1 Foster, W. ed., The English factories in India, 1655–1667 II (Oxford 1921–1925) 254–255.Google Scholar

2 Some of the recent works on the Paravas are: Vink, M.P.M., ‘The Temporal and Spiritual Conquest of the Fishery Coast: The Portuguese-Dutch Struggle over the Parava Community of Southeast India, c. 1640–1700’, Portuguese Studies Review 9/1–2 (2001) 372–397;Google ScholarIdem, , ‘Church and State in Seventeenth-century Colonial Asia: Dutch-Parava Relations in Southeast India in a Comparative Perspective’, Journal of Early Modern History 4/1 (04 2000) 1–42;Google ScholarZupanov, I., Disputed Mission: Jesuit Experimentsand Brahmanical Knowledge in Seventeenth-century India (Oxford and New York 1999)Google Scholar; McPherson, K., ‘Paravas and Portuguese: A Study of Portuguese Strategy and its Impact on an Indian Seafaring Community’, Mare Liberum (n.s.) 13 (06 1997) 69–82;Google ScholarVink, M.P.M., ‘Images and Ideologies of Dutch-South Asian Contact: Cross-cultural Ecounters between the Nayaka State of Madurai and the Dutch East India Company in the Seventeenth Century’, Itinerario 21/2 (1997) 82–123;CrossRefGoogle ScholarZupanov, I., ‘Aristocratic Analogies and Demotic Descriptions in the Seventeenth-century Madurai Mission’, Representations 41 (winter 1993) 123–148;CrossRefGoogle ScholarBayly, S., Saints, Goddesses, and Kings. Muslims and Christians in South Indian society, 1700–1900 (New York 1989) 321–369;Google ScholarRoche, , Fishermen of the Coromandel Coast: A Study of the Paravas of the Coromandel (Delhi 1984)Google Scholar; Kaufmann, S.B., ‘A Christian Caste in Hindu Society: Religious Leadership and Social Conflict among the Paravas of Southern Tamilnadu’, Modern Asian Studies 15/2 (1981) 203–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 A term borrowed from: Parker, G. and Smith, L.M. eds, The General Crisis of the Seventeenth Century (2nd ed.; London/New York 1997)Google Scholar.

4 A 'portfolio capitalist' has been defined as a large-scale entrepreneur who farmed revenue, engaged in local agricultural trade, commanded military resources (war animals, arms, and human labor), and often participated in long-distance trade. See: Subrahmanyam, S. and Bayly, C.A., ‘Portfolio Capitalists and the Economy of Early Modern India’, Indian Economic and Social History Review 25/4 (1988) 401–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Between 1659 and 1665, the English East India Company maintained a trading settlement at the Madurai Coast. In 1665, the Dutch arrested John Harington, Travers' successor, ‘the troublemaker and quarreler among nations’, and closed down the local factory upon the outbreak of the Second Anglo-Dutch War (1665–1667).

6 Richard White and others have defined the term 'middle ground’, emphasising accommo- dation and common meaning in the Great Lakes {pays d'en haut). In the two centuries before the intrusion of the Americans, they argue, the pays d'en haut was a joint Indian- white creation, a common, mutually comprehensible world. French and British could neither dictate to nor ignore Indians. They needed Indians as allies, as partners in the exchange, as sexual partners, as friendly neighbours. The middle ground is the place in between: in between cultures, peoples, and in between empires and the non-state world of villages. It is a place where many of the North American subjects and allies of French and British empires lived. It is the area between the historical foreground of European invasion and occupation and the background of Indian defeat and retreat. The real crisis and the final dissolution of this world came when Indians ceased to have the power to force whites onto the middle ground. As a consequence, the middle ground eroded. The American Republic succeeded in doing what the French and English could not do and started to dictate the terms of accommodation. See: White, R., The Middle Ground: Indians, Empires, and Republics in the Great Lakes Region, 1650–1815 (Cambridge 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar See also: Kling, B.B. and Pearson, M.N., Europeans in Asia before Dominion (Honolulu 1979).Google Scholar The ‘culture and authority’ school of the University of Chicago, including Bernard Cohn and his students Arjan Appadurai, Nicholas Dirks, and others, are proponents of ‘hegemonic discourse’, whereas the ‘Cambridge school’ of Indian colonial historians, such as Chris Bayly and David Washbrook, espouse the notion of ‘dialogue’.

7 Marshal, PJ. ed., Oxford History of the British Empire II (Oxford 1998) 506.Google Scholar

8 These findings corroborate Jerry Bentley's conclusions on conversion. Bentley argues that cultural traditions did notreally cross boundary lines. According to him, adoption of foreign values and cultural standards rarely took place except with the encouragement of powerful political, social, or economic influences. Even successful cases of cross-cultural conversion, he asserts, did not involve a process of exact cultural replication, but rather a merger of traditions by a process of syncretism. See: Bentley, J., Old World Encounters: Cross-cultural Contacts and Exchanges in Pre-modern Times (New York 1993) 15–17Google Scholar.

9 For an example of a Weberian, ‘ideal type’ approach to cross-cultural encounters: Vink, , ‘Images and Ideologies of Dutch-South Asian Contact’, 82–83.Google Scholar The civilisational approach in the U.S. was popularised after World War I by James Harvey Robinson (1863–1936). See: Segal, D.A.,' ‘“Western Civ”and the Staging of History in American Higher Education’, The American Historical Review 105/3 (06 2000) 770–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar The term ‘clash of civilisations’ is of course taken from Samuel Huntington.

