The Dutch Republic

The ancestor of states based on capital, such as the Dutch Republic from the late sixteenth century and England from the late seventeenth century, was the medieval city state, which might mobilize far larger forces in proportion to its number of inhabitants than the contemporary kingdoms.

Various conflicts with the Spanish authorities, including reactions against attempts to introduce the Inquisition in order to suppress the strong Protestant movement in the country, led to the Dutch War of Liberation, which ended with seven of the provinces achieving independence from Spain, temporarily in 1609 and permanently in 1648. The independent provinces were all situated in the north, whereas the south, with cities like Ghent, Antwerp and Brussels, which remained under Spanish control, had earlier been those leading in trade and man­ufacture. The Southern Netherlands, later (from 1831) called Belgium, had con­siderable independence under Spanish rule. The Spanish aim was to eradicate Protestantism, not to make the Low Countries a Spanish province. Nevertheless, the Dutch Republic in the north was more successful commercially.

With less than two million inhabitants, the Dutch Republic became a European great power in the seventeenth century, able to field an army of 75,000 men, mostly mercenaries, during the Thirty Years War, which increased further during the wars against Louis XIV,⁹ and at that time the largest and most efficient navy in Europe.

How was it possible for a country of two million inhabitants to mobilize such forces, almost continuously during 80 years (1572—1648, except the years 1609—21) when the much larger and more populous countries of France and Spain at the time were on the brink of bankruptcy during any prolonged war? Not only did the Dutch Republic manage to raise the troops but also pay them regularly and keep them in garrisons in the country without causing any harm to the civilian popula­tion. In 1673, the English ambassador Sir William Temple at least partly gave the answer with the following comment on the Dutch public debt:

Whoever is admitted to bring in his money, [regards] it for a great deal of favour; and when they pay off any part of the principal, those it belongs to, receive it with tears, not knowing how to dispose of it to interest, with such safety and ease.¹⁰

Of course, a solid economy is necessary to make people invest their money in this way, but also a strong government. The Dutch Republic was the leading trading and colonial nation in Europe at the time, but also had an efficient tax system which in turn enabled it to introduce a permanent public debt.¹¹ The system was mainly based on the provinces. The Union determined the level of taxation and the percentage each province had to pay. The actual taxation was the responsibility of the provinces and varied between them; indirect taxes dominated in the urban and mercantile ones; direct taxes in the rural provinces. The Union also deter­mined the weight and value of the mint while the provinces issued the coins.

Thus, for a long time the Republic had considerable economic freedom, could maintain a strong army and navy and engage in wars without imposing undue burdens on the taxpayers. In 1713, the total debt had increased to 378 million guilders which meant 14 million in interest or more than the total annual tax revenues. By this time, most of the debt was concentrated in relatively few Dutch families whose members largely had access to privileged political office; none of it was held by foreign governments. The consequence was a drastic reduction in military expenses which meant the end of the Republic’s period as a great power.¹² Thanks to greater austerity in the following period, the debt was somewhat reduced but increased once more as a consequence of the war against Britain in the 1780s and then the internal conflict in 1787 and the Napoleonic Wars. By the end of the latter, the Republic in practice went bankrupt. Thus, as we shall see, there was some resemblance to the situation in France, although most of the other pro­blems there were not to be found in the Dutch Republic. However, a basic pro­blem was that the economy became less dynamic. There was more competition from abroad, many of the markets were lost and, owing to its lack of coal and iron, the Dutch Republic had little opportunity to participate in the beginning Industrial Revolution from the late eighteenth century.

Politically, the Dutch Republic was less consolidated than kingdoms like Eng­land and France; the provinces ruled themselves in most ways, but there was also a central executive power in the shape of the stadholder.

Each of the seven provinces had their own government. In addition, they were very different and often competed with each other. Holland was by far the largest and richest and profited most from the trade, with the other sea province, Zeeland, as its main rival in this field. The other provinces were less urbanized and without access to the sea, although they had some important towns. Moreover, the provinces were fairly decentralized internally; particularly the cities had great independence. Considering these conditions, the relative stability of the Republic seems remark­able. However, it had the advantage of great wealth and easy communications which made it possible to meet frequently and solve problems that occurred. Above all, the exposed position must have been a strong incentive to stick together, as a small country with no natural borders and threatened by powerful neighbours, England, France and Spain, the latter from 1713 replaced by Austria.

Frans Hals’ portrait of the Lady Governors of the Old Men’s Almshouse in Haarlem shows five elderly women, dressed wholly in black. Despite the immediate impression of monotony, they are highly individualized and seen from different angles.

