AUSTRIAN TRADE TOWARDS THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE AND ASIA DURING THE 18

After geographical discoveries of the 15th and 16th centuries the economic system based on trade began to develop in the real sense at the planetary level. During the 18th century, just before the start of the industrial revolution, the system experienced a peak. Naval powers played a key role in its global development, as their commercial and military fleets enabled the constant fluctuation of the goods on all oceans and continents. The trade of European naval forces with India and other parts of Asia was particularly significant regarding the commercial aspects and large profits were achieved especially in the triangle of slave trade between Europe, Africa and America. In this context Austria was mostly just an observer because its effect on the global commercial efforts was dominantly continental. However, with the development of the 18thcentury Austria invested also more efforts to increase its share in the global trade and the accumulation of trade capital. The Court Chamber was efficiently organized for the new conditions of economic activity in 1714 through a thorough set of reforms. The division of chambers into independent commissions was fully achieved. It was an adequate administrative basis for the start of the Austrian trade expansion to the east and southeast throughout the rest of the 18th century.

t the beginning of the 18 th century the mercantilist principles of economy started to play a crucial role in Austrian efforts towards new dimensions of development.Therefore, for Austria, this was the time for the real implementation of ʻThe Age of the territorial economyʼ (ʻZeitalter der Territorialwirtschaftʼ). Due to the French model around the end of 17 th century mercantilism in Austria was often referred to as ʻColbertismusʼ. 1But later on, during the 18 th century mercantilism in the Habsburg lands was mainly defined as ʻCameralismʼ.Over time cameralism became a specific Austrian kind of mercantilism, which further emphasized the influence of the state in the implementation of economic principles in relation to the private sector, where this kind of 1 Srbik 1907: 19.A influence was generally much stronger than in the more classical forms of Western mercantilism.It was a revolutionary change in the system of priorities of the Habsburg policies, set in line with increasingly relevant and commonly accepted attitudes of European philosophers that in the 18 th century ʻmoney replaced Godʼ.2However, the Habsburg Monarchy was a state which was too predominantly based on metaphysical concepts of the royal government to be able to quickly put into effect this kind of a total financial and ideological transformation.
Chronologically speaking, the real beginning of the era of mercantilism in Austria was related to the suppression of the Ottoman Empire at the time of the Vienna War (1683-1699) and the development of attitudes of the founder of the Austrian mercantilist theory and later practice, Johann Joachim Becher (1635-1682).Becher was the first to understand the idea of the necessity of an ʻegoistic state actionʼ, which was the core of the mercantilist system. 3or a proper implementation of such an approach the access to as many people as possible was a necessary prerequisite. 4Essentially mercantilists urged the need for a demographic revolution, mainly by attracting more people from other countries.Accordingly, ʻubi populus, idi obulusʼ became the basic maxim of Austrian cameralism. 5The development of such principles further increased the development of the national spirit, which also happened in France during the second half of the 17 th century.In this context particularly significant was the merit of the German mathematician and philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716), who used to live and work in Vienna for several years (1712-1714).At the end of the 17 th century, under the influence of mercantilism, the motto ʻeconomy instead of warʼ (ʻWirtschaft statt Kriegʼ) was proclaimed for the first time in Austrian politics.It was meant to be a clear indication of the guidelines of the Austrian foreign policy for the upcoming century.The motto, however, never became the dominant maxim of Austrian politics because the ideological need of the Habsburg dynasty to continually maintain and magnify its power through war victories was still overwhelming.In any case, Austria introduced the system of prohibition in the trade in 1700. 6n the context of the development of mercantilism, of absolutely crucial importance for Austria was the export of mercury and copper.The business with these raw materials was the most illustrative indicator of the mercantilist principles of economy in Austria.The mercury mine in Idrija was the most important of its kind in Europe.In the middle of the 18 th century this mine produced 170 tons of mercury per year, but already in 1786 the production increased to 584 tons. 7The Netherlands was increasingly becoming a role model, but also a trading partner for Austria in the context of the development of its economy.To this end, the establishment of the first Austrian Western Company was in line with Dutch tradition.The development of the first factories in Austria began pretty soon and colonial goods were increasingly imported.However, very soon it became clear that the path of Austria to the desired mercantilist perfection could not be so easy.In the early 18 th century English East India Company began the import of Indian and Chinese mercury in order to destroy the Austrian monopoly in the sale of this precious raw material, which happened very drastically already in 1706.After this move the Dutch and English traders gained even greater rights in comparison to the Austrian politicians.Only in the last decades of the 18 th century Austria realized the existence of mechanisms for maintaining its monopoly on the production of mercury, which enabled a new large increase of production in Idrija.
