Case study investigates settlement system dynamics in the Great Wall, suggesting new defense unit structures.
The settlements of the Great Wall are the product of the overlap of ancient Chinese agricultural civilization and non-agricultural civilization. The structure of the settlement system is of great value for understanding the law of defense engineering and social spatial organization. The Great Wall, built by a non-agricultural civilization, is an important part of the development history of the Chinese civilization. Its uniqueness reflects the relationship between institution and space. However, the archaeological remains and related research methods for non-agricultural Great Wall settlements are not perfect. This paper takes the typical case of the Great Wall built by a non-agricultural civilization (Linhuang Lu settlements of the Jin Great Wall) as the object and integrates spatial analysis and social network analysis. It aims to explore the structure of the settlement system. The settlements of Linhuang Lu show non-random distribution characteristics. They can be divided into four levels. The number ratio from high-level to low-level settlements is 70:30:10:1. Through the weighted Voronoi and social network analysis of human connection and geographical connection, this paper clarifies the structural characteristics of spatial association and social association of settlements. Combined with accessibility and geographical environment, the Linhuang Lu settlements were finally divided into 10 Meng’an defense units and 12 Mouke defense units. Quantitative analysis of the settlement system structure shows the hierarchical management of nature and military by non-agricultural civilization. This provides an empirical basis for the reconstruction of the military defense system of the Great Wall of the Jin Dynasty and further explores the applicability of the research paradigm. This paper has methodological innovation value for solving the problem of spatial cognition of settlement heritage.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xie et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: