The State of Ironworks in Zunhua, Hebei, 1403-1581

The State of Ironworks in Zunhua, Hebei, 1403-1581

Donald B. Wagner

Late Imperial China, Volume 26, Number 2, December 2005, pp. 68-88(Article)

Published by The Johns Hopkins University PressDOI: 10.1353/late.2006.0004

For additional information about this article

Access provided by Grand Valley State University Library (1 Jun 2013 19:04 GMT)

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/late/summary/v026/26.2wagner.html

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/late/summary/v026/26.2wagner.html

68 Donald B. Wagner

Late Imperial China Vol. 26, No. 2 (December 2005): 68–88

© by the Society for Qing Studies and The Johns Hopkins University Press

68

THE STATE IRONWORKS IN

ZUNHUA, HEBEI, 1403–15811

Donald B. Wagner

It has often been remarked that bureaucracy favors the historian, for it pro-duces great quantities of paper which later become historical sources. TheMing state ironworks in Zunhua, Hebei, provides a good example: its admin-istration, especially the management of a large force of corvée, conscript, andconvict labor, gave the officials of the Ministry of Works (Gong bu) enoughtrouble that a good deal of written communication was required, and some ofthis has survived to tell us about both the technology and the organization ofthe works. We therefore know much more about this one ironworks than aboutany—or all—of the thousands of private ironworks of the Ming period.2

We have in particular a description of the blast furnaces in which the ironwas smelted and some quantitative information about inputs of ore, fuel, andlabor and outputs of cast iron, wrought iron, and steel. Several authors havestudied the details of the administration of the Zunhua works, especially theorganization of the labor force.3 Here I shall concentrate on the more techni-cal aspects of its operation, but also attempt to place it in its historical context.

Background

Zunhua District (modern Zunhua County, Hebei) lies about 150 km east ofBeijing, very close to the Ming Great Wall, and was thus a militarily impor-

1 This article is part of a larger project, the volume on Ferrous Metallurgy for Joseph Needham’s Sci-ence and Civilization in China. Support from The Nordic Institute of Asian Studies, The Danish ResearchCouncil for the Humanities, The Carlsberg Foundation, The University of Copenhagen, The Julie vonMüllen Foundation, The Needham Research Institute, The Leverhulme Trust, and The Technical Univer-sity of Berlin is gratefully acknowledged. I have received advice on earlier versions from so many personsthat I cannot list them here, but I remain responsible for all remaining errors, misunderstandings, andinfelicities of expression.2 It seems important to emphasize here our ignorance of the Ming iron industry, for Robert Hartwell hasclaimed, without real evidence, that Ming iron production was far inferior to that of the Song. I haveexamined Hartwell’s claims for the Song critically in Wagner (2001c).3 See e.g. Sakuma Shigeo 1972 and Eberstein 1974: 33–7, together with several other studies, whichthey cite.

Angelia Fell

new muse

69The State Ironworks In Zunhua, Hebei, 1403–1581

tant peripheral region. Numerous garrisons were stationed here and in neigh-boring districts, and these provided a significant part of the labor used by theironworks.

There was some iron production near here as early as the Warring Statesperiod,4 and possibly in the Tang.5 In the Yuan, Hebei appears to have been avery important iron-producing region.6

In the early years of the Ming, state involvement in the iron industry was acontentious issue.7 Starting in 1364, before the final consolidation of Mingpower, state ironworks were established piecemeal in various places through-out the Empire; in 1374 there were thirteen (none anywhere near Zunhua). In1382 the Emperor ordered an official flogged because he proposed the estab-lishment of one more, and in 1385 all the state ironworks were closed, “be-cause they weary the people.”8 In the following years many of these stateironworks were reopened, but then in 1395 all were again closed. The orderwas repeated in 1397, presumably because it had not been obeyed; in 1398 itwas ordered that the state ironworks should be opened again for one year,then closed.

The political background of all this opening and closing of state ironworksis not easy to see in the sources, but presumably the fundamental factor wasconflict between local and national interests.9 The central government neededa dependable production of iron to supply the armies with weapons, but theironworks demanded corvée labor to an extent which conflicted with the in-terests of the local gentry. No doubt there were also many places where thestate ironworks competed directly with local ironmasters.

Zunhua

After 1398 the only major ironworks established and administered by thecentral government was the one in Zunhua. The reason for the special statusof Zunhua seems to have been a need for high-quality wrought iron and steel,smelted and fined with charcoal, conveniently near the capital. By the Songperiod population growth in north China had led to increased pressure on theland, increased demand for iron, and forest destruction, so that it was neces-

4 See e.g. Wagner 1993: 261; 2001a: 100.5 Da Ming yi tong zhi, 1: 8a; Eberstein 1974: 33.6 This is stated in a memorial by Wang Yun in the 1260’s. See Qiu jian xian sheng da quan wen ji, 90:19a–b; cf. Chun ming meng yu lu, 46: 68b; Eberstein 1974: 33.7 The following is largely based on Eberstein 1974: 23–32.8 Ming shi lu, Tai-zu, 176: 5b; Li Guoxiang & Yang Chang 1993: 120.9 We seem to have no sources on this issue with respect to iron production, but one source notes aproposal to start lead mining in Zunhua which came to nothing because of opposition by the local gentry(shi shen). Chun ming meng yu lu, 46: 70b.

70 Donald B. Wagner

sary to substitute mineral coal for charcoal in iron production.10 (In the south,charcoal iron production continued.) Iron produced using mineral fuel wouldhave had a high sulphur content: this does not matter much in foundrywork,and there is indeed some evidence that in the Ming, in north China, agricul-tural implements were generally cast rather than wrought.11 But fining thisiron to produce wrought iron would have resulted in an inferior, “red-short”product.

