origins of chinese architectural style: the earliest plans and building types

Origins of Chinese Architectural Style: The Earliest Plans and Building TypesAuthor(s): Robert L. ThorpSource: Archives of Asian Art, Vol. 36 (1983), pp. 22-39Published by: University of Hawai'i Press for the Asia SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20111134 .

Accessed: 13/06/2014 11:20

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Hawai'i Press and Asia Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Archives of Asian Art.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.118 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 11:20:58 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uhp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asiasoc

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20111134?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Origins of Chinese Architectural Style: The Earliest Plans and Building Types

Robert L. Thorp

Princeton University

y<J ntil recently, histories of Chinese architec

ture have begun with wistful statements, drawn

from early literary sources, about the vanished

monuments of antiquity. The preference for per

ishable building materials led to the virtual disap

pearance of ancient architecture, not only of the

Bronze Age but also of the early Imperial period. Modern field archaelogy is now redressing those

losses. Beginning with the excavations of Late

Shang sites near modern-day Anyang,a Chinese

archaeologists have gradually uncovered the re

mains of a variety of ancient structures, from

humble, subterranean dwelling pits of common

people to large-scale, palatial or ritual edifices for

the elite. In fact, hard, pounded-earth foundations

and rows of post holes can tell us a great deal

about the architecture of the early Bronze Age, when fundamental traits of building ancestral to

the architecture of the historic period first ap

peared. An examination of the best current evi

dence for the early Bronze Age, the second mil

lennium b.c., reveals the origins of an architec

tural style that was to flourish for many centuries

thereafter.

Although the archaeologist's spade has uncov

ered traces of dwellings from the Neolithic pe

riod, remains of the early Bronze Age represent a

quantum leap in scale, complexity of plan, and

sophistication of construction.1 Few sites of the

early Bronze Age, however, are both well pre

served and adequately explored.2 Two sites in

particular deserve special attention: a large com

pound near Erlitou^ in Henan province, and a

much smaller enclosure at Fengchuc in Shaanxi

province. Both contain foundations of architec

tural complexes that were reasonably well pre

Fig. ia. Plan of the Erlitou compound, Yanshi district,

Henan. Ca. middle second millennium b.c. Redrawn by Y. S. Huang after Koagu

no. 4 (1974): 235.

served as self-contained units, so that one can ex

amine the whole and its constituent elements,

gaining a sense of plan, construction, and even

elevation. When considered in conjunction with

other sources?oracular and bronze texts and the

literary canon?the archaeological data provide a

basis for the preliminary definition of early Chi

nese architectural style.

ERLITOU

Since a scholarly symposium in 1977, the ques tion of the identity of the remains at Erlitou has

flowered into one of the great debates in modern

day Chinese archaeology.3 At the heart of that

debate, both topographically and theoretically, lies a large compound (Fig. ia) that has been iden

22



Fig. ib. Model of Erlitou compound, Luoyang Museum. Photograph courtesy David N. Keightley.

tified as a "palace" (gongdiand). Finds at Erlitou

have been published piecemeal, but the explora tion of the architectural foundations has been rela

tively thorough in recent years, yielding evidence

for stratigraphy and date.4 Work began at the site,

located 9 kilometers southwest of Yanshie district

between the Luo^ and Yig rivers, in the fall of

!959- The complex is situated in Work Zone V

south of Erlitou village. This zone includes other

foundations, most as yet unreported, and evidence

of a workshop where bronze was cast. First recog nized in the course of eight seasons' work from

i960 to 1964, the area of the complex was cleared

in 1972-1973, leaving only some of the northeast

corner and eastern margin unexplored. Strata at

Erlitou are now divided into four layers num

bered I-IV, from early to late. The foundations

are within stratum III, for which a calibrated ra

diocarbon dating of ca. I450?i55 b.c. has been

obtained.5 A judicious, albeit tentative, estimate

would place the date of the foundations in the

middle of the second millennium b.c.

Although the position of the architectural com

plex within the site as a whole remains unclear

pending further investigations, its plan can be de

scribed in some detail.6 The compound stood on a

broad platform (taijin) of hard, pounded earth

(hangtu1) 108 meters east-west by 100 meters

north-south (Fig. ia). As yet there is no evidence

that the earth below the platform was leveled be

fore construction began. Today the platform sur

face is about 80 centimeters higher than the sur

rounding ground level. Some edges of this plat form slope; others are covered with pebbles or a

hard surface like a path, evidence of human traffic.

The platform is aligned about 8 degrees west of

present-day magnetic north, at 352 degrees. A

large notch in the northeast corner makes the

southern half of the platform wider than the

northern.

Walls enclosed the area, although today few

traces of them remain. Only the west wall has

been completely unearthed and confirmed; sec

tions of three other walls have, however, been

located. The west wall footings run for 98 meters

north-south, extending slightly beyond the ad

joining north and south walls at each end. The

walls were built to a thickness of 45 to 60 centi

meters from earth pounded hard around a line of

small posts. Galleries were probably created by the addition of parallel rows of columns. Post

holes for a single row of columns were found at a

distance of 6 meters inside the west wall, the holes

at intervals of 3.8 meters. The excavators suppose that a single-slope roof covered the area between

the wall and the columns here, but as yet it is

23



impossible to estimate the height of the original wall or the slope and structure of the roof. The

north and south walls, by contrast, had rows of

columns both inside and outside only 3 meters

from the wall. Here a roof with two slopes could

have been built. The entire compound may have

been bordered by galleries within the wall on all

four sides and outside on the north, east, and

south.

In the middle of the south wall stood a large

gate, slightly west of center, its columns aligned in a row 34 meters in length. The nine gate col

umns were also spaced at intervals of 3.8 meters.

In this position, the gate was only approximately on axis with the main hall inside the compound, but was almost as wide. Reconstruction of the

gate must be highly speculative. The authors of

the 1974 excavation report suppose that door

panels were hung on paired columns with a hori

zontal tie beam at their top, by analogy with the

ancient form of the graph for gate (menJ) (Fig.

2a).7 Little more is known of this part of the com

pound, although an inclined road surface extends

about 10 meters south from the gate. A second

gate may have been placed in the northern half of

the east wall, but the evidence is contradictory. The 1974 report indicates a row of four post holes

about 3 meters west of the inner gallery, implying a structure extending into the compound, and a

model on display in the Luoyang City Museum

(Fig. ib) shows this area as a gate.8 Yet the exca

vation report also indicates a continuous row of

internal posts in the wall opposite the post holes,

impossible if a gateway were situated here. We

await further information on this point. An elevated main hall (tangk), the single struc

ture within the compound, was placed near the

north wall, its foundation about 70 meters north

of the south gate and equidistant from both edges of the platform. Its foundation block, measuring

36 meters wide by 25 meters deep, was built first;

the platform took shape afterward. As in the gal

leries, columns here were spaced at intervals of

3.8 meters, nine columns extending across the

front and rear and four columns at each end.

These columns delimited a structure 30.4 meters

wide by 11.4 meters deep, often inaccurately de

m n

fi

e

Fig. 2. Oracle-bone graphs for Shang structures. Late

second millennium b.c. Rendering by Y. S. Huang after

Zhongguo kexueyuan kaogu yanjiuso (ed.),Jiagu wenbian

(Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1965): (a) men, gate, 12/33, p. 465; (b) zong, ancestral temple, 7/ioa, p. 319; (c) gong,

temple-palace, 7/23a, p. 327; (d) yi, settlement, 6/nb-i2a,

pp. 280-281; (e) guo/yong, city wall, 5/2ia, p. 245; (f)jing, capital settlement, 5/2ib, p. 246; (g) gao, high, 5/2ob-2ia,

pp. 244-245; (h) shi, chamber, 7/i7a, p. 315.

scribed as eight bays (jian^) wide and three deep. Each column of the perimeter had a pair of smaller

post holes on the outside, perhaps to support eaves or to stabilize the columns themselves.9 The

lack of internal post holes or partition walls poses serious problems for any reconstruction of the

structure. This lacuna in the evidence cannot be

rationalized simply as the result of later damage to

the top surface of the foundation block. The pe rimeter columns were installed in post holes 40?

