1 On the commercial success of the overseas Hokkiens, see Chin, James K., ‘Junk trade, business networks and sojourning communities: Hokkien merchants in early maritime Asia’, Journal of Chinese Overseas 6, 2 (2010) 157–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On their native-place associations, land purchases, temple (kelenteng) construction, along with daily rituals, and the economic interdependence created by supplying daily necessities, see Boyi Chen, ‘Beyond the land and sea: Diasporic South Fujianese in Hội An, Batavia, and Manila, 1550–1850’ (PhD diss., Washington University in St. Louis, 2019).

2 Earlier scholars like Wang Gungwu and Leonard Blussé offer different views on the failures or successes of the Chinese in Southeast Asia, and arrive at contrasting historical explanations. Wang thinks that the Dutch ‘were much stronger than the Spanish and more determined to expand quickly. They welcomed Chinese cooperation and tried to woo them, wherever possible away from the Portuguese and the Spanish’. See Gungwu, Wang, ‘Merchants without empire: The Hokkien sojourning communities’, in The rise of merchant empires: Long distance trade in the early modern world 1350–1750, ed. Tracy, James D. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), pp. 409–10Google Scholar. Wang attributes this limitation to the fact that, compared to the highly-supported and well-organised Western colonialists, they were not supported by a strong home state. Blussé refuted the dichotomy of a compliant or aggressive Overseas Chinese, arguing that the Chinese played their roles well and had great success in the Dutch East Indies.

3 See Tana, Li, ‘An alternative Vietnam? The Nguyen kingdom in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries’, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 29, 1 (1998) 111–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Giản, Phan Thanh, Khâm Định Việt Sử Thông Giám Cương Mục (Taipei: Guoli zhongyang tushuguan, 1969), 44: 23aGoogle Scholar.

5 Shiyao, Li, ‘Zou wei nahuo zai fan zishi Hong Ahan, Li Aji deng gefan zunzhi fenbie shenni shi’, Junjichu lufu zouzhe, 04-01-01-0347-038, First Historical Archives of China, Beijing (henceforth FHA). This memorial is also collected in Zhongguo shehui kexue yuan lishi suo, ed., Gudai Zhong-Yue guanxi shi ziliao xuanbian (Beijing: Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, 1982), pp. 654–6Google Scholar, but the date given for it there is incorrect. Li Aji's case is also seen in three other memorials in the FHA, ‘Zoubao xuhuo Liu Amei dengren ji chachu Li Aji jiacai shi’, 03-1419-001; Li Shiyao, ‘Zou wei shenni Li Aji deng zai yang qiangduo shaoren yian Zhong zaishi renfan zhongzui qingni fengzhi shenchi xie'en shi’, 04-01-01-0361-020; Yang Jingsu, ‘Zouqing jiang Li Aji qi Chenshi deng liuming fenshang Jiangning dengchu zhufang bingding shi’, 03-1360-041.

6 FHA, no. 04-01-01-0347-038.

7 Skinner, G. William, Marketing and social structure in rural China (Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Asian Studies, 2001)Google Scholar.

8 We do know a little about the rebel leader Si-pánjang (Khe Pandjang/Oie Panko), who fled to East Java and led a group of Chinese in resisting Dutch suppression after the 1740 ‘Batavia Massacre’ (Chinezenmoord, ‘Murder of the Chinese’), alongside a Javanese coalition led by Sultan Pakubuwono II (ruler of Mataram), but he was just a lower-class Hokkien with little prestige. See Thomas Stamford Raffles, The history of Java, vol. 2 (London: John Murray, 1830), pp. 232–47. Pan Hewu, who led a rebellion in Manila in the late 16th century, was also a lower-class labourer. See Zhang Tingyu et al., Ming shi (1746) (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1974), p. 323: 8370–75; Zhang Xie, Dong xi yang kao (1617) (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1981), pp. 89–91.

