Yuanmingyuan and Its “Perfect Brightness” as an Embodiment of a Clash of Empires

원명원 · 정수연 · 연세대학교

Introduction

On a hot summer day in Beijing, I finally got to see Yuanmingyuan on a field trip that initiated my interests on the site. Never having visited China or Beijing before, I was intrigued by everything that I saw. However, I was most interested by the seemingly displaced Yuanmingyuan, the intensity of the sun, and the dark and foggy air. I was compelled by how the Yuanmingyuan stood its ground as an unrenovated site of historical and nationalistic significance despite fundamental changes in the politics, society, and environment in China. It proved to be much more complex than I had understood it to be; the maze inside the Yuanmingyuan, and its entertainment, yet perplexment inducing components almost symbolized the magnitude and marvel of the Yuanmingyuan. While I still lack complete comprehension of Yuanmingyuan, I could not agree more with the beauty of Yuanmingyuan stated by Victor Hugo when he traveled to observe the Yuanmingyuan.

153

“If people did not see it, they imagined it. It was a kind of tremendous

unknown masterpiece, glimpsed from the distance in a kind of

twilight, like a silhouette of the civilization of Asia on the horizon of

the civilization of Europe.”-Victor Hugo

“The French empire has pocketed half of this victory, and today with a

kind of proprietorial naivety, it displays the splendid bric-a-brac of the

Yuanmingyuan. I hope that a day will come when France, delivered

and cleansed, will return this booty to despoiled China.”-Victor Hugo

Writing to his friend Captain Butler, Victor Hugo wrote emotionally and scathingly of the destruction of the Yuanmingyuan, which he considered to be a “wonder of the world,” comparing it to the Pantheon in Greece, the pyramids in Egypt, the colosseum in Rome, and Notre-Dame in Paris. He said it was a work of the people. And, he compared Elgin‟s destruction of the Yuanmingyuan, to the theft of marbles form the Parthenon. Then, in a voice heard echoed a century and half later, he opined:

“Both the beauty and tragedy of the Yuanmingyuan and its destruction is clearly

154 indicated in multiple accounts of Western scholarship. In the debate on whether or not the Yuanmingyuan should be rebuilt and renovated, however, the very memories of its beauty and destruction have profoundly affected the Chinese in what they call “the century of shame,” a period that begin the early 19th century with the first Opium War and ended in 1949 with victory on the mainland by the Chinese Communist Party.30

It would be a reduction to suggest that the Yuanmingyuan is simply a site of great marvel. After having reading, studying, and visiting the site in Beijing, it is a site that presents and represents more. The construction, destruction, and debates surrounding the reconstruction of the Yuanmingyuan engender notions of how empires clash in the historical context in which the Yuanmingyuan is embedded. Lydia Liu‟s notion that “civilizations do not clash, but empires” resonates when thinking of the Old Summer Palace having been destroyed, especially because it is a space that was contested with Chinese and Western representations. It exemplifies the consequences of a struggle between two great empires. Thus, this paper argues that the devastated state of the Yuanmingyuan is a physical depiction of a “clash of empires”, and can be observed through the historical processes in which the garden was built, destroyed, and unrenovated.

30 Lillian M. Li, “The Garden of Perfect Brightness—Destruction, Looting, and Memory (1860-Present),” Accessed April 10, 2019.

https://visualizingcultures.mit.edu/garden_perfect_brightness_03/ymy3_essay0 2.html.

