海澄 개항과 새로운 교역망의 형성
The Open of Hai-Cheng Port and the Establishment of New Commerce Network
0
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This article examined the development process of a brand-new oversea commerce network centered around a harbor named Hai-Cheng海澄, which took the official open port of the Ming empire after 1567. This article Significantly dealt with the connection of Hai-Cheng海澄 with Manila, which was the Spain empire's colonial stronghold of the Eastern Asian Seas at that time. For the Ming empire, the open of Hai-Cheng海澄 port was a measure to secure coastal stability. Many pro-trade officials criticized that the indiscriminative sea-ban policy in the late Jia-Jing嘉靖 era had threatened littoral people's livelihood, it made them conspire with wokou倭寇 and pirates. They claimed that the license trade system would be the most efficient policy for coastal security. Since the early stage of the open-sea policy，the Ming court's main interest was on the coastal area's long-term stability, rather than the area's economic vitalization or tax revenue. The Hai-Cheng海澄 oversea trade started to be supervised by systematic license regulations since 1575. At the time, the Spain empire buckled down to an inroad into Eastern-Asian seas. It chose Manila as a colonial stronghold in this area. Not long after, a very prosperous trade network, which was second only to the Macao-Nagasaki route, was developed between Hai-Cheng海澄 and Manila. This trade network developed relying on high profitability, driven by a mutual preference for each other’s goods – Chinese silk and American silver. Further, the stable diplomatic relationship between those empires was a solid foundation for maintaining this trade network. The Hai-Cheng海澄 – Manila trade network was in a crisis of trade break at least twice. The one was the sea-ban of the Ming court in 1593, which was caused by the Korea-Japan War broken out in the previous year. The other was the massacre of the Chinese in Manila by the Spain authority that occurred in 1603. Although both cases could be recognized as severe security threats for the Ming court, neither were led to a long-term commerce disconnection. The Fujianese coastal merchants, who were in oversea trade business, succeeded in fending off or minimizing the sea-bans by lobbying their local governments. The local officials, who tried to persuade the central government to withdraw the sea-ban for protecting the oversea trade merchants' profit, presented a critical argument that open-sea is a better policy than a sea-ban for coastal security. Due to conceding its validity, the Ming court maintained the license trade system consistently, despite security crises. The Hai-Cheng海澄 – Manila trade network kept flourishing by balancing the Ming's security interest and the merchant's economic interest. The Spain authority in Manila also played an essential role in this trade network due to maintaining a non-hostile mood with the Ming built up during initial contact. The massacre of the Chinese in 1603 could escalate into a severe conflict between these empires. However, both powers defused the situation quickly by a swift diplomatic negotiation. The Hai-Cheng海澄 – Manila trade network kept functioning as if nothing had happened.
Abstract
This article examined the development process of a brand-new oversea commerce network centered around a harbor named Hai-Cheng海澄, which took the official open port of the Ming empire after 1567. This article Significantly dealt with the connection of Hai-Cheng海澄 with Manila, which was the Spain empire's colonial stronghold of the Eastern Asian Seas at that time. For the Ming empire, the open of Hai-Cheng海澄 port was a measure to secure coastal stability. Many pro-trade officials criticized that the indiscriminative sea-ban policy in the late Jia-Jing嘉靖 era had threatened littoral people's livelihood, it made them conspire with wokou倭寇 and pirates. They claimed that the license trade system would be the most efficient policy for coastal security. Since the early stage of the open-sea policy，the Ming court's main interest was on the coastal area's long-term stability, rather than the area's economic vitalization or tax revenue. The Hai-Cheng海澄 oversea trade started to be supervised by systematic license regulations since 1575. At the time, the Spain empire buckled down to an inroad into Eastern-Asian seas. It chose Manila as a colonial stronghold in this area. Not long after, a very prosperous trade network, which was second only to the Macao-Nagasaki route, was developed between Hai-Cheng海澄 and Manila. This trade network developed relying on high profitability, driven by a mutual preference for each other’s goods – Chinese silk and American silver. Further, the stable diplomatic relationship between those empires was a solid foundation for maintaining this trade network. The Hai-Cheng海澄 – Manila trade network was in a crisis of trade break at least twice. The one was the sea-ban of the Ming court in 1593, which was caused by the Korea-Japan War broken out in the previous year. The other was the massacre of the Chinese in Manila by the Spain authority that occurred in 1603. Although both cases could be recognized as severe security threats for the Ming court, neither were led to a long-term commerce disconnection. The Fujianese coastal merchants, who were in oversea trade business, succeeded in fending off or minimizing the sea-bans by lobbying their local governments. The local officials, who tried to persuade the central government to withdraw the sea-ban for protecting the oversea trade merchants' profit, presented a critical argument that open-sea is a better policy than a sea-ban for coastal security. Due to conceding its validity, the Ming court maintained the license trade system consistently, despite security crises. The Hai-Cheng海澄 – Manila trade network kept flourishing by balancing the Ming's security interest and the merchant's economic interest. The Spain authority in Manila also played an essential role in this trade network due to maintaining a non-hostile mood with the Ming built up during initial contact. The massacre of the Chinese in 1603 could escalate into a severe conflict between these empires. However, both powers defused the situation quickly by a swift diplomatic negotiation. The Hai-Cheng海澄 – Manila trade network kept functioning as if nothing had happened.
