The Great Wall of China: From History to Myth

Arthur Waldron's "The Great Wall of China: from History to Myth" is a well-researched and scholarly attempt to clarify the existence and meaning of the construction dubbed "the Great Wall", mainly by Westerners. Waldron actually offers little on pre-Ming wall-building in China, rather choosing to focus on the various court intrigues and challenges to Ming preeminence in mainland east Asia that led to wall-building by the Ming. Waldron then goes forward to assess various modern views of the wall and its utility in defining the Chinese Nation. Contrary to what many reviewers assert, the Chinese have not held that the so-called "Great Wall" existed in totality since the Qin Dynasty. Waldron does indicate this point at various places in his book, but the overall impression that one might get is still somewhat muddled. Waldron dismisses early accounts of the extent of the wall by Western visitors, but doesn't really offer evidence to support the dismissal - rather relying on a heavy dose of scepticism to support his own views. Despite his scepticism, recent archeological research has provided us with extensive data on the various walls, and while one must certainly dismiss reports (by Westerners) that anything like single wall effectively encircled northern China, the various walls were, and are, far more extensive than many would have us believe. As to the effectiveness of the various walls, it appears that where they were used in conjunction with a reasoned policy of interaction with peoples on both sides of the structure, they were quite effective in delineating the geographic space claimed by the various builders. Unfortunately, the policies associated with wall-building were all to frequently unreasoned. Court intrigues related to power struggles often undermined policies which might have led to good relations with peoples outside the wall. These problems frequently were a product of Literati efforts to define the culture and exclude peoples from this culture. Combined with concerns about how power might accrue to those associated with successful border policy, these efforts led to ongoing impasses about whether or not to trade or interact with foreigners, whether to implement antagonistic actions against them, or whether to build fortifications or walls in attempts to control access. Waldron goes on at great length about these debates and intrigues and the resulting ineffective policies. When dicussing modern views of the "Great Wall", the genesis and purpose of utilizing the term should be carefully assessed. Waldron does cover these aspects, but emphasizes those that express his own positions. Clearly, the original utilization of the term had a Western genesis, but there is no question that the term has been used to effect by modern Chinese leaders. Waldron's final assessment is carefully couched so that he does not go too far out on a limb as to the future of the Chinese nation, but he unquestionably was harboring doubts. One wonders about

Researched in excruciating detail, with almost 600 footnotes, this book describes how and why the Great Wall was built. Not always the reasons you would think. The Wall is apparently still a mystery as to its extent and location. Text is readable, graphics are barely adequate for the purpose. but this is the most scholarly book I have seen on the subject. Not a coffee table book.

It's a shame in some ways that Arthur Waldron published this book in 1990, just as the world order was starting to change in ways that would have added even greater force to some of his arguments. For this is a remarkable book, with a breadth that goes far beyond its notional, even if gigantic, physical subject. At a purely descriptive-historical level, Waldron debunks most if not all of the myths about the Wall. So far from being an eternal barrier between China and barbarism, created by Chin Shih Huang Ti and sustained by every subsequent dynasty, the early Wall (if it existed at all) was an outgrowth of an already ancient Chinese tradition of building defensive walls, mostly against each other. The really successful dynasties, like the early and middle Tang, built no walls at all; their preferred approach to dealing with troublesome nomads was a combination of bribes, flattery (both offered from a position of strength) and massacres conducted by flying columns of light cavalry. Even in the earlier years of the Ming dynasty, China could still produce a steppe general like Wang Yueh, who for speed, wiliness and ruthlessness matches any Indian fighter of the American West. The Wall as we know it was mainly a 16th century AD creation of the later Ming, who were bankrupt militarily and paralysed by internal factionalism in which proponents of a unipolar cultural-supremacist stance always had the moral upper hand. Unable to fight in the field, and ideologically debarred from using the Tang arts of suasion, the Ming had no choice but to build, at vast cost, works that the nomads could always get round in the end. It is astonishing that the Ming survived the resurgence of Mongol power that prompted the construction of the Great Wall we know; the chronic disunity of the Mongols with the enfeeblement of the line of Chingis had far more to do with it than fortifications manned by peasant militias. In the end it was a new set of nomads, the Manchu, who finally solved the `barbarian problem' by out-Mongoling the Mongols from the Pacific to Xinjiang and then incorporating China in their empire. Geographically, modern China, with its vast territories `beyond the Wall', is their legacy. Where Waldron goes far beyond a historical recitation, and where he has most to say that is relevant to our own times, is in his analysis of the Ming preconceptions and internal politics that led to the building of the Wall. China was for millennia the superpower of East Asia and Chinese thinking about the world order was always basically unipolar (a luxury the USA has only enjoyed since 1990), dictated by their geographic location at one end of Eurasia, remote from any comparable agrarian power. The unipolar stance, however, permitted at least in principle a diversity of views about the means appropriate and permissible for ensuring China's safety and dominance. The great divide in the 15th-16th century Ming courts was between the pragmatists, who favoured a policy on the

Many times we meet Great Wall. However, how many people can distinguish the fact from bubble about the wall? Why was it built? When? For what? This book try to find the relation of the walls between the Wall of the Ming and previous 'Walls' including First Emperor's. After you read this book, you'll understand what made Chinese build the Wall.