Shuji Funo: Ancient Chinese Capital ModelsーMeasurement System in Urban Planningー, Proceedings of the Japan Academy Series B Physical and Biological Sciences November 2017 Vol.93 No.9, 721ー745.
Cover Illustration; Three Models of Chinese
Ancient Capitals
Funo (the author of this paper) has been deeply involved in the urban
and housing issues in Asian regions for these forty years and is well known as
one of the specialist of the study of urban tissues. He won a prize of Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ ) by
the Ph. D dissertation titled "Transitional process of kampungs and the
evaluation of kampung improvement program in Indonesia" in 1991. He
published many books on urban tissues, two of which were awarded the Prize of
AIJ for Book and designed an experimental housing project named Surabaya
Eco-House in 1998 as an architect.
His field studies focusing Asian cities give us a unique world wide view
in the field of history of urban planning and design , because Western concept,
manner, framework etc. are dominant so
far. First of all, it is very stimulus
that he divides two types of capital cities in ancient times focusing the
relationship between cosmology and the city shape and that part of Asia where
cosmology guided the layout of the cities and city life into two regions: India and
its peripheral regions, and China and its peripheral regions
The paper clarified three models of Chinese Ancient Capitals. We have
one ancient classic “Zhōu lǐ” ‘Kaogong ji’ （Rites
of Zhou, Book of Diverse Crafts）mentioning the ideal model of a Chinese
capital, and many scholars have attempted to draw its model plan. However, no
definitive model has emerged, as the description concerning the physical plan
of the city is too brief and includes a number of contradictory elements. This
paper evaluates past reconstruction plans and proposes the most appropriate
original model plan. The plan of Mandalay is almost only example following “Zhōu
lǐ” (A). On the other hand ,
Ancient China has another ‘North Palace’ type like Chang'an to the ‘Center
Palace’ type, as described in “Zhōu lǐ” . The author cleared the land
division system of like Chang'an (B) different from previous papers
persuasively. Lastly, planning system of
Dà Yuán（Dadu） by Khubilai Khan (1260-94)(C). All three models are clarified not only as
street system but also as Bo (Street Block) model based on an analysis
of the measurement system, which no researcher had tried.
Masao Ando
Guest Professor, Institute of Industrial
Science, Tokyo University
Professor Emeritus, Chiba University
Ancient Chinese Capital Models
-Measurement System in Urban Planning-
By Shuji Funo[*][1]
（Communicated by Yoshitika Utida, M.J.A.）
Abstract: Measurement systems are very important in urban design. This article
reviews the theories of grid plans, particularly with respect to the spatial
formations of ancient capital cities in Asia, and clarifies three Chinese
Capital Models. The “Zhōu
lǐ” Capital Model (Z) is based on the ancient text “Zhōu lǐ” that makes mention of the ideal city. However, because the description of
the physical plan of the city is very brief and includes contradictory elements,
conclusions regarding the specifics of the city design are extremely difficult
to reach. This article proposes the most appropriate Model (Z) as an architype of the ideal Chinese
city. Interestingly, there are no excavated examples of Model (Z). The two
existing models, the Chang'an Capital
Model (C), which is well known as the model for ancient Japanese capitals like
Heiankyo (the present Kyoto) and the Dà Yuán (Dadu) Capital Model (D), the
model for the city that is today Beijing, are described as Variants I and II, with a focus on the land
division system of bo (street blocks).
Keywords： urban and architectural planning, urban tissues, street system, block
formation, modular coordination, unit of measure
Introduction
The
city is as
complicated an artifact as language; it represents the combined work of society
and history, and is transformed according to the needs of its citizens. In the
field of urban and architectural planning, the city is seen as composed of
urban tissues (fabrics), which are sets of buildings and open spaces supported
by infrastructure, analogous to an organic body that consists of genes, cells,
internal organs, blood vessels, bones and so on. Based on field work conducted
by the author, a continued analysis of the various urban tissues of Asian
cities is presented here.
This article takes a general view of city
plans based on the grid systems of the world and focuses on Chinese capitals as
examples. The ancient classic “Zhōu lǐ（周礼）” ‘Kaogong
ji（考工記）’ （Rites of Zhou, Book of Diverse Crafts）1 mentions the ideal model of a Chinese capital, and many scholars have attempted to draw its model plan. However, no
definitive model has emerged, as the description concerning the physical plan
of the city is too brief and includes a number of contradictory elements. This
article evaluates past reconstruction plans and proposes the most appropriate original
model plan.
Builders, along with architects/planners,
have, from ancient times, repeatedly referred to “Zhōu lǐ” ‘Kaogong
ji’ as the only text mentioning the ideal model of a Chinese capital. In the Capital Model, with
the palace at the center, “Zhōu lǐ” describes the fundamental model of the ideal
Chinese city. However, no city has yet been found with a palace at the center and
following precisely the city model given by “Zhōu lǐ”. If we dare list a city that might show at
least some resemblance to such a model, Beijing of the Ming and Qing dynasties is
the only possible example.
In
terms of the relative location of the palace within the city, there are actually
two classifications of Chinese capitals: the ‘Center Palace’ type, as described
above, and the ‘North Palace’ type. Chang'an（長安）(presently, Xi'an西安), which became the model for ancient Japanese capitals
such as Heiankyo (the present Kyoto（京都）), has its palace on the north side of the city. The origin of the ‘North Palace’ type, the complete shape of which we
see in Chang'an, dates back to the
capital Pingcheng（平城） (398-493) of Bĕiwèi (北魏, Northern Wei). This type of plan became the model for
Sanggyeong Yongcheonbu（上京龍泉府）, the capital of Balhae（渤海） (756-785/793-926), and two ancient Japanese capitals (Heijokyo（平城京), the present Nara（奈良）, and Heiankyo (平安京)). The author believes that
this ‘North
Palace’ type of plan belongs to the tradition of nomads on the northern plateau
of Mongol. Kaifeng（開封）, the capital city
of the Song（宋） dynasty, followed the ‘Center Palace’ design formulated by “Zhōu lǐ” ‘Kaogong ji’; Nanjing(南京) and Beijing(北京) followed
Kaifeng in succeeding periods, at least in terms of the position of the palace. Dadu（大都）(Khanbaliq) (the present Beijing) 2,built by Khubilai Khan (1260-94), represents another variation, where the bell
tower and drum tower were placed at the center of the city.
This article
clarifies the land division system of the three ancient Chinese capital models—
the “Zhōu lǐ” Capital Model (Z), the Chang’an Capital Model(C) and the Dà Yuán（大元）（Dadu）Capital Model (D).