60 centimeters deep, and it is plausible to suppose that internal columns would have been similarly

anchored, leaving their traces in spite of later

damage. A lightweight thatch roof spanning the

11.4-meter depth of this hall might have been

possible given a triangular truss with a relatively

rigid structure. The roof may even have been

hipped, that is, it may have consisted of four

slopes, in view of the use of both columns and

small, paired posts around the perimeter. The Erlitou compound offers good evidence

for methods of construction during the period.

24



The broad platform, roughly 10,000 square me

ters in area, probably represents the most exten

sive use of hard, pounded earth until this time in

North China. The initial stage of construction,

however, required excavating a 50- by 30-meter

bed for the main hall foundation. This bed was

covered with three layers of un worked stones.

The foundation block was then built up from thin

increments of earth, each layer pounded hard to a

thickness of about 4.5 centimeters. The hall foun

dation reached a total thickness of 3.1 meters. By

contrast, the surrounding platform that consti

tuted the bulk of the compound averaged only about 1 meter thick. The massive foundation for

the main hall anticipates later building practice at

Shang sites such as Panlongchengm and Anyang. Columns served as the essential structural ele

ments for the hall and galleries built on the plat form and foundation block. In all cases, columns

rested on bases (chun) of unworked sandstone or

limestone in holes 40-60 centimeters deep, with

earth pounded hard around the wooden shaft.

Large columns of the gate and hall stood on single blocks of stone, but smaller columns were placed on stacks of 3-5 stones. While the size of shafts

varied, the largest were fully 40 centimeters in

diameter, presumably large tree trunks. Only the

footings of the compound walls have been found.

The walls rose from trenches about 40-70 centi

meters deep, wider at the top than at the bottom.

Stone bases lay in the trenches, the posts on them

spaced at intervals of a meter and then surrounded

with earth pounded hard.

Analogous techniques are attested as early as

the Yangshao Neolithic culture of North China.

At the Dahe? village site north of Zhengzhou,P excavators found a house with four rooms, its

walls made from posts set closely together and

sheathed by wattle and daub (Fig. 3).10 Both

elements of this technique?rows of closely set

posts and wattle and daub?continued in the

Shang and early Zhou periods, but it is at Erlitou

that one first observes posts surrounded by

pounded earth.

Soon after its discovery, Chinese writers iden

tified the Erlitou compound as a "palace." If so,

this strengthens the argument of scholars who

equate the Erlitou site with a royal capital, whether

Xia or Shang. At present, however, we lack com

pelling evidence for the use of the compound. Traces neither of habitation nor of ritual activities

are especially prominent, at present, in the artifac

tual remains from the immediate area of the pal ace, Work Zone V. Ritual bronzes and jades col

lected or excavated at the site have come from

other zones.11 Burials in and around the com

Fig. 3. House foundation

and walls, Dahe village,

Zhengzhou, Henan. Yangshao Neolithic Culture ca. 3000 b.c.

View from south; w. 4.0, l. 5.2 m.

From Kaogu no. 6 (1973): pi. 2.1.

25



pound, on the other hand, are poorly reported. Even if some were sacrificial in character, the na

ture of the compound remains problematic. On

the other hand, whether or not one entirely ac

cepts Paul Wheatley's thesis of Shang patrimoni

alism, a royal edifice in the Shang period un

doubtedly served as the locus of a variety of activ

ities by the king.12 From a modern perspective, some of these actions should be classified as fa

milial, others as political-administrative or as re

ligious ritual. The Shang kings, however, acted

these roles without our categorical niceties in

mind. It may be enough to say that a compound as large as the Erlitou platform implies a royal

tenant, and to define the locus of his actions as a

temple-palace. The most conspicuous feature of the Erlitou

compound is its large enclosed area, especially the

unobstructed space before the main hall. Profes

sor Zou Heng of Beijing University suggests that

this area was a courtyard (ting^).13 This term oc

curs in the Shang oracle-bone inscriptions, as well

as in early Western Zhou bronze texts, although the writing of the graph seems to have undergone some changes in this period.14 From oracle-bone

inscriptions, Chen Mengjia inferred that the ting

courtyard was a place for sacrifices and ritual

feasting.15 In Western Zhou bronze texts and

early literary sources such as the Book of Documents

(Shang shuT), ting-courtyards (da tings or zhong

tingt) figure in accounts of sacrifices and re

wards.16 The alignment of south gate, courtyard, and hall evident in the Erlitou plan accords well

with the environment one can deduce from Zhou

texts, both bronze inscriptions and literary sources. Even acknowledging the time that sepa rates the Erlitou site and the later oracle-bone and

bronze inscriptions, it seems plausible that the

compound at Erlitou presages the courtyard ar

chitectural plan and the elevated main-hall build

ing type.

F E N G C H U

For many years, the late Shang sites near Anyang dominated the archaeology of the early Bronze

Age. Within the last decade, however, important evidence of the Zhou people for the period before

their conquest of Shang has begun to reach print. The most important region for the study of pre

conquest or predynastic Zhou (xian Zhouu) is

Qishanv district in central Shaanxi province, north

of the Wei River about 130 kilometers west of

Xi'an.17 Long known as a source of Shang and

Zhou ritual vessels, since 1976 this locale has

yielded well-preserved architectural foundations

and quantities of oracle-bones. Most Chinese

writers now regard these finds as predynastic

Zhou, contemporary with the Late Shang re

mains at Anyang and elsewhere but distinct cul

turally and/or politically. The question deserves

much further scrutiny. The Qishan sites might

plausibly be assigned to an "outpost" of that

Shang polity known through the sites at Anyang and the indubitable Shang oracle-bones found

there in great numbers.

Architectural remains at Fengchu village (Figs.

4-5), 25 kilometers northeast of Qishan district, are the most informative yet discovered for the

study of early Bronze Age structures, far more

useful in this respect than the sites excavated be

fore 1949 at Anyang, or indeed, any Shang site

unearthed since then. The Fengchu foundations

represent a compact, self-contained unit, an ap

propriate structure for analysis and comparison with the larger Erlitou compound. Excavations at

Fengchu are still in progress, and our data at this

point are admittedly preliminary. The initial re

port has been supplemented by several studies,

the most important restorations from the pens of

Fu Xinian and Yang Hongxun, two gifted archi

tectural historians.18 The articles by Fu and Yang

incorporate many important insights into the

specific circumstances of the Fengchu site crucial

for this discussion. Our purpose here is to under

stand the complex in historical perspective and to

identify its fundamental traits.

The date of the Fengchu foundations cannot be

fixed with great precision. The complex lies in

stratum iv above sterile earth, but ceramic mate

rial recovered from this level is too scant to be

dated. Two Western Zhou (ca. 1045-771 b.c.) strata (IIIA and IIIB) overlaid the foundations.

Sherds found in these levels may be compared with ceramics of Western Zhou date at sites near

26



Xi'an.19 The cache of oracle-bones in a pit (Hi i) inside the complex included inscriptions that have

been dated to the period immediately before the

conquest of Shang.20 The available evidence may

support a preconquest date for the initial con

struction and habitation at the Fengchu village

site, in the eleventh century b.c. if the conquest

took place betwen 1051 and 1041 b.c.21

The plan and construction of the Fengchu com

plex contrast with the earlier and simpler com

pound at Erlitou, which was about seven times

larger. The Fengchu complex rose on a raised

platform of pounded earth 45 meters north-south

by 32 meters east-west (see Fig. 4). This rectangle had sides in a ratio of 3:2, unlike the irregular but

approximately square Erlitou platform. As at

Erlitou, the structure is now aligned slightly west

of magnetic north, in this case at 350 degrees. After the site had been leveled, laborers pounded the earth of the platform, attaining an average

height of 1.3 meters, a somewhat higher elevation

than the Erlitou platform.22 At the former, gal leries and courtyard stood on a common level.