In many respects the Požarevac peace treaty was a turning point for the development of the Austrian economy and trade in the region of Southeast Europe.The commercial contract signed on July 27 1718, six days after the peace agreement, was the basis for the expansion of Austrian trade.The contract, whose formal name was ʻThe Commercial and maritime contract with High Porteʼ, explained all the details and aspects of trade in the Balkans and the Levant and determined the directions of maritime trade routes, the customs duties, payment of tolls, punishments for smuggling attempts, damage compensations, conflict resolutions, dealings in death cases, treatments in the event of a shipwreck, the freedom to profess religion for all traders from the area of the Habsburg Monarchy, etc.It was also agreed that the Austrian ships sailing through the Danube could drive their goods all the way to Vidin, where they were obliged to reload the goods on Turkish ships in case of possible further transport. 8During the peace negotiations in Belgrade in 1739 the Habsburgs were able to keep in force the decision deriving from this commercial contract, which was in fact their biggest success in the generally very poor outcome of peace talks in 1739 for the Austrian side.The provisions of trade agreements from 1718 were confirmed later on several occasions and remained in force until 1771, when Austria managed to sign a new, more favorable trade agreement. 9he development of industry and trade with the East at the beginning of the 18 th century was increasingly conducted via overland routes through Hungary.Not much later even Persia entered the Austrian sphere of economic interests.In addition to the English and the Dutch, a key role for the development of the Austrian trade towards East was in the hands of Armenian merchants.One of them who was particularly significant was Zechariah Sedgevic. 10After signing the peace treaty in 1718 and winning northern Serbia, Austriaʼs abundant use of mines in Majdanpek and Oravice motivated a fast increase of copper ore export in the Ottoman Empire.11Ottomans owned those mines during several previous centuries but always lacked adequate technical knowledge for their effective exploitation.Austria was quickly able to extract 80,000 tones of ore from these two mines and export the majority to the Ottoman Empire, so only through this export the total annual sales of about 360,000 ducats were injected into the new Austrian financial stream.
The trade circles from Vienna had successful examples of commercial activities and organizations in the territory of the Ottoman Balkans and the Levant right before them, especially a very successful French example and, later on, possibly the Dutch and the British examples.The Ottoman Empire was a logical destination for the first Austrian attempts for a significant accumulation of commercial capital. 12To this end, the first commercial company which was specialized in trade with the Ottoman Empire and the East in general was founded in Vienna in 1667. 13It was based in Istanbul, right next to the Austrian consulate, which was a clear signal that the Habsburg state decided how its diplomacy and trade should operate in strong cooperation.The Oriental Trading Company (Orientalische Handelscompanie), how the first Austrian merchant attempt was dubbed, did not last long in an increasingly fierce commercial competition in the Levant.The company was liquidated in 1683 with the beginning of the Austro-Turkish War. 14 After the signing of the Požarevac peace treaty in 1718, Austria found new possibilities for the development of the trade with the Ottomans, so already in 1719 the Privileged Oriental Company (Privilegierte Orientalische Kompanie) was established to trade with the Ottoman Empire.This new eastern company allowed the monopolistic use of the Danube for young Austrian industry, which in the perspective of the economic environment led to the Balkan parts of the Ottoman Empire. 15This company made rapid progress and within a few years it was in possession of factories and warehouses in Vienna and Belgrade and then in Trieste and the Schwechat. 16In the beginning almost the entire company dealt only with the import and processing of cotton from the Ottoman Empire.However, under the pressure of naval forces of Great Britain and France and in terms of increased competition of Venetian and Greek traders, the company started to fall apart and finally closed in 1734. 