9 Antonio de Morga, Sucesos de las Filipinas, in The Philippine Islands, 1493–1803 [henceforth TPI], ed. Emma Helen Blair, James Alexander Robertson and Edward Gaylord Bourne (Cleveland, OH: A.H. Clark Co., 1903–09), vol. 16, 1609, pp. 33, 292. de la Costa, H. S.J., The Jesuits in the Philippines, 1581–1768 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1961), p. 209CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 The chief of Bantam refused to see him, since he could not supply any certification to prove his ‘official’ status. See Blussé, Leonard, ‘Testament to a towkay: Jan Con, Batavia and the Dutch China trade’, Itinerario 9, 2 (1985) 3–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Leonard Blussé, Badaweiya huaren yu Zhong-He maoyi [The Overseas Chinese in Batavia and the Sino-Dutch trade], trans. Zhuang Guotu et al. (Nanning: Guangxi renmin chubanshe, 1997), p. 211.

11 Blussé, Leonard, ‘Inpo, Chinese merchant in Pattani: A study in early Dutch–Chinese relations’, in Proceedings of the Seventh IAHA Conference, ed. Warren, William, Duke, Pensri and Manomaivibool, Prapin (Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Press, 1977), pp. 290–309Google Scholar. When the 1740 Chinese rebellion in Batavia broke out, the Chinese leader, Kapitan Ni Hoekong, was stuck at home and could do nothing. See Yun-Ts'iao, Hsu, ‘Kaiba lidai shiji jiaozhu’, Nanyang xuebao 9, 1 (1953): 42Google Scholar; Blussé, Leonard, ‘Batavia, 1619–1740: The rise and fall of a Chinese colonial town’, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 12, 1 (1981) 159–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Suryadinata, Leo, ed., Chinese adaptation and diversity (Singapore: Singapore University Press, 1993)Google Scholar; Chin-Keong, Ng, Boundaries and beyond: China's maritime southeast in late imperial times (Singapore: NUS Press, 2017)Google Scholar.

13 This question also echoes the discussions of Chinese migrants as ‘essential outsiders’ in the Malay Archipelago, and the discourse on the ‘Chinese Problem’ (Masalah Cina), and the labelling of the descendants of Chinese as ‘non-natives’, when nationalism appeared in the twentieth century. See Reid, Anthony and Chirot, Daniel, eds., Essential outsiders: Chinese and Jews in the modern transformation of Southeast Asia and Central Europe (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1997)Google Scholar; Sai, Siew-Min and Hoon, Chang-Yau, eds., Chinese Indonesians reassessed: History, religion and belonging (London: Routledge, 2013)Google Scholar.

14 The northern regime did not always have its best interests in mind in trade policy. As late as 1624, when the northern regime established official relations with Japan, it maintained an arrogant attitude toward the Japanese emperor. This caused the Tokugawa Bakufu to forbid Japanese from sending ships to northern Vietnam. See Hayashi Akira (Fukusai), ed., Tsūkō ichiran (1853) (Tōkyō: Kokusho kankōkai, 1912–13), pp. 172: 493–5.

15 Li Tana has pointed out the impact of the famines of 1559–1608 and 1681–1740s on the southern migrations of the Chinese, and thus stresses the need for us to note the logic of Quang Nam's overseas trading. See Tana, Li, Nguyễn Cochinchina: Southern Vietnam in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (Ithaca, NY: SEAP, Cornell University, 1998), pp. 18–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Dong xi yang kao, p. 20.

17 Charles le Gobien, Jean-Baptiste du Halde, Nicolas Maréchal, Louis Patouillet et al., Lettres édifiantes et curieuses, écrites des missions étrangères, par quelques missionnaires de la Compagnie de Jésus, trans. Zheng Dedi et al., Yesuhui shi Zhongguo shujian (Zhengzhou: Daxiang chubanshe, 2001), vol. I, p. 54.

18 Dagh-register gehouden int Casteel Batavia vant passerende daer ter plaetse als over geheel Nederlandts-India, trans. Hui, Guo, Badaweiya cheng riji (Taipei: Taiwan sheng wenxian weiyuanhui, 1989), vol. 2, p. 331Google Scholar.

19 De Dagregisters van het Kasteel Zeelandia, trans. Shu-sheng, Chiang, Relanzhe cheng rizhi (Tainan: Tainan shi zhengfu, 1999), vol. 1, pp. 179, 342Google Scholar.

20 Prakash, Om, ‘The Portuguese and the Dutch in Asian maritime trade: A comparative analysis’, in Merchants, companies and trade, ed. Chaudhury, Sushil and Morineau, Michel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), p. 185Google Scholar.