10 Wong, R. Bin, ‘The Search for European Differences and Domination in the Early Modern World: A View from Asia’, The American Historican Review 107/2 (04 2002) 454–456;Google ScholarIdem, , China Transformed: Historical Change and the Limits of European Experience (Ithaca, NY 1997) 127–151.Google Scholar The term ‘great divergence’ is of course based on: Pomeranz, K., The Great Divergence: China, Europe, and the Making of the Modern World Economy (Princeton, NJ, 2000).Google Scholar Pomeranz' sophisticated hypothesis can be simplistically subsumed under the heading ‘coal and colonies’'. For recent evaluations of these seminal works from a South Asian perspective: Ludden, D., ‘Modern Inequality and Early Modernity: A Comment for the AHR on Articles by R. Bin Wong and Kenneth Pomeranz’, American Historical Review 107/2 (04 2002) 470–480;CrossRefGoogle ScholarBayly, C.A., ‘South Asia and the “Great Divergence”’, Itinerario 24/3–4 (2000) 89–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Landes, D.S., The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor (New York 1998)Google Scholar; Sowell, T., Conquests and Cultures: An International History (New York 1998)Google Scholar; Gellner, E., Plough, Sword, and Book: The Structure of Human History (London 1988)Google Scholar; Jones, E.L., The European Miracle: Environments, Economies and Geopolitics in the History of Europe and Asia (2nd ed.; Cambridge 1987)Google Scholar; Mann, M., The Sources of Social Power I: A History of Power from the Beginning to 1760 A.D. (Cambridge 1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hall, J.A., Powers and Liberties: The Causes and Consequences of the Rise of the West (Oxford 1985).Google Scholar For examples of the ‘California school’ (apart from Pomeranz and Bin Wong): Glahn, R. von, Fountain of Fortune: Money and Monetary Policy in China, 1000–1700 (Berkeley, CA 1996)Google Scholar; Flynn, D.O. and Giraldez, A., ‘Born with a “Silver Spoon”: The Origin of World Trade in 1571”, Journal of World History 6 (1995) 201–221;Google ScholarWills, J.E., Jr, ‘Maritime Asia, 1500–1800: The Interactive Emergence of European Domination’, American Historical Review 98/1 (02 1993) 83–105;CrossRefGoogle ScholarGoldstone, J., Revolution and Rebellion in the Early Modem World (Berkeley, CA 1991).Google Scholar For a recent critical examination of the social-Darwinist, (neo) classical paradigm of the positive effects of interstate competition Vries, J. de, ‘Governing Growth: A Comparative Analysis of the Role of the State in the Rise of the West’, Journal of World History 13/1 (Spring 2002) 67–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Dirks, N.B., Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern India (Princeton and Oxford 2001) 13–14.Google Scholar See also: Idem, , The Hollow Crown: Ethnohistory of an Indian Kingdom (2nd ed.; Ann Arbor 1993) xxiii-xxviii, 3–10Google Scholar, and passim; , Idem ed., Colonialism and Culture (Ann Arbor 1992) 1–25.Google Scholar

13 Giddens, A., The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration (Berkeley, CA 1984) 1–40;Google ScholarIdem, , Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis (Berkeley 1979) 49–95;Google ScholarIdem, , New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies (New York 1976) 118–126.Google Scholar For a general introduction to Giddens' work: Bryant, C.G.A. and Jary, D., ‘Introduction: Coming to Terms with Anthony Giddens’ in: , Idem eds, Giddens' Theory of Structuration: A Critical Appreciation (London 1991) 1–31Google Scholar.

14 Sewell, W.H., Jr, ‘A Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency, and Transformation’, American Journal of Sociology 98 (07 1992) 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15 Idem, , 20.Google Scholar

16 Vink, M., ‘Encounters on the Opposite Coast: The Dutch East India Company and the Nayaka State of Madurai in the Seventeenth Century’ (Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Minnesota 1998) 133–146.Google Scholar

17 The existing literature is vast, but for recent general introductions: s'Jacob, H.K., The Rajas of Cochin, 1663–1720: Kings, Chiefs, and the Dutch East India Company (New Delhi 2000) 3–31;Google ScholarLannoy, M. de, The Kulasekhara Perumals ofTravancore: History and State Formation of Travancore from 1671 to 1758 (Leiden 1997) 1–10;Google ScholarWinius, G.D. and Vink, M.P.M., The Merchant-warrior Pacified: The VOC (Dutch East India Company) and its Changing Political Economy in India (Delhi 1991) 28–44, and 67–76;Google Scholars'Jacob, H.K., De Nederlanders in Kerala, 1663–1701: De memories en instructies betreffende het commandement Malabar van de Verenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie (The Hague 1976) xxii–xxxv.Google Scholar For information on specific groups and individuals: s'Jacob, H.K, ‘Babba Prabhu: The Dutch and a Konkani Merchant in Kerala’ in: All of One Company: The VOC in Biographical Perspective (Utrecht 1986) 135–150;Google ScholarBrown, L.W., The Indian Christians of St Thomas (London 1956)Google Scholar; Kurup, K.K.N., The Ali Rajas of Cannanore (Trivandrum 1975)Google Scholar; Miller, R.E., Mappila Muslims of Kerala: A Study in Islamic Trends (2nd ed.; Cambridge/New York 1982)Google Scholar; Dale, S.F., Islamic Society on the South Asian Frontier: The Mappilas of Malabar, 1498–1922 (Oxford 1980)Google Scholar; Nambiar, O.K., The Kunjalis: Admirals of Calicut (Bombay 1963)Google Scholar.

18 The main actors were the English and the Dutch and the sultanates of Jambi and Palembang along the eastcoast of Sumatra, the English and the Dutch and the sultanate of Aceh and its ‘dependencies’ along the westcoast of Sumatra, the English and the Dutch and the interior sultanate of Mataram and the coastal pasisir states on the island of Java, the Portuguese and the Dutch and Makassarese Gowa and Buginese Bone in southwestern Sulawesi, and the Portuguese, Spaniards, English, and Dutch and the sul- tanates of Ternate and Tidore in Maluku. For Sumatra: Harfield, A.G., Bencoolen: A History of the Honourable East India Company's Garrison on the Westcoast of Sumatra (1685–1825) (Barton-on-Sea 1995)Google Scholar; Andaya, B. Watson, To Live as Brothers: Southeast Sumatra in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (Honolulu 1993) 38–144;Google ScholarStuers, H.J.J.L. and Veth, PJ., De vestiging en uitbreiding der Nederlanders terwestkust van Sumatra (Amsterdam 1849-1850).Google Scholar For Java: Nagtegaal, L., Riding the Dutch Tiger: The Dutch East Indies Company and the Northcoast of Java, 1680–1743 (Leiden 1996)Google Scholar; Ricklefs, M.C., War, Culture and Economy in Java 1677–1726: Asian and European Imperialism in the Early Kartasura Period (Sydney 1993).Google Scholar For southwestern Sulawesi:Andaya, L.Y., The Heritage of Arung Palakka: A History of South Sulawesi (Celebes) in the Seventeenth Century (The Hague 1981)Google Scholar; Boxer, C.R., Francisco Vieira de Figeiredo: A Portuguese Merchant-adventurer in South East Asia, 1624–1667 (The Hague 1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stapel, F.W., Het Bongaais verdrag (The Hague 1922).Google Scholar For Maluku: Andaya, L.Y., The World of Maluku: Eastern Indonesia in the Early Modern Period (Honolulu 1993) 151–175;Google ScholarKnaap, GJ., Kruidnagelen en Christenen: De Verenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie en de bevolking van Ambon, 1656–1696 (Dordrecht/Providence 1987)Google Scholar; Graaf, HJ. de, De geschiede-nis van Ambon en de Zuid Molukken (Franeker 1977).Google Scholar Apart from these main indigenous political actors, there were numerous minor political, commercial, and religious groups and individuals.

