide, the Manchu transitions of power

were relatively tame, leaving only a few cases of blood in the halls of the Manchu capitals.31

30 Beile was the Manchu world for prince. In the case of the Manchus, Nurhaci held this until his coronation as khan in 1616, after which this title was granted to his sons. 31 Tanistry is defined by Fletcher in his stating, “Choice of the tribal chief was, in a manner of speaking, electoral, being governed by the principle of tanistry, a central element in the dynamics of Turkish, Mongolian, and Manchurian politics that historians of Asia have too often overlooked. Put briefly, the principle of tanistry held that the tribe should be led by the best 22

These transitions, however, were still prime examples of a core issue surrounding the growing

power imbalance between the emperor and his collegial peers. During the life of Nurhaci, the

banners were the personal property of the beile princes rather a central military, a structure which

made each beile a semiautonomous warlord in his own right, capable of his own semi-sovereign diplomacy, trade agreements, loot proliferation, and military maneuvers. As Keliher explains,

Despite his leadership, and the widespread recognition of Nurhaci as khan, the Banner lords still had a high degree of military and economic autonomy and the banners like their own fiefdoms. This allowed them to set their own agenda and move freely, with only minimal obligation or links to the khan. They did not need to take orders from the khan or defer to him on matters of strategy or internal discipline and organization. Apprehensive of this autonomy, and desiring a more cohesive organization, in the early Nurhaci instilled his own officials in each of the banners. He appointed a censor, two judges, and four officials to each of them. His instruction to these appointments was on pain of death, to “remind [the Banner lords] of state laws.32 Nurhaci, however, did lay the groundwork for a more balanced state where the princes

would be partners of the khan rather than purely his rivals. Nurhaci attempted this through series

of fundamental ethos—firstly, Nurhaci established that the khan should rule with the approval

and cooperation of his allied tribal chieftains, whose decedents would comprise the conquest

elite, and secondly, by not designating an heir, Nurhaci set the precedent that whoever should

replace him from among his sons should be a first among equals, thus drawing his authority from

his brothers and dividing his power amongst them. In the words of Nurhaci:

When you [the Beiles] select a leader for the country to succeed the father, do not make a powerful one leader. When a powerful one becomes khan, he will set his power above everything else. He will not be afraid to offend Heaven. No matter how able one man may be. Will he come up to the common decision of many

qualified member of the chiefly house. At the chief's death, in other words, the succession did not pass automatically, in accordance with any principle of seniority such as primogeniture, but rather was supposed to go to the most competent of the eligible heirs. By custom, a father's personal property passed, at his death, by "ultimo- geniture" to his youngest son by his principal wife. Chieftaincy did not.” See, Fletcher, “The Mongols,” 17. 32 Keliher, The Board of Rites and the Making of Qing China, kindle location 720. 23

people?...Take the person who does not reject the words of you eight wangs as leader of the country. If he does [not] accept your words, does not follow a good way, depose the khan you have selected and select a good person who does not reject your words...in going about any business, report to and consult with all. If you come together with the leader of the country who you eight wangs have selected, do not just assemble in ones or twos; come all together and rule the country collectively.33

This system would prove untenable even through one succession, as Hong Taiji would undermine and then surmount his brothers to become the primary executor of centralized authority. This conflict between the ideals of Nurhaci and the actualities of empire would reemerge in the narrowly-avoided civil war between 多爾袞 (1612-1650) and Hooge 豪

格 (1609-1648), as well as the conflict among Emperor Kangxi’s 康熙 (1654 -1722) heirs.34

The struggle between Dorgon and Hooge was of particular note. As the state began to collapse,

in the days that followed Hong Taiji’s death, the Banner lords took turns swearing oaths before

Heaven to their favored contender. Nobles hatched plots to place their patron on the throne, only

to be uncovered and subject to familial extermination. At one point, the banners marched

on the deliberations of the princes in full battle armor and with weapons drawn to demand that

Hooge be proclaimed khan. The Qing state was never so close to imploding then at this point

with no khan at the head of the Shamanic empire.35

These struggles for power were also decided within a Shamanic context. Even before the

first succession, the beile princes made and broke oaths and formed grudges in the eyes of

Heaven and the ancestors, in accordance with Shamanic worldview. In one particularly dramatic

33 Roth Li, The Rise of the Early Manchu State, 50-51. 34 Fletcher, "The Mongols," 25. The power struggle among Kangxi sons is an understudied case of tanistry in the Manchu setting. 35 Keliher, The Manchu Transformation of Li, 163. 24

struggle that ended with the execution of Nurhaci’s second son Daisan’s 代善 (1583 -1648) wife

(among others) and his demotion from the position as Nurhaci’s , Nurhaci commanded the beile princes to utilize a Shamanic ceremony to confess their wrongdoings and make written oaths to be burnt before Heaven. As Hidehiro Okada relays,

Nurhaci ordered Daišan, first of all to reconcile himself with Manggültai and take oath before Heaven with his younger brothers to let the bygones be bygones. Daišan accordingly wrote on a sheet of paper the following oath and burned it before Heaven: "I did not adhere to Father's precepts, failed to listen to the advices of my three younger brothers (, Manggültai and Hong Taiji) and one elder brother who is a Hiya (bodyguard, i.e., Hürhan), blindly followed what my wife told me and thus placed myself in a position to lose the great power entrusted by Father to me and to kill my wife by my hands. As it was my own fault that I had to kill her, Heaven and Earth may punish me with a terrible death should I hereafter again mistake the wrong for a right and the bad for good and harbor grudge or enmity.36

This passage helps illuminate the Shamanic nature of these interactions. Nurhaci demanded that these oaths be made before Heaven and sealed with a Shamanic ritual.

Two other pivotal transformative events exemplify the history of the emerging Shamanic empire—firstly, the polarizing election of Hong Taiji as khan of the state, and secondly, the 1636 founding of the Qing state and proclamation of Hong Taiji as great khan and emperor by . The election of Hong Taiji was vehemently opposed by the other senior beile princes to the brink of the dissolution of the entire state. Just as in the case of the political secession of

Chinggis Khan’s grandson (1205-1255) from the Great Mongol Empire after the death of Güyük Khan (1206 -1248), so too were there movements by many of the beile to depart

36 Hidehiro, “How Hong Taiji Came to the Throne,” 257-256. 25

from the state, bringing with them their appointed Banner forces to form new khanates.37 The chief of among these movements was led by Amin. As Hong Taiji summarized,

At the time we bemoaned the death of the emperor Taizu [Nurhaci], Amin, the beile of the Bordered Blue Banner, sent Furdan to tell me “I have consulted with all the Beiles; we will make you wang, but after you succeed to the position of khan, let me leave and live on the outer frontier. I then called Abatai Beile and Yangguri Efu, Darhan Efu, Lenggeri, Namutai, Suna and told them Amin had said 'I have consulted with the beiles and we have decided to make you wang, but you should let me leave and let me live on the outer frontier.' If I let him live outside, then also the two red, the two white, and the Plain Blue Banner could all go across the border and live outside. Then I am without a country, and whose emperor shall I be? If I follow his suggestion, the country will fall apart38

The majority of the Beile princes appear to have held a greater commitment to the

collegial rule laid out by Nurhaci and not exclusively in opposition to the rise of Hong Taiji.

Only the concession of Daisan saved the emerging empire as he led the other princes in their

acknowledgement of Hong Taiji’s rule. The election of Hong Taiji as khan of the Later Jin by

kurultai was marked by several distinct rituals associated with the submission of rivals. One such

ritual was the custom of a candidate for khan refusing the appointment several times before

ultimately accepting the throne or doro.39

Because the entire Shamanic empire was grounded in the khanal authority and legitimacy

[doro], direct challenges to the Manchu throne by rival claimants or separatists were tantamount

to the weakening of the state and the questioning of the khan’s heavenly support.40 Thus, these

actions were punished as rebellion with the greatest severity. The purge of Amin 阿敏 (1585-

37 This concept of allowing a disgruntled rival to take his followers and leaving the state, while rare, did have some precedent in Inner Asian power struggles. See Fletcher, “The Mongols,” 26. 38 Roth Li. The Rise of the Early Manchu State, 120. 39 Ibid. 118. 40 Fletcher, “The Mongols,” 26. 26

1640) best represents the violation of Hong Taiji’s Shamanic khanal authority. Amin was one of

the four senior beile and nephew of Nurhaci. He believed that he and his cousins should be equal

to the khan and constantly defied Hong Taiji. The most notable act of defiance was the events

surrounding the Yongping Massacre. In 1629, Amin, under the khan Hong Taiji’s orders led his

Banner forces in a tactical withdrawal back to Manchu lines. During the retreat, Banner forces seized several Chinese cities without a struggle and under the khan’s order were to leave the

Chinese populace unmolested. Amin, defying the khan, pillaged Yongping of its riches and liquidated its populace:

Amin, after entering Yung-p’ing [Yongping], detested the Chinese residents and was displeased with the khan's policy of caring for them...Everybody knew that the towns which had surrendered without a fight were not to be harmed and that the people of Yung-p'ing, even after a battle, were not to be killed but should be cared for. By spreading a bad reputation and by purposely maltreating the Chinese, he [Amin] violated the doro.41

In this passage, the suspected intentions of Amin to disgrace the khan are assumed to be fact.

More importantly is the clear indication that by disobeying Hong Taiji’s orders, Amin was in fact

challenging Hong Taiji’s Shamanic khanal authority. As the passage continues,

Although Soto Taiji and all 'the ambans did not agree to leave the three cities, because one had been lost and because the people the khan intended to care for were killed. Amin wanted to go back thirteen days after Luan-chou was lost. He did not listen, killed all officials and people at Yung-p’ing and Ch'ien-an, took goods, livestock and women, and considering them [the booty] most important, went back but did not bring back our troops [they were killed]. Having seen the Chinese flag and without shooting a single arrow, and without using the good troops whom the khan had left behind, you wanted to break the doro because you are jealous.42

41 Ibid. 122. 42 Ibid. 122-123. 27

Amin’s violations of Hong Taiji’s doro extended beyond this event. Amin sought to also be

treated as a khan, on numerous occasions demanding wives from Mongol allies, seizing the right

to accept Mongol delegations, and otherwise engaging in diplomatic negotiations with Mongol

khans without Hong Taiji’s permission.43 These actions, although not unusual for a Banner lord

prior to the rise of Hong Taiji, were now considered not just disobedience but an open attempt to

ground himself in a recognized form of authority amongst the Mongols outside of Hong Taiji’s

authority. Amin claimed to have received a vison of a yellow snake guardian spirit which had

protected him against the discipline of Nurhaci, which was a blatant claim to independent divine

authority.44 Amin was thus sentenced to death, but at Hong Taiji’s discretion, instead was

incarcerated for life. Another senior beile soon also fell to Hong Taiji’s purge under the pretext

of disobedience or coveting his position as khan. Manggultai 莽古爾泰 (1587 -1633), the fifth son of Nurhaci, after being goaded by Hong Taiji drew his sword in presence of the khan, an act that led to his imprisonment and likely execution. Two years after this event, the now deceased

Manggultai was found to have conspired in a plot to usurp the throne, an imperial among his

possession presented as evidence.45 Daisan, the older brother of Hong Taiji was soon also accused of disobeying the khan and coveting the throne. After sentencing, Daisan was pardoned

by Hong Taiji but remained subordinate to the khan under fear of further prosecution.46

Hong Taiji’s purges of the senior beile resulted in greater reliance on his chosen inner

court of ambans and supporting junior beile.47 In particular, the junior beile composed of Hong

Taiji’s younger siblings, nephews, and other princes, lacking a direct line to the throne, mostly

43 Ibid. 123. 44 Ibid. 124. 45 Ibid. 124. 46 Ibid. 125.

28 supported his claim to the khanship in hopes of securing their position in the state.48 The institution of the ambans, on the other hand, was formed under Nurhaci as a council to govern the state. Originally, Nurhaci maintained five sunja ambans (counselors) who were made up of allied Jurchen chieftains and served as ministers to the throne. Below them were ten judges who enacted their will and handled judicial matters. Both in turn submitted to the khan and thus existed at the nexus of two competing political trends. Nurhaci and Hong Taiji formed the ambans through the process of granting to rival and allied Jurchen chieftains to the purpose of both pacifying and integrating them into the Later Jin khanate.

The governing councils and the heads of the six boards were further expanded to include the younger brothers of Nurhaci and many Banner officials, which diluted the influence of Hong

Taiji’s chief rivals and gained him loyal allies.49 These allies would be the main factor in Hong

Taiji’s ability to purge and surmount the senior beile. It is clear that the other beile princes were attempting to solidify their administrational positions by refusing to travel to the to handle matters and to conform to sumptuary laws, an action Hong Taiji perceived as an intentional slight, leading to a greater reliance on his ambans to counter their power. 50 This transition in the state has been seen by many Qing scholars as evidence of Sinicization and the adoption of

Chinese centralized rule; however, upon examination of this process, Hong Taiji was also drawing from an Inner Asian tradition and cultural context based on Shamanic understanding of khanal rulership. In this way, Hong Taiji’s in the Manchu cultural context served as his bondsmen and nokor in times of war and political struggle.51 The institution of the nokor is

48 Keliher, The Manchu Transformation of Li, 137-8. 49 Keliher, The Board of Rites and the Making of Qing China, kindle location 857. 50 Keliher. The Manchu Transformation of Li, 145. 51 For a detailed study see Fletcher, “The Mongols,” 19-22. 29 found almost universally in nomadic and semi-nomadic societies across . Nokor is a

Mongolian word for a khan or khan-elect’s personal retinue of supporters who handled his affairs, provided him with further political legitimacy in his claim to the throne and attempts to overcome the tribal bureaucracy.52

Marked by this process of consolidation of power by the ruler is encapsulated by the positioning of the Manchu khan as the lords of ritual, who harnessed their innate charisma to dominate the bureaucracy. As and Keliher put it:

In the Qing, New Year’s Day ceremonies, imperial birthday celebrations, and Winter Solstice rites worked alongside the more conventionally understood sovereign activities of defeating rivals, making laws, and setting up administrative organs. Such rituals directed the sovereign to act once his competitors were eliminated or subjugated, while signaling to others how to act towards him. Ritual solidified settlements in the struggle for power, demonstrating actors’ place and position in the new order, and shifted loyalties from the individual to the position. Ritual prefigured the political order and grounded the charisma of the leader within formalized arrangements.53

This gradual process of nominally restraining the princes was finally achieved by the Yongzheng emperor, whose use of the inner court and grand council employed imperial princes into a body that individually diluted their power but collectively formed a pivotal institution for the emperor.54

For this imperial system to succeed, the Qing emperors were increasingly determined to control the succession and reduce the state’s reliance on tanistry, which always carried with it the risk of separatism and civil war. In 1675, the sought to eliminate this tension by

52 Gommans, "Warhorse and post- in Asia, c. 1000–1800," 17. 53 Islam and Keliher. "Leading through Ritual," 3. 54 Crossley, “The Rulerships of China,” 1471. 30

naming an heir apparent in the prince Yinreng 胤礽 (1674-1725). Unfortunately for Emperor

Kangxi, Yinreng proved a deeply unworthy heir. Yinreng not only indulged in wanton violence, avarice, and depravity, but in line with the concept of blood tanistry had conspired with his nokor, led by the Manchu lord Songgotu (1636 -1703) to overthrow his father. Yinreng’s plot came to light, and Yinreng fell from Kangxi’s favor, and Songgotu was imprisoned for the remainder of his life. In 1708, Kangxi was again informed that Yinreng had again conspired with a new nokor known as the Eighth Lord Party (八爺黨) to murder and overthrow him. The

Kangxi emperor then formerly disinherited and arrested Yinreng and had the members of his nokor executed or exiled. What followed were years of fractious tanistry and infighting, as

Kangxi’s twenty living sons were embroiled in court intrigue, each seeking to denounce the other and elevate his favored candidate to next in line for the succession. The Kangxi emperor’s eighth son Yinsi 胤禩 (1680-1726) formed a palace-wide nokor, known as the Crown Prince Party (太

子黨), with his eldest brother Yinzhi and a sorcerer named Ming , who used his magic to support Yinsi’s spirutal legitimacy. Yinsi sought to have Yinreng executed and himself named heir. The Kangxi emperor upon hearing of this was enraged and ordered the sorcerer executed by , Yinsi demoted from beile, and the members of his nokor punished severely.55 That same year, Kangxi’s third son Yinzhi 胤祉 informed Kangxi that his eldest son Yinzhi 胤禔 had conspired with a heterodox lama named Bahangelong to hex Yinreng.56 Kangxi upon searching

his quarters and finding the evidence of sorcery, ordered his eldest son to be imprisoned, the

lama executed by lingchi, and Yinreng restored to heir apparent. However, just three years later,

55 Lingchi or death by slow slicing was the process of small pieces of the flesh of the condemned being slowly sliced off piece by piece until death. This was considered the ultimate punishment and was usually applied to traitors. 56 Hung, The Brilliant Reign of the Kangxi Emperor, 176. 31

a coup attempt by Yinreng and a nokor composed of military officers and bureaucratic officials

was uncovered. Crestfallen, the Kangxi emperor ordered Yinreng imprisoned for life and his

followers executed or exiled. The Kangxi emperor was thus frequently embattled with ever-

emerging nokor and princely machinations for the rest of his life.

This constant threat of tanistry continued into the Yongzheng reign. Yinsi continued to

strive for the throne, even ordering his nokor and personal guard to skirmish with the imperial

guard.57 Yongzheng ultimately imprisoned Yinsi and his followers, where they later died (under

suspicious circumstances). Kangxi never announced an heir before he died but was succeeded by

his fourth son Yinzhen 胤禛. The Yongzheng emperor who took the throne after Kangxi’s death

(and who was himself accused of falsifying his father’s will to become emperor) acted

preemptively to stabilize the system of succession by instituting a secret selection system.58

Under this system, the emperor would observer the behavior of his sons throughout their upbringing. Upon selecting the most meritorious of his issue, the name of the chosen son would be placed in a vessel hidden within the Qianqing palace and one upon his person. This system was ingenious in that it nullified the instability of tanistry while simultaneously allowing for a continued form tanistry where potential heirs could strive for the throne, but only with the emperor’s approval made in secret could a claimant be considered legitimate. This practice would continue until the end of the dynasty (although many of the subsequent emperors would leave only one heir or be left childless, leaving the decision in the hands of empress dowagers and regents). It appears that the Manchu rulers since the days of Nurhaci’s experimentation with collegial rule desired to reduce the harmful instability that came with political successions, while

57 Hung, The Brilliant Reign of the Kangxi Emperor, 187. 58 Rawski, The Last Emperors, 102. 32

also harnessing the political effectiveness of their tradition. Yongzheng, the fifth emperor of

Qing had finally attained the desire of his forefathers.

As it concerns the consolidation of Manchu Shamanic ritual under the khan, a brief

discussion of the Eight Banner system is in order. The Manchu state divided its society into

socio-cultural military units. Drawing on the Jurchen tradition of forming hunting niru, the

Jurchen khans organized every aspect of society under the Eight Banners.59 Upon the expansion

of the state, the banners were divided by perceived ethnic identity into separate Eight Banners for

Manchus, Mongols, and Han. Initially each Banner was considered the property of one of the

beile princes, but through the machinations of the Manchu khans, the banners became

increasingly under the control of the khan.60 This transition took many forms, including the exclusive control of the upper three banners by the emperor, the demotion of rank with each inherited potion in a Banner prince’s lineage, the replacement of Banner princes as wartime

generals with princes of the royal lineage and career officers, and the systematic

bureaucratization of the banners by court through appointed officers and officials. After the Qing

conquest the banners were stationed throughout China in military garrisons further diluting the

power of the Banner princes.

This process held major implications for Manchu Shamanism. The first was that because

the banners were formed with the objective of breaking down the unity of individual Manchu

clans, members of each clan were spread out throughout the empire. The Bannermen were forced

to recreate kinship organizations within each Banner garrison to continue their rituals. The

59 The niru, meaning arrow in Manchu, was the smallest unit within the Eight Banner system and found its origin in Jurchen hunting parties. 60 Rawski, The Last Emperors, 99-100. 33

second effect was that newly-separated clans were in a vulnerable position to be brought under the new Qing ritual dogma. This process of bureaucratizing the Manchu nation, coincided with the calcification of genealogies and what Humphrey has called the ancestralizing of the external spirits.61 Manchu Shamanism survived the separation from the homeland of Manchuria through

ancestralized Manchu clans. Each clan held many lineages spread out across the Qing empire.

The Manchu Bannermen would seek out kinsmen or clansmen and could be adopted into a local

lineage.

As it pertains to Shamanic ritual, the Manchu clans served as the spiritual organizations within the garrisons. These organizations were composed of sacred lineages finding their origin in the conquest generation, who first raised their clan’s spirit poles in the wake of the great enterprise. Each lineage was required to maintain its own own spirit poles with which they could offer sacrifices to both the ancestors and nature sprits of their ancestral land. When the descendants of a clan expanded the clan’s territory, a new lineage was created, and a spirit pole was raised at the site of their new settlement. Migration to a totally different territory required adoption into the local clan and lineage.62

In essence, although the Manchus were dispersed amongst the Banner garrison, resulting in a weakening of the clan as a socio-political unit, the importance of clan in spiritual and cultural life remained a paramount staple of Banner life.63 The Eight Banner system was an

effective tool for weakening and subjugating the diverse Shamanic practices of the early

61 Thomas and Humphrey, Shamanism, History, and the State, 210. 62 Crossley, Orphan Warriors, 34. 63 Ibid. 3. 34

Manchus. By separating clans among garrisons, the Clan Shamanic identity was only as strong as

the kinship bonds across garrisons.

Manchu Shamanism and the Concept of Sacred Khanship

Although not traditionally listed as a component of the so-called Manchu Way (credited

to the Qing imperial Nurhaci), alongside Manchu language, horse archery, and

frugality, Manchu Shamanism served as one of the most central components of Manchu identity.

In the tradition of the Turco-Mongolic and of the Asian Northeast, Shamanic

practice was inseparable from culture and politics and was inherent in any indigenous

understanding of clan unity and khanal legitimacy. A khan was defined by the concept of Abkai

Fulingga, which was an innate charisma, a certain intellect that displayed Heaven’s approval and was the harbinger of success. This was a charisma which transformed the khan into a political shaman, through whom Heaven spoke.64 Abkai Sure denoted the idea of divinely inspired

wisdom and charisma and was comparable to concepts of fate or Chinese tianming.65 The office of the khan was thus understood by the peoples of Inner Asia to be sacred kings, destined by

Heaven. While this concept has been at times tied primarily to close contact with the development of the Chinese concept of the , in fact, it is, more heavily integrated with the Mongol and Inner Asian concept of the ruler which likely developed parallel to the Mandate of Heaven. As Gertrude Roth Li states.

The idea of a universal monarch, mandated by Heaven, though it might have been originally developed through Chinese influence on Inner Asia, also came through the Mongolian filter. The founder of the Yüan dynasty, Chinggis, was called

64 Crossley, A Translucent Mirror, 144. 65 Ibid. 139 -143. 35

-yin jayagatu, ‘destined by Heaven,’ a direct model for the later term abka-i fulingga, referring to Nurhaci’s reign title.66 Nurhaci at a kurultai in 1616 was proclaimed as Brilliant Khan (Genggiyen Khan) by his followers, elevating him above his previous title of wise khan. (Sure Kundulen Han) which had held since his first proclamation in 1603. This promotion of sorts held multicultural implications for the development of his political identity As Gertrude Roth Li details “Brilliant Emperor

Nurturer of all Nations (geren gurun-be ujire genggiyen han) inaugurated his own calendar, and, in Chinese fashion, created a reign title (Ma. abka-i fulingga, “Mandated by Heaven”; Chin. t’ien-ming [tianming], “Heavenly mandate”). The Manchu version of the reign title was inscribed on the first Manchu coins.”67 In line with his political titles, the Manchus promoted the

spiritual nature of Nurhaci’s legitimacy. For example, Nurhaci’s rise was accompanied by

strange manifestations of lights in the sky, which occurred monthly in 1612, 1614, and 1615,

which was understood among the Manchus as Heaven’s omens.68 The Old Manchu Chronicles

滿文老檔 provide us with numerous examples of this narrative:

In the twelfth month of the same year, a heavenly beam of light from the direction of Ula shone south of the south tower of the house where Sure Kundulen Khan was living, striking to the south of Hūlan Hada. After that, Sure Kundulen Khan watched Bujantai until the New Year had passed, to see whether he would reform…They defeated the thirty thousand soldiers of Bujantai, khan of Ula, and killed ten thousand people. After that, fearing that the remainder of the army would succeed in getting back into the city, a select group of hardened troops were sent forward, and they entered into the city and seized the gates. Sure Kundulen Khan followed them himself, and climbed the tower of that city and stationed himself there. They defeated that enemy army of thirty thousand and killed ten thousand people. They captured seven thousand suits of armor. Having put an end to the generations-old legacy (banjiha doro) of the khans of the land of Ula, they captured the great city. Having conquered the entire gurun, they set up

66 Roth Li, “State Building before 1644,” 18-19. Although Roth Li presents the idea of a Chinese origin to this concept, this should not be taken as a form of a Sinicization but rather a shared politico-cultural origin among the peoples of Asia. 67 Ibid. 37. 68 Ibid. 37-38. 36

camp in the capital and spent ten days there dividing up the captives. They made them into ten thousand households and brought them back. Those two appearances of a heavenly ray of light, did they not foretell the road by which the land of Ula was captured?69 Accounts of such Heavenly manifestations appearing in support of a ruler can also be observed

in the dynastic history of the Jin, which demonstrates a key continuity in Jurchen-Manchu understandings of Shamanic khanal legitimacy.

“On the day Keng-tzu [kengzi] [of the first month in the first year of Shou- kuo/Shouguo], when the army was about to advance, a flaming light fully round in shape appeared in the sky and descended downwards. The emperor said, ‘This is a fortunate and proof that Heaven will help us’ the he presented a cup of plain water and bowed [to the apparition]. The generals and troops were all delighted.”70

It was with this authority and guarantee of Heaven’s favor against rivals that the Manchu khans

conducted the business of state and the declaration of conquest. The Manchu khans were the

executors of Heaven’s will as reflected by the Manchu term doro sajin meaning the laws

ordained by Heaven.71

This Shamanic understanding of authority is the core basis of the relationship between

the khan and his bondsmen, which reverberated through all Manchu institutions. The khan was a

the chosen of Abka Enduri, he who ruled by the election and submission of the princes, and

master of slaves to all Bannermen. The office of the Inner Asian khan and the establishment of a

great enterprise typically followed a certain trajectory of state centralization, which

fundamentally altered the role of the khan in Manchu society. The khan was not an unmitigated

autocrat, but rather existed on a spectrum ranging between the a first among equals and an

69 MWLD Fascicle Two Taizu 2 70 Franke and Chan. Studies on the Jurchens and the Chin Dynasty, 142. 71 Roth Li, “State Building before 1644,” 19. 37

steppe emperor. Contrary to ideas of Sinicization, the transition did not exclusively

draw from the Chinese example of the but found its basis in an Inner Asian model

stemming from even before the age of Chinggis Khan. A khan began as the head of a permanent

lineage, who governed conjointly with a nominally-submitted tribal aristocracy. Through the

performative-legitimacy of frequent war and conquest, the khan created a supra-tribal

confederacy based on his identity as the perpetually victorious recipient of Heavenly favor. In

this role the khan served as a master of slaves to all bondsmen and the granter of loot and

plunder. It was then that the khan sought to centralize his rule, typically through the

disenfranchisement of his sibling familial rivals through the institutionalization of primogeniture

succession. This act by the khan typically resulted in culture of intense blood tanistry, which saw

not only violence between the khan and his male kin, but also amongst his sons, each willing to

kill for his chance at becoming heir. In order to establish oneself as khan, a claimant would need

to all other potential claimants to in recognition of his Heavenly mandate. In

the case of the Qing, stemming from the age of Nurhaci, the Manchu khan engage in a process of

state centralization which overwhelmed the tribal aristocracy through the formation of the Eight

Banner system and the creation of governing bodies which diluted their power. Thus, all

Bannermen became the bondsmen of the khan drawing their power, authority, and sustenance

from him, and in turn offering their loyalty and service. This political structure was then

perpetuated through the khanal institutions and Shamanic ritual practices.72 This is not to say that

this transition uninterruptedly cascaded toward an imperial khanship, but that despite major

periods of elite and noble backlash exemplified by the Dorgon and 鳌拜 (1610-1669) regencies, under strong leadership the Manchu state trended in this direction.

72 Crossley, “Rulerships of China,” 1473-1474. 38

This notion of Bannermen as slaves of the khan or emperor was not truly in a chattel

sense but rather the expression of a hierarchical social system, in which like their Mongol

counterparts, every member whether legally bondservant (aha) or Banner noble, all owed their life and lifelong service to the khan or to their individual Banner lord and in return would receive his protection, privilege, and sustenance.73 This bond was deeply ingrained in Manchu culture

and enforced strictly. As one account The Old Manchu Chronicles 滿文老檔 warns:

The minister Ilaka , who had been given to the Han's [khan] son Hong Taiji Beile, while failing to exert himself, complained that "[Hong Taiji] does not look after me. I want to return to the Han, who looked after me." The Han accordingly consulted with the princes and ministers, saying, "Although [Ilaka] was originally with me, he hardly exerted himself for me and gave no benefit, and he often caused me resentment and troubled me. [But] I did not give heed to the fact that he thus caused me resentment, and I made Ilaka a minister and gave him to my son. If you, llaka, without exerting yourself at all, complain without reason that we do not look after you, do you intend going back and forth between us and living in disobedience?" He [then] killed Ilaka74 This passage demonstrates that a Manchu’s oath as bondsman to his liege lord was intrinsically connected to the khan’s legitimacy and authority, and thus violation could carry the penalty of execution. The khan granted the Banner lords the exclusive use of a prescribed number of households as well as their combined resources, personnel and productive output.75 This

understanding of society as a network of personal loyalties to the khan and Banner lord

superseded any concepts of obligation or administrational jurisdiction adopted from the Ming.76

This model of khanship was not limited to Jurchens but extended to all Inner Asian peoples who submitted to the khan. In particular the allied Mongols were brought into the Manchu doro under this form of paternalistic relationship. The election of Hong Taiji as khan of the rising Manchu

7373 Crossley, A Translucent Mirror, 140-141. 74 Sugiyama, "The Ch'ing Empire as a Manchu Khanate," 531. 75 Sugiyama, "The Ch'ing Empire as a Manchu Khanate," 530-531. 76 Sugiyama, "The Ch'ing Empire as a Manchu Khanate," 535. 39

state was the first step in a progressively-developing, multiethnic coalition and exemplified the

deep cultural links that tied the outcome of the Manchu rise to the nature of their position within

a greater Inner Asian sphere. This relationship was characterized by the early struggle between

the Manchu khans and their Mongol rivals and the Shamanic rituals used by the Manchu khans

to cement their own positions as great khans of the rising Qing empire.

The Role of Shamans in Manchu Khanal Legitimacy

To further understand the conceptual basis of khanal legitimacy and its relationship to

Manchu Shamanic empire, a further examination of the Manchu shaman and his or her role in

the Manchu order is warranted.77 The Manchus, evolving from their Jurchen forefathers and

Nurhaci’s Jianzhou state, lived at the nexus between two ways of life. The Jurchen and their

Tungusic neighbors had originated form millennia long hunter-gatherer traditions to which some scholars attribute the origins of their Shamanic . As Meng Huiying summarizes,

“Shamanism became the main from of spiritual belief in hunter-gatherer societies. It governed every aspect of spiritual and social life. The lack of security and stability characteristic of a hunter-gatherer lifestyle created a situation in which people had no means of assuring their own fate. Often because of a decrease in prey, they had to rely on illusory forms of “” to try and change the situation and achieve peace of mind.”78

This origin seems possible, as according to Kun Shi, the very meaning of the term

shaman (saman in Manchu and Chinese) is “those who are the most knowledgeable.”79 It seems

77 On the clan level, Manchu shamans could be either male or female, although females appear to have been more numerous. During the post conquest period, all court shamans were female. 78 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 377. 79 Shi, “Ny Dan The Manchu Shamaness,” 224. 40

that this concept is in line with the shamans of the Jin dynasty as well. Interestingly, Guo Shuyun

has located what appears to be the first record of the term within Chinese records:

Early in the twelfth century, the Southern Song historian Mengsheng wrote, ‘Wushi was crafty and very capable. He united the Nuzhen people, created their laws, and invented a script to write their language. Some of these people are called shanman [珊蠻, saman in Manchu], which means sorceress in the Nuzhen[Jurchen] language. In the past, the shanman were as powerful as gods, but since Han, none are so capable.’ This is the first use of the word ‘shaman’ in Chinese historical records.80

Just like the preceding Jurchen Jin dynasty and in contrast to their Wild Jurchen counterparts,

Nurhaci’s Jurchens transitioned their lifestyle from strictly hunter-gatherer, herder, and

fishermen society to one that both practiced these traditional arts alongside animal husbandry

and crop cultivation. The Manchus harnessed their traditional lifestyle to acquire much-valued furs, pearls, and ginseng, which helped to economically provide the foundation for their emerging state.81 This hybrid lifestyle directly corresponded with the Manchu Shamanic

worldview. The Jurchen pantheon was filled by the sprits of beasts, willow trees, and streams

alongside the gods of harvest and hearth, fortune, and tragedy. Early Jurchen shamans were

charged with managing the energy and spirits of both beasts and livestock. These shamans

carefully oversaw the burial of symbolic beast and prominently displayed the bones of sacrifices

outside their homes and ritual sites and were themselves after death honored with and

80 Guo, “Religious Education in Manchu Shamanism, as Seen from Jiaowuyun,” 49. 81 These trade goods were the very economic basis of the early Manchu state. The Qing created numerous hunter banners which included the New Manchus in the interest of securing a steady supply of product for foreign and domestic markets. The Manchu state of the eighteenth century would even go as far as to engage in elaborate economic marketing schemes to protect the market value and support the branding of Manchurian ginseng. For more on these topics see A World Trimmed with Fur Wild Things, Pristine Places, and the Natural Fringes of Qing Rule by Jonathan Schlesinger, and Ginseng and Borderland: Territorial Boundaries and Political Relations Between Qing China and Choson , 1636-1911 by Seonmin Kim 41 interned.82 These shamans were beast masters and used their powers to ensure profitable hunts.

