The Connection between Buddhist Temples, the Landscape, and Monarchical Power: A Comparison between Tuoba Hong (471–499) from the Northern Wei Dynasty and Li Shimin (626–649) from the Tang Dynasty
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The topic of this paper is important and it deserves a careful study. Overall, this is a good paper in term of style and flow, with good argumentation. Although it is clear the author is either Chinese or reads only Chinese books for this research, I saw few errors in terms of the English (e.g., p. (page) 4- (line) 171: the tense should be "attempt," not attempted.
Because the topic is Buddhist temple history, the author must read and cite Lévi, S., et al. (1929-2003). Hōbōgirin 法寶義林: Dictionnaire encyclopédique de bouddhisme d'après les sources chinoises et japonaises. Tokyo, Maison franco-japonaise, especially the entry on "Daiji" 大寺 on pp. 704-711.
There are many errors, however, and these must be corrected. I address these errors below according to page number (p.) and line number as follows: 1-36-37 = page 1, lines 36-37.
1-36-37: We do not speak of a "golden age" of Buddhism during the Tang, and have not since the 1960s because it is historically incorrect. Think of, for example, the 北塔 in Chaoyang 朝陽, which was rebuilt during the Liao following Northern Wei and Tang models. I provide this example because the author investigates Buddhist temple history.
2-53 / 4-193: Use either 繁體字 or 简体字, not both. Note 厕 and 鲜. Check throughout.
2-74: Citing the 2018 edition of Daoxuan's works is unacceptable. You must cite the Taishō Buddhist Canon (CBETA or SAT online editions) for Daoxuan's texts, and then provide references to this 2018 edition if it is still relevant. What does the 3 in 3, 61 refer to?
2-74: The text is the Da Tang sanzang shengjiao xu; Tang is a proper noun, and throughout the author must correct incorrectly spaced Pinyin. See also 3-99: Bei Qi (author has beiqi) Yecheng (author has yecheng), and so forth. Proper nouns require a capital letter. Check throughout.
3-104: What is the 七寺之詔? I know what it is as a specialist, but a general reader would not. This requires a footnote and explanation.
3-105 & 106: Xu gaozong zhuan and Gaoseng zhuan require italics or underlining because they are book titles. Check throughout with all premodern and modern book titles.
3-123-135: What does the European Renaissance have to do with these temples? The chronology does not match, and that might lead readers to presume that later Chinese Buddhist temple history does not exist. If the author must mention the Renaissance, an introduction to that topic in the form of a TRANSITION is required.
4-161-162: Here we find the thesis of the paper, which is too late in the paper on p. 4 for it.
4-183: Buddhism did not spread in China after the 4th century CE. It began to spread in China at least during the first centuries of the Common Era, especially if we wish to consider "minority ethnic communities."
5-254: Even if the author wishes to use modern editions of primary source texts, citations like this to Wei Shou are misleading and incorrect. This is a 6th century source. Make that clear. Fix throughout.
6-282: Politics aside, 民族 is a modern category. Period. When people (not "ethnic minorities") ruled China whose native language was not a Chinese language, they were in charge and in power. They were not "minorities." The Tuoba, Tibetan, Tangut, and so forth who lived within the boundaries of the modern PRC only became "minorities" when the Chinese government mandated that status. See the history of the 羈縻. It is incorrect to describe the people here as "ethnic minorities" because that is anachronistic or historically incorrect, politics aside.
6-291 Dates for the Later Han?
8-384: Source for the analysis of 風水 (I presume?) ideas and the directions? Unclear and needs footnotes.
11-534: "Buddhism believes" is unacceptable. A religion does not DO anything (the author cites Campany who wrote about this); people DO things. There are Buddhist beliefs and Buddhists believe many things. But Buddhism does not believe anything.
12-594-589: I have no idea what this is and why it is here without any context to inform the reader.
12-609-612: The concept of saṃsāra (note the diacritical marks for Sanskrit words) isn't something every reader understands, especially within this context. Explain what the author means, here.
