Showing posts with label India Office Records. Show all posts
Showing posts with label India Office Records. Show all posts

Thursday, April 30, 2026

Danvers 1893 Records relating to the East

 The following post relates to my academic research which is documented in my thesis:

Holmes, D. L. (2008). Old company records: The effect of custodial history on the arrangement and description of selected archival collections of business records. Thesis, Master of Science, School of Computer and Information Science, Edith Cowan University, 2008.  Available at https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/23

If you would like further information about Frederick Charles Danvers and the records he investigated in the 1890s at the State Archives in The Hague, please email me on geniedonna @ yahoo.com.au 

The following transcript is from my copy of manuscript made by Ray, 1945.

Report on the Records

Relating to the East in the 

State Archives in The Hague

By Frederick Charles Danvers, 1893.

Report pages 3-28 (of 54), without footnotes.

Frederick Charles Danvers

[Page 3]

During my visit to the Hague last year, I searched through the following records, viz., “Letters from [the]* XVII to India”, from their commencement in 1614 to the year 1633, “Letters from the Governors General to the various factories”, from 1617 to 1633 and “Letters from India” from 1669 to 1686.  On my return visit I continued an examination of these same records from the last named dates to the year 1700 ; I also examined a fourth series, consisting of “Letters from the Kamer to Amsterdam to the Governors General”, from their commencement in 1642 also to the year 1700.  I have thus completed an examination of all the most important documents in the Rijksarchief, bearing upon the history of the Dutch in India, and have made selections of documents to the copies “principally of those having reference to the contemporaneous histories of the European nations (in the East) up to the beginning of the 18th century”.

Since the commencement of my engagements of this work I have searched through 564 volumes and have marked the important documents to be copied.  Of the latter copies have already been made and delivered of …1  selected records, all belonging to the 17th century.  Where important documents have been published I have procured copies of them, that being, at the same time, more satisfactory and cheaper than having them specially copied.  Other Dutch records are contained in books already in the India Office Library, such as those by de … 1  .  

The 17th century was a most important period of Indo-European commerce and witnessed more …. 2 by the Portuguese, Dutch and English for the monopoly of that trade.  The opening of the century found the Portuguese in almost undisputed possession of this commerce but in little more than half a century the Dutch had captured their most important possessions, leaving them practically little more to boast of than the territories now occupied by them in the East.  The struggles between the Dutch and English during this period were principally confined to the eastern Archipelago where the former succeeded in driving the latter out of Java.  In the early years of this century the English had been sufficiently strong to command the respect of the Dutch, and from some letters from the latter of a much later date it would appear as though they had, for the time being, limited their opposition with the Portuguese against themselves in the East, in which contingency it seems highly improbable that the Dutch would have been able to withstand them.  Fears to this effect were seriously entertained in 1635 3, in 1652 4, and again in 1672 5 and these apprehensions no doubt contributed in some measure towards the comparative freedom of the English factories in India proper from attach.  Towards the end of the century, however, these fears evidently died out, and in 1688 we find the Dutch Governor General referring to “the miserable condition of the English”, whilst, so far from feeling any dread of them he remarked to the Commander at Cochin, that “fear of the English does not exist ‘ they only talk’ ”. 1

It will be seen from my report of last year (copy annexed)2  that I therein gave a very brief sketch of some of the leading events that occurred in the East, of general European interest, between the years 1595 and the conclusion of the Treaty of Westminster in 1654.  In my recent researches I have come across a number of additional documents bearing upon several of these events, between 1635 and the last named year, and it may be of interest if I here refer back to that period before continuing my narrative for the second half of the seventeenth century.

Foremost amongst these documents may be mentioned the “Instructions” issued at various dates by the Netherlands Administrations for the regulation of their Eastern Trade.  These “Instructions” are the embodiment of the principles on which the Dutch East Indian possessions were obtained, held, and governed.  Without these it would be impossible fully to appreciate the continuity of policy pursued by the Dutch in the East, or properly to apportion responsibility for their actions between the State, the Company, and their Governors.  This is, I believe, the first instance of these important documents being made available excepting in the Dutch language.

Up to the latter part of 1609 the Dutch East India Company was carried on principally as a trading enterprise, and the Treaties entered into with the rulers of various places in the Eastern Archipelago were, with the exception of one with Amboyna, in 1600, principally commercial Treaties, for facilitating the purchase of spices by the Dutch.  The Treaty with Amboyna, above referred to, included however, a stipulation that the Dutch should assist in the expulsion of the Portuguese from that island ‘ and subsequent Treaties with Banda and Pulo Ay respectively – both dated in 1602 – contained clauses under which the Dutch bound themselves to assist the natives against their enemies.

Under these, and subsequent Treaties, the Dutch had acquired predominant influence in the Moluccas, and has opened trade relations with Bantam, Borneo, Macassar, Johore, the Malay Peninsula, Achin, Malabar, Coromandal and even with China.  With the exercise of so wide an influence over a vast number of distant countries, the want of some supreme authority in the East soon began to be felt at home, and accordingly, by a Proclamation of the States General, of the 26th November 1609, it was decided to appoint a Governor General and Council for the purpose of regulating the affairs of the Dutch in the East Indies, who should “act as an authority over persons and their actions, so as to inspire the Indian Princes and peoples with confidence in the Dutch nation and regulate their relations with the mother country. 1   By a proclamation dated the day following (27th November, 1609) Pieter Both was appointed the first Governor General.

It will be interesting to give here a few details of these first Instructions, contained in the Proclamation of the 26th November, the author of which is reputed to have been Cornelius Matelief 1  the younger, a distinguished naval commander in the Eastern seas, who returned to Holland in the year 1608.  The first Article of these instructions is as follows:

“As soon as the Governor General shall have arrived at Bantam, all actions of the daily Council, which had authority over the fleet, shall cease, and, after all information shall have been duly taken, a legislative body, to control all actions and affairs in India, shall be formed under the advice of the Fiscal and Accountant, which Council shall be called the Council of State for India.  It is expressly ordered that, besides the Governor General himself, the two following gentlemen shall be members of the Council of State, namely Jan Lodenykaz van Rossengijn and Steven Doensz. Van Groendijck ; furthermore, these three shall appoint others so as to bring the number of the Council up to five, by the advice of which five persons the Governor General shall appoint Counsellors and others with power and authority to administer justice in all civil actions”.

Under Article 8 the Governor General was granted full liberty of action in regard to all matters connected with trade ; Article 9 prescribed certain enquiries the Governor General was to make about persons and affairs connected with the internal affairs of the Company, whilst Article 10 explained, in considerable detail, the investigations he was to institute with regard to the Company’s foreign relations, of which the following is an extract:

“You will enquire particularly into the relations with all Kings, Princes, and nations of all India with whom the Company is trading, so as to know whether these are friendly and favourably, or otherwise, disposed, and why, and for what purpose each and every one of them is so disposed towards the Company.  You will try to find out which of them are friends or enemies of the Portuguese, and why, and for what purpose they are so, what their power, possessions, and connections are, and in what relations they stood towards the Portuguese before the arrival of the ships of these countries in India, and how each and every one of them behaved towards our nation and towards the Portuguese.  You will further enquire who are the actual rulers of affairs in the different States of India, and what are the best means of entering into closer relations with them, in order to be able to decide what can and should be done, not only to extend the East Indian Commerce, to propagate the name of Christ for the salvation of the Heathen, for the honour and reputation of our nation, and for profits of the Company, but also to increase by all possible ways and means.”

Up to this time the Dutch had no head or central station in the East, but under these “Instructions” Pieter Both was directed to select either Bantam, or Johore, for a capital and residence of the Governor General ; the Officers of the Company were prohibited from trading on their own account, and authority was given for searching the ships when anything of that sort was suspected ; and by Article 21 the Governor General was granted a wide margin of liberty in his dealings with native Kings, so long as he succeeded in extending the power and trade of the Company in their several territories.

With regard to the Moluccas (Art. 22) it was especially laid down that the trade of those Islands, including also that of Amboyna and Banda, was to be retained “wholly, absolutely, and entirely in the hands of the United Company, and that no particle of it shall be left to anyone but ourselves, and to those whom we think proper.”  To this effect it was ordered that all the Dutch fortresses and strongholds thereabouts were to be strengthened and well garrisoned, to which end, if necessary, the Kings of those countries were to be required to give assistance.  As however, the Dutch were at this time, at peace with Spain and Portugal, Pieter Both was instructed that his actions must be regulated accordingly.

