Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:07:52.408Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Silk to Japan. Sino-Dutch Competition in the Silk Trade to Japan, 1663–1685

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2010

Henriette Bugge
Henriette Bugge
Affiliation:
Institute of History, University of Copenhagen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

European expansion in Asia and the subsequent clashes between European trading companies and the trading systems of Asia have given rise to vivid discussions in the last decades. The discussions, ranging from Van Leur's theories of the tenacity of the indigenous ‘pedlar’-trade, to Steensgaard's theories of the structural superiority of the trading companies over their Asian competitors, have as yet been rather one-sided. Mostly, when comparing the two trading systems, the historians have concentrated on the trade which took place directly between Europe and Asia. Consequently, the competition between the ‘native’ Asian trade and the trade carried out by the companies have been discussed solely as an aspect of this bi-lateral trade. European participation in the intra-Asian distribution and re-distribution of goods has as yet not been fully discussed. Although authors like Holden Furber and K.N. Chaudhuri have acknowledged the need for further analysis of this subject, neither case-studies nor more theoretical works have appeared.

Type
Articles
Information
Itinerario , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , July 1989 , pp. 25 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © Research Institute for History, Leiden University 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1 van Leur, J. V., Indonesian Trade and Society: Essays in Asian Social and Economic History (The Hague 1955)Google Scholar; Steensgaard, Niels, The Asian Trade Revolution of the Seventeenth Century: The East India Companies and the Decline of the Caravan Trade (Chicago/London 1973)Google Scholar.

2 Examples hereof abound in the classic works on European trading in Asia during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, viz. Glamann, Kristof, Dutch Asian Trade 1620–1740 (Copenhagen/The Hague 1958)Google Scholar; Meilink-Roelofsz, M.A.P., Asian Trade and European Influence in the Indonesian Archipelago between 1500 and about 1620 (The Hague 1962)Google Scholar; Chaudhuri, K.N., The Trading World of Asia and the English East India Company 1600–1760 (London 1978). An attempt of viewing the European expansion in Asia in André Gunder-Frank-inspired terms was carried out by Immanuel Wallerstein in his pioneering studyCrossRefGoogle ScholarThe Modern World System l-ll: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World Economy in the Sixteenth Century (New York 1974) andGoogle ScholarMercantilism and the Consolidation of the European World Economy 1600–1750 (New York 1980). To an even larger extent than the above mentioned authors does Wallerstein see the European trading activities in Asia as bi-lateral, and neglects any European participation in the internal Asian tradeGoogle Scholar.

3 Furber, Holden, Rival Empires of Trade in the Orient 1600–1800 (Minneapolis 1976)Google Scholar; Chaudhuri, K.N., Trade and Civilisation in the Indian Ocean. An Economic History from the Rise of Islam to 1750 (London 1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 ‘Chinese Trade to Batavia in the (17th and) 18th centuries. A Preliminary Report’, by Leonard Blussé, Ja n Oosterhof and Ton Vermeulen. Paper presented at the Conference on Asian Trade Routes, Continental and Maritime, Humlebaek, Denmark, August 1984.

5 VOC-archive, Resolutiön der hooge Indische regering, 622, March 26, 1639.

6 Prakash, Om, The Dutch East India Company and the Economy of Bengal 1630–1720 (Princeton 1985) 126, has no figures for the years here mentioned, and for the following years there is a slight discrepancy between his figures and mine. This is probably due to the fact that Dr. Prakash bases his tables on the invoices showing the amount of silk being shipped from Bengal. The Bengal silk earmarked for the Japanese market did however not always reach its destination and anyway not always in the same year. The tables compiled by Dr. Prakash do not take into consideration that the amount of silk from Bengal may have diminished on the way to Batavia or for the possibility of stock-piling in Batavia. My figures, on the other hand, are based on the amount of silk actually received in Japan as given in tin-Nagasaki and Hirado Daghregistcrs. See alsoCrossRefGoogle ScholarPrakash, Om, The Dutch East India Company (1985) 262–264. ‘Appendix on the Dutch Sources’Google Scholar.

