sometimes doomed to perish before they have attained their full political growth. The history of the Netherlands is, with circumstantial variations, the history of the Italian Republics, the history of England, the history of the American Federacy. Too frequently the mutual jealousies of neighbouring and rival cities have terminated in the loss of the freedom and independence they had achieved; and it would seem to require the pressure of a common danger, or a common oppression, to consolidate them into one political body. Too feeble in themselves, insulated commonwealths have rapidly declined from the zenith of their prosperity, a prey to intestine factions which have invited a conqueror, or the victims of mutual jealousy. In this way, Thebes, Tyre, Cyrene, Carthage, Genoa, and Venice, have been overthrown. It was a fortunate circumstance, that the several towns of the Netherlands were early taught by salutary reverses the absolute necessity of a federal union. In the contest which took place, in 1323, between the burghers of Bruges and Count Louis, Ghent, actuated by the jealousy which at all times existed between its citizens and those of the former city, stood aloof. The consequence was, that the burghers of Bruges were obliged to come to a compromise with the Count, and subsequently, on a new quarrel, were almost overwhelmed and destroyed at the battle of Cassel. The lesson was not lost upon the rival cities; and a general insurrection, aided by an English alliance, a few years afterwards, established the independence of Flanders. When Edward III. landed at Antwerp, to assert his claim to the French crown, he was joined by the Flemings with 60,000 men; and when the English and French fleets met near Sluys, in a fierce encounter meant to be decisive of the war, a Flemish squadron, hastening to the aid of the English, secured to them the long doubtful victory. A Flemish army covered the siege of Calais in 1348; and, under the command of Giles de Rypergherste, a mere weaver of Ghent, they beat the Dauphin in a pitched battle. On the withdrawment of the English, Count Louis de Mâle made an effort to re-establish his former authority; and he succeeded in gaining over to his views not only all the nobles, but many of the most influential guilds, or trades.

"Ghent, which long resisted his attempts, was at length reduced by famine; and the Count projected the ruin, or at least the total subjection of this turbulent town. A son of Artaveldt started forth at this juncture, when the popular cause seemed lost; and joining with his fellow citizens John Lyons and Peter du Bois, he led 7000 resolute burghers against 40,000 feudal vassals. He completely defeated the Count, and took the town of Bruges, where Louis de Mâle only obtained safety by hiding himself under the bed of an old woman who gave him shelter. Thus, once more, feudality was defeated in a

VOL. IV.N.S.

G G

fresh struggle with civic freedom. The consequences of this event were immense. They reached to the very heart of France, where the people bore in great discontent the feudal yoke; and Froissart declares, that the success of the people of Ghent had nearly overthrown the superiority of the nobility over the people of France.'

Under the dominion of the powerful house of Burgundy, in the fifteenth century, the cause of popular liberty experienced a considerable decline. Flanders, however, strictly preserved its republican institutions, although intestine quarrels, the result of the yet unextinguished municipal jealousies, enabled Philip of Burgundy to divide and successively conquer the two chief cities. Ghent, whose citizens had aided the Duke in subduing and punishing the men of Bruges, was in its turn oppressed and punished for having resisted the payment of some new tax; and being unsupported by the rest of Flanders, was, after a struggle of two years, compelled to yield with the loss of its principal privileges. During these transactions, the provinces of Holland and Zealand were rising in wealth and importance; and although their wars with the Hanseatic towns, and the naval operations of the French, in the war between Charles V. and Francis I., retarded their prosperity, they were destined to become the most wealthy and powerful, and to maintain their independence when Flanders fell under the iron yoke of Spain.

In the early part of the sixteenth century, however, the southern provinces were the most flourishing. Antwerp had succeeded to Bruges as the general mart of commerce, and was the most opulent town of the north of Europe. Flanders alone was taxed for one-third of the general burdens of the State, and Brabant paid only one-seventh less than Flanders; so that these two rich provinces furnished thirteen out of twenty-one parts of the general contribution. The opulence of the towns of Brabant and Flanders was without any previous example in the history of Europe. This opulence entailed excessive luxury, which naturally led to great corruption of manners. During 'the reign of Philip de Mâle, there were committed in the city of Ghent and its outskirts, in less than a year, above 1400 'murders in gambling-houses and other resorts of debauchery.' At the same time, literature and the arts were making considerable progress.