By Article 23 Pieter Both was advised to establish a rendezvous as Jakatra.  He accordingly contracted an alliance with the King of that country, by which certain privileges of commerce were granted to the Dutch, and he purchased from him a piece of land, situated to the East of the river Tangerang, for the erection of a Factory, which subsequently developed into the City of Batavia.

Orders were given in Articles 28 and 29 that the Portuguese were, by all means, to be kept out of the country “and”, it was added, “if the Portuguese or Spaniards should so far forget themselves (which we hope may not be the case) as to attack you, your subjects, or your allies, or cause them damage, contrary to the Truce and the interpretation thereof given by the States General, and embodied in resolution of the last meeting of the Seventeen, whereof a copy is enclosed,  you must at once counteract the same, in such manner as you may deem proper according to Divine and Human right in your Council, always remembering the duty incumbent on you of upholding our nation’s honour and reputation by all honourable means.”

Article 34 provided that some ships should be employed in a coasting trade, which should bring all produce to Jakatra, from whence the hold sailing vessels would take in their cargoes and return at once to the mother country.  This regulation, however, proved inconvenient in practice and with regard to some of the outlying stations to the west of Jakatra and, accordingly, in 1633 the Seventeen sent out instruction to the effect that shipments from Surat and Persia should be sent home direct “on the principle adopted by the English”, and that the vessels from those ports should meet the homeward bound fleets from Batavia at the Cape of Good Hope or at St. Helena 1.

With regard to the China trade, it was recommended (Art. 35) that Nanking should be made the principal port of call, instead of Macao or Canton ; and by Article 37 it was advised that reprisals should be taken against Surat, where David van Deynsen has been murdered. 2

The foregoing “Instructions” were necessarily of a somewhat tentative nature, and those remained in force for a short time only.  On the appointment of Gerard Reynat*, in 1613, as Governor General, in succession to Pieter Both, new “Instructions” were issued.  These are not contained in “Verzameling van Instruction**”, but are to be found in Dr. P. van Dam’s “Beshrijving”, Appendix, Vol. III, a MS. book in the Archives at the Hague.  They have been published in “Tijdschrift Indische Taal, Land en Volkenkunde” Vol. I. p. 117-161.  These “Instructions” contain more detailed directions with regard to trade than were given in the earlier Orders to Pieter Both ; they authorised the new Governor General to change the Commanders at all the Ports (Art. 3) which would appear to have been in imitation of the plan adopted by the Portuguese in India.

It would seem from Article 18, that the servants of the Company had already entered upon a regular system of private trading and that many of the best articles and commodities sent home were on private account ; the most stringent orders were consequently issued for the prevention of this trade, and all vessels going home, or trading from port to port were to be searched accordingly.  But little change was made in the former orders with regard to Native Princes, except as regards Bantam, where, it was complained, the trade was much prejudiced by the high duties exacted.

With regard to the Portuguese, it was observed in Article 26, they would no doubt endeavour to spoil the commercial of the Dutch as much as possible, and that therefore every means must be adopted to drive them away from the various countries visited by Dutch vessels, so that such natives as desired to trade with the latter should not be hindered from doing so.  Should force, however be employed by the Portuguese or Spaniards it must be resisted by force.

Article 30 gives instructions regarding shipping, wherein it is stated that as a journey from Holland to the Moluccas takes a whole year, and at the end of that time the vessels have become too much damaged to withstand with safety the stormy seas of the Cape of Good Hope, on a return journey, those ships must as a rule, be kept in the Indian seas, and the produce from those Islands stored at some head quarters, to be put on board vessels arriving these from Holland, to be sent home direct.  The trade with China (Art. 31) was also to be carried on by means of small vessels from the seat of Government in the East.

In the 33rd Article, the death of David van Deynsen was again referred to, and orders were given that possession should be taken of vessels belonging to the people of Surat, (but in such a manner as to avoid complications with any friendly Native Princes of India) with the view of impressing the Natives with a sense of the injuries of their actions, and with the view of obtaining compensation for the death of van Deynsen.  Should, however, compensation be refused, the Governor General was to take revenge in such manner as might seem fit.

The next “Instructions” to the Governor General dated the 22nd August 1617, and were ratified by the States General on the 3rd November following.  They commence by defining the authority of the Governor General, and decree that his Council shall be constituted as follows:

1st Member. The most able merchant who can be found.

2nd Member. A valiant and able sailor.  A Vice-Admiral.

3rd Member. One of the most able and experienced Officers of the Army.

4th Member. A person learned in Law and Equity.

5th Member. Director General of all Officers of Trade in India.

6th Member. Vice-Governor and Director of the Fortresses and Offices in the Moluccas.

7th Member. Vice-Governor of the Fortresses and Offices on the Coromandal Coast.

8th Member. Vice-Governor and Director of the Fortresses and Offices in Amboyna and the adjacent countries.

9th Member. Vice-Governor and Director of the Fortresses and Offices on the Islands of Banda Neera, Pulo Ay, Pulo Rhun, Lontivi Rosengyn, Goenong Api, and all countries adjacent thereto.

Then follows a list of salaries of all the highest Offices, exclusive of the Governor General, the Director General at Bantam and the Vice-Governor of the Moluccas receiving the highest, viz. f. 250 a month (Art. 12-16).  The greater part of these “Instructions” refer to Officers of the Company and their respective duties.  Article 35 contains orders for preventing other nations from injuring the trade of the Dutch, contrary to treaties ; if this cannot be done by persuasion, force is to be used, and their vessels and cargoes to be seized.  Articles 52-55 contain directions in the case of captured prizes and the treatment to which prisoners were to be subjected ; none but enemies were to be employed as Galley slaves, and Spaniards are particularly mentioned in this category, but no convict of Dutch nationality was to be so used.  Articles 56 to 73 refer to free trading, and in Article 74 it is recommended that Chinese should be encouraged to settle in the Moluccas, there not being in those islands a sufficient number of inhabitants for the proper cultivation of the soil.  Chinese, it was stated, are to be preferred for their purpose, they being an industrious and laborious race, and not in the habit of carrying weapons.  Orders were again given in these “Instructions” for the selection of a place as the capital and seat of Government in the East (Arts. 75-77); accordingly Jakatra was decided upon for that purpose on the 30th May, 1619, and its name was changed to Batavia, on the 4th March, 1621.

The circumstances connected with the selection of Jakatra for his purpose were as follows1 :   Jan Pietersz Coen* felt great difficulty in arriving at a solution of the questions as to which place in the East would be most suited for a capital, and his choice wavered between Bantam and Malacca.  On the whole he gave a preference to the latter, partly on account of its traditions as a place of commerce and being more convenient for the trade with China and the Eastern Archipelego*.  He had not however sufficient force at his disposal to capture that port.  On the other hand, if the Dutch left Bantam, that place and the pepper trade would be left open to the English.  He decided therefore, to remain for the present at Bantam, and to erect a fort there.  Shortly afterwards, however, in consequence of differences with the Regent of Bantam, opinion changed in favour of Jakatra as a head quarters for the Dutch Government.  Buildings had already been erected there for the storage of merchandise, and, on the 10th July, 1619, Coen resolved to garrison the place with 24 soldiers, owing to a great extent to his mistrust of the English there.  On the arrival of a British fleet commanded by Sir Thomas Dale off Jakatra, in December, 1618, Coen fortified the Dutch factory, and prepared for resistance.  This place was speedily strengthened and converted into a fortress, and on the 12th March, 1619 it was officially named “Batavia”, and since then became the head quarters of the Dutch in the East.  These occurrences are intimately associated with the expulsion of the English from Jakatra and as that event is not recorded in any of our histories, and only fragmentary documents bearing on the subject are extant in our Records it may be interesting to give a brief account of it as taken from the Dutch Records.

Although the Governments of Great Britain and of the Netherlands had, since 1611, endeavoured to devise means for the establishment of amicable relations between the English and Dutch East India Companies, the quarrels between them, in the East, appear to have increased rather than otherwise and by 1616 their animosities resulted in fights between their respective adherents in the streets of Bantam, and shortly after the arrival of Dr. Laurens Reael in Java, as Governor General, a most serious riot occurred at Bantam on the 22nd November, 1617.

It appears from the Records at the Hague that some Spanish and Portuguese prisoners had escaped from the Dutch and Found a safe hiding place on board certain British vessels ; and when one of the Dutch Officials went to claim them back, the English refused to give them up1.  A few weeks later, one of these prisoners was seen walking about Bantam, where he was seen by some Dutchmen, who recaptured him, and locked him up in one of their warehouses.  As soon as this became known to the English, they attacked the Dutch factory, plundered a warehouse, and killed and wounded several Dutchmen.  Shortly after this news arrives that two2 British ships, which had been sent to Banda had been seized by the Dutch, and this further incensed the English against them.

