Trade in the Indonesian Archipelago not Centred Exclusively on Malacca

  • M. A. P. Meilink-Roelofsz
Chapter

Abstract

Pasè and Pidië have already been discussed in connection with the fact that they were two of the small states which managed to remain independent of Malacca.1

Keywords

Shipbuilding Industry Indonesian Archipelago Direct Trade Chinese Source Sunda Island 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Reference

  1. 1.
    See p. 32–34.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    According to Pires, in its time Pasè had a population of 20,000 (Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 143).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 144.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ibid., p. 139. One consequence of the Portuguese capture of Malacca was that Pidië’s pepper production decreased so drastically that it failed to exceed 2,000 to 3,000 bahar (Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 140 ).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jan Huygen van Linschoten, Itinerario I, p. 77. Linschoten estimates that Bantam could supply 4,000 to 5,000 quintals (r quintal = zoo lbs).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. E. Heeres, Corpus Diplomaticum I, p. 20.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Encyclopaedia van Nederlandsch-Indië III, p. 385.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    The text of the relevant passage in Empoli’s letter does not make it entirely clear whether the total export of pepper from Sumatra is meant or only the amount that was exported to China. It is true that the passage occurs in a section that refers exclusively to the trade of the Chinese, but at the same time Empoli records the size of pepper exports from the Malabar coast and there he is not referring to exports to China (letter from Giovanni da Empoli, 22 October r516, in Archivio Storico Italiano III (1846), p. 87. I am indebted to Mr. W. H. Avelingh for the translation of this letter ). Sumatra’s pepper exports were therefore considerably higher at this period than those of the Malabar coast.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    According to Giovanni da Empoli, the king of Pasè promised the Portuguese the total silk export of his country which, up till then, had been acquired by the Gujarati in exchange for cloth from Cambay and other merchandise to the value of roo,000 ducats ( Giovanni da Empoli, Archivio Storico Italiano III (1846), P. 73 ).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 144.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ibid., p. 139.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    See p. 20.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lancharas = type of small ship.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yule, Marco Polo, II, p. 300, 3o1; Yule, Cathay II, p. 246; Rouffaer, “Malaka,” p. 158. 25. Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 138.Google Scholar
  15. 16.
    Ibid., p. 138, 139.Google Scholar
  16. 17.
    Ibid., p. 154.Google Scholar
  17. 18.
    Ibid., p. 155Google Scholar
  18. 19.
    Ibid., p. 155. According to Pires, Palembang was conquered by the Javanese kings of the harbour principalities who had been converted to Islam. The only Javanese ruler of Palembang whom he mentions by name is the monarch of Demak.Google Scholar
  19. 20.
    Schrieke, “Shifts in Political and Economic Power,” p. 33.Google Scholar
  20. 21.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 155.Google Scholar
  21. 22.
    Ibid., p. 257.Google Scholar
  22. 23.
    Pires makes a distinction between two islands supposedly lying off the coast opposite Palembang. He calls them Banka and Monomby, but Cortesao presumes that by the latter he meant a part of Bangka (Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 155, note r).Google Scholar
  23. 24.
    Mentioned by Pires in the wrong order (Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 158).Google Scholar
  24. 25.
    Pires, Suma Oriental, I, p. 158.Google Scholar
  25. 26.
    Ibid., p. 158, 159.Google Scholar
  26. 27.
    Ibid., p. 159.Google Scholar
  27. 28.
    Ibid., p. 159–165.Google Scholar
  28. 29.
    Ibid., p. 137–139.Google Scholar
  29. 30.
    Coedès, Etats hindouisés, p. 207; K. A. Nilakanta Sastri, “A Tamil Merchant Guild in Sumatra,” TBG LX XII (1932), p. 314 (concerns the Tamil inscription of 1088, originating in a merchant guild from southern India).Google Scholar
  30. 31.
    For Gujarati shipping via the Sunda Straits to the Javanese coast, see p. 22–23.Google Scholar
  31. 32.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 163. Cf. the pepper-growing places listed by the Dutch in the journal of the First Voyage (Rouffaer-IJzerman, Eerste schipvaart I, p. 70 ).Google Scholar
  32. 33.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 158.Google Scholar
  33. 34.
