Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T02:05:53.475Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transformations and Continuity in Chinese Economic and Social History

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2011

Ramon H. Myers
Ramon H. Myers
Affiliation:
University of Miami, Coral Gables
Get access

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Articles
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , February 1974 , pp. 265 - 277
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

* The Pattern of the Chinese Past. By Elvin, Mark. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1973. 346 pp. Maps, Figures, Index. $12.50. I wish to thank the Social Science Research Council for supporting the preparation of this essay. I owe an enormous debt to Professor Thomas Metzger who gave unstintingly of his time to make incisive comments on several early drafts. He is not responsible, however, for my interpretation of his remarks or for the general discussion of issues raised.Google Scholar

1 Yü-ch‘üan, Wang, Ming-tai-te chün-t‘un (The Military Agricultural Lands of the Ming Dynasty)(Peking, 1965), pp. 98–113.Google Scholar

2 Han, Wu, “Ming-ch‘u shc-hui sheng-ch‘an-li-te-chan” (The Development of the Productive Capacity of Early Ming Society) Li-shih yen-chiu (1955:3) P. 61, p. 68.Google Scholar

3 Wang Yü-ch‘üan, p. 272, pp. 290–313.

4 Ibid., pp. 337–339.

5 Ibid., pp. 98–113, pp. 213–216, p. 169, pp. 150–158, pp. 132–134.

6 In particular, he might have referred to a solid body of Chinese scholarship such as Yen Keng-wang's two volume study of local administration during the Ch‘in and Han dynasties, Sa Meng-wu's four volume socio-political study, Mao Han-kuang's study of leading families during the period of post-Han disunity, Wang Shou-nan‘s analysis of the relations between regional commanders and the central administration of Tang, and Yü Ying-shih's discussion of trade and growth of the Han empire. Professor Jung-pang Lo once produced a bibliography on the history of China's military institutions which shows some of the unexplored research horizons in this area.

7 This military burden must have had some relation to population and territorial size of the empire. The Ming did not control the territory managed by the Han and T‘ang dynasties. Ming hegemony did not extend to Singkiang as had that of the Han and T‘ang rulers. See Chiao-min Hsieh, Atlas of China (New York, 1973), p. 246.Google Scholar On the other hand population doubled between 705 and 755 (37 t0 52 million) and again between 1014 to 1103 (60 to 123 million). See Leo Orleans, Every Fifth Child: The Population of China (Stanford, 1972) p. 26.Google Scholar The imbalance between population and imperial domain and the difficulties which this might have posed for government arc ignored by Elvin.

8 Motonosuke, Amano, “Chūgoku nōgyō no yakushinki - Chūgoku nōgyōshi oboegaki yori -” (Periods of Acceleration in Chinese Agriculture: Notes on Chinese Agricultural History) in Taikei nōgyō hyakka jiten no shiori (A Guide to a Comprehensive Agricultural Encyclopedia) No. 6 (Aug. 1967) pp. 1–2.Google Scholar Also Amano, “Chūgoku nōgyō no hatten” (The Development of Chinese Agriculture) Taikei nūgyū hyakka jiten (A Comprehensive Agricultural Encyc‘jopcdia) No. 6 (Aug. 1967) pp. 168–182.

9 A good description of improvements in dry farming can be found in Amano, “Chūsei nōgyō no tenkai” (The Evolution of Agriculture during the Medieval Period”) in Yabuuchi Kiyoshi (Edit.), Chūgoku chūsei kagaku gijutsushi no kenkyū (Studies in the History of Scientific Technology during China's Medieval Period) (Tokyo, 1963) pp. 384–442.Google Scholar