155

The Garden of “Perfect Brightness”

The history of Yuanmingyuan begins with Kangxi, who was the emperor of China from 1662 to 1722. As the Son of Heaven and the ruler of the Celestial Empire, Kangxi secured his power in the final decades of the seventeenth century by refurbishing many desolated gardens and parklands.31 In order to create a private retreat near the Forbidden City but away from its formality, Kangxi built a villa with gardens to the northwest of Beijing, which was named the Garden of Joyful Spring.32

In 1709 Kangxi began the construction of another estate for his fourth son, Prince Yinzhen, the future Yongzheng emperor. Just a half mile to the north, these gardens were named the Yuanmingyuan—literally, the round (yuan 園 ) and bright (ming 明 ) garden (yuan 園 )—or the Garden of Perfect Brightness. When he became emperor, Yongzheng expanded this complex and made it his main residence, while leaving the Garden of Joyful Spring for his mother‟s residence. He was sensitive to potential criticism of extravagance and considered himself to be frugal in his building projects.

Having been born and raised there, Yongzheng‟s son the Qianlong emperor was far more dedicated to the expansion of Yuanmingyuan‟s pavilions, buildings, and vistas. In 1749, a new garden named the Garden of Eternal Spring (Changchunyuan 長春園) was added to the east, built according to designs made under the emperor‟s close supervision. Because he intended this to be his residence after retiring, the structures, waterways, and views were intended for pleasure more than for formal responsibilities.

In 1774, Qianlong added a third garden to the entire complex, the Garden of Elegant Spring (Qichunyuan 綺春園). His son, the Jiaqing emperor (r. 1796 to 1820) added a great deal to this garden, including pavilions, bridges, 31 v 32 Ibid.

156 lakes, and islets. When Jiaqing died in 1820, his son the Daoguang emperor (r. 1821 to 1850) maintained the tradition of garden-building. His mother and other women were moved from the Joyful Spring Garden that Kangxi had built before the Yuanmingyuan to the Elegant Spring Garden. Thereafter the former fell into disuse, while the three other gardens together became known as the Yuanmingyuan.

Although only an occasional retreat for the Kangxi emperor, the Yuanmingyuan served as the principal residence of the Yongzheng emperor. From the third year of his reign, he resided and held court there from the first lunar month until the ninth (roughly February to October). He went to the Forbidden City only when necessary for ceremonial duties, and during the winter months. Unlike his father, Yongzheng did not follow the practice of going to Chengde in the summer or autumn.

Despite the fact that he contributed the most to the expansion of the Yuanmingyuan and loved to be there, the Qianlong emperor also liked to tour other locations and travel to Chengde in the fall. His stays at the Yuanmingyuan ranged from a mere 10 days in a year to as many as 251, averaging out to 127 days annually. He stayed at the Forbidden City about an equal number of days each year. In general, he preferred the Yuanmingyuan from the first to the ninth lunar months, and the Forbidden City in the winter months. In the fall he also went to Chengde to hunt.

The next three emperors spent relatively more time at the Yuanmingyuan. Jiaqing usually spent more days there than at the Forbidden City. The Daoguang emperor, beset with many problems of state, spent most of his time there, averaging only three months a year at the Forbidden City. He did not return to the Forbidden City until the 11th lunar month of the year. The last emperor to live there, the hapless Xianfeng (r. 1851 to 1861), spent virtually all his later years at Yuanmingyuan until it was destroyed in 1860. Paintings of activities within the Yuanmingyuan convey a sense of the intensely private and personal nature of this imperial space. Although it grew in size and complexity, its function was to provide elegant and intimate pleasure to the emperor.

As in the Forbidden City, the emperor was in effect the only adult male resident in the Yuanmingyuan. Adult princes, noblemen, and high-ranking

157 officials visited only on particular occasions and never lived there. In addition to the emperor himself, only the imperial wives, ladies, and servant girls; imperial children; and eunuchs resided at the Yuanmingyuan. The Jesuit Jean Attiret wrote:

There is but one Man here; and that is the emperor. All pleasures are

made for him alone. This charming Place is scarce ever seen by any

body but himself, his Women, and his Eunuchs. The Princes, and the

other chief Men of the Country, are rarely admitted any farther than

the Audience Chambers.33

The eunuchs at the Yuanmingyuan performed important roles in the life in the gardens, as well as escorting the emperor during his travels and serving as bodyguards. Their numbers increased and reached over 500 by the end of the Qianlong reign. At the Yuanmingyuan eunuchs, like their master and the court women, enjoyed a relative informality—even familiarity—compared with the formality of the Forbidden City. Although the Qing emperors mostly succeeded in keeping eunuchs out of politics, some eunuchs did acquire wealth and considerable influence at the court and the Yuanmingyuan.34

