Meine Kanäle - Kulturaustausch Ost-West|东西方文化交流|East-West cultural exchange|Échange culturel Est-Ouest
汤若望最重要的贡献之一是参与明末历局的改历、编纂修定“崇祯历书”
"窃维九万里孤踪,结知英主。既荣其生,复哀其死。鱼水相欢,得若将终其身,又预为之计,久远如此。宠施优渥,出于格外,岂人力也哉!"--汤若望墓志铭。
1660年,耶稣会传教士、德国人汤若望在中国大清皇帝顺治赐予他的茔地上建立了一座圣母小教堂。教堂前树立石碑一块,碑上便用满汉两种文字刻着上述碑文。在感激中国君主知遇之恩的同时,不远万里来到这一东方古国、当时已年近古稀、在华渡过了大半生的汤若望,并没有忘记身负的传教使命,以及对天主的景仰。
“古圣贤于遇合之际,率归之天。今予之得遇主上,用西法以定运,进修士以演教。道之将行,日升月恒,殆未可量。又不特一身之感恩称知遇而已,谓非天主上帝默作合于其间,可乎?”
随着1498年葡萄牙航海家达伽马开辟东方新航线,大批欧洲殖民者和商人相继东来。自明朝中叶起,天主教的耶稣会、方济各会和多明我会的传教士也纷纷进入中国内地,其中以耶稣会势力最大,他们逐渐由澳门深入内地,打开传教局面,使天主教在中国立下根基。就连"天主"一词也是16世纪耶稣会传教士进入中国后,借用中国人较容易接受的名称对其所信之上帝赋予的称谓,从此中国便把他们传播的宗教定名为"天主教"。耶稣会士的代表人物当首推意大利人利马窦、瑞士人邓玉函、德国人汤若望以及比利时人南怀仁等,他们甚至跻身朝廷,博得了中国皇帝的青睐。
然而,深受中国儒家思想影响,或者是笃信佛教的中国皇帝,器重这些西方传教士的原因并不在于他们的信仰,而是他们带来的先进科学技术。他们当中有天文学家、数学家、地理学家、画家、医生、音乐家、钟表匠、珐琅专家等。中国社会科学院世界宗教研究所所长卓新平教授说:
“为了在中国站稳脚跟,他们必须具备一些知识,既包括科技也包括人文方面的知识,科技知识在中国尤受欢迎。于是汤若望、纪理安等人的科技知识赢得了中国百姓,特别是学者的佩服,进而是信服,这样在信仰这个方面进行交流就要容易得多了。”
不仅如此,了解中国本土文化、尊重中国人的习俗、掌握中国语言也是耶稣会教士开启中国社会大门的一块敲门砖。曾在德国慕尼黑大学获得哲学博士学位、兼任中国基督教研究中心主任的卓新平教授说:
“当时耶稣会士东来,到了一个陌生的文化、陌生的土地上,他们要想传播他们的信仰,必须先了解这个国度,这个民族的所思所想。在了解过程中,一方面他们是吸收中国的思想文化,另一方面,又把西方的思想文化带入。”
澳门是四百年前耶稣会士进入中国的第一个落脚点。以利玛窦为代表的许多传教士们,一踏上澳门土地,便开始精心研习中国语言文化,甚至以掌握北京官话为目标。这些西方修士入乡随俗,脱下僧袍,换上儒服,住进中式房屋,并潜心研究中国经史和伦理,寻找其中东西方文化的融合点。在同朝野名流交往的过程中,这些上通天文,下知地理,又熟读汉文典籍的西方传教士,自然赢得了中国文人士大夫的好感和信任,从而达到其传播信仰的目的。1605年,名代翰林院学者、主持历局的官员徐光启受洗入教便是一例。
汤若望的贡献
继利玛窦之后,出身于德国科隆贵族世家的汤若望则是又一名活跃于明清之际的著名耶稣会传教士,而比之这位来自意大利的先驱,汤若望的在华经历可谓跌宕起伏,坎坷不平。他不仅是明朝灭亡、清兵入关的见证人,而且以其凛然正气,获得新统治者的应允,得以”留居原寓“,即今宣武门内南堂,继续其历法的修定工作。
汤若望在华四十余年,虽未能达到其传教的目的,但在将西方先进的天文学、光学、火器、矿业等领域的知识介绍到中国这方面,却取得了丰硕成果。而其最重要的贡献之一则是参与明末历局的改历、编纂修定“崇祯历书”。
明朝末年,行用多年的“大统历”误差渐大,钦天监所预报的天象,尤其是日月食屡屡失验。在用中国传统方法与西方方法预报日月食,几经校验比较之后,皇家确定由徐光启主持历局,修改历法。徐光启则聘请了邓玉函、龙华民等传教士参与改历。
1630年,汤若望奉诏从陕西调往北京进历局供职。在中西学者的共同努力下,编译了长达137卷的长篇巨著“崇祯历书”,而其中由汤若望撰写编译的就有包括“交食历指”、“恒星出没表”、“南北高弧表”、“五纬诸表”等共43卷。
