Bulletin of Portuguese - Japanese Studies ISSN: 0874-8438 [email protected] Universidade Nova de Lisboa Portugal Golvers, Noël DISTANCE AS AN INCONVENIENT FACTOR IN THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNICATION BETWEEN EUROPE AND THE JESUITS IN CHINA (17TH / 18TH CENTURY) Bulletin of Portuguese - Japanese Studies, vol. 18-19, junio-diciembre, 2009, pp. 105-134 Universidade Nova de Lisboa Lisboa, Portugal Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=36129851004 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative BPJS, 2009, 18/19, 105-134 DISTANCE AS AN INCONVENIENT FACTOR IN THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNICATION BETWEEN EUROPE AND THE JESUITS IN CHINA (17TH / 18TH CENTURY) Noël Golvers K.U. Leuven (Fac. of Arts, Dept. Sinology) – F. Verbiest Institute Abstract Distance was a key element in the existential situation of the European Jesuits in China in the 17th-18th century. In addition to the linguistic and cultural distance they had to overcome, we will reflect here especially on the geographical distance (with consequences in terms of time and money), as a contribution to the historical research on the scientific communication from Europe to China, more precisely on the basis of a selection of contemporary testimonia. Therefore, I focus on three precise questions: (1) how seriously the geographical distance did affect a smooth communication of Western scientific innovations (through mail and books) to China; (2) which initiatives the Jesuits took to counter these problems of communication and to optimize the conditions for an adequate supply of books and information from Europe (by organizing a network of control ‘in via’; looking for sponsoring; ratio- nalizing their demands; etc.); (3) and how efficient these initiatives were, especially measured from the time lapse between a book’s publication date in Europe, the date of shipping to China and its first mention there (in the best conditions from ca. 3 years in the early 17th to less than 12 months in the 18th cent.). Resumo A distância era um elemento-chave na situação existencial dos Jesuítas europeus na China, nos séculos XVII-XVIII. Para além da distância linguística e cultural que tinham de ultrapassar, reflectiremos aqui especificamente sobre a distância geográ- fica (com consequências em termos de tempo e dinheiro), enquanto contribuição para a pesquisa histórica sobre a comunicação científica da Europa para a China, mais precisamente tendo por base uma selecção de testemunhos contemporâneos. Centrar- -me-ei portanto em três questões precisas: (1) em que medida é que a distância geográfica afectou uma comunicação eficaz da inovação científica ocidental (através de correio e 106 Noël Golvers livros) para a China; (2) quais as iniciativas tomadas pelos Jesuítas para contrariar estes problemas de comunicação e optimizar as condições para um fornecimento adequado de livros e informação da Europa (organizando uma rede de controlo de entra- das; procurando patrocínios; racionando os seus pedidos; etc.); (3) e até a que ponto estas iniciativas foram eficientes, especialmente quando medidas a partir do espaço de tempo entre a data de publicação de um livro na Europa, a data do seu envio para a China e a primeira referência ao mesmo neste país (nas melhores condições, cerca de 3 anos no início do século XVII a menos de 12 meses no século XVIII). 要約 距離は17世紀から18世紀の中国におけるヨーロッパのイエズス会に実存 した重要な要素だった。 彼らが超えなければならなかった言語的及び文化的な距離に加えて、我 々は特にヨーロッパから中国へのサイエンスコミュニケーションの歴史 研究への貢献としての地理的距離（時間と金銭への影響）を当時の選択 されたより正確な証に基づいて研究した。 したがって、具体的に次の３つの問題に焦点をあてた: (1) 地理的な距離は西洋の科学革新の中国への効果的なコミュニケー ション(郵便や本による)にいかに影響を及ぼしたか; (2) イエズス会がこれらコミュニケーションの問題に、またヨーロッ パからの書籍や情報の適切な供給のための条件の改善（経由地制御の組 織化; 支援の獲得; 要求の合理化; 等々）に、どのように取り組んだか; (3) このような取り組みはどのような効果をもたらしたか、特にヨー ロッパでの書籍の出版日付からの時間経過、中国への出荷日付と到着先 での最初の記録（17世紀初頭では最上の条件下で3年、18世紀では12ヶ 月未満）から。 Keywords: Jesuits, China mission, history of science, 17th and 18th century, scientific communi- cation Jesuítas, missão da China, história da ciência, séculos XVII e XVIII, comunicação cien- tífica イエズス会士 – 中国のミッション – 科学史 – 17世紀および18世紀 – サイエンス コミュニケーション Distance as an inconvenient factor 107 “(…) Je n’ay entendu parler de rien, et il faut qu’en chemin ils se soient perdus. Paris et Pékin sont loin l’un de l’autre, et dans une si grande distance, il faut bien s’attendre que plusieurs choses ou se perdent ou changent entièrement de nature” (A. Gaubil, on 9.IX.1725 to Jean-Baptise Du Halde [R. Simon, Le P. Antoine Gaubil, S.J., Correspondance de Pékin, 1722-1759, Geneva, 1970, p. 82]). “Je vous ay, ce me semble, averti que je n’ai jamais receu la vie de Gentchiscan, je vous ay aussi envoyé le catalogue des livres que je n’ay