Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Emden and the Dutch Revolt$

Andrew Pettegree

Print publication date: 1992

Print ISBN-13: 9780198227397

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: October 2011

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198227397.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2020. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use.  Subscriber: null; date: 23 January 2020

Victory in Holland; Diminishing Influence

Victory in Holland; Diminishing Influence

Chapter:
(p.188) 7 Victory in Holland; Diminishing Influence
Source:
Emden and the Dutch Revolt
Author(s):

Andrew Pettegree

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198227397.003.0007

Abstract and Keywords

This chapter examines the participation of Dutch towns in the Dutch Revolt of 1572. The revolt caused major economic problems, particularly with the fishing trade, and thousands of people were left with no work and municipal charity was strained to the limit. This chapter suggests that if the Dutch revolt is to be seen as a military victory for the rebel forces and a spontaneous uprising, it should be noted that the Protestant exiles made significant contributions to this victory.

Keywords:   Dutch Revolt, economic problems, Protestants, Netherlands, exiles

GOOD ANGEL. Sweet Faustus, think of heaven and heavenly things.

BAD ANGEL. No Faustus, think of honour and wealth. faustus. Wealth! Why the signory of Emden shall be mine.

(Marlowe, Doctor Faustus, II. i.1)

It would be wrong to over-estimate the enthusiasm with which the towns of Holland joined the rebellion in 1572. Certainly since Alva's coming the local economy had been through exceptionally troubled times. By the winter of 1571 the Sea Beggars’ depredations had had an extremely depressing effect on both fishing and trade; thousands had no work and municipal charity was strained to the limit. On top of this the demands of Alva's taxes placed an almost intolerable new burden, and the towns might legitimately resent the fact that they were expected to endure the expense of maintaining garrisons without there being any serious attempt to protect their shipping.2 The Beggars’ occupation of Den Briel and Vlissingen (Flushing) in the first week of April threatened further serious economic consequences, particularly for the south-Holland towns like Delft and Rotterdam, now effectively cut off from the sea.3

(p.189) For all that, few in positions of influence in the towns embraced the revolt with enthusiasm. The revolt does seem to have had a more popular character in the towns of north Holland, where material hardship was most acute, and where returning exiles played an active role in fomenting dissent. Orangist sympathizers succeeded in seizing control in Enkhuizen in the middle of May, and in the next few weeks Hoorn and Alkmaar followed it into the exile camp.4 In south Holland, however, town governments seemed initially determined to remain loyal, even at the cost of accepting a hated Spanish garrison.5 What swung the balance, was the fact that the rebels were clearly gaining the upper hand militarily. An attempt to dislodge the rebels from their stronghold in Den Briel ended in abject failure, and from the middle of June Alva was forced to withdraw troops from Holland to deal with the gathering threat from the south. When in July the last Spanish garrison was withdrawn, Delft and Rotterdam quickly defected. By the end of the summer Amsterdam remained the only major city still in Spanish hands.6

It is arguable then that the revolt in Holland should be seen as a military victory for the rebel forces, rather more than as a spontaneous uprising. If so it was a victory to which the exiles contributed very substantially. Almost from the first days of the Beggars’ descent on Den Briel the exile communities exerted themselves to provide all possible assistance. News of the capture of Den Briel provoked an immediate response among the Dutch communities in England. Alva's agent in London reported the recruitment of over five hundred troops within a fortnight, and by the end of the month the two London congregations had raised £500 to buy arms.7 In May the London Dutch Church organized a new collection among the smaller communities in East Anglia, to which each contributed according to their means; the largest, Norwich, itself fitted out a further 125 (p.190) troops.8 Appeals continued to pour in dirough the summer, from Vlissingen, Enkhuizen, and from William himself, and the Church responded as best it could. By the end of the year the London Church reckoned to have contributed £1,400 to the costs of the rebel garrisons, in addition to the soldiers fitted out at their own expense.9

The events in Holland produced a similarly enthusiastic reaction in Emden. On 9 April Bossu's spies in Den Briel reported the arrival of 150 men in two ships from Emden; they must therefore have left almost immediately on arrival of news of the town's capture. Another 300 followed within a week.10 On 28 April Morillon reported to Granvelle a general return from England and the German towns to assist the revolt.11 The Emden exiles enjoyed particularly close links with the towns of north Holland, so that their adherence to the revolt in May produced a new wave of returns. The exile ministers, Jan Arentsz among them, played an active role in persuading the exiles to return to consolidate the revolt, seconded by appeals from within the towns themselves. A number of exiles did return in time to take part in the tense negotiation leading to Enkhuizen's defection, and within a week the shaky rebel regime had received further invaluable reinforcement with the arrival of a fleet of corn ships from Emden carrying 500 men.12 Two months later a further 500 troops from Emden arrived in Haarlem and Enkhuizen.13

Other exiles exerted themselves in the collection of funds. In the spring of 1572 Orange had no permanent representative in Emden, since Basius's departure the previous year. He therefore quickly despatched Pieter van der Werff, the later burgomaster of Leiden and a familiar figure in the northern exile, to raise money on his behalf.14 Llis endeavours were seconded by Jacob van Wesembeke, who had returned to East Friesland to co-ordinate the raising of troops in north Germany. These efforts were evidently successful since on 24 June Bossu reported to Alva that 1,000 harquebusiers (p.191) had embarked in Emden, and another 1,000 or 1,200 well-armed fighting men were ready there.15

These connections with the exile congregations continued to play a vital role as the rebel position worsened steadily towards the end of the year. As Alva's campaign of reconquest gathered pace, Orange appealed with ever greater urgency for new help; his representatives in London and Emden renewed the search for money and recruits. And although the London Church would eventually protest at these unremitting demands, at the turn of the year William's agents still found a ready response in England and East Friesland. At this point Emden seems to have been the principal recruiting and assembly place for troops raised in Germany, and the town teemed with soldiers and sailors for the Beggar fleet.16

Yet for Emden this near acquaintance with active warfare was not without cost. Not all shared the exiles’ enthusiasm for the rebel cause, and with good reason. The revival of the Beggars’ fortunes, for example, posed considerable problems for Emden. In particular Emden citizens had to contend with the renewed enmity of Lumey, now in a position to revenge his ignominious expulsion from Emden the previous year.17 In the spring of 1572 the conquerer of Den Briel stood at the height of his powers, and Emden ships felt the full force of his hostility. Captains in the Beggar fleet were given authority to take and plunder vessels coming from the city, and all citizens of Emden found on board were to be thrown overboard. In May a fleet of twenty grain ships from Emden destined for Amsterdam was intercepted and diverted into Den Briel, and the seamen held for ransom against a boatload of provisions.

Emden's merchants could not sustain losses on this scale, and representatives were swiftly despatched to reason with the rebel States. In September a formal treaty was signed restoring Emden's privileges as a neutral, and when the following January Orange finally tired of Lumey's ill-discipline and ordered his arrest the depredations of the Sea Beggars were effectively at an end. Nevertheless, the position of East Friesland remained a hazardous one. Count Edzard (p.192) was determined to maintain his land's formal neutrality, even to the extent of ordering the arrest of one of Orange's most active recruiting agents.18 New edicts were published forbidding the taking up of troops in the province. Yet if these measures were intended to reduce East Friesland's role in the conflict they were almost totally ineffective, particularly after the Spanish reconquest of the Netherlands’ north-eastern provinces in the autumn of 1572. The rebels’ loss of Friesland brought East Friesland for the first time directly into the war zone and stimulated a new wave of exiles to Emden, which more than compensated for those who had returned to Holland earlier in the year.19 More importantly the stop in trade between the rebel towns and areas still loyal to Spain, which both sides attempted to enforce, brought a new windfall to the neutral port. More merchants than ever diverted their trade through Emden, In 1573 the town's custom receipts reached unprecedented levels, a four hundred per cent increase on the previous year.20

With the revolt in such a perilous situation, the trade with Emden was clearly of the utmost political and strategic importance. The rebel towns shipped supplies from Emden, but so did places in Spanish hands. In January 1573 large quantities of provisions, herring, cheese, salt, and meat, were shipped up the Rhine from Emden to Wesel and Cologne, and thence to Antwerp and the Spanish forces besieging Haarlem. The following year the Spanish emissary Viglius confessed frankly that only the steady traffic with Emden had enabled the Spanish garrison in Amsterdam to hold out against the rebel forces in Holland.21

Not surprisingly evidence of Emden's even-handed dealings with both parties caused considerable resentment in the rebel towns. In October 1572 Orange's commander in Friesland had written to the town asking that Emden should not continue to supply the enemy, a request which the Council received sympathetically.22 But in fact Emden's rulers did not have a free hand. Count Edzard also came under strong diplomatic pressure from the Spanish side, and after the recovery of Friesland by forces loyal to Spain Emden's citizens could not realistically be expected to forgo this important trade with the (p.193) north-eastern provinces. The feelings of anger and frustration raised in the rebel camp by this apparent double-dealing found elegant expression in a long letter directed to the Emden Church from Delft in the autumn of 1573.23 It followed closely on the fall of Haarlem, which had surrendered to the besieging Spanish forces amidst terrible butchery, after frantic efforts at relief had failed. The letter denounced Emden for its notorious role in supplying the Spanish troops, and continued to a root-and-branch attack on the conduct of the town, its ministers, and its morals. The letter was clearly written by someone very familiar with Emden, probably one of the Holland ministers who had spent time there before returning to Holland in 1572. The author reserved his most scathing criticism for the Emden minister Bernhardus Borsumanus, who had apparently denounced the rebel cause in a sermon on the right of resistance. Whether this was, as the Delft writer alleged, a cynical move to ingratiate himself with sceptical local citizens, it made a stark contrast with distinguished predecessors in the Emden ministry, like Cornelis Cooltuyn, who had committed themselves wholeheartedly to the cause of true religion.24 So lax and rotten had the Church become, the author prophesied that divine retribution would shortly follow: ‘the sorrow which the Lord will send over our enemies will embrace Emden, once the refuge of ourselves and the community of Christ’.25

This portrait was clearly overdrawn; as we have seen, the general climate of opinion in Emden remained distinctly favourable to the revolt. But it was clear that unless action was taken Emden would continue to profit through Holland's misfortune, and the States drew the correct conclusion: if their towns were ever to recover their former trade, it was necessary to curb that of Emden. Early in 1574 the rebels therefore took decisive measures. In March William of Orange ordered all exiles from Holland and Zeeland who had taken refuge abroad to return. A copy of the proclamation was exhibited to the Emden town council.26 This was then followed by a new order forbidding all trade with the Spanish-held provinces. In April a fleet (p.194) from Holland arrived off the Ems to enforcerder by blockade.

The Ems blockade was immediately effective, not least in persuading the Holland exiles to obey William's order to return. According to the Emden Chronicle some three thousand left East Friesland in April alone.27 It soon became apparent that the blockading ships were interpreting their orders very strictly. Not only did they carefully search all sea-borne traffic, but they also took steps to inhibit the short-distance trade with Groningen. For three years the Holland blockade played havoc with Emden's trade. Protests were of no avail; a delegation to the States of Holland in 1575 was received with the pious hope that Emden, for so long the refuge of exiles, would understand the necessity of these measures.28 Only at the end of 1576, when the Pacification of Ghent removed its last justification, was the blockade lifted.