除此之外,1626年,汤若望还在中国学者李祖白的协助下撰写了“远镜说”。研究西方传教士对中国科学史所做贡献的专家、北京古观象台副台长李东生女士介绍说:
“汤若望还编纂了‘远镜说’,是根据1616年德国法兰克福出版社出版的赛都利的著作编译而成的。这本书对伽利略望远镜的制作原理、功能、结构、使用方法都做了详尽的说明,通篇条理清楚、浅显易懂,图文并茂。所以专家学者认为,这是中国出版的最早的一部介绍西方光学理论和望远镜技术的启蒙著作。”
为帮助中国开采矿藏,加强国储,汤若望在历局期间,又同中国学者合作翻译了德国矿冶学家阿格里科拉(Georgius Agricola)于1550年撰写的论述16世纪欧洲开采、冶金技术的巨著“矿冶全书”(Dere Metallica Libri XII),中译本定名为“坤舆格致”。此书编成后,汤若望进呈给朝廷,崇祯皇帝御批:“发下‘坤舆格致’全书,着地方官相酌地形,便宜采取”。
不过,因战事已紧,明王朝迅速崩溃,已无暇过问“坤舆格致”的命运,因此该书未被刊行,后来也便在明末清初纷繁的战事中遗失了。而“崇祯历书”却由于汤若望挺身而出,据理力争,不仅躲过了浩劫,后来还得以颁行天下。
迭宕起伏的一生
1644年,清兵入主北京。摄政王多尔衮下达严令:“内城居民,限三日内,尽行迁居外城,以便旗兵居住“。当时住在宣武门天主堂的汤若望冒着违令受惩的危险,上疏朝廷,称:
“曾奉前朝故皇帝令修历法,著有历书多轶,付工镌版,尚未完竣,而版片已堆积累累;并堂中供像礼器、传教所用经典、修历应用书籍并测量天象各种仪器,件数甚伙。若一并迁于外城,不但三日限内不能悉数搬尽,且必难免损坏,修正既非容易,购买又非可随时寄来。”因而恳请“仍居原寓,照旧虔修”。
颇为开明的新统治者第二天便传谕:“恩准西士汤若望等安居天主堂,各旗兵弁等人,毋许阑入滋扰。”
在保护南堂及内存所有历书、仪器和传教所用经典免遭战火洗劫后,汤若望又多次奉召入朝,向新统治者力陈新历之长,并适时进献了新制的舆地屏图和浑天仪、地平晷、望远镜等仪器,而且用西洋新法准确预测了顺治元年(1644年)农历8月初一丙辰日食时,初亏、食甚、复圆的时刻,终于说服当时的摄政王多尔衮,决定从顺治二年开始,将其参与编纂的新历颁行天下。
当时汤若望等传教士得以留住的天主堂便是北京历史最悠久的一座天主教堂,以南堂著称。1605年,利马窦曾于该处建起京城内第一座经堂,但规模很小。后来,在汤若望主持下,于1650年建造了北京城内的第一座大教堂,此处成为汤若望等神父的起居地。
不过,这名曾官至钦天监监正的德国教士工作的地点则是矗立在北京建国门附近的古观象台。古观象台,原名观星台,始建于明正统七年(1442年),是世界上最古老的天文台之一,迄今已有560年的历史了。
它由一座高14米的砖砌观星台和台下紫微殿、漏壶房、晷影堂等建筑组成。在青砖台体上耸立着八件青铜铸就的宏大精美的仪器,是清代制造的天体仪、赤道经纬仪、黄道经纬仪、地平经仪、象限仪、纪限仪、地平经纬仪和玑衡抚辰仪。仪器身上刻有栩栩如生的游龙和精美绝伦的流云,其中部分甚至仍具有实测功能。
明清时代,作为钦天监外署,它是一个重要的天文观测基地。当时中国修定立法、观测天象、编制星表、制造天文仪器等活动都与西方传教士密切相关。汤若望当年工作的厅堂至今仍保存完好。北京古观象台副台长李东生女士介绍说:
“北京古观象台是西方传教士来华最早的落脚点之一,可以说是一个中西方文化交流的窗口。在古观象台工作的传教士有50多人,汤若望是其中最主要的传教士,还担任台长,即钦天监监正。”
1651年,多尔衮死,顺治皇帝爱新觉罗-福临亲政。这名清代开国皇帝虽笃信佛教,但却非常钦佩汤若望的道德与学问,并与之保持着很好的关系,先后24次到访南堂,与汤若望促膝谈心。在华西方传教士长眠的腾公栅栏墓地所在地、今北京西郊行政学院中西文化交流研究中心的研究员林华女士介绍说:
“顺治年幼,对大胡子外国老头非常好奇,多次跑到南堂去看他们是如何生活,工作和吃饭的。汤若望对宫里一些人,包括顺治的母亲,都有一定的影响。根据资料说,汤若望在宫中也发展了一批教徒,但影响不大,因为中国自己就有着各种各样的宗教,佛教、道教等,而满人是信萨满教的。虽然中国人不信西方的宗教,但很尊重这些传教士的学识。顺治还称汤若望为“玛法”,即满语爷爷之意,并赐给他很多特权,比如可以随时进入后宫等。”
