Monies, Markets, and Finance in China and East Asia, 1600-1900: Local, Regional, National, and International Dimensions - Research Framework

4. Approaches and methods

In response to the multidimensional and multidisciplinary approach the individual methods of investigation to be applied will be manifold, comprising hermeneutics and historical text criticism, qualitative and quantitative discourse analysis, quantification and statistical methods, numismatic investigations, metallurgical studies, field research for exploring ancient mining areas and for tracing former transport routes, methods of economic, social, political, legal, institutional and religious history, and methods of comparative literature.

While different projects use different groups of sources or combinations of them, three types of approaches may be singled out as being essential to all of them:

Empirical analysis of a large corpus of historical materials: One of the primary objectives of the research project proposed here is the consultation and analysis of the large corpus of historical documentation on monies, markets and finance in China from about the seventeenth to the late nineteenth centuries, including the history of mint metal (copper, zinc, lead and tin) mining and transport. In contrast to iron and coal mining, Chinese contemporaries considered the exploitation and transportation of these metals as being part of monetary policy. The verification and elucidation of historical facts and the full provision of quantified and quantifiable information for analytic, statistical and cartographic purposes, for instance with regard to data on mint metal production, moral hazard ratio, cash output of the mints, and figures concerning state revenue, is one major aim of the project. The utilisation of a variety of source materials for the reconstruction of historical facts of both qualitative and quantitative nature is of equal importance in the individual projects dealing with Japan and Korea.

Contrasting historical facts and discourses: A particular feature with regard to method and approach in all the individual projects is the juxtaposition and contrasting of historical facts with results attained by a discourse-analytical approach. By this procedure the relative shares of factual and fictitious elements in both historiographical or public-sphere rhetorics and discourses can be identified to a more reliable degree. Thus, through the variety of sources and perspectives involved, this research group can be expected to attain more nuanced interpretations and reconstructions and in several respects will result in revisions of established views. Areas of exploration in which we expect the comparative reading to reveal particularly interesting tensions are, e.g., the record provided by the coins themselves vs. the historical account based mainly on state histories, norms and regulations vs. the actual actions taken, normative values vs. the lives and values reflected in narrations, topical description of social status and living conditions vs. concrete glimpses of conditions.

Comparative intra- and intercultural approaches: The comparative dimensions within this project should be underlined. In a number of selective cases, i.e. mining, monetary policies, monetary systems, market developments, politico-economical thought, and fiction and religion, we will compare the structures of actions and discourses in China, Japan, Korea and sometimes also Europe. In tracing the similarities and disparities in the paths followed by different civilisations in society, economy, politics, law and culture as well as the reasons for differences in the speed of development or for the predominance of involutionary elements may become clear.

Comparisons will be also carried out between Europe on the one hand and China and Japan on the other. For instance, the differences in the general development of mining and smelting in Europe and China may be of great significance, if we take into account the likely contributions of the mining and smelting sectors to the industrial revolution and to the process of modernization in Europe. In Europe, mining and smelting techniques were enhanced by mechanization. This stimulated the deliberate combination of theory and practice, as demonstrated in the setting up of mining schools in mining regions and the institutionalisation of a rational mining science. This development formed a basis for the application of new technical and scientific discoveries to mining and smelting. Mining and smelting exhibited many modern characteristics. It required large amounts of capital, so that specific forms of capital investment and entrepreneurial organization evolved. It involved industrial production, insofar as often large numbers of workers were employed, and production passed through distinct and separate stages of processing. Specialization in professions and a high degree of labour division arose. It was difficult and strenuous work, so workdays and restrictions on workdays and working hours became important. The incipient social solidarity and security systems in many European mining communities were certainly exemplary for the time. Finally, mining and smelting were considered distinct occupations separate from agricultural production. Due to their benefits for the economy and state revenue, they conferred special status on the miners and smelters, and enhanced the importance of non-agricultural pursuits in pre-modern Western societies. All these comparisons may highlight different paths of developments in Western and Eastern societies and provide a better understanding of the disparity in the results of modernization efforts in Japan and China during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In the dominating discourse dealing with the "great divergence", such comparisons have been only attempted for the coal mining sector (Pomeranz 2000: 62-65), but not for the mining sector in general.