The traditional architecture in China is simple in hand drawing.

The division of social development history and the classification by architectural category are two commonly used framework systems to study the history of ancient architecture in China. I am personally interested in this issue for two reasons: First, in previous years' teaching, due to my contact with students, I began to feel that the existing framework of the history of ancient architecture in China could not meet the demands and thoughts of students in many aspects. Even if the teacher evaluates it scientifically and objectively, it is impossible to establish * * * knowledge with it. A considerable number of students think that the content taught by the existing framework system of architectural history is only a kind of knowledge and accomplishment for them, and they can't understand it deeply. Secondly, I think the research framework of a discipline can be said to be an important symbol of the serialization and systematization of carrier knowledge in that era. In recent ten years, the overall knowledge structure of architectural history research in China has changed greatly, and the background of related disciplines and research methods and means on which architectural history depends have made great breakthroughs. This prompted me to think about this question: what are the outstanding features of the existing framework and the current knowledge background changes? Can we take this as a starting point and try to construct a new framework system of China ancient architectural history?

one

From an epistemological point of view, according to the development history of ancient China society, that is, the formation process of primitive society, slave society, pre-feudal society, middle and late feudal society and political dynasty, the framework of the history of ancient China architecture is based on such a materialistic understanding: "No matter from which aspect, architecture is a reflection of the times and a faithful historical record". Its outstanding contribution lies in that it completely and accurately outlines the characteristics of China vast forest in terms of image, technology and function, and the process of its rise and fall with the development of social politics, economy and culture, which mainly solves the "yes or no" problem of architectural dating and times style. According to the linear study of this chronicle, it is easy to understand the architectural style and mature technology of the Tang Dynasty, which reached the peak of China feudal society. However, this framework system of China's ancient architectural history, which we can call "chronological style", also has some limitations.

First, it ignores the differences and unsynchronization between the development of architecture itself and social development. For example, in the history of social development, the Eastern Han Dynasty and the Western Han Dynasty are collectively referred to as the Han Dynasty, which is the same as the Warring States, the Qin Dynasty and the later Three Kingdoms in the early feudal society. However, as far as the development of architecture itself is concerned, the Eastern Han Dynasty is an important period of change compared with the Western Han Dynasty, with rapid development and great breakthroughs in building types, building technologies, building materials, building images, etc., and the unique wood structure technology system in China is also mature at this time. Therefore, if the framework of the history of ancient architecture in China is established according to the general history of social development, the internal development laws and revolutionary symbols of architecture can not be fully revealed.

Second, it ignores the lag of architecture in time and space. For example, the wooden buildings in the Song, Yuan and Ming Dynasties, generally speaking, regional differences are more abnormal than the differences of the times. Many buildings in the south of the Yuan Dynasty, such as the Enbukuji Hall in Wuyi, Zhejiang, and the Xinyi Hall in Shanghai, were built in the Yuan Dynasty, but they were based on the "architectural style" of the Song Dynasty and were the inheritors of the official architecture in the Song Dynasty. At the same time, the northern architecture mainly shows the architectural framework characteristics of the Yuan Dynasty, which is simple and sloppy. On the contrary, after the reordering of big wood construction technology in Ming Dynasty, many areas such as Shanxi and Sichuan still retained the primitive style and practice of Yuan Dynasty. For another example, gorgeous package components prevailed in the northern part of the Western Han Dynasty as a symbol of prosperity. After the ban in the Northern Song Dynasty, the Southern Song Dynasty flourished and became a fashion. All these reflect that architecture, as a special cultural phenomenon and material entity, its spread and influence in time and space is far from being comprehensively summarized by the dating method of social development history.

On the other hand, the main achievement of establishing the framework of China's architectural history according to architectural categories is practical and clear, which systematically summarizes the types, vocabulary, technical characteristics and style characteristics of various buildings, which is of great significance for students to master the ancient architectural language of China, and mainly solves the problem of the attribution of architectural types "image and non-image". The analysis of some examples has also reached a considerable depth. However, this "classification" framework system also shows some shortcomings. The main questions are:

Classification can't reflect the inherent attributes of ancient buildings in China in ancient China society. In the west, architecture, as an abstract whole, is a science. Architecture is an independent entry in the western ancient encyclopedia "Nine Books on Valo, Summary of Subjects", namely, three studies (logic, grammar and rhetoric), four techniques (astronomy, geometry, music and arithmetic) and two studies on Valo (medicine and architecture). However, in China's ancient books, we have never found a building. The order of book content has no hierarchy and scientific attributes, and basically reflects a set of ethical systems, organizational forms and ideologies around imperial power. The literary gathering in the Tang Dynasty is a typical example. The book is divided into 48 parts, and the basic structure can be represented by concentric circles (see figure 1). The "heaven" here is not the sky in the astronomical sense now, but the sky of the "son of heaven", which is the day when the Temple of Heaven worships heaven; The "land" here is not what geologists or geographers say, but the land where the emperor sacrificed at the altar. For another example, the residence of the Crown Prince is mentioned in the Palace Treasury Department, and the residence of a lower level is mentioned in the Residence Department. From the comparison, we find that Chinese and western understanding of architecture is completely different. This comparison illustrates at least two problems:

First, the inherent attributes of ancient architecture in China belong to system, culture or human activities, but there are no clear architectural concepts such as residential attributes. The meaning of "follower" is quite different from the western concept and today's understanding.