As soon as the Dutch Governor General at Jakatra heard of the attack on the Bantam factory, he ordered a large fleet to proceed to that port, and issued a placard3 declaring that the trade with Banda, Amboyna and the Maluccas would be closed to the English, on the ground that the Dutch has procured for themselves a monopoly of trade with those islands, and threatening that if these orders were disobeyed the English would be driven from these ports.  Against these orders Mr. George Ball, the President at Bantam wrote a strong protest1 and positively refused to recognize his authority or pretensions to an exclusive trade.

The relations between the English and Dutch became still further strained when, on the arrival of two2 vessels belonging to the French East India Company at Java, one of which was commanded by Hans de Decker, a Dutch subject, the Director General (Jan Pietersz Coen) had him arrested and tried on a charge of disobeying the law3.  He was imprisoned, and the two French ships were detained.  De Decker however escaped – as was alleged – by the aid of the English, and he obtained a hiding place in Bantam, the Regent of which place refused to surrender him to the Dutch.

The English Factories at Bantam and Jakatra were now, the Dutch authorities asserted, being used as places of refuge for run-away Dutch soldiers, sailors, and inferior officials, who were enticed away by the promise of higher wages.  George Ball, the English President at Bantam was deemed to be the principal offender in this matter, and Nicholas Ufflete, the Factor at Jakatra was charged with having incites the natives to kill Coen4 and all the Dutchmen there, and to pillage their Factory.  Coen, in consequence, issued a placard prohibiting all intercourse of Dutch subjects with either Englishmen or Chinese.

In the course of the year 1618, a serious difference arose between the English and the Regent of Bantam, who now seemed inclined to be more friendly with the Dutch ; but just as affairs appeared to be taking a favourable turn for the latter, a conspiracy broke out, instigated by the Javanese, who feared lest the Dutch who had obtained permission to erect a fortress at Jakatra should abuse that privilege by making themselves masters of the whole Island, as they had done in the Moluccas1.  An intention had been formed to murder all the Dutch.  At Japara, their factory was taken by assault, the merchandise stolen, and several Europeans were killed.  At Jakatra precautions against attach were taken by strengthening the fort with guns from the ships, until the place became so strong that Coen considered it “the very place for a capital” 2.

These preparations for defence seriously alarmed the King of Jakatra, who applied to the English to assist him in an attack he intended to make on the Dutch, but this the Chief Factor declined3.

About this time the English East India Company sent out a strong naval force, of ten vessels, to Bantam, which arrived there in November 1618 ; and in the following month five more ships arrived under the command of Sir Thomas Dale.  According to the Dutch account, the arrival of these 15 ships much emboldened the English at Bantam, who declared they would “teach these Dutchmen a lesson ; they would not only drive them out of Amboyna, Banda and the Moluccas, but altogether out of India, and as to that fellow Coen who had done them so much harm, they would catch him dead or alive.” 1

A few days after the arrival of this fleet at Bantam, they captured the Dutch vessel, “Black Lion” upon which Coen addressed a strong protest2 to Sir Thomas Dale, asking for explanations, and enquiring whether he intended peace or war.  The reply was that war was meant, and than an English force would arrive at Jakatra, annihilate the Dutch forces, and take Coen prisoner, either dead or alive.

About this time news arrived at Bantam from Jambi that Richard Westby, Cape Merchant at that port, had been invited by the Dutch to supper, and had been murdered by them in their own house3.

Coen had not been prepared for the present turn of affairs, and was very scantily provided with war material both at Jakatra and Bantam, having recently sent way the main part of his fleet, which was, at the juncture, concentrated in the Moluccas, and at Banda and Amboyna.  Besides this it soon became ebident to him that the Javanese Kings and Princes had conspired together against the Dutch.

The Dutch fortress at Jakatra was situated on the eastern bank of the river Tji-li-wang.  On the 22nd December, 1618 Coen discerned a covered battery to the southwest in the place where the English factory had stood, and earthworks to the westward manned by Javanese, mounted with guns in charge of English gunners.

Altogether he estimated the enemy’s force to number some 7,000 men.

On the 23rd December, Coen found that all the Javanese dwellings round about the Dutch factory were destroyed ; he thereupon, at once attacked the English fortification, which was captured, sacked and burnt.  The English would appear to have then retired from Jakatra, for in a letter to the Company from Messrs. James Cartwright and John Cooper, dated Amsterdam, 20th August, 16191 it is stated that the force in the native fort consisted only of Indians (Javanese) some 7,000 or 8,000 in number “our English keeping their forces by sea from them”.  Coen then had the ground cleared between the Dutch factory and the town of Jakatra.  The next day the Regent of Jakatra opened a destructive fire from his batteries to the westward of the Dutch fort, which were unsuccessfully attacked by the Dutch on the 25th December.

On the morning of the 30th December eleven English ships arrived before Jakatra, from Bantam, whereupon Coen determined to attack them with the seven vessels he had there, and himself took command of the fleet, leaving Pieter van den Broeck* in charge of the fortress.  On the 31st Coen encountered the English vessels, which were shortly afterwards reinforced by three more ships.  The English fleet avoided coming to close quarters, and after a few days of fighting, Coen finding his ammunition running short, sailed away to the Moluccas to procure reinforcements from the ships in those seas, intending to return at once and recover lost ground.  Before leaving he sent a message1 to Van den Broeck to defend the fortress as long as possible, and, should he be unable to hold it, he was to consent to no negotiations with the Javanese, but rather surrender the place to the English.  In reporting these events to the XVII in Holland, Coen impressed upon them the necessity for sending him a strong reinforcement in ships, and wound up his letter with the observation, “I swear by Almighty God that the General Company hath no worse enemies then the ignorance and apathy which excuse me for saying so, reigns supreme amongst your Council.” 2 

Sir Thomas Dale shortly after his arrival concluded an alliance with the King of Bantam by the payment of 1500 Reals in cash, and an annual allowance of 700 Reals to assist him in routing the Dutch.  This was dated the 14th January, 1619.  It appears from a letter3 addressed from Bantam to Sir Thomas Dale in Jakatra, dated the 26th December, 1618, that the King of Bantam was then sending a number of prows full of men to Jakatra as reinforcements.  Subsequently, at a Council4 held at the King’s Court, Jakatra, on the 14th January, 1619 at which Sir Thomas Dale presided, it was agreed to lend the King 10 more pieces of cannon with 20 barrels of power and ammunition to assist him in battering the Dutch fort at Jakatra.  On the same date van den Broeck received a letter from the Regent of Jakatra1 in which he sued for peace and offered to assist the Dutch against the English in return for a payment of 5,000 Reals in cash, and 1,000 Reals in Cloth.  This was accepted, and a contract was entered into on the 19th whereupon van den Broeck went to the Regent’s palace with a small escort, who, on arrival, were all knocked down, bound and imprisoned.  The Regent then forced van den Broeck to write to the Dutch garrison directing them to deliver the fortress to the Javanese.  The Chief Merchant, who had assumed the command on the departure of van den Broeck, at first refused to comply, and on the 29th January he received a letter from Sir Thomas Dale advising the he should surrender to him, urging that it would be better for the Dutch to capitulate to a Christian nation rather than to Javanese, Moors or Mahommedans.

After various devices had been adopted by the Regent of Jakatra to secure the surrender of the fortress, van den Broeck at last agreed to a treaty2 which was signed on the 31st January, under which the fortress with its garrison, guns and ammunition were to be given up to Sir Thomas Dale ; the money, treasure and merchandise were to go to the Regent, and the garrison to be embarked on board an English vessel and transported to the Coromandel Coast.

The King of Bantam was greatly enraged at these conditions ; he deposed the Regent of Jakatra, quarrelled with the English, and at the same time showed favour towards the Dutch.  Finding every impediment thrown in his way in fulfilling the terms of this treaty Sir Thomas Dale proceeded to Bantam to try and set matters right again with the King, whereupon the garrison of the Dutch fortress seeing no prospect of an attack, set to work to repair the damaged fortifications, and destroyed the earthworks that had been erected against them.

