下载掌阅APP，畅读海量书库
立即打开
François Gipouloux（吉浦罗）
In 1567，Emperor Longqing lifted the ban on maritime activities（ haijin 海禁）.Until the collapse of the Ming Dynasty（1644），China's maritime trade enjoyed unprecedented growth.This liberalization had long-lasting consequences：it broke the limitations imposed by the tributary trade，favoured the influx of silver，and accelerated the monetarization of the Chinese economy.A growing number of merchants from Fujian but also from Zhejiang，engaged in long-distance trade.
Merchants hail from all regions，sea routes are prosperous，large trees are used to buildlarge ships，trade is divided along two routes，east and west；Every year，all sorts of valuable goods that cannot be made out of the picture are packaged and loaded on ships.Surely，the benefits of this trade amount to several hundred thousand taels and pieces of copper. [1]
Gu Yanwu（1613-1682）noted the growing monetarization of the Chinese economy in the seventeenth century：
More people are involved in the trade and less attention is paid to land ... The land is not a constant mainstay.
As a result of the single whip tax reform（ yitiaobian fa 一条鞭法），rich merchants become reluctant to invest in land ownership.Yuegang（Zhangzhou），the only port authorized to trade with foreigners becomes the first port of Fujian.In 1589，the Imperial Administration fixed the number of ships that could leave Yuegang for the Western Seas（44）and for the Eastern Seas（44）. [2] This provision is far from satisfying the merchants，who ask for exit permits for 110 ships a year.But the distance to reach the countries in the western seas is long，and the ships leave this road to turn to Manila，and the shipping of silver.Most of Yuegang's ships are thus “sucked up”by trade with Manila.Structured by the Manila galleon and the Fujian merchants，an axis Acapulco-Manila-Yuegang is clearly outlined at the end of the sixteenth century.
Five years after the opening of Longqing（1567）one year after the takeover of Manila by the Spaniards，the establishment of the Yuegang-Manila axis firmly inserts China in international trade.While Chinese ships leave Fujian with a permit for the Southern Seas，as we have seen，they actually go to Manila，where they engage in a much more lucrative trade.At the beginning of the 17th century，300 ships leave Yuegang each year.The merchants operate overseas and trade with 47 countries in an area stretching from Manila to Nagasaki，Siam，Banten，Patani，
from Champa（central and south of present-day Vietnam）to the Sulu archipelago.
[3]
From their Asian settlements—Macao，Manila，and soon Batavia—Portuguese，Spanish，and Dutch were also involved in these exchanges between Banten，an important transit port in Southeast Asia that rivals Makassar，and Malacca and Yuegang.
In addition to traditional luxury goods，consumer goods and textiles were commonly traded.Is this a change in nature in the conduct of China's foreign trade？ How was trade organized？
Let's first notice the importance of the involvement of local officials in smuggling，from which they derive considerable benefits.This is not new.In 1548，Zhu Wan（1494-1550），the chief coordinator of coastal defenses in the provinces of Fujian and Zhejiang，wrote：
Getting rid of foreign pirates（ waiguodao 外国盗），is easy，but getting rid of Chinese pirates is not easy.Getting rid of Chinese pirates operating along the coast is easy，but getting rid of pirates in robes and hats（ yiguanzhidao ，i.e.officials衣冠之盗）is particularly difficult. [4]
He also wrote：
The local officials in Zhangzhou and Quanzhou treat the people from high and behave very authoritatively towards the petty administration...When a ship [who went to trade abroad] returns with goods [bought overseas]，they repay first the initial loan，then subtract the interest corresponding to the capital borrowed，and finally divide the rest of the diverted goods.The transactions extend over several years and concern a very large number of families. [5]
Trade is impossible without the blind eye or even the active participation of local customs.In fact，local customs were often controlled by“mafia gangs”（ guanba 关霸）in which the local elite played an important role.The smugglers thus corrupt the administration to pass the customs without hindrance，or pretend to be pilgrims.To facilitate their passage the smugglers often even use false flags and seals of the administration.
