The erosion of the VOC. The VOC and its search for alternatives to decline ( ) Chris Nierstrasz (University of Warwick)

Non-state actor vs State actor 17 November 1757, Van der Parra to Van Eck: ‘It is essential not to accede to the request of the Armenians of Madras, and if feasible also to achieve an interdiction on the sending of cloths by the Moors and merchants from the Malabar. This is to clear the way for those, who would otherwise be prevented from making an acceptable profit, and who would find themselves in [financial] difficulties because of these heathens.’

Sources Secondary literature Primary sources: – The Regulations of the VOC – The private correspondence of Van Eck

Silver and bills of exchange

Monopoly and Private trade Monopoly between Europe and Asia Monopoly in intra-Asian trade

Monopoly and Private trade Move away from monopoly in Asia (1741)

Monopoly and Private trade Regulations: According to goods According to groups According to regions

Monopoly and Private trade Changes in policy, managing Dutch private trade ( ): – Van Imhoff ( ): Monopoly of certain goods combined with freedom of trade – Mossel ( ): Restrictive on trade between Indian subcontinent and Batavia – Van der Parra ( ) : Continues the line of Mossel, but sudden reversal towards freedom of trade in 1771

Monopoly and Private trade Changes in policy, relating to expansion of English Power: ( ) After 1771, English allowed access to Batavia After 1784, VOC forced to allow access to the Spice Islands

Monopoly and Private trade European Monopoly: Slowly eroded by allowing permitted trade after 1771

The reality of private trade Case study: Lubbert Jan van Eck, VOC-servant on the Coromandel Coast and in Ceylon (Correspondence for the period )

The reality of private trade Company priorities were considered to prevail over private trade interests permitted packages (December 1761): Your Honour is pressingly charged to ensure it that next year and thereafter too, no so-called permitted packages containing cloth are to be allowed to the naval officers upon their departure for this capital, nor shall any servants under your government be permitted to do so, until the demands for both patria and Asia have been delivered in their entirety and approved, under punishment of confiscation and a fine of four times their value.

The reality of private trade Allowing private trade, a deterioration of the position of the VOC servants ‘Nowadays a Governor has at his disposal only what he earns by his personal participation in the trade, of which he has to spent a large part to sustain his pomp and circumstance.’ 15 October 1759, Van Eck to Van der Parra

The reality of private trade Private trade divided according to the VOC hierarchy ‘First, you know all too well that in the smaller VOC settlements almost nobody but the chiefs and their deputies, and they alone, participate in trade (...) So, as a good friend, I advise you to abandon your plans, news of which has already spread along the Coast like wildfire, which many people will deem very strange and, to tell you the honest truth will be judged far too greedy.’ 8 August 1758, Van Eck to Faure

Conclusion