Thus matters remained until the 10th May when the Dutch frigate “Ceylon” arrived at Jakatra, and was followed the next day by a Dutch fleet of 16 vessels with Jan Pieteraz Coen, having ascertained the state of affairs, assembled a force of 1,000 men, and attacked and captured the town of Jakatra.  Having driven out the Javanese garrison, he burned down the town including the palace and mosque, and in writing home to the Company giving an account of his proceedings, he observed, “Thus have we punished the people of Bantam, and driven them out of Jakatra …  The foundation for a capital has been laid ; a great part of the best and most fertile country now belongs to you.” 1 

Coen next desired to have his revenge on the English, whom he looked upon as the real cause of all these troubles ; he therefore sent out vessels with instructions to take compensation from any English vessels they might encounter.  In Patani roads they met two English vessels, one of which was commanded by John Jourdain ; these they fought and captured and in the engagement John Jourdain and 39 of his men were killed2.  On the 11th October, 1619, four other English ships were encountered near Tekoe, which were also captured, after a sharp fight, and the Commander, Captain Bonner, was killed together with thirty of his men1.  Coen was not satisfied with the revenge thus taken on the English, and was contemplating further acts of retaliation when news arrived, on the 27th 2 March, 1620, of the conclusion of a treaty between the English and Dutch (on the 7th July preceding), in accordance with the conditions of which both parties were to trade peaceably in India, abstaining from all acts of hostility and violence.  At this Coen was very indignant, and, writing to the authorities at home, on the 11th May, 1620, he remarked3, “Well may the English thank you ; they had already shut themselves out of India, and now you have put them right back in the middle of it.  If their intentions be honest and just, all will be well, but, if not, then you will perceive that you have fostered a serpent in your bosom.  True, the servant has not to enquire into his master’s actions, and I am aware that to the United Provinces it is of great importance to live in friendly relations with the Crown of England ; but still, if I mistake not, you have been too hasty, and I cannot conceive why the English should be allowed a third of all the spices of the Moluccas, for they have not conquered one grain of sand of the beach of the Moluccas, neither of Amboyna, nor of Banda.  If they had any power there, why have they not driven the Spaniards away from Tidore and Ternate?”

Under this Treaty, the “Council of Defence” was established, which consisted of four English and four Dutch members.  The King of Bantam, however, persistently refused to have anything to do with the English, and that town was consequently blockaded by a combined fleet.  This prevented the re-establishment of an English factory there, and necessitated the selection, for that purpose of a site close to the Dutch fortress at Jakatra, being prevented by Coen from Occupying again their former position, which was still strong enough for defence should hostilities again break out between the two companies.  From this time the English remained in Jakatra only by sufferance, the Dutch claiming proprietory rights in the town and neighbourhood, in virtue of having conquered the country by force of arms.

Besides the Dutch Records referred to in the footnotes I have procured copies of many others bearing upon this subject, including some consultations and letters of the English President and Council, which will be found in Nos. CIV to CVI in “Dutch Records at the Hague”, first series, Vol. III, Translations.

On the 17th March, 1632 new Orders were issued on the appointment of Hendrik Brouwer as Governor General.  These being for the most part, of a private nature, were not ratified by the States General ; they did not supersede the previous “Instructions”, but on the contrary, contained strict injunctions that they should be followed and obeyed (Art. 96).

The first part of these “Instructions” is taken up principally with suggestions with the view of affecting economy in the administration, particularly with regard to the maintenance of fortifications and repair of ships.  Wedding gifts to young women, sent out from Holland, on their marriage in India were to be abolished1 (Art. 28-30), and economy was enjoined in the payment of premiums for enemies slain ; in defraying expenses of funerals for high Officials and Officers, and in the giving of presents (Art. 36-38).  The following ten Articles refer to trade in Persia and Surat.  Care was enjoined that the English should not be permitted to draw away trade from the Dutch in Persia, and every attempt was to be made to secure a monopoly of the spice trade at Surat.  The Masulipatam Factory was to be maintained (Art. 49) “and the wrong done to us to be avenged later on in case of a renewal of the same.”  The request of the Achinese for assistance in attacking Malacca was not to be entertained (Art. 51, 52).  Instructions are given with reference to trade with Siam, China, and Japan (Art. 54-59) ; and in Article 62 it is remarked that as a considerable fleet of war vessels had to be maintained in the Chinese waters, for the protection of the Dutch trade with China, Tai-wan , and Japan, it would be advisable to employ those ships, from time to time, in attacking the Portuguese vessels between Mecao and Japan, so as to prevent them from continuing to carry on that trade.  With regard to Amboyna (Art. 65-68) every effort was to be made to maintain a monopoly for the spice trade and on the Islands of Rhun and Rosengyn (Art. 73-75) all the clove trees were ordered to be cut down, and fruit trees and other food producing plants to be cultivated in their stead.

The next general “Instructions” were issued on the 26th April, 1650, and these also did not receive the ratification of the Netherlands Government.  They describe in a minute manner the system of trade and commerce to be followed by the Company ; and in them Batavia is recognized as the capital of the Dutch Eastern possessions.  By this date the Portuguese power had been checked, Spain had by the Treaty of Munster been forced to resign all her claims to an East Indian trade whilst the Dutch had acquired influence and power in the East, and possessed numerous staff of Officials competent to carry our a complete system of trade.  That these “Instructions” continued in force for at least a century is proved by the fact that in a letter written on the 16th February, 1747, by the Council of Justice at the castle of Jakatra, they are referred to as being still the basis of the Colonial Government.

These “Instructions” commence by a declaration that the existing form of Government is to be continued.  It refers almost exclusively to trade, which it is stated may be classed under three heads, viz. :- 

1st The trade with the Company’s own possessions, acquired by conquest, namely, the Island of Banda. 

2nd The trade with the King of Ternate’s Islands (the Moluccas and Amboyna) which whom exclusive Treaties have been concluded.

3rd The trade with diverse oriental Kings and Princes in virtue of special contract or as common merchants (like other nations) allowed to trade during pleasure of the authorities.

With regard to the Moluccas it is stated that as [page 28] Amboyna could produce sufficient cloves for the use of the whole world cloves should only be cultivated on that Island and, in order to prevent the King of Ternate from planting and dealing in cloves, every endeavour was to be made to involve him in a war with the King of Tidore and the Spanish garrison there.

As the Islands of Banda could produce more mace and nutmeg than would suffice for the want of the whole world, nutmeg trees were to be carefully cultivated there, and not to be allowed to grow too near the coast lest strangers should pick and export them.  Further, all food producing trees and plants were to be well looked after, and the Islanders were to be encouraged to trade with the newly discovered South Eastern Islands, with the view of securing an abundant supply of food.  Any nutmeg trees found on these last named Islands were to be gradually destroyed by coercion of the inhabitants ; fortresses were to be erected on the Island of Dame and all foreigners were to be prevented from landing.

After enjoining the strictest circumspection with regard to Foreign, European and Indian nations, yet so as to prevent actual war, certain general directions are given with the view of developing trade in the various places as follows:- 

......

REFERENCES
Dutch Activities in the East Seventeenth Century Being a "Report on the Records relating to the East in the State Archives in The Hague" with two appendices by Frederick Charles Danvers, Edited with an Introduction by Nihar-Ranjan Ray, University of Calcutta. 1945.


Holmes, D. L. (2008). Old company records: The effect of custodial history on the arrangement and description of selected archival collections of business records. Thesis, Master of Science, School of Computer and Information Science, Edith Cowan University, 2008.  Available at https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/23

If you would like further information about Frederick Charles Danvers and the records he investigated in the 1890s at the State Archives in The Hague, please email me on geniedonna @ yahoo.com.au

Wednesday, June 3, 2020

FC Danvers Dutch activities in the East 17th century

The following post relates to my academic research which is documented in my thesis:
Holmes, D. L. (2008). Old company records: The effect of custodial history on the arrangement and description of selected archival collections of business records. Thesis, Master of Science, School of Computer and Information Science, Edith Cowan University, 2008.  Available at https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/23

If you would like further information about Frederick Charles Danvers and the records he investigated in the 1890s at the State Archives in The Hague, please email me on geniedonna @ yahoo.com.au

LIST OF ITEMS

Danvers, 1898, Report on India Office Records
http://geniedonna.blogspot.com/2020/06/danvers1898reportonindiaofficerecords.html
Report on India Office Records by F.C. Danvers, 1898. [IOR L/R/4/17]

Ray, 1945, Introduction, Dutch Activities in the East Seventeenth Century
http://geniedonna.blogspot.com/2019/04/ray1945dutchactivitiesintheeastindies.html
Dutch Activities in the East Seventeenth Century Being a "Report on the Records relating to the East in the State Archives in The Hague" with two appendices by Frederick Charles Danvers, Edited with an Introduction by Nihar-Ranjan Ray, University of Calcutta. 1945.