    Ibid., p. 160.Google Scholar
  34. 35.
    Ibid., p. 163.Google Scholar
  35. 36.
    Ibid., p. 163.Google Scholar
  36. 37.
    Ibid., p. 206.Google Scholar
  37. 38.
    Ibid., p. 206.Google Scholar
  38. 39.
    Keuning, Tweede schipvaart III, p. 111; Ibid., V2, p. 73.Google Scholar
  39. 40.
    L. A. MacGregor, “Some Aspects of Portuguese Historical Writing of the 16th and 17th centuries on South East Asia,” in; Proceedings of the Conference of the South East Asia Seminar, School of Oriental and A/rican Studies of the University of London, 1956, p. 2, 3.Google Scholar
  40. 41.
    Cf. for example, the figures given for the pepper output of Pasè and Pidië by Pires and Giovanni da Empoli respectively (see p. 89). The nutmeg output was estimated by Araujo at 1,200 to 1,300 bahar (Alguns Documentos, p. 225, Ruy de Araujo 6 Feb. 1510). and by Pires at 600 bahar. The figures quoted by Pires for the export of gold from the interior of Sumatra more or less correspond with those given by Urdaneta. See p. 8o, note 158.Google Scholar
  41. 42.
    G. P. Rouffaer en H. H. Juynboll, De batikkunst in Nederlandsch Indie en haar geschiedenis “Memorie handel 1603,” p. XXII.Google Scholar
  42. 43.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 207.Google Scholar
  43. 44.
    Cited in Rouffaer en Juynboll, “Memorie x603,” p. XXII.Google Scholar
  44. 45.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 207.Google Scholar
  45. 46.
    Rouffaer en Juynboll, “Memorie 1603,” p. XXII.Google Scholar
  46. 47.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 208.Google Scholar
  47. 48.
    On the Banda Islands, therefore, there really was a market for goods needed to meet daily requirements (cf. Van Leur, Indonesian Trade and Society; “On Early Asian Trade,” p. 388, note 161). That the quantities involved were relatively small was of course due to the small number of inhabitants on the islands.Google Scholar
  48. 49.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 209.Google Scholar
  49. 50.
    Rouffaer en Juynboll, “Memorie 1603,” p. XXII, not 4.Google Scholar
  50. 51.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 207.Google Scholar
  51. 52.
    Ibid., p. 205.Google Scholar
  52. 53.
    Ibid., p. 207.Google Scholar
  53. 54.
    Ibid., p. 193.Google Scholar
  54. 55.
    Barbosa, Book II, p. 196.Google Scholar
  55. 56.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 207.Google Scholar
  56. 57.
    Ibid., II, p. 268.Google Scholar
  57. 58.
    See p. 42.Google Scholar
  58. 59.
    Alguns Documentos, p. 348 (Ruy de Brito, 6 Jan. 1514 ). For later Bandanese shipping to Malacca see Alguns Documentes, p. 475 (Antonio de Brito to King John III, 6 MayGoogle Scholar
  59. 1523).
    Beschrijvinge van de eylanden Banda,“ BKI III (x855) p. 77; F. Valentijn, Oud-en Nieuw-Oost-Indiin (Beschrijving van Banda) III2, p. 34. Probably going back to data from Hendrik van Bergel, lost at the beginning of the 17th century; Kenning, Tweede schipvaart IV, p. XLI, XLII.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Pires, Suma Orientai I, p. 212. Cf. also J. A. van der Chijs, De vestiging van het Nederlandsche gesag over de Banda eilanden 1599–1621, p. 11, who in this connection cites Heemskerck about the low standard of Bandanese navigation.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 212.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ibid., p. 206.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Ibid., p. 211.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Ibid., p. 206.Google Scholar
  65. 64.
    See P. 97, note 68.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Barbosa, Book II, p. 198.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Ibid., II, p. 198.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    According to Pires, as much as 5o years before his time (about 1465), according to Barros, 8o years before the Portuguese came to Ternate (about 1435 ). (Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 213; Barros, Da Asia, Dec. III, Lib. V, cap. 5 ).Google Scholar
  69. Moslem merchants were established in the Banda Islands some 3o years before Pires’ time (about 2485).Google Scholar
  70. Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 213.Google Scholar
  71. 70.
