In my podcast on the new Town Hall of Amsterdam, which opened in 1655, I had an interesting conversation with Dr. Maurits den Hollander. In the blog text accompanying the podcast (go to www.rembrandtmoney.com, RM24012 ‘Amsterdam’s new Town Hall’), we decided to post a short summary of our discussion at the end of that text. Dr. Maurits den Hollander is assistant professor of legal history at Tilburg University. I refer to the aforementioned blogtext. Its text actually precedes the text below.
Specifically of interest for the podcast at hand is Den Hollander’s PhD dissertation from 2021: ‘Stay of Execution. Institutions and Insolvency Legislation in Amsterdam, 1578-1700’. It is based on archival research. Of course, in our conversation he will draw from his work.
The project fits in wonderfully with a common interest that I share with Maurits: what happened every day in Amsterdam’s new city hall? Since 1808 the building functions as the Royal Palace on Dam Square. But from 1655 to 1808? We plan to dedicate a publication to this rater mysterious period as well. The listener/reader is therefore actually a participant in our study in progress. And of course, suggestions or comments are certainly appreciated!
1 Amsterdam’s city governance: institutional services
As explained earlier, in the city with its growing population the aldermen were certainly very busy. To relieve the aldermen’s workload, a large number of (judicial) chambers were established in the 17th century. These were governmental institutions, which mainly handled the financial and justice institutions, which settled large numbers of legal cases. All those working in a specific function, such as commissioner, at these chambers were part of the regents or ‘ruling class’ of the city. They were assisted inside and outside the town hall by the city secretaries, clerks, the concierge, the ushers and many other officials and administrative workers.
One eyewitness (Thomas Penson, an Englishman) wrote in 1687: ‘Having ascended the stairs [one sees] on the first floor … several chambers or offices proper for each particular business that happens to come there, either for the administration of justice or mercy, viz. the Justice Chamber, the Secretary’s Chamber, the Orphan’s Chamber, the Shippers’ Chamber (‘Schepenen’, i.e. judges), the Assurance Chamber, the Burgermasters’ Chamber, …., the Treasury Chamber, etc., all which doors are adorned with figures and histories (carved in white marble) proper of each office’. (Van Strien (1998), p. 38).
Now, I will look more closely at some of the public services provided in the town hall: by the Orphan Chamber (Weeskamer), the Chamber of Abandoned and Insolvent Estates (Desolate Boedelskamer) and the Chamber of Insurance and Average (Assurantiekamer).
During our imaginary tour of the building, I will very briefly touch on the iconography of the respective rooms where these chambers were located. Also, of major significance for Amsterdam’s strong financial position and located in the town hall, is the Amsterdam Bank of Exchange (Wisselbank). For more minor quarrels and disputes the Chamber of Matrimonial Affairs and Insults (Kamer van Huwelijkszaken en Injuriën) is also mentioned, popularly called Krakeelkamer. ‘Injuriën’ roughly mirrors insult (belediging) and swearing (schelden).
1 1 Orphan Chamber
Orphaned children would be cared for by two kinds of institutions, the Orphan Chamber and an orphanage. This applied in various cities throughout the Republic. An orphanage (weeshuis) was founded to house and take care of children whose parents had died in the event that the relatives were unable to provide for further education. In many cases, the establishment was a private initiative connected to one of the religions and governed by persons (quite often women) belonging to those religions. An Orphan Chamber (Weeskamer), on the other hand, was a public facility, established by the city. It focused on the property (or: money) interests of a child.
Since the 15th century, children had sometimes been neglected by those to whom they had been entrusted. Perhaps their possessions had been sold without their knowledge or participation. There was a growing need for supervision by guardians of these minors and this was regulated by the city government. Orphan Chambers were located in Holland (for example Amsterdam, Leiden and Dordrecht) and a few places in Zeeland, Utrecht and Brabant. In Amsterdam, this governmental task was assigned to a separate body: the College of Orphan Masters (College van weesmeesteren) which comprised ‘four gentlemen’ (‘vier Heeren’) (Bontemantel (1897), 118). The name Orphan Chamber (called Weescamer in Holland) is often used, since the administrators were assigned a separate room in the town hall on Dam Square.