Secondly, as a result, the categories of ancient buildings in China cannot be distinguished strictly according to their functions. Because the real function of many ancient buildings is not very clear, such as Mingtang; Or it has staggered multiple functions, such as gardens; Or include each other, such as the functional relationship between palaces, houses and cities. Therefore, it can be said that the existence of ancient buildings in China is meaningless if they are not included in the relationship.

Generally speaking, the outstanding features of the "chronological" and "classified" framework system of China's ancient architectural history are: lack of understanding of "relationship"-the relationship between metaphysics and metaphysics, the relationship between time and space, the relationship between the whole and parts, and so on. Of course, this is also due to the limitations of the research background and conditions at that time.

two

In recent ten years, great changes have taken place in the knowledge background and research methods that China Institute of Ancient Architecture History relies on, which provides a new opportunity for us to re-understand and construct the framework system of China's ancient architectural history.

First of all, the increasingly rich information has brought us more information about ancient environment, ancient architecture and ancient life. On the one hand, the collection and mapping of field data such as relics, relics, sites and suicide notes are more detailed, extensive and in-depth; On the other hand, with the continuous development of archaeology, chronology, ethnology, culturology and other related disciplines and the emergence of a large number of achievements, it is possible for us to go beyond the theoretical study of physical objects.

Secondly, advanced technology is an important means to generate new data and conduct in-depth research. If radar is used to detect the distribution of underground sites, carbon-14 analysis is used to determine the age of buildings, and advanced elevation photography technology is used to speed up surveying and mapping, new data can be generated or new information can be found from old data. Another example is the application of aerial remote sensing technology, which can more effectively study the spatial relationship of settlement form, the relationship between buildings and the similarities and differences between different buildings. In this regard, the archaeological community has made great achievements. 199 1 year, the Ministry of science and technology also used remote sensing technology to detect the Qin tombs. The application prospect of computer technology is also quite broad. In 1928, Mr. Fu Sinian once said, "Above, he searched for the green space, below, and found things with his hands and feet", which basically represented the conditions and conditions for historians at that time, including the Chinese Architectural Society to study architectural history. In contrast, there are indeed earth-shaking changes today.

Moreover, the updating of methods, the exchange of information, and the continuous improvement of the level of global knowledge and cultural interaction have given us a broader vision. Professor Zhang Guangzhi, a famous American scholar, comprehensively applied the methods of cultural ecology and settlement archaeology to study the origin, development track and replacement process of cities in Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties in China, which is a good research example to see the essence of things from the perspective of relationship. In China, the research on cultural circle and communication mechanism is also going on, and great achievements have been made. Therefore, it is imperative to study the history of ancient architecture in China dynamically, coherently and relevantly.

three

Based on this, this paper attempts to put forward a new research framework for the history of ancient architecture in China, one of which is necessary and the other is inevitable. It mainly adopts the method of architectural typology, focusing on establishing the relationship between architectural self-discipline and overall cultural consistency, in order to make up for the shortcomings of the existing two framework systems to some extent.

Architectural typology is quite different from our usual architectural classification. Mainly manifested in: general classification, such as houses, palaces, temples and so on. , often according to the different functions and properties of known building entities, pay attention to objective classification. However, architectural typology often regards the orderly development of architecture as a gradual process, paying more attention to the source of objective things, and the category is only a result of the flow based on the source. Quatremere de Cancy pointed out in the Encyclopedia of Architecture: "One of the fundamental functions of science and philosophy is to reveal the original motivation, with the aim of understanding the reasons, which is the type mentioned in architecture". This is different from the connotation of our established architectural types, and it is actually prototype typology. It has the following characteristics: 1, and universal principles or connotations can be found in various types of buildings; 2. If several types of buildings have the same principle or connotation, they belong to the same type (referred to as different from the established "type"); 3. The environment and context have changed, and different architectural results may be produced under the influence of the same type; 4. The relationship between type and category is not completely inclusive and inclusive, but has a certain transformation, which can solve the transitional problem. Therefore, the application of architectural typology can solve the problems of metaphysics and metaphysics, whole and part, source and flow, and some staggered relations. It is in this respect that it is particularly consistent with the motivation of establishing a new framework system of China's ancient architectural history. Accordingly, combined with the characteristics of China's ancient architectural history, I use three variables: type, class and period to summarize and form a new framework system of China's ancient architectural history.