Peripheral regions like Zunhua were undoubtedly the last places in northChina where significant forests remained and charcoal iron could be producedeconomically. Further north, in the province of Liaodong, 25 small ironworkswere established in the Ming garrisons (wei) in 1411.12 Half of the 120 sol-diers assigned to the ironworks “fined iron” (chao tie) while the other halfengaged in agriculture to support them.13 Presumably the soldiers also pro-duced the cast iron to be fined, using small blast furnaces, but it was finingwhich would have required the most labor. The annual production quotas ofthe individual ironworks varied from 4 to 19 tons, with an average of 10 tons.The total of about 250 tons per year appears to have been the production of1500 soldiers (half of a total of 120 x 25); the labor required was thus about 6man-years per ton.14 In the Dabieshan region, production of wrought iron fromironsand and charcoal by traditional methods required only 2–4 man-monthsper ton: more labor-efficient by a factor of more than twenty.15

In Zunhua and neighboring districts a number of garrisons were established inthe early Ming.16 That these garrisons, like those in Liaodong, engaged inwrought-iron production is made clear by a memorial of 1403 which mentionsconvict laborers “fining iron” in Zunhua.17 This production seems to have becomemore important as time went on, and in 1426 a major decision was made:18

10 Wagner 2001b; 2003.11 E.g. Chun ming meng yu lu, 46: 66b.12 Ming shi lu, Tai-zong, 115: 5a; Li Guoxiang & Yang Chang 1993: 121; Huang Ming shi fa lu, 61: 8a–16a; Eberstein 1974: 38.13 “Fining” (chao, sometimes translated “puddling” or “refining”) is the process by which cast iron isconverted to wrought iron or mild steel. See e.g. Wagner 1985: 22–5, 60–69; 1997: 21, 24–5, 39–43.14 The figure of 120 soldiers, of whom half engaged in agriculture, is given in the Ming shi lu (citedabove). Unfortunately it is not made explicit whether this was the total number or the number at each of the25 ironworks. If 120 is in fact the total number, then the labor used would be only 3 man-months per ton,fitting nicely with the Dabieshan figure; but the higher figure is supported by the later production figuresfor the state ironworks at Zunhua (see below).15 Wagner 1985: 2. And an engineer, reviewing Wagner 1985 in Neue Zürcher Zeitung, called the Dabieshanproductivity “ein Elend,” miserable, compared with modern methods. Voiret 1986.16 Da Ming yi tong zhi, 1: 19a–b.17 Ming shi lu, Tai-zong, 20a: 4b; cf. Eberstein 1974: 33, 55 n. 37.18 Ming shi lu, Xuan-zong, 14: 5a; Li Guoxiang and Yang Chang 1995: 790. An abridged quotation ofthis memorial in Fu Weilin’s unofficial history, Ming shu (82: 1669–70) omits the word shu, “wrought,” so


[An official memorialised:] For the production of weapons there isa shortage of wrought iron, and we request permission to purchaseit at various places in the Jiangnan region. However, because ofthe distance involved, we are afraid that it will not be delivered ontime, and we propose to send people to the ironworks at Zunhua tofetch 20,000 jin [12 tons] to meet immediate needs.

The Emperor replied: If iron is available in Zunhua, why pur-chase it in Jiangnan? Iron is heavy and clumsy, and transporting itwould be a burden to the people. . . . It will be sufficient to obtainit in Zunhua.

As we shall see directly below, this was the beginning of a process whichresulted in the creation of an entirely new organization for the production ofiron for the State, including a large walled ironworks in the mountains in thesoutheast corner of Zunhua District.

The mention of Jiangnan (the Yangzi Delta: southern Jiangsu, southernAnhui, and Zhejiang) as a source of iron is a surprise, for this region is usuallysaid to be very poor in iron, importing most of its iron from Fujian and othermore southerly provinces.19 However, other sources indicate that this was oneof the major Chinese iron-production regions in the Yuan period, and that ithad some importance in the Ming as well.20

Zhejiang in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries had a traditional small-scale iron industry based on charcoal and ironsand, and this technology couldwell go back to the early Ming or before.21 At Zunhua, as we shall see, thesame fuel and ore were used. We are accustomed to thinking of iron fromGuangdong as being the best in China,22 but it may very well be that therewere advantages—real or imagined—in the use of ironsand iron, produced insmall furnaces, for weapons production.23 It is quite possible that the garrisonironworks established in the border regions near Beijing, including Zunhua,used technology imported from Jiangnan.24

that the memorial appears to concern iron in general rather than specifically wrought iron (see also Chun mingmeng yu lu, 46: 70b). This confused Eberstein (1974: 35), who was unaware of the version in Ming shi lu.19 Li Bozhong 1987; 2000: 299ff. Eberstein (1974: 35) interprets the term broadly, as the entire regionsouth of the Yangzi, but in fact “Jiangnan” was a well-defined toponym with the more limited meaninggiven here.20 Golas 1999: 157–8; Yuan shi, 94: 2384; Schurmann 1967: 161–2; Eberstein 1974: 26, 42–3.21 See Golas 1999: 164; also von Richthofen 1872: 47, 52; Tegengren 1921–3; Yang Dajin 1938, vol. 2:313–15; Wagner 1985: 28–9.22 See e.g. Wagner 1997: 58–75, esp., 65.23 For example, ironsand iron usually has a significant titanium content, and this can be an advantage in steel.24 Perhaps it is significant that one of the later directors of the ironworks, Fu Jun, came from Fujian,another place where this technology was used. See below.

72 Donald B. Wagner

Establishment

Three months later a military commander in Jizhou subprefecture (whichincluded Zunhua) noted a “recent” order to reopen the ironworks at Zunhuaand resume iron-fining, “using military and corvée labor as before,” and re-ported that the order was giving difficulties.25 The “thousand” soldiers fromfour nearby garrisons who had worked at the ironworks had long since beensent home, and the “thousand” peasants from six districts in Yongping Prefec-ture (east of Zunhua) had been assigned other corvée duties. Further, this wasa busy agricultural season, and the peasants should not be disturbed in theirwork at this time. He therefore requested permission to use soldiers from along list of military units, some quite far away, and only after the harvest wascompleted go back to the system of using peasants and soldiers from borderdistricts. This is our only information about the earlier arrangements at Zunhua:if we trust the “thousands” of soldiers and corvée laborers to indicate theorder of magnitude of the labor force, it was already a major industrial com-plex in its earlier period of operation.

