The author is Associate Professor of History at the University of British Columbia. The analysis and preparation of this paper depended on the assistance of Virginia Green. The University of British Columbia supplied computer time. The author is indebted to Piet van der Veen for his personal help and to Robert Allen, Don Paterson, Jan de Vries, and especially John Norris for reading and commenting on an earlier draft.

¹ Vondel, Joost van den, “Lofsangh op den Scheepsvaart,” De vernieuwde Gulden Winckel (Amsterdam, 1622), lines 197–200Google Scholar. “O what a golden industry is created for us by that food, the royal herring. How many thousand souls, thank God, live by this trade and earn their living from it.”

² Blink, H., “De Geschiedenis en Beteekenis der Nederlandsche Haringvisscherij,” Vragen van den Dag, 45 (1930), 985–86Google Scholar. Adriaen Coenen Zn., Visboeck, Handschriftkamer, Koninklijke Bibliotheek, begun 1577, fol. 15r-16v. In this lavishly illustrated short manuscript on the fishery the author twice pictures the herring with a crown on its head and calls the fish, “our noble herring, the king above all other fish.” McCulloch, John R., ed., A Select Collection of Scarce and Valuable Tracts on Commerce (London, 1859), pp. 21–22Google Scholar. Sir Walter Raleigh estimated for his king, James I, the employment which grew directly and indirectly out of the Dutch herringfishery. Court, Pieter de la, The True Interest and Political Maxims of the Republick of Holland and West-Friesland … Written by John DeWitt and other Great Men in Holland (originally published in Dutch in 1662; London, 1702), pp. 37–42Google Scholar, added recognition of the secondary jobs created in shipping and manufacturing, the value of thefisheryas a school for seamen, and the value of herring as an exportable good. His estimate of 19 percent of the population earning their living from thefisheriesis too high. Raleigh was also much too extravagant: his claim that the net gain to the Dutch Republic from the herringfisherywas 21,500,000 guilders was well above the actual figure of about 2,500,000 guilders. See Kranenburg, H. A. H., De Zeevisscherij van Holland in den Tijd der Republiek (Amsterdam, 1946), pp. 39, 212Google Scholar. The contribution of the herring fishery to total Dutch output had been stated officially as early as 1476.

³ For Voltaire see Doorman, Gerard, “Nogmaals: de middeleeuwse haringvisserij,” Bijdragen voor de Geschiedenis der Nederlanden, 14 (1960), 104Google Scholar. Bengston, Nels A. and Royen, William Van, Funda mentals of Economic Georgraphy (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1956), pp. 314–15Google Scholar, made the most lavish claims for the importance of the herring fishery. The extreme statement appeared in the first (1935) through the fourth (1956) editions, but was dropped in the fifth (1964) and subsequent editions.

⁴ Fruin, Robert, Tien Jaren uit den Tachtigjarigen Oorlog, 1588–1598, 5th ed. (The Hague, 1899), 185Google Scholar. , McCulloch, Tracts on Commerce, p. 97Google Scholar. The implied comparison was presumably with mines in the New World. In the first half of the seventeenth century, even in the best years for thefishery,spe-cie of a value almost four times that of the Dutch herring catch arrived annually in Spain from America. Compare Hamilton, Earl J., American Treasure and the Price Revolution in Spain, 1501–1650 (Cambridge, Mass., 1934), pp. 32–35Google Scholar, and , Kranenburg, De Zeevisscherij, pp. 133, 212Google Scholar. Posthumus, Nicolaas W., Inquiry into the History of Prices.in Holland (Leiden, 1946–1964), vol. I, pp. cxv–xviGoogle Scholar. The value of the herring catch in the 1630s, one of the best decades for thefishery,was annually about 30 metric tons of silver. Incidentally, in the same decade Spain received an annual average of 140.5 metric tons of silver.

⁵ Unger, Richard W., “The Netherlands Herring Fishery in the Late Middle Ages: The False Legend of Willem Beukels of Biervliet,” Viator, 9 (1978), 335–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶ Brulez, W., “De Zoutinvoer in de Nederlanden in de 16e eeuw,” Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis, (1955), 181–84Google Scholar. Dijk, Johannes van, “The Technology of Herring Utilization,” Report of the FAO Meeting (Bergen, 1950), pp. 224–25Google Scholar. Jager, H. de, De Middeleeuwse Keuren der Stad Brielle (The Hague, 1901), pp. 161–62, 190–91Google Scholar. Wee, Herman van der, “De groei van de Nederlandse haringin-dustrie en het raadsel van het Zeeuwse Zout, 14e-16e eeuw,” De Vier Ambachten (1964–1965), pp 18–23Google Scholar.