19 For Dutch estimates on the Parava population in the 1660s: VOC 1243, OBP 1664, fl. 1243, Attestatie van Philip de Hase te Colombo, 6.11.1663; VOC 1251, OBP 1666, fls. 784–785, Rapport, kaptn. Hendrick van Rheede aan gouvr. Van Goens van Ceijlon, 7.10.1665; VOC 1242, OBP 1664, fls. 999r-999v, Miss, gouvr. Van Goens en raad van Ceijlon aan Batavia, 10.11.1663; Dagh-register 1663, 326–328, 569, and 577–578; Nieuhof, J., Gedenkwaerdige zee- en lantreize door de voomaemste landschappen van Oostindiën (Amsterdam 1682) 182;Google ScholarValentyn, F., Oud en nieuw Oost-IndienV (Dordrecht-Amsterdam 1726) 164.Google Scholar In 1675, Van Goens claimed that the Parava population of the seven large and small ports was no less than 70,000, of which 28,000–30,000 resided at Tuticorin. See: Valentyn, , Oud en Nieuw Oostindiën V, 237.Google Scholar Jesuit estimates of the sixteenth century vary widely, though the original number of Paravas to have converted to Christianity is consistently put at 20,000. In 1644, Antonio Lopez, a Jesuit residing at the Fishery Coast, put the number of Paravas at 28,000. See: Schurhammer, G., ‘Die Bekehrung der Paraver (1535–1537), Orientalia (Rome/Lisbon 1963) 236–240.Google Scholar For statistical information on the pearl fisheries of 1668 and 1669: VOC 1268, OBP 1669, 92 MARKUS P.M. VINK fi. 1158v, Monture der thonijs, stenen en personen in de parelvisserij van Tuticurin, 27.6.1668; Idem, fl. 1197r, Miss, gouvr. Van Goens en raad van Ceijlon aan Batavia, 13.7.1668; VOC 1270, OBP 1670, fl. 942v, Monture der thonijs, stenen en personen in de parelvisserij van Tuticurin, 16.7.1669; VOC 1266, OBP 1669, fl. 867v, Rapp. commr. Van Goens dejonge over Ceijlon, Malabar, en Madure aan de bewindhebbers, 15.8.1669.

20 bArunachalam, S., The History of the Pearl Fisheries of the Tamil Coast (Ananmalai 1952) 87–93;Google ScholarRao, V.N., Shulman, D., and Subrahmanyam, S., Symbols of Substance. Court and State in Nayaka Period Tamilnadu (New York 1992) 265ff;Google ScholarBayly, , Saints, 79ffGoogle Scholar; Roche, , Fishermen, 36–40.Google Scholar

21 The Portuguese in India were anything but a monolithic community. The main internal divisions were amongst the ofificial Estado da India (headed by the viceroy and council at Goa), the Indo-Portuguese settlers (casados), the ‘rebels’ (alevantados) of the informal ‘shadow empire’ in the Bay of Bengal, and the regular and secular clergy (Jesuits, Francis- cans, Augustinians, Dominicans, and other religious orders). Each of these groups was further divided along political, socioeconomic, religious, and other fault lines.

22 Flores, J.M., Os Portugueses e o mar de Ceilao: Trato, diplomacia e guerra (1498–1543) (Lisbon 1998) 157–183;Google ScholarMcPherson, , ‘Paravas and Portuguese’, 69–82.Google Scholar See also: Bouchon, G., Regent of the Sea: Cannanore's Response to Portuguese Expansion, 1507–1528 (Delhi/New York 1988)Google Scholar; Dale, S.F., Islamic Society on the South Asian Frontier: The Mappilas of Malabar, 1498–1922 (Oxford 1980)Google Scholar; Nambiar, O.K., The Kunjalis, Admirals of Calicut (New York 1963).;Google Scholar

23 Schurhammer, G., ‘Die Bekehrung der Paravar (1535–1637)’, GesdmmelteStudienll: Orienta lia (Rome 1963)Google Scholar; Idem, , ‘Letters of D. Joao da Cruz in the National Archives of Lisbon’, Gesammelte Studien IV: Varia (Rome 1965)Google Scholar; Silva, C.R. de, ‘The Portuguese and Pearl- fishing off South India and Sri Lanka’, South Asia (n.s.) 1/1 (1978) 14–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

24 S.C.Motha provides a ‘genealogical table’ of sixteenth and seventeenth century jati talaivans. Under the Portuguese government: D. Joao da Cruz (1543–1553), his son D. Miguel Joao da Cruz (1553–1562), his daughter Dona Maria Marguerita da Cruz (1562–1565), her husband D. Luis Estovao da Cruz Pires (1565–1590), his son D. Jeronimus Luis da Cruz Pires (1590–1615), his son D. Miguel Jeronimus da Cruz Pires (1615–1641), his son D. Xavier Miguel da Cruz Pires (1641–1646), his son-in-law D. Xavier Henrique da Cruz Correa (1646–1671), his son D.Jose Henrique da Cruz Correa (1671–1680); under Dutch rule: his nephew and son-in-law D. Estova da Cruz ‘Poobalarayen’ (1680–1686), his son-in-law D. Gabriel da Cruz Gomes (1686–1700). See: Motha, S.C., A Short History of the fathithalaimai or the Chieftainship of the Bharathars, 14–15Google Scholar.

25 Correia-Afonso, J., Thejesuits in India, 1542–1773 (Anand, Gujarat 1997) 9–14;Google ScholarSchurhammer, G., Francis Xavier: His Life, His Times II (Rome 1977) 308–309, 385–389, 471–472;Google ScholarThekkedath, J., History of Christianity inlndiaW (Bangalore 1982) 162–163, 257Google Scholar; Schurhammer, G. and Voretzsch, E.A. eds, Ceylon zur Zeit des Konigs Bhuveneka Bahu und Franz Xavers 1539–1552 I (Leipzig 1928) 135–136, and passim.Google Scholar

26 Kaufmann, , ‘A Christian Caste in Hindu Society’, 204Google Scholar; Roche, , Fishermen, 38, 42–43, and 54–59;Google ScholarBayly, , Saints, 325Google Scholar.

