提要：最近，对中国海上丝绸之路史的研究，西方学术界出现了“范式转变”的潮流。以往的研究，学者们沉溺于欧洲中心论或中国中心论的研究模式，常将中国与西方简单地二元对立。然而，当代学者正试图跳出这种旧的研究藩篱，不再将中国古代海洋视为边缘或次要的区域，而是将欧洲人视为众多外来者中的一个群体，从而探索西方是如何遵守和适应亚洲本已建立起来的成熟模式和惯例。这种新趋势，为开辟新的课题铺平了道路。如今，亚洲海洋史研究的范围非常宽广，如海洋考古、港口城市、航线、贸易和文化网络、移民、地方宗教信仰、海洋法、外交、海防、海盗和走私等，均有涉及。
关键词：海洋史 海上丝绸之路 南海 新范式 全球史
Latest Trends in English-language Research on China’s Maritime History
Robert J. Antony; MA Guang
Abstract: Recently, there has been something of a “paradigm shift” whereby China’s maritime past is no longer viewed as peripheral history or as a minor tradition. The use of a wide range of sources from archaeological findings to literary texts, official documents, dairies, stone inscriptions, and pictorial materials, to ethnographic fieldwork and linguistic evidence, hallmark this new research. As the new Asian maritime history moves away from Eurocentric and Sinocentric models and simple East-West dichotomies, scholars now are more likely to explain how the West conformed and accommodated to well-established Asian patterns and practices. Europeans were simply one group among many others. New trends have paved the way for a variety of new research agendas. Today the scope of China’s maritime history is boundless: maritime archaeology, port cities, sailing routes, trade and cultural networks, diasporas, local religious cults, maritime law, diplomacy, coastal defence, piracy and smuggling.
Keywords: maritime history, maritime silk road, South China Sea, paradigm shift, global history
作者简介：* Robert J. Antony（安乐博），普林斯顿高等研究院历史研究学院访问学者（School of Historical Studies, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton）；
马光，澳门理工大学中西文化研究所副教授，山东大学兼职齐鲁青年学者。
基金项目：本文系国家社科基金年度项目（编号：22BZS010）、山东省社科规划研究专项项目（编号：21CWHJ11）的阶段性成果。
原刊：《海交史研究》2023年第3期，第1—9页。文字版仅供参考，引用请参考PDF文档（CNKI官网可下载）。
提及丝绸之路，大部分人脑海中都会浮现出大漠驼队行走在中欧陆上丝绸之路上的情景。然而，与陆上丝绸之路并驾齐驱的，还有另外一条同样古老、同样重要的海上丝绸之路。[1]将其称之为海上丝绸之路，或许略为不当，因为事实上，在古代中国海洋贸易中最重要的商品是瓷器，而非丝绸。尽管如此，这一术语还是被广为接受，尤其是2013年10月习近平主席提出“21世纪海上丝绸之路”的倡议后，变得更为流行。习主席展望了这条从中国到东南亚，再到印度甚至更远处的新海洋经济带的发展趋势。按照这一倡议的设计，中国将与外界进行贸易、金融、外交、科技和文化等多方面的交流与合作。[2]这一倡议，并非凭空想象，而是有着深刻的历史渊源。