The Orphan Chamber only took action when a grave digger (a city officer) informed the Chamber that a buried person had left one or more minor children. This was recorded in so-called ‘death books’ (doodboeken) or burial registers of the Orphan Chamber, so that the person who had the estate under his possession could be summoned to come to the Orphan Chamber (De Roever (1878), 4ff). The procedure, which was initiated after registration in the burial registers, entailed that the remaining parent or another relative had to indicate which goods belonged to the orphan, i.e. indicate what was due to them from the estate. If guardianship had not been regulated in a will, the commissioners of the Orphan Chamber would provide for it. The basis for their performance was the Ordinance of the Orphan Chamber of the city of Amsterdam (Ordonnantie vanden weescamer deser Stede Amstelredamme) of 1563, recorded in Handvesten (1597), 148ff; see De Roever (1878), 29.
In the first instance, the father was eligible for guardianship. If he was not available, then the closest relatives were to act as guardian. In the absence of family members, ‘good people’ (goede lieden), usually called assistants (suppoosten), were entrusted with guardianship and property management. These were estate administrators by profession. The core of a guardian’s duties was to supplement the minor, representing them where and as often as he had to act in law, making an inventory and bringing it to the Orphan Chamber, taking care of maintenance and education and, in connection with this, authorizing the annual income of the minor to marry, etc.
One of a guardian’s core duties was the inventory of all possessions, with a valuation by experts or one of the stakeholders, and taking an oath before the commissioners of the Orphan Chamber. All of these possessions were also referred to as ‘underaged goods’ (‘onmondige goederen’, see Bontemantel (1897), 118). The involvement of the Orphan Chamber usually came to an end when the orphan child reached the age of majority, which in Holland was the age of 25, through marriage, or through the granting of the ‘venia aetatis’ via a request to the court.
As an example of the latter, reference is made to a request of Rembrandt’s son Titus, in June 1665 at the age of 24. He filed a request for legal maturity (bequaemheyt) which was granted in the same month. The request, with three favourable letters of recommendation and a recommendation of the sexton (koster) of the Zuiderkerk, is made to Their Honourable Mighty Lords of the States of Holland and Westvrieslandt. The request, holding that Titus may be granted legal maturity by means of a formal document (‘ten yende hem verleent werde veniam aetatis bij acte in forma’) was signed by father Rembrandt and son Titus van Rijn. On the same day, the burgomasters of Amsterdam sent a letter to the States with the humble request that they will grant him legal maturity with the requisite certificate in response to this humble entreaty (‘met gedienstig versoek dat Uw Ed. Gr. Mo: gelieven op sijne oodmoedige bede hem te verlenen veniam aetatis met Brieven daertoe vereyscht’).
This letter is signed on behalf of the burgomasters by Jacob de Vogelaer (1625-1697), a city secretary. On 19 June 1665, the States granted him letters regarding his legal maturity in the customary form (‘brieven in communi forma’). According to Dutch law at that time, the legal custody of a father for a child ended when the child came of age (meerderjarigheid), or married (huwelijk), and by granting a minor limited legal capacity to enter into a contract (handlichting). By granting the request, the supervision of Titus by the Orphan Chamber came to an end.
It is also interesting to note the developments on the other side of the Atlantic, namely in New Amsterdam (present-day New York City). Although in the 1650s the population there was rather small, there was still a need for an Orphan Chamber. It was established in 1656, adhering in a large measure ‘… to the homeland’s rules and standards but with a certain liberty appropriate to a new society’, see Van Zwieten (1996), 324.
1 2 Chamber of Abandoned and Insolvent Estates
In the 17th century, insolvency estate chambers (boedelskamers) were established in various cities in the Republic. These chambers had both rule-creating, judicial and supervisory functions in matters of insolvency. There were chambers operating for instance in Amsterdam, Dordrecht and Middelburg. Municipal ordinances not only provided for the establishment and working methods of those estate chambers, but also provided rules of a formal and substantive nature.
In addition to these city ordinances, a large number of other local approvals, resolutions and regulations on ‘desolate’, ‘unmanaged’ or ‘insolvent’ estates in various other cities and provincial areas were in force. The term ‘Desolate’ also refers to the estate of a person who had died in ‘East India’ or while travelling from there to the Netherlands and vice versa. Abandoned estates also included deserted plantations and timber.
In Amsterdam, following a decision of the City council in 1627, it took until 1643 before the Chamber of Abandoned and Insolvent Estates was established. Similar chambers (copying the motherland, i.e. Holland) were also established in former Dutch colonial countries, such as Sri Lanka during the turn of the 18th and 19th century, Surinam (functioning after the abolishment of slavery in the 19th century) and in Curaçao, Bonaire and Aruba.
