Of Bk. II. in the
first Volume.) ["Before arriving at the bridge the small walled city of
Kung-ki cheng is passed. This was founded in the first half of the 17th
century. The people generally call it Fei-ch'eng" (Bretschneider,
Peking, p. 50.) - H.C.] It is described both by Magaillans and Lecomte,
with some curious discrepancies, whilst each affords particulars
corroborative of Polo's account of the character of the bridge. The former
calls it the finest bridge in China. Lecomte's account says the bridge was
the finest he had yet seen. "It is above 170 geometrical paces (850 feet)
in length. The arches are small, but the rails or side-walls are made of
a hard whitish stone resembling marble. These stones are more than 5 feet
long, 3 feet high, and 7 or 8 inches thick; supported at each end by
pilasters adorned with mouldings and bearing the figures of lions.... The
bridge is paved with great flat stones, so well joined that it is even as
a floor."
Magaillans thinks Polo's memory partially misled him, and that his
description applies more correctly to another bridge on the same road, but
some distance further west, over the Lieu-li Ho. For the bridge over the
Hwan Ho had really but thirteen arches, whereas that on the Lieu-li had,
as Polo specifies, twenty-four. The engraving which we give of the Lu-kou
K'iao from a Chinese work confirms this statement, for it shows but
thirteen arches. And what Polo says of the navigation of the river is
almost conclusive proof that Magaillans is right, and that our traveller's
memory confounded the two bridges. For the navigation of the Hwan Ho, even
when its channel is full, is said to be impracticable on account of rapids,
whilst the Lieu-li Ho, or "Glass River," is, as its name implies, smooth,
and navigable, and it is largely navigated by boats from the coal-mines of
Fang-shan. The road crosses the latter about two leagues from Cho-chau.
(See next chapter.)
[Illustration: Bridge of Lu-ku k'iao]
[The Rev. W.S. Ament (M. Polo in Cambaluc, p. 116-117) remarks regarding
Yule's quotation from Magaillans that "a glance at Chinese history would
have explained to these gentlemen that there was no stone bridge over the
Liu Li river till the days of Kia Tsing, the Ming Emperor, 1522 A.D., or
more than one hundred and fifty years after Polo was dead. Hence he could
not have confounded bridges, one of which he never saw. The Lu Kou Bridge
was first constructed of stone by She Tsung, fourth Emperor of the Kin, in
the period Ta Ting 1189 A.D., and was finished by Chang Tsung 1194 A.D.
Before that time it had been constructed of wood, and had been sometimes a
stationary and often a floating bridge. The oldest account [end of 16th
century] states that the bridge was pu 200 in length, and specifically
states that each pu was 5 feet, thus making the bridge 1000 feet long. It
was called the Kuan Li Bridge. The Emperor, Kia Tsing of the Ming, was a
great bridge builder. He reconstructed this bridge, adding strong
embankments to prevent injury by floods. He also built the fine bridge over
the Liu Li Ho, the Cho Chou Bridge over the Chue Ma Ho. What cannot be
explained is Polo's statement that the bridge had twenty-four arches, when
the oldest accounts give no more than thirteen, there being eleven at the
present time. The columns which supported the balustrade in Polo's time
rested upon the loins of sculptured lions. The account of the lions after
the bridge was repaired by Kia Tsing says that there are so many that it is
impossible to count them correctly, and gossip about the bridge says that
several persons have lost their minds in making the attempt. The little
walled city on the east end of the bridge, rightly called Kung Chi,
popularly called Fei Ch'eng, is a monument to Ts'ung Ch'eng, the last of
the Ming, who built it, hoping to check the advance of Li Tzu ch'eng, the
great robber chief who finally proved too strong for him." - H.C.]
The Bridge of Lu-kou is mentioned more than once in the history of the
conquest of North China by Chinghiz. It was the scene of a notable mutiny
of the troops of the Kin Dynasty in 1215, which induced Chinghiz to break
a treaty just concluded, and led to his capture of Peking.
This bridge was begun, according to Klaproth, in 1189, and was five years
a-building. On the 17th August, 1688, as Magaillans tells us, a great flood
carried away two arches of the bridge, and the remainder soon fell. [Father
Intorcetta, quoted by Bretschneider (Peking, p. 53), gives the 25th of
July, 1668, as the date of the destruction of the bridge, which agrees well
with the Chinese accounts. - H.C.] The bridge was renewed, but with only
nine arches instead of thirteen, as appears from the following note of
personal observation with which Dr. Lockhart has favoured me:
"At 27 li from Peking, by the western road leaving the gate of the
Chinese city called Kwang-'an-man, after passing the old walled town of
Feuchen, you reach the bridge of Lo-Ku-Kiao. As it now stands it is a
very long bridge of nine arches (real arches) spanning the valley of the
Hwan Ho, and surrounded by beautiful scenery. The bridge is built of green
sandstone, and has a good balustrade with short square pilasters crowned by
small lions. It is in very good repair, and has a ceaseless traffic, being
on the road to the coal-mines which supply the city. There is a pavilion at
each end of the bridge with inscriptions, the one recording that K'anghi
(1662-1723) built the bridge, and the other that Kienlung (1736-1796)
repaired it." These circumstances are strictly consistent with
Magaillans' account of the destruction of the mediaeval bridge.
Enter page number
PreviousNext
Page 9 of 360
Words from 8121 to 9139
of 370046
