Johannes Menne Postma - The Dutch in The Atlantic Slave Trade, 1600-1815 (2008) PDF

The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade
1600-1815
The Dutch
in the
Atlantic Slave Trade
1600-1815
JOHANNES MENNE POSTMA
Mankato State University
CAMBRIDGE
UNIVERSITY PRESS
Published by the Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge
The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 IRP
40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011-4211, USA
10 Stamford Road, Oakleigh, Victoria 3166, Australia
© Cambridge University Press 1990
First published 1990

Reprinted 1992
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Postma, Johannes Menne.
The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade, 1600-1815 /Johannes Menne Postma.
p. cm.
Bibliography: p.
Includes index.
ISBN 0-521-36585-6
1. Slave-trade - Netherlands - History. 2. West-Indische Compagnie
(Netherlands) - History. 3. Slave-trade - Africa, West - History.
4. Slavery - Latin America - History. I. Title.
HT1203.P67 1990
382'. 44/0943-<lci9 89-31239 CIP
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Postma, Johannes Menne
The Dutch in the Atlantic slave trade, 1600-1815
1. Netherlands, Slave trade, history
I. Tide
ISBN 0-521-36585-6 hardback
Transferred to digital printing 2004

To Laurel Menne Postma
Contents
List of tables, figures, and maps page viii

Preface xi
1. Foundations of the slave traffic, 1600-61 1

2. Curasao and the asiento trade, 1650-1730 26
3. The Dutch on the West African coast 56
4. Trade and politics on the African coast 84
5. Volume of African exports and origins of slaves 106
6. Organization and mechanics of the trade 126
7. The triangular trade 149
8. The Dutch plantation colonies under WIC monopoly,
1618-1738 174
9. The era of the free trade, 1730-80 201
10. The slaves: their treatment and mortality 227
11. Finances, marketing, and profitability 259
12. The end of the Dutch slave trade, 1781-1815 284
Appendixes 304
Bibliography 412
Index 420
Tables, figures, and maps
Tables
1.1 Slave imports in Dutch Brazil, 1630-1651 21

1.2 The chambers of the WIC 23
2.1 Asiento contracts, 1662-1713 34
2.2 Estimated traffic and destination of slaves, 1658-1674 35
2.3 WIC traffic to Curasao and Spanish colonies,
1675-1699 45
2.4 WIC traffic to Curagao and Spanish colonies,
1700-1732 48
2.5 Slave ship assignments and arrivals 54
2.6 The Dutch asiento slave trade, 1658-1729 54
3.1 Slaves sold to Brazilians in Africa by the WIC
establishment 78
3.2 Documented interloper slaving activity 82
5.1 Dutch slave exports from Africa, 1675-1738 no
5.2 Slave origins under the old WIC, 1658-1674 112
5.3 Slave origins in the WIC trade, 1675-1699 113
5.4 Slave origins in the WIC trade, 1700-1738 114
5.5 Fluctuations of WIC slave origins, 1658-1738 115
5.6 Slaves from Africa by Dutch free traders, 1730-1803 118
5.7 Slave origins in the free trade, 1730-1803 121
5.8 Specified slave origins from the Guinea coast,
1741-1782 122
5.9 Gold Coast slave origins, 1705-1716 123
5.10 Fragmented Gold Coast slave origins, 1725-1754 124
6.1 Recorded slave-ship assignments and regional WIC
affiliation 129
6.2 Home ports of the WIC, 1675-1738 131
6.3 Home ports in the free trade, 1730-1803 132
Tables, figures, and maps ix
6.4 Daily loading rates on the African coast 142
6.5 Ship carrying capacity and mortality 146
6.6 Utilization of slave ships 147
7.1 Time dimensions of triangular slaving missions 152
7.2 Dutch slave ship crew members and their monthly
salaries 154
7.3 Documented voyages by Dutch slave captains 156
7.4 Seasonal factors in the Dutch slave trade 159
7.5 Documented slave uprisings on Dutch slave ships 166
8.1 Population of Surinam, 1684-1754 185
8.2 Slave landings at Surinam by WIC ships, 1668-1738 186
8.3 Slave imports at Essequibo, 1618-1738 191
8.4 Slave imports at Berbice, 1627-1737 195
8.5 Documented slave landings at St. Eustatius, 1689-1729 199
9.1 WIC slave sales to free traders, 1737-1777 206
9.2 The free trade to Surinam, 1732-1803 212
9.3 Free trade to Berbice, 1731-1795 218
9.4 Free trade to Essequibo, 1731-1795 220
9.5 Free trade to Demerara, 1746-1795 221
9.6 Free trade to Curasao, 1731-1795 223
9.7 Free trade to St. Eustatius, 1731-1795 224
9.8 Free-trade slave ships without verified destination 225
9.9 Estimates for unknown slave destinations 225
10.1 Slave gender and age ratios 230
10.2 Gender and age groups in sample slave population 231
10.3 Provisions for a consignment of 400 slaves 234
10.4 Postdisembarkation mortality, 1700-1739 240
10.5 Causes of death among the slaves 244
10.6 Coasting and ocean crossing mortality compared 249
10.7 Mortality in the WIC slave trade 250
10.8 Mortality in the Dutch free trade 251
10.9 Categories of true mortality 252
10.10 Consignments with catastrophic mortality rates 254
10.11 Distribution of slave mortality 255
10.12 Crowding/mortality comparison 256
10.13 Gender/age mortality ratios 257
11.1 Comparative measures and currencies and money of
account 262
11.2 WIC slave prices, 1675-1738 264
11.3 Slave prices and profits, 1740-1795 265
11.4 Partial WIC price table of the year 1676 265
11.5 Slave prices in Africa for the ship Delft in 1736 266
x Tables, figures, and maps
11.6 Prices and profits by African region, 1740-1795 268
11.7 Comparative consumer retail prices, 1650-1795 269
11.8 Profit ranges per slave consignment, 1740-1795 279
11.9 Profits in the MCC slave trade, 1740-1795 280
12.1 Slave allocations, 1780-1803 285
12.2 Aggregate Dutch slave exports from Africa 295
12.3 Aggregate slave destinations in the Dutch slave trade 300
Figures
3.1 WIC ranks and functions in Africa 62

6.1 Generic diagram of the interior of a slave ship 143
10.1 Middle passage mortality cycle 247
11.1 Prices of slaves in the Dutch slave trade 269
12.1 The Dutch slave trade and the combined Atlantic traffic 296
12.2 African origins of the slaves 298
12.3 Regional Dutch participation in the slave trade 299
12.4 American destinations in the Dutch slave trade 301
Maps
1.1 New Holland in Brazil, ca. 1640 20

2.1 The Caribbean region 28
3.1 Coastal regions of West and Central Africa: 17th and
18th Centuries 58
3.2 Dutch trading factories in West Africa 64
4.1 Political developments on Gold and Slave coasts: ca.
1650-1750 93
5.1 The Windward coast: 18th century West Africa 117
6.1 The Dutch Republic: ca. 1700 130
8.1 The Guiana region 176
8.2 The Lesser Antilles 196
Preface
Since 1958, when as a student I crossed the Atlantic from Rotterdam to

New York on a passenger ship, I have been intrigued by the massive move-
ment of people across that ocean. As a graduate student during the 1960s
I developed an interest in African history. Coupled with my Dutch back-
ground and my decision to stay in America, it is no surprise that all of this
converged into a strong interest in transatlantic migrations. The Dutch
involvement in the Atlantic slave trade had received only scant attention up
to then, and I decided to fill this gap by writing a doctoral dissertation on
the Dutch participation in that forced migration from Africa. After com-
pleting a dissertation for Michigan State University in 1970, and publishing
a number of articles in scholarly journals, this book is the culmination of
many years of research that should place the Dutch role in the Atlantic slave
trade in proper perspective.
The Dutch involvement in the Atlantic slave trade is a subject of enormous
complexity. Not only does it cover about two centuries of history, but it has
wide-ranging geographical dimensions, including Europe, Africa, North
America, South America, and the Caribbean. In addition, the subject involves
complicated economic, demographic, medical, and statistical dimensions.
Organizing this rather complex subject into a readable book has not been
an easy task, and it has necessitated a number of revisions. Chronological,
geographic, and thematic developments have all been employed to provide
a structure for this book.
The first chapter sets the stage of the beginnings of the Atlantic slave
trade and the initial Dutch participation in it. It deals with the financial and
institutional prerequisites for the traffic, such as the Dutch West India
Company (WIC). The establishment of a Dutch colony in northern Brazil,
"New Holland," is discussed as the catalyst for the Dutch entry into the
slave trade. Chapter 2 continues the emphasis on the New World markets
for slaves, because without such a demand for cheap labor there would not
have been forced migration from Africa. Here, the significance of the so-
xii Preface
called asiento trade with the Spanish colonies and the role of Curasao as a
slave trade depot are examined.
In the next three chapters the focus shifts to Africa. Chapter 3 explores
the Dutch presence on the West African coast; the Afro-European com-
mercial and political relations are examined in the following chapter. Chapter
5 makes an assessment of the aggregate Dutch slave exports from Africa
and also focuses on the question of African origins of the slaves.
The organization and mechanics of the Atlantic slave trade are discussed
in Chapters 6 and 7. This involves the institutions and tools of the trade,
such as commercial companies and ships, as well as the various techniques
employed in acquiring and disposing of slaves. The nature of the triangularity
of the slave trade is examined focusing on two specific slave ships in action.
Chapters 8 and 9 return to the chronological account, with an emphasis
on the Western slave markets. But whereas the first two chapters deal es-
sentially with the seventeenth century, these chapters deal with the eighteenth
century. First, the establishment and supply of the Dutch plantation colonies
on the Guiana coast are explored, especially the sizable settlement of Sur-
inam. The Antillean island of St. Eustatius and its role in the slave trade
are also discussed. The early part of the eighteenth century, with continued
WIC monopoly over the Dutch slave trade, is discussed in Chapter 8. After
the termination of that monopoly in 1738, the so-called free-trade slaving
period is examined in Chapter 9.
Chapters 10 and 11 deal with special themes in the slave trade. In the
first, the attention is on the slaves themselves, how they were housed, fed,
and treated, and how they reacted to their fate. Much emphasis is placed
on death and dying on the so-called middle passage. Chapter 11 explores
the financial and economic intricacies of the slave trade and the question of
profitability. The final chapter discusses the declining decades of the Dutch
slave trade, 1780 to 1803. It also deals with the moral implications, the
question of the abolition of the traffic, and the absence of an abolitionist
movement in the Dutch Republic.
In a subject such as the Atlantic slave trade, the forced migration of
approximately ten million human beings, one cannot escape the issue of
morality. This phenomenon will always remain one of the dark pages in
human history. The focus of this study is not on the moral dimensions of
the slave traffic, but it is meant to clarify what in fact happened and when
and why the traffic existed. I have tried to be as objective as possible and
not to let moral considerations of human suffering and injustice be central,
so that the subject could be therefore tolerable for lengthy examination. In
a study such as this, one also develops a certain distancing to human suf-
fering; in time slaves become mere statistics and commercial items, as they
Preface xiii
must have been to the slave traders. However, periodically one has to confront
the enormous injustice and suffering that the slave trade brought about.
I clearly remember one day in the archives in The Hague, when I dis-
covered a batch of letters and reports that brought to light the tragic sinking
of the slave ship, Leusden, on January i, 1738. Nearly 700 slaves drowned
in this incident off the Surinam coast; of the 716 slaves who had left the
African coast on November 19, 1737, only 14 survived (see Chapter 10).
As I read the various reports written by surviving crew members, I realized
that I had rediscovered one of the great maritime tragedies which had been
completely erased from human memory, primarily because the victims were
mere slaves. I felt a mixture of emotions: stunned by the tragedy and human
suffering, but at the same time excited professionally about the rediscovery
of a significant historic event. This is one example of the mixture of emotions
that can be experienced in the research on the squalid aspects of human
history.
Many people have assisted in making this book a reality. Scholars from all
coasts of the Atlantic have offered advice and encouragement as this project
unfolded through the years. It would be impossible to remember or mention
all of them, but I wish to mention at least a few. Professors J. R. Bruyn and
Robert Ross, of Leiden University, and Dr. G. W. van der Meiden, archivist
at the Rijksarchief in The Hague, have read the manuscript and offered
suggestions for content improvements. Similarly, the readers of Cambridge
University Press, Dr. P. C. Emmer of Leiden University, and Dr. David
Eltis of Algonquin College of Ontario, Canada, have offered valuable advice.
All of the above are historians by training, and their suggestions have been
extremely valuable in getting the manuscript into its present form, although
I accept ultimate responsibility for the contents of the book. Professor G. W.
Bruyn of the Leiden Medical Faculty read and critiqued Chapter 10, which
deals with tropical and maritime diseases. Dr. C. J. T. Talar and Dr. Fred
O. Doty have read and critiqued the manuscript primarily for style and
grammar, and I greatly appreciate their contributions.
There are many quotations in this book that are translated from the Dutch
language. All of the translations from archival and printed materials are
mine, unless they are quoted from a published work already translated into
English. Professor J. R. Bruyn also helped with the translations of some of
the appendices.
Several people have given me assistance and advice in learning to master
computer skills and applying them to this study. Three friends and colleagues
at Mankato State University need to be singled out for their particular
assistance and encouragement in this area. Professor Richard Weisgerber
xiv Preface
helped me to understand the basic principles of computer technology and
he introduced me to various programs. Dr. Ronald Yezzi and Dr. Dennis
Braun gave valuable assistance with the tables and graphics.
I also want to thank Mr. Frank Smith, editor at Cambridge University
Press, for guiding the manuscript through the publication process. Special
thanks are due to Mr. Herbert A. Gilbert for the final editing of the
manuscript.
While on sabbatical leave during the 1986-7 academic year, I taught a
graduate seminar at Leiden University on the subject of the Dutch and the
Atlantic Slave Trade. My research and writing on this project were nearly
completed by that time, but the research projects of the students and the
discussions in the seminar contributed significantly to the final manuscript.
Several students have been credited for their specific contributions in the
footnotes, but to give adequate recognition to that valuable and enjoyable
experience, I list all the students of the Leiden Seminar: M. van Bellen, J.
de Boer, R. Chander, V. Enthoven, M. Eygenraam, J. Gewald, H. den Heyer,
A. Neeser, E. Neuman, H. Nooitgedagt, W. Reiger, R. Sewnarain-
Soerdjbalie, P. Veder, and J. Verhoog.
Without special financial assistance, this lengthy research project could
not have been completed. The following institutions and agencies have con-
tributed over the years to make the many research trips to Europe and Africa
possible: The National Defense Education Assistance (1967-8), African
Studies Center at Michigan State University (1968), The American Council
of Learned Societies (1972-3), Zuiver Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek in the
Netherlands (1986-7), and several small research grants from Mankato State
University.
Last but not least, major credit is due to my wife, Laurel Menne Postma,
for her patience and steady encouragement in this academic project. Not
only did she read the entire manuscript at least twice and make several
suggestions for improvements, but she is also responsible for completing all
the maps and diagrams, and she designed the jacket of the book. I dedicate
this book to her.
1
Foundations of the slave traffic

1600-61
The slave trade from Africa to the Western Hemisphere was undoubtedly
one of the major migrations in human history, a precursor to the even larger
subsequent migration from Europe to the West. The migration from Africa
was unique in that the emigrants were all forcibly transferred and, as slaves,
were looked upon as social and racial inferiors by their European counter-
parts. As a consequence, the Atlantic slave trade made a significant and in
many ways a lasting impact on the history of Africa and the Americas and
to a lesser extent on Europe as well. Africa supplied the labor force, Europe
the means of transportation and the necessary capital and commercial in-
stitutions, and the Americas the market for cheap labor for its plantations
and mines. Thus, the slave trade provided a significant link between con-
tinents that surround the Atlantic. It contributed to the massive increase of
world trade and the resulting accumulation of wealth, expanded the racial
and cultural mosaic of Western societies, and became a major cause of racial
conflicts in American societies. The slave trade itself produced one of the
most embarrassing chapters in human history, which has haunted historians,
moralists, and economists ever since.
For Africa, the Atlantic slave trade had major consequences, mostly neg-
ative. Although some scholars have suggested that its demographic impact
was minimal and the economic results positive, others have stressed a wide
range of negative consequences. Not only were many of its sons and daugh-
ters carried off, generally in the prime of life, but slave raids and increased
warfare had an impact on the social and political fabric of African societies
that will continue to be debated for many years. One scholar referred to the
slave trade as "one of the greatest crimes committed against Africa, and one
of the most disastrous episodes of its history."1
The Atlantic slave trade was also an important component in the global
i. J. D. Fage, A History of West Africa (Cambridge: University Press, 1969), pp. 84-92; Adu
Boahen, Topics in West African History (London: Longman Group, 1966), pp. 108-13.
2 The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade
economy that was evolving under European technological and administrative
leadership. The trade provided Europe with a market for its manufactured
goods with which slaves were purchased from African merchants. After the
Atlantic crossing, the slaves were exchanged for precious metals or agri-
cultural staples such as sugar, tobacco, coffee, and cotton, which were pro-
duced principally by slave labor. These products added to Europe's
purchasing power and standard of living, at least in certain areas and for
certain segments of the population. The wealth generated by this intricate
process was invested in the expanding commercial network as well as in
technological innovation. It is therefore with some justification, although
unquestionably exaggerated, that the West Indian scholar and statesman,
Eric Williams, a descendent of African slaves, asserted that the industrial
revolution was based on the Atlantic system of slavery and the slave trade. 2
Although many Europeans were enriched by the slave trade, there were
negative effects for others, in particular the sailors on the slave ships who
experienced heavy death tolls. The moral predicament implicit in this trade
in human beings became an issue among Europeans at the end of the
eighteenth century, and this led to the gradual abolition of the traffic during
the next century.
The American continents undoubtedly reaped the greatest benefits from
the Atlantic slave trade. Millions of workers were brought in who with their
descendents contributed their labor to the development of American societies
and the accumulation of riches, receiving as their remuneration only the
barest sustenance. Even if the cultural contributions of the Afro-Americans
are ignored, their labor in exploiting and developing the resources of the
New World was essential, and their economic contribution was recognized
as early as 1663 as "the strength and sinews of the Western World." 3
Measuring the Atlantic slave trade
The years 1441 and 1444 have each been cited as the beginning of the
Atlantic slave trade. During 1441 a Portuguese raiding party captured ten
blacks on the African west coast, in what is perhaps present-day Mauritania
or southern Morocco, and sold them on the Lisbon slave market. Black and
white slaves were bought and sold regularly on several southern European
slave markets at this time. Earlier, blacks were generally purchased in north-
ern Africa and brought into Europe across the Mediterranean. In 1444 the
2. Eric Williams, Capitalism and Slavery (Richmond: University of North Carolina Press, 1944),
p. vii. The so-called "William's Thesis" will be examined further in Chapter 11.
3. David Brion Davis, The Problem of Slavery in Western Culture (Ithaca N.Y.: Cornell University
Press, 1966), p. 10.
Foundations of the slave traffic 3
Portuguese started sending regular trading expeditions to the northwestern
coast of Africa, and before the end of that year they had carried 235 slaves
from Africa to Portugal. This commerce was apparently so important that
Prince Henry, who was in charge of Portuguese maritime activities, decreed
the slave trade a state monopoly.4
At that time slavery and the trade in slaves was not novel to either African
or European societies. Various forms of human bondage, including chattel
slavery by which a slave is considered as an item of property that can be
sold by the owner at will, have been practiced almost everywhere at one time
or another since ancient times. The "great Mediterranean slave trade," as
David Brion Davis calls it, reached its peak during the fourteenth and
fifteenth centuries, and slave markets were held regularly in many of the
southern European capitals such as Venice, Seville, and Lisbon, and even
as far north as Antwerp. In Venice alone, approximately 1,000 slaves were
sold during the years 1414 to 1423. Several of the slaves sold on these
markets had been brought from across the Sahara desert, and this may
account for the eagerness of the Portuguese to acquire African slaves directly
from Africa now that a direct route by sea was open to them. 5
Thus, the Atlantic slave trade was initiated with African slaves being
shipped to Europe rather than to America. Philip Curtin calculated that by
the early seventeenth century as many as 50,000 Africans were involuntarily
shipped to Europe. During this same period the Europeans transported
25,000 African slaves to the Atlantic islands of Cape Verde, Madeira, and
the Canaries, and another 100,000 were taken to the European sugar plan-
tations of the African island of Sao Thome. Collectively, this pattern has
been called the Old World Atlantic slave trade. 6
The trade to the Old World was only a prelude to what was to follow in
the transatlantic slave trade. Although some of the slaves shipped to Europe
were subsequently reexported to the New World, the year 1518 is generally
thought to be the opening of the "real" Atlantic slave trade, directly from
Africa to the American colonies. In that year the Spanish monarch, Charles
V, granted the first of the well-known royal licenses, or asientos, allowing
the holder to take African slaves to the Spanish-American colonies. Some
writers have pointed to the year 1510 as the beginning of the trade, because
4. Basil Davidson, The African Slave Trade (Boston: Little, Brown, 1961), p. 33; Elisabeth
Donnan, Documents Illustrative of the Slave Trade to America, 4 vols. (Washington, D.C.:
Carnegie Institution, 1931), vol. 1, p. 1.
5. Davis, pp. 42-4; For an assessment ot the trans-Saharan slave trade see: Ralph A. Austin,
"The Trans-Saharan Slave Trade: A Tentative Census," in Henry A. Gemery and Jan
S. Hogendorn, eds., The Uncommon Market (New York: Academic Press, 1979), pp.
23-76.
6. Philip D. Curtin, The Atlantic Slave Trade; A Census (Madison: University of Wisconsin
Press, 1969), pp. 17-28 and 268.
4 T h e Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade
during that year King Ferdinand of Spain approved the transport of 250
slaves from Lisbon to the New World.7
By the 1520s the transatlantic slave trade had developed into an accepted
and lucrative business, which was managed exclusively by the Portuguese,
who at that time controlled the African bases of supply. Only sporadic
intrusions by rival Europeans interrupted this pattern during the sixteenth
century. By the middle of that century a few thousand black slaves were
shipped annually across the Atlantic and these numbers increased steadily;
one source even suggests that there were as many as 10,000 per year, but
the evidence for such a high claim is lacking.8
A significant expansion of the Atlantic slave trade occurred in the sev-
enteenth century, particularly during the 1640s. One author describes the
phenomenon as an "explosion of the slave trade," and another states that a
"trickle became a flood." This may well have been an exaggeration because
the increase was limited to specific regions; nevertheless, a significant in-
crease in the flood of forced emigrants was evident. The spread of sugar
cultivation from Brazil to the Caribbean islands seems to have been the
crucial factor in this upward trend in the slave trade, or the sugar revolution,
as it was called. Sugar cultivation required large supplies of cheap labor,
and the profits were adequate at that time to secure the needed workers in
the form of African slaves. Developments on the island of Barbados clearly
illustrate this trend. In 1641 the island counted only a few hundred slaves
among its population, but four years later their number had increased to
approximately 6,ooo.9
With the growing volume of the slave trade came an increase in partici-
pants. By the end of the seventeenth century the Portuguese had been joined
by the Dutch, English, French, Danish, and even the Brandenburgers in
the traffic in slaves. In fact at times during the century the Dutch may well
have replaced the Portuguese as the leading slave traders. The volume of
the Atlantic slave trade continued to expand until a peak was reached in the
1780s, when annually as many as 100,000 slaves may have been taken across
the Atlantic. The outbreak of the American Revolution and the international
crisis that grew out of this conflict caused a decline in the trade. By 1815,
when this long period of intermittent warfare ended, a number of countries
had responded positively to the crusade to end the slave trade, and others
were to follow suit in the decades that followed. However, through the illicit
7. Donnan, vol. 1, p. 15; James A. Rawley, The Transatlantic Slave Trade (New York: Norton,
1981), pp. 10 and 26. See Chapter 2 for a more detailed examination of the asiento trade.
8. Davidson, p. 49; Curtin, pp. 115-16.
9. K. Polanyi and A. Rotstein, Dahomey and the Slave Trade (Seattle: University of Washington
Press, 1966), p. 17; Curtin, p. 126; Donnan, vol. I, p. 97; K. G. Davies, The Royal African
Company (London: Longman Group, 1957), p. 14.
trade and the persistent legal trade of a few southern European countries,
the transatlantic slave trade continued to flourish until the 1850s.
The grand total of slaves transported from Africa to the New World has
long been a matter of conjecture. Estimates have ranged from under ten
million to as many as fifty million, with fifteen million long accepted as the
most reasonable count. Curtin's pioneering and comprehensive evaluation
of the volume of the Atlantic slave trade, published in 1969, has stimulated
a great amount of research on this subject. Curtin calculated that nearly 9.6
million African slaves were landed in the New World, with approximately
eleven million forcibly exported from Africa. Subsequent archival research
has prompted some regional and chronological revisions, but Curtin's overall
estimate has been raised only slightly. According to Lovejoy's synthesis of
the figures, the total number of slaves landed in the West comes to nearly
9.8 million and, accounting for the losses on the middle passage, between
eleven and twelve million must have been exported from Africa.10
Africa and slavery
With an increasing demand for workers on the plantations in the Western

Hemisphere, and indigenous Americans and European immigrants being
either inadequate to the task or unobtainable in sufficient numbers, Africa
became a logical source for inexpensive labor for the most arduous work on
the plantations. When the Atlantic slave trade got under way, slavery as an
institution had been declining in Europe and had virtually disappeared in
agriculture. Initially European indentured servants were taken to the New
World, but the limitation of their time of service and the element of choice
prevented them from becoming a reliable work force. On various occasions,
native Americans had been enslaved by Europeans, but with devastating
results. They could not or would not adjust to the harsh regimentation of
slavery, and they were also decimated by diseases brought by the Europeans.
As a result the Spanish authorities were persuaded to allow the importation
of African slaves on a regulated basis through the so-called asiento trade.11
For centuries slaves had been exported from Africa across the Sahara
desert and the Red Sea. Various forms of human bondage had been practiced
by many African societies, including the right to transfer ownership or to
sell slaves. Thus it was possible for the Portuguese to purchase slaves from
Africans during their early explorations along the African coast. Because the
10. See Curtin, pp. 3-13 and 265-73 on the various estimates and the major trends. For a
revision of Curtin's figures see Paul E. Lovejoy, "The Volume of the Atlantic Slave Trade:
A Synthesis," Journal ofAfrican History, vol. 23 (1982), pp. 496-7.
11. Williams, pp. 3—11.
transatlantic slave trade grew slowly in intensity, it was possible for Africans
to adjust the limited demand of the internal slave trade to the growing
demand of the external trade. 12
One of the crucial questions in the debate over the moral responsibility
for the Atlantic slave trade is the difference between slavery as practiced in
Africa and the system of slavery that was developed in the Western Hem-
isphere. One unfortunate African who experienced enslavement in the West
reflected on the system in Africa as follows:
but how different was their condition from that of the slaves in the West
Indies! With us they do no more work than other members of the
community, even masters; their food, clothing and lodging were nearly
the same as theirs (except that they were not permitted to eat with those
who were free born), and there was scarce any other difference between
them than a superior degree of importance which the head of a family
possesses in our state, and that authority which, as such, he exercises
over every part of his household. Some of these slaves have even slaves
under them as their own property and for their own use.13
Outsiders have long been ignorant about slavery in Africa, as they have been
about Africa in general. Recently, a groundbreaking study on the subject
concluded that human bondage was widespread in Africa during the time
of the Atlantic slave trade but that it should be seen as "one part of a
continuum of human relations, which at one end are part of the realm of
kinship and at the other involve using persons as chattels." Slavery in the
Western Hemisphere, perhaps one of the less humane forms of human
bondage in modern times, has become our frame of reference for the term
slavery. It has influenced our thinking about that institution everywhere, in-
cluding Africa, where there was great variation in the forms of human bon-
dage. One major contrast between slavery in Africa and the Americas was
that in the former slaves were quite readily incorporated into the society
where they resided, whereas in the Americas slavery was identified with race
and with perpetual servitude.14
Whether or not African slave traders were aware of the differences between
these systems is hard to determine. Europeans who purchased African slaves
12. This adjustment is illustrated in the specific case of the Vili of Loango by Phyllis Martin,
"The Trade of Loango in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries," in Richard Gray
and David Birmingham, eds., Pre-Colonial African Trade (London: Oxford University
Press, 1970), pp. 139-48.
13. Olaudah Equiano, Equiano's Travels (New York: Praeger, 1967, p. 10; this autobiography
is abridged and edited by Paul Edwards, and was first published in 1789.
14. Susanne Miers and Igor Kopytoff, eds., Slavery in Africa (Madison: University of Wisconsin
Press, 1977, pp. 6, 11, 16 and 66; Walter Rodney, "African slavery and other forms of
social oppression on the upper Guinea Coast in the context of the Atlantic slave trade . . . "
Journal ofAfrican History, vol 7 (1966), pp. 431-43.
were almost certainly ignorant of conditions in the interior of Africa because
the European penetration of Africa did not take place until the nineteenth
century. European apologists for the slave trade, on the other hand, were
readily prone to justify the enslavement of Africans on the ground that the
slaves' benefits of "civilization" and Christianity easily outweighed the "curse
of savage Africa." The cruelties involved in the slave trade were by the
standards of its age perhaps not all that unusual, until the humanitarian
impulses of the eighteenth century began to introduce more humane stan-
dards, which in time also began to challenge the slave trade itself. It is
undoubtedly safe to assume that African and European merchants alike were
motivated chiefly by economic profit. Willem Bosman, a Dutch trader sta-
tioned on the African coast about 1700, describing the treatment and the
branding of the slaves after they were sold by Africans to the Dutch, defended
the institution merely by stating: "I doubt not but this Trade seems very
barbarous to you, but since it is followed by mere necessity it must go on;
but we yet take all possible care that they are not burned too hard, especially
the Women, who are more tender than the Men. 15
The base of operation in Holland
Why was it that the small Dutch nation with a population of no more than
1.5 million people during the seventeenth century played such a prominent
role in the transatlantic slave trade? The United Provinces, as the republic
was known until it became the Kingdom of the Netherlands in 1814, was
going through its birth struggle in a war of independence against Spain when
it became involved in the slave trade. Participation in the slave trade was
only a by-product of the enormous economic expansion of the nation that
during the seventeenth century became a world-wide maritime empire.
The Low Countries, particularly the maritime provinces of Holland and
Zeeland, already controlled a large share of the seaborne trade of Europe
before the Eighty Year War with Spain broke out in 1568. This war, however,
greatly intensified the economic activities and power of the Dutch as they
discovered that their best defense was an aggressive offense. Along with
their periodic allies, the French and English, the Dutch made serious inroads
into the maritime empires of Spain and Portugal, which were temporarily
united through their monarchs during the period 1580 to 1640. The north-
western European powers virtually robbed the Iberian states of their longtime
mastery of the seas. For a time it appeared as if Holland had succeeded
15. Willem Bosman, A New and Accurate Description of the Coast of Guinea (New York: Barnes
& Noble, 1967), first published in Dutch in 1704, pp. 364-5.
Portugal in controlling the trade with the East Indies, the West African coast,
and the slave trade to the New World. The Dutch, however, were forced
to allow other European powers a share in these activities.16
The Dutch economic and cultural resurgence during the seventeenth
century, a period characterized as the Golden Age, cannot be explained by
one simple factor. The war of independence against Spanish rule tended to
fuse many of these forces for growth into a unified policy. As a result of the
war, the loosely federated provinces were forced to establish a common
foreign policy, which gave force and direction to the military struggle and
led to the formation of one of the most powerful naval forces of that time.
The States General, the representatives of the various regions of the United
Provinces, was given control over foreign policy, while the grand pensionary
foreshadowed the role of a modern prime minister. The Orange family,
which held the hereditary title of stadholder, became even more closely
affiliated with the Dutch through this struggle; as stadholders they were
empowered with military leadership and the power of certain appointments
and various other forms of influence. Contrary to the rather advanced maritime
and commercial institutions of the Republic, this governmental edifice was
essentially a modified relic of medieval balance of power. One important
difference in this situation, however, was that the commercial oligarchy rather
than the hereditary aristocracy was the dominant social and economic class. 17
Religious beliefs also played a role in the economic development of the
young republic. An influential minority of the population, many of them
merchants, were zealous Calvinists who saw the Catholicism of their Spanish
overlords as the greatest danger to their religious convictions as well as to
their economic interests. Periodic invasions by Spanish armies drove many
Calvinist merchants and craftsmen from the southern provinces (now Bel-
gium) to the north, where they contributed vitally to the religious and eco-
nomic fervor of the new nation. This does not mean that Calvinism created
the Dutch economic miracle in the seventeenth century; it is more likely
that the Dutch were attracted to Calvinism because of its tolerance of cap-
italistic practices. As Schama puts it: "That lesson had been drunk with
Dutch capitalism's mother's milk, in the earliest accounting between north-
ern trade and the Christian gospel."18
One religious group that contributed to the economic growth of the Dutch
Republic during much of the seventeenth century were the Sephardic Jews.
16. Charles R. Boxer, The Portuguese Seaborne Empire, 1415-1825 (New York: Knopf, 1969),
pp. io6ff.
17. Jan De Vries, "On the Modernity of the Dutch Republic," Journal of Economic History
(1973), vol. 33, pp. 191-202.
18. Charles R. Boxer, The Dutch Seaborne Empire, 1600-1800 (New York: Knopf, 1965),
pp. 8-13; Simon Schama, The Embarrassment of Riches (New York: Knopf, 1987), p. 371.
Many of these refugees from the Inquisition in Spain and Portugal found
a haven in Amsterdam and Rotterdam and contributed significantly to the
Dutch trade with their original Iberian homeland and its overseas colonies.
The Sephardim also became a factor in the spread of sugar cultivation from
Brazil to the West Indies and in the development of Dutch overseas plan-
tation colonies. Similarly, at the end of the seventeenth century many Hu-
guenots from France found refuge in Holland, after King Louis XIV revoked
the Edict of Nantes in 1685, and they made their contribution to the eco-
nomic development of the Dutch Republic.19
The Dutch Republic soon developed the largest merchant marine in the
world and Amsterdam, its capital and principal seaport, became the world's
center of insurance and financial institutions. Fernand Braudel summarizes
the situation as follows:
The Amsterdam entrepot trade verged on a monopoly. And if the Dutch
really were 'the Carryers of the World, the middle persons in Trade,
the Factors and Brokers of Europe', as Defoe wrote in 1728, this was
not... thought because 'all the other nations were willing to suffer it to
be so', but because they were unable to prevent it. The Dutch system
was built on a network of commercial relations of interdependence which
combined to produce a series of virtually obligatory channels for the
circulation and redistribution of goods. It was a system that could only
be maintained by constant vigilance, by a policy designed to thwart all
competition, and by subordinating the whole of the Dutch economy to
this essential objective.20
One of the cornerstones of Dutch maritime and commercial organization

was their shipping firm, the partenrederij, or literally "shared outfitting."
Initially, shipping was a family venture, but as the size of the ships, the
voyage distances, and the volume of trade grew, additional capital was at-
tracted by allowing various individuals to purchase shares in a single shipping
venture. Such shares could be bought and sold but were limited to investment
in a single ship making a specific voyage. The individual shareholder, or
reder, lost or profited only to the degree of the investment, and financial
accounts were settled at the conclusion of each shipping venture. One of
the investors was appointed as the manager (boekhouder), who supervised the
outfitting of the ship. This system of operation attracted the necessary capital
for the rapidly expanding Dutch merchant marine. Captains of ships were
19. Jonathan Israel, "Spain and the Dutch Sephardim, 1609-1660," Studio. Rosenthaliana,
vol. 12 (1978), pp. 6, 9, 26, 55-6; Cornelius Ch. Goslinga, The Dutch in the Caribbean
and the Wild Coast, 1580—1680 (Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1971), pp. 103,
338, 421, and 424-5; J. G. van Dillen, Van Rijkdom en Regenten (The Hague: Nijhoff,
1970), pp. 396-8, 409, and 503.
20. Fernand Braudel, The Perspective of the World (New York: Harper and Row, 1984); first
published in French in 1979, p. 239.
io The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade
frequently part owners, which increased their level of motivation and thereby
the potential success of the undertaking. The rederij could also be broadened
into a shipping firm, such as the the great joint-stock companies. During
the early sixteenth century, the Dutch created two of these, the East India
Company and the West India Company. Both existed for nearly two centuries
and gained considerable success and renown. The West India Company was
to play a formidable role in the Atlantic slave trade. 21
During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the Dutch Republic
held a prominent position in the world and attained a controversial repu-
tation. To the Spanish and many other Catholic peoples, Holland was a
land of money-hungry heretics. For many political and religious dissenters,
such as John Locke, Rene Descartes, and Pierre Bailie, Holland became a
haven of freedom, although many Dutch Catholics had their own civil rights
curtailed. The Dutch Republic was a country of new economic and profes-
sional opportunity for many exiled Spanish Jews, French Huguenots, and
other Protestant dissenters. Its growing wealth contributed to the flourishing
of the arts, scientific experimentation, and technological and organizational
advancement in such areas as shipbuilding, maritime insurance, commercial
organization, and financial institutions. But for some half a million unfor-
tunate Africans who were transported across the Atlantic, the Dutch must
have been remembered in a more negative way.
The Dutch enter the slave trade
The Dutch entry into the Atlantic slave trade was more by accident than by
design, and their participation in it did not start in earnest until the 1630s.
As early as 1528, Dutch names crop up in connection with the importation
of slaves into the Spanish colonies, but these may well have been either
Germans or Flemings from the Belgian provinces. One of the earliest direct
Dutch connections with the African slave trade occurred in 1596, when a
Rotterdam skipper, Pieter van der Haagen, brought 130 African slaves into
the harbor of Middelburg, capital of the province of Zeeland. After lengthy
debates, the city council decided that no slave market would be allowed
there and that the slaves should be released and allowed to find jobs as free
laborers. Similar incidents had taken place in Amsterdam in connection with
the Portuguese Jews residing in that city, which suggests that the Dutch
themselves were not favorably disposed to enter the trade in human beings,
which was widely practiced in southern European cities at that time. 22
21. Boxer, Dutch Empire, pp. 8 and 18-19; FJ.A. Broeze, "Bedrijfsorganisatie," in Maritieme
Geschiedenis der Nederlanden (Bussum: Uniboek, 1977), vol. 3, pp. 99-114.
22. E. van den Boogaart and P. C. Emmer, "The Dutch Participation in the Atlantic Slave
This attitude prevailed until 1621, when the Dutch West India Company
(West-Indische Compagnie, hereafter referred to as WIC), came into being.
Some of the shareholders suggested participation in the slave trade; however,
after consultations with theologians the directors agreed that the trade in
human beings was morally not justified and should therefore not be practiced
by the company. In general, Calvinist theologians accepted slavery as a
legitimate human institution, justifying it on the so-called curse of Ham
theory, which held that blacks were the offspring of Ham (and his son
Canaan), the son of the biblical Noah, who had dishonored his father and
thereby drew the curse of God that condemned his offspring to perpetual
servitude. Calvinists who spoke out against slavery in the pre-
eighteenth-century Enlightenment days were the exception to the rule. It is
therefore quite likely that the majority of the WIC directors were econom-
ically motivated in selecting particular Calvinist advisers who would give
them the advice they wished to hear.23
For nearly a decade the WIC avoided the trade in slaves. This does not
mean, however, that individual Dutch skippers may not have engaged in the
traffic on an extralegal basis, especially before the WIC gained a monopoly
over the Atlantic trade. A few cases have in fact been documented, and
others may come to light when the extensive notarial archives of Amsterdam
are thoroughly examined. As early as 1615 the Dutch poet, G. A. Brederoo,
in his play, Moortje ("Little Moor"), made reference to the slave trade
practiced by merchants from Amsterdam. But the reference is clearly a
condemnation of the slave trade: "Inhumane custom! Godless rascality! That
people are being sold, to horselike slavery. In this city there are also those,
who engage in that trade. In Farnabock, but God will know."24
The poet was most likely referring to some Sephardic Portuguese Jews
who had found refuge in Amsterdam a few centuries earlier but who were
still trading with the Portuguese in Pernambuco, Brazil. Prominent among
these Jewish merchants was Diego Nunes Belmonte, a family name that will
crop up again a century later in connection with the Dutch slave trade.25
An early case of Dutch involvement in the Old World slave trade has
been documented for the year 1596, the same year that Middelburg rejected
Trade, 1596-1650," in Henry A. Gemery and Jan S. Hogendorn, eds., The Uncommon
Market (New York: Academic Press, 1979), pp. 354-7; Donnan, vol. 1, pp. 16-17.
23. Van den Boogaart and Emmer, p. 356; Davis, p. 63; L. R. Priester, u De Nederlandse
houding ten aanzien van de slavenhandel en slavernij, 1596-1863," M.A. thesis, Erasmus
University, Rotterdam, 1986, pp. 38-47. The last cited work covers the Dutch attitude
towards slavery quite thoroughly.
24. W. S. Unger, "Bijdragen tot de geschiedenis van de Nederlandse slavenhandel,"
Economisch-Historisch Jaarboek, vol. 26 (The Hague: Nijhoff 1956) (cited hereafter as
Unger, I), pp. 136-7; G. A. Brederoo, Moortje (Amsterdam: Van Raven, 1617), lines
233-6.
25. Unger I, p. 137; Van den Boogaart and Emmer, p. 354.
the establishment of a slave market. The case involved an Amsterdam captain
who took fifty-eight African slaves from Sao Thome to Lisbon. The first
clearly identified effort by Dutchmen to participate in the transatlantic slave
trade took place in 1597. That year a certain captain, Melchior van Kerkhove,
sailed two ships to Angola for the purpose of obtaining slaves there. The
venture failed, however, because the ships were captured by the Portuguese. 26
The first successful Dutch slaving expedition was recorded for the year
1606, when Isaac Duverne delivered 470 slaves to the island of Trinidad.
Undoubtedly, there were other such ventures of which the records have
either been lost or remain undiscovered. Documentation for this early period
is obviously sparse and far from complete. In general, Dutch merchants had
not yet come to appreciate the commercial value of the slave trade. This is
confirmed by the fact that in the year 1606 Captain Pieter van den Broecke
captured a ship with ninety slaves. Because he saw little commercial value
in this human cargo, he quickly traded them for "victuals" to an English
captain.27
Textbooks in the United States have perpetuated the notion of an early
role of the Dutch in the Atlantic slave trade by citing a passage from Captain
John Smith's old history of Virginia, which includes the following reference
to the first African slaves arriving in the North American mainland. "About
the last of August (1619) came a Dutch man of Warre that sold us twenty
negars."28 A closer examination of the circumstances confirms that the ship
must have been a Dutch privateer, not a slave ship, that had been on a
plundering expedition against the Spanish in the West Indies. It had captured
the slaves, apparently from an enemy ship, and sold them for needed supplies
at or in the vicinity of the Jamestown settlement. The identity of the particular
Dutch ship has unfortunately never been established.
As was stated, the WIC did not immediately get involved in the Atlantic
slave trade at its founding in 1621. The sporadic Dutch slaving incidents
just mentioned were mostly prior to this date, and they seem to have di-
minished as a result of the WIC monopoly during the 1620s. Before long,
however, WIC captains also got involved in the traffic; their intensive ac-
tivities in the Atlantic could hardly prevent them from doing so. Surprisingly,
in 1626, the WIC captain, Cornelis Jol, let a captured ship go free without
taking an interest in its cargo of 600 slaves. There may have been special
26. Van den Boogaart and Emmer, p. 354; Unger I, p. 136.
27. Vincent Harlow, ed., Colonizing Expeditions to the West Indies and Guiana, 1623-1667
(London: Hakluyt Society, 1925), series II, vol. 56, p. 125; Unger I, p. 136.
28. Edward Arber and A. G. Bradley, eds., The Travels and Works of Captain John Smith
(Edinburgh: Burt Franklin, 1910), vol. II, p. 541; W. F. Craven, White, Red, and Black:
The Seventeenth Century Virginian (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1971),
pp. 77-81.
reasons for JoPs action, because other WIC captains are reported to have
confiscated slaves from captured enemy ships at this time. At any rate, it
was not long after this incident that the company made a regular practice
of capturing enemy slavers and confiscating their human cargo. One of the
WIC directors, Joannes de Laet, reported in his description of the company's
activities that between the years 1623 and 1637 a total of 2,336 slaves had
been acquired by the company in this manner and that they were sold at
various locations in the New World at an average price of 250 guilders.29
In the meantime the WIC had also begun to participate in the regular
slave trade from Africa. The Zeeland chamber of the WIC sent a company
yacht, a small ship, to Angola in 1626 for the purpose of purchasing a cargo
of slaves to be transported to the "Amazones," one of the small settlements
in that river valley, presumably or at the nearby Guiana coast. The following
year Zeeland granted the pioneer colonist Abraham van der Pere permission
to take six slaves with him in his effort to establish a plantation colony on
the Berbice river, in present-day Guyana, A similar request was granted for
the island Tobago. In 1629 the Zeeland chamber accepted the responsibility
of supplying the colony in northern Brazil, which the WIC was intending
to capture from the Portuguese.30
The beginnings of the Dutch involvement in the Atlantic slave trade was
thus rather haphazard and incongruous. The much cited Description of the
Guinea Coast, published in 1602 by Pieter de Marees, lacks any reference
to Dutch slaving activities, although the author discusses the Slave Coast
and the Portuguese participation in the traffic. We may assume that prior
to their acquisition of firm bases on the African coast, the Dutch slave trade
had to remain a relatively insignificant business. In 1612 the Dutch had
acquired a small trading station at Mori on the Gold Coast, modern-day
Ghana, but it was not until they captured the chief Portuguese stronghold
at Elmina in 1637 that they could engage in the slave trade in earnest.31
As a result of the marginal participation in the slave trade and the lack
of a foothold on the African coast, the Dutch could not have carried a large
number of slaves from Africa before the middle of the 1630s. The majority
of the slaves landed in the New World by the Dutch must have been captured
from foreign vessels while on the middle passage. With de Laet's figures of
29. B. B. van Overeem, "De reizen naar de West van Cornells Cornelisz. Jol, alias Kapitein
Houtebeen, 1626-1640," De West-Indische Gids, (1942), vol. 24, p. 3; Joannes de Laet,
in S. P. l'Honore Naber, ed., Iaerlyck Verhael... (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1937); first pub-
lished in 1644, vol. IV, p. 287. De Laet gives an account of the WIC's activities for the
1623—37 period.
30. Unger I, pp. 137-8.
31. P. de Marees, Beschrijvinghe van de Goudkust van Guinea (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1912),
first published in 1602.
2,336 captured and the 470 taken to Trinidad as the only substantively
documented landings, the total number of slaves taken to the New World
by the Dutch prior to 1636 may not have exceeded 5,000.
Brazil and the WIC
The factor that drew the Dutch into the transatlantic slave trade on a regular
basis and on a grand scale was their conquest of northern Brazil in 1630.
Large portions of the coastal regions of Brazil had been developed into a
sugar plantation colony by the Portuguese during the previous century. But
the weakening of the far-flung Portuguese empire during the late sixteenth
and early seventeenth centuries provided the Dutch with an opportunity to
take over much of the Portuguese maritime empire, including the valuable
Brazilian areas north of Bahia.32
With the acquisition of their first sizable plantation colony, the Dutch
found themselves in need of slave labor. As was mentioned above, Portugal
had also pioneered the transatlantic slave trade, first to Europe and the
Atlantic islands, and subsequently to Brazil and the Spanish colonies. In
fact their unchallenged monopoly of this trade had been responsible for
bringing perhaps as many as 400,000 African slaves to the New World.33
The Dutch now also had a motive to challenge the Portuguese monopoly
of the transatlantic slave trade, because their plantation colony in northern
Brazil demanded a steady supply of forced laborers.
Actually the Dutch had been indirectly involved in the Brazil sugar pro-
duction since the end of the sixteenth century. Dutch capital was invested
in the Brazilian economy and their merchant ships had carried substantial
amounts of unprocessed sugar products from Brazil to the refineries in the
United Provinces. By 1622 there were twenty-nine sugar refineries in Hol-
land and the Dutch shipyards were constructing fifteen ships annually for
the Brazil trade alone. The formal capture of part of Portuguese Brazil could
therefore be seen as a logical extension of existing Dutch economic
interests.34
The expansion of Holland and the creation of its far-flung overseas empire
during the early seventeenth century were part of a broader international
development that involved the weakening of the Spanish and Portuguese
empires and the growth of the Dutch, French, and English maritime empires
32. Boxer, Portuguese Empire, Chapter IV.

33. Curtin, p. 116; Rawley, p. 428.
34. Herbert Klein, The Middle Passage (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1978),
p. 10; Charles R. Boxer, The Dutch in Brazil, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1957),
pp. 20-1.
at the expense of the Iberian empires. Spain had been involved in several
wars during the previous century, including the Eighty Year War (1568-
1648) with the Dutch Republic and the Thirty Years War (1618-48) in
Central Europe. Portugal was drawn into some of these bitter conflicts when
in 1580 the Spanish king became the ruler of both countries. The royal
merger of the two Iberian states greatly weakened the Portuguese empire,
which seemed to be getting secondary attention from the royal bureaucracy,
making it therefore vulnerable to serious encroachments by the aspiring
colonial powers of England, France, and Holland. The Dutch Republic was
the major beneficiary of this turn of events and took over much of the
Portuguese overseas empire, including most of the East Indies, or Indonesia,
and several other commercial strongholds in southern and eastern Asia. In
the Atlantic the Dutch came to control much of the western coast of Africa
as well as northeastern Brazil. In addition they were also making inroads in
the Spanish empire in the Americas by conquering a number of Caribbean
islands and establishing settlements on the Wild Coast, or Guiana. As Boxer
puts it: "By 1648 the Dutch were indisputably the greatest trading nation
in the world, with commercial outposts and fortified 'factories' scattered
from Archangel to Recife and from New Amsterdam to Nagasaki."35
The management of these widely scattered colonial possessions was ad-
ministered by the two famous Dutch joint-stock companies, the United East
India Company (Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie), or VOC, and the
West India Company, or WIC. The VOC was chartered in 1602 and was
placed in charge of the expansion and management of the Dutch possessions
in the Indian Ocean littoral, which came to include the southern tip of Africa,
and east and southeast Asia. The Dutch East Indies (Indonesia) became the
most valued of these colonies but it also included at one time or another
trading stations in India, Japan, Formosa (Taiwan), and Ceylon (Sri Lanka).
The WIC, chartered in 1621, had initially a trading monopoly in Atlantic
waters except along the European coast. Both companies survived for nearly
two centuries. Due to its tremendous financial success, however, the VOC
always enjoyed a dominant position in the historiography of Dutch colonial
expansion over the less successful WIC. Nevertheless, the WIC played a
significant role, albeit a continually declining one, in the commercial and
political history of the Atlantic. It played a crucial role in the Atlantic slave
trade.36
Dutch aspirations in the Atlantic during the early seventeenth century
included the following: Inflict damage on the Spanish adversary through
35. Boxer, Portuguese Empire, Chapter V; Boxer, Dutch Empire, p. 27.

36. P. C. Emmer, "The West India Company, 1621-1791," in L. Blusse and F. Gaastra,
eds., Companies and Trade (Leiden University Press, 2401), pp. 71-2; Boxer, Dutch Empire,
pp. 22-7.
privateering, control the trade with Africa, establish settlements colonies in
the New World, control the salt trade from the Caribbean, and maintain
naval and commercial bases in the Caribbean. In order to accomplish these
goals, the Dutch States General chartered the WIC in 1621. The company
had been in the planning stage for several years but its organization had
been delayed for some time for a number of reasons, of which the most
important no doubt was the Twelve Year Truce (1609-21) with the Spanish
enemy. Perhaps this shows that the political authorities saw the WIC's prin-
cipal function as military or naval, an objective that would end with the
cessation of the war. The man who most actively campaigned for the es-
tablishment of the WIC, Willem Usselinx, had stressed settlement as the
primary role of the company. The fact that it took three years to collect the
necessary investment capital and that the States General waited until the
resumption of war may be taken as an indication that settlement did not
enjoy a priority with the government authorities. Private investors may also
have been alarmed by the military responsibilities of the company.
Given these tenuous circumstances surrounding the establishment of the
WIC, it should be no surprise that the company always remained in the
shadow of its counterpart, the VOC. During the first few decades, however,
the WIC seemed to meet its intended objectives well. Among its most dra-
matic feats were the capture of a complete Spanish silver fleet in 1628, the
conquest of northeastern Brazil in 1630, the virtual domination of the African
trade, and the establishment of several commercial and settlement centers
in the Caribbean and the Guiana coast. After a peace treaty was signed
between Holland and Spain in 1648, the WIC lost the essential income from
its privateering and the company soon began to rely on government subsidies
in order to continue its operations. During the Dutch war with England and
France in the early 1670s, the WIC was faced with bankruptcy, and only
through government support was it reorganized in 1674. That date remains
a watershed in WIC history, and the company was subsequently often re-
ferred to as the "second" or "new" WIC in comparison with the pre-1674
"old" WIC. During the eighteenth century, the company's territorial bound-
aries were slowly reduced, and finally it also lost its monopoly over the Dutch
slave trade during the 1730s.37
The WIC, however, did play a very crucial role in the slave trade. Not
only did the company have a monopoly over the traffic until 1730 but in a
variety of ways it continued to participate in the trade after that date. The
company continued to manage the Dutch trading stations on the African
coast and in the Caribbean, and as such it accumulated an extensive statistical
37. Emmer, "The WIC," pp. 71-95; see also W. R. Menkman, De West-Indische Compagnie
(Amsterdam: Van Kampen, 1947), for a short history of the WIC.
record on the slave trade. For this reason the history of the Dutch partic-
ipation in the slave trade is intricately interwoven with that of the WIC.
As already stated, the WIC directors initially had little interest in the slave
trade. But this attitude changed drastically after the WIC had acquired a
plantation colony in northern Brazil in 1630, only nine years after the foun-
dation of the company. No contemporary record is found concerning con-
sultations with theologians; apparently economic incentives were sufficient
to brush aside whatever moral scruples might initially have precluded the
company from participating in the slave trade. In 1638 the governor of New
Holland, as the Dutch colony in northern Brazil was called, stated in his
report to his WIC superiors: "It is not possible to accomplish anything in
Brazil without slaves."38 It was therefore with the acquisition of the settlement
in Brazil that the Dutch got involved in the Atlantic slave trade on a systematic
basis. And in order to be effective in this they needed to acquire bases on
the African coast, where they could purchase slaves on a reliable basis.
The Dutch on the African coast
In defiance of the Portuguese monopoly, Dutch merchants had actually

frequented the West African coast since the 1590s. A Dutch captain from
Medemblik in northern Holland, Barent Ericzoon, had been trading with
Brazil and on his voyage in 1591 was diverted by a storm to the African
island of Principe. Here, he was imprisoned by the Portuguese and learned
of the commercial opportunities on the West African coast. Upon his return
to Holland in 1593, he organized a small company for trade with Africa. As
a result, a small-scale commercial pattern between Holland and Africa de-
veloped. An occasional Dutch ship may have sailed to Africa before this
time, and others certainly did during this decade, but 1593 is the year that
a regular trade link was established. In 1599 a larger company was organized,
the Vereenigde Compagnie, or United Company. Eleven years later the United
Company was enlarged again and renamed the Guinea Company. In 1612
the Dutch established their first African trading station (also known as "fac-
tory" in those days) at Mori on the Gold Coast, in present-day Ghana.
Hereafter, the Dutch presence on the African coast increased steadily, and
Boxer claims that by 1621 the Dutch were the principal traders on the Gold
Coast. Four years later they made an abortive attempt to capture the Por-
tuguese castle Sao Jorga at Elmina, the headquarters of the Portuguese in
West Africa.39
38. Boxer, Dutch in Brazil, p. 83.

39. Van Dillen, pp. 139-41; Boxer, Dutch in Brazil, p. 5; S. P. l'Honore Naber, "De Ko-
Up to that time, however, African gold rather than slaves had been the
primary interest of the Dutch traders. The acquisition of a plantation colony
in Brazil changed this; slaves were then not only in demand but they became
a necessity for New Holland to thrive. But the small trading station at Mori
was overshadowed by nearby Elmina and was unable to supply slaves in
large enough numbers to satisfy the demand. Also, the Gold Coast was not
primarily a slave exporting area at this time. The Portuguese castle at Elmina
dominated the West African coast and stood in the way of the expansion of
Dutch trade in Africa. For these reasons the Dutch made a second attempt
to capture the Portuguese headquarters, and they succeeded. The Africans
of the local area had become dissatisfied with the Portuguese as trading
partners, and they actively aided the Dutch in dislodging the Portuguese.
This was the only time the strongly defended castle was taken by force.
Interestingly, the fleet that forced the Portuguese to surrender the Elmina
castle sailed from Dutch Brazil and was commissioned by the WIC au-
thorities in that colony. There was therefore a firm link between the slave
trade, New Holland, and the WIC expansion in Africa.40
Many of the planters in New Holland were accustomed to getting Bantu-
speaking slaves through the Angola ports of West-Central Africa and this
prompted the WIC to extend their African holdings to this area as well. In
1641 the Dutch drove the Portuguese from the islands of Sao Thome and
Annabon, and from the coastal trading stations at Sao Paula and Benguela.
The WIC sweep of the African Atlantic coastline was complete with the
capture of the last remaining Portuguese coastal station at Axim the following
year. Except for the fact that they had to tolerate the presence of rivaling
northern Europeans, such as the English, French, Danes, Germans, and
Swedes, the Dutch Republic had become the dominant nation on the West
African coast. The WIC had reached the zenith of its power during
the 1640s.41
New Holland and the slave trade
The Dutch expansion in Africa and Brazil were clearly linked. From its very
foundation in 1621, the directors of the WIC had intended to dislodge the
Portuguese from Brazil. In 1624 the company captured and briefly held Bahia,
the capital of the Brazilian colony. They were driven out again by a combined
lonien," Geschiedkundige Atlas van Nederland (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1937), pp. 8-12; Gos-
linga, p. 51.
40. Van Dillen, p. 161; K. Ratelband, ed., Vijf Dagregisters van het Kasteel Sao Jorga da Mina
aan de Goudkust (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1953), pp. lxiv-lxx.
41. Boxer, Dutch in Brazil, pp. 106-8; Van Dillen, p. 161.
Spanish-Portuguese fleet during the following year. It was during that same
year that the WIC also tried to capture Elmina. The WIC persisted in its
dual objective and in 1629 it dispatched a large fleet consisting of 77 ships
to establish a firm foothold in northern Brazil. This time they succeeded in
their aim and captured the valuable sugar-producing captaincies of Pernam-
buco, Itamaraca, and Paraiba. Recife became the capital of the New Holland
colony. The Portuguese maintained a tenuous control over the southern half
of the colony, with their capital at Bahfa, but even this town was briefly besieged
by the Dutch in 1638.42
Notwithstanding these Dutch successes, the WIC's hold on Brazil was
always tenuous. The vast majority of the colonists were and remained Por-
tuguese by origin and culture. The WIC was never able to induce adequate
numbers of Dutchmen to settle in the faraway colony to influence the ethnic
makeup of the settlement. Several hundred Sephardim Jews from Amster-
dam settled in New Holland, but they were originally from Portugal and
had retained an Iberian cultural flavor. During the sixteenth century they were
persecuted in Portugal and, as so many others, found freedom in Holland.
The WIC directors sought to overcome these disadvantages by appointing
as colonial governor the well-known and able Prince Johan Maurits, a scion
of the Dutch Orange family. Maurits, also referred to as the Humanist
Prince, governed the colony from 1637 to 1644, during which time New
Holland functioned with a fair degree of stability and efficiency.43
In 1640 the union of Spain and Portugal came to an end, which led to
establishment of an uneasy peace between Portugal and the Dutch Republic
in the following year. For the distant colonies, the hostilities continued into
1642, and the two countries did not settle their differences firmly until 1661.
These developments prevented the WIC from consolidating their colony in
Brazil. As long as the Portuguese retained a foothold in Brazil the Dutch
settlement would never be secure. Imbued with a new sense of patriotism
after the revolt against Spain, the Portuguese settlers, or Moradores, became
increasingly dissatisfied with Dutch rule and, in 1645, th e v r o s e m open
rebellion against the WIC administration. Deprived of the able leadership
of Johan Maurits, the WIC rapidly lost control over the colony. In time only
Recife remained in Dutch hands, and it continued as a beleaguered strong-
hold in a Portuguese world until 1654, when it was forced to surrender. 44
Given the tenuous hold over their colony in northern Brazil and their lack
of experience in the slave trade, the Dutch importation of slaves into New
Holland was relatively small, especially during the first few years. Many of
42. Boxer, Portuguese Empire, p. 112; Boxer, Dutch in Brazil, pp. 14, 26, 37 and 85.
43. Van Dillen, p. 156; Boxer, Dutch Empire, pp. 129-31; Boxer, Dutch in Brazil, p. 133, and
Chapter IV.
44. Boxer, Dutch in Brazil, Chapter V.
35L
MAP 1.1
NEW HOLLAND IN BRAZIL
the Portuguese settlers had fled to Bahia when the Dutch invaded, and many
slaves had used the confusion of the flight to escape inland to join already
existing maroon societies. Shortly after the Dutch captured Recife, a WIC
ship delivered a cargo of 280 slaves, but there was still so much confusion
in the colony that they hardly knew what to do with the slaves, because the
plantations had not started functioning. It was only in 1635 that the WIC
Table 1 .1
Slave imports in Dutch Brazil, 1630-1651
From From Imported Left
Year Guinea Angola Other total Deaths3 Africa
1630 280 280 49 329
1636 1,046 1,046 183 1,229

1637 1,211 346 1,557 109 1,666
1638 1,267 66 419 1,752 210 1,962
1639 1,393 326 77 1,796 359 2,155
1640 1,316 1,316 184 1,500
1641 1,062 297 1,359 258 1,617
1642 1,616 762 2,378 579 2,957
1643 1,553 2,461 4,014 682 4,696
1644 1,111 4,354 5,465 1,420 6,885
1645 594 3,179 3,773 943 4,716
1646 24 251 275 48 323
1649 290 200 490 86 576

1651 785 785 137 922
Totals 11,437 14,353 496 26,286 5,247 31,533

Source: Van den Boogaart and Emmer, pp. 367-69.
Note: aMortality during the middle passage.
chartered two company ships for the purpose of obtaining slaves in Africa
and taking them to New Holland, and they did not arrive there until about
two years later. In the meantime the WIC found a quicker method of ob-
taining slaves, that was by capturing them at sea from enemy ships. Through
this method 1,046 slaves were landed in the colony in 1636. Apparently this
feeble start was also due to their lack of experience in slaving, because in
1637 the WIC employed Portuguese merchants in the traffic. The other
reason for the slow start of the slave trade is that the WIC simply did not
possess adequate African bases until the capture of Elmina in 1637.45
As Table 1.1 illustrates, the importation of slaves into Dutch Brazil did
not become a serious business until 1636, and for the next five years it
averaged around 1,500 annually. During the four years that followed, 1642-
5, the traffic reached its peak with over 5,000 slaves imported in 1644 alone.
With the onset of the Moradores' revolt the following year, the WIC slave
trade to Brazil quickly came to a halt. Of the grand total of 26,286 docu-
mented slave imports into New Holland, 94 percent were brought in during
the ten-year period of 1636 to 1645. And this is essentially the limit of the
45. Van den Boogaart and Emmer, pp. 357-8.
Dutch contribution to the African migration to Brazil. The yearly average

for this period comes to about 2,500, which is significantly lower than the
3,000 to 4,000 slaves the Portuguese were said to have brought to Brazil
annually in the time prior to the Dutch attack. However, if one considers
that the Dutch were not supplying the southern Brazilian captaincies, which
may not have required as many slaves, the Dutch seem to have adapted
themselves rapidly to this new enterprise.
In terms of the vast numbers of victims involved in the transatlantic slave
trade this initial Dutch participation was quite insignificant. But when the
limited scale of the traffic at that point in time is taken in perspective, the
Dutch may well have dominated the Atlantic slave trade for a few years,
particularly from 1642-5. Portugal, the traditional supplier of slaves to the
Western Hemisphere, was at that time not very active in the slave trade and
the northwestern European competitors of the Dutch had not yet entered
the traffic on a significant scale. In spite of this advantage, the WIC was
unable to retain its control over New Holland and thereby lost the principal
reason for its participation in the Atlantic slave trade.
The WIC and its failures
Why was the Dutch Republic, at the height of its power in the mid-
seventeenth century, unable to hold on to its principal plantation colony in
Brazil? There are undoubtedly a number of reasons for its failure to do so,
and one of the best ways to get at the solution of the problem is to examine
the structure and function of the WIC, the principal agent of the Dutch
Republic in the Atlantic and responsible for the colony.
The WIC, in essence a commercial institution, was governed by a board
of nineteen directors, the Heren XIX, which was reduced to the Heren X
(also known as The X) after the reorganization of the company in 1674. As
illustrated in Table 1.2, the WIC was divided into five regional chambers,
or kamerSy each with its own board of directors and with a considerable
degree of autonomy. The structure of the company had thus the same
separatist tendencies that characterized the Dutch Republic, where regional
autonomy was guaranteed by tradition and law and supervised by the Dutch
States General. The board of directors of the WIC was responsible for
making major policy decisions, but they usually met only once or twice a
year, and the daily affairs of the company were managed by the governing
boards of the two largest chambers, Amsterdam and Zeeland, in alternate
terms of six and two years respectively. Only major shareholders with in-
vestments in excess of 4,000 guilders (6,000 in Amsterdam) had voting rights
Table 1.2
The chambers of the WIC
Chambers Delegates2*
Amsterdam 8 4 / 2,846,582
Zeeland (southwest province) 4 2 1,379,775
Maze (Rotterdam region) 2 1 1,039,202
Noorder Kwartier (north of Amsterdam) 2 1 505,625
Stad en Lande (Groningen region) 2 1 836,975
States-General 1 1 500,00(1
Total 19 10 / 7,108,159
Source: Van Dillen, pp. 146-49.

Notes: a Delegates before and after the WIC reorganization of 1674.
In guilders.
in the company and could be members of the various governing boards,

unless they were representing major shareholders.46
In addition to commercial activities, the WIC was authorized by its charter
to administer and legislate the areas under its monopoly, its trading stations,
and colonies. In time of war it could authorize privateering missions. The
company could make treaties with other states, organize naval units, and
maintain military units in its territories.47
The company was often lacking in unity of purpose and policy, however.
Internal strife and bickering, particularly between the two major chambers,
was a chronic problem in the administration of the WIC. One of the major
issues of contention was the company's monopoly over all the trade in its
chartered territories. Because of its relative isolation in the southwestern
corner of the Republic, the Zeeland chamber persistently defended this
monopoly. Amsterdam, on the other hand, generally favored the more com-
petitive free trade and often advocated curtailment of the WIC monopoly.48
In addition to this persistent conflict over authority and commercial policy,
the WIC was constantly in financial difficulties, quite unlike its prosperous
sister company, the VOC. Only for a brief period following the conquest of
a Spanish silver fleet by the famous Dutch admiral, Piet Heyn, in 1628, was
the WIC solvent and dispensed generous dividends to its shareholders. But
for most of its history the company was chronically short of capital and often
precariously close to bankruptcy. The privateering function of the WIC
turned out to be less profitable than had been anticipated, particularly after
46. Menkman, pp. 42-8.

47. Menkman, p. 43; Van Dillen, pp. 146-9.
48. Emmer, "The WIC," pp. 78-9.
1641, when that activity was turned over to a separate organization admin-
istered from the province of Zeeland. A company report of 1633 indicated
that only the trade with the Guinea coast was profitable for the WIC. Three
years later the company was eighteen million guilders in debt and had great
difficulty getting credit advanced at the financial markets in Amsterdam.
And this was at a time when the Dutch Republic was experiencing economic
prosperity. By 1650 the value of the WIC's shares had dropped to about
fifteen percent of their original worth. In order to cope with the WIC's
financial dilemmas, efforts were made as early as 1634 to merge the WIC
with the VOC, but the directors of the VOC rejected this. 49
In the meantime Amsterdam was winning the battle over commercial
policy; the original trading monopoly of the WIC was gradually diminished.
In 1638 the Brazil sugar trade was opened to Dutch free traders. Ten years
later several other products were surrendered to the free trade in Brazil as
well as the Caribbean and North America. These changes struck at the very
core of the company's existence, because it remained obligated to maintain
military and commercial stations while it had to trade in a competitive market.
One commercial branch that remained a company monopoly in most of the
WIC's sphere of operation for more than a century was the Atlantic slave
trade. Thus a strange situation had developed for the Dutch in the Atlantic.
While the nation with its enormous merchant marine was powerful at sea,
it lacked the unity of purpose and the determination to carry through with
the original intent that had led to the creation of the WIC. The Dutch colony
in Brazil was one of the first victims of this predicament, particularly when
the First Anglo-Dutch War of 1652-4 demanded the Republic's attention. 50
Added to the WIC's financial problems and the conflicts over policy was
the inability of the company to attract a sufficient number of Dutch colonists
to make settlement successful. As noted above, the colonists in Brazil re-
mained overwhelmingly Portuguese in culture and loyalty. Even New Neth-
erland on the Hudson River remained small, and eventually fell to the English
in 1664. Only in the eighteenth century were the Dutch successful, with
colonies on the Guiana coast, but these were made up predominantly of
slaves from Africa with only a small superstructure of Dutch settlers. The
Dutch may have had great success in commerce and the establishment
of trading posts but as one scholar expressed it the Dutch failed at
colonization.51
49. Van Dillen, pp. 167-8 and 173; Franz Binder, "Die Zeelandische Kaperfahrt, 1654-
1662," Archief, Middelburg, KZGW (1976), pp. 40-92.
50. Emmer, "The WIC," pp. 79-80; Boxer, Dutch in Brazil, Chapter VI.
51. K. G. Davies, The North Atlantic World in the Seventeenth Century (Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press, 1974), pp. 88-9.
New Netherland and the slave trade
In respect to colonization, the Dutch attempt on Manhattan island and

vicinity, known as New Netherland, turned out to be a failure, like Brazil,
even though it lasted a few years longer (1625-64). As Davies pointed out,
the Dutch were leading exponents of "trading post" expansion, which they
practiced widely, but they were not very effective with settlement. Usselinx,
the driving force behind the Brazilian experiment, was an exception in cham-
pioning Dutch colonization. Thus the main reason for the failure in Brazil
also proved to be the undoing of the New Netherland colony. In the end,
here too the colonists of Dutch descent were far outnumbered by other
Europeans, particularly by English-speaking settlers who had gradually in-
filtrated the colony.52
As far as the importation of slaves was concerned, however, the two Dutch
colonies of New Holland and New Nederlands differed greatly; Brazil was
essentially a slave society, New Nederlands was not. In the latter, as late as
1645, black slaves were treated as if they were indentured servants.
The Dutch brought few slaves into their North American colony, because
the demand was small compared to the large number needed in Brazil. Only
two complete slave cargoes sailed into the New Amsterdam (New York)
harbor under the Dutch flag. In 1654 the WIC ship Witte Paert landed an
unspecified number of slaves there. Ten years later, just prior to the English
capture of the colony, the WIC ship Gideon delivered 290 slaves. There may
have been another small consignment of slaves brought in from Recife in
1648, but this has not been verified. For the rest, the Dutch brought in
small groups of slaves from the island of Curasao, in the Caribbean. In 1659
five such slaves were delivered, in the following year thirty-nine, and in 1661
forty arrivals were documented. All in all, New Netherland was insignificant
in the total picture of the Dutch slave trade. This is also evidenced by the
fact that the WIC surrendered its slave trade monopoly to the colony as
early as 1652, a monopoly that the company in general defended vigorously.53
52. Van Dillen, pp. 31, 36, 142, 157, and 162-83.
53. P. C. Emmer, "De Slavenhandel van en naar Nieuw Nederland," Economisch en Soriaal-
Historisch Jaarboek, vol. 35 (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1972), pp. 105-6, 111-16 and 126.
Curaqao and the asiento trade
1650-1730
The loss of Brazil might have ended the Dutch participation in the slave
trade had the WIC not been able to find new markets for its human mer-
chandise. This was not an easy task, however. New Netherland, as discussed,
offered little promise as a slave market; besides, the colony was taken over
by the English in 1664. The profits in the traffic, however, were apparently
sufficient to urge the company to search for new outlets, although the
market reorientation was characterized by a short period of stagnation
and experimentation.
Finding new markets was not the only problem for the WIC. The second
half of the seventeenth century also saw several new competitors enter the
Atlantic slave trade. English subjects took an active interest in the traffic
shortly after the middle of the century and France became involved toward
the end of the century. In addition, Danes, Swedes, and Germans from
Hamburg and Courland entered the slave trade, albeit on a small scale.
These minor participants, however, were supplied with capital and ships by
Dutch investors and may therefore be counted as an extension of the Dutch
slave trade.1 Portugal also reentered the slave trade by recapturing her old
trading centers on the Angola coast in 1648. Only after peace was made
between Holland and Portugal in 1661, ending many years of hostility, did
the Dutch again become regular participants in the slave trade.
Notwithstanding all this competition, the Dutch maintained a foothold in
the traffic. The Portuguese-held island of Sao Thome briefly became a market
for WIC slavers; from 1646 to 1648 the WIC sold 2,300 slaves to the planters
of the island, because the Portuguese were unable to supply their subjects.2
More significant, however, was the Dutch capture of the traditional Por-
tuguese markets in the Spanish-American colonies, with slaves channeled
via the Dutch-held island of Curasao.

2. Ibid., p. 372.
26
Curasao and the asiento trade 27
Curasao as a slave-trade depot
The small island of Curagao, forty miles off the Caracas coast of Venezuela,
was captured by the WIC in 1634. The Spanish had found little use for it
after they failed to discover gold or other significant economic resources to
exploit. The peace-loving indigenous population was decimated by disease
and maltreatment, and a remnant of them was exported as slaves to His-
paniola in 1515. Later ranching and dyewood cutting became the principal
occupation of the sparse immigrant population. The island was left virtually
undefended, making it an easy prey for the small six-vessel WIC fleet to
capture in 1634.3
Unsuitable for a plantation economy because of its aridity, the WIC utilized
Curasao primarily as a naval refurbishing station, for which its natural har-
bors were ideal. In 1641 the WIC directors established Curasao as a col-
lecting point for slaves captured from foreign vessels. The slaves were then
sold on the island, and this may well have been the beginning of the practice
of smuggling slaves to the Caracas mainland. The small Dutch colonies on
the Guiana coast, which will be discussed in the next chapter, may also have
received slaves via Curasao.4
A WIC report of 1642 mentioned Curasao as an ideal depot for the slave
trade, but the company directors were not immediately persuaded by this
suggestion. After all, the Dutch colony of Brazil was still flourishing at this
time and needed all the slaves it could obtain. It was therefore not until the
late 1650s that Curasao became a significant center for the Atlantic slave
trade. In 1657 a contract was signed in Amsterdam providing for the delivery
of 500 to 600 slaves at Curasao. Ironically, this transaction was initiated by
the Swedish-African Company in competition with the WIC, to be financed
by Dutch capital and carried by Dutch ships.5
It is not known if the above mentioned contract was carried out, but its
occurrence may well have stimulated the WIC to value seriously Curasao's
potential. The WIC director of the island, Matthias Beck, also reported in
1657 that a Spanish merchant visited him and wanted to establish commercial
links with Curasao on a regular basis. Two years later Beck reported to his
superior in New Netherland, Peter Stuyvesant, that the trade with "our
nearest neighbors" (the Spanish) was beginning to look very promising. At
the same time Beck reported on individual shipments of slaves. The WIC
3. H. Hoetinck, ed., Encyclopedic van de Nederlandse Antillen (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1969),

pp. 139-42 and 223-8.
5. W. R. Menkman, "Nederlandse en Vreemde Slavenvaart," West-Indische Gids, vol. 26
(1943), pp. 97-8; G. W. Kernkamp, "Een Contract tot de Slaafhandel van 1657," Bijdragen
en Mededelingen van het Historisch Genootschap, vol. 22 (1901), pp. 4 4 4 - 5 9 .
MAP 2.1
THE CARIBBEAN REGION
EJ 0
-21°
-18°
ship, KoninckSolomon, had delivered 331 slaves to Curasao in 1658, an event
mentioned again in subsequent correspondence as a great success. The early
slave trade to Curasao was not without its misfortunes. The WIC slaver, St.
Jan, was shipwrecked in 1659, and the surviving eighty-four slaves were
captured by pirates. The following year the slave ship, Gideon, landed a
disappointing cargo of only twenty-eight slaves. Nevertheless, Beck reported
in 1660 that additional slave shipments had been initiated for the island,
and he continued to be optimistic about prospects for the Curasao slave
trade: "I have witnessed with pleasure your honours' diligence in providing
us here from time to time with negroes. That will be the only bait to allure
hither the Spanish nation, from the Main as well as from other parts, to
carry on trade of any importance."6
The significance of Curasao in the Atlantic slave trade was always pred-
icated on the need for slaves in the Spanish mainland colonies. When later
the Dutch dominated the slave trade to this area, Curasao flourished, but it
rapidly declined when this traffic came to a halt.
The asiento slave-trade system
Because Spain had no commercial bases on the African coast due to the
1496 Treaty of Tordessilas with Portugal, its American colonies were de-
pendent on other nations for the shipment of slave labor from Africa. Initially,
the colonists tried to force native Americans into slavery, but the results
were discouraging and contributed to the decimation of the indigenous
population. The Spanish friar, Las Casas, along with other Spanish settlers
on the island of Hispaniola, persuaded the Spanish monarch, Charles V, to
allow African slaves to be brought into the Spanish colonies on a regular
basis. The outcome of this was a series of contracts, the asiento de negroes,
which started the shipment of slaves directly from Africa to the Americas
in 1518. Prior to this, black slaves had been brought to the colonies by way
of Europe.7
According to Georges Scelle, a diligent student of the asiento slave trade,
asiento is a "term in Spanish public law which designates every contract
made for the purpose of public utility... between the Spanish government
and private individuals." Of these various government contracts the asiento
de negroes (hereafter referred to as asiento) is the best remembered because
it frequently assumed crucial importance in issues of international trade and
6. Donnan, vol. 2, pp. 138-51.

7. Leslie B. Rout, The African Experience in Spanish America (London: Cambridge University
Press, 1976), pp. 23-4 and 37.
diplomacy, and the term asiento became a well-known historical expression
connected with the slave trade.
Asiento contracts meant that in return for a substantial fee the royal
government appointed a prominent person, generally a Spanish nobleman,
who would then sell licenses entitling the holder to bring slaves into the
Spanish colonies according to specific contract.8
The asiento thus generated revenues for the royal treasury, in addition
to supplying the colonists with servile labor and, at the same time, protecting
the closed economic system of the Spanish colonial empire. In this iast
objective the asiento did not succeed, because contraband goods were smug-
gled into the colonies by the very ships that brought the slaves. In fact,
as Scelle claims, it was often the opportunity for illicit trade rather than
the profits made on the slave trade that made the asiento contracts such a
coveted prize.9
Asiento contracts were not the only method by which slaves were legally
brought into the Spanish colonies. On a number of occasions, most con-
spicuously during the years 1540 to 1586 and 1640 to 1662, the asiento was
suspended and was replaced with the sale of individual licenses. The business
community of the port city of Seville, generally referred to as the chamber
of commerce (although this should not be confused with its modern Amer-
ican namesake), was in charge of selling such licenses. Compared with these
licenses, the asiento system appears to have been more effective, and it also
left the historians with a better record of the flow of the slave trade. Barring
the just mentioned interruptions, the asiento system functioned until 1805,
and several European nations participated in its activities.10
Another method by which the Spanish colonists obtained slaves was
through illicit imports. This smuggle trade was operated primarily from the
Caribbean islands off the Caracas coast, and the Dutch were undoubtedly
very active participants in this trade. For obvious reasons, not many docu-
ments pertaining to such illegal activities have survived, and it is therefore
difficult if not impossible to estimate the volume of this trade. One rare
piece of evidence, a report from the Spanish ambassador in Holland to his
superiors in Spain, alludes to the signing of a smuggling contract during the
1650s involving the shipment of 800 slaves.11
Although this illegal trade may be the biggest question mark in determining
the volume of the asiento trade, the licenses and the various asiento contracts
by themselves do not provide us a clear picture. For one thing, it is not
8. Georges Scelle, "The Slave Trade in the Spanish Colonies of America: the Asiento,"
The American Journal of International Law, vol. 4 (1910), pp. 614, 622, and 626.
9. Ibid., pp. 618 and 622.
10. Rout, pp. 44-53.
11. Goslinga, p. 355.
always certain that asiento contracts were actually carried out in their entirety,
as the Dutch asiento trade clearly demonstrates. Philip Curtin used asiento
contract figures as a basis for estimating the overall importation of slaves to
the Spanish colonies. He reasoned that the import figures of the contracts
reflected the labor needs of the colonies, as they were determined by officials
who were best aware of these needs. As a result of this method, Curtin
estimates a total of 700,000 slaves imported before 1773, when the asientos
were discontinued. Curtin's figure would come to nearly one million if later
importations up to 1810 were added. Leslie Rout, another student of this
subject, projects about the same number for this period, but then adds
another 600,000 for the problematic smuggle and license trade, which were
already included in Curtin's combined estimate of one million.12 These
varying estimates show the lack of agreement and the speculative nature of
the volume of the asiento trade.
In terms of slave suppliers, the history of the asiento trade can be divided
into three periods. The period before 1640 was dominated by the Portuguese,
and the years after 1713 were monopolized by the English. The interim
period, which is the main concern here, was characterized by intense com-
petition for control over the asiento; subjects from several nations partici-
pated alternately in supplying the Spanish colonies with slaves.
The Portuguese initially monopolized the slave trade to the Spanish col-
onies because they were the only Europeans who had African trading bases
that could obtain large numbers of slaves. The cooperation between Spain
and Portugal was particularly easy when they shared a common ruler during
the period 1580 to 1640. When the Portuguese revolted and regained their
independence from the Spanish in 1640, they also lost the privilege of the
asiento contracts. This created a real dilemma for the Spanish because of
the other European maritime powers that had acquired African bases; Eng-
land, Holland, and France were at this time at war with Spain. In addition,
the Spanish viewed the Dutch and the English as religious heretics, with
whom they preferred not to do business. As a result, the asiento was sus-
pended and the Spanish authorities tried to satisfy their colonists' demand
for slaves through individual licenses, at great financial losses to the
treasury.13
Illicit trade with the Spanish Main
Due to the ineffective license system, the Spanish colonists were acquiring
most of their slaves illegally, through smuggling. From their Curasao base,
12. Curtin, pp. 21-5, 35 and 40; Rout, pp. 62-6.
13. Scelle, pp. 626-9; Rout, p. 44.
the Dutch became actively involved in this illicit trade, even though they
were still at war with Spain. After peace was made between these two powers
in 1648, the Dutch became even more active in the smuggle trade with the
Spanish Main, and it seems to have been "considered legitimate from its
necessity" by the Spanish colonial authorities. Ships operating between
Curasao and the mainland often flew the Spanish flag, although they were fi-
nanced and operated by the Dutch. Initially, the slaves transacted in this
trade were captured by the Dutch, mostly from Portuguese vessels, as these
two powers continued to be hostile with each other until 1661. But after
the loss of Brazil the Dutch began to ship their slaves directly from Africa
to the Caribbean.14
Because most of the records of the old WIC have been destroyed, it is
almost impossible to determine the level of slaving activity during these early
years. It is certain that after the slave deliveries to Brazil dropped off after
1645 th e Dutch slave trade was greatly reduced.
As has been demonstrated in the case of Curasao, the Dutch slave trade
revived again in the late 1650s. Surviving correspondence from the WIC
director-general in Africa, Jan Valkenburg, testifies to a renewed urgency
about the slave trade at this time and a concomitant increase in slaving
activity. This coincided with an intense increase of the English involvement
in the trade.15
The Dutch slave trade of the years 1650-75 has been researched thor-
oughly by the Austrian scholar Franz Binder, using the Notarial Archives
of Amsterdam as his chief source. Unfortunately, his efforts on this subject
have not been published. His preliminary findings were made available to
this author and are incorporated in this study. Binder's research shows a
sudden revival of the WIC slave trade in 1657-8. During that last year, as
many as seven WIC ships were reported to have landed an estimated 1,700
slaves at various destinations in the Caribbean region. It is interesting to
note that in addition to Curasao, the Guiana coastal settlements and the
French and English Caribbean islands were the destinations of these Dutch
slavers. This sudden revival of the trade was not sustained at that initial
level, however, and such a large number of ships and slaves was not attained
again until the Dutch signed their own asiento contracts during the 1660s.16
14. Goslinga, pp. 355-6; S. van Brakel, "Bescheiden over den slavenhandel der WIC," Econ-
omisch-Historisch jfaarboek, vol. 4 (1918), pp. 49-51; Scelle, p. 628.
15. KITLV, vol. H. 65, pp. 386-411; see also Table 2.2.
16. See Table 2.2 and Appendix 4. After several years of research in various archives in
Holland, Portugal, and Spain, Binder went to Latin America in 1982 to continue his
research of the Atlantic slave trade, but unfortunately this author has been unable to
contact him again. His extensive research on the slave trade has thus far not resulted in
any publications, but Binder was generous enough to share many of his findings with me.
The Dutch enter the asiento trade
Fearful that the illicit importation of slaves might become standard practice,
the Spanish government reinstated the asiento in 1662. The action was not
prompted by a shortage of slaves or complaints by the colonists, who seemed
to be quite content with the illicit imports, but rather by the loss of revenues
to the crown and the undermining of the mercantile colonial system. This
time the asiento was granted to two wealthy Genoese merchants, Domingo
Grillo and Ambrosia Lomelin, who agreed to supply the Spanish colonies
with 24,000 slaves during the next seven years. It was a stronger monopoly
than previous asientos, and the Spanish colonists complained bitterly about
rising prices and scarcity of slaves during the tenure of this contract. 17
Like their predecessors, Grillo and Lomelin had to rely on northern
Europeans to ship the slaves to the West. Initially, they contracted with both
the English Royal African Company and the Dutch WIC to obtain the needed
slaves, but increasingly they began to rely on their Dutch suppliers. In time,
this culminated in the appointment of the Dutch banker, Balthasar Coymans,
as the administrator of the asiento. Table 2.1 lists the various asientists, as
well as most of the WIC subcontracts, during the period of Dutch involve-
ment in this trade. Not all of the relevant records have been preserved but
the ones that have been located give us a picture of the asiento operation
at that time.18
The initial WIC contract with Grillo and Lomelin called for the shipment
of 700 to 1,400 slaves to be delivered to the asiento agents stationed at
Curasao. During the years 1663-7 nearly 3,600 slaves were shipped from
Curasao to the Spanish mainland colonies, slightly more than 700 per year.
In 1667 the WIC signed a bigger asiento contract with the Spanish asientists
which called for the delivery of 4,000 slaves annually, and a similar contract
was signed the following year. A new pattern had been established in the
Atlantic slave trade, and Curasao had suddenly become the busiest slave
trade depot in the Caribbean.19
With the 1667 contract the Dutch gained a monopoly over the asiento
slave trade and as a result the volume of the trade via Curasao increased
significantly. At one point in 1668, due to conflicts over asiento arrangements
more than 3,000 slaves were detained in the island's storage facilities. In
17. Scelle, pp. 629-30.

18. See Marisa Vega Franco, El Trdfico de Esclavos con America; asientos de Grillo y Lomelin,
1663-1674 (Seville: Escuela de estudios Hispano-Americanos, 1984). See also Enriqueta
Villa Villar, "La sublevacion de Portugal y la trata de negros," Ibero-Amerikanisches
Archiv, vol. 2 (1976), pp. 171-92.
19. Goslinga, p. 361; Franco, pp. 194-202.
Table 2.1
Asiento contracts, 1662-1713
WIC Slaves to deliver Conditions and
Asientists Subcontract annually comments
Grillo & Lomelin 1662 3,000-3,500 To run for 5 years
1662-1669 1667 4,000 Extension for 2 years
Garcia (1670-1675) 1670
1672
Barroso & Porcio 1675 4,000 Operated only briefly
(1675-1692)b 1677 A small contract
Seville Consulada 1679 6,500a
(1676-1677) 1681
1682
1683 3,000 To run for 6 years
Coymans administration 1684
(1684-1688) 1685
1686
1687
Porcio (alone) 1689
1691
Fluctuating contracts 1697
1699 l,000a
French asiento 1700 2,500-3,000a
(1702-1713) 1711 400a
English asiento
(1713-1748)
Source: Scelle, "Slave Trade;" S. Van Brakel, "Bescheiden; "WIC, vol. 34, pp.
18-21; vol. 833, pp. 339 and 783; ILTVK, H-66.
Notes: aIndicates the total number of slaves involved in the contract.
This contract experienced interruptions, as indicated.
the period 1668 to 1673, nearly 13,000 slaves were landed at the Spanish-
American ports of Portobelo, Cartagena, and Veracruz by ships that obtained
their cargoes at Curasao. This was an average of not quite 1,900 annually
and was thus far less than the contracts had stipulated.20
But the Dutch were supplying other slave markets, such as the Dutch
settlements on the Guiana coast and in the Antilles, and periodically French
and English colonies. The incomplete study by Binder (see footnote 16 and
Table 2.2) shows a significant increase in the Dutch slave traffic soon after
the WIC signed the first asiento contract. Few of the recorded slaving voyages
of this early period provide many statistical details, and it is therefore nec-
essary to make estimates on the basis of data known from other slave con-
signments. Such estimates have been derived from the sizes of ships, verified
20. S. van Brakel, pp. 61-77, published the contract of 1668. A translation of the contract
of 1667 is printed in Appendix 3.
Curagao and the asiento trade 35
Table 2.2
Estimated traffic and destination of slaves, 1658-1674
Caribbean: Dest.
Slaves Spanish English Surinam not
Year Ships total Curasao America a French Guyana known
1658 7 1,741 611 1,030 100
1659 2 514 84 430
1660 4 708 28 170 510
1661 1 450 450
1662 2 650 400 250
1663 6 2,400 674 440 440 1,520
1664 2 810 1,603 360 450
1665 2 925 166 475 450
1666 1 120 168 120
1667 3 1,400 900 967 500
1668 19 6,059 2,970 722 325 604 2,160
1669 16 5,502 3,640 1,997 642 380 840
1670 15 5,658 4,138 1,500 1,520
1671 16 4,800 2,945 1,698 585 970 300
1672 17 6,054 4,944 2,011 1,110
1673 6 2,466 2,026 3,438 440
1674 13 4,231 1,903 1,340 485 1,843
Total 132 44,488 24,555 16,284a 3,756 4,964 11,213
Source: Binder (note 16 in Chapter 2), and Appendix 4; Vega Franco, pp. 194-202.
Note: a The figures in the Spanish America column are borrowed from Vega
Franco; they should not be added in the totals because they are already
included in either the Curasao figures or in the unknown destinations.
cargo sizes of other slaving voyages by the same ship, qualitative comments
about the cargo in the record, or an average based on verified data for the
WIC slave trade in that period. The results of this method are shown in
Table 2.2. The Dutch slave trade showed an initial surge in 1658 and for
the next four years dropped to an annual average of 500 to 1,000 slaves
landed in the West. After the signing of the first asiento contract in 1662,
the WIC slave trade surged to a level of nearly 2,500 the following year, but
that too proved to be only temporary.
By 1670 the Genoese asiento partners were in serious financial trouble;
their contract was not renewed but was transferred to the Portuguese mer-
chant, Antonio Garcia. This shift implied that the Portuguese would now
resume their traditional role in the slave trade. Several Spanish authorities
had always opposed dealing with the Dutch "heretics," and when in 1668
their hostilities with the Portuguese were concluded they returned to their
former commercial partnership with the Dutch. The change in commercial
arrangements did not produce the change that the Spanish had anticipated,
for Garcia signed another contract with the WIC that very same year, which
resulted in the temporary suspension of his asiento contract. The maritime
financial situation had changed significantly during the past half century,
however, with the Dutch having achieved a position of dominance. In the
end Garcia was allowed to resume his dealings with the Dutch, and it was
during his asiento that the Dutch came to monopolize the delivery of slaves
to the Spanish colonies.21
From the first to the second WIC
The decade of the 1670s was a turbulent time for the WIC as well as for
the Dutch Republic in general. In 1672 the nation was faced with an invasion
by French troops and a war at sea with England, the Third Anglo-Dutch
War (1672-4). The conflict with France lasted until 1678. For a while it
seemed the Republic was doomed. French troops occupied large portions
of its territory, but under the leadership of Stadholder William III, who later
also became king of England, the French were driven back during the winter
of 1672-3. At sea, under the leadership of the famed admiral Michiel de
Ruyter, the Dutch held their own against the combined navies of England
and France. Nevertheless, the war was an enormous drain on the resources
of the Republic, and it also exacted its toll from the corporate and private
maritime strength of the nation and its colonial possessions.22
In 1674 the WIC was faced with bankruptcy; in fact the company had
been in serious financial difficulties since the early 1640s, when it lost a
principal reason for existence - the practice of legalized piracy against the
enemy. For a long time the company was kept solvent through government
subsidies, which had been cut back as a result of the war in 1772-4. This
was reflected in the enormous drop in the value of the company's stock; by
1655 it had declined to only 10 percent of its original value, and its depre-
ciation continued after that.23 The slave trade had in fact become the main-
stay of the company's activities, as WIC memoirs repeatedly affirmed
beginning in the 1670s. As a prelude to an appointment of a special com-
missioner for the slave trade in 1702 stated: "And since the slave trade has
always been considered, and always should be, one of the biggest and chief
concerns of the company, we should time and time again pay good attention
to it, continue it, and preserve it."24 Another WIC document declared: "The
slave trade is one of the principal activities of the company... " 25 When the
21. Goslinga, pp. 361-62.

22. For a general overview see Goslinga, pp. 457-82.
23. Ibid., pp. 323-33.
24. WIC, vol. 54, doc. 12/18/1702.
25. WIC, vol. 56, p. 23.
WIC charter was due for renewal in 1671, its finances were in such disarray
that a temporary reprieve was granted by the States General, and a committee
was appointed to study the fate of the company. After the war with England
came to an end in 1674, the States General decided to dissolve the WIC,
but because it was agreed that the interests of the Republic in the African
and Caribbean area were best served by a monopolistic organization, it was
agreed to reorganize the old WIC into a new but similar organization.26
Wars and financial instability of the WIC did not stop the slave trade,
although it may at times have been impaired. What was perhaps the
greatest stumbling block to the delivery of slaves was the capricious oper-
ation of the asiento itself; it rarely functioned smoothly. In 1668, the year
after the WIC had contracted to become the principal supplier of slaves
for the Spanish colonies, there were such serious conflicts between the
contracting parties in the asiento that Curasao had stockpiled 3,000
slaves without making deliveries. Generally the WIC refused to make de-
liveries without prompt payments, and that was a perennial problem in
the asiento trade.27
Despite these problems, the early asiento contracts significantly in-
creased the WIC's slaving activity, even though the deliveries called for
in the contracts were rarely if ever fulfilled. According to Binder's tenta-
tive findings, more than 4,200 slaves were taken to Curagao annually be-
tween the years 1668 and 1674. Approximately half of these, accounting
for attrition from the Atlantic crossing and the transfer from Curasao to
the Spanish mainland, were absorbed by the asiento trade. Either the es-
timates based on Binder's findings are significantly inflated or the Dutch
must have found a variety of other markets for their slaves that cannot be
accounted for.28
A word on how slaves were counted is in order here because this also
influences the appraisal of the asiento trade. Asiento transactions measured
slaves in terms of piezas de India or leverbaar (deliverable slaves), which
represented a healthy adult male or female slave in the age group 15 to 35.
Strange as it may seem, children were calculated as fractions of such a unit.
Older slaves or those with some physical or mental impairment were as a
rule classified as rnanquerons, or macrons. According to asiento contracts,
such slaves were not acceptable and as a rule they either remained at Curasao
or were shipped elsewhere in the Caribbean or illegally to the Spanish Main.
The percentage of macrons could vary significantly from one consignment
of slaves to another. In five consignments during the years 1673-4, out of
a total of 2,763 slaves 372 were rejected as macrons, which constitutes a
26. See Menkman, "WIC," pp. 145-52 regarding the reorganization of the WIC.
27. OWIC, vol. 16, res. 5/10/1674.
28. See Table 2.2 and also NBKG, vol. 24, min. 8/20/1674.
rejection rate of about 15 percent. In 1675 six WIC slave ships landed 1,790
slaves at Curasao, of which only 1,370 and one-sixth were acceptable piezas
de India. This would seem to represent a rejection rate of 20 percent. A
broader statistical analysis, as demonstrated in Chapter 10, places the dis-
crepancy closer to 10 percent.29
When the Heren X of the new WIC held its first series of meetings in
the fall of 1674, they found the asiento trade in such disarray that they
considered discontinuing the asiento contracts and making Curasao a free
port. This meant that anyone would be allowed to purchase slaves on the
island, and it also implied the reopening of the smuggle trade with the
Spanish Main. To add substance to their threat they proposed to dispatch
1,000 to 1,500 slaves to the island, even though the asiento trade had
come to a standstill. The whole discussion may well have been a warning
to the Spanish for the purpose of obtaining another asiento contract. And
apparently it was successful, because during the first month in 1675 a
representative of the asiento in Holland, the Dutch financier, Balthazar
Coymans, appeared in a meeting of the Heren X to propose terms for a new
asiento agreement.30
After several additional meetings and negotiations, involving the settlement
of a previous debt and a security payment of 100,000 guilders by Coymans,
a new five-year asiento contract was signed in March 1675. The new agree-
ment called for the delivery of 4,000 slaves annually, as long as warlike
conditions persisted, and 3,000 when peace returned. The five-year contract
was short-lived, however. In September 1675 word came from Spain that
the asientist, Garcia, was at odds with his royal authorities, and a few months
later his position as asientist was terminated. 31
A vacillating asiento and the illicit trade
Garcia's loss of the asiento was clearly related to his dealings with the
Dutch and also because a significant amount of contraband was brought
into the Spanish colonies along with the slaves. What the Spanish au-
thorities really wanted was to get permission from the Dutch to fetch
their own slaves directly from the African coast, which the WIC directors
were unwilling to grant. For a while the chamber of commerce at Seville
was empowered to complete Garcia's contract, but unable to secure an
adequate supply of slaves the chamber transferred the asiento contract to
29. WIC, vol. 831, p. 401. See Curtin pp. 22-3. The accounting practices in the slave trade
will be examined in greater detail in Chapter 10.
30. WIC, vol. 231, pp. 28, 57, and doc. 12/27/1674.
31. WIC, vol. 330, pp. 79 and 138; vol. 331, p. 258; vol. 831, pp. 98-9, m , and 137.
the Genoese commercial partners, Juan Baroso and Nicolas Porcio. In
the meantime the breach of contract with the WIC had developed into a
very complicated affair, involving the ambassadors of Spain and Holland
as well as the Dutch States General. The latter tried to intercede on be-
half of both the WIC and the Coymans firm with the Spanish crown. For
a few years the WIC actually lost the asiento slave trade, but the Spanish
were apparently unable to get their slaves from other vendors and were
forced to return to the WIC. 32
Before these conflicts surfaced, however, the WIC had acted on their
contract of 1675 and initiated the shipment of several large consignments
of slaves to Curasao. Because of the primitive communication facilities of
the times, these shipments could not be halted in time to avoid another
oversupply of slaves on the island. A note in the minutes of the WIC directors'
meeting sums up the situation:
Several changes have taken place of late in the affairs of the slave trade.
The asiento of the Spanish Crown for the importation of slaves into
her West Indian colonies, which was granted to Don Antonio Garcia,
has been discontinued. As a result the terms as promised by the Crown
will not be paid, since the contract has gone to the Chamber of Com-
merce of Seville, which will grant licenses to private persons. The (WIC)
chambers are therefore advised to deliberate and resolve the problem
of disposing the large supply of slaves already shipped to Curasao, as
well as the ones that are on the way33
Early in 1676 Joseph Coymans was still making claims on the slaves at
Curasao, understandable in light of the hefty guarantee payment he had
made the previous year, but the WIC directors insisted that a broken contract
empowered them to dispose of the slaves as they saw fit. Meanwhile, they
were exploring other ways of marketing their slaves. Illicit trade with the
Spanish mainland was openly discussed, and undoubtedly practiced. As a
result of these problems, the WIC slave trade was significantly reduced
during the next several years. In the years 1677 to 1679, only five company
slaver ships were found recorded landing slaves at Curasao, involving a total
of only about 1,800 slaves.34
In the absence of the legal trade through the asiento, the smuggle trade
with the Spanish Main via Curasao must have been intensive. In April 1676
the Spanish protested against this smuggling and demanded that the WIC
stop these activities. Similar protests were directed to the States General
later that year, with the implicit promise that regular asiento trade would
32. Scelle, pp. 630-2.

33. WIC, vol. 131, p. 133.
34. WIC, vol. 331, p. 23; vol. 330, pp. 219 and 223; see also Table 2.3.
resume if smuggling were halted. The Coymans firm also entreated the WIC
to halt the illicit trade, as this prevented them from regaining their position
as asiento agents.35
The minutes of the meetings of the WIC directors, as well as those of
the Amsterdam chamber, acknowledged the smuggle trade; in fact, it was
openly encouraged. The WIC policy on this issue was clearly outlined in
the minutes of May 1677, which can be summarized as follows: Company
agents at Curasao should stabilize the slave market there and sell to the
highest bidder; the Spanish ambassador in Holland, Don Emanuel de Lira,
should be admonished to see to it that Spanish colonial subjects were allowed
to purchase slaves at Curasao; and meanwhile the Amsterdam chamber
should make efforts through the Spanish commercial envoy in Holland, Don
Manuel Belmonte, to renegotiate a new asiento contract. The first policy
met with considerable success, for by the middle of 1677 the costly over-
supply of slaves at Curasao had been disposed of, and additional slave
consignments were dispatched again.36
During the summer of 1677 the WIC also started negotiating for a new
asiento contract, this time with Belmonte, and an agreement was reached
in September of that year. The terms of the agreement are not clear from
the minutes; whatever they were the contract was never implemented because
serious disagreements surfaced immediately. The Spanish authorities re-
peatedly demanded that they be allowed to fetch slaves directly from the
WIC's stations in Africa. This was squarely against the WIC charter, and
WIC authorities could never agree to such demands, although they avoided
rejecting the idea outright in order to keep the negotiations alive. The issue
was still being discussed as late as July 1678, when the WIC decisively
rejected the Spanish demand.37
In the meantime the WIC directors were also searching for new or ad-
ditional slave markets. After the Dutch signed a peace treaty with France
in 1678, the French Caribbean islands were mentioned as potential markets.
In addition, old scores had to be settled with Balthazar Coymans, who was
summoned to appear before the WIC directors (his older brother Joseph
had recently died, making Balthazar the responsible head of the family), to
account for the losses suffered as a result of the recently aborted asiento
35. WIC, vol. 331, pp. 175, 190 and 244.

36. WIC, vol. 331, pp. 133 and 192; vol. 332, p. 40; vol. 831, pp.374, 398-402, and
407-8.
37. WIC, vol. 332, pp. 86, 166, 152-5, and 186-90; vol. 831, pp. 374, 431, and 446-8. A
group of merchants from Cadiz, Spain, proposed a contract with the WIC which would
allow them to fetch 880 slaves from the Cape Verde region (Senegambia) for shipment
to the Spanish colonies: See WIC, vol. 746, cor. 9/12/1678.
contract. And when this produced no satisfaction to the company, Balthazar
was summoned before the provincial court of Holland.38
From Barroso to the Coymans asiento
In the fall of 1678 the Spanish crown had granted a new asiento to two
Seville merchants, Juan Barroso de Pozo and his son-in-law Nicolas Porcia.
They soon started negotiating with the WIC, the most reliable suppliers of
slaves. The first of a series of contracts was signed in June 1679, four years
after the last such contract had been signed and aborted. The new agreement
called for the delivery of 6,500 slaves at Curasao, and six WIC slavers were
immediately assigned for their transport and more ships were to follow.
Additional contracts of a similar nature were signed without interruption
during the next eight years. Like the period 1662 to 1673, the years of 1679
to 1687 were among the most active and stable asiento years for the WIC.
The first two years of the Barroso contract went smoothly for the WIC. The
first slave deliveries under this contract were made in April 1680, when
1,500 piezas de Indiay or nearly 2,000 slaves, were boarded on two vessels
for shipment from Curasao to the Spanish colonies. WIC officials estimated
that another 3,700 slaves would be ready for delivery by the end of that year,
and another 4,300 during the year 1681.39
The issue of payments continued to be an irritant in asiento affairs, and
the treatment of the asiento agents at Curasao also produced problems.
There was also a conflict over whether or not Coymans should continue to
function as liaison between the WIC and the asientist, or if the Frenchman,
Jacobus Jubert, should replace him. During the summer of 1681 the WIC
governor at Curasao threatened to stop the delivery of slaves unless old
asiento debts were paid. Governor Van Liebergen expressed much general
criticism over the conduct of Balthazar Beck, who functioned as factor of
the asiento at Curasao. In spite of all these difficulties, Barroso agreed to a
renewal of the contract with the WIC in November 1681, and additional
contracts were signed in 1682 and 1683.40
The asiento business was so pleasing to the WIC directors that they sent
an adulatory letter to Barroso in 1682, to which the latter responded with
an offer of a six-year contract. In another gesture of goodwill, the company
38. W I C , vol. 831, pp. 439, 446, and 520; vol. 832, p. 520.
39. Scelle, p. 631; W I C , vol. 331, pp. 260, 289, and 294; vol. 832, pp. 20-2 and 180-4; v°l-
834, pp. 18-20; W I C , vol. 617, pp. 5, 25, 221, and 346; vol. 831, p. 185; vol. 832, p. 191.
40. W I C , vol. 617, pp. 112 and 133; vol. 832, pp.320, 358, 366, 424, 479, 511, 551,
and 649.
offered Barroso 600 slaves on credit as an advance on the new agreement,
with the understanding that Barroso was not to negotiate with other potential
slave vendors. In fact there were indications that the asientists had purchased
slaves from other nations. While Barroso's relationship with the Spanish
crown appeared to be strained for a while, by March 1683 he felt secure
enough to negotiate another major agreement with the WIC. Through
the intermediacy of Jean Coymans, Henrico Staets, Jacobus Jubert, and
Manuel Belmonte (quite an international delegation), a six-year contract
was negotiated in a two-month period, involving the delivery of 18,000
piezas de India.41
A few months earlier, in November of 1682, a serious confrontation had
taken place at Curasao between WIC authorities and agents of the asiento,
which threatened the continuation of the asiento trade and had serious long-
range consequences. WIC authorities in Europe were so concerned about
negotiating a new contract that they ignored the incident, which was the
prelude to the downfall of co-asientist Porcio and the subsequent rise of
Balthazar Coymans as chief administrator of the asiento. When Barroso died
in 1683, leaving his son-in-law, Porcio, as sole asientist, the latter traveled
to the Americas to straighten out some of the asiento problems there. Shortly
after his arrival in Cartagena, Porcio was accused of mishandling asiento
affairs and was imprisoned by the colonial governor.42
At this juncture, Balthazar Coymans, longtime resident at Cadiz and head
of the Spanish branch of the Coymans' firm, began to play a leading role
in the asiento. Coymans helped to discredit Porcio, who was not permitted
to return to Spain for the next three years. Coymans then took over the
actual administration of the asiento. While Coymans was continually berated
by Porcio sympathizers for the fact that he was a foreigner and a Protestant,
his position was saved because he had the capital and the connections to
deliver slaves to the colonies on a reliable basis. When Coymans died in
November 1686, his place at the asiento office was taken by his longtime
assistant Jan Carc,au, who kept the asiento functioning according to contract
until he was jailed in March 1688. While Coymans was still alive his religion
and nationality had become such an important issue among Spanish au-
thorities that his position would eventually have become untenable anyway.
The arrest of Carc.au signaled the end of Dutch preponderance in the asiento.
41. WIC, vol. 832, pp. 607, 618 and 625; WIC, vol. 783, doc. 10; vol. 833, pp. 11-12, 24,
and 37-38.
42. WIC, vol. 832, pp. 53 and 137; vol. 833, p. 165. See also I. A. Wright, "The Coymans
Asiento, 1685-1689," Bijdragen voor Vaderlandse Geschiedenis en Oudheidkunde, vol. 6
(1924), pp. 24ff. This article is based on Spanish documents and provides a detailed
account of Coymans' problems with the Spanish authorities.
Not even the intercession of the Dutch ambassador to Spain, Francisco van
Schonenberg, could save the asiento for the WIC.43
While Coymans was administrator of the asiento, the WIC was secure in
its role as asiento slave supplier. The relationship between Coymans and
the WIC dated to 1670, when Garcia had become the chief asientist. There
had been conflicts between Porcio and the WIC, which might have led to an
earlier break with the asiento had he remained at the helm, primarily because
the asiento indebtedness to the WIC had reached nearly 72,000 pesos. These
debts continued to be an irritant, but they did not prevent the WIC from
negotiating another contract with Coymans in the spring of 1685. As the
previous contracts, it called for the delivery of 3,000 slaves annually. One
new element of this contract was that each year two WIC slavers were allowed
to sail directly to the Spanish colonial ports of Veracruz, Portobelo, or
Cartagena, instead of delivering their cargoes to the asientists at Curasao.
The Portuguese had used that arrangement exclusively, and the Dutch had
also employed this method in the past, although not on a regular basis. This
change in method may have been an indication of greater trust between the
WIC and the new asientist, and it certainly was more efficient than unloading
and loading at Curasao. Going directly to the Spanish colonial ports, how-
ever, involved greater risk of contraband being shipped into the colonies.44
Old debts and tardy payments continued to plague the asiento trade, even
when Coymans managed the asiento. A common excuse for belated dis-
bursements was that "bandits" retarded the silver shipments from Peru,
making the Spanish cash flow uncertain. Under Coymans the settlement of
old debts did improve. Even so, the WIC continued to have some other
complaints against Coymans, including two direct slave shipments from
Africa, apparently by Dutch ships not under WIC auspices, and the purchase
of 300 slaves from an English vendor. On the other hand, the asiento agents
complained that WIC ships disembarking in Spanish ports were selling
contraband goods to the Spanish colonists, as well as sending such goods
on slave ships from Curasao to the mainland. These were perennial com-
plaints against practices expressly forbidden in asiento contracts.43
After Balthazar Coymans' death in November 1686, the asiento trade
deteriorated rapidly. Even though Carâu tried to keep the slave trade going,
by June of the following year the WIC had to cancel four scheduled slave
43. Ibid., pp. 23-62.

44. WIC, vol. 833, pp. 231-2, 275, 297, 304-6, and 320. For the relative value of pieces of
eight and other monetary units see Chapter 11; WIC, vol. 833, pp. 333-9, 353, and 368.
The first WIC slavers found designated for Spanish colonial ports were the ships Alida
and Propheet Daniel.
45. WIC, vol. 833, pp. 304 and 377; vol. 834, pp. 59, 85, 101-6, 114, and 141.
assignments, and the number of slaves in stock at Curasao had grown so
large that a special ship had to be dispatched from Africa with food supplies
for the waiting slaves. In the fall of 1687, the asiento agents at Curasao
requested and obtained the services of a large WIC ship, the St. Jfago de la
Victoria (the last part of the name may have been added for the special
occasion), to carry slaves from Curasao to the Spanish Main. The Spanish
had frequently rented Dutch ships for this purpose. Nine hundred slaves
were embarked on the St. Jfago. WIC agents were hesitant to go ahead with
the project because by October 1687 the asiento owed the WIC 459,740
guilders for slaves and their upkeep. WIC directors in Holland, meanwhile,
sent the WIC-asiento financial conflicts to four impartial arbiters of the Dutch
high court.46
In December 1687 Ambassador Van Schonenberg notified the WIC di-
rectors of their tenuous hold on the asiento. They responded by sending
William Kerkrinck as a special envoy to Curasao to settle the confusing
asiento situation there. Shortly thereafter word arrived from Spain that the
1685 asiento contract with Coymans had been discontinued and that the
agreement with the WIC had thereby also been terminated. When in April
1688 Kerkrinck tried to confiscate the asiento possessions at Curasao he
met with firm opposition from asiento agents. Just prior to Kerkrinck's arrival,
the St. Jfago had been dispatched with 1,086 slaves, adding significantly to
the already large asiento indebtedness to the WIC. 47
From Kerkrinck's subsequent correspondence with his superiors in Hol-
land, a gloomy picture unfolds. He repeatedly expressed the hope that the
asiento trade might be resumed, although the response from the Heren X
was not encouraging. He was ordered to sell the remaining slaves at public
auctions, at least those that had been at Curasao for more than three months.
Asiento agents in the Spanish colonies also wanted to resume the trade, but
their superiors in Spain firmly rejected the resumption of trade with the
WIC. Because the situation did not improve during 1688 or the next year,
Kerkrinck wrote to his superiors in Amsterdam in October 1689:
To our regret it becomes now certain that a resumption of the asiento
is beyond hope, and the company must be prepared tofindnew methods
since the Spanish in the West Indies can not function without slaves,
and other nations will not be able to supply them for the same price as
the honorable company has always been able to do.48
Because nearly 5,000 trade slaves had accumulated at Curasao by October
1688, WIC authorities encouraged their sale to any potential buyer. Mortality
46. WIC, vol. 68, cor. 6/29/1688; vol. 834, pp. 152-3, 161-2, 238-9, and 279-280.
47. WIC, vol. 68, cor. 6/29/1688 and 5/23/168; vol. 617, pp. 13, 21, 28, 45-53, 138-40,
147, 153, and 156; vol. 834, pp. 304-5, 313 and 323; vol. 835, pp. 26 and 29.
48. WIC, vol. 617, p. 170.
Table 2.3
WIC traffic to Curasao and Spanish colonies, 1675-1699
Destinations Unspecified
Year Curasao Spanish Main destinations Total
1675 1,315 (4) 1,315
1676 2,990 (8) 2,990
1677 200 (1) 200
1678 900 (2) 900
1679 675 (2) 675
1680 1,358 (3) 510 (1) 1,868
1681 1,200 (3) 450 (1) 910 (2) 2,560
1682 1,010 (2) 1,010
1683 960 (2) 830 (2) 1,790
1684 475 (1) 925 (2) 1,400
1685 450 (1) 1,020 (2) 1,350 (3) 2,820
1686 484 (1) 300 (1) 430 (1) 1,214
1687 2,790 (6) 525 (1) 3,315
1688 3,676 (10) 450 (1) 4,126
1689 400 (1) 450 (1) 850
1690 475 (1) 450 (1) 925
1691 766 (1) 766
1692 930 (2) 850 (2) 1,780
1693 450 (1) 450 (1) 900
1694 1,875 (4) 460 (1) 2,335
1695 475 (1) 475
1696-97 0
1698 475 (1) 475
1699 2,385 (6) 2,385
Total 25,399 (60) 1,770 (4) 9,905 (23) 37,074

Source: Appendix 1.
Note: Figures in parentheses list the number of shipments.
rates among the slaves were increasing and their maintenance posed a fi-
nancial burden to the company. By the spring of 1689 Curasao had been
declared an open market and slaves were sold for shipment to any destination
in the Caribbean. Most of these slaves may well have ended up in the Spanish
colonies illicitly, despite the opposition of Spanish authorities. The open
market was a success, for within a year the surplus of slaves had virtually
disappeared, and the WIC directors approved two new slave assignments
for Curasao.49
The decade of the 1680s may seem like one of the high points of the
WIC asiento trade, particularly when the prominence of Coymans is taken
into consideration. Yet, the annual number of slaves taken to Curasao and
49. Ibid., pp. 147 and 153.

Spanish colonial ports during the years 1680 to 1688 averaged approximately
2,250. This figure was considerably lower than during the final years of the
old WIC, and it was also much lower than called for by the asiento contracts.
It is true that the documentation for this period is incomplete, and that a
number of slave shipments directly to the Spanish colonial ports may have
gone unnoticed; however, such ships would probably have been included in
the category with unidentified destination, which has already been included
in the total of the asiento trade. Furthermore, qualitative evidence seems to
corroborate the identified ups and downs in the asiento trade. Table 2.3
gives this author's global estimates for the asiento trade during the last
quarter of the seventeenth century. Only in the last two years of the Coymans
asiento did the volume of the trade reach the level called for in the asiento
contracts, ironically in the years after Coymans died and the asiento was
slipping away from Dutch control.
Limited Dutch role in a fluctuating asiento
While the termination of the Coymans asiento spelled the end of Dutch
dominance in the asiento trade, they continued to participate in the traffic
to Spanish America for several more decades. The Dutch, however, now
clearly played a secondary role. During the decade of the 1690s the asiento
was dominated by the Portuguese, who gave way in 1701 to the French.
They in turn were replaced by the English in 1713. At first it seemed the
Coymans affair was simply another crisis in asiento history that would blow
over after a short interruption, for in December of 1689 the WIC negotiated
another asiento contract with Manuel Belmonte, the Spanish commercial
envoy in Holland. Meanwhile, Porcio had regained control over asiento
affairs, but he still needed the Dutch to obtain an adequate supply of slaves.
This contract helped eliminate the surplus of slaves of Curasao that had
been left from the Coymans contract. It may well have been a matter of
mere convenience to both parties, as the WIC disposed of its Curasao
surpluses and Porcio got his slaves. Not until 1691 did the WIC assign slave
ships to Curasao again, perhaps because in April of that year negotiations
resumed with Belmonte. At their annual series of meetings, the Heren X
had the minutes record " . . . it is of the greatest importance that the slave
trade at Curasao be continued." But in the negotiations with Belmonte they
appeared to be hesitant about a new contract because there was still a large
asiento debt left from previous years.50
The limited recovery of the Curasao slave trade in 1691 was followed by
50. WIC, vol. 68, cor. 11/3/1790; WIC, vol 835, pp. 113, 126, 233, 272, and 301.
two more lean years, but 1694 saw a slight increase again with perhaps more
than 2,000 slaves landed at the island. This again was only a temporary
recovery, followed by several years of inactivity. By this time it appeared as
if the much coveted asiento trade had finally eluded the Dutch permanently.
WIC directors admonished their subordinates in Curasao to change their
lifestyle, to economize, and to reduce the number of company service slaves.
They were to concentrate on producing salt, lumber, and agricultural prod-
ucts in order to reduce the company's expenses. A special tax was introduced
for inhabitants not affiliated with the company, and WIC agents were urged
to be more diligent in collecting duties on incoming and outgoing ships.
There was even talk of reorganizing the whole WIC administration on the
island in order to save money.51
The Royal Portuguese African Company, also known as the Company of
Cacheu, had meanwhile obtained control over the asiento trade, and its agent
Bernardo Marin de Guzman was responsible for locating slave suppliers.
Guzman traded with the English and the French, as well as with the Por-
tuguese, but he avoided the Dutch slave vendors. After Guzman's death in
1695, Simon and Louis de Souza became agents for the Portuguese com-
pany, and in 1697 they approached the WIC again for new slave deliveries.
After several months of negotiations a subcontract for 2,500 to 3,000 slaves
was signed, and in January of 1699 this contract was renewed for a two-
year period. The following year the same contract was slightly amended,
which meant that it was still in operation. These contracts produced a
significant revival of the Curasao slave trade. In 1699 al° n e, six ships with
nearly 2,400 slaves were landed at the island, and a higher level of activity
was achieved in the year 1701 (see Table 2.4).52
This revival of the Dutch participation in the asiento trade exhibited one
characteristic that further undermined the position of Curasao, namely that
several WIC slavers sailed straight to Spanish colonial ports instead of pro-
cessing their slaves through the Curasao establishment. Nevertheless, the
arrangement had the usual array of problems, including inadequate remit-
tances. The administrator of the asiento at Cartagena was arrested on orders
of the colonial governor, and by the end of 1701 the whole asiento was in
disarray again. Back in Holland, Belmonte and the Souza brothers were
ordered to appear at the meeting of the Heren X, and had their security
deposit of 60,000 guilders confiscated in lieu of nonpayment for slaves
delivered. In order to avoid further losses, four departed WIC slave ships
were diverted to Curasao, which was greatly appreciated by the Curasao
51. WIC, vol. 69, pp. 42-3, 54-8, 82, 86, and 106-9.
52. WIC, vol. 69, cor. 9/16/1698; Donnan, vol. 2, p. 107; WIC, vol. 836, p. 150; Scelle,
pp. 632-4; WIC, vol. 200, pp. 53, 55-6, 67, 112-113, and 159-60; vol. 783, doc. 2 3 -
31; vol 836, pp. 81, 112, 121, 142, 150, 152, 208, and 261-2. See also Table 2.3.
Table 2.4
WIC traffic to Curasao and Spanish colonies, 1700-1732
Destinations Unspecified
Year Curasao Spanish Main destinations Total
1700 70 1,435 (3) 1,505
1701 2,841 (6) 1,086 (2) 450 4,377
1702 331 400 731
1703 492 492
1704 479 (2) 479
1705 2,135 (4) 2,135
1706 1,171 (3) 1,171
1707 1,352 (3) 1,352
1708 817 (3) 640 (2) 1,457
1709 464 464
1710 1,031 (3) 610 (2) 1,641
1711 1,172 (2) 1,172
1712 1,023 (2) 1,023
1714 1,056 (2) 1,056
1715 898 (3) 898
1716 1,226 (5) 1,226
1718 448 448
1720 66 66
1724 328 328
1726 225 225
1728 672 672
1729 798 (2) 798
1732 150 150
Total 19,245 (50) 2,921 (6) 1,700 (5) 23,866

Source: Appendix 1.
Note: Figures in brackets signify shipments; single cargoes are not indicated.
establishment. The latter had been critical of the new arrangement because
it deprived them of their traditional role in the slave trade. In the fall of
1700 they complained about a shortage of slaves at Curasao, insisting that
they could have sold three full consignments in the past year.53
The asiento in international diplomacy
These new difficulties with the recently revived asiento actually stemmed
from a larger problem, namely a transfer of the whole asiento from Portu-
guese to French control in 1701. The last Spanish Habsburg king, Charles
53. WIC, vol. 200, pp. 5, 43, 53, 66, 112, 159, and 180; vol. 836, pp. 222, 238, and 262.
Curacao and the asiento trade 49
II, died in 1700 and was followed by a Bourbon king, Philip V, grandson
of the influential contemporary Louis XIV of France. Although this devel-
opment was challenged by several states, including Holland and England,
and led to the lengthy War of the Spanish Succession (1702-13), the French
nevertheless initially acquired control over the asiento trade through this
new found fraternity between Spain and France. The asiento had now be-
come an important issue in international diplomacy. During the French
tenure of the asiento (1701-13), the WIC was involved only sporadically
and to a small degree. Although the company continued to participate in
the illicit trade from Curasao to Caracas, even these activities were frequently
curtailed by this war.54
The transfer of the asiento and the outbreak of war brought confusion to
Curasao. Regular asiento deliveries had halted, but WIC agents continued
to sell slaves to private merchants, especially to the Portuguese formerly
associated with the asiento. French and Spanish merchants also visited Cu-
rasao, but they were supplied with slaves only if they paid in cash, an
indication of the unreliability of these contacts. Most of the slaves in these
transactions were left from the incomplete asiento contract with the Por-
tuguese, and they were now almost certainly smuggled into the Spanish
colonies. Adding to the uncertainty at Curasao were reports of a large French
fleet assembling at Martinique and a severe drought that plagued the island
until 1703. The WIC directors in Holland cautioned their subordinates in
Curasao against dealings with the asiento agents still domiciled on the island,
as they owed the company in excess of 12,000 pesos. They were, however,
openly encouraged to engage in the illicit slave trade with the Spanish Main.
Much of this smuggling was done by private traders who lived on Curasao,
but WIC ships now also participated, often under the protection of the
Danish flag.55
There appears to have been a great demand for slaves throughout the
Caribbean in 1702. Curasao correspondence reveals that as many as 3,000
slaves could have been sold had they been available. Nevertheless, Curasao
agents advised their superiors not to assign any large slavers to the island
because of the war. With France and Spain pitted against Holland and
England, there was a great deal of naval action in the Caribbean. Many ships
were captured and confiscated on both sides. During the conflict at least four
WIC slave ships, the Duynenburg, the Beschermer, the Amsterdam, and the St.
Jago were captured by the French; the latter was taken in sight of the Curasao
harbor of Willemstad, and the Amsterdam was captured and taken to Grenada
54. See Scelle, pp. 636ff.

55. WIC, vol. 69, p. 155; vol. 200, pp. 270-2, 336, 341, 346, 356, and 393-4; vol. 201, pp. 66
and 153; vol. 836, p. 270.
with over 500 slaves aboard. Two additional WIC slave ships disappeared
during the war, undoubtedly also captured by the French. 56
One curious twist in this war was the open hostility in the Caribbean
between the alleged allies Holland and England. On the contention that the
two were bound by treaty not to trade with their mutual Spanish enemy,
England tried to halt the illicit trade operating from Curasao; strangely
enough, it was tolerated by the mutual Spanish enemy. Several small WIC
ships engaged in this illicit trade were captured and confiscated by English
privateers, causing much loss to the company. By the spring of 1704 the
English had confiscated twenty-one such WIC vessels and taken them to
Jamaica. How many slaves were captured in this manner is impossible to
determine, but it must be remembered that these were mostly small ships.
After much negotiation the English stopped harassing this WIC trade, and
began participating in the illicit trade themselves. 57
A few years after the conflict with the English had been resolved, the French
began to threaten the WIC more seriously. In 1707 they captured the island
of Nevis, thus strengthening their position in the Caribbean, and that same
year a French fleet blockaded the Curasao harbor of Willemstad. For the
next several years they seemed to dominate the Caribbean, and increased
their toll on Dutch shipping. In 1708 a French fleet of eighteen ships bom-
barded Willemstad, and its citizens paid a heavy ransom to avoid capture.
Another attack and ransom payment followed in 1713.58
Regardless of the French threat, the Curasao slave trade was not forced
to a complete standstill. During the whole period of French control over
the asiento, there was only one year, 1713, that not a single slaver arrived
at Curasao. In fact, the year 1705 saw a significant revival of the trade with
over 2,000 slaves delivered at the island. After that year, however, the Cu-
rasao trade dwindled to a few ships annually, with an average of about one
thousand slaves landed each year.59
After the French gained control over the asiento in 1701, a conflict of
interest seems to have developed between the WIC directors in Holland and
the WIC establishment at Curasao; whereas the former lost interest in the
asiento trade, the latter continued to cling to the hope of regaining at least
56. WIC, vol. 200, pp. 356, 390-1, cor. 4/24/1702; vol. 201, p. 163; vol. 203, p. 513; vol.
485, p. 29; Cornells Ch. Goslinga, "Curasao as a Slave Trading Center during the War
of the Spanish Succession, 1702-1714," Nieuwe West-Indische Gids, vol. 77 (1977-1978),
pp. 45-6. The ships lost were Axim and Africa, which were relatively small ships (see
Appendix 1).
57. WIC, vol. 201, pp. 66, 162-3, 246-9, and 286. Goslinga, "Curasao," provides an excellent
analysis of the diplomatic aspects of the war in the Caribbean.
58. WIC, vol. 202, pp. 200-8; vol. 205, pp. 2-3; vol. 248, p. 146; Goslinga, "Curasao," p. 33.
59. WIC, vol. 201, p. 162; vol. 202, p. 120. See also Appendix 1.
a share of it. In 1703 the French asientist, Gaspar Martin, visited Curasao
and proposed renewed WIC participation in the asiento trade. Nothing came
of this proposal, and a similar effort five years later also failed. And, in 1708,
Jean Chouria and Louis Chambert, two Frenchmen connected with the
asiento, visited Curasao and convinced the WIC establishment there to sell
them slaves. Subsequently, the Heren X disapproved of this action because
they feared that such an arrangement could bring as many as 150 French-
men to the island, at a time when Holland and France were still at war.
The Curasao council was quite disturbed about the reversal of their
action, although they did obey their superiors and detained Chouria for a
short time. Meanwhile, only a small number of slaves had been sold to the
asiento agents.60
Apparently attitudes had changed by 1711, for that year Chouria returned
to Curasao and negotiated a slave contract for 400 piezas d'India from the
first WIC slaver to arrive, paying a security of 6,000 pesos for the transaction.
The contract implied that these slaves were intended for the Caracas coast,
and private Curasao slave traders objected to the Chouria deal as this rep-
resented competition for their illicit trade with the same area. Nonetheless,
Chouria continued to frequent Curasao and purchase slaves from the WIC
until 1715, even after the French had lost control over the asiento. The
Chouria connection should not be seen as a major factor in the Curasao
slave trade, however. He might simply be viewed as another slave smuggler,
although a big one as he was indebted to the WIC for 33,000 pesos by 1715.
At a price of 108 pesos per slave, not counting other expenses, Chouria
must have purchased 50 percent or more of the approximately 4,000 slaves
landed at Curasao during the 1711-15 period.61
Even after the English captured the asiento contract in 1713, Curagao
continued to play a limited role in supplying the Spanish colonies with slaves.
Two representatives of the English asiento visited the island in 1718 and
again in 1723, and Curasao correspondence continued to refer to the asiento
trade. No formal contracts connecting the WIC with the asiento have been
discovered for this period, and the rapidly declining number of slave landings
at Curasao confirms the enormous drop in the Curasao slave trade. Only
during the first few years of the English asiento did Curasao import ap-
proximately 1,000 slaves per year, but after 1716 that trade became insig-
60. WIC, vol. 200, p. 394; vol. 201, pp. 66 and 163; vol. 202, pp. 372-3, 431-5, 461, 501,
553, 617-8 and 623; vol. 203, pp. 20-1, 36-40, and 50-1; vol. 384, correspondence
1/4/1710.
61. WIC, vol. 202, pp. 577-81, 617-19, and 631-4; vol. 203, pp. 36-51 and 88; vol. 204,
pp. 6-11, 20-8, 53-5, 464-6; vol. 205, pp. 15, 20, 28, 386, 425, and 502; vol. 206,
pp. 19-27.
nificant. Even during the free trade after 1730, Curasao never regained its
former significance in the traffic.62
An evaluation of the sources
A summary of the slave trade to Curasao, the chief conduit of slave im-
portation to the Spanish mainland colonies, makes it evident that the years
after 1700 are the best documented period. In fact, it appears that virtually
every slave consignment to Curasao has been documented, most of them in
considerable detail. There are several reasons for this excellent documen-
tation. First, a far greater number of WIC documents of the post-1700
period have been preserved; much of the paperwork of the years prior to
the date was simply discarded. Second, the previously cited study by Pro-
fessor Goslinga, thoroughly covering the slave trade to Curasao for the 1700-
15 period, corroborates and confirms this author's research.63 Only in a few
cases did the independent research projects contradict or supplement each
other. Third, the WIC commercial and bookkeeping practices, albeit at the
painful expense of the unfortunate slaves, assured the thoroughness of the
documentation in this study. An explanation of this last point is in order.
It was the practice of the WIC to brand newly arrived slaves at Curasao
with a red-hot iron, apparently in addition to the branding applied in Africa
when the slaves were purchased by the Europeans. Later, slaves were iden-
tified at sales, criminal proceedings, and in death affidavits by the scars that
were left from this experience. All slaves arriving on a particular ship were
branded with the same iron, and these irons were used in a rational succes-
sion. Until 1703 the Curasao establishment had used branding irons fea-
turing arabic numbers of up to one hundred. That number was used in the
year 1703, and applied to the slaves arriving on the ship, De jfager. When
this system was started has not been verified, and the inadequate docu-
mentation of the years prior to the eighteenth century makes it difficult if not
impossible to ascertain this. After 1703 the company switched to branding
irons with the letters of the alphabet, from A to Z, but excluding the letters
U and J in order to avoid confusion with V and /. The alphabet sequence
of twenty-four cases had been completed by 1715, and was then started
again. The last documented use of the alphabet branding iron, letter T for
the slaves on the ship, Phenix, was in 1729. Such a rational identification
device, which was faithfully reflected in WIC bookkeeping as well, became a
convenient method for monitoring the flow of slaves to Curasao. When this
62. WIC, vol. 206, pp. 25, 74, and 625; vol. 208, p. 506; vol. 619, p. 76, correspondence
4/19/1723 and 6/18/1723; vol. 1154, pp. 61-77. See also Table 2.4.
63. See Goslinga, "Curasao."
author failed to find the use of letter 0 in the bookkeeping, a careful ex-
amination of the correspondence of the same time revealed that that iron
had not been used because it was worn out. The absence of the letters /
and R in the Curasao bookkeeping implied that the documentation of two
slave ships was either lost or that the iron had been discarded, as was the
case with letter 0. Aside from these two irregularities, these symbols provided
a perfect check on the arrival and disembarkation of slave ships at Curaqao
for the 1699 to 1729 period.64
The asiento summarized
The cumulative results of these various research procedures show that the
WIC directed at least forty-eight slave consignments to Curasao in the thirty-
year period 1700 to 1729. If one assumes that a few slave ships may have
escaped the scrutiny of this research, approximately 19,000 slaves were
shipped to the island during those years (see Table 2.4). In addition, at least
six WIC slavers landed about 3,000 slaves at Spanish colonial ports. Because
these ships sailed straight to the Spanish ports and were not observed and
recorded at Curasao or other Dutch ports in the Caribbean, it is quite
possible that a few of those ships have not been verified. However, when
one compares slave ship arrivals with assignments made by the WIC during
the period that this policy was practiced, the total number of arrivals actually
exceeded the assignments, which would support the relative reliability of the
recorded arrivals. For the period 1700 to 1716, the WIC was instrumental
in shipping a total of about 21,000 slaves to Spanish America, nearly 1,250
per year, with another 2,500 for the inactive years after 1716. The vast
majority of the slaves landed at Curagao ended up as Spanish subjects.
There was obviously some attrition, as the macrons were usually not accepted
by the asientists. But most of those macrons, as well as the healthy slaves
sold on the free market at Curaqao, were usually smuggled to the Spanish
mainland anyway.
Determining the number of slaves brought to the Spanish colonies in the
seventeenth century is more difficult because the documentation is less
abundant. Nevertheless, there is enough evidence to venture a reasonable
estimate. Two valuable comparative sets of data are available for the period
1675 to 1725: actual shipping statistics and a list of slaving assignments
made by the WIC directors. Both have been painstakingly gleaned from
various archival collections and they are included as Appendix 1 and 5,
respectively. A total of 277 WIC slaving missions have been documented
64. WIC, vols. 200-11.