10 For a brief statement of the Natiō interpretation see Naitō Torajirō, “Gaikatsuteki Tō-Sōdai kan” (Some Generalizations about Conditions during the T‘ang and Sung Periods) Rekishi to chiri 9:5 (March 1922) pp. 1–12.Google ScholarA good summary of Naitdō's writings and his influence upon Japanese sinological scholarship can be found in Hisayuki Miyakawa, “An Outline of the Naitō Hypothesis and Its Effects on Japanese Studies of China” The Far Eastern Quarterly 14:4 (August 1955) pp. 533–552. A paradox in historiography still requires some explanation. What accounts for the fact that Japanese sinologists have repeatedly emphasized the importance of the Sung whereas Chinese scholars constantly stress the importance of T‘ang as key, threshold periods in Chinese medieval history?CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11 I do not wish to categorize unfairly these two principal currents of Japanese sinological scholarship, but they are well known and referred to as such by the combatants themselves in a long standing controversy which has raged in the major journals andmonograph literature. The time has perhaps come for someone to show how pre-war and post-war Japanese scholars posed different questions about Chinese history and relied on different methods and source materials to answer these questions.

12 Sudō Yoshiyuki, Chūgoku tochi seidoshi kenkyū (Studies in the History of the Chinese Land System) (Tokyo, 1954) Chapter 2. The polarization of landholdings suggested by Sudō at the outset of his study that allegedly began in late T‘ang is not justified at all on conceptual grounds and is certainly not demonstrated by sufficient facts. During the periods when prescribed procedures arc being abandoned and more opportunity exists for exchanging property, some equalization of land-holding could just as well have taken place as the rich became indebted and sold their land to those aspiring to become‘more wealthy. Very likely, many small holders were able to accumulate more land, and vigorous upward and downward mobility of property holders took place.Google Scholar

13 Kaoru, Umehara, “Nan-Sō Wai-nan no tochi seido shitan” (An Examination of the Land System in the Southern Huai Region during the Southern Sung Period) Tōyoōhi kenkyū 21:4 (March 1963) pp. 26–57. Both t‘un-t‘ien and ying-t‘ien landhold-ings and tenant relationships are examined in this study.Google Scholar

14 Yasuhiko, Satakc, “Tō-Sō henkakuki ni okcru Konan toshiro no tōchi shoyū to tochi seisaku” (Land Ownership and Land Policy in the Provinces Along the Yangtze in the Transition Period of T‘ang to Sung) Tōyōshi kenkyū 31:4 (March 1973) PP. 29–50.Google Scholar This article treats the institution of i-men, a type of estate used to generate income for the lineage; the author traces the rapid increase in i-men during the Sung as compared to the T‘ang. For a discussion of the importance of this same institution, later termed i-chuang after the Sung sec Wolfram Eberhard, Social Mobility in Traditional China (Leiden, 1962) pp. 41–42.Google Scholar

15 Op. cit., Sudō Yoshiyuki, chapter 5 for a discussion of chuang-yuan in the vicinity of Ch‘ang-an.

16 Kyōji, Tan, “Sōdai no jinushi ‘nuboku’ kankei” (The Relationship between Landlords and Estate Serfs in the Sung Period) Tōyō gakuhō 53:3–4 (March 1971) pp. 76–116. This study argues that the serfs tilling landlord estates only represented a small proportion of villagers, and that many peasant wives and children made up the serf work force. The majority of villagers farmed on an owner-cultivator basis. Again, it is not at all certain how typical were the conditions described, but this article clearly attempts to refute the Sudo perception of Sung rural society and economy with new evidence.Google Scholar

17 Noboru, Niida, Chūgoku hōseishi kenkyū: dorci nōdo hō, kazoku nōson hō (Studies in the History of the Chinese Legal System: Laws Pertaining to Serfs and Slaves; Laws Pertaining to Family and Village) (Tokyo, 1962).Google Scholar

18 Ichisada, Miyazaki, “Sōdai igo no tochi shoyū keitai” (The Form of Land Ownership after the Sung Period) Tōyōshi kenkyū 20:2 (December 1952) pp. 1–34. This essay sharply attacks the Sudo argument about the emergence of tenant-serfs in the early Sung period. See also Hamaguchi Shigekuni, Tō ōchō no semmin seido (A Study of the Chien-min System during the T‘ang Period) (Kyoto, 1966), pp. 562–574.Google Scholar

