Патриоттентид (1780-1787) в Нидерландах: период политической нестабильности, борьба патриотов против штатгальтера Вильгельма V Оранского и реформы власти.
Сравнивайте с английским: нажмите на абзац — оригинал откроется в окне. Кнопка EN под абзацем показывает его прямо в тексте.
Содержание
Введение
Период насилия и социально-политической нестабильности в Нидерландах между 1780 и 1787 годами. *Patriottentijd* был периодом политической нестабильности в Нидерландской Республике между приблизительно 1780 и 1787 годами. Его название происходит от фракции патриотов (*Patriotten*), которые выступали против правления статхольдера Вильгельма V, принца Оранского, и его сторонников, известных как оранжисты (*Orangisten*). В 1781 году один из лидеров патриотов, Йоан Дерк ван дер Капеллен тот ден Пол, под влиянием реформатора Ричарда Прайса и диссидента Джозефа Пристли, анонимно опубликовал памфлет под названием *Aan het Volk van Nederland* («К народу Нидерландов»), в котором он, подобно Эндрю Флетчеру, выступал за создание гражданских ополчений по шотландской, швейцарской и американской моделям, чтобы помочь восстановить республиканскую конституцию. Впоследствии такие ополчения были организованы во многих населённых пунктах и вместе с патриотическими политическими клубами сформировали ядро патриотического движения. Начиная с 1785 года, патриотам удалось захватить власть в ряде голландских городов, где они заменили старую систему кооптации регентов системой демократически избранных представителей. Это позволило им заменить представителей этих городов в Штатах нескольких провинций, получив патриотическое большинство в Штатах Голландии, Гронингена и Утрехта, а также часто в Генеральных Штатах. Это помогло ослабить власть статхольдера, поскольку он был лишён командования над значительной частью голландской армии. Последовала вялотекущая гражданская война, которая привела к военному тупику, пока в сентябре-октябре 1787 года патриоты не были разгромлены прусской армией, и многие были вынуждены бежать в изгнание.
Period of violence and sociopolitical instability in the Netherlands between 1780 and 1787
The Patriottentijd (; ) was a period of political instability in the Dutch Republic between approximately 1780 and 1787. Its name derives from the Patriots (Patriotten) faction who opposed the rule of the stadtholder, William V, Prince of Orange, and his supporters who were known as Orangists (Orangisten). In 1781 one of the leaders of the Patriots, Joan Derk van der Capellen tot den Pol, influenced by the reformer Richard Price and the dissenter Joseph Priestley, anonymously published a pamphlet, entitled Aan het Volk van Nederland ("To the People of the Netherlands"), in which he advocated, like Andrew Fletcher, the formation of civic militias on the Scottish, Swiss and American model to help restore the republican constitution. Such militias were subsequently organised in many localities and formed, together with Patriot political clubs, the core of the Patriot movement. From 1785 on, the Patriots managed to gain power in a number of Dutch cities, where they replaced the old system of co option of regenten with a system of democratically elected representatives. This enabled them to replace the representatives of these cities in the States of several provinces, gaining Patriot majorities in the States of Holland, Groningen and Utrecht, and frequently also in the States General. This helped to emasculate the stadtholder's power as he was deprived of his command over a large part of the Dutch States Army. A low key civil war ensued that resulted in a military stalemate, until in September–October 1787 the Patriots were defeated by a Prussian army and many were forced into exile.
Этимология
Термин "патриот" (от греческого πατριώτης, "соотечественник") впервые использовался еще в середине XVII века Андрисом Бикером и фракцией Лоевестейна, но когда французские войска вторглись в Республику в 1747 году, "патриоты" потребовали восстановления должности штатгальтера Оранского, что положило конец Второму периоду без штатгальтера. Однако, начиная с 1756 года, регенты партии голландских штатов вновь стали называть себя "патриотами". Оранжистская партия пыталась вернуть себе этот термин, но была вынуждена перейти к обороне, что проявилось в переименовании одного из своих еженедельных журналов в De Ouderwetse Nederlandsche Patriot ("Старомодный голландский патриот"). Патриотизм и антиоранжизм стали синонимами. Патриотов можно разделить на две группы: аристократов и демократов. Аристократические патриоты (также известные как oudpatriotten, или "Старые патриоты"), изначально наиболее влиятельные, представляли собой оппозиционных регентов, стремившихся либо войти в состав правящих фракций, либо реализовать так называемый "лоевштейновский" идеал республики без Оранского; они происходили из существующей партии голландских штатов. Демократические патриоты возникли позднее и состояли преимущественно из небогатых буржуа, стремившихся к демократизации Республики. Наконец, термин Patriottentijd для обозначения этой исторической эпохи – это историографическое изобретение голландских историков XIX века, сопоставимое с терминами "Первый период без штатгальтера", "Второй период без штатгальтера" и "Французский период" (для эпохи Батавской республики, Королевства Голландии и Первой Французской империи, 1795–1813). Герман Теодор Коленбрандер, например, использовал этот термин в качестве названия одного из своих основных трудов: De patriottentijd: hoofdzakelijk naar buitenlandsche bescheiden (Гаага, 1897). Этот термин часто употреблялся в уничижительном контексте, но в последнее время приобрел более позитивную окраску.
The term Patriot (from Greek πατριώτης, "fellow countryman") had previously been used mid 17th century by Andries Bicker and the Loevestein faction, but when French troops invaded the Republic in 1747, "Patriots" demanded the return of the Orange stadtholderate, which ended the Second Stadtholderless Period. From 1756 onward, however, Dutch States Party regenten once again began styling themselves "Patriots". The Orangist party did try to reappropriate the term, but it was forced on the defensive, which became apparent when it renamed one of its weekly magazines to De Ouderwetse Nederlandsche Patriot ("The Old Fashioned Dutch Patriot"). Patriotism and anti Orangism had become synonymous. The Patriots can be divided into two separate groups: aristocrats and democrats. The aristocratic Patriots (also called oudpatriotten or "Old Patriots"), initially the strongest, can be viewed as oppositional regenten, who either sought to enter the factions in power, or tried to realise the so called "Loevesteinian" ideal of a republic without Orange; they came from the existing Dutch States Party. The democratic Patriots emerged later, and consisted mainly of non regent members of the bourgeoisie, who strove to democratise the Republic. Finally, the term Patriottentijd for the historical era is a historiographical invention of 19th century Dutch historians, comparable to the terms "First Stadtholderless Period", "Second Stadtholderless Period", and "Fransche Tijd (French Era)" (for the era of the Batavian Republic, the Kingdom of Holland and the French First Empire, 1795–1813). Herman Theodoor Colenbrander for instance, used the term as the title of one of his main works: De patriottentijd: hoofdzakelijk naar buitenlandsche bescheiden (The Hague, 1897). The term was often used in a pejorative fashion, but lately has acquired a more positive connotation.
Ощущаемое снижение Нидерландской Республики
После счастливого периода Голландского золотого века, охватившего первые две трети 17-го века, голландская экономика вступила в период стагнации и относительного упадка. Абсолютный размер голландского ВНП оставался неизменным, однако в течение 18-го века экономика была обогнана экономиками других европейских стран. Помимо этого, в ряде экономических секторов, таких как рыболовство и большинство отраслей промышленности, возникших в начале 17-го века, наблюдался абсолютный спад. Деиндустриализация страны привела к деурбанизации, поскольку ремесленники, работавшие в исчезающих отраслях, были вынуждены переезжать в районы, где еще можно было найти работу. Сокращающаяся промышленная база также концентрировалась в определенных регионах, что наносило ущерб другим регионам, где ранее преобладали такие отрасли, как судостроение и текстильная промышленность. Примечательно, что в эпоху быстрого роста населения в других европейских странах численность населения Нидерландов в течение 18-го века оставалась стабильной, составляя около 1,9 миллиона человек, что (учитывая постоянный абсолютный размер экономики) привело к стабильному доходу на душу населения. Однако это было несколько обманчиво, поскольку экономическое неравенство значительно возросло в течение 18-го века: экономика оказалась под контролем небольшой группы очень богатых рантье, и произошел сдвиг к экономике услуг, в которой доминировали коммерческий сектор (всегда сильный в Нидерландах) и банковский сектор. Эти изменения оказали разрушительное воздействие на людей, переживших социальное понижение и оказавшихся в низших слоях голландского общества. Но даже те, кто не пострадал от такого понижения и остался в высших и средних классах, ощутили на себе последствия этого воспринимаемого экономического упадка. Экономический упадок отразился и в политической сфере: после Утрехтского мира 1713 года правительство Нидерландов сочло необходимым перейти к политике жесткой экономии из-за тяжелого положения голландских государственных финансов. Как (наемная) армия Генеральных штатов, так и голландский флот в последующий период значительно сократились, и, следовательно, Республике пришлось отказаться от претензий на статус европейской великой державы в военном отношении, что повлекло за собой дипломатические последствия. Стало очевидно, что Республика превратилась в пешку в европейской политике силы, зависящую от доброй воли других стран, таких как Франция, Пруссия и Великобритания. Это снижение международного дипломатического статуса также способствовало общему ощущению упадка.
After the halcyon days of the Dutch Golden Age of the first two thirds of the 17th century, the Dutch economy entered a period of stagnation and relative decline. The absolute size of Dutch GNP remained constant, but the economy was overtaken by that of other European countries in the course of the 18th century. Besides, in a number of economic sectors, such as the fisheries and most industries that had sprung up in the early 17th century, an absolute decline occurred. The country's deindustrialization resulted in de urbanization as artisans that had worked in the disappearing industries had to move to areas where work was still to be found. The shrinking industrial base was also concentrating in particular areas, to the detriment of other areas where certain industries (shipbuilding, textiles) had formerly been prominent. Remarkably for an era of rapid population growth in other European countries, the size of the Dutch population remained constant during the 18th century at around 1.9 million people, which (in view of the constant absolute size of the economy) resulted in a constant per capita income. But this was somewhat misleading as economic inequality markedly increased during the 18th century: the economy became dominated by a small group of very rich rentiers, and the economy shifted to what we would now call a service economy, in which the commercial sector (always strong in the Netherlands) and the banking sector dominated. These shifts had a devastating effect for the people who experienced downward social mobility and ended up in the lower strata of Dutch society. But even those that were not affected by such downward mobility, and remained in the upper and middle classes, were affected by this perceived economic decline. The economic decline worked through in the political sphere as after the Peace of Utrecht of 1713 the government of the Dutch Republic felt constrained to enter upon a policy of austerity as a consequence of the dire state of the Dutch public finances. Both the (mercenary) Dutch States Army and the Dutch navy suffered a large shrinkage in the following period, and consequently the Republic had to give up the pretense of being a European great power, in the military sense, with the diplomatic consequences that entailed. It became clear that the Republic had become a pawn in European power politics, depending on the good will of other countries such as France, Prussia and Great Britain. This decline in international diplomatic standing also contributed to the malaise that resulted from the perceived decline.
Растущее недовольство политической системой
Недовольство воспринимаемым состоянием экономики и дипломатическим упадком сочеталось с растущим недовольством политической системой Нидерландской Республики среди голландцев среднего класса. Голландская "конституция" определяла Нидерландскую Республику как конфедерацию суверенных провинций с республиканским характером. Формально власть должна была исходить снизу вверх, от местных органов власти (правительств отдельных городов, обладавших городскими правами, и аристократии в сельской местности) к провинциальным штатам и, в конечном итоге, к Генеральным штатам. Однако эти местные органы власти, хотя и представляли, по утверждению господствующей идеологии, "народ", на деле превратились в олигархии, где доминировали несколько семей, которые, по крайней мере в городах, формально не принадлежали к знати, но считались "патрициями" в классическом понимании этого слова. Члены класса регентов кооптировали друг друга в городской совет, который избирал магистратов и направлял делегатов в региональные и национальные штаты. Эта ситуация сложилась постепенно, поскольку в средневековье корпоративные институты, такие как гильдии и шхуттерии, иногда имели хотя бы право выдвижения кандидатов в фо́рдсхаппен, наделяя членов среднего класса определенной политической властью (хотя называть это "демократией" было бы преувеличением). Концентрация власти в всё более замкнутой олигархии вызывала недовольство среднего класса, который видел, что его возможности для политического и социального продвижения заблокированы, а также из-за того, что политическое покровительство в отношении всевозможных мелких должностей было сосредоточено в руках олигархов, которые поддерживали своих политических союзников. Хотя должности часто продавались, этот факт, по иронии судьбы, вызывал меньше возмущения, чем тот факт, что доступ к ним был неравным. Поэтому открытие политической системы для среднего класса стало целью политических реформаторов, таких как так называемые Доэли́стен, которые в 1747 году способствовали возвышению фризского штатгальтера Вильгельма IV на пост штатгальтера во всех семи провинциях на наследственной основе с существенно расширенными полномочиями, в надежде, что он использует их для укрепления политического влияния будущих "демократов". Эта надежда оказалась напрасной, в том числе из-за его преждевременной смерти в 1751 году, после чего его сменил его малолетний сын Вильгельм V, которому тогда было всего три года. Власть перешла к регентам, сначала к вдовствующей принцессе Оранской, а после её смерти в 1759 году – де-факто герцогу Людовику Эрнсту Брауншвейг-Люнебургскому, который проявлял ещё меньше интереса к "демократическим" экспериментам. Герцог Людовик сохранил фактическое опекунство в соответствии с так называемым Акте ван Консулентсхап даже после достижения молодым принцем совершеннолетия. Между тем, существенно расширенные полномочия штатгальтера заключались главным образом в его праве назначать или, по крайней мере, утверждать магистратов на местном и провинциальном уровнях, что было закреплено в так называемых регерингсреглемéнте́н (Правительственных регламентах), принятых большинством провинций в 1747 году. Эти полномочия позволяли ему отменять выборы, проводимые местными фо́рдсхаппенами, если результаты не соответствовали его желаниям, и таким образом наделяли его значительными полномочиями политического покровительства на местном уровне (а также регентов, правивших вместо несовершеннолетнего Вильгельма V до 1766 года). В итоге "партии штатгальтеров" регенты, правившие страной во Второй период без штатгальтеров, были заменены сторонниками Оранской партии, которые идеологически выступали против народного влияния, закрывая дверь для "демократических" экспериментов. Хотя "демократы" в 1747 году находились в лагере оранжистов, они вскоре вступили в союз по расчету с лишенными прав регентами "партии штатгальтеров".
