Send message to Author

Paper abstract:

What does it mean to frame the Manchu-ruled Qing Dynasty as a shamanic state and its emperor as a sacred king? In what form were the shamanic traditions of the Manchus reflected in their state formation and ruling ideology? What preceding Inner Asian influences contributed to their ideas of legitimacy? These questions are pivotal for our understanding of China’s last dynasty. Well before the Manchu eight banner forces passed through the gates of Shanhaiguan and took hold of the city of Beijing, the Manchus were bearers of a distinct Inner Asian native religion, the archetypal “shamanism.” At the center of this tradition, was a structure known as the Tangse [Ch. Tangzi], which served as the main performance point for the Manchu shamanic tradition and an embodiment of the sacred charisma of the Manchu ruler and his Aisin Gioro clan. Situated on the outskirts of successive Manchu capitals, this shrine not only housed sacred objects but served as a central ritual site employing a cohort of shamans and other ritual personnel to perform offerings, blood sacrifices, and ritual obeisance to the shamanic central deity Abka Enduri [the Spirit of Heaven], the mafari [ancestors], and the enduri weceku [guardian spirits and household gods] on behalf of the Manchu ruler. From martial sacrifices to the sacred military standard before setting out on campaign to New Year's Day rituals and the making of solemn oaths, this site served as a venue for important religio-political rituals and demonstrations of the Manchu ruler’s role as sacred king before the Qing officialdom and nobility. From its earliest days, the possession of the Tangse was imbued with profound religio-political significance in efforts at early state centralization, while the shamans of rival factions were killed, their shrines desecrated, and possession of a separate Tangse by anyone other than the Aisin Gioro clan was strictly prohibited. This paper explores the connections between the Manchu ruler’s role as sacred king and Tangse as chief ritual site and the formation of a model of legitimacy rooted in shamanism through multilingual primary sources in Manchu, Mongolian, and Chinese. By comparison with preceding models of sacred kingship and maintenance of imperial shrines among the Mongols and other Inner Asian peoples and in contrast to ideas of shamanism as inherently fragmented and anti-institutional, this paper demonstrates that Manchu shamanism was a force for state-building quite as powerful as Chinggisid ideology or Buddhist cakravartin monarch ideals.