Du Hao first proposed the concept of "Palace Museum Cultural Circle" in "Creative China": The Research Content and Value of the "Palace Museum Cultural Circle" Concept

Written by  Du Hao   Wang Baochao

This article is a phased achievement of the 2021 Palace Museum Open Project "Research on Examples of Inheritance of Qing Dynasty Court Crafts", a major research project of Hebei University's Yanzhao Institute of Advanced Culture, and a phased achievement of Hebei University's Philosophy and Social Sciences (Key) Cultivation Project.

Abstract: This article proposes the concept of the "Palace Museum Cultural Circle." By reviewing the background and academic basis for the proposal of the "Palace Museum Cultural Circle," it examines the geographical locations and cultural characteristics of existing palaces named "Palace Museum" during the Ming and Qing dynasties from the perspective of cultural stratification. With the Beijing Palace Museum as the core cultural circle, it proposes the "core circle" and "outer circle" of the "Palace Museum Cultural Circle." Through a historical梳理 of the Palace Museum, Palace Museum culture, the Palace Museum (Beijing), and the history of Palace Studies research, it elucidates the academic, cultural, and historical values of the "Palace Museum Cultural Circle."

Keywords: Palace Museum Cultural Circle; Palace Studies; Culture; Value

1. Background for the Proposal of the "Palace Museum Cultural Circle": Palace Museum Culture and the Palace Museum (Beijing)

The term "gugong" (故宫), or "palace museum," refers to former imperial palaces. In Bao Zhao's collection of essays, "Bao Canjun Jijzhu" (鲍参军集注) vol. 5, from the Southern Dynasties period, there is a poem titled "Passing by the Old Palace" (从过旧宫). The "old palace" in this poem refers to the palace at Pengcheng, where Bao Zhao served as an official during Emperor Wen of Song's Yuanjia reign (445 AD). Pengcheng was home to the imperial tombs and former palaces of Liu Yu, the founder of the Song dynasty. During the reign of Emperor Taizong of the Ming Dynasty, "the imperial city was rebuilt to the east, about one li away from the old palace."② Here, the "old palace" refers to the Yuan Dynasty imperial palace, which likely included Daming Palace, Xingsheng Palace, Longfu Palace, and Qionghua Island. During the Qing Dynasty, Emperor Kangxi referred to the palaces in Shengjing (Shenyang) as "old palaces" in a poem during his eastern tour.③ Subsequently, Emperor Qianlong and Emperor Jiaqing of the Qing Dynasty also referred to the Shengjing old palaces as "gugong" (故宫) in their poems during their eastern tours.④ From a historical perspective, the term "gugong" was used by a later dynasty to refer to the imperial palace of a previous dynasty. The rich cultural connotations of the Palace Museum are jointly constructed by its architecture, art collections, and court history and culture.

(I) Palace Museum Culture

In 1952, Kroeber and Kluckhohn co-authored "Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions," which meticulously examined 161 definitions of culture between 1871 and 1951.⑤ They provided a standard definition, accepted by most social scientists: "Culture consists of explicit and implicit patterns of behavior and patterns related to behavior. It is acquired and transmitted through symbols. It encompasses the unique achievements of that group, including their manifestations in artifacts. The core of culture consists of traditional (i.e., historically acquired and selectively transmitted) ideas, especially the values attached to them." This reveals the historical and hierarchical types of culture. The development of culture should be a unification of various levels and types of cultural qualities throughout history.

"The Palace Museum is a comprehensive history of China, not just an imperial palace. Its architectural layout, spatial composition, and even the plaques and couplets within reflect 5,000 years of Chinese social, civilized, and cultural history. Its collection of artifacts is traditional. Many artifacts, apart from those unearthed through archaeological excavations in recent years, are rare handed-down treasures. Most of these handed-down treasures came from palaces and temples of the Shang, Zhou, and later dynasties, finally reaching the Ming and Qing dynasties, embodying Chinese cultural traditions. Therefore, it harbors history."⑥ The Beijing Palace Museum has a history of 491 years, during which 24 emperors reigned (from the 18th year of Emperor Yongle of the Ming Dynasty to the 3rd year of Emperor Xuantong of the Qing Dynasty), and its value and status are objectively evident. From the perspective of its status, function, and connotations, the Palace Museum can be seen as the court culture established around the emperor, imperial power, and imperial palace at the end of China's feudal dynasties. This political and artistic cultural center, established around the capital city, differs from Western church culture. Therefore, Palace Museum culture undoubtedly belongs to the grand, upper-class, mainstream traditions, representing the magnificent part of traditional Chinese culture, yet it is intricately linked with folk traditions and various aspects of Chinese culture such as craftsmanship, family-state concepts, and political systems.⑦ Palace Museum culture possesses uniqueness, richness, holism, and symbolism within traditional Chinese culture, and the understanding of Palace Museum culture is an ever-deepening process.

① See Bao Zhao, edited by Qian Zhonglian: "Bao Canjun Jijzhu," Shanghai Guji Publishing House, 1980, p. 302.

② See [Qing] Sun Chengze: "Tianfu Guangji," Beijing Guji Publishing House, 1984, p. 314.

③ See [Qing] Xuanye: "Shengjing Jiugong," "Gao Si Li Cheng Yan Zhu Ju Yu Jiugong," in "Qing Shengzu Yu Zhi Wen Ji Di Yi Ji" (Vol. 38).

