Dutch Revolt Lecture
Instead of the overall generalisation, it would be better to take the Dutch Revolt as three separate revolts - in 1566, 1672 and 1572. While each were distinctive and had their own character, their motives and the social groups involved overlapped. They definitely had a religious element, but also involved political and social and economic issues.
The political background to the 1566 revolt was unstable. Margaret of Parma was the Regent of Netherlands, and ruled with advice from an Inner Council. This Council superseded the traditional Council of State, which had previously been comprised of Dutch grandees. Dissatisfied with the lack of power they had over the Regent, the grandees temporarily withdrew their support from Margaret of Parma, as did the town oligarchs. These two social groups instead supported the Alliance of lesser nobles, or the "Confederates" as they were called, who presented a compromise to Margaret of Parma. The grandees hoped to use this to their advantage to gain more power, although they never actually took part in the revolt itself; instead just undermining the government of Margaret of Parma. However, when the actual revolt took place, the grandees restored the alliance between them and the government and suppressed the disorder that had ensued during the brief period of discontent. Despite the grandees aversion to the political system set up at this time, as they did not revolt themselves, there were actually very few, if any political motivations for the first revolt.
Unlike the second revolt, which took place in 1572, and consisted of two different rebelling groups, in which politics played a key part in motivating those involved. The seizure of The Brill on April 1st, led to a chain reaction of oligarchs in Holland and Zealand allowing the Beggars into the towns in order to stay in power. It was only a matter of time after the Sea Beggar’s invasion before William of Orange led an uncoordinated alliance of Calvinist exiles, French Huguenots and Palatinate Germans into the south of the Netherlands. Orange’s motivations were politically inclined, as he wanted to regain his titles, land, power and influence in the Netherlands. Also unlike the first revolt, large numbers of the Dutch population were also in revolt, due partly to Orange’s propaganda, which stated that the rebellion was for things such as Dutch rights and liberties, and was against oppression and intolerance. Also, Alva, who had replaced Margaret of Parma in 1657, had been regarded as a menace to all of the Netherlands, with his policy of no mercy. A ‘Council of Troubles’ had been set up, which soon became known as the ‘Council of Blood.’ It tried over 1200 people, and of those, between 1000 and 2000 were executed, while about 9000 people lost all or part of their lands. Two of those were the grandees Egmont and Hornes, both of whom were members of the Order of the Golden Fleece. By executing those, Alva attacked noble privileges. He also alienated the nobles from the government far more than Margaret of Parma had previously done, by surrounding himself with Spanish and Italian advisors. However, it was his decision to impose a new tax, the Tenth Penny, which caused the most outcry, and meant that oligarchs instead turned to the rebels over the Spanish government.
The third revolt occurred four years later in 1576, and was a mixture of long-term and short-term political issues, triggered by the mutiny of the Army of Flanders, who looted and ransacked the loyal southern provinces. Both the southern grandees and oligarchs had their own grievances against Alva’s government, such as the infringement of rights and privileges by the government especially since 1567. The mutiny of the Army of Flanders provided them with a window of opportunity to overthrow Alva’s government, and remove the foreign troops from their country. Aershot and other southern Catholic grandees joined the other side and made peace with Orange in order to achieve their political aims of restoring the aristocracy to their rightful place. However, desperate measures had been required by the northern states to survive against the Catholic onslaught, and a kind or parliamentary democracy had been formed, which favoured the oligarchs. The states of Holland and Zealand had sworn their allegiance to Orange, who was appointed as stadholder, but he did not have absolute power as a committee picked by the states of Holland and Zealand advised him. This meant that there was a clash between the north and the south, as their political aims were entirely different, and this, along with faction struggle between the Houses of Croy (Aershot) and Orange meant that the Pacification of Ghent broke down.