In the city of Amsterdam, prior to 1643, insolvent estates were administered by the aldermen of the city. The first Ordinance of 1643 was mainly based on customary law applicable in the city until then. In individual cases, the aldermen appointed an administrator or trustee (curateur). The administrator had to accept all the goods in case they were located inside as well as outside the city. After making an inventory, the administrator had to sell the goods and deposit the money received in the consignation account held by the secretariat of the city, until distributions could be made to the creditors.
Certain rules applied to the payment of such dividends. Possessory pledge-holders (houders van vuistpand), for instance, could have their goods sold by the concierge (conchiërge) of the city and receive their monies. Mortgage holders could only receive money from the secretariat with two sufficient sureties (‘twee suffisante Borghen’) ‘… owing real estate, being subject to the jurisdiction of this city’ (‘besittende onroerende goederen, subject de Jurisdictie deser stede’) in case someone would come forward within three years with older Letters or better entitlement (‘ouder Brieven ofte beeter recht hebbende’). Also, a certain ranking system existed of various preferential debts. Creditors had to report to the secretariat within three months, after which time a creditor could summon his co-creditors to initiate a rudimentary form of what is currently known as a verification proceeding. This would take place before delegated aldermen and would include a claim validation procedure if these creditors contradicted each other’s pretensions.
The Chamber of Abandoned and Insolvent Estates Amsterdam was located in the new town hall on the first floor. The coats of arms of the first five commissioners were incorporated in the frame of the mantelpiece. There were five commissioners at the Chamber; they were appointed every year. The commissioners would meet daily in their Chambers.
One well-known secretary of the Desolate Boedelskamer was Frans Bruijningh (1610-1684). In 1656, he was in overall charge of making an inventory and taking into custody the assets and belongings of the painter Rembrandt, after his application for insolvency (cessio bonorum). See my podcast on this theme at www.rembrandtsmoney.com, RM24011.
1 3 Chamber of Insurance and Average
The Flemish migrant Isaac le Maire (Tournai, 1558/1559 – Egmond aan den Hoef, 1624) had become one of the greatest traders since he arrived in Amsterdam in 1586. More than a thousand chartering contracts (bevrachtingscontracten) were concluded and recorded by notary Jan Franszoon Bruyningh in the last decade of the 16th century (between 1591 and 1602). Partly thanks to a broad family network, Le Maire was very well informed about departure and arrival times of ships, where certain merchandise could be picked up or dropped off, as well as the going prices at the various market locations. In general, these contracts show that trade flows mainly went to Spain and Portugal, and also to the Baltic Sea. As early as the 16th century, Amsterdam was an important hub for rye and wheat, and the port was a stacking and trans-shipment location for grain and wood from the Baltics. On the outward journey, Holland (and Zeeland) ships mainly took salt with them which was used in the Baltic Sea area for salting fish. With so many chartering contracts, Le Maire was the largest Amsterdam trader. In early 1590, grain trade in the direction of Italy was mainly undertaken by Amsterdammers, initially Flemish immigrants. Uncertain political and military risks and barbarism by North African pirates created a need among charterers for ship insurance, a financial product that Le Maire was familiar with from the Antwerp stock exchange.
Marine insurance arose from the needs of ship owners and merchants to cover the financial consequences of loss of ship or cargo cut down on. The first known maritime insurance was taken out in 1592 for a shipload of rye, transported in three ships to Genoa. It was closed according to the customs of the streets of London and the stock exchange of Antwerp. Le Maire bore the first risk, at a profit premium of 16 percent if everything went well (Dieusaert (2023), p. 110ff).
Subsequently, the emergence and development of marine insurance was of great importance for the expansion of long-distance trade during the early modern period. Without maritime insurance, the Republic of the Netherlands would have lost its trade network and could not have expanded so much or become so prosperous. An insurance market emerged in Amsterdam in the early 17th century. Merchants from Southern European descent introduced the financial novelty of marine insurance in the city. Merchants, shipowners, insurers, brokers and town administrators were among the relevant actors in the market: merchants and shipowners as buyers of marine insurance, insurers as providers of the service. Brokers facilitated the transaction while administrators created the formal framework, through approvals and ordinances of the city council, but also with the establishment of the Chamber of Insurance and Average (Kamer van Assurantie en Averij, in short: Assurantiekamer). See the PhD research of Go (2009).