Only the main hall rose higher on its separate

foundation. All units of the compound at Feng

chu, however, were elevated above the court

yards, although how the builders achieved this

effect remains uncertain.23 The floors of the gate

houses on the south were 60 centimeters above

!} O ? ?? ?1q0 ?- + ~ ? ? &

ft H ? 0o o U o o ri

H

M tio

y n_?i i

~-*P

cgc^i

loi

h n n??

J ?lu

"m

t?, ol

t?

??* il'

:.-jJ??==ga&"Jl

3

S II o o

11 ? 11 f

Fig. 4. Plan of the Fengchu compound, Qishan district,

Shaanxi. Late second millennium B.c. Redrawn by Y. S.

Huang after Wenwu no. 10 (1979): 29.

Restoration of the Fengchu ^^^^^V^^^^^/x compound by Yang Hongxun. l??0^ J^///

From Wenwu no. 3 (1981): 25. II Ki^^^^/^/y

27



the inner courtyard level, a difference in elevation

maintained in the other chambers and galleries around the perimeter. The floor of the main hall,

however, was 30-40 centimeters higher still.

Only the roadway of the south gate interrupts the

circuit of elevated levels around the perimeter. This compound embodies the most sophisti

cated ground plan yet known from the early Bronze Age.24 About 4 meters in front of the

south gate stood a wall 5 meters in length east

west and a meter thick, shielding the roadway. Such a screen wall (yingbiw or zhaobix), familiar

even from late traditional architecture like the city houses of Beijing, may have been called ping Y or

shuz in the vocabulary of the period.25 From two

stone bases found at one end, the excavators infer

a diminutive protective roof. Aligned precisely on the central axis rather than shifted to one side as

at Erlitou, the south gate (men) cannot be restored

with confidence due to heavy damage. Both Fu

and Yang agree that its central roadway was

flanked by elevated gate houses (shuaa). A single roof seemingly covered both the roadway and the

adjoining gate houses, judging from the post

holes in this area. The gate houses served to join the gate to both flanks of the compound, and pre sented a closed facade punctuated only by the

doors at their east and west ends (see Fig. 5).

Passing through this gate, one entered a large,

rectangular courtyard (ting). Designed after the

same 3:2 ratio observed for the entire platform, but here turned 90 degrees, this area measured

18.5 meters east-west by

12 meters north-south.

Ramps or steps at both sides and the rear con

nected this area to galleries on two sides and the

main hall at the rear. This main hall (tang) occu

pied a central position within the complex, be

hind an imaginary median line drawn across the

platform from east to west. The grid of post holes

defined a hall seven columns (six intervals) across

and four columns (three intervals) deep, 17 by 6

meters. Rows of post holes running east-west

were carefully aligned, but the rows in depth were

not, a point examined below. Twin courtyards, each 8 meters square, lay behind the hall, sepa rated by an elevated walk 3 meters wide. In area,

the hall foundation is overshadowed by the open

space of the courtyard before it, being more shal

Fig. 6.

Pounded-earth house walls,

Taixi village, Gaocheng district, Hebei. Late second millennium

B.c. View from south; w. 3.6,

L. 10.35 m. From Wenwu no. 8

(1974): plate 3.1.

28



low. The twin courtyards behind the main hall,

however, approximate at only a slightly reduced

scale the volume of the hall. The designers of this

structure laid out three lateral units?front court

yard, main hall, and rear courtyards?on axis

within the compound. Their volumes vary in a

measured fashion, while the alternation of roofed

and open spaces is balanced.

As many as twenty-one rooms could have oc

cupied the perimeter of the compound on the two

flanks and across the rear. Traces of walls on the

platform clearly reveal the chambers along the

two sides, probably eight on both east and west.

At the south, these side chambers (identified vari

ously as xiangab or wuac) extended beyond the

two gate houses, almost to the line of the screen

wall, creating a small forecourt (ningac*). Under

the side chamber eaves, galleries facilitated an un

interrupted circuit of the front courtyard, main

hall, and twin rear courtyards. On the north, the

number of rear chambers (shiae or qina^) is less

certain; five seem possible. In two cases, the rear

chambers had doorways in the north wall (per

haps the rear gates, wei men, mentioned earlier in

connection with Erlitou). All the chambers?side

and rear alike?may have had doors and windows

in their front walls. Traces of the former can still

be read in the ground, while wall fragments sug

gest window frames.

In its construction, the Fengchu compound also

overshadows the primitive Erlitou complex. Three different techniques for building walls are

represented here: pounded earth, adobe brick

(tupiaS) and mud-plaster (duonian). The walls of

pounded earth varied in thickness from 60 to 90

centimeters, and may have tapered as they rose

upward. Impressions created during the pound

ing process indicate that five small wooden pestles bound together were used to make the hangtu. The layers of pounded earth were 10 to 16 centi

meters, notably thicker than at Erlitou. Unlike

Erlitou, however, the pounded-earth walls did

not contain rows of interior posts. Thick

pounded-earth walls have been found at several

Shang sites, including Taixiai village in Gao

cheng^ district (Fig. 6), Hebei, Zhengzhou, and

Anyang.26 Such walls are not associated with

large elevated foundations at these Shang sites,

but rather with houses of more modest scale built

at ground level or below. The use of chambers

(shi) with solid walls within the Fengchu com

pound distinguishes this site from architectural

remains at Shang sites on the North China plain. The Fengchu compound thus combines the shi

chamber building type and the tang-hall building

type.

Another technique employed at Fengchu, adobe brick, has also been found at several Shang sites in North China. At the Taixi village site in

Hebei, the excavators suggest that courses of

adobe were laid above the pounded-earth walls.

At the Fengchu site, adobe bricks formed in

wooden molds from clay mixed with straw were

employed at the rear of the main hall foundation.

Although not found extensively in the early Bronze Age, adobe does represent the first stage

of brick construction in ancient China. The third

technique, mud-plaster, was utilized at the Feng chu site for thin walls of uniform thickness. Lay ers of the plaster could be shaped and trimmed

with a cutting tool much the way mortar is

worked today. Mud-plaster was used primarily in

some front and rear walls of the side chambers,

those pierced by doors and windows. Most of the

wall and roof surfaces were finished with several

coats of lime, the only extensive use of this kind of

whitewashing yet reported from an early site.

While columns served as a skeleton to carry the

roof structure, some walls at Fengchu may have

been load-bearing. Columns again varied in di

ameter and spacing. The largest shafts and widest

intervals were found in the main hall grid and

galleries. As at Erlitou, columns rested on stone

bases set into post holes 30-70 centimeters deep that were cut into the pounded-earth foundation.

However, conglomerate bases?chips of stone

bound together in a lime mortar?supported the

engaged columns of the chamber walls around the

perimeter. Since they were not anchored, Fu and

Yang hypothesize that these columns did not sup

port the weight of the roof. Under the burden of a

roof unanchored columns might have crept from

their bases to destroy the timber framework.

The partition walls in the perimeter chambers

29



Fig. 7. Roof tile sherds, Kexingzhuang site, Xi'an, Shaanxi.

Late second millennium b.c. From Zhongguo kexueyuan

kaogu yanjuiso (ed.), Feng xifajue baogao (Beijing: Kexue

chubanshe, 1962), pi. 11.

may also have been load-bearing if they had gables that supported the roof directly, such as the end

wall reported at the Taixi village Shang site (see

Fig. 10). A timber frame that freed the walls from

the burden of supporting the roof was, of course,

one of the principal features of later Chinese ar

chitecture.

The Fengchu site has yielded some clues to the

appearance and construction of roofs. Both Fu

and Yang estimate the height of the eaves from

traces of an eave column, 2.35 meters in length, found in the southwest corner of the west rear

courtyard. Since their assumptions differ, the res

torations attempted by Fu and Yang also diverge, the more straightforward solution being the

two-slope, mud-plaster roofs proposed by Yang

Hongxun (see Fig. 5). The construction of the

roof poses fewer problems. Fragments of mud

plaster bearing impressions of straw bundles sug

gest that such bundles served either as rafters or as

purlins encased with mud-plaster.27 Fu Xinian

has estimated the weight of a mud-plaster roof at

200 kilograms per square meter, a burden so pon derous as to require a sturdy structure beneath.

