Training the builders of a nation. Political history of public
student support policies in the United Kingdom of the
Netherlands, 1815-1830
Pieter Slaman MA
Leiden University
Campus The Hague
International Conference Political History Leiden, 4-6 September 2014
This paper presents some of the research results included in the recent PhDthesis The student’s state. A two hundred year political history of public
student support policies in the Netherlands. 1 In this thesis, the appearance of
public student grant policies in their different historical forms since 1815 is
explained by tracing the political backgrounds of formal decisions that
determined the shapes of these policies. This period of two centuries is divided
in seven periods, in which seven different types of policy are identified.
This research project is based on the proposition that public policies are
not created in isolation and imposed in a top-down fashion, and not forged in
systematic or rational ways, but find their origins in a continuous and variable
interaction between individual politicians, political institutions and society.2
Consequently, the social, cultural and economic contexts of political decisions
are of crucial importance for a good understanding of their origins. Apart from
the formal institutional framework in which decision-making processes were
set, ‘softer’ determinants such as the role of individual actors, cultural
characteristics of political practices and social context need to be taken into
account. The cultural turn in political history has provided us with valuable
new insights on these ‘soft’ determinants. These have opened new
opportunities for the writing of public policy history.3
The explanatory value of placing public policies in a broader cultural
and social context can be shown by taking the first of seven episodes in the
history of Dutch public student grant policies as an example. This episode
consists of the line of policy set out by king William I of Orange, during his
reign over the United Kingdom of the Netherlands between 1814 and 1830.
During this period, the northern and southern parts of the Low Countries were
united in a single political framework. In retrospect, this territory encompassed
modern-day Luxembourg, Belgium and the Netherlands.
This paper sets out with a short description of student grant policies in
this period, followed by some interpretations of these policies by other
scholars. Thereupon, these policies will be put in the wider political and
cultural context of this period. This will lead to an additional interpretation of
the political motives behind public student grants.
1
Pieter Slaman, Staat van de student. Tweehonderd jaar politieke geschiedenis van
studiefinanciering in Nederland (to be published, 2014)
2
Dirk Jan Wolffram, ‘Onze belastingcenten. Een pleidooi voor beleidsgeschiedenis’ in: G.
Voerman en D.J. Wolffram (red.), Kossmann Instituut. Benaderingen van de geschiedenis van
politiek (Groningen 2006) 62-67.
3
Julian E. Zellizer, ‘Clio’s lost tribe: Public Policy History Since 1978’ in: Journal of Policy
History 12 3 (2000) 369-394, there 387.
Public student grant policies in the United Kingdom of the Netherlands, 18151830
During this period, the central government of the United Kingdom of the
Netherlands provided an amount of student support that was never reached by
its constitutional predecessors, and was not surpassed again until the late
nineteenth century. The first major provisions were established as part of the
higher education act of 1815 and its extension for the universities in the
recently added south. The act ruled that 157 public grants were to be given
each year to students of Dutch universities, as opposed to the 30 grants that
were available in previous years. These grants covered a third of the normal
costs of education and living, and were often combined with exemption from
tuition fees. The distribution of these grants to the five different academic
faculties at each university was precisely regulated. There was a remarkable
preferential treatment of students of the philosophy & arts all over the
kingdom, of Dutch reformed theology at universities in the north and of
science in the south.
Leiden
Utrecht Groningen Gent
Leuven Luik
Reformed
Theology
Law
10
5
5
2
2
2
4
4
4
Medicine
4
4
4
5
5
5
Science
Philosophy &
Arts
4
10
4
5
4
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
Distribution of grants to universities and faculties according to the act on higher
education, 1815. Source: Organiek besluit 2 augustus 1815 no. 14, art. 217; Nederlandsche
Staatscourant 13 January 1817.