As Meng writes:

Besides having to hold supplication rituals to the mountain spirit and the water spirit before the seasonal fishing and hunting begin, hunting groups and individual hunters often hold small-scale sacrifices and perform magical rites. During these rituals the shaman often foretells the direction in which one should travel and also the prospects of future gains. Some rituals often include the shooting of animal effigies through sympathetic magic.83 Shamans could be professionally trained by elder shamans or could be seized by the spirits leading them to the path.84 These members of the clan served as healers, spirit mediums, teachers, historians, and political advisors, as well any number of other roles. The shaman’s craft was the defining feature in the Manchu clan’s interactions with the supernatural and the commemoration of the clan’s lineage.85 Manchu shamans were at the core of clan cohesion, leadership, and identity and who without which, the clan would cease to exist. As Fu writes

During memorial ceremonies and festivals, or before a war, the shaman would tell clan members legends of their origin in order to strengthen and unite clan power. Thus, the morals and behavior of the clan were first established and then strengthened...Shamanism as an institution undertook the important task of maintaining and developing the clan. Shamans performed a crucial function and merited higher prestige and position. Thus, shamans have long been accredited as keepers of clan culture and perhaps one of the most highly esteemed members of the clan. Without a shaman, clans would have gradually deteriorated and become extinct.86

These shamans held not only spiritual or religious authority but also could attain a great deal of political power. Shamans could gain wider influence via proximity to a clan headman or preeminent khan or through the concentration of political power and spiritual charisma into their

82Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 377. 83 Ibid. 379. 84 Shi, “Ny Dan The Manchu Shamaness.” 225. 85 Smith, The Qing Dynasty and Traditional Chinese Culture, 52. 86Holyoak, Piao Han, 30. 42

own persona. According to Crossley, “The clan headman (mukunda) in some cases was a shaman

(saman) himself, or moved close to the shaman, the better to invoke the needs communications

with the spirits at the appropriate moment.”87 This relationship traded political access for

spiritual legitimacy which was the foundation of Altaic concepts of Shamanic sovereignty.88 In

the right hands, a shaman was a key advisor for a rising ruler, divining Heaven’s will and placating the populace. The endorsement of a shaman greatly legitimatized a ruler’s claim to the

Heaven’s approval. In times of war, a shaman performed Shamanic war rituals before battle, imbuing troops with divinely inspired confidence in victory.89

For example, Aguda 阿骨打 (1068 –1123) founder of the Jin dynasty maintained a shaman called Wushe as one of his most trusted advisors, lending his ear during the governance of state.90 Most famously ,this relationship to power is represented by the shaman’s ability to

lend his ecstatic access to the spirit world to enhance the legitimacy of the ruler by demonstrating

Heaven’s endorsement, quieting skeptics and challengers alike. Conversely, a shaman could

undermine the khan by questioning his spiritual legitimacy and transferring Heaven’s

endorsement to a rival. This conflict inevitably ended with either the overthrowal of the khan, or

the execution of the shaman and the subsuming of Shamanic characteristics within his own

position.91 This relationship is most clearly identified in the souring relationship between the

87 Crossley, Orphan Warriors, 34. This dynamic is most interesting given that it was the consolidation of Shamanic authority into the hands or khans that alienated and shelved the influences of the shaman. It was perhaps these shaman-headmen that provided the basis for the reinvention of khanal rule under the Manchus and the greatest threat to a khan’s authority. 88 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 400. 89 Ibid. 401. Notably, many of these powers would be stripped from the shaman and assumed by the khan, a phenomenon discussed in greater detail elsewhere in this chapter. 90 Ibid. 400. 91 Fletcher, “The Mongols,” 32. 43

rising Chinggis Khan (then Temujin) and his crowning shaman Teb Tengri, which concluded

with the shaman’s execution by backbreaking.92

One such manifestation of the institutional position of the shaman’s ability to rival the

khan that has remained understudied in Western historiography is the concept of the grandfather

shaman gods. In this case, the spirit of deceased shamans could return to the clan to guide later

shamans, and through this apotheosis exist as a pivotal representation of the clan’s Shamanic

identity separate from the reigning khan’s regime.93 This was reinforced by the fact that the

grandfather spirit was created and sustained by the rituals of the clan in the period following the

shaman’s earthly death.94 This is to say, the living manifestation of the shaman would hold

incredible influence and a parallel source of legitimacy rooted in the clan itself, rather than the

khan. Guo relays the relationship between shaman gods and the clan in explaining,

The special position of even non-Grandfather God shamans enables them to transmit divine words, express the people's hopes, dispel doubts and treat diseases for the people. So, they too, enjoy a very high status in the clan. Once they are exalted to the status of Grandfather God, however, they are ever after worshipped as imperial gods. The clansmen use incense burner bowls to represent each Grandfather God, who thus forever enjoy the aroma of incense during clan rituals. Moreover, their , figures and deeds arc painted on the Great God Scroll for the clansmen to revere.95

This contentious relationship held the potential to turn antagonistic. Khans of the Turco-Mongol and Tungusic traditions were defined by power struggle and the need for continuous performative legitimacy, requirements that if left neglected, would lead to the khan’s murder, imprisonment, and replacement at hands of competing factions. This dynamic was further

92 Baldick, Animal and Shaman, 97. 93 Guo, “Analysis of the Grandfather God of the Manchu Shi Clan,” 30. 94 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 385. 95 Guo, “Analysis of the Grandfather God of the Manchu Shi Clan,” 39. 44

complicated by the spiritual dimension of khanal rule, as shamans could be pushed and pulled

among powerful factions. The shaman often did not work alone but rather was member of a

Shamanic guild which held political influence over several clans and molded steppe politics

toward their own ends. These guilds often placed a member-shaman within the nokor of a khan,

bolstering his legitimacy in exchange for greater influence over governance of the state. During

periods of succession, these guilds could levy their influence to back a favored candidate for the

throne or even seek to take it for themselves. During such struggles, the shaman utilized the

influence accumulated from their myriad social roles to gain the support of the military and tribal

elite before carrying out a coup against the khan.96 These essential truths of khanal governance

and legitimacy were by their very nature volatile, endangering tribal confederation and empire

alike. This dynamic is most interesting given that it was the consolidation of Shamanic authority

into the hands of the khans that alienated and shelved the influence of the shaman. In effect, it

was this merging of roles either initiated by the khan or the shaman which lay the groundwork

for the Shamanic empire.

The role of a hybrid rulership did have some precedent in early Jurchen culture. For

example, Jurchen shamans served as givers and enforcers of the law. Presiding shamans would

seize the property and herds belonging to murderers, and then cursed their households to ruin.97

It was perhaps these judicial shaman-headmen that provided the basis for the reinvention of

khanal rule under the Manchus and served as the greatest threat to a khan’s authority. As

Fletcher explains, “Even the most powerful supra-tribal ruler might find himself limited or even threatened by a paramount shaman backed up by the intertribal Shamanic ‘guild.’”98 According

96 Fletcher, “The Mongols,” 18. 97 Crossley, A Translucent Mirror, 141. 98 Fletcher, “The Mongols,” 20. 45

to Jurchen legend, the first shaman was actually a champion and commander of men known as

Cooha Janggin. According to this legend Cooha Janggin was beheaded by the Chinese but

refused to die.99 In order to solidify a specific khan’s authority and establish his personal control

over an empire, the khan would need to engage in a gargantuan project of state centralization

which would ensure that his enemies were defeated, his rivals stripped of their access to power,

and the groundwork for a stable succession was in place.100

The khan and the shaman were often at odds with one another and thus the stage was set

for the Manchu khans not only to consolidate their control of the Shamanic world but also to

expand their Shamanic influence over Inner Asia. In comparison with the Mongol empire,

Humphrey states,

“I suggest that during the power formation of the Mongol state, when political power was very much up for grabs, Shamanic practitioners entered the fray with a characteristic discourse of prophesy and interpreting omens, often using the imagery of natural events (hailstorms that would defeat and enemy and the like). After a state had been consolidated, taking the Manchus as an example, we find retreating in significance, to be replaced by discourse concerned primarily with interpersonal power and identity.”101

The retreat of prophecy and the ecstatic left legitimacy in the emerging Qing Shamanic empire in

flux. The following battle was one of the dragon throne exerting its centralized control to

monopolize the manner of ritual and de-center the shaman as the practitioner for the purpose of consolidating the state against rivals and the expansion of this dynamic to the periphery of the

Shamanic empire.

99 Crossley, Orphan Warriors,” 238. 100 Fletcher, “The Mongols,” 28. 101 Thomas and Humphrey. Shamanism, History, and the State, 194. For example, the lights that filled the sky repeatedly surrounding Nurhaci’s elevation to khan and subsequent invasions. See Roth Li, “State Building before 1644,” 37-38. 46

Manchu Sovereignty in the Inner Asian Context: The Role of the Shamanic Empire in

Manchu Hegemony over the Mongols.

The concept of Shamanic empire, just as in the case of princely rivalries among the beile

princes for the title of khan, so too applied to the inter-khanate conflicts over the peoples of the greater Shamanic world. The concept of a great khan chosen by Heaven was not exclusive only to one Inner Asian ethnic group but found resonance in a plethora of Inner Asian peoples, many whom existed within the orbit of previous Shamanic empires such as the Liao, Jin, and .

Claiming this mantle, challenged other claimants and often led to armed conflicts over legitimacy. One core example of this Inner Asian politico-cultural practice was the series of wars

(1619-1634) between the Manchu coalition led by Nurhaci and later Hong Taiji against their

archrival Ligden Khan of the Chaqar Mongols. During the early days of the later Jin khanate, the

Manchus faced military, economic, and political challenges on every front. After Nurhaci’s

decree of independence from the Ming, and following proclamation of his Seven Grievances, the

later Jin waged an ever-escalating war with Ming forces throughout Liaodong, as well as later

sponsoring military incursions into the Korean state (1392–1897). This, however, left the

Later Jin khanate extremely vulnerable to Mongol attack as Manchu forces were overcommitted

and their economy was in dire straits.

In the closing years of the sixteenth century, Ligden khan was in the midst of reunifying

the Mongols into what he hoped would be the resurrection of the six great tumens of Dayan

Khan (1464–1517) and potentially the rebirth of a Great Mongol empire, a goal not only parallel

to that of the Manchu rulers but also a dire threat. This enterprise was however deeply hindered

by the precedent of fragmented segmental sovereignty that had emerged in the wake of Altan

47

khan’s (1507-1582) reign.102 had resisted the Dayan peace and instead utilized the

mutually-understood semi autonomy of each ulus among the six great tumens. This is to say that

Ligden Khan could not prevent other Mongol ulus from fleeing his dominance, at least not while

a competing khanal sovereign existed.103 The existence of two dominant Shamanic khanates in

the Inner Asian realms instigated antagonism by its very nature.

To put his plan into action, Ligden’s forces first launched raids into rival Khorchin lands,

slaying their leadership. The Khorchin Mongols, facing an existential crisis, appealed to Nurhaci for aid, not only as an allied chieftain whose forces could guarantee their prolonged autonomy, but as the great khan chosen of Tengri, the Tengri-yin Süldetü. According to Elverskog,

“Explaining the new alliance, Ooba Khung Taiji described how peace accords among the dominant groups of the Mongol plateau had recently collapsed. Chakhar [Chaqar] and Khalkha troops had killed seven Khorchin noblemen in the last year. Nurhaci, Ooba Khung Taiji explained, was ‘the even-minded Gegen Khan, who leads the unfeigning royal lineage that has descended on Heaven and Earth by decree of the Supreme Eternal God.’”104

This passage reveals the existence of a form of Shamanic khanal sovereignty intertwined with

the legacy of Chinggis Khan which was held by both parties, Manchu and Mongol, alike.105 One

after another, Mongol chieftains traveled to Mukden to offer their loyalty to the Manchu khan.

As Di Cosmo recounts:

Under both Nurhaci (Qing Taizu, r. 1616–1626) and Hung Taiji [Hong Taiji], many Mongols joined the Manchus as a direct or indirect consequence of the Õaqar [Chaqar] wars. For instance, the Bayut joined the Manchus on 24 February 24 1624, and the QorÔin[Khorchin] under Oba with the Jalayid, Dörbed and Gorlos concluded a treaty on 3 April 1624. On 15 August 1627 the Aoqan and the

102 Di Cosmo, “Competing strategies of Great Khan Legitimacy in the Context of the Chaqar- Manchu Wars,” 245. 103 Elverskog, Our Great Qing, 27. 104 Ibid. 14. 105 Ibid. 14. 48

Naiman joined with the Manchus, and on 14 December 1627 the first Õaqar chieftains defected to the Manchu camp. The Bagarin joined Hung Taiji, after a rather troubled relationship, on 28 May 28 1628, and some chiefs of the QaraÔin swore an oath on 31 August 1628. The Tümed presented tribute on 2 August 1629. The Dörben-Keüked joined on 31 December 1630, followed by the Ongnigud in 1631, by the Kesigten in 1633, and by the Moominggan on 10 March 1634. The large Qalqa confederation first entered a treaty on 6 December 1619 but relations were not smooth. Various Qalqa groups joined at different stages (e.g., on 30 December 1621, and 27 March 1622).106

Of note is the fact that the forming of an alliance between the Manchus and the Khorchin

Mongols was marked not with a Buddhist ritual but a Shamanic one, finding its origin in the Liao

Dynasty (916-1125).107 The event was marked with the sacrifice of a white horse to Heaven and a black ox to Earth. The participants then swore an oath to each other. In the case of an identical ritual performed with the Kharachin in 1626, the oath went, “In order to form one alliance, we two ulus, the Manchu and Karachin, offer a white horse to Heaven and a black ox to Earth.

Wearing an oath of loyalty together, we offer one bowl of araki, one bowl of meat offerings, one bowl of blood, and one bowl of dried remains!”108 This oath was made not before a Buddhist deity revered by both Mongols and Manchus such as Mahakala but before the Manchu Heaven

Abka Enduri and the Mongol Eternal blue sky Tengri. Furthermore, these oaths were considered deeply sacred and should be composed of so-called trustworthy words which if broken could breed incredible animosity and armed conflict.109

Such rituals were also performed by the Manchus with tribes of the Khalkha in 1619, the

Khorchin in 1626, and the Kharchin in 1628, displaying the core Shamanic basis of the joining of

106 Di Cosmo, “Military aspects of the wars against the Chaqars,” 335. 107 Elverskog, “Our Great Qing,” 14. 108 Ibid. 29. 109 Di Cosmo, "From Alliance to Tutelage,” 188. 49 these peoples to the Qing enterprise.110 This, however, is not to say that Tibetan Buddhism was not a major element in Manchu Mongol relations, but rather that the fundamental political and military relationship and understanding between the Mongol and Manchu peoples was grounded in a Shamanic Inner Asian tradition that predated the proliferation of Buddhism among the

Mongols. Following these rituals, the Khorchin and Manchus were now joined in the formation of a new imperial state in the vestige of ’s Six Tumens.111

This emerging state was underlined by the concepts of gurun/ulus and doro/ törö which would be understood as a source of Shamanic legitimacy for Nurhaci. The progressive development of the Manchu claim to the Shamanic mantel of Chinggis Khan began in 1606 with the bestowment of his Mongol title Kundulun Khan, an identity which was cemented with the

1626 joint performance of the Shamanic sacrifice of a white horse to Heaven and a black ox to

Earth sacrifice with the Khorchin Mongols. This joint performance of Shamanic sacrifice and military rites in the tradition of the , was more than simply a formality but an induction of Nurhaci into the sacred lineage of Chinggis Khan. Nurhaci thus became the

Shamanic head of a great enterprise comprised of a hybrid rulership built upon religious, military, and political relationships and systems of legitimacy.112

Thus, for the Manchu rulers, the system of Buddhist legitimacy was not the only or perhaps even the fundamental basis for Qing legitimacy in Inner Asia. The Manchu khans were invoking the shared understanding that the formation of this multiethnic Manchu-ruled state was the next succession in a historical process of doro transference, a notion supported by the seizure

110 Di Cosmo, “Manchu Shamanic Ceremonies at the Qing Court,” 369. 111 Elverskog, Our Great Qing, 24-25. 112 Lamaan, ", Magic and Politics in Qing and Republican China," 90-91. 50

of the Yuan seal form Ligden Khan.113 Ligden Khan’s aggression served as the casus belli to

which the Manchus answered with the formation of a steppe coalition. They united with

Ligden’s foes among the Mongols and staged a strategic, economic, political, and (most notably

for this study) Shamanic challenge to the authority of Ligden Khan. It is no great stretch to say

that without the defeat of Ligden Khan and the incorporation of his forces into the Manchu

Shamanic empire, the conquest of China proper would never have been possible.114

Throughout the conflict, numerous communiques between the camps of Ligden and the

Manchu khans, inform us that the central conflict over the legitimacy of each khan’s authority

was paramount. In a 1619 letter to Nurhaci, Ligden Khan portrayed the relationship between

Nurhaci and himself as a contest between two competing khans for sovereignty over relations

with the Ming and, more importantly, over the privileges of a khan. Ligden writes “Baghtur

Chinggis Khan, Lord of 400,000 Mongols, enquires after the health of Kundulen Genggiyen

Han, Lord of the 30,000 Jushen (Jurchen) of the Water.’ …In the summer of 1619 Ligden Khan

went in person and, winning over the (Ming) city of Kuang-, took tribute; if you now attack

Kuang-ning, I will hinder you”115 Here not only does Ligden attempt to reinforce the legitimacy

of his lineage and authority by claiming the title of warrior of Chinggis Khan, but also

emphasizes his superiority in the imagined military superiority between a “united” Mongol

nation and a “peripheral” non-Mongol warlord. He goes on to threaten Nurhaci, claiming his

khanal authority over those land to which he receives tributes. Nurhaci, not to be outdone by

Ligden, responds:

113 Brook, van Walt van Praag, and Boltjes. Sacred Mandates, 132. 114 Di Cosmo, “Competing strategies of Great Khan Legitimacy in the Context of the Chaqar-Manchu Wars,” 244. 115 Hagiwara, “The Political Ideas of third piac,” 98. 51

In your two personal campaigns against the Ming, how many prisoners did you take. What large walled cities did you take? What great did you defeat? Do you think the Ming gave you the paltry goods you received when you went to Kuang-ning because, since you were such a great destroyer of fortresses, they feared your attacks? Or did they give it to you out of affection for you as a kinsman? If they gave it to you out of love, why did you accept such a trifling amount…Did not the Ming, out of fear of my power give you that property in order to dupe you? 116 It is here that Nurhaci asserts his authority over all lands to which his khanal power laid claim and sets the playing field for the zero-sum game that would follow under Hong Taiji. Nurhaci questions Ligden Khan’s legitimacy and cast him as the servant of the Ming, rather than a true descendant of Chinggis Khan, thus evening the legitimacy playing field. The nature of this competition is encapsulated in one letter from Ligden Khan to Hong Taiji: “If I let you take an ulus I have conquered, what will happen to my honor?”117

The conflict between these two poles of khanal legitimacy only concluded with the death of Ligden Khan. Where Ligden Khan had driven the flailing Mongol opposition into the arms of his enemies, the Manchus through the establishment of a Banner administrative system, tributary vassalage, and the bonding of martial, economic, and ritual ties, were able to successfully unify a new state.118 An important ritualistic signifier of these events was burning of the recorded narration of the conflict and the ritual offering of alcohol at Hong Taiji’s 1636 kurultai. Within the Manchu-Mongol Shamanic context, the burning of paper documents was a means of communicating with both Heaven and the ancestors.119 The ceremonial burning of this document symbolized the belief among the gathered Manchus and Mongols of the legitimate claim of Hong

116 Ibid. 99. 117 Elverskog. Our Great Qing, 29. 118 Ibid. 30. 119 Di Cosmo, “Manchu Shamanic Ceremonies at the Qing Court,” 368. 52

Taiji’s before Heaven and the spirits thus displaying the core Shamanic nature of Manchu

Mongol relations and the rising Qing. As Di Cosmo summarizes,

These ceremonies, as an expression of the political and diplomatic relations established by the newly born Manchu state, reflect the pervasive influence of shamanistic beliefs at the level of state administration, and not just at the level of the clan. Shamanic rituals were, of course, an integral part not only of Manchu native culture, but also of a tradition of rulership practiced by the Turks, Khitans, Mongols, and Jurchen.120

Hong Taiji further attempted to reinforce his legitimacy by claiming the seal of

Chinggis Khan.121 Ejei Khan ([?–1661] Ejei Erke Qongyor Efu, the heir of Ligden Khan), after

surrendering his forces to Manchu armies, was escorted to Mukden as head of a Mongol

delegation. Alongside Badari Tusiyetu Jinong of the Khorchin Mongols, who was also a prince

of the clan, the Mongol delegation recognized Hong Taiji’s claim to the Shamanic

empire and the authority of Chinggis Khan.122 It was here that Ejei Khan submitted the jade

imperial seal of the Mongol (1271-1368) alongside a idol of the protector

Buddhist deity Mahakala most favored by (1215-1294).123 The mythology of this

seal claimed that it had been held by many Mongol khans dating back to the empire of Chinggis

Khan. Hong Taiji further buttressed his legitimacy by marrying five Mongol noblewomen

including two of the widows of Ligden Khan, at his 1636 grand kurultai. In exchange, the now

subdued Ejei Khan, married Hong Taiji’s own daughter princess Makata , thus joining the

imperial houses of Aisin Gioro and Borjigin and eliminating any lineage barrier to Hong Taiji’s

recognition as the legitimate inheritor of the sacred suzerainty of Chinggis Khan. It is the

120 Ibid. 368-369. 121 Elverskog. Our Great Qing, 31a. 122 Hidehiro, "The Yüan Imperial Seal in the Manchu Hands," 267. 123 Brook, van Walt van Praag, and Boltjes. Sacred Mandates, 123. 53

intersection of these models of legitimacy that created both the foundation and the impetus for

the transition of the state from the later Jin to the Qing empires.124 Thus contrary to the narrative

that Hong Taiji’s sole motivation in transitioning to the Qing as a precursor to conquering China

proper, it is clear that from this perspective, it was the inheritance of an understanding of politico-shamanic khanship over the Mongols that was bequeathed onto the Manchus through the procurements of the jade Yuan seal, the joining of lineages, and the martial triumph over Ligden

khan which granted Hong Taiji the vision and authority to establish the Qing.125

The Qing from its very conception was thus a multiethnic empire but also one grounded

in the recognized politico-shamanic authority of the Manchu khan, an authority demonstrated by

the gathering of a diverse coalition of member states of the Manchu coalition for Hong Taiji’s

1636 by kurultai.126 This event was attended not just by Manchu nobility but also

by Mongol princes, submitted frontier Liaodongese , and former Ming officials.127 For

the Mongols this kurultai was the official recognition of Hong Taiji as great khan, the inheritor

of Shamanic khanal legitimacy of Chinggis Khan, and formation of the Qing törö.128 The

enthronement ceremony itself, presents an interesting parallel with that of the fallen Ligden

Khan. In the Mongol tradition of this era, an enthronement as great khan heavily relied (but not

124 Hidehiro, "The Yüan Imperial Seal in the Manchu Hands," 269. 125 The enthronement of Hong Taiji was as much a triumph in the Roman fashion as a succession. Surrendered enemies such as Ligden Khan’s heir were paraded before the nobility and made to kowtow before Hong Taiji. This extended to internal politics as the enthronement of Hong Taiji as emperor was won at the expense of his fraternal rivals. It was only with the defeat of Ligden Khan that the Hong Taiji could truly be recognized as great khan and the Qing empire as legitimate. As Joseph Fletcher explains “A reign's real beginning dated from the winning contestant's definitive triumph over the last of his serious rivals.” Fletcher, “The Mongols,” 26. 126 Ibid. 267. Altaic religious beliefs and practices. This practice is not unlike the grand Kurultai of the great Mongol empire, where extravagant tribute and noble titles were laid upon the enthroned khan. 127 Hidehiro, “China as a Successor State of the Mongol Empire,” 268. 128 Ibid. 268. 54 exclusively) on the claimant’s relationship to either the blood or symbolic lineage of Chinggis

Khan. An enthronement ceremony like that of Hong Taiji’s would include a grand ritual as members of the elite pledged their loyalty to the new khan, followed by a black ox and sheep sacrifice.129 Embedded in these rituals was the understanding that the spirit of Chinggis Khan would be present in the transference of doro/ törö. In the case of Ligden Khan, this endorsement was demonstrated with the Eight White Tents of Chinggis Khan which contained his relics.130

For the Mongols, the presence of these tents was not only an act of political theatre but also the symbol of the now deified Chinggis Khan who alongside the Mongol belief in the granted spiritual legitimacy.131 The enthronement of Hong Taiji in 1636 is a microcosm of the

Shamanic empire. The ceremony drew on Manchu, Mongol and Chinese traditions to lay the groundwork for the new imperial enterprise. We have previously discussed the practice of the kurultai from an internal Manchu perspective; however, this institution also held importance for the Manchu legitimation over the Mongols of the Shamanic empire. In Inner Asian tradition, the most important political event was the grand kurultai which saw the gathering of the supra-tribal nobility for a political purpose. This purpose could be the enthronement of a new great khan, such as the election of Guyuk Khan (1206-1248) in 1246, the formation of a new state or imperial enterprise in the concept of Doro/ Törö such as the one held by Chinggis Khan in the formation of the Mongols, and finally the declaration of a new military enterprise, as which was held by Ogedei Khan (1186-1241). The enthronement of Hong Taiji met all of these requirements in the eyes of both Manchus and Mongols. Having compelled his older brother

Daisan to support his claim and lead the remaining beile in electing him khan and swearing oaths

129 Keliher, The Board of Rites and the Making of Qing China, 4. 130 Elverskog, Our Great Qing, 41. 131 Ibid. 42. 55

to him, and having defeated Ligden Khan and attained the jade seal of the Yuan dynasty, Hong

Taiji in 1636 called for a grand kurultai to be held in Mukden. The enthronement of Hong Taiji

was by far not the first nor the last grand kurultai held by the Manchus. The institution of the

kurultai existed among the Jurchen-Manchus at least since the times of the later Jin.132 The Qing

rulers utilized the kurultai as a key propagandist tool to mark major events in the Shamanic

empire. For example, the Kangxi emperor held a kurultai at Dolon Nor in 1691 to mark the

submission of the Khalkha. The Khalkha khans fleeing Dzungar (1634-1755) aggression had

migrated their Gers to Manchu lands and promptly recognized the Kangxi emperor as khan.133

Another Kurultai was held to mark the return of the Mongols.

Another important element surrounding the legitimation of the Manchus over the

Mongols was the role of regnal titles and the narratives that surrounded them as a technology of

legitimacy. Both the Manchu khans and Ligden khan sought to align their titles with an identity

that supported their claim to legitimacy. For example, the title given to Nurhaci of revered khan,

directly elevated Nurhaci to a prestigious position capable of projecting his power over the

Mongols and further drawing the Mongols into Nurhaci’s Shamanic sphere. The Manchu khans

paid special attention to the cultivation of this identity and the maintenance of these titles

represented in each major language and people group of the empire. In particular, it was

Nurhaci’s titles of kundeulen khan in Mongolian and shenwu huangdi 神武皇帝, or Holy Martial

Emperor in Chinese, which enabled him to overtake Ligden Khan as the legitimate head of an

emerging multiethnic state. Nurhaci, having first been proclaimed amongst the Jurchens as

Brilliant Emperor Nurturer of all Nations (geren gurun-be ujire genggiyen han) possessed both

132 Hodous. "The Quriltai as a Legal Institution in the Mongol Empire," 90. 133 Millward, New Qing Imperial history, 99. 56

politico Shamanic systems of authority among both the Jurchens and the Mongols, which was

transferred to Hong Taiji.134 The titles of Hong Taiji, who was known as secen (wise) khan in

Mongolian, and tiancong 天聪 in Chinese, which can also be translated as Heavenly astute, enabled him to transition the multiethnic state to a Shamanic empire upheld by a distinct narrative of legitimacy supported by the narrative surrounding the events of this conflict. As the early seventeenth century Mongol historian Sehang Secen stated in the Precious Summary of

1662:

After that, as more and more decrees and documents came out profusely, his [Hong Taiji’s] strength and might proceeded to become great, and on the border the Mongols became frightened. When he was nomadizing on campaign against the western three [] of Ligdan Khutugtu Khan, he brought into his power peacefully the Khorchin princes, and he became famed to all as Sechen Khan. Thereupon after Ligdan khan had been overcome by fate, his wife Sutai Taikhu (daughter of Delger Taishi , the son of Jing Taishi of the Jurchen) returned by God’s own decree…In this way, he took the state of the Mongols’ khan when was forty-four years old in the Pig Year. He became famous as the Vastly Merciful one, the Supremely Virtuous, Peaceful, Holy Sechen Khan.135

It is this second identity as a ruler which further demonstrated Hong Taiji’s claim to the

Shamanic legitimacy of Chinggis Khan. At the 1636 kurultai, Hong Taiji was proclaimed across

each recognized language across the empire as “the Vastly Gracious, Harmonious and Holy

Khan-Emperor.”136This narrative presents a propagandistic take on the events of this struggle.

This, however, does not detract from the overwhelming message of khanal legitimacy that it is

intended to project. By invoking Chinggis Khan, Hong Taiji represented a unifying force in the

134 Roth Li, “State building before 1644,” 37. 135 Elverskog, Our Great Qing, 45. 136 Hidehiro, “China as a Successor State of the Mongol Empire,” 268. Okada records the Hong Taiji’s titles in Manchu, Mongolian, and Chinese as follows: Gosin Onco Huwaliyasun Enduringge Han, Aghuda Oroshiyegchi Nayiramdaghu Boghda Qaghan, and K’uan Jen -ti. 57

creation of the multiethnic Qing empire which allowed their Mongol allies to live by their own

customs as long as ultimate sovereignty was in the hands of the khan. 137

Out of the convergence of these technologies of administering the Shamanic periphery of the early Qing empire emerged a distinct form of governance based on the Inner Asian understandings and incorporating Shamanic rituals as a means of generating authority. The first method was the introduction of the migrating Southern Mongol tribes into the emerging Mongol

Eight Banners, a method that swelled their ranks as a direct result of Ligden Khan’s aggression.138 The second method involved two overlaid systems of authority over the outer

Mongol allies. The formation of the Mongol Eight Banner was of vital importance in the

formation of the Later Jin-Qing empire. Each Mongol ulus that ritually submitted to the Manchus

not only removed a potential rival or supporter of a rival from the game board of power politics,

but also provided the Manchus with a burgeoning number of experienced troops with which to

wage their war against the Ming. This process was also spiritually significant. By accepting

Manchu suzerainty, these Mongol Bannermen were acknowledging the legitimacy of Nurhaci

and later Hong Taiji’s spiritual authority to the empire of Chinggis Khan and were becoming the

sworn bondsmen of a newly-crowned great khan. These Mongols recognized Hong Taiji as the

boyda ejen or Holy Lord, a title reserved for Chinggis Khan.139

The relationship of these Mongols to the Manchu khans was now an extension of the

khan-bondsmen relationship in which the Mongols received protection and fatherly sustenance in

trade for loyalty and submission. A system of princely titles was granted by the Qing primarily

137 Di Cosmo, “Competing strategies of Great Khan Legitimacy in the Context of the Chaqar- Manchu Wars,” 341. 138 Di Cosmo, “The Qing and Inner Asia: 1636–1800,” 340. 139 Lamaan, "Christianity, Magic and Politics in Qing and Republican China," 91. 58

to nobles of Borjigid lineage, who were invited to partake in Manchu ceremony ritual.140 These

princes each held hereditary estates composed of both populace and herds. Secondly, a system of

banner territories was administered by assemblies or leagues made of Mongol nobles and led by

a jasak (Mongol prince comparable to a Manchu beile). The of these leagues

then answered to the amban appointed by the Lifanyuan, and alongside their Mongol Eight

Banner prince, colleagues were permitted to take part in the Manchu Tangse rites which represented their place in the Shamanic empire.141 Under the governance of Hong Taiji and his

successors, these Mongol polities were organized and continued to grow in number.142 This

structure would be adjusted and revamped later in the Qing Dynasty as increased levels of

administration and integration drew the periphery closer to the center.143

As we have seen in this chapter, technologies of Inner Asian empire originated in

mutually -cultural notions of gurun/ulus and doro/törö. Over the course of Qing history, this system transformed by the Manchus into what they hoped would be a more stable system that bound the Mongols to the Qing imperial enterprise, while revoking the political independence of the Mongols to withdraw from the project.144 The experience of the Chaqar Mongols reveals

both the strength of the bonds of the Shamanic empire, and also its inherent weaknesses. After

the defeat of Ligden Khan, those Chaqar who had submitted to Manchu khanal authority were

incorporated into the Eight-Banner system, granting them full status within the Qing empire.

Following this, however, was the previously-discussed submission of Liden Khan’s heir Ejei

140 Brook, van Walt van Praag, and Boltjes Sacred Mandates, 134. 141 Crossley, Siu, and Sutton, Empire at the Margins, 72 and Ning, "Lifanyuan and Libu in Early Qing Empire Building," 52. 142 Brook, van Walt van Praag, and Boltjes Sacred Mandates, 18. 143 Di Cosmo, “The Qing and Inner Asia: 1636–1800,” 339. 144 Elverskog, Our Great Qing, 37. 59

Khan. Following Ejei Khan’s ritual submission, the remaining Chaqars were formed into a

Banner with Ejei Khan as jasak.145 This meant that there were simultaneously two diverging

experiences as part of the Manchu Shamanic empire. Ejei Khan, as a subordinate jasak, was granted an increased degree of autonomy and privilege in trade for the pacification of Chaqars and the recognition of the Manchu khan’s khanal legitimacy.

This line of reasoning is supported by the response of Ejei Khan’s successors’ during the period of the Revolt of the Three Feudatories, one of the early Qing’s greatest periods of imperial weakness. The hostilities started in 1669 when the son of Ejei Khan, Abunai, openly disrespected Manchu rule and was subsequently arrested and held prisoner in .

Abunai’s sons Borni and Lubuzung then revolted, seeking to awaken the sleeping Mongol giant and rally pan-Mongolian tumens to their banner. This revolt, however, resulted not with the rekindling of Mongolian “independence” nor the symbolic raising of the black banners of

Chinggis Khan, but with a brutal military crackdown by the Kangxi emperor in 1675, the systematic extermination of the Chaqar male royal bloodlines, and the enslavement of non-

Manchu female members of the Chaqar royalty.146 The Chaqar banners were then forcibly

integrated into the Eight Banners.147 This dark chapter further reveals the dynamics of this

system. By again challenging the hard fought khanal legitimacy of the Manchu khans, the semi-

autonomous Chaqar were treated not as foreign powers breaking an alliance of convenience but

rather as rebel subjects and thus eliminated.

145 Di Cosmo, “The Qing and Inner Asia: 1636–1800,” 342. 146 Ibid. 342. 147 Ibid. 342. 60

We have thus far analyzed the political context in which the Manchu empire was created, centralized, and expanded to encompass numerous Inner Asian peoples. It now is time to explore

the Shamanic beliefs and practices of the Manchus which undergirded this institution.

61

CHAPTER II: THE SHAMANIC PRACTICE OF THE MANCHUS

At the heart of the scholarly debate surrounding Manchu Shamanism is a disagreement

over how to define Manchu Shamanism as a practice and how to describe its essential

components. In alignment with the consensus of research on this subject, Manchu Shamanism can be seen as the combination of several semi-distinct ritual practices. Those are the Tangse and

Kunninggong (temple) ritual, the Clan ritual, and Wild Ritual. Each part of the Shamanic system had different practitioners and audiences.

The Tangse (tangzi, 堂子) ritual consisted of Shamanic ceremonies which represented the

Manchu khan’s authority over the Bannermen and Inner Asian allies, and thus was a tool of empire. The Kunninggong（kunninggong 坤寧宮）was a ritual site for the personal clan rites of the Aisin Gioro clan, and was a demonstration of the khan’s authority over the persons of his clan. Clan ritual was centered around the spirit pole and served as the spiritual heart of the

Manchu clans and their cohesion. This practice gained prominence within the Manchu garrisons as its influence displaced that of the third and final practice being the Wild ritual (yeji, 野祭).

Wild ritual involved the harnessing of ecstatic trance, and best represents the Shamanism of the

Jurchen clans prior to the consolidation of the Qing empire under the Manchu khans and involved the harnessing of ecstatic trance.

The relationship between these forms of Shamanic ritual was that of a continuum. Each practice bled into the other in terms of ritual form, not always bearing clear demarcation. The ritual practiced by the Aisin Gioro clan and performed at two Shamanic ritual sites located at the

Manchu capital in the Tangse and Kunninggong, should not be seen as two distinct practices, but similar practices strategically aimed at different audiences.

62

The Shamanic Sites of the Manchus and the Birth of a Shamanic Empire

These forms were all vital for the process of state-making and the stability of the empire.

Not only did the Manchus construct Shamanic sites at Nurhaci’s capital at Mukden (modern-day

Shenyang) as well as every capital prior (Hetu Ala and Fe Ala), but upon riding through

Shanhaiguan and capturing the Forbidden City, the Tangzi was one of the first structures commissioned by the regent Dorgon.1 The origins of Tangse as well as its true , are

even today debated. The term Tangse appears to have been derived from the Chinese tang 堂,

describing a place of worship or ritual site. However, the Tangse does not strictly align with the

Chinese concept of such structures.2 Some scholars have traced the Tangse to its earliest forms

as a structure maintained by various Jurchen groups.3 It is likely that these structures began as

mobile tents that traveled with nomadic and semi-nomadic groups and served as a portable site

for spiritual ritual. The Manchu Tangse furthermore originated as ritual sites amongst the clans,

each associated with a particular strongman. The possession of a Tangse communicated to other

tribes that this local warlord dictated his own ritual and sacrifices to Heaven and was thus was a

1 The Kunninggong structure still exists under the name the Palace of Earthly Tranquility. however, the Tangse which was located outside the imperial city near the left 'an gate was demolished. After the Boxer uprising, the land was extracted by the Western powers and granted to Italy as part of their expanded foreign legation. Italy then used the site for their new embassy. Apparently, a new range was constructed in 1904 but this too no longer exists. Stary and Walravens, “The Manchu Imperial Shamanic Complex Tangse.” 2 Udry, Muttering Mystics, 63. 3As Meng Huiying writes “After the middle period of the Ming dynasty, the Jurchen tribes settled the holy place in the city of 霍通 Huotong, where they offered sacrifices to ancestors and guardian spirits, was also called the hall, alternately rendered 堂涩 tangse, 唐舍 tangshe, and 挡 色 dangse.” Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 408.

63

potential claimant to be a khan to his people.4 This act was inherently provocative to other khans,

as it served as a tool of legitimacy.

The best documented amongst the early Tangse existed within the warlord Nurhaci’s

mountain fortress at Hetu Ala.5 These deity alters were transported with the tribe and contained

the idols, holy text, and relics of the tribe.6 It is here that Nurhaci would make offerings to

Heaven and request its blessings. The presence of a Tangse, suggests an early distinction

between gurun.

