Drawing on the archives of seven countries and on a wealth of recent research by Dutch, Belgian, and British historians, Geoffrey Parker has produced a much needed new synthesis that should certainly replace Geyl as the standard account of the sixteenth century’s longest and most violent revolt.
In a departure from the often reductionistic traditions of Dutch Revolt historiography, Dr. Parker stresses the complexity of his subject, a complexity conditioned by the contradictions and tensions within the country itself. Fragmented by topography, language, and law, its economic personality split between the gargantuan cows of Friesland and the money brokers of Antwerp, its stormy history dominated by memories of urban and noble particularism, its central administration only a few years old, this dynastic miscellany defies all generalizations. Even without the added strains of war, royal bankruptcy, recession, and growing heresy, these internal contradictions suffice to explain not only why the best-intentioned crown policies were repeatedly frustrated, but also why each of the three successive waves of revolt between 1565 and 1581 was susceptible to inner disintegration. Yet, although Dr. Parker fully appreciates the revolt’s complex internal dynamics, he avoids the concomitant parochialism of many recent students: he places the problem of the Netherlands firmly in the greater context of the Spanish monarchy and sixteenth-century Europe. Applying arguments developed in his first book, The Army of Flanders and the Spanish Road, Dr. Parker indicates how distance, endemic financial crisis, and conflicting military and political priorities combined to affect the fate of the Netherlands. He convincingly shows, for instance, how Philip’s absorption in Mediterranean affairs played directly into the uprisings of 1566 and into the army atrocities of the 1570s; similarly, external factors such as England’s intervention and the French succession problem had a critical effect in the 1580s. This attention to the context of royal policy signifies a notable departure from the myopic bias of the Protestant and liberal traditions of Dutch Revolt historiography; as we come to appreciate the impossible difficulty of Philip II’s problems, he no longer makes a very convincing ogre.
From its ambitious conception to its excellent bibliographical essays, The Dutch Revolt represents an important addition to the literature on early modern revolution, and a superb introduction to Habsburg Spain’s longest and costliest problem.