7 Generate Missiven van Gouverneurs-Generaal en Raden aan Heeren XVII, Coolhaas, W.Ph., ed., vol II, 386 (hereafter abbreviated to GM).Google ScholarDam, Pictcr van, Beschrijvinge van de Oostindische Compagnie (written about 1693–1701), Stapel, W. F., ed. vol. 11–1, 383 (hereafter abbreviated o t PvD). The estimated profit is as given in the sources, i.e. the difference between cost of purchase and the price of sale without counting wages, transport costs, losses etcGoogle Scholar.

8 Calculated from the information in VOC-archive Ned. Factorij in Japan, Factuuren van ingekomen scheepsladingen 1633–1666, 1670–71, nos. 781, 78 2 and 785.

9 Sansom, G., A History of Japan (London 1958–1964 ) vol. III, 120–129.Google ScholarPrakash, Om (1985) The Dutch East India Company 131–135. GM IV, 63, PvD 11–1, 450, 455Google Scholar.

10 VOC-archive Ned. Factorij in Japan, 866, Journalen 1672, and Ned. Factorij in Japan 870, Joumalen 1686Google Scholar.

11 PvD 11–1,472–490.

12 GM IV, 806. Gm V, 13–14.

13 As early as 1636 the governor-general in Batavia impressed upon the Dutch traders in Japan the need to submit to the Japanese demands and that they ‘sich gantsch endc gacr naa dc Japanse humeuren sal vocgen, hacrc gunst sicn tc winncn ende hit minstc hunnc bcvelen nict contrariercn…’ Dagh-Register gehouden int Casteel Batavia van! passerende daer ter plaetse over geheel Nederlands-India, J. A. van der Chijs el at. eds. (hereafter abbreviated to DR-Batavia) 1636, 104. Sec also DR Batavia 1675, 156–158. DR Batavia 1661, 420. PvD 11–1, 455, 462, 511–512,543. GM III, 494–495.

14 Descriptions of these events arc found in Merklcin, Johan Jakob, Reise nachjava, Vorder- und Hinter-Indien, China undJapan 1644–1653, l'Honoré-Naber, S.P., ed. (Reisebeschreibungen von Deutschen Beamten und Kriegsleuten im Dienst der Niederländischen West- und Ost-Indischen Kompagnicn 1602–1797, vol. Ill) The Hague 1930, 86–90. See alsoCrossRefGoogle ScholarKaempfer, Engelbert, The History of Japan (London 1727–1728), vol. I, 341, 349–351, 363–364Google Scholar.

15 GM II, 125. GM IV, 63.

16 PUD II-l, 396, 432.

17 DR Batavia 1641–1642, 73. DR Batavia 1640–1641, 257–259. PvD 11–1, 487.

18 GM I, 137, 700. GM III, 65. PvD II-l, 431–432. DR Batavia 1630–1634, 249. DR Batavia 1641–1642, 73, 98. DR Batavia 1661, 181, 420. DR Batavia 1765, 156.

19 PvD II-l, 377, 455, 490. GM V, 85. DR Batavia 1675, 337–338.

20 DR Batavia 1663, 165, 428. Prakash, Om (1985), The Dutch East India Company, 125–128Google Scholar.

21 GM III, 545. VOC-archive, Ned. Factorij in Japan, 665, Jaarlijkse rapporten van de aftredende opperhoofden aan G.G. en Raaden, 1665.

22 DR Batavia 1675, 128, 156–157. PUD II-l, 454–455.

23 DR Batavia 1675, 128, 156–157. PUD 1101, 454–455. Whether there was any truth in the Japanese claim to being in no further need of the Dutch trade in silk cannot be determined. The development of the Japanese economy and in particular the development of the Japanese textile industry in the seventeenth century is still sorely in need of research. See Sansom, , A History of Japan vol. III, 120–137, who argues for a general economic progress in Japan during the last decades of the seventeenth centuryGoogle Scholar.