Danvers, 1893, Report on the Records relating to the East in the State Archives in The Hague. 
http://geniedonna.blogspot.com/2022/10/danvers1893recordsrelatingtotheeast.html
Printed in Dutch Activities in the East Seventeenth Century Being a "Report on the Records relating to the East in the State Archives in The Hague" with two appendices by Frederick Charles Danvers, Edited with an Introduction by Nihar-Ranjan Ray, University of Calcutta. 1945.

Danvers 1898 Report on India Office Records

The following post relates to my academic research which is documented in my thesis:
Holmes, D. L. (2008). Old company records: The effect of custodial history on the arrangement and description of selected archival collections of business records. Thesis, Master of Science, School of Computer and Information Science, Edith Cowan University, 2008.  Available at https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/23

If you would like further information about Frederick Charles Danvers and the records he investigated in the 1890s at the State Archives in The Hague, please email me on geniedonna @ yahoo.com.au


Report on India Office Records by F.C. Danvers, 1898. [IOR L/R/4/17]

The following is a transcript from the original document
[note: in some instances "East India" denotes "The East Indies (islands)"]

REPORT
The Records of the India Office form a unique collection, which, for historical interest, are scarcely to be excelled by any other collection of documents; and, considering all the circumstances under which they have existed it is perhaps a matter of surprise rather than otherwise, that they are not more defective than has been found to be the case. With a few exceptions, in the earlier years of the existence of the East India Company, the Court Minutes furnish a tolerably complete record of their Home proceedings. From these latter volumes it is clear that, at the commencement of the operations, no measures were taken for the proper custody and preservation of their records, for it was not until the year 1607 (1) that a register was ordered to be kept of the letters to and from India, nor until October 1609 (2) that it was thought necessary to appoint anyone for the special duty of registering, and for the custody of the Company's Records.

It is very clear, from entries in the Court Minutes, that, in the absence of any method for preserving documents in the early years of the Company's existence, many were lent and not returned, and that, to such an extent as to attract the attention of the Court, who gave directions (3) in consequence of certain journals being wanted, that were then missing, that for the future the journals were to be first written in the Company's books before being lent to any one, and that none was to use them without the consent of the Committees. It is impossible to say to what particular journals reference was here made, as the number of missing documents has no doubt been largely increased since that time. 

On the formation of the East India Company, Richard Hakluyt was appointed historiographer (4); their historical and geographical documents were subsequently placed in his custody, and he had charge of them until the date of his death in 1616. About four years later these journals came into the hands of the Reverend Samuel Purchas, having been made over to him for publication. Instead of printing them in extenso, Purchas resolved to epitomize his materials, and, in this form, he published them in four folio volumes, under the title Hakluytus Posthumus or Purchas his Pilgrims. It seems doubtful whether most of these original journals were ever returned to the East India House, but, if they were, many of them have since been lost, and of others only fragments now exist. This is much to be regretted, as the earliest journals were the most important, and, in many cases, the only records of the proceedings of the Company's Agents abroad. Later on, much of this information is contained in letters received by the Court from their Captains and Factors in the East.

No proper provision appears to have been subsequently made for the safe custody of these journals, and, consequently, those that remain of these priceless records of the past are in many cases defective, and a still greater number are damaged by damp and decay.

MARINE RECORDS
Of the first expedition sent out by the East India Company no journals now exist. The first document of that nature extant in the records of this Office is a fragment of a journal, from the 31st July to the 4th August 1605, kept by an Officer on board the Ascension, one of the vessels that took part in the second expedition. There are no journals now existing of any of the vessels that took part in the 5th and 12th voyages, and there are only three journals amongst the records of this Office of the early joint stock voyages, vizt. two of the first voyage of the first joint stock, and one of the first voyage of the second joint stock. Subsequently to 1617 - the date of the last-mentioned voyage - the defects amongst these records are not so numerous, but whilst of the missing journals of the more recent voyages there do not exist any published copies (so far as is known) many of those previously to 1617 have been published, principally in an abbreviated form in the Hakluyt Society's Publications in Purchas his Pilgrims, or in Harris's Voyages.


Up to 1701 the accounts of voyages were kept in the shape of journals, on board the several Ships, but from 1702 (the date of the coalition between the two East India Companies), onwards, these were abandoned for Log books. The list of journals now extant is contained in Section 1 of the Marine Records, and that of Log books in Section II. The latter extend from 1702 to 1856. Amongst the Miscellaneous Marine Records will be found a quantity of information relative to appointments; proceedings of Committees; trade, correspondence in the Marine Department with the Governments in India; Lloyds Lists; the introduction of Steam Navigation &c. &c, particulars of which will be found in the separately printed list of Marine Records.

COURT MINUTES
Although the East India Company was not incorporated until the end of 1600, their records commence from the 22nd September 1599 with a statement of the names of those who subscribed towards the "venture in the pretended voyage to the East Indies".


The "Court Books", which contain the earliest records of the East India Company in this country, consist of Minutes of the Court in London, and extend continuously from 1599 to 1858-59, comprising in all 191 volumes. The books for the following years are, however, missing, viz., 10th August 1603 to 30th December 1606; February 1610 to January 1614; 17th November 1615 to 18th September 1617; 1st July 1629 to 1st July 1630; 17th July 1631 to 3rd July 1632, and 4th July 1637 to 4th July 1639. There are fourteen volumes of "Dissents" by Members of the Court of Directors; four volumes, extending from February 1764 to March 1811, are in original, and the remaining ten volumes, from 14th October 1807, to 1st September 1858, consist of copies only. Next come nineteen volumes of "General Court Minutes", extending from 1702 to 30th August 1858.


Following the "Court Books" of the East India Company, the "Council Minutes" of the Secretary of State for India in Council bring this series of records up to the present date. Duplicate copies of the first five volumes of these Minutes, ... [the next page was not transcribed] ...

RECORDS RELATING TO THE PORTUGUESE IN INDIA
But very few separate papers relating to the Portuguese in India have been found amongst the old East India Company's papers, but it is almost needless to remark that references to the Portuguese, and our struggles with them for supremacy in the East are scattered all through the older records, and occur, at intervals, amongst the more modern papers. Two separate entries on this subject will be found amongst the Miscellaneous Records. They are as follows:-
> Portuguese in India; disputes with the English regarding Bombay &c., 1661-1725; occupation of Portuguese settlement by British troops, 1788-1809; inquisition at Goa, and jurisdiction of the Roman Catholic Archbishop 1819. Mi ss: No. 60.
> American and Portuguese trade with India - 1794-1803. Mi ss: No. 439.


There also exists unique collection of copies of Portuguese Records at Lisbon and Evora, which were made under orders of the Secretary of State for India, and extend from the year 1500 to 1806. These have been bound and are as follows:-

. Documentos Remettidos da India ov Livros dos Moncoes - 1600-1697. Four volumes of these extending to 1619 have been printed in extenso. From documents of later date in this collection selections have been made, which have been copied, and these are bound in five volumes.
. Corpo Chronologica - 1500-1630. Two volumes.
. Gavetas Antigas - 1511-1711. One volume.
. Evora, Pombal and Cartas - 1572-1806. One volume.
. Conselko Ultramarino - 1793-  Three volumes.
. Noticias da India - 1475-1750. Two Volumes.
. Cartas da Albuquerque - 1507-1615. One volume (printed).


The above have now been nearly all translated, and the translations bound up in volumes. Besides these the following publications which contain copies of Portuguese Records, not included in any of the foregoing series, have also been added to the collection of this Office.
. Collection of Engagements and Treaties of Peace between the Portuguese and Kings and Chiefs with whom they had relations in Asia and Eastern Africa - by J.F.J. Biker - 10 vols.
. O Chronista de Tissuary - by J.H. da Cunha Rivara. 4 vols.
. Archivo Portuguez Oriental. 6 vols.

RECORDS RELATING TO THE DUTCH IN INDIA
The documents relating to the Dutch in India, which were contained amongst the old Records of the East India Company are as follows:-
. A summary of events relating to the connection of the Dutch in the Eastern Seas.
. Treaties between the dates 1596 and 1864. Four volumes.
. Treaties with the Dutch 1787 and 1823-1824. Three volumes.
. Miscellaneous letters and documents, 1617-1824. Eight volumes.
. Disputes with the Dutch, 1750-1764. Seven volumes.
. Expedition against the Dutch Settlements in 1781. 
. Claims of the Dutch, French and Danes, 1786. Four volumes.
. Capture of Dutch Settlements, 1795-1796.
. Mission to Achin - 1818-1819.
. Trade in the Eastern Archipelago - 1818-1820.