27 Following the conquest of the Portuguese setdements on the Madurai Coast in January 1658, for instance, the recendy deposed jati talaivan Joao da Cruz (not mentioned in Motha's list) readily allied himself with the Dutch. His brother Henrique was forced to leave the field along with his Portuguese patrons to become the head of a powerful antiCompany faction. In August 1692, the Parava merchant Tome de Melo, inhabitant of Manappad, who had served as a V.O.C. broker since 1680, refused to pool resources with other local merchants in a so-called ‘compagnie’, arguing ‘that he had two sons and three son-in-laws with whom he could manage everything’. De Melo continued that ‘they were all willing to assist their father, but certainly not a stranger’. At the same time, the request of the jati talaivan D. Gabriel Pires and other Parava office-holders of Tudcorin to be admitted to trade with the V.O.C. along with the local Parava brokers was flatly turned down by the latter.

28 For details: Schurhammer, Francis Xavier.

29 For the published correspondence of Superiors Antonio Criminalis, Henrique Henriques, and others: Wicki, J. ed., Documenla Indica I (1540–1549) (Rome 1948) esp. 158–164, 223–227, 231–250, 279–300, 482–484, 486–488, 491–493, and 577–588;Google Scholar Idem II, esp. 155–168, 300–309, 388–401, and 558–572; Idem III, esp. 236–242, 415–427, and 595–601, and so forth. The Jesuit presence seemed to have declined significandy in the seventeenth century. Membership of the Malabar Province (created in 1602) fell from 190 men in 1626 to only 67 in 1717 due to causes such as the decline of Portugal as a colonial power, the secularisation of European society, the conflict between the Padroado and the Propaganda Fide, the Rites Controversy, the loss of men at sea, and so forth. See: Correia-Affonso, J., The Jesuits in India, 1542–1773: A Short History (Anand 1997) 215.Google Scholar In 1663 the seventeen Parava villages between Kanniyakumari and Mukkaiyur were served by eight European priests. For a succinct overview of events: Subrahmanyam, S., The Portuguese Empire in Asia 1500–1700: A Political and Economic History (London/New York 1993) 263–267.Google Scholar

30 Wicki, J. ed., Documenta Indica I, 158–164, and 165–170.Google Scholar See also: Schurhammer, and Voretsch, , Ceylon, 330–332.Google Scholar

31 Henrique Henriques (1520–1600) served on the Fishery Coast from 1546 until his death in 1600, mostly as Superior. He was the first European to master the Tamil language, and translated and published a number of works in Tamil.

32 One captain in particular, because of his evil character traits and actions, bore the brunt of Henriques' wrath, who thought him ‘not to be a human, but rather a beast’ (parece nao ser homem, senao besta). See: Documenta Indica III, 417. Not all local captains received a bad press. Henriques, for instance, was quite pleased with Manuel Rodrigues Coutinho, serving intermittently between 1550 and 1561 at Tuticorin.

33 For an example of existing suspicions among officials of the Estado da India, see the comments of the financial superintendent (vedor da fazenda) Simao Botelho in the mid-1550s. Felner, RJ. de Lima ed., Subsidios para a historia da India Portugueza (Lisbon 1868) ii, 245.Google Scholar For figures of Portuguese revenues from the pearl fishery: Subrahmanyam, S., ‘Noble Harvest from the Sea: Managing the Pearl Fishery of Mannar, 1500–1925’ in:Stein, B. and Subrahmanyam, S. eds, Institutions and Economic Change in South Asia (Oxford 1996) 143.Google Scholar

34 Historical Archives, Panaji, Goa, Livros de Moncoes 17, fl. 95. Quoted in: Subrahmanyam, , The Portuguese Empire in Asia, 265Google Scholar.

35 Pissurlencar, P.S.S. ed., Assentos do Conselho do Estado. Documentos coordenados e anotados I-V (Bastora-Goa 1953-1957) I, 258–259, and 364–365; II, 16–18, and 84–90;Google ScholarBocarro, A., ‘Livro das plantas de todas as cidades, fortalezas, e povoacoes do Estado da India Oriental’ in: Pereira, A.B. de Branganca ed., Arquivo Portuguh Oriental (n.s.) IV, part III, section 1 (Goa 1938) 368–369Google Scholar.

36 VOC 1158, OBP 1646, fis. 218r-218v, Verbaal van Coromandel, September 1645; VOC 1161, OBP 1647, fl. 952v, Journaal van het kasteel Geldria, 23.4.1646; Idem, fl. 825v, Miss, gouvr. Heussen van Coromandel aan Batavia, 3.5.1646; Idem, Us. 798r-798v, Miss, gouvr. Heussen van Coromandel aan Batavia, 9.6.1646; VOC 1164, OBP 1648, fls. 756r-756v, Miss, gouvr. Heussen van Coromandel aan Batavia, 27.6.1647; der, J.A. van Chijs ed., Dagh-register gehouden int Casteel Batavia vant passerende daer ter plaetse ah over geheel Nederlandts-India 1645 (Batavia 1887-1928) 351–352Google Scholar.

37 VOC 1164, OBP 1648, fl. 715v, Miss. Van Barth van Kayelpatnam aan Van der Meijden en Crackouw te Karaikal, 15.1.1647; VOC 1268, OBP 1669, fl. 1170r, Rapport Captn. Van Rheede aan Rijckloff van Goens, 2.7.1668; VOC 1270, OBP 1670, fls. 155v-156r, Redenen en oorsaecken over het begin en vervolgh des Maduresen oorloghs, 19.12.1669. Goonewardena argues: 'The Viceroy [Manuel Mascarenhas Homem] himself caused much harm to the Dutch by successfully inciting the Nayaka of Madura to expel them from Kayalpatnam.' Goonewardena, K.W., The Foundation of Dutch Power in Ceylon, 1638–1658 (Amsterdam 1958) 132Google Scholar.