1. Grid Systems in the World
Throughout
history, city form and urban patterns have appeared to be amorphous, disordered
and spontaneously generated; yet architects/planners have often attempted to create
the ideal city based on their own theories. Through careful study, it is
possible to infer the process of urban formation, analyze the best spatial
forms, and interpret the meanings of urban forms that developed over the course
of history.1) In this study, the focus is on grid plans, as this
makes it easier to understand the principles of spatial structure. Historically,
the grid (or gridiron or chessboard) is the most common pattern for planned
cities and is universal, both geographically and chronologically. We can see
many examples in the East and the West, as well as in the past and at present. The grid itself is
widely used as a spatial indexing system when we divide space into a series of
contiguous cells. Among a wide variety of grid systems, architects/planners use
square or rectangular grids frequently because
they are the simplest in works of urban planning.
For
architects/planners, the unit of measurement is their most fundamental concern since
it is impossible to draw a meaningful line without a dimensional system. In the
contemporary world, we have generally adopted the metric system. In earlier
times, however, various measurement systems were used, differing from region to
region. It is interesting to note that despite these regional differences, many
of the basic units of length during these earlier times were very similar throughout
most of the world. The reason is that it is (and was) common to use one of the
parts of the human body as a basic unit of length. For example, a foot (0.3048 m)
nearly equals a chi (尺) (0.3333
m) in China and a shaku (尺) (0.3030
m) in Japan, while a cubit
(coudée, elle, cubitus) in ancient Sumer (0.5172 m)
equals that of Egypt (0.5235～0.5240 m), Rome (0.4440 m)
and hasta (dhanurgraha hasta (0.4800 m),
sishu hasta (0.4260 m)) in India and its
neighboring region. 2)
Fig.1 Dimensional System in Bali to Decide the
Sizes of Posts and Beams, drawn by Shuji Funo Fig.2 Dimensional
System in Bali to Decide the Layout of Buildings, drawn by Shuji Funo
In the course of my work, I interviewed a master of carpenters, called ‘undagi’, on the Island
of Bali (Indonesia) to better understand the building process of traditional
houses there. Undagi use the length
of various body parts (i.e., hands, fingers, and elbows) to determine the size
of the building elements (posts, beams, bricks, etc.). The distance between the
articulations of the finger is used to decide the size of the cross section of the
posts and beams, the length of the elbow, that is, a cubit, is used to decide
the length of short members like a diagonal beam, and body length and fathom are
used to decide the size of rooms and the expanse of the compound (Fig. 1). In Bali, the house compound consists of several buildings, the
positions of which inhabitants decide following the cosmological order, while
The Origin of the Grid System in Europe
The most famous grid city, and one that is referenced on the first page of nearly every textbook on the history of urban planning, is Miletus (Fig. 3), along with the name of the architect Hippodamus (498-408 BCE). Based on the writings of Aristotle, Hippodamus of Miletus is considered the ‘father’ of urban planning and the originator of the grid plan, commonly called the ‘Hippodamian plan’, although there were many grid plan cities built before Hippodamus, and it is widely known that he did not plan the city of Miletus. Planners in Miletus used ‘pes’ as the basic unit of length in dividing the land into individual lots. The area of a street block, which consisted of six house lots, is 100 pes × 180 pes (six house lots, each of which is 50 pes × 60 pes). The pes used in Miletus is called an Ionian foot (= 0.294 m); 1/4 pes is a palmus, and 1/4 palmus is a digitus. 3
It is well known that the Roman Republic planned its colonies, that is, Roman towns, very systematically, using the grid system. These cities were called ‘Roma Quadrata’, which indicated a square shaped city divided into four districts by a ‘cardo’ (vertical trunk road) and a ‘decumanusu’ (horizontal trunk road), with a forum in the center and four gates in the middle of the four sides. The Roman foot is also called a pes and is used in urban planning. In the case of Ticinum (present-day Pavia, Italy), 4 which was constructed in 89 BCE, the total area of the city is 1,770 pedes × 2,910 pedes, with housing lots of 240 pedes × 240 pedes—a unit of area called a heredium (Fig. 4). One hundred heredia, that is, 2,400 pedes（≒708 m）× 2,400 pedes is called a ‘centuria’.
Spanish colonial cities are considered typical examples of cities that used the most integrated grid plan system, though grid plan cities are seen everywhere, as mentioned above. The principles of urban planning are prescribed in Indias Law (Ordenanzas de Descubrimiento, Nuebva Poplación y Pacificación de las Indias, 1573, Phillip II) and we can draw the ideal city plan as a diagram (Fig. 5) with which there is little disagreement among academics. We know of the military engineer/governor José de Escandón y Helguera (1700–1770) who planned and constructed 25 cities with more or less the same plans in the colony of Nuevo Santander (now the State of Tamaulipas in Mexico) following Phillip II’s Ordnance (1573).
Because
of such excessive standardization, the plans of Spanish colonial cities appear boring.
However, we should take note that not all the city plans necessarily followed
|
Fig.6 Hato & C |
Cosmology and City Form in
Asia
Turning
our eyes to pre-modern Asia, we can see that there were two types of capital cities in ancient
times. The first mirrors a cosmology that enshrines the seat of royal power or
god at its pivot; the second is not governed by such cosmology.
In East, South and Southeast Asia there are
planning ideologies and classical literature prescribing the features of the
capital cities that are the seat of a ruling power. However, there are no definite
documents embodying the ideal concept of an Islamic city. 4) It
should be especially noted that no definite common relationship exists among
the cities and neighborhoods of such countries as the cities of Arabian
countries and Indonesia, which has the largest Islamic population in the world.
This does not necessarily imply that the Islamic city has no relation to its
cosmology. Although there is no particular Islamic thought that a city should
represent its cosmology, Muslims believe that the network of Islamic cities
centered on Macca (Medina, Jerusalem) forms the Islamic cosmos.
We can divide that part of Asia where cosmology guided the layout of the cities and city life into two regions: India and its peripheral regions, and China and its peripheral regions（Fig. 7）.
In
India, there have been a number of books written on the ideal city and its architecture,
including Arthasastra and Manasara, which were written in ancient times. 5) Arthasastra argues for the prosperity of the nation. Its author, Kautilya, was the
Prime Minister of the famed Chandragupta I of the Maurya dynasty during the 4th century BCE. His expositions on the
ideal form of the capital city are plainly stated, although his work might have
been edited between the 2nd century BCE
and the 2nd century CE. R. Shamasastry (1908)6) and R.P. Kangle
(1960)7) translated the ancient document into English. L.N.
Rangarajan (1992)8) later published a new edited translation. This
work, the basis of the reconstruction of the ancient city by P.V. Begde (1978),9)
W. Kirk (1978),10) and T.
Ohji (1991),11) proposes an explanation based on the concept of the ‘Mandala’,
which is not only a symbol representing the universe, but is also the spatial
pattern of the configuration of the gods.