The simplicity and discreet colours of Dutch art are not only evidence of pur­itanism but also of the importance of the burghers as patrons. There is little reli­gious art, not because the Dutch were not religious but because of the Calvinist ban on religious paintings. Although the republic did have a nobility of some importance and the Prince of Orange was sufficiently recognized internationally to be able to marry a king’s daughter, members of the bourgeoisie were the main patrons of art. As the Dutch Republic was the richest country in Europe in the seventeenth century, there were plenty of patrons. Frans Hals’ governesses form one of many examples of this, but there were also others, including the most famous of them all, Rembrandt’s night watch, a dramatic picture of a troop of soldiers breaking up to march out, painted when the Republic was still at war (1642), although the troop in question was a social club rather than a military unit.

Thus, we are dealing with bourgeois art but a bourgeoisie sufficiently rich and confident in itself not to imitate the court and the aristocracy, but developing its own taste. It has been discussed, both in the seventeenth century and among modern historians, to what extent the wealthy burghers used their wealth exclu­sively for investment, in accordance with Max Weber’s Protestant work ethic, or whether they spent it on luxury and comfort. Dutch cities, notably Amsterdam, where large areas dating from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries have been preserved, give a more austere impression than, for instance, Venice and other Italian cities. The tall, narrow houses do not much resemble palaces, but of course we must bear in mind that in the rapidly expanding city of Amsterdam, the ground was very expensive, not only because the space was narrow but also because the soft and humid terrain made it very difficult to build there. Most of the houses, as well as the many monumental town halls, are built in a style often referred to as Renaissance, which was imitated in many other places in northern Europe, but which is closer to medieval architecture than the more classicizing Italian style. It would also seem that the Dutch gave priority to comfort rather than ostentation and of course also that they had to spend much on collective purposes, notably defence, because of the vulnerable position of the country. This is also confirmed by a comparison between Venice and Amsterdam.¹⁴ Although austerity was also an ideal in the private lives of the Venetian elite, both the city and its leading citizens organized lavish and spectacular festivities on special occasions. In the seventeenth century, Venice was still an important commercial city, but many members of the elite at this time were rentiers rather than active businessmen. Whereas this reflects the reduced importance of Venice and other Italian cities in international trade, it is also a normal phenomenon that the number of rentiers increases with time in commercial cities. In the eighteenth century, there was a similar tendency in Amsterdam as well.

A frequent observation by foreign visitors is how clean everything was in the Dutch towns; the houses were dusted and cleaned regularly, and even the streets are said to have been clean:

The beauty and cleanliness of the streets are so extraordinary that Persons of all ranks do not scruple, but even seem to take pleasure in walking them. As the streets were paved with brick and as clean as any chamber floor, a woman could even walk there in mules.¹⁵

A waste and garbage service was introduced in Amsterdam in the 1590s. Considering the filth and rubbish filling the streets in most European towns, the surprise and admiration of visitors to the Dutch ones are easy to understand. When entering the houses, however, some of them might find the cleanliness a little exaggerated. Sir William Temple tells of a magistrate visiting a house where the maid found that his shoes were not clean enough. Resolutely, she took him on her back, set him down at the bottom of the stairs, took off his shoes and gave him some slippers, after which she told him to go up to the mistress who was in her chamber.

Visitors also note the numerous charitable institutions, including the one already mentioned, and many others whose regents are also portrayed in art. A Venetian observer comments that the Dutch were able to practise this kind of charity because they had stolen the wealth of the Church, which suggests the difference from Catholic countries, that charity in Calvinist countries was almost the only way to spend money on religious purposes. Moreover, Calvinist ethics included care for the ‘worthy poor’. All humans should work but it was the duty of society to sup­port those who were not able to do so. This gradually became the attitude all over Europe, regardless of confession, partly replacing earlier ideas of poverty as an expression of virtue and the poor as particularly loved by God, but it was practised to a greater extent in Calvinist areas.¹⁶ A further motive for this kind of charity was actually a constant lack of workers which formed an incentive to take care of poor children so that they might be of use to society later. Like all colonial powers, the Dutch exploited their colonies and profited from the slave trade. The conditions on board Dutch ships were no better than of those of other nations, which means that the voyages were dangerous and the mortality high. The surplus of the trade and shipping, however, seems to a greater extent than in most other places to have been invested in better living conditions, above all, for the bourgeoisie, but to some extent also for the rest of the population.