Comments by "TheEvertw" (@TheEvertw) on "Dutch Ships of the Golden Age" video.

  1. "The Dutch lost the 4 Anglo-Dutch wars" Yeah, but only after taking over the English crown. A lot of Amsterdam bankers joined William of Orange in London, so the success of London and the English Empire was due to the Dutch taking over management there.
    78
  2. It is a pity that the archaic spelling threw him off, but it was a valiant effort.
    11
  3. ​ @brachiator1  A simple question with a very complicated answer. There was no question of giving up offices, in those days nobility believed it was their divine right to rule. William was Prince of Orange (a region in southern France). In the Netherlands, he held the office of Stadthouder, which was an office that was not hereditary then but was offered by the various provinces, who were known to declare that office vacant or give it to someone else. The victories in the Anglo-Dutch wars had put it in William's head to become King of the Netherlands, but that was not in the cards. Politics in the Netherlands at the time were dominated by the power struggles between various organisations and factions at the provincial and federal levels. There were fights between Republicans and Orangists, and with e.g. France who wanted to take over those rebellious Netherlands. Some politicians lost their heads. William saw an opportunity to become a real king, and many of his entourage welcomed the stability his kingship offered, leaving the uncertainty of the Netherlands behind. This was the real cause of the end of the Dutch golden century and the rise of the British Empire. After the Glorious Revolution, the Netherlands were a vassal state to France for 20 years and had a powerful monarch for 30. The other 110 years it was a more-or-less loose collection of states with a more-or-less powerful federal governmental system, and the Orange dynasty with various offices, all vying for power. It would take till 1815 until the political fights were settled and the Netherlands became a sovereign kingdom. Well, they still continued, but less violently. In 1830 Belgium separated from the Netherlands because its interests were under-represented, and in 1848 the power of the monarch was finally taken away through a constitution that made Parliament pre-eminent. Our history since the middle of the 16th century has been dominated by the belief that no single person should have absolute power. As they say, "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely". Sadly there are always people who want absolute power, and sheeple who want to give them that power because of "stability".
    8
  4. ​ @gellfex9287  Please get your facts straight, mate. The Glorious Revolution came after the THIRD anglo-dutch war, and put a stop to further hostilities for a century. There was about a decade between each of the first three wars, so personally I think the 4th needs to be seen separately from the others. The international context was completely different. The brilliant thing about the operation is that the UK still considers it a Revolution instead of an invasion 🤣🤣🤣
    2
  5. ​ @brachiator1  It was a very confusing period. Most important were the co-ordinated actions against Louis the 14th, the expansionist French king, who was put in his place by the combined efforts of the Dutch and English. After William, the Dutch had a period without Stadthouders, became inward-looking and a bit backward.
    2
  6.  @brachiator1  I find the relevant wikipedia pages pretty good, e.g. their page on the Dutch Republic. I haven't read any English books on Dutch history, but "The Dutch Republic: Its Rise, Greatness, and Fall 1477–1806" by Jonathan Israel looks like a good one, as it also covers the Burgundian and French periods which are important context.
    1
  7. ​ @gellfex9287  You got your dates wrong by a century. The 4th Anglo-Dutch war started in 1780, 92 years after the Glorious Revolution, (1688). The third one ended in 1674 with a Dutch victory and the English begging for peace.
    1