jamais receus, et que vous dites pourtant avoir été envoyés par vous. De votre chambre à la mienne, il y a bien loin, et bien des endroits dangereux à passer” (A. Gaubil to E. Souciet, on 5.XI.1730 [R. Simon, ibid., p. 271]). * Distance was a key element in the existential condition of the Jesuits (and other congregations) in China in the 17th-18th century. First in the most literal, geographical – and, by consequence, temporal – sense: by the ‘via Lusitana’ or ‘Goana’ the distance between Europe, say Lisbon (the only starting point for Far Eastern ‘excursions’), and Macau (the main harbour of arrival) was about two years, depending on weather conditions and the peripetia en route; this was the proverbial “90.000’ or ‘100.000” li the Jesuits mentioned in their Chinese reports regarding this intercontinental distance; in the late-17th and especially the 18th century, thanks to technological inno- vations, this route was seriously shortened – up to a period of about 8 months – by the ‘via Batavica (Jaquetrensis)’, the ‘Via Gallica’, etc.; but from the reports of the Jesuits, traumatized by the meteorological conditions during the transit, the living conditions on board, sea monsters, etc. we can under- stand how immense this distance was felt by those who survived the journey (about 6,8% died); for Ferdinand Verbiest (1623-1688), as for many of his fellow fathers, the sea journey itself was part of the palm of ‘martyrdom’ they could gain in the Chinese / Japanese mission anyway.1 After installation in China, they were confronted with the ‘cultural’ distance, which manifestly existed between the Humanistic European civi- lization and the contemporary Late-Ming, Early Qing-culture (albeit with some remarkable concordances, such as the central position of book culture). The linguistic situation certainly contributed considerably to reinforce this feeling of distance and alienation, and the study of Chinese was felt as a ‘tedious’, albeit unavoidable commitment; I mean the study of Mandarin 1 H. Josson & L. Willaert, Correspondance, 252 – 253. 108 Noël Golvers Chinese – the only possible vehicle of communication with the Chinese lite- rati, the target group by excellence of Jesuit missionary strategies. Already since Johann Schreck - Terrentius (1576-1630) in the 1620s, we find – in pri- vate letters to Europe – expressions of some clear ‘disgust’ towards this study, only supportable in view of the final missionary commitment: “Already for two years I am occupied with (the study of) this language, and I still don’t speak it, nor do I understand books, so difficult is the language. The origin of the problem is that we are learning at the same time the language and books, and it looks like we are studying three languages. Because the language itself one learns within two years, so that one can speak it conveniently, not in another way that one speaks Polish, or Hungarian, or Turkish. For the study of the characters, one year does not suffice. After two years I have still not perfectly learned 3000 characters: ‘sie flieg aus und ein wie die Tauben im tauben sich lag’. Even if one under- stands characters, one does not understand books. One has to guess from the individual characters what their intention is [etc.]. I have to work hard for another one or two years more, until I have some understanding of books. Within one year, I hope I will speak suffi- ciently, not without many errors, but enough to understand and to be understood”.2 (Terrentius, in a letter of 22 April 1622 to the physician Johann Faber in Rome).3 Compare this with another statement, of some thirty years later, from François de Rougemont, S.J. (1624-1676): “We are occupied in the mean- time with the study of the language and almost innumerable characters. It is an enormous and wholly tedious work, if it were not undertaken for God and the Souls” (in a letter of 23.XII.1658 to Jean Bollandus).4 In addition to this subjective feeling, there was also a more objective factor: according 2 “Iam duos annos occupor in ista lingua, sed necdum vel loquor vel libros intelligo, tanta est linguae difficultas. Caussa rei est, quod simul discamus linguam et libros, et perinde est ac si tres lingas disceremus. Nam lingua sola discitur intra duos annos, ut quis commode loqui possit, non minus quam quis apud nos linguam Polonam aut Hungaram aut Turcicam. Pro litteris discendis non sufficit unus annus. Ego intra duos annos nondum novi perfecte 3000 characteres: ‘sie flieg aus und ein wie die Tauben im tauben sich lag’. Intellectis characteribus, nihil in libris intellegitur. Oportet in singulis characteribus divinare quid velit, (etc.). Adhuc annum unum alterumve sudare oportet, donec libros aliquod