文章内容

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CHINA AND PORTUGAL IN EARLY SlXTEENTH CENTURY:Some Observations

Kazunori FUKUDA

　　〔提要〕：達伽馬開拓通往印度航路之后，葡國獲得果阿和馬六甲，又開闢前往中國的航線，衆所周知，他們於一五一四年初次來中國，但正式派遣使節是一五一七年，卻引起了種種的問题，到一五一八年Simão de Andrade 來航以後，兩國之間的關係變得惡化，到一五二二年在新會西草灣發生了衝突。
　　因此葡國停止了正式派遣使節，接着葡國以印度為中心展開活動，經過海盜以及官紳的協助，敵對停止了，到一五五七年實現了租借澳門。
　　本稿是基於從佚文「月山叢談」來概述那個時期的活動，而再檢討在佛郎機火銃傳來時期的有關澳門租借之說法。

on “The Yüeh Shan Ts’ung T’an”「月山叢談」

　　Since Vasco da Gama returned to Portugal in August, 1499, from his epoch-making voyage　opening the sea-route to India round the Cape of Good Hope, many fleets by order of the King　were sent to India. Among others, ir is very important to know that Pedro Alvares Cabral who　after drifting ashore of Brazil in 1500, built a fortress ar Cochin in southwest India and established the center of trading in India. In 1505, Almeida ordered by King Manuel I was sent to　Malacca as Viceroy, the control system was growing stronger. In 1510 to 1513, the fleet of　Affonso de Albuquerque conctured Goa, Malacca, Horumuz. Soon after that, the Portuguese　established the golden age of trading in Asia.
　　Since Sequeira sailed to Malacca in 1508,⁽¹⁾ the Portuguese tried to normalize diplomatic relations with China. However, the first visit to China was in 1514, and that of ambassador was　in 1517.⁽²⁾As is well known, the former is Jorge Alvares, the latter is Fernão Peres de　Andrade. From 1514 to 1522, the Portuguese sailed to China with the same purpose. But their　visits ended in failure under prohibition of foreign trade and later the ambassadors were not　sent to China during some years. Up until this time, ir is not clear why they gave up their　purposes. Indeed, it is because Simão d’ Andrade committed a series of outrages which completely destroyed the amicable relations between Portugal and China in 1518, the financiai difficulties under the reign of King João III, and the increase of the defence budget. Consequently, during 1523 to 1557 their visits to China depended on the people worked in Estaclo da India or some rime together with Chinese lived in southeast Asia.

Some observations on “Yüeh Shan T’sung T’an”

　　There are manv Chinese historical-sources concerning to the Portuguese activities. I think particularly the most important one is “Yüeh Shan T’sung T’an”. It was written by Li Wen　Feng(李文鳳) who was appointed government official (雲南僉事) in Yün-nan (雲南) in　1532.⁽³⁾According to “Ming Shih”「明史」, it was made up of ten volumes ,⁽⁴⁾ but now　scattered. We can see some quotations from this book only in “Kuang-tung t’ung-chih”「廣東通志」⁽⁵⁾ “Chu Yü Chou Tzǔ Lu”「殊域周咨錄」⁽⁶⁾,“T’ien-hsia Chün Kuo Li-ping Shu”「天下郡國利病書」⁽⁷⁾and so on . However, it was published right after the years when the Portuguese　came to China, and written about the time of their visits or soon after them. Moreover, it　gives usa vivid descriptons of their lives. So, let’s quote from “Kuang-tung T'ung-chih”,⁽⁸⁾now.
　　佛朗機國在瓜哇國之南。二國用統形製同。但佛朗機銃大瓜哇銃小。國人用之甚精。小者可擊雀。中國人用之用稍不戒則擊去數指或斷一掌一臂。銃制須長若短則去不遠。穴須

滑若有歪邪帶礙則彈不正。
　　惟口莞人造之與口制同。餘造者往口短而無用。嘉靖初佛朗機國遣使來貢。初至行使皆金錢後乃覺之。其人好食小兒，雲在其國惟國王得食之，臣僚以下不能得也。至是潛市十餘歲小兒食之。每一兒市金錢百文。廣之惡少掠小兒競趨之，所食無算。其法以巨鑊煎滾沸湯，以鐵