Table 2.5
Slave ship assignments and arrivals
WIC Esti- Known WIC Esti- Known
Year assigned mate3 arrivals Year assigned mate8 arrivals
1674 (?) 1700 8 4
1675 13 5 1701 4 10
1676 3 7 1702 4 5
1677 3 1703 6 3
1678 (2) 2 1704 8 3
1679 5 2 1705 5 7
1680 8 4 1706 9 3
1681 4 7 1707 6
1682 4 3 1708 8 5
1683 9 7 1709 5 3
1684 7 5 1710 (1) 6
1685 7 11 1711 (1) 2
1686 8 7 1712 4 2
1687 13 8 1713 (2) 1
1688 3 10 1714 3 4
1689 (2) 6 1715 4 5
1690 3 2 1716 (3) 3
1691 3 4 1717 3 4
1692 2 (1) 5 1718 7 4
1693 5 3 1719 3 4
1694 3 (1) 5 1720 4 2
1695 1 3 1721 8 5
1696 3 2 1722 8 8
1697 7 2 1723 (3) 10
1698 3 5 1724 7 9
1699 5 8 1725 9 7
Total 119 ( + 6) 126 Total 117 (10) 125
Source: Appendixes 1 and 5.

Notes: aEstimates for presumed assignments not verified.
bThese slave ship arrivals exclude the small consignments authorized by
the WIC authorities in Africa.
Table 2.6
The Dutch asiento slave trade, 1658-1729
Spanish Unverified
Period Main Curasao destinations Total
1658-1662 1,089 1,190 2,279
1662-1674 23,466 10,023 33,489
1675-1688 1,770 17,168 7,245 26,183
1689-1699 8,231 2,660 10,891
1700-1716 2,921 16,708 1,700 21,329
1717-1729 2,537 2,537
Total 4,691 69,199 22,818 96,708
Source: Tables 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4.

with varying degrees of detail, for the years 1675 to 1725. Twenty-six of
these were small vessels that were commissioned by the WIC authorities in
Africa and should therefore not be counted in this comparison. For this
same period, 236 WIC slaving assignments have been documented, and 16
have been added where such information appears to be missing (see Table
2.5). This suggests that very few WIC slaving missions escaped detection
in this research endeavor.
Table 2.6 presents the global estimates for the asiento and WIC slave
trade for the 1658 to 1729 period. Before 1730 the Dutch shipped a grand
total of approximately 97,000 slaves to the Spanish colonies, either directly
or by way of Curasao. To the extent that the Curasao trade can be used as
a gauge for the importation of slaves into the Spanish colonies, one may
conclude that the Dutch rarely supplied the number of slaves called for in
the asiento contracts. Unless other nations contributed significantly to this
traffic, or contraband imports were substantial, the Spanish colonies may
never have received the numbers anticipated by these contracts.
The Dutch on the
West African coast
It was on the African coast that so much of this tragic chapter in human
history played itself out. Here the intricacies of the Afro-European trade
bargained over the fate of the slaves. And here the slaves first saw their new
white masters and the mighty ocean they were to cross, and faced what must
have seemed to them a mysterious and frightening future. The next few
chapters will focus on Africa, essential to the understanding of the slave
trade, although the European initiators and facilitators of the trade will still
remain in the limelight because they also created and preserved most of the
pertinent historical records. The slaves themselves will receive more atten-
tion in Chapters 7 and 10,
Commercial profit was undoubtedly the principal inducement for Euro-
peans to live and work on the West African coast. Through commerce they
might succeed in this, and the importance of trade was reflected in the Eu-
ropean nomenclature for West Africa's coastal regions. Rather than adopting
terms of African derivation, Europeans tended to name certain portions of
the coast after the principal commercial items acquired in such areas. Hence,
such names as Ivory Coast, Gold Coast, and Slave Coast were commonly
applied to the various regions of the West African coast.1
The coastal regions and the slave trade
Europeans tended to divide the western coastline of Africa into two general
areas, the Guinea and the Angola coasts. The term Guinea was generally
1. Several descriptions of the African coastal regions made by Europeans during the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries have been published and have gained considerable
prominence. Chief among these are the following by Dutch traders and writers: P. de
Marees, Beschrijvinghe ende Historische Verhael van het Gout Koninkrijck van Guinea; Olfert
Dapper, Naukeurige Beschrijvinge der Afrikaanse Gewesten (Amsterdam: Meurs 1668); Willem
Bosman, Naukeurige Beschrijving van de Guinese Goud-en Slavekust... (Utrecht, 1704). De
Marees and Bosman have been translated into English; see bibliography.
56
The Dutch on the West African coast 57
applied to the coastal region of West Africa between modern-day Senegal

and the Cameroon. The name Angola, prior to the establishment of the
Portuguese colony by that name, was long used by Europeans to denote the
African coastline between Cameroon and Namibia, essentially the western
coastline of Bantu-speaking Central Africa. The northernmost portion of
this region, between the Cameroon and the Congo River, was generally
referred to by the Dutch as Angola, although it has also been referred to as
Loango after the seventeenth-century African state in that region. This
mixup of historical and contemporary labels can be confusing, and where
the hyphenated name Loango-Angola is used in this study it refers to the
region north of the Congo (See Map 3.1).
The Guinea coastal region is very large; Europeans invented several names
for its subdivisions, often reflecting the principal item of export of the region
in its label. Starting from west to east, the Senegambia region held little
significance for the Dutch slave trade. For about three decades, the Dutch
held the important island of Goree, but they were unable to carry out their
plans of exporting large numbers of slaves from the region before they lost
the stronghold to the French in 1677. Two years later WIC documents
indicate that the Dutch had given up regaining the island and the adjacent
Cape Verde coastline, and instead were satisfied with financial compensation
from the French for its loss. But at that time they were still planning to
reestablish lodges on the Gambia River, and they assigned thirty-four per-
sons for service at these stations.2 In spite of these intentions, however,
they never managed to establish a firm footing there and exploit the area
commercially.
The western portion of the Guinea coast, from the Gambia to modern
Ghana, was also referred to as the Windward coast. Like Senegambia, this
area was generally by-passed by the WIC ships. Early Dutch descriptions
of the West African coast generally commence with the Ivory Coast. It was
not until the early eighteenth century that the WIC began to trade in this
area on a regular basis. And after 1730 Dutch free traders became very
active in the regions of modern-day Liberia and the Ivory Coast.3
The coastal area of greatest interest to the Europeans was the Gold Coast,
an area roughly coterminous with modern Ghana. Most of the European
forts and trading lodges, including the St. George castle at Elmina, were
located here. Archaeological remains of as many as fifty building sites have
been identified in the region, although these were not in operation simul-
taneously. The Dutch maintained up to a dozen trading stations in this area
between 1612 and 1872, when they sold their West African holdings to the
2. WIC, vol. 832, pp. 7 and u ; WIC, vol. 331, p. 221.
3. See Dapper, and GAR, folder 802. See also H. A. Wyndham, The Atlantic and Slavery
(Oxford University Press, 1935), p. 45.
11°
1 L
MAP 3.1
COASTAL REGIONS OF WEST A N D CENTRAL AFRICA
17th and 18th century
El
British. As suggested by its name, gold was originally the most important
commodity of export in this region. A report from Africa in 1669 indicates
that at that time the Gold Coast trading stations, also called factories, were
offering very few slaves. With the passing of time, however, export from the
region became more diversified. During the late-seventeenth and early-
eighteenth centuries as many as twenty-three different commodities were
exported from West Africa by the Dutch, and several of these items originated
from the Gold Coast. Early in the eighteenth century the gold trade declined,
and slave exports from the region increased. In 1726 the WIC director in
Africa reported that the "Gold Coast... [had] become a slave coast."4
The coastal regions of present-day Togo, Benin, and the region of western
Nigeria had acquired the name Slave Coast. It is a narrow corridor of savannah
territory that reaches all the way to the coast, which may have made the
distant interior more accessible than most of the Guinea coast, where rain
forest is prevalent. The area did not become significant in European com-
merce until the slave trade became formidable. A Dutch document appar-
ently written during the 1660s does not yet use the term Slave Coast, but
refers to the area as the Bocht, the Bight of Benin. After the rapid expansion
of the Atlantic slave trade during the 1640s, European slavers increasingly
frequented the Slave Coast. The document just cited reports that the WIC
alone purchased between 2,500 and 3,000 slaves in the area annually during
the 1660s. Hence, Slave Coast became an appropriate name for the region.5
The Portuguese had purchased slaves on the Slave Coast as early as the
sixteenth century, and they were joined in this by the English, French, and
the Dutch during the first half of the seventeenth century. In 1639 the WIC
sent an agent to supervise the company's slaving activities in that area,
signaling a deepening involvement on their part. The arrangement continued
to be tentative, however, as local African authorities did not allow them to
establish a permanent lodge there. Instead, they operated from dilapidated
ships (leggers) anchored in a lagoon, although occasionally they were also
allowed by Africans to store merchandise on the beach. During or shortly
after 1647, the Dutch joined other Europeans and established permanent
lodges on the Slave Coast.6
On the whole, the Dutch showed relatively little interest in the coastal
area directly east of the Slave Coast, the Niger delta region, and the Bight
of Biafra. Small WIC coastal vessels would occasionally trade in the bay,
4. NAA, vol. 2231, p. 100; WIC, vol. 387, p. 63; VWIS, folder 928; Albert Van Dantzig, Forts
and Castles of Ghana (Accra: Sedco, 1980), Introduction. See also Johannes Postma, "West
African Exports and the Dutch West India Company," Economisch en Sociaal-Historisch
Jaarboek, (1973), vol. 36, pp. 53-74.
5. GAR, folder 802.
6. Ratelband, pp. lxxx-lxxxi.
but they never purchased many slaves there. During the period 1660 to
1740, the WIC periodically had a trading lodge at Benin, with rubber (gom)
and sandalwood (roodhout) as the chief items of export. Once in a while WIC
boats would fetch a few slaves from this area and ship them to Elmina. It
does not appear that the Dutch ever had a permanent foothold in the Niger
delta region, and the WIC frequently sent coastal yachts to this area to
purchase a variety of goods at Calabary. Occasionally, small WIC vessels
were dispatched to the area for the specific purpose of obtaining slaves to
be employed as laborers for the company on the Gold Coast.7
The western coastline of Central Africa also played a significant role in
the Dutch slave trade. Contemporary Dutch documents nearly always re-
ferred to this region as Angola, although after 1649 tne Y really meant the
area north of the Congo River. This area would be more appropriately
referred to as Loango, after the dominant state of the region during the
seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. The Dutch frequented the
Loango area since the early seventeenth century, but until about 1670 they
concentrated more on the ivory and copper trade, because slaves were not
in abundant supply there. Trading lodges were maintained at various times
at Loango-Boary, Malemba, Cabinda (Ngoyo), and Mpinda (Sonyo). For a
few years after 1642, when the WIC also controlled the coast of what today
is called Angola, the whole Loango-Angola region was separately admin-
istered as Africa-South from the port of Luanda, while the Guinea coast
under Elmina was referred to as Africa-North. But with the loss of Angola
in 1648, Elmina became again the administrative center of all WIC activities
on the African coast.8
During the 1670s the WIC slave trade increased significantly in the
Loango region, but so did the interest in the region of rival European nations.
A report from the 1660s states that the company had three lodges there and
was exporting 3,000 slaves annually from the region. This was undoubtedly
an exaggeration, for in 1679 the WIC had only one lodge left at Malemba.
A WIC document of 1682 also speaks of the "decay in the business on the
coast of Angola," and two years later the company decided to discontinue
the only remaining lodge at Loango. That decision was carried out in 1686,
and from then on the WIC slave ships trading on the Loango coast would
7. GAR, folder 802; NBKG, vol. 1, min. 7/11/1704, 10/11 1716 and io--' 15/1738; NBKG,
vol. 236, p. 61; WIC, vol. 102, p. 427; NBKG, vol. 5, min. 11 14 1710; WIC, vol. 485,
P-327-
8. GAR, folder 802; WIC, vol. 832, p. 11; WIC, vol. 268; WIC, vol. 56, p. 192; Phyllis M.
Martin, The External Trade of the Loango Coast, 1576-1870 (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1972), pp. 43-72 and 92; H. Herman, "Onze bezittingen op de kust van Guinea
en dekrijgsverrichtingen aldaar, 1598-1872," vol. 2 (The Hague: typewritten manuscript
at ARA, 1925), p. 30.
have to fend for themselves, without the benefit of WIC personnel stationed
there.9
After many years without a lodge in Loango, the WIC directors decided
in 1721 to reestablish a small lodge there with only four WIC employees.
Five years later the local Africans overran the lodge, and that appears to
have been the end of it, although as late as 1748 correspondence from Africa
still made references to the lodge at Loango. Thus, the slave trade from
that region was administered largely by the captains of the slave ships, which
had the unfortunate result that far less historical data of this trade has been
preserved. The activities of slavers on the Guinea coast had to be reported,
either through the captain of the ship or the local WIC authority, to the
director-general at Elmina, who in turn reported back to Holland. The
directors were required to make at least three copies of all reports and
correspondence, sending two by separate ships and keeping one for their
own records. Slave ships destined for Angola sometimes stopped at Elmina
for provisions but were on their own after they sailed from there. After they
had acquired a cargo of slaves they sailed directly from Angola to the Amer-
icas without reporting to Elmina.10
The WIC organization in Africa
As was shown in Chapter 1, the general administration of the WIC was in

the hands of the Heren X, but these gentlemen met infrequently - only
once a year after 1684 - to decide on extremely important issues. The day-
to-day administration of the company was carried out on a rotating basis by
the directors of the two major chambers of the WIC: Amsterdam for six
years alternated by Zeeland for two years. The highest authority of the WIC
in Africa was the director-general {directeur-generaat), who was stationed at
the WIC castle at Elmina. Appointed by the WIC directors in Holland, the
director-general had jurisdiction over all political, military, judicial, and
commercial activities in WIC territories, its personnel stationed in Africa,
and over WIC ships in African waters. He was assisted by a council, con-
sisting of the director-general himself, the superintendent (fiscaal, who was
in charge of judicial and revenue matters), and a small group of high-ranking
WIC officers stationed on the coast. The council met at irregular intervals
(after 1670 six times annually) to discuss and modify the implementation of
9. Martin, Loango, pp. 73-4; Albert Van Dantzig, Het Nederlandse Aandeel in de Slavenhandel
(Bussum: Fibula, 1968), p. 70. WIC, vol. 833, p. 213; WIC, vol. 834, p. 123.
10. WIC, vol. 55, cor. 3/14/1722; WIC, vol. 619, p. 341; MCC, vol. 488; NBKG, vol. 236,
min. 3/16/1716; WIC, vol. 102, p. 350; WIC, vol. 99, p. 430.
Figure 3.1
WIC ranks and functions in Africa
Upper ranks of WIC employees

1 Director-General or President
2-3 Chief Commissioner (Oppercommies)
7-8 Commissioner (Commies)
18-20 Assistant (Assistant)
Prominent functions in the WIC administration
Director-General
CouncilJ
JI
Chief Factor Superintendent Ichaplair Equipage
(Fiscaal) Master
Clerical Staff, incl.
Accountant General
(Boekhouder)
First Secretary
Factors (heads of the outposts)
Note: Dutch equivalents are in parentheses.
policies and orders of the Heren X and the presiding chamber. In theory,
decisions were made by a plurality of votes, with the director-general pos-
sessing two votes. In practice, as Willem Bosman complained, the director-
general wielded absolute authority, with the other members of the council
acting as uyes men," who had to cover up for their superior when he made
mistakes. On a few occasions, however, the council actually placed restric-
tions on the director-general, and in one instance they expressed their op-
position by simply boycotting the council meetings.11
According to the numerous surviving personnel rosters, the WIC had an
average of between 200 to 400 persons on the payroll in Africa. About one-
fourth of these were considered civil servants, engaged in either or both
administrative and commercial activities. The remainder consisted primarily
11. Ratelband, p. lviii; WIC, vol. 109, pp. 52-3; WIC, vol. 57, p. 78; NBKG, vol. 4, min.
10/1/1708; NBKG, vol. 8, min. 8/12/1738. The minutes of the council meetings after
1700 have nearly all been preserved. Some of the council members were stationed on
the outer forts and had to travel a long distance to Elmina.
of soldiers, sailors, and craftsmen. Figure 3.1 illustrates the ranking system
used for the WIC personnel, and the accompanying diagram charts the
prominent functions at the top of the organizational structure. With the
exception of the factory masters, or factors as the English called the heads
of the major fortified trading stations, all these functionaries listed were
stationed at Elmina.12
The superintendent and all persons with the rank of chief commissioner,
who as a rule also held the function of factor of their particular station, were
members of the council. Promotions were made by the authorities in Holland
on the recommendation of the director-general. The post of chief factor
went as a rule to the most influential chief commissioner, a post held by
Willem Bosman for a number of years. The chief factor was stationed at
Elmina and was in charge of commercial transactions at the principal WIC
trading station there, and also functioned as a kind of executive assistant
and substitute for the director-general. The factors of the outposts had total
responsibility for their specific trading station. When the director-general
died and no arrangements for his succession had been made beforehand,
the council named a temporary successor with the title of president. The
WIC authorities in Holland eventually replaced or confirmed him as director-
general.13
The equipage master (equipage meester) supervised food supplies, building
materials, and was also in charge of the service corps of the WIC estab-
lishment in Africa. The latter included the sailors on coastal vessels, crafts-
men, and the "factory" slaves, which the company kept for menial jobs. The
ensign (vaandrig) was the company's highest ranking military officer in Africa;
he was in charge of the Elmina garrison as well as other military affairs of
the WIC. Chief among the clerical staff were the accountant-general, or
first accountant (boekhouder), and the first secretary, each of whom had
several clerical assistants. The function of chaplain (predikant) was usually
vacant and occupied by an unordained minister, a reader, or comforter
(ziekentrooster), who preached in the chapel and officiated at funerals and
other religious ceremonies in the European community at Elmina. 14
Approximately 50 percent of the Europeans in the service of the WIC
12. Bosman, pp. 4 and 94-9.

13. WIC, vol. n o , p. 204; NBKG, vol. 1, min. 12/4/1704; NBKG, vol. 4, min. 3/31/1711;
Bosman, p. 95; Ratelband, p. lxiii. It is often assumed that the superintendent was second
in command in Africa, but the minutes of the Council clearly place the chief factor in
that position.
14. WIC, vol. 113, 596; NBKG, vol. 278, nr. 4; WIC, vol. 488, pp. 190-1; Bosman, p. 97;
Ratelband, pp. lv-lxi. In 1736 the WIC establishment in Africa listed 244 persons, of
whom 142 were military personnel; 43 of the military were stationed at the outposts.
Several rosters of WIC personnel in Africa can be located in WIC, vols. 101-15 and
487-91.
i
Ill ; p
MAP 3.2
DUTCH TRADING FACTORIES IN WEST AFRICA T
T h e Dutch on the West African coast 65
were stationed at Elmina; the other half lived at the outposts, or buitenforten,
as the Dutch called them. Map 3.2 shows the locations of the Dutch factories
along the coast. On two occasions, in 1678 and again in 1717, a number of
the fortified factories were reduced to the status of lodges, or unfortified
trading stations. The WIC factories on the Gold Coast were nearly all heavily
fortified, but on the Slave Coast and the Loango coast the company had
mere trading lodges that could operate only with the approval of the indig-
enous African authorities. By 1700 the Dutch had ten forts of varying sizes
on the Gold Coast, and they strengthened them during the eighteenth cen-
tury while gradually abandoning their lodges elsewhere.15
WIC personnel in Africa
The majority of the Europeans serving in Africa were by and large a pitiful
lot; the expression "dregs of the nation" would be quite appropriate. Drawn
from various countries, they included convicts and beggars. Employment
with the WIC was regarded as inferior to that of the Dutch East India
Company, and the disease-ridden Guinea coast, also styled "the white man's
grave," was among the least desirable of the WIC stations. The chance of
rapid promotion for those who were fortunate to survive was one of the only
attractions for service in Africa. The qualifications for a position of prom-
inence were therefore minimal; apparently one had to be able to read and
write, because factors often complained that some assistants could barely
master those skills. Members of the governing council generally spoke no
other languages than the native Dutch, although Bosman claimed that he
and a few other Europeans could understand an African language, presum-
ably Twi. On one occasion, the council had to postpone a decision because
no one on the council or the WIC staff could read a report written in English,
although this might also be indicative of the fact that at that time English
lacked the universality it acquired in later years. 16
Most of the Europeans adjusted poorly to the tropical environment of
West Africa. The tropical heat, the excessive humidity during much of the
year made life in Africa extremely unpleasant for Europeans. Add to this
the unfamiliar tropical disease environment, in which malaria and the par-
asitic worm were the worst, according to Bosman. To make matters even
worse, Europeans were unwilling to adapt to African dietary practices. They
continued to live primarily on salted and dried foods imported from Holland.
15. A. W. Lawrence, Trade Castles and Forts of West Africa (London: J. Cape, 1963), p. 51;
Herman, p. 65; NBKG, vol. 6, min. 4/2/1717; Van Dantzig, Forts, Introduction and
Chapter 5.
16. Bosman, pp. 50-4; NBKG, vol. 12, min. 10/29/1769 and 1/19/1767.
When food shipments were tardy, as was the case in 1730, the director-
general lamented to his superiors: "for to subsist on what grows here in this
dry and forlorn land, without shipments from the fatherland, is one of the
saddest conditions in the world, closely akin to famine." Perhaps as a result
of these conditions and accompanying homesickness, Europeans tended to
drink excessively. The rank and file, in addition, lived in miserable quarters,
were treated by unskilled physicians, and received savage punishments for
committing legal offenses.17
Life expectancy among Europeans living on the West-African coast was
very low, especially during their first year. An analysis of mortality among
English personnel in similar circumstances for the years 1683 to 1737 shows
that nearly 60 percent died within eight months of their arrival in Africa.
After that period of adjustment to the new situation, death rates dropped
significantly. A recent statistical analysis shows that Dutch death rates were
not as drastic as previously assumed, and perhaps not as serious as those of
other Europeans, as Bosman suggested in the early eighteenth century.
Nevertheless, death rates were still extremely high, as some random figures
confirm. In 1729, 76 out of 335 (nearly 25 percent) persons who served the
WIC in Africa died. In 1750 deaths numbered 49 out of a total of 212. As
many as 72 persons died during the first nine months of the year 1774. An
analysis of a list of directors-general for the years 1638 to 1852 shows that
about 50 percent died while in office. On the average they served only two
years and seven months. It should be kept in mind that these men lived
more comfortable lives than the rank and file, and that they were often
selected from WIC personnel who had already survived the critical period
of adjustment to the new disease environment. Once Europeans had survived
this initial period they could expect to serve several years in Africa. Thus,
Bosman could spend ten years in Africa and return to Holland alive, while
Pieter Woortman served as director-general for nearly thirteen years (1767-
80). They were the exceptions, however.18
17. J. A. de Maree, Reizen op en Beschrijving van de Goudkust van Guinea, 2 vols. (The Hague:
Van Cleef, 1817-1818), vol. 2, pp. 5-8; Bosman, pp. 104-11; WIC, vol. 487, p. 359;
A. W. Lawrence, Trade Castles and Forts of West Africa (London: J. Cape, 1963), p. 62.
Bosman describes the symptoms of and remedies for the diseases on the African coast
in considerable detail. After spending more than ten years there, Bosman said he could
still not determine a predictable pattern to the seasons of the Guinea coast.
18. K. G. Davies, "The Living and the Dead: White Mortality in West Africa, 1684-1732,"
in S. Engerman and E. Genovese, eds., Race and Slavery in the Western Hemisphere,
(Princeton, N J.: Princeton University Press, 1975), pp. 94-8; Brodie Cruickshank,^/tf*>«
Jaren aan de Goudkust (Amsterdam, 1853), pp. 1-5; WIC, vol. 294, pp. 3-9; WIC, vol.
487, p. 361; WIC, vol. 490, p. 175; H. M. Feinberg, "New Data on European Mortality
in West Africa: The Dutch on the Gold Coast, 1719-1760," Journal ofAfrican History,
vol. 15 (1973), pp. 359-71- It is undoubtedly correct, as Feinberg seems to suggest, that
death rates among Europeans in Africa were not unlike other new disease environments,
Under such adverse circumstances, one may assume that only high fi-
nancial rewards could lure Europeans to service in Africa. Certainty of
employment was one reward, and salaries may have been better than in
Holland although inferior to those of the East India Company. High-ranking
WIC servants received good salaries plus reasonable fringe benefits and
special commissions. The director-general, with a monthly salary of 300
guilders, had three times as much as the chief factor (see Figure 3.1). Fringe
benefits for the higher echelon included wages for servants, free room, and
dining privileges with the director-general, and other benefits depending on
one's position. Those involved in commerce received a special commission
on transacted merchandise or a percentage of the WIC's African profits. As
a rule, the higher the rank the better the opportunities for fringe benefits.
Factors, for example, received special advances to be used as gifts or bribes
for indigenous African leaders and merchants in order to advance trade in
their region. They were often accused of keeping these advances for them-
selves. The superintendent received a percentage of all confiscated goods
and the fines levied. The director-general was in a particularly good position
to add to his earnings. For every slave transacted by the WIC in Africa, he
received a special commission of one ackey, the equivalent of about two and
one-half guilders. He also received 2.5 percent of the company's profits in
Africa, as compared with less than 1 percent of the profits being divided
among approximately twenty-four assistants. The others received portions
of the profits between these two extremes, depending on their rank and
position.19
Some of the high-ranking WIC officials were apparently quite successful
in accumulating capital, as evidenced by their degree of financial indepen-
dence. In 1706 Commissioner P. C. de Candele was permitted by the council
to undertake a military expedition inland from Shama at his own expense.
If successful, he would be appointed as factor at Shama as a reward. Similarly,
Commissioner B. Coejmans was allowed to establish a new lodge east of
Accra at his own expense. On the other hand, prominence could also bring
costly responsibilities. Jan de Pauw, factor at Ouidah in 1712, complained
that his food compensation was inadequate to cover feeding and entertaining
captains and officers of visiting slave ships. English and French factors
received more generous compensations from their companies, he argued. 20
All of the company employees not benefiting from the so-called free table
but the impression among contemporaries still remained that Africa was an undesirable
place to work.
19. WIC, vol. i n , p. 70; WIC, vol. 114, p. 37; NBKG, vol. 25, min. 12/6/1699; Bosman,
pp. 94-8; Ratelband, pp. lx-lxii. These salaries and benefits may well have varied from
time to time.
20. NBKG, vol. 2, min. 1/2/1706; NBKG, vol. 9, min. 7/1/1745; WIC, vol. 102, p. 43.
with the director-general at Elmina received food compensation. This in-
come was graduated according to rank and function, and as a rule was paid
in kind. Low-ranking employees were therefore at a considerable disadvan-
tage, particularly because their salaries were also very low (see Table 7.2).
The income of soldiers and sailors was perhaps even lower than the near-
starvation income of weavers in Holland at that time. Skilled laborers working
in Africa were earning about the same as their counterparts in Holland.
WIC personnel in Africa had the advantage of their food compensation,
which may have given them a financial edge. Also, the spending and social
opportunities were limited in Africa, which may have contributed to the
heavy drinking and rowdiness of the Europeans. As a result, heavy indebt-
edness among company employees was endemic. On occasion, such "un-
christian" behavior would draw strong denunciation from the company
chaplain. Director-General Pieter Nuyts (1706-9) tried to combat this by
calling special days of prayer, during which "cursing, wrestling, drinking,
and gambling" were prohibited. But usually the leadership would condone
such behavior of their subordinates, claiming that life in Africa was different
and could not be subject to the rules of morality operative in Holland.
Chaplains were urged to preach sermons of encouragement and not to stress
moral denunciations.21
The WIC and the Africans
Although Europeans occupied the leadership in the WIC establishment in

Africa, they constituted only a small minority of the total labor force of the
company. Actually, the personnel of the WIC, and those whose lives were
greatly influenced by the presence of the company, could be divided into
three categories: Europeans, mulattoes, or tapoejers; and blacks, or zwarten,
as the Dutch were prone to call the indigenous population of Africa. Oc-
casionally, the term Negroes was also used in reference to indigenous Africans.
The number of Europeans serving the WIC in Africa generally fluctuated
between 200 and 400. With the passing of time, more and more mulattoes
entered the service of the WIC to replace Europeans, particularly among
the military personnel. Toward the end of the eighteenth century, people
of mixed race were even allowed to be promoted to the ranks of the com-
mercial service, but not above the rank of assistant; they were needed, but
they were still seen as a threat by the Europeans. Mulattoes were generally
fathered by Europeans, either legally or illicitly, and they tended to adopt
21. NBKG, vol. 1, min. 4/25/1704; NBKG, vol. 2, min. 7/27/1706; WIC, vol. 57, p. 13;
WIC, vol. 487, cor. 2/3/1729. For comparable wages paid in Holland, see Van Dillen,
pp. 182-184 and 294-301.
European names, and could therefore not be distinguished from Europeans

unless the term tapoejer was added to their name. On personnel rosters this
was not the case, and it is therefore impossible to determine how many of
them there were among the WIC employees. By the middle of the eighteenth
century, most of the military as well as several other linguistic and commercial
specialists were people of mixed race.22
People of mixed Afro-European descent had played a role in the
coastal trade ever since the days of the Portuguese hegemony on the
West African coast. Their descendents continued to function as indepen-
dent traders and diplomatic liaisons between Africans and Europeans.
The Dutch generally called these people Portuguese, because they helped
perpetuate a derivation of the Portuguese as the lingua franca along the
West African coast. They seem to have been particularly active on the
Slave Coast. On the Gold Coast, however, where most of the north Eu-
ropeans were stationed, mulattoes speaking Dutch or English were pre-
dominant, and their European names are perpetuated to this day in
coastal communities like Elmina. The WIC council minutes of 1716 con-
tain several references about a mulatto called Willem Bosman, apparently
fathered by the author of the book frequently cited in these pages, who
also appeared to be an influential independent merchant at Elmina. The
record leaves the impression that the WIC merchants were resentful of
the young Bosman. He was accused of trading with the competing Bran-
denburg African Company and forced to pay a hefty fine for this illegal
act or face banishment from WIC territory.23
By the beginning of the nineteenth century, mulattoes, such as Jan Nieser
and Jacob Ruhle, became quite wealthy and influential in the WIC estab-
lishment; at first they were regarded as threats, as the younger Bosman was,
but in time became members of the WIC Council.24
Although people of mixed race were treated as inferiors and regarded
with suspicion, in some instances they were treated as equals to Europeans
and their position tended to improve with time. This was never the case
with the indigenous Africans or blacks. WIC policy was that company per-
sonnel should always maintain distance from the blacks. They were not
allowed to spend nights outside of the locked gates of the European trading
castles, and African women were not allowed to spend the nights inside.
Obviously, this policy was only selectively enforced as evidenced by the
growing number of mulattoes and the common practice of regular liaisons
between WIC officials and African women. WIC authorities condemned the
22. Kwame Yeboa Daaku, Trade and Politics on the Gold Coast (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1970), pp. o,6ff.
23. W I C , vol. 100, p. 535; N B K G , vol. 5, min. 2/12/1716.
24. A M K , no. 4030, doc. 11/18/1815; N B K G , vol. 13, min. 3/2/1787.
lending of money to blacks as "bad behavior," and in 1683 two WIC servants
were reprimanded because they were drinking in the company of Negroes.
Thus, every effort was made to maintain social distance between Europeans
and Africans.25
In spite of this condescending attitude toward Africans, WIC officials were
repeatedly admonished by their superiors in Holland to "live in good harmony
with the natives." This was a necessity in order to have successful commercial
relations with the Africans, not for humanitarian reasons. In 1722 the WIC di-
rectors had a placard posted at all company trading stations in West Africa
stating, under the threat of severe penalty, that company personnel "treat all
natives with gentleness and friendly words and deeds, in order that they bring
their commerce to the company factories . . . so that the WIC might benefit."
As a result of this attitude, an increasing number of African traders, workers,
and their dependents were allowed to live just outside the walls of the Dutch
trading castles, where they enjoyed a degree of protection against their
African adversaries. Africans residing in these coastal redoubts, which were
regarded as protectorates of the Dutch, were promised protection against
arbitrary threats and maltreatment by servants of the company as well. WIC
personnel who robbed Africans of merchandise or other property could be
punished severely by the company. Free blacks under WIC protection were
also guarded by the company against kidnapping and hostage-taking (pan-
yaring). WIC records reveal many incidents of such Africans being released
from enslavement through efforts of company officials. All of these measures,
however, were motivated by the desire to further commerce with Africans
and not by a genuine interest in their well-being.26
Compared with other Europeans, the Dutch may well have been the least
interested in efforts to educate and Christianize the African population; only
a few feeble efforts were made in that direction. In 1737 WIC officials, on
orders of the Heren X, sent three or four black African boys to Holland to
be taught a craft. Seven years later the Asante king requested that seventeen
Asante children be sent to Holland to be educated in reading, writing, and
music. WIC officials on the coast, however, refused to comply with this
request, and their superiors in Holland later applauded that decision. Earlier,
in 1722, the WIC directors in Holland had ordered a few young black slaves
be taught a trade in order to work more efficiently for the company in Africa.
The director-general responded that he would try to carry out the order but
that he was convinced that Negroes could never become independent crafts-
men, and would always need the supervision and direction of white crafts-
25. N B K G , vol. 8, min. 4/19/1741; N B K G , vol. 5, min. 1/21/1716 and 7/21 1716; N B K G ,
vol. 2, min. 1/31/1707; W I C , vol. 57, p. 226; W I C , vol. 1024, doc. 14.
26. N B K G , vol. 235, min. 11 12/1713, art. 21; N B K G , vol. 5, min. 3/6/1710; N B K G , vol.
9, min. 6/27/1746, 6/1/1751, 2/21/1747, 6/19/1758, and 11 1/1754; W I C , vol. 55,
cor. 4/12/1722.
men. In general, the Dutch attitude toward blacks could thus openly be
described as racist, arrogant, and condescending, although in this they were
not much different from other northern Europeans. Ironically, in time the
WIC's craftsmen in Africa became almost exclusively black. On the whole,
the Dutch record in respect to education efforts for their African allies and
subjects was very poor.27
One successful case of educating an African should be singled out, how-
ever. During the first half of the eighteenth century, a young black man,
known to the Dutch as Jacobus Eliza Capiteyn, was successfully educated
as a Protestant minister at the University of Leiden. During the 1740s he
returned to Elmina as a preacher and teacher, starting a school for children
there. But his educational and missionary efforts soon ended in failure, as
WIC personnel ridiculed Capiteyn for his efforts to educate African children
in the Christian religion. The directors in Holland supported Capiteyn's
efforts, but they disapproved of his attempts to baptize African children
(possibly children of company slaves), and encouraged him instead to set up
an orphanage and school for teachers. In the end he became so discouraged
that he took to drinking and died at the early age of thirty. The frequent
references to Capiteyn in Dutch circles was partly due to the fact that he
was a curiosity, but more important still was the fact that he wrote and spoke
out in favor of the slave trade and slavery. Dutch slave traders constantly
cited him to justify their occupation.28
When in 1769 WIC officials in Holland urged their subordinates in Africa
to resume missionary activity, the council responded that the "natives are
not inclined to accept Christianity," and that in any event "their heathen
lives would bring shame to Christianity." Earlier, in 1745, the director-
general had written to his superiors: "the more time I spend here and the
more I penetrate the nature of the natives, the more difficult, if not impos-
sible, it appears to me that - unless a miracle occurred - the natives could
be converted to Christianity."29
The company slaves
Regardless of the negative attitudes the Dutch held towards the Africans, a
large number of them were employed by the WIC. The group of Africans
most intimately connected with the WIC establishment were the company-
27. WIC, vol. 57, cor. 9/13/1737 and p. 63; WIC, vol. 489, p. 98; WIC, vol. 486, p. 252;
WIC, vol. 55, doc. 9/21/1737.
28. WIC, vol. 55, cor. 10/2/1744 and 5/9/1746; L. C. Vrijman, Slavenhalers en Slavenhandel
(Amsterdam: Van Kampen, 1937), pp. 51 and 58; For a detailed account of Capiteyn
see: A Eekhof, De Negerpredikant Jacobus Eliza Capiteyn, 1717-1747 (The Hague: Ned-
erlandsarchief van Kerkgeschiedenis, 1917), Nieuwe Serie 13.
29. WIC, vol. 113, p. 319.
owned slaves. They were identified by various names by contemporaries,

including service slaves (trainslaven), coast slaves, and castle slaves, with the
Dutch employing the term trainslaven as a rule. The WIC generally kept
around 300 of these slaves. These company slaves were exploited primarily
as manual laborers at the various trading stations, the majority of them being
stationed at Elmina. Their tasks included loading and unloading ships, quarry
labor, rowing canoes, etc., and with the passing of time there were several
craftsmen among them. Of the 348 company slaves in 1703, 34 were listed
as craftsmen; a total of twenty-three different occupations were listed for
these slaves. In rare cases they were employed at experimental indigo and
cotton plantations, and in one situation, in Benin in 1729, six company slaves
were employed to prospect for gold.30 Company slaves were, as a rule,
brought to the Gold Coast from either the Slave Coast or the Niger delta
region. Periodically, when the company needed more slaves for internal
service, a small coastal vessel was dispatched eastward to purchase several
dozen slaves for this specific purpose. The apparent reason for not selecting
these slaves from the trade slaves on the Gold Coast was to avoid fraternizing
with the free Africans in the area.31
Compared to the multitude of trade slaves, who were taken across the
Atlantic, the company slaves were relatively fortunate. Not only were they
permitted to remain in Africa, albeit far from their home, they often enjoyed
a greater degree of freedom as well as a better chance for manumission.
The WIC provided them with protection from being sold, with housing, and
food allowances like employees of the company, and with the opportunity
to learn a craft or make other advancements. The status of company slaves
was attractive enough to one free African, named Ammo, who decided in
1723 to sell himself for three trade ounces and eight ackeys (about ten to
twelve guilders) to the WIC as a company slave. The motive of Ammo was
not found recorded; one may assume that he was deeply indebted. 32
The efficient operation of the WIC establishment depended a great deal
on the work of the company slaves. Being aware of this, the slaves were
sometimes bold enough to make certain demands. On at least two occasions,
in 1785 and 1789, they refused to work and rebelled against the company
authority on grounds of inadequate food allowances. Company slaves re-
ceived one and a half ackeys (about five to six guilders) in food allowances,
compared to four and a half for soldiers and ten for WIC civil servants. The
outcome of the dispute was not found recorded.33
30. WIC, vol. 105, p. 318; WIC, vol. 107, p. 226; NBKG, vol. 1, min. 2/4/1705; WIC, vol.
485, PP- 373-4, 495 and 729-
31. NBKG, vol. 240, p. 53; WIC, vol. 1024, doc 17.
32. WIC, vol. 107, pp. 494-5
33. NBKG, vol. 13, min. 10 13/1785; AAC, vol. 2419, cor. 9/15 1789, WIC, vol. 488,
P> 153-
One of the advantages of being a company slave was the opportunity for
manumission. Several so-called letters of release, granting freedom to slaves,
have been located in the WIC archives. Freedom could be granted for a
variety of reasons such as a ransom payment by the slave himself or another
interested person, replacement by another slave, or a favor granted by the
company for faithful service. The latter occurred frequently with older slaves,
who were then either freed or retired with retention of food allowances.34
It appeared that the law was applied mildly to company slaves, but when
they did commit serious crimes they were usually punished by death. As a
rule, such punishments were commuted into selling the slave to a slaver who
carried the victim across the ocean, which illustrates the privileged position
of the company slave. This should not necessarily be seen as a humanitarian
gesture but rather as a sound business practice, a gain of at least the proceeds
of the sale in return.35
A large number of free Africans were also in the employ of the WIC.
Many of them served as household servants or in capacities similar to those
of company slaves, except they were wage earners and free to go when they
pleased or their contract expired. Others served in more prestigious capac-
ities, as interpreters, or even going on diplomatic missions for the WIC into
the interior, such as the two so-called black boys who took letters to the
Asantehene in 1702, or to African chiefs on the coast. Many of them received
commissions as contracted beforehand. Because most of those functions
were commercial in nature, they will be treated in greater detail in the
following chapter.36
Rivalry and cooperation with other Europeans
Unlike the Portuguese during their early contacts with the Africans, the
Dutch were unable to monopolize the West African coastal waters. They
had to tolerate other European nations to operate trading stations there and
compete with them for the commerce with Africans. The most formidable
competitors were the English, who had come to Africa at about the same
time as the Dutch and who were, after them, the strongest European nation
on the Gold Coast. During the years of the WIC's existence, the Dutch and
the English fought four naval wars (1652-4, 1665-7, 1672-4, and 1780-4)
which all had their reverberations in Africa. The Second Anglo-Dutch War
had serious repercussions for the WIC in Africa. Under the English admiral,
Robert Holmes, several company trading stations were captured by the En-
34. NBKG, vol. 237, p. 33; NBKG, vol. 238, p. 73; NBKG, vol. 241, pp. 10, 38-9; WIC,
vol. 56, p. 45; NBKG, vol. 1, min. 2/4/1705.
35. Wyndham, p. 230; WIC, vol. 113, p. 711; WIC, vol. 501, pp. 57 and 120.
36. WIC, vol. 99. p. 20; WIC, vol. 98, p. 3.
glish in 1665, including Goree, Cape Verde, and Cape Coast. But during
the next year the Dutch admiral, de Ruyter, took revenge by virtually driving
the English from the Gold Coast; they only held on to their heavily fortified
castle at Cape Coast.37
Apart from these short wars, these two Protestant nations were usually
on friendly terms, although they were stern economic competitors. Con-
sequently, there was nearly always tension between the two in one or the
other region of their respective colonial empires. In Africa the WIC and the
English RAC (Royal Africa Company), which was organized in 1672, rep-
resented the rival nations in negotiating their conflicts. It was during the late
1650s, after the English had issued the Navigation Acts, that WIC reports
indicate a significant increase in English competition on the African coast.
In 1701 there were again several WIC reports of greatly increased English
competition in Africa, and from then on the English pressed on to become
an even more threatening competitor.38
The economic rivalry between the Dutch and the English often found
expression in maneuvering for friendship with African states, in order to
improve their respective commercial advantage. In 1699 tensions between
the WIC and the RAC rose to the brink of war, even though the two nations
they represented were allies during most of the war period of 1674 to 1713.
Their governments in Europe finally ordered the two companies to settle
their differences through negotiations and strive for greater cooperation. An
agreement between the two companies was reached in 1701, and two years
later they negotiated a defensive pact, which was aimed at keeping the French
from gaining a foothold on the Gold Coast. New conflicts arose in 1706-7,
but the two able directors, Dalby Thomas and Willem Nuyts, were able to
negotiate the so-called Convention of 1708, which for several years created
greater harmony between the two rivals. But this did not preclude future
conflicts. In 1721 the English captured the Dutch fort at Cormantin, and the
Dutch threatened to retaliate by taking English ships. From 1728 to 1731
the two companies were virtually at war with each other and captured a
number of each other's ships. By 1733, however, relations between the two
sides had improved sufficiently to allow English subjects passage to Europe
on WIC ships.39
Like the Dutch and the English, the French also benefited from the
weakness of the Portuguese during the first half of the seventeenth century
and established a number of trading stations on the African coast. They also
37. Goslinga, The Dutch in the Caribbean and the Wild Coast, pp. 374-8.
38. KITLV, vol. H-65, p. 411; WIC, vol. 200, pp. 157-8, 222 and 224.
39. WIC, vol. 484, pp. 72-3; WIC, vol. 97, p. 377; WIC, vol. 54, cor. 10/19/1701; NBKG,
vols. 2 and 3, minutes of 1706-1708; NBKG, vol. 9, min. 3/28/1747; RLLM, Rader-
macher, folders 589 and 590.
established plantation colonies in the Caribbean, and got involved in the
slave trade from Africa. For most of the seventeenth century, however, they
recognized their limitations and were hesitant to challenge the Dutch and
the English. Thus, they tended to avoid the Gold Coast, and instead estab-
lished footholds in Senegal, the Ivory Coast, the Slave Coast, and they were
also active in the Loango trade. 40
Toward the end of the seventeenth century the French became bolder,
however. They even tried to establish a trading station at Komenda on the
Gold Coast, but the Dutch were able to prevent this. During the war-filled
period of 1690 to 1713, French naval power was seen as a great threat by
the Dutch. In 1693 a French fleet captured a large share of a combined
Dutch-English convoy from the east, near the port of Lagos. Later that
decade, the WIC director in Africa feared that the French might take ex-
clusive control of the Slave Coast. In 1705 the Dutch tried to encourage
the Ouidah king to drive the French from their fortified trading post there,
although the king had persuaded all major European powers the previous
year to sign a treaty that guaranteed the neutrality of that port. During the
first decade of the eighteenth century at least three WIC slave ships were
captured by the French, and several other ships were detained on the African
coast because of the French threat.41
The WIC had to deal with three other European competitors on the West
African coast, the Swedes, who were succeeded by the Danes, and also the
Brandenburgers. All three of these rivals established trading stations on the
Gold Coast, and they had all been able to do so with the assistance of Dutch
capital and renegade WIC officials. WIC authorities tolerated these com-
petitors, either because they were seen more as deterrents to the English,
as was the case with the Scandinavians, or they represented valuable political
allies, as was the case with the elector of Brandenburg.
The Polish-born Henry Caerlof had served as fiscal officer for the WIC
at Elmina. When in 1648 he left the company's service disgruntled, he offered
his service to the Swedish African Company to get a foothold on the Gold
Coast, in which he succeeded two years later. The Swedes also received
financial backing from Amsterdam financiers who resented the trade mo-
nopoly of the WIC in Africa. By 1655, however, Caerlof returned once more
40. Robert Louis Stein, The French Slave Trade in the Eighteenth Century; An Old Regime Business
(Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1979), pp. 3-12, and 92.
41. Albert Van Dantzig, Les Hollandais sur la Cote de Guinee; A VEpoque de FEssor de VAshanti
et du Dahomey, 1680-1740 (Paris: Societe Franchise d'Histoire d' Outre-Mer, 1980),
pp. 56—66; Fritz Snapper, Oorlogsinvloeden op de overzeese handel, 1551—171Q (Amsterdam:
E. Harms, 1959), pp. 194, 205, and 207; WIC, vol. 97, p. 7; WIC, vol. 98, p. 456; WIC,
vol. 55, cor. 3/30/1705; WIC, vol. 484, pp. 30, 231, and 266; WIC, vol. 99, p. 14; WIC,
vol. 485, p. 169; NBKG, vol. 1, min. 3/10/1702 and 3/10/1704; NBKG, vol. 5, min.
5/30/1710.
to Europe and within two years offered to help the Danes to replace the
Swedes on the Gold Coast. After several years of confusion and warfare
between the two Scandinavian rivals, the Swedes were evicted from their
last stronghold, Carolusburg, in 1663. The Danes kept their trading stations
until the middle of the nineteenth century. From their heavily fortified trading
castle, Fort Christiansborg, at Accra, they maintained a modest African trade,
which was perhaps more damaging to the English than to the Dutch. They
also participated in the slave trade from Africa to the Caribbean, but their
volume seldom exceeded two consignments a year, and many a year not a
single slave ship was dispatched.42
The Brandenburg presence on the Gold Coast was short-lived and was
tolerated because of the political alliance between the United Provinces and
elector of Brandenburg. The Brandenburg African Company was also or-
ganized by a Dutch subject, Benjamin Raule, who created essentially an
anti-WIC interloper company under the Brandenburg flag. The company
built a strong castle called Gross Friedrichsburg at Pokesu, or later Princes
Town, at the western end of the Gold Coast, in 1682. From here a modest
trade was carried on primarily with various European interlopers. The un-
dertaking was no success for Brandenburg, and in 1717 the company sold
its whole establishment to the WIC.43
In regard to foreign relations, it is interesting to note that the chief threat
to the WIC coastal stations was not from Africans but from European rivals.
This is evidenced in the fact that as a rule most of the cannons on castle
walls were aimed toward the sea rather than inland.
The WIC as middleman in the Brazil-Africa trade
The Portuguese were officially banned from the Guinea coast by treaties
between Holland and Portugal in 1641 and confirmed in 1661. Slowly they
started returning to this area because the Brazilian colonists preferred slaves
from this area, and also because Africans had come to prefer tobacco from
Brazil, the so-called third grade variety that was sweetened with molasses.
Recognizing this symbiotic relationship and the possibility of profiting from
it, the Dutch allowed Brazilians to trade on the Guinea coast again in 1689,
on the condition that they pay the WIC 10 percent of their merchandise.
42. Van Dantzig, Forts, pp. 23-30; See also Georg Norregaard, Danish Settlements in West
Africa, 1658-1850 (Boston: Boston University Press, 1966).
43. Van Dantzig, Forts, pp. 37-39; Eberhard Schmitt, "The Brandeburg Overseas Trading
Interests in the Field of European Politics, 1634-1682," in L. Blusse and F. Gaastra,
eds., Companies and Trade (Leiden University Press, 1981), pp. 163-176.
Much of this duty (recognitie) was paid in the form of tobacco, which became
an essential item in the African trade during the eighteenth century. Failure
to pay the 10-percent duty at Elmina carried with it the threat of capture
and confiscation, which became the fate of many a Brazilian vessel.44
An average of fifteen ships paying their fees at Elmina was not uncom-
mon during the first half of the eighteenth century, and there were years
when the number of ships exceeded thirty. There were years, however,
when the relationship between the Dutch and the Portuguese was
strained and the two did much damage to each other. Throughout the
decade of the 1720s the Portuguese reasserted themselves, particularly on
the Slave Coast. In 1725 they captured a large WIC slaver with 550
slaves aboard, and during the next two years three smaller WIC slave
ships met the same fate. The WIC retaliated by destroying the Portu-
guese lodge at Cape Lopez and capturing Portuguese vessels in turn. But
the Portuguese attacks constituted a serious menace and brought the
WIC considerable financial loss.45
This revival of Portuguese determination was not necessarily coordi-
nated with the interests of the Brazil traders. The latter continued to an-
chor at Elmina, pay their 10-percent duty, and trade with both WIC and
African merchants for most of the eighteenth century. WIC officials
clearly distinguished between Lisbon and Brazil Portuguese, and they fa-
vored the latter greatly. Quite regularly the WIC also sold slaves to the
Brazilians, particularly during the years 1715 to 1731. In fact, in 1719
the WIC sold 1,491 slaves to twelve different Brazil captains, but that
was an unusually active year for the trade with Brazil. The reason for this
may have been that in the previous year a formal agreement had been
worked out between the WIC and the Brazilians, putting this trade on a
firm footing. The total number of slaves sold in these transactions
reached nearly 4,000, as Table 3.1 illustrates, and averaged slightly more
than 200 per year. Not all records have been located, however the num-
ber of slaves sold during this period was undoubtedly considerably
higher, although the WIC plans in 1722 called for approximately 200
slaves a year and an average of 25 slaves for each Brazilian ship.46
44. Pierre Verger, Flux et reflux de la traite des negres (Paris: Mouton, 1968), pp. 28-46; WIC,
vol. 1275, doc. of 1725; VWIS, vol. 37; RLLM, Radermacher, folder 593; NBKG,
vol. 420.
45. WIC, vol. 113, p. 432; WIC, vol. 108, pp. 74, 529 and 631; NBKG, vols. 237 and 238;
WIC, vol. 485, p. 533; WIC, vol. 487, pp. 34-6 and 40-3; WIC, vol. 107, p. 522; WIC,
vol. 269, Account 1726-8.
46. WIC, vol. 55, cor. 11/20/1720; WIC, vol. 106, p. 14; NBKG, vol. 6, min. 4/21/1728;
NBKG, vol. 237, instr. 9/15/1729; NBKG, vol. 85, doc. 5/17/1718; WIC, vol. 56,
p. 192; WIC, vol. 104, p. 245.
Table 3.1
Slaves sold to Brazilians in Africa by the WIC establishment
Year Ships Slaves Year Ships Slaves
1715 7 473 1721 1 14
1717 2 199 1727 3 412
1718 7 761 1728 1 99
1719 12 1,491 1730 1 143
1731 1 10
Total 28 2,924 7 678
Grand total 35 3,602

Source: WIC, vols. 102-5; NBKG, vol. 237.
Even when the WIC lost its monopoly over the slave trade in the 1730s,
the company preserved its unique position in the trade with the Brazilians.
Dutch free traders were not allowed to trade with the ships from Brazil,
though they were free to trade with Africans and other European nation-
alities. The trade with the Brazilians remained the exclusive domain of the
WIC, under the supervision of the director-general.47
Privateers, pirates, and interlopers
In addition to dealing with rivaling nations, the WIC also had its freedom
of action curtailed by pirate ships, whose crews owed allegiance to none but
themselves, and by Dutch interlopers who ventured into the WIC monopoly
areas at the risk of being captured and confiscated. In time of war there was
the additional problem of privateers who were commissioned by proper
authorities to do damage to enemy shipping. They operated much like pirates,
except that their behavior was more predictable. During its early years the
WIC itself had functioned as a privateering agency against the Spanish and
the Portuguese. At times pirate groups became so powerful that they estab-
lished land bases, such as at Dunkirque and on the Algerian coast. Slave
ships often carried a so-called Turkish pass, which had been purchased
from pirates operating from Algeria, and made the Atlantic waters to the
west of Africa dangerous for slave ships leaving and returning to Europe.
In 1687 a large WIC slave ship, on its way to Africa, was attacked and sunk
47. WIC, vol. 57, pp. 59 and 76.

near the Canary Islands by an Algerian pirate, apparently because it did not
carry such a pass.48
Occasionally, the WIC also had to contend with pirates on the African
coast. In 1685-6 two powerful pirate ships appeared on the Slave Coast and
captured two WIC slavers at Ouidah, while a third company ship barely
escaped. And again, in 1719 pirates made the West African coast unsafe
and captured or grounded several merchant ships of various nationalities.
This time the WIC lost one slaver on the Guinea Coast, the Emmenesy and
the slave ship Africa was robbed of its cargo. That same year the WIC slaver,
Companies Welvaren, was grounded and wrecked off the Loango coast, ap-
parently by the same pirates. As a result of this raid commerce stagnated
along the entire Guinea coast, because merchant vessels did not dare leave
the protection of the European forts. The port of Ouidah, which usually
harbored a large number of European slavers, became a particular target of
these pirates. Again, in 1721-2 a team of four large pirate ships made the
Guinea coast unsafe. At this time four WIC vessels were robbed of their
cargo and then released. The English dispatched a large warship to Africa
and neutralized three of the pirate ships, and a WIC cruiser captured the
last of them, thus ending the pirate attacks on the African coast. 49
Privateers, in this case Dutch ships commissioned to prey on enemy ships,
were a factor only in times of war. It has already been noted that the WIC
in its early days had privateering as one of its functions. Dutch privateers
were not a threat to WIC slave ships unless they stimulated an enemy into
retaliating and hurt Dutch interests, as was sometimes the case of the Dutch
West Indian colonies (see Chapter 8). A number of slave ships were captured
by the French privateers early in the eighteenth century, and a few additional
WIC slavers were taken by the Portuguese on the African coast during the
1720s. Occasionally, WIC slave ships had also privateering commissions,
and they did capture foreign ships or interlopers either in their capacity as
privateers or in defense of the WIC monopoly rights.50 Penetration of the
WIC monopoly areas by independent Dutch ships was a perennial problem
for the company authorities on the African coast and to a lesser extent also
in the Caribbean. WIC documents repeatedly make references to such in-
terlopers, or lorredraayers, and several measures were taken to prevent this
practice. As a rule, captured interlopers were confiscated by the WIC, and
the officers of these ships faced punitive action. Captured sailors, however,
48. Menkman, "Nederland in Amerika en West Afrika," in H.J. de Graff, ed., Nederland
Over de Zeeen (Utrecht: W. de Haan, 1955), p. 58; WIC, vol. 54, p. 4.
49. WIC, vol. 267, 4th account; WIC, vol. 1024, doc. 18; WIC, vol. 574, pp. 712 and 750;
WIC, vol. 105, p. 714; WIC, vol. 486, pp. 25, 61-2, 68-9, 75, 77-80, 214-16, and 256-
7; NBKG, vol. 6, min. 7/1/1719, n/22/1719, 11/31/1719, and 9/30/1721.
50. J.Th.H. Verhees-van Meer, De Zeeuwse Kaapvaart tijdens de Spaanse Successieoorlog, 1702-
(Middelburg: Koninklijk Zeeuws Genootschap, 1986), p. 200.
were allowed to keep their personal belongings and were often offered an
opportunity to join the generally depleted WIC work force. In order to
increase the interloper confiscation rate, a WIC order of 1680 promised 10
percent of the captured value to the crews of the WIC ships that captured
an interloper. Five years later the captors were offered two-months extra
wages. In 1714 the 10 percent of confiscation reward was again awarded.51
Many Dutch interlopers undoubtedly traded on the African coast under
the cover of foreign flags, especially the Swedish and later the Danish and
Brandenburger flags. But many independent-minded Dutch maritime mer-
chants must have taken the risk without that protection. In 1661 the WIC
directors issued a strong set of instructions against interlopers for the use
of the director at Elmina. This order was repeated in 1675 and again in
1682; during the decade of the 1680s the Dutch interlopers were particularly
active on the African coast. In 1687 the WIC sent a frigate, which may be
regarded as a warship at that time, to cruise along the African coast and
intercept and confiscate interlopers. By 1691 the company had three frigates
employed for this purpose, which became a heavy financial burden for the
WIC. This effort must have been effective, however, because little interloper
activity was reported for several years afterward. Not until 1698 did the
WIC authorities in Africa again request the dispatch of two frigates to ward
off interlopers.52
Perhaps the greatest interloper threat against the WIC occurred during
the second decade of the eighteenth century, which was met by vigorous
WIC response and numerous confiscations. From a lamenting report from
the province of Zeeland, which apparently was producing the lion's share
of the interlopers, we learn that twenty-six Zeeland ships had been confis-
cated in the ten-year period of 1713-24, with an economic loss in excess
of one million guilders.53
In 1715 alone ten interloper confiscations have been documented, and
they included among their cargo a total of eighty-two slaves from five of
these ships. This last figure is significant, for it seems quite certain that the
vast majority of the Dutch interlopers on the African coast were interested
in the direct trade between Africa and Europe and not so much in the slave
trade. It is quite likely that the small number of slaves aboard these captured
interloper ships were intended for resale to the rare interloper that crossed
51. WIC, vol. 54, cor. 7/20/1693 and 9/26/1699; WIC, vol. 55, cor. 10/12/1714; WIC, vol.
832, p. 227; WIC, vol. 833, p. 400.
52. WIC, 831, p. 87; WIC, vol. 832, pp. 12 and 588; WIC, vol. 834, pp. 158-9 and 184;
WIC, vol. 836, p. 175; WIC, vol. 54, pp. 2, 4, 9, and cor. 11/3/1690, 11/12/1691, and
10/5/1697.
53. VCC, vol. 6, pp. 118-19. See Chapter 11 and Table 11.1 for the relative value of currency
at that time.
the Atlantic to the West Indies.54 The triangular slave trade was a longer
and more complex commercial venture than the Guinea trade, the direct
trade between Europe and the Guinea coast, and it is therefore not surprising
that only a small percentage of the interlopers were actual slavers.
It is very difficult to gain reliable statistical information about the illicit
activities of the interlopers. WIC records of sightings and confiscations often
provide the only source. For this reason such studies are rarely undertaken,
but recently a master's thesis has been devoted to the subject and has
identified seventy-eight Dutch interlopers for the period 1700 to 1725. Of
this number, twenty-four could be said to have any dealings with the slave
trade, and only ten could be linked to an Atlantic crossing with 300 slaves
or more. During the period 1688 to 1725, a total of twenty-eight interloper
slave ships have been identified (see Table 3.2). Much of this evidence
comes primarily from sightings by WIC personnel active in the Caribbean.
Furthermore, it is clear that the first quarter of the eighteenth century can
be regarded as the high point in Dutch interloper activity.55
Obviously, several interloper slavers must have gone unreported, because
they often took their human cargo to French and Spanish markets in the
Caribbean, primarily to the northern islands of the Lesser Antilles. Early in
the eighteenth century there seems to have been an active interloper interest
in the slave trade, which may well have gone beyond the number of cases
reported. This is confirmed by the fact that in 1702 the WIC again sent a
warship to Africa to counter interloper activity. Similarly, in the years 1715
to 1718, slave-trading interlopers appear to have been very active, notwith-
standing the fact that the WIC warship, De Faam, captured and confiscated
a few in this period.56
This sketchy record obviously prevents a reliable accounting of the con-
tribution of the interlopers to the Dutch slave trade. One can only produce
some speculative estimates for this traffic, which is taken into account in the
discussion on slave origins in Chapter 5. An estimated 14,000 slaves were
exported from Africa by Dutch interlopers.57 The interloper contribution to
the slave trade is thus not to be ignored, but one should be careful not to
overstate this factor. The triangular slave trade was a complex affair which
required a great deal of coordination and protection, on the African coast
54. NBKG, vols. 255-60.

55. MJ.G. Kors, "Lorrendraaien in het vaarwater van de Westindische Compagnie; De
Nederlandse smokkelhandel op de westkust van Afrika in de periode 1700-1734," M.A.
thesis, Leiden University, 1987, Appendixes 2 and 7.
56. WIC, vol. 200, pp. 67, 115, 157-8, and 224. WIC, vol. 54, cor. 12/18/1702; NBKG,
vol. 6, min. 29/6/1718 to 3/18/1719; WIC, vol. 485, p. 713. The information on St.
Thomas was supplied by Robin Sabino of the University of Pennsylvania.
57. See Chapter 5, Table 5.1, and accompanying text for further treatments of the interloper
question.
Table 3.2
Documented interloper slaving activity
Year Ship Captain Africa America Slaves
1688 Rode Leeuw Antonius Tange Loango Surinam
1690 Vogel Phenix Loango
1695 ? Frans van Goethem Surinam
1698 ? Willem Fante St. Eustatius
1700 Carolus Secondus C. Wendt Loangoa 5-600
1701 Plaatsenburgh Leendert Jansz. St. Eustatius 52
1701 Dolphijn Mathijs Bogaert Loango St. Eustatius 400
1701 Levant Gabriel Jansen Calabary Caracas 400
1702 St. Joseph J.J.Koetswagen Surinam ?
1702 Vier Gebroeders Lucas Oostdupuis St. Eustatius
1702 Grote Amazone F.Huyge de Lange Loango
1702 ? J. v/d Klooster St. Thomas
1702 ? A. Dames St. Thomas
1703 ? J. Roggestaert St. Thomas
1707 Vliegent Hert Jacob Vos Loango St. Thomas 420
1709 Roosenburgh Loango Caracas 400
1710 De America David Misen St. Thomas
1715 De America David Misen St. Eustatius 300
1715 Vlissings Welvaren J. Guipijn Loango 321
1717 Jonge Christina Jan Vosbrug St. Eustatius
1717 Jonge Adriaan Reyke Maerschalk St. Eustatius
1717 Elisabeth Jan Pater
1717 Adriana Catharina P. Gelijnsz. Curasao
1719 Vergulde Vryheit David de Laay St. Eustatius
1719 De Jager D. de Laa Loango St. Eustatius
1724 7 Jacob Prins St. Eustatius 440
1725 ? Ketelaar St. Thomas 400
1725 ? Jan Vergouwen St. Christopher 400
Source: WIC, vols 54, 69 200, 203, 248, 560, 619, 835, 1137, 1152 and 1300;
Kors, pp. 75-76; Waldemar Westergaard, The Danish West Indies
under Company Rule, 1671-1754 (New York: Macmillan, 1917), pp.
320-325.
Notes aThis ship was captured by the WIC on the Loango coast; its intended
destination was Veracruz, Mexico.
b
The record states that no slaves were on board, but they could well
have been sold elsewhere beforehand. See WIC, vol. 1137, cor. 6/
29/1703.
and in the West. Faced with hostility and the threat of punitive action in
both of these areas, it is understandable that interlopers generally limited
their activity to one of these areas and to regular commercial products. WIC
officials were always keen to report the slightest evidence of interloper ac-
tivity, since this was often used as an excuse for their own commercial failures.
It is therefore not likely that too many interloper slavers escaped the notice
and the correspondence of the WIC establishments on the African coast
and in the Caribbean.
Trade and politics
on the African coast
When the Europeans first arrived on the coast of western Africa during the
second half of the fifteenth century, they found conditions quite different
from today. Instead of the sprawling urban centers along the coast, like
Lagos, Accra, and Dakar, the centers of population in West Africa were
deep in the interior, where states like old Ghana, Mali, and Kanem had
controlled vast stretches of the Sahel on the Sahara desert fringes, and where
Songay and Kanem-Bornu were to rise to great power status in the sixteenth
century. The trade networks of West Africa converged on the caravan routes
across the Sahara, which gave rise to the power of these states. By contrast,
the coastal regions were thinly populated with small autonomous fishing
villages, separated by an endless ethnic variety and dispersed political
authority.
One exception to this coastal pattern was the city-state of Benin in south-
western Nigeria. Early Dutch visitors described the town with considerable
admiration and compared it to contemporary European urban centers in
Holland. But on the whole, it was not until the arrival of the Portuguese
that several trading centers along the Atlantic coast were developed. This
gradually changed the focus of West African trade from the Sahara to the
Atlantic, where it tied into the international trading network that was de-
veloped and dominated by the Europeans.1
An Afro-European trading partnership
The Dutch arrived on the African coast in the early seventeenth century
after the Portuguese had spent over a century creating a trading network
between Europeans and Africans. Most of the important European trading
i. Philip D. Curtin, et al., African History (Boston: Little, Brown, 1978), pp. 185-9; Olfert
Dapper, Naukeurige Beschrijvinge der Afrikaensche Gewesten.
84
Trade and politics on the African coast 85
stations had already been well established and several had been heavily
fortified, like Goree and Elmina. After driving the Portuguese from the
coast, the Dutch and other Europeans who filled the vacuum simply con-
tinued the established pattern. The competition among the various north-
western Europeans merely added to the number of trading stations and
intensified the commercial activity by offering more goods for sale to the
Africans and opening up a broader market for African products.
Lest one conclude that slaves were the only item of commercial value in
Africa, there were many other products that Europeans exported from there
through their various trading stations. A compilation of WIC exports from
West Africa for the period 1675 to 1731 lists fifteen different commercial
items. By far the most valuable of these products was gold. This precious
metal exceeded all other items of trade during this whole period, albeit at
a declining rate. It represented 75 percent of the combined commercial value
of WIC exports from the Guinea coast. According to the same document,
ivory was another significant African export commodity. It represented more
than 5 percent of the goods exported by the WIC, and it was obtained at
various points along the west coast of Africa, unlike gold which came es-
sentially from the Gold Coast. According to this document, the slaves ex-
ported from the Guinea coast by the WIC accounted for slightly over 13
percent of the total commercial value for this period. The remaining com-
modities totaled a mere 3 percent combined, and may thus be regarded as
secondary export items.2
Slaves were thus by no means the only reason for the Dutch to seek to
replace the Portuguese in the African Atlantic waters. Slaves may have been
essential to the Dutch colony in Brazil after 1630, but gold was crucial for
the European dominance of world trade, because at this time the European
nations produced little that was in great demand on the world's markets.
Gold had drawn the Portuguese to Africa in the first place, and it continued
to draw other European nations as well until the beginning of the eighteenth
century, when the African gold supplies seemed to be depleted and new
discoveries of gold in southern Brazil could replace the African exports.
Before this time, however, Africa's contribution to the world's gold pro-
duction may have been as much as one-fourth of the total during the sev-
enteenth century. And during the last quarter of that century, the Dutch
exported nearly half of all the gold mined in West Africa.3
2. VWIS, Folder 928; Postma, "West African Exports," pp. 53-74.

3. Davies, RoyalAfrican Company', pp. 225 and 360; F. W. Paish, "Gold," Chambers Encyclopedia
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1950), vol. 6, p. 416; Van Dantzig, Hollandais sur
Guine'e, pp. 77-102; Postma, "West African Exports," pp. 58-66; Franz Binder, "Die
Goldeinfuhr von der Goldkiiste in die Vereinigten Provinzen," in H. Kellenbenz, ed.,
Precious Metals in the Age of Expansion, (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1981), pp. 131-49.
African products, like gold, slaves, and ivory, were crucial in the inter-
national commercial network of the Europeans. Therefore, it was necessary
for them to maintain friendly relations with African merchants, especially
because Europeans were unable to penetrate the African interior and exercise
control there until medical and technological advances made this possible
during the end of the nineteenth century. The pattern of mutually beneficial
commercial relations had been established by the Portuguese and was per-
petuated by other Europeans. The trading stations, or factories as they were
then often called, provided for a systematic and peaceful exchange of goods
as well as ideas. This made the African historian, Kwame Daaku, characterize
these trading stations as "windows," through which both information and
goods could flow in and out of Africa.4
African merchants would often come from the interior to these trading
stations and negotiate deals and exchange goods with Europeans. More often
it was the local African traders and brokers who served as conduits between
the African interior and the European traders at the factories. Whatever the
regional or local practice, out of necessity the trading generally occurred in
a cooperative and mutually beneficial relationship between Africans and
Europeans. These practices evolved slowly and had to be carefully main-
tained if commerce were toflourish.As a rule, Europeans made payments in
kind to local Africans, which could be viewed either as a rent for the use of
land or space or a bribe for favorite commercial treatment, such as pref-
erential treatment over a European competitor or first pick of the merchan-
dise. Such payments often became a customary practice, a custom as they
were frequently called, which may well have contributed to the modern term
customs, or import duties.5
African traders were highly specialized and operated as skillful profes-
sionals, as most European contemporaries were willing to attest. They quickly
learned to distinguish between the various European and Asian manufac-
tured goods. Willem Bosman, who was consistently demeaning in his as-
sessment of Africans when he wrote his letters from there around 1700,
describes the blacks of the Gold Coast as "crafty, villainous, and fraudulent,"
which in this case implies a degree of respect. One of the WIC directors,
writing to Holland in 1790, gives a more poignant assessment of the African
trader:
Daaku, pp. 20 and 142-3; For the changes that made the penetration of the African interior
possible see Daniel R. Headrick, The Tools of Empire; Technology and European Imperialism
in the Nineteenth Century. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1981).
WIC, vol. 54, cor. 11/1/1701; WIC, vol. 835, p. 363; Van Dantzig, Hollandais sur Guinee,
pp. 25—31; See also Ray A. Kea, Settlements, Trade, and Politics in the Seventeenth Century
Gold Coast (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1982), Chapters 6 and 7.
One has to be fair to the Negroes and say that as merchants, in whatever
branch, they are very cunning; one quickly notices how one merchant
tries to do as much damage to the other as possible. All they have to
do is stay away with their slaves and the inevitable result is that the
prices will rise hand over fist.6
African merchants were frequently organized as professional groups;

sometimes a whole clan or ethnic group specialized in trade and frequently
monopolized commerce in a given region, as is illustrated by the role of the
Hausa, Dyula, and Akani. During the seventeenth century the Akani came
to dominate the gold trade from the interior to the Gold Coast, but they fell
victim to the rise of the Asante state and disappeared from the Gold Coast
by 1700. They were replaced primarily by Asante and Fante merchants. The
Dutch came to regret the demise of the "reliable" Akani traders, and in
1705 they were still expressing hope for their return. 7
In addition to these merchants from the interior, the WIC attracted an
increasing number of African specialists who established themselves near
the fortified trading stations. A few able merchants from among this new
class were appointed by the WIC to the position of broker {makelaar). This
influential post was created wherever the company had sizable trading stations,
and Elmina had even more than one, a chief broker and an assistant broker. 8
The role of the broker was to represent the WIC and to function as an
intermediary between African traders and the company. When in 1741
Amba, the Elmina caboceer (a leader or person of prominence), was rec-
ommended to succeed the diseased chief broker, Abbocan, the function of
broker was described as "furthering the trade and the general well-being of
the company." The position of broker was frequently transferred from father
to son. Brokers, even those who served at the outer forts, were apparently
installed in official ceremonies at Elmina; at least this was the case with the
successor to broker Apetta Coffy of the Apam trading station, when he swore
an oath of allegiance to the WIC in 1788. 9
One of the functions of the company broker was to collect outstanding
debts from African traders. In 1767 an unnamed WIC broker was sent to
6. Wyndham, p. 63; Bosman, Description, p. 117; ARA, Aanwinsten, LX-447; WIC, vol. 838,
p. 292. According to this last citation, Africans insisted on receiving Swedish iron and
refused to purchase iron from Luyk, or Belgium.
7. Lars Sundstrom, The Trade of Guinea (Lund, Sweden: Hakan Ohlsson, 1965), Chapter II;
Daaku, pp. 310 and 345; WIC, vol. 97, pp. 452-3; WIC, vol. 98, p. 454; see also Kea,
Chapter 7.
8. NBKG, vol. 7, min. 1/-/1735, p. 5; Harvey M. Feinberg, "Elmina, Ghana, A History of
its Development and Relationship with the Dutch in the Eighteenth Century," Ph.D.
dissertation, Boston University, 1969, pp. 93ff.
9. NBKG, vol. 14, min. 11/3/1788; NBKG, vol. 240, p. 45; NBKG, vol. 290, Doc. 50.
the island of Shipon, near Shama, to collect payment for four slaves kid-
napped by Jan Tim, a prominent African resident of the island. The outcome
of the mission was that the local ruler, King Cobbena Apo, agreed to trade
exclusively with the WIC as long as he received a monthly subsidy from
the company.10
Some of the prominent African merchants on the Gold Coast remained
more independent from the European establishment. However, they too
have been referred to as brokers, and in fact they did function as middlemen
between smaller African traders and European companies. They maintained
their own warehouses, and were involved in the trade along the coast as well
as in dealing with Europeans. Many of the brokers became extremely wealthy
and influential. Men such as John Conny, John Kabes, and Pieter Pasop came
to hold power equal to African kings or chiefs; Daaku calls them merchant
princes. Pieter Pasop, who was related to the king of Akwamu, had sufficient
power and influence to effect the end of warfare between Akwamu and neigh-
boring states.11
Influential as the merchants may have been at times, political authorities
generally wielded ultimate control over commercial affairs. They could refuse
or grant passage on the trade routes between the interior and the coast, and
demand tolls and transit duties along the way. On the Slave Coast African
political authorities exercised greater control over commerce than on the
Gold Coast. Before the rise of Dahomey in the first quarter of the eighteenth
century, the supreme kings of the Aja state, who resided at Allada (or Great
Ardra), controlled the trade of the region through their appointed merchants.
The best of the European merchandise of each arriving slave ship had to
be carried to the royal palace, some twenty-five miles inland, in order that
the king could have first choice. Toward the end of the seventeenth century,
the kings of the coastal towns became more independent from Aja, and
demanded preferential treatment. From a directive compiled by Willem
Bosman we learn that the king of Ouidah received in duties merchandise
to the value equal to six slaves, plus goods equal to the value of two slaves
for servicing each slave ship that did business in the harbor. In addition, the
captain of the slaver was obligated to purchase his first slaves from the king,
paying approximately ten to twenty percent more than he would on the free
market. Occasionally, the king demanded additional duties and higher prices
from the captain after a cargo of 500 slaves had been obtained.12
Some of the most prominent merchants in the Slave Coast ports also
received preferential treatment after the king had gained satisfaction. These
10. NBKG, vol. 12, min. 11/14/1767.

11. Kea, pp. 212-23; Daaku, pp. 115-43; WIC, vol. 484, p. 238.
12. Sundstrom, pp. 62 and 65; Ratelband, p. lxxxi; WIC, vol. 485, p. 156; NBKG, vol. 233-
4, instr. 10/3/1700. See Appendix 7 for a translation of Bosnian's instructions.
merchants were often referred to as the "favorites of the king," a distinction
they had earned in part through their relationship to the ruler, and sometimes
because of services they had rendered to the WIC. Like the king, they
received gifts from the captains of the slave ships and also received better
prices than were paid on the free market. These merchants, also called
captains by the Dutch, enjoyed the WIC's special trust and esteem, like the
brokers on the Gold Coast. They functioned as links between the Africans
and the Europeans, informing the WIC of market conditions and serving as
interpreters. Names such as Captain Carte (or Carter) and Captain Agou
are repeatedly found at the top of purchase accounts of the slave ships at
the beginning of the eighteenth century. Carte held his favorite position for
many years. In a WIC report of 1720, the wish is expressed that "he may
yet live many years" because he "renders much friendship, as he has great
influence with the king."13
War and peace and Afro-European trade
How did the trade in human beings function in this cooperative atmosphere?
In that the vast majority of the trade slaves were acquired as prisoners of
war, common sense would suggest that the slave trade encouraged warfare,
and to a degree this is true. At the same time, however, we find the European
commercial community constantly working for cooperation and friendly re-
lations between Africans and Europeans, as well as among Africans. In 1695,
a time of war between Europeans as well as among Africans on the Gold
Coast, the WIC directors wrote company representatives in Africa:
We can imagine that the wars among the natives make the just mentioned
task (collecting debts from the Africans) extremely difficult and that in
times of peace there is more hope for this. For this reason, your honor's
most important charge is to make every effort and use every means to
further peace among the natives. The whole well being and commercial
success of the company in Africa depends on this, and without this it
will be impossible for us to pay for the heavy annual burdens there. It
will be greatly to your advantage if you can work out amicable relations
between you and the natives and also establish peace among them.14
WIC documents contain repeated references to this concern over warfare,

for without peace commerce could not be conducted. One of the most
frequently cited causes for the deteriorated state of commerce in Africa was
wars among Africans. Warfare tended to shift African priorities away from
13. NBKG, vol. 234, instr. 6/6/1703; WIC, vol. 102, pp. 21-44; WIC, vol. 104, p. 846.
14. WIC, vol. 54, cor. 11/25/1695.
commerce and led to the blocking of the trade routes between the interior
and the coast. For this reason, WIC agents occasionally were willing to
forfeit the payment of debts and give presents to African leaders in order
to prevent hostilities and keep commerce going. In 1699 disagreement arose
between WIC authorities in Africa and their superiors in Holland over
whether trade credits (spenduen) or gifts furthered peace or created more
warfare. The penny-pinching directors in Holland thought the latter was
the case.15
Political instability and wars continued to erupt from time to time among
the Africans, as was the case among Europeans. In 1780 WIC Director-
General Pieter Woortman reported that he had managed to bring peace
between the Fante, Hante, and the Asante; he added that the trade routes
were clear again and that trade could flourish once more. A century earlier,
the Amsterdam directors wrote to the WIC director in Africa:
That the fire of war among the natives there has to a large degree been
extinguished is very sweet and pleasant news for us. And we hope that
the other parties will follow this good example ... and that the mediation
efforts of your predecessor will have succeeded, with the result that the
deteriorated trade will revive again under your direction.16
There were special circumstances in which Europeans interfered in African
political affairs and even encouraged warfare if that promised to improve
their power base and ultimately their commercial opportunities. Europeans
repeatedly tried to exploit their African clients against their European rivals,
and African states tried to do the same. This is shown in the Komenda
Wars during the end of the seventeenth century, in which the English, Dutch,
and French were all vying for control of an important coastal trading outlet;
and again in 1703, when the WIC supplied the Akwamu state with 100
company soldiers and a large quantity of arms for the purpose of making
war on its neighbors.17
This leaves us with a strange ambiguity in the European attitude toward
war and peace. In order to get an adequate number of slaves to the trading
stations, hostility among Africans was often desirable because it would most
likely increase the number of marketable slaves, but peace was necessary in
order to get these slaves and other trade commodities to the coast. A study
of liberated slaves at Sierra Leone during the early nineteenth century re-
vealed that more than a third lost their freedom as a result of warfare or
15. NBKG, vol. 25, cor. 12/6/1699; WIC, vol. 180, pp. 62 and 67; WIC, vol. 114, pp. 300-
3; NBKG, vol. 3, min. 3/20/1708; WIC, vol. 54, cor. 9/26/1699.
16. NBKG, vol. 24, cor. 6/25/1674; MCC, vol. 1567, p. 20; see also WIC, vol. 54, cor.
7/4/1692 and 9/16/1698.
17. Van Dantzig, Hollandais sur Guinee, pp. 102-114; WIC, vol. 98, pp. 98-9.
raids, while others were victims of kidnapping, indebtedness, or judicial
offenses.18
A number of issues need to be clarified in order to understand conditions
in precolonial Africa with respect to war and commerce. First, African so-
cieties were and still are extremely heterogeneous: a gigantic mosaic of ethnic
and linguistic variation. Most of Africa was politically more fragmented than
it is today. As a result, a large number of Africans were enslaved by their
rivals and traditional enemies. To many Africans a European could be more
readily seen as an ally than an equally foreign African neighbor. Further, a
distinction needs to be made between wars and raids, even though the two
overlap to some extent. Slave raids in Africa were generally committed by
superior powers at the expense of often greatly outnumbered or militarily
weaker societies. They were often carried out on a regular or seasonal
pattern, although special circumstances such as natural disasters or political
chaos might also make societies subject to raids. Warfare would more gen-
erally exist between societies that were more evenly matched in their military
power, with either party having a chance at victory, or the loser at least
having a chance to resist and inflict damage on the victor. From this per-
spective, as the demand and volume of external slave trade increased, it was
most likely that raids increased greatly, often at the expense of the weaker
and smaller ethnic groups. Such raids may often have been termed wars by
both Africans and Europeans.
As a result of slave raids, whole communities could be wiped out; the
population could be captured or might flee to a safer abode. In many cases
Africans may have felt there were only two choices: either raid or be raided.
Thus, societies once plagued by intense slave raiding, like the Dahomey,
armed themselves and became slave raiders in turn. In this process they
extended their power toward the coast, where they could deal directly with
the European traders. As Van Dantzig claims, societies near the coast tended
to be participants in the slave trade and others farther in the interior spe-
cialized in raiding.19
Africa felt the impact of the European presence on the coast in several
ways. New products, new plants, and new ideas were introduced by the
Europeans, who encouraged the exploitation of Africa's natural resources,
gold, ivory, and her young men and women. The European presence on the
coast also affected Africa's political and social institutions by causing a shift
in the trade patterns and population concentrations, introducing new military
technologies and shifting the commercial demands increasingly to human
18. P.E.H. Hair, "The Enslavement of Koelle's Informants," Journal of African History, vol.
6 (1965)* PP- I93-2O3-
19. Albert Van Dantzig, "Effects of the Atlantic Slave trade on Some West African Societies,"
in Revue Franqaise d'Histoire d'Outre-Mer, vol. 62 (1975), pp. 252-67.
merchandise. New and larger states began to emerge in the coastal regions,
often as a result of and in cooperation with European traders. Some of these,
such as Denkyira on the Gold Coast and Aja on the Slave Coast, were still
relatively small and remained more in the traditional African mold, although
their wealth and power resulted to a large degree from their European
contacts. By the beginning of the eighteenth century, two still more powerful
states, Asante and Dahomey, came to dominate the Gold Coast and Slave
Coast, respectively.
The rise to prominence of Asante and Dahomey was significantly influenced
by what has been called a military revolution, which consisted essentially of
the adoption of firearms by African military establishments. The Portuguese
had avoided selling muskets to Africans, but during the second half of the
seventeenth century both the Dutch and the English intended to bolster
their power by arming their African clients. The first states in West Africa
to adopt this new technology were Akwamu and Denkyira. But they lost out
to Asante and Dahomey because these new states effected still further
changes, including the creation of new political organizations and the creation
of mass citizen armies.20
Political developments on the Gold Coast
Because political conditions in Africa influenced the supply of slaves on the

coast, the political developments in regions crucial to that trade should be
explored. The Gold Coast region, where the Dutch had their headquarters
and their strongest presence, was essential in this process, although the
Dutch did not export slaves from there in a significant number until the end
of the seventeenth century. For this reason, the political developments in
this region prior to this time will be largely ignored. Suffice it to say that
since their arrival in the early seventeenth century the Dutch had built nearly
a dozen trading posts along the Gold Coast. They had cultivated and main-
tained friendly relations with a number of African states, among which was
the powerful state of Denkyira, and to which were added the states of
Akwamu and Asante during the early eighteenth century.
Due to the multifarious nature of the African political scene, it was a
difficult task for the Dutch to keep on good terms with the rivaling African
states that influenced commerce either on the coast or in the interior. Re-
curring wars among Africans hindered the flow of trade in the late 1650s and
again during the early 1670s. The Komenda Wars, which had their roots
20. Kea, pp. 154-168 and 324; See also Van Dantzig, Hollandais sur Guinee, which focuses
on the rise of the Asante and the Dahomey states.
11°
V
MAP 4.1
POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS ON GOLD AND SLAVE
COASTS
ca. 1650-1750
in the middle of the seventeenth century, became extensive affairs during
the later 1680s. They drew into their web several African as well as a number
of European states, and caused considerable stagnation in the commerce on
the Gold Coast until their conclusion in 1696, and there were serious re-
percussions for years afterward.21
In the meantime an even more serious conflict was developing, namely the
revolt of the Asante against their overlord Denkyira. Under the able lead-
ership of Osei Tutu, one of the Asante princes from the Kumasi region,
the various Asante clans were molded into a unified state during the final
decades of the seventeenth century. Excessive demands for tribute by the
Denkyira king in 1699 led to a struggle for dominance of the region, from
which the former vassals emerged as victors in 1701. Denkyira was com-
pletely despoiled and in turn had to submit to the overlordship of the Asante
state. Its allies, such as Akyem, were subsequently defeated by the Asante.
The result was that the Asante came to dominate most of the areas formerly
dominated by Denkyira, in the western Gold Coast, and their control reached
much farther into the interior. Subsequently, the states of Akyem and Ak-
wamu farther to the east, became involved in their own battle for survival,
in which the Asante ultimately interceded to effect the fall of both states.
During all this turmoil the coastal Fante, relatives of the Asante and other
Akan peoples, had organized their own federation, with the help of the
English, to stop the Asante from taking over the whole Gold Coast.22
This whole complex political realignment on the Gold Coast caused con-
siderable consternation and damage to the WIC trade in Africa. WIC reports
from Africa at the turn of the century abound with news of adjustments to
the new situation and they were gloomy about trading prospects. But rec-
ognizing the reality of the political revolution that had taken place, the Dutch
and the English alike tried to establish friendly relations with the new and
rising power of Asante. In 1701 the WIC sent David Van Nyendael as an
emissary to the court of the Asantehene in Kumasi, one of the deepest
penetrations of the West African interior by a European until that time. Van
Nyendael spent a year in Kumasi, perhaps longer than he wished, and died
shortly after his return to Elmina. The important report he wrote about his
mission has been the object of many a scholar's search, but thus far to
no avail.23
In due time the Dutch did develop a friendly relationship with the Asante,
21. Daaku, Chapter IV; ILTVK, vol. H-65, p. 409; ARA, Aanwinsten-1902, xxvi, nr. 112.
22. Daaku, Chapter VII.
23. WIC, vol. 54, cor. 9/26/1699, 11/22/1700, 3/24/1701, 11/1/1701, and 12/18/1702;
NBKG, vol. 1, min. 5/30/1701, 4/9/1704 and 11/7/1704; see also reports from the
Director-General in vols. 484 and 485. Van Dantzig, Hollandais sur Guinee, pp. 133-5
and 138-41; Daaku, pp. 67-71.
but the turmoil that accompanied their rise to dominance continued to plague
the region for many more years. In 1705 the trade at Apam declined dras-
tically as a result of war between the Akyem and the Akwamu states. The
following year trade faltered at Accra as a result of internal Akwamu prob-
lems, and that same year commerce came to a virtual halt at Elmina, Butri,
and Kormantin because of wars and political tension in the region as a
whole.24
During this same time, commerce was frequently disrupted in the Axim
area on the western Gold Coast, where the African merchant prince, John
Conny, continually defied the authority of the WIC. For a few years he
claimed title to the trading castle of Gross Friedrichsburg, which the Bran-
denburgers had abandoned and sold to the WIC in 1717. Conny's opposition
to the company lasted from 1711 to 1725, when he was finally driven from
his castle stronghold, and the Dutch renamed it Hollandia. In 1712 Conny
had been bold enough to attack and capture the WIC fort Dorothea at
Akwida, and in 1724 he laid siege to the company's fortress at Axim. And
just after the WIC directors in 1720 decided that commerce might be revived
in this western region, warfare between the Hante people on the coast and
the Wassa, Twifo, and Adorn farther inland broke out the following year.25
To the east of Elmina the trade at Accra was disrupted again, in 1723,
when Akyem and Akwamu disputed the control of this coastal port. Four
years later the Asante completely stopped the flow of slaves to Elmina, and
in 1729 regional wars killed the trade at both Axim and Accra again. In
1727 widespread wars began in the interior and on the Gold Coast. This
was the beginning of another significant drive of Asante expansion that
caused commercial disruption until 1730.26
In the meantime, a significant shift in the Dutch trade pattern had taken
place, perhaps as a result of this political turmoil. Whereas the Dutch pur-
chased most of the slaves on the Slave Coast during the seventeenth century,
they later began to acquire a larger proportion of their slaves on the Gold
Coast. In 1726 the WIC director-general reported that the "Gold Coast
had become a slave coast."27 Already in 1705 a WIC report commented that
the Gold Coast was "changing completely into a slave coast, and the natives
no longer concentrate on the search for gold, but make war on each other
in order to acquire slaves, and (for this purpose) do not even shrink from
24. WIC, vol. 98, p. 455; WIC, vol. 99, pp. 15-16 and 19.
25. WIC, vol. 55, p. 5; WIC, vol. 101, p. 37; Van Dantzig, Forts, pp. 50-2; Daaku, Chap-
ter VI.
26. WIC, vol. 486, p. 372; WIC, vol. 107, p. 528; WIC, vol. 108, pp. 511-2; WIC, vol. 109,
pp. 16-17, 88, and 95; WIC, vol. 487, pp. 40-3, 177, 355, and 372; NBKG, vol. 6, min.
10/11/1723, 8/11/1728; 1/3/1729, and 2/16/1731.
27. WIC, vol. 487, p. 63. See also Chapter 5, on the origin of slaves.
g6 The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade
violating the public roads."28 The WIC authorities were not pleased with
this commercial transformation, primarily because they feared that it hin-
dered their profitable gold trade. For several years they tried to redirect the
slave trade to the Slave Coast, with the result that few slavers were receiving
their human cargoes at Elmina between 1708 and 1724. But in the long run
the trend could not be reversed, because the gold export from Africa was
rapidly drying up and the demand for slaves was increasing during the
eighteenth century.29
The Dutch on the Slave Coast
In contrast to the Gold Coast, the Slave Coast authorities maintained greater
independence from European infringement. Only a limited number of trad-
ing lodges were allowed, and not until the second half of the eighteenth
century were a few European powers allowed to build fortified trading sta-
tions in the area. The WIC was never allowed to build a castle there; they
had to be content with one or a few lodges, which were maintained only
with the approval of local rulers. The kings exerted much influence over the
trade, demanded heavy duties, and even the transportation of merchandise
between the European ships and the trading lodges was controlled by Af-
ricans. When in 1708 the WIC tried to guard its merchandise against theft
by African carriers by sending three armed sailors on shore, the king of
Ouidah threatened to halt trading as a reprisal. That same year the king
forced the Dutch and French factors there to sign a treaty that recognized
the neutrality and inviolability of the Ouidah port, even though the two
European nations were at war with each other at that time.30
Initially, the WIC did little trading on the Slave Coast; it attracted Dutch
attention only after the capture of Brazil, when slaves were in demand. They
did not even establish a lodge there until the middle of the seventeenth
century. Slaves were initially kept on leggers,floatingships in a lagoon, and
later in corrals on the beach, until a company slave ship arrived to board
them for the middle passage. No facilities like warehouses or dungeons, as
on the Gold Coast, were available for the Europeans there.31
For most of the seventeenth century the kings of Aja, who resided at
Great Ardra (modern-day Allada), seemed to monopolize the trade at one
28. WIC, vol. 98, p. 322.

29. NBKG, vol. 2, min. 9/17/1710; WIC, vol. 918, no. 15. See also Chapter 5.
30. NBKG, vol. 85, cor. 9/20/1716, and 6/21/1718; WIC, vol. 100, p. 342; WIC, vol. 180,
p. 172; NBKG, vol. 1, min. 2/4/1705; WIC, vol. 98, p. 291; WIC, vol. 102, p. 360; WIC,
vol. 484, p. 235.
31. Ratelband, pp. lxxix-lxxx.
of the coastal ports, which was then usually referred to as Little Ardra.
Several other coastal ports functioned as slave export centers, such as Offra
(Abomey Calavi), Jakin (Godomey), Appa (Ekpe), Ouidah and Popo, and
occasionally these ports were rivals. The kings of each town in the area
derived their authority from the Aja king at Great Ardra. The latter could
thus be regarded as the capital of a small confederation, and the supreme
king as a father of the brother kings of the various towns. Toward the end
of the seventeenth century, the authority of the king of Aja had greatly
deteriorated, and the kings of the separate towns became virtually
independent.32
During the 1670s the ruler of Ouidah began to defy the authority of Allada
and subsequently the town attracted several European merchants who es-
tablished lodges at the port. Ouidah became for a time perhaps the busiest
slave port on the African coast. For several decades there were tensions and
periodic warfare between Aja and its nominal vassal Ouidah; however, Oui-
dah was spared punitive actions because of Allada's military weakness. But
because Allada controlled the hinterland, it could use economic sanctions
and threaten to close the trade routes leading to Ouidah. Such threats were
issued in 1680, but they were not implemented until 1688 and on several
occasions afterward. While this weakened Ouidah's position, Ardra was never
able to destroy the newly gained independence of Ouidah. 33
The WIC remained loyal to the king at Allada longer than the French
and the English. Not until 1687 did they establish a lodge at Ouidah, and
as late as 1690 they kept a permanent slaving lodge at Offra, which functioned
as the loyal port of Allada. The 1680s, the period of the Coymans' asiento,
found the Dutch slave trade at a peak, and much business was done at Offra,
and after 1687 at Ouidah as well. In 1682 the WIC scheduled one slave
ship every three months for the Slave Coast, which would amount to ex-
porting at least 2,000 slaves a year. The company briefly had a lodge at Great
Popo in 1680, but little is known of its activities. WIC authorities were clearly
sympathetic to Great Ardra, because of a long and satisfying business ar-
rangement, but when Ouidah began to harass the town of Offra, the latter's
desirability as a trading center quickly deteriorated and the WIC bowed to
reality and moved its operation to Ouidah. The decline of Great Ardra,
however, also signaled the decline of the WIC on the Slave Coast. 34
32. See I. A. Akinjogbin, Dahomey and Its Neighbors, IJ08-1818 (London: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, 1964). For Slave Coast nomenclature see Patrick Manning, "The Slave
Trade in the Bight of Benin," in H. Gemery and J. Hogendorn, eds., 77?^ Uncommon
Market (New York: Academic Press, 1979), p. 115.
33. WIC, vol. 180, pp. 65 and 67-9, and 151; WIC, vol. 106, p. 52; WIC, vol. 485, pp. 375,
and 485-486; WIC, vol. 1024, doc. 4; NBKG, vol. 5, min. 4/4/1714; WIC, vol. 85, doc.
5/13/1718; Akinjogbin, p. 29.
34. WIC, vol. 1024, cor. 12/19/1680 and doc. 35; WIC, vol. 180, pp. 51 and 63; WIC, vol.
After the WIC had established a lodge at Ouidah and allowed the trade
at Offra to deteriorate, Offra's population took it out on the company factor,
N. V. Hoolwerf, who was allegedly killed by a mob during the end of 1690.
Little trade was carried out at Offra after that, and the town was destroyed
by people of neighboring Jakin, allegedly on orders of the king of Ardra,
who wanted to appease the WIC for the murder of Hoolwerf. Negotiations
with the king of Ardra for the purpose of reestablishing the Offra lodge
were held on a few occasions, as late as 1705, but they never produced
results. In 1703 a WIC communication mentioned the "immense loss"
suffered on the Slave Coast since the abandonment of the lodge at Offra.35
For several years after the Hoolwerf affair there was little indication of
WIC activity on the Slave Coast, although the exportation of slaves from
that area was entering its peak. The decade of the 1690s was a period of
warfare for the Dutch Republic, and it was also a nadir for the WIC trade
in Africa, including the slave trade. An official WIC letter to Africa in the
year 1693 bemoans the "deteriorated state at Ardra," but assigns a slave
ship to the region anyway, in the hope that the situation might improve.
Apparently things did not improve, for it was not until 1702 that the WIC
ordered the reestablishment of a lodge at either Ouidah or Popo, and the
following year the one at Ouidah was restored. Political conditions on the
Slave Coast continued to be very unstable, however, and the Dutch continued
to negotiate with Great Ardra for the reestablishment of a lodge at Offra or
Appa. But in the end they decided to strengthen their position in Ouidah
instead and kept their trading lodge operating there until 1726.36
The year 1707 was full of political turmoil on the Slave Coast when Ardra
closed the trade routes to Ouidah once more. Tension between the two
rivals rose to an all-time high in 1714-15, without either one being able to
eliminate the other. Akinjogbin suggests that the trade routes were blocked
almost continually between the years 1712 and 1720, except for an inter-
ruption in 1717. Still, according to Manning this was one of the peak decades
for slave exports for the region. The council at Elmina was so discouraged
by this political chaos and its negative effect on the Dutch slave trade that
they decided to close the lodge at Ouidah; however, this decision was not
carried out. In 1716 there seemed to be hope for peace and the revival of
832, pp. 442 and 476; WIC, vols. 180 and 1024 contain a large amount of information
on Slave Coast trade.
35. WIC, vol. 180, pp. 51, 63, 103-4, 111; WIC, vol. 1024, doc. 35; WIC, vol. 98, pp. 305-
6, 309-10, and 354; WIC, vol. 100, pp. 537-8 and 593; NBKG, vol. 234, instr. 6/6/1713.
36. Manning, pp. 117 and 133; WIC, vol. 54, doc. 12/8/1702 and 7/20/1703; WIC, vol. 97,
pp. 35, 123, and 288; WIC, vol. 98, pp. 94-6, 184, and 353-8; WIC, vol. 99, pp. 14 and
431-2; WIC, vol. 100, p. 33; WIC, vol. 484, p. 237.
commerce, but this time a war between Jakin and Ouidah spoiled the revival
of trade.37
By 1720 Ardra and Ouidah ended their hostilities and it seemed that
trade could be resumed again. Four years later, however, war between the
two towns broke out again and this time the slave trade seemed to be
completely ruined. In 1726 the WIC abandoned its lodge at Ouidah and set
up a new one at Jakin, which lasted until 1734, and operated a second Slave
Coast lodge at Appa from 1732 until 1736.38 These final years of the WIC
involvement in the slave trade were active ones, also on the Slave Coast, but
then they were brought to a halt by the rise of a new political power not at
all sympathetic to the Dutch.
The rise of Dahomey
The abandonment of the WIC lodge at Ouidah in 1726 was the result of a
drastic change in the political situation on the Slave Coast. Ouidah had
always managed to maintain considerable independence from the Aja capital,
Great Ardra, because of the latter's military weakness, and also because of
the support received from the state of Akwamu on the western flank of Aja.
The rapid rise to great power status of Dahomey during the period 1725
to 1735 changed all this. Located about fifty miles from the coast, Dahomey
had long been one of the weaker brother states in the Aja system. They had
often been the object of slave raids from their more powerful neighbors,
which may have been the cause for their establishing a powerful military
deterrent. Under their young king, Agaja, they developed both a strong army
and a nationalistic political organization that enabled them to defend them-
selves against raids and then to take the offensive and expand their power
base. In 1724 Agaja actually captured Allada and claimed for himself the
paternalistic authority traditionally associated with the capital of the Aja state.
Many of the other Aja subject states, recognizing the determination and
power of the newcomer, submitted voluntarily to Agaja's assumed status;
those who resisted were subdued by force. Such was the fate of Ouidah in
1727, and of Jakin in 1732 and again in 1734, when Jakin revolted against
Dahomey.39
37. NBKG, vol. 3, min. 11/24/1707; NBKG, vol. 5, min. 12/31/1716; NBKG, vol. 236,
doc. 3/16/1716; WIC, vol. 100, pp. 519, 527-9, and 540-1; WIC, vol. 103, p. 267; WIC,
vol. 180, pp. 151 and 182; Akinjogbin, p. 46.
38. WIC, vol. 106, p. 52; WIC, vol. 486, pp. 484-5, 492, and 737; WIC, vol. 487, pp. 40-
3; See also the personnel rosters in WIC, vols. 107-11.
39. Akinjogbin, pp. 33-4, 50, 66-7, and 99-100; WIC, vol. 107, p. 549; Patrick Manning,
i oo The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade
As a result of these turbulent political developments on the Slave Coast,
the slave trade in that region became even less predictable. In light of the
fact that Dahomey subsequently became identified as a strong participant
in the slave trade, this may come as a surprise. Two important factors
contributed to this uncertainty. First, Agaja seems to have opposed the idea
of exporting so many able-bodied young Africans to distant places; it appears
that he wanted to develop a slave system at home that would exploit slave
labor under the control of Dahomeyans rather than by Europeans in the
Americas. The second influencing factor was the repeated invasions of the
Oyo empire from the northeast into Dahomey territory. Powerful as Da-
homey appeared in the coastal region, as Aja before, it was a vassal of the
state of Oyo and was militarily in no position to defy Oyo until the early
nineteenth century. For the WIC, there was the added factor that it had
always tended to side with Great Ardra and, as the following helps to illus-
trate, Agaja had come to see the Dutch as his opponents, who should not
expect his cooperation in the slave trade.40
Thus, the WIC abandoned Ouidah after its conquest by Dahomey in
1724. For a while, they sought to continue the trade from Appa, Jakin, and
later at Badagry, which were beyond Agaja's reach and under the protection
of Oyo. The political upheaval on the Slave Coast also created much conflict
over commercial policy within the WIC, between the directors in Holland
and the council at Elmina, as well as among WIC agents on the Slave Coast.
Commissioner Hendrick Hertogh was the WIC factor at Ouidah when the
lodge was abandoned. Hertogh had been in WIC service in Africa since
1716, and was regarded as an astute slave trader and a valuable asset to the
company. To the chagrin of Director-General Jan Pranger, Hertogh had
recently acquired unprecedented independence from Elmina. He had been
allowed to assume the title of governor, like other European factors on the
Slave Coast, but the title had no precedence for the WIC in Africa. Hertogh
also was given the authority to accept tolls from Brazilian traders on the
Slave Coast, which had always been the exclusive prerogative of the director-
general at Elmina. He was also allowed to modify the purchase price
for slaves, and he carried on an extensive correspondence with the WIC
authorities in Holland, without acknowledging his immediate supervisors at
Elmina.41
When in 1733 Hertogh headed the WIC lodge at Jakin, Pranger simply
refused to send him provisions and merchandise. Nor did Pranger give
Slavery, Colonialism and Economic Growth in Dahomey, 1640—ig6o (New York: Cambridge
University Press, 1982), pp. 41 and 130.
40. WIC, vol. 55, cor. 11/27/1724.
41. Akinjogbin, pp. 92; WIC, vol. n o , pp. 2-6, 169 and 204; See WIC, vol. 55, for Hertogh's
correspondence with Holland.
Trade and politics on the African coast ioi
Hertogh any support in the latter's forced retreat from Jakin to Appa in
1734. Instead, he sent Commissioner Jacob Elet to undermine Hertogh's
authority by negotiating a settlement with agents of Dahomey. Pranger ap-
parently recognized the latter as the permanent power of the region, which
authorities in Holland had not yet come to realize. King Agaja demanded
that Hertogh be removed from the Slave Coast because he had intrigued
against Dahomey along with the deposed king of Ouidah. Elet succeeded
in getting Agaja's approval to reestablish a WIC lodge at Ouidah, although
this was never implemented because the WIC authorities in Holland dis-
charged both Pranger and Elet for not supporting Hertogh in his plight
against Dahomey. The top WIC authorities underestimated Agaja's deter-
mination, for Dahomey did become the dominant power on the Slave Coast.
Hertogh never succeeded in stabilizing his position in that region, and was
assassinated at Badagry in 1738, quite likely by agents of Agaja. Thus ended
an ill-fated diplomatic gamble of WIC directors, one that had far-reaching
consequences, for the Dutch were never able to regain the confidence of
Agaja and his successors, and were shortly thereafter driven from all of the
trading outlets on the Slave Coast.42
The Loango-Angola region
Dutch control over the coastal area of Angola was short-lived (1642-8), not
long enough to provide the Dutch with a firm foothold and to establish a
firm pattern of trade in the region. North of the Congo River, however, on
the Loango coastal region, the Dutch traded for nearly two centuries. Since
about 1670, the WIC had acquired slaves from the region on a regular basis,
and free traders continued that practice after 1730. The decline of the once
powerful Kongo state to the southwest seems to have contributed to the
steady supply of slaves after the middle of the sixteenth century.
As was pointed out in the previous chapter, the WIC once had as many
as three lodges in this region, of which the one at Loango-Boary seemed
to be the most stable. Here, the Vili traders provided a reliable flow of slaves,
mostly brought to the coast in walking caravans, or coffles. In addition to the
larger state of Loango, the states Ngoyo, Kongo, and Sonyo also sold slaves
to Europeans at rival coastal outlets. A complex structure of royally appointed
42. NBKG, vol. 238, p. 19; WIC, vol. 487, pp. 598 and 622; WIC, vol. 488, pp. 1 and 16;
WIC, vol. n o , pp. 5-6, 152, 229-31, and 659; WIC, vol. 487, p. 350; NBKG, vol. 7,
min. 6/25/1734 and 8/-/1734; NBKG, vol. 8, min. 4/27/1735; WIC, vol. 925, p. 174.
Pranger was recalled to Holland, and Elet remained in Africa for several more years; see
WIC, vol. 57, pp. 49 and 64; vol. 11, pp. 411 and 597. This issue has been carefully
scrutinized by Jeroen Verhoog in the Leiden Seminar.
African administrators and brokers arranged the exchange of merchandise.
Most of the trading was done on African terms and with the interests of the
African authorities setting the tone. Although efforts were made by Euro-
peans to establish a commercial monopoly in the region, African authorities
would never allow this; they were even more successful in this than their
African counterparts on the Slave Coast. In addition, European rivalry also
aided the Africans in preventing the establishment of a European trade
monopoly.43
After a brief period of dominating the slave trade at Loango during the
1670s, trade seemed to flourish, particularly in 1679, when WIC correspon-
dence discussed the establishment of a second lodge in that region. In 1682,
however, WIC reports from the region became quite gloomy, and two years
later the company decided to abandon the one remaining lodge in Loango.
After some hesitation the decision was finally carried out in 1686. As was
shown earlier, this did not mean that the Dutch would stop trading in the
region; it meant that WIC slave ships would have to fend for themselves
when they traded there. In fact, trading from the slave ship, with only a
temporary storage place on the coast, became the pattern for the trade in
the Loango region. Shortly before the lodge in Loango was dismantled, the
ruler of Sonyo wrote a letter to the WIC directors at Zeeland, requesting
that WIC ships come and trade at his port. Shortly thereafter the company
dispatched a slave ship to Sonyo, carrying a present for the king. A WIC
report of 1691 indicated that the slave trade at Loango had been "good
lately," affirming in essence the precariousness of the WIC position in that
region.44
Because the Dutch had trading lodges and never had any fortified trading
stations in the Loango region, the African political scene here affected them
in a different manner. Their commercial activities were still vulnerable to
African wars and other developments. A WIC report of 1659 stated bluntly
that "the Angola trade was completely ruined as a result of wars among the
natives." Most of the time it was the captains of the WIC ships that had to
deal with the situation on the coast, without the assistance of stationed WIC
personnel. Slave ship captains were responsible for maintaining commercial
contacts, and the reputation of a particular person, a company, and a nation
had to be safeguarded if commerce was to flourish. This can be illustrated
by an incident that occurred in 1695, when the Dutch interloper, Captain
Frans van Goethem, allegedly kidnapped and exported as a slave an African
who was actually a royal prince from the Sonyo state. African traders made
it virtually impossible for the Dutch to do any further business there unless
43. Martin, Loango, pp. 73-118.
44. WIC, vol. 832, pp. 10-2, 42, 89, 128, 274, 297, 357, 415, 437, and 523; WIC, vol. 833,
p. 213; WIC, vol. 434, p. 123; WIC, vol. 834, pp. 27-8; WIC, vol. 835, p. 295.
the prince was returned from his enslavement in Surinam, and WIC au-
thorities made every effort to locate the person in question and return him
to his African home. In the long run, the princely slave was actually located
and returned to Africa via the Dutch Republic, and on WIC ships.45
The principal trading areas for the WIC on the African coast were the
Gold Coast, the Slave Coast, and the Loango region. The company did have
commercial relations with other coastal regions, but they were either limited
in terms of the bulk of the trade or the commercial contact was of a relatively
short duration, which would make an examination of the political devel-
opments in such regions superfluous. These other coastal regions will be
discussed in connection with the origins of the slaves in the following chapter.
Merchandise exchanged for slaves
As Africa exported its human merchandise in increasing numbers from the

sixteenth to the nineteenth century, what was the continent getting in return?
The range of merchandise that Europeans shipped to Africa varied greatly.
In 1628 there were no less than 218 different types of merchandise stored
at the WIC castle at Elmina, although these were not exclusively intended
for the slave trade. Keeping up with the changing demands of the African
market was a serious problem for WIC merchants, and this could at times
be very costly to the company. Dutch interlopers, with their smaller and
speedier sailing ships, could apparently respond more readily to demands
of the African market.46
During the years of the WIC monopoly, textiles were clearly dominant
among the trade goods that the company brought to Africa. Guns and
gunpowder were often included in slave ship cargoes, but compared to
textiles they were of minimal value in the WIC slave trade. Due to the
irregularity of the documentation on European merchandise, a systematic
appraisal of this subject has not been possible, and for this reason the
following impressionistic assessment will have to suffice. An account of the
WIC trade on the Slave Coast during the years 1714-15 shows that ap-
proximately 10 percent of about 2,000 slaves were purchased with guns and
gunpowder. By contrast, about 800 slaves were obtained with cowrie shells,
and most of the remainder with a variety of textiles. Several of the WIC
slave ships, including the Clara (1712) and the Piershil (1733), included no
guns at all, and requests for merchandise for the Slave Coast often listed
none or very little in weapons and gunpowder. The Adrichem, purchasing a
45. KITLV, vol. H-65, p. 397; WIC, vol. 69, pp. 76-8; WIC, vol. 836, p. 35.
46. WIC, vol. 108, pp. 521-5. Leiden seminar student H. R. Nooitgedacht has contributed to
the understanding of the WIC predicament in the constantlyfluctuatingAfrican markets.
total of 613 slaves on the Slave Coast in 1708, exchanged only forty-seven
guns and two-hundred pounds of gunpowder for a very small percentage of
its slave consignment.47
Alcoholic beverages were also nearly always present among the WIC
cargoes from Europe, but they too accounted for only a small percentage of
purchasing power. In the case of the earlier mentioned ships, the Ouinera
(1709) and Clara (1712), less than 5 percent of the slaves were purchased
with liquor. Luxuries and trinkets, like mirrors and jewelry, were also of
limited importance in the WIC trade, although perhaps slightly more im-
portant than alcoholic beverages. Useful materials, such as iron bars, were
often significant among the European cargoes. On the two last mentioned
ships, these accounted for 100 and 109 slaves purchased, respectively, or
nearly 20 percent of the total slave cargo. Household goods and other useful
items, such as pots, pans, knives, clocks, and locks, were nearly always present
among the cargoes from Europe, although these too were limited in signif-
icance when compared with textiles. Textiles were clearly dominant in the
slave trade. Some of the textiles were exotic items from Asia, but these goods
were often regarded as too dear for the African market. The vast majority
of the textiles appeared to be manufactured in Holland, especially in the
towns of Haarlem and Leiden.48
Thanks to the excellently preserved documents of the Middelburgsche
Commercie Compagnie (MCC), a much clearer picture can be presented
about European goods shipped to Africa for the free-trade period, later in
the eighteenth century. In a general appraisal, linger has calculated that in
the MCC slave trade 57 percent of the trade goods consisted of textiles, 9
percent were guns and 14 percent gun powder, slightly more than 10 percent
consisted of alcoholic beverages, and a generous 9 percent could be cate-
gorized as sundry luxury items or trinkets. This, as well as the asssessment
of goods carried to Africa by the WIC, refutes an earlier held view that the
goods with which slaves were purchased were of an inferior nature and more
often than not useless trinkets.49
Approximately 50 percent of the textiles taken to Africa by the MCC
could be regarded as exotic, silks and other fineries originating from Asia;
their share was lower in the early stages but increased gradually during the
47. See WIC, vol. 55, doc. 10/12/1714; WIC, vol. 98, p. 316; WIC, vol. 102, p. 40, and
253; WIC, vol. 103, pp. 98-9; WIC, vol. 180, pp. 165, 174, and 184; WIC, vol. 238,
pp. 62-3.
48. WIC, vol. 54, doc. 7/20/1793; WIC, vol. 332, p. 90; WIC, vol. 836, p. 140. See also
note no. 26. A thorough analysis of the merchandise shipped to Africa has not been made
yet, but that is beyond the scope of this study.
49. W. S. Unger, "Bijdragen tot de geschiedenis van de Nederlandse slavenhandel II," Econ-
omisch-Historisch Jaarboek uy vol. 28 (1958-1960), p. 33, cited hereafter as Unger II. See
also Vrijman, p. 68.
second half of the eighteenth century. The overall percentage of textiles

carried by Dutch slave ships remained at about the same level, which meant
that the European- and Dutch-made textiles decreased relatively. A total of
forty-five different types of textiles were taken to Africa by the MCC. Slave
ships sailing to the Loango region seemed to carry a larger proportion of
textiles than those obtaining their slaves on the Guinea coast, although this
finding should be treated with caution, as it is based on a very small sample.
The gun and gunpowder traffic of the MCC increased slightly with the
passing of time, although as a result of decreasing prices their relative value
seemed to decrease. The quantity of alcoholic beverages taken to Africa by
the MCC also increased as the eighteenth century progressed.50
Something was returned to Africa for the exodus of its sons and daughters,
although few would argue that the accumulative results were positive eco-
nomically for African societies, let alone morally and socially.51 The slave
trade did link African economies more firmly to the global commercial
system, however. The overall effect on African society of these imported
goods remains to be evaluated in a separate study. The price paid for such
a development by the slaves shipped to the West is certainly beyond any
rational comprehension.
50. These findings are based on a more detailed analysis of merchandise shipped by the
MCC, carried out by the Leiden Seminar student, Jan Gewald.
51. See Chapters i and 12 on these issues.
Volume ofAfrican exports
and origins of slaves
The question of where the African slaves came from is one of the most
perplexing problems in the Atlantic slave trade, one which will probably
never be solved to satisfaction. This is largely due to the fact that so little
written evidence exists on the trade routes of the African interior. Although
recent studies have tried to come to grips with this problem, the internal
African markets were by no means static and provide therefore indications
only and are of limited value about slave origins. Studies using information
on the ethnic origins of slaves in the New World have been attempted, but
they too suffer from a lack of comprehensive data.1 The best contributions
this study can offer are to delineate the coastal regions from which the Dutch
obtained their slaves and to discuss the qualitative evidence of the ethnic
or coastal preferences indicated by Dutch slave traders and colonists in
the West.
Demands of the market place
Numerous factors determined where Europeans acquired their slaves. In

addition to the availability of slaves, the existing commercial contacts, and
the political and economic conditions in a given African region, slaves from
certain regions were simply in greater or lesser demand in the colonial
markets of the New World. And such preferences might differ from one
market area to another, and also from one time to another. Slaves from the
Bight of Biafra, implying the Niger delta region and eastward to the Camer-
oons, were generally referred to as Calabaries and were invariably considered
undesirable by most Dutch colonists. This is repeatedly brought out in
correspondence and directives, and it is also confirmed by the limited number
i. See for example Paul E. Lovejoy and Jan S. Hogendorn, pp. 213-35; Curtin, Atlantic Slave
Trade, pp. 97-100, 113, 189, 192—6 and 202.
106
African exports and origins of slaves 107
of slaves obtained from that coastal region, particularly during the WIC
monopoly period. Asiento contracts with the Dutch also stipulated that slaves
from that region were not acceptable, and for this reason over 1,000 such
slaves were simply rejected by asiento agents in 1675. Even before the Dutch
acquired the asiento, during the 1650s, a limited number of so-called Cal-
abary slaves were purchased by Dutch slavers but they were then already
regarded as inferior to slaves from the Bight of Benin.2
By the 1680s the dislike of Calabary slaves became so pronounced that
a number of slaving assignments were shifted from the Bight of Biafra to
other areas, primarily because the Surinam planters did not want slaves from
that region. The WIC directors decided in 1681 to send two special slave
consignments to Surinam with slaves from the Bight of Biafra, because the
fledgling colony was badly in need of slaves and the asiento trade demanded
the best. If the demand was critical enough the Surinam planters could
tolerate these slaves, but by 1685 they complained bitterly that such slaves
were undesirable because they were unwilling to work and their death rate
was extremely high. In spite of such protests the WIC directors decided that
25 percent of the shipments to this colony could be Calabaries. Eventually,
the planters' pleas were heeded because by the end of the seventeenth century
such slaves were no longer purchased by the WIC. During the early stages
of their development, small settlements like Berbice, Essequibo, St. Eus-
tatius, and Saba were forced to accept shipments of Calabary slaves, because
the settlers there had no other choice but to accept what they could get.
The asiento contracts demanded the bulk of the slaves in those early days,
leaving only the least desirable ones for the colonies that had little capital
and influence.3
Why were the slaves from the Bight of Biafra region so much less in
demand by the colonists? A report of the 1650s already characterized them
as prone to run away or to die more readily than other African slaves.
Correspondence from Surinam in 1684 described the shipment of slaves
arriving from that region on the ship, St. jfan, as "crazy and retarded." And
they also believed that they were unwilling to work and died more readily.
Antagonism toward these slaves persisted, for in a handbook for Dutch
slavers, published in 1770, these slaves are described as "lazy" and "cow-
ardly" in character. One can speculate that Calabary slaves originated from
the predominantly stateless societies of that region, people who were ac-
customed to a great amount of individual freedom and were thus, like most
2. WIC, vol. 783, doc. 5; W I C vol. 330, pp. 113 and 145;' WIC, vol. 832, pp. 182 and 290;
WIC, vol. 652, doc. 1/24/1686; SS, vol. 113, p. 8; WIC, vol. 831, p. 95; WIC, vol. 649,
doc. 2/9/1682; KITLV H-65, cor. 9/-/1659.
3. WIC, vol. 833, pp. 448, 182 and 424; WIC, vol. 834, p. 191; SS, vol. 213, pp. 97, 180
and 369; SS, vol. 214, p. 190.
of the native Americans, less able to adjust to the degradation and regi-
mentation of enslavement. Thus, although the Dutch traders were active on
the nearby Cameroon coast, they bought very few slaves there and perhaps
never designated a slave ship to that region. Only during the peak of the
free-trade period did a few Dutch slave ships fetch their slaves from the
Bight of Biafra.4
Bantu-speaking slaves from the Loango region, north of the Congo river,
were also less well appreciated than their counterparts from the Slave Coast
and Gold Coast, although the Dutch did ship a substantial number of these
slaves to the West Indies. When during the 1720s large numbers of slaves
were shipped to St. Eustatius, many for resale to French and English planters
on nearby islands, the so-called "Angola" or "Loango," slaves were not in
demand by these settlers, and the WIC had at times difficulty selling them.
Surinam planters may well have preferred these Loango slaves, and they
seemed to have replaced the shipments from the Bight of Biafra by the early
eighteenth century. But by the second decade these planters were also com-
plaining that they disliked the "Loangos." The main reason was because
these slaves were prone to run away into the forest. Of one shipment in
1720, more than half of the slaves had fled into the wilderness within a short
time. In a contract for the importation of 1,500 slaves into Surinam one-
third to one-fourth of the slaves were to come from Angola, while the
remainder had to be Ardra slaves from the Slave Coast. The Guinea coast
alone could not satisfy the demand for slaves in the West, even though slaves
from the Loango region regularly sold for less than Guinea coast slaves. In
1767 Gold Coast slaves sold for 380 guilders compared to 350 for those
from the Loango region. There were, however, some planters in Surinam
who preferred Bantu-speaking slaves, at least as a mix with slaves from other
areas, to avoid slave conspiracies. Some sources stated that Angola slaves
were more prone to run away or to become sick because of their unhygienic
eating habits. Not long after one shipment was brought from the Loango
region in 1720, the Surinam governor claimed that two-thirds of the male
slaves had escaped into the forest. Other planters did not object to slaves
from that region if they came in large enough groups, particularly when
many of them were young and a large percentage of them were women,
because most adult males from the Loango region were regarded as lazy.5
4. SS, vol. 113, p. 8; SS, vol. 214, p. 190; Ratelband, p. 320; D. H. Gallandat, "Noodige
onderrichtingen voor slaafhandelaren," Verhandelingen Zeeuws Genootschap (1769-1770),
pp. 438-9. See also Ralph A. Austin and K.Jacobs, "Dutch Trading Voyages to Cameroon,
1721-1759; European Documents and African History," Annales de la Faculte des lettres et
sciences humaines, Universite federate du Camerones/de Yaounde, vol. 2 (1974), pp.
47-83.
5. W I C , vol. 619, cor. 1/17/1724, 1/18/1724, 12/12/1725, 1/22/1725, and 6/30/1727;
W I C , vol. 619, cor. 3/28/1727 and 6/30/1727; W I C , vol. 1138, cor. 2/16/1707 and 3/
On the whole, Dutch colonists clearly preferred slaves from the Slave
Coast and Gold Coast. The English preference for the so-called Cormantin
slaves from the Gold Coast, however, is not reflected in the correspondence
from Surinam, at least not before the eighteenth century, when the Dutch
had not yet concentrated on the Gold Coast as a slaving region. A careful
reader may also detect that the WIC directors preferred the slave trade to
remain on the Slave Coast and discouraged any inclination to purchase too
many slaves on the Gold Coast, fearing that it might interfere with the gold
trade. The so-called Ardra slaves from the Slave Coast, also referred to as
Papas in Surinam, were still clearly rated above Gold Coast and Loango
slaves during the first decade of the eighteenth century, although a report
of 1707 seems to indicate that Gold Coast slaves were well-liked at Surinam.
During the 1720s the WIC began to mix slave consignments, even mixing
some Loango slaves with those from the Guinea coast when this was feasible.
This was apparently aimed at confusing the settlers and increasing the price
of the slaves from less desirable regions. In 1734, however, the Ardra slaves
were still selling at higher prices than others in the Dutch Caribbean. 6
Slave exports during the WIC monopoly period
Table 5.1 presents the global estimate of the slaves exported from Africa
by the WIC and by Dutch interlopers during the period 1600-1738. As was
already shown in Chapter 2, the figures for the years prior to 1675, of the
old WIC, are based on data collected by other scholars for a time when
scarcity of the surviving records provide less reliability than the later years.
Where the data seemed incomplete, an estimated adjustment has been added
to the documented figures. The latter also involve estimates, but at least
those are based on documented slaving voyages or company account.
For the years of the new WIC, 1675 to 1738, a more comprehensive
record of individual slaving voyages, as well as considerable detail on many
of the consignments, has been collected. They are listed in Appendix 1.
Where detailed figures on slave consignments are missing, they have been
filled in by estimates based on other cases for which data was available. If,
for example, only the number of slaves landed in the West was recorded,
the mortality on the middle passage and the number of slaves boarded in
26/1712; WIC, vol. 1139, doc. 147; WIC, vol. 1140, doc. 63; WIC, vol. 204, p. 467; WIC,
vol. 69, p. 109; WIC, vol. 1026, pp. 27, 52, and 338; WIC, vol. 836, p. 358; M C C , vol.
1567, doc. 68, p. 7; SS, vol. 226, p. 187; SS, vol. 238, p. 317; SS. vol. 247, p 753.
6. WIC, vol. 832, pp. 186 and min. 4/9/1682; WIC, vol. 1026, p. 3; WIC, vol. 1137, cor.
10/5/1701 and 7/30/1704; WIC, vol. 202, pp. 8 and 98; WIC, vol. 55, pp. 6 and 20;
WIC, vol. 619, p. 223; WIC, vol. 55, cor. 10/29/1734.
no The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade
Table 5.1
Dutch slave exports from Africa, 1675-1738
Ships WIC Adjustment Annual
Years Documented Interlopers Total average
1600-1635 10 a 799b 2,000 2,799 78
1636-1645 65 a 29,383 1,000 30,383 3,039
1646-1657 15 a 1,821 2,000 3,821 318
1658-1659 9 2,670 2,670 1,410
1660-1664 16 6,548 500 7,048 1,410
1665-1669 47 19,210 19,210 3,842
1670-1674 59 24,202 500 24,702 4,940
1675-1679 21 8,650 8,650 1,730
1680-1684 28 13,538 1,000 500 15,038 3,007
1685-1689 46 22,660 1,000 23,660 4,732
1690-1694 21 10,910 1,000 11,910 2,382
1695-1699 23 10,934 1,000 1,000 12,934 2,587
1700-1704 29 14,032 2,000 16,032 3,206
1705-1709 28 14,564 1,500 16,064 3,213
1710-1714 17 8,625 500 1,500 10,625 2,125
1715-1719 27 11,950 500 2,000 14,450 2,890
1720-1724 37 16,654 1,000 17,654 3,531
1725-1729 43 21,926 500 1,500 23,926 4,785
1730-1734 27 13,767 13,767C 2,753
1735-1738 19 11,144 11,144° 2,229
Total 587 263,987 8,500 14,000 286,487 2,754d
Source: Appendix 1, and Tables 1.1 and 2.2.