这一时期,汤若望在华事业可谓达到了峰巅。岂料顺治皇帝英年早逝,于是年仅8岁的爱新觉罗-玄烨登基,年号康熙。汤若望虽经中国朝代更迭的重大变故,安然无恙,却在清廷内部的权力斗争中成为牺牲品,这便是中国历史上著名的“历案”。林华女士说:
“因为康熙是一个几岁的小娃娃,掌握实权的则是敖拜等反对洋教和西方学说的一些人。因此他们上台以后,汤若望就马上被打入底层,遭到栽赃陷害,并锒铛入狱。他当时已是一位老人,而且很快中风,不会说话。在拷打审问中,都是其助手、比利时的南怀仁替他辩护,但还是被判了死刑。这时候,北京发生大地震,于是皇太后出面为汤若望求情,才得以出狱。但健康已不能挽回,之后不久便去世了。”
康熙亲政后,铲除敖拜等人,为汤若望平反,并派大员在顺治所赐墓地上为汤若望修建坟茔,举行隆重葬礼,还率领百官及亲眷到其墓前祭奠。汤若望墓碑正面是拉丁文和中文碑文,反面是康熙皇帝以汉文和满文为其撰写的祭文。从“鞠躬尽瘁,恤死报勤,国之盛典”等用词足以见中国一代明君对这位来自万里之遥、莱茵河畔的德国传教士高度的评价和认可。
继汤若望之后,来自德国的传教士还有纪理安(Bernard-Kiliam Stumpf)、戴进贤(Ignatius Koegler)等人,他们在钦天监供职,从事天文、历法的观测和推算工作。而死后,同样埋葬在利马窦、汤若望、南怀仁、朗士宁等前辈长眠的腾公栅栏墓地。
如今,传教士们的身躯早已化作一掊黄土,留下的是这座浓荫蔽日、保存了60尊各国教士墓碑的墓园,它已成为中西方科学文化交流的一个历史见证,以及超越时空的推进人类思想文明的象征。(Quelle:德国之声 DW.com)
Il Milione è il resoconto dei viaggi in Asia di Marco Polo, intrapresi assieme al padre Niccolò Polo e allo zio paterno Matteo Polo, mercanti e viaggiatori veneziani, tra il 1271 e il 1295, e le sue esperienze alla corte di Kublai Khan, il più grande sovrano orientale dell'epoca, del quale Marco fu al servizio per quasi 17 anni.
Il libro fu scritto da Rustichello da Pisa, un autore di romanzi cavallereschi, che trascrisse sotto dettatura le memorie rievocate da Marco Polo, mentre i due si trovavano nelle carceri di San Giorgio a Genova.
Rustichello adoperò la lingua franco-veneta, una lingua culturale diffusa nel Nord Italia tra la fascia subalpina e il basso Po. Un'altra versione fu scritta in lingua d'oïl, la lingua franca dei crociati e dei mercanti occidentali in Oriente, forse nel 1298 ma sicuramente dopo il 1296. Secondo alcuni ricercatori, il testo sarebbe poi stato rivisto dallo stesso Marco Polo una volta rientrato a Venezia, con la collaborazione di alcuni frati dell'Ordine dei Domenicani.
