In the Shadow of the Companies Empires of trade in the orient and informal entrepreneurship, Chris Nierstrasz (University of Warwick)
In the Shadow of the Companies VOC and EIC and their presence in Asia
In the Shadow of the Company Part I: Power and Trade Part II: Monopoly and Private Trade Part III: Profits and fortunes Part IV: Dutch Decline and British Dominance
In the Shadow of the Company Based on: Official VOC documentation Private Correspondence
In the Shadow of the Company Portfolio capitalists
Increase in entrepreneurship? VOC Increase in bills of exchange for Europe More people stay in Asia EIC Increase in bills of exchange for Europe Nabobs
Increase in entrepreneurship? VOC, invoice and sale values in relation to exports of silver and bills of exchange
Increase in entrepreneurship? VOC, invoice and sale values in relation to export of silver and bills of exchange
The Erosion of Monopoly ( ) Regulations VOC 1740: reorganisation of its intra-Asian trade, no longer a strict monopoly, private trade allowed EIC 1680: allows private trade in intra-Asian trade Around 1770: first Agency houses appear
The Erosion of Monopoly ( ) Regulations VOC Three phases in the regulation of private trade in the intra-Asian trade 1)Freedom of trade ( ), except some monopoly goods 2)Increasing restriction on the trade close to monopoly ( ) 3)Reversal of restrictive policy: freedom of trade ( )
The Erosion of Monopoly ( ) Regulations EIC Two phases : 1)Freedom of trade ( ) 2)Servants no longer allowed private trade (1773- ), Agency houses take over
Freedom of trade in practice Private correspondence VOC Private trade a privilege related to hierarchy Private trade regionally specialised Private trade strongly related to goods from and too Batavia
Freedom of trade in practice Secondary literature EIC Same system as with VOC used as explanation of the exceptional position of the British in Bengal before Empire Evolves away from servants to a new system: Agency houses
Freedom of trade in practice Why did the English evolve to this new stage and the Dutch not?
Profits and fortunes Ways to make a fortune for a servant: Private trade Government War
Profits and fortunes Correspondence: VOC, comparison Ceylon and the Coromandel coast Private trade: high risk, high investment and doubtful success Government: no risk, initial high investment and quite successful War: fastest way to fortune, but VOC better able to control its servants to follow its orders
Profits and fortunes Secondary literature EIC, comparison before and after Empire Servant move out of private trade Most Nabobs made their fortunes in government Servants more able to manipulate war as a way to make a fortune
Profits and fortunes Why were English servants better able to manipulate war for their own good?
Power and trade VOC: no state support in Asia until 1783 EIC strong support of the State since 1740s The result of this support for the balance of power became clear during the Battle of Bedara (1759)
Power and trade VOC: the Dutch servants solely depended on the Company to reinforce them during conflict and thus the directors and high government were better able to contain conflict EIC: The presence of both state and company priorities, was easier for the English servants to manipulate as well as making them far more powerfull
Conclusion