Labor problems continued, and in 1432 a military officer at Zunhua re-ported that the available workers were not familiar with fining; he was givenpermission to bring in metallurgical experts (an lian zhi ren) from elsewhere.26

In 1435 the newly enthroned Emperor Yingzong ordered the Zunhua iron-works closed, but the next year it was reopened.27 Another source has thisreopening in 1438;28 probably a major reorganization and relocation occurredin this three-year period, and from this time the ironworks operated continu-ously for almost 150 years. In 1507 a long memorial concerned with variousadministrative reforms at the Zunhua ironworks, by an otherwise unknownofficial, Han Dazhang, included a good deal of archival information on theworks as it had operated in 1438. Its early history, and its ecological conse-quences, are summarized as follows:29

Investigation indicates that the Zunhua ironworks was establishedat Shapogu in the Yongle period [1403–24]. It was later moved toSongzhagu, and in the Zhengtong period [1436–49] it was movedto its present location at Baiyezhuang [White Smelter Village].30

25 Ming shi lu, Xuan-zong, 17: 4a–b; Li Guoxiang and Yang Chang 1993: 122; 1995: 790.26 Ming shi lu, Xuan-zong, 95: 10b; Li Guoxiang and Yang Chang 1995: 791.27 Ming shi lu, Ying-zong, 24: 9b; Li Guoxiang and Yang Chang 1995: 791.28 Da Ming hui dian, 194: 17a, 19a.29 Han Dazhang in Huang Ming jing shi wen bian , bu yi, 2: 7a–b; variant text, Chun ming meng yu lu, 46:67a–b; Tian fu guang ji, 21: 287–8. All that is known of Han Dazhang is that he received his jinshi degreein 1493 (Zhu Baojiong and Xie Peilin 1980: 1497, 2485).30 Shapogu and Songzhagu are places in the north of Zunhua District, at or near mountain passes. Onereason for the two relocations of the ironworks, as well as the building of its wall after the second reloca-


At that time the forests were flourishing, and it was not difficult tosupply firewood and charcoal. Now, over a hundred years after itsestablishment, the trees have all been felled and the prices of woodand charcoal are high. If nothing is done to restrict [forest use],within ten years the price will have risen by several-fold.

Later, in the Qing period, forestry was forbidden in this region because of theproximity of the Imperial tombs, and in 1917 the forests were thriving; but by1928 deforestation was again a problem here.31

One aspect of the reorganization of 1438 seems to have been the buildingof a wall around the new works at Baiyezhuang. The early sources do notmention this wall, but the site is today the village of Tiechang (Ironworks),which according to a modern local gazetteer has a stone wall 10 meters high,5 meters thick, and 2000 meters in circumference.32 This massively walledvillage deep in the mountains is an extreme oddity, and it had military signifi-cance long after the ironworks was closed. It was a factor in 1638 in the Qingconquest of the region, and in 1938 and 1942 in the Japanese invasion.33

Still another aspect was a reduction of the labor force by half, to 683 corvéelaborers and 465 soldiers.34 These were in addition to convict laborers andskilled craftsmen. There is more information about these laborers, their orga-nization, their tasks, and their productivity, but before dealing with this mate-rial we must look at their technology.

Fu Jun’s description of technology at Zunhua

Iron production at Zunhua was described in some technical detail in a bookby one of its directors. Fu Jun was a native of Nan’an in Fujian. He receivedhis jinshi degree in 1499, and in 1513 was placed in charge of the Zunhuaironworks. While in office he wrote a book entitled Tie ye zhi, “Treatise on theironworks,” seemingly a kind of local gazetteer.35 The book is no longer ex-

tion, may have been their proximity to the border and vulnerability to attack by Mongol raiders. The twonames are also found in the sources with yu for gu, sha for sha, and peng for zha. Da Ming yi tong zhi, 1:16a, 23a; Da Qing yi tong zhi, 46: 1a, 1b, 1b–2a; Ming hui yao, 194: 984. Baiyezhuang is presumablynamed for the nearby mountain Baiyeshan, where a legendary smith named “Master Baiye” producedswords. Da Qing yi tong zhi, 45: 4b.31 Diaocha baogao, 36–7.32 Zunhua xian zhi, 61, 561.33 Ming shi, 273: 7006; Zunhua xian zhi, 61.34 Ming shi lu, Ying-zong, 46: 4b; Li Guoxiang and Yang Chang 1995, 792; Han Dazhang in HuangMing jing shi wen bian, bu yi, 2: 1a–2b; Da Ming hui dian, 194: 19b–20a.35 The little we know of Fu Jun comes from the following sources: Si ku quan shu zong mu ti yao, 17:1759 (only source for the date 1513); Nan’an xian zhi, 14: 1b–2a, 3b–4b (1973 repr., 754–5, 760–62) (briefbiographies of Fu Jun, his father, and his son); Ben chao fen sheng ren wu kao, 30: 13a–b (1971 repr.,6431–2); Zhu Baojiong and Xie Peilin 1980: 738, 2488.

