The fleet system and the troubled shipping institutions in the Portuguese Atlantic (seventeenth and eighteenth centuries)
2023; Routledge; Volume: 32; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1080/10609164.2023.2246835
ISSN1466-1802
Autores Tópico(s)History of Colonial Brazil
ResumoABSTRACTImprovements in shipping productivity, resulting from increased maritime safety, are considered essential factors to explain commercial growth in long-distance trade between the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries. However, this article points out that for more than a century, the routes between Portugal and the ports of Brazil were unsafe. The fleet system was the solution found to overcome pirates and privateers. This transport system created a series of problems, though. This article shows how weather conditions, infrastructure problems regarding port facilities, the distances from the port of Recife to sugar mills, and disagreements between shippers, merchants, and sugar mill owners hampered shipping and how they had some negative implications for traders. The fleets generated stocks of sugar in the colony and lengthened the payback period on investments made by merchants in Portugal. These problems disappeared with the end of the fleet system in 1762/1766. Still, others emerged, such as the regulation of freight rates in 1751 and 1766, the decline in shipping productivity throughout the second half of the eighteenth century, and the wars from the 1790s onwards. I argue that shipping in the Portuguese Atlantic was constantly hampered but that this did not prevent commercial growth from occurring.KEYWORDS: colonial Brazilsugartradeshippinginstitutions AcknowledgmentsMy thanks to Maximiliano Menz and Angelo Carrara for providing me with information on deflation, silver, and gold. I am indebted to the three anonymous reviewers, as well as to Dana Leibsohn, for the generous feedback and valuable suggestions. I am very grateful to Fergal Treanor end Lewis Driver for preparing the revision of the manuscript. All remaining errors are my own.Notes1 North’s article sought to challenge the view that technological improvements in vessels made possible an optimization of the shipping sector. For a different interpretation, see Harley Citation1988.2 ‘Transaction costs arise from the transfer of ownership or, more generally, of property rights’ (Niehans Citation2016). It is understandable and likely that human beings, companies, and nation states looked for ways to lower transaction costs in this period; see North Citation1991.3 The method I have used in this article consisted of gathering information about ‘fleets’ in the Overseas Historical Archives (Arquivo Histórico Ultramarino, hereafter AHU) catalogue referring to Pernambuco (AHU, ACL, CU, 015). I found about 160 documents for the period from 1650 to 1762. The structure of the article emerged from reading these documents. Gaps were filled with the records of the Códices referring to Pernambuco also in the AHU and the Conde dos Arcos documents in the Archive of the University of Coimbra (AUC. CA.). For the second half of the eighteenth century, I followed the chronology of Portuguese legislation concerning the abolition of fleets and the regulation of freight. These laws can be found in the records of the Junta do Comércio in the National Archives Torre do Tombo in Lisbon (ANTT. Junta do Comércio, Registro Geral) and in the legislation (Silva Citation1830). I also used merchant documentation, both published (Lisanti Citation1973) and unpublished (lawsuit between merchants deposited at ANTT). Most of the quantitative data were taken from other works, but I merged this already published information with new data and tried to approach them from an original perspective.4 The same argument is used by Lamikiz Citation2010, 73–77.5 AHU. Códice n° 267. Consultas, sobre representações de várias entidades das capitanias de Pernambuco, Paraíba do Norte e Ceará. 1749–1807. Record referring to 1752, f. 32v. For the councilors of Recife, see Souza Citation2015.6 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 16, D. 1608, 18 August 1693.7 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 17, D. 1683, 9 May 1695.8 See, for instance, AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 23, D. 2093, 25 August 1708. Cx. 47, D. 4184, 18 August 1734. Cx. 47, D. 4235, 29 September 1734. AHU. Códice n° 266, f. 289. (Silva Citation1830, 1:175). (Informação geral da capitania de Pernambuco 1749 1906, 144–45). AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 80, D. 6691, 4 March 1756. Cx. 84, D. 6993, 5 June 1757. Cx. 86, D. 7106, 8 July 1758. Cx. 91, D. 7292, 24 June 1759. Cx. 93, D. 7397, 6 April 1760. Cx. 94, D. 7433, 10 October 1760. Cx. 95, D. 7503, 15 February 1761.9 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 84, D. 6960, 20 May 1757.10 Arquivo da Universidade de Coimbra (AUC). Conde dos Arcos (CA). Tomo 2, Disposições de Pernambuco, 1699–1745 – Índice, f. 275 (Costa Citation1954, 94–95).11 AHU, Códice n° 266, ff. 288v–89.12 