Production in the Zeeland coastal salines seems to have fallen off in the fifteenth century, making the importation of salt from the Atlantic coast of Europe even more advisable. The cause was probably the frequent and disastrous floods. Wee, Herman van der, The Growth of the Antwerp Market the European Economy (The Hague, 1963), vol. I, pp. 287–91Google Scholar. The advantages of imported sea salt were partly offset by its higher level of impurities, which meant that it had to be extensively refined. Moreover, it took only four casks of Zeeland salt to treat fourteen lasts of herring whereas it took five and one-half casks of refined sea salt.

⁷ The pattern is similar to that noticed in general for the adoption and widespread use of any technical change. Rosenberg, Nathan, “The Direction of Technological Change: Inducement Mechanisms and Focusing Devices,” Economic Development and Cultural Change, 17, no. 1 (1969), 1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar; idem, “Factors Affecting the Diffusion of Technology,” Explorations in Economic History, 10 (Fall 1972), 7–28.

⁸ Dardel, Eric, La Peche Harenguiere en France: Etude d'historie économique et sociale (Paris, 1941), p. 153.Google ScholarYpma, Ysbrand N., Geschiedenis van de Zuiderzeevisserij (Amsterdam, 1962), p. 40.Google ScholarWee, Van der, Growth of the Antwerp Market, vol. I, p. 278Google Scholar.

⁹ Doorman, Gerard, “Het Haringkaken en Willem Beukels,” Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis, 69 (1956), 373Google Scholar. , Luijpen, De Invloed, pp. 37–39, 61–73Google Scholar.

¹⁰ Coenen Zn., Visboeck, fol. 20v. Doehaerd, Renee, “La Genese d'une entreprise maritime: les pecheurs de Wenduine au XV^e siècle,” Contributions a I'Histoire Economique et Sociale, 1 (1962), 9–25Google Scholar. , Dardel, La Pêche Harenguière, pp. 55–56, 86–92Google Scholar. Kranenburg, H. A. H., “Het Visserijbedrijf van de Zijdenaars in de 15e en 16e Eeuw,” Tijdschrift voof Geschiedenis, 62 (1949), 328–32Google Scholar. Towns established rules to protect investors from unscrupulous skippers who might not pay them what they deserved. For example, Heeringa, Klaas, Rechtsbronnen der stad Schiedam (The Hague, 1904), p. 245Google Scholar. Also, Jager, H. de, De Middeleeuwse Keuren der Stad Brielle, p. 162Google Scholar, paragraphs 6, 7.

¹¹ The van Adrichems, a prominent Delft business family of the late sixteenth century, is a good example of these structural changes. Algemeen Rijksarchief, The Hague, Archief van Adrichem, 12, 13, 126, 127. Gelder, H. Enno van, “Gegevens Betreffende de Haringvisscherij op het einde der 16de Eeuw,” Bijdragen en Mededeelingen van het Historisch Genoolschap, 32 (1911), 1–62Google Scholar, publishes 3 of the 29 surviving accounts of the van Adrichems herring fishery ventures. , Kranenburg, De Zeevisscherij, pp. 61–71, 117–25Google Scholar.

¹² Beylen, Jan van, Schepen van de Nederlanden Van de late middeleeuwen tot het einde van de eeuw (Amsterdam, 1970), pp. 135–41Google Scholar. The earliest trustworthy illustration of a herring buss dates from 1504 or 1540. Thechange from a flat to a rounded stern on larger busses has been dated to between 1600 and 1650. Witsen, Nicholaes, Architectura Navalis et Regimen nauticum … 2nd ed. (Amsterdam, 1690), pp. 186–87Google Scholar. Tillema, Johannes E., “Ontwikkeling van de Nederlandsche Haring-visscherij in den Loop der Eeuweh,” Het Nederlandsche Zeewezen, 16 (1917), 66–67Google Scholar. , Kranenburg, De Zeevisscherij, pp. 15–18, 56–58, 200–01Google Scholar. Ploeg, J., “Speurtocht naar Haringbuizen,” Mededeelingen de Nederlandse Vereniging voor Zeegeschiedenis, 25 (1972), 25–31Google Scholar. Two-masted busses apparently isted as early as the sixteenth century but did not dominate the three-masted type until after 1700. Coenen Zn., Visboeck, said that busses of his day could land 30–36 lasts of herring, a last being made up of fourteen casks each containing about 900 fish.