38 VOC872, BUB 1648, fl. 302, Miss. GGen Raan gouvr. Maetsuijckervan Ceijlon, 16.9.1648. See also: Dagh-register 1648, 17.9.1648; Rijks Geschiedkundige Publicatiön, Grote Serie 112, Coolhaas, W.Ph. ed., Generate missiven van gouverneurs-generaal en raden aan Heren XVII der Verenigde Oostindische Compagniell (The Hague 1964) 345, dd. 18.1.1649Google Scholar; Roelofsz, M.A.P., De vestiging der Nederlanders ter Kuste Malabar (The Hague 1943) 125–136Google Scholar.

39 The best accounts of the expedition are provided by two of its participants, the soldier Johann von der Behr and the junior merchant and secretary Johan de Vogel, and the Portuguese protest: VOC 1187, OBP 1652, fls. 509r-531r, Extract dagregister De Vogel gedurende de expeditie van Tuticorin, 31.1-1.3.1649; VOC 1185, OBP 1652, fl. 532r-540r, Verhael van de incomste der Hollanders binnen Tuticorin, gegouverneert bij de gouvr. van Gale, Joan Maetsijcker, 7-20.2.1649; l'Honore-Naber, S.P. ed., Reisebeschreibungen von deutschen Beambten und Kriegsleuten im Dienst der Niederldndischen West- und Ost-Indischen Kompagnien, 1602–1797 IV (The Hague 1930-1933) esp. 109–116.Google Scholar Also: VOC 1173, OBP 1650, fls. 446r-449v, Resolution gedurende hetexploictop de Madurese kust, 10–28.2.1649.

40 VOC 1173, OBP 1650, fls. 450r-450v, Translaat contract uit het Latijn nopende die van Tuticorin, 18.2.1649; VOC 1187, OBP 1652, fls. 522r-522v, Extract dagregister De Vogel, 31.1-1.3.1649; Heeres, J.E. ed., Corpus diplomaticum Neerlando-Indicum II (The Hague 1907-1938) 512–513,Google Scholar dd. 18.2.1649. Although failing to consult Von der Behr, Nilakanta Sastri correctly characterised these two contracts as ‘paper agreements’: Sastri, K.A. Nilakanti, ‘Tirumula Naik, the Portuguese and the Dutch’, Indian Historical Records Commission, Proceedings of Meetings 16 (1940) 37Google Scholar.

41 Letter Viceroy Filipe de Mascarenhas from Goa to the King, 30.11.1649. In: Pissurlencar, , Assentos III, 515–516.Google Scholar There are two references in the meetings of the Council of State at Goa to the Dutch punitive expedition. In April 1649, there is a short reference to the ‘excesses’ (exorbitancias) they committed at Tuticorin’. In January 1650, it was noted ‘how last year the Dutch sacked and ravaged (saqueara e assolara) the settlement of Tuticorin under the truce agreed upon’. Idem, Assentos do Conselho doEstadolll, 126 and 135.

42 Resolutiēn van de Staten van Hollandt ende West-Vrieslandt, 159, dd. 25.3.1651. See also: Prestage, E. et al., Correspondência diplomática de Francisco de Sousa Coutinho durante a sua embaixada em Holanda (Coimbra/Lisbon 1920-1955)Google Scholar; Prestage, E., The Diplomatic Relations of Portugal loith France, England, and Holland from 1640–1668 (Watford 1925)Google Scholar.

43 VOC 1195, OBP 1653, fls. 576r-576v, Miss, gouvr. Van Kiitensteijn en raad van Gale aan Batavia, 28.2.1652.

44 VOC 1185, OBP 1652, fls. 532r-540r, Corte verantwoordinge vanwege de VOC die gedaan werd opt relaes bij de Portuguese ambassadeur aan haar Ho. Mo. afgegeven over het gepasseerde in Tuticorin ao. 1649. See also: Generale missiven II, 503–505,Google Scholar dd. 19.12.1651.

45 VOC 1177, OBP 1651, fls. 420r-420v, Transl. brief van de patangatins ofte overheden der stadt Tuticurin aen de gouvernr. van Gale, 9.1.1650; Idem, fls. 422r-424r, Dagregister koopman Goes gedurende de Toutecourijnse voijagie, 13–24.1.1650. See also: Idem, fl. 349r, Miss, gouvr. Van Kittensteijn van Gale aan gouvr. Heussen van Coromandel, 1.5.1650; VOC 1179, OBP 1651, fl. 47r, Generale missive, 10.12.1650.

46 An apologetic letter written afterwards by Cabral from Palaiyamkottai provides some interesting details surrounding the expulsion of the Portuguese and the ambiguous position of the aranmanai. Cabral claimed that he had been initially determined to face the enemy head on, inciting the local Parava and Hindu population to fight. According to Cabral, however, he was tricked with ‘deceptive talk’ (discurzo enganozo) by the Madurai Governor Vadamalaiyappa Pillai into retreating to Palaiyamkottai. The Portuguese commander claimed that the ‘chief regent’ of Madurai had assured him that he would personally see to it that the Portuguese forces from Ceylon would beat the Dutch from the coast (ha vista de nossa forca maritima botar o enemigo da costa). Letter from Jorge Cabral at Palaiyamkottai (‘Palião’) to the governors of India, 12.2.1658. In: Pissurlencar, , Assentos III, 625 n. 1Google Scholar.

47 In 1658 a planned mission under the Company Senior Merchant Eduard Ooms to Palaiyamkottai and Madurai was cancelled since the Company was unable to come up with elephants from Ceylon. According to intelligence reports, the Nayaka of Madurai could not be visited without presenting one of these high-esteemed animals. The Dutch later suspected that the initial reports were unfounded and had been spread by their inveterate enemy Henrique da Cruz and other Tuticorin pattangattins in order to prevent the Company from achieving its objectives. A 1659 high-profile mission under Governor Adriaen van der Meijden, scheduled to visit the Nayaka court, was held back in view of troubled conditions in Madurai. Instead, Van der Meijden dispatched the Company Merchant Cornelis Valckenburgh to Barmiliappa Pillai, governor of the Madurai lowlands at Neliappatirnegari.

48 VOC 1230, OBP 1660, fls. 424r-426r, Transl. articulen door den Neijck van Madura aen de hr. gouvr. Van der Meijde verleent, [11].3.1659; Idem, fls. 430r-431r, Transl. ola Barmiliappa Pulle aan de deurwaarders van Van der Meijden, 18.3.1659; Heeres, , Corpus II, 142–149.Google Scholar See also: VOC 1231, OBP 1660, fl. 410v, Miss, gouvr. Van der Meijden en koopman Ooms van Tuticorin aan superintendent Van Goens, 15.3.1659.