亚洲海洋史研究，或被中国学者称为海上丝绸之路的研究，如今已成为历史学家最为关注的热门议题之一。[3]事实上，不单是历史学家，考古学家、人类学家、地理学家、社会学家和政治学家，同样也在重新探索中国海洋。最近，学术界出现了“范式转变”的潮流。中国古代海洋，不再被视为边缘或次要的区域。[4]新的研究范式，以广泛利用各种各样的资料，如考古文物、文学作品、官方文件、日记、碑刻、图像、民族志田野调查和语言证据等，为主要特点。以往的研究，学者们沉溺于欧洲中心论或中国中心论的研究模式，常将中国与西方简单地二元对立。然而，当代学者已跳出这种旧的研究藩篱，将欧洲人视为众多外来者中的一个群体，从而探索西方是如何遵守和适应亚洲本已建立起来的成熟模式和惯例。[5]这种新趋势，为开辟新的课题铺平了道路。如今，亚洲海洋史研究的范围非常宽广，如海洋考古、港口城市、航线、贸易和文化网络、移民、地方宗教信仰、海洋法、外交、海防、海盗和走私等，均有涉及。
南海，拥有350万平方公里的辽阔海域。从中国南部到东南亚，大大小小的岛屿星罗棋布，东海、北海湾、泰国湾、苏禄海、西里伯斯海和爪哇海分布其间，构成了边界缓冲地带。这片海域，是多种文明交汇的十字路口。Craig Lockard教授敏锐地指出，南海不但是中国航海者的活动场所，同时是东南亚、印度、阿拉伯半岛、波斯、葡萄牙、西班牙、荷兰、法国和英国等国航海者的聚集地。[6]过去几千年，南海航线纵横交错，从一个岛屿到另外一个岛屿，从一个港口到另外一个港口，密如网织。通过南海，中国、日本、琉球群岛、台湾岛和东南亚等地得以联通印度洋，甚至到达更远处的红海和地中海。[7]
考古研究表明，早在欧洲人出现在南海之前，这片海域就已是充满活力的交错之地。1998年，印度尼西亚沿海发现了一艘九世纪的阿拉伯沉船。值得注意的是，沉船上载有7万件由穆斯林顾客所定制的中国陶瓷器。毫无疑问，这是中国和西印度洋有着直接贸易的有力证据。这艘沉船还载有大量西亚制造的商品，表明该船可能从当时的室利佛逝（三佛齐）出发。[8]
历史文献和考古发现都表明，早在汉代之前，中国就已经与东南亚、南亚等地有着频繁的间接贸易往来。徐闻、合浦、日南以及北海湾附近的商业区域发挥着重要作用。[9]最近，Judith Cameron将长途海运的历史向前推至史前时期，并提出“史前海上丝绸之路”的概念。她认为，现存的有力证据表明，史前时期，从南海到印度洋再到马达加斯加，存在着一系列相互重合和交叉的贸易区域。她指出，考古发现表明，诸多历史时期的贸易路线建立在史前路线基础之上。[10]
从九世纪开始，中国参与国际事务的活动开始增多。中国商人不再局限于充当中间商的角色，而是逐渐对外展开直接贸易。这一现象，在十世纪之后，更加明显。伴随着城市、市场和货币经济的发展，宋代开始了一场商业革命，东南沿海的表现尤为突出。[11]泉州、广州已明显呈现出国际化大都市的特征，来自伊朗、阿拉伯、印度和东南亚的商人在此居住生活，形成离散社区。[12]中国商人、其他亚洲商人和欧洲商人，通过连接南海和印度洋海外社区之间的贸易网络，展开了大规模的跨区域贸易。[13]贾志杨（John Chaffee）对著名的中国穆斯林蒲氏富商家族进行了详细研究。宋元时期，作为海商和地方官，蒲氏在泉州政治和经济事务中扮演着重要角色。泉州蒲氏家族与越南、海南岛的蒲氏家族有着密切的商业往来。[14]
过去相当长一段时间内，西方学术界大都集中关注元代陆上丝绸之路和中欧之间的陆上经济往来，而较少细致研究元代海洋史。然而，事实上，元代政府同样也非常积极鼓励中国与外界的海洋贸易和宗教文化交流。为招徕朝贡和贸易，元代统治者派出了众多外交和贸易使团奔赴海外各地，甚至远至印度。[15]尽管元朝政府在1285—1325年间曾偶尔禁止海外贸易和旅行，但之后却极大放宽了海洋政策。人类学家魏泽福（Jack Weatherford）指出，作为新开放政策的一部分，成吉思汗同样提倡宗教自由，并帮助伊斯兰教、佛教、道教、儒教、天主教和琐罗亚斯德教（祆教）在他广阔的欧亚帝国传播。[16]然而，与此同时，元朝又不断加紧对日本和越南的军事征服行动。[17]对于元朝中央统治者来讲，海洋贸易和海外征服，似乎可以同时进行，并行不悖。最近，在对山东海洋史的研究中，马光强调了元朝开展海洋活动的重要性，并对元末明初倭寇、中国与朝鲜半岛之间的私人贸易等问题进行了深入探讨。[18]
传统史学界认为，明朝一改前朝海洋开放政策，转而实行严厉的海禁政策，只允许朝贡贸易。然而，最近一些学者认为，明朝海洋贸易事实上并非一潭死水，而是有其繁荣的一面，这种状况，甚至一直持续到清前期。直到1800年前后，才出现了所谓的中西“大分流”。[19]赵刚、布琮任通过对清代海洋史的考察，认为清代的海洋政策并非消极被动以致充满防御性，而是有其积极、务实和灵活的一面。[20]大致与此同时，16世纪至17世纪早期，日本和东南亚同样也开始在蓬勃发展的世界经济中占据更加重要的地位。事实上，德川时期，日本将自己视为亚洲中心，开启“日本中心”模式，这一度挑战了中国长期以来在亚洲的主导地位，萌发了日本自身的国家认同意识。[21]
