Toni Andrade’s Article: The Good and the Bad of Microhistory

Tonio Andrade’s Microhistory of the Siege of Fort Zeelandia is an excellent article in highlighting both the benefits and the pitfalls of micro history. Although Andrade begins his study with a rejection of the importance of the episode he pieces together, I found the article to be illuminating about some of the key factors at play in the exchange between the Dutch and Chinese in Taiwan. He claims that that the death of Sait is “insignificant in the sweep of global history”, that “there’s no prodding historiographical need to piece together his story” and that the only reason to write his article is to redress the balance as “we’ve tended to neglect the human dramas that make history come alive.” I feel strongly that this implies that this history is not as useful as others, that it belongs in a realm of histories that are fun to read but do not contribute a great deal to historical understanding. Towards the end of the article, Andrade again seems to reduce the historical significance of this article, with a lament about “the other lives that left no trace,” which I also feel takes away from what is a really interesting and useful article, not because his aim of restoring human agency to history is a bad one, but because it is far more useful than simply reminding readers that these people existed.

The article brings together and illustrates some key factors behind the Dutch loss of Taiwan to Koxinga, especially with regards to espionage during a siege. It reveals the different attitudes taken by the two sides towards collaborators, and that the Dutch could have won if they had trusted the Taiwanese natives more. In the disagreements between Cauw and Coyet we also see the problem of disagreements between the Dutch commanders, and how this might have affected the treatment of Chinese collaborators. Along with the gruesome accounts of Koxinga’s treatment of Dutch soldiers, we find out that the Dutch tortured prisoners, and that this resulted in them receiving false information. Furthermore, from a transnational perspective we gain a fascinating insight into the importance of African slaves in the conflict. Overall then we can divulge a great level of detail about an entire conflict from this relatively short article informing us about the story of a Chinese farmer.

There are however obvious drawbacks to the micro historical approach evidenced in this article. The ambiguity over the end of the life of Sait makes understanding what happened fully impossible. The array of different possibilities over whether he was spying for the Dutch or if he was spying for the Chinese, whether he killed himself or was killed by the Dutch, will never be solved. Andrade describes Sait as “the hero” of the article, but this only highlights the extent to which he leans on Braudel’s insistence on the importance of imagination to the historian: Sait could just as easily be painted as a villain based on the evidence presented in the article, and Andrade seems confused himself when in one paragraph claiming “It seems likely that he really was a double agent at the end,” and in the next “There’s no way to know whether Sait was a double agent.” The amount of questions that remain, and the amount of ‘maybe’s’ posed as possible explanations for the death of Sait show how a lack of evidence can be problematic for a micro historical approach.

In conclusion I would reiterate that I actually really liked this article, but found aspects of it frustrating. Overall it is useful for understanding both the conflict between the Dutch and the Chinese warlord Koxinga, and the change this caused in the relations between the Dutch and the Taiwanese people who they had got along with for so long. From our transnational perspective it highlights the usefulness of micro history in finding transnational connections, but also the limitations of evidence when looking at history on a micro level.

Tonio Andrade, ‘A Chinese Farmer, Two African Boys and a Warlord: Toward a Global Microhistory, Journal of World History, Vol.21, No.4 (December 2010)