In addition to these privileged members of the court, there were a handful of Jesuit missionaries who had special access to the emperors. Jesuit and other Catholic missionaries had first gone to China in the 16th century, and by the early-17th century some were welcome at the late Ming court and later at the Qing court. The emperor Kangxi greatly valued their knowledge of astronomy, mathematics, geography, and other scientific matters. Although there was an official ban on proselytizing imposed in the 1720s, some Jesuits were still retained at the court for their knowledge of the outside world. The Qianlong emperor particularly valued their skill in painting. He had them paint 33 Lillian M. Li, “The Garden of Perfect Brightness—Destruction, Looting, and Memory (1860-Present),” Accessed April 10, 2019. https://visualizingcultures. mit.edu/garden_perfect_brightness_03/ymy3_essay02.html.

34 Lillian M. Li, “The Garden of Perfect Brightness—Destruction, Looting, and Memory (1860-Present),” Accessed April 10, 2019. https://visualizingcultures. mit.edu/garden_perfect_brightness_03/ymy3_essay02.html.

158 numerous portraits and large-scale paintings commemorating famous battles, hunting and archery at Chengde, and other activities. At the Yuanmingyuan they were asked to paint the interiors of buildings, to help design the European- style buildings later introduced to one small section of the gardens, and to keep painting portraits and domestic scenes. Attiret, the French Jesuit, wrote that among Europeans only clock-makers and painters were privileged to see the Yuanmingyuan at all.

The Treasurable Ruins

After unsuccessful negotiations in October 1856, Harry S. Parkes, the British counselor in Guangzhou, provoked a confrontation with Ye Mingchen, the governor-general of Guangdong. As a result of these negotiations,

159 Governor-General Ye was captured by the British and died on the way to Egypt.35 China had a few adversaries, and its trouble was not just with Britain. Napoleon III of France was furious about the execution of the priest Abbé Auguste Chapdelaine in Guangxi for engaging in illicit activities. Consequently, France and Britain joined hands to seize Guangzhou on December 28, 1857, with the moral support of both Russia and the United States.36

The fall of the Yuanmingyuan to foreign invaders takes place within the context of the Sino-Western confrontations in the nineteenth century. Although the post-Opium War (1840-1842) treaty system had secured British commercial interests that neither Macartney nor Amherst had been able to obtain, Britain sought to expand its privileges on the China coast. On the other hand, Xianfeng, a new Emperor, was ashamed of losing to the British national interest, and struggled to recover the Qing‟s honor and was certainly not willing to yield more rights. Subsequently, the British demanded for treaty revision to acquire further concessions from China.37 However, resistance from both China and England led to the outbreak of the second Opium War, and the burning of the Yuanmingyuan.

After disastrous tensions from the attempts to ratify the second treaty between China and Britain, the British decided to use force. The allied Britain and France urged China to concede through force, and Xianfeng faced a dilemma. He believed that China had to show some strength in order to obtain an acceptable peace; yet on the other, he knew by this time that the military option was too risky to pursue. His advisors were not very helpful either, as some of them asked him to command the imperial army in person to show his determination to resist, while others dissuaded him from a direct confrontation with the invaders. The confused emperor, when verbally speaking of war, sent 35 Young-Tsu Wong, The Imperial Garden Yuanming Yuan: A Paradise Lost, (China Academic Library: Springer, 2016), 147.