④ See [Qing] Hongli: "Gugong Yongzhu," "Gugong Shi Huangtaihou Yan," "Gugong Lan Zhangzou," in "Qing Shengzu Yu Zhi Shi Chu Ji" (Vol. 18). [Qing] Yongyan: "Qingninggong Yougan," "Jiayingtang," in "Qing Renzong Yu Zhi Shi Er Ji" (Vol. 15), "Qing Renzong Yu Zhi Shi San Ji" (Vol. 55).

⑤ See Gong Donglin: "A Giant in Anthropology - Kroeber," in "Shijie Minzu," Issue 3, 1999.

⑥ See Shan Shiyuan: "The Palace Museum is a General History of China," in Zhuo Yun, Zhu Chengru (eds.): "Collection of Papers of the China Forbidden City Society (Second Series)," Forbidden City Publishing House, 2002, p. 386.

⑦ See Cao Bingwu: "The Palace Museum, Palace Studies, and the Protection, Research, and Cultural Inheritance of the Palace Museum—Summary of the Palace Studies Academic Symposium," in "China Cultural Relics News," July 1, 2005, p. 5.

(II) The Palace Museum (Beijing)

Globally, most rich and exquisite imperial collections and palaces, after modern revolutions, were quickly collected by national museums, or the palaces themselves became museums. For example, after the French Revolution, confiscated royal collections were gathered in the Louvre, which opened as the National Museum of Fine Arts of the Republic in 1793. After the October Revolution in Russia, treasures from the Tsarist palaces were nationalized, and the State Hermitage Museum, including the Winter Palace, was established.

The Beijing Palace Museum's collection, inherited from the Song, Yuan, and Ming dynasties, is exceptionally rich in artifacts. According to the "Report on the Inventory of the Committee for the Aftermath of the Qing Imperial Household" published between 1925 and 1930, the Beijing Palace Museum held 1.17 million artifacts left from the Ming and Qing imperial courts. The Palace Museum (Beijing), established in 1925, was one of the world's largest museums at the time in terms of collection, and a great achievement in Chinese cultural and art history. The Palace Museum aimed to "manage the preservation, exhibition, and dissemination of the architecture, cultural relics, books, and archives of the Palace Museum and its affiliated sites" ("Organic Law of the Palace Museum (Beijing)," 1928), making China's excavation of Palace Museum culture more organized and in-depth, consciously inheriting China's excellent intangible cultural heritage.

With the continuous development of the Palace Museum (Beijing), it has become not only a cultural heritage site but also a research institution for Palace Museum culture, gathering numerous Palace Museum scholars with senior professional titles. Based on the Beijing Palace Museum, the Palace Museum Academy aims to create an "academic Palace Museum," bringing together excellent experts and scholars from home and abroad to build an open academic platform, which has formed a scale of "one office and fifteen institutes." The Palace Museum College is an open platform established by the Palace Museum (Beijing), and its standardized and diverse training mechanisms cultivate more professionals for the cultural relics and museum community.①

① See Shan Jixiang, Mao Ying: "From 'Palace Museum' to 'The Palace Museum'—An Interview with Director Shan Jixiang," in "Southeast Culture," Issue 5, 2016.

2. Academic Basis for the Proposal of the "Palace Museum Cultural Circle"

Palace Studies was officially proposed by Zheng Xinmiao, then director of the Palace Museum (Beijing), at a museum forum held in Nanjing Museum on October 18, 2003, to celebrate its 70th anniversary. He elucidated the disciplinary background and developmental significance of Palace Studies from three aspects: "the research object of Palace Studies," "the existing good foundation of the Palace Museum," and "the purpose and significance of establishing the disciplinary status of Palace Studies." In summary, Palace Studies is a comprehensive discipline that takes the Palace Museum and its historical and cultural connotations as its research object, integrating organization, research, protection, and exhibition; it is a discipline that focuses on the Ming and Qing Forbidden City and the Palace Museum (Beijing) as its research core.① Within the framework of Palace Studies, new research topics are formed, new research conclusions and achievements are obtained, and new knowledge systems and disciplinary structures are created through new perspectives, approaches, and methods around the research on the Palace Museum, its cultural relics, and the Palace Museum (Beijing).

(I) Palace Studies

As an academic research system, Palace Studies is bound to evolve from a narrow to a broad scope. The disciplinary construction of "Palace Studies" must be forward-looking and sustainable. From a historical perspective, any institutional system of the Ming and Qing dynasties generally had its origins in previous dynasties.② From a regional perspective, "Greater Palace Museum" has become a consensus in recent years in Palace Studies research. "Greater Palace Museum" refers to understanding the connection between the architecture of the Forbidden City and related imperial palace buildings as a whole, with the Beijing Palace Museum as the center. Therefore, the research perspective of Palace Studies is bound to transcend the current research system, leading to a deeper and clearer understanding of the "connotation" and "extension" of Palace Studies research.③

① See Zheng Xinmiao: "Introduction to Palace Studies," Forbidden City Publishing House, 2017, p. 43.

② See Wang Su: "Preliminary Ideas on the Disciplinary Construction of 'Palace Studies'—Focusing on the Beijing Palace Museum (Part 1)," in Zheng Xinmiao, Li Wenru: "Palace Studies Journal (Issue 6)," Forbidden City Publishing House, 2010, pp. 323-324.

