Suchergebnisse

Niek van Sas, History from a multiple of perspectives A number of reviewers found the lay-out and design of De metamorphose van Nederland rather unconventional. The book consists of a series of separate studies, written from various perspectives, that attempt for example to defend a specific thesis, to challenge some historiographical cliché, or to shift the contours of a debate. Ido de Haan would have liked to seen a firm conclusion containing a model for the political development of the Netherlands. Instead, the two opening articles explored the evolution of the Dutch state and nation from the Dutch Revolt to the present day. Lode Wils examined the book from a specifically Belgian angle. He firmly disagrees with the view that under different conditions the Dutch-Belgian United Kingdom of William I (1815-1830) might well have been saved. For his part, Wils overestimates Belgium's importance to the Dutch self-image after 1830 when he tries to explain the supposed anti-democratic reaction that was such a distinctive feature of the Netherlands right up until the Second World War. This response is part of the discussion forum 'De metamorfose van Nederland' (N.C.F. van Sas).

In this review article, Pepijn Brandon discusses Petra Groen (ed.), De Tachtigjarige Oorlog. Van opstand naar geregelde oorlog 1568-1648 (The Eighty Years War: From Revolt to All-Out War 1568-1648). The main strength of this work lies in its outspoken endorsement of a 'War and Society' approach to the Dutch Revolt, freeing military history from its old-fashioned, often nationalist and militarist streak, and focusing attention on the interaction between the military struggle and society at large. However the possibilities for reinterpretation offered by this approach are not fully grasped, and the gaps in our knowledge of the Revolt that become apparent from this synthesis frequently remain under-explored. Why do we still know so little about the motivations of 'ordinary soldiers' in the rebel army? Were military factors the main determinant in the eventual separation between North and South? In what ways did war influence the character of the new state? A more consistent application of a 'War and Society' approach would help to integrate these old questions in a new interpretative framework.In dit recensie-artikel bespreekt Pepijn Brandon het onder redactie van Petra Groen verschenen De Tachtigjarige Oorlog. Van opstand naar geregelde oorlog 1568-1648. De kracht van deze overzichtsstudie ligt in de toepassing van een uitgesproken 'War and Society'-benadering, die de militaire geschiedenis ontdoet van haar ouderwetse, vaak nationalistische en militaristische insteek en de aandacht richt op de samenhang tussen oorlog en maatschappij. Maar de mogelijkheden voor herinterpretatie die deze benadering van de Opstand biedt, worden niet volledig benut, en de lacunes in onze kennis die deze studie blootlegt, blijven vaak onbenoemd. Waarom weten we nog zo weinig over de motieven van 'de gewone soldaat' in het rebellenleger? Hoe doorslaggevend waren militaire factoren in de uiteindelijke scheiding tussen Noord en Zuid? En op welke manieren beïnvloedde de oorlog het karakter van de nieuwe staat? Een consequente toepassing van de 'War and Society'-benadering maakt het mogelijk deze oude vragen in te passen in een nieuw betoog.

H. te Velde, Stijlen van leiderschap. Persoon en politiek van Thorbecke tot Den Uyl Jac Bosmans, The political culture between political history and the history of civilizationIn principle, the author agrees with Te Velde's choice of Thorbecke, Kuyper, Colijn, Drees and Den Uyl as examples of styles of policy-making which, with the benefit of hindsight, seem to be an apt expression of the political spirit of their days, though he does place a few question marks against the choice of Colijn and Drees. In addition, he advocates the establishment of a mutually beneficial co-operative relationship between tfiose political historians who focus in particular on investigating the cultural aspects of politics and those who are more interested in examining the actual results. He argues that this kind of co-operation is necessary in order to withstand the tendency of many cultural historians to claim almost the entire past as the focus of their research, a claim which leaves no room for political history as a separate field of study. This review is part of the discussion forum 'Stijlen van leiderschap' (H. te Velde).

In this review article, Pepijn Brandon discusses Petra Groen (ed.), De Tachtigjarige Oorlog. Van opstand naar geregelde oorlog 1568-1648 (The Eighty Years War: From Revolt to All-Out War 1568-1648). The main strength of this work lies in its outspoken endorsement of a 'War and Society' approach to the Dutch Revolt, freeing military history from its old-fashioned, often nationalist and militarist streak, and focusing attention on the interaction between the military struggle and society at large. However the possibilities for reinterpretation offered by this approach are not fully grasped, and the gaps in our knowledge of the Revolt that become apparent from this synthesis frequently remain under-explored. Why do we still know so little about the motivations of 'ordinary soldiers' in the rebel army? Were military factors the main determinant in the eventual separation between North and South? In what ways did war influence the character of the new state? A more consistent application of a 'War and Society' approach would help to integrate these old questions in a new interpretative framework.In dit recensie-artikel bespreekt Pepijn Brandon het onder redactie van Petra Groen verschenen De Tachtigjarige Oorlog. Van opstand naar geregelde oorlog 1568-1648. De kracht van deze overzichtsstudie ligt in de toepassing van een uitgesproken 'War and Society'-benadering, die de militaire geschiedenis ontdoet van haar ouderwetse, vaak nationalistische en militaristische insteek en de aandacht richt op de samenhang tussen oorlog en maatschappij. Maar de mogelijkheden voor herinterpretatie die deze benadering van de Opstand biedt, worden niet volledig benut, en de lacunes in onze kennis die deze studie blootlegt, blijven vaak onbenoemd. Waarom weten we nog zo weinig over de motieven van 'de gewone soldaat' in het rebellenleger? Hoe doorslaggevend waren militaire factoren in de uiteindelijke scheiding tussen Noord en Zuid? En op welke manieren beïnvloedde de oorlog het karakter van de nieuwe staat? Een consequente toepassing van de 'War and Society'-benadering maakt het mogelijk deze oude vragen in te passen in een nieuw betoog.