盛小兒置之鑊上，蒸之出汗盡，乃取出用鐵刷刷去苦皮。其兒猶活，乃殺而剖其腹，去腸胃蒸食之。居二三年兒被掠益衆，遠近患之。海道鏞以兵逐之不肯去反用銃擊敗我兵。或獻計善水者入水，鑿沉其舟盡擒之。
　　These contents are as follows. Firstly , the problem is when cannon (佛朗機銃) was　brought to China, secondly, the Portuguese activities in the beginning of Ch’ ia-ching (嘉靖) period, thirdly, expulsion of the Portuguese by Wang Hung, Hai-tao(海道汪鏞). So, I will　try to think about each content.
　　First, it is not clear about when and how the cannon was brought to China. However, we　can see some characteristics of the cannon in San-ts’ai t’u-hui“「三才圖繪」⁽⁹⁾For example, it　is made from iron, 5 to 6 尺length, big body and long neck, and it was presented by a interpreter(通事). In addition, from “Ming-shih lu「明实錄」, we know the following: Ho-Ju (何儒) had been with the Portuguese, came to know how to make it.⁽¹⁰⁾ Moreover, we can see in　“Chu Y~#Chou Tzǔ Lu” that Wang Hung gave instructions to Ho-ju to get the information how　to make the cannon and the gunpowder, and it could become successful with the co-operation　of Yang San (楊三) and Tai Ming (戴明).⁽¹¹⁾Probably, the interpreters (通事) in “San-ts’ai t’u-hui” must be these Chinese people.
　　By the way, we can understand that Ho-ju was appointed government official:baisha hsunchien(白沙巡檢)in some years during Chêng-tê(正德) period in “Tung-wang hsien-chih”「東莞縣志」.⁽¹²⁾ Therefore, I assume that he gota cannon at this time. Tien-Wei hua(張維華)once suggested that the cannon was already introduced by merchants (閩建商人)before the　Portuguese carne to China, ⁽¹³⁾ quotation from “Fu-chien t’ung-□ih”「福建通志」:⁽¹⁴⁾when YangKun-lun(楊崑崙) attacked Xian-you prefecture(仙遊縣) in September of 1510 (正德五),governor, Fan-Gui(範珪)ordered the officer Huang-Guan(黃琯)to beat them by that　cannon, But, I do not agree with bis observation. Because I can see in “Xiang-you hsien-chih”「仙遊縣志」that Fan Gui was appointed in 1512, Huang-Guan was appointed in 1506.⁽¹⁵⁾
　　Therefore, Fang-Gui did not arrive at his post in 1510, so “Fu-chien t’ung-chih” is not　correct.
　　Now, I would like to study about this problem by the other historical sources. It is clear in　“Shou-jen xian-sheng-quan-shu”「陽明先生全書」 that when Ning Wang (寜王朱宸濠) rebelled against the Emperor(武宗) in 1519, this rebellion was suppressed by that cannon.⁽¹⁶⁾ In　addition, in “Deng-tan-bi-jiu” 「登檀必究」 there is a description of using ir in 527.⁽¹⁷⁾And, we can understand from “Letters from AIbuquerque” that the Portuguese had the first relation　with the Chinese in July of 1511.⁽¹⁸⁾Moreover, thinking about the Chinese activities in South-sea　trade, it seems quite difficult for them to get the cannon. Therefore, ir is my contention that　the cannon was brougt to China during the period form 1514 to 1519.
　　Secondly, Li Wen Feng says about the Portuguese arrival and behavior in the beginning of　Chia-Ching period:they bought children at 100 文 in cash each, and ate them roasted. In Chinese historical sources, there are same descriptions in “Ming Shih”, “Ming-shang-ts’ang”「名山蔵」and so on⁽¹⁹⁾ Bur , ali of them are inthe time of 1518, and there are some differences　between “Yueh Shan-Tsung Tan” and “them”. In “Kuang-tung tung-chih”, we understand Ch’ iu Tao-lung(丘道隆) who was at the post of Censor, and another Censor Ho-Ao(何鰲) said　the Portuguese were cruel and attacked Malacca some years ago, they sent Huo-che Ya-San　(火者亞三) to China with a false qualification of the Ambassador of Malacca they scouted our　territories, they bought children and ate them roasted.⁽²⁰⁾However, as is well known, Huoche Ya-San is one of the interpreters, be came to China in 1517 with ambassador Tome Pires. And during the following year, be stayed ar Canton to pay a visit of the Emperor. So, it is certain that these sentences are the same as the contents of “Ming Shih” and so on. According to　“Ming Shih Lu” it is also clear that the govemment permitted their remonstrances on December　the 5th in 1520.⁽²¹⁾