49 VOC 1230, OBP 1660, fl. 124v, Miss, koopm. Valckenburgh van Tuticorin aan Batavia, 6.11.1659.

50 Letter from Pierre Martin, Missionary of the Company of Jesus, to Father Charles le Gobien, 1.6.1700. Cited in: Ch. Gobien, Le ed., Lettres edifiantes et curieuses ecrites des missions etrangeres par quelques missionaries de la Compagnie de Jesus V (Paris 1708) 100Google Scholar.

51 VOC 1239, OBP 1663, fl. 1654v, Miss, gouvr. Van der Meijden en raad van Ceijlon aan Batavia, 16.8.1662. In November 1659, Admiral Rijckloff van Goens informed Batavia of ‘a prominent and sensible pattangattim’, who had himself instructed by Almeida and eagerly frequented the Protestant church and catechisation at Tuticorin. VOC 1230, OBP 1660, fl. 133r, Miss, admiraal Van Goens aan Batavia, 12.11.1659.

52 Motha's genealogical table merely mentions D. Xavier Henrique de Cruz Correia (1646–1671). See: Motha, , A Short History, 14Google Scholar.

53 VOC 1231, OBP 1660, fls. 419r-420r, Miss, topas moor Andre de Morais te Punecaijle aan adml. Van Goens, 30.12.1658.

54 VOC 1231, OBP 1660, fls. 417r-417v, Brief door de principaalste Paravas aan adml. Van Goens, 23.1.1659; VOC 1230, OBP 1660, fls. 133r-133v and 165r, Miss, gouvr. Van der Meijden en raad van Ceijlon aan Batavia, 12.11.1659.

55 VOC 1231, OBP 1660, fls. 272r-272v, Miss, koopm. Ooms van Tuticorin aan adml. Van Goens, 1.11.1658; Idem, fls. 403r-403v, Miss, koopm. Ooms van Tuticorin aan comms. Van Goens, 12.1.1659; Idem, fls. 433r-434r, Miss, koopm. Valckenburgh van Tuticorin aan superint. Van Goens, 3.4.1659; VOC 1230, OBP 1660, fls. 124r-124v, Miss, koopm. Valckenburgh van Tuticorin aan Batavia, 6.11.1659; VOC 1243, OBP 1664, fl. 1249, Rapport De Haze aan Van Goens, 20.6.1663.

56 Foster, W. ed., The English Factories in India, 1661–1664 (Oxford 1923) 254–255.Google Scholar

57 VOC 1230, OBP 1660, fl. 132v, Miss. adml. Van Goens en raad van Ceijlon aan Batavia, 12.11.1659; VOC 888, BUB 1664, fl. 417, Memorie GG en R voor Van Goens gaande als gouvr. naar Ceijlon, 5.9.1664. English investments at Old Kayal amounted to a mere 2,000–3,000 ounds in cotton goods. The factory was therefore considered ‘a deare bought experiment at the Companies cost’. , Foster ed., The English Factories in India I, 343Google Scholar; Idem, The English Factories in India II, 73Google Scholar; Dagh-register 1663, 577, dd. 27.11.1663.

58 VOC 1231, OBP 1660, fl. 410v, Miss, gouvr. Van der Meijden en koopm. Ooms van Tuticorin aan superint. Van Goens, 15.3.1659.

59 VOC 1233, OBP 1661, fl. 150v, Miss. adml. Van Goens van Jaffnapatnam aan Batavia, 15.3.1660. The mere fact that references to Henrique da Cruz become also less and less frequent during the 1660s is indicative of this development. See also: VOC 1270, OBP 1670, fl. 175v, Redenen Madurese oorlog, 19.12.1669. As usual Van Goens overstated his case. Fifteen years later, commenting on the ‘extreme hesitations’ of the aranmanai against farming out the revenues of Tuticorin and Kayalpatnam to the Company in 1675, Van Goens the Younger wryly observed: ‘The large family of die old Henrique da Cruz, the papists and odier Portuguese supporters are undoubtedly the most harmful in this respect…’ VOC 1308, OBP 1676, fl. 560r, Nadere consideration commt. Huijsman aan gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge van Ceijlon, 23.12.1675. According to Motha's ‘genealogical table’, Xavier Henrique da Cruz Correia (1646–1671) passed the office of jati talaivan on to his son D.Jose Henrique da Cruz Correia (1671–1680). See: Motha, , A Short History, 14.Google Scholar

60 Dagh-register 1664, 409, dd. 14.10.1664. The Company also attempted, in vain, to exclude the Jesuit priests (‘het schadelijc volck’) from the lands of Travancore via treaties with its ruler, Rama Varma (r. 1662–1671), in April 1665 and August 1666. See: Memorie commr. Isbrand Godske voor commr. Lucas van der Dussen, Cochin, 5.1.1668. In: Rijks Geschiedkundige Publication, Kleine serie 43, s'Jacob, H.K., De Nederlanders in Kerala, 1663–1701. De memories en instructies betreffende het commandement Malabar van de Verenigde Oost- indische Compagnie (The Hague 1976) 58Google Scholar; Heeres, , Corpus II, 323 and 344Google Scholar.

61 VOC 888, BUB 1664, fls. 417–418, Miss. GG en R voor Van Goens gaande als gouvr. naar Ceijlon, 5.9.1664.

62 Ibidem; Brown, L.W., The Indian Christians of St. Thomas: An Account of the Ancient Syrian Church of Malabar (Cambridge 1956) 11–37, and 92–108;Google Scholars'Jacob, , De Nederlanders in Kerala, esp. xxxvii–xxxviii;Google ScholarHeeres, , Corpus II, 242,Google Scholar dd. 20.3.1663.

63 Vink, , ‘The Temporal and Spiritual Conquest of the Fishery Coast’, 378–387.Google Scholar

64 The three standard, albeit outdated, accounts are: Aiyar, S. Sathyanatha, History of the Nayaks ofMadurai (Madras 1924)Google Scholar; Rangachari, V., ‘History of the Naik Kingdom of Madurai’, Indian Antiquary 43–46 (1914-1917) passimGoogle Scholar; Nelson, J.H., The Madura Country: A Manual (Madras 1868),Google Scholar along with the various district gazetteers. The term imperial ’overstretch’ (in relation to productive resources) is derived from: Kennedy, , The Bise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000 (New York 1989)Google Scholar.

