Search results

English chartered companies began to trade with both the Ottoman and the Mughal states in the last decade of the sixteenth century. In India, as recent work has shown, the rudiments of an English polity were established very early and eventually metastasized into a sizeable colonial empire. In Turkey, on the other hand, no “company-state” ever took root. This paper endeavors to explain this divergence from the perspective, not of the highly “successful” East India Company, but of the “failed” (and much less well-studied) Levant Company, which, with short interruptions, maintained a monopoly English trade with the Ottoman Empire from 1592 until 1803. The paper offers an account of this divergence that emphasizes the importance of an independent overseas administrative apparatus, something that the EIC had but that the Levant Company lacked. The Levant Company lost control of its overseas administration in the 1630s, when the Crown began to regard the Ottoman Empire as too diplomatically important to leave England’s representation there to “mere merchants.” Thereafter, the company was at a competitive disadvantage vis-à-vis rival commercial organizations that, because they had established a territorial base, could control and cheapen production in the colonial sites with which they traded.

Willard A. Hanna's astute observation above about the institutionalization of corruption in Indonesia was published in August 1971, five years after President Soeharto assumed power. The origins of corruption in Indonesia can be traced to the Dutch colonial period as bribery was rife among the lowly paid personnel of the Dutch East India Company (Day, 1966, pp. 100–103). However, corruption became institutionalized during President Soeharto's 32-year reign as his cronies and family “made an art form of creaming off many of Indonesia's most profitable ventures … while being protected by monopoly regulations and their relationship to the president” (Kingsbury, 1998, p. 202). Raymond Bonner (1988, p. 80) has used the euphemism “the family business” to describe “the corruption surrounding members of the Suharto family,” which was “a public secret” in 1988.

The purpose of this paper is to examine sixteenth century Netherlands business organisation and accounting practices, then the most advanced in Western Europe, to test Sombart's theory that scientific double entry bookkeeping was an essential prerequisite for the development of modern capitalism and the emergence of the public corporation during the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. Rather than being a development of Paciolian bookkeeping, double‐entry bookkeeping in sixteenth century Netherlands was grounded in northern German (Hanseatic) business practices.

Sixteenth century Dutch business records and Dutch and German bookkeeping texts are used to establish that north German Hanseatic commercial practices exercised the greatest influence on The Netherlands' bookkeeping practices immediately prior to the development of the capitalistic commercial enterprise in the first years of the seventeenth century.

Contrary to Sombart's thesis, scientific double‐entry bookkeeping was rarely used in sixteenth century Netherlands, which became Europe's most sophisticated commercial region during the late sixteenth century and early seventeenth century. Instead, extant commercial archives and the numerous sixteenth century accounting texts suggest that Hanseatic business practices and agents' (factors') bookkeeping were the dominant influence on northern Netherlands' business practices at this time. The organisation and administrative practices of Netherlands' businesses prior to the seventeenth century, especially their decentralised structure and lack of a common capital, were founded on Hanseatic practices that were considerably different to the best Italian practice of the time.

North German influences on Dutch accounting and business practices have significant implications for social theories of the development of capitalism, notably that of Bryer, that assume the use of a scientific (capitalistic) form of double‐entry bookkeeping was essential to the development of capitalism from the seventeenth century. This is tested in a subsequent paper which examines the accounting practices of the Dutch East India Company (Verenigde Oost‐Indische Compagnie or VOC) which was founded in 1602 at the very cusp of modern capitalism. The research presented here was partially constrained by the scarcity of transcriptions of original sixteenth century bookkeeping records.

The vigorous debate in the accounting history literature about the dependence of modern capitalism upon a scientific (capitalistic) form of double entry bookkeeping prompted by Sombart has been mainly concerned with England. This paper introduces into the debate material which documents the accounting and business practices of the most commercially advanced region of Europe in the late sixteenth century and the influence of Dutch bookkeeping texts.

This paper aims to investigate the history and distribution of trade ceramics in Southeast Asia over a thousand-year period stretching from the ninth to the early nineteenth century CE.