Considerato un capolavoro della letteratura di viaggio, Il Milione è anche un'enciclopedia geografica, che riunisce in volume le conoscenze essenziali disponibili alla fine del XIII secolo sull'Asia, e un trattato storico-geografico.[5] È stato scritto che «Marco si rivolge a tutti quelli che vogliono sapere: sapere quello che c'è al di là delle frontiere della vecchia Europa. Non mette il suo libro sotto il segno dell'utile, ma sotto il segno della conoscenza».
Rispetto ad altre relazioni di viaggio scritte nel corso del XIII secolo, come la Historia Mongalorum di Giovanni da Pian del Carpine e l'Itinerarium di Guglielmo di Rubruck, Il Milione fu eccezionale perché le sue descrizioni si spingevano ben oltre il Karakorum e arrivarono fino al Catai. Marco Polo testimoniò l'esistenza di una civiltà mongola stanziale e molto sofisticata, assolutamente paragonabile alle civiltà europee: i mongoli, insomma, non erano solo i nomadi "selvaggi" che vivevano a cavallo e si spostavano in tenda, di cui avevano parlato Giovanni da Pian del Carpine e Guglielmo di Rubruck, ma abitavano città murate, sapevano leggere, e avevano usi e costumi molto sofisticati. Così come Guglielmo di Rubruck, invece, Marco smentisce alcune leggende sull'Asia di cui gli Europei all'epoca erano assolutamente certi.
Il Milione è stato definito come "la descrizione geografica, storica, etnologica, politica, scientifica (zoologia, botanica, mineralogia) dell'Asia medievale".Le sue descrizioni contribuirono alla compilazione del Mappamondo di Fra Mauro e ispirarono i viaggi di Cristoforo Colombo.
The China Folk House Retreat is a Chinese folk house in Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, United States, reconstructed from its original location in Yunnan in China. A non-profit organization dismantled and rebuilt it piece by piece with the goal to improve U.S. understanding of Chinese culture.
History
John Flower, director of Sidwell Friends School's Chinese studies program, and his wife Pamela Leonard started bringing students to Yunnan in 2012 as part of a China fieldwork program. In 2014 Flower, Leonard, and their students found the house in a small village named Cizhong (Chinese: 茨 中) in Jianchuan County of Yunnan, China. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, they brought dozens of 11th and 12th-grade students to Yunnan to experience the cultural and natural environment of this province every spring. The architectural style of this house is a blend of Han, Bai, Naxi and Tibetan styles.
The Cizhong Village is located in eastern Himalaya, alongside the Mekong River. It has a long history of Sino-foreign cultural exchanges. The Paris Foreign Missions Society established the Cizhong Catholic Church in 1867. When they visited the village, Zhang Jianhua, owner of the house, invited them to his home. Zhang told them that the house was built in 1989, and would be flooded by a new hydroelectric power station. While the government built a new house for him one kilometer away, Flower came up with the idea of dismantling the house and rebuilding it in the United States. This house was built using mortise and tenon structure, which made it easy to be dismantled.
Logistics
Flower and his students visited Zhang several times and eventually bought the house from him. After measurements and photographing, the whole house was dismantled, sent to Tianjin and shipped to Baltimore, and finally to West Virginia. Since 2017, they have spent several years rebuilding the house in Harpers Ferry, at the Friends Wilderness Center, following the traditional Chinese method of building. For the development of this project, Flower and Leonard formed the China Folk House Retreat.