Dinghai Customs has turned a blind eye to these traffic. The port of Taohuadu allowed boats to be built.The local administration and sailors were involved in these operations. [6]
Collusion is evident between corrupt customs officials，bureaucrats，and merchants.Their actions discovered，noted Wang Zaijin，the smugglers sought the support of the local authorities.
The Chinese historian Fu Yiling outlined a typology of the great merchants of the Ming period. [7] The investors and operators of the maritime trade can be classified into finer categories：Shipowners，shippers，charterers，financiers，to which must be added to the crowd of small merchants（ qunshang 群商 ，sanshang 散商）.
Maritime trade is not within the reach of everyone.Profits are huge，but trade has long been in the hands of rich people.The investor is part of what is known as the local elite：landowners，wealthy merchants，scholars，degree holders，high-ranking military，but also，although more rarely，small employees of the administration（ xuli 胥吏）.
A source in Xiamen says that only wealthy merchants can build an ocean-going junk and buying the cargo.Although they own the cargo，they do not travel with their goods for most of the time.It is entrusted to people of trust，adoptive children，or partner merchants who take part in the trip.
For the fitting of a ship and the purchase of the goods，relatives of the same clan（ zongqin 宗亲）who will take care of the cargo during the voyage are called upon.Another common practice is to jointly build a ship，buy it and acquire the cargo：“When several people associate to build a ship，they let go itinerant merchants from all over to take their goods.”
In Xiamen，“They are pooling capital to build a vessel，and call it ‘xing jin’（姓金，literally ‘name [of the participants] -capital’）”，which shows that it is a joint operation. [8]
In Fuzhou，
Merchants gather several people，the funds assembled thus constitute the debt [the most important part of the capital]，then each merchant raises a portion of the capital，builds an ocean-going junk.They then recruit sailors，and are going to trade. [9]
This type of arrangement continued under the Qing Dynasty.John Barrow（1764-1848），a British administrator attached to the first Embassy of Lord Mac Cartney in China，reported that it is very rare for a ship to have a single owner.
There are usually 40 to 50，and that number can even be as high as 100.The ship is divided into as many parts as there are merchants，and everyone knows exactlywhich slot is allotted to him on the ship.Each cares for his own property or entrusts it to an adopted child or a member of his clan，and it is very rare that the goods are entrusted to someone who has no clan affiliation with the principal. [10]
This last remark shows how personal relationships are fundamental in asset management.This is very different from what happened in Europe，with the bill of lading and the transfer of ownership of the goods to the captain of the ship.In Genoa or Venice，negotiable financial instruments were quickly developed，in order to rise funds efficiently.The figure of the capitalist，if it remains prominent，is also supported by a crowd of small bearers，barbers，clerks，etc. [11]
The shipowner is also called chuanzhu （船主）， bozhu （舶主）.One also finds，to designate the one who fit the ship，the expressions “ nada ”（哪哒），“ laha ”（喇哈），“ nanheda ”（南和达），which according to Kobata Atsushi and Fu Yiling，would come from Persian nakhuda or Malay nakhada . [12] A source from the Qing era repored that “those who are responsible for an ocean-going ship are called nada （哪哒）”. [13] The shipowner must be distinguished from the captain，called chuanzhang （船长），or chuantou （船头）in Japanese sources.It must also be distinguished from the subcargo（ shangzhu 商主）although this distinction is not always made in Chinese sources.It is often a merchant or the representative of the shipowner.The owner has enough capital to build the ship and recruit the crew.He solicits the merchants who will take part in the voyage overseas，assembles the cargo，and launches the expedition.But in other cases，he is content to rent the vessel to a merchant who will organize the expedition overseas，and to charge a commission on all the commercial operations carried out.This type of commission，called shangjin （商金），is paid to the owner of the ship.The relations between the recruiters and the shipowner are therefore based on commissions.