4 Jiang, “The Reform of Shamanism before Qing Dynasty Entering the Central Plains,” 68. 5 Little is known about earlier Tangse structures that may have been constructed at Nurhaci earlier dwellings such as at Fe ala. 6 Ma, Meng, Chi, and DuBois, “Characteristics of Shamanism of the Tungusic Speaking People,” 408. Rawski also comments on the origin and purpose of these structures in saying “The Tangzi was the site for shamanic rituals during the Qing dynasty. The term may have originated in the portable ‘god boxes’ (Tangse) in which the figures of the deities were placed during an earlier era, when the Jurchen were mobile hunters. After the ancestors of Nurgaci settled in a palisaded village, their deity alters (Tangse) faced southeast and was constructed in an octagonal shape because the shamans taught that all the spirits of nature came from an eight- sided, nine layered Heaven.” Rawski, The Last Emperors, 236. The reason for the Tangzi direction is a question to consider. According to Meng (“Characteristics of Shamanism of the Tungusic Speaking People,” 408) the direction of the Tangzi, is associated with the sunrise. 64

Fig. 1 Sacrificial altar and implements located within the Tangse.

(Imperially Commissioned Manchu Rites for Sacrifices to the Spirits and to Heaven Manzhou

jishen jitian dianli)

During the wars of unification, Nurhaci, upon capturing a contesting warlords’

settlement would destroy his Tangse. This was more than just an act of martial dominance. By

destroying a rival’s , Nurhaci was ending a rival’s source of legitimacy and beginning a process of acculturation where the subjugated clans’ rituals, local deities, and traditions would be

displaced by the rituals of Nurhaci’s newly-formed Aisin Gioro lineage.7

Conquest extended to the realm of -making. One such example of this spiritual

standardization by conquest is the prominence of the magpie in Manchu Shamanic myth, a

construction Pamela Crossley connects with the Aisin Gioro’s own supremacy. The magpie for

example, is distinctive of the Aisin Gioro royal lineage. Other clans originally worshiped other

beasts, but their spirits were displaced by the sacred magpie.8 The Sumuru clan for example originally worshipped the sable before the Aisin Gioro magpie supplanted it. Another example is

7 Rawski, The Last Emperors, 236. 8 Crossley, A Translucent Mirror, 203. 65 the Guwalgiya clan who originally sacrificed sheep in addition to pigs, which the Aisin Gioro preferred.9 The process of expunging competing traditions extended to the shamans of rival cults who were executed or exiled, with their ritual instruments destroyed.10 Enemy shamans could not be allowed to live, as they were sources of clan and tribal identity and if left alive would foment rebellion through their perfidious and pernicious spirit channeling.11

Nurhaci and Hong Taiji prosecuted their war on rival Shamanic traditions highly seriously, as there were significant implications for khanal sovereignty. Through the destruction of rival Tangse, elimination of rival shamans, and the enforcement of Shamanic adherence, they were in fact creating a new people. Defeated tribes would be forced to take part in the rituals of the Aisin Gioro, and without a Shamanic alternative, became part of the emerging Manchu

Shamanic identity. As Meng explains:

When Nurhaci conquered the 哈达 Hada, 朱舍里 Zhusheli, 长白山 Changbaishan, 挥发 Huifa, 叶赫 Yehe, 董鄂 Dong’e, and 乌拉 Wula, he first destroyed the halls of these tribes, “carrying relics and horses in front of the beile.” The relics and the scriptures of the conquered tribes would be destroyed or modified, in order to cut off the connection between the conquered people and their spiritual worlds… They forced tribes to submit not only through military and political means, some leaders of big tribes would require other smaller tribes to make offerings in their sacrificial war rites. Those who did not participate were considered defiant and were destroyed. The leaders of big tribes, who were already famous for their power, would conquer such tribes first and obtain control over their rites by military means. All others yielded in obedience.12 In 1625, upon unifying the Jurchen state and declaring the later Jin Dynasty, Nurhaci constructed his Tangse at their capital in Mukden.13 Without any remaining Jurchen rival east of

9 Crossley, Historical and Magic Unity, endnote 52. 10 Elliott, The Manchu Way, 236. 11 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 408. 12 Ibid. 410. 13 Notably, Shenyang was not Nurhaci’s first choice as a capital. Form 1621-1625 Nurhaci held court from the prospering city of . It was only under strategic concerns and growing 66

Liao river, Nurhaci possessed paramount Shamanic authority among the Jurchen. This Shamanic authority was further solidified by his successor Hong Taiji, in criminalizing the possession of a

Tangse structure by both the populace and, more importantly, the nobility composed of both loyal allies and reluctantly-surrendered foes. 14

The role of Tangse was thus overtly political. The rituals performed at Tangse were not only public ceremonies but were targeted performances aimed at first the Manchus outside of the

Aisin Gioro clan and secondly, Inner Asian subjects of the empire made up of Mongols,

Khazaks, Sibe, Daur, Solon, and others; these groups shared Shamanic origins and were in theory and practice susceptible to the demonstration of Shamanic authority. Further, the Tangse served as the site of mustering in times of war where the khan would request Heaven’s approval in waging battle against his foes, a practice first attributed to Nurhaci in his war against Nikan

Wailan 尼堪外蘭 (?-1587. Nurhaci, believing that Nikan Wailan was the orchestrator of the death

of his father and grandfather, brought together five generations of his clan at the Tangse located

at Ningguta and swore an oath to take vengeance on Nikan Wailan.15 This practice would

develop into the Dispatching Generals Embarking on Campaign (mingjiang 命將) ritual, which

was performed again in 1636 by Hong Taiji before sending Dodo 多鐸 (1614-1649) and Ajige 阿

濟格 (1605-1651) to wage war against the Ming forces. This particular ceremony would

ultimately become institutionalized by the Qianlong emperor 乾隆 (1711–1799).16 By choosing

the Tangse as the site of mustering and the place of ritual, the Manchu ruler exploited his

unrest from the predominantly Han residents of Liaoyang, that the capital was moved to the small town of Shenyang. For more on this see Agostino Sepe. "Back to the Roots,” 131. 14 Rawski, The Last Emperors, 236 15 Udry, Muttering Mystics, 21. 16 Waley-Cohen, “Military ritual and the Qing Empire,” 420. 67 exclusive right as khan and, more importantly, invoked his access to Heaven, concentrated in his person as expressed through this Tangse structure, to call bondsmen to battle in a holy war.

Much as in the Confucian tradition, the Manchu emperor dictated the Shamanic ritual schedule and frequency of sacrifice as a performative element of his ritual authority. The

Manchu Shamanic rites, however, represented Manchu identity within the empire and thus were politicized by Manchu emperors in their political machinations. Of the early Manchu rulers,

Nurhaci, Hong Taiji, and Dorgon all frequently commissioned the rites to reinforce their legitimacy as the leaders of the Manchus and their Inner Asian allies. The notable exception which proves the rule lies in the Shunzhi Emperor 顺治 (1638-1661). From the day he inherited his throne, he was subject to the dominance of his regents Dorgon and Jirgalang 濟爾哈朗 (1599

–1655). His adolescence was defined by constant struggle to regain power from his regents and the Manchu political aristocracy. Shunzhi accomplished this by restoring Ming social intuitions, such as the political employ of the eunuchs. One victim of this retaliation was the Tangse ritual.

Shunzhi, seeking to undermine his rivals, continually decreased the frequency of Tangse rituals, and but for the knowledge that Manchu rule was anchored in Shamanic authority would have retired them entirely. Soon after his death, all Tangse rites would be fully restored.17 This lack

Shamanic dedication was then corrected by Kangxi, who reprimanded his deceased father for his lack of dedication.18

17 Wang, "The Significance of State Sacrifice in Early Qing,” 140. The role of Manchu shamanism during the power struggles that developed form the reign of the regent Dorgon to the fall the Oboi clique is a fascinating one. The reign of Shunzhi was the first time that a Manchu leader had actively suppressed the previously sacrosanct supremacy of Shamanic ritual as symbol of Qing rule. 18 Udry, Muttering Mystics, 50. 68

In terms of its physical structure, each iteration of the Tangse appears to have been

constructed with the same design but each time with increased complexity, including ritual

spaces for foreign deities. The Tangse was located inside a walled courtyard protected by guards.

Inside the courtyard were various trees evoking the forested Mountains of the Northeast. Once

past the courtyard, there were several buildings, each with a ritualistic purpose. Beyond the

various storehouses where ritualistic devices and sacrificial elements were stored existed the

ordo, which was an octagonal structure, as well as the main sacrificial hall. Between these

structures, the spirit pole would be erected during rituals.

Fig. 2 Diagram of the Tangse grounds. (Imperially Commissioned Manchu Rites for Sacrifices to the Spirits and to Heaven Manzhou jishen jitian dianli)

69

Fig. 3 Photograph of the Beijing Tangse,

(Manzu Saman Yueqi Yanjiu 满族薩满乐器硏究.)

The second Shamanic complex found in the imperial city is the Kuninggong or Palace of

Earthly Tranquility. This structure served as the arena for rites specific to the imperial clan rites.

Not unlike the Tangse, the Kunninggong served as the theatre of rituals directed toward a political audience; however, its ritual was oriented inwards toward the Manchus of the Aisin

Gioro clan and as an example for the Manchu clans. Like the Tangse, design of the Kunninggong

evolved from its previous iteration constructed at the former Manchu seat of power in Mukden.19

The Mukden site, known as the Qinginggong or Palace of Pure Tranquility, was an elaborate

structure located at the heart of the palace, which contained numerous kitchens, rooms, and a

pole hoisted in the courtyard.20 It was here that the Aisin Gioro performed their

private rituals, many of which were similar to the Tangse rituals.

19 For a detailed examination of the previous iterations of the Kuninnggong see Sepe,"Back to the Roots." 20 Ibid. 70

Fig. 4 Photograph of the Kunninggong located in the Forbidden City, Beijing.

(Manzu Saman Yueqi Yanjiu 满族薩满乐器硏究.)

The Esoteric Tools of the Manchu Shaman

Another important aspect of Manchu ritual practice is the instruments used by the

shaman, including a drum for invocation (shengu), spirit pole (somo), the spirit weaponry

(usually a sword [hulingga] or arrow), the shaman’s apron with waistbells, and a mask or headdress.

71

Fig. 5 Shaman drum and drumstick.

(Imperially Commissioned Manchu Rites for Sacrifices to the Spirits and to Heaven Manzhou

jishen jitian dianli)

The spirit drum was universal to Manchu Shamanic ritual and was usually an oval single- headed design composed of wood or iron and covered with animal skin.21 These drums were usually struck with an animal skin-covered drumstick bearing spiritual and images.22

Attached to these instruments were metallic jingles that sounded during ritual performances. As one passage by Bin in his text A Brief History of the Willow Borders relays,

“The shaman […] ties bells to his hip, rocks them and beats a drum with his hands. The drum is iron-framed, covered with animal skin on one side, and carrying several rings at its handle. The shaman beats the drum and shakes the bells simultaneously, producing a clinking sound (Yang Bin 1985, vol. 4:3).”23

21 , “Musical Instruments in the Manchurian Shamanic Sacrificial Rituals,” 107. 22 Li, "The Symbolization Process of the Shamanic Drums sed by the Manchus and Other Peoples in North Asia." 23 Liu, “Musical Instruments in the Manchurian Shamanic Sacrificial Rituals.” 111. 72

The sprit drum was the means by which the ritual specialist communed with deities.24

Additionally, when played with the waistbells, the Manchu shaman was capable of channeling the power of thunder magic to drive away demons.25

The spirit pole (somo) was one of the most vital elements in Manchu Shamanic ritual.

Like the spirit poles raised in the imperial Kunninggong and Qingninggong respectively, each

Manchu household, both amongst the nobility and the ordinary households, made offerings

utilizing the spirit pole as a means of offering up sacrifices to the spirits. The spirit pole ideally

would be made from timber felled in the Manchu homeland and would sit in the courtyard of a

ritual site or residential complex. During the zenith of a Manchu ritual, the shaman would

slaughter a beast (usually a pig), then place the animal’s innards atop the pole for the revered

magpies and crows to descend and accept on behalf of Heaven.26 For the Manchus, the sprit pole

represented the world tree’s branches which could be used as a bridge to Heaven. As

Bing’an relays,

In order to subdue the demons below, Abka Enduri (Manchu: “heaven deity”) broke the bridge to Heaven. In doing so, the people who had come up to Heaven weren’t able to return to the earth. Abka enduri picked the tallest, biggest tree and let the people go back to the earth. Not all of them went back. Those that stayed turned into stars... Later, when the people had something to ask of Heaven, they would go to a tall tree. Because the tree was very tall, the Heaven spirit only had to bend a little at the waist to hear it 27

24 Liu, “Musical Instruments in the Manchurian Shamanic Sacrificial Rituals.” 118. 25 Ibid. 119. 26 The magpie is a highly-revered bird by the Manchus; this belief stems from the story of their first ancestor Bukuri Yongson. 27 Udry, Muttering Mystics, 86 n 46. 73

While many examples of the use of spirit poles are found in studies of the Manchu

Shamanic customs, a particularly vivid example from a primary source account is translated by

Durrant:

All households large and small set up a wooden pole in front- of their court­yard which they take as a spirit. Whenever they encounter either happy occasions or sickness, then as a gratitude offering to the gods, they select a big pig, not arguing with others over the price. After slaughtering and displaying it at the foot of the pole, they ask one who is skilled at reciting, called a shaman, to chant to it. The master of the household kneels, and when it is over, they place fragments of intestine and meat and suspend them on top of the pole. Then they gather up the pig meat, head, feet, liver and intestines and thoroughly clean them. They fill the large intestine full of blood and boil them all in one pot. They ask relatives and friends to arrange themselves on the oven-bed where they do not use a table but spread out oil cloth. Each person has one tray, and they themselves cut pieces of the food with a small knife. They leave no leftovers and do not present the food to others. If, on account of illness, are offered and the illness is not cured, then they take the pole and throw it away in the wilds, considering that it was not spiritually enlivened. Later, if they encounter joy or sickness again, they set up another pole and have a shamanic ritual. Whenever it is either of the two seasons, spring or autumn, this is done. A half-month before, they brew rice wine that is like the wine of my homeland, the taste being extremely sweet. They grind flour and make cakes, of which there are several types, all fried with a small amount of oil. It is necessary that these be made extremely clean. Pork, mutton, chicken and goose are all prepared. They take the wife of the house as master. On the outside of her clothing they tie a skirt, and all around the waist of the skirt are attached many long metal bells. Her hand grasps a paper drum, and when she strikes it the sound is like. She chants Manchu, her waist shakes and the bells ring, all brought into harmony with the drum. At the side there are also several large, skin drums. Following her lead, these are struck and brought into harmony. She must face the west, and on the western oven-bed they set up an oven-bed table, arranging the food atop it. Above this table they put threads crosswise upon which they hang silk strips of the five colors. It seems that the ancestors rely upon these. From morning until evening, they shamanize three times. All Manchu and Chinese. acquaintances along with their women must be invited. After three days they cease and what is left over of the sacrifices they present to one another.28 In this passage, it is clear that the spirit pole was in fact the chief ritual implements in

Manchu Shamanic sacrifice. The spirit pole was placed as the center of a community’s

28 Durrant, “Three Early Ch’ing Descriptions of Manchu Shamanism,” 209. 74

interactions with Heaven, with each community member completing a separate role in the

sacrifice.

Fig. 6 The Spirit Pole known as (somo)

(Imperially Commissioned Manchu Rites for Sacrifices to the Spirits and to Heaven Manzhou

jishen jitian dianli)

The Manchu shamans used an esoteric collection of spirit tools and ritual garments.

Often, they wore a cap or helmet bearing reindeer antlers in odd numbers, denoting rank and

serving as protection while engaging the spirits. Attached to the headdress were dangling strings, which masked the shaman’s face and the fomenting of power. The shaman’s dress was comprised of a vest or apron displaying the bones, feathers, and images of birds and other forest

75

creatures serving as talismans containing their spirits.29 Additionally, attached to the shaman’s

garb were great mirrors symbolizing the sun and moon.30 When the shaman adorned this

wear, he or she gained the symbolic power and authority of those spirits displayed on his or her

dress.31 Attached to the Shaman’s apron were waist bells. The shaman’s waist bells (xisha in

Manchu) were used together with the shaman’s drum and were also universal in Manchu

Shamanic rituals. They were composed of woven ropes bearing copper bells. These ropes were tied around the waist and hips and rang with the shaman’s movements.

Fig. 7 The image of the Nisan Shamaness provides an excellent depiction of Manchu Shamanic

garments

(Saman yang de li shi kao cha 薩滿信仰的歷史考察)

29 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 392. 30 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 393. 31 Guo and Simoncini, "Functions and Features of the Shamanic Masks," 175. 76

The shaman’s mask or tasseled headdress was also of mystical importance. According to

Guo Shuyun, Tungusic shaman masks were composed of four types—a mask or headdress for

sacrificing on behalf of the hunt, one for ecstatic trance, one for Shamanic healing, and one for

worship and burial rites.32 These masks could take many forms and were symbols of the

shaman’s interactions with the spirits. Some represented spirit familiars or helpers who assisted

the shaman in his Shamanic journeys, others wrathful spirits.33The shaman’s mask also acted as

a means of cutting the shaman off from the terrestrial realm and opening the doorway to the spirits. The tassels of the shaman’s headdress protected the wild shaman’s soul during trance or

spirit flight.34 As one Manchu scholar writes, “Beat the drum, hide the face, men and women

abide by the law. A revealed face hurts the spirit and the wicked devil is hard to defeat. A long

curtain protects one-self, a coloured curtain is scaring. A noising curtain moves the spirit, a rigid

curtain is difficult to hold under the arm. A beautiful tool and a job long, collect golden boxes.”35

During invocation the Manchu shaman made use of the spirit sword, the spirit arrow, and

the bell staff. These were important tools of ritual invocation present in most rituals. The sacred objects were kept in the protection of ritual assistants until their key moment during the heart of the ritual.

32 Ibid. 164. 33 Ibid.165. 34 Ibid. d177. 35 Ibid. 177. 77

Fig. 8.1 and 8.2. Two images of Shamanic tools of invocation. The spirit sword (left) and sprit

arrow (right).

(Imperially Commissioned Manchu Rites for Sacrifices to the Spirits and to Heaven Manzhou

jishen jitian dianli)

The Sacred Craft of the Manchu Shaman

As discussed in the introduction, defining the Manchu shaman has existed as a great challenge for modern scholars. This difficulty is due in part to the multiplicity of roles the

Manchu shaman held, as well as the as transitionary changes that occurred throughout the dynasty, which altered the role the shamans played on both the imperial and clan levels. The

Manchu shaman was first and foremost in charge of the clan’s interactions with nature and the spirit world. They communicated with the spirits of mountains, rivers, and animals, as well as the souls of the dead. Shaman’s performed great sacred rites before the Jurchen niru (Manchu word meaning arrow, which was used as the name for small hunting parties and the basic military

78

unit.) set off on their spring and autumn hunts and made offerings for bountiful harvest.36

Shamans were also healers, fortune tellers, and rain bringers who cared for the clan’s physical

and psychological needs. Lastly, the shaman was also the defender of the clan against spiritual

attack stemming from angry deities or the spirits of rival clans.37

Research into the Manchu shaman has traditionally been divided two dichotomies— firstly, the wild shaman (ye 野 saman 萨满/da 大 萨满 or amba saman in Manchu) and domestic

shaman (jia 家 saman 萨满/gongting 宫廷 saman 萨满, or booimukun saman in Manchu), as

well as the Wild Rites yeji 野祭/ tiaodashen 跳大神 and Clan/Domestic rites tiaojiashen 跳家神.

While these rites created a dichotomy, they should perhaps be seen more on a continuum, as

some Domestic Rites retained some aspects of wildness and many of these rituals could be

performed in either the domestic or Wild Ritual form. Domestic ritual emphasized Shamanic

and ritual sacrifice, while Wild Ritual emphasized spirt possession, witchcraft, and

healing and was seen holding a greater degree of power over the spirits and increased degree of

agency over which spirits they may channel.38 This dichotomy extended to the pantheon itself,

while Domestic Rites primarily honored Heaven, the ancestors, and specific orthodox gods who

served the empire, such as Fodo Mama. Wild Shamanism honored animal nature spirits,

grandfather gods, and manni heroic gods who represented the clan and its individual connection

to the spirit world.

36 Crossley, Historical and Magic Unity, 93. 37 Di Cosmo, “Manchu Shamanic Ceremonies at the Qing Court,” 361. 38 Udry, Muttering Mystics, 45. 79

Fig. 9.1 and 9.2 Two images depicting Manchu shamans engaging in tiaoshen ritual.

(Saman xin yang de li shi kao cha 薩滿信仰的歷史考察)

The so-called wild shamans often lived separate from the tribes alone or among a group of shamanic assistants(zaili, 栽立 or jari in Manchu), electing to practice their rituals at small altars in the wilderness, only returning to engage the population in sacrifices and sacred rites.39

The wild shaman engaged and channeled the spirits by way of spirit dancing (跳大神 Tiao Da

Shen). This practice saw the shaman enter an altered state of mind via trance inducing

psychotropic supplements, rhythmic drumming, and ritualistic movements.40 This ritual would

call forth the natural spirits in and around the shaman, enticing them to serve the clan and

speaking on their behalf.

39 These zaili were also responsible for performing non-ecstatic rituals on behalf of the clan. See Qu, “Two Faces of the Manchu Shaman,” 3. 40 Guo, “On the Main Characteristics of the Manchu Shamanic Dance Rituals.” 61. 80

Wild Ritual contained two essential forms of Shamanic ecstasy. The first was spirit possession, in which the shaman would draw the spirits into the body and serve as its vessel.

Once possessed by the spirits, a wild shaman body would imitate the nature of the particular deities and mimic their instinctive behaviors. While entranced, each movement of the Manchu shaman conveyed sacred communiques from the channeled deity. Based on the shaman’s movements, the future of the clan’s condition, whether it be war or peace, surplus or scarcity, was identified and interpreted by shamanic ritual attendants (zaili, 栽立).41

Our knowledge of Wild Rites is not only based on Jin and Qing records but also from ethnographic research on modern Manchu clans. These clans have successfully to revived wild rites within their communities. Song Heping observing the Shi clan’s ritual describes:

At this point the god of hawks is manifest. The shaman's assistants remove both drums from the shaman and tie the ribbons extending from his sacred cap to his hands. The shaman then begins to twist from the waist from side to side in order to swing the bells and dances to the rhythm of the drums his assistants are now beating. The shaman extends his arms outwards and flaps them. Occasionally, the shaman turns around with his arms wide open, as the hawk god circles in the sky. By now the shaman has identified himself completely with the deity invoked and the hawk deity is completely present. The shaman as hawk god, steps up onto two tall ta - hies, and still flapping his arms prepares to fly. At this point, the assistants sing: "Hawk god with a stone head, gold mouth, silver nose and bronze neck, you spread your wings in order to cover the sky and the earth, and hold up your tail to tuck it up under the moon and the stars." With this the shaman as hawk god looks pleased… The Manchu shaman also makes offerings to animal gods. These gods can be any of the following: wolf, , wild boar, bear, etc. These animal deities behave in a distinctive manner when they are present during a shamanic dance-offering. For example, the bear god always carries a large wheel on his shoulders and the god of wild boars always uses the walls to aid his movements. I once witnessed the invocatory dance of the sleeping-mother-tiger deity. In this case, once the sleeping-mother-tiger was invoked, the shaman immediately adopted a position on all fours and began to roar and walk about. The shaman as sleeping-

41 Guo, “On the Main Characteristics of the Manchu Shamanic Dance Rituals,” 58 and Liu, “Musical Instruments in the Manchurian Shamanic Sacrificial Rituals,” 119. 81

mother­tiger deity then looked around, searching for something. Eventually, the sleeping-tiger- noticed two bundles on the ground which were cloth representations of tiger cubs which she proceeds to pick up, one in each hand, and then put down again on the ground. The sleeping­mother-tiger deity nuzzled the tiger cubs lovingly with her head and kissed them. She then sat lightly on the tiger cubs demonstrating her love for them and fed them with bread from her mouth.42

Ritual dance, along with spirit possession was the central component of Shamanic worship. The

wild shamans of old led the clan in , blood worship, fertility and reproduction worship and others.43 They would climb the spirt pole and bestow the blood sacrifices and lead

the population in ritual activities and dances with the spirits.

The second form of ecstatic ritual involved the spirit journeying across the multilayered universe. The shaman with the guidance of a spirit familiar (usually an animal), would ascend to the spirit world. The shaman’s body would fall into a deep trance with vital bodily functions lowering to a minimum. Upon returning from this spirit journey, the shaman would tell of his visons and the messages of the gods. In some cases, these rituals were combined with the spirit possession, allowing the body of the shaman to be inhabited by a deity while the shaman’s spirit journeyed to Heaven.44

In this second scenario a spirit familiar (usually an animal) served as the shaman’s guide

through the spirit realms. These two elements of Shamanic rituals were when compared to

Domestic Ritual, quite distinct. Firstly, Wild Ritual only invoked one deity at a time as the

shaman must take on the character of each deity, losing himself temporarily during the ritual for the deity to be recognized by the zaili ritual assistants. The number and forms of the deities were

42 Guo, “On the Main Characteristics of the Manchu Shamanic Dance Rituals,” 147. 43 Ibid. 56-59. 44 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 390. 82

dependent on the power and skill of the wild shaman.45 Sacrifices of the new Qing ritual catered to groups of deities and lacking any possession, instead maintained a controlled environment.

The process of becoming a wild shaman was also prescribed by ritual. The nascent shaman was chosen by the spirits and experienced Shamanic illness and spiritual rebirth. He or

she would be taken with an unexplained illness of varying seriousness. This illness would defy

treatment until the patient was brought before a master shaman who would recognize the signs of

spirits.46 Shamans, in many cases, received returning spirits of long-deceased heroic shamans

which possessed the body spirit in a process known as spirit capture（ zhua 神抓)47 After

studying at the feet of a master shaman as a zaili, a zaili underwent numerous tests to prove their

ability to climb the world tree and entice the spirits. 48 Some ritual examinations could require

life-threating trials, which tested an aspiring shaman’s favor with the spirits, an example being

the zuanbingyan ritual (鑽冰眼) where a Manchu shaman would prove his mastery of the spirits

by completing perilous tasks such as walking over burning coals or diving in and out of holes in

a frozen river and remaining unharmed.49 The Shi clan’s senior shaman Shi Dianfeng was tested

in 1909 to determine if he was indeed possessed by a grandfather god. In this instance, the clan

first burned incense then made nine holes in the frozen surface of the . Shi

Dianfeng invoked the possession of the Otter god and dove through seven of the holes and was

45 Fu, and Meng, “Manzu Sa man jiu Di 1 ban,” 87-89. 46 Ma, Meng, Chi, and DuBois, “Popular Religion and Shamanism,” 392. 47 Guo, “Analysis of the Grandfather God of the Manchu Shi Clan,” 32 n5 For the Shi Clan, their grandfather god was also a historically verifiable shaman who lived during the early Qing period, thus a witness to the events discussed in these chapters. 48 Walter, “Shamanism: An Encyclopedia of World Beliefs, Practices, and Culture 1.1,” 583. 49 Eliade, “Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy,” 112. 83

thus recognized as a powerful shaman by the people of .50These shamans, were called to

perform seances, and harness the spirits to heal the sick from supernatural attack, as well as even

raise the dead by retrieving their lost souls. The best example of this lies in the tale of the Nisan

Shaman, where the wild shaman Teteke raises the son of a wealthy man from the dead.51

The second group of shamans were the domestic shamans, who were defined by their ritual and social roles rather than their inherent power over the supernatural. These shamans can

be further divided into two categories—Clan shaman and Temple shaman.52 Clan shamans could

inherit their positions or be elected by the clan and performed clan ritual rites. These shamans

performed rituals mainly at night harnessing protective spirits for the purposes of receiving a

bumper harvest, gaining good luck for the offspring of the clan, or warding off wrathful deities.53

However, these shamans primarily possessed power only over their own clan spirits.

Like their wild rite counterparts, domestic shamans underwent a period of training where

chief shaman (ta saman in Manchu) would teach them the Shamanic songs, prayers, and

sacrificial rites of invocation, a tradition passed on orally from generation to generation. This

period of Shamanic training and education is known by a composite Manchu-Chinese word as

jiaowuyuan (教烏雲).54 Domestic shamans were primarily used to officiate sacrifices to spirits

rather than to channel their will. Clans shamans were officiants of all major clan rites such as

weddings and funerals.55 As discussed throughout this chapter, shamans played fluid roles as

50 Guo, “Analysis of the Grandfather God of the Manchu Shi Clan,” 34. Referencing the Shi clan’s Great God Scroll. 51 Nowak and Durrant, The Tale of the Nišan Shamaness. 52Walter, Shamanism: An Encyclopedia of World Beliefs, Practices, and Culture 2. 2, 583. 53Walter, Shamanism: An Encyclopedia of World Beliefs, Practices, and Culture 1.1, 583. 54 Guo, “Religious Education in Manchu Shamanism, as Seen from Jiaowuyun,” 50. 55 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 385. 84 they were peripheral to many sacrifices and also replaceable with the inclusion of women of the household or Biaohun shamanesses.

The counterpart of domestic shamans at court were temple shamans, all noblewomen employed by the office of Shamanism (Shenfang 神房) under the Imperial Household

Department (Neiwufu 內務府). The Shamanic personnel were made of twelve female shamans known as (saman taitai 萨满太太), thirty-six sacrificing supervisor women (sizu furen 司俎婦

人), thirty-seven bark grinder women (sidui furen), and nineteen incense supervisor women

(sixiang furen 司香婦人).56 Two shamans were selected as chief shamans and were treated with the rank and privileges of a woman of high station.57 Their chief responsibilities were to engage their spirits on behalf the emperor, pray on his behalf, and coordinate the sacrifices.

Rites involving both categories of liturgical shamans were to be performed on a precise calendric schedule. On the clan level, Domestic Rites were composed of four kinds of rituals composed of seasonal rites, such as the semi-annual grand sacrifice ritual; public rites, which were performed to offer thanks to the spirits for protecting the clan; huanyuan 還原, which also offered thanks to the spirits for protection but on behalf of an individual ; and xupu 续谱, which honored new additions to the clan genealogy. These rituals corresponded with rituals performed on the imperial level and represented the relationship between the local clan and the

Aisin Gioro ritual practiced at the Kunninggong, which we will discuss in greater detail in chapter 3. Although these shamans were prohibited from engaging in ecstatic ritual, they did interact with the spirits by guiding them through the ritual and offering sacrifices. The position of

56 Walter, Shamanism: An Encyclopedia of World Beliefs, Practices, and Culture 1.1, 584. 57 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 413. 85

the domestic shaman vis-a-vis their Wild Shamanic counterparts grew more important

throughout the Later Jin and Early Qing periods. Starting with Hong Taiji, the Manchu khans

exerted their control over the clans more directly, eventually moving the shaman to the periphery

in many cases. These shamans would move from the center of Shamanic ritual to a replaceable

liturgical role managing rather than engaging with the spirits throughout the ritual.58

Fig. 10.1 and 10.2 Manchu shamans engaging in ritual dance

(Saman xin yang de li shi kao cha 薩滿信仰的歷史考察)

The role of the Manchu shaman as healer is one of particular note for both our understanding of Manchu society and implications for Manchu identity. Both the wild and clan shamans were responsible for the physical and spiritual health of the clan. While wild shamans

specialized in the battling of spirits and raising the dead, domestic clan shamans oversaw

58 Elliott, The Manchu Way, 240.

86

treatment for more tangible ailments. According to Meng Huiying’s research, when members of

Manchu clan fell ill or a plague spread through their livestock, the shamans would perform fire sacrifices, to appease the spirits. During fire sacrifices, a wooden structure was constructed from branches and a spirit pole raised before it. A fire was lit, and animals sacrificed to the spirits. At such ceremonies, a clan head would make known to the spirits the reason for this ritual, which was then followed by the shaman leading the congregation in spirit songs. Then during the following days, several ritual activities were performed including, the holding of hot coals and fire walking. These acts were performed to please the spirits and request their aid in avoiding disaster.59 Healing was requested from the sprits only after a spirit pole was erected and the

sacrifices accepted.

Proponents of the Sinicization school have pointed to the inclusion and patronage of

Chinese traditional medicine and Daoist healing as proof that the Manchus abandoned their so called “primitive” cultural practices. However, Sinicization narratives, are too teleological, insufficiently-nuanced, and challenged by the historical record. For example, the Kangxi

Emperor showed utter disdain for Chinese physicians and particularly Daoist healers. In their stead, he was devotedly supportive of Manchu Shamanic healing. The Kangxi emperor frequently criticized the intelligence, work ethic, and ability of Chinese physicians, even further castigating them for their commercial avarice. In particular Daoist priest were the targets of his ire, who he believed to be complete charlatans. In contrast Shamanic healing was consistently praised and prioritized in treatment of the royal family.60 This skepticism of Buddhist and Daoist

practitioners was not exclusive to Kangxi. Hong Taiji himself remarked,

59 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 384. 60 Flowers, Treating the Emperors in the Qing Palace, 64. 87

“The lamas spread false stories…pretend that they can make people avoid the nether world; their absurdity is extreme. The lamas merely spend their lives on the earth; they are sinful, cheat the ignorant. As for the underworld, even if the lamas may be well versed in reading people’s feelings, how can they escape others form punishment”61 This skepticism seems indicative of a lack of Sinicization in this area.