《Chinese characteristics》(中国人的性格)是西方人介绍研究中国民族性格的最有影响的著作。由美国公理会来华传教士明恩溥(Arthur Henderson Smith)撰写。书中描述了100多年前中国人,有高尚的品格、良好的习惯。也有天生的偏狭、固有的缺点。此为1894年刊本。
明恩溥的《中国人的性格》一书的内容1890年曾在上海的英文版报纸《华北每日新闻》发表,轰动一时;1894年在纽约由弗莱明出版公司结集出版。这位博学、不无善意的传教士力图以公允的态度叙述中国。他有在中国生活22年的经验为他的叙述与评价担保,他看到中国人性格的多个侧面及其本相的暖昧性。他为中国人的性格归纳了20多种特征,有褒有贬,并常能在同一,问题上看到正反两方面的意义。《中国人的性格》在近半个世纪的时间里,不仅影响了西方人、日本人的中国观,甚至对中国现代国民性反思思潮,也有很大影响。张梦阳先生对此曾有过专门研究。
史密斯是位诚实、细心的观察家。读者在阅读中不难发现这一点。然而,诚实与信心并不意味着客观与准确。因为文化与时代的偏见与局限,对于任何一个个人都是无法超越的,尤其是一位生活在100年以前的基督教传教士。西方文化固有的优越感,基督教偏见,都不可避免地影响着史密斯在中国的生活经验和他对中国人与中国文化的印象与见解。基督教普世精神、西方中心主义,构成史密斯观察与叙述中国的既定视野。中国人的性格形象映在异域文化背景上,是否会变得模糊甚至扭曲呢?辜鸿铭说”要懂得真正的中国人和中国文明,那个人必须是深沉的、博大的和淳朴的”,”比如那个可敬的阿瑟。史密斯先生,他曾著过一本关于中国人特性的书,但他却不了解真正的中国人,因为作为一个美国人,他不够深沉。。”(《春秋大义》”序言”)
美国传教士眼里的中国人的形象,并不具有权威性。它是一面镜子,有些部分甚至可能成为哈哈镜,然而,问题是,一个美国人不能了解真正的中国人,一个中国人就能了解中国人吗?盲目的自尊与脆弱的自卑,怀念与希望,不断被提醒的挫折感与被误导的自鸣得意,我们能真正地认识我们自己吗?《中国人的性格》已经出版整整l00年了。一本有影响的著作成为一个世纪的话题,谁也绕不开它,即使沉默也是一种反应,辜鸿铭在论著与演说中弘扬”中国人的精神”,史密斯的书是他潜在的对话者,回答、解释或反驳,都离不开这个前提。林语堂的《吾国吾民》,其中颇费苦心的描述与小心翼翼的评价,无不让人感到《中国人的性格》的影响。《中国人的性格》已成为一种照临或逼视中国民族性格话语的目光,所有相关叙述,都无法回避。
我们不能盲信史密斯的观察与叙述都是事实,但也不必怀疑其中有事实有道理。读者们可以根据自己的阅读来判断。了解自己既需要反思也需要外观。异域文化的目光是我们理解自己的镜子。临照这面镜子需要坦诚、勇气与明辨的理性。鲁迅先生一直希望有人翻译这本书,在他逝世前14天发表的《”立此存照”(三)》中,先生还提到:”我至今还在希望有人翻译出斯密斯的《支那人气质》来。看了这些,而自省,分析,明白哪几点说的对,变革,挣扎,自做工夫,却不求别人的原谅和称赞,来证明究竟怎样的是中国人。
明恩溥观察到了中国文化的二十五种特征,他的这本书也包含了这二十五章,每个章的标题都是描述了一个特征,最后两章描述了宗教和社会。
第一章 保全面子
第二章 节俭持家
第三章 勤劳刻苦
第四章 讲究礼貌
第五章 漠视时间
第六章 漠视精确
第七章 易于误解
第八章 拐弯抹角
第九章 顺而不从
第十章 思绪含混
第十一章 不紧不慢
第十二章 轻视外族
第十三章 缺乏公心
第十四章 因循守旧
第十五章 随遇而安
第十六章 顽强生存
第十七章 能忍且韧
第十八章 知足常乐
第十九章 孝悌为先
第二十章 仁爱之心
第二十一章 缺乏同情
第二十二章 社会风波
第二十三章 诛连守法
第二十四章 相互猜疑
第二十五章 缺乏诚信
第二十六章 多元信仰
第二十七章 中国的现实与时务
明恩溥(Arthur Henderson Smith 1845—1932) 又作明恩普,阿瑟·亨德森·史密斯,美国人,基督教公理会来华传教士。1872年来华,最初在天津,1877年到鲁西北赈灾传教,在恩县庞庄建立其第一个教会,先后在此建立起小学、中学和医院,同时兼任上海《字林西报》通讯员。1905年辞去宣教之职。在明恩溥等人推动之下,1908年,美国正式宣布退还“庚子赔款”的半数,计1160余万美元给中国。第一次世界大战爆发后,明恩溥返回美国。
作为一个美国传教士,明恩溥深入天津、山东等地了解中国民众的生存状况,熟悉中国的国情,因而他知道如何以恰当的方式影响中国的未来。1906年,当他向美国总统西奥多·罗斯福建议,将清王朝支付给美国的“庚子赔款”用来在中国兴学、资助中国学生到美国留学时,他大概已经意识到了实施这一计划所能具备的历史意义。清华留美预备学校(后改名为清华大学)的成立,为中国留学生赴美打开了大门,一批又一批年轻学子从封闭的国度走向世界,他们中间涌现出众多优秀人才,归国后成为不同领域的精英。
Here the artist William Alexander represents the moment when Lord Macartney, a British diplomat, was received by the Qing Emperor Ch’ien-Lung on the occasion of the first embassy to China. Within the grounds of the imperial palace at Jehol (Chengde), a lavish tent was erected to host the audience on 14 September 1793. Despite the level of detail in this sketch, Alexander, official draughtsman to the Embassy, was not actually present to witness the event. His reconstruction is based on verbal accounts and sketches produced by core members of the delegation. Those twelve members are depicted at right, each man numbered to correspond to a labelled key at top right. Sir George Staunton, the Secretary to the Embassy and East India Company official, stands behind Macartney, wearing the silk robes and velvet hat which mark him as Doctor of Laws from Oxford University. Other members of the retinue include Lieutenant Henry Parish, whose sketches of the Embassy provided the absent Alexander with important source material.
