The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.
Art of Doing Good: Charity in Late Ming China
Abstract
An unprecedented passion for saving lives swept through late Ming society, giving rise to charitable institutions that transcended family, class, and religious boundaries. Analyzing lecture transcripts, administrative guidelines, didactic tales, and diaries, Joanna Handlin Smith abandons the facile explanation that charity was a response to poverty and social unrest and examines the social and economic changes that stimulated the fervor for doing good. With an eye for telling details and a finesse in weaving the voices of her subjects into her narrative, Smith brings to life the hard choices that five men faced when deciding whom to help, how to organize charitable distributions, and how to balance their communities' needs against the interests of family and self. She thus shifts attention from tired questions about whether the Chinese had a tradition of charity (they did) to analyzing the nature of charity itself. Skillfully organized and engaging, The Art of Doing Good moves from discussions about moral leadership and beliefs to scrutiny of the daily operation of soup kitchens and medical dispensaries, and from examining local society to generalizing about the just use of resources and the role of social networks in charitable giving. Smith's work will transform our thinking about the boundaries between social classes in late imperial China and about charity in general.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
During the Ming and Qing periods, a new tradition of religiously inspired lay charities called shantang emerged.
“During the Ming (1368 -1644) and Qing (1644 -1911) periods, these efforts were joined by a new tradition of religiously inspired lay charities called shantang 善 棠 (benevolent associations) (Fuma, 2008; Smith, 1987; Smith, 2009).”
From Before the NGO: Chinese Charities in Historical Perspective (2015) · cites this paper as Smith, 2009
Citations
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 93
Metadata
- Authors
- Smith, J. H.
- Corresponding author
- Smith, Joanna H
- Venue
- University of California Press eBooks
- Publisher
- University of California Press
- Published
- 2009-12-31
- OpenAlex
- W4387485599
- Cited by
- 93
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 2.39
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- University of California Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Chinese history and philosophy
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Nonprofit Sector and Volunteering
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Historical Economic and Social Studies
- Keywords
- charity, late Ming dynasty, charitable institutions, soup kitchens, medical dispensary, social networks, moral leadership, social class boundaries, resource allocation, charitable giving
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review