65 Desikar, P.S.S., ‘Viceroys of die Nayaka of Madurai’, Journal of Indian History 17 (1938) 175–180.Google Scholar Desikar erroneously claims that Vadamalaiyappa died in 1663, but Company sources make clear that he passed away in early 1675. See: VOC 1308, OBP 1676, fl. 146r, Missive opperkoopm. Huijsman van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge van Ceijlon, 20.10.1675. For a description of Vadamalaiyappa: VOC 1274, OBP 1671, fl. 189r, Extract Ceijlons dagregister behelzende de samenspraeck tusschen gouvr. Van Goens en Barmiliappe Pulle tot Tuticorin gehouden, 1.3.1670.

66 VOC 1468, OBP 1691, fl. 317r, Rapport asst. Welter aan opperk. en opperh. Van Vliet en raad van Tuticorin, 9.9.1689.

67 Subrahmanyam, S., The Political Economy of Commerce: Southern India, 1500–1650 (Cambridge 1990) 327–336;CrossRefGoogle ScholarIdem, Symbols of Substance, 96–104.

68 Rijckloff van Goens Sr, among others, governor of Ceylon (1662–1663; 1665–1675), director general of the Indies (1675–1678), and governor general of the Indies (1678–1681). Rijckloff van Goens Jr, governor of Ceylon (1675–1679).

69 Vink, ‘The Temporal’.

70 VOC 1333, OBP 1679, fl. 135r, Miss, gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge en raad van Ceijlon aan Heren XVII, 2.1.1679. One Dutch observer even suggested incorporating the Muslim Maraikkayars of Kayalpatnam into the Company patronage network, exploiting the existing Parava-Maraikkyar rivalry to bring the recalcitrant Catholic fishermen to order. VOC 1308, OBP 1676, fls. 560r-560v, Nadere consideratien commt. Huijsman, 23.12.1675.

71 VOC 1292, OBP 1674, fls. 154v-155r, Resolutie gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge en raad van Ceijlon, 20.12.1673; VOC 1304, OBP 1675, fl. 325r, Rapport Huijsman wegens den jegenwoordigen stant der saecken op de custe van Madure, 29.3.1674.

72 VOC 1308, OBP 1676, fl. 560r, Nadere consideratien commt. Huijsman raeckende het gedane rapport wegens den toestant van Madure, 23.12.1675.

73 VOC 1315, OBP 1677, fls. 345r-345v, Transl. ola landregent Commare Swami Modeljaar aan commt. Huijsman, 7.6.1676; VOC 1315, OBP 1677, fls. 346r-346v, Transl. contract of of obligatie van de landregent Commare Suami Modeljaar, 2.7.1676; Heeres, , Corpus III, 31–34Google Scholar.

74 Although accepting the offer would have highly indebted these officials and would increase the Company's reputation, it was feared that Chokkanatha Nayaka or a new governor of the lowlands might not acknowledge the agreement. Moreover, if news of the secret deal leaked out, it could create suspicion concerning the Company's real intentions and endanger the reimbursement of the loan on the seaports. In view of these caveats, Governor Van Goens ordered to play for time until further instructions from Batavia were known.

75 VOC 1316, OBP 1677, fl. 336v, Missive Verwer en raad van Nagapatnam aan gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge van Ceijlon, 16.12.1676.

76 Illustrative of imperialist discourse was that the robbery was described as ‘a villainous and treacherous deed’ on the part of the Company's supposed loyal client community. VOC 1333, OBP 1679, fls. 195r-198v, Miss, commt. Huijsman en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge van Ceijlon, 8.11.1678; Idem, fls. 200r-200v and 203r-204r, Miss, koopm. Fauconnier van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge van Ceijlon, 17.11.1678; Idem, fls. 241r-242v and 244r, Transl. ola Moeckapa Neijck aan commr. Huijsman te Tuticorin, 19.11.1678; Idem, fls. 158v-159r, Resolutie gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge en raad van Ceijlon, 21.11.1678.

77 In October 1678, the Dutch had sent an embassy under the head peon Mukkapa Nayaka to the Madurai court. VOC 1333, OBP 1679, fls. 241r-242v, Transl. ola Moeckapa Neijck aan commr. Huijsman te Tuticorin, 19.11.1678; Idem, fls. 212r-213r, Missive Fauconnier en Van Vliet van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge van Ceijlon, 27.11.1678; Idem, fls. 134r-135r, Miss, gouvr. Van Goens de Jonge en raad van Ceijlon aan H. XVII, 2.1.1679.

78 VOC 1469, OBP 1691, fl. 60r, Miss, gouvr. Pijl en raad van Ceijlon aan comms. Van Rheede te Tuticorin, 30.3.1690; VOC 1505, OBP 1693, fls. 424r-424v, Rekest van de pattangattins en verdere Paravase gemeente aan gouvr. Van Rhee van Ceijlon, 3.5.1692; VOC 1506, OBP 1693, fl. 859r, Dagregister gouvr. Van Rhee op de voijagie naar Tuticorin, 12.8-8.9.1692.

79 Markus Vink, ‘Communalism or Coexistence? Muslim-Christian Relations on the Madurai Coast in the 17th Century’, Midwest Conference on Asian Affairs, 46th Annual Meeting, DeKalb, 26–28 September 1997 (unpublished paper).

80 In the seventeenth-century pearl fisheries, consisting of 400–500 vessels and 12,000–16,000 men, the Paravas accounted for fifty-five to sixty-five per cent of the diving stones, while the Muslim divers made up thirty to forty per cent of the stones. Markus Vink, ‘Encounters on the Opposite Coast’, table 6.2, page 397.

81 Rao, Shulman, and Subrahmanyam, Symbols of Substance, 264ff; Shulman, O. and Subrahmanyam, S., ‘Prince of Poets and Ports: Citakatti, the Maraikkayars and Ramnad, ca. 1690–1710’ in: Dallapiccola, A.L. and Lallemant, S. Zingel-Ave eds, Islam and Indian Regions I (Stuttgart 1993) 497–535;Google ScholarBayly, , Saints, esp. 71–86;Google ScholarArasaratnam, S., ‘A Note on Periathamby Marikkar: A 17th Century Commercial Magnate’, Tamil Culture 11/1 (January–March 1964) 51–57. Rao, Shulman, and Subrahmanyam identify three individuals belonging to the Kilakkarai-based family of Shaykh Abd al-Qadir or ‘Cittakatti’, but Dutch sources clearly show that there were fourGoogle Scholar.