③ See Zhang Hongwei: "The Object and System of Palace Studies Research," in "Journal of Liaoning University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition)," Issue 4, 2012.

(II) Palace Museum Cultural Circle

Cultural circle is one of the geographical concepts used in cultural studies to describe cultural distribution. Cultural scholars emphasize the spatial distribution and evolution of culture, believing that only by placing culture in a specific region can its characteristics be accurately grasped and compared. A cultural circle has regionality in space, independence in cultural dissemination, and persistence in time. The reason why academia proposes the concept of a cultural circle is to attempt to find patterns of common origin in reconstructing the historical sequence of ancient and modern cultural relations.①

"The Palace Museum," as a rich historical and cultural entity that embodies traditional Chinese culture, has its research objects primarily focused on the Palace Museum itself, ranging from Palace Museum culture and the Palace Museum (Beijing) to academic reflections on the Palace Museum. However, there is still a gap in regional research on the Palace Museum cultural strata and cultural relics related to Palace Museum culture. The "Palace Museum Cultural Circle" is based on Palace Museum culture, conducting a regional division of Palace Museum culture, and carrying out an "extensional" academic reflection on Palace Museum culture. From the perspective of cultural strata, the "Palace Museum Cultural Circle" not only emphasizes the excavation of the "connotation" of Palace Museum culture but also bases itself on the regional characteristics of the Palace Museum and its integration with surrounding cultures, further extending the connotation of Palace Studies in space, while also integrating disciplines such as communication studies, history, museology, and art. In excavating local cultural resources and local gazetteers, it uncovers historical and cultural values that are interconnected and interact with Palace Museum culture. Therefore, the "Palace Museum Cultural Circle" can create a ripple effect, significantly enhancing the brand awareness of excellent historical and cultural resources in the areas surrounding the Palace Museum, while also achieving the spillover effects of the Palace Museum brand, culture, elements, and channels, which will lead to original and collaborative breakthroughs in the field of regional historical and cultural aspects of Palace Museum culture and holds significant value for coordinating the inheritance of excellent cultural resources in different regions.

① See Wang Yude: "Cultural Studies," Yunnan University Press, 2006, p. 85.

3. Research Objects of China's Palace Museum Cultural Circle

Understood literally, "Gugong" (故宫) does not refer specifically to the Forbidden City in Beijing, but rather broadly to palaces left behind by ancient dynasties. In this sense, the Louvre in France and the Hermitage Museum in Russia are also, to some extent, "Gugong." Currently, there are four museums in China named "Gugong" from the Ming and Qing dynasties: the Beijing Palace Museum, the Qing Shenyang Palace Museum, the Nanjing Ming Palace Museum, and the Taipei Palace Museum. Except for the Taipei Palace Museum, the other three are imperial palace sites from the Ming and Qing dynasties (as shown in Table 1). These different "Gugong" belong to different regions in China, not only varying slightly in their status and value but also in their regional cultures and cultural elements related to "Gugong" culture. Therefore, the development of "Gugong" cultural resources cannot be generalized. From the perspective of cultural strata, four "Gugong" cultural circles can be roughly formed: the Beijing Palace Museum Cultural Circle, the Qing Shenyang Palace Museum Cultural Circle, the Nanjing Ming Palace Museum Cultural Circle, and the Taipei Palace Museum Cultural Circle.

Table 1: "Gugong" Architecture of the Ming and Qing Dynasties

Name	Managing Authority	Construction Time	Affiliated Region	Status and Value
Beijing Palace Museum	The Palace Museum (Beijing)	Ming Yongle 4 (1406)	Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region	Possesses the world's largest, best-preserved, and most exquisitely constructed ancient palace complex, with 1.5 million historical artifacts, documents, and artistic treasures.
Qing Shenyang Palace Museum	Shenyang Palace Museum
Nanjing Ming Palace Museum	——	Yuan Zhizheng 26 (1366)	Yangtze River Delta region	The core and political center of the early Ming Dynasty capital. Grand in scale and rigorous in layout, it was deeply influenced by the traditional system and culture of ancient Chinese capitals, becoming the blueprint for the later construction of the Beijing Palace Museum.
Taipei Palace Museum	Taipei Palace Museum	Built in 1962	Taiwan, China region	A modern building in the style of traditional Chinese palace architecture. It houses imperial collections from the Palace Museum (Beijing), Nanjing Palace Museum, Shenyang Palace Museum, Chengde Mountain Resort, Summer Palace, Jingyi Garden, and the Guozijian (Imperial Academy), among others. It is a major center for the study of ancient Chinese art history and Sinology, and the largest museum in Taiwan, China.