Surrounded by courtiers, Ch’ien-Lung is depicted seated at his throne with Macartney before him. The Ambassador, on the orders of his British advisors, decided to forgo performing the customary ritual of the kowtow before the Emperor. This required an individual to kneel with both knees on the ground and prostrate themselves low enough so that their forehead touched the ground. The kowtow was considered demeaning by the British, and thus Macartney chose to genuflect as he would to his own sovereign George III. The Ambassador was repeatedly urged to perform the traditional Chinese kowtow, but as diplomat he felt it important to present George and Ch’ien-Lung as equals. This was not received positively by the Chinese who viewed their Emperor as the Son of Heaven with no human equal. According to their view the objects presented by the British in the ceremonial exchange of gifts were perceived as ‘tribute’ items, and Macartney as conveyor of tribute rather than legate of King George.
As well as presenting gifts to the Emperor, Macartney gave a letter to Ch’ien-Lung written by George III. The letter requested that Chinese officials controlling the port of Canton, hub of Anglo-Chinese trade and headquarters of the East India Company, reconsider the legislations they applied to foreign merchants. These rules were seen as dogmatic and limiting to British trading interests. George also asked for permission to establish an ambassador in Canton, who would oversee the expansion of British markets. In the event, these requests were declined by the Emperor, who saw no reason to oblige the demands of an ultimately rival Empire. He stated in an edict that China was entirely self-sufficient, and that everything he and his subjects needed could be manufactured domestically. There was no reason to allow an infiltration of British goods. There was no precedent for loosening Cantonese legislations and it was in China’s interest to preserve their dominion over the strategic port.
(Quelle:https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/the-emperor-of-china-receiving-the-macartney-embassy)
神宗万历时,葡萄牙殖民者继续在澳门扩展其势力,来澳门者多至万余人。神宗即位后,即向澳门的葡萄牙商船抽取舶税。每年可得税银二万余两。葡人居住澳门,每年贿赠明朝官吏银五百两,其后转归官府,形成地租。明廷因有利可得,遂听任澳门被葡人租占。广东居民则掀起了反侵略的斗争。