Painting, which had languished before the fifteenth century, sprung at once into a new existence from the invention of John Van Eyck, known better by the name of John of Bruges. His accidental discovery of the art of painting in oil, quickly spread over Europe, and served to perpetuate to all time the records of the genius which has bequeathed its vivid impressions to the world. Painting on glass, polishing diamonds, the Carillon, lace, and tapestry, were among the in

ventions which owed their birth to the Netherlands in these ages, when the faculties of mankind sought so many new channels for mechanical development. The discovery of a new world by Columbus and other eminent navigators, gave a fresh and powerful impulse to European talent, by affording an immense reservoir for its reward. The town of Antwerp was, during the reign of Charles V., the outlet for the industry of Europe, and the receptacle for the productions of all the nations of the earth. Its port was so often crowded with vessels, that each successive fleet was obliged to wait long in the Scheldt, before it could obtain admission for the discharge of its cargoes. university of Louvain, that great nursery of science, was founded in 1425, and served greatly to (promote) the spread of knowledge, although it degenerated into the hotbed of those fierce disputes which stamped on theology the degradation of bigotry, and drew down odium on a study that, if purely practised, ought only to inspire veneration.'-pp. 77, 8.

The

The Netherlands were never in a more flourishing state, than at the accession of the ferocious son of Charles V., the execrable Philip II. But, in the political union of their country to Spain, how was it not foreseen that their ruin was certainly involved? It was like placing Switzerland at the mercy of Austria, or Greece in the grasp of Turkey; it was, in fact, placing Europe under the dominion of Africa; and the Saracen would have been a less intolerant and ferocious tyrant, than the Christian Spaniard. Spain, Mr. Grattan correctly remarks,

was, at this period, in some degree excluded from European civilization. A contest of seven centuries, between the Mahomedan tribes and the descendants of the Visigoths, cruel, like all civil wars, and, like all those of religion, not merely a contest of rulers, but essentially of the people, had given to the manners and feelings of this unhappy country a deep stamp of barbarity. The ferocity of military chieftains had become the basis of the government and laws. The Christian kings had adopted the perfidious and bloody system of the despotic sultans they replaced. Magnificence and tyranny, power and cruelty, wisdom and dissimulation, respect and fear, were inseparably associated in the minds of a people so governed. They comprehended nothing in religion but a God armed with omnipotence and vengeance, or in politics, but a king as terrible as the deity he represented.'-p. 79.

Yet, had the people of the Netherlands been true to themselves, they might, by timely resistance, have shaken off the yoke of their perfidious tyrant. But changes had been going forward in society, which unhappily prepared the way for the execution of his well-laid designs, in which was embraced the total extinction of the national liberties, civil as well as religious. The Belgian clergy, alarmed at the progress of the doctrines of the Reformation, gathered more closely round the Government, to which they could alone look for support. The nobles had lost much of their attachment to liberty, and had become

in various ways dependent upon the royal favour. The commons were in part corrupted by luxury, in part divided by religious animosities. A new system of ecclesiastical organization, sanctioned by the Pope, at which the clergy murmured, but submitted, enabled Philip to wield the whole power of the church by means of prelates of his own appointment, the mere creatures of the crown, and the ready tools of intolerance. In Granvelle, Archbishop of Mechlin, he found a Laud, whom he was compelled so far to sacrifice to the popular voice, before his plans were ripe, as to recal him from the helm of government, but not to abandon him to the fate he merited. The unrelenting despot was not, however, to be diverted from his purpose. His secret instructions remained unrevoked; and he issued fresh orders to have the edicts against heresy put into most rigorous execution, and to proclaim through the seventeen provinces the furious decree of the Council of Trent.

