Cited by 2China's Ethnic Minorities and RelationsChinese history and philosophyIslamic Studies and History

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Muslims under the Manchu Reign in China

Israeli, Raphael·1979·Studia Islamica

Abstract

This passage, which probably reflected popular and official sentiment in China during the Muslim rebellions of the 1850's and 1860's, epitomizes the disruption of the modus vivendi and the breakdown of the modus operandi that the Hui minority had worked out among the Chinese up to the advent of the Ch'ing (2). This outright attack on Muslims, all Muslims, was uttered in public by a prominent Chinese figure at a time when an attempt was being made in official circles to distinguish between good Hui and evil Hui. The slogan was Pu-fen

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/1595321

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Israeli, R.
Venue
Studia Islamica
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1979
Issue
49
Pages
159
ISSN
0585-5292 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2074580655
Cited by
2
References
0
Citations by year
2022: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Studia Islamica (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › China's Ethnic Minorities and Relations
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Chinese history and philosophy
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Islamic Studies and History
Keywords
Hui people, Manchu Qing dynasty, modus vivendi, Islamophobia, ethnic minorities in China

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