• 検索結果がありません。

The Influence of Yin Keng's Hsiang Yüeh: a 16th-century Planning Text and the Fortified Towns and Villages in the Ming Empire

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

シェア "The Influence of Yin Keng's Hsiang Yüeh: a 16th-century Planning Text and the Fortified Towns and Villages in the Ming Empire"

Copied!
199
0
0

読み込み中.... (全文を見る)

全文

(1)

The Influence of Yin Keng's Hsiang Yüeh: a 16th-century Planning Text and the Fortified Towns and Villages in the Ming Empire

党, 晟

http://hdl.handle.net/2324/4110425

出版情報:九州大学, 2020, 博士(人間環境学), 課程博士 バージョン:

権利関係:

(2)

The Influence of Yin Keng’s Hsiang Yüeh:

a 16th-century Planning Text and the Fortified Towns and Villages in the Ming Empire

Sheng DANG

2020

(3)

ABSTRACT

Hsiang-yüeh (鄉 約) is a book on fortification technology from Ming China, composed by a scholar-official named Yin Keng (尹耕) (1515~1552?) in 1550. The author’s start point was helping organizing villagers to build walled-settlements and defend themselves from the attack of the Mongols.

The book comprised of 12 clauses, each deal with a specific problem of successful fortification and defence, such like site selection, fortress layout, weapons, defence tactics and even daily routine maintenance. Yin Keng proposed detailed countermeasures for the deficiency of the prevalent layout and the difficultly of finance for the villagers. His theory drew an abroad attention especially after his death.

In fact, Hsiang-yüeh had affected not only civilian but also official constructions of fortified towns in the northern frontier of the Ming Empire. However, since the 17th century, its value was long neglected. The dissertation aims to find out how Hsiang- yüeh had been implemented in the officially built stationed fortresses (towns) and mostly self-built walled-villages within the Hsüan Fu (宣府鎮) and Ta T’ung (大同鎮) Garrisons, where the book was composed and first printed.

Firstly, all 148 well-recorded stationed fortresses in the research scope were put in a chronical order and functional categories. Then, three main points were selected to analyze the research targets based on a conventional elementary analysis method developed in fortification research: a) site selection; b) wall design; c) tower and its arrangement. By comparing the cases before and after the publish of Hsiang-yüeh, it can be concluded that the book’s planning scheme was a summary of previous lessons and experiences, especially the inappropriate site selections, inefficient tower layout and distant tower arrangement. Before the final publish, the author might get direct experiences in the constructions of Chün Tzu (君子) and Sung Shu (松樹) forts in 1546, as they can be seen as prototypes of the small and big forts proposed in Hsiang-yüeh.

Since 1558,new constructions in the Ta T’ung Garrison as well as the upgrading constructions in the Hsüan Fu Garrison begun to follow the direction of Hsiang-yüeh,

(4)

especially those in Ta T’ung, which honestly reproduced Yin Keng's design. The approach of planning by fixed tower gap and changeable tower number was carried out since then.

After 1571. Ming Empire reached a treatise with the Mongols but kept strengthening the border fortresses, mainly by heightening the walls. During this period the suggested proportion of wall section, that height divided by bottom width equals to two, was implemented in strengthened fortresses. Moreover, the relocation and enlargement of some poorly located fortresses suggest an awareness of the importance of site selection among the army leaders.

To sum, in Hsüan Fu and Ta T’ung Garrisons, Hsiang-yüeh had prompted the rationalization and standardization of the official fortification activities.

Secondly, the influence of Hsiang-yüeh on walled-villages was exerted in a different way. An overall investigation on the fortified villages through the whole Ming Dynasty suggested that the fortification activities carried out by villagers laid more emphasis on the arrangement on houses rather than military structures. Traditionally, permanent walled-villages adopted two kinds of layout, one is with big blocks divided by a checkerboard-like road system, the other is small blocks arrayed at both sides of one single street. In mid term of Ming Dynasty, a new layout combined the two types appeared, which adopted simplified checkerboard roads that divided small blocks.

Commonly an axis goes from south to north was stressed and the temple of God of Warfare was placed at the north end of the axis. The new layout got so popular that in the case of Chang-li-pu(張李堡), a village fort built according to the text of Hsiang- yüeh, employed a similar division of blocks.

Unlike officially built fortresses, walled-villages accepted the idea of Hsiang-yüeh as a strengthening method to their conventionally planned settlement, like relocating the village to occupy a better site, or putting more towers on the wall curtain. Only after 1573, when Hsiang-yüeh was assigned as official guideline for constructing qualified fortresses for the villagers, had some local authorities brought the ideal layout into reality in a relatively small range.

In late 17th century, Hsiang-yüeh ended its mission as a therapy to the vulnerable walled-villages and inappropriately built fortresses in northern frontier of the Ming

(5)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ... I Table of Contents ... III List of Tables ... VII List of Figures ... VIII

CHAPTER 1

GENERAL INTRODUCTION ... 1

1.1 Background ... 2

1.1.1 An introduction to the fortification in acient China ... 2

1.1.2 Literature of poliorcetics in acient China ... 6

1.1.3 Fortification in the Ming Dynasty and Hsiang-yüeh ... 9

1.2 Literature Review ... 19

1.2.1 The Study of fortification of ancient western world:challenges, questions and methods ... 19

1.2.2 The study of fortification of ancient China:tradition and status ... 23

1.4 Research Objectives, Scope and Methods ... 26

1.4.1 The questions and objectives ... 26

1.4.2 The scope and objects ... 28

1.4.3 The matierals and methods ... 30

1.4 Research Organization ... 38

References ... 39

(6)

CHAPTER 2

THE BACKGROUND, CONTENTS AND SPREAD OF HSIANG-YÜEH ... 42

2.1 Introduction ... 43

2.1.1 Background ... 43

2.1.2 Related works ... 45

2.2 The Background of Hsiang Yüeh ... 46

2.2.1 The Conflicts between the Ming Empire and the Mogolians during the Chia Ch’ing Reign (1522-1566). ... 46

2.2.2 The author Yin Keng’ s life ... 47

2.2.3 Yin Keng’s writings and thoughts on defence. ... 51

2.2.4 The siegecaft of the Mongolians ... 52

2.3 The Contents of Hsiang Yüeh ... 54

2.3.1 Title and structure ... 54

2.3.2 Layout ... 58

2.3.3 Defence tactics and organization ... 62

2.3.4 Management ... 65

2.3.5 The merging of small forts ... 66

2.4 The spread of Hsiang Yüeh ... 82

2.4.1 The publish and republish ... 82

2.4.2 The cite by other books ... 83

2.4.3 The spread in the Joseon Kingdom ... 85

2.5 Conclusion ... 91

References ... 92

CHAPTER 3

THE PRACTICE OF HSIANG-YÜEH ON THE STATIONED FORTRESSES IN THE HSÜAN FU AND TA T'UNG GARRISONS ... 94

3.1 Introduction ... 95

3.1.1 Background ... 95

3.1.2 Related works ... 96

3.2 Research Objects and Methods ... 97

3.2.1 The objects and materials ... 97

(7)

3.4 The Analysis ... 109

3.4.1 Site selection ... 109

3.4.2 Wall design ... 110

3.4.3 Tower and its arrangement ... 111

3.5 Conclusion ... 122

Notes ... 124

References ... 125

CHAPTER 4

THE EVOVLMENT OF THE WALLED-VILLAGES AND THE EFFECT OF HSIANG-YÜEH ON THEM IN THE HSÜAN FU AND TA T'UNG GARRISONS 4.1 Introduction ... 127

4.1.1 Background ... 128

4.1.2 Related works ... 129

4.1.3 Terminology ... 131

4.2 Research Objects and Methods ... 133

4.2.1 The objects and materials ... 133

4.2.2 The methods ... 134

4.3 Phases and Types of the Objects ... 137

4.3.1 Phases Divstion ... 137

4.3.2 Typological classification ... 142

4.4 The Practice of Hsiang-yüeh on the walled-villages ... 162

4.4.1 As a blueprint ... 162

4.4.2 As a theory ... 164

4.5 Conclusion ... 167

Notes ... 169

References ... 175

(8)