Besides the above, the collection of Records at this Office on the subject of the Dutch in the East has been considerably enriched by copies of documents in the State Archive at the Hague between the years 1600 and 1699, as follows:-
. Letters from India - 1600-1698. 1588 documents.
. Letters from the XVII to India - 1614-1699. 228 documents.
. Letters from the Governor General to various factories in the East - 1617-1690. 427 documents.
. Letters from the Camara at Amsterdam to the Governor General - 1642-1684. 13 documents.


The majority of these copies have already been received here from Holland and been bound. Translations are now being made of them, and with this work some fair progress has already been effected.

Besides the foregoing there are several volumes of published Dutch Records relating to the Indies which form part of the collection at this Office. They are as follows:-
. Collection of Proclamations relating to the Netherlands Indies - 1602-1811. Fifteen volumes of this work have been published, which brings it down to the year 1809.
. Instructions, Ordinancies and Regulations for the government of the Netherlands Indies, collected by Mr. P. Mijer - 1848.
. Daily Register kept at the Castle of Batavia, 1624-1669. Ten volumes.
. The Governors General and Commissaries General of the Netherlands Indies - 1610-1888.
. Documents for the history of the Dutch in the East. Collected by P.A. Tiele.
. Extracts from the Resolutions of the State of Holland and West Frisia, from 14th August 1760 to 18th March 1761.

RECORDS RELATING TO THE FRENCH IN INDIA
There is a separate collection of Records relating to the French in India, which has been made up from miscellaneous papers that formed part of the documents in the late East India Company's possession. These have been bound up in 14 volumes, and they extend in date from 1664 to 1813. Other references to the French will be found scattered through the various collections of Records, and particularly in the "East Indies Series", in 98 volumes, which comprises documents dated between the years 1748 and 1785. 

... {to be transcribed} ...

So far as I am aware no examination has been made of the papers in the French Archives relating to the connection of that nation with India, or to other subjects in which this Country would be interested; and no Calendar of French State Papers has as yet been published by the Public Record Office. Thus the information available with regard to the French in India is not nearly so complete as is the case with respect to the Portuguese and the Dutch in the East.


RECORDS RELATING TO INDIA IN THE PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
In the Public Record Office there are a number of documents relating to India and the East. A list of those contained in the Colonial Section is given in Appendix No.   Of these the most important are those contained in the series labelled "East Indies". In the first volume will be found correspondence relative to Robert Shirley, in Persia; to Sir Thomas Rowe's Embassy to the Great Mogul; Letters from Richard Cocks, in Japan; controversies between the English and Dutch in India and the East &c. &c.

... {to be transcribed} ...

VENETIAN RECORDS

The design of the Calendars of Venetian Records being to give an account of such materials for English history as exist in the several Archives in Venice, it cannot be expected that they will contain much relating to the Venetian trade with the East except in so far as it has a bearing on this Country and its trade. ...

... {to be transcribed} ...

Doubtless many more records belonging to this class at one time existed, but losses from amongst these, as amongst others must have taken place on the occurrence of the three fires which occurred in the Dacal palace in 1483 and in 1574 and in 1577; but the principal losses occurred on the fall of the Republic, in 1797, during the confusion that followed the change of Government. In 1817 a decree was issued for the collection of all the scattered Records, wherever they were to be found, into the convent of the Frari, but it was not until 1847 that the general work of arrangement and classification was commenced on a plan originated by the late Abbote Cadorin according to which the Records were divided into four compartments vizt. political, judicial, commercial and territorial.

The Venetian trade was principally carried on by a fleet of trading vessels called the "Flanders galleys", which appear to have made their first voyage under the immediate auspices of the State in 1317. ...

... {to be transcribed} ...

... These Flanders Galleys continued their voyages until 1532, after which date the Merchants of Venice sent their "rich argosies" at their own risk, and regulated their movements at their own pleasure.

Not very much relating to India, or the Eastern trade, appears in these volumes, the documents referred to being chiefly of a political character and no document is calendared unless it refers directly or indirectly to Great Britain, or pertains to English history or to Englishmen. Still there are many side references to events connected with the Indo-European trade which cannot fail to interest the historian. Thus we find references to spices shipped to England by Flanders galleys in 1395, 1402 and 1413 (Vol. 1. pp.36, 41, 54); of English ships loaded with spices and merchandise on their homeward voyage from the Levant being captured by a Spanish vessel, (Vol. 1. p. 121), and of ships being built in Holland for the King of Portugal, for the Calicut voyage (Vol. 1, p. 311). Also, at later dates are letters relating to the Portuguese and Spanish voyages to the East, and to the differences between the two nations relative to the possession of the Moluccas Islands (5). This series of Calendars, hitherto published, brings us only to the year 1591; they contain only casual references to India and the Indo-European trade, but much more information on these subjects would no doubt be obtained from the records classed as "Commercial" an examination of which would certainly result in filling up a comparative blank in the known history of that trade.

SPANISH RECORDS
Spain was much more directly interested in the Indo-European trade of more modern times than was Venice, and in that country therefore we must look for records on the subject from the commencement of the 16th century when Spanish vessels began their expeditions to the East, and more especially between the years 1580 and 1640 when Portugal and her possessions were subject to the Spanish Crown. ...

... {to be transcribed} ...

MSS. IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM
The various collections of MSS. in the British Museum also contain many original records relating to the East. The several catalogues of these have similarly been referred to, and a list, forming Supplement No.   , contains over six hundred references (some of them comprising many volumes, others only single documents) between the years 1494 and 1849. These also have been chronologically arranged.


FREDERICK CHARLES DANVERS, 1898
Footnotes:
(1) Court Minutes 6th July 1607
(2) Court Minutes 6th October 1609
(3) Court Minutes 13th and 20th December 1614 and 30th August 1615
(4) Court Minutes 29th January 1600
(5) Vo. III pp. 278, 296, 304, 356, 371, 464.

Monday, April 22, 2019

Ray 1945 Dutch activities in the East

The following post relates to my academic research which is documented in my thesis:
Holmes, D. L. (2008). Old company records: The effect of custodial history on the arrangement and description of selected archival collections of business records. Thesis, Master of Science, School of Computer and Information Science, Edith Cowan University, 2008.  Available at https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/23

If you would like further information about Frederick Charles Danvers and the records he investigated in the 1890s at the State Archives in The Hague, please email me on geniedonna @ yahoo.com.au






Dutch Activities in the East Seventeenth Century Being a "Report on the Records relating to the East in the State Archives in The Hague" with two appendices by Frederick Charles Danvers, Edited with an Introduction by Nihar-Ranjan Ray, University of Calcutta. 1945.

Transcript of the Introduction written by Ray, 1945.


On January 26, 1910, Messers Mackenzie Lyall & Co. of Calcutta held a public auction in which a large number of books, manuscripts and typescripts were put under the hammer.  A portion of the collection was purchased by Mr. Haridas Ganguli, a very keen student of history and a friend and collaborator of the late Mr. Rakhaldas Banerjee, archæologist and historian.  It transpired that the collection contained at least two books bearing the signature of F.C. Danvers, and more important, three typescripts of uniform foolscap size, paper, script and ink, the last two bearing on a slip of paper pasted on their covers their respective title, name of author and date.  They may be described as follows:

1. [63 pp.]  No pagination number.  On the first page at the top runs the title:  Report on the records relating to the East / in the State Archives in the Hague.  Text proper, 45 pp. Appendix I / List of important events in connection with the Dutch in India / during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries [45-55 pp.]  Appendix II / Governore General of Netherlands India [57-63 pp.].  Typing on one page (recto) only.  Writing faint on first and several other pages including the last.  Paper board cover, blank.  Thick cartridge paper bearing water-mark of A. Pirie & Sons / Ld. / Register.  Ink : violet.  No mention of authorship anywhere.

2. A slip of paper containing the title pasted on paper-board cover.  Report / on / India Office Records / by / F.C. Danvers/ - / Appendix / - / 1898 [42 pp.]  Content:  List of Manuscripts in the British Museum relating to India and the East.  On pages 4, 6 and 7 there are entries, one on each page, in inked handwriting, presumably of Danvers himself, that had evidently been indistinct.  Thick cartridge paper bearing watermark of A. Piri & Sons / Ld. / Register.  Ink:  violet.