The disaffection with the perceived state of the economy and diplomatic decline was paired with a growing disaffection with the political system of the Dutch Republic among middle class Dutchmen. The Dutch "constitution" defined the Dutch Republic as a confederation of sovereign provinces with a republican character. Formally, power was supposed to flow upward, from the local governments (governments of select cities that possessed City Rights, and the aristocracy in rural areas) toward the provincial States, and eventually the States General. Those local governments, however, though ostensibly representing "The People" according to the prevailing ideology, had in fact evolved into oligarchies dominated by a few families that in the cities at least were not formally part of the nobility, but were considered "patrician" in the classical sense. The members of the regenten class co opted each other in the city council, which elected the magistrates and sent delegates to the regional and national States. This situation had come about gradually, as in medieval times corporate institutions, like the guilds and schutterijen had sometimes had at least nominating powers to the vroedschappen, bestowing a certain amount of political power on members of the middle class (though calling this "democracy" would be an exaggeration). The concentration of power in a more and more closed oligarchy frustrated the middle class, that saw its opportunities for political and social advancement blocked, also because the political patronage in regard to all kinds of petty offices was concentrated in the hands of the oligarchs, who favored their own political allies. Though offices were often venal and for sale, this fact was ironically less resented than the fact that those offices were not available on the same footing to everyone. Opening up the political system to the middle class had therefore been an objective of political reformers like the so called Doelisten who in 1747 helped elevate the Frisian stadtholder William IV to stadtholder in all seven provinces, on a hereditary basis, with greatly expanded powers, in the hope that he would use those powers to promote the political influence of the would be "democrats." That hope proved vain, also because of his untimely death in 1751, after which he was succeeded by his infant son William V, who was three years of age at the time. Power devolved upon regents, first the dowager Princess of Orange, and after her death in 1759, de facto Duke Louis Ernest of Brunswick Lüneburg, who saw even less merit in "democratic" experiments. Duke Louis would retain a virtual guardianship in accordance with the so called Acte van Consulentschap even after the young Prince had come of age. Meanwhile, the greatly expanded powers of the stadtholder consisted primarily in his right of appointment, or at least approval, of magistrates on the local and provincial level, which were enshrined in the so called regeringsreglementen (Government Regulations) adopted by most provinces in 1747. These powers allowed him to overrule the elections by the local vroedschappen if the results did not comport with his wishes, and so bestowed great powers of political patronage on the local level on him (and the regents who ruled in place of the under age William V before 1766). The end result was that the "States party" regenten that had ruled the country during the Second Stadtholderless Period were replaced by Orangist party men, who were ideologically opposed to popular influence, closing the door to "democratic" experiments. Though the "democrats" had been in the Orangist camp in 1747, they therefore soon came into an alliance of convenience with the disenfranchised "States party" regenten.
Американская интрига
Американская Декларация независимости не вызвала энтузиазма у всех в Голландской республике, когда о ней стало известно в августе 1776 года. Штатгальтер написал греффиеру Генрику Фагелю, что это была лишь "пародия на провозглашение, изданное нашими предками против короля Филиппа II". Но другие были менее презрительны. Голландские купцы, особенно в Амстердамской палате угасающего WIC, давно были недовольны ограничениями, налагаемыми британскими Навигационными актами на прямую торговлю с восставшими американскими колониями. Американская революция открыла новые перспективы для свободной торговли, хотя на данный момент в основном по контрабандному маршруту через колонию WIC Синт-Эвстациус. Этот антрепот вскоре стал важным экспортным портом для поставок голландского оружия американским повстанцам. Амстердамские регенты особенно интересовались открытием официальных торговых переговоров с Континентальным конгрессом; секретная дипломатия вскоре была предпринята пенсионерами ряда торговых городов, таких как Энгельберт Франсуа ван Беркель (Амстердам) и Корнелис де Гийселар (Дордрехт), за спиной штатгальтера и Генеральных штатов. Французский посол в республике Вогьон в 1778 году организовал контакты с американским послом при французском дворе Бенджамином Франклином, что со временем привело к отправке Джона Адамса в качестве американского эмиссара в республику. В 1778 году также велись тайные переговоры между амстердамским банкиром Жаном де Неуфвилем и американским агентом в Аахене Уильямом Ли. Они заключили секретное соглашение о договоре о дружбе и торговле между двумя республиками, проект которого был обнаружен британцами, когда они перехватили посланника в Нидерландах, которым должен был быть Генри Лоуренс, в море. Они использовали это как casus belli для объявления Четвертой англо-голландской войны в декабре 1780 года (вместе с действиями с голландской территории американского капера Джона Пола Джонса и планируемым присоединением Голландии к Первой лиге вооруженного нейтралитета). Война обернулась катастрофой для голландцев, несмотря на то, что голландский флот значительно увеличился в предшествующие годы. Но голландцы едва использовали его, а штатгальтер, как генерал-адмирал, был верховным командующим. В начале войны ряд голландских военных кораблей были застигнуты врасплох кораблями Королевского флота, которые, по словам голландцев, подкрались под ложным флагом, и когда они подошли к ничего не подозревающим голландцам (которые еще не знали о начале войны), поднимали свои настоящие флаги и открывали огонь. Затем голландские корабли спускали флаги, ответив одним бортовым залпом "для соблюдения чести". Таким образом, были потеряны отдельные корабли и даже целые эскадры. Британцы блокировали голландское побережье, не встретив существенного отпора от голландского флота. Произошло одно крупное сражение между голландской эскадрой под командованием контр-адмирала Йохана Зотмана и британской под командованием вице-адмирала сэра Хайда Паркера, которое закончилось безрезультатно, но в целом голландский флот оставался в порту из-за состояния "неготовности", по словам голландских командиров. Это бездействие вызвало большое недовольство среди голландских судовладельцев, которые хотели конвойную защиту от британцев, а также среди населения в целом, которое чувствовало себя униженным тем, что многие считали "трусостью". Вину обычно возлагали на штатгальтера. После кратковременной волны эйфории, вызванной героизмом Зотмана (который был должным образом использован в официальной пропаганде), флот вновь заслужил неодобрение общественного мнения из-за своей бездеятельности. Это только усилилось после того, как Генеральные штаты в 1782 году договорились с Францией о военно-морском союзе или концерте, который привел к запланированным совместным действиям против Великобритании. С этой целью в 1783 году голландский флот из десяти линейных кораблей должен был быть отправлен во французский порт Брест, чтобы присоединиться к французскому флоту. Однако прямой приказ отплыть был проигнорирован голландским военно-морским руководством, вновь со ссылкой на "неготовность", но некоторые офицеры, такие как вице-адмирал Лодевик ван Байландт, предполагаемый лидер экспедиции, дали понять, что не хотят сотрудничать с французами. Это вызвало скандал, известный как Брестское дело, в котором Питер Паулюс, фискал (прокурор) Адмиралтейства Роттердама, должен был провести расследование, но оно не привело к осуждению. Однако ущерб репутации голландского флота и штатгальтера как его главнокомандующего в общественном мнении был значительным и подорвал режим. Штатгальтер был не единственным, кому Американская Декларация независимости напомнила о ее голландском аналоге 1581 года. Многие другие видели аналогию между Американской революцией и Нидерландской революцией, и это способствовало росту симпатий к американскому делу в голландском общественном мнении. Когда Джон Адамс прибыл в Нидерланды из Парижа в 1780 году в поисках голландских займов для финансирования американской борьбы, он был вооружен длинным списком голландских контактов. Однако поначалу было трудно заинтересовать голландскую элиту. Адамс приступил к работе по влиянию на общественное мнение с помощью ряда этих голландских контактов, которые он перечислил в письме государственному секретарю США Роберту Ливингстону от 4 сентября 1782 года. Он упоминает амстердамского юриста Хендрика Калкоена, который очень интересовался американским делом и задал тридцать вопросов, на которые Адамс ответил в ряде писем, которые позже были собраны и опубликованы в виде влиятельного памфлета. Калкоен стремился вновь подчеркнуть аналогию между голландской и американской борьбой за независимость. Он также упоминает семью Люзаков, которая издавала [[Nouvelles Extraordinaires de Divers Endroits, влиятельную газету, чей издатель Жан Люзак поддерживал американское дело, освещая американские конституционные дебаты. В этой газете была опубликована первая в Европе перевод Конституции Массачусетса, главным образом написанная Адамсом, 3 октября 1780 года. В этом контексте Адамс также упоминает журналиста Антуана Мари Серье и его периодическое издание le Politique hollandais. Другим пропагандистом американского дела, который делал выводы для голландской политической ситуации, был оверийссельский эксцентричный дворянин Йоан Дерк ван дер Капеллен тот ден Пол, который перевел Декларацию независимости и другие американские конституционные документы на голландский язык. Благодаря этой пропагандистской деятельности американское и голландское дела переплелись в сознании публики как образец "республиканского братства". Сам Адамс развивал эту тему в "Мемориале", который он представил Генеральным штатам для получения одобрения своих полномочий в качестве посла 19 апреля 1781 года:
The American Declaration of Independence did not elicit enthusiasm from everyone in the Dutch Republic once it became known there in August 1776. The stadtholder wrote to the [[greffier of the States General, Hendrik Fagel, that it was only " the parody of the proclamation issued by our forefathers against king Philip II". But others were less scornful. Dutch merchants, especially in the Amsterdam Chamber of the moribund WIC, had long chafed against the restrictions the British Navigation Acts imposed on direct trade with the American colonies in revolt. The American Revolution opened new perspectives to unfettered trade, though for the moment primarily on the smuggling route via the WIC colony of Sint Eustatius. That entrepôt soon became an important export port for the supply of the American rebels with Dutch arms. The Amsterdam regenten were particularly interested in opening formal trade negotiations with the Continental Congress; secret diplomacy was soon embarked upon by the pensionaries of a number of mercantile cities, like Engelbert François van Berckel (Amsterdam) and Cornelis de Gijselaar (Dordrecht), behind the back of the stadtholder and the States General. The French ambassador to the Republic, Vauguyon, arranged contacts with the American ambassador to the French court, Benjamin Franklin, in 1778, which in time led to the sending out of John Adams as American emissary to the Republic. In 1778, there also were secret negotiations between the Amsterdam banker Jean de Neufville and the American agent in Aachen, William Lee. The two concluded a secret agreement on a treaty of amity and commerce between the two Republics, the draft of which was discovered by the British when they intercepted ambassador to the Netherlands to be Henry Laurens at sea. They used this as a casus belli for declaring the Fourth Anglo Dutch War in December 1780 (together with the actions from Dutch territory by the American privateer John Paul Jones, and the planned Dutch accession to the First League of Armed Neutrality). The war went disastrously for the Dutch, despite the fact that the Dutch fleet had been enlarged appreciably in the preceding years. but it was scarcely used by the Dutch, with the stadtholder, as Admiral General, in supreme command. At the start of the war, a number of Dutch warships were surprised by ships of the Royal Navy, who according to the Dutch, sneaked up under a false flag, and when they had approached the unsuspecting Dutchmen (who were not yet aware of the start of the war), ran up their true colors and opened fire. The Dutch ships then struck their colors after firing a single broadside in reply "to satisfy honor." In this way individual ships, and even a complete squadron, were lost. The British blockaded the Dutch coast without much response from the Dutch fleet. There was one big battle between a Dutch squadron under rear admiral Johan Zoutman and a British one under vice admiral Sir Hyde Parker, which ended inconclusively, but on the whole the Dutch fleet remained in port, due to a state of "unreadiness," according to the Dutch commanders. This lack of activity caused great dissatisfaction among Dutch shippers who wanted convoy protection against the British, and also among the population at large, who felt humiliated by what many saw as "cowardice." The stadtholder was generally blamed. After a brief wave of euphoria due to Zoutman's heroics (which were duly exploited in the official propaganda), the navy again earned the disapproval of public opinion because of its inactivity. This only increased after the States General in 1782 agreed with France on a naval alliance or concert that led to a planned joint action against Great Britain. To that end a Dutch fleet of ten ships of the line would in 1783 be sent to the French port of Brest to join the French fleet there. However, a direct order to set sail was disobeyed by the Dutch naval top with again the excuse of "unreadiness," but some officers, like vice admiral Lodewijk van Bylandt, the intended leader of the expedition, let it be known that they did not want to cooperate with the French. This caused a scandal, known as the Brest Affair in which Pieter Paulus, the fiscal (prosecutor) of the Admiralty of Rotterdam was to lead an inquest, but this never resulted in a conviction. But the damage to the reputation of the Dutch navy and the stadtholder as its commander in chief in Dutch public opinion was appreciable, and this undermined the regime. The stadtholder was not the only one reminded by the American Declaration of Independence of its Dutch equivalent of 1581. Many others saw an analogy between the American Revolution and the Dutch Revolt, and this helped engender much sympathy for the American cause in Dutch public opinion. When John Adams arrived in the Netherlands from Paris in 1780, in search of Dutch loans for the financing of the American struggle, he came armed with a long list of Dutch contacts. At first, however, it was an uphill struggle to interest the Dutch elite. Adams set to work to influence public opinion with the help of a number of those Dutch contacts which he enumerates in a letter to United States Secretary of Foreign Affairs Robert Livingstone of 4 September 1782. He mentions the Amsterdam lawyer Hendrik Calkoen, who was very interested in the American cause, and who posed thirty questions on the matter that Adams answered in a number of letters, that were later bundled and published as an influential pamphlet. Calkoen was keen to again emphasize the analogy between the Dutch and American struggles for independence. He also mentions the Luzac family that published the [[Nouvelles Extraordinaires de Divers Endroits, an influential newspaper, whose publisher Jean Luzac supported the American cause by publicising the American constitutional debate. The Gazette was the first European newspaper to carry a translation of the Constitution of Massachusetts, principally authored by Adams, on 3 October 1780. In that context Adams also mentions the journalist Antoine Marie Cerisier and his periodical le Politique hollandais. Another propagandist for the American cause, who drew inferences for the Dutch political situation, was the Overijssel maverick nobleman Joan Derk van der Capellen tot den Pol, who had the Declaration of Independence, and other American constitutional documents, translated into Dutch. By these propagandistic activities the American and Dutch causes became intertwined in the public's mind as a model of "republican fraternity". Adams himself harped on this theme in the "Memorial" he presented to the States General to obtain acceptance of his credentials as ambassador on 19 April 1781:
The immediate audience of the "Memorial" may have been sceptical, but elsewhere the document made a great impression. "Seditious" it certainly was, as the pamphlet repeatedly exhorted the burghers of the Netherlands to arm themselves and take matters into their own hands. As was usual at the time, the pamphlet contained a romanticized overview of Dutch history, going back to the mythical ancestors of the Dutch people, the [[Batavi (Germanic tribe), and taking the Middle Ages and the early history of the Republic in stride. But the perspective was decidedly anti stadtholderian, and emphasized that the people are the true proprietors, the lords and masters of the country, not the nobles and regenten. The author likens the country to a great company, like the VOC, in which the administrators serve the shareholders. The author then continues with a diatribe against the stadtholder: Therefore:
These themes: the primacy of the people, whose servants the politicians are; the need to arm the people in units who elect their own officers; to elect commissioners who investigate government wrongdoing, as a parallel source of power next to the existing institutions; the need to protect the freedom of the press; would be repeated time after time in other Patriot pamphlets and the Patriot press in later years. But these ideas were rooted in a particular perspective on Dutch history, not in abstract philosophical ideas, taken from the French Enlightenment. It was a mixture of old and new ideas,
and attitudes to the Dutch constitution. But this mixture would diverge into two distinctive strands in the course of the next few years, until it would lead to an ideological split between the "aristocratic" and "democratic" Patriots. Of course, Aan het Volk van Nederland was just one example of the many pamphlets, both Orangist and Patriot, that were published during the Patriottentijd. But these one off publications were soon joined by an innovation in the vernacular press. Before 1780 the "opinion newspapers," like the Gazette de Leyde and the Politique Hollandais were written in French, and generally only read by the elite. But in 1781 the Patriot Pieter 't Hoen started a periodical in Dutch in Utrecht, entitled De Post van den Neder Rhijn (The Post of the Lower Rhine) that would become a combination of opinion weekly, tabloid, and scandal sheet, with a Patriot bias that attacked the stadtholder and the "aristocratic" Patriots with equal abandon. It was soon joined by an Amsterdam magazine with the same character, the Politieke Kruijer (Political Porter), edited by J. C. Hespe, and later by Wybo Fijnje's Hollandsche Historische Courant (Dutch Historical Journal) in Delft. All these periodicals enjoyed great popularity in middle class circles, probably because they mixed serious political analysis with scurrilous libels of the political elite. The journalists and publishers were often prosecuted by their enraged victims, but fines and jail time were part of the job in these times. As they had a national readership they helped Patriot politics go beyond the local confines they would normally have encountered. And their ideological consistency helped to bring about unity in especially the "democratic" wing of the Patriot movement.