Author Response
Point 1: The topic of this paper is important and it deserves a careful study. Overall, this is a good paper in term of style and flow, with good argumentation. Although it is clear the author is either Chinese or reads only Chinese books for this research, I saw few errors in terms of the English (e.g., p. (page) 4- (line) 171: the tense should be "attempt," not attempted
Response 1: Thank you very much for your review and comments. The “attempted” had changed to “attempts”.
Point 2: Because the topic is Buddhist temple history, the author must read and cite Lévi, S., et al. (1929-2003). Hōbōgirin 法寶義林: Dictionnaire encyclopédique de bouddhisme d'après les sources chinoises et japonaises. Tokyo, Maison franco-japonaise, especially the entry on "Daiji" 大寺 on pp. 704-711.
Response 2:Thank you very much for your recommend. This is series of valuable French buddhism books ,and I cited the Daiji(Chine) of Hōbōgirin法寶義林(Sixième fascicule: DA- DAIJIZAITEN) from pp.682 to pp.704 in 2-47-50. But pp.704-711 you mentioned are contents of Daiji(Japon).
Point 3: There are many errors, however, and these must be corrected. I address these errors below according to page number (p.) and line number as follows: 1-36-37 = page 1, lines 36-37.
1-36-37: We do not speak of a "golden age" of Buddhism during the Tang, and have not since the 1960s because it is historically incorrect. Think of, for example, the 北塔 in Chaoyang 朝陽, which was rebuilt during the Liao following Northern Wei and Tang models. I provide this example because the author investigates Buddhist temple history.
Response 3: Thank you for your comments and explaination. Sorry for the use of “golden age. My original intent was to explain the development of Buddhism in the Tang Dynasty. For example, both Fan Wenlan范文瀾's "Buddhism in the Tang Dynasty唐代佛教" and Tang Yongtong湯用彤's "History of Buddhism in Sui and Tang Dynasties隋唐佛教史稿" pointed out that the different styles of Buddhism in the Southern and Northern Dynasties merged in the Tang Dynasty and reached a peak. I changed “golden age” to “the period of vigorous development”.
Point 4: 2-53 / 4-193: Use either 繁體字 or 简体字, not both. Note 厕 and 鲜. Check throughout.
Response 4: Thank you for your comment. This manuscript use traditional Chinese as the journal’s demand. I have rechecked all the Chinese in the manuscript and revised some inconsistent words.
Point 5: 2-74: Citing the 2018 edition of Daoxuan's works is unacceptable. You must cite the Taishō Buddhist Canon (CBETA or SAT online editions) for Daoxuan's texts, and then provide references to this 2018 edition if it is still relevant. What does the 3 in 3, 61 refer to?
Response 5: Thank you for your comment. The sentences I cited could be searched in both CBETA and SAT. The cite item corrected to ‘Daoxuan道宣. 664. Ji Gujin Fo Dao Lunheng 集古今佛道論衡 [Collection of Critical Evaluations of Buddhism and Daoism from the Past and Present]. T52n2104’.
Point 6: 2-74: The text is the Da Tang sanzang shengjiao xu; Tang is a proper noun, and throughout the author must correct incorrectly spaced Pinyin. See also 3-99: Bei Qi (author has beiqi) Yecheng (author has yecheng), and so forth. Proper nouns require a capital letter. Check throughout.
Response 6: Thank you for the comment. All the proper nouns had been revised.
Point 7: 3-104: What is the 七寺之詔? I know what it is as a specialist, but a general reader would not. This requires a footnote and explanation.
Response 7: Thank you for your advise. I added a foodnote about the Qisi zhizhao七寺之诏 in page 2.
Point 8: 3-105 & 106: Xu gaozong zhuan and Gaoseng zhuan require italics or underlining because they are book titles. Check throughout with all premodern and modern book titles.
Response 8: Thank you for your comment. All the book titles unified to italics.
Point 9: 3-123-135: What does the European Renaissance have to do with these temples? The chronology does not match, and that might lead readers to presume that later Chinese Buddhist temple history does not exist. If the author must mention the Renaissance, an introduction to that topic in the form of a TRANSITION is required.
Response 9: Thank you for your comment. This literature supports the current research on the relationship between power and landscape. I have now removed all ambiguous chronological expressions and retained only the opinions of academics.