The study takes a material culture approach to the writing of marketing history by researching the ceramics trade from the starting point of artifacts and their social context. It draws from literatures on Chinese and Southeast Asian ceramics art history and archaeology. It also is informed by first-hand experience inspecting surviving artifacts in shops, talking to dealers and taking in museum displays.

After a brief historical overview of the ceramics trade in Southeast Asia, the research further explores topics in physical distribution (transportation routes, hubs and local marketplaces and ships, cargo and packing) and product assortments, adaptation and globalization of consumer culture.

The art history and archaeological literatures provide a good overview of the ceramics trade and analysis of surviving material artifacts, but only limited information about distribution and consumption. Many questions remain unanswered.

This study contributes to international business and marketing history by documenting a thousand years of trade among China, mainland and insular Southeast Asia, and a long-standing cultural exchange facilitated by seaborne commerce. It also shares a marketing perspective with the fields of Southeast Asian art history and archaeology. Research in marketing history has neglected this region. To fully understand the development of marketing in the pre-industrial era, accounts from civilizations outside the West must be included.

The purpose of this paper is to explain the origins and evolution of auditing and control by linking the changes in the manner in which the audits were conducted with the changes in the institutional function and development of the English East India Company (EIC).

Using Sunder’s contract theory of a firm as an interpretive framework, this paper introduces to the debate material documenting the evolution of the auditing practice during a period of 40 years using the single case of the EIC.

Auditing in the EIC evolved from a simple adjudication on allowable expenditures to ex post verification of transactions, and from using volunteers to paid auditors. Initially, the company was organized into a series of separate, terminable stocks, and simple verification by volunteer auditors chosen from among the shareholders was sufficient to secure the latter’s interests. When the increasing number, size, and complexity of transactions by the EIC rendered the adjudication approach insufficient, ex post verification of financial transactions was added. With a clearer separation between ownership and control at the time of the introduction of permanent joint stock, the audit function assumed a more professional form.

This paper contributes to the research on the early modern period at a time of the formation and rapid development of the first joint-stock organization. It offers a dynamic picture of the evolution of control and auditing as a response to the growth of business, organizations, and the attendant challenges of governance.

This paper aims to expand the scope and mitigate the biases of extant archival indexes.

The authors use automatic entity recognition on the archives of the Dutch East India Company to extract mentions of underrepresented people.

The authors release an annotated corpus and baselines for a shared task and show that the proposed goal is feasible.

Colonial archives are increasingly a focus of attention for historians and the public, broadening access to them is a pressing need for archives.

If moments of historical rupture create spaces for social change, what emerges to fill those gaps? This article approaches this question by exploring the creation of the “domestic” in 17th century Europe and Asia following the decline of the Spanish Habsburgs in the West and the Ming Dynasty in the East. Two events will serve as lenses through which that process will be explored. The first case centers on arguments for the legitimacy of the 1603 Dutch seizure of a Portuguese carrack in what would serve as the basis for Hugo Grotius’s defense of the free seas. The second debate focuses on the appropriate mourning ritual following the 1659 death of King Hyojong, the 17th ruler in Korea’s Choson dynasty. I argue that, in the process of responding to the crises they faced in their environments, social elites in both cases defined and articulated a conception of themselves as sovereign societies, creating a political space and corporate identity distinct from the extant institutional apparatus of the state and cultural framework of the nation.

German legal historians of nineteenth and twentieth centuries defined the main characteristics of the corporations and believed that one renaissance institution, the Casa di San Giorgio at Genoa (1407–1805), was similar to the corporations of later centuries. This paper proposes to reverse this perspective: did the founders of early modern corporations know the financial model of the fifteenth century Casa di San Giorgio? The research shows the connection between the model of the Casa di San Giorgio and the Mississippi Company of John Law (1720), the famous financial scheme and bubble. The history of the Casa di San Giorgio was mainly transmitted through a passage of Machiavelli’s History of Florence (VIII, 29). The paper offers new biographical evidence that Law had been to Genoa and introduces sources connecting the genesis of Law’s scheme for the Mississippi Company in France with the model of the Casa di San Giorgio.