Notes: aThe number of consignments are estimated.
HThis includes 470 slaves landed at Trinidad.
c
Free trade figures are not included for these years; see Table 5.6.
The overall average is calculated for the period 1636-1738.
Africa were estimated based on averages derived from cases in which the
information was complete as well as from qualitative references in the doc-
uments. The cumulative results of this process are presented below in suc-
cessive periods of five years, unless conditions dictated a different span
of time.7
As has been described in Chapter i, the Dutch introduction in the Atlantic
slave trade was hesitant and restrained, and the documentation for the years
prior to the 1630s is severely limited. With the establishment of the Dutch
in Brazil and their capture of Elmina, a boom in their exportation of slaves
7. For a more detailed explanation of the adjustments and the basis for making estimates see
Chapters 2 and 8.
from Africa occurred. Another peak was registered during the late 1660s
and early 1670s, when the WIC acquired the asiento trade with the Spanish
colonies. Still another peak is noticeable during the 1680s, when the Coy-
mans family dominated the asiento trade. The intervening reductions in the
flow of the trade resulted primarily from complications in the asiento trade
or international conflicts in which the Dutch Republic became embroiled.
The loss of the asiento contracts and the frequently occurring and long-
lasting wars were responsible for a significant slowdown of the Dutch slave
trade during the period 1690 to 1720. Beginning in the 1720s, however, the
Dutch slave trade began a long period of gradual expansion, which was
caused primarily by the growth of the plantation colony of Surinam. The
introduction of the free trade in 1730, which operated simultaneously with
a reduced WIC monopoly until 1738, may also have contributed to the
increase of the volume of the Dutch slave trade.
Regional African distribution of the WIC slave trade
The WIC obtained slaves from virtually every African coastal region between
Senegal and Angola, although the various regions varied in significance and
their contribution also changed through the years. As we might expect from
the political realities during the 1636-46 peak years for the Brazil market,
when the Dutch gained dominance along the whole west-central African
coast, more than half of the slaves obtained by the WIC came from the
Angola region (see Table 1.1). This period was also the only time that Angola
proper was an important slave-producing area for the WIC. After the Por-
tuguese reconquest of the Angola ports in 1648, the Loango coastal region
to the north of the Congo River became the only slaving area for the WIC
outside the Guinea coast. At this early time the Slave Coast was already a
principal supplier of slaves for the WIC, accounting for approximately 50
percent of the slaves purchased along the entire Guinea coast. The Gold
Coast supplied less than 20 percent of the WIC slaves, and about 30 percent
came from the Bights of Biafra and Benin.8
It should be mentioned that, unlike several other European nations and
the United States, the Dutch did not actively become involved in the ex-
portation of slaves from East Africa for markets in the Western Hemisphere.
The Dutch East India Company (VOC), however, did export slaves from
that region across the Indian Ocean to its Asian colonies. This company
also supplied Cape Colony at the southern tip of Africa with slaves from
eastern Africa. Approximately 4,000 slaves were shipped to the Cape by the

ii2 The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade
Table 5.2
Slave origins under the old WIC, 1658-1674
Average %of
Region Slaves Ships consignment total
Senegambia 1,520 4 380 5.1
Ivory Coast 750 2 375 2.1
Gold Coast 5,453 13 419 18.3
Slave Coast 12,154 29 419 40.8
Bight of Biafraa 2,581 8 323 8.7
Guinea combined 22,458 56 401 75.
Loango/Angola 7,339 16 459 25.
Documented total 29,797 100.
Unknown origin 22,883 60 381 43.2
Grand total 52,680 132 402 100.

Source: Franz Binder (see Chapter 2, note 16) collected the data from which this
table has been extrapolated.
Note: aThese may have included small consignment destined for Elmina.
VOC during the period 1652 to 1795, but many more slaves of Asian origin
were brought into the colony on VOC ships that stopped at the Cape on
their return voyage from Batavia to the Dutch Republic. Perhaps no more
than about 500 slaves were brought to Cape Colony from the Atlantic shores.
Only one slave ship, carrying 260 slaves, obtained its cargo on the Slave
Coast, and an undetermined but small number were taken from captured
Portuguese ships sailing from the Angola region. But this topic is outside
the limits of this study, and because these slaves did not cross the Atlantic
they have not been included in the statistical tables of this work.9
The data on slave origins for the third quarter of the seventeenth century
are less clear than for the eighteenth century, as is demonstrated in Table
5.2. For 60 of the 132 slave consignments no area of African coastal departure
is known. If the remaining 72 are taken as representative of the whole, the
Loango coast produced one-fourth of the WIC slave exports; the remaining
75 percent came from the Guinea coast, with the Slave Coast by far the
most important export market, with over 40 percent of the total WIC export
for the period 1658 to 1674.
9. James Armstrong, "The Slaves, 165 2—1780," in R. Elphick and H. Giliomee, eds., The
Shaping ofSouth African Society (London: Longman Group, 1979), pp. 76-9. On this issue,
Robert Ross of the University of Leiden extended his advice to me.
Table 5.3
Slave origins in the WIC trade, 1675-1699
Average %of
Senegambia 710 3 237 1.5
Gold Coast 2,207 7 315 4.7
Slave Coast 24,323 49 496 52.2
Bight of Biafra 1,403 4 351 3.0
Guinea combined 28,643 63 455 61.5
Loango/Angola 17,948 33 544 38.5
Documented total 46,591 96 100
Unknown origin 20,501 43 477 30
Grand total 67,092 139 483 100
Source: Appendix 1.
A clearer picture about slave origins emerges for the last quarter of the
seventeenth century, with more than two-thirds of the slave origins docu-
mented, as is shown in Table 5.3. For this period, however, the Loango
area contributed a greatly increased proportion of nearly 40 percent of the
total. The Slave Coast also had become a more significant slave exporting
region for the WIC, while Senegambia and the Bight of Biafra dwindled to
insignificance and the Gold Coast supplied less than 5 percent of the total.
For the final phase of the WIC slave trade, 1700 to 1738, over 80 percent
of the coastal origins of exports have been verified, providing a greater degree
of accuracy in estimating the origins of the slaves involved. At this time the
Loango contribution dropped back to one quarter of the total, and the relative
significance of Slave Coast exports was also reduced significantly. The Gold
Coast contribution to the WIC slave exports rose to an unprecedented high
of nearly 30 percent, as is shown in Table 5.4.
The question of African origins with respect to the interloper trade, dis-
cussed in Chapter 3, is quite simple. With few exceptions interloper slave
traders obtained their slaves from the Loango region; all but one of the
interlopers listed in Table 3.2, went to the Loango coast. Qualitative doc-
umentary references also repeatedly confirm the interloper predisposition
toward the Loango coast, primarily because the WIC was not as able to
protect its monopoly there as on the Guinea coast. At one point, in 1688,
the king of Loango prevented a WIC warship from attacking a Dutch in-
H4 The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade
Table 5.4
Slave origins in the WIC trade, 1700-1738
Average %of
Guinea general 3,881 7 554 4.1
Gold Coast 27,196 58 469 28.5
Slave Coast 39,765 75 530 41.6
Bight of Biafra 103 1 103 .1
Guinea combined 70,945 141 503 74.2
Loango/Angola 24,630 45 547 25.8
Documented total 95,575 186 514 100
Unknown origin 16,687 41 407 17.5
Grand total 112,262 227 495 100
Source: Appendix 1.
terloper with the threat that he would no longer do business with WIC ships.
Thus, the interloper slave trade should perhaps be regarded entirely as
originating from the Loango region.10
Because Tables 5.3 and 5.4 cover increasingly longer periods of time,
dictated essentially by the nature of the documentation, a more detailed
tabulation of exports may clarify the export trends. Table 5.5 presents the
WIC slave exportation by decades, except in a few instances, and this shows
a steady contribution of 25 to 40 percent from the Loango region. The
obvious exception is the final decade, when the free traders had virtually
replaced the WIC in this region. The Slave Coast retained a dominant role
in the WIC slave exports, averaging more than 45 percent of the total. The
only significant drop occurred during the 1720s, when warfare in the region
made trade in that area very unstable, as has been discussed in Chapter 4.
One striking change is the enormous increase in the slave exports from the
Gold Coast after 1720. As early as the 1650s the WIC had obtained a
moderate number of slaves from this region, but the WIC continued to
emphasize the export of gold from there. A significant shift began to take
place early in the eighteenth century, when the export of gold from that
region was rapidly declining, which may well have led to the trade in humans
to offset the decline. More likely, however, the dramatic increase of slave
exports from the Gold Coast during the 1720s was also linked to the decrease
10. WIC, vol. 200, p. 158; WIC, vol. 104, p. 408; WIC, vol. 835, pp. 75 and 116.
African exports and origins of slaves
Table 5. 5
Fluctuations of WIC slave origins, 1658-1738
Senegal Gold Slave Bight of Origin
Years Ivory Coasi Coast Coast Biafra Loango Total unknown
1658-1674 2,270 5,453 12,154 2,581 7,337 29,796 22,883
(%) (7.6) (18.3) (40.8) (8.7) (24.6) (100) (43)
1675-1689 710 2,101 15,777 1,403 11,266 31,257 14,301
(%) (2.3) (6.7) (50.5) (4.5) (36) (31)
1690-1699 106 9,449 6,682 16,237 6,200
(%) (0.7) (58.2) (41.2) (28)
1700-1709 3,275 14,752 9,128 27,155 1,038
(%) (12.1) (54.3) (33.6) (3.7)
1710-1719 1,045 12,851 103 4,447 18,446 2,563
(%) (5.7) (69.7) (0.6) (24) (12)
1720-1729 12,869 5,572 9,762 28,203 10,103
(%) (45.6) (19.8) (34.6) (26)
1730-1738 12,492 7,793 1,293 21,578 2.983
(%) (58) (36) (6) (12)
Total 2,980 37,341 78,348 4,087 49,915 172,672 37,188
(1.7) (21.6) (45.4) (2.4) (28.9) (100) (16)
Source: Appendix 1.
Notes: Percentages of the various coastal regions are expressed in terms of total
documented slave origins. Percentages of unknown origins relate to the
grand total.
The Gold Coast and Slave Coast columns include a few consignments that
contained a mixture of slaves, mostly from these regions (see Table 5.4).
in the Dutch slave trade on the Slave Coast; this forced the WIC to obtain
most of its slaves from the Gold Coast. The complete dominance of the
Gold Coast in the WIC slave trade during the 1730s resulted from the
change in the WIC charter in 1730, which limited the company's monopoly
in the slave trade to the Gold Coast. Four years later the WIC lost this
privilege as well, resulting in the company's retreat from the transatlantic
slave trade after 1738."
Because the African ports of origin of a significant number of the WIC
slave ships have not been verified, making conjectures necessary, it is im-
portant to note that the system of slave-ship assignments by the directors of
the company basically confirms the conclusions stated above (see Table 2.5).
In addition, the assignments confirm that the documented WIC slave voyages
WIC, vol. 55, cor. 11/27/1724; KITLV vol. H-65, pp. 406-7. The circumstances of the
shift from monopoly to free trade will be discussed in Chapter 6.
are fairly representative of the company's total slave traffic, and are not
skewed toward one area or another. Unfortunately, the listing of assignments
is not complete either, and it refers to ships rather than slaves, but at least
it lends tentative confirmation to the primary statistical calculations employed
in this study.12
A final note on the coastal regions between Senegambia and Ghana, the
so-called Windward coast, which is conspicuous by its absence in the WIC
slave trade (see Map 5.1). The WIC never established any trading stations
or made it a practice to purchase slaves there. One exception is that in 1716
the company dispatched one slave ship to the "Upper Coast," or Windward
coast, to experiment with slave trading in that region. Company directors at
Elmina may have been threatened by this, for they seemed to be elated when
the experiment failed, and no additional WIC slavers have been found re-
corded sailing to this coastal region. Nevertheless, among the slaves exported
by the WIC there may well have been a few slaves from the Ivory Coast,
because the WIC was engaged in a general small-scale coastal trade, all the
way from the Ivory Coast to the Bight of Biafra. By this method a wide
variety of merchandise was purchased from Africans, including some slaves,
who were then taken to Elmina.13 Thus, some of the slaves counted among
the Gold Coast departures may in fact have originated from the Ivory Coast,
but the number involved in these transactions cannot have been very high.
This situation changed drastically during the free-trade period, when large
numbers of slaves were obtained by the Dutch from the Windward coast.
The free-trade traffic
During the 1730s the Dutch slave trade increased dramatically. This decade
also witnessed a significant shift in the manner in which the Dutch organized
the slave trade. Starting in 1730, Dutch slavers unaffiliated with the WIC
were allowed to purchase slaves in select areas of the WIC monopoly, and
four years later the WIC monopoly of the slave trade was terminated com-
pletely. Although the company made a determined effort to maintain a
foothold in the traffic, and in fact transported as many slaves annually as
during the previous decade, it had terminated its involvement in the Atlantic
slave trade by 1739. Thereafter, the free trade increased its volume steadily
until it reached its peak during the early 1770s with an annual average of
nearly 7,000 slaves exported from Africa by Dutch free traders. 14
Table 5.6 lists the volume of the free trade in five-year intervals. Between
12. See Appendix 8.
13. WIC, vol. 485, p. 564; NBKG, vol. 85, Instr. 6/3/1718; WIC, vol. 834, p. 187.
14. See Appendix 2 for a listing of all free-trade missions.
MAP 5.1
THE WINDWARD COAST
18th Century West Africa
n8 The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade
Table 5.6
Slaves from Africa by Dutch free traders, 1730-1803
Cargo Annual
Years Ships average Slaves Adjustment Total average
1731-1734* 31 295 9,138 9,138 2,285
1735-1739* 37 271 10,031 10,031 2,006
1740-1744 64 306 19,982 19,982 3,996
1745-1749 78 353 27,592 27,592 5,518
1750-1754 71 299 21,212 21,212 4,242
1755-1759 80 351 28,150 1,416 29,566 5,913
1760-1764 83 333 27,671 2,324 29,995 6,000
1765-1769 109 292 31,830 588 32,418 6,484
1770-1774 121 287 34,742 291 35,033 7,007
1775-1779 58 281 16,353 1,415 17,768 3,554
1780-1784 21 309 6,480 6,480 1,296
1785-1789 30 246 7,365 7,365 1,473
1790-1803 36 242 9,905 9,905 708
Total 815 311 250,451 6,034 256,485 3,514

3,794b
Source: Appendix 5 and text in Chapter 5.
Notes: *The WIC traffic of 1730-1738 is not included here; see Table 5.1.
This annual average is for the years 1731-1795 only.
1744 and 1773 the average annual export by the Dutch came to about 6,000
slaves, with only a few years dropping significantly below that figure. Only
during the mid-1750s was there a noticeable slump in the traffic. During
the peak years of 1764 and 1771 the number of slaves exported by the Dutch
reached nearly 9,000 each year. But the economic crisis of 1773, which will
be discussed later, reduced the traffic drastically. Toward the end of the
decade, the American Revolution and the diplomatic turmoil that grew out
of it caused additional reduction of the Dutch slave trade, until it came to
a complete standstill when Holland became directly embroiled in the ensuing
Atlantic conflicts. There were a few efforts to revive the slave trade during
the early 1790s, but only during the year 1793 did the total number of slaves
shipped from Africa exceed 2,000, and this turned out to be the final major
effort. The international turmoil flowing from the revolution in France, be-
ginning in 1789, and which involved the Dutch Republic directly starting
in 1795, terminated the Dutch involvement in the Atlantic slave trade. The
last recorded Dutch slaver, the Standvastigheid, sailed in 1802-3, taking 281
slaves to Surinam.
As was the case with the WIC slave trade, the basis for calculating the
free trade are records of individual slaving voyages. There were far more
free-trade slave ships than W1C slavers, even though the total number of
slaves carried by the two different processes were not far apart; for the WIC
the total reached an estimated 273,000 (not including about 14,000 slaves
shipped by interlopers), and for the free trade a generous 256,000. Because
the WIC was a much larger institution and was in a sense a public institution
that received financial support from the government, its records have been
better preserved and provide far greater detail. Even for the free trade, the
records of the WIC are essential in determining the volume of its trade in
human beings. In spite of its discontinuation of the transatlantic slave trade,
the WIC was still responsible for managing the administration of the slave-
trade passes that were required for free traders, and the company also
continued to maintain the trading stations on the African coast from which
free traders frequently purchased slaves.
By scrutinizing a large number of pertinent archives in the Netherlands,
it has been possible to verify most of the free-trade slaving voyages. And
just as the WIC slave ship assignments provided verification for the individual
slave-ship records of that company, a similar Rosetta stone has been located
for the free trade in the form of two separate lists of slave-trade passes, sold
by the WIC to the so-called free traders. By comparing these documents
with the data collected on individual free-trade voyages, it appears that an
estimated twenty-two ships, or less than 3 percent of the total, escaped the
scrutiny of this historical investigation. An adjustment for these potentially
overlooked slaving missions has been made in Table 5.7.15
In spite of the preservation of all these records, statistics on the free trade
are far from complete. In many cases there is only the record of a pass being
purchased at a given date, providing permission to trade on the African coast
but leaving the remainder of the undertaking a matter of conjecture. This
is a serious problem for the 1730s, the first decade of the free trade, when
an undetermined number of such passes were intended for the Afro-
European trade rather than the slave trade. But beginning in 1742, the
records of the governors of Surinam as well as other documentary collections
provide us with much additional information about the slave trade. The
volume of the free trade durmg the 1730s, however, remains a problem that
promises no easy solution. For the years 1731 to 1741 an undetermined
number of Guinea traders, ships that limited themselves to the Afro-
European trade, are included in the lists of passes. There is no fail-safe method
to separate the Guinea traders from the slave traders, and in the absence
of other concrete data, the lengths of the voyages have been employed in
deciding which passes were used for the slave trade and which were used
15. See Appendix 9 for the lists of slave passes, and their comparison with the documented
slaving records.
for the Afro-European trade. Only those ships that required more than a
thirteen-month voyage were regarded as slave traders. Of a total of ninety
recorded missions for the eleven-year period, fourteen fit the slaver category,
and one of these, the Lammerenburg of 1740, could otherwise clearly be
identified as a slave ship, even though it completed its voyage in 370 days.
Of all the free-trade slave ships with recorded voyage length, only 8 out of
330 completed their triangular voyage within 393 days and these 8 were all
only slightly under that mark.16 The foregoing provides only speculative
answers to the early years of the free trade, but it provides no answer to the
crucial questions of origins and destinations; at least it supplies a rational
solution to the broad picture of the Dutch slave trade during the 1730s.
Slave origins in the free trade
Slightly more than two-thirds of coastal origins of the free-trade slaves have
been documented. If these figures are accepted as representative of the
overall traffic, Bantu Africa north of the Congo provided approximately one-
third of the total number of slaves exported. This calculation is based on
the number of slaves exported and not on the number of ships frequenting
that area, because free-trade slave ships sailing to Loango tended to be larger
than those going to the Guinea coast. The slave trade with Bantu-speaking
Africa tended to decrease when the free trade in general was low or in
decline, as is illustrated by the early 1740s and early 1750s, and also during
the declining decades of the Dutch slave trade. During the most active years
of the Dutch slave trade, the Bantu share of the trade increased, particularly
during the peak years 1665 to 1674, when slaves from that region amounted
to more than 42 percent of the total Dutch slave trade. If the attraction of
the slaves from the Loango region increased with the growing demand for
slaves, it confirms the qualitative evidence cited earlier that slaves from Bantu
Africa were generally regarded as inferior to those from the Gold Coast and
Slave Coast regions. A similar pattern is noticed in the WIC slave trade,
but in the free trade (see Table 5.7) the Loango share rose by about six
percentage points.
The documentation is less clear on the separate regions of the Guinea
coast, in that the majority of free-trade slave ships were often simply des-
ignated with Guinea as their African boarding area. As clarified in Chapter
6, the free traders also employed a new method of trading, which often took
them along the Guinea coast and made it difficult to distinguish between
specific areas of origin. The ships designated as having boarded their slaves
16. See Chapter 7 on the discussion of length of voyage.

Table 5.7
Slave origins in the free trade, 1730-1803
Guinea Gold Slave Total No docb.
Period Loango (%) general Coast Coast verified %
1730-1739 318 356 676 18,495
(96.5)
1740-1749 5,990 (38.5) 7,409 1,636 530 15,565 32,009
Cargo avg.a 374 353 (67.4)
1750-1759 9,587 (29.4) 16,283 6,696 32,566 16,796
Average 417 326 279 (34.1)
1760-1769 19,771 (39.9) 24,657 4,763 380 49,571 9,930
Average 330 301 340 (16.7)
1770-1779 17,306 (36.1) 30,093 563 47,962 2,970
Average 293 281 (.6)
1780-1789 2,190 (19.1) 5,726 3,569 11,485 2,360
Average 438 286 223 (17.1)
1790-1803 2,313 (27.7) 2,357 3,685 8,355 1,550
Average 386 196 217 (15.7)
Total 57,475 (34.5) 86,881 20,912 910 166,180 84,110

Average 340 297 272 (33.6)
Source: Appendix 2.
Notes aAverage slave consignments are not listed when fewer than four ships
were recorded.
Lists the slaves whose origin has not been found recorded, and their per-
centage of the grand total exported.
at Elmina did not necessarily obtain all their slaves on the Gold Coast;
usually it meant that Elmina was their last port of call in Africa. In 1744
the W1C director at Elmina reported that most of the free traders purchased
their slaves on the Windward coast, sailing on to Elmina only when their
slave cargo was still deficient.17
That general pattern of trade is clearly illustrated by the detailed trading
records of fifty free-trade slave ships, which have been preserved in the
Dutch archives. They represent about 16 percent of the free-trade traffic
to the Guinea coast for the period 1741 to 1792, and their records are listed
in Appendix 12. Table 5.8 presents a summary of these data, and several
of the trading villages and rivers where slaves were obtained are listed on
Map 5.1. Occasionally, slaves were purchased in the Senegambia region,
17. WIC, vol. 113, p. 187.

Table 5.8
Specified slave origins from the Guinea Coast, 1741-1782
Places of origin 1750-9 1770-9 Total
1741-9 1760-9 1780-9 %
Sierra Leone 0 122 27 407 143 699 5.3
St.Paul & StJohn R. 4 45 12 151 47 259 2
Cess R. to Cape Palmas 297 374 208 514 115 1,508 11.4
Cavalla toSassandra 10 102 112 141 89 454 3.4
Cape Lahou 106 695 2,060 1,817 283 4,961 37.6
Grand Bassam 2 65 86 233 33 419 3.2
Assini to Axim 13 22 43 101 8 187 1.4
Unidentified 0 203 183 220 0 606 4.6
Subtotals 432 1,628 2,731 3,584 718 9,093 69
Axim 7 23 80 200 4 314 2.4

Poquefoe 0 0 0 10 0 10 .1
Akwida 0 9 2 24 0 35 .3
Butri 0 4 8 62 0 74 .6
Takoradi 0 0 13 59 0 72 .6
Secondi 0 18 19 3 0 40 .3
Shama 2 0 0 22 6 30 .2
Komenda 32 0 0 2 0 34 .3
Elmina 20 217 429 788 228 1,682 12.8
Cape Coast 0 0 5 0 0 5 .1
Mori 0 0 13 136 0 149 1.1
Anomabu 64 208 126 4 0 402 3.1
Kormantin 0 0 40 57 0 97 .7
Apam 0 274 5 118 0 397 3
Bercu 0 0 5 86 0 91 .7
Accra 0 12 79 10 0 101 .8
Keta 0 1 4 4 0 9 .1
Epe 0 0 0 5 0 5 .1
Popo 0 34 0 118 0 152 1.2
Unidentified 66 100 76 106 47 395 3
Gold and Slave 191 900 904 1,814 285 4,094 31.1
Coasts combined
Grand total 623 2,528 3,635 5,398 1,003 13,187 100

Source: Appendix 12.
but as a rule the acquisition of slaves commenced on the coasts of present-

day Sierra Leone and Liberia. Cape Mesurado, where Monrovia was sub-
sequently built, was the most frequent starting point of slave acquisition.
The average free-trade slave cargo, according to this sample, was nearly 70
percent complete before the Gold Coast was reached, making the Windward
coast (the approximate equivalent of today's Liberia and Ivory Coast) one
Table 5.9
Gold Coast slave origins, 1705-1716
Year Butri Secondi Komenda Mori Kormantin Total
1705 9 2 0 12 36 59
1706 16 10 33 92 30 181
1707 30 40 34 9 43 156
1708 11 64 13 20 15 123
1709 18 93 29 13 21 174
1710 31 57 21 5 1 115
1711 7 5 4 0 0 16
1712 0 0 0 0 0 0
1713 4 10 0 0 3 17
1714 2 11 6 1 0 20
1715 0 60 10 2 0 72
1716 28 52 1 1 0 82
Total 156 404 151 155 149 1,015
Source: WIC, vol. 488, pp. 416-18.
of the principal slaving areas for the Dutch. All export regions taken together,
Dutch free traders may well have obtained 40 percent of their slaves from
the Windward coast. Cape Lahou in particular and the Ivory Coast in general
clearly emerged as the most prolific supplier of slaves in this region.18
There is thus a noticeable shift westward in the Dutch slave trade. First
from the Slave Coast to the Gold Coast, which became especially pronounced
during the 1720s, and then incorporating the Ivory and Liberian coastlines
with the onset of the free trade. The latter may well have resulted from the
fact that during the early years of the free traders the Gold Coast was off-
limits to them. Captains from Zeeland, who dominated the free trade, may
also have frequented these regions as interlopers during the final years of
the WIC monopoly and thus already had trading contacts there. After the
Gold Coast restriction was lifted in 1734, it became a practice for free traders
to make Elmina their final stop in Africa and complete their consignment
through purchases from the WIC establishment at the Gold Coast. Some
free traders, such as the ships of the Coopstad and Rochusen firm of Rot-
terdam, frequently contracted their whole slave cargo in advance with the
WIC at Elmina. The vast majority of the slave ships in the sample just cited
belonged to the MCC, which was undoubtedly the largest of the free-trade
slaving companies in the Dutch Republic. If other free traders practiced a
18. See Adam Jones and Marion Johnson, "Slaves from the Windward Coast," Journal of
African History, vol. 21 (1980), pp. 17-34, for a valuable appraisal of this region.
Table 5.10
Fragmented Gold Coast slave origins , 1725-1754
Locations 1725 1727 1735 1738-40 1742-43 1752-54 Total
8mo. a 8 mo. 9 mo. 17 mo. 18 mo. 24 mo. 84 mo
Axim 77 64 42 25 692 39 939
Poquefoe 0 1 45 3 174 16 239
Akwida 0 0 25 28 93 5 151
Butri 26 34 33 30 20 21 164
Takoradi 0 89 65 54 65 6 279
Sekondi 55 231 115 81 234 22 738
Shama 112 134 218 114 560 19 1,157
Komenda 26 15 376 67 149 4 637
Elmina 1,095 826 768 178 435 159 3,461
Mori 47 49 72 8 8 18 203
Kormantin 265 174 263 62 298 3 1,065
Apam 24 37 97 0 54 660 872
Bercu 8 40 37 19 8 99 211
Accra 103 97 58 32 307 311 908
Total 1,838 1,791 2,242 701 3,097 1,383 9,214

Source: WIC, vol. 102, pp. 160, 167 and 284; vol. 108, pp. 32, 41,46 and 53; vol.
112, p. 336; vol.113, p. 294; vol.290, p. 609; vol.484, pp. 418-19.
Note: aTimespan is expressed in consecutive months.
trading pattern unique and different from that of the MCC, it might weaken
the conclusions presented in Table 5.8. But in the absence of contrary
evidence, the data from two of the foremost slave-trading companies must
stand as representative for slave origins in the free trade.
Because the WIC establishment on the Gold Coast remained involved in
the slave trade in a middleman capacity during the free-trade period, it is
possible to give a more detailed account of slave origins in that region. Table
5.9 lists the slaves exported from the outforts (buitenforten), the Dutch trading
stations on the Gold Coast outside of Elmina. These slaves were most likely
taken by small boats to Elmina, where they were kept for a while and then
boarded on WIC slave ships or, in later years, sold to free traders. It is
obvious from the record that the slave trade in these areas was not very
significant in the years 1705 to 1712. Elmina itself must have been by far
the chief source of Gold Coast slaves for the WIC. An incomplete statistical
record, but including Elmina, of slaves dispatched or sold by the WIC from
the Gold Coast is listed in Table 5.10. As was stated earlier, Elmina was
clearly the chief port of export in nearly every period for which there is
documentation, providing more than one-third of the export slaves in the
sample. Slaves from Kormantin, favored by the English slave traders, became
also highly regarded by Dutch slave traders. This was particularly true during
the waning years of the Dutch slave trade. A report of 1788 stated that
Kormantin had surpassed Elmina in the export of slaves; that year the Dutch
obtained 300 to 400 slaves in Kormantin and neighboring Anomabu.19
One striking change in terms of origins of slaves was that the Slave Coast,
once the primary slaving area for the WIC, became relatively insignificant
during the free-trade era. As was shown in Chapter 4, this shift can be
linked to political changes in that area during the 1720s and 1730s. Only
two ships in the sample of fifty free traders obtained any slaves in that area.
Likewise, in the complete collection of data (see Appendixes 1 and 2), only
two free traders were reported to have departed Africa from the Slave Coast,
and presumably received the bulk of their slave cargo there. In two other
areas, Senegambia and the Bight of Biafra, the free traders continued in the
same pattern as the WIC by not exploiting the export of human beings in
these areas.
19. ARA, AW 1895, LX-447.
Organization and mechanics
of the trade
The sinews of the Dutch slave trade were in Holland, where the whole
complex system of obtaining slaves and disposing of them was ultimately
arranged. During the first century of the Dutch involvement in the traffic,
the WIC had complete mastery of this system, but during the free-trade
period the company's role was largely limited to administrative and inter-
mediary commercial functions. This chapter focuses on the organization of
the slave trade, examining the regional distribution of the Dutch partici-
pation, and the techniques employed in obtaining the slaves in Africa and
disposing of them in the Americas.
The WIC as manager of the slave trade
The WIC was not chartered for the purpose of the slave trade, however, a
few decades after its organization the traffic became one of its main interests.
By the 1670s one of the nine committees of the Amsterdam chamber gov-
erning board dealt exclusively with the slave trade, and the supreme direc-
torate of the WIC, the Heren X (and before 1674 the Heren XIX), also
devoted much attention to this subject.1
As a typical joint-stock company, or corporation of that time, the WIC
was totally dominated by its major investors, or hoofdpartidpanten. To belong
to this illustrious group one had to purchase shares in the company amount-
ing to 6,000 guilders through the Amsterdam chamber or 4,000 through
one of the other chambers. There must have been 150 to 200 of these major
stockholders, for Amsterdam alone had 83 at one time. From their number
the directors (bewindhebbers) of the separate chambers were selected by the
supreme civil authorities of the respective cities or regions, while the mem-
1. N. H. Schneeloch, "Die Bewindhebber der Westindischen Compagnie in der Kammer
Amsterdam 1674-1700," Economisch en Sociaal Historisch Jaarboeky (1973), vol. 36, p. 17.
See also WIC, vol. 831.
126
Organization and mechanics of the trade 127
bers of the Heren X or Heren XIX were appointed as representatives of
their respective chambers. The Amsterdam chamber was governed by ten
directors, Zeeland had six, and the minor chambers had from seven to
fourteen directors each, bringing the total to fifty. By and large, the WIC
directors came from the merchant oligarchy in the Dutch Republic, albeit
from the less well-to-do elements as compared to the directors of the East
India Company. Among the WIC directors were lawyers, bankers, and mer-
chants; several of them had also served as mayors or council members of
the cities they represented.2
The relative authority of each chamber was determined by the respective
investment that each chamber had been able to draw at the inception of the
company. On that basis the regional authority was set at units of one-ninth,
with Amsterdam carrying four, Zeeland two, and the remaining chambers
one each. This also determined the number of representatives each chamber
had on the chief board of directors, the Heren X, with the tenth member
representing the States General. Another indication of regional strength in
the WIC can be found in the day-to-day administration of the company.
Because the Heren X met only twice a year, spring and fall, for several
consecutive weeks, and after the mid-1680s only once a year, the overall
supervision of the company's affairs was in the hands of one of the two
largest chambers on a rotating basis with the title presiding chamber. Am-
sterdam would get the honor for six years, after which the leadership would
go to Zeeland for two, and then back to Amsterdam. Obviously, much of
the initiative was in the hands of these respective chambers between the
infrequent meetings of the Heren X (hereafter called the X or the Council
of X). The directors of the Amsterdam chamber met twice weekly, Tuesday
and Friday evenings, and during their long terms as presiding chamber they
obviously were able to greatly influence if not dominate the WIC operation.
There was also considerable continuity between the X and the presiding
chambers, since nine members of the Council of X were also directors of
the chambers they represented.3
Conflicts between the two largest chambers of the WIC were quite common.
Each chamber functioned as an independent economic unit, and the Zee-
landers in particular resented the obvious dominance over company affairs
by Amsterdam. The issue may have been resolved partially by giving the
two dominant chambers independent control over some of the company's
West Indian possessions, although the African coastal regions and the gold,
2. Menkman, WIC, p. 45; Van Dillen, pp. 146-7; Schneeloch, pp. 3off.
3. Schneeloch, pp. 1-16; C. Ch. Goslinga, "West-Indische Compagnie," Encyclopedic van de
Nederlandse Antillen (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1969), pp. 602-3; WIC, vol. 833, p. 271. In
1684 the Heren X decided to meet only once per year during the month of November,
although for some unknown reason they were in session again during the next spring.
ivory, and slave trade remained directly under the supervision of the X. The
directors from Zeeland seemed to be more determined than those from
Amsterdam to maintain the trade monopoly the WIC had acquired at its
inception. Living somewhat on the periphery of the Dutch Republic, the
Zeelanders nevertheless insisted that meetings of the X be held in their
territory during their presidency, and in fact they once boycotted the meetings
when this request was not honored. On at least two occasions the X ordered
Amsterdam to check out complaints that Zeeland had sent slave ships to
Africa without approval of the X.4
It was in the context of this governing structure that the Dutch slave trade
was operated and directed. The policy of general company control over the
African slave trade was reiterated during the first year of the new WIC in
1675 that no ships were to be sent to the African coast without approval by
the X. In fact, WIC ships were not even allowed to sail to parts of the African
coast that were not approved in the meeting of the X supreme directors.
The directors of the Maze chamber were reprimanded in 1675 f°r allowing
one of their ships bound for the Slave Coast to make an unauthorized stop
at Elmina. In subsequent years these rules were eased a little by allowing
the presiding chambers to authorize modifications in the assignments when
the situation clearly demanded this. In 1702, however, the Council of X
expressly demanded that each slave ship return to the chamber that had
commissioned its dispatch, and that all chambers should receive an ac-
counting of the ship's transactions.5 This contributed to the large collection
of paperwork that researchers have come to appreciate.
The home ports
The meetings of the X specified the WIC slave-ship assignments that have
been listed in Appendix 5. On a rotating basis, the X directed the separate
chambers to outfit slave ships and execute their slaving assignments. General
directives were issued for each assignment, including a ship's African and
West Indian destination and the approximate size of the slave cargo. The
details were determined by the directors of the respective chambers. Oc-
casionally, slave ships sailed under the general auspices of the WIC, but
these were usually small ships initiated by the WIC authorities in Africa.
The individual chambers generally employed their own standard slave ships
and occasionally they rented ships from individual owners or smaller com-
4. Emmer, "The WIC," pp. 78-82; Goslinga, "WIC," p. 603; WIC, vol. 832, p. 217; WIC,
vol. 834, p. 215; WIC, vol. 835, p. 146.
5. WIC, vol. 830, p. 128; WIC, vol. 831, p. 195; WIC, vol. 835, p. 175; WIC, vol. 836, p. 127;
WIC, vol. 69, p. 166.
Table 6.1
Recorded slave-ship assignments and regional WIC affiliation
Total %of Serial
Chambers assigned total numbers Towns Regions
Amsterdam 100.5 42.6 (1,3,5,9) Haarlem, Gelderland,
Leiden, Utrecht,
Gouda Overijsel
Zeeland 57 24 (2,7) Middelburg,
Vlissingen,
Veere, Tholen
Maze 28 11.9 (4) Rotterdam,
Delft,
Dordrecht
Noorder 26 11 (6) Enkhuizen, North of
Kwartier Hoorn, Alkmaar, Amsterdam
Edam, Medemblik,
Monnikendam
Stad en Lande 24.5 10.4 (8) Groningen Groningen,
Friesland
Total 236 100
Source: Schneeloch, pp. 1-8; Appendix 9.
panies. Rented ships were given service priority to speed up the process and
limit the duration of their voyage, in order to limit their cost to the company.
Profits and losses were apparently determined for each chamber separately
and not for the WIC in general unless an assignment was designated as
such.6
Each chamber of the WIC was comprised of several affiliating towns or
regions. Even Amsterdam had several inland towns and regions associated
with its chamber, although this may have been only for the purpose of
attracting the initial investment capital. Other chambers consisted of several
port towns that did in fact participate direcdy in WIC maritime activities,
including the slave trade. Table 6.1 lists the affiliated towns and regions. In
the WIC trade the chambers rather than specific ports outfitted slave ships,
although the sources are not always clear on this. In that respect the doc-
uments of the free trade are more explicit.7
From the surviving records of slave-ship assignments we learn the division
6. WIC, vol. 69, p. 41. See also Chapter 11 concerning finances and profits in the slave trade.
7. Schneeloch, pp. 6-8.
MAP 6.1
THE DUTCH REPUBLIC
ca. 1700
51°
of slaving opportunity, as shown in Table 6.i. Slave-ship assignments were

listed in the minutes of the X by consecutive series of numbers of one
through nine. The assignments were made in a very systematic manner with,
as a rule, the same numbers being assigned to the same chamber. Docu-
mentary evidence of an estimated three-fourths of the slaving assignments
have been verified by this author. In some instances Amsterdam undertook
Organization and mechanics of the trade
Table 6.2
Home ports of the WIC, 1675-1738
Consignments Slaves transported Cargo
Regions with % with % Average
Amsterdam 89 == 34.5 48,759 = 36.5 548

Zeeland 77 == 29.8 37,991 = 28.4 493
Maze 35 == 13.6 18,108 = 13.5 517
Noorder Kwartier 24 = 9.3 12,024 = 9.0 501
Stad en Lande 33 == 12.8 16,868 = 12.6 511
Total 258 == 100 133,750 = 100 518

WIC - general 27 5,328 197
Interlopers51 5 2,160
Not documented 80 38,596
Grand total 370b 179,834 486
Source: Appendix 1.
Notes: aAll recorded Dutch interlopers were based in Zeeland.
This includes a few aborted missions.
joint slaving missions with the small chamber of northern Holland. It is quite
likely that more joint ventures occurred than are reflected in the surviving
assignment records. Occasionally, special assignments were made for Am-
sterdam and Zeeland. The method used in the assignment process clearly
reflects the division of the original capital investment and the relative influence
of the separate WIC chambers, with a slight advantage to the chambers of
Zeeland and Maze.8
The actually documented Dutch ports of origin of WIC slave traders
produce a picture slightly different from the record of assignments, as is
shown in Table 6.2. Ports of origin have been documented for about 75
percent of the total number of WIC ships dispatched on the slave trade.
They suggest that during the years of the Second WIC (1675-1738) Am-
sterdam was responsible for slightly more than 37 percent of the slaves
transported by the Dutch and Zeeland carried nearly 28 percent, leaving
slightly more than 10 percent for each of the three remaining regional
chambers. These data also suggest that Zeeland obtained a slightly larger
share of the slaving assignments than her financial share in the company
warranted, and this appears to have been at the expense of Amsterdam.
However, Zeeland did tend to employ smaller ships on the average, and that
8. See Table 6.2 and Appendix 1.
Table 6.3
Home ports in the free trade, 1730-1803
Consignments Slaves transported Cargo
Region with % with % average
Amsterdam 84 = 11.0 24,776 = 10.6 295

Zeeland 595 = 78.3 180,485 = 77.4 303
Middelburg 172 = 22.6 49,232 = 21.1 286
Vlissingen 215 = 28.3 66,713 - 28.6 310
Unspecified 208 = 27.4 64,514 = 27.7 310
Maze 80 = 10.5 27,504 = 11.8 344
Noorder Kwartier 0 0
Stad en Lande 1 0.01 401 - 0.02
Total documented 760 = 100 233,166 = 100 307

Not documented 55 7.2 17,285 = 7.4 314
Source: Appendix 2, and Postma Data Collection.

Note: All percentages are based on the documented figures.
may have reestablished the proper balance. In addition, Amsterdam occa-

sionally joined forces with the small chambers when these lacked the capital
for their assigned slaving missions.9
Home ports during the free trade
With the introduction of the free trade during the 1730s, several drastic
changes took place in the Dutch slave trade. Not only did the volume of the
trade rise and the methods of slaving change, but the relative participation
of the various regions changed significantly. As Table 6.3 shows, the province
of Zeeland and particularly the ports on the island of Walcheren became
the center of the Dutch slave trade. The northern regions of the Dutch
Republic, the areas of the Stad en Lande and Noorder Kwartier, almost
completely dropped out of the picture. Only one slave consignment for
Groningen or Friesland has been documented for the free-trade period.
The Maze region, primarily the port of Rotterdam, kept its share of the
slave trade at nearly the same level. Amsterdam's participation, on the other
hand, dropped drastically, from about 37 percent during the WIC monopoly
to 11 percent in the free-trade period.
9. Appendixes 1 and 2.
The Zeeland area had clearly come to dominate the Dutch slave trade as
no other area had done before, by carrying nearly 80 percent of the free-
trade traffic. The island of Walcheren, and particularly the neighboring
towns of Vlissinger (Flushing) and Middelburg carried the largest share of
the slaves, while nearby ports like Veere, Tholen, and Zierickzee participated
on a marginal basis. Several Zeeland slave-trading firms (rederijen) and ship-
ping companies began to specialize in the slave trade after 1738, replacing
the erstwhile monopoly of the WIC. Appendix 10 lists many of these com-
panies; the majority were operating from Vlissingen. In 1763 the town's firms
reportedly had twenty-eight ships at sea of which fourteen were engaged in
the slave trade. Middelburg and Vlissingen must have been virtual slaving
communities, with a substantial amount of its capital and manpower involved
in the traffic. In fact, a report of 1750 confirms that Vlissingen's only com-
mercial branch of significance was the slave trade. 10
The most active of these companies was the MCC, which participated in
the slave trade from 1732 to 1803. Records of 43 of its slave ships and more
than 100 of its slaving voyages have been preserved, some of them in con-
siderable detail, providing essential data for this study. Another very active
free-trade slaving company was the firm of Coopstad and Rochussen. Op-
erating from Rotterdam, although Rochussen came from Zeeland, it was
engaged in the slave trade during the years 1750 to 1777. Extensive records
of fifteen of the firm's slave ships have been preserved, which represent
about fifty slaving voyages; a few cannot be clearly identified. Coopstad and
Rochussen carried an estimated 7.5 percent of the entire Dutch free trade,
whereas the MCC could be estimated at 15 to 20 percent of the total. The
records of most of the other slave-trading firms have undoubtedly been lost,
but some may surface in the future.11
Another interesting comparative element in the Dutch slave trade is the
variation in the size of the slave consignments. It has already been pointed
out that free traders used smaller ships than WIC slavers. The average cargo
also varied, depending on the home region or port in Holland, although the
differences were not significant. As Tables 6.2 and 6.3 illustrate, Zeelanders
always carried smaller-than-average slave consignments, with Amsterdam
the larger ones during the WIC period and Rotterdam during the time of
the free trade. The reason for these discrepancies and changes may simply
be that Zeeland had a smaller economic base and smaller port facilities and
10. RAX-A, no. 17, sub. 405; MCC, vol. 1569, doc. 10.
n . A valuable analysis of the MSS slave trade records has been made by W. S. Unger, see
Unger II. This author was one of the first admitted to examine the papers of Coopstad
and Rochussen, but more recently the collection has been studied more thoroughly by
Pamela Veder in the Leiden Seminar, and her conclusions have been incorporated in
this studv.
catered to smaller ships. Perhaps this was also one of the reasons why Zeeland
became the center of the Dutch slave trade. Why the remaining Amsterdam
participants used ships even smaller than the Zeelanders during the free
trade is difficult to explain. Larger ships may simply have been put to more
efficient use in other branches of maritime trade at a time when the slave
trade was utilizing smaller ships, as will be shown below.12
Monopoly and stationary trade
The WIC directors tried to keep close control over all facets of the slave
trade, including the essential procurement of the slaves on the African coast.
This unitary command structure was accomplished in part through the ex-
istence of a chain of trading stations or castles along the West African coast,
which spawned a pattern of trade that might be called castle, station, or
stationary trade. The last term is preferred in this study. The trading stations
functioned as connecting links between African and European merchants.
The WIC officials stationed at the so-called factories were facilitators in the
exchange of merchandise, including the human captives. In theory, the com-
pany personnel would get a consignment of slaves ready for embarkation
before a WIC slave ship arrived in African waters, although in reality there
were always various factors that prevented such a smooth operation.
Various methods were used by the metropolitan directors to maintain a
maximum of control over the operations on the periphery. The system of
assignments discussed earlier was one of these methods. WIC ships were
directed to a specific African and American destination, with an approximate
timetable and cargo size stipulated. Any changes made in these instructions
by the African director of the WIC could result in a serious reprimand,
unless existing market or political conditions clearly justified such
alterations.13
Another means of metropolitan control was the issuing of a price guide
(marktbriefiy which stipulated the prices for goods to be bought and sold on
the African coast by WIC personnel. The price guide was posted at the
various trading stations, and deviations from this list could be made only by
the WIC director-general and then only with the approval of his council.
Only under unusual conditions was the director allowed to change prices
on his own authority. In 1710 WIC factors were allowed to sell European
12. See Tables 6.2 and 6.3. The utilization of ships will be explored further below.
13. WIC, vol. 484, p. 114; WIC, vol. 486, p. 320; WIC, vol. 487, p. 101; WIC, vol. 835,
135-6.
goods at prices higher than the price guide, but the resulting profits had to
be returned to the company.14
Communications were slow at that time; it could take half a year for a
two-way communication between Africa and Holland. The authorities in
Africa had to be given some leeway in adjusting policies initiated in Holland.
In addition to the cases mentioned, the director and council in Africa had
the authority to issue specific instructions for WIC captains and company
personnel on the coast that fit the general policies of the company. One
such directive for the conduct of the slave trade at Ouidah is printed as
Appendix 7. An important element of flexibility in the slave trade was that
the WIC directors in Africa were allowed to take the initiative to send small
slave consignments across the Atlantic when there was a surplus of slaves.
This policy seems to have been initiated in 1688, although there were in-
cidental cases before that date. As a rule small ships confiscated from the
Portuguese or from Dutch interlopers or ships used in the coastal trade were
utilized for this purpose. A few dozen of such slave consignments have been
documented, and they generally stand out from the regular WIC slavers by
their small cargoes of only 100 to 200 slaves.15
There were also several variations in the stationary pattern of trade. One
of these was the coastal trade, which is mentioned in Chapter 5. This trade
was generally carried out by small company ships, yachts as a rule, that
frequented various places along the coast where the WIC had no trading
stations. At any rate, this practice seems to have had little or no impact on
the slave trade. During the period 1710 to 1725 the WIC leadership in
Africa experimented occasionally with a more mobile trade that was similar
to the practice of the coastal trade and also to that of the Dutch interlopers.
Consequently, contemporaries often referred to this as the interloper trade.
In this context a few WIC ships were sent to trade on the upper coast
(Windward coast) directly with coastal African merchants. This took place
at a time when the WIC slave and gold trade were at a low point and when
the company monopoly and stationary trade were under much pressure from
the private sector in Holland. After one such experiment the WIC director
at Elmina reported with elation that the experiment had met with failure,
obviously because the WIC establishment in Africa had a vested interest in
the stationary trade.16
14. WIC, vol. 56, p. 115; WIC, vol. 109, p. 56; WIC, vol. 831, min. 1/18/1675; WIC, vol.
746, cor. 1/11/1677; WIC, vol. 54, cor. 11/3/1690; WIC, vol. 55, p. 3.
15. WIC, 55, p. 20; WIC, vol. 832, pp. 182-3; KITLV, doc. H-65 and H-67; WIC, vol.
200, p. 54; WIC, vol. 54, p. 9. See Table 10.2, category "General," and Appendix 1,
where these ships are marked with the A after their names.
16. These experiments took place in 1710, 1714, 1720, 1724, and 1725. See WIC, vol. 56,
p. 74; WIC, vol. 485, pp. 150, 496, and 328; WIC, vol. 486, pp. 75, 328, and 524-6;
NBKG, vol. 235, Instr. 11/21/1713.
The most important exception to the WIC stationary trade was the com-
pany's activities on the Loango coast. Because the WIC only sporadically
had trading stations of any permanence in that region, the stationary trade
was not possible there. WIC ships procuring slaves in this region would
establish temporary lodges on the beach, sometimes purchasing their slaves
all in one location, but other times moving to a number of different locations
to complete their slave consignment. This practice was a blend between
stationary and mobile trade. Slave-ship captains could not always rely on
the services of the WIC merchants at the trading stations. Captains often
had the dual responsibility of being merchant as well as master of the ship.
But sometimes a special merchant, or supercargo, came along to supervise
the commercial aspect of the slaving expedition.17 The stationary trade had
its variations, and it was limited to the areas of the Gold Coast and Slave
Coast.
The forbidden private trade
WIC employees, wherever they were stationed, were thus expected to work
as a team and to maximize efficiency and profitability for the benefit of the
company. The WIC had a special set of regulations (artikelbrief), which all
WIC employees overseas had to adhere to under oath and with the threat
of dismissal and prosecution. Article 36 of these WIC regulations stated
clearly that employees were prohibited from engaging in private trade of any
sort, except when specifically approved. This applied to WIC employees on
company ships as well as in the different WIC territories. Only the officials
at the top of the hierarchy and captains of WIC ships had opportunities for
special bonuses or commissions, and these were carefully defined by com-
pany rules.18
In spite of these regulations and their repeated warnings and postings at
the trading stations, violations of the prohibition of private trade seemed to
be endemic, judging from the frequent references to it in WIC correspond-
ence. It was apparently the involvement in this practice that prevented the
prominent factor, Willem Bosman, from attaining the position of director,
and forced his repatriation to Holland after about fourteen years of service
on the African coast. It may have been rather naive on the part of the WIC
directors in Holland to assume that these men risked their lives serving in
17. WIC, vol. 485, p. 328; WIC, vol. 833, pp. 128-32 lists a set of instructions for a supercargo
on the WIC slaver St. Jan. Some good records of the Loango pattern of trade have been
preserved, see SS, vol. 113, on the Vrede, 1684.
18. WIC, vol. 54, pp. 2-3 and cor. 9/26/1699; WIC, vol. 69, cor. 12/20/1691; WIC, vol.
832, pp. 241, 263-74.
such a dangerous area without being tempted by extra bonuses, even if it
involved serious risks. Some got involved trading with foreign ships, others
with interlopers, with whom they then shared a common legal transgression. I9
In order to avoid such illicit private trade the WIC had to create a host
of bureaucratic regulations, which incidentally became a windfall for re-
searchers, including a careful bookkeeping system for each consignment of
slaves (cognossement), and signed death affidavits (attestaties) for slaves who
died while the property of the company. The branding of company-owned
slaves before embarkation was another means of preventing them from being
stolen or exchanged by company personnel.20
One of the most common violations of the code against private trade was
that captains of slave ships were prone to carry slaves not accounted for on
the ledgers, which they claimed to be their private property. Sometimes this
involved sizable numbers, such as in 1680 when Captain de Vos smuggled
thirty-eight slaves on his ship Africa from the Slave Coast to Curasao. Four
years later, Captain Petts of the Vrede tried to sell twenty-seven privately
owned slaves at Surinam, in addition to 172 ivory tusks and some African
copper. Captain Wassenaer of the Rusthof sold twenty-five privately trans-
ported slaves to a French merchant at St. Eustatius, but before delivering
them was apprehended and saw his slaves confiscated by WIC officials. In
1708 the council of X complained that so much privately owned merchandise
was carried on slave ships that there was not enough space for the slaves.
Since 1675 only captains had been allowed to take along a small amount of
private merchandise on their ships, but this privilege was gradually adopted
by other officers and to sailors. When apprehended, as in the aforementioned
cases, the slaves and merchandise were confiscated and the men involved
were punished with demotion, fining, or both. Sizable bonuses were given
to WIC personnel who contributed to the apprehension of violators.21
A more common form of exploitation and violation of the company policy
against private trade was the practice of slave captains taking privately owned
slave girls or boys on board. Of the specific cases documented in this study,
there were nineteen boys and four girls, and in a few cases more than one
boy was owned by the captain. We may surmise that sexual exploitation was
involved. Like the other trade slaves, the youngsters generally ended up
being sold on the Western slave markets at the conclusion of the middle
passage, which was the real offense insofar as the company directors were
concerned. When, in 1724, Captain Gerrit de Haen of the Emmenes had
19. W I C , vol. 98, p. 9; W I C , vol. 55, cor. 11/9/1713.

20. W I C , vol. 832, p. 241. See also Appendixes 22 and 23.
21. W I C , vol. 617, pp. 5 and 35; SS, vol. 113, pp. 427-9; W I C , vol. 55, cor. 11/28/1708;
W I C , vol. 619, p. 237; W I C , vol. 330, pp. 22 and 40; W I C , vol. 833, p. 194; W I C , vol.
68, cor. 5/23/1689; W I C , vol. 69, p. 183 and cor. 12/20/1691; W I C , vol. 832, p. 249.
two young boys confiscated by the authorities at Surinam, he promptly bought
back the young slaves at the next public-slave auction. One can only speculate
upon the nature of the captain's attachment to the boys. In virtually every
case the captains claimed that the young slaves were presents, given to them
by either African or European traders, most likely in return for favors granted.
Because a single slave could rather easily have escaped the scrutiny of the
WIC official in the port of destination, one may assume that the practice of
taking young slaves as private property on the middle passage was not at all
uncommon.22
Free trade and mobile trade
As a result of enormous pressures from the private sector in Holland, the

slave-trade monopoly of the WIC was significantly curtailed in 1730 and
was completely terminated for the coast of Africa in 1734. Compared to
other nations the Dutch were late in adopting a free-trade policy; France
and England had already done so in 1672 and 1698, respectively. The WIC
establishment fought against freeing the trade, and with the renewal of their
charter in 1730 they were able to retain portions of the old monopoly,
including the Gold Coast of Africa, and Surinam and the other Guiana
colonies in South America. Due to continued pressure by free traders and
financial difficulties of the WIC, those remnants of the company's monopoly
were also terminated, in 1734 and 1738, respectively.23
Any Dutch subject who wished to engage in the slave trade was now
permitted to do so upon the payment of a fee known as recognitie, or lastgeld,
literally "recognition" or "burden money." The latter term was derived from
the capacity of the ship, which was measured in "burden," or last. The
records of these fee payments have become a crucial measure of the flow and
volume of the Dutch slave trade during the free-trade period, as has already
been demonstrated in this chapter and Appendix 9. The WIC was the
recipient of these fees, as well as the agency that collected them. A WIC
director wrote in 1750 that this "recognitie is one of the important, if not the
most significant part of the (income of) the company." Thus, the WIC
remained involved in the slave trade, albeit indirectly, long after it lost a
monopoly over the traffic.24
22. WIC, vol. 68, cor. 5/5/1687; WIC, vol. 200, p. 160; WIC, vol. 202, pp. 218 and 367;
WIC, vol. 203, p. 556; WIC, vol. 204, p. 469; WIC, vol. 205, p. 23; WIC, vol. 619, pp. 270
and 344; WIC, vol. 1141, cor. 4/10/1733, 6/23/1733, and 7/10/1733; SS, vol. 221, p. 2.
23. The process and forces instrumental in the shift from monopoly to free trade will be
discussed in greater detail in Chapter 9.
24. MCC, vol. 1569, doc. 10; See VWIS, folder 1244; ARA, Aanwinsten, 1895, LX-447;
MCC, vol. 119; MCC, vol. 1569; WIC, vol. 1265 for listings of these recognition fees.
The fees for slaving permits, or passes as they were also called, were paid
one-third in advance and the remainder after the slaving mission was com-
pleted. Initially, a slave ship was allowed only twelve months for a triangular
voyage, after which a monthly late fee, or napremie was collected. After a
few years' experience with the free trade, however, the time span for a slaving
voyage was extended to a more realistic duration of eighteen months. The
rate for slave permits was 60 guilders per last (equivalent to about two
maritime tons), which was lowered to 42.5 guilders in the charter of 1760.
The penalty for late fees was 210 guilders a month. These fees constituted
a significant source of revenue for the WIC, as shown in Appendix 11. 25
In return for this income the WIC retained the responsibility for the
upkeep of the African and Caribbean trading stations, as well as the right
to trade in these areas without duty payments. Thus the WIC continued to
trade on the African coast, albeit at a greatly reduced rate. WIC merchants
continued to purchase slaves from African traders and then resell them to
free traders who chose to anchor at one of the WIC trading stations. In fact,
Elmina often became the last port of call for free traders on the Guinea
coast because slave consignments were frequently completed here. One of
the reasons for this was that slaves bought from the WIC establishment were
more expensive than those acquired directly from Africans, because WIC
merchants had to pay the company a special fee of twenty guilders for each
slave sold. This fee was called hoofdgeldy or head money, and supplied the
company with another source of income, as is shown in Table 8.1. Free
traders often complained that the cost of their slaves was significantly higher
than that of other European nationals, because of the permit fees and the
head money payment. They could avoid the head money if they bought
directly from African vendors.26
The shift from monopoly to free trade also signaled a change in the
methods of slave procurement. Free traders used trading stations only as a
second choice or in emergencies, and they operated a system that might be
called a mobile trade. It has also been called the ship trade because instead
of the coastal trading station the slave ship itself had become the base of
operation and the coordinating center of the trade. In the free trade, a captain
had to be an expert merchant, know African affairs, as well as perform as
a navigator and master of the ship and crew. A free trader could not rely
on storage and assistance from the WIC establishment. On the other hand,
a captain was free of WIC restrictions, and he could anchor and trade directly
with Africans at his own risk. African traders often came aboard the slave
ships to negotiate deals with European captains. Instead of sailing directly
25. VWIS, folders 24 and 41. See also WIC charters in Le Moine de L'Espine, De Koophandel
van Amsterdam. (Amsterdam: J. de Groot, 1810).
26. VWIS, folder 1203.
to Elmina or to the Loango coast, the free-trade ship generally started trading
along the Windward coast, and procured a slave cargo in piecemeal fashion,
as was described in Chapter 5 (see Table 5.8).
One unique feature of the mobile trade was boating: sending small sloops
or boats upstream on the rivers or along the coast while the mother ship
continued trading in the general vicinity off the coast. On the whole, however,
this practice did not significantly add numbers to the Dutch free trade. Of
the fifty ships listed in Table 5.8, only thirteen reported the use of sloops
or boats, with a total of thirty-three separate trips, and the acquisition of
approximately 150 slaves by this method. This represents only slightly more
than 1 percent of the total number of slaves (12,865) acquired in this sample,
and is thus hardly worth mentioning as a significant feature of the Dutch
slave trade.27
Procurement efficiency
The free traders operated in a very individualistic and competitive manner.

There is only scant evidence of cooperation between them, unless the ships
represented the same company. In addition, they did not have the full co-
operation of the WIC trading establishment on the African coast. The WIC
stationary trade, by contrast, was geared to coordinate activities of the com-
pany slave ships. This greatly reduced the procurement or loading period
of the WIC slave ships, which averaged slightly more than three months.
The shortest procurement period on record occurred in 1693, when the
WIC slaver, Rachel, required only eleven days to purchase and board its
human cargo. Unfortunately, we do not know the number of slaves taken
in, and it should be noted also that this ship may well have spent several
weeks at Elmina before sailing to the Slave Coast, where it obtained its
slaves. Other WIC slavers singled out for their speedy procurement were
the Europe, which obtained 471 slaves in twenty-seven days, and the slaver,
Duynvliet, with 340 slaves in twenty-three days. The longest procurement
period on record for the WIC was at least eight months, involving the ship,
Duynenburgh, on the Loango coast. Little detail is known about this slaving
voyage; besides, the Loango trade was perhaps closer to the mobile trade
of the free traders than to the stationary trade of the WIC. The next longest
WIC slaver on record, the Phenix, took about seven months to board 674
slaves on the Gold Coast from March until October I728. 28 It should be
27. See Table 5.8 and its sources.
28. WIC, vol. 97, p. 152; WIC, vol. 180, p. 59; WIC, vol. 486, p. 365; WIC, vol. 486, pp. 129
and 176; WIC, vol. 658, cor. 11/10/1701.
kept in mind, however, that occasionally WIC ships were assigned alternate
duties, such as patrolling against interlopers and Brazilian ships, while on
the African coast.
Unfortunately, the records on procurement time for the WIC are not very
solid, primarily because very few African arrival dates have been found
recorded and thus far only two WIC slave-ship logbooks have been located.
For only nineteen WIC ships is the time spent on the African coast known,
and for three of these the number of slaves boarded have not been verified.
According to this skimpy record, WIC ships spent an average of ninety days
on the African coast. A larger but more speculative set of data, focusing on
mortality records and representing forty-nine WIC ships, suggests a ninety-
nine-day procurement period. Time calculations based on the overall voyage
length of WIC slaving missions suggest an African coasting time in excess
of one hundred days. Slightly more than three months of trading on the
African coast before anchor was weighed for the Atlantic crossing seems to
be a representative average for WIC slave ships.29
Better statistics on this matter are available for the free trade, especially
from the MCC records. Unger had already noted that seventy MCC ships
spent an average of seven and a half months in Africa to obtain their human
cargo; twenty-four ships took longer and forty-six needed a shorter period.
The unpublished thesis of Robert Hezemans explored these MCC statistics
in greater detail, and the results give us a far better picture of the relative
efficiency of the MCC slave trade, as shown in Table 6.4.30
A comparison of these statistics shows that the stationary system of the
WIC loaded about three times as many slaves as the MCC during the same
time period: approximately five slaves per day for the WIC as compared to
fewer than two on the average for the MCC free traders. In terms of costs
these differences are offset by other factors, such as the cost of maintaining
the trading stations and the slower WIC sailing ships. The MCC statistics
also point to the interesting fact that the slave trade with Bantu-speaking
Africa on the Loango-Angola coast was far more efficient for free traders
than their procurement of slaves on the Guinea coast. The WIC data is
inadequate to provide meaningful distinctions between these two areas. The
same is true for changes in procurement efficiency over time, where the
MCC statistics point to a declining efficiency until the 1760s, after which
it remained stable at an average of one and a half slaves per day.31
29. See Table 6.4 and Appendixes 15, 16 and 17. See also Chapter 7 for elaboration on the
duration of the various legs of slave voyages.
30. Unger II, p. 39; R.A.F. Hezemans, "De Atlantische slavenhandel der Middelburgsche
Commercie Compagnie," M.A. thesis, Leiden University, 1985.
31. Hezemans, pp. 16-20, and 71. See also Appendix 18.
Table 6.4
Daily loading rates on the African coast
Average Days in Loaded
Period Category Sample per ship Africa per day
1687-1735 WIC 19 436 90.4 4.8
1700-1734 WIC 49 397 93.4 4.7
1732-1802 MCC (all) 57 284 200 1.8

MCC (Cent. Africa) 13 361 143 3
MCC (Guinea coast) 42 256 217 1.4
1732-1749 MCC 8 201 158 1.9

1752-1759 MCC 10 284 170 1.7
1760-1769 MCC 15 282 191 1.5
1770-1779 MCC 18 277 192 1.5
1780-1802 MCC 7 284 200 1.5
Source: Appendixes 15-18.

Notes: See accompanying text for explanation of calculations.
The ships of the slave trade
The wooden sailing ships employed in the Dutch slave trade were typical
cargo ships of their time. Contrary to what some writers have claimed, there
is no evidence that the Dutch ever designed ships specifically for the slave
trade, as did their competitors from Liverpool, and the frequently pictured
slave ship Brooks. In WIC correspondence of 1687 we read that slave ships
should have a diep verdeck, which refers to a narrow 'tween deck between
the lower and upper deck. When such an extra deck, generally used for
storage, was deep enough for a person to walk through nearly upright, it
supplied valuable additional space for slaves to be housed. The reference
also confirms that slaves were, as a rule, kept between decks and not in the
holds of ships. Figure 6.1 is a simplified view of a generic slave ship. With
the different ship types, the variations within these types and changes that
occurred through time, one should keep in mind that the representation may
not show an exact pattern among existing slave ships. In general, Dutch
literature and archives have revealed little about slave-ship architecture. This
may be because slave ships were of minimal importance in the Dutch ship-
building industry or because merchant ships could readily be refashioned
into slave ships through internal modifications.32
Before the period of the free trade, the types of ships utilized for the slave
32. Daniel P. Mannix and Malcolm Cowley, Black Cargoes; A History of the Atlantic Slave Trade
(New York: Viking, 1962), pp. 105 and i46ff.; WIC, vol. 652, doc. 4/21/1687.
Figure 6.1
Generic diagram of the interior of a slave ship
Source: This drawing is adapted from a design by Victor Enthoven (see Chapter 6, note 34).
trade remain somewhat of a mystery. Occasionally, the terms fluit, hekboot,

katschipy and pinas are used in connection with specific types of WIC slave
ships, all typical merchant ships of that period. Yachts were usually employed
for the small consignments of slaves that were dispatched on the initiative
of Elmina. On rare occasions a frigate (fregat) carried slaves, but during the
seventeenth century this type of ship was commonly employed as a cruiser
for naval and military purposes. Much has been said of the Dutch construc-
tion and use of the so-called flute ship (fluitschip), the seventeenth-century
Dutch invention that was specifically designed to maximize cargo capacity.
Some writers have claimed that the flute also played a significant role in the
Dutch slave trade. This may indeed have been the case during the early
years of the Dutch slave trade, but by the last quarter of the seventeenth
century flute ships may already have been in the minority among WIC slavers.
During the course of the seventeenth century, many of the Dutch ships were
designed with flutelike characteristics to maximize carrying capacity. Ship
types are rarely mentioned in the records; the word ship was generally used
as a designation to distinguish them from the smaller and faster sailing
frigates. Toward the end of the seventeenth century, the fluit (flute) was often
singled out in negative terms in the slave trade. In 1686 Governor Som-
melsdijck of Surinam wrote to his superiors in Holland complaining that
flute ships were not suitable for the slave trade. His comments were stimulated
by the recently arrived flute, t'Huys te Loirheim, which in September of that
year had landed 303 slaves in the colony. The flute ship, Gideon, also active
during the 1680s, was expected to be an ideal slaver able to carry 900 slaves,
a great improvement over the then standard 500 slave cargoes. Detailed
statistics on the Gideon's consignments are lacking but there is no indication
that the ship was exceptional among WIC slave ships in its carrying capacity.
If flute ships were used as slavers during the early days of the Dutch slave
trade - and there is no evidence to that effect - they were certainly on their
way out by the end of the seventeenth century. The pear-shaped flute had a
large hold for cargo but limited deck space, and that is the area where slaves
were housed.33
Advancing into the eighteenth century, the faster sailing but generally
smaller frigates became the most commonly used Dutch slavers. But in
addition, the barque (bark), yacht, snauw, hoeker, and galjoot are also com-
monly mentioned ship types. The special slave shipments initiated by the
WIC establishment at Elmina, generally made use of yachts, and these ships
were also quite frequently employed by free traders. One WIC document
of 1675 describes yachts as being generally about 60 feet in length and the
typical frigate 75 feet, whereas the WIC slaver Sonnesteyn (1714-30), a bark,
was 115 feet in length. It should be kept in mind that length and capacity
of ships could vary significantly within a given ship type. In the Dutch free
trade, frigates were clearly most common among the slave ships. Of twenty-
nine recorded types among the MCC slavers, nineteen were frigates, and
five belonged to the snauw type, and three others were a combination of
both. The slave ships employed by the Rotterdam-based shipping firm Coop-
stad and Rochussen were also mostly frigates.34
General-purpose cargo ships were used for the Dutch slave trade. As a
rule, the ship's carpenter, aided by sailors and selected slaves, would grad-
ually modify the decks of the ships during the coasting phase. Gradually,
European merchandise was moved to the top deck and sold, and wood
shelving was installed between decks to accommodate the incoming human
cargo. Many ships were used only for a single or a few slaving voyages;
others were put to use exclusively in the slave trade. The most actively
utilized WIC slave ships were the Leusden (1720-38) and the Duynvliet
(1721-37), which made ten and nine slaving missions, respectively. The
33. SS, vol. 216, p. 8; WIC, vol. 652, doc. 4/21/1687; Van Dantzig, Nederlands Aandeel,
pp. 17 and 87; Vrijman, p. 48; J. van Beylen, "Scheepstypen," in Maritieme Geschiedenis
der Nederlandeny (Bussum: Uniboek, 1977) vol. 2, pp. 28-32.
34. Starting in the eighteenth century ships were usually identified by their rigging, but in
earlier days this was generally done by the appearance of the hull of a ship. WIC, vol.
832, p. 601; WIC, vol. 55, cor. n/1/1720 and n/20/1720; G.C.E. Crone, Onze Schepen
in de Gouden Eeuw (Amsterdam: Van Kampen, 1939), pp. 69, 72, and 86-91; Unger, II,
p. 19. See also Appendixes 1 and 2. Special thanks go to Victor Enthoven, student in the
Leiden Seminar, who has contributed significantly to my understanding of ships used in
the Dutch slave trade.
Leusden alone carried a total of 6,642 slaves from Africa. During the period
1675 t 0 I 738, eighteen WIC vessels made five or more Atlantic crossings;
their combined 105 slaving voyages carried more than one-third of the total
number of slaves transported by the company in the period 1675 to 1738.
The fact that ninety-three WIC vessels, more than fifty percent, undertook
only a single voyage underscores the fact that any cargo ship could and was
readily modified into a slave ship. The single-voyage slavers include most
of the special assignments that were authorized in Africa, and several others
were ships the company had rented for a specific slaving mission.35
Most of the WIC slaving ships were owned by the company, but on
occasion the company rented ships for specific duties including the slave
trade. These shipsflewthe company flag for the duration of their mission, and
they might be given different names. They were generally given preferential
service at the WIC trading stations in order to keep down the time and
thereby the cost of their rental fee. Occasionally, such ships were subse-
quently purchased by the company and used for additional slaving duty.
During the early 1680s there was much conflict between the cautious council
of X and some of the chambers that wanted to purchase more ships. Going
into the eighteenth century, there were fewer references to rented ships,
and after 1720 the company seems to have owned all its regular slaving
vessels.36
The utilization of ships in the free trade was basically similar to that of
the WIC, except that the former tended to have a somewhat smaller carrying
capacity and carried smaller slave consignments. In addition, whereas WIC
slave cargoes gradually increased in size, free-trade slave consignments
tended to get smaller with time. For WIC slave ships, very little data about
tonnage has survived and no meaningful comparison about size differential
can be made. A typical WIC slaver during the period 1720 to 1738, the only
time for which some data on sizes has survived, measured between about
90 to 120 feet in length, while MCC free-trade ships ranged between about
79 to n o feet.37
For the free trade, statistics on tonnage or carrying capacity and size are
abundant. This resulted primarily from the fact that the fees paid for ob-
taining slaving permits were based on tonnage, or last (burden), by which
Dutch ships were measured during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

36. WIC, vol. 831, doc. 1/14/1675; WIC, vol. 832, pp. 230, 261, 409, 416 and 480; WIC,
vol. 833, pp. 10, 14, and 61; WIC, vol. 834, pp. 286 and 312; WIC, vol. 838, pp. 246
and 394; WIC, vol. 659, cor. 4/6/1703; WIC, vol. 647, cor. 5/9/1675 and 6/10/1675;
WIC, vol. 54, cor. 11/3/1690, 9/4/1694, and 11/17/1706; WIC, vol. 1139, c o r - 4-/D/
1719.
37. Credit is due to Victor Enthoven of the Leiden Seminar for analyzing comparative ship
sizes during the final years of the WIC slave trade.
Table 6.5
Ship carrying capacity and mortality
Slave Average Avg. mort. Ship Adjust- Per Ship
Years sample cargo Deaths % size1* ment last b total
1730-1739 14,933 305 2,398 16.1 58 58 5.3 56
1740-1749 19,717 318 2,967 15. 61 61 5.2 62
1750-1760 39,568 329 4,865 12.3 64 64 5.2 120
1762-1769 a 33,844 293 4,387 13. 82 66 a 4.5 115
1770-1779 28,755 285 3,603 12.5 87 70 a 4.1 104
1780-1789 6,027 301 978 16.2 107 86a 3.5 24
1790-1803 2,902 290 293 10.1 115 92 a 3.2 10
Source: Appendix 2.
Notes: a Date discrepancy and size adjustments were the result of a change in ship
capacity measurement in 1761. This year is not included for that reason.
Ships were measured in last; one last was approximately two register tons.
It is impossible to state precisely what a last represented, because the method

of measuring ships changed from time to time. Dutch maritime historians
generally equate one last with two register tons. During most of the sev-
enteenth century, the length of a ship was the primary factor in determining
its lasten, but by the end of the century a more mathematical formula came
in use. According to this, lastagewas calculated by multiplying length, width,
and depth, and dividing that by 200. A ship measuring 100 x 24 x 11 would
be registered as 132 last; it had a storage capacity of 16,500 cubic feet, and
a carrying capacity of 561,000 pounds of grain. But this standardization did
not prevent variations in measurement from occuring afterward, which might
have differed from region to ship function. In the slave trade, for example,
the method of measuring slave ships was changed significantly in 1662, with
the result that the same ship measured on average about 20 percent more
than before. Table 6.5 shows the size variation of free-trade slave ships, and
it adjusts for the measuring change of 1760 by not including the years 1760-
1, when the changes were being applied. An interesting development is
noticeable in free-trade utilization of ship space, as is shown in the same
table. Whereas the capacity of the ships slowly but persistently increased
with the years, the average slave cargoes gradually decreased. 38
As was the case with the WIC, many slave ships in the free trade were
used for one slaving mission only. A total of 111 ships, or two out of five,
were not used for the slave trade a second time, and a relatively small number
of ships undertook several slaving missions, as is shown in Table 6.6. One
38. J.R. Bruyn, F.S. Gaastra, and I. Schaffer, Dutch Asiatic Shipping in the 17th and 18th
Centuries (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1987), vol. 1, pp. 42-44.
Table 6.6
Utilization of slave ships
Maximum number of slave missions per ship
Categories Number of voyages
16 12 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
WIC ships
Category max. 1 1 1 3 5 7 9 15 37 93
Voyage per ship 1 2 3 6 11 18 27 42 79 172'
Free traders
Category max. 1 1 5 7 7 9 14 17 18 36 49 111
Voyage per ship 1 2 7 14 21 30 44 61 79 115 164 275'
Combined
Category max. 1 1 6 8 7 13 19 24 27 51 86 204
Voyage per ship 1 2 8 16 23 36 55 79 106 157 243 447;

Notes: Out of a total of 368 WIC and 831 slaving missions documented in this
study, 4 and 15 respectively failed before slaves had been boarded on
the African coast.
a
Totals of the sample in each catagory.
free-trade ship may have made as many as sixteen Atlantic crossings, carrying
a total of 5,350 slaves from Africa. This was the ship Surinaamse Welvaart,
also referred to as Surinaams Welvaren. It is quite likely that these were
actually two different ships which because of the timing and the similarity
in name became inextricably confused through the often incomplete and
inaccurate documentation. The unusually high number of slaving voyages
would also suggest that the records of two separate ships may have been
involved. The second most active free-trade ship was the Prim Willem V,
which exported slightly more than 4,000 slaves from Africa in twelve
missions.39
As Table 6.6 shows, there were several free-trade ships that made a
record number of crossings. Counting the Surinaamse Welvaart as a single
vessel, there were 61 free-trade ships out of a total of 275 that undertook
five or more slaving missions, shipping a total of 132,500 slaves from Africa.
This represents more than half of all the slaves exported by Dutch free
traders.
What was the quality of the ships engaged in the slave trade? From the
literature on the traffic, one might surmise that the ships must have been
of poor quality because of the wretched conditions in which the slaves were
39. See Appendix 2.

quartered. Of course, there were cases of old ships that were leaking and
in a general poor state of repair. Given the high value of the human cargoes,
however, one may assume that slaving firms would be very careful not to
risk their investment in an unseaworthy vessel. Slave ships regularly returned
to Europe with sugar products from the West Indies, so there was an added
reason to keep ships in good repair to preserve products extremely vulnerable
to spoilage. For this reason, a number of slave ships were sold or retired in
the Caribbean, or warnings would be sent to Holland to either repair or
discontinue use of certain ships for the slave trade.40
Thus with the shift from monopoly to free trade, there was also a significant
change in the methods of procurement of slaves, from a rather stationary to
a more mobile pattern. In the latter, the captains of the ships were often
expected to be more involved in the trade, and they had more frequent direct
contact with African merchants. The WIC slave captain was to a large extent
deprived of his intermediary position in the slave trade, as far as contact
with Africans was concerned. With the introduction of the free trade, the
volume of the Dutch slave trade started to increase significantly, and the
number of ships used for the traffic increased even more because they were
smaller and, on average, carried significantly smaller consignments.
40. WIC, vol. 1138, cor. 6/15/1707. The housing of slaves on board ships is discussed more
extensively in Chapter 10.
The triangular trade
The Dutch slave trade, like that of other European nations, can truly be
called a triangular trade because it involved three principal stages or legs
and three different continental regions. European goods were shipped from
there to Africa, where they were exchanged for slaves, who in turn were
taken across the ocean to some destination in the Americas. There the slaves
were exchanged for either cash, promissory notes, or tropical agricultural
produce that was then shipped back to Europe. Although there were several
variations of this pattern, which has made some historians question the
triangularity of the system, broadly speaking this was at least the general
pattern of the Atlantic slave trade as practiced by Europeans. English writers
called this system the "great circuit trade." Slave ships originating from
Brazil followed a bilateral pattern and, in a sense, the same can be said about
slavers from North America, although the latter have also had their slave-
trade pattern referred to as triangular. This chapter focuses on the various
stages of the Dutch triangular slave trade, clarifying the basic pattern as well
as pointing to the exceptions and peculiarities within the system, and it places
the major emphasis on the so-called middle passage in which the slaves were
the crucial elements.1
Preparation and voyage to Africa
Once it became apparent that a profitable slaving mission could be under-

taken, the interested authorities assigned a ship for that task. In the case of
the WIC, the Heren X authorized specific missions for a specific chamber,
specifying the year and the African and American destinations. The des-
ignated WIC chamber then selected a ship, appointed the master or captain,
i. See Walter E. Minchington, "The Triangular Trade Revisited," in The Uncommon Market
(New York: Academic Press, 1979), pp. 331-52, for an examination of the debate on the
triangular trade; Davison, pp. 51 and 62.
149
and saw to it that the needed preparations for the voyage were made. In the
free trade such tasks were the responsibility of the chief reder, or boekhouder,
who represented the shareholders of the slave ship, or it was done by the
directors of the companies that engaged in the slave trade. In addition to
the preparation of the ship, a crew had to be hired, appropriate merchandise
for the African trade had to be obtained, and provisions for the crew and
the slaves had to be secured and taken aboard. The provisioning of a slave
ship needed special care and exceptional expertise, because of the fluctuating
nature of the cargo. For the middle passage in particular, extra personnel
was needed for the care of the "living merchandise," and large quantities
of food had to be stored to keep the slaves alive and well until their disposal
in the West. Although water and some of the fresh foods could be obtained
in Africa, the bulk of the food for slaves and crew was boarded in Holland,
consisting of dried fish, smoked meats, bread, beans, barley, cheese, and
spirits, to mention the most important items. As a rule, the delivery of these
provisions was contracted out by way of public announcers or by advertise-
ments. The acquisition of the merchandise for the slaver, consisting of a
large variety of goods, involved a similar process.2
Preparing the ship for the voyage could take several months. In the case
of the ship, Standvastigheid (1802-3), one of the last legal Dutch slavers, it
took from March to September before it was ready to sail. With the crew
and cargo complete, the ship was towed from the harbor to open water. It
was at this point that the crew members boarded the ship, with the captain
the last one to arrive. With Zeeland ships this was a relatively simple matter,
but Amsterdam ships had to be piloted across the shallows facing the city
and then across the Zuiderzee (now Ijssel Lake) to the takeoff anchorage at
the island of Texel. Here the captain, having traveled by different means,
finally joined his ship. In addition to overseeing the whole preparation for
the voyage, the captain had to wait until all the ship's papers were prepared
- insurance policies, fee payments, company directives, and the appropriate
passes. The latter usually included the so-called Turkish pass which safe-
guarded the ship against North-African privateers. Appendix 6 lists the
various papers that slave ships had to have on hand. 3
2. See Chapter 4 for a discussion of European merchandise used in the African slave trade.
For the preparation of ships of the free trade see Unger II, pp. 18-20. See also P.C.
Emmer, "De laatste slavenreis van de Middelburgsche commercie compagnie," Economisch
en Sociaal-Historisch Jaarboek, vol. 34 (1971), pp. 83-8; D. van der Vlis, "De reis van het
fregatschip Het Vergenoegen naar Angola en Suriname," Mededelingen van de Nederlandse
Vereniging voor Zeegeschiedenis, no. 15 (November, 1967), pp. 3-5; H.I. Vroeijenstijn, "De
eerste voyage van het fregatschip De Standvastigheid... ", M.A. thesis, Leiden University,
1969, pp. 9-13.
3. Unger II, pp. 34-6; J. Hudig, De Scheepvaart op West Afrika en West-India in de i8de eeuw
(Amsterdam, 1926) pp. 16-17.
T h e triangular trade 151
After the captain boarded and a number of formalities, such as appropriate

salutes, completed the voyage officially started. Waiting for the captain and
other final arrangements could keep a ship from starting the voyage im-
mediately, but the weather was often the principal cause for postponement,
as frost, storms, or unfavorable winds could prevent the ship's departure. A
week was the least amount of time spent waiting, and most ships were delayed
far longer. Some ships had to wait two or three months before favorable
winds allowed them to sail. Once the ship was on the North Sea, the trip
to Africa was underway.4
With the ships in good repair and the crews at their prime, the voyage
to Africa must have been one of the most pleasant and leisurely legs of
the triangular voyage. It is difficult to determine how long this voyage
lasted, because the African destination and location where trading began
varied greatly. Some free traders started purchasing slaves on the Senegal
coast, but ships destined for the central African coast (Loango) were
barely past the halfway mark of the initial leg of the voyage at this point.
For WIC slave ships the variation was less confusing, because they sailed
directly either to Elmina or to the Loango region and commenced trad-
ing shortly thereafter. Unfortunately, very few of the WIC African arrival
dates have been documented. As Table 7.1 shows, the average voyage
length of five WIC slavers was 87 days; the shortest took 59 days and the
longest 144. More reliable statistics are available when the initial voyage
and the trading period on the African coast are combined. An extrapola-
tion from the various combinations of data on voyage length, as is shown
in Table 7.1, puts the first leg of the triangular voyage at an average of
approximately 100 days for the WIC.
The free trade may be more complicated but the data on the voyage length
is more abundant. In his thorough study of the MCC records, Unger has
collected a much larger sample of data and puts the average length of the
initial leg of the voyage at approximately 76 days, with voyages ranging from
37 to 326 days before slaves were taken on. It should be noted that these
figures include the ships' waiting periods between leaving the harbor and
the time they sailed into open sea, which in some cases lasted for months.
Such conditions undoubtedly were contributing factors in the few extremely
long-lasting voyages to the African coast.5 The smaller and swifter sailing
ships used by the free traders outpaced the bulkier WIC slaving vessels, as
shown in the comparable average voyage length. This comparison will be
explored further at the end of this chapter.
4. The ship Vergenoegen had to wait seventy-nine days in 1793, and the Vliegende Foam took
a full three months before it departed. See Van der Vlis, p. 4; Unger II, pp. 35-6.
5. Unger II, pp. 38-9 and 50. See also Table 7.1.
Table 7.1
Time dimensions of triangular slaving missions
Units of the Average Range Median
slaving voyage Category in days in days in days Sample 6
Complete WIC 520 306-837 515 32

mission Free trade 553 323-1399 327
1.
Holland to Africa WIC 87 59-144 5
(100a)
MCC1 ca.76 37-326 90
z.
On African coast WIC 92 11-245 70-85 14
96 28-177 95 17
(11â\
^ 1 ID )
MCC2 200 60-508 177 57
3.
Middle passage WIC 81 23-284 74 110
MCC1 62 41-135 ca. 65
Free trade 71 32-182 61 56
4.
Stay in the West WIC 116 18-425 107 76
Free trade 86 13-285 81 281
5.
Return voyage WIC 72 28-216 66 28
MCC1 74 45-146 ca. 90
Free trade 87 28-281 78 109
Holland to Afri- WIC 217 76-509 199 44

can departure Free trade 348 127-653 323 51
Holland to arrival WIC 310 111-624 285 38

in America Free trade 379 133-976 366 283
Holland to depar- WIC 235 93-773 186 30

ture from West Free trade 181 49-936 167 191
Source: ^ n g e r II, pp. 38-39 and 50; 2 Hezemans, p. 71; and Appendixes 1, 2, 15,
and 17.
Notes: a Extrapolated from the 2d, 3d, and 7th units of the triangular voyages.
Number of missions in the sample.
Captains and crews
The people managing and operating the slave ships played crucial roles in
the slave trade, although they often were more victims than beneficiaries of
the traffic. Their mortality rates, for example, were generally higher than
those of the slaves. Sailors on slave ships were a varied lot. The captains
and officers were primarily Dutch and frequently had a direct interest in
the financial success of a slaving venture either through family ownership

or through special bonus payments, but many of the sailors were drawn from
a pool of foreign migrant labor concentrated in the capital city of Amsterdam.
Unger calculates that over one-third of the sailors serving on MCC slave
ships were foreigners, primarily from German and Scandinavian countries.
Far less is known about the crews of WIC slave ships, but because more of
these ships sailed from Amsterdam this author assumes that a large per-
centage of those crews were also of foreign origin.6
A typical WIC slave ship at the end of the seventeenth century had a crew
of forty when slaves were obtained on the Slave Coast and Gold Coast and
forty-five when Loango was the African destination. The larger crew was
necessary to make up for the lack of onshore company assistance, which was
available only on the Guinea coast. One WIC slaver departing Holland in
1680 and commissioned to fetch 500 slaves had a crew of thirty-four. In
the eighteenth century we find WIC slavers with crews of sixty and one ship,
the Arent, with as many as seventy crew members, and these figures may
have gone even higher during the 1720s and 1730s, when the slave cargoes
were larger. Table 7.2 lists the various functions of crew members on Dutch
slave traders, with their respective salaries.7
Not all of these crew members listed were present on every slave ship, as
is shown in Table 7.2. Some functions were simply not filled and occasionally
crew members served dual roles. One important addition on the WIC ships
sailing to Loango was a supercargo, who was in charge of the commercial
aspect of the slaving mission, leaving the captain in charge of overall su-
pervision and navigation of the ship. Free traders apparently also have been
known to use supercargoes, even when trading on the Guinea coast.8
Free-trade slave ships, being smaller on the average and carrying fewer
slaves, also had correspondingly smaller crews. The MCC slave ships carried
an average crew of thirty-six, ranging from a minimum of twenty-six to a
maximum of forty-four. With the average recorded tonnage of free traders
at 74 last (148 ton) per ship, this meant approximately one crew member
per two fasten, if the MCC average for crews is applied to all free traders.
The documentation for WIC ships on tonnage and crews is extremely sparse;
consequently, a single example of the WIC slaver, Brandenburg, will have to
suffice. This vessel made three slaving voyages during the period 1726 to
1733, carrying 563 and 409 slaves, respectively, on its two last missions. It
measured 128 last (256 tons), was armed with twenty-five cannon, and had
a crew of sixty. This again is very close to one crew member per two fasten,
6. Unger II, pp. 22-3.

7. WIC, vol. 834, p. 132; WIC, vol. 836, pp. 147 and 333; WIC, vol. 832, pp. 208 and
567-8.
8. WIC, vol. 834, p. 132.
Table 7.2
Dutch slave ship crew members and their monthly salaries
Listed in guilders (/)
Positions (Dutch equivalents) 1682a 1732b 1802c
Master or Captain /50 /60 /60
Mate or First Mate 36 36 38
Second Mate 25 30 30
Third Mate 20 (3d Watch) 24
Third Mate Assistant 14
Supercargo (Oppermeester) 36
Supercargo Assistant (Ondermeester) 24
Boatswain 20 22 26
Second Boatswain 14 22
and Sailmaker 24 22
Constable 20
Second Constable 14 15
Bottler 20 20
Bottler Mate & Cooper 22
Second Bottler 14
Cook 20 20 22
Second Cook 14
Surgeon (Ship Doctor) 26-28 36
Second Surgeon 16 20
Third Surgeon 12
Cooper 14 26
Second Cooper 20
Sail Maker 14
Carpenter 36 36 40
Second Carpenter 20 20 22
Smith 22
Sailors 10-11 (10-28)1 12 (16) 1 20
Seamen 9-11 (7)1 14
Boys 8 (I) 1 7
Source: WIC, vol. 832, pp. 567-8, lists maximum wages as determined by theWIC
Council of X in 1682.
b
Unger 2, pp. 20-5; crew of an MCC slaver in 1732.
c
Emmer, pp. 120-3; crew of MCC slave ship in 1802.
Note: Refers to the total number in that function.
or one for every four tons. In both the WIC and the free trade it seems that
for each crew member about nine to ten slaves could be shipped across the
Atlantic.9
Judging by the salaries, ship carpenters were highly valued. This is un-
derstandable in light of their important role, for not only were they doing
9. Unger II, pp. 19-21; RLLM, Radermacher, vol. 576; VCC, vol. 6. See also Apendix 2.
ordinary repairs but they also had to rebuild the interior of the slave vessel
to accommodate three divergent types of cargo during the triangular voyage.
By and large, salaries did not increase much during the 120 years covered
in Table 7.2. Salaries increased a little for some categories during the final
decades of the eighteenth century, and for the sailors they were raised
significantly during this period.
Relatively little is known about the crews of slave ships, except the masters
or captains, or those who eventually rose to that rank. Shipmasters seem to
have benefited the most from successful slaving missions. Under the WIC
and the free-trade cbmpanies they generally received bonuses on the slaves
successfully transported to the West, and as a rule they also had the privilege
of doing a limited amount of private trade. As a result, the slave-ship masters
not only enjoyed the greatest comforts and the highest salaries among the
crew members, but if they were fortunate enough to survive several slaving
missions they had a chance to become wealthy. This is best illustrated by
the French slave captain, Pierre Van Alstein, who survived eight slaving
voyages and as a result of the profits secured became the owner of a sizable
estate and a member of the French nobility.10
No Dutch slave-ship captains are as well-known as Van Alstein and the
English captain, John Newton, who published his own account of the slave
trade after he had become an abolitionist. The names of many Dutch slave
shipmasters have been collected and are presented in Appendixes 13 and
14. This study does not lend itself to an examination of the lives of these
captains, but others might benefit from this list and pursue such an inves-
tigation. The economic opportunities of these captains went hand in hand
with much responsibility. Starting from the preparation of the voyage to its
conclusion, shipmasters had to account for their actions in this many-faceted
commercial enterprise. It was therefore difficult at times to find competent
captains for slave ships, as one WIC document of 1675 illustrates. In that
year WIC directors were debating the bonuses that slave captains should
receive for carrying slaves alive and well across the Atlantic. A number of
former interloper captains, including Jan van Arrel and Jan van der Does,
were hired by the WIC to serve as masters on WIC ships. The mates of the
masters, particularly the first mate, also had special privileges and respon-
sibilities. They usually kept a journal and were responsible for other book-
keeping chores as well. In addition, they succeeded the captain when he was
unable to exercise his duties due to illness or death, which seems to have
happened quite often.11
10. See John Everaert, De Franse Slavenhandel (Brussels: Koninklijke Academie, 1978), Part
III.
11. WIC, vol. 330, p. 183; WIC, vol. 331, p. 31; WIC, vol. 663. cor. 10/1/1716; WIC, vol.
205, p. 478. See also John Newton, The Journal of a Slave Trader, 1750—1754 B. Martin
Table 7.3
Documented voyages by Dutch slave captains
Captains Voyages 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
WIC trade 186 260 1 1 4 5 16 37 122
Free trade 310 673 2 1 4 9 8 18 26 31 58 153
Source: Appendixes 1, 2, 13 and 14.

Note: The captains who replaced deceased captains are included in these figures.
A considerable amount of data exists concerning the activities of the

captains of the slave ships. The names of the masters of about 75 percent
of the slave voyages have been documented. As Table 7.3 illustrates, a
surprisingly large number of captains went on slaving missions only once;
whether they chose not to go again or were disqualified by the owners of
the ships is not certain. Some WIC captains endured the hazards of the
slave trade for several voyages, but only nine are recorded to have com-
manded from four to six slaving missions. In the free trade, a much larger
number of captains repeated the triangular voyage and as many as sixty-one
went on four or more trips. One, David Rietveld, commanded as many as
ten slaving missions, while twelve others were in charge of seven to nine
voyages.
Shipmasters lost their lives on their slaving missions. In the case of the
WIC at least twenty-nine, or 11 percent of those found recorded, died during
the voyage and for the free trade the casualties among the captains reached
forty-seven, or 7.3 percent. The author surmises that these may not represent
even half of the casualties. In fact, death in the line of duty7 may have been
a major reason why many captains failed to undertake a second or subsequent
slaving mission. Mortality for the rest of the crew may have been even higher
than for the captains. An examination of the MCC records puts the mortality
rate of the slave-ship crews at 17.9 percent, compared with 12.3 percent
among the slaves on the same ships. High death rates among the slave-ship
crews have been confirmed by other studies as well. Sailors were subject to
the same illnesses as the slaves, and life for them was also far from com-
fortable. This may be confirmed by the fact that many crew members de-
serted at either African or American ports.12
and M. Spurrell, eds., Epworth Press, (London: 1962); Unger, II. p. 23; Appendixes 1
and 2. Crew mortality will be discussed further in Chapter 10.
12. WIC, vol. 1137, cor. 7/30/1674; WIC, vol. 1138, cor. 6/15/1707; WIC, vol. 1140, cor.
9/14/1726; WIC, vol. 1141, cor. 4/10/1733; Hezemans, pp. 43-4; Emmer, "Laatste
slavenreis," pp. 90-1; Unger II, pp. 26-7; Curtin, Atlantic Stave Trade, pp. 282-3,
T h e triangular trade 15 7
One of the reasons for the high mortality among crew members was the
fact that they were on the ship much longer than the slaves. If one takes
this into account, respective death rates may have been very similar during
the middle passage. Occasionally, the casualties among the crew were much
heavier than among the slaves. This was the case with the slaver, Vergenoegen,
which will be examined later in this chapter. On the free-trade ship, Lam-
merenberg (1743), only eight crew members survived and at one point only
the mate, who had meanwhile become the master of the ship, and two boys
were able to do any work. On the WIC slaver, Petronella Alida (1723), all
crew members seem to have succumbed, and the ship with its forty surviving
slaves was finally rescued by a Portuguese ship. The WIC slave ship, Stad
en Lande (1773), lost sixty-seven or nearly all of its crew members and the
captain and four survivors of the crew were barely able to navigate the ship
into the Surinam River. This same ship on its next slaving mission again
had heavy losses among its slaves and crew.13
On the African coast
Perhaps the most crucial and generally the longest leg of a slaving mission
was the time spent on the African coast in the process of procuring slaves.
This subject has been discussed before, especially in Chapter 6, which
established that free traders spent at least twice as long as WIC slavers on
the African coast. Table 7.1 confirms that trend. Whereas WIC slave ships
required approximately 100 days on the average to procure their slaves, free
traders took twice as long for taking in their often smaller human cargo.
Aside from the fact that the ships destined for the Loango region followed
a quite different pattern from those on the Guinea coast and that free traders
differed in their methods from WIC slavers (see Chapter 6), there were also
other distinct patterns of trade within each category.
Before 1700 WIC slavers on the Guinea coast obtained their water and
firewood supply nearly always at Shama, west of Elmina, where the Pra River
flows into the Gulf of Guinea. Even ships loading their human cargoes on
the Slave Coast would first go to Shama to obtain the water that was so
crucial for the middle passage. Because this was a time-consuming process,
often with only one boat a day carrying water-filled barrels to the ship
anchored offshore, it was decided in 1695 t 0 build large water cisterns at
Elmina for the purpose of storing rainwater for slave ships. The cisterns
were near completion by the end of the following year, but they may not
13. WIC, vol. 1140, docs. 223 and 224; WIC vol. 1142, doc. 61; SS, vol 407, 3/10/1743;
WIC, vol. 486, p. 367.
have been satisfactory because during the first decade of the eighteenth
century there are still reports of WIC ships getting their water and wood at
Shama. By the 1720s, however, water was obtained on the Slave Coast and
boarded with the slaves, as described below.14
Most of the food for the slaves was brought from Holland, but the pre-
dominantly dried and salted supplies from Europe were supplemented by
fresh vegetables and small lifestock purchases in Africa. On occasion, staples
such as millet were purchased when a larger than expected slave consignment
was obtained. The availability of water, however, was also a seasonal question.
On the Loango coast, water was taken aboard while the slave negotiations
were in process. In the case of the WIC slaver, Brandenburg, the daily boat
ferrying goods to shore in the morning and returning with slaves in the
evening would also bring fresh water to the ship whenever possible.15 This
was in contrast to the Gold Coast and Slave Coast, where it was often
difficult to obtain water.
One may wonder if there was a seasonal pattern to the slave trade. It is
true that specific seasons at any particular stage of the trade were more or
less compatible with the slave trade. A report from the WIC director in
Africa in 1659, when the Dutch were still quite new in the traffic, stated
that the period from mid-August to mid-February was ideal for the trade
on the African coast and that the trade ought to be halted during the rest
of the year. The recommended time span corresponds with the dry season,
and it has been verified subsequently that the wet season, particularly on
the Loango-Angola coast, could have a detrimental effect on the slave trade.
There is no clear indication that the WIC slave traders let the advice cited
above influence them a great deal, except that their least active month of
arriving in Africa was in May and their most active month was November,
the height of the wet and dry seasons, respectively. The WIC directors
seemed to be mainly concerned about spacing slave assignments; thus, in
1691, they assigned their large slave ships to depart in March, June, and
September. They were certainly in a position to adjust their departure from
Holland to accommodate themselves to the seasons, but on the whole the
WIC showed no clear indication of doing this. Allowing for a three-month
sailing period from Holland to Africa, WIC slave ships favored the dry season
as a whole by only 4 percent. Free traders, however, may have learned from
the mistakes of their predecessors, because they showed a decisive preference
for the dry season. Their low point of activity on the African coast was also
in May, but their peak did not come until January. In general, they favored
14. W I C , vol. 54, cor. 11/25/1695 and 12/21/1696; N B K G , voi. 2, min. 10/15/1706;
N B K G , vol. 3, min. 7/16/1708.
15. NBKG, vol. 3, min. 5/16/1708; ECMMR, no. 190.
The triangular trade 159
Table 7.4
Seasonal factors in the Dutch slave trade
Projected arrivals in Africa
WIC Free trade
Month Ships % Ships %
January 10 6.6 73 14.7
February 11 7.2 38 7.6
March 17 11.2 45 9.1
April 20 13.2 38 7.6
May 5 3.3 20 4
June 9 5.9 32 6.4
July 11 7.2 30 6
August 19 12.5 32 6.4
September 7 4.6 48 9.7
October 7 4.6 36 7.2
November 22 14.5 53 10.7
December 14 9.2 52 10.5
Total 152 100 497 100
August - January 79 52 294 59
the dry season at a ratio of 60 to 40 percent of the total number documented,

as is shown in Table 7.4. l6
Two Dutch slave ships in action
One of the rare surviving WIC slave-ship logs, or journals, belonged to the
slaver, Brandenburg, and it is kept at the Maritime Museum in Rotterdam.
The ship left Zeeland for its slaving mission on June 18, 1729, with Captain
Frangois Block commanding a crew of sixty and armed with fourteen cannon.
During the first six weeks little of pertinence is found recorded in the log,
except weather and nautical information. Cape Verde was sighted on August
1, other African coastal landmarks, like Cape Appolonia, followed on August
30, and Elmina was reached on September 4, 1729. While the ship was
anchored at Elmina small boats from the WIC castle came daily to unload
various items. All along, the log faithfully reports the sighting of various
other ships, Dutch and foreign.17
16. KITLV, H-65, p. 405; WIC, vol. 560, p. 12; WIC, vol. 835, p. 291.
17. The information about the Brandenburg is all derived from its journal at ECMMR, no.
190.
At this point there is some confusion in the journal. It seems to shift from
the Brandenburg to a smaller WIC coastal ship named Berckensteyn. The
latter's captain, Pieter de Roo, appears to continue the log book as his ship
sailed along the Slave Coast and on to the Benin River, purchasing some
ivory, firewood and water, as well as a total of fifteen slaves, all apparently
intended for the Brandenburg. (The writer of the log was most likely the first
mate on the Brandenburg, and was temporarily transferred to the Berckensteyn)
Finally, on November 29, Captain de Roo arrived at Jakin, where the
Brandenburg had meanwhile arrived. By this time, however, the Brandenburg
may have taken in about 100 slaves, and it was then actively engaged in
boarding additions to its human cargo. Its sloop or accompanying "small
boat" was fetching slaves nearly every day, usually bringing along water and
firewood.
On December 31 smallpox was discovered among the slaves on the Bran-
denburg, and three days later the disease produced its first casualty. By that
time there must have been about 250 slaves on board. When the ship was
ready to lift anchor on January 28, 1730, at least seven slaves had succumbed
to the dreaded disease, and many more were to follow during the middle
passage, until a total of 38 out of 409 had died when the survivors were
disembarked at Surinam. On the day of departure from Africa, as the ship
was being readied by the crew, those crew members who had been working
on shore returned to the ship and the local WIC officials visited the ship to
sign the cosignment papers. The middle passage could now begin.18
The free trade has bequeathed a much more generous supply of slave-
ship log books to posterity than the WIC. One of the more dramatic and
best-documented Dutch free-trade slaving voyages was that of the ship,
Vergenoegen, from Vlissingen, Zeeland, 1793-7. The excessive length of the
mission was due primarily to the international situation, which delayed the
ship unusually long in the West Indies. Two of its log books have been
preserved among the MCC papers at Middelburg, and a copy of the most
detailed of these logs, written by the first mate and later captain of the ship,
J. G. Klaver, is also at the Maritime Museum in Rotterdam. In addition,
this slaving mission has been given extensive coverage in two publications
in the Dutch language. The Vergenoegen started its slaving mission on De-
cember 20, 1793, but it had to wait for seventy-nine days before ideal winds
brought the ship into the open waters of the North Sea. It took the ship 101
days to reach Elmina on June 18, 1794, where it took in water and firewood,
and purchased three slaves. It was unusual for a ship with Loango as its
intended African destination to stop at Elmina and remain there, as the
Vergenoegen did, before sailing on to Loango, where the ship arrived after
18. See Appendix 22 for a translated copy of such a cargo affidavit.

another seventy-eight days, on September 5. Without dramatic reversals,

except for unfavorable winds and weather, this was nevertheless an unusually
slow start for a slaving voyage, and worse was yet to come.19
A few days after dropping anchor at Loango the first mate and the ship's
doctor went ashore to make commercial arrangements with the local au-
thorities. The captain continued this process on the following day, while the
ship was given a thorough cleaning in preparation for further negotiations
aboard ship. The next day, on September 10, the ship log records that "a
few black gentlemen came aboard to check out our merchandise, and above
all to collect the gifts that customarily are given in this area."20 During the
next week the ship was prepared to accommodate its intended human cargo,
and a week later the captain took up quarters on shore to supervise the
trading process. After two days, the first group of six slaves was brought
aboard, followed by others on a daily basis in groups of two to about seven,
but rarely more than seven. This relatively slow process went on for more
than four months, until 390 slaves had been purchased.
The weather was a constant problem for the slave traders. It seemed to
rain virtually every day, and storms and heavy surfs at times kept the boat
from going to shore. u The sails were nearly rotting from wet and damp
weather as it rains every day," the log book stated on November 21, and
two weeks later it recorded: "The weather is so bad, no slaves can come on
deck," for their customary fresh-air break. But the weather was only one of
the problems of the Vergenoegen. The captain had fallen ill and returned from
shore to the ship on October 14, where he died after a painful illness nearly
two months later. Several crew members also fell ill with high fevers, and
one of them contracted smallpox. On November 30, the new captain reported
that "each crew member is sick to some degree," and in the end he had to
call on an English ship to help supply them with water, because not enough
crew members of the Vergenoegen were able to carry the containers. In addition
to the original master of the ship, seven crew members died before the ship
started its middle passage.
The slaves on the Vergenoegen also suffered badly. Ten days after the first
slaves were boarded a slave girl showed signs of smallpox. She was taken
ashore, where she died a few days later. Shortly thereafter another case of
smallpox was detected, and rumors were heard that the disease was wide-
spread in the region as well as on other slave ships. By November 23 as
many as fifty of the slaves aboard were suffering from the disease. Two days
earlier the captain had reported about the slaves that:
19. ECMMR, folder 47; Van der Vlis, pp. 1-21; Unger II, pp. 39-43.
20. Unless otherwise indicated, this account is derived from the ship's logbook, written by
the first mate and later captain, J. G. Klaver, ECMMR, folder 47.
Some looked like monsters, raw from top to toe as if they were skinned
alife, and a stench that was hardly bearable. We have to turn them over
with... old rags.
Meanwhile many crew members were ill, or weak and recovering, and
the new captain was worried that the slaves would become aware of the
precarious position of their captors. At any rate, the slaves too must have
lacked the strength to revolt. To make matters worse, dysentery broke out
among the slaves by the middle of December. The captain became almost
desperate at this point and recorded in this log: "what will come of us, I
don't know."
At this point, the aid of an English competitor was requested in order to
get the ship ready for departure and out into the open sea. After taking
inventory of the remaining merchandise early in January 1795, it was decided
that twenty-five more slaves could be purchased. Having done this during
the next week and paying the customary duties and fees to African brokers
and other officials, the Vergenoegen lifted anchor and started its middle passage
on January 12, 1795. Altogether, 390 slaves had been purchased at Loango
(plus three at Elmina), and of these 26 had died before the departure. An
additional 25 slaves were still suffering from smallpox, which may have
contributed to another 18 deaths on the middle passage. Eight crew members
had died on the African coast, and two English sailors had been hired in
late November to make up for the loss of manpower at this crucial juncture
in the slaving mission.
The middle passage and its perils
The voyage from Africa to the Western Hemisphere was generally one of
the shortest legs of a slaving mission, although it has for many good reasons
often been dramatized as the most crucial. For the slaves, the departure
from the African coast must have been a dramatic, if not a heartrending
experience. As Table 7.1 shows, the duration of the middle passage could
vary greatly from one voyage to another. The WIC's average crossing was
81 days but its shortest and longest ranged from 23 to 284 days. When the
WIC slaver, Amsterdam, in 1706 accomplished its crossing in two months,
it was singled out in the correspondence as a short voyage.21
Free traders averaged 71 days for the ocean crossing, the fastest ship
sailing only 32 days and the slowest 182 days. The free traders of the MCC
were even faster than the others in their category with an average of 62 days
and a range of 41 to 135 days. The few unusually long crossings for the
21. WIC, vol. 1138, doc. 14.

WIC raised its average, but one should expect that the company's bulkier
and slower sailing ships would be slower than the smaller and sleeker free-
trade ships. About 50 percent of the WIC slavers accomplished the ocean
crossing within two or three months. The same was true for the free traders,
except that far more free traders made the crossing in less than two months.
To the casual observer it might come as a surprise that the average duration
of the middle passage originating on the Loango-Angola coast was generally
shorter than from the Guinea coast, despite the longer distance a look at
the map suggests. The reason for this has been explained by Philip Curtin.
A ship from Senegambia could move directly into the northeast trade
winds for a relatively short and predictable passage to the Caribbean.
The Guinea Coast, however, had prevailing westerly winds and a strong
current flowing towards the east. The usual voyage, and the route still
recommended for sailing ships bound from the Guinea Coast to the
North Atlantic, took the ship south to the equator to pick up the south-
east trades. Then in mid-ocean, it turned northward across the equa-
torial calms to catch the northeast trades for the Caribbean. Thus, a
ship bound for the northern hemisphere had to cross the doldrums
twice with slaves on board, each time taking a chance on prolonged
calms which could mean shortages on food and water and a greater
danger of disease in the crowded slave quarters. The voyage from
Europe to Angola and return by the Caribbean was much the same, but
in this case the first crossing of the equatorial calms took place with
only the crew aboard.22
Dutch slave ships were bound by this pattern also. Those that obtained
their slaves on the Guinea coast would as a rule sail east and south until
they reached Cape Lopez, where they would often take on additional water
and firewood, after which they would benefit from the southeast trade winds
and cross the Atlantic, as described above. This pattern is illustrated in the
case of the Brandenburg, the WIC slaver cited earlier in this chapter. Dutch
slavers carrying a slave cargo from the Loango-Angola region registered
considerably shorter middle passage durations than their counterparts from
the Guinea coast. WIC slavers averaged fifty and free traders forty-seven
days for the crossing from Loango, compared with eighty-one and seventy-
one days, respectively, for overall averages for the middle passage. 23
As was noted earlier, Surinam planters generally preferred Guinea slaves
to those from Bantu-speaking Africa, and they tried to use the common-
sense argument of the greater distance that had to be traveled by ships from
"Angola." In 1726 the WIC slaver, Beekesteyn, which had obtained slaves at
Loango, took twice as long for its overall voyage length as its contemporary,
22. Curtin, Atlantic Slave Trade, pp. 278-9.
23. ECMMR, no. 190; WIC, vol. 1139, cor. 3/11/1718; Appendixes 1 and 2.
the Amsterdam, which sailed via Guinea. The planters tried to use this as
evidence that slaving at Loango was more costly and should be avoided.24
But such arguments could not change the statistical facts, which the slave
traders must have known, and which must have been an inducement to keep
going back to Loango.
The doldrums, or periodic absences of wind on the equator, was one of
the most dreaded phenomena encountered on the middle passage. Invariably
prolonged calms meant delays and shortage of food and water, coming at a
time when the ships were filled to capacity with hungry and thirsty human
beings. It was often a major cause of unusually high mortality among the
slaves, as will be discussed in Chapter 10. Storms could also imperil a slave
ship by blowing it off course and delaying its mission, doing damage to vessel
and passengers, or causing a shipwreck that could lead to extensive loss of
life. Of course, a ship could run aground as a result of other causes, but
strong winds were usually the reason. At least eight of the WIC slave missions
are recorded to have ended in shipwreck during the period 1675 to 1739,
and the records of others may well have been lost. The destiny of an ad-
ditional nine WIC ships was uncertain, and shipwreck may well have been
the reason for this. At least seven WIC ships were reportedly captured by
enemy privateers or pirates. Free traders faced similar misfortunes, although
they fared better when one considers that they had many more ships in the
traffic. Seven of their slave ships were reportedly shipwrecked or stranded,
and ten of their number were captured by enemies.25
Perhaps the most disastrous Dutch shipwrecks on the middle passage
occurred in January 1738, when the ship, Leusden, was caught in a storm
off the Surinam coast and got stranded on rocks near the Marowin River.
While the crew escaped with 14 of the slaves, who had been assisting the
crew on deck, the remaining 702 slaves suffocated and drowned below deck.
This is indeed the most tragic disaster in the Dutch slave trade, and it may
well have been the compelling reason for the WIC to quit the slave trade
altogether.26
Occasionally, piracy hampered the slave trade, particularly on the African
coast and in the Caribbean, although this was a factor that hit like an
occasional epidemic, as has been discussed in Chapter 3. The problem
tended to decline in the eighteenth century, although the so-called Turkish
pass was carried by merchant ships well into the nineteenth century. Hos-
tilities with rivaling European nations and the plague of foreign privateers
could also be a menace to Dutch slave shipping, as they themselves tried to
24. WIC, vol. 1140, doc. 63.

25. See Appendixes 1 and 2.
26. WIC, vol. 1141, doc. 168. The shipwreck of the Leusden will be discussed further in
Chapter 10.
damage their enemies as much as they could. The French in particular
captured several WIC slavers and confiscated their human cargoes, as has
been described in Chapter 2. Free traders suffered greatly at the hand of
the English during the Fourth Anglo-Dutch War (1780-4). Unger states
that the whole Dutch slave fleet was captured. The MCC was apparently so
seriously damaged that it dispatched only a few slaving missions after that
war.27
Slave resistance and uprisings
The slaves did not always accept their fate passively, although their resistance
was against unsurmountable odds. Several slaves tried to flee during the
boarding process, for once on the ship the opportunities for escape were
diminished. Some slaves refused to eat, which resulted in forced feeding,
or they jumped overboard when they had the chance. Both were forms of
suicide, which showed the slaves' desperate resentment against their fate,
At times Dutch ships employed spies, presumably free Africans who could
understand various African languages, to obviate escapes and slave revolts.
It has been suggested that free traders managed to prevent several slave
uprisings by this method.28
One of the reasons for the slaves' desperation was that some suspected
the Europeans were cannibals or would sell them to cannibals. The Dutch
factor, Willem Bosman, summed up these fears: "Sometimes we deal with
slaves from deep in the interior, who convince each other that the reason
why we buy and transport them is to fatten them up and sell them again for
an appetizing meal."29 One MCC captain reported in 1752, while in the
harbor of Paramaribo, in Surinam, with his ship, Prins Willem V, that he was
afraid his slaves would jump overboard because "they feared they would be
eaten" at their destination. An eighteenth-century Dutch handbook for slave
traders urged them to "assure the slaves, after they have been purchased,
that they should not be afraid; that white people were not cannibals " 3°
In spite of such efforts, if they were actually employed, slaves did protest
and sometimes they revolted in groups.
Table 7.5 lists twenty-five documented slave uprisings on Dutch slave
ships, and these do not include revolts planned but aborted. The records
of several more slave rebellions on board Dutch slave ships must have gone
unrecorded, particularly on those of the WIC. Of the fifty-eight carefully
27. Unger II, p. 13; Appendixes 1 and 2; SG, vol. 5773, p. 8.

