Dissertation_A Bick_May 25 - DataSpace at Princeton University

Dissertation_A Bick_May 25 - DataSpace at Princeton University Dissertation_A Bick_May 25 - DataSpace at Princeton University

dataspace.princeton.edu
from dataspace.princeton.edu More from this publisher
09.04.2013 Views

particularly important role within the oligarchic and decentralized political structure of the United Provinces and, second, meetings offer a largely untapped source for examining the practical negotiation of policy. John Kenneth Galbraith is said to have quipped that “meetings are indispensable when you don't want to do anything,” but in the Dutch Republic they were in fact the heart and soul of politics. As many historians have pointed out, the Dutch Republic was a meeting society. 72 Following the revolt from Habsburg authority in the 1560s, and several abortive efforts to attract the protection of another European monarch, the Treaty of Utrecht created a system of government in which urban and provincial assemblies, represented at the States General, were largely responsible for decision-making. This system—which built upon, among other things, a long tradition of locally managing water-works—enhanced the power of urban magistrates in relation to the remaining elements of the nobility and increased the importance of committees, boards, and other representative bodies for deliberating on issues of public concern. 73 It gave rise to what Wilbert van Vree calls “Europe's first meeting class” and, with it, a relatively horizontal political system in which discussion and consensus, rather than hierarchy and command, played a central role. 74 It was not simply that the Dutch met often, or that so many people participated in these meetings, but that meetings were constituitive of political authority to a greater extent than elsewhere in Europe. Among Dutch historians, this aspect of political culture is referred to as discussieculture (discussion culture), a concept that helps to explain both the relatively open and inclusive 























































 72 Wilbert van Vree, Meetings, Manners, and Civilization: The Development of Modern Meeting Behaviour (London: Leicester University Press, 1999); Hank te Velde, Dennis Bos, and Maurits Ebben, eds., Harmonie in Holland: het Poldermodel van 1500 tot Nu (Amsterdam: Bert Bakker, 2008). A recent summary can be found in Frijhoff and Spies, 1650: Hard-Won Unity. 73 Te Velde, Bos, and Ebben, Harmonie in Holland: het Poldermodel van 1500 tot Nu. 74 Van Vree, Meetings, Manners, and Civilization, 107. 
 21

character of Dutch political institutions and the sometimes slow, even dysfunctional pace of political decision-making. With power and authority scattered among dozens of city councils, provincial assemblies, synods, admiralties, and the States General, the state itself was less a clearly defined locus of sovereignty or a monopoly on the legitimate use of force than it was, in effect, a system of meetings. 75 As Anne Goldgar has shown, this system created serious problems when one needed swift resolution to a particular problem: in the wake of the Tulip Bubble, which popped in 1637, litigants were referred from one assembly to the next, and sometimes back again, before they were able to find redress for their petitions. 76 In cases relating to foreign policy or war this could be quite damaging, though, as Guido de Bruin has pointed out, the deliberative nature of decision-making may have offered important advantages as well: First, the large number of voting provinces [within the States General] and parts guaranteed a careful process of decision-making and a consistent line of policy, contrasting favorably with the politics of the absolute monarchies. Second, the stratified process of decision-making fostered a large measure of involvement from provincial and local authorities, an unusual interest on the part of the public and, consequently, a reasonable inclination to cooperate, unlike the monarchies. Third, the broad base of participation considerably reduced the influence of political corruption. 77 Thus, De Bruin concludes, “the form of government in the Dutch Republic does not deserve the negative judgment it has received from foreign contemporaries, eighteenth-century reformers, and nationalist historians.” 78 De Bruin and Van Vree have both shown the extent to which power was exercised not only in formal assemblies, but in the smaller ad hoc committees to which many issues were 























































 75 The reference is to Max Weber’s well-known definition of the state in his essay “Politics as a Vocation”: “Today, however, we have to say that a state is a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory.” On the variety of state forms in early modern Europe, see Hendrik Spruyt, The Sovereign State and its Competitors (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994). 76 Anne Goldgar, Tulipmania: Money, Honor, and Knowledge in the Dutch Golden Age (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007). 77 Guido de Bruin, Geheimhouding en Verraad: de Geheimhouding van Staatszaken ten tijde van de Republiek, 1600-1750 (’s-Gravenhage: SDU Uitgeverij, 1991), 616. 78 Ibid. 
 22

particularly important role within the oligarchic and decentralized political structure of the<br />

United Provinces and, second, meetings offer a largely untapped source for examining the<br />

practical negoti<strong>at</strong>ion of policy.<br />

John Kenneth Galbraith is said to have quipped th<strong>at</strong> “meetings are indispensable when<br />

you don't want to do anything,” but in the Dutch Republic they were in fact the heart and soul of<br />

politics. As many historians have pointed out, the Dutch Republic was a meeting society. 72<br />

Following the revolt from Habsburg authority in the 1560s, and several abortive efforts to <strong>at</strong>tract<br />

the protection of another European monarch, the Tre<strong>at</strong>y of Utrecht cre<strong>at</strong>ed a system of<br />

government in which urban and provincial assemblies, represented <strong>at</strong> the St<strong>at</strong>es General, were<br />

largely responsible for decision-making. This system—which built upon, among other things, a<br />

long tradition of locally managing w<strong>at</strong>er-works—enhanced the power of urban magistr<strong>at</strong>es in<br />

rel<strong>at</strong>ion to the remaining elements of the nobility and increased the importance of committees,<br />

boards, and other represent<strong>at</strong>ive bodies for deliber<strong>at</strong>ing on issues of public concern. 73 It gave rise<br />

to wh<strong>at</strong> Wilbert van Vree calls “Europe's first meeting class” and, with it, a rel<strong>at</strong>ively horizontal<br />

political system in which discussion and consensus, r<strong>at</strong>her than hierarchy and command, played<br />

a central role. 74 It was not simply th<strong>at</strong> the Dutch met often, or th<strong>at</strong> so many people particip<strong>at</strong>ed in<br />

these meetings, but th<strong>at</strong> meetings were constituitive of political authority to a gre<strong>at</strong>er extent than<br />

elsewhere in Europe.<br />

Among Dutch historians, this aspect of political culture is referred to as discussieculture<br />

(discussion culture), a concept th<strong>at</strong> helps to explain both the rel<strong>at</strong>ively open and inclusive<br />

























































<br />

72 Wilbert van Vree, Meetings, Manners, and Civiliz<strong>at</strong>ion: The Development of Modern Meeting Behaviour<br />

(London: Leicester <strong>University</strong> Press, 1999); Hank te Velde, Dennis Bos, and Maurits Ebben, eds., Harmonie in<br />

Holland: het Poldermodel van 1500 tot Nu (Amsterdam: Bert Bakker, 2008). A recent summary can be found in<br />

Frijhoff and Spies, 1650: Hard-Won Unity.<br />

73 Te Velde, Bos, and Ebben, Harmonie in Holland: het Poldermodel van 1500 tot Nu.<br />

74 Van Vree, Meetings, Manners, and Civiliz<strong>at</strong>ion, 107.<br />


 21

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!