Raynal, Luzac and Pinto: global trade, the Dutch Republic and the history and constitution of the commercial state

[Extract] The aim of this chapter is to discuss the meaning of Raynal’s political writings in the Dutch Republic. As is well known, among Raynal’s early works was his Histoire du stadhouderat. Depuis son origine jusqu’à présent of 1747, a damning indictment of the institution of the stad-holder that was republished in the 1780s in the Republic, alongside the ongoing reception of the Histoire des deux Indes, in the context of the "Patriot" unrest of that decade. The argument of this chapter connects Raynal's writings and the Dutch contexts in these two periods – the 1740s and 1780s – in order to explain the different reasons why Raynal was criticised from all sides in the later debate, even though the Histoire des deux Indes was a big publishing success in the Dutch Republic. Elie Luzac – the publisher of Jacques Accarias de Serionne – dissociated himself from Raynal because of his earlier critique of the stadholderate and the way in which Raynal portrayed the development of Dutch trade in the Histoire des deux Indes. While Dutch "Patriots" such as Antoine-Marie Cérisier (who was not himself Dutch) embraced Raynal's view of the stadholderate and his critique of Britain, they rejected Raynal's attacks on American independence. Finally, Isaac de Pinto disagreed with Raynal's fundamental outlook on the origins of modern wealth and the appropriate ways to dissolve global conflict