28. Hezemans, p. 39.
29. Unger II, p. 57.
30. Hezemans, p. 41.
i66 The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade
Table 7.5
Documented slave uprisings on Dutch slave ships
Casualties Comments
Company Ship ]Location Crew Slaves
1685 WIC Koninck Salomon ? 1 Minor
1699 WIC Rachel ? 1 12
1703 WIC Son (de) Africa 36
1715 WIC Sonnesteyn
1717 WIC Agatha Africa 9
1731 WIC Leusden 9 9
Minor
1735 MCC De Hoop ?
1741 MCC Afrikaanse Galey 7 0
Minor
1751 MCC Middelburgs Welvaren 7 0 213
1751 MCC Grenadier Africa 0 0
1756 MCC Vliegende Faam Africa 22 b
1756 MCC Philadelphia Africa 0 0
1757 MCC Philadelphia Africa 0 0
1757 MCC Drie Gezusters 7 0
1759 MCC M'burgs Welvaren Africa 0 0

1762 MCC Johanna Cores Africa 24
1764 MCC Johanna Cores Africa 2C
1764 MCC Eenigheid Africa 0 0 Serious
1769 MCC Zanggodin 7 21d
1770 Guinese Vriendschap 7 5
1774 MCC Zanggodin 7
1775 Armina Elisabeth 7 11 11
1775 MCC Geertruyda & Christina ?
1780 MCC Vigilantiea Africa 21
1785 Neptunis Africa 17 all-8 e Exploded
Source: WIC, vol. 103, p. 168; vol. 206, p. 105; vol. 484, pp. 6 and 264; SG, vol.
1212, logs of the ships Pollux and Castor; HAR, vols . 41-2; SS, vol.
205, p. 465; SS, vol. 409, 2/11/1751; MCC, vol. 1155 and 1570; Unger 2,
pp. 57-8; Menkman, WIC, p. 109; Priester, p. 119; Hezemans, p. 61.
Notes: a Three slave rebellions were reported on this voyage.
Priester reports 11 deaths, 6 wounded, and 22 missing.
c
An additional 16 slaves were wounded.
These slaves were reported missing.
e
Only eight slaves survived.
examined MCC slaving missions, at least eleven reported slave rebellions,

and the Vigilantie recorded three revolts in one voyage. This represents one
slave uprising in five missions for the well-documented and well-researched
MCC, and if this statistical average were applied to all of the Dutch slave
trade there may have been as many as 300 such revolts on Dutch ships
alone.31
Most of the slave revolts seem to have taken place in sight of the African
coast; this was the case in at least twelve of the twenty-five documented
rebellions listed in Table 7.5. Once in open sea, the slaves must have realized
that the chances of a successful rebellion were virtually nil, whereas the sight
of the African shore gave them hope for escape. But such hope was usually
misplaced, because when twenty-one slaves managed to escape from the
Zang Godin in 1769, they were promptly recaptured by Africans on the coast,
who offered to sell them again to the slave captain. We may assume, when
the latter refused to repurchase the slaves, that they were sold to the next
slaver that came along. On at least one occasion the slaves on the Vigilantie
(1780) revolted near the Marowin River, on the Guiana coast. The nearly
200 slaves aboard chased the crew and eighteen of the slaves to shore, while
the ship remained stranded. Apparently the ship was wrecked, because the
record indicates that the captain of the ship sailed back to Holland as a
passenger on another Dutch slaver.32 What happened to the rebel slaves
remains a mystery, however chances are slim that any of them survived the
ordeal.
Most of the slave uprisings were small affairs and none of the recorded
revolts resulted in the slaves taking and maintaining control of a ship, except
for the Vigilantie and the Neptunis in 1785. In the latter case, the slaves had
also gained control of the ship, but an English ship came to the aid of the
desperate Dutch crew and accidentally hit the powder chamber of the Nep-
tunis with a cannon shot, causing the ship to explode. All of the seventeen
crew members still on board died in the explosion but eight slaves of an
undetermined number aboard survived the ordeal. They were collected from
the water by local Africans and returned to the surviving captain, who had
been ashore when the revolt broke out. The death toll in this case may well
have been 200 to 300, the full cargo capacity of the ship.33
Another tragic slave revolt on a Dutch ship had occurred in 1741 on the
free trader, Middelburgs Welvaren. Of the approximately 260 slaves obtained
on the Guinea coast only 30 were landed at Surinam. Only about 15 slaves
had died of natural causes on the ocean crossing, but an estimated 213 died
in the revolt that broke out a few days after the ship had started the middle
passage. None of the crew members died in the uprising, and the slaughter
may well have been a case of a trigger-happy crew. Claiming there was a
31. See Priester, pp. 118-24, on slave rebellions. Priester lists at least five planned revolts
that were prevented by the crew.
32. WIC, vol. 487, p. 446; Priester, p. 120.
33. SS, vol. 416, 10/11/1780 and 1/23/1781; AAC, vol. 1212, log of the Pollux.
threat to their lives, they fired indiscriminately into the crowd of slaves on
and below decks.34
In the slave revolt on the Guineese Vriendschap in 1770, the slaves had
virtually gained control of the ship when the Dutch warship, Castor, appeared
on the scene, rescuing the crew and restoring order and authority on the
ship. No casualties among the crew members were reported, but four slaves
died in the tumult as a result of jumping overboard. The alleged ringleader
of the rebellion, an Asante slave named Essjerrie Ettin (one of the few slaves
aboard a slaver ever to be identified by name in the records) was executed
by the crew in a brutal manner. His right hand was cut off, his left hand
was already maimed as a result of the battle, and he was then suspended by
a rope under his arms and subsequently abused by the crew until he died.
Such legally sanctioned forms of lynching were not uncommon responses
to slave revolts, as will also be shown in Chapter 9, in the case of the slave
rebellion in Berbice during the 1760s.35
The disposal of slaves in the West
Arriving at their destination in the Western Hemisphere must have been a

relief for slaves and crew members, as fresh water became available again
and slaves were generally treated with fruit and other fresh foods. This was
true in particular in the eighteenth century, when such food, citrus fruit in
particular, was known to deter scurvy. It was reported that slaves danced
with joy when they saw land and green trees again. For the managers of the
slave ships, it was important that the slaves were in good spirits and looked
healthy as they were prepared for the market.36
Most of the Dutch slave ships had a single destination, and the majority
of the slaves were sold and remained in the vicinity of their point of disem-
barkation. For some slaves, however, there was a second voyage, as was the
case with the asiento slaves who were landed at Curasao and afterward were
shipped to the Spanish-American mainland ports. This was also the case
with the slaves smuggled through Curaqao to the Caracas coast. A small
number of slaves were transshipped from Curasao to other Dutch colonies
in the Caribbean or Guiana. Only a small percentage of the slaves landed
in Curasao remained on the island. Occasionally, a slave ship was rerouted
due to war or market conditions, and thus might actually make more than
one landing in the West, but this was rare in the WIC slave trade. With the
free trade, however, slave captains frequently had to search for profitable
34. MCC, vol. 1570; SSUR, vol. 409, 2/11/1751.
35. AAC, vol. 1170, Castor log.
36. ECMMR, folder 47; Unger, II, p. 67; Van der Vlis, p. 14.
markets and anchored at more than one harbor in the West. At least thirty-
one free-trade slavers were reported stopping at Surinam and subsequently
sailing on to other locations, and many others may not have been included
in this count. Ships taking slaves to St. Eustatius might also stop at neigh-
boring islands, like St. Martin, and sell a portion of their slaves there. Mixed
landings for the Guiana colonies were not uncommon in the WIC trade,
and they became more frequent in the free trade, especially during the last
quarter of the eighteenth century. At least twenty-two of the latter took slaves
to a variety of locations, and many more mixed destinations must have been
left unrecorded. Just about any conceivable combination of West Indian
destinations can be found in the record. One slaver, the Neptunis, sailed in
one month in 1777 from Surinam to St. Eustatius, and then to Curasao and
possibly elsewhere to dispose of its human cargo, thus extending the middle
passage extensively.37 Such voyages must have added greatly to the confusion
and consternation of the slaves aboard the vessels. In spite of these variations,
however, the vast majority of the Dutch slave ships disembarked their slaves
at one harbor.
When a slave ship arrived at its destination it was by no means certain
that the slaves would be disembarked immediately. The situation in Surinam
illustrates this best. Since about mid-eighteenth century, slave ships sailing
into the mouth of the Suriname River were boarded by health officials of
the colony to check the condition of the slaves, and the highest ranking
officers of the ship were required to sign a statement under oath that there
were no contagious diseases among the slaves. Only after positive responses
were registered to these actions was a ship allowed to go up the river to the
harbor of Paramaribo. Serious outbreaks of smallpox on a number of oc-
casions had given rise to these precautions. Similar policies existed in other
Dutch colonies. Visitations upon arrival of slave ships had been practiced at
Curasao as early as the seventeenth century, but then it was a precaution
against smuggling rather than the spread of disease.38
As a rule, these hygienic visitations, for which the captain had to pay as
much as seventy-five guilders during the 1790s, were routine and were
followed immediately by permission to sail up the river. Occasionally, a slaver
had to wait until the epidemic aboard ship had subsided, and permission to
go ahead was given at subsequent visitations. One ship, the earlier mentioned
Vergenoegen of 1793, had to go through four visitations and had to remain
for fifty-two days on the river before it was allowed to enter the Paramaribo
harbor. But this must have been one of the most drastically delayed cases. 39
Apart from such delays, disembarkation took place quite quickly, generally
37. WIC, vol. 205, p. 19; WIC, vol. 648, cor. 11/25/1678; WIC, vol. 632, 1777.
38. WIC, vol. 617, doc. 41; Unger II, pp. 66-7 and 105.
39. Unger II, pp. 51-2.
within a week of arrival. At most places of destinations the slaves were housed
in crowded barracks, where they were forced or encouraged to exercise, in
order to recuperate from the taxing ocean voyage. Occasionally, slaves were
sold while still aboard ship, but as a rule they were sold after disembarkation
either by public auction, by previously agreed contract, or on an individual
basis. At Curasao, as part of the asiento trade, the slaves were housed either
in barracks or warehouses or they were temporarily put to work on WIC
plantations. The asiento agents, who had their own facilities at Curasao,
were obligated to examine the slaves within fourteen days after arrival and
take possession of them within thirty-eight days or the WIC would charge
a maintainance fee of one stuiver (one-twentieth of a guilder) per day for
each slave. If after three months the asiento agents had still not claimed and
shipped the slaves from Curasao, the WIC was free to dispose of the slaves
as it pleased.40
When the asiento trade began to slip from WIC control during the end
of the 1680s, the WIC began to operate Curasao as an open market and
sell slaves either on an individual basis or at public auctions. The latter
seems to have been preferred and was demanded by company authorities
in 1690. But subsequent records show that both methods were employed at
Curasao during the next few decades.41
Selling slaves by previously agreed contract was often practiced in the
settlements of Essequibo and Demerary, and occasionally in Surinam as
well. Sometimes a portion of a slave consignment was delivered on contract
and the remainder sold individually or by auction. At Surinam both of these
last two methods were the common practice, although a regulation of 1742
called for public auctions exclusively. Unger's analysis of eighty-six MCC
slave consignments shows that the majority (fifty-six) of the slavers used
both methods, and only slightly more slaves were sold "on the block" than
by individual agreement. Prior to 1769 the auction method seems to have
been prevalent, and a specially appointed vendue master regulated this trade,
but it was discontinued and replaced by individual sales during that year.42
Return voyage and cargo
After the slaves had been disembarked and sold the slave ship had to be
thoroughly cleaned and prepared for the return voyage to Holland. Signif-
icant modifications were made on the decks of the ship to accommodate a
40. WIC, vol. 832, p. 533; Appendix 18. See also Chapter 2 on Curasao and the asiento.
41. WIC, vol. 835, p. 175; See WIC, vols. 201 and 202 on the sale of slaves.
42. MCC, vol. 1567, doc. 6; SS, vol. 407, 1/5/1743 and 12/19/1742; SS, vol. 414, 4/10/
1769; Unger II, p. 69.
new cargo. Ideally, a return cargo was secured in order to provide for ballast
and to make the slave mission more remunerative. Thus, slave vessels often
remained for quite some time in the West Indies before they started their
homeward voyage. As Table 7.1 shows, WIC ships remained an average of
116 days in the West. This figure would be considerably lower if a few ships
that stayed very long were not included in the average; the median is therefore
also significantly lower. Both figures are nonetheless slightly higher than the
three months that were set in 1699 as a limit for WIC ships to remain in
the West. This decision was made because a number of WIC slave ships
had stayed there six to seven months in order to secure a return cargo, and
the WIC directors decided such long stays were too costly. A larger set of
data combining the stay in the West with the return voyage raises the averages
for the WIC also decisively. By comparison, free-trade ships spent less time
in the West, eighty-six days on the average. This lower figure is also con-
firmed by the larger data package combining both legs of the mission. The
median length for return voyages for free traders is also shorter than for the
WIC, although only by five days.43
The question of return cargoes is only of peripheral interest to the slave
trade. Payment for slaves in the asiento trade came primarily in the form of
silver cash, Spanish pesos called pieces of eight. Such freight, not bulky but
extremely valuable, was generally carried by heavily armed WIC ships, leaving
space in many of the slave ships for other commodities. Little is known
about the return cargoes from the West in the seventeenth century. Some
of the earliest products mentioned were wood products (stokvishout) from
Curasao and salt from neighboring Bonaire. When additional space was
available, WIC ships were allowed to carry freight for private persons. Sugar
and oriane paint pigments were exported from Essequibo in slave ships as
early as 1700. A few years later various animal hides, cotton, and lemon
juice are mentioned in a cargo from Curasao, and indigo is listed in 1709.
Wood products were particularly prominent in the first decade of the eigh-
teenth century, although wood products seem to have become depleted by
1713. That same year, however, six WIC vessels shipped wood for a value
of more than 50,000 pesos from Curasao.44
With the growth of the Surinam and Guiana plantations early in the
eighteenth century sugar products became increasingly more prevalent
among the return goods on slave ships. In 1710 there were not enough ships
to carry the available sugar to Europe. Two years later thirteen Dutch ships
exported nearly 13,000 oxheads, or more than ten million pounds of the
43. Unger II, p. 83; WIC, vol. 69, pp. 133 and 178; See Table 7.1 and Appendix 5.
44. WIC, vol. 200, pp. 5, 273, and 298-300; WIC, vol. 69, pp. 1, 180-1; WIC, vol. 201,
p. 219; WIC, vol. 202, pp. 368, 371, and 466; WIC, vol. 203, p. 445; WIC, vol. 560,
p. 14; WIC, vol. 1026, pp. 33-6; WIC, vol. 205, pp. 325-7 and 495.
sweet stuff. Planters were particularly interested in sending their sugar prod-
ucts to Amsterdam, where many refineries were located. WIC officials were
initially not too eager to shift primarily to sugar as cargo. Nevertheless, even
from St. Eustatius, so active in the slave trade during the 1720s, sugar
products were the principal commodities on the return voyage, although a
variety of other goods, such as cotton, indigo, and ginger, were included as
well. Sugar continued to be most prominent in WIC return cargoes during
the 1730s.45
The pattern established early in the eighteenth century continued with
the free trade. Sugar continued to dominate and, as Unger points out, it
took two to three ships to carry the comparable value of one cargo of slaves.
The large number of ships sailing directly between Holland and the West
Indies could take care of any surplus. There were also many other colonial
products, such as coffee, cocoa, cotton, to mention the main ones, which
were taken back to Holland in exchange for slaves or as freight items. Van
de Voort gives a good account of the variety and quantity of the tropical
exports from the West Indies by the Dutch during the free-trade period,
and its link with the slave trade is convincingly established in his
dissertation.46
One of the reasons for the shorter West Indian stay of free traders was
that they often left with small return cargoes or simply in ballast, weighed
down with water and sand. Of the 185 slave ships clearing from Paramaribo,
of which a cargo record has been preserved, 65 were reported leaving in
ballast, and 69 had a full or fairly sizable cargo. Another 51 ships left with
a small or token cargo. It should be noted, however, that several free-trade
ships may have sailed to other West Indian harbors in order to obtain a
cargo before they started their Atlantic return crossing.47
Free traders thus clearly regained some of the time through their shorter
stay in the West, time that they might have lost on the African coast through
their slow procurement process. But they may have sacrificed some of these
gains again by sailing home with empty holds. The average complete sailing
time for all slaving missions was still shorter for the WIC, as Table 7.1
shows, although only by about one month out of eighteen, or slightly more
than 5 percent.
On the return voyage, which took an average of two to three months, WIC
ships actually recorded better times than free traders. However, it should
45. WIC, vol. 1138, docs. 36, 65, and 6/25/1711 and 3/26/1712; WIC, vol. 1139, cor. 3 /
24/1717 and 3/29/1720. WIC, vol. 619 on St. Eustatius and vol. 1141 on Surinam. A
study of exports from Surinam is in progress by this author.
46. Unger II, pp. 83-4. J. P.Van de Voort, De Westindische Plantages van ij2o-ijgs: Financial
en Handel (Eindhoven: De Witte, 1973), pp. 30-3 and 234-41.
47. See Appendix 1.
be kept in mind that when the departures were recorded the slave ships
often made stops at other locations in the West Indies to obtain backhaul
before they started their Atlantic crossing. Thus, the actual crossing was
undoubtedly significantly shorter than indicated in Table 7.1, particularly
for free traders.
Some slave ships never returned to Holland. Of the free-trade ships at
least seven were found recorded as unseaworthy after they delivered slaves
in the West. Another nineteen were reported captured, shipwrecked, or met
an uncertain fate and thus never returned to Holland. For the WIC the
record was even worse, primarily because it operated in a more turbulent
period of time; twenty-four of its slave ships never returned home, which
is about 7 percent of the total number of WIC slaving voyages in the period
1675 t 0 X 739- 4§ Those slavers that did return to their port of origin, unloaded
and marketed their West Indian cargo, and that marked the end of the
triangular slaving mission. In several cases, the same ship and the same
captain were soon preparing for another slaving mission.
48. Appendixes i and 2.
8
The Dutch plantation colonies

under WIC monopoly
1616-1738
The first two chapters of this book describe how the Dutch got involved in the
Atlantic slave trade during the seventeenth century, first to supply their new
plantation colony in northern Brazil, and then to make profits by supplying the
Spanish mainland colonies with slaves either through the asiento or by means
of illicit trade. As the asiento slave trade declined toward the end of the seven-
teenth century, Dutch slavers found a growing demand for their human car-
goes in the various Dutch plantation colonies of Guiana, then also known as the
Wild coast, in northwestern South America, between the river deltas of the
Amazon and the Orinoco. The next two chapters will focus on the slave traffic
to Surinam and the settlements in present-day Guyana: Berbice, Essequibo,
and Demerara, as the Dutch identified their plantation colonies there.
The Guiana coast, which today includes the countries of Guyana, Surinam,
and French Guiana (as well as portions of Brazil and Venezuela), had been the
object of numerous colonization attempts during the sixteenth and seven-
teenth centuries by Dutch, English, and French settlers. The Dutch may have
been pioneers in the area by establishing a settlement on the Essequibo River
in the second half of the sixteenth century. But this, like many similar attempts
afterward, had failed as a result of the hostile physical environment or the op-
position of the indigenous population, the Caribs and the Arawaks. The Por-
tuguese also eliminated a number of Dutch settlement attempts in the
Amazon River delta. Most of these early settlements ended in disaster, and
they have left very little documentary evidence for historians to scrutinize. 1
Settlement and trade on the Guiana coast
Dutch interest in the Guiana region was initially twofold: settlement and
commerce with the indigenous people. A variety of local products, including
1. For an overview of the early settlements in the Guiana region. See Goslinga, Dutch in the
Caribbean, pp. 409-32.
174
The Dutch colonies under WIC monopoly 175
dyes, wood, oil, and balsam, were purchased through barter trade by the
Europeans; the reportedly warlike Caribs also sold slaves to the Dutch. As
a potential settlement area, Guiana was forced to the background when the
Dutch captured northern Brazil in 1630, but as described in Chapter 1, that
situation changed again a few decades later. In addition to the loss of Brazil
in 1654, the peace between Holland and Spain in 1648 had deprived the
WIC of its privateering role, and these two events made settlement in Guiana
an attractive alternative again. The Treaty of Munster in 1648 had, in fact,
given the Dutch legal possession of the river valleys of the Essequibo and
the Berbice in present-day Guyana.
Settlement in the Guiana region produced its share of problems for
the WIC. First there was the usual rivalry between the leading chambers
of Amsterdam and Zeeland for control of the region. Zeeland initially
gained the upper hand in this battle and initiated most of the settlement
attempts, although Amsterdam also organized a few abortive settlements.
Once a colony had been established the WIC directors had to organize a
governance structure for it, by virtue of rights inherent in its charter. The
system of patronship, granting a patent for settlement to a person or fam-
ily, became the pattern in Berbice, where the Van Pere family acquired
such status and retained it for many years. In Surinam the Van Aersses
van Sommelsdijck (hereafter referred to as Sommelsdijck) family had
much influence, but they had to share their authority with the WIC and
the city of Amsterdam through the Society of Surinam, the governing
committee of the colony established in 1682. Because the WIC's primary
function was not colonization, the overall administrative supervision of
the early settlements in this region was generally directed by interested
groups in the province of Zeeland.
The Dutch were not alone in establishing plantation settlements in
Guiana. The French had pioneered a settlement on the Cayenne River,
which was subsequently developed into the colony of French Guiana. The
most prosperous settlement in the whole region was on the Suriname River.
It was founded by the English in 1651 and controlled by them until 1667.
By the time of the Second Anglo-Dutch War (1665-7) t n e colony had a
population of about 4,000. But this war, unlike the First Anglo-Dutch War
(1652-4), proved to be quite unsettling for the Guiana region. Virtually every
settlement changed hands at least once, and when the war was finally ended
with the Treaty of Breda in 1667 the Dutch had achieved hegemony in the
region. Only the French regained possession of their colony; the English
lost all their colonies in the region. Because England received title to New
York (New Amsterdam) by the same treaty, the impression was left that
Surinam and New York were simply exchanged. At that time the exchange
appears to have been beneficial to the Dutch, because Surinam held far
\ /TRINIDAD
MAP 8.1
THE GUIANA REGION
greater promise for economic exploitation, both in agricultural production
and the slave trade.2
On the whole, the Dutch were more committed to trade than to coloni-
zation; they simply did not have the surplus population required for settle-
ment, and their extensive maritime commerce already demanded a large toll
from their population of about a million and a half. In fact, they relied heavily
on the recruitment of sailors and soldiers from other European areas.3 The
tropical plantations in the Guianas, however, could be worked primarily by
slave labor, requiring only a skeletal settler community as supervisors. And
by the second half of the seventeenth century the Dutch had acquired the
experience, the capital, and the commercial structure to obtain an adequate
number of slaves from Africa to operate their plantations.
As a result of the turbulent early history of the Guiana colonization, as
well as subsequent developments, the population of the region became an
amazing mixture of human beings. It was perhaps for this reason that the
Dutch scholar, Rudolf van Lier, dubbed it "a society of a border territory."4
The early settlers included Dutch, English, French, and Sephardic Jews.
To this mixture, with the indigenous populations, were added numerous
African slaves from every conceivable region in Africa. The people of African
descent came to constitute the vast majority of the population in the region,
until the influx of large numbers of Asians during the nineteenth century
changed the demographic configuration once again.
In spite of several attacks by colonial rivals, the Dutch were for many
years able to retain their early settlements, as well as their conquests in
Guiana. The colonies on the Essequibo and the Berbice rivers were main-
tained, and another neighboring settlement was started on the Demerara
River in 1746. These three settlements formed the basis of what later became
a British colony, and more recently the country of Guyana.
The early Surinam settlement
The settlement on the Suriname River, however, remained the most pros-
perous and most populous colony in the region. Building on the foundation
laid by the English, the Dutch continued to develop the colony and enlarge
its population, which was no easy task. When the Treaty of Breda was signed
2. G. W. van der Meiden, Bestwist Bestuur: Een eeuw strijd om de macht in Suriname, 1651—
I
753 (Amsterdam: Bataafse Leeuw, 1987), Chapter 1.
3. J. R. Bruyn and J. Lucassen, eds., Op de schepen van de Oost-Indische Compagnie (Groningen:
Wolters-Noordhoff, 1980), Chapter 1.
4. See Rudolf van Lier, Samenleving in een Grensgebied; een Sociaal-Historische Studie van
Suriname (Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus, 1971), pp. 1-14.
in 1667, the English settlers were initially unwilling to surrender and co-
operate with the Dutch. It was not until an admonition by the English king
and a sizable show of force by the Dutch that they surrendered the entire
colony to the WIC in 1668. The opposition by the settlers was evidenced
by a large amount of physical damage and the departure of some 1,200
settlers and slaves. By 1680 most of the English settlers had left the colony.
In 1663 the population of Surinam had been about 4,000 not counting the
indigenous population, and it was enlarged a little with the arrival of the
Jewish settler, David Nassy, and his entourage the following year. The Jewish
settlers continued as a substantial element of the white population in Sur-
inam. As a result of the war and these various population shifts, the colony's
combined white and black settler population must have been in the neigh-
borhood of 3,000 when the Dutch took firm control of the colony in 1668.5
For the next fourteen years the Surinam settlement continued to exist in
a state of suspense. Because the province of Zeeland had taken the initiative
in capturing Surinam from the English, it was allowed to administer the
colony, continuing the longstanding relationship between the Guiana region
and Zeeland. It failed, however, to establish an adequate governing structure
for the colony. Partly as a result of this, the relative freedoms granted by
the English became a permanent part of the Surinam tradition, and so did
the planters' individualism and the quarrelsome relationship between the
settlers and the administrators of the colony. In order to rebuild the depleted
population of Surinam, the WIC started a program in 1670 to attract Dutch
subjects to settle in the colony. This might have increased the population
had it not been for the fact that soon thereafter the Dutch got involved in
another war with both France and England, a war that also precipitated the
bankruptcy of the WIC. After the reorganization of the company in 1674,
the chamber of Zeeland was allowed to continue the administration of Sur-
inam, but the war with France continued until 1678, and this made any
effort to supply and enlarge the colony very difficult. In addition, increasing
conflicts with the indigenous Caribs during the end of the decade brought
the colony close to its demise.6
In 1679 the Carib population in the Surinam region attacked the white
colonial establishment and gained control over much of the settlement,
leaving little more than the fortress and the town of Paramaribo in the hands
of the colonists. A few settlers had gone so far as to board ships in order
to escape if the Caribs should capture the whole settlement. However, under
the firm leadership of the newly arrived governor, Johannes Heinsius, with
the assistance of the Arawaks (traditional enemies of the Caribs) from the
5. Van der Meiden, pp. 22-32.
6. A. J. A. Quintus Bosz, "Misvattingen omtrent de Staatkundige Ontwikkeling van Suri-
name," West-Indische Gids, vol. 40 (i960), p. 5; Van der Meiden, pp. 32-33.
Berbice, and the arrival of 200 fresh soldiers from Holland, the white settlers
persevered and saved their settlement. The threat of renewed indigenous
attacks remained a problem for the settlers at least until 1706.7
It was during the two years before the Carib attack that the WIC for the
first time tried to supply the colony with new slaves. One WIC slave ship
was assigned to Surinam in 1677, and the following year as many as three
slavers were assigned to the colony. That same year, special directives were
formulated for the sale of slaves in Surinam, confirming that the arrival of
slaves in the colony had not yet developed into a regular routine. One obvious
reason for this generosity on the part of the WIC directors toward Surinam
was that the asiento trade had recently come to a halt, and new markets for
slaves already in transit were in demand. The WIC directors even discussed
the possibility of making Surinam a new slave-transit station, like Curasao,
but nothing came of that notion as the asiento trade was resumed again. As
a result of all the confusion in the colony, none of the assigned slave ships
made it to Surinam. In fact, not a single slave ship arrived in the colony
during the period 1678-81. 8 As might be expected under these conditions,
the settler population of Surinam was in serious decline. Whereas in 1671
there had been still 800 white settlers in the colony, this number had dropped
to 400 to 500 at the end of the Carib attack in 1679. That same year Governor
Heinsius reported that the white population had declined to 500, where
there once had been 1,500. In addition, a number of slaves may have used
the upheaval to run away from their plantations, and joined the Caribs or
fled into the wilderness. The outlook for the colony at that time was indeed
bleak.9
The charter of 1682 and the Society of Surinam
It became evident by the early 1680s that the Zeeland sponsors of Surinam
could no longer shoulder their responsibilities, and in 1682 they sold their
interest in the colony to the WIC for the sum of 260,000 guilders. But even
the WIC directors found Surinam too much of a risk to take on by themselves.
There was, however, considerable interest in the colony among the Am-
sterdam merchants. After lengthy negotiations, it was agreed by the end of
that year that three parties would take joint responsibility for Surinam in
the governing structure, which took the name Societeit van Suriname (So-
ciety of Surinam). The WIC, the city of Amsterdam, and the prominent
7. SS, vol. 233, pp. 1-21; R. Buve, "Gouverneur Johannes Heinsius," West-Indische Gids,
vols. 44-5 (1966), pp. 16-22.
8. WIC, vol. 831, pp. 410, 441-2, 439-40; vol. 333, pp. 17-18.
9. Buve, p. 17; Van der Meiden, p. 32.
Sommelsdijck family had equal representation in a body of directors that
would meet in Amsterdam and determine policy for the colony. Hereafter,
Amsterdam rather than Zeeland dominated the affairs of Surinam. The
three-way partnership in the governance of the colony lasted until 1770,
when the Sommelsdijck family sold its share to the other two partners. The
Society of Surinam governed the colony until 1795, when the region was
placed under the jurisdiction of the Dutch government.
The arrangements of 1682 were approved by the States General in a
special charter that spelled out the terms of the governance of Surinam,
including its administration, taxation, and the provisioning of slaves. The
colony was opened to free trade by all Dutch subjects on condition of payment
of stipulated duties. However, Article 6 of the charter specified that the
WIC would retain a monopoly over the importation of slaves and be re-
sponsible for supplying the colony with as many slaves as were needed by
its planters. In 1730 this article was amended to include a specific number
of slaves, 2,500 a year. The charter also specified the terms and methods
to be employed in the sale of the slaves. As a special favor, the society of
Surinam was initially allowed to assist the WIC in the slave trade, but this
prerogative was withdrawn after a few years. (Only one slave ship, sailing
with an agent of the Society on board, has been found recorded. This was
the Koninck Solomon in 1686, and it is one of the few WIC slavers whose
log book has survived.) The daily administration of the colony was placed
in the hands of a governor, who was appointed by the society's directors in
Amsterdam, and he was assisted by a council of ten (Raad van Politie) who
were selected by the governor from a group of twenty big planters elected
by their peers. The colony's basic source of revenue consisted of a 2.5
percent duty on all exports and a head tax of 50 pounds of sugar levied on
every inhabitant of the settlement, including slaves. Newly arrived settlers,
however, were exempt from the head tax for themselves and their slaves for
the first ten years in the colony.10
One of the first major decisions under the new arrangement was the
appointment of Cornelis Aerssen van Sommelsdijck as governor of the col-
ony. As one of the principal shareholders of the society, Sommelsdijck proved
to be a forceful and stubborn leader. A legend of unswerving integrity and
dedication has developed about this man that has until very recently been
perpetuated by the writers of Surinam history. According to this legend he
carried through several reforms and put the colony on a sound fiscal footing.
Many new settlers arrived in Surinam during Sommelsdijck's tenure of
office, and slaves were beginning to be imported on a regular basis. At least
10. SS, vol. 215, pp. 446-75; Van der Meiden, Chapter II. Van der Meiden discovered this
rare ship log and called it to my attention.
T h e Dutch colonies under WIC monopoly 181
ten WIC slavers landed their black cargoes in the colony during his five
years as governor, amounting to 4,327 slaves, according to a contemporary
WIC report. This was about as many as in the previous fifteen years, thus
three times as many annually (see Tables 8.2 and 8.3). Several new plan-
tations were started; their number more than doubled while Sommelsdijck
was governor. The exact number is not known for the period, but in 1668
there had been only twenty-three functioning plantations, and by 1700 their
number had increased to well over a hundred. Special efforts were made to
encourage new settlers to come to Surinam and also to increase slave imports.
Rather than giving Sommelsdijck the credit for all this progress, however,
the growth of the colony was undoubtedly due more to the new governance
structure of the colony and the firm financial backing from Amsterdam
merchants. Nor should one blindly accept that everything was running
smoothly under Sommelsdijck's governorship. Problems surfaced in 1686,
when the WIC directors began to balk at further slave deliveries, because
the planters were seriously behind in settling their accounts. There were
continual and serious conflicts between the governor and the planters, re-
sulting among other things from Sommelsdijck's abuse of power by de-
manding preferential treatment in the distribution of the slaves brought by
WIC slave ships. In the end, the governor seemed to have more enemies
than friends, and he was certainly far from the legendary altruistic person
that his admirers created. In fact, after his death the Sommelsdijck share in
the society was confiscated for several years by the other partners, because
of the former's financial indebtedness to the society.11
The governorship of Sommelsdijck came to a sudden and dramatic end
in 1688, when he was killed by a group of eleven mutinous soldiers at
Paramaribo. Angered by a reduction in rations, caused by a shortage of
supply shipments from Holland, the soldiers at the fortress demanded im-
provements. While on a walk, according to the story, the governor was
accosted by the soldiers and shot to death when he reached for his pistol.
The rebels then took control of the fortress and started negotiating with
members of the Surinam council for a ransom and a safe exit from the
colony. But while negotiations were in progress, the captain of a slave ship
anchored in the river tricked the rebels into surrendering. After a hasty trial,
the ringleaders of the rebellion were promptly sentenced and gruesomely
executed.12
The death of Sommelsdijck temporarily threw the Surinam colony into
11. Doc. "Consideration...," ARA Library and KITLV, WIC, vol. 834, pp. 92-5, 107, and
142-4; Cornelis C. Goslinga, A Short History of the Netherlands Antilles and Surinam (The
Hague: Nijhoff, 1979), pp. 96-7; Van der Meiden, Chapters III and IV.
12. J. J. Hartsinck, Beschrijvingvan Guiana, ofde WildeKust van ZuidAmerika . . . , (Amsterdam:
Tielenburg, 1770), vol. 2, pp. 683-720; Van der Meiden, Chapter III.
confusion, and it had barely recuperated when in 1689 aflotillaof nine French
warships sailed up the river and demanded the colony's surrender. However,
the Surinam garrison and militia, aided by several armed WIC merchant
ships, were able to drive off the attackers. This was at the beginning of the
Nine Year War between France and Holland (1688-97), known in a broader
perspective as the War of the League of Augsburg. In 1696 Surinam was
threatened again by a French fleet patrolling along the Guiana coast, but this
time an attack did not materialize. The whole period from 1688 to 1714
knew few peaceful years between the colonial empires of Holland and France,
which greatly disturbed the provisioning and development of the young
Surinam colony. In 1712 the constant fears of the colonists became a reality
when the French attacked again, now with greater force and determination. 13
In October of that year a French fleet under Admiral Cassart captured and
destroyed several of the upstream Surinam plantations. Fearing that the
French would eventually succeed in capturing the rest of the colony as well
as the fortress, the colonists started negotiations with the enemy and agreed
to the payment of a large ransom in return for the enemy's departure. After
lengthy negotiations, the ransom was set at 750,000 Surinam guilders, to
be paid in a combination of cash, slaves, and sugar. A total of 750 slaves,
valued at 350 guilders each, were turned over to the French. In addition to
these losses to the colonists, some slaves may have made use of the confusion
and escaped into the interior to join their fellows in so-called maroon so-
cieties that had been established a few years before the war. These setbacks
must have been extremely demoralizing to the planters, and they bitterly
complained about the additional tax burden that was instituted for the future
defense of the colony.14
Surinam expands
Despite these various setbacks, the Surinam settlement grew slowly but
steadily. The colony's plantations numbered 80 in 1684 and had grown to
128 by 1704. Sugar remained the staple export crop during most of the
eighteenth century, amounting to an average of 15 to 20 million pounds per
year. Initially, this was supplemented only by small amounts of wood prod-
ucts, dyes, indigo, cocoa, and cotton. Coffee became a major export item
13. Hartsinck, vol 2, pp. 651-71.

14. WIC, vol. 1138, doc. 88; Hartsinck, vol. 2, pp. 674-80. Population statistics based on
head taxes showed a drop of fewer than 600 between 1711 and 1713. With the loss of
750 slaves to the French, this would suggest that the runaway problem cannot have been
too significant at that time.
during the 1720s, climbing to nearly 16 million pounds in 1763. Cocoa
became a significant crop during the 1730s, and cotton in the 1750s.15
Between the death of Sommelsdijck and the 1712 French attack, the
colony had imported nearly 20,000 slaves. This was fewer than a 1,000 a
year, and far less than the planters desired and felt entitled to obtain. In the
period 1692 to 1695, the number of slave imports had been particularly low,
only 1,600 for the period. In 1692 the WIC directors discussed the possibility
of stopping the delivery of slaves to Surinam completely, and they went so
far as to suggest that they abandon the colony. Both may well have been
threats with ulterior motives, for three years later their attitude had changed
completely and they weighed the possibility of a contract for the delivery of
20,000 slaves to the colony. As no agreement could be reached on the price
of the slaves, the WIC went back to the old practice stipulated by the charter
of 1682. This meant that conflict regarding slave deliveries remained endemic,
with planters constantly complaining about insufficient imports and high
prices, and WIC officials lamenting the poor remittances and mounting slave
debts. When the latter became very serious the company responded with
fewer deliveries, as was the case during the early 1690s.16
Conflicts between planters and WIC directors became acute again in the
period 1702 to 1705. In 1703 a group of Surinam planters, led by a society
official named Arnoud Van Pauwe, directed a formal request to the Dutch
States General to end the WIC monopoly over the importation of slaves.
The planters argued that freeing the slave trade would increase deliveries
and lower the prices of slaves. The WIC chamber of Amsterdam, which
had its turn of presiding over the day-to-day affairs of the company at this
time, responded to the challenge with a lengthy rejoinder of forty pages and
supporting documentation. According to the WIC directors, the "spoiled"
Surinam planters had always benefited from the services of the company
and had received all the slaves for which they had been willing to pay. At
that time, the directors argued, Surinam planters owed the WIC 557,566
guilders on unpaid slave deliveries. Furthermore, they claimed that over the
past few decades the colony had been greatly enriched, often at the expense
of the WIC. They documented that since the mid-1680s the number of
plantations in the colony had increased from 80 to 126, and the slave pop-
ulation during this time had risen by 4,281 to 9,321. The directors admitted
that the official slave prices had risen from 210 to 250 guilders, but this was
15. WIC, vol. 1138, doc. 5; SG, 5773, vol. 1705; David de Ishak Cohen Nassy, et al.,
Geschiedenis der Kolonie van Suriname (Amsterdam: Emmering, 1974); first published in
French in 1788 and in Dutch in 1791, Appendix on Surinam exports. A study on the
production of the Surinam colony is in progress by this author.
16. WIC, vol. 69, pp. 45, 52, 93, 103-4, 132, 153, and 160; WIC, vol. 836, pp. 32-3; WIC,
vol. 1137, docs. 4 and 5; SS, vol. 226, pp. 131 and 227.
the result of the long war with France, which had raised costs through higher
wages, insurance, and the necessity of convoys. The demand for ending the
slave-trade monopoly of the WIC was totally rejected by the company di-
rectors, because this would completely destroy the company's viability. Fur-
thermore, the directors promised to deliver 1,500 to 1,600 slaves to Surinam
annually, and more if demanded, if the planters would only promise to pay
for them.17
Slaves consumed by the land
One might ask at this point why Surinam required so many slaves. Expansion
of the colony was only part of the answer, whereas high mortality must have
been a principal cause for this intense demand for slaves, as one planter
explained in 1706: "There are here about 160 plantations which on average
each lose six slaves per year. This comes to a loss of at least 1,000 slaves
each year, which shows that this land devours Negroes at a rate . . . that the
importation can barely keep up with the losses due to death and runaways." 18
This was the reason, the planter continued to explain, why better terms for
payment of slaves needed to be made available, why they could not pay their
debts on time, and why they continually needed more slaves. The colony
could easily import and put to use 2,000 slaves per year, he claimed; but
above all, the colony needed more European settlers. It seemed as if the
planter admitted that the colony could not be self-sufficient, and needed to
be subsidized; or that someone, in addition to the slaves, needed to be
exploited for the colony to flourish.
New slave importations could thus barely keep up with the losses in the
slave population. This explains why in spite of the sizable influx of slaves, the
Surinam population registered only marginal growth, and at times even
declined. Surinam was not unique in this respect. A study of English slave-
plantation societies in the Caribbean confirms that mortality rates were higher
in sugar-growing settlements than with any other crops. Furthermore, new
sugar colonies registered higher death rates than well-developed ones, and
Surinam fitted into both of these negative categories until the middle of the
eighteenth century.19
What proportion of these losses were due to flight is difficult to determine.
Obviously, the death rates among the slaves in this worker's hell must have
been catastrophic, but a significant number of slaves must also have risked
their lives in order to gain their freedom. Maroon societies were large and
17. SG, vol. 5773, vol. 1705; WIC, vol. 836, pp. 267, 292, and 358.
18. WIC, vol. 1138, doc. 5.
19. See Chapter 2, note 16.
Table 8.1
Population of Surinam, 1684-1754
Selected years - from Head Tax payments' 1
European settlers African slaves Grand
Adults Children1" All Adults Children*5 All total
1684 652 3,332 3,984
1695 379 4,618 4,997
1700 745 8,926 9,671
1705 601 132 733 8,433 1,330 9,763 10,496
1710 672 173 845 10,372 1,737 12,109 12,954
1715 671 167 838 9,702 1,962 11,664 12,502
1720 767 166 933 11,347 2,257 13,604 14,537
1725 785 162 947 11,945 2,382 14,327 15,274
1730 909 176 1,085 15,391 2,799 18,190 19,275
1735 1,038 228 1,266 18,799 3,397 22,196 23,462
1744 1,028 189 1,217 20,707 4,428 25,135 26,352
1754 1,275 166 1,441 27,533 5,890 33,423 34,864
Source: SS, vols. 213-85.
Notes: aSee accompanying text for an explanation of head taxes.
This refers to children below the age of 12.
significant during the second half of the eighteenth century, but the size of
these societies for earlier years has frequently been exaggerated. It seems
that maroon villages were first established in Surinam about 1709, and in
1717 Governor Mahoney estimated their population at a generous i,4oo. 2°
Of course, life was extremely hard for the maroons, and many must have
died in the initial stages of their flight. High death rates rather than flight,
however, must have been the primary cause of the slow growth of the Surinam
slave population, during the early years at least.
Although incomplete, Table 8.1 charts the slow growth of the Surinam
population. The statistics are based on the payments of head taxes, paid on
an annual basis by the free citizens for members of their families, their
servants, and their slaves. New settlers were exempt from these taxes for
their first ten years in the colony, in order to encourage immigration and
bolster the growth of the European population. It is therefore uncertain how
many of these individuals were absent from these tax rolls, but given the
slow growth of the white population, the absences cannot have been very
high, rarely in excess of 10 percent. There have also been complaints that
occasionally not all servants and slaves were reported, which may explain
20. SS, vol. 239, p. 58; SS, vol. 242, p. 513; SS, vol. 244, p. 6. The size of the early maroon
societies has often been strongly inflated. One source gives an estimate of no less than
16,000 maroons in 1713; F. Oudschans Dentz, Geschiedkundige Tijdtafel van Suriname
(Amsterdam: J. H. de Bussy, 1949), p. 8.
i86 The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade
Table 8.2
Slave landings at Surinam by WIC ships, 1668-1738
Documented Partial Annual
Years Ships Slaves cargoes Adjustment8 Total average
1668-1674 11 3,404 3,404 486
1675-1679 3 1,160 400 1,560 312
1680-1684 6 2,418 100 260 2,778 556
1685-1689 17 7,072 7,072 1,414
1690-1694 4 2,076 150 2,226 445
1695-1699 10 5,079 40 5,119 1,023
1700-1704 7 3,433 3,433 687
1705-1709 9 4,250 90 4,340 868
1710-1714 4 2,065 280 2,345 469
1715-1719 11 5,212 60 5,272 1,054
1720-1724 7 2,191 400 2,591 518
1725-1729 15 7,432 115 400 7,947 1,589
1730-1734 21 9,423 400 9,823 1,965
1735-1738 16 7,704 7,704 1,926
Total 141 62,917 555 2,140 65,612 924
Source: Appendix 1, Table 2.2 and 9.9, and Postma Data Collection.
Note: a Estimates for potential shipments that have not been verified (see text).
the severe penalties imposed on inaccurate reporting of dependents. Never-

theless, these figures provide at least a basis for understanding the demo-
graphic development of Surinam. When these statistics are compared with
the actual importation of slaves into the colony, the enormous attrition of
the slave population becomes evident.21
Table 8.i shows that the war period, particularly the years between 1706
and 1718 (for which statistics are lacking), show a growth in the Surinam
population of little more than 10 percent, and that may well have occurred
after the end of the War of the Spanish Succession in 1714. The wars
between Holland and France, particularly the final years, may well have
caused a decline in the Surinam population as a result of casualties, desertion
of slaves, and a significant drop in slave importations (see Table 8.2). Af-
terward, there followed a steady increase, with a new slowdown throughout
most of the 1720s, and then a significant and sustained increase began during
the end of the 1720s.
The demographic trends of Surinam correspond with the importation of
slaves by the WIC, as is shown in Table 8.2. From 1717 to 1719 there was
a significant increase in slave landings in the colony, and archival materials
21. SS, vol. 158, p. 278.
confirming this renewed growth of the colony are abundant. Even though
the WIC was importing slaves in excess of a thousand a year, the planters
complained that they badly needed more of these forced laborers. Never-
theless, the slave transports declined again during the early 1720s; in fact,
not a single slave consignment reached Surinam in the years 1722 and 1724.
This reduction was due essentially to the perennial problem of nonremittance
for slave deliveries. When the old slave debts had been reduced appreciably
by 1725, the WIC started delivering slaves again, and at an increased rate.22
The year 1730 was a watershed in the history of the Dutch slave trade,
because in that year the WIC relinquished a portion of its slave-trade mo-
nopoly to Dutch free traders (see Chapter 8). The Dutch plantation colonies
on the Guiana coast, however, were outside of the free-trade sphere, and
the WIC continued to supply these areas until 1738. In fact, by concentrating
its activities on this one area, the company supplied these colonies more
effectively with slave labor than ever before. And as mentioned earlier, the
WIC committed itself to a specific figure: 2,500 slaves a year. During the
eight-year period 1730-7, Surinam alone was supplied with nearly 18,000
slaves, still 2,000 short of the WIC's commitment. During that last year,
however, the WIC's interest in the traffic began to decline, and only two
more WIC ships landed slaves in Surinam in 1738. Surinam planters were
starting to complain again about high prices, poor payment terms, and limited
deliveries, and the trend toward free trade was now so obvious that the WIC
directors finally succumbed to the inevitable and surrendered their slave-
trade monopoly.23
Because annual statistics on slave arrivals can be deceptive, with ships
arriving at the very beginning or end of a given year, a comparative series
of years might be more meaningful. Table 8.2 provides that perspective, and
it also takes into account the factor of possible missing data. Slave-ship
arrivals at both Surinam and Curasao have been thoroughly researched for
the years after 1674. WIC slave shipments to Surinam for the years 1668
to 1675 are estimates based on data received from Binder (see Chapter 2)
and these numbers appear to be rather high, although this may well reflect
an initial effort to develop the colony.24 It can be said then with considerable
certainty that during the seventy-one years that the WIC supplied the colony
with slaves on an exclusive basis, the company shipped approximately 62,000
slaves to Surinam. A few additional slaves may have been disembarked there
illegally by either foreign ships or Dutch interlopers, but their number can
22. WIC, vol. 1138, cor. 2/26/1714 and 4/7/1714; WIC, vol. 1140, cor. 6/29/1721, 8/11/
1721, 3/23/1722, and 9/12/1725; VCC, vol. 6, pp. 127 and 137.
23. SS, vol. 14, cor. 6/5/1737 and 11/6/1737.
24. B. W. Higman, Slave Populations of the British Caribbean, 180 j—1834 (Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1984), pp. 322-8.
hardly have been significant enough to alter the overall picture. An estimated
2,140 landings have been added as an adjustment for such probabilities.
The Essequibo settlement
Of the various Dutch plantation settlements in today's Guyana, only the

ones in the Berbice and the Essequibo River valleys were of any significance
to the slave trade before the free-trade period. There was a small Dutch
settlement on the Pomoroon River, but it hardly got off the ground and its
share in the slave trade must have been minimal. The Demerara settlement
was not started until 1746, after the WIC monopoly in the Dutch slave trade
had been terminated.
Essequibo was one of the earliest Dutch overseas settlements. It was
started in 1618, even before the WIC was established and northern Brazil
was captured. For several decades the settlement remained extremely small,
and little is known of its early history. At first it was essentially a trading
station, where regional products such as oriane paint and wood products
were purchased from the indigenous population. In 1657 the WIC allowed
a group of Zeeland towns (Middelburg, Vlissingen, and Veere) to expand
the tiny settlement into a sugar-plantation colony. A small number of Jews,
refugees from recently abandoned Dutch Brazil, settled in Essequibo in
1658. That same year, the Jewish merchant, David Nassy, agreed to supply
the colony with slaves, but there is no evidence that this promise ever ma-
terialized. This sudden spurt of activity in the 1650s apparently met with
little success, but even if it had the struggling colony was captured and
destroyed by the English in 1666.25
By 1670 the Zeelanders were busy getting the Essequibo colony off the
ground again. The WIC promised to contribute a shipment of 100 slaves,
but the instability of the company and the volatile international situation
prevented this promise from being carried out. With the reorganization of
the WIC in 1674, the Zeelanders lost control and Essequibo was placed
directly under WIC supervision. This did not necessarily improve the col-
ony's prospects for growth. In 1676 there were only twenty-five WIC em-
ployees stationed at the colony's fortress, Kijkoveral, and it appeared as if
the settlement had reverted back to a trading station.26
In order to revive Essequibo as a settlement enterprise, the WIC directors
decided, in 1676, to open the colony to private settlers. The following year
they also discussed dispatching slaves to the colony again, which apparently
25. P. M . Netscher, Geschiedenis van de Kolonien Essequebo, Demerary en Berbice ( T h e Hague:
Nijhoff, 1888), pp. 71-5 and 89; ILTVK, doc. H., 65.
26. Netscher, pp. 89-93; NBKG, vol. 24, doc. 2; WIC, vol. 831, p. 200,.
had not been done for a long time. Three years later the colony still had
only one WIC plantation and two additional ones in the planning stage. Only
thirty-three slaves worked the WIC plantation, whereas in the past there
had been as many as 120 slaves in the colony. In spite of good intentions
on the part of the WIC directors, the colony remained a very small operation
indeed.27
The situation changed during the 1680s, when several private settlers
came to the colony. In 1685 there were five private plantations and two years
later their number had grown to thirteen. WIC correspondence of this period
reveals a chronic shortage of slaves on company as well as private plantations.
Slave consignments, directly from Africa to the settlements in Guyana, had
rarely if ever taken place, but the WIC directors were not setting aside
portions of Surinam consignments for Essequibo and Berbice. The first
regular slave assignment entirely for Essequibo or Berbice had to wait until
1720. 28
The Essequibo demand for slaves became so intense during the 1680s
that a variety of new attempts were made to import them. Efforts were made
to get small WIC boats to bring in slaves from Surinam and Curasao. For
both 1686 and 1687 there is evidence that small consignments of about one
hundred slaves each were shipped to the colony from Curasao. Earlier, in
1684, planters requested that a boat would be allowed to fetch thirty slaves
for them from Surinam. After an initial rejection, the WIC directors approved
this the following year, establishing a precedent for years to come. Essequibo
planters even explored the possibility of obtaining slaves from the Spanish
asiento agents, which surprisingly was approved by the WIC, but which was
apparently never carried out. There is also evidence that suggests that the
Essequibo director, Samuel Beekman, against regulations, traded with Eng-
lish subjects. In order to pacify their subjects to some degree, in 1688 the
WIC directors ordered their agents at Curasao to send some macron slaves
to Essequibo.29
In that same year, the WIC directors also tried to reestablish the defunct
settlement on the Pomoroon River. This was greatly resented by the Es-
sequibo planters because this would further endanger their prospects of
obtaining much needed forced labor. A French attack in 1689, however,
caused the WIC to abandon this settlement indefinitely. Survivors from the
Pomoroon settlement scrambled to safety in nearby Essequibo, where a
similar attack was feared to be imminent. In spite of these disturbances, the
WIC managed to dispatch a small ship with 150 slaves to Essequibo that
27. W I C , vol. 1025, pp. 75, 82, 85, 87-8, 102-9, and 592.
28. W I C , vol. 1025, pp. 137, 331, and 342.
29. W I C , vol. 833, pp. 363 and 418; vol. 834, pp. 142 and 288; vol. 1025, p. 406; vol. 68,
cor. 6/29/1688; SS, vol. 113, p. 444.
same year. This was undoubtedly the largest single shipment landed there
up to that time.30
Slowly the Essequibo colony expanded. An inventory of 1691 shows that
the WIC had three functioning plantations, operated by 43 Europeans, 165
black slaves, and 54 red indigenous slaves. Six years later, the colony had
four plantations in operation, and the number of WIC European employees,
including the personnel on the fortress, had reached 73, with a salary outlay
of 872 guilders a month. The number of private plantations had also in-
creased; by 1700 there were 14 of them, managed by 39 Europeans and
worked by 225 slaves. With an average of only eleven slaves, these were
indeed small plantations. When in 1697 the WIC ship, Goude Brackhond,
arrived in Essequibo with 226 slaves, the planters were overjoyed and ex-
pressed their great satisfaction to the company. "If only such shipments
could arrive each year," Director Beekman wrote to his superiors in Holland.
Two years later he wrote that the colony needed 150 slaves each year, in
order to be effective. In fact, 130 slaves were disembarked at Essequibo in
1699. The following year, 266 slaves were landed after 56 had died on the
middle passage. Of the survivors, the private planters obtained 154 and the
company plantations the remainder.31
Catastrophe and renewal in Essequibo
As the eighteenth century opened, the Essequibo colony was still quite small
but it appeared to be stable and growing. Population statistics are lacking
for this period, but it would seem reasonable to estimate a total population
of 600 to 700, of which about 500 may have been African slaves. Early in
the first decade the modest importation of slaves seems to have come to a
halt again, and in 1706 Beekman complained that the plantations had virtually
come to a standstill.32
Worse was yet to come. The wars between the colonial empires came
home to Essequibo, as it had to other colonies. In October 1708, three
heavily armed French privateers attacked the settlement and damaged several
plantations. The fortress, Kijkoveral, did not surrender, but the warring
parties negotiated a ransom settlement of 50,000 guilders, paid principally
in the form of 112 slaves. The following year two other French privateers
attacked and damaged the remaining plantations, and carried off more slaves.
30. W I C , vol. 1025, pp. 208-9,a n d 4°6» vol. 835, p. 88; vol. 834, p. 357.
31. Netscher. p. 98; W I C , vol. 1025, pp. 430-2; vol. 1026, pp. 9—11, 20, 36-41, and 72.
32. W I C , vol. 1026, pp. 72-5, and 139-41.
Table 8.3
Slave imports at Essequibo, 1618-1738
Years Ships Slaves cargoes Adjustment8 Total average
1618-1669 1 100 400 500
1670-1679 3 225 25 250 25
1680-1689 1 170 110 50 330 31
1690-1699 5 987 227 50 1,264 126
1700-1709 4 1,079 90 50 1,219 122
1710-1719 3 709 60 50 819 82
1720-1729 2 395 200 50 645 65
1730-1738 1 306 750 1,056 117
Total 20 3,971 687 1,425 6,083 51
Source: Appendix 1, Tables 2.2 and 9.9, and Postma Data Collection.
a
Estimates for potential shipments that have not been verified.
Only two sugar mills remained operative in the whole colony by the summer
of 1709. The Essequibo settlement had nearly been wiped out.33
While the planters of Essequibo kept struggling to get the colony to flourish
again, little activity and no profits were reported during the second decade
of the century. For several years WIC documents only sparingly mentioned
the settlement. By 1717 the WIC was taking slaves to Essequibo again, but
the consignments were much smaller than before the French attacks. In
1719 the cultivation of coffee was started in Essequibo, a clear sign that the
colony was recovering. During the 1730s the colony also experimented with
growing cocoa beans and indigo, but it soon became evident to the planters
that the soil was best suited for sugar cultivation. It was during the 1730s
that the same level of activity was again reached as in the late 1690s. By
1735 the WIC was operating four or five plantations, and there were an
estimated twenty-five to thirty private plantations in the colony. A census
report of that year placed the European population at 66 and the slaves at
859. The latter may well have included a number of native American slaves.34
Table 8.3 presents an overall estimate of the number of slaves landed in
the colony during the period 1618 to 1738. The WIC shipped a grand total
of about about 6,000 slaves to Essequibo. Adjustments have been made in
these calculations for periods in which documentation appeared to be weak,
33. Netscher, pp. 100-3; WIC, vol. 1138, doc. 5/1/1709.

34. WIC, vol. 1026, pp. 249, 274, 410, 436, and 459; vol. 1139, doc. 2/26/1719; Netscher
assumes that this population figure was exclusive of the private plantations and arrives at
a much higher overall estimate for the Essequibo population. However, his figures are
totally out of line with other population statistics for the settlement; see Netscher, p. 108.
and qualitative evidence implies that additional shipments may have been
made. This is particularly true during the decade of the 1730s, when free
traders may have supplied the colony with slaves before they were officially
allowed to do so.35 Some adjustments have been made to round off the
figures for whole decades. It appears, however, that on the whole few if any
significant slave imports to Essequibo have been overlooked.
The Van Pere patronship at Berbice
Another seventeenth-century Dutch colony in Guiana that had significance

for the slave trade was located on the Berbice River. In many respects,
Berbice and Essequibo had parallel developments, but both were obviously
overshadowed by Surinam. Berbice was one of the personal Dutch patron-
ship colonies. Settled by the Dutch Van Pere family in 1627, it remained a
family possession until 1712. It was, nevertheless, subject to the overarching
WIC monopoly, which included the company's exclusive right and obligation
to supply the colony with slaves. For most of the seventeenth century, Berbice
remained a very small colony, and little is known of its history prior to 1666.
In that year, during the Second Anglo-Dutch War, Berbice was the only
settlement in the region to remain in Dutch hands. By 1672, there were five
plantations in the colony, and the settlement was led by a WIC ship captain,
who was assisted by a few of the planters. The control of the Van Pere family
had apparently slowly eroded. But when the newly reorganized WIC in 1675
acted as if the settlement were company property, representatives of the Van
Pere family hastened to remind the directors of the unique status of the
colony, and as a result it was allowed to continue as a family patronship.36
Although the WIC was obligated to supply the Berbice colony with slaves,
the small size of the settlement must have made it a very lean market for
the company. This may be one reason why so little documentary evidence
exists on the subject. The relative independence of the settlement, due to
its patronship status, may also have contributed to a dearth of historical
records among the surviving WIC papers. During the years 1679 a n d 1680,
the Van Pere family requested that the WIC import 100 and 200 slaves for
those years, respectively, which was not a routine request and may therefore
represent a special effort to strengthen the colony. For the next two decades
no evidence of any additional requests for slave deliveries has been located.37
In 1703 the proprietors again requested the WIC to bring slaves to Berbice,
but the company directors balked at the request because of the planters'
35. WIC, vol. 1026, pp. 394, 474, 481, 486, 518, 533, and 549
36. Netscher, pp. 59, 78, 151, and 153.
37. WIC, vol. 832, pp. 28, 58-9, and 228.
poor credit rating. Two years later, however, the WIC slaver, Pijnenburg,
disembarked fifty slaves at the colony. Then, after several more years of
apparent inactivity, in 1716 the WIC ordered two company boats to ship
fifty slaves each from Curagao to Berbice. This order, similar to the practice
in Essequibo, was carried out the following year. While this very scanty
documentary record must be due in part to the loss of evidence, there is no
doubt that the slave traffic to Berbice during the seventeenth century must
have been small indeed. Not until the 1720s was there a significant increase
in the slave trade to the colony.38
In the meantime, however, the colony of Berbice had experienced a num-
ber of dramatic events that threatened its very existence. In 1687 the in-
digenous population revolted and attacked the white settlement, causing
considerable damage to some of the plantations. And in 1712 three French
privateers attacked and subdued the colony. As had been the case in Surinam
and Essequibo, the planters negotiated the return of their independence for
a ransom payment of 300,000 guilders. Forty percent of this ransom was
paid immediately in the form of sugar products and 259 slaves. The re-
maining 180,000 guilders were to be paid by the Van Pere family, who were
all domiciled in Holland as absentee landowners at that time. The family
representatives subsequently refused to honor the ransom agreement, and
offered to turn the whole colony over to the French. Perhaps this signifies
the limited economic value of the Berbice colony at that time. After two
years of negotiating and uncertainty, four merchants from Amsterdam agreed
to pay 108,000 guilders on the balance of the ransom in return for control
over the settlement.39
The Society of Berbice
Thus the Van Pere patronship of Berbice came to an end, and the new
owners made a concerted effort to make good on their investment. The
WIC agreed to continue its prior obligations to the colony and deliver slaves
whenever the planters demanded them. Immediately, a consignment for 250
slaves was prepared in order to get the colony revitalized, and the WIC
promised to send additional shipments when further bona fide requests were
made. However, since the owners and settlers lacked the means to pay for
the additional slaves, there were no follow-up shipments. Thus, the new
proprietorship was no more successful than its predecessor. Nevertheless,
38. Netscher, p. 155; WIC, vol. 836, pp. 315-17; WIC, vol. 747, doc. 1/19/1705; WIC, vol.
206, pp. 266 and 281.
39. Netscher, pp. 155-9.
an inventory of 1719 listed the total slave population, including children, at
895-4°
In 1720 the Berbice planters organized themselves into a society, or cor-
poration, on the Surinam model, which was approved by the WIC and the
States General. The new society planned to create eight to ten new plan-
tations and import 1,200 slaves from Africa, if the WIC was willing to
accommodate them. They also decided to start the cultivation of coffee,
indigo, and cotton, in addition to the traditional sugar crop. The records of
a number of slave contracts and deliveries of this period have been preserved.
In 1722 the WIC ship, Vrijheid, delivered 400 slaves, and two years later
the Leusden landed 314 slaves at Berbice. Contracts calling for slave deliveries
of 250 to 300 slaves for the years 1720,1723, and 1730 have been preserved,
but fulfillment of such contracts has not been verified.41
The ambitious plans of 1720 must have fallen short of their goals, for by
the late 1720s the society faced serious financial problems and was in virtual
disarray. These problems led to the reorganization of the society and the
issuance of a new charter in 1732. The new charter gave the society slightly
greater independence from the WIC, although the company retained a mo-
nopoly over the importation of slaves as long as the needs of the planters
were satisfied. Apparently the WIC tried to fulfill its obligation, because
during the next five years it dispatched four slave consignments to Berbice,
delivering a total of about 1,100 slaves. This was undoubtedly the most rapid
expansion of the colony in such a brief time. Perhaps there were even more
slaves landed during this period, because there were WIC complaints about
slave contracts with free traders in 1733 and 1736. During the final years
of that decade, perhaps beginning with 1736, the free traders replaced the
WIC as the slave suppliers of Berbice.42
The decade of the 1730s represents therefore the real takeoff for the
Berbice colony. By 1733 the society alone had twelve operating plantations,
and there must have been a number of private plantations as well. An undated
map of the colony, which has sometimes been attributed to the year 1740,
shows ninety-three plantations; however, this must belong to a later period,
for in 1762 there were still only ninety-five plantations in Berbice.43
Table 8.4 tabulates the estimated number of slaves landed in Berbice in
the period 1627 to 1737. The estimate has been generously inflated by dou-
bling the number actually documented as arriving, because of the poor
condition of the records for that period. In terms of numbers, Berbice was
40. SB, vol. 31, pp. 108-109; Netscher, pp. 159-60.

41. SB, vol. 31, pp. 132-3, and 151; Netscher, pp. 162-70.
42. SB, vol. 31, pp. 268, 462-9. See also Appendixes 1 and 2.
43. Netscher, p. 173.
Table 8.4
Slave imports at Berbice, 1627-1737
Years Ships Slaves cargoes Adjustments8 Total average
1627-1699 1 90 327 600 1,017 14
1700-1709 1 50 90 100 240 24
1710-1719 2 422 60 300 782 78
1720-1729 2 770 200 100 1,070 107
1730-1737 5 1,547 750 2,297 287
Total 11 2,879 677 1,850 5,406 49
Note: aEstimates for potential landings that have not been verified.
the smallest of the Dutch slave markets during the period of the WIC
monopoly, importing a grand total of approximately 5,000 slaves by 1738.
Colonization attempts at St. Eustatius
One of the small Leeward Islands in the Lesser Antilles, St. Eustatius, also
played a substantial role in the Dutch slave trade, albeit for a short duration
during the 1720s. Although started as a small plantation colony, St. Eustatius
is best remembered for its transit trade, playing a role much like that of
Curasao. St. Eustatius had been acquired by the Dutch in 1635, and the
Zeelander, Jan Snouck, was granted a patronship over the island with the
purpose of developing it into a plantation settlement. At first tobacco and
later sugar became the dominant crops of the island. Native Americans,
shipped primarily from the Guiana region, were initially forced to work the
plantations, but by the middle of the seventeenth century they were replaced
by black slaves. The island was too small and its climate was unsuitable (long
intervals of drought) for St. Eustatius to become a plantation colony of
significance. In addition, the island was politically unstable and frequently
changed colonial masters between Holland, England, and France, especially
during the seventeenth century.44
After several setbacks and failures of leadership at St. Eustatius, the Van
Pere family was allowed to develop the island in 1679, and the WIC directors
buttressed this attempt with a special slave transport of 200 to 250 slaves
44. Goslinga, Dutch in the Caribbean, pp. 261-3, and 336.

0
Nf VIS O SI JOHN'S
> 0 MONTSERAT
MAP 8.2
THE LESSER ANTILLES
g 0ST""A
/ <9 STV1NCFM
directly from Africa. This may well have been the first such shipment, for
the island had generally been supplied with small boat loads of macron slaves
from Curasao. The Van Peres were no more successful than their prede-
cessors, and in 1685 St. Eustatius was placed directly under WIC gover-
nance, with a WIC official, titled commander, as its ranking officer and
manager. In addition to small shipments of macron slaves from Curaqao,
interlopers occasionally supplied the island with slaves. The interloper ship,
Dolphin, for example, landed approximately 400 slaves at St. Eustatius in
1701. 45
Reflecting the size of its economy, the population of St. Eustatius always
remained small though fairly stable. The European population, including
children, numbered 330 in 1665, and by 1734 this figure had grown to 519.
The slave population during this period fluctuated between 800 and 1,000,
although the figures for both slaves and Europeans were considerably lower
during the War of the Spanish Succession at the beginning of the eighteenth
century.46
St. Eustatius as slave-trading depot
Isaac Lamont, the commander of St. Eustatius, suggested to his WIC su-
periors in 1701 that the island would make an ideal slave-trading station,
like Curasao, and he requested that the company assign several slave trans-
ports for this purpose. He claimed that he could sell 3,000 to 4,000 slaves
annually and, he continued: "that trade would render much profit to Your
Honors and also be the only means to end the interloper trade here, as the
foreign planters would rather buy from me than from interlopers I hope
you will soon resolve to send Negro slaves."47
The international situation prevented Lamont's plan from being imple-
45. Y. Attema, St. Eustatius: A Short History of the Island and Its Monuments (Zutphen, Neth-
erlands: Walburg Press, 1976), pp. 18-19; WIC, vol. 68, cor. 10/20/1688; WIC, vol. 69,
p. 152; WIC, vol. 248, p. 18; WIC, vol. 832, pp. 59 and 291; WIC, vol. 833, pp. 148 and
274; WIC, vol. 834, p. 152.
46. The scarce population statistics for St. Eustatius for the early years are as follows:
Europeans Slaves
1665 330 840
1705 253 120?
1709 349 463
1720 422 823
1723 426 871
1730 980
1734 519 973
See: Attema, p. 16; WIC, vol. 248, pp. 66-7, 117-8, and 373; WIC, vol. 249, p. 349;
WIC, vol. 619, pp. 67-8; WIC, vol. 620, p. 499.
47. WIC, vol. 248, p. 19.
mented, however, as St. Eustatius was for several years under imminent
threat of a French attack. Many of the island's inhabitants left St. Eustatius
for safety on neighboring islands, causing a large drop in its population. And
French attacks came, in 1709 and again in 1713. In the first attack the
French destroyed all buildings on the island and carried off 264 slaves, more
than half of its slave population. The island remained in Dutch hands, and
by 1713 the WIC directors inquired about the feasibility of starting the slave
trade there as Lamont had suggested twelve years earlier. Now that the
asiento trade at Curasao had officially been terminated, St. Eustatius might
conveniently fill the vacuum. The St. Eustatius commander responded pos-
itively, but in a more modest tone, suggesting that he would be able to sell
about 300 slaves annually for the company. At the same time a more opti-
mistic report was written by Anthonius Cowan, the Protestant pastor of St.
Eustatius: "Your Honors should direct one or two slave ships to this island
each year, and these slaves can be sold to the French, English, and this
island's inhabitants, and the ships will be returned to Your Honors with
produce. This could result in much profit for the company."48
Apparently the WIC directors were in no hurry with the St. Eustatius
slave trade, because the first slave assignment to the island was not recorded
until 1720, resulting in the arrival of the ship, Leusden, the following year.
One reason for the slow response of the WIC directors may have been the
bitter struggle for leadership of the WIC establishment on the island in 1717,
which could have made the new venture risky. Interloper activity in the
region may well have prompted the WIC to pursue the St. Eustatius slave
trade. In 1915 two interloper slavers were reported at the island, and in
1719 three others appeared and threatened to attack the island unless they
were given permission to sell slaves there. The following year, the interloper
ship, Korte Prim, delivered 340 slaves to the island. This is undoubtedly the
most intense effort made by Dutch interlopers to penetrate the WIC slave
trade monopoly. And the location of St. Eustatius, with several islands of
other nationalities in the vicinity, was an ideal location for the interloper
trade, making WIC policing efforts extremely difficult. Several St. Eustatius
citizens were accused of encouraging the interloper trade. One of the WIC
employees on the island, Jacob Stevens, had been an interloper trader him-
self, and the social environment thus lent support to the suspicions of the
WIC's directors. After the WIC began to respond to the demand for slaves
in that region, however, the interlopers either became less active or they
sold their slaves on nearby French islands instead.4g
48. WIC, vol. 203, 439; WIC, vol. 248, pp. 5-10, 109, 118, 149-51; WIC, vol. 1299, cor.
10/12/1717.
49. Thirty-three slaves were sold to foreigners in 1717. For the power struggle on the island
see: WIC, vol. 248, pp. 151, 173-5, ^ 7 , 205, 229, 239, 249, 450, 487; WIC, vol. 619,
Table 8.5
Documented slave landings at St. Eustatius, 1689-1729
Year Ships Slaves Cargo portions Total
1689 1 175a 175
1701 1 400a 400
1719 2 700a 700
1720 1 340a 340
1721 1 450 450
1722 3 1,579 1,579
1723 5 2,744 2,744
1724 3 1,067 221 1,288
1725 3 1,324 1,324
1726 5 2,238 104 2,342
1727 1 570 570
1729 1 75 75
Total 5+22 11,587 400 I 1,987

Note: a Interloper consignments are estimates.
As Table 8.5 shows, in 1721 the WIC started to get intensely involved
in the St. Eustatius slave trade, and made the island into an active slave -
trading depot. During that decade twenty-three WIC ships disembarked
nearly 11,000 slaves at the island, and interlopers had brought in about 1,000
during the years 1719-20. Many of the slaves were apparently resold to the
nearby French islands of Guadeloupe and Martinique, but some also ended
up in nearby English islands or were sold to English asiento agents operating
from the Spanish mainland. Some Dutch traders living at St. Eustatius
participated in the process of distributing the slaves; Joanz Doncker, for
example, son of the former commander of the island, complained that he
lost one of his boats to a French privateer while taking slaves to Guadeloupe.50
During the 1720s St. Eustatius briefly became the cornerstone of the Dutch
slave trade, facilitating the sale of more than a third of the total traffic, even
more than Surinam at that time. In contemporary correspondence the island
was compared to Curasao, whose role it seemed to have usurped. The growth
of commercial activity in the island stimulated a flurry of building activities,
including the refurbishing of the local fort and the construction of a two-
story building that could house 400 to 450 slaves who were awaiting trans-
pp. 99-101, 131 and 230; WIC, vol. 1300, doc. 5/12/1719. See Attema, p. 62, for a list
of the commanders of St. Eustatius.
50. WIC, vol. 248, pp. 405 and 487; WIC, vol. 249, p. 29; WIC, vol. 619, pp. 76-80. See
Chapters 3 and 5 about the interloper trade.
shipment. The slave trade at St. Eustatius was not without problems, how-
ever. The predictable three-month-long hurricane season created havoc and
delays for slave ships, and the unreliability of the foreign market was a
constant concern, as was the competition from foreign slave ships that sold
their slaves at neighboring islands.51
The documentation for the St. Eustatius trade during the 1720s is quite
reliable and complete. With the increase of commercial activity came a stream
of correspondence between the island and the WIC headquarters in Holland,
and much of it has been preserved. Ships assigned to the St. Eustatius slave
trade were five short of actual arrivals, but for two years the records of such
assignments have been lost, which might explain the discrepancy. The doc-
uments certainly confirm the feasibility of the twenty-three WIC slave con-
signments that have been found recorded. Three of these ships disembarked
only a portion of their slaves on the island, taking the remainder of their
slaves to Curasao. The St. Eustatius slave trade reached its peak in 1726,
and then suddenly seemed to evaporate. The activity of the years immediately
following that year are somewhat unclear, but by early 1729 it was evident
that the slave trade had come to a halt. In February of that year, Commander
Everard Raecx wrote to Holland that the "slave trade needs to be maintained,
for without it this island amounts to nothing." Shortly thereafter the last
arriving WIC slaver, Phenix, could sell only seventy-five of its slaves, and
was forced to continue with the remainder of its consignment to Curasao.
The captain of the ship reported: "Never do we trade slaves beneficially at
St. Eustatius."52
In 1730 Commander Raecx again saw hope for the revival of the slave
trade at St. Eustatius and he urged the WIC to send slaves again. A year
later he reversed himself, claiming that the English were flooding the market,
and that slave prices had dropped significantly, discouraging further ship-
ments. Meanwhile, Raecx was busy collecting for the WIC on old debts
from French planters at Martinique and Guadeloupe. From that time on,
St. Eustatius played only a marginal role in the slave trade, and it was not
until the 1770s that the island earned the nickname "Golden Rock" and
became a significant part of Dutch overseas commerce again.53
51. Attema, p. 29; W I C , vol. 248, pp. 405-7, and 481; W I C , vol. 409, pp. 3-4; W I C , vol.
619, pp. 103, 124, 128 and 269.
52. W I C , vol. 249, pp. 3-4, and 29; W I C , vol. 1154, pp. 91 and 95.
53. WIC, vol. 619, pp. 412, 451 and 661; WIC, vol. 294, pp. 491-4, 510, 528 and 549;
Attema, pp. 30-3.
The era of the free trade
1730-80
In contrast to their European competitors, the Dutch were slow in replacing

company monopoly with free trade in the Atlantic slave trade. The French
in 1672 and the English in 1689 permitted their nationals to participate
freely in the slave trade on condition that they pay a certain fee, 10 percent
in case of the English subjects. Hence, they were often referred to as the
1 o-percent men. By the end of the 1720s, when the WIC charter was due
for its customary thirty-year renewal, the Dutch States General also bowed
to pressure from the private sector and curtailed the WIC monopoly so
drastically that it essentially inaugurated the free-trade period with the new
WIC charter of 1730.1
The free trade triumphs
The Atlantic trade monopoly of the WIC had slowly been eroded throughout
the seventeenth century, first in Brazil and in North America, and in specific
branches of commerce; however, the slave trade had been retained by the
company as one of the last vestiges of company control. There had been
discussions as early as the 1660s to open the slave trade to private merchants.
This had come to nothing, and in the WIC reorganization in 1674 the slave
trade was perhaps even more firmly under the company's monopoly than
before. In 1687 the Heren X discussed the freeing of the slave trade to
Surinam, but it offered so many objections that one can hardly interpret this
as a serious intent; they merely made efforts to loosen restrictions within
the framework of the company monopoly. Five years later the city council
of Middelburg urged that the trade with Africa be opened to all citizens of
the Dutch Republic. But the directors of all WIC chambers overwhelmingly
1. Davies, Royal African Company, pp. 20 and 46.

rejected the free trade, at least until 1710, although the Zeeland directors
may have wished to free the slave trade to Surinam and the Guianas.2
With the loss of the asiento trade early in the eighteenth century, the WIC
slave trade had declined seriously. With the rapid development of the Sur-
inam colony during the 1720s, it had revived again but by then the opposition
to monopoly trade had become too powerful to retain it in its entirety.
Besides, the Dutch government was paying sizable subsidies in order to keep
the WIC afloat, and all these factors influenced the members of the States
General, who by 1730 had to decide on the renewal of the WIC charter for
an additional thirty years. The strongest pressure for freeing the slave trade
came from the private sector in Zeeland. In 1728 the merchants of Vlissingen
took the initiative by signing a request for ending the WICs monopoly, and
that same year the Zeeland estates and the Zeeland chamber of the WIC
discussed the issue favorably. The argument in favor of the free trade was
that foreign competitors were overwhelming the WIC in the African trade,
and that since the WIC had lost the asiento trade the English were in a
position to offer higher prices for slaves in Africa. When the States General
received the Zeeland proposal in December 1729, WIC directors complained
about the lateness of the proposed alteration. They put forth a valiant defense
for the retention of the company monopoly, claiming their method to be the
most efficient means of supplying the colonies with slave labor. But their
defense was not strong enough to prevent the States General from forcing
a reduction in the WIC monopoly. Free traders, however, were required to
purchase a permit from the WIC for the privilege of trading on the African
coast. This fee, or "recognition," amounted to approximately sixty guilders
per last, more than twice as much as the Zeeland merchants had anticipated.3
In the compromise solution of the so-called Regulations of 1730, which
were appended to the new WIC charter of 1730, the WIC retained its
monopoly for the Gold Coast, where its trading stations were clustered. The
company also retained the exclusive right of importing slaves into the plan-
tation colonies in Surinam and Guyana. Elsewhere on the African coast and
in the Caribbean, free traders were allowed to come and go as long as they
2. WIC, vol. 656, doc. 9/29/1692; WIC, vol. 839, p. 166; GAR, folders 458 and 802; WIC,
vol. 834, p. 295.
3. VWIS, folders 1199 and 36. See also van de Voort, pp. 120-2, from which the following
table of "recognition" payments has been excerpted:
SHIP LENGTH MEASUREMENT DUTIES
70 feet 45 last /3,ooo
80 feet 60 last f3S00
90 feet 80 last / 5,100
100 feet n o last /6,900
n o feet 125 last /7,8oo
120 feet 150 last /"9,300
T h e era of the free trade 203
purchased a permit from the WIC and followed the accompanying instruc-
tions. The WIC establishment at Elmina was alarmed at the concessions
made in the new charter, because in the compromise of 1730 the WIC also
committed itself to ship 2,500 slaves to Surinam annually. They claimed
that this number could not possibly be acquired in the small monopoly
territory of the Gold Coast, and they also feared that the arrival of large
numbers of free traders would inflate the price of slaves, making their obli-
gation to Surinam even more difficult to fulfill.4
On the other hand, free traders in Holland were not satisfied with the
terms of the charter either, although they eagerly responded to the new
opportunities, and they continued to keep up the pressure for a total abolition
of the WIC monopoly over the slave trade. In 1734 they managed to persuade
the States General to amend the charter of the WIC with a special ordinance
or regulation known as Naader Reglement, which also opened the Gold Coast
to free traders and extended the period of validity for a slaving pass from
twelve to twenty months. The penalties for prolonging slaving voyages beyond
these time spans were also reduced from 8 percent to 5 percent of the total
fee paid for the slaving permit or pass. Another limitation for free traders
that remained in effect was the carrying capacity of their ships; they were
not allowed to use flute ships, and the maximum length allowed for free-
trade slavers remained at 125 feet, although the table for recognition pay-
ments favored smaller ships. There is a certain irony in this arrangement
because the WIC rarely used flutes for the slave trade and hardly any of its
slave ships were over 125 feet in length. Whatever the rationale, the free
traders did develop a pattern of using smaller ships than the WIC's, as has
been explained in Chapter j . 5
In 1738 the WIC surrendered the last vestiges of its slave-trade monopoly
in the Guianas as well, and the first free traders arrived in Surinam that
same year. But even then the WIC registered a symbolic gesture of opposition
by voting against the complete surrender of their monopoly in the meeting
of the Society of Surinam. In reality, however, there were many factors that
forced the WIC to face the inevitable. The WIC's financial position had
greatly deteriorated during the decade of the 1730s. The value of its shares
on the stock market had dropped drastically and the company had no capital
to replace its aging slave-trade fleet. In addition, a number of misfortunes
plagued the WIC slave trade during these final years, the worst of which
was the sinking of the slaver Leusden, in January 1738, off the coast of
Surinam, drowning 702 of the 716 slaves on board. This must have been
4. WIC, vol. 41, docs. 35-43; WIC, vol. 487, p. 421; WIC, vol. 109, cor. 8/1/1731.
5. VCC, no. 6, pp. 116-17; RLMM, Lelyveld, folder 106. This folder includes printed copies
of the pertinent charters and ordinances. See also H.J. den Heyer, "De ondergang van
een monopoly," M.A. thesis, Leiden University, 1988.
an enormous financial loss for the company, and it may well have helped
the directors to get out of this risky business before it was too late. Two
years earlier two other WIC ships had suffered 59 percent and 46 percent
mortality rates on the middle passage, raising the average mortality of the
WIC's last few years well above the aggregate average. Only two more large
WIC slavers sailed after the catastrophe with the Leusden, completing their
assignments in 1739, because they had been en route to Africa or were
about to depart when that disaster occurred. Records of only a few additional
WIC slavers have been located for the next few decades, but for all practical
purposes the WIC was no longer an active participant in the transatlantic
slave trade after 1738.6
In an indirect way the WIC remained involved in the slave trade. The
company was still the agent that managed the sale of the slaving passes to
free traders, and it still maintained trading and refreshment stations in
African and Caribbean waters. The WIC had assumed an intermediary, or
middleman, function. Starting in 1734, and particularly after 1740, WIC
agents in Africa were selling slaves to free traders but the company charged
a fee of twenty guilders for each slave transacted. This mandatory fee angered
free traders and caused them to protest, but in the end the States General
confirmed the WIC's right to continue this practice. As a concession, the
free traders were allowed more flexible payments for slaving passes: one-third
at the commencement of the voyage and the remainder upon their return
to Europe. The special ordinance of 1734 had been specified for the duration
of twenty years, and when it was due to expire the States General prolonged
its operation until the expiration of the WIC charter in 1760. The special
ordinance of 1754 also confirmed the other alterations in policy mentioned
above.7
In the renewal of the WIC charter in 1760, the previously mentioned
ordinances were adopted as permanent elements of the provision, and there
were some additional modifications that perpetuated the balancing act the
States General had been playing. With the new charter taking effect at the
beginning of 1762, all limitations on the size of slave ships were dropped.
Furthermore, slave ships were given twenty to twenty-four months for their
slaving missions, depending on the type of ship, before they had to pay
overdue fees. The fees for slaving permits were also reduced at this time,
although this coincided with a change in configuring the cargo capacity of
6. The end of the WIC monopoly has been analyzed by H.J. den Heyer in his thesis cited
in this chapter, note # 5 . WIC, vol. 57, p. 47; WIC, vol. 113, pp. 502 and 523; WIC, vol.
489, pp. 301 and 703; VWIS, folder 932. The middle passage and mortality are discussed
in Chapters 7 and 10. The last recorded WIC slavers were the Catharina Galey (1742 and
1748), the Maria Galey (1747), and the Margaretha Christina (1750); these ships are listed
with free traders in Appendix 2.
7. RLLM, Lelyveld, folder 106; GAR, folder, 457a.
ships. In general, these changes may have come close to canceling out each
other. Nevertheless, these decisions collectively were greeted with vigorous
protests from Zeeland slave traders, who had by now come to dominate the
trade. They complained bitterly that they had been "left alone to face the
stiff competition of the French and the English in this dangerous traffic."
Later in that decade, Vlissingen slave merchants were requesting that fees
for the slave trade be dropped altogether, especially for the Guiana colonies,
where they faced fierce competition by the British. But their demands were
not met until the 1780s.8
Africa and the free trade
When the company monopoly over the slave trade ended on the Gold Coast
in 1734, and particularly when five years later the WIC essentially discon-
tinued its Atlantic crossings with slaves, the company's role in Africa had
to be reassessed. WIC officials still had the obligation to maintain the trading
stations and they were allowed to continue trading with Africans as in the
past. On the whole, the company's activity was greatly reduced and reductions
in personnel was one of the inescapable results. The surviving minutes of
the WIC council in Africa during the following decades give a gloomy picture
of low morale, internal bickering, and preoccupation with what previously
would have been regarded as mere minutiae. Company officials still bought
slaves from Africans, but they now sold them to free traders instead of simply
boarding them on WIC slave ships. By 1740 the factory masters of the
trading stations were permitted to buy and sell slaves at their own risk in
addition to their customary obligations to the company. For this privilege
and opportunity, they had to pay the company eight ackeys of gold (the
equivalent of twenty Dutch guilders) for every slave that they thus channeled
from African merchants to Dutch free traders. In effect, they had become
middlemen. The policy of charging a fee, or head money, was started on
the WIC's own initiative and was not officially approved by the Dutch gov-
ernment until 1754. By 1762 WIC servants ranking below factory masters
were allowed to trade gold, but not in slaves until 1768.9
The records of these head-money payments provide us with a glimpse of
the slaving activity at the Dutch trading stations on the Gold Coast, but
unfortunately their preservation is far from complete. Table 9.1 presents the
incomplete record of company slave sales to free traders, providing us with
an impression of the volume and flow of the slave trade from this region.
8. MCC, vol. 1569, pp. 36 and 48; RLLM, Lelyveld, folder 106; MCC, vol. 1567, doc. 68.
See also Chapter 6 on ship measurements.
9. NBKG, vol. 9, min. 4/11/1747; WIC, vol. 57, pp. 79 and 82.
Table 9.1
WIC slave sales to free traders, 1737-1777
Period Annual Period Annual
mo./ year Slaves average mo./ year Slaves average
11/ 1737 through 1755 1,137 1,137
10/ 1738 l,676a 1,676
11/ 1738 through 1762 2,424 2,424
3/ 1740 702 558
1740 634 634 1766 1,131 1,131
1741 1,216 1,216 1/ 1767 through
1742 1,586 1,586 6/ 1767 622 1,244
1743 1,743 1,743 1771 2,594 2,594
1744 2,241 2,241 1772 2,317 2,317
1745 962 962 1773 1,530 1,530
1746 228 228 1774 2,362 2,362
1775 1,839 1,839
8/ 1752 through 1776 1,503 1,503
11 1754 1,383 692 1111 1,612 1,612
Source: WIC, vol. 113, p. 421; vol. 114, p. 229; vol. 117, p. 177; vol. 488, p. 537;
vol. 490, p. 609; VWIS, nr. 932.
Note: aThese may include some sales to WIC ships.
Some of the early figures also include slaves boarded on the last WIC slave
ships. On the average, the WIC was selling 1,500 to 2,000 slaves annually
at its stations on the Gold Coast. Fluctuations in the export figures can often
be explained by political turmoil in that specific African region.
With the demand for slaves either stable or growing during much of the
eighteenth century, increasing areas of Africa began to respond to this de-
mand and supply slaves in growing numbers. The mobile pattern of the free
traders was more flexible in its response to changes in political or economic
conditions in Africa than the stationary system, which was restricted by the
heavy investment in fortified stations. If a given region was plagued by war
and political instability, and the trade routes converging on a particular
trading station were blocked, the station was of no value. Free traders, on
the other hand, could sail to another coastal area to obtain their slaves.
For the WIC with its trading stations concentrated on the Gold Coast,
the disadvantages of the stationary system remained a problem. African wars
on or near the coast could have a disastrous effect on the company's trade.
There were several small-scale wars at Elmina, Accra, and Bercu during
the late 1730s that may have contributed to the decline in slave exports for
the WIC. Larger conflicts could immobilize the whole trading system, as
was the case during the second half of the 1740s, when the Wassa people
blocked the trade routes to the coastal stations in that region. As a result,
The era of the free trade 207
WIC agents reported repeatedly that the slave trade was "completely dead,"
and they openly blamed "native wars" for the deterioration of the trade.
Table 9.1 reflects the impact of these political disturbances. Tensions between
the Wassa on the coast and the Asante in the interior were the cause of
problems, preventing the latter from bringing their merchandise (slaves in-
cluded) to the WIC stations. Asante traders eventually diverted their mer-
chandise to the Slave Coast, causing the Dutch to think of reactivating their
trading stations in that area.10
Free traders could try to obtain their slaves elsewhere in such situations
by shifting their operation to the Windward coast or to other areas. During
the early 1750s, however, the slave trade on the Windward coast was also
reported dead, causing the free traders real problems. One free-trade ship
required nearly eleven months to obtain its cargo of 317 slaves, and the
overall volume of the Dutch slave trade shows a decided decline at this
time.11
As widespread West African wars dissipated after 1755, Dutch slave ex-
ports also increased significantly. In 1767 conflicts erupted between the Fante
and the Asante, as Akyem shifted its alliance from the former to the latter,
but no negative commercial repercussions from this diplomatic shift were
reported by the WIC. A more troublesome problem for the WIC was the
insubordination of the wealthy and powerful merchant prince, Amnichia,
from Apollonia, who controlled most of the Hante lands on the western
Gold Coast, forcing the trade at Axim to a virtual halt. Amnichia's actions
were reminiscent of John Conny in the same region early in the century.
WIC leaders desperately tried to arouse neighboring people to oppose Am-
nichia, but apparently to little avail, as he continued to defy the Dutch as
well as the English. In 1768 the WIC threatened to bombard Amnichia's
headquarters at Apollonia with the WIC cruiser, Amazone, which led to a
temporary truce between the feuding parties. It was not until 1774 that WIC
leaders succeeded with a variety of gifts in appeasing Amnichia into a working
relationship with them.12
Although the disorders caused by Amnichia were restricted to only a small
region of the Gold Coast, elsewhere the WIC trade flourished. This changed
in 1773, when trade along most of the Gold Coast was hampered by hostilities
between the Fante and Asante nations. The latter had become increasingly
more prominent in the coastal slave trade and they prevented Asante mer-
10. WIC, vol. n o , p. 731; WIC, vol. 113, pp. 447-8, 504, 522, 570, and 585; NBKG, vol.
8, min. 7/-/1736, 5/27/1737, and 10/30/1738. NBKG, vol. 9, min. 5/1/1747; MCC,
vol. 60, cor. 1/3/1755; WIC, vol. 490, pp. 360-2, 602, and 635-640.
n . MCC, vol. 60, cor. 10/26/1753; WIC, vol. 113, p. 322. See also Table 5.8.
12. WIC, vol. 117, pp. n , 82, 101, and 467; WIC, vol. 118, p. 58. For an account of
Amnichia's activities see also WIC, vol. 115, pp. 289-91, 559, and 744; NBKG, vols. 11
and 12.
chants from taking their merchandise to European stations.13 It is doubtful
that these political developments in Africa caused the sharp decline of the
Dutch slave trade during the 1770s. The answer to the precipitous drop in
the slave trade at this time must be sought in international political and
economic developments.
International factors
The eighteenth century was also clearly a period of economic decline for
the Dutch at home and abroad, despite brief periods of revival during the
1720s and 1730s and again during the 1760s. Nevertheless, the Dutch still
had a huge merchant marine, which continued to play a prominent part in
international commerce until the turmoil of the Napoleonic era. Foreign
competition, particularly from the English and the French, was steadily
eroding the seventeenth-century Dutch dominance in international
shipping.14
Compared with the war-filled era that ended in 1715 and the turbulent
political period 1775 to 1815, the years in between were quite peaceful for
the Dutch Republic. Even during the War of the Austrian Succession (1740-
8) and the widespread Seven Years War (1756-63), the Dutch essentially
maintained their neutrality, except for getting involved briefly in hostilities
with France in 1747-8. By this time Holland was no longer a first-rate
power; its one-time powerful navy stood in the shadows of the now-mighty
British Empire, and neutrality could not always prevent damage to Dutch
maritime activities. It was not until the Fourth Anglo-Dutch War (1780-4),
however, that the Dutch suffered irreversible losses from which they never
recovered. The Dutch slave trade also came to a complete halt during this
war, and only faintly recovered during the decade that followed.15
During the 1740s the Dutch may actually have benefited from the Eu-
ropean war, which prevented the French from supplying their Caribbean
plantation colonies with slaves, and provided the Dutch with a share of this
market. Besides, the French were never a threat to the Dutch stations on
the African coast until the 1780s. Other European nations did threaten Dutch
trade in Africa. The Portuguese-Brazilian return to the Slave Coast region
during the later 1720s drew defiant reactions from WIC leaders in Africa,
and it clearly undermined Dutch activities in that region. The Danes also
13. HAR, vols. 41 and 42, cor. 7/15/1773; WIC, vol. 494, docs. 68 and 83; WIC, Vol. 926,
no. 109; De Maree, vol. 2, p. 129.
14. Van Dillen, pp. 652-57.
15. The waning years of the Dutch slave trade will be discussed in Chapter 12.
renewed their pressure on the Dutch on the Gold Coast during the second
half of the century.16
The rise of British competition during the eighteenth century was phe-
nomenal, and WIC correspondence from Africa repeatedly refers to them
as their chief competitors. Despite the lack of open hostility between the
two countries for more than a century (1674-1780), their competitive po-
sitions could not but cause tension between the two powers. In time of war
the British navy frequently harrassed neutral Dutch ships. In peace time
their economic rivalry was often intense, with the British increasingly gaining
the upper hand. In 1749 the Royal African Company reorganized its admin-
istration in Africa and in the process significantly raised its purchase price
for slaves above that of the Dutch. This drew angry denunciations from the
Dutch, and it may well have been one of the reasons why the volume of the
Dutch slave trade declined significantly during the early 1750s. Five years
later, Dutch traders were still complaining that the British were paying their
slavers subsidies, while they were burdened with the payment of permit fees
and head money, which greatly increased the cost of their operation. Actually,
the permit fees paid by Dutch free traders averaged slightly more than 4
percent of outlays on each slaving voyage, but this did not include the head
money that the WIC establishment in Africa demanded. The WIC director
in Africa wanted to negotiate with the English for parity of slave-purchase
prices, but the directors of the WIC vetoed such attempts on grounds that
fluctuating market conditions actually favored the Dutch. 17
The flow of the trade
It was during the free-trade period that the volume of the Dutch slave trade
reached its peak, particularly during the years from 1756 through 1773,
when the annual average exported from Africa rarely fell below 5,000 slaves;
twice, in 1763 and 1771, it nearly reached the 9,000 mark. Please note
annual averages can be deceiving, with ships leaving at the beginning or end
of a specific year.18 See Figure 12.1, Chapter 12.
An earlier high point in the Dutch slave trade was registered during the
16. NBKG, vol. 9, min. 4/14/1744; NBKG, vol. 13, min. 12/19/1786 and 6/2/1787; Van
Dantzig, Forts, pp. 57-8.
17. WIC, vol. 133, p. 585; WIC, vol. 114, p. 96; WIC, vol. 115, p. 101; WIC, vol. 37, p. 95.
The fee calculations are based on the records of thirty-three MCC slaving voyages of
the Haast U Langzaamy the Philadelphia, the Johanna Cores, and the Prins Willem V, on
which fees of 702, 607, 613, and 609 Flemish pounds were paid, respectively, not counting
late fees.
18. Specific annual averages can be derived from Appendixes 1 and 2. See also Figure 12.1,
Chapter 12, for the overall pattern of the trade.
early 1730s, when the combined activities of the WIC and the initial entrance
of free traders became evident. The initial spurt in the free trade was not
sustained. Except for the years 1732 and 1735, which may be seen as
responses to the 1730 and 1734 policy changes, the free trade operated on
a modest scale during the 1730s. The biggest problem in assessing the free
trade for this decade is that so little is known of the details of these early
missions. What little data exist are essentially from the sale of slaving permits
to shipowners. Details on African and Caribbean destinations and the num-
ber of slaves transported have been verified for only a few slaving missions.
It is quite certain that some of the permits to Africa were not used for the
slave trade but for the direct trade between Africa and the Dutch Republic.
This problem disappears for the post-1741 years because then far more
corroborative data become available, and also a complete list of the number
of permits issued for the slave trade confirms the number of slave voyages.19
This uncertainty in free-trade statistics during the 1730-41 period has
been resolved by conjecture based on verified but incomplete voyage data,
primarily on the length of the voyages. Two of the missions listed were so
short that they could not possibly have been triangular slaving voyages, but
had to be part of the Guinea trade. For the eighty-four recorded permits
to Africa, if the total voyage time span was less than thirteen months, or
395 days, the ship was regarded as a Guinea trader. Thirteen voyages fell
into this category but one ship, the Lammerenburg (1740), could clearly be
identified as a slave ship with a voyage length of 370 days, thus close to the
assumed limit. By applying this test to the remainder of the free-trade slaving
voyages, it appears that only 7 out of 246 completed their slaving missions
in less than eleven months, with only 2 in less than 363 days. All but one
of these seven have clearly been identified as bona fide slaving voyages. The
fastest of all the free-trade slavers was the Guide Vrijheid (1770), which
completed a triangular voyage in 225 days. Because this whole calculation
remains somewhat conjectural, all of the ships discussed above have been
retained on the list of free traders in Appendix 2, but the ones thought to
have been Guinea traders have not been assigned estimates for slave
consignments.20
The volume of the Dutch slave trade reached unprecedented heights
during the second half of the 1740s. There are a number of reasons for
this. Dutch slave traders may well have benefited from the war between the
19. Unger II, p. 5, claims the the ship Leliendaal was a Guinea trader and not a slaver;
however, the ship was insured for the triangular voyage and took nearly two years to
complete its mission, and it is therefore listed as a slave ship in this study. See GAR,
vol. 218, 9/11/1730.
20. Because of the conjectural nature of the method employed here, the ships thus identified
as Guinea traders have been maintained on the list of free traders in Appendix 2, but
estimates for slaves have been omitted.
major European powers at this time, as was stated before, although the cost
of shipping had actually risen as a result of the war.21 In addition, free traders
were now completely responsible for supplying the Dutch plantation colonies
in the West, which were expanding significantly at that time.
The precipitous decline in the volume of the Dutch slave trade during
the mid-1770s also had multiple causes. Most important of these was the
international economic crisis that also gripped the Amsterdam financial mar-
kets in 1773 and which led to a drastic drop in the prices of colonial produce
and caused many bankruptcies in the plantation colonies. This crisis was
aggravated by the revolt of the American colonies during succeeding years,
causing considerable diplomatic tension between the British and the Dutch,
and culminating in a state of war between the two countries in 1780. The
combined result of these crises led to a drastic reduction of the slave trade
and ultimately to a temporary halt of the Dutch traffic by 1782.22
The colony of Surinam
As described in Chapter 8, the plantation colony of Surinam had expanded

rapidly since the end of the seventeenth century, and the WIC continued
to supply the planters with slaves through 1738. During this last decade the
company had shipped over 17,000 slaves to Surinam, an average of ap-
proximately 2,000 a year through 1737, when the importation of slaves
dropped suddenly. This was less than stipulated by the compromise of 1730,
which obligated the WIC to import 2,500 slaves annually. These figures are
also confirmed by Hartsinck, the eighteenth-century Surinam chronicler,
who claimed that the WIC had landed slightly more than 13,000 slaves
during the period 1731-7, which was 4,500 less than promised. The com-
promise of 1730 also stipulated that if the WIC was unable to supply 2,500
slaves annually, Surinam would be opened to the free trade. Thus, the WIC,
under pressure from planters and merchants, had little choice but to abandon
its last element of monopoly over the slave trade in 1738, as it had done in
other areas in 1730 and 1734.23
As early as 1732 a small free-trade slaver, the Berkendam, was reported
stopping at Surinam in transit to Curasao. Although it was illegal for these
slave ships to sell their human cargo there before 1738, they were allowed
to anchor at Paramaribo for repairs or replenishments, and in this manner
they may well have sold some slaves there against WIC regulations. Not
21. Van Dillen, pp. 532 and 558-9.

22. Van Dillen, p. 588. Both the economic crisis and the Anglo-Dutch War will be discussed
in greater detail below.
23. See Van der Meiden, p. 120; Hartsinck, vol. 2, p. 740.
Table 9.2
The free trade to Surinam, 1732-1803
Documented Consignment Annual
Years Ships Slaves Adjustment8 portions Total average
1732-1734C 400 400
1735-1739° 1 276 400 676
1740-1744 31 7,872 400 8,272 1,654
1745-1749 44 14,062 400 14,462 2,892
1750-1754 41 10,169 500 10,669 2,134
1755-1759 50 15,079 500 164 15,743 3,149
1760-1764 47 13,919 500 455 14,874 2,974
1765-1769 76 19,309 250 19,559 3,912
1770-1774 69 17,535 500 412 18,197 3,639
1775-1779 24 6,320 250 439 7,009 1,402
1780-1784 6 1,856 250 161 2,267 453
1785-1789 13 2,423 2,423 485
1790-1795 19 3,605 250 88 3,943 789
1802-1803 6 1,087 250 1,337 669
Total 427 113,512 4,350 1,969 119,831 2,089(

Notes: aEstimated arrivals from ships without verified destination (see Table 9.9).
Parts of these consignments were shared with other settlements.
c
For WIC shipments during these years see Table 8.3.
Annual average for the 1740-1795 period.
surprisingly, concrete evidence of such illicit importations has not been

unearthed, but in order to account for the large number of unspecified free-
trader destinations during these early years this author has designated a
small portion of the free-trade slaves for Surinam (see Table 9.2). The first
reported free trader landing its entire slave cargo at Surinam was the Jonge
Rombout in 1739. Another free-trade slaver has been reported arriving the
following year, and thereafter an increasing number of free traders disem-
barked their human cargo at Surinam on a regular basis, as is shown in
Table 9.2. The last WIC ships to take slaves to Surinam arrived in 1738,
even though the company continued to ship some slaves to other destinations
in subsequent decades.24
The colony of Surinam continued its steady expansion during the free-
trade period, although this growth was periodically impaired by a variety of
factors. One such period of stagnation occurred during the late 1730s,
coinciding with the opening of the free slave trade to the colony. Reports
of slackening slave sales and slave prices began to appear in 1737, and a
letter from Surinam early the following year mentioned that the "bad con-
24. WIC, vol. 1140, doc. 225; WIC, vol. 1142, doc. 11.
ditions of most of the colony is deteriorating daily due to the continuing low
prices of the coffee beans (shipped) to the Fatherland." Changes in company
policies concerning the payment for slaves also were blamed for the problems.
These factors may provide a partial explanation as to why the WIC lost its
monopoly over the importation of slaves to Surinam; it may also clarify the
decline in coffee production in the colony during the following decade.25
Appendix 26 shows the growing diversification as well as the steady in-
crease in agricultural production of Surinam. The colony's sugar production
had remained fairly stable at approximately sixteen million pounds a year,
until it started to decline somewhat during the 1730s. Other plantation
products were gradually added to the list of the colony's commodities. Coffee,
already a substantial commodity by 1740, experienced a decline during the
following decade, but it had become a major product again by the middle
of the 1760s. It continued to be produced at an annual average of often
more than ten million pounds and in some years over fifteen million pounds.
Cocoa, first exported in 1736, seems to have increased when coffee pro-
duction declined during the 1740s, and it continued to be produced in
quantities of several hundred thousand pounds per year by the mid-1740s,
and its production increased further during the 1770s. Cotton came into
production in the 1730s but its cultivation was not undertaken seriously until
1752. It began to reach substantial production levels during the late 1770s.
Tobacco was a latecomer among Surinam's plantation products, and its
production levels were substantial only during a few isolated years.26
Reliable population statistics for Surinam are difficult to obtain for the
eighteenth century, but the steady growth of the first half of the century
must have persisted, as the few surviving statistics imply. Whereas the colony
had a total of about 10,000 settlers and slaves in 1706, their number had
grown to 25,000 by 1743, to 35,000 in the mid-i75os, and to 63,000 by
1787 (see Table 8.1). On the average, around 90 percent of these people
were of African descent, with a smattering of indigenous so-called red slaves.
These figures do not include the free indigenous population and the growing
number of maroons, or runaway, slaves. The Europeans living in Surinam
came primarily from the Dutch Republic, but there was also an increasing
number of other nationalities, and a sizable Jewish community as well as
Moravians, who had been encouraged to settle there. The number of plan-
tations numbered around 400 in 1737, but by 1793 Surinam counted 614
such units of agricultural production.27
25. WIC, vol. 1141, docs. 147, 165, and 178, p. 182. See Appendix 26 for a tabulation of
Surinam's production figures for 1740-1793.
26. Oudschans Dentz, p. 10; See Tables 8.1 and Appendix 26. A study of Surinam exports
is in process by this author.
27. Van de Voort, p. 86; Oudschans Dentz, pp. 10-13 and 18-19; See also Chapter 8 and
A variety of factors served to slow the growth of Surinam and the im-
portation of slaves into the colony. These forces include natural disasters
such as the weather, earthquakes, forest fires, epidemics, and so forth. The
prolonged drought of 1769 reduced Surinam's exports the following year.
Slave rebellions and attacks by maroon communities could be unsettling,
and these occurred frequently, particularly around 1760 and again around
1770. International conflicts could make the seaways unsafe, as was the case
during the wars of 1740-6 and 1756-63. Financial problems such as low
prices of colonial commodities and a limited flow of capital or high interests
were endemic problems for the Surinam planters. During the 1740s the
colony also experienced a serious crisis of morale, which divided the settlers
into quarreling factions until the early 1750s. The Society of Surinam, seated
in Amsterdam, appointed Jan Jacob Mauricius as governor in the hope that
a capable and talented administrator would create harmony in the colony,
but his presence seems to have intensified the tension between the quar-
relsome planters and the authorities in Holland. The situation improved
during the 1750s, when a number of Dutch financiers worked out a scheme
to make credit more readily available to the Surinam planters. Even though
these schemes later often brought bankruptcy to individual planters, the
colony as a whole flourished for the next few decades.28
One of the results of the apparent prosperity in Surinam during much of
the free-trade period was that the supply of new slaves from Africa was, on
the whole, quite abundant. Between 1745 and 1774, the annual averages of
slaves imported rarely dropped below 2,000, and some years it exceeded
4,000. The credit schemes developed by Dutch financiers, mainly after 1750,
made it possible for many Surinam planters to expand their holdings and
invest in slaves as they had never been able to do in the past.
During the 1770s Surinam was confronted with several serious problems.
First came the disastrous drought of 1769, which dramatically reduced the
production of the plantations and the exports of the colony during the fol-
lowing year, as is shown in Appendix 26. Also, in 1770 the prices of coffee
and cocoa beans began to drop on the Dutch staple market, and they did
not recover for seven years. Furthermore, a series of slave rebellions and
maroon attacks began in 1771, to which the planters responded with costly
countermeasures. Then, in the fall of 1772 an international financial crisis
struck London and quickly spread to Amsterdam, where several financial
Table 8.1. Some scholars, including van de Voort, have cited Surinam population statistics
supplied by C. van der Oudermeulen, who seems to have inflated the figures significantly.
28. SS. vols. 407-19, Governor's records, 4/28/1750, 7/20/1757, 7/6/1762, 1/22/1771, 4/
22/1778, and 7/28/1778; DMS, B1482, doc. eb; Van De Voort, pp. 90-103, and 153.
See also Van der Meiden, Chapters 4 and 5, where Surinam's administrative conflicts are
thoroughly analyzed.
establishments faced bankruptcy. The speculative investment schemes of
the past decades soon exhibited their vulnerability. Bills of exchange from
Surinam planters were frequently not accepted, and a rejected bill carried
heavy penalties. Speculative land and property values of the plantations
dropped dramatically, and new credit schemes were attempted but rarely
met with success. These conditions greatly reduced the planters' ability to
purchase slaves.29
While the repercussions of the financial crisis were troubling the West
Indian planters, the political crisis flowing from the North American colonial
revolt against the English produced additional pressures for the Dutch slav-
ers. Dutch ships were subject to searches after the outbreak of the colonial
war in 1774, and privateers and foreign warships made life for the Surinam
colony uneasy. The number of slave ships anchoring at Paramaribo had
averaged above twenty since the mid-eighteenth century but it dropped to
seventeen in 1774, largely due to the financial crisis. The volume of slave
landings continued to go down for the remainder of that decade, and when
in 1780 the Fourth Anglo-Dutch war broke out the slave trade to Surinam
ground to a virtual standstill.30 The full implications of this war for the slave
trade and the feeble efforts to revive it again after the war ended in 1784
will be discussed in Chapter 12.
Berbice and the slave rebellion of 1763
Compared to Surinam the Dutch plantation colonies on the Berbice, Es-

sequibo, and Demerara rivers in present-day Guyana were far less signifi-
cant, both in terms of production and the slave trade. Close in proximity
and sharing the same natural environment, they were subject to the same
natural political forces that shaped the destiny of Surinam. As has been
shown in Chapter 8, Berbice, the oldest of the Dutch settlements in the
region, had led a precarious existence until the 1730s, when the colony
experienced an economic growth spurt. Berbice continued to grow modestly
during the free-trade period, specializing primarily in coffee production,
until the great slave revolt in 1763. By that time there were ninety-five
plantations operating in the colony and the total settlement population had
grown to at least 4,423. Of this number, black slaves constituted nearly 90
percent, totaling 3,833; and there were 244 native American slaves, leaving
346 Europeans as managers of plantations, soldiers, and administrative per-
sonnel. The Berbice settlement had thus quadrupled in size since 1720.31
29. For a discussion of the financial crisis of 1773 see Van de Voort, pp. 153-62.
30. SS, vol. 416, 5/25/1777, 4/22/1778, 7/28/1778. See also Appendix 2.
31. SB, vol. 49, p. 85; Netscher, p. 191; Van de Voort, p. 87. The actual population was most
Reports from the Guiana region indicate that the lot of the slaves was
particularly harsh in Berbice, although the reasons for this are not clear.The
colony was poorly governed and the "moral" standards of the planters were
judged to be very low in comparison to other plantation colonies, but this
judgment may well have been tainted by the events of the 1760s. The planters
in Berbice tended to be very suspicious of outsiders; in contrast to several
other West Indian colonies, for example, no Jews were allowed into the
colony. Roman Catholics were likewise barred. Missionaries of the German
Moravian Brotherhood were tolerated in the colony, but they operated under
the strongest suspicions of the settler community. In this respect, Berbice
did not differ much from neighboring Essequibo and Demerara. Several
minor slave rebellions were reported from Berbice in the years 1749, 1751,
1752, 1756, 1759, a n d 1762. The 1750s were particularly trying times for
the settlement. A deadly epidemic, characterized by high fevers and dys-
entery, broke out in Berbice and persisted until 1765. It appears to have
struck Europeans in particular, and carried numerous planters, soldiers and
visiting sailors to their graves, especially new arrivals.32
In February 1763 the slaves at a few plantations rebelled and killed their
European masters, and the revolt quickly spread to neighboring plantations
until it nearly engulfed the whole colony the following month. Severely
hampered by the epidemic, the military establishment was unable to contain
the rebellion, and several planters fled to neighboring Demerara or to the
capital town New Amsterdam and its nearby fortification Fort Nassau, until
these too had to be abandoned to the rebelling slaves. The beleaguered
settlers burned down the fort as they crowded into three merchant ships
and drifted downstream for several days, until they found shelter in the
fortified post of St. Andries, near the mouth of the Berbice River. Here they
held out, fighting off several rebel attacks until assistance arrived from Sur-
inam and St. Eustatius during the ensuing months. Decisive assistance ar-
rived from Holland in October of that year, enabling the settlers to take the
offensive and slowly recapture control of the colony. The rebel slaves fought
fiercely against the reimposition of planter control, but their leaders were
gravely divided among themselves and they were up against a growing and
better-armed military machine. During several battles in the early months
of 1764, many surviving rebel fighters surrendered and other former slaves
returned to their plantations voluntarily. The suppression of the rebellion
and the reprisals that followed were marked by extreme cruelty. In four
likely a few hundred persons higher, as these statistics are based on the payment of "head
taxes" from which settlers were exempt during the first ten years of their domicile in the
colony. See also Chapter 8.
32. Netscher, pp. 180-9, *9 2 ' a n d 131; SB, vol. 49, p. 8.
separate mass executions, a total of 128 of the rebel slaves were executed,
some in the most brutal manner.33
As a result of the slave rebellion, the colony of Berbice was decimated,
and the epidemic among white soldiers and planters continued unabated for
two more years. Many of the plantation buildings were ruined and several
were still not rebuilt by 1772. The slave population was reduced from an
approximate 4,200 before the rebellion to 2,464 in June 1764, when the
colony returned to settler control. Virtually no export commodities were
produced in the colony for over a year. The planters were financially in
desperate straits, and it took special low-interest loans from the provincial
government of Holland and West Friesland to stimulate the rebuilding of
Berbice's plantation economy. This did lead to a significant slave importation
after the rebellion, as is shown in Table 9.3. By 1777 the slave population
of Berbice had climbed to 4,463, about the same level as before the rebellion,
and by 1780 there were 5,112 slaves in the colony. The Society of Berbice
permanently lost five of its eleven plantations as a result of the rebellion,
and many of the private plantations were still not restored when the colony
was taken over by the British in 1781.34
Table 9.3 lists the slave importations into the Berbice settlement that have
been verified by this study; estimates for possible additional shipments have
been added. On the whole, the records of the Guiana settlements have not
been kept or preserved as well as those of Surinam. There is considerable
uncertainty about the early years of the free trade to this region. The Dutch
historian, Netscher, writes as if the WIC continued to supply these colonies
throughout the eighteenth century, although we now know that Essequibo
was expecting slaves as early as 1738 from the free-trade ship JongeRombout,
for which slaving permit fees had been paid. In addition, the Jonge Pedro
stopped at Surinam on its way to Berbice as early as 1737. It is therefore
quite likely that some of the free traders, whose destinations have not been
verified, landed their slaves at the Guyana colonies before it was legally
allowed. It was also not uncommon for Guyana planters to purchase slaves
at official sales in Surinam and carry them in small boats to their own
respective settlements.35 All these factors add considerable uncertainty to
the problem of determining slave imports to the Guyana colonies. Adjust-
ments made for missing data in Tables 9.3 to 9.7 are based on a combination
of insights from the following factors: (1) qualitative documentary evidence,
(2) documented free-trade slave ships with unknown destination, (3) a com-
33. See Netscher, pp. 193-249 for a detailed account of the slave rebellion.
34. Netscher, pp. 254-8.
35. SS, vol. 165, p. 475.
2l8 The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade
Table 9.3
Free trade to Berbice, 1731-1795
Years Ships Slaves portions 8 Adjustment Total average
1731-1734° 350 350
1735-1739° 1 300 400 700
1740-1744 500 500 100
1745-1749 500 500 100
1750-1754 2 300 500 800 160
1755-1759 1 430 500 930 186
1760-1764 100 500 600 120
1765-1769 6 1,753 1,753 351
1770-1774 7 1,516 214 500 2,230 446
1775-1779 250 250 50
1780-1789 0
1790-1795 2 530 104 250 884 147
Total 19 4,829 418 3,750 9,497

Source: Appendix 2, Table 9.9, and Postma Data Collection.
Notes: aParts of these consignments were shared with other settlements.
Estimated arrivals without verified destination (see Table 9.9).
c
parison with the rates of population growth and slave imports into Surinam,
and (4) the uncertain factor of foreign markets for free traders.
Essequibo and Demerara
The small WIC colony on the Essequibo River was barely kept going, as
was shown in Chapter 8, but it survived into the free-trade period and
expanded considerably during the second half of the eighteenth century.
Population statistics for the colony are scarce, but by 1769 Essequibo had
ninety-two plantations in operation and a slave population of 3,086, com-
pared to 854 slaves and 66 Europeans in 1737. Essequibo experienced stable
and forceful leadership through Laurens Storm van 's-Gravesande, whom
the WIC appointed as Secretary in 1738 and as commander in 1742, and
he retained that position for thirty years. On the negative side, unlike Surinam
and Berbice, Essequibo did not attain semi-independent society status, but
remained under direct WIC jurisdiction. From 1750 until 1772 control over
Essequibo was disputed between the chambers of Zeeland and Amsterdam,
which undoubtedly impeded the colony's growth.36
an
36. Van de Voort, pp. 27-9, 88, and 129; Netscher, pp. 108-13, 121-33, d 139; Hartsinck,
vol. 1, p. 268.
During the 1740s, Essequibo spawned a satellite colony on the nearby
Demerara River (see Map 8.1). On the promptings of Storm van V
Gravesande, the first plantation on the Demerara was established in 1746,
and six years later the rapidly growing new settlement had its first commander
appointed, although he remained subordinate to the now director-general
of Essequibo. The first three commanders of Demerara were all close rel-
atives of Storm van 's-Gravesande, the director-general of Essequibo, and
the two colonies did not become entirely independent from each other until
1772. Demerara quickly outgrew its parent colony, counting a slave popu-
lation of 5,967 by 1769. One of the reasons for its rapid growth was the
fact that the WIC allowed several British settlers from the Caribbean islands
into the Demerara colony. Netscher claims that of its 130 plantations in
1770, one-third were owned and operated by British settlers. Neighboring
Essequibo also attracted many English settlers, and both colonies carried
on a considerable amount of trade with British ships, and the latter un-
doubtedly smuggled slaves into these colonies.37
No free-trade slave ships have been found recorded taking their human
cargoes to either of these two colonies before the 1760s, although this must
be due primarily to the sparse documentation for this region. If the British
were able to smuggle slaves into these colonies, it is safe to assume that
several Dutch free traders must have disembarked their slaves there. Oth-
erwise, it would be difficult to account for the steady growth of the two
settlements. When in 1767 the planters of Essequibo complained that Dutch
ships were not supplying them adequately with slaves, the MCC company
alone claimed that they had taken eleven and one-third slave cargoes there
during the past eight years, and at least two slave ships from Vlissingen had
disembarked slaves at the two colonies that same year. Two additional MCC
ships had been contracted to take another 1,095 slaves there in 1768. The
MCC also claimed that the Essequibo settlers owed them 350,000 guilders
for slaves delivered. Another source states that the MCC disembarked 1,134
slaves at Essequibo and Demerara during 1768, and these came from at
least three different shipments. These combined factors suggest that the two
colonies imported at least 5,000 slaves during the 1760s, and quite likely
considerably more.38
Earlier decades may not have been as active for the slave trade to Essequibo
and Demerara. The latter did not start importing slaves until the later 1740s,
although the rate of importation must have been quite high thereafter to
establish a slave population of nearly 6,000 in two decades. The WIC ap-
parently still was responsible for supplying slaves for these two colonies, as
37. Netscher, pp. 115-18, 128-30, 145; Van de Voort, p. 129.

38. MCC, vol. 1567, doc. 68; VWIS, vol. 1203, cor. 12/19/1769.
Table 9.4
Free trade to Essequibo, 1731-1795
Years Ships Slaves portions*1 Adjustment*3 Total average
1731-1734° 350 350
1735-1739° 400 400
1740-1744 500 500 100
1745-1749 500 500 100
1750-1754 500 500 100
1755-1759 500 500 186
1760-1764 405 750 1,155 231
1765-1769 1 269 1,078 250 1,597 319
1770-1774 7 1,810 373 500 2,683 537
1775-1779 1 397 290 250 937 187
1780-1784 1 437 100 537 107
1785-1789 0
1790-1795 102 250 352 59
Total 10 2,913 2,348 4,750 10,011

Notes: a Parts of these consignments were shared with other settlements.
b
c
a plaintive source reports that the company had brought only four cargoes
of slaves to Demerara during the period 1749 to 1765, which justified their
obtaining them from either foreigners or free traders. Essequibo developed
more slowly than Demerara. Qualitative sources suggest a significant ex-
pansion of the colony during the 1740s, but at this time the colony apparently
never received a complete slave shipment but only partial cargoes, perhaps
shared with Berbice or Surinam. The practice of sharing cargoes of slaves
became quite common for Essequibo and Demerara, particularly since the
two were geographically in such close proximity. This is evident in the rather
large number of slaves in the mixed column in Tables 9.4 and 9.5.™
In 1782 the British took control of Essequibo and Demerara and captured
three Dutch slave ships moored in the river. The Anglo-Dutch War halted
the Dutch slave trade for a few years, but after the war and its return to
Holland Demerara still experienced considerable growth before the colony
was lost to the English permanently during the early nineteenth century.
These last few decades are discussed in Chapter 12.
39. Netscher, pp. 113-15, 120, and 138.

Table 9.5
Free trade to Demerara, 1746 -1795
1746-1749 500 500 100
1750-1754 500 500 100
1755-1759 750 750 150
1760-1764 410 750 1,160 232
1765-1769 850 250 1,100 220
1770-1774 1 270 150 500 920 184
1775-1779 306 250 556 111
1780-1784 2 840 102 942 188
1785-1789 10 2,793 2,793 559
1790-1795 4 1,177 100 250 1,527 255
Total 17 5,080 1,918 3,750 10,748

Source: Appendix 2 , Table 9.9 and Postma Data Collection.
Notes: aParts of these consignments were shared with other settlements.
b
Curasao and St. Eustatius
The once formidable Dutch slave transit centers in the Netherlands Antilles,
Curasao and St. Eustatius, lost their prominence in the slave trade during
the free-trade period, although they continued to function as transit centers
on a marginal basis. They also continued to be governed by the WIC, and
although they had become open markets the company kept track of all the
commercial activities on these islands. Compared to Surinam these islands
had become insignificant in the Dutch West Indies, except for specific
periods of time when they flourished as commercial transit centers. They
tended to attract a wide range of international merchants, often men of
questionable character. Among them were traders from various Caribbean
islands, the Spanish Main, as well as from the North American colonies of
Great Britain, particularly during the American Revolution. In fact, after
1770 Curasao and St. Eustatius became quite profitable for the WIC, al-
though this was not due to the slave trade. 40
When the free trade began in 1730, Curasao had already lost its prom-
inence as a major center of the slave trade, and it never again occupied a
position of significance in the traffic. Its community of merchants began
concentrating its efforts on the so-called kleine vaart, or trade between the
40. Goslinga, Netherlands Antilles, 63-4 and 82-8; Van de Voort, p. 59; VWIS, vols. 304 and
1172.
Caribbean islands and the American mainland. Henceforth, its economic

fortunes shifted with the international situation, quick spurts of growth fol-
lowed by periods of economic depression. Curasao often benefited from
Dutch neutrality in hostilities between the various great powers operating
in the Caribbean. This was the case during the Seven Years War (1756-
63) and the early stages of the American Revolution. With declining pros-
perity came conflicts between the European residents of the island; the Jews,
who at times constituted half of the white population, were often feuding
with the other Europeans. In 1750 the slave population of the island revolted,
but it was quickly and brutally suppressed.41
Because the slave trade from Africa had now become a minor factor in
the Curasao economy, it is difficult to document it with precision. Un-
doubtedly, a few of the early free traders for which the American destinations
are unknown may have disembarked their human cargoes at Curasao. As
Table 9.6 shows, there was an increase in the slave trade to Curasao during
the later 1740s and again during the Seven Years War. Portions of slave
cargoes were often landed at the island after mid-century, when portioning
became a more common practice in the Dutch slave trade. Correspondence
from the island in 1762 indicated that the Dutch could actually benefit
greatly from the war between Spain and Great Britain, and that three to
four cargoes of slaves could profitably be sold there annually. Four years
later, however, the slave trade in Curasao was again reportedly "dead" and
by the middle of the following decade the slave trade was at a virtual standstill
there. Because the island had become a slave market of peripheral impor-
tance, some slave landings may have been overlooked, and this accounts for
the adjustments in Table 9.6. As had many of the other Dutch West Indian
possessions, Curasao fell into British hands in 1780.42
The role of St. Eustatius during the free-trade period was quite similar
to that of Curasao, and they often traded with the same Caribbean regions.
One may have assumed the position of the other on occasions, as the slave
landings in Tables 9.6 and 9.7 seem to suggest. As was shown in Chapter
8, St. Eustatius achieved notoriety as a slave-trade depot during the 1720s,
just as Curasao was losing that distinction. Little has been written about the
history of St. Eustatius during the following decades, although the island
seems to have continued a rather undramatic existence of a small-scale
international marketplace. Nevertheless, the island's population was slowly
increasing during the 1730s, as the main town, Oranjestad, expanded until
41. Cornells Ch. Goslinga, The Dutch in the Caribbean and in the Guianas, 1680-1ygi (Assen:
Van Gorcum, 1985), pp. 105-20.
42. Goslinga, Netherlands Antilles, pp. 63-4; Cornelius C. Goslinga, Encyclopedic van de Ned-
erlandse Antillen (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1969), p. 230; Unger II, pp. 12-13; WIC, vol.
1154, p. 66.
Table 9.6
Free trade to Curasao, 1731-1795
Years Ships Slaves portions51 Adjustment*5 Total average
1731-1734 1 418 1,000 1,418 284
1735-1739 1,500 1,500 300
1740-1744 2 810 1,000 1,810 362
1745-1749 5 1,640 1,000 2,640 528
1750-1754 500 500 100
1755-1759 4 1,438 400 500 2,338 468
1760-1764 6 1,318 100 750 2,118 434
1765-1769 1 806 250 1,056 211
1770-1774 2 508 158 750 1,416 283
1775-1779 250 250 50
1780-1784 91 91 18
1785-1789 0
1790-1795 250 250 42
Total 21 6,938 749 7,750 15,437

Note: aParts of these consignments were shared with other settlements.
b
Estimated arrivals without verified destination.
the war that broke out in 1740 slowed this process. During the middle of
the 1740s the weighing house was repaired, evidence of commercial activity
on the island. A devastating hurricane in 1772 destroyed most of the doc-
uments on the island, which accounts for a dearth of documentation from
the preceding decades. The abolition of the 1-percent import tax in 1757
seems to have stimulated the island's commercial enterprise, for during the
1760s considerable expansion took place on the island, including several
new buildings on the bay below Oranjestad. By 1770 St. Eustatius had
developed into one of the most impressive international marketing centers
in the Caribbean, and merchants of Spanish, British, and French, as well
as Dutch nationality had established themselves on the island. Profits from
the trade on the island became so formidable that St. Eustatius became
known as the Golden Rock. Ships from the North American mainland in
particular frequented the island, especially after the American Revolution
broke out in 1775. During the last years of that decade as many as 3,000
ships anchored off St. Eustatius annually, and as a neutral harbor the island
played a significant role in supplying the American rebels with ammunition
and other supplies.43
43. Attema, pp. 29-38; J. Hartog, Geschiedenis van St. Eustatius (Aruba: De Wit, 1976),
PP- 35ff-
22 4
Table 9.7
Free trade to St. Eustatius, 1731-1795
1731-1734 1,000 1,000 200
1735-1739 1,500 1,500 300
1740-1744 1,500 1,500 300
1745-1749 1,000 1,000 200
1750-1754 1,000 1,000 200
1755-1759 3 1,129 500 1,629 326
1760-1764 1 294 200 750 1,244 249
1765-1769 2 608 136 250 994 199
1770-1774 1 313 314 750 1,377 275
1775-1779 13 3,536 516 250 4,302 860
1780-1784 1 443 250 693 139
1785-1789 250 250 50
1790-1795 250 250 42
Total 21 6,323 1,166 9,250 16,739

Notes: aParts of consignments shared with other settlements.
The remarkable development of St. Eustatius as a commercial center was

actually not based on the slave trade but rather on the fact that the island
became a center of the sugar trade. However, slaves and sugar production
are related, and St. Eustatius functioned as a slave-trade depot almost with-
out interruption, although with varying degrees of intensity. As has been
shown in connection with the WIC slave trade, St. Eustatius continued to
function as a conduit to and from the French islands, particularly in time
of war, when the French were unable to supply their own nearby colonies.44
The number of slave arrivals documented for the free trade in Table 9.7
were certainly not the only ones disembarked there. Some of the Dutch
free-trade slave ships for which the destinations are not known must have
taken their slaves to St. Eustatius and the neighboring Dutch possessions
of Saba and St. Martin. This author's estimates for that category are indicated
in the Adjustment column of Table 9.7, and estimates for the unaccounted
destinations are presented in Tables 9.8 and 9.9.
It is unfortunate that no better account can be given of the slave ships
with unknown destination, but the dearth of records for this period simply
allows no other choice but to make calculated estimates. Nor does this
44. Van de Voort, pp. 138 and 150; Goslinga, Netherlands Antilles, p. 82.
Table 9.8
Free trade slave ships without verified destination
a
Destination unknown Not to Surinam
Years Ships Slaves Ships Slaves Total
1730-1734 28 7,020 7,020
1735-1739 31 8,207 8,207
1740-1744 29 7,830 1 250 8,080
1745-1749 28 7,760 1 357 8,117
1750-1754 25 6,435 1 300 6,735
1755-1759 17 4,260 3 1,164 5,424
1760-1764 21 5,734 3 1,128 6,862
1765-1769 11 2,450 2,450
1770-1774 17 3,828 8 2,112 2,452
1775-1779 3 820 8 1,632 2,452
1780-1784 4 1,075 1 300 1,375
1785-1789 5 685 685
1790-1795 8 1,675 2 520 2,195
Total 227 57,959 26 7,763 65,542

Note: a These ships stopped or were sighted at Surinam but they sailed on with-
out landing slaves. Their destination has not been verified.
Table 9. 9
Estimates for unknown :slave destinations
Surinam Essequibo Curacao St. Others
Years Total Berbice Demerara Eustatius
1730-1734 7,020 400 350 350 1,000 1,000 3,920
1735-1739 8,207 400 400 400 1,500 1,500 4,007
1740-1744 8,080 400 500 500 1,000 1,500 4,180
1745-1749 8,117 400 500 500 500 1,000 1,000 4,217
1750-1754 6,735 500 500 500 500 500 1,000 3,235
1755-1759 5,424 500 500 500 750 500 500 2,174
1760-1764 6,862 500 500 750 750 750 750 2,862
1765-1769 2,450 250 250 250 250 1,450
1770-1774 5,940 500 500 500 500 750 750 2,440
1775-1779 2,452 250 250 250 250 250 250 952
1780-1784 1,375 250 250 875
1785-1789 685 250 435
1790-1795 2,195 250 250 250 250 250 250 695
Source: Appendix 2 and Table 9.8.

approach account for all the Dutch free traders and their slaves. Some free
traders undoubtedly took their human cargoes to colonies not administered
by the Dutch, even if this was against regulations. Just as the British and
French occasionally sold slaves in Dutch colonies, as was the case in 1749
at St. Eustatius and in the Guiana colonies at other times, so Dutch slavers
would penetrate foreign markets when it was to their advantage. Such land-
ings were not the rule, and were illegal, yet they were not as likely reported
in WIC or other Dutch documents. The Spanish Caracas coast undoubtedly
continued to attract Dutch slavers, particularly during the early years of the
free trade when their markets were still limited, and some of the slave
shipmasters may well have had experience there as interlopers. During the
1730s MCC ships were trading actively with the Caracas coast as well as
Cuba, and because these ships were generally selling textiles rather than
slaves it is quite likely that the established contacts were subsequently ulitized
for the slave trade, for which there was precedence during the WIC monopoly
years.45
In addition the French islands were attractive markets when war prevented
their own nationals from supplying them. St. Thomas has been mentioned
a number of times as a potential slave market, and a list of ships landing
slaves there contains names of captains that suggest Dutch ethnicity, even
if the names of the ships did not. Santo Domingo has also cropped up in
correspondence of the MCC as a possible slave market. There were many
Dutch planters residing on the islands of St. Thomas, St. Croix, and St.
John, and much Dutch capital was invested in these islands as well as on
Grenada, Tobago, Dominica, and St. Vincent.46 All of these potential des-
tinations remain quite conjectural as far as slave deliveries were concerned,
but collectively they may account for free-trade slavers whose destinations
remain a mystery. Finally, it is also possible that a number of the free traders
destined for the slave trade did not complete their assignments, were lost
at sea, or limited their trading voyage to the two-way Afro-European trade,
as has already been established for the first decade of the free trade. This
last consideration leads this author to conclude that any error in the estimated
number of slaves carried by Dutch free traders is likely to be on the high
side.
45. The early MCC activities in the Spanish colonies will be confirmed by Dr. C. Reinders
Folmer in her still incomplete dissertation on the MCC.
46. Unger II, pp. 4, 9, and 13; MCC, vol. 1569, p. 15; Van de Voort, pp. 106-8.
10
The slaves: their treatment and
mortality
The slaves are the principal subjects in this study, yet so little is known of
them except as groups and statistics. Only on very rare occasions was the
name of an individual slave known, such as the slave, Ettin, who led an
uprising as detailed in Chapter 7. They were generally identified by a number
burned on their skin, either an individual number or one that identified
them with the ship on which they sailed or the company that purchased
them. Slaves were seen and treated as objects of potential economic utility,
which was also the primary reason for their enslavement. If the lot of the
slave seemed cruel it should be remembered that this was an age in which
life was often cruel and cheap. The slaves came from different cultures and
a race different from their European owners, which were used as rationales
to justify this inhumane system at a time when slavery was disappearing in
Europe. The slave trade was not only a grueling experience for African black
slaves but also for European white sailors, who were often forced to partic-
ipate in the system out of economic necessity, and many of them paid with
their lives. The white sailors who survived their slaving voyage at least had
a degree of freedom slaves lacked. And even if they had few economic options
they would not have wished to exchange their position with the slaves, who
had little to look forward to but unquestioned obedience and hard labor for
the remainder of their short lives.
Accounting for the slaves
The slaves transported across the Atlantic were labeled by various terms. In
addition to slave\ the term head was widely employed in the slave trade. The
latter is still used in reference to cattle, which might suggest how slaves were
valued at that time. Unlike English, the Dutch language distinguishes be-
tween the human head as hoofd and that of an animal as kop, and it was
ironically the latter term that designated slaves and cattle. It should be pointed
227
out, however, that Dutch and English employed the same word, hands, to
describe the crew of a ship. The term Negro was also widely used by the
Dutch in reference to slaves; Negro appears to be almost synonymous with
slave. A slave ship was often labeled a neger schip, or Negro ship. The Dutch
employed the term blacks (zwarten), generally in reference to free blacks,
although this term was also employed as a synonym for the word Negro. A
point of interest is that the Dutch used a special name for a consignment
of slaves: an armazoen (human cargo, in English), whereas a cargo of mer-
chandise was called a cargazoen.
A very common designation for slaves, particularly in the trade with the
Spanish colonies or the asiento trade, was pieza de India, literally a piece of
India. In translations the Dutch would often substitute for this the word
leverbaar, or deliverable, slave, or they might simply use the term pees, or
piece. A pieza de India was not an individual but essentially a measure of
potential labor. Thus, younger slaves were counted as fractions of piezas. In
the asiento trade, cargo accounts would often include fractions, which might
produce difficulties in determining the number of human beings this might
represent. From the ship, Adrichem, for example, 355 slaves were sold at
Curasao in 1708 which were counted as 3472/3 piezas de India. In many
accounts, however, both figures were indicated.1
The expression pieza de India alluded to a healthy slave, male or female,
between the ages of fifteen and thirty-six, who was "without major blemish
. . . good in health, not blind, lame, or broken," according to one asiento
contract. Those slaves above and below this age group could be counted as
fractions of one-half, two-thirds, or as other fractional values. According to
asiento contracts of 1683 and 1699 the age groups of eight to twelve and
three to seven counted as two-thirds and one -half piezas, respectively. Infants
below the age of three were kept and sold with the mother.2
Discrepancies between the number of human beings and piezas de India
could vary greatly from one slave ship to another. Before the seventeenth
century fewer slaves outside the specified age limits were purchased by the
WIC, perhaps due to the asiento contracts, but in the next century the
number of children in the human cargoes increased. There were exceptions
in both periods and these were often singled out in correspondence for that
very fact. Two WIC slavers, the Brandenburg and the Joanna Maria (1688),
carried large numbers of young children, in excess of 30 percent of the total
human cargo. The standards determining what constituted a pieza de India
1. Curtin, Atlantic Slave Trade, p. 22. See also Chapter 2 concerning piezas de India, and
Appendix 19 for a comparison of the two correlative sets of statistics.
2. See Appendix 3, which is a translated copy of an asiento contract; NAA, no. 1352; WIC,
vol. 783, contract 5/3/1683; WIC, vol. 68, doc. 9/27/1687.
T h e slaves: their treatment and mortality 229
could also vary from one place to another. Asiento agents at Curasao, for
example, would often apply a more stringent examination of the slaves than
the WIC traders in Africa, resulting in financial losses and complaints by
the WIC directors. As is illustrated in Appendix 19, the average discrepancy
between human beings and piezas de India was slightly less than 9 percent.
Of fifty-two slave consignments for which comparative records have been
unearthed the average head count was 316; the average piezas in this same
group came to 289^
The slaves who did not measure up to the standards of the asiento contracts
were generally referred to as macrons, or manquerons, and occasionally they
were also referred to as malingers. These less-valued slaves were either sold
at a lower price locally, or they were sold to private traders and transshipped
to various Caribbean locations. At one point the WIC at Curasao insisted
that macrons were to be reexamined and if they still failed to meet asiento
requirements they could be sold to the Spanish at about two-thirds of the
value of a pieza de India. Sometimes macrons were kept at Curasao, but they
were also shipped to St. Eustatius and to the Guiana coast. Even Tobago
has been mentioned as a possible destination, but the majority were un-
doubtedly smuggled to the Spanish Main by private traders. In 1687 the
Curasao WIC directors were ordered to send a whole cargo of 500 macrons
to Surinam, although the fulfillment of this order has not been verified.4
Because slaves were taken to the West primarily for the purpose of per-
forming hard labor, it was to be expected that a majority of them were males
in the prime of their lives. Asiento contracts always stipulated a two-to-one
male-to-female ratio, and this became a practice for Surinam and the other
slave markets. Male slaves were nearly always sold at a higher price than
women, which may have been an added incentive for the slave traders to
prefer men to women slaves. In 1706 WIC authorities cautioned not to delay
a ship's departure from Africa for the sole reason of getting the proper two-
to-one gender ratio. Women slaves came to be in greater demand during
the eighteenth century, particularly younger females of childbearing age. As
early as the 1680s there were requests for young women, particularly from
the Loango-Angola region, for Curasao, presumably for the Spanish colonial
markets.5 By 1728 slave traders at Curasao expressed their preference for
women in no uncertain terms: "It is more profitable for the company (WIC)
to send women rather than negro men, especially since the Spanish spare
3. W I C , vol. 206, pp. 177 and 206. See Appendix 19.

4. W I C , vol. 831, pp. 27 and 242; W I C , vol. 834, pp. 144 and 288; W I C , vol. 1026, pp. 93-
4 and 139.
5. W I C , vol. 833, p. 340; W I C , vol. 834, pp. 190 and 152-3; W I C , vol. 55, cor. 11/17/1706;
W I C , vol. 835, pp. 142 and 174; W I C , vol. 1138, cor. 9/19/1710.
Table 10.1
Slave gender and age ratios
Ships Total Males (%) Females (%) Youths
To Brazil
1637-1645 23 4,072 2,293 (56) 1,779 (44)
WIC
1
1680-1699 8 3,314 2,267 (68) 1,047 (32) 180 (5)
1700-1709 35 16,115 10,855 (67) 5,260 (33) 1,778 (ID
1710-1719 17 6,819 4,720 (69) 2,099 (31) 724 (11)
1720-1729 14 5,161 3,872 (75) 1,289 (25) 627 (12)
1730-1739 5 3,157 2,035 (64) 1,122 (36) 103 (3)1
Total 79 34,566 23,749 (69) 10,817 (31) 3,412 (10)
Free trade
1734-1749 7 2,093 1,454 (69) 639 (31) 423 (2) !
1750-1759 18 5,095 3,008 (59) 2,087 (41) 987 (19)
1760-1769 26 7,884 4,485 (57) 3,399 (43) 1,870 (24)
1770-1779 37 9,382 5,496 (59) 3,886 (41) 2,370 (25)
1780-1802 10 2,897 1,733 (60) 1,164 (40) 618 (21)
Total 98 27,351 16,176 (59) 11,175 (41) 6,268 (23)
Grand total 200 65,989 42,218 (64) 23,771 (36)
Source: Appendixes 19 and 20, and van den Boogaart and Emmer, pp. 365-66.
Notes: Signifies percentage of young slaves between the ages of 3-15 (these fig-
ures are based on a smaller sample than those for gender).
Based on only a few consignments and therefore not very meaningful.
no money for women 15-20 years old, a n d . . . these can be bought for less
on the Guinea Coast."6
In spite of these encouragements, no increase in the female ratio was
noticeable until the second half of the eighteenth century. As Table 10.1
shows, the male-to-female ratio in the WIC slave trade remained quite
constant, and very close to the stipulations of the asiento contracts, even
though the bulk of the slaves were going to the Guiana colonies after 1700.
During the initial stages of the WIC involvement in the traffic to Brazil,
company directors did not give any instructions as to gender preference,
and the result was a gender ratio favoring males by 56 to 44 percent. Similar
male-to-female ratios occurred again after 1760.7
6. WIC, vol. 208, p. 507.

