Tibetan Buddhism in Qing China’s Policy of Integration of Tibet and Mongolia
https://doi.org/10.25205/1818-7919-2025-24-10-23-33
Abstract
After several successful military campaigns aimed to expand and strengthen the Qing state’s borders, the Manchu rulers faced the challenge of integrating culturally diverse regions into their growing empire. Many researchers believe that the Manchu rulers’ interest in Buddhism was linked to a desire to comprehensively control Tibet and Mongolia, as well as to limit the significant influence of lamas on people living in these regions. Thus, the empire needed a unified and distinctive Qing culture. This investigation, drawing on biographies, official reports, and administrative documents, primarily those associated with General Nian Genyao and other military leaders, aims to add new material to the descriptions of the process of incorporating Tibetan Buddhist traditions into the general Qing culture. The study primarily focuses on the Amdo (modern Qinghai), border region between Tibet and Qing China, which from the 1720s had a strategically important role for expanding Qing contacts with communities in Inner Asia.
Supporting agencies: This investigation is a part of the State Assignment of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation no. FSUS-2024-0028 “Axiological Potential of Buddhism in the Context of International Relations between Russia and the Countries of East Asia: History and Modernity”
About the Author
E. A. Girchenko
Novosibirsk State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ekaterina A. Girchenko, Candidate of Sciences (History)
Scopus Author ID 57224809685
WoS Researcher ID ITR-9951-2023
RSCI Author ID 821099
Novosibirsk
References
1. Garri I. R. Buddhism and Politics in Inner Asia. Oriental Studies, 2020, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 8–16. (in Russ.) DOI 10.22162/2619-0990-2020-47-1-8-16
2. Gombozhapov A. D. K voprosu o politicheskom ustroistve Mongolii v XVI v. [On the issue of the political structure of Mongolia in the 16th century]. Vlast’ [Power], 2020, no. 4, pp. 216–221. (in Russ.)
3. Hermann J. Collaboration and Resistance on the Southwest Frontier: Early Eighteenth-Century Qing Expansion on Two Fronts. Late Imperial China, 2014, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 77–112.
4. Kitinov B. U., Lyulina A. G. Tibetan relationship “cho-yon” in Qin sources mid. 17th – end 18th centuries. RUDN Journal of World History, 2018 vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 126–134. (in Russ.) DOI 10.22363/2312-8127-2018-10-2-126-134
5. Lai Huimin. Tianhuang Guizhou: Qing huangzu de jieceng jiegou yu jingji shenghuo [賴惠敏。天潢貴冑：清皇族的階層結構與經濟生活]. The Imperial Family: The Hierarchy Structure and Economic Life of the Qing Imperial Family. Taibei, Чжунъян яньцзююань чубаньшэ, 1997, 359 p. (in Chin.)
6. Lyulina A. G. Some Aspects of Regent Titles in Tibet (17th – 18th). RUDN Journal of World Histo-ry, 2019, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 202–212. (in Russ.) DOI 10.22363/2312-8127-2019-11-3-202-212
7. Mа Jie. Nian Gengyao shengzhi que baishen de lishi yu xianshi jingjian [马杰。年羹尧升职却败身的历史与现实镜鉴 // 领导科学]. Nian Gengyao’s Promotion and Downfall: In Historical and Current Mirror. Lingdao kexue, 2020, no. 7, pp. 89–92. (in Chin.)
8. Martynov A. S. Status Tibeta v XVII–XVIII vekakh v traditsionnoi kitayskoi sisteme politicheskikh predstavlenii [The Status of Tibet in the 17th – 18th Centuries in the Traditional Chinese System of Political Concepts]. Moscow: Nauka, 1978, 286 р. (in Russ.)
9. Murzaeva E. Sh. The Significance of Religion in the Migration Process of Khoshuts to Qinghai. Vestnik Kalmytskogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Kalmyk University], 2017, no. 35 (3), pp. 48–54. (in Russ.)
10. Nayancheng Qinghai zouyi [那彦成青海奏议]. Nayancheng’ Qinghai memorials. Xining, Qinghai renmin chubanshe, 2020, 398 p. (in Chin.)
11. Nian Gengyao man-han zouzhe yibian [年羹尧满汉奏折译编]. Nian Gengyao’s Memorials Translation in Manchu and Chinese languages. Ed. by Ji Yonghai. Tianjin, Tianjin guji chubanshe, 1995, 368 p. (in Chin.)
12. Soloscheva M. A. Kukunorskii myatezh 1723–1724 godov i ego znachenie dlya istorii Tibeta [The Kukunor Rebellion of 1723–1724 and its Significance for the History of Tibet]. Bulletin of the St. Petersburg State University. Series 13, 2013, iss. 1, pp. 58–67. (in Russ.)
13. Soloscheva M. A. O roli instituta panchen-lam vo vnutrennei politike imperii Tsin [The role of the Panchen Lama institution in the domestic policy of the Qing Empire]. Problemy Dal'nego Vostoka [Problems of the Far East], 2017, no. 4, pp. 141–149. (in Russ.)
14. Tsomu Yudru. Images of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama in the Public Opinion of the Late Qing Period. Revue dʼEtudes Tibétaines, 2022, no. 64, pр. 629–655.
15. Tsyrempilov N. V. Gosudarstvo i Buryatskaya buddiiskaya obshchina v Rossiiskoy imperii XVIII – nachala XX v. [The State and the Buryat Buddhist Community in the Russian Empire of the 18th – Early 20th Centuries]. Dr. Hist. Sci. Diss. Ulan-Ude, 2015, 431 p. (in Russ.)
16. Uspensky V. L. Tibetskii buddizm v Pekine pri dinastii Tsin (1644–1911) v kul'turno-istoricheskom kontekste epokhi [Tibetan Buddhism in Beijing during the Qing Dynasty (1644–1911) in the Cultural and Historical Context of Epoch]. Abstract of Dr. Hist. Sci. Diss. St. Petersburg, 2004, 44 p. (in Russ.)
17. Wang Xilong. Nian Gengyao “Qinghai shanhou shiyi shisan tiao” shulun [王希隆。年羹尧《青海善后事宜十三条》述论 // 西藏研究]. A Commentary on Nian Gengyao’s “Thirteen Articles on the Post-War Affairs in Qinghai”. Xizang yanjiu, 1992, no. 4, pp. 27–37. (in Chin.)
18. Wu Lan. Refuge from Empire: Religion and Qing China’s Imperial Formation in the Eighteenth Century. Dr. Philos. Sci. Diss. New York, 2016, 223 p.
19. Xining fu xin zhi [西宁府新志]. Xining Prefecture New Records. Ed. by Yang Yingju. Xining, Qinghai renmin chubanshe, 1988, vol. 15, 385 p. (in Chin.)
Review
For citations:
Girchenko E.A. Tibetan Buddhism in Qing China’s Policy of Integration of Tibet and Mongolia. Vestnik NSU. Series: History and Philology. 2025;24(10):23-33. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25205/1818-7919-2025-24-10-23-33
Views:
229
JATS XML
Email this article 