7. Ibid.

37. Young-Tsu Wong, The Imperial Garden Yuanming Yuan: A Paradise Lost, (C hina Academic Library: Springer, 2016), 171.

160 Prince Yi and the War Minister Muyin to reopen peace talks to “prevent the enemies from further advance.”38 However, Elgin refused, and raised the price for peace. The British conditions now included the advance of the allied troops into China to set up an army garrison. The continuous frustrations between Elgin and Xianfeng persisted, until Elgin charged forward into China with French forces. Eventually, Xianfeng fled with a large entourage, including family members, Manchu noblemen, officials, and eunuchs. They left the Yuanmingyuan through the East Gate of the Eternal Spring Garden in haste.39

The Physical Clash

With Xianfeng having left Beijing, the French troops arrived in Yuanmingyuan. Although there were Chinese guards, who tried desperately to keep the foreigners outside of the gate, the main bulk of the garden‟s security force was not able to stop the intrusion of the modern army, and was compelled to retreat without further resistance.

The British troops arrived at the Yuanmingyuan late because they had spent the night near a lamasery. The British leader Elgin in the company of General Grant met with Montauban in the Yuanming Yuan early in the morning of October 7th. On his way, while riding a horse, Grant “perceived the Palace beautifully situated amidst gardens and woods and a range of large suburbs in front.” He seems to have gone through the district of Haidian to see “a fine old stately gateway and the park walls” and then, proceeding up an avenue, “a range of handsome dwellings roofed over with yellow tiles.” He soon found that “in different parts of the grounds were forty separate small palaces in 38 Ibid., 150 39 Ibid., 153.

161 beautiful situations” and that “the park was carefully kept—the footpaths and roads clean and in excellent order, and there were various pretty pieces of ornamental water”. His interpreter Robert Swinhoe likewise admired the beautiful scene along the way. He strolled to the Main Audience Hall, and a pebbled path led him “through groves of magnificent trees, round lakes, into picturesque summer-houses, over fantastic bridges.” He further observed:

Here a solitary building would rise fairy-like from the center of a lake,

reflecting its image on the limpid blue liquid in which it seemed to

float, and then a sloping path would carry you into the heart of a

mysterious cavern artificially formed of rockery, and leading out on to

a grotto in the bosom of another lake. The variety of the picturesque

was endless, and charming in the extreme; indeed, all that is most

lovely in Chinese scenery, where art contrives to cheat the rude

attempts of nature into the bewitching, seemed all associated in these

delightful grounds. The resources of the designer appear to have been

unending, and no money spared to bring his work to perfection. All the

tasteful landscapes so often viewed in the better class of Chinese

paintings, and which we had hitherto looked upon as wrought out of

the imagination of the artist, were here brought forth in life.40

Lord Elgin, too, was impressed by the beauty of the garden. On Sunday, October 7, 1860, in the midst of these surroundings, he praised the “Summer Palace” as “really a fine thing, like an English park—numberless buildings with handsome rooms—and filled with Chinese curios, and handsome clocks, bronzes, etc.” His private secretary Henry Loch admired especially the architectural beauty of the garden. The buildings to him “were nearly all isolated from each other, being connected by gardens, courts, and terraces.” He considered the “Hall of Audience,” perhaps the Zhengda Guangming Dian, “the most striking.” In this compound, he saw large buildings “connected by courtyards, passing through which we entered spacious reception rooms that opened into gardens of considerable extent, which lead down to a marble 40 Young-Tsu Wong, The Imperial Garden Yuanming Yuan: A Paradise Lost, (C hina Academic Library: Springer, 2016), 171.

