Divinity Atlas

Sacred Correspondences
Sources

The Manchu Way: The Eight Banners and Ethnic Identity in Late Imperial China (Elliott, 2001)

Mark Elliott's institutional and ethnohistorical study of Manchu identity under the Qing dynasty

Citation Formats

General Reference

APA Style

BibTeX

Mark C. Elliott, a historian of the Qing dynasty, examines in this monograph the creation and evolution of Manchu ethnic identity under Qing rule, centered on the Eight Banners, the Manchu system of social and military organization that secured the conquest of the Ming and structured Manchu ethnic sovereignty and dominance of the imperial power structure through 1911. The book treats shamanic ritual, alongside language, dress and mounted archery, as one of the state-recognized markers of Manchu ethnic distinctiveness the Qing court worked to define and preserve. Published by Stanford University Press, it is the standard English language institutional study of the Manchu banner system and Manchu identity in late imperial China.

Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier
1
Mark C. Elliott's The Manchu Way: The Eight Banners and Ethnic Identity in Late Imperial China, published by Stanford University Press in 2001, the top tier reflecting a peer reviewed academic monograph by a historian of the Qing dynasty and the standard English language institutional study of the Manchu banner system. Its treatment of shamanic ritual as a state-recognized marker of Manchu ethnic distinctiveness is part of a broader argument about identity construction under Qing rule, so a claim about the ritual practice itself in isolation benefits from a source focused specifically on Manchu shamanism.
Notes
Standard institutional study of the Manchu Eight Banners and Qing-era ethnic identity, in which shamanic ritual is documented as one recognized marker of Manchu distinctiveness. Use for established facts about Manchu ethnic identity and its state-recognized religious practice; not a dedicated ritual manual.
Citation
Author
Mark C. Elliott
Publisher
Stanford University Press
Publication Year
2001
Source Type
academic monograph
Claims Backed By This Source (13 claims)

This source backs 13 claims across the atlas. As facts: 11 well-attested, 1 scholarly debate. Plus 1 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.

Disposition By Topic

  • Sources, 7 claims: 7 well-attested.
  • Religions, 6 claims: 4 well-attested, 1 scholarly debate, 1 general references.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.

View At A Past Year

The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.