The slaves: their treatment and mortality 231
Table 10.2
Gender and age groups in sample slave population
Men Women Boys Girls Sample
(%) (%) (%) (%) Ships
WIC
1680-99 665 (53) 404 (33) 127 (10) 53 (4) 1,249 3
1700-09 7,899 (58) 3,946 (29) 1,379 (10) 375 (3) 13,599 26
1710-19 3,321 (60) 1,524 (27) 522 (9) 202 (4) 5,569 14
1720-39 3,904 (61) 1,718 (27) 515 (8) 215 (3) 6,352 13
Total 15,789 (61) 7,592 (27) 2,543 (8) 845 (3) 26,769 56
Free trade
1734-49 1,178 (56) 492 (24) 276 (13) 147 (7) 2,093 7
1750-59 2,379 (47) 1,729 (34) 629 (12) 358 (7) 5,095 17
1760-69 3,344 (43) 2,670 (34) 1,141 (14) 729 (9) 7,884 25
1770-79 4,080 (44) 2,932 (31) 1,416 (15) 954(10) 9,382 36
1780-1802 1,315 (47) 928 (32) 382 (13) 236 (8) 2,897 9
Total 12,332 (47) 8,751 (32) 3,844 (13) 2,424 (8) 27,351 94
Grand total 28,121(52) 16,343(30) 6,387(12) 3,269 (6) 54,120 150

The age factor played a similar role to that of gender in the slave trade.
The number of children and youths transported from Africa by Dutch slavers
remained fairly steady until the free-trade period, when their numbers in-
creased. In the Brazil trade 13 percent were counted as youths, and these
percentages remained about the same for the remainder of the WIC trade,
although individual human cargoes might vary considerably. During the first
decades of the free trade the number of young slaves increased to 20 percent
and it reached a peak during the 1770s, when about a quarter of the slaves
were below the age of fifteen. This does not take into consideration the very
young children and infants who remained with their mothers. There are
only sporadic references to these little ones, and a meaningful statistical
assessment of them is therefore out of the question. For at least two WIC
ships, it was noted that each had seven babies on board, but most other
recorded cases listed fewer infants. One exceptional situation occurred in
1734, when the WIC slaver, Rusthof, was reported to have had approximately
100 infants on board, in addition to the 716 adult slaves and youths. But
this was a very unusual case, with female slaves outnumbering males by
more than two to one. The middle passage of the Rusthof took more than
three months and the length of the voyage contributed to the fact that nearly
half of the slaves died. We may assume that the vast majority of the babies
did not survive the middle passage either.8
Records were not always kept of infants, because their economic value
was questionable to the owners, although on at least one occasion a death
affidavit was made out for an infant. The opposite was true for young and
mature slaves. Careful accounts were kept of the purchase and sale of the
slaves, including the date, price, and place of purchase. Before a WIC slaver
could set sail from Africa, the captain and officers had to sign consignment
papers (cognossement), detailing the slave cargo. When a WIC slave died it
was not only noted in a special death register but an additional death affidavit
had to be signed under oath by at least two of the company's officers,
declaring they had seen the body of the deceased. Obviously, this was not
done for the sake of human interest, but rather to ensure economic efficiency
for the company and to prevent mismanagement and theft. In 1680 and
again in 1717, the WIC management sent special instructions to Curasao
for the maintenance of careful and detailed records of company-owned
slaves.9
Accommodation and feeding
Because the Dutch ships used for the slave trade were regular freight ships
temporarily refurbished for human transport, one can imagine that the mid-
dle passage was far from comfortable for the involuntary passengers. This
was aggravated by the fact that as many slaves as possible were crowded
between decks. Slaves slept on hard boards, and they were apparently naked.
The ship's carpenters constructed special platforms or galleries, which were
so close together that the slaves were not even able to sit upright. They were
stacked like loaves on a shelf, with "not so much room as a man has in his
coffin," as one English writer described the accommodations aboard slave
ships. According to one Dutch physician-historian, Dr. M. A. van Andel,
each slave had barely 15 cubic feet of space on board, with women having
slightly more space than men. These conditions varied, of course, depending
on the size and style of the ship and the crowding of a particular slave
consignment. As a result of overcrowding, the lower-deck areas, where the
slaves were housed, tended to get unbearably hot and foul smelling. Ven-
tilation was generally so inadequate that some captains had additional ports
installed during the voyage. On one occasion at least, it was reported that
8. WIC, vol. 200, p. 230; WIC, vol. 1140, Doc. 86; WIC, vol. 1141, docs. 33, 35 and 36.
For the Rusthof statistics see Appendix 19.
9. WIC, vol. 832, cor. 10/30/1680; WIC, vol. 206, p. 280. See Appendixes 21, 22 and 23
for copies of these documents; WIC, vol. 180, p. 192.
several slaves suffocated when bad weather forced the hatches to remain
closed for an extended period of time. It is not surprising that ship logs
would refer to the slave quarters simply as slavegaaten, or slave holes. To
make matters worse, most male slaves appear to have been chained together,
whereas women, children, and the infirm were kept in separate quarters on
the upper deck and were spared the indignity and discomfort of the
shackles.10
Weather permitting, slaves were frequently taken to the upper deck for
fresh air and exercise, regarded as essential for their health and thus their
salability. For this reason each slave ship had drums on board and sometimes
other African musical instruments as well, to accompany the dancing, that
slaves were often forced to perform with the threat of a whip. WIC ships
had special orders to purchase drums in Africa for these dances or exercises.
Each afternoon, weather permitting, slaves were washed with sea water, and
at this time they might also be checked for signs of illness by the ship's
doctor. The slaves' hair was periodically cut to keep it very short for hygienic
purposes. Bad weather could prevent most of these recommended activities
and also force the ports and hatches to be closed, thus aggravating the
unhygienic situation between decks. This was frequently the case with the
earlier cited slaver, Vergenoegen, while still on the Loango coast, although
the weather became much more congenial after the ship weighed anchor
and set sail for the West.11
While the slaves were on the upper deck, their quarters below were
periodically cleaned, depending on weather and other factors. The living
quarters were disinfected with vinegar, or lemon juice, or possibly with
fermented palm wine, while incense and gunpowder were burned to combat
bad odors. Several trusted slaves might be employed as aids in such tasks.
Women in particular may have been drafted for the preparation of the meals.
Lavatory facilities were sparse and inconvenient. Overboard leaning privies
were constructed on the upper deck for daytime use. Buckets were used as
privies during the night at special locations between decks, which added to
the suffocating stench of slave ships.12
The slaves were fed twice a day, at about nine o'clock in the morning
and at five in the afternoon. The Dutch factor, Willem Bosman, claimed
that it was three times a day, but he did not sail on a slave ship and he may
have merely said this to bolster his claim that the Dutch treated their slaves
10. M. A. Van Andel, "Geschiedenis der Geneeskunde," Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Genees-
kunde, vol. 75 (1931), pp. 624-5; Hezemans, pp. 36-7. See also the log of the Vergenoegen,
ECMMR, folder 47; WIC, vol. 1140, cor. 6/29/1721.
11. Unger, I. p. 153; Van Andel, p. 629; Hezemans, pp. 37-8; ECMMR, folder 47.
12. Hezemans, p. 38; WIC, vol. 55, cor. 10/30/1717; ECMMR, folder 47; Unger I, p. 154;
D. Schoute, "Geschiedenis der Geneeskunde," Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde,
vol. 92 (1948), p. 3650.
Table 10.3
Provisions for a consignment of 400 slaves
Amount Measure Unit price Equivalents Product Total price
1800 pounds / 18.00 Bacon / 324.00
5 0.5 aam 18.00 1 aam = ca. Grain brandy 57.10
155 liter
2 0.5 aam 22.00 French brandy 44.00
3 pounds 28.00 1 oxhead = ca 84.00
230 liter Vinegar
800 pounds 7.00 Biscuit Hard bread 56.00
320 zakken 4.50 1 zak = ca. barley 1,440.00
(bags) 2 bushels
or 80 dm3
160 zakken 3.00 Peas 480.00
300 pounds 20.00 Tamarinden Dates 60.00
1 barrel Tobacco 90.00
12 gross .70 a bunch Pipes 4.10
Total / 2,640.00
Source: Van Brakel, p. 82; for measurements, see: W. Staring, Maten, Gewichten
en Munten.
better than other Europeans. The basic diet consisted of barley and dried
peas or beans (Dutch records used the now obsolete term paardebonen), as
is confirmed by the food list for a consignment of 400 slaves listed in Table
10.3. Three times a week the slaves had a ration of ship biscuits, regarded
as a delicacy; at other times they received a shot of brandy or were given
pipes and tobacco to smoke for a treat. Bacon, peppers, and palm oil were
used to give flavor to the cooked staples, and supplemental food was often
also bought in Africa, including for example millet, citrus fruit, coconuts,
melequete peppers, etc. The accounts of the slaver, Quinera (1709), show
that the following items were purchased in Africa as victuals for slaves: 300
chickens, 13 pigs, 6 cattle, 7 amen palm oil, and 38 cases of millet. Such a
list may not be typical, however, and would undoubtedly vary according to
the availability and quality of food brought from Holland, as well as the
available supplies at the African ports. 13
In spite of careful planning for provisions by the slave traders, there were
often scarcities and spoilage in food and water. Slaves always suffered terribly
as a result. Several incidents have been reported in which the death toll
became exceptionally high or the slaves were in very poor shape at the end
13. Unger I, p. 153; Unger II, p. 55; Van Andel, p. 629; Hezemans, p. 39; RLLM, Rader-
macher, folders 558-88; WIC, vol. 54, pp 4 and 13; WIC, vol. 486, p. 138; WIC, vol.
832, p. 588; WIC, vol. 834, pp. 288, 253 and 307; WIC, vol. 180, p. 186.
of the voyage because of such shortages. This was particularly true when
uncooperative winds or other factors prolonged the middle passage. Water
shortages in particular could pose a serious problem, and it was therefore
always carefully rationed. As a rule, slaves were given water to drink twice
daily, with or after their meals, and sick or especially weak slaves might be
given an extra drink of water when it seemed advisable. It has been estimated
that slaves received about a quart of water a day. On these long sea voyages
water was very likely to spoil; in fact, it seems to have gone through cycles
of going bad and curing itself again. The water taken aboard in Africa was
regarded as inferior to that obtained in Holland. When American ports were
reached and fresh water became available, however, the slaves were only
gradually weaned from the old African water to the new supplies.14
The cycle of suffering and death
In this study we meet the slaves only from the moment they became the
property of European slave traders on the African coast until the time they
were sold to their new masters in the Americas. The agony in the process
of enslavement started for many of the slaves with war or a slave raid. This
must have been a most traumatic rupture of kinship ties for people to whom
family was so crucial. The long march to the coast, tied together in single-
file coffles and often burdened by heavy loads of merchandise, can only have
added to their despair. Little is known with certainty of the details of these
early stages, nor of the number of slaves who succumbed before the coast
was reached. At any rate, that part of the slaves' suffering is beyond the
scope of this book.
Without having experienced the condition of slavery it is impossible to
understand the ordeal to which the slaves were subjected. At best one can
only attempt to comprehend it. The humiliating and painful process of being
branded and sold to strange-looking and strange-behaving "pink" people,
seeing an ocean for the first time, and then being carried by a small boat
to a larger one anchored offshore can only have worsened the misery of
the slaves. The process of boarding a ship, being taken through heavy surf
in a small boat, and being hoisted aboard the slave ship must have been a
frightening experience. It caused death by drowning for a number of slaves.
Once crowded in this ship with other victims, whose fate they shared but
whose languages were often incomprehensible, most slaves must have been
bewildered. Then, after seeing the mainland disappear and after months of
sailing to some unknown destination, without land in sight for what must
14. Van Andel, p. 632; Unger I, p. 154.

have seemed an endless voyage, the new land must have been both a welcome
and a haunting sight. Disembarking, receiving new clothes (or simply a rag
to cover their genitals) and better food, and being able to walk around may
well have been a heartening experience for many of the slaves. But the
auction block, another encounter with the branding iron, and additional
physical examinations must have returned them to their nightmare. The
experiences in the middle-passage stages of the journey and the toll on lives
will be examined in greater detail.
Of those enslaved Africans who survived the often long march to the coast,
many died before embarking on European ships. It has been suggested that
only 60 percent of the enslaved reached the coast alive and an additional
10 to 12 percent died before embarkation. The evidence for such claims is
highly speculative, however, and the answer to that problem may always
remain a mystery. On the African coast the surviving slaves came in contact
with Europeans and Africans who were infected with diseases to which the
new arrivals had not developed an immunity. The "white man's grave," the
Guinea coast so dreaded by Europeans, posed a threat to Africans from the
interior as well. Added to the danger of contracting some strange disease
were the squalor of their accommodations and the uncertainty of their future.
The initial sight of the ocean and the rumors of "white savages" who might
eat them may have been traumatic enough to rob them of the will to live or
to fight off illness.15
The process of being sold to Europeans must been very dehumanizing
as well as painful to the slaves. Being sold involved humiliating physical
examinations, into which an eighteenth-century Dutch handbook for slave
traders provides considerable insight. To check hearing and speaking ability
the slave was forced to scream. To avoid buying older slaves, the captains
were advised to check the teeth of the slaves, examine their hair, and test
the firmness of women's breasts. The buyers were warned against the various
tricks of the sellers, such as rubbing and greasing the bodies of slaves, and
shaving, plucking, and painting gray hair. All such tricks and others the slave
captains used when marketing the slaves on the other side of the ocean. 16
Willem Bosman described this ordeal of the slaves as follows:
When these slaves come to Fida, they are put in prison all together,
and when we treat concerning buying them, they are all brought out
together in a large Plain; where, by our Chirurgeons, whose Province
15. Philip D. Curtin, "The White Man's Grave: Image and Reality, 1780-1830," Journal of
British Studies, (1961), vol. 1, pp. 94-110; Philip D. Curtin, "Epidemiology and the Slave
Trade," Political Science Quarterly, (1986), vol. 83, p. 205; De Marree, vol. 2, p. 248;
Joseph C. Miller, "Mortality in the Atlantic Slave Trade: Statistical Evidence on Caus-
ality," Journal of Interdisciplinary History (1981), vol. 11, p. 413.
16. Gallandat, p. 432.
it is, they are thoroughly examined, even to the smallest Member, and
that naked too both Men and Women, without the least Distinction or
Modesty. Those which are approved as good are set on one side; and
the lame or faulty are set by as Invalides, which are here called Mackrons.
These are such as are above five and thirty Years old, or are maimed
in the Arms, Legs, Hands or Feet, have lost a Tooth, are grey-haired,
or have Films over their Eyes; as well as all those which are affected
with any Veneral Distemper, or with several other diseases.'7
Once the property of Europeans, the slave was subjected to the painful
ordeal of being branded with a red-hot iron. All WIC slaves had to be
branded before they were allowed to board a company slave ship, because
it was feared that crew members might otherwise exchange them for less
expensive slaves and pocket the difference in price. One slaver described
the scene in vivid terms: " . . . the yard reeking with the smell of burning
flesh," and the air filled with "cries of agony and terror."18 Bosman described
the scene in less dramatic terms: "In the mean while a burning Iron, with
the Arms or Name of the Companies, lyes in the Fire; with which ours are
marked on the Breast...; but we yet take all possible care that they are not
burned too hard, especially the Women, who are more tender than the
Men." 19
When these slaves arrived in the Western Hemisphere they were usually
branded again. After 1687 WIC slaves of a particular ship arriving at Curasao
were all branded with the same number or letter, and at varying parts of the
body (shoulders, chests, or arms) in order to distinguish among them. The
scars were subsequently used as identifications for various purposes. Free
traders also branded their slaves, but they may have given each slave a
successive number based on the order of his or her purchase, because that
is how they were identified in the log. A description of these practices and
procedures is in Appendix 8.2°
During the WIC monopoly trade, slaves often had to wait in confinement
for many weeks or even months before a company slave ship arrived. On
the Slave Coast the slaves were generally kept in barracoons or stockades
(tronks, the Dutch called them), unroofed but fenced areas on the beach,
until their embarkation. At Elmina on the Gold Coast, some of the storage
space was set aside for housing slaves, as the castle there was not built with
17. Bosman, Description, p. 364.

18. WIC, vol. 484, p. 45-6; NBKG, vol. 233, cor. 1/20/1700; WIC, vol. 25, min. 8/5/1699;
Averil Mackenzie-Grieve, Last Years of the English Slave Trade; Liverpool, 1750-1807
(London: Putnam, 1941), p. 122; WIC, vol. 68, cor. 9/27/1687; WIC, vol. 69, p. 60;
WIC, vol. 617, p. 436; MCC, vol. 1571, cor. 3/29/1767.
19. Bosman, Description, p. 364. See Appendix 8 for a description of "branding."
20. WIC, vol. 617, p. 436; WIC, vol. 1148, doc. E; MCC, vol. 1571, cor. 3/29/1767; Hudig,
p. 38.
the slave trade in mind. This area was nevertheless dubbed the slave hole
or dungeon, and it could accommodate 300 slaves, although as many as 400
were often packed into it.21
Many slaves lost their lives in these storage areas; forty-three died at
Ouidah in 1724 and eighty at Epe in 1735. The Dutch exported approxi-
mately 1,200 and 1,800 slaves from this Slave Coast region during these
respective years, which would put the death rate of the waiting period at
about 4 percent. At Elmina slaves were put to work during the waiting period
because this was regarded as better for their health than just sitting in
confinement. Their treatment at Elmina is explained in Appendix 21. One
WIC director on the Gold Coast expressed his concern about the unpre-
dictable arrival of slave vessels and the possible consequences as follows:
"(I) recommend that you space the arrival of ships better for we cannot
purchase large numbers of slaves if no ships are on the (African) coast or
due to arrive, because if slaves have to wait a long time they run a great risk
of dying and also cost a great deal to feed."22 Sometimes slaves were em-
barked even though the ship was not ready to clear the port, because the
fresh air on the water was better for their health than the stale air of the
slave hole.
Death affidavits prepared by the record-conscious WIC officials also throw
some light on the preembarkation mortality rates. Although the numbers are
not complete, they do confirm that mortality among waiting slaves could
occasionally be very high. In 1705, for example, 95 slaves died out of a group
of approximately 650 boarded at Elmina, which is a 15 percent mortality
rate. For one eight-month period (1734-5) a t l e a s t fi% death affidavits have
been preserved, and for the years 1728 and 1729 at least ninety-five such
documents have been unearthed. During these last two years the WIC
exported between 3,000 to 4,000 slaves from the Guinea coast, which would
put the average death rate for the waiting period at nearly 3 percent, assuming
all deaths had been accounted for in the surviving documents. For the year
1725, however, only twenty-five death affidavits have been located, which
would be barely above 1 percent of the slaves exported by the WIC during
that year. Because no complete set of mortality statistics are available, one
is left to conjecture; for the WIC slave trade a 3-5 percent preembarkation
death rate would not be an unrealistic estimate. 23 For the free trade these
figures are undoubtedly lower because these ships came in larger numbers
21. WIC, vol. 487, p. 35; NBKG, vol. 7, min. 1/27/1737.

22. WIC, vol. 486, pp. 491-2; WIC, vol. 488, pp. 92-4; NBKG, vol. 24, cor. 6/25/1774;
NBKG, vol. 6, min. 3/22/1730; WIC, vol. 55, cor. 3/30/1705; WIC, vol. 180, p. 192.
See also Appendix 21 about the Elmina "slave hole."
23. WIC, vol. 107, pp. 322-41; WIC, vol. 99, pp. 199-205. Most of the death affidavits are
located in WIC, vols. 107 and 108; see Appendix 23 for a sample.
and boarded their slaves shortly after their purchase. Nevertheless, their
African and European vendors at times may have retained the slaves before
a willing buyer arrived. Moreover, the slaves paid for the shorter waiting
period in a much longer coasting time on board the free-trade slave ships.
The middle passage, or the crossing of the Atlantic, has generally been
viewed as the most awful stage of the slaves' experience. This stage generally
included a period of coasting, described in Chapters 6 and 7. The uncer-
tainty, discomfort, deprivation, and suffering in general must have been awful
indeed. It is therefore not surprising that several slaves took their own lives
when they had the opportunity. The diseases and mortality on the middle
passage will be dealt with in greater detail later. With the arrival at their
destination in the West, the torturous experiences during the preceding
months did not end the trail of death and suffering for the slaves. Compli-
cations from the suffering of the preceding months often resulted in many
more deaths after arrival in the West, and after their sale to new owners the
slaves entered the new disease environment of the Western Hemisphere.24
As noted in Chapter 8, ships often had to wait several days after arrival
before they were allowed to disembark their human cargo. When a contagious
disease was discovered aboard a slave ship this waiting period could turn
into several weeks. One slave captain complained that the waiting period
would make the slaves listless and the crew restless, and that many slaves
died because of the lack of activity. Of thirty-four WIC ships in a sample
of 101 that reported harbor deaths, an average of five slaves a consignment
died between arrival and disembarkation. The reported deaths fluctuated
between one and fifteen, although several ships may have been spared such
losses, and the records of others have not been located. When the reported
harbor deaths are correlated with middle-passage mortality rates and the
total number of slaves in the resulting sample, the harbor death rate comes
to nearly 1 percent, as is shown in Table 10.4.25
Some of the casualties mentioned above may have been included in the
mortality rates of the middle passage, but this would not apply to slaves who
died shortly after their landing. After their disembarkation, the slaves were
often getting more and better food, more exercise, and in general improved
treatment as they were being prepared for the auction block. They generally
needed this recuperation as many slaves were too sick to be sold immediately.
Approximately 25 percent of the slaves that landed in Curasao, as shown in
Appendix 17, were either categorized as macrons or were too sick to be sold
at the first examination after disembarkation. Nevertheless, at this time the
slaves suffered the indignity of one or more physical examinations and in
24. See Curtin, "Epidemiology," on disease environments.

25. WIC, vol. 1138, cor. 6/26/1706 and 9/22/1706; WIC, vol. 1140, doc. 74; Appendix 19.
Table 10.4
Postdisembarkation mortality, 1700-1739
Mortality
Slave sample Middle passage Postlanding
Harbor deaths 17,804 3,171 168
(%) of total (17.8) (0.94)
Postlanding deaths 20,762 3,799 525

(%) of Total (18.3) (2.53)
Aggregate WIC mortality 111,129 18,787

1700-1739 (16.9)
Source: Appendixes 1, 2 and 19.
most cases another branding. During this waiting period, which lasted on
average a couple of weeks but sometimes much longer, as in the case of the
asiento slaves, many more slaves would die, especially when the preceding
middle passage had been long or very taxing on the slaves. In the sample
cited above, thirty-four consignments reported slave deaths of from two to
fifty-four, an average of 15 per consignment. Some of the most disastrous
cases are not included in these statistics. The ship, Brandenburg, in 1700,
for example, lost 130 of its 450 slaves on the middle passage, and of the
survivors 64 more died within a period of ten months after disembarkation
at Essequibo. In 1727 the Rustoj'had a large consignment of 684 slaves, 74
of whom died on the middle passage, but an additional 263 died within four
months after arrival at St. Eustatius. Another 148 slaves could not be sold
at that time because of persistent illness. As shown in Table 10.4, the death
rate after landing and before the slaves were sold amounted to another 2.55
percent after registering a 1 percent loss in the harbors and a generous 18
percent mortality rate on the middle passage.26 As will be shown below, the
death rates in the free trade tended to be slightly lower than in the WIC
traffic.
In contrast to the middle passage, the postdisembarkation mortality sta-
tistics are scanty, especially for the free-trade period. For those slaves who
faced another voyage, as the vast majority sold at Curasao and St. Eustatius,
the chances of survival must have been reduced even further. The whole
issue of postembarkation mortality remains vague given the limited data at
hand, and it is beyond the scope of this study. But the sparse data presented
here illustrate that the Africans who got caught in the Atlantic slave trade
faced death at every stage of their ordeal and, on the average, must have
had a very short life expectancy.27
26. WIC, vol. 1026, pp. 26, 36, and 44; WIC, vol. 619, pp. 373 and 388; Appendix 19.
27. WIC. vol. 206, doc. 85. See also Table 10.3 and Chapter 8.
Causes of death on the middle passage
Mortality on the middle passage of the Dutch slave trade is quite well
documented, as are the causes of death. Officers on slave ships kept a special
list for diseased slaves, identifying them by their purchase number, sex, age
group, and presumed cause of death. Several of these lists have been pre-
served. As already noted in Chapter 7 (see Table 7.5), a number of slaves
died as a result of slave revolts; however, this did not involve large numbers
except in a few cases such as the Middelburgs Welvaren (1751) and the
Vtgilantie, which had most of their slaves killed as a result of slave uprisings.
Apart from revolts, individual attempts to escape from slave ships occurred
quite often, but as a rule they resulted either in the slaves' recapture or their
being consumed by the sharks that often accompanied ships in tropical
waters. Many of these attempts at jumping overboard might in fact be re-
garded as suicide by drowning. Suicide was also attempted by other means,
such as self strangulation, and it was not uncommon for slaves to refuse to
eat. As a rule, slave ships carried instruments to pry open the mouth of such
slaves to force-feed them. One slave was so determined in his hunger strike
that the following was reported about him: "This afternoon a man slave died
who refused to eat, no matter what I tried. He bit so hard on the 'mouth
screw' that the teeth fell out Fellow slaves acknowledged that he was so
stubborn that he would rather be dead than eat."28
In the WIC traffic at least twenty-eight cases of suicide, mostly by jumping
overboard, have been identified among the deaths in forty-two slave con-
signments. This represented nearly 1 percent of the deaths in this particular
sample. At least eighteen missions listed suicides as a cause of death, and
on one voyage four suicides were reported. A number of deaths were reported
as accidents, such a "fell in the water," and while some of these may have
been genuine accidents, others may have been caused by slaves as an expres-
sion of resistance. One can imagine that the miserable circumstances of the
slaves, particularly among the men who were chained together, might have
led to conflicts among the slaves themselves. Rarely were such incidents the
cause of death, but in one tragic case a slave reportedly died as a result of
"his testicles (being) bitten off," which must have been done by another
slave, presumably as a result of a fight with his partner in chains.29
Another phenomenon bordering on passive suicide was that after em-
barkation certain slaves became listless and lost the will to live. Such slaves
might have lost their appetites and thus were more susceptible to nutrient-
deficient diseases. Lethargic behavior was most common among slaves from
28. Hezemans, pp. 39-40 and 48.

29. Hezemans, p. 48; WIC, vol. 202, p. 205; WIC, vol. 1152, doc. 71 and 79.
the Bight of Biafra coastal region, a reason why they were less attractive to
European slave merchants. One woman slave was reported to have "died of
grief shortly after her newborn baby died. Other slaves were emotionally
unable to stand up to the ordeal and became so imbalanced mentally that
they were categorized by the ship authorities as having gone "crazy." This
was the case with two slaves, a man and a woman, on the ship, Koning van
Portugal, in 1702. Asiento agents promptly returned the slaves to the WIC,
and their subsequent fate was not reported. In the earlier mentioned sample
of forty-two slave consignments the death causes of twenty slaves were
described as mentally or emotionally disturbed, usually simply dubbed crazy,
and many others must have been in that state but managed to survive the
middle passage. Thomas van Serat, captain of the Nieuwe Post in 1716,
abandoned five of his slaves on the African coast because they were thought
to be so disturbed mentally or physically so handicapped as to be worthless.
It should be pointed out, however, that such cruel practices were the ex-
ception rather than the rule, or at least such incidences have rarely been
found recorded.30
In a few instances large numbers of slaves died as a result of shipwrecks.
The worst recorded case in this category undoubtedly was the sinking of
the WIC slaver, Leusden, on January 1, 1738. After a relatively quick Atlantic
crossing of less than six weeks, bad weather caused the ship to be grounded
near the mouth of the Marowin River, on the eastern Surinam coast. Ac-
cording to a report signed by surviving crew members, the stranded ship
slowly tilted on its side and the crew closed the hatches so the slaves were
locked below decks, where they drowned or suffocated during that day and
the following night. The slaves had apparently managed to loosen their
chains, and made valiant efforts to get to the upper deck, but to no avail.
Only fourteen slaves survived the ordeal because they happened to be on
deck doing chores. The crew excused their callous action on grounds that
if they had let the slaves out pandemonium would have broken out and no
one would have survived because the life boats could barely carry the crew
and the few slaves that were on the upper deck. The seventy-three surviving
crew members and fourteen slaves managed to reach Paramaribo on January
4, 1738, where the surviving slaves were sold. The consignment consisted
of 714 plus 2 privately owned slaves, thus the total casualties on this voyage
came to 702. Detailed records of the casualties on the middle passage were
obviously lost, but given the quick crossing and the absence of any reference
to unusual mortality during the voyage, we may assume that between 600
to 700 slaves died as a result of the shipwreck. It was a human catastrophe
30. WIC, vol. 205, pp. 640-3.

in no uncertain terms, but to the WIC directors it must have been seen
primarily as an economic disaster.31
Some slaves had their lives shortened as a result of harsh treatment by
slave-ship crews, although this was invariably against instructions, which
demanded good treatment in order to safeguard the investment of the own-
ers. The killing of rebellious slaves was often brutal and in many cases
unwarranted, as was shown in the case of the Middelburgs Welvaren in 1751
(see Chapter 7). Exploitation of slaves by crew members was against reg-
ulations and, if it occurred, was probably not recorded. When slaves were
singled out to do chores various unfulfilled promises may have been made.
One slave, who served as a slave foreman (bombaas) on the ship, Adrichem,
in 1712 was allowed to stay on the return with the ship to Holland. What
happened to him afterward is not known, but this was certainly an exception
to the rule of selling all the slaves in the West. Sexual favors were undoubtedly
demanded from slaves by crew members, and although the crew were threat-
ened with severe punishment for such actions, the existence of the regulations
tends to confirm their occurrence. The female slave quarter was often re-
ferred to as the whore hole (hoeregat), perhaps a reference arising from the
imaginations of sexually deprived sailors as well as actual sexual activity.
Captains of slave ships frequently had privately owned male or female com-
panions, which usually were sold along with other slaves at the end of the
middle passage. Considering the rough lot of crew members and their fre-
quent escape into heavy drinking, slaves must occasionally have become
victims of the situation. On a few occasions at least, the officers of slave
ships were reprimanded for harsh treatment of slaves, which allegedly had
led to excessive death rates. A careful scrutiny of MCC papers produced
records of a few slaves dying as result of brutal treatment by crew members,
but these appear to have been exceptions. This author is left with the impres-
sion that though the whole ordeal was indeed bad, sadistic acts against slaves
were the exception rather than the rule.32
Morbidity and care of the sick
Most of the deaths on the middle passage were the result of diseases. Table
10.5 lists the most common illnesses that occurred on Dutch slave ships
31. WIC, vol. 1140, docs. 165 and 172; WIC, vol. 206, p. 189; SS, vol. 265, p. 4. See Table
10.10 below.
32. For slave ship instructions see WIC, vol. 54, 12/24/1690, WIC, vol. 832, p. 376-8. Unger
I, p. 154; Hezemans. pp. 44 and 47; WIC, vol. 560, pp. 11 and 35; WIC, vol. 835, p.
79; WIC, vol. 1137, cor. 7/30/1704; WIC, vol. 1141, cor. 1/4/1738; WIC, vol. 204, p.
538; Priester, pp. 107-12.
Table 10.5
Causes of death among the slaves
Slaves in sample Deaths % Frequency
Aggregates 20,653 3,563 173 42
Diseases (Dutch equivalents)
Dysentery (loop, dysentery, "persing") 1,200 33.7 41
Smallpox (kinderpokken, pokken) 540 15.1 19
Scurvy (scheurbuyk) 524 14.7 19
Tuberculosis (teering) 270 7.6 20
Long illness (langdurige ziekte) 39 1.1 11
Sudden death (schielijck, subiete dood) 244 6.8 22
Heart attack (hartvangh) 44 1.2 7
Illness (ziekte, natuurlijke ziekte) 260 7.3 15
Fevers (koorts, hevige coors, etc.) 116 3.3 23
Dropsy (hydrope, waterzucht, 't water) 67 1.9 22
Epilepsy (stuypen, vallen, syncope etc. 36 1.0 13
Suicide (overboord, hangen, niet eten) 28 0.8 18
Accident (verwonding, in water gevallen) 19 0.5 11
Mental/emotional (gek, dol, kwaad, mal) 20 0.6 7
Respiratory (hoesten, benauwdheid, etc.) 13 0.4 6
Pleurisy (pleuris) 14 0.4 5
Reproductive/venereal (craam, venus) 21 0.6 7
Parasitic worms 10 0.3 3
Blindness 6 0.2 1
Sleeping sickness 2 0.1 1
Miscellaneous (koudvuur, abcess, klapoor, 90 2.5 25
colyck, litergus, verlamming, etc.)
Total 3,563 100

Note: Terms employed by the doctors are noted in parentheses.
during the eighteenth century. The care of the sick slaves and crew members
on slave ships was entrusted to one or a few ship surgeons (chirurgijns) of
the barber-surgeon tradition, who as a rule had been trained as boys in a
one-to-two-year apprenticeship. They had been trained to deal primarily
with trauma cases, such as gunshot wounds, ulcers, and amputations, and
to apply bleeding procedures. They knew little or nothing about internal
medicine, the diseases that were rampant on slave ships. Not until 1769-
70 was a training school for ship surgeons established, in Rotterdam, shortly
before the Dutch slave trade experienced its steep decline, too late to have
an impact on the Dutch slave trade. Twentieth-century experts have claimed
that the contents of the surgeon's medicine box may have been more harmful
than beneficial to crew members and slaves alike.33
33. Van Andel, pp. 618 and 633.

Given the limited knowledge of the medical profession in general and of

the ship surgeons in particular during the pre-nineteenth-century years, one
must treat the list of mortality causes in Table 10.5 with reservations. All
they could do was observe and write down the external symptoms a diseased
slave manifested prior to death. For example, they frequently noted that a
slave died of dropsy (waterzucht) when retention of fluids had caused enlarge-
ment of the victim's abdomen, without knowing that malfunctioning of the
liver was caused by parasitic worms. High fevers could be observed, but
apparently no attempt would or could be made to determine a cause unless
it was obvious, as in the case of smallpox.34
Dysentery, or loop as it was generally called by the Dutch surgeons, was
undoubtedly the biggest killer among the slaves. It was listed as the cause
of death for more than one-third of the 3,565 slaves who died on the forty-
two slaving voyages included in the sample in Table 10.5; all but one of the
slaving voyages were plagued by this illness. It was essentially a bacterium
or amoeba-induced infection of the intestines, causing loose and frequent
bowel movements, vomiting, severe abdominal pains and headaches, and it
was frequently accompanied by high fevers. Ulcerated intestines would often
lead to loss of blood, which gave rise to the description bloody flux (rode loop).
In the crowded and unhygienic quarters on the slave ships, it was passed
on readily to other persons through close contact or shared food or water,
and it could easily turn into a deadly epidemic. It could devastate a human
cargo, as happened on several occasions, and there was little the ship's
surgeon could do to combat it.35
Smallpox was the second most deadly disease among slaves after they
entered the new disease environments on the coast and aboard the slave
ships. Unlike Europeans who developed an immunity to this disease during
childhood, Africans were often devastated by it. Once smallpox was brought
aboard by a slave it spread rapidly to others. Smallpox killed more than 15
percent of the slaves and manifested itself on nearly half of the ships in the
sample.36
Another dreaded illness with a heavy death toll was scurvy. It caused the
death of nearly 15 percent of the slaves, and it occurred on eighteen of the
forty-two consignments in the sample just cited. Its symptoms were severe
pains of joints and limbs, physical weakness, bleeding and blackening of
34. I.D.R. Bruyn, "Chirurgijnsarbeid en VOC-Beleid," M.A. Thesis, Leiden University,

1986, pp. 8-12 and 72.
35. Mannix and Cowley, p. 121; Hezemans, p. 46; Bruyn, "Chirurgijns," pp. 13-14; see also
Table 10.4.
36. From the record it is not clear whether the disease was of the chicken pox (varicella) or
the smallpox (variola) variety. Professor G.W. Bruyn, of the University of the Leiden
Medical School, has been most helpful by providing advice on sorting out the causes of
death reported by ship surgeons.
gums, and loss of teeth, and it culminated in the inability to move and
ultimately death if not arrested. Scurvy was induced by a dietary deficiency
of vitamin C, which was often lacking in the dried and salted diets of long
ocean voyages. During its final years in the traffic WIC slave ships still
suffered heavily from scurvy. Most of the ninety-two deaths on the Amsterdam
(1725) resulted from this disease, as many as 150 slaves succumbed to scurvy
on the Beekesteyn (1731), and it was a major cause of death on the voyage
of the Leusden in 1735. Prior to the eighteenth century the cause of this
disease was not understood and it was therefore a scourge among sailors,
but early in that century maritime specialists became increasingly aware that
citrus fruit was an excellent preventative and cure for scurvy. A WIC directive
of 1732 stated that all slaves should be given lemon juice as a preventative
and cure, because "experience has taught us that it is an infallible medication
against scurvy." There is evidence that as early as 1700 slaves on WIC ships
were given lemons for the prevention of scurvy. In spite of this knowledge,
however, it continued to be a significant cause of death among slaves through-
out the eighteenth century. As late as 1773 the slaves on the free trader,
Nooitgedacht, suffered severely from scurvy.37
Deaths caused by scurvy occurred sometimes surprisingly soon after slaves
were boarded, which is indicative of poor nourishment in Africa. This phe-
nomenon has been noted in other studies, and it has been said that much
of the middle-passage mortality was more the result of bad treatment and
malnourishment in Africa than aboard European ships. Deaths resulting
from scurvy would certainly lend credence to such an argument, and so
might mortality resulting from tuberculosis. In these cases, however, proper
nutrition aboard the ships could have cured scurvy, while the putrid con-
ditions between decks would have greatly exacerbated tuberculosis. There
is no doubt that conditions prior to the middle passage influenced the mortality
rates, but this study does not confirm that mortality rates dropped as the
voyage progressed (see Figure 10.1).38
Unbearably hot and humid and devoid of fresh air, a slave ship must have
been an ideal breeding place for germs. It is therefore no surprise that a
large number of slaves died of respiratory illnesses. On the basis of the
available evidence it is difficult to determine what the real causes of some
of the fevers were but pneumonia, although never mentioned by the surgeons,
must have killed several slaves. Many fatal diseases were simply referred as
illness, or as a "mean" illness. Tuberculosis, then generally known as con-
sumption (teering), was also cited as a cause of death on half of the slave
37. W I C , vol. 1154, p. 334; W I C , vol. 1140, cor. 7/13/1731; W I C vol. 1141, doc. 111; W I C ,
vol. 8, p. 192; W I C , vol. 55, cor. 9/20/1732; SS, vol. 415, 4/25/1773; W I C , vol. 1146,
doc. 23; Hezemans, p. 46.
38. Miller, pp. 409-18.
Figure 10.1
Middle passage mortality cycle
(Deaths perlO-day periods - expressed in percentages of slaves in transit)
4% 4%
3% 3%
2% 2%
3.33
1% 1%
1.85
1.74
,33
,,,
1.49
1.42
1.21
1.31
*
108 J
0.91
Days 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 Days
ships in the sample. The all-inclusive lingering illness may in fact have in-
cluded tuberculosis as well as other long-lasting illnesses.
Heart attacks (hartvangh) are frequently listed as a cause of death among
the slaves, but the simple label sudden death occurs even more frequently on
the mortality lists. These two combined accounted for about 7 percent
of the deaths in the WIC sample. These quick and inexplicable deaths
mystified the surgeons, although they may well have been heart failures or
strokes resulting from dehydration and a lack of essential nutrients. 39
Smallpox and dysentery were feared chiefly because they were so contagious
and could develop into epidemics, which could also be spread to the settle-
ment colonies. Various efforts were made by ships' surgeons to cure illnesses
among the slaves and prevent epidemics. Although rarely mentioned in the
records, bleeding was apparently practiced to combat smallpox, but this
procedure might have increased rather than decreased the death rate. When
possible, the sick were separated from the other slaves, with mats provided
39. Van Andel, pp. 632 and 634; Hezemans, p. 46.
for their comfort. To effect a cure, dysentery-infected slaves were fed baked
beans (paardebonen) mixed with palm oil. A mixture of beans and rice was
also used as a binding agent, but there is no indication that these measures
had positive results. During the 1680s, and before the link between scurvy
and fresh foods was understood, a recommended cure for this disease was
tamarind syrup mixed with water and honey.40 The higher sugar content of
such remedies might well have provided temporary invigoration, but the
long-term effect is doubtful and cannot be verified from the records.
Mortality during the middle passage
The ocean crossing, or middle passage, was one of the shorter legs of the
triangular trade but it has been most closely associated with slave mortality.
This is partly due to the dreadful experience of so many human beings
crowded into the sailing vessels, facing the perils of storms, the equatorial
calms, shortage of food and water, and other calamities. William Wilberforce,
the English antislavery activist, once said: "never can so much misery be
found condensed in so small a place as in a slave ship during the middle
passage."41 What also contributed to the notoriety of the middle passage is
the fact that better statistics have been kept and preserved of this part of
the slave-trade cycle. Strictly speaking, the middle passage refers to the
actual crossing of the ocean, from the time of departure from Africa to the
landing in the West. Statistics on mortality for the middle passage, however,
generally start from the moment the slaves were taken on board until the
time they disembarked. As was already shown in Chapters 6 and 7 (see
Table 7.1), the coasting period was often longer than the actual ocean
crossing.
Free traders in particular often spent many months along the African coast
before they had acquired their human cargo and were ready to start the
Atlantic crossing. In such situations many a slave died while the slave ship
was still in sight of the African coast. According to calculations based on
fifty-eight MCC slave ships (see Appendix 18), an average of nearly 5 percent
of the slaves died before their ship set sail for the West. With a free-trade
slave mortality rate of 13.8 percent in this sample, this meant that about
one-third of the slaves dying aboard free-trade ships passed away before
the ocean crossing had started.42
40. See Curtin, "Epidemiology," pp. 190-216. Hezemans, pp. 46-7; Table 10.4; WIC, vol.
1138, p. 192; Kenneth F. Kiple, The Caribbean Slave; A Biological History (New York:
Cambridge University Press, 1984), p. 21.
41. Kiple, p. 57.
42. Hezemans, pp. 49-51; Appendix 18.
Table 10.6
Coasting and ocean crossing mortality compared
Mortality Mortality
Catagories Duration %of %of Duration %of %of
coasting total deaths crossing total deaths
WIC trade
(1675-1738) 100 days 3.2 18 80 days 14.3 82
Free trade
(1730-1803) 200 days 4.8 30 67 days 11.4 70
Source: Appendix 1, 2, 16, 17, 18, and Table 7.1.
In the WIC trade the coasting period was much shorter, approximately
ioo days compared to 200 days in the free trade (see Table 7.1), and the
coasting mortality rates were correspondingly lower. Based on a sample of
fifty-five WIC voyages (see Appendixes 16 and 17), approximately 3.5 per-
cent of the slaves boarded died before leaving Africa. With an overall mor-
tality rate of nearly 17.5 percent in the sample, this meant that nearly one-
fifth of the dying slaves succumbed while still on the African coast (see Table
10.6). 43
An assessment of the slave mortality for the middle passage as a whole,
including the coasting time, is far less conjectural because of an abundance
of statistical evidence for the WIC as well as the free trade. Losses per ship
ranged from zero to nearly all of the slaves. At least two consignments have
been found recorded without a single middle-passage casualty. Special notice
in correspondence, however, illustrates the rarity of such occurrences. As
Tables 10.7 and 10.8 show, the overall death rate for the WIC came to
nearly 16 percent and for the free trade to nearly 14 percent, producing a
combined death rate of 14.8 percent. The lower mortality rates for the free
trade might be explained by its added experience, faster ships, and smaller
consignments. It should be mentioned that the mortality statistics cited here
are based on the total data base used in this study, and these include several
estimates along with verified cases. But because qualitative evidence and
comparisons with other voyages of the same ships were available and seemed
to provide a sound basis for estimates, all cases have been included in these
calculations. Mortalities based on known cases tend to be only slightly higher,
but they are weighted by the fact that catastrophes were more likely to be
reported than ordinary situations. These mortality figures for the middle
43. See Appendix 1.

Table 10.7
Mortality in the WIC slave trade
Average %
Ships Slaves cargo Deaths of total
WIC total 364 178,417 490 28,323 15.9
1675-1679 21 8,650 412 1,330 15.4
1680-1689 73 35,598 488 5,165 14.5
1690-1699 46 23,044 501 3,001 13.0
1700-1709 56 27,996 500 4,459 16.1
1710-1719 45 20,979 466 3,559 17.0
1720-1729 78 37,793 485 5,955 15.0
1730-1739 47 24,361 518 4,814 19.8
Guinea coast 203 99,001 488 16,247 16.4
Loango coast 77 42,228 548 5,378 12.7
Source: Appendix 1.
passage are in line with the 15 percent that marine-insurance companies

anticipated as an average death rate during the free-trade period. 44
In general, there is a trend toward declining death rates with the passing
of time, except for a few decades when some catastrophic cases raised the
averages. During the first major phase of the Dutch slave trade to Brazil,
mortality rates reached nearly 18 percent. And when one considers the
shorter distance of the middle passage to Brazil compared to the Caribbean
area, the relative mortality figures for Brazil are therefore considerably higher
than those of the Dutch slave trade in later years. Lack of experience with
human cargoes must have contributed to these high death rates. It is tempting
to think that added experience in the traffic resulted in a drop of the mortality
rates from 18 percent (1630-50) to 16 percent (1675—1738) to 14 percent
(1730-1803), respectively. A comparison between the free trade and the
WIC is confused by the offsetting facts that the WIC had a shorter coasting
period (100 to 200 days) but a longer ocean crossing (80 to 66 days).45
Percentages can be deceiving, and it is therefore valuable to translate these
figures into what demographers call true mortality, which is the number of
persons dying per year, in a population of 1,000 persons. In a premodern
society, a stable population could sustain a mortality rate of 40/1,000/year,
with an upper limit of 50/1,000/year before such a population would decline.
Based on a WIC sample of 116 slave missions with an 18.7 percent mortality
44. Van Andel, p. 624; See also Table 10.8.

45. Van den Boogaart and Emmer, pp. 366-7. See Table 9.1 for voyage duration.
Table 10.8
Mortality in the Dutch free trade
Average %
Category Ships Slaves cargo Deaths of total
Free trade total a 815 250,451 307 34,626 13.8
1730-1739 62 19,169 309 3,108 16.2

1740-1749 140 46,879 334 6,645 14.2
1750-1759 150 48,676 324 6,810 14
1760-1769 191 59,867 313 8,119 13.6
1770-1779 182 52,110 286 6,911 13.3
1780-1789 46 13,304 289 1,816 13.7
1790-1803 44 10,446 237 1,217 11.7
Guinea coast 374 108,866 299 15,138 13.9
Loango coast 170 57,475 338 6,925 12
Source: Appendix 2.
Note: dThis also includes the cargoes for which African origins are not documented.
rate during the middle passage, the true mortality rate came to 649/1,000/
year. (The time factor is supplied by the duration of the crossing plus 25
days, or 25 percent of the average coasting time, which adds up to 105
exposure days.) With all other things equal, such a population would die out
in about a year and a half. For the free trade the figures are significantly
lower. Unger's study of the MCC, which includes 108 slaving missions, can
be translated into a true mortality rate of 393/1,000/year, as is shown in
Table 10.9. A much smaller sample of twenty-two slaving missions during
the final years of the Dutch slave trade produces a true mortality rate of
493/1,000/year. There is a significant drop in both percentage and true
mortality rates from the WIC trade in spite of the much longer exposure
period (105 to 116 days) to the free trade. The rising mortality rates at the
end of the Dutch slave trade are difficult to explain. The sample is rather
small, and a few cases of unusually high death rates could easily have skewed
the results. It should also be kept in mind that the MCC mortality rates are
lower by a few percentage points than the free trade in general. The overall
true mortality rate for the free trade should be in the vicinity of 450/1,000/
year. In spite of these variations, the true mortality rates in all of these
categories are appallingly high when compared to the rates in the traditional
societies from which the slaves originated.46
46. Miller, pp. 389ff; Roland Pressat, Demographic Analysis (Chicago: Aldine-Atherton, 1972);
original French edition, 1961, pp. 30 and 71; Appendixes 1 and 2. The 25 percent of
2
Table 10.9
Categories of true mortality
% Crossing Coast True
Categories Sample Deaths of deaths days daysa mortality
WIC
1685-1739 61,470 1,146 18.66 80 + 25 648/1,000/year
MCC
1730-1803 31,095 3,750 12.06 62 + 50 393/1,000/year
Free trade
1784-1803 5,699 863 15.14 62 + 50 493/1,000/year
Free trade
General b 13.9 62 + 50 453/1,000/year
Sources: Appendixes 1 and 2 , and Table 7.1; linger II, pp. 50 and 62.
Notes: aUpward adjustment for the coasting period (see text).
Aggregate statistics for the Dutch free trade.
On the basis of forty well-preserved mortality lists of the WIC trade during
the early eighteenth century, it is possible to chart the pattern of dying during
the middle passage, as is shown in Figure IO.I. The ocean crossing has
been divided into stages of approximately ten days each. The diagram shows
an elevated rate of mortality during the first ten days, when nearly 4 percent
of the slaves who left Africa died. For fifty days the death rates remained
quite stable at around 1.5 percent, but then started to rise. They exceeded
5 percent after 100 days and then remained high but irregular, perhaps
because of the declining size of the sample (see Appendix 17).
The unusually high death rate at the beginning of the ocean crossing was
the result of at least two factors. Captains often decided to commence the
ocean crossing when they had the desired human cargo or when boarded
slaves started dying at a higher than normal rate. In the latter case, if there
was space for additional slaves and merchandise to purchase them, captains
often bought slaves at higher prices and with less consideration for the quality
and health of the slaves. There seems to have been an expectation that the
open ocean was healthier than the coastal waters, as illustrated with the
slaver, Vergenoegen, in Chapter 7. That expectation was certainly confirmed
by a decline of mortality rates shortly after departure, as is shown in the
diagram in Figure 10.1.
There were tremendous fluctuations in middle-passage mortality between
individual consignments; in extreme cases, none died or nearly all of the
slaves died. The reason for this is that the slave trade was a very complex
the coasting time was derived from the fact that the majority of the slaves were generally
purchased during the final stages of the coasting period.
and risky business with a variety of unpredictable forces that could influence
its outcome. Poor planning and management can be added to the perils of
the ocean crossing. The leading cause of catastrophic death rates was epi-
demic diseases, which could be brought aboard by a single slave. One of
the reasons for the physical examinations was to avoid such catastrophes. In
the crowded conditions aboard a slave ship, once an epidemic struck there
was little the crew of a ship could do but hope for the best.
The duration of the middle passage is a more decisive factor in explaining
mortality, as is illustrated in Figure 10.1. Statistical evidence of the Dutch
slave trade clearly shows that the longer the middle passage the larger the
death rate was likely to be, and other scholars have demonstrated the same
for other European nations. Other factors, particularly the dramatic results
from epidemics and shipwrecks could override the effects of voyage duration,
as is shown in Table 10.10. With the lengthening of the middle passage,
food and water supplies were likely to become exhausted, which would tend
to exacerbate illness or any other existing problem on the crowded ship.
When the WIC directors warned against overcrowding the slave vessels, they
were chiefly concerned for the adequacy of the food supply rather than for
the density of human bodies, as was clearly stated in the new WIC policy
in 1702.47
The significance of the duration of the middle passage is further illustrated
by the discrepancy in mortality rates between consignments obtained on the
Guinea coast compared to those from the Loango region. The latter showed
consistently lower death rates, both in the WIC and in the free trade, although
Loango is farther from the Caribbean than Guinea. As was discussed in
Chapter 8, the western winds and currents along the Guinea coast made it
necessary for ships to sail east and south to Cape Lopez (above Loango)
before they could pick up the eastern winds suitable for the Atlantic crossing.
These ships had to cross the equator twice with their cargo of slaves, thus
lengthening their crossing by an average of several weeks at least. The WIC
slave ships that took their cargoes to St. Eustatius generally had lower death
rates, but this was also because they usually obtained their slaves on the
Loango coast rather than in Guinea.48
Table 10.11 displays the distribution of slave mortality in two different
ways and compares the figures for the WIC and free trade in both categories.
On the left, consignments are grouped together in order of their percentage
47. WIC, vol. 54, cor. 12/18/1702; WIC, vol. 832, pp. 133-4 and 323; Herbert S. Klein
and Stanley L. Engerman, "A Note on Mortality in the French Slave Trade in the
Eighteenth Century," in H. Gemery andj. Hogendorn, eds., The Uncommon Market (New
York: Academic Press, 1979), pp. 263-70.
48. Curtin, Atlantic Slave Trade, p. 279; Johannes Postma, "Mortality in the Dutch Slave
Trade, 1675-1795," in H.A. Gemery and J.S. Hogendorn, eds., The Uncommon Market
(New York: Academic Press, 1979), p. 252.
Table 10.10
Consignments with catastrophic mortality rates
Crossing
Ships Year days Cargo Deaths % Primary cause
WIC
Leusden 1737 716 702 98 Shipwreck
Petronella Alida 1722 525 a 485 92 Lengthy crossing
Leusden 1735 687 408 59 Scurvy
Stad en Lande 1732 93 439 307 70 Scurvy
Nieuwe Post 1718 535 344 64 Lengthy crossing
Carolus Secundus 1708 425 254 60 Illness
Vigilantie 1677 400 a 200 a 50 ??
Rusthof 1733 719 345 48 Food shortage
Adrichem 1715 717 344 48 Illness
Moscow 1706 120 582 271 47 Lengthy crossing
Stad en Lande 1735 760 349 46 Scurvy
Emmenes 1718 718 270 38 ??
Acredam 1727 ? ? Exploded; no survivors
Free trade
Baskenburg 1744 250 a 230 a 92 Shipwrecked
M'burgs Welvaren 1750 265 238 90 Slave revolt
Watervliet 1747 400 a 250 a 63 9?
Surinam Welvaart 1773 165 300 a 220 a 73 Lengthy crossing

Belisarius 1771 230 194 84 Grounded
Neptunis 2 1748 380 a 200 a 53 Lengthy crossing
Cioede Verwachting 1767 228 200 88 Shipwrecked
Nicolaas 1757 270 179 66 Illness
Nooitgedacht 1772 183 157 140 a 89 Scurvy
/eemercuur 1789 272 174 64 ??
Jonge Jan 1763 370 a 190 a 51 ??
Neptunis 1785 Exploded during slave i*evolt; 8 survived
Source: Appendixes 1 and 2, and Postma Data Collection.

Note: a These are estimates.
of slave losses; on the right, they are listed according to the number of deaths
per consignment. With its larger slave consignments, the WIC exhibited
more catastrophic losses than the free trade. This is true in percentages as
well as in actual deaths per voyage. The percentage rates may be more
meaningful, although they may conceal rather significant losses in large
consignments. In both the WIC and free trade, 59 percent of the voyages
suffered mortality rates between 10 and 20 percent. One should keep in
mind, however, that these figures are inflated by the inclusion of the estimated
cases. In reality, several of the unverified cases would have been placed in
higher or lower ranges.
Table 10.11
Distribution of slave mortality
Deaths as percentage of consignments Range of mortality per consignment
% WIC Free trade Deaths per WIC Free trade
deaths ships ships consignment ships ships
0-4 26 32 0-4 4 7
5-9 54 173 5-9 5 15
10-14 142 354 10-14 14 28
15-19 71 138 15-19 12 30
20-24 33 55 20-29 28 140
25-29 11 33 30-39 27 164
30-34 5 15 40-49 17 165
35-39 7 4 50-59 43 134
40-49 9 5 60-69 32 58
50 + 8 12 70-79 77 25
80-89 20 13
90-99 13 10
100-199 60 19
200 + 15 7
The average consignment for WIC slavers was much larger than in the
free trade, as is shown in Tables 10.7 and 10.8. These last tables also point
to the fact that slave ships sailing from Loango, compared to the Guinea
coast, had lower mortality rates but also significantly larger slave consign-
ments. This discrepancy is largest in the WIC trade, but this was largely
due to the small special assignments that all sailed from the Gold Coast (see
Chapter 6). These small ships actually experienced lower mortality rates,
which may be attributed to their extremely short coasting period.49
These statistical variations allude to the issue of crowding in slave ships.
Crowding has long been thought to constitute an important factor in slave
mortality, and there is no doubt that the inhumanly crowded conditions
aboard slave ships spread disease and contributed to high death rates. The
difference between the so-called tight packers and loose packers, a distinction
made by slave traders themselves in separating those who used every available
inch of space to increase their human cargo from those who were slightly
more concerned about the comforts of the slaves, may not have been critically
significant in slave mortality. In either case, the crowding was severe enough
to ensure the spread of diseases. On the other hand, excessive crowding
could contribute to food and water shortages. The WIC directors seemed
to have been convinced that tight packing would increase the death rate,
49. Appendixes 1 and 2, and Tables 10.7 and 10.8.
Table 10.12
Crowding /mortality comparison
Consignments Average Total Average %
_____ Period
_________ compared
__ Sample cargo mortality deaths deaths
High mortality 11,676 687 2,008 118 17.2

Low mortality 7,743 455 1,341 79 17.3
Free trade 1739-1803 26

High mortality 9,261 356 1,443 56 15.6
Low mortality 6,416 247 905 35 14.1
and they warned their captains against such practices. Recent studies have
suggested that the duration of the middle passage was a far more significant
variable in mortality than crowding.50
The declining mortality rate from WIC trade to free trade seems to suggest
that increased space might have been a contributing factor. Unfortunately,
the absence of tonnage statistics for WIC slave ships make a valid comparison
with free-trade ships impossible. Instead, a comparison between the least
and most crowded conditions for the same ships on different voyages is
shown in Table 10.12. Only those consignments with a significant discrep-
ancy have been included. There was virtually no difference in WIC mortality
rates between the most and least crowded consignments for the same ships.
The more crowded consignments in the free trade had a slightly higher
death rate (1.5 percent) than the least crowded ones. This comparison
suggests that crowding was not a crucial mortality factor in the Dutch slave
trade. It should be noted, however, that the WIC slavers experienced in-
creased mortality among the slaves during the 1730s, when their captains
were obviously increasing the size of their slave cargoes for the same ships.
Aging of the slaving fleet, epidemics, or other factors may have been re-
sponsible for this, but extreme crowding may also have been a contributing
factor to the increased mortality rates at that time. Overcrowding was clearly
a factor in slave-trade mortality, but if excessive crowding contributed ex-
tensively to increased mortality rates remains an enigma that may never be
clearly understood.
50. WIC, vol. 55, cor. 11/23/1733; WIC, vol. 832, p. 323; Mannix and Cowley, pp. 105-6;
Postma, "Mortality," pp. 243-62.
Table 10.13
Gender/age mortality ratios
Gender/age ratios Mortality
Men Children3 Men Children3
Total Women Deaths Women
WIC
Total 19,907 11,789 5,885 2,233 3,527 2,187 942 398
% of total (100) (59) (30) (11) (17.7)
% of category (18.6) (16) (17.8)
Avg. per cargo 538
Free trade
Total 13,462 6,007 4,373 3,082 1,425 814 390 221
% of total (100) (45) (33) (23) (10.6)

% of category (13.6) (8.9) (7.2)
Avg. per cargo 281
Aggregate 33,396 17,796 10,258 5,315 4,952 3,933 1,710 670
% of total (100) (53) (31) (16) (16)
% of category (17) (13) (12)
Note: aChildren refers to the ages 4 to 14 approximately.
Sex and age ratios in mortality
Slave-trade mortality affected men and women with different degrees of

severity. Data from Dutch archives provide us with an adequate sample to
make meaningful comparisons of the mortality rates between age and gender
groups. Table 10.13 presents the statistics from ninety-six slave consign-
ments, including a total sample of over 36,000 slaves of whom 5,647 died.
In the free trade in particular, men died at a significantly higher rate than
women, whereas for the WIC the discrepancy was less pronounced. Young
people between the ages of three and fifteen died at about the same rate as
women. The free-trade sample had a far higher proportion of women and
youths than the WIC; this may explain why the death rate was far lower for
the free trade.
It has also been noted that women tended to die more promptly than men
from scurvy, but with smallpox it was the opposite. There appears to be no
medical explanation for these discrepancies.51
51. The medical aspects of the Dutch slave trade were also examined by A. Neeser-van
Houten and MJ. Eijgenraam in the Leiden Seminar, and this is how the gender dis-
crepancy with these two diseases was brought to my attention.
In general, the differences in mortality rates between males and females
can in part be explained as a natural phenomenon, which is that women are
simply better equipped by nature to survive under adverse circumstances.
That the young people, who were predominantly males, fared much better
than men and equal to women may be explained by the fact that they often
enjoyed the same treatment as women; they were housed better and had
more freedom, which may have given them a stronger desire to live. Women
must have had a big share in the care of the young, which may also have
resulted in a greater sense of purpose. Quite likely they assisted in the
preparation of food and may thus have had access to better food rations.
Finally, women as well as young people may simply have been accustomed
to a greater degree of servitude than men were, giving them more stamina
to survive the humiliations and hardships of enslavement.
Given the hardships, it is surprising that not more slaves succumbed to
the ordeal of being forcibly moved from the Old World to the New World.
A true mortality rate of about 450/1,000/year is traumatic by any standard.
And this does not include the deaths that occurred during the waiting period
on the African coast before embarkation, in the Western harbors, and during
the waiting period between disembarkation and sale of the slaves. When
estimates for these stages are added to middle-passage mortality, the ag-
gregate death toll was slightly over 20 percent for the WIC and close to 20
percent for the free-trade traffic. Adding to this, the deaths resulting from
slave raids in Africa and travel to the African coast, and the mortality resulting
from the seasoning process after slaves were sold in the West, the death toll
must have been staggering indeed. If the African phase alone killed 40
percent of the slaves (see footnote 15) between capture and sale to Euro-
peans, the overall loss to the enslaved population may well have reached 70
percent before the survivors were adjusted to life in the Western Hemisphere.
11
Finances, marketing, and

profitability
During the past two centuries, the slave trade has come to be equated with
gross immorality. However, it is often assumed that those who engaged in
it must have had very compelling motives. Racial prejudice is often thought
to be the principal motive for slave traders, but it is more likely that racism
came to the fore as a consequence of the ever-growing and sharper socio-
economic disparity between blacks and whites that arose out of slavery.1 A
more convincing argument for explaining motives for participation in the
traffic is the generous profits that it produced. Slave-trade literature has
frequently pointed to specific slaving voyages that were extremely profitable.
Only recently has the subject of slave-trade profitability been subjected to
a systematic evaluation. But before the profits can be assessed a whole array
of related financial factors needs to be explored.
Financial configurations in the traffic
The slave trade was a complex business. Not only because it was unusual
in that it dealt with human beings as a commodity, but also because it was
stretched over a wide area and involved many different societies and cultural
and economic systems. It was therefore quite appropriate that one scholarly
study labeled it the uncommon market, even though the slave trade was a
very common practice in its time.2
The financial complexity started in Europe, for not only did every par-
ticipating European nation bring its own system of currency, weights, and
measures, but the small Dutch Republic used at least two monetary systems
in accounting. Flemish pounds were used as a system of account in the
province of Zeeland while the rest of the country used guilders. Neither of
1. This is one of the theses of Basil Davidson's book, Black Cargoes; see pp. 5-10.
2. Henry A. Gemery and Jan S. Hogendorn, eds., The Uncommon Market (New York, Academic
Press, 1979) p. 19.
259
these monetary units were divided decimally before 1795. Furthermore, the
Dutch employed a variety of now defunct measuring units.
On the African coast there existed an even greater variety of mediums
of exchange and measuring units. And since neither African nor Euro-
pean merchants were willing to sacrifice their own familiar practices, the
confusing situation spawned still more systems of exchange from concrete
to fictitious measures of value. One of the results of this confusing situa-
tion was the development of a sophisticated form of bartering in the
Afro-European trade. Because large quantities of merchandise were con-
tinually exchanged, certain standard values evolved, consisting of com-
mercial items prominent in a given region. Thus, cloth and iron bars
were used as a standard of value in the Senegambia region, and iron and
copper bars were used as a standard in the Bight of Biafra. Cowrie
shells, generally shipped to Europe from the Maldive Islands by the
Dutch East India Company, were widely used as a standard value as well
as a currency on the Slave Coast.3
Gold, the principal export commodity from the Gold Coast for many
centuries, provided a standard measure of value for that region. On the Slave
Coast slaves were occasionally used as a measure for value and services.
The expense of repairing the WIC lodge at Ouidah, for instance, was es-
timated at twelve to fourteen slaves; this presumably alluding to the com-
mercial value of that number of slaves. Duties paid at Jakin in the year 1724
were expressed in terms of seventeen slaves, but the account added that the
obligation was met through a quantity of Dutch textiles equal to the com-
mercial value of that many slaves. Masters of slave ships frequently listed
their expenses incurred for water and food in terms of the number of slaves
that could have been purchased for the European goods expended on such
services. The slave ship, Adrichem, for example, boarded 512 slaves, but it
listed the cost price as 527.5 to include the expenses for services involved
in the embarkation of the slaves.4
For the purpose of facilitating the trade in Africa and assuring for them-
selves a comfortable margin of profit, Europeans also developed the fictitious
standard of value known as the ounce trade. This measure developed from
the practice called sorting, consisting of an assortment of European mer-
chandise that was valued as a trade ounce. The ounce was used as a basic
measure of value in the gold trade, as it still is, but the Europeans tried to
exploit the Africans by creating a measuring unit that in fact included a
3. Polanyi and Rotstein, pp. 140, 165, and 168; Sundstrom, pp. 66 and 73-4; Daaku, p. 157;
Curtin, Atlantic Slave Trade, Chapter 6; Wyndham, p. 70; Marion Johnson, "The Cowrie
Currencies of West Africa," Journal ofAfrican History, vol. 11, no. 1 (1970).
4. WIC, vol. 180, pp. 26, 37, 124 and 182; WIC, vol. 486, p. 492; WIC, vol. 1024, docs. 20
and 36ff.
Finances, marketing, and profitability 261
markup (an avance the Dutch called it), often as high as 100 percent of the
price of the European merchandise. In 1675 the WIC price guide in Africa
called for a markup of 50 percent. Europeans often raised the prices much
higher, a practice the Dutch called cladden, creating all kinds of problems
between African and European merchants. Of course, the Africans quickly
caught on to these European tricks, but the practice did establish a duality
of ounce values that was subsequently distinguished by the terms of a gold
ounce and a trade ounce. When prices were given in ounce values, as was
often the case in the WIC price guides, it can generally be assumed that
they referred to trade ounces, which through its elasticity and fluctuations
made any relationship between the prices meaningless. WIC directors re-
jected the method of cladden and reminded their subordinates in Africa that
such practices would in fact lead to a loss of their commercial credibility
with the Africans. As a result, the Dutch may well have applied these sorting
practices with greater restraint than other Europeans, for during the 1730s
they differentiated between the gold and trade ounce values on a six to five
ratio, a modest 20 percent markup. In 1726 WIC servants were complaining
that African merchants were manipulating the system to their own advantage
by buying slaves for gold and afterward selling them again for a larger number
of ounces in European goods. Both sides could thus manipulate the system
to their advantage.5
If the ounce system was basically a European creation the Europeans also
had to be able to calculate in terms of African units of values. As is shown
in Table 11.1, the African measures for cowries and gold were well known
and used by Europeans. Prices for slaves in the WIC price guide were
generally expressed in terms of trade ounces, but on the Slave Coast they
were also listed in terms of cowries. On the Gold Coast the Dutch frequently
employed the African monetary unit called benda, which came in a large and
a small denomination. The small benda equaled the value of approximately
two ounces of gold, and was also known as the coastal benda. It was used
widely by the WIC in listing prices on the Guinea coast for African export
commodities as well as for European merchandise. 6
In the Western Hemisphere, financial arrangements were under the con-
trol of Europeans, but they were nevertheless very complex because such a
variety of measures were involved. The most common monetary unit used
in the asiento trade was Spanish reals, which were commonly minted in the
form of pieces of eight reals, also known as pesos. These silver coins were
coveted by Europeans because they were widely used as currency in the
5. Polanyi, pp. i4off, 155, and 162-4; Ratelband, p. XCIV; NBKG, vol. 7, min. 8/8/1732;
NBKG, vol. 237, instr. 9/22/1731; WIC, vol. 107, p. 3; WIC, vol. 831, p. 87; WIC, vol.
54, cor. 9/27/1699
6. WIC, vol. 102, p. 31; Ratelband, pp. 15, 32, and 63.
Table 11.1
Comparative measures and currencies, and money of account
Approximate values in the period of 1650-1790
Unit Metal/symbol Subunit 2 Subunit 3 Guilder value
IMark (gold) = 8 ounces = 128 ackeys = / 320:00:00
(or engels)
1 ounce = 16 ackeys
1 Benda (gold) (small or coast) 65:00:00

1 Benda (gold) (large) = 81:00:00
1 Ducat (gold) 5:00:00
1 Piece of eight (silver) = 8 reals == 48 stuivers 2:00:00

1 real = 6 stuivers
1 Guilder (/) 20 stuivers = 320 penningen 1:00:00

1 stuiver = 16 penningen
or "duyten"
1 £ Flemish (£F) 20 schelling = 240 grooten 6:00:00

1 schelling = 12 grooten
1 £ Sterling (£) - 20 shillings = 240 pence 12:00:00

1 shilling = 12 pence
Source: McCusker, pp. 290-2; Posthumus, vol. I, p. LIV; Ratelband, pp.15, 32,
63, 183, 186, 190; WIC, vol. 560, pp. 5 , 8, 14, 498-9.
trade with Asia. The quality of these coins was frequently in dispute, and
the WIC always insisted on true, or (volwaardige), pieces of eight, as minted
in the years 1650 to 1660. The WIC authorities as a rule insisted on being
paid in pieces of eight, and the slave prices at Curasao were nearly always
quoted in that currency rather than in guilders. During the first decade of
the eighteenth century, WIC agents were grudgingly taking gold ducats
(dubbloenen and pistoletten) in payment for slaves. These were of slightly less
value than pieces of eight, but having no choice they rationalized that such
payments were "better than getting stuck with the slaves." At times cash
was so scarce, as was the case in 1701 with the slave ship, Quinera, that
slaves were sold on two conditions: in bills of exchange for "weighty" pieces
of eight or in bottomry (bodemerij), which was a form of mortgage on the
ship and a method of payment accompanied by exorbitant interest rates, and
therefore strongly discouraged by the WIC. As a rule, pieces of eight were
actually delivered by the asientists to Curasao and from there shipped to
Europe. Heavily armed WIC ships would often carry large quantities of this
currency to Holland, although bullion and currency were also carried in
smaller quantities by many WIC ships returning to the metropole. On one
occasion pirates robbed the WIC ships Elisabeth and Rotterdam of 10,000
pieces of eight. Bills of exchange were also used in the asiento, and occa-
sionally the asientists received slaves on credit. These practices seem to have
been used only if control over the coveted asiento slave contracts was in
danger; hard cash was always preferred. In 1684 a compromise pay schedule
was worked out whereby the WIC agents at Curasao would get one-third
of the price for slaves delivered paid in cash, one-third paid by the asiento
agents in Holland, and the remaining third paid in colonial or Spanish
produce. As was discussed in Chapter 2, payment problems were endemic
to the asiento trade and was a major reason for the frequent interruptions
in these commercial arrangements.7
The use of Spanish pieces of eight was apparently widespread throughout
the Caribbean region, for they were also used in the St. Eustatius slave
trade. During the WIC period slave prices were always cited there in terms
of this monetary unit, although tropical agricultural produce such as sugar
and cocoa were generally shipped back to Holland, presumably in payment
for slaves. During the second half of the eighteenth century, however, St.
Eustatius became such an international market that several other currencies
were also accepted as legal tender. 8
In the Dutch settlements on the Guiana coast the guilder was the
dominant price measuring unit, and slave prices were nearly always cited
in such terms. A distinction was made, however, between Dutch guilders
and Surinam guilders, with the latter generally about 20 percent less in
value. As was pointed out in Chapter 8, the planters in these colonies
were often heavily indebted to investors in Holland, and with the passing
of time the plantations increasingly came to be owned by absentee land-
lords. This meant that slaves were frequently paid for, at least in part, by
bills of exchange. Due to this often unsteady financial structure, such
bills of exchange were often not honored by the listed creditor, which
had an effect similar to a bounced check in modern banking. The penal-
ties for such faulty bills of exchange were very high, sometimes as much
as 25 percent of the value of the bill. By the middle of the eighteenth
century the credit shortage had become so severe in Surinam that the
Society of Surinam introduced a type of paper money (kaartengeld), which
led to even greater chaos in financial matters. 9
7. John J. McCusker, Money and Exchange in Europe and America, 1600-1775 (Chapel Hill:
University of North Carolina Press, 1978), pp. 290-3; WIC, vol. 200, p. 240; WIC, vol.
617, p. 150; WIC, vol. 560, pp. 5, 8, 14 and 498; WIC, vol. 832, p. 192; WIC, vol. 833,
pp. 155-6 and 231-3; WIC, vol. 617, pp. 150 and 159; Ratelband, p. 243.
8. McCusker, p. 292. See also Chapter 8 on St. Eustatius.
9. WIC, vol. 1141, cor. 4/10/1733, 5/10/1733, and 4/21/1738; WIC, vol. 1138, cor. 7/3/
1708; SS, vol. 415; Van de Voort, p. 99.
Table 11.2
WIC slave prices
Period Africa Curasao St. Eustatius Surinam Guyana
Price category High Low High Low Auction Contract
/ PS F8 F8 P8 / f /
1675-1699 35 123 50 190 210 210
1700-1709 45 105 60 213 237 250
1710-1719 59 105 69 235 189
1720-1729 83 102 90 94 79 247 239 275
1730-1738 265 168
Total averages 57 108 69 94 79 240 200 236

Notes:/ = Dutch guilders; F8 = Pieces of eight.
Pricing the slaves
As was the case with the asiento trade, securing payment for delivered slaves
was often also a serious problem in Surinam and the other Guiana colonies.
Various payment schemes were developed in order to keep the settlements
supplied with slaves and, at the same time, to keep the slave vendors satisfied.
When the WIC monopolized the slave trade, the company tried to control
and keep the prices stable, particularly on the African coast, where they used
the mechanism of the price guide for that purpose. The system worked only
as long as the slave prices on the international market remained fairly stable,
which was the case until the early part of the eighteenth century. 10 Tables
11.2 and 11.3 show the broad outlines of slave price trends, and Appendixes
24 and 25 illustrate fluctuations of prices in greater detail.
In Africa, for many years, the WIC price guide kept the purchase price
for a prime male slave at forty guilders. That rate was already common
during the 1640s in the traffic to Brazil, and it was not until the end of the
seventeenth century that market conditions slowly forced prices upward, as
is shown in Appendix 24. Table 11.4 lists the WIC purchase guide for 1676.
Suggested slave prices were listed at forty guilders, but they were often
purchased for less, particularly when the lower prices for women and children
were incorporated in the average price. The suggested price apparently
alluded to the most common unit, a pieza de India, and the price for women
piezas was also kept at a lower rate. In the price guide of 1727 the variance
was as much as eighty ackeys for men compared to forty-eight for women.
Nine years later purchases for the ship Delft show the differential at eighty
10. Curtin, in his Atlantic Slave Trade, p. 270, also claims that the price of slaves remained
relatively low before 1750.
Table 11.3
Slave prices and profits, 1740-1795
(Prices listed in guilders)
Purchases in Africa Sales in the West
Average Total Average Total
Period Slaves pricea price Slaves pricea proceeds
1740-1749 3,013 82 248,083 2,430 217 527,568
1750-j759 5,535 94 522,191 4,976 236 1,175,821
1760-1769 7,138 123 877,422 5,816 307 1,786,192
1770 1779 9,920 158 1,571,194 9,349 347 3,242,593
1780-1795 2,439 162 394,354 1,955 487 951,660
Total 28,045 129 3,613,244 24,526 313 7,683,834

Note: a These figures are rounded off to the nearest full guilder.
Table 11.4
Partial WIC price table of the year 1676
Commodity Per unit Unit price
Gold Mark / 320:00
Slaves Pieza de India 40:00
Ivory Pound (lb) 0:15
Wax 100 lbs 40:00
Hides Piece 0:30
Gum 100 lbs 9:00
Copper 100 lbs 4:00
Millet 100 lbs 6:00
Feathers Bundle 0:03
Source: WIC, vol. 831, p. 341.
Note: f = Dutch guilder.
and fifty-six ackeys, respectively (see Table 11.5). A woman slave with a
healthy young child, however, might sell for a higher price. Prices fluctuated
in response to supply and demand, and the price differential between the
sexes tended to decrease during the eighteenth century as females and
youthful slaves came to be in greater demand. In 1788 the difference in
purchase price was cited as slightly more than 10 percent, or thirteen com-
pared to eleven "ounces" of merchandise.11
After a long period of stability in slave prices in Africa, the WIC price
11. RLLM, vol. 1, p. 558. See also Table 11.3. NBKG, vol. 233, inst. 5/3/1701; NBKG,
vol. 85, docs. 8/10/1718 and 9/7/1718; WIC, vol. 10, p. 885; RLLM, LX-447, doc. 5/
15/1788; VWIS, vol. 1203, P- 5°- See also Appendix 24.
Table 11.5
Slave prices in Africa for the ship Delft in 1736
Type of slave Price in ackeys Price in guilders
a
Male slaves: piezas de India 80 100
Female slaves ' 56 70
Woman slave with infant 64 80
Boys: 2/3 piezas de India 53 66
Girls: 2/3 42 53
Girls: 1/2 " 28 35
Source: a WIC vol.110, p. 885. See also Table 11.1 and accc)mpanyine text.
Note: There were 16 ackeys to the ounce. If trade ounces are the measure
here (half the value of gold), then an ackey would be worth 20 percent
less than a guilder (see Table 11.1).
guide was adjusted upward in 1690. This may have been the result of
increasing European competition and conflict among the major European
colonial powers. In 1713 there was again a need to raise the prices of slaves
on the WIC price guide, and by 1721 slave prices on the African coast had
nearly doubled from what they had been during most of the seventeenth
century.12
During the 1730s the Dutch free traders joined the WIC slavers on the
African coast, and the upward movement in prices seems to have been halted.
In fact, during that decade, prices may even have dropped. And during the
1740s average prices were not much above those of two decades earlier. By
the early 1750s, however, purchase prices passed 100 guilders and they
rarely dropped below that mark again. Average prices continued to go up
during the next decades until, by the last decade of that century, individual
slaves were often purchased in Africa for around 200 guilders.13
Slave prices were always erratic, in Africa as well as in the West, because
they were influenced by so many different factors. The price data listed in
Appendixes 24 and 25 are averages drawn from either whole consignments
or large groups of slaves bought or sold at a given period of time. They
illustrate these fluctuations on both sides of the Atlantic. The commercial
value of a slave consignment or group of slaves could be influenced by the
following factors in a plantation colony: local demands, spacing of slave-ship
arrivals, ability to invest, time of year, weather and condition of the crops,
world prices of commodities produced by the planters, and expansion or
contraction of the settlement in question. In the transit markets of Curasao
12. WIC, vol. 54, cor. 11/3/1690; WIC, vol. 55, cor. 11/9/1713; Van den Boogaart aid
Emmer, p. 364. See also Johannes Postma, "West African Exports and the Dutch West
India Company, 1675-1731," Economisch en Sociaal-Historisch Jaarboek, (1973), vol. 76,
PP- 53-74-
13. See Appendixes 24 and 25.
and St. Eustatius, there were also international factors, such as contracts
with third parties and relations with other nations. War and peace were
always significant in influencing theflowof the slave trade as well as the prices,
because they influenced the safety of the seas and the price of maritime
insurance. If several slave ships arrived in close succession on the same
African coastal region the price was likely to rise because of the competition,
but the opposite would result if few slavers were in attendance. The reverse
would be the case in the seller markets in the Western Hemisphere. For
these various reasons a quantitative analysis of prices with scientific exactness
is virtually out of the question. However, the statistical data presented in
Appendix 24 provide a guide to general price trends.
In addition to the various price-influencing forces and the confusion due
to variations in currency, there were still other factors to blur the record on
slave prices. For most of the Western markets, it was necessary to create at
least two price columns, one for prime slaves and one for inferiorly priced
groups. In the asiento trade at Curagao, prime slaves always brought the
highest prices, the remaining macrons were sold at auctions for much less.
In 1701 the WIC slaver, Guide Vrijheid, for example, sold 113 macron slaves
at Curasao for an average price of sixty-seven pesos before sailing on with
its remaining 482 piezas de India to Veracruz. That same year, the ship,
Croonvogel, sold its macrons at Cartagena for an average of seventy-five pesos
while its piezas de India sold for 114 pesos. When the asiento was not
functioning, prime slaves could also be put on the auction block, thus raising
the average price of such transactions considerably. A similar situation applies
to St. Eustatius, with the exception that prices always tended to be lower
there than at Curasao. At Surinam the price might vary considerably if slaves
were sold on contract individually selected, or if a whole consignment was
sold at the auction block.14
The price paid for slaves fluctuated also in accordance with the region
of origin of the slaves. Slaves from the Loango-Angola coast and the
Bight of Biafra were generally purchased at lower prices than the slaves
from the Guinea coast. This is clearly indicated in the free-trade pur-
chasing prices shown in Table 11.6. Slaves from this region were ob-
tained at 13 percent less than on the Guinea coast, and this discrepancy
is carried over to the other side of the ocean, where the slaves of the
consignments from Loango produced prices on average 20 percent less
per slave. This may, incidentally, also account for the price difference
between Curasao and St. Eustatius in the WIC trade, because a larger
proportion to St. Eustatius came from the Loango region. The price
guide in 1718 also differentiated prices between the upper coast, to the
14. WIC, vol. 366, p. 530; WIC, vol. 1146, doc. 39.
Table 11.6
Prices and profits by region, 1740-1795
Region Slaves Average price a Profit/lossb Ships + /- c
Guinea 17,967 /135 / 2,214 69 45/24
Loango 9,035 118 8,064 24 15/9
Africa mixed 1,512 95 -6,672 7 111
Curasao 2,657 233 13,902 10 1/3

Guyana 3,242 391 8,358 12 9/3
Surinam 14,732 309 2,280 61 37/24
St. Eustatius 2,226 277 -3,012 7 3/4
Mixed 2,143 334 -3,222 10 3/7

Notes: aSlave prices, profits, and losses are listed in guilders.
Average losses are preceded by (-).
c
Number of consignments with profits ( + ) and losses (-).
west of Elmina, and the eastward lower coast, where prices were approxi-
mately 20 percent less.15 Unfortunately, the price data of the African
coast are inadequate to make a regional distinction beyond qualitative ob-
servations, at least not before the free-trade period.
Thus far, this price assessment has focused on the WIC slave trade,
but the record of slave prices in the free-trade period is no less complex.
In his examination of MCC records, Unger has demonstrated the erratic
pattern of prices in the West Indies. He pictures the ups and downs and
the unpredictability of slave prices even more dramatically than is shown
in the statistical analysis attempted here. On the whole, it is clear that
slave prices were rising during the free-trade period, at least until a peak
was reached around 1770. During the credit crisis that started in 1773,
prices dropped, but they started to go up again during the mid-1780s,
when there was a revival of the Dutch slave trade, as will be discussed in
Chapter 12.16
In order to get an idea of the financial value of a slave, a comparison of
contemporary prices is presented in Table 11.7. Table 7.2 has already pre-
sented some wage ranges for the period 1682 to 1802. Both tables confirm
that wages and prices remained quite stable during the years of the Dutch
slave trade, in contrast to the rising slave prices.
15. NBKG, vol. 85, doc. 8/10/1718 and 9/7/1718; NBKG, vol. 233, doc. 5/3/1700; RLLM,
LX-447, doc. 5/15/1788. See also Appendix 25. Regional variation of profitability will
be discussed later in this chapter.
16. Unger II, pp. 72-82.
Figure 11.1
Prices of slaves in the Dutch slave trade
(Five-year averages in guilders)
600
Legend
Curasao
500 • Surinam 500
Guyana
* * * * St. Eustatius
400 •Africa 400
300 300
200
1675 1700 1725 1750 1775 1795
Table 11.7
Comparative consumer retail prices, 1650-1795
Periods Meat Sugar Butter Pigs Cows
pr.lb pr.lb pr.lb
1650-1674 0.19 0.53 0.39 21.33 82.24
1675-1699 0.18 0.27 0.34 23.79 63.14
1700-1724 0.19 0.33 0.33 23.46 71.31
1725-1749 0.19 0.30 0.34 29.41 82.99
1750-1774 0.20 0.35 0.35 32.53 81.85
1775-1795 0.18 0.37 0.38 41.83 105.73
Source: Posthumus, vol. II, pp. 248-53, 360-5, 494-9, and 664-5.
Note: Prices are given in guilders and are rounded off in decimals. They are
averages derived from bulk sales to health care institutions in Amster-
dam, Leiden, and Utrecht.
Market conditions at Curasao and St. Eustatius
The slave-trade operation at the island of Curasao was largely based on the
asiento trade with the Spanish mainland, as has been described in Chapter
2. The asientos stipulated prices as well as conditions under which slaves
were to be examined and turned over to the new owners. The WIC had
several plantations on the island to grow food for the slaves while in transit,
and these places also provided shelter and constructive labor when large
numbers of slaves were kept waiting for transfer to the asiento owners. In
addition, macrons, or rejected slaves, often found a home on these company
plantations. The island's economy could not accommodate all of the macrons,
and many of them were therefore shipped to other Caribbean islands or
illicitly to the Spanish mainland. The frequent interruptions in the asiento
operation also produced periodic surpluses of slaves, which had to be dis-
posed of elsewhere if the WIC directors were to avoid economic disaster.
Thus, an alternative slaving operation developed at Curasao alongside that
of the asiento, one that functioned on a smaller scale and more along the
lines of free-market practices.17
This alternative slave market spawned the growth of a sizable community
of slave traders, who operated from Curasao and distributed slaves from the
island to various locations in the West Indies. This development also brought
the slave-auction block to Curasao, at first essentially for the disposal of the
macrons but later also for other slaves as the asiento trade experienced
increasing stagnation and ultimately departed from Curasao. While the WIC
establishment at Curagao greatly lamented the termination of the asiento
trade during the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, their su-
periors in Holland expected the slave market at Curasao to continue to
flourish through the open-market system. Thus, they ordered their subor-
dinates at Curasao in 1688 not to drop the slave prices below the one hundred
pesos the asientists had paid. This price was already significantly below the
price slaves had drawn during the peak period of the Coymans' asiento
earlier that decade, and the WIC was forced to drop slave prices in the years
to come.18
Selling slaves through public auctions had been a disputed practice at
Curasao for many years. For obvious reasons, the early auctions of the
macron slaves had drawn significantly lower prices than the asientists were
paying for prime slaves. In the free market WIC authorities in Holland
usually insisted on selling their slaves through auctions, and some Curasao
WIC agents preferred the method of selling slaves individually {uit de hand,
17. WIC, vol. 831, p. 242; WIC, vol. 200, p. 316, and WIC, vol. 206, pp. 99-100 list several
such slave dealers. See also Chapter 2 for a discussion of the Curasao operation.
18. WIC, vol. 834, pp. 349-50; WIC, vol. 69, p. 180. See also Appendix 24.
"by hand," the Dutch called it) to local traders. The auction method was
unpredictable, of course, causing prices to fluctuate considerably and giving
each party at one time or another a chance to claim that his method was
preferable. In the wake of the demise of the asiento trade, Curasao's com-
mercial establishment declined greatly and this contributed much to squab-
bles and infighting among local WIC personnel. Pricing of slaves and
methods of sale were important issues in these conflicts. Competition from
other Caribbean islands that made slaves available for the region, especially
Jamaica and St. Thomas, also contributed to the demise of Curasao as an
important center of the slave trade. 19
As was pointed out in Chapter 8, the island of St. Eustatius replaced
Curasao as a slave-trading depot during the 1720s. As at Curasao, St.
Eustatius began to cultivate a significant number of private slave traders
who, along with local WIC officials, operated a busy slave market that sup-
plied nearby islands as well as faraway Spanish colonies. The focus was on
the French islands, however, and the market quickly dried up when during
the end of the decade the French authorities forced an end to the importation
of slaves from St. Eustatius. As was the case with Curasao, by flooding the
Caribbean markets with slaves, the English also harmed the Dutch in St.
Eustatius.20
At St. Eustatius, slaves were traded primarily through individual trans-
actions between WIC officials and middlemen merchants; auctions were
held but they were much less significant than those in Surinam and Curasao.
Slave prices were at about the same level as at Curasao, perhaps slightly
lower. The upper and lower ranges of slave prices were less pronounced
because, in the absence of the asiento, the distinction between piezas de India
and macrons as separate categories had become blurred. The same trend
is true for Curasao after the asiento trade declined. Slave price data for St.
Eustatius are preserved only for the crucial decade of the 1720s. For Cur-
asao, price statistics are available for a longer period, but for both islands
these statistics are very scarce for the free-trade period. 21
To find buyers for their slaves at St. Eustatius, the WIC had to extend
credit, in this case to planters under foreign sovereignty; however, WIC
officials were ultimately unable to collect. At Curasao, credit to middlemen
merchants had also been a problem and this constituted an even greater
problem in the plantation colonies on the Guiana coast. Thus, the days of
St. Eustatius as a prolific center of the slave trade were dramatic but short-
lived. The island continued to function as a conduit for trade in the Car-
19. WIC, vol. 68, cor. 5/23/1689; WIC, vol. 200, pp. 288, 294, and 316; WIC, vol. 202, p.
179; WIC, vol. 205, p. 380; Goslinga, "Curasao," p. 22.
20. WIC, vol. 619, pp. 380 and 388; WIC, vol. 249, pp. 528 and 549.
21. See Appendix 24.
ibbean, reaching its height during the 1770s, when it produced significant
profit for the WIC, but by then its emphasis was no longer on the slave
trade.22
The markets of the plantation colonies
Meaningful comparative price statistics on the slave trade are available be-
ginning only in the early decades of the eighteenth century, when Surinam
became the chief center for the Dutch trade. Data for Surinam after 1740
are available for comparison; these data include West Indian prices for
specific slave consignments listed in Appendixes 24 and 25.
As shown in Chapter 8, the Dutch settlement on the Suriname River
experienced considerable difficulty in getting started. Obtaining new settlers
from Europe and new slaves from Africa were some of its primary problems.
In 1677 the WIC appointed a commissioner for the slave trade with the task
of examining the methods of slave importation for Surinam. A few years
later it was agreed that all imported slaves should meet the same qualifications
as those of the asiento trade. The charter of the Society of Surinam, issued
in 1682, included several references to both the selling and financing of the
newly imported slaves, and the WIC received a monopoly as well as the
obligation to supply the colony with an "adequate" number of slaves. Planters
were allowed to make special contracts with the WIC for the delivery of a
stipulated number of slaves, and they could make private purchases or pur-
chase slaves at an auction held after each human cargo arrived. Payment for
contracted slaves was in cash or otherwise guaranteed, but slaves purchased
at auction could be paid for in three installments at six-month intervals, thus
providing credit up to eighteen months. Contracted slaves were assigned to
their owners by lot.23
Satisfying the Surinam settlers with an "adequate" number of slaves
seemed to have been an impossible task for the WIC, fraught as it was with
numerous disputes. Planters were repeatedly delinquent in the payments of
debts incurred by slave purchases. When overdue slave debts reached high
levels the WIC retaliated by refusing to import more slaves, a decision that
hurt the company as well as the planters. Planters complained that the price
of sugar had gone down, or gave other excuses to explain their delinquency.
Correspondence to Holland in 1721 spoke of these "bad and sorrowful
times," when "low sugar prices bring many plantations to ruin." The WIC
22. W I C , 203, pp. 74-5; W I C , vol. 619, pp. 138, 340, and cor. 12/23/1722 and 12/2/1726.
23. W I C , vol. 831, pp. 366 and 439-42; W I C , vol. 68, cor. 9/27/1687 and 10/23/1688;
W I C , vol. 834, p. 190; S G , vol. 5773, 1705; W I C , vol. 1138, cor. 8/25/1706; SS, vol.
113 contains a copy of the charter.
revoked the credit stipulations of the charter and limited payment for slaves
to cash or granted credit for three months only. As a consequence, few
planters were willing or able to buy, and to the detriment of the WIC the
price of slaves dropped. A similar situation took place in 1706 and occurred
again in the early 1730s.24
Much of the credit problem can be traced to the early years, when Surinam
developed an economic monoculture of sugar. Even when coffee was added
as a significant second product during the 1730s, the colony remained vul-
nerable to the price fluctuations of these staple products, and also to the
seasonal nature of these crops. Slave ships often had to leave without return
freight or wait many months before the crops were ready. WIC ships tried
to return on each slave ship a significant portion of the value of the slave
cargo they had delivered, although waiting for the crops might become too
costly. Many free traders chose to return in ballast, with water and sand as
cargo. Cash was rarely available to planters, and they had to pay for their
slaves with sugar and other agricultural commodities, or increasingly with
bills of exchange.25
In time a number of modifications were introduced in the Surinam slave-
trade practices, although the charter of 1682 was constantly reiterated as
the authoritative basis for the traffic. It seemed as if the eighteen-month
credit-payment plan had been extended to two years during the first decade
of the eighteenth century, and some sources even refer to three-year terms.
Planters regularly demanded longer terms, and at one point six years was
put forth as reasonable. But in 1736 the WIC suddenly shortened the credit
for slave purchases to a maximum of six weeks. This was during the final
stages of the company monopoly. The planters protested bitterly and invoked
the charter of the colony. The conflict between planters and the WIC was
not resolved until 1741, and by that time free traders were allowed to sell
slaves in the colony while the WIC had withdrawn from the traffic.26
A majority of the slaves disembarked at Surinam were sold at the auction
block, a method stipulated by the charter and most commonly used when
the WIC supplied the colony with slaves. There was a gradual shift away
from using the auction method, however, after free traders entered the
Surinam market. Unger has calculated for the MCC trade that more than
54 percent of the slaves went via the auction block but that individual sales
(uit de hand) became dominant after 1770. In the majority of slave-ship
24. W I C , vol. 833, p. 308; W I C , vol. 1137, cor. 7/30/1704; W I C , vol. 1138, cor. 6/8/1714,
9/22/1706 and 6/15/1707; W I C , vol. 1140, docs. 24, 46, 190, 196, 225, and 229; VWIS,
vol. 975, cor. 4/9/1713.
25. W I C , vol. 1138, cor. 6/31/1706, 4/1/1710, 5/3/1710, and 3/26/1712; W I C , vol. 1139,
cor. 7/20/1719; W I C , vol. 1140, cor. 4/12/1726 and doc. 91.
26. W I C , vol. 1141, docs. 117-70, W I C , vol. 1142, docs. 20-31; W I C , vol. 1138, cor. 6/8/
1714 and 4/16/1715; W I C , vol. 1026, p. 93.
landings more than one method was used to sell slaves. During the period
of the WIC monopoly many slaves were sold by previously agreed contract
in which the price was set in advance. For several years the contract prices
for prime slaves were set at 210 guilders and then raised to 250 guilders by
1712. The slaves involved in these sales were distributed to their new owners
by lot. The lot system sometimes erupted into a scandal, as it did in 1702,
when the governor demanded first choice. Many slaves were sold individ-
ually, letting the prospective buyer select slaves from the recently arrived
consignment and then negotiating the price with the company authorities or
the captain of the slave vessel. Such slaves obviously tended to be more
expensive, although the auction prices could fluctuate considerably depending
on the market. WIC authorities favored contract sales, and they may have
used the method to raise prices in general.27
A reminder that slaves never had any choice in the matter of their own-
ership is hardly necessary. Occasionally, four different methods were used
to sell slaves, as is demonstrated in the case of the WIC slaver, Christina,
in 1705. Of the 421 slaves brought over alive, 34 were sold on contract, n o
individually, 273 at the auction block, and 4 were exchanged for other slaves
who were then apparently sold at auction. Contract selling seems to have
disappeared with the increased competition for slaves at the end of the WIC
monopoly. Free traders sold slaves either individually or by auction, with
the former method gradually gaining favor.28
Slave prices steadily rose at Surinam during the eighteenth century. At
the beginning of the century contract prices were 21 o guilders a slave; auction
prices must have fluctuated slightly below or around the same amount. As
shown in the price series in Appendixes 24 and 25, there may have been
an increase or decline here and there, but on the whole the trend was steadily
upward. Auction prices remained generally below 250 guilders a slave, until
the later 1720s, when prices first exceeded 300 guilders a slave. Then they
tended to slacken, and in some auctions during the 1730s the average price
dropped below 200 guilders again. Around 1750 there was a sudden rise in
slave prices. The governor of Surinam explained the development in his
journal:
Captain Daniels (of the Muscovische Galey) sells his slaves, which are
Cormantins (Gold Coast), individually for 450 guilders for men and
400 for women, and he is adamant about selling for no penny less. He
says that there were about 300 French slave ships on the (African) coast,
who drove the price up to 500 guilders. A shocking price for a time
27. WIC, vol. 69, pp. 165 and 169; WIC, vol. 1137, cor. 11/18/1702; WIC, vol. 1138, cor.
3/26/1712; WIC, vol. 836, pp. 276 and 292; WIC, vol. 783, doc. 25; SS, vol. 131, pp.
13-27; Unger II, pp. 69-70.
28. WIC, vol. 1138, doc. 10.
when (colonial) products bring so little and credit is lacking. However,
we can't keep going without bringing in slaves, even if they should cost
1,000 guilders.29
After a significant drop during the early 1760s, prices jumped above 500
guilders in 1765. This was followed by a drop in prices during the remainder
of that decade, but a new high of nearly 600 guilders was reached in 1771.
The latter must have been an exceptional situation, for prices continued to
fluctuate between 300 and 400 guilders during the 1770s, despite the financial
crisis that began in 1773.30
As was shown in Chapter 8, much of the prosperity and growth of the
colony of Surinam during the middle of the eighteenth century resulted from
rather reckless investment schemes. Increasingly, slaves were purchased on
credit. The burden of indebtedness was shifting from the WIC to Dutch
investors and to small slaving companies. The introduction of paper money
during the 1760s added to the financial chaos. In 1777, Surinam planters
alone owed the MCC in excess of 185,000 guilders on delinquent slave
debts. Payments for slaves were made less in cash, or even tropical produce,
as evidenced by an inordinate number of slave ships returning home in
ballast, and increasingly with bills of exchange. This was particularly the
case during the period 1766 to 1773. Many planters remained deeply in
debt and others saw their plantations being confiscated by their creditors.
The Anglo-Dutch War of 1780 finished what the financial crisis had started,
plunging Surinam into a long period of economic decline and virtually ending
Dutch participation in the Atlantic slave trade on any significant scale.31
Conditions and slave-trade practices in the neighboring colonies in what
is present-day Guyana resembled those in Surinam, but the scale of the
Surinam operation greatly outstripped its neighbors. For many decades, most
of Guyana's slaves were obtained by contract or small shipments via Surinam
and Curasao. Prices of slaves tended to be higher in Guyana and deliveries
less reliable than in Surinam. To extend this comparison further, prices in
Surinam were high when compared with both Curasao and St. Eustatius
during the same period. In the plantation colonies, however, slaves were
sold directly to the planters, whereas middlemen merchants were involved
in the process at Curasao and St. Eustatius.32
As shown in Table 11.6, profitability in the MCC trade varied from one
market area to another. For reasons difficult to explain the MCC ships
taking slaves to Curasao made the largest profits, although the company
directed less than 10 percent of its ships there. The Guyana colonies also
29. SS, Vol. 409, 8/1/1750.
30. See Appendix 24.
31. MCC, vol. 1567, p. 127; Van de Voort, pp. 78-82, 97, and 164-89.
32. See Chapter 8 and Appendix 24.
were quite profitable, and this may have been the result of contracting slave
deliveries beforehand. Surinam, which attracted the majority of the MCC
slaves, produced modest but steady profits. The St. Eustatius trade was
unprofitable, as was the trade with multiple destinations, which often in-
cluded this island. Apparently, St. Eustatius was a market of last resort, to
which slave captains sailed only when prices elsewhere were not to their
liking. Slave ships with mixed destinations were already an indication that
the slave market was troubled and the prices low.
Similar conclusions can be drawn for the markets of origin in Africa. Ships
obtaining their slaves from wide-ranging areas ended up with the greatest
losses; in fact, all eight of the recorded cases with mixed origins registered
losses. The surprising fact is that the ships trading in the Loango region
were the most profitable. This may explain why the Dutch kept sending a
large number of ships to this region, even though the Bantu-speaking slaves
from there were not in great demand in the Dutch colonies.33
Profits and losses
Profitability is one of the most complex problems in the Atlantic slave trade.
A comparison of average purchase and sale prices suggests handsome gains
by the slave traders, and the legend developed and was perpetuated by the
antislavery literature that the traffic was rewarded with excessive profits.34
Enlightenment-generated morality could apparently not conceive of such
inhumane activities unless high financial returns were its reward. As a result,
it is often overlooked that during the eighteenth century and before, the
slave trade was generally thought of as just another commercial activity,
albeit a rather risky one.
Profits in the slave trade can be calculated in various ways. One can
evaluate the purchase and sale of a few slaves or the transactions surrounding
a single consignment, and get results as indicated in price tables discussed
earlier. The activities of a company engaged in the traffic for a given period
of time is another way of assessing profits. One can also look at the whole
economic system, such as a national or imperial economy of which the trade
was an integral part, and develop a formula that shows the contribution of
the slave trade to that economic system. Various approaches will be explored
below.
For the WIC trade it is virtually impossible to calculate profits and losses
for individual slaving voyages, as not a single complete financial account has
33. See Chapter 5 on African origins.
34. For a general evaluation of slave trade profits see Roger Anstey, The Atlantic Slave Trade
and British Abolition, 1760-1810 (London: Macmillan Press, 1975), pp. 38-41.
survived. Comparing purchase and sale prices can be misleading because

the cost of outfitting a ship for a one- to two-year voyage was substantial.
In addition to the depreciation of the ship, the food for crew and slaves,
and the wages of crew and officers, there was a whole array of other expenses.
Various passes had to be purchased to sail the wide range of water and
coastal areas of the triangular voyages. Expenses could vary greatly, and
depended on the weather, length of voyage, market variations, and inter-
national political conditions. Maritime insurance, for example, could rise
precipitously in times of international political tension. Most of the slave-
ship insurance policies issued in Rotterdam during the period 1721 to 1792
ranged from 6 to 9 percent, although at the beginning and the end of this
period they tended to be higher yet. In 1677 insurance rates for the WIC
slave trade ranged from 10 to 15 percent; however, Holland was still at war
with France at that time.35
In Africa slavers encountered a variety of special expenses. They included
payments (often referred to as customs or dashes) to rulers and chiefs, in
order to earn their permission and cooperation in the trade in a given area.
Then there were payments to African brokers for assisting in the commercial
transactions. Often there were fees or markups for middlemen, as was the
case with WIC officials during the free-trade period. Wages and fees had
to be paid to guards, announcers, carriers, and rowers, who ferried slaves
to the slave ships. Water and firewood had to be purchased and ferried to
the ships; for a slave consignment of several hundred, these were substantial
undertakings. As mentioned in Chapter 10, in addition to the food brought
from Europe, a wide range of victuals were purchased in Africa, which had
to be carried to the beach and ferried to the ships. Once across the ocean
and arriving at the port of destination, similar expenses were incurred. Fees
for the visitation of the medical officers of the colony and for auctions were
added to the list of expenses. In most colonial markets a fee was charged,
called slavegeld at Curasao, for bringing a slave ashore. The incidental ex-
pense account for the ship, Rusthof, in 1730 amounted to more than 1,500
guilders, and did not include provisions bought in Africa.36
The triangular slave trade entailed special expenses lacking in most other
maritime trade. The human cargo was exceptionally sensitive to "spoilage,"
diseases, and death, as was discussed in Chapter 10. Special insurance was
required, and twice the decks had to be modified in order to accommodate
the variation of the cargoes. This not only required extra equipment, boards,
chains, and other tools required for housing and controlling the slaves, but
35. WIC, vol. 332, pp. 5 and 89. See also GAR, Archief der Maatschappy van Assurantie, vols.
215-28 for maritime insurance rates.
36. WIC, vol. 1140, pp. 176-7; WIC, vol. 566, p. 223; MCC, vol. 431, p. 66ff; MCC, vol.
808.
also extra personnel to make the necessary modifications. And, again, slave
ships required a significantly larger crew than ordinary merchant ships.
Without the benefit of consistent data on WIC slaving voyages, it is im-
possible to make a meaningful and reliable financial evaluation of the WIC
slave trade. The best one can do is to make an assessment of how the
company fared in general, particularly after 1662, when the slave trade
became its dominant commercial branch. During the later 1720s various
efforts were made to collect and analyze the WIC's financial status, possibly
in preparation for the renewal of the charter due in 1730. The complex and
confusing picture that emerged showed that the company was not in good
financial health, and that the slave trade could not rescue it. Since 1675 the
WIC had received state subsidies of over one million guilders, and in 1728
it had a debt of nearly four million. The company had shown some resiliency
from 1723 to 1725, when profits were recorded and investments could be
made again, although this new image may in part have been the result of
changes in bookkeeping. The loss of monopoly over the slave trade during
the next decade confirmed the WIC's inability to make the slave trade a
profitable business.37
The free trade in the eighteenth century lends itself better to a profits
assessment of individual slaving missions than the WIC slave trade. This is
due to the excellent preservation of MCC records and to the nature of
accounting, whereby the books of each single voyage were closed after the
completion of a mission, rather than rendering an annual account. Unger's
collection of MCC records, which are reprinted with corrections in Appendix
25, shows that the profits of Dutch free traders were amazingly low. The
overall profitability of 100 MCC slaving voyages was slightly lower than 3
percent, which means an annual gain of at most 2 percent on the investments.
Of these 100 voyages, no fewer than 41 registered losses. As shown in Table
11.8, some of these losses could be rather large, but were offset by other
voyages with significant profits. The majority of the slaving missions, 54
percent, registered gains in the range of 5 to 10 percent. The great risk of
the traffic, resulting in a wide range of profits and losses, is clearly evident
in the MCC record.38
MCC profits were surprisingly low indeed, lower than the 6 to 7 percent
calculated for the French and English slave trade, and one wonders why the
company remained in this business. It must be noted, however, that most
of the MCC losses were during the initial and final stages of its involvement
in the slave trade, and these negative rates coincided with significantly higher
37. The Rademacher and Van Citern collections are valuable in the evaluation of WIC
finances. RLLM, folders, 564-5, 575 and 591; VCC, no. 6, p. 278. See also Chapters
6 and 9 on the transition to the free trade.
38. Anstey, p. 75. See also Appendix 25 and Unger II, pp. 86-92.
Table 11.8
Profit ranges per slave consignment, 1740-1795
Ships % Profits % Losses Years
V. Johanna Cores 88 1759
Vergenoegen 37 1787
12 Ships 30 +
20 Ships 20 +
34 Ships 10 +
47 Ships 5 +
14 Ships 5 + to 5-
21 Ships 10 +
7 Ships 20 +
4 Ships 30 +
Geertruyda & Christina 37 1784

Grenadier 48 1749
mortality rates, as is shown in Table 11.9. (The WIC also had high death
rates during its final years in the slave trade. In both situations, rising mor-
tality rates may have been a factor in deciding to abandon the traffic.) During
the period 1750 to 1780 alone, the MCC managed an overall profit margin
of 5.6 percent, which was reasonable and more in line with that of the French
and English experience. Furthermore, it should be noted that the MCC
bookkeeping was done in such a manner that unsold commodities obtained
in Africa and the West were registered at purchase prices when the books
were closed, which means that profits were probably higher than calculated
by Unger.39 On the other hand, these MCC statistics do not include the
ships that were lost at sea, such as the six captured by the English during
the 1780s, which would further reduce the company's profits from the slave
trade.
But even if an assessment of profitability of individual slaving ventures
shows erratic and low financial gains, there was always the gambling mentality
to keep slave traders going; the next venture could produce better results.
Also, one needs to look at the larger picture to gain an appreciation of
profitability in the slave trade. The slave trade was, after all, a part of a
larger system that involved plantations, settlements, and national economies.
Many of the merchants involved in the slave trade also owned plantations
39. For a more recent assessment of MCC bookkeeping see: C. Reinders Foliner-van Prooi-
jen, "De Middelburgse Commercie Compagnie; Reglement en Praktijk, 1720-1729,"
M.A. thesis, Leiden University, 1985.
Table 11.9
Profits in the MCC slave trade, 1740-1795
Values in pound Flemish3
Average per cargo Profits Cargo averages
Years Ships Outlays Proceeds Total Average Slaves Deaths
1740-1749 12 10,988 10,783 -2,452 -204 301 58
1750-1759 19 12,852 14,206 25,737 1,355 277 29
1760-1769 25 15,342 16,192 21,266 855 275 33
1770-1779 35 16,899 17,502 21,095 590 261 28
1780-1795 9 23,170 21,896 -11,467 -1,274 271 54
1750-1780 84 15,433 16,295 68,094 862 288 31

Profit (%) (5.6)
Average 15,596 16,137 284 37

Total 100 1,559,564 1,613,743 54,179 541
Profit (%) (2.88)
Note: a A pound Flemish equaled 6 guilders (see Table 11.1).
in Surinam, and they knew that unless fresh slaves were brought from Africa
their other investment would suffer. This is illustrated by the slaving firm,
Coopstad and Rochussen of Rotterdam, and also by repeated requests writ-
ten by West Indian planters.40
The slave trade and the economy at large
The slave trade was inextricably tied to the slave system, and to the plantation
economies of the New World. It is quite conceivable that investors were
willing to lose money on the slave trade if they could profit from their
plantations. But to assess the profitability of the Surinam colony, for example,
would be a major investigation that is outside the scope of this study. It is
perhaps sufficient here to illustrate how many persons not directly involved
in the slave trade nevertheless benefited from it. One does not need to go
as far as the ground-breaking thesis of Eric Williams, who asserted that the
Atlantic slave system was a cornerstone of the industrial revolution. However,
one can certainly agree that the financial implications of the slave trade were
spread far and wide.41
One needs to realize that the accounts of slaving missions were limited
40. See the HAR inventory at the Gemeente Archief at Rotterdam.

41. See Anstey, Chapter 2, for an evaluation of the so-called "William's Thesis."
to the firm that financed the undertaking. They do not include financial
benefits such as wages to crew members of the ships, which were actually
subtracted as an expense on the company ledgers. If one estimates that on
the average a slave ship had fifty to sixty crew members, and that an average
of ten to thirty slave ships were in action at any given time, it would mean
employment for 1,000 to 1,200 men during the years 1662 to 1780, and a
smaller work force for several decades before and after that period. No large
business, but for a country with a population of less than two million it was
not to be ignored. As was discussed in Chapter 7, wages of sailors were low
but captains and other officers serving on slave ships received generous
salaries and special bonuses, and in addition made profits from private trade.
There is no evidence of Dutch slave captains becoming wealthy from the
traffic, as was the case with the earlier cited French captain, Van Alstein,
but such cases may well surface when the personal involvement in the slave
trade is carefully studied.42
Others benefiting from the slave trade were WIC personnel and agents
of free-trade companies stationed in Africa and the West. After 1700 the
WIC establishment in Africa became very much geared to the slave trade
and it, like the slave-ship officers, often drew bonuses and engaged in private
or illicit trade that added to their retirement opportunities in the Dutch
Republic. The same is true for the asiento trade, which caused the WIC
establishment at Curasao to become largely dependent on the slave trade.
Moreover, ranking asiento officials earned a commission on the sale of slaves.
Similar practices operated at Surinam and other slave markets.43 As with
the captains, the risks to the lives of those colonial officials were enormous;
if they died prematurely their earnings were enjoyed by their heirs. One way
or another, such funds ended up in the national economy of the Dutch
Republic.
Several other persons gained financial benefits more indirectly from the
slave trade. The slave ships had to be built, each mission had to be provi-
sioned with food and the tools of the trade, and above all merchandise had
to be manufactured and marketed for the trade with Africa. This must have
produced many jobs for the Dutch textile and firearms shops, as well as
many other workshops. Furthermore, the agricultural commodities raised
by slave labor and purchased for slaves produced profits and jobs in Dutch
refineries and processing plants. These finished products had to be trans-
ported and marketed again. In summary, the slave trade was an important
42. The payment of bonuses for delivery of slaves fluctuated significantly and is therefore
difficult to assess. For evidence of such bonus payments, as well as private and smuggle
trade see the following: WIC, vol. 823, pp. 238-40; WIC, vol. 833, pp. 70 and 320; WIC,
vol. 835, pp. 137 and 157-835; WIC, vol. 832, p. 150.
43. WIC, vol. 68, p. 38, and doc. 5/23/1689; WIC, vol. 619, p. 138.
link in the economy of the Dutch colonial empire, particularly in the Atlantic
region.
The goods obtained in the West in exchange for slaves varied with time
and place; these back-haul goods, or retours, as the Dutch called them, were
an important concomitant of the slave trade, and they became significant in
the overall Dutch economy. An extensive assessment of their nature and
significance is beyond the scope of this book; however, a brief summary will
have to suffice here.
It all started with sugar products in the slave trade to Brazil, and sugar
continued to be a major commodity among the shipments from the West
until the end of the Dutch slave trade. Silver currency at Curagao, the so-
called pieces of eight from the Spanish colonies, became a coveted means
of payment for slaves, although some agricultural commodities were also
accepted as payment for slaves. Sugar products appear to have been the
primary exchange items for slaves at St. Eustatius. In Surinam and the other
Guiana settlements sugar was also the major item used as payment for slaves.
As the eighteenth century progressed, other agricultural commodities, such
as cocoa, cotton, coffee, and indigo, were added to the list. Periodically, salt
was obtained in the West Indies and shipped to Europe. Other curious items
prominent in the returning slave ships were wood products, such as stock-
vishout from Curagao and letterhout from Surinam. These items were not
very valuable, and they seemed to have functioned in part as ballast to fill
the holds when more valuable commodities were not available. Curasao also
produced hides, and lemon juice was exported in small quantities from
Surinam.44
A slave ship did not necessarily carry the commodities purchased for the
slaves it had delivered. Sometimes, when currency or bills of exchange were
obtained, the ship had room to carry freight for private individuals or busi-
nesses. In the busy two-way shipping traffic between Surinam and the Dutch
Republic it often occurred that a WIC slaver carried commodities for the
Society of Surinam or for private planters, and other ships might bring home
the sugar for outstanding slave debts. Information about 184 return cargoes
has been collected, and of these 65 returned to Holland merely in ballast
and 50 had a token or limited cargo. A total of 69 ships, or about 40 percent
had a full cargo in their holds. As might be expected, the vast majority of
the near-empty ships sailed during the peak of the Dutch slave trade, when
the demand for slaves was high and speed was essential; 51 of the 65 ships
returning to Europe in ballast only sailed during the years 1766 to 1773.
Before and after this peak period slave ships generally brought back a con-
44. WIC, vol. 200, pp. 5, and 273; WIC, vol. 202, pp. 368 and 464. See also Van de Voort's
Westindische Plantages.
siderable amount of commodities from the West.45 The commodities re-
turned on the last leg of the triangular trade must have produced profits to
the slave traders as well as to the Dutch economy.
Determining the profitability from the slave trade and from the West
Indian slave system is illusive, and perhaps unachievable. Although this study
has concentrated on numerous financial benefits from the slave system,
others have pointed to the investment losses and bankruptcies, the feasible
consequences of the capitalist system. During the two decades of 1753 to
1773, Dutch financiers invested approximately sixty million guilders in Sur-
inam. The capital invested was poorly used, buying more slaves but failing
to cultivate new soil, and it culminated in a financial debacle and contributed
to the trend toward absentee landlordism. Dutch free-trade policies did little
to stimulate their West Indian economies, quite in contrast to the British,
who protected their West Indian sugar industries to benefit more from their
West Indian investments. In the long run, the Dutch experiment with plan-
tation slavery was a financial failure, and their share in the Atlantic slave
trade dropped prematurely.46 The next chapter focuses on the final years of
the Dutch slave trade.
45. See Appendix 2.
46. P.C. Emmer, "Suiker-goud en slaven; de Republiek in West Afrika en West Indie, 1674-
1800," in Overzee; NederlandseKoloniale Geschiedenis, I$QO—IQJ$ (Haarlem: Van Dishoeck,
1982), pp. 150-5.
12
The end of the Dutch slave trade

1781-1815
Crucial changes were taking place in the Dutch slave trade during the decade
of the 1770s. At the beginning of the decade the traffic reached an all-time
high, but as an economic recession struck, in 1773, Dutch slaving activity
declined significantly. The diplomatic fallout of the American Revolution,
which put additional strains on Atlantic shipping, also had a retarding effect
on the Dutch slave trade. In 1780 the Dutch Republic openly chose the
side of the American colonies and got involved in a war with Great Britain,
bringing the Dutch slave trade to a temporary halt.
The final decades of the Dutch slave trade
The Fourth Anglo-Dutch War (1780-4) was disastrous for the Dutch Re-
public. British naval power far outdistanced the Dutch navy. The still large
Dutch merchant marine was relatively unprotected, and numerous Dutch
ships were captured and confiscated by the enemy. The capture of at least
twelve Dutch slave ships during the years 1780 to 1783 has been verified,
and the fate of at least three other slavers is uncertain, but they were un-
doubtedly captured as well. The MCC alone lost at least six slave ships to
the British. Several Dutch colonial territories were taken over by Great
Britain, including the settlements in Guyana and the island of St. Eustatius,
which had initially played a prominent role in supplying the American rebels.1
Table 12.1 gives a statistical display of the much-reduced volume of the
Dutch slave trade during its final years. It shows that the traffic continued,
but at a greatly reduced rate. The Anglo-Dutch War brought the Dutch
slave trade temporarily to a halt. The Dutch outfitted only one slave ship in
1781 and that ship was captured the following year on the African coast.
1. Unger II, p. 53; Appendix 2. For the role of St. Eustatius see J.F.Jameson, "St. Eustatius
in the American Revolution," American Historical Review, vol. 8 (1903), pp. 683-708.
284
The end of the Dutch slave trade 285
Table 12.1
Slave allocations, 1780-1803
From To To Other Unknown Total
Years Africaa Surinam Demerara destinations dest. imports
1780-1784 5,905 1,856 840 1,334 975 5,005
1785-1789 7,399 2,423 2,793 865 6,081
1790-1795 9,240 3,605 1,177 1,566 2,195 8,543
1802-1803 1,206 1,087 1,087
Total 23,750 8,971 4,810 2,900 4,035 20,716

Source: Appendix 2.
Note: a The figures in this column correspond with American arrival dates, which
may vary from African departure dates.
Not a single slave was landed in the West by Dutch ships during the year
1783. Most of the ships dispatched early in the war were captured by the
British. But the Dutch did not abandon the slave trade; even before the war
officially ended in 1784, preparations were underway for its resumption. In
1783 six slaver ships left Holland and five more followed in 1784, and at
that greatly reduced volume the traffic continued for the remainder of the
decade. Efforts were made to expand the traffic during the early 1790s. In
1793 the slave trade reached a minor peak when Dutch ships transported
nearly 3,000 slaves across the Atlantic, but it turned out to have been only
a temporary revival because the turmoil that would render the Dutch slave
trade impossible was already set in motion.2
In 1795 the disruptive period of war and revolution also enveloped the
Dutch Republic, which was renamed the Batavian Republic, modeled on
the revolutionary French First Republic. In alliance with France the Dutch
became embroiled in a war with Great Britain, which dominated the oceans,
and the Dutch slave trade was forced to a complete halt. Actually, when
hostilities had started between various European powers in 1792, Dutch
maritime activities had already experienced its negative effects. In 1793 only
three ships and in 1794 only two ships were dispatched on slaving missions.
After getting directly involved in the hostilities in 1795, the Dutch partici-
pation in the Atlantic slave trade came to a complete halt. When the Treaty
of Amiens in 1802 made the seas safe again for a short period, the Dutch
slave trade experienced a short-lived and final revival. Slightly more than
1,200 slaves were landed in Surinam during the two years, 1802-3. The
resumption of war in 1803 removed the Dutch completely from the Atlantic
See Appendix 2.
slave trade, and the reasons why the traffic was not resumed after the Na-
poleonic era are discussed below.3
The limited revival of the slave trade during the 1780s and early 1790s
resulted from pressures and decisions in Holland and the colonies. Planters
in the colonies and absentee landowners in Holland continued to clamor
for fresh shipments of slaves, and certain merchants in Holland and Zeeland
also wished to see the slave trade rekindled. Many a pamphlet was written
during these years containing a variety of proposals on how to revive the
traffic. In 1784 pressure was put on the States General to end the payment
of premiums and lastgeld payments to the WIC for the right to purchase
slaves in Africa. Various requests from planters in Guyana were submitted
to Dutch governmental authorities in order to increase the importation of
slaves. The WIC, particularly the WIC officials in Africa, were often blamed
for the malaise in the Dutch slave trade. They, with many Dutch slave
traders, tended to blame foreign competitors, especially the Americans and
the Danes. The Dutch planters would have welcomed foreign slave vendors
if they had been allowed to sell slaves in the Dutch colonies. A proposal
supported by the Provincial Assembly of Zeeland stated that the colonies
required 8,000 slaves annually and that a fleet of thirty slave ships was nec-
essary to carry these slaves. The debate reached a climax in 1789, and in
November of that year the States General issued a set of new regulations
that were meant to stimulate the Dutch slave trade. The preamble to the
regulations reads in part:
Since the trade with the West Indies is one of the most important
branches to provide a livelihood for many subjects of this country...
and as long as no one has thought of a method to provide the colonies
with the necessary hands to do the labor, the 'Negro trade' cannot be
separated from the growth and prosperity of these colonies, as well as
the commerce that results from them.4
Thus, the States General tried to ease the restrictions and encourage the
slave trade in its final hour. Recognition payments and other duties on the
traffic were eliminated, which deprived the WIC of a crucial source of
income. Only Dutch ships were allowed to purchase slaves from the Dutch
forts in Africa and deliver them to the Dutch colonies. The slave merchants
seemed to have won the day, and the WIC was dissolved two years later
when its charter expired. But an act of the States General could not guarantee
the revival of the Dutch slave trade. This was clearly demonstrated a few
months later by the lawyer of the WIC, D.I. de Kempenaar, who produced
a detailed proposal for the reinvigoration of the Dutch slave trade. De
3. Van de Voort, pp. 197-213.

4. AW-1895, no. LX-447; VWIS, vol. 1184, cor. 2/24/1787; Unger I, pp. 163-8.
Kempenaar argued that the colonies required 12,000 slaves annually, and
the only way to accomplish such a feat was a concerted cooperative effort
between merchants and officials in Europe, Africa, and the West Indies. His
proposal almost seems like a restoration of the original WIC operation during
the monopoly period. The Zeeland merchant, Johannes Louissen, head of
a very prominent slave-trade firm during the free-trade period, added his
advice in a pamphlet that same year. Among other things, he advocated that
Dutch slave traders be awarded premiums for delivering slaves to the col-
onies. He was willing to allow foreigners to participate in supplying Dutch
colonies with slaves, but at considerable disadvantage compared to subjects
of the Dutch Republic.
Another elaborate plan for the revitalization of the Dutch slave trade was
presented in 1791 by Cornelis van der Oudermeulen, an international mer-
chant who was also a director of both the Society of Surinam and the Dutch
East India Company. Complete with statistics on recent slave deliveries,
West Indian slave populations, and the needed replacement and growth of
such populations, van der Oudermeulen's stressed the need for consultation
and cooperation between merchants and administrative officials. He repeated
many of the suggestions already made by de Kempenaar and Louissen, but
he went further by placing the need for slaves in the framework of patriotism.
No part of his ambitious plan was implemented in its entirety; however, it
may well have helped to stimulate the final resurgence of the slave trade in
1792-3. Later, in 1814, van der Oudermeulen made one last effort to defend
the value and necessity of the slave trade if the Dutch colonies were to
flourish again.5
The markets during the final years
With the exception of a significant reduction in volume, the last decades of

the Dutch slave trade continued the free-trade practice that had been de-
veloped since 1730. Zeeland continued to dominate the trade with nearly
two-thirds of the traffic. Amsterdam remained the second most important
center of Dutch slave traders, while Rotterdam retained a mere fraction of
the trade. Other Dutch ports had ceased to participate in the traffic during
these final decades. Slave ships and consignments continued to decrease in
size, averaging only 230 slaves after 1780. Average mortality rates for the
middle passage amounted to 12.8 percent during these final decades, slightly
lower than for the free trade in general. The regulations of 1789, including
5. RLLM, Lelyveld, doc. 112, 113, 116, and 118; AW-1895, no. LX-447; VWIS, folder
1172; Unger I, pp. 168-71.
an order for better accommodations for the slaves, may have been a cause
for the declining size of slave cargoes as well as declining death rates. 6
On the African side there were also only minor changes from the previously
evolved pattern. A smaller share of the slaves were obtained from the Loango
region during these final years; its share was less than 25 percent, whereas
previously it had been about a third of the total. Notable in this last phase
of the Dutch slave trade was the larger than usual number of ships that
recorded Elmina as their African port of departure. This may well have been
caused by the termination of premiums for purchasing slaves at the Dutch
trading stations in 1789. All WIC merchants stationed in Africa were now
free to participate in the slave trade without paying the premium of twenty
guilders a slave, and without the director-general having a monopolistic role
in this trade. Because the Dutch trading stations were all concentrated on
the Gold Coast, this coastal region must have become much more attractive
for Dutch slave traders.7
Surinam remained the dominant market in the West for the Dutch slave
vendors. As shown in Table 12.1, the colony absorbed nearly half of the
slaves carried by Dutch vessels after 1780. The new market of significance
was the relatively young settlement on the Demerara, in present-day Guyana.
After Surinam it became the most important market in the Dutch slave trade
during these final years. Moreover, it is quite possible that a significant
percentage of the slaves of which the destinations are not known also ended
up in Demerara.
All the other traditional Dutch slave markets in the West declined in
significance after 1780. Only one shipment of slaves was recorded for St.
Eustatius, and Curasao received only portions of consignments. Two slave
cargoes were taken to Berbice, and three others distributed their cargoes
among various Guyana settlements. Essequibo is not specifically mentioned
among the slave importers, but its close proximity to Demerara may well
have meant that a share of those slaves ended up in Essequibo. 8
Although the preceding figures and trends accurately reflect the Dutch
involvement in the Atlantic slave trade, they do not represent the entire slave
importation for these Western markets during these final years of the traffic.
During the Fourth Anglo-Dutch War (1780-4), and continuing at a reduced
rate afterward, all of the traditional Dutch markets were purchasing slaves
from foreign vendors. This is well established for the Guyana settlements,
which the English occupied during the early 1780s, and where a significant
6. Unger I, p. 170. Van der Oudermeulen claimed that only two of the fifty-one slaving
voyages in the 1783-1790 period originated in Rotterdam, whereas Zeeland claimed thirty-
one and Amsterdam eighteen missions.
7. AW-1895, no. LX-447; NBKG, vol. 14, min. 4/15/1790. See also Appendix 2.
planter population was of English extraction. Surinam had long allowed
American ships to import horses, food, and other provisions into the colony.
After 1780 some of these ships were also bringing slaves, albeit in small
numbers. St. Eustatius had long been an international market. An analysis
of extensive shipping to the island before the English takeover in 1780 shows
that many slaves were brought and traded there by ships of the inter-
Caribbean, or the Heine vaart. There was considerable interest to reestablish
St. Eustatius in that role after the last Anglo-Dutch War. Nearby St Martin
obtained its slaves generally from St. Eustatius, and Curasao merchants were
even encouraged to purchase slaves there and sell them on the Spanish
mainland.9
The illicit importation of slaves into Dutch colonies was of modest pro-
portion before 1795; however, after they fell under British control during
the Napoleonic Wars (1799-1815) they became regular markets for British
slave traders. It has now been well established, for example, that during the
two British protectorate periods (1799-1802 and 1804-16), Surinam was
for all practical purposes incorporated into the British Empire and was
adequately supplied with slaves by British ships. Post-1795 Surinam is a
subject beyond the scope of this study; the focus here is the Dutch share
in the slave trade.10
The abolition of the Dutch slave trade
The long period of warfare from 1795 to 1815 weaned the Dutch away from
the slave trade. Slave merchants in Holland undoubtedly had either retired
or found other occupations when peace finally returned and the Dutch could
freely sail the oceans again. But perhaps the most important factor that
precluded the resumption of the Dutch slave trade was that both Great
Britain and the United States had in 1807 passed legislation prohibiting the
slave trade from Africa by their subjects. But all of these factors combined
would not have stopped certain Dutch merchants from resuming the traffic
if the Dutch government had not followed the example of the British at the
conclusion of the Napoleonic era.
As mentioned, in February 1814 van der Oudermeulen urged the re-
sumption of the Dutch slave trade on the grounds that it was a necessity for
9. See the Governor's journals, SS, vols. 416-17, and the correspondence from Surinam,
SS, vols. 2i2ff. For St. Eustatius see: VWIS, no. 1184, cor. 1/13/1791, 2/2/1791, and
11/13/1791.
10. For this subject see: R. Chander, "Slavenhandel in de periode 1789 tot 1826: Suriname
op de grens van twee eeuwen," M.A. thesis, Leiden: Leiden University, 1988.
the resurgence of the Dutch colonies. His appeal must have had a limited
audience, for it was totally ignored by governmental authorities. In June of
that same year the newly proclaimed King Willem I (formerly Stadtholder
Willem V) by royal decree forbade further Dutch participation in the slave
trade.11 What was the reason for such drastic action, and why was there no
apparent opposition to it from Dutch merchants?
As prince regent, Willem I had spent several years in England in exile,
and it was with the support of the British government that the prince was
allowed to return to Holland in November 1813, when Napoleon was driven
back to France. It is not clear whether the new king's motive was human-
itarian or political. There is no doubt, however, that the issue of the slave
trade was linked to the political settlement that followed the Napoleonic
Wars. The British government clearly wanted to stop the slave trade in
Africa. It failed to bring the French, Portuguese, and Spanish in line im-
mediately, but with the Dutch they had persuasive weapons at their disposal.
The new Dutch king wished to regain the lost overseas colonies from British
control, and he also counted on British support for the creation of a greatly
enlarged Dutch kingdom at the Congress of Vienna. Thus, it could be said
that Willem I was beholden to the British foreign office. Therefore his
abolishment of the slave trade was an easy means of pleasing his British
benefactors. Rather than being forced into the abolition decree by the British,
the king's action could best be explained as a clever and pragmatic move.
And the results were not disappointing, because the Dutch achieved nearly
all their objectives. In the end, only Cape Town in South Africa and the
three plantation settlements in Guyana were permanently left under British
control.12
The abolition of the Dutch slave trade involved several political actions
in addition to the royal decree of June 1814. In August 1814, after consid-
erable negotiation the Dutch and British signed a bilateral agreement that
confirmed the abolition decree and secretly made territorial commitments
to the Kingdom of the Netherlands. At the Congress of Vienna, June 1815,
these agreements were affirmed and the territorial adjustments made public.
An additional bilateral British-Dutch accord was signed in May 1818, which
regulated the suppression of the illicit slave trade. At the core of this agree-
ment were the mutual visitation rights of each other's ships, suspected of
slave trading, and the establishment of mixed courts at Sierra Leone and
Surinam. These courts were to deal with violators of the abolition laws. At
11. AW-1895, no. LX-447.