The Ems blockade certainly diminished the advantage Emden had won through the troubles in the Netherlands. The measures to restrict Emden's trade did allow the Holland towns to mount something of a recovery. The instructions of the blockading ships made clear that the intention was to bring maximum benefit to the Holland towns: in 1575 all ships owned by Hollanders or new citizens (that is recent immigrants to Emden) were ordered to be re™ directed to Holland.29 The principal beneficiary of these measures was Enkhuizen, where the intercepted ships were diverted and where licences were issued; it enjoyed steady growth during these years. But the effect on Emden should not be overstated. Despite the blockade and the departure of some Holland merchants, Emden's fleet in 1575 was still greater than any town's in Europe. The years of prosperity had built a trade infrastructure, particularly with the German hinterland, which was sufficiently robust to withstand some heavy blows.

If the military conflict had troubling implications for the Emden authorities, the exiles could at least give unstinting support to the restoration of the Reformed Church which followed the Beggar victories. In most of the major Holland towns the restoration of the Church followed immediately after the rebel take-over. In Delft, Haarlem, and Dordrecht churches were made over to the Reformed (p.195) within days of their declaration for the revolt: in Delft the prestigious Nieuwe Kerk, in Dordrecht the Augustijnerkerk.30 In a number of cases the Reformed were indebted to the initiative of returning exiles, who played a prominent role in the negotiations leading to the rebel take-over. Thus at Leiden the demands presented to the town authorities included as their third article the provision that the town's principal church should be made over to the Reformed; and indeed a month later they were able to hold their first service in the church of our Lady, the Onze Lieve Vrouwekerk.31 Even in conservative Gouda the first preachings took place only a fortnight after the town had declared for the revolt.32

The new Churches inevitably required organization and leadership, but for many of the ministers in exile this was a moment for which they had long held themselves in readiness. The first to preach in Enkhuizen after the rebel take-over was Andries Dirksz, who returned from Emden to take up once more the leadership of the Church he had served during the Wonderyear.33 In the same way Andreas Cornelisz returned from Emden to take charge of the Church in Den Briel.34 Jan Arentsz, having lingered in Emden to urge the prominent north-Holland exiles to support the revolt, then himself returned to his home town of Alkmaar; his former Amsterdam colleague Pieter Gabriel, meanwhile, came to assist the establishment of the Church in Delft.35 This speedy response was in part made possible by the previous reluctance of these ministers to accept any new appointment which would detract from their former commitment to their home Churches; something which had often obstructed the Emden Church in their search for new ministers, but (p.196) which now rebounded to the Church's benefit.36 Thus many of the ministers active in Holland during the Wonderyear were again on hand to take part in the restoration of the churches. All in all something over thirty ministers seem to have returned from East Friesland to Holland in the spring and summer of 1572.37

The Churches in England and the Rhineland witnessed a similar movement back to the Netherlands. Three ministers of the London church, Wybo, van Winghen, and Bartholdus Wilhelmi quickly crossed the Channel to lend a hand, as did a number of their colleagues from Norwich, Sandwich, and the smaller provincial Churches.38 With few exceptions the leading members of the English and Rhineland comminities were not native Hollanders, and their determination to assist the establishment of the Churches there was thus all the more noteworthy.39 The first ministers to preach in Rotterdam in 1572 were all men who had taken an active role in the events of the Wonderyear in Flanders and had since taken positions in the exile Churches: Isbrand Balck and Carolus Rijckwaert, respectively ministers in Sandwich and Thetford, and Sebastiaan Matte, the first originator of the iconoclasm and subsequently minister of the Church in Frankfurt.40 Among those drawn to Holland by the events of 1572 were a number of the most important figures of the exile, including Pieter Dathenus, who in the summer of 1572 performed a roving brief as minister and representative of the Prince of Orange. In 1574 the Church at Middelburg even succeeded in persuading Gaspar van der Heyden to leave his post at Frankenthal and return to the Netherlands.41

The desperate keenness of the Church to obtain the services of van der Heyden was a testimony to the pressing need for ministers in the years after 1572. In this respect the Reformed were to some extent victims of their own success. In the first instance the intention (p.197) of both Orange and the local corporations in Holland had been to grant rights of open worship in the rebel towns for both Protestant and Catholic. But as the Reformed grew in confidence so did pressure to abolish the Mass. Pressure for the suspension of Catholic services was maintained with sporadic attacks on the churches. In April the attack on Den Briel had been accompanied by a devastating assault on the churches, and this pattern was renewed wherever the Reformed wished to force the pace of change. Iconoclastic incidents took place at Leiden and Gouda in September, and elsewhere, often repeatedly, through the autumn.42 Such events made Orange's original objective of equal religious treatment for both parties increasingly unrealistic. In Delft, where the Oudekerk had been reopened for Catholic use in the autumn, a ferocious attack on the church fabric in the spring of 1573 forced the local authorities to back down. This church, like the Nieuwekerk, was now turned over to the Reformed.43 In Gouda the Reformed made good their claim to the town's principal church by breaking it open and holding their services there. Soon the States of Holland were forced to bow to the inevitable and issue a general ban on public celebration of the Mass.44

It was one thing, however, to order the abandonment of Catholic services, quite another to provide a settled ministry across the whole of Holland. The most pressing need remained a shortage of trained ministers, and even the wholescale return of 1572 provided only the most scanty coverage. In 1572 Rotterdam, a town of eight thousand inhabitants, disposed of only two ministers, and their situation was by no means exceptional.45 Inevitably the Church's leaders looked to the exile Churches to make good the deficiency. In August 1572 the Church of Dordrecht wrote to thank London for releasing Wilhelmi, but asked them to send over more men; the following month Gallinaceus wrote from Delft to plead the case of Schiedam, at this point utterly without a minister.46 In this as in other letters the author made a specific suggestion: the church asked for Pieter Carpentier, another veteran of the Wonderyear and now a deacon in the London (p.198) Church. By the end of the year both he and his London colleague Pieter de Bert had taken up posts in Holland.47 But given the scale of the demand, it was quite impossible for London to meet all the calls for help. In 1573 Enkhuizen, having appealed unsuccessfully for ministers from London the previous year, turned instead to Emden with the suggestion that they might send them either Anthonius Nicolai or Petrus Sichenius.48 The following year Nicolai a veteran of the Reformation in Friesland, accepted the call to Enkhuizen.49 These negotiations were indicative of the special affinity which existed between Emden and the Churches in north Holland. When in 1573 the north-Holland synod considered the large number of vacancies which still existed in the ministry it was resolved to write to Emden to request help.50 In 1576 the Church at Enkhuizen returned to the matter again, asking for some six or eight ministers to be sent from East Friesland, all of whom could be guaranteed to find places.51

In the light of this pressing and continuing shortage of ministers it is noteworthy how inflexible the Churches abroad showed themselves in their determination to maintain the highest standards among the men they despatched. In June 1572 the Emden consistory took a firm line against a number of Frisian ministers who were unwilling to submit themselves to examination. It was resolved to refuse them attestations, and to attempt to prevent their being appointed to positions in the Netherlands.52 But the urgency of the need meant that inevitably a number of men of dubious qualities succeeded in intruding themselves into positions, particularly in the hard-pressed smaller towns or rural parishes. The case of Arnoldus de Stuer, the London visitor of the sick who had left England and obtained a post despite an unresolved disciplinary case in London, was the subject of a long correspondence between London and the Churches in Holland and (p.199) Zeeland.53 Although in this case the Zeeland Church was reluctant to relinquish de Stuer, on the whole they were careful to respect the judgement of their brethren in exile. The procedure adopted, whereby no minister should be appointed without a valid attestation from their previous Church, strengthened the exiles’ hand considerably, and was probably the reason why Peter van Ferwert appeared before the Emden consistory in 1574 to ask for such an attestation: the brethren in Holland had removed him from his position for lack of one.54 This request was refused, and the Emden Church took an equally firm line with Aggaeus Hillensz van Sloten, a Frisian minister banished from Emden for drunkenness and bad company and since 1572 active in Holland. In 1575, following correspondence with Emden, the north-Holland synod removed him from office until he had reconciled himself with the northern Church.55 The most serious case of this nature during these years, was that of Pieter de Zuttere (Hyperphragmus).56 After a long exile in Switzerland, Wesel, and Emden, in 1574 de Zuttere left East Friesland in the hope of obtaining a post in Holland. He found in Rotterdam a party among the magistrates prepared to support his claims, but there was equally determined resistance from the Reformed community led by the minister Aegidius Johannes Frisius. Several letters were despatched to Emden laying out in detail de Zuttere's disruptive behaviour in Rotterdam, and asking for a frank opinion of his merits; even without this strong hint there is little doubt that the opinion of the Emden Church would have been negative, since de Zuttere's conduct in the northern Church had been scarcely less troublesome.57 In the event, (p.200) and after representations to Orange as well as to Emden, de Zuttere's appointment was rescinded.58

Although the Emden Church can thus be seen to have co-operated closely in the building-up of a strong and orthodox Reformed Church in the Netherlands, it is clear that it itself was not without problems in these years. The heavy demands of the Church in the Netherlands left their mark on Church life. Returning exiles left gaps in the Church structure, and from 1574 Emden's problems were compounded by the Ems blockade which threatened the town's new but still vulnerable prosperity. The consistory minutes give the hint that these were in fact exceptionally troubled times. In July 1572 the consistory had reacted with some asperity when the Church at Gorinchem had attempted to recall their former minister, Johannes Lindanus, who had since accepted a post in Emden.59 The consistory denied that this was a valid calling, though they recognized their obligations to the Church in the Netherlands and were prepared to let him go if a replacement could be found. In the event Lindanus died before this could be achieved, but the Emden Church was in any case finding it increasingly difficult to find appropriate men to fill its ministry. After 1572 there was no longer the large pool of unemployed ministers in the town, and even those who remained in East Friesland often refused office on the grounds of a prior commitment in their homeland. This objection might be raised even if the minister's former place was still in Spanish hands; this happened when the consistory tried to call Odierus Althes from Hamswchrum (a local rural parish), only to have him decline on the grounds that he was still committed to the Church at Steenwijk.60 In 1574 the Church lost two further ministers, Hinricus Holte and Albert Hardenberg, a much revered figure and the last human link with the Church of Lasco.61 Reduced for a time to only one minister (the controversial Borsumanus), the consistory did finally persuade two (p.201) men from local Churches, Johannes Ostendorpius and Assuerus Faber, to transfer to Emden.62 But their joy was short-lived since in 1575 all three ministers fell victim to the plague.