明朝与清前期，海外贸易只允许在朝贡体系中进行，所以大部分的海外贸易只能秘密进行。然而，朝贡体系并非天衣无缝。为方便监督日本进贡的商品，中国政府雇佣一批私人掮客参与其事，掮客则借机与官员和商人串通勾结，从事盈利的半合法私人贸易活动。[22]需要指出的是，大部分的海上贸易仍由来自各国的走私者和海盗主导。彼时，中国官方将这些海盗称为倭寇。其实，众所周知，这些非法之徒中，除日本海盗之外，很多都是中国的商人，如王（汪）直、洪迪珍、郑芝龙等，其他则为东南亚、欧洲及非洲的船员、商人和冒险家。[23]一些贸易是在浙江、福建、广东等地的偏僻小港口进行，但大部分贸易是在众多近海岛上进行，如双屿、南澳、龙门、涠洲等。这些岛屿是各国走私者、海盗、商人的聚集地。在这里，他们的交易可以避开官府的监管。[24]欧阳泰（Tonio Andrade）指出，郑芝龙及其继承者，以福建和台湾为基地，通过对中国、日本、荷兰和巴达维亚等地统治者、官员和商人的娴熟控制，建立了横跨南海的庞大海洋帝国。他认为，如果把海盗问题置于全球史这一更大的框架下去考察，将有助于我们进一步理解海盗与国家间的交互作用是如何帮助欧洲进行扩张的。[25]
许多活跃在中国沿海的日本海盗，亦盗亦商。有时，他们受到日本地方官员甚至国家统治者的支持。正如Maria Grazia Petrucci所言，早期萨摩大名和德川幕府一边采取措施镇压国内海盗，一边却又允许外国海盗集团取代他们。平户作为日本的重要港口，是日本、中国、荷兰和英国等国海盗、走私者、商人活动的国际大本营，各色人物混杂于此，难以区分。Adam Clulow对平户海盗的研究，进一步丰富了我们对这一时期海盗活动的理解。正如同时代的中国人和欧洲人一样，日本商人也积极地将他们的触角伸向东南亚港口和市场。有时，他们和海盗并无二致。[26]
自十六世纪起，葡萄牙和西班牙开始进入亚洲。随后，荷兰、英国等国家也接踵而至。此时的亚洲贸易网络已相当成熟，作为后来者，为了生存和获利，他们被迫寻求融入这一网络的方式。事实上，大部分商船就是一座浮动的军械库，船上的武器装备远超和平贸易所需的配置。十六世纪五十年代，葡萄牙开始在澳门站稳脚跟。葡萄牙商人不仅参与贸易，而且还时常抢劫村庄，掳掠或购买儿童，将之再转手卖为奴隶。[27] Ubaldo Iaccarino指出，当西班牙到达亚洲时，他们带着大无畏征服者的精神，试图用他们在新世界所使用过的暴力方式，去掠取中国的财富。随后，荷兰和英国东印度公司也准备使用暴力去打开市场和消灭敌人。事实上，荷兰人在日本开展贸易时，以掠夺方式获取了大量的丝绸、缎子和瓷器。在帝国扩张时期，暴力行为不但被欧洲人，而且被亚洲人所认可，甚至被认为这是必要手段。[28]
无疑，这些暴力行为造成了政治、经济和社会方面的紧张局势。尽管如此，它却加速了互相交织的国际经济体系的形成。在这个体系中，南海成为“欧亚贸易网络的核心”。[29]17世纪后期，所有的欧亚地区都被卷入了深不见底的中国市场和新兴世界经济。[30]数量巨大的新世界白银跨过大西洋，到达马尼拉，然后又被运到中国，用于交易丝绸、瓷器、茶叶和其它商品。随着中国经济的发展，中国对东南亚商品，尤其是异域美味，如燕窝、鱼翅、海参，还有珍珠、龟壳、胡椒、丁香、糖、米和锡等，需求量大增。欧洲商人也积极收求同样的当地产品，然后再转手卖到中国。印度的鸦片在东南亚、中国和日本等地开始盛行。这里不仅是货物的聚散地，同时也是世界各地人民的流动场所。[31]1684年，中国解除海禁后，大量来自广东和福建的移民，寓居于此。这种状况，一直持续到19世纪末。随着东南亚中国移民的增加，中国的茶叶、瓷器、居家用品等商品也逐渐增多，用于满足日益增长的市场需求。不单单是茶叶，东亚的其他商品，也流向印度洋、欧洲和美洲。[32]
从以上分析可以看到，目前英语学术界对亚洲海洋史的研究兴趣有增无减，在研究的广度和深度上，都有所进展。一方面，学术界不断发掘和利用新资料，广泛利用文物、碑刻、图像、语言证据等传统学者不太重视的资料，并重视田野调查在研究中的作用。另一方面，学术界逐渐转变研究视角和范式，开始跳出欧洲中心论和中国中心论的简单二元对立研究模式的束缚，从全球史角度对亚洲海洋史进行考察，尤其重视考察来自多个国家或地区的不同群体之间的交流和相互影响。
在漫长的历史时期，通过陆上丝绸之路和海商丝绸之路，中国曾深度参与外面世界的活动。早在16世纪欧洲人到来之前，南海在相当长的一段时间内，就是中国、日本、东南亚、南亚和穆斯林航海者的国际接触地带，甚至在更早的史前时期，航海者就已开创航海路线，为后来航海者和商人的航线奠定了基础。