 

(I) Core Cultural Circle: Beijing Palace Museum Cultural Circle

The Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region is China's "Capital Economic Circle," comprising Beijing, Tianjin, and 11 prefecture-level cities and 2 provincial-administered cities in Hebei Province. During the Ming and Qing dynasties, the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region was not only the political core area of China but also an important component of the northern Chinese economy. Currently, coordinated development of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei is a major national strategy, with the core being the orderly dispersion of Beijing's non-capital functions. Breakthroughs are to be made first in key areas such as Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei transportation integration, ecological environmental protection, and industrial upgrading and transfer. This is consistent with the historical regional status of China's Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region. Culturally, although the cultural forms of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region differ slightly, historically they all belong to the Yanzhao culture. The integrated development of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei also requires integrating different cultural resources and forming a "new culture" through "integration and innovation" to lead and support.① This integrated new culture fully maintains its regional characteristics while integrating and absorbing excellent cultural essences from other regions, enhancing their respective cultural qualities and tastes, and also providing impetus for regional cultural development. This "new culture" is formed on the basis of coordinated regional development in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, and it should not only enhance cultural inclusiveness and openness but also strengthen mutual cultural development and interaction, and strengthen the protection of cultural heritage and the development of cultural resources in the three regions through multiple channels, angles, and levels.

In this process of cultural collaborative development, the significant IP effect of Beijing Palace Museum culture cannot be ignored. As the Forbidden City during the Ming and Qing dynasties, the Beijing Palace Museum was the imperial palace used for the longest period, and it also has natural geographical connections with Hebei and Tianjin. For example, the Beijing Palace Museum has architectural connections with material cultural heritage such as the Eastern Qing Tombs and Western Qing Tombs in Hebei; in terms of intangible cultural heritage, the Beijing Palace Museum has certain connections with the "Eight Great Skills of Yanjing" and Ding porcelain.

Therefore, the Beijing Palace Museum Cultural Circle should be based on the cultural resources of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei coordinated development cultural circle, with the study of Beijing Palace Museum culture as its core. It should academically define the excellent material and intangible cultural heritage in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region that has connections with Palace Museum culture, forming an integrated IP effect with Palace Museum culture, and seeking realistic paths and theoretical foundations for the coordinated cultural development of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei. Through systematic research and review from a historical and geographical perspective, it aims to outline the "regionally integrated, culturally coherent" Palace Museum cultural background and origins in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, and construct a preliminary heritage protection system and structure for the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region with the protection of Beijing Palace Museum culture as its core, in anticipation of providing a foundation and guidance for future in-depth research and protection efforts. Examples include the joint excavation of Peking University (Jingshi University Hall), the Zhili Governor's Office, the ruins of Qing imperial temporary palaces, Lianchi Academy, Tianjin Jingyuan, the Eastern Qing Tombs, the Western Qing Tombs, and a large number of cultural relics, as well as intangible cultural heritage of court craftsmanship in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region such as Beijing embroidery, inner-painted snuff bottles, and Ding porcelain.

① See Li Hai, Sun Wanguo: "Research on the Strategic Development and Cooperation of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Regional Culture," in Hebei Provincial Philosophy and Social Sciences Office (ed.): "Analysis and Forecast of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Coordinated Development (2014-2015)," Hebei Education Publishing House, 2015, p. 110.

(II) One of the Outer Circles: Qing Shenyang Palace Museum Cultural Circle

In ancient times, Northeast China was called "Guandong" and belonged to the Youzhou region. Today, it includes Heilongjiang, Jilin, and Liaoning provinces, as well as the four eastern leagues of Inner Mongolia. The Northeast has been a region where ethnic minorities have gathered since ancient times. According to historical documents such as the "Classic of Mountains and Seas" and the "Bamboo Annals," early ethnic groups in the Northeast included Yi, Dongyi, Jiuyi, Donghu, and Sushen.① After entering feudal society, ethnic minorities such as Fuyu, Goguryeo, Murong Xianbei, Khitan, Jurchen, and Manchu successively established their regimes in the Northeast. Each ethnic group created different cultures in different ways, forming distinctive cultural forms such as Yangshao culture, Longshan culture, and Dawenkou culture. The cultural characteristics of the Northeast region are formed by the regional characteristics of its ethnic cultures, possessing not only distinct regionality but also strong ethnicity. The regional culture of the Northeast is formed by the long-term production, life, labor, and integration of ethnic minorities in the Northeast. This cultural imprint is deeply embedded in the tangible culture such as famous historical sites, cultural heritage, and local legends, and in the intangible culture such as social customs, thinking habits, moral traditions, and values.

The Qing Shenyang Palace Museum was the fifth imperial palace built after the Manchu rise and establishment of the "Later Jin" local regime. It was founded by Nurhaci, the founder of the Qing Dynasty, in the 10th year of Tianming (1625 AD) when he made Shenyang his capital, and its initial establishment dates back to the first year of Chongde (1636 AD), when Hong Taiji, Emperor Taizong of the Qing Dynasty, changed his reign title and proclaimed himself emperor. After the Qing Dynasty entered the Central Plains, the Qing Shenyang Palace Museum underwent extensive rebuilding and expansion. In 1926, its architectural complex gradually became a museum (today's Shenyang Palace Museum). "The Shenyang Palace Museum, while inheriting the traditions of ancient Chinese imperial palace architecture, drew extensively from rich regional and ethnic cultures, retaining the typical features of traditional Manchu folk dwellings. In terms of architectural style and decorative art, it formed a vivid and unique style that integrates Han, Manchu, and Mongolian architectural art. In particular, its architectural layout, arranged according to the unique Manchu social organization of the 'Eight Banners' system, is unique among palace architecture worldwide. The sacrificial rituals performed by the emperor in the Qingning Palace bear witness to the Manchu shamanic traditions passed down for centuries."② With a history of 400 years, the Qing Shenyang Palace Museum has largely preserved the palace layout and architectural style of the mid-Qing Dynasty. As an imperial architectural complex coexisting with the Beijing Palace Museum after the Qing Dynasty, the architectural culture of the Shenyang Palace Museum reflects more the cultural characteristics of the Northeast region and the Manchu people, integrating the architectural features of the Manchu, Han, Mongolian, and Tibetan ethnic groups, and reflecting the diverse development of Manchu culture. Compared with Beijing Palace Museum culture, Qing Shenyang Palace Museum culture embodies the characteristics of cultural integration and inclusiveness of ethnic minorities, making the Qing Shenyang Palace Museum a model of architectural cultural diversity in ancient Chinese palaces. Moreover, it has formed and preserved hundreds of thousands of historical relics, arts and crafts, and photographic archives, which are important materials and historical records for current Palace Museum culture research. Specialized research on the history, architecture, and collections of the Qing Shenyang Palace Museum began in the 1940s, and thus, research on the Qing Shenyang Palace Museum has become one of the important categories of "Palace Studies" research.