　　 Therefore, it is somewhat difficult to understand that these sentences in “Yueh Shang Ts’ung　T’an” indicate the first Portuguese in the beginning of Chia Ching period.
　　Moreover, in the Portuguese sources, Barros says Simão d’ Andrade was ordered by King　Manuel I to visit to China, in April, 1518, at the time of Lobo Soares, he sailed with three　junks belonging to Malacca merchants, and four captains; Jorge Botelho, Alvaro Fuzeiro, Jorge Alvarez, Francisco Rodriguez. The fleets arrived at Tunmên(屯門) in August.⁽²²⁾After　finishing their business at Canton, they sailed to India, when they arrived at Cochin, many　wealthy people in Canton got angry to know their children were stolen. But, they did not think　their behavior was bad. Because they thought people in Asia had a traditional custom to sell　their children for money and mortgage.⁽²³⁾Moreover, it was believed among the Chinese that　the Portuguese ate their children roasted.⁽²⁴⁾From the above entioned, it became clear that Simão ate children in Portuguese sources. Therefore, I think that is Li’s mistake.
　　Then, I will try to further examine the Portuguese in 1522. Among Chinese sources, “Ming　Shi Lu”, “Ming Shih” says that when the Portuguese came to China, they were beated.⁽²⁵⁾But, “Ming Shih Lu” and “Ming-Shih” are different concerning to the year of their arrivals . Once, Fujita argued　別都盧 was Pedro Homen,末兒丁甫思多滅兒 was Martim Affonso de Mello　Coutinho in these sources, and that differences were because of editor’s mistake: he thought　the time Emperor ordered was the rime the Portuguese came.⁽²⁶⁾There is no doubt about　visitors, but, I think it is not sufficient to try to know the arrival time only by the Chinese historical sources.
　　So, I want to make further examination about this. Barros says the following: the Portuguese fleet left Malacca for China. It consisted of four ships and were commanded by the　captain major Martim Affonso de Mello Coutinho, his brothers Vasco Fernandes Coutinho and　Diogo de Mello, and Pedro Homen. Martin Affonso was charged by King Manuel I to conclude a treaty of friendship with the Emperor of China. But, the Portuguese proposals were　rejected, soon after that, a fierce battle was fought between the Chinese and the Portuguese, and Pedro Homen was taken prisoner. Martin Affonso tried to revenge, but, before he could　fulfill his ambition, the war ended in his defeat, sailed back to Malacca and reached in October 1522.⁽²⁷⁾In addition, Ir is certain that the Court had confirmed the death penalty of Pedro　Homen, on December the 6th in 1522, soon after that, they were executed on September the　23rd in 1523. ⁽²⁸⁾Therefore, it is clear that Martin arrived in China in 1522.
　　Thirdly, once, Yang insisted that the expulsion of the Portuguese appeared in Chinese historical sources: for example, “T’ien-hsia Chün Kuo Li-ping Shu” was carried out by Wang Hung　and that was against Simão d’ Andrade.⁽²⁹⁾ Doing cruel behavior like eating children, the expulsion of the Portuguese by the Chinese seemed to be reasonable. But, there are no Chinese　historical sources about the expulsion of Simão by Wang Hung. We can only understand that　when the Portuguese carne, the officer of Canton asked for permission of trade, but the proposal was rejected by Li-pu(禮部) in “Ming Shih Lu”⁽³⁰⁾and Wang Hung got rid of the Portuguese in 1521 in “Kuang-chou fu-chih”「廣州府志」.⁽³¹⁾So, it was quite evident that Portuguese man was not Simão, but a different man.
