“私园公用”——明清徽州村居园林公共性活动研究

"Private Gardens Opening to the Public" Research on Public Activities of Huizhou Village Garden inMing and Qing Dynasties

关键词:  风景园林  公共性活动  村居园林  徽州

Key words:  landscape architecture  public activities  village garden  Huizhou

摘要:

公共性伴随着中国园林发展的始终，现有关于园林公共性的研究对象多集中于城市园林，缺乏对村居园林公共性的探究。以徽州地区为例，通过方志 检索出村居园林的相关诗文集，利用字词检索与文献分析，对明清时期徽州村居园林的基础信息与公共活动信息进行梳理、归纳，进一步分析活动表现并与城市 园林的开放游赏进行对比。据此，明清徽州村居园林的公共活动可分为雅集游赏等休闲型活动及劝农讲学等公益型活动，园主们通过雅集游赏以交流文学、疏通 关系、展现地位，通过公益行为以惠及农耕、促进教育。村居园林与城市园林在开放时间、活动人群、类型及尺度上有着较大不同，对明清村居园林公共性的探 究是解析明清徽州村居公共生活的重要窗口。

Abstract:

Chinese classical gardens have never lacked public attributes, yet applying Western modern definitions of "public parks" to evaluate their communal characteristics would result in historical misjudgment. Contemporary research reveals that ancient Chinese gardens developed their own criteria for assessing publicness, validated through studies of mainstream urban gardens. However, current scholarship predominantly focuses on metropolitan horticultural spaces while neglecting systematic exploration of "mountain-forest" and "villagebased" garden landscapes. This creates pressing academic inquiries: Through what human activities does the public nature manifest in village residential gardens? How does this rural communal quality differ from the open sharing observed in urban gardens? Defined as distinct from urban counterparts, village residential gardens integrate rural architectural elements (farmsteads, croplands, hedgerows, embankments) with natural landscapes (woodlands, lakes, streams) to form vernacular horticultural spaces deeply embedded in rural life. Their public nature manifests not merely through spatial accessibility but extends to pursuits of communal welfare (philanthropic dimension). The assessment framework encompasses dual criteria: primary evaluation through physical boundary presence (boundless gardens enabling unrestricted multi-class access indicate publicness), and supplementary judgment based on observable classinclusive public behaviors or charitable activities regardless of enclosure. Taking Huizhou region as exemplar, this study reconstructs the evolutionary trajectory of rural garden openness through systematic analysis of Ming-Qing local gazetteers, literary anthologies, and visual materials. Employing textual mining and hermeneutic analysis of garden-related poetry and prose, we categorize public activities in Huizhou's village gardens into recreational (literary gatherings, scenic tours) and philanthropic types (agricultural encouragement, educational initiatives). Mid-Ming witnessed Huizhou merchants' economic ascendancy, whose remittances financed elaborate garden constructions. These mercantile elites transformed gardens into sustained social arenas transcending literati exclusivity. The Zuoyin Garden in Wang Village (Xiuning County) exemplifies this trend, where Changgong Lake and its surroundings remained unenclosed, welcoming unrestricted visitation as depicted in Illustrated Garden Scenes of Huancui Hall and Zuoyin Garden Scroll. Comparable cases include Xiong Village's Fei Garden and Tangmo Village's Tan'gan Garden. In this way, the Hui merchants are comparable to the elegant literati and take care of the world. They can not only communicate with the officials with ease, but also express their feelings, show their talents, and show off their "achievements" to highlight the glory of the family. Rooted in agrarian traditions, Huizhou's village gardens manifested unique educational and agricultural philanthropy. Under merchant patronage, garden-adjacent farmlands became communal cultivation zones, with proprietors establishing rest houses offering tea and shelter to farmers. Educational transformation proved more remarkable: Xixi Village's Bushu Garden (She County) nurtured eminent scholars including Dai Zhen and Jiang Yong, ultimately becoming the birthplace of Huizhou School of Textual Criticism. Such academic activities not only democratized basic education but also stimulated academy-garden constructions, profoundly impacting regional educational development. Philanthropic dimensions extended beyond pedagogy. Garden owners implemented infrastructural improvements (road construction, irrigation works), agricultural subsidies, and educational endowments, collectively advancing rural welfare. Comparatively, village gardens diverged from urban counterparts across four dimensions: 1) Differences in the populations involved: Predominantly serving clan members and villagers rather than aristocratic circles; 2) Differences in the opening times: Maintaining irregular or perpetual openness versus urban gardens' seasonal access (e.g., Suzhou/Yangzhou gardens opening during Qingming/Mid-Autumn festivals); 3) Differences in the activity types: Village gardens are more inclined to contact with the countryside activities, but urban gardens are more inclined to elegant appreciation activities; 4) Differences in the range of activity: The village garden has a relatively vague boundary, the scope of activities exceeds the garden itself, the forest wild interest, village field farmhouses are also a part of the garden tour activities. This investigation establishes village residential gardens as crucial interfaces for decoding Ming-Qing Huizhou's rural public life. Their hybrid nature as private domains serving communal needs challenges conventional public-private dichotomies in garden studies. The Huizhou case demonstrates how mercantile capital, Confucian ideals, and rural ecology coalesced to create unique models of vernacular public space, offering fresh perspectives for reassessing Chinese garden history and rural social dynamics. Future research directions include comparative studies across geographic regions and deeper integration with socio-economic historical frameworks.