The Great Purge and the Struggle for the Shamanic Empire

The great purge of Wild Ritual from Manchu Shamanic practices was in every way a

usurpation of Shamanic authority by the Manchu khan over a portion of the Shamanic spiritual

sphere, to which previous Jurchen leaders had tolerated. The spiritual authority of the shaman by

its very nature maintained a parallel pole to the khan at the nexus of spiritual and political

authority. Thus, the domination of the Shamanic sphere and the elimination of competing poles

of authority was an inexorable mechanism in the consolidation of the Manchu state under its

second ruler, the so called Heavenly Astute Khan (天聰汗), Hong Taiji. Throughout his nearly

two-decade reign, the legitimacy of his rule was often challenged and subverted by powerful

figures within both the imperial family and the Qing conquest elite. Future rulers, such as Hong

Taiji’s younger half-brother Dorgon, maintained a political faction that did not forgive nor forget

Hong Taiji’s usurpation of the throne, a process which led to the of Dorgon’s

mother.62 This general insecurity over his rule would affect the Shamanic world as Hong Taiji

sought to purge those who held parallel Shamanic authority. Thus, the ecstatic Wild Ritual

61 Ch'en, “Analysis of the Reasons of Manchu Emperor Hong Taiji’s Restriction of Shamanism,” 39. 62 The willingness of Lady Abahai to commit suicide is still debated. What is certain however is that Dorgon maintained animosity toward Hong Taiji, if not over his mother’s death, then over a throne usurped. See , “ of Qing Taizu Nurhaci's Second Wife Gundai,” 183. and Hidehiro, “How Hong Taiji Came to the Throne,” 251-252

88

became an inherently political act. The ability to communicate with Heaven and the spirts and

attain sacred knowledge over the fates of the commoner and ruler alike, was highly politically

charged, and was driven out into the periphery.63

Nurhaci and Hong Taiji took the process a step further as they attempted to absorb the

role of the shaman into their own position as khan. They accomplished this by assuming the

position of Heaven’s conduit. In particular, Nurhaci and Hong Taiji frequently claimed to receive

messages of Heaven through dreams and visions, thus superseding the shaman from deliberations with Heaven. For example, in 1619, Nurhaci dreamt of a white crane spirit which symbolized that the Mongolian leader Jaisai would ultimately be defeated. Again in 1637, Hong

Taiji dreamt that he was transported to the Ming court and discovered the historical records of

the Jin dynasty, symbolizing the rise of the Manchus and the defeat of the Ming state.64 This

demonstrated the usage of spiritual imagery as a tool to reinforce the political agenda of the

khan. Hong Taiji was transforming the office of khan from collegial ruler elected by his peers

and anointed by Heaven’s chosen shaman into a sacred khan, who dominated the imperial host

and held a heavenly mandate of which no shaman could revoke. Khan’s were now the primary

conduits to the spirits and the shamans merely subordinate priests, whose autonomous power the

khan would no longer tolerate65

The next theme represented in the usurpation of communications with Heaven, was the

concept of legitimacy versus fraudulency. Hong Taiji worked to cast only his connection with

Heaven as legitimate, defensible, and trustworthy, while the divine inspirations within others

63 Thomas, and Humphrey, Shamanism, History, and the State, 197. 64 Ch'en, “Analysis of the Reasons of Manchu Emperor Hong Taiji’s Restriction of Shamanism,” 34. 65 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 402. 89

were inherent acts of deception, conspiracy and lèse majesté. For example, when Hong Taiji

dreamt of Prince 薩哈璘 (1604-1636) returning from the grave to demand an ox, Hong

Taiji offered an ox sacrifice to rectify the matter. When Hong Taiji sought to purge his cousin

Amin 阿敏 (1585- 1640), he utilized Amin’s dream of a yellow snake spirit protecting him from

Nurhaci’s discipline as evidence that he was harboring a spirit of conspiracy against the throne.66

The use of a yellow snake spirit is notable given that animal nature spirits occupied a separate

branch of the Manchu Shamanic pantheon than Heaven which mandates the khan, and

undoubtedly represented a separate source of power and legitimacy. This provided the groundwork for weaponizing the spirit world against the enemies of the khan. The notion that a spirit would be in cooperation with a rival prince, and no less against the discipline of their father khan, was a deeply-provocative claim which paralleled Amin’s own resistance to Hong Taiji’s khanal legitimacy. This charge would be levied at Amin’s trial.67

A tactic used by the state in its crackdown on ritual was the regulation of the use of

animals in rituals. Due to their native lifestyle, the Manchu relationship with wild beast and

livestock alike was of great importance. Hong Taiji seized control of this relationship in his 1627

declaration, stating, “Horses and mules are for riding, oxen and asses for work, and sheep, goats,

chickens, turkeys for eating. From the beiles down to the common people stop all slaughtering of

horses, mules and oxen for sacrificial purposes, weddings and funerals, or for sale.”68 Hong Taiji

again, perhaps in response to opposition to this policy, in 1636 reiterated this ban on animal

sacrifice and all manners of extravagance performed by private parties:

66 Ch'en, “Analysis of the Reasons of Manchu Emperor Hong Taiji’s Restriction of Shamanism,” 34. 67 Roth Li, The Rise of the Early Manchu State, 126. 68 Ibid. 115. 90

…It is forever forbidden to kill, sell or to slaughter oxen, horses, mules, donkeys when offering a sacrifice or redeeming a vow to a god, getting married, upon a person’s death and when visiting a grave’. ‘It is forbidden to kill a sow; in case one does so, the seller will be duly condemned for the crime. He will have to compensate for the sow and the money will be paid to the government. If anybody disobeys this order and uses a horse, a mule or a donkey to redeem a vow or offer a sacrifice to a god,…the killer, the seller who is denounced by a member of his own family or by one of his subordinates will have to compensate for the killing of a domestic animal and also pay the plaintiff. Or if other people report the offence, he will have to compensate for the killing of the animal and pay the informer. If the company commander in the Banner system (or niru jangging in Manchu) and the other official in charge of accounts and secretariat or bosoku in Manchu) inspect but fail in their investigation, they will be duly condemned for the crime69

This communicates not only a general objective of eliminating these practices but also

explicitly names sacrificial rites in the list of forbidden acts to be adjudicated on the Eight

Banner military command. Such regulations have a long history within Inner Asian states. Both

the Liao (916-1125) and Jin dynasty also enacted similar bans on large .70 As previously mentioned, Hong Taiji was in a constant battle with his rivals amongst the princes and the non-Aisin Gioro clan nobility. These rivals had been both denied the right to construct their own ritual site such as a Tangse and forced to practice their rituals on small household and community level altars called weceku.71 Only high ranking princes of the Aisin Gioro lineage

were permitted to host their rituals in the Tangse, and even then the number of rituals was closely

regulated by the khan as Hong Taiji decreed, “In the ritual of spring and autumn, the princes, the

county kings, and the beile, can use three poles per family; the beizis, the Zhenguo dukes, and

the Fuguo dukes, can use two poles per family; the Zhenguo, Fuguo, and Fengguo generals can

69 Ch'en, “Analysis of the Reasons of Manchu Emperor Hong Taiji’s Restriction of Shamanism,” 38. 70 Franke, and Chan, Studies on the Jurchens and the Chin Dynasty, 145. 71 Elliott, The Manchu Way, 239. 91

use one pole.”72 The prohibition on the ritualistic slaughter of large animals would all but make independent, non-state sanctioned rituals impossible. Further, the ritualistic slaughter of horses,

donkeys, bulls, and other large domestic beast was associated with the forming of alliances, the

acknowledgement of borders, and the beginning of other martial enterprises. Notably, this ritual

was used in the forming of an alliance between Nurhaci and Ooba Khung Taiji, lord of the

Khorchin Mongols,

The 1626 pact between Nurhaci and the head of the Kharachin Mongols Ooba for instance, involved the sacrifice of a white horse to Heaven and of a black ox to Earth. After the two leaders had sworn their oaths, they burned the documents on which their oaths had been recorded to enable the spirits of the ancestors to learn of the event…. Ceremonies as an expression of the political and diplomatic relations established by the newly born Manchu state, reflect the pervasive influence of Shamanic beliefs at the level of state administration, and not just at the level of the clan. Shamanic rituals were of course, an integral part not only of Manchu native culture, but also of a tradition of rulership practice by the Turks, Khitans, Mongols and Jurchen73

An earlier example of a similar ritual is relayed by The Old Manchu Chronicles Laodang 滿文老

檔, describing a ritual sealing the borders between Nurhaci and the Ming’s frontier forces:

Then, having erected stelae to mark the border in various places, in the year of the monkey, on the twentieth day of the sixth month, they killed a white horse, placing blood in one bowl, flesh in another bowl, earth in another bowl, and liquor in another bowl. Once they had scraped the bones clean, they set everything out. Wu, the Liaodong regional commander and Wang, the beiguwan, came and swore that, “No one shall cross the khan’s border.74

This ritual was also referenced by Nurhaci in his deliberations surrounding the prospect

of the surrender of the Joseon Korean state: “The second letter from Nurhaci was written in a

72 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 411. 73 McDermott, State and Court Ritual in China, 368. 74 MWLD Fascicle One Taizu 1.

92

higher tone than the previous one and urged Chosŏn to choose between the Ming and the Later

Jin. It also proposed that if Chosŏn choose the Later Jin, it should declare so officially, by

performing a sacrifice to Heaven and Earth with the blood of a horse and a cow.”75 It is no

surprise, especially considering Amin’s attempts at usurping the diplomatic privileges of the

khan, that Hong Taiji would seek to eliminate this practice of forming martial bonds and

diplomatic relationships from the population and monopolize it for the ruler. These two strategies

served as a combined arms assault on independent Shamanic identities and, by their very nature,

rival access to Shamanic legitimacy.76 The multipolar nature of Manchu Shamanism, which placed cultural familial rites in the home while making all political and legitimizing rites the exclusive propriety of the khan, was the basis of the New Qing ritual.

A further possible rationale for suppressing Wild Ritual may have been due to the presence of among the Manchus. The Manchus, like many of their Inner Asian peers, possessed no natural immunity to the disease. Most notably the Shunzhi emperor himself fell victim to this disease, a development that helped to elevate the boy Xuanye 玄燁/康熙 to the position of heir to the son of Heaven, due to the fact that he had survived the disease as a child and now possessed immunity to it.77So terrified of this plague were the Manchus, that entire societal practices were developed to minimize the spread of the disease. For example, throughout the conquest of the Ming, Manchu forces made every effort to deploy only those nobles and officers who had suffered from the disease as a child and gained an immunity. Another strategy was the Manchu practice of constructing a small palace (bidousuo 避痘所) on an island

75 Kye, “Nurhaci in Korean Sources, 1594-1622,” 102. 76 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 410. 77 Crossley, The Manchus, 87. 93 separated by a moat within the Forbidden City for the purpose of quarantining the emperor in case of an outbreak within the city limits.78 Furthermore, those found to be infected were driven from the city until the disease had run its course.

Although the Manchus developed these more rational means of fighting outbreaks, the terror of smallpox led the infected to seek the aid of wild shamans, despite Hong Taiji’s decree.

Smallpox was often seen by the Manchus as a spiritual threat represented in their legends and . Shamans were believed to be able to detect and dispel the workings of evil spirits and drive them off by appeasing them through offerings, engaging them in supernatural battle, or even bribing baleful spirits to harry an enemy tribe.79 Manchu shamans often made offerings to the goddess of fecundity Fodo Mama and the flower goddess Ajige Ilha Mama and Amba Ilha mama, which were seen as providing protection from the disease.80 The records of one rite of healing is translated by Durrant:

Whenever the Manchus have illness, they are certain to shamanize. But there are also occasions when they shamanize without there being illness. Among wealthy and noble families, some hold a shamanic performance each month and some each season. At the end of the harvest, there are none who would not shamanize. Before they begin the performance, they first plant a thin pole of over ten feet in length in the southern corner of the walled yard. Then they place a basket on top of it and call it "kan." At the time of the sacrifice, meat is placed in the basket. A crow will surely come and peck at it; and then they say, "The gods accept the sacrifice."… The shaman is sometimes a female and sometimes a regular woman of the household. They take bells and tie them onto her hips. As she drags the bells, they make a noise, and she beats on a drum with her hand. The drum is made with a single layer of ox skin and a metal rim with several rings on the handle. She both strikes the drum and at the same _time shakes it. Its sound is mournful, and her mouth utters words of chants and prayers, but the words cannot be distinguished. When the prayer is over, she leaps and spins with various types of actions such as "tiger" and'"moslem. The sacrifices which they offer are pork and fisihe efen. Fisihe efen is a glutinous millet cake. Its color is like jade and its

78 Meserve, “Smallpox among the Tungus Peoples,” 92. 79 Ibid. 84. 80 Ibid. 89 94

substance is fine and· smooth. It is sprinkled with bean powder and dipped in honey. After the performance is over, they take this and present it to neighbors and · relatives. In the case of the meat, they pull people into their houses and feed it to them, requiring that it be completely consumed. If it is not entirely eaten, it is considered bad fortune. 81 Most famously, during the Dorgon regency, Prince Dodo was stricken with smallpox, and while

he was laying on his deathbed his family sought the services of a wild shaman named Jingguda

who attempted to dispel the angry spirit who had beguiled him.82 Unsurprisingly, Dodo still

perished from the affliction. This narrative, however, highlights a key danger for the Manchu

rulers. This event revealed that even amongst the most-educated and “Sinified” of the Manchu elite, a fundamental affinity for their Shamanic practices was still present. This affinity was evidently powerful enough to risk retaliation from the throne. Furthermore, if Dodo had recovered under the care of a wild shaman, concerned Manchu nobles would undoubtedly have attempted to revive the practice, thus stealing back some semblance of Shamanic authority. The evidence seems to support this conflicting narrative of Shamanic healing. Kangxi’s fifth son

Yinzuo, who perished in 1685, was treated by a Shamanic healer, who performed the seeking good fortune rite.83 Based on these accounts, it appears that while ecstatic Shamanic healing had

been prohibited since the reign of the Hong Taiji, the enforcement of these policies varied from

emperor to emperor. While Hong Taiji punished Banner captains for insufficiently prosecuting

these Shamanic violations, the attempted healing of Dodo in 1649 under the Dorgon regency, as

well as the aforementioned Kangxi era attempted healing of Yinzuo, not to mention Kangxi’s

own views on Shamanic healing, suggest the waxing and waning attitudes toward the practice

81 Durrant, “Three Early Ch’ing Descriptions of Manchu Shamanism,” 210. 82 Rawski, The Last Emperors, 233. 83 Ibid. 233. 95

and fluidity in the state’s intolerance.84 The tale of the Nisan shamaness also displays a

phenomenal example of Shamanic healing. Tekete utilizes an ecstatic ritual to travel to

underworld and save the soul of the son of wealthy nobleman. Throughout her journey, she

harnesses the aid of the animal spirits, such as the crane spirit.

The narrative surrounding the criminalization of Wild Ritual originates in part within the personal history of Aisin Gioro clan. Following the fall of Nurhaci’s younger brother and co- ruler Surhaci 舒爾哈齊 (1564-1611) and the consolidation of greater power in the hands of

Nurhaci, control over the Jurchen state was shared for a time with Nurhaci’s eldest son Cuyen 褚

英 (1580-1615). This exercise in collegial rule, however, ended tragically as in an effort to seize

power from his father, Cuyen consulted a wild shaman in order to hex Nurhaci along with all of

his rivals throughout the clan.85 As the Old Manchu Chronicles reports,

The eldest son consulted with his four friends, saying, ‘Once my households (gurun) have been divided in this way between my younger brothers, I won’t be able to go on living and will die. Will you die together with me?’ The four friends answered, ‘If you die, beile, we will follow you unto death.’ Afterwards, when the father-khan went to fight in Ula, the eldest son did not worry about whether his father would win or lose battling against a country (gurun) that was equal to his in strength. [Instead,] he wrote a letter cursing the father-khan, who had gone off to war with his brothers and the five ambans, and burned it, [so sending it] to heaven and earth. Again, he said to his friends, ‘May our troops who have gone to battle be crushed by Ula. When they have been crushed, I will not give shelter in the walled city to my father or brothers.’ Having thus spoken these evil words, the person who had written the curse on the khan who had gone off to war, his younger brothers, and the ambans, thought to himself, ‘Sooner or later the khan is going to hear that this curse was written and burned. Once he has

84 Ibid. 233. Rawski briefly mentions the punishment of banner captains over the failed enforcement of shamanic policy. 85 Crossley, A Translucent Mirror, 162. While this narrative does provide a convenient excuse for the removal of Cuyen by the other beile princes, of whom had previously made accusations against him, Nurhaci during this period appears to be committed to experimenting with an appointed successor. It is unlikely that he would have had his son executed without some manner of proof of the deed. 96

heard about it, he is going to kill me before the multitude. My beile has said that he has lost his own reason for living and will die. Before my beile-father dies, let me die first.’ So saying, he wrote a note, left it, and hanged himself.86

The validity of this story in terms of the motivations of Nurhaci’s purge of Cuyen is secondary

to the effect this narrative had on the association of Wild Ritual and for the royal family.

This imperative demanded that the Wild Ritual no longer be seen as simply fraudulent but also treasonous. The use of a wild shaman was depicted as an act of conspiracy, conducted in secret while the khan was at war conducting the will of Heaven and matters of state. This fear heterodox sorcery was echoed throughout the history, of the Qing court. For example, the two of

Kangxi’s sons Yinreng and Yinzhi, and Yinsi were all accused of consorting with heterodox sorcerers to hex their brethren or assist them in pursuit of the throne.

The final possible motivation for the elimination of Wild Ritual this study will examine is the question of Shamanic sorcery and belief. Regardless of whether the Manchu rulers personally believed in the efficacy of Shamanic sorcery, it is an omnipresent and observable fact that

Bannermen of the ordinary households and imperial subjects more broadly did. In fact, the

Manchus themselves may have practiced some form of war magic as part of their military rituals, which in turn influenced their concepts of Heaven’s favor in warfare. Traces of such practices can be observed during the Jin dynasty. As the Dynastic History of the Jin records, “When the army was staying in the region of T’ang-kua-tai Wo-chia 唐括带斡甲, the whole army prayed for their shooting and their armor. As they stood there, light like that of a flaming fire appeared from the feet of the solders and above their spears and lances. The soldiers took this as a good

86 MWLD Fascicle three. /

97 military omen. The next day, when they stayed at Cha-chih 扎只 River, the same light appeared as before.”87 Such manifestation of divine lights appears in several places throughout the Old

Manchu Chronicles 滿文老檔.

Manchu Banner forces throughout the dynasty’s reign fought numerous Shamanic or ecstatic magic-practicing peoples or heterodox . During these conflicts, fear of supernatural forces being harnessed by local peoples or insurgents to harry and vex Banner forces was rife among both the infantry and the command structure. Numerous examples of this fear are relayed to us from the high Qing period wars against the Miao rebels and Sino-Tibetan Jinchuan hill tribes, not to mention the ecstatic possession practiced by Taiping forces and Boxer rebels.88

Terrified of black magic and suffering the terrestrial psychological effects associated with guerrilla mountain warfare, Banner forces faced dangerously low morale and desertion, leading to two of the Qing’s most hard-fought and pyrrhic quagmires. The Jinchuan hill tribes, themselves practitioners of their own shamanistic tradition alongside red hat Buddhism

(much reviled by the Qing), also deployed their magic against Qing forces. In the path of the

Qing army, sorcerers left all manners of demon traps to terrify Qing troops.89 Qing forces also faced erratic weather patterns, which brought blizzards, hailstorms, and apocalyptic rainstorms down upon beleaguered troops. The Qing forces deeply suspected weather magic as the source of this dilemma. One commander even went as far as to report his suspicion in his 1772 memorial:

At the beginning of the fourth month, it rained and snowed continuously on the troops on the southern front; really, in this uncivilized territory the weather is mostly cold and rarely warm; since…early spring there has been a biting wind

87 Franke and Chan, Studies on the Jurchens and the Chin Dynasty, 141. 88 Sutton “Ethnic Revolt in the Qing Empire,” 122. 89 Waley-Cohen, “Religion, War, and Empire building in the Eighteenth-Century,” 346. According to Waley-Cohen, these traps were composed of collection of scrolls bearing magical incantations and the icons of animal spirits. 98

every day, and driving rain that starts and stops without warning. We suspect that the Xiaojinchuan, who habitually practice the Red Religion, are using zhata rain magic.90

It was in the interest of the Manchu khans to publicly eliminate these practitioners of

sorcery with and extreme prejudice. Those found practicing this brand of heresy (邪教)

were executed or sent to Beijing as part of the Triumphant Return form of war ritual.91 Weather

magic and its many applications were incredibly effective against Qing troops, not merely due to

superstition in a modern sense but because weather magic within Manchu and Mongol Buddhist

and Shamanic was a very real threat and one that the Manchu emperors gave priority

to eliminating.92

Qing forces again faced offensive magic during the Miao revolts of the late eighteenth

and early nineteenth centuries. Miao shamans and spirit mediums known as shakers performed a

sort of spirit capture. While possessed, they shook wildly, waving weapons and proclaiming the

return of the much-prophesized Heavenly kings. They called for millenarian uprising against the

Qing settlers who had methodically encroached on their sacred land.93 Across the Miao hills, tribesmen rose up against the Qing. Among the Miao rebels, Shamans wearing spirit mask cast spells against Qing troops, some shamans even leading Miao troops into battle:

Shamans called “old masters” (lao ) wearing a spirit mask and uttering spells to win the gods’support, accompanied the rebels into battle. Shakers may have led out some of the forces, “grasping their standards and dancing forth.” Possession continued to play a role in battle as late as March, 1796. A force with ’an was “attacking up a ridge killing uncounted Miao when at once from among the rebels ten or twenty Miao shakers, male and female (dian Miao

90 Ibid. 347. Waley-Cohen relays that Red Hat Buddhism appears to have been associated with weather magic in the minds of Inner and Central Asian peoples. 91 Ibid. 347. 92 Perdue, “Comparing Empires,” 261. 93 McMahon, “The Qing Response to the Miao Kings of China’s 1795-7 Miao Revolt,” 15. 99

dianfu), rushed forward. Our soldiers fired their muskets and arrows together, and every time one fell dead other rebels came from behind to carry the corpse away.94

The Qing sentenced these practitioners to death and went about the attempted

annihilation of these spiritual practices.95 This targeting of Wild Shamanism and heterodoxy developed into a central component of Qing governing philosophy and martial strategy and provided the foundation for the Qing’s interactions with numerous heterodox sects and insurrections throughout its reign. The Manchu rulers saw no great separation between religion and politics, and thus the heterodoxic engagement of the spirit world outside sanctioned ritual was equivalent to an act of rebellion and any unsanctioned sects regarded as enemies of the state.96 The Manchu court would not tolerate any form of competition to its jurisdiction over the

spirit world and its monopoly over truth. To further understand this system, an evaluation of the

legal mechanism of the suppression of Wild Shamanism is required.

The Legal Mechanisms of the Persecution of Wild Shamanism

The formal purge of Wild Ritual can be ascribed to the 1631 decree by Hong Taiji and

the establishment of a legal process of enforcement. In 1631, Hong Taiji decreed,

天聰五年, 諭凡巫覡星士, 妄言吉凶, 蠱惑婦女, 誘取財物者必殺。無赦該管佐 領領、催及本主各坐應得之罪。其信用之人, 亦坐罪。 All shamans and shamanesses, astrologers who wantonly speak of fortune and ill, poisonously deceiving women, seducing away wealth and property. These people are to be killed and are not eligible for amnesty. The relevant company commanders, corporals, and presiding officers, each will suffer an appropriate punishment. Those who patron these people will also be punished.97

94 Sutton, "Ethnic Revolt in the Qing Empire," 121. 95McMahon, “The Qing Response to the Miao Kings of China’s 1795-7 Miao Revolt,” 21. 96 Waley-Cohen, “Religion, War, and Empire-Building in Eighteenth-Century China,” 3. 97 YZHD 163 juan Tiancong fifth year 10551 100

In 1636, Hong Taiji further elaborated on this policy, decreeing, “[It is] forever prohibited to

shamanize (tiaoshen 跳神) for people [in order to] exorcise evil, [and] to speak recklessly

[about] misfortune and fortune, to delude people’s hearts. If there are those who disobey, [We

will] kill them.”98 This ban on Wild Shamanism was meant to be enforced among all clans of the

Manchu state, a task Hong Taiji treated with great seriousness. On a separate occasion, Hong

Taiji remarked, “The clan’s members should not dance in trance [tiaoshen], catch ,

improperly foretell disgraces and fortunes, poisons the human heart and kill all those who seem

not to respect them any longer.”99 The repeated nature of Hong Taiji’s decrees on this issue reveal that this was no mere formality and that control over the practices of shamans was a nonnegotiable element of his sovereignty. Another notable element of these passages is the use

of the term wu 巫 in the Chinese versions of these . While the use of wu holds a long

history, its use here can perhaps be credited to the translation of concepts between Manchu and

Chinese. The term wu bears a deeply negative connotation, which was likely intended by its

authors to convey a cross-cultural negative connotation on the wild shamans by the court. This

cannot be entirely accredited to Confucian influence on the Manchus, given that numerous terms

used by the Manchus throughout Chinese translations existed to describe shamans and Shamanic

ritual specialist, which did not bear such negative connotations.100 In fact, this term can be more

closely be associated with the concept of witchcraft and varies immensely by its user.101

98 Udry, Muttering Mystics, 29. 99 Guo, and Simoncini, “Functions and Features of the Shamanic Masks,” 179. 100 Some examples are 薩滿，薩滿太太，司祝, 標渾, to name a few. 101 Liu, “Musical Instruments in the Manchurian Shamanic Sacrificial Rituals,” 104. 101

Lest we believe that the suppression of Wild Shamanism was solely the preoccupation of

Hong Taiji, an examination of the subsequent decrees under the Shunzhi and Kangxi emperors

reveal that these concerns were strongly instilled in the minds of the Manchu royal host. During

the Shunzhi reign, the Shunzhi emperor explained the legal penalty for Wild Rites in decreeing:

十八年, 定, 凡無名巫覡私自跳神者, 杖一百, 因而致人於死者, 處死。

It is ordered that all unknown shamans who privately shamanize (tiaoshen), they will be canned 100 times with the heavy , if there is a death as a result of this, then the punishment is death.102

This decree displays a firm dichotomy between those shamans practicing with the awareness and tacit permission of the state in contrast to those persons unknown practicing Wild Ritual in the shadows. This legal view extended to the realm of Shamanic healing. In the first year of

Kangxi, the Kangxi emperor decreed:

康熙元年。題準, 人有邪病請巫覡道士醫治者, 須稟明都統, 用印文報部, 准其 醫治。達者, 巫覡道士正法外, 請治之人, 亦治以罪。 In the first year of Kangxi it is ratified ‘if a person has an unnatural illness and request shamans or Daoist priest to cure him, he must report this to the Dutong, then with proper seal, report it to the appropriate department. If they do not report the healing, then these shamans and Daoist priests shall be executed. As for the person who solicited the cure, they will also be punished according to the law.103

This passage indicates that the court of Kangxi was still just as concerned with the presence of

heterodox healing methods. What is also notable is the mentioning of Daoist priest alongside

shamans, displaying the expanding war on heterodoxy. The bureaucratization of the suppression

102 YZHD 163 juan Shunzhi eighteenth year 10552 103 YZHD 163 juan Kangxi First year pg. 10552 102 of the heterodox arts continued to mount throughout the Kangxi reign. In the fifty seventh year of Kangxi, the Kangxi emperor decreed:

五十七年, 議准, 各處邪教, 令該督撫嚴行禁止。若地方官不行嚴查, 或別處發 覺者, 將地房官及該督撫一併嚴行查議, 笞四十。里長知師巫邪術, 軍民賽會, 而不首者, 杖一百。軍民裝扮神像, 鳴鑼擊鼓, 迎神賽會, 為首者. If anywhere there are evil cults, prefectural officials should strictly prohibit it. Then If the local authorities also do not prohibit it or it is noticed by outside authorities, then the local authorities, provincial governors, and governor-generals should be investigated and sternly sanctioned…If the community chief is aware of shamans and the performing of perverse magic or if it is performed within a civilian or military personnel religious procession, and if he does not report it, then he will be canned 40 times with the light bamboo…If military personnel or civilians dress themselves up as gods and beat the gong and the drum to welcome the gods in a procession, the leader will receive 100 stokes of the heavy bamboo.104

From this passage, it is clear that under the Kangxi reign, a fully fleshed-out system of punishments was established to not only punish military and civilian personnel for tampering with spiritual affairs but also to prosecute those officials guilty of either negligence or conspiracy to allow heterodox arts to spread and create unrest. This concern is echoed in article 178 of the

Qing code, which reads:

Diviners who speak absurdly about bad and good fortune. No diviner who practices according to the doctrine of [the opposed principles of light and dark, male and female, etc.] is permitted in the homes of great or lessor civilian or military officials to speak absurdly of national bad and good fortune. Anyone who violates this provision will receive 100 strikes of the heavy bamboo. Making calculation according to the books on fortune telling or by the stars. [under which people are born] are not within this prohibition.105

104 YZHD 163 juan Kangxi fifty-seventh year 10555 105 Jones, The Great Qing Code, 174. 103

This article appears to be targeted primarily at military and civil officials within the Qing government, of whom a challenge could arise.106 In particular, it refers to the keeping of heterodox practitioners as retinue nokor that has been present throughout all Inner Asian regimes. One such example of this practice during the Jin Dynasty is found in the Biography of

Wuguchu within the The History of the Jin:

Biography of Wuguchu” in The History of the Jin 《(金史·乌古出传》), “At first, the 昭祖 Zhaozu Emperor did not have children. There was a shaman said to be efficacious and who could communicate with the spirits, so he was invited to pray for the Zhaozu Emperor. After a long time, the shaman said: “A male’s soul has come. This son is the source of and morality. His offspring will be prosperous. Worship and accept him. When he is born, name him 乌古迺 Wugunai.” This was the 景祖 Jingzu Emperor. Again, after a long time, the shaman said: “A female’s soul has come. You can name her 五鸦忍 Wuyaren.” After another long time, he said: “Again I see an omen for a female. She can be named 斡都拔 Woduba.” And again, after a long time later, he said: “Again I see an omen for a male, but he is not a tractable one. If he grows up, he will become cruel. He will not appreciate the grace of his elders, and will do evil. You cannot accept him.” Considering that no heir had been established, the Zhaozu Emperor said: “Even if he is not good, I wish to accept him.” The shaman then said: “You should name him 乌 古出 Wuguchu.” Later, the Zhaozu Emperor had two sons and two daughters; the order of their births was just as the shaman predicted. So they were named as the shaman said.”107

In reference to Manchu Shamanism, this article would allude to the classic practice of

Inner Asian strongmen possessing sympathetic shamans within their political orbit or nokor. This measure would take on the purpose of isolating rivals from Shamanic authority, which could be used for revolt amongst the Banner peoples. This, in turn, further supports the Qing preoccupation with the elimination of such groups and societal stability. Further, articles from

106 In line with the themes of Chinese history, officials and military officers were prime suspects when a local revolt arose. 107 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 400. 104

the Qing code also present a preview into the Qing governing philosophy. For example, in the

Great Qing Code, articles 256 and 289 specifically targets the wild shaman’s craft:

Those who make or write books on sorcery or speak about sorcery, as well as those who circulate and use them and disturb the multitudes, will be beheaded (with delay). (the persons who were disturbed will not be punished. If [the materials] reach less than three people, the penalty will be to 3000 li. The penalty will be based upon an examination of the circumstances.) if , (some other person having been the author or having circulated them.) a person has such magical books in his possession and hides them and does not deliver them to the authorities, the penalty will be 100 stokes of the heavy bamboo and three years of penal servitude.108 In this article the Qing state reveals a primary concern about the proliferation of heterodox

material. What is most notable is that the punishment for these crimes are schedule-based on the number of people the forbidden material reached thus denoting a focus on societal stability and control.

Article 289 focuses on the potential impact of said spiritual machinations:

Everyone who calls up demons, or makes charms, or utters curses in order to kill another ( whether it is an ordinary person, a child or sons’ child , a slave, a hired servant, or a superior, elder, inferior, or younger relative) each will be punished on the basis of plotting a killing… If in consequence death ensues, then each will [be punished] according to the applicable law of (plotting) to kill) if he wishes (merely) to cause another to become sick or to suffer (but there is no intention of killing anyone), then reduce ( the punishment for plotting a killing where some action has been taken but there is no injury)...109

This article is especially notable given the credence that the state gives to the actions of

the perpetrators. In contrast to article 162, the state recognizes the potential harm or perceived

harm of these actions. This particular article takes on new meaning when contrasted with the

aforementioned Cuyen affair, which saw this very scenario play out as son harnessed the

108 Jones, The Great Qing Code, Article 256 240. 109 Jones, The Great Qing Code, Article 289 105 supernatural in hopes of sickening the father, and the Kangxi succession crisis in which several

Manchu princes and nobles were accused of harnessing heterodox sorcery to hex their rivals and support their claims to the throne. Any doubt that these judicial efforts to disrupt Wild Ritual in all its forms had a chilling effect on its proliferation should look no further than the prosecutorial records of the period. As scholar Xiaoli Jiang states:

The imposition of such bans dealt a severe blow to shamanic practices. According to the Original Archives of the Ministry of Punishments in Shengjing (Shengjing xingbu yuandang), seven of the judicial cases settled between 1638 and 1639 were about sorcery; two of them resulted in the death penalty while the other five attracted whipping, of ears and nose, and confiscation of properties. This shows that the bans were not taken lightly. The above can be regarded as a reformation of Manchu Shamanism in the preconquest period. The clampdown on the shamanic practice of witchcraft, especially the execution of those shamans who claimed to have access to spirits, inevitably led to the discontinuation of wild ritual and their eventual decline.110

Jiang also provides details into one such case, according to my translation:

Among them there are unfortunate experiences illustrated. The wife of Gushan Ejin Namutai, the mother of A’lami, who was prominent in the Plain Yellow Banner. Because at that time the wife of Gu was making an offering for her late son, she brought to herself a female shaman who claimed that she was able to see souls. She was [then] deceived into bringing the burial clothes back. After the incident was exposed, the mother of A’lami and the female shaman were both executed. This is an example of the severity of the penalty.111

Numerous other cases surrounding Wild Shamanism and ecstatic heterodoxy litter Qing history, revealing a constant struggle for control over the supernatural and constant vigilance by the state to exorcise any spiritually rebellious practice. As Laamann writes:

110 Jiang, "Did the Imperially Commissioned Manchu Rites for Sacrifices to the Spirits and to Heaven Standardize Manchu Shamanism," 7. 111 Jiang, “The Reform of Shamanism before Qing Dynasty Entering the Central Plains,” 69

106

When Zhang Junde chanted the North Star Sutra in the summer of 1771, for instance, while performing a spirit dance 跳神, the district magistrate saw himself compelled to intervene. Another case in Zhili caused local Qing officials to fear the combined threat of black magic and popular insurrection. The provincials Li Fu and Li Juncheng stood accused of howling at the wind while calling for rain. Apart from wreaking havoc with the forces of nature, the pair were also plotting to overthrow the dynasty, storing books and pictures, as well as weapons, withdrawing into mountainous retreats whenever the arm of Qing law happened to approach.112

It appears that individual clan heads were also given great responsibility and latitude to prosecute

justice against wild shamans. The horrors of these trials are passed down to us through the oral histories of contemporary Manchu clans. As Fu and Meng retell through my translation:

“In the implementation of this statute, although not as ruthless and bloody as in the time of Nurhaci, the strategies of the rulers were also utterly unyielding. The sacrifices of all Manchu were subject to strict surveillance and indoctrination from top to bottom, the dutongs’ of all regions will have the authority to intervene in the sacrifices of the Bannermen. Those not conforming to the standard, must be met with severe punishment. Either a demotion to their office, a dismissal from their office, a demotion from their banner, a fine of silver, or a confiscation of their horses or bondservants. This portion of the history is avoided in most popular folk telling. Especially noteworthy are stories passed on involving forbidden shamanic spirit capture. The surnames of Fucha, Guarjia, Zangjia, and Xi, all passed on stories of the spirit captured shamans of their surname (spirits appoint a certain son of the surname to be shaman). [According to these stories] The divisional clan mukun (mukun refers to a clan head) and the head mukun in a conferred and unanimously opposed a [certain] person becoming a shaman. They [then] commanded that this person be burned to death, [in order to] return that person to heaven by fire. During burnings, white eagles, hawks, shining stars or water would sometimes emerge to rush towards the flames. Some shamans were saved, such as one with the surname Guan (Guarjia) a hawk spirit dived three times to rescue the shaman from the flames. [in the stories of the surname fu (fucha), a white hawk spirit [attempted to save the shaman], Because of this the head clan mukun used a sturdy pole to press down the shaman. The white hawk spirit could not grasp the shaman, but instead some of his feathers were torn loose. thus, the spirit was not able to be passed on further. There will be never again be such a spirit in the future.

112 Lamaan, "Christianity, Magic and Politics in Qing and Republican China," 95. 107

This story reflects the history of the prohibition of sacrifices to spirits other than those exactly stipulated by the Qing court. The enforcement policies of the rulers utilized sacrificial laws to be implemented smoothly among the people”113

Bannermen during the Qing were treated as a special legal category. Prior to the legal

compromise that placed Bannermen and civilian alike in the jurisdiction of the

in 1656, Qing Bannermen had been governed by the Manchu penal code.114 The Manchu penal

code favored whipping over bamboo strikes and immediate over delayed

strangulation and never carried out sentences of penal servitude or exile115 Legal jurisdiction

over Bannermen was inconsistent and myriad with Bannermen cases, which occurred in the provinces, sometimes being directed to Beijing and other times being judged under the general

Qing code. For the majority of the dynasty, the Bannermen were governed and sentenced under the Qing code but with a practice of commutation which would covert sentences such as penal servitude and exile to time held in a or other more appropriate sentences for military personnel.116The severity of the previously mentioned punishments in this context helps illustrate

just how serious these crimes were taken by the Qing court.

Following these decrees, the Manchu emperors were now in a sense sacred kings of the

Shamanic realm. This new dynamic was the foundation of the new Clan ritual and thus the basis

of the Qing Shamanic empire. Having eliminated the power of Shamanic rivals, weakened their

support base, and created a state-sponsored alternative, the Manchu emperors had successfully

waged a war over Heaven and stabilized the realm. This purge of Wild Ritual would have helped

113 Fu and Meng, Man zu Sa man jiao yan jiu Di 1 ban, 58-59. 114 Hu, "Reinstating the Authority of the Five Punishments," 29-30. 115 Ibid. 30. Some more exotic early legal penalties even included hamstringing 116 Ibid. 47. 108

form the template for the prosecution of heterodoxy and regulation of spiritual practices during

the reigns of succeeding Manchu emperors.117

When sanctioned by the state, this new form of institutionalized Shamanism was fiercely

protected by legal statutes as displayed by an 1813 case handled by the Board of Punishments in

Mukden, when a man was convicted of stealing yellow satins from the Imperial Shamanic sites.

“The section of the Board of Punishments which is currently accompanying His Majesty…reports that according to a memorial from the Board of Punishments in Manchuria , Chi Erh is guilty of having stolen yellow satins from the Imperial Shamanic temple in Mukden…The memorial recommends that Chi Erh under the statue on the theft of objects used for imperial worship…should be sentenced to immediate decapitation. An imperial rescript replying to the memorial has confirmed this sentence.” 118

In summary, the Manchu emperors successfully used the mechanism of the state and the

vehicle of centralization to strip powers from the wild shamans and assumed it within their khanal persona.

117 Lamaan, "Christianity, Magic and Politics in Qing and Republican China," 93. An example is the purge of heterodoxy that was a sanctioned by Emperor Kangxi’s sacred edicts. 118 Bodde et al, Law in Imperial China, 291, Case 134.2, 1813. Leading case from the department for Mukden of the Board of Punishments. reported in HAHL 7.12/21b. 109

CHAPTER III: THE NEW QING RITUAL AND THE SHAMANIC EMPIRE

After banning Wild Shamanism, the Qing dynasty proceeded to establish a new set of

Shamanic rites representing imperial . The concept of a New Qing ritual is vital to our

understanding not only of the temple shaman-court and the clan shaman-banners, but also the

entirety of the Qing ritual system. The Bannermen served at the emperor’s pleasure and derived

their meaning from his direction, a basic structure that was demonstrated and reaffirmed through

ritual. Through an examination of ritual, we can detect an overarching trend of the Qing. It

gradually became less the collective enterprise of the conquest elite, and instead was progressively the private realm of the emperor alone.1 Through an examination of ritual the

central forces of the Qing Shamanic empire are thus revealed.

