The Rise of the Dutch Republic — Volume 32: 1582-84 — John Shaqi
The Rise of the Dutch Republic — Volume 32: 1582-84Motley, John Lothrop
History
The Rise of the Dutch Republic — Volume 32: 1582-84
Motley, John Lothrop
Netherlands -- Church history; Netherlands -- History -- Eighty Years' War, 1568-1648
It will be observed that in his first letters the Duke had not affected
to deny his agency in the outrage--an agency so flagrant that all
subterfuge seemed superfluous. He in fact avowed that the attempt had
been made by his command, but sought to palliate the crime on the ground
that it had been the result of the ill-treatment which he had experienced
from the states. "The affronts which I have received," said he, both to
the magistrates of Antwerp and to Orange, "have engendered the present
calamity." So also, in a letter written at the same time to his brother,
Henry the Third, he observed that "the indignities which were put upon
him, and the manifest intention of the states to make a Matthias of him,
had been the cause of the catastrophe."
He now, however, ventured a step farther. Presuming upon the indulgence
which he had already experienced; and bravely assuming the tone of
injured innocence, he ascribed the enterprise partly to accident, and
partly to the insubordination of his troops. This was the ground which
he adopted in his interviews with the states' commissioners. So also,
in a letter addressed to Van der Tympel, commandant of Brussels, in which
he begged for supplies for his troops, he described the recent invasion
of Antwerp as entirely unexpected by himself, and beyond his control.
He had been intending, he said, to leave the city and to join his army.
A tumult had accidentally arisen between his soldiers and the guard at
the gate. Other troops rushing in from without, had joined in the
affray, so that to, his great sorrow, an extensive disorder had arisen.
He manifested the same Christian inclination to forgive, however, which
he had before exhibited. He observed that "good men would never grow
cold in his regard, or find his affection diminished." He assured Van
der Tympel, in particular, of his ancient goodwill, as he knew him to be
a lover of the common weal.
In his original communications he had been both cringing and threatening
but, at least, he had not denied truths which were plain as daylight.
His new position considerably damaged his cause. This forgiving spirit
on the part of the malefactor was a little more than the states could
bear, disposed as they felt, from policy, to be indulgent, and to smooth
over the crime as gently as possible. The negotiations were interrupted,
and the authorities of Antwerp published a brief and spirited defence of
their own conduct. They denied that any affront or want of respect on
their part could have provoked the outrage of which the Duke had been
guilty. They severely handled his self-contradiction, in ascribing
originally the recent attempt to his just vengeance for past injuries,
and in afterwards imputing it to accident or sudden mutiny, while they
cited the simultaneous attempts at Bruges, Denremonde, Alost, Digmuyde,
Newport, Ostend, Vilvoorde, and Dunkirk, as a series of damning proofs of
a deliberate design.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account