The Manila Galleon and the Trade Monopoly of the Philippine Islands

Yang Yang

doi:doi:10.11648/j.history.20251302.14

Research Article |

| Peer-Reviewed

The Manila Galleon and the Trade Monopoly of the Philippine Islands

Yang Yang^*

Published in History Research (Volume 13, Issue 2)

Received: 15 July 2025 Accepted: 25 July 2025 Published: 13 August 2025

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Spain opened the world's first global trade route through China, the Philippines, Mexico and Seville. This route became the lifeline and supply line for the Spanish royal family to maintain its colonial rule in the Philippine Islands for more than 330 years. At the same time, with the help of this route, early indirect, rather than direct trade was generated between China and Latin America. While countless praises describe this route, it is undeniable that the disadvantages it brought cannot be ignored: the mined silver continued to flow to Asia rather than Europe and did not significantly improve the local agricultural and industrial development in the Philippines at that time. At the same time, the lucrative Chinese materials destroyed the interests of local Spanish merchants, etc. In the last 10 years of the 16th century, the Spanish royal family issued a series of decrees. Franchise, Permiso, Pancada, Boleta and Tariff were superimposed together to form a complete set of trade monopoly business models, which maintained Spain's colonial rule in the Philippines and maintained a certain balance between colonies and between colonies and the mother country to the greatest extent. Unfortunately, it did not promote the long-term development of the first globalization. Under the challenge of other countries and military forces, this route, which was hailed as the most profitable, finally came to an end. This article uses literature analysis to elaborate on five types of trade monopolies and their corresponding laws, expressing that monopoly trade can only create short-term, false prosperity, and long-term trade requires open markets and full competition. This is not only a reflection brought about by the Manila Galleons in the 17th century, but the same principle also applies to the fourth globalization.

Published in	History Research (Volume 13, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.history.20251302.14
Page(s)	80-88
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Manila Galleon, Trade Monopoly, Philippines, New Spain, Silk Road

