Holland/History

The Rise of Holland
in the High Middle Ages The center of power in these emerging independent territories was in the County of Holland. Originally granted as a fief to the Danish chieftain Rorik in return for loyalty to the emperor in 862, the region of Kennemara (the region around modern Haarlem) rapidly grew under Rorik's descendants in size and importance. By the early 11th century, Count Dirk III was levying tolls on the Meuse estuary and was able to resist military intervention from his overlord, the Duke of Lower Lorraine. In 1083, the name ‘’Holland’’ first appears in a deed referring to a region corresponding more or less to the current province of South Holland and the southern half of what is now North Holland. Holland's influence continued to grow over the next two centuries. The Counts of Holland conquered most of Zeeland but it was not until 1289 that Count Floris V (1254–96) was able to subjugate the Frisians in West Friesland (that is, the northern half of North Holland).

Renaissance and Reformation (1384-1568)
Philip the Bold of Burgundy became the ruler of Flanders and Artois (1384) and his successors added Holland, Zeeland, Hainaut, Namur, Limburg, and Luxembourg. The dukes of Burgundy were rich and powerful, rivaling the greatest kings in the size of their armies and the magnificence of their courts. The military prowess and courtly splendor were funded by taxing the towns, which more and more frequently resisted; the city leaders also resented the Burgundian officials who tried to reduce their privileges and the rights of the states, the provincial assemblies formed to represent the interests of subjects in dealings with their rulers. The Netherlanders felt particularly repressed under Charles the Bold, who sought to create a middle kingdom between France and Germany. His death in 1477 gave the Netherlands a chance to wrest renewal of their privileges from his heiress, the Duchess Mary. But after her death in 1482, her widower, Maximilian of Austria, a Hapsburg, ruled as regent for their young son Philip and crushed the opposition to his rule. After the death of Philip in 1506, his son Charles I (1500–1558) became ruler of the Netherlands as well as king of Spain (1516–56); and (as Charles V), Holy Roman Emperor (1519–58). He taxed the Netherlands for the never-ending Hapsburg wars against France. To the Netherlands he added Friesland in 1524, Utrecht and Overijssel in 1528, Groningen in 1536, and Gelderland in 1543. Charles centralized power by establishing a privy council and councils of state and finance over the provincial assemblies and by formally uniting the 17 provinces of the Netherlands and the duchy of Burgundy in the "Burgundian circle" within the Holy Roman Empire. A devout Catholic, he attempted to stop the spread of Protestantism in the Low Countries; he was somewhat more successful there than in Germany chiefly because the adherents of the new faith in the Netherlands had no princes to defend them against the emperor. Charles put down a political rebellion in Ghent in 1539–1540; his angry abolition of the town's historic privileges was a sign of his contempt for local rights and autonomy.

The Netherlands had become the richest place in the world. Population reached 3 million in 1560, with 25 cities of 10,000 or more, by far the largest urban presence in Europe; the trading and financial center of and Antwerp, population 100,000, was especially important.

Dutch Revolt 1568-1648
The Dutch revolt against Spain, 1568–1648, is the most protracted rebellion in modern European history and it involved more continuous fighting than any modern war. Spain's failure was due to the determination of the Dutch and their military advantages, especially strength at sea, the defensibility of the northwestern provinces, as well as Spanish financial mismanagement and diversion of Spanish resources to other conflicts. Spanish diversions against England led to the disaster of the Spanish Armada (1588), while intervention to support of the Catholics in the French religious wars, reduced resources to suppress the revolt. Yet Spain was reluctant to accept failure, partly because Dutch terms for peace were unacceptable and, by 1628, because Spain was also fighting to preserve her overseas trade from Dutch attacks. The Spanish economic and political collapse of the 1620s-1640s brought about a truce because it coincided with Dutch suspicions of France and increased hopes for the Dutch reconquest of Brazil.

Philip II (1527–98) reigned over the Netherlands not as king of Spain (which he also was), but as the hereditary duke, count or lord in each of the provinces. He made the fatal mistake of excluding established political leaders in the Netherlands from the process of decision-making, relying instead at the critical moment (1559–64) on one person, Cardinal Granvelle (1517–86). The local elites led the revolt in part to restore their traditional roles.In 1567 he appointed Fernando Álvarez de Toledo, the duke of Alba (1508-1582) as governor. A religious fanatic and ruthless absolutist, Alba sought to totally crush the Dutch quest for religious toleration and political self-government. He set up the Court of Blood to spread terror throughout the provinces. Some 18,000 persons were executed and their properties confiscated. He raised taxes again and again, getting more animosity than money.[4]