① See Wang Ken et al.: "History of Northeast Folk Culture," Chunfeng Literature and Art Publishing House, 1992, p. 2.

② See the 36th World Heritage Committee meeting document, WHC-12/36.COM/8E.

Currently, research on Qing Shenyang Palace Museum culture has largely formed five major areas: first, the history of the Qing Dynasty, particularly its early period; second, court history, focusing on the court history of the Shenyang Palace Museum; third, treating the Shenyang Palace Museum as a grand cultural relic, an object, and a whole for study; fourth, the construction and development of museums; and fifth, the management and protection of world heritage.② Generally speaking, cultural research on the Shenyang Palace Museum is largely established. However, as an important component of Qing Manchu culture, Shenyang Palace Museum culture is closely related to the regional culture of the Northeast and minority cultures. There has been limited research on the relationship between Qing Palace culture and surrounding cultures. Therefore, based on academic research on Qing Palace culture, linking with the cultural characteristics of the Northeast region to construct the "Qing Shenyang Palace Museum Cultural Circle" can not only foster coordinated development of regional cultural characteristics but also enrich the connotations of Shenyang Palace Museum cultural research, building a deeper historical context and regional characteristics for Qing Dynasty Shenyang Palace Museum cultural research.

① See Wu Bin (ed.): "Research on the Qing Shenyang Palace Museum," Liaoning University Press, 2006, p. 2.

② See Wu Bin (ed.): "Shenyang Palace Museum and World Cultural Heritage," Liaoning University Press, 2007, p. 234.

(III) One of the Outer Layers: Nanjing Ming Palace Cultural Circle

On September 7, 2008, the State Council issued the "Guiding Opinions on Further Promoting Reform, Opening Up, and Economic and Social Development in the Yangtze River Delta Region," which for the first time defined the Yangtze River Delta region as the entire area of Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Shanghai.① The Yangtze River Delta we refer to is centered on the ancient Taihu Lake basin, radiating outwards to the provinces of Jiangsu and Zhejiang, and the city of Shanghai. From the perspective of regional cultural studies, the Yangtze River Delta region is dominated by Wu culture, Yue culture, and Haipai culture, and there is a possibility of integration between regional cultures in the process of Yangtze River Delta integration. Since ancient times, the Yangtze River Delta region has long been in a non-political center, and its status was much lower compared to traditional political centers. However, ancient Yangtze River Delta cities possessed strong economic power and famous talented individuals, and this relatively relaxed cultural environment also created a cultural lineage different from that of the northern regions. Since the reform and opening up, the cooperation, closeness, and integration of the Yangtze River Delta region have continuously improved, with frequent talent flow and close cultural exchanges, laying a historical foundation of regional integration and a practical basis for today's high-quality integrated development of the Yangtze River Delta. Nanjing, as the capital city of Jiangsu Province in the Yangtze River Delta region, was historically known as Jinling, a city with a dragon-like terrain, nestled by the river and mountains, and is a historical and cultural city with over 2,400 years of urban history and more than 1,700 years as a capital. Since the late Han and Three Kingdoms period, ten regimes, including Eastern Wu, Eastern Jin, Liu Song, Xiao Qi, Xiao Liang, Chen, Southern Tang, early Ming, and the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom, successively established their capitals here, with the duration of capital status lasting as long as 1,700 years. In Chinese history, Nanjing is one of the four famous ancient capitals, along with Xi'an, Luoyang, and Beijing. Especially during the Ming Dynasty, Emperor Taizu Zhu Yuanzhang, with the full strength of the nation and over 30 years of effort, completed the capital metropolitan area, including the imperial city, imperial city, capital city, and outer city walls, reaching an unprecedented peak in Nanjing's ancient urban construction history, laying the foundation for Nanjing's urban development for the next 600 years. At that time, the Nanjing Ming Palace Museum architecture, as a symbol of imperial power, whether from historical records or physical remains, was grand in scale and magnificent in architecture, far surpassing the Six Dynasties Jiankang Palace City (Taicheng) or the Southern Tang capital Jinling Palace City, which were capitals of partial peace.