Shamanic Folklorization as a Mechanism of Empire

The New Qing ritual was built upon the incorporation of the Manchu khans into the

divinized pantheon of the ritual themselves. By including stories of Nurhaci into rituals, the

Manchu khans tied their own identity with the ritual. These performances actively attempted to

tie Nurhaci to various deities such as Lord Guan and Geser. By the eighteenth century, the Qing

court had through state sponsored festivals and ritual practices created a mythos around Nurhaci

casting him as a great huntsman and heroic warrior. At significant festivals and events

throughout the Qing, reenactments of these legends were performed under the supervision of

Manchu shamans.2 Although stemming from the late nineteenth century, Pang gives two such

1 For more on this concept and how it affected the shamanic and cultural sphere of the Manchu state see Thomas and Humphrey, Shamanism, History, and the State, 196. 2 Crossley, A Translucent Mirror, 244. 110

examples of such rituals which divinized Nurhaci, and were performed in the Kunningong as written in the 1935 travel log In Search of Old Peking:

These shamanic rites were very secret; they took place in the early hours of the morning between 3 and 4 a.m., and none but Manchus were allowed to take part in them. They were held on the birthdays of Emperors or Empresses, as also on the 1st of the 1st Moon. The ceremony was opened by the 'Guardian of the Nine Gates' giving the signal for a man to crack a long whip three times, when the huge drum in front of the T' Ho Tien[Tai hou ] was beaten three times, the music struck up, and the Emperor ascended his throne. Troops of men, from sixteen to thirty-two in number, arranged in two rows, then gave a kind of mimic performance. One such pantomime, called Mi-hu-ma-hu, referred to a legend, that Nurhachu [Nurhaci], the real founder of the Manchu dynasty (1559-1626), had in his youth destroyed and bears that devoured children. Killing the tigers was called mi-hu and killing the bears ma-hu. The performers, half of them dressed in black sheepskins and half in bearskins, were drawn up in two lines facing each other; each man wore a mask of the animal he was to represent, and a high hat with feathers. The leader of the troupe who took the part of Nurhachu, in a high helmet and fantastic costume, rode on a horse between the lines, firing arrows at the opposing 'animals.' One of these, supposed to be hit, then fell down, and the others ran off, as if terror-stricken. Another display was that of Yang (Lamb up a Tree). This, too, originated with a story about Nurhachu who is said to have hung a lamb on a tree and waited for a tiger to come, when he shot him with an arrow thus saving the Iamb. A third, curious play was that called Kua Po Chi (Scraping the Winnowing Fan), also taken from the life of Nurhachu who once met a tiger in a farmyard and, having no weapon to hand, picked up a winnowing-fan, scraped it with a stick and thus scared the beast away. Still another ceremony was that of riding on hobby-horses which were supposed to represent the Eight Banner Corps. The riders each wore a different costume and a different-colored flag stuck at the back of their necks, with stilts on their feet covered with small bells which set up a-jingling, as they pranced about on their hobby-horses and imitated the neighing of their steeds. During these ceremonies the band played martial airs, and at the end of each play. The performers made obeisance to the Emperor or Empress.3 If such accounts are to be relied upon, it gives a perfect example of the canonization of the emperors. Through Shamanic- folklorization and theatrical performance of Aisin Gioro legend and motif, narratives of legitimacy were spread throughout the Manchu populace. This was just one tool by which the Manchus reinforced their legitimacy by demonstrating that Nurhaci and by

3 Pang, “The Kun-ning-gung Palace in Peking,” 68. 111

extension the Aisin Gioro walked in the gods’ favor. With each decree the Manchu khans

referenced their role as a khan appointed by Heaven who acted with Heaven’s approval.

The very legitimacy and authority discussed in previous chapters, was demonstrated through these rituals and motif. As Meng explains:

The Old Records in Manchu Language, the Taizu Reign 《(满文老 档·太祖朝)》 and the Veritable Record of the Taizong Reign 《( 清太宗实录》) record that from the beginning of the regime, Nurhaci used the words “spirit of Heaven” (天 灵), “omen from Heaven” (天兆), “will of Heaven” (天意), “rules of Heaven” (天 理), “help from Heaven” (天助), “blessing from Heaven” (天佑), “fate of Heaven” (天命), etc. in relation to all of his acts, such as solving issues, selecting officials, and resorting to arms…“Heaven appoints the Khan (汗), and the Khan appoints administrators.” He attributed his unbeaten record to the fact that, “I am favored by Heaven.” Every time he overcame others, Nurhaci deified his victory with phrases such as the “gods from Heaven gave us shelter,” “gods from Heaven protected us,” “gods from Heaven helped us to kill.4

Many of these stories have reached the present day through the collection of oral histories

among Manchu clans. While these stories were altered over the years, they provide a distinct

insight into the ways in which the Manchu state utilized folklore, as disseminated through ritual,

as propaganda. Chinese scholars have found hundreds of versions of Nurhaci folklore passed

down throughout the peoples of the Chinese Northeast. Many are built around the Manchu

deities revealing themselves to Nurhaci. From childhood, Nurhaci is often visited by animal

spirits such as eagles and tigers who protected him until adulthood. In one legend Fodo Mama

sends a dog to lead Nurhaci to a sacred cave where she reveals to him how to organize the Eight

Banner system. In another legend, Nurhaci is taught buckwheat cultivation which saves the later

Jin state from starvation. Others during the Qing dynasty tell of Nurhaci‘s battles against his foes

4 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 404. 112

and exploits against tigers and bears during hunts.5 Just as the first emperor Qin Shihuang

had sought to equate his rule with the personification of Heaven, Di, so too were the Manchu

emperors equating their lineage with the mythological first ancestor Bukuri Yongson, the early

ancestor Mongke Temur, and the Jin dynastic founder Aguda.6

This same process of spreading Manchu centric folklore and dance can be observed

throughout the Shamanic empire as a tool of legitimizing Manchu suzerainty. One example is the

Manchu efforts to introduce integration of their cousins amongst the New Manchus composed of

the tribes of Xibe, Daur, Oroqen, Solon, and other groups, who while initially were not drafted in

the Eight Banners by Nurhaci, were later formed into Eight Banner units or Butha hunting

banners. The role of Shamanism among the New Manchus was akin to the position of prime

importance amongst the Manchus themselves. For example, shamans among the New Manchus

were primarily tied to indigenous concepts of the clan and the land. Shamans healed the sick and

served central roles in the clan’s administration.7 So important was Shamanic beliefs among the

New Manchus that many refused to convert to Christianity despite constant incursions of Tsarist

Russian and violent Cossack settlers. Many accounts tell of Manchurian converts to

Christianity continuing their Shamanic practices by cover of night, much to the ire of the Russian

Christian orthodoxy.8

5 Crossley, A Translucent Mirror, 243. 6 Ibid. 202. 7 Kim, “Saints for Shamans? Culture, Religion and Borderland Politics in Amuria from the Seventeenth to Nineteenth Centuries,” 184 n55. 8 Kim, “Saints for Shamans? Culture, Religion and Borderland Politics in Amuria from the Seventeenth to Nineteenth Centuries,” 171. 113

The Manchus utilized the spread of Qing-centric Shamanic folklore as the tip of the spear

in a multifaceted cultural offensive, which Rawski calls Manchuizaiton.9 In addition to the

promotion of Manchu marriage, funeral rites, books, fashion, and language among other cultural

products, the Manchus promoted their own Shamanic rituals and deified folklore of Nurhaci. In

these legends Nurhaci is portrayed as the constant object of divine favor. Throughout these

legends numerous animals such as magpies, tigers, and dogs are sent by Heaven and the spirits to

aid, protect, or reveal some secret to Nurhaci. Others emphasized Nurhaci as a great warrior defeating his terrible foes in battle.10 In the likely Qing manipulated Daur tale of the Manchu general Sabasu, the divine favor of the Manchus is expressed through the presence of a magical cannon that could only fire on the Russian Cossack enemies of the Manchus but when captured by their foes refused to take Manchu lives. As the legend reads,

One autumn 300 years ago there was a war against an old tsarist named Habarof. At that time, Sabusu had been appointed as the first general of . His forces had a cannon that was so heavy it required 16 horses to pull it to the top of Luntur Mountain…Once General Sabusu got the cannon to the mountain top, he trained it on Habarof’s forces, who had constructed a fortress on an island in the center of the nearby river. After the fortress was shelled, Habarof and his soldiers retreated. But not long after, another Russian force, led by Sijievannof, invaded north Heilongjiang, forcing General Sabusu to retreat. Now that the Russians were in control of Luntur Mountain, they attempted to aim the gun at the Chinese forces. But every time they tried, it automatically aimed itself at the Russian forces. With the help of several strong soldiers, the gun was aimed at some fishermen in the Heilongjiang River and the fuse lit. But just before firing, the cannon swiveled of its own accord and delivered its charge at the Russian forces. After this happened several times, Sijievannof ordered the cannon destroyed. Though the cannon was pounded with stones, it was not damaged. Later, when the Aihui Treaty was signed, the cannon fired its last charge at Aihui City, knocking Mulaviyef, the Russian representative, unconscious. Afterwards, the cannon slowly began sinking and, at last, vanished into Luntur Mountain.11

9 Crossley, A Translucent Mirror, 242. 10 Ibid. 243. 11 Stuart, “Li Xuewei & Shelear China's Dagur Minority,” 120. 114

From this narrative some important concepts can be extracted. First is the Manchu idea of

sovereignty. The Russian Cossacks had progressively encroached further and further into the

Qing Northeast and , resolving not merely to hold the ground, but also its numerous

peoples including the Daur. In this legend, the cannon only firing on the Russian interlopers and

refusal to be used against the Qing is symbolic of the recognition of the Manchu sovereign claim

over these lands and its peoples.

Clan Shamanism Under the New Qing Ritual

Clan Shamanism in the wake of the and subsequent monopolization

of Tangse ritual by the throne, Manchu Clan Shamanism was also subjected to the orthodoxy of

the throne. This was due to the fact that Tangse ritual and Kunninggong ritual found its roots in

the Shamanic practice of the clans. On the imperial level, rituals were made distinct by the

greater frequency of performances and larger numbers of performers and offerings. The

development of Tangse and Kunninggong ritual was result of the complex needs of a

progressively more centralized state.

How did the new Qing ritual, which was intended to displace wild or ecstatic rites, affect

Clan Shamanic practices? To answer this question, we can turn to one of the paramount primary

sources on clan ritual in the reformed Shamanic world, which comes from the Sacred Book of the

Shi (Sikteri, Manchu) family. The Shi clan of Jiutai, Jilin province remains one amongst the exceptionally few Manchu peoples inhabiting the Chinese Northeast who have managed to retain their Shamanic cultural practices to the present day.12 The rituals of the Shi clan are exceptional

in two ways. Firstly, by preserving their Shamanic rituals the Shi clan has provided scholars with

12 Guo, “Analysis of the Grandfather God of the Manchu Shi Clan.” 29. 115

one of the most groundbreaking contemporary examples of Manchu Shamanic ritual. Although,

the historian can never assume that a ritual practice has remained unchanged or unaltered over

the generations, the accounts of these rituals provide a firsthand look into a tangible example of

what the Clan Shamanic rituals could have been like. Secondly, the Shi clan’s rituals contain

Wild Rituals thought eliminated by Hong Taiji’s great purge, an example being the great deity

sacrifice.

The continued presence of ecstatic elements in contemporary Shamanic practices presents

a challenge for historians to explain how Wild Shamanism has survived. This study argues that

Wild Ritual did in fact survive to some degree on the periphery of the empire where state social

controls were weakest, only reemerging during the periods of great disorder and the final

decades before the fall of the Qing dynasty. This demonstrates that the return of Wild Shamanic

rituals to directly correlates with the stability of the Bannermen relationship with the throne and

its ability to enforce the Shamanic empire.

In order to both understand the rituals and evaluate the validity of this hypothesis, a brief

examination of the Shi clan’s rituals is necessary. The deities of the Shi clan contain essentially

three tiers of deities, high deities composed of the grandfather deity, Taiyeshen, and numerous

Manni hero deities; animal deities such as the Jackal, Wolf, Tiger, Leopard, Eagle, Python,

Snake, Hawk and Otter Gods; and household deities Fodo Mama, Aodu Mama and Grandfather

Chaohazhanye of Changbaishan13 Each tier containing their own distinctive traits and ritual

worship. The Shi family clan’s primary rituals can be divided between two major offerings: the

13 Guo, “Analysis of the Grandfather God of the Manchu Shi Clan,” 30. Chaohazhan is a heroic deity, Fodo Mama is the Manchu goddess of fertility. Aodu Mama is the female war goddess often depicted riding into battle. 116

sacrifice to high deities and the family deity offering. These great deities represented not the

distant abstract deities sanctioned pantheon that had been ordained by the throne, but rather

deeply personal deities interwoven with the clan distinct identity separate from the state. The

grandfather, animal and Manni hero deities for example did not specifically serve the emperor nor honor the khan’s arrangement with Heaven, but instead held loyalty to the clan’s lineage and its shamans which undoubtably provided a separate system of legitimacy and societal cohesion.

The animal spirits were also not abstract concepts strictly tied to specific prayers or chants but

were known personally by the shaman who during possession rituals summoned them into his or

her own body or allowed them to be his or her guides during spirit journeys. Lest we consider

this ritual tradition and its pantheon to be pure Wild Ritual, we must examine the third deity category. The household deities such as Fodo Mama and Grandfather Chaohazhanye of

Changbaishan (likely a personification of the spirt of Changbaishan.) were worshipped by all

Manchus and upheld by the court. Mount Changbaishan was considered by the court to be the spiritual origin of the Manchus with Hong Taiji as the Lord of Changbaishan. The worship of

Fodo Mama or Grandmother Willow was also an element of clan ritual central to the new Qing ritual and later the post-Qing Manchu society. The Manchu’s believed Fodo Mama to be their progenitor goddess of their genealogy, showing some overlap with the adoption of Chinese ancestor worship. The state welcomed and sponsored her worship at both the court and clan level. The worship of Fodo Mama revolved around the spirit rope. This rope was tied with knots and ribbons which served as records of births within the clan. With each generation that began, an ankle bone was added. The rope was kept within a golden sack in the clan’s place of worship or spirit alter. During these rituals the rope was used to join the sacred place or spirit altar with a

117

willow tree or spirit pole joining Heaven and earth.14 The shaman then interceded with the spirits

praying for health and prosperity for the children of the clan.

The presence of both wild and domestic spirits on equal footing within the pantheon of

the Shi clan reveals a hybridized Shamanic tradition combining elements of both traditions. This

hypothesis is supported by the parallel practice of both wild and Domestic Rituals. The

contemporary Shi clan practices a three-part ritual structure over several days.15 During the first

ritual, the clan shaman sacrifices to the domestic spirits. Upon completion of this ritual, amba

wild shaman will then perform Wild Rituals to the wild spirits. On the last day of the rituals the

clan shaman will return and offer a final sacrifice to Heaven. This ritual structure supports the

hypothesis that the formation of a hybridized traditions was in response to the collapse of the

Shamanic empire.

Ritual Form as Empire

The new Qing ritual reconfigured the relationship between Khanal legitimacy, authority,

and Shamanic ritual. Unlike the more dispersed power structure experienced when Wild

Shamanism was practiced, the new orthodoxy highlighted the authority of the Qing emperor within the Shamanic empire. This new power structure is clearly evident, for example, in the seating order used in each new ritual. Within these rituals, the khan sat mounted upon a dais, and in his immediate presence were the princes of the royal blood line, followed by the highest- ranking military and then civil officials. The elevation of hereditary and military ranks to such high station, emphasized a dual system of Manchu values composed of blood and martial

14 The worship of Fodo-mama Progenitor of the Manchus. Pang, “Kinship in the Altaic world.” 15 Qu, “Two Faces of the Manchu Shaman,” 7. 118

merit.16 This was a great departure from the preceding Ming ritual system, and was much more

reminiscent of the Shamanic empires of the Liao, Jin, and Yuan . This dual system was

not exclusive to the Manchus in its membership, but rewarded those who submitted to the khan,

a system which expanded to encompass an ever-increasing number of subjects being

incorporated by the expansion of the state. This ritual system provided greater rewards and

position within rituals to those who willingly submitted to the khan above those who were

defeated by way of conquest. For example, princely titles were granted to Mongols of the Eight

Banners as well as leaders of the Inner Asian peoples of the Qing, following a similar system to

the princely ranks among the Manchu princes themselves.17 In fact, the Qing state utilized

Shamanic rituals, princely titles, and Shamanic-folklorization together to support their rule. Just as Chinggis Khan had relied on the promotion of his khanal authority by sanction of the Mongol supreme deity Monke Tenggeri, so too did the new ritual order built upon the foundations of

Nurhaci, transforming the Jurchen belief system of the nine heaven’s into one “highest Heaven- khan” as a reflection of his own rule.18 These state ritual elements were all the culmination of

multifaceted ritual system of the Qing.

The Tangse Rituals

The Tangse (alongside the Kunninggong) was the one of the two primary ritual sites

within the Manchu capital. The Tangse represented the imperial enterprise of the khan, and the distinction of his state from his rivals. It was the first and most important ritual to take place on

New Year’s Day and was the prime component of a system of rituals that took place throughout

16 Sugiyama, "The Ch'ing Empire as a Manchu Khanate the Structure of Rule under the Eight Banners," 17 Ibid. 54. 18 Crossley, A Translucent Mirror, 234-235. 119

the day at different sites throughout the capital. This ritual contained two stages—first, the

sacrifices and reporting of affairs to Heaven, which took place at 5:00 am on the ritual day, and

second, the emperor returned to the capital to receive the ritual submission of his bondsmen.

The New Year’s Day Ritual

The Tangse New Year’s Day ritual was arguably the most vital ritual of the Shamanic

empire. It was the first and most important ritual to take place on New Year’s Day and was the

prime component of a system of rituals that took place throughout the day at different sites

throughout the capital. This ritual contained two stages. First the sacrifices and reporting of

affairs to Heaven which took place at 5am on the ritual day. Second, the emperor returned to the

capital to receive the ritual submission of his bondsmen.

While previous Han-ruled dynasties had performed New Year’s rites, the Manchus

reinvented the tradition infusing their own Shamanic tradition and rituals at the center and

introducing the Tangse as a ritual site. The New Year’s rite was so vital because it symbolically communicated the order of Manchu society to the nobility and more specifically to political rivals. Ritual was the first line of defense against the usurpation of the throne from within.19 In

fact, the Manchu’s performed their own ritual forms long before they entered Shanhaiguan. It

was the introduction of Manchu Shamanic elements into Chinese state ritual and the emphasis on

the ruler’s legitimate authority over a diverse group of ethnic, religious, and political entities

which defined the Qing ritual from previous dynasties. For example, rather than placing the

emperor as a depersonalized position dominated by the bureaucracy in line with Ming tradition,

the Manchu ritual emphasized the dominant charismatic khan demanding fealty of his

19 Islam and Keliher, "Leading through Ritual,” 3. 120

bondsmen.20 The choice of the Tangse as the first ritual site displayed the Qing emphasis on the

Manchu forms of Shamanic legitimacy above all others. Actual rituals emphasized the position

of the emperor vis-à-vis military officials, civilian officials, and foreign envoys. The position of

each ranking relative to the emperor was meant not merely as a status symbol but as an

expression of the khan domination of all members of the empire.21 During these rituals, the emperor and empress served as the imperial center and were aided by the shaman, who served as an officiator. The princes and Banner lords, as well as subordinate Inner Asian rulers, were each placed in their appropriate position within the state hierarchy. This is unlike the Ming ceremony, where civilian officials, rather than military leaders, were dominant, and the emperor was represented more a depersonalized office than an independent actor.

The Manchu New Year’s rite was a performative element of khanal authority dating back to Nurhaci. Similar rituals go as far back as 1596, when Nurhaci still shared power with his brother Surhaci.22 According to one Korean envoy, early Manchu-Jurchen rituals were held

within the homes of different lords and officials. Nurhaci and Surhaci sat together in the highest

ritual position to receive the of all guests and envoys positioned in the four directions.23

The night and days that followed were filled with dances, music, and games. From this record, it

is clear that in this era, the rituals of the Jurchens reflected their early ethos of collegial rule. This

is reflected by the group diffused-nature of the ritual lacking a stark enforced system of hierarchy

beyond the shared leadership. What is also notable is the lack of a separate Tangse in the record.

20 Keliher, The Manchu Transformation of Li, 81. 21 Islam and Keliher, "Leading through Ritual,” 9. 22 Ch'en, “Religions and Lay Symbolism of Imperial Manchu Practices in Observing the New Year,” 971. A Korean envoy observed great feasting and celebrations in which dances were performed in the presence of both Korean and Chinese envoys. 23 Ibid. 971. 121

It is possible this was due to the fact that Nurhaci and Surhaci, who were still beile, had not yet

set their eyes on the position of khan of any empire and thus lacked their own Tangse site,

instead opting for household shrines. Using a Tangse would declare their intentions broadly to their rivals and would likely have attracted premature attention from more dominant forces.

Within a few decades, as Nurhaci became more ambitious, however, his New Year’s rituals evolved and included the use of a Tangse. This is shown in the records of the 1622 rite:

The khan [Nurhaci] led the Eight Banner beise and high officials out of the city to kowtow at the shrine in the Tangse. Afterwards, they returned and sat in the yamen. The Eight Banner beise led all the high officials in kowtowing to congratulate the khan on the passing of the year. Next, the Mongol Enggeder Efu, Manggol Efu, and Gurbusi Taiji [the rank of a Mongol noble] led all the Mongols in kowtowing, Next, Fusi Efu, and Uli Efu led all the Chinese officials in Kowtowing. Next, two lamas from the and Four Korean officials kowtowed. After each were finished kowtowing in turn, a hundred tables were prepared and cows and sheep were killed. All the Beise and high officials, the Chinese, the Korean officials, and the Mongol Beise gathered for various Chinese performances and a grand banquet.24

From this record, it is clear that the position of Nurhaci had changed since the 1590’s.

Not only was Nurhaci now recognized as khan, but he also possessed his own Tangse within his

capital. The Shamanic rites at the Tangse were again the first action of the rulers asserting their primacy. Upon returning to the yamen, a much more regulated system was established with

general groups of lords and officials taking turn offering their submission. The next feature of

this passage is the mention of a greater number of guest and envoys who are named, some of whom traveled as far from their borders as Tibet, again suggesting the extent of Nurhaci’s growing prestige and charismatic authority.

24 Keliher, The Manchu Transformation of Li, 88. 122

Two years later, in 1624, the New Year’s rites reveal that Nurhaci’s authority had continued to grow:

At 5 a.m. on the morning of the new year, the khan kowtowed in the Tangse. Afterwards, he returned and kowtowed to the ancestors. At 7 a.m. he exited the octagonal pavilion. After sitting, the senior beile [Daisan] was the first to kowtow. Then Enggeder Efu led all the Mongol Beile in kowtowing. Third was Amin Beile. Fourth, Manggultai beile. Fifth, Duici beile. Sixth, Ajige age. Seventh, Dodo age. Eighth, Abatai age and Dudu age. Ninth age and Xoto age. Tenth, Fusi efu and Si Uli efu led Korean officials and Chinese officials in kowtowing. Eleventh, Unege Baksi led all the Eight Banner Mongols in kowtowing. After the kowtowing had finished, they drank and the khan entered. At 9 a.m. they went out to the banquet. At 1p.m. they dispersed from the octagonal pavilion.25

Unlike the 1622 New Year’s rite, which lacked a specific order of entry and ritual submission, by

1624, we can identify the beginning of a state ranking. At the time of this ritual, Daisan was still a powerful player for the throne as a possible heir to Nurhaci, which explains his placement at the head of the procession to offer his ritual submission. What is fascinating is that the Mongols of allied states are presented with such an early entry, even ahead of many of the beile, perhaps demonstrating the crucial nature of their bonds during a precarious time for the Later Jin khanate.

Another observation of note is that Hong Taiji is not mentioned by name in this record, demonstrating just how unsuspecting his rise was for the court. Also, the presence of not only

Mongol and Chinese allies but also special mention of Mongol Bannermen highlights their growing status within the Later Jin khanate. Just as in the previous celebrations, the rituals were followed by ice games and feasting, but this time operas and fireworks are noted, denoting the rising level of wealth afforded to the rising state.26

25 Ibid. 80. 26 Ch'en, “Religions and Lay Symbolism of Imperial Manchu Practices in Observing the New Year.” 972. 123

These developments continued with the 1626 New Year’s rite, which also offers new

clues as to the nature of the bond between the khan and his bondsmen. Nurhaci first went to the

Tangse for the ritual: “The Khan [Nurgaci] went to worship in the Tangse, and then returned

home to kowtow and worship the primary spirits.”27 Nurhaci then returned to receive ritual

submissions. Just as in the previous cases, a careful entrance and seating order was observed.

First came the wives of the khan, followed by the princes of the Eight Banners and their wives.

After these princes, came the princes of the Mongol and Inner Asian allies along with their

wives. The Han Chinese officials and their wives entered last. This displayed a distinct ethnic

hierarchy which corresponded with each groups place within the Shamanic empire. All

participants then at the proper time kowtowed before the khan. Following the kowtows, Nurhaci

engaged in the second most important element of the New Year’s ritual, the khan’s fulfillment of

his sacred duty to his bondsmen by acting as a provider. This custom was deeply rooted in Inner

Asian culture, which defined the relationship between Bannermen and ruler. The khan granted

the Bannermen loot and prosperity, while the khan received the bondsmen’s loyalty and

servitude. Nurhaci granted several kinds of gifts to his bondsmen such as silver, pelts, and silk,

each holding its own symbolic meaning. Additionally, this record for the first time specifically

mentions the women of the court and their position in the ordering of the state.28

Under Hong Taiji, under whom the Qing transitioned to ruling in Beijing, these rites were institutionalized and further routinized. “Every New Year’s Day, the emperor will lead people from princes to vice 都统 dutongs and king from other kingdoms to offer sacrifices and incense, make obeisance and kowtow.”29 This decree highlights the Manchu khan’s deep awareness of

27 Udry, Muttering Mystics, 25. 28 Crossley, A Translucent Mirror, 178. 29 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 411. 124

this role of ritual in diplomatic engagements and the necessity of annual participation. This form of performative submission needed to be renewed annually and in perpetuity for the Shamanic

empire to exist. This institutionalized element of the New Year’s Day appears to have been a component of the Shamanic centralization efforts of Hong Taiji.

Another change made by Hong Taiji was to establish a specific order for his bondsmen to participate in the New Year’s rites. Prior to 1632, the ordering of the participants had not yet been fixed. Originally under Nurhaci, generals, ministers, and officials were ordered by seniority.30 This fact is not surprising given the dynamics of Nurhaci’s state, where allied tribal

chieftains, beile princes, and subordinate Inner Asian rulers held greater agency within the

Shamanic empire. This transition during the reign of Hong Taiji mirrored the centralization of

the state which can observed throughout the reign of Hong Taiji. Hong Taiji’s first New Year’s

rite as khan (1627) shows this change:

On the first day of the first month of the first year the Wise Khan… All the beile, high officials, and civil and military officials assembled at the main yamen after the fifth watch. Each of the banners lined up in order. At dawn, the Wise Khan led all the beile and high officials to the Tangse, where they performed the three and nine to Heaven. Thereupon they returned. When the khan came out of the yamen, the beile and high officials lined up by rank and prepared to each kneel three times and each prostrate nine times. When kowtowing, two people stood on either side of the khan. One person called out, ‘all beile and all high officials kowtow and congratulate on the passing of the year’ After saying this, the other called out to kneel and prostrate. Originally, the doro of the Manchus for New Year’s Day was to put on all kinds of performances and dances, and to have a great banquet. This year because of mourning for Taizu, there were no joyful performances, and no banquet. The khan only received the kowtows of everyone.31 In this passage it becomes clear the changes Hong Taiji was enacting and their direct

relationship with his usurpation of the throne and consolidation of power in the form of specific

30 Islam and Keliher, "Leading through Ritual,” 11. 3131 Crossley, A Translucent Mirror, 89. 125

ritual movements. First, the beile enter and perform their ritual submission according to specific rank and order. Records of this rite also establish the presence of both Banner and civilian officials incorporated into the rituals. Records of this rite also include that the ceremony concluded with the burning of notes to inform Heaven of the events.32

Hong Taiji’s performance of the New Year’s rituals, a few years after his father

Nurhaci’s death, offered him an opportunity to manage some of the most contentious issues of

his rise to power, like the violent rivalry he displayed towards his brothers and the compromises

with other leaders that enabled him to become khan. The records of the 1630 rite show Hong

Taiji displaying greater humility among his leaders, returning their bows and otherwise

demonstrating a greater sense of equality:

The emperor led all the beile and high officials to visit the temple and perform the rites. After a short while they returned to the palace to pray to the ancestors. Upon entering court, the two senior beile sat on the east and west sides, and all the beile and officials separated into two lines and sat below the emperor. The Mongol - she-tu efu from the Kuo-er-qin state, and Zhi-nong efu from the -han tribe each lead their officials in the first procession. The Banner beile each led their Banner officials in the next procession. En--de-li efu led the Mongols Cha-han-er, Kua- er-kua, and all the Mongols in the third procession. General Shi-wu-li efu and Tong Yangxing led the Chinese officials in the fourth procession. General Wu- nei-ge led the Eight Banner Mongol officials in the fifth procession. The Mongol tribe A- was sixth. When each had done the court ceremony in turn, the senior beile retired first. The emperor led Manggultai beile and all the beile to bow to the senior beile [i.e. Daisan]. The senior beile did not receive their bows and also bowed. Afterwards, he offered tea and wine. Manggultai beile retired. The emperor led all the beile to his residence and bowed Manggultai beile also did not receive their bows, but bowed to them. The beile’s wife also bowed in front of the emperor. The emperor also reunited the bow. Shortly after, they also went to bow to the older sister, Ha-da Ge-ge. Ge-ge also did the same bow. Thereupon, the emperor led the beile into court where he ordered the performance of various plays and a great banquet for the officials.33

32 Ch'en, “Religions and Lay Symbolism of Imperial Manchu Practices in Observing the New Year,” 972. 33 Keliher, The Manchu Transformation of Li, 92. 126

Two years later, the 1632 Records show that the rites had been “corrected” into a more clearly hierarchical sequence of prostrations, with Hong Taiji’s status receiving obeisance, rather than participating in mutual displays of respect:

On the first day of the month, the khan led all the beile to kowtow to Heaven and to the ancestor spirits, [Afterwards], sitting in the yamen, the senior beile [Daisan] sat on the right side of the khan, and Manggultai on his left. The two Beile sat facing sideways on beds placed sideways. After being seated, all the Beile and taiji kowtowed. After kowtowing, the taiji entered the yamen en masse and sat on the two sides. Next were the beile of Cahar and Kalka, wo came from a foreign state to pay respects. Third, Si Uli efu, who came from the Chinese state to pay respects, led all the Chinese officials in kowtowing. Next, the Plain Yellow Banner general Yangguri Efu [a rank given to a son in law] led his Banner officials in kowtowing. Next, the Bordered Yellow general Darhan efu led his Banner officials in kowtowing. Next, the Plain Red Banner general Hosotu efu led his Banner officials in kowtowing. Next, the Plain White Banner general Kakduri led his Banner officials in kowtowing. Next, the Bordered Red general Yecen led his banner officials in kowtowing. Next, the Bordered White vice general Ilden led his Banner officials in kowtowing. Next the Plain Blue Banner, but because the commander was sick, all the Banner officials kowtowed [without being led]. Next, the general Unege led all the Mongol high officials in kowtowing. Next the new officials that were brought over with the surrender at Dalinghe kowtowed. Next, the leader of the Aru state Dalai Cuhur led all his friends in kowtowing. Next, the officials of the three teachings, Confucian scholars, Daoist priests, and Buddhist , kowtowed. Next, the Korean envoy, General Cheong Ik kowtowed and placed on the table the gifts for the spring rite that he was sent with and offered a letter to the khan. After all the people had kowtowed, the khan went to the home of the senior beile and kowtowed in the brother rite. Up until now, for these past five years the khan has sat on the throne with the three beile together all facing south, and there received the kowtows of the people. from this year it is corrected. The khan distinguishably sits alone facing south. The Eight Banners have been each leading their Banner officials in kowtowing. When kowtowing, they have not been following the order of the central wing battalions, but rather first kowtowing according to the age of the brother [i.e. ritual propriety has been following age of the beile leading the Banner and not the strength of the banner]. From this year it is corrected. Kowtowing follows the Banner ranking. For the banquet, each Banner received ten tables and five geese. All those with the rank general got twenty tables and twenty geese. Altogether there were one hundred tables and one hundred bottles of wine. They cooked the meat of wild animals and banqueted.34

34 Ibid. 83-84. 127

Again, there is notable contrast between these rituals separated by just two years. One change is that there are participants from outside the inner empire. Mongol princes, Inner Asian rulers, and

Chinese and Korean officials alike (amongst others) traveled to participate in their ritual submission to the khan, bearing gifts and tribute. For the first time among these records

Confucian, Buddhist, and Daoist priests are mentioned to be part of the procession, denoting the increasing complexity of the Shamanic empire as these officials, while stemming from their own traditions were taking part in the state ritual representing the khan of the Shamanic empire, drawing the question of when do outside influences change the nature of a ritual.

Another major change is in respect to the positioning of inner empire leaders themselves.

In the 1630 rite, following the Shamanic rite at the Tangse, Hong Taiji, in line with the compromise that made him khan, bowed to his elder brothers among the senior beile, respecting their seniority. This rite unmistakably, was a demonstration of a lack of total control of the state and an homage to collegial rule. This portion of the rite is notably absent from the 1632 ceremony. Furthermore, in 1632, Hong Taiji was set apart from his brothers, signifying his elevated status as supreme focus of the ritual, and enforcing the hierarchy of the khanate. The khan was supported on both sides by the two most powerful of his brothers, who held seniority over him, which communicated the collegial nature of his rule. The absence of the now purged

Amin, however, details the increasing usurpation of power by the khan. The brothers of senior beile still held enough power in 1630 to remain at the head of the ceremony, but not enough to be active participants on equal footing with the khan. The consensus of which this arrangement was based saw Hong Taiji elected khan but only as long as the senior beile princes would remain seated at the khan’s side. The demotion of their positions from the khan’s side in 1632 was

128

manifestation of the centralized nature of the new khanship. These changes to the hierarchical placement of ritual participants did not go unnoticed by the officials of the court and senior beile.

A discussion between officials, the beile and Hong Taiji displays this tenuous debate as found in the Taizong shilu the official chronology of Hong Taiji’s reign as Qing emperor. In the following passage, Hong Taiji and his beile are discussing the ritual fate of Manggultai, previously one of

Nurhaci’s four senior beile, and now out of favor:

The emperor spoke to the Eight Banner beile and officials about the New Year's day celebration, and told them that Board of Li vice president Li Bolong memorialized saying, "When conducting state rites, officials are not lining up according to rank but rather by the quality of furs they possess. Those possessing furs of higher value line up first, and those with furs of lesser value after [i.e. the ritual order is arbitrary]. This is my honest opinion: this year for the New Year’s Day ceremony the Banner beile should [first] line up and do their rites. Next, will be the foreign Mongol beile who surrendered. Next, the civil and military officials of the banners should line up according to their Banner order. Because Manggultai committed an offense he should have his beile rank revoked [and no longer be allowed to sit with the emperor and other beile for the ceremony]." [The emperor said,] "Since coming to the throne, whenever performing state rites I have always sat together with [Manggultai]. If foreigners hear of this, they will not know that the fault is his and think that I am a disrespectful younger brother. Since he is older than me, how about allowing him to [continue to] sit with me?" [The emperor] ordered Dahai baksi, Kurcan baksi, Lungsi, , and the senior beile [Daisan], these beile, to discuss. Half did not agree with the emperor's suggestion, but then reluctantly agreed. Daisan agreed with the emperor and said, "[Manggultai’s] mistake is not enough for the emperor to mind. According to the principle of li, it is permissible to allow him to sit with us." He continued, saying, "We all agreed to support [Hong Taiji] as the khan, while at the same time sitting together with him as khan. But I fear that people will gossip and say that although we venerate him as khan, we also act like three Buddhas. How can such an arrangement [of equal seating] not lead to gossip? Since this is Manggultai's personal transgression, the deities will hear and will condemn and shorten his life. If we can measure our ability and act according to principle, then luck will follow and Heaven will bless us with long life. How is this not wonderful? "From this day forth, the emperor will sit in the middle facing south. Myself and Manggultai will sit below on the left and right. The foreign Mongol beile will sit beneath us. Since he is the khan, how can we not give him primacy?" Thereupon

129

he reported to the beile and they all said, "good." The matter was settled, and the emperor agreed35

Also, of note is the attendance of the ritual. First, as to be expected, the remainder of the eight

beile princes performed their ritualistic kowtows in submission to the khan, followed by

representatives of the Eight banners. This represented the internal component of the Shamanic

empire.