A town like Emden, which had experienced such rapid population growth in the past twenty years, must have been particularly susceptible to epidemic disease. With its people tightly packed into a relatively small area and much old housing there were no adequate defences against a serious epidemic, and the plague of 1575 was particularly devastating. According to one source it claimed over 6,000 victims, in which case it probably had a greater impact on the population than the exodus back to the Netherlands.63 Among its victims were all three of the Church's ministers. Although in July the Church had appointed visitors of the sick to take the ministers’ place at the sickbed and thus spare them this hazardous obligation, the provision came too late: all three succumbed within the space of a fortnight, before the end of August.64

For the first time the Emden Church was now entirely bereft of ministers, and the consistory was obliged to take rapid steps to rectify the situation. Early in September the Church succeeded in obtaining two ministers from nearby Churches, Odierus Althes and Johannes Zuidlareus.65 Both would prove to be excellent appointments, Zuidlareus in particular serving the Church for almost thirty years, and providing much needed continuity after recent events. But their most significant success was to persuade Menso Alting to take up one of the vacant positions. Airing's appointment opened a new era for the Emden Church. A native of Drente, Alting had for the last decade been resident in the Palatinate, most recently as a minister in (p.202) Heidelberg.66 In June 1575 he had made a appearance in Emden on his way to visit his wife's family is uroningen. Invited to preach in the Gasthnis church, Menso made such a profound impression that the consistory and town council immediately invited him to accept a post as minister.67 This he could not do without first consulting his Church in Heidelberg, but the Emden authorities were determined to pursue the matter; in the end, thanks to the intervention of Count Johann and the persuasions of Pieter Dathenus, who had experienced the parlous state of the Emden Church on a recent visit, the Palatine authorities were persuaded to release him. On 17 October Alting arrived in Emden, accompanied by his colleague Rudolph Landius, who had also been prevailed upon to accept a post in the beleaguered northern Church.68

The arrival of Menso Alting is rightly regarded as a milestone for the Emden Church. The coming of the two Palatine ministers brought Emden once again more closely into contact with the principal centres of international Calvinism, after years under comparatively obscure figures. Menso was both an obdurately orthodox Calvinist and a man of considerable international reputation: he had chosen Emden over competing calls to Delft, Middelburg, and Frankenthal.69 In Emden Menso would maintain a wide correspondence, both with colleagues in the Netherlands and with Beza in Geneva.70 On his arrival in East Friesland Alting swiftly took on the effective leadership of the Church, emerging as the driving-force behind a concerted effort to restore the Church to the condition it had first achieved under Lasco in the 1540s and 1550s. Immediately after the new ministers’ arrival the Church proceeded to a new election of elders, the first for some years. This brought into the consistory a number of significant figures, men who in the years to come (p.203) would offer Menso sturdy support: as for instance Matthias van der Loo, a veteran of the Convent of 1567, and Laurens de Veno.71 This was followed by a wholesale renovation, and where necessary, reorganization of the institutions of the Church. In February 1576 the divisions into which the town had been organized in 1573, the ‘kluften’, were re-drawn in order that the new town could be included. Each district was assigned to the care of a minister and three elders; intended, no doubt, to make possible a more efficient supervision of morals and discipline throughout the town.72 The diaconate also underwent a substantial reorganization.73 Finally, the Church's services were reviewed. From henceforth regular use would be made of both the Grosse Kirche and the Gasthuis church, with a commensurate increase in the number of services.74

The newly appointed ministers also quickly embarked on a determined effort to restore the somewhat decayed moral order. In this respect the charges of the Delft letter were clearly not without a certain foundation; years of drift and comparatively weak leadership since 1568, together with the effect of the freebootery and successive immigrant influxes, had certainly brought a falling-off of standards. In January 1576 the deacons were ordered to investigate cases of immorality in their districts, and in May the ministers made the first of a series of appeals to the town authorities for help in improving the (p.204) standard of behaviour in public places.75 A concern was conduct during the Sunday services, a theme to which the ministers returned repeatedly in their representations to the Council. The ministers also took full advantage of their control of the pulpit to remind councillors of their responsibilities, and to fulminate against excess in the community.76

The ministers’ efforts clearly had some effect. The years after 1575 witnessed a perceptible increase in cases where members were called to account for drunkenness, adultery, or long absence from the community.77 Menso and his colleagues also achieved a certain success with their renewed assault on anabaptism. Numerous cases in the consistory minutes reflect the ministers’ concern that members had abandoned the Church for the anabaptist congregations.78 On several occasions the Church appealed to the authorities for a renewal of the general mandate against the sectaries, but these were in any case largely ineffective in the face of constant new immigration.79 In 1578 the anabaptists were sufficiently confident of the continuing friendly climate in East Friesland to appoint Emden as the place of a conference called to discuss their own pressing internal dissensions. For the ministers of the Emden Church, eager to regain the propaganda initiative against the local sectaries, this provided a welcome opportunity. In February the consistory resolved to challenge the gathered anabaptists to a disputation, and although only one group accepted (the Flemish Mennonites) the disputation went ahead, ranging widely over the fundamental doctrinal issues which divided the parties.80 The debate continued intermittently for three (p.205) months, for much of which time meetings of the consistory were suspended, a measure of the importance ministers attached to the debate.81 The whole proceedings were later published in two versions, one in the local Low German dialect and one in Dutch.82

The determination of the Reformed to give the debate the widest possible publicity reflects their conviction that the doctrine of the Church had been vindicated.83 Since the Mennonites refused to sign the official record and were in consequence threatened with sharper measures, this confidence may well have been justified. Even the most doubtful members of the community had been strengthened, Alting later confided to Beza, and for Menso the disputation was a further manifestation of his increasing dominance of the Church.84

For all that, Menso was fully aware of the difficulties he faced in bringing the Emden Church to order. His first years were marked by a number of serious challenges to his authority and leadership. The first, from a man disappointed in his hopes of appointment to the ministry, Arnold Possembroeck, was more irksome than alarming. Although Possembroeck had initially succeeded in building a following which included important local citizens, Menso was quickly able to discredit his claims by demonstrating that he had twice failed an examination for the ministry in the Palatinate.85 More serious by far was the renewed controversy in the turbulent French Church. This quarrel was in essence a continuation of the problem which had arisen in the mid-1560s, concerning the then minister Adrian Gorin.86 Gorin's unorthodoxy (he had sponsored the publication of a (p.206) book by the Spanish spiritualist Juan de Valdés87 and publically criticized Calvin's Institutes), had alienated a section of the French community, who took their complaint to the town ministers. When the consistory proved reluctant to act, they appealed to other external authorities, the French Church at Antwerp and Beza, both of whom urged the minister's dismissal.88 The Emden ministers, however, stood by their colleague, who remained in his post until he left Emden in 1568.

The dispute hung fire until the appointment of a very different minister, Jean Polyander, in 1571.89 Unlike Gorin, Polyander was a firm and unflinching Calvinist,90 and he soon came into conflict with the well-entrenched supporters of his liberal predecessor. The spark which reignited the conflict was the election as elder (with Polyander's support) of one of Gorin's former opponents.91 The opposition, who had proposed their own candidate, refused to accept the election, and took their complaints to the consistory and the civic authorities. The dispute posed difficult problems for Menso and his colleagues. Polyander's opponents were powerful men, including several leading figures of the Walloon grain cartel who had influential friends in the city government.92 At an early stage they carried their complaints to Count Johann, who lent a sympathetic ear. For Menso then, the dispute in the French Church raised important issues of (p.207) principle: not only the defence of orthodox doctrine, in the person of Polyander, but the whole matter of whether the Church might determine points of discipline free of interference from the State.

Faced with these difficult problems Menso displayed a high degree of resolution and tactical skill. In June 1576 the consistory proceeded to judgement, Menso having secured from both parties in advance an agreement to abide by the verdict.93 Polyander and his opponents were both found to be at fault, and required to express repentance, a decision the minister's opponents promptly refused; by their defiance, and by appealing once again to the Count against their promise, they seriously undermined their position with their remaining supporters. Undeterred, Menso now pronounced the excommunication of the principal dissidents, a verdict to which he adhered notwithstanding further appeals on the part of the civil authorities.94

The French Church dispute thus ultimately proved to be an important victory for the ministers, who had succeeded in defending their right to impose the discipline against some ill-judged interventions by the civil power. The whole affair was a triumph less for Polyander than for Menso Alting, who had ultimately prevailed through an impressive moral authority against considerable odds. Nevertheless there were aspects of the affair which gave cause for concern, and pointed to a troubled future. First, the willingness of the town authorities and the Court to involve themselves in the controversy suggested that the untroubled years of easy co-operation between Church and State were coming to an end. One of Menso's first duties on his appointment to Emden had been to give the funeral oration for the revered Countess Anna, who had died in October 1575. Deprived of her benign protecting influence, the Church would find itself increasingly drawn into the squabbles of the ruling house, a road which would ultimately lead to conflict and confrontation. Further, the whole tenor of events since Menso's arrival—the campaign to restore discipline, confrontation with the Mennonites and the long-running French dispute—suggested a growing introspection. Although the Emden Church never lost its sense of its place in the wider Reformed world, least of all under Menso Alting, of necessity it became increasingly preoccupied with its own problems. Inevitably this left less time for involvement in the Netherlands.

(p.208) Something of the same process may be observed in the production of Emden's printing presses. It has been suggested in previous chapters, that Emden's presses played a vital role in supplying evangelical literature for the Netherlands in the period before 1566; a function which was to an extent resumed in the period 1567–72. In these years of renewed exile both the Gailliart press and the new press from Sedan made important contributions to the religious and polemical literature of the exile. The consolidation of the revolt in Holland, however, brought a rapid change in this situation Once the rebels had established a foothold, printers were quick to take advantage of an opportunity to set up their presses closer to the market, a market which with the establishment of Churches in Holland was once again expanding rapidly. Emden's presses were quickly superseded by printers at Dordrecht, Delft, and Leiden.95 The most powerful of these new competitors was the printing house of Jan Canin at Dordrecht. Having established his press first as an exile in Wesel, in 1572 or 1573 Canin transferred his operations to Dordrecht, where he quickly built up a close relationship with the Reformed community.96 Over the following years Canin turned out a steady stream of books for congregational use, Testaments, psalm editions, and catechisms. Many of the works of his press, like editions of Haemstede's martyrology and the Deux-Aes Bible, were in fact reprints of Emden works.97 The establishment of this and other presses close to the Reformed Church effectively cut Emden's printers out of a market they had once dominated.

Henceforth Emden's printers were forced to concentrate on a much more restricted local market. The most active printer working during these years was Goossen Goebens, a capable jobbing printer who had previously been employed by the owners of the ‘Haarlem’ (p.209) press, first in Sedan and later in Emden.98 In 1573 he succeeded in purchasing the two familiar printing marks of this press, which he subsequently employed in his own work. By this time the Gailliart press, Goebens's major potential competitor, had dwindled almost to inactivity, and following the death of Jan Gailliart in 1574 it was broken up and sold.99 A portion of the stock passed into the hands of the younger Nicolaes Biestkens, who between 1575 and 1578 produced a number of small works using these types.100 After the Alteratie Biestkens moved his press back to Amsterdam, and Gailliart's types thus found their way back to the Netherlands. Goebens continued printing until 1579, producing the two substantial editions of the disputation with the anabaptists; then his work abruptly stopped, probably due to the printer's death. In 1,583 the press was sold on to one Ewardus Frisius (Ostfriese), and briefly revived, but when his activities came to an end in 1585 Emden's wider role was effectively at an end. Thereafter works printed in Emden were mostly occasional small works in the local vernacular and of purely local interest.101

Thus in several aspects one may observe Emden drawing back into itself, with an altogether lower level of commitment to events in the Netherlands. Nevertheless this was a gradual process, and one which took many decades to complete; in the mean time there were still many ties of loyalty and family which bound the Emden community to events in the western provinces. The years after 1576 witnessed a steady passage back and forth of Church members and correspondence, the latter often relating to members of the Emden Church (p.210) who had returned to the Netherlands and left behind them a piece of unfinished business.102 The Churches in the Netherlands also confined to look hopefully to the exile Churches in their search for ministers. Thus a letter from Enkhuizen in 1576 spoke of the need for six or eight ministers to serve congregations in north Holland, a sentiment echoed by a letter from Den Briel early the following year.103 At about this time the congregations in Zeeland despatched Johannes Gerobulus, an old alumnus of the Emden Church, to explain in person the Churches’ need for help, both with ministers and financial support.104

These renewed demands were in one respect an index of the revolt's rapidly improving prospects, As the failure of the Spanish efforts at reconquest became clear, the Reformed in Holland were able to set about building their Churches with renewed confidence. When the Pacification of Ghent in 1576 suspended persecution and brought a temporary end to the military struggle, the Church's leaders were also able to contemplate the restoration of Churches in the south.105 At first this process was carried forward with a proper caution. The Pacification clearly prompted a further large-scale return of exiles to the Netherlands,106 but the treaty made no provision for open worship outside Holland and Zeeland, and in the first instance the Churches of the southern provinces remained at least semi-clandestine. In the following year, however, pressure for further concessions quickly became irresistible. In 1578, following an effective Calvinist coup at Ghent, a whole series of towns throughout (p.211) the Netherlands proclaimed freedom of Protestant worship: these included Groningen and Amsterdam, the last loyal outpost in Holland, following a purge of its pro-Spanish magistrates.107 When in September Antwerp accepted the provisions of the Religionsvrede or Religious Peace, by which freedom of worship would be permitted to religious minorities consisting of one hundred families, the Calvinist breakthrough seemed complete.