今天，中国的“一带一路”倡议正在追寻和恢复历史上的先例，并试图建造一个跨越欧亚大陆及其周边地区的全球网络。通过大规模的投资，中国着力发展以中国为中心的贸易、文化和科技网络，以求在国际事务中扮演更大角色的动力。
[1] 文初稿完成于2019年，后略有增订。限于篇幅，本文主要以2000—2020年间英语相关作品为讨论对象。英语学术界通常只是关注陆上丝绸之路，例如：James Millward 米华健, The Silk Road: A Very Short Introduction , New York: Oxford University Press, 2013; Valerie Hansen 韩森, The Silk Road: A New History, New York: Oxford University Press, 2015; and Peter Frankopan 弗兰科潘, The Silk Roads: A New History of the World ,New York: Oxford University Press, 2016。2010年，刘欣如所著The Silk Road in World History, New York: Oxford University Press, 2010是个例外，该书对海上丝绸之路有所涉及。
[2] 习近平讲话的英译，详参：“Speech by Chinese President Xi Jinping to Indonesian Parliament”, online at http://www.asean-china-center.org/english/2013-10/03/c_133062675.htm (accessed 3 March 2017).
[3] 有关中国海洋史的早期研究论著，可以参考：Robert Gardella 加德拉, “The Maritime History of Late Imperial China: Observations on Current Concerns and Recent Research”, Late Imperial China,Vol. 6, No. 2, 1985, pp. 48-66; Chang Pin-tsun 张彬村, “Maritime China in Historical Perspective”, International Journal of Maritime History, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1992, pp. 239-55; Lai Chi-kong 黎志刚, “The Historiography of Maritime China since c. 1975”, Research in Maritime History, Vol. 9, 1995, pp. 53-79；近期论著，可参考：Harriet Zurndorfer 宋汉理, “Oceans of History, Seas of Change: Recent Revisionist Writing in Western Languages about China and East Asian Maritime History during the Period 1500–1630”, International Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2016, pp. 61-94. 有关东南亚海洋史的论著，可参考：Geoff Wade 韦杰夫, “The Pre-Modern East Asian Maritime Realm: An Overview of European-Language Studies”, National University of Singapore, Asia Research Institute Working Paper Series, No. 16, December 2003.
[4] 最近两部中国新海洋史的代表作，对传统观点提出了挑战，参见：Zheng Yangwen 郑扬文, China on the Sea: How the Maritime World Shaped Modern China,Leiden: Brill, 2012 and Gang Zhao 赵刚, The Qing Opening to the Ocean: Chinese Maritime Policies, 1684–1757, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2013.
[5] Zurndorfer, “Oceans of History, Seas of Change”, pp. 62-63.