Непосредственная аудитория "Мемориала", возможно, была настроена скептически, но в других местах документ произвел большое впечатление. "Подстрекательский" он, безусловно, был, поскольку в памфлете неоднократно призывалось к гражданам Нидерландов брать в руки оружие и решать вопросы самостоятельно. Как было принято в то время, в памфлете содержался романтизированный обзор голландской истории, восходящий к мифическим предкам голландского народа, [[Батавам (германское племя), и охватывающий Средневековье и раннюю историю Республики. Но перспектива была явно антистатгальтерской и подчеркивала, что народ является истинным владельцем, господами и хозяевами страны, а не дворяне и регенты. Автор уподобляет страну большой компании, такой как VOC, в которой администраторы служат акционерам. Затем автор продолжает с тирадой против штатгальтера: Поэтому:
The American Declaration of Independence did not elicit enthusiasm from everyone in the Dutch Republic once it became known there in August 1776. The stadtholder wrote to the [[greffier of the States General, Hendrik Fagel, that it was only " the parody of the proclamation issued by our forefathers against king Philip II". But others were less scornful. Dutch merchants, especially in the Amsterdam Chamber of the moribund WIC, had long chafed against the restrictions the British Navigation Acts imposed on direct trade with the American colonies in revolt. The American Revolution opened new perspectives to unfettered trade, though for the moment primarily on the smuggling route via the WIC colony of Sint Eustatius. That entrepôt soon became an important export port for the supply of the American rebels with Dutch arms. The Amsterdam regenten were particularly interested in opening formal trade negotiations with the Continental Congress; secret diplomacy was soon embarked upon by the pensionaries of a number of mercantile cities, like Engelbert François van Berckel (Amsterdam) and Cornelis de Gijselaar (Dordrecht), behind the back of the stadtholder and the States General. The French ambassador to the Republic, Vauguyon, arranged contacts with the American ambassador to the French court, Benjamin Franklin, in 1778, which in time led to the sending out of John Adams as American emissary to the Republic. In 1778, there also were secret negotiations between the Amsterdam banker Jean de Neufville and the American agent in Aachen, William Lee. The two concluded a secret agreement on a treaty of amity and commerce between the two Republics, the draft of which was discovered by the British when they intercepted ambassador to the Netherlands to be Henry Laurens at sea. They used this as a casus belli for declaring the Fourth Anglo Dutch War in December 1780 (together with the actions from Dutch territory by the American privateer John Paul Jones, and the planned Dutch accession to the First League of Armed Neutrality). The war went disastrously for the Dutch, despite the fact that the Dutch fleet had been enlarged appreciably in the preceding years. but it was scarcely used by the Dutch, with the stadtholder, as Admiral General, in supreme command. At the start of the war, a number of Dutch warships were surprised by ships of the Royal Navy, who according to the Dutch, sneaked up under a false flag, and when they had approached the unsuspecting Dutchmen (who were not yet aware of the start of the war), ran up their true colors and opened fire. The Dutch ships then struck their colors after firing a single broadside in reply "to satisfy honor." In this way individual ships, and even a complete squadron, were lost. The British blockaded the Dutch coast without much response from the Dutch fleet. There was one big battle between a Dutch squadron under rear admiral Johan Zoutman and a British one under vice admiral Sir Hyde Parker, which ended inconclusively, but on the whole the Dutch fleet remained in port, due to a state of "unreadiness," according to the Dutch commanders. This lack of activity caused great dissatisfaction among Dutch shippers who wanted convoy protection against the British, and also among the population at large, who felt humiliated by what many saw as "cowardice." The stadtholder was generally blamed. After a brief wave of euphoria due to Zoutman's heroics (which were duly exploited in the official propaganda), the navy again earned the disapproval of public opinion because of its inactivity. This only increased after the States General in 1782 agreed with France on a naval alliance or concert that led to a planned joint action against Great Britain. To that end a Dutch fleet of ten ships of the line would in 1783 be sent to the French port of Brest to join the French fleet there. However, a direct order to set sail was disobeyed by the Dutch naval top with again the excuse of "unreadiness," but some officers, like vice admiral Lodewijk van Bylandt, the intended leader of the expedition, let it be known that they did not want to cooperate with the French. This caused a scandal, known as the Brest Affair in which Pieter Paulus, the fiscal (prosecutor) of the Admiralty of Rotterdam was to lead an inquest, but this never resulted in a conviction. But the damage to the reputation of the Dutch navy and the stadtholder as its commander in chief in Dutch public opinion was appreciable, and this undermined the regime. The stadtholder was not the only one reminded by the American Declaration of Independence of its Dutch equivalent of 1581. Many others saw an analogy between the American Revolution and the Dutch Revolt, and this helped engender much sympathy for the American cause in Dutch public opinion. When John Adams arrived in the Netherlands from Paris in 1780, in search of Dutch loans for the financing of the American struggle, he came armed with a long list of Dutch contacts. At first, however, it was an uphill struggle to interest the Dutch elite. Adams set to work to influence public opinion with the help of a number of those Dutch contacts which he enumerates in a letter to United States Secretary of Foreign Affairs Robert Livingstone of 4 September 1782. He mentions the Amsterdam lawyer Hendrik Calkoen, who was very interested in the American cause, and who posed thirty questions on the matter that Adams answered in a number of letters, that were later bundled and published as an influential pamphlet. Calkoen was keen to again emphasize the analogy between the Dutch and American struggles for independence. He also mentions the Luzac family that published the [[Nouvelles Extraordinaires de Divers Endroits, an influential newspaper, whose publisher Jean Luzac supported the American cause by publicising the American constitutional debate. The Gazette was the first European newspaper to carry a translation of the Constitution of Massachusetts, principally authored by Adams, on 3 October 1780. In that context Adams also mentions the journalist Antoine Marie Cerisier and his periodical le Politique hollandais. Another propagandist for the American cause, who drew inferences for the Dutch political situation, was the Overijssel maverick nobleman Joan Derk van der Capellen tot den Pol, who had the Declaration of Independence, and other American constitutional documents, translated into Dutch. By these propagandistic activities the American and Dutch causes became intertwined in the public's mind as a model of "republican fraternity". Adams himself harped on this theme in the "Memorial" he presented to the States General to obtain acceptance of his credentials as ambassador on 19 April 1781:
The immediate audience of the "Memorial" may have been sceptical, but elsewhere the document made a great impression. "Seditious" it certainly was, as the pamphlet repeatedly exhorted the burghers of the Netherlands to arm themselves and take matters into their own hands. As was usual at the time, the pamphlet contained a romanticized overview of Dutch history, going back to the mythical ancestors of the Dutch people, the [[Batavi (Germanic tribe), and taking the Middle Ages and the early history of the Republic in stride. But the perspective was decidedly anti stadtholderian, and emphasized that the people are the true proprietors, the lords and masters of the country, not the nobles and regenten. The author likens the country to a great company, like the VOC, in which the administrators serve the shareholders. The author then continues with a diatribe against the stadtholder: Therefore:
These themes: the primacy of the people, whose servants the politicians are; the need to arm the people in units who elect their own officers; to elect commissioners who investigate government wrongdoing, as a parallel source of power next to the existing institutions; the need to protect the freedom of the press; would be repeated time after time in other Patriot pamphlets and the Patriot press in later years. But these ideas were rooted in a particular perspective on Dutch history, not in abstract philosophical ideas, taken from the French Enlightenment. It was a mixture of old and new ideas,
and attitudes to the Dutch constitution. But this mixture would diverge into two distinctive strands in the course of the next few years, until it would lead to an ideological split between the "aristocratic" and "democratic" Patriots. Of course, Aan het Volk van Nederland was just one example of the many pamphlets, both Orangist and Patriot, that were published during the Patriottentijd. But these one off publications were soon joined by an innovation in the vernacular press. Before 1780 the "opinion newspapers," like the Gazette de Leyde and the Politique Hollandais were written in French, and generally only read by the elite. But in 1781 the Patriot Pieter 't Hoen started a periodical in Dutch in Utrecht, entitled De Post van den Neder Rhijn (The Post of the Lower Rhine) that would become a combination of opinion weekly, tabloid, and scandal sheet, with a Patriot bias that attacked the stadtholder and the "aristocratic" Patriots with equal abandon. It was soon joined by an Amsterdam magazine with the same character, the Politieke Kruijer (Political Porter), edited by J. C. Hespe, and later by Wybo Fijnje's Hollandsche Historische Courant (Dutch Historical Journal) in Delft. All these periodicals enjoyed great popularity in middle class circles, probably because they mixed serious political analysis with scurrilous libels of the political elite. The journalists and publishers were often prosecuted by their enraged victims, but fines and jail time were part of the job in these times. As they had a national readership they helped Patriot politics go beyond the local confines they would normally have encountered. And their ideological consistency helped to bring about unity in especially the "democratic" wing of the Patriot movement.
Эти темы: первичность народа, чьи слуги политики; необходимость вооружать народ в подразделения, которые избирают своих офицеров; избирать комиссаров, которые расследуют злоупотребления в правительстве, как параллельный источник власти наряду с существующими институтами; необходимость защиты свободы печати; будут повторяться снова и снова в других памфлетах патриотов...