21 Hou Jigao, Quan Zhe bingzhi kao (1593) 2, Appendix, ‘Jin bao wo jing’, collected in Siku quanshu cumu congshu (Jinan: Qilu shushe, 1996), Zibu 31. See also Seiichi, Iwao, Nan'yō Nihon-machi no kenkyū (Tōkyō: Nan'a bunka kenkyūjo, 1940), p. 17Google Scholar; Yiling, Fu, Ming-Qing shidai shangren ji shangye ziben (Beijing: Renmin chubanshe, 1956), p. 121Google Scholar.

22 Chingho, Chen, ‘Shiqi, ba shiji zhi Hui'an Tangren jie jiqi shangye’, Xin Ya xuebao 3, 1 (1957): 271–332, esp. 296–7Google Scholar; Ch'en, Ching-ho, Historical notes on Hội-an (Faifo) (Carbondale: Center for Vietnamese Studies, Southern Illinois University, 1974)Google Scholar; Guoxue, Jiang, Yuenan nanhe ruanshi zhengquan haiwai maoyi yanjiu (Guangzhou: Guangdong shijie tushu chuban gongsi, 2010), pp. 24–5, 46, 56, 59–60Google Scholar.

23 Charles Wheeler, ‘Missionary Buddhism in a post-ancient world: Monks, merchants, and colonial expansion in seventeenth century Cochinchina (Vietnam)’, in Secondary cities and urban networking in the Indian Ocean realm, c.1400–1800, ed. Kenneth Hall (Lanham, MD: Lexington, 2008), pp. 205–31; Wheeler, Charles, ‘Interests, institutions, and identity: Strategic adaptation and the ethno-evolution of Minh Hương (Central Vietnam), 16th–19th centuries’, Itinerario 39, 1 (2015) 141–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Li Qingxin, Shiqi, shiba shiji Huaren nandu yu Yuenan shehui, National Social Science Program, unpublished (2013).

25 Cooke, Nola and Tana, Li, eds., Water frontier: Commerce and the Chinese in the Lower Mekong Region, 1750–1880 (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield), pp. 1–17Google Scholar.

26 Li Tana, Nguyễn Cochinchina, p. 74.

27 Trương Đăng Quế et al., Đại Nam thực lục tiền biên (1844), Viện Nghiên cứu Hán Nôm, NLVNPF-0143-04/R.777, 12: 7b.

28 Ming Shilu (MSL) (Taipei: Academia Sinica, 1962) [References to MSL and Qing Shilu (QSL) are in the form: reign name, volume, reign title and year (date in Chinese calendar), p. no.], Xizong shilu 68 TQ 6/2 bingzi, p. 3218: ‘killed a big head’. MSL, Xizong shilu 76 TQ 6/9 wuxu, p. 3690; Guoping, Jin and Zhiliang, Wu, ‘Nuerhachi siyin zhenxiang xinzheng’, Aomen yanjiu 27 (2005): 134–42Google Scholar.

29 Laichen, Sun, ‘Military transfers from Ming China and the emergence of northern mainland Southeast Asia’, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 34, 3 (2003) 495–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘Chinese-style firearms in Southeast Asia: Focusing on archaeological evidence’, in New perspectives on the history and historiography of Southeast Asia, ed. Michael Arthur Aung-Thwin and Kenneth R. Hall (London: Routledge, 2011), pp. 75–111. In the Vietnamese Veritable Records, it is not hard to find evidence that the lords took artillery seriously. See Đại Nam thực lục tiền biên, NLVNPF-0143-03/R.773, 7: 18b, 7: 19b; Trịnh Hoài Đức, Gia Định thành thông chí (1820), collected in Dai Kelai and Yang Baoyun, eds., Lingnan zhiguai deng shiliao sanzhong (Zhengzhou: Zhongzhou guji chubanshe, 1991), p. 203.

30 Tana, Li, Yuenan ruanshi wangchao shehui jingji shi (Beijing: Wenjin chubanshe, 2000), p. 38Google Scholar.

31 Le Gobien et al., Lettres édifiantes et curieuses, v. I, p. 55.

32 Li Tana, Nguyễn Cochinchina, pp. 35–40.

33 Naoko Iioka, ‘Literati entrepreneur: Wei Zhiyan in the Tonkin–Nagasaki silk trade’ (PhD diss., National University of Singapore, 2009), pp. 169–74, 216–34.