Modern academic research on the Nanjing Ming Palace Museum began in the Republic of China era. At that time, Professor Zhu Xie of Central University, in his "Jiling Guji Tukao," dedicated a section "City Walls and Palaces" in Chapter 10 "Relics of the Ming Dynasty," introducing the Ming Palace Museum and related textual research. Professor Ge Dinghua's "Jiling Ming Gugong Tukao" is the first monograph specifically on the Ming Palace Museum. This book, through reviewing and cross-referencing various documents from the Ming Dynasty onwards, analyzes in detail the historical evolution, main buildings, and their interrelationships in the Ming Palace Museum in 5 sections: Ming Palace Museum Relics, Rise and Fall of the Ming Palace Museum, Location of the Ming Palace Museum, Establishment of the Ming Palace Museum, and Ming Palace Museum Palaces. Its textual research is very thorough.② Due to inadequate repair and protection measures after the Ming Dynasty, current research on the Nanjing Ming Palace Museum is mainly based on archaeological surveys. After the founding of New China, significant progress was made in research on the Nanjing Ming Palace Museum, with breakthroughs in city wall surveys and cultural relic excavations, leading to a number of quality academic achievements. Similarly, as the imperial capital in the early Ming Dynasty, the planning and architectural regulations of the Nanjing Ming Palace Museum's imperial and official cities served as the blueprint for Beijing in the Ming and Qing dynasties, holding an important position in the history of Chinese official city development. Currently, cultural research on the Nanjing Ming Palace Museum is not as complete and three-dimensional as that of the Beijing Palace Museum and the Qing Shenyang Palace Museum, but with the continuous excavation of the Nanjing Ming Palace Museum site, Nanjing Ming Palace Museum culture will also become an important part of Palace Studies research. From the perspective of cultural strata, comprehensively planning the Ming Palace Museum site with the concept of protecting major heritage sites and constructing the Nanjing Ming Palace Museum Cultural Circle is of great practical significance for promoting cultural development in the Yangtze River Delta region, as well as protecting historical and cultural heritage and promoting excellent historical culture.

① See "Guiding Opinions of the State Council on Further Promoting Reform, Opening Up, and Economic and Social Development in the Yangtze River Delta Region," http://www.gov.cn/xxgk/pub/govpublic/mrlm/200809/t20080916_32924.html, accessed on February 7, 22023.

② See Yang Xinhua: "Nanjing Ming Gugong," Nanjing Publishing House, 2009, p. 205.

(IV) One of the Outer Circles: Beijing—Taipei Palace Museum Cultural Circle

From modern times until the founding of the New China, the domestic situation was turbulent, and the cultural relics in the Beijing Palace Museum suffered three major losses. After Japan launched the "September 18th Incident" in 1931, North China was in peril. To prevent more severe damage to the Palace Museum's cultural relics, the Palace Museum (Beijing) Council at that time, with the approval of the Nationalist Government, relocated a selection of cultural relics from the Beijing Palace Museum in batches to the south in 1933. After several transfers, one-quarter of the relocated cultural relics were transported to Taiwan, China, in three batches by the Nationalist Government in 1948, and the Taipei Palace Museum was established there in 1965. This created a situation of "one Palace Museum, two museums." In fact, most of the precious collections in the Taipei Palace Museum originated from the Beijing Palace Museum. The two Palace Museums are from the same root and origin, and their collections are highly complementary. According to statistics, the Beijing Palace Museum currently has over 1.5 million pieces (sets) of cultural relics, of which over 1.3 million pieces (sets) are Qing Dynasty court collections and remnants, accounting for 85% of the total collection. The Taipei Palace Museum has 650,000 pieces (sets) of cultural relics, with Qing Dynasty court collections and remnants accounting for 92%.①

In the framework of Palace Studies, Palace Museum cultural relics are inherently divided into two parts: first, the ancient architecture of the Palace Museum; and second, the cultural relics of the Palace Museum. Of course, "both the Forbidden City itself as an architectural complex and the various cultural relics treasured within the Forbidden City are rare and unparalleled treasures."② Therefore, although the Taipei Palace Museum building itself is not imperial architecture, the cultural relics it houses are part of Palace Museum cultural research. Taiwanese scholar Ye Shuhui, through analyzing the "Gugong Quarterly" and "Gugong Academic Quarterly," found that "research focused on Chinese Ming and Qing dynasty paintings, calligraphy, ancient artifacts, and historical themes, followed by archaeology and ancient books. In particular, there is keen interest in research on bronze wares, jade wares, porcelain, and Chinese landscape paintings, and it is most relevant to research fields such as art, cultural archaeology, and Chinese history and geography... The Taipei Palace Museum is the main author institution, with authors from the Art History Institute of National Taiwan University having the highest average number of papers. Author affiliations are mainly research institutions with academic backgrounds in art history, history, and Chinese language and literature."③ Cross-Strait Palace Museum cultural exchanges began in 2009, leading to 9 areas of consensus for exchange and cooperation. Especially with the joint efforts of the Palace Museums on both sides of the Strait, exchanges, cooperation, and academic seminars have become increasingly frequent.④ From the current situation, cross-Strait Palace Museums are developing in a positive and steady direction. Forming a "Beijing-Taipei Palace Museum Cultural Circle" centered on Palace Museum culture, continuing to strengthen cross-Strait Palace Museum cultural exchanges, can both promote closer cross-Strait Palace Museum exchanges and facilitate win-win cooperation in cross-Strait Palace Museum cultural research.