74 Donald B. Wagner

tant, but it is described briefly in the Si ku bibliography of 1798, among bookswhich were considered politically acceptable but not important enough to beincluded in the Si ku quan shu:36

Tie ye zhi, in two juan, by Fu Jun in the Ming period. . . . It includes23 topics, from ‘Forestry’ [shan chan] to ‘Miscellaneous tasks’ [zazhi], and begins with two illustrations, showing the administrativeoffices and the ironworks. It records the yearly input and outputquantities in great detail, but is useless for evidential research [kaozheng].37

It seems that we have quotations from Fu Jun’s lost book in two books of theseventeenth century, by Zhu Guozhen in 1622 and by Sun Chengze between1654 and 1675.38 Both describe the blast furnaces at the Zunhua ironworks inthe same words, and it appears to be certain that this description was origi-nally in Tie ye zhi.39

The Zunhua iron furnace has a depth of 1 zhang, 2 chi [3.7 m]; abreadth of 2 chi, 5 cun [78 cm] in front and 1 chi, 7 cun [84 cm] inback; to the left and right 1 chi, 6 cun [50 cm]. In front there is aclearing of several zhang [a zhang is 3.1 m], the place for tappingthe iron.

It is built entirely of stone. The door [forearch] is of jian qianstone.40 Oxhead stone [niu tou shi] forms the inside [xin].41

Black sand is the basis [ben] [the ore] and “stones” [shi zi] arean auxiliary [zuo] [the flux]. Hour by hour they move downward[xuan xia]. A charcoal fire is used, and two bellows are installed tofan it. Iron can be obtained [i.e. tapped] four times in one day.

The stones are a marvel. They are produced [quarried?] atShuimenkou.42 Their color is between red and white, rather like

36 Si ku quan shu zong mu ti yao, 17: 1759.37 The editors go on to cite a single point on which the book can be used in evidential research, correctingan entry in the Ming shi concerning the organisation of the Ministry of Works (Hu bu), which had admin-istrative responsibility for the ironworks.38 Yong chuang xiao pin, 4: 94–5; Chun ming meng yu lu, 46: 68a–69a.39 Liu Yuncai 1978: 25.40 The version in Chun ming meng yu lu has jian gan.41 I have been unable to identify the two types of stone.42 A place about 15–20 km southwest of the Zunhua district seat, probably at or near the modern villageof Shimen. Da Qing yi tong zhi, 45: 4b, 7a, 7b, 8a, 46: 1b; Zunhua xian zhi, fold-out map.


that of a peach-blossom. The largest are like a hu [grain measure,ca. 50 liters], the smallest like a fist. They are pounded and brokenand thrown into the fire; then they transform and become liquid. Ifthe “stone center” [shi xin, apparently the furnace burden] becomesdry, and the sand [ore] cannot descend, it is remedied with this [theflux]. Then the sand begins to melt and turn to iron.

If not,43 then the center [xin, lit., “heart”] is ill and does not melt[xiao, can also mean “disperse”]. It is like a man whose heart isfiery [xin huo da sheng]. He takes a prescription [liang ji] to rem-edy it, his spleen and stomach are harmonized, and food and drinkadvance [are digested]. Such are the wonders of the Transforma-tions [zao hua, i.e. the workings of Nature]. . . .44

The “refining” [lian] of pig iron [sheng tie] is completed in threedouble-hours [shi].45 Wrought iron [shu tie] is produced from pigiron by five or six “refinings,” and steel [gang tie] is producedfrom wrought iron by nine “refinings.”

The furnace begins feebly and then flourishes; after flourishingit declines. At the most it reaches 90 days, and then it is ruined.

This furnace is 3.7 m high, with an elliptical shaft only ca. 50 x 80 cm insection, and is thus extremely narrow in relation to its height. It is quite differ-ent from other traditional Chinese blast furnaces used for smelting ironsand.46

That ironsand was the ore seems certain from the description, and this is con-firmed by incidental mentions in Han Dazhang’s memorial47 and by a men-tion of ironsand production at Zunhua by Song Yingxing in Tian gong kai wu.48

Fu Jun, or whoever wrote the description, was greatly impressed by theaction of the “stones” as a flux in the blast furnace. Ironsand is normallyproduced by sluicing river sand.49 The product of the sluicing is an ore with75–95 percent iron oxides, the rest being largely quartz. A flux is not abso-lutely necessary in the smelting of such a rich ore, but it can greatly improveefficiency. Yang Kuan identifies the “stones” as fluorspar (CaF

2, also called

43 This paragraph is not in Chun ming meng yu lu.44 A reference to Zhuang zi (juan 3a, Guo Qingfan 1961: 262; tr. Graham, 1981: 88–9), in which Heavenand Earth are compared to a furnace, and their Fashioner and Transformer (zao hua) to a great smeltingmaster.45 This fits with the earlier statement that iron is tapped from the blast furnace four times per day.46 Wagner 1984; 1985: 12–21, 48–59; 1997: 16–21.47 Huang Ming jing shi wen bian, bu yi, 2: e.g. 2b, 3b, 4b (1964 repr., vol. 30: 756, 758, 760).48 Tian gong kai wu, xia: 15b; Sun and Sun 1966: 248. Liu Yuncai (1978: 24–5) has a different interpre-tation.49 Golas 1999: 164–5, 246–55.

76 Donald B. Wagner

fluorite), which is commonly used in modern steelmaking.50 It has a low melt-ing point, 1386˚C, and can depress the melting point of a silicate slag below1200˚C.51 This identification is certainly possible from the description, butneeds confirmation from slag analyses.