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION ... 176

5.1 The Composition and the First Propaganda of Hsiang Yüeh ... 177

5.2 The Practice of Hsiang Yüeh on the Stationed Fortresses ... 180

5.3 The Practice of Hsiang Yüeh on the Walled-villages ... 182

5.4 The Spread of Hsiang Yüeh beyond the Border ... 184

Acknowledgements ... 186

(9)

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1-1 Wei and So of the Hsüan Fu Garrison ... 35

Table 1-2 Chou and Hsien of the Hsüan Fu Garrison ... 36

Table 1-3 Wei and So of the Ta T'ung Garrison ... 36

Table 1-4 Chou and Hsien of the Ta T'ung Fu ... 37

Table 2-1 The militia organization of Hsiang-yüeh ... 68

Table 2-2 The weapons’ distribution of Hsiang-yüeh ... 68

Table 2-3 The tactics in different Conditions ... 69

Table 2-4 The academic origins and developments of Hsiang Yüe ... 87

Table 3-1 Data of the stationed fortresses in the Ta T’ung Garrison ... 103

Table 3-2 Data of the stationed fortresses in the Hsüan Fu Garrison ... 105

Table 4-1 Hung-wu Period t’un-pu in the Shan Hsi Garrison ... 153

Table 4-2 The list of Ts’un-pu constructed during the Hungwu Period ... 153

Table 4-3 The list of t’un-pu constructed during the Yung-lo Period ... 154

Table 4-4 The list of t’un-pu without recorded date of the establishment ... 154

Table 4-5 The statistics of 92 civilian and 106 military walled-villages that adopted the type-c layout but in different house arrangement. ... 155

Table 4-6 The number of different types in different periods ... 156

Table 4-7 The number of different types of walled-villages in the Ta T’ung Garrison and the data of their average size. ... 156

Table 4-8 The number of different types of walled-villages in the Hsüan Fu Garrison and the data of their average size. ... 156

(10)

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig.1-1 The plan of Fan-yang Hsien in the East Han Dynasty ... 12

Fig.1-2 The restored Chu Chün T'u (Garrison map) of the Western Han Dynasty. ... 13

Fig.1-3 An earthen model of privately built castle in the East Han Dynasty. ... 14

Fig.1-4 A relief of siege scene of the Assyrians. ... 14

Fig.1-5 The illustration of “city layout” from Wu Ching Tsung Yao ... 15

Fig.1-6 The plan of T'ung Wan Ch'eng ... 15

Fig.1-7 The cover of Hsiang-yüeh (republished in Yü Chou, 1882) and Chi Hsiao Hsin Shu (republished in 1819) ... 16

Fig.1-8 Heatmap of garrison distribution at the end of the Ming Empire ... 16

Fig.1-9 The Map of the Nine Garrisons (The part shows Hsüan Fu and Ta T'ung) .... 17

Fig.1-10 The map of the Yü Chou City and some walled-villages around ... 18

Fig.1-11 The map of the Yü Chou City ... 18

Fig.1-12 Illustration for the layout of moat and fortress from Ying Tsao Fa Shih, by Liang Ssu-ch’eng ... 25

Fig.1-13 The Nine Garrisons of the Ming Empire ... 33

Fig.1-14 The map of the Hsüan Fu and Ta T'ung Garrisons ... 34

Fig. 2-1 A picture taken from the main road of Ch'en-chia-chien-pu. ... 71

Fig. 2-2 A picture taken from the terrace to the north of Ch'en-chia-chien-pu ... 71

Fig. 2-3 A picture taken from the south valley of Yen-chia-chai ... 72

Fig. 2-4 A picture taken from the path to the gate of Yen-chia-chai ... 72

Fig. 2-5 A bird view of Tan-hou-pu. ... 73

Fig. 2-6 A picture of one tower of Heng-chien-pu. ... 73

Fig. 2-7 The making of adobes in Ta-yin-ma-chun-pu. ... 74

Fig. 2-8 The vertically laid adobes in a yard wall ... 74

Fig. 2-9 The gate of Ssu-chia-wa-pu. ... 75

Fig. 2-10 The barbican of Feng-chia-ling-pu. ... 75

(11)

Fig. 2-12 A bird view of Heng-chien-pu (from north to south). ... 76

Fig. 2-13 Illustrations of Hsiang Yüeh-A. ... 77

Fig. 2-14 Illustrations of Hsiang Yüeh-B. ... 77

Fig. 2-15 Illustrations of Hsiang Yüeh-C. ... 77

Fig. 2-16 Illustrations of Hsiang Yüeh-D ... 77

Fig. 2-17 Illustrations of Hsiang Yüeh-E ... 78

Fig. 2-18 Illustrations of Hsiang Yüeh-F ... 78

Fig. 2-19 The section of wall, tower, ditch and ditch wall of an ideal Hsiang Yüeh style fortress. ... 78

Fig. 2-20 A 3D restoration of Barbican proposed by Hsiang Yüeh ... 79

Fig. 2-21 A 3D restoration of corner tower and ditch wall proposed by Hsiang Yüeh. ... 79

Fig. 2-22 A restoration of the plan for a standard small-sized fortress proposed by Hsiang Yüeh. ... 80

Fig. 2-23 Illustrations of Hsiang Yüeh-G. ... 81

Fig. 2-24 Illustrations of Hsiang Yüeh-H. ... 81

Fig. 2-25 Illustrations of Hsiang Yüeh-I. ... 81

Fig. 2-26 Illustrations of Hsiang Yüeh-J. ... 81

Fig. 2-27 The stone tablet on the gate of Chang-li-pu. ... 88

Fig. 2-28 The stone tablet on the gate of Heng-chien-pu ... 89

Fig. 2-29 The cover of Min Bou I ... 90

Fig. 2-30 The illustration from Min Bou I ... 90

Fig. 2-31 The cover of Min Pu Chi Shuo ... 90

Fig. 2-32 The cover of Min Pu Hsin Yüeh ... 90

Fig. 3-1 The record of Wan-ch'üan-yu-wei in Hsüan Ta Shan Hsi San Chen T'u Shuo ... 100

Fig. 3-2 Wan-ch'üan-yu-wei in 1970s ... 100

Fig. 3-3 Wan-ch'üan-yu-wei in 2018 ... 100

Fig. 3-4 A map of the Hsüan Fu, Ta T'ung and Shan Hsi Garrisons from Hsüan Ta Shan Hsi San Chen T'u Shuo ... 101

Fig. 3-5 Distribution of stationed fotresses with different functions in the Hsüan Fu and Ta T'ung Garrsions ... 102 Fig. 3-6 The condions of site selection for stationed fortreeses in the Hsüan Fu and Ta

(12)

T'ung Garrsions before and after the publish of Hsiang Yüeh ... 114

Fig. 3-7 Satellite image of Tu-shih -k'ou-pu ... 115

Fig. 3-8 Satellite image of P'ing-lu-ch'eng ... 115

Fig. 3-9 Satellite image of Ma-ying-pu ... 115

Fig. 3-10 Satellite image of Hsin-yün-kang-pu... 115

Fig. 3-11 The size and proportion of the wall sections for the stationed fortreeses in the Hsüan Fu and Ta T'ung Garrsions before and after the publish of Hsiang Yüeh . 116 Fig. 3-12 The number of new constructions and strengthening projects and typical value of tower intervals year by year ... 117

Fig. 3-13 The four types of corner towers ... 118

Fig. 3-14 An arieal photo of Ta T’ung City ... 118

Fig. 3-15 Typical plans of stationed fortresses -A ... 119

Fig. 3-16 Typical plans of stationed fortresses -B ... 120

Fig. 3-17 Typical plans of stationed fortresses -C ... 121

Fig. 4-1 The distribution of walled-villages in the in the Hsüan Fu and Ta T'ung Garrsions ... 136

