Holland's Influence on English Language and Literature

[p. 282]

Chapter XXXIII Tracts Relating the Execution of John of Oldenbarnevelt in 1619. The Tragedy of Sir John van Olden Barnevelt. A Play Called the Jeweller of Amsterdam.

During the centuries in which the Netherlands played their greatest part in the world's history, all the nations of Europe took interest in what happened in Holland. In many cases pamphlets were written in English, in French, and in German, and sent abroad to spread the news of what happened in Holland among the people in England, France, and Germany. From these pamphlets the narratives often entered into literary circles, where they were taken up as subjects for all kinds of literary productions. So it happened in the year 1619; at a time, when according to R. Boyle ‘Englishmen took more interest in Holland than in any other country in Europe.’¹ In May of that year, one of the most tragic events in the history of the Dutch Republic took place. The old, and in many respects eminent, statesman John of Oldenbarnevelt, accused and convicted of high treason, was beheaded at the Hague, after a splendid and hardly ever equalled career as Pensionary of the States of Holland. Everybody knows the story, at least so far as the great merit of the Pensionary, and the fact of his execution is concerned, and therefore it would be out of place to tell it here again at length. Interesting

1 A.H. Bullen, A Collection of Old English Plays, Vol. II, p. 434, in an Appendix written by R. Boyle.

[p. 283]

for our present purpose is the fact, that, immediately after the execution three different pamphlets in the English language were written and spread abroad in England:

1.	Barnavelt's Apologie, or Holland's Mysteria, with marginal castigations by Robert Houlderus, Minister of the Word of God. 1618.^1
2.	Newes out of Holland - Concerning Barnavelt and his fellow-prisoners, their conspirary against their Native Country with the enemies thereof - The Oration and Propositions made in their behalf unto the General States of the United Provinces at the Hague by the Ambassadours of the French King, etc. 1619.
3.	The Arraignment of John van Olden Barnevelt, late Advocate of Holland and West Friesland. Containing the articles alleged against him and the reasons of his execution 1619.

Probably in the main by these pamphlets, the story of Oldenbarnevelt made an impression in England, with the result that within three months after the execution of Oldenbarnevelt a tragedy was written and played in London by the King's company acting at Blackfriars, under the title: ‘The tragedy of Sir John of Olden Barnavelt.’ This play was, so far as we know, never printed during the 17th century, and was later entirely forgotten, until, in the year 1851, the British Museum purchased the original manuscript, ‘a folio of thirty-one leaves, written in a small clear hand,’ from the Earl of Denbigh. At the British Museum Mr. A.H. Bullen found it, and published it in Vol. II of his collection of Old English Plays, IV Vols. London, 1883. The edition is printed only in one hundred and fifty copies ‘on Dutch Hand-made

1 A.H. Bullen, l.e., p. 205. If the year 1618, as Bullen gives it, is right, then of course this pamphlet cannot yet describe the execution, but only the great struggle that preceded it.

[p. 284]

paper,’ so that even now, after it has been published, the play would be pretty rare, were it not that the great Dutch historian, Robert Fruin, has reprinted it in the original English language, with an introduction in Dutch: Gravenhage. Martinus Nÿhoff, 1884. Both Bullen and Fruin, as well as other competent judges in England and in Holland, are enthusiastic in valuing this tragedy as a masterpiece of dramatic literature. ‘It is curious,’ says Bullen, ‘that it should have been left to the present editor to call attention to a piece of such extraordinary interest; for I have no hesitation in predicting that Barnavelt's Tragedy, for its splendid command of fiery dramatic rhetoric, will rank among the masterpieces of English dramatic literature.’¹ Another English author and scholar in dramatic poetry, F.G. Fleay, calls it a ‘magnificent play,’ while Robert Boyle, not less competent in this field of literature, says: ‘This play, the most valuable Christmas present English scholars have for half a century received, appears indubitably to belong to the Massinger and Fletcher series. Even a cursory glance will convince the reader that it is one of the greatest treasures of our dramatic literature. That such a gem should lie in manuscript for over two hundred years, should be catalogued in our first library, should be accessible to the eye of the prying scholar, and yet never even be noticed till now, affords a disagreeable but convincing proof of the want of interest in our early literature displayed even by those whose studies in this field would seem to point them out for the work of rescuing these literary treasures from a fate as bad as that which befell those plays which perished at the hands of Warburton's accursed menial.’² Swin-