162 terrace stretching along the shores of a lake some three miles in length.” He took a fancy for white marble balustrades, blue inlaid enamel vases with imitation flowers, and the larger-than-life lion and cow bronzes.41

What followed such admiration was the ransacking and looting of the Yuanmingyuan, which resulted in the seizure of the “40 Scenes of Yuanmingyuan” by the French. It only took a few days of plundering to disgrace the Yuanmingyuan. “Everything of value that could be carried off, consisting of gold, silver, clocks, watches, enamels, porcelain, jade stone, silks and embroidery, with numerous other articles of vertu,” as the Major General Allgood testified, “were removed by the Allies”. 42 While rushing about for the valuables, the looters also destroyed those they could not take away. Excitement reached a peak on October 9, when news spread that a huge quantity of gold and silver was discovered in the garden. In addition to gold and silver, the soldiers also found a room “full of the richest silks and furs.”43

In the aftermath of the Anglo-French loot, the local residents, both peasants and bannermen, managed to sneak into the garden to steal whatever leftovers they could find. To be sure, the follow-up plundering made the rampage worse; but blaming the tragedy mainly on the local people, as some did, borders on avoiding the important while dwelling on the trivial. The loss of the treasure in the imperial gardens was in the main because of the vengeance of the victorious army. It was the foreign invaders who turned the splendid Yuanmingyuan and its subsidiary gardens into a shambles. In fact, they themselves admitted that once they found the enormous wealth inside the garden, they became too greedy to respect fundamental military discipline.44 Colonel Wolseley, in particular, had this to say:

When looting is once commenced by an army, it is no easy matter to

stop it. At such times human nature breaks down the ordinary 41 Ibid., 180. 42 Ibid. 195. 43 Ibid., 197.

44 Young-Tsu Wong, The Imperial Garden Yuanming Yuan: A Paradise Lost, (C hina Academic Library: Springer, 2016), 175.

163 trammels which discipline imposes, and the consequences are most

demoralizing to the very best constituted army.45

The “Perfect Brightness” of Burning

Although Prince Gong protested the looting to the Allied Command, it only further impressed the British and the French that the Qing court treasured the Yuanmingyuan a great deal. In fact, they had seen themselves how anxious the Manchu and Han Chinese officials were to reoccupy the garden upon the evacuation of the foreign troops. General Grant of Britain, for example, was now absolutely convinced that the Manchu emperor considered the Yuanmingyuan his “most important palace” (Knollys 1875, 204). This may help explain at least in part why the British eventually wanted to burn down the garden in order to pain the emperor.

The Allied Command threatened to shell Beijing if the gates were not opened on October 13. Hengqi‟s negotiation with Parkes resulted in permitting the entry of 1,500 troops for each of the three nations, England, France, and the United States, to accompany their respective diplomats for treaty ratification. At noon, on October 14, Hengqi guided Elgin and an entourage of three to four hundred men, who would be lodged at the Imperial Academy (Guozijian), into the Desheng Gate plus over thousand cavalrymen, who were stationed at the Anding Gate. The foreign flags flew atop all of the gates and the soldiers shouted in joy and glory.46

The release of all European prisoners on October 15, however, gravely complicated the peace process because they told their horrible stories of their 45 Ibid., 159.

46 T. Weng, (1970), Weng wengonggong riji [The diary of the imperial tutor Weng Tonghe] (Vols. 20). 1925. Reprint (in 20 Vols.), 158.

164 imprisonment, not to mention that some of them did not return alive. Elgin at once declared that it was an “atrocious crime,” and he decided to deal with it severely.47 When Prince Gong tried to set a date to meet with Elgin and Gros, there was no response until 2 days later when the allies bitterly raised the new issue of the mistreatment of the Europeans in Chinese prison. Besides demanding substantial cash compensation, amounting to 300,000 taels for Britain and 200,000 taels for France, Elgin specifically wanted to demolish the whole Yuanmingyuan. The destruction so as to redress the grievance, and this was non-negotiable. He was firm in his message to Prince Gong: unless the new demand was met on October 20, cash paid on October 22, and the treaty ratified on October 23, war would resume. 48

This sudden turn of events surely caught Prince Gong by surprise. On October 16, he was still outside of the city walls when the allies entered Beijing.49 The allies had ignored the prince‟s complaints about plundering the Yuanminguuan and other royal demesnes; and now Elgin notified him in a haughty manner that the principal imperial garden as a whole should be burned down to the ground as punishment. The humiliation was huge and inevitable. Had he put up a stiff resistance and shown some courage, the prince might still have some bargaining chips to play; however, with Beijing having been occupied by the allies, he knew he was totally at the mercy of the enemy. He could only plead to Elgin, again through Hengqi, to spare the Yuanmingyuan. Nevertheless, Elgin was adamant, and on October 18 he waited no longer to give his order to set fire to the Yuanmingyuan and its subsidiary gardens.

