In 249 BC, the State of Lu was invaded and annexed by the State of Chu (楚国). Liangguan together with the royal palace no longer functioned as the state political institution. Then when did the palace turn into a place of memory? And how would the ancient Chinese conceptualize Liangguan as a heritage site? I do not have enough historical records to make this inquiry exactly answerable. The earliest extant book I could find is the Yuanhe Provincial Gazetteers (《元和郡县志》, 806-820) which
firstly recorded Liangguan’s geographical location and designated its heritage. This recorded place was associated with the Spring and Autumn Annals and noted in association with Confucius. Many other historical books indirectly mentioned this place too. And at least four subsequent imperial Chinese dynasties purposefully conceptualized the place as a heritage site. The Liangguan site was recorded in Chinese historical gazetteers to transmit the political implication by referring to the
jing – the Spring and Autumn Annals. Then, Liangguan had been remembered and
then constantly updated in the local records as a place name of heritage for over two thousand years.
The Universal Geography of the Taiping Era (《太平寰宇记》, 976-983) recorded,
The Liangguan Tower is located about fifty foot steps away from the county.
Zuo’s Commentaries on the Spring and Autumn Annals wrote: in the second year of Duke Ding, Zhi Gate and the affiliated Liangguan were on fire.
Du made the note, saying: Liangguan refers to Que.14
两观台，在县东五十步。
《左传》：定公二年，雉门及两观灾。 杜注云：阙也。
The National Gazetteers of Ming Period (《明一统志》, 1408-1466) said,
Liangguan Tower is located in the ancient Lu State within the Qufu County.
It refers to the Que of ancient Lu State.15
14 Wang, W. C. 王文楚 et al.(eds.) & Le, S. 乐史(Author from Song Period, 960-1127), p. 439. 15 Li, X. 李贤(Author from Ming Period, 1368-1644), Chapter Twenty-three.
两观台，在曲阜县鲁城内，本鲁阙。
The General National Gazetteers of Qing Period (《大清一统志》, 1644-1912) recorded,
Liangguan refers to the site in the South East direction of the Qufu county. The Spring and Autumn Annals wrote, in the second year of Duke Ding, Zhi Gate and Liangguan were on fire.
Note: Liangguan refers to Que.16
在曲阜县东南。
《春秋》：定公二年，雉门及两观灾。 注：两观，阙也。
The Universal Geography of the Taiping Era recorded the place by referring to the Zuo’s Commentaries on the Spring and Autumn Annals (《左传》, 403-386 BC, hereafter the Zuo), a commentary book that was said to be originally composed by Zuo Qiuming (左丘明, 556-451 BC) – a contemporary of Confucius. It was recognized as historical narratives which described and illuminated in detail the major events recorded in the chronicle Spring and Autumn Annals. The Zuo did not provide any story about the Liangguan entry. But it was quoted by the ancient gazetteer as the source book of the chronicle because it was regarded as the most authoritative book among three commentary books. The Zuo was composed at a time closest to Confucius. While the General National Gazetteers of Qing Period (《大清一统 志》,1644-1912) recorded three aspects of information about the site: 1) its geographical location in its contemporary Qufu city; 2) a direct quote from the Spring
and Autumn Annals; 3) a further note on the architectural name Que. The National Gazetteers of Ming Period (《明一统志》, 1408-1466) did not explicitly refer to the
scripture. It recorded that the site of Liangguan resided in the ancient city of Lu State and at that time it was the administrative county of Qufu. The mention of Lu State
implied a time when the fire event of Liangguanoccurred. In some way, three national gazetteers conveyed a sense of political significance on the Confucian heritage site by pointing out the records in the Annals. Queen argued the importance of the Spring and
Autumn Annals in the Chinese culture that, “the imperial government, drawn from the
scriptural traditions of antiquity, defined Chinese political culture for thousands of years.” (Queen, 1996, p. 1)
Obviously in terms of the heritage, the physicality and materiality of the original architectural meanings on the place of Liangguan did not matter. What was cared to the ancient was whether this site was recorded in the Spring and Autumn Annals. The recording of the Liangguan’s location was treated very important for acknowledging how ancient scholars would read the place as part of the Confucian Classics. These gazetteer recordings would be regarded as the regular arts of the regional governance, where the validity of ruling powers could be admitted in the cultural manners. As mentioned before, the kings or emperors were believed to be chosen by Heaven, and their principles of ruling the place were embedded in what Confucius had intended to transmit in the Confucian Classics. The geographical information and its association with the Spring and Autumns Annals were decisive to designate the Confucian heritage.