In 1572 the Dutch again rose up, and on a larger scale than before. Their leaders and theorists now developed a theory of sovereignty that said local privileges were the articles of a contract between prince and people, with the States General as the people's representatives, and when a prince like Philip II violated this contract the states and people could legitimately resist him. William the Silent (1533–84),[5] previously loyal to Philip and the richest nobleman of the Low Countries, proclaimed his opposition. He took the lead of the Gueux (or "Gueus"), a revolutionary party formed in 1566 by 2,000 Dutch and Flemish nobles and burghers (both Protestants and Catholics), whose "Compromise of Breda" bound them by solemn oath to resist the curtailment of liberties imposed by Spain. Alba defeated the invading Gueux forces but failed to regain the north-western areas. In 1573 he was recalled to Spain in disgrace, and Philip replaced him with a series of commanders (Luis de Zúñiga y Requesens (b 1528 d 1576 in charge 1573-76), Don John of Austria (b 1545, d 1578, in charge 1576-78), and Alessandro Farnese, duke of Parma (b1545 d1592, in charge 1578-86)). The Spanish army in Flanders, its pay in arrears, mutinied in 1576 and began to loot in the provinces not under rebel control. In 1578-90 Farnese reconquered the southern parts of Netherlands (approximately present-day Belgium); he succeeded in winning back to the king the nobles of the Walloon French-speaking southern provinces by the treaty of Arras (1579), which restored their old privileges. In 1584 his military victories gave him control of Flanders; he forced all the Protestants to flee and set up a Counter-Reformation that firmly established Catholicism and wiped out Protestantism in the Spanish Netherlands (which later became Belgium). In response the Union of Utrecht (1579) united the seven northern provinces against Spain. They formally declared independence in the Oath of Abjuration ("Plakkaat van Verlatinghe") July 26, 1581.[6]

The English support of the Dutch rebels led Philip to plan the invasion of England in 1588, which was a total disaster; see Spanish Armada.

Prince Maurice of Nassau (1567-1625), son of William the Silent, implemented tactical, technical, and logistical changes, and built a highly disciplined army that fought only two infantry battles but lay 30 sieges between 1588 and 1609. His military and naval victories enabled the Netherlands to conclude in 1609 a 12-year truce with Spain, which in practice meant the independence of the seven United Provinces.[7]

The province of Holland, and especially the city of Amsterdam, was the center of the revolt and provided over 60% of the taxes and an even larger share of war loans. The unwillingness of the increasingly powerful and militant Calvinists to accept religious compromises for the sake of national unity made the split with the Catholic south inevitable.

Interpreting the Dutch Revolt
Dutch historians have made the successful 80-year revolt against Spain the centerpiece of national history—as a revolt against tyranny on behalf of political, religious and economic freedom.[8] The Duke of Alba is depicted as the central villain, with basic causes assigned to religion and to the constitutional crisis, that is, the demand for greater local and regional autonomy. Historians stress the interplay of the economy, finance, the nobility, and the cities, as well as the military logistics, and international complications.[9] An important cause was the fear that Spanish King Philip II planned to impose an inquisition based on the fearful Spanish model to replace the local Dutch Inquisitions that complied with local customs and sentiments. The fears were sparked in the late 1550s by a new plan for Catholic bishoprics in the Low Countries and his appointment of many new bishops who were former inquisitors.[10] Historians have downplayed the importance of the threat because it did not in fact exist—Philip had no such plans, but the fears were nevertheless real enough to spark a revolt.

After 1945 research shifted from the drama of national liberation and instead has focused on the enormous variety of political and economic conditions in Dutch towns and provinces and on the weaknesses of attempts at centralization by the Habsburg rulers. Major breakthroughs have come in Social history, especially in demographic history. Economic history has become a central topic, with the exact relationship between economics and political events highly controversial among scholars. The religious aspects of the revolt have been studied in terms of mentalities, exposing the minority position of Calvinism, while the international aspects have been studied more seriously by foreign historians than by the Dutch themselves.

Rowen (1990) asks whether the revolt was a revolution—that is, an anticipation of the French Revolution that involved the seizure of a state by a revolutionary party aiming to transform the state along economic, social, cultural, ideological, and political lines. He sees the revolt as the coming together of multiple conflicts in a series of rebellions. It was primarily a war of religion, but it was also a defense of local interests against centralization and against subordination to a foreign state. The Dutch Revolt was a time when authority fell apart and then rebuilt itself in two parts.[11]

Golden Era, 1600-1720s
During the 17th century, the Netherlands, with just two million people, enjoyed its "Golden Age" of economic success, world power, and tremendous artistic output. The Netherlands, with a rapidly growing trade and worldwide empire, boasted Europe's greatest number of cities and highest literacy rate, many world-class artists and generous patrons, religious tolerance, and a highly structured and wide-ranging social network.

The underpinnings of the golden age involved a very strong economy based on international trade and colonies, along with advances in textiles, brewing, glass-making, shipbuilding, printing, canal and irrigation works, land reclamation, and energy (using peat, not coal or wood). Holland was the vanguard of Europe, leading the way in productivity-enhancing economic advances. The per-capita income remained steady and high, as the population grew 50%. Urban workers saw their wages grow 50% from 1570 to 1670.

