China and the trade in cloves, circa 960-1435.

• Author: Ptak, Roderich

INTRODUCTION

ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT COMMODITIES in early intra-Asian and Euro-Asian trade was cloves. Cloves originated in the Moluccas, in particular from the islands of Ternate, Tidore, Moti, Makian, Batjan, and Ambon. From these islands cloves were either shipped north, through the Celebes and Sulu Seas into the South China Sea, or sent west, via Ambon and the Java Sea to various destinations in western Indonesia and continental southeast Asia. From such places as Malacca or Palembang cloves were further distributed to the countries and ports bordering the Indian Ocean and, ultimately, to the Near East and Europe. In some cases, ports in western Indonesia and continental southeast Asia also re-exported cloves to China, Japan, and Korea. Hence, China received Moluccan cloves either via the more direct route through the Sulu zone or the much longer route through the Java Sea. It is this pattern of two possible routes for clove shipments to China that--with respect to the period c. 1000-1400--will be one of the points of concern of the present paper.(1)

The second issue concerns the size of the clove trade. For this we should briefly refer to the European end first. Some scholars have assembled data suggesting that Europe's imports of Moluccan spices rose at the end of the fourteenth century and continued to grow thereafter.(2) Anthony Reid thought that increased demand in Europe mirrored economic growth in late medieval southeast Asia. More significantly, he also believes that China's markets supported this growth: "At the end of the fourteenth century China began two centuries of expansion in wealth and population. The demand for Southeast Asian products was particularly boosted by the six state trading expeditions of the Ming Emperor Yung-lo (1403-22)." Differently put, it was the combined effects of market changes in both the China and the Indo-European scenarios that contributed to the emergence of "an age of commerce" in southeast Asian history.(3) While there can be no doubt that, on a general level, such was indeed the case, two questions arise: How important was China's demand for cloves within this overall development? Secondly, what can be said about China's imports of cloves during the period before 1400 which Reid does not cover? Hence, an attempt has been made at piecing together relevant information on these imports and, where possible, this information is related to the broader context of commodity shipments from southeast Asia to China.

A third issue concerns the commodity itself, in particular the Chinese terminology, the uses of cloves in China, and the institutional framework that governed China's imports of aromatic substances. Wheatley and other scholars have paid some attention to these questions but have not discussed all the relevant terminological problems.(4) Recent studies on "rare" commodities involved in Asian trade show that, especially in the case of China's imports, philological research may indeed be needed to gain a more complete picture of what was going on and how certain data should be interpreted.(5) The present paper follows this philological tradition and therefore begins with some brief remarks on terminology.

THE COMMODITY

(a) The Clove Tree and its Habitat. In commerce, the English expression "cloves" usually refers to the dried, unopened buds of the clove tree, Eugenia caryophyllata, Thunb. (also Eugenia aromatica, Kuntze). The clove tree is a small tree but takes several years to mature. Its buds show slight variations in color and size. In the Moluccas they were usually collected after the tenth year, mainly between September/October and December/January, then dried and made ready for export.(6)

Most modern authors agree in saying that the clove tree is a native of the Moluccas and did not spread to other parts of Asia before the arrival of Europeans in Indonesia. Some Chinese historical records also seem to confine the habitat of the clove tree to the Moluccas,(7) but others indicate the opposite: they list cloves as a product of southern China, in rare cases also of other regions far away from the Spice Islands. These references are incorrect. "True" cloves were definitely not grown in China, nor in the Middle East, as, for example, Chao Ju-kua, author of the famous Chu-fan chih, had thought.(8) Some early European reports are equally misleading: Marco Polo, for example, speaks of cloves in connection with Caindu in eastern Tibet; what he means is probably cassia buds. He also wrongly reports that clove trees were found in the tropical forests of the Nicobar Islands and that cloves were produced on Java.(9) Other stories relate that cloves were the flower, cinnamon the bark, and nutmeg the fruit of one and the same plant. This legend, with a number of variations, spread widely over parts of Asia and, for many centuries, caused confusion among botanists and travellers.(10) In sum, a medieval reference to cloves has to be taken with some reservation; not everything called "cloves" was really cloves.