Fig. 4-2 The plan of Wang-hao-t’uan-pu (1:4000) ... 157

Fig. 4-3 The plan of Ch’ang-an-ts’un-pu (1:4000) ... 157

Fig. 4-4 The standard model of a t’un-pu in the Yung-lo Period (1:4000). ... 157

Fig. 4-5 The plan of Pu-chou-ying-pu and the standard small t’un-pu ... 157

Fig. 4-6 A bird view of Shang-hu-lu-chai and Shang-hu-lu-pu ... 158

Fig. 4-7 The six forts of Pai-chia-chuang in Yü Chou ... 158

Fig. 4-8 The plan of Hsi-chia-tou-pu (Chia-tou-chai) (1:4000) ... 159

Fig. 4-9 The plan of Nan-liu-chuang-pu (1:4000) ... 159

Fig. 4-10 The plan of Hsin-chia-chuang-pu and its layout restoration (1:4000) ... 159

Fig. 4-11 The plan of Shih-chia-chuang-pu (1:4000) ... 160

Fig. 4-12 The plan of Ta-chiu-wu-t’ou-pu (1:4000) ... 160

Fig. 4-13 The plan of Pai-hou-pu, Pai-chung-pu and Pai-ning-pu (1:4000) ... 160

Fig. 4-14 A glance at the gate-temple axis of Shih-chia-chuang-pu. ... 161

Fig. 4-15 A bird view of Shui-chung-pu ... 161

Fig. 4-16 The six guanbu built during wanly period in Pao-an Chou ... 165

Fig. 4-17 Zhangli-bu and the Standard Model of Hsiang Yüeh. ... 165

(13)

Fig. 4-19 A Bird View of Chen-chia-chien-hsin-pu (Hsi-chen-chia-chien-pu). ... 166

(14)

CHAPTER ONE

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

(15)

Chapter      1        General Introduction 

1.1 Background

1.1.1 An introduction to the fortification in ancient China

It is generally known that walled settlement is one of the symbolic features of the Chinese Civilization. The term Chung Kuo (中國) (China in Chinese) itself means the guarded fortress (Kuo) located in the middle (Chung) of the world.

Since the Western Chou Dynasty (1046–722 BC), a fortified city became a mark of a particular aristocratic level. As Zuǒ Ch'uan (左傳) had recorded, the capital wall of the T'ien-tzu (天子) (the Son of Heaven, the king of the suzerain) has a perimeter of one thousand chih (雉) (1 chih equals to a piece of wall measures 3 chang (丈) long and 1 chang high) and a height of 7 chih. Then, the capital wall of the Kung (公) and Hou (侯) (feudal princes with higher titles of nobility) must not exceeds one hundred chih long and five chih high. Lastly, the size for the capital wall of Tzu (子) and Nan (男) (lower titles of nobility) must not exceeds 50 chih long and 3 chih high. The graded

(16)

size of fortification, along all other physical materials, are a reflection of the graded political order.

In the successive Easter Chou Dynasty (722-221 BC), the authority of the T'ien-tzu from the Chou (周) Kingdom decreased greatly. Meanwhile, the power of the feudal princes grew as well as the size of their capitals. Chinese Civilization went into a multinational system in which kingdoms competed with each other not only by military but also discourse power. At the first stage of this period, known as Ch'un-ch'iu (春秋) era (Spring and Autumn period: 722–476 BC), the power of a kingdom sometimes came from its support to the T'ien-tzu of Chou and the will to maintain the old hierarchy.

However, in the second period, the Chan-kuo (戰國) era (Warring States period :476–

221 BC), such will was no longer of necessity in the international political game comparing to the military force. Then the capitals were constructed in heavier consideration of military defence and power display, ignoring the old rules. Fortified cities were also erected up as bases in newly conquered areas, known as Chün (郡), or as a shelter of central power agency in a de-aristocratic region, known as Hsien (縣).

In the coming Ch’in (秦) Dynasty, the famous Ch'in Shih Huang (秦始皇) (the first emperor of Ch’in) eliminated all other rivals, entitled himself Huang-ti (皇帝) (the Emperor), a term never used before. He torn down the capitals of his old competitors and established many fortresses to hold his dispatched officials. The institution of Chün and Hsien finally triumphed against feudalism. Under the new political order, the fortified cities served as the infrastructure of the centralised empire to control its territory, protecting its local government from being overturned, resisting the rebels and the invaders before the regular army come to reinforce. During peacetime, the wall governed the local daily life. Its warehouses stored the weapons for the army and the corns handed in by the farmers, who were compelled to register their family and property information in a file governed by the local authorities. Of course, the city had court and prison, dealing with cases and criminals. Moreover, the commercial activities, which include the legal trade of some critical goods like salt and iron tools, were controlled by the opening and closing of the city gate. During wartime, the vegetation out of the wall curtain would be burn down and the population would be moved inside, preventing the enemy from obtaining foods or labors nearby. In the frontier area, where

(17)

more prominent. Together these fortresses made up a defence system. In the case of the north border, where the empire burdened the pressure from the nomadic tribes, a super long linear wall that took advantages of the landforms was engaged. To defend Hsiung- nu (匈奴), the first strong empire established by the steppe wanderers in the East of Eurasia, Ch'in Shih Huang connected and strengthened the wall previously built by the rival kingdoms, which later won the reputation of artificial wonder as the Great Wall.

Within the wall, fortified city of Chün or Hsien, and smaller fortresses called T’ing (亭) or Chang (障) connected and supported each other, forming a web of fortified strongpoints. Other transportation facilities like roads and posts, message transition facilities like beacon towers made the defence web more organized as a whole.

The reason why so many details of the fortification in Ch’in Dynasty were depicted here is that such a system was inherited by later Chinese empires. In the succeed unified dynasty, Han (漢), the imperial force was stretched upon the west, along the famous Silk Road. The new empire learned the lesson of Ch’in who dispatched its main force to the frontier, leaving the hinterland vulnerable. Its residents were in heavy burden of transporting provisions to the border which eventually led to a rebellion. In the new age, a mix of soldiers, farmers and prisoners were migrated to the frontier and settled there for a long duty during which they feed themselves by harvest from the newly reclaimed lands nearby. The strategy is called t'un-t'ien (屯田) (to garrison one place and be fed by its farmlands). Meanwhile, after a short rebound of multi-national tradition at its early stages, Han Empire successfully spread the institution of Chün and Hsien to most of its territory by a gradual weakening of the local power in the old districts and a series of military conquers in the newly explored lands. The state machine of Ch’in, which physically be established on the base of fortification, was eventually inherited and perfected by the anti-Ch’in power. A cycle of rising and falling of the Ch’in-style empires then began to rule the history of China for the next two thousand years during which the basic function of fortification changed very little. The function of fortified cities during the wartime was best shown in the chaos of the Three Kingdoms Era in which the main purpose of battle between the warlords was to control more fortified cites, called Ch'eng-ch'ih (城池) (a complex of wall and moat). In the traditional pattern of war, a long-range attack that ignored the fortresses along the path is extremely

(18)

dangerous due to the difficulty of material supply. The more realistic way is to capture each walled-city even though siege is of high cost.