The American Declaration of Independence did not elicit enthusiasm from everyone in the Dutch Republic once it became known there in August 1776. The stadtholder wrote to the [[greffier of the States General, Hendrik Fagel, that it was only " the parody of the proclamation issued by our forefathers against king Philip II". But others were less scornful. Dutch merchants, especially in the Amsterdam Chamber of the moribund WIC, had long chafed against the restrictions the British Navigation Acts imposed on direct trade with the American colonies in revolt. The American Revolution opened new perspectives to unfettered trade, though for the moment primarily on the smuggling route via the WIC colony of Sint Eustatius. That entrepôt soon became an important export port for the supply of the American rebels with Dutch arms. The Amsterdam regenten were particularly interested in opening formal trade negotiations with the Continental Congress; secret diplomacy was soon embarked upon by the pensionaries of a number of mercantile cities, like Engelbert François van Berckel (Amsterdam) and Cornelis de Gijselaar (Dordrecht), behind the back of the stadtholder and the States General. The French ambassador to the Republic, Vauguyon, arranged contacts with the American ambassador to the French court, Benjamin Franklin, in 1778, which in time led to the sending out of John Adams as American emissary to the Republic. In 1778, there also were secret negotiations between the Amsterdam banker Jean de Neufville and the American agent in Aachen, William Lee. The two concluded a secret agreement on a treaty of amity and commerce between the two Republics, the draft of which was discovered by the British when they intercepted ambassador to the Netherlands to be Henry Laurens at sea. They used this as a casus belli for declaring the Fourth Anglo Dutch War in December 1780 (together with the actions from Dutch territory by the American privateer John Paul Jones, and the planned Dutch accession to the First League of Armed Neutrality). The war went disastrously for the Dutch, despite the fact that the Dutch fleet had been enlarged appreciably in the preceding years. but it was scarcely used by the Dutch, with the stadtholder, as Admiral General, in supreme command. At the start of the war, a number of Dutch warships were surprised by ships of the Royal Navy, who according to the Dutch, sneaked up under a false flag, and when they had approached the unsuspecting Dutchmen (who were not yet aware of the start of the war), ran up their true colors and opened fire. The Dutch ships then struck their colors after firing a single broadside in reply "to satisfy honor." In this way individual ships, and even a complete squadron, were lost. The British blockaded the Dutch coast without much response from the Dutch fleet. There was one big battle between a Dutch squadron under rear admiral Johan Zoutman and a British one under vice admiral Sir Hyde Parker, which ended inconclusively, but on the whole the Dutch fleet remained in port, due to a state of "unreadiness," according to the Dutch commanders. This lack of activity caused great dissatisfaction among Dutch shippers who wanted convoy protection against the British, and also among the population at large, who felt humiliated by what many saw as "cowardice." The stadtholder was generally blamed. After a brief wave of euphoria due to Zoutman's heroics (which were duly exploited in the official propaganda), the navy again earned the disapproval of public opinion because of its inactivity. This only increased after the States General in 1782 agreed with France on a naval alliance or concert that led to a planned joint action against Great Britain. To that end a Dutch fleet of ten ships of the line would in 1783 be sent to the French port of Brest to join the French fleet there. However, a direct order to set sail was disobeyed by the Dutch naval top with again the excuse of "unreadiness," but some officers, like vice admiral Lodewijk van Bylandt, the intended leader of the expedition, let it be known that they did not want to cooperate with the French. This caused a scandal, known as the Brest Affair in which Pieter Paulus, the fiscal (prosecutor) of the Admiralty of Rotterdam was to lead an inquest, but this never resulted in a conviction. But the damage to the reputation of the Dutch navy and the stadtholder as its commander in chief in Dutch public opinion was appreciable, and this undermined the regime. The stadtholder was not the only one reminded by the American Declaration of Independence of its Dutch equivalent of 1581. Many others saw an analogy between the American Revolution and the Dutch Revolt, and this helped engender much sympathy for the American cause in Dutch public opinion. When John Adams arrived in the Netherlands from Paris in 1780, in search of Dutch loans for the financing of the American struggle, he came armed with a long list of Dutch contacts. At first, however, it was an uphill struggle to interest the Dutch elite. Adams set to work to influence public opinion with the help of a number of those Dutch contacts which he enumerates in a letter to United States Secretary of Foreign Affairs Robert Livingstone of 4 September 1782. He mentions the Amsterdam lawyer Hendrik Calkoen, who was very interested in the American cause, and who posed thirty questions on the matter that Adams answered in a number of letters, that were later bundled and published as an influential pamphlet. Calkoen was keen to again emphasize the analogy between the Dutch and American struggles for independence. He also mentions the Luzac family that published the [[Nouvelles Extraordinaires de Divers Endroits, an influential newspaper, whose publisher Jean Luzac supported the American cause by publicising the American constitutional debate. The Gazette was the first European newspaper to carry a translation of the Constitution of Massachusetts, principally authored by Adams, on 3 October 1780. In that context Adams also mentions the journalist Antoine Marie Cerisier and his periodical le Politique hollandais. Another propagandist for the American cause, who drew inferences for the Dutch political situation, was the Overijssel maverick nobleman Joan Derk van der Capellen tot den Pol, who had the Declaration of Independence, and other American constitutional documents, translated into Dutch. By these propagandistic activities the American and Dutch causes became intertwined in the public's mind as a model of "republican fraternity". Adams himself harped on this theme in the "Memorial" he presented to the States General to obtain acceptance of his credentials as ambassador on 19 April 1781:
The immediate audience of the "Memorial" may have been sceptical, but elsewhere the document made a great impression. "Seditious" it certainly was, as the pamphlet repeatedly exhorted the burghers of the Netherlands to arm themselves and take matters into their own hands. As was usual at the time, the pamphlet contained a romanticized overview of Dutch history, going back to the mythical ancestors of the Dutch people, the [[Batavi (Germanic tribe), and taking the Middle Ages and the early history of the Republic in stride. But the perspective was decidedly anti stadtholderian, and emphasized that the people are the true proprietors, the lords and masters of the country, not the nobles and regenten. The author likens the country to a great company, like the VOC, in which the administrators serve the shareholders. The author then continues with a diatribe against the stadtholder: Therefore:
These themes: the primacy of the people, whose servants the politicians are; the need to arm the people in units who elect their own officers; to elect commissioners who investigate government wrongdoing, as a parallel source of power next to the existing institutions; the need to protect the freedom of the press; would be repeated time after time in other Patriot pamphlets and the Patriot press in later years. But these ideas were rooted in a particular perspective on Dutch history, not in abstract philosophical ideas, taken from the French Enlightenment. It was a mixture of old and new ideas,
and attitudes to the Dutch constitution. But this mixture would diverge into two distinctive strands in the course of the next few years, until it would lead to an ideological split between the "aristocratic" and "democratic" Patriots. Of course, Aan het Volk van Nederland was just one example of the many pamphlets, both Orangist and Patriot, that were published during the Patriottentijd. But these one off publications were soon joined by an innovation in the vernacular press. Before 1780 the "opinion newspapers," like the Gazette de Leyde and the Politique Hollandais were written in French, and generally only read by the elite. But in 1781 the Patriot Pieter 't Hoen started a periodical in Dutch in Utrecht, entitled De Post van den Neder Rhijn (The Post of the Lower Rhine) that would become a combination of opinion weekly, tabloid, and scandal sheet, with a Patriot bias that attacked the stadtholder and the "aristocratic" Patriots with equal abandon. It was soon joined by an Amsterdam magazine with the same character, the Politieke Kruijer (Political Porter), edited by J. C. Hespe, and later by Wybo Fijnje's Hollandsche Historische Courant (Dutch Historical Journal) in Delft. All these periodicals enjoyed great popularity in middle class circles, probably because they mixed serious political analysis with scurrilous libels of the political elite. The journalists and publishers were often prosecuted by their enraged victims, but fines and jail time were part of the job in these times. As they had a national readership they helped Patriot politics go beyond the local confines they would normally have encountered. And their ideological consistency helped to bring about unity in especially the "democratic" wing of the Patriot movement.
В
С конца Средневековья города в Габсбургских Нидерландах использовали гражданские ополчения для внешней обороны (в основном против вторжений из соседних провинций) и для поддержания общественного порядка. Эти ополчения, называемые *schutterijen*, играли важную роль на ранних этапах голландского восстания, когда они самостоятельно успешно защищали важные города от испанских войск герцога Альбы, что помогло придать им ауру героизма. В этот ранний период ополчение часто формировало отдельный и независимый центр власти бургеров, которые были его членами, конкурируя с *vroedschap* как с центром власти элиты. Эта независимость была символизирована тем, что *schutterij* обычно избирал своих собственных офицеров. Но начиная с начала XVII века ополчения потеряли свою независимость и стали подчиняться обычной городской магистратуре. Они также стали частью регулярной оборонительной структуры страны, наряду с Армией штатов (хотя и не входили в эту наемную военную формацию). Во время революции 1747 года Доэлистен попытался восстановить независимую роль *schutterijen*, но эта попытка потерпела неудачу. К началу 1780-х годов ополчения были лишь карикатурой на своих гордых предшественников, подчиненных городским магистратам, которые сделали офицерские комиссии прерогативой класса регентов и больше напоминали рекреационные общества, чем серьезные военные формирования. Многие патриоты восприняли этот упадок *schutterijen* как синекдоху упадка Республики, а реформа ополчений рассматривалась как важная часть необходимой реформы Республики. Но, как и в других местах, стадхолдерский режим блокировал такую реформу. С 1783 года патриоты начали формировать свои собственные ополчения, параллельно с официальными *schutterijen*, которые они называли безобидными именами, такими как *exercitiegenootschappen* или *vrijcorpsen* (свободный корпус), чтобы не провоцировать городские власти. В отличие от *schutterijen*, эти конкурирующие ополчения были открыты для членов всех религиозных конфессий; они избирали своих собственных офицеров; и регулярно тренировались в военной подготовке (*exercitie*) и обращении с оружием. Патриоты предлагали использовать ополчения для продвижения представительства своих офицеров в официальных советах и защиты прав на свободу собраний и слова граждан. В зависимости от местных политических обстоятельств свободные корпуса иногда оставались параллельной военной структурой, а иногда постепенно перехватывали старые *schutterijen*. Примером последнего был город Утрехт, где под руководством *Exercitiegenootschap Pro Patria et Libertate* (в котором студентский лидер Квинт Ондаатье играл заметную роль) *schutterij* был передан свободному корпусу, в то время как старая организационная структура с названиями рот, такими как "Пики" и "Черные парни", была тщательно сохранена (включая старые флаги и знамена). Сначала в некоторых городах *vroedschap* поощрял узурпацию роли *schutterij*, потому что это помогало подорвать право стадхолдера назначать руководство ополчения (как в Алкмаре, Лейдене и Дордрехте). В таких городах, как Лейден, Цутфен и Утрехт, свободные корпуса составляли петиции с требованием признания вновь созданных ополчений городскими правительствами, что впоследствии было предоставлено. На этом раннем этапе между патриотами и антиоранжистскими регентами существовало счастливое сотрудничество из-за их общей заинтересованности в уменьшении полномочий стадхолдера. В провинции Голландия его преимущество в осуществлении командования гаагским гарнизоном Армии штатов было компенсировано силой свободного корпуса в большинстве городов, и последний имел дополнительное преимущество в обеспечении обороны от обычного оранжистского оружия – угрозы насилия толпы, потому что патриоты среднего класса боялись городских бедняков так же, как и регенты, и сформировали общий фронт против бедных. И не без причины, потому что в нескольких городах были беспорядки, вдохновленные оранжистами, членами рабочего класса, как в Роттердаме в 1783 году и в Гааге в 1784 году, возглавляемые торговцем рыбой Каатом Мусселем. 3 апреля 1784 года такой бунт был кроваво подавлен ротой свободного корпуса в Роттердаме, когда панический офицер приказал своим людям открыть огонь по толпе, в результате чего было убито несколько человек. Первоначально офицер был обвинен, но (из-за того, что происходило все больше и больше беспорядков) Штаты Голландии позже оправдали свободный корпус и обвинили бунтовщиков-оранжистов. Свободные корпуса были локальным явлением, ограниченным областями, где движение патриотов было сильным, отчасти потому, что патриотическая идеология на протяжении долгого времени уважала конфедеративную структуру Голландской Республики. Они оставались "федеральными" демократами. Но с конца 1784 года они начали организовываться на национальном уровне. В декабре состоялся первый конгресс представителей федерации свободных корпусов в Утрехте. Вскоре за ним последовал второй конгресс 25 февраля 1785 года, который поручил Лейденскому свободному корпусу разработать манифест. Этот манифест был принят во время третьего конгресса, вновь в Утрехте 14 июня 1785 года. Он принял форму торжественного *Acte van Verbintenis ter verdediging der Republicainsche constitutie* (Акта ассоциации для защиты республиканской конституции, или "Акта ассоциации" сокращенно), в котором члены свободного корпуса обязывались поддерживать друг друга против попыток подавления со стороны гражданских властей и против нападений оранжистских толп. Также в Акте впервые была установлена *Volksregering bij representatie* (Народное правительство посредством представительства) как конечная цель движения свободных корпусов. Но это был лишь первый такой манифест. *Leids Ontwerp* (Лейденский проект), еще один важный патриотический манифест, был составлен после того, как Лейденскому *exercitiegenootschap* было запрещено проводить свои учебные маневры 23 июля 1785 года городским правительством. В ответ конгресс представителей *exercitiegenootschappen* Голландии поручил группе членов, среди которых были Выбо Фейне, Питер Вреде и Рутгер Ян Схиммелпеннинк, написать манифест в соответствии с проектом, который они обсуждали на встрече 4 октября 1785 года. В результате был опубликован манифест под названием *Ontwerp om de Republiek door eene heilzaame Vereeniging van Belangen van Regent en Burger van Binnen Gelukkig en van Buiten Gedugt te maaken* (Проект сделать Республику внутренне довольной и внешне устрашающей посредством благотворного союза интересов регентов и граждан и т. д.), Лейден, принятый решением провинциального собрания вооруженных корпусов в Голландии 4 октября 1785 года в Лейдене, в котором, среди прочего, предлагалось отменить право утверждения городских правительством назначений стадхолдера, заменив его демократическими выборами.