¹³ Degryse, Roger, “De Omvang van Vlaanderens haring- en zoutevisbedrijf op het einde van het Frans-Bourgondisch conflict (1482),” Académie de Marine de Belgique, Communications, 15 (1963), 37–38Google Scholar. Häpke, Rudolf, Niederländische Akten und Urkunden zur Geschichte der Hanse und zur chen Seegeschichte (Munich, 1913–1923), vol. I, #14, #115, #628. Algemeen Rijksarchief, The Hague, Archief van de Rekenkamer der Domeinen van Holland, 4990, is an account, dated 1523, for the fitting out of 11 warships for protection of herring boats.Google ScholarDegryse, Roger, “De Konvooieering van de Vlaamsche visschersvloot in de 15de en de 16de eeuw,” Bijdragen voor de Geschiedenis der Neder landen, 2 (1948), 1–24Google Scholar. Degryse, Roger, “Het tucht- en politiereglement voor de Hollands-Vlaamse krijgsvloot van buiskonvooiers van 1547,” Académie de Marine de Belgique, Communications, 15 (1963), 17–30Google Scholar.

¹⁴ Rijksarchief in Noord-Holland, Verzamling aanwinsten, L. 504, fols. 99r-100r, is a set of rules established by Duke Philip for the herringfishery,both deep-sea and in inland waters. Fruin, J. A., De Oudste Rechten der Stad Dordrecht en van het Baljuwschap van Zuidholland (The Hague, 1882), II, #229Google Scholar, is a town ordinance on herring selling and packing dating from 1494. , Heeringa, Rechtsbronnen, pp. 232–50Google Scholar, is a town ordinance on the proper practice of commanders of herring boats and on packing and salting the herring dating from 1434. Haak, S., “Brielle als vrije en bloeinde Handelsstad in de 15de eeuw,” Bijdragen voor Vaderlandsche Geschiedenis en Oudheidkunde, 4th ser., 6 (1907), 37Google Scholar.

¹⁵ The government of the Netherlands began its first tentative regulation of the herring fishery in 1509. Gottschalk, Nelly, Fischereigewerbe und Fischhandel der niederldndischen Gebiete im (Bad Worishofen, 1927), pp. 16–19Google Scholar. Jenkins, J. Travis, The Herring and the Herring Fisheries (London, 1927), pp. 68–75Google Scholar. , Kranenburg, De Zeevisscherij, pp. 73–79, 151–57Google Scholar. , Tillema, “Ontwikkeling,” 15 (1916), pp. 348–49, 360–63, 371–72; and 16 (1917), 19–20Google Scholar.

¹⁶ The same goal of quality control to satisfy export markets was recognized in Liibeck regulations of the Scania and other fisheries of 1576. Schafer, Dietrich, Das Buch des Lubeckischen Vogts auf Schonen, 2nd ed. (Lubeck, 1927), pp. 132–34Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Regulation of ventjagers has certainly been too much emphasized by historians.- Michell, A. R., “The European Fisheries in Early Modern History,” The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, vol. V (Cambridge, 1977), pp. 152–53Google Scholar.Beylen, Van, Schepen, p. 139Google Scholar. , Tillema, “Ontwikkeling,” 16 (1917), 3–4Google Scholar. , Hapke, Niederldndische Akten, vol. II, #1032Google Scholar.

¹⁸ The long-term trend was interrupted by the Revolt and the attacks of the Sea Beggars. For a list of overestimates see Wätjen, Hermann, “Zur Statistik der hollandischen Heringsfischerei im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert,” Hansisches Geschichtsblätter, 28 (1910), 131–32Google Scholar. A 1476 government document includes a figure of 250 for the number of busses in Holland, Zeeland, and Friesland. Kranenburg, “Het Visserijbedrijf,” p. 327. An official estimate of 1552 put the buss fleet of Holland at 300 vessels. , Hapke, Niederldndische Akten, vol. I, #628Google Scholar. The number was larger when the provinces of Zeeland and Flanders were added, and so the estimate of a fleet of 700 busses for the entire Netherlands in the late sixteenth century seems just possible. , Brulez, “De zoutinvoer,” pp. 183–84. AlsoGoogle Scholar, Degryse, “Het tucht- en politiereglement,” p. 18Google Scholar. Estimates by contemporaries in the early seventeenth century of a buss fleet of 2000 or more were clearly inflated. The figure of 500 for the province of Holland alone was much nearer the mark. The best modern calculations on herring output are those of , Kranenburg, De Zeevisscherij, pp. 25–43Google Scholar. Unfortunately, he limited his estimates to the province of Holland.