Archaeology seems to be at odds with Fu Jun’s description. In 1991 theremains of eighteen blast furnaces were discovered at a site east of the villageof Tiechang. The only publication of this discovery is a very short journalisticarticle, which states that the furnaces are built into hillsides,52 and are 1–2meters high.53 But Fu Jun states that the furnace is built entirely of stone, sothese seem to be of quite a different type.54

Operating parameters

We have some input and output figures in two sources, the Collected Stat-utes of the Ming Dynasty of 1587 and the memorial of 1507 by Han Dazhang,already mentioned.55 Both are primarily concerned with administrative mat-ters, and give a circumstantial (and highly confusing) account of changesthrough the long period in which the works functioned. However, both giveconcrete figures for the year 1438; these differ enough to indicate that theyare independent sources, but are enough alike to be mutually confirming. The“Collected statutes” give the following data for 1438:

Specialist artisans in ZunhuaCharcoal production, 70 households

producing 143,070 jin (86 tons)Ironsand production, 63 households

producing 447.3 shi (= hectoliters)Iron production, 60 households

Laborers from nearby placesCorvée, 683 persons, working 6 months per year

50 Yang Kuan 1960: 109; also Liu Yuncai 1978: 25.51 Rosenqvist 1974: 333.52 Presumably like the Song-period blast furnaces described in Wagner 2001b: 42–3, 47–50; 2003: 25–8.53 Chang Lijun 1991. The journalistic author seems to be entirely unaware that iron production in Zunhuahad a unique history.54 On the other hand, if Fu Jun’s furnace was dug into the hillside, this would explain why he refers to its“depth” rather than its height. As an anonymous referee for this article has noted, a visit on site might verywell solve some questions of this sort. However a visit to this village, far out in the mountains east ofBeijing, would be a very expensive undertaking; and it is not entirely improbable that one would find thatthe local farmers have completely ploughed away all remains of furnaces.55 Da Ming hui dian, 194: 18b–22a; Han Dazhang in Huang Ming jing shi wen bian, bu yi, 2: 1a–9b.


Conscripts, 462 persons, working 6 months per yearCraftsmen from more distant places, on rotating duty, 6 months

every 4 years, 630 personsConvict laborers, number not given, who fined iron

Han Dazhang indicates that the laborers, working presumably under the su-pervision of the specialist households, performed such tasks as cutting wood,digging ironsand, working the furnace bellows, transporting materials, trans-porting iron to the capital, and maintaining buildings and walls. Some of thesoldiers also did guard duty. He gives a good deal of information on the ra-tions of grain and cloth which the state supplied to the specialist households,the laborers, and the convicts respectively.56

Annual deliveries of iron to the state from Zunhua varied in the fifteenthcentury between 300,000 and 400,000 jin, i.e. 180–240 tons.57 Using the laborfigures above and making some casual assumptions about their interpretationsuggests that labor expenditure may have been 4–5 man-years per ton, i.e. ofthe same order of magnitude as the Liaodong military production noted ear-lier, perhaps slightly better.

(Here it is necessary to note that the production figures for charcoal andironsand in 1438 are not sufficient for the production of 180–240 tons of iron.Production of 180 tons of iron would require at least 500 tons of charcoal and750 hectoliters of ironsand.58 Probably the figures for 1438 are atypical, forthe new ironworks’ first year of production; but another possibility is thatthey represent only part of the charcoal and ironsand inputs. Perhaps the pro-duction of the laborers was registered separately from that of the specialisthouseholds.)

Production increased for a time after this, and the labor force was reduced.Eberstein collects from a variety of sources figures for delivery of iron prod-ucts to the capital from Zunhua.59 These, converted from jin to tons, are:

56 Huang Ming jing shi wen bian, bu yi, 2: 1a–9b. He also gives some information on production ofironsand and charcoal per laborer which unfortunately is very difficult to interpret.57 Eberstein 1974: 33–4.58 The best fuel efficiency ever recorded for charcoal iron smelting (in Sweden in the early 20th century)is about 3/4 ton charcoal per ton pig iron (see e.g. Tegengren 1921–24, vol. 2: 334, fn.); in Dabieshan thecorresponding figure was about 3 tons per ton pig iron, and this is a much more realistic estimate for theZunhua ironworks. Sluiced ironsand contains 50–60 percent iron by weight, and one hectoliter wouldweigh at most 400 kg (the specific gravity of magnetite is 5.2).59 Eberstein 1974: 33–4.

78 Donald B. Wagner

15th century 180–240 tfrom 1483 180 t1507 348 t cast iron, wrought iron, and

steelfrom 1509 292 t cast iron

125 t wrought iron37 t steel

––––––––––––454 t

from 1529 152 t cast iron125 t wrought iron

steel production discontinued––––––––––––

277 t1581 125 t wrought iron

And deliveries of iron are not the whole story, for there was a considerableoverproduction, and in 1507 the Zunhua ironworks had a stockpile of no lessthan 2100 tons.60

Meanwhile the input of labor was falling. The labor force in 1438, dis-cussed above, had just been halved. In 1504 the corvée and conscript-laborquotas were further reduced by 60 percent.61 Detailed calculation of laborproductivity is even more risky here than for the earlier case, but in 1509 a tonof iron cost perhaps somewhere around 2 man-years per ton. The improve-ment from 4–5 man-years is no doubt largely attributable to “learning by do-ing,” that old stand-by explanation of economists, along with the organiza-tional improvements with which our sources are primarily concerned. But itwould seem that technical improvements were also taking place at this time.

That there may also have been technical advances is suggested by a pas-sage in the Collected Statutes of the Ming Dynasty of 1587. Perhaps this too isquoted from Fu Jun’s Tie ye zhi.62 The passage occurs in a chronological sur-vey of the history of the Zunhua ironworks:63

60 1400 t cast iron, 450 t wrought iron, 136 t steel, and 127 t of a type of iron called song tie, apparentlyan intermediate product, perhaps “spongy iron.” Han Dazhang in Huang Ming jing shi wen bian, bu yi, 2:6b; Eberstein 1974: 34. Note the typographical error, tong tie for gang tie, in Han Dazhang’s text.61 Han Dazhang in Huang Ming jing shi wen bian, bu yi, 2: 1b, 3a, 3b.62 But note that this assumption would imply that Fu Jun wrote Tie ye zhi after 1529, sixteen years afterhis first appointment at Zunhua.63 Da Ming hui dian, 194: 21a–b.