The term chuanzhu （船主），designates the owner of all or part of the goods shipped，has in Chinese a very broad meaning.In the case of an overseas operation，the shipper can even invest funds and conduct commercial operations.The one who steers the ship，which carries goods overseas is called chu hai （出海），it is also called chuanzhu （船主），literally，“the one that goes to sea”. [14]
The charterer is the one who builds the ship and rents it thereafter.He rents his ship to merchants for overseas trade，and then shares the profit made in commercial operations with the merchants he has partnered with，usually taking a quarter of the profits.
Initially， chuanzhu，fanzhu （贩主）， chuanhu （船户）do not refer to the same person.Subsequently，as the relations were very close between chuanshang and chuanzhu ，these two appellations designate the same person.This point would indicate that the function of the investor and that of the operator are merged.The transport functions and commercial functions are not distinguished in China in the late Ming，while maritime trade was flourishing.
In some of the cases reported earlier，Wang Zaijin wrote：
The scholar（ shengyuan 生员）Shen Yunfeng entrusted his capital to his servants（or adoptive children：they bear the same name）Shen Laizuo and Shen Laixiang and sent them to Haicheng business，then Laixiang goes directly to Manila（Lüsong）to sell the goods there，and promises to hand over the profits to his master. [15]
It is necessary to specify here the economic role of the dependents.They may be people who have not been able to repay the money they have borrowed and become enslaved.“Enslaved merchants”（ pushang 仆商），dependents （ puren 仆人），adoptive sons（ yangzi 养子， yinan 义男），are all linked by strong relationships with the owners of the vessel or the investors.Associations with dependents or adoptive children for commercial reasons are common.He Qiaoyuan，in his Book of Fujian （ Minshu 闽书），mentions the case of a native of Haicheng：
There are children of very poor families and abandoned children（ qier 弃儿）who raise themselves and study for a long time the language and customs of foreigners，and who endure and overcome many difficulties in doing business. [16]
Ultimately，this acquisition of equity makes them adoptive children（or “loyal sons”，literally）and thus creates bonds of allegiance and obligation with the shipowners.
Fujian people，including those who already have children，adopt several children.When they grow up，they send them to trade overseas.Those who earn money must be established with several wives to keep them in the family，and that the inheritance remains in the family. [17]
And also：
Most rich and powerful families go into the offshore business，but do not want their own kids to take that risk.The “brothers by contract”（ qidi 契弟），if they are competent，should be considered as adopted children.One can give them important capital，send them abroad to trade，and if they earn a lot，they share the gains with the rich family own children... [18]
Itinerant merchants play a big role in the circulation of goods in China and abroad.Small merchants who do not have the financial means to build，rent，or buy a ship，can only embark as itinerant merchants，on the junks of large traders.They may also lease the vessel's master a slot to store their goods.They are called sanshang （散商），the sea peddlers，as opposed to the great traders of the maritime adventure，the official-merchant（ guanshang 官商），or the landowners-merchant onshore.Their situation is not enviable：
A merchant who faced storms and stormy seas，who was barely gaining enough to live in the sea trade，luckily made a profit，and thought of his native land.Happy，he passed another generation as life in the homeland was very far away，now he leaves to continue his life，the corrupt（ mo 墨）want to capture his profits，the cunning（ xia 黠）and the haves（ hao 豪）extort their earnings by any means possible，which is particularly distressing. [19]
On a ship their number can reach hundreds，and each one specializes in different products.Itinerant merchants experienced all kinds of constraints and vexations.On the ship，they are subject to a double control：that of the subcargo（ shangzhu 商主）which allowed them to participate in the expedition，and secondly that of the captain or owner of the ship（ chuanzhu 船主）to whom they have to，obey.
Apart from some very rich merchants who are often landowners，most merchants are small traders who have to set up partnerships to embark on an overseas commercial expedition.This system is hardly different from that practiced under the Song.This way of distributing profits does not seem to exhibit any significant progress，in legal terms，compared to what was the rule in the 12th century.Moreover，this type of operation does not distinguish the transport function from the trade function.Why was there no evolution？ The Conservatism of Chinese merchants，extreme caution in their methods？ Institutional constraints stemming from relations with the bureaucracy，the landowners，the usurers？ While in the Mediterranean world，the transition from commenda to compania was done quite quickly.What are the elements that would indicate the transition to a more formal status in the business organization？
Is Chinese maritime trade a marker of the emergence of capitalism？ In the 1960s and early 1980s Many Chinese historians（Fu Yiling，Wu Chengming，and Li Jinming，among others），have spotted the “sprouts of capitalism”in the Ming Dynasty.Their response is generally negative，and for two reasons：firstly，China has never been a great maritime power，on the other hand China is an essentially agricultural country，and the maritime trade has had only a minor impact on economic development.