However, the fortification of ancient China has another aspect. When the power of a unified empire was weakened to the degree that it needs local power to suppress a rebellion or defend an invasion. The empire would be unable to provide protections for its people. That is when the civilians have to armed and defend themselves from being slaved and plundered by both sides of the war. At the end of Eastern Han Dynasty, the court allowed the local landlords to recruit soldiers in order to suppress the rebelled farmers. Many self-made fortifications erected on the land of the empire, in which the lords practically obtained the military and economic authority over his residents who had to trade freedom for safety. They were more likely the castles of the Medieval Europe. Despite landlords, bandits also rely on fortifications, and sometimes it was hard to tell landlords from bandits. These Fortresses were named wu (塢) or bi (壁), which means a small circuit of wall. During the short-term of unification of Wei (魏) and Chin (晉) Dynasties, many leaders of the local forces were embodied by the central power, their people turned into semi-slave for the empire by which the t'un-t'ien policy was more broadly carried out, not only in frontier but also in hinterland. Many researchers argued that cun (邨/村), the commonly used term to represent village since the T’ang Dynasty, came from t'un (屯). The unification was soon ended by the invasion of barbarians from the west and north, a process assimilates the fall of the Roman Empire.

Again, wu and bi rebirthed across the Northern China, while many cities of Hsien were abandoned and degraded to ch'eng (城) (a walled-city). Such pattern for the fortification formed in the Han Dynasty then repeated again and again in the later history.

To sum, since the Ch’in Dynasty, the fortification activities of ancient China is a loop of growth and decline between the officially built cities and the privately built fortresses.

Sometimes the two kinds coexisted, such as in frontier of the Ming Dynasty, which would be discussed later.

(19)

1.1.2 Literature of poliorcetics in ancient China

Corresponding to the popular phase-division of the Chinese History, the antiquity (pre-Ch’in period), the middle ages (from Ch’in to Yüan) and the late imperial China era (Ming and Ch’ing), three most significant and representative texts of piliorceltics, Mo-tzu (墨子), Wu Ching Tsung Yao (武經總要) and Wu Pei Chih (武備志) are well- known.

Mo-tzu is the earliest book of China that contains knowledge of fortification and siegecraft. The book was composed by the Mohist school during the competitive Chan- kuo era, when constant war between the kingdoms stimulated the progress in fortification technology. Mo-tsu engaged 21 chapters to interpret the methods of defending a walled-city. In a form of Q & A between the master Mo-ti (墨翟) and his student Ch'in Hua-li (禽滑釐), the common twelve approaches of siege which include:

mounding up a hill to attack from higher level; using a ladder with a hook to climb up the wall; using a battering ram to hammer the gate; Using a yün-t'i (雲梯) (a car carrying a ladder); mounding up a slope to reach to the wall top; channeling water to impact the wall; digging tunnels to penetrate in; digging holes on the wall; channeling water to erode the wall base; launching a charge regardless of loss; transporting soldiers by fen- wen (轒輼) (a car wrapped with raw cowhides); attacking from a movable tower; were solved one by one. Although Mo-tzu have no illustrations preserved, some reliefs from the Assyrian Empire can perfectly demonstrate the texts. (Figure.1-4) In the solutions proposed by Mo-ti, the very fundamental demands for the fortification and tools are that the wall should be thick and high, moat deep and wide, towers firm and the weapons of the best quality. According to its detailed but obscure texts, the ideal fortification seems to have more than one circuits of wall. The outer and the inner wall are of 1.5 chang and 3.5 chang high respectively. It seems that short wall with parapets are built at each side of the 1.5 chang deep moat and the besieged rely on the inner side parapets for cover (Fig.1-4). Towers of different heights are attached to both outer and inner walls.

On the inner wall, every 100 pu (步) (about 139m) stands a tall tower and every 30 pu (about 42m) a short one. Thus, there would be two short towers between two tall ones.

The tower is constructed by four wooden columns standing on stone bases which are set on the wall top. A pavilion is built on top of each tower. Some towers are equipped

(20)

with crossbows whose sight bead can turn around. Outside of the gate, additional facilitates such door planks, deeper moat and suspension bridge are used to stop the besiegers. Despite of architectural works, complicated weapons and machines are employed, and all possible materials such like stones, woods, mud, boiled water, fire, smoke are used to kill or disturb the attackers. Moreover, all residents, include women, children and the old are organized to provide support. Though mastered superb techniques, Mo-ti believed in pacifism. Thus, no attacking tactics were explained in the book, contrasting to the Assyrian reliefs which put emphasis on siegecraft. In a word, Mo-tsu and the Assyrian Reliefs are two most significant materials to demonstrate the fortification and siege technology in antiquity.

Wu Ching Tsung Yao is a military encyclopedia of Sung Dynasty, compiled by Tseng Kung-liang (曾 公 亮) and Ting-tu (丁 度) and published in 1044. The book is a summarization of the development of military technology and tactic in the middle ages of China. The traditional methods such as channeling water, mounding hills, digging tunnels and setting fires, and the machines such as yün-t'i, fen-wen and movable tower are still in use with improvements. The most critical progress made by the attackers is the creation of the powerful catapult and crossbow, both equipped with wheels.

Crossbow arrows can even be propelled by gunpowder. Moreover, a wheeled-bridge, sometimes foldable, are used to cross the moat.

In Wu Ching Tsung Yao, the layout of fortification also changed greatly. The most prominent aspect is the use of Ma-mien (馬面), a platform projected from the wall body, giving more room to install large machines and creating a flank from which defenders may shoot at the attackers who had approached to the bottom of the wall. The reappearance of Ma-mien in the East Asia (first used in a Neolithic fortress) might result from the progress of sieging technology that the attackers had better protection to ensure an easier access to the bottom of the wall. Sometimes the complex of a projected platform and the wooden house is named Nu T'ai (弩台). (Fig.1-5) The Nu T'ai has a length of 1.6 chang and a width of 3 bu. If added the thickness of the wall body at top (1.25 chang, for example), the total width would reach to 1.75 chang. A two-storied house is supposed to be built on the platform, and each floor can hold 12 crossbowmen.

Similar houses are built every 10 bu along the wall and on each Ma-mien.

(21)

Despite for the strengthened towers, the defence of the city gate is consolidated by a circle of additional wall enclosing the space outside of the doorway. The small fortress is called Weng Ch’eng (甕城) (jar-like fort). In Wu Ching Tsung Yao, the existence of the short wall built along the moat was confirmed. It is called Yang-ma Ch’eng (羊馬 城) (a walled space for taking in sheep and horses). The height of Yang-ma Ch’eng should be between 8 chih and 1 chang. And the parapets could be as tall as 5 chih (尺).

Moreover, the layout of the city wall has an explicit proportion. The cross section of the wall body should be a trapezoid with a bottom side half-length of the height and twice as long as the top side.

The earliest and best example to illustrate the layout changes during middle ages is T'ung Wan Ch'eng (統萬城) (the capital that rules all kingdoms), a fortress built by Ho- lien Po-po (赫連勃勃), a descendant of Hsiung -nu, as the capital of his kingdom of Ta Hsia (大夏) (Fig.1-6). The construction lasted five years and completed in the year of 418. It won a long-last reputation of firmness and had been mentioned as a lesson that if without merciful domination, the strongest castle would also fall. The modern archaeological survey revealed its secrets of being firm. The fortress has a circle of platform-studded wall and four barbican-surrounded gates, all made by compact rammed earth. Some of the towers are hollow inside, allowing better protection, unexpected attacks and a storage of weapons. In the T’ang Dynasty (618-907), the use of Ma-mien and Weng-ch’eng was so common in fortification that many well-preserved fortress relics of this kind were found in the Gobi of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region.

Among the trilogy of Chinese fortification texts, Wu Pei Chih is the latest. It was compiled by Mao Yüan-i (茅元儀) and possibly first published in 1621. Similar to Wu Ching Tsung Yao, the book is also a military encyclopedia. The fortification part, includes some latest developments in the gunpowder era.

The sources of the new contents mainly came from two books. One is Hsiang-yüeh (鄉約) (rural compact) composed by Yin Keng (尹耕) and first published in 1550, which is the primary concern of this dissertation. The other is Chi Hsiao Hsin Shu (紀效新書) completed in 1560 by the famous general Ch'i Chi-kuang (戚繼光). Mao Yüan-i copied the full text of Hsiang-yüeh, with a new title pu-yüeh (堡約) (fort compact) which is less likely to be misunderstood. When Hsiang-yüeh was created, firearms from the

(22)

western world, especially from Portugal, had been broadly equipped in the Ming Army.