In the 4th year of Zhengde [1509], ten da jian furnaces were inoperation, producing 486,000 jin [292 tons] of cast iron. Twentybai zuo furnaces produced 208,000 jin [125 t] of wrought iron and12,000 jin [7.2 t] of steel. [In all 424 t of ferrous products.]

In the 6th year [1511] there were five da jian furnaces and eightbai zuo furnaces in operation, producing cast iron, wrought iron,and steel as before.

From the 8th year of Jiajing [1529], each year three da jian fur-naces produced 188,800 jin [113 t] of cast-iron plates and 64,000jin [38 t] of “broken iron” [sui tie, granulated cast iron?]. In baizuo furnaces were produced 208,000 jin [168 t] of wrought iron inbundles [shu gua ti], which was delivered to the Capital. Steel [pro-duction] was discontinued. One bundle of wrought iron is four“pieces” [kuai], weighing 20 jin [12 kg], for a total of 10,400bundles.

The context makes it clear that a da jian furnace is a blast furnace, producingcast iron, and a bai zuo furnace is some sort of finery in which both wroughtiron and steel are produced from cast iron. Neither term makes obvious tech-nical sense in itself, and neither seems to be found elsewhere.64

The passage indicates that some major technical improvements took placearound this time, leading to greatly increased output per furnace.65 This wouldhave saved labor in the construction and operation of the furnaces, and quitepossibly have saved fuel as well. There seems to be no way of knowing whethertechnical improvements were made at the same time in charcoal and ironsandproduction.

Closure

Regardless of whatever productivity improvements were attained, iron fromZunhua remained very costly, as a memorial of 1581 reveals:66

The Zunhua ironworks delivers an annual quota of 208,000 jin of[wrought] iron [125 t]. The [market] price of this is not more than2,700 taels of silver, but the expenditures involved in providing forofficials, officers, soldiers, and corvée laborers is over 10,000 taels.

64 One possibility is that a da jian furnace was a furnace shaped like a large jian-bowl, i.e. one like thatdescribed in Wagner 2001b: 60, fig. 7; 2003: 31–2, figs. 8–9. But these do not fit Fu Jun’s description,written after 1513, so this hypothesis is unlikely to be correct.65 Eberstein (1974: 55, n. 42) has a different interpretation.66 Ming shi lu, Shen-zong, 110: 3a; Li Guoxiang and Yang Chang 1993: 134; Eberstein 1974: 37.

80 Donald B. Wagner

We recommend that the works be closed and replaced by a tax insilver, with which iron can be bought for use.

The indication of 10,000 taels as the annual cost of production at Zunhua isprobably no more than an estimate, for it is unlikely that accounts were keptin such a way that this information was easily extracted. The market price of2,700 taels for 125 tons of wrought iron, on the other hand, was undoubtedlythe result of an investigation. It amounts to somewhat less than a gram ofsilver for a kilogram of wrought iron.

The proposal to close the works was approved, and after this we hear nomore about iron production in Zunhua until 1623, when the now-failing Mingdynasty attempted to re-open it, seemingly without great success.67

Recapitulation

Let us now attempt a connected history of the Zunhua ironworks, drawingon the evidence presented above and filling in the gaps in our knowledge withreasonably well-informed speculation.

In the early decades of the Ming dynasty, political controversy over state-run ironworks was finally settled with a firm decision to leave iron productionin private hands. The single exception at Zunhua was a response to a technicalneed: weapons for the armies required high-quality wrought iron, smeltedand fined using charcoal as the fuel. It is likely that most iron production innorth China now used mineral fuel, and the iron produced was best suited tofoundry rather than smithy work. Buying charcoal iron on the open marketmeant importing it from south of the Yangzi, and the undeveloped market ofthe time meant that the government itself had to arrange transport to the capi-tal. In 1426 the Emperor declared that this would be “a burden to the people,”i.e. politically dangerous, and therefore arrangements were made for stateproduction of high-quality charcoal iron nearer the capital. Presumably it wasknown that this iron would be more costly than iron from the south, but theuse of corvée laborers for transport would take them far outside their homedistricts, and this had been known to be dangerous ever since the fall of Qin,sixteen centuries earlier.

There had earlier been military iron production in the region, but we knowvery little about this. Apparently iron was produced and delivered to the capi-tal by small works spread out in the garrisons of Zunhua and neighboringdistricts. The garrison works in Zunhua seems to have been closed at sometime after 1403 and reopened in 1426; various administrative problems led in

67 Eberstein 1974: 37.


time to a complete reorganization and the establishment in 1435–38 of a singlelarge works in a walled compound at the village today named Ironworks,Tiechang.

Several sources make it clear that at this new large-scale works ironsandwas the ore and charcoal was the fuel. On the blast furnaces used for smelting,the evidence allows more than one interpretation, but the most obvious is thata major change in design was made around 1509. The type of blast furnacewhich was dug into a hillside was used widely in China from the Song throughthe Ming; in the twelfth century as far north as Heilongjiang.68 The archaeo-logical evidence suggests that the same type was used at Zunhua. The furnacedescribed by Fu Jun, sometime after 1513, is very different, however, so it islikely that he describes the da jian furnace, a new type introduced around1509. The efficiency of these furnaces improved with experience: roughly thesame quota was produced by ten furnaces in 1509, five in 1511, and three in1529. On the technology used for fining cast iron to wrought iron we seem,unfortunately, to have no direct evidence at all.

In spite of efficiency improvements, wrought iron produced at Zunhua re-mained much more costly than what could be purchased on the market. Thishad probably been known from the outset: the disadvantage of importing itfrom the south was political rather than economic. But in the course of thedynasty the economy stabilized and long-distance trade became more devel-oped. In the late sixteenth century it is likely that merchants were bringinghigh-quality wrought iron from Jiangnan and Guangdong to the Capital re-gion and selling it at prices that made the enterprise at Zunhua absurd. Whenthis was finally realised, the works were closed and the Imperial arsenals be-gan obtaining their raw materials by purchase on the open market.