In the national gazetteers, Liangguan was recorded as a part of the administrative spatial governance. But the Provincial Gazetteer of Shandong (《山东通志》) listed the site of Liangguan in the Chapter “Supreme Sage’s Traces” (至圣遗迹) by saying,
Liangguan Tower is watchtowers outside of Zhi gate from the Lu State. It is forty feet in circumstance and 6.66 in height. The distance of the two symbolic towers was 100 feet apart.
Zuo Commentaries said that, Zhi Gate was a southern gate of the palace, and Liangguan referred to the affiliated watchtowers.17
两观台，在鲁城雉门之外。周围各四十步，高二丈，东西相去一百 步。
《左传》注：雉门，公宫之南门。两观，阙也。
The Supreme Sage referred to Confucius. But Liangguan itself and the fire event were not directly related to Confucius himself in the first place. Then why did the Shandong province assign the place to Confucius? It could be conceived that both the fire and the site were made significant because it was recorded and interpreted by Confucius in the Spring and Autumn Annals. So the book itself was the authorized source of heritage meanings of the site. This cited Provincial Gazetteer of Shandong was compiled for the cultural heritage information in the area under its administration. As shown above, this place was noted as the watchtowers from the Confucius time in the Zuo Commentaries on Spring and Autumn Annals. This provincial gazetteer highlighted that the site’s location was recorded in the Spring and Autumn Annals. The Provincial Gazetteerof Shandong provided a note from the Zuo Commentaries. And this commentary Classics turned out to be an important criterion for interpreting the heritage following textural tradition of antiquity. Additional information recorded by the Provincial Gazetteer of Shandong, which was not mentioned by other gazetteers, was the description of the physical status of the place. To the time under the reign of Yongzheng (雍正, 1678-1735), the site was said to be turned into forty feet in circumstance and 6.66 in height. The distance of the two symbolic towers was 100 feet apart. The architectural remained no longer existed, but the increased high mounds indicated the ancient Chinese were constantly managing the site. Apart from this provincial record, more local-level gazetteers for Qufu in different periods recorded the place by attributing the Spring and Autumn Annals for recognizing its cultural significance. Therefore, the Liangguan term was situated as part of the Spring
and Autumn Annals. The location made the term valuable in terms of the place as the
transmitted heritage because of its association with the classical virtues that Confucius once promoted. For this, Nylan commented that Classical virtues were place-based,
“to be effective, must always be rooted in the past” (Nylan, 2001, p. 245).
What emerged foremost in above four local records on Liangguan was closely relevant to the interactive senses of place, antiquity and heritage. The three national records compiled by different Chinese regimes generally referred to “a compendium of information about an administrative unit” (Bol, 2001, p. 37). The records covered a period of about one thousand year. This indicated that the place of Liangguan as the situated Classics was valued by the imperial system of government of different periods. At the time when they recorded the place, Liangguan had becamean empty place but was authorized as the site of national heritage. The focus of the recording was mostly on its geographical location in reference to the whim of the Qufu without mentioning the material remains. Meanwhile, they explicitly pointed out the source of related jing scripture to indicate the significance of the site. The records also noted that Liangguan was the que (阙) – an implication to show its further ritual meanings, which would be discussed in Chapter 2.