References

[1]	Chang, Na (2015). Two representations of Mediterranean civilization: a new approach to the study of maritime history. Asia-Pacific Security and Maritime Studies, no. 06, pp. 104-111. https://doi.org/10.19780/j.cnki.2096-0484.2015.06.010
[2]	Chen, Bingxian (2015). Philippine colonial authorities’ China policy (16th-17th centuries). Xiamen: Xia Men University Press.
[3]	Chen, Jian (2022). Review of Western maritime history research after World War II. Journal of Maritime History, no. 02, pp. 45-59. https://doi.org/10.16674/j.cnki.cn35-1066/u.2022.02.002
[4]	Chen, Jinmei (2024). Chinese cultural thinking under the Manila Galleon Trade. Chinese Cultural Studies, no. 02, pp. 171-180. https://doi.org/10.15990/j.cnki.cn11-3306/g2.2024.02.008
[5]	Delgado, L. Á. (2012). Los sangleyes y los problemas de la diversidad cultural en una colonia imperial (Filipinas, siglos XVI-XVIII). Actas De La XI Reunión Científica De La Fundación Española De Historia Moderna: Comunicaciones, vol. 1, tomo 1, pp. 913-924. https://doi.org/10.20350/DIGITALCSIC/14441
[6]	Emma Helen Blair and James Alexander Robertson (1903). The Philippine Islands 1493-1898. Cleveland: The Arthur H. Clark Company.
[7]	Esquivel, R. M. (2023). La Misión China, el mundo Pacífico y el advenimiento de la modernidad, siglos XVI-XVIII. América Latina y El Caribe - China. Historia, Cultura y Aprendizaje Del chino 2023, pp. 101–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/00253359.2016.1169652
[8]	Feng, Zheng (2025). American and European academic circles’ understanding of the Digital Silk Road. Yunnan Social Sciences, no. 04, pp. 42-52. https://doi.org/10.16721/j.cnki.cn61-1487/c.2025.04.042
[9]	Han Qi, Zhang Yunchen (2021). The establishment and evaluation of the Manila Galleon trade monopoly system. International Sinology, no. 04, pp. 28-43. https://doi.org/10.19326/j.cnki.2095-9257.2021.04.004
[10]	Jin, Xiaokang (2019). On the motivation of Spanish colonists to persuade Filipino Chinese to convert to Catholicism. Western Journal, no. 09, pp. 107-109. https://doi.org/10.16721/j.cnki.cn61-1487/c.2019.09.032
[11]	Jin, Yingxi and Liu, Dihui (1990). History of the Philippines. Zhengzhou: Henan University Press.
[12]	Jose Antonio Cervera(2020). El Galeón de Manila: mercancías, personas e ideas viajando a través del Pacífico (1565-1815). México y la Cuenca del Pacífico, vol. 9, no. 20, pp. 69-90. https://doi.org/10.32870/MYCP.V9I26.677
[13]	Li, Fulin and Yu, Zhen (2018). The political impact of galleon trade on the Philippines during the Spanish rule. Journal of Qiqihar University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), no. 07, pp. 61-67. https://doi.org/10.13971/j.cnki.cn23-1435/c.2018.07.018
[14]	Liang, Zhiming, Li Mou and Yang, Baoyun (2013). Ancient History of Southeast Asia. Beijing: Peking University Press.
[15]	Liu, Ziqiang and Luo Qi (2024). Mercury trade between Latin America and China during the Galleon Trade Period. Journal of Inner Mongolia University for Nationalities (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), vol. 50, no. 03, pp. 22-30. https://doi.org/10.14045/j.cnki.nmsx.2024.03.011
[16]	Liu, Qingfeng (2019). Modern China in Maritime History: Fujianese Activities and the Responses of Britain and the Qing Dynasty. Journal of Maritime History, no. 03, pp. 123-127. https://doi.org/10.16674/j.cnki.cn35-1066/u.2019.03.010
[17]	Long, Donghua and Chen, Lianjun (2023). A study on language planning of Fujian Chinese families in Manila, Philippines. Journal of Minnan Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), no. 04, pp. 62-70. https://doi.org/10.16007/j.cnki.issn2095-7114.2023.04.021
[18]	Lü, Junchang (2016). The extension and reconstruction of the relationship between Catholicism and Chinese society in the Spanish Philippines. Southeast Asian Studies, no. 01, pp. 74-93. https://doi.org/10.19561/j.cnki.sas.2016.01.010
[19]	Quan, Yi and Lin, Shang (2015). Zhangzhou Yuegang and China's Maritime Silk Road in the Age of Sailing Ships. Journal of Fujian Administration Institute, no. 06, pp. 107-112. https://doi.org/10.19357/j.cnki.35-1295/d.2015.06.017
[20]	Sha, Ding, Yang, Dianqiu, Jiao, Zhenheng, and Sun, Guirong (1986). A brief history of relations between China and Latin America. Zhengzhou: Henan People's Publishing House.
[21]	Shen, Hongfang (2009). The status and thoughts on the study of overseas Chinese in the Philippines. Southeast Asian Studies, no. 09, pp. 79-85. https://doi.org/10.19561/j.cnki.sas.2009.06.013
[22]	Shi, Xueqin (2007). Studies on Philippine Catholicism. Xiamen: Xia Men University Press.
[23]	Wang, Lijiao (2025). Research on the dynamic mechanism of population migration and ethnic integration along the Southern Silk Road in Ming and Qing Dynasties. Academic Exploration, vol. 11. no. 11. Pp. 71-89. https://kns-cnki-net.webvpn.synu.edu.cn/kcms/detail/53.1148.C.20250326.1329.006.html
[24]	Wang, Zhihong (2017). Missionaries and the Manila Galleon Trade in the Early Modern Period. Southeast Asian Studies, no. 03, pp. 69-110. https://doi.org/10.13848/j.cnki.dnynybjb.2017.03.011
[25]	Wang, Zhihong (2019). A review of the research on Spanish Manila from the perspective of maritime history since 2010: Focusing on the research results published by Chinese scholars. Journal of Maritime History, no. 04, pp. 125-142. https://doi.org/10.16674/j.cnki.cn35-1066/u.2019.04.007
[26]	Wu, Jiewei (2012). Galleon Trade and Trans-Pacific Cultural Exchange. Qinghai: Kun Lun Publishing House.
[27]	Yao, Nan (1991). Collection of Essays on the History of Sino-foreign Relations. Shanghai: Shang Hai Translation Publishing House.
[28]	Zhang, Zhenghao and Gong, Lianbing (2025). Cooperative governance of piracy risks on the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road under the Belt and Road Initiative. Southeast Asia, no. 03, pp. 1-12. https://doi.org/10.20226/j.cnki.issn1003-2479.20250616.003
[29]	Zhou, Meng. (2020). Impacto cultural de los reales españolas en el sur de Fujian. Revista De Patrimonio Iberoamericano, no. 17, pp. 104–116. https://doi.org/10.30827/QUIROGA.V0I17.0009