    Ibid., p. 217.Google Scholar
  72. 71.
    I: 10, as against z: 4 in Ternate.Google Scholar
  73. 72.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 214.Google Scholar
  74. 73.
    Pires does not state what foodstuffs the islands of Ternate and Tidore produced for themselves. On Motir, however, rice was cultivated (Pires, Suma Oriental I, P. 217 ).Google Scholar
  75. 74.
    According to Pires, the crop only amounted to 150 bahar, but in view of the total amount for all the islands (6,000 bahar), Ternate must have yielded 1,500 bahar.Google Scholar
  76. 75.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 215, 216.Google Scholar
  77. 76.
    Ibid., p. 217.Google Scholar
  78. 77.
    Ibid., p. 227.Google Scholar
  79. 78.
    This does not tally with later data which indicate that provisions were, in fact, easy to obtain in Batchan (for example, V.O.C. archives 96o 6, resolution Van Caerden).Google Scholar
  80. 79.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 228, cf. the description in x610 in B amp; V II (“Pieter Willem Verhoeff”), p. zoo.Google Scholar
  81. 80.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 213, 221.Google Scholar
  82. 81.
    Estimates of clove crops in the Moluccas (16th century)Google Scholar
  83. The figure of about 6,000 bahar is actually quoted again in 2599 by Reyer Cornelisz., who obtained his information from the inhabitants of Ternate. He divides the crop up over the various islands as follows:Google Scholar
  84. Batchan was no longer of any consequence at this time (late 16th century). (Keuning, Tweede schipvaart V2, p. 73; Ibid., III3).Google Scholar
  85. The solution to the riddle of the differing figures for the size of the crops is provided by Van den Broecke: B amp; V II (“Pieter van den Broecke”) p. 27 (1615). Allowance should be made for the circumstance that the clove output varied a good deal. An extra large crop could be expected only once in 7 years. In the intervening years there was only a “small monsoon” (small harvest). The figures given by the Portuguese and byGoogle Scholar
  86. Reyer Cornelisz. apparently applied to the big harvests. Pigafetta must have been nearer to the truth, for his figure agrees more or less with that given by Coen, in whose own interests it was to make an accurate estimate and who considered that in 2624 the average annual output of the Moluccas was some 1,000 to 1,500 bahar ( Coen, Bescheiden I, p. 82 ).Google Scholar
  87. 82.
    See p. 208, 209.Google Scholar
  88. 83.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 226.Google Scholar
  89. 84.
    Ibid., p. 214. Cf. Van Leur, Indonesian Trade and Society, “On Early Asian Trade,” P.142.Google Scholar
  90. 85.
    Keuning, Tweede schipvaart, I, p. 56.Google Scholar
  91. 86.
    Rockhill, TP XVI, p. 260 (Wang Ta Yuan (2349)).Google Scholar
  92. 87.
    Groeneveldt, Notes, p. 119 (Wang Ch’i Tsung).Google Scholar
  93. 88.
    See p. 158, 159.Google Scholar
  94. 89.
    Keuning, Tweede schipvaart III, p. 223, 133; Ibid., V, p. 233, 134; B amp; V II (“Cornelis Matelieff”), p. 6g.Google Scholar
  95. 90.
    Translated by A Cortesao as “woolly-haired bestial people” (Pires, Suma Oriental II, P. 442).Google Scholar
  96. Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 212.Google Scholar
  97. 91.
    See p. 84, 85.Google Scholar
  98. 92.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 132.Google Scholar
  99. 93.
    Rockhill, TP XVI, p. 265 (Wang Ta Yuan (2349))•Google Scholar
  100. 94.
    Groeneveldt, Notes, p. 202.Google Scholar
  101. 95.
    Rockhill, TP XVI, p. 265.Google Scholar
  102. 96.
    Groeneveldt, Notes, p. 102 (Wang Ch’i-Tsung (1618)).Google Scholar
  103. 97.
    Pigafetta, Magellan, p. 1x4.Google Scholar
  104. 98.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 187.Google Scholar
  105. 99.
    Pigafetta, Magellan, p. 127–118.Google Scholar
  106. 100.
    Valentijn, Oud-en Nieuw Oost-Indian III2, p. 242.Google Scholar
  107. 101.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 172, 223–225.Google Scholar
  108. 102.