Amsterdam became the most important insurance market in Europe, where social status and political power played a role in mutual relations in the market. Of the administrative authorities involved in the insurance market, the Chamber of Insurance and Average, founded in 1598, had the greatest influence. The Chamber initiated new ordinances and approvals and also took decisions in the event of disputes and disagreements. The commissioners of the Chamber of Insurance and Average were usually prominent merchants who were often related to insurers. They were mainly appointed on the basis of their specific knowledge and experience and not so much on their possible political loyalties. File research shows that in cases where risk patterns changed structurally (war, piracy), the Chamber was called upon more often. This may have been an indication that the expertise and authority of the commissioners was recognized by the market parties involved.
The recognition of the Chamber’s position within the legal system reduced uncertainty about the legal validity and interpretation of contracts, which generally contributed to a positive influence on the growth and development of a marine insurance market. This was fairly well organized, there was significant demand for insurance and there was also sufficient supply of insurance capital as a result of the influx of capital from the profitable Baltic trade.
However, research (Go (2009)) shows that the protection of the personal interests of some also played a role. The formal arrangements in Amsterdam deviated sharply from past similar practices and routines and this caused constant tension on the market. The commissioners of the Chamber chose their own policies and deviated in various ways from the ordinance in force at the time, in particular the rules regarding insurance brokers.
1 4 Amsterdam Bank of Exchange
The Amsterdam Bank of Exchange (Amsterdamsche Wisselbank) was founded in 1609 by the City council. Its policy was to move the organization of money transfers away from rather unregulated private markets and to bring it under the control of the city. It was an intervention to impose extra regulations on the market, a conscious interference in the private market as well as the behaviour of market parties, and to concentrate all commercial money transfers in the Bank. The message was: the city of Amsterdam has the power, the commitment, and the instruments to protect its commerce against the monetary excrescences of the turbulent economic growth.
The Amsterdamsche Wisselbank was founded by a Flemish man, Dirck van Os (1556-1615). He was the son of a carpet merchant from ‘s-Hertogenbosch, who had moved to prosperous Antwerp due to a decline in trade. Van Os was therefore a Brabantine who fled to Amsterdam in the 1580s. He is described as a merchant and venture investor, is considered one of the large inventors in the stock exchange (Beurs), and was one of the founders of the Amsterdam Bank of Exchange and the Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie (VOC). He was active as an insurer, a financier, and a ship owner (Boots & Woortman, 2023).
The purpose of establishing the Bank was therefore to replace the many cashiers and exchangers with a ‘central’ cashier and exchange office and thus put an end to the chaotic situation in the currency system. Coins circulated from all kinds of countries and regions, but there was no good system for determining exchange rates. At the bank, one could exchange one’s coins for full-fledged commercial coins that were accepted by everyone. The second Exchange Bank was founded in Middelburg in 1615, and a third in Rotterdam in 1635.
The VOC was also an account holder and only made payments via the Wisselbank. The bank’s customers felt safe that their capital was kept in the basement of the town hall and that the city of Amsterdam guaranteed their assets. In the bank, money was both valued and exchanged for precious metal. Later, traders could also open accounts themselves. They could make cashless payments to other exchange offices abroad. This involved specifying in letters to whom, at what time, and what amount was to be handed over. In the 17th century, paper bills of exchange were covered by the reserves of the Amsterdamsche Wisselbank, making transactions without coins possible. Reportedly, 100 percent coverage was guaranteed, for which purpose a large stock of precious metal was maintained. From 1683 onwards, this stock continued to increase. This continued well into the 18th century, resulting in Amsterdam becoming the financial centre of the world. The bank’s ‘guilder’ gained the status of reference currency worldwide, a position that was only taken over by the British pound in the 19th century and later by the American dollar. It was not until 1820 that the function of the Amsterdamsche Wisselbank was taken over by De Nederlandsche Bank.
The Exchange Bank had a large staff of civil servants. Until 1686 there were three commissioners, then four. They were often former aldermen and council members. Two of the commissioners had to be present at the office every day. They supervised four bookkeepers, who together had two clerks and a valet, four counter-accountants, three receivers with a clerk, ushers and an assayer (keurmeester). The latter was an important figure. In the assay room, he conducted research into the content of mortar and material. He usually also purchased the precious metal and ordered certain coins from the mint master. Each of the bookkeepers had their own specific task; the first received the written orders for payment, the second kept the journal, the third the balance sheet book and the fourth the general ledger.