[6] Craig A. Lockard, “‘The Sea Common to All’: Maritime Frontiers, Port Cities, and Chinese Traders in the Southeast Asian Age of Commerce, ca. 1400–1750”, Journal of World History, Vol. 21, No. 2, 2010, pp. 219-247; Craig A. Lockard, Southeast Asia in World History, New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
[7] 有关航线问题，可参考Roderich Ptak 普塔克（葡萄鬼）, “Jottings on Chinese Sailing Routes to Southeast Asia, Especially on the Eastern Route in Ming Times”, in Roderich Ptak ed., China, the Portuguese, and the Nanyang, Aldershot: Ashgate, 2004; Karl Reinhold Haellquist ed., Asian Trade Routes,Copenhagen and London: Scandinavian Institute of Asian Studies and Curzon Press, 1991; Paul Van Dyke 范岱克, “New Sea Routes to Canton in the 18th Century and the Decline of China’s Control over Trade”, Haiyang shi yanjiu 海洋史研究, Vol. 1, 2010, pp. 57-108. 有关中国与伊斯兰的文化交流，可参考：Hyunhee Park 朴贤熙, Mapping the Chinese and Islamic Worlds: Cross-Cultural Exchange in Pre-Modern Asia, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
[8] Michael Flecker, “A Ninth-Century Arab Shipwreck in Indonesia: The First Archaeological Evidence of Direct Trade with China”, in Regina Krahl 康蕊君, John Guy, and Julian Raby eds., Shipwrecked: Tang Treasures and Monsoon Winds, Washington and Singapore: Arthur M. Sackler Gallery and National Heritage and Tourism Board, 2010, pp. 101-119 (online at https://www.asia.si.edu/Shipwrecked/downloads /07Flecker.pdf, accessed 5 March 2017); Denis Twitchett 崔瑞德 and Janice Stargardt 思鉴, “Chinese Silver Bullion in a Tenth-century Indonesian Shipwreck”, Asia Major, Vol. 15, No. 1, 2002, pp. 23-72. 其它相关的海洋考古发现，可参考：Jeremy Green 格林, “The Song Dynasty Shipwreck at Quanzhou, Fujian, People’s Republic of China”, International Journal of Nautical Archaeology and Underwater Exploration, Vol. 12, No. 3, 1983, pp. 253-261; Sayan Prishanchit, Maritime Trade During the 14th to 17th Century: Evidence from the Underwater Archaeological Sites in the Gulf of Thailand, Bangkok: Office of the National Culture Division, 1996; Pierre-Yves Manguin 莽甘, “The Archaeology of the Early Maritime Polities of Southeast Asia”, in Peter Bellwood 彼得活 and Ian C. Glover eds., Southeast Asia: From Prehistory to History, London: Routledge Curzon, 2004, pp. 283-313; Jun Kimura木村淳, “Maritime Archaeological Perspectives on Seaborne Trade in the South China Sea and East China Sea between the Seventh and Thirteenth Centuries”, Crossroads: Studies on the History of Exchange Relations in the East Asian World, Vol. 11, April 2015, pp. 47-61.
[9] James Chin 钱江, “Ports, Merchants, Chieftains and Eunuchs: Reading Maritime Commerce of Early Guangdong”, in Geoff Wade ed., China and Southeast Asia: Routledge Library on Southeast Asia, Vol. 1, Introduction and History to the 14th Century, London: Routledge, 2009, pp. 55-74; Li Tana 李塔娜, “Jiaozhi (Giao Chi) in the Han Period Tongking Gulf”, in Nola Cooke, Li Tana, and James A. Anderson eds., The Tongking Gulf Through History, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011, pp. 39-52.
[10] Judith Cameron, “A Prehistoric Maritime Silk Road: Merchants, Boats, Cloth and Jade”, in Robert Antony and Angela Schottenhammer 萧婷 eds., Beyond the Silk Roads: New Discourses on China’s Role in East Asian Maritime History, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2017, pp. 25-42.
[11] Angela Schottenhammer, “China’s Rise and Retreat as a Maritime Power”, in Antony and Schottenhammer eds., Beyond the Silk Roads, pp. 189-212; John W. Chaffee, “Song China and the Multi-state and Commercial World of East Asia”, Crossroads – Studies on the History of Exchange Relations in the East Asian World 1/2 , 2010.