Manasara is one of the ‘Silpasastra’, which are books related to general science on the art
of city planning, architecture, art and sculpture. Collectively these books constitute
the Sanskrit literature on these fields. Manasara
is the most complete work of ancient Indian literature on architecture among
the ‘Silpasastra’, while other works include
Mayamata, Casyapa, and Vayghanasa. In Manasara
Silpasastra, ‘mana’ means
measurement and ‘sara’ is the
essence. Thus, ‘manasara’ is the
essence of measurement. According to P.K. Acharya, Manasara was completed during the 6th and 7th centuries in South
India. Among the many published research studies on Manasara, the works of P.K. Acharya are considered to be
encyclopedic.12)
The relationship of the prevailing cosmology
and the formation of Fig.
8 Cakranegara 1942, Land Survey Department of the headquarter of
the Japanese cavalry force (1942, January)
One unique city among the Indian capital
cities merits special mention. Cakranegara, in Indonesia, was constructed as a
colonial city of the Hindu-Bali kingdom and appears to reflect the concepts of
ideal Hindu city planning and the traditions of Hindu society. Cakranegara, in
Lombok,5) located east of the Island of Bali, is a little-known grid-based city on which no academic papers had been
written before the 2002 publication of a study done by S. Funo (2002).13)
The reconstruction plan is the original work of the author. One of the most interesting aspects of the city plan is that the street
patterns resemble those of ancient Japanese cities such as Kyoto. Since it has
been established that Kyoto was planned following the Chang'an Capital Model, the resemblance of Kyoto to Cakranegara would appear to be among
the more exciting topics to be addressed in discussions of the history of Asian
capital cities.
The Balinese Hindu kingdom of Karangasem
built Cakranegara as a colonial city in the early 18th century. In Sanskrit, 'cakra' 6 means ‘Wheel of Law’ or simply wheel, and ‘negara’ means city (state). It is clear that the name ‘Cakranegara’
is Indian in origin. We can hypothesize that the construction of Cakranegara
was based on the ideals of ancient Hindu cities. Nagara-Kertagama,7 the lontar (coconut leaf) chronicle that describes the Javanese
Majapahit kingdom in the 14th century was, interestingly enough, discovered
within the kraton (palace) of
Cakranegara. The central temple of the city is Pura Meru. Meru is the
sacred cosmic mountain in the Hindu cosmology. Pura Meru was constructed in 1720 at the center of the city; similarly,
Pura Mayura, was built beside the
royal palace in 1744. Mayura means
peacock, which is the name of an ancient Indian ruling dynasty.
Cakranegara was
planned with three hierarchic levels of streets (Fig. 9). The streets are
categorized as marga sanga, marga dasa and marga according to their width, with marga sanga being the widest. 9 Sanga is the number 910 and dasa is the number 10. Marga
sanga are the two streets that cross through the center of the city.11
These two streets are exactly oriented to the cardinal directions running
vertically (north-south) and horizontally (east-west) and divide the city into
four quarters. Marga dasa divide
these quarters into urban blocks, while marga
are the streets that run within the urban blocks.
Fig.9 Street System of Cakranegara, Funo, Shuji (2002)11)
The measured width
of the marga sanga running east-west
is ≒36.50 m, and that of the marga sanga running north-south is ≒45.00 m. The width of individual marga dasa among the twelve marga dasas measured varies from 12.86 m
to 21.60 m. Given the disparity in the individual widths, the average value of
17.20 m is not of much significance. However, if we consider those streets that
show a clear grid structure as well as the remains of old walls, we see that
the three levels of the streets of Cakranegara were planned with widths of
approximately 8 m, 18 m and 36 m (and 45 m).
The planned
execution of Cakranegara is most evident from the dimensions of the pekarangan (house plot).The average
length of the plot along the east-west axis is 26.43 m, with individual
dimensions ranging from a maximum of 30.44 m to a minimum of 25.08 m. The
average width along the north-south axis is 24.96 m, with 27.03 m and 21.55 m
the maximum and minimum widths, respectively. If we take the most frequent
dimensions and round them off in meters, the east-west plot dimension is 26 m,
while the north-south dimension is 25 m.
According to
the elderly residents living in the center of the city, the planning dimension of
a pekarangan was 25 m by 25 m. The
measurement instrument used was the tomba,
a rod approximately 2.5 m in length. Ten tomba
equal 25 m. A tagtagan is two tomba, or about 5 m. Further inquiries
revealed that a pekarangan was a
square plot with an area of six or eight are
(600 m2 or 800 m2). However, measurements show that the
plots were not exact squares as the elderly residents believed them to be. Nevertheless,
if the tomba was used as a measuring
rod, it would make sense that the plots were in fact square. At any rate, it is
certain that a standard fixed dimension was used to mark the housing plots. According
to the measurement data above, the area of the pekarangan averaged 26.43 m × 24.96 m (659.69 m2) or
approximately 25 m × 26 m (650 m2), which is generally in accordance
with what the elderly residents told us.
The urban
block enclosed by the marga dasa is
divided into four smaller strips of blocks crossed longitudinally by margas. Each strip of block is then
divided in a back-to-back manner giving 10 housing plots on either side, or 20
plots in the strip block. If we take the measure of a tomba as 2.5 m, the width of the plot in the north-south direction
is 10 tomba, or 25 m. Further, the
length of the block enclosed by the marga
dasa would be 10 times the width of the housing plot, or 250 m. The meaning
of dasa in Sasak is 10, and it seems
that the meaning is derived from this standard of 10 used in the measurement
employed in planning the divisions of the urban blocks. The width of the block
along the east-west axis is the plot length 26 m × 2 × 4 + the width of the marga, 8 m × 3 = 232 m. If we add to
this length the width of the marga dasa,
which is 18 m, the width of the urban block measured from center to center of
the marga dasa becomes 250 m. Thus,
it can be considered that the planned dimension of the urban block is a square
of 250 m × 250 m. In this module, the north-south dimension is the inner clear
dimension of the block, while the east-west is a center-to-center measurement. In
any event, it is clear that architects/planners used a modular system of 10 ×
10 and 100 × 100, with the tomba as
the basic unit of measurement, in planning the housing plot and the urban
block.
Observation of street patterns and analysis
of planning dimensions indicate that the block enclosed by the marga dasa is the unit of a residential
neighborhood. Another basis for this assumption is that the marga dasa defines the boundary of the
present spatial unit, the karang.12
According to the elderly residents, the basic
neighborhood unit is made up of two groups of 10 dwelling plots, each lining
either side of the marga running
north-south and facing each other. This cluster of 20 plots arranged along the
two sides of the marga comprises the
basic unit known as a marga. Two marga make up a unit called a kriang. In Bali, kriang is the title of the chief of a community unit, or ‘banjar’. Further, two kriang comprise 80 dwelling plots, and
make up a neighborhood district known as a karang.
An interesting fact here is that this street block formation resembles that of
Heiankyo (presently, Kyoto), which was established following the Ancient
Chinese Capital Model (C).