참고문헌 (61)
- 張燮, "東西洋考" (2000), 中華書局
- "明史" (1974), 中華書局
- "明實錄" (1964), 明和美術印刷廠
- 臺灣銀行經濟硏究室, "明實錄閩海關係史料(臺灣文獻叢刊 第296種)" (1971)
- 何喬遠, "閩書(四庫全書存目叢書 史部 204-207, 地理類)" (1996), 齊魯書社
- 陳子龍, "明經世文編", 中華書局影印本, ~
- 臺灣銀行經濟硏究室, "福建通志臺灣府 臺灣文獻叢刊 第84種" (1960)
- 臺灣銀行經濟硏究室, "漳州府志選錄(臺灣文獻叢刊 第232種)" (1967)
- 鄭若曾, "籌海圖編(中國兵書集成 第15-16冊)" (1990), 解放軍出版社･遼瀋書社
- 顧炎武, "天下郡國利病書(四庫全書存目叢書 史部 171-172, 地理類)" (1996), 齊魯書社
- 臺灣銀行經濟硏究室, "廈門志(臺灣文獻叢刊 第95種)" (1961)
- 남민구, "萬曆연간 海澄縣 상선 징세와 그 배경", 동양사학연구, (149), pp.147~182 (2019), 동양사학회
- 남민구, "萬曆年間, 呂宋의 入貢 要請과 明朝의 對應 ― 福建당국의 역할을 중심으로 ―", 명청사연구, (52), pp.181~215 (2019), 명청사학회[DOI]
- 최연식, "해역아시아사연구입문" (2012), 민속원
- 오금성, "국법과 사회관행" (2007), 지식산업사
- 이화승, "明代 東南沿海 走私貿易 연구 ― 官, 民, 賊의 三重奏 ―", 명청사연구, (53), pp.1~32 (2020), 명청사학회[DOI]
- 조영헌, "明 後期 月港 開港과 壬辰倭亂", 史叢(사총), (90), pp.83~126 (2017), 역사연구소[DOI]
- 차혜원, "중국 복건지역의 임진전쟁(1592~1598) 대응", 동방학지, (174), pp.137~162 (2016), 국학연구원[DOI]
- 한지선, "嘉靖年間 東南沿海社會와 月港의 開放", 중국사연구, (90), pp.127~168 (2014), 중국사학회
- 塗志偉, "大航海時代世界格局下月港地位的變遷", 閩商文化研究, (6) (2015)
- 毛麗, "明後期的漳州與對日貿易", 閩南師範大學學報(哲學社會科學版), (1) (2019)
- 葉偉奇, "福建"海上絲綢之路"與外國銀幣的流入", 福建金融, (7) (2016)
- 蘇惠蘋, "族譜所見明清時期中菲貿易的月港海商", 沈陽農業大學學報(社會科學版), (1) (2018)
- 蘇惠蘋, "海洋社會變遷下的福建官紳與海商-以高寀事件爲中心的考察", 閩台文化研究, (3) (2014)
- 吳春明, "月港—馬尼拉航路對中華文化史的貢獻", 南方文物, (3) (2019)
- 王日根, "明淸海疆政策與中國社會發展" (2005), 福建人民出版社
- 王日根, "海洋區域治理視域下的月港"二十四將"叛亂", 江海學刊, (5) (2012)
- 劉濤, "戴城改良的福船与大航海时代漳州月港发展考", 閩商文化研究, (1) (2019)
- 李慶新, "明代海外貿易制度" (2007), 社會科學文獻出版社
- 李金明, "『更路簿』與『東西洋考』針路之研究", 南海學刊, (4) (2016)
- 李賢强, "明代福建月港“二十四將”叛亂與設縣問題再硏究", 中國邊疆史地硏究, 27(2)
- 任軍, "全球化視野下明代月港"走私"興起的社會學研究", 閩商文化研究, (6) (2015)
- 林耀卿, "漳州月港在古代海絲之路的曆史地位", 東方收藏, (6) (2018)
- 林仁川, "明末淸初私人海上貿易" (1987), 華東師範大學出版社
- 林仁川, "明代漳州海上貿易的發展與海商反對稅監高寀的鬥爭", 廈門大學學報(哲學社會科學版), (3) (1982)
- 林惠玲, "月港時代漳州的國際化與地方化", 閩商文化研究, (6) (2015)
- 張桂林, "稅璫高寀亂閩述略", 福建師範大學學報(哲學社會科學版), (2) (1990)
- 張永欽, "論明代漳州月港在海內外貿易交流中的地位", 齊齊哈爾大學學報(哲學社會科學版), (1) (2019)
- 錢江, "1570-1760年中國和呂宋貿易的發展及貿易額的估算", 中國社會經濟史硏究, (3) (1986)
- 鄭美華, "周起元與東林黨關系考辨", 福建史志, (2) (2017)
