Monopoly and Private trade:’Rival Empires of Trade in the Orient’ Revisited,

1600-1800

Chris NierstraszUniversity of Warwick

Introduction

• Rival empires of trade

• Monopoly and private trade

Rival empires

Trade between Europe and Asia:• 17th Century: Spices• 18th Century: Cotton, Tea and Coffee

Intra-Asian trade:• 17th Century: VOC’s intra-Asian monopoly• 18th Century: English Country trade

Rival Empires

Increase in trade to Europe

VOC:17th Century: 251 million guilders18th Century: 678 million guilders

EIC:1671-1700: 8,4 million pounds1701-1730: 14 million pounds1731-1760: 22 million pounds1760-1800: 79 million pounds

How was trade financed?

From Europe:

• Export of silver• Export of goods

How was trade financed?

From Europe:• Export of silver• Export of goods

From Asia:• Intra-Asian trade• Remittance of fortunes• Taxation

• Table 1 Average annual value of treasure exported by the English and the Dutch east India Companies to Asia, 1601-1794 (in million florins rounded off to the nearest thousand; £1=f.12= Rs 8)

• • Years English East India Company Dutch East India Company• 1601-10 0.143 0.651• 1611-20 0.588 1.019• 1621-30 0.484 1.236• 1631-40 0.452 0.850• 1641-50 n/a 0.920• 1651-60 n/a 0.840• 1661-70 1.073 1.210• 1671-80 3.053 1.129• 1681-90 4.058 1.972• 1691-1700 2.561 2.860• 1701-1710 4.276 3.927• 1711-20 4.970 3.883• 1721-30 6.513 6.603• 1731-40 5.914 4.012• 1741-50 7.236 3.827• 1751-60 7.782 5.896• 1761-70 n/a 5.354• 1771-80 n/a 4.832• 1781-90 n/a 4.790• 1790-94 n/a 4.243• Source: Om Prakash, ‘Precious-metal flows in India, Early Modern Period’, in: Dennis Flynn, Arturo Giraldez

and Richard von Glahn, Global Connections and Monetary History, 1470-1800 (Aldershot 2003), 152, table 6.1.

VOC’s intra-Asian trade

Table 18 The Financial results of the VOC in Asia, 1620-1790 (in guilders, rounded off to the nearest hundred thousand)

Expenses Income Profit Loss1621-1630 17,400,000 18,300,000 900,0001631-1640 16,400,000 28,400,000 12,000,0001641-1650 27,000,000 37,400,000 10,400,0001651-1660 38,400,000 40,700,000 2,300,0001661-1670 41,500,000 57,900,000 16,300,0001671-1680 44,900,000 47,300,000 2,400,0001681-1688 35,700,000 38,700,000 3,000,0001689-1700 69,000,000 58,700,000 10,300,0001701-1710 55,800,000 44,300,000 11,500,0001711-1720 63,400,000 54,200,000 9,200,0001721-1730 58,200,000 44,900,000 13,300,0001731-1740 74,900,000 54,200,000 9,200,0001741-1750 81,800,000 70,000,000 11,000,0001751-1760 67,000,000 49,200,000 17,800,0001761-1768 67,000,000 49,200,000 17,800,0001769-1780 88,500,000 58,400,000 30,100,0001780-1790 100,400,000 50,000,000 50,400,000 Source: Gaastra, Bewind en beleid, 281-283 (for the period to 1800); De Korte, De jaarlijkse financiële verantwoording, 31, 47

and appendix 10.

VOC

Monopoly on intra-Asian trade

Expanding trade in 18th Century:From 1740 allows private trade to boost

performance

Bills of Exchange

• VOC17th Century: 30 million guilders18th Century:237 million guilders

EIC’s export of silver after 1760

EIC drop in silver export

Combination:

• Colonisation• Intra-Asian private trade

Bills of Exchange

• VOC17th Century: 30 million guilders18th Century:237 million guilders

• EIC1710-1745: 3,3 million pounds1760-1800: 79 million pounds

The servant’s perspective

VOC :

Private trade part of remuneration

The servant’s perspective

VOC :

Private trade part of remuneration

Social exclusion model

The servant’s perspective

VOC:

Private trade part of remuneration

Social exclusion model

EIC:Colonial control and private trade

Comparison

• Dutch and English private trade based on same principle up to colonisation of Bengal

• Dutch private trade continued on the old path, while colonisation allowed English private trade to embark on a new path

Conclusion