19 See the discussion of social transformation from slave to tenant-free households as described in Miyazaki, “Bukyoku kara denko e” (From Slave Households to Tenant Households) Tōyōthi kenkyū 29:4 (March 1971) pp. 30–65. Part two of this essay can be found in 30:1 (June 1971) pp. 1–32.Google Scholar

20 See note 18.

21 Twitchett, D. C., Financial Administration Under the T‘ang Dynasty (Cambridge, 1970) pp. 74–77. People during T‘ang preferred to take good copper coins out of circulation, use the copper for other remunerative purposes, and substitute counterfeit coins. Although the government passed severe laws to prevent such actions, even cutting back on its production of copper coins, the practice continued to flourish.Google Scholar

22 This process is well described in D. C. Twitch-ctt, “The T‘ang Market System” Asia Major New Scries 12:2, pp. 202–248; Twitchett, "Merchant, Trade and Government in Late T‘ang" Asia Major New Series 14:1, pp. 63–95.

23 See Miyazaki Ichisada, “S6-Gcn no keizaitcki jotai” (The Economic Conditions of the Sung and Yuan Periods) in Haneda Takashi (Comp.), Toyo bunkos hi tatk/fi (A Comprehensive History of Far Eastern History) (Tokyo, 1938) p. 138.

24 ibid., p. 146.

25 Alexander Gerschenkron has listed five concepts which conceivably exhaust the various interpretations of historical continuity: (a) constancy of direction; (b) periodicity of events; (c) endogenous change; (d) length of causal regress; (e) stability of the rate of change. It would appear that Elvin conceives of quantitative growth during Ming and Ch‘ing to be a case (e) without any particularly unique qualitative changes in production, distribution, and material living standard taking place. See Alexander Gerschenkron, Continuity in History and Other Essays (Cambridge, 1968) p. 21. Whether or not Elvin‘s perception of quantitative growth during the Ming and Ch‘ing is correct remains very open to question.

26 The monetization of taxes has been discussed in Liang Fang-chung, The Single-Whip Method of Taxation in China, translated by Wang Yii-ch‘uan (Cambridge, 1956); Wang Fang-chung, “Ming-tai i-t‘iao pien-fa-te ch‘an-shcng chi ch‘i tso-yung” (The Creation of the Single-Whip Method of Taxation during the Ming Period and Its Functions) in Jen-min ta-hsueh chung-kuo li-shih chiao-yen shih(Comp.), Ming-ch‘ing ske-hui ching-chi hstng-t‘ai-te yen-chiu (Studies on the Social and Economic Structure of Ming and Ch‘ing) (Shanghai, *957) PP- ‘03-197. Henceforth referred to as CHY.

27 For the spread of new crops and the progress in new farming practices pertaining to these see Amano Moionosuke, "Mindai no nogyo to nomin" (Agriculture and Farmers during the Ming Period) in Kyoto Daigaku Jimbun Kagaku Kenkyujo, Min-Shin jidai no k?Saku gijutsushi (A History of Scicncc and Technology during (he Ming and Ch‘ing Periods) (Kyoto, 1970) pp. 465–483. For evidence on the increasing use and importance of silver as a component of the Ming money supply sec the two ‘essays by Ch‘uan Han-sheng, “Tzu Sung chih Ming chcng-fu sui-ch‘u-ju-chung ch‘ien-yin pi-li-te pien-tung” (Fluctuations in the Ratio of Copper and Silver in the Annual Income and Expenditures of the Government from the Sung to the Ming Periods) pp. 355–367 (vol. I); “Ming-Ch‘ing chien Mei-chou pai-yin-tc shu-ju Chung-kuo” (The Import of American Silver into China during the Ming and Ch‘ing) pp. 435–450 (vol. I) in Chung-k.ito ching-chi-shih lun-ts‘ung (Essays on Chinese Economic History) (Hong Kong, 1973) 2 volumes. For handicraft development and the emergence of new commodity markets see Huang P‘ei-chin, "Kuan-yü Ming-tai kuo-nei shih-ch‘ang wen-t‘i-te k‘ao-ch‘a" (An Examination of the Domestic Mar-ket Problem during the Ming Dynasty) in CHY, pp. 201-206 for discussion of handicraft development and pp. 227–244 for a treatment of the market expansion issue.