- 鄭永常, "來日海洋的挑戰-明代海貿政策演變研究" (2004), 稻郷出版社
- 鄭鏞, "張燮與『東西洋考』", 漳州師範學院學報(哲學社會科學版), (2) (2004)
- 陳尙勝, "隆慶開海 : 明朝海外貿易政策的重大變革", 人民論壇, (30) (2018)
- 湯開建, "明隆萬之際粵東巨盜林鳳事迹詳考-以劉堯誨"督撫疏議"中林鳳史料爲中心", 歷史硏究, (6) (2012)
- 黃友泉, "明代東南沿海士紳與海疆治理—兼論明代月港部分開禁政策藍本的構畫", 中國海洋大學學報(社會科學版), (2) (2020)
- 黃重言, "『東西洋考』中的中菲航路考", 學術硏究, (4) (1978)
- 檀上寬, "明代海禁=朝貢システムと華夷秩序" (2013), 京都大學學術出版會
- 上田信, "海と帝國" (2005), 講談社
- 中島樂章, "十六世紀末の福建-フイリピン-九州貿易", 史淵, 144 (2007)
- Giraldez, Arturo, "The Age of Trade" (2015), Rowman & Littlefield
- Li Kangying, "The Ming Maritime Trade Policy in Transition, 1368 to 1567" (2010), Harrassowitz
- Ng Chin-keong, "Trade and society, the Amoy network on the China Coast, 1683-1735" (2015), NUS Press
- Tremml-Werner, Birgit, "Spain, China, and Japan in Manila, 1571-1644 : local comparisons and global connections" (2015), Amsterdam University Press
- Borao, José E., "The massacre of 1603 : Chinese perception of the Spaniards in the Philippines", Itinerario, 23(1) (1998)
- Chia, Lucille, "The Butcher, The baker, and the Carpenter; Chinese sojourners in the spanish philippines and their impact on southern fujian(16th-18th centuries)", Journal of Ecnomic and Social History of the Orient, 49(4) (2006)
- Chin, James K., "Junk Trade, Business Network, and Sojournig Communities : Hokkien Merchants in Early Maritime Asia", Journal of Chinese overseas, 6 (2010)
- Crossley, John N., "Chinese characters in the Spanish court : The Manila petition of 1598 to Philip II", Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 29(4) (2019)
- Flynn, Dennis O., "Born with a ‘Silver Spoon’: The Origin of World Trade in 1571", Journal of World History, 6(2) (1995)
- Iaccarino, Ubaldo, "Beyond the Silk Roads" (2017), Harrassowitz Verlag
- Kuhn, Philip A., "Why China Historians Should Study the Chinese Diaspora, and Vice-versa", JOURNAL OF CHINESE OVERSEAS, 2(2) (2006)
- Wills, John E. Jr, "China and Maritime Europe, 1500-1800 : Trade, Settlement, Diplomacy, and Missions" (2010), Cambridge University Press