Sherds of roof tiles found in rather meager quanti ties at the Fengchu site would seem to indicate

that the tiles were used at this time only in a lim

ited way, perhaps to mask the roof ridges or to

serve as gutters where roof slopes intersected.

Western Zhou roof tiles had been reported previ

ously from the Kexingzhuanga^ site near Xi'an

(Fig. 7), but at the time these tiles could not be

associated with any architectural remains.28 The

Fenchu discoveries may push back the inception of roof tiles to the period prior to the Zhou con

quest.

This elaborate compound adumbrates the

manifold elements of a fundamental plan that

flourished for many centuries. A precise identifi

cation of this site should await further excavations,

especially inasmuch as a recent study mentions in

passing another set of foundations immediately to

the west.29 In spite of this reservation, the original excavation report and several subsequent studies

characterize the Fengchu site as an ancestral tem

ple (miaoal). This identification springs from a

definition supplied by Erya*m (Literary Expositor), a late Zhou glossary edited in the Han period.

That source reads: "A chamber (shi) with east and

west side chambers (xiang) is called an ancestral

temple (miao). Without east and west side cham

bers, it is called a rear chamber (qin)."30 Most

Chinese authors have been willing to take the

general (and vague) correspondence between that

characterization and the ground plan of the Feng chu compound as proof for their identification.31

Many ritual structures and their components are named in the oracle-bone texts and bronze

inscriptions. The Shang referred to ancestral tem

ples as zongan but did not employ the term miao.32

The former is usually glossed as a roof element

over an ancestral tablet (see Fig. 2b).33 The latter

term, a word of cloudy etymology, can be found

in many early Western Zhou bronze inscriptions,

30



each temple named for the deceased king whose

tablet occupied it.34 While miao may have been

the proper term for a Zhou ancestral temple, the

evidence is not adequate at present to demonstrate

beyond a doubt that the Fengchu complex served

that function. Its most prominent features, the

central hall within a perimeter of smaller cham

bers, and a division between front and rear court

yards, are reminiscent of a temple-palace (gongao)

(see Fig. 2c) .35 As with the Erlitou site, one is well

advised to adopt a neutral term such as temple

palace until more evidence is available.

FUNDAMENTAL TRAITS

In addition to the Erlitou and Fengchu sites, other

architectural remains of the early Bronze Age can

be studied, although none is as well preserved or

as complete as those two compounds.36 Nonethe

less, other locales confirm the most important traits of the period to be discussed below, and

supply evidence with which to gain a sense of the

range of variation over time and space. Archae

ological evidence should not, however, be seen in

a vacuum, even for so early a period. The oracle

bone inscriptions include references to structures

that may be applied in two ways: first, for the

information to be deduced from pictographic rep resentation in this early stage of the writing sys

tem; second, for whatever information can be

gleaned from the context of these graphs in in

scriptions.37 Together, archaeological and epi

graphic data produce the preliminary definition of

early Bronze Age architectural style sought here.

All thoroughly excavated Shang and early Zhou

architectural sites reveal platforms or foundations

square or rectangular in shape, although not al

ways simple quadrilateral figures. This trait, which

contrasts with the variety of irregular plans known

at Neolithic sites and among the subterranean fea

tures at Shang sites, is so obvious and ubiquitous that it might easily pass unnoticed. Yet it repre sents a choice made consciously and consistently

throughout the period. The practical requirements of this choice for square or rectangular structures,

accurate measurements and right-angle corners,

imply surveying of some sophistication. The Er

litou compound measured almost ioo meters

square, albeit with a sizable notch missing from

the northeast quadrant. The north and south walls

met the west wall at true 90-degree angles. Oppo site walls were in all cases parallel. Equal precision can be attested at Late Shang sites such as the ex

traordinary royal tombs of the XibeigangaP cem

etery northwest of Anyang.38 Large tombs such

as HPKM 1002 (Fig. 8) were provided with four

lengthy ramps whose axes intersect with great

precision. A regular, geometric topography could

be achieved even on a much larger scale, such as

with the Shang city wall at modern-day Zheng chou or the smaller enceinte at Panlongcheng in

Hubei.39

Oracle-bone graphs (jiaguwenacl) depict settle

ments and structures of the Shang world as square

figures. The graph yiar (settlement; see Fig. 2d) consists of a kneeling figure seen in profile below

a squared enclosure, representing the two essen

tial components of a settlement, its population and land.40 A contras ti ve definition of the yi-set tlement from the inscriptions themselves opposes it to farming fields and surrounding, uncultivated

areas. Thus y i represents a nucleated settlement.

Yi-settlements were built at the king's behest,

recorded in the phrase wang zuo yi,as "the king built [i.e., had built] the settlement," and were

movable, the names traveling with the settle

ments.41 The Shang word for city wall, variously

equated to modern forms guoat or yong,au illus

trates two roofed structures atop the walls of a

square enclosure (see Fig. 2e).42 A variant with

four roofs is also known. The Shang graph for

temple-palace, gong, incorporates two square

elements, perhaps chambers or courtyards, below

a roof (see Fig. 2c).43

Shang builders oriented their settlement walls

and foundations with the four cardinal directions.

At Erlitou, the east and west walls are aligned 8

degrees west of magnetic north, while at Fengchu the orientation is 10 degrees west. The Shang

royal tombs likewise evidence extraordinary care

in their orientation (see Fig. 8). Each wall of a

structure therefore faced squarely one of the car

dinal directions. Oracle-bone inscriptions reflect a

world in which the "great settlement Shang" (da

yi Shangav) lay at the center of four quarters, si

31



Fig. 8. Tomb 1002 (HPKM 1002), Xibeigang cemetery, Anyang district, Henan. Late second millennium B.c. View from

northwest; dimensions at mouth of shaft, 19 by 18 m. From Liang Siyong and Gao Chuxun (eds.), Houjiazhuang, vol. 3,

1002 hao da mu (Nangang: Zhongyang yanjiuyuan, 1965), pi. 3.

tu,aw or four directions, si fang.ax44 Square foun

dations so aligned encapsulated this fundamental

conception of the shape of the world. Winds ema

nating from each direction were given special

names, and particular sacrifices offered to the

winds and/or their directions appear among the

rituals recorded in the oracle-bone inscriptions.45

Major structures aligned with the cardinal points were locked into a north-south by east-west grid

in harmony with such forces or spirits of nature.

The quadrate royal tombs at Anyang illustrate

this harmonious orientation explicitly (see Fig. 8). No less fundamental is the elevation of all large

structures above ground level. Early literary tra

ditions, in their accounts of prehistoric eras when

men lived in caves and holes in the ground, no

doubt reflect the actual progress in North China

from subterranean and semisubterranean dwel

lings to surface structures, a development now

verified from excavations of Neolithic sites.46 At

Anyang, even in the Late Shang period, a mixture

of subterranean and surface structures was typi cal. The foundations north of Xiaotun were usu

ally built over earlier water ditches, dwellings, and storage pits densely clustered in the ground.47

When the elite elevated their structures, they quite

literally stood above the remainder of the popu lace. At Erlitou, the platform was about 80 centi

meters above the natural ground level, while at

Fengchu the height varied from 20 to 100 centi

meters. As a practical matter, the elevated plat forms and foundation blocks raised their floors

above ground water and dampness. Symbolically,

they emphatically set these structures apart from

the ordinary. Variable levels are found within the com

pounds. The main hall at Erlitou was elevated

well above the surrounding platform. If the prin

cipal activities of the courtyard took place there,

they were separated from the level of participants

32



and spectators standing within the compound. At

the Fengchu complex, a hierarchy of levels is ap

parent. Both the south gate roadway and the front

courtyard must have been at about ground level;

all surrounding areas were about 60 centimeters

higher, while the main hall was elevated another

30-40 centimeters, a full meter above the court

yard floor. Such variation may well correlate with

status levels. If the compound was a stage for im

portant ceremonies, all members of the company

could be properly positioned relative to each

other and to the principals. The late Zhou ritual

texts detail these matters of position and hierar

chic relationships with an almost obsessive pro

lixity. Oracle-bone graphs represent elevated struc

tures. The graphs jingaY (capital; see Fig. 2f) and

gaoaz (high; see Fig. 2g) are both glossed as repre

sentations of tall buildings seen in profile.48 In

each graph a wide, elevated base supports columns

that carry a pitched, two-slope roof. The base is

drawn without a bounding line across the bottom,

perhaps to indicate that the foundation rises from

below ground level. Columns are placed well

within the borders of the raised surface. The

pitched roof overhangs the columns for a consid

erable distance, sheltering some of the surface.