In Hsiang-yüeh, to accommodate the structural change of weapons, some part of fortification layout was changed. And in Chi Hsiao Hsin Shu, the change went further that many details of fortification were redesigned to facilitate the installation of canons.

For example, the traditional crossbow tower was transformed into the hollow tower constructed by stones and bricks, its surface dotted with holes of various sizes to allow gun barrel of different calibers to fire outward. Same change happened to the Yang-ma Ch’iang, too. Until then, the adjustment of fortification layout brought by the firearms were long from revolutionary. That is because the opponents of the Ming Army, neither the Mongolians nor the oversea pirates were equipped with powerful cannons. However, the Ming Army rely more and more on the western firearms, especially after the import of the advanced cannon invented by the Europeans around 1600. The Ming Army entitled such canon as Hung-i Ta-p'ao (紅夷大炮). The new weapon was broadly used in the war of Liao-T’ung against the Jurchens. Unfortunately, the technology was soon learned by the Jurchens. Some Confucian Scholars who converted to Catholicism learned and tried to spread the newest fortification technology of bastion, which was first designed by the Italian engineers. At that time, a bastion is the only form of fortress that can resist the bombardment of the cannons. However, everything was too late. The Jurchens crossed the defence line of Liao-T’ung and finally conquered the whole China with their Hung-i Ta-p'ao. After the establishment of a new Empire, fortification technology fall into a long period of stagnation—Military books were banned in case of being used by the rebels.

1.1.3 Fortification in the Ming Dynasty and Hsiang-yüeh

The Ming Dynasty was a climax of both fortification and military writings. In the early years of the new empire, old cities of Chou (州) (replaced Chün in the middle ages) and Hsien were broadly reconstructed. Chou and Hsian are ruled by the higher administrative setup called Pu-cheng Ssu (布政司). Meanwhile, cities of garrisons were also built up across the whole empire, especially in the border areas. These garrisons

(23)

So is independent from Wei. They are both ruled by the higher Tu Ssu (都 司).

Sometimes a city is shared by both civilian and military administration. Thus, it was common to see offices dispatched by both Tu Ssu and Pu-cheng Ssu in the same city (Fig.1-7). But in some military cities, there was no any offices of civilian administration.

For example, the Hsüan Fu (宣府) City (the biggest square in Fig.1-6) is occupied by three Wei.

To cut down the expense of military provisions, Chu Yüan-chang (朱元璋), the founder of the Ming Empire, applied the policy of t'un-t'ien in both border areas and places where population decreased severely. Many villages named after t’un were established by the immigrants. In military areas, the immigrants joined the army and they must hand in a proportion of their harvest to the local stationed army. Others who kept a civilian identity pay the taxes to the local government. So far, there have been four kinds of settlements mentioned above:

1) Chou and Hsien;

2) Wei, Suo and their guarded fortresses;

3) T’un of villagers with military identity;

4) Ts’un of villagers with civilian identity.

Obviously, the origin of these four kinds of settlements dates back to the Ch’in and Han Dynasties. During the more than two thousand years, names might be changed whereas the fundamental model kept working. If there is anything left, that would be the capitals of the Empire, sometimes only one while sometimes as many as five. For the Ming Empire, there were the Peking (北京) (north capital) and Nanking (南京) (south capital).

The distribution of the settlements was not homogeneous. Particularly the military ones were much condensed in the north and southwest borders and the east coastal areas (Fig.1-7). Fortification is probably the only solution for the Empire to guarantee its dispatched armies and officials control force over the local issues. In the north and east borders, the Mongolians and pirates invaded from time to time. While in the mountainous regions to the central and southwest, minor groups were unwilling to obey the central empire. However, the problem brought by the nomads and the pirates were more intractable. Therefore, more and better fortresses were built in the north and east borders. Correspondingly, the composition of Hsiang-yüeh and Chi Hsiao Hsin Shu

(24)

was the sum-up of the experiences from the two regions (Fig.1-7). Therefore, the two books are the keys to understand those fortifications.

As the title implied, the paper aims to tell a detailed story of the former, the book of Hsiang-yüeh and the fortification, called pu in Chinese, in the north border.

Yin Keng, the author of Hsiang-yüeh, was born in Yü Chou Wei (蔚州衛), whose ancestors migrated to the north border and joined the army as a farmer. He got educated in the Confucian School of Yü Chou and became an official though passing the imperial exams. From childhood, he was obsessed in military affairs and read a lot of military books. Yin Kengü lives in a period when the Mongolians frequently invaded, sometimes deep in his hometown. That is also when most settlements, regardless of their kinds, got fortified. Yin Keng used to carefully observe the effectiveness of those fortresses and discovered many unreasonable points. In 1542, his mother passed away. He then left his work, went back home, and began a three-year long mourning period, according to the traditional customs. During this leisure time, he was running around the Hsüan Fu and Ta T’ung area, paying attention to the battlefield and trying to help the officers to improve the fortification. In 1550, Hsiang-yüeh was published in Yü Chou which recorded his efforts in the past years.

Different from many other military writings, Hsiang-yüeh has an explicit background rooted in the fortification practice in Hsüan Fu and Ta T’ung areas. Before the rise of Jurchens (女真) in Liao T’ung area, the Hsüan Fu and Ta T’ung Garrisons were paid the most attentions among the Nine Garrisons which lined up to shield the north border of the Empire. Here all kinds of fortified settlements co-existed (Fig.1-9,1-10) and most advanced military technologies the Ming Empire owned were applied, including fortification and firearm. Therefore, by an in-depth study of the interaction between Hsiang-yüeh and pu in the Hsüan Fu and Ta T’ung Garrisons, a better understanding of fortified settlements of Ming Empire as well as ancient China may be deepened. That is just what this dissertation tried to find out.

(25)

Figure 1-1 The plan of Fan-yang (繁陽)Hsien in East Han Dynasty. The drawing was found on the wall of a tomb in Horinger, Inner Mongolia Province. The owner of the tomb was a high-levelled official who used to rule the Fan-yang Hsien. In the map, a smaller circle of wall to the southeast corner of the city defines the office area of the local government, in which courtyard type office building (in the middle) and high-rise barn (in the upper right corner) were constructed. Other separated courtyards in the office region may serve as prison or arsenal. On the wall which is shared by the office area and the city (east wall), three additional watch towers stand up high. Similar structure can be seen in the central triangular fortress of Chu Chün T'u (Fig.1-2). Additionally, on top of the wall are the parapets and there is no projected defense tower on the wall body.

(26)

Figure 1-2 The restored Chu Chün T'u (駐軍圖) (Garrison map) of the Western Han Dynasty.

Many fortresses of different sizes and shapes were drawn with thicker outline. The round circles represented the settlements of common people. It is a proof of defence or colonizing system built up by fortresses. The map illustrated the southern region of the Empire where rivers plays a more significant role rather than the north border where mountains are the main feature. It is comparable to the garrison map of the Ming Dynasty (Fig.1-7).

(27)

Figure 1-3 An earthen model of privately built castle in the East Han Dynasty. It is guarded by four corner towers and one gate tower. It was unearthed form a tomb of Easter Han Dynasty. The castle and high-rise building models were broadly used as the funerary objects which bore the hope of living a rich life after death for the tomb owner.

Figure 1-4 A relief of siege scene of the Assyrians. In many reliefs created by the artists from the Assyrian Empire (935-612BC), various siege tactics, include digging tunnels or holes, using a ladder, a battering ram, a car wrapped by leather and a movable tower, were illustrated with details.

These scenes are so similar to what Mo-tzu had depicted. It is worth noting that the fortification works mainly rely on towers and several circles of walls in different heights. The towers are not deeply projected outside of the wall body, assimilating the towers in the Han Dynasty (Fig.1-1, 1- 3).