17he end of the wars with Turkey (1716-1718) and Spain (1717-1720) and the new prestigious political position of the Habsburg Monarchy led to attempts to create a new trading empire, which relied on the experience that Charles VI brought with him from Spain and on the actions of Spanish councilors, primarily in the sense of managing the existing commercial and maritime infrastructure in southern Italy and the Austrian Netherlands.On 18 March 1719 Charles VI issued a special decree on the general stimulation of trade.The Austrian ruler sought to create a port in his possession in the northern Adriatic, which would be a key site for commercial traffic between the Levant and the Far East on the one hand and Vienna, Prague, Budapest and other cities in the interior on the other.Already in 1719 the Venetian ambassador in Vienna Giovanni Priuli reported to his government that the Austrian emperor did not think about anything else except the creation of naval forces (ʻpotenza Marittimaʼ).In the euphoria of the war victory Viennese circles were hoping to be able to create a trading empire that would solve all the chronic financial problems of the complex Habsburg state within a few years. 18he key locations of the Austrian trade expansion in the northern Adriatic were to be Trieste and Rijeka and the Kaiser gave them a status of free ports in 1719. 19Trieste had been in the possession of the Habsburgs since 1382 and Rijeka since 1471. 20For an objective assessment of the potential positions of Rijeka and Trieste it is very important to understand the transport infrastructure that existed at that time.The ʻCarolingian Roadʼ (ʻKaroliner Straßeʼ), which connected Karlovac and Rijeka, was completed in 1728 and had a great significance for the development of the Habsburg economy. 21However, the construction of the road that linked Karlovac and Senj, known as the ʻJosephine roadʼ (ʻJosefiner Straßeʼ), started only in 1778, which meant that large parts of the Austrian Littorale, the including potentially significant port of Karlobag, were isolated from the interior. 22n addition to the road network, during the 18 th century the Habsburgs ambitiously approached solving the problem of the construction of river channels and the regulation of riverbeds.After the Požarevac peace treaty and winning the whole area of Posavina and the Danube up to Negotin (in the sense of possessing both banks of the Danube), the Habsburg Monarchy was able to achieve an efficient system of commercial monopoly in the entire northern Balkans or to fully control the river system Danube-Sava between Zagreb and Negotin.In this sense, Austrians created plans for the regulation of linking the northwestern area of the Balkans with the regions of Central Europe and river channels and flows were particularly suitable for such projections.Upon the completion of the Carolingian road they had a possibility for transport of grain from the grain area of Timisoara and other parts of Southeast Pannonia upstream all the way to Zagreb and Karlovac and then through the rivers and channels further towards west, where it was exported to various European markets. 23he first plans to build a canal between the Danube and the Tisza were made in 1723.Already in the following year the construction of the canal began but it was quickly abandoned due to a lack of funds.Subsequent efforts in building the whole transversal were made only in 1796, but even then there were no results. 24There were plans to connect the Danube and Rhine through canals with the Elbe, but there was no funding for their implementation. 25For the purposes of internal trade Austrians regulated rivers and streams in civilian areas of Croatia and Slavonia, especially the Drava River 26 and its tributaries in southern Styria. 27lans were not only concerned with the area of the Ottoman Empire.In the early 1720ʼs Charles VI still did not give up the perspective of rule over Spain, which he so desired during the War of the Spanish Succession (1701-1714).Therefore, he was planning to create a trade route between the Austrian Netherlands, Spain and the Austrian Adriatic ports, which would connect and further integrate all the parts of his projected empire.