In 1825, the government established a state faculty for catholic theology at the
university of Leuven, the Collegium Philosophicum. Graduation was
mandatory for anyone who wished to become a priest. For students of this new
institution, the government provided a relatively large amount of grants. Not by
spending public money, but by interfering in the system of private roman
catholic benefices. King William took these away from episcopal seminaries
and shifted them towards his new Collegium, leading to outrage among many
of his catholic subjects. In the second year of its existence, a total amount of
208 students received grants as a result of this drastic arrangement.4
In the meanwhile, the royal government established two institutions that
offered occupational training to future teachers in lower education. Mainly
youngsters from the lower ranks of society were looking for a career in lower
4
P. Albers, Geschiedenis van het herstel der hiërarchie in de Nederlanden. Eerste deel
(Nijmegen 1903) 144-145; Nederlandsche Staatscourant, 10 september 1825.
education. Their training did not allow for additional earnings, so their
maintenance was publicly funded. At the Haarlem institution, an annual
amount of 26 grants was available. At the institution in the Flemish town of
Lier 30 grants were provided.5 On top of that, teachers with years of experience
were subsidised for additional training in modern didactic methods. After 1827,
female students could request for public grants for the first time. Annually, 20
young women who wished to become teachers at secondary schools for girls
could receive financial support. Finally, students in visual arts could win large
subsidies for completing their studies in Rome.6
Existing views on student grant policies
Some decades after king William’s abdication, a jurist writing on the act on
higher education of 1815 placed university grants in the perspective of
encouragement of academic studies in general. In this view, the low attendance
numbers at universities could be enhanced and higher education could be
brought to flourishment once again by supporting talented young students. This
view derives from the act on higher education itself. The articles on student
grants were placed under the title “(…) support and encouragement of
academic studies”.7 Under this title other encourageing provisions could be
found as well, such as academic prize contests and travel subsidies.
In more recent studies other interpretations were given. Historian Pieter
Caljé for instance stated that public scholarships at universities were
predominantly granted to the influential echelons of polity in order to tie them
more closely to the royal government. The new regime depended heavily on
their support and would use these grants as means for securing their loyalty.8
Recent research by Wouter Marchand shows that these scholarships indeed
mostly benefitted young men of aristocratic and patrician descent. This
endorses Caljé’s theory.9
Peter van Rooden showed the use of public scholarships as means of
social selection. University administrators and the Secretary of the Interior, on
behalf of the king, decided on the choice of candidates. By excluding students
from lower social classes, the social status of certain professional groups could
be enhanced. This would especially apply to ministers of the Dutch Reformed
church.10
Although there is little to be brought against these interpretations, there
appears to be more to the political reasons behind these public student grant
policies. This can be shown by examining the political and cultural context in
which they came into existence.
5
Koninklijk Besluit 8 September 1823 and 3 July 1824.
P. Boekholt e.a., Tweehonderd jaar onderwijs en de zorg van de staat. Jaarboek voor de
geschiedenis van opvoeding en onderwijs (z.p. 2002) 298-301; Roel Pots, Cultuur, koningen en
democraten. Overheid & cultuur in Nederland (Nijmegen 2000) 81-83.
7
B.J.L. de Geer van Jutphaas, ‘De regeling van het hooger onderwijs in Nederland in 1814’ in:
Nieuwe bijdragen tot regtsgeleerdheid en wetgeving XIX (1869) 212-272, there 247.
8
P.A.J. Caljé, Student, universiteit en samenleving. De Groningse universiteit in de
negentiende eeuw (Hilversum 2009) 335-336.
9
W.J. Marchand, Onderwijs mogelijk maken. Twee eeuwen invloed van studiefinanciering op
de toegankelijkheid van het onderwijs in Nederland (1815-2015) (to be published, 2014) 51.
10
Marchand, Onderwijs mogelijk maken 50.
6
The United Kingdom of the Netherlands
After Napoleon’s defeat at Leipzig in 1813, the victorious powers gathered at
Vienna to draw a new political order for the European continent. This was a
major event in the process of Dutch constitutional development. After a brief
experiment with monarchy under French rule, it was decided that the
Netherlands would appear on the new world stage as a kingdom reigned by the
House of Orange, a house that has had a leading position in early modern
times. However, the new king William I of Orange turned out to hold much
more power than his ancestors could ever have hoped for. Public
administration was kept centralised in French revolutionary fashion and the
king was now to be the central legislative and executive figure in this
apparatus. He had to act cautiously: although he could claim authority on
behalf of his illustrious descent, there was little self-evidence in the amount of
power that was now vested in him.
