Make Up Assignment for our "Dog Day" **GREENWOOD ONLY**

Watch the link on our main web site for lecture over Dutch and British Exceptionalism. It is a fantastic lecture. After you finish start a dialog in this forum area. You must ask one question and contribute twice. Think of this as a virtual scored discussion.

AGAIN, Get the VIDEO off our class site.

Video

My question would be where exactly did the Netherlands and England differ, in the 17th and 18th centuries? It seems like they went together with everything, as far as development goes, but what were some differences and even disputes between them?

well I know that this isn't specific but he did say that even though they were alike they did fight wars over certain things, but I am with you on this I still have know idea what their differences were. Was is how they saw themselves?

One of the differences between Netherlands and England was there different religious views; England believed in Protestantism while the Netherlands believed in Calvinism. Their identity was defined by not being Catholic. The Netherlands and England were both large trade powers, and they had wars over the control of the seas so one could become greater than the other.

Why and how did they have the largest middle class population?

I think the reason England had the largest middle class population was because it was so urbanized. It was more of a major city than a farm town, kind of like New York City compared to Franklin, KY, and there weren't rulers that controlled huge populations. Most men were "free-born". So most people were their own rulers in a sense, and might have considered themselves middle class even if they were poor. But how did the Netherlands have a big middle class if Spain was ruling them the whole time? Was their middle class as big as Englands?

Since the North is so urban, how do they produce any crops or livestock? Is the rural population large enough to support the North, or do they depend on the South?

Maybe just trade was enough to get all the goods they needed, or maybe they got crops from their colonies? I thougnt it was interesting how in the Netherlands they took land back from the sea, and also it was amazing how much they reclaimed in such a short time. What I didn't understant though was, why did England remain powerful while the Dutch faded even though they were so similar?

Well since the north has such a large population and such little land they had to reclaim the land from the sea by doing so they got back 36000 acres between 1590-1615. This revolution made a rise in production of food for the heavly populated north. And for why the dutch faded instead of the british i think it was because England has been around longer or maybe becuase they were just more involved.
What I dont get is why the dutch feared the Irish?

Okay. So how exactly did having a large middle class help prevent them from following absolutism?

Maybe one of the reasons why having a large middle class helped prevent absolutism was the nobles and leaders were afraid to go to absolutism. They might have thought that the middle class would revolt and try to take over since there so many more of them than the nobles. Since there weren’t many nobles, if the common people got out of hand it might have been harder for them to control it. One thing I didn’t understand was why the painters only painted happy scenes and pictures of people eating and having a good time? Why didn’t they paint pictures of war and other things like that?

I think they were trying to suppress the war. But my question is why exactly were there so few nobles during this time?

Before the European Countries had standing armies, the nobles were the army. They were the ones that fought against others and against themselves so that was probably killing them. I was curious why the Netherlands never really became a major power since they had several things in common with England/Great Britain?

One reason might have been that the Netherlands were very afraid that their country would go back to how it was when Spain was controlling them. They were focusing on keeping it how they wanted that they didn’t really give much thought on becoming one of the major powers, they just wanted to keep other countries from controlling them. I didn't get why the Netherlands was so obsessed and focused about their “identity”?

I think that the Netherlands never became super power because after the death of William III in 1702, unified political leadership was gone, naval supremacy was going to the British. The fishing industry was declining and the Dutch lost technological supremacy in shipbuilding. The lack of unity in Dutch provinces quickened the Dutch economic decline
Why wouldn't the two protestant countries (the Netherlands and England) join forces to keep the Spanish out of the Netherlands and join together to make a protestant empire.

I think that the Netherlands was so obsessed with their national identity because similar to the case of Portugal and Spain there is a sense of cultural divergence and national pride. This also has to do with the fear of being too much like another country resulting in the loss of their national heritage and traditions such as a strong middle class that lead the Dutch to their economic success.

At the beginning of the lecture, he talks about how there were so many wealthy landlords in England. This is due to the quick and dramatic growth of the English economy. But in Prussia, France, and England, it was out of the ordinary for the nobles to be involved in commerce or to be necessarily wealthy. This doesnt make much sense to me. Maybe I'm the only one?

No Molly, you're not the only one! But I just think he was trying to compare and contrast the different countries to show the resemblances and differences and give you an insight on what is going on.

I agree with Elvira, I think he was doing a compare/contrast with all the countries. It was out of the ordinary for England to have suddenly have many nobles and wealth. But, England accomplished this, because landowners and nobles were investing in commerce, lots of land. Merriman talks about how 1/6 of England would visit London frequently and most of the middle class lives in very urban areas. During the 17th century, England, Netherlands, and Italy had the biggest urbanized populations, which means they have the biggest Middle Classes in Europe during this time.

Adding to Cody answer, I'd say that the reason England at this time had the largest urbanized population was because it wasn't in absolute rule. Places like Germany, who didn't have urbanized cities and had more diverse social groups, with no are in between were absolutists. Did England have the largest middle-class due to this one thing, or was there more to it?

I dont want to sound ignorant but I dont get how the absolute rule can effect that?

I think what Hunter is trying to say, Ashten, is that since England doesn't have Absolute Rule, the king doesn't really have the right to force population rules on urban cities, that is the task of the lord or ruler of that city. Absolute Rule is kinda like a dictatorship. The ruler has no restrictions and nobody to tell him no, such as advisers; for example: the Parliament of England. Therefore, Parliament could advise the King to keep Middle Classes high in Urban Cities.

I think maybe another reason that England had a middle class was that the nobles in Parliament didnt want the king to get to much power, which meant he couldn't control any of his subjects too much unless Parliament allowed it. Even though the middle class didn't directly get a say, they were protected by the power the Parliament had over the king. Does anyone know if the Netherlands had a Parliament or something like that? Because I didn't get exactly what type of gov. they had from the lecture.

Netherlands, aka the Dutch, had a Republic government in the 17th century. Their government is kinda like federalism, but the Netherlands had 7 confederate provinces, which had their own government and they were very independent. Each province was governed by the Provincial States, the main executive official was the "Grand Pensionary", kinda like a Prince. But, during war the stadtholder, or the "steward" or "lord lieutenant", had more power then the Prince himself.

Yea, that's why in the book it says that after the invasion of Louis XIV, Prince William III of Orange AND the Stadtholder of Holland rallied the Dutch. The Stadtholder had a lot of influence on the Dutch. This was also a key to William becoming King of England.

So, when William III of Orange went to England, did he remain ruler of the Netherlands as well, or did the Stadtholder get more power?