The events of 1578 permitted a further enormous expansion of Reformed worship throughout the Netherlands. As ever, the most pressing need was for ministers. In the space of a few months Emden received requests for help from four newly constituted Churches, at Amsterdam, Leeuwarden, Ghent, and Utrecht.108 While the exile congregation would have been hard put to meet all of these demands, it did recognize a special obligation to the reviving Churches in Friesland and Groningen, and to a certain extent to the Churches of the south. Since the Spanish reconquest of Friesland in 1572 had snuffed out the brief hopes of a revival of the Frisian Churches, the mother Church in Emden had continued to exercise a wide-ranging supervisory role over its sympathizers in the north-eastern provinces. Members of the Church continued to pass back and forth, and the consistory dealt with a number of cases where the alleged offence had taken place in Friesland or Groningen; a sure indication that at this time there were no congregations gathered there.109 But as the Churches began to revive in the spring of 1578 Emden was inevitably closely involved. Gellius Snecanus returned from Emden to resume his ministry in the Church at Leeuwarden, a Church which grew so rapidly that in October Snecanus appealed to Emden to find a second man to assist him in his work.110 Over the next two years the (p.212) Emden consistory minutes reveal fairly frequent contact with the new Churches in the north, with congregations at Sneek and Harlingen as well as Leeuwarden and Groningen.111 Groningen too, looked to Emden for help in building up the ministry, at one point requesting the loan of one of Emden's ministers for a period. This the Emden Church was prepared to concede, although they jibbed at the Groningen consistory's suggestion that they send Menso Alting.112 But the Groningen Church persisted and eventually carried their point, at least judging by a further letter of August 1579 giving joyful thanks for Emden's permission to have Menso's services for a while.113 In the event their joy was short-lived; within a few months Rennenberg's treachery had restored Groningen to Spanish hands once more, forcing a new exile among leaders of the Orangist party and those compromised by their association with the Church.114

While the loss of Groningen was undoubtedly a serious reverse (and one with serious implications for Emden), events in the south continued to wear a more promising aspect. The connections between Emden and the Churches of Flanders and Brabant were of course of long standing. Many descendants of the first refugee influx remained in Emden, and they and more recent arrivals ensured that the suffering southern congregations had not been forgotten. The support of the Emden Church had been a material factor in rebuilding the Antwerp Church after the Wonderyear, and in 1573 the Church had appealed once more to Emden for help. Apparently at this time fear of disclosure had forced both ministers to leave Antwerp, and the Church hoped that Emden would provide a replacement.115 In the summer of 1576 the Church repeated this request, with another for help in maintaining their poor Here at least (p.213) their petition was answered: a collection in Emden at this time raised 165 gulden for the Antwerp poor.116

These references make clear that although the circumstances of the Church remained difficult, there had been a considerable revival of evangelical activity in the south since Alva's time. Correspondence in the London church archives confirms that by 1576 Churches had been gathered once more not only in Antwerp but in Ghent, Brussels, 's-Hertogenbosch, and several smaller places.117 These became the basis for an extraordinary explosion of Reformed activity following the Pacification of Ghent. Within a couple of years the evangelical communities had recovered most of the ground lost since 1566, and churches were springing up in towns throughout Flanders and Brabant. Once again, the principal problem was an acute shortage of ministers. The Emden Church despatched Matthias van der Loo to assist the Churches around Ghent, and several other local men returned from East Friesland;118 but in this instance the principal burden fell on the English Churches. The hard-pressed London congregation despatched one of its three remaining ministers to help build up the Church in Antwerp, and several of the smaller English Churches sacrificed their only minister to the demand of the Flanders Churches.119 But the constant demands left the Churches abroad increasingly stretched. Already in 1577 the London consistory had refused to release Jacobus Regius to serve the Church in Haarlem—although the request was personally endorsed by William of Orange—on the grounds that if Regius left the Church might collapse altogether.120 Yet the following year they were obliged to release Regius to Ghent, if only for a short period on loan; so great (p.214) was the demand for ministers that a Church in Flanders even tried to elect the aged and by now decrepit Godfried van Winghen.121

They were told that this was frankly impossible.122 In the longer term the London Church would do what it could to meet the needs of the Churches by establishing a number of scholarships to train young men for the ministry, and the Churches were asked to have patience until they were ready. This scheme did in time produce some most able ministers, but it did nothing to solve the short-term problems of the fast-growing southern Churches. As the Churches in Antwerp and Ghent clamoured for ever more help, it was increasingly clear that the traditional resources of the exile Churches were close to exhaustion.

In the last resort it is clear that the great expansion of the Churches in the south in the years after 1578 would not have been possible without considerable help from the newly established Churches in Holland. In the period after 1578, when the English and German exile congregations provided perhaps a dozen ministers, Holland made available almost three times this number, either loaned to the young southern Churches for a short time, or permanently transferred,123 Most of the ministers of Dordrecht served at least a term in the new Churches during 1578 and 1579, when the demand for ministers was most acute, and the city Churches also did what they could by redeploying ministers from the villages roundabout.124 Most of these men were natives of the southern provinces, who had accepted posts in the north while their homelands remained under Spanish control so their willingness to serve was understandable; but a number were northerners keen to assist the upholding of the Church in these soudiern urban strongholds.125

The increasingly dominant role played by the Holland Churches in the organization of the reviving Churches of the south was in fact (p.215) indicative of a more profound shift. Increasingly, the principal centres of Dutch Calvinism were to be found not in the exile Churches, but in the established congregations back in the Netherlands. In the years since 1572 Dutch Calvinism had developed as a largely self-sufficient entity. This change in fact went on remarkably quickly after 1572. Those familiar with the perilous military situation of the revolt in Holland, the gloomy spirit of foreboding which pervades the correspondence of the rebel leaders in these years, can only marvel at the energy with which the leaders of the Reformed Church set about the organization of the Church; not only of their individual communities, but also of the structure of synods and classes anticipated by the synod of Emden. These institutions quickly became the focal point of efforts to ensure uniformity of doctrine and practice in the emerging Churches. While it fell to the synod to proclaim unity on fundamental points, it was essentially on the classis, the regular meetings of ministers of a locality, that responsibility for most day-to-day questions devolved.126 It was the classis that exercised control over the arrival and despatch of ministers, ensuring that only those of sound doctrine should be appointed; it was left to the classis, too, to ensure that each Church had its duly constituted consistory, and had instituted synodal decisions concerning procedure and discipline.127 Meeting as it did every few months, the classis was able to offer advice on the knotty problems of Church practice which seemed to crop up in every Church: how to respond to requests for baptism from parents not of the community, tangled cases relating to betrothal and marriage.128 More fundamental questions regarding church ceremonies, the proper order of service or disputes of an intractable nature were referred to the synod.

In other words these institutions were performing precisely those functions which previously had been undertaken by the exile Churches.129 The leading role devolved upon the ministers of the (p.216) larger town Churches where meetings of the classis generally took place. They also took the initiative in the organization of Churches in the villages roundabout, for which they now became the effective mother Churches,130 It would be many decades before an adequate minister could be found for every place, but in the mean time the Church leaders did what they could, encouraging new Churches to proceed to the election of a consistory, and urging on the civil authorities numerous regulations for the control of unorthodox sects, who were recognized as providing continuing strong competion.131

The exile Churches were not completely excluded from this church-building process. When in 1578 it was proposed to hold a new national synod, the Churches abroad were quite properly informed, and invited to propose matters for discussion.132 But this could not disguise the fact that the principal driving-force behind this most important gathering came from the Churches in Holland and Zeeland. The delegates who gathered in Dordrecht equally reflected this preponderance.133

The ostensible purpose of the synod was to promote necessary changes in the discipline and Church order, but it was also an event of great political significance. Meeting as it did at a time of acute political difficulties, it could not but have an influence on the troubled events of the time. The synod in fact demonstrated a high degree of co-operation between the principal ministers and the friends of William of Orange, and it is from this context that the synod's proposal for a general religous peace emerged (the Religionsvrede later adopted in Antwerp).134 But the hope that the general restoration of the Reformed religion could thus be achieved by peaceful means was to prove increasingly unrealistic. Indeed, the (p.217) growing assertiveness of the Reformed was a tangible factor in the gradual alienation of Catholic friends of the revolt, leading in 1579 to the breakup of the fragile union into two conflicting alliances, the Unions of Utrecht and Arras.135 From this time Holland found itself once again the hub of resistance, but now facing a revitalized Spanish military power under the shrewd leadership of the Duke of Parma. The northern Churches and their friends in exile could do little more than watch helplessly as one by one the major towns of Flanders fell to his advance, and their Churches were shut up once more. In 1582 and 1583 the Emden Church received a succession of pleas for help from the Church in Brussels, now reduced to a miserable condition by the proximity of the armed conflict.136 As they had done in earlier years the Emden Church raised a collection to help the Church, but they could do nothing to prevent its disbandment following the town's capitulation in 1585. Ghent and Bruges had already succumbed to the Spanish advance, and in August 1585 came the final catastrophe: the surrender of Antwerp, and with it the final closure of the first and most distinguished of the Reformed Churches of the Netherlands.

The Emden Church received an advanced warning of the impending tragedy with the arrival of one of the elders of the Antwerp Church bearing a testimonial signed by all ten of its ministers.137 In the general exodus following the fall of the city many Church members made the familiar journey back to the exile towns, where many still had family connections.138 But the greater proportion preferred now to move north to Holland, which from this time and during the next two decades received a huge influx from the south.139

(p.218) Of the ten ministers who had signed the letter of attestation to Emden, six moved directly to posts in Churches in Holland, and two others after a brief sortie abroad. Only two, Assuerus Reghenmortel and the veteran van der Heyden, returned to the exile Churches.140 It was a further indication of the shifting balance between the Churches in Holland and their former mother Churches, now in essence complete.