Elgin made this crucial decision to burn down the Yuanmingyuan all by himself without French consent. In fact, Baron Gros disapproved of the violent vengeance against a peaceful estate; for him, if some palaces were to be destroyed, those in the Forbidden City, the center of administration, would 47 Young-Tsu Wong, The Imperial Garden Yuanming Yuan: A Paradise Lost, (C hina Academic Library: Springer, 2016), 175.

48 Ibid., 178.

49 Young-Tsu Wong, The Imperial Garden Yuanming Yuan: A Paradise Lost, (C hina Academic Library: Springer, 2016), 120.

165 make a better target than the harmless imperial garden. In his correspondence to the French, Elgin argued why he wanted to “make the blow fall on the Emperor, who was clearly responsible for the crime committed.” The “high crime” of ill treatment of European prisoners, in his opinion, could not be compensated merely by a large sum of money, nor could the Chinese government obtain additional “large pecuniary indemnities.” He would not demand the surrender of “the persons guilty of cruelty to our countrymen,” either, because he felt “throwing the responsibility for the acts of Government in this way on individuals resembles too closely the Chinese mode of conducting war to approve itself altogether to my judgment.” Hence, he concluded that the destruction of the Yuanming Yuan was the “least objectionable” course open to him. He was fully aware of the fact that the imperial garden was the Xianfeng Emperor‟s “favourite residence, and its destruction could not fail to be a blow to his pride as well as to his feelings”. The destruction of the Yuanmingyuan caused Xianfeng great pain.50

Thus, Lord Elgin alone dictated the ultimate justice: the total destruction of the Yuanming Yuan. Apparently, as plenipotentiary, he made this crucial decision without the prior knowledge of his own British government and without regard for the opposition of his French ally. He wanted revenge against the Xianfeng Emperor (Walrond 1872, 366). The burning of the Yuanming Yuan had indeed caused the emperor great pain, but His Majesty died shortly afterward. The persistent pain is perhaps the loss of 150-year-old architectural wonder and garden beauty. But, for Elgin, his decision was not so harsh as it should have been. Originally, he had contemplated not only the demolition of all the palaces in and out of Beijing but also the abdication of the Manchu monarch Xianfeng.

50 Ibid., 123.

166

The 40 Scenes

The three parts of the Yuanmingyuan, as well as the Joyful Spring Garden that preceded them, were considered to be gardens, hence the term yuan. Each consisted of a number of complexes containing buildings of various types, artfully arranged in a “natural” setting that was carefully designed with lakes and streams; hills, bridges, and pathways; and pagodas and the like. Each complex was meant to create a separate vista, while blending into a diverse whole. Unlike European palaces, where the building was the central focus, in this Chinese paradise the buildings—practically all singlestoried—were linked together, and formed just one part of the view. Altogether there were 650 “individually named structures” and 130 “formal views.” The total area was over 800 acres.51

Since all the Chinese buildings were made of wood, almost nothing remained of this vast paradise after the British and French troops set torch to the Yuanmingyuan in 1860. Virtually the only visual record of this imperial paradise is found in a set of paintings—the “40 Scenes” of the Yuanmingyuan—commissioned by the Qianlong emperor in 1744. Two court artists, Shen Yuan and Tangdai (a Manchu), and a calligrapher, Wang Youdun, undertook this work. The resulting album consisted of paintings on silk, one per page with calligraphy on the facing side. Each page measures 62.3 cm (24.5 51 Lillian M. Li, “The Garden of Perfect Brightness—Destruction, Looting, and Memory (1860-Present),” Accessed April 10, 2019. https://visualizingcultures. mit.edu/garden_perfect_brightness_03/ymy3_essay02.html.