Since the late Middle Ages cities in the Habsburg Netherlands had employed citizen militias for external defense (mostly against incursions from neighboring provinces), and to keep public order. These militias, called schutterijen, played an important part in the early stages of the Dutch Revolt when they on their own successfully defended important cities against the Spanish troops of the Duke of Alba, which helped to give them an aura of heroism. In this early period the militia often formed a separate and independent center of power of the burghers who were its members, rivaling the vroedschap as the power center of the elite. This independence was symbolized by the fact that the schutterij usually elected its own officers. But starting in the early 17th century the militias lost their independence and became subservient to the regular city magistracy. They also became a part of the regular defense structure of the country, next to the States Army (though not part of that mercenary military formation). During the revolution of 1747 the Doelisten attempted to restore the independent role of the schutterijen, but this attempt failed. By the early 1780s the militias were but a caricature of their proud predecessors, subservient to the city magistrates, who made officer commissions the preserve of the regenten class, and more like recreative societies than serious military formations. Many Patriots took this decline of the schutterijen as a synecdoche for the decline of the Republic, and the reform of the militias was seen as an important part of the necessary reform of the Republic. But as elsewhere the stadtholderian regime blocked such reform. From 1783 onwards, the Patriots therefore started to form their own militias, parallel to the official schutterijen, which they called by innocuous names like exercitiegenootschappen or vrijcorpsen (Free Corps) in order not to provoke the city governments. In contrast with the schutterijen these competing militias were open to members of all religious denominations; they elected their own officers; and they trained regularly in military drill (exercitie) and the use of arms. The Patriots proposed to use the militias to promote the representation of their officers in official councils, and to defend the rights of free assembly and speech of the citizenry. Depending on local political circumstances the Free corps sometimes remained a parallel military structure, and sometimes gradually took over the old schutterij. An example of the latter was the city of Utrecht where under the direction of the exercitiegenootschap Pro Patria et Libertate (in which the student leader Quint Ondaatje played a prominent role) the schutterij was taken over by the Free Corps, while the old organisational structure with company names like "the Pikes" and "the Black Boys" was studiously retained (including the old flags and banners). At first in some cities the vroedschap encouraged this usurpation of the role of the schutterij, because it helped to undermine the stadtholder's right to appoint the leadership of the militia (as in Alkmaar, Leiden and Dordrecht In cities like Leiden, Zutphen and Utrecht the Free corps drew up petitions demanding recognition of the newly constituted militias by the city governments, which was subsequently granted. In this early phase there was a happy cooperation between the Patriots and the anti Orangist regenten, because of their common interest in diminishing the powers of the stadtholder. In Holland province his advantage of exercising command of the Hague garrison of the States Army was offset by the power of the Free Corps in most cities, and the latter had the additional advantage of providing a defense against the usual Orangist weapon of threatened mob violence, because the middle class Patriots feared the city paupers as much as the regenten did, and formed a common front against the poor. And not without reason, because in several cities, there were Orangist inspired riots by members of the working class, like the riots in Rotterdam in 1783 and the Hague in 1784, led by the fish monger Kaat Mussel. On 3 April 1784 such a riot was bloodily suppressed by a Free Corps company in Rotterdam, when a panicky officer ordered his men to open fire on the mob, which resulted in several people killed. Initially, the officer was blamed, but (due to the fact that more and more riots occurred) the States of Holland later exonerated the Free Corps and blamed the Orangist rioters. The Free Corps were a local phenomenon, limited to the areas where the Patriot movement was strong, partly because the Patriot ideology for a very long time respected the confederal structure of the Dutch Republic. They remained "federal" democrats. But from the end of 1784 they started to organize on a national level. In December the first congress of representatives of a federation of Free Corps assembled in Utrecht. This was soon followed by the second congress on 25 February 1785, which commissioned the Leiden Free Corps to draft a manifesto. This manifesto was adopted during the third congress, again in Utrecht on 14 June 1785. It took the form of a solemn Acte van Verbintenis ter verdediging der Republicainsche constitutie (Act of Association for the defense of the Republican constitution, or "Act of Association" for short) in which the members of the Free Corps pledged to support each other against attempts at suppression by the civil authorities and against attacks by Orangist mobs. Also the Act for the first time established Volksregering bij representatie (People's government by representation) as the ultimate goal of the Free Corps movement. But this was only the first such manifesto. The Leids Ontwerp (Leiden Draft), another important Patriot manifesto, was drawn up after the Leiden exercitiegenootschap was prohibited from performing its drill maneuvers on 23 July 1785 by the city government. In response a congress of the representatives of the Holland exercitiegenootschappen commissioned a group of members, among whom Wybo Fijnje, Pieter Vreede, and Rutger Jan Schimmelpenninck to write the manifesto along the lines of the draft they discussed in a meeting on 4 October 1785. This resulted in the publication of the manifesto, entitled Ontwerp om de Republiek door eene heilzaame Vereeniging van Belangen van Regent en Burger van Binnen Gelukkig en van Buiten Gedugt te maaken", Leiden, aangenomen bij besluit van de Provinciale Vergadering van de Gewapende Corpsen in Holland, op 4 oktober 1785 te Leiden (Design to make the Republic inwardly contented and outwardly feared by a salutary union of interests of Regent and Citizen, etc.) in which among other things the abolition of the right of approval of city government appointments of the stadtholder was proposed, to be replaced by democratic elections.
Свержение старого порядка в Утрехте и Амстердаме
Реализация манифестов патриотов выявила фундаментальный раскол между «демократическим» и «аристократическим» крыльями патриотического движения. Изначально обе стороны видели общий интерес и основу для сотрудничества (как это явно предлагается в Лейденском проекте). Это проявилось на примере Утрехта, где в июле 1783 года *vroedschap* поддержал требование местного Свободного корпуса о признании его новым воплощением *schutterij* под руководством избранного Совета гражданской обороны. Обе фракции выступали против Правительственного регламента 1674 года, предоставлявшего штатгальтеру широкие полномочия по назначению городских магистратов. Это было постоянным соблазном для злоупотреблений. Николас де Пестерс, *schepen* Утрехта, был печально известен своим злоупотреблением политическим патронажем. Ситуация обострилась, когда в январе 1783 года член Утрехтского *vroedschap* (то есть регент) предложил отказаться от прав назначения штатгальтера, а в августе 1783 года петиция членов вновь сформированной *schutterij* призвала *vroedschap* больше не допускать такого вмешательства. Попытки достичь соглашения со штатгальтером осенью 1783 года провалились, поскольку тот настаивал на своих «законных правах». Затем в январе 1784 года появилась возможность проверить решимость штатгальтера, когда в *vroedschap* образовалась вакансия. Регенты приняли вызов и, намеренно игнорируя штатгальтера, назначили умеренного члена *schutterij* на вакантную должность. Однако перемирие между «демократами» и «аристократами» было недолгим. 23 апреля 1784 года в патриотической газете Утрехта *Utrechtse Courant* был опубликован проект новой «конституции» для провинции Утрехт, призванной заменить Регламент 1674 года, после того как Утрехтские штаты опрометчиво пригласили всех граждан представить свои возражения против Регламента в начале 1784 года. В проекте, состоящем из 117 статей, предлагалось, чтобы впредь городской *vroedschap* Утрехта избирался народом на основе имущественного ценза посредством косвенных выборов. Это относительно умеренное предложение напрямую посягало на право регентов на кооптацию. Другим спорным предложением было создание выборного органа из 16 представителей горожан, которые должны были постоянно заседать для рассмотрения и разрешения жалоб граждан на действия городского правительства. Регенты не собирались отказываться от своей власти без борьбы, но вместо прямой конфронтации с демократами они сначала попытались утопить предложение в бюрократических проволочках. Штаты разработали гораздо более консервативный контрпроект и попытались провести его через закулисные махинации. Это вызвало резкую реакцию утрехтской *schutterij* в виде петиции против этого контрпроекта. *Schutterij* также избрала группу из 24 представителей (включая Ондаатье), которые назвали себя «Конституированными», для проведения прямых переговоров с *vroedschap*. Вскоре Конституированные создали себя как конкурирующий центр власти по отношению к *vroedschap* и начали действовать как предлагаемый Городской совет из проекта конституции. Переговоры бесплодно затянулись, и в январе 1785 года шесть рот *schutterij* обратились к Конституированным с призывом принять более решительные меры. Возмущенные «стрелки» избрали новую группу представителей, названных «Комиссионерами», чтобы постоянно обеспечивать рвение Конституированных. *Vroedschap* неохотно признал Конституированных постоянными представителями *schutterij* 21 февраля 1785 года, но не пошел на дальнейшие уступки. Однако судьба вмешалась: умер еще один член *vroedschap*, и Конституированные и Комиссионеры обратились к *vroedschap* с просьбой заполнить вакансию человеком, симпатизирующим их делу. *Vroedschap* же намеренно назначил человека, которого петиционеры уже объявили «неприемлемым» – Джонатана Сихтермана. Последовательность событий, которая тогда была запущена, можно было считать «парадигмой» для революционных «журнэ», которые будут повторяться в аналогичных обстоятельствах в самом Утрехте и в других голландских городах в течение следующих двух лет. Сначала городское правительство совершало некий «провокационный» акт, который вызывал гнев членов Свободного корпуса и других патриотов. Демократы приходили в ярость, подстрекаемые подстрекательскими памфлетами и речами. Затем они маршировали к ратуше и собирались с оружием на городской площади, которую легко заполняли своим большим количеством. Городских отцов вызывали в ратушу и более или менее запирали в зале заседаний. К ним не прибегали к физическому насилию (даже предоставляли еду и питье), но психологическое давление угрожающей толпы и угрозы «невозможности сдержать их, если не будут удовлетворены требования» вскоре убеждали их уступить. Но как только все возвращались домой с триумфом, городские отцы вновь обретали храбрость и отказывались от своих обещаний «поскольку они были даны под давлением». И новый цикл начинался снова. Нечто подобное произошло 11–12 марта 1785 года в Утрехте, когда агитаторы, такие как Ондаатье, довели толпу до безумия; утрехтская ратуша была окружена 2000 разъяренных членов Свободного корпуса, и Утрехтский *vroedschap* неохотно согласился отозвать назначение Сихтермана после того, как Ондаатье заявил, что Конституированных не удастся обмануть. «Мы не «сороквосьмерые», – заявил он, – «а «восьмидесятые», которые хорошо понимают свои права и свободы, мы не плебс», имея в виду аналогичное событие во время революции 1748 года, когда Доэлистам действительно удалось обмануть тогдашнего штатгальтера. Но реакция была быстрой: 17 членов *vroedschap* подали в отставку в знак протеста, и вскоре петиция видных граждан была направлена в Штаты с просьбой о вмешательстве. Штаты осудили Ондаатье и его толпу и сумели настолько запугать Ондаатье, что он принес смиренное извинение. 23 марта 19 членов *vroedschap* вновь заняли свои места и возбудили уголовное дело против Ондаатье и других подстрекателей событий 11 марта. Сихтерман мог вернуться на свою должность, но отказался; поэтому совет оставил вакансию незаполненной. Но демократы вернулись в августе и снова в сентябре с демонстрациями, следующими установленной парадигме. В конечном итоге, в конце декабря 1785 года, ситуация достигла апогея, когда в ходе финальной демонстрации силы Свободного корпуса *vroedschap* был вынужден капитулировать. 20 декабря они пообещали принять демократическую городскую конституцию в течение трех месяцев. И действительно, 20 марта 1786 года, пока Свободный корпус снова занимал центральную площадь в молчаливой угрозе, пока бушевала метель, *vroedschap* позволил нескольким своим членам формально отказаться от старого Правительственного регламента. 2 августа 1786 года был установлен избранный Городской коллеж в качестве нового городского совета. Весной 1787 года аналогичные события произошли в Амстердаме. Политическая ситуация в этом городе долгое время сильно отличалась от утрехтской. Амстердамские регенты принадлежали к старой фракции Штатов и, как таковые, выступали против штатгальтера задолго до того, как патриотическое движение начало набирать обороты. Его пенсионарий, Энгельберт Франсуа ван Беркель, вместе с пенсионариями Дордрехта (Корнелис де Гизелар) и Харлема (Адриаан ван Зееберг) сформировал антиштатгальтерский триумвират в Штатах Голландии во время войны с Великобританией. Но все это основывалось на интересах Амстердама как торгового города. Амстердамские регенты не были настроены на «демократические» эксперименты, которые могли бы подорвать их привилегии. Чем больше влияния приобретали демократы в других городах, тем ближе амстердамские регенты сближались со своими оранжистскими врагами и режимом штатгальтера. Ван Беркель потерял инициативу перед оранжистскими регентами, такими как Йоахим Рендорп и Виллем Геррит Дедел Саломонс, которые сформировали оранжистское меньшинство в Амстердамском *vroedschap*. В Амстердаме был большой Свободный корпус, состоящий из 55 рот, но старый…