Thus it can be seen that by the 1580s the former directing functions of the Churches abroad were in all respects much diminished. Most exiles whose principal motive had been religious rather than economic had now returned, and even many of the more pragmatic merchants now concluded that future prosperity lay in Holland rather than in the towns of Germany and England. Yet the ties that bound Emden to the Netherlands loosened only gradually. Although the exile community no longer exercised the influence it had on the Church, it still proved impossible to disentangle the town's political and economic fortunes from events in the western provinces. This was graphically demonstrated when Rennenberg's treachery returned Groningen to Spanish control in 1580. The fall of Groningen brought a new wave of exiles to Emden;141 more importantly it brought the military conflict back into the north-east with inevitable consequences for Emden's local trade. Since the isolated garrison in Groningen was almost totally dependent on Emden for supplies, one consequence was the renewal of the Ems blockade. In 1582 the States of Holland ordered a general prohibition of trade with all lands in the King's hands, an order enforced not only by the return of a blockading fleet, but from 1584 by a Frisian garrison established (p.219) at Oterdum on the southern bank of the Ems.142 The blockade, and particularly the disruption to internal communications caused by the occupation of Oterdum, caused acute difficulties in the Emden economy, and a backwash of hostility towards the immigrants.143 Emden at this time was in any case becoming increasingly isolated. The return of the English Merchant Adventurers in 1580 had led to a sharp deterioration in relations with its German Hanseatic neighbours, who had a great deal to lose by the diversion of the English cloth trade. In was thus a considerable relief when in 1587, and following an intervention by Queen Elizabeth, the States were persuaded to lift the Ems blockade.144

The problems with the Netherlands certainly added to the growing internal tensions evident during these years, as the population and economy both entered a period of contraction. But the most serious threat to internal stability lay in the increasingly troubled relationship between Emden and East Friesland's ruling house. The seeds of this conflict were to be found in the arrangements made for the succession when Countess Anna ceded administrative responsibility to her sons. Ignoring the local traditions of primogeniture, the Countess had in 1558 determined that sovereignty should eventually be shared between her three sons, Edzard, Johann, and Christoph.145 These arrangements quickly led to disputes and mutual hostility. Although the youngest brother Christoph died young, Edzard never ceased to resent the diminution of his rights involved with the promotion of Count Johann to a separate administration in part of the county. Johann for his part did all he could to undermine his brother both at home and abroad. These sibling rivalries had serious consequences both for East Friesland's foreign relations and internal politics. While the cautious Edzard strove to maintain a strict neutrality, and earned in consequence a reputation as a closet supporter of Spain, Johann was widely regarded as a friend to the revolt. The (p.220) result of these conflicting loyalties could be seen in the almost disastrously equivocal conduct of East Friesland's foreign policy during the period of Alva's government, which succeeded only in harvesting suspicion and mistrust on both sides in the Netherlands.146

Internally, however, the most serious consequences arose from the two counts’ increasingly antagonistic attitude in matters of religion. Whereas Count Johann, following the example of his mother, proved a sympathetic patron to the Emden Reformed Church, Edzard made no secret of his preference for Lutheranism, particularly after his marriage to a daughter of the king of Sweden. Edzard's determination to promote Lutheranism in his lands was quickly apparent. In 1568 he appointed a Lutheran Court preacher, an office filled from by Johannes Ligarius, an uncompromising adversary of the Reformed in his former posts at Norden and Antwerp.147 Two years later the Count intervened decisively to end controversy over the appointment of a new minister at Norden by appointing a Lutheran to the vacant place and dismissing the second minister Adolph Empenius, until this point a wholly uncontroversial figure.148

These events had profound significance for the Church in Emden, since Emden like Norden lay within the area of Edzard's administration. Since die appointment of Menso Alting in 1575 relations between Church and Court had become increasingly strained, and an attempt to find common ground in the wake of the dispute at Norden achieved predictably little. A meeting between ministers of the rival confessions at the Count's residence produced an exchange of pamphlets but no formal agreement.149 When in 1580 Count Edzard moved his residence from Aurich to the Emden Burg some sort of trial of strength became inevitable. In 1583 the Count banned further meetings of the Coetus, the assembly of East-Frisian ministers, and a forum through which the influence of Emden's ministers was (p.221) extended over the country parishes.150 This was a heavy blow, but the ministers were not entirely defenceless. The Coetus was swifitly reestablished in the areas under Count Johann's jurisdiction, and when in 1583 the Count ordered the town to make over the Gasthuis church for Lutheran services, the town authorities could legitimately refuse on the grounds that disposal of the church pertained to the community, not to the Count.151 Edzard was forced to content himself with a makeshift church in a property of his own, the Neuen Münze in the Neumarkt, where a congregation soon gathered to hear sermons which on occasions included outspoken criticism of the town's ministers.152 This Menso and his colleagues were forced to endure, but when in 1588 Edzard made a new attempt to enforce his authority, they again emerged victorious. The occasion for this new confrontation was the death of the Count's daughter Margarethe, following which Edzard made known his wish that a funeral sermon should be preached in the Grosse Kirche by his own Court preacher Heshusius. This met with a direct refusal, and when on the day of the funeral the body was conveyed to the church it was met by a large body of armed citizens, determined to prevent any Lutheran preaching. In the event the burial went ahead without any sermon.153

This incident demonstrated clearly one major strength of the ministers’ position, that they carried with them the loyalty of an important part of the citizenry. Here loyalty to the Church's doctrines played a part, but the citizens were also not slow to recognize that the Count's attempt to undermine the autonomy of the ministers was part of a wider assault on the town's independence.154 This too provoked a strong reaction: in the early months of 1589, immediately following the confrontation at Norden, an unauthorized citizen assembly determined to elect its own representative body, the Council of Forty, to act alongside the old council increasingly dominated by the Count's (p.222) nominees.155 These events demonstrated how far Eniden had developed since the earlier part of the century, when at least until the 1540s the Count's officers had been able to rule a relatively docile and inactive town council. Since then several decades of rapid growth had transformed not only the town's physical appearance but also the political aspirations of the citizenry. The increasingly sophisticated urban institutions introduced from the middle decades of the century, the diaconate and municipal corn reserve for example, reflected not only the needs of a growing town, but also the citizenry's growing desire for effective control of their own affairs.156 Events in the Netherlands also played an important role here, partly in bringing in a large number of new citizens, many of them with experience of the sophisticated urban patriciates of the southern provinces, and also in bringing home to the town's rulers that their interests were not always identical with those of the ruling house; a fact of which Emden had repeatedly been aware ever since the failure to agree adequate measures against the depredations of the Sea Beggars.157

Thus Edzard, in attempting to impose his will faced not only an unusually determined opponent in Menso Alting, but a town population which recognized the political implications of his assault on the Church. Since the Count showed no sign of drawing back, a confrontation could not be long delayed, particularly after the death of Count Johann in 1591, which finally brought him control over the whole of East Friesland. Edzard moved swiftly to abolish the Coetus in johann's lands, but the incident which provoked the decisive confrontation originated, perhaps appropriately, in the Netherlands. In July 1594 the States retook Groningen, In anticipation of this happy event the leaders of the States forces had invited Menso Alting to come and preach the first sermon and assist in the organization of the restored Reformed community. When, notwithstanding Edzard's express prohibition, Menso accepted and journeyed to Groningen, the Count retaliated by deposing him and ordering the town council to ban Alting from the town pulpit.158 Tense months of negotiations brought no resolution of the crisis; rather, early in 1595 die Count took a further step to impose his authority, forbidding all gatherings (p.223) of the citizenry, including the consistory and deacons, and demanding an inspection of the town's records of poor-relief. This final double attack on the institutions of town and Church united the citizenry in opposition. On 18 March, at a meeting in the consistory room addressed by Menso Alting, one of the citizens present called for resistance. The meeting elected six new officers to replace the old Council and proceeded swiftly to occupy the town. Lutheran services were forbidden, and the Count's ministers expelled.159

Although the Count appealed to the Holland States for mediation, his powerlessness was soon revealed. The intervention of the States was decisively on the side of the insurgent townsfolk. When in June the new magistrates invited Netherlandish troops to enter the town they came to protect the revolution, and it was under their supervision that a treaty confirming Emden's victory was negotiated.160 The Count was forced to a humiliating capitulation. The Treaty of Delfzijl not only confirmed the town's right to appoint its own ministers, it also obliged the Count to accept the closure of the Lutheran church in Emden. Henceforth no other religion than the Reformed was to be practised in the town. Negotiations with the new Count Enno in 1599, following Edzard's death, substantially confirmed these terms.161

The Emden revolution represented the culmination of several different trends. In one respect the revolution completed a long overdue political emancipation, of the sort achieved in many other Germany cities a century earlier.162 But one cannot ignore the strong confessional element or the close connection with events in the Netherlands. The political and economic groups which led the opposition movement in the 1580s and 1590s had been closely identified from the beginning with the most committed supporters of the Emden Church. Of the first members of the College of Forty, a third were either elders or deacons, and other church officers were elected in the following years.163 Equally the turbulent events in Emden bore the marks of the long association with the Netherlands. Members of the original exile families were among the most prominent supporters (p.224) of the ministerial faction, and played an important part it* events;164 the direct intervention of the States forces was ultimately to prove decisive. Once drawn into the conflict the authorities in the Netherlands remained heavily committed for years to come. When in 1602 Enno renewed his threat to the town, the frantic appeals of the city authorities resulted in the despatch of a new military force. The following year Count Enno visited Holland in person to plead his case, leading to the negotiation of a new compromise agreement, the Treaty of The Hague.165

This continued involvement in Emden's affairs was, at least on the part of Oldenbarnevelt, undertaken with some reluctance. But Emden's strategic situation on the Provinces’ northern flank made it too important to be ignored, given the still perilous state of the war with Spain. The Netherlands garrison therefore remained, both to keep a wary eye on the notoriously pro-Spanish Enno, and to ensure that Emden did not profit from its status as a neutral through renewed trade with the enemy.166 For at the turn of the century and despite die return of many of the exiles Emden remained a potent economic force. According to a document prepared in 1600 by the chancellor, Franzius, East Friesland's fleet still at this time amounted to a thousand vessels, the vast majority sailing out of Emden. The port was busy with ships from all parts of Europe; Franzius enumerated merchants from England and the Netherlands but also from the Mediterranean.167 Notwithstanding the recover of Holland's trade, in 1595 Emden still accounted for ten per cent of tolls through the Sound.168

Yet although Emden was far more than a shadow of its former self—the population was probably still in the region of twenty thousand, and the built-up area would expand further in the seventeenth century169—nothing could disguise the fact that the town's great days (p.225) were past. Over the next fifty years as the economy of the Holland towns grew, so Emden's would stagnate, and the Thirty Years War left its mark on East Friesland as on other parts of the empire. Yet as Emden declined as a competitor, so perhaps that left more room for burnishing to continuing ties of sentiment and fellow feeling established during the previous half century. Young men from Emden and East Friesland pursued their studies at the University of Leiden, as in a previous age Dutch refugees had found their vocation in the informal academy of the Emden Church.170 And when in 1618 the great crisis of Dutch Calvinism reached its resolution at the synod of Dort, two ministers from Emden were among the foreign ministers who attended and pronounced judgement on the Remonstrants.171 In this Emden remained true to its heritage as a formidable northern redoubt of the Reformed Church. It was a heritage on which the Church continued to look back with pride. When in 1660 a new doorway was added to the Grosse Kirche, it celebrated appropriately the work of the Fremdendiaconie, the diaconate of the refugees. The simple inscription was a ship with the following words: ‘Gods kerck vervolgt, verdreven, heft God hyr trost gegeven’ ‘God's Church, persecuted and driven out, has here been given succour’.172

Notes:

(1) Ed. R. Gill (London, 1965), 24.

(2) On the economic hardships of Alva's years see Parker, Dutch Revolt, 126–31; F. H. M. Grapperhaus, Alva en de tiende penning (Zutphen, 1982); Con. Granvelle, iv. 139–43–146–65.

(3) A. Brouwer, Spaans benauwd: strijdende geuzen en Spanjaarden in het Maasmondgebied, 1568–157 (Vlaardingen, 1984), 31; C. C. Hibben, Gouda in Revolt (Utrecht, 1983), 49.

(4) G. Brandt, Historie der vermaerde zee- en koop-stadt Enkhuizen (2nd edn.; Hoorn, 1747), 143–62; R. Willemsen, Enkhuizen tijdens de republiek (Hilversum, 1988), 122–39; van Vloten, Nederlands opstand, iii. 25–8.

(5) J. C. Boogman, ‘De overgang van Gouda, Dordrecht, Leiden en Delft in de zomer van het jaar 1572’, TG 57 (1942), 81–112; van Vloten, Nederlands opstand, iii.l–liv.

(6) Boogman, ‘De overgang’; Hibben, Gouda in Revolt is a classic study of a conservative town drawn reluctandy into the rebellion.