Point 10: 4-161-162: Here we find the thesis of the paper, which is too late in the paper on p. 4 for it.
Response 10: Thank you for your comment. I moved it to the background, where it should now be at 1-64-80, hoping to make my thesis more visible to the reader.
Point 11: 4-183: Buddhism did not spread in China after the 4th century CE. It began to spread in China at least during the first centuries of the Common Era, especially if we wish to consider "minority ethnic communities."
Response 11: Thank you for your comment. I revised such expressions.
Point 12: 5-254: Even if the author wishes to use modern editions of primary source texts, citations like this to Wei Shou are misleading and incorrect. This is a 6th century source. Make that clear. Fix throughout.
Response 12: Thank you for your comment. I revised the references of Weishu.
Point 13: 6-282: Politics aside, 民族 is a modern category. Period. When people (not "ethnic minorities") ruled China whose native language was not a Chinese language, they were in charge and in power. They were not "minorities." The Tuoba, Tibetan, Tangut, and so forth who lived within the boundaries of the modern PRC only became "minorities" when the Chinese government mandated that status. See the history of the 羈縻. It is incorrect to describe the people here as "ethnic minorities" because that is anachronistic or historically incorrect, politics aside.
Response 13: Thank you very much for your comment. I have changed these words that would cause ambiguity.
Point 14: 6-291 Dates for the Later Han?
Response 14: Thank you for your question. There is a translation error here; the original text is "後漢末", meaning the end of Han dynasty rather than the Later Han dynasty,”後”in there means “然後then”, while other documents indicate a date of 194 AD. This misuse of words has now been corrected.
Point 15: 8-384: Source for the analysis of 風水 (I presume?) ideas and the directions? Unclear and needs footnotes.
Response 15: Thank you for your comment. I explained the source and directions in the footnote on page 9.
Point 16: 11-534: "Buddhism believes" is unacceptable. A religion does not DO anything (the author cites Campany who wrote about this); people DO things. There are Buddhist beliefs and Buddhists believe many things. But Buddhism does not believe anything.
Response 16: Thank you for your comment. I revised the word to “terms” cause which is the modifier of the following short sentences.
Point 17: 12-594-589: I have no idea what this is and why it is here without any context to inform the reader.
Response 17: Thank you for your comment. I've added explainations here to make the context more coherent.
Point 18: 12-609-612: The concept of saṃsāra (note the diacritical marks for Sanskrit words) isn't something every reader understands, especially within this context. Explain what the author means, here.
Response 18: Thank you for your comment. I added a Chinese translation here and revised the saṃsāra. By using this word, I ‘d like to convey that Buddhism's theory of afterlife and reincarnation is deeply rooted in people's minds, regardless of whether they believe in Buddhism. Consequently, people pray for good fortune in their next incarnation, a practise that is also reflected in the architecture and landscape.
Thanks again for your comments and useful advise which are very important for me. In addition to revising the above-mentioned points, I have added diagrams and adjusted the structure of several paragraphs based on the feedback of another reviewer. These improvements are clearly apparent in the most recent manuscript.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
1.
It is found that many parts of the author's Chinese text are not related to the actual content described in the manuscript.
Please select only Chinese sentences that describe the relevant content and write them in the manuscript.
for example,
載貞觀十五年，太宗躬幸弘福宗，與僧人論buddhao先After，有曰：今李家據国，李老在前；釋家治化，则上.
初，高祖孝於太后，乃於永固陵東北里餕，豫營壽宮，有終焉瞻望之志 (Wei, 1974).
The judges said that many of the Chinese character sentences did not match any English sentences at all. After writing all Chinese characters as separate sentences, the author, please indicate the English translation of the Chinese sentences as separate sentences at the bottom.
There are two ways. First, the author creates parentheses after the sentence translated into English, and writes the Chinese sentence in succession; or second, the author writes the translated sentence into English and then the Chinese sentence in the next sentence.