一五八一年(万历九年),西班牙国王兼为葡萄牙国王,葡萄牙事实上被西班牙所兼并,又与荷兰殖民者发生冲突。一六○一年,派出战舰两艘,装备大炮,驶入澳门港外,自称与中国通贡市。葡方记载说,葡人曾拘捕并处死荷兰人多人。《明史·和兰传》说,明税使李道召其首领入广州城游一月,未敢奏闻。一六○三年,又有荷兰船舰炮击澳门,焚掠商船。次年,荷兰遣使求贡市,未获允准,派军舰来攻,在澎湖海上遇明朝福建水师,退走。荷兰遂转向漳州求通贸易,并进而侵占台湾岛,在台湾“筑室耕田,久留不去”。(《明史·和兰传》)一六○五年,葡人借口防备荷兰来袭,不得中国允准,即在澳门修筑炮台等工事,以图长久占据。
一五七四年,葡萄牙的耶稣会士范礼安等传教士四十一人,曾自葡来澳门,企图进入中国内地传教,未获允准。一六○六年,范礼安病死澳门。意大利籍的耶稣会士郭若静遂在澳门西北隔海的小岛青州建筑墙高六、七丈的耶稣会礼拜堂。犹如堡垒,作为传教的据点。香山知县张大猷请毁去墙垣,不成。香山居民遂携带竿矛,冲入青州岛,将教堂焚毁。当时传说郭若静将据地称王。澳门中国居民纷纷迁往广州。广州城内戒严,澳门商业贸易停顿。葡萄牙殖民者居住澳门,生活需用均靠当地居民供给。青州教堂事件发生后,葡萄牙殖民者被迫派遣代表去广州,陈述传说虚诳,又向官吏行贿,以平息事态。(冯承钧译费赖之《入华耶稣会士列传》)次年,番禺举人卢廷龙入京会试,上疏请驱逐澳门番人出居浪白外海,就船贸易,交还壕境澳故地。明廷因“事亦难行”,予以搁置。自一五九八年起任广东总督的戴耀,因见有宝货之利,对葡人多有纵容,遇事或佯禁而阴许。一六一○年,江西万安人张鸣岗接替戴耀,继任两广总督。一六一四年上疏陈述澳门事,说:“有谓宜剿除者,有谓宜移之浪白外洋就船贸易者,顾兵难轻动。”他认为:“壕境在香山内地,官军环海而守,彼日食所需,咸仰于我,一怀异志,我即制其死命”,“似不如申明约束,内不许一奸阑出,外不许一倭阑入,无启衅,无弛防,相安无患之为愈也。”(《明史·佛郎机传》)疏上,被明廷采纳。张鸣岗书中所说“外不许一倭阑入”,是指葡人役使倭奴,引起明朝的注意。同年,两广制定“海道禁约”,在香山县刻石立碑,内列禁畜养倭奴,禁买人口,禁兵船骗饷(舶税),禁接买私货,禁擅自兴作房屋亭舍,如有违犯,即行治罪(康熙《香山县志》)。此后,又在澳门附近的雍陌设参将,领兵千人扎营驻守。
澳门被葡人租占后,不仅成为商业贸易的基地,也还是欧洲传教士来华传教的前站。一五七九年,意大利传教士罗明坚来澳门,学习中国语文,次年,去广州,向两广总督馈赠礼物。一五八二年,又获准去肇庆传教。一五九○年回国。意大利贵族出身的传教士利玛窦曾同罗明坚在肇庆传教,苦学中国语文。一五八九年移居韶州,以后又到过南京、北京与南昌等地。一五九六年,被教廷任命为耶稣会在华会长。一六○一年,偕同西班牙传教士庞迪我再次到达北京,向明神宗贡呈珠嵌十字架、自鸣钟及《万国图志》,得神宗嘉赏,获准留住京师。利玛窦研习中国儒学,得以与明朝官员和士大夫交往。撰述天文、数学、地理、语言学等方面的著述多种,为在中国传播西方的科学知识作出了贡献。一六一○年病死于北京。意大利传教士龙华民继任耶稣会在华会长。
万历时,先后来中国的西方传教士还有葡萄牙人麦安东、孟三德、费奇观、罗如望、李玛诺,意大利人石方西、熊三拔等。他们在中国都用汉语姓名,以便交往。一五八三年,利玛窦在广东肇庆,开始接收中国信徒一人。一六○三年,各地的中国教徒有五百人。一六一七年多至一万三千人。明朝末年,发展到三万八千余人。元代景教徒多是色目人和蒙古人,正式奉教的汉人,史不多见。明神宗万历时,耶稣会士经澳门来内地传教,天主教才在汉族居民中传播。
The Macartney Embassy (Chinese: 馬加爾尼使團), also called the Macartney Mission, was the first British diplomatic mission to China, which took place in 1793. It is named for its leader, George Macartney, Great Britain's first envoy to China. The goals of the mission included the opening of new ports for British trade in China, the establishment of a permanent embassy in Beijing, the cession of a small island for British use along China's coast, and the relaxation of trade restrictions on British merchants in Guangzhou (Canton). Macartney's delegation met with the Qianlong Emperor, who rejected all of the British requests. Although the mission failed to achieve its official objectives, it was later noted for the extensive cultural, political, and geographical observations its participants recorded in China and brought back to Europe.