Both graphs, in short, represent structural cross

sections.

Solid walls enclosed both the Erlitou and Feng chu compounds, penetrated only by gates on the

south. Both were self-contained, unified, inde

pendent entities, complete unto themselves even

if they were also part of larger ensembles.49 Per

sons outside the walls were denied access, except

by the single, southern approach, and denied a

view, except of roofs, if we assume that walls

were of normal height. Once allowed entry, con

versely, a person on the inside was removed from

the world, unable to see anything but the sky.

Encircling walls created a dichotomy between

interior and exterior space, between the limited,

defined, and regular geometric space of the com

pound and the unlimited, undefined, and natural

space of the site. All the traits discussed up to this

point?square shape, elevation, and enclosure?

enhanced this effect.

Walls also played a major role in determining how anyone entering the compounds could expe rience their spaces. A single gate dictated the point of entry. Passing through the gate, one gained the

first, preselected view of the interior and its major

buildings. At Erlitou, one entered through a wide

gate into a broad, undifferentiated courtyard be

hind which, 70 meters distant, stood the main

hall. The Erlitou courtyard was completely intel

ligible upon entry; it held no secrets. The width of

the courtyard decreased in the rear, so that the

space surrounding the main hall was lessened.

The position of the hall vis-?-vis the walls on the

sides focused the visitor's sight and movement on

one, irresistible goal. By contrast, at the Fengchu

complex, one entered a much smaller courtyard contained by galleries, chambers, and the main

hall. Any further movement required ascending

higher levels. The main hall of the Fengchu com

plex abutted laterally to galleries and chambers.

Movement was regulated through the galleries or

doors in the hall's rear wall. Courtyards and

chambers in the rear were out of sight until one

moved through or around the main hall. In this

respect, the plan of the Fengchu compound is

more complex, even mysterious, in spite of its

well-integrated parts. Great breadth and relatively shallow depth

characterize Shang period buildings, although ad

mittedly the number of foundations for which full

information is available remains limited. At both

sites discussed above, the main hall displayed a

broad south facade opposite the south gate. The

ratio of breadth to depth for the foundation block

at Erlitou is about 3:2, while that for the hall itself, as defined by post holes, is almost 3:1. Foundation

blocks are reported with ratios in the range of 3 or

4 to 1 at Panlongcheng, Zhengzhou, and Anyang. Similar proportions are evident at Fengchu. While

there are no signs of walls in the Erlitou hall, at

Fengchu the south facade may have been open, the other sides walled.50 In the northern hemi

sphere, an open south face ensures maximum day

light and warmth throughout the year. A broad

facade also created an optimal stage visible to

those in the courtyard. A relatively shallow, rectangular hall dominated

33



both compounds. The Erlitou hall was defined by rows of nine columns each on the north and the

south, with four columns at each end. The ratio of

columns was 9:4, the number of columns on the

facades twice plus one the number on the ends,

analogous to the Doric temple. Such a perimeter of columns created eight intervals laterally and

three intervals in depth, the combination of an

even number and an odd number. At Fengchu, the main hall shared this proportion, with six in

tervals across against three intervals in depth. The

careful alignment of the east-west rows of columns

at Fengchu, both those on the perimeter and those

within, has been interpreted as evidence that these

columns were tied together laterally by beams for

rigidity.51 There are no structural limits to the

breadth of a building constructed in this way,

only pragmatic constraints. Intervals between the

columns aligned perpendicular to the facade can

be varied freely, but increasing the depth of a

structure shuts out natural light. With their broad facades, the Erlitou and Feng

chu halls anticipate the mature tang-hall building

type, but the system of bays so characteristic of

later structures had not appeared in the early Bronze Age. The hall at Erlitou consisted simply of a perimeter of columns. It is not clear how they

were tied together for greater rigidity, nor can the

roof structure be determined unambiguously. Some writers have assumed that an internal col

umn grid and partition walls existed, but this

view is not warranted by the excavation data.52

~.v,.,y,..?^.,.~ ,yfm..,?3.^?r.-,^ ..^?^Wy.w.t, t! . ? -v.

..^.^^-y -WK

QDBBDSDD

ux -

ja

0 5_10* ?J

^

PB

PD

Fig. 9.

Restoration of hall Fi, Panlong

cheng site, Huangpi district,

Hubei, by Yang Hongxun. Mid to late second millennium b.c.

From Wenwu no. 2 (1976): 23.

34



As noted above, a triangular truss could have been

used to support the roof, and simultaneously would have strengthened the perimeter columns.

After Erlitou, the next well-preserved hall for

which we have good information is F i at Pan

longcheng (Fig. 9). This structure consisted of

partition walls?posts set closely together with

pounded earth around them?and an encircling

perimeter of eave columns.53 This hall, by its use

of walls, represents only slight progress over the

Erlitou structure. It does not prefigure a true bay

system. The number of eave columns in the two

facades differs, 20 across the south and 17 across

the north. As a consequence, the spacing of these

columns varies as well. The posts of the interior

walls are laid out without reference to the columns

of the two facades, and the latitudinal partition walls do not align with eave columns. The gallery

running around all four faces of the hall under the

eaves is much shallower than the depth of the

rooms inside. We infer that the roof structure was

carried both by the posts of the walls and by the

columns at the perimeter, but as at Erlitou, a large

interval, about 6 meters, had to be spanned with

out columns.

A column grid suitable for a true bay system can be recognized in the disposition of post holes

for the Fengchu hall (see Fig. 4). Although the latitudinal columns are not precisely aligned, as

noted above, the number of columns in each east

west row was equal, and the intervals between

each pair of columns in these rows were basically uniform. This hall had solid walls on both ends

and across the rear, while the facade was probably

open. By using lateral tie beams, each longitudi nal row of columns could be made rigid. Other tie

beams aligned perpendicular to the facade might have been carried above the lateral tie beams.

They or the roof truss itself would have been re

quired to make the entire skeleton rigid. A large chamber without internal partition walls was cre

ated, while at the same time the considerable

weight of the roof could be supported. Even

though the column grid of the Fengchu hall pre

figures a proper bay system, the technique of an

choring columns in deep post holes still sets this

hall apart from later structures. The development

Fig. io. Pounded-earth end wall with gable, Taixi village,

Gaocheng district, Hebei. Late second millennium B.c. View

of west end wall; no dimensions reported. From Hebei sheng

bowuguan et al., Gaocheng Taixicun Shang dai yizhi (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 1977), p. 78.

of the tang-hall as seen at Erlitou, Panlongcheng, and Fengchu represents the earliest phase in the

history of this important building type and marks

the inception of bays. Most of what can now be said about the roofs of

early Bronze Age structures is based on inference.

Two clues to their character may be cited from

recent excavations. At the Taixi village site in

Gaocheng district, Hebei, one end wall of an earth

house was found intact and clearly bore a two

slope roof (Fig. 10), each slope at about a 45-de

gree angle with the ground.54 At Fengchu, more

evidence for a roof has come to light. Yang

Hongxun illustrates a mass of mud-plaster with

impressions of large beams, of the wall on which

those beams rested, and of the straw bundles that

served as the core for the mud-plaster covering.55 The angle between the rafter and the top of the

wall was 48 degrees. Such clues are at present the

best physical evidence for the design of the roofs

of this period.