167 inches) in height and width. Of the 40 Scenes, 12 were paintings of vistas newly created by Qianlong; the others were of sites created under Kangxi or Yongzheng. None of the buildings subsequent to 1744—in the Eternal Spring Garden (Changchunyuan) and Elegant Spring Garden (Qichunyuan)—are visually documented. The 40 Scenes were later copied into woodblock prints that were circulated among literati, but the original album was owned by the emperor himself.52 In 1860, it was seized by French troops, taken back to France, and held at the Bibliothèque Nationale, where it remains to this day. It is deeply ironic and tragic that the French not only burned down the Yuanmingyuan, but also stole the Emperor‟s own visual record of it.

The Struggle for Reconstruction

The burning of 1860 disfigured the Yuanmingyuan so much that the imperial garden was no longer fit for royal living. Troops and eunuchs, however, guarded the destroyed garden estate to keep out unauthorized persons. The newly ascended Tongzhi Emperor, together with the two dowagers, Ci‟an and Cixi, escorted Xianfeng‟s coffin back to Beijing from Chengde. They all took residence inside the Forbidden City. They missed the pleasant garden life, and their memory was simply too fresh to forget. Tongzhi was born in the garden on April 27, 1856. The Dowager Cixi, the new emperor‟s biological mother, had her romance with the late Xianfeng Emperor in the garden. Many other members of the family had in mind the sad moments when they had the last breakfast in the garden with the late emperor before the hasty flight to Chengde. They, of course, remembered the agony of the late emperor when he heard the bad news about the looting and burning of the Yuanmingyuan.

52 Ibid.

168 The best remedy, of course, was to restore the Yuanmingyuan to its past glory. But given the persistent rebellions and the financial crisis derived from excessive military expenditures and war indemnities, even the Tongzhi Emperor himself felt uncomfortable to raise such an issue. Not until the autumn of 1867 did the censor Detai speak on behalf of the royal family. Knowing how empty the state treasury was, the censor recommended that they seek donations and contributions from individual households in the country. This was clearly a trial balloon. When the general response of officialdom was negative, the emperor quickly backed off in a decree dated September 16, 1867, denouncing the censor‟s idea as “inappropriate” and “ridiculous”.53 The censor‟s untimely proposal backfired. The court decided to exile him in the remote Manchurian frontier. He chose to commit suicide instead. Most likely, the royal family incited the censor to make the recommendation, and hence he felt betrayed and died in protest. Consequently, the garden remained in an appalling condition for many more years to come. Yuanmingyuan had eventually gone through the Boxer‟s Rebellion and Cultural Revolution that deconstructed the Yuanmingyuan even further.

53 Young-Tsu Wong, The Imperial Garden Yuanming Yuan: A Paradise Lost, (C hina Academic Library: Springer, 2016), 145.

169

The Yuanmingyuan Ruins Park Today

Over the years, as the Yuanmingyuan was repeatedly culled of its artifacts by both foreigners and Chinese, its grounds were turned into farmland and housed villages of farmers. After the establishment of the People‟s Republic of China in 1949, 15 work units numbering about 270 people were located there. Under the constant urging of Premier Zhou Enlai, in 1988 the Fuhai Lake area and the European ruins were opened to the public, and in the 1990s some of the other gardens were developed into a recreational park, with its lakes available for boating, children‟s amusement, restaurants, tourist shops, and the like.

The European ruins are by far the area most visited and photographed. Most recognizable is the arch of the gate that formed the background for the Great Fountain (Dashuifa), with the ornate columns of the Yuanyingguan on the hill above it. No tourist could fail to have his or her picture taken in front of these iconic ruins, and the many photographs and videos of Yuanmingyuan that now appear online convey the different uses and aspects of its restoration.

