An interview with Raúl Alencar, author of “Strangers in the Promised Land: Jenízaros, Foreigners, and the Perils of Trade in Colonial Peru, 1750–1764”

Raúl Alencar, who has a PhD in history from Tulane University, specializes in early modern maritime trade, with a focus on Spanish America. His research examines transatlantic and transpacific trading networks between Spain, France, and their colonies, exploring the intersections of commerce, social connections, and material culture. You can read his article “Strangers in the Promised Land: Jenízaros, Foreigners, and the Perils of Trade in Colonial Peru, 1750–1764” in HAHR 105.4.

Interview by Rebeca Martínez-Tibbles

1. What inspired you to explore the experiences of foreign merchants in colonial Peru during the mid-eighteenth century?

While researching eighteenth-century maritime trade between Peru, Spain, and France, one of the aspects that most captivated me was the nature of human interaction across social worlds. I became especially interested in how individuals and groups—shaped by their own institutional structures, whether familial, commercial, or corporate—navigated societies that were initially foreign to them, forged common ground, and built alliances. This process made me reflect on the remarkable adaptability and fluidity of human relationships. Foreign merchants in colonial Peru were no exception.

2. How did the Spanish registered ship system impact the dynamics of transatlantic trade and the integration of foreign merchants into Peruvian markets?

In short, the registered ship system transformed not only the frequency of maritime traffic but also the volume and documentation of merchandise shipped. Compared to the old galleon system, the registered ship system appeared more flexible, dismantling the rigid commercial patterns and monopolistic controls that Sevillian merchants had long imposed on their Spanish American counterparts. Yet the reality was more complex and depended largely on perspective. Elite merchants reacted negatively to the new system, as it undermined their ability to monopolize shipping schedules and commercial circuits—developments that, by contrast, benefited less affluent merchants. The increased frequency of voyages also encouraged new patterns of consumption, allowing for quicker circulation of goods and more immediate feedback on market demand. Within this context, foreign merchants followed the flow of registered ships, taking advantage of the relatively lax oversight exercised by colonial authorities during the 1750s and expanding along the Peruvian coast to facilitate these faster, more flexible patterns of trade.

3. Based on your research, what lessons can modern global trade networks learn from the strategies employed by foreign merchants in the Spanish Empire?

One of the central lessons that modern global trade networks can draw from the experience of foreign merchants in the Spanish Empire is that commercial success has never depended solely on economic competitiveness, but also on political positioning and institutional literacy. Foreign merchants in the eighteenth-century Spanish world understood that operating on the right side of the sidewalk was essential: They invested considerable effort in cultivating relationships with colonial officials and local elites, learning how imperial regulations actually functioned in practice and how they could be navigated, bent, or selectively enforced. Figures such as Juan Cranisbro illustrate that the effectiveness of these merchants lay less in outright defiance of the system than in their ability to work within it, securing protection, exemptions, and partnerships that allowed their businesses to flourish despite formal restrictions.

Modern global trade operates in a different legal and technological environment, but the underlying dynamic remains strikingly similar. Large-scale commercial projects today still depend heavily on alignment with state priorities, regulatory frameworks, and political interests. The development of the megaport of Chancay in contemporary Peru offers a useful parallel. Backed by Chinese capital and promoted as a future commercial hub of the South Pacific, the project has advanced through sustained engagement with the Peruvian state, long-term contractual arrangements, and the strategic cultivation of political and institutional support by all means necessary. As in the eighteenth century, the success of such ventures rests not only on infrastructure and capital, but on the ability to embed commercial networks within favorable political and legal environments.

4. Read anything good recently?

I have been greatly enjoying Desertion in the Early Modern World: A Comparative History, edited by Matthias van Rossum and Jeannette Kamp (Bloomsbury, 2016). I am currently writing an article on French desertion along the Peruvian coast that approaches desertion as a form of hidden migration, and this volume has been particularly eye-opening for thinking about early modern mobility. It encourages us to treat desertion as a window onto the worlds that individuals were attempting to escape, as well as the alternative social, economic, and geographic horizons they hoped to reach. What I find especially compelling is the subversive dimension of this form of mobility. Desertion disrupted imperial labor regimes, military discipline, and commercial hierarchies, allowing individuals to renegotiate their identities and social positions beyond the structures meant to contain them. Seen this way, desertion was not merely an act of flight but a practice of repositioning within global systems of power. In this respect, I was particularly drawn to Alessandro Stanziani’s work on the global nature of desertion and Marcel van der Linden’s analysis of who deserters were, why they left, and how they integrated into new social and labor environments.