35



Given their broad facades, the roofs of Shang halls would naturally have peaked at a line parallel to and intermediate between their front and rear

facades. The roof element (mianba) seen in the

oracle-bone graphs has long been interpreted as a

side view of a two-slope roof, and can be seen in

many graphs: ancestral temple, palace, and cham

ber (see Fig. 2b,c,h).56 Some Shang roofs were

probably thatched, a view endorsed by early lit

erary sources. Mud-plaster, however, must have

been very common as well, or so excavations

suggest. The weight of the mud-plaster may ac

count for the earth walls at both Gaocheng and

Fengchu, and the incipient bay system at the latter

site. Roof tiles would seem to be merely an ad

junct to the plaster roofs at this time.

The use of four-slope, hipped roofs remains

more problematic. Both at Erlitou and Panlong

cheng, eave columns ran around all four sides of

the halls and had smaller, paired posts. Yang

Hongxun and others take this as evidence for

hipped roofs, which had the virtue of protecting the foundation and walls on all sides from the

elements. Yang envisions a second eave carried by the small, paired posts (see Fig. 9). Otherwise,

however, the evidence for hipped roofs remains

slight indeed, even while noting the hipped form

used for the lids of fang-i and fang-lei ritual ves

sels in the Shang period. It is only with a middle

Western Zhou site at Zhaochenbb in Fufengbc dis

trict, not far from Qishan, that clear evidence for

hipped roofs appears. At Zhaochen, there are

splash slopes (sanshuibd) on all sides, paved sur

faces made of creek stones placed around the pe

rimeter of the foundation to receive rainwater

runoff from the roof. This feature is not yet at

tested for the early Bronze Age.57 Even so, it

must be acknowledged that a hipped roof, if used,

may have left few traces in the foundations that

archaeologists uncover.

The fundamental traits identified and discussed

above hardly surprise anyone conversant with

traditional Chinese architecture, yet how remark

able that is. Many features of later buildings are

clearly anticipated in these early Bronze Age ar

chitectural sites. These basic habits of building were maintained in spite of obvious changes in

construction. The earliest architecture illustrates

the continuity of Chinese civilization more readily observable in other cultural traits such as the writ

ing system.

Physical evidence from recent archaeological work rescues the architectural past from the realm

of the literary canon and its obscurities. Early Chinese architecture exhibits some peculiarities that set it apart from later periods, such as the

structural role of walls and the repertoire of build

ing materials. The courtyard plan and the cham

ber and hall building types analyzed above, while

ancestral to later forms, were nonetheless differ

ent in many details from the architectural tradi

tion of later eras. This knowledge places the his

tory of Chinese building technology in perspec

tive and offers hope for escaping the images of the

past spun from textual scholarship in which the

changing physical manifestations of ancient

words and terms tend to be downplayed. Better understanding of the physical circum

stances and attributes of early Bronze Age ritual

precincts contributes to our knowledge of other

aspects of Shang and Zhou civilization. It is impor tant to know where the oracle-bones were cracked

and the ritual bronze vessels offered up in solemn

sacrifices. The preliminary definition of Bronze

Age architectural style developed here is a step in

the rediscovery of early Chinese civilization.

36



Chinese Characters

? mit

h r??^

j n

? it?

- fest ?

B3H.

aa

afc

ac />^\

ad -^

ae %

ah

ai

aj

ak

al

am

an

ao

ap

ar

as

at

au

av

aw

ax

te

r?P fc rr liL

I? 7T

aq ?*fX.

ba p-7

bf /]xi^

bh ?JL-fe

? wn

? *^ ?m 3C^

ton ||? bo Jf?g

Notes

i. Yang Hongxun, Yangshao wenhua juzhu jianzhu fazhan wenti

de tantao (An Investigation of the Problem of the Development of

Dwelling Architecture in Yangshao Culture). Kaogu xuebao (Acta

Archaeologia S?nica) no. i (1975): 39-72. For a general introduction to

the Chinese Neolithic, see Kwang-chih Chang, The Archaeology of Ancient China (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977). This arti

cle is an expansion of a paper delivered at the College Art Associa

tion Annual Meeting at The Asia Society, New York, in February

1982. I wish to thank Richard Barnhart, chair of the panel on "Chi

nese Art Styles," and David Keightley of the Department of His

tory, University of California at Berkeley, for helpful criticisms of

the manuscript. I am also indebted to my colleague, Huang Yun

sheng, for many stimulating discussions and for drawing several of

the figures.

2. The fifty-three foundations (jizhibc) and other remains uncov

ered north of Xiaotun village near Anyang before the Second

World War cannot be used productively for this study. The prewar

campaigns at the site are summarized conveniently in Li Chi, Anyang

(Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1977), chapters 4-6. The

main architectural features are described in chapter 10. The incom

plete preservation, excavation, and reporting of these remains pose

profound problems for their interpretation. Academia Sinica's

methods of excavation changed during the course of its fifteen sea

sons of field work at Xiaotun, so that the information gained from

different parts of the site varied significantly. In areas where narrow

strips were excavated, the complete dimensions of foundations

could not be determined because, in many cases, contiguous plots were not cleared. In addition, the foundation surfaces were generally

37



found in a much damaged state, post holes destroyed and stone bases

missing, making it impossible to establish the plans of structures.

Moreover, the north and east margins of the site have been badly eroded by the Huan g River. The data are assembled in Shi Zhangru,

Zhongguo kaogu baogao ji (Archaeologia Sinica), Series II, Xiaotun, vol.

i, Yizhi defaxian yu fajue (Discovery and Excavation of the Site), Part II,

Yinxu jianzhu yicun (Architectural Remains at the Ruins of Yin) (Nan

gang: Zhongyang yanjiuyuan, 1959).

3. For the Erlitou site, see Chang, Archaeology of Ancient China,

pp. 218-229. The most extensive discussion of the identity of these

remains is Zou Heng, Shilun Xia wenhua (A Preliminary Discussion

of Xia Culture), in Zou (ed.), Xia Shang Zhou kaoguxue lunwun ji

(Collected Essays on the Archaeology of Xia, Shang, and Zhou) (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 1980), pp. 95-182. Professor Zou and some

other scholars regard Erlitou as a Xia capital. In light of such hy

potheses, many Chinese archaeologists now speak of an "Erlitou

culture" preceding an Early Shang period, which, in turn, was fol

lowed by a Late Shang period. See Beijing Daxue Lishixi (ed.),

Shang Zhou kaogu (Shang and Zhou Archaeology) (Beijing: Wenwu

chubanshe, 1979), pp. 29?37, and my review of this work, The

Chinese Bronze Age from a Marxist Perspective, Early China 6

(1980-1981): 97-102. Readers accustomed to the term "Middle

Shang" for sites of the Erligang phase should translate that nomen

clature to "Early Shang" in this study.

4. Xu Xusheng, 1959 nian xia Yu xi diaocha "Xiaxu" de chubu

baogao (Initial Report of the Investigation of the "Ruins of Xia" in

Western Henan in Summer 1959), Kaoguhl (Archaeology) no. 11

(!959): 592-600; Luoyang fajuedui, 1959 nian Henan Yanshi Erlitou

shijue jianbao (Brief Report of Trial Excavations at Erlitou, Yanshi,

Henan for 1959), K^w no. 2(1961): 82-85, 81; idem, Henan Yanshi

Erlitou yizhi fajue jianbao (Brief Report of Excavations at the Erli

tou Site, Yanshi, Henan), Kaogu no. 5 (1965): 214-224; Erlitou

gongzuodui, Henan Yanshi Erlitou zao Shang gongdian yizhi fajue

jianbao (Brief Report of Excavations at the Early Shang Palace Site at

Erlitou, Yanshi, Henan), Kaogu no. 4 (1974): 234-248; idem, Henan

Yanshi Erlitou yizhi san, ba chu fajue jianbao (Brief Report of Exca

vations in Zones Three and Eight at the Erlitou Site, Yanshi, Henan),

Kaogu no. 5 (1975): 302-309, 294; idem, Yanshi Erlitou yizhi xin

faxian de tongqi he yuqi (Newly Discovered Bronze Vessels and

Jades from the Erlitou Site, Yanshi), Kaogu no. 4 (1976): 259-263;

Yanshixian wenhuaguan, Erlitou yizhi chutu de tongqi he yuqi

(Bronze Vessels and Jades Unearthed at the Erlitou Site), Kaogu no. 4

(1978): 270.