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Yang, Y. (2025). The Manila Galleon and the Trade Monopoly of the Philippine Islands. History Research, 13(2), 80-88. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.history.20251302.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Yang, Y. The Manila Galleon and the Trade Monopoly of the Philippine Islands. Hist. Res. 2025, 13(2), 80-88. doi: 10.11648/j.history.20251302.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Yang Y. The Manila Galleon and the Trade Monopoly of the Philippine Islands. Hist Res. 2025;13(2):80-88. doi: 10.11648/j.history.20251302.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.history.20251302.14,
  author = {Yang Yang},
  title = {The Manila Galleon and the Trade Monopoly of the Philippine Islands
},
  journal = {History Research},
  volume = {13},
  number = {2},
  pages = {80-88},
  doi = {10.11648/j.history.20251302.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.history.20251302.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.history.20251302.14},
  abstract = {Spain opened the world's first global trade route through China, the Philippines, Mexico and Seville. This route became the lifeline and supply line for the Spanish royal family to maintain its colonial rule in the Philippine Islands for more than 330 years. At the same time, with the help of this route, early indirect, rather than direct trade was generated between China and Latin America. While countless praises describe this route, it is undeniable that the disadvantages it brought cannot be ignored: the mined silver continued to flow to Asia rather than Europe and did not significantly improve the local agricultural and industrial development in the Philippines at that time. At the same time, the lucrative Chinese materials destroyed the interests of local Spanish merchants, etc. In the last 10 years of the 16th century, the Spanish royal family issued a series of decrees. Franchise, Permiso, Pancada, Boleta and Tariff were superimposed together to form a complete set of trade monopoly business models, which maintained Spain's colonial rule in the Philippines and maintained a certain balance between colonies and between colonies and the mother country to the greatest extent. Unfortunately, it did not promote the long-term development of the first globalization. Under the challenge of other countries and military forces, this route, which was hailed as the most profitable, finally came to an end. This article uses literature analysis to elaborate on five types of trade monopolies and their corresponding laws, expressing that monopoly trade can only create short-term, false prosperity, and long-term trade requires open markets and full competition. This is not only a reflection brought about by the Manila Galleons in the 17th century, but the same principle also applies to the fourth globalization.},
 year = {2025}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - The Manila Galleon and the Trade Monopoly of the Philippine Islands

AU  - Yang Yang
Y1  - 2025/08/13
PY  - 2025
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.history.20251302.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.history.20251302.14
T2  - History Research
JF  - History Research
JO  - History Research
SP  - 80
EP  - 88
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2376-6719
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.history.20251302.14
AB  - Spain opened the world's first global trade route through China, the Philippines, Mexico and Seville. This route became the lifeline and supply line for the Spanish royal family to maintain its colonial rule in the Philippine Islands for more than 330 years. At the same time, with the help of this route, early indirect, rather than direct trade was generated between China and Latin America. While countless praises describe this route, it is undeniable that the disadvantages it brought cannot be ignored: the mined silver continued to flow to Asia rather than Europe and did not significantly improve the local agricultural and industrial development in the Philippines at that time. At the same time, the lucrative Chinese materials destroyed the interests of local Spanish merchants, etc. In the last 10 years of the 16th century, the Spanish royal family issued a series of decrees. Franchise, Permiso, Pancada, Boleta and Tariff were superimposed together to form a complete set of trade monopoly business models, which maintained Spain's colonial rule in the Philippines and maintained a certain balance between colonies and between colonies and the mother country to the greatest extent. Unfortunately, it did not promote the long-term development of the first globalization. Under the challenge of other countries and military forces, this route, which was hailed as the most profitable, finally came to an end. This article uses literature analysis to elaborate on five types of trade monopolies and their corresponding laws, expressing that monopoly trade can only create short-term, false prosperity, and long-term trade requires open markets and full competition. This is not only a reflection brought about by the Manila Galleons in the 17th century, but the same principle also applies to the fourth globalization.
VL  - 13
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Yang Yang