12. P.C. Emmer, "Engeland, Nederland, Afrika en de Slavenhandel in Negentiende Eeuw,"
Economisch-en Sociaal-Historisch Jaarboek, vol. 36 (1973), p. 184. See also GJ. Renier,
Great Britain and the Establishment of the Kingdom of the Netherlands (The Hague: Nijhoff,
1930).
T h e end of the Dutch slave trade 291
this point the chief legislative body of the Netherlands, the Second Chamber,
got involved in the issue. It debated and approved the legal measures that
determined how violators of the abolition decree were to be punished.
The outcome of the debate was a foregone conclusion, which may reflect
the attitude toward the abolition of the slave trade in the Netherlands in
1818. The Second Chamber voted 87 to 5 to approve the proposed legis-
lation. The debate in the chamber had been nearly unanimous in praise and
approval of the royal decree of 1814; even the few legislators voting negatively
did so only because they opposed certain elements of the bill. Dutch leg-
islators expressed themselves clearly against the slave trade, quite a shift
from the previous decade. In 1797 the National Assembly of the Batavian
Republic had debated the issues of slavery and slave trade in connection
with the formulation of a new constitution, but at that time there was still
so much disagreement on the issue that the slave trade was simply not
mentioned in the new constitution. A number of legislators, particularly
Pieter Vreede, used their oratorical skills to persuade their colleagues to
abolish the slave trade then, but his efforts were to no avail. Not that the
Dutch were an exception to the rule at this time. England and the United
States were still actively engaged in the slave trade, and did not decide to
end their participation till 1807. O n ty Denmark had decided to terminate
the traffic in the near future.13
Attitudes toward the slave trade
In the foregoing paragraphs the attitude of Dutch public officials in respect

to the slave trade has been sampled, but how did public opinion and special
interest groups relate to the practice? In contrast to England, France, and
the United States, there is a notable absence of any major abolitionist move-
ment in the Netherlands. Such movements are generally recognized as prod-
ucts of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment, which directed public
attitudes toward a more humane and rational society and had spawned many
humanitarian reforms. These changes in attitude had certainly not by-passed
Holland, but they had not produced a popular movement that focused on
the abolition of the slave trade.
Most of the eighteenth-century Dutch literature that dealt with the slave
trade and slavery was apologetic; it tended to condone and defend the slave
trade. All the arguments used elsewhere, such as biblical endorsement, were
also displayed by Dutch writers. Most expressed the belief that the blacks
13. Emmer, "Slavenhandel Negentiende Eeuw," pp. 180-4. Credit is due to M.E. van Bellen,
of the Leiden Seminar (1986-1987), for putting the issue of the Dutch abolition in proper
perspective with the political settlement of 1814-1815.
were much better off in the colonies as slaves than as free men in Africa.
Others argued that Africa could not feed all its people anyway, making forced
emigration a blessing in disguise. Some went so far as to claim that slaves
were often grateful for the passage provided by European ships and that
slave traders tried and often succeeded in keeping families together rather
than tearing them apart. The best that such apologists could do for the slaves
was to urge better treatment by their owners. The slave-trade handbook by
Gallandat (1769) also made suggestions for improvement of the slaves's lot,
although this could be interpreted as being as much for economic efficiency
as for humanitarian deeds.14 The regulations concerning the slave trade,
passed by the States General in 1789 and aimed at expanding the Dutch
slave trade, did in fact include provisions to improve slave accommodations
aboard slave ships, and this seems to have been based on humanitarian mo-
tives. Such action may well have been stimulated by Gallandat's handbook.
A few economic branches of the Dutch Association of Sciences (Hollandse
Maatschappij van Wetenschappen) were critical of flagrant advocacy of the slave
trade in 1777. In that year, the national leadership of the organization had
organized an essay contest on the subject: "Whoever uses a copper covered
bark ship in the slave trade from Guinea should receive a gold medal." A
number of local branches of the organization (Haarlem, Zwolle, and De-
venter) found this subject in such poor taste that they protested loudly enough
to have the national leadership withdraw the subject. In subsequent years
there were no protests against other subjects dealing with plantations and
slavery in the West Indian colonies.15
Perhaps the earliest Enlightenment-influenced publication with anti-slavery
overtones by a Dutch author was a doctoral dissertation by Cornelis Spencer
in 1779. As was customary then, the publication was in Latin and could
hardly have reached a wide audience. Not until after 1790, the year the well-
known Dutch writer, Betje Wolff, translated the influential French abolitionist
book by Benjamin Frossard into Dutch, was there a significant change in
attitude and an increase in abolitionist writings in the Dutch language. But
even then the abolitionist publications were generally by anonymous writers,
an indication that their position had not yet attained popularity. As late as
1797 Jan van Geuns wrote an abolitionist tract under the pseudonym Phi-
laletus. But others, like progressive minister Bernardus Bosch, openly ex-
pressed their astonishment that Christians participated in the slave trade.
14. A Barrau, "De waare staat van de slavendandel...," in Bijdragen tot het Menschelijk Geluk,
(1790), vol. 3, pp. 353-4 and 370-371; Gallandat, pp. 6-7; Vrijmoedige gedachten (Am-
sterdam, 1795). Credit is due to Roselien Sewnarain-Soerdjbali for examining the Dutch
literature that dealt with attitudes toward slavery and the slave trade in a paper for the
Leiden Seminar (1986-1987).
15. Emmer, "Slavenhandel Negentiende Eeuw," pp. 181-182.
Pieter Paulus, another Dutch writer, expressed himself strongly against the
abuses of the slave trade and, in a major publication (which was later trans-
lated into French) he called openly for its abolition.16
In 1794 the poetess, Petronella Moens, was so inspired by the French
abolition of slavery that she wrote a poem in honor of the event. Four years
later it was included in a publication of a collection of her poetry. Other
poems on the subject of slavery were to follow early in the nineteenth century.
Worth mentioning in this connection is a poem written by an unknown
author in 1775 and published a few years later in the Dutch publication, De
Vaderlander. It called slavery dramatically into question in the following
manner:
The liquid put in your coffee cup
is no longer water, but tears
I say: It is the blood and sweat
of those unfortunates
in whom a white soul lives,
rather than in the bodies of their tormentors.17
This poem may well have been inspired by ideas from the abolitionist
movement in England, which actually sponsored boycotts of sugar con-
sumption in order to protest the use of slave labor in producing it. But in
Holland such sentiments were apparently isolated expressions, hardly noticed
by the general public. At least, they did not result in an abolitionist movement
that tried to halt the Dutch participation in the Atlantic slave trade. It was
not until the 1840s, several decades after the last Dutch slave ship had sailed,
and long after the Dutch government had outlawed the Dutch slave traffic,
that an abolitionist movement developed in the Netherlands. But this move-
ment was directed against the system of slavery, which continued to operate
in the Dutch West Indies until its abolition in 1863.18
The fact that the Dutch slave trade had drastically decreased by the end
of the eighteenth century, and was concentrated in one of the isolated corners
of the country (Zeeland), may have been primary reasons why no movement
against the traffic developed. By contrast, many Dutch subjects and a sig-
nificant element of the country's economy continued to be wedded to the
plantation system in the West. Abolishing the slave trade, but not the system
16. C. de Jong, "The Dutch Press Campaign against the Negro Slave Trade," Mercurius
(Pretoria, 1973), pp. 27-9; A.N. Paasman, Reinhart: Nederlandse literatuur en slavernij ten
tijde van de Verlichting (Amsterdam: Nijhoff, 1984), pp. 113-5; "De Proeve eener ver-
handeling...," in Bijdragen tot het menschelijk geluk, vol. 4 (1790), pp. 49-88; B. Bosch,
"De Slavenhandel," in Leerzame Praat-al vote. 46-8 (1791), pp. 361-84; Emmer, "Slav-
enhandel Negentiende Eeuw," p. 181.
17. P. Moens, Vruchten der eenzaamheid (Amsterdam: Saakes en Tiel, 1798), pp. 24-7; De
Vaderlander, vol. 1 (Amsterdam, 1776-1779), pp. 343-44.
18. De Jong, p. 42; Mannix and Cowley, p. 182; Anstey, pp. 255-85.
of slavery, may have been a compromise that satisfied the minorities that
felt strongly about this issue, without getting large segments of the population
involved. After slavery was abolished in the British Empire in 1830, including
British Guyana next door to Surinam, the Dutch population also increasingly
became involved in this movement of social reform, albeit belatedly.
Summary and conclusions
For most of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the Dutch were active
participants in the Atlantic slave trade. Their initial involvement was sporadic
and incidental, but after their capture of northern Brazil, the Dutch became
seriously interested in the traffic. Not until their capture of a firm foothold
on the African coast in 1637 did their new-found interest produce significant
results. Brazil was clearly the catalyst in the Dutch slave trade. After the
decline and loss of this colony in 1654, the Dutch involvement in the slave
traffic was tenuous for a few decades, until new markets for slaves were
located in the West.
The next important market for Dutch slave vendors were the Spanish
colonies on the American mainland, primarily Venezuela, Colombia, and
Mexico. After smuggling slaves into these colonies during the decade of the
1650s, the WIC obtained a major share in the legalized asiento trade in
1662. For the next thirty years this company dominated the slave trade to
Spanish America, and thereafter continued to have an indirect and vacillating
share in this traffic until about 1717. The Dutch also made efforts to market
slaves in other European settlements in the West, but that proved to have
limited success. Only the French periodically needed the Dutch vendors
when war prevented them from supplying their own colonies.
During the second half of the seventeenth century the Dutch had estab-
lished or conquered a number of plantation colonies on the Guiana coast,
which also needed to be supplied with slaves. Initially, the numbers of slaves
shipped there were few compared to the asiento traffic, because the demand
and the ability to pay for slaves was limited, and the more lucrative asiento
trade was favored by the WIC. But after the Surinam settlement was es-
tablished on a firm footing in 1682, it became an increasingly important
slave market. Particularly after the loss of the asiento, Surinam became the
most important slave market for the Dutch. Only during the 1720s did the
island of St. Eustatius, having replaced Curasao as the Dutch slave depot
in the Caribbean, briefly become a more important market for slaves than
Surinam. But after 1726 Surinam clearly became the dominant Dutch slave
market in the West. The other Guiana settlements, Berbice, Essequibo, and
Demerara, also remained insignificant compared to Surinam.
Table 12.2
Aggregate Dutch slave exports from Africa
WIC trade Free trade Annual
Years Documented Adjusted Documented Adjusted Total average
1600-1645 30,182 3,000 33,182 721
1646-1664 11,039 2,500 13,539 713
1665-1674 43,412 500 43,912 4,391
1675-1699 66,692 5,500 72,192 2,888
1700-1709 28,596 3,500 32,096 3,210
1710-1719 20,575 4,500 25,075 2,508
1720-1729 38,580 3,000 41,580 4,158
1730-1739 24,911 19,169 44,080 4,408
1740-1749 47,574 47,574 4,757
1750-1759 49,362 1,416 50,778 5,078
1760-1769 59,501 2,912 62,413 6,241
1770-1779 51,095 1,706 52,801 5,280
1780-1795 22,544 22,544 1,409
1802-1803a 1,206 1,206 603
1600-1803 263,987 22,500b 250,451 6,034 542,972 2,659
1665-1795 495,730 3,784
Source: Tables 5.1, 5.6 and 12.1.

Notes: *No Dutch slaving during the years 1796-1802, as a result of warfare.
Includes 14,000 for the interloper trade.
In terms of slave-trading practices, the Dutch slave trade can be divided

into a period of monopoly trade by the WIC, from 1621 to 1734, and the
free trade from 1730 until 1803. A brief period of overlapping methods has
caused some difficulty in assessing the volume of the traffic. As is shown in
Table 12.2, the WIC shipped approximately 273,000 slaves from Africa.
During the WIC period, an undetermined number of Dutch interlopers
penetrated the WIC monopoly area. Although their interest was primarily
in the African gold trade, the number they added to the volume of the Dutch
slave trade has been estimated at about 14,000. Dutch free traders, although
operating for a shorter duration, exported approximately 257,000 slaves from
Africa. This rise in annual average shipments is in line with the rapid growth
of the Atlantic slave trade in general during the eighteenth century, as is
illustrated in the diagram in Figure 12.1.
The Dutch slave trade reached its peak during the early 1770s. In 1773
a financial crisis rocked the Dutch economy. It also had serious consequences
for the Dutch plantation societies in the West and greatly undermined the
planters' ability to purchase slaves. While these economic dislocations were
still undermining the Dutch slave trade, international tensions flowing from
Figure 12.1
The Dutch slave trade and the combined Atlantic traffic, 1630-1805
(In 1,000 per year)
90
80
a
The Atlantic slave trade 70
(20 year annual averages) 60
50
40
30
20
The Dutch slave trade b

(5 year annual averages)
WIC traffic
1630 1650 1675 1700 1725 1750 1775 1800

a
Source: Curtin, pp. 116, 119, 216 and 234.
b
Tables 1.1,5.1, 5.6, 12.1, 12.2, and Appendixes 1 and 2.
Note: The WIC slave trade ended in 1738.
T h e end of the Dutch slave trade 297
the American revolt against the British complicated the Dutch slave trade
further, and brought it to a temporary halt during the early 1780s. Although
several efforts were made to revive the traffic, the Dutch were never able
to regain a significant share of the Atlantic slave trade. Except for a brief
revival in 1802-3, the Dutch slave trade had for all practical purposes come
to a halt in 1795.
The Dutch slave trade can be categorized as a true triangular commercial
enterprise. Principally European manufactured goods, supplemented with
some Asian luxury textiles, were shipped from Holland to Africa, where they
were exchanged for slaves. After the slaves were delivered in the West Indies
or the Guianas, the ships were as a rule laden with tropical agricultural
commodities, which were taken to the Dutch Republic for processing and
distribution. In the asiento trade via Curasao, silver currency was also an
important commercial item in return for slaves.
The chartered company, the Dutch WIC, played a crucial role in the
Dutch slave trade. Not only did it monopolize the traffic for more than a
century, but it continued to be instrumental in the trade as an administrative
facilitator and a commercial link in the free trade. Because of its long history,
the WIC's surviving documents are crucial to an understanding of the Dutch
slave trade. The company maintained trading stations on the African coast
as well as in the Caribbean, and it held a one-third partnership in the Society
of Surinam as well. Whenever and wherever the slave trade was a significant
part of the WIC's activities, the company had special agents appointed to
specialize in the slave trade.
On the African coast a symbiotic relationship between European mer-
chants and administrators and African merchants and political authorities
developed. The promise of economic profit kept these relationships func-
tioning. The Dutch held a clearly condescending attitude toward Africans
and did little to advance their development and enlightenment; however,
they did have a healthy respect for the abilities of African merchants. Al-
though wars and slave raids were an integral part of the process of obtaining
slaves in Africa, Dutch officials worked to maintain peace with Africans in
order to facilitate commerce.
Slaves were obtained through ordinary commercial channels from African
merchants at various points on the African coast. Approximately 70 percent
of the slaves shipped by the Dutch originated from the Guinea coast, and
the remainder from the Bantu-speaking west-central coast of Africa. Figure
12.2 provides a visual sketch of slave origins. The Dutch East India Company
obtained some slaves on the East African coast, but these were not shipped
across the Atlantic, and are therefore not included in this study. During the
seventeenth century the slaves purchased on the Guinea coast came primarily
from the Slave Coast, but after 1700 the Gold Coast became an increasing
Figure 12.2
African origins of the slaves
Seventeenth century
1630-1651 1658-1674 1675-1699

Guinea 55% Loango 39%
Slave Coast 41% Gold Coast 18%

Blafra 3%
vory Coast 2% Senegal 2%
Senegal 5% Gold Coast 5%
Blafra 9%
Loango 25% Slave Coast 52%
Angola 45%
Eighteenth century
1700-1738 1740-1780 1781-1803
Slave Coast 42% Windward Coast 43%

Gold Coast 40%
Blafra ^ ^
Blafra 1% A
Slave Coast 1%
Windward Coast
Mixed 4%
Loango 26%
Gold Coast 19%
Loango 36%
Gold Coast 28% Loango 23%
Source: Table 1.1, 5.2 - 5.5, and 5.7 - 5.8.

Note: The percentages in the chart for 1740-1780 are rather speculative.
Figure 12.3
Regional Dutch participation in the slave trade
WIC Free trade
1675-1738 1730-1803
Zeeland
28% Amsterd arr
L Maze A tterdar- Region

Stad en Lane
13% I ^
^14%
w7N. Kwartier
•m
1
'Onmgen
0%
12%
/ 9%
Zeeland
77%
Ar
37%
Source: Tables 6.2 and 6.3.
target for Dutch slave ships. After the free trade began during the 1730s,
the Ivory Coast also became an important supplier of slaves. The Gold Coast
remained, however, a primary source of slaves for the Dutch. They obtained
very few slaves from either Senegambia or the Bight of Biafra. The break-
down of the separate regions on the Guinea coast cannot be determined
with accuracy. The accompanying diagram provides, in some cases, only
approximations.
If there was a center of slave-trade activities in the Dutch Republic, as
Liverpool in England and Nantes in France, it was without doubt the island
of Walcheren in the province of Zeeland. The centers of Dutch slaving
activities were in the twin towns of Middelburg and Vlissingen, especially
after the free trade started in the 1730s. Earlier, during the WIC monopoly,
Amsterdam played the leading role in the slave trade, followed by the Zeeland
towns. Rotterdam followed Amsterdam and Zeeland as a third slaving center
in Holland. Other towns, such as Hoorn, Enkhuysen, and Delft, participated
in the traffic during the WIC period, but they are rarely mentioned in the
documents during the free-trade period. Figure 12.3 sketches the regional
Dutch participation in the traffic.
The Dutch got involved in the slave trade in order to supply their newly
acquired plantation colony in Brazil during the 1630s. Two decades later
the Spanish colonies, via Curasao and through the asiento contracts, became
the chief market for Dutch slave traders. By the end of the seventeenth
century the Dutch plantation societies on the Guiana coast were also de-
manding slaves. During the eighteenth century Surinam became the principal
target of the Dutch slave trade, as shown in Table 12.3 and Figure 12.4.
The setdements in present-day Guyana were also supplied with slaves by
Table 12.3
Aggregate slave destinations in the Dutch slave tradea
Dutch Spanish
Periods Brazil Surinam Guyana Antilles0 America0 Misc.bc Total
17th cent. 26,500 27,000 3,500 7,000 64,000 11,000 139,000
(%) (19.1) (19.4) (2.5) (5) (46) (7.9) (100)
18th cent. 162,000 38,500 10,000 77,500 29,000 317,000
(%) (51) (12.2) (3.2) (24.5) (9.2) (100)
19th cent. 1,000 1,000
Total 26,500 190,000 42,000 17,000 141,500 40,000 457,000

% of total (5.8) (41.6) (9.2) (3.7) (30.9) (8.7) (100)
Source: Tables 1.1, 2.2 - 2.4, 8.2 - 8.5, and 9.2-9.9.
Notes: aThe figures in this table are rounded off to the nearest 500.
b
Shipped to markets that were not under Dutch jurisdiction.
°The numbers for these regions are rather speculative, and they refer to
the ultimate destination of the slaves rather than their first port of dis-
embarkation.
the Dutch, and the island of St. Eustatius became a significant slave market
during the 1720s. The number of slaves retained in the Dutch Antilles
remains quite uncertain, and the destination to foreign markets is highly
speculative.
Little is known about the slaves, the principal victims of the traffic and
the focus of this subject. Only on very rare occasions has the name of a
slave crossing the Atlantic been recorded; they were generally remembered
as a number on a specific slave ship. The slaves obviously deplored their
lot, and they rebelled against it in many ways, such as attempting escape,
committing suicide, and even engaging in mass resistance. Virtually all of
the revolts ended in failure, however, and many slaves and some crew mem-
bers died in the process.
The experience of slaves in transit to their new homes in the Western
Hemisphere can hardly be described with any sense of accuracy; it must
have been like an unending nightmare. The experience has been likened to
the concentration camps in Nazi Germany, except that the Africans' en-
slavement was motivated by economic profit and not by racial hatred or
genocide. Beyond the discomforts of confinement aboard the slave ships,
slaves were by and large fed adequately and treated prudently by the stan-
dards of the time and the circumstances. There were, of course, exceptions
to these generalizations, but these were often noted with disapproval by
Figure 12.4
American destinations in the Dutch slave trade
Seventeenth century
1630-1649 1650-1674
Mixed 5% Surinam 8%
Spanish Main 20% Curagao 42%
Guyana 2% Surinam 30%
Curagao 55% Others 15%
Spanish Main 6% Span.Main (Illicit) 18%

Brazil 95%
Eighteenth century
1700-1738 1740-1779 1780-1803
Others 6% Surinam 40%

Curagao 22%
Surinam 62% Guyana 12%
Spanish Main 3% St. Eustatius 6%
Surinam 48% Guyana 9% Curagao 7%

St. Eustatius 8%
St. Eustatlus 12%
Others 11% Guyana 37%
Source: Tables 1.1, 2.2 - 2.4, 8.2 - 8.5, and 9.2 - 9.7.
authorities in slave-trade companies. Efforts at reasonable treatment were
not so much motivated by humaneness as from the desire for profits; only
a well-looking slave would fetch a good profit in the West.
Many slaves died during this process of transition. Mortality on the middle
passage was approximately 15 percent in the Dutch slave trade, slightly higher
than calculated for many other European slave vendors. Mortality rates were
erratically affected when serious contagious epidemic diseases occurred.
Deaths in the free trade were on average a few percentage points below the
earlier WIC trade; the WIC had a lower mortality rate compared to the trade
to Brazil earlier in the seventeenth century. Added experience and the use
of faster and smaller ships may have been the main reasons for the decline
in the free-trade death rates.
If profits were the principal motive for participation in the slave trade,
many investors and entrepreneurs must have been sorely disappointed. Even
more than other branches of cross-ocean commerce, the trade in human
beings was beset with unpredictable variables, which sometimes produced
big profits but often also staggering losses. One can only estimate that the
return on investments in the Dutch slave trade may have averaged approx-
imately 5 percent. This does not take into account the indirect profits through
wages of maritime and commercial personnel, nor the benefits drawn though
the slave plantation system in the West. Except for specific towns, as Mid-
delburg, the slave trade by itself can hardly have made much of an impact
on the domestic Dutch economy, but as an integral part of the total Dutch
economic system it cannot be ignored.
As Figure 12.1 illustrates, the Dutch played a relatively minor role in the
overall Atlantic slave trade; the total number of slaves carried by them must
have been approximately 5 percent of the total. By exporting nearly 550,000
slaves from Africa, and landing nearly 460,000, the Dutch ranked fourth in
the Atlantic slave trade. Great Britain, Portugal (in combination with Brazil),
and France transported the lion's share of the traffic, landing a combined
total of about 8.6 million, or almost 90 percent of the total. But compared
to Portugal, which must have carried approximately 35 percent of the Atlantic
traffic, the Dutch were involved for a relatively short time. During the years
of active Dutch participation (ca. 1630-1795), they must have been carrying
approximately 7.5 percent of the total, and at their peak (ca. 1760-1773)
they may have carried close to 10 percent of the traffic. Their aggregate
share also dropped because they hardly participated at all in the nineteenth-
century slave trade.19
Did the Dutch at any time dominate the Atlantic slave trade? Yes, for
19. These estimates are extrapolated from Lovejoy, pp. 483 and 497; and Curtin, Atlantic
Slave Trade, p. 268.
brief spells during the seventeenth century, when the volume of the trade
was still relatively small. When the Dutch were supplying northern Brazil
with slaves, particularly during the period 1636 to 1648, they were un-
doubtedly the most prominent in the traffic. After they gained the asiento
trade in 1662, they may also have dominated the trade for the next thirteen
years. And again, when they totally dominated the asiento trade, particularly
during the years 1 6 8 6 - 9 , t n e Dutch may well have been the largest Atlantic
slave vendors.
Appendixes
1. Slave-ship data in the WIC trade, 1675-1738 308

2. Slave-ship data of the free trade, 1730-1803 320
3. Asiento contract of 1667 349
4. Annual old-WIC slave traffic, 1657-1674 354
5. WIC slave-ship assignments and documented traffic,
1675-1732 355
6. Documents carried by a slave ship i n i 7 6 i 362
7. Guidelines for the slave trade at Ouidah 363
8. Instructions for a slave-ship captain of the MCC 366
9. Slave-trade passes issued to Dutch free traders 369
10. Slave-trade companies and brokers 371
11. Fees received for slaving permits, 1729-1791, from WIC
trienninal accounts 372
12. Guinea coast origins of slaves on free-trade ships 373
13. Slave-ship captains sailing for the WIC 377
14. Slave-ship captains in the free trade 382
15. African coasting time in the WIC trade 388
16. Slave mortality in coasting and middle passage in the WIC
trade 389
17. Coasting, middle-passage mortality cycles (A); Mortality
cycle on the middle passage. Deaths in ten-day
periods (B). 390
304
Appendixes 305
18. Coasting, mortality, crowding, and efficiency in the MCC
slave trade 392
19. Gender, age, and mortality among WIC slaves, 1680-1739 395
20. Slave gender, age, and mortality ratios, 1734-1803 399
21. Instructions for the slave supervisor at Elmina 402
22. A slave-ship consignment affidavit 404
23. Attestation or death certificate 405
24. Average WIC slave prices, 1676-1738 406
25. MCC free-trade prices and profits, 1740-1795 407
26. Production and exports of Surinam, 1740-1793 411
Appendixes 1 and 2
Notes and sources.
The following two appendixes list essential data on documented Dutch slave
ships for the 1675 to 1802 period. Ships are listed in alphabetical order,
with multiple missions in chronological order. Appendix 1 includes a total
of 370 slaving missions, sailing in the 1675 to 1738 period under the auspices
of the WIC, except for six interloper ships that are identified with a + sign.
The A sign at the end of some ship names indicates that they were special
assignments authorized by the WIC authorities in Africa. Appendix 2 in-
cludes a total of 840 slaving missions for the free-trade period from 1730
to 1802. Additional and more specialized data for some of these slaving
voyages are given in subsequent appendixes.
Key to abbreviations and explanatory notes

In some instances, the names of the ships listed in the first column, "Ships,"
have been abbreviated to save space. For example, Amsterdam and Mid-
delburg have occasionally been listed as A'dam and M'burg. The documents
frequently misspelled or gave different variations in spelling of names. For
the sake of consistency, the most frequently used or simplest rendition of
the name has been employed in the lists.
The next column "Hoi." indicates the missions' port or region of origin
in the Dutch Republic. The following abbreviations have been employed:
AM — Amsterdam; Z = Zeeland province; M = Maze (Rotterdam region);
306 Appendixes
NK = Noorder Kwartier (Holland north of Amsterdam); SL = Stad en
Lande (The Groningen/Friesland region).
African coastal regions, uAf.," where the slaves were obtained, are listed
with the following abbreviations: GG = Guinea Coast (without detailed
specification); GS = Senegambia; GC = Gold Coast; SC = Slave Coast;
GM = Guinea mixed; GB = Bight of Biafra; A = Loango-Angola; M =
G + A mixed.
Ports of destination in the Western Hemisphere, "Am.," are listed with
the following abbreviations: SM = Spanish mainland; C = Curasao; SE
= St. Eustatius; GG = Guiana region; GB = Berbice (Guiana); GE =
Essequibo (Guiana); S = Surinam; GS = Mixed-Guiana and Surinam
GD = Demerara (Guiana); SI = sighted or stopped at Surinam, but took
its slaves to an unverified destination.
The following three columns list data on slaves: the numbers boarded in
Africa, deaths on the middle passage, and disembarkations, respectively. A
punctuation period that precedes data indicates that the data is documented
and verified; the remaining figures are estimates.
The following five columns list dates, by year, month, and day, as indicated
in the headings. When years only are listed, they may have been inferred
from other verified dates.
Captains of slave ships are listed by codes that are identified in Appendix
13. A second column identifies the replacement when a captain died during
the slaving mission.
Ship types are listed under the heading "Ship" by the following abbre-
viations: F = fregat; B = barque; Fl = fluit; Br = brik; H = hoeker; S
= snauw; Y = yacht; P = pinas; G = galjoot; Hb = hekboot.
The column headed "Sp." indicates unusual or special circumstances that
occurred during the slaving mission. The following abbreviations are em-
ployed: u = uncertain fate; w = shipwrecked with slaves or on home voyage;
b = shipwrecked or captured; c = captured by enemy; s = stranded; d =
disqualified in Western port; r = slave revolt; k = extremely high death
rate.
Appendix 2 has the following additional columns:

The carrying capacity of the ship is listed under the heading "Last." A
last measured approximately two metric tons.
The column headed " C " indicates the nature of the backhaul, or return
cargo, employing the following abbreviations: b = in ballast; c = full cargo;
s = partial cargo.
The column headed "Sale" lists the manner by which slaves were sold
in the Americas, indicated by the following abbreviations: C = sale by prior
contract; I = individual sale; A = auction; M = mixed sales.
Appendixes 307
The final column lists the free-trade companies that sponsored the specific
slaving mission. Appendix 10 explains the abbreviations and gives additional
details on these firms.
Sources
The information listed here is obtained from such a large variety of sources
that individual listings would enlarge and confuse the appendix immensely.
Nearly all the archival collections listed in the bibliography have contributed
data. Specific sources and additional information about these slaving mis-
sions are part of the Postma Data Collection, which can be consulted by
request.
The possessives in names, like van (v), de (d), van de (v/d), and ter (t)
have occasionally been left out, or they have been abbreviated as indicated.
The names Zondernaam (no name), at the end of Appendix 1, were slave
ships whose names could not be verified.
The following ship names are abbreviated in Appendix 2: Cornelia Chris-
toffelina, Essequibo Vriendschap, Guineese Vriendschap, Jonge Matheus en
Catharina, and Surinaamse Vriendschap.
Appendix 1
Slave-ship data in the WIC trade, 1675-1738
P or t s slave s Left Left Arrival Left Return Captain Sp.
Ships Hoi. Af. Am. In Died Land Holland Africa America America Holland 1 2 Ship
Acredam AM SC S .596 .117 .479 1712 1713/6/24 1713/11/10 1714/2/12 1714 508 700
Acredam NK SC S .590 .120 .470 1715 1715/9/19 1715/12/20 1716/4/8 1716 507
Acredam SC S .704 .119 .585 1716 1717/10/7 1717/12/30 1718 1718 506
Acredam SL SC S .650 .96 .554 1718 1719/2/19 1719/6/26 1719/7/18 1719 505
Acredam AM SC S .606 .159 .447 1720/10/15 1721/4/2 1721/6/23 1721/8/4 1721 503 504
Acredam NK SC S .455 .108 .347 1723/1/8 1723 1723/9/19 1724/11/17 1724/ 3/02 502
Acredam AM GC 's .643 .37 .606 1724/8/14 1725/5/10 1725/7/ 2 1725/9/11 1725/11/18 501
Acredam A 1726/4/15 W
Acredam2 SL GC s 580 100 480 1727/2/10 1728 1728 1729 1729
Adrichem AM SC c .613 .150 .463 1708 1708/8/3 1708/11/27 1708/12/15 1709 510
Adrichem Z A s .713 . 8 .705 1710 1710 1710/9/16 1711 1711 511
Adrichem Z SC c .611 .40 .571 1711 1712/1/23 1712/ 5/ 2 1712 1712 509
Adrichem Z A c .717 .344 .373 1714/7/14 1715/4/2 1715/ 6/ 7 1715 1716 509
o drichem Z SC s .540 . 10 .530 1716 1717/2/6 1717/4/16 1717 1717/10/07 512
s
00
sdrichem Z SC .719 .108 .611 1718 1718/11/16 1719/ 1/15 1719/5/26 1719 512
Adrichem Z 550 75 475 1720/2/15 1720 1721 1721 1721
Africa A c 450 50 400 1675/5/18 1675/12/12 1676 1676/3/18 1676/4/15 513
Africa c 450 75 375 1678/ 2/ 2 1679 1679/12/11 1680 1680 514
Africa NK A s .372 50 322 1688/ 7/20 1689 1689/3/ 4 1689/10/10 1690
Africa2 WG SC .195 15 180 1709 1710/4/15 1710 1710 U
Agatha AM GC GE .166 .15 .151 1714 1714/12/20 1715/ 4/ 4 1715 1715/10/13
Agatha WG GC GM .184 . 10 .174 1716 1717/1/19 1717 1717 1718 R
Aletta Maria SL GS 400 60 340 1674/ 5/24 1674 1675 1675 1675 596
Aletta Maria Z S 525 75 450 1676/ 4/14 1677 1677 1677 1677/7/5 516
Alida AM SP 330 30 .300 1685 1686 1686 1686/6/29 1686/10/23 603
Amsterdam AM SC s .522 . 11 .511 1705 1706/6/20 1706/8/20 1707 1707 517
Amsterdam AM SC s 580 80 500 1707 1707/11/16 1708/2/20 1708/3/23 1708 508
Amsterdam AM .483 .53 .430 1709 1710/1/13 1710 508 C
Amsterdam2 NK A s 525 70 .455 1719 1719 1719/10/22 1720/3/28 1720 518 FL
Amsterdam2 AM GC c .423 .95 .328 1723/9/15 1724/6/23 1724/9/27 1725/3/21 1725 519 F
Amsterdam2 WG GC s .466 .178 .288 1726/ 1/15 1726/4/27 1726/7/10 1726/9/3 1726 520
Amsterdam2 AM GC s .459 . 1 .458 1727/ 8/15 1727 1728/1/18 1728/3/17 1728 521
Amsterdam2 AM 450 65 385 1728/10/26 1729 1729 1730 1730
Amsterdam2 NK GG s 380 50 330 1731 1732 1732/8/16 1732/12/26 1733 522
Annaboa ~ WG GC c 110 40 70 1699 1700/6/22 1700/10/25 1701 1701 523
Appolonia Z BB s 345 93 252 1686/1/24 1686 1686/12/1 1687 1687 701
Arent Z SC c .515 70 445 1691/6/3 1691/11/24 1692/1/10 1692 1692 524
Axim^ WG GC c .139 .56 .83 1710 1710/7/10 1710/9/30 1711 1711 525 Y
Beekesteyn AM A SE 700 140 .560 1721/7/23 1722 1722 / 4/ 4 1722/8/6 1722 526
Beekesteyn AM A SE .722 .85 .637 1723/1/8 1723 1723 /9 /20 1724/3/20 1724 /5/26 526 501
Beekesteyn NK A s .442 .191 .251 1725/3/19 1726/5/29 1726/7/10 1726/9/3 1727/4/7 527 528
Beekesteyn NK SC s .507 .89 .418 1728/5/30 1728/10/30 1729/3/2 1729 1729 529
Beekesteyn AM GC s .755 .238 .517 1730/4/15 1731/2/18 1731/7/12 1731/11/8 1732 530
Beekesteyn GC s .866 .258 .608 1732 1733/6/8 1733/8/14 1733/12/30 1734 521
Beekesteyn AM SC s .705 .103 .602 1735 1735/12/15 1736/3/25 1736/6/18 1736 531
Berkendam ~ WG GC c 170 20 150 1731 1732 1732/ 9/15 1733 1733 536
Beschermer AM SC SP .576 . 11 .565 1700 1700/8/7 1700/10/25 1701 1701 532
Beschermer A 1702 C
Beschutter GC s .768 .23 .745 1735/5/30 1735/11/8 1735/12/27 1736 1736 533
Beschutter GC s .809 .69 .740 1738 1738/12/25 1739/2/14 1739/5/30 1739 534 535
Beurs Amsterdam AM SC s .650 .82 .568 1702/1/14 1702/8/1 1702/10/8 1703 1703 523
Beurs Amsterdam AM A c .653 .38 .615 1704 1704 1705/ 1/ 5 1705/2/15 1705 538
Beurs Amsterdam AM A c .708 .80 .628 1706 1706 1706/10/16 1707 1707 539
Beurs v Amsterdam Z SC s .512 .25 .487 1690/9/29 1691/4/19 1691/10/8 1691 1692 537 C
Blyswyk SL SC s .494 .50 .444 1708 1709/4/8 1709/6/3 1709 1710/11/24 540
Bosbeek Z SC GB 350 50 300 1713 1714 1714 1714 1715
Bosbeek Z GB 200 78 .122 1715 1715 1715/12/15 1716 1716 503
Bosbeek WG SC GE 300 45 255 1716 1716 1717 1717 1717
Bosbeek Z SC GE .381 .78 .303 1718 1718/8/13 1718/12/17 1719 541 542 W
Brandenburg Z .563 .154 .409 1726/8/15 1727 1727 1727 1728
Brandenburg Z SC S .409 .38 .371 1729/6/18 1730/1/28 1730/4/27 1730/7/13 1730/9/18 545 703 R
Brandenburg Z S .564 .54 .510 1732 1732/12/14 1733/1/30 1733/5/10 1733 546
Appendix 1 (cont)
Brandenburgl Z SC GE .456 .131 .325 1699/2/2 1699/7/21 1699/11/ 4 1700 1700 543 544
Brigdamme Z A S .594 .80 .514 1695/8/14 1696 1696/ 3/29 1696/7/3 547 C
Carolus Secundus GC c .425 .254 .171 1707/8/8 1707/11/30 1708/2/15 1708 1708 548
Carolus Secundus z SC c .490 .32 .458 1710 1710/10/5 1710/12/7 1711 1711 549
Casteel Curasao ~ AM GS c 220 20 200 1676 1676/7/27 1676 1677 1677 679 F
Casteel Elmina ~ Z GC c .171 .13 .158 1704 1704/10/12 1704/12/12 1705 1705 551
Casteel Elmina^ WG GC c .1% . 13 .183 1708 1708/9/19 1708/11/18 1709 1709 552
Casteel Souburg^ WG GE .188 . 0 .188 1699 1700 1700/10/15 1700/12/6 1701 550
Catharina AM SC S 570 76 .494 1697/12/17 1698 1698 1699 1699 514
Catharina Christina NK GC C .540 .33 .507 1706 1706/12/31 1707/3/11 1707 1707 553
Catharina Christina AM SC S .509 100 409 1708/4/30 1709/9/6 1709/12/30 1710/3/22 1710 554
Christina SC S .513 .27 .486 1703/5/10 1703 1704/ 1/13 1704/4/4 1704 553
Christina GC S .548 .127 .421 1705 1705/10/25 1705/12/29 1706/3/28 1706 532
Christinal AM A S 525 75 450 1684/12/13 1685 1685 1686 1686
Churf. Brandenburg SC S .500 .131 .369 1685 1685 1685/11/15 1685/12/24 1686 703 692
Churf. Brandenburg c .541 41 500 1686 1687 1687/ 6/23 1687 1687 557
Clara AM SC c 525 75 450 1693 1693/11/5 1694 1694 1694 556
Comps. Welvaren ^ WG A c .89 .23 .66 1719 1719 1720/ 2/18 1720 1720 558
Coning David c .600 90 510 1682 1683 1683 1683/7/20 1683
Coning Portugal AM SC c .536 .108 .428 1707 1707/7/24 1707/10/31 1708 1708 560
Coningin Hester AM SC s .500 .22 .478 1684 1685 1685/ 3/16 1685/4/18 1685 704 705
Coningin Hester SL A 525 75 450 1691/11/9 1692 1693 1693 1693
Coningin Hester Z SC c .625 .126 .499 1713 1714 1714/ 9/17 1775 1775 514
Cormantyn A s .539 .36 .503 1688/1/30 1689 1689/ 4/20 1690/3/9 1690 629
Cormantyn AM SC c .539 79 460 1686 1686/12/8 1687 1687 1687 633
Cornelia c 230 30 200 1675 1676/1/14 1676 1676/6/27 1676/8/20 FL
Croonvogel c 550 65 485 1691 1692 1692/ 6/ 5 1692 1693 629
Croonvogel M SC c 550 75 475 1694/6/27 1695 1695 1695 1695 563
Croonvogel AM SC s 550 65 .485 1695/12/19 1696 1696/11/23 1697/4/8 1697 556
Croonvogel SL A s .570 .41 .529 1697/11/17 1698 1699 1699/9/16 1699 561
Croonvogel Z SC SP .566 .71 .495 1700 1700 1700/ 9/28 1700 1701 591
Debora Amerantia NK A s 700 85 .615 1692/7/27 1693 1693/ 4/15 1693/8/2 1693 514
Delft M 300 50 250 1721/1/15 1722 1722 1722 1722
Delft M 300 50 250 1723/4/15 1724 1724 1724 1724
Delft M A c .286 .61 .225 1726/1/13 1726 1726/12/31 1727 1727/8/25 564
Delft M A 300 50 250 1728/12/28 1729 1729 1730 1730 564
Delft2 M GC s .618 .124 .494 1733 1733/11/8 1734/ 1/ 1 1734/4/29 1734 565
Delft2 M SC s .571 .110 .461 1735 1736/7/13 1736/10/9 1737/1/15 1737 565
Dolphijn + SE 450 50 400 1700 1701 1701/ 8/15 1701 1701 701
Dolphyn SC C 525 75 450 1677 1678/3/12 1678 1678 1678/9/1
Duynbeek Z A SE 525 75 450 1722/3/3 1722 1723 1723 w
Duynenburg Z A 525 75 450 1700 1701 1701 1701 1701 509
Duynenburg Z A C .542 .50 .492 1702/3/14 1703 1703/ 3/ 7 1703 1703 509
Duynenburg Z SC C .473 .74 .399 1704 1705/8/26 1705/11/17 1706 1706 509
Duynenburg Z 1707
Duynvliet Z A GE 325 51 .274 1720/11/1 1721 1721/10/17 1722 1722
Duynvliet Z GC SE .340 .27 .313 1722/5/15 1723/5/1 1723/5/24 1723/7/22 1723 566
Duynvliet Z GE 200 79 .121 1724/3/15 1724 1724/12/23 1725 1725
Duynvliet Z M .385 .168 .217 1725 1726/3/24 1726/5/25 1726 1727 567
Duynvliet AM 300 45 255 1728/9/30 1729 1729 1730 1730
Duynvliet GC GB .362 .32 .330 1731 1732/1/26 1732/3/19 1732 1732 617
Duynvliet NK SC S .360 .10 .350 1733 1733/9/21 1733/12/13 1734/4/15 1734 568
X
Duynvliet GG GB .370 .30 .340 1734 1735/8/14 1735 1736 1736
Duynvliet GC GB .375 50 325 1736 1737/6/30 1736 1737 1737
Eendragt Z C 525 75 450 1675 1675/10/26 1676 1676/5/20 1676/7/02
Eendragt Z C 550 100 450 1684 1685 1685/ 4/13 1685 1685 516 w
Eendragt C 550 100 450 1687 1687 1688 1688/7/19 1688 569
Eendragt A C .781 .15 .766 1691/1/3 1691 1691/ 8/27 1692/4/3 1692 570
Elmina ^ WG GC S .300 .23 .277 1722 1723 1723/ 7/15 1723/8/11 1723 648
Emmenes AM SC c .563 .104 .459 1714 1715/3/9 1715/6/10 1715 1716 506
Emmenes Z SC c .718 .270 .448 1717 1717/11/23 1718/3/27 1718 1718 571 572
Emmenes SL SC s .335 . 11 .324 1719 1719 1720/ 1/ 1 1720/3/28 1720 540
Appendix 1 (cont)
P ort s slave s Left Left Arrival Left Return Captain Sp.
Emmenes SL SC S .208 .20 .188 1720/11/1 1721 1721/12/5 1722/3/16 1722 573
Emmenes SL SC S .176 .18 .158 1723/1/8 r~3 1723/12/15 1724/3/15 1724/6/06 575
Emmenes SL GC S .657 .76 .581 1725/1/19 1725 1725/10/15 1726/2/6 1726/5/13 576
Engelenburg ^ WG GC C .153 .17 .136 1716 1716/9/3 1716/12/10 1717 1717 577
Europa M C 525 75 450 1677/5/3 1678 1678 1678 1679
Europa C 600 90 510 1680 1681 1682 1682/4/28 1682 514
Europa Z SC C .471 . 7 .464 1687 1687/10/30 1688/2/21 1688 1688 578
Europa Z A S .500 .26 .474 1689/3/26 1689 1689/11/21 1690/6/21 1690 547
Eva Maria 525 65 460 1693/4/7 1694 1694 1694 1694 580
Eva Maria NK A s 560 72 .488 1697/12/16 1698 1698 1699 1699
Eva Maria NK A c .644 .44 .600 1700 1701 1701/ 11 8 1701 1702 580
Eva Susanna^ WG GC s .217 .31 .186 1725 1725/12/22 1726/2/23 1726 1726 581
Faam Z SC SP .505 .66 .439 1700 1700/12/8 1701/3/28 1701 1701 582
Fida~ WG GC c .257 . 15 .242 1715 1715/12/14 1716/2/9 1716 1716 583
Fortuyn Z A GE 275 58 .217 1701 1702 1702/ 5/22 1702 1702 585
Fortuyn Z 1703 W
Geertruyd Galey M 525 75 450 1721/8/15 1722 1722 1723 1723
Geertruyt AM BB s .373 .84 .289 1684/5/6 1684/12/5 1685/2/ 5 1685 1685 586
Gelderland ~ WG GC c .146 . 5 .141 1715 1716/4/12 1716/6/7 1716 1717 587 F
Gele Ruyter NK SC 525 75 450 1684 1685 1685 1685 1686
Gele Ruyter NK A s 590 36 .554 1686 1686 1686/11/16 1687 1687
Gele Ruyter 525 125 400 1690/11/15 1691 1692 1692 1693
Gideon M c .650 150 500 1680 1681 1682 1682/3/2 1682/5/13 FL
Gideon SC c .482 72 410 1688 1688/8/14 1688 1689 1689 FL
Gideon M A c 600 100 500 1697/5/1 1688 1688 1698 1689 588 632 FL
Gideon M s 600 72 .528 1698/11/28 1699 1700/ 4/24 1700/7/15 1701 FL
Goud Brackhont ^ SC GE .248 .20 .228 1696 1697 1697/ 6/16 1697 1698 590
Goude Leeuw SL 550 75 475 1683 1684 1684 1685 1685
Goude Leeuw SL SC C 550 150 400 1688 1688 1689 1689 1689/6/15 633
Goude Poort Z SC s 500 54 .446 1696/7/15 1697 1697/ 7/20 1697 1698 591
Goude Poortl Z A S 300 40 260 1674/9/15 1675 1675 1675 1675
Goude Put Z A SE .390 .26 .364 1724/9/3 1725 1725/ 6/28 1726/1/16 1726/2/22 502
Goude Put z GC S .610 .68 .542 1726/8/31 1727/ 2/26 1727/3/21 1727/6/26 1727/ 9/05 502
Goude Put z GC S .550 .19 .531 1728/9/9 1729/11/17 1730/1/14 1730/4/25 1730 502
Goude Put z SC S .475 .37 .438 1731 1731/12/25 1732/3/5 1732/6/3 1732 502
Goude Put z SC s .550 .29 .521 1733 1734 1735/ 2/17 1735/5/16 1735 502
Goude Put z GC s .629 . 17 .612 1735 1736/8/25 1736/10/31 1737/2/23 1737 546 592
Goude Putl z SC s 500 154 .346 1697/12/27 1698 1699/1/15 1699/9/16 1699
Goude TVger z A s .906 .176 .730 1684 1685/7/24 1685/11/15 1686/1/10 1686 693
Goude TVger z 600 75 525 1686 1687 1687 1687 1688
Goude Winthont AM 525 75 450 1689/12/17 1690 1690 1690 1690 589
Goude Winthont 525 75 450 1691/1/3 1691 1692 1692 1692
Graaf v Laarwijck AM SC SP .488 .113 .375 1699 1700/4/30 1700 1700/9/17 1701 514
Griffioen Z A 450 70 380 1674/8/13 1675 1675 1675 1676
Groot Bentveld AM SC SE 600 100 500 1725/5/17 1726 1726 1727 1727/7/11 504
Groot Bentveld AM GC C .767 .95 .672 1728/1/22 1728/6/19 1728/8/25 1729 530 w
Groote Apollo SC C .448 68 380 1698 1699/5/21 1699 1699 1700
Groote Tyger AM SC S .452 .57 .395 1705/3/19 1705/8/26 1705/12/29 1706/3/28 1706 508 532
Grote Africaan AM C 525 75 450 1680 1681 1681 1682 1682
Grote Africaan c 525 75 450 1682 1683 1683 1683/12/24 1684
Grote Africaan AM SC 525 75 450 1684/12/18 1685 1685 1686 1686
Guntersteyn AM SC s .541 .111 .430 1714 1714/10/9 1714/12/19 1715/4/9 1715 540
Guntersteyn NK A s 600 171 .429 1716 1716 1716/12/16 1717 1717 595
Guntersteyn M SC s .538 .108 .430 1717 1718/8/5 1718/12/15 1719/2/17 1719 596 597
Guntersteyn M SC s .5% .146 .450 1719 1720/8/15 1720/11/24 1721/3/1 1721 597
Guntersteyn M A SE .644 .46 .598 1722/6/13 1723 1723/ 6/11 1723/7/22 1723/9/24 598 599
Helena ~ WG GC .250 40 210 1727 1728/1/31 1728 1728 1728
Helena ~ WG GC C .250 .54 .196 1728 1729 1729/ 5/29 1729 1730 600
Helena ~ AM GC S .200 .20 .180 1734 1735/6/16 1735/8/11 1735/11/22 1736 534
Henricus s 525 75 450 1681 1682 1682/ 3/ 8 1682 1682
Hollandia SC c .533 73 460 1686 1687/4/3 1687 1687 1688
Appendix 1 (cont)
P o r ts s laves Left Left Arrival Left Return Captain Sp.
Honaert SC C .584 . 7 .577 1711 1711 1711/12/ 7 1712 1712 601
Huys Nassau AM SC C .525 125 400 1679 1680/3/14 1680/5/5 1680 1680/10/05 602
Huys te Loirheim BB S .485 .182 .303 1686/1/4 1686/7/10 1686/9/16 1687/1/11 1687 706 FL
Huys ter Laan AM GC C 500 50 450 1675/1/8 1675/10/26 1676/1/13 1676/3/18 1676/4/15 603
Jaager ^ WG SC C .136 . 12 .124 1699 1699/9/23 1699 1700 1700 604 Y
Jager + ZL SE .400 .50 .350 1718 1718 1719/ 4/15 1719 1719 699 L
Joanna Maria A C .550 80 470 1686 1687 1687/ 5/23 1687 1687 605
Johanna Magtelt A C 650 55 .595 1711 1711 1711/12/27 1712 1712 606 553
Johannes de Doper AM A s .952 .99 .853 1696/5/15 1697 1697/ 2/22 1697/7/6 1697 570
Jonge Alexander M 300 50 250 1722/4/15 1723 1723 1724 1724 G
Jonge Daniel GB 430 60 370 1725 1726 1726/ 4/26 1726 1726 607 P
Jonge Daniel 450 50 400 1728 1729 1729 1729 1730 P
Jonge Daniel SC GE .375 .69 .306 1731 1731/8/1 1731/10/14 1732 1732 608 P
Jonge Daniel Z GC S .461 .61 .400 1733 1734/2/12 1734/5/15 1734/7/25 1734 608 P
Jonge Daniel GB .500 .84 .416 1738 1738 1739/ 1/22 1739 1739 P
Jonge Jagher ~ NK GC C .177 .15 .162 1687 1688 1688/ 8/28 1688 1689 609
Jonge Willem Z S .594 .138 .456 1737 1737 1738/ 1/4 1738/4/21 1738 611
Justitia Z A S .740 .161 .579 1706 1706/12/24 1707/2/6 1707/5/3 1707 612
Justitia Z SC S .673 .177 .496 1707/12/13 1708/6/16 1708/8/10 1708/9/18 612 W
Koninck Salomon A c 550 75 475 1683 1684 1684 1684 1685 691
Koninck Salomon M SC s .508 .53 .455 1686/1/5 1686/6/16 1686/8/19 1686/10/2 1686/12/8 707 691 R
Korte Prins + ZL A SE 400 60 340 1718 1719 1720 1720 1720 613
Leusden A SE 525 75 450 1720/6/6 1721 1721/3/3 1721 1721 504
Leusden AM GC SE .562 .101 .461 1721/12/21 1722/5/20 1722/9/19 1723/1/12 1723/3/06 504
Leusden AM SC M .605 .70 .535 1723/10/20 1724/3/12 1724/5/15 1724/8/16 1724/10/02 504
LeusdeN AM GC SE .747 .76 .671 1725/8/5 1725/11/1 1726/1/20 1726/4/22 1726/6/07 616
Leusden AM GC S .748 .66 .682 1727/11/30 1727/8/22 1727/11/1 1728/2/27 1728/5/22 616
Leusden AM GM s .708 .72 .636 1729/3/21 1729/8/30 1729/11/16 1730/2/25 1730 618
Leusden AM A s .629 .76 .553 1730 1731/6/13 1731/8/12 1731/12/24 1732 521 R
Leusden SL SC s .715 .52 .663 1732 1733/3/25 1733/6/17 1733/9/3 1734 530
Leusden SL SC s .687 .408 .279 1734 1735/8/29 1735/12/29 1736 1736 675 K
Leusden SL GC s .716 .700 . 16 1737 1737/11/19 1738/1/27 618 W
Levant A SP 460 60 400 1701/9/2 1702 1702 1702 1703 694
Margarita Catharina NK A c .443 .57 .386 1700 1701 1701/11/20 1702 1702 619
Maria (Vrouw) ^ WG GC GB .166 .30 .136 1733 1734/4/15 1734/5/21 1735 1735
Mercurius Z SC 540 80 460 1680 1681/2/28 1681 1681 1682 621
Middelburgh Z A C 525 50 475 1693/3/24 1694 1694 1694 1695 622
Morgenster AM C 525 75 450 1687 1688 1688 1688/8/5 1688 602
Morgenster AM SC s .499 .36 .463 1690/5/20 1690/12/22 1691/3/24 1691/7/24 1691/10/05 556
Moscow (Stad) AM SC GE .582 .271 .311 1705/11/16 1706/9/16 1707/1/15 1707 1707/6/01 661
Moscow (Stad) SC C .572 .82 .490 1709 1710/10/15 1710/12/7 1710 1711 U
Nieuwe Post SL A C .559 .46 .513 1715 1715 1716/ 2/ 9 1716 1716 623
Nieuwe Post M S .535 .344 .191 1717/8/15 1718 1719/ 1/21 1719/4/15 1719 583
Nieuwenhoven Z 250 40 210 1721/8/15 1722 1722 1722 1723
Nieuwenhoven Z 250 40 210 1723/6/15 1724 1724 1724 1724
Orangieboom SC s .488 60 428 1682 1682/12/21 1683/3/24 K
Petronella Alida NK .525 .485 .40 1721/8/17 1722 1722 1723 1723 625 000 W
Phenix Z A SE .771 .25 .746 1722/10/22 1723 1723/12/21 1724/6/28 1724/10/20 626
Phenix Z A SE .590 .80 .510 1725/1/19 1726 1726/4 2 1726/8/3 1726/9/25 626
Phenix AM GC M .783 .181 .602 1727 1728/10/15 1729/1/14 1729 1729 626
Philippus Johannes Z SC S .510 .15 .495 1706 1707/2/28 1707/5/13 1707 1708 583
Piershil M 250 35 215 1723/9/15 1724 1724 1725 1725
Piershil M 250 25 225 1726/8/15 1727 1727 1727 1727
Poelwijk 1 ~ WG GE 200 31 .169 1692 1692 1692/12/31 1693 1693 Y
Poelwyk C 350 50 300 1677/12/21 1678/11/25 1679 1679 1679
Poelwyk C 350 50 300 1680 1681 1681 1682/2/19 1682 627
Poelwyk AM A S .282 .30 .252 1682/8/28 1683/5/15 1683 1683 1683/11/01
Poelwyk GE 210 41 .169 1690 1690 1691 1691 1692
Portugaalse Handelaar SC C .525 75 450 1686 1687/2/1 1687 1687 1687 589
Appendix 1 (cont)
P o r ts S lave s Left Left Arrival Left Return Captain Sp.
Postillion * Z GC S 204 29 .175 1688 1688 1689/ 1/15 1689/5/19 1689 697 F
Prins Willem Z A C 510 60 .450 1675 1676 1676 1677 1677 628 F C
Profeet Daniel SP .600 90 510 1685 1685/10/4 1685 1686 1686
Profeet Daniel c 600 90 510 1687/10/8 1688 1688 1688 1689
Pynenburg AM SC s 470 44 .426 1694/8/12 1695 1695/ 4/ 7 1695/9/22 1695 629 F
Pynenburg AM A c 400 50 350 1697/12/15 1698 1699 1699 1700 532 F
Pynenburg GE 400 37 .363 1702 1703 1703/ 4/26 1703 1703 582 F
Pynenburg GC GS .348 68 280 1704 1705/10/4 1705/12/8 1706 1706 631 F C
Quinera AM A C 525 50 475 1697/5/8 1698 1698 1699 1699 632
Quinera AM SC C .499 .83 .416 1700 1701 1701/ 9/11 1701 1702 633
Quinera SL A s 618 50 .568 1703/7/25 1704 1704/ 6/17 1704 1705 633 539
Quinera AM GC c .547 .179 .368 1705 1706/3/23 1706/5/25 1706 1707 634
Quinera AM SC c .530 .66 .464 1708 1709/2/12 1709/5/12 1709 1710 539
Rachel SC M .512 75 437 1691/1/3 1691/4/19 1691/11/9 1692 1692 635
Rachel AM SC C 550 75 475 1693/4/19 1694 1694 1694 1695 636
Rachel AM s .534 .36 .498 1697/5/1 1697 1698/1/29 1698/6/19 1698 633
Rachel SC c .620 90 530 1698 1699/4/4 1699 1699 1700 R
Rachel AM SC c .419 .88 .331 1700/10/5 1701 1702/ 1/24 1702 1702 556
Rode Leeuw ZL A s .480 .56 .424 1688 1689 1689/ 4/ 5 1689 1689 709 L
Roomse Keyser AM s 581 70 .511 1691/8/15 1692 1692 1693 1693
Roomse Keyser AM A c 550 75 475 1693/7/30 1694 1694 1694 1695 708
Roosenburgh + Z A ST .390 60 330 1709/1/7 1709 1710 1710 1710 638 L
Rotterdam M C .450 60 390 1675 1676 1676 1676 1677/1/06
Rotterdam M SC 450 60 390 1682/8/28 1683 1683 1683 1684
Rotterdam SC .499 69 430 1685/9/23 1685/12/8 1686 1686 1686
Rusthof Z A SE .661 .103 .558 1721/5/15 1722 1722/11/10 1723/4/19 1723 639 640
Rusthof Z A SE .481 .22 .459 1724/3/10 1725 1725/ 4/23 1725/8/15 1725/11/18 641 695
Rusthof Z A SE .684 .74 .610 1726/4/20 1727 1727/ 4/16 1727 1728 642
Rusthof Z A S .664 .120 .544 1730/2/15 1730 1730/11/20 1731/3/17 1731 546
Rusthof Z SC S .719 .345 .374 1732 1733/11/21 1734/3/1 1734/6/13 1734 643 644
Salamander AM GC 500 75 425 1674/8/15 1675 1675 1675 1676 652
Salamander SL SC S .485 .66 .419 1687/7/29 1688/1/15 1688/4/12 1688/8/11 1688 652
Samaritaan Z A 525 75 450 1687/11/29 1688/7/20 1688 1689 1689
Sara S 525 75 450 1687 1688 1688 1688 674
Sara & Maria ~ WG SC c .173 23 150 1687 1688/2/10 1688 1688 1688 560
Sem Galey SL 400 60 340 1722/8/15 1723 1723 1724 1724
Sem Galey SL 400 60 340 1725/1/15 1725 1725 1726 1726
Sem Galey 350 150 . 0 1726/9/15 1727 1727 653
Seven Gebroeders Z BB 200 30 170 1674 1675 1675 1675 1676
Son (Vergulde) SL SC c .369 .54 .315 1701/5/3 1701/7/20 1701/12/11 1702 1702 561
Son (Vergulde) AM SC s .513 .134 .379 1703/1/22 1703/8/26 1703/11/6 1704 1704 556 654
Son (Vergulde) SL A c .694 .135 .559 1704 1705 1705/10/12 1706 1706 647
Son (Vergulde) M SC c .559 .142 .417 1707 1707/9/2 1707/12/30 1708 1708 655 684
Sonnesteynl ^ WG BB c .103 .37 .66 1714 1715 1715/ 9/21 1715 1716 656
Sonnesteyn2 AM 600 75 525 1722/5/15 1723 1723 1723 1723
Sonnesteyn2 AM SC .587 ? 0 . 0 1724/2/10 1724/9/3 1724
Sonnesteyn3 AM GC SE .627 .70 .557 1725/11/23 1726/3/7 1726/5/9 1727/3/1 1727/5/17 657
Sonnesteyn3 AM 600 100 500 1729/9/4 1730 1730 1731 1731
St. Alida AM SC SP 600 90 510 1685 1685/10/3 1685 1686 1686
St. Andries M SC s .563 .83 .480 1715 1716/4/23 1716/6/13 1716/7/21 1716 645
St. Andries s 545 68 .477 1717 1718 1718 1719 1719 645
St. Clara SL A 550 75 475 1707/5/31 1708 1708 1709 1709 692
St. Clara SL SC s .517 .66 .451 1709 1710/8/3 1710/10/12 1711 1711 646
St. Clara SL SC c .584 .132 .452 1711 1712/9/2 1712/11/26 1713 1713 647
St. Claral c 525 75 450 1692 1693 1693 1693 1694
St. Francis Xavier Z A SP 525 75 450 1680/10/24 1681 1681 1682 1682 665
St. Jago~ WG SC .200 35 165 1707 1708 1708
St. Jan AM SC 525 75 450 1680 1681/2/28 1681 1682 1682
St. Jan AM SC s .500 . 9 .491 1683 1684 1684/ 4/ 9 1684 1684 629
St. Jan SL A s 500 75 425 1685/8/15 1687 1687 1688 1688 514
St. Laurens^ SL GC s .162 . 13 .149 1733 1734/4/15 1734/6/8 1734/8/8 1734 617
St. Laurens^ AM GC s .171 .27 .144 1735 1736/2/14 1736/6/17 1736 1737 651
Appendix 1 (cont)
P or t s s laves Left Left Arrival Left Return Captain Sp.
St. Marcus AM SC C .585 .28 .557 1713 1713/11/21 1714/1/19 1714/6/15 1714 511
St. Pieter A 600 90 510 1679 1680 1680 1681 1681 FL
Stad & Lande SL GC S .751 .76 .675 1726/9/2 1727/5/16 1727/6/28 1727/8/23 1727/10/01 575
Stad & Lande SL SC C .779 .177 .602 1728/9/30 1729/5/27 1729/8/10 1729 1730 575
Stad & Lande NK SC S .439 .307 .132 1731 1732/4/29 1732/8/1 1733/3/9 1733 529 K
Stad & lande NK GM s .760 .349 .411 1734 1735/2/17 1735/4/19 1735/7/15 1735 522 659
Stad & Lande M GC s .800 .88 .712 1736 1737 1737/ 6/24 1737 1738 660
StadhouderFriesland GC GE .106 .10 .96 1697 1698 1698/ 5/ 5 1698 1699 658
Steenhuysen M A SE .780 .88 .692 1723/8/20 1724 1724/ 9/19 1725/3/29 1725/5/11 616 F
Steenhuysen M GC S .789 .102 .687 1725/11/25 1726 1726/10/ 2 1727/3/28 1727/6/02 662 688 F
Steenhuysen M GM s .645 .83 .562 1728/4/7 1729/2/12 1729/4/4 1729/7/4 1729 683 F
Steenhuysen M GM s .625 .53 .572 1730 1731/9/28 1731/12/14 1732/4/4 1732 683 F
Steenhuysen AM GC s .800 .25 .775 1736/1/3 1736/12/19 1737/2/13 1737 1737 534 F
Surin. Koopman AM SC c 550 67 .483 1679 1680 1680/11/17 1681 1681
s'Graveland AM A SE .517 .16 .501 1724/10/31 1725 1725/ 9/28 1726/4/22 1726/6/07 546
Tholen ~ Z GS GE .90 .10 .80 1675/4/15 1675/10/28 1676 1676 1676/6/12 696 F
Tholen ~ WG C .150 .20 .130 1687 1688/7/15 1688 1688 1689 F
Vergulde Vryheyt A C .694 .23 .671 1700 1701 1701/ 3/9 1701 1701 664
Vergulde Vryhyt + ZL SE 400 50 350 1718 1718 1719/ 4/15 1719 1719 680
Vigilantie C 400 ?200 ?200 1676 1677 1677/ 4/22 1677 1677 RC
Vliegent Hert + ZL A ST 480 60 .420 1706 1707/1/28 1707 1707 1708 665
Vlissings Welvaren ~ SL A C .194 . 0 .194 1715 1716 1716/ 3/13 1716 1716 505
Vogel Phenix A C 525 75 450 1675 1675/10/25 1676 1676 1676 516
Vogel Phenix S 525 75 450 1677 1677 1677/12/25 1680/2/06
Vogel Phenix GS 300 7150 ?150 1680 1681 1681/10/12 1682 1682
Vreede A C 550 75 475 1679 1680 1680/ 4/22 1680 1680 578
Vreede A S .437 . 10 .427 1683 1684 1684/ 8/29 1685/2/18 1685 547
Vriendschap GM C .393 .72 .321 1703 1704/2/20 1704/5/9 1704 1705 585
Vrye Zee AM C 550 75 475 1689/12/17 1690 1690 1691 1691 697
Vryheyt NK SC c .521 71 450 1680 1681/3/28 1681 1681 1682
Vryheyt SC .520 .80 .440 1682 1683/2/8 1683 1683 1683
Vryheyt SC 525 75 450 1683 1684 1684 1685 1685
Vryheyt SL GC C 520 70 450 1686 1687 1687 1687 1688 666
Vryheyt2 AM GC GB 450 50 .400 1721/2/15 1721/12/25 1722/1/31 1722 1722 667 HB
Vryheyt2 NK A SE .419 .44 .375 1723/5/13 1724 1724/12/30 1725/6/18 1725/8/27 668
Vryheyt2 NK S 450 70 380 1726/6/10 1727 1727/ 7/21 1727/9/25 1728/1/17 698 529
Vryheyt2 AM 525 75 450 1729/4/8 1730 1730 1731 1731
Vryheyt2 AM GC S .647 .104 .543 1731 1732/6/25 1732/8/24 1732/12/26 1733 657 R
Vryheyt2 AM SC S .605 .42 .563 1733 1734/5/30 1734/8/1 1734/10/20 1735 657
Vryheyt2 AM GC S .670 .31 .639 1735 1736/6/25 1736/8/14 1737/11/12 1737 617
Waartwyk NK 500 75 425 1726/1/15 1726 1726 1727 1727
Waartwyk SL SC S .433 .90 .343 1729 1730 1730/12/25 1731 1731 675
Waartwyk GC s .493 .55 .438 1731 1732/9/3 1732/11/18 1733/4/24 1733 675
Wakende Craen ~ WG GC c .190 .15 .175 1705 1706/9/9 1706/11/30. 1707 1707 670 Y
Wapen v Amsterdam SC 525 75 450 1684 1685 1685 1686 1686
Wapen v Amsterdam AM c 525 75 450 1686 1687 1688 1688 1688/7/19
Wapen v Holland M SC c .664 .211 .453 1700 1701 1701/6/27 1701 1702 669 548
Wapen v Holland M SC s 500 61 .439 1702/4/26 1702 1702/11/29 1703 1703 548
Wapen v Holland M A c .712 .150 .562 1704 1705 1705/5/10 1705/7/25 1706 583
Wapen v Zirickzee SC c .508 .24 .484 1685 1686/2/14 1686 1686 1687 672
Wapen v Zirickzee SC 525 75 450 1687 1688/10/13 1689 1689 1689 C
Welvaren AM SC s 425 55 370 1682 1683 1683/1/17 1683/6/30 1683 673 674
West Souburg ~ WG GC GS .200 30 170 1681 1682/2/8 1682 1682 1683
West Souburg ~ WG GE .200 .30 .170 1683 1684 1684 1685 1685
Westindisch Huys SL SC C .540 .70 .470 1698 1698/12/1 1699 1698 1699
Westindisch Huys AM SC SP .762 .115 .647 1700 1700/12/7 1701/3/9 1701 1701 681 U
Winthont Z SC C .555 .24 .531 1698 1699/9/23 1699/12/1 1700 1700 676
Winthont Z SC S .495 .30 .465 1700/12/16 1701 1701/9/24 1702/3/14 1702 677 678
Zondernaaml GS .350 130 220 1694 1695/6/9 1695 1695 1696 682
Zondernaam2 SE 200 25 175 1697 1699 1698/9/16 1698 1698 594
Appendix 1
Acredam AM SC S .596 .117 .479 1712 1713/6/24 1713/11/10 1714/2/12 1714 508 700
Acredam NK SC S .590 .120 .470 1715 1715/9/19 1715/12/20 1716/4/8 1716 507
Acredam SC S .704 .119 .585 1716 1717/10/7 1717/12/30 1718 1718 506
Acredam SL SC S .650 .96 .554 1718 1719/2/19 1719/6/26 1719/7/18 1719 505
Acredam AM SC S .606 .159 .447 1720/10/15 1721/4/2 1721/6/23 1721/8/4 1721 503 504
Acredam NK SC S .455 .108 .347 1723/1/8 1723 1723/9/19 1724/11/17 1724/ 3/02 502
Acredam AM GC 's .643 .37 .606 1724/8/14 1725/5/10 1725/7/ 2 1725/9/11 1725/11/18 501
Acredam A 1726/4/15 W
Acredam2 SL GC s 580 100 480 1727/2/10 1728 1728 1729 1729
Adrichem AM SC c .613 .150 .463 1708 1708/8/3 1708/11/27 1708/12/15 1709 510
Adrichem Z A s .713 . 8 .705 1710 1710 1710/9/16 1711 1711 511
Adrichem Z SC c .611 .40 .571 1711 1712/1/23 1712/ 5/ 2 1712 1712 509
Adrichem Z A c .717 .344 .373 1714/7/14 1715/4/2 1715/ 6/ 7 1715 1716 509
o drichem Z SC s .540 . 10 .530 1716 1717/2/6 1717/4/16 1717 1717/10/07 512
s
00
sdrichem Z SC .719 .108 .611 1718 1718/11/16 1719/ 1/15 1719/5/26 1719 512
Adrichem Z 550 75 475 1720/2/15 1720 1721 1721 1721
Africa A c 450 50 400 1675/5/18 1675/12/12 1676 1676/3/18 1676/4/15 513
Africa c 450 75 375 1678/ 2/ 2 1679 1679/12/11 1680 1680 514
Africa NK A s .372 50 322 1688/ 7/20 1689 1689/3/ 4 1689/10/10 1690
Africa2 WG SC .195 15 180 1709 1710/4/15 1710 1710 U
Agatha AM GC GE .166 .15 .151 1714 1714/12/20 1715/ 4/ 4 1715 1715/10/13
Agatha WG GC GM .184 . 10 .174 1716 1717/1/19 1717 1717 1718 R
Aletta Maria SL GS 400 60 340 1674/ 5/24 1674 1675 1675 1675 596
Aletta Maria Z S 525 75 450 1676/ 4/14 1677 1677 1677 1677/7/5 516
Alida AM SP 330 30 .300 1685 1686 1686 1686/6/29 1686/10/23 603
Amsterdam AM SC s .522 . 11 .511 1705 1706/6/20 1706/8/20 1707 1707 517
Amsterdam AM SC s 580 80 500 1707 1707/11/16 1708/2/20 1708/3/23 1708 508
Amsterdam AM .483 .53 .430 1709 1710/1/13 1710 508 C
Amsterdam2 NK A s 525 70 .455 1719 1719 1719/10/22 1720/3/28 1720 518 FL
Amsterdam2 AM GC c .423 .95 .328 1723/9/15 1724/6/23 1724/9/27 1725/3/21 1725 519 F
Amsterdam2 WG GC s .466 .178 .288 1726/ 1/15 1726/4/27 1726/7/10 1726/9/3 1726 520
Amsterdam2 AM GC s .459 . 1 .458 1727/ 8/15 1727 1728/1/18 1728/3/17 1728 521
Amsterdam2 AM 450 65 385 1728/10/26 1729 1729 1730 1730
Amsterdam2 NK GG s 380 50 330 1731 1732 1732/8/16 1732/12/26 1733 522
Annaboa ~ WG GC c 110 40 70 1699 1700/6/22 1700/10/25 1701 1701 523
Appolonia Z BB s 345 93 252 1686/1/24 1686 1686/12/1 1687 1687 701
Arent Z SC c .515 70 445 1691/6/3 1691/11/24 1692/1/10 1692 1692 524
Axim^ WG GC c .139 .56 .83 1710 1710/7/10 1710/9/30 1711 1711 525 Y
Beekesteyn AM A SE 700 140 .560 1721/7/23 1722 1722 / 4/ 4 1722/8/6 1722 526
Beekesteyn AM A SE .722 .85 .637 1723/1/8 1723 1723 /9 /20 1724/3/20 1724 /5/26 526 501
Beekesteyn NK A s .442 .191 .251 1725/3/19 1726/5/29 1726/7/10 1726/9/3 1727/4/7 527 528
Beekesteyn NK SC s .507 .89 .418 1728/5/30 1728/10/30 1729/3/2 1729 1729 529
Beekesteyn AM GC s .755 .238 .517 1730/4/15 1731/2/18 1731/7/12 1731/11/8 1732 530
Beekesteyn GC s .866 .258 .608 1732 1733/6/8 1733/8/14 1733/12/30 1734 521
Beekesteyn AM SC s .705 .103 .602 1735 1735/12/15 1736/3/25 1736/6/18 1736 531
Berkendam ~ WG GC c 170 20 150 1731 1732 1732/ 9/15 1733 1733 536
Beschermer AM SC SP .576 . 11 .565 1700 1700/8/7 1700/10/25 1701 1701 532
Beschermer A 1702 C
Beschutter GC s .768 .23 .745 1735/5/30 1735/11/8 1735/12/27 1736 1736 533
Beschutter GC s .809 .69 .740 1738 1738/12/25 1739/2/14 1739/5/30 1739 534 535
Beurs Amsterdam AM SC s .650 .82 .568 1702/1/14 1702/8/1 1702/10/8 1703 1703 523
Beurs Amsterdam AM A c .653 .38 .615 1704 1704 1705/ 1/ 5 1705/2/15 1705 538
Beurs Amsterdam AM A c .708 .80 .628 1706 1706 1706/10/16 1707 1707 539
Beurs v Amsterdam Z SC s .512 .25 .487 1690/9/29 1691/4/19 1691/10/8 1691 1692 537 C
Blyswyk SL SC s .494 .50 .444 1708 1709/4/8 1709/6/3 1709 1710/11/24 540
Bosbeek Z SC GB 350 50 300 1713 1714 1714 1714 1715
Bosbeek Z GB 200 78 .122 1715 1715 1715/12/15 1716 1716 503
Bosbeek WG SC GE 300 45 255 1716 1716 1717 1717 1717
Bosbeek Z SC GE .381 .78 .303 1718 1718/8/13 1718/12/17 1719 541 542 W
Brandenburg Z .563 .154 .409 1726/8/15 1727 1727 1727 1728
Brandenburg Z SC S .409 .38 .371 1729/6/18 1730/1/28 1730/4/27 1730/7/13 1730/9/18 545 703 R
Brandenburg Z S .564 .54 .510 1732 1732/12/14 1733/1/30 1733/5/10 1733 546
Appendix 1 (cont)
Brandenburgl Z SC GE .456 .131 .325 1699/2/2 1699/7/21 1699/11/ 4 1700 1700 543 544
Brigdamme Z A S .594 .80 .514 1695/8/14 1696 1696/ 3/29 1696/7/3 547 C
Carolus Secundus GC c .425 .254 .171 1707/8/8 1707/11/30 1708/2/15 1708 1708 548
Carolus Secundus z SC c .490 .32 .458 1710 1710/10/5 1710/12/7 1711 1711 549
Casteel Curasao ~ AM GS c 220 20 200 1676 1676/7/27 1676 1677 1677 679 F
Casteel Elmina ~ Z GC c .171 .13 .158 1704 1704/10/12 1704/12/12 1705 1705 551
Casteel Elmina^ WG GC c .1% . 13 .183 1708 1708/9/19 1708/11/18 1709 1709 552
Casteel Souburg^ WG GE .188 . 0 .188 1699 1700 1700/10/15 1700/12/6 1701 550
Catharina AM SC S 570 76 .494 1697/12/17 1698 1698 1699 1699 514
Catharina Christina NK GC C .540 .33 .507 1706 1706/12/31 1707/3/11 1707 1707 553
Catharina Christina AM SC S .509 100 409 1708/4/30 1709/9/6 1709/12/30 1710/3/22 1710 554
Christina SC S .513 .27 .486 1703/5/10 1703 1704/ 1/13 1704/4/4 1704 553
Christina GC S .548 .127 .421 1705 1705/10/25 1705/12/29 1706/3/28 1706 532
Christinal AM A S 525 75 450 1684/12/13 1685 1685 1686 1686
Churf. Brandenburg SC S .500 .131 .369 1685 1685 1685/11/15 1685/12/24 1686 703 692
Churf. Brandenburg c .541 41 500 1686 1687 1687/ 6/23 1687 1687 557
Clara AM SC c 525 75 450 1693 1693/11/5 1694 1694 1694 556
Comps. Welvaren ^ WG A c .89 .23 .66 1719 1719 1720/ 2/18 1720 1720 558
Coning David c .600 90 510 1682 1683 1683 1683/7/20 1683
Coning Portugal AM SC c .536 .108 .428 1707 1707/7/24 1707/10/31 1708 1708 560
Coningin Hester AM SC s .500 .22 .478 1684 1685 1685/ 3/16 1685/4/18 1685 704 705
Coningin Hester SL A 525 75 450 1691/11/9 1692 1693 1693 1693
Coningin Hester Z SC c .625 .126 .499 1713 1714 1714/ 9/17 1775 1775 514
Cormantyn A s .539 .36 .503 1688/1/30 1689 1689/ 4/20 1690/3/9 1690 629
Cormantyn AM SC c .539 79 460 1686 1686/12/8 1687 1687 1687 633
Cornelia c 230 30 200 1675 1676/1/14 1676 1676/6/27 1676/8/20 FL
Croonvogel c 550 65 485 1691 1692 1692/ 6/ 5 1692 1693 629
Croonvogel M SC c 550 75 475 1694/6/27 1695 1695 1695 1695 563
Croonvogel AM SC s 550 65 .485 1695/12/19 1696 1696/11/23 1697/4/8 1697 556
Croonvogel SL A s .570 .41 .529 1697/11/17 1698 1699 1699/9/16 1699 561
Croonvogel Z SC SP .566 .71 .495 1700 1700 1700/ 9/28 1700 1701 591
Debora Amerantia NK A s 700 85 .615 1692/7/27 1693 1693/ 4/15 1693/8/2 1693 514
Delft M 300 50 250 1721/1/15 1722 1722 1722 1722
Delft M 300 50 250 1723/4/15 1724 1724 1724 1724
Delft M A c .286 .61 .225 1726/1/13 1726 1726/12/31 1727 1727/8/25 564
Delft M A 300 50 250 1728/12/28 1729 1729 1730 1730 564
Delft2 M GC s .618 .124 .494 1733 1733/11/8 1734/ 1/ 1 1734/4/29 1734 565
Delft2 M SC s .571 .110 .461 1735 1736/7/13 1736/10/9 1737/1/15 1737 565
Dolphijn + SE 450 50 400 1700 1701 1701/ 8/15 1701 1701 701
Dolphyn SC C 525 75 450 1677 1678/3/12 1678 1678 1678/9/1
Duynbeek Z A SE 525 75 450 1722/3/3 1722 1723 1723 w
Duynenburg Z A 525 75 450 1700 1701 1701 1701 1701 509
Duynenburg Z A C .542 .50 .492 1702/3/14 1703 1703/ 3/ 7 1703 1703 509
Duynenburg Z SC C .473 .74 .399 1704 1705/8/26 1705/11/17 1706 1706 509
Duynenburg Z 1707
Duynvliet Z A GE 325 51 .274 1720/11/1 1721 1721/10/17 1722 1722
Duynvliet Z GC SE .340 .27 .313 1722/5/15 1723/5/1 1723/5/24 1723/7/22 1723 566
Duynvliet Z GE 200 79 .121 1724/3/15 1724 1724/12/23 1725 1725
Duynvliet Z M .385 .168 .217 1725 1726/3/24 1726/5/25 1726 1727 567
Duynvliet AM 300 45 255 1728/9/30 1729 1729 1730 1730
Duynvliet GC GB .362 .32 .330 1731 1732/1/26 1732/3/19 1732 1732 617
Duynvliet NK SC S .360 .10 .350 1733 1733/9/21 1733/12/13 1734/4/15 1734 568
X
Duynvliet GG GB .370 .30 .340 1734 1735/8/14 1735 1736 1736
Duynvliet GC GB .375 50 325 1736 1737/6/30 1736 1737 1737
Eendragt Z C 525 75 450 1675 1675/10/26 1676 1676/5/20 1676/7/02
Eendragt Z C 550 100 450 1684 1685 1685/ 4/13 1685 1685 516 w
Eendragt C 550 100 450 1687 1687 1688 1688/7/19 1688 569
Eendragt A C .781 .15 .766 1691/1/3 1691 1691/ 8/27 1692/4/3 1692 570
Elmina ^ WG GC S .300 .23 .277 1722 1723 1723/ 7/15 1723/8/11 1723 648
Emmenes AM SC c .563 .104 .459 1714 1715/3/9 1715/6/10 1715 1716 506
Emmenes Z SC c .718 .270 .448 1717 1717/11/23 1718/3/27 1718 1718 571 572
Emmenes SL SC s .335 . 11 .324 1719 1719 1720/ 1/ 1 1720/3/28 1720 540
Appendix 1 (cont)
P ort s slave s Left Left Arrival Left Return Captain Sp.
Emmenes SL SC S .208 .20 .188 1720/11/1 1721 1721/12/5 1722/3/16 1722 573
Emmenes SL SC S .176 .18 .158 1723/1/8 r~3 1723/12/15 1724/3/15 1724/6/06 575
Emmenes SL GC S .657 .76 .581 1725/1/19 1725 1725/10/15 1726/2/6 1726/5/13 576
Engelenburg ^ WG GC C .153 .17 .136 1716 1716/9/3 1716/12/10 1717 1717 577
Europa M C 525 75 450 1677/5/3 1678 1678 1678 1679
Europa C 600 90 510 1680 1681 1682 1682/4/28 1682 514
Europa Z SC C .471 . 7 .464 1687 1687/10/30 1688/2/21 1688 1688 578
Europa Z A S .500 .26 .474 1689/3/26 1689 1689/11/21 1690/6/21 1690 547
Eva Maria 525 65 460 1693/4/7 1694 1694 1694 1694 580
Eva Maria NK A s 560 72 .488 1697/12/16 1698 1698 1699 1699
Eva Maria NK A c .644 .44 .600 1700 1701 1701/ 11 8 1701 1702 580
Eva Susanna^ WG GC s .217 .31 .186 1725 1725/12/22 1726/2/23 1726 1726 581
Faam Z SC SP .505 .66 .439 1700 1700/12/8 1701/3/28 1701 1701 582
Fida~ WG GC c .257 . 15 .242 1715 1715/12/14 1716/2/9 1716 1716 583
Fortuyn Z A GE 275 58 .217 1701 1702 1702/ 5/22 1702 1702 585
Fortuyn Z 1703 W
Geertruyt AM BB s .373 .84 .289 1684/5/6 1684/12/5 1685/2/ 5 1685 1685 586
Gelderland ~ WG GC c .146 . 5 .141 1715 1716/4/12 1716/6/7 1716 1717 587 F
Gele Ruyter NK SC 525 75 450 1684 1685 1685 1685 1686
Gele Ruyter NK A s 590 36 .554 1686 1686 1686/11/16 1687 1687
Gele Ruyter 525 125 400 1690/11/15 1691 1692 1692 1693
Gideon M c .650 150 500 1680 1681 1682 1682/3/2 1682/5/13 FL
Gideon SC c .482 72 410 1688 1688/8/14 1688 1689 1689 FL
Gideon M A c 600 100 500 1697/5/1 1688 1688 1698 1689 588 632 FL
Gideon M s 600 72 .528 1698/11/28 1699 1700/ 4/24 1700/7/15 1701 FL
Goud Brackhont ^ SC GE .248 .20 .228 1696 1697 1697/ 6/16 1697 1698 590
Goude Leeuw SL 550 75 475 1683 1684 1684 1685 1685
Goude Leeuw SL SC C 550 150 400 1688 1688 1689 1689 1689/6/15 633
Goude Poort Z SC s 500 54 .446 1696/7/15 1697 1697/ 7/20 1697 1698 591
Goude Poortl Z A S 300 40 260 1674/9/15 1675 1675 1675 1675
Goude Put Z A SE .390 .26 .364 1724/9/3 1725 1725/ 6/28 1726/1/16 1726/2/22 502
Goude Put z GC S .610 .68 .542 1726/8/31 1727/ 2/26 1727/3/21 1727/6/26 1727/ 9/05 502
Goude Put z GC S .550 .19 .531 1728/9/9 1729/11/17 1730/1/14 1730/4/25 1730 502
Goude Put z SC S .475 .37 .438 1731 1731/12/25 1732/3/5 1732/6/3 1732 502
Goude Put z SC s .550 .29 .521 1733 1734 1735/ 2/17 1735/5/16 1735 502
Goude Put z GC s .629 . 17 .612 1735 1736/8/25 1736/10/31 1737/2/23 1737 546 592
Goude Putl z SC s 500 154 .346 1697/12/27 1698 1699/1/15 1699/9/16 1699
Goude TVger z A s .906 .176 .730 1684 1685/7/24 1685/11/15 1686/1/10 1686 693
Goude TVger z 600 75 525 1686 1687 1687 1687 1688
Goude Winthont AM 525 75 450 1689/12/17 1690 1690 1690 1690 589
Goude Winthont 525 75 450 1691/1/3 1691 1692 1692 1692
Graaf v Laarwijck AM SC SP .488 .113 .375 1699 1700/4/30 1700 1700/9/17 1701 514
Griffioen Z A 450 70 380 1674/8/13 1675 1675 1675 1676
Groot Bentveld AM SC SE 600 100 500 1725/5/17 1726 1726 1727 1727/7/11 504
Groot Bentveld AM GC C .767 .95 .672 1728/1/22 1728/6/19 1728/8/25 1729 530 w
Groote Apollo SC C .448 68 380 1698 1699/5/21 1699 1699 1700
Groote Tyger AM SC S .452 .57 .395 1705/3/19 1705/8/26 1705/12/29 1706/3/28 1706 508 532
Grote Africaan AM C 525 75 450 1680 1681 1681 1682 1682
Grote Africaan c 525 75 450 1682 1683 1683 1683/12/24 1684
Grote Africaan AM SC 525 75 450 1684/12/18 1685 1685 1686 1686
Guntersteyn AM SC s .541 .111 .430 1714 1714/10/9 1714/12/19 1715/4/9 1715 540
Guntersteyn NK A s 600 171 .429 1716 1716 1716/12/16 1717 1717 595
Guntersteyn M SC s .538 .108 .430 1717 1718/8/5 1718/12/15 1719/2/17 1719 596 597
Guntersteyn M SC s .5% .146 .450 1719 1720/8/15 1720/11/24 1721/3/1 1721 597
Guntersteyn M A SE .644 .46 .598 1722/6/13 1723 1723/ 6/11 1723/7/22 1723/9/24 598 599
Helena ~ WG GC .250 40 210 1727 1728/1/31 1728 1728 1728
Helena ~ WG GC C .250 .54 .196 1728 1729 1729/ 5/29 1729 1730 600
Helena ~ AM GC S .200 .20 .180 1734 1735/6/16 1735/8/11 1735/11/22 1736 534
Henricus s 525 75 450 1681 1682 1682/ 3/ 8 1682 1682
Hollandia SC c .533 73 460 1686 1687/4/3 1687 1687 1688
Appendix 1 (cont)
P o r ts s laves Left Left Arrival Left Return Captain Sp.
Honaert SC C .584 . 7 .577 1711 1711 1711/12/ 7 1712 1712 601
Huys Nassau AM SC C .525 125 400 1679 1680/3/14 1680/5/5 1680 1680/10/05 602
Huys te Loirheim BB S .485 .182 .303 1686/1/4 1686/7/10 1686/9/16 1687/1/11 1687 706 FL
Huys ter Laan AM GC C 500 50 450 1675/1/8 1675/10/26 1676/1/13 1676/3/18 1676/4/15 603
Jaager ^ WG SC C .136 . 12 .124 1699 1699/9/23 1699 1700 1700 604 Y
Jager + ZL SE .400 .50 .350 1718 1718 1719/ 4/15 1719 1719 699 L
Joanna Maria A C .550 80 470 1686 1687 1687/ 5/23 1687 1687 605
Johanna Magtelt A C 650 55 .595 1711 1711 1711/12/27 1712 1712 606 553
Johannes de Doper AM A s .952 .99 .853 1696/5/15 1697 1697/ 2/22 1697/7/6 1697 570
Jonge Daniel GB 430 60 370 1725 1726 1726/ 4/26 1726 1726 607 P
Jonge Daniel 450 50 400 1728 1729 1729 1729 1730 P
Jonge Daniel SC GE .375 .69 .306 1731 1731/8/1 1731/10/14 1732 1732 608 P
Jonge Daniel GB .500 .84 .416 1738 1738 1739/ 1/22 1739 1739 P
Jonge Jagher ~ NK GC C .177 .15 .162 1687 1688 1688/ 8/28 1688 1689 609
Jonge Willem Z S .594 .138 .456 1737 1737 1738/ 1/4 1738/4/21 1738 611
Justitia Z A S .740 .161 .579 1706 1706/12/24 1707/2/6 1707/5/3 1707 612
Justitia Z SC S .673 .177 .496 1707/12/13 1708/6/16 1708/8/10 1708/9/18 612 W
Koninck Salomon A c 550 75 475 1683 1684 1684 1684 1685 691
Koninck Salomon M SC s .508 .53 .455 1686/1/5 1686/6/16 1686/8/19 1686/10/2 1686/12/8 707 691 R
Korte Prins + ZL A SE 400 60 340 1718 1719 1720 1720 1720 613
Leusden A SE 525 75 450 1720/6/6 1721 1721/3/3 1721 1721 504
Leusden AM GC SE .562 .101 .461 1721/12/21 1722/5/20 1722/9/19 1723/1/12 1723/3/06 504
Leusden AM SC M .605 .70 .535 1723/10/20 1724/3/12 1724/5/15 1724/8/16 1724/10/02 504
LeusdeN AM GC SE .747 .76 .671 1725/8/5 1725/11/1 1726/1/20 1726/4/22 1726/6/07 616
Leusden AM GC S .748 .66 .682 1727/11/30 1727/8/22 1727/11/1 1728/2/27 1728/5/22 616
Leusden AM GM s .708 .72 .636 1729/3/21 1729/8/30 1729/11/16 1730/2/25 1730 618
Leusden AM A s .629 .76 .553 1730 1731/6/13 1731/8/12 1731/12/24 1732 521 R
Leusden SL SC s .715 .52 .663 1732 1733/3/25 1733/6/17 1733/9/3 1734 530
Leusden SL SC s .687 .408 .279 1734 1735/8/29 1735/12/29 1736 1736 675 K
Leusden SL GC s .716 .700 . 16 1737 1737/11/19 1738/1/27 618 W
Levant A SP 460 60 400 1701/9/2 1702 1702 1702 1703 694
Margarita Catharina NK A c .443 .57 .386 1700 1701 1701/11/20 1702 1702 619
Maria (Vrouw) ^ WG GC GB .166 .30 .136 1733 1734/4/15 1734/5/21 1735 1735
Mercurius Z SC 540 80 460 1680 1681/2/28 1681 1681 1682 621
Middelburgh Z A C 525 50 475 1693/3/24 1694 1694 1694 1695 622
Morgenster AM C 525 75 450 1687 1688 1688 1688/8/5 1688 602
Morgenster AM SC s .499 .36 .463 1690/5/20 1690/12/22 1691/3/24 1691/7/24 1691/10/05 556
Moscow (Stad) AM SC GE .582 .271 .311 1705/11/16 1706/9/16 1707/1/15 1707 1707/6/01 661
Moscow (Stad) SC C .572 .82 .490 1709 1710/10/15 1710/12/7 1710 1711 U
Nieuwe Post SL A C .559 .46 .513 1715 1715 1716/ 2/ 9 1716 1716 623
Nieuwe Post M S .535 .344 .191 1717/8/15 1718 1719/ 1/21 1719/4/15 1719 583
Nieuwenhoven Z 250 40 210 1721/8/15 1722 1722 1722 1723
Nieuwenhoven Z 250 40 210 1723/6/15 1724 1724 1724 1724
Orangieboom SC s .488 60 428 1682 1682/12/21 1683/3/24 K
Petronella Alida NK .525 .485 .40 1721/8/17 1722 1722 1723 1723 625 000 W
Phenix Z A SE .771 .25 .746 1722/10/22 1723 1723/12/21 1724/6/28 1724/10/20 626
Phenix Z A SE .590 .80 .510 1725/1/19 1726 1726/4 2 1726/8/3 1726/9/25 626
Phenix AM GC M .783 .181 .602 1727 1728/10/15 1729/1/14 1729 1729 626
Philippus Johannes Z SC S .510 .15 .495 1706 1707/2/28 1707/5/13 1707 1708 583
Piershil M 250 35 215 1723/9/15 1724 1724 1725 1725
Piershil M 250 25 225 1726/8/15 1727 1727 1727 1727
Poelwijk 1 ~ WG GE 200 31 .169 1692 1692 1692/12/31 1693 1693 Y
Poelwyk C 350 50 300 1677/12/21 1678/11/25 1679 1679 1679
Poelwyk C 350 50 300 1680 1681 1681 1682/2/19 1682 627
Poelwyk AM A S .282 .30 .252 1682/8/28 1683/5/15 1683 1683 1683/11/01
Poelwyk GE 210 41 .169 1690 1690 1691 1691 1692
Portugaalse Handelaar SC C .525 75 450 1686 1687/2/1 1687 1687 1687 589
Appendix 1 (cont)
P o r ts S lave s Left Left Arrival Left Return Captain Sp.
Postillion * Z GC S 204 29 .175 1688 1688 1689/ 1/15 1689/5/19 1689 697 F
Prins Willem Z A C 510 60 .450 1675 1676 1676 1677 1677 628 F C
Profeet Daniel SP .600 90 510 1685 1685/10/4 1685 1686 1686
Profeet Daniel c 600 90 510 1687/10/8 1688 1688 1688 1689
Pynenburg AM SC s 470 44 .426 1694/8/12 1695 1695/ 4/ 7 1695/9/22 1695 629 F
Pynenburg AM A c 400 50 350 1697/12/15 1698 1699 1699 1700 532 F
Pynenburg GE 400 37 .363 1702 1703 1703/ 4/26 1703 1703 582 F
Pynenburg GC GS .348 68 280 1704 1705/10/4 1705/12/8 1706 1706 631 F C
Quinera AM A C 525 50 475 1697/5/8 1698 1698 1699 1699 632
Quinera AM SC C .499 .83 .416 1700 1701 1701/ 9/11 1701 1702 633
Quinera SL A s 618 50 .568 1703/7/25 1704 1704/ 6/17 1704 1705 633 539
Quinera AM GC c .547 .179 .368 1705 1706/3/23 1706/5/25 1706 1707 634
Quinera AM SC c .530 .66 .464 1708 1709/2/12 1709/5/12 1709 1710 539
Rachel SC M .512 75 437 1691/1/3 1691/4/19 1691/11/9 1692 1692 635
Rachel AM SC C 550 75 475 1693/4/19 1694 1694 1694 1695 636
Rachel AM s .534 .36 .498 1697/5/1 1697 1698/1/29 1698/6/19 1698 633
Rachel SC c .620 90 530 1698 1699/4/4 1699 1699 1700 R
Rachel AM SC c .419 .88 .331 1700/10/5 1701 1702/ 1/24 1702 1702 556
Rode Leeuw ZL A s .480 .56 .424 1688 1689 1689/ 4/ 5 1689 1689 709 L
Roomse Keyser AM s 581 70 .511 1691/8/15 1692 1692 1693 1693
Roomse Keyser AM A c 550 75 475 1693/7/30 1694 1694 1694 1695 708
Roosenburgh + Z A ST .390 60 330 1709/1/7 1709 1710 1710 1710 638 L
Rotterdam M C .450 60 390 1675 1676 1676 1676 1677/1/06
Rotterdam M SC 450 60 390 1682/8/28 1683 1683 1683 1684
Rotterdam SC .499 69 430 1685/9/23 1685/12/8 1686 1686 1686
Rusthof Z A SE .661 .103 .558 1721/5/15 1722 1722/11/10 1723/4/19 1723 639 640
Rusthof Z A SE .481 .22 .459 1724/3/10 1725 1725/ 4/23 1725/8/15 1725/11/18 641 695
Rusthof Z A SE .684 .74 .610 1726/4/20 1727 1727/ 4/16 1727 1728 642
Rusthof Z A S .664 .120 .544 1730/2/15 1730 1730/11/20 1731/3/17 1731 546
Rusthof Z SC S .719 .345 .374 1732 1733/11/21 1734/3/1 1734/6/13 1734 643 644
Salamander AM GC 500 75 425 1674/8/15 1675 1675 1675 1676 652
Salamander SL SC S .485 .66 .419 1687/7/29 1688/1/15 1688/4/12 1688/8/11 1688 652
Samaritaan Z A 525 75 450 1687/11/29 1688/7/20 1688 1689 1689
Sara S 525 75 450 1687 1688 1688 1688 674
Sara & Maria ~ WG SC c .173 23 150 1687 1688/2/10 1688 1688 1688 560
Sem Galey SL 400 60 340 1722/8/15 1723 1723 1724 1724
Sem Galey SL 400 60 340 1725/1/15 1725 1725 1726 1726
Sem Galey 350 150 . 0 1726/9/15 1727 1727 653
Seven Gebroeders Z BB 200 30 170 1674 1675 1675 1675 1676
Son (Vergulde) SL SC c .369 .54 .315 1701/5/3 1701/7/20 1701/12/11 1702 1702 561
Son (Vergulde) AM SC s .513 .134 .379 1703/1/22 1703/8/26 1703/11/6 1704 1704 556 654
Son (Vergulde) SL A c .694 .135 .559 1704 1705 1705/10/12 1706 1706 647
Son (Vergulde) M SC c .559 .142 .417 1707 1707/9/2 1707/12/30 1708 1708 655 684
Sonnesteynl ^ WG BB c .103 .37 .66 1714 1715 1715/ 9/21 1715 1716 656
Sonnesteyn2 AM 600 75 525 1722/5/15 1723 1723 1723 1723
Sonnesteyn2 AM SC .587 ? 0 . 0 1724/2/10 1724/9/3 1724
Sonnesteyn3 AM GC SE .627 .70 .557 1725/11/23 1726/3/7 1726/5/9 1727/3/1 1727/5/17 657
Sonnesteyn3 AM 600 100 500 1729/9/4 1730 1730 1731 1731
St. Alida AM SC SP 600 90 510 1685 1685/10/3 1685 1686 1686
St. Andries M SC s .563 .83 .480 1715 1716/4/23 1716/6/13 1716/7/21 1716 645
St. Andries s 545 68 .477 1717 1718 1718 1719 1719 645
St. Clara SL A 550 75 475 1707/5/31 1708 1708 1709 1709 692
St. Clara SL SC s .517 .66 .451 1709 1710/8/3 1710/10/12 1711 1711 646
St. Clara SL SC c .584 .132 .452 1711 1712/9/2 1712/11/26 1713 1713 647
St. Claral c 525 75 450 1692 1693 1693 1693 1694
St. Francis Xavier Z A SP 525 75 450 1680/10/24 1681 1681 1682 1682 665
St. Jago~ WG SC .200 35 165 1707 1708 1708
St. Jan AM SC 525 75 450 1680 1681/2/28 1681 1682 1682
St. Jan AM SC s .500 . 9 .491 1683 1684 1684/ 4/ 9 1684 1684 629
St. Jan SL A s 500 75 425 1685/8/15 1687 1687 1688 1688 514
St. Laurens^ SL GC s .162 . 13 .149 1733 1734/4/15 1734/6/8 1734/8/8 1734 617
St. Laurens^ AM GC s .171 .27 .144 1735 1736/2/14 1736/6/17 1736 1737 651
Appendix 1 (cont)
P or t s s laves Left Left Arrival Left Return Captain Sp.
St. Marcus AM SC C .585 .28 .557 1713 1713/11/21 1714/1/19 1714/6/15 1714 511
St. Pieter A 600 90 510 1679 1680 1680 1681 1681 FL
Stad & Lande SL GC S .751 .76 .675 1726/9/2 1727/5/16 1727/6/28 1727/8/23 1727/10/01 575
Stad & Lande SL SC C .779 .177 .602 1728/9/30 1729/5/27 1729/8/10 1729 1730 575
Stad & Lande NK SC S .439 .307 .132 1731 1732/4/29 1732/8/1 1733/3/9 1733 529 K
Stad & lande NK GM s .760 .349 .411 1734 1735/2/17 1735/4/19 1735/7/15 1735 522 659
Stad & Lande M GC s .800 .88 .712 1736 1737 1737/ 6/24 1737 1738 660
StadhouderFriesland GC GE .106 .10 .96 1697 1698 1698/ 5/ 5 1698 1699 658
Steenhuysen M A SE .780 .88 .692 1723/8/20 1724 1724/ 9/19 1725/3/29 1725/5/11 616 F
Steenhuysen M GC S .789 .102 .687 1725/11/25 1726 1726/10/ 2 1727/3/28 1727/6/02 662 688 F
Steenhuysen M GM s .645 .83 .562 1728/4/7 1729/2/12 1729/4/4 1729/7/4 1729 683 F
Steenhuysen M GM s .625 .53 .572 1730 1731/9/28 1731/12/14 1732/4/4 1732 683 F
Steenhuysen AM GC s .800 .25 .775 1736/1/3 1736/12/19 1737/2/13 1737 1737 534 F
Surin. Koopman AM SC c 550 67 .483 1679 1680 1680/11/17 1681 1681
s'Graveland AM A SE .517 .16 .501 1724/10/31 1725 1725/ 9/28 1726/4/22 1726/6/07 546
Tholen ~ Z GS GE .90 .10 .80 1675/4/15 1675/10/28 1676 1676 1676/6/12 696 F
Tholen ~ WG C .150 .20 .130 1687 1688/7/15 1688 1688 1689 F
Vergulde Vryheyt A C .694 .23 .671 1700 1701 1701/ 3/9 1701 1701 664
Vergulde Vryhyt + ZL SE 400 50 350 1718 1718 1719/ 4/15 1719 1719 680
Vigilantie C 400 ?200 ?200 1676 1677 1677/ 4/22 1677 1677 RC
Vliegent Hert + ZL A ST 480 60 .420 1706 1707/1/28 1707 1707 1708 665
Vlissings Welvaren ~ SL A C .194 . 0 .194 1715 1716 1716/ 3/13 1716 1716 505
Vogel Phenix A C 525 75 450 1675 1675/10/25 1676 1676 1676 516
Vogel Phenix S 525 75 450 1677 1677 1677/12/25 1680/2/06
Vogel Phenix GS 300 7150 ?150 1680 1681 1681/10/12 1682 1682
Vreede A C 550 75 475 1679 1680 1680/ 4/22 1680 1680 578
Vreede A S .437 . 10 .427 1683 1684 1684/ 8/29 1685/2/18 1685 547
Vriendschap GM C .393 .72 .321 1703 1704/2/20 1704/5/9 1704 1705 585
Vrye Zee AM C 550 75 475 1689/12/17 1690 1690 1691 1691 697
Vryheyt NK SC c .521 71 450 1680 1681/3/28 1681 1681 1682
Vryheyt SC .520 .80 .440 1682 1683/2/8 1683 1683 1683
Vryheyt SC 525 75 450 1683 1684 1684 1685 1685
Vryheyt SL GC C 520 70 450 1686 1687 1687 1687 1688 666
Vryheyt2 AM GC GB 450 50 .400 1721/2/15 1721/12/25 1722/1/31 1722 1722 667 HB
Vryheyt2 NK A SE .419 .44 .375 1723/5/13 1724 1724/12/30 1725/6/18 1725/8/27 668
Vryheyt2 NK S 450 70 380 1726/6/10 1727 1727/ 7/21 1727/9/25 1728/1/17 698 529
Vryheyt2 AM 525 75 450 1729/4/8 1730 1730 1731 1731
Vryheyt2 AM GC S .647 .104 .543 1731 1732/6/25 1732/8/24 1732/12/26 1733 657 R
Vryheyt2 AM SC S .605 .42 .563 1733 1734/5/30 1734/8/1 1734/10/20 1735 657
Vryheyt2 AM GC S .670 .31 .639 1735 1736/6/25 1736/8/14 1737/11/12 1737 617
Waartwyk NK 500 75 425 1726/1/15 1726 1726 1727 1727
Waartwyk SL SC S .433 .90 .343 1729 1730 1730/12/25 1731 1731 675
Waartwyk GC s .493 .55 .438 1731 1732/9/3 1732/11/18 1733/4/24 1733 675
Wakende Craen ~ WG GC c .190 .15 .175 1705 1706/9/9 1706/11/30. 1707 1707 670 Y
Wapen v Amsterdam SC 525 75 450 1684 1685 1685 1686 1686
Wapen v Amsterdam AM c 525 75 450 1686 1687 1688 1688 1688/7/19
Wapen v Holland M SC c .664 .211 .453 1700 1701 1701/6/27 1701 1702 669 548
Wapen v Holland M SC s 500 61 .439 1702/4/26 1702 1702/11/29 1703 1703 548
Wapen v Holland M A c .712 .150 .562 1704 1705 1705/5/10 1705/7/25 1706 583
Wapen v Zirickzee SC c .508 .24 .484 1685 1686/2/14 1686 1686 1687 672
Wapen v Zirickzee SC 525 75 450 1687 1688/10/13 1689 1689 1689 C
Welvaren AM SC s 425 55 370 1682 1683 1683/1/17 1683/6/30 1683 673 674
West Souburg ~ WG GC GS .200 30 170 1681 1682/2/8 1682 1682 1683
West Souburg ~ WG GE .200 .30 .170 1683 1684 1684 1685 1685
Westindisch Huys SL SC C .540 .70 .470 1698 1698/12/1 1699 1698 1699
Westindisch Huys AM SC SP .762 .115 .647 1700 1700/12/7 1701/3/9 1701 1701 681 U
Winthont Z SC C .555 .24 .531 1698 1699/9/23 1699/12/1 1700 1700 676
Winthont Z SC S .495 .30 .465 1700/12/16 1701 1701/9/24 1702/3/14 1702 677 678
Zondernaaml GS .350 130 220 1694 1695/6/9 1695 1695 1696 682
Zondernaam2 SE 200 25 175 1697 1699 1698/9/16 1698 1698 594
Appendix 2
Slave-ship data of the free trade, 1730-1803
Ports Slave! Left Left Arrival Left Return Last Cap. Sale Sp
Ship name Hoi. Af. Am. In Died Land Holland Africa America America Holland 1 2 Ship C Firm
Abraham Z 250 40 210 1764/2/25 1764 1764 1765 1766/01/17 310 AK
Abraham Z 250 50 200 1766 1768 1768 1769 1769/05/15 001 AK
Achtienhoven z 375 100 275 1730/12/11 1731 1732 1732 1732/09/11 60 002 JG
Achtienhoven z 375 35 340 1733/01/28 1733 1734 1734 1734/08/27 60
Achtienhoven z 375 75 300 1734/05/09 1735 1735 1736 1736/05/13 60
Achtienhoven z 375 65 310 1737/04/25 1738 1738 1738 1738/10/06 60 IG
Achtienhoven z 375 35 340 1739/04/13 1740 1740 1740 1740/08/18 60
Achtienhoven z 375 55 320 1740/11/17 1741 1741 1742 1742/03/05 60
Achtienhoven z 375 25 350 1742/09/03 1743 1743 1743 1743/11/20 60
Achtienhoven z 375 45 330 1744/10/15 1745 1745 1745 1745/11/15 60
Achtienhoven z 375 40 335 1746 1746 1747 1746 1746 60
Achtienhoven2 z 400 40 360 1747 1748 1748 1749 1749 70
Achtienhoven2 z 400 80 320 1750/09/15 1751 1751 1752 1752/04/15 70 003
Achtienhoven2 z 400 100 300 1752/07/15 1753 1753 1754 1754/06/15 70
Achtienhoven2 z 400 70 330 1754/08/15 1755 1755 1756 1756/03/15 70 003
Achtienhoven2 z 400 30 370 1756/05/15 1757 1757 1757 1757/09/15 70
Active Fleishing z 150 10 140 1791 1792 1792 1792 1793
Adrana Maria z A S 230 30 200 1748 1749 1749/09/16 1749 1750 004
Adriana Petronella z A S 370 34 .336 1758/06/15 1759 1759/05/27 1759/09/07 1759/12/15 005 6 A JSZ
Adriana Petronella z A s 360 43 .317 1760/05/15 1761 1761/07/09 1761/10/01 1762/02/15 007 A JSZ
Adriana Petronella z A GB 350 50 300 1762/05/15 1763 1763 1763 1763 007 A JSZ
Adriana Petronella z A S 360 41 .319 1763/12/19 1764 1765/02/20 1765 1765/07/01 007 A JSZ
Adriana Petronella z A s 325 25 .300 1765/11/15 1766 1766/08/17 1766/10/17 1767/02/15 007 b JSZ
Africa M 300 80 .220 1753/03/15 1754 1754 1755 1755/07/15 52 008 H&M
Africa M 300 60 240 1755/11/15 1756 1756 1757 1757/06/15 52 009 H&M
Africa M 300 20 280 1757/09/15 1758 1758 1759 1759/05/15 52 009 H&M
Africa M 275 35 240 1759/05/15 1760 1760 1760 1760/09/15 52 H&M
Africa M 275 60 215 1760 1761 1762 1762 1762/09/15 52 H&M
Africa M c 250 25 225 1763/10/29 1764 1765 1765 1765 52 H&M
Africa Z GG S 260 40 .220 1765/11/11 1767 1767/08/08 1767/09/11 1767/10/02 52 010 cA JZZ
Africaan AM GG S 210 35 .175 1741 1742 1742/12/01 1743/02/19 1743 Oil cA JSZ
Africaan AM S 260 30 .230 1743 1744 1744/08/12 1744/11/28 1745 012 sA JSZ
Africaan AM GG S 320 20 .300 1745 1745 1746/07/12 1746/10/01 1746 012 cA JSZ
Africain M GG SE 300 30 .270 1766/10/15 1767 1768 1768 1768 C&R
Afrikaan Z 300 40 260 1789/10/15 1790 1790 1791 1791 101
Afrikaan AM 300 40 260 1791/09/15 1792 1792 1793 1793 101
Afrikaanse Galey Z 300 40 260 1735/09/21 1736 1736 1736 1737/01/24 65 F MCC
Afrikaanse Galey Z GG S .341 .70 .271 1740/10/26 1741 1741/07/20 1741 1742/01/15 65 013 F Cr MCC
Afrikaanse Galey Z GG S .330 .66 .264 1742/05/24 1743 1743/03/21 1743/06/15 1743/08/07 65 014 F cC MCC
Afrikaanse Galey Z 325 50 275 1743/10/21 1744 1744 1744 1744/11/09 65 014 F MCC
Afrikaanse Galey z 350 50 300 1745/09/10 1746 1746 1746 1747 65 F MCC
Afrikaanse Galey z 300 30 270 1748/08/01 1749 1749 1749 1749 65 F MCC
Afrikaanse Galey z 325 75 250 1750 1751 1751 1752 1752/03/15 65015 F MCC
Algemene Welvaart z GG GD 270 40 .230 1787/08/05 1788/10/11 1788/12/11 1788/12/26 1789 016 F FC
Amazantha z 300 90 210 1731/01/18 1731 1732 1732 1732/09/09 55 017 RS
Amazantha z 300 20 280 1735/02/01 1736 1736 1736 1736/06/13 55 AS
Amazantha z 300 20 280 1738/04/26 1739 1739 1740 1740/03/21 55
America2 z A S 260 30 .230 1763/03/09 1763 1764/02/28 1764/05/11 1764/07/21 71 018 19 A JZZ
America2 z A s 260 19 .241 1764/11/16 1765 1765/06/27 1765/08/23 1765/11/15 71 020 b JZZ
America2 z A GB 270 62 .208 1766/04/06 1767 1767/06/17 1767 1767/11/02 71 020 K JZZ
Amerika S 145 15 .130 1743 1744 1744/11/17 1745/03/20 1745 021 B
Amerika AM GG S 175 25 .150 1745 1746 1746/08/29 1746 1747 021 94 B A
Amphitrite A S 250 100 .150 1764 1765 1765/08/22 1766/02/27 1766 022 23
Andries Z 450 120 330 1731/04/07 1732 1732 1732 1733/03/23 71 024 AD
Anna Catharina Z S 300 24 .276 1769/06/15 1770 1770/04/12 1770/05/25 1770/07/15 71 024 b H&L
Anna Catharina Z A 300 50 250 1770/12/02 1771 1772 1772 1772/02/20 71 028 H&L
Appendix 2 (cont)
Ports Slaves Left Left Arrival Left Return Last Cap. Sale Sc>
Ship name Hoi. AAf. Am. In Died Land Holland Africa America America Holland 1 2 Ship C Firm
Anna Catharina Z A 275 35 240 1772/10/20 1773 1773 1773 1773/12/02 H&L
Anna Catharina Z A S 265 35 230 1774/10/28 1775 1775/09/16 1775 1776/0607 71 028 H&L
Anna Galey AM S 264 40 224 1745 1746 1746/03/18 1746/06/07 1746 025 26 sA
Anna Galey AM C 230 30 200 1746 1747 1747/12/19 1748 1748 027
Anna Galey AM GG S 200 54 .146 1749 1750 1750/06/16 1750/09/11 1750 027 c
Anna Galey AM GG S 280 19 .261 1751 1752 1752/06/03 1752/07/29 1752 027 cA
Anna Maria GG M 330 30 300 1763 1764 1764/10/24 1765 1765 116
Anna Maria GG S 320 33 287 1766 1767 1767/03/29 1767/05/01 1767 116 30 c
Anna Maria GG S 310 28 282 1768 1769 1769/05/23 1769/07/28 1769 030 c
Anthony Ewout Z A S 320 30 290 1761/10/15 1762 1762/07/15 1762 1763/02/15 55 032 33 A JSZ
Anthony Ewout Z A S 330 30 300 1763/06/21 1764 1764/04/05 1764/05/11 1764/07/20 033 A JSZ
Anthony Ewout Z A S 300 50 250 1764/10/07 1765 1765/07/08 1765/08/22 1765/12/11 033 bA JSZ
Anthony Ewout Z A S 250 50 200 1766/04/06 1767 1767/08/01 1767/10/20 1768/03/02 033 bA JSZ
Armina Elisabeth GG S .120 .11 .109 1774 1775 1775/05/30 1775 1776 034 35 r
Aurora Z A GB .318 .6 .312 1771/10/24 1772 1772/12/01 1773 1773/04/21 97 036 F MCC
Aurora Z A GS .319 .10 .309 1773/12/14 1774 1775/02/02 1775 1775/09/14 97 036 F MCC
Aurora Z GG SE .260 .11 .249 1776/04/19 1776 1777 1777 1777/06/04 97 F MCC
Aurora Z GG S .326 .42 .282 1779/01/03 1779 1779/11/15 1780 1780/05/29 97 037 F MCC
Aurora Z GG 1780/10/28 1 97 038 F cMCC
Aurora2 M GG S 275 25 .250 1787/12/24 1789 1789/04/23 1789 1789 75 03940 ]Br wC&R
Avontura Galey Z 275 40 235 1741/10/28 1742 1742 1743 1743/04/11 AL
Avontura Galey Z 275 40 225 1743/08/19 1744 1744 1744 1744/10/12 AL
Avontura Galey Z 1745/02/15 1 b AL
Avonture Z GG S 325 75 250 1771/12/05 1773 1773/05/11 1773/07/02 1773/09/01 120 041 B&S
Avonturier AM GC GD 325 25 .300 1785/12/22 1786/11/04 1787/01/05 1787 1787 042 C
Baskenburg Z 250 230 .20 1743/09/07 1744 1744/07/23 043 s
Belisarius Z GB .230 .194 .36 1771/01/13 1771 1771/11/30 72 044 wDMW
Berbice Verlangen AM 1789/11/15 1791 045 w vdN
Beyerland Z 250 20 230 1731/05/08 1732 1733 1733 1733/06/05 49 046 AD
Beyerland Z 1734/10/28 1734 1734 1735 1735/04/03 49 BW
Beyerland Z 275 35 240 1737/10/21 1738 1738 1739 1739/04/27 49 IG
Beyerland z 1739/07/06 1740 1740 1740 1740/07/18 49 IG
Beyerland z 250 30 220 1741/01/23 1742 1742 1742 1742/12/05 49 IG
Brandenburg z GG GS .226 .24 .202 1791/06/16 1792 1792 1793 1793/09/05 H MCC
Burggraaf z 275 65 210 1730/12/15 1732 1732 1732 1733/02/14 50 047 RS
Burggraaf z 775 15 260 1733/05/01 1735 1735 1735 1735/11/10 50 048 MR
Burggraaf z 275 20 255 1735/10/27 1736 1736 1737 1737/03/29 50 AS
Carolina Medioburg. z GS 350 43 .307 1762/12/07 1763 1763 1764 1764/07/06 99 049 B&S
Carolina Medioburg. z 340 40 .300 1769/11/15 1770 1770 1771 1771/05/15 99 B&S
Carolina Medioburg. z SI 330 50 .280 1771/11/18 1772 1772/12/10 1773 1773/05/20 99 065 B&S
Carolina Medioburg. z GG GE 340 40 .300 1774/01/02 1774 1774/11/29 1775 1775/06/09 99 050 B&S
Casteel Souburg M GC S 290 33 .257 1752 1753 1753/07/24 1754/02/01 1754 051 cA
Catharina Galey GC C .556 .96 .460 1742 1743/12/15 1743 1743 1743 310
Catharina Galey GC c .460 .60 .400 1747 1748/03/01 1748 1748 1749 311
Catharina Hendrina M 400 50 350 1774 1775 1775 1776 1776 118 052 C&R
Christoffel Z A s 440 40 .400 1759/06/15 1760 1760/03/19 1760/07/04 1760/09/15 60 053 A TW
Christoffel Z 400 50 350 1760 1761 1762 1762 1762/06/15 60 053 TW
Christoffel Z A s 400 28 .372 1762/09/15 1763 1763/07/16 1763/11/10 1764 80 054 55 A TW
Christoffel Z A s 230 30 .200 1764/07/30 1765 1765/11/03 1766 1766/04/15 80 055 A TW
Christoffel z A s 250 50 .200 1766/07/10 1767 1767/10/07 1768/01/08 1768/04/17 80 055 56 A TW
Clasina Petronella A s 350 20 .330 1764 1765 1765/09/08 1765 1766 057 58 A
Clasina Petronella A s 270 90 .180 1766 1767 1767/07/29 1767/10/09 1767 059 cA
Concordia z 375 65 310 1732/06/22 1733 1734 1734 1734/06/13 69 060 JG
Concordia z 375 65 310 1734/11/08 1735 1735 1736 1736/04/19 69
Concordia z 375 65 310 1737/01/24 1737 1738 1738 1738/06/02 69 FG
Appendix 2 (cont)
Ports Slaves Left Left Arrival Left Return Last Cap. Sale Sp
Ship name Hoi . Af. Am. In Died Land Holland Africa America America Holland 1 2 Ship C Firm
Concordia Z 375 65 310 1738/08/18 1739 1739 1740 1740/03/14 69 MA
Concordia Z 375 65 310 1740/06/02 1741 1741 1741 1741/10/20 69 FC
Concordia z 375 65 310 1742/03/22 1743 1743 1743 1743/07/22 69 JG
Concordia z 375 65 310 1744/04/15 1745 1745 1745 1745/06/15 69
Concordia z 375 65 310 1745 1746 1746 1746 1746 69
Concordia2 z 400 50 350 1747 1748 1748 1748 1749
Conordia2 z 400 60 340 1750 1751 1751 1752 1752/03/15
Concordia2 z 400 90 310 1752/07/15 1753 1754 1754 1754/06/15
Concordia2 z 400 50 350 1755/04/15 1756 1756 1756 1756/09/15 061
Cornelia GG SI 320 40 .280 1763 1764 1764/07/13 1764 1764 062
Cornelia Christoffel z 300 45 255 1732/04/12 1733 1733 1734 1734/03/11 064 FC
Cornelia Christoffel z 300 45 255 1735/01/09 1735 1735 1736 1736/04/26
Cornelia Christoffel z 300 50 250 1740/04/11 1741 1741 1741 1741/07/16 FC
Cornelia Christoffel z 300 50 250 1746 1747 1747 1748 1748
Cornelia2 z GG GD 175 25 .150 1788/09/11 1790/02/16 1790/06/26 1790 1790 61 063 JZZ
Diagne Johanna z GG GS 290 32 .258 1767/03/11 1767 1767/12/18 1768 1768/07/06 100 066 GH
Diagne Johanna z GG GE 290 21 .269 1768/09/16 1769/06/15 1769/08/26 1770 1770/05/15 100 066 0 GH
Dirk Apolonia z A SI 525 25 .500 1757/06/15 1758 1758/02/20 1758 1758/07/15 70 067 TW
Dirk Apolonia z A SI 540 32 .508 1759/09/15 1760 1760/05/30 1760 1760/1015 70 067 TW
Dirk Apolonia z 400 50 350 1761 1761 1762 1762 1762/06/15 70 TW
Dirk Apolonia z A 450 50 400 1763/03/07 1763 1764 1764 1764/06/15 93 067 TW
Dirk Apolonia z A s 460 60 .400 1765/09/14 1766 1766/08/02 1766/10/17 1767/03/13 93 067 bA TW
Dirk Apolonia z A s 350 90 .260 1767/07/17 1768 1768/11/13 1769/02/14 1769/05/09 93 068 b TW
Dolphijn z A s 326 20 .306 1747 1748 1748/07/11 1748/09/27 1748 60 069 s
Dolphijn Z GG S 315 35 .280 1749 1749 1750/01/28 1750/04/13 1750 60 069 sA
Dolphijn Z 320 40 280 1750/08/15 1751 1751 1751 1751 60
Dolphijn z GG S 280 34 .246 1751 1751 1751/10/13 1752/01/08 1752 60 069 s
Dolphijn z GG s 320 41 .279 1752/06/15 1753 1753/03/13 1753/06/02 1753 60 069 s
Dolphijn z GC s 280 30 .250 1753/11/15 1754 1755/02/10 1755/05/13 1755/06/30 60 069 A JTW
Dolphijn z GC s 300 30 .270 1756/01/15 1756 1756/12/22 1757/03/03 1757/06/15 60 069 A
Dolphijn z GG s 300 26 .274 1757/09/15 1758 1758/09/18 1759/01/17 1759 60 069 70
Domburg z s 520 57 .463 1744/11/16 1745 1745/10/05 1745/12/28 1746/04/13 071 0 s A DMW
Domburg z A s 580 73 .507 1748 1749 1749/04/03 1749/08/19 1749 072 c A DMW
Domburg z A s 470 50 420 1763 1763 1763/07/22 1763/11/10 1764 073 A DMW
Drie Gebroeders M SC s 380 60 .320 1762/12/15 1763 1764/03/05 1764/06/01 1764 94 074 F A C&R
Drie Gebroeders M GG s 410 40 .370 1764/10/15 1765 1765/11/16 1766/03/14 1766 94 074 F A C&R
Drie Gebroeders M GG GB 400 40 360 1766/10/15 1767 1768 1768 1768 94 075 F C C&R
Drie Gezusters Z GZ s .234 .23 .211 1755/08/13 1756 1756/06/23 1756/08/20 1756/10/21 61 076 S A r MCC
Drie Gezusters Z GG SE .405 .14 .391 1757/06/24 1758 1758/03/22 1759 1759/11/04 61 077 S MCC
Drie Gezusters Z GG 1761/12/15 1762 61 077 s b MCC
Duynvliet C 400 50 350 1741 1741 1742 1742 1742 WIC
Duynvliet S 390 51 .339 1743 1744 1744/12/30 1745/05/06 1745 078 c A WIC
Eendragt Z 450 120 330 1730/12/17 1731 1732 1732 1733/02/01 80 079 MCC
Eendragt2 Z GG 1779/10/27 80 b H&L
Eenhoorn Z 250 40 210 1747 1748 1748 1748 1749 55
Eenhoorn Z 250 30 220 1749 1750 1750 1750 1750 09/15 55
Eenhoorn Z 250 30 220 1751/01/15 1751 1752 1752 1752 55 081
Eenhoorn Z 250 60 190 1752/10/15 1754 1754 1754 1754/12/15 55
Eenhoorn2 s 260 34 .226 1765/07/15 1766 1766/06/01 1766 1766 082 AwJCH
Eenigheid z GG GS .326 .33 .293 1761/10/01 1762/05/10 1762/07/04 1762/12/17 1763/03/26 083 s MCC
Eenigheid z GG M .256 .67 .189 1763/08/14 1764 1764/12/29 1765 1765/08/08 89 084 s r MCC
Eenigheid z A S .315 .62 .253 1766/02/08 1767 1767/05/27 1767/07/31 1767/11/09 89 085 s c A MCC
Eensgezindheid z A 1780/11/29 1781/07/02 1781/08/13 086 H c
Appendix 2 (cont)
Eerste Edele Z 285 35 250 1751/12/15 1752 1753 1753 1753 54 087
Eerste Edele Z GC S 275 60 .215 1753/08/15 1754 1754/09/12 1754/12/02 1755/03/15 54 087 b A
Eerste Edele Z A S 300 20 .280 1755/08/15 1756 1756/11/05 1757 1757/05/15 54 032 A
Eerste Edele Z GG s 270 34 .236 1757/09/15 1758 1758/12/01 1759/04/06 1759/09/15 54 032
Elisabeth M GG s 460 60 .400 1772 1773/07/25 1773/09/18 1774/02/11 1774 106 010 c C&R
Elisabeth M GG s 550 50 .500 1776 1777 1777/06/04 1777 1777 106 010 C&R
Elisabeth M GG 1780 106 089 b C&R
Elisabeth Sophia Z A s 260 20 .240 1764/11/16 1765 1765/11/16 1766 1766/04/15 79 091 A DMW
Elisabeth Sophia Z A s 280 50 .230 1766/07/27 1767 1767/09/03 1768/03/18 1768/04/25 79 091 kDMW
Elisabeth Sophia z A s 260 30 230 1768/08/28 1769 1769/11/27 1770/02/24 1771 79 091 b DMW
Elisabeth2 M GC s 280 30 .250 1790/03/07 1791/04/30 1791/07/27 1791/11/04 1792 090
Epaminond'as Z GC s .200 .50 .150 1785/02/12 1785/10/24 1785/12/26 1786 1786 092 H SR
Essequibo Vriendsch. Z 320 45 275 1743/12/15 1744 1745 1745 1745/04/15
Europa Z 300 50 250 1754/06/15 1755 1755 1756 1756/04/15 53 095 JZZ
Europa Z 300 50 250 1756/06/15 1757 1757 1757 1758/02/15 53 081 JZZ
Europa Z 300 20 280 1758/07/15 1759 1759 1759 1760/03/15 53 081 JZZ
Europa Z 275 25 250 1760/05/15 1761 1761 1761 1762/02/15 53 081 JZZ
Europa Z 275 35 240 1762/05/05 1763 1763 1763 1764 70 081 JZZ
Europa Z GG 275 75 200 1766/09/22 1767 1768 1768 1768/10/15 70 311 JZZ
Francois Catharina AM GG s 290 37 .253 1747 1747 1747/11/30 1748/03/11 1748 097
Francois Pieter Z 300 60 240 1754/04/15 1755 1755 1756 1756/04/15 57 098
Francois Pieter Z s 275 25 250 1756/08/15 1757 1757 1757 1758/02/15 57
Frans Will em M s 305 30 .275 1756 1757 1757/10/20 1758 1758/12/15 62 099 S C&R
Frans Willem M s 320 30 .290 1758/12/15 1759 1759 1759/09/13 1760 62 099 s C&R A
Frans Willem M GG s 330 28 .302 1760/08/15 1761 1761/04/20 1761/06/27 1761 62 100 s C&R A
Frans Willem M GG s 330 27 .303 1761/12/15 1762 1762/09/12 1762/12/30 1763 62 100 s C&R
Frans Willem M GC s 310 35 .275 1763 1764 1764/07/06 1764 1765 58 100 s C&R
Frans Willem M GG s 260 33 .227 1765 1765 1766/02/06 1766/04/25 1766 58 010 s A C&R
Frederika Sophia M A s 340 64 .276 1769/07/11 1770 1770/06/01 1770/07/14 1770 101 b H&M
Frederika Sophia M GG S 420 20 .400 1770/11/19 1772 1772/04/28 1772 1772 101 H&M
Geertruy Elisabet Z GC S 280 60 .220 1753/09/15 1754 1754/09/01 1754/11/02 1755/01/15 60 109 bA AK
Geertruy Elisabet Z GC s 290 30 .260 1755/06/15 1756 1756/06/01 1756/08/20 1756/10/15 60 109 A AK
Geertruy Elisabet Z GG s 340 20 .320 1757/02/15 1757 1757/12/06 1758/03/03 1758/06/15 60 109 AK
Geertruy Elisabet Z GG s 320 30 .290 1758/09/15 1759 1759/06/27 1759/10/12 1760/03/15 60 109 AK
Geertruy Elisabet z GG s 330 30 .300 1760/07/15 1761 1761/06/24 1761 1762/12/15 60 110 AK
Geertruy Elisabet z GG s 320 60 .280 1762/05/05 1763 1763/05/10 1764 1764 110 A AK
Geertruyda z A s 400 44 .356 1756 1757 1758/01/14 1758 1758/07/15 59 102 58
Geertruyda z A s 400 40 .360 1758/09/15 1759 1759/06/01 1759 1759/12/15 59 058
Geertruyda z A s 310 66 .244 1760/03/15 1761 1761/04/08 1761 1761/10/15 59 058 A
Geertruyda z A s 400 60 .340 1761/12/15 1762 1762/11/05 1763 1763 59 103 A
Geertruyda Catharina GG s 290 40 .250 1774 1775 1775/07/09 1775/10/20 1776 105 c MCC
Geertruyda Christina z GG GS .261 .33 .228 1767/11/23 1768 1768/12/08 1769 1769/05/29 107 106 107 F A MCC
Geertruyda Christina z GG s .321 .38 .283 1769/11/22 1770 1770/12/03 1771/02/08 1771/04/27 107 068 F b MCC
Geertruyda Christina z GG c .289 .41 .248 1771/08/22 1772 1772/08/27 1773 1773/05/19 107 107 F MCC
Geertruyda Christina z GG SE .345 .73 .272 1774/05/09 1775 1775/06/06 1775 1776/02/22 107 105 F r MCC
Geertruyda Christina z GG SE .304 .11 .293 1776/10/27 1777 1777/11/08 1778 1778/06/06 107 068 F c MCC
Geertruyda Christina z GG s .276 .131 .145 1783/08/21 1785/04/29 1785/06/29 1785 1785/08/17 107 108 F MCC
Geertruyda Galey GG s 450 75 .375 1762 1763 1763/06/07 1763 1764 104
Genoveva Maria z 315 40 275 1731/06/02 1732/02/12 1733 1733 1733/06/06 53 250 MR
Genoveva Maria z 315 40 275 1733/09/29 1734 1734 1735 1735/02/28 53 AS
Genoveva Maria z 315 40 275 1735/08/11 1736 1736 1736 1736/08/30 53 SR
Genoveva Maria z 315 40 275 1737/08/19 1738 1738 1738 1739/01/26 53 AS
Genoveva Maria z 315 35 280 1740/03/07 1740 1741 1741 1741/04/24 53
Genoveva Maria z 315 40 275 1741/10/14 1742 1742 1743 1743/04/08 53
Genoveva Maria z GG s .265 .5 .260 1743/06/20 1744 1744/02/10 1744/04/16 1744/06/29 53 111 s A
Genoveva Maria z s 310 23 .287 1745/01/15 1745 1745/09/16 1745/12/02 1746/03/15 53 111 c A
Genoveva Maria z A s 300 21 .279 1746 1746 1746/12/16 1747/03/07 1747 53 112 s A
Genoveva Maria z A s 325 34 .291 1747 1748 1748/08/10 1748/09/27 1748 53 112 S
Appendix 2 (cont)
Ship name Hoi. \f.
J Am. In ]Died Land Holland Africa America America Holland 1 2 Ship C Firm
Gerardina Petronel Z 300 40 260 1731/03/02 1732 1732 1732 1732/09/03 68 113 AD
Gezegend Zuikerriet AM S 350 50 .300 1744 1745 1745/02/15 1745/05/07 1745 011 115 s
Gezegend Zuikerriet AM S 350 50 .300 1747 1748 1748/04/30 1748/07/17 1748 115 c
Gezegend Zuikerriet AM GG S 285 50 .235 1749 1750 1751/01/18 1751/04/17 1751 115 116 s
Gezegend Zuikerriet AM GG S 330 44 .286 1751 1752 1752/12/27 1753/03/12 1753 116 c
Gezegend Zuikerriet AM GC S 290 40 .250 1753 1754 1754/09/04 1754/11/29 1755 116 c
Goed Success GC S 300 30 270 1755 1756 1756/06/05 1756 1757 308 A
Goed Voornemen AM GC S 320 44 .276 1790/10/24 1791/04/23 1791/06/05 1791 1792 117 F H&L
Goed Voornemen Z GC S 320 12 .308 1792/04/30 1793/05/23 1793/07/06 1793 1794 117 F H&L
Goede Hoop Z GD 460 33 .427 1786 1787 1787/10/25 1788 1788 109 297 F H&L
Goede Hoop M GC 1788 109 297 F d H&L
Goede Oogmerk Z 175 15 160 1792/05/07 1793 1794 1794 1794 J.M
Goede Verwachting Z GC GS 228 200 .28 1765/11/15 1767 1767 1767 1768 312 Cw
Grenadier z S .236 .29 .207 1741/06/09 1742 1742/04/21 1742 1742/10/21 68 F C MCC
Grenadier z GG s .304 .26 .278 1743/03/01 1743 1743/11/20 1744/02/22 1744/05/30 68 118 F s A MCC
Grenadier z GG s .376 .56 .320 1745/06/10 1746 1746/09/08 1747/01/10 1747/04/10 68 119 120 Fc A MCC
Grenadier z A s .352 .156 .196 1748/08/17 1749 1749/11/23 1750/03/14 1750/06/06 68 121 Fs Ak MCC
Grenadier z GG GB .289 .16 .273 1751/01/03 1751 1752 1752 1752/05/09 68 F MCC
Grenadier z 300 40 260 1752/09/15 1753 1753 1754 1754/07/15 68 077 F MCC
Groningen AM GC S 145 10 .135 1786/08/09 1787/02/28 1787/04/11 1787 1787 117
Groot Prooyen Z s .225 .29 .196 1742/02/20 1742 1742/12/22 1743/03/04 1743/06/06 68 122 Fc C MCC
Groot Prooyen Z s .338 .67 .271 1743/11/24 1744 1744/12/16 1745/04/08 1745/06/01 68 014 Fc A MCC
Groot Prooyen Z s .328 .62 .266 1747/10/27 1748 1748/08/08 1748/11/10 1749/02/08 68 123 Fc A MCC
Guineese Galey Z s .246 .40 .206 1740/07/20 1741 1741/07/13 1741 1742/01/16 52 014 B C MCC
Guineese Galey Z 250 25 225 1742/06/04 1743 1743 1743 1743/11/25 52 B MCC
Guineese Galey Z 250 40 210 1744/10/09 1745 1745 1745 1746/01/15 52 B MCC
Guineese Galey Z 250 25 225 1746/03/25 1747 1747 1747 1747 52 MCC
Guineese Vrienden GG s 370 50 .320 1762 1763 1763/02/16 124 Ad
Guineese Vriendsch. M GG s 400 70 .330 1767 1768 1768/09/26 1768/12/30 1769 126 125 Ca C&R
Guineese Vriendsch. M GG S 415 65 .350 1769/04/20 1769 1770/01/18 1770/02/24 1770 125 b C&R
Guineese Vriendsch. M GG S 430 32 .398 1770/07/05 1771 1771/04/18 1771/06/07 1771 125 b r C&R
Guineese Vriendsch. M GG SI 360 60 .300 1772/05/19 1773 1773/05/16 1773 1773 125 C&R
Guineese Vriendsch. M GG S .284 .6 .278 1774/04/27 1774 1775/01/27 1775 1775 125 C&R
Guinese Welvaren GG S 290 40 .250 1765 1766 1766/02/06 1766/04/02 1766 127 A
Guide Vrijheid Z 290 40 250 1731/07/19 1732 1732 1733 1733/02/07 55 128
Guide Vrijheid Z 1734/10/31 1735 1735 1735 1735/11/28 55 IR
Guide Vrijheid Z 1737/09/21 1738 1738 1738 1738/09/25 55 AK
Guide Vrijheid Z 290 40 250 1738/11/10 1739 1739 1740 1740/02/05 55 AK
Guide Vrijheid Z S .270 .44 .226 1740/10/03 1741 1741/07/20 1741 1742/01/22 55 129 A
Guide Vrijheid Z S 270 24 .246 1742/08/20 1743 1743/05/30 1743/08/20 1743/11/04 55 129 s
Guide Vrijheid Z S 300 15 .285 1743 1744 1744/10/26 55 129 Ad
Guide Vrijheid2 290 40 .250 1748 1749 1749 1749 1749 S C&R
Guide Vrijheid2 M GG S 300 50 .250 1750/04/09 1751 1751/12/01 1752/03/10 1752 50 130 Sc C&R
Guide Vrijheid2 M GG S 270 45 .225 1752 1753 1753/11/23 1754/03/13 1754 50 130 S c A C&R
Guide Vrijheid2 M GG S 330 26 .304 1754 1755 1755/07/30 1755/11/01 1756/05/15 50 131 132 S C&R
Guide Vrijheid3 Z GG S 270 40 .230 1761/10/15 1762 1762/12/01 1763/02/08 1763 59 133 A DMW
Guide Vrijheid3 Z A S 310 21 .289 1763/08/14 1764 1764/05/25 1764 1764/09/23 79 135 136 S A DMW
Guide Vrijheid3 Z A S 285 35 .250 1765/04/15 1766 1766/01/28 1766/03/14 1766/05/15 79 136 S A DMW
Guide Vrijheid3 Z A S 280 30 .250 1766/09/22 1767 1767/10/09 1768/01/08 1768/04/16 79 136 S A DMW
Guide Vrijheid3 Z GG S 285 35 .250 1768/08/11 1769 1769/06/14 1769/07/14 1769/09/16 79 136 Sb DMW
Guide Vrijheid3 Z A S 290 30 .260 1769/12/29 1770 1770/08/24 1770/09/21 1770/11/25 79 136 S DMW
Guide Vrijheid3 Z A 285 35 250 1771/07/17 1772 1773 1773 1773/08/02 79 136 S DMW
Guide Vrijheid3 Z A SE 360 20 .340 1774/02/03 1774 1775/02/08 1775 1775/07/15 79 136 S DMW
Guide Vrijheid3 Z A M 290 40 .250 1776/09/19 1777 1777/06/13 1778 1778/03/08 79 136 S DMW
Guide Vrijheid3 Z GG SI 345 45 .300 1779/10/06 1780 1780/07/26 1780 79 137 S cDMW
Haast U Langzaam Z GG s .297 .42 .256 1764/07/09 1765 1765/09/06 1765 1766/03/12 99 083 F MCC
Haast U Langzaam Z A M .302 .19 .283 1766/11/30 1767 1768/01/05 1768 1768/07/11 99 134 F MCC
Haast U Langzaam Z A S .327 .7 .320 1769/01/04 1770 1770/03/04 1770/05/08 1770/06/27 99 134 F b MCC
Appendix 2 (cont)
Ship name Hoi. Af. Am. In ]Died Land Holland Africa America America Holland 1 2 Ship C Firm
Haast U Langzaam Z A GE .400 .12 .388 1770/11/19 1771 1771/08/19 1771 1772/04/12 99 134 F MCC
Haast U Langzaam Z A SE .329 .16 .313 1772/10/21 1773 1773/09/30 1774 1774/04/05 99 139 F MCC
Haast U Langzaam z GG SE .262 .13 .249 1775/04/06 1776 1776/03/06 1776 1776/06/17 99 108 F MCC
Haast U Langzaam z GG S .281 .18 .263 1777/06/06 1778 1778/03/29 1778/07/03 1778/09/20 99 108 F c MCC
Haast U Langzaam z GG GD .373 .69 .304 1779/08/29 1780 1780/09/02 99 108 F c MCC
Helena z GG 310 40 270 1773/12/08 1774 1775 1775 1775/07/13 140 DMW
Helena z GG SI 310 40 .270 1777/01/25 1777 1777/11/08 1778 1778/07/15 140 DMW
Hermina Elisabeth M 170 20 150 1773/07/13 1774 1774 1775 1775 C&R
Hermina Elisabeth M GG S 180 35 145 1775/11/04 1776 1776/11/02 1777 1777 141 C&R
Herstelder Z GG GE 350 50 300 1768/09/13 1769 1770/01/31 1770 1770/08/25 108 278 H&L
Herstelder Z GG SI 340 40 .300 1771/07/17 1772 1772/08/24 1772 1773/06/20 108 278 H&L
Hof Pauwenburg 290 40 250 1745 1745 1746 1746 1746
Hof Pauwenburg 290 40 250 1747 1747 1748 1748 1748
Hof v Zeeland Z A C .318 .50 .268 1732/06/24 1733/04/01 1733 1734 1734/05/07 77 F MCC
Hoop Z 275 35 240 1731/09/07 1732 1732 1733 1733/06/04 55 143
Hoop Z 1734/08/25 1735 1735 1735 1735/05/05 55 143 r MV
Hoop z GG 1736/07/26 1737 1737 1737 1737/08/16 55 144 MV
Hoop z 275 75 200 1737/09/08 1738 1739 1739 1739/05/14 55 145 JC
Hoop z 275 55 220 1739/10/01 1741 1742 1742 1742/10/29 55 MV
Hoop2 GG SI 360 20 .340 1762 1763 1763/06/09 1763 1763 146
Hoop3 z GG SI 290 90 200 1778/09/15 1779 1779/07/05 1779 1780/05/23 148 H&L
Hoop3 z GG s 360 60 .300 1783/08/19 1784/12/07 1785/04/04 1785 1785 080 H&L
Hoope s 320 33 .287 1766 1766 1767/02/15 1767 1767 030
Hougly Galey z 300 30 270 1732/10/11 1734 1734 1734 1735/02/21 JG
Huys Brandenburg z GG 1780/07/12 1782 149 b H&H
Huys ter Mee z s 280 20 .260 1763/08/14 1764 1764/12/21 1765 1765/06/01 84 041 A JVN
Huys ter Mee z GG s 240 40 .200 1765/09/26 1766 1766/12/13 1767 1767/05/30 84 041 A JVN
Huys ter Mee z GG s 260 30 .230 1767/09/21 1768 1768/08/10 1768/10/01 1769/02/22 84 041 A JVN
Huys ter Mee z GG s 230 30 .200 1769/07/04 1770 1770/05/16 1770/06/29 1770/09/13 84 041 b JVN
Huys ter Mee Z GG S 250 50 .200 1771/02/15 1772 1772 0428 1772/07/31 1772/10/16 84 150 bA JVN
Huys ter Mee Z GG M 270 13 .257 1773/07/17 1774 1774/06/06 1774 1775/01/05 84 150 JVN
Huys ter Mee z GG SI 250 50 .200 1775/07/21 1776 1776/07/31 1776 1777/03/17 84 150 JVN
Huys ter Mee z GG SI 225 25 .200 1778/05/04 1779 1779/05/22 1779 1779/12/20 84 150 86 JVN
Ida Agatha GG s 340 40 .300 1783 1784/04/24 1784/06/19 1784 1785 141
Indiaan z GC s 170 22 .148 1792/02/16 1793/06/16 1793/08/22 1793 1794 85 151 F RC
Industry GG s 70 8 .62 1802 1803 1803/06/08 1803 1804 317
Isabella Maria M 250 40 210 1772 1773/07/15 1773 1773 1774 152 C&R
Jacoba Maria Z GG s 320 83 .237 1761/06/15 1762/05/07 1762/10/07 1762/12/15 1763/02/15 52 153 A AK
Jacoba Maria Z GG s 260 41 .219 1763/08/14 1764 1764/12/18 1765 1764/07/20 52 153 154 A AK
Jacobina GG s 110 10 100 1802 1803 1803/02/23 1803 1803 316
Jan Elisabeth2 Z GG s 250 37 .213 1765/06/29 1766 1766/04/24 1766 1766/07/25 157 A JSZ
Jan Elisabeth2 Z GG s 250 50 .200 1766/11/07 1767 1767/11/07 1767/01/18 1768 157 56 A JSZ
Jan & Elisabeth z 310 35 275 1749 1749 1749 1750 1750 61 JSZ
Jan & Elisabeth z A s 300 40 .260 1750 1750 1751/01/04 1751/03/30 1751 61 155 c A JSZ
Jan & Elisabeth z GC s 300 40 .250 1752/08/15 1753 1753/07/26 1753/10/24 1754/01/15 61 155 A JSZ
Jan & Elisabeth z GG s 290 40 .250 1754/03/15 1755 1755/03/20 1755 1755/0815 61 155 JSZ
Jan & Elisabeth z A s 410 22 .388 1756/01/15 1756 1756/12/02 1757/02/12 1757/06/15 61 155 Ak JSZ
Jan & Elisabeth z s 350 50 300 1757/09/15 1758 1759/07/15 1759 1759/0915 61 156 JSZ
Jan & Elisabeth z GG s 350 52 .298 1760/01/15 1761 1761/02/06 1761/04/24 1761/06/15 61 156 A JSZ
Jan & Elisabeth z GG s 270 37 .233 1761/10/15 1762 1762/11/06 1763 1763/03/15 61 156 JSZ
Jan & Elisabeth z GC s 280 40 .240 1763/08/14 1764 1764/08/09 1764 1765/06/01 61 156 A JSZ
Jan & Elisabeth z GG 1765 156 d JSZ
Jan & Jacob z GG M 240 40 .200 1775/04/06 1776 1776/04/14 1776 1776/06/16 137 S&D
Jan & Jacob z GG s 300 20 .280 1777/02/04 1777 1778/01/07 1778 1778/08/20 137 S&D
Joan Cornelis M 350 50 300 1765/11/18 1766 1766 1767 1767 H&M
Joan Cornelis M GG s 320 55 .265 1769 1771 1770/07/03 1770/08/03 1770 089 b H&M
Joan Cornelis M GG s 340 24 .316 1770/11/17 1772 1772/03/13 1772/05/15 1772 089 H&M
Johanna M GG s 280 31 .249 1785/07/19 1786/05/06 1786/06/29 1786 1787 158 S
Appendix 2 (cont)
Johanna Christina Z A GE 115 25 .90 1772/08/29 1773 1774/01/14 1774 1774 164 H&H
Johannesburgh S 275 40 235 1753 1754 1754/04/01 1754 1754 244 A
Johannis GG S 290 40 .250 1765 1766 1766/12/16 1767/04/10 1767 159 cA
Jonge Adriaan Z 250 40 210 1731/10/07 1732 1733 1733 1733/08/26 50 IP
Jonge Adriaan Z 250 40 210 1733/12/17 1734 1734 1735 1735/05/07 50
Jonge Cornelis AM S 420 40 .380 1744 1745 1745/08/12 1745/10/19 1746 166 c
Jonge Cornelis AM GG S .347 .87 .260 1746 1747 1747/06/06 1747/08/05 1747 166 Gb
Jonge Dirk AM GC S 230 30 .200 1789/09/19 1790/11/15 1791/01/09 1791 1791 141 F AvY
Jonge Dirk AM GG S 225 25 .200 1792/04/24 1793/08/27 1793/11/24 1794 1794 141 F AvY
Jonge Hendrik Z GC S 350 50 300 1754/05/15 1756 1756/03/15 1756/07/22 1756/11/15 87 167 253
Jonge Hermanis Z 290 40 250 1746 1747 1747 1747 1748 57
Jonge Hermanis Z 290 40 250 1748 1749 1749 1749 1749 57
Jonge Hermanis Z 300 70 230 1752/01/15 1753 1753 1753 1753/10/15 57 168
Jonge Issac M GG S 330 80 .250 1754/03/05 1754 1755/01/02 1755 1755/10/15 150104 A C&R
Jonge Issac M GG S .470 .47 .423 1756/05/05 1757 1757/01/10 1757/04/27 1757 150 104 A C&R
Jonge Issac M GG M .552 .38 .514 1757 1758 1758/08/30 1758 1759 150 104 C&R
Jonge Jacob Z 250 40 210 1764/12/28 1765 1765 1766 1766/10/15 74 S MB
Jonge Jacob Z 250 30 220 1766 1767 1768 1768 1768/08/15 74 169 S MB
Jonge Jacob Z GG 250 40 210 1768/12/09 1769 1770 1770 1770/07/17 74 170 S MB
Jonge Jacob Z GG GS 250 50 .200 1770/11/15 1771 1772/02/02 1772 1772/07/02 74 171 S MB
Jonge Jacob Z A 250 30 .220 1772/11/16 1773 1773 1774 1774/06/19 74 S MB
Jonge Jacob Z GG M 250 30 220 1774/09/17 1775 1775 1776 1776/06/04 74 S MB
Jonge Jacob Z GG SE 230 30 200 1777/01/24 1777 1778 1778 1778/10/30 74 171 172 S MBL
Jonge Jacob Z 1779/06/01 74 S MB
Jonge Jacob2 AM GG M 270 18 .252 1779 1780 1780/04/23 172 c MBL
Jonge Jacob2 AM GG 1780 173 c
Jonge Jan AM GG S 370 190 .180 1762 1763 1763/05/07 1763/07/23 1763 174 Ak
Jonge Jan AM A S 220 50 .170 1764 1765 1765/03/09 1765 1765 071
Jonge Jan2 AM GG S 170 23 .147 1782 1783 1784/01/24 1784/04/24 1784 175
Jonge Jan2 AM GC S 150 20 .130 1791/06/03 1791/10/18 1792/01/03 1792 1792 176
Jonge Johannes Z GG M 280 30 .250 1776 mi 1777/04/16 1777 1777 177 S&D
Jonge Johannes Z GG S 300 30 .300 1779/01/03 1779 1779/11/15 1780 1780 177 S&D
Jonge Lambert Z A GB350 25 .325 1765/12/22 1766 1766/08/29 1766 1767/01/10 89 178 DMW
Jonge Lambert Z A GB320 40 .280 1767/04/18 1768 1768/03/04 1768 1768/07/15 89 178 DMW
Jonge Lambert Z A S 340 60 .280 1768/12/09 1769 1769/12/27 1770/02/24 1770/05/19 89 178 DMW
Jonge Lambert Z A S 320 40 .280 1770/10/12 1771 1771/08/12 1771/11/08 1772/02/12 89 178 179 DMW
Jonge Lambert Z A SI300 50 .250 1772/09/14 1773 1773/09/12 1773 1774/04/08 89 073 DMW
Jonge Lambert Z GG M 450 50 .400 1777/10/12 1778 1778/11/11 1779 1779/10/19 89 073 180 DMW
Jonge Mattheus Ca. GC C.380 50 330 1766 1767/03/27 1767 1767 1767 181
Jonge Pedro Z 375 55 320 1733 1734 1734 1735 1735
Jonge Pedro Z 350 50 300 1735/06/06 1735 1736 1736 1736/04/24 CDC
Jonge Pedro Z GB 350 50 300 1736/09/06 1737 1737/06/22 1737 1737/09/27
Jonge Pedro Z 375 65 310 1740/04/11 1741 1741 1741 1741/08/21
Jonge Pedro Z 375 55 320 1742/02/08 1743 1743 1743 1743/06/06
Jonge Pieter Galey Z 275 35 240 1747 1748 1748 1748 1749
Jonge Rombout Z GG S .356 .80 .276 1738/09/03 1739 1739/09/25 1740/02/05 071 SD
Jonge Rombout Z S .296 .26 .270 1740/10/06 1741 1741/07/13 1741 1742/01/22 071 A SD
Jonge Rombout Z GG S 286 26 .260 1742/07/09 1743 1743/05/22 1743/08/09 1743/10/15 071 bA SD
Jonge Rombout Z 1743/12/15 SD
Jonge Ruyter Z 290 40 250 1765/05/10 1766 1766 1766 1766/11/14 74 AK
Jonge Ruyter Z A S 290 40 .250 1767/04/04 1768 1768/03/29 1768/06/18 1768/08/15 74 182 Ak AK
Jonge Ruyter Z A S 280 30 .250 1768/12/14 1769 1769/09/08 1769/10/27 1770/01/15 74 182 AK
Jonge Ruyter Z A S 280 30 .250 1770/06/13 1771 1771/03/16 1771/05/17 1771/07/08 79 182 AK
Jonge Ruyter Z A G D 300 30 .270 1771/12/31 1772 1772/10/27 1773 1773/05/05 79 182 AK
Jonge Ruyter Z A SI 285 45 .240 1773/12/07 1774 1774/08/27 1774 1775/05/02 79 182 AK
Jonge Ruyter Z GG S 240 40 .200 1776/01/16 1776 1777/01/17 1777 1777/07/02 79 182 AK
Jonge Samuel Z A G S 270 42 .228 1770/06/19 1771 1771/04/12 1771 1771/10/08 67 183 MBL
Jonge Samuel Z A S 275 25 .250 1772/02/12 1772 1773/01/27 1773 1773/07/12 67 183 MBL
Appendix 2 (cont)
Ports <
Slaves Left Left Arrival Left Return Last Cap. Sale Sp
Ship name Hoi. ,Af. Am. In Died Land Holland Africa America America Holland 1 2 Ship C Firm
Jonge Samuel Z A S 280 30 .250 1773/12/08 1774 1774/08/08 1775/01/06 1775/04/18 67 184 c MBL
Jonge Samuel Z GG SI 186 30 .156 1775/09/07 1776 1776/11/23 1777 1777/0503 67 185 MBL
Jonge Samuel z GG S 180 20 .160 1777/08/12 1778 1778/08/25 1778 1779/04/13 67 185 MBL
Jonge Stam z A S 630 52 .578 1757/03/15 1758 1758/03/01 1758/05/22 1758/07/15 87 183 A
Jonge Stam z A S 650 60 .590 1758/11/15 1759 1759/08/07 1759/12/28 1760/03/15 87 183
Jonge Willem z .445 .108 .337 1736/12/24 1738/01/03 1739 1738/04/21 1739 87
Jonge Willem2 z GG S .118 .2 .116 1769/10/02 1770 1770/07/07 1770/08/03 1770/09/30 70 105 F MCC
Jonge Willem2 z GG S .189 .6 .183 1771/01/15 1771 1771/08/17 1771/10/04 1771/12/26 70 105 F s MCC
Jonge Willem2 z GG M .108 .6 .102 1772/04/14 1773 1773/03/16 1773 1773/07/22 70 105 F MCC
Jonge Willem2 z M GS .163 .18 .145 1774/06/07 1775 1776 1776 1776/08/03 70 F MCC
Jonge Willem2 z GG GE .203 .6 .197 1778/05/25 1779 1779/04/16 1779 1779/11/21 70 186 F MCC
Jonge Willem2 z 1780/07/18 u
Keenenburg M S 325 49 .276 1757 1757 1757 1758 1758 187 C&R
Keenenburg M GG S 315 45 .270 1770/08/20 1771 1771/06/18 1771/08/09 1771 187 A C&R
Keenenburg M GG s
340 40 .300 1772/05/19 1773/06/07 1773/07/11 1773 1774 187 C&R
Keenenburg M GG s
375 25 .350 1775/06/20 1776 1776/04/20 1776 1776 187 C&R
Kroonprins Pruisen AM 200 30 170 1784/01/24 1785 1785 1785 1785
Laarenburg Z GG M 230 20 .210 1772/03/13 1773 1773/02/23 1773 1773/08/28 190 H&L
Laarenburg Z GG SI 180 30 .150 1774/03/11 1775 1775/04/06 1775 1775/10/14 190 H&L
Lammerenburg Z s
.293 .67 .226 1739/10/01 1740 1740/07/08 1740 1740/10/05 188
Lammerenburg Z 275 25 250 1741/03/06 1741 1742 1742 1742/04/19 AK
Lammerenburg z A s
.263 .30 .233 1742/06/18 1743 1743/03/10 1743/07/03 1743/08/26 188 189 bAk
Lammerenburg z SI 275 25 .250 1743 1744 1744/11/10 1745 1745 189
Landlust AM GC s
185 25 .160 1788 1789/05/16 1789/07/18 1789 1790 117
Lea AM GC s
160 20 .140 1787/06/16 1788/05/07 1788/07/24 1788 1789 191 Br PvH
Louisa Margarita AM GG s
590 47 .543 1746 1747 1747/09/01 1748/02/10 1748 078 c A
Lust & Vlijt AM GC s
100 85 .15 1793/01/05 1793/07/03 1793/11/14 1794 1794 000 192 H
Maas GG s
450 50 400 1770 1771 1771/12/10 1772/05/01 1772 193 c A
Magdalena Maria Z 225 25 200 1760/09/15 1761 1762 1762 1762/06/15 53 194 JZZ
Magdalena Maria Z GG S 250 14 .236 1762/09/13 1763 1763/08/27 1763/12/01 1764/02/15 70 194 JZZ
Magdalena Maria Z GG S 230 30 .200 1764/05/26 1765 1765/05/10 1765 1765/09/20 70 194 M JZZ
Magdalena Maria Z GG 230 30 .200 1765/12/23 1766 1766 1767 1767/06/25 70 195 JZZ
Magdalena Maria Z GG s 230 20 .210 1767/11/23 1768 1768/10/04 1768/12/30 1769/03/03 70 195 b A JZZ
Magdalena Maria Z GG s 250 30 .220 1769/06/04 1770 1770/04/08 1770/05/19 1770/07/13 70 195 b JZZ
Magdalena Maria Z A s 230 20 .210 1770/11/15 1771 1771/07/30 1771/09/20 1771/11/26 70 195 b M JZZ
Magtelt A s 440 40 .400 1764 1765 1765/10/03 1765 1766 196 A
Maria z 275 55 220 1737/07/22 1738 1738 1739 1739/02/05 MP
Maria z 275 35 240 1739/05/08 1740 1740 1741 1741 J.T
Maria Elisabeth z s 450 90 .360 1743/06/15 1744 1744/06/20 1744/08/29 1744/11/26 198 s Ak
Maria Elisabeth z A s 470 45 .425 1745 1746 1746/04/02 1746/06/06 1746 198 s A
Maria Galey GG c .317 27 290 1747 1748/06/06 1748 1748 1749 313
Maria Geertruy GaleyM GG s 331 30 .301 1753 1754 1754/12/03 1755/03/21 1755/06/15 77 199 A C&R
Maria Geertruy GaleyM GG s .367 .37 .330 1755/11/15 1756 1756/11/30 1756/04/18 1756 77 199 A C&R
Maria Geertruy GaleyM GG s 400 40 .360 1757/09/15 1758 1758/06/27 1758/09/15 1758 77 199 200 C&R
Maria Geertruy GaleyM GG s 420 41 .379 1759 1760 1760/05/29 1760 1761 77 104 C&R
Maria Geertruy GaleyM GC s 400 50 .350 1761/12/15 1762 1762/04/27 1762/06/25 1762 77 104 A C&R
Maria Geertruy GaleyM s 375 50 325 1762/12/15 1763 1763 1764 1764 77 104 C&R
Maria Geertruy GaleyM GC s 350 50 .300 1764/05/22 1765 1765/08/29 1766/02/27 1766 77 104 A C&R
Maria Isabella M GG s .271 .11 .260 1768/08/08 1769/04/01 1769/05/22 1769/06/23 1769 010 C&R
Maria Isabella M GG s 400 30 .370 1769/09/16 1770 1770/06/16 1770/06/29 1770 010 b C&R
Maria Isabella M GG s 420 20 .400 1770/10/02 1771 1771/12/16 1772/02/05 1772 010 b C&R
Maria Isabella M GG s 300 60 .240 1773/03/25 1774/01/13 1774/04/02 1774/07/01 1774 201 c C&R
Maria Isabella M GG s 310 30 .280 1774/10/20 1775 1775/11/08 1776/03/16 1776 201 C&R
Maria Jacoba Z A s .480 .30 .450 1745 1746 1746/05/29 1746/07/16 1746/02/02 70 s A
Maria Jacoba Z 400 50 350 1747 1747 1747 1748 1748 70
Maria Jacoba Z 400 50 350 1748 1749 1749 1749 1749 70
Maria Jacoba Z GG s 300 97 .203 1749 1751 1751/03/09 1751/05/15 1751/05/15 70 202
Maria Jacoba Z 390 40 .350 1752/01/15 1752 1753 1753 1753 70 s
Appendix 2 (cont)
Maria Jacoba Z A 430 60 .370 1753/08/15
S 1754 1754/08/22 1754/10/25 1755/03/15 70 202 s A
Maria Jacoba Z A 400 50 .350 1755/09/15
S 1756 1756/07/13 1756 1756/12/15 70 202 A
Maria Magdalena GG S
235 25 .210 1765 1766 1767/01/12 1767 1767 195 A
Maria2 z As 310 41 .269 1766/02/06 1767 1767/05/23 1767/08/10 1767/10/19 79 089 S A S&L
Maria2 z As 270 60 .210 1768/02/01 1769 1769/05/28 1769/07/14 1769/11/14 79 189 Sb k S&L
Maria2 z As 270 20 .250 1769/12/29 1770 1771/01/21 1771/03/15 1771/05/15 79 189 Sb S&L
Maria2 z As 300 40 .260 1771/08/23 1772 1772/06/13 1772/09/04 1772/11/10 79 189 Sb S&L
Maria2 z Ac 290 30 .260 1773/04/26 1773 1774/01/27 1774 1774/06/29 79 197 S S&L
Maria2 z ASE 320 40 .280 1774/10/28 1775 1775/12/13 1776 1776/06/06 79 197 S S&L
Maria2 z GE 240 40 .200 1777/08/13
GG 1778 1778/07/15 79 197 S d S&L
Meerenburg AM 200 30 170 1788/08/05 1789 1789 1789 1790
Meermin Z A 350 50 300 1762/12/15 1763 1763 1764 1764/02/11 81 203 BSS
Meermin Z A S 360 32 .328 1764/05/26 1765 1765/03/24 1765/05/10 1765/08/04 81 203 A BSS
Meermin Z A S 360 31 .329 1765/12/05 1766 1766/10/23 1767 1767/05/07 81 203 A BSS
Meermin Z A S 300 50 .250 1767/11/23 1768 1769/01/10 1769 1769/06/02 81 203 BSS
Meermin Z A S 270 50 .220 1769/12/01 1771 1771/03/02 1771/05/31 1771/08/05 81 203 b BSS
Meermin Z A S 290 30 .260 1772/03/05 1773 1773/04/12 1773/07/02 1773/09/02 81 203 b BSS
Meermin Z A s 250 30 .220 1774/03/23 1775 1775/05/31 1776/01/12 1776/04/01 81 203 c k BSS
Meeuw Z GC SI 235 15 .220 1792/02/16 1793/01/04 1793/02/17 1793 1793 204
Meliskerke z GG s .310 .32 .278 1748 1749 1749/08/09 1749/12/11 1750 070 255 s A
Meliskerke z GG s 300 85 .215 1751 1752 1752/11/30 1753/03/07 1753 205 s Ak
Mercurius z 235 35 200 1750 1751 1751 1752 1752/03/15 48 112 S MCC
Mercurius z GC s .231 .32 .199 1753/09/13 1754 1754/09/08 1754/11/16 1755/01/19 48 076 Ss A MCC
Mercurius z 240 40 200 1755/03/15 1756 1756 1756 1756/11/15 48 077 S MCC
Mercurius z 230 30 200 1758/06/15 1759 1759 1759 1759/09/15 48 206 S MCC
Mercurius z 200 25 175 1760/07/15 1761 1761 1761 1762 48 207 S MCC
Meydrecht z 350 40 310 1731/12/07 1733 1733 1734 1734/02/04 72 A.C
Middachten z 1732/01/01 68 131 b IR
Muscovische Galey z s 300 33 .267 1743/08/19 1744 1744/07/20 1744/09/24 1744/12/11 102 s A
Muscovische Galey Z S 320 40 .280 1745 1746 1746/02/05 1746/04/15 1746 102 s A
Muscovische Galey Z GG S 250 35 .215 1746 1747 1747/11/25 1748/03/10 1748 102 s A
Muscovische Galey z GC s 210 37 .173 1749 1750 1750/07/26 1750/11/30 1751 102 c
M'burgs Welvaren z GG GB265 238 .27 1749 1750 1751/02/11 1751 1751/06/17 67 208 r MCC
M'burgs Welvaren z GC S.270 .53 .217 1752/08/19 1753 1754/01/09 1754/03/23 1754/06/03 67 209 F s A MCC
M'burgs Welvaren z GG s.291 .26 .265 1754/12/20 1755 1755/11/27 1756 1756/05/03 67 209 F A MCC
M'burgs Welvaren z GG s.300 .45 .255 1756/10/22 1757 1757/07/20 1757/10/20 1758/03/18 67 147 F A MCC
M'burgs Welvaren z A c .428 .10 .418 1758/10/20 1759 1760 1760 1760/03/19 67 F MCC
M'burgs Welvaren z A c .455 .203 .252 1761/01/07 1761 1762 1762/05/04 1762/04/26 67 147 F MCC
M'burgs Welvaren z A c .410 .5 .405 1762/08/13 1763 1763 1763 1763/11/03 88 210 F w MCC
Nehalenia z s 270 50 .220 1746 1747 1747/12/07 1748/03/11 1748 59 209
Nehalenia z 300 50 250 1749 1750 1750 1751 1751 59
Nehalenia z 280 55 225 1753/03/15 1754 1754 1754 1755/07/15 59 015
Neptunis z 400 50 350 1739/07/06 1740 1740 1740 1740/10/11 JSZ
Neptunis z A s .280 .80 .200 1741/01/17 1741 1742/01/14 1742 1742/0625 212 211 JSZ
Neptunis z A s .309 .1 .308 1742/09/27 1743/03/01 1743/04/21 1743/07/03 1743/09/06 211 k JSZ
Neptunis z A s 320 34 .286 1744/01/18 1744/08/15 1744/10/17 1745/01/09 1745/03/22 211 s A JSZ
Neptunis z s 370 27 .343 1745 1746 1746/02/16 1746/04/15 1746 205 s JSZ
Neptunis A s 385 35 .350 1746 1747 1747/05/02 153 G Ad JSZ
Neptunis2 AM s 630 36 .594 1744 1745 1745/05/04 1745/08/23 1745 213 c A
Neptunis2 Z s 380 200 .180 1746/06/27 1748 1749/02/27 1749 1749 214 G
Neptunis3 z A s 290 40 250 1772/10/22 1773 1773/07/25 1773 1774/08/26 039 S TW
Neptunis3 z A SI 290 30 .260 1774/06/08 1775 1775/04/05 1775 1775/08/30 039 S TW
Neptunis3 z A M 300 50 .250 1776 1777 1777/04/25 1777 1777 039 s TW
Neptunis3 z GG s 280 30 .250 1778/06/30 1779 1779/05/13 1779/07/23 1779/10/10 039 S c TW
Neptunis3 300 75 225 1785 1786 1786 1786 1787 S r TW
Neptunis4 z A SI 380 23 .357 1748 1749 1750/02/09 1750 1750/08/15 153
Nicolaas AM GG s .270 .179 .91 1756 1757 1757/07/17 1757/10/28 1757 215 k
Nicolaas AM GC s 350 50 .300 1759 1760 1760/05/30 1760/07/15 1760 027 c
Appendix 2 (cont)
Ports <Slaves Left Left Arrival Left Return Last Cap. Sale Sp>
Ship name Hoi. ,<\f. Am. In Died Land Holland Africa America America Holland 1 2 Ship C Firm
Nicolaas AM GG S 370 32 .338 1760 1761 1762/01/30 1762/03/26 1762 027
Nicolaas AM GG S 350 38 .312 1763 1764 1764/02/28 1764/05/11 1764 027 I
Nicolaas AM GC S 340 44 .296 1764 1765 1765/08/21 1765/10/11 1765 217 A
Nicolaas AM A S 270 51 .219 1766 1767 1767/05/23 1767/08/07 1767 217 c
Nicolaas AM GG S 310 30 .280 1768 1767 1769/04/04 1769 1769 217
Nicolaas AM GG S 300 20 .280 1769 1770 1770/12/10 1771 1771 218 219
Nicolaas AM GG S 250 62 .188 1772 1773 1773/04/04 1773/06/25 1773 219 c
Nicolaas Jan Z GG 200 25 175 1779/10/04 1780 1780 1780 1781 195 H&L
Nicolaas Jan Z GC GD.180 .44 .136 1783/11/03 1784/09/20 1784/12/21 1785 1785/08/16 220 S H&L
Nicolaas Theodorus M GG S 280 30 .250 1768/11/24 1770 1770/04/06 1770/05/25 1770 221 b C&R
Nicolaas Theodorus M GG GB .350 .150 .200 1770/10/02 1772 1772/05/20 1772 1772 221 52 k C&R
Nieuwe Hoop Z GG M .305 .42 .263 1762/08/13 1763 1763/06/21 1763 1764/01/16 82 147 S MCC
Nieuwe Hoop Z A SE .351 .13 .338 1764/05/26 1765 1765 1766 1766/02/19 82 147 S MCC
Nieuwe Hoop Z GG S .325 .34 .291 1766/12/27 1767 1767/12/27 1768/03/05 1768/05/30 82 279 206 S A MCC
Nieuwe Hoop Z GG S .262 .13 .249 1768/08/27 1769 1769/07/18 1769 1769/12/16 82 206 S MCC
Nieuwe Hoop Z GC s .260 .23 .237 1770/04/30 1771 1771/03/31 1771/05/31 1771/09/04 82 222 S b MCC
Nieuwe Hoop Z GG M .214 .39 .175 1772/07/03 1773 1773/11/27 1774 1774/06/14 82 222 S MCC
Nieuwe Hoop Z GG GS .268 .29 .239 1775/07/13 1776 1777 1777 1777/06/02 82 222 S MCC
Nieuwe Hoop Z GG SE .298 .16 .282 1779/02/19 1779 1779/12/27 1780 1780/05/20 82 223 S MCC
Nieuwe Hoop Z GG GS .215 .13 .202 1783/10/12 1784 1785 1785 1785 82 224 S d MCC
Nieuwe Hoop2 Z GG GD 210 10 .200 1784/10/12 1785/02/16 1785/05/18 1785 1285 186 F
Nieuwe Hoop2 AM GC S 200 20 .180 1789/09/21 1790/04/21 1790/06/15 1790/09/28 1790 165 F
Nooitgedacht GG S 157 140 .17 1771 1772/10/23 1773/04/23 1773 1773 071 k
Oldenbarneveld AM GC S 200 11 .189 1787/09/06 1788/05/21 1788/07/24 1788/11/07 1789 165 Fc
Oostenstax GC S .210 .24 .186 1794 1795 1795/07/03 1795 1796
Orange Galey A S 350 45 .305 1753 1754 1754/05/15 1754/09/21 225 c A
Oud Domburg Z 400 60 340 1760/06/15 1761 1761 1762 1762/02/15 87 226 DMW
Oud Domburg Z 400 55 345 1762/08/15 1763 1763 1763 116 227 uDMW
Oudekerk SL GG c 401 51 350 1748 1749/07/15 1749 1750 1750 097
Oudekerk GB 500 70 .430 1757 1758 1758/12/11 1759 1759 228 229
Outhuysen Z S 340 27 .313 1744/11/15 1745 1745/12/04 1745 1746/05/15 230 A
Outhuysen Z S 250 40 .210 1746 1747 1747/10/30 1748/02/10 1748 230 s
Palm Boom z GG 200 20 .180 1786/07/06 1787 1787 1788 1788 H&H
Paulus SI 430 66 .364 1758 1759 1759/02/21 1759 1759 231
Pelicaan AM GC GB 420 40 .380 1789/01/06 1790/04/24 1790/07/09 1790 1791 232 d WIC
Petronalla Cecilia Z 200 40 160 1752/09/15 1753 1754 1754 1754/05/15 49 233
Petronalla Cecilia Z 225 45 180 1754/07/15 1755 1755 1756 1756/03/15 49
Petronalla Cecilia Z 200 20 180 1756/05/15 1757 1757 1757 1757/09/15 49 233
Petronalla Cecilia Z 200 30 170 1761/06/15 1762 1762 1763 1763 49 234
Philadelphia Z 250 25 225 1750 1751 1752 1752 1752/07/15 60 235 F MCC
Philadelphia Z GC S .229 .15 .214 1752/11/18 1753 1754/01/09 1754/03/23 1754/06/04 60 083 Fb A MCC
Philadelphia Z GC s .271 .18 .253 1754/09/21 1755 1755/07/11 1755 1755/12/21 60 083 F A r MCC
Philadelphia Z GG GS .308 .22 .286 1756/09/06 1757 1757/06/18 1757 1757/11/12 60 083 Fb A MCC
Philadelphia Z GG s .337 .77 .260 1758/06/24 1759 1759 1759/06/29 1759/09/10 60 083 F MCC
Philadelphia Z GG s .312 .25 .287 1760/02/22 1760 1761/01/13 1761/04/11 1761/07/08 60 083 F A MCC
Philadelphia Z A .358 .29 .329 1762/04/12 1763 1763 1763 1763/08/10 80 236 F MCC
Philadelphia Z A c .324 .73 .251 1763/10/07 1764 1765 1765 1765/07/14 80 221 F MCC
Phoenix GG s 210 27 .183 1793 1794 1794/08/13 1794 1795 237 F
Princess Carolina z 300 50 .250 1747 1747 1748 1748 1748
Princess Royaal z A s 330 30 .300 1771/01/13 1771 1771/08/12 1772 1772/01/10 99 238 F AK
Princess Royaal z A s 300 50 250 1772/05/19 1773 1773/04/12 1773 1773/09/07 99 056 F AK
Princess Royaal z A SE 305 40 .265 1774/06/08 1775 1775/05/27 1775/07/15 1776 99 056 Fc AK
Princess Royaal z A SE 430 50 .380 1779/05/23 1779 1779/11/19 1780 1780/05/01 99 136 F AK
Princess Royaal z A .350 50 300 1780 1781 1781 99 239 F AK
Princess Royaal z A 350 50 300 1782/11/29 1783 1784 1784 1784 99 239 F c AK
Prins v Orange z 310 50 260 1734/10/16 1735 1735 1735 1736/01/15 AK
Appendix 2 (cont)
Prins Willem Z S280 50 .230 1749 1751 1751/02/17 1751/05/15 1751 241 240 s
Prins Willem Z .310 .35 .275 1751/11/15 1752 1752 1752 175
Prins Willem z GG S 340 10 .330 1756 1757 1758/02/01 1758 1758 240
Prins Willem V z 350 50 300 1749 1750 1751 1751 1751 72 F MCC
Prins Willem V z S .261 .15 .246 1751/12/11 1752 1752/10/27 1753/01/27 1753/04/27 72 242 Fs A MCC
Prins Willem V z GC S .233 .8 .225 1753/08/11 1754 1754/06/02 1754/09/02 1754/10/26 72 242 F A MCC
Prins Willem V z A C .348 .8 .340 1755/05/23 1756 1756 1756 1756/07/30 72 F MCC
Prins Willem V z A S .465 .2 .463 1757/04/19 1757 1758/01/07 1758/04/07 1758/06/17 72 242 F MCC
Prins Willem V z A S .478 .4 .474 1759/06/20 1759 1760/01/05 1760 1760/06/28 72 242 F MCC
Prins Willem V z GG SE .306 .12 .294 1761/03/09 1761 1762 1763 1762/05/16 72 242 F MCC
Prins Willem V z GG S .312 .37 .275 1762/11/10 1763 1763/10/20 1763/02/17 1764/04/14 79 242 F A MCC
Prins Willem V z GG s .239 .18 .221 1764/11/24 1765 1766/02/09 1766/04/25 1766/06/30 79 242 FbA MCC
t Prins Willem V z A s .340 .7 .333 1767/06/09 1768 1768/05/25 1768 1768/10/08 79 081 F A MCC
Prins Willem V z A s .377 .89 .288 1769/03/21 1770 1770/05/13 1770/07/07 1770/09/15 79 081 186 F b MCC
Prins Willem V z A s .313 .4 .309 1771/06/26 1772 1772/05/25 79 186 F d MCC
Publicola M GC s 425 55 .370 1761/12/15 1762 1762/06/13 1762/09/17 1762 103 243 A C&R
Publicola M GG s 400 50 .350 1763 1764 1764/12/18 1765/03/07 1765 103 243 A C&R
Publicola M GG GB 350 50 .300 1765/09/11 1766 1766/12/13 1767 1767 103 243 C&R
Publicola M GC 350 50 300 1767 1768 1768 1768 1769 103 C&R
Raadhuys v M'burg Z 250 25 225 1731/11/02 1732 1733 1733 1733/11/12 53 F MCC
Raadhuys v M'burg Z GG s .272 .41 .231 1741/01/20 1741 1742 1742 1742/04/17 53 F MCC
Raadhuys v M'burg Z s .252 .26 .226 1742/08/10 1743 1743/05/08 1743/07/20 1743/09/30 53 166 F s MCC
Raadhuys v M'burg Z .281 .31 .250 1745/06/13 1745 1746 1746 1746/06/24 53 F MCC
Raadhuys v M'burg Z 250 25 225 1746/07/24 1747 1747 1748 1748 53 F MCC
Raaff AMI 175 15 160 1791/09/24 1792 1792 1793 1793
Ramsburg Z S 280 50 .230 1747 1748 1748/05/26 1748/08/20 1748 59 244 S A
Ramsburg Z 250 25 225 1749 1750 1750 1750 1750 59
Ramsburg z GG s 290 50 .240 1751/01/15 1752 1752/03/14 1752/06/02 1752 59 244 s
Ramsburg z GG s 260 46 .214 1752/10/15 1754 1754/04/04 1754/06/12 1754/08/15 59 244 b A
Ramsburg z GG s 230 34 .196 1754/10/15 1755 1755/11/14 1756 1756/04/15 59 245 A
Rebecca GG s 250 34 .216 1771 1772 1772/05/20 1772 1772 246 C
Resolutie AM GC s 350 50 .300 1753 1754 1754/06/18 1754/08/16 1754 247 c A
Rotterdam M s .290 .86 .204 1754 1755 1755/09/13 1756/02/19 1756/05/15 59 248 51 c C
Rotterdam M 290 40 250 1758/12/12 1760 1761 1761 1761/12/15 59 249
Rusthof Z 350 50 300 1733/04/15 1734 1734 1734 1734/09/30 250 AD
Sara Henrietta Z GG 200 30 170 1772/10/10 1773 1773 1774 1774/08/26 077 DMW
Sara Henrietta Z GG M 200 30 170 1776/03/22 1777 1777/05/30 1777 1777/08/25 313 DMW
Sara Maria s 350 52 .298 1777 1778 1778/07/05 1778 1779 125 A.A
Sara Maria GG s 380 30 350 1779/09/17 1780 1780/05/17 1780 1780 141 A.A
Sara Suzanna Maria AM GG M 350 50 .300 1773/12/08 1774 1774/09/02 1774/10/11 1775/04/18 251 H&L
Sara Suzanna Maria AM GG S 360 60 .300 1776/07/31 1777 1777/11/08 1778/03/24 1778/05/31 251 c H&L
Sara Suzanna Maria AM GG S .390 .42 .348 1779/03/05 1780 1780/02/12 1780 1780/1015 251 H&L
Snoek Z S 460 40 .420 1744/05/15 1745 1745/03/06 1745/06/07 1746/03/15 252 s
Spreeuwenburg Z A s 340 40 .300 1754 1755 1755/05/04 1755 1755/09/15 60 253 A JSZ
Spreeuwenburg Z GG SE 340 40 300 1756/04/15 1756 1757/01/06 1757 1757/0615 60 253 JSZ
Spreeuwenburg Z 350 50 300 1757/10/15 1758 1759 1759 1759/09/15 60 JSZ
Spreeuwenburg Z 310 35 275 1760/01/15 1761 1761 1761 1761/07/15 60 JSZ
Spreeuwenburg Z A GS 355 40 315 1762 1763 1763/09/03 1763 1763 253 JSZ
Spreeuwenburg Z A S 355 32 .313 1763/12/18 1764 1764/12/31 1765 1765/01/25 253 A JSZ
Spreeuwenburg Z A S 255 43 .212 1765/12/03 1766 1766/12/11 1767/02/27 1767/05/31 253 b A JSZ
Spreeuwenburg Z S 260 54 .206 1767/09/20 1768 1768/11/29 1769 1769/0528 253 JSZ
Standvastigheid Z GG S .231 .11 .220 1790/11/24 1792/03/02 1792/05/10 1792/07/30 1792/11/13 255 Fc A MCC
Standvastigheid Z GG S .281 .25 .256 1802/09/23 1803/06/16 1803/08/13 315 F c MCC
Standvastigheidl Z GG S 270 20 .250 1765 1766 1766/12/30 1767/04/23 1767 254 MCC
Appendix 2 (cont)
Surinaamse Galey AM GC S 280 70 .210 1742 1743 1743/06/01 1743/07/26 1743 247 s
Surinaamse Galey AM s 300 20 .280 1744 1745 1745/01/05 1745/02/20 1745 247 s
Surinaamse Vriend. Z 325 50 275 1747 1748 1748 1748 1749 60
Surinaamse Vriend. Z GG s 270 70 .200 1749 1751 1751/02/15 1751/05/15 1751/08/17 60 198
Surinaamse Vriend. Z GG s 310 16 .294 1752/01/15 1753 1753/02/13 1753/04/26 1753 60 198 s A
Surinaamse Welvaart AM s 400 50 .350 1745 1746 1747/01/13 1747/03/07 1747 247 C
Surinaamse Welvaart AM GG s 360 100 .260 1748 1749 1749/05/10 1749/07/08 1749 247 C
Surinaamse Welvaart AM GG s 280 80 .200 1750 1751 1751/05/25 1751/07/16 1751 247 C
Surinaamse Welvaart AM GG s 340 40 .300 1753 1754 1754/12/04 1755 1755 027 A
Surinaamse Welvaart AM GG s 350 49 .301 1755 1756 1756/12/18 1757/04/18 1756 027 A
Surinaamse Welvaart AM GG s 360 31 .329 1757 1758 1758/07/22 1758/09/22 1758 027 A
Surinaamse Welvaart AM GC s 390 40 .350 1759 1760 1760/02/05 1760/04/04 1760 259
Surinaamse Welvaart AM GC s 330 63 .267 1760 1761 1761/10/12 1762/01/27 1762 259 A
Surinaamse Welvaart AM GG s 310 42 .268 1762 1763 1763/07/04 1763 1764 259
Surinaamse Welvaart AM GG s 320 29 .291 1764 1765 1765/06/20 1765/09/13 1765 259 c A
Surinaamse Welvaart AM GG s 310 30 .280 1766 1767 1767/01/27 1767/04/03 1767 259 c
Surinaamse Welvaart AM GG s 320 27 .293 1767 1768 1768/12/16 1769 1769 127
Surinaamse Welvaart AM GG s 340 49 .291 1769 1770 1770/09/24 1771/02/08 1771 127 c k
Surinaamse Welvaart AM s 300 220 .80 1772 1773/01/07 1773/05/21 1773/07/23 1773 142 127 260 b k
Surinaamse Welvaart AM GG s 310 24 .286 1774 1775 1775/06/27 1775 1775 142 260 c
Surinaamse Welvaart AM GG s 330 30 .300 1776 1777 1777/07/26 1778/01/09 1778 142 261 c
Suriname AM SC s 530 52 .478 1748 1749 1749/06/27 1749/11/04 1749 256 c A
Suriname2 Z GC s 160 20 .140 1786/06/14 1787/11/09 1788/01/05 1788/05/10 1788 257
Suzanna Helena Z GG s 270 48 .222 1770/03/09 1771 1771/01/28 1771/04/26 1771/09/05 100 262 263 A
Suzanna Jacoba Z s 310 39 .271 1743/03/25 1744 1744/03/25 1744/06/01 1744/08/11 235 s
Suzanna Jacoba Z s 300 33 .267 1744/12/15 1745 1745/12/28 1746/03/16 1746/05/15 235 s A
Suzanna Jacoba Z A s 390 40 .350 1746 1747 1747/08/12 1748/01/11 1748 235 s A
Taamen Z 350 50 300 1739/10/16 1740 1741 1741 1741/05/09
Taamen Z s 310 40 .270 1741/12/14 1742 1742/12/22 1743/04/07 1743/06/10 264 s
Taamen Z S 340 30 .310 1743/09/23 1744 1744/11/04 1745/01/27 1745/04/06 264 s
Taamen Z 350 50 300 1745 1746 1746 1747 1747
Trompenburg AM GC S 90 30 .60 1792 1793/04/12 1793/06/04 1793 1793 265
TVee Gezusters Z GG M 270 37 .233 1773/03/29 1774 1774/02/10 1774 1774/08/26 195 JZZ
TVvee Gezusters Z GG M 290 20 .270 1775/04/06 1776 1776/02/28 1776 1776/06/27 195 JZZ
T\vee Jonge Joachims Z GG S 310 23 .287 1768/02/06 1768 1768/11/19 1769/02/14 1769/05/25 107 137 b CK
TVvee Jonge Joachims Z GG 300 50 250 1769/07/15 1770 1771 1771 1771/05/15 107 137 CK
TXvee Jonge Joachims Z GG GB 300 40 .260 1771/09/04 1772 1772/07/17 1773 1773/01/12 107 137 CK
Twee Jonge Joachims Z GG 300 40 260 1773/05/24 1774 1774 1774 1774/10/25 107 163 CK
Vaderland Getrouw Z GC GD 230 40 .190 1783/12/18 1785/03/23 1785/06/03 1785 1785 266 S
Valkenisse z 1735/05/19 1736 1736 1736 1736/04/30 267
Valkenisse z 350 50 300 1736/08/02 1737 1737 1737 1738/01/20
Valkenisse z 350 50 300 1738/10/03 1739 1739 1740 1740/03/14
Valkenisse z 350 50 300 1740/06/01 1741 1741 1741 1741/10/20
Valkenisse z 350 50 300 1742/03/22 1743 1743 1743 1743/06/21
Valkenisse z 350 50 300 1743/11/18 1744 1744 1745 1745/02/15
Vergenoegen z GC S .386 .22 .362 1786/06/03 1787/03/25 1787/06/07 1787/08/28 1787/11/14 105 038 Fc MCC
Vergenoegen z GC S .266 .59 .207 1788/05/13 1789/11/06 1790/01/09 1790 1790/07/24 105 038268 F MCC
Vergenoegen z A S .393 .44 .352 1793/11/20 1795/01/12 1795/02/26 1797 1797/0919 105 MCC
Vergenoegen GG S 310 29 .281 1794 1794 1795/03/01 1795 1795
Verrekijker z A S 270 40 .230 1771/04/29 1772 1772/04/06 1772/07/11 1772/09/26 60 120 AH&H
Verrekijker z A 225 25 200 1773/02/02 1773 1774 1774 1774/10/06 60 H&H
Verrekijker z A 225 25 200 1777/01/25 1777 1778 1778 1778 60 H&H
Vertrouwen z GC GB 170 20 .150 1789/08/03 1791/05/18 1791/08/19 1791 102 w RC
Vertrouwen GG S .95 .6 .89 1802 1803 1803/06/14 1803 1804 91
Verwachting z A S 290 40 .250 1768/07/01 1769 1769/06/17 1769/07/14 1769/09/14 91 033 b JSZ
Verwachting z A s 330 30 .300 1769/11/11 1770 1771/01/17 1771/03/15 1771/05/22 91 033 b JSZ
Verwachting z A s 350 50 .300 1771/12/31 1772 1772/11/24 1773 1773/05/22 91 033 k JSZ
Verwagting2 z GG SE 340 40 .300 1778/04/02 1779 1779/06/29 1779 1780/05/13 95 190 Fc H&L
Appendix 2 (cont)
Ship name Hoi. Af. Am. In Died Land Holland Africa America America Holland 1 2 Ship c Firm
Verwagting2 M 350 50 .300 1780/11/03 1781 1782 95 F u A.A
Verwagting2 Z GG GD 340 40 300 1784/07/05 1785 1785/07/15 1785 1786/06/17 95 190 F H&L
Verwagting2 Z GC GD 360 29 .331 1787/12/24 1789 1789/03/13 1789 1789 95 270 F H&L
Verwagting2 Z A SI 350 50 .300 1790/02/22 1791/01/08 1791/02/21 1791 1791 95 270 F H&L
Verwagting3 Z A S 200 50 .150 1792/03/27 1793/07/07 1793/08/19 1793 1794 270 S
Vigilant GC S 130 25 .105 1788 1789/04/18 1789/05/30 1789 1790 273
Vigilantie Z GG S .246 .11 .235 1778/08/09 1779 1779/04/23 1779 1779/09/08 97 271 S MCC
Vigilantie Z GG S .267 .56 .211 1780/03/25 1780 1780/10/11 97 272 s rw MCC
Vigilantie2 Z GG GD 290 40 250 1785/12/19 1787 1787/03/26 1787 1787 105 251 F H&L
Vigilantie2 Z GG 250 25 225 1789/04/06 1790 1791 1791 1791 105 274 F H&L
Vigilantie2 z GC M 330 36 .294 1792/01/20 1793/01/25 1793/02/26 1793 1793 105 275 F H&L
Vigilantie2 A S 450 50 400 1801 1802 1803/01/11 1803 1803 270
Vijf Gezusters AM GG S 270 24 .246 1764 1765 1765/12/14 1766/03/14 1766 283 C
Vijf Gezusters AM GG S 260 24 .236 1766 1767 1767/12/04 1768/02/19 1768 283
Vijf Gezusters AM GG S 250 42 .208 1770 1771 1771/09/14 1772/01/18 1772 283 c
Violivo Geertruyd Z 290 40 250 1757/05/15 1758 1758 1759 1759 59 102
Vis Z GG GS .238 .16 .222 1774/10/28 1775 1775/11/14 1776 1776/07/17 107 276 F A r MCC
Vis Z GG 1779/02/02 107 034 b MCC
Vliegende Faam Z 250 70 180 1753/10/15 1754 1755 1755 1755/10/15 51 205 S MCC
Vliegende Faam Z GG S .281 .99 .182 1756/03/05 1757 1757/06/22 1757/09/30 1758/02/05 51 205 S MCC
Vliegende Faam Z GG GE .212 .25 .187 1770/08/14 1771 1771/06/15 1771 1771/12/21 71 108 s MCC
Vliegende Faam Z GG S .168 .17 .151 1772/08/28 1773 1773/11/25 1774 1774/06/05 71 108 s MCC
Vliegende Tijdt Z 275 75 200 1730/12/10 1732 1732 1732 1732/07/03 277 CB
Vlissingen Z GC S 260 30 .230 1755/09/15 1756 1756/08/28 1756 1757/01/15 52 278 A AK
Vlissingen Z GC SI 330 30 .300 1757/05/15 1758 1758/05/31 1758 1758/11/15 52 278 AK
Vlissingen Z 300 25 275 1759/03/15 1760 1760 1760 1760/07/15 52 AK
Vlissingen Z GC S 300 40 .260 1760/09/15 1761 1761/12/05 1762/03/12 1762/06/15 52 278 A AK
Vlissingen Z GG S 290 36 .254 1762/10/09 1763 1763/08/08 1763/12/01 1764/02/16 69 278 A AK
Vlissingen Z GG S 250 34 .216 1768/10/04 1769 1769/11/23 1770/02/24 1770/06/04 69 279 b AK
Vlissingen z GG S 240 50 .190 1771/01/13 1772 1772/02/18 1772 1772/08/06 69 201 I AK
Vlissings Hooft Neg. z GG SI 300 40 260 1770/06/15 1771 1771/03/20 1771 1771/10/15 94 251 H&L
Vogelstein AM GC S 155 16 .139 1792/07/09 1793/02/28 1793/05/05 1793 1794 280 F
Vreede S 200 20 180 1801 1802 1802/12/23 1803 1803 318 Br
Vriendschap AM GG S 300 50 .250 1770 1771 1771/04/16 1771/07/05 1771 95 217 c
Vriendschap AM GG S 250 20 .230 1772 1773 1774/01/02 1774 1774 95 090
Vriendschap AM GG S 300 50 .250 1775 1776 1776/11/28 1777/03/25 1777/07/15 95 090 c
Vriendschap2 GG c 330 30 .300 1754 1755 1755/06/29 1755/10/03 1756 228
Vrijburg Z 300 50 250 1731/11/04 1732 1733 1733 1733/10/06 282 A.D
Vrijheyd A s 550 50 .500 1779 1780 1780/10/04 1781 1781 197
Vrijheyd GD 450 50 400 1781 1781 1782/02/22 1782 197 c
Vrindschap Z GG S 270 70 200 1772/02/18 1773 1773/05/15 1773/07/02 1773/09/04 95 154 b
Vr. Johanna Cores Z 350 40 310 1751/01/15 1752 1753 1753 1753 60 160 F MCC
Vr. Johanna Cores Z 320 70 250 1753/02/15 1754 1754 1755 1755/06/15 60 160 F MCC
Vr. Johanna Cores Z GG s .282 .98 .184 1756/02/12 1757 1757/04/26 1757/07/22 1757/11/02 60 161 F MCC
Vr. Johanna Cores Z A c .372 .4 .368 1758/05/22 1759 1759 1759 1759/09/08 60 F MCC
Vr. Johanna Cores Z A c .381 .138 .243 1760/03/27 1761 1761 1761 1761/09/21 60 F MCC
Vr. Johanna Cores Z GG s .271 .68 .203 1762/03/16 1762 1763/02/12 1763/04/02 1763/08/01 80 085 F r MCC
Vr. Johanna Cores Z GG s .249 .31 .218 1763/12/14 1765 1765/02/28 1765/03/22 1765/07/01 80 163 F bA MCC
Vr. Johanna Cores Z GG s .226 .11 .215 1766/10/10 1767 1768/02/02 1768/04/13 1768/06/14 80 163 F MCC
Vr. Johanna Cores Z GG GB .212 .64 .148 1769/01/04 1770 1770/01/05 1770 1770/06/12 80 163 F MCC
Vr. Johanna Cores2 Z GC s .303 .44 .259 1771/05/14 1772 1772/04/18 1772 1772/09/29 80 161 62 F b A r MCC
Waakzaamheid Z GG 370 70 .300 1768/01/06 1771 1771 1770 1770/06/09 96 284 B b A kDMW
Waakzaamheid Z A s 360 60 300 1770/11/12 1771 1772/01/02 1772/05/15 1772/07/15 96 061 DMW
Waakzaamheid Z A SI 250 50 .200 1772/09/12 1773 1774/01/14 1774 1774/07/15 96 061 DMW
Watergeus Z A GE .375 .23 .352 1773/12/08 1774 1774/10/05 1775 1775/06/09 134 F MCC
Watergeus Z A SE .325 .10 .315 1776/03/25 1777 1777 1777 1777/10/08 134 F MCC
Appendix 2 (cont)
Ports <Slaves Left Left Arrival Left Return Last Cap. Sale Sp
Ship name Hoi. Af. Am. In Died Land Holland Africa America America Holland 1 2 *Ship C Firm
Watergeus Z GG S .380 .47 .323 1778/08/01 1779 1779/05/13 1779 1779/10/27 134 F MCC
Watergeus Z A GE 460 23 .437 1780/06/12 1780 1781/02/02 186 F u MCC
Watervliet AM S 420 60 .360 1741 1742 1743/01/18 1743/04/26 1743 285 c A
Watervliet AM GG C 450 50 .400 1744 1745 1745/02/30 1745 1745 285
Watervliet AM GG S 400 250 .150 1746 1747 1747/07/17 1747 1748 286 Ak
Welmeenende Z GG s .1% .2 .194 1769/07/04 1770 1770/04/08 1770/05/08 1770/06/25 70 287 S b MCC
Welmeenende Z A s .261 .22 .239 1770/09/04 1771 1771/08/19 1771/11/22 1772/03/04 70 287 S b MCC
Welmeenende Z GG GE .203 .10 .193 1773/07/21 1774 1774/04/02 1774 1774/08/27 70 287 271 S MCC
Wendelina Z 350 100 250 1731/01/13 1732 1732 1732 1732/07/25 55 288 CR
Werkendam Z 175 25 .150 1731/05/06 1732 1732/08/25 1733 1733/02/23 51 118 r BW
Werkendam Z 175 25 150 1733/09/24 1734 1734 1734 1734/09/31 51
Werkendam Z 175 25 150 1734/10/31 1735 1735 1735 1735/11/29 51
West Capella Z A S 340 34 .306 1770/08/04 1771 1771/07/27 1771/10/04 1771 93 253 b A JSZ
West Capella z A SI 320 38 .282 1772/04/27 1772 1773/05/07 1773 1774/03/06 93 253 JSZ
West Capella z A SI 270 74 .196 1775/07/21 1776 1776/06/10 1776 1777/03/17 93 253 JSZ
West Capelia z A SE 480 37 .443 1779/08/26 1780 1780/06/26 1780 93 270 c JSZ
West Indische Hoop z GG 275 35 240 1788/07/29 1789 1790 1790 1790 108 204 AK
Westdorp z A S 300 34 .266 1771/08/23 1772 1772/06/22 1772/10/09 1773/01/09 88 289 b HB
Weyvliet z GG 250 40 210 1767/02/28 1768 1768 1769 1769/02/25 69 154 AK
Weyvliet z GG S 250 32 .218 1769/07/15 1770 1770/07/13 1771/04/24 1771/11/07 69 154 b AK
Weyvliet z 250 40 210 1765/09/27 1766 1766 1766 1767/02/15 69 154 AK
Wilhelmina z 275 75 200 1731/01/19 1732 1732 1732 1733/02/28 55 290
Wilhelmina z 275 15 260 1734/07/19 1735 1735 1735 1735/11/29 55 290
Wilhelmina Aletta M GG S 350 60 .290 1765 1766 1766/08/02 1766/08/30 1766 100 A C&R
Wilhelmina Aletta M GG S 330 36 .294 1767 1768 1768/02/14 1768 1768 100 C&R
Wilhelmina Aletta M GG s 330 30 .300 1768/08/08 1769/07/10 1769/08/28 1769/09/29 1769 152 b C&R
Wilhelmina Aletta M GG s 330 30 .300 1770/03/09 1771 1771/02/06 1771/04/26 1771 152 b C&R
Wilhelmina Aletta M GG GB 350 50 300 1771/09/21 1772 1773/01/23 1773 1773 152 C&R
Wilhelmina Aletta M GG S 340 25 .315 1773 1774 1774/11/22 1775/04/14 1775 152 291i b r C&R
Willem Z 310 35 275 1740/10/24 1741 1742 1742 1742
Willem Alexander Z 350 50 300 1743/09/12 1744 1744 1744 1745/01/07 s A
Willem Alexander z S 330 40 .290 1745 1745 1745/12/03 1746/02/18 1746 292 b A
Willem Alexander z GC S 340 46 .294 1746 1747 1747/03/26 1747/05/16 1747 292 241 A
Willem Carolina M A s 360 50 .310 1749 1750 1750/07/02 1750 1751 79 074 c C&R
Willem Carolina M A s 380 53'.327 1751/08/02 1752 1752/08/09 1752/11/20 1753 79 074 A C&R
Willem Carolina M GC s .253 .14 .239 1753/12/15 1754/05/18 1754/07/21 1754/11/23 1755/06/15 79 074 A C&R
Willem Carolina M GG s 380 60 .320 1755/10/10 1756 1756/11/16 1757 1757 79 074 C&R
Willem Carolina M A c .451 .21 .430 1757 1758 1758/06/01 1758 1758 79 074 C&R
Willem Carolina M 475 45 440 1758 1759 1760 1760 1760/03/15 79 074 C&R
Willem Suzanna M .300 .32 .268 1772 1773 1774 1774 1774 149 293 H C&R
Wulpenburg Z GG s 500 50 .450 1745 1746 1746/06/10 1746/07/16 1746 73 211 c A TW
Wulpenburg Z A s 600 40 .560 1747 1747 1747/11/18 1748/03/10 1748 73 205 s TW
Wulpenburg Z A SI 400 100 .300 1749 1750 1750/11/06 1750/08/15 1750 73 205 TW
Wulpenburg Z GG s 300 66 .244 1752/06/15 1753 1753/08/23 1753/11/09 1753 73 153 s A TW
Wulpenburg Z A s 400 86 .314 1754/07/15 1755 1755/08/17 1755/11/01 1756/01/15 73 153 A TW
Wulpenburg Z GG SE 500 62 .438 1756/04/15 1756 1757/06/04 1757 1757/09/15 73 153 TW
Wulpenburg Z GG s 540 24 .511 1758/02/04 1758 1758/12/22 1759/04/20 1759/06/15 73 153 TW
Wulpenburg2 Z A GB 330 50 .280 1768/04/17 1769 1769/01/27 1769 1769/05/28 90 067 b TW
Wulpenburg2 Z A s 310 50 .270 1769/11/11 1770 1770/08/11 1770/09/04 1770/11/26 90 077 TW
Wulpenburg2 Z A s 350 50 .300 1771/05/15 1772 1772/04/29 1772/07/24 1772/10/11 90 294 b TW
Zanggodin Z GG .161 .11 .150 1764/05/12 1766 1765 1765 1766/04/15 68 262 MCC
Zanggodin Z A s .67 .22 .45 1768/09/28 1770 1770/01/22 1770 1770/06/12 68 139 S r MCC
Zanggodin Z GG s .162 .9 .153 1770/10/21 1771 1771/11/04 1772 1772/04/13 68 139 S I MCC
Zanggodin Z GG SE .127 .16 .111 1773/04/06 1775 1775/04/15 1775 1775 68 314 S r MCC
Zee Fortuyn Z GC GD .230 .15 .215 1784/09/06 1785 1785/08/18 1785 1786 297 S H&L
Zee Mercuur Z GC S .272 .174 .98 1787/12/07 1789/04/28 1789/07/07 1790 1790/04/28 110 108 F k MCC
Zee Mercuur Z GG GD .174 .6 .168 1791/10/27 1793/04/19 1793/06/19 1793 1794/01/22 110 177 F MCC
Zee Nimph Z GG 1784/10/18 1785 1785 1786 1786/06/26 199 303 F H&L
Appendix 2 (cont)
Ship name Hoi. ,Af. Am. In Died Land Holland Africa America America Holland 1 2 Ship C Firm
Zee Nimph Z GD 400 50 .350 1787 1788 1788/07/13 1788 1789 199303 F H&L
Zee Nimph Z A GD 420 41 .379 1790/01/08 1790/11/23 1791/01/07 1791 1791 199303 F H&L
Zee Nimph z A GD 500 20 .480 1792/10/25 1793/07/04 1793/08/14 1793 1794 199136 F B&S
Zeeberg z 230 30 200 1761/10/15 1762 1762 1763 1763/04/15 62295 B&S
Zeeberg z GS 230 15 .215 1765 1766 1766 1766 1767 86296 B&S
Zeeberg z GG GS 220 44 .176 1767/06/03 1768 1768 1768 1768/12/22 86296 B&S
Zeeberg z GG 230 30 .200 1769/06/15 1770 1770 1770 1770/08/24 86296 B&S
Zeeberg z GG 200 25 .175 1771/01/15 1771 1771 1772 1772/08/04 86296 B&S
Zeeberg z A 200 25 175 1773/03/07 1773 1774 1774 1774/08/14 86296 B&S
Zeelands Welvaren 310 35 275 1749 1750 1750 1751 1751/04/15 60298 s A JSZ
Zeelands Welvaren z GG S 340 32 .308 1751 1752 1752/04/15 1752/07/29 1752 60298 s A JSZ
Zeelands Welvaren z GC S 240 40 .200 1752/12/15 1754 1754/06/12 1754/08/16 1754/11/15 60298 106 s A JSZ
Zeelands Welvaren z GC S 290 40 .250 1755/02/15 1756 1756/05/02 1756/07/24 1756/10/15 60299 A JSZ
Zeelands Welvaren z GG S 330 30 .300 1756/12/15 1757 1757/12/07 1758 1758/06/15 60299 A JSZ
Zeelands Welvaren z GC S 340 26 .314 1758/09/15 1759 1759/07/27 1759/11/08 1760/0515 60299 JSZ
Zeelands Welvaren z GC S 330 66 .264 1760/07/15 1761 1761/12/22 1762/03/26 1762/06/15 60299 A JSZ
Zeelands Welvaren z GG S 270 100 .170 1762/12/25 1764 1764/06/16 1764 1764/10/25 81299 68 A JSZ
Zeelands Welvaren z GG S .278 .42 .236 1765/06/06 1766 1766/06/11 1766/08/06 1766/10/29 81003 b A JSZ
Zeelands Welvaren z A S 260 60 .200 1767/03/11 1768 1768/03/19 1768/05/18 1768/07/06 81003 A JSZ
Zeeleeuw z A S 250 40 .210 1773/05/23 1774 1774/03/14 1774/07/01 1774/08/29 300 b BSS
Zeelust AM GC 140 20 120 1788/03/26 1789 1789 1790 1790 F LBZ
Zeelust AM GC S 135 15 120 1791/09/08 1792/08/31 1792/12/09 1793 1793 301 F LBZ
Zeemire Z GC GS 170 28 .142 1791/08/18 1792/08/24 1793/01/06 1793 1793 57 302 RC
Zeerust Z 250 65 185 1731/03/02 1732 1732 1732 1732/12/11 50 304 AD
Zeevrugt AM 250 20 230 1791/10/27 1792 1793 1793 1793 BZ
Zorg Z GG S .246 .15 .231 1777/10/15 1778 1778/11/13 1779/04/30 1779/07/29 107 105 F c MCC
Zorg Z GG 1780/10/27 107 222 F c MCC
Appendixes 349
Appendix 3 1
Asiento contract of1667