(28)

Fig.1-5 The illustration of “city layout” from Wu Ching Tsung Yao

Nü Ch'iang (Parapets) Nu T'ai

(Crossbow Platform)

Ma-mien (Tower)

Yang-ma Ch'iang (Short Wall)

Weng Ch'eng (Barbican)

Hao (Moat)

(29)

Figure 1-7 The cover of Hsiang-yüeh (republished in Yü Chou, 1882) and Chi Hsiao Hsin Shu (republished in 1819)

T'ai Chou

Chi Hsiao Hsin Shu 1560

Yü Chou Hsiang-yüeh 1550

Figure 1-8 Heatmap of garrison distribution at the end of the Ming. The figure is from The Art of Being Governed: Everyday Politics in Late Imperial China. The birth place and date of the two most significant fortification writings in the Ming Dynasty were marked out.

(30)

Figure 1-9 The Map of the Nine Garrisons (The Part of the Hsüan Fu and Ta T’ung

Hsüan Fu

Ta T’ung

Yü Chou

(31)

Figure 1-10 The map of the Yü Chou City and some fortified villages around it. Near the center of Fig.1-7, Yü Chou city is easy to recognize due to its irregular northern wall.

Figure 1-11 The map of Yü Chou City. The city was shared by Yü Chou and Yü-chou Wei. Each multi-floored building on the wall took place of a ma-mien. Offices and temples are marked out inside the city. Rebuilt in 1374, Yü Chou City is one of the strongest fortifications along the north

Office of the Yü Chou Wei Office of the Pu-cheng Ssu

and the local government

Office of the Inspectors

Tower of the bell

South Gate

West Gate East Gate

Temple of the Jade Emperor

Temple of the God Chen-wu

Mosque

Temple of the City God

Confucian

School Temple of

Army Flag Temple of

Fire God Buddhist temple

Corn Barn Forage Barn Office of

the City Guards

(32)

1.2 Literature Review

1.2.1 The Study of fortification of Ancient Western World: Challenges, Questions and Methods.

The academic research of fortification is relatively young in compassion with its focused objects, those grand monuments comprised with curtains, towers and other defensive structures. As for the reason of such delay since archeology in the 19th century had excavated many famous ancient city ruins, the huge size that cannot be fully documented by modern methods like GPS, aerial photography and photogrammetry.

However, as the technological approaches have become more prevalent and matured in the 21st century, the study of fortification across the world began to prosper.

Nevertheless, some basic difficulties still remain. As pointed out by Silke Müth (2015), for the study of giant fortification, researchers must strike an appropriate balance between accuracy of the research conducted and the duration of the project in relation to the goals being pursued. The detailed survey of all possible specimens in the research scope is impossible, neither was all matters of one individual case. He suggested that despite of archangelical methods, architectural and historical analysis should also be adopted, to make the fragmented image readable.

Apart from the acquisition of basic data, the most knotting problem lies in the difficulty of chronology. Y Garlan (1982), well-known for his work on Greek Fortification, used to remark that chronology of many circuits is unknown or uncertain.

Many cities were used for a relatively long time, with numerous repairs and even total reconstruction. Traces of these construction are not as prominent as potteries and handicrafts with vivid style of period by which archaeologists may know the age of the stratum where they were buried. To accurately know the date of the establishment for a specific fortification without detailed historical records is almost impossible for most

(33)

not be restored, any analysis about change and development would not be persuasive.

Such difficulty is a consensus for all researchers dealing with not only a fortress but also other kinds of human settlements in use.

The two problems of what and when can only be solved with a comprehensive employment of all existed methods through which new approaches suitable for a specific research project may be created (S. Müth et al., 2015).

The general consciousness of questions for fortification research formed in an accumulation of individual site studies. Among the existing research of all the regions and periods, those on Hellenistic fortification rank the first (S. C. Bakhuizen, 1994; V.

D. Hanson, 1999). The competitiveness between the Greek city states had urged the engineers of that time constantly refine their military works. Thus, the Greek relics had revealed great variety and creativity. The representative research had been done by E.

W. Marsden (1969), F. Winter (1971), and Y. Garlan (1974), A.W. Lawrence (1979), J.-P. Adam (1982). The most significant change during the period was the obsolete of the tactic that defenders only hide themselves behind the higher and thicker wall. As shown in the case of Syracuse, the adoption of many posterns could deliver soldiers outwards to counterattack the enemies, destroying their heavy siege machines. The concept of static/passive defence against elastic/active defence set by McNicoll, A. W.

(1986) may best explain such change.

In Valbonne,1982, an important symposium related to the Greek city walls was held during which several classic questions were prepared for the participants, and the last two can be seen as the ultimate problem for fortification research of the 20th century:

How did the new technology of offensive, stone-throwing catapult artillery affect cities and their fortification system? What about defensive artillery and its effect on fortification architecture?

The questions are also a projection of the later competitive process between the attackers and the defenders in the age of black powder back to the archaic times. The change of a fortress after the invention of canons was known revolutionary that people cannot stop asking what about those changes happened long ago.

For the successive Roman Empire, the fundamental studies on its fortification could not match those for the Greek. After the creation of the Empire, intensive wars between

(34)

cities ended and the fortress of roman legionary became the dominant landscape within the vast territory. These fortresses are of greater uniformity in comparison to the Greek fortification (Toy. S., 2006). The plan and structures of a roman castra was well interpreted in the work by Petrikovits, H. (1975). However, due to the broad territory and lasting lifetime of Roman Empire, an overall study on its fortification is almost impossible (V. D. Hanson, 1999). As Rob Collins and Meike Weber (2015) reviewed, some summary overviews with a chronological and geographical focus such like studies by Reddé et al. (2006), Mackensen (1999), and von Petrikovits (1971) may merely consolidate the Empire’s military tactics and activities. The period was also featured with territorial defense represented by border forts and frontier wall. Thus, the related research has to deal with the relationship between forts that constituted to a total defence system. The work by Johnson, J. S. (1976) for the west Empire in late term and by Gudea, N. (1979) for Dacia province were such studies. As Rebuffat, R. (1986) pointed out, the scarcity of well-dated sites, and the lack of poliorcetical commentary in archaeological publications is another difficulty. Nevertheless, Rebuffat, R. had some enlightening thinking, as reviewed by Simon. C. Bakhuizen (1994), such as the fortification of Roman Empire had more meaning on display of imperial or local proudness, and more attentions should be paid to the political context, the local circumstances and the cultural heritage. That may imply the fact that the construction of a fortification in Roman period had more complicated impetus than in the Greek time.

After all, the war between “civilized” groups of people had ended and the main opponents for the world empire are “barbarians” who can hardly launch a siege with heavy weaponry.

Another point about the Roman world is the differentiation of civilian and military settlements for its conquered territory. Lenoir, M. (1986) investigated the relations between fortified Roman camps and the planned, fortified towns and cities of the ancient world. As reviewed by Simon. C. Bakhuizen (1994), Lenoir wonders whether in Roman city planning the architects were inspired by military models. Obviously, under the regime of an empire, the domain of fortification study enlarged. Simon. C.

Bakhuizen also proposed that the subject of defence and fortification doses not stop at cites. There exist a great many field forts, border defences, and even rural defences which should be paid with more attention.