Law School, Shen Yang Normal University, Shen Yang, China. Legal Culture Centre, Shen Yang Normal University, Shen Yang, China. Global Innovation Law and Policy, University of Alicante, Alicante, Spain. Legal History, University of Alicante, Alicante, Spain

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3229-5520

Download PDF

Submit an Article

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Yang, Y. (2025). The Manila Galleon and the Trade Monopoly of the Philippine Islands. History Research, 13(2), 80-88. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.history.20251302.14

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Yang, Y. The Manila Galleon and the Trade Monopoly of the Philippine Islands. Hist. Res. 2025, 13(2), 80-88. doi: 10.11648/j.history.20251302.14

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Yang Y. The Manila Galleon and the Trade Monopoly of the Philippine Islands. Hist Res. 2025;13(2):80-88. doi: 10.11648/j.history.20251302.14

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.history.20251302.14,
  author = {Yang Yang},
  title = {The Manila Galleon and the Trade Monopoly of the Philippine Islands
},
  journal = {History Research},
  volume = {13},
  number = {2},
  pages = {80-88},
  doi = {10.11648/j.history.20251302.14},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.history.20251302.14},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.history.20251302.14},
  abstract = {Spain opened the world's first global trade route through China, the Philippines, Mexico and Seville. This route became the lifeline and supply line for the Spanish royal family to maintain its colonial rule in the Philippine Islands for more than 330 years. At the same time, with the help of this route, early indirect, rather than direct trade was generated between China and Latin America. While countless praises describe this route, it is undeniable that the disadvantages it brought cannot be ignored: the mined silver continued to flow to Asia rather than Europe and did not significantly improve the local agricultural and industrial development in the Philippines at that time. At the same time, the lucrative Chinese materials destroyed the interests of local Spanish merchants, etc. In the last 10 years of the 16th century, the Spanish royal family issued a series of decrees. Franchise, Permiso, Pancada, Boleta and Tariff were superimposed together to form a complete set of trade monopoly business models, which maintained Spain's colonial rule in the Philippines and maintained a certain balance between colonies and between colonies and the mother country to the greatest extent. Unfortunately, it did not promote the long-term development of the first globalization. Under the challenge of other countries and military forces, this route, which was hailed as the most profitable, finally came to an end. This article uses literature analysis to elaborate on five types of trade monopolies and their corresponding laws, expressing that monopoly trade can only create short-term, false prosperity, and long-term trade requires open markets and full competition. This is not only a reflection brought about by the Manila Galleons in the 17th century, but the same principle also applies to the fourth globalization.},
 year = {2025}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - The Manila Galleon and the Trade Monopoly of the Philippine Islands

AU  - Yang Yang
Y1  - 2025/08/13
PY  - 2025
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.history.20251302.14
DO  - 10.11648/j.history.20251302.14
T2  - History Research
JF  - History Research
JO  - History Research
SP  - 80
EP  - 88
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2376-6719
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.history.20251302.14
AB  - Spain opened the world's first global trade route through China, the Philippines, Mexico and Seville. This route became the lifeline and supply line for the Spanish royal family to maintain its colonial rule in the Philippine Islands for more than 330 years. At the same time, with the help of this route, early indirect, rather than direct trade was generated between China and Latin America. While countless praises describe this route, it is undeniable that the disadvantages it brought cannot be ignored: the mined silver continued to flow to Asia rather than Europe and did not significantly improve the local agricultural and industrial development in the Philippines at that time. At the same time, the lucrative Chinese materials destroyed the interests of local Spanish merchants, etc. In the last 10 years of the 16th century, the Spanish royal family issued a series of decrees. Franchise, Permiso, Pancada, Boleta and Tariff were superimposed together to form a complete set of trade monopoly business models, which maintained Spain's colonial rule in the Philippines and maintained a certain balance between colonies and between colonies and the mother country to the greatest extent. Unfortunately, it did not promote the long-term development of the first globalization. Under the challenge of other countries and military forces, this route, which was hailed as the most profitable, finally came to an end. This article uses literature analysis to elaborate on five types of trade monopolies and their corresponding laws, expressing that monopoly trade can only create short-term, false prosperity, and long-term trade requires open markets and full competition. This is not only a reflection brought about by the Manila Galleons in the 17th century, but the same principle also applies to the fourth globalization.
VL  - 13
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download