네덜란드 동인도회사의 기록을 통해 본 明末의 貿易構造― 1620년대 月港 무역의 변화와 澎湖事件 ―
The Trade Structure of the late Ming Dynasty Examined through Records of The East India Company
0
조회
0
다운로드
13
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In the early 17th century, The Ming Dynasty had two gates for commerce, but one was only for the Chinese while the other was controled by Portugal. The rule that no trade was allowed in any Chinese area without permission was equated with taboo to the Dutch. However, the fact that the Dutch withdrew from Penghu did not mean that the Ming Dynasty can control over costal area. Behind the conflict between VOC and government officials, there was negotiation on commerce. However, negotiations with the officials did not have constant binding power and might change according to the situation as they were temporary. Xunfu(巡撫) Nan, Ju-yi(南居益) negated what had been negotiated and prohibited trade with the Dutch. Nam Geo-Ik insisted on exclusive rights over the territory, besides he intended to secure a sea route to Manila and protect trading rights in Yue-xiang(月港) to maintain overseas trade. Although administrative or military officers stuck to the principles in political or military terms, they tried to find peaceful measures rather than military solutions. This direction was decided on through adjusting to interests in overseas trade. Meanwhile, merchants who were engaged in overseas trade had serious losses due to the Hai-jin(海禁) and the violent rambles of VOC. So they sought peace between them. In particular, Li, Dan(李旦) was charged with finding a way for diplomacy and commerce between VOC and Chinese officials, and mediated conflicts between them. Also Xu, Xin-Su (許心素) gained a position as an official in Taiwan trade, served as a mediator for non-tribute countries and secured trade space through creating a new trade custom.
Abstract
In the early 17th century, The Ming Dynasty had two gates for commerce, but one was only for the Chinese while the other was controled by Portugal. The rule that no trade was allowed in any Chinese area without permission was equated with taboo to the Dutch. However, the fact that the Dutch withdrew from Penghu did not mean that the Ming Dynasty can control over costal area. Behind the conflict between VOC and government officials, there was negotiation on commerce. However, negotiations with the officials did not have constant binding power and might change according to the situation as they were temporary. Xunfu(巡撫) Nan, Ju-yi(南居益) negated what had been negotiated and prohibited trade with the Dutch. Nam Geo-Ik insisted on exclusive rights over the territory, besides he intended to secure a sea route to Manila and protect trading rights in Yue-xiang(月港) to maintain overseas trade. Although administrative or military officers stuck to the principles in political or military terms, they tried to find peaceful measures rather than military solutions. This direction was decided on through adjusting to interests in overseas trade. Meanwhile, merchants who were engaged in overseas trade had serious losses due to the Hai-jin(海禁) and the violent rambles of VOC. So they sought peace between them. In particular, Li, Dan(李旦) was charged with finding a way for diplomacy and commerce between VOC and Chinese officials, and mediated conflicts between them. Also Xu, Xin-Su (許心素) gained a position as an official in Taiwan trade, served as a mediator for non-tribute countries and secured trade space through creating a new trade custom.
참고문헌 (36)
- "明實錄", ~
- 顧炎武, "天下郡國利病書" (1935), 上海書店
- 許孚遠, "敬和堂集" (1990), 臺北漢學研究中心
- 台灣銀行, "明季荷蘭人侵據澎湖殘擋" (1997), 行政院研究發展考核委員會
- 江樹生, "熱蘭遮城日誌 第一冊)" (1999), 臺南市政府
- 江樹生, "荷蘭臺灣長官致巴達維亞總督書信集Ⅰ・Ⅱ" (2010), 國史館台灣文獻館
- 姚楠, "東印度航海記, In 中外關係史名著譯書" (1982), 中華書局
- 李慶新, "明代海外貿易制度" (2007), 社會科學文獻出版社
- 程紹剛, "荷蘭人在福爾摩莎, In 臺灣硏究叢刊" (2000), 聯經
- 包樂史, "中荷交往史 1601~1989)" (1989), 路口店出版社
- Vermeer, Eduard B, "Development and Decline of Fukien Province in the 17th and 18th Centuries" (1990), E. J. Brill
- Wm. Campbell, "Formosa Under the Dutch: Described From Contemporary Records, With Explanatory Notes and a Bibliography of the Island" (2001), 南天書局
- 荒野泰典, "江戶幕府と東アジア" (2003), 吉川弘文館
- 永積洋子, "近世初期の外交" (1990), 創文社
- 村上直次郞, "バタヴイア城日誌1" (1970), 平凡社
- 정병철, "‘天崩地裂’의 시대, 명말청초의 화북사회" (2008), 명말청초의 화북사회 전남대학교 출판부
- 주경철, "대항해시대" (2008), 서울대학교출판부
- 티모시 브룩, "베르메르의 모자" (2008), 추수밭
- 하네다 마사시, "동인도회사와 아시아의 바다" (2012), 선인
- 萬明, "商品、商人與秩序―晚明海上世界的重新解讀", 古代文明, 3 (2011)
- 徐曉望, "論明代臺灣北港的崛起", 臺灣硏究, 2 (2006)
- 聶德寧, "明清之際福建的民間海外貿易港口", 中國社會經濟發展史研究, 4 (1992)
- 永積洋子, "由荷蘭史料看十七世紀的臺灣貿易, In 中國海洋發展史論文集7-上" (1999), 中央研究院人文社會科學研究中心
- 李金明, "十七世紀初荷蘭在澎湖․臺灣的貿易", 臺灣硏究集刊 (1999)
- 李德霞, "17世紀初荷蘭在福建沿海的騷擾與通商", 海交史研究, 1 (2004)
- 林偉盛, "荷蘭人居澎湖始末(1622-1624)", 國立政治大學歷史學報, 16 (1999)
- 林偉盛, "荷蘭貿易與中國海商(1635-1662)", 國立政治大學歷史學報, 17 (2000)
- 林偉盛 譯, "雷理生(Cornelis Reyersen)司令官日誌(1622)", 臺灣文獻, 54(3) (2003)
- 林偉盛, "雷理生(Cornelis Reyersen)司令官日誌(1623)", 臺灣文獻, 54(4) (2003)
- 曹永和, "環中國海域交流史上的臺灣和日本", 臺灣風物, 41(1) (1991)
- 陳小沖, "十七世紀上半葉荷蘭東印度公司的對華貿易擴張", 中國社會經濟史研究, 2 (1986)
- 陳小沖, "1622~1624年的澎湖危機-貿易․戰爭與談判", 思與言, 31 (1993)
- 何孟興, "被動的應對：萬曆年間明政府處理澎湖兵防問題之探討(1597~1616)", 硓𥑮石, 61 (2010)
- 岩生成一, "明末日本僑寓支那人甲必丹李旦考", 東洋學報, 23(3) (1939)
- 주경철, "네덜란드 동인도 회사의 설립 과정", 서양사연구, 2 (2000)
- 한지선, "鄭芝龍의 海上制覇過程", 明淸史硏究, 34 (2010)