(35)

After the milestone conference on ancient fortification held in Valbonne, 1982, the successive one in Ottawa, 1988 seems less inspiring. Most papers deal, in essence or in passing, with the problem of dating ruins (Van Wees, H. ,1994). The analysis of defense system of Megarid by Van de Maele, inevitably faced with the questioning in chronology. Neither did later conferences in Istanbul (1993) and Madrid (2003) “led to a new understanding of ancient fortifications as complex results and mirrors of the interaction between the natural environment and social, political and cultural systems”, commented by S. Müth et al. (2015)

Fortification research in the new century has showed a broader interest on the interaction between the monument and its contexts while previous questions still bothered the researchers. In 2008, a research network concentrated on fortifications in the Eastern Mediterranean was established at the Orient Department of the DAI (German Archaeological Institute) in berlin. In its publication entitled Ancient Fortifications: A Compendium of Theory and Practice (S. Müth et al., 2015), some basic questions were raised as the methodology of dating fortifications, the question of building experiences, the character and emphasis of functions beyond mere defence, the interaction between the historical context and the appearance and functions of a fortification, the relationship between single fortification and greater regional defense systems and its effect on the regional fortification technology. These marked a new turning point of fortification research.

Despite of excavation reports which served as the main resource of materials, researchers of ancient fortification also draw on literal records like inscriptions and documents. Military writings, though very few survived until today, bring the most dependable information. The most mentioned one, is composed by Philo of Byzantium, whose Paraskeuastika and Poliorketika (Garlan 1974; Lawrence 1979) constitute a comprehensive guide to defending and attacking a Hellenistic city. The Paraskeuastika concerns the design, layout, and construction of walls, towers, battlements, and outworks, as well as the organization of manpower and provisions; the Poliorketika considers engineering, equipment, and tactics used by besieger and besieged. Another crucial literature is The Ten Books on Architecture by Vitruvius, who mentioned some principles of building a fortified town. To better use of these text materials is also a critical problem of methodology.

(36)

To sum, the complicated situations of different locations and times makes the fortification research a comprehensive process, one should be at least equipped with the knowledge of archaeology, architecture, urban planning and history while keep sensitive to the technological progress.

1.2.2 The Study of fortification of Ancient China: Tradition and Status

Among all the human civilizations, the Chinese is well-known for its rich preservations of ancient relics and texts. The study of the classics and the history had keeping a subjective position in the Chinese traditional academy while knowledge of science, engineering, and even art never become the mainstream. Therefore, the non- literature materials were only taken as proofs to perfect and supply the literal texts.

Records on science and technology were seldom considered as classics, except for when they were compiled together with other political and philosophy issues like in Chou Li (周禮) and Mo-tsu. Thus, many texts of ancient experiences before middle ages failed to survive the periodical dynastic changes that commonly accompanied by severe wars.

Thanks to the prosperity of printing techniques in the Sung Dynasty, the costs of produce books decrease to a degree that some ancient experiences and newly developed technologies were able to be recorded and spread. For example, the fortification knowledge of and before Sung Dynasty can be found in Wu Ching Tsung Yao, as have introduced in the 1.1.2. Moreover, in the famous book on architectural construction, Ying Tsao Fa Shih (營造法式), a specific part named Hao Chai Chih Tu (壕寨制度) (the layout of moat and fortress) was included, giving construction provisions for city wall and its base. Both books were compiled by the order from the emperors.

The subordinate condition of issues other than classics and histories did not change much until the beginning of the 20th century. Material culture of ancient China drew more attentions from the young generations who had both traditional and western education backgrounds. In the heatwave of modern nation creation across the world, the ancient Chinese empire began a long-term and painful transformation. During the time, many western concepts entitled a prefix of “Chinese” came into being such like Chinese history, philosophy, art, science and technology. Architecture was generally within the domain of art which in part relate to engineering. As well-known, the modern

(37)

of Chinese Architecture in the 1930s. Among its members, we can see a string of shinning names like Liang Ssu-ch’eng, Lin Hui-yin and Liu Tun-chen. They had established a method that combines the practical research and literature research. In his masterpiece entitled A Pictorial History of Chinese Architecture, Liang compared the two technological books, Ying Tsao Fa Shih and Kung-pu Kung-ch'eng Zuò-fa Tse Li (工部工程做法則例), to the grammar books of Chinese ancient architecture. That is to say, the concept of the latter had taken the dominant position rather than the proofs to the texts. In his accurate architectural illustrations to the two books, we may see the drawings of the fortification layout with full information in dimensions and short explanations (Fig.1-12).

Due to the heavy task of building up a history of Chinese architecture that concentrates in the evolvement of wooden structure, issues on fortification and urban planning only account of very little in the studies of Society for the Study of Chinese Architecture. Different from the investigation and research on architecture which lay emphasis on the building technology, later attention to city planning mainly focused on the evolvement of city plan and institution rather than the fortification. The outstanding researchers include Kuo Hu-sheng, Ho Yeh-chü as well as historians like Yang Kuan.

Their trying of restore a history of Chinese ancient cities centered on those outstanding examples like imperial capitals. In such a research pattern, the arrangement of different functioned architectural complex such as palaces, temples of the ancestors, and markets on the plan is the main concern. The methodology dates back to the traditional historical geography of Chinese academy. Another feature of these studies is that the examples distributed dispersedly both in time and space dimensions. Generally, there were not enough specimens from the same place and period for comparison.

The fortification as an aspect of urban study only drew greater attention with the development of archaeology by which more and more relics of the ancient cities were found and explored. Early poliorcetics: The Mohists to the Sung by Robin D. S. Yates (1994), in the Vol.6 of Science and Civilisation in China, edited by Joseph Needham, used considerable archaeological, historical materials to draw an outline of the development of fortification from the dawn of Chinese civilisation to its most refined period, Sung Dynasty. He based his research to an extent on the text of Mo T’su and Wu Ching Tsung Yao and found as much as possible the proofs from archeological findings. Yet the difficulty Yates faced with is the separation of physical space and the

(38)

independent text. Both Mo T’su and Wu Ching Tsung Yao are a pile of experiences accumulated during long term of practice in siege and defence, which are not in conformity with any specific examples. Meanwhile, the regional difference in the vast territory of China was not taken into consideration.

Military researchers in China also tried to fulfill the task of composing a general history of Chinese fortification. The book entitled Chung Kuo Chu Ch’eng Shih (中國 築城史) (the history of city construction of China) by Shi et al (1999) was such an exploration. It collected war cases and literature of piliorcetics though all dynasties of China, under a somewhat presumed pattern that fortification kept improving under the growing pressure of siegecract. However, the materials seem not support the pattern very well. Yet it was very few try of adopting a technological viewpoint.

Referring to the building material and related construction technology, archaeologists made great contributions dealing with rammed earth.

The study of one specific element in the fortification is a new tendency. Chia Ting Li and Chen Wei (2010) explored the evolvement of parapets in the fortification of China. The recent excavation of Shi-mao (石峁) relics in Shenxi Province, has revealed many astonishing facts in the late Neolithic age, including the adoption of barbicans and towers. Sun Chou-yung and Shao Ching had published the related results and research on Cultural Relics.

Figure 1-12 Illustration of the Layout of Moat and Fortress from Ying Tsao Fa Shih, by Liang

(39)

1.3 Research Objects, Goals and Methods

1.3.1 The Scope and objects

As mentioned in 1.1.2 and 1.1.3, Hsiang Yüeh is one of two most significant writings on poliorceltics in the late Imperial China. It was a summarization of experiences from the intensive fortification practice in the north border of Ming Dynasty. Yet the progress of its appearance and influence has not been interpreted, though the materials for such topic is relatively of abundance. To begin the study, a clear scope and objects should be selected, despite of the book.

Naturally, Yü Chou (see Fig.1-8, 1-9, 1-10, 1-11), the hometown of Yin Keng, where Hsiang Yüeh was written and first published is prior in consideration. The question is, how far the scope should be prescribed beyond Yü Chou.