¹⁹ , Michell, “The European Fisheries,” pp. 148–49, 155Google Scholar. Employment in the herring fishery in North Holland alone at the peak was some 3500. Woude, Adriaen M. van der, Het Noordkwartier, een re-gionaal historisch onderzoek in de demografisch en economische geschiedenis van westelijk Nederland van de late middeleeuwen tot het begin van de negentiende eeuw (Wageningen, 1972), p. 408Google Scholar. A figure of 10,000 employees for the entire Republic is probably low. Still the total was less than 2 percent of the labor force.

²⁰ Bohnke, Werner, “Der Binnenhandel des Deutschen Ordens in Preussen und seine Beziehung zum Aussenhandel um 1400,” Hansische Geschichtsblätter, 80 (1962), 27Google Scholar. Lauffer, Victor, “Danzigs Schiffs- und Waarenverkehr am Ende des XV. Jahrhunderts,” Zeitschrift des Westpreussischen Ges-chichtsvereins, 38 (1894), p. 44Google Scholar. Spading, Klaus, Holland und die Hanse im 15. Jahrhundert. Zur Prob-lematik des Uberganges vom Feudalismus zum Kapitalismus (Weimar, 1973), pp. 50–51Google Scholar. , Haak, “Brielle,” pp. 40–43Google Scholar. , Gottschalk, Fischereigewerbe und Fischhandel, pp. 39–42Google Scholar.

²¹ Linger, Willem S., “De Sonttabellen,” Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis, 41 (1926), 144Google Scholar. Bang, Nina E. and Korst, Knud, eds., Tabeller over Skibsfart og Varetransport gennem øresund, 1498–1783 (Copenhagen, 1906–1953)Google Scholar. Compare Bang with Obuchowska-Pysiowa, Honorata, Handel Wislany W Pierws-zej Potowie XVII Wieku (Warsaw, 1964), pp. 16–17Google Scholar, tables 44–45. There are a number of years for which data are missing.

²² , Dardel, La Pêche Harenguière, pp. 41, 154–55Google Scholar. While the Dutch may have sent as much as 10,000 lasts of herring to Rouen each year around 1600-and the estimate appears high-that was still only about one-fifth of total imports by all shippers into that Norman port. , Kranenburg, De Zeevisscherij, pp. 35, 53, 133–35Google Scholar. Hamburg in the third and fourth decades of the seventeenth century took 3500 to 5000 lasts of herring each year from Holland. Already by the second half of the seventeenth century (1661–1700) the Baltic took only 12–20 percent of Dutch output. Kranenburg, H. A. H., “De Haring-export naar het Oostzeegebied in de 18e eeuw,” Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis, 72 (1959), 257–58Google Scholar.

²³ Winkelman, P. H., Nederlandse Rekeningen in de Tolregisters van Koningsbergen 1588–1602 (The Hague, 1971)Google Scholar. Kempas, Horst, Seeverkehr und Pfundzoll im Herzogtum Preussen. Ein Beitrag zur Ge-schichte des Seehandels in 16. and 17. Jahrhundert (Bonn, 1964), p. 369Google Scholar. Tangelder, Franciscus B.M., Nederlands Rekeningen in de Pondtolregisters van Elbing, 1585–1602 (The Hague, 1972)Google Scholar. In 1594, 16 of 85 Dutch ships entered carrying herring and in 1602 it was 10 of 55, but the average cargo had almost doubled in those years to 21.4 lasts per ship. From 1605 to 1651 the annual average of herring passing Warsaw was 965.3 lasts, or almost twice the annual average of 504.5 lasts which passed the nearby Wloclowek customs house in the previous century. , Obuchowska-Pysiowa, Handel, p. 210Google Scholar.