In the name of the Lord, Amen. In the year of our merciful Lord Jesus
Christ sixteen hundred sixty-seven, on the sixteenth of May, appeared before
me, Pieter Padthuysen, public notary for the Court of Holland, resident of
Amsterdam, in the presence of the following witnesses: Mr. Johannes Rijck-
aert and Mr. Cornelis van Beeck(?), former council member of this city and
director of the West India Company, Chamber Amsterdam. The directors
of the former (Chamber) have ordered, as authorized in the meeting of the
XIX (Directors of the WIC), as the first party of this (contract), and the
other - Mr. Francisco Ferony, merchant in this city, as representative of
Messrs. Domingo Grillo and Ambrosio Lomelin, residing at Madrid, Spain,
according to legal action in Madrid before Notary Gironomo Nunes, on the
nineteenth of December, sixteen hundred and sixty-three.2 As notary of the
opposite side I confirm that the individuals mentioned have agreed with each
other on the following contract: that the respective directors of the WIC
shall dispatch from time to time a sufficient number of ships and cargoes
to the coast of Africa and purchase there a total of 4,000 deliverable slaves,
to wit pieces of India, and deliver these during the current year 1667 and
before the end of December 1668, at the island of Curasao to the agents
of the mentioned Grillo and Lomelin. When these 4,000 Negroes have been
handed over to Grillo and Lomelin at Curasao before the end of December
1668, they will be paid for as stipulated below, and in addition to the 4,000
Negroes the WIC directors will be allowed an additional 500 on the same
conditions and for the same price as the 4,000 Negroes.
None of the aforementioned slaves may be obtained from the areas of
Calabary, Del Rey, or the Cameroons, and all those (slaves) that are without
major blemish, that are in good health, not blind, lame, or broken, will be
counted as deliverable.
The following stipulation shall be made in respect to their age. Those
between the ages of 15 and 36 will be counted as deliverable, pieces of
India; those from the age of 8 to 15 and 36 to 42 will be counted as three
persons for two pieces of India; those below 8 and down to 4 years of age
will be counted as two persons for one piece of India; those below the age
of four will remain with their mothers.
In respect to the gender ratios, two-thirds of the slaves delivered must be
male persons, and the remaining one-third portion shall be women. Messrs.
Grillo and Lomelin will not be obligated to take any more than one-third
1. KITVK, H-65, p. 68ff.

2. Hereafter dates and numbers will be translated in numeric fashion only.
350 Appendixes
women slaves. If, however, the (WIC) directors deliver more than two-thirds
male slaves, they will be paid for at a rate of seven pieces of eight per piece
of India more than the regular contracted number.
The earlier mentioned Messrs. Grillo and Lomelin must keep well-
stocked factories on the island of Curasao for the reception and payment
of contracted slaves. The factors must examine newly arrived shipments of
slaves within a period of 14 days and separate the deliverable from the
undeliverable. After this is done, the WIC directors will be responsible for
the maintenance of the deliverable Negroes for an additional 24 days, or a
total of 38 days after the arrival of each ship for both risk and maintenance
without holding Messrs. Grillo and Lomelin responsible in any way. The
remaining undeliverable slaves may be disposed of by the WIC, selling and
transporting them, to the best interest of the company.
The directors of the WIC will be responsible for the deliverable slaves
after separation and beyond the stipulated 38 days, in respect to food, drink,
and risk of death, for a total of 3 months. Messrs. Grillo and Lomelin will
be obligated to pay for the maintenance of the deliverable pieces of India
for the time after 38 days after arrival at a rate of 6 stuivers per day for a
period not exceeding 3 months after arrival. If the transfer does not take
place before the end of the 3 month period, conditions will be specified
below. Messrs. Grillo and Lomelin will only have to pay the daily mainte-
nance fee for slaves that die until the day of their death, and they will not
be responsible to compensate the WIC for slaves that died during this period.
For this reason, the Assistant Director of the WIC at Curasao shall promptly
notify the factors of Grillo and Lomelin when one of the respective Negroes
dies, and if the factors cannot be reached the Assistant Director shall make
an affidavit of such a death, witnessed by two or three persons.
After the waiting period of three months has expired without any payment
being received for the separated deliverable slaves, the WIC directors may
feel free to dispose of the slaves to their best advantage, instead of keeping
them any longer for Messrs. Grillo and Lomelin. If, however, one of Grillo
and Lomelin's ships arrives at the island of Curasao after the period of three
months, the remaining separated slaves should still be turned over to Grillo
and Lomelin at the contracted prices, on the condition that they pay the
daily maintenance fees as stipulated, also for the days in excess of the
contracted 38 days. And if requested by Messrs. Grillo and Lomelin,
the WIC directors must give an accounting of the separated slaves that were
disposed of otherwise.
While the separated slaves are being held at Curasao the WIC directors
are entitled to put the Negroes to work for the profit of the company. It is
advisable that this would lead to a slight reduction of the maintenance cost
Appendixes 3 51
charged to Messrs. Grillo and Lomelin. Once the maintenance fees have
been paid, the WIC is obligated to deliver the slaves immediately.
Messrs. Grillo and Lomelin commit themselves to pay for each "deliv-
erable piece Negro of India," at the time of transfer, ic^Vi quality (vol-
waardige) pieces of eight. This payment exempts Messrs. Grillo and Lomelin
from any fees or duties that the XIX directors of the WIC would ordinarily
demand for the sale of slaves.
The directors of the WIC are forbidden to remove or sell any of the slaves
that are set aside for the factors of Grillo and Lomelin. And the WIC
directors must instruct the Assistant Director to publish and forbid, on threat
of severe punishment, the population of Curasao to purchase any of the
slaves from the crews of the slave ships.
The WIC directors must also instruct the masters of the slave ships sailing
for this contract, and not yet having left their ports, that they must under
no circumstance drop anchor at any Caribbean islands, unless out of dire
necessity that is approved by the entire ship's council. If such measures are
unavoidable, no slaves are to be sold there or taken ashore, and if slaves
should be obtained at such places a consignment must be signed by the
captain of the ship and submitted to the Assistant Director at Curasao, and
this shall also be communicated to the factors (of the Asiento at Curasao),
and all masters of slave ships must sign their special instructions of the WIC,
of which a copy follows. Furthermore, they (masters) commit themselves by
special action not to act in any way against instructions, at the risk of forfeiting
such slaves, their salaries, their share in ship and cargo, to the benefit of
the WIC directors and Grillo and Lomelin each 50 percent, for the cost
and damage suffered as a result. For the payment of any such damages and
costs the masters commit their persons and their possessions.
When a ship sailing for this contract is ready to depart, the WIC directors
must notify the representatives of Grillo and Lomelin in this city, and report
essential names, in order that they can be given instructions and commu-
nications for the factors at Curasao. This applies to ships that have not yet
departed from this town; Mr. Ferony has already sent notification with the
ships that left earlier.
All the conflicts and problems that may arise between the Assistant Director
and the factors of Grillo and Lomelin at Curasao, about the quality and
quantity of Negroes, the fees and maintenance, will be resolved by four
"good men," two chosen by each side, empowered if needs be to select a
mediator in order that conflicts may be resolved within fourteen days. Such
conflicts should not interfere with the shipment of Negroes already transferred
or retard the ships of Messrs. Grillo and Lomelin beyond the reasons men-
tioned. Should other conflicts arise over the contract, which we hope not,
352 Appendixes
they should be forwarded here (Amsterdam) where "good men" will be
appointed by both parties as mediators, or otherwise they can be nominated
by the courts of this city to resolve the conflicts. Should Messrs. Grillo and
Lomelin not provide adequate evidence in their defense they may be ordered
to appear before the arbitrators or courts.
The WIC directors must instruct the Assistant Director at Curasao to
receive and treat the factors of Messrs. Grillo and Lomelin with the greatest
courtesy and assist them (and also in Amsterdam) in every way necessary to
carry out their duties and to maintain order and authority over their em-
ployees. To assist them to this end is required by civilized standards, and
it should contribute to good relations and friendship among the contracting
parties.
Finally, the contracting parties agree that the mentioned Mr. Ferony, as
representative of Messrs. Grillo and Lomelin, immediately after the signing
of this document shall pay to the directors of the WIC the sum of 6,000
Caroli guilders, in rough silver. With that all the past disagreements and
issues between the parties, brought out openly or not, of whatever nature,
will be settled undisputably and cannot be brought up again by any person
who makes claims. And this applies especially to the case currently before
the courts here, involving Messrs. Ferony and Jean Emanuel Hugla con-
cerning the security payment they made in anticipation of receiving 50,000
guilders. This is a promise that whatever was done, directly or indirectly,
no action may be taken against them whatsoever.
In confirmation of these agreements the parties involved, namely the WIC
directors, commit all the effects and means of the mentioned company, and
Mr. Ferony with power of attorney for Messrs. Grillo and Lomelin, commits
all their personal effects and means, placing themselves before all courts
and justices in good faith. Agreed upon in Amsterdam, in the presence of
requested witnesses, Jan van Campen and Evert Voskuyl.
Instructions mentioned in the contract above

I, the undersigned , captain of the ship ,
sailing to the coast of Africa and to the island of Curasao, promise and
commit myself to the following during this voyage.
As long as the voyage is in progress I shall not engage in any individual
or private trade of any type, small or large scale, direct or indirect, pre-
meditated or unpremeditated. I shall not bring along any merchandise, se-
cretly or openly, on any coast or along any coastline, to trade, exchange,
confiscate, or to receive as bribe or present, whatever the circumstances for
myself or anyone else - but only for this chamber of the chartered WIC. In
addition, should I notice others engaged in such activities, I shall report this
Appendixes 353
to the authorities. All of this I promise at the risk of confiscation of any
goods that I should bring or acquire, or any backhawl, and all my salary and
premiums, my share in the ship and its cargo. I shall sail directly from the
coast of Africa, with my purchased Negroes, to the Island (Curasao) without
stopping at any of the other Caribbean islands - unless in extreme emergency
and then with approval of the ship's council, and under no circumstances
shall I sell slaves there or take them ashore. I promise all of this at the risk
of confiscation to the benefit of the Company and the buyers of the slaves
I transport, in order that these parties might be compensated for losses that
my actions might bring them. As a guarantee against such losses and costs
I commit my person and possessions, and sign my name,
Amsterdam, this (date)
Undersigned, Cum Cordat Cum Registro Quod Attestor
Was signed at the Town Hall.
354 Appendixes
Appendix 4
Annual old-WIC slave traffic, 1657-1674
Slaves , Slaves
Year3 Ships from Africa Deaths b landed
1658 7 2,050 309 1,741
1659 2 620 106 514
1660 4 1,048 240 808
1661 2. 800 100 700
1662 3 1,500 230 1,270
1663 4 1,750 220 1,530
1664 3 1,450 190 1,260
1665 2 700 105 595
1666 1 600 100 500
1667 6 2,600 340 2,260
1668 19 7,448 1,182 6,271
1669 20 7,862 1,214 6,648
1670 11 4,900 755 4,145
1671 20 7,730 1,081 6,649
1672 11 4,550 691 3,859
1673 9 4,167 787 3,380
1674 8 2,855 397 2,458
Total 132 52,630 8,047 44,588

Notes: aThe years apply to the departure from Africa. A number of these ships
.arrived in the West during the following year.
Many of the cargo sizes and mortality figures were not found reported
and had to be estimated.
Source: The data listed in this appendix were collected by Franz Binder (see
Chapter 2, note 16) from a variety of WIC documents in The Hague
(ARA) and Middelburg (Provincial Archives), and also from the Notary
Collection in Amsterdam (City Archives). This author is responsible for
organizing the data in this fashion, and also for estimates where specific
data were not supplied.
Appendixes 355
Appendix 5
The directors of the WIC made it a practice in the annual or biannual

meetings to assign slaving missions to particular chambers of the company.
A specific year of departure, and sometimes even a particular month, were
stipulated for such voyages. The African and American destinations, and
the approximate cargo sizes were generally also indicated. As a rule, such
assignments followed a certain order of progression (column 3), in order to
create balance and show fairness to the various chambers. Since this order
was indicated in the records, starting in 1683, it provides a useful check on
the completeness or incompleteness of such records. Occasionally, it appears
that special assignments (marked s) were added to the regular ones, and it
also seems apparent that specific assignments were scrapped when the slave
trade experienced unexpected stagnation.
The last column of the appendix lists the actual departures of slaving
ships during the same years that the assignments were made. While the
figures do not completely match up, over longer periods of time the dis-
crepancies are limited, which lends support to the claim made in this study
that very few Dutch slaving missions have remained undetected. It should
be mentioned that the smaller slaving missions, which were initiated by the
WIC authorities in Africa, were not included in the column of departures
because they generally did not sail under the auspices of a particular chamber.
The data in this appendix are gleaned from the minutes of the meetings
of the X (WIC directors), the regional presiding chambers, and letters from
Amsterdam to Africa. These records are located in WIC, vols. 1, 54-7, 831 —
3; and NBKG, vol. 25. See also Appendix 1.
Appendixes
Appendix 5
WIC slave-ship assignments and documented traffic, 1675-1732
Ships Serial WIC African American Cargo Doc.
per year no. Chamber origin destination size ships
1675 13 Amsterdam Cape Verde 5
Zeeland Argyn Essequibo
Amsterdam Elmina 450
Maze Angola 450
N.K. Aja 450
Zeeland Elmina 450
S.&L. Aja 450
Zeeland Ajigola 450
Maze Elmina 450
Amsterdam Aja 450
N.K. Angola 450
Zeeland Aja 450
1676 3 S.&L. Elmina 450 7
Maze Elmina 450
1677 3
1678 2 2
1679 5 Amsterdam Aja 450-500 2
Zeeland Ajigola 450-500
S.&L. Aja 450-500
N.K. Loango 450-500
S. & L./A'dam Angola 450-500
1680 8 N.K. Aja 500 4
Amsterdam Angola 500
Zeeland Aja 500
Amsterdam Aja 500
Amsterdam Aja 500
S. & L./A'dam Angola 500
Maze Angola 500
S. & L./A'dam Angola 500
1681 4 Zeeland Angola 7
Maze Aja
N.K. Aja
Maze Aja
1682 4 Zeeland Angola 500 3
Maze Aja 500
Maze Aja 500
N.K. Calabary 250-300
1683 9 1 Amsterdam Angola 500 7
2 Zeeland Aja 500
3 Amsterdam Elmina 500
Appendixes 357
Appendix 5 (cont)
4 Maze Angola 500
5 Amsterdam Aja 500
0c
Zeeland
7 S.&L.
8
9 Amsterdam
1684 7 1 Amsterdam 5
2 Zeeland Angola Surinam 500
3 Amsterdam Aja Surinam 500
4 Maze Aja Surinam 500
5 Amsterdam Aja Curasao 500
6 N.K. Angola Curasao 500
7 Zeeland Aja Curasao 500
1685 7 8 S.&L. Angola Curasao 500 11
s Maze Elmina Surinam 500
s Amsterdam Calabary Surinam 300-500
s N.K. Angola Surinam 500
Zeeland Calabary Surinam 300-500
1 Amsterdam Aiigola Curasao 500
1686 8 2 Zeeland Angola Curasao 500 7
3 S.&L. Aja Curasao 500
4 Maze Aja 500
5 Amsterdam Elmina/Lay 500
6 N.K. Angola 500
7 Zeeland Angola 500
8 Amsterdam Aja 500
9 Amsterdam Aja 500
1687 13 1 Amsterdam Angola 500 8
3 Amsterdam Angola Curasao 500
4 Maze Aja Curasao 500
5 Amsterdam Elmina/Lay Curasao 500
6 N.K. Angola Curasao 500
7 Zeeland Angola Curasao 500
Q
o
Amsterdam Angola Curasao 500
9
1 Amsterdam Elmina/Lay Curasao 500
4 Maze Elmina/Lav Curasao 500
1688 3 6 Amsterdam Aja Curasao 500 1C
7 Zeeland Angola Curasao 500
358 Appendixes
Appendix 5 (cont)
8 S.&L. Aja Surinam 500
1689 2a 6
1690 5 Amsterdam Angola Curasao 500 2
1691 3 2 Zeeland Aja Curasao 500 4
4 Maze Aja Curasao 500
1692 2 5 Amsterdam Aja Curasao 500 5
la 8 S.&L. Angola Curasao 500
1693 5 6 N.K. Angola Surinam 500 3
9 Amsterdam Aja Curasao
1 Amsterdam Angola Curasao
2 Zeeland Angola Curasao
1694 3 6 N.K. Angola Curasao 500 5
la 7 Zeeland Aja Surinam 500
8 S.&L. Angola Curasao 500
1695 1 9 Amsterdam Aja Surinam 500 3
1696 3 1 Amsterdam Angola Surinam 500 2
2 Zeeland Aja Surinam 500
1697 7 4 Maze Aja Curasao 2
5 Amsterdam Angola Surinam 500
6 N.K. Aja Surinam 500
7 Zeeland Aja Surinam 500
8 S.&L. Angola Surinam 500
1698 3 1 Amsterdam Aja Surinam 500 5
3 S.&L. Aja Curasao 500
4 Maze Angola Surinam 500
1699 5 5 Amsterdam Aja Curasao 500 8
6 N.K. Aja Curasao 500
7 Zeeland Aja Cartagena 500
8 Amsterdam Angola Veracruz 500
9 Amsterdam 500
1700 8 1 Amsterdam Aja Puortobelo 4
2 Zeeland Aja Cartagena
3 Amsterdam Angola Puortobelo
4 Maze Aja Curasao
5 Amsterdam Aja Cartagena
6 N.K. Angola Cartagena
Appendixes 359
Appendix 5 (cont)
7 Zeeland Aja Surinam
8 S.&L. Aja Surinam
1701 2 9 Amsterdam Aja Curasao 10
1702 4 1 Amsterdam Aja Surinam 5
4 Maze Aja Surinam
s Zeeland Aja Essequibo 400
1703 6 5 Amsterdam Angola Curagao
6 N.K Aja Surinam
7 Zeeland Aja Curasao
8 S.&L. Angola Surinam
1704 8 2 Zeeland Aja Curasao
3 Amsterdam Aja Surinam
4 Maze Angola Curasao
6 N.K. Angola Curasao
8 S.&L. Angola Curasao
Q
1705 5 1 Amsterdam Aja Curasao

2 Zeeland Angola Surinam
4 Maze Aja Curasao
1706 9 6 N.K. Aja Curasao
8 S.&L. Angola Surinam
4 Maze Aja Curasao
1707
1708 8 6 N.K. Aja Surinam
8 S.&L. Aja Surinam
3 Amsterdam Angola Surinam
360 Appendixes
Appendix 5 (cont)
4 Maze Aja Curasao
1709 5 5 Amsterdam Aja Surinam 3
6 N.K. Angola Curasao
8 S.&L. Aja Surinam
1710 la 6
1711 la 2
1712 4 1 Amsterdam Angola Surinam 2
3 Amsterdam Aja Curasao/Surinam
4 Maze Aja Curasao
1713 2 s Zeeland 1
s Amsterdam
1714 3 5 Amsterdam Aja Curasao 4
6 N.K. Aja Curasao
s Zeeland Aja Curasao
1715 4 7 Zeeland Aja Curasao 5
8 S.&L. Aja Curasao
9 Amsterdam Aja Cu ragao/Su r i n am
1 Amsterdam Aja Surinam/Curasao
1716 3a 3
1717 3 2 Zeeland Aja Surinam 4
4 Maze Aja/Angola Surinam
1718 7 5 Maze Aja Surinam 4
6 N.K. Angola Surinam
8 S.&L. Aja Surinam
1 Amsterdam Aja/Angola Surinam
1719 3 3 Amsterdam Elmina Surinam 4
4 Maze Aja/Angola Surinam
1720 4 6 N.K. Aja Surinam 2
s Amsterdam Aja Berbice
s Zeeland Aja Essequibo
1721 8 7 Zeeland Angola St. Eustatius 5
8 S.&L. Aja Surinam
2 Zeeland Angola St. Eustatius
Appendixes 3(
Appendix 5 (cont)
4 Maze Angola St. Eustatius
5 Amsterdam Angola St. Eustatius/Cur.
6 N.K. Aja Surinam
1722 8 7 Zeeland Angola St. Eustatius 8
8 S.&L. Aja Surinam
9 Amsterdam Angola/Aja Curasao
1 Amsterdam?
2 Zeeland Angola St.Eustatius
1723 3a 10
1724 7 3 Amsterdam Elmina St. Eustatius 9
4 Maze Angola St. Eustatius
5 Amsterdam Elmina St. Eustatius
6 N.K. Elmina/Aja St. Eustatius
8 S.&L. Elmina/Aja St. Eustatius/Sur.
9 Amsterdam Angola St. Eustatius
1725 9b 1 Amsterdam Elmina/Aja St. Eustatius 7
3 Amsterdam Angola St. Eustatius
4 Maze Elmina/Aja Surinam (1726) 11
5 Amsterdam Angola St. Eustatius (1727) 5
6 N.K. Angola Surinam (1728) 9
8 S.&L. ??
9 Amsterdam ??
1729 2 1 Amsterdam Elmina Surinam 5
2 Angola Angola Surinam
1730 4 3 Amsterdam Elmina Curasao 4
4 Maze Elmina Surinam
5 Amsterdam
6 N.K.
1731 3 7 Zeeland 7
8 S.&L. Elmina Surinam
9 Amsterdam Elmina Surinam
1732 2 1 Amsterdam 9
2 Zeeland
Notes: j*These estimates have been substituted for unverified assignments.
After 1725, the sequence numbering appears to have little relationship to
the implementation of the traffic.
362 Appendixes
Appendix 6
Documents carried by a slave ship in 1761
List of documents and papers for Captain Jan van der Sluys, commanding
the ship Frans Willem, to obtain slaves in Guinea and then to take them to
Surinam. This list is published in J. Hudig, De scheepvaart op WestAfnka en
West-Indi in de achtiende eeurv (Amsterdam: 1926), pp. 16-17.
1. Instructions for the captains from the Company (Reeders);
2. Muster roll of officers and sailors from the Rotterdam Commissioner
for the Merchant Marine;
3. Certificate of registry in Dutch from the City Council of Rotterdam;
4. One in French, as above;
5. Health certificate from the City Council of Rotterdam;
6. Turkish Pass from the Admiralty of the Maze;
7. List of agents in England, in case such harbors need to be entered;
8. The Pass from the WIC directors of the chamber Maze at Rotterdam;
9. The Pass from the Society of Surinam, accompanied by a placard;
10. Manifest of the ship's cargo, numbered and marked;
11. Tonnage Certificate (Ykbrief), from the Admiralty;
12. Marine Treaty, dated 1674, between the English Crown and this
state;
13. Clearance Certificate from Hellevoetsluys (near Rotterdam);
14. A list of papers (aboard?);
15. Certificate with the names of the ship owners, all subjects of this
state.
I acknowledge to have received the abovementioned documents and papers
from the Company Coopstad & Rochussen, and promise to take good care
of them and return them upon my safe return - if God grants this.
Rotterdam, 13 November 1761
(signed by Jan van der Sluys)
Appendixes 363
Appendix 7
Guidelines for the slave trade at Ouidah
The following document was written by the often cited Dutch factor Willem
Bosman in 1699 o r 1700.1 At that time Bosman was stationed at Elmina as
second in command of the WIC establishment in Africa. Much of the pre-
vious decade he had been stationed as factor in Ouidah, and during his stay
he learned much about the African slave trade.
The handwritten document was found in the NBKG Collection, vol. 233,
Doc. 10/3/1700. The translation places the emphasis on the content of the
document, but it also tries to preserve some of the original style.
Guidelines by Willem Bosman
Guidelines according to which one may regulate the slave trade at Ouidah.
Composed by the Honorable Chief Factor Willem Bosman, and currently
used by the Chief Commissioner Nicolaas Pol. Slave prices have been ad-
justed to current levels.
1. On arrival, the captain (of the ship)2 must make certain that he gives
generous presents to the king, and in addition pay the required duties, which
are:
To the King—six slaves, paid in cowries, plus two slaves for water;
To the Chiefs (principal traders)—two slaves for all;
To the Announcer—one pitcher (bekkeri) of cowries, when he an-
nounces the free market.
2. When the duties have been paid and the market announced, the captain
is still not allowed to buy slaves until he has negotiated with the king. After
that he is free to trade with any merchant. Try to buy the fewest possible
slaves from the king, as he always demands cowries as payment, approxi-
mately 120 lbs. per slave. Although the captain cannot avoid buying a sizable
number from the king, he may discontinue when prices get too high.
3. To the three or four merchants (captains or chiefs) who furnish the

largest number of slaves the same price counts as with the king, but it is
1. See text Chapter 5.

2. Information in brackets has been added by the translator for clarification.
364 Appendixes
paid in (European) merchandise and not in cowries, at a rate of about Vs,
V5, or V6 more than to private traders. For example: Cowries—12 pitchers
(bekkens) equal 10; Graaties (a textile)—5 pieces equal 4; Servetten (a textile)—
8 pieces equal 7; Plattilios (a textile)—10 pieces equal 8. For bars (iron?),
much or little is paid depending on the market. For a woman one generally
pays one piece of any kind of merchandise less (than for a man). Cowries
have a stable price; as with the king, a "Kopere aken" full, and the chief
merchants a case.3 As a rule we also pay the Negro Assoe a little more, and
because he is of great service to us and sells us many slaves we give him
cowries to the value of a slave as a "custom."
4. If one trades with the English factor, the price of 95 lbs. cowries (per
slave) is the rule; and if paid in goods, the same price as with the king and
the chief merchants. If the captain wants to verify price levels, which con-
tinually fluctuate, the best thing to do is to see either the Negro Assoe, Captain
Carte, or the interpreter Agay. The reliability of these Negroes need not be
questioned. These men can also supply information regarding the charges
for transporting merchandise. For these reasons it is important that captains
remain on good terms with these persons.
5. Captains should carefully watch out for the thievery of the Negroes,
in order that not too much gets stolen. I say "too much," since it is almost
impossible to escape theft completely; at least I have never heard of such a
situation. Even the rowers hired by the captain will try to steal. For this
reason he must watch everyone, since theft seems to be an inherited trait
of the people there.
6. The captain should try, if possible, to sell his (European) merchandise
first and keep his cowries, otherwise the slave prices will rise too much.
When the trade stagnates, however, and without the use of cowries no
improvement can be effected, he should act as seems best for the Honorable
Company, since remaining on the coast for a long time is most disadvan-
tageous for the Company.
7. Finally, when trading has been completed, the following duties should
be paid—again in cowries: one slave for the tronk (accommodation); one
slave to the interpreter; one slave for those who have taken the slaves to the
beach; one slave for those who have taken the merchandise from the beach
to the lodge; and one to the wives of the king. From the latter we gain the
following advantage. If a few slaves escape from the tronk or during transport
to the beach, the king will recapture them or compensate us (for the loss).
One should not always count on this, however.
3. The meaning of these last phrases is not clear.

Appendixes 365
Also, the gifts to the king's wives cover the daily supplies for the table,
making this actually the best investment. Finally, before one leaves, it is
customary to give another present to the king, and also to the principal
traders who have supplied large numbers of slaves. These, in addition to
the daily supplies of brandy, are the expenses of the captain. If he is required
to make more expenditures, he can reply that such is against the established
customs and that he has no desire to introduce new practices.
As a result of many French, English, and Portuguese ships, the slave
prices have been going up considerably lately.
[The document continues with a detailed list of merchandise and slave
prices, which is difficult to read and therefore not included in this
translation.!
366 Appendixes
Appendix 8
Instructions for a slave-ship captain of the MCC

The following translated document clarifies the way in which captains and
crews of slave ships had to conduct themselves, how they purchased the
slaves, and how they were compensated for their efforts. The document is
printed, and was apparently available for all MCC slave-ship officers. The
name of the ship, destinations, and other additional instructions were written
by hand. These latter additions have been underlined in the translation. The
document was used for one of the voyages of the MCC ship De Nieuwe
Hoop, which undertook at least ten slaving missions in the period of 1762-
1786. The document is located in MCC, No. 816.
Private instructions for captains and officers of the ship De Nieuwe Hoop
of the Commercie Compagnie at Middelburg in Zeeland
According to article 3 of the General Instructions, you shall proceed with

your voyage and as quickly as possible sail to the coast of Guinea in Africa;
and after arriving there you must purchase, with the greatest care and most
profitably, a high quality cargo (armazoen) of slaves. After that, sail with the
slaves to Surinam in America, according to instructions given in article 9
below. Also, purchase as many ivory tusks as possible; as many a s . . . l
II
As mentioned in article 4 of the General Instructions, precautions should

be taken that you not be attacked by Negroes or slaves. We also seriously
demand that you do not permit any Negroes, slaves, or slave women to be
defiled or mistreated by any of the officers or crew members. And if such
should occur anyway, this should be noted in the log book, an affidavit
signed, and the offender punished by the ship's council according to the
offense, including confiscation of salary.
Ill
Also, the person(s) in command shall see to it that the slaves are treated
well, properly checked, and cared for. Also, the "slave kettle"2 must be kept
1. This sentence was not completed in the document.
2. The kettle refers to the pot in which the food was prepared.
Appendixes 367
clean. Likewise, care should be taken that the doctor and supercargo check
the mouths and eyes of the slaves every morning, and try to discover if
anything ails them. The captain is obligated to supply the doctor with every-
thing he needs for the slaves.
IV
It is our fervent intent that neither you nor any of the officers bring along
any merchandise, or privately buy and sell slaves. You are ordered once
more to watch carefully that everyone obey this rule; and if you discover any
violation of this rule, you must note this in the ship's log, and deal with the
offender appropriately. Furthermore, you should involve the ship's council
in obtaining evidence and a declaration, which will be useful for us after
your return, and which, through the interference of death, might otherwise
no longer be available. And even if such (private trade) is undertaken for
reason of improving poor trading conditions (if possible), the directors will
still not tolerate it. Upon your return, you may be requested to declare,
under oath, that neither you nor your officers had brought any merchandise
or used this to trade in slaves; if this should turn out to be the case, the
offender shall have his salary and premiums confiscated; in addition, he must
pay a fine of 1,000 guilders for every slave, male or female, that he has
traded; and such a person will forever be barred from serving this company,
and he will legally be charged with perjury.
In return, the directors promise to pay you and all officers, upon your
return, for every slave (male and female) landed and sold in the Americas,
a premium as follows:
To the Captain 80 stuivers per slave3
To the First Mate 24 stuivers per slave
To the Second Mate 10 stuivers per slave
To the Third Mate 6 stuivers per slave
To the Supercargo 24 stuivers per slave
Totals 144 stuivers per slave
Everyone should be satisfied with this. Equal amounts shall be paid for the
ivory (tanden en crevelle) as if slaves had been purchased.
The premiums mentioned above have to be paid even if no more than

the cost price is obtained for slaves and backhaul. But if it turns out that,
3. There were 20 stuivers to a guilder.

368 Appendixes
after all salaries and expenses for this ship and its cargo have been paid, a
profit has been made, then, and only then, will the earlier mentioned officers
receive an extra premium of 12 percent of the profits; no more, and only
once for each of them. This (share of the) profit will be divided among them
according to the ratio of the "slave money" (slaavegeld). And if, by some
chance, the ship should experience some unusual disaster, the premium will
be based on the profit still remaining.
VI
If it should happen that two or more ships of this company meet in the
same colony, where you sell the slaves, the one that arrived there first shall
sell the slaves first and then continue its voyage expeditiously. The second
ship shall return the bills of exchange of both ships, unless these had been
sent with another ship beforehand.
VII
The export of ammunition on your ship, approved by the Admiralty Coun-

cil here, is permitted on the following condition: that upon your return you
can prove that the ammunition, as specified on the attache among your papers,
has been taken ashore in Africa and stored there. You will be required to
sign, along with your officers, a written declaration of this, in order that the
company can account for this at the Admiralty Council.
As you purchase slaves you must mark them at the upper right arm with
the silver marker CC N, which is sent along with you for that purpose. Note
the following when you do the branding: (1) the area of marking must first
be rubbed with candle wax or oil; (2) The marker should be only as hot as
when applied to paper, the paper gets red. When these (precautions) are
observed, the slaves will not suffer bad effects from the branding.
Appendixes 369
Appendix 9
The table compares individually documented slaving missions with two lists
of slave-trade passes issued by the WIC Free traders. Sources of the data
are: AW, LX-447, VWIS, vol. 1244, and Appendix 2. See Notes below for
problems or discrepancies that should be taken into consideration.
Appendix 9
Slave-trade passes issued to Dutch free traders
Year Documented L X 447 List V W I S 1244 List
1730 5 13
1731 16 13
1732 5-11 42 7 51G
1733 7 8
1734 9 10
1735 7 6
1736 6 6
1737 8 38 6 34
1738 9
1739 8
1740 11 11
1741 12 10
1742 14 70 12 12 69
1743 20-1 22 22
1744 13 24e 14
1745 19-1 15 14
1746 17 27 27
1747 17 81 9 80 9 80
1748 12 16 17
1749 16 13 13
1750 9 9 9
1751 13 11 11
1752 17 71 18 72 18 72
1753 17 18 18
1754 15 16 16
1755 14 15 17
1756 18 15 15
1757 17 75 18 78 18 80
1758 16 15 15
1759 10 15 15
1760 19 19 19
1761 15 16 ?
1762 26 99 27 106 9
1763 17 18 9
37° Appendixes
Appendix 9 (cont)
Slave-trade passes issued to Dutch free traders
Year Documented3 L X 447 List V W I S 1244 List
1764 22 26 29
1765 20-lb 25 34f

1766 28 21 41f
1767 19 110 21 112
1768 19 22
1769 24 23
1770 29 30
1771 23 23
1772 21 103 21 104
1773 15 15
1774 15 15
1775 11 11
1776 12 13
1777 6 50 7 55
1778 11 11
1779 10-lb 13
1780 9-3b 17C
Total 748-8 748

Source: AW, LX-447; VWIS, vol. 1244; and Appendix 2.
Notes: a A few passes may not have been executed while others may not have been
put into effect until the following year.
The second figure lists slaving missions that were not completed.
c
These discrepancies between passes and completed missions were largely
the result of the Anglo-Dutch War of 1780-1784.
The text explains the special problems with documentation for the free-
trade traffic during the 1730s.
e
The original document mistakenly listed 24 instead of 14.
f
These figures must have been an erroneous estimate.
Appendixes 371
Appendix 10
Slave-trade companies and brokers
Key3 Name Place Years Nr.b
MCC Middelburgsche Commercie Middelburg 1732-1803 146
Compagnie
C&R Coopstad & Rochussen Rotterdam 1748-1790 65
AK Adriaan Kroeff Vlissingen 1735-1790 40
(Kroef and J.Martveld)
JSZ Jan Swart & Zn. Vlissingen 1739-1778 55
AvY A. van Ys(s)el Amsterdam 1790-1794 2
A.A. A. Almelo Rotterdam 1777-1781 3
A.C Abr. Claudora Middelburg 1733-1735 1
BSS Boursse de Superville Middelburg 1763-1777 8
Sr onnm
oc Cmith
B&S de Bruyn & de Smith 1762-1795 15
BZ Brantlight & Zn Amsterdam 1792-1793 1
CDC Claude de Chuy 1735-1736 1
CK Christiaan Ketner 1768-1775 5
DMW Der Moyse & v/d Woordt Vlissingen 1745-1780 32
FC Furing & Co. Middelburg 1733-1742 3
HB Hans Barends 1772-1774 1
H&H Helleman & van Houte 1771-1789 6
(and Hijkelenborg)
H&L Hurgronje & Louyssen Vlissingen 1769-1795 32
H&M Wed. A. Hamilton & Meyers Rotterdam 1754-1773 11
IR I. Rochussen Rotterdam 1733-1736 2
JCH Jan Corn, v Hoorn 1765-1766 1
JNV Jeremias v Nederveen 1764-1780 8
JZZ Jan/Jacob/Joh. de Zitter Vlissingen 1755-1791 20
JM Jan Martvelt Vlissingen 1793-1794 1
JT J. Tobiassen Vlissingen 1740-1741 1
LBZ L. Brandligt & Zn. Amsterdam 1789-1793 2
MBL Bovil & de Loos 1765-1780 15
PvH P. van Harlingen Amsterdam 1788-1789 1
RC Rietvelt & Cateau Vlissingen 1792-1795 3
SD Splinter van Doom Vlissingen 1739-1744 4
S&D Sandry? van Dijke 1775-1781 4
TW Jacob/Jan/Pieter Wulphert Vlissingen 1745-1787 26
vdN Van der Noordt Amsterdam 1790-1791 1
Source: Appendix 2; ARA, Bound Document no. 1.05.07; VWIS, Nr. 1379; and
Postma Data Collection.
Notes: Abbreviations as employed in Appendix 2.
The number of slaving missions found documented in this study.
37 2 Appendixes
Appendix 11
Fees received for slaving permits, 1729-1791
From WIC triennial accounts
Period Receipts Period Receipts
1729-1731 f. 101,274 1762-1764 f. 258,042
1732-1734 147,664 1765-1767 281,346
1735-1737 70,394 1768-1770 280,524
1738-1740 97,766 1771-1773 259,201
1741-1743 173,692 1774-1776 178,978
1744-1746 257,609 1777-1779 120,915
1747-1749 161,389 1780-1782 48,195
1750-1752 131,750 1783-1785 28,569
1753-1755 177,692 1786-1788 62,314
1756-1758 215,704 1789-1791 22,974
1759-1761 197-197
Grand total 3.273.189
Source: Triennial Accounts, WIC, Vol. 269.
Appendix 1ZA
Guinea coast origins of slaves on free-trade ships
Places of Origin 1741 1746 1753 1753 1754 1755 1755 1756 1756 1757 1758 1761 1762
Sierra Leone Coast 18 2 15 2 2 27 56 5
St. Paul R. and St. John R. 2 2 9 8 13 2 12 1
Cestos R. to Cape Palmas 143 154 9 31 47 58 69 3 4 75 78 10 6
Cavalla R. to Sassandra R. 10 34 1 6 16 8 10 12 11 4 2
Cape Lahou 106 34 43 77 94 60 30 98 97 162 121 179
Grand Bassam 2 1 21 7 8 13 9 6 14
Assini to Axim 13 8 1 2 1 6 4 4
Not Identified 15 4 92 30 9 24 12 17 2
Windward coast totals 145" 287 128 98 141 277 197 67 152 246 322 131 212
Axim 3 4 2 12 1 4 2 2 11
Poquefoe
Akwida 2 3 4
Butri
Takoradi
Secondi
Shama 2
Komenda 32
Elmina 20 84 13 52 55 97 80
Cape Coast
Mori
Anomabu 61 3 10 9 37 90 62 73
Kormantin
Apam 52 124 44 54
Bercu
Accra 12
Keta 1
Popo 34
Epe
62 28 40 32
Not identified 4
Gold and Slave coasts combined 102
89 141 219 90 12 64 167 130 62 15 no 91
376 269 317 231 289 261 234 282 308 337 301 303
Grand total 247
Appendix
Appendix izj3
Guinea coast origins of slaves in free-trade ships
Places of Origin 1763 1763 1764 1765 1765 1765 1767 1767 1768 1769 1769 1769 1770
Sierra Leone Coast 10 3 1 2 1 1 4 5
St. Paul R. and St. John R. 2 7 3
Cestos R. to Cape Palmas 11 59 3 28 31 20 9 13 18 18
Cavalla R. to Sassandra R. 10 8 13 3 35 6 28 7 16
Cape Lahou 297 154 191 167 165 174 43 149 175 105 140 98
Grand Bassam 2 4 5 24 2 27 8 32
Assini to Axim 5 4 2 4 7 4 6 7 18
Not identified 4 7 3 24 6 119 18
Windward coast totals 312 242 214 167 239 217 235 214 181 0 180 187 187
Axim 3 6 18 35 7 5
Poquefoe
Akwida 2 5
Butri 2 6 14
Takoradi 6 7 6
Secondi 1 1 10 7 3
Shama 17
Komenda
Elmina 24 48 16 16 32 61 55 23
Cape Coast 5
Mori 6 7
Anomaou 13 40
Kormantin 15 25
Apam 4 1
Bercu 5
Accra 71 8
Keta 4
Popo
Epe
Not identified 13 63
Gold and Slave coasts combined ~ ~ 0 6 3 5 9 7 T l 7 8 0 9 0 4 5 6 9 6 7 8 2 * 0 73
Grand total 3 1 2 3 0 5 2 7 3 2 3 8 2 5 6 2 9 7 3 2 5 2 5 9 2 5 0 6 7 2 6 2 1 8 7 260
Appendix 12C
Places of origin 1771 1771 1771 1772 1772 1773 1773 1774 1774 1775 1775 1775 1776
Sierra Leone Coast 1 2 11
St. Paul R. and St. John R. 14 2 4
Cestos R. to Cape Palmas 32 7 4 10 14 11 11 30 37 71
Cavalla R. to Sassandra R. 11 16 6 7 11 5 11 6 6 14 9
CapeLahou 91 47 131 74 108 120 59 87 84 113 134 139
Grand Bassam 6 14 3 8 7 2 6 2 4 4 6
AssinitoAxim 7 10 13 7 6 9 3
Not identified 12 32 2 45 8 8 13 15
Windward coast totals 174 112 160 132 142 160 72 115 124 168 204 239
Axim 3 9 34 2 114 6
Poquefoe 10
Akwida 3 8
Butri 7 4 18
Takoradi 12 29
Secondi
Shama 5
Komenda 2
Elmina 28 118 1 169 10 51 6
Cape Coast
Mori 12 27 80
Anomabu 4
Kormantin 40
Apam 64 54
Bercu 12 27 47
Accra 10
Keta 4
Popo 118
Epe 5
Not identified
106
80 52 157 106 26 54 273 169 114 90 58 30
Gold and Slave coasts combined 50
192 212 289 107 168 214 345 284 238 258 262 269
Grand total 224
Appendix 12D
Places of origin 1777 1777 1778 1778 1778 1779 1779 1780 1787 1788 1792 Total
Sierra Leone coast 44 155 1 94 94 138 2 3 699
St. Paul R. and St. John R. 3 13 3 9 103 47 259
Cestos R. to Cape Palmas 54 64 72 15 55 9 47 20 42 6 1,508
Cavalla R. to Sassandra R. 1 6 16 65 11 13 454
Cape Lahou 66 105 71 105 75 33 77 32 33 149 69 4,961
Grand Bassam 25 12 25 29 25 23 16 17 419
Assini to Axim 3 17 5 2 7 1 187
Not identified 15 15 42 2 11 606
Windward coast totals 161 237 226 230 198 223 319 271 137 219 91 9^093
Axim 11 16 4 314
Poquefoe 10
Akwida 8 35
Butri 2 3 14 74
Takoradi 12 72
Secondi 40
Shama 6 30
Komenda 34
Elmina 112 42 154 11 63 103 47 78 1,682
Cape Coast 5
Mori 17 149
Anomabu 402
Kormantin 17 97
Apam 397
Bercu 91
Accra 101
Keta 9
Popo 152
Epe 5
Not identified 47 395
Gold and Slave coasts combined 123 52 154 16 48 75 14 103 47 51 84 4,094
Grand total 284 289 380 246 246 298 333 374 184 270 175 13,187
Appendixes 377
Appendixes 13 and 14
Notes to Appendixes 13 and 14
Appendix 13 lists nearly 200 captains of slave ships who served the WIC
during the years 1675 *° X739- Appendix 14 lists nearly 300 free trade
captains, who commanded slave ships between 1730 and 1803. Their names
are listed in alphabetical order, and by means of the accompanying codes,
can be matched with the ships they commanded in Appendixes 1 and 2,
respectively. The lists include the number of documented slave missions
(M) for each captain, and they also indicate the voyages where as mates they
replaced their deceased captains (r). Also listed are the years in which the
record shows that they were active in the slave trade. For the free trade, an
additional column is added for the companies the captains represented.
The slaving missions listed here are often short of the total that captains
undertook. Only the ones that could be documented are included, although
in a series of voyages of a particular ship one could perhaps guess additional
missions of a given captain. Many of these captains must also have served
on slave ships in various subordinate capacities before they were given com-
mand of a ship, but that information is rarely available.
It must be understood that this type of data gathering is far from precise.
There were often contradictions in spelling, and on occasion names of ships
and captains were simply inaccurately listed. Closer scrutiny will undoubtedly
reveal such flaws, but if this list can serve as a basis for further study they
will have served a useful purpose.
These data are drawn from a large variety of sources, too many to mention.
Sources can be verified through the Postma Data Collection.
Appendix 13
Slave-ship captains sailing for the WIC
Code Captains Ma Years Code Captain Ma Years

653 Andriesse, Jan 1 1726-27 664 Bruyst, Jan 1 1721-22
516 Arrel, Jan v 3 1675-85 667 Buttel, Christoffel 1 1721-22
534 Baarspul, Theunis 3 1734-39 646 Caagman, Claas 1 1709-10
603 Balck, Jan Jacobsz 2 1675-86 580 Cagees, Nanningh 1 1693-94
672 Banckert, Joost 1 1685-86 692 Claassen, Herman rl 1685-86
609 Beeck, Simon ter 1 1687-88 606 Claasz., Jan rl 1711-12
572 Belle, Pieter rl 1717-18 696 Convent, Frederick 1 1675-76
660 Berg, Daniel 1 1736-37 560 Coster, Symon 2 1687-1708
654 Bleeker, Samuel rl 1703-04 548 Crans, Pieter r3 1700-08
545 Blok, Francois 1 1729-30 676 Credo, Jan 1 1698-99
599 Blom, Nicolaas rl 1722-23 502 Creeft, Benjamin 5 1720-26
591 Bodt, Pieter J. 1 1696-1701 604 Daal, Juriaan 1 1699-1700
554 Boer, Cornells 1 1708-09 588 Dam, Herman 1 1697-98
564 Bolden, Christiaan 2 1726-29 510 Decker, Claas 1 1708-9
701 Boogaart, Mathys 1 1700-01 707 Dijck, Leendert J. van 1 1686-87
600 Booms, Anthony 1 1728-29 569 Doemer, Claas 1 1687-88
546 Boonen, Cornelis 4 1724-36 661 Dorp, Jacob P. 1 1705-06
519 Bouman, Cornelis 1 1723-4 674 Dronker, Jan r2 1682-88
628 Boute, Daniel de 1 1675-76 563 Dullaart, Huygh 1 1694-95
643 Bovenmans, Anthony 1 1732-33 544 Elink, Pieter rl 1699-1700
578 Brasser, Matthijs L. 2 1679-88 673 Engelsman, Samuel 1 1682-83
668 Brouwer, Dammes 1 1723-24 627 Ens, Jacob Jansen 1 1680-81
565 Brouwer, Jan 2 1733-36 621 Ephraim, ? 1 1680-81
518 Brouwer, Sipke 1 1719-20 633 Eyck, Michiel Joosten v 5 1686-1704
549 Brown, Jacob 1 1710-11 639 Fortborgh, Jan 1 1721-22
543 Fret, Frans 1 1699-1700 664 Hinke, Pieter 1 1700-01
699 Genegten, Nicolaas v/d 1 1718-19 681 Hinneken, Jan 1 1700-01
552 Gerrits, Jan 1 1708-09 511 Hoeve, Jan v/d 2 1710-14
539 Gessen, Arent v r3 1703-09 683 Hoogdorp, Jan L. van r3 1725-31
657 Gewelt, Jan Pietrsz. 3 1725-34 598 Hoogen, Jan 1 1722-23
635 Gijsbertse, Pieter 1 1691-92 520 Hoop, Joost 1 1726-7
613 Gipson, Willem 1 1718-19 671 Hoop, Pieter 1 1700-01
566 Gleynsen, Pieter 1 1722-23 574 Horst, Hendrik ter 1 1683-84
587 Goed, Jan P. 1 1715-16 524 Huygen, Abraham 1 1691-92
691 Goes, Willem Jansen r2 1683-86 607 Jacobson, Bastiaan 1 1725-26
512 Goethals, Pieter 2 1716-19 525 Jacobsz., Pieter 1 1710-11
682 Goethem, Frans van 1 1694-95 694 Jansen, Gabriel 1 1701-02
530 Graan, Andries 3 1728-33 679 Jansen, Huybert 1 1676-77
652 Groenewolt, Thomas 1 1687-88 704 Jansen, Jusua 1 1684-85
535 Groot, Michiel de rl 1738-39 538 Jansen, Liendert 1 1704-05
507 Groot, Pieter 1 1715-16 622 Jansz., Pieter 1 1693-94
575 Haan, Gerrit de 3 1723-29 677 Jaspers, ? 1 1700-01
503 Hagerop, Rijk 2 1720-21 528 Jensen, Jacob rl 1725-26
705 Harder, Job J. van rl 1684-85 662 Jong, Pieter de 1 1725-26
521 Harmensz., Bruyn 3 1727-33 595 Kennis, Adriaan 1 1716-17
658 Hendrix, Arend 1 1697-98 558 Kennis, Andries 1 1719-20
596 Heym, Jan v/d 1 1717-18 605 Keuvel, Steven 1 1686-87
590 Hidt, Cornelis v/d 1 1696-7 553 Kist, Jan 4 1703-07
710 Hierschot, Renier van rl 1729-30 557 Klinkert, Adriaan 1 1686-87
636 Hinke G. 2 1693-1701 619 Knoppeldoeck, Jacob P. 1 1700-01
Appendix 13 (cont)
Slave-ship captains sailing for the WIC
Code Captain Ma Years Code Captain Ma Years

632 Kock, Dirck r2 1696-98 513 Pieterse, Reyer 1 1675-76
680 Laey, david de 1 1718-19 608 Port, Gerrit v/d 3 1731-36
577 Lambrechts, Andries 1 1716-17 656 Pronk, Hans 1 1714-15
642 Lankvelt, Francois v 1 1726-27 527 Ras, Jacob 1 1725-26
568 Leeck, Claas J. 1 1733-34 504 Ras, Pieter 5 1720-26
631 Leeuwen, Dirk v 1 1704-05 541 Reynders, Salomon 1 1718-19
645 Leym, Jan v/d 2 1715-18 570 Rijck, Willem Robertsz. 2 1691-97
583 Leym, Lodewijk v/d 4 1704-1718 634 Rijniersz., Wouter 1 1705-06
625 Lit, Jan Jansen v 1 1721-22 708 Robertson, Willem 1 1693-95
697 Longmans, Claas 2 1688-1700 523 Roem, Symon J. 2 1699-1703
536 Loo, Jan v/d 1 1731-32 648 Roos, Roelof 1 1722-23
506 Louw, Claas 2 1714-17 542 Rosiers, Willem rl 1718-19
567 Maas, Simon 1 1725-26 540 Saanen, Jan v 3 1708-15
612 Mercksen, Daniel 2 1706-08 508 Sas, Jurriaan 4 1705-13
586 Mol, Gerrit Corn. 1 1684-85 700 Schalkendam, Andries rl 1712-13
529 Mooylieves, Cornells r4 1726-32 616 Schamp, Jan 3 1723-28
638 Muller, Erasmus 1 1709-10 629 Schepmoes, Abraham 4 1683-95
576 Nygh, Leendert 1 1725-26 706 Schey, Pieter 1 1686-87
594 Nyse, Jacob de 1 1697-98 684 Schot, Adriaan rl 1707-08
537 Oole, Remns 1 1690-91 695 Schouwenburg, Jean rl 1724-25
618 Outjes, Jochem 2 1729-38 623 Serat, Thomas v 1 1715-16
617 Ovens, Simon 3 1731-36 659 Smidt, Jan rl 1734-35
551 Parera, Steven v 1 1704-05 703 Smith, Hendrik B. 1 1685-86
501 Parre, Arie v/d r3 1723-24 531 Snoek, Isaak 1 1735-36
547 Petts, Daniel 2 1689-96 666 Starr, Gerrit 1 1686-87
514 Stolck, Arent Gysen v/d 6 1685-1714 533 Velz., Christiaan 1 1735-36
669 Stoop, Pieter 1 1700-02 651 Verdoes, Bastiaan 1 1735-36
517 Storck, ? 1 1705-6 655 Verhoeff, Jacob 1 1707-08
647 Strijd, Jan Jorisz. 2 1704-12 601 Verhoeven, Jacob 1 1711-12
561 Stuart, Hans 2 1697-1702 556 Visser, Jacob Cortse r6 1685-1704
592 Swaan, Adriaan rl 1735-36 522 Vlugt, Jan 2 1731-35
597 Sweeris-Seegert, H. v r2 1717-20 585 Voile, Jacob 2 1701-04
709 Tange, Anthonius 1 1688-89 602 Vos, Herman Claesz. 2 1679-88
505 Teyl, Jacob 2 1715-19 665 Vos, Jacob Lente 2 1680-1707
644 Theunissen, Willem rl 1732-33 641 Wassenaer, Hendrik 1 1724-25
611 Tromp, Jacob 1 1737-38 581 Welsingh, Hendrik 1 1725-26
693 Turner, Ephraim 2 1684-1701 670 Wenman, Roeloff 1 1705-06
573 Valck, Pieter S. 1 1720-21 509 Weteringe, Cornells v/d 5 1700-15
626 Valee, Jacob 3 1722-28 550 Wijnantsen, Adriaan 1 1699-1700
532 Valies, Thomas Jan r4 1700-06 701 Wilkenson, Marinus 1 1686-87
678 Valkenburg, Willem rl 1700-01 582 Winterman, Antony 2 1700-03
675 Velde, Daniel te 3 1729-35 698 Wit, Benjamin de 1 1726-27
589 Veltkamp, J.G. 2 1686-1700 526 Wolf, Dirk de 2 1720-24
571 Zitter, Jan de 1 1717-18
Notes: a The number of a captain's slaving missions.
The r before the missions signifies replacement
captain on at least one occasion.
Appendix 14
Slave-ship captains in the free trade
Code Captain Ma Years Firm Code Captain Ma Years Firm

204 Andriessen, Christiaan 2 1787-93 AK 260 Boon, J. G. r3 1774
61 Antheunisse, Jan 3 1754-72 DMW 272 Boswijk, Claas 1 1780 MCC
155 Baane, Jan Corn. 4 1749-57 JSC 196 Boudewijn, J. M. 1 1764
246 Baarts, Jan 1 1771 206 Bouque, Jacob r3 1757-69 MCC
86 Baas, Isac v/d r3 1780 262 Bourlick, Dirk 2 1763-70 MCC
176 Bakker, Dirk 1 1791 49 Bouwens, Jan 6 1761-71 B&S
68 Bakker, Johannes r6 1766-76 MCC 240 Bovel, Michiel r2 1748-57
35 Barendse, R. rl 1774 1 Bovens, A. 1 1765-66 AK
67 Barends, Hans 5 1756-68 TW 8 Bovens, D. de 1 1752-53
294 Beckman, Pieter 1 1771 TW 255 Bredem, Carel r3 1790 MCC
104 Beekman, Godfreyd 8 1753-65 C&R 162 Breen, P. van 1 1771 MCC
53 Beekman, N. 2 1758-60 TW 157 Bree(u)n, H. van 2 1764-67 JSZ
231 Beelensdorp, Jacob 1 1758 73 Bremer, Carel 4 1761-77 DMW
167 Beeter, Jacob 1 1754 91 Bremer, Carl (2) 3 1763-68 DMW
101 Bekker, Fred A. 2 1768-71 H&M 26 Brinkman, C. rl 1745
243 Bell, Jacob v/d 4 1760-67 C&R 282 Bruggeman, C. 1 1731
71 Bevers, Anthony 6 1737-71 SD 27 Bruyn, Arend 9 1745-63
304 Blankebijl, E. 1 1731 187 Bruyn, Jan (Joh) de 4 1756-76 C&R
140 Boer, Adriaan de 3 1770-77 DMW 244 Bruyn, Michiel 4 1746-54
34 Boer, A. de (2) 1 1774 47 Buykschoot, A. G. van 1 1730
103 Boer, Cornells de (2) 1 1761 64 Carelson, A. 1 1732 FC
41 Boer, Corn, de 5 1762-71 B&S 288 Casna, Jan 1 1731 C&R
39 Bollaard, Hermanus 5 1771-87 TW 58 Castaleyn, Johan r4 1757-64
94 Bollevaarde, J. rl 1745-47 134 Chateleyn, Adriaan 6 1765-79 MCC
14 Bonrepas, Gideon de 4 1739-44 MCC 312 Churchill, Ewout 1 1765
46 Bon, G. de 1 1731 218 Claasen, Mattheus 1 1769
152 Clebo, Jan 5 1767-73 C&R 107 Drijver, Willem r2 1771 MCC
185 Clerque, Francois de r3 1777 MBL 192 Duyker, Gerrit rl 1793
182 Clerque, Isaac de 6 1766-77 AK 201 Edebool, Carsten 3 1770-75 C&R
145 Clijver, Jacob 1 1737 30 Eggers, M. r3 1765-68
6 Codde, Claas rl 1758 66 Ende, Jacobus v/d 2 1766-69
326 Collenier, N.A rl 1765 JZZ 113 Engelsen, Joris 1 1731
292 Conwel, Jan 2 1744-46 143 Eversen, Huybrecht 2 1730-35
95 Cornelissen, C. 1 1754 JZZ 159 Everse, Hans 1 1765
250 Cornelissen, J. 2 1733 313 Eyndlijk, E. 1 1747
109 Cornelisse, Simon 5 1743-59 AK 150 Forbes, Izak 4 1770-79 JNV
252 Cornelis, Simon 1 1745 291 Fransen, Jacob rl 1774
263 Cosyne, Gilles v/d rl 1770 51 Fraser, David r2 1752-56
279 Crevens, Jacobus 2 1766-69 AK 316 Fredericks, M. 1 1802
2 Daal, A. 1 1730 164 Frijben, L.R. 1 1772 H&H
229 Dahlbom, Claas rl 1758 300 Galen, Josua 1 1773 BSS
4 Daling, T. E. 1 1747-48 226 Galle, J. 1 1760 DMW
102 Daniels, Abraham 6 1742-58 37 Garcon, A. J. 1 1779 MCC
321 Dankers, Jan 1 1766 JZZ 208 Gerritsen, Jacob 1 1749 MCC
251 Dankerts, Joost 5 1769-86 H&L 112 Gerritsen, Job r4 1745-51 MCC
72 Dankquart, Willem 1 1748 DMW 38 Goodwill, R. 3 1779-88 MCC
110 Deynoot, Jasper 2 1759-63 AK 245 Goosen, F. 1 1754
24 Dheere, C. M. 1 1731 H&L 60 Graaf, P. de rl 1732
22 Diedeloff 1 1764 310 Graan, Andries 1 1742
165 Dijker, Willem 2 1786-90 125 Grim, Jan r7 1768-78 C&R
144 Doos, Josua v/d 1 1736 141 Grim, Jochem 5 1774-93 AvY
5 Drijver, J. 1 1758 JSZ 217 Groeff, Maguus 4 1763-71
Appendix 14 (cont)

97 Groot, Michiel de 2 1746-48 189 Jansen, Jan r5 1741-72
12 Hagerop, Christiaan 2 1742-45 JSZ 89 Jansen, Jurgen 4 1765-80 H&M
174 Hambeek, Hendrik 1 1762 265 Jansen, Pieter 1 1792
249 Harelstadt, F. 1 1758 122 Janssen, Wm. 1 1742 MCC
10 Harmel, Jan 7 1764-76 JZZ 119 Jansz., Roelof 1 1745 MCC
214 Harmensen, J. H. 1 1746 166 Joll, David 3 1741-47 MCC
54 Hauwen, J. van r2 1762 TW 286 Jonker, Cornelis 1 1746
173 Havinga 1 1780 99 Joosen, F. 2 1755-59 C&R
287 Hayem, Corn, van 3 1768-73 MCC 298 Jurriaansen, Hendrik 3 1748-52 JSZ
21 Hees, J. van 2 1742-45 151 Kaas, Willem 1 1792 RC
320 Helleman, J.C. 2 1774-87 H&H 108 Kakum, Corn, van 7 1770-88 MCC
133 Hermanz., N. 1 1761 DMW 323 Kamer, Aart v/d 1 1777 H&H
328 Hierschot, Renier van 1 1733 232 Kams, Wm. 1 1789 WIC
314 Hof, J.H. 1 1773 MCC 209 Kerkhoven, Jan van 3 1745-55 MCC
203 Hogerzeyl, M. B. 7 1761-75 BSS 137 Kettner, Christiaan 7 1767-80 CK
183 Hollander, C. A. 4 1756-73 MBL 322 Klaver, J.G. 1 1794
156 Hollander, J. C. 5 1756-66 JSZ 149 Klerk, F. le 1 1780 H&H
215 Hollen, Jac. 1 1756 207 Klerk, J. de 1 1760 MCC
57 Hommen, G. 1 1764 194 Klerk, Pieter de 3 1759-65 JZZ
210 Hudson, Jacobus 1 1762 MCC 111 Kleuter, Jacob 2 1742-46
52 Hult, Abr. 1 1774 C&R 160 Kluiterman, J. 2 1750-54 MCC
23 Huysing, C. rl 1764 7 Kock, Cornelis 4 1759-65
242 Jacobs, Adriaan 7 1750-65 MCC 98 Kok, de?? 1 1754
106 Jacobs, A. 2 1767 MCC 295 Kronkque, J. 1 1761 B&S
191 Jacobs, Claas 1 1787 PvH 75 Krul, Jochem rl 1766 C&R
146 Jacobs, Paulus 1 1762 79 Kruyer, A. v/d 1 1731 MCC
87 La Fayolle, Pieter 2 1750-54 230 Meegem, Pieter 2 1743-47
257 La Gaay, ? 2 1779-87 62 Mellendags, Jacob rl 1763
198 La Gordt, Andries r5 1742-53 83 Menkenveld, Jan 7 1751-64 MCC
154 La Moote, Corn. r5 1763-73 AK 309 Meyer, Jan 1 1764 AK
116 Lagerboom, Pieter r5 1750-66 259 Meyster, Hendrik 5 1758-67
178 Langebeek, Abr. 4 1764-71 DMW 271 Michielsen, Olfert r3 1778 MCC
302 Langeraad, Jan van 1 1791 RC 171 Mick, C. F. 1 1770 MBL
277 Leek van Wijdenes, J.C. 1 1730 45 Middemeyer, I. F. 1 1789 vdN
253 Leger, Jan 9 1753-76 JSZ 135 Minlust, Carel 1 1763 DMW
78 Lindenberg, J. 2 1742-46 WIC 270 Moelaart, Gijsbr. 5 1778-1802 H&L
132 Lins, Gabriel rl 1754 C&R 169 Moerman, F. 1 1766 MBL
186 Loef, Cornelis r6 1770-85 MCC 85 Molder, Willem de 3 1761-68 MCC
289 Loevermans, F. 1 1771 HB 130 Moor, Jan de 2 1749-53 C&R
118 Loo, Jan van 2 1731-44 MCC 205 Moor, Pieter de 6 1744-57 MCC
296 Louyssen, Ernst 5 1764-73 B&S 147 Mulders, David 4 1755-65 MCC
235 Maarschalk, Corn. 4 1742-51 MCC 158 Mulke, Pieter (Murk?) 1 1785
17 Maas, S. 2 1730-33 90 Muller, Daniel 3 1771-90
327 Machielsen, C. 1 1777 MCC 297 Muyen, Corn, van 3 1783-89 H&L
301 Macky, Anthony 1 1791 LBZ 172 Napp, Claas 5 1770-80 MBL
241 Macquee, Mattheus r3 1749 168 Nieuwenhuyse, F. 1 1752
220 Maguus, Carel 2 1777-84 H&L 190 Noels, Andries 4 1771-85 H&L
40 Makins, G. rl 1787 105 Noordhoek, Joh. 6 1768-78 MCC
3 Makkers, Cornelis 4 1749-67 JSZ 20 Noordhof, Nic. 5 1763-74 H&H
293 Malmberg, Jan 1 1772 C&R 129 Nysse, Jacob de 3 1739-44
15 Matthijsen, C. 2 1749-53 MCC 254 Obbe, Sijbrand 1 1765 MCC
317 Medden, W. 1 1802 184 Oorbaan, Wm. 1 1773 MBL
Appendix 14 (cont)

16 Oostdijk, Willem 1 1786-87 FC 92 Rudolphus, S. 1 1785-1802
213 Outjes, Jochem 1 1744 124 Rulle, A. 1 1762
228 Parre, Pieter v/d 2 1753-57 115 Rust, Jonas r3 1746-50
181 Pauw, Jan 1 1766 153 Salomi, David 8 1745-63 TW
219 Pekroen, Adam r2 1769-73 77 Santleven, H. 6 1761-73 MCC
81 Pietersen, Claas 7 1750-69 JZZ 32 Sap, Adriaan 3 1754-61 JSZ
200 Pietersen, Jan rl 1758 224 Sap, Claas 1 1783 MCC
197 Pieterse, Carl 5 1772-82 163 Sap,Jan 4 1762-74 MCC
303 Pietersz., Carel 3 1783-91 H&L 237 Schoeman, F. 1 1793
193 Pott, Ary v/d 1 1770 11 Schrijver, Jan de 2 1740-44 JSC
276 Prang, Jan van 1 1774 MCC 274 Sellow, C. van ,1 1789 H&L
50 Prins, P.W. 1 1774 B&S 311 Servijn, C ? 1 1747
84 Pruymelaar, Daniel 1 1763 MCC 261 Sever, Hans 1 1776
195 Reichert, Frans 8 1764-80 JZZ 275 Silon, I. C. 2 1791-1803 H&L
19 Reichert, M. rl 1763 JZZ 100 Sluys, Jan v/d 5 1759-68 C&R
59 Renneken, H. 1 1766 127 Sluyter, P.H. 4 1764-73
123 Reyen, Hendrik van 1 1747 MCC 179 Smidt, Michiel rl 1770 DMW
290 Rhee, J. de 2 1730-34 74 Smit, Lyn di 8 1748-65 C&R
247 Ridder, Jan de 6 1741-54 120 Solomons, Jan rl 1746
175 Riems, Jan 1 1782 280 Spaen, Christoffel 1 1792
63 Riese, Lodewijk 1 1788 JZZ 139 Sprang, Jan van 3 1767-73 MCC
136 Rietveld, Dirk rl 1763-92 76 Stam, Maartin 2 1752-55 MCC
284 Rijst, Pieter 1 1768 DMW 278 Stap, Pieter 7 1754-72 AK
268 Robelin, Ab. rl 1768 121 Steenhoff, Albert 1 1748 MCC
223 Robert, ? 1 1779 MCC 264 Stellen, Jacob v/d 2 1740-44
324 Rudolphus, Servaas 1 1776 131 Sterk, Corn. 2 1731-55 C&R
225 Sterk, Evert 1 1753 180 Ververne, Cornells rl 1778
9 Sterk, H. 2 1754-59 13 Veyle, P. de 1 1739-40 MCC
273 Sterry, Nathan 1 1788 188 Vleeshouwer, Michiel 2 1738-43
28 Stuurling, S. 3 1769-74 H&L 267 Vlissingen, P. R. 1 1735
211 Swart, Jan r4 1741-46 JSZ 43 Vos, Hen. de 1 1743
69 Taylor, David J. 8 1746-58 56 Vos, Jan. de r4 1766-91 AK
70 Taylor, R.J. r3 1748-57? 33 Vriese, J. de r6 1762-71 JSZ
161 Thuynman, Jan 2 1755-71 MCC 25 Vrij, J. de 1 1745
117 Toll, Casper 4 1785-93 H&L 82 Walthey, Anthony 1 1765 JCH
80 Udeman, P. G. 1 1783 H&L 202 Wickman, Albert 4 1744-56
239 Valk, Barend de 3 1779-86 AK 222 Wilton, Jan 5 1769-81 MCC
128 Valle, J. 1 1731 285 Winea, Dirk 2 1740-45
212 Velde, Daniel de 1 1741 JSZ 283 Winterheim, C. F. 3 1763-71
256 Veltz, Christiaan 1 1748 233 Wolff, C. de 2 1751-57
221 Verdonk, Philip 3 1762-70 C&R 236 Wolf, Frans 1 1762 MCC
55 Verheggen, Pieter r3 1762 TW 234 Wolf, J. 1 1761
199 Vermout, Hermanus 4 1752-62 C&R 18 Woutersen, J. 1 1763 JZZ
266 Verschuur, Jan 1 1783 299 Woutman, Frederik 4 1754-61
177 Zell, G. C. 3 1775-92 S&D
a
Notes: The number of a captain's slaving missions.
The r before the missions indicates replacement
captain on at least one occasion.
Appendix 15
African coasting time in the WIC trade
Departure Arrival Origin Departure Days Slave Boarded
Ships Holland Africa Africa Africa loading cargo per day
Adrichem 1714/7/14 1714/10/25 A 1715/4/2 159 111 4.5
Amsterdam 1707/ 9/18 G 1707/11/16 59
Amsterdam 1709 G 1710 135 483 3.6
Beschutter 1735/5/30 1735/7/28 E 1735/11/8 103 768 7.5
Brandenburgh 1729/6/8 1729/9/9 G 1730/1/28 177 409 2.3
Duynenburgh 1701 A 1701 245 ?
Duynvliet 1723 E 1723 23 340 14.8
Europa 1687 G 1687 27 471 17.4
Geertruyt 1684/5/ 6 1684/8/2 G 1684/12/05 126 373 3.0
Guntersteyn 1720 G 1720 70 596 8.5
Guntersteyn 1718/ 7/21 G 1718/8/5 15 538 35.9
Huis Loirheim 1686/4/26 G 1686/7/10 76 485 6.4
Coning Salomon 1686/4/19 G 1686/6/16 58 508 8.8
Phenix 1728/3/15 E 1728/10/15 214 783 3.7
Poelwijk 1682 A 1682 32 283 8.8
Quinera 1708/10/22 G 1709/2/12 113 530 4.7
Rachel 1693 G 1693 11 ?
St. Clara 1710/ 6/ 6 G 1710/8/3 58 517 8.9
West-Indisch Huys 1700/ 9/14 G 1700/12/ 8 85 762 9.0
Averages 90.4 436 4.8
Sources: WIC, vols. 97, 99, 180, 200, 206, 485-6, 619, and 658; ECMMR, vol. 190.
Appendix 16
Slave mortality in coasting and middle passage in the WIC trade
Region Slaves Duration
of 1st Coast bought Left ocean Arrival Total Deaths
Ship origina death days per day Africa crossing West cargo m.p.c Af.c
Acredam G 1715 1715/9/19 92 1715/12/20 590 120 59
Amsterdam2 E 1724/3/21 134 3.2 1724/6/23 108 1724/10/9 423 95 7
Beschutter G 1735 1735/11/8 49 1735/12/27 768 23 14
Bosbeek G 1718 1718/8/13 126 1718/12/17 318 78 36
Brandenburg G 1729/12/10 89 4.6 1730/1/28 89 1730/4/27 409 38 10
Brandenburg ? 1732/9/15 130 4.3 1732/12/14 47 1733/1/30 564 54 25
Coning van Portugal G 1707/5/17 108 5.0 1707/7/24 99 1707/10/31 536 108 9
Graaf van Laarwijk G 1700 1700/4/30 ? 1700 488 113 91

Jonge Daniel E 1733/12/4 110 4.2 1734/2/12 87 1734/5/10 461 61 ?
Jonge Daniel G 1735/9/23 132 3.6 1735/12/24 121 1736/4/23 469 58 1
Justitia G 1708 1708/6/16 55 1708/8/10 673 177 48
Leusden G 1727 1727/8/22 71 1727/11/1 748 66 25
Quinera E 1705/11/29 154 3.6 1705/3/23 63 1706/5/25 547 179 45
St. Clara G 1710/6/6 58 8.9 1710/8/3 129 1710/12/10 517 66 17
West Indisch Huys G 1700/9/14 125 6.1 1700/12/8 86 1701/3/4 762 115 ?
Notes: * African origins: E = Elmina; G = Guinea coast.