82 VOC 1396, OBP 1685, fls. 179r-179v, Transl. ola Perie Tambij aan gouvr. Pijl, 15.3.1684; Idem, fls. 179v-181r, Transl. ola Perie Tambij aan de bramine Timmersa, 15.3.1684; Idem, fl. 378v, Miss, commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 18.10.1684.

83 VOC 1396, OBP 1685, fls. 412v-413r, Resolutie commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin, 21.3.1684; Idem, fls. 169v-170v, 171v and 174r-174v, Resolutie gouvr. Pijl en raad van Ceijlon, 3.4.1684; Idem, fl. 312r, Extract missive commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 30.5.1684; Idem, fl. 339v, Miss, commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 16.6.1684; Idem, fls. 13v-14r, Miss, gouvr. Pijl en raad van Ceijlon aan Batavia, 3.7.1684; Idem, fls. 419r-420r, and 422r-423v, Rolle der wederwaardigheden aan d'E. Comps. dienaren en koopl. &a. door sTeuverheers palligares, manigares, als Moorse regenten aangedaan, 28.10.1684.

84 In March 1684, for instance, the rice and nelli purchased by some Parava peddlers at Valinokkam, Mariyur, and other places in the lands of the Tevar were placed under arrest along with the vessel dispatched from Tuticorin to collect it. The ship and the commodities were only after six months to the great detriment of the traders, who claimed to have lost twenty-five per cent in the process.

85 In a subsequent olai of April 1684, the Periya Tambi dismissed this whole episode categorically as ‘false and fabricated rumors’. VOC 1396, OBP 1685, fl. 332v, Miss, commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 14.2.1684; Idem, fl. 181r, 98 MARKUS P.M. VINK Resolutie gouvr. Pijl en raad van Ceijlon, 9.4.1684.

86 VOC 1396, OBP 1685, fls. 331v-333v, Miss, commt. De Heijde en raad van Ceijlon aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 14.2.1684; Idem, fls. 181v-183r, Transl. ola Perie Tambij aan den Bramine Timmersa, 15.3.1684; Idem, fls. 168v-169r, Resolutie gouvr. Pijl en raad van Ceijlon, 3.4.1684; Idem, fls. 378v-379r and 380v, Miss, commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 3.4.1684.

87 VOC 1396, OBP 1685, fl. 414v, Resolutie commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin, 21.3.1684; Idem, fls. 171r-171v, Resolutie gouvr. Pijl en raad van Ceijlon, 3.4.1684.

88 VOC 1396, OBP 1685, fls. 172v-174r, Resolutie gouvr. Pijl en raad van Ceijlon, 3.4.1684; Idem, fl. 427r, Translaat antwoord den Marca Perietambij op de overgegeven rol van klachten, 15.11.1684.

89 VOC 1396, OBP 1685, fls. 309v-310r, Missive commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 13.4.1684; VOC 1395, OBP 1685, fls. 1839r-1839v, Transl. ola Teuverheer Tiroemalij Chedoepadde Katte Teuver aan de Bramine Timmersa, 26.4.1684; VOC 1396, OBP 1683, fls. 310r-31 lr, Extract missive Van Rhee en Fauconnier van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl van Ceijlon, 28.4.1684; Idem, fls. 335r-335v, Miss, commt. De Heijde en raad van Tuticorin aan gouvr. Pijl, 19.5.1684.

90 VOC 1410, OBP 1686, fls. 247r-248r, Artikelen van de vrede met de Teuver, 15.3.1685; Generale missiven IV, 822, dd. 11.12.1685; Heeres, , Corpus III, 377–380Google Scholar.

91 Bayly, , Saints, esp. 341–347;Google ScholarZupanov, , Disputed Mission, 28–30, 40–41, 122–125, 183–184, and 220–226;Google ScholarKaufman, , ‘A Christian Caste in Hindu Society’, 210–213;Google ScholarClooney, F.X., ‘Robert de Nobili, Adaptation, and the Reasonable Interpretation of Religion’, Missiotogy 18 (1990) 25–36;Google Scholar VOC 1479, OBP 1691, fl. 599r, Dgl. aantekening van de parelvisserij op de kust van Madure door opp.k. Alebos en kaptn. De Theil, 20.6.1690. For a discussion of the syncretic Hindu-Christian beliefs of Tamil Christians in the interior, such as the Alampuram Nadars (Shanars), low-ranking palmyra cultivators and petty traders in Ramanathapuram, see: Mosse, D., ‘Catholic Saints and the Hindu Village Pantheon in Rural Tamil Nadu’, Man (n.s.) 29 (1994) 301–332;CrossRefGoogle ScholarIdem, ‘Roman Catholicism and Hindu Village Society in Tamil Nadu, India’ in: Stewart, C. and Shaw, R. eds, Syncrelism/Anti-syncretism: The Politics of Religious Synthesis (London/New York 1994) 85–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

92 Nieuhof, , Gedenkwaerdige zeeen lantreize, 182.Google Scholar For similar comments: Baldaeus, Ph., Naauwkeurige beschryvinge van Malabar en Chormandel (Amsterdam 1672) 150.Google Scholar Frustration to convert the Paravas to the Calvinist ‘True Faith’ partially account for these condescending remarks.

93 Zupanov, , Disputed Mission, 226.Google Scholar

94 Vink, , ‘Encounters’, 49–50.Google Scholar

95 VOC 1506, OBP 1693, fls. 859v-860v and 868v-869r, Dagregister gouvr. Van Rhee, 12.8-8.9.1692; Anthonisz, S. ed., Memoir of Thomas van Rhee, Governor and Director of Ceylon, for his Successor, Gerrit de Heere, 1697 (Columbo 1915) 36Google Scholar.

96 Between the fiscal years 1678–1679 and 1690–1691, for instance, Dutch investments increased 246 percent from 159,000 to 550,000 guilders. Starting in 1680, ‘associations of indigenous merchants’ were created along the Madurai Coast, holding a monopoly of local trade with the V.O.C. These joint-stock companies were dominated by the Parava mejaikarar. The gradual removal of restrictions on the Indo-Ceylon trade in 1696 furthered boosted the fortunes of the Parava leadership. See: Vink, , ‘Encounters’, 137–138, and 443–445Google Scholar.

97 VOC 1308, OBP 1676, fl. 560v, Nader consideratiën commandant Huijsman wegens den toestant van Madure, 23.12.1675.