3. A slip of paper containing the title pasted on paper-board cover.  Report / on / India Office Records / by / F.C. Danvers / - / Appendix / - / 1898 [6 pp.]  Contents:  Papers in the Public Record Office (Colonial Section) relating to India and the East, [p.1]; India, East, [p.2]; Admiralty Records, East India House, [p. 3]; Pepper Purchase and sale of, [p. 3]; Persia, [p. 4]; Correspondence, S. Helena, [p. 4]; Colonial Office Records [p. 6].  Clear writing.  Thick cartridge paper bearing water-mark of A. Pirie & Sons / Ltd / Register.  Ink: violet.

Mr. Ganguli was not slow to realise the importance of the typescripts, and he was persuaded by one of his friends to make a present of them along with some other books he had purchased from the auction to the public library of the Young Men’s Association of Vaidyabati, an old and flourishing village not very far from Calcutta.  There they stood on the shelves until 1920 when Mr. Prabhatchandra Ganguli, a scholar and publicist, then interested in the history of Dutch activities in Bengal, tried to utilise them ; but he eventually gave up the idea, and they again went to rest on the shelves.  In 1940, I happened to visit the Vaidyabati Library and examine its collections when the three typescripts fell to my hands.  The authorities of the Library were good enough to part with them on personal loan to me, and since then they have been lying with me.  It has been proposed that they will eventually be made over as a gift to the Manuscripts Department of Calcutta University Libraries for preservation and use.

A close preliminary study and examination of the typescripts convinced me that they were unpublished works of Danvers, and perhaps even unknown to and unutilised by scholars in the field ; indeed I did not find any reference anywhere to these documents, though it was well known that Danvers had been deputed to the Hague by the India Office for securing for their library transcripts of Dutch Records relating to India and the East, and presumably also to report on them.  True, the first typescript had nowhere any mention of its authorship, but it was clear from the text that there was nothing inherently improbable about Danvers being the author ; on the contrary, the first few paragraphs and the last of the Report left hardly any doubt in this respect.  But before deciding to publish the documents or part thereof I put myself in touch with Dr. S. N. Sen, Director of Archives of the Government on India and wanted to have some more definite information in respect of Danvers and the typescripts in my possession.  Here is the relevant portion of Dr. Sen’s letter, dated 8th July, 1941:

“F.C. Danvers was deputed by the India Office for securing for their library transcripts of Portuguese and Dutch Records on India.  These transcripts are now available in the India Office Library.  Danvers published a brief report on the Portuguese records and two volumes on the Portuguese in India (1894).  The typescript in your possession is unknown to me and so far as I am aware has not been published as yet.  You will however do well to write to Sir William Foster who is likely to be better informed.  Danvers was an official of the India Office and more is likely to be learnt about him at that end than at Delhi.  The transcripts of Dutch records brought by him are also in the India Office.  Eleven volumes of these transcripts were translated into English.  Sir William Foster however told me that these translations might not always be accurate because Danvers did not know Dutch, and the Dutch scholar who collaborated with him was not familiar with Indian history …”

Subsequently in a private letter Dr. Sen advised me to publish the documents for scrutiny by scholars.  But I deferred publication and wanted to contact the India Office and Sir William Foster before going to press.  This I did sometime towards the middle of 1942.  The Superintendent of Records on the India Office informed me with regret that after an exhaustive search no tract had been found of the Report by Mr. F.C. Danvers’ (letter dated 25th August, 1942).  Almost simultaneously came also Sir William’s reply which is all but fully quoted below:

“I know nothing of any report by Mr. Danvers (beyond interim ones) on his researches in the Dutch archives.  His assistant in that task (until 1895) never heard of anything of the kind ; the India Office can not trace one ; and I myself could hardly have been ignorant of such a document.  In any case I can not conceive that such a report be worth publishing.  It must be nearly half-a-century old and would be now quite out of date.  Moreover, Mr. Danvers knew no Dutch and was not well-informed on the subject of Dutch colonial history.

“There remains the mystery how anything written by him could have found its way to a small library in India.  Is it certain that the document really relates to Dutch archives?  Or, can it be the work of some Indian student in London, based upon Mr. Danvers’ general report on the India Office Records, issued in 1888 (can 1898 be a mistake for that date?).  This reports contains sections dealing with Dutch activities in Java, Sumatra and elsewhere.  In that case “State Archives” would refer, not to the Dutch but to the English official records.”

Even a casual reading of the Report published would show that it deals not with English but with Dutch official records in the State Archives in the Hague.  And since it is so, the Report is more concerned with Dutch colonial activities in the Archipelago than with India proper, and India in the Report more often than not stands for the Dutch colonies in the East in general but their colonial settlements in the Southern Seas in particular.  Certain Dutch publications relevant to the subject have also been utilised and largely drawn upon.  The documents examined and utilised are the most important ones in the Hague Rijksarchief and are mentioned in the very first few paragraphs of the Report.  Nor can it be the work of an Indian student in London based on any of Mr. Danvers’ general reports.  A reference to the first few paragraphs and the last one of the Report would show that it is the work of one who examined the Dutch Records locally in the State Archives in the Hague in 1893, 1894 and also in the year (1895?) when the Report was actually drawn up.  Mr. Danvers’ general “Report .. on the Records of the India Office” was issued in 1888 – a reference presumably to this report is made in f.n 2 of page 51 ; but the present Report has hardly any thing to do with either that Report or with the India Office Records.  It is interesting, however, to note that Typescripts 2 and 3 though described as Report on India Office Records : Appendix, contain, in fact, only lists of English official documents relating to Dutch activities in the East, in the British Museum, Public Record Office (Colonial Section), Colonial Office and elsewhere, in London.  I presume, they were intended to be treated as appendices to the main general report on the India Office Records issued in 1888.  This may or may not be true, but since the English official records are more or less well-known and have been utilised by various scholars I am not publishing these bar lists which are hardly of any use to-day.  

The Report on the Dutch official Records stands, it seems, on a different footing.  True, it is already about half-a-century old, and we are now fairly well-posted with facts and circumstances relating to Dutch activities in the East.  Even so, there are in this Report points of information, and in certain instances details of facts that are not yet available to English readers.  Such, for instance, is the details account of the relations between the English and the Dutch between the years 1617 and 1620 and of the selection of Jakatra as the seat of the Dutch Government in the East and its eventual transformation into what came to be known as “Batavia”, the head-quarters of the Dutch in the East.  New side-lights on Dutch policy are also available on many points of detail, especially in respect of Dutch relations with the Archipelago nationals, the Chinese, the French and the Spaniards besides the English and the Portuguese.  Of other interesting items mention may be made of the introduction of coffee plantation in Java.  But the value of the Report lies in its analysis of the “Articles of Instructions” issued from time to time, beginning from November, 1609, by the Netherlands Administration for the regulation of their eastern trade.  Mr. Danvers correctly points out that “these instructions are the embodiment of the principles on which the Dutch East Indian possessions were obtained, held and governed.  Without these it would be impossible fully to appreciate the continuity of policy pursued by the Dutch in the East, or properly to apportion the responsibility for their actions between the State, the Company and their Governors.  This is, I believe, the first instance of these important documents being made available excepting in the Dutch language.”  Reference to these “Instructions” are to be met with in recent publications in English, but Mr. Danvers’ claim that he makes available for the first time to English readers their detailed statement and draws attention of English readers to their importance is, I think, substantially correct even to-day.

The ‘mystery’ of how anything written by Mr. Danvers could find its way to a small library in India can easily be explained.  Instances are frequent of personal collections including manuscripts of scholars and bibliophiles in Europe being broken up after the death of their owners, their being auctioned locally and then shipped out – if they were of Indian interest – for sale in India.  More than one auction house in Calcutta within my knowledge used to and do even now hold periodical auctions of such books etc., and some of our important libraries have enriched their collections by purchase in lots from such sales.  Important old book-sellers also make a profitable trade in business of this kind.  It seems that Mr. Danvers’ collection after his death was similarly broken up and somehow or other part of it at least found its way to Calcutta where Messers Mackenzie Lyall & Co. put it under the hammer.  This assumption finds support in the fact that in the lot purchased by Mr. Ganguli there were at least two books which from the signatures on their title pages seem to have belonged to the collection of Mr. Danvers.  I am told by Sir Jadunath Sarkar that H. H. Shrimant Bala Sahib Pant Pratinidhi Raja Sahib of Aundh also has in his possession a small collection of typed papers of Mr. Danvers which, I understand, were purchased by H. H. the Raja Sahib from a London old book stall, and which relate themselves to Dutch activities in India and the Archipelago.