2 “Zhōu lǐ” Capital Model - Archetype of the Chinese Ideal City
“Zhōu lǐ”, which describes
the ideal administrative system of kingdoms, is commonly said
to have been written by Dan,
Duke Wen of Zhou (周公旦), who was a member of the royal family of the Zhou (周) dynasty. It is also
said that Emperors of subsequent dynasties tried to follow “Zhōu lǐ”. Many scholars have
reconstructed the ideal capital city plans according to “Zhōu lǐ” ‘Kaogong
ji’. However,
because the book’s sentences relating to city planning, street pattern, block
formation, and so on are relatively short (less than 7,000 Chinese characters),
a number of different diagrams have been drawn over time. Complicating matters
is the fact that there are inconsistencies in the contents of the text.
‘Kaogong ji’ jiang ren ying guo
“Zhōu
lǐ” ‘Kaogong ji’ contains three paragraphs referring to ‘shu jing’ (匠人master builder or planner/architect)
but the most important paragraph is the Si
shu jing zhu ji zheng (匠人営国) paragraph; the paragraph most
frequently referred to includes the features described below. Here the author
cites essential parts of the relevant text, while omitting others for detailed
analysis. Li (里) is a unit of length and ki（軌）is the width of carriages, i.e., the breadth between wheels, which is estimated
to be about eight feet.
匠人営国Jiang ren ying guo: Master builder who constructs the
city.
方九里fang jiu li: 9 li ×
9 li square.
旁三門pang san men:
Sides
with three gates.
国中九経九緯Guo zhong jiu jing jiu wei: Nine vertical streets and nine horizontal streets within the city.
経塗九軌jing tu jiu gui: The width of the vertical axes is 9 ki (wheels).
左祖右社Zuo zu you she: Ancestral shrine (Mausoleum) to the left, divine worship (Soil & Grain platform) to the right.
面朝後（后）市13qian chao hou shi: Imperial Court in front (of Imperial Palace), markets at the back.
市朝一夫14shi chao yi fu: Size of palace and market 1 li × 1 li.
Contradictions
inherent in ‘Kaogong
ji’
Many rulers and their architects/planners15 attempted to construct the ideal city from the description of ‘Kaogong ji’ as a means of expressing their legitimacy. Confucian scholars proposed plans in a number of different manners, perhaps the most representative one being Sān lǐ tú (三礼図), which was drawn during the Song dynasty (960-1279 CE) (Fig. 10).The first thing we notice in the diagram is that one street has three lanes. This might be an attempt to interpret the idea of integrating ‘three gates on one side and nine lanes’ with ‘nine vertical streets and nine horizontal streets within the city’ mentioned in the text. The author, however, considers this interpretation to be rather unnatural.
Fig.10 Reconstruction Diagram of “Zhōu lǐ” Capital Model
Fig.11 Site Plan of Mandalay, Funo, Shuji (2015)19)
In the latter case (9 × 9 division), it is not possible to lay out the gates at regular
intervals. It is necessary to divide one side into four equal segments in order
to lay out gates at the same interval. The crucial question, then, is which feature
should we take as the first priority, the 8 × 8 ＝64 division or the 9 × 9 = 81 division?
To solve this
inconsistency, a 12 × 12 division model based on a common multiple of four is
convenient. We know the architects/planners who designed Amarapura and Mandalay
in Myanmar in the mid-19th century used a fundamental grid with 12 ×
12 cells (Fig. 11). It may be that they were also worried about inconsistency
among the features and found the same solution.
Chinese scholars interested in ancient urban planning continue to propose reconstruction models based on “Zhōu lǐ” ‘Kaogong ji’. The most noteworthy among recent efforts is the ‘Model A’ proposed by He Ye Ju（賀業鋸） (1985),14) which restores a detailed plan of the blocks (Fig. 12).
Fig.14 “Zhōu lǐ” Capital Model C, Zheng
Ring (2010)14) Fig.13 “Zhōu lǐ” Capital Model B, Wang
Shi Ren (2000)13)
“Zhōu
lǐ” Capital Model
One can thus
conclude that reconstruction plans differ depending on what elements or rules are
regarded as most important, as reviewed in the theories described above. I
raise here one more model (Model F) (Fig. 15) that shows no apparent
inconsistency with “Zhōu lǐ”. Model F essentially follows the architects/planners
of Amarapura and Mandalay and represents a compromise between Models A, B, and
C. Its essential characteristics can be summarized as follows:
a. Model F follows ‘square 9 li (方九里）’ and a 1 li
(300 bu × 300 bu) grid.
b. Model F follows ‘sides with three gates (旁三門)’as well as Model B, which is based on a nine
square (3 × 3＝9) plan, with one of the gates placed at the
center of the block.
c. Model F follows ‘nine vertical
streets and nine horizontal streets within the city (国中九経九緯)’
without the wall streets. Each block (1/9) has three vertical streets
and three horizontal streets. The streets running by the sides of the central
block are included among the nine streets.
d. Each block is divided into 16
= 4 × 4 bo; that is, the block
consists of four bo (450 bu × 450 bu) divided into four sub
blocks.
e. A bo (450 bu × 450 bu) is divided into a 10
× 10 grid; that is, one bo square
block consists of 100 (10 × 10) lots making each lot 45 bu × 45 bu.
f. Model F follows Model B in that it has the mausoleum on the left hand
side and the soil & grain platform on the right (左祖右社). Likewise, the Imperial Court is in front
of the emperor’s palace and the market behind it (面朝後市).
g. Model F follows Model A with respect to the spatial formation of the palace.
The Bo（坊）model is proposed here, which is useful for
comparing Model F with the Chang’an Capital model and the Dadu Capital model. Mu (畝 100 mu
= 100 bu (歩) × 100
bu) has been used as a unit of area measure in China from ancient times.
Under the ancient well-field system(井田制), 900 mu
equals a square li (300 bu); however, 450 bu × 450 bu is used as a
unit of bo in ‘Model F’（Fig. 1６）. The premises are as follows:
h.
An area of 100 bu × 100 bu = 100 mu is used as a unit of area.
i.
The width of a street 9 ki (wheel) wide
is 72 shakus (feet) and that of a wall
street is 7 ki = 56 shakus, following 1 ki ＝ 8 shakus.
It is assumed that 56 shakus ＝ 9.33 bu + the thickness of the wall equals 12 bu.
j.
A bo is divided into 4 and 16 sub
areas by crossroads, the width of each being 12 bu. A square unit will be 213 bu
× 213 bu or 105 bu × 105 bu.
k.
A square of 105 bu × 105 bu might be divided in several ways. If
we assume the width of the crossroad is 5 bu,
the area of a sub district will be 50 bu ×
50 bu ＝25 mu,
and total area will be just 100 mu.
The total area of a bo consists of 16
sub districts that will be 400 mu × 4
= 1,600 mu.
The detailed division and land division
system described above demonstrate that the “Zhōu lǐ” Capital Model F follows a consistent
system and logic, so I believe that no additional discussion of the “Zhōu li” Capital
Model will be needed. “Zhōu lǐ”
Capital Model F will be re-named as the Chinese
Capital Model（Z） as an archetype later in this paper.