From Marginal to Mainstream?: Populism in Dutch HistoryIn this article populism is perceived as a thin ideology with specific core concepts (a homogeneous people, a treacherous elite and popular sovereignty) that can flourish when specific conditions are met (political dissatisfaction, convergence of the established parties, increasingly opaque governance and new media). In the Netherlands one might discern three 'populist moments' – a period between 1916 and 1918, a period between 1963 and 1967 and a period which started in 2001/2002 and which seems not yet to be over. In electoral terms the first and second populist moments were rather weak. Both times the populist rhetoric was incorporated by (one of) the established parties. In 2001/2002 the established parties again attempted to incorporate populism but with less result. The new populism of the twenty-first century proved to be much stronger and much more durable in terms of its electoral strength and its programmatic appeal.

Bijna vijf jaar na het laatste grote congres van de politieke historici in Nederland, organiseerde de Onderzoeksschool Politieke Geschiedenis (OPG) eind juni 2022 opnieuw een congres, dit keer in samenwerking met de Association for Political History (APH). Het thema was Political history today: exploring new themes. Naast de gebruikelijke formats van plenaire lezingen en debatten, informerende sessies, en posterpresentaties, had de organisatie nadrukkelijk naar nieuwe vormen van congresseren gezocht. Dat kreeg onder andere de vorm van een interview met een vroegmodernist en een lunchevenement onder de titel Visualizing politics. In zijn hoedanigheid als conferentievoorzitter benadrukte Jacco Pekelder het belang van de ontmoeting en stimuleerde hij deelnemers hun kans te grijpen om te netwerken. Die lieten dat zich geen twee keer zeggen, en de wandelgangen van het Amsterdamse Trippenhuis gonsden dan ook van de netwerkende historici.

Introduction. The Internationalization of the National History and the PillarizationEfforts to approach Dutch political history from an international perspective have been going on for a long time. This has worked rather well for the early modern period, before the national state existed in a modern form. Nevertheless, applying this to the last few centuries remains a challenge. This is because this period was dominated by the national state and historiography was focussed on the state from the very beginning. Eliminating the national aspect from historiography altogether would not be a desirable course of action. However, it is necessary to be aware of the effects it has, and each generation has its own way of doing this. Nowadays, international comparisons and the history of transfers offer new opportunities. It is against this backdrop that the introduction explains how pillarization expanded to become the Dutch Sonderweg and how a new approach towards political history can compensate for the disadvantages of this perspective. This article is part of the special issue 'The Internationalization of the National History and the Pillarization'.

Prince Bernhard: Biography of a Public RoleIn her biography Bernhard. Een verborgen geschiedenis [Bernhard: A Hidden History], Annejet van der Zijl strives to write unaffectedly about a controversial character, and to set out a human portrayal of Bernhard. But has this undertaking succeeded? This dissertation certainly demythologises the jovial prince with the carnation, making for an exciting read – but do we really get to know any more about the prince as a 'man'? A question all the more relevant as the biography pretty much gives up describing his life after 1945. By placing the emphasis on the revelations – and as Van der Zijl assumes that Bernhard must have changed little between 1945 and 2004 – the story of Bernhard's life takes on a hermetic quality. Which in turn means this is not so much the story of a human prince, but of a public role. This review is part of the discussion forum 'Een verborgen geschiedenis' (Annejet van der Zijl).

National Principles? A Transnational History of Politics and the Constitution in the Nineteenth CenturyHow 'national' was the political history of the nineteenth century? This question is relevant because it relates to a century steeped in nation-building and nationalism. The article examines both the historiography and the transnational traffic of models for a constitutional order. Paradoxically, it was precisely during this century of nationalism that, more than ever before, the political and constitutional models were of a transnational nature. In general, the Netherlands evolved into an international trend-hopper during the nineteenth century. This also applied to the constitutional process. And yet, against the background of this general trend, the Dutch constitution of 1814/1815 and that of 1848 remained relatively original and were crafted on the basis of the national scene. Moreover, although British, French and Belgian models did indeed feature in the discussions leading up to the revision of the 1848 constitution, they did not play a prominent role. This study invites the audience to reflect upon the nature of 'national' as far as this relates to political history and the explanatory frameworks used for it. This article is part of the special issue 'The Internationalization of the National History and the Pillarization'.

'Holland's Militant Suffragettes'? A Theme from the History of Dutch FeminismThe historiography of feminism is bristling with international comparative surveys. It is precisely because of this that the use of national frameworks has been acknowledged, albeit unintentionally and indirectly. Nevertheless, this paper adopts the opposite stance, and argues that both national and internal affairs, as well as international and foreign affairs, can be viewed as categories which serve certain political agendas, thereby making it possible to distinguish between friends and foes in the political struggle. Historians should not reproduce such a differentiation but analyze it instead. To give an example of such an analysis, this paper outlines how the customary distinction between a moderate Dutch and a radical English electoral feminism gained an important impetus at a key moment: when in 1907 the discordant entanglement of political and personal contacts between feminists on both sides of the Channel eventually led to a schism in the Dutch Society for Women's Right to Vote. This article is part of the special issue 'The Internationalization of the National History and the Pillarization'.