Political events during the next decade and objective limits of the Habsburg ranges prevented the realization of such grandiose plans.Therefore, the Austrian ruler focused only on consolidating his positions on the Adriatic coast and in southern Italy.At the assembly of the government in 1728 the decision was made for Vice Admiral Eduard Deichmann, a Dane who was head of the Austrian Navy, to be sent to the Adriatic ports and also to Naples and Sicily in order to thoroughly inspect the situation there and the opportunities for the development of the fleet and trade.Deichmann was soon given the mission and later he submitted a detailed report to the emperor. 28He concluded that it was possible to achieve great results using the ports in the area he visited, but it was previously necessary to make large investments in the creation of adequate infrastructure or even to launch structural changes in the entire Austrian system of trade and economy.With the loss of possessions in southern Italy in 1735, the plans for increased trade in Sicily and Naples were completely deserted and only since then there was a full concentration of Austrian maritime efforts towards Trieste and Rijeka. 29he situation with the possibilities of development of Trieste and Rijeka was rather complex.Already mentioned was a lack of an adequate connection with the interior through roads.In addition, those ports lacked industrial backing that would encourage a greater development of commercial traffic.The population of the cities themselves and their surroundings were quite modest.However, in Vienna they knew that Venice was in a similar situation in the area of the northern Adriatic Sea that was not particularly representative in the Mediterranean framework and still Venice managed to become one of the most important ports in the whole of Europe for many centuries. 30Therefore, the Viennese circles were persistent in their efforts to create major ports from Trieste and Rijeka.Soon they began intensive investment in the construction of port infrastructure and plants for the processing of imported goods. 31Quick successes were achieved particularly with the refineries of sugar, wax and brandy in Rijeka, where the mass processing of imported sugar cane was carried out.At first, the inhabitants of the two port cities were delighted that the Kaiser and the state were investing so much in their ports and it seemed that great opportunities for instant profit have were coming, but then they were very unpleasantly surprised by centralist interventions of the emperor and with the regulation of trade in such a way that the state itself received much more than the residents of both ports.Therefore, soon there was an emergence of a real rebellion, which was manifested in a refusal to participate in the trade.
The Kaiser noted that the problems that appeared in Trieste and Rijeka were similar to the situations that were present in other parts of the Empire.The Austrian administrative system was managed with a considerable level of chaos and the powers of individual states and regional authorities in certain European administrative territorial units in general were not precisely regulated.There was a particularly vague relationship between the central government in Vienna and the government of Inner Austria, which since the 16 th century consisted of Styria, Carinthia, Carniola, Gorizia, Trieste and Istria, and whose economy functioned very poorly, mainly due to internal disunity. 32Based on that, immediately after gaining inner stabilization in 1720, Charles VI began the complex job of Austrian centralization.The centralization of administrative economic institutions was fully implemented by 1749 with the establishment of central economic affairs under the title ʻSenior Commercial Directoryʼ (ʻKommerzien-Oberdirektoriumʼ) headed by Count Rudolf Chotek (1707-1771). 33Coastal areas comprised a separate administrative unit (ʻLitoralebezirkʼ).In 1752 Chotek personally led a commission that visited Trieste and Rijeka to be sure about their current capacities, but the findings were devastating.At this point, the market was much more modest than in the earlier stages during the 1720's and 1730's. 34or the development of the Austrian maritime trade in the area east of the Adriatic Sea and in the whole Mediterranean a big problem was the constant pirate activity.Austrian commercial efforts were particularly threatened by pirates from the region of North Africa as well as from Ulcinj.After the Požarevac peace treaty in 1718 the pirate threat from Ulcinj was largely neutralized, but the pirates from the areas of Tunisia and Libya continued to attack ships under the Austrian flag. 35During the 1720's Austria launched an extensive campaign to stop pirate attacks which was largely controlled by a agreement mediated by the Ottoman authorities and signed in Tunis in 1725.What was the scope of importance of the victory of Eugene of Savoy over the Turks in the battles of 1697 and 1716-1717 was clearly indicated by the fact that he gained particular respect even across the Islamic world.When signing the agreement in 1725 regarding the protection of the trade between Austria and the deys who ruled Tunisia and Tripoli, who were nominally the vassals of the Ottomans, the admiration of the local rulers towards the famous Austrian army commander played a significant role. 36his, however, was not a permanent solution of the problems with North African pirates, whose prey always partly belonged to the Ottomans themselves, who were inclined to see the pirates' activities as a means of political pressure on the Habsburgs because formally the Ottomans did not have to respond to the Habsburg calls in the case of troubles with the African pirates.Knights of Malta and their warships were officially in charge of the defense of Austrian merchant ships from pirates, but did nothing in this respect, which is why Austrians would constantly distribute protest notes, usually without any results. 