① See Zheng Xinmiao: "Tianfu Yongcang: An Overview of the Cultural Relics Collections of the Two Palace Museums Across the Strait," Forbidden City Publishing House, 2008, p. 2.

② See Pei Wenzhong: "Unparalleled Treasures - The Forbidden City," in "Gugong Xin Hua," Shanghai Culture Publishing House, 1984, p. 34.

③ See Ye Shuhui: "Analysis of Palace Museum Research Themes and Author Groups: A Bibliometric Study of Papers in 'Gugong Quarterly' and 'Gugong Academic Quarterly' from 1966 to 2017," in "Journal of Library & Information Science," Issue 2, 2018.

④ See Zheng Xinmiao: "Introduction to Palace Studies," Forbidden City Publishing House, 2017, pp. 220-224.

4. Value of the Proposed Concept of the Palace Museum Cultural Circle

The Palace Museum in China, as an exemplary imperial garden of the Ming and Qing dynasties, embodies the cultural attributes of the Ming and Qing imperial families and serves as a carrier of Ming and Qing cultural symbols, possessing extremely high value and status in world intangible cultural heritage. From the establishment of the Palace Museum to the systematization of Palace Museum culture, and then to the concept of "Palace Studies" proposed by Mr. Zheng Xinmiao in recent years, we can see that: current research on the Palace Museum has gradually become systematic and institutionalized, and the protection, development, and utilization of Ming and Qing imperial palaces, collections, and cultural heritage have entered a regular track. Palace Museum culture is gradually becoming an important component of excellent traditional Chinese culture. Therefore, the concept of the "Palace Museum Cultural Circle" is an extension of Palace Studies research, taking the Beijing Palace Museum cultural circle as the core, deeply investigating the different characteristics of "Palace Museum culture" in different regions, promoting the integration and co-existence of Palace Museum culture and local cultures, and creating an "excellent calling card" for Palace Museum culture.

(I) Academic Value: Broadening and Developing Palace Museum Research

Palace Studies is an important component of Palace Museum research. Only with widespread participation, exchange, and mutual learning from domestic and international research forces can Palace Studies truly become an international prominent discipline.① Although Mr. Zheng Xinmiao defined the research object of Palace Studies as the Beijing Palace Museum (Forbidden City), he also pointed out that "Palace Museum" not only refers to this ancient palace complex but also refers to the court culture carried by the "Palace Museum." Thus, the "Palace Museum" itself is a symbol of imperial culture, containing rich cultural connotations. In this regard, Wu Bin, director of the Shenyang Palace Museum, proposed the concept of "Greater Palace Museum," meaning "one 'Greater Palace Museum,' three museums," believing that "Palace Studies research is not only applicable to the Beijing Palace Museum but also to the Taipei Palace Museum and the Shenyang Palace Museum, and equally applicable to other ancient architectural complexes and related units with imperial cultural characteristics that are linked to the 'Palace Museum.'"② Therefore, Palace Studies is a cultural whole that integrates architecture, cultural relics, classics, history, and other elements, and it is a discipline that observes, studies, and understands the Palace Museum from a cultural perspective.③

The proposal of the Palace Museum Cultural Circle further delves into the holistic and expansive nature of Palace Studies. From a cultural perspective, the generation, development, and evolution of culture are inseparable from the influence of regional culture. For example, the architectural style of the Shenyang Palace Museum reflects the characteristics of the integration of Manchu and Han cultures, which is closely related to the fact that the Northeast region has been inhabited by ethnic minorities since ancient times. The architecture of the Beijing Palace Museum, on the other hand, is closely linked to surrounding buildings such as the Chengde Mountain Resort, imperial tombs, Yuanmingyuan, and Summer Palace. Essentially, the architecture and cultural collections of the Palace Museum are closely related to the surrounding regions. By studying the connections between the Palace Museum and the cultural aspects of surrounding ancient buildings, we also broaden and develop Palace Studies research.

① See Zheng Xinmiao: "The Disciplinary System of Palace Studies," in "Palace Studies Journal (2017, General Issue 18)," Forbidden City Publishing House, 2017, pp. 8-36.

② See Wu Bin: "On the 'Greater Palace Museum'," in "Journal of the Shenyang Palace Museum," Issue 1, 2012.

③ See Zhang Hongwei: "The Object and System of Palace Studies Research," in "Journal of Liaoning University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition)," Issue 4, 2012.

(II) Cultural Value: The Symbolic, Regional, and IP Nature of Palace Museum Culture

The Palace Museum cultural circle takes the four existing Palace Museums in China as its research objects, with the Beijing Palace Museum as its center, and explores the distinct regional characteristics of Palace Museum culture in different areas. The Beijing Palace Museum is located in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, a region primarily characterized by Yanzhao culture. The Nanjing Ming Palace Museum is in the Yangtze River Delta region, where regional culture is mainly characterized by Wu-Yue culture and Haipai culture. The Qing Shenyang Palace Museum is in the Northeast region, which has been inhabited by ethnic minorities since ancient times; the architecture of the Qing Shenyang Palace Museum is a blend of Manchu, Han, and other minority cultures. Although the Taipei Palace Museum is a modern building, its rich Ming and Qing historical materials originate from the Beijing Palace Museum, and research on Palace Museum culture based on the Taipei Palace Museum's collections has flourished in recent years. Chinese Palace Museum culture itself is an important part of excellent traditional Chinese culture. To unearth the value of Palace Museum culture, it must be seen as a holistic and symbolic concept. By exploring the excellent cultures surrounding the Palace Museum, and linking them with the excellent culture within the Palace Museum, we can enrich the connotation of Palace Museum culture and form a regional research content dominated by the Palace Museum, Palace Museum culture, and the Palace Museum (Beijing).

