Our research during the first 2.5 years has basically confirmed our hypothesis of the importance of marginalia and informal, accidental, and ‘invisible’ movements, of the intriguing role of 'minor' actors and practical knowledge on the ground, and of the crucial role of the environment. Pirates, for example, played an active role in the transmission of geographic and nautical knowledge as well as in the distribution of goods in general. To a large extent, it was private networks and activities of individuals on the ground, such as merchants, crew members, missionaries, and government agents, that brought about specific knowledge transfers or fostered the acquisition of particular knowledge, the smuggling of certain items, the transplantation of plants, or the decision to take a certain route, call at certain ports, etc. Physical evidence proved that shipbuilders used hybrid technologies when constructing the galleons.
Manila-based Spaniards, as could be shown, were far more active in intra-Asian trade than has hitherto been recognised. Cross-cultural partnerships were a key, and merchants of many more countries and ethnicities were involved in the trans-Pacific business than expected. Local, indigenous actors were essential for making the entire system work. The Manila galleon was not just an economic and socio-cultural enterprise between Acapulco and Manila, but included a large number of geographic regions on both sides of and within the Pacific. The main actors, the Spanish and Chinese, were active in most of these regions, many more than normally assumed. The structure of all these networks, however, changed over time
These 'sub-surface' networks also confirm close connections of trans-Pacific exchanges and movements with the Indian Ocean, the Atlantic, and even the Eurasian land axes. Oceanic and land spaces became increasingly interconnected, what is especially evident in the private, commercial, and scientific interlinkages between trans-Pacific and intra-Asian trades and exchanges. These larger oceanic spaces, like the Pacific, on the other hand, actually have to be seen as a combination of various smaller entities, depending on actors, environments, and interests. We should consequently speak of various kinds of 'Pacifics', of a macro space of micro-histories, and of a 'localised globalisation', 'glocalisation' in other words. In terms of trans-Pacific and intra-Asian oceanic medical knowledge and practice, for example, the medical supply of 18th-century Manila shifted from expensive New Spanish imports to more local and indigenous Asian plants, while we also observe a shift to remedies with more chemical constituents.
We have only been able to uncover all these results by our very interdisciplinary approach, examining multi-lingual sources from various origins, including artefacts from material culture.
Project members have systematically analysed archival materials and a wide range of hitherto largely unconsidered records from various archives on the topics and research questions as introduced in the proposal but could not (yet) integrate archaeological evidence to the extent originally planned, due to Covid-19 restrictions.