²⁴ Rusiński, Wladyslaw, “The Role of Polish Territories in the European Trade in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries,” Studia Historiae Oeconomicae, 3 (1968), 123–25Google Scholar. Christensen, Aksel E., Dutch Trade to the Baltic about 1600 (The Hague, 1941), pp. 369–79Google Scholar. The records of the van Ad-richems of Delft confirm the expectation of low shipping costs for herring going to the Baltic. Dutch shippers even carried bricks and roofing tiles into the Baltic to fill their holds. The decrease in salt shipments from the 1590s to the 1630s is in part explained by the increase in local production near Gdansk.

²⁵ The data on goods shipped through the Sound are from Bang and Korst, eds., Tabeller over Skibsfart. For Gdansk prices, see Pelc, Julian, Ceny W Gdänsku w XVI i XVII Wieku (Lwów, 1937), pp. 64–65Google Scholar, and Furtak, Tadeusz, Ceny W Gdänsku W Latach 1701–1815 (Lwów, 1935), p. 152Google Scholar. On the importance of Gdansk, see Hoszowski, Stanistaw, “The Polish Baltic Trade in the 15th-18th Centuries,” Poland at the Xlth International Congress of Historical Sciences in Stockholm (Warsaw, 1960), pp. 139–40, 148Google Scholar. , Rusiński, “Role of Polish Territories,” pp. 120–21Google Scholar; and , Unger, “De Sonttabellen,” pp. 147–48Google Scholar.

²⁶ Malowist, Marian, “The Economic and Social Development of the Baltic Countries from the Fifteenth to the Seventeenth Centuries,” Economic History Review, 2nd ser., 12 (12 1959), 184–87Google Scholar. Maczak, Antoni, “The Balance of Polish Sea Trade with the West, 1565–1646,” Scandinavian Economic History Review, 18, no. 2 (1970), 118–21Google Scholar. Samsonowicz, Henryk, Untersuchungen über das Danziger Bürgerkapital in der Zweiten Hälfte des 15. Jahrhunderts (Weimar, 1969), pp. 31–35Google Scholar. Früs, Astrid, “The Two Crises in the Netherlands in 1557,” Scandinavian Economic History Review, 1, no. 2 (1953), 200–11Google Scholar. Bogucka, Maria, “Die Bedeutung des Ostseehandels fur die Aussenhandelsbilanz Polens in der Ersten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts,” Der Aussenhandel Ostmitteleuropeas 1450–1650, Bog, Ingomar, ed. (Cologne, 1971), pp. 47–50Google Scholar. In the first half of the seventeenth century contemporaries complained about a flight of money from Poland to buy foreign luxuries. The conclusion made then was that there was a balance of payments deficit rather than a surplus, which seems the more likely explanation. The Netherlands ran an overall balance of payments deficit in the late sixteenth century. Brulez, W., “The Balance of Trade in the Netherlands in the Middle of the 16th Century,” Acta Historiae Neerlandica, IV (1970), pp. 45–48Google Scholar. One writer claims that the'Netherlands bought twice as much in value from the Baltic as it sold. , Christensen, Dutch Trade, p. 367Google Scholar.

²⁷ V is volume and P is price. The commodities are herring (H), rye (Y), and wheat (W) D indicates shipments in Dutch bottoms, T total shipments. N indicates price in the Netherlands, G price in Gdansk. For V_HD P_HG = f(V_VD P_VG). N = 163 R @.05 =.15 R² =.31 That is, for a sample = 163, the absolute value of R should exceed R @.05 =.15 in order to reject the hypothesis at the 5 percent level of significance. The results are not as good using data for all herring shipped into the Baltic and all rye shipped out.

The addition of wheat shipments also does nothing to improve results.

²⁸ , Maczak, “Polish Sea Trade,” pp. 135–36Google Scholar. Using his figures for prices of goods declared at the Sound and the volume of goods going in each direction the following ratios of the value of herring imports to the value of rye and wheat exports are derived: 1565.040; 1575.012; 1585.072; 1595.105; 1605.195; 1615.154; 1625.233; 1635.074; 1646.185. The figures for those representative years show no consistency. The values for grain exports are for the two ports of Gdansk and Elblag.

²⁹ N = 31 R @.05 =.36 R² =.03. The data are for proifts in the Iberia wheat trade including those made from agio or disagio of the ducat generated by Bogucka, Maria, “Merchants' Profits in, Gáansk Foreign Trade in the First Half of the 17th Century,” Acta Poloniae Historica, 23 (1971), 79–82Google Scholar. Idem, “Amsterdam and the Baltic in the First Half of the Seventeenth Century,” Economic History Review, 2nd ser., 26 (Aug. 1973), 439–47.