Protected inland waters such as the Zuider Zee and the waters around Zeeland attracted fishermen, who built small towns. The demand for food from the growing cities encouraged them to build dikes and reclaim arable land for commercial agriculture. Gradually the sea was conquered and the northern provinces of the Netherlands rose out of the water. Agricultural output grew steadily at 4% a decade.[12]

The Dutch, proud of their Republicanism used a strong sense of civic pride to improve the infrastructure, setting a model for the world. Once the Eighty and Thirty Years' Wars ended in 1648, the accumulation of grandiose and ambitious schemes that had been postponed because of war led to a frenetic burst of building and refurbishment throughout the Netherlands. Numerous large public buildings were erected in the 1650s and 1660s, far more than in the previous three decades. Those cities which grew fastest between 1648 and 1672, especially Amsterdam, Leiden, Rotterdam, The Hague and Haarlem, laid out whole new urban quarters, constructed new canals and roads, and planned new housing as part of integrated urban development schemes. Delft though it grew at a slower pace, was extensively rebuilt following the great gunpowder explosion of 1654 which devastated the city center. Even Utrecht, a relatively stagnant stagnant city, drew up far-reaching plans, hoping by means of investing in redevelopment to attract more immigrants and activity.[13]

Culture of the Golden Era
Baruch de Spinoza (1632–77) was one of the most important philosophers of the era, and certainly the most radical. His works were published after his death. Spinoza was excommunicated from Amsterdam's Sefardic synagogue at the age of twenty-four; he then changed his first name to Benedict. The immediate reasons for the "cherem" pronounced against him are unclear, although it seems he was already propounding the heretical views that are found in his later writings.[14]

Painting of the Dutch Century. In this period, a proliferation of distinct genres of paintings is conducted. With a small amount of religious painting, other genres like scenes of peasant life, landscapes, townscapes and cityscapes, seascapes, and still lifes of various types, specially flower paintings, all were enormously popular.

Seventeenth century Netherlanders had a passion for depictions of city and countryside, either real or imaginary. Local scenery asserted Holland's national pride, while vistas of foreign sites recalled the extent of its overseas commerce. Holland's ocean ports teemed with fishing and trading ships, and the tiny country's merchant fleet was almost as large as all the rest of maritime Europe's combined. [1] Maritime painting was enormously popular in Dutch Golden Age. Amsterdam was the largest artistic center.

Amsterdam By the mid-1660s Amsterdam had reached the optimum population (about 200,000) for the level of trade, commerce and agriculture then available to support it. The city contributed the largest quota in taxes to the States of Holland which in turn contributed over half the quota to the States General. Amsterdam was also one of the most reliable in settling tax demands and therefore was able to use the threat to withhold such payments to good effect.

Amsterdam was governed by a body of regents, a large, but closed, oligarchy with control over all aspects of the city's life, and a dominant voice in the foreign affairs of Holland. Only men with sufficient wealth and a long enough residence within the city could join the ruling class. Many were from noble families, who were successful in maintaining their power within the supposedly bourgeois Republic; they formed the elite in administrative, political and economic systems. The first step to joining the regents for an ambitious and wealthy merchant family was to arrange a marriage with a long-established regent family. In the 1670s one such union, that of the Trip family (the Amsterdam branch of the Swedish arms makers) with the son of Burgomaster Valckenier, extended the influence and patronage available to the latter and strengthened his dominance of the council. The oligarchy in Amsterdam thus gained strength from its breadth and openness. In the smaller towns family interest could unite members on policy decisions but contraction through intermarriage could lead to the degeneration of the quality of the members. In Amsterdam the network was so large that members of the same family could be related to opposing factions and pursue widely separated interests. The young men who had risen to positions of authority in the 1670s and 1680s consolidated their hold on office well into the 1690s and even the new century.[15]

Amsterdam's regents provided good services to residents. They spent heavily on the water-ways and other essential infrastructure, as well as municipal almshouses for the elderly, hospitals and churches.

Amsterdam's wealth was generated by its commerce, which was in turn sustained by the judicious encouragement of entrepreneurs whatever their origin. This open door policy has been interpreted as proof of a tolerant ruling class. But toleration was practiced for the convenience of the city. Therefore, the wealthy Sephardic Jews from Portugal were welcomed and accorded all privileges except those of citizenship, but the poor Ashkenazi Jews from Eastern Europe were far more carefully vetted and those who became dependent on the city were encouraged to move on. Similarly, provision for the housing of Huguenot immigrants was made in 1681 when Louis XIV's religious policy was beginning to drive these Protestants out of France; no encouragement was given to the dispossessed Dutch from the countryside or other towns of Holland. The regents encouraged immigrants to build churches and provided sites or buildings for churches and temples for all but the most radical sects and the native Catholics by the 1670s (although even the Catholics could practice quietly in a chapel within the Beguinhof).

Foreign policy

The House of Orange frewuently undermined the interests of the united Dutch provinces by pursuing an alliance with the Stuart kings of England for dynastic reasons. Although Frederick Henry (1584-1647), head of the House of Orange, refused to become entangled in British politics, and focused on the war with Spain that began in 1621. His son William II (1626-50), reversed policy, altered Anglo-Dutch relations, and sought a Stuart alliance, which came to nothing. Not until 1672 did William III adopt an independent policy.[16]