[12] 有关泉州的研究，可参考：John Chaffee, “At the Intersection of Empire and World Trade: The Chinese Port City of Quanzhou (Zaitun), Eleventh–Fifteenth Centuries”, in Kenneth R. Hall ed., Secondary Cities and Urban Networking in the Indian Ocean Realm, c. 1400 –1800, Lanham: Lexington Books, 2008, pp. 99-121; Hugh R. Clark 柯胡, “Overseas Trade and Social Change in Quanzhou through the Song”, in Angela Schottenhammer ed., The Emporium of the World: Maritime Quanzhou, 1000–1400, Leiden: Brill, 2001, pp. 47-94; Chen Dasheng 陈达生 and Denys Lombard 龙巴尔, “Foreign Merchants in Maritime Trade in Quanzhou (‘Zaitun’): Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries”, in Denys Lombard and Jean Aubin eds., Asian Merchants and Businessmen in the Indian Ocean and the China Sea, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000, pp. 19-24; Billy So 苏基朗, Prosperity, Region, and Institutions in Maritime China: The South Fukien Pattern, 946–1368, Cambridge: Harvard University Asia Center, 2000. 有关早期广州的研究，可参考：Lo Hsiang-lin 罗香林, “Islam in Canton in the Sung Period: Some Fragmentary Records”, in F. S. Drake 林仰山 ed., Symposium on Historical, Archeological and Linguistic Studies on Southern China, South-East Asia and the Hong Kong Region, Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1967; James Chin, “Ports, Merchants, Chieftains and Eunuchs”; Adam Fong 许文富, “‘Together They Might Make Trouble’: Cross-Cultural Interactions in Tang Dynasty Guangzhou, 618–907 c.e.”, Journal of World History, Vol. 25, No. 4, 2014, pp. 475-492; Adam Fong, “Flourishing on the Frontier: Trade and Urbanization in Tang Dynasty Guangzhou, 618—907 CE”, PhD dissertation, University of Hawaii, 2009. 有关中国穆斯林社区的研究，可参考：John Chaffee, “Diasporic Identities in the Historical Development of the Maritime Muslim Communities of Song-Yuan China”, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, Vol. 49, No. 4, 2006, pp. 395-420; Hugh R. Clark, “Muslims and Hindus in the Culture and Morphology of Quanzhou from the Tenth to the Thirteenth Centuries”, Journal of World History, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1995, pp. 49-74.
[13] Angela Schottenhammer, “China’s Gate to the Indian Ocean: Iranian and Arab Long-Distance Traders”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, Vol. 76, No. 1, 2016, pp. 135-179; Richard von Glahn 万志英, “The Ningbo-Hakata Merchant Network and the Reorientation of East Asian Maritime Trade, 1150—1350”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, Vol. 74, No. 2, 2014, pp. 249-279; Tansen Sen 沈丹森, “The Formation of Chinese Maritime Networks to Southern Asia, 1200–1450”, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, Vol. 49, No. 4, 2006, pp. 421-53; Derek Heng 王添顺, Sino-Malay Trade and Diplomacy from the Tenth through the Fourteenth Century, Athens, OH: Ohio University Press, 2009; Franck Billé, Sanjyot Mehendale, and James Lankton eds., The Maritime Silk Road: Global Connectivities, Regional Nodes, Localities, Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam Press, 2022.
[14] John Chaffee, “Pu Shougeng Reconsidered: Pu, His Family, and their Role in the Maritime Trade of Quanzhou”, in Antony and Schottenhammer eds., Beyond the Silk Roads, pp. 63-76; Li Tana, “A View from the Sea: Perspectives on the Northern and Central Vietnamese Coast”, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1, 2006, pp. 93-94.
[15] Tansen Sen, “The Yuan Khanate and India: Cross-Cultural Diplomacy in the thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries”, Asia Major, Vol. 19. No. 1/2, 2006, pp. 299-326.
[16] Jack Weatherford, Genghis Khan and the Quest for God: How the World’s Greatest Conqueror Gave Us Religious Freedom, New York: Viking, 2016; Richard Foltz, Religions of the Silk Road: Premodern Patterns of Globalization, 2nd ed., New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.
[17] Schottenhammer, “China’s Rise and Retreat as a Maritime Power”, pp. 200-202; Randall J. Sasaki, The Origins of the Lost Fleet of the Mongol Empire, College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press, 2015.
[18] Ma Guang 马光, “Tributary Ceremony and National Security: A Reassessment of Wokou Diplomacy between China and Japan during the Early Ming Dynasty”, Journal of Asian History, Vol. 51, No. 1, 2017, pp. 27-54; Rupture, Evolution and Continuity: The Shandong Peninsula in East Asian Maritime History During the Yuan-Ming Transition, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2021.
[19] 有关明代海洋政策，可参考：Li Kangying 李康英, The Ming Maritime Trade Policy in Transition, 1368 to 1567, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2010。有关“大分流”及其讨论，可参考： Kenneth Pomeranz 彭慕兰, The Great Divergence: China, Europe, and the Making of the Modern World Economy, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000; Jean-Laurent Rosenthal 罗森塔尔 and R. Bin Wong 王国斌, Before and Beyond Divergence: The Politics of Economic Change in China and Europe, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2011; Peer Vries, “The California School and Beyond: How to Study the Great Divergence?”, History Compass, Vol. 8, No. 7, 2010, pp. 730-751; Robert Eng 伍健民, “From ‘The West and the Rest’ to Global Interconnectedness: China Historians and the Transformation of World History as a Discipline”, ASIANetwork Exchange, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2015, pp. 35-48; Angela Schottenhammer, China and the Silk Roads (ca. 100 BCE to 1800 CE), Leiden: Brill, 2023.