So important were these rites that even the Shunzhi emperor, who returned the eunuchs to

the court and relied heavily upon the Han scholar elite, actions that suggest a desire to distance

himself from Manchu practices, never neglected the New Year’s rite as he did the imperial hunt

and other Shamanic rituals. To put it succinctly, the New Year’s rite was Shamanic legitimacy.

The ultimate takeaway from my analysis of this ritual is that it symbolized and enacted a

new understanding of khanal leadership under the now Qing emperors. In the early rituals, Hong

Taiji sat on equal footing with the senior beile. Then progressively, through political

machinations, the senior beile were demoted or purged, leaving him with progressively more

power. This process is also observed by the increased status of the ambans, civil and Banner

officials who were given specific placement and order within the New Year’s ritual to denote a

changing political sphere. Finally, the role of Inner Asian allies within these rituals was clearly

changing. As the Qing state formed the Shamanic empire, more and more Inner Asian peoples are recorded as taking part in these rituals, sometimes in particularly high positions equal to the banners, suggesting their greater importance to the Qing consolidation of power.

35 Ibid. 107-8. 130

The Monthly Rites

The Tangse Monthly rites were performed in the spirit pavilion, which was home to

numerous Manchu deities. The rituals were performed for the Manchu gods Abka Juse or the Son of Heaven, Niohan Taiji the possibly ancestral Green heavenly prince, and Uduben Beise.36 The

ritual began with the entrance of musicians, imperial guards, acolytes, and ritual attendants. The

shaman would then enter and perform six wine offerings and the offering of foods. Then after

kowtowing, the ritual would transition to the spirit sword portion of the ritual. Clasping the spirit

sword, the shaman would lead the procession in Shamanic songs and prayers. The ceremony

would conclude with the consuming of the ritual elements by the procession seated on a great

.

Sacrifice to the Horse God

The sacrifice to the horse god was held each spring and autumn and occurred over a two-

day period, during which sacrifices were made on behalf of the great horse herds of the empire.37

The ceremony involved ten white horses, which were decorated with numerous colored strips of

silk paper tied to the manes and tails of each horse. The shaman would make a wine offering.

Then the head herdsman led the horses along the before the Tangse pavilion. The shaman would

engage spirits, utilizing the spirit sword to the sound ritual music, and perform prayers and spirit

songs. Horses were the blood of the empire, and its ritual worship was tied to martial prowess.

These rituals were sometimes held in a third Shamanic site known as the Horse deities' Room

36 Ibid. 88. This concept of the son of heaven differed from the Chinese version and did not represent the emperor. 37 Di Cosmo, “Manchu Shamanic Ceremonies at the Qing Court,” 396. 131

(Mashenshi).38 It appears that this ritual also had a clan ritual form, one source translated by

Durrant demonstrates this:

Shamanism can be likened to invoking ancestors. For the most part young women do it. On their heads they wear a kind of metal helmet, and at their waists are tied skirts on which are strung many pieces of copper and iron. As they sway them, they make sounds, and their mouths murmur and drums clamor. They take a pole and tie on strips of silk cloth over the oven-bed. Then, binding a pig, they anoint its ears and bristles with wine. If the ears or bristles move, it is good fortune. Killing the pig by hand with a knife and removing its intestines, they tum them over with their hands, for these also contain omens of good and ill fortune. If the young woman is beautiful and graceful, then she also sings and dances. But if her appearance is old, then she is disliked; and men are disliked even more. The horse god leads a horse into the yard, and, while they bind up its tail and mane with red and green cloth threads, they mummer in order to bless it. When the performance is over, they summon relatives to eat raw meat and drink rice wine until they are completely drunk and full. They are not allowed to take anything and go out the gate, for they say, "The gods will be angry." ordinarily there is certain to be a pole in the yard, and atop this pole they tie cloth strips, explaining that the ancestors rely upon these, if you move them. then it is the same as excavating their graves." After they have cut open the pig, if flocks of crows come down and peck at the leftover meat, then they joyously say, ''The ancestors are pleased." If not, then they sadly say, "Our ancestors are dissatisfied; disaster will come.39

The Dispatching Generals Embarking on Campaign (命將) and Triumphant Returning Rituals

(凱旋)

The new Qing ritual contained two Shamanic rituals defined by their role in Manchu military tradition. The Dispatching Generals Embarking on a Campaign (Mingjiang 命將) ritual and the Triumphant Returning ritual (凯旋) expressed the legitimacy of the khan in exercising a privileged authority that increasingly only he possessed over the Banner forces. The Mingjiang ritual was first formalized under Hong Taiji but held its roots in Jurchen tradition. During the Jin

38 Jiang, “Did the Imperially Commissioned Manchu Rites for Sacrifices to the Spirits and to Heaven Standardize Manchu Shamanism?" 3. 39 Durrant, “Three Early Ch’ing Descriptions of Manchu Shamanism,” 208. 132 dynasty, before major conflicts, Jurchen khans would lead the nobility and warriors alike to make a Shamanic offering to Heaven and Earth and to pray for the heavenly enhancement of their armaments and the holy protection of their battle armor. As Franke details,

“Before crucial battles it was customary among the Jurchen to invoke Heaven and Earth. Thus, in 1114 T’ai-tsu [Taizu] escorted his aunt and all his generals out the gate where they held their wine cups towards the east and prayed to Heaven and Earth…The prayer was performed on the eve of the decisive battle in which the Liao forces were routed by the Jurchen under A-ku-ta [Aguda], but it was not only the leader himself who prayed before a battle . The world army apparently took part in solemn ceremonies prior to the engagement.”40

This resembles rituals performed by Nurhaci and Hong Taiji on numerous occasions during their reigns. The location of the ritual outside the city, however, is of particular note given the placement of the Manchu Tangse, denoting a continuity in ritual locations. When Nurhaci was fighting a war on all sides against the Eight-Tribe alliance during the wars of unification, it was at the Tangse that he informed Heaven of the coming battle. As Corradini explains:

In 1593. the day renzi 壬子 of the 9th month of the year guisi 癸巳(21st year of Wanli, September 25, 1593) was a very difficult moment, when Nurhaci was being attacked from three sides by an army of 30,000 men of a confederation composed of the Yehe (Chinese: Yehe 業赫）Hada (Hada 哈達）Ula (Wula 烏 喇）Hoifa (Huifa 輝發）Mongol Korcin (Keerqin 科爾沁）from the north of the river Nen (Bei Nenhe Menggu Keerqin 北嫩合蒙古科爾沁）Sibei (Xibei 席北） Guwalgiya (Guaercha 掛爾察）Juseri (Zhusheli 朱舍里） Manchus of the Changbaishan (Manzhou Changbaishan suo shu Zhusheli 滿洲長白山所扈朱舍 里）Nayin (Nayin 訥殷）He gathered his officials in the Tangzi and pronounced a speech. However, according to the Manzhou Shilu 滿洲實錄 [Manchu Veritable Records], on this occasion Nurhaci visited only the Tangzi.41 Nurhaci in 1616 burned his Seven Grievances to inform Heaven of his oath of conquest during a Shamanic ceremony held at the Tangse, displaying Jurchen custom surrounding the

40 Franke and Chan, Studies on the Jurchens and the Chin Dynasty, 140-141. 41 Corradini, “The Worship of Heaven and of Earth during the Qing Dynasty,” 20 133

declaration of war. Hong Taiji later in 1636 performed another early form of this ritual in

dispatching Ajige and Dodo as commanding generals against the Ming forces.42 The ritual

tradition continued under Kangxi who performed this ritual at least five times between 1675 and

1719 before major expeditions against the Chaqar, Galdan, the , the rebellious three

feudatories, the , and to place a new in place in Tibet.43

The ritual itself was one of extreme pomp and circumstance. As in the New Year’s Day ceremony, the khan was the central figure mounted upon the imperial dais to receive the ritual submission of his generals. As Waley-Cohen vividly describes:

The imperial insignia were set out, with stone chimes for musical accompaniment, and a table was set up in the Taihedian…for the imperial credentials sent by the emperor. Princes, lords, and officials clad in formal ceremonial clothing (mangpao) decorated with different dragons depending on rank, and the bearing their rank badges, stood in order of precedence. The general and officers who were actually going on campaign waited on the east side facing west, similarly attired. Senior officials from the board of rites proceeded to the gat of Sovereign Purity, (Qianqing—in the heart of the Forbidden City) to request the emperor’s attendance, and the at the Meridian Gate (Wumen—the front entrance of the Forbidden City), bells and drums were sounded. Clothed in full imperial dragon robes, the emperor rode out in his carriage as far as the north side the Taihedian, then alighted and entered the hall. A prescribed piece of court music was played until the emperor had ascended the throne; the whip crack sounded three times, followed by more music. Surrounded on either side by those who were going on campaign, all kneeling, the commander-in-chief was then led forward to receive the credentials, which were passed from official to official and even eventually handed over with great ceremony by a Grand Secretary, to a musical accompaniment . After he and the other officers preparing to go on campaign performed three kneelings and nine obeisances, the music stopped. All left and the whip crack sounded. The Emperor rose as more music was played, and then returned to the palace. On the actual day of departure, the emperor went through the Merdian gate to the Tangse, preceded by the imperial insignia. The horn and conch were blown, and ceremonies took place in which emperor, commander-in-chief, and princes going on campaign all took part. Then the emperor proceeded to a specially erected

42 Waley-Cohen, “Military Ritual and the Qing Empire,” 419-420. 43 Udry, Muttering Mystics, 48. 134

yellow tent outside the Chang’an gate in the south wall of the Imperial Palace where he personally handed wine to the commander-in-chief from a temporary throne. After ritually partaking, the commander led the other campaigning officers in performing the three kneelings and nine obeisances. Armed with their bows and arrows, they took their leave of the emperor, mounted their horses and set toff. After the emperor had passed back through the Meridian Gate, he sent an official to give farewell feast with tea and wine outside the ages of the capital. After the feast which involved further ceremonial, they made obeisance toward the capital to thank the emperor for his beneficence.44

The rituals were addressed to Heaven and involved kowtowing before Heaven and before the spirits of the banners, then burning messages to Heaven to inform the spirits. The two stages of this ritual reflected each other. First, the khan paid his respects to Heaven; then, the princes and their banners paid their respect to the khan. The importance of these rituals can be inferred in

Qianlong’s entrance into the Huidian 会典:

The ceremony in the hall [Tangse] is the general ceremony of our tribe’s ancestors. The god to whom we sacrifice is the god in Heaven. Our ancestors would go to the outlying areas to light a campfire and implement the ceremony at a certain time. The hall will follow this old tradition, to offer sacrifices and pray when an emergency happens, in the first ten days of the first months of spring and autumn, and on New Year’s Day. Since the regulation was established, we have never disobeyed it, and we never change the names of this ceremony out of respect for the old tradition. While examining the old texts, we found out that there are different ways to offer sacrifices for the harvest or for the year. Of course, we have to offer sacrifices in the hall before we start a military action of any kind, we will array many items in a sacrifice for luck. When our ancestors were on their way in the army, they could not return to the hall [Tangse]. So, they offered sacrifices in the hall [Tangse]. This was the best and most respectful way they could find. If I, the emperor, send out a conquering army, I will offer sacrifices when I triumphantly return. Since all the gods in the Heaven and Earth to which are offered sacrifices and respect are listed in our holy book, and have been studied by scholars, if our ritual specialists make mistakes in the hall or during the ceremonies, what will happen? This concerns the rituals and ceremonies so it is very important, it should be well prepared. The details of the rituals conducted by the ministers and princes will be determined by me, the emperor, and will be recorded in the holy book.45

44Waley-Cohen, “Military Ritual and the Qing Empire,” 420-421. 45 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 412. 135

This passage reveals that the Qianlong emperor, famed for his ten grand campaigns, firmly

recognized the necessity of appealing to Heaven via Shamanic ceremony before a war of military

conquest and a formal reporting to Heaven of the great deeds of the empire’s forces. Specifically,

the Qianlong emperor refers to the idea that a failure to properly perform these Shamanic rites

could result in offending Heaven. An important takeaway for historians is the acknowledgement of the central Shamanic understanding of khanship as late as the Qianlong reign, when according to Sinicization narratives, the Qing emperors may be assumed to have largely lost their adherence to Manchu religious practices.

The second ritual is the Triumphant Returning ritual, which can be subdivided into three stages—Jiaolao, Xianfu, and Shoufu. The rite originated from Manchu custom (jiaolao) of the khan departing the capital to greet his victorious army and bestow rewards and feasting. In 1627,

Hong Taiji rode out to meet Amin on his return from his victorious campaign in Korea; then they worshiped at the Tangse to thank the gods for their victory.46 This custom is recorded to have

occurred many times under Nurhaci and Hong Taiji and after 1644 became institutionalized and

performed at the conclusion of every major victory by Qing forces. Notably, the Kangxi

emperor’s victory over the rebellious Three Feudatories and Galdan’s Dzungar forces,

Yongzheng’s defeat of the forces, and Qianlong’s all saw the

performance of this ritual.47 During this ritual, the emperor once again mounted the imperial dais

facing south built under the Imperial yellow tent which was surrounded by eight blue tents. 48

Upon the emperor’s platform the spoils of war were presented to the emperor amid ritual music

46 Ch'en, “Religions and Lay Symbolism of Imperial Manchu Practices in Observing the New Year,” 972. 47 Waley-Cohen, “Military Ritual and the Qing Empire.” 48 The yellow tent was meant to invoke the Inner Asian and semi nomadic origins of the Manchus. This practice was also performed while on imperial hunts. 136 and theatric demonstrations. The emperor’s role in this ceremony was to lead his generals in a ritualistic reporting of triumphs and offering of thanks to Heaven.49

Fig. 11 The Emperor Greeting the Triumphant Troops Outside of the Capital 1772

(The Metropolitan Museum of Art Collection: The Conquests of the )

Following this, the emperor would hold feasting and spectacle then precede to grant rewards to the victorious generals in the form of wealth and titles in a reflection of early Jurchen/Manchu customs. During these ceremonies, the emperor poured wine for his generals from his own goblet and presided over the spectacle performed by performers of the defeated people.50

49 Waley-Cohen, “Military Ritual and the Qing Empire,” 424. 50 Ibid. 427. 137

Fig. 12 The Victory Banquet 1770

(The Metropolitan Museum of Art Collection: The Conquests of the Emperor of China)

As part of the Triumphant Returning ritual, further ceremonies were held at several ritual sites, including the Tangse. The Huidian 会典 passage continues with a detailed account of the temple portion of the ritual:

If the army returns triumphantly, we will implement our sacrificial ritual and ceremonies in the Heaven and Earth Hall, the Great Temple (太 庙), the Ancestor Hall (奉先殿), the Altar of Land and Grain, and the sepulcher of our ancients as usual. The emperor will lead the ritual in the hall [Tangzi] at the time the Heaven Observer (钦天监) selects with full sacrifices. The general who has won the war will wait at 金水桥 Jinshui Bridge, all the officials will wait in their usual place at morning court, outside 午门 Wumen, the kings, beile, beizis, dukes, high scholars, dutongs, 尚书 shangshus, and all the other first-level officials should wait outside the inner gates of the hall [Tangzi] in that order. The ritual official will play music to invite the emperor. Those officials, who do not have the right to accompany the emperor, should wait for the emperor to leave while kneeling down on the ground. The triumphant generals and kings, beile, beizis, dukes, scholars, dutongs, shangshus, and first-level officials should kneel down and await the emperor.

138

When he comes, they should accompany him to enter the hall. The ritual official should invite the emperor to enter the hall to offer sacrifices; the accompanying officials should stand aside in order. The ritual official will play a piece of music indicating the end. The ritual official should then invite the emperor to exit and embark in a sedan chair.51

From this passage, we can extract several fascinating elements of these rituals, one element being the attendance of the ritual. A comprehensive list of high-ranking officials, princes, nobles, and

scholars are all in attendance and in their proper place within the hierarchy. Regardless of rank

and including the victorious general, all are made to wait upon the emperor on their knees,

emphasizing that regardless of the general’s achievement and anticipated popularity, he is still subordinate to the emperor and should now pay homage to his master, reducing any political or

spiritual autonomy. It is only then that the emperor will enter and perform the ritual expressing

the emperor’s monopoly on religio-political power.

This acknowledgement became of dire importance as a result of its origins during the

later Jin and Early Qing. As previously discussed, the later Jin dynasty was essentially ruled by a

council of beile princes, of which Hong Taiji through ingenious machinations and political

maneuvering surmounted his brothers to take over as khan after the passing of Nurhaci.

Throughout the Manchu conquest, the crusading Manchu generals were in fact relatives of the

khan, some of whom like Dorgon or Amin coveted the throne. The act of ritual obeisance in the

form of the three genuflections and nine prostrations during the rituals, such as the New Year’s

Day ritual, Triumphant Return, and Dispatching Generals rituals, served as a means by which to maintain public authority over his chief rivals. “Up until now, for these past five years, the khan and the three nobles all one and the same sat together to receive kowtows. From this year it is

51 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 413. 139

corrected. The khan distinguishably sits alone facing south.”52From a mounted position on

elevated dais the khan received the ritual submission thus emphasizing the his khanal

legitimacy.53

In regard to surrendered foes, in true Inner Asian fashion, their treatment was heavily

based on whether they had submitted willingly to the khan’s authority or not. In cases where

their capture was not voluntary, the Xianfu (presentation of captives) and Shoufu (sentencing by

the emperor) rituals were performed. These rituals were mainly reserved for especially hard- fought victories or for episodes of great political importance.54

In the Shoufu ritual, prisoners of war were paraded through the Chang’an gate of Beijing,

their necks bound with a white silk cloth. They were then transitioned to the Board of

Punishments for sentencing and ritual execution. From atop the Meridian Gate, the emperor and

his entourage observed the ceremony. Father Amiot, a French eyewitness to a 1776 ceremony

following the defeat of the Jinchuan hill tribe rebellion conveys:

The shoufu consists of receiving war captives and deciding their fate. For this occasion, the empire brought together as much that was grand and august as possible. This ceremony takes place in the third court of the Palace bordered to the north by the gate known as Wu-men. The emperor is [seated upon] a throne installed in a raised gallery on a twenty=five=foot high terrace, surmounted by a building that might be as much as fifty feet tall. Next to the emperor are the senior officers of the Crown, while below are the Princes, Dignitaries (Regulos), Counts, and great Mandarins. Up and down this immense courtyard, as far as the eye can see, are the imperial insignia, flags, standards, pikes, maces, clubs, dragons, instruments, symbolic figures and I know not what , two parallel lines, on the east and west sides, going on ad infinitum. The bearers are dressed in red silk embroidered with gold; a second line is made up of the imperial officials

52 Islam and Keliher, "Leading through Ritual,” 10. 53 Ibid. 11. 54 Waley-Cohen. “Military Ritual and the Qing Empire.” 426. According to Waley-Cohen The Xianfu and Shoufu rituals occurred less than twelve times throughout the Qing period and were especially associated with martial victories in , the final ceremony concluding in 1828. 140

(tribuneaux), and a third consists of the Imperial Guard armed as for war. In the forward courtyard are the emperor’s elephants, bearing gilded towers, with war chariots to either side of them. Musicians and their instruments flank the two sides of the gallery that borders the great courtyard to the north where the emperor is seated upon his throne. The board of rites had set the ceremony to begin at seven in the morning, but the emperor issued a counter order during the night: he wished the ceremony to begin at half past four. The emperor appears on his throne when he hears the sound of the music and of all the extremely noisy instruments. First, he receives homage and congratulations, then a from the Board of Rites shouts loudly: “officers who have brought the captives here, advance, prostrate yourselves, kowtow!” Once this ceremony has been performed to the sound of the instruments, the victorious generals withdraw and at once the same Mandarin shouts again: “Officials of the Board of War and Generals come and present your prisoners!” Seven unfortunate Jinchuan prisoners appear from afar before the emperor and this entire, redoubtable assembly, each with a kind of white silk cord around his neck. They advance several steps then are ordered to kneel. Beside them is placed a cage containing the head of Seng-ge-sang, one of the rebels [whose brother is among the prisoners]. Behind them are one hundred military officers; to their right fifty civil officials and metropolitan troops; to their left, fifty officers of the “tribunal des Princes.” To this display, which is replete with terror, one of the prisoners, a Jinchuan general, cannot restrain himself rom a slight movement that appears resentful but can be seen only by those close to him. Even so he knocks the ground with his forehead with the other prisoners, and then they are at once removed to a side chamber. The emperor again receives congratulations from every important dignitary in the empire then he withdraws to the sound of music and the noisy instruments, having made no decision as the fate these illustrious captives, but it soon became known they were lost.55

55 Ibid. 429-428 quotation from Amiot Lettre sur la Reduciton des Miao-tsee, en 1776, Memories Concernant L’Histoire, Les Sciences, Les arts, Les moeurs, les usages des chinois; par les missionaries de pekin. 141

Fig. 13 Prisoners Presented to the Emperor 1767–74

(From the Metropolitan Museum of Art Collection: The Conquests of the Emperor of China)

This depiction illuminates Manchu emperors’ desire to harness ritual to promote both their roles as martial warriors and heavenly enforcers of the sacred law. The khan was both law- bringer and avenger. This ritual provided the opportunity for the khan to display both roles and dispose of his enemies in one carefully-constructed performance of state propaganda.

The ritual treatment in cases where foes had surrendered voluntarily differed greatly.

Stemming from the time of Nurhaci, the khan or other high officials would ride out to meet the surrendered foes. A great yellow tent would be constructed, at which point the khan would direct the leadership in kowtowing and worshipping Heaven. After this rite was complete, the khan would mount an imperial dais, where he would receive the ritual submission of his former foes.

The surrendered generals offered their tribute, at which point the khan would refuse and instead

142

grant them great treasures, furs, horses, and titles. In some cases, Hong Taiji even granted surrendered Ming officials the privilege of embracing his person, which was the highest honor.56

Brides were often offered by the submitting party as a means of joining the houses. Notably in

contrast to the preceding era, surrendered generals maintained a degree of command over their

forces and were made part of the combined forces of the Qing. The most important element of

this ritual was the public establishment of the hierarchy between the surrendered foe and the

khan in the eyes of Heaven.

The Washing the Buddha Ritual

Other new rituals intentionally combined Shamanic elements with Buddhist practices, for

example, the Washing the Buddha ceremony, held each year on the Buddha’s birthday

representing the Buddha’s birth and first bath.57 The idols of the Buddha, , and Lord

Guan, along with the tablets of Avalokitesvara, were taken from their resting place within the

Kunninggong. The sacred figures were then transported by procession to Tangse, attended by a

ritual caravan. Amongst the ritual caravan traveled the princes who each carried an offering of

wine, honey, cakes, and cotton. Upon arriving at the Tangse, the Buddha was then dismounted

from its kang and ritually washed by the shaman using a blend of honey and fragrant water. After

bathing, the Buddha was placed next to idols of Guanyin and Lord Guan. The offerings were

then presented before the Buddha alongside nine vessels of wine. The shaman then performed a

ceremonial chants and ritualistic dances with the spirits sword. Upon the closing of the ritual, the

idols were then returned to the Kunninggong.

56 Keliher, The Manchu Transformation of Li, 19-207. 57 Di Cosmo, “Manchu Shamanic Ceremonies at the Qing Court,” 395. 143

While similar rites existed elsewhere as part of the greater Buddhist tradition, some

elements appear unique to Manchu practices. One difference lies in the presence of the shaman

rather than a Buddhist lama. During this rite, the shaman not only washes the Buddha image but also invokes (i.e., shamanizes) the Buddha to accept the imperial sacrifices. The handling of the invocation suggests that for the Manchus, the Buddha may have been perceived somewhere along the lines of a foreign spirit, introduced to them by their interactions with the traveling lamas of Mongolia, China and Tibet. This understanding is logically based on the Shamanic worldview where the separation of gods and spirits are perhaps a distinction without a difference

and the Manchus would likely make every effort to placate a deity so sacred to the Chinese and

Mongols within this conquered foreign land.

The inclusion of the Buddha in the Tangse and Kunningong shamanic ritual sites separate

from other Buddhist rituals held across the capital’s dedicated Buddhist sites also suggests that

the Manchu Shamanic worship of the Buddha was perceived as inherently different from their

Mongol, Chinese, and Tibetan counterparts. The Buddha is found alongside the idols of Guanyin

and Lord Guan and persistently grouped as such, suggesting a sort of foreign trinity with the

Buddha as the head deity. Of this trinity, the presence of Lord Guan presents an interesting

addition. Lord Guan, as a Daoist-folk deity, was introduced to the Manchus upon entering China

proper. This deity was soon associated not exclusively with the Daoist practice of the Chinese

heartland but also as a holy Buddhist vanquisher of demons, and as we have seen was associated

with the martial nature of Nurhaci the dynastic founder.58 This analysis appears to be supported

by differentiation in legal attitudes toward Lord Guan. An 1823 case handled in the Department

for Mukden of the Board of Punishments recommended execution as a sentence for two men

58 Crossley, A Translucent Mirror, 244-245 144

who had broken into the Hall of the Glorious Protector, which was dedicated to Lord Guan. The

crime might not have punished as severely had it not been perpetrated against the spiritual head

of the dynasty, i.e. the avatar of Nurhaci himself:

The Board of Punishments of Manchuria…has memorialized concerning a case in which Kuo Liang gained the collaboration of Chang Wen-kuei in robbing one of the state temples, the hall of the Glorious Protector…The two men used knives to gouge out the silver ornaments embedded in the sacred statues and also stole the silver vessels used for making offerings to Lord Kuan. This department finds that although the cult of Lord Kuan does not belong to the major state sacrifices… he is divinity very highly respected by our dynasty. The two culprits therefore should be sentenced to immediate decapitation by analogy to the statute…which provides the punishment for both principals and accessories guilty of the theft of objects used for imperial worship…An imperial rescript replying to this memorial has changed the penalty to decapitation after the Autumn assizes, with classification of the case among those whose ‘circumstances are deserving of ’…59

Ultimately, the content of each of these rituals reveals important historical trends within our understanding of the Qing. For example, the gradual centralization and standardization of the hierarchical placement within the New Year’s Day ritual can be used as a metric to measure the centralizing trend occurring across all Qing institutions. The martial rites listed in this section also demonstrate the interconnectedness between the ritual authority of the khan with the actual administrational functions of state governance. Finally, rituals such as the Washing the Buddha

rite display the formation of a multiethnic mode of ritual centric rulership which harnessed the

adaptability of Manchu Shamanic practices to meet a diverse range of societal and state needs.

59 Bodde et al, Law in Imperial China, Case 134.1 leading cases from the Department for Mukden of the Board of Punishments. Reported in HAHL 7.12/21a-b. 145

The Kuninggong Rituals

If the Tangse was the ritual site of the greater Shamanic empire, the Kuninggong was the

ritual site of the Aisin Gioro imperial clan itself. Rituals performed at this site were just as vital

to the Shamanic empire as Tangse rituals, but they were more intimate affairs attended only by

Aisin Gioro clan members and represented their lineage’s dominance over rivals both within the

clan and among the other Manchu clans. Many of the Kuninggong rituals also had some elements performed in the Tangse in the presence of non-lineage members, but as we will see, their key importance is most clearly defined by the portions of the ritual performed within

Shamanic spaces reserved for the clan.

The Grand Sacrifice

The Grand Sacrifice was held biannually, occurring in both the autumn and spring, possessing both a state and clan form. The Grand Sacrifice contained three sub-rituals in the baoji ritual, the raising of the spirit pole before the Tangse ritual, and finally the grand sacrifice ritual. The three rituals alternated location beginning at the Kunninggong, continuing at the

Tangse, and concluding at again at the Kunninggong. The preparation of the spirit pole began weeks before the ceremony. Ritual experts would travel to the Manchu homeland and retrieve a fir tree, which they would wrap in yellow cloth and strip of all but nine branches representing the nine Manchu Heavens.

The first ritual at the Kunninggong began with entrance and ritualistic positioning of the two eunuchs, a sizuguan, and eight sizu, and a number of acolytes followed by the entrance the two shamans.60 The idols of Guanyin, Lord Guan, and the Buddha were taken from their resting

60 Udry, Muttering Mystics, 73. 146

places and placed in their ritual positions. The shamans would begin the ceremony with the wine

offering. Kneeling before an altar, the shamans would accept wine from their attendants then

pour it into ceremonial bowls and would raise their offerings nine times accompanied by the

ritual chanting and music. The shamans would then kowtow, clasp hands, and offer prayers,

signaling the end of the wine offering. Next, a shaman would receive the spirit sword from an

attendant. The shamans would first kowtow before the altar then rise and the spirit sword

to the chants of the ritual attendants. The shaman would lead the attendants in a Shamanic song

followed by prayers. This process was repeated nine times. Following this, the shamans again kowtowed and prayed transitioning the ceremony. The Buddhist deities of Guanyin and the

Buddha were then placed back in their resting places in preparation for the shedding of blood, leaving Nurhaci’s avatar, Lord Guan, in place. The ritual attendants then brought in two sacrificial pigs. The shaman first made an offering of wine, then having prayed over it, poured it into the first sacrificial pig’s ear. The pig was then brought to sacrificial altar, while the ritual was repeated with the second pig. The pigs were then ritually sacrificed before the altars and their blood was collected in basins. The pigs were then skinned, their viscera collected, and their carcasses taken to the Kunninggong’s kitchens. The intestines were marinated in blood and cooked alongside cuts of meat from the sacrificed animals. The meat was then returned and offered to the gods followed by six more offerings of wine. The meat was then eaten by those in attendance usually composed of princes, bodyguards, officials and others. The bones, skin, bile, and hoofs, were then taken to a sacred place and burned, the ashes thrown into a river.61

61 Pang, “The Kun-ning-gung Palace in Peking,” 77. 147

When the emperor and empress were in attendance, they would in essence share the ritual

responsibilities with the shaman in performing ritual kowtows and offerings of wine and meat.62

Most notably, it was the emperor who assumed the position of provider for the princes, leading

them in the consumption of meat. Those receiving the meat offering were ritually required to

finish consuming it as the offering could not leave the ritual grounds. That would anger the gods

and violate the relationship between the emperor and his bondsmen. The first ritual was then

concluded.

The next ritual involved the invitation of the protective Murigan spirit and the ancestral

portrait Huaxiang spirit of the Manchus, as well as the Mongol spirit. The presence of the

Mongol spirit is not surprising due to the deeply interconnected history of the Manchus and the

Mongols along with their practice of frequent intermarriage on the aristocratic level. Before these

spirits altars an offering of fruit, wine, and cakes was made. A sacrificial pig was also brought in

to await its role in the ritual. The shaman then entered wearing the ritual skirt and apron bearing

the numerous bells and invocational talismans.63 The shaman then invoked the spirits through beating of her hand drum, singing the songs of invocation, and engaging in ritual dance.64 The

attendants in attendance would themselves chant and beat drums and ring bells in sequence.

Following the invocation, just as in the morning rite, the ritual swine were brought in and ritually

slaughtered, their meat cooked and consumed.

The next portion of the second rite was known as tuibumbi or praying unto darkness and

occurred after several different Manchu Shamanic rituals closing the day’s rituals. According to

62 Udry, Muttering Mystics, 74. 63 Ibid. 79. 64 Pang, “The Kun-ning-gung Palace in Peking,” 78. 148

Stary, this rite was primarily addressed to female deities most prominently Fodo Mama.65 The ceremony began with the extinguishing of all lights in the Kuninggong. Then to the sound of sequenced drumming, the shaman led the attendants in a spirit song and the offering of prayers.

One Guwalgiya clan prayer recorded in 1892 details the importance of the darkness and silence to the ritual:

Doors and windows are closed. The some of the chimney is spent. The coal’s fire in the stove has been extinguished. The voice of men is silenced. The golden hens have turned their necks. The voice of the dogs has quieted. It is the hour in which bulls and horses return [to the stable]. It is the hour in which the birds curl up. It is the hour in which the galloping animals lied own. It is the hour in which 10,000 stars come up. It is the hour in which 1000 stars appear. It is the hour in which 3 stars come out. It is the hour in which 7 stars shine. It is the hour in which the comets shine.66

The shaman waved a pole attached with many bells calling the spirits to her song and inciting

them to consume the sacrifice. As the same prayer continues:

We invite the god Nadan Narhun Hiyancu. We invite the god Ahun Niyansi. We invite the god Hulara Beise. We invite the god Dekeliyan Sefu. We invite the god Daimin Gunin. We invite the divinities of the two thrones. After meeting to consult [with each other] we invite the god Daimin gasha. The maternal clan, all the Guwalgiya clan, we slaves have voiced our primes, we have said it solemny. We have prepared much sacrificial food, we have distilled a strong brandy. We have joined together wit h[our] live, we have offered ourselves with [our] lungs to obtain the grace of the gods. The old shaman has grown [too] old, the young shaman will begin [the rites]. We shall note the words indicated by the gods, we shall preserve the words which will guide us, we shall follow the laws of the gods.67

65 Stary, "Praying in the Darkness,” 15 and 27 66 Ibid. 20. 67 Ibid. 21. 149

Fig. 14.1 and 14.2 Two diagrams of the Praying into Darkness ritual. (Dengjan mukiyebufi tuibire durun “Praying in the darkness after having extinguished the lanterns” (top) Genealogical Tables” of the Guwalgiya clan, published in Liaobinta Manzu jiaji (bottom)

Upon completing the rite, lights would be restored to the Kunninggong. Just as in the first ritual, when the emperor and empress attended, they would share the ritual responsibilities with the shamans. The purpose of the ritual was the invocation of the deities to accept sacrifice and grant to them their benevolence and protection. From Stary’s research on these ceremonies

150

throughout the Chinese Northeast, we can gain more information about the content of these

prayers. One such prayer reads, “We respectfully pray to the gods to descend from Heaven, to

give to the good [people] the goodness they deserve, to punish the wicked and to keep evil at

bay. We pray to the gods to grant us their benevolence, so that our children and grandchildren

may enjoy peace and tranquility. We respectfully pray to the gods to descend from Heaven.”68

From this passage, we can extract the association between the worship of these female deities with the wellbeing of the children and future generations. Furthermore, in contrast to Abka

Enduri whose will governs the nations, these deities were seen as the source of discipline for

those within the society, and a possible allusion to the home. The rites also hold a strong

connection to the passing of seasons and the providence of agriculture. As another prayer reads,

“We have said farewell to the old year, we have welcomed the new year. In the spring season, in its truly rich splendor we have chosen the first day as the appropriate day, we have prepared sacrificial food. We have separated the grains form the bran of the corn which we sowed last year, and we have got ready rich sacrificial food. We have thrown away the [cooking] water and we have prepared yellow food.”69

The final rite of the Grand Sacrifice was the Grand Sacrifice with the Spirit Pole. The rite

took place the following day in the courtyard of the Kunninggong, where the spirit pole stood.

The spirit pole was first lowered and prepared for the ritual. Then, just as in the previous

descriptions, a pig was ritually sacrificed. The pig’s meat was cooked and prepared in bowls. The

pig’s neck bones and gallbladder were then separated and hooked to the top of spirit bowl. After

a shaman-led prayer to Heaven, the bowl of meat was the placed upon the spirit pole and raised

before Heaven to be consumed by the sacred magpies.

68 Ibid. 22. 69 Ibid. 26. 151

The Grand Sacrifice also had a Tangse portion of the ritual. During this ritual, the spirit pole was raised before the pavilion alongside the ritual elements. During the ceremony, the idols of the Buddha, Lord Guan, and Guanyin were escorted upon a sedan from their resting place in the Kuninggong to the Tangse by a procession made up of gold clad eunuchs, shamans, shaman assistants, and even imperial bodyguards. A rope bound with multicolored paper was fastened on one end of the spirit pole and the other to the sacrificial hall. The shamans then entered the sacrificial hall to the sound of ritual chanting. Then the shamans made an offering of wine and cakes to the Manchu deities Abkai Juse, Uduben Beise, Niohan Taiji, as well as the foreign deities of the Buddha, Lord Guan, and Guanyin, kowtowing nine times following the offering.

The ritual was then repeated within the pavilion. Next, the two senior shamans would separate, one standing before the sacrificial hall and other before the pavilion. Each shaman was handed a spirit sword by an acolyte. The shamans would recite Shamanic songs as they engaged in ritual movements, finally kowtowing before each Shamanic altar to conclude the ritual.

The Grand Sacrifice ritual was vital for the perpetuation of the Manchu khan’s sovereignty and moral authority. Throughout these rituals, the shamans performed rites and offered up sacrifices to various deities on behalf of the khan’s household, rather than the entirety of the empire. Many of these deities were personal deities of the Aisin Gioro clan, and provided a basic identity and differentiation for the scions of the Aisin Gioro clan.