(7) KL vi. 384–5, 395. See also de Spes to Philip 15, 26 Apr., and Antonio de Gueras to Alva, 12, 24 May 1572: Calendar of State Papers Spanish, 168–7g, 385–6, 390–3

(8) Hessels, ii. 403–9 (nos. 114–16), iii. 166–9 (nos. 195, 197)

(9) Ibid., ii. 412–22, 437–42 (nos. 118, 119, 123).

(10) Van Vloten, Nederlands opstand, ii. 333, 334; Franz, ‘Ostfriesland’, 358.

(11) Corr. Granvelle, iv. 203.

(12) Brandt, Historie Enkhuizen, 143, 146, 163.

(13) Bossu to Alva, 16 July 1572: ‘Depuis deux jours en ça sont arrivez à Enckhuysen environ vc homines embarquez à Embden, et par la pluspart harquebousiers.’, van Vloten, Nederlands opstand, iii. lxxx.

(14) Franz, ‘Ostfriesland’, 360.

(15) Franz, loc. cit. Bossu to Alva, 24 June 1572, van Vloten, Nederlands opstand, Hi. lxxvi. For Wesembeke's stay in Emden see particularly the letters to him from Orange in Kervyn de Lettenhove, Documents inedits, 162–5.

(16) Franz, ‘Ostfriesland’, 369–70.

(17) Above, p. 166. For what follows, Hagedorn, i. 315–19; Franz, ‘Ostfriesland’,

(18) Franz, ‘Ostfriesland’, 359.

(19) Hagedorn, i. 324–5; Franz, ‘Ostfriesland’, 369 ff.

(20) Hagedorn, i. 329. Ibid., 327, 329.

(21) Ibid., 327,329.

(22) Ibid., 331.

(23) A. A. van Schelven, ‘Emden in niederländischer Beleuchtung aus dem Jahr 1573’, EJ 20 (1920), 174–93. A paraphrase is in Jaanus, Hervormd Delft, 139–42;024n Schelven's transcription is from a text retained in Delft, presumably a draft. Interestingly, there is no trace of this highly critical letter in Emden.

(24) Van Scheiven, ‘Niederländischer Beleuchtung’ 179, 181.

(25) Ibid., 181.

(26) Hagedorn, i. 335.

(27) Hagedorn, 336.

(28) Ibid., 358.

(29) Ibid., 357.

(30) Jaanus, Hervormd Delft, 30–31; J. Spaans, Haarlem na de Reformatie (The Hague, 1989), 41; Uw rijk kome: acta van de kerkeraad van de Nederduits gereformeerde gemeente te Dordrecht, 1573–1578, ed T. W. Jensma (Dordrecht, 1981), x. For an excellent general survey of tie planting of Churches in Holland, A. Duke and R. Jones, ‘Towards a Reformed Polity in Holland, 1572–1578’, TG 89 (1976), 373–92; repr. in Duke, Reformation and Revolt, 199–226.

(31) R. Jones, ‘De Nederduits gereformeerde gemeente te Leiden in de jaren 1572–1576’ faarboekje voor geschiedenis en oudheidkunde van Leiden en omstreken, 66 (1974), 126.

(32) Hibben, Gouda in Revolt, 84.

(33) Brandt, Historic Enkhuizen, 162. On Dirksz, NNBWi. 587; Biografisch lexicon, ii. 118. At Hoorn, similarly, the new Church summoned back from Emden the priest who had led them in 1566, Clement Maertensz. Van Vloten, ‘Noordholland in ’t geuzen- Jaar’ 143–52; Biografisch lexicon, i. 151.

(34) Troost and Woltjer, ‘Brielle’, 352; NNBWm. 329–30 (Cornelisz).

(35) Jaanus, Hervormd Delft, 31; NNBWI 165–8 (Arendsz), vi. 541 (Gabriel).

(36) Above, p. 154.

(37) The calculation is my own, based on data collected from the NNBW, church records, and sources in Emdcn.

(38) E.g. Gerard de Haan (Gallinaceus) from Lynn, Johannes Migrode from Colchester, Isbrand Balck from Sandwich. Hessels, iii. 173, 176–7, 179–81 (nos. 205, 207, 211, etc.); NNBW x. 631–3 (Migrode), i. 227–30 (Balck), vi. 541–2 (Gallinaceus).

(39) Discussed below, Ch. 8.

(40) Ten Boom, Rotterdam, 155. On Rijckewaert, NNBW iii. 1114–16.

(41) Theodoras Ruys, Petrus Dathenus (Utrecht, 1919), 108–13; van Lennep, Van der Heyden, 101–4.

(42) Duke and Jones, ‘Towards a Reformed Polity’, 376–7.

(43) Boogman, ‘De overgang’, 108–9; J. van Vloten, ‘De beeldenstorm te Delft in April 1573’, Studiën en bijdragen op ‘t’ gebied der historische theologie, 3 (1876), 185–90.

(44) Apparently around Apr. 1572. See Duke and Jones, ‘Towards a Reformed Polity’, 379.

(45) Ten Boom, Rotterdam, 155. For the population, ibid., 43.

(46) Hessels, iii. 173 (no. 205), 176–7 (no. 207).

(47) Ibid., iii. 180, 183–4 (nos. 211, 213)., On Carpentier see Decavele, i. 408; de Schrevel, Troubles religieux, 361.

(48) Hessels, ii. 423–5 (no. 120); Harkenroht, ‘Aenmerkingen nopens de kruiskerken’, 585, 592–3. Sichenius, formerly minister in Coudum, Friesland, from where he fled to Emden in 1567. From 1578 he was minister at Purmerend (north Holland). Acta, ed. Reitsma and van Veen, i. 48, 49. He later returned to serve in Friesland.

(49) NNBW v 371–2 (Nicolai); Woltjer, Friesland, 150–3, 169.

(50) Acta, ed. Reitsma and van Veen, i. 10.

(51) Emden Archive Rep. 320 B 17; printed in Meiners, ii. 44–6.

(52) Emden KP 30 June 1572; Schilling, Protokolle, i. 451.

(53) Hessels, ii. 464–70 (no. 128), Hi. 243, 247 (nos. 271, 278); NNBW'm. 1201–3.

(54) Emden KP 22 Mar. 1574; Schilling, Protokolle, i. 500. For Ferwert's problems with the consistory, which in 1571 led to his suspension from communion, Schilling, Protokolle, i. 407, 411–13, 416, 420.

(55) Acta, ed. Reitsma and van Veen, i. 31–2; Emden KP 19 July 1574, 2 May 1575. On Hillensz, NNBWvi. 785–6; de Meij, Watergeuzen, 136.

(56) On de Zuttere see NNBW'w. 1049–50; Decavele, i. 93–5; Christiaan Sepp, Drie evangeliedienaren uit de tijd der Hervorming (Leiden, 1879); P. Rogghé, ‘Pieter Anastasius de Zuttere’, Appeltjes van het Meetjesland, 17 (1966), 138–88; ten Boom, Rotterdam, 159–63.

(57) Emden Archive Rep. 320 A 93, B 16a, 16b, 2 letters from Jean Taffin and one from the Rotterdam Church, Sept., Oct. 1574. The last 2 are printed in Brieven uit kerkelijke archieven, ed. Janssen and van Toorenenbergen (WMV, 3rd ser., 2; Utrecht, 1878), 12–19. The 1st letter, unpub., was received in the consistory on 20 Sept.: Schilling, Protokolle, i. 512. For de Zuttere's conduct in Emden, and particularly his long-running dispute with the French minister Polyander see ibid., 491–2, 494–504.

(58) Ten Boom, Rotterdam, 163.

(59) Emden KP 31 July 1572; Schilling, Protokolle, i. 454. For Lindanus's reluctance to accept the call to Emden, precisely because of this prior obligation, above, p, 154.

(60) Emden KP 19 Nov., 17 Dec. 1573, 1 Mar. 1574; Schilling, Protokolle, i. 488–90, 497. See also 2 letters from Althes in the Emden Archive declining the call: Rep. 320 A 116, 117.

(61) Hinricus Holte van Goens, minister 1573–4, formerly minister in Dykhausen. For his appointment and death see Emden KP 15, 29 June, 14 July i573, 26 Apr. 1574; Schilling, Protokolle, i. 478–9, 481–2, 502. Hardenberg's death noted in Emden KP 18 May 1574; Schilling, Protokolle, i. 504.

(62) Johannes Ostendorpius, formerly minister in Deventer and Rysum, minister in Emden 1574–5. Assuerus Faber de Bouma, the son of the former minister Gellius Faber, and previously minister at Larrelt. For their appointment Emden KP 7, 8 June, 6 Dec. 1574. In Ostendorpius's case the Church once again had to overcome considerable reluctance on account of his previous commitment to Deventer: Schilling, Protokoll i. 505–6, 515.

(63) Stukken betreffende de diaconie, 114, quoting Mülder, Die Diaconie der Fremdelingen-Armen. These years witnessed an exceptionally severe epidemic throughout the whole northern Netherlands: see Leo Noordegraaf and Gerrit Valk, De gave Gods: de pest in Holland vanaf de late middeleeuwen (Bergen, 1988), 43, 226.

(64) Emden KP 24 July, 8, 10, 27 Aug. 1575.

(65) Emden KP 29 Aug., 12 Sept. 1575. Both ministers had previously refused a call to Emden, Althes in 1574 (above, n. 60), Zuidlareus earlier this same year (Emden KP 30 May 1575). Presumably they were now persuaded of the Church's urgent need.

(66) H. Klugkist Hesse, Menso Alting, eine Gestalt tins der Kampfzeit der calvinistischen Kirche (Berlin, 1928), 62–78.

(67) Emden KP 12 June 1575; Hesse, Alting, 94–101.

(68) Rudolfus Landius, minister in Pfeffelcorn (near Dirmstein). He served only a year in Emden before his untimely death. Emden KP 23 July 1576.

(69) Hesse, Alting, 96. Menso's letter refusing the call to Delft is preserved in the Delft archive. Delft, Gemeentearchief, Kerkeraadsarchief, 24 (Ingekomen stukken etc.), 15 Nov. 1575.

(70) See e.g. the letters from Menso Alting to Arent Cornelisz, preserved in the archive of the Reformed Church at Delft. Delft, Gemeentearchief, Archief van de Hervormde gemeente (Inventaris 112). 2 letters from Alting to Beza are printed by Herman de Vries van Heekelingen, Geneve, pepiniere du Calvinisme hollandais (2 vols.; Fribourg and The Hague, 1918–24), i. 224–35.

(71) Emden KP 25 Nov., 11 Dec. 1575. For Matthias van der Loo at the Convent of Wesel, Acta, ed. Rutgers, 39. He would later serve as a minister in Flanders and Esklum (East Friesland). Laurens de Veno was a former minister from the Netherlands. Hesse, Alting, 108.

(72) On the ‘kluften’, Emden KP 3 July 1573, 17 Feb. 1576. The reorganization in these years clearly built on some earlier precedent: cf. Emden KP 17 Nov. 1557, where reference is made to the responsibilities of the ministers in their ‘kluften’: Schilling, Protokolle, i. 11.

(73) The occasion for this reorganization was a dispute between the administrators of funds for poor-relief over a legacy to the poor without further specification whether this was for the indigenous or immigrant poor. The dispute revealed a complicated network of overlapping jurisdictions: the Fremdendiaconie on the one hand, and on the other various bodies caring for the indigenous poor, the town deacons and the ‘deacons of the beaker’ (responsible for the local poor of the community), together with the administrators of the Gasthuis, now the hospital for the community's aged and orphans. The reorganization of 1576 established clear responsibility by dividing the town into 5 areas, each with a head and 5 under-deacons; later the 2 groups dealing with indigenous poor would be merged. Emden KP 28 Nov. 1575, 17 Feb. 1576. See Weber, ‘Emden-Kirche und Gesellschaft’, 85–97. The Armenordnung of 1576 is in Evangelische Kirchenordnungen, ed. Sehling, 455–63.

