Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Edgar Pereira
(Leiden University)
Julie Svalastog (Leiden University)
Kaarle Wirta (Socio Economic History Leiden)
Elisabeth Heijmans (Leiden University)
Send message to Convenors
- Location:
- Sala 1.05, Edifício I&D, Piso 1
- Start time:
- 15 July, 2015 at
Time zone: Europe/Lisbon
- Session slots:
- 2
Short Abstract:
This panel aims to reassess, in a comparative perspective, how different States, Charted Companies and entrepreneurial firms, collected and broadcasted information on markets and circuits in order ground their overseas endeavours between 1500 and 1750.
Long Abstract:
During the early modern period, knowledge on different markets and exchange of information across long distances was a key element behind the development of transcontinental chains of commodities, capital and individuals. These factors were, arguably, just as important as availability of capital, insurance-mechanisms, shipping and logistic solutions, or trust.
To what extent, were the outcomes of overseas enterprises tied to the different ways institutional apparatus and self-organized networks handled information-asymmetries? How did institutional and cultural contexts affect the organization and diffusion of insight across regions and continents? Did bureaucratic apparatus possess more efficient communication chains, or were firms more successful in this regard? Last, but not least, how did formal institutions and self-organized networks interact with each other, through the sharing, conceal or manipulation of information, to better achieve their objectives?
This panel's major aim is, thus, to reassess how States, Charted Companies and entrepreneurial partnerships, gathered, broadcasted and made use of information to ground their overseas endeavours, during the first age of European global expansion and imperialism (1500-1750).
We welcome papers touching upon different chronological and geographical contexts, so that a comparative perspective showcasing the similar and distinctive knowledge traits of western European empires and transnational networks can be achieved.
Accepted papers:
Session 1Paper short abstract:
Through the example of local networks in the French settlement of Juda on the slave coast of Africa, this paper aims to understand why the French Compagnie des Indes found it economically relevant to outsource its own overseas business.
Paper long abstract:
From 1720 to 1749, only 16.1% of the French ships engaged in the slave trade sailed on behalf of the French Compagnie des Indes and a large majority was left to by private traders. Although the company was largely inactive, it still held a formal monopoly on the West African coast and outsourced the trade by allocating licenses in exchange for a percentage of the profit. Why did this state-sponsored company license most of the slave trade on the Slave coast to private traders? The state, through the Company, was still held responsible for the maintenance of the forts and the provisioning of trained personnel without getting maximum return on its investment. What were the state's interests behind such strategy?
This presentation will argue that private entrepreneurs took on most of the French slave trade because they were connected to relevant networks both in Europe and in the overseas domains. Through cross-cultural and trans-national networks, private traders had maximized their access to knowledge of the markets abroad. Men on the spot developed trust relations with local rulers and local merchants. Furthermore they interacted on a daily basis with other European officials and traders. Such connections put them at the focal point for knowledge exchange. With the example of local networks in the French settlement of Juda on the Slave Coast of Africa, this paper aims to understand why the French state found it economically relevant to outsource its own overseas business.
Paper short abstract:
This paper aims at discovering what challenges the Board of Trade, as well as the people and groups they corresponded with, faced when they had to interpret and understand situations, opinions and viewpoints that had to cross the Atlantic.
Paper long abstract:
The British domains overseas demanded much attention from the metropole, especially in the formative years at the end of the 17th Century. For the British Caribbean colonies the place to turn to for answers and direction, especially after the Revolution of 1688, was the Board of Trade. The Board started out as a prolonged arm of the Privy Council, but by the end of the 1690s it had taken on a more information-gathering and directory role. Its main tasks became the compiling of reports for the direction and advice of Parliament, as well as offering and asking advice for better managing the British overseas trade from people considered to have necessary expertise. Through looking at the Board's correspondence and minutes, as well as its various members and their backgrounds, it is the hope of this paper to be able to contribute to our understanding of the exchange of information, knowledge, direction and advice across the Atlantic in this period. This becomes especially relevant when we take into account the challenges that the Board faced when they in the early eighteenth century took on a mediating role between the separate trader interests and the Royal African Company. These debates would inevitably mean the involvement of different communities, societies, trading groups, networks and geographical spheres. The question of how to manage early modern British commerce in the Atlantic was to a large extent answered through intense long-distance lines of correspondence, with the Board of Trade headquarter at Whitehall as its hub.
