Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T07:32:15.798Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Monopoly and Free Trade in Dutch-Asian Commercial Policy: Debate and Controversy within the VOC

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

S. Arasaratnam
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Dutch East India Company (VOC) secured in March 1602, by charter from the States General of the Netherlands, a monopoly of eastern trade. Throughout its history of two centuries, it sought zealously to maintain and safeguard this monopoly against all interlopers and against any attempts at private trade by its own officers. With its establishment and expansion in the east the Company extended this concept of monopoly to embrace as much of Asian trade as it could master. It developed early the policy of acquiring a monopoly of certain key commodities of Asian trade by controlling the areas of production and hence the supply. It soon went further and declared a total monopoly of the entire seaborne trade of specific trading areas by virtue of conquest, enforced contracts and naval domination. Thus the close monopoly of the Europe/Asia trade and of large areas of their inter-Asian trade constituted a commercial system to which the Company's Directors and its officers in Asia became closely attached and it formed a major plank in its commercial policy in the two centuries of its existence. Through this period, its energies and exertions were largely directed to the acquisition and maintenance of this many-sided monopoly system. Monopolistic policies and practices in trading dominated the thinking and activities of the Company at all levels of operation. The VOC was held as the archetype of such a trading body.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , March 1973 , pp. 1 - 15
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1973

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

1 Hogendorp, D. van, Beright van den tegenwoordigen toestand der Bataafsche bezittenger in Oost-Indie en den handel op dezelve (Delft, 1800)Google Scholar.

2 Coen's letters and memoirs on this subject are published in Colenbrander, H.T., Jan Pietersz Coen, Bescheiden omtrent zijn bedrijf in Indre (The Hague 1929–1923)Google Scholar Vol. II and his policies summarised in Colenbrander, H. T., Jan Pietersz Coen, Levensbeschrijving ('s-Gravenhage, 1934) pp. 63–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Some of the sources for this controversy are published in Tiele, P.A., Bouwstoffen voor de geschiedenis der Nederlanders in den Mateischen Archipel (The Hague 1886–1895)Google Scholar Vol. I. Differences between Coen and Reael summarised in Colenbrander, Pietersz, Jan. , Coen, Levens-beschrijving pp. 320–354Google Scholar. A fair and critical discussion of the controversy in Meilink-Roelofsz, M.A.P., Asian Trade and European Influence in the Indonesian Archipelago 1500–1630 (The Hague, 1962) pp. 208–222Google Scholar.

4 , Coen, “Discoers aen de E. Heeren Bewinthebberen touscherende den Nederlandche Indischeinstaet, 1 Januari 1614”, , Colenbrander, Jan Pietersz Coen, Levensbeschrijving, pp. 470–472Google Scholar.

5 Dam, Pieter Van, Beschryvinge van de Oostindische Compagnie, Boek, Derde, uitgegeven door DrStapel, F.W. ('s-Gravenhage, 1943) pp. 349–351Google Scholar.

6 Dam, Van, Beschryvinge van de Oostindische Compagnie, III pp. 352–354Google Scholar.

7 Dam, Van, Beschryvinge van de Oostindische Compagnie, III pp. 355–357Google Scholar.

8 “Concept en Consideration door Pieter van Dam, advocaat van de Generaale Nederland-sche geoctroyeerde Oost-Indische Compagnie, in geschrifte vervat op' t stuk van den handel van Indien mitsgaders directie van saaken van de gemelte Compagnie so daar als hier te lande, en dat in voldoening van de resolutie den 30 Maart deses jaars 1662 dienaangaande ter vergadering van de Heeren Seventienen genoomen,” Bijdragen tot de Taal-Land-en Volkenkunde, Deel 74, pp. 270–298.

9 Resolution van Heeren Zeventien 14 September 1662, Bijdragen tot de Taal-Land-en-Volkenkunde, Deel 74, pp. 268–9.

10 For details of this see Arasaratnam, S., Dutch Power in Ceylon 1658–1687 (Amsterdam, 1958) pp. 159–177Google Scholar.

11 “Preparatoir Consideratien op den prasenten toestant van het eijlant Ceylon,” Hoorn, Pieter Van, 6 March 1675, Koloniale Archief (The Hague) 1196 fos 193–197Google Scholar.

12 “Nader Consideratien op het Eylant Ceylon,” Hoorn, Pieter Van 28 November 1676 Kol. Arch. 1204 fos 332–333Google Scholar.

13 Pyl to Directors, 9 January 1681, Kol. Arch. 1244 f88.

14 Governor General and Council to Pyl, 19 September 1681, Kol. Arch. 809 f 88O.

15 Pyl to Directors, 9 January 1681, Kol. Arch. 1244 f81; Pyl to Directors, 22 January 1683 Kol. Arch. 1262 f89.

16 Governor General and Council to Directors, 30 Nov. 1697, Kol. Arch. 1475 fos 196–197.

17 Directors to Governor General and Council, 18 September 1702, Kol. Arch. 462.

18 Bijdragen tot de Taal-Land-en-Volkenkunde, Deel 66, pp. 445–555.

19 “Memorie over Malacca en den thinhandel aldaar, ter speculatie van de WelEdele Achtbare Heeren Bewindhebberen der Nederlandse Oost-Indische Companie, door A.E. Van Braam Houchgeest,” Bijdragen tot de Taal-Land-en-Volkenkunde, Deel 76, pp. 292–309.

20 Raffles, T.S., History of Java I (Kuala Lumpur Report, 1965) pp. 218–232Google Scholar.