24 GM III, 308, 325–326, 358–359, 301. Apart from the Dutch an d Chinese, Tonkin was also visited by Spanish merchants from their trading posts in Cambodia.

25 GM II, 541, 759, 771.

26 PUD II-2, 10. GM II, 795. DR Batavia 1644–1645, 323. GM IV, 770. Bowrey, Thomas, A Geographical Account of the Countries Round the Bay of Bengal 1669–1679, Temple, R. C. ed (London 1905) 213, note 2. Om Prakash rightly emphasizes the impressive flexibility and adaptability of the Bengal silk production. Without any large-scale formal transformations t was possible to honor the ever-rising Dutch and English demands in the seventeenth and i eighteenth centuries.Google ScholarPrakash, Om (1985), The Dutch East India Company, 97–112, 234–248Google Scholar.

27 See among others PUD 11–1, 397, 462, 464. GM V, 466. DR Batavia 1675, 156–157. Jan Pietersz. Coen, Beschijden omtrent zijn Bedrijf in Indië, Colenbrander, H.T. & Coolhaas, W.Ph. eds., vol. I, 203 (hereafter abbreviated to Coen). However, Pictcr van Dam mentions that in 1658 all junks were paying a duty of 300 tael. PUD 11–1, 413Google Scholar.

28 This is evident from the fact that Tonkin and Chinese fetched almost equal prices in the Japanese market between 1635 and 1667. Examples of the sales prices may be found in VOC-archive, Overgekomen Brieven en Papieren nos. 1110 fol. 384–385 (1634); 1120 fol. 669 (1637); 1123 fol. 969 (1638); 1140 fol. 15–18, 20–21 (1641); 1145 fol. 12–13, 93–95 (1643); 1241 fol. 331–332 (1663) and 1267 fol. 714–716 (1667).

29 GMI, 256–257. PvD II-l, 293, 460; 11–3, 325.

30 Chaudhuri, K..N. (1985), The Trading World of Asia, 102–118Google Scholar.

31 DR Batavia 1644–1645, 108. DR Batavia 1663, 68. GM II, 709.

32 GM II, 423. PvD II-l, 193. DR Batavia 1664, 506.

33 GM II, 709. PvD III, 193. GM IV, 763. PvD II-l, 427, 444, 468.

34 PvD II-1,442, 520. GM II, 211.

35 PUD II-1, 498, 500, 511–512. GM V, 468. Kaempfer(1727–1728), op.cil. vol. 1, 259, 276–280.

36 GM III, 494–495. DR Batavia 1661, 420. DR Batavia 1664, 506.

37 PvD II-1, 455. DR Batavia 1675, 337–338.

38 PvD II-1, 449, 454. Kristof Glamann mentions in his article ‘The Dutch East India Company's Trade in Japanese Copper 1645–1736’, Scandinavian Economic History Review, vol. I no. 2 (1953) 47Google Scholar, that fixing of prices took place after a joint Japancse-Chinese-Dutch agreement. As for the silk trade I have found nothing to support such a conclusion.

39 Prakash, Om (1985), The Dutch East India Company, 133Google Scholar.

40 Coen vol. II, 7–8, 110, 369–371.

41 Teiijiro, Yamawaki, ‘The Great Trading Merchants, Cocksinja and His Son’, Acta Asiatica vol. 30 (1976) 107–108. See alsoGoogle ScholarDagregisters van het Kasteel Zeelandia, Taiwan, 1629–1662, Blussé, L., Opstall, M. E. van and Yung-Ho, Ts'ao eds., vol. I, 69 (C fol. 234) 18 01 1632; 151 (F fol. 45) 25–27 January 1634Google Scholar.