Paper short abstract:
This paper studies why and how knowledge was crucial for bridging the long distances of overseas trade and why knowledge was a valuable tool for the individuals when they negotiated with the overseas institutions.
Paper long abstract:
In this paper, I want to study the importance of Knowledge about local customs and practices in the 17th century long-distance trade. Hitherto, in overseas historiography Individuals and their knowledge about the long-distance trade have been overlooked. Historians have mainly studied the Atlantic trade either from a large-scale perspective or from a locally focused perspective. However, in this research, I want to bridge this gap and emphasize the role of cross-cultural and transnational entrepreneurs and the asset of their knowledge.
As point of departure, I will look at the value of knowledge for the Atlantic system. Via following the Atlantic career of the entrepreneur Henrich Carloff I will be able to showcase that individuals who had broad knowledge of various temporal and spatial articulations of trade, had the asset and capability to connect the different parts of Atlantic trade. I will argue that knowledge was a crucial asset in establishing and maintaining the trade. This does not only entail the perspective of human business networks, but actually connected the Atlantic as a system. In this paper, the focus is in the Atlantic trade but from a perspective, which emphasizes the importance of knowledge of the social connections and various local trading customs. The outcome of this study will show, why and how knowledge was crucial for bridging the long distances, of overseas trade, and why knowledge was a valuable tool for the individuals when they negotiated with the overseas institutions.
Paper short abstract:
This paper aims to consider to what extent success and failure in managing colonial monopolistic contracts in 17th century Portugal was tied to (ill)informed decision-making and poor/adequate assessment of risk.
Paper long abstract:
In seventeenth century Portugal, the adjudication of colonial monopolistic contracts (contratos) was extensively used by the Monarchy to tax and regulate long distance trade, as well as to finance the empire's administrative apparatus across continents. For businessman, the contracting of these monopolies placed them in a favorable position to dominate key sectors of overseas commerce and to lobby for the Monarch's favor. However, these enterprises were not devoid of risks. The shadow of bankruptcy, followed by the expropriation of mortgaged assets and prosecution, not only of the contract-holder(s), but also of a series of warrantors who backed them up, loomed at large.
This paper's goal is to assess if the decision to bid for a certain contrato was guided by proficient knowledge of the different variables that conditioned the overseas trades they were to engage with. Did contractors and their networks possessed a clear understanding of the consumption demands of different markets and its institutions? Were they capable of correctly assessing the evolution of demand and supply? Could they anticipate factors lying "outside" the market, such as armed conflict? Did they fully grasp the logistic and financial means that these burdensome enterprises required? Ultimately, I seek to understand, to what extent success or failure might have been tied to (ill)informed decision-making and poor/adequate assessment of risk.
To answer these questions I will look at the trajectories of several individuals who held contratos in different businesses and areas of the empire, and their strategies to finance and operationalize them.
Paper short abstract:
In this paper I will observe the involvement of Luis Mendes de Vasconcelos on the slave trade, as well as his actions during Angola’s territorial occupation, whose process was contemporary with the massive disputes and investments on the asientos and contratos, held by rival groups.
Paper long abstract:
The Transatlantic slave trade at the dawn of the seventeenth century was far from being a simple endeavour for the merchants that dwelled on it. To ensure the transport between the various territories of the Atlantic, a large scale enterprise was required, backed by private investment and based on the establishment of vast networks, composed of wealthy entrepreneurs and supported by trustworthy persons who could properly conduct their business on the various edges and ports of the Empire.
Among these groups of men, the ones possessing the highest financial means would always bid for the Contratos and the Asientos of slaves that would allow them to regulate the trade. However, they were not the only ones able to control or dictate its pace. The case of the Governor Luís Mendes de Vasconcelos (1617-1621) is an example of a Crown official who took advantage of his power position to influence the trade. Backed by agents of his own, Vasconcelos managed to greatly profit from his warmongering policy that destroyed the Kingdom of Ndongo, and developed his own financial enterprise. The impact that he and his network had in the territory had massive consequences for Luanda, and for the flow of the trade in the following years.
In this paper I will take the slave trade in early seventeenth century Angola (1600-1620) and Vasconcelos' network, to reflect the role of the private agents on development the slave trade and on the progression of Angola's territorial occupation, whose process was contemporary with the massive investments on the asientos and contratos, and, inseparable from it.