3 Chang'an Capital Model
Chang'an, the capital of the
Suí (隋) and Táng (唐) dynasties, whose population of roughly one million
was comparable to that of Bagdad at its zenith in the 7th century, is
quite famous. However, while we know much about its history and space formation,
there are still many riddles left to solve.
Chang'an is unique in the history of city planning. The genius Yǔ wén Kǎi (宇文凱)（555-612 CE） planned the city as the ideal land of Buddha as ordered by the Emperor
Wen(文帝). How he decided the size and space formation of the capital is our concern
here, and we have already several reconstruction plans based on archaeological
surveys. The one (Chang’an Capital
Model A) reconstructed by the Japanese scholar Takeo Hiraoka（平岡武夫）(1956)17) appears to be generally accepted by Chinese
scholars, but it is not considered to be the final one. I will propose what I
consider the most feasible plan next.
The
measurements given by the authority of archaeological surveys in China records
the size of Chang'an as follows: the east-west
width = 9,721 m（6,617.43 bu ＝ 3,3087.1 syaku) ; the north-south width = 8,651.7 m (5,885.51 bu ＝29,447.6 shaku）. Fu Xi Nian (傳熹年)（2001）18) shows the measure of parts and the proportional
relationships between the segments of the two sides (Fig. 17).
The Basic Grid－A Primary Division
The reconstruction plan of Fu Xi Nian16) shows firstly that the
width of the districts next to the Imperial Palace on both sides is the same
(B) and that the length of the southern district below the Imperial Palace is
one and half times the width (B). The first clue is the size of the Imperial
Palace. One old document mentioned the width (east-west)（A）as 5 li 115 bu (1,915 bu) and the length (south-north)(B) as 3 li 140 bu (2,210 bu). The actual measurements are A = 2,820.3
m = 1918.6 bu and B = 3,335.7 m ＝2,269.2 bu. Furthermore, the south-north
length of the Inner Palace is 1,492.1 m ＝1,015.0 bu. The numerical
values differ with the measuring points. One reason for this is likely derived
from the margin of error in construction, but whether the planner used a single
grid system or a double grid system, and what unit of measurement the planners/architects
used, are essential elements.
We should at least distinguish the size of a block
and the width of the streets separately. Actual measurements are rather uneven,
so we can only guess that Yǔ Wén Kǎi decided firstly on the sizes of the larger
proportions of the city—the sizes of the Imperial palace, markets, major
streets and so on—following a single grid system.
It can be supposed that Yǔ Wén Kǎi determined
the size of the Inner Palace (1,000 bu ×
2,000 bu) first, judging from the
actual east-west measure (960 bu ～1,015.0 bu and south-north
1,900 bu ～1,950 bu). If the width of the
vertical streets adjacent to the Imperial Palace is 100 bu, the distance between the centers of streets on both sides will
be just 2,000 bu × 1,000 bu. In addition, the horizontal width (B)
of the large blocks located on both sides of the Imperial Palace are divided
into three. Thus, B is supposed to have been set as 750 bu × 3 ＝ 2,250 bu. Both parts of the
large blocks next to the Imperial Palace are planned as a 2,250 bu × 2,250 bu square. The breadth of the special east-west street between the
Inner Palace and the Imperial Court will be 250 bu, while the length of the Inner Palace and Imperial Court will each
be 1,000 bu. As for the southern
district below the Imperial Palace, if the north-south length of 3,375 bu（1.5 B） is divided into nine segments, then the width of each segment will be
375 bu（750/2）.
a. First, the position of the Inner Palace and central axis was decided.
b. Second, the walled forbidden garden and Imperial Court were
constructed.
c. Third, six trunk streets (六道) that connect the gates were constructed. Three vertical trunk streets
run on the central axis and on both sides of the Imperial Palace. Three horizontal
trunk streets run through the center of the Imperial Palace, along the southern
side of the Imperial Court and through the center of southern outer block.
d. Fourth, nine vertical streets and 12 east-west
streets (六道), including six trunk streets, were constructed.
e. Finally, the outer walls were constructed.
To sum up, the basic principles of the reconstruction
described above are as follows:
i. Very simple multiples of bu such as 1,000 bu, 2,000 (2 × 1,000) bu,
500 (1/2 × 1,000) bu, 250 (1/4 × 1,000) bu, and 750 (3/4 × 1,000) bu are used as the unit of measure.
The
size of the palace（2000 bu × 1000 bu）and the location was decided first (a), then the Imperial Court (2000 bu × 1250 bu) was constructed (b). The unit of measurement is 250 bu.
ii. The city consists of two sectors, the north block, including the Imperial
Palace, and the south block, which includes the east and west markets (b). The
size of the upper part of the bo street
blocks next to the palace and Imperial Court is a planned square (1250 bu × 1250 bu).
iii. Six trunk streets divide the city into 12
(16 - 4) different districts (c). Three horizontal trunk streets and three vertical
trunk streets divide the capital into 16 districts, but the palace and Imperial
Court occupy four districts. The districts are divided into five bo street blocks, as the same bo size is symmetrically allocated. The
street blocks (bo) are 5, 500 bu × 750 bu（A），625 bu × 750 bu（B），375 bu × 750 bu（C），375 bu × 550 bu（D）, and 375 bu × 450 bu（E）.
Street System and Street
Width
Fig.19
The Amended Plan of Chang’an according to Archeological data, Wang Hui (2008)18)
We thus reject the Chang’an Capital Model B and propose a far more consistent reconstruction plan (Chang’an Capital
Model F)（Fig. 21）with the following properties:
a. The breadth of the trunk street is 100 bu.
b.
The breadth of the street alongside the city wall, including the thickness of
the city wall, is 50 bu. The east-west
length of the left and right large blocks next to the Imperial Palace, which are
divided into nine bo, will be 2,200 bu （2,250 bu－50 bu = 2,200 bu = 700 bu＋50 bu＋700 bu＋50 bu＋700 bu, where the width of a bo =
700 bu, and the width of the street =
50 bu).
The south-north length of 2,250 bu can be divided into reasonable
segments: 450 bu＋50 bu＋450 bu＋100 bu＋550 bu＋50 bu＋550 bu＋50 bu.
c. The size of the bo adjoining the Inner Palace is 450 bu × 700 bu and that of the bo adjoining the Imperial Court is 550 bu × 700 bu.
d. The width of all
south-north streets is set at a measure that is a half the width of the trunk
street, which is 50 bu. The east-west lengths of the large blocks
just below the Imperial Court are divided into four bo: 100
bu＋475 bu＋50 bu＋375 bu＋100 bu＋375 bu＋50 bu＋475 bu＋100 bu.
