and was finished by Chang Tsung 1194 A.D.  Before that time it had been constructed of wood, and had been sometimes a stationary and often a floating bridge.  The oldest account [end of 16th century] states that the bridge was pu 200 in length, and specifically states that each pu was 5 feet, thus making the bridge 1000 feet long.  It was called the Kuan Li Bridge.  The Emperor, Kia Tsing of the Ming, was a great bridge builder.  He reconstructed this bridge, adding strong embankments to prevent injury by floods.  He also built the fine bridge over the Liu Li Ho, the Cho Chou Bridge over the Chue Ma Ho.  What cannot be explained is Polo’s statement that the bridge had twenty-four arches, when the oldest accounts give no more than thirteen, there being eleven at the present time.  The columns which supported the balustrade in Polo’s time rested upon the loins of sculptured lions.  The account of the lions after the bridge was repaired by Kia Tsing says that there are so many that it is impossible to count them correctly, and gossip about the bridge says that several persons have lost their minds in making the attempt.  The little walled city on the east end of the bridge, rightly called Kung Chi, popularly called Fei Ch’eng, is a monument to Ts’ung Ch’eng, the last of the Ming, who built it, hoping to check the advance of Li Tzu ch’eng, the great robber chief who finally proved too strong for him.”—­H.C.]

The Bridge of Lu-kou is mentioned more than once in the history of the conquest of North China by Chinghiz.  It was the scene of a notable mutiny of the troops of the Kin Dynasty in 1215, which induced Chinghiz to break a treaty just concluded, and led to his capture of Peking.

This bridge was begun, according to Klaproth, in 1189, and was five years a-building.  On the 17th August, 1688, as Magaillans tells us, a great flood carried away two arches of the bridge, and the remainder soon fell. [Father Intorcetta, quoted by Bretschneider (Peking, p. 53), gives the 25th of July, 1668, as the date of the destruction of the bridge, which agrees well with the Chinese accounts.—­H.C.] The bridge was renewed, but with only nine arches instead of thirteen, as appears from the following note of personal observation with which Dr. Lockhart has favoured me: 

“At 27 li from Peking, by the western road leaving the gate of the Chinese city called Kwang-’an-man, after passing the old walled town of Feuchen, you reach the bridge of Lo-Ku-Kiao.  As it now stands it is a very long bridge of nine arches (real arches) spanning the valley of the Hwan Ho, and surrounded by beautiful scenery.  The bridge is built of green sandstone, and has a good balustrade with short square pilasters crowned by small lions.  It is in very good repair, and has a ceaseless traffic, being on the road to the coal-mines which supply the city.  There is a pavilion at each end of the bridge with inscriptions, the one recording that K’anghi (1662-1723) built the bridge, and the other that Kienlung (1736-1796) repaired it.”  These circumstances are strictly consistent with Magaillans’ account of the destruction of the mediaeval bridge.  Williamson describes the present bridge as about 700 feet long, and 12 feet wide in the middle part.