[20] Gang Zhao, The Qing Opening to the Ocean: Chinese Maritime Policies, 1684—1757; Ronald C. Po 布琮任, The Blue Frontier: Maritime Vision and Power in the Qing Empire, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018.
[21] 有关德川幕府时期日本的新世界观，可参考：Arano Yasunori 荒野泰典, “The Formation of a Japanocentric World Order”, International Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2005, pp. 185-216. 有关近世日本对太平洋和海洋亚洲的想象的创造力的精彩论述，可参考：Marcia Yonemoto, “Maps and Metaphors of the ‘Small Eastern Sea’ in Tokugawa Japan (1603—1868)”, Geographical Review, Vol. 89, No. 2, 1999, pp. 169-187. 有关东南亚的情况，可参考：Lockard, Southeast Asia in World History, Chapter 4.
[22] Angela Schottenhammer, “‘Brokers’ and ‘Guild’ (huiguan) Organizations in China’s Maritime Trade with her Eastern Neighbours during the Ming and Qing Dynasties”, Crossroads: Studies on the History of Exchange Relations in the East Asian World, Vol. 1-2, 2010, pp. 108-113; Oláh Csaba, “Chinese Brokers and Sino-Japanese Trade during the Ming Period – A Case Study from 1539”, in Angela Schottenhammer ed., Tribute, Trade and Smuggling: Commercial, Scientific and Human Interaction in the Middle Period and Early Modern World, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2014, pp. 23-39.
[23] Kwan-wai So 苏均炜, Japanese Piracy in Ming China during the Sixteenth Century, East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1975，该书虽出版较早，但至今仍有学术价值。有关中国对倭寇的想象，可参考：Wang Yong, “Realistic and Fantastic Images of ‘Dwarf Pirates’: The Evolution of Ming Dynasty Perceptions of the Japanese”, in Joshua Fogel ed., Sagacious Monks and Bloodthirsty Warriors: Chinese Views of Japan in the Ming-Qing Period, Norwalk, CT: East Bridge, 2002, pp. 17-41. 最近西方对中国海盗的历史研究述评，可参考：Patrick Connolly 余康力 and Robert Antony, “‘A Terrible Scourge’: Piracy, Coastal Defense, and the Historian”, in Teddy Y.H. Sim 沈荣辉 ed., The Maritime Defence of China: Ming General Qi Jiguang and Beyond, Singapore: Springer, 2017.
[24] James Chin, “Merchants, Smugglers, and Pirates: Multinational Clandestine Trade on the South China Coast, 1520—50”, pp. 43-57; Maria Grazia Petrucci, “Pirates, Gunpowder, and Christianity in Late Sixteenth-Century Japan”, pp. 59-72, both in Robert J. Antony ed., Elusive Pirates, Pervasive Smugglers: Violence and Clandestine Trade in the Greater China Seas, Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2010. 有关这一时期中越水域边境的贸易商和海盗的研究，可参考：Robert J. Antony, “War, Trade, and Piracy in Early Modern Gulf of Tonkin”, in Schottenhammer ed., Tribute, Trade, and Smuggling, pp. 77-94; Xing Hang 杭行, “Leizhou Pirates and the Making of the Mekong Delta”, in Antony and Schottenhammer eds., Beyond the Silk Roads, pp. 115-132.
[25] Tonio Andrade, “The Company’s Chinese Pirates: How the Dutch East India Company Tried to Lead a Coalition of Privateers to War against China”, Journal of World History 15, 2004, pp. 415-444. 近期对郑氏家族的其它研究成果，可参考：Patrizia Carioti 白蒂, “The Zhengs’ Maritime Power in the Context of the 17th Century Far Eastern Seas: The Rise of a ‘Centralized Piratical Organization’ and Its Gradual Development into a ‘State’”, Ming-Qing Yanjiu 5, 1996; Cheng Wei-chung 郑维中, War, Trade and Piracy in the China Seas, 1622—1683, Leiden: Brill, 2013; Xing Hang, Conflict and Commerce in Maritime East Asia: The Zheng Family and the Shaping of the Modern World, 1620–1720, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
[26] Maria Grazia Petrucci, “Caught Between Piracy and Trade: The Shimazu of Southern Japan at the Onset of the New Tokugawa Regime, 1599−1630”, in Antony and Schottenhammer eds., Beyond the Silk Roads, pp. 99-114; Adam Clulow, “The Pirate and the Warlord”, Journal of Early Modern History, Vol. 16, 2012, pp. 523-542; Adam Clulow, “Like Lambs in Japan and Devils Outside Their Land: Diplomacy, Violence, and Japanese Merchants in Southeast Asia”, Journal of World History, Vol. 24, No. 2, 2013, pp. 335-358; Igawa Kenji, “At the Crossroads: Limahon and Wakō in Sixteenth-Century Philippines”, in Antony ed., Elusive Pirates, Pervasive Smugglers, pp. 73-84.