Fig.22 Chang’an Capital Model F, Square Li Model, Funo, Shuji (2015)19)
The only ambiguous element
in this Chang’an Capital Model F is the distance between the Imperial Court
and the bo area; that is, the width
of the main horizontal street. If the width of the main street is precisely 100
bu，it is necessary to move the line from the basic line (α ＝37.5 bu，β ＝75 bu). However, gap γ is still left at the south end（γ ＝ 97.5 bu ＋50 bu）。
Land Division
of Bo (Street Block)
The division of bo into sub blocks and house lots can be demonstrated with an
example. Consider a bo of size 375 bu × 750 bu. This is generally the most common bo. We can easily hypothesize that the unit of area is based on a unit
of 1 li (360 bu) × 1 li (360 bu) = 1 fu (夫). Considering the width of a street and the size of the basic grid to
be 375 bu × 750 bu, the area of a bo
might be 1 li (360 bu) south-north × 2 li (720 bu) east-west. If
we hypothesize that the widths of streets are 30 bu (south-north) and 15 bu
(east-west), the size of a bo, the
375 bu × 750 bu is clearly reasonable.
The area of a bo unit is a square of 360 bu × 360 bu; 1 mu = 240 square bu. It is supposed that the pattern
of bo division varied, but according
to old documents, a 4 × 4 ＝16 division and a 4 × 3＝12 division by crossroads were often
used. The shape of a house lot, the size of which is 1 mu = 240 square bu, is
also assumed to vary—for example, 4 bu ×
60 bu, 8 bu × 30 bu, 12 bu × 20 bu, 15 bu × 16 bu, and so on. The most square- like
shape of 15 bu × 16 bu division might have been used most
commonly.
The bo adjacent
to the Imperial Palace consisted of four and 16 sub street blocks, while the bo below the Imperial Palace consisted
of two and six sub blocks.
It is now possible
to show the most feasible bo model (Fig. 22). Taking the thickness of the bo
wall into account, a bo (360 bu × 360 bu) is reduced to 340 bu ×
340bu, which is divided into four
sections by crossroads (width = 10 bu)
and 16 sub-blocks (80 bu × 80 bu). One-sixteenth of a bo ＝25 mu（5 × 5），1/4 bo ＝100 mu，so a bo ＝400 mu. The
smallest unit bo (360 bu × 360 bu) consists of four street blocks (100 mu).
The basic unit of area measure is based on the
1 mu = 240 bu × 1bu system. Other types of bo can be divided in the same way. Fig. 23 shows all five types of bo.
Later in this paper, the Chang’an Capital
Model F will be re-named the Chinese Capital Model（C）, as Variant I.
4 Dà Yuán（Dadu） Capital Model
Dadu or Khanbaliq16) (present-day
Beijing, the capital of China) was originally built as the capital of Dà Yuán (Yehe Yuan) Ulus
(Yuan dynasty), the Mongol Empire founded by Kublai
Khan. In 1264, Kublai Khan ordered his chief architect/planner, Liu Bingzhong (劉秉忠), to design the city. Liu’s student, Guo Shoujing（郭守敬）, Muslim Ikhtiyar al-din（他黒迭児）, and many talented others participated in constructing Dadu. The main Imperial Palace was built from 1274 onwards. Following the establishment of the Yuan dynasty in 1271, Kublai Khan proclaimed
the city as his capital under the name Dadu,
although construction was not completed until 1293.
People in general believe that the design of
Dadu followed several of the rules laid down in “Zhōu lǐ” ‘Kaogong ji’, such as "nine vertical and
horizontal axes", "palaces in front, markets at the back",
"ancestral worship to the left, and divine worship to the right." This
belief is challenged below.
Planning Principles—Basic Grid
The actual measure of horizontal
length is 6,673.419 m, which converts to 18 li
(4,320 bu; 1 li = 240 bu). 17
A = 480 bu. Vertical length varies
from 7,521.80 m～7,651.17 m, which converts
to 19.83～20.18 li. Therefore, we can suppose that the planned measure is 20 li (20 li × 240 bu ＝4,800 bu) and easily establish that a very simple grid
system based on a square of size 480 bu ×
480 bu was used (Fig. 25).
Fi
In reality, the vertical
axis of the center was moved 129 m＝83.77
bu westward from the central axis of the
palace because the ground was so soft that the east wall had to be moved
inward. The drum tower and bell tower were moved to the present place, on the
central axis of the palace, during the Ming dynasty.
Old documents state that the ‘width of the large streets is 24 bu and that of the small streets is 12 bu’, the ‘breadth of a hutong (lane) is six bu’, and that ‘the largest area of house
lots is limited to less than eight mu’.
Since 1 mu ＝240 square bu ＝240 bu ×
1 bu = 240 × 1.58 m（1.54 m）× 1.58 m（1.54 m）＝ 599.14（569.18）m2, then 8 mu = 4,793.09（4,553.47）m2.
Keeping the number of units of measure above in mind, it is possible to
determine the street system and block formation. Large trunk streets are
distributed in a systematic manner. Looking
at the present map of Beijing and the Qianlong Peking Map, we notice many
blocks to be of the same size. Checking the distance between hutong (horizontal lanes), one gets more
or less 50 bu（79.0 m）from center to center of the lanes. The
widths of the other streets (24 bu,
12 bu) are also confirmed. As for the
horizontal streets, a length of 440 bu
is common.
Fig.26 Street System of Dadu, Funo, Shuji (2015)19)
Eight mu is the upper
limit of land, so an area of 8 mu was
divided into smaller lots. In fact, land of this size was usually divided into
8 or 10 lots. If it is divided into 10 lots, a housing block will consist of
100 (10 × 10) house lots. This establishes that the space formation of street blocks is based on a
simple land division system (Fig. 27).
The Idea of the Plan of Dadu
F
I
consider the Dadu plan to be the third model (Chinese Capital Model D),
different from both the “Zhōu
lǐ” Capital Model (Chinese Capital Model (Z)) and the Chang’an Capital Model
(Chinese Capital Model (C)). Below is an attempt to compare the Dadu Capital
Model (D) with the “Zhōu
lǐ” Capital Model (Z):
a. ‘Square 9 li × 9 li’: D does not follow Z: The horizontal length is 18 li and vertical length is 20 li
(1 li = 240 bu). However, a simple numerical system is followed.
b. ‘Sides with three gates’：D basically follows Z, the but north side lacks one gate.
c. ‘Nine vertical and horizontal axes within
the city’: D basically follows Z, but it is difficult to determine whether this
idea was in the planners’ minds. A simple 480 bu × 480 bu grid was
adopted.
d. ‘The width of vertical axes is nine ki (wheels) wide’: It is difficult to
judge whether D follows Z, but 40 bu
for large streets and 6 bu for hutong were decided first.
e. ‘Ancestral worship (Mausoleum) to the left, divine worship (Soil &
Grain platform) to the right’: D clearly follows Z. It seems to follow “Zhōu lǐ” and ‘Kaogong ji’ faithfully;
that is, in the east and the west the layout is different from the layout in front of palace, as in Nanjing
and Beijing during the Ming dynasty.
vi) ‘Imperial Court at front, markets at back’:
The court is in front of the emperor’s palace and the market is behind it’: D follows Z.
f. ‘Size of palace and market is 100bu × 100bu’: It is not
clear whether D follows Z.