(74) Emden KP 16, 25 Dec. 1575.

(75) Emden KP 16 Jan., 7, 21 May 1576.

(76) Emden KP 16 Jan. 1576. On this occasion the ministers had to defend themselves against the charge that they had not acted properly in criticizing the council from the pulpit without making private representations to them first.

(77) E.g. Emden KP 30 July, 27 Aug., 3 Sept. 1576 (all drunkenness), 23 Dec. 1577 (staying away from communion). It is also the case that the consistory dealt with unusual quantities of business in these months.

(78) As e.g. in 1576, Emden KP 2 Apr. (Isebrant Klaatsz), 28 May (Joachim Steenmesseler), 13 Aug. (Tanneken), 10 Dec. (Geer Leerbereiter). One of these cases ended in excommunication (Steenmesseler); Klaatsz, on the other hand, returned to the community. Emden KP 5 Dec. 1576, 2 Sept. 1577.

(79) Emden KP 20 Aug. 1576, 6, 20 May 1577 (to speak to council concerning anabaptists), 16 Jan. 1577 (order from Count to end anabaptist meetings).

(80) W. van ’t Spijker, ‘Het gesprek tussen dopers en gereformeerden te Emden (1578)’, Doopsgezinde bijdragen, 7 (1981), 51–65; Cornells Krahn, ‘The Emden Disputation of 1578’, Mennonite Quarterly Review, 30 (1956), 256–8.

(81) Emden KP 24 Feb. 1578: ‘haec intermissio propter colloq(uium) cum Anabapt(istis)’ (the colloquium began on 27 Feb.). The next entry is not until 9 Apr.

(82) Protocol, dat is alle handelinge des Gesprecks met den Wederdooperen (Emden, 1579): App. nos. 231, 232.

(83) On 31 Aug. 1578 the classis of Rotterdam received a letter from Emden informing them of the dispute: J. P. van Dooren, ‘Gegevens over de toestand van de gereformeerde kerk in 1578’ in D. Nauta and J. P. van Dooren (eds.), De mtionale synode van Dordrecht 1578 (Amsterdam, 1978), 189. See also Menso's letters to Beza, de Vries van Heekelingen, Geneve, i. 224–35. Menso was apparently also in contact with Gaspar van der Heyden in Antwerp about the disputation: in 1579 Gaspar wrote to Cornetisz in Delft, relaying Menso's suggestion for a similar disputation in Holland: van Lennep, Van der Heyden, 241–3.

(84) Hesse, Alting, 230–44.

(85) Hesse, Alting, 122–5; Emden KP 18 Oct., 25 Nov., 16 Dec. 1575, etc. Despite this rebuff Possembroeck remained in Emden, and it was another year before he had finally buried his grievances against the ministers. His case recurred intermittentiy during that time.

(86) The whole Gorin affair is reviewed at some length by J. N. Bakhuizen van den Brink, Juan de Valdes, refomiateur en Espagne et en Italie (Geneva, 1969), 63–118, where he reprints a number of the documents preserved in Geneva and Emden. A large quantity of material relating to this dispute remains unpub. in Emden, in addition to the frequent references in the consistory minutes. Emden Archive, Rep. 321 (Acta betreffende die Streitigkeit in der franztisisch-reformierten kirehe zu Emden).

(87) App. no. 153. Regrettably no copy of this interesting edn. survives.

(88) Beza to Countess Anna, 22 Jan., 2 Sept. 1566, in Correspondance de Beze, vii. 37–8, 220. Latin and French letters from the Company of Pastors to the Emden consistory, also 2 Sept. 1566 in Bakhuizen van den Brink, Valdes, 113–18. For the intervention of the Antwerp Church, Emden KP 28 Feb., 1 Mar. 1566; Schilling, Pro toko lie, i. 238, 240.

(89) Jean Polyander, minister 1571–98. A native of Ghent, Polyander had preached in Metz and Antwerp before making his way to the Palatinate. He took a leading part in the synod of Emden, representing the Walloon congregations and acting as secretary: NNBW'w, 814; Biografisch lexicon, ii. 365–6.

(90) See e.g. his 2 letters to Arent Cornelisz, in which he expressed his strong support for the maintenance of consistorial discipline in the new Holland Churches, and denounced those taking a contrary position. Delft, Gemeentearchief, (as n. 70), 10 Dec. 1574, 7 Apr. 1575.

(91) Hektor Cornioele, one of the signatories of the original complaint against Gorin. Emden KP 24 Oct. 1575. From this point the affair occupies a considerable proportion of the consistory minutes. A summary is in Hesse, Ailing, 127–34.

(92) E.g. Frans, Nicolaus and Philip du Gardin, and Nicolaus and Johann Commelin. Emden KP 19 Dec. 1575, 2 Jan. 1576. Emden KP 8, 13 June 1576.

(93) Emden KP 8, 13 June 1576.

(94) Hesse, Alting, 131–4.

(95) J. G. C. A. Briels, Zuidnederlandse boekdrukkers en boekverkopers in de republiek der Veretiigde Nederlanden omstreeks 1570–1630 (Nieuwkoop, 1974), 16, 38–61, 83–8.

(96) He was an elder of the Dordrecht Church from 1573 to 1575: Uw rijk koine, ed. Jensma, xiv. 2, 10. Among his Wesel edns. were 2 edns. of Dathenus's psalm trans. with the Heidelberg catechism, a repr. of the Deux-Aes Bible, and the official version of the text of the Frankenthal disputation with the anabaptists in 1571. Heijting, Catechismi en confessies, B 12.28, 29; Protocol…Handelinge des Gesprecks ie Frankenthal, met Wederdoopers (1571); van Lennep, Van der Heyden, 87–9. The Bible is illus. in Briels, Zuidnederlandse boekdrukkers, 44.

(97) Briels, Zuidnederlandse boekdrukkers, 43–55, 203–6; Heijting, Catechismi en confessies, B 12.30, 35, 11.11.

(98) Valkema Blouw, ‘Haarlem Press’, 257, 274–80. Goebens was active as an independent printer in Emden between 1570 and 1579. A forthcoming article by Mr Valkema Blouw will add greatly to our knowledge of his activities.

(99) The last edns. known to have come from Gailliart's press date from 1570 and 1571: App. nos. 208, 210.

(100) App. nos. 222, 224, 230.

(101) Denis Rhodes, ‘Rembertus Fresen and his Writings’, British Library Journal, 8 (1982), 203–5. From 1598 a press was operated in Emden by Johan Hindricksz, and from 1605 by Frans de Vlamingh. Their works were mostly small and ephemeral, though the publication of Ubbo Emmius's De Frisia Republica Commentaries in 1619 demonstrated that Emden presses were still capable of more ambitious work. The recent discovery of a book printed in Emden by Hindricksz in 1579 (App. no. 233) is a surprise; was he in fact in the town some 20 years earlier than previously thought? Cf. Emden KP 29 June 1584, a reference to ‘Johan Hendricks, boeckebinder’. Later Emden edns. can mostly be traced in Conrad Borschling and Bruno Claussen, Niederdeutsche Bibliographic. Gesamtverzerchnis der niederdeutschen Drucke bis zum jfahre 1800 (3 vols.; Neumunster, 1931–1957).

(102) Emden Archive Rep. 324 I 2, ministers of Rotterdam to Emden, Oct. 1576 (enquiry concerning a woman who had left Emden without attestation). Rep. 320 A 99, B 20, 2 letters from Den Briel concerning a young minister, apparently disturbed, who had abandoned the Church. See also Emden KP 22 Oct. 1576 (woman from Enkhuizen without attestation), 2 Sept. 1577 (members intending to go to Netherlands to earn living).

(103) Rep. 320 A 19 (Enkhuizen), B 20 (Den Briel); printed in Meiners, ii. 44–6; Brieven uit kerkelijke archieven (WMV, 3rd ser., 2, 1878), 19–24 (here 23); Emden KP 7 Mar., 9 Apr. 1576 (2 ministers ask whether they should accept call to Enkhuizen).

(104) Emden KP 11 Feb. 1577.

(105) For an outline of events in this period see Parker, Dutch Revolt, 169 ff. On the Pacification, Opstand en pacificatie in de Lage Landen: bijdragen tot de studie van de pacificatie van Gent (Ghent, 1976), with text at 351–65; English text, Kossmarm and Mellink, Texts, 126–32.

(106) Mostly from the English and Rhineland communities. See Messels, ii. 590–2 (no. 160), iii. 441–2 (no. 466). But Emden was not unaffected: see letter from Renier de Pestere from Ghent to Emden, June 1577, thanking the Church on his return to his homeland, Emden Archive Rep. 320 A 23.

(107) Andre Despretz, ‘De instauratie der Gentse calvinistische republiek (1577–1579)’, Handelingen der Maatschappij voor Geschiedenis en Oudheidkunde te Gent, 17 (1963), 119–229; J. Decavele, Het eind van een rebelse droom (Ghent, 1984). On the Alteratie in Amsterdam see Evenhuis, Ook dut mas Amsterdam, i. 83 ff.

(108) Ghent, Emden Archive Rep. 320 A 22, Utrecht, Rep. 320 B 21; printed in Meiners, ii. 47–50. The letter from Leeuwarden, which does not survive in the Emden archive, is printed by Meiners, ii. 51–3. For the appeal from Amsterdam see Emden KP 16 June 1578: consistory approved the call of Johannes Cuchlinus to Amsterdam. On Cuchlinus, NNBW ii. 353–7.

(109) Emden KP 13 Sept. 1574, 19 Mar. 1576, 1 Mar., 1 Apr., 7 Oct. 1577. Cf. particularly Emden KP 18 Feb. 1577: Laurens de Veno resigns as elder to go to Leeuwarden, but intends to come to Emden for communion several times a year, as services are forbidden there.

(110) Meiners, ii. 51–3 (original lost); see Woltjer, Friesland, 229, 268–9.

(111) Emden KP 4 Feb. (Sneek), 15 June (Harlingen), 29 June, 27 July (Leeuwarden), 19 Oct. 1579 (Groningen); Letter from Leeuwarden of May 1579, a renewed appeal for a 2nd minister, Meiners, ii. 54–5.

(112) Emden KP 6 July 1579 (reluctance to send Menso); Emden Archive Rep. 320 B 22, Groningen to Emden 28 July (thanks for agreeing to send minister); printed in Meiners, ii. 58–65.

(113) Emden Archive Rep. 320 B 24; printed in Meiners, ii. 65–8.

(114) Below, pp. 218–19.

(115) Emden Archive Rep. 320 A 80; printed in Brieven nit kerkelijke archieven (WMV, 3rd ser., 2, 1878), 10–12, and in Meiners, ii. 39–41. A similar letter was sent to London: Hessels, iii. 222–3 (no. 245). The 2 ministers concerned were Woudanus, who had served the Church since 1571, and Adriaan de Bleecher. On de Bleecher, NNBW i. 369.

(116) Emden Archive Rep. 320 A 24, B 19, Antwerp Church to Emden 9 May, 12 July 1576. The 2nd letter is printed in Meiners, ii. 42–3. Appeals discussed in consistory: Emden KP 19 Mar., 6 Aug. 1576; collection received on 29 Oct.

(117) Hessels, ii. 222–3 (no. 245), activity in Brussels, Breda, and 's-Hertogenbosch; 302, 310–11 (nos. 332, 339) collections for Antwerp and 's-Hertogenbosch; 307–10 (no. 338), Cubus called by Ghent. All these refs. are for 1575.