I hope you write:
“I, Li Shimin, Son of Heaven, dare to report to the Heaven. Since I became the emperor, I have always been caring about my people and have cultivated them with ethics and rites. I get up early and sleep late at night, with no time wasted on politics and governance, which, I hope, would live up to the expectations of my ancestors. These words are to be recorded, and I hope that my country will enjoy long-lasting peace and harmony, and that I am proven competent to carry forward the ambition of my ancestors. 於時累日陰雪, 是旦猶雲霧晦冥。及太宗升壇, 煙氛四散, 風景清朗, 文物昭映。禮畢，祝官讀謝天祝文曰 ：“嗣天子臣世民，敢昭告於昊天上帝。世民纂成鴻基，君臨宇縣，夙興旰食，無忘於政 道，導德齊禮，良愧於前聖， 爰有成命，表瑞貞石。文字昭然，歷數惟永。既旌高廟之 業，又錫眇身之祚
2.
For the content below, there is no description of the specific relationship between Dafo Temple and Zhaoren Temple. The author never mentioned any explanation of meaning through interrelationships and interpretations other than descriptions. If so, it is advisable for the author to delete these sentences.
There are many Buddhist temples around the Zhaoren Temple, the nearest being the Dafo Temple. It is unknown whether Li Shimin ordered the construction of the Dafo Temple. Li Song inferred that the Dafo Temple might have been established by Li Shimin, who as still the Prince of Qin at that time. However, he did not make it public to keep a low profile (Li, 2002, p. 42). However, Buddhist relics unearthed in Changwu County prove that at least since the Northern Wei dynasty (Liu, 2006), Buddhist culture has prospered in this area. The Dafo Temple, built on the mountain in the same period, is 20 kilometres away from the Zhaoren Temple and is surrounded by the Jing River against the backdrop of hills and mountains.
3.
Considering the scope of the research, the content of each section is poor. The author did not write any specific details except for the relationship between the ruling class and the temple. The relationship between the temple and the city that the author wants to talk about should be described in more detail.
The author did not include much in this regard.
For example, based on the following (1.1.1. The Relationship between Buddhist Temples and Cities), the author did not deal with the city-related story at all in the first half and in the second half. Most of the references are to Empress Wenming and Tuoba Hong.
In the case of Siyuan Temple, there is only the meaning of building the temple in close relationship with the royal family. In other words, The temple was an expression of the power of Empress Wenming and Tuoba Hong’s filial piety.
To provide a clearer understanding of the relationship between a temple and a city, the author must represent the location of the temple around and within the city on a map that depicts topographical and geographic elements.
The author also mentions many monumental structures. For example, the author wrote:
Shuijingzhu 水經注 stated, ‘to he west of Yonggu Tomb is the Siyuan Temple, and to the west of the Siyuan Temple is the canteen room. There are two stone gate towers at the south gate of the mausoleum.
If so, the map that the author has to express should have detailed descriptions of the canteen room, mausoleums, and two stone gate towers.
Another sentence mentioned by the author also gives a description of the buildings of the time. They should also be represented on the map.
Outside the mausoleum gate, the original landscape was transformed to make a winding royal road from where one can see the pond in Lingquan Palace that is as bright as a round mirror 院外西側，有'思遠靈圖'，圖之西有齋堂，南門表二石闕，闕下斬山，累結禦路， 下望靈泉宮池，皎若圓鏡矣
It is possible to clearly and logically state the author's argument only when the analysis is done in the state that this overall mapping work is completed.
Since all the contents of each chapter are not related to each other, each chapter tells a different story. The author should seriously consider these contextual problems and correct them.
4.
“These works confirmed that the establishment of Buddhist temples was closely related to the incumbent regimes.” Here, the author cites the Italian case of the Renaissance period. The main focus of this manuscript is closely related to the Confucian-based political system in East Asia. If so, the author should mention cases in Korea, China, and Japan together in this manuscript. There are many similar research achievements in these areas.
5.
In Methodology, in Research Scope and Research Methods, the author notes:
In Research Scope,
This paper focuses on the following two questions: (1) considering different political periods and historical backgrounds of the Siyuan and Zhaoren Temples, what are the differences in landscape, especially their relations with the capital? (2) Can these differences be mapped directly or indirectly to the actual significance and function of the temple landscapes in the two historical periods?