It can be said that the Dadu plan basically follows “Zhōu
lǐ” ‘Kaogong ji’. However, the Dadu Capital Model (D) is different from the “Zhōu lǐ” Capital
Model (Z) and the Chang’an Capital Model (C) in that in the center of Dadu is the
drum tower rather than the palace; the palace here is in the southern part of
the capital.
Beijing
The
last Yuan emperor fled north to Xanadu while the Ming razed the palaces of
their capital to the ground. The capital
of the Ming dynasty was then laid at Nanjing, which was constructed following
the “Zhōu lǐ”
Capital Model (Z). Later, the third emperor
of the Ming dynasty moved his capital north to the ruins at Dadu. He
contracted the northern area of the Mongol city and added a new and separately
walled district in the south. The initial plan was to enclose the capital
threefold, but the plan was never completed for financial reasons. As a result,
Beijing remains the most suitable exemplar of a Chinese capital following the “Zhōu lǐ” Capital
Model (Z).
Summary
Although
it can be extremely difficult to understand and interpret logically how urban
tissues are formed, architects/planners do, in fact, make plans to construct
buildings and cities according to persuasive theories. One of the most
important matters for architects/planners is the unit of measurement.
This
article seeks to leave for the record the following observations, principles
and theories:
1.
Various measurement systems have been used in different regions of the world; however,
basic units of length are very similar all over the world, as the length of
some part of the human body has commonly been used to define the fundamental unit
of length.
2. Grid
systems are universal both geographically and chronologically. We can see many
examples in the East and the West, in the past and at present.
3.
On the other hand, cosmological order is considered to be one of the principle
factors for urban planning in the pre-modern world. There are essentially
two types of cities: The first mirrors a cosmology that enshrines the seat of
royal power at its pivot; the second is not governed by such cosmology. We can divide Asia into two regions— one
where the cosmology guided the building of
these cities and city life, as in India and its peripheral regions; the
other is China and its peripheral regions. It is basic theory that we find the ideal
form or older form in the periphery rather than in the center where the
planning idea crystalized. Cakranegara, in Lombok, is a very
interesting Hindu city whose planning principles were clarified by the author
for the first time in earlier publications.
4. As for Chinese Capital Models, this paper examines
three models (Z, C, D): the “Zhōu lǐ” Capital Model (Z: Architype), the Chang'an Capital Model (C: Variant I), and the Dadu Capital
Model (D: Variant II), all of which are original.
The
author believes that “Zhōu
lǐ” was written during the period from the late Western Han dynasty (前漢)(206 BCE-8 CE) to the early Eastern Han
dynasty（後漢）(25-220 CE）and that the “Zhōu
lǐ” Capital Model (Z), with palace in the center, was authorized along with
the establishment of the Confucian state. Although the “Zhōu lǐ” Capital Model (Z) continued
to be the ideal for successive emperors, a model completely following “Zhōu lǐ” ‘Kaogong ji’ was never realized for various reasons. Some
Japanese scholars assert that Great Fujiwara Kyo（藤原京）in ancient Japan followed the “Zhōu lǐ” Capital
Model (Z). The Chang'an Capital Model (C),
with palace in the north and a north-south axis, was formalized by Xianbei Tuoba, a nomadic
tribe, during the periods from the Three
Kingdoms (Wei魏,Shu呉,Wu蜀) (220–280 CE) to Sui and Tang(206 BCE～8 CE), in place of the “Zhōu
lǐ” Capital Model (Z), as Variant I. The Yamato Imperial Court imported the Chang'an Capital Model (C). The Dà Yuán (Dadu)
Capital Model (D), with bell tower in the center, was constructed by Mongols in
the 13th century as Variant II. The Min dynasty established by the Han
transformed Dadu into Beijing according to the Zhōu lǐ” Capital Model (Z).
This
paper clarifies the Bo (Street Block)
Model of the three Chinese Capital Models based on an analysis of the measurement
system. Although the author uses only very elementary mathematics related to modular
coordinations, he would like to believe that his proposals throw one pebble in
the pond of historical riddles to be solved. My book, “Dà Yuán City,” translated
into Chinese, is on schedule for publication in China. It is my hope that my theories
will be widely accepted, especially in China, in the near future.
Acknowledgements
The studies on which this paper is
based were conducted in collaboration with many young researchers whose names are
too numerous be listed here. I am grateful to all of my collaborators, especially to Professor Mohan Moorti Pant,
who is coauthor of “Stupa and Swastika”(Kyoto University Press and Singapore
National University Press, 2007).
End Note
1 The Rites
of Zhou, originally known as "Officers of Zhou" (周官; Zhouguan), is actually a work on
bureaucracy and organizational theory. It was renamed by Liu Xinto to
differentiate it from a chapter in the Book of History by the same name. Such purely
administrative texts are usually referred to as Legalist, but the text's governmental
model is one of co-governance, with the ruler's family holding in hand a
particularly aristocratic-bureaucratic state, as opposed to the absolutist
administration of Han Fei. To replace a lost work, it was included along with
the Book of Rites and Book of Etiquette and Ceremony– becoming one of three
ancient ritual texts (the "Three Rites") listed among the classics of
Confucianism.
2 I published a book titled “Dà Yuán City: The Idea and Spatial Structure
of Chinese Capital Cities” in 201519), discussing the subjects in
detail. This article
summarizes the essence of the book.
3 In ancient Greece, various
units of length were used: pes is
0.327～0.328 m
in c.5c. BCE 0.295～0.297 m
after Solon, 0.312 m in the northwest of Greece, 0.296 m in Attica, 0.326～0.328 m
in Doris, and 0.350 m in Samos.
4 F.Blume, K.Lachmann and A. Rudorf
(1848, 1852), “Die Schriften der römischen Feldmesse,” I, II.
5 Lombok Island is attractive in several ways. The well-known Wallace
Line, which runs between Bali and Lombok Island, marks the boundary of the
Australian and Asian biogeographic areas. Bali has the marine climate of the
east Pacific, while Lombok belongs to the Australian climatic zone. Lombok is
also interesting in terms of religion. Most Balinese are Hindu, although more
than 80 per cent of the population in Indonesia is Muslim. Islam is the
predominant religion on Lombok, but Balinese Hinduism has had a strong
influence in the western part of the island. The peaceful coexistence of Hindu
and Muslim people on this small island is worthy of investigation.
6 In the esoteric Indian concept of the psychic energy of
the human body, energy is concentrated on, and channeled from, the nodes
located at certain stations of Susumna nadi— the spinal cord of the body. These
nodes are known as cakra.