Implementing the Patriot manifestos brought a fundamental rift between the "democratic" and "aristocratic" wings of the Patriot movement to light. Initially both saw a common interest and a basis for cooperation (as the Leiden Draft explicitly proposes). This was exemplified by the Utrecht example where in July 1783 the vroedschap acceded to the demand of the local Free Corps to be recognized as the new manifestation of the schutterij under the direction of an elected Burgher Defense Council. Both factions were opposed to the 1674 Government Regulation that gave extensive powers to the stadtholder to appoint city magistrates. This was a standing invitation to abuse. Nicolaas de Pesters, schepen of Utrecht, was infamous for his abuse of political patronage. The matter came to a head when in January 1783 a member of the Utrecht vroedschap (i. e. a regent) proposed to disavow the appointment rights of the stadtholder, and in August 1783 a petition of members of the newly reconstituted schutterij urged the vroedschap to no longer brook such interference. Attempts to come to an understanding with the stadtholder in the fall of 1783 failed, because the latter insisted on his "due rights." Then in January 1784 an occasion presented itself to test the stadtholder's resolve, when a vacancy in the vroedschap occurred. The regenten accepted the challenge and, studiously ignoring the stadtholder, appointed a moderate member of the schutterij to the vacant post. But the honeymoon between the "democrats" and "aristocrats" did not last. On 23 April 1784 a draft of a new "constitution" for Utrecht province, to replace the 1674 Regulation, was published in the Utrecht Patriot newspaper Utrechtse Courant, after the Utrecht States had imprudently invited all citizens to lodge their objections to the Regulations in early 1784. This draft of 117 articles proposed that henceforth the Utrecht city vroedschap was to be popularly elected under a form of census suffrage in indirect elections. This relatively moderate proposal directly attacked the co option rights of the regenten. Another objectionable proposal was the institution of an elected body of 16 burgher representatives to sit in permanent session to hear and address grievances of citizens against the city government. The regenten were not about to let go of their powers without a fight, but instead of getting into a direct confrontation with the democrats they at first tried to drown the proposal in red tape. The States drafted a far more conservative counter proposal and tried to push this through by subterfuge. This elicited a strong response of the Utrecht schutterij in the form of a petition opposing that counter draft. The schutterij also elected a group of 24 representatives (among whom Ondaatje), which called themselves the "Constituted," to conduct direct negotiations with the vroedschap. The Constituted soon set themselves up as a rival power center to the vroedschap, and started acting like the proposed Burgher Council from the draft constitution. The negotiations fruitlessly dragged on and in January 1785 six companies of the schutterij approached the Constituted to urge them to take more drastic steps. The irate "shooters" elected a new group of representatives, called the "Commissioned," to permanently ensure the zeal of the Constituted. The vroedschap grudgingly accepted the Constituted as permanent representatives of the schutterij on 21 February 1785, but made no further concessions. But then fate intervened, another member of the vroedschap died and the Constituted and Commissioned petitioned the vroedschap to fill the vacancy with someone sympathetic to their cause. The vroedschap then went out of its way to appoint someone the petitioners had already declared "unacceptable", one Jonathan Sichterman. The train of events that then was set in motion could be considered a "paradigm" for revolutionary "journées" that would be followed in similar circumstances in Utrecht itself, and in other Dutch cities in the following two years. First the city government would commit some kind of "provocation" that would enrage the Free Corps members and other Patriots. The democrats would work themselves into a lather, whipped up by seditious pamphlets and speeches. Then they would march to the town hall and assemble, with their weapons, in the town square, which they would easily fill with their large numbers. The city fathers would be summoned to come to the town hall and would be more or less locked up in their meeting room. They would not be physically assaulted (even provided with food and drink), but the psychological pressure of the threatening crowd, and the threats that "it would be impossible to constrain them, if the demands were not met" would soon convince them to give in. But once everybody had returned home in triumph, the city fathers would regain their courage, and renege on their promises "as these had been forced under duress." And a new cycle would soon commence. Something like this happened on 11–12 March 1785 in Utrecht, when agitators like Ondaatje whipped the crowd into a frenzy; the Utrecht city hall was surrounded by 2,000 angry Free Corps men and the Utrecht vroedschap reluctantly agreed to withdraw Sicherman's appointment after Ondaatje made clear that the Constituted would not be fobbed off. "We are not '48 ers," he declared, "but 85 ers, who understand our rights and liberties well enough, we are not canaille" referring to a similar event during the revolution of 1748, when the Doelisten had indeed been fobbed off by the then stadtholder. But the reaction was swift: 17 members of the vroedschap resigned in protest, and soon a petition of notable citizens was sent to the States with a request to intervene. The States excoriated Ondaatje and his mob and manage to intimidate Ondaatje sufficiently to elicit a humble apology. On 23 March the 19 vroedschap members reoccupied their seats, and opened criminal proceedings against Ondaatje and other instigators of the events of 11 March. Sicherman could have his appointment back, but he declined; the council therefore left the vacancy unfilled. But the democrats were back in August and again in September with demonstrations following the established paradigm. Eventually, end December 1785, things came to a head when in a final demonstration of Free Corps strength the vroedschap was forced to capitulate. On 20 December they promised to adopt a democratic city constitution within three months. And indeed, on 20 March 1786, while the Free Corps again occupied the central square in silent menace, while a blizzard blew, the vroedschap allowed several of its members to formally abjure the old Government Regulation. On 2 August 1786 an elected Burgher College was installed as the new city council. In the spring of 1787 similar events took place in Amsterdam. The political situation in that city had long been very different than in Utrecht. The Amsterdam regenten belonged to the old States Party faction and were as such opposed to the stadtholder long before the Patriot movement started to rear its head. Its pensionary, Engelbert François van Berckel, together with the pensionaries of Dordrecht (Cornelis de Gijselaar) and of Haarlem (Adriaan van Zeebergh) formed an anti stadtholderian triumvirate in the States of Holland during the days of the war with Great Britain. But this was all based on the interests of Amsterdam as a mercantile city. The Amsterdam regenten were in no mood for "democratic" experiments that would undermine their privileges. The more the democrats gained influence in other cities, the more the Amsterdam regenten drew closer to their Orangist enemies, and the stadtholder's regime. Van Berckel lost the initiative to Orangist regenten like Joachim Rendorp, and Willem Gerrit Dedel Salomonsz, who formed an Orangist minority within the Amsterdam vroedschap. Amsterdam had a large Free Corps, consisting of 55 companies, but the old schutterij, under Orangist command, was still a rival armed force. Besides, the Patriots did not have a monopoly on mob violence, as the workers in the Amsterdam shipbuilding industry, the so called Bijltjes ("Ax men"), were a strongly pro Orange political force in the city. Patriot political clubs were rivaled by Orangist political clubs. In sum, the political forces were more evenly balanced than in other cities. And this paralyzed the Amsterdam vroedschap in the spring of 1787. Things came to a head in February 1787 when a group of Free Corps officers, led by a Colonel Isaac van Goudoever forced entry to the council chamber in protest against an anti Patriot move Dedel had engineered. Only the intervention of Hendrik Daniëlsz Hooft, a venerable burgemeester prevented a fracas. On 3 April Goudoever returned at the head of 102 officers to demand that henceforth Amsterdam would only be represented by its pensionaries Van Berckel and Visscher (who were both trusted by the Patriots) in the States of Holland. Dedel replied with an attempt to come to an arrangement with the stadtholder in which Amsterdam would align itself with the stadtholderian regime in exchange for concessions by the stadtholder on the point of his right of appointment (which the States Party regenten had always opposed), and his help with mobilizing the Bijltjes. This conspiracy failed due to the obduracy of the stadtholder, but on 20 April 1787 an incendiary pamphlet, entitled Het Verraad Ontdekt ("The Treason Discovered"), made it public, and this incensed the Patriots. That night the city was abuzz with fervid Patriot activity. The Burgher Defense Council, which commanded the Free Corps, organised a petition (the "Act of Qualification") which was signed by 16,000 people, and the next day the Dam Square before the city hall was thronged with thousands of guild members, Patriot citizens and armed militiamen. The Amsterdam council was once more locked in chambers, not expected to emerge without a positive decision, and on the initiative of Hooft the vroedschap was purged of the members whose dismissal had been demanded in the Act of Qualification. Amsterdam had belatedly joined the Patriot coalition. The rioting of the Bijltjes on 30 May 1787 did not change this. William May had to flee across the IJ. Other cities in Holland that had been holding out, like Rotterdam, where Pieter Paulus finally managed a purge of the vroedschap, and several cities, like Delft, Dordrecht, Alkmaar, Hoorn, and Monnikendam were helped along by the "Flying Legion", a corps of 300 Free Corps members, and 200 horses, led by Adam Gerard Mappa, threatening violence. Delft's "liberation" gave the Patriots command of the largest arsenal in Holland province in the summer of 1787.
Начинается гражданская война .
It is true that compared to the French revolution, the Patriot revolution was singularly bloodless and that widespread military maneuvering remained the exception. But there actually were military actions by regular forces on both sides, aimed at deciding the issue by military means, and blood was spilled in battle. To understand how this came about, it is important first to understand the way the forces on both sides were distributed in the seven provinces and the Generality Lands. The States Army, commanded by the stadtholder, was a mercenary army, paid for by the several provinces according to a formula for apportionment, called the repartitie. Holland paid for more than half of the troops, and it was known which regiments belonged to its repartitie, though this had no consequences for the operational command, as the army was an institution of the Republic as a whole. The troops were in peacetime usually divided over a number of garrisons in different parts of the country. These garrisons played an important role in local politics, as the officers were Orangists to a man, and the troops in the whole felt a strong allegiance to the stadtholder. The garrison cities, like Nijmegen in Gelderland, The Hague in Holland, and 's-Hertogenbosch in "States Brabant" were strongpoints of Orangist influence, even though the surrounding provinces might tend to favor the Patriots. So even without explicitly threatening military violence, the army played an important role in local politics. Before 1784 the States army was the only official standing army in the Republic, but during the so called Kettle War, a minor military conflict with the Austrian emperor and sovereign of the Austrian Netherlands, Joseph II, the States of Holland lost confidence in the States army under the wavering command of the stadtholder, and decided to raise a separate military formation of brigade strength, outside the States army, under the command of the Rhinegrave of Salm Grumbach, an officer in the States army, for its own account. This so called "Legion of Salm" was not subject to the stadtholder as Captain General of the States army. After the crisis passed, the States of Holland decided to abolish it, as an austerity measure, but several Holland cities, Amsterdam among them, decided to take over the financing for their own account, so that from 1785 on the Legion continued in being as a military unit that was not part of the official military command structure, and also not part of the Free Corps federation, because the members of the Legion were mercenaries, just like the soldiers of the army. The Legion did not play a role, until the Rhinegrave in September 1786 became commander in chief of all forces of the province of Holland, including the States army troops under the Holland repartitie, and later also the Free Corps in the provinces of Holland and Utrecht. The events that gave rise to this development were the following. In September 1785, after a number of riots between Patriots and Orangists in The Hague during the summer of that year, the States of Holland (by then with a slender majority of cities tending toward the Patriot side) decided to deprive the stadtholder of his command of the strong Hague garrison of the States army (though this was only formalized in July 1786). On 15 September 1785 he therefore decided to leave the city and to repair to the Het Loo Palace in Gelderland with his family. Around the same time things had come to a head in Utrecht city and part of the States of Utrecht decided to move to the city of Amersfoort, causing a schism in the States, as the representatives of the city of Utrecht and several other cities remained in Utrecht city. The Amersfoort States subsequently asked the stadtholder to put a garrison of States army troops in Amersfoort and Zeist, which was done in September 1785 with a cavalry division from the Nijmegen garrison. This remained the status quo until in May 1786 the vroedschappen of the Gelderland cities of Hattem and Elburg refused to seat a number of Orangist candidates in defiance of the stadtholder's right of appointment, and with help of Patriot Free Corps of Kampen, Overijssel, Zwolle and Zutphen started to fortify the cities under the command of the young firebrand Patriot Herman Willem Daendels, a Hattem native. The pro Orangist States of Gelderland then asked the stadtholder to lend a hand in suppressing this "insurrection" and on 4 September a task force of the Nijmegen garrison duly marched to Hattem and entered that city over light opposition the next day. The troops were allowed to loot the two small cities and desecrate the local churches. Stadtholder William V is said to have exclaimed on the news of the success of the operation: "Have they be hanged? Hell and Damnation. Why not hang the Satan's children?". The "Hattem and Elburg events" electrified the Patriot opposition. Pensionary de Gijselaar (calling the stadtholder "a new Alva") demanded in the States of Holland that the stadtholder would be deprived of his command as Captain General of the States army (which only the States General could do), and in any case take the troops on the Holland repartitie out of the States army. When this was done this deprived the stadtholder of more than half of his troops, effectively denying him the military means to decide the political conflict. In Utrecht city the Patriots feared an attack from the Amersfoort and Zeist troops, and started to fortify the city against a siege. The defenders received reinforcements from Holland and other Patriot strongholds, so that by the spring of 1787 they numbered 6,000. When the Utrecht Defense Council learned that the States army had sent a task force to occupy the hamlet of Vreeswijk near a strategically important sluice (useful to defensively inundate the surrounding countryside) they decided to force a confrontation. On 9 May 1787 the Patriot force under the command of the Utrecht vroedschap member Jean Antoine d'Averhoult attacked the States army force in the Battle of Jutphaas, and despite several people killed, routed the mercenaries. Though this was only a skirmish, the Patriot propaganda made hay of the victory and the officer killed received a state funeral.