42 Seiichi, Iwao, ‘Japanese Foreign Trade in the 16th and 17th Centuries’, Ada Asiatica vol. 30 (1976) 10–12. VOC-archive, Ned. Factorij in Japan,Google ScholarDagh-Registers van de factorij te Hirado en te Deshima (Nagasaki) 1633–1701, no. 55–56, 1639–1642. In the 1640s, when the Ch'ing government gradually got established in China, it gained control of the main silkproducing areas in China, which further reduced the possibilities of the Cheng-family of controlling the foreign trade in Chinse silk. See for further information Atwell, William S., ‘Some Observations on the “Seventeenth Century Crisis” in China and Japan’, Journal of Asian Studies vol. XVL no. 2 (02 1986) 229–230, 233–234.Google ScholarYamawaki, ‘The Great Trading Merchants…’, 108–110.Google ScholarWills, John E. Jr, Pepper, Guns and Parleys. The Dutch East India Company and China 1622–1681 (Cambridge, Mass. 1974) 22–25.Google ScholarWills, John E. Jr, ‘De VOC en de Chinezen in Taiwan, China en Batavia en de 17e en 18e eeuw’, Meilink-Roelofsz, M.A.P. ed., De VOC in Azië (Bussum 1976) 12–13Google Scholar.

43 DR Batavia 1640–1641, 147, 175.

44 DR Batavia 1631–1634, 311–312. Wills, (1976) op. cit., 22–25Google Scholar.

45 Meilink-Roelofsz, M. A. P., ‘The Structure of Trade in Asia in the 16th and 17th Centuries. A Critical Appraisal of Niels Steensgaard: “Carracks, Caravans and Companies”’, Mare Luso-Indicum 4 (1980) 14–15.Google ScholarChaudhuri, K. N. (1978), op. cit., 109–111.Google ScholarSanten, Hans van, De Verenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie en Gujarat en Hindustan 1620–1660 (Leiden 1982) 16–17, 62 Sec also DR Batavia 1663, 336–337Google Scholar.

46 Coen 1, 184–185. Coen 11, 563, 704, 711, 715, 748. Meilink-Roelofsz, , Asian Trade and European Influence, 263–265Google Scholar.

47 Furber, , Rival Empires of Trade, 63.Google ScholarWills, (1976), ‘Dc VOC en de Chinezen’, 180Google Scholar.

48 DR Batavia 1641–1642, 63.

49 GM II, 486–487, 759, 784. DR Batavia 1668–1669, 113, 327–328.

50 PvD II-1, 487–489. Glamann, Kr., Dutch Asian Trade, 178Google Scholar. In contrast, the Chinese junk merchants were allowed to import goods to a value of 600,000 lael, which made it easier for them to acquire the expensive Japanese copper. See also GM IV, 446, 760; GM V, 175.

51 GMV, 627.

52 DR Batavia 1656–1657, 182. DR Batavia 1661, 457. DR Batavia 1663, 692. DR Batavia 1664, 549. GM III, 185, 301, 325, 347, 358–359. VOC-archive, Ned. factorij in Japan, 653. Brieven van Toneguin, 1652–1657.

53 DR Batavia 1640–1641, 250–252. DR Batavia 1674, 123. DR Batavia 1675, 334. DR Batavia 1677, 5, 193, 428. DR Batavia 1678, 680. Sec also A.J. Farrington, ‘A New Source for Chinese Trade to japan in the Seventeenth Century’, Paper presented at the XXXII International Congress for Asian and North African Studies, Hamburg, August 1986.

54 Wills, (1974), Pepper, Guns and Parleys, 21–22.Google ScholarWills, John E. Jr ‘Maritime China from Wang Chih to Shih Lang. Themes in Peripheral History’, Wills, J. E. & Spence, J.D. eds., From Ming to Ch'ing. Conquest, Region and Continuity in Seventeenth Century China (New Haven/London 1979) 172–179Google Scholar.

55 DR Batavia 1644–1.645, 198–109. VOC-archive, Ned. Factorij in Japan, 653, Brieven van Toncquin.

56 GM III, 358–359, 390–391. GM IV, 221.

57 GM III, 307, 347. DR Batavia 1664, 549.

58 GM IV, 221, 539, 662. DR Batavia 1664, 65. DR Batavia 1677, 428.