(118) These included Jean Polyander, minister of the French Church, loaned for a time to Ghent, and the veteran Jan Dyrkinus. Emden Archive Rep. 320 A 20, Dyrkinus (Ghent) to Emden: proposes to establish himself at Waerschoot, near Eeklo. See also Rep. 320 B 23 (letter of van der Loo to Emden), B 22 (appeal of Bruges community for ministers); printed in Meiners, ii. 55–7.

(119) Johannes Cubus, London to Antwerp; Adriaan Obri, Maidstone to Hondschoote, both in 1577: Hessels, iii. 441–2, 457–8, 463–4, 473–4 (nos. 466, 482, 492, 503). Theodorus van den Berghe, Colchester to Flanders, 1578: Hessels, iii. 531 (no. 570).

(120) Hessels, iii. 470–3 (nos. 500–2).

(121) Hessels, iii. 509–10, 512–13, 536–7 (nos. 541. 544, 579,581).

(122) Ibid., 539 (no. 584).

(123) The figure is based on my own calculation, and is no doubt incomplete. for ministers from the classis Dordrecht see the biographical sketches in Classicale acta, ed. van Dooren, xxvi–xxxiv.

(124) From Dordrecht Jacob Michiels (to VHertogenbosch, 1577), Jan Lippens (to Hulst), Johannes Vredaeus (to Mechelen), Hendricus van der Corput (to Breda on loan): Urn rijk home, ed. Jensma, pp. x–xi, xiii. Requests tor ministers, ibid., n 1–12, 127, 136, 141, 149, 161, etc. Allocation of minister from local Church, ibid., 116–17. Cf. Classicale acta, ed. van Dooren, 56, 59, 62, 83.

(125) E.g. Gerobulus, Pieter Hardenberg, Herman Herbertsz, Johannes Rochus.

(126) C. A. Tukker, De classis Dordrecht van 1573 tot 1609 (Leiden, 1965). The examples which follow are taken from Classicale acta, ed. van Dooren. The classis of Dordrecht was both one of the 1st to be established and the most active. For a perceptive study of the difficulties ministers faced where no classis existed, as e.g. in Utrecht, see Duke, ‘The Reformation of the Backwoods’, in id. Reformation and Revolt, 227–68.

(127) Classicale acta, ed. van Dooren, 2, 10, n, 19, 23 (establishment of consistories); 3, 5, 21, 36 (ministers).

(128) Ibid., 13–17, etc.

(129) Above, Ch. 3.

(130) Principally Dordrecht in the south and Enkhuizen in north Holland. Tukker, Classis Dordrecht, 62–6; Classicale acta, ed. van Dooren. Cf. ten Boom, Rotterdam, 182–3 (classis Rotterdam).

(131) Classicale acta, ed. van Dooren, 4, 19, 23. For the continuing struggle against anabaptists in the northern provinces see F. S. Knipscher, ‘De Nederlandsche gereformeerde synoden tegenover de doopsgezinden (1563–1620)’, Doopsgezinde bijdragen, 50 (1910), 1–40; 51 (1911), 17–49.

(132) Hessels, ii. 611–14 (no. 166). It was also necessary to write to Emden, not least because the original text of the synod of Emden remained in the hands of Jean Polyander: D. Nauta, ‘De nationale synode van Dordrecht (1578)’, in id. and van Dooren, Nationale Synode van Dordrecht, 14–16.

(133) Acta, ed. Rutgers, 261–2, 313–17; Nauta, ‘Nationale synode’, 16–22.

(134) R. H. Bremmer, ‘De nationale betekenis van de synode van Dordrecht’, in Nauta and van Dooren, Nationale Synode’, 68–117.

(135) For these events see Parker, Dutch Revolt, 187–216; J. J. Woltjer, ‘De vrede-makers’, TG 89 (1976), 315–21. On the Union of Utrecht, S. Groenveld and H. L. Ph. Leeuwenberg (eds.), De unie van Utrecht: wording en rverking van een verbond en een verbondsacte (The Hague, 1979).

(136) Emden Archive, Rep. 320 A 52 (Feb. 1582), printed in Meiners, ii. 75–80; A 3 (Jan. 1583). In May the Brussels Church returned grateful thanks for Emden's gift: Rep. 320 A 15; Meiners, ii. 80–1. A similar request was also made to the Churches in Holland: M. D. Lammerts, ‘De predikanten van de Ned. herv. kerk te Brussel in het jaar 1585’, NAK 31 (1940), 16.

(137) Emden Archive Rep. 320 A 5; printed in Brieven uit kerkelijke archieven (WMV, 3rd ser., 2, 1878), 26–7.

(138) Mostly to England, which experienced a considerable influx at this time. But Emden also received considerable numbers, to judge by the surviving attestations from southern Churches dating from the years 1583–8: Emden Archive Rep. 324 I 4–61; listed by Barghoorn, ‘Kirchliche Zeugnisse’, 64–6.

(139) J. G. C. A. Briels, ‘De emigratie uit de zuidelijke Nederlanden omstreeks 1540–1621/30’, in Opstand en pacifiaitie, 198–220, summarizing his other work on this subject.

(140) Isbrand Balck, Pieter Hardenberg, and Philip van Lansberghen went to Leiden; Libertus Fraxinus to The Hague; Thomas Tilius to Delft; and Jeremias Bastingius to Dordrecht. Johannes Becius, after a brief visit to Emden, moved on to Amsterdam and Andries de Meestere spent some years in Frankfurt before returning as minister to Dordrecht. Information mostly from NNBW.

(141) Including Menso Airing's biographer Ubbo Emmius and the farmer/chronicler Abel Eppens: Wiebe Bergsma, De ivereld volgens Abel Eppens (Groningen, 1988), 19. A register of non-citizens in Emden's inns compiled in July 1580 included the names of 68 citizens of Groningen, many of them recent fugitives: Hagedorn, ii. 73. The names of those arrested at the time of Groningen's defection, including the leading figures in the Reformed community, are recorded in De Fresen Chronicon, i. 46–50.

(142) Hagedorn, ii. 74–90.

(143) Recorded by Abel Eppens in his chronicle, De Fresen Chronicon, i. 376–8, ii. 167–8.

(144) Hagedorn, ii. 25–66, 174–6. The presence of the English is reflected in occasional refs. in the consistory minutes: Emden KP 27 Feb. 1581, 29 Oct. 1582, 6 Jan. 1584, 31 Oct. 1586. According to the entry of Jan. 1584 the English had their own Church and minister once again; nothing more is known about the community, however.

(145) The best account of these disputes and their consequences is in Smid, Kirchengeschichie, 204 if.

(146) For conflicting assessments of Edzard's loyalties (but on both sides hostile), see Requesens to Philip II, 25 July 1574, KL vii. 234–5; Orange to Brunynck, 12 Jan. 1575, Archives Orange-Nassau, ed. Groen van Prinsteren, v. 116. Cf. Walwyck's report to the Emden council, Sept. 1571 (widespread suspicion in Germany of motives of those in power in East Friesland): Schnedermann, ‘Berichte eines Gesandten’, 3.

(147) H. Garrelts, Johannes Ligarius: Sein Leben und seine Bedeutungfur das Luthertum Ostfrieslands und der Niederlande (Emden, 1915). For Ligarius in Antwerp see also J. W. Pont, De luthersche kerken in Nederland (Amsterdam, 1929), 79, 91.

(148) Smid, Kirchengeschichte, 215–18.

(149) Ibid., 218–21.

(150) Emden KP 10 June 1583.

(151) Smid, Kirchengeschichte, 221–30.

(152) Emden KP 30 Dec. 1587: consistory considers complaint against recent sermons of Jacobus Sartorius criticizing ministers and the doctrine of the Church. Negotiations with the 2 ministers on 2 Jan. could not prevent a repetition of the offence by Johannes de Prato on 14 Jan. Emden KP 22 Jan. 1588 (consistory decided to take no further action).

(153) Smid, Kirchengeschichte, 230–2; Hesse, Alting, 167–77.

(154) Heinz Schilling, ‘Reformation und Bürgerfreiheit: Emdens Weg zur calvinistischen Stadtrepubliek’, in Bernd Moeller (ed.), Stadt und Kirche im 16. Jfahrhundert (Giitersloh, 1978), 128–61.

(155) Heinz Schilling, ‘Reformation und Bürgeri Veiheit: Emdens Weg zur calvinistischen Stadtrepubliek’, in Bernd Moeller (ed.), Stadt und Kirche im 16. Jahrhunderi (Giitersloh, 1978), 150.

(156) On the Kornvorrat see Weber, ‘Emden—Kirche und Gesellschaft’, 99–100.

(157) Above, Ch. 6; Hagedorn, i. 229–30.

(158) Smid, Kirchengeschkhte, 239–52; Hesse, Alting, 387 ff.

(159) Ibid., 393–9.

(160) H. Wiemann, Die Grundlagen der landstdndischen Verfassung in Ostfriesland: Die Verträge von 1595 his 1611 (Aurich, 1974), 112 ff. See also Evangelische Kirchenordnungen, ed. Sehling, 414–30.

(161) Smid, Kirchengeschichte, 255–66; Wiemann, Grundlagen, 160 ff.

(162) Schilling, ‘Reformation und Bürgerfreiheit’.

(163) Ibid., 153–4; Weber, ‘Emden—Kirche und Gesellschaft’, 67–8.

(164) Schilling, Niederldändische Exulanten, 179–80. One of the leaders of the citizen assembly was Pieter de Visscher, a member of one of the foremost immigrant families.

(165) Jan van Tex, Oldenbarnevelt (Eng. edn., 2 vols.; Cambridge, 1973), i. 325–6; E. R. Brenneysen, Ost-Friesische Historie und Landes-Verfassung (2 vols.; Aurich, 1720), ii. 307.

(166) Van Tex, Oldenbarnevelt, i. 317–18.

(167) Kommerzienrat Schweckendieck, ‘Zur Geschichte von Emdens Handel und Schiffahrt’, Ejf 6 (1884–5), 85–106; 7 (1886–7), 1–18 (here pt. 2, p. 2).

(168) Buhr, Entwicklung Emdens, 77.

(169) As is evident from printed maps of the period. A comparison of the famous Braun-Hogenberg map of f. 1570 (Fig. 1) with maps of the mid-17th cent, shows a 2nd major extension of the town to the north, almost doubling the area once again. (Maps in University of Leiden, Collectie Bodel Nijenhuis, P127 N 150, 153 (1636), 154 (n.d., mid-17th cent.)

(170) Album Smdiosorum: Academiae Lugduno-Batavae (The Hague, 1875), 54. See also Catalogus principem, civitatem, et singularorutn, qui donatione…bibliothecam publicum, in Academia Lugduno-Batava (Leiden, 1597), sig. G 2V: 2 books donated by the Emden law student Everhardus Everdes. I am grateful to Dr Paul Hoftijzer for calling my attention to this reference.

(171) De synode van Dordrecht in 1618 en 1619, ed. W. van ’t Spijker (Houten, 1987), 70; H. Kaajan, De groote synode van Dordrecht in 1618–1619 (Amsterdam, 1918), 47–8. The Emden delegates were Daniel Bernhard Eilshemius and Ritzius Lucas Grimeshemius, the first native-born ministers of stature since the Reformation: Smid, Kirchengeschichte 279. The Emden delegates’ firm support for orthodoxy irritated the remonstrant defendants. See Brandt, Historie der Reformatie, iii. 531.

(172) The doorway still stands, in the ruins of the Grosse Kirche (destroyed in the Second World War and not rebuilt): illus. in Smid, Kirchengeschichte, 281.