For the period between first purchase and first mortality, 40 days are added (see Chapter 6)
c
Mortality on the ocean crossing and during coasting in Africa respectively.
390 Appendixes
Appendix 17A
Coasting, middle-passage, and mortality cycles
African First Coast Slaves Depart Cross- Arrival Slaves
Ship origin death daysa per day Africa ing West cargo died
Beurs Amsterdam A 1704/9/15 75 8.7 1704/10/28 77 1705/1/25 653 38
Beurs Amsterdam A 1706/5/28 105 6.7 1706/8/1 76 1706/10/16 708 77
Coningin Hester G 1713/12/29 182 3.4 1714/5/20 118 1714/9/15 625 126
Duynenburg A 1702/11/3 99 5.5 1703/1/1 59 1703/3/1 542 40
Eva Maria A 1701/4/4 86 7.5 1701/5/20 49 1701/7/8 644 29
Margarita Catharina A 1701/8/5 76 5.8 1701/9/10 79 1701/11/21 443 49
Nieuwe Post A 1715/7/14 169 3.3 1715/11/20 79 1716/2/7 559 44
Quinera G 1701/4/11 110 4.5 1701/6/20 83 1701/9/11 499 70
Rachel G 1701/7/25 127 3.3 1701/10/20 96 1702/1/24 419 79
Son (Vergulde) A 1705/5/12 99 7.0 1705/7/10 94 1705/10/12 694 133
Sonnesteyn E 1715/5/31 71 1.5 1715/7/1 77 1715/9/16 103 37
Vergulde Vrijheit A 1700/12/1 80 8.7 1701/1/10 58 1701/3/9 694 23
Wapen van Holland A 1704/12/13 99 7.2 1705/2/10 90 1705/5/11 712 150
Wapen van Holland G 1700/11/26 144 4.6 1701/3/10 106 1701/6/24 664 205
Anneboa E 1700/6/25 40 2.8 1700/6/22 125 1700/10/25 110 40
Axim E 1710/7/10 40 3.5 1710/7/10 82 1710/9/30 139 55
Elmina (Casteel) E 1704/10/12 40 4.3 1704/10/12 61 1704/12/12 171 10
Engelenburgh E 1716/10/4 40 3.8 1716/9/3 89 1716/12/1 153 17
Fida E 1715/12/17 40 6.4 1715/12/14 57 1716/2/9 257 15
Gelderland E 1716/4/3 49 3.0 1716/4/12 56 1716/6/7 146 5
Wakende Craan E 1706/9/29 40 4.8 1706/9/9 82 1706/11/30 190 13
Adrichem A 1714/11/16 177 4.1 1715/4/2 66 1715/6/7 717 332
Ad rich em G 1712/1/23 40 15.3 1712/1/23 100 1712/5/2 611 39
Adrichem G 1708/6/14 90 6.8 1708/8/3 116 1708/11/27 613 149
Beschermer G 1700/6/23 85 6.8 1700/8/7 79 1700/10/25 576 11
Carolus Secundus E 1707/11/26 44 9.7 1707/11/30 77 1708/2/15 425 250
Carolus Secundus G 1710/8/17 89 5.5 1710/10/5 63 1710/12/7 490 32
Catharina Christina E 1706/11/24 77 7.0 1706/12/31 70 1707/3/11 540 31
Duynenburg G 1705/3/30 189 2.5 1705/8/26 83 1705/11/17 473 70
Emmenes G 1714/11/25 144 3.9 1715/3/ 93 1715/6/10 563 94
Emmenes G 1717/11/5 58 12.4 1717/11/23 124 1718/3/27 718 269
Leusden E 1725/10/22 50 14.9 1725/11/1 80 1726/1/20 747 71
Quinera G 1708/12/10 104 5.1 1709/2/12 89 1709/5/12 530 64
Rusthof G 1733/11/21 40 18.0 1733/11/21 100 1734/3/1 719 345
Son (Vergulde) G 1701/5/28 93 4.0 1701/7/20 144 1701/12/11 369 47
Son (Vergulde) G 1707/7/30 74 7.6 1707/9/2 119 1707/12/30 559 139
St. Clara G 1712/5/9 156 3.7 1712/9/2 85 1712/11/16 584 124
St. Marcus G 1713/9/21 101 5.8 1713/11/21 59 1714/1/19 585 28
Vriendschap G 1703/12/10 118 3.3 1704/2/26 73 1704/5/9 393 72
Winthont G 1699/9/4 59 9.4 1699/9/23 69 1699/12/1 555 20

Note: aForty days have been estimated for the period between first purchase and first death.
Appendixes 39 *
Appendix 17B
Mortality cycle on the middle passage
Deaths in ten-day periodsa
Coast Days 11-20 31-40 51-60 71-80 91-100 111-120 131-140
deaths 1-10 21-30 41-50 61-70 81-90 101-110 121-130 Port1
18 7 4 2 1 4 2 0
23 8 16 10 7 4 2 3 4 0 1
54 6 3 10 10 11 4 14 6 3 3 0 2 0
7 7 5 13 3 1 4 10
12 7 4 2 3 1 15
23 3 3 10 3 5 0 2 8
27 0 2 5 1 1 2 3 3 2
12 4 3 3 5 8 11 9 15 13
32 4 11 8 4 5 2 2 4 7 9
31 7 2 7 5 10 13 33 13 12 2
14 5 2 4 4 3 4 0 1 0
6 2 4 2 2 2 5 2
50 11 9 14 13 9 13 14 17 5
29 7 20 18 20 18 13 16 18 12 18 16 6
0 1 3 6 2 1 4 5 6 6 1 2 1 2 0
0 12 11 8 10 6 4 1 3 1
0 1 3 3 1 1 1 3
0 0 0 0 5 2 5 1 1 2 1 0
0 4 4 0 3 2 2 0
1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0
0 0 1 4 3 1 0 1 3 2
116 20 34 29 31 26 29 47 12
0 2 0 0 1 2 4 8 11 11 1
18 34 29 16 9 9 4 3 5 8 5 9 1
5 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 2 0
5 35 51 50 28 11 29 26 15 4
18 2 4 3 1 1 3 0
6 4 2 3 1 3 6 6 2
31 4 2 5 5 5 6 6 6 4
17 7 8 6 6 6 8 9 14 13 10
36 19 16 15 12 8 6 12 11 22 28 21 16 47 1
1 5 6 17 7 8 12 6 9 5
6 10 16 4 8 5 9 6 2
0 15 5 6 11 14 17 26 48 90 113 0
4 1 0 1 2 0 7 1 4 5 5 4 4 4 5 7
23 14 8 13 5 7 2 5 5 8 14 16 19 3
23 9 9 11 12 20 10 17 9 4 8
14 3 4 2 3 2 1
18 6 4 5 6 2 12 13 6 7
7 3 1 2 3 0 4 4

Notes: a See Appendix 17A for the names of the ships.
b
Deaths between arrival and disembarkation.
392 Appendixes
Appendixes 18, 19, and 20
Notes and sources
The tides and headings of these appendixes are generally self-explanatory,

but a few columns need elaboration that was not possible in the tabular
listings.
Appendix 18. Under the column heading "Crowding," the number of slaves
carried per last (one last measured approximately two register tons) are listed.
The mortality percentages are expressions of: (i) deaths during the coasting
stage of the total number of slaves boarded, (2) deaths during coasting of
the total number that died during the slaving mission, and (3) all deaths
combined in the entire consignment.
The data have been gleaned from a variety of MCC records by Hezemans
in 1985. His data have been corrected and expanded by this author from a
variety of MCC sources. See Postma Data Collection.
Appendix ig. The year listed refers to the slaving mission activities on the
African coast. Where no data are entered, no statistics were found recorded.
Due to lack of space, the following abbreviations have been employed in the
headings: Fern. = females; Wn. = women; Yth. = children between the
approximate ages 4 to 14; H = deaths in the Western harbor, before di-
sembarkation; P = recorded deaths after disembarkation and before slaves
were sold. The column on slave values compares individual slaves (heads)
and their relative economic value in terms of piezas de India (Pdl), in certain
consignments.
The data in this appendix are derived from a large variety of WIC sources.
See Postma Data Collection.
Appendix 20. The year listed refers to the time of the middle passage. The
abbreviations for African origins and American destinations are the same as
employed in Appendix 1. See Postma Data Collection.
394
393 Appendix 18
Coasting, mortality, crowding and efficiency in the MCC slave trade
Mortality percentages
African Days Slaves Coast Total on of of
Ships Year origin Africa Slaves per day Crowding Deaths Deaths Coast deaths cargo
Hof Van Zeeland 1732 A 113 318 2.8 2.5 3 50 0.9 6.0 15.7
Guineesche Galey 1740 G 122 246 2.0 4.7 45 18.3
Afrikaanse Galey 1740 G 158 271 1.7 4.1 14 61 5.2 23.0 22.5
Grenadier 1741 G 175 236 1.3 3.5 17 29 7.2 58.6 12.3
Groot Prooyen 1742 G 156 225 1.4 3.3 29 12.9
Grenadier 1743 G 120 304 2.5 4.5 17 26 5.6 65.4 8.6
Grenadier 1745 G 376 5.6 56 14.9
Grenadier 1749 A 260 352 1.4 5.2 83 156 23.6 53.2 44.3
Prins Willem V 1752 G 197 261 1.3 3.6 5 15 1.9 33.3 5.7
Prins Willem V 1753 G 166 233 1.4 3.3 1 8 0.4 12.5 3.4
Philadelphia 1753 G 271 230 0.8 3.8 6 15 2.6 40.0 6.5
Middelburgs Welvaren 1755 G 227 289 1.3 4.3 10 26 3.5 38.5 9.0
Drie Gezusters 1755 G 152 234 1.5 3.8 6 23 2.6 26.1 9.8
Middelburgs Welvaren 1756 G 166 300 1.8 4.5 11 45 3.7 24.4 15.0
Vr. Johanna Cores 1756 G 248 282 1.1 4.7 14 98 5.0 14.3 34.8
Drie Gezusters 1757 A 141 405 2.9 6.7 1 14 0.2 7.1 3.5
Philadelphia 1758 G 174 337 1.9 5.6 9 77 2.7 11.7 22.8
Prins Willem V 1759 A 60 478 8.0 6.7 1 4 0.2 25.0 0.8
Vr. Johanna Cores 1760 A 212 385 1.8 6.5 56 138 14.5 40.6 35.8
Eenigheyd 1761 G 150 326 2.2 3.5 7 33 2.1 21.2 10.1
Prins Willem V 1761 G 171 302 1.8 4.2 1 12 0.3 8.3 4.0
Eenigheyd 1763 G 335 256 0.8 2.9 53 67 20.7 79.1 26.2
Middelburgs Welvaren 1763 A 82 412 5.0 6.2 2 7 0.5 28.6 1.7
Haast U Langzaam 1764 G 224 297 1.3 3.0 23 42 7.7 54.8 14.1
Eenigheyd 1766 A 187 315 1.7 3.5 4 62 1.3 6.5 19.7
Haast U Langzaam 1767 A 234 304 1.3 3.1 8 21 2.6 38.1 6.9
Prins Willem V 1767 A 121 340 2.8 4.7 3 7 0.9 42.9 2.1
Nieuwe Hoop 1768 G 181 262 1.4 3.2 4 13 1.5 30.8 5.0
Haast U Langzaam 1769 A 195 327 1.7 3.3 6 7 1.8 85.7 2.1
Jonge Willem 1769 G 148 118 0.8 1.7 1 2 0.8 50.0 1.7
Prins Willem V 1769 A 168 377 2.2 5.3 15 89 4.0 16.9 23.6
Nieuwe Hoop 1770 G 144 260 1.8 3.2 6 23 2.3 26.1 8.8
Vliegende Faam 1770 G 177 212 1.2 4.2 7 25 3.3 28.0 11.8
Vr. Johanna Cores 1771 G 189 212 1.1 3.6 64 30.2
Welmeenende 1771 A 105 261 2.5 3.8 5 22 1.9 22.7 8.4
Geertruyda & Christina 1771 G 234 289 1.2 2.7 20 39 6.9 51.3 13.5
Haast U Langzaam 1771 A 92 400 4.3 4.0 12 3.0
Vliegende Faam 1772 G 269 168 0.6 3.3 12 17 7.1 70.6 10.1
Jonge Willem 1772 G 221 108 0.5 1.5 0 1 0 0 0.9
Zanggodin 1773 G 377 127 0.3 1.9 16 26 12.6 61.5 20.5
Watergeus 1774 A 150 375 2.5 28 7.5
Nieuwe Hoop 1775 G 208 258 1.2 3.2 5 29 1.9 17.2 11.2
Vis 1775 G 240 238 1.0 2.2 2 16 0.8 12.5 6.7
Aurora 1776 G 130 260 2.0 2.7 11 4.2
Haast U Langzaam 1777 G 175 281 1.6 2.8 6 18 2.1 33.3 6.4
Vigilantie 1778 G 125 246 2.0 2.5 3 11 1.2 27.3 4.5
Jonge Willem 1778 G 148 203 1.4 2.9 1 6 0.5 16.7 3.0
Nieuwe Hoop 1779 G 172 298 1.7 3.7 8 16 2.7 50.0 5.4
Vigilantie 1780 G 77 322 4.2 3.3 23 55 7.1 41.8 17.1
Zeemercuur 1788 G 428 272 0.6 2.5 34 174 12.5 19.5 64.0
Standvastigheyd 1791 G 264 231 0.9 2.2 5 11 2.2 45.5 4.8
Zeemercuur 1792 G 392 174 0.4 1.6 1 6 0.6 16.7 3.4
Vergenoegen 1794 A 199 393 2.0 3.8 26 44 6.6 59.1 11.2
Standvastigheyd 1802 G 281 281 1.0 2.7 9 24 3.2 37.5 8.5
Appendix 19
Gender, age, and mortality among WIC slaves, 1680-1739
C o n s i g n m e n t c l a s si fi c a t i o n Slave value Mo r t a l ity
Ships Year Cargo Male Fem. Yth. Men Wn. Boys Girls Head = PdI All Male Fem. Men Wn.Yth. H a p b
Acredam 1725 643 482 129 135 370 106 112 23 32 2 3

Adrichem 1708 613 422 191 4 418 191 4 0 355 = 348 149 133 16 132 16 1 1
Adrichem 1710 713 705 = 627
Adrichem 1712 611 423 188 10 413 188 10 0 476 = 458 39 36 3 36 3 0 1
Adrichem 1715 717 200 173 118 118 137 82 36 141 = 118 332 257 75 188 64 75
Adrichem 1719 719 445 157 91 70 21 63 17 11 9
Agatha 1715 166 107 33 11 15
Amsterdam(2) 1724 423 92 79 13 9
Annaboa 1700 111 55 56 23 110=101 41 19 22 18 17 6
Axim 1710 139 106 33 2 99 32 2 0 139 = 138 55 46 9 46 9 0 1
Beekesteyn 1723 722 85 54
Beekesteyn 1726 442 191 27
Beekesteyn 1729 507 247 171 89
Beekesteyn 1731 755 238 32
Beekesteyn 1736 705 103 15
Beschutter 1736 768 595 173 14 584 170 11 3 768 = 763 23 4
Beschutter 1739 809 69 13
Beurs Amsterdam 1705 653 478 175 121 391 141 87 34 468 = 412 37 31 6 30 4 3
Beurs Amsterdam 1707 708 526 179 154 397 154 129 25 626 = 475 79 63 16 46 14 19 1
Brandenburg 1699 456 300 150 131 53
Brandenburg 1730 409 38 5
Brandenburg 1733 564 373 126 54 45 9 44 9 1 4
Carolus Secundus 1708 425 259 166 50 222 153 37 13 109 = 100 250 154 96 142 89 19 4
Carolus Secundus 1711 490 320 155 335 = 330 32 26 6 26 6 0
Casteel Elmina 1704 171 107 64 102=101 10 7 3 0 3
Casteel Elmina 1708 196 146 50 136=129 13 11 2 9 3 2
Appendix 19 (cont)
Consignm e n t c l a s s i fication Slave value Mortality
Ships Year Cargo Male Fem. Yth. Men Wn. Boys Girls Head = PdI All Male Fem. Men Wn.Yth. H a Pb
Cathanna Christina 1707 540 366 174 54 317 169 49 5 365 = 352 31 21 10 21 10 0 2
Christina 1705 548 243 178 41 210 170 33 8
Comps. Welvaren 1720 89 70 16 16 57 16 13 3 46 = 41 23 17 6 13 6 4
Coning v Portugal 1707 536 359 177 2 357 177 2 0 327 = 327 102 72 30 72 30 0 6
Coningin Hester 1714 625 403 217 64 348 208 55 9 289 = 245 126 83 43 74 39 11
Delft 1726 286 173 59 57 131 44 42 15
Delft 1736 571 367 200 24 349 194 18 6 571 = 565
Duynenburg 1703 542 393 149 103 318 121 75 28 354 = 304 40 10
Duynenburg 1705 473 325 148 17 312 144 13 4 347 = 331 74 55 19 55 19 0 4
Duynvliet 1721 325 167 39 27 141 38 26 1
Elmina 1723 300 257 17 23
Emmenes 1715 563 350 211 99 291 171 59 40 270 = 248 94 57 37 44 21 29 10
Emmenes 1718 718 480 238 170 370 178 110 60 245 = 206 269 203 66 171 48 50 22
Emmenes 1721 208 131=128 20
Emmenes 1723 176 106 65 18
Engelenburg 1716 153 131 22 8 125 20 6 2 99 = 94 17 15 2 12 3
Eva Maria 1701 674 459 215 205 317 152 186 19 497 = 379 29 15 14 9 13 15 12
Fida 1716 257 189 68 15 178 64 11 4 257 = 250 15 14 1 14 0
Geertruyt 1685 373 132 154 26 117 143 15 11
Gelderland 1716 146 104 42 11 96 39 8 3 80 = 74 5 5 0 5 0 0
Goude Brackhont 1697 248 163 83 20 19 1 19 1 0
Goude Put 1736 629 505 102
Groot Bentveld 1728 672 544 128 64 493 115 51 13
Helena 1729 250 166 32 14 157 27 9 5
Huys Nassau 1680 525 405 78
Jonge Daniel 1734 461 61 46 15
Jonge Daniel 1736 469 58 5
Justitia 1707 740 408 180 73 339 176 69 4 152 89 63 75 56 21
Justitia 1708 673 346 150 111
Leusden 1722 562 91 11
Leusden 1724 605 214 100 32 182 100 32 0 314 = 300 73
Leusden 1726 747 71 5
Leusden 1727 748 542 130 60 502 110 40 20 41 9
Leusden 1729 708 72 9
Leusden 1731 629 76 2
Leusden 1733 714 42 5
Leusden 1735 687 408 51
Margaritha Christina 1701 443 283 160 136 186 121 97 39 302 = 263 49 29 20 14 10 25 8
Mercurius 1681 540 346 154 520 = 500
Nieuwe Post 1716 559 418 141 139 300 109 118 32 344 = 282 44 30 14 21 12 11 2
Phenix 1723 771 25 32
Phenix 1729 783 236 69 43 207 55 29 14 2 2
Philippus Johannes 1707 510 336 159 1
Pynenburg 1703 400 210 162
Pynenburg 1705 348 153 127 28 125 127 28 0
Quinera 1701 499 327 172 57 278 164 49 8 227 = 214 69 42 27 40 27 2
Quinera 1706 547 357 190 61 310 176 47 14 135 = 122 153 108 45 96 40 17 13
Quinera 1709 530 350 180 14 287 163 7 7 362 = 357 65 1
Rachel 1701 419 288 131 4 285 130 3 1 220 = 213 79 66 13 66 13 0 9
Rusthof 1730 663 120 101 19 31
Rusthof 1733 719 195 521 65 175 476 20 45 716 = 685 345 109 236 99 221 25 43
Son 1701 369 229 140 13 222 127 3 10 237 = 232 47 42 5 42 5 0 7
Appendix 19 (cont)
Consignment c l a s s i fi c a t i o n Slave value Mortal i t y
Ships Year Cargo Male Fem. Yth. Men Wn. Boys Girls Head = PdI All Male Fem. Men Wn.Yth. Ha p b
Son 1703 513 379 = 244

Son 1705 694 515 179 151 443 177 120 31 438 = 381 135 108 27 89 22 24 2
Son 1708 559 378 180 3 376 179 2 1 288 = 288 139 109 30 109 30 0 3
Sonnesteyn 1715 103 77 25 13 67 22 10 3 26 = 24 37 30 7 24 7 6
St Clara 1712 584 390 194 7 383 194 7 0 298 = 284 124 100 24 100 24 0 8
St Marcus 1714 585 418 167 18 404 136 14 4 471 = 440 28 21 7 21 7 0 1
Stad & Lande 1727 751 76 4
Stad & Lande 1729 779 380 222 137 302 163 78 59 172 5 6
Stad & Lande 1732 439 307 22
Stad & Lande 1735 760 349 34
Steenhuysen 1724 780 85 14
Steenhuysen 1726 789 102 12
Vergulde Vryheid 1701 694 477 217 213 327 155 150 62 556 = 482 23 3
Vlissings Welvaren 1716 194 159 35 39 129 26 30 9 142 = 126
Vreede 1684 437 192 118 132 195 83 97 35 410 = 355 10 10 0 4 0 6
Vriendschap 1704 393 275 118 43 247 103 28 15 228 = 215 72 58 14 54 10 8 7
Vryheyt (2) 1722 450 288 112 42 254 104 34 8 433 = 413 33
Vryheyt (2) 1734 605 42 2
Wakende Craen 1706 190 126 64 126 64 0 0 120=120 13 7 6 7 6 0 2
Wapen V Holland 1701 664 431 233 55 244 151 42 13 257 = 239 205 6
Wapen V Holland 1705 712 538 174 110 447 155 91 19 333 = 298 150 109 41 95 39 16 5
Wapen Zirickzee 1686 508 359 125
Westind. Huys 1701 762 426 221 43 398 206 28 15 114 95 19 91 19 4
Winthont 1699 555 370 185 22 353 178 15 7 361 = 354 20 19 1 19 1 0 2
Notes: aDeaths in the harbor, prior to disembarkation; Deaths after disembarkation but before the sale of the slaves.
Appendix 20
Slave gender, age, and mortality ratios, 1734-1803
Origina All Female Men Boys ]Dea t hs
Ship Year Af. A m Male Youth Women Girls All M W B G
Aurora 1777 A GB 318 206 112 114 132 72 74 40 6 3 0 2 1
Aurora 1775 A M 319 195 124 184 73 62 122 62 10 5 0 3
Aurora 1777 G SE 260 140 120 60 110 90 30 30
DeVis 1776 G M 238 153 85 42 135 61 18 24 16
Drie Gezusters 1756 G 234 149 85 16 140 78 9 7
C/3
Drie Gezusters 1759 G SE 405 258 147 72 209 124 49 23

Eenigheid 1763 G M 293 153 140 59 114 120 39 20
Eenigheid 1765 G M 256 107 116 37 85 101 22 15 67 29 33 2 3
Eenigheid 1767 A S 315 189 126 87 139 89 50 37 62 43 10 2 7
Geertruyde Chr. 1769 G M 261 145 116 15 139 107 6 9
Geertruyde Chr. 1771 G S 321 199 122 130 115 76 84 46 38 16 7 9 6
Geertruyde Chr. 1773 G c 289 140 149 50 113 126 27 23
Geertruyde Chr. 1775 G SE 345 188 157 45 159 141 29 16 73 40 27 5 1
Geertruyde Chr. 1111 G SE 284 173 111 29 156 99 17 12
Geertruyde Chr. 1785 G S 276 176 100 58 132 86 44 14
Grenadier 1744 S 304 237 67 26 222 56 15 11
Grenadier 1747 G S 376 225 151 139 134 103 91 48 56 17 11 19 9
Grenadier 1749 G S 343 217 126 56 177 110 40 16
Grenadier 1754 G GB 289 162 127 21 152 116 10 11 16 9 7 0 0
Groot Prooyen 1743 S 225 184 41 22 166 37 18 4
Guineese Galey 1741 S 246 154 92 43 128 75 26 17 45
Haast U Langzaam 1765 G S 297 138 158 34 119 143 19 15 42
Haast U Langzaam 1768 A M 302 167 135 99 105 98 62 37
Haast U Langzaam 1770 A S 327 193 134 66 148 113 45 21 7 3 3 1 0
Haast U Langzaam 1771 A GS 400 271 129 72 223 105 48 24 12
Haast U Langzaam 1774 A SE 326 195 131 92 138 96 57 35 16 8 6 1 1
Haast U Langzaam 1776 G M 262 147 115 49 121 92 26 23 13 8 3 0 2
Haast U Langzaam 1778 G S 281 169 112 57 132 92 37 20 18 13 1 1 3
Haast U Langzaam 1781 G GD 373 230 143 88 171 114 59 29 69 49 15 3 2
HofZeeland 1734 A C 318 251 67 91 186 41 65 26 50 41 1 6 2
Vr. Johanna Cores 1757 G S 282 176 106 43 150 89 26 17 98
Vr. Johanna Cores 1759 A C 372 244 128 117 163 92 81 36 4
Vr. Johanna Cores 1761 A C 385 249 132 104 172 105 77 27 138
Vr. Johanna Cores 1763 G S 303 164 139 17 151 135 13 4
Vr. Johanna Cores 1765 G S 271 154 117 31 139 101 15 16 68 42 24 1 1
399
Appendix 20 (cont)
Origina All Female Men Boys 1D e a t h s
Ship Year Af . Am Male Youth Women Girls All M W B G
Vr. Johanna Cores 1772 G GB 212 117 95 30 104 78 13 17
Jonge Willem 1770 G S 116 62 54 14 53 49 9 5 2 2 0 0 0
Jonge Willem 1773 G S 108 53 55 51 32 25 21 30 1 0 0 1 0
Jonge Willem 1776 M M 163 102 61 40 75 48 27 13 18 10 1 5 2
Jonge Willem 1779 G GS 203 127 76 45 106 52 21 24 6
Mercurius 1755 G S 231 116 115 61 79 91 37 24 32
Middelb. Welvaren 1754 G S 269 120 149 64 87 118 33 31 53 10 36 3 4
Middelb. Welvaren 1756 G S 291 158 133 42 133 116 25 17 26 18 3 4 1
Middelb. Welvaren 1758 G S 300 45
Middelb. Welvaren 1760 A C 428 266 162 115 197 116 69 46 10
Middelb. Welvaren 1762 A C 455 273 182 234 113 108 160 74 203
Middelb. Welvaren 1763 A C 410 5
Nieuwe Hoop 1764 G M 305 179 126 48 152 105 27 21 42
Nieuwe Hoop 1766 L C 351 214 137 137 132 82 82 55 13
Nieuwe Hoop 1768 G s 325 170 155 106 115 104 55 51 44
Nieuwe Hoop 1769 G s 262 128 134 60 100 102 28 32 13 7 4 2 0
Nieuwe Hoop 1771 G s 260 152 108 46 128 86 24 22 23 12 7 4 0
Nieuwe Hoop 1774 G M 214 119 95 42 98 74 21 21 37
Nieuwe Hoop 1777 G GS 258 134 134 53 106 109 28 25 29 16 11 1 1
Nieuwe Hoop 1780 G SE 298 169 129 63 128 107 41 22 16 8 4 2 2
Nieuwe Hoop 1785 G M 215 142 73 31 127 57 15 16 13 10 0 3 0
Philadelphia 1754 G S 229 123 106 82 72 75 51 31 15 5 10 0 0
Philadelphia 1755 G s 261 136 125 68 93 100 43 25 18 7 8 1 2
Philadelphia 1757 G M 308 175 133 65 131 112 44 21 22 7 11 3 1
Philadelphia 1759 G s 337 194 143 38 169 130 25 13 77 45 28 2 2
Philadelphia 1761 G s 312 164 148 41 141 130 23 18 25 17 8 0 0
Philadelphia 1763 G s 358 231 127 126 145 87 86 40 29 23 1 5 0
Philadelphia 1765 G s 324 214 110 105 151 68 63 42 73
Prins Willem V 1753 G s 261 135 126 63 92 106 43 20
Prins Willem V 1754 G s 233 128 105 56 85 92 43 13
Prins Willem V 1756 A c 348 207 140 125 126 96 81 44 8
Prins Willem V 1758 A s 465 341 124 8 333 124 8 0 2 2 0 0 0
Prins Willem V 1760 A s 478 295 183 93 233 152 62 31 4 4 0 0 0
Prins Willem V 1762 G SE 311 160 151 24 154 133 6 18 12 11 0 0 1
Prins Willem V 1764 G s 312 177 135 21 165 126 12 9 37 26 9 0 2
Prins Willem V 1766 G s 238 143 95 25 128 85 15 10 18 12 5 1 0
Prins Willem V 1768 A s 340 186 154 124 101 115 85 39 7 5 1 1 0
400
Appendixes 401
Appendix 20 (cont)
Origin51 All Female Men Boys Dea ths
Ship Year Af. Am Male Youth Women Girls All M W B G
Prins Willem V 1770 A S 377 257 120 142 157 78 100 42 89 47 19 18 5
Prins Willem V 1773 A S 313 206 107 95 149 69 57 38 4 2 1 1 0
Raadhuys M'burg 1746 281 186 95 46 165 70 21 25
Standvastigheid 1792 G S 231 133 98 47 106 78 27 20 11 8 2 1 0
Standvastigheid 1803 G 281 175 106 54 141 86 34 20
C/5
Vergenoegen 1787 G s 386 211 175 74 172 140 39 35 22

Vergenoegen 1794 M 393 254 139 108 186 99 68 40 44
C/5
Vigilantie 1779 G s 246 143 103 56 112 78 31 25 11 9 2 0 0

Vliegende Faam 1758 G s 281 186 95 46 165 70 21 25 77
Vliegende Faam 1771 G GS 212 118 94 33 101 78 17 16 25
Vliegende Faam 1774 G s 168 96 72 30 80 58 16 14 17
Watergeus 1775 A GS 375 191 184 155 96 124 95 60 28
Watergeus 1777 A SE 325 184 141 107 116 102 68 39 10
Watergeus 1779 G S 380 257 123 89 202 89 55 34 49 42 3 3 1
Welmenende 1770 G S 196 107 89 44 80 72 27 17 2 0 0 1 1
Welmenende 1772 A S 261 173 88 76 117 68 56 20 22
Welmenende 1774 G GS 203 109 94 52 90 61 19 33 10
Zanggodin 1766 G 191 95 96 80 56 55 39 41
Zanggodin 1770 A S 67 29 38 25 14 28 15 10 22 12 3 7 0
Zanggodin 1772 G s 162 91 71 40 70 52 21 19 9 6 1 1 1
Zanggodin 1775 G SE 111 47 64 41 30 40 17 24 10 4 3 1 2
Zee Mercuur 1790 G S 270 150 120 60 117 93 33 27 174 93 56 9 56
Zee Mercuur 1793 G GD 174 93 81 35 71 68 22 13
Zorg 1779 G S 246 131 115 33 112 101 19 14 15 8 5 2 0
a
Note: Codes for origins and destinations are explained in Appendix 1.
402 Appendixes
Appendix 21
Instructions for the slave supervisor at Elmina
The followng document was located among the WIC papers that were kept
on the African coast until 1872, see NBKG, vol. 235-36, doc. 12/5/1710.
It throws much light on the treatment of the slaves in the castle at Elmina,
while awaiting the arrival of a slave ship from Europe. Information in brackets
has been added by the translator. In the document, "he" constantly refers
to the supervisor.
Instructions for Nicolaas Elgersma, Supervisor for the care of the slaves,
according to which he must conduct himself and carry out the duties of his
office.
Art. 1. He must keep a record of the number of slaves kept in the castle.
If additional slaves arrive from other factories, or leave after being assigned
for embarkation by the Equipment Master, an account should be kept of
this also.
2. Every evening when the slaves come inside, he must count them and
report to the Equipment Master the correct number. The Equipment Master
must be notified if one or more have died, and he should also keep a record
of this for himself, and sign the death affidavits. And if one or more are
sick, the Master should be notified of this, and those whom the Master
deems contagious must be taken to the Berg St. Jago (another castle ca. one
mile uphill), to be cured by the Bumboy1 [Bombaas].
3. In the morning when the gate is open while the slaves are ushered
out, he shall separate and count the slaves going to work. The slaves who
are too weak should stay in the dungeon [slavegat]2 and the Bumboy shall
be notified to not put these to work. Care should be taken that the slaves
who go to work are counted again when they return, to verify the correct
number.
4. Early each morning he will receive for each slave one can of millet
[milhi] from the Equipment Master, to be rubbed and boiled by the women
slaves into "bussels" on the [Katteplaats].3 Take a look periodically to avoid
having things stolen. Ask the Equipment Master for the necessary salt,
1. The Bumboy was an African, possibly a company slave, with supervisory authority among
the trade slaves. See Chapters 4 and 10, and Lawrence, p. 61.
2. The castle at Elmina did not have a real dungeon, like the English castle at Cape Coast,
but a few lower level storage rooms were set aside as slave quarters. These quarters were
visited by this author in 1973.
3. Literally, "place for the Cats"; an area by the slave quarters.
Appendixes 403
pepper, and palm oil, for the food preserved in a cupboard specifically
designated for that. He must keep the key for this and must always be present
when something is taken from it.
5. Toward midday, at eleven o'clock, the slaves must line up on the square,
be counted and verified that all are still there; a "crust" should be handed
to each slave in his [supervisor's] presence, to make sure that each slave
gets a fair share. Saving half of the food, they should be fed in the same
manner in the evening.
6. In carrying out his duties, he must be very polite to the Equipment
Master, and if something should occur that is not mentioned here, he must
ask "us" for further instructions.
Accordingly granted by the Director-General of the North and South
Coasts of Africa, residing at the Castle of St. George d'Elmina, this 5th
December 1710.
404 Appendixes
Appendix 22
A slave-ship consignment affidavit

The following is an affidavit of transfer of responsibility for a cargo of slaves,
from WIC authorities in Africa to the captain of a WIC slave ship. Captains
signed such documents just prior to leaving Africa and starting the middle
passage. This particular consignment paper (cognossement) is located in WIC,
vol. 488, p. 799. The document has been translated almost verbatim in order
to preserve the original style. For the sake of clarity and brevity, the numerical
figures of the original long hand have been changed into numerals in this
English translation.
CONSIGNMENT
I, the undersigned, Jan Pietersz. Gewelt, Captain under God on the Noble
ship Sonnesteyn, presently prepared to sail from here [Elmina] to St. Eustatius
in America, acknowledge to have received into the ship just mentioned, from
the hands of the Honorable Lord Director-General Pieter Valkenier, the
total of 627 head of slaves, consisting of 410 men, 112 women, 39 boys at
two-thirds, 32 boys at one-half, 7 boys at one-third, 19 girls at two-thirds,
and 8 girls at one-half, altogether consisting of 583 piezas de India, all healthy
and in good condition.
All the slaves mentioned are to cross [the Atlantic] at the risk of the
Honorable General Chartered Dutch West India Company, which I promise
and accept to deliver — if God almighty grants me a safe voyage - at St.
Eustatius, into the hands of the Lord Commander, Joannes Lindezaay, in
order to be sold by him and for me, and of which I shall give an accounting
to the Lord Directors on my return to the fatherland (Patria).
To the fulfillment of this [charge], I pledge my whole being and all my
goods, actions, credits, and integrity [gerechtigheden], nothing excluded, es-
pecially my already earned and still to be earned salary [maandgelden] and
premiums, and according to regulations I shall not draw on this.
As evidence of the truth of this, four identical affidavits [cognossementen]zrt
written, one is signed and the others are of no value. Enacted at the Chief
Castle [Hoofdcasteel] St. George d'Elmina, this 6th of March, 1726.
(Signature)
Appendixes 405
Appendix 23
Attestation, or death certificate
The following is the affidavit of the death of a slave owned by the WIC.
Several sworn statements of this type are to be found among the WIC papers.
The document suggests that, to the company, the slave's commercial value
was paramount. The document has been translated almost verbatim in order
to preserve the original style. The document was found in WIC, vol. 107,
P-45-
ATTESTATION
We, the undersigned, Julianus Oudorp and Dingnus Masuer, both assis-
tants in the service of the Honorable General Chartered Dutch West India
Company, assigned to the Chief Castle St. George d'Elmina, declare at the
request of the Chief Factor, Laurens Buens, also serving at the same station,
that it is the honest truth that on the first of March this year a certain
purchased woman slave died, giving as the evidence of our knowledge (of
this) that we saw the body after she died. Being completely aware of these
facts, we are willing to reinforce this with a solemn oath.
As evidence of the above (follows) our customary signature. Signed this
first of March, Anno. 1725.
(signatures here)
406 Appendixes
Appendix 24
Average WIC slave prices, 1676-1738
Curac,aoa St. Eustatius3 Surinam
Contract Auction Upper/lower Upper/lower
Year Africa5 price price price ranges price ranges Guyana
1676 40
1680 30 122
1685 128
1687 180
1688 120 180
1689 120
1694 210 210
1695 210
1697 210 210
1699 50
1700 59 178
1701 99 43 210
144 75
1702 44 250 250 250
1703 45 99 43
1704 100 92
1705 100 57 249
1706 108 60
1707 106 70 211
1708 108 52
1709 108
1710 108 60 245 210
1712 43 99 67 250
1713 250
1714 44 108 63
1715 62 97 40
91
1716 108 51
57
1717 70 108 85 224 208
1718 75 86
1719 108 85 208 148
1720 103 85
1721 80 80 191
1722 96 81
1723 97 74 214
1724 95 76 246
1725 85 81 80 237 238
1726 99 99 80 274 226 275
1727 84 81 229 227
1728 103 93 218
1729 100 96 311 288
1730 274 217
1731 243 135
1732 247 148
1733 366 220
1734 270 186
1735 263 190
1736 194 138
1737 259 135
1738 139
Source: WIC, vols. 200-209, 560-579, 617-619, and 831-834; SS, vols. 407-419.
Notes: a Prices at Curasao and St. Eustatius are listed in pesos (pieces of eight).
b
For Africa, Surinam, and Guyana, prices are listed in guilders (see Chapter 11).
Appendix 25
MCC free-trade prices and profits, 1740-1795
Areas Average Average Pro- Total Profits
Year Year Africa/ price Price Slaves price ceeds invest- Total and
a
Ships Africa West West Slaves Af. total landed Am. slaves ment yields losses
Afrikaanse Galey 1740 1742 GS 271 209 9,991 9,088 -903 -9.0
Afrikaanse Galey 1742 1743 GS 330 62 20,471 244 249 60,767 9,825 11,405 1,580 16.1
Aurora 1772 LG 318 176 56,037 312 314 98,042 20,916 20,677 -239 -1.1
Aurora 1774 1775 LM 319 177 56,322 309 336 103,768 21,410 21,448 38 0.2
Aurora 1777 GSE 260 157 40,884 249 292 72,782 19,289 17,815 -1,474 -7.6
Aurora 1779 GS 326 128 41,751 284 306 86,862 19,618 18,986 -632 -3.2
Brandenburg 1792 GG 226 177 39,967 202 624 125,968 23,888 23,929 41 0.2
Drie Gezusters 1755 1756 GS 234 25,817 211 58,872 12,579 11,399 -1,180 -9.4
Drie Gezusters 1758 LSE 405 72 29,249 391 115 44,935 16,170 16,238 68 0.4
Eenigheid 1762 GG 326 100 32,625 293 341 99,981 14,302 16,522 2,220 15.5
Eenigheid 1765 GM 256 131 33,462 189 317 59,945 13,923 12,417 -1,506 10.8
Eenigheid 1767 AS 311 137 42,693 252 280 70,526 14,663 12,753 -1,910 13.0
Geertruyda & Christina 1768 GS 261 178 46,367 231 472 109,142 21,280 22,503 1,223 5.7
Geertruyda & Christina 1772 GC 289 111 51,089 250 302 75,470 20,893 15,583 -5,310 25.4
Geertruyda & Christina 1775 GS 345 186 64,049 272 320 87,026 24,104 23,552 -552 -2.3
Geertruyda & Christina 1784 GS 276 131 36,067 145 416 60,375 20,943 13,137 -7,806 37.3
Groot Prooyen 1742 1743 AS 225 103 23,075 1% 264 51,716 12,230 11,074 -1,156 -9.5
Groot Prooyen 1744 1744 AS 338 77 25,878 271 186 50,285 11,073 9,941 -1,132 10.2
Groot Prooyen 1748 1748 LS 328 63 20,694 261 209 54,488 10,519 10,439 -80 -0.8
Grenadier 1741 1742 AS 236 92 21,739 207 216 44,690 12,173 10,703 -1,470 12.1
Grenadier 1743 1743 GS 304 86 26,276 278 275 76,323 12,194 15,809 3,615 29.6
Grenadier 1746 1746 GS 376 57 21,473 320 189 60,555 12,121 16,432 4,311 35.6
Grenadier 1749 1749 LS 352 103 36,271 196 163 31,995 12,134 6,305 -5,829 48.0
Grenadier 1752 1752 GG 289 84 24,415 273 253 68,993 10,647 11,955 1,308 12.3
Guineese Galey 1740 1742 AS 246 206 10,928 9,668 -1,260 11.5
Appendix 25 (cont)
Areas Average A\verage Pro- Total Profits
Ships Africa West Westa Slaves Af. total landed Am. slaves ment yields losses %
Haast U Langzaam 1765 GS 297 140 41,455 255 308 78,556 18,220 17,970 -250 -1.4
Haast U Langzaam 1767 1768 LM 302 151 45,508 283 299 84,684 21,576 19,538 -2,038 -9.4
Haast U Langzaam 1770 LS 327 159 51,870 320 430 137,673 21,079 27,118 6,039 28.6
Haast U Langzaam 1772 LG 400 146 58,594 388 414 160,604 22,438 29,770 7,332 32.7
Haast U Langzaam 1773 LSE 329 201 66,187 313 343 107,377 22,513 21,181 -1,332 -5.9
Haast U Langzaam 1775 1776 GSE 262 189 49,501 249 332 82,791 19,649 20,848 1,199 6.1
Haast U Langzaam 1778 GS 281 130 36,440 263 350 92,110 19,204 23,204 4,000 20.8
Jonge Willem 1770 GS 118 155 18,248 116 484 56,145 13,099 16,119 3,020 23.1
Jonge Willem 1771 GS 189 177 33,413 183 364 66,700 13,283 13,676 393 3.0
Jonge Willem 1772 1773 GM 108 104 11,218 107 334 35,772 12,450 15,328 2,878 23.1
Jonge Willem 1775 AM 150 193 29,007 132 447 58,988 15,200 14,522 -678 -4.5
^ Jonge Willem 1779 GM 203 155 31,509 197 535 105,394 18,217 24,493 6,276 34.5
00
M'burg Welvaren 1753 1754 GS 270 94 25,329 217 329 71,406 12,970 14,607 1,637 12.6
M'burg Welvaren 1754 1756 GS 331 305 12,285 13,099 814 6.6
M'burg Welvaren 1757 GS 300 100 30,027 255 256 65,377 11,771 12,410 639 5.4
M'burg Welvaren 1759 LC 428 75 32,112 418 224 93,658 14,066 18,732 4,666 33.2
M'burg Welvaren 1761 LC 455 77 34,884 252 301 75,856 13,685 17,920 4,235 30.9
M'burg Welvaren 1762 1763 LC 410 405 13,946 18,801 4,855 34.8
Mercurius 1754 GS 231 102 23,528 199 227 45,137 10,613 11,612 999 9.4
Nieuwe Hoop 1763 GM .305 114 34,673 263 281 73,858 16,408 15,283 -1,125 -6.9
Nieuwe Hoop 1765 LM 351 117 40,991 338 241 81,622 16,951 15,878 »l,073 -6.3
Nieuwe Hoop 1767 GS 325 134 43,439 291 335 97,579 16,324 17,950 1,626 10.0
Nieuwe Hoop 1769 GS 262 150 39,287 249 457 113,890 15,192 20,149 4,957 32.6
Nieuwe Hoop 1770 1771 GS 260 147 38,158 237 343 81,300 14,380 14,576 1% 1.4
Nieuwe Hoop 1773 GM 214 194 41,440 177 345 61,124 15,069 11,973 -3,096 20.5
Nieuwe Hoop 1776 GG 258 176 45,508 229 374 85,605 15,920 16,584 664 4.2
Nieuwe Hoop 1779 GS 298 123 36,733 282 178 50,121 15,434 19,004 3,570 23.1
Nieuwe Hoop 1784 GG 215 176 37,816 202 575 116,161 16,189 21,130 4,941 30.5
PrinsWillemV 1752 1752 GS 261 95 24,837 246 322 79,097 12,290 15,424 3,134 25.5
Prins Willem V 1754 1754 GS 233 110 25,727 225 304 68,498 11,965 12,938 973 8.1
PrinsWillemV 1756 LC 348 122 42,496 340 222 75,484 15,631 18,360 2,729 17.5
PrinsWillemV 1757 1758 LS 465 82 38,178 463 195 90,254 13,190 15,460 2,270 17.2
Prins Willem V 1760 LS 478 99 47,468 474 195 92,478 14,067 16,080 2,013 14.3
PrinsWillem V 1762 GSE 302 143 43,188 299 301 90,020 13,286 15,666 2,380 17.9
PrinsWillemV 1763 GS 312 134 41,928 275 291 80,065 13,632 15,032 1,400 10.3
PrinsWillemV 1765 1766 GS 238 177 42,025 220 388 85,270 16,394 14,604 -1,790 10.9
PrinsWillemV 1768 LS 340 139 47,119 333 280 93,293 15,883 16,227 344 2.2
Prins Willem V 1770 LS 377 121 45,753 288 309 89,100 14,437 14,889 452 3.1
PrinsWillemV 1772 LSE 313 169 52,755 309 326 100,820 19,797 18,801 -996 -5.0
Philadelphia 1753 1754 GS 230 106 24,271 215 318 68,388 11,721 12,955 1,234 10.5
Philadelphia 1755 GS 261 107 27,821 243 272 66,109 11,134 11,857 723 6.5
Philadelphia 1757 GS 308 96 29,480 286 286 81,853 11,631 13,624 1,993 17.1
Philadelphia 1759 GS 337 94 31,742 260 202 52,401 11,191 9,789 -1,402 12.5
Philadelphia 1760 1761 GS 312 89 27,789 287 2% 84,820 11,973 14,329 2,356 19.7
Philadelphia 1762 1763 LC 358 90 32,217 329 274 90,256 12,570 14,925 2,355 18.7
Philadelphia 1764 LC 324 107 34,590 250 218 54,602 13,549 11,938 -1,611 11.9
Raadhuis M'burg 1742 1742 GS 272 105 28,550 231 200 46,105 9,203 9,406 203 2.2
Raadhuis M'burg 1743 1743 AG 252 94 23,656 226 224 50,644 9,462 9,131 -331 -3.5
Standvastigheid 1792 GS 231 201 46,387 220 442 97,160 21,929 22,891 962 4.4
V. Johanna Cores 1756 1757 GS 282 99 27,797 184 218 40,142 11,480 7,567 -3,913 34.1
V. Johanna Cores 1759 LC 372 73 27,283 368 157 57,736 12,833 24,166 11,333 88.3
V. Johanna Cores 1760 1761 LC 381 21,285 243 33,758 12,383 14,626 2,243 18.1
V. Johanna Cores 1763 GS 303 116 35,000 259 329 85,333 12,136 16,506 4,370 36.0
V. Johanna Cores 1764 1765 GC 271 131 35,416 203 319 64,855 14,070 11,754 -2,316 16.5
Appendix 25 (cont)
Areas Average Average Pro- Total Profits
Ships Africa West Westa Slaves Af. total landed Am. slaves ment yields losses %
V. Johanna Cores 1767 1768 GS 249 155 38,652 218 359 78,281 23,054 20,508 -2,546 11.0
V. Johanna Cores 1769 1770 GS 226 165 37,247 215 405 87,118 14,071 14,925 854 6.1
V. Johanna Cores 1772 GM 212 173 36,779 148 346 51,275 13,604 8,560 -5,044 37.1
Vergenoegen 1787 GS 386 127 49,183 364 427 155,335 23,507 32,295 8,788 37.4
Vergenoegen 1789 1790 GS 266 173 46,045 207 424 87,810 24,200 20,486 -3,714 15.3
Vergenoegen 1794 1795 GS 393 153 60,269 349 476 166,275 30,720 25,792 -4,928 -16
Vigilantie 1779 GS 246 178 43,908 235 330 77,469
Vis 1775 GG 238 175 41,647 222 377 83,629 18,494 19,265 771 4.2
Vliegende Faam 1757 1758 GS 281 114 32,082 182 261 47,481 20,013 17,725 -2,288 11.4
Vliegende Faam 1771 GG 212 147 31,068 187 403 75,404 11,936 12,866 930 7.8
Vliegende Faam 1773 GS 168 170 28,519 151 371 56,000 12,288 11,763 -525 -4.3
Watergeus 1774 LG 375 56,330 347 134,685
Watergeus 1776 LSE 325 56,971 315 91,602
Watergeus 1778 GS 380 49,409 331 102,360
Welmenende 1770 GS 1% 141 27,551 194 412 80,000 10,833 14,336 3,503 32.3
Welmenende 1771 LS 261 135 35,302 239 254 60,800 11,957 10,842 -1,115 -9.3
Welmenende 1774 GG 203 147 29,915 193 365 70,355 10,914 11,634 720 6.6
Zanggodin 1769 1770 GS 67 83 5,582 45 372 16,750 12,827 13,876 1,049 8.2
Zanggodin 1771 GS 162 159 25,694 153 316 48,406 12,846 11,320 -1,526 11.9
Zanggodin 1774 GSE 127 74 9,370 101 264 26,678 12,190 8,829 -3,361 27.6
Zeemercuur 1788 1789 GS 272 150 40,759 98 457 44,816 25,624 17,517 -8,107 31.6
Zeemercuur 1793 GG 174 218 37,861 168 582 97,760 21,527 19,883 -1,644 -7.6
Zorg 1778 GS 246 145 35,745 231 333 76,953 23,303 24,000 ,697 3
Source: MCC, vols. 335-1437 (see Postma Data Collection); and Unger II, pp. 146-8.
Notes: * Symbols for origins and destinations follow the same pattern as in Appendixes 1 and 2.
The following three colomns are listed in £ Flemish; all other prices are listed in guilders.
Appendixes 411
Appendix 26
Production and exports of Surinam, 1740-1793a
Sugar , Coffee Cocoa Cotton Tobacco
Year (oxheads)b (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs)
1740 21,670 5,232,812 68,516
1741 26,365 4,801,410 116,064
1742 24,024 2,347,214 215,105
1743 20,141 3,873,576 220,246
1744 18,640 2,452,146 307,874
1745 23,239 2,969,281 584,177
1746 18,517 2,122,480 513,380
1749 30,000
1753 6,000
1760 21,442
1761 21,123
1762 19,871
1763 22,800
1764 22,347
1766 21,642 12,388,397 246,847 138,513
1767 21,231 13,664,601 249,537 215,942 64O
1768 21,774 12,349,180 432,489 249,265
1769 22,411 14,007,073 326,249 231,582
1770 17,143 6,968,399 206,907 171,516
1771 22,271 14,320,574 512,796 216,619
1772 20,770 13,891,197 384,316 117,876
1773 18,426 14,699,743 388,914 136,595
1774 16,118 13,421,785 575,407 122,073
1775 21,412 20,231,941 778,421 155,720
1776 17,552 13,900,020 549,346 235,510
1777 17,687 20,214,562 629,061 173,832 8,637
1778 21,189 16,473,762 778,132 352,210 43,915
1779 18,602 11,465,817 780,577 427,950 362,171
1780 15,798 11,363,077 620,269 399,187 56,290
1781 2,693 4,034,446 185,365 61,725
1782 13,514 11,054,348 839,273 474,625 2,495
1783 19.040 11,758,570 1,041,626 855,492 544
1784 19,617 15,600,007 612,010 831,456
1789 15,613 11,149,305 658,965 1,020,905
1790 21,105 14,856,275 517,464 943,580 36,933
1791 19,174 13,296,620 571,257 980,345 25,377
1792 17,050 7,044,642 119,131 1,130,270 166,625
1793 5,419 315,507 29,840 800
Source: Van de Voort, pp. 31 and 237-8; SS, vols. 148-238.
Notes: a Other products exported from Surinam included wood products, citrus
fruit juices, rice, and molasses, but the amounts were small compared to
those listed in the table.
An oxhead measured approximately 800 pounds.
Bibliography
1. Archival Sources
Abbreviations Archives and Collections Locations
ARA Algemeen Rijksarchief (National Archives) The Hague
WIC Tweede West-Indische Compagnie, ARA
OWIC Oude west-Indische Compagnie, ARA
AW Aanwinsten, ARA
VWIS Verspreide West-Indische Stukken, ARA
SB Societeit van Berbice, ARA
SS Societeit van Suriname, ARA
NBKG Nederlandse bezittingen ter Kuste van Afrika,
ARA
RLLM Radermacher, Leliveld, Luyk-Masis Collectie,
ARA
SG Staten Generaal, ARA
AMK Archief van het Ministerie van Kolonien, ARA
AAC Archieven der Admiraliteitscolleges, ARA
KITLV Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-Land-en
Volkenkunde Leiden
GAR Oude Stadsarchief, Gemeente Archief Rotterdam
AMA Archief der Maatschappij van Assurantie
ECMMR Engelbrecht Collectie, Maritiem Museum
HAR Hudig Archief, Stadsarchief
NAA Notarieel Archief, Stadsarchief Amsterdam
APGA Portugees-Israelische Gemeente, Stads Archief
MCC Middelburgse Commercie Compagnie, Provin-
ciaal Archief Middelburg
VCC Van Cittern Collectie, Provinciaal Archief
RAZ-A Rijksarchief van Zeeland - Aanwinsten
DMS DE Mey van Streefkerk Papers James Ford Bell
Library Minneapolis
2. Unpublished studies
Bruyn, I. D. R. "Chirurgijnsarbeid en VOC-Beleid," M.A. Thesis. Leiden: Leiden
University, 1986.
412
Bibliography 413
Chander, R. "Slavenhandel in de periode 1789 tot 1826; Suriname op de grens van
twee eeuwen," M.A. thesis. Leiden: Leiden University, 1988.
Den Heijer, H. "De ondergang van een monopolie; de Westindische compagnie van
handelsmaatschappij naar beheersorganisatie, 1730-1738." M.A. thesis. Lei-
den: Leiden University, 1988.
Feinberg, Harvey M. "Elmina, Ghana, A History of its Development and Relation-
ship with the Dutch in the Eighteenth Century." Ph.D. dissertation Boston:
Boston University, 1969.
Herman, H. "Onze bezittingen op de kust van Guinea en de krijgsverrichtingen
aldaar." The Hague: ARA, typewritten manuscript, 1925.
Hezemans, R. A. F. "De Atlantische slavenhandel der Middelburgsche Commercie
Compagnie," M.A. thesis. Leiden: Leiden University, 1985.
Kors, M. J. G. "Lorrendraaien in het vaarwater van de Westindische Compagnie;
De Nederlandse smokkelhandel op de westkust van Afrika in de periode 1700-
1734." M.A. thesis. Leiden: Leiden University, 1987.
Priester, L. R. "De Nederlandse houding ten aanzien van de slavenhandel en slav-
ernij, 1596-1863," M.A. Thesis. Rotterdam: Erasmus University, 1986.
Reinders Folmer-Van Prooyen, C. "De Middelburgae Commercie Compagnie; Re-
glement en Praktijk, 1720-1729," M.A. Thesis. Leiden: Leiden University,
1985.
Vroeyenstijn, H. I. "De eerste vopyage van het fregatschip De Standvastigheid...,"
M.A. thesis. Leiden: Leiden University, 1970.
3. Printed Materials
Akinjogbin, I. A. Dahomey and Its Neighbors, IJ08—1818. London: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, 1964.
Anstey, Roger. The Atlantic Slave Trade and British Abolition, IJ6O-I8IO. London:
Macmillan Press, 1975.
Arber, Edward and A. G. Bradley, eds. The Travels and Works of Captain John Smith.
Edinburgh: Burt Franklin, 1910.
Armstrong, James. "The Slaves, 165 2-1780." The Shaping of South African Society,
R. Elphick and H. Giliomee, eds., London: Longman Group, 1979.
Attema, Y. St. Eustatius: A Short History of the Island and its Monuments. Zutphen:
Walburg Press, 1976.
Austin, Ralph A. "The Trans-Saharan Slave Trade: A Tentative Census," The
Uncommon Market, H. A. Gemery and J. S. Hogendorn, eds. New York: Aca-
demic Press, 1979.
Austin, Ralph A. and K.Jacobs. "Dutch Trading Voyages to Cameroon, 1721-1759;
European Documents and African History." Annales de la Faculte des lettres et
sciences humaines, vol. 11. Universite federate du Cameroun/de Yaounde, 1974.
Barrau, A. "The waare staat van de slavenhandel...," Bijdragen tot het Menselijk
Geluk, vol. 3 (1790).
Binder, Franz. "Die Goldeinfuhr von der Goldkiiste in die Vereinigten Provinzen,"
Precious Metals in the Age ofExpansion, H. Kellenbenz, ed. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta,
1981.
Binder, Franz. "Die Zeelandische Kaperfahrt, 1654-1662," in Archief KZGW,
Middelburg, 1976.
Boahen, Adu. Topics in West African History. London: Longman Group, 1966.
Bosch, B. "De Slavenhandel," Leerzame Praat-al, vols. 46-8 (1791).
414 Bibliography
Bosman, Willem. A New and Accurate Description of the Coast of Guinea, first published
in Dutch in 1704. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1967.
Bosman, Willem. Naukeurige Beschrijving van de Guinese Goud-en Slavekust....
Utrecht: 1704.
Boxer, Charles R. The Dutch in Brazil. Oxford: Oxford University Press (Clarendon
Press), 1957.
Boxer, Charles R. The Dutch Seaborne Empire, 1600-1800. New York: Knopf, 1965.
Boxer, Charles R. The Portuguese Seaborne Empire, 1415-1825. New York: Knopf, 1969.
Braudel, Fernand. The Perspective of the World. New York: Harper and Row, 1984,
first published in French in 1979.
Brederoo, G. A. Moortje. Amsterdam: Van Ravensteyn, 1617.
Broeze, F. J. A. "Bedrijsorganisatie," in Maritieme Geschiedenis der Nederlanden, vol.
3. Bussum: Uniboek, 1977.
Bruyn, J. R., F. S. Gaastra, and I. Schoffer. Dutch Asiatic Shipping in the 17th and
18th Centuries. The Hague: Nijhoff, 1987.
Bruyn, J. R. and J. Lucassen, eds. Op de Schepen van de Oost-Indische Compagnie.
Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff, 1980.
Buve, R. "Gouverneur Johannes Heinsius," West-Indische Gids, vols. 44-5 (1966).
Craven, W. F. White, Red, and Black: The Seventeenth Century Virginian. Charlottesville:
University Press of Virginia, 1971.
Crone, G. C. E. Onze Schepen in de Gouden Eeuw. Amsterdam: Van Kampen, 1939.
Cruickshank, Brodie. Achtien Jfaren aan de Goudkust. Amsterdam: 1953, 1853.
Curtin, Philip D., et al. African History. Boston: Little, Brown, 1978.
Curtin, Philip D. "The White Man's Grave: Image and Reality, 1780-1830." Journal
of British Studies, vol. 1 (1961).
Curtin, Philip D. The Atlantic Slave Trade: A Census. Madison: University of Wisconsin
Press, 1969.
Curtin, Philip D. "Epidemiology and the Slave Trade," Political Science Quarterly,
vol. 83 (1968).
Daaku, Kwame Yeboa. Trade and Politics on the Gold Coast. Oxford: Oxford University
Press (Clarendon Press), 1970.
Dapper, Olfert. Naukeurige Beschrijvinge der Afrikaanse Gewesten. Amsterdam: Van
Meurs, 1668.
Davidson, Basil. The African Slave Trade. Boston: Little, Brown, 1961.
Davies, K. G. The North Atlantic World in the Seventeenth Century. Minneapolis: Uni-
versity of Minnesota Press, 1974.
Davies, K.G. "The Living and the Dead: White Mortality in West Africa," Race
and Slavery in the Western Hemisphere, Stanley L. Engerman and Eugene D.
Genovese, eds. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1975.
Davies, K.G. The Royal African Company. London: Longman Group, 1957.
Davis, David Brian. The Problem of Slavery in Western Culture. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell
University Press, 1966.
De Jong, C. "The Dutch Press Campaign against the Negro Slave Trade." Mercurius.
Pretoria, 1973.
De Laet, Joannes. Iaerlyck Verhael..., S. P. l'Honore Naber, ed. The Hague: Nijhoff,
1937, first published in 1644.
De Marees, P. Beschrijvinghe van de Goudkust van Guinea. The Hague: Nijhoff, 1912,
originally published in 1602.
De Maree, J. A. Reizen op en de Beschrijving van de Goudkust van Guinea, 2 vols. The
Hague: Van Cleef, 1817-1818.
Bibliography 415
De Vaderlander, vol. I. Amsterdam: 1776--1779.
De Vries, Jan. "On the Modernity of the Dutch Republic," Journal of Economic
History, vol. 33. (1973).
Donnan, Elisabeth. Documents Illustrative of the Slave Trade to America, 4 vols. Wash-
ington, D.C.: Carnegie Institution, 1931.
Eekhof, A. De Negerpredikant Jacobus Eliza Capiteyn, 1717-1747. The Hague: Ne-
derlandsarchief van Kerkgeschiedenis, Nieuwe Serie 13, 1917.
Eltis, David. Economic Growth and the Ending of the Transatlantic Slave Trade. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1987.
Emmer, P. C. "Suiker-goud en slaven; de Republiek in West Afrika en West-Indie,
1674—1800," Overzee; Nederlandse Koloniale Geschiedenis, i5go-iQ7$. Haarlem:
Van Dishoeck, 1982.
Emmer, P. C. "The West India Company, 1621-1791," Companies and Trade, L.
Blusse and F. Gaastra, eds. Leiden University Press, 1981.
Emmer, P. C. "De Slavenhandel van en naar Nieuw Nederland," Economisch en
Sodaal-Historisch Jaarboek, vol. 35 (1972).
Emmer, P. C. "Engeland, Nederland, Afrika en de slavenhandel in de negetiende
eeuw," in Economisch en Sociaal-Historisch Jaarboek, vol. 36 (1973).
Emmer, P. C. "The History of the Dutch Slave Trade; A Bibliographical Survey,"
Journal of Economic History, vol. 32 (1972).
Emmer, P. C. "De laatste slavenreis van de Middelburgsche Commercie Com-
pagnie," Economisch en Sociaal-Historisch Jaarboek, vol. 34 (1971).
Engerman, Stanley L. "The Slave Trade and British Capital Formation in the
Eighteenth Century: A Comment on the Williams Thesis," Business History
Review, vol. 25, 1 (1972).
Engerman, Stanley L. and Eugene D. Genovese, eds. Race and Slavery in the Western
Hemisphere; Quantitative Studies. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press,
1975-
Equiano, Olaudah. Equiano's Travels', abridged and edited by Paul Edwards; first
published in 1789. New York: Praeger, 1967.
Everaert, John. De Frame Slavenhandel. Brussels: Koninklijke Academie, 1978.
Fage, J. D. A History of West Africa. London: Cambridge University
Press, 1969.
Feinberg, Harvey. M. "New Data on European Mortality in West Africa: The Dutch
on the Gold Coast, 1719-1760," Journal ofAfrican History, vol. 15 (1973).
Galenson, David. Traders, Planters, and Slaves. New York: Cambridge University
Press, 1986.
Gallandat, D. H. "Noodige onderrichtingen voor slaafhandelaren," Verhandelingen
van het Zeeuws Genootschap. Middelburg, 1769-1770.
Gemery, Henry A. and Jan S. Hogendorn, eds. The Uncommon Market. New York:
Academic Press, 1979.
Goslinga, Cornelis Ch. A Short History of the Netherlands Antilles and Surinam. The
Hague: Nijhoff, 1979.
Goslinga, Cornelis Ch. "Curasao as a Slave Trade Center during the War of the
Spanish Succession, 1702-1714," Nieuwe West-Indische Gids, Vol. 77 (1977-
1978).
Goslinga, Cornelis Ch. The Dutch in the Caribbean and the Wild Coast, 1580-1680.
Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1971.
Goslinga, Cornelis Ch. The Dutch in the Caribbean and the Guianas, 1680-1791.
Assen: Van Gorcum, 1985.
416 Bibliography
Goslinga, C. Ch. "West-Indische Compagnie," Encyclopedic van dc Nederlandse An-
tillen. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1969.
Hair, P. E. H. "The Enslavement of Koelle's Informants," Journal of African History,
vol. 6, 2 (1965).
Harlow, Vincent, ed. Colonizing Expeditions to the West Indies and Guiana, 1623-1667.
London: Hakluyt Society, Series II, vol. 56, 1925.
Hartsinck, J.J. Beschrijving van Guiana, ofde Wilde Kust van Zuid Amerika..., 2 vols.
Amsterdam: Tielenburg, 1770.
Headrick, Daniel R. The Tools of Empire; Technology and European Imperialism in the
Nineteenth Century. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.
Higman, B.W'. Slave Populations of the British Caribbean, 1807-1834. Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1984.
Hoetinck, H., ed. "Curasao," Encyclopedie van de Nederlandse Antillen. Amsterdam:
Elsevier, 1969.
Hudig, J. De Scheepvaart of West Afrika en West-India in de i8de eeuw. Amsterdam:
1926.
Israel, Jonathan. "Spain and the Dutch Sephardim, 1609-1660," Studia Rosenthal-
iana, vol. 12 (1978).
Jameson, J. F. "St. Eustatius in the American Revolution," American Historical Review,
vol. 8 (1903).
Johnson, Marion. "The Cowrie Currencies of West Africa,"'JournalojAfrican History,
vol. 11 (1970).
Jones, Adam and Marion Johnson. "Slaves from the Windward Coast," Journal of
African History, vol. 21 (1980).
Kea, Ray A. Settlements, Trade, and Politics in the Seventeenth Century Gold Coast.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1982.
Kernkamp, G.W. "Een Contract tot de Slaafhandel van 1657," Bijdragen en Me-
dedelingen van het Historisch Genootschap, vol. 22 (1901).
Kipple, Kenneth F. The Caribbean Slave: A Biological History. New York: Cambridge
Klein, Herbert S. The Middle Passage. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press,
1978.
Klein, Herbert S. and Stanley L. Engerman. "A Note on Mortality in the French
Slave Trade in the Eighteenth Century." The Uncommon Market, Henry A.
Gemery and Jan S. Hogendorn, eds. New York: Academic Press, 1979.
Lawrence, A. W. Trade Castles and Forts of West Africa. London: J. Cape, 1963.
Le Moine de L'Espine. De Koophandel van Amsterdam, 10th rev. ed. Amsterdam: J.
de Groot, 1810, originally published in 1704.
L'Honere Naber, S. P. "De Kolonien," Geschiedkundige Atlas van Nederland. The
Lovejoy, Paul E. "The Volume of the Atlantic Slave Trade: A Synthesis," Journal
OfAfrican History, vol. 23 (1982).
Lovejoy, Paul E. and Jan S. Hogendorn. "Slave Marketing in West Africa," The
Uncommon Market, Henry A. Gemery and Jan S. Hogendorn, eds. New York:
Academic Press, 1979.
Mackenzie-Grieve, Averil. Last Years ofthe English Slave Trade; Liverpool, 1750-1807.
London: Putnam, 1941.
Manning, Patrick. Slavery, Colonialism and Economic Growth in Dahomey, 1640—IQ6O.
New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982.
Manning, Patrick. "The Slave Trade in the Bight of Benin," The Uncommon Market,
Bibliography 417
Henry A. Gemery and Jan S. Hogendorn, eds. New York: Academic Press,
1979.
Mannix, Daniel P. and Malcolm Cowley. Black Cargoes; A History of the Atlantic Slave
Trade. New York: Viking Press, 1962.
Martin, Phyllis. "The Trade of Loango in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Cen-
turies," Pre-Colonial African Trade, R. Gray and D. Birmingham, eds. London:
Oxford University Press, 1970.
Martin, Phyllis. The External Trade of the Loango Coast, 1576-1870. Oxford: Oxford
University Press (Clarendon Press), 1972.
Mckusker, John J. Money and Exchange in Europe and America, 1600-1775. Chapel
Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1978.
Menkman, W. R. "Nederlandse en Vreemde Slavenvaart," West-Indische Gids, vol.
26 (i943)-
Menkman, W. R. "Nederland in Amerika en West Afrika." Nederland Over de Zeeen,
H J . de Graaf, ed. Utrecht: W. de Haan, 1955.
Menkman, W. R. De West-Indische Compagnie. Amsterdam: Van Kampen, 1947.
Miers, Susanne and Igor Kopytoff, eds. Slavery in Africa. Madison: University of
Wisconsin Press, 1977.
Miller, Joseph C. Slavery: A Worldwide Bibliography, igoo-ig82. White Plains, N.Y.:
Kraus International Publishers, 1985.
Miller, Joseph C. "Mortality in the Atlantic Slave Trade: Statistical Evidence on
Causality," Journal of Interdisciplinary History, vol. 11, 3 (1981).
Minchington, Walter E. "The Triangular Trade Revisited," The Uncommon Market,
Henry A. Gemery and Jan S. Hogendorn, eds. New York: Academic Press,
1979.
Moens, P. Vruchten der eenzaamheid. Amsterdam: Saakes en Tiel, 1798.
Nassy, David de Ishak Cohen, et al. Geschiedenis van de Kolonie van Suriname. Am-
sterdam: Emmering, 1974; first published in French in 1788.
Netscher, P. M. Geschiendenis van de Colonieen Essequebo, Demerary en Berbice. The
Newton, John. The Journal ofa Slave Trader, 1750-1754, B. Martin and M. Spurrell,
eds. London: Epworth Press, 1962.
Norregaard, Georg. Danish Settlements in West Africa, 1658—1850. Boston: Boston
Northrup, David. "African Mortality in the Suppression of the Slave Trade: The
Case of the Bight ofBenin," Journal of Interdisciplinary History, vol. 9, 1 (1978).
Oudschans Dentz, F. Geschiedkundige Tijdtafel van Suriname. Amsterdam: J. H. de
Bussy, 1949.
Paasman, A. N. Reinhart: Nederlandse literatuur en slavernij ten tijde van de Verlichting.
Amsterdam: Nijhoff, 1984.
Paish, F. W. "Gold," Chambers' Encyclopedia, vol. 6 New York: Oxford University
Press, 1950.
Polanyi, K. and Rotstein, A. Dahomey and the Slave Trade. Seattle: University of
Washington Press, 1966.
Posthumus, N. W. Inquiry into the History of Prices in Holland, 2 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1964.
Postma, Johannes. "Mortality in the Dutch Slave Trade, 1675—1795." The Uncommon
Market, Henry A. Gemery and Jan S. Hogendorn, eds. New York: Academic
Press, 1979.
Postma, Johannes. "West African Exports and the Dutch West India Company,
1675-1731," Economisch en Sodaal-Historisch Jaarboek, vol. 36 (1973).
418 Bibliography
Pressat, Roland. Demographic Analysis. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton, 1972, original
French ed. 1961.
"De Proeve eener verhandeling over den slaavenhandel en aankleeve van
dien," in Bijdragen tot het menschelijk geluk, vol. 4 (1790).
Quintus Bosz, A. J. A. "Misvattingen omtrent de Staakundige Ontwikkeling van
Suriname," West-Indische Gids, vol. 40 (i960).
Ratelband, K., ed. VijfDagregisters van het Kasteel Sao Jorga daMina aan de Goudkust.
The Hague: Nijhoff, 1953.
Rawley, James A. The Transatlantic Slave Trade. New York: Norton, 1981.
Renier, G. J. Great Britain and the Establishment of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
The Hague: Nijhoff, 1930.
Riley, James C. International Government Finance and the Amsterdam Capital Market,
1 j40-1815. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1980.
Rodney, Walter. "African slavery and other forms of social oppression on the upper
Guinea coast in the context of the Atlantic slave trade,"Journal of African History,
vol. 7 (1966).
Rout, Leslie B. The African Experience in Spanish America. London: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, 1976.
Scelle, Georges. "The Slave Trade in the Spanish Colonies of America: the Asiento,"
The American Journal of International Law, vol 4 (1910).
Scelle, Georges. La traite negriere aux Indes de Castille..., 2 vols. Paris: Larose et
Tenin, 1906.
Schama, Simon. The Embarrassment of Riches. New York: Knopf, 1987.
Schmitt, Eberhard. "The Brandenburg Overseas Trading Interests in the Field of
European Politics, 1634-1682." Companies and Trade. Leiden: University Press,
1981.
Schneeloch, N. H. "Die Bewindhebber der Westindischen Compagnie in der Kam-
mer Amsterdam, 1674-1700," Economisch en Sociaal-Historisch Jaarboek, vol. 36
(i973)-
Schoute, D. "Geschiedenis der Geneeskunde," Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Genees-
kunde, vol. 92 (1948).
Snapper, Fritz. Oorlogsinvloeden op de overzeese handel, 1551—ijiQ. Amsterdam: E.
Harms, 1959.
Staring, W . C . H . DeBinnen-en BuitenlandseMaten, Gewichten enMunten.... Arnhem:
Gysbers en Van Loon, 1980.
Stein, Robert Louis. The French Slave Trade in the Eighteenth Century; An Old Regime
Business. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1979.
Sundstrom, Lars. The Trade of Guinea. Lund: Hakan Ohlsson, 1965.
Unger, W. S. "Bijdragen tot de geschiedenis van de Nederlandse slavenhandel,"
Economisch-Historisch Jaarboek, vol. 26 (The Hague, Nijhoff, 1956).
Unger, W. S. "Bijdragen tot de geschiedenis van de Nederlandse slavenhandel II,"
Economisch-Historisch Jaarboek, vol. 28 (1958-1960).
Van Andel, M. A. "Geschiedenis der Geneeskunde," Nederlands Tijdschrift voor
Geneeskunde, vol 75 (1931).
Van Beylen, J. "Scheepstypen," Maritieme Geschiedenis der Nederlanden, vol. 2. Bus-
sum: Uniboek, 1977.
Van Brakel, S. "Bescheiden over den Slavenhandel der WIC," Economisch-Historisch
Jaarboek, vol. 4 (1918).
Van Dantzig, Albert. Les Hollandais sur la Cote de Guinee; A VEpoque de VEssor de
VAshanti et du Dahomey, 1680-1740. Paris: Societe Franchise d'Histoire
d'Outre-Mer, 1980.
Bibliography 419
Van Dantzig, Albert. "Effects of the Atlantic Slave Trade on Some West African
Societies," Revue Francaise d'Historie d'Outre-mer, vol. 62 (1975).
Van Dantzig, Albert. Forts and Castles of Ghana. Accra: Sedco, 1980.
Van Dantzig, Albert. Het Nederlandse Aandeel in de Slavenhandel. Bussum: Van Dish-
oeck, 1968.
Van den Boogaart, E. and P.C. Emmer. The Dutch Participation in the Atlantic
Slave Trade, 1596-1650," The Uncommon Market, Henry A. Gemery and Jan
S. Hogendorn, eds. New York: Academic Press, 1979.
Van der Meiden, G. W. Betwist Bestuur: Een eeuw strijd om de macht in Suriname,
1651-1753. Amsterdam: Bataafse Leeuw, 1987.
Van der Vlis, D. "De reis van het fregatschip Het Vergenoegen naar Angola en Sur-
iname," Mededelingen van de Nederlandse Vereniging voor Zeegeschiedenis, no. 15
(1967).
Van de Voort, J. P. De Westindische Plantages van 1720—ijg$: Financien en Handel.
Eindhoven: De Witte, 1973.
Van Dillen, J. G. Van Rijkdom en Regenten. The Hague: Nijhoff, 1970.
Van Lier, Rudolf. Samenleving in een Grensgebied; een Sodaal-Historische Studie van
Suriname. Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus, 1971.
Van Overeem, B. B. "De reizen naar de West van Cornelis Cornelisz. Jol, alias
Kapitein Houtebeen, 1626-1640," De West-Indische Gids, vol. 24 (1942).
Vega Franco, Marisa. El Trdfico de Esclavos con America; asientos de Grillo y Lomelin,
1663-167 4. Seville: Escuela de estudios Hispano-Americanos, 1984.
Verger, Pierre. Flux et reflux de la traite des negres. Paris: Mouton, 1968.
Verhees-van Meer, J.Th.H. De Zeeuwse Kaapvaart tijdens de Spaanse Successieoorlog,
1702-1713. Middelburg: Koninklijk Zeeuws Genootschap, 1986.
Villa Villar, Enriqueta. La sublevacacion de Portugal y la trata de negroes." Ibero-
Amerikanisches Archiv, vol. 2 (1976).
Vrijman, L. C. Slavenhalers en Slavenhandel. Amsterdam: Van Kampen, 1937.
Vrijmoedige Gedachten. Amsterdam, 1795.
Westergaard, Waldamar. The Danish West Indies under Company Rule. New York:
Macmillan, 1917.
Williams, Eric. Capitalism and Slavery. Richmond: University of North Carolina Press,
1944.
Wright, I. A. "The Coymans Asiento, 1685-1689," Bijdragen voor de Vaderlandse
Geschiedenis en Oudheidkunde, vol. 6 (1924).
Wyndham, H. A. The Atlantic and Slavery. London: Oxford University Press, 1935.
Index
Page references to figures, maps, notes, ta- Amnichia, 207

bles, and tabular appendixes are followed Amsterdam, 49, 162, 164
b y / m, n, t, a, respectively. Slave-trade Amsterdam (castle), 64m
ships (listed in Appendixes i, 2, 15, 16, Amsterdam: city and WIC chamber, 9, 23f,
17A, 18-20, and in Tables 3.2, 7.5, and 127, 1291, 130m, 1311, 1321, 153, 175,
10.10) are included in the Index if they 299^ 305, 356-61; conflict with Zeeland,
are mentioned in the text. The names of 23-4, 61, 127-8, 175; and governance of
ships are italicized. Slave-trade companies Surinam, 180
and brokers (listed in Appendix 10) and Anglo-Dutch wars: First (1652-4), 24, 175;
captains (listed in Appendixes 13 and 14, Second (1665-7), 73> J75> J 9 2 ; Third
and in Table 3.2) are included in the In- (1672-4), 36; Fourth (1780-4), 165, 208,
dex if they are mentioned in the text. 275, 284, 288-9
Angola, 57, 58m, i n , 298f
Abbocan, 87 announcers, 277, 363
abolition: decree (1814), 290-1; of Dutch Anomabu, 64m, i22t, i24t, 125, 373-6
slave trade, 289-91; movement, 155, 291, Antilles, Lesser, 81, 195, 196m, 3oot, 300
293; of slavery in the Dutch West Indies, Antwerp, 130m; slave market, 3
293-4 Apam, 64m, 87, 95, i22t, i24t, 373-6
Accra, 58m, 64m, 67, 84, 93m, 95, i22t, Apetta Coffy, 87
i24t, 206, 373-6 Appa (Ekpe), 97-100
Adrichem, 103-4, 243, 2541 apologists for slavery, 7, 291-2
Africa, 5on, 137 Arawaks, 124, 178
African-Dutch relations, 68-71, 89-90 Ardra (Allada), 88, 93m, 96-100; slaves
Agaja, 99-100 from, 108-9
Agay, 364 Arent, 153
Agou, 89 armazoen, 228, 366
Aja, 88, 92, 93m, 96-7, 99, 356-61 Arrel, Jan van, 155
Akani, 87, 93m Asante, 87, 90, 92, 93m, 94-6, 207
Akwamu, 88, 90, 92, 93m, 94-5 Asantehene, 73, 94
Akwida, 64m, 95, i22t, 1241, 373-6 asiento: agents, 41, 170, 229, 270; con-
Akyem, 93m, 94-5, 207 tracts, 3, 5, 26, 107, i n , 168, 171, 174,
alocholic beverages, 104-5; brandy, 234, 179, 228, 26-4, 267, 270, 281, 294, 297,
234t 299, 303, 349; Coymans administration,
Alida, 43n 41-6; Dutch dominance, 33-46; early
Amazon, 20m, 174, 176m history, 29-31; summary of trade, 53-5
Amazone, 207 Assini, 64m, 117m, 122m, 373-6
Amba, 87 Assoe, 364
American Revolution, 4, 118, 211, 2 2 1 - 3 , Atlantic: crossing, 155, 162, 389a (see also
284 middle passage); system, 2
Ammo, 72 Axim, 5on
420
Index 421
Axim, 18, 58m, 64m, 95, 117m, i22t, 124I:, 230, 250, 264, 282, 294, 3Oif, 299, 3oot,
207, 373-6 302-3; as slave market, 2in, 21-2, 27
Brazil-Africa trade, 76—8, 96, 100, 141, 149
backhaul, 171-3, 282, 306, 353. See also Breda, 130m, 175, 177
produce, tropical British-Dutch accords (1818), 290
Badagry, 64m, 100-1 Broeke, Pieter van den, 12
Bahia, 19, 20, 20m brokers (makelaars), 86-7, 89, 102, 162
ballast, 171-3, 273, 282, 306 Brooks, 142
Bantu-speaking Africans, 57, 108, 120, 141, buitenforten (outposts), 64m, 65, 124
163, 276, 297 Butri, 64m, 95, i22t, i23t, i24t, 373-6
Barbados, 4, 28m, 196m
barque (barkschip), 143, 306. See also ships Cabinda (Ngoyo), 58m, 60
Barroso de Poso, Juan, 34t, 39, 41-2 Caerlof, Henry, 75
barter trade, 260 Calabar (or Calabary), 58m, 82t, 349, 356—
Baskenburg, 2541 7; slaves, 106-7
Beck, Balthazar, 41; Matthias, 27 Calvinists, 8, 11
Beeck, Cornelis van, 349 Camaroons, 57, 106-8, 349
Beekesteyn, 163 Campen, Jan van, 352
Beekman, Samuel, 189—90 Candele, P. C. de, 67
Belmonte, Diego Nunes, 11; Don Manuel, cannibalism, 165, 236
40, 42, 46 Cape Appolonia, 159, 207
benda, 261, 262L See also gold Cape Coast, 74, i22t, 373-6
Benin: Bight of, 58m, 59; city state, 58m, Cape Colony, 111-2; Cape Town, 290
60, 64m, 84; region, 59, 107, i n , 161 Cape Lahou, 117m, i22t, 123, 373-6
Berbice: river and settlement, 13, 28m, 107, Cape Lopez, 58m, 77, 253
174-7, 176m, 188, 294, 306; patronship, Cape Palmas, 58m, i22t, 373-6
175; slave importation, 193-5, 217; slave Cape Verde, 3, 4on, 57, 74, 159, 356
rebellion (1763), 215-18; Society of, capitalist system, 283
193-5, 217 Capiteyn, Jacobus Eliza, 71
Berckensteyn, 160 captains (or masters) of slave ships, 61, 150,
Bercu, 64m, i22t, i24t, 206, 373-6 152, 1541, 156, 243, 252, 306, 308, 352;
Berkendam, 21 identification codes, 308-48; listed for
Beschermer, 49 WIC, 308-19; listed for free trade, 320-
Biafra, Bight of, 58m, 106-8, i n , 113, 48; owners of ships, 9-10; qualifications
116, 242, 260, 267, 298f, 306 and duties, 140, 148, 366-8, 404; salar-
bills of exchange, 214, 262-3, 273, 275, ies, i54t, 281; and slave exploitation,
282, 368 137-8
Binder, Franz, 32, 32n, 34, 37, 187, 354n Caracas coast, 27, 28m, 82t, 168, 196m,
blacks (zwarten), 68-70, 228; black boys, 73 226. See also illicit slave trade
Block, Francois, 159 Cargau, Jan, 42-3
boekhouder (accountant), 9, 130, 371. See also Caribs, 174-5
rederij and reder Carolus Secundus, 82t, 2541
bombaas (bumboy), 243, 402, 40 2 n carpenters, 144, i54t, 154
bonuses and premiums, in the slave Cartagena, 28m, 34, 43, 267, 358
trade, 67, 137, 155, 281, 28m, 286-7, Carte (or Carter), 89, 364
367-8 castle slaves (trainslaven), or company slaves,
Bosch, Bernardus, 292 7i-3
Bosman, Willem, 62, 63, 65-6, 88n, 136, Castor, i66t, 168
165, 233, 236-7, 363 Catharina Galey, 2O4n
Bosman, Willem Jr., 69 Cavalla, 58m, 117m, i22t, 373-6
Boxer, Charles R., 15, 17 Cayenne, 175, 176m
Brandenburg, 153, 158-60, 163, 228, 140 Central Africa, 58m, 160
Brandenburg, 4, 75-6, 80, 95 Cestos, 117m, i22t, 373-6
Brandenburg African Company, 69 Chambert, Louis, 51
Braudel, Fernand, 9 Charles II (Spain), 48-9
Brazil, 13, 14, 17, 20m, n o , 174-5, 208, Charles V (Spain), 3, 29
422 Index
Chouria, Jean, 51 406, 349-53; captured by the Dutch, 27,
Christianity: and the slave trade, 7; mission- 28m; and the slave trade, 29, 33-5, 37—8,
ary activity, 70-1 44-5, 47-8, 50-5, 223, 270-1
Christiansburg, 64m, 76 Curtin, Philip D., 3, 5, 31, 163
Christina, 274 customs. See duties; costs
Clara, 103-4
citrus fruit, 234, 246; lemon juice, 171, 282. Daaku, Kwame, 86, 88
See also scurvy; medical practices; pro- Dahomey, 88, 91, 93m, 99-101
duce, tropical death: affidavit of (attestatie), 137, 232, 238,
coastal trade, 116, 135 350, 402, 405; causes, 241-3, 244t
Cobbena Apo, 88 debts: for slaves at Surinam, 183-4, 187,
Cocoa. See produce, tropical 278, 282; owed to WIC by Africans, 87,
Coejmans, B., 67 263, 272
coffee. See produce, tropical De Faatn, 81
coffles, 235 Delft, i29t, 264, 266t, 299
commissioners, 62f. See also merchants Demerara, 176m, 177, 188, 218, 288, 294
Companies Welvaren, 79 Denkyira, 92, 93m, 94
confiscation, of Brazil ships, 77; interlopers, Denmark, 4, 26, 49, 75-6, 80, 208, 291
80; sailors, 368; planters, 275 destinations of slaves. See slaves
Congo (Kongo), 58m, 60, 101 director-general, 61, 62f, 63, 66, 78, 134,
Congress of Vienna, 290 403
Conny, John, 88, 95, 207 diseases, on slave ships, 243-8, 244t; conta-
consignment (cognossement), or cargo, 137, gious, 169; mental illness, 242; parasitic
232, 250, 308-48, 404 worms, 65, 2441, 245. See also medical
contraband, 39, 43. See also illicit slave trade practices; surgeon-doctor
Coopstad & Rochussen, 123, 133, 144, 280, Does, Jan van der, 155
362, 371 doldrums. See weather
copper trade, 60, 2651 Dominica, 196m, 226
Cornelia Christoffelina, 307 drinking water, on slave ships, 157-8, 160,
2
costs (accounting), 277-8. See also duties; fi- 35> 255> 2 77- See ak° slaves, feeding
nances and currencies dungeon (slavegat), 233, 238, 402, 402n
cotton. See produce, tropical Dutch Association of Sciences, 292
council: at Elimina, 62, 62f, 65, 127, 205; at Dutch-British bilateral agreement (1814),
Surinam, 180 290
Cowan, Anthonius, 198 Dutch East India Company. See Vereenigde
cowry shells, 103, 260-1, 363-4 Oost-Indische Compagnie (VOC)
Coymans asiento, 34t, 40-6, 97, i n . See Dutch empire: colonial expansion, 7, 14-15,
also asiento 284; economy, 9, 281-2, 302; merchant
Coymans, Balthazar, 33, 38, 40—3 marine and navy, 9, 208, 284
Coymans, Joseph, 39 Dutch Republic, 112, 130m, 201, 229, 259,
craftsmen, 63, 68; among slaves, 72 284; Batavian Republic, 285, 299
credit, in slave trade: to Africans, 90, 275; Dutch settlements overseas, 16, 24-5, 174,
to Surinam planters, 263-4, 27I~3> 2 75 177, 189, 279
crews on slave ships, 152-7, 1541, 227-8, Dutch West India Company. See West-
242; illness and mortality, 152, 156-7, Indische Compagnie (WIC)
161, 166, 168; wages, 153, i54t, 155, duties: customs in Africa, 96, 162, 260,
281; mates, 155, 367. See also captains of 277, 363-5; gifts or presents, 161, 363,
slave ships 365; Brazilians paid to WIC, 77-8
Croonvogel, 267 Duverne, Isaac, 12
crowding: on slave ships, 147-8, 232, 245, Duynenburg, 49, 140
253; and mortality, 255-6, 392—4. See also Duynvliet, 140, 144
mortality dysentery (loop), 2441, 245, 247. See also
Cuba, 28m, 226 diseases
Curasao, 25, 82t, 168-9, I 7 I » 196m, 199-
200, 221-2, 229, 237, 240, 262, 2641, economic crisis of 1773, 118, 211, 214,
267-9, 2 8 i , 288-9, 294, 297, 3Oif, 306, 2
75> 295
Index 423
education, of Africans by the Dutch, 70-1 Garcia, Antonio, 34t, 35-36, 38, 43
Eighty Year War (1568-1648), 15-16 Germans: on slave ships, 153; in service of
Elet, Jacob, 101, ioin WIC, 100-1
Elgersma, Nicolaas, 402 Geuns, Jan van, 292
Elisabeth, 82t, 263 Gewelt, Jan Pietersz., 404
Elmina, 58m, 64m, 85, 93m, 95, n o , i22t, Gideon, 25, 142-3
123, i24t, 128, 144, 150, 157, 159-60, Goethem, Frans van, 82t, 102
203, 268, 288, 356-61, 373-6, 402-5; gold: from Africa, 18, 59, 73, 85, 87, 91,
captured by Dutch, 13, 18-19, 21; head- 114, 260; currency and trade, 59, 135,
quarters of WIC, 60, 62, 77, 87, 103, 261, 262t, 2651
116, 117m, 121, 203 Gold Coast, 57, 58m, 64m, 76, 85, 89, 92,
Emmenes, 79, 137, 2541 93m, 95, 108-9, J ^ - ^ ' I2I ~3> J 38,
English: asiento, 34t, 46, 51; cooperation 158, 255, 297, 298f, 299, 306, 373-6
with Dutch, 75; free trade, 138; rivals of Goude Brackhond, 190
Dutch, 74, 209 Gouree, 57, 74, 85, 117m
Enkhuyzen, I29t, 130m, 299 Grand Bassam, 117m, i22t, 373-6
Enlightenment, 276, 291-2 Great Britain, 284, 289, 302. See also
Epe (Nigeria), 64m, i22t, 373-6 English
epilepsy, 244t. See also diseases Grenada, 49, 196m, 226
Equiano, Olaudah, 6n Grillo, Domingo, 33, 34t, 349-52
equipage master, 62f, 402-3 Gross Friedrichsburg (Hollandia), 76, 64m,
Ericzoon, Barent, 17 95
Essequibo, 107, 174-7, 188, 218, 240, 288, Guadaloupe, 28m, 196m, 199, 300
294, 306; English settlers, 219-20; Guiana region, 138, 174-6, 176m, 229,
French attack, 189; population, 190-1; 25Ot, 253, 255, 267, 268t, 299-300
population, slave importation, 189-91, Guinea Coast, 17—18, 56, 120, 12it, 121-2,
22Ot 292, 297, 298^ 306, 366
Essequibo Vriendschap, 307 Guinea trade, 56, 119-20, 210, 260, 297
Ettin, Essjerrie, 168, 277 Guineese Vriendschap, i66t, 168, 307
Europey 140 Guide Vrijheid, 210, 267
Europeans: in Africa, 18, 66, 65; as rivals of guns. See firearms
Dutch, 4, 26, 73-6, 102, 205, 208-9, Gusman, Bernardo Marin de, 47
274, 286, 365 Guyana, region and settlements, 35t, 174,
176m, 275, 288. See also Berbice; De-
factors, at trading stations, 62f, 63, 67; chief merara; Essequibo
factor, 62f, 63
Fante, 87, 90, 93m, 94 Haagen, Pieter van der, 10
Ferony, Francisco, 349, 351-2 Haarlem, 104, i29t, 130m, 292
fevers, 244t, 245. See also diseases Haast U Langzaam, iogn
Fida. See Ouidah Haen, Gerrit de, 137
finances and currencies, 171, 259-64, 278- Ham, theory of, 11
9, 262t, 352, 410; kaartengeld, 263; slave- Hante, 90, 93m, 95, 207
geld, 277; ounce trade, 260-1 head money (hoofdgeld), 205, 2o6f, 209. See
firearms, 92, 103-4, 281; gunpowder, also duties
233 head tax, in Surinam, 1851, 185-6
firewood, 157, 160, 277 heart attack (hartvangh), 2441, 247. See also
fiscaal. See superintendent diseases
fluitschip (flute), 142-3, 203, 306 Heren X. See West-Indische Compagnie,
France, 26, 36, 138, 208, 278, 285; on Af- Heinsius, Johannes, 178
rican coast, 75, 96; and asiento, 34t, 46, Hertogh, Hendrik, 100-1
48-50; attacks Dutch West Indies, 165, home ports, for slave ships, 128-34, i29t,
175, 182, 189-91, 193, 198 130m, 299^ 299
free-trade era, n6ff, 138-40, 201-26, 209- Hoolwerf, N. V., 98
11,302, 377, 382-6 Hoorn, I29t, 130m, 299
frigate (fregat), 142-3, 306. See also ships Hugla, Jean Emanuel, 352
Frossard, Benjamin, 292 Huys te Loirheim, 142
424 Index
illicit slave trade: to Caracas coast, 30-2, last or lastage (tonnage), 139, 145-6, 153,
39—40, 49—50, 270, 281; to Surinam, 256
212; by ship crews, 137, 281 lastgeld, to purchase slaving passes or per-
Indian Ocean slave trade. See slave trade, mits, 119, 138—9, 2O2n, 202-4, 210, 286,
Indian Ocean 369-70, 286, 372; napremie, 204
indentured servants, 5 Leusden, 144-5, 164, i64n, i66t, 194, 198,
indigo. See backhaul; produce, tropical 203, 242, 2541
industrial revolution, 2, 280 Liebergen, Nicolaas van, 41
insurance, maritime, 10, 267, 277 Lindezaay, Joannes, 404
interlopers (lorredraayers), 76, 78-83, 102-3, Lira, Don Emanuel de, 40
109, n o t , 113, 123, 1311, 135, 137, 141, Lisbon, 2-4
187, 197-8, 226, 2951, 195, 305 Liverpool, 142, 299
international relations, 208-9; m asiento, Loango coastal region (also Loango-
48—52; on African coast, 73—8 Angola), 56-7, 58m, 60-1, 82t, 101-3,
iron bars, 104, 260 108, 111-12, 114, ii5t, 120, 150, 158,
ivory, 86, 91, 137, 160, 2651, 366-7 163, 233, 253, 255, 276, 288, 298f, 306,
Ivory Coast, 57, 58m, 75, 116, 122-3, 29^ 356-61; commerce, 65, 75, 101-3, 136,
299 140-1, 158-60, 163, 267-8; slaves, 108-
9, 253
Jager, 52, 82 Lomelin, Ambrosia, 33, 34t, 349-52
Jakin, 64m, 97-100, 160 Louis XIV (France), 9, 49
Jamaica, 28m, 50, 271
Jamestown, 12 macrons (manquerons), 37, 53, 189, 197,
Jews: in Guiana, 188, 213, 216; Sephardic 229, 237, 239, 267, 270-1
Jews, 8, i o - n , 19, 177; in the slave malaria, 65. See also diseases
trade, 10 manumission, of slaves in Africa, 72—3
Joanna Maria, 228 Margaretha Christina, 2O4n
Johanna Cores, i66t, 2O9n, 2791 Maria Galey, 2Oâ
Jol, Cornelis, 12-13 maroons (runaways), 179, 182, 184-5, l%5n->
Jonge Matheus & Catharina, 307 213-4; in Palmares, 20
Jonge Rombout, 212 Marowin, 164, 167, 176m, 242
Jubert, Jacobus, 41-2 Martin, Gaspar, 51
Martinique, 28m, 49, 196m, 199-200
Mauricius, Jan Jacob, 214
Kabes, John, 88 Maurits, Prinsjohan, 19
Kempenaar, D. I. de, 286-7 Maze, 23t, i29t, 130m, 131, 13it, i32t,
Kerkhove, Melchior van, 12 299^ 305, 356-61
Kerkrinck, William, 44 medical practices: bleeding, 244, 247; medi-
Keta, 64m, i22t, 373-6 cine box, 244. See also diseases; surgeon-
Klaver, J. G., 16m doctor
kleine vaart, 221, 289 Mediterranean slave trade. See slave trade,
Komenda, 93, i22t, i23t, i24t, 373-6; Mediterranean
wars, 90, 92-3 merchandise, European, 103-5, 161
Koninck Solomon, 29, i66t, 180 merchants: African, 87-9, 92, 297, 363-5;
Koning van Portugal, 242 Cadix, 40; Dutch, 17, 179, 193, 202-5,
Kormantin, 64m, 95, 109, i22t, 1231, i24t, 289—90; French, 49, 51; Portuguese, 21;
124-5, 373-6 Spanish, 49
Korte Prim, 198 Middelburg, 10-11, 1291, 130m, i32t, 133,
188, 201, 299, 302, 305, 366
Laet, Joannes de, 13 Middelburgsche Commercie Compagnie
Lagos, 64m, 75, 84 (MCC), 104-5, J23> 133, Hi* J44> I5 1 *
Latnmerenburg, 120, 157, 210 153, 165, 170, 219, 226, 143, 248, 251,
Lamont, Isaac, 197-8 268, 273, 275, 278-80, 284, 366, 371,
languages, on the African coast, 65, 69. See 392, 407-10
also Twifo Middelburgs Welvaren, i66t, 167, 241, 243,
Las Casas, 29
Index 425
middle passage, 140, 149, i52t, 155, 162-5, Pere, Abraham van den (and family), 175,
240t, 241-3, 2471, 248, 253, 256, 305, 192-3, 195, 197
389a, 390a, 391a Pernambuco, 11, 19, 20m
mixed courts, 290 Petronella Alida, 157, 2541
mobile trade, 135, 138-40, 148, 206 Petts, Daniel, 137
Moens, Petronella, 293 Phenix, 52, 140, 200
Moradores, 19; revolt, 20 Philadelphia, i66t, 2O9n
morality: and the slave trade, 2, 184, 276; pieces of eight, 161-3, 262t, 2641, 406. See
and humaneness, 292, 302; and Nazi also finances and currencies
concentration camps, 300 Piershil, 103
Mori, 13, 17-18, 64m, i22t, i23t, i24t, pieza de India (leverbaar or pees), 37-8, 228-
373-6 9, 2651, 266t, 349-51, 392~4> 395"8> 4°4
mortality, 109, 164, i66t, 204, 238, 240-3, Pijnenburg, 193
247^ 249-58, 25Ot, 25it, 255t, 2561, 287, pirates, 78-9, 164, 263
301, 306, 350, 354, 389a, 390a, 391a, plantation economies, 279-80
392-4, 395-401, 405; catastrophic, 249, planters, absentee, 193, 263, 286
253, 254, 254t; coasting, 2491, 249, 250; Pol, Nicolaas, 363
harbor, 239; postdisembarkation, 240; Pollux, i66t, i67n
true mortality, 250-2, 252t, 258 Pomoroon, 176m, 188
mulattoes (tapoeyers), 68-9 Popo, 64m, 97, i22t, 373-6
Muscavische Galey, 274 Poquefoe, 64m, i22t, i24t, 373-6
Porcio, Nicolas, 34t, 41-3, 46
Napoleon, era and wars, 208, 289-90 Portobelo, 28m, 34, 43
Nassy, David, 178-8 Portugal: and asiento, 46, 49; in Africa, 59,
native American, 5, 29; slaves, 191 74, 78, 84-5, 135; in slave trade, 2-3, 5,
navigation acts, 74 14, 26; rivals of Dutch, 26, 74, 77, 135
Neptunis, i66t, 167, 2541 Postma Data Collection, 1321, i86t, 19it,
New Amsterdam, 25, 175 I95t, I99t, 2I2t, 2l8t, 22Ot, 22It, 223t,
New Holland, 18-22, 20m, 2it; See also 2241, 2251, 2541, 307, 371, 377, 389-91,
Brazil 392
New Netherland, 24-6 Pra, 64m, 93m, 117m, 157
Newton, John, 155 Pranger, Jan, 100-1, ioin
Nieutve Hoop, 366 price guide (marktbrief), 134-5, 261, 264,
Nieuwe Post, 242, 254t 2651
Niger (river and delta), 58-60, 64, 93m; prices of slaves. See slaves, prices of
slaves from, 72 Prins Willem V, 147, 2O9n
Noorder Kwartier (NK), 23, 129-32, 2991, privateers, 12, 15, 23, 50, 78-9, 164, 190,
305, 356-61 199
private trade, 136-8, 155, 281, 352, 367.
See also illicit slave trade
Offra, 64m, 97-8
procurement of slaves. See slaves,
Orange family, 8, 19
procurement
Oranjestad, 222-3. See also St. Eustatius
produce, tropical, 149, 263, 297; cocoa,
origins of slaves. See slaves, origins 172, 182-3, 191, 213, 263, 282, 411;
Oudermeulen, Cornelis van der, 287, 288n, coffee, 2, 172, 182, 194, 213-15, 273,
289 282, 411; cotton, 2, 171-2, 182-3, *94>
Oudorp, Julianus, 405 213, 411; indigo, 171-2, 182, 191, 194,
Ouidah, 64m, 67, 75, 79, 88, 93m, 96-101, 282; oriane paint, 171, 188; sugar, 4, 9,
236, 260, 363 14, 171-2, 180, 182, 191, 194-5, 272-3,
ounce trade. See finances and currencies 282, 411; tobacco, 2, 76-7, 213, 411. See
Oyo, 93 m, 100 also wood products
profits and losses, 276—80, 259, 2651, 268t,
Padthuysen, Pieter, 349 2791, 28ot, 302, 368, 407-10; deprecia-
Parimaribo, 169, 178, 211, 242 tion, 277; bankruptcies, 283
Pasop, Pieter, 88 Propheet Daniel, 43 n
Paulus, Pieter, 293
Pauw, Jan de, 67 Quinera, 104, 234, 262
426 Index
Rachel, 140, i66t Senegambia region, 57, 113, 116, 121, 163,
racism, 70, 259, 300 260, 299, 306
Raecx, Everard, 200 Serat, Thomas van, 242
ransom payments, 50, 182, 190, 193 Seven Years War (1756-63), 208, 222
Raule, Benjamin, 76 Seville, 3, 30-1, 34, 38-9
Recife, 15, 19-20, 20m, 25 sexual exploitation. See slaves
recognitie. See duties; lastgeld Shama, Simon, 8
records, historical, 11, 32, 52-3, 109-10, Shama, 64m, 67, 88, i22t, i24t, 157-8,
119, 121, 128, 133, 137, 141, 151, 160, 373-6
180, 192, 200, 210, 217, 222-3, 2 48, shared cargoes (mixed destinations), 220,
278, 356-61 276
rederij and reder, 9, 133, 362; slave-trade ships, 142-8, 281, 305, 306; architecture,
companies, 371 i42f, 143; assignments, 128-9, *34> 255,
regulations, slave trade: of 1730, 202; of 355-61; capacity, 120, 133-5, I 45~°,
1798, 287; naader reglement of 1734, 203- 204, 250, 256, 289; captured by enemies,
4; ordinance of 1754, 204 50, 164, 284; documents carried, 150,
return voyage, from West Indies, i52t, 171- 368-70; logbooks, 159-60, 233; names,
3. See also backhaul 308-48; route of voyages, 150—1, i52t;
revolts. See slaves, revolts and resistance speed, 249; spies, 165; types, 142-3, 306;
Rietveld, David, 156 utilization, 145, i47t, 1561, 173, 392-4
Rijckaert, Johannes, 349 shipwrecks and strandings, 164, 242, 306
Roo, Pieter de, 160 Sierra Leone, 90, i22t, 122, 290, 373-6
Rotterdam, 263 Slave Coast, 58m, 59, 64m, 75, 77, 79,
Rotterdam, 9, 123, 1291, 130m, 133, 244, 9 3 ^ . 95-9. 109. 113-5, 121-3, 157-8,
277, 280, 299 260, 297, 298f, 306, 373-6
Royal African Company (RAC), 33, 74, 209 slave raids, 1-2, 91, 99, 235
Rusthof, 137, 231, 232n, 240, 2541 slavery in Africa, 3, 5-7
Ruyter, Admiral Michiel de, 36, 74 slaves: accommodations, 14, 170, 144, 232-
3, 402-3, (see also crowding); auctions,
170, 239, 267, 270-4, 306, 406; brand-
Saba, 107, 196m, 224 ing, 7, 52, 137, 235-7, 368; clothes, 236;
sailors. See crews on slave ships destinations, 2it, 35t, 451, 48t, i86t,
St. Croix, 196m, 226 1911, I95t, I99t, 2l8, 225t, 2I2t, 2l8t,
St. Eustatius, 28m, 82t, 107-8, 137, 169, 22Ot, 22It, 223t, 224t, 225t, 226, 2 8 5 ^
196m, 216, 222-4, 24°>253> 2 ^4t, 267, 3oot, 30if; escapes, 167; exercise and
269^ 271, 276, 288—9, 294> 30If> 3°°> music, 170, 233, 239; feeding, 150, 158,
306, 363, 404, 406; colonization, 195, 168, 232-5, 300, 366, 402-3; gender/
197; "golden rock," 200, 223; population, age, 257-8, 349-50, 364, 395-401; hy-
197, i97n; slave-trade depot, 271-2, genics, 169-70, 229, 236-7; identity, 7,
197-200, 1991, 224; trade with French, 137—8, 227-31, 257; origins, 106-25,
271 ii3t, ii4t, ii5t, 12it, i22t, i23t, 298f,
St. George at Elmina, 17, 57, 64m, 403-5 373-6; panyaring, 70; prices of, 109, 183,
St. jfago (de la Victoria), 44, 49 209, 252, 264-9, 2 ^4t, 2651, 266t, 266-
St. Jan, 107, i36n 75, 268t, 269t, 299, 3oot, 364, 406; pro-
St. John Island, 196m, 226 curement, 139-42, 157; revolts and resis-
St. John (river), 117m, i22t, 373-6 tance, 165-8, i66t, 241, 243, 300, 306;
St. Martin, 169, 196m, 224, 289 return to Africa, 101-3; seasoning, 258;
St. Paul, 58m, 117m, i22t, 373-6 selling, 168-70, 270, 272-4, 306; sexual
St. Thomas, 82t, 196m, 226, 271 exploitation, 137, 243, 366 (see also cap-
St. Vincent, 196m, 226 tains of slave ships); suicide, 165, 241,
Sao Thome, 3, 12, 18, 26, 58m 2441, 300; treatment, 165, 168, 233, 243,
Sassandra, 58, 117m, i22t, 373-6 366. See also mortality
Schonenberg, Francisco van, 43-4 slave trade: coasting, 239, 248, 2491, 249-
scurvy, 168, 2441, 245-6. See also diseases 50, 388a, 389a, 390a, 392-4; companies,
Secondi, i22t, i23t, i24t, 373-6 371; consequences of, 1-3, 180-3; guide-
Senegal, 58m, 75, 111, ii5t, 117m, 150, lines and instructions, 363, 366, 402; In-
2 9 8f dian Ocean, i n ; Mediterranean, 2-3. See
Index 427
Slave trade (cont.) Takoradi, 64m, i22t, i24t, 373-6
also mobile trade; profits and losses; regula- 1 o-percent men, 201
tions, slave trade; slaves; stationary trade; Texel, 130m, 150
triangular slave trade, 81, 149, i52t, 297; textiles: from Asia, 104-5, 297; to Africa,
weather 103-5, 2 6o, 362; to Cuba, 226
smallpox, 160-2, 169, 244t, 245-7. See also Tim, Jan, 88
diseases tobacco: for slaves, 2341, 234; see also pro-
Smith, Captain John, 12 duce, tropical
smuggling. See illicit slave trade Tobago, 13, 196m, 226, 229
Snouck, Jan, 195 trade routes in Africa, 90, 98, 206
Sommelsdijck, Cornelis van Aerssen, 142, triangular slave trade, 81, 149, i52t, 297
175, 180-1, 183 Trinidad, 12, 14, 28m, 176m, 196m
Sonnesteyn, i66t, 404 trinkets, 104
sorting (avance or cladden), 260-1. tronks, 237, 364
See also finances and currencies, tuberculosis (teering), 244^ 246-7. See also
ounce trade diseases
Souza, Louis, 47; Simon, 47 Turkish pass, 78, 150, 164. See also pirates
Spanish-America, 3, 81, 294, 299, 3oot; Twifo, 65, 93m, 95
mainland or Main, 44, 451, 289, 301 f,
306 Unger, W. S., 150, 170, 251, 268, 273,
Spanish-Portuguese union, 7, 19, 31 278-9
Spanish silver fleet, 16, 23 United States of America, 289, 291
Spencer, Cornelis, 292 Usselinx, Willem, 16
Stad en Lande, 157
Stad en Lande (WIC), 23t, i29t, 130m, Valkenier, Pieter, 404
i3it, i32t, 132, 2541, 299^ 305, 356-61 Van Alstein, Pierre, 155, 281
Standvastigheld, 118, 150 Veere, i29t, 133, 188
States General, 8, 22, 39, 127, 180, 194, Veracruz, 34, 43, 82t, 267, 358
202, 204, 286 Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie
stationary trade, 134-6, 141, 148, 206 (VOC), 10, 15, 65, 67, i n , 127, 260,
Stevens, Jacob, 198 289, 297
Storm van's-Gravensande, Laurens, 218-9 Vergenoegen, 15in, 157, 160-2, 169, 233,
Stuyvesant, Peter, 27 252, 2 7 9 t
subsidies, to the WIC, 201-2, 209 Vigilantie, i66t, 166, 241, 254t
sugar. See produce, tropical Villi, 58m, 101
suicide of slaves. See slaves, suicide VliegendeFaam> 15m, i66t
supercargo, 136, 153, i54t, 366-7 Vlissingen, i29t, 130m, i32t, 133, 160, 188,
superintendent {fiscaal), n n , 61, 62f, 63n, 299
67 Voskuyl, Evert, 352
supervisor of slaves at Elmina, 402 Vrede, I36n, 137
surgeon-doctor, on ships, 1541, 244, 245, Vreede, Pieter, 291
367. See also medical practices Vrijheidy 194
Surinaamse Vriendschap, 307
Surinaamse Welvaart, 147, 254t Walcheren, 130m, 133, 299
Surinam (river and settlement), 28m, 35t, warfare in Africa, 89—90, 206-7. $ee a^so
82t, 138, 160, 164, 169, 174-5, 176m, Asante; Dahomey; Komenda
203, 181, 212-3, 229, 2 ^ 3 , 273, 280-3, War of Spanish Succession (1702-13), 49,
288-9, 294> 299-301, 306, 366, 357-6i; 186, 197
attacks by French, 182-3; government, Wassa, 93m, 95, 206-7
179-183; planters and foreign settlers, weather: doldrums, 163-4, 248; seasons,
107, 109, i n , 178, 187, 275; population, 158, i59t; storms, 164, 247
178-9, 184, 1851, 185-7, 2i4n; slave de- West-Indische Compagnie (WIC), 11, 15-
liveries and prices, 169, 183-4, i86t, 187, 16, 22-4, in Africa, 61-78; bankruptcy
2i2t, 2641, 267, 268t, 269^ 273; Society and reorganization, 16, 24, 36-8, 178,
of, 175, 179, 183, 203, 362 201, 278; and Brazil, 14-7, 76-8; cham-
Sweden, 75-6, 80 bers, 22, 23t, 23-4, 128-31, 356-61; di-
428 Index
rectors, 22, 51, 53, 61, 126-8, 135, 145, Windward coast, 58m, 116, 117m, 121,
149, 155, 179, 183, 189, 201, 242, 349- 123, 207, 298f, 373-6
52, 355; employees, 61, 63, 281, 288, Witte Paert, 25
3°5> 355> 404;Heren X, 22, 44, 46, 47, Wolff, Betje, 292
51, 61-2, 70, 126-8, 130, 149, 201, 355; wood products, 175, 182, 188; letterhout,
Heren XIX, 22, 126; governance, 40, 6 1 - 282; stockvishout, 171, 282
5, 126, 136, 138, 218, 355 Woortman, Pieter, 66, 90
Wilberforce, William, 248
Willem I (Netherlands), 289-90 Zeeland (province and WIC), 7, 23, 23t,
Willemstad, 49, 50, 196m i29t, 130m, 13it, 131-2, i32t, 178, 202,
Williams, Eric, 2, 280 205, 286-7, 293, 305, 356-61

Johannes Menne Postma - The Dutch in The Atlantic Slave Trade, 1600-1815 (2008) PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Johannes Menne Postma - The Dutch in The Atlantic Slave Trade, 1600-1815 (2008) PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade

© Cambridge University Press 1990

First published 1990

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

ISBN 0-521-36585-6 hardback

Transferred to digital printing 2004

List of tables, figures, and maps page viii

1. Foundations of the slave traffic, 1600-61 1

1.1 Slave imports in Dutch Brazil, 1630-1651 21

3.1 WIC ranks and functions in Africa 62

1.1 New Holland in Brazil, ca. 1640 20

Since 1958, when as a student I crossed the Atlantic from Rotterdam to

Foundations of the slave traffic

Measuring the Atlantic slave trade

Africa and slavery

With an increasing demand for workers on the plantations in the Western

The base of operation in Holland

One of the cornerstones of Dutch maritime and commercial organization

The Dutch enter the slave trade

Brazil and the WIC

32. Boxer, Portuguese Empire, Chapter IV.

35. Boxer, Portuguese Empire, Chapter V; Boxer, Dutch Empire, p. 27.

The Dutch on the African coast

In defiance of the Portuguese monopoly, Dutch merchants had actually

38. Boxer, Dutch in Brazil, p. 83.

New Holland and the slave trade

NEW HOLLAND IN BRAZIL

1636 1,046 1,046 183 1,229

1649 290 200 490 86 576

Totals 11,437 14,353 496 26,286 5,247 31,533

Dutch contribution to the African migration to Brazil. The yearly average

The WIC and its failures

Source: Van Dillen, pp. 146-49.

in the company and could be members of the various governing boards,

46. Menkman, pp. 42-8.

In respect to colonization, the Dutch attempt on Manhattan island and

1. Van den Boogaart and Emmer, pp. 371-2.

3. H. Hoetinck, ed., Encyclopedic van de Nederlandse Antillen (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1969),

The asiento slave-trade system

6. Donnan, vol. 2, pp. 138-51.

Illicit trade with the Spanish Main

17. Scelle, pp. 629-30.

From the first to the second WIC

21. Goslinga, pp. 361-62.

A vacillating asiento and the illicit trade

32. Scelle, pp. 630-2.

35. WIC, vol. 331, pp. 175, 190 and 244.

From Barroso to the Coymans asiento

43. Ibid., pp. 23-62.

Total 25,399 (60) 1,770 (4) 9,905 (23) 37,074

49. Ibid., pp. 147 and 153.

Limited Dutch role in a fluctuating asiento

Total 19,245 (50) 2,921 (6) 1,700 (5) 23,866

The asiento in international diplomacy

54. See Scelle, pp. 636ff.

An evaluation of the sources

The asiento summarized

64. WIC, vols. 200-11.

Total 119 ( + 6) 126 Total 117 (10) 125

Source: Appendixes 1 and 5.

Total 4,691 69,199 22,818 96,708

Source: Tables 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4.