    Ibid., p. 226, 227.Google Scholar
  109. 103.
    Pires also mentions Bima as distinct from Sumbawa, but he does actually mean the latter island (Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 200–203). Bima is one of the ports on the north coast of Sumbawa. The Dutch also used the name Bima for the whole island (e.g. Rouffaer-IJzerman, Eerste schipvaart, II, p. 220 ).Google Scholar
  110. 104.
    Eredia, “Report on the Golden Chersonese,” p. 253.Google Scholar
  111. 105.
    Rockhill, TP XVI, p. 257 (Wang Ta Yuan).Google Scholar
  112. 106.
    Groeneveldt, Notes, p. 126 (Wang Ta Yuan).Google Scholar
  113. 107.
    Ibid., p. 117 (Wang Ch’i Tsung).Google Scholar
  114. 108.
    Barbosa, Book II, p. 2g6.Google Scholar
  115. 109.
    Alguns Documentos, p. 348 (Ruy de Brito 6/2 2514).Google Scholar
  116. 110.
    Barbosa, Book II, p. 196.Google Scholar
  117. 111.
    Ibid., p. 296; Pigafetta, Magellan, p. 153.Google Scholar
  118. 112.
    H. J. de Graaf, “Tomé Pires’ ”Suma Oriental“ en het tijdvak van godsdienstovergang op Java,” BKI CVIII (1952), p. 232 et seq.Google Scholar
  119. 113.
    Schrieke, “Shifts in Political and Economic Power,” p. 29, 22, 23.Google Scholar
  120. 114.
    The large type of Javanese cargo vessel, the junk, was somewhat similar to Chinese junks and ships from Further India as regards shape, rigging, and the division of the hold into separate compartments. Since it was very solidly constructed, with layer upon layer of heavy planks, this type of ship, like the Chinese junks, cannot have been very suitable for navigating the Indian Ocean.Google Scholar
  121. 115.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 295.Google Scholar
  122. 116.
    Ibid., p. 226; Eerste schipvaart I, p. 132.Google Scholar
  123. 117.
    Albuquerque, Commentaries III, p. 268; Tide “Europeers” I, P. 343.Google Scholar
  124. 118.
    Rouffaer-IJzerman, Eerste schipvaart I, p. 232.Google Scholar
  125. 119.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 195.Google Scholar
  126. 120.
    Schrieke, “Shifts in Political and Economic Power,” p. 23 (description of a Javanese junk).Google Scholar
  127. 121.
    Albuquerque, Cartas I, p. 64, 65.Google Scholar
  128. 122.
    The original of this chart was unfortunately lost when Albuquerque was shipwrecked on the coast of Sumatra. The geographical names on it were written in JavaneseGoogle Scholar
  129. characters (Albuquerque, Cartes I, p. 65). But the most remarkable thing about the chart, which dates back to before 151a, is the fact that the coast of Brazil is depicted upon it. Probably the Javanese drew it up on the basis of a Portuguese chart and added details about their own sailing area which were then still quite unknown to the Portuguese, for example, the sailing route to the Moluccas (about which the Arabs, according to the Mohtt, were also only partially informed) and the trade routes of the Chinese. We also encounter this method of cartography among the 18th century Buginese seafarers who adapted the charts of.the East India Company to their own use by adding particulars of their own (C. C. F. M. Le Roux, “Boegineesche zeekaarten van den IndischenGoogle Scholar
  130. Archipel,“ Tijdschr. Aardrijkskundig Genootschap, 2e serie, LII (1935), p. 687–714.Google Scholar
  131. It is most remarkable, however, that the knowledge of western cartography had already spread so far in Asia.Google Scholar
  132. For this Javanese chart see Cortesao’s introduction to Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. LXXVIII, LXXIX; Cortesao, Cartografia II, p. 122–130; Ferrand, Astronomie nautique, p. 236; Ferrand, “A propos d’une carte javanaise du XVe siècle,” JA, IIe série, X II (1918).Google Scholar
  133. 123.
    At any rate, the high Bantamese functionaries with whom the Dutch came into contact (both of whom, to be sure, came from India) were very well acquainted with nautical charts, and they immediately asked to be allowed to inspect those of the newcomers so that they might know from which country their strange visitors had come (RouffaerI Jzerman, Eerste schipvaart I, p. 75).Google Scholar
  134. 124.