5. The architectural complex is atop pits with ceramic sherds of

Erlitou periods I and II, and below pits with sherds of period IV.

Only seven carbon-14 dates for the Erlitou site have been published. The early strata (I and II) yielded samples that range in date from ca.

2400 to 1900 b.c. when calibrated, while the range for late strata (III and IV) is ca. 1625-1450 b.c. See Xia Nai, Tan-14 ceding niandai he

Zhongguo shiqianshi kaoguzue (Carbon-14 Dating and Chinese

Prehistoric Archaeology), Kaogu no. 4 (1977): 217-232, and subse

quent reports in Kaogu no. 4 (1978): 281, no. 4 (1980): 374, and no. 4

(1981)1365. 6. All data are drawn from Erlitou gongzuodui, Henan Yanshi

Erlitou zao Shang gongdian yizhi fajue jianbao (see note 4).

7. Zhongguo kexueyuan kaogu yanjiuso (ed.), Jiagu wenbian

(Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1965), i2/3a, p. 465. 8. Zou Heng (Shilun Xia wenhua, p. 169) compares this putative

gate to the side gate of a palace (wei men-') traditionally placed in the

northeast corner.

9. Yang Hongxun regards the paired posts as supports for a sec

ond, lower register of eaves installed with the purpose of protecting the surface of the foundation from the elements; Cong Panlong

cheng Shang dai gongdian yizhi tan Zhongguo gongting jianzhu fazhan de jigc wenti (A Discussion of Several Questions on the

Development of Chinese Palace Architecture Based on the Shang Period Palace Site at Panlongcheng), Wenwu (Cultural Relics) no. 2

(1976): 16?25. My colleague, Huang Yunsheng, questions Yang's

interpretation and proposes instead that the small, paired posts may have helped make the columns of the perimeter rigid.

10. Zhengzhoushi bowuguan, Zhengzhou Dahecun Yangshao wenhua de fangji jizhi (A Yangshao-Culture House Foundation Site

at Dahe Village, Zhengzhou), Kaogu no. 6 (1973): 330-336. 11. For some of the finest examples, see Wen Fong (ed.), The

Great Bronze Age of China (New York: Metropolitan Museum o?

Art, 1980), pp. 69-77. 12. Paul Wheatley, The Pivot of the Four Quarters: A Preliminary

Enquiry into the Origins and Character of the Ancient Chinese City (Chi

cago: Aldine, 1971), esp. pp. 52-61.

13. Zou, Shilun Xia wenhua, p. 168.

14. Li Xiaoding, fiagu wenzi jishi (Nangang: Zhongyang yan

jiuyuan, 1965), pp. 2945-2952.

15. Chen Mengjia, Yinxu buci zongshu (A General Account of the

Divinatory Inscriptions from the Ruins of Yin) (Beijing: Kexue chu

banshe, 1956), pp. 477-478. 16. Zhou Fagao, Jinwengulin (Hong Kong: The Chinese Univer

sity of Hong Kong, 1974), no. 0229; Chen Mengjia, Xi Zhou tongqi duandai (Chronology of Western Zhou Bronzes), Kaogu xuebao no.

2 (1956): 89-92; Chen Mengjia, Shangshu tonglun (General Discussion

of the Book of Documents) (Shanghai: Shangwu yinshuguan, 1957),

pp.155-157.

17. Chen Chuanfang, Zao Zhou ducheng Qi yi chutan (A Prelim

inary Investigation of the Early Zhou Capital Qi Yi), Wenwu no. 10

(1979): 44-50; Zou Heng, Lun xian Zhou wenhua (A Discussion of

Predynastic Zhou Culture), in Zou (ed.), Xia Shang Zhou kaoguxue

hmwenji, pp. 297-356. 18. Shaanxi Zhouyuan kaogudui, Shaanxi Qishan Fengchucun

Xi Zhou jianzhu jizhi fajue jianbao (Brief Report of the Excavation

of the Western Zhou Architectural Foundations at Fengchu Village,

Qishan, Shaanxi), Wenwu no. 10 (1979): 27-37; Fu Xinian, Shaanxi

Qishan Fengchu Xi Zhou jianzhu yizhi chutan (A Preliminary In

vestigation of the Western Zhou Architectural Site at Fengchu,

Qishan, Shaanxi), Wenwu no. 1 (1981): 65-74; Yang Hongxun, Xi

Zhou Qi yi jianzhu yizhi chubu kaocha (A Preliminary Examination

of the Western Zhou Architectural Sites at Qi Yi), Wenwu no. 3

(1981): 23-33.

19. All data about the site are drawn from Shaanxi Zhouyuan

kaogudui, Shaanxi Qishan Fengchucun Xi Zhou jianzhu jizhi fajue

jianbao (see note 18). No typological sequence for pottery has yet been established for the Fengchu site, but at the nearby Yuntang tombs and bone workshop, a sedation has been developed; see

Shaanxi Zhouyuan kaogudui, Fufeng Yuntang Xi Zhou mu (West ern Zhou Tombs at Yuntang, Fufeng), Wenwu no. 4 (1980): 39-55. For the sedation and chronology of pottery near Xi'an, see Zhong

guo kexueyuan kaogu yanjiuso, Feng Xi fajue baogao (Report of Exca

vations West of the Feng River) (Beijing: Kexue chubanshe, 1962), esp.

pp. 129?131; Fengxi fajuedui, 1967 nian Chang'an Zhangjiapo Xi

Zhou muzang de fajue (Excavations of Western Zhou Burials at

Zhangjiapo, Chang'an District in 1967), Kaogu xuebao no. 4 (1980);

457-502. 20. Specialists continue to debate the attribution and dating of

these oracle-bones. A recent estimate by Li Xueqin places the Feng chu oracle-bones between the reigns of the Zhou king Wen Wang and kings Kang and Zhao ; Xi Zhou jiagu de jidian yanjiu (Re search on Western Zhou Oracle-Bones), Wenwu no. 9 (1981): 7-12.

21. David N. Keightley, Sources and Shang History (Berkeley:

University of California Press, 1978), pp. 171-176 and table 38, p. 228. Uncalibrated radiocarbon dates from the Fengchu site cluster

ca. 1095-1040 b.c. with one exception (890?no b.c.). When cali

brated, the former are about a century earlier?95 years. Shaanxi

38



Zhouyuan kaogudui, Shaanxi Qishan Fengchucun Xi Zhou jianzhu

jizhi fajue jianbao, p. 34, and the samples reported by the laboratory of Beijing University, Wenwu no. 5 (1978): 76.

22. Yang Hongxun suggests that this is misleading on two

counts: (1) The 1.3-meter figure includes both the platform and the

foundation of the elevated main hall, about 69 and 61 centimeters,

respectively. (2) The Fengchu site inclines from north to south, so

that the platform was built higher (thicker) in the south, about 1

meter, and lower (thinner) in the north, about 20 centimeters, to

create a level surface. Yang, Xi Zhou Qi yi jianzhu yizhi chubu

kaocha, p. 27 and note 22.