1 5 Chamber of Marital Affairs
Finally, attention for a first instance court, the Chamber of Marital Affairs (Houwelijxse saeken). In daily practice, this Chamber was closest to the concerns and conflicts of the ordinary citizenry. That chamber was officially called the ‘Kamer van Huwelijkszaken en Injuriën’ (‘Chamber of Matrimonial Affairs and Injuries’). In Latin ‘injuria’ could mean injustice, disadvantage, insult, defamation, injustice; injury. Besides marriage problems, it also dealt with people swearing or insulting each other. People used to call it the ‘Krakeelkamer’, with alliteration in Dutch from pronouncing ‘k’ twice. And the Commissioners ruled in cases where parties were quarrelling or scolding each other. In busy Amsterdam, everyone had to stand up for his or her own rights. The Chamber’s broad jurisdiction guaranteed that a large number of daily arguments, feuds and insults were discussed. These are recorded in the Marital Affairs Book (Krackeelboek). One of the reported cases occurred in the late 1640s. It involved Geertje Diricx, Rembrandt’s housekeeper and later lover. She put up a hard fight, but that’s a story for another time.
To conclude
Thomas Penson (the eyewitness mentioned earlier) writes euphorically in 1687, having ascended the stairs to the first floor with all the different chambers: ‘Also festoons of fruit and flowers and instruments of music and other ornaments, so finely and tenderly performed that they would delight any curious eye to behold them. Nor is the outsides only thus beautified, but the insides also affords brave paintings of great masters, …’ (Van Strien (1998), p. 38). You are surely very curious about what really went on from one day to another in these rooms and spaces in ‘… that overly artistic piece of work, and the world’s eighth wonder, the Stadt- or Raedhuis’? These words were written over 360 years ago by Olfert Dapper in his book on the Description of the City of Amsterdam, a five-part book dedicated to Mayor Cornelis Witsen. I hope that my podcast guest Maurits den Hollander and I will soon be able to satisfy your curiosity through a publication.
Summary of the conversation between Maurits den Hollander (MdH) and me (Wess.)
Q1 (Wess.) What happened when an insolvent like Rembrandt ended up at the Chamber of Abandoned and Insolvent Estates (‘Desolate Boedelskamer’)? How would this chamber or court process his case?
A1 (MdH) Just like today, the entrance to the court in the present building on Dam Square in Amsterdam was impressive. Waiting outside the room of the court itself, Rembrandt faced sculptures of rats gnawing on derelict books and scattered papers, symbolizing financial demise, as well as the fall of Icarus: pride cometh before the fall. Inside the court, however, the art diametrically opposed this bleak outside image. A painting by Thomas de Keyzer, which sat above the fireplace in the courtroom, shows the story of Princess Nausicaa saving the naked and unkempt Odysseus after the latter had experienced shipwreck and washed up on the shore of her island. Just like Nausicaa, the commissioners of the Desolate Boedelskamer helped insolvents back on their feet. Through their professional and transparent procedure, they helped insolvents such as Rembrandt to revive their businesses.
As part of the curatele procedure, the secretary or one of his supporting clerks would visit the house of the debtor, drafting a complete inventory of all movables, while the bookkeeper would extract a financial overview from the books and papers of the insolvent. Upon requesting ‘cessie van goede’ (cession bonorum), the insolvent would have to provide a ‘staet’, listing his own outstanding claims as well as the names of his creditors and the reasons for his insolvency. If no composition could be concluded, the High Court would issue a letter of cessie after receiving a confirmation from the local authorities of the insolvents’ place of residence that he was honest and had not committed fraud, subsequently this letter would enter into effect once Rembrandt would have registered it with the Amsterdam court.
Q2 (Wess.) What are the consequences of such a cessio bonorum / cessie van goede? Was Rembrandt special, or just one of many similar cases?
A2 (MdH) Cessie allowed an insolvent to escape debt imprisonment, in exchange for handing over all his or her possessions to be sold for the benefit of the creditors. Some specific types of goods, such as a single bed and its appurtenances, as well as artisans’ tools, were excluded. His other possessions would be auctioned. My research has indicated that former insolvents were able to obtain new credit after going through this procedure. It confirmed their bad luck, the non-fraudulent nature of their insolvency, which was essential to restore trust and business alike. Rembrandt’s case was by no means unique. Over the 17th century, up to a hundred Amsterdam insolvents per year requested this legal ‘benefice’.