37hen Tunisia and Libya were finally pacified to a greater extent, 38 the key problem became Morocco because the local pirates sailed even as far as the Adriatic Sea in order to intercept 32 Faber 1995: 65-68. 33 Ibid.102. 34Beer 1899: 39. 35 41 Immediately after that act the relations between Austria and the Moroccan pirates became much more settled. 42The problems, however, still persisted.Despite effective diplomacy, the Austrian naval trade policy could not function properly primarily due to the lack of an adequate naval fleet that would protect merchant ships from pirate attacks. 43Only with the gain of Venice and part of its flee in 1797 did Austria acquire a basis to adequately protect its trade so the naval activities in the 19 th century were much safer and more profitable in the area of the Mediterranean Sea.Despite all attempts of Habsburgs during the 18 th century Trieste and Rijeka did not become large ports which would significantly contribute to the development of trade and economy in general.Besides, the Austrian trade with the Ottoman Empire itself did not progress at a pace that had been planned.On 2 February 1751 Penckler, Austrian Internuncio in Istanbul, sent a detailed report on the state of the Austrian trade with the Ottoman Empire to Count Chotek, president of the new central economic services of the Viennese government.In this report Penckler concluded that, especially from the perspective of Istanbul, ʻthe German tradeʼ did not exist on the territory of the Ottoman Empire. 44The only Austrian items that were constantly in need on the Turkish market were the products of Czech crystal workshops, which had already had great importance in the whole of Europe for centuries.In Istanbul it was absolutely impossible to find a dealer from the Habsburg Monarchy.Products from Styria and other areas came to the Turkish market just over Venetian intermediaries.
The degree of development of the Austrian maritime trade with the Ottoman Empire was very illustrative in the statistics of maritime transport in Ottoman ports during the 18 th century.In the period from 1756 to 1776 French ships were accounted for 54.4% of all European ships that docked in Izmir, one of the largest commercial ports in the entire Ottoman Levant.This fact was a clear indicator of absolute French dominance in the European trade with the Ottomans, as well of the political position that France had at the Porte.In the same period 15.4% of all European ships were Venetian, which meant that the Venetian Republic still retained a considerable influence in the Levantine trade despite the general economic and political decline.The third place in the maritime trade routes was occupied by the Dubrovnik Republic with 11.8%, followed by the Netherlands with 8% and so on.Austria did not even exist in the statistics of ships that docked in Izmir. 45n April and May 1775 Emperor Joseph II personally visited Trieste, Rijeka and all other areas of the Austrian Adriatic coast in order to be sure of their economic potential.Arriving to Rijeka from Karlovac he found the circumstances to be very unpleasant.He noticed that the port was in such a bad shape that the few ships that transported sugar cane and sugar could not even find a place to dock.The population was so poor that the entire city often lacked bread and no one ever thought of the development of trade. 46After his return to Vienna, Joseph II issued a decree to dissolve this separate administrative unit which comprised the coastal areas and to award Rijeka to the Hungarian Kingdom.With the support of the Hungarian party at the Viennese court led by Count Theodore Batthány the decision was officially proclaimed on 3 January 1776.Thus, Rijeka, Bakar and the surrounding territory ceded to the administration of the Kingdom of Hungary as its only coastal area.Karlobag was attached to the Military Frontier. 47Trieste was somewhat more significant than Rijeka and significant commercial projects were initiated on several occasions at the Trieste port, such as the establishment of a separate company for trade with Egypt on 2 December 1782. 48But even those projects were mostly short-lived.
All measures taken in the end did not significantly contribute to the development of maritime trade with the Ottoman Empire.Trieste and Rijeka remained very modest ports in the Adriatic context in comparison with Venice or Dubrovnik.Only in the upcoming decades, when Austria somewhat unexpectedly got hold of the Venetian and Dubrovnik Republics (in 1797 and 1813, respectively) and of Venice and Dubrovnik as the largest and most important ports of the Adriatic, the right circumstances were finally created for the expansion of the Habsburg maritime trade in the Levant.