152

Monthly Rites

The Monthly Rites performed in the Kunninggong greatly resembled the Grand Sacrifice

ritual and were composed of the Morning and Evening sacrifices, a prayer unto darkness

ceremony, and finally a sacrifice at the spirit pole. 70 In addition to these monthly rites were daily

rites and, more importantly, the Offering to Seek Good Fortune rite. Rites dedicated to the Fodo

Mama and the offspring of the Aisin Gioro clan were of great importance to the Manchus. Meng

Describes one such ritual:

There is still the 坤宁宫 Kunning Palace where one can pray to Fere fodo omosi mama for children. When the ceremony began, they hung the image of the god, the mother Fere fodo Omosi Mama. Preparations for the ritual began several days in advance. The official who managed the food would find nine harmonious Manchurian families, and collected cotton thread and pieces of silk from them. The cotton would be twisted into two strings, to which were attached three little squares of silk. In addition, a willow nine 尺 chi tall and three 寸 cun in circumference was cut down and erected upon a stone. Paper spirit money and three pieces of silk were tied around the tree. Flax strings were tied around a holy arrow and they hung the thread made from cotton collected from the nine families on the arrow; and colorful pieces of silk were tied on a yellow and green cotton thread that stretched from out a willow up to an iron nail on the west hill wall. The emperor and empress would attend the performance and the ritual. A shaman would aim the holy arrow towards the willow, then pass pieces of flax on the willow, and sing the songs inviting the gods. After singing, the shaman would bow to the east, and aim the arrow towards the emperor. The emperor was required to stroke the cloth on the arrow three times and hold it in his arms. The shaman then raised the arrow again. He then presented the flax to the emperor, who repeated the action described above two more times. Then the shaman presented the empress with this arrow three times, and the empress repeated her husband’s actions three times. The emperor and the empress set wine on the table for the willow, and placed cakes on the table between the branches of the willow. Then they repeated this. Then, the shaman gave the holy knife to the official who handled the incense, and plucked three strings from the arrow, giving one to the emperor and one to the empress to hang around their necks. Then they sat on the western kang, and the shaman and the incense official offered the sacrificial meat on a plate to the emperor and the empress. After eating, they return to the palace. The cakes between the willow branches were free for the taking by those in

70 Udry, Muttering Mystics, 91. 153

attendance until nothing was left. The other ritual items were packed in a bag and hung on the wall on west hill.”71

The Structure of the New Qing Ritual

The clan Shamanic rites of the ordinary households were in many cases a reflection of the

Kunninggong rites, but some variations as have been recorded in the sacred books of their clans.72 On the basic level, clan rites were composed of Sunrise rites, Sunset rites and the extinguishing of the light rites (tuibumbi), as well as numerous other rites. Another example was the rites dedicated to the goddess of fertility and the hearth Fodo Mama. In much the same way as the imperial ritual, shamans or women of the household would engage the spirits with offerings and spirit dances then conclude the ceremonies with the ritual slaughter of pig and the offering of its innards to Abka Enduri via the sacred spirit pole and magpie.73 Banner garrisons

throughout the empire held Shamanic rituals dedicated to the Banner god and the horse god as

well, who were so closely tied to their lifestyle.74 Shaman cults among the Bannermen tended to

hold greater emphasis on Lord Guan than on Buddhist deities, and engaged in syncretic

development with Chinese .

The most distinct element of the new Qing ritual was the peripheralization of the shaman.

Upon examination of Manchu Shamanic practice in the post conquest period, we find that not

only did the Manchu shaman play a much-diminished role, but they themselves were carefully

selected by the imperial bureaucracy and the subordinate clan heads. The Office of Shamanism

(shenfang) selected 183 temple shamans from among the women of the nobility, the imperial

71 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 420. 72 Elliott, The Manchu Way, 239. 73 Ibid. 239. 74 Ibid. 116. 154 consorts, and imperial bodyguard troops.75 Brunnert and Hagelstrom also provide us with look into the deeply-bureaucratic system of the temple shamans, their selection, compensation, and roles:

The staff of shamanic priestesses of the Court numbers twelve; they are usually the wives of members of the Imperial Bodyguards. For their services they receive nothing, but the dresses used, and they are called, officially, Ssy , Readers of Prayers. Also, there are: 1. 36 Ssu Tsu Fu Jên, shamanic Sub-priestesses or Supervisors of Sacrificial Attributes, 2. 37 Ssu Tui Fu Jên, Supervisors of Powdering of Bark, and 3. 19 Ssu Hsiang Fu Jên, Supervisors of the Preparation of Incense (for shamanic services); these are wives of the Palace soldiers and receive from one half a to two and a bag of rice per month from the Court.76

Amongst the clans who inhabited the garrisons, shamans were selected by clan heads, who due to the state persecution saw increasingly fewer wild shamans and progressively more domestic shamans. As Humphrey explains in analyzation of Shirokogoroff,

Each ritual contained the p’ogun [boigun] samans rapidly became different from what Shirokogoroff calls ‘real shamans.’ They did not undergo the shamanic but were chosen mundanely by the clan-chief mokun-da) at clan meetings or else proposed themselves for service. The main one, the da saman, was elected annually at the autumn sacrifice. Almost all of the were unable to introduce the sprits into themselves in trance or to master any spirits. (Shirokogoroff 1935:146) In effect, Shirokogoroff maintains, they became priest. At the court in Peking, they became a largely hereditary social class, responsible for maintaining the regular sacrifices for the well-being of the government and empire. The female shamans were the wives of court officials and ministers.77

An army of ritual attendants (zaili, 栽立), eunuchs, and most importantly, the fascinating position of the master or women of the household assumed the bulk of ritual responsibility.

75 Rawski, The Last Emperors, 238. 76 Pang, “The Kun-ning-gung Palace in Peking,” 85. 77 Thomas and Humphrey, Shamanism, History, and the State, 211. 155

These women known as biaohun (標渾), were called to take on the role of a shaman amongst the

banners engaging with the spirits instead of the shaman. Upon being selected by the clan would

dawn the ritual garb of the shaman and perform the sacred rituals.78 These women upon

completion of their role in the rituals, they would then return back to their normal lives. This

practice meant that these women were a form of transitory proxy of the shaman, which enabled

access to the spirit realm without the need of a permanent ritual specialist.

Fig. 15.1 and 15.2 Manchu shamans engaging in tiaoshen ritual.

(Saman xin yang de li shi kao cha 薩滿信仰的歷史考察)

Why did the new Qing ritual favor female shamans among the clans and exclusively select women to serve as temple shamans? Given the threat that male shamans posed to the new

Shamanic order and imperial legitimacy as a whole, choosing women from loyal families may

78 Durrant. “Three Early Ch’ing Descriptions of Manchu Shamanism.” 210. 156

have eliminated the political risk of a Shamanic challenge to the khan within the flexible but still patriarchal structure of Manchu society.79Another factor may have been the relatively high cultural position of women within Manchu and other Inner Asian cultures. Royal Manchu women could hold considerable power and influence, exemplified by the

(1835-1908), effectively the last Qing ruler, and Empress Dowager Xiaozhuang (1613-1688), a powerful consort of Hong Taiji. Perhaps the lack of strong Confucian gender roles or the inherent necessity of employing female labor to survive the demanding way of life in Inner Asia was responsible for this phenomenon. Regardless of its origins, the Manchu and Mongol leadership both consistently relied upon the counsel of senior female family members within the ruling class.80

Another possibility is that women of Northeast Asian cultures may have been seen as

inherently connected to the spirit world.81 Certainly tales abound of powerful Manchu

shamanesses, like the Nisan Shamaness, a legendary Manchu woman who was recognized for

her incredible power to resurrect the dead, or the tale of Umesiben Mama, which describes

several Jurchen shaman women of considerable power, including a female khan or .82

Qianlong and the Reinvention of Shamanic Ritual

The Qianlong era was the next great period of Shamanic social engineering. The sixty

years of Qianlong’s reign has been regarded by contemporary Chinese and scholars alike as a

golden age in Chinese history. In respect to Manchu identity, however, the Qianlong reign was a

79 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 403. 80 Crossley, Orphan Warriors, 80. 81 Young, Women Who Fly, 183. 82 Guo et al, Umesiben Mama,

157

time of crisis of cultural adherence. To be sure, it can be argued that cultural erosion predated

Qianlong. Some would argue that Hong Taiji’s respect for Chinese religions and customs was a

possible catalyst for Sinicization. Others argue that this crisis emerged with the performance of

Confucian rites by the regent Dorgon amidst the freshly captured Beijing. Another period would be the tumultuous Shunzhi era, during which Manchu Shamanic rites were neglected only to be

followed by the reactionary retaliation of the Oboi regency’s explicit policy of Manchu

supremacy. Although the Kangxi and Yongzheng emperors had continued to embody the

Manchu esthetic, the Qing imperial imperatives of audience-driven, multiethnic state-making led the Qing emperors to balance the Manchu Inner Asian elements with that of the Chinese agrarian empire.

Even more than his predecessors, the Qianlong emperor was faced with a series of unprecedented crises. Manchu, Mongol, and Han Bannermen, on which the security and legitimacy of the state rested, were adrift in the Han cultural sphere, which undermined their strategic purpose. This neglect of Bannermen social bonds and responsibilities to the Manchu throne can be attributed to causes as numerous as its manifestations. The Qianlong emperor, who viewed himself as a sort of patriarch of the Manchu identity, recognized the threat that a loss in cultural distinctiveness held for the Qing empire, and implemented a series of political and ritualistic reforms alongside sponsorship of Manchu cultural production in the interest of not only arresting Manchu cultural decline but reinventing it. These reforms affected the Manchu

Shamanic empire in two keyways. Firstly, the Qianlong emperor fundamentally reinvented the

Manchu clan, transitioning it from a culturally performative identity to one based concretely in ancestral and genealogical legitimacy. Secondly, the Qianlong emperor commissioned a series of instructional and promotional Shamanic texts and cultural products which sought to

158

reinvigorate Manchu identity and standardize Shamanic practices. The most pivotal of these texts was the Imperially Commissioned Manchu Rites for Sacrifices to the Spirits and to Heaven

(Qinding Manzhou jishen jitian dianli, hereafter the Qianlong Shamanic code), which was published in Manchu in 1747 and Chinese contained in the Complete Library of the Four

Treasures (), in 1780.83 The objective of this work has been subject to a great deal of debate; some scholars such as Nicola Di Cosmo have argued that the Qianlong Shamanic

Code was intended to correct and standardize the practices of Manchus both within the court and

throughout the clans.84 As Di Cosmo argues:

“The Code of Manchu Rituals was intended to restore the original meaning and form of Manchu beliefs and rituals. The compilation was meant to include all that Manchus needed to know about the correct way to prepare for Manchu ritual occurrences and carry them out. Although the chief source for the Code’s rituals was the Imperial Household and although the code’s ceremonies reflected and informed almost exclusively court ritual, the Code’s was supposed to provide the correct from for each ritual by all Manchus in their own family and clan religious observances.”85

Contrary to this position lies a new interpretation represented by scholars such as Xiaoli

Jiang, who point to the preconquest years as the period of shamanic unification and

standardization by Nurhaci’s Jianzhou Jurchens and Hong Taiji’s Later Jin state, and thus left the

Clan Shamanic practices with imitation Aisin Gioro rituals and with little need of Qianlong’s

83 Jiang, "Did the Imperially Commissioned Manchu Rites for Sacrifices to the Spirits and to Heaven Standardize Manchu Shamanism?" 1. 84 Di Cosmo, “Manchu Shamanic Ceremonies at the Qing Court,” 357. Contrary to this position lies a new interpretation represented by scholars such as Xiaoli Jiang, who point to the preconquest years as the period of shamanic unification by Nurhaci’s Jianzhou Jurchens and Hong Taiji’s Later Jin state, and thus left the Clan Shamanic practices with imitation Aisin Gioro rituals and with little need of Qianlong’s standardization. Jiang goes on to argue that due to the limited distribution of Qianlong’s text, the goal of widespread standardization was both impractical and unintended. 85 Di Cosmo, “Manchu Shamanic Ceremonies at the Qing Court,” 357. 159 standardization.86 Jiang goes on to argue that due to the limited distribution of Qianlong’s text, the goal of widespread standardization was both impractical and unintended.

Upon further consideration, it is the opinion of this study that both scholars are correct in part. That is to say that Xiaoli Zhang correctly argues that the purge of Wild Ritual and consolidation of Manchu Shamanic practices occurred prior to Manchu conquest of the Ming.

We have discussed this process in great detail in this study. That being said, Zhang treats

Manchu as being a static set of rituals by relying on records and accounts from the final years of the dynasty, rather than a dynamic living spiritual practice that without the stern hand of the

Manchu throne became increasingly localized and heterogeneous in nature.87 Thus, Di Cosmo also rightly argues that the purpose of the Qianlong Shamanic code was to correct Manchu

Shamanic practices in the eyes of the court. When the developmental process of Manchu

Shamanism is considered, it becomes apparent that the nature of Manchu Shamanism was historically contingent on its formative and restrictive conditions. It the opinion of this study that the objective of the Qianlong Shamanic code was restorative, seeking to bring the Shamanic practices of the clans back into alignment with the orthodoxy of the state.

To be sure, Manchu Shamanism was in no way a static process. By the 1740s, a century into the Qing, the Bannermen throughout the empire were already chafing at the proverbial leash.

Manchu Bannermen were neglecting the Manchu way including fluency in their native tongue, for more profitable or recreational pursuits.88 At the same time, the cultural divide between metropolitan Beijing and the Banner garrisons became more profound. In this situation it is no

86 Jiang, "Did the Imperially Commissioned Manchu Rites for Sacrifices to the Spirits and to Heaven Standardize Manchu Shamanism?" 2. 87 Ibid. 5-6. 88 Di Cosmo, “Manchu Shamanic Ceremonies at the Qing Court,” 357. 160

surprise that the Manchu clans, left to their own devices regained some distinct heterodox wild

elements to their ritual.89

Regardless of intent the clans would likely have drifted from the conceptual center,

formulating greater degrees of local based spiritual authority separate from the throne.

Qianlong’s commissioned works thus still served as template for the instruction of Manchu

nobles and Banner elites in the rectification of Manchus shamanic ritual in the interest of the

Qianlong’s reign as head of the Shamanic empire. The Eight Banner system was an effective

means of regulating and sanctioning unapproved Shamanic practices. The distribution of the

Qianlong Shamanic code to the princes and Banner elites who made up the Eight Banner

command structure, was in affect distributing it to the proper local authorities who held the

power to ensure such changes were implemented on the local level.90 This system ensured local practices remained compliant (more or less) with Qianlong’s many prescriptions for the rejuvenation of the Bannermen.

Banners were subject to continued surveillance and enforcement of Shamanic authority.

In particular Manchu shamanic rituals among the banners continued to be closely monitored for wild elements by the court and local Manchu authority could at their discretion interfere with any ritual of the ordinary households. Those communities found to be practicing heterodoxy such as forbidden deities and Wild Ritual would be condemned and harshly sanctioned. Possible

punishments included demotion, dismissal from office, dismissal from the Eight Banners system,

fines, horse and slave seizures and others.91 If Zhang is correct in asserting that the Manchu court

90 Jiang, "Did the Imperially Commissioned Manchu Rites for Sacrifices to the Spirits and to Heaven Standardize Manchu Shamanism?" 3. 91 Ma et al, Popular Religion and Shamanism, 415. 161 was no longer concerned with the Shamanic practices of the ordinary households, then the continuance of such paternalistic and punitive policies would not have been necessary, which was not the case.

During the period of his reign, Qianlong’s Shamanic code served as an effective corrective action against cultural erosion. But in successive reigns, times of even greater stress upon the Shamanic empire and breakdowns in the cohesiveness of the emperor and the Banner peoples, Wild Ritual did make a return to the surface. The resurgence of ecstatic ritual was due to the breakdown in courts authority and ability to enforce its Shamanic policies. In particular during the Daoguang 道光 (1820-1850) and Xianfeng 咸豐 (1850-1861) reigns, the empire was torn with war and rebellion, and the court was divided in amongst itself. These calamities and failures to vanquish the khan-emperor’s foes would have undoubtedly undermined his Shamanic authority and his right to dictate the social order and practices of the clans, thus incentivizing the disaffected Manchus population to look back to the wild gods and rituals. As Fu and Meng explain according to my translation

There are many reasons why Manchu wild shamanic ritual was preserved in some Manchu clans. In general, these clans are mostly living in some remote places and were out of the reach of the ruler. These places were also less influenced by foreign cultures. These clans are all local indigenous people and mostly belong to Yiche in Manchuria. In comparison, there are more original elements in their cultural soil. Most of these clans did not enter through Shanhaiguan. The continuation of their culture is maintained in their original soil and conditions, but we must point out that we have not yet found any examples of clans who have practiced wild shamanic ritual uninterrupted till today. Wild Shamanism practicing clans today, have resumed wild spirit rituals after several or even ten generations. This break is related to the operations of the early rulers of the Qing dynasty. Also related to the historical policy of destroying clan societal organization and spiritual pillars; and also related to unyielding adherence to the Imperially Commissioned Manchu Rites for Sacrifices to the Spirits and to Heaven. Among Manchu wild ritual practicing clans today, all of them practice

162

domestic rituals according to the Imperially Commissioned Manchu Rites for Sacrifices to the Spirits and to Heaven. The wild spirit ritual is practiced informally after the domestic ritual. Historical phenomenon is that the wild god ritual is performed parallel and dependent to the domestic ritual. The renaissance of the Manchu wild god ritual is related to the sociopolitical environment, especially in turbulent social environments. The wild god ritual that we researched, was mainly in two eras, one is the Daoguang and Xianfeng eras during which time there was the war. The ruler of Qing dynasty had no time to pay attention to the religious concerns of his own people and could not but leave them to their own devices. The second era is just after the republic of china, at which time the Qing dynasty died out and continued to fight with each other, allowing a great opportunity for the renaissance of wild spirit ritual.92

Fu and Meng also explain that according the records of Manchu clan spirit books, after

more than twelve generations the wild gods came back to the clan’s spirit capturing the shamans

and ushering the return of Wild Ritual. Legends speak of long-dead shamans in the form of

grandfather gods returning upon the backs of great tigers while others revealed themselves

through divine revelations to their clan.93 The same resurgence is recorded during the collapse of the dynasty in the early twentieth century, as more and more clans returned to Wild Ritual. This process is evident in the previously discussed records of the Shi clan. Grandfather gods of long dead shamans would return to the clan during times of spiritual agency.

This, however, does not totally discount the efficacy of Qianlong’s work among certain

Bannermen clans, but implies that its strict implementation varied by community. Surveys in

1981 demonstrated that not only were Manchu shamans still practicing in the Chinese Northeast,

but they were also utilizing Qianlong’s works as the basis.94 Rather than there being a decline in

Shamanism amongst Manchu clans, there was instead a decoupling of local clan ritual and

92 Fu and Meng, Manzu Saman jiao yan jiu, 86. 93 Ibid. 60. 94 Rawski, The Last Emperors, 241. 163

Imperial state ritual in response to the weakening of the societal bonds between the Bannermen and the throne. This is further supported by the fact that according to Fu and Meng, no practicing Manchu clans have been found with an uninterrupted ritual legacy tracing back to the preconquest era, all for many generations had submitted to the khan’s Shamanic authority and thus are recreations by the clans descendants.95

Fig. 16 Manchu Shamanic sacrifice taking place in village courtyard in 1980s.

(Da moshen yun: shen mi de beifang Saman wenhua 大漠神韵: 神秘的北方萨滿文化)

95 Fu and Meng, Manzu Saman jiao yan jiu, 86.

164

Fig. 17.1 and 17.2 Invocation of eagle spirit (left) pork offering on Shamanic altar (right) (Da moshen yun: shen mi de beifang Saman wenhua 大漠神韵: 神秘的北方萨滿文化)

Thus, the New Qing Ritual was the sum of a coordinated effort by the Qing court to harness Manchu Shamanism on both the clan and Imperial levels to provide the foundation for their rule. Imperial rituals each represented different area of Qing rule and was a means of cultivating legitimacy among different audiences. Clan ritual became a tool of the Qing court to promote cultural cohesion and compliance among the clans. In essence, while linguistic and performative inaccuracies in rituals due the errors in oral transmission were a concern for the throne, the return of the Wild Ritual was set apart as a much greater threat. It was therefore vital that Qianlong’s Shamanic code be composed and implemented but not solely for the purpose of accuracy. Together these parallel ritual systems provided the cornerstone of the Shamanic empire.

165

CONCLUSION: THE COLLAPSE OF THE SHAMANIC EMPIRE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR MANCHU IDENTITY

The Shamanic empire of the Qing was developed by under specific conditions and

maintained through careful ritual adherence by the Qing emperor, and strict enforcement of

Shamanic policies against heterodoxy. The question of how and why this system collapsed is

deeply interwoven with the fate of the Manchu identity itself. Manchu identity was mapped out

and constructed by the early Manchu rulers was based on a series of institutional pillars. These

pillars were Shamanic authority, martial prestige, economic privilege, cultural distinction, and

ethno-political sovereignty. These values supported Manchu identity by providing cohesion,

defined (although malleable) cultural parameters, and socio-economic incentives for cultural

adherence. As the Qing state passed its zenith and the tragedies of the tumultuous 19th and 20th

centuries unfolded, each of these pillars was undermined and left neglected by a dynasty of fractured ruling elite, distracted by infighting, and disturbingly but understandably unprepared for the challenges of Western .

The Fall of Qing Shamanic Authority

Unlike earlier Manchu Qing rulers, the rulers of the nineteenth century neglected their

ritualistic duties to the Shamanic empire and the Inner Asian world, decreasing the frequency of

these rituals and rarely taking part in them personally. In fact, Qianlong’s successor the Jiaqing

emperor (1760 –1820) was the final emperor to regularly take part in the hunts at Mulan beyond

the Great Wall, a ritual vital to the bonding of Inner Asian allies to the Manchu throne. By the

second half of the nineteenth century, the Qing hunting grounds at Mulan and within the Manchu

homeland were opened up for agricultural exploitation, never to be utilized for ritual purposes

166

again.1 One driving force for this change was the rising political power of a Han military elite

during the nineteenth century. Following the conclusion of the , a new wave of

Han military leaders such as 李鴻章 (1823 – 1901, 曾國藩 (1811 –

1872), and Zongtang 左宗棠 (1812 –1885, had rose to the top of the Qing system through

the unparalleled martial performance of their forces against the Taiping rebels. With the Qing

court fractured and the state debilitated, the Manchu throne found itself not upon the shoulders of

the Bannermen, but at the mercy of these Han proto-warlords. Han officials throughout the dynasty’s history had looked upon the Manchu Shamanic rituals as at best an idiosyncrasy, and at worst a symbol of their foreign barbarian origin. This key shift in power within the empire would have undoubtably pressured the Qing court to deemphasize such Shamanic rituals in hope of convincing these powerful forces of their authentic acculturation.

As the years of the dynasty passed, so too did the Manchu struggle to maintain their identity. This effected Shamanism in several keyways. As discussed earlier in this work, the

Qianlong emperor composed several Shamanic works regulating Shamanic practice in an attempt to restore and further standardize Manchu Shamanic ritual. This was a crucial component of a larger effort by the Qianlong court to maintain Manchu identity and the usefulness of Bannermen as bondsmen to the emperor. By prescribing an official state sponsored practice, the throne was again, centralizing control over a wavering Bannermen people, just as Hong Taiji had done. This effort however, proved not be sufficient to calcify Manchu Shamanic practices as the Manchu clans throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries demonstrated a return to Wild Ritual in defiance of the throne. Many records from this era depict blatant use of ecstatic ritual.

1 Rhoads, Manchus and Han, 58. 167

The return of ecstatic ritual during the late Qing was a key warning sign that the court

was systematically losing control over the cultural and Shamanic adherence of the Manchu clans

and the levers of governance statewide. The lack of a cohesive Shamanic identity and the rise of

many individualized identities was also the result of a changing dynamic between ruler and

ruled. Without an emperor to dictate heterodoxy among the clans, unprecedented levels on

individualism and differentiation emerged amongst the clans arose resulting in today’s scattered

and deeply syncretic manifestations of Shamanic ritual. This Shamanic environment rapidly grew to resemble the Shamanic environment of the preconquest Jurchens, before Hong Taiji’s reforms, when each clan had their own myths, ritual spaces, and perspectives. Another factor was the reduction in prestige and prominence of state approved professional shamans. The sacrificial and ritual roles of these shamans gradually became subsumed into the jurisdiction of women of the household and clan heads just as is the case in Korea today.2Without a

professional class of officially recognized controllable shamans, the rituals practices of the clans

became at the discretion of the local clan head. This was a recapture of the Shamanic authority

seized by Hong Taiji in the preconquest period and resulted in many isles of Shamanic practice

rather than one cohesive body in the service of the Qing state. In effect it was less a

disappearance of Manchu Shamanic identity due to Sinicization, but rather a loss of ethnicity

wide consciousness and common Shamanic practices.

Perhaps the final blow to the Shamanic empire was interference with the Tangse ritual

and the eventual destruction of the Tangse itself, being the very core of Imperial Shamanic

practice and the symbol of the Manchu Shamanic empire, destruction of such a site encapsulated

the utter inability of the late Qing state to continue its rule. For a precursor for just this dynamic,

2 Rawski, The Last Emperors, 241. 168

we may look to the 1860s during which the Opium War forced he emperor to flee Beijing, and

instead conducted his rituals at Jehol, undoubtedly a significant blow to his authority and

prestige.3 To provide a capstone on this saga, the Tangse was damaged during the Boxer

Rebellion (1899-1901), leading the structure to be eventually demolished and replaced with a

new foreign legation.4 The Tangse could not be restored nor rebuilt on the grounds of the new

foreign legation according to the treaty of Peking, even if the emperor could have made the

unthinkable action of asking for permission from the foreign powers.5 After 1901, a smaller

Tangzi was constructed but it never recaptured its position in the Qing empire.6 The substantial

damage to emperor’s position in the psyche of the Manchu-Bannermen populations was already done. Without a core central ritual, Manchu clans no longer looked to the emperor for centralized leadership and authority in the Shamanic world. After the fall of the dynasty no controls remained over Shamanic practice. This likely contributed to the ecstatic ritual observed by twentieth century scholars such as S. M. Shirokogoroff in their studies.

This decline in Shamanic authority and ultimately Manchu identity was compounded by harrowing violence of the Manchu experience during the nineteenth century. In the case of the

Taiping Rebellion (1850-1864) thousands of Manchus and other Bannermen were viewed as demons and massacred within their garrisons by Taiping zealots. As one 1853 account reads

“The revolutionaries, in a fury of revenge for the bloody battle, carried out a brutal massacre of all but a few hundred people lucky enough to escape into the outer city. At one point several thousand Manchu women were surrounded and driven through one of the gates, there to be

3 Ch'en, “Religions and Lay Symbolism of Imperial Manchu Practices in Observing the New Year,” 976. 4 Rawski, The Last Emperors, 236. 5 Corradini, "The Worship of Heaven and of Earth during the Qing Dynasty.” 23 6 Ibid. 22. 169 burned, stabbed, or drowned. According to the later investigation of Tseng Kuo-fan (Zeng

Guofan), more than thirty thousand lost their lives in this great massacre of Bannermen.”7

Harrowing massacres of the Manchu population like this coupled with staggering military casualties and their outperformance by Han forces may have shaken their confidence in the emperor’s ability to satisfy his role as protector, as well as their own roles as defenders of the throne. This trend continued with embarrassing defeats to the European power in both Arrow

War and the .

The economic status and social prestige of the Bannermen during the nineteenth century was markedly different from their ancestors. Whereas the conquest generation received great hoards of wealth and land allotments as reward, and Bannermen elite of the Qianlong era accumulated incalculable wealth through service to the emperor and more unsavory exploits in corruption, the Bannermen of the 19th century were characterized by poverty and squalor. Within the major metropolitan cities, Bannermen scraped by on meagre stipends by relying mainly on credit and living in smaller, dilapidated homes than their Han peers.8 Bannermen in the countryside laid down their weapons and survived marginally better as farmers or craftsmen. The state and by that virtue the emperor had abandoned his most sacred duty as provider leaving them no choice but to make a living in other ways. This poverty also led to the migration of

Bannermen to locales with more economic opportunity. The economic poverty of the Bannermen most likely effected their ability to maintain elaborate rituals and their sacred spirit poles.

Ultimately, the greatest factor that contributed to the fall of the Shamanic empire and the prominence of the Manchu identity was the fundamental disintegration between the relationship

7 Rhoads, Manchus and Han, 59. 8 Ibid. 51. 170

between the Manchu emperor and his Bannermen. Just as in any other Inner Asian society,

Bannermen identity was based on the submission to a heavenly mandated khan in exchange for his protection and sustenance. As the relationship broke down between these two parties, the

Bannermen of the late Qing were given less incentive to adhere to the norms and social mores of their identity and instead became increasingly more malleable in the face of outside cultural forces. This trend however was intensified by the increase in persecution of the Manchu and

Bannermen identities. The post Taiping Rebellion Bannermen identity was left greatly weakened by the societal disruption, only to be again designated as an enemy by many ethnically Han anti-

Qing revolutionary movements. Several prominent anti-Qing thinkers adopted a racialized view of Manchu-Han difference and often invoked violent imagery to galvanize their movements. One example is 章炳麟 (1869--1936) who crafted a narrative of a proud Han people who had long suffered under a Manchu yoke; a wrong which needed to be righted with restorative revenge.9 Revolutionary leaders such as Sun Yat-sen 孫中山 (1866 –1925) while also

invoking these sentiments maintained a much cooler head instead opting for a state which would

restore Han centeredness but would not necessitate the genocidal destruction of the Manchus.

Sun Yat-sen’s perspective however did not curtail the wanton explosion of anti-Manchu

violence that engulfed China starting in 1902. Assassinations of numerous Manchu officials

occurred across China in hopes of sparking an anti-Qing uprising. For example, in 1907 the

Manchu governor of , Enming was publicly assassinated at a police academy graduation by the academy’s own superintendent. Upon capture the assassin explained, “I have harbored

9 Zarrow, “Historical Trauma,” 91. According to Zhang’s narrative, the Han, just as in the case of a father who loses his father, had a right to revenge on account of the suffering of their ancestors. In this light, the punishment of the Manchus should be collective and without distinction between the guilty and the innocent. 171

anti-Manchu feelings for more than ten years. Only today have I achieved my goal. My intention

was to murder Enming…to kill , Tieliang, and Liangbi, so as to avenge the Han

people… You say that the governor was a good official, that he treated me very well. Granted.

But since my aim is to oppose the Manchus, I cannot be concerned with whether a particular

Manchu was a good or bad official. As for his treating me well, that was the private kindness of

an individual person. My killing of the governor, on the other hand, expresses the universal

principal of Anti-Manchuism (pai-man).”10 Such acts were only the prelude to what would

become an anti-Manchu fervor only culminating in the fall of the dynasty. Anti-Manchu

persecution slaughtered or made refugees of the once proud Bannermen. Pogroms in the Manchu

quarters of Wuchang, Xi’an, , , Fuzhou and claimed the lives of men

women, and children. Anti-Manchu riots torched the Bannermen garrisons in ,

Guangzhou, and Yili leaving its residents displaced refugees.11

In the last decade of the dynasty, anti-Manchu/Bannermen pogroms broke out across

China killing tens of thousands and devastating an already crippled cultural identity. The worst

of the genocidal violence only abated with Sun Yat-sen’s promotion of the five races model. The once feared conquerors were now victims of vengeful predation. Manchus seeking to save their lives just as in the Taiping Rebellion, abandoned their most distinct cultural markers and sought to hide in plain sight passing themselves off as Han.12 Many changed their surnames as a clan or

as individuals both at the government and informal level and fabricated entire family histories in

an attempt to save themselves form further persecution.13 Those who could not hide found other

10 Rhoads, “Manchus and Han,” 105. 11 Zarrow, "Historical Trauma," 94. Manchus were especially targeted for symbols of perceived ethnic difference such as flatheads, unbound feet, and northern accents. 12 Fu and Meng, “Manzu Saman jiao Yanjiu,” 61. 13 Li and , “Ethnic China,” 42. 172

ways to survive, Men became rickshaw drivers and day laborers to try and stave off abject

poverty, Manchu women overwhelmingly married Han men, and action which could provide

greater security. In some blood-chilling cases, Manchu women were even targeted for their

unbound feet and trafficked in the sex trade.14 Others further blended their relgio-shamanic

rituals with those of their Han neighbors, as not to be discovered.

The legacy of this persecution makes it so that many contemporary Manchu clans no

longer remember their Shamanic rituals or can no longer distinguish them clearly from the folk

religion and ancestor worship of their Han neighbors.15 Under Chiang Kai-shek’s (1887 –1975)

蔣介石 promotion of the theory of one Chinese race without distinctions, Manchus often utilized an opportunity to escape an identity which in this age mostly brought suffering and persecution.

The CCP era brought with it some relief for those Manchus who continued to live in the open, as many Manchus found a place in the CCP’s promotion of recognized ethnic identity. Although no semi-autonomous region was established for he Manchus (possibly due to the shadow of the puppet state of ) some county level administrative locales were established, Mao

Zedong 毛澤東 (1893 –1976), Zhou Enlai 周恩來 (1898 –1976), and Deng Xiaoping 鄧小平

(1904 –1997) all made statements and enacted polices conducive to the survival of the Manchu identity.16 Those Manchu communities in more remote less integrated regions of the Northeast

still maintain greater degrees of distinction in language, culture, and ritual.17 In effect this trend

has little to do with the supposed all-consuming alure of Han Chinese culture, and more to do

with the adaption of survival tactics in a increasingly dangerous world to be Manchu.

14 Ibid. 44-45. 15 Fu and Meng, “Manzu Saman jiao yanjiu,” 61. 16 Li and Shan, “Ethnic China,” 49. 17 Fu and Meng, “Manzu Saman jiao yanjiu,” 62. 173

Manchu Sinicization and the Path Forward for Manchu Studies.

A final discussion should be had of how an understanding of a Shamanic empire allows us to reevaluate the longstanding debates over Sinicization. As noted, some proponents of

Sinicization theory such as Ho Ping-ti, based their assumption of Sinicization on the process of acculturation and adoption of Chinese institutions, seen as the active ingredient in the success of the Qing empire. For Ho, the adoption of a Chinese identity did not preclude the simultaneous possession of a sunsetting Manchu identity. Most famously, Ho and member of the New Qing

History, Dr. Evelyn Rawski engaged in a high-profile disagreement over the nature of the

Manchus. This passage grants insight into Ho’s argument:

Governing China meant first and foremost developing the capacities to rule China's many hundreds of millions of people, whose numbers increased dramatically between 1650 and 1800. Manchu success at this most challenging task was achieved in large measure by drawing upon a Chinese tradition of policies and institutions. Their relations with other non-Han peoples may not fit post-T'ang conventional notions of Chinese rule, but this hardly means that the core of their strategy of rule was not predicated on Chinese political principles…Rawski constructs a false dichotomy between sinicization and Manchu relations with non-Han peoples of Inner Asia. There is no logical reason to assume that what we have recently learned about Manchu activities means that what we already knew about their rule within China proper and Inner Asia is therefore mistaken.

Here Ho makes the common misstep of privileging the Han centric perspective of evets while simultaneously trivializing the sheer importance of the Manchu connection to Inner Asia. Firstly, by emphasizing the population of the Han, Ho falls back on the idea that the number of the population dictates the importance of the region in the minds of the Manchu rulers. Perhaps in terms of tax revenue or the demand for necessary infrastructure this may have been the case, but in areas involving culture, identity, and religion, this was categorically not the case for the

Manchus. The Manchus while recognizing the great and increasing importance of China proper,

174

the concept of China proper for the majority of the Qing period was not the center of the empire.

The Manchus also saw their empire as a progressively expanding Shamanic empire in the Inner

Asian fashion of Chinggis Khan, rather than exclusively the successor of an ancient (and ethnic)

conception of China. In fact, the spiritual heart of the empire was not in major Han cultural

centers, but rather the regions from Beijing to the fringes of Manchu homeland as demonstrated

by the , which protected the Manchu homeland from Han Chinese settlement. Ho

and other Sinicization theorists give little credence to the Manchu perspective and cultural

worldview and instead assigns them a position within a Chinese perspective. This is proven by

his continued emphasis on the idea that the Manchu focus was primarily on China proper, and that the Manchu relations with the Inner Asian peoples was cursory and superficial. The facts,

however, as discussed in this study reveal that the Manchus were deeply concerned with the

matters of Inner Asia from which equally potent threats to their legitimacy could stem. In fact,

until the arrival of the European imperialist forces, the Manchus were perpetually focused on the

threat of the Mongols such as the Dzungars. This was not simply because they were a military

threat, but because as an Inner Asian state they also held with access to the raw DNA of a

Shamanic empire which could uniquely threaten the Manchu system of legitimacy.