    Ferrand, Astronomie nautique, p. 97.Google Scholar
  135. 125.
    De archieven van de Compagniein op Oost Indii, 1594–1603, No. 86, fol. 4o. (Rekening wegens de negotie van de Zon 1600-,6o1).Google Scholar
  136. 127.
    Rockhill, TP XVI, p. 237 (Wang Ta Yuan, 1349 ); Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 180.Google Scholar
  137. 128.
    Rouffaer, “Malaka,” p. 145; Krom, Hindoe-Javaansche Geschiedenis, p. 261.Google Scholar
  138. 129.
    Groeneveldt, Notes, p. 45; Rouffaer, “Malaka,” p. 145.Google Scholar
  139. 130.
    De Graaf, “Tomé Pires’ ‘Sums Oriental’,” p. 142.Google Scholar
  140. 131.
    Ibid., p. 143; Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 191.Google Scholar
  141. 132.
    De Graaf, “Tomé Pires’ ‘Suma Oriental’,” P. 145.Google Scholar
  142. 133.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 191.Google Scholar
  143. 134.
    Ibid., p. 191.Google Scholar
  144. 135.
    De Graaf, “Tomé Pires”Suma Oriental’,“ P. 145.Google Scholar
  145. 136.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 190.Google Scholar
  146. 137.
    Ibid., p. 190.Google Scholar
  147. 138.
    Kenning, Tweede schipvaart III, P. 34, 36.Google Scholar
  148. 139.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 192.Google Scholar
  149. 140.
    Ibid., p. 190, 191.Google Scholar
  150. 141.
    Ibid., p. 192.Google Scholar
  151. 142.
    Ibid., p. 191; Kenning, Tweeds schipvaart III, P. 34–40.Google Scholar
  152. 143.
    Ma Huan puts the number of families in Tuban between 1425 and 1432 at a thousand ( Groeneveldt, Notes, p. 47 ).Google Scholar
  153. 144.
    According to De Graaf, Daha (Kadin) must be meant here (De Graaf, “Tomé Pires’ ‘Suma Oriental’,” p. 134).Google Scholar
  154. 145.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 191, 292.Google Scholar
  155. 146.
    Groeneveldt, Notes, p. 47.Google Scholar
  156. 147.
    Ibid., Notes, P. 47; Rockhill, TP XVI, p. 241.Google Scholar
  157. 148.
    Rockhill, TP XVI, p. 236.Google Scholar
  158. 149.
    Groeneveldt, Notes, p. 41.Google Scholar
  159. 150.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 192.Google Scholar
  160. J. A. B. Wiselius, “Historisch onderzoek naar de geestelijke en wereldlijke suprematie van Grissee op Midden-en Oost Java gedurende de 16e en 17e eeuw,” TBG XXIII (1876), P. 464.Google Scholar
  161. 152.
    Ibid., p. 483, 484.Google Scholar
  162. 153.
    This is an allusion to a well-known Dutch legend about a rich tradeswoman in what was once the celebrated Frisian tradingtown of Stavoren or Staveren.Google Scholar
  163. 154.
    J. A. B. Wiselius, “Historisch onderzoek naar de geestelijke en wereldlijke suprematie van Grissee,” p. 468.Google Scholar
  164. 155.
    Ibid., P. 468.Google Scholar
  165. 156.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 192–195. Apparently the authority of the ecclesiastical ruler pp. 108–223, 355Google Scholar
  166. at the beginning of the z6th century was still exclusively spitirual, thus he had nothing to do with the secular government of the port of Grise and therefore did not come to Pires’ attention (The scant interest taken by the latter in religious matters has already been indicated elsewhere. See De Graaf, “Tomé Pires’’Suma Oriental’,” p. x63).Google Scholar
  167. 157.
    J. A. B. WiseBus, “Historisch onderzoek near de geestelijke en wereldlijke suprematie van Grissee” p. 472.Google Scholar
  168. 158.
    Ibid., p. 474•Google Scholar
  169. 159.