The monetary wealth accumulated through maritime trade fails to transform into productive capital.Unable to invest the sphere of production，the wealth reverts to the acquisition of land or is lent through loans at usurious rates，or dilapidated in corruption，or lavish lifestyle.
For many Chinese historians，the maritime trade reinforces the “feudal”structure of Chinese society in the sense that only landowners，large commissioned merchants，and rich scholars can embark on the adventure of maritime commerce.This argument，elaborated by Fu Yiling，is echoed by He Pingdi，
and more recently by researchers in Xiamen University，like Lin Renchuan，Nie Dening or Liao Dake.But they also insist that maritime trade promotes the development of capitalism.The picture is actually more complex：the two economies（feudal and capitalist），therefore appear entwined，as noted by Harold Berman in the case of the medieval economy
[20]
.The great dynamism of maritime commerce in China in the middle of the Ming Dynasty is undeniable.But paradoxically，we would look in vain for several institutional arrangements that could make transactions predictable and lead to the sustainability of a company：
1.How is the responsibility of the captain formalized，and the distinction between his role and the shipowner？ The bill of lading（ huodan 货单），attested for the first time in a contract drafted in Marseille in 1127，is in fact a transfer of property from the shipper to the captain，who is authorized to throw the cargo overboard if the circumstances（storm，imminent sinking）require it.It is because of its absence that the itinerant merchants are present on the Chinese ship.
2.Marine insurance.How to put a cost on a risk？ How to diffuse risks？ Chinese sources are very rare on this issue.No trace of any contracts by which an insurer commits himself to pay an insured person to compensate for the shipwreck of the loss of cargo as a result of the realization of risk at sea.An interesting testimony is provided by the Chinese Repository，a newspaper published in Canton between 1832 and 1851，which provides valuable information about the organization of the Chinese overseas trade.Chinese junks carrying rice to China were usually built in Siam.These high-sea vessels were called “white-bow vessels”（ baitouchuan 白头船）.With a carrying capacity of 260 to 300 tons their crews consisted of Chaozhou sailors：
The major part of these junks is owned，either by Chinese settlers at Bangkok or the Siamese nobles.The former put on board as supercargo，some relative of their own，generally a young man，who has married one of their daughters；the latter take surety of the relatives of the person，whom they appoint supercargo.If anything happens to the junk，the individuals who secured her are held responsible，and are often，very unjustly，thrown into prison. [21]
These lines were written in 1832，while China's maritime trade had more than a thousand years of experience.Apparently，a mechanism that would allow the transfer of risk does not exist in Chinese overseas trade practices.Neither a distinction between the legal responsibilities of the shipowner and the captain.
3.Rigorous accounting methods，without which it is almost impossible to monitor the evolution of the investment and the capital account.One can notice the appearance，in the Chinese sources，of the distinction between the capitalist and the manager，and we can note the sophistication of the operations of pooling of capital.However，without the capital account，the perpetuation of partnerships is problematic.
4.How does the legal separation of responsibilities between the owner and the manager occur in the case of Chinese maritime trade？ This distinction has been the basis of the trading company in Europe？ The company or a provision that goes beyond the partnership（合伙 hehuo ）is certainly attested from the Song for the maritime trade and continues until the late nineteenth century.There has been no legal improvement as in the case of the commenda .Why？ So far，this question has not been answered.