　　And then, who carne at this time? About this problem, Barros says the following：In the port　of Tunmên(屯門)a fleet of the Portuguese ships arrived. The fleet consisted of a ship from　Portugal, owned by a state officer in the name of Nuno Manuel with D. Calvo as captain, a　junk of Jorge AIvarez, and several other ships which could not join the Simáo d’ Andrade’s　previous trip because they had been late to arrive at Malacca. At this time, Vasco Calvo who　was the brother of Diogo Calvo, and several Portuguese who continued to live in the city of　Canton were arrested.
　　And the Portuguese ships which had just come from Patani and Siam were also captured. At　the same time, on June the 27 th, in 1521, another Porturguese captain, in the name of Duarte Coelho, arrived off Tunmên in a junk belonging to some inhabitants of Malacca. Having　learned of the hostility between the Portuguese and the Chinese, Duarte Coelho might have　escaped immediately, had ir not been for love for his friend Jorge Alvarez. Realising the great　danger, Duarte Coelho prooposed a cease-fire, but, his proposal was rejected.
　　On September the 8th in 1521, under cover of darkness, they set sailed. Tbey arrived safely in Malacca toward the end of October.⁽³²⁾Moreover, by other sources, ir is clear that Simão　d’ Andrade left China in January, 1521.⁽³³⁾Therefore, when the order made by Li-pu became　effective in July, he had already returned to Malacca. So, it is my contention that the above　sources concem Diogo Calvo.
　　Activities of the Portuguese in Chia Ching period (1522-66)
　　As mentioned above, the navigations from 1517 to 1522 were not permitted, and caused　some troubles between the two countries. Then, the Portuguese stopped sending missions for　a while, after that, they began to come in private capacity in Chia Ching period. Consequently, it is difficult to comfirm their activities, and we can only understand their activities in a figure⁽³⁴⁾which was made up by the Chinese and the Portuguese sources. So, thinking　of pirate (海寇)’s activities, I will try to explain the Portuguese activities at this rime .
　　First, I say the condition of China at this time according to Chinese sources. In “Ming shih　lu” we understand since 1517, the Portuguese came, between the Portuguese and the Chinese　some cases of troubles happened. The port of Canto was closed in consequence, and every　foreign ship removed their trading market from Canton to Chang-chou(漳洲).⁽³⁵⁾Because of this , the Cantonese economy declined. Then, Lin Fu(林富)proposed a remediai measure to open　the port of Canton again to foreign ships except the Portugese.⁽³⁶⁾However,in “Ch’ou-hai T’ pien”「籌海圖編」 we can see that Li-Kuang-tou(李光頭)and Hsu-Tung(許棟)who were pirates carne together with Wo(倭). Wo should be read as the Portuguese here, and gathered　at Shuang - hsu (雙嶼), made it their base. ⁽³⁷⁾So it is clear that the Portuguese (not allowed to　enter the port) seemed to come to Chang-chou and Che-chiang(浙江) guided by pirates, and, other foreign ships seldom carne to Canton. As many scholars already mentioned, it began in　the 1530s to 1540s.⁽³⁸⁾In “Ji-pen i-chien”(日本一鑑)we can come to know the following:in　1540 four men (許一，許二，許三，许四) came to the sea of Che-chiang with the Portuguese, and began trading at Shuang-hsu(双嶼).⁽³⁹⁾And, in 1543, Deng-liao(登繚) attacked the sea　area of Fu-chien, then, stayed at Shuang-hsu with the Portuguese.⁽⁴⁰⁾Moreover, Cruz says the　Chinese who were not permitted to come back to China and lived in Malacca conspired with　the Portuguese, sailed to China. After the trading in Canton by the Portuguese was forbidden, they invited the Portuguese to Niang-po(寜波).