It is true that compared to the French revolution the Patriot revolution was singularly bloodless and that widespread military maneuvering remained the exception. But there actually were military actions by regular forces on both sides, aimed at deciding the issue by military means, and blood was spilled in battle. To understand how this came about, it is important first to understand the way the forces on both sides were distributed in the seven provinces and the Generality Lands. The States Army, commanded by the stadtholder, was a mercenary army, paid for by the several provinces according to a formula for apportionment, called the repartitie. Holland paid for more than half of the troops, and it was known which regiments belonged to its repartitie, though this had no consequences for the operational command, as the army was an institution of the Republic as a whole. The troops were in peacetime usually divided over a number of garrisons in different parts of the country. These garrisons played an important role in local politics, as the officers were Orangists to a man, and the troops in the whole felt a strong allegiance to the stadtholder. The garrison cities, like Nijmegen in Gelderland, The Hague in Holland, and 'Hertogenbosch in "States Brabant" were strongpoints of Orangist influence, even though the surrounding provinces might tend to favor the Patriots. So even without explicitly threatening military violence, the army played an important role in local politics. Before 1784 the States army was the only official standing army in the Republic, but during the so called Kettle War, a minor military conflict with the Austrian emperor and sovereign of the Austrian Netherlands, Joseph II, the States of Holland lost confidence in the States army under the wavering command of the stadtholder, and decided to raise a separate military formation of brigade strength, outside the States army, under the command of the Rhinegrave of Salm Grumbach, an officer in the States army, for its own account. This so called "Legion of Salm" was not subject to the stadtholder as Captain General of the States army. After the crisis passed, the States of Holland decided to abolish it, as an austerity measure, but several Holland cities, Amsterdam among them, decided to take over the financing for their own account, so that from 1785 on the Legion continued in being as a military unit that was not part of the official military command structure, and also not part of the Free Corps federation, because the members of the Legion were mercenaries, just like the soldiers of the army. The Legion did not play a role, until the Rhinegrave in September 1786 became commander in chief of all forces of the province of Holland, including the States army troops under the Holland repartitie, and later also the Free Corps in the provinces of Holland and Utrecht. The events that gave rise to this development were the following. In September 1785, after a number of riots between Patriots and Orangists in The Hague during the summer of that year, the States of Holland (by then with a slender majority of cities tending toward the Patriot side) decided to deprive the stadtholder of his command of the strong Hague garrison of the States army (though this was only formalized in July 1786). On 15 September 1785 he therefore decided to leave the city and to repair to the Het Loo Palace in Gelderland with his family. Around the same time things had come to a head in Utrecht city and part of the States of Utrecht decided to move to the city of Amersfoort, causing a schism in the States, as the representatives of the city of Utrecht and several other cities remained in Utrecht city. The Amersfoort States subsequently asked the stadtholder to put a garrison of States army troops in Amersfoort and Zeist, which was done in September 1785 with a cavalry division from the Nijmegen garrison. This remained the status quo until in May 1786 the vroedschappen of the Gelderland cities of Hattem and Elburg refused to seat a number of Orangist candidates in defiance of the stadtholder's right of appointment, and with help of Patriot Free Corps of Kampen, Overijssel, Zwolle and Zutphen started to fortify the cities under the command of the young firebrand Patriot Herman Willem Daendels, a Hattem native. The pro Orangist States of Gelderland then asked the stadtholder to lend a hand in suppressing this "insurrection" and on 4 September a task force of the Nijmegen garrison duly marched to Hattem and entered that city over light opposition the next day. The troops were allowed to loot the two small cities and desecrate the local churches. Stadtholder William V is said to have exclaimed on the news of the success of the operation: "Have they be hanged? Hell and Damnation. Why not hang the Satan's children?". The "Hattem and Elburg events" electrified the Patriot opposition. Pensionary de Gijselaar (calling the stadtholder "a new Alva") demanded in the States of Holland that the stadtholder would be deprived of his command as Captain General of the States army (which only the States General could do), and in any case take the troops on the Holland repartitie out of the States army. When this was done this deprived the stadtholder of more than half of his troops, effectively denying him the military means to decide the political conflict. In Utrecht city the Patriots feared an attack from the Amersfoort and Zeist troops, and started to fortify the city against a siege. The defenders received reinforcements from Holland and other Patriot strongholds, so that by the spring of 1787 they numbered 6,000. When the Utrecht Defense Council learned that the States army had sent a task force to occupy the hamlet of Vreeswijk near a strategically important sluice (useful to defensively inundate the surrounding countryside) they decided to force a confrontation. On 9 May 1787 the Patriot force under the command of the Utrecht vroedschap member Jean Antoine d'Averhoult attacked the States army force in the Battle of Jutphaas, and despite several people killed, routed the mercenaries. Though this was only a skirmish, the Patriot propaganda made hay of the victory and the officer killed received a state funeral.
Иностранное вмешательство
Патриотическое восстание не произошло в дипломатическом вакууме. Голландская Республика с момента своего основания была ареной борьбы великих держав, где регенты Голландии (в последнее время под видом сторонников штатов) симпатизировали Франции, а оранжисты обычно поддерживали Англию, а позднее – Великобританию. С вторжения в Англию в 1688 году, последовавшего за военно-морским договором с Англией в 1689 году, голландцы находились в номинальном союзе с англичанами, в то время как дипломатические отношения с Францией оставались напряженными со времен Франко-голландской войны и последнего французского вторжения в 1747 году. Однако отношения с Францией заметно улучшились в эпоху Американской революционной войны, когда голландцы сначала извлекали выгоду из торговли контрабандными товарами с французами и американцами под "нейтральным флагом", а затем воевали на стороне французов против британцев во время Четвертой англо-голландской войны, которая недавно завершилась. Французско-голландские отношения стали еще лучше, когда Франция предложила свои услуги для заключения Парижского договора 1784 года с Великобританией, положившего конец войне, и для достижения мира с императором Иосифом II, завершившего "Войну за чайник" Фонтенблоским договором. Вскоре после этого специальный посланник Жерар Бранцен, умеренный патриот, укрепил это заключением договора о дружбе и торговле с Францией в октябре 1785 года. Одним из тех, кто с большой тревогой наблюдал за этой оттепелью в франко-голландских дипломатических отношениях, был новый британский посол в Гааге, аккредитованный с 1784 года, сэр Джеймс Харрис. Харрис был склонен видеть французские заговоры повсюду, и в случае с Голландией он, возможно, был прав. Французы с большим удовольствием наблюдали за затруднительным положением голландского штатгальтера, хотя их энтузиазм ограничивался поддержкой их давних друзей, регентов амстердамской партии штатов; они были гораздо менее заинтересованы в демократических устремлениях другого крыла партии Патриотов. При поддержке кабинета Уильяма Питта Младшего Харрис попытался вернуть Республику под британское влияние и не ограничивался исключительно дипломатическими средствами. Важной задачей было поддержать моральный дух обескураженного штатгальтера после его отъезда из Гааги в сентябре 1785 года. У Вильгельма в то время было два варианта: уступить требованиям патриотов и принять какой-либо компромисс в отношении Правительственных регламентов или любой ценой сохранить свои "надлежащие права". Последний вариант был его любимым (он часто цитировал максиму "Aut Caesar, aut nihil"), и Харрис, действуя в согласии с женой Вильгельма, Вильгельминой Прусской, побуждал его выбрать именно его. Но Харрис сделал гораздо больше: он получил значительные средства из фонда британской секретной службы и использовал эти деньги для покупки влияния повсюду, начиная со щедрой пенсии в размере 4000 фунтов стерлингов в год для самого штатгальтера. Активно помогая "конфиденциальным агентам", среди которых наиболее известен барон Хендрик Август ван Кинкель, он использовал эти средства для субсидирования создания оранжистских свободных корпусов в провинциях, таких как Зеландия и Фрисландия, где оранжисты составляли большинство, которые использовались для запугивания патриотического меньшинства в этих провинциях. Он пытался переманить консервативных регентов в Амстердаме от их антиоранжистской позиции, обещая торговые уступки со стороны Великобритании и уступки со стороны штатгальтера, которые бы защитили их собственные привилегии, но избегали любых "демократических" экспериментов. Но самым важным ходом Харриса была попытка организовать союз с Пруссией, который бы сорвал "французские планы". Это позволило бы решить сразу две задачи: сохранить штатгальтера у власти и восстановить англо-прусский союз, который ненадолго существовал во время Семилетней войны. С этой целью он посетил в Берлине в августе 1785 года стареющего короля Пруссии Фридриха Великого, дядю Вильгельмины. Но Фридрих не хотел рисковать хорошими отношениями с Францией и отказался от наживки. "Груша еще не созрела", – загадочно заметил старый король. Вместо этого Пруссия, действуя в согласии с Францией, попыталась выступить посредником между враждующими сторонами в Республике. С этой целью обе страны направили посредников, послов Верака и Тулемейера, которые неоднократно пытались привести умеренных к компромиссу. Например, в 1785 году они предложили, чтобы штатгальтер передал свои военные полномочия совету, в который вошли бы принцесса, пенсионарии и лидеры как оранжистской, так и "аристократической" фракций патриотов (исключение составили бы только демократы). Но Вильгельм отказался уступать свои "надлежащие права", и без этого патриоты тоже не пошли бы на уступки. В 1786 году прусский министр Иоганн фон Герц прибыл в Гаагу с предложением, которое могло бы быть приемлемым даже для демократов, но Харрис легко убедил Вильгельма, уже воодушевленного событиями в Хаттеме и Эльбурге, что это равносильно "капитуляции", и штатгальтер выдвинул условия, неприемлемые для патриотов. Иными словами, Харрис постоянно препятствовал любым попыткам мирного решения. В любом случае, Фридрих Великий умер в августе 1786 года и был преемником его племянника (старшего брата Вильгельмины) Фридриха Вильгельма II Прусского. Хотя новый король не стремился к войне с Францией, он был менее решителен в том, чтобы избежать такого развития событий, и с тех пор планы Харриса позволить пруссакам воевать от имени Великобритании имели больше шансов на успех. И французская игра, подталкивающая патриотов с одной стороны и сдерживающая их с другой, стала более рискованной. Французский коллега фон Герца, маркиз де Рейневаль, понимал это, а также то, что победа демократов в Республике противоречила бы французским интересам; Франция становилась все менее и менее заинтересованной в поддержке патриотов. Харрис тем временем продолжал свою политику конфронтации, которая имела больше шансов на успех после смерти французского министра иностранных дел Верженна в феврале 1787 года. С уходом Фридриха Великого и Верженна было гораздо вероятнее, что Франция позволит прусскому военному вмешательству обойтись без крупного европейского конфликта. С 13 по 18 мая 1787 года (сразу после битвы при Ютфаасе) в Неймегене состоялась конференция оранжистских нотаблов для определения стратегии конфронтации. Харрис был готов предоставить субсидию в размере 70 000 фунтов стерлингов (якобы в виде займа штатам Гелдерланда), но на самом деле – в качестве "черного ящика" для финансирования оранжистских свободных корпусов, которые должны были быть использованы в уличных беспорядках и для подкупа колеблющихся городов Оверейссела, чтобы они покинули патриотический лагерь. Неохотно штатгальтер подписал своего рода фактическую "декларацию войны" (Декларатор) 26 мая 1787 года. Теперь французы сыграли в опасную игру. Преемник Верженна, Монморен, произвел впечатление, что Франция поддержит патриотов в случае прусского военного вмешательства и что для этого готовится военный лагерь в Живе, на маршруте вторжения через независимое княжество-епископство Льеж, что избавляет от необходимости вступать в Австрийские Нидерланды. Это оказалось блефом, и как только это стало ясно пруссакам и Харрису, ничто не помешало вторжению в Республику. Но патриоты, проинформированные о французских планах вмешательства еще одним французским посланником Жаном-Франсуа де Бургуа, верили в лагерь в Живе до тех пор, пока не стало слишком поздно, и это укрепило их сопротивление прусским требованиям. Вторженческая армия численностью около 26 000 прусских солдат под командованием герцога Брауншвейгского (племянника старого наставника Вильгельма) вошла в Республику 13 сентября 1787 года после того, как последний ультиматум остался без ответа. Несмотря на всю воинственность свободных корпусов, их сопротивление оказалось незначительным. Вооруженный лагерь в Утрехте, где несколько месяцев назад лично командовал Рейнграв фон Зальм, был эвакуирован...