28 The best discussion of the putting-out merchant-capitalist system for fulling and dyeing of cotton cloth can be found in Yokoyama Suguru, Chugoku kjndmlui no keizai kpzd (The Economic Structure during the Modernization of China) (Tokyo, 1972) Part 2. For evidence on the wage earning work force in central Chinese cities and the numerous labor-management and labor-official conflicts that erupted during the early Ch‘ing period see Li Hua, "Shih-Iun Ch‘ing-tai ch‘ien-ch‘i-te shih-min tou-cheng" (A Preliminary Discussion of the Struggle of City People during the Early Ch‘ing Period) pp. 319-321 in Chung-kuo jen-min ta-hsueh Chung-kuo li-shih chiao-yen shih (Comp.), Chung-kuo feng-chien ching-chi kuan-hsi-te jo-kanwen-t‘i (Some Problems Regarding Feudal Economic Relationships in China) (Peking, 1958).

29 I make this claim even though we have as yet no detailed study of the private production and distribution of hemp and silk during Sung to compare with the tea and sugar processing industries of late Ming and early Ch‘ing. For evidence of the putting-out system in processing sugar in Taiwan during the Ch‘ing period see Rinji Taiwan kyukan chosakai, Taiwan togyo kyukan ippan (A Draft Outline of Traditional Customs of the Taiwan Sugar Industry) (Place of Publication unknown, 1910) pp. 1-125. Sugar was exported to various parts of China during the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries through a well developed commercial network of merchant gilds. Did a similar system of putting-out exist in commodity production during the Sung ?

30 Abbot Payson Usher, A History of Mechanical Invention (Boston, 1959) pp. 337–341.

31 R. R. Nelson, “A Theory of the Low-Level Equilibrium Trap in Underdeveloped Countries,” American Economic Review 46 (December 1956) pp. 894–908. The simple ‘Malthusian* model frequently used to explain Western economic development in the nineteenth century simply failed to predict accurately the events which actually occurred. It is very likely that the low or high level equilibrium trap models scarcely explain the development of China in the past or of present less developed countries. For a powerful critique of the Malthusian model see Everett E. Hagen, “Population and Economic Growth” American Economic Review 49:3 (June 1959) pp. 310–327.

32 For the best discussion of continued improvements in farming practices and technology as related to rice and cotton during the Ming and Ch‘ing periods sec the monumental study of Amano Motonosuke, Chugoku nogydshi kenkyu (Studies in Chinese Agricultural History) (Tokyo, 1967). For cotton during Ming and Ch‘ing sec pp. 506-642 and for rice during the same period see pp. 278–387.

33 The scries of rising short run total product curves for labor in his figure 4 (p. 313) really depict the transfer of existing stock of farming technology to more backward farming regions and increased efficiency obtained from specialization of labor. Yet Elvin conceives of this process taking place where the remaining ‘potential’ output is rapidly being exhausted because he has assumed that the long run ‘potential’ output curve must be rigidly fixed and can be shifted “only by using modern methods” (p. 313). What docs one realty mean by modern methods? Was the transfer of farming practices using legumes in Europe of the lowlands to England in the sixteenth century an example of modern methods? Elvin's nco-Mal-thusian model is theoretically correct, given its rigid assumptions, but the process of agricultural development implied by his model scarcely is confirmed by evidence from the real world of eighteenth, nineteenth, or twentieth century China.

34 It is worth pondering whether at the turn of this century acute scarcities of wood, draft animals, land, etc., were becoming serious as Elvin claims (p. 301). If so, such scarcities could have been eliminated by the creation of capital, but Elvin has already argued that the shortage of capital was not a key factor impeding economic development during the Ch‘ing (p. 286). The final section of the study gives the reader the distinct impression that China was beginning to experience a severe economic crisis around 1900. Hut this is a complex issue in which cultural, political, and military factors arc perhaps more responsible for the country's economic problems than any set of purely economic factors.