Q3 (Wess.) In your dissertation you have defended that the Desolate Boedelskamer was a revolutionary institution, supporting the proliferation of credit through a new way of dealing with insolvent debtors. Can you explain how this worked? What makes the Amsterdam way of dealing with insolvency so special?
A3 (MdH) The Amsterdam curatele procedure was especially innovative for two main reasons. First, it unified the enforcement of debts, carried out by a judge, with the management of the insolvent estate. This constituted a solution to the problematic information asymmetries that had previously hampered the work of judges and curators. Second, facts gained the upper hand over rumors. While in late 16th-century Antwerp, for instance, the ‘failliet’ (bankruptcy) of a debtor who had not run away from his creditors was based upon rumors, such as stories about his failure to attend the stock exchange, in 17th-century Amsterdam, the factual establishment of over-indebtedness became the formal starting point of the insolvency procedure. Through the investigation of a debtor’s possessions and administration which started every curatele procedure, it was possible to make decisions based upon facts and figures rather than hearsay and rough estimates.
Moreover, in the 17th century, the Amsterdam court punished acts of bankruptcy rather than illiquidity itself. The Chamber increasingly adopted the idea that unfortunate insolvents had to be helped to become productive members of the civic community once more rather than facing a crude execution that ultimately benefited only a few of the parties involved. In the 17th century, religion was an important socio-cultural factor. Insolvents could be excluded from social networks if they were suspected of having acted in bad faith. Intriguingly, Amsterdam’s religious communities considered the judgements of the Desolate Boedelskamer enough to once more accept a former insolvent in their midst. They therefore accepted a legal solution, such as a composition or a cessie, as the only morally correct way to solve one’s financial problems and to be rehabilitated into social networks. This would have been essential for former insolvents to restore their business and once more contribute to society.
Q4 (Wess.) Can we identify one or more important individuals who influenced these developments?
A4 (MdH) Frans Bruijningh, a legal graduate, stemming from a family of prominent notaries and financial specialists focusing on commerce, became the first secretary of the new insolvency court. Over the 1640s and 1650s, he shaped the procedure and work practices of the Desolate Boedelskamer in important ways. For instance, my research has revealed how he made his notarial business’ formularies into the standard style for drafting compositions between insolvents and their creditors. As secretary during the first decades of the courts’ existence, Bruijningh created most of the innovative Amsterdam insolvency procedure that would benefit numerous citizens, both insolvents and creditors.
Q5 (Wess) The most challenging question is why the Amsterdam insolvency procedure developed in this innovative direction? Was there a general financial crisis, necessitating better insolvency legislation?
A5 (MdH) The year 1650 is often seen as the high-point of the Dutch Golden Age. Remember that in 1648 the 80-years war with Spain had ended with the Peace of Münster (Westphalia); rather than a result of crisis, we should interpret this product of legal and governmental innovation as the fruit of a pluralistic and vibrant society that is at the top of its commercial and political success. Of course, that does not mean that every individual necessarily shared the opulent success of the ‘golden age’: at the end of the day, individual entrepreneurs such as Rembrandt depended on their own skills and failures. Besides the institutional context, the agency of individual historical actors is always a crucial determining factor in business.
References
Boots, Alice & Rob Woortman, Een geniale koopman. Dirk van Os en de invloed van Zuid-Nederlanders op de Amsterdamse geldmarkt, Zutphen: Walburg Pers, 2023.
Dapper, O., Historische Beschryvinge van Amsterdam, (niet-gepagineerde ‘Opdracht’), 1663.
Den Hollander, Maurits, Stay of Execution. Institutions and Insolvency Legislation in Amsterdam, 1578-1700, PhD Tilburg University, 2021.
Dieusaert, Tom, Rond de Kaap. Isaac le Maire contra de VOC, Ertsberg 2023.
Go, Sabine, Marine Insurance in the Netherlands 1600-1870: A comparative institutional approach, PhD Amsterdam, 2009.
Van Strien, Kees, Touring the Low Countries. Accounts of British Travellers, 1660-1720, Amsterdam University Press, 1998.
Dehing, P., Geld in Amsterdam. Wisselbank en wisselkoersen 1650-1725. PhD Amsteram, 2012.