1 A.H. Bullen. Introduction.

2 Ed. A.H. Bullen, p. 434. It is interesting that in this play the Netherlands are called ‘the United States,’ p. 306.

[p. 285]

burne calls it: ‘so noble a poem, this newly unearthed treasure.’ Fruin, the Dutch historian and editor of the play, after having made some critical remarks, says that the tragedy Palamedes, treating the same historical theme, written by Vondel, the prince of Dutch poets, may not be compared with it, and that it is not a shame for Vondel to be beaten by such a competitor.’¹ Fruin was also the man who solved the question of the date at which the play was written. This question had been solved by Bullen only so far as to prove that it was written between May, 1619, the date of the execution of Oldenbarnevelt, and the year 1622, the year in which George Buc, who signed it in a marginal note with his initials, resigned as ‘master of the revels.’ But Fruin fixed the date of the play much more exactly from two unpublished letters written by Thomas Locke from London to the English ambassador, Sir Dudley Carleton, at the Hague. The first letter is dated August 14, 1619, and therein it is said: ‘The players here were bringing “of Barnavelt” upon the stage and had bestowed a great deal of money to prepare all things for the purpose, but at th' instant were prohibited by my Lo - of London.’ The second letter was dated August 27th, in which it is said: ‘Our players have found the means to goe through with the play of Barnevelt, and it had many spectators and received applause.’ Consequently the play must have been written between May, 1619, the date of Oldenbarne-

1 R. Fruin, Verspreide geschriften, Vol. IX, p. 122. On p. 125 Fruin gives six Dutch words used in the play by the English author, viz.: schellain (Dutch schelm), the bree (brui), lustique (lustig), kremis (kermis), doyt (duit), and vroa (vrouw). In the main the play is true to history in so far as it lays full stress on the point that Oldenbarnevelt tried to break the union of the state (p. 226, 286 and 291) at a time when the other party certainly might claim: ‘The union must be preserved.’ It is more true to history than Motley's book, Life and Death of Oldenbarnevelt. See Groen van Prinsterer, Maurice et Barnevelt, the best book on this question.

[p. 286]

velt's execution, and August 14, 1619, the time when the players were ready to bring it on the stage. But even that time of three months, in which the play must have been written, was shortened by the researches of Fruin. He found two places in the play where the dismissing of the son of Oldenbarnevelt as governor of the city of Bergen op Zoom is spoken about.¹ This fact is mentioned by the Ambassador Carleton in a letter to London dated July 14th. The letter says that the dismission took place ‘last week,’ which is in accordance with the resolutions of the States General of July 5, 9, 11 and 17. Consequently the tragedy must have been written after July 14th, the first date at which the dismissal of Barnevelt's son could be known in England, and before August 14th, the date on which the players were ready to bring it on the stage, so that not more than one month was taken for the writing of the play - just approximately the time, says Fruin, which in those days was allowed for the writing of a play.²

Another question is, who was the author of this play?

Both Bullen and Boyle come to the conclusion that Fletcher and Massinger together were the authors. Their arguments founded on long quotations are too extensive to be given here. But Boyle in one place gives this summary of the evidence, which may suffice: ‘But, it may be asked, what proof have we that it was a production of Massinger and Fletcher? As for the latter, there can be no doubt. His double endings are sufficient proof. As for the Massinger part, there is first the probability of his being Fletcher's partner, as the play belongs to a

1 Ed. Bullen, p. 249. Here the son of Oldenbarnevelt says: ‘My government of Berghen is disposed of.’ See also p. 277, where Oldenbarnevelt says: ‘Where's my son William? His government is gon too.’

2 Fruin Verspreide Geschriften, IX, p. 113.

[p. 287]

period when we know they were working together; secondly, the metrical style could belong to nobody else; thirdly, according to his well-known manner, he has allusions to and repetitions of expressions in his other plays.’

Finally in connection with this tragedy of Oldenbarnevelt, I must mention with a few words another play written at about the same time, and for which the subject also was obtained from the Dutch. At the end of his introduction to the Tragedy of Oldenbarnevelt, the editor Bullen writes - ‘The following note, for which I am indebted to Mr. Fleay, will be read with interest: It is noticeable that a play called the Jeweller of Amsterdam or the Hague, by John Fletcher, Nathaniel Field and Phillip Massinger, was entered on the Stationer's Books, 8th April, 1654, but not printed. This play must have been written between 1617 and 1619, while Field was connected with the King's company, and undoubtedly referred to the murder of John van Wely, the Jeweller of Amsterdam, by John of Paris, the confidential groom of Prince Maurice, in 1619.’