In Research Methods,
First, it analysed the background of their construction, the role played by the emperor in the construction process, and the temples’ statuses within national politics. Second, it compared the relationship of their locations with neighbouring cities, capitals, mountains, and rivers, thereby revealing the importance of geographic location and the emperor’s considerations. Finally, it suggests the interrelationship between state temples and monarchical politics and the underlying ideas conveyed through such a landscape.
The author has not conducted a specific comparative analysis of the two temples. If a qualitative analysis is difficult, the author should create a table that allows comparisons in the larger context so that the details can be compared visually.
6.
The author notes in the Methodology part as follows:
: (1) the ruling class was behind the construction of the two temples; (2) both temples were close to the capital, signifying their similar geopolitical nature; (3) the Buddhist temples were used as venues for rituals to worship kings and were closed to the public at that time. Thus, they were used as a viable mechanism for promoting political ideas; (4) the two temples were geographically close to Fang Mountain and Qingliang mountains, surrounded by rivers
For these contents, please make a conceptual map centered on the entire temples and cities, expressing the relationship between Siyuan Temple and Zhaoren Temple's capital and geographical location. If it is difficult to write a conceptual diagram, the author may draw it on the map. In the case of the ruling class, it is generally understood, but the author did not specifically explain political ideas related to the Buddhist system. The author should also provide specific details about that part.
7.
What is the difference between Methodology and Research Methods?
Research Methods covers something completely unrelated. The author advises to amend the title of the section.
In the Research Methods part, the authors noted:
First, it analysed the background of their construction, the role played by the emperor in the construction process, and the temples’ statuses within national politics. Second, it compared the relationship of their locations with neighbouring cities, capitals, mountains, and rivers, thereby revealing the importance of geographic location and the emperor’s considerations. Finally, it suggests the interrelationship between state temples and monarchical politics and the underlying ideas conveyed through such a landscape.
As the author notes in Methodology:
(1) the ruling class was behind the construction of the two temples; (2) both temples were close to the capital, signifying their similar geopolitical nature; (3) the Buddhist temples were used as venues for rituals to worship kings and were closed to the public at that time. Thus, they were used as a viable mechanism for promoting political ideas; (4) the two temples were geographically close to Fang Mountain and Qingliang mountains, surrounded by rivers.
The two sentences above may look almost identical, but there is a difference in context. The author compares these sentences and corrects them in the same context. Even in the manuscript, the author does not specifically mention these contents. In order to enhance the quality of the manuscript, the author should add specific details.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Point 1: 1.It is found that many parts of the author's Chinese text are not related to the actual content described in the manuscript.
Please select only Chinese sentences that describe the relevant content and write them in the manuscript.
for example,
載貞觀十五年，太宗躬幸弘福宗，與僧人論buddhao先After，有曰：今李家據国，李老在前；釋家治化，则上.
初，高祖孝於太后，乃於永固陵東北里餕，豫營壽宮，有終焉瞻望之志 (Wei, 1974).
The judges said that many of the Chinese character sentences did not match any English sentences at all. After writing all Chinese characters as separate sentences, the author, please indicate the English translation of the Chinese sentences as separate sentences at the bottom.
There are two ways. First, the author creates parentheses after the sentence translated into English, and writes the Chinese sentence in succession; or second, the author writes the translated sentence into English and then the Chinese sentence in the next sentence.
I hope you write:
“I, Li Shimin, Son of Heaven, dare to report to the Heaven. Since I became the emperor, I have always been caring about my people and have cultivated them with ethics and rites. I get up early and sleep late at night, with no time wasted on politics and governance, which, I hope, would live up to the expectations of my ancestors. These words are to be recorded, and I hope that my country will enjoy longlasting peace and harmony, and that I am proven competent to carry forward the ambition of my ancestors. 於時累日陰雪, 是旦猶雲霧晦冥。及太宗升壇, 煙氛四散, 風景清朗, 文物昭映。禮畢，祝官讀謝天祝文曰 ：“嗣天子臣世民，敢昭告於昊天上帝。世民纂成鴻基，君臨宇縣，夙興旰食，無忘於政 道，導德齊禮，良愧於前聖， 爰有成命，表瑞貞石。文字昭然，歷數惟永。既旌高廟之 業，又錫眇身之祚
Response 1: Thank you very much for your review and comments. I revised the format of these English sentences, which corresponded to Chinese, and ensured all the Chinese words and sentences were after English.