Foreign maritime trade in China was regulated through the Canton System, which emerged gradually through a series of imperial edicts in the 17th and 18th centuries. This system channeled formal trade through the Cohong, a guild of thirteen trading companies (known in Cantonese as "hong") selected by the imperial government. In 1725, the Yongzheng Emperor gave the Cohong legal responsibility over commerce in Guangzhou. By the 18th century, Guangzhou, known as Canton to British merchants at the time, had become the most active port in the China trade, thanks partly to its convenient access to the Pearl River Delta. In 1757, the Qianlong Emperor confined all foreign maritime trade to Guangzhou. Qianlong, who ruled the Qing dynasty at its zenith, was wary of the transformations of Chinese society that might result from unrestricted foreign access.[1] Chinese subjects were not permitted to teach the Chinese language to foreigners, and European traders were forbidden to bring women into China.[2]: 50–53
By the late 18th century, British traders felt confined by the Canton System and, in an attempt to gain greater trade rights, they lobbied for an embassy to go before the emperor and request changes to the current arrangements. The need for an embassy was partly due to the growing trade imbalance between China and Great Britain, driven largely by the British demand for tea, as well as other Chinese products like porcelain and silk. The East India Company, whose trade monopoly in the East encompassed the tea trade, was obliged by the Qing government to pay for Chinese tea with silver. To address the trade deficit, efforts were made to find British products that could be sold to the Chinese.
At the time of Macartney's mission to China, the East India Company was beginning to grow opium in India to sell in China. The company made a concerted effort starting in the 1780s to finance the tea trade with opium.[3] Macartney, who had served in India as Governor of Madras (present-day Chennai), was ambivalent about selling the drug to the Chinese, preferring to substitute "rice or any better production in its place".[2]: 8–9 An official embassy would provide an opportunity to introduce new British products to the Chinese market, which the East India Company had been criticised for failing to do.[4]
In 1787, Prime Minister William Pitt the Younger and East India Company official Henry Dundas dispatched Colonel Charles Cathcart to serve as Britain's first ambassador to China. Cathcart became ill during the voyage, however, and died just before his ship, HMS Vestal, reached China. After the failure of the Cathcart Embassy, Macartney proposed that another attempt be made under his friend Sir George Staunton. Dundas, who had become Home Secretary, suggested in 1791 that Macartney himself take up the mission instead. Macartney accepted on the condition that he would be made an earl, and given the authority to choose his companions.
Macartney chose George Staunton as his right-hand man, whom he entrusted to continue the mission should Macartney himself prove unable to do so. Staunton brought along his son, Thomas, who served the mission as a page. John Barrow (later Sir John Barrow, 1st Baronet) served as the embassy's comptroller. Joining the mission were two doctors (Hugh Gillan[5][6] and William Scott), two secretaries, three attachés, and a military escort. Artists William Alexander and Thomas Hickey would produce drawings and paintings of the mission's events. A group of scientists also accompanied the embassy, led by James Dinwiddie.[2]: 6–8
It was difficult for Macartney to find anyone in Britain who could speak Chinese because it was illegal for Chinese people to teach foreigners. Chinese who taught foreigners their language risked death, as was the case with the teacher of James Flint, a merchant who broke protocol by complaining directly to Qianlong about corrupt officials in Canton.[7] Macartney did not want to rely on native interpreters, as was the custom in Canton.[8] The mission brought along four Chinese Catholic priests as interpreters. Two were from the Collegium Sinicum in Naples, where George Staunton had recruited them: Paolo Cho (周保羅) and Jacobus Li (李雅各; 李自標; Li Zibiao).[9] They were familiar with Latin, but not English. The other two were priests at the Roman Catholic College of the Propaganda, which trained Chinese boys brought home by missionaries in Christianity. The two wanted to return home to China, to whom Staunton offered free passage to Macau.[2]: 5 [10] The 100-member delegation also included scholars and valets.[11]
Among those who had called for a mission to China was Sir Joseph Banks, 1st Baronet, President of the Royal Society. Banks had been the botanist on board HMS Endeavour for the first voyage of Captain James Cook, as well as the driving force behind the 1787 expedition of HMS Bounty to Tahiti. Banks, who had been growing tea plants privately since 1780, had ambitions to gather valuable plants from all over the world to be studied at the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew and the newly established Calcutta Botanical Garden in Bengal. Above all, he wanted to grow tea in Bengal or Assam, and address the "immense debt of silver" caused by the tea trade. At this time, botanists were not yet aware that a variety of the tea plant (camellia sinensis var. assamica) was already growing natively in Assam, a fact that Robert Bruce was to discover in 1823. Banks advised the embassy to gather as many plants as possible in their travels, especially tea plants. He also insisted that gardeners and artists be present on the expedition to make observations and illustrations of local flora. Accordingly, David Stronach and John Haxton served as the embassy's botanical gardeners.[12]