It is difficult to assess from this report the extent of Mr. Danvers’ knowledge of the Dutch language or that of help he received from his Dutch assistant.  The fact that he was deputed to the Hague to report on the Dutch Records in the State Archives perhaps shows that he was not altogether ignorant of Dutch and it is quite possible that he was materially helped by Dutch assistants.  In any case I have not been able to find in his Report anything that seriously contradicts facts known from English and Dutch publications on the subject or materially alters the course of events reconstructed from unpublished records in the State Archives in the Hague.  It is true, the Report is scrappy and inadequate even in respect of the seventeenth century which admittedly was the scope Mr. Danvers had set for himself ; but we must remember that it was not meant to be anything more than a preliminary sketch like his brief Report on the Portuguese Records … (1892) that seems to have later developed into two big volumes of History of the Portuguese in India (1894).  Had he lived for several years more the would perhaps have given us an equally valuable book on the Dutch in India.  His investigations in Dutch activities in the East seem to have begun sometime before 1888 when he issued his Report on the India Office Records, and continued till his death.  It is likely therefore that he had taken noted and drafted tentative reports that we have yet no knowledge of.  Sir William in his letter refers to such interim drafts ; in the present Report Danvers also speaks of one that was drawn up a year before (1894?).

Frederick Charles Danvers was for nearly fifteen years, from January, 1884 to 1898, Registrar and Superintendent of Records of the India Office.  In the India Office List for 1898, his career has been detailed as follows:

Educated at Merchant Taylors’ School and King’s College, London, and after a special training preparatory for Addiscombe, studied for two years for a civil and mechanical engineer ; East India House writer, old establishment, 26th January, 1853 ; junior clerk, Public and Ecclesiastical Department, India Office, September, 1858 ; Public Works Department, 1861 ; senior clerk, June 1867 ; assistant secretary in the Public Works Department, February, 1875 ; assistant secretary in the Revenue Department, 1877 ; Registrar and Superintendent of Records, January, 1884 ; in 1855 designed a salt-weighting machine, of which a number were manufactured in this country for the use of the Madras Government; in 1859 was deputed to Liverpool and Manchester to report on Traction engines, with a view to their being used in India ; deputed to Lisbon to examine the Portuguese records relating to India, 1891-92 [and at Evora relating to India ; India Office List, 1895] ; on similar duty to the Hague, 1893-95.  [On similar duty to the Hague, Sept., 1893 and again, Oct., 1894 ; India Office List, 1895] ; author of articles published in “Engineering” relative to public works in India, 1866-1875 ; of a design for carrying the East Indian Railway under the Hugli from Howray to Calcutta, transmitted to India by the Secretary of State in 1868 ; of “Statistical Papers relating India” (Parliamentary Paper 1869) ; of memoranda on Indian coal, coal-washing and artificial fuel 1867-69 ; of “Coal Economy”, 1872 ; of “A Century of Famines”, 1770-1870, 1877, of papers read before the Society of Arts, on “Agriculture in India”, 1878 (Society’s silver medal), “Famines in India”, 1886, and “The India Office Records”, 1889 (Society’s silver medal); of a “Report on the Records of the India Office”, 1887 ; “Chiefs, Agents, and Governors of Bengal”, 1888 ; of a “Report on the Portuguese Records relating to India”, 1892 ; and of a “History of the Portuguese in India”, 1894 ; elected a Corresponding Member of the Royal Geographical Society of Lisbon, 1894, and of the International Colonial Institute, Brussels, 1895.

It will be seen from above that Mr. Danvers was deputed by the India Office to the Hague thrice, once every year, in 1893, 1894 and again in 1895, evidently to report on the Dutch Records on India in the State Archives in the Hague.  This is exactly what Mr. Danvers states in the last paragraph of his Report.  It is further clear that except an interim one in 1894 (p. 5), he did not issue any further report on those records before his death, though it appears that the present Report was actually drawn up in 1895.  The two appendices (not published) to the Report on the India Office Records were however prepared in 1898.  It is difficult to say why Danvers chose not to submit to the authorities his final Report on the Dutch Records which must have been the purpose for which he was deputed to the Hague.  In any case it is clear that he did prepare a Report which for some reason or other was not submitted to the proper authorities nor issued independently which explains why the India Office List has no entry, or why Danvers’ assistant (ill 1895) had no knowledge of any such report.  Absence of any knowledge on the part of the India Office and of Sir William Foster may also be explained in the same manner.

In the printing of the Report, Mr. Danvers’ typescript has been followed rather very scrupulously.  Nothing has been changed, not even the spelling of proper names.  I have however inserted certain punctuations to facilitate easier reading and understanding, but that too where it was found absolutely necessary.  Vingurla has been spelt in a least three different ways (Wingorla, Vengurla, Vingorla) ; Mataran occurs also as Mataram; Pondicherry as Pondichery, Negapatam as Nagapatam; Achin as Atchin; Coromandel as Coromandal; Macao as Mecao; and so on.  I have chosen not to interfere with such alternative forms of proper names.  There are however certain evident mistakes, perhaps typist’s errors, which have been rectified in “Notes and Corrections”, e.g. Pieter van den Broeck should certainly be Pieter van den Broecke.

There are very few comprehensive works in English relating to Dutch Activities in India and the East.  Prof. P. Geyl’s chapter on the “Dutch in India” in the Cambridge History of India, vol. V (1929), is certainly a competent and well-summarised narrative, but it is meagre.  K.M. Panikkar’s Malabar and the Dutch (1931) traces the history of the relations of the Dutch with the west coast of India which may be said to begin with the capture of Cochin from the Portuguese in 1663 and continued till the surrender of that place to Major Petrie in 1795.  In recent years Prof. D.G.E. Hall published two very interesting accounts relating to Dutch relations with Burma and Arakan (“Studies in Dutch relations with Arakan” and the “Daghregister of Batavia and Dutch Trade with Burma in the seventeenth century”, in the Journal of the Burma Research Society, 1936 and 1939).  Interesting studies on different aspects and phases of Dutch relations with Bengal, Ceylon and the eastern coast of India have in recent years been made by various scholars ; some of them have been published in the Annual Proceedings of the Indian Historical Records Commission, others in different Indian historical journals.  

But there is yet scope for a full and comprehensive account in English of Dutch activities in India and the East such as Mr. Danvers gave us in respect of Portuguese activities.  Original materials for such a study, in manuscripts and in printed form, are now easily available, in Dutch and in English translations; and a fairly comprehensive bibliography of such materials has been furnished by Prof. Geyl and Mr. Panikkar.  Besides, Prof. J. van Kan, a Dutch scholar who visited India in 1929-30, has given us a valuable catalogue entitled Compagniesbescheiden En Aanverwante Archivalia in Britisch-Indie En op Ceylon which gives us an inventory of the documents available in India and Ceylon.  There is also a small collection of Dutch records in the Bengal Record Room, but they deal mainly with revenue matters in Chinsurah.  Valuable secondary works in Dutch are also available and Prof. Geyl and Panikkar mention all important publications in this connection.  Attention may also be drawn to the necessity of consulting materials available in books and manuscripts in Indian languages, mainly in Malayalam, Sinhalese, Tamil, and Bengali where incidental references to the Dutch and their activities are not altogether rare.  It is true they are not mentioned as often as the Portuguese, but nevertheless such references furnish side-lights that are too interesting to be missed.

It remains for me to acknowledge my obligations.  I am very thankful to Mr. Haridas Ganguli and the authorities of the Vaidyabati Young Men’s Association who very kindly allowed me to keep the typescripts with me for such a long time, and gave me permission to edit and publish the Report.  I am also thankful to Dr. S.N. Sen, Director of Archives, Government on India, for having promptly replied to all the enquiries I addressed him from time to time.  Sir William Foster was also very prompt in replying to the queries I placed before him for clarification.  My young friend and pupil Mr. Sudhiranjan Das helped me in reading the proofs and preparing the Index.  To all of them I extend my sincerest thanks and gratitude.
N.R.
The University

Calcutta.
1945




REFERENCES
Dutch Activities in the East Seventeenth Century Being a "Report on the Records relating to the East in the State Archives in The Hague" with two appendices by Frederick Charles Danvers, Edited with an Introduction by Nihar-Ranjan Ray, University of Calcutta. 1945.

Holmes, D. L. (2008). Old company records: The effect of custodial history on the arrangement and description of selected archival collections of business records. Thesis, Master of Science, School of Computer and Information Science, Edith Cowan University, 2008.  Available at https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/23

If you would like further information about Frederick Charles Danvers and the records he investigated in the 1890s at the State Archives in The Hague, please email me on geniedonna @ yahoo.com.au