The Trade of the English East India Company in the Far East, 1623–1684. Part II: 1665–84

1960 ◽  
Vol 92 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 145-157
Author(s):  
D. K. Bassett
Keyword(s):  
Far East ◽  
East India Company ◽  
Chief Factor ◽  
The Far East ◽  
China And Japan ◽  
Selection For ◽  
English East India Company

It is difficult to decide exactly when English interest in Japan revived; as so often it seems to have been individuals who aroused the enthusiasm of important members of the court of committees. Except for the proposals of Hawley and Smethwick and the ensuing debates, the court minutes contain no reference to the possibility of resuming trade with Japan until 1658. In view of the important role later played by Quarles Browne, it may be worth referring to certain details of the preparations begun in that year. When the directors fitted out the Welcome in December, 1657, her destination was China; no mention was made of a voyage to Japan. The venture was abandoned in January, 1658, because of the lateness of the season. Quarles Browne, the former chief factor in Cambodia, arrived home from Bantam on the Society only on 24th December, 1657, and so cannot have influenced the decision to fit out the Welcome. Besides, Browne had come home under a cloud and it was not until 9th February, 1658, that his accounts for the Cambodian factory were approved by the Company's accountants. Browne then rose rapidly in the favour of the directors: in April he was appointed agent at Bantam but had to surrender his claim to that post because of certain unspecified charges against him. He remained in London to defend himself before the lord protector—successfully as it proved. It may well have been at his instigation that the directors began preparations on 6th September, 1658, to send ships to China and Japan; certainly his selection for the post of chief factor in Japan at the unusual salary of £300 per annum suggests that his influence was considerable. But his usefulness ended together with his employment, when the project collapsed in December, 1658.

The Trade of the English East India Company in the Far East, 1623–84

1960 ◽  
Vol 92 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 32-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. K. Bassett
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Far East ◽  
East India Company ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Recent Book ◽  
The Far East ◽  
The Subject ◽  
English East India Company ◽  
Eighteenth And Nineteenth Centuries ◽  
Work Done

Much has been written about British activities in the Far East, particularly in China, in the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries, especially by American historians. Dr. H. B. Morse's monumental Chronicles of the East India Company trading to China was first in the field and Professor E. H. Pritchard and J. K. Fairbank have been worthy successors. English scholarship on the subject is naturally somewhat older but, possibly for that reason, the work done has not usually been as detailed or thorough: an exception is Michael Greenberg's recent book, British Trade and the Opening of China, 1800–42. To find general surveys of Anglo-Chinese relations by British writers which extend back into the seventeenth century, it is necessary to turn to the books of A. J. Sargent and J. Bromley Eames. But as far as the seventeenth century is concerned historical research has been scanty. That Greenberg should have regarded a summary of events before the period with which he was immediately concerned as sufficient for his purpose was only natural. Fairbank's introductory chapters are more comprehensive but show greater interest in the attitude of the Chinese to external intruders than in the efforts of the East India Company to intrude. Sargent, as he himself acknowledged, was mainly concerned with the nineteenth century and his attempt to provide a historical background was very superficial. Eames paid considerable attention to early British contacts with China but was prone to errors of fact which make him unreliable.

The “Amboyna Massacre” of 1623

1960 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. K. Bassett
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Physical Condition ◽  
East India Company ◽  
The Other ◽  
Chief Factor ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Face ◽  
English East India Company

On 27 February, 1623, Gabriel Towerson, the chief factor or merchant of the English East India Company in Amboyna, was beheaded by command of the local Dutch governor, Herman van Speult. Nine other Englishmen, ten Japanese and one Portuguese shared Towerson's fate. The charges brought against these unfortunate men were that they planned to kill Speult and overwhelm the Dutch garrison of Fort Victoria as soon as an English ship appeared in the roadstead to support them. It is not the purpose of the present article to re-open the more controversial aspects of the Amboyna tragedy. Suffice it to say that the plausibility of the Dutch accusation has never commanded much respect in the estimate of British historians and it is unlikely that this attitude will change. On the other hand, there is every evidence to suggest that Speult, despite English suspicions to the contrary, was genuinely convinced that an English plot was afoot to overthrow his government. Normally the governor was a humane and reasonable man, who had received Towerson at his table on many occasions, and his bitterness at the strange turn of events in February, 1623, is very understandable. Dr. Stapel has recorded the reputed reply of Towerson to Speult when the latter upbraided him for thus abusing his hospitality and friendship: “Alas! If it were to beginne againe, it should never be done”. Is this the response of a man who knew he was innocent? asks Dr. Stapel. On the face of it, Towerson would appear to be condemned by his own words, but it must be remembered that his physical condition at that time was pitiful. He had firmly protested his innocence under prolonged and severe torture until his powers of endurance were broken, after which he sought relief, presumably, by telling the Dutch what they wanted to hear. In these circumstances, it is difficult to attach to Towerson's rather cryptic expression of repentance the importance it would otherwise deserve.

The Penetration of the Copernican Theory into Feudal Japan

1944 ◽  
Vol 76 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 52-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bolesław Szcześniak
Keyword(s):  
Sixteenth Century ◽  
Far East ◽  
Christian Faith ◽  
Western Civilization ◽  
Western Science ◽  
Philosophy Of Life ◽  
The Far East ◽  
Matteo Ricci ◽  
China And Japan ◽  
The Universe

Western science began to penetrate to the Far East at the end of the sixteenth century, along with the Christian faith spread by Portuguese Jesuits.Astrology was important in both China and Japan. It included not only a limited knowledge of astronomy, but some philosophy and logic. The advent of astronomical knowledge as understood in Europe was the beginning of a new kind of science, which did not affect the East's traditional view of the universe; although at first information from Europe about medicine, physics, and astronomy reached the Far East along with the doctrines of Christianity, as a means of attracting converts to what the Chinese termed a new philosophy of life. An early propagator of Western civilization in China was the Jesuit Matteo Ricci (1553–1610), who taught medicine and astrology together with the principles of Catholicism. Another Jesuit, Francis Xavier, advised his superiors to send a mission consisting not only of the devout but also of the cultured.

scholarly journals A cross-cultural perspective on musealization: the museum’s reception by China and Japan in the second half of the nineteenth century

2012 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chang Wan-Chen
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Far East ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Preservation ◽  
Cultural Perspective ◽  
The West ◽  
The Far East ◽  
The World ◽  
China And Japan ◽  
Chinese Intellectuals

Historically museums emerged in the West and were subsequently taken up by people in other regions of the world, including the Far East, where the museum was adopted with alacrity by Japanese and Chinese intellectuals. This article explores how China and Japan imagined museums when they first encountered them in the West. It sketches how intellectuals in these two nations began to conduct ‘musealization’, and suggests that the museum in China and Japan was a product of appropriation of Western formats that was, however, deeply influenced by traditional attitudes to cultural preservation and display.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document