34 Pagès, Léon, Histoire de la religion Chrétienne au Japon depuis 1598 jusqu’à 1651 (Paris: Charles Dounil, Libraire-Éditeur, 1870), vol. 2, p. 165Google Scholar.

35 In the 16th year of the Gia Long reign (1817), and the 28th year of the Tự Ðức reign (1875), the diasporic Chinese community in Hoi An marked their contribution again by carving an inscription on the crossbeams inside the top of the bridge. Author's fieldwork in Hoi An, 8 Apr. 2014.

36 Chen Chingho, ‘Guanyu “Mingxiang” de jige wenti’, pp. 145–56; Trịnh Thị Lệ Hà, Làng Minh Hương của người hoa ở Khu vực lớn (cuối thế kỷ XVII–giữ a thế kỷ XIX) (TPHCM: Luận văn thạc sĩ khoa học Lịch Sử, 2010), p. 121, quote from Chien An-Chih, ‘Zhongzu bianjie de xinggou yu zai xinggou’, paper presented at the ISSCO Chinese diaspora from South to South, Universidad de Panama, 6–9 Aug. 2014, p. 15; Trần Văn An, Nguyễn Chí Trung, and Trần Ánh, Xã Minh Hương với Thương Cảng Hội An thế kỷ XVII—XIX (Di tích Quảng Nam: Trung tâm Bảo tồn Di Sản, 2005), pp. 35, 37.

37 Chingho, Chen, ‘Qingchu Zheng Chenggong canbu zhi yi zhi Nanqi’ (1), Xin Ya xue bao 5, 1 (1960–3): 436–60; (2)Google Scholar, Xin Ya xue bao 8, 2 (1968): 413–84.

38 Trịnh Hoài Đức, Gia Định thành thông chí (1820) 3, in Lingnan zhiguai deng shiliao sanzhong, pp. 121–2.

39 Đại Nam thực lục tiền biên, 7: 14a–b.

40 Gia Định thanh thông chí, 2: 77, 2: 82, 2: 102, 2: 110.

41 Đại Nam thực lục tiền biên, NLVNPF-0143-02/R.5917, 6: 5a–6b; Gia Định thành thông chí, 6: 224–5; Trần Trọng Kim, Việt Nam Sử Lược (Outline history of Vietnam), trans. Dai Kelai, Yuenan shilüe (Beijing: Shangwu yinshuguan, 1992), pp. 241–3.

42 For an excellent reflection of how the Nguyễn lords depended upon littoral inhabitants to exploit the south, see Wheeler, Charles, ‘Re-thinking the sea in Vietnamese history: Littoral society in the integration of Thuận-Quảng, seventeenth–eighteenth centuries’, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 37, 1 (2006) 123–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43 FHA, No. 04-01-01-0347-038, No. 04-01-01-0361-020; Gudai zhongyue guanxi shi ziliao xuanbian, p. 656; QSL, Gaozong shilu 999, QL 12/40 renxu (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1986), 21: 360b.

44 For a detailed study of this movement, see George Dutton, Edson, The Tay Sơn Uprising: Society and rebellion in eighteenth-century Vietnam (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2006)Google Scholar.

45 Cheng Swag-Ming has provided many examples of how overseas Chinese engaged in the new Vietnamese civil war (‘the fighting between New and Old Nguyễn’) as mercenaries, and played key roles in 1773–1802. See Cheng Swag-Ming, ‘Shi lun Yuenan huaren zai xin jiu Ruan zhi zheng zhong suo banyan de juese’, in Yuenan, Zhongguo yu Taiwan guanxi de zhuanbian, ed. Shiu Wen-Tang (Taipei: Academia Sinica, 2001), pp. 1–36.

46 Nguyễn Trọng Hợp et al., Đại Nam chính biên liệt truyện sơ tập (1889), Viện Nghiên cứu Hán Nôm, NLVNPF-0137-07/R614, 28: 1a–2a.

47 Đại Nam thực lục tiền biên, 12: 4a–b.

