, maritime empire: official business relationship and origin of Zheng group (1625-1683), written by Liu Qiang, Zhejiang University Press, November 2015. Many scholars of “spekds” and “spkds” have done research on these issues in the history of “spekds” and “spkds”, but not in the history of “spekds”. The value of maritime empire is that the author examines the Zheng regime in the context of global economic development. He believes that the formation, rise and demise of the Zheng group are not only isolated events on the continental margin, but closely related to the era of great navigation all over the world. Taking the official business relationship of Zheng’s group as the theme, the author discusses the formation and rise and fall of Zheng’s group from the perspective of world history and globalization, and draws many unexpected new conclusions.

,

,

and

the era of great navigation from the 15th to the 17th century opened up new routes and discovered the new continent of America. More importantly, the era of great navigation broke the state of relative isolation among continents and integrated regional trade circles through continuously extending new routes, forming a real global market and global economy.

,

,

,

the formation of the global marine trade system will also involve China. Starting with the opening of new routes in the era of great navigation, maritime empire explores the rise of Zheng’s regime as a maritime group with the development of global economy, the expansion of marine market, the competition of armed trade by Western businessmen, and even the implementation of the maritime ban policy of the Ming Dynasty. The author believes that the rise of Zheng’s group is undoubtedly related to the expansion of global marine trade in the era of great navigation and the large demand for Chinese products in Europe, Asia and America.

with the opening of new routes and the establishment of a globalized economy, the market of Chinese goods has been expanded (such as silk, porcelain, etc.), and the profits of overseas trade have increased. At this time, the traditional tributary trade system centered on China gradually declined, especially the legal trade channel between the Ming Dynasty and Japan ended due to the abolition of Zhejiang shipping department in the Ming Dynasty, resulting in the gradual prosperity of private overseas trade. Faced with the increase of trade profits, the sea ban policy of the Ming Dynasty and the armed trade competition of Western businessmen, under the absence of military protection of the Ming government, Chinese businessmen gradually formed a powerful armed maritime group. Zheng group, which rose in 1625, is a typical representative. By virtue of its unique official business relationship, Zheng group has mastered the trade dominance and sea domination in the Far East waters, and has suffered a major setback in the global expansion of western countries.

maritime empire focuses on the unique official business relationship of Zheng group. The author believes that the dominant position of Zheng group in early economic globalization is closely related to its unique official business relationship. Through the collection of relevant historical materials, this book restores the mercantilist policy of the Zheng regime. The relationship between the Zheng group and the officials and businessmen who did not actively support or even suppress businessmen in the Ming and Qing Dynasties is obviously different. The Zheng regime has established a set of systems including taxation, organization and Finance to support businessmen in the face of the changing external environment, Flexible use of different trade strategies to protect and strive for commercial interests.

,

,

,

China has always had the tradition of “emphasizing agriculture and restraining commerce”, but the Zheng regime adopted a mercantilist policy similar to that of western countries at that time. Why? Liu Qiang, the author of

,

,

and

, believes that on the one hand, the geographical and natural environment of the southeast coast based on Zheng family determines that they can only focus on Trade (lack of land and insufficient products); On the other hand, in the trade competition with European armed businessmen, the best choice of Zheng’s group at that time was to implement official business relations and military armed trade policies similar to those of European powers. Therefore, the Zheng regime’s high dependence on the benefits of marine trade is the economic rationality of the Zheng regime’s mercantilism, which is stronger than the influence of Chinese traditional culture.

however, it should be noted that although the mercantilism policy is also implemented, the mercantilism of Zheng group is still different from that of Western powers (Britain, Spain, Portugal, Netherlands, etc.). The difference lies in that the Zheng regime adopted commercial mercantilism because of its dependence on trade profits, that is, it focused on the development and maintenance of the trade market and the monopoly of foreign trade of Chinese products; The Western powers adopted commercial mercantilism and industrial mercantilism in parallel. While paying attention to the development of trade market and realizing trade profits, they also paid attention to obtaining local production capacity. In other words, while opening the door to trade by force, we also explored overseas colonies, established production bases in the colonies, and incorporated the colonial economy into our own economic system. The two different mercantilism of

,

,

and

led to the growing strength of European powers, while Zheng’s regime has always been just a trading empire. Moreover, because there is no production capacity matching with the trading empire, its trade monopoly on Chinese products is also very fragile. When the Zheng regime became hostile to the Qing Dynasty, and the Qing Dynasty continued to implement the sea ban and border relocation, the fate of the collapse of this trading empire could not be avoided.

,

,

and

in the view of many historical scholars, the sea ban and relocation of Taiwan during the Kangxi period of the Qing Dynasty was not a successful policy. Through relevant materials, they believe that the sea ban and relocation not only did not cut off the trade between Taiwan and the mainland, but also ceded the maritime dominance and control to each other, giving Zheng group a broad space for marine development. Of course, these views are not unreasonable, but the maritime empire re examines them from the perspective of economics and Global trade, and draws different conclusions.

as mentioned earlier, the Zheng regime monopolized the foreign trade right of Chinese products through its powerful armed forces, established a huge trade Empire and obtained huge trade profits. According to the statistics of the author, Zheng’s revenue from foreign trade accounts for 4.45 million yuan, accounting for 2.45% of the total revenue of the government every year. Therefore, the Zheng regime is highly dependent on trade income. However, when the Qing government continued to implement the sea ban and boundary relocation, it actually isolated Taiwan from the southeast coastal areas to a considerable extentAs an open way of contact (although non-public contact is not ruled out), Taiwan’s access to products from the mainland has been greatly weakened, and Taiwan itself does not have the production capacity to maintain its trade scale. Therefore, its trade profits have been reduced to a considerable extent, resulting in financial difficulties and insufficient to support the war with the Qing Dynasty for a long time, Its fate will inevitably lead to failure.

the maritime empire deeply interprets the official business relationship of the Zheng group under the background of mercantilism and modern Western Ocean expansion, which shows the author’s broad academic vision. The author’s interpretation of the official business relationship of the Zheng regime can eliminate our kind of academic “fog”: in the view of many people, Chinese Confucian culture naturally has the tradition of “emphasizing agriculture and restraining business”, but the trade founding policy of the Zheng regime shows from another dimension that culture is not the only option to determine the official business relationship.