Geddes, an English historian and Johan's roaster supreme, drops a well-researched book(likely his magnum opus) in 1879. Fruin, the final boss of dutch historiography, reviews it the next year. Tune in for the epic follow up to Geddes vs. Veegens.
James Geddes thought he had won. He had successfully roasted Johan de Witt with a mix of biting wit, brutal policy critiques, and strangely personal attacks about his nose, calling him a pitiful non-hero who had no place in history’s Pantheon. Veegens’ Dutch pride defense didn't really stand a chance.
"If the rumor is true, we can expect something like this from the chief of our historians, and where he makes himself heard, a poor foot soldier, like me, lays down his arms."
But Veegens summoned Robert Fruin, Dutch historiography’s final boss.
Fruin’s 1880 review of Geddes’ History of the Administration of John de Witt, Grand Pensionary of Holland was less of a debate and more of an academic beatdown. While Veegens argued with Geddes over Johan’s legacy, Fruin gatekeeped him into oblivion.
Fruin calls Geddes' representation of the states regime a "distorted caricature".
Geddes:"Each town a sovereign; this seems about the maddest and saddest of political ideals, and every Dutchman ought to feel satisfied that De Witt's work failed."
Fruin:"De Witt's ideal was by no means to make every city a sovereign state. On the contrary, he always strove to maintain the unity of Holland unimpaired."
Fruin pulled archival receipts, citing Johan’s own letters to prove Geddes had misunderstood his entire policy.
Fruin:"He is much too harsh on the stadholder's party because of its foreign policy."
Fruin argues that Geddes attributes too much of their justification for war to personal ambition and not enough to political ideology or historical continuity.
Fruin concludes that even if their foreign policy was bad, there were deeper strategic concerns.
According to Fruin, understanding Johan required understanding the entire 17th century: "To describe the history of a single period well, one must also know the time that preceded and followed through and through."
In order to write about Johan de Witt, you must first:
Cover Maurits vs. Oldenbarnevelt.
Oh, but to do that, you need to write the entire Eighty Years' War.
Wait, actually, let's go back to the formation of the provinces.
And while you’re at it, maybe add a full history of European diplomacy since the Peace of Westphalia.
Congrats, now you can maybe write about Johan de Witt.
Fruin: "I have not been able to determine with certainty for whom Geddes actually wanted to write—his fellow countrymen, or us, the fellow countrymen of De Witt."
For Dutch readers? Then why didn’t he explain English politics properly?
For English readers? Then why did he assume they already understood 17th-century Dutch bureaucracy?
Fruin completely discredits Geddes:"indispensable knowledge, the correct and complete knowledge, of the form of government of the Republic is for anyone who wants to write its history."
Fruin argues that Geddes wrongly blamed Johan for something he probably had nothing to do with.
Geddes: Johan was behind removing the Orange coat of arms from the Hague militia’s banners.
Fruin: That decision was made by another council that Johan wasn’t even in. I brought up this tiny, insignificant mistake on purpose, to show how little you know.
Fruin even quotes Johan to drive the point home:"When he resigned from office in August 1672, he complained emphatically that he was accused of many things, 'according to the degree of the policy of affairs that is inherent in the office of Grand Pensionary, or rather that many people think is inherent in it through ignorance.'"
Fruin:"Geddes says that his hero was born on 24 September 1623… But I cannot approve of this transaction."
Fruin fact-checked Johan’s own daughter and refuted Geddes with primary sources.
Also Geddes: Johan de Witt is in no sense a hero.
Fruin: Ah yes. His hero.
Despite all this, Fruin still said "I conclude with the wish that Geddes will soon give us an opportunity to report on a new part of his book."
Fruin wanted more. Not because he liked Geddes’ book, but because he wanted to continue reviewing it and flexing his own De Witt knowledge.
Poor Geddes was just a Cromwell apologist and wanted to roast Johan in peace.
Geddes never wrote another book. Coincidence? I think not.