[27] 例如，Lúcio de Sousa 苏札, The Jewish Diaspora and the Perez Family Case in China, Japan, the Philippines, and the Americas (16th Century), Macau: Macau Foundation, 2015; James Fujitani, “The Ming Rejection of the Portuguese Embassy of 1517: A Reassessment”, Journal of World History, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2016, pp. 99-101.
[28] Timothy Brook 卜正民, The Confusions of Pleasure: Commerce and Culture in Ming China, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998, pp. 122-123; Robert J. Antony, “Turbulent Waters: Sea Raiding in Early Modern South East Asia”, Mariner’s Mirror, Vol. 99, No. 1, 2013, pp. 25-27; Adam Clulow, The Company and the Shogun: The Dutch Encounter with Tokugawa Japan ,New York: Columbia University Press, 2014, Part 2; Anne Pérotin-Dumon, “The Pirate and the Emperor: Power and the Law on the Seas, 1450—1850”, in C. R. Pennell ed., Bandits at Sea: A Pirates Reader, New York: New York University Press, 2001, pp. 25-54.
[29] Lockard, “The Sea Common to All”, pp. 226-227. 同时，也可参考：John Lee, “Trade and Economy in Preindustrial East Asia, ca. 1500 – ca.1800: East Asia in the Age of Global Integration”, Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 58, No. 1, 1999, pp. 2-26.
[30] Jerry H. Bentley 本特利, “Sea and Ocean Basins as Frameworks of Historical Analysis”, Geographical Review 89, 1999, pp. 220-221; James Warren, The Sulu Zone, 1768–1898: The Dynamics of External Trade, Slavery, and Ethnicity in the Transformation of a Southeast Asian Maritime State ,Singapore: National University of Singapore Press, 1981; James Warren, Iranun and Balangingi: Globalization, Maritime Raiding and the Birth of Ethnicity, Singapore: National University of Singapore Press, 2003.
[31] Carl Smith 施其乐 and Paul Van Dyke, “Armenian Footprints in Macao”, Review of Culture, International Edition, Vol. 8, 2003, pp. 20-39; “Four Armenian Families”, Review of Culture, International Edition, Vol. 8, 2003, pp. 40-50; “Muslims in the Pearl River Delta, 1700 to 1930”, Review of Culture, International Edition, Vol. 10, April 2004, pp. 6-15.
[32] 对商品流动的研究，可参考：Paul Wheatley 鮑威里, “Geographical Notes on Some Commodities Involved in Sung Maritime Trade”, Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. 32, No. 2, 1959, pp. 45-129; Rodrich Ptak, “China and the Trade in Cloves, circa 960—1435”, Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 113, No. 1, 1993, pp. 1-13; David Bulbeck, Anthony Reid 瑞德, Lay Cheng Tan, and Yi Qi Wu eds., Southeast Asian Exports since the Fourteenth Century: Cloves, Pepper, Coffee, and Sugar, Leiden: KITLV Press, 1998; Eric Tagliacozzo, “A Necklace of Fins: Marine Goods Trading in Maritime Southeast Asia, 1780—1860”, International Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2004, pp. 23-48; Eric Tagliacozzo and Wen-Chin Chang 张雯勤 eds., Chinese Circulations: Capital, Commodities, and Networks in Southeast Asia ,Durham: Duke University Press, 2011; Tamara H. Bentley ed., Picturing Commerce in and from the East Asian Maritime Circuits, 1550-1800, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2019. 有关中国移民的研究，可参考：Wang Gungwu 王赓武, China and the Chinese Overseas, Singapore: Times Academic Press, 1991; Philip A. Kuhn 孔飞力, Chinese among Others: Emigration in Modern Times, Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 2008; Boyi Chen 陈博翼, “The Hokkien in Early Modern Hoi An, Batavia, and Manila: Political Agendas and Selective Adaptions,” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, Vol. 52, No. 1, 2021, pp. 67-89.