Located to the west of Peking, Yü Chou in Ming Empire was half belonged to Ta T’ung Fu (prefecture) and half belonged to Hsüan Fu Chen (garrison), the border of which is saw-like. The Ta T’ung Garrison and Ta T’ung Fu shared the land near the Ta T’ung city. The former mainly occupied the mountainous and frontier area to the north and northwest while the latter took the hinterland to the south. The two regions, centered in their core city are to some extent a whole area for the defence of the Empire, traditionally called the Hsüan-Ta Erh Chen (宣大二鎮) (two garrisons), or simply Hsüan-Ta. Though with their own distinct features, the two near regions were relatively unified in comparison with other border garrisons. In the mid and late Ming Dynasty, a position of supreme commander called Hsüan-Ta Tsung Tu (宣大總督) was set to govern the military issues in the two garrisons. Moreover, the border of Hsüan-Ta area was well defined by the mountains and the Great Wall (Fig.1-13). Therefore, taking Hsüan-Ta as research scope is reasonable. The problem came from the Shan Hsi (山西) Garrison which located to the south of Ta T’ung area. For the Ming Empire, the Shan Hsi Garrison was less crucial than the Hsüan-Ta Erh Chen due to its farther distance to the capital. Most military fortresses of it were located near the southwest of the Ta T’ung Garrison, while cities which shelter the local government were mainly found in

(40)

the hinter land around T'ai Yüan, the capital city of the Shan His Province. Villages near T'ai Yüan were mostly fortified during the Chia Ching Reign, when the Mongolians started to penetrate into the hinterland of the Ming Empire. Generally, Shan Hsi area had very different circumstances and situations. Despite the fact that some strengthening of cities during the Long-ching and Wan-li reigns showed the similarity to what Hsiang Yüeh suggested and walled-villages built in later period assimilated the layout popular in Yü Chou, Shan Hsi Garrison should be considered as an individual research scope and left to the future study.

The other directions to Hsüan-Ta area are clearly bordered. To the north and west is the steppe occupied by the Mongolians; to the south and east is mountainous area with few population (Fig. 1-13).

Secondly, the fortification within the Hsüan-Ta area comprised with many kinds of construction, such like the border wall (pien ch'iang 边墙), ditch and moat (hao ch'ien 壕堑), towers (tun t'ai 墩台) along the wall (bien tun 边墩) or between fortresses, beacon towers (feng tun 烽墩), hidden traps (an chiao 暗窖) and all kinds of fortresses (see 4.1.3). Yet the dissertation only focuses on the fortified settlements, both temporary or permanent. As introduced in 1.1.3, there were generally four kinds of fortified settlements in the Ming Empire:

1) Chou and Hsien;

2) Wei, So and their stationed fortresses;

3) T'un of villagers with military identity;

4) Ts’un of villagers with civilian identity.

Lists of Chou, Hsien, Wei and So within the Hsüan-Ta area are in Table 1-1, 1-2, 1- 3, 1-4. T'un and Cun were marked on map in Fig. 4-1. It should be noted that the function of one settlement may change through time. To make the classification more convenient and clearer, the fortresses recorded in Hsüan Ta Shan Hsi San Chen T'u Shuo (宣大山西三鎮圖說), an officially edited document contained details of stationed fortresses by the year of 1603, would be taken as the first two categories. While, other fortresses found in local gazetteers, yet not in HTSHSCTS would be taken as walled- villages. The research on those two groups of fortified settlements can be found in Chapter 3 and Chapter 4 respectively.

(41)

Lastly, the time range for the research is from 1368, the year of establishment of Ming Dynasty, to 1644, the year when the regime was overturned by rebelled farmers.

1.3.2 The objectives and questions

The dissertation aims to reconstruct the history of Hsiang Yüeh, not only in a chronological sequence but in physical space marked by one and another fortified settlement. Such a historical progress, would give researchers a broader view to observe all the materials of archeology, literature, architecture and culture.

To fulfill such a task, a series of questions about the book itself should be answered first as below:

1) What is Hsiang Yüeh? What kind of literature Hsiang Yüeh is?

2) Who is the author Yin Keng? What kind of life he underwent?

3) What role the book played for the author himself? What do the author think about it?

4) For what the book was composed? What is its background? In what status and name the author published it?

5) What contents the book comprises of? What they are about? In what order were these contents arranged? Are there any ideal models to be followed?

6) What thought or theory of fortification the author tried to express through the book?

7) What is the relationship between Hsiang Yüeh and the Ming official?

8) What is the relationship between Hsiang Yüeh and the local issues?

9) How and where the text of the book spread? How the readers commented on it?

Secondly, based on the research oriented by those questions, the author discovered two main routines the book exerted its influence through. The first is the Ming official, resulted in a change of layout for the stationed fortresses including cities where local government and/or military headquarters were set, fortresses garrisoned by a particular number of soldiers. These fortifications represent the standard of the official construction. Related questions include:

10) When, where and why were these fortifications established? How many phases could such a long-term construction be divided?

11) What role did each fortress played in the total system?

(42)

12) How to evaluate the influence Hsiang Yüeh might have had on them? What elements and indicators should be compared between the fortresses and the text?

13) What methods to take to fulfil the comparison? How to compare an architecture complex formed in a long time with a static, standardized model?

14) What is the result of such comparison, what can we learn from the outcomes?

15) Is there a difference generated by the function, locality and period?

16) How did Hsiang Yüe affected the stationed fortresses? Why a personal writing eventually affected the official construction?

Another routine is towards the walled-villages, which, for the most times, were fortified areas as residence. The primary purpose of Hsiang Yüe was to improve the defence of these residents without much experience of fighting. As informal constructions, these villages are of great diversity in comparison with the stationed fortresses, and without much detailed records. It seems that the practice of Hsiang Yüe on them did not follow the pattern for the official ones. Thus, the questions began with the attributes of the walled-villages:

17) Which of the villages were inhabited by civilians? Which were inhabited by soldiers?

18) How many phases can be divided for the construction of walled-villages?

19) How to classify the walled-villages? How many types of are there? Is there any model followed by the walled-villages?

20) Are types and phases related?

21) Is there a difference generated by locality and period?

22) How military and non-military elements work together?

23) Why and How did the official interfere the construction of walled-villages? Is such interference successful?

24) How did Hsiang Yüe adapted to the existed methods of planning a village? How did Hsiang Yüe exert its influence by the volunteered behavior and official oriented behavior?

By answering these questions, an overall understanding of Hsiang Yüe itself and how it relates to all kinds of fortified settlements in the border area could be achieved.

Figure 1-1 The plan of Fan-yang (繁陽)Hsien in East Han Dynasty. The drawing was found on the  wall of a tomb in Horinger, Inner Mongolia Province
Figure  1-2 The  restored  Chu Chün T'u ( 駐軍圖 ) (Garrison map) of  the  Western Han Dynasty
Figure 1-3 An earthen model of privately built castle in the East Han Dynasty. It is guarded by four  corner towers and one gate tower
Figure 1-8 Heatmap of garrison distribution at the end of the Ming. The figure is from The Art of  Being Governed: Everyday Politics in Late Imperial China
+7

参照

関連したドキュメント

The only thing left to observe that (−) ∨ is a functor from the ordinary category of cartesian (respectively, cocartesian) fibrations to the ordinary category of cocartesian

An easy-to-use procedure is presented for improving the ε-constraint method for computing the efficient frontier of the portfolio selection problem endowed with additional cardinality

(Construction of the strand of in- variants through enlargements (modifications ) of an idealistic filtration, and without using restriction to a hypersurface of maximal contact.) At

It is suggested by our method that most of the quadratic algebras for all St¨ ackel equivalence classes of 3D second order quantum superintegrable systems on conformally flat

Then it follows immediately from a suitable version of “Hensel’s Lemma” [cf., e.g., the argument of [4], Lemma 2.1] that S may be obtained, as the notation suggests, as the m A

Our method of proof can also be used to recover the rational homotopy of L K(2) S 0 as well as the chromatic splitting conjecture at primes p > 3 [16]; we only need to use the

[Mag3] , Painlev´ e-type differential equations for the recurrence coefficients of semi- classical orthogonal polynomials, J. Zaslavsky , Asymptotic expansions of ratios of

Finally, in Figure 19, the lower bound is compared with the curves of constant basin area, already shown in Figure 13, and the scatter of buckling loads obtained