7 Nagara-Kertagama is an ancient
chronicle of the14th century Javanese kingdom of Majapahit, which was written
on coconut leaves. It is preserved in the Leiden University Library. It is
significant that J. Brandes, a linguist, discovered the chronicle in the palace
of Cakranegara on Nov. 18, 1894. Th. G. Pigeaud, (1960) translated and
explained this work in five volumes.
8 This map was produced by the Land Survey Department of
the headquarter of the Japanese cavalry force (January 1942). The map is based
on the work done by Holland. There are six sheets of map that cover the area
from Ampenan to Cakranagara.
9 Information from Ide Bagus Alit, a senior (Pengusap) of
Cakranegara. Marga means ‘street’ and
is a Sanskrit word. Marga is used for
street and is a community unit in cities like Jaipur in India.
10 In Bali, there exists a concept known as nawa sanga regarding spatial
orientation, which is a system of four cardinal and four intermediate
directions with a center.
11 The street running north-south is called Jalan Sri Jasanudin; that running east-west
is called Jalan Selaparang. Cakranegara is situated at latitude 8 degrees south
of the equator, and the setting of the sun was observed with the course of the
sun along the path of the east-west street during the time of our field survey
in the month of September.
12
Personal
statements from elderly residents and relevant literature indicate that a karang was a community unit related to
the ritual ceremonies of Cakranegara.
13 As for this phrase, we have two other
interpretations: one is political affairs in the morning and market matters in
the afternoon; the other means the Emperor is in charge of political affairs
and the Empress is in charge of market matters.
14 Fu夫 is another unit of area and equals 300 bu × 300 bu.
15 Architects/planners in ancient China were bureaucrats specialized in architectural
design who belonged to the building board under the emperor.
16 The name Khanbaliq comes
from the Mongolian and Uyghur words khan and
balik ("town," "permanent settlement"), so it
translates to "City of the Khan".
17 No ruler used in the Yuan dynasty has been
excavated thus far; scholars think rulers from the Sòng dynasty were used. However,
rulers varied region by region and according to the times. I use basically chi (尺) ＝ 316
mm in this paper, but many Chinese scholars use 308 mm, so I take 308 mm into
account in checking the measurement. 1 bu
＝1.58（1.54）m，1 li ＝240 bu ＝ 379.2（369.6）m.
References
1) Kostof, S.（1991）The City Shaped: Urban Patterns and Meanings
through History. Thames and Hudson, London.
2) Funo, S. and Pant, M.M. (2007) Stupa and
Swastika. Kyoto University Press, Kyoto & Singapore National University
Press, Singapore.
3) Funo, S. and
Jimenez Verdejo, J.R. (2013) The Grid City The Origin, Formation &
Transformation of Spanish Colonial Cities. Kyoto University Press, Kyoto (in
Japanese, 布野修司・ヒメネス・ベルデホ，ホアン・ラモン（2013）グリッド都市－スペイン植民都市の起源，形成，変容，転生，京都大学学術出版会).
4) Funo, Shuji and Yamane, Shu (2008) Mughal
Cities Spatial Transformation of Islam Cities. Kyoto University Press（in Japanese 布野修司＋山根周（2008）『ムガル都市--イスラーム都市の空間変容』京都大学学術出版会）.
5)
Funo, Shuji (2006), “The City as Mandala Spatial Formation and Transformation
of Hindu Cities”, Kyoto University Press (in Japanese 布野修司（2006）『曼荼羅都市 ヒンドゥー都市の空間理念とその変容』京都大学学術出版会).
6) Shamasastry, R. (1908) Arthasastra of
Kautilya. University of Mysor, Oriental Library Publications, 1916. The
Japanese translation titled Utilitarianism:
The Kingship in Ancient India was published by Uemura, K. (1984) (“Jitsuriron(実利論)”
(Japanese translation of Arthashastra), Tokyo, Iwanami Bunko, 1984).
7) Kangle, R.P. (1960) The Kautaliya
Arthasastra. University of Bombay.
8) Rangarajan L.N. (1992) The Arthashastr.New
Delhi, Penguin Books, India.
9)
Begde, P.V. (1978) Ancient and medieval town planning in India. Sagar
Publications, New Delhi.
10)
Kirk W. (1978) Town and Country Planning in Ancient India According to
Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Scottish Geographical Magazine, No. 94, 67-75.
11) Ohji, T. (1990) The ‘Ideal’ Hindu city of
ancient India a described in the Arthasastra and the urban planning of Jaipur.
East Asian Cultural Studies, ⅩⅩⅨ, Nos.1-4.
12) Acharya, P.K. (1934, 1984) Architecture
of Manasara Vol. I-V”, New Delhi, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers (First
edition 1934).
13)
Funo, S. (2002) The Spatial Formation of Cakranegara，Lombok’. In
Peter J.M. Nas (ed.) Indonesian Town Revisited，Muenster/Berlin，Lit Verlag.
14) He, Y.J.（1985）Study of Kaogong
ji City Planning. China Architecture and Building Press (in Chinese, 賀業鋸（1985）『考工記営国制度研究』中国建築工業出版社).
15) Wang, S.R. (2000) Wang Shi Ren’s Theses of
Architectural History. China
Architecture and Building Press (in Chinese, 王世仁（2000）『王世仁建築歴史理論文集』中国建築工業出版社).
16)
Zheng, R. (2010) Study on Transformation of Chengdu from Pre-Qing to Wu-dai
period. China Architecture and Building
Press (in Chinese, 張蓉（2010）『先秦至五代成都古城形態変遷研究』中国建築工業出版社).
17)
Hiraoka, T. (1956) Chang’an and Luoyang in Tang Dynasty”, Kyoto University (in
Japanese, 平岡武夫（1956）『唐代の長安と洛陽』（『唐代研究のしおり』第7）京都大学人文科学研究所).
18) Fu, X.N.（2001） History
of Chinese Architecture. China Architecture and Building Press (in Chinese, 傳熹年（2001）『中国古代建築史』中国建築工業出版社).
19)
Seo, T. (2001) Urban Planning of Chang’an”, Kodansha (in Japanese, 妹尾達彦（2001）『長安の都市計画』).
20) Wang, H. (2008) Comparative Consideration on Japanese
Ancient Capitals and Chang’an in Sui and Tang Dynasty. China Architecture and Building Press (in Chinese, 王暉（2008）「日本古代都城城坊制度的演変及与隋唐長安里坊制的初歩比較」）.
21) Funo, S. (2015), “Dà Yuán City: The Idea
and Spatial Structure of Chinese Capital Cities”, Kyoto University Press (in
Japanese 布野修司 (2015) 『大元都市－中国都城の理念と空間構造－，京都大学学術出版会).
Profile
Born in 1949, Shuji Funo graduated from Tokyo University
in 1972. Following graduation, he became an Assistant Professor at the Universityl. He
then moved to Toyo University and began field studies on human settlements and
housing issues in Southeast Asia under president and urban sociologist Eiichi
Isomura (1903-1997). In 1991, he was invited to join the faulty of Kyoto
University to extend his field of study to India