Conclusion

Significant scholarly work had been published involving the ruins of the larger Chinese sections of the Yuanmingyuan. For archaeologists, art historians, and historians, the importance of this work lies in the ability to understand and imagine the physical spaces of the grounds, the waterways, and the numerous buildings and compounds that comprised the original three

170 sections: the Yuanmingyuan, the Qichunyuan and the Changchunyuan. One major archeological site is that of the Hanjingtang, the complex on the island at the center of the Changchunyuan. 54 Rebuilding some of the original Yuanmingyuan buildings has been a subject of discussion for the last couple of decades. Apart from the expense, there are heated controversies about the need and the standards for reconstruction. Critics say that preservation is the goal, not restoration. In Beijing in general, academic specialists have been pitted against those government officials in the Cultural Relics Bureau and developers whose goal in historical preservation is not historical accuracy but the commodification of history for tourism. Many projects took place in the period prior to the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing. As a result, many historians and archaeologists, as well as local residents, have complained that the Yuanmingyuan has been developed

principally as a tourist site and recreational park in a way that ignores its importance as a historical site worthy of study and possible restoration. Thus, it becomes questionable as to how we remember history and the places that encompass such changes, developments, and the passing of time. While the Yuanmingyuan remains as a product of a “clash of empires”, its historical significance is undermined by various other political and social inclinations. 54 Lillian M. Li, “The Garden of Perfect Brightness—Destruction, Looting, and Memory (1860-Present),” Accessed April 10, 2019.

171 Bibliography Alain Peyrefitte, The Collision of Two Civilisations: The British Expedition to China in 1782-4, Trans. Jon Rothschild. (London: Harvill, 1993).

Barme, Geremie. "The Garden of Perfect Brightness: A Life in Ruins." East Asian History 11 (1996).

Danby, Hope. The Garden of Perfect Brightness: The History of the Yüan Ming

Yüan and of the Emperors Who Lived There. London: Henry

Regnery, 1950.

Gao, Lei, and Marc Treib. "Making and Remaking the Yuanmingyuan." Journal

of Historic Preservation, History, Theory, and Criticism 3, no. 1

(2006): 10-23.

Kissinger, Henry. On China. New York: Penguin Press, 2011.

Kutcher, Norman. "China's Palace of Memory," The Wilson Quarterly (Winter 2003).

Lee, Haiyan. “The ruins of yuanmingyuan: Or, how to enjoy a national wound.”

Modern China 35, no. 2 (2009): 155-90.

Li , Lillian M. “The Garden of Perfect Brightness—Destruction, Looting, and Memory (1860-Present).” Accessed April 10, 2019. https://visualizingcultures.mit.edu/garden_perfect_brightness_03/ymy3_essay0 2.html.

Liu, Lydia He. The Clash of Empires: The Invention of China in Modern World

Making. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2004.

Ringmar, Erik. Liberal Barbarism: The European Destruction of the Palace of the Emperor of China. (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013).

Walrond, T. (Ed.). (1872). Letters and Journals of James, 8th Earl of Elgin. London: John Murray.

172 Weng, T. (1970). Weng wengonggong riji [The diary of the imperial tutor Weng Tonghe] (Vols. 20). 1925. Reprint (in 20 Vols.), Taibei: Shangwu yinshuguan. Facsimile edition

Young-Tsu Wong. A Paradise Lost: The Imperial Garden Yuanming Yuan. (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2001).

YMYJ (Yuanming Yuan garden journals). Zhongguo yuanming yuan xuehui choubei weiyuan hui, ed. Beijing: Zhongguo jianzhu gongyi chubanshe. Vol. 1 (1981), Vol. 2 (1983), Vol. 3 (1984), Vol. 4 (1986).

Zou, Hui. A Jesuit Garden in Beijing and Early Modern Chinese Culture. Comparative Cultural Studies. West Lafayette, Ind.: Purdue University Press, 2011

173