³⁰ Maczak, Antoni, “Der Polnische Getreideexport und das Problem der Handelsbilanz (1557–1647),” Der Aussenhandel Ostmitteleuropas 1450–1650, Bog, Ingomar, ed. (Cologne, 1971), pp. 35–45Google Scholar. , Bogucka, “Die Bedeutung,” pp. 52–55Google Scholar. , Hoszowski, “The Polish Baltic Trade,” pp. 123–27Google Scholar. Price, Jacob M., “Multilateralism and/or Bilateralism: The Settlement of British Trade Balances with ‘The North’; c. 1700,” Economic History Review, 2nd ser., 14 (12 1961), 254–74Google Scholar. Sperling, John, “The International Payments Mechanism in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries,” Economic History Review, 2nd ser., 14 (04 1962), 446–68Google Scholar.

³¹ N = 207 R @.05 =.14 R² =.31 for the volume of rye shipped out of the Baltic in Dutch vessels with the volume of herring shipped into the Baltic in Dutch ships. Limited to the period 1600–1780, the result is slightly better. N = 173 R @.05 =.15 R² =.34. It was the rye shipped out of the Baltic in any given year that was correlated with herring shipments into the Baltic, not rye exports for the previous year. Herring shipments depended more on tonnage available at a given point in time. For herring shipments compared with rye shipments out of the Baltic for the previous year, where data for both were available and using only 1600–1780, N = 169 R @.05 =. 15 R² =.24.

³² For all cases, N = 210 R @.05 =.14 R² =.14. For 1600–1780, N = 175 R @.05 =.15 R² =.18. The addition of wheat to the quantity of grain sent out of the Baltic not only does not improve the correlation but it actually decreases the coefficient of determination. For all cases, that is 1550–1780, V_TH = f(V_TY + V_TW ), N = 210 R @.0 2 =.16 R² =.16.

³³ Bogucka found herring to be the most profitable commodity shipped from West to East, and she probably underestimated profitability. She used Amsterdam prices for full herring which is of higher quality and produced later in the year than matie (matjesharing), for which prices are also available. The revised table here uses prices for matie on the Amsterdam bourse from Posthumus, , Inquiry, vol. I, pp. 88–90Google Scholar. Duties and taxes are adjusted to reflect the different herring prices. Bogucka's estimates of freight charges are probably too high as well since she assumes that herring was charged the same as grain going in the other direction, which was not true. For problems with using Posthumus' Amsterdam herring prices see , Kranenburg, De Zeevisscherij, pp. 193–95Google Scholar. He suggests that full herring prices are even suspect, and that they may not reflect the true cost of herring when it left Dutch ports. It is possible that the errors are consistent, however. , Bohnke, “Der Binnenhandel,” pp. 55–56Google Scholar.

³⁴ , Maczak, “Polish Sea Trade,” pp. 115–16Google Scholar. Bruijn, Jacobus R. and Davids, C. A., “Jonas Vrij De Nederlandse Walvisvaart, in het Bijzonder de Amsterdamse, in de Jaren 1640–1664,” Economisch- en Sociaal-Historisch Jaarboek, 38 (1975), 150–52Google Scholar.

³⁵ For V_HD = f(P_HG-P_HA) where the subscript A refers to the price in Amsterdam, N = 61 R @.05 =.25. As expected, there is no significant correlation between the Gdansk-Amsterdam price differential and the total quantity of herring shipped into the Baltic; that is, V_TH = f(P_HG-P_HA). N = 63 R @.05 =.25 R² =.03.

³⁶ , Michell, “The European Fisheries,” p. 177Google Scholar. Little correlation was found between the rye price difference in the Netherlands and Gdansk and the quantity of herring entering the Baltic in Dutch bottoms, which also contradicts the suggestion that Dutch traders were dumping herring; that is, V_HD = f(P_YN-P_YG). N = 203 R@.0 5 =.14 R² =.08.

³⁷ The fall in herring prices in Gdansk in the late seventeenth century coincided with wars and political crises in Poland which served to dampen demand. , Hoszowski, “The Polish,” pp. 119–22Google Scholar. Simson, Paul, Geschichte der Stadt Danzig bis 1626 (Danzig, 1918–1924), vol. II, p. 500Google Scholar. , Scháfer, Das Buch, pp. xlii–ixGoogle Scholar.