In

And now in reality commenced (A.D. 1566.) the awful struggle which in a few years converted a flourishing and happy country into a scene of conflict, massacre, and desolation. 'the midst of European civilization, the wickedness of one 'prince drew down on the country he misgoverned, more evils than it had suffered for centuries from the worst effects of its foreign foes.' We must refrain from entering upon the history of the Revolution, of which Mr. Grattan has given us a succinct and spirited outline. There are some circumstances connected with its commencement, however, of which we must regret that we have no clear and satisfactory account. Mosheim, in the very brief reference he makes to the tumultuous proceedings of the iconoclasts, is charged by his English Editor (Maclaine) with distinguishing too little between the spirit of the nobility and that of the multitude. His fault is rather, that he slurs over the transactions of this period in so vague and general a manner. We can scarcely find fault with Mr. Grattan for not more adequately discharging the duties of an ecclesiastical historian. Yet, he should have known better than to speak of the Anabaptists, the Calvinists, and the Lutherans', as the three sects into which the reformers were divided; or, after saying that their dogmas were nearly the same with those of the es'tablished religion of England', to add, that the only principle 'they held in common, was their hatred against Popery, the 'Inquisition, and Spain.' Perhaps, Mr. Grattan meant to say, that this was the only principle held in common by the insurgents, not by the three sects so inaccurately designated. All three appellations were terms of reproach, and, as such, were probably used by their enemies almost as convertible terms. In strict propriety, the terms Lutheran and Calvinist would denote simply a conformity to the Confession of Augsburg or to

6

the Swiss Confession. It is true, that, in the Belgic provinces, the friends of the Reformation were for some time divided be tween the two. It was not till the year 1571, that the Belgic Confession was adopted, when the Dutch, who before had been denominated Lutherans, assumed universally, like the French Protestants, the title of Reformed. So long as they were sub'ject to the Spanish yoke', says Mosheim, 'the fear of exposing themselves to the displeasure of their sovereign, in'duced them to avoid the title of Reformed, and to call them'selves Associates of the Brethren of the Confession of Augsburg; for the Lutherans were esteemed by the Spanish Court, 'much better subjects than the disciples of Calvin, who, on account of the tumults which had lately prevailed in France, were supposed to have a greater propensity to mutiny and se'dition.'*

'It requires no profound research,' remarks Mr. Grattan, ' tó comprehend the impulse which leads a horde of fanatics to the < most monstrous excesses. That the deeds of the iconoclasts arose from the spontaneous outburst of mere vulgar fury, 'admits of no doubt.' We differ altogether from the Writer. Fury is blind, and there is nothing to wonder at in its excesses; but fury is still an effect not unconnected with some adequate exciting cause. And when we are told that a band of mere peasants, and beggars, and vagabonds, urged by only the basest passions, proceeded to demolish with rapidity, order, and simultaneous zeal, the types' of an abhorred idolatry, which was identified with all the atrocities of the most barbarous intolerance and oppression, and this, so far as appears, unaccompanied with any deeds of personal violence or private rapine, we feel that the two parts of the statement do not hang together; that the latter part refutes the former. It is not thus that beggars and vagabonds do their work. Nor could 400 churches be pillaged in Flanders and Brabant by a band of this description. It is little short of ridiculous to describe in this manner, a deliberate national movement, instigated by a maddening oppression. The beggars (Gueux) of the Netherlands, were something better than either fanatics or vagabonds. The whole of the statements relating to the apostles of calvinism,' the field preachings,' &c., given on the authority of Vandervynet, are liable to similar exception. The facts and the language in which they are given, do not agree; and we seem to be reading an apology for Philip. Some further light may be thrown upon these disorders, by bringing into juxta-position, two statements which are widely separated in Mr. Grattan's narrative, although the facts cannot be regarded as unconnected.

* Mosheim's Eccl. Hist., B. IV. Sect. iii. Part 2. ¶ 22.