本文檢討黃仁宇所提「數目字管理」概念，文分兩節，第一節針對「數目字管理」概念的三大構成要素:經濟組織、法律體系、文化觀念，說明黃氏如何藉此分析明清中國「不能在數目字上管理」而十七世紀末年英國則「能夠在數目字上管理」。第二節透過學界對明清市場與政府關保的新理解，反省「數目字管理」概念的作用與限制。基本上，我同意黃氏所提「經濟組織、法律體系、文化觀念」三者對分析明清市場與政府關係演變的洞見，但是，黃氏未能細緻說明三者間的交互關連；同時，更因為預設「現代性」發展的普同方向，從也減弱了三者間可能存在的複雜互動。如何發展黃氏開創的業績？是值得繼續努力的學術事業。

My review article analyses and evaluates the “mathematically manageable” thesis raised by Professor Ray Huang. He points out three components in this thesis: form of efficient economic organizations, innovation of effective judicial system, and cultural constructions of private property. Only in England by the end of 17th century, have these components have all met together, though it is more like a process in conjunction than a series of conscious movement. By contrast, as Huang asserts, economic and human resources cannot be divided into interchangeable pieces in China, that is why he called it the “mathematically unmanageable” state. After sketching out the above thesis, I testify some of the shortcomings when applies it to China. In conclusion, I posit two facets about Professor Huang's thesis. One is that the economic-legal-cultural components are indeed potential factors when delving into market/government relations in Late Imperial China, albeit they still needed to be defined carefully. The other is the theoretic deficiency, as it presumes all “modern” countries converge in capitalism, ignoring the possibility of the “alternative modernity” entailed in the economic organizations, legal system, and cultural understandings and interrelations of Late Imperial China.