48 Murray, Dian H., Pirates of the South China Coast, 1790–1810 (Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, 1987)Google Scholar.

49 QSL, Renzong shilu 50 JQ 4/8 xinchou, 28: 624b; 89 JQ 6/10 xinyou, 29: 172b; 102 JQ 7/8 jiachen, 29: 361a–b; 106 JQ 7/12 bingchen, 29: 427a–b. Ming–Qing shiliao geng bian (Taipei: Academia Sinica, 1960), 3: 211–2. Gudai Zhong-Yue guanxi shi ziliao xuanbian, pp. 577–87.

50 Gia Định thành thông chí, 6: 221.

51 Đại Nam thực lục tiền biên, 12: 14a–b.

52 Ibid., 12: 16b–17a. See also Gia Định thành thông chí, 2: 80.

53 Owen, Norman G., The emergence of modern Southeast Asia (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2005), p. 113Google Scholar.

54 Wheeler, Charles, ‘Identity and function in Sino-Vietnamese piracy: Where are the Minh Hương?’, Journal of Early Modern History 16, 6 (2012) 503–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

55 Relanzhe cheng rizhi, vol. 3, pp. 249, 251.

56 Hoàng Anh Tuấn's work uses VOC sources in an original manner and deserves to be noticed. See Hoang Anh Tuan, Silk for silver: Dutch–Vietnamese relations, 1637–1700 (Leiden: Brill, 2007).

57 See Huikian, Kwee, The political economy of Java's northeast coast c. 1740–1800: Elite synergy (Leiden: Brill, 2006)Google Scholar.

58 Franke, Wolfgang, Salmon, Claudine and Siu, Anthony, eds., Chinese epigraphic materials in Indonesia (Singapore: South Seas Society; Paris: École Française d'Extrême-Orient; Association Archipel, 1997)Google Scholar. Van Leur also mentions that Guangdong and Fujian merchants immigrated to Indonesia after the 15th century. See van Leur, J.C., Indonesian trade and society: Essays in Asian social and economic history (The Hague: W. van Hoeve, 1955), p. 193Google Scholar.

59 Skinner, William, ‘Java's Chinese minority: Continuity and change’, Journal of Asian Studies 20, 3 (1961) 353–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Many rich Cantonese merchants lived there, some even converted to Islam. See Cator, W.J., The economic position of the Chinese in the Netherlands Indies (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986)Google Scholar.

60 Anthony Reid, Southeast Asia in the age of commerce, 1450–1680, vol. 2 (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1995), p. 122.

61 Edmund Scott, ‘An exact discourse of the subtilties, fashions, pollicies, religion, and ceremonies of the East Indians, as well Chyneses as Javans, there abyding and dweling’ (1606), in Sir William Foster, ed., The voyage of Henry Middleton to the Moluccas (London: Hakluyt Society, 1943), p. 174.

62 Dong xi yang kao, pp. 82–7.

63 Ming shi, 324: 8405.

64 Leo Suryadinata, ‘The state and Chinese minority in Indonesia’, in Chinese adaptation and diversity, pp. 84–6.

65 Kwee Hui Kian, ‘Money and credit in Chinese mercantile operations in colonial and precolonial Southeast Asia’, in Credit and debt in Indonesia, 860–1930: From peonage to pawnshop, from kongsi to cooperative, ed. David Henley and Peter Boomgaard (Leiden: KITLV Press, 2009), pp. 124–42.

66 Seiichi, Iwao, ‘Xiagang (Wandan) tangren jie shengshuai bianqian kao’, Nanyang ziliao yicong 2 (1957): 108–19Google Scholar.

67 Blussé, Badaweiya huaren yu Zhong-He maoyi, p. 73.

68 Purcell, Victor, The Chinese in Southeast Asia (London: Oxford University, 1951)Google Scholar.

69 Kertanagara's son-in-law, Raden Wijaya (Nararya Sanggramawijaya), took the opportunity to lead Yuan Chinese troops astray in 1293, to take revenge for the Mongol overthrow of Jayakatwang. See Bade, David, Of palm wine, women and war, the Mongolian naval expedition to Java in the 13th century (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On 2 November in the same year, Raden Wijaya established the Majapahit Empire. See Hall, Kenneth R., ‘Ritual networks and royal power in Majapahit Java’, Archipel 52 (1996): 95–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Aoyama Toru, ‘Jingasari=Majyapahito Ōkoku’, in Ikehata Setsuho et al., Tōnan Ajia shi 2: Tōnan Ajia kodai kokka no seiritsu to tenkai (Tōkyō: Iwanami Shoten, 2001), pp. 197–230.