The next development was even less evident. In Vienna this new
kingdom was allowed to encompass the entire Low Countries, including the
southern parts that later developed into modern Belgium and Luxembourg. It
was the first time the Low Countries were united in a single political
framework since the sixteenth century. Religious, political and cultural
differences had not faded over time, some of them had considerably deepened.
To many inhabitants of the south the new king of Orange was a stranger at
best. This protestant foreign king now set out to rule a predominantly catholic,
strongly regionally oriented southern population. He could hardly expect
spontaneous support from these new subjects.
Despite the possible lack of support and the need for caution the king
and his advisors were brimming with ambition. In their minds the new state
was not to be based on federalism and careful compromise, but it had to be
built as a centrally governed “intimate and complete union”.11 The old familiar
north and the new obtained south were to be melted together administratively,
economically and financially. This construction had to be solidly grounded on,
and legitimised by, a closely tied nation. The formation of a state and a single
nation were regarded by government officials as parallel and mutually
dependent objectives.12
As a result, the king had little patience with political discord or
religious and cultural differences among his subjects. In the official state
ideology he was a father who watched over his children: he would protect them
and foster their happiness and prosperity, and in return he demanded his
subjects to be loyal, harmonious and diligent. All grieves and strife of the past
were to be left behind, and the king expected his subjects to contribute jointly,
as fellow Dutchmen, to this project of a strong and prosperous United
Kingdom of the Netherlands.13
11
“Union intime et comlète.” Translation by the author. J.C.H. Blom en E. Lamberts (red.),
Geschiedenis van de Nederlanden (Baarn 2003) 250.
12
J.P. de Valk, ‘Landsvader en landspaus? Achtergronden van de visie op kerk en school bij
koning Willem I (1815-1830)’ in: C. A. Tamse en E. Witte (red.), Staats- en natievorming in
Willem I’s koninkrijk (1815-1830) (Brussel 1992) 76-97, there 83-84.
13
De Valk, ‘Landsvader en landspaus?’ 92; Jeroen Koch, Koning Willem I 1772-1843
(Amsterdam 2013) 286-287.
King William had a striking confidence in his ability to fold people’s
widely diverging attitudes and beliefs into this one new shape. His confidence
was based on his enlightened view on the personal development of the human
being. In this view, people were born pure and innocent. The way they
developed their personality later in life was highly dependent on the continuous
input from their surroundings: parents, teachers, preachers and others. This
implied that a well-considered and consistent nurture and raise gave man the
ability to shape the developing child into any desired form. To a new king at
the head of an uncertain state with divided populations, this opened an
opportunity to raise a future generation of subjects with all desired attitudes:
industriousness, usefulness, tolerance, moderation, and above all, harmony and
obedience to the state. This way, a strong, successful state could be founded on
a nation fit to carry it.14
In order to have a lasting impact on the public mind this ideological
message had to reach all echelons of society continuously over a long period of
time. To this end the royal government had several means at its disposal. As
historian Els Witte puts it:
“The head of state, the other components of the political order, the armed forces,
education, religion, the press in its broader sense, the arts, the rites and symbols
constitute the canals through which this system of values is propagated by the
15
producers and spreaders of the nation-forming ideology.”
In short, all professional groups of lettered men and women that could be
called in for this task by the government, had to be mobilised for the national
cause.16
However, not all of them were fit for this purpose at the time of the
foundation of this new state. A system of public lower education had only
existed for a few years and was nearly absent in the south; higher education
was in a state of decay; the protestant churches were recovering from a ruinous
loss of financial support in the revolutionary period and the roman catholic
church was hardly inclined to support king William’s ambitious plans.
Compared to the glory days of Dutch and Flemish arts in the early modern
period, the standard of the contemporary arts was disappointing. In order to
shape up education, the churches and the arts for spreading the official message
of usefulness, loyalty and national unification, an entirely new body of
teachers, preachers, ministers and artists had to be edified. It is here where the
first Dutch national system of public student grants comes in.
14
De Valk, ‘Landsvader en landspaus?’ 85; Nelleke Bakker, Jan Noordman en Marjoke