IP (Intellectual property) is a cultural brand, a cultural product, or even a cultural expression of a certain circle, possessing distinct characteristics. Through industrial integration and user self-selection, it becomes well-known and loved by people, forming a culturally-oriented industrial chain that can realize commercial value.① The cultural development of the Palace Museum is also increasingly diverse, no longer focusing solely on the basic functions of collection, research, exhibition, and education within the museum, but beginning to integrate with social trends and current artistic situations, becoming a public space that meets audience expectations.② Palace Museum culture itself contains numerous IP contents, such as "Palace Cats," "Twelve Beauties of Yongzheng," "A Thousand Li of Rivers and Mountains," and the "Palace Museum Hundred Children Series." From the current perspective, although "Palace Museum culture" already has relatively mature forms and institutions for cultural product development, cultural IP is not simply an endless excavation of certain content; it also needs to form a way of expressing cultural strata based on regions. Utilizing the existing IP forms of Palace Museum culture, discovering local cultures that are similar or related to Palace Museum culture, and continuously expanding the regional influence of Palace Museum culture are also important manifestations of the value of Palace Museum culture.

① See Chen Yan: "2018 China Cultural IP Industry Development Report," https://www.163com/dy/article/EG902BTU0514R9OJ.html, accessed on April 10, 2023.

② See Huang Junfu: "A Preliminary Study on the Feasibility of Museums Engaging in Cultural and Creative Industries," in "Science & Technology Museum," Issue 2, 2015.

(III) Historical Value: Broadening the Research Perspective on Imperial Palaces and Ming and Qing Collections

The Ming and Qing imperial palace complexes and a vast number of precious ancient cultural relics, paintings, sculptures, books, and archives are invaluable Chinese cultural heritage, and their study holds great significance. The palaces, books, and historical archives of the Ming and Qing dynasties are all precious historical materials for historians. Currently, archaeological discoveries at the Nanjing Ming Palace Museum, and research on the palace complexes, palace history, and unearthed artifacts of the Beijing Palace Museum and the Qing Shenyang Palace Museum, constitute the most important historical materials for historians studying the imperial culture of the Ming and Qing dynasties. For instance, regarding the Palace Museum's collection of books, the Qing rulers inherited the tradition of royal collection of classics from ancient times, housing most books within the imperial court, leading to the phrase that the Imperial Household Department's "scriptures flourished, scholarship prospered, and cultural governance reached an unprecedented level since the Han and Tang dynasties."① With the passage of time, the original state of these collections has become untraceable, but the locations of imperial libraries were "scattered like stars," with traces of Ming and Qing collections found in various imperial temporary palaces, the Shengjing Palace (Qing Shenyang Palace Museum), the three southern pavilions (Yangzhou, Zhenjiang, Hangzhou), and other regions.② In terms of imperial palace architecture, the Beijing Palace Museum's architecture drew inspiration from the construction style of the Nanjing Ming Palace Museum, while the Qing Shenyang Palace Museum's architectural complex exhibited more characteristics of ethnic minorities than the Beijing Palace Museum's architecture: a clear result of regional ethnic culture. Therefore, if research is limited solely to the architectural complexes and book collections within the Ming and Qing imperial palaces, the research perspective would inevitably be too narrow. The "Palace Museum Cultural Circle," from a historical perspective, introduces regional culture, comparative studies of imperial palace architectural complexes, and even resonates with surrounding Ming and Qing historical research, thus broadening the research perspective on imperial palaces and Ming and Qing collections.

① See Zhang Naiwei: "Qinggong Shuwun," Beijing Guji Publishing House, 1988, p. 270. Quoted from [Qing] Wu Zhenfu, collated by Bao Zhengfu: "Yangji Zhai Conglu," Forbidden City Publishing House, collated edition, 1990, p. 550.

② See Zhu Saihong: "Imperial Collections in the High Qing Period: Scale, Types, and Functions," in Zhu Chengru, Wang Tianyou (eds.): "Ming Qing Lun Cong (Second Series)," Forbidden City Publishing House, 2001, p. 499.

5. Conclusion

The Beijing Palace Museum serves as a prime example of Ming and Qing imperial gardens in China. Palace Museum culture, as a crucial component of China's excellent traditional culture, possesses inherently high academic, historical, and cultural value. Therefore, this article centers on the Beijing Palace Museum cultural circle, encompassing all four museums named "Palace Museum" from the Ming and Qing dynasties within the scope of Palace Museum cultural circle research. Furthermore, it aims to collect information related to and interacting with Palace Museum culture from local cultural resources and local gazetteers. To some extent, this also reflects how various regions utilize Palace Museum cultural IP to enrich and develop local culture, providing a broader perspective and more possibilities for Palace Museum cultural research.

(Du Hao, the author, is a professor and doctoral supervisor at Hebei University, and director of the Hebei University Palace Studies Research Center; Wang Baochao is a doctoral student at the School of Arts, Hebei University.)