The Patriot Revolt did not take place in a diplomatic vacuum. The Dutch Republic had from its inception been a battlefield of Great Power diplomacy in which the Holland regenten (lately in the guise of the States Party) had been sympathetic to France, and the Orangists usually favored England and later Great Britain. Since the days of the 1688 invasion of England followed by the 1689 naval treaty with England, the Dutch had been in nominal alliance with the British, while the diplomatic relations with France had been strained since the start of the Franco Dutch War and the latest French invasion in 1747. The relation with France had, however, markedly improved during the era of the American Revolutionary War, when the Dutch at first profited from their "neutral flag" trade of contraband goods with the French and Americans, and later fought alongside the French against the British during the Fourth Anglo Dutch War that had recently ended. Franco Dutch relations became even better when France offered its good offices, both to obtain the 1784 treaty of Paris with Great Britain that ended the war, and subsequently to obtain peace with emperor Joseph II, that ended the "Kettle War" with the Treaty of Fontainebleau. Shortly after that, special envoy Gerard Brantsen, a moderate Patriot, crowned this with the treaty of amity and commerce with France of October 1785. One person who observed this thaw in Franco Dutch diplomatic relations with great alarm was the new British ambassador to The Hague, accredited since 1784, Sir James Harris. Harris had a tendency to see French conspiracies everywhere, and in the Dutch case he may have been right. Because the French saw the discomfiture of the Dutch stadtholder with great pleasure, although their enthusiasm was limited to the advance of their old friends, the Amsterdam States Party regenten; they were far less enthusiastic about the democratic designs of the other wing of the Patriot party. With the support of the Cabinet of William Pitt the Younger Harris set about to reclaim the Republic for British influence, and he did not always limit himself to diplomatic means. One important task was to shore up the morale of the dispirited stadtholder after his departure from The Hague in September 1785. William at that time had two options: either to give in to the Patriot demands and accept some kind of compromise as to the Government Regulations, or to hold on to his "due rights" at any cost. The latter was his favorite option (he was wont to quote the maxim Aut Caesar, aut nihil) and Harris, in concert with William's wife Wilhelmina of Prussia, encouraged him to take this option. But Harris did far more: he was supplied with ample funds from the British Secret Service fund and he used that money to buy influence left and right, beginning with a generous pension with strings attached of £4,000 per annum for the stadtholder himself. Ably assisted by "confidential agents", of which baron Hendrik August van Kinckel is the best known, he used these funds to subsidize the establishment of Orangist Free Corps in provinces like Zeeland and Friesland where the Orangists were in the majority, which were used to intimidate the Patriot minorities in these provinces. He tried to lure the conservative regenten in Amsterdam away from their anti Orangist stance with promises of trade concessions by Britain, and promises of concessions from the stadtholder that would safeguard their own privileges, but avoid any "democratic" experiments. But Harris' most important ploy was an attempt to engineer an alliance with Prussia that would thwart the "French designs". This would kill two birds with one stone: it would keep the stadtholder in power, and it would renew the Anglo Prussian alliance that had briefly existed during the Seven Years' War. To that end he visited the aging king Frederick the Great of Prussia, Wilhelmina's uncle, in August 1785 in Berlin. But Frederick was loath to endanger good relations with France, and refused to take the bait. "The pear is not ripe," the old king remarked cryptically. Instead Prussia in concert with France attempted to mediate between the warring parties in the Republic. To that end both countries sent mediators, the ambassadors Vérac and Thulemeyer, who repeatedly attempted to bring the moderates to compromise. For instance, in 1785 they proposed that the stadtholder would cede his military powers to a council, with the Princess, the pensionaries, and the leaders of both the Orangist and "aristocratic" Patriot factions as members (only the democrats would be excluded). But William refused to budge on his "due rights" and without that the Patriots would not budge either. In 1786 a Prussian minister, Johann von Goertz, came to The Hague with a proposal that might even be acceptable to the democrats, but Harris easily convinced William, already in great spirits after the events of Hattem and Elburg, that this would amount to a "capitulation" and the stadtholder appended conditions that were unacceptable to the Patriots. In other words, Harris was a constant obstacle to any attempts at a peaceful solution. In any case, Frederick the Great died in August 1786, and was succeeded by his nephew (Wilhelmina's elder brother) Frederick William II of Prussia. Though the new king was not keen to go to war with France, he was less determined to avoid such a development than the old king, and from then on Harris' designs to let the Prussians do the fighting on behalf of Great Britain stood a better chance. And the French game of egging on the Patriots on the one hand, and keeping them in check on the other, became more risky. The French opposite number of von Goertz, the marquis de Rayneval, understood this, and also that a victory of the democrats in the Republic would be against French interests; France became less and less enthusiastic about favoring the Patriots. Harris meanwhile went on with his policy of confrontation, that stood a better chance of success as also the French foreign minister Vergennes died in February 1787. With both Frederick the Great and Vergennes out of the way it was far more likely that France would allow a Prussian military intervention without a major European conflagration. Between 13 and 18 May 1787 (so shortly after the Battle of Jutphaas) a conference of Orangist notables was held in Nijmegen to decide on a strategy of confrontation. Harris stood ready with a subsidy of £70,000, ostensibly as a loan to the Orangist States of Gelderland), but in reality as a slush fund to finance Orangist Free Corps, to be used in street rioting, and to buy the favors of the vacillating Overijssel cities to leave the Patriot camp. A kind of de facto "declaration of war" (the Declaratoir) was reluctantly signed by the stadtholder on 26 May 1787. Now the French played a dangerous game. Vergennes' successor Montmorin gave the impression that France would support the Patriots in case of Prussian military intervention and that to this end a military camp was being prepared in Givet, on an invasion route through the independent Prince Bishopric of Liège, obviating the necessity of entering the Austrian Netherlands. This turned out to be a bluff, and once this became clear to the Prussians and Harris, nothing prevented an invasion of the Republic. But the Patriots, informed of the French intervention plans by yet another French envoy Jean François de Bourgoing believed in the Givet camp till it was too late, and it steeped them in their resistance to the Prussian demands. An invasion force of around 26,000 Prussian troops under the command of the duke of Brunswick (a nephew of William's old mentor) entered the Republic on 13 September 1787, after a final ultimatum was again left unanswered. Despite all the martiality of the Free Corps their resistance proved to be negligible. The armed camp of Utrecht, where the Rhinegrave of Salm had personally assumed command a few months earlier, was evacuated without a fight, after Salm on 14 September convinced the Military Commission in Woerden that it was a rat trap, about to be encircled by two Prussian pincers, and that it was strategically necessary to retreat to Amsterdam. This earned the Rhinegrave the enduring opprobrium of the Patriots and all Dutch historians, but he was probably right. The retreat proved, however, a death blow to Patriot morale. Though the Patriots indeed made a stand around Amsterdam (without Salm, however, who was replaced by a French officer, Jean Baptiste Ternant). The Prussians attacked on 1 October and the city capitulated on the 10th, after the French had intimated that no assistance would be forthcoming.
Последствия
Статухольдер вернулся в Гаагу 20 сентября 1787 года во главе войск армии штатов, которые маршировали вместе с триумфальной прусской армией. Немедленно началась чистка Штатов Голландии и Генеральных Штатов, обеих структур, заседавших в Гааге. Первым результатом стало то, что Маппе, командовавший крепостью Наарден, был приказан восстановленными Штатами Голландии сдать её пруссам, что он и сделал 27 сентября. Ещё до возвращения статухольдера Голландское рыцарство проявило инициативу, чтобы Штаты отменили всё законодательство предыдущих лет, носящее "патриотический" характер. "Оранжевая Реставрация" продвигалась быстрыми темпами. Повсюду происходила чистка членов местных форешшаппенов и городских магистратов, симпатизировавших патриотам. Великий пенсионер Голландии Питер ван Блейсвейк (выбравший сторону патриотов в 1785 году) был заменён своим коллегой из Зееландии Лоренсом Питером ван де Спигелем в ноябре 1787 года. По указанию принцессы Вильгельмины и посла Харриса он возбудил уголовное дело против ряда лидеров патриотов по списку, предоставленному Вильгельминой, включая Роберта Яспера ван дер Капеллена, двух бургомистров и двух пасторов из Эльбурга, которые были приговорены к смертной казни заочно. Денделс и Ондаатье были приговорены к пожизненной высылке, как и ряд других лидеров патриотов. В ноябре 1787 года была объявлена частичная амнистия, но "внесудебные" преследования патриотов оказались более эффективными: в Гуде разграблено 200 домов оранжистской толпой; в Хертогенбосе – 829; в Утрехте ущерб составил один миллион гульденов. Более 40 000 патриотов (включая женщин и детей) бежали за границу в Антверпен и Брюссель в Австрийские Нидерланды, а оттуда – в города Французской Фландрии (в то время всё ещё говорящие на фламандском языке), такие как Сен-Омер и Дюнкерк, где они были радушно приняты французским правительством по просьбе Ван дер Капеллена тот ден Марш, который написал меморандум королю Людовику XVI с просьбой о финансовой поддержке беженцев. Король выделил средства на финансовую помощь, которая администрировалась фризским Патриотическим судом Ламбертусом ван Беймой в качестве комиссара и Йоханом Валькенером в качестве его секретаря. Они представляли соответственно "демократическое" и "аристократическое" крылья фризских патриотов, однако вскоре поссорились из-за распределения средств. Это привело к расколу в патриотическом сообществе во Франции. Сторонники Валькенера в конечном итоге одержали верх, получив поддержку французского генерального контролёра, возмущённого продажностью Беймы. Две фракции, "Валькенисты" и "Бейманисты", разошлись и сформировали конкурирующие клубы, вовлечённые во внутреннюю французскую политику во время Французской революции. Валкенер вступил в Батавский легион, который вступил в конфликт с якобинцами, не доверявшими иностранцам. Но в конечном итоге голландские патриоты вернули расположение французского правительства после Термидорианской реакции, и голландские добровольцы вошли в состав французской армии, вторгшейся в Голландскую республику в конце 1794 года. Денделс и Ян Виллем де Винтер даже стали бригадными генералами. Другие патриоты в конечном итоге эмигрировали в Соединённые Штаты, как Маппа, основавший литейную фабрику в Нью-Йорке, которая вскоре обанкротилась. Позже он стал агентом Holland Land Company, структуры для спекуляций землёй, основанной Питером Стадницким и рядом финансистов из Амстердама в 1789 году в Барневелде, штат Нью-Йорк, где к нему присоединился Франсуа Адриан ван дер Кемп, распространитель памфлета Ван дер Капеллена. Патриотическое восстание, его причины и исход в виде прусской интервенции представляли большой интерес для Отцов-основателей. Это иллюстрируется Федералистской статьёй № 20, написанной Джеймсом Мэдисоном и опубликованной под псевдонимом Публий 11 декабря 1787 года в контексте дебатов о Конституции Соединённых Штатов, в частности о недостатках Статей Конфедерации и аналогичных конституций. После описания и анализа конституции Голландской республики статья характеризует её как пример, которого следует избегать: В статье явно упоминается прусская интервенция, но, по-видимому, новости о её успехе ещё не достигли США к моменту публикации статьи, поскольку формулировка оставляет надежду на то, что патриоты одержат победу: в Голландской республике, тем временем, Харрис работал над тем, чтобы...
The stadtholder returned to The Hague on 20 September 1787 at the head of the States army troops that had marched together with the triumphant Prussian army. A purge of the States of Holland and the States General, both institutions who had their seat in The Hague, started immediately. The immediate result was that Mappa, who was in charge of the fortress town of Naarden was ordered by the reconstituted States of Holland to surrender it to the Prussians, which he did on 27 September. Even before the return of the stadtholder the Holland ridderschap had taken the initiative to have the States repeal all legislation of the preceding years with a "Patriot" imprint. The "Orange Restoration" proceeded apace. Everywhere the Patriot members of the local vroedschappen and city magistracies were purged. The Grand Pensionary of Holland Pieter van Bleiswijk (who had chosen the Patriot side in 1785) was replaced by his Zeeland colleague Laurens Pieter van de Spiegel in November 1787. On the instruction of Princess Wilhelmina and ambassador Harris he started criminal proceedings against a number of Patriot leaders on a list Wilhelmina provided, like Robert Jasper van der Capellen, two burgemeesters, and two Elburg ministers, who were all sentenced to death in absentia. Daendels and Ondaatje were sentenced to perpetual banishment, as were a number of other Patriot leaders. A limited Amnesty was declared in November 1787, but the "extra judicial" persecution of Patriots was more effective anyway: in Gouda 200 houses were looted by the Orangist mob; in 's Hertogenbosch 829; in Utrecht the bill ran to one million guilders. More than 40,000 Patriots (including women and children) fled abroad to Antwerp and Brussels in the Austrian Netherlands, and from there to towns in French Flanders (in those days still Flemish speaking), like Saint Omer and Dunkirk, where they were hospitably received by the French government, at the request of Van der Capellen tot den Marsch, who wrote a memorandum to King Louis XVI asking for financial support of the refugees. The king provided funding for the financial relief, which was administered by the Frisian Patriots Court Lambertus van Beyma as Commissioner, and Johan Valckenaer, as his secretary. They represented the "democrat" and "aristocrat" wings of the Frisian Patriots, respectively, however, and soon fell out over the disbursements. This led to a schism in the Patriot community in France. The followers of Valckenaer eventually came out on top, as they won the support of the French comptroller general , who was enraged by Beyma's venality. The two factions, "Valckenisten" and "Beymanisten" split, and formed competing clubs that became embroiled in internal French politics during the French Revolution. Valckenaer became involved in the Batavian Legion that fell afoul of the Jacobins, who distrusted foreigners. But eventually the Dutch Patriots got back in the good graces of the French government after the Thermidorian Reaction and Dutch volunteers formed part of the French army that invaded the Dutch Republic in late 1794. Daendels and Jan Willem de Winter even became générals de brigade. Other Patriots eventually migrated to the United States, like Mappa, who established a type foundry in New York City, that soon went bankrupt, however. He later became the agent of the Holland Land Company, a vehicle for land speculation founded by Pieter Stadnitski and a number of Amsterdam Patriot financiers in 1789, in Barneveld, New York, where he was joined by François Adriaan van der Kemp, the distributor of Van der Capellen's pamphlet. The Patriot Revolt, its causes and its denouement in the Prussian intervention were of great interest to the Founding Fathers. This is illustrated by Federalist Paper No. 20, written by James Madison and published under the pseudonym Publius on 11 December 1787 in the context of the debate about the United States Constitution, more particularly about the defects of the Articles of Confederation and similar constitutions. After a description and analysis of the constitution of the Dutch Republic, the paper characterizes it as an example to avoid:
The Paper explicitly refers to the Prussian intervention, but apparently the news of its success had not yet reached the U. S. by the time of the paper's publication, as the wording leaves the hope open that the Patriots will prevail:
In the Dutch Republic, meanwhile, Harris worked to ensure that such an outcome would not come about; that there would not be a repeat of the Patriot Revolt; and that the stadtholderian regime would remain on top in perpetuity. To that end he initiated a network of diplomatic treaties that would anchor the regime, beginning with a treaty between Great Britain and the Dutch Republic, signed on 15 April 1788 by Van de Spieghel in London. It guaranteed the stadtholderate to the House of Orange Nassau in perpetuity and formed a defensive alliance between the two countries. On the same date, at the same hour, a similar treaty was signed between Prussia and the Republic in Berlin. To complete the triangle, Harris brought about a treaty between Great Britain and Prussia during a visit of the Prussian king to his sister at Het Loo on 12/13 June 1788, again guaranteeing the stadtholderian constitution, and renewing the Anglo Prussian military alliance. This led to the Triple Alliance that was signed on 13 August 1788 between all three countries. Meanwhile, on 10 July 1788 the States General had passed the Act of Guarantee that became a formal part of the Constitution of the Dutch Republic. In this case "perpetuity" only lasted seven years. One of the first actions of the
Provisional Representatives of the People of Holland during the Batavian Revolution of 1795, that founded the Batavian Republic, was its repeal and ritual burning on 16 February 1795. The stadtholder had already fled to Kew with his family. He would never return.