(b) Ting-hsiang. The most frequently found Chinese expression to designate both the clove tree and its buds is ting-hsiang ("nail incense"). It is possible that in medieval China some rudimentary distinctions were made between ting-hsiang varieties or qualities, or, alternatively, that this expression was used for both "true" cloves and one or several other products similar to cloves such as cassia buds. The principal basis for this assumption are two uncommented lists of commodities, in each of which there is reference to ting-hsiang and hsia-teng ting-hsiang, i.e., "cloves" without further specification and "low-grade cloves."(11)

While the precise implications of this differentiation remain unknown, it is evident, on a more general level, that quality considerations played some role in connection with China's trade in aromatics (hsiang or hsiang-yao). Fan Ch'eng-ta, one of the few Sung authors with an intimate knowledge of China's deep south, indicates, for example, that the best of all domestically produced aromatics were those from tropical Hainan; contrary to what people said, the province of Kwangtung did not produce, but imported, most of its aromatics by ship.(12) These observations, if referring to ting-hsiang, can be interpreted as indirect proof of the fact that all claims to domestic Chinese production of cloves were indeed wrong and that such compounds as hsia-teng ting-hsiang probably served to name "false" cloves.(13) Be this as it may, it is often impossible to decide exactly whether a specific reference to ting-hsiang really designated Moluccan cloves or another substance. To simplify matters, the present study equates all imported ting-hsiang with "true" cloves.

(c) Other Chinese Terms. There are a number of other Chinese terms that deserve brief comment. The first, ting-hsiang-hua, is very rare and, generally speaking, can be straightforwardly taken as "clove flower buds." To what extent a distinction was made between ting-hsiang and ting-hsiang-hua is not clear. Most likely both terms were interchangeable.

Ting-hsiang-mu poses more complications. This expression, meaning "mother-of-cloves," usually refers to the fruits of the clove tree, but Chao Ju-kua, probably misled by the syllable mu, thought of it as a larger type of clove, not as the fruit of the clove tree. This is wrong, for, according to most botanical works, any clove that has begun to thicken below the calyx qualifies as "mother-of-cloves."(14) Hence, in connection with China's maritime trade, ting-hsiang-mu is likely to refer to the fruits of the clove tree. This also seems to be supported by fact that in a few cases ting-hsiang and ting-hsiang-mu are listed simultaneously as import items.

Two other expressions are derived from ting-hsiang: viz., ting-hsiang-p'i (short form: ting-p'i) and ting-hsiang-chih. The first can be translated as "bark of cloves." According to Li Hsun, this substance had medicinal properties: it was a remedy for toothache.(15) Perhaps it had something to do with cinnamon, for, as mentioned above, cinnamon was often wrongly identified with the bark of the clove tree; however, the sources do not really permit us to establish any clear relation between the two substances. Ting-hsiang-p'i, therefore, may have stood for a completely different thing.

The expression ting-hsiang-chih, "clove branches," probably designated the same as Pegolotti's fusto di gherofani and fistuchi di gherofani ("clove stalks," "clove twigs"). Perhaps it was also identical with the "wood" (or "twigs") of cloves mentioned by Ibn Battuta. Some have even thought that Ibn Battuta's "wood" stood for what some Middle Eastern "physicians called Kirfatul-Karanful or bark of clove."(16) This suggests that ting-hsiang-p'i and ting-hsiang-chih were also identical but, according to Needham, ting-hsiang-chih was used in making miniature objects of art whereas ting-hsiang-p'i, as we have seen, was used in medicine.(17) Moreover, both substances are listed together in the above-mentioned commodity lists and it is likely, therefore, that they represent two different things. Whatever they may exactly have indicated, they rarely appear in connection with China's maritime trade and for that reason may be ignored in the context of this paper.

The same also applies to the old Chinese expression chi-she-hsiang, the meaning of which--"chicken's-tongue incense"--seems to relate to the shape of the clove bud, as does the expression ting-hsiang or "nail incense." According to Chao Ju-kua, chi-she-hsiang was the same as ting-hsiang-mu; but in other sources it is equated with "simple" ting-hsiang.(18) The latter view is most likely correct and is also the one given in most modern handbooks on Chinese botany.(19)

It should not go unnoticed, however, that a number of early botanical and encyclopedic works contain highly erratic descriptions of chi-she-hsiang; thus, Hsi Han wrongly lists chi-she-hsiang...