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 47, D. 4184, 18 August 1734.13 Couto Citation1981, 155. See also, AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 76, D. 6353, 12 May 1754.14 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 81, D. 6766, 18 August 1756 and AHU, Códice n° 267, ff. 90–93.15 AHU, ACL, CU, 005, Cx. 46, D. 4108, 13 October 1733.16 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 84, D. 6973, 22 May 1757.17 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 59, D. 5042, 8 April 1743.18 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 17, D. 1683, 9 May 1695.19 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 84, D. 6973, 22 May 1757.20 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 57, D. 4899, 29 August 1741.21 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 79, D. 6585, 17 May 1755.22 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 47, D. 4184, 18 August 1734.23 Abreu Citation2006, table 6. The distances were calculated by me.24 AHU, ACL, CU, 005, Cx. 18, Doc. 1605 and Cx. 27, Doc. 2488.25 AHU, ACL, CU, 017, Cx. 11, Doc. 1246.26 AHU, ACL, CU, 017, Cx. 12, Doc. 1364.27 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 10, D. 963, 2 September 1672.28 AUC. CA. Tomo 1, Disposições de Pernambuco, 1648–1696 – Índice, f. 255r/v. See alo AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 10, D. 963, 2 September 1672. The same law appears in 1720; see Informação geral da capitania de Pernambuco 1749 1906, 135–36.29 AUC. CA. Tomo 2, Disposições de Pernambuco, 1699–1745 – Índice, ff. 251v, 299v–300.30 AUC. CA. Tomo 2, Disposições de Pernambuco, 1699–1745, f. 19.31 AUC. CA. Tomo 2, Disposições de Pernambuco, 1699–1745, f. 73v.32 AUC. CA. Tomo 2, Disposições de Pernambuco, 1699–1745, ff. 431v–32.33 AUC. CA. Tomo 2, Disposições de Pernambuco, 1699–1745, ff. 438, 441v.34 AUC. CA. Tomo 2, Disposições de Pernambuco, 1699–1745, ff. 460v, 463.35 AUC. CA. Tomo 2, Disposições de Pernambuco, 1699–1745, ff. 464v–65.36 AUC. CA. Tomo 2, Disposições de Pernambuco, 1699–1745, f. 489v.37 AUC. CA. Tomo 2, Disposições de Pernambuco, 1699–1745, f. 515v.38 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 39, D. 3492, 19 July 1729.39 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 76, D. 6358, 17 May 1754.40 AUC. CA. Tomo 2, Disposições de Pernambuco, 1699–1745 – Índice, ff. 92, 102, 115v, 116. Sampaio mentions a similar problem in Rio de Janeiro (2014, 408, 415).41 AHU, Códice n° 266, ff. 288v–89.42 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 86, D. 7106, 8 July 1758. See also, AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 23, D. 2138, 16 June 1710, and AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 23, D. 2141, 20 June 1710. AHU, ACL, CU, Consultas de Pernambuco, Cod. 265, f. 21v (Smith Citation1975, 170).43 See Documentos históricos. Pernambuco e outras capitanias do norte. Cartas e ordens. 1717–1727 1949, 274–75.44 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 86, D. 7106, 8 July 1758. See also Boxer Citation1962, 26.45 On organizations becoming similar but not efficient, see DiMaggio and Powell Citation1983.46 ANTT. Junta do Comércio, Registo Geral, Liv. 110, ff. 108v–9.47 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 98, D. 7696, 12 August 1762.48 I did not consider 1630 and 1639 because they were atypical years, a period in which the direct attacks by the Dutch in Brazil caused freight rates to skyrocket.49 Silva Citation1830, 1:37, 501. In 1737, the Mesa do Bem Comum do Comércio in Lisbon already proposed a regulation. They wanted to set the freight rate for the goods traveling the route Portugal-Brazil-Portugal at 16,200 réis per ton, which was equivalent to 300 réis per arroba of sugar; see Alberto Lamego. AL-050-012, 28 February 1737.50 ANTT. Junta do Comércio, Registo Geral, Liv. 110, ff. 108v–9.51 ANTT. Junta do Comércio, Registo Geral, Liv. 130, ff. 67–68v.52 ANTT. Junta do Comércio, Registo Geral, Liv. 110, ff. 135v, 137v–38, 140v–41.53 ANTT. Feitos Findos, Juízo da Índia e Mina, mç. 114, n.° 4, cx. 114.54 For some examples, see Pedreira Citation1995.55 AHU, ACL, CU, 015, Cx. 132, D. 9924, Cx. 136, D. 10156, Cx. 135, D. 10133, Cx. 136, D. 10152, D. 10170, D. 10186, Cx. 137, D. 10196, D. 10227, Cx. 138, D. 10249, and D. 10275. The original figures are in arrobas. One ton was equivalent to 54 arrobas of sugar; see Costa Citation2002, 310, 371, 377.Additional informationNotes on contributorsFelipe Souza MeloFelipe Souza Melo is a PhD candidate at the European University Institute. His research focuses on the production, marketing, shipping, and consumption of tropical goods such as cotton and sugar in the early modern period. His research has appeared in Revista de Historia Económica – Journal of Iberian and Latin American Economic History, Historical Research and Revista de História. He is the author of the book Financiando o negócio de Pernambuco: produção colonial, comércio ultramarino e a economia do transporte no Atlântico português (século XVIII), published in 2021.
Referência(s)