    De Graaf thinks that the origin of the dual town Grise-Jaratan should perhaps be sought in the rule of Pate Cuçuf and Pate Zeynall (De Graaf, “Tomé Pires’ ‘Sums Oriental’,” p. 151).Google Scholar
  170. 160.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 195.Google Scholar
  171. 161.
    Ibid., p. 293.Google Scholar
  172. 162.
    Ibid., p. 295. “There is nothing worth spending time on, because he has nothing on the sea,” Pires, therefore, was only interested in the commercial activities of the Javanese notables.Google Scholar
  173. 163.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 193.Google Scholar
  174. 164.
    According to De Graaf, “Tomé Pires’ ‘Sema Oriental’,” p. 15x, Pate Adem was pure Malay, but this is difficult to reconcile with the fact that Pate Aden’s father apparently owned land in Java (Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 293).Google Scholar
  175. 165.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 293, 294.Google Scholar
  176. 166.
    Brown, “Malay Annals”, p. 236, 237; Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 293, note x.Google Scholar
  177. 167.
    See p. 83, 84.Google Scholar
  178. 168.
    Pires, Sama Oriental I, p. x94.Google Scholar
  179. 169.
    Ibid., p. 293.Google Scholar
  180. 170.
    Quotation: “Want is genoegsaem een besloten haven, men can op 12 vadem op een steenworp aen de muren van de stadt, met grole schepen leggen,” Keening, Tweeds sckipvaart III, p. 204; Rouffaer-IJzerman, Eerste schspvaart, I, p. 202.Google Scholar
  181. 171.
    Groeneveldt, Notes, p. 48.Google Scholar
  182. 172.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 196.Google Scholar
  183. 173.
    Ibid., p. 292.Google Scholar
  184. 174.
    Ibid., P. 196–198.Google Scholar
  185. 175.
    Ibid., p. 227.Google Scholar
  186. 176.
    Ibid., p. 284–286.Google Scholar
  187. A collection of charts published by Joannes and Gerard van Keulen at the end of the 27th century and at present in the Dutch General State Archives (Buitenlandse kaarten, kaartboek U) includes one of Java, showing the areas of rice production. These were located near Bantam, Cheribon (along the entire coast as far as Tegal), in the Rem-bang district not far from Demak, near Surabaya, and in the interior of Mataram, with communications with Surabaya and Grise.Google Scholar
  188. 177.
    Pires, Suma Oriental, I, p. 189.Google Scholar
  189. 178.
    Ibid., p. 287.Google Scholar
  190. 179.
    See p. 209.Google Scholar
  191. 180.
    For 16th century Semarang, Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 184.Google Scholar
  192. 181.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 283.Google Scholar
  193. 182.
    Ibid., p. 283.Google Scholar
  194. 183.
    Ibid., p. 283–185.Google Scholar
  195. 184.
    Ibid., p. 188.Google Scholar
  196. 185.
    Ibid., p. 295.Google Scholar
  197. 186.
    Ibid., p. 182.Google Scholar
  198. 187.
    Ibid., p. 200.Google Scholar
  199. 188.
    Ibid., p. 279.Google Scholar
  200. 189.
    Ibid., p. 266–273.Google Scholar
  201. 190.
    Ibid., p. 167.Google Scholar
  202. 191.
    Ibid., p. 273.Google Scholar
  203. 192.
    Ibid., p. 273.Google Scholar
  204. 193.
    Ibid., p. 272.Google Scholar
  205. 194.
    Ibid., p. 272, see p. 82–84.Google Scholar
  206. 195.
    Ibid., p. 268, 272–273.Google Scholar
  207. 196.
    The Sundanese word “Dajeuh” means “capital town.”Google Scholar
  208. 197.
    In the treaty concluded by the king of Sunda with the Portuguese, the tribute to beGoogle Scholar
  209. paid in pepper is fixed at 160 bahar (Alguns Documentos, p. 460, 461; Studia V, p. 63).Google Scholar
  210. 198.
    Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 168, 169.Google Scholar
  211. 199.
    Ibid., p. 169.Google Scholar
  212. 200.
    Ibid., p. 170–173.Google Scholar
  213. 201.
    Ibid., p. 170.Google Scholar
  214. 202.
    See Pires, Suma Oriental I, p. 168, 169.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands 1962

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. A. P. Meilink-Roelofsz

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations