This book observed well-liked, bureaucratic and royal reactions to the gesticulation of supposed sorcery cases, which began from Jiangnan and extended to other areas from late March to early November 1768. It can be seen from the book that, the Qianlong Emperor’s involvement of these cases with the matters of dissent and agitation, resulted to the extreme utilization of imperial authority to act against these cases. From this it can be argued that, these cases endangered both the honesty of the legal structure and local order (Kuhn 12-309).
From the book; in most areas of central and north China there was a consideration of the local executives concerning cases of evident sorcery. In this case, different aspects were involved in these sorcery cases, where in some instance an adversary’s name would be placed on the supporters of a bridge-construction project. From this, the enemy’s soul would be crushed by the gust of the construction-crews’ mallets.
Based on this it can be argued that, the writers argument was the belief in sorcery among the Chinese. On the other hand religion was another argument of the writer where he said that; the Chinese people believed that the cutting off the trimmings of people’s lines of hairs, could call for the spirits with the stolen tresses. In this case, these spirits’ appearances could then form the shock hordes for burglary groups, or for those setting up new wicked exploits. From this it can be argued that, the Chinese people believed in calling for help from the spirits (Ding et al. 102-134).
It can be argued that, Kuhn offered a charming explanation of the sorcery occurrences at the well known community level. In this case, he described the character and risk of ‘soul-stealing’ to recount the episodes of supposed soul-stealing; as they were taken to regional administration courts. Additionally, he delineated the legal processes that were used to solve the cases and reconcile the local tranquil (Weber et al. 133-148)
It can be seen from his book that, Kuhn explained the socio-psychological division and the administration organization of the Qianlong era. In this case, he pointed out the edge-cutting predicament to worries about spirit stealers from both the sovereign and the masses; hence a theme of social stratification. Based on this, despite the fact that the Qianlong era had been commended in history as an affluent period, the frequent stresses of the overpopulation and the deteriorating fraction of possessions per capita placed the commoners in a state of restlessness. From this it can be argued that, the commoners always thought that their lives were endangered by invisible ambient spirits.
On the other hand, the monarch thought that there was an incitement to rebellion and incorporation of people’s way of life by Han. As a result of these, the ruler and the ordinary people worked together in ordering the administrators to press the movement of impeaching sorcery cases. By doing this, the priests and the vagabonds in China became the scapegoats (Kohn 167-183).
It can further be argued from the book that, the fears connected with sorcery were worsened in this era because many Chinese communities were facing struggling social-economic variations. In this case, these variations in collectivity increased the income of the country as a whole. Additionally, these variations produced a displacement, downward social mobility and the appearance of an underclass of fleeting unfortunate that puffed up the class of wandering beggars and monks (Fu et al. 103-121).
It should be noted that, the spirit stealers assist in comprehension of the relation between custom and subjective power in the administrative-monarch system of Qing. In this case, the monarch wished to have a stable; systematic and consistent command over the administration as well as being personally bureaucratized. It can further be argued that the soul stealer case, which was viewed as a political offense trembled the administrators out of the patterns of custom conduct; which they used to guard themselves. By doing this, Qianlong was given an opportunity to solve the soul stealers problems, and reinforce the monarch power over influential and ingenious elites.
On the other hand, the administrators did not completely submit to imperial harassment. In this case, they resisted the subjective authority through their own work-styles, which included a cautious cover up for information; defensive indecisive cover ups to guard individual association and a steadfast partiality for customary actions. In this case, despite the fact that the custom and subjective power was disagreed in certain aspects, it still found means of living alongside the people (Kuhn 12-309).
It is of importance to note that, Kuhn’s work was well evidenced through an amalgamation of different techniques including communal account; cultural narration, administrative history and religion investigation. On the other hand, the only weakness which can be evident in his work is the local gentry. In this case, as one of the chief authorities of Qing Empire, gentry were totally excluded in his broad work (Kuhn 12-309).
In conclusion; the outlines about the Chinese culture given by the author increase ones understanding of the Qian Empire, social stratification concerning the bureaucrats, monarchs and the commoners. It can be argued that, the cases of soul-stealing affected the political, social and economic system of the Chinese.
Works cited
Ding, Xiao & Yang, Yuan. “Tales of Emperor Qin Shihuang”. Chicago: Foreign Languages Press. (1999): P. 102-134.
Fu, L., Lao, P. & Strohl, Jean. “American and Chinese Perceptions and Belief Systems”. New York: Springer Publishers. (1994): P. 103-121.
Kohn, Livia. “Daoism and Chinese Culture”, 2nd edition. New York; Three Pines Press. (2oo1): P. 167-183.
Kuhn, Philip. “Soulstealers: The Chinese Sorcery Scare of 1768”. Harvard: Harvard University Press. (2006): P. 12-309.
Weber, Max, Gerth, Hans & Yang, C.K. “The Religion of China”, 1st edition. New York: Free Press. (1968): P. 133-148.