All attempts for trade organizations in the Balkans and the Levant during the 18 th century were to be only part of the great Austrian project of trade development with the whole of Asia.Following the example of the East India Companies, which in England and the Netherlands existed since 1600 and 1602 respectively, Charles VI tried to create the Austrian equivalent.The basis for such aspirations was the possession of the port in Ostend (Oostende) on the Atlantic coast of the Austrian Netherlands.The use of Antwerp was disabled because under the decisions of the Utrecht peace treaty from 1713 there was general prohibition from using of the River Scheldt for commercial traffic from the Atlantic. 49Thus, under the pressure from the Netherlands and Great Britain the once wealthy city on the Scheldt delta was permanently unable to evolve into a meeting place for large retail revenue for the Habsburg Monarchy.To avoid high monopolistic prices of colonial goods that they had to pay mainly to the Dutch and to dealers from Hamburg, 50 a mode of action of the company in the area of Bengal and the system of exploitation of the local population, which led to the creation of a quasi-state system by the company, not only in the context of Indian states, but also in relations towards Great Britain.By doing so Bolts managed to reveal a large spinning wheel of bribery and corruption.His book from 1772 54 became an instant bestseller and the East India Company suffered extensive damage not only in the field of bad publicity.
On the other hand Bolts gained enormous popularity and the possibility that his expertise acquired in the ten years of Indian experience was soundly desired by the majority of British competitors.With the intervention of the Austrian ambassadors in London (Ludovico di Belgiojoso) and The Hague (Thaddäus von Reischach), Bolts got in touch with the Vienna court and already in the fall of 1774 he was in Vienna for the negotiations about the establishment of the Austrian version of the East India Company. 55Similar to the situation when, in exchange for an alliance with Britain and the Netherlands under the contract from 1731, Austria was ready to liquidate the so-called Ostend Company, which the Vienna court orchestrated from the region of contemporary Belgium, Austria was deprived of opportunities to organize the trade from Belgium with Asia.Bolts came up with the idea to organize trade from the Austrian ports on the Mediterranean.In the foreground of idea was the port of Trieste, but Livorno (Leghorn) was of huge significance as well, because Tuscany was a kind of an Austrian "secundogenitur".
So began the process of creating the Austrian East India Company, which was fully embodied with the great expedition to India, which William Bolts led from Livorno in 1776. 56During next ten years Bolts formed two different companies in succession that carried the names ʻSociété Imperial asiatique de Trieste et Anversʼ and ʻSociété asiatique de Triesteʼ respectively, based in Trieste, Ostend and Antwerp (because his key financiers were the Antwerp bankers and traders led by Charles Proli), 57 trying to break the British and Dutch monopoly on the trade in South and Southeast Asia and further trying to reach the base for trade with China, Japan and even with the north-west coast of North America. 58n the end his efforts were not fruitful in an attempt to make a decisive breakthrough and the complete process was inadvertably halted for Austria with the emergence of the French revolution and subsequent wars in Europe (1792-1815). 59Still, this episode with William Bolts was a hard testimony about the Austrian possibilities for efficient positioning in the Asian market under certain circumstances and about the general potential that was accumulated inside the Asian trade for Austria, the state that was traditionally so much concentrated exclusively on Central European affairs.Connections established with some parts of the world were unique in the perspective of the Habsburg history and were never again established in that context until the end of the dynastic rule in 1918. 54Hallward 1920. 56 HHStA, Staatenabteilungen, England, Kart. 117
Austrian ships.39Inaddition,piratesfrom Libya and Tunisia further usually attacked under the Moroccan flag because both were now accountable to Austria if attacks happened under their flags.40Inthis context the turning point occurred in 1782, when a special Moroccan delegation led by Mohammed Abdulmalek came to Vienna.Upon his return to Morocco he brought a new companion from Vienna.Austrian linguist and translator Franz von Dombay, who completed his studies at the Oriental Academy, arrived in Tangier on 21 August 1783 and officially opened the Austrian consulate.