70 Chin-Keong, Ng, The Chinese in Riau: A community on an unstable and restrictive frontier (Singapore: Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences, Nanyang University, 1976)Google Scholar.

71 See Remmelink, W.G.J., The Chinese War and the collapse of the Javanese state (1725–1743) (Leiden: KITLV Press, 1994)Google Scholar.

72 Blussé, Badaweiya huaren yu Zhong-He maoyi, pp. 43–4. Carey, Peter, ‘Changing Javanese perceptions of the Chinese communities in central Java, 1755–1825’, Indonesia 37 (1984): 1–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

73 Raffles, History of Java, p. 234.

74 Ricklefs, Merle Calvin, ‘The crisis of 1740–1 in Java: The Javanese, Chinese, Madurese and Dutch, and the fall of the court of Kartasura’, Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde 139, 2 (1983) 268–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

75 Blussé, ‘Batavia, 1619–1740’.

76 Ming shi, 324: 8408.

77 Andrade, Tonio, ‘The Company's Chinese pirates: How the Dutch East India Company tried to lead a coalition of pirates to war against China, 1621–1662’, Journal of World History 15, 4 (2005) 415–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Even pirates were invited by the Dutch to live in those Chinese villages.

78 See further Blussé, ‘Batavia, 1619–1740’; Jianyong, Wu, ‘Qing qianqi Zhongguo yu Badaweiya de fanchuan maoyi’, Studies in Qing History 3 (1996): 31–4Google Scholar.

79 Kuhn, Philip, Chinese among others: Emigration in modern times (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2008), p. 56Google Scholar.

80 Salmon, Claudine and Lombard, Denys, Les Chinois de Jakarta: Temples et vie collective (Paris: Éditions de la Maison des Sciences de l'Homme, 1977), pp. 86–97Google Scholar; H.J. De Graaf and Th.G.Th. Pigeaud, Chinese Muslims in Java in the 15th and 16th century: The Malay Annals of Sěmarang and Cěrbon, ed. M.C. Ricklefs (Clayton, Vic.: Monash University, 1984), pp. 8–9; Franke et al., Chinese epigraphic materials, vol. 2, I, p. 23; Johannes Widodo, ‘A celebration of diversity: Zheng He and the origin of pre-colonial coastal urban pattern in Southeast Asia’, in Admiral Zheng He and Southeast Asia, ed. Leo Suryadinata (Singapore: ISEAS, 2005), pp. 94–123.

81 Bulbeck, David, ed., Chinese economic activity in Netherlands India: Selected translations from the Dutch (Singapore: ISEAS, 1992), pp. 2–3Google Scholar.

82 Ming shi, 323: 8370.

83 Ibid., 323: 8374.

84 Ibid., 325: 8423–4.

85 For the statistics of the Philippine trade, see Pierre Chaunu, Les Philippines et le Pacifique des Ibériques (XVIe, XVIIe, XVIIIe Siècles): Introduction Méthodologique et Indices d'Activité (Paris: S.E.V.P.E.N., 1960).

86 Qian Jiang, ‘1570–1760 nian Zhongguo he Lüsong maoyi de fazhan ji maoyi e de gusuan’, Zhongguo shehui jingji shi yanjiu (1986): 69–78.

87 Chen, ‘Beyond the land and sea’, pp. 157–73.

88 Geronimo de Salazar y Salcedo, ‘Three Chinese mandarins at Manila’ (Manila, 27 May 1603), TPI, vol. 12, 1601–04, pp. 83–97. Miguel de Benavides, ‘Letters (from Benavides) to Felipe III’ (5 & 6 July 1603), TPI, vol. 12, 1601–04, pp. 101–27. Pedro de Acuña and others, ‘Relations with the Chinese’ (Manila, 4 & 5 July 1605), TPI, vol. 14, 1606–09, pp. 38–52. Pedro de Acuña, ‘Letters to Felipe III’ (1–15 July 1605), TPI, vol. 14, 1606–09, pp. 53–77.

89 Xiongfei, Wen, Nanyang huaqiao tongshi (Shanghai: Dongfang yinshuguan, 1929), pp. 93–7Google Scholar; Shi-ching, Hsiao, Zhong-Fei waijiao guanxi shi (Taipei: Zhengzhong shuju, 1995), pp. 14–19Google Scholar.

90 For the Spanish records of this case, see Antonio de Morga, Sucesos de las Filipinas, TPI, vol. 15, 1609, pp. 25–287; vol. 16, 1609, pp. 25–209; Bartolome Leonardo de Argensola's Conquista de las Islas Malucos, TPI, vol. 16, 1609, pp. 211–317.

91 Santiago de Vera, ‘Letter from Vera to Filipe II’ (26 June 1588), TPI, vol. 7, 1588–91, pp. 56–7.

92 Alonso Sauyo seemed to be the responsible official at that period, see Francisco Tello and others, ‘Military affairs in the Islands’ (Manila, 12 July 1599), TPI, vol. 10, 1597–99, p. 213.

93 de Argensola, Bartolome Leonardo, Conquista de las Islas Malucos (Madrid, 1609)Google Scholar, TPI, vol. 16, pp. 251–2.

94 Ibid., pp. 256–8.

95 Antonio de Morga, Sucesos de las Filipinas, TPI, vol. 15, pp. 25–287; vol. 16, pp. 25–209; De Argensola, Conquista de las Islas Malucos.

96 In the second year (1594), the Ministry of War again confirmed that ‘[we] kill the captured-criminals, and enormously reward the envoys of the chiefs (Spaniards in the Philippines), to strengthen their vested faith and detect the situation with respect to Japan’. See MSL, Shenzong shilu 278, WL22/12, dingwei, p. 5136.

97 Dong xi yang kao, pp. 89–96.

98 Ibid., p. 91. Xu Fuyuan, the General-Governor of Fujian, also admitted that ‘after killing the chief, and taking his fortune, [Pan et al.] escaped to the south of Jiaozhi (Vietnam). Our people are really malevolent’.

99 Gaspar de san Agustín, O.S.A., Conquistas de las Islas Filipinas (1565–1615) (Manila, 1571), libro 2, capítulo VIII, pp. 359–60, in Taiwan yu Xibanya guanxi shiliao huibian [The historical sources collection of Taiwanese–Spanish relations], vol. I, ed. Lee Yu-chung (Nantou: Guoshi guan Taiwan wenxian guan, 2008), pp. 119–21.

100 Wilson, Andrew, Ambition and identity: Chinese merchant elites in colonial Manila, 1880–1916 (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a general description of Lin's uprising and its legacy, see Callanta, Cesar V., The Limahong Invasion (Quezon City: New Day, 1989)Google Scholar; Teresita Ang See, ‘Limahong: Pirate, rebel or hero?’, in Chinese in the Philippines, vol. 4 (Manila: Kaisa Para Sa Kaunlaran, 2013), pp. 290–302. The Spanish archives describe Lin's attack, see De San Agustín, Conquistas de las Islas Filipinas (1565–1615), libro 2, capítulo XVI, pp. 401–5; capítulo XXI, p. 435, in Taiwan yu Xibanya guanxi shiliao huibian, pp. 145–9.

101 Wilson mentions Lin's attack, and also confirms that ‘[t]hroughout this period the Spanish were understandably suspicious of sangleys … For much of the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, the Spanish feared a Chinese invasion’. See Wilson, Ambition and identity, pp. 37–8.

102 Francisco de Sande, ‘Relation of the Filipinas Islands’ (Manila, 7 June 1576), TPI, vol. 4, 1576–82, p. 45.

103 Wickberg, Edgar, The Chinese in Philippine life, 1850–1898 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1965), pp. 10–11, 40–41, 211Google Scholar. Larkin, John A., The Pampangans: Colonial society in a Philippine province (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1972), p. 49Google Scholar; Borao, José Eugenio, ‘The massacre of 1603: Chinese perception of the Spaniards in the Philippines’, Itinerario 23, 1 (1998) 22–39Google Scholar.