2.
For the content below, there is no description of the specific relationship between Dafo Temple and Zhaoren Temple. The author never mentioned any explanation of meaning through interrelationships and interpretations other than descriptions. If so, it is advisable for the author to delete these sentences.
There are many Buddhist temples around the Zhaoren Temple, the nearest being the Dafo Temple. It is unknown whether Li Shimin ordered the construction of the Dafo Temple. Li Song inferred that the Dafo Temple might have been established by Li Shimin, who as still the Prince of Qin at that time. However, he did not make it public to keep a low profile (Li, 2002, p. 42). However, Buddhist relics unearthed in Changwu County prove that at least since the Northern Wei dynasty (Liu, 2006), Buddhist culture has prospered in this area. The Dafo Temple, built on the mountain in the same period, is 20 kilometres away from the Zhaoren Temple and is surrounded by the Jing River against the backdrop of hills and mountains.
Response 2: Thank you for your advise. The paragraph has been removed.
3.
Considering the scope of the research, the content of each section is poor. The author did not write any specific details except for the relationship between the ruling class and the temple. The relationship between the temple and the city that the author wants to talk about should be described in more detail.
The author did not include much in this regard.
For example, based on the following (1.1.1. The Relationship between Buddhist Temples and Cities), the author did not deal with the city-related story at all in the first half and in the second half. Most of the references are to Empress Wenming and Tuoba Hong.
In the case of Siyuan Temple, there is only the meaning of building the temple in close relationship with the royal family. In other words, The temple was an expression of the power of Empress Wenming and Tuoba Hong’s filial piety.
To provide a clearer understanding of the relationship between a temple and a city, the author must represent the location of the temple around and within the city on a map that depicts topographical and geographic elements.
The author also mentions many monumental structures. For example, the author wrote:
Shuijingzhu 水經注 stated, ‘to he west of Yonggu Tomb is the Siyuan Temple, and to the west of the Siyuan Temple is the canteen room. There are two stone gate towers at the south gate of the mausoleum.
If so, the map that the author has to express should have detailed descriptions of the canteen room, mausoleums, and two stone gate towers.
Another sentence mentioned by the author also gives a description of the buildings of the time. They should also be represented on the map.
Outside the mausoleum gate, the original landscape was transformed to make a winding royal road from where one can see the pond in Lingquan Palace that is as bright as a round mirror 院外西側，有'思遠靈圖'，圖之西有齋堂，南門表二石闕，闕下斬山，累結禦路， 下望靈泉宮池，皎若圓鏡矣
It is possible to clearly and logically state the author's argument only when the analysis is done in the state that this overall mapping work is completed.
Since all the contents of each chapter are not related to each other, each chapter tells a different story. The author should seriously consider these contextual problems and correct them.
Response 3: Thank you very much for your comment. I added two maps to detail the architecture and other elements and made a comparison with Zhaoren Temple. Please see Figure 2&3 in the manuscript.
4.
“These works confirmed that the establishment of Buddhist temples was closely related to the incumbent regimes.” Here, the author cites the Italian case of the Renaissance period. The main focus of this manuscript is closely related to the Confucian-based political system in East Asia. If so, the author should mention cases in Korea, China, and Japan together in this manuscript. There are many similar research achievements in these areas.
Response 4: Thank you for your suggestions. I have cited some relevant literature to support the arguments in this manuscript, particularly those discussing Buddhist temples in ancient China, Japan, and Korea.
5.
In Methodology, in Research Scope and Research Methods, the author notes:
In Research Scope,
This paper focuses on the following two questions: (1) considering different political periods and historical backgrounds of the Siyuan and Zhaoren Temples, what are the differences in landscape, especially their relations with the capital? (2) Can these differences be mapped directly or indirectly to the actual significance and function of the temple landscapes in the two historical periods?