摘要： 隆庆开海后，中国的海上贸易迅速扩张，对中国和世界经济都影响深远，具有无可否认的活力。但是通过分析海上贸易的人员构成，包括投资者、船只所有者、货物托运人、承租船只者、官商、散商等，可以发现宋代以来海上贸易中的合伙关系没有什么发展，海上贸易积累的财富也无法通过投资转化为生产资本。我们找不到让交易变得可预测并支持公司永续经营的制度安排。这些局限包括：船长的法律责任没有得到明确并与船只所有者相区分，缺乏类似海运保险这样的风险转移机制，没有细致的会计方法，以及缺乏相应的法律改进。
关键词： 明末清初 贸易组织 制度安排
（执行编辑：申斌）
[1] Zhou Qiyuan， Xu ，in Zhang Xie， Dongxi Yang Kao （张燮：《东西洋考》），Beijing：Zhonghua book company，1981，p.17.
[2] Ming Shenzong Shilu （《明神宗实录》），juan 210，Taipei：Institute of History and Philology，Academia Sinica，p.6a.
[3] Zhang Xie， Dongxi Yang Kao .
[4] Mingshi （《明史》），juan 205，Beijing：Zhonghua Book Company，1974，pp.5404-5405.
[5] Zhu Wan， Piyu Zaji ，juan 5.
[6] Wang Zaijin， Yue Juan （王在晋：《越镌》），juan 21，p.19a.
[7] Fu Yiling， Mingqing Shidai Shangren ji Shangye Ziben （傅衣凌：《明清时代商人及商业资本》），Beijing：Zhonghua Book Company，2007，p.137.
[8] Zhou Kai， Xiamen Zhi （周凯：《厦门志》）juan 15，Xiamen：Lujiang publication，1996，p.515.
[9] Zhang Weiren ed.， Zhongyang Yanjiuyuan Lishi Yuyan Yanjiusuo Xiancun Qingdai Neigedaku Yuancang Mingqing Dangan （张伟仁主编：《“中央”研究院历史语言研究所现存清代内阁大库原藏明清档案》），Vol.28，Taipei：Linking Publishing Co.，Ltd.，p.B16068.
[10] John Barrow， A Voyage to Cochinchina in the Years 1792 and 1793 ，London：Cadell and Davies，1806，p.42.
[11] Cf.Michel Balard， Gênes et l'outre-mer ，Vol.Ⅰ， Les Actes de Caffa du Notaire Lanmberto di Sambuceto，1289-1290 ，Paris：Mouton ＆ Co.，p.41.
[12] Kobata Atsushi，Chûsei Nantô Tsûkô Bôeki Shi No Kenkyû（小葉田淳『中世南島通交貿易史の研究』），Tokyo：Nippon Hyôronsha，1939.Quoted from Fu Yiling， Mingqing Shidai Shangren ji Shangye Ziben ，pp.121-122.
[13] Huang Qiong， Xijin Shi Xiaolu （黄邛：《锡金识小录》），juan 6，p.8a.
[14] Zhou Kai， Xiamen Zhi ，juan 15，p.512；juan 5，p.139.
[15] Wang Zaijin， Yue Juan ，juan 21，p.22b.
[16] HeQiaoyuan， Minshu （何乔远：《闽书》），juan 38，p.10a.
[17] Zhou Kai， Xiamen Zhi， juan 15，p.517.See also Liao Dake， Fujian Haiwai Jiaotongshi ，Fuzhou：Fujian People's Publishing House，2002，p.401.
[18] Defu， Minzheng Lingyao （《闽政领要》），juanzhong，reserved in Fujian Normal University Library.See also Wang Zhenzhong， Xiuzhong donghai yibian kai （王振忠：《袖中东海一编开：域外文献与清代社会史研究论稿》），Shanghai：Fudan Daxue Chubanshe，2015，p.39.
[19] Zhang Xie， Dongxi Yang Kao ，p.135.
[20] Harold Berman ，Law and Revolution，Ⅰ：The Formation of the Western Legal Tradition， Harvard University Press，1983.
[21] Rev.Charles Gutzlaff，“Journal of a Residence in Siam，and of a Voyage along the Coast of China to Mantchou Tartary，” The Chinese Repository ，Vol.1，No.2（June 1832），p.56.