CAJ | 학술논문

徽州田价是徽商资本流动的风向标。以往研究认为，明代徽州田价呈倒U形增长或直线增长。两种观点都值得商榷，原因是其田价处理存在两类错误：第一，天启前的徽州田价因忽视田税推割延迟而被高估；第二，忽视了亩的标准不一、亩价数据的高离散度对平均亩价有效性与代表性的影响。在充分考虑田税推割延迟的因素之后，以田价年租比代替亩价指标，通过趋势分析发现：明代徽州田价既不呈倒U形增长，也不呈直线增长，而呈N形增长。这是徽商资本在嘉靖“严肃海禁”后大量从土地流向盐业、典业，又在万历商业环境恶化后持续回流土地的结果。
휘주전개시휘상자본류동적풍향표。이왕연구인위，명대휘주전개정도U형증장혹직선증장。량충관점도치득상각，원인시기전개처리존재량류착오：제일，천계전적휘주전개인홀시전세추할연지이피고고；제이，홀시료무적표준불일、무개수거적고리산도대평균무개유효성여대표성적영향。재충분고필전세추할연지적인소지후，이전개년조비대체무개지표，통과추세분석발현：명대휘주전개기불정도U형증장，야불정직선증장，이정N형증장。저시휘상자본재가정“엄숙해금”후대량종토지류향염업、전업，우재만력상업배경악화후지속회류토지적결과。
Huizhou farmland prices indicate Hui merchants capital flow. According to previous scholarships, the trend of Huizhou farmland prices during the Ming dynasty exhibited an inverted-U curve or a rising straight-line. We believe both interpretations are wrong for two reasons. First, Huizhou farmland price data before Tianqi era were overestimated due to the neglect of the effect of tax delay on farmland property transactions （TDFPT）. Second,the validity and representat.iveness of average Mu price should be questioned because the previous Huizhou studies neglected the differences between Mu and Tax mu, and the wide dispersion of Mu prices as well. Considering the TDFPT factor,we replace Mu price with the Ratio of Land Price to Annual Rent. Trend analysis shows an N-shaped growth, rather than an inverted-U or a straight-line. The N-shaped curve is the result of Hui merchants capital influx from farmland into salt industry and pawn broking during Jiajing era,and the reverse flow during Wanli era.