In Research Methods,
First, it analysed the background of their construction, the role played by the emperor in the construction process, and the temples’ statuses within national politics. Second, it compared the relationship of their locations with neighbouring cities, capitals, mountains, and rivers, thereby revealing the importance of geographic location and the emperor’s considerations. Finally, it suggests the interrelationship between state temples and monarchical politics and the underlying ideas conveyed through such a landscape.
The author has not conducted a specific comparative analysis of the two temples. If a qualitative analysis is difficult, the author should create a table that allows comparisons in the larger context so that the details can be compared visually.
Response 5: Thank you very much for your comment. Just as the research scope and methods I mentioned, I compared these two temples in three aspects (the black words in italics are from the manuscript):
First, it analysed the background of their construction, the role played by the emperor in the construction process, and the temples’ statuses within national politics. I compare them from the background, process, and related historical events of temple construction.
Second, it compared the relationship of their locations with neighbouring cities, capitals, mountains, and rivers, thereby revealing the importance of geographic location and the emperor’s considerations. I used descriptions from ancient county annals and different historical records to demonstrate the content of the previously mentioned historical geographic information. I also used modern surveying and mapping information, and the satellite map's geographical elements are still clearly visible and corroborate the above content. Moreover, as you mentioned, I provide comparison graphs at different scales.
Finally, it suggests the interrelationship between state temples and monarchical politics and the underlying ideas conveyed through such a landscape. The two emperors had the same motivation to strengthen the political centralization by building temples, but the difference is that Tuoba Hong was eager to consolidate his political status; here, I list the temples in different landscapes of the same period. In contrast, Li Shimin expressed richer emotions through the construction of temples, such as family affection and atonement. The content of these comparisons can be seen in 4.2.2 and 4.2.3.
6.
The author notes in the Methodology part as follows:
: (1) the ruling class was behind the construction of the two temples; (2) both temples were close to the capital, signifying their similar geopolitical nature; (3) the Buddhist temples were used as venues for rituals to worship kings and were closed to the public at that time. Thus, they were used as a viable mechanism for promoting political ideas; (4) the two temples were geographically close to Fang Mountain and Qingliang mountains, surrounded by rivers
For these contents, please make a conceptual map centered on the entire temples and cities, expressing the relationship between Siyuan Temple and Zhaoren Temple's capital and geographical location. If it is difficult to write a conceptual diagram, the author may draw it on the map. In the case of the ruling class, it is generally understood, but the author did not specifically explain political ideas related to the Buddhist system. The author should also provide specific details about that part.
Response 6: Thank you very much for your comment. I added conceptual maps to explain the relationship between the temples and cities. And the details of the political ideas of the emperors can be found in 4.2.
7.
What is the difference between Methodology and Research Methods?
Research Methods covers something completely unrelated. The author advises to amend the title of the section.
In the Research Methods part, the authors noted:
First, it analysed the background of their construction, the role played by the emperor in the construction process, and the temples’ statuses within national politics. Second, it compared the relationship of their locations with neighbouring cities, capitals, mountains, and rivers, thereby revealing the importance of geographic location and the emperor’s considerations. Finally, it suggests the interrelationship between state temples and monarchical politics and the underlying ideas conveyed through such a landscape.
As the author notes in Methodology:
(1) the ruling class was behind the construction of the two temples; (2) both temples were close to the capital, signifying their similar geopolitical nature; (3) the Buddhist temples were used as venues for rituals to worship kings and were closed to the public at that time. Thus, they were used as a viable mechanism for promoting political ideas; (4) the two temples were geographically close to Fang Mountain and Qingliang mountains, surrounded by rivers.
The two sentences above may look almost identical, but there is a difference in context. The author compares these sentences and corrects them in the same context. Even in the manuscript, the author does not specifically mention these contents. In order to enhance the quality of the manuscript, the author should add specific details.
Response 7: Thank you very much for your comment. I amend the titles of Charpter 2, and added a new charpter behind. The specific details shows in 4. Results.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I have read any can see the many changes the author has made to the original manuscript. I think sufficient changes have been made.
Author Response
Thank you so much for your comments. Your helpful and professional suggestions made this manuscript more complete.