³⁸ Unger, Willem S., “Trade through the Sound in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries,” Economic History Review, 2nd ser., 12 (12 1959), 208–09Google Scholar. , Kranenburg, De Zeevisscherij, pp. 204–05Google Scholar. , Kranenburg, “De Haringexport,” pp. 252–57Google Scholar. At least not all Dutch ports suffered from falling herring production. Vlaardingen and to a lesser degree Maassluis noted significant growth even if the catch per buss was falling. , Wätjen, “Zur Statistik,” pp. 173–77Google Scholar. , Unger, “The Netherlands Herring Fishery,” pp. 350–53Google Scholar.

³⁹ For 1624–1694, N = 29 R @.05 =.37 R² =.11, and for 1718–1780, N = 32 R @.05 =.35 R² =.20.

⁴⁰ (V_TH)_I+I - (V_TH)_I = f[(P_HG)_I+I - (P_HG)_c] where, for example, (V_TH), is the total volume of herring shipped out of the Baltic in year t. N = 147 R @.05 =.16 R² =.01.

⁴¹ , Posthumus, Inquiry, vol. II, pp. 245–52, 274–82Google Scholar.

⁴² For 1624–1690, N = 29. For 1691–1780, N = 34 and the differential was negative in 26 of the 34 cases.

⁴³ (V_HD)_I. = f[(V_HD)_t-t], N = 201 R @.05 =.14 R² =.65. As expected, the results were not as good using all herring shipments. (V_HT), = f[(V_HT)_I = f[(V_HT)_I-I], N = 205 R @.05 =.14 R² = 59.

⁴⁴ Dutch traders had factors in Baltic ports by the second half of the sixteenth century, by which time their correspondence was already extensive and regular. Gelder, H. Enno van, “Zestiende-eeuwsche Koopmansbrieven,” Economisch-Historisch Jaarboek, 5 (1919), 136–91Google Scholar. , Christensen, Dutch Trade, pp. 215–16, 431–40Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ , Dardel, La Peche Harenguiere, pp. 138–40, 152–58Google Scholar. Harper, Lawrence A., The English Navigation Laws (New York, 1939), pp. 28–31Google Scholar. Smith, Adam, Wealth of Nations, ed. Carman, Edwin (New York, 1937), pp. 484–88, 901–03Google Scholar. Smith was distressed about the net loss in gross income from the subsidy, but it seems to have been effective, directed as it was at increasing the production of herring to compete with the Dutch product. Högberg, Staffan, Utrikeshandel och sjöfart pä 1700-talet (Stockholm, 1969), pp. 168–71Google Scholar. Koser, Reinhold, Geschichte Friedrich des Grossens (Darmstadt, 1964), vol. III, 257Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ Gordon, H. Scott, “The Economic Theory of a Common Property Resource: The Fishery,” Journal of Political Economy, 62 (1954), 129–32Google Scholar. For a summary of the common property equilibrium applied to a fishery see Paterson, Donald G. and Wilen, James, “Depletion and Diplomacy: The North Pacific Seal Hunt, 1886–1910,” Research in Economic History, 2 (1977), 83–86, 118–27Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ , Dardel, La Pêche Harenguière, pp. 138–58Google Scholar, on French attempts to replace Dutch imports with domestically produced herring. Vries, Johannes De, De Economische Achteruitgang der Republiek in de Achttiende Eeuw, 2nd ed. (Leiden, 1968), pp. 137–41Google Scholar. Beaujon, Anthony, The History of Dutch Sea Fisheries: Their Progress, Decline and Revival… (London, 1884), p. 286Google Scholar. , Kranenburg, De Zeevisscherij, pp. 169–71Google Scholar, on the development of competing fisheries. On evidence for a shift in demand for herring in the eighteenth century, see , Michell, “The European Fisheries,” pp. 182–83Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ , Wätjen, “Zur Statistik,” pp. 142–51Google Scholar. , Kranenburg, De Zeevisscherij, p. 204Google Scholar. Production per vessel was also subject to greater variation in war years (Ibid., pp. 42–43). Israel, Jonathan I., “A Conflict of Empires: Spain and the Netherlands, 1618–1648,” Past and Present, 76 (08 1977), 44–48Google Scholar.