The troubles at the end of the Ming disrupted trade with the south and ledto the brief attempt to re-open production at Zunhua in 1623. From the begin-ning of the Qing onward there appears to be no evidence at all for iron pro-duction anywhere near Beijing;69 trade was by this time so well-developedthat iron from better-favored regions was in sure supply and cheaper thanwhat could be produced locally.

68 Wagner 2001b: 42; 2003: 25–6.69 See e.g. Qing dai de kuang ye, 493–522.

82 Donald B. Wagner

Glossary


84 Donald B. Wagner

References

Ben chao fen sheng ren wu kao (Biographies of Ming-dynasty persons, arranged by

province). Comp. by Guo Tingxun (ca. 1570–1625); printed 1622. Facs. repr.

with the title, Ben (Ming) chao . . . , 30 vols., Taibei: Chengwen Chubanshe,

1971.

Chang Lijun 1991. “Zunhua faxian shiba chu gu liantie lu yizhi” (Eighteen iron-

smelting furnace sites discovered in Zunhua County). Zhongguo wenwu bao,

28 July 1991, 1.

Chun ming meng yu lu (A work on Beijing and its environs as it was in the late

Ming). By Sun Chengze (1593–1675); Written after 1654. Si ku quan shu zhen

ben chu ji ed.


Da Ming hui dian (Collected statutes of the Ming dynasty). Comp. by Shen Shixing

(1535–1614); Rev. ed. suppl. to 1585, completed 1587. Facs. repr. of the

Palace ed., Taibei 1963.

Da Ming yi tong zhi (Comprehensive gazetteer of the Ming empire). Comp. under

the direction of Li Xian (1408–66). Facs. repr. of 1461 ed., 10 vols., Taibei:

Wenhai Chubanshe, 1965.

Da Qing yi tong zhi (Comprehensive gazetteer of the Qing Empire). Rev. ed.

authorised by the Jiaqing Emperor, also entitled Jia qing chong xiu yi tong zhi;

completed 1843. First printed Shanghai 1934, with added index; repr. 11 vols.,

Taibei: Taiwan Shangwu Yinshuguan, 1966.

Diaocha baogao, di san bian: Nong kuang (Investigation reports [for Hebei

Province]: No. 3: Agriculture and mining). Ed. by Hebei Provincial Govern-

ment, Construction Office. N.p., 1928.

Eberstein, Bernd 1974. Bergbau und Bergarbeiter zur Ming-Zeit (1368–1644).

Hamburg: Gesellschaft für Natur- und Völkerkunde Ostasiens.

Golas, Peter J. 1999. Joseph Needham, Science and Civilization in China. Vol. 5:

Chemistry and Chemical Technology. Part 13: Mining. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Graham, A. C. (tr.) 1981. Chuang-tzu: The Seven Inner Chapters and other writings

from the book Chuang-tzu. London: George Allen & Unwin.

Guo Qingfan (ed.) 1961. Zhuang zi ji shi (Annotated edition of Zhuang zi). Orig.

1894; typeset ed. 1961; facs. repr. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1985 (Xinbian

Zhu zi jicheng).

Huang Ming jing shi wen bian. (Collected memorials and other political writings of

the Ming period). Comp. by Chen Zilong (1606–47), Xu Fuyuan (1600–1665),

and Song Zhengbi (fl. 1643). Pinglu Tang ed., 1638; facs. repr. Taibei:

Guofeng Chubanshe, 1964.

Huang Ming shi fa lu. (Political encyclopaedia of the Ming dynasty). Comp. by

Chen Renxi (1579–1634?); Completed 1630, printed after 1632. Facs. repr.

Taibei: Taiwan Xuesheng Shuju, 1965.

Li Bozhong 1987. “Ming Qing Jiangnan shehui shengchan zhong de tie yu qita jian

jinshu” (Iron and other base metals in social production in the Jiangnan region

in the Ming and Qing periods). Zhongguo shi yanjiu, 1987. 2, 153–64.

Li Bozhong 2000. Jiangnan de zaoqi gongyehua 1550–1850 (Early industrializa-

tion in Jiangnan, 1550–1850). Beijing: Shehui Kexue Wenxian Chubanshe.

86 Donald B. Wagner

Li Guoxiang and Yang Chang (chief eds.) 1993. Ming shi lu leizuan:Jingji shiliao

juan. (Classified selections from the Veritable records of the Ming: Items

relevant for economic history). Wuhan: Wuhan Chubanshe. Numerous typo-

graphical errors.

Li Guoxiang and Yang Chang (chief eds.) 1995. Ming shi lu leizuan: Hebei Tianjin

juan (Classified selections from the Veritable records of the Ming: Items

referring to Hebei and Tianjin). Wuhan: Wuhan Chubanshe. Numerous

typographical errors.

Liu Yuncai 1978. “Zhongguo gudai gaolu de qiyuan he yanbian” (The origin and

development of the blast furnace in ancient China). Wenwu, 1978.2: 18–27.

Ming hui yao (Important documents of the Ming dynasty). Comp. by Long Wenbin

(1821–93). Orig. 1887; typeset edition, 2 vols., Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju,

1956.

Ming shi lu (Veritable records of the Ming dynasty). Taibei: Zhongyang Yanjiuyuan

Lishi Yuyan Yanjiusuo, 1963ff, 133 vols.

Ming shi (Standard history of the Ming Dynasty). Critical ed., 28 vols., Beijing:

Zhonghua Shuju, 1974.

Ming shu (A history of the Ming dynasty on the pattern of the official histories). By

Fu Weilin (d. 1667). Cong shu ji cheng ed.

Nan’an xian zhi (Gazetteer of Nan’an Prefecture, Fujian). Rev. ed. 1671 by Liu

You. Facs. repr., 2 vols., Taibei: Nan’an Tongxianghui, 1973.