⁽⁴¹⁾From these sources, it is clear that the Portuguese were invited to Chie-chiang and Chang-chou by pirates. Moreover, Couto says in　1542, three Portuguese, Antonio da Mota, Francisco Zeimoto and Antonio Peixoto, came to　Siam. And there, they decided to begin Chinese trade which produced great profit at that time , and set sail in junk with fur and other articles. They passed big gulf of Hai-nan(海南) and ar-rived at Canton. But, they were not allowed to enter, then, they changed their way to　Chang-chou. Because, that was the last time when Fernão Peres brought the letter from King　Manuel I and acceptedby Mandarin, after that, a man with mustache and big eyes was not allowed to enter. This was written in golden letters, put on the entrance at Canton. So, the　Portuguese never went to Canton and any ships changed their way to other points to trade.⁽⁴²⁾ And, we can see in “Ming Shih Lu” that when the Portuguese came to Fu-chien in 1547, KoChiao(何喬), Hai-tao banished them,⁽⁴³⁾and in “ji-pen i-chien”, in the same year, Lin-Cien(林剪) came from Pahan with pirates, united with the Chinese and attacked Fu-chien, Chechiang.⁽⁴⁴⁾Therefore, Japanese scholars thougt as follows:since official mission was not sent to　China, the arrival of Portuguese was for many times together with pirates,and acquired　Macau. But, I think, at that time the Portuguese had already established a seaborne empire in　Asia, and had great power so, they did not always work together with pirates and retired officers(鄕紳) till they leased Macau. Because retired officers and pirates could gain great profit　out of the trade under cover. So, they combined strongly.
　　Once, Sakuma who thougt over about the pirate in Chia ching period suggested that the pirates traded with the retired officers, merchant prince, and they had close connections with　one another, gained great profit trade under cover, that is, they got together for the same　purpose.⁽⁴⁵⁾Therefore, I think the Portuguese who had a purpose to establish a diplomatic relation from the first visit to China, had good relation with pirates for a while, but, did not　work together ali the time. According to “Pi-yu za-ji「甓餘雑集」, it is clear that Portuguese　came four times in 1548, and the Portuguese were described as Fo-lang-chi(佛朗機), bur, people except them were written as pirate(賊 or 海寇)⁽⁴⁶⁾.
　　Moreover, in “Ao-mên Chi-lüeh”「澳門紀略」, we can confirm that the Portuguese came　and asked for the lease of Macau to dry their wet tributes in 1553.⁽⁴⁷⁾ As is well know, the　lease of Macau was in 1557, the year of 1553 was nota correct description. And, in the letter from Souza dated 15th of January in 1556, we can see that in 1554, the Portuguese were　to be allowed to trade in China on condition that they paid tax, after that, Canton was reopened to trade.⁽⁴⁸⁾Therefore, we can clearly understand that the Portuguese aquired Lang-paikao (浪白澳) in 1554, and they have already cut off the conection with pirates. And then, we know that when pirates broke out a rebellion, the government at Canton requested the　Portuguese to put down them, after that, the Portuguese have got the right of settlement in　Macau in “the letter presented by people of Macau in 1629.”⁽⁴⁹⁾ Moreover, sometime arround　the lease of Macau in Chinese sources, I can see there are some attacks by pirates alone, bye　there are no sentences that apirates invited the Portuguese. Therefore, it is my contention that　the Portuguese kept good relation with pirates till 1540s, but after that for their primary purpose: they wanted to establish the diplomatic relations, and they cut off the relation with pirates and obtained the right of settlement in Macau.