Social and economic factors also contributed heavily to the three Dutch revolts, although each revolt had its own separate social classes involved. The first revolt was due to the economically troubled lesser nobility, who were under pressure from inflation, for although both the grandees and the oligarchs had forsaken Margaret of Parma, neither of the social classes actually revolted. The grandees had objected to the economic ramifications of Philip II’s proposed Bishopric Scheme, which would have removed the source of income from their younger sons, who, as they inherited nothing, usually went into the Church. The patricians also objected to the Bishopric Scheme as the heresy laws and Inquisitions it had would have targeted the economically productive artisans and craftsmen in the towns. Hence, from their point of view, the Bishopric Scheme would prove damaging to the Dutch economy.
Something else, which would have proved damaging to the Dutch economy, was the Tenth Penny, a ten percent sales tax which Alva tried to implement in 1572 and was another cause as to the revolt. The Tenth Penny was a bane to all of the Netherlands, especially after they had suffered a poor harvest, bad weather, unemployment, starvation and the Sea Beggars raiding their shipping. This had heightened tensions between the patricians and the artisans, which led to the towns admitting the Sea Beggars instead of fighting them off.
The loyal towns in the south in 1576 suffered economically when they were forced to pay tax to support the Army of Flanders, which was required to fight against the rebel states of Holland and Zealand. There was also social tension between the classes as in some southern towns, such as Ghent in 1577 and in Oudenaarde in 1578, as artisans seized power in coups from the oligarchs. The Pacification of Ghent, which was signed after the sack of Antwerp in October 1576 between the north and the south, also highlighted the differences between the third revolt and the revolt of Holland and Zealand, as the third was more aristocratic, unlike the other in which Orange was the only grandee who took part.
However, religious factors were also motivations in all three of the revolts, although each to a different degree. In the first revolt in 1566, the Iconoclast Fury was undertaken by small, organised groups of Calvinists, thus prompting Margaret of Parma to panic and write to Philip for reinforcements. However, because the revolt was not a mass movement, it was easily put down without the Spanish reinforcements. It was not a mass movement as the primary reason for rebelling was to have Calvinism replace Catholicism, and there were only few Calvinists.
But since the first revolt, Spanish policy showed a religious motive, such as the use of heresy laws and Inquisitions by the government. It was this harshness, and the absolute refusal to even consider religious toleration that offended the Dutch, who were not committed Calvinists.
The second revolt in 1572 led to the small number of Calvinists in Holland and Zealand winning their emancipation and Calvinism became the established religion in the two states. Part of their motivation behind the revolt was to carry out a Reformation, which succeeded despite Calvinists being a minority. Orange himself converted, as did many of the patricians, be it only to maintain their power. With both Calvinist exiles and French Huguenots fighting in the revolt, it is clear that religion played a key part in this revolt.
However, religion was not part of the initial revolt undertaken by Aershot and the other southern grandees in 1576. However, the Pacification of Ghent once again illustrated the differences between the north and the south and their two separate revolts. With the revolt of Holland and Zealand being partially motivated by Calvinism, and with the third revolt having little to do with religion - especially not Calvinism - these differences helped to contribute to the breakdown of the Pacification of Ghent. With many artisans being Calvinists, and first taking over towns before reforming them with help from the mercenary army of John Casimir of the Palatinate, this soon led to some of the troops in the States-General’s army mutinying, and starting to fight Casimir’s mercenaries.
it is clear to see that although religion was a key element in the motivation of some of the rebels during the three Dutch revolts, it was not necessarily the main factor and thus it would be inaccurate to describe them simply as a war of religion.
OThe Treaty of Arras in 1579, which signalled the end of the southern province’s rebellion contains no religious content, instead indicating the political and social and economic reasons as to why they revolted, such as the breach of Dutch liberties. However, the rebellion in the north continued on, fuelled by a committed Calvinist minority, although other political and social and economic factors ensured the continued support of the populations of Holland and Zealand.
verall, due to the completely non-religious motivations of the third revolt, the generalisation of the Dutch revolt can not be described as a war of religion. However, as the first revolt failed due to its lack of non-religious motivations, and the second one continued on because of its religious motivations, it could be argued that from 1566 to 1576, the Dutch revolt could have been described as a war of religion."