More recently, some Chinese researchers led by scholars such as Zhang of

University, while still rejecting the more concrete claims of the New Qing History, see much of

the conflict between the schools as stemming from a misreading of Sinicization and an

overestimation of cultural distinction. As Jian summarizes

What is “Sinicization”? To many Chinese scholars, including myself, “Sinicization” is an abbreviation of a one-way inclination of a weaker culture to rely on a stronger culture in the cultural interaction of states and ethnicities. It is not substantially different from the political and cultural phenomena of “Egyptization,” “Hellenization,” “Romanization,” and “Arabization” in ancient

175

world history and global “Westernization” and even “Americanization” over the past two centuries…Not only did the Manchus not have the slightest impact on the continuity of traditional Han culture and self-confidence in Han ethnic culture, they also did not shake the mainstream status of Han culture in Chinese society. Li Hongzhang’s famous cry that “it has not greatly changed in three thousand years!” was completely aimed at the surging influence of the West. Therefore, based on the traditional understanding within Chinese academia of “Sinicization,” Manchu Sinicization is an indisputable fact18

Jian’s understanding is rooted in the notion that New Qing historians have relied on a reductionist understanding. Jian argues that the argument for Sinicization does not require completion nor the total elimination of Manchu cultural traits. Rather a gargantuan imbalance in the process of acculturation in favor of Chinese culture. Zhang states further,

I should point out that the stance of the American New Qing History is overly narrow and close to nonsense, because if there had been no regime change, then how could the ruling group of the era of the imperial system and centralized rule lose its special group identity? This could not occur even under the rule of one (the same) ethnic group. As the ruling class during the Qing, the political status of the Manchus was systematized, and already fully ensured the continuation of their group identity. The Ming, under Han rule, and later rulers had their own strong group identity with systemic assurances, and bloody conflicts broke out between both sides when regime change occurred. Therefore, the continuation of Manchu group identity occurred in a completely different category from Manchu Sinicization and the two should not be confused with one another. Furthermore, as descriptions, “ac culturation” (hanhua; 涵化) and “convergence” (qutong; 趋同) are even more confused as they appear to transcend a certain “centrism” (zhongxin zhuyi; 中心主义), while completely covering up the huge imbalance in ethnic cultural integration and mainstream position of Han culture within Manchu cultural integration.19 While this approach is improved from other proponents of Sinicization such as that of Li

Zhiting, it, however, still relies on the fundamentally flawed teleological and essentialized understanding of acculturation as well as the assumption that by the cognizant hybridizing of some elements of “Chinese” governance alongside cultural exchanges, that in some way this

18Zhang, “Manchu Sinicization,” 32. 19 Ibid. 176

process equates to a change in identity.20 Jian exhibits a classic case of cultural blindness that

prevents the acknowledgement of how much impact the Inner Asian conquest regimes and non-

Han populations left on the cultural legacy of China. The most relevant example being the

massive changes in the authoritative role of the emperor displayed by many Ming emperors,

none more obvious than Yuanzhang 朱元璋 (1328-1398) who inherited this political tradition from the very Mongols of the Yuan dynasty that he drove from the Chinese heartland.21

Under further examination, the changes and cultural developments of the Mongol Yuan period

are dramatic and self-evident in the political and frontier policies of the Ming. One such notable

change in the Ming state was the delegation of regional fiefdoms to the ’s sons,

a practice while not necessarily unheard of in Chinese imperial history, is in fact during this era

more resembling of Inner Asian approaches to resolving potential succession crisis. Upon the

Hongwu emperors death, the ruling family engaged in bloody political strife resembling Inner

Asian blood tanistry.22 Unlike the preceding ethnically Han dynasties who had mostly managed

rising Inner Asian empires on the steppe through a system of strategic economic acquiesce,

granting the Inner Asian polities subsidies, titles, and exclusive trade rights in trade for reprieve

from disruptive raids which could bring a dynasty its knees, the Ming opted for a much more martial strategy. Another example of changes to the Chinese tradition stemming from the

20 Interestingly, if we examine examples of Manchu bannermen deployed to frontier garrisons such as in , we can observe examples of Manchus adopting Islamic dress and cultural practices alongside their own Manchu practices. These changes were a development of the close interactions between the Qing administration and the elements of proxy political rulers such as hakim begs and Mongol Jasaks as well as religious ones such as imams. In these culturally distinct regions, it was in the interest of the Qing prior to the 187 to emphasize 1884 their Inner Asian roots rather than their Chinese elements. It can be assumed that proponents of Sinicization would in no way accept that these changes would merit a transition in the ethnic identity of these bannermen nor should they.

22 Barfield. The Perilous Frontier, 234. 177

Mongol Yuan (also the Tang Dynasty), lie in early concepts of multiethnic empire. The rising

Ming armies in their war against the withdrawing Yuan armies incorporated large numbers of

Inner Asian defectors to their cause encouraging them through ethnic policies to remain in Ming

lands making up part of the base of their early military, a policy unthinkable among previous

native dynasties, and completely representative of previous Inner Asian dynasties namely the

Xianbei-Chinese Tang and others.23 Also out of character ethnically Han dynasties was Ming

aggressive military pursuit of The Northern Yuan dynasty into Mongolia, which despite two

successive disastrous campaign ending defeats by Mongol forces, finally broke Mongols at the

battle of Lake Buir in 1388.24 Lest we label these polices the fluke of an unique emperor to be

reverted in his absence, the Ming under the maintained many Yuan government

institutions.25 Just one example being the Wei-suo frontier defense strategy which resemble more the policies of a Manchurian empire in Barfield’s tradition.26 Yongle himself would order multiple large scale military incursion into the steppe in pursuit of the Mongols to mixed results.

Further, Jian’s reference to numerous forms of cultural change such as romanization or eygptization is in desperate need of problematization. Any close examination of any imperial periphery will undoubtably reveal that not only did cultural practices of the metropole change dramatically when adapted and localized by inhabitants of imperial peripheries but also that in many cases cultural practices and products made their way to become of the utmost demand within the markets of the imperial metropole. A prime example of this phenomenon can be found within the empires of Alexander the Great and the Roman empire. No respectable scholar of

23 Ibid. 231. 24 Ibid. 232. 25 Ibid. 232. 26 Ibid. 235. 178

these topics would argue that the Imperial provinces within North Africa and the Near East

cleanly adopted the customs of Rome or Pella. However, we as scholars need not look any

further than Chinese history to find such phenomenon occurring. For example, as a legacy of the

Liao, Jin and Yuan dynasties, and much to the dismay of cultural hardliners, animal pelts

became popular as wear even into the late Ming dynasty, exemplified by the Ming dynasty long

vest known as the Bijia 比甲 and the court robe known as the zhisun 隻孫.27 So popular were

these fashions that the Ming court attempted to ban them among commoner in 1506.28 The Qing

was no different in bringing about large cultural changes to the Chinese body politic and cultural

sphere. The wearing of fur pelts was a great divergence from the traditionally Chinese

understanding of wearing furs as a barbaric practice as amply expressed through literature.29

Throughout the Qing dynasty, Manchurian furs, ginseng, and pearls were but a few of the

cultural products that became mandated as symbols of rank and status by the Qing court

ultimately helping to transform Chinese perceptions of status.30 By the reign of Yongzheng wide

spread fur gifting culture had become established. Supported by a proliferating literature culture

of popular literature which depicted prominent characters wearing fur and sable, the market for furs among Chinese elites grew exponentially.31 In this way many historical trends were not

merely changing the Manchus to become more “Chinese” so to speak, but in a certain light the

“Chinese” had adapted to many Inner Asian cultural norms.

In regard to Chinese religious beliefs, Guo Shuyun in her study of Han Bannermen of the

Zhang clan, demonstrates the acculturation of Manchu Shamanic customs onto frontier

27 Schlesinger, World Trimmed with Fur, 31, 28 Ibid. 32. 29 Ibid. 29-30. 30 Ibid. 36. 31 Ibid. 43. 179

populations. These Han Bannermen because of their close relationship with the Manchus adopted shamanistic practices to their own folk religion and ancestral worship aiding in the

formation of a new cross ethnic Bannermen identity.32 The Zhang clan employs shamans who

engage in ecstatic channeling of deities in the same manner as Manchu wild shamans.33 It strikes

me that the very fact that the Han Bannermen and Chinse marital identities even exist as they did

is testament to the power of Manchu soft power in assimilating those Han people in close

relationship with them. This is just one example of the massive shifts towards a multiethnic

empire that occurred under the rule of the Northern peoples which contradicts the immensely

overstated cultural trends championed by the Sinicization school. The objective of Qing scholars

when dealing with the Manchus should be to not privilege one form or cultural adaption over

another. Scholars should deny the indulgences of contemporary politically expedient appeals to

national unity and Han centric teleological ideology. It is my hope that the concept of the

Shamanic empire is a step in this direction. Ultimately, this study has sought to create the

groundwork for a new way to understand Manchu identity and the Qing dynasty, through the

analysis of the pillar of Shamanic authority and cohesion. Further studies may further evaluate

how each of these pillars interacted with the Manchu Shamanism, and thus providing a totality of

our understanding of the Manchu identity. It is important to remember that Manchu identity did

not die and is not dead, but rather is awakening from its slumber during the twentieth century.

Demographic data on the Manchus has fluctuated dramatically over the last century depending

on the socio-political environment in China. For example around 1911 the estimated Manchu

population was approximately five million, then in 1982 the Manchu population was estimated at

32 Guo, “Symbols and Function of the Zhang Clan Han Army Sacrificial Rite,” 4. 33 Ibid. 4-11. 180

4.3 million, this would not seem entirely unusual but for the fact that in just 18 years the number

of recognized Manchus had more than doubled to 10.68 million.34 How are we as scholars to

understand this unprecedented demographic fluctuation? Shan has argued that rather than

utilizing various metrics of ethnicity to analyze the Manchu population, a measure of Manchu

self-consciousness should be utilized. This seems especially poignant given that the Manchu

ethnicity was at its origin invented by the Hong Taiji, incorporating many other peoples with his

own Jurchen ethnic group.

Since the great reform and opening under Deng Xiaoping, ethnic Manchus across China have sought to rediscover their roots. Language schools across Dongbei have begun teaching

Manchu language classes, as well as universities offering degrees in Manchu studies.35 Pockets

of Manchu related Xibei culture have also remained strong in parts of Xinjiang. Many ethnic

Manchus still remember their hala (clan) and Banner as a major component of their genealogy.

Within the most earnest communities of revivers, Manchu Shamanism has experienced the

beginnings of a rebirth, as clans like the Shi clan begin to call back their brightest youth to take

up the mantle of shaman and lead their clan into the twenty-first century. While there is still

much reason for concern, in particular in regard to the endangered condition of Manchu

language, perhaps it is time for the Manchu culture to be recognized as more than just a

language, but instead as the spirit of a people.

34 Li and Shan, Ethnic China, 40. 35 Ibid. 181

Bibliography

Abramson, Marc Samuel. Ethnic Identity in Tang China. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008. Andreas, Siegl. "Damu Emke Dabala – “There Can Only Be One:” Tibetan-Mongol-Qing Discussions Concerning the Succession of the 5th Dalai Lama." Central Asiatic Journal 58, no. 1-2 (2015): 181-87. Atwood, Christopher Pratt. “‘Worshiping Grace’: The Language of Loyalty in Qing Mongolia.” Late Imperial China. 21, no. 2 (2000): 86–139. Baldick, Julian. Animal and Shaman: Ancient Religions of Central Asia. New York: New York University Press, 2000. Barfield, Thomas J. The Perilous Frontier: Nomadic Empires and China. Cambridge, Mass: B. Blackwell, 1989. Bawden, Charles R. The Modern . London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1968. — Confronting the Supernatural: Mongolian Traditional Ways and Means: Collected Papers. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1994. — Shamans, Lamas, and Evangelicals: The English Missionaries in Siberia London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1985. —"The Mongol Rebellion of 1756-1757.” Journal of Asian History. 2, no. 1 (1968): 1-31. Bodde, Derk, Clarence Morris, and Jinqing Zhu. Law in Imperial China: exemplified by 190 Ch'ing Dynasty cases. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967. Brook, Timothy, M. C. van Walt van Praag, and Miek Boltjes. Sacred Mandates: Asian International Relations since Chinggis Khan. : University of Chicago Press, 2018. Boekhoven, J.W. 2011. Genealogies of Shamanism: Struggles for Power, Charisma and Authority. Kooiweg: Barkhuis, 2011. Chang, C.-F. "Disease and Its Impact on Politics, Diplomacy, and the Military: The Case of Smallpox and the Manchus (1613-1795)." Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 57, no. 2 (April 2002): 177-97. Ch’en, Chieh-hsien. “A Study of the Manchu Posthumous Titles of the Chi’ing Emperors.” Central Asiastic Journal. 26, no. 3-4 (1982): 187-192. — “Analysis of the Reasons of Manchu Emperor Hong Taiji’s Restriction of Shamanism.” In Proceedings of the 35th Permanent International Altaistic Conference, edited by Chieh- hsien Chʻen, 34. : Center for Chinese Studies Materials,1993.

182

— “Religions and Lay Symbolism of Imperial Manchu Practices in Observing the New Year.”. Critical Readings on the Manchus in Modern China (1616-2012). 3 (2013). Chuluu K.E. "The Formation and Regulations of the Military Hunt in Qing Mongolia." Inner Asia. 20, no. 1 (2018): 5-25. Chan, Hok-lam. “From Tribal Chieftain to Sinitic Emperor: Leadership Contests and Successful Crises in the Jurchen-jin State, 1115-1234.” Journal of Asian History. 33, no. 2(1999): 105-141. Chia, Ning. "Lifanyuan and Libu in Early Qing Empire Building". Managing Frontiers in Qing China. 35 (2017) 43-69. Cosmo, Nicola Di, Zvi Benite, Stefanos Geroulanos, and Nicole Jerr. "Nurhaci’s Gambit Sovereignty as Concept and Praxis in the Rise of the Manchus." In The Scaffolding of Sovereignty, edited by Zvi Ben-Dor Benite. New York: Columbia University Press, 2017. Crossley, Pamela Kyle. A Translucent Mirror: History and Identity in Qing Imperial Ideology. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999. —Orphan Warriors: Three Manchu Generations and the End of the Qing World. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990. —"Manzhou Yuanliu Kao and the Formalization of the Manchu Heritage." The Journal of Asian Studies. 46, no. 4 (1987): 761-790. —The Manchus. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 2006. —"The Rulerships of China." The American Historical Review. 97, no. 5 (1992): 1468-1483. —"The Lifanyuan and Stability during Qing Imperial Expansion." Managing Frontiers in Qing China. 35, 92-115 (2017). — “An Introduction to the Qing Foundation Myth.” Late Imperial China 6, no. 2 (1985): 13–24. Crossley, Pamela Kyle, Helen F. Siu, and Donald S. Sutton. Empire at the Margins: Culture, Ethnicity, and Frontier in Early Modern China. Berkeley: Univ. of California Pr. (2006). Corradini, Piero. 2003. "The Worship of Heaven and of Earth during the Qing Dynasty.” Ming Qing Yanjiu. 12, no. 1 (2003): 17-70. —"The Legitimization of the Qing Dynasty." Central Asiatic Journal. 46, no. 1 (2002): 112-127. Curtin, Jeremiah. A Journey in Southern Siberia: the Mongols, Their Religion and Their Myths. Boston: Little, Brown, 1909. Dai, Yingcong. "To Nourish a Strong Military: Kangxi's Preferential Treatment of His Military Officials." War & Society. 18, no. 2 (2000): 71-91. Di Cosmo, N. "From Alliance to Tutelage: A Historical Analysis of Manchu Mongol Relations before the Qing Conquest." Frontiers of History in China. 7, no. 2 (2012): 175-197.

183

— “Manchu Shamanic Ceremonies at the Qing Court.” In State and Court Ritual in China, edited by Joseph Peter McDermott, 54. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999. — “Competing strategies of Great Khan Legitimacy in the Context of the Chaqar-Manchu Wars.” In Managing Frontiers in Qing China, edited by Dittmar Schorkowitz and Ning CHIA. Leiden: Brill, 2016 —Military Aspects of the Wars Against the Caqars Warfare in Inner Asian History (500-1800). Leiden: Brill, 2001. — “The Qing and Inner Asia: 1636–1800.” In The Cambridge History of Inner Asia: The Chinggisid Age, edited by Nicola Di Cosmo, Allen J. Frank, and Peter B. Golden. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015. Di Cosmo, Nicola, Allen J. Frank, and Peter B. Golden. 2015. The Cambridge History of Inner Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. Di Cosmo, Nicola, and Dalizhabu . Manchu-Mongol Relations on the Eve of the Qing Conquest: A Documentary History. Leiden: Brill, 2003. Durrant, Stephen. “Three Early Ch’ing Descriptions of Manchu Shamanism.” In Proceedings of the Fifth East Asian Altaistic Conference, December 26, 1979-January 2 1980, Taipei. — “Folklore Motif and the Portrayal of Nurhaci in the ‘Man-chou Shih-lu.’” In Critical Readings on Manchu History, edited by Lars Laaman. Leiden: Brill, 1979. — “Repetition in the Manchu Origin Myth as a Feature of Oral Narrative.” Central Asiatic Journal. 23, no. 1-2 (1979): 72-83. Elliott, Mark C. The Manchu Way: The Eight Banners and Ethnic Identity in Late Imperial China. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001. — The Old Manchu Chronicles. Translated by Mark C. Elliott. Cambridge: Manchu Studies Group, 2006. Elverskog, Johan. Our Great Qing: the Mongols, Buddhism and the State in Late Imperial China. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2006. East Asian Altaistic Conference and Chieh-hsien Chʻen. Proceedings of the Fifth East Asian Altaistic Conference, December 26, 1979-January 2, 1980, Taipei, China. Fletcher, Joseph. "The Mongols: Ecological and Social Perspectives." Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 46, no. 1 (1986): 11-50. Florence, Hodous. "The Quriltai as a Legal Institution in the Mongol Empire." Central Asiatic Journal 56 (2013): 87-102. Flowers, James. “Treating the Emperors in the Qing Palace: The Tension between the Manchu Rulers’ Public Power and Private.” PhD diss. University of Technology Sydney, 2009.

184

Franke, Herbert, and Hok-lam, Chan. Studies on the Jurchens and the Chin Dynasty. Aldershot: Ashgate: 1997. Fu, Yuguang, and Huiying. Meng. Manzu Sa man jiao yan jiu Di 1 ban. Beijing: Beijing da chu ban she, 1991. Gommans, Jos. "Warhorse and post-nomadic empire in Asia, c. 1000–1800." Journal of Global History. 2, no. 1 (2007): 1-21. Guo, Shuyun. “Analysis of the Grandfather God of the Manchu Shi Clan.” Shaman 17, no. 1/2 (Spring/Autumn 2009). — “Religious Education in Manchu Shamanism, as Seen from Jiaowuyun.” Shaman 16, no. 1-2 (2008): 47–64. — “Symbols and Function of the Zhang Clan Han Army Sacrificial Rite.” Religions 10, no. 2 (2019). — “On the Main Characteristics of the Manchu Shamanic Dance Rituals.” In Shamanism in Performing Arts, edited by Mihaly Hoppal, Tae-gon Kim, and Otto Von Sadovszky. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1995. Guo, Shuyun, and Emilia Simoncini. "Functions and Features of the Shamanic Masks." Central Asiatic Journal 47, no. 2 (2003): 163-82. Guo, Shuyun, Liu , and Liang Yanjun. Umesiben Mama: A Study of the Shamanic Epic of Northern China. Paths International Ltd, 2019. Guo, Qinghua. "Shenyang: the Manchurian ideal and imperial palace, 1625-43." Urban History 27, no. 3 (2000): 344-359. Guy, R. Kent. "Who Were the Manchus? A Review Essay." The Journal of Asian Studies 61, no. 1 (2002): 151-64. Hagiwara, Jupei. “The Political Ideas of Ligdan Khan third piac.” In Proceedings of the Third East Asian Altaistic Conference: August 17—24, 1969, edited by Ch'en Chieh-Hsien and Jagchid Sechin. Harris, Rachel (Rachel A.). Singing the Village: Music, Memory, and Ritual Among the Sibe of Xinjiang. Oxford: Published for the British Academy by Oxford University Press, 2004. Hesse, Klaus. "A Note on the Transformation of White, Black and Yellow Shamanism in the History of the Mongols." Studies in History. 2, no. 1 (1986): 17-30. Heissig, Walther. The Religions of Mongolia. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980. Hidehiro, Okada. “How Hong Taiji Came to the Throne.” Central Asiatic Journal, 23, no. 3/4 (1979): 251-52.

185

— "The Yüan Imperial Seal in the Manchu Hands: The Source of the Ch'ing Legitimacy," In Altaic Religious Beliefs and Practices: Proceedings of the 33d Meeting of the Permanent International Altaistic Conference, Budapest June 24-29 1990, 267-70. Budapest: Research Group for Altaic Studies, Hungarian Academy of Sciences. — “China as a Successor State of the Mongol Empire.” In The Mongol Empire and its Legacy, edited by Reuven Amitai and David Morgan. Leiden: Brill, 1999. Holyoak, Lorne. “Piao Han: The Creation of Manzu Identity and the Shamanic Tradition.” PhD diss., 2000. Hoppál, Mihály. Shamans and Cultures: [27-28 July, 1991, Seoul, Korea]. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1993. Hoppál, Mihály. Shamanism in Eurasia. Göttingen: Edition Herodot, 1984. Hostetler, L. "The Qing Court and peoples of central and Inner Asia: Representations of tributary relationships from the Huang Qing Zhigong tu." Brill's Inner Asian Library 35 (2017): 185-223. Heuschert-Laage, D. "Manchu-Mongolian controversies over judicial competence and the formation of the lifanyuan." Brill's Inner Asian Library 35 (2017): 224-253. Hu, X. "Reinstating the authority of the five punishments: A new perspective on legal privilege for Bannermen." Late Imperial China 34, no. 2 (2013): 28-51. Huang, . "The Grand Council of the Ch'ing Dynasty: A Historiographical Study." Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 48, no. 3 (1985): 502-515. Huang, Ray. "The Liao-tung Campaign of 1619". Oriens Extremus. 28, no. 1 (1981): 30-54. Humphrey, Caroline, and Ujeed Hürelbaatar. A Monastery in Time: the Making of Mongolian Buddhism. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2013. Humphrey, Caroline, and Urgunge Onon. Shamans and Elders: Experience, Knowledge and Power Among the Daur Mongols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996. Islam, Gazi, and Macabe Keliher. "Leading through Ritual: Ceremony and Emperorship in Early Modern China." Leadership. 14, no. 4 (2018): 435-459. Jian, Zhang. “Manchu Sinicization: Doubts on the Ethnic Perspective of New Qing History.” Contemporary Chinese Thought. 49 (2016). Jiang, X. "Did the Imperially Commissioned Manchu Rites for Sacrifices to the Spirits and to Heaven Standardize Manchu Shamanism?" Religions. 9, no. 12 (2018). Jiang, li. “The Reform of Shamanism before Qing Dynasty Entering the Central Plains.” Journal of Normal University 29, no. 1 (Jan. 2008): 67–69. Jones, William C. The Great Qing Code. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994.

186

Jagou, Fabienne. Lifanyuan and Tibet" In Managing Frontiers in Qing China, edited by Dittmar Schorkowitz and Ning Chia, 312-335. Leiden: Brill, 2017. Kara, György, Ákos Bertalan Apatóczky, Christopher Pratt Atwood, and Béla Kempf. Philology of the Grasslands: Essays in Mongolic, Turkic, and Tungusic studies, 2018. Kam, Tak-Sing. "The dGe-lugs-pa Breakthrough: The Uluk Darxan Nangsu Lama's Mission to the Manchus." Central Asiatic Journal 44, no. 2 (2000): 161-176. Katz, Paul R. "Trial by Power: Some Preliminary Observations on the Judicial Roles of Taoist Martial Deities." Journal of Chinese Religions 36, no. 1 (2008): 54-83. Keliher, Macabe. The Board of Rites and the Making of Qing China. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2020. — “The Manchu Transformation of Li: Ritual, Politics, and Law in the Making of Qing China, 1631-1690.” PhD diss., Harvard University, 2015. Kim, Le. “Saints for Shamans? Culture, Religion and Borderland Politics in Amuria from the Seventeenth to Nineteenth Centuries.” Central Asiatic Journal 56, no. 1-2 (2012): 169– 202. Kim, Seonmin. Ginseng and Borderland - Territorial Boundaries and Political Relations Between Qing China and Choson Korea, 1636-1912. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2017. Krader, Lawrence. "Qan-qayan and the Beginnings of Mongol Kingship.” Central Asiatic Journal 1, no. 1 (1955): 17-35. Kuhn, Philip A. Soulstealers the Chinese Sorcery Scare of 1768 Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990. Lamaan, Lars Peter. "Christianity, Magic and Politics in Qing and Republican China." Central Asiatic Journal 58, no. 1-2 (2015): 89-105. Lattimore, Owen. The Mongols of Manchuria: Their Tribal Divisions, Geographical Distribution, Historical Relations with Manchus and Chinese, and Present Political Problems; with Maps. New York: The John Day Company, 1934. Li, Gertraude Roth. “State Building before 1644.” In The Cambridge , edited by Willard J. Peterson, 9:9–72. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. — The Rise of the Early Manchu State: A Portrait Drawn from Manchu Source to 1636. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University, 1972. Li, Lisha. "The Symbolization Process of the Shamanic Drums sed by the Manchus and Other Peoples in North Asia." Yearbook for Traditional Music 24 (1992): 52-80. Li, Xiaobing, and Patrick Fuliang Shan. Ethnic China: Identity, Assimilation, and Resistance. Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books, 2015.

187

Li, Zhiting. “New Qing History: An Example of ‘New Imperialist’ History.” Contemporary Chinese Thought, 47 (2016): 1. Liu, Gui-. “Musical Instruments in the Manchurian Shamanic Sacrificial Rituals.” In Shamanism in Performing Arts, edited by Sha Hoppál, Mihály, Tae-gon Kim, and Otto Von Sadovszky. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1995. Liu, Guiteng. Manzu sa man qi yan jiu Di 1 ban. Shenyang Shi: min zu chu ban she, 1999. Liu, Xiaomeng, Yizhuang Ding, and Yun Shi. Saman jiao Dongbei min zu. Shi: Jilin jiao yu chu ban she, 1990. Liu, Kwang-Ching, and Richard Hon-Chun Shek. Heterodoxy in Late Imperial China. Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press, 2004. Link, E. Perry, and Frederick W. Mote. The Scholar's Mind: Essays in Honor of Frederick W. Mote. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press, 2009. Ma, Xisha, Huiying Meng, Zhen Chi, and Thomas David DuBois. “Popular Religion and Shamanism.” in Contemporary China Collection 1, (2011): 400. McMahon, Daniel. “The Qing Response to the Miao Kings of China’s 1795-7 Miao Revolt.” Hmong Studies Journal 17, no. 1 (2016): 1-37. Meng, Huiying. Chen feng de : Saman jiao guan yan jiu Di 1 ban. Beijingi: Beijing chu ban she, 2000. Meng, Huiying. Zhongguo bei min zu Saman jiao Di 1 ban. Beijing: She xue wen chu ban she, 2000. Meserve, Ruth I. "Smallpox among the Tungus Peoples: The Language of a Disease." Central Asiatic Journal 50, no. 1 (2006): 75-100. Mish, John L. "An Early Manchu-Chinese Patent of Nobility" Monumenta Nipponica 10, no. 1/2 (1954): 270-276. Millward, James A. New Qing Imperial history: The Making of Inner Asian Empire at Qing . London: Routledge Curzon, 2006. Mircea, Eliade. Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964). Naquin, Susan. Peking: Temples and City Life, 1400-1900. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. Nowak, Margaret, and Stephen Durrant. The Tale of the Nišan Shamaness: A Manchu Folk Epic. Seattle: Univ. of Washington Press, 1977. Norman, Jerry. A Sketch of Sibe Morphology. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1974.

188

Ning, C. "Lifanyuan and libu in the Qing Tribute System." Brill's Inner Asian Library 35: 144- 184, 2017. Oidtmann, Max. Forging the : The Qing Empire and the Politics of in Tibet, 2018. Permanent International Altaistic Conference, and Barbara Kellner-Heinkele. Altaica Berolinensia: The Concept of Sovereignty in the Altaic World. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1993. Pang, Tatiana A. “Destiny of Qing Taizu Nurhaci’s Second Wife Gundai.” In The Role of Women in the Altaic World: Permanent International Altaistic Conference 44th Meeting, edited by Veronika Veit. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2007. — “The Kun-ning-gung Palace in Peking: The Manchu Dynasty’s Shaman Centre in the Forbidden City.” Shaman 1, no. 2 (Autumn 1993). Pang, Tatjana A., and Giovanni Stary. "On the Discovery of a Manchu Epic." Central Asiatic Journal. 38, no. 1 (1994): 58-70. Perdue, Peter C. “Comparing Empires: Manchu Colonialism.” The International History Review 20, no. 2 (1998): 255-62. Perdue, Peter C. “Fate and Fortune in Central Eurasian Warfare: Three Qing Emperors and their Mongol Rivals.” In Warfare in Inner Asian History: 500-1800, edited by Nicola Di Cosmo. Leiden: Brill, 2002. Peterson, Willard J., and Getrude Roth Li. "State Building before 1644." The Cambridge History of China 9, (2002): 9-72. Qiu, Pu. Saman jiao yan jiu. : Shanghai ren min chu ban she. 1985. Rawski, Evelyn. The Last Emperors: A Social History of Qing Imperial Institutions. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998. Rossabi, Morris. How Mongolia Matters: War, Law, and Society, 2017. Rhoads, Edward J. M. Manchus and Han: Ethnic Relations and Political Power in Late Qing and Early Republican China. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2015. Sanders, Alan J. K. Historical Dictionary of Mongolia 2nd Ed. Lanham: Scarecrow Press, 2003. Sadovszky, Otto von, and Mihály Hoppál. Shamanism: Past and Present. Budapest: Ethnographic Institute Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 1989. Schorkowitz, Dittmar, and Ning Chia. Managing Frontiers in Qing China: The Lifanyuan and Libu Revisited, 2017. Schlesinger, Jonathan. World Trimmed with Fur: Wild things, Pristine Places, and the Natural Fringes of Qing Rule: Stanford University Press, 2019.

189

Sepe, Agostino. "Back to the Roots: The Imperial City of Shenyang as a Symbol of the Manchu Ethnic Identity of the Qing Dynasty." Ming Qing Yanjiu 16, no. 1 (2011): 129-76. Seung B. Kye. “Nurhaci in Korean Sources, 1594-1622.” International Journal of Korean History 21, no.1 (Feb. 2016). Shi, Kun. “Ny Dan The Manchu Shamaness.” In Religions of China in Practice, 1996. Shi, Guangwei, and Housheng. Liu. Manzu Saman tiaoshen Di 1 ban. Changchun shi: Jilin wen shi chu ban she, 1992. Smith, Richard J. The Qing Dynasty and Traditional Chinese Culture. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015. Sneath, David. Imperial Statecraft: Political Forms and Techniques of Governance in Inner Asia, Sixth-Twentieth Centuries. Bellingham, WA: Center for , Western Washington University for Mongolia and Inner Asia Studies Unit, University of Cambridge, 2006. Song. Heping. “The Dances of Manchu Shamans.” Shaman 5 (1997). Song, Heping, and Huiying Meng. Manzu Saman wen ben yanjiu. Taibei: Wu nan tu shu chu ban you xian gong si. 1997. Stary, Giovanni, and Hartmut Walravens. “The Manchu Imperial Shamanic Complex Tangse.” In Selected Manchu Studies: Contributions to History, Literature, and Shamanism of the Manchus. Berlin: Klaus Schwarz, 2013. — "From ‘Clan-Rule’ to ‘Khan-Rule’: Some Considerations about the Relations between Nurhaci and Šurhaci." Central Asiatic Journal 58, no. 1/2 (2015): 149-54. — "’Praying in the Darkness’: New texts for a Little-known Manchu Shamanic Rite.” Shaman 1 (1993). — "An Example of a Manchu Shamanic Invocation Reconstructed from its Chinese Tanscription." Shaman 20, no. 1/2 (2012): 139-143. — “Bibliographical Review on the Occasion of the 40th Birthday of Nishanology," Shaman 10, no. 1/2 (2002). Stuart, Kevin. “LI Xuewei & Shelear China's Dagur Minority: Society, Shamanism, and Folklore.” Sino-Platonic Papers 60 (December 1994). Struve, Lynn A. The Qing Formation in World-Historical Time. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Asia Center, 2004. Sugiyama, Kiyohiko. "The Ch'ing Empire as a Manchu Khanate the Structure of Rule under the Eight Banners." Acta Asiatica 88, 2005.

190

Sutton, Donald S. "Ethnic Revolt in the Qing Empire: The ‘Miao Uprising’ of 1795-1797 Reexamined." Asia Major 16, no. 2 (2003): 105-52. Tan Yu-xiu, Cui Ting-ting. View on the Relation between the Manchu Shamanism and Fete from among Eight Banners Genealogy. Journal of Jilin Normal University (Humanities & Social Science Edition) No. 4. 2008. Tulisow, J. "The Wedding Song of Shamaness Nisin - An Unknown Fragment of a Well-Known Tale." Central Asiatic Journal 58, no. 1-2 (2015): 155-168. Thomas, Nicholas, and Caroline Humphrey. Shamanism, History, and the State. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1994. Udry, Stephen. “Muttering Mystics: A Preliminary Examination of Manchu Shamanism in the Qing Dynasty.” PhD diss., 2000. Ujeed, Uranchimeg. "A Mongolian Source on the Manchu Manipulation of Mongolian Buddhism in the Seventeenth Century: The Biography of the Second Neichi Toyin." Inner Asia. 15, no. 2 (2013): 225-242. — "Persecuted Practice: Neichi Toyin's Way of Conducting Work." Inner Asia. 13, no. 2 (2011): 265-277. Vasilevich, G. M. "Preshamanistic and Shamanistic Beliefs of the Evenki." Soviet Anthropology and Archeology. 11, no. 1 (1972): 29-44. Wakeman, Frederic E. The Great Enterprise: the Manchu Reconstruction of the Imperial Order in Seventeenth-Century China. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985. Waley-Cohen, Joanna. "Politics and the Supernatural in Mid-Qing Legal Culture." Modern China. 19, no. 3 (1993): 330-353. — "Religion, War, and Empire-Building in Eighteenth-Century China." The International History Review 20, no. 2 (1998): 336-52. — “Military Ritual and the Qing Empire.” In Warfare in Inner Asian History (500-1800), edited by Nicola Di Cosmo, 405-444. Leiden: Brill, 2002. Walter, Mariko Namba. Shamanism: An Encyclopedia of World Beliefs, Practices, and Culture 1.1. Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO, 2004. — Shamanism: An Encyclopedia of World Beliefs, Practices, and Culture 2. 2. Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO, 2004. Walravens, Hartmut. “Tribute-bearers in Manchu and Chinese: A Unique 18th-Century Source for East and Central Asian History.”' Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. 49, no. 3 (1996): 395-406. Wang, Penglin. "Tokharian Words in Altaic Regnal Titles." Central Asiatic Journal 39, no. 2 (1995): 165-207.

191

Wang P.C.-M. "The Significance of State Sacrifice in Early Qing - An Examination of the Shunzhi Period." Central Asiatic Journal 58, no. 1/2 (2015): 133-147. Wang, Yuanchong. Remaking the Chinese Empire: Manchu-Korean Relations, 1616-1911. Ithaca: Press, 2018. Wang, Honggang, and Xiaofei. Yu. Da shen yun : shen mi de bei fang Saman wen Di 1 ban. Chengdu: wen yi chu ban she, 2003. Wechsler, Howard J. Offerings of Jade and Silk: Ritual and Symbol in the Legitimation of the T’ang Dynasty. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985. Weiers, Michael. "The Lifanyuan: A Review Based on New Sources and Traditional Historiography." 70-91, n.d. Waida, Manabu. "Problems of Central Asian and Siberian Shamanism." 30, no. 2 (1983): 215-39. Wei, Betty Peh-Tʻi. Yuan, 1764-1849: The Life and Work of a Major Scholar-Official in Nineteenth-Century China before the Opium War. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2006. Wittfogel, Karl August, and Jiasheng Feng. History of Chinese Society: Liao, 907-1125. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society: distributed by the Macmillan Co., New York, 1949. Wu, Junqing. Mandarins and Heretics: The Construction of "Heresy" in Chinese State Discourse, 2017. Yongjiang Z. "The Libu and Qing Perception, Classification and Administration of Non-Han People." Brill's Inner Asian Library. 35 (2017): 116-143. Young, Serinity. Women Who Fly: , Witches, Mystics, and Other Airborne Females. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. Yuen-Chung Lui, Adam. Critical Readings on the Manchus in Modern China (1616-2012) Volume 2, 2013. 469-485 From Feudalism to Bureaucratic Rule: The Control of Princes and Manchu Officials, 1644–1661. Zarrow, Peter Gue. "Historical Trauma: Anti-Manchuism and Memories of Atrocity in Late Qing China". History & Memory. 16, no. 2 (2004): 67-107 , Zhan, and Lida Luo. Nishan sa man zhuan. Shenyang: Liaoning ren min chu ban she. 1988. , Jifa. Saman xin yang di li shi kao cha. Taibei Shi: Wen shi zhe chu ban she. 1996.

192