Conclusing remarks

　　It was fortunate for Portugal to be able to lease Macau, and monopolize the market in Asia　by linking here with Malacca, Goa, till the Dutch occupied Malacca in 1641. On the other　hand, it affected China in changing traditional diplomatic system: tribute system. Moreover, since after the Portuguese carne to China, another Europeans:Dutch and English began to visit. Therefore, I think that the Portuguese visit to China is very important. Now in Japan, there are　few scholars who study the relationship between Portugal and China. In the future I will try to　stud?this theme further by Iooking into Portuguese and Chinese sources.

　　(1)Alguns Documentos do Archlvo Nacinal da Torre do Tombo，açcerca das navegações e conquistas　Portugezas.Lisboa，1892.pp.194－195.In Japan，this sentence was translated by Yositomo Okamoto.cf.J-urokuseiki nichiō ktōsi no kenkyū(Tokyo，l936)，p.66.
　　(2)Fukuda Kazunori，“seitoku nenkan ni okeru porutogarujin no chūgoku raikō一正德年間にぉけゐポルトガル人の中國來航。in Senriyama hungaku roushū，no.23(May 1980).
　　(3)「廣西通志」明林富修　明黃佐等纂嘉靖十一年刊本。卷l0.「明淸進士題名碑錄索引」。
　　(4)「明史」淸張廷玉等修　雍正十三年刊。卷98蕓文志。
　　(5)「廣東通志」明談愷修　明黃佐等纂嘉靖三十九年刊本。卷66之下，cf.37b－38a.
　　(6)「殊域周咨錄」明嚴從簡撰　明萬曆十一年刊本。卷9
　　(7)「天下郡國利病書」明顧炎武撰　崇禎十二年刊。交阯西南夷。
　　(8)Op.cit，「廣東通志」。
　　(9)「三才圖繪」明王圻撰　萬曆三十七年刊本。器用8卷。
　　(10)「明实錄」(國立北平圖書館紅格鈔本影即本)。世宗实錄卷154，嘉靖12年9月丁卯。
　　(11)Op.t.「殊域周咨錄」。卷9
　　(12)「東莞縣志」淸陳伯陶纂　宣統三年刊。卷41.
　　(13)張維華，明史佛郎機呂宋和蘭意太利亞四伝(台北，1934ed).p.31.
　　(14)重纂「福建通志」淸陳壽祺等修　同治七年刊本。卷267，cf.10b.
　　(15)「仙遊縣志」明林有年修　嘉靖十七年刊本。卷2.
　　(16)「陽明先生全書」明王守仁撰　卷24Cf.20b－21b.
　　(17)「登檀必究」明王鳴鶴輯　萬曆27年刊。奏疏　卷1
　　(18)Okamoto，op.cit.p.69.
　　(19)「明史」卷325，「名山藏」　明何喬遠撰明崇禎十三年刊本　王享記l.
　　(20)Op.cit.「廣東通志」
　　(21)Op.cit.「明实錄」　武宗实錄　卷194.正德15年12日。
　　(22)Barros，Joao de.Decadas da Asia(1552－1615ed).Dec.“ⅢLiv.VI.cap.I.p.2.
　　(23)ibd.Dec.Ⅲ.Liv.Ⅵ.cap.Ⅱ.pp16－17.
　　(24)ibd.Dec.Ⅲ.Liv.Ⅵ.cap.Ⅱ.p.14.
　　(25)Op.cit.「明实錄」　明世宗实錄　卷24.嘉靖2年3月。「明史」　卷325.
　　(26)Fujita Toyohachi，“porutogarujin makao senkyo ni itaru made no shomondai”－葡萄牙人澳門占

にぃたゐ迄諸問題(Tōyō gakrhō，8－1，January.l9l8).
　　(27)Barros.Dec.Ⅲ.Liv.Ⅵ.cap.Ⅱ.pp.281－288
　　(28)Donald，Ferguson.Letters from Portuguese Captive in Canton(Bombay，1902).pp.112－113.
　　(29)Yano Jinichi.“porutogarujin sina torai tenmatu”－葡萄牙人支那渡來顚末(Tōa keizai kenyū 5－4，1923).
　　(30)Op.cit「明实錄」　世宗实錄　卷4正德16年7月.
　　(31)「廣州府志」　淸史澄等修光緒5年刊　卷107
　　(32)Barros.Dec.Ⅲ.Liv.Ⅵ.cap.Ⅱ.pp.18－23.
　　(33)Ibid.Dec.Ⅲ.Liv.Ⅵ.cap.I.
　　(34)See，figure.no.1
　　(35)Op.cit「明实錄」　世宗实錄　卷106　嘉靖8年10月。
　　(36)Op.cit「天下郡國利病書」　卷120.There is no description about the year of his proposal in this　sentence，but it is clear tha this proposal is in 1529 from“Ming shi lu.”
　　(37)「籌海圖編」　明鄭若曾　明天啓4年。卷5　浙江倭變紀。
　　(38)Okamoto，Fujita，Yano.op.cit.
　　(39)「日本一鑑」　明鄭舜撰　窮河話海。卷6　海市。
　　(40)Ibid.
　　(41)Cruz，Gaspar da.Tratado em que se contam muito poy estenso as cousas da China，com suas　particularidades，e assi do Reynod’Ormuz.Lisboa，1829.pp.139－140.op.cit.Okamoto，p.116.
　　(42)Couto，Diogode.Dec.V.Liv.Ⅷ.cap.XII.pp262－263.
　　(43)Op.cit.「明实錄」　世实宗錄　卷330嘉靖26年11月
　　(44)Op.cit「日本一鑑」
　　(45)Sakuma Sigeo.“Kasei kaikousikou－O’choku wo meguru shomondai” in Hosi hakase taikan kinen　chūgokusi ronsyū嘉靖海寇史考一王直をぁぐゐ諸問題　星博士退官記念中國史論集1977.
　　(46)「甓餘雜集」明朱紈撰　萬曆15年刊。卷5　六報　巷海捷者事。
　　(47)「澳門紀略」淸印光任，張汝霖撰　淸乾隆16年刊。
　　(48)I used the sentences translated by Okamoto.p.249.
　　(49)Ibid.p.266.I