Qing dai de kuang ye (Sources on the mining industry in the Qing period). 2 vols.,

Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1983.

Qiu jian xian sheng da quan wen ji (Collected works of Wang Yun [1227–1304]).

Sibu congkan ed.

von Richthofen, Ferdinand [1872?]. Baron Richthofen’s letters, 1870–1872 [to the

Shanghai Chamber of Commerce]. Shanghai: North China Herald, n.d.

Rosenqvist, Terkel 1974. Principles of extractive metallurgy. New York: McGraw-

Hill, 1974. (McGraw–Hill series in materials science and engineering.)

Sakuma Shigeo 1972. “Mindai no Junka tetsusho ni tsuite – Gan’ei tetsuya no

roeki taisei” (The ironworks at Zunhua in the Ming period – The corvée system

of a state-administered ironworks), 203–14 in Yamamoto hakase kanreki kinen

Toyoshi ronso (Jubilee volume presented to Dr. Tatsuro Yamamoto on the

occasion of his sixtieth birthday). Tokyo: Yamakawa Shuppansha.


Schurmann, Herbert Franz (tr.) 1967. Economic Structure of the Yüan Dynasty:

Translation of Chapters 93 and 94 of the Yüan shih. Cambridge, Mass.:

Harvard University Press. (Harvard–Yenching Institute Studies, 16.)

Si ku quan shu zong mu ti yao (Annotated bibliography of the Complete library of

the four categories of literature). Typeset ed. with index, 4 vols., Shanghai:

Shangwu Yinshuguan, 1933.

Sun, E-tu Zen and Shiou-chuan Sun (trs.) 1966. T’ien-kung k’ai-wu: Chinese

Technology in the Seventeenth Century. University Park and London: Pennsyl-

vania State University Press.

Tegengren, F. R. 1921–24. The Iron Ores and Iron Industry of China: Including a

Summary of the Iron Situation of the Circum-Pacific Region. 2 vols., Peking:

Geological Survey of China, Ministry of Agriculture and Commerce (Memoirs

of the Geological Survey of China, series A, no. 2.) Part I 1921–23, part II

1923–24. English text and abridged Chinese translation by Xie Jiarong.

Chinese title: Zhongguo tiekuang zhi, by Ding Gelan (Dizhi zhuanbao, A.2).

Xerographic repr. available from University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Mich.,

order no. OP 12715.

Tian fu guang ji (A work on Beijing and its environs). By Sun Chengze (1563–

1638). First publ. 1962; typeset ed. Beijing: Beijing Guji Chubanshe, 1982.

Tian gong kai wu (The products of Heaven and Man). By Song Yingxing, d. ca.

1660; preface dated 1637. Facs. repr. of orig. 1637 ed., together with three

other titles, Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Chubanshe, 1988 (Zhongguo gudai

banhua congkan, 3).

Voiret, J.-P. 1986. Review of Wagner 1985. Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 15 Nov. 1986,

39.

Wagner, Donald B. 1984. “Some Traditional Chinese Iron Production Techniques

Practiced in the 20th Century.” Journal of the Historical Metallurgy Society,

18.2: 95–104.

Wagner, Donald B. 1985. Dabieshan: Traditional Chinese Iron-production Tech-

niques Practised in Southern Henan in the Twentieth Century. London &

Malmö: Curzon Press, 1985. (Scandinavian Institute of Asian Studies mono-

graph series, no. 52.)

Wagner, Donald B. 1993. Iron and Steel in Ancient China. Leiden: Brill.

(Handbuch der Orientalistik, vierte Abteilung: China, no. 9.)

Wagner, Donald B. 1997. The Traditional Chinese Iron Industry and its Modern

Fate. Richmond, Surrey: Curzon Press.

88 Donald B. Wagner

Wagner, Donald B. 2001a. The State and the Iron Industry in Han China.

Copenhagen: Nordic Institute of Asian Studies. (NIAS report series, 44.)

Wagner, Donald B. 2001b. “Blast furnaces in Song-Yuan China,” East Asian

Science, Technology, and Medicine, 18: 41–74.

Wagner, Donald B. (2001c). “The Administration of the Iron Industry in Eleventh-

century China.” Journal of the economic and social history of the Orient, 2001,

44 (no. 2), 175–97.

Wagner, Donald B. 2003. “Chinese Blast Furnaces from the 10th to the 14th

Century,” Journal of the Historical Metallurgy Society, 2003, 37.1: 25–37.

Abridged version of Wagner 2001b.

Yang Dajin (ed.) 1938. Xiandai Zhongguo shiye zhi (Gazetteer of modern Chinese

industry and commerce). Changsha, 1938; facs. repr. in 3 vols., Taibei: Huashi

Chubanshe, 1978 (Zhongguo jingji shiliao congshu, E0105).

Yang Kuan 1960. Zhongguo tufa yetie lian’gang jishu fazhan jianshi (A brief

history of the development of Chinese regional siderurgical techniques).

Shanghai: Renmin Chubanshe.

Yong chuang xiao pin (Short notes on various subjects, in large part related to Ming

history). By Zhu Guozhen (ca. 1557–1632); written between 1609 and 1621,

printed 1622. Typeset ed., 2 vols., Shanghai: Zhonghua Shuju, 1959 (Ming

Qing biji xiaoshuo).

Yuan shi (Standard history of the Yuan Dynasty). Critical ed., 15 vols., Beijing:

Zhonghua Shuju, 1976.

Zhu Baojiong and Xie Peilin (comps.) 1980. Ming Qing jinshi timing bei lu suoyin

(Index of names of jinshi graduates in the Ming and Qing periods). Shanghai:

Shanghai Guji Chubanshe.

Zun hua xian zhi (Gazetteer of Zunhua County, Hebei). Shijiazhuang: Hebei

Chubanshe, 1990.

Documents

The State of Ironworks in Zunhua, Hebei, 1403-1581