23. The excavators claim that the low areas were dug out after the

platform block took shape, the entire platform being, in effect,

sculpted into the several levels now evident; Shaanxi Zhouyuan

kaogudui, Shaanzi Qishan Fengchucun Xi Zhou jianzhu jizhi fajue

jianbao, p. 32. Yang Hongxun dissents, interpreting the floor levels

of the perimeter chambers and central hall as built by a separate stage of construction on top of the platform block; Xi Zhou Qi yi jianzhu

yizhi chubu kaocha, p. 27.

24. For an elaborate but highly speculative and implausible

ground plan at Xiaotun, see Li, Anyang, p. 154.

25. Wang Ensi, Qishan Fengchucun Xi Zhou jianzhu qun jizhi de

youguan wenti (Problems Concerning the Group of Western Zhou

Architectural Foundations at Fengchu Village, Zishan), Wenwu no.

1 (1981): 75-80. 26. Taixi fajue xiaozu et al., Hebei Gaocheng xian Taixicun Shang

dai yizhi 1973 nian de zhongyao faxian (Important Discoveries of

1973 at the Shang-Period Site at Taixi Village, Gaocheng District,

Hebei), Wenwu no. 8 (1974): 42-49; Hebeisheng bowuguan et al.,

Gaocheng Taixicun Shang dai yizhi (The Shang-Period Site at Taixi

Village, Gaocheng) (Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe, 1977), p. 77. For the

periodization of the site, see Taixi kaogudui, Hebei Gaocheng Taixicun Shang dai yizhi fajue jianbao (Brief Report of Excavations

at the Shang-Period Site at Taixi Village, Gaocheng, Hebei), Wenwu

no. 6 (1979): 33-43. The majority of the dwellings at the Taixi

village site are dated to Yinxu period IL Cf. my The Date of Tomb 5 at Yinxu, Anyang, Artibus Asiae 43 (1981-1982): 239-246.

27. Fu Xinian supposes that the bundles were used as rafters;

Shaanxi Qishan Fengchu Xi Zhou jianzhu yizhi chutan, p. 65. Yang

Hongxun argues instead that the bundles rested on large beams

(dachashou p) that ran between the ridgepole and eaves and thus

were equivalent to purlins. In Yang's favor is a fragment of roof

plaster bearing impressions both of the bundles and a large diameter

beam; Xi Zhou Qi yi jianzhu yizhi chubu kaocha, p. 28 (fig. 8). 28. Zhongguo kexueyuan kaogu yanjiuso, Feng Xi fajue baogao,

pp. 26-27 and pi. 11.

29. Yin Shengping, Zhouyuan Xi Zhou gongshi zhidu chutan

(Preliminary Investigation of the Western Zhou Palace System in the

Plain of Zhou), Wenwu no. 9 (1981): 15. Cf. Tanaka Tan, Senshin

jidai ky?shitsu kenchiku josetsu (Preliminary Remarks on Pre-Qin Period Palace Architecture), T?h?gakuh? (Kyoto) 52 (1980): 123

197

30. Erya (Sibu beiyao, ed.), 4/8a-b. Cf. Hayashi Minao, Kandai

no bunbutsu (The Material Culture of the Han Period) (Kyoto: Kyoto

daigakujimbun kagaku kenky?jo, 1976), pp. 155-156.

31. Wang Ensi adduces the elevated gate houses, screen wall, and

oracle-bones as evidence for a royal Zhou attribution, but none of

these features was the exclusive perogative of the Zhou kings;

Qishan Fengchucun Xi Zhou jianzhu qun jizhi de youguan wenti,

pp. 77-78. See also Yin Shengping's discussion cited in note 29.

32. Chen, Yinxu buci zongshu, pp. 479-480.

33. Li, Jiagu wenzijishi, pp. 2479-2480.

34. Zhou, finwengulin, no. 1250.

35. Much of the argumentation on the identity of the Fengchu site

hinges on a supposed dichotomy between miao (ancestral temple)

and gong (temple-palace). Tang Lan disproved this distinction in Xi

Zhou tongqi duandai zhong de "Kang gong" wenti (The Problem of

"Kang gong" in the Periodization of Western Zhou Bronze Ves

sels), Kaogu xuebao no. i (1962): 27-32.

36. Kwang-chih Chang summarizes Shang sites in Shang Civi

lization (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1980).


38. Chang, Shang Civilization, pp. 110-119; Robert L. Thorp, Burial Practices of Bronze Age China, in Fong (ed.), Great Bronze

Age of China, pp. 51-64.

39. Chang, Shang Civilization, pp. 273-274, 297-298.

40. Li, fiagu wenzijishi, pp. 2165-2166.

41. Kwang-chih Chang, Towns and Cities in Ancient China, in

K. C. Chang (ed.), Early Chinese Civilization: Anthropological Per

spectives (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1976), pp.

61-63.

42. Li,fiagu wenzijishi, pp. 1827-1837, 3999.

43. Ibid., pp. 2495-2502.


45. Hu Houxuan, Jiaguwen sifang feng ming kaozheng (The Names of the Winds of the Four Directions in the Oracle-Bone

Texts), in Hu Houxuan (ed.), fiaguxue Shang shi luncong (Collected

Essays on Shang History from Oracle-Bone Studies) (Chengdu: Jilu Daxue, 1944-1945), vol. 1, n.p.; Zhang Bingchuan, Yinxu wenzi

bingbian (Graphs from the Ruins of Yin, Series C) (Nangang, Zhong

yang yanjiuyuan, 1957-1962), zhongji, pp. 295-300.

46. Seen?te 1.

47. Chang, Shang Civilization, pp. 76?80 and 90-99.

48. Li,fiagu wenzijishi, pp. 1839-1840, 1817-1819.

49. A smaller compound, perhaps 50 meters square, appears to be

situated near the Erlitou complex; Zou, Shilun Xia wenhua, p. 167. On the Fengchu site, see note 29.

50. As Figure 4 shows by its use of broken lines, the excavators of

the Fengchu compound suppose that all four sides of the hall were

walled; Shaanxi Zhouyuan kaogudui, Shaanxi Qishan Fengchucun Xi Zhou jianzhu jizhi fajue jianbao, p. 30. However, both Yang

Hongxun (Xi Zhou Qi yi jianzhu yizhi chubu kaocha, pp. 24-26) and Fu Xinian (Shaanxi Qishan Fengchu Xi Zhou jianzhu yizhi chutan, p. 66) deduce an open south facade; see Figure 5. Both

writers, it should be noted, had access to unpublished excavation

plans and data; their assumption may reflect the most recent thinking of the site's excavators.

51. Fu, Shaanxi Qishan Fengchu Xi Zhou jianzhu yizhi chutan,

pp. 65-66.

52. Yang, Cong Panlongcheng Shang dai gongdian yizhi tan

Zhongguo gongting jianzhu fazhan de jige wenti, p. 18; idem, Xi

Zhou Qi yi jianzhu yizhi chubu kaocha, p. 25.

53. Panlongcheng fajuedui et al., Panlongcheng yijiuqisi niandu

tianye kaogu jiyao (Summary of Archaeological Field Work for 1974 at Panlongcheng), Wenwu no. 2 (1976): 8-11. Yang's restoration

(Fig. 9) should be used with caution in view of the much damaged state of this part of the site at the time of its excavation.

54. Hebeisheng bowunguan et al., Gaocheng Taixicun Shang dai

yizhi, p. 78. Pieces of mud-plaster 20?25 centimeters thick bearing the imprint of roof beams, perhaps rafters, were also found here.

55. See note 27.

56. Li, fiagu wenzijishi, pp. 2427-2428, 2439.

57. Shaanxi Zhouyuan kaogudui, Fufeng Zhaochen Xi Zhou

jianzhu qun jizhi fajue jianbao (Brief Excavation Report of the West

ern Zhou Architectural Foundations at Zhaochen, Fufeng), Wenwu

no. 3 (1981 ): 10-22. Yang Hongxun believes that ceramic sherds

found near the foundation at Fi, Panlongcheng, may have served as

a splash slope; cf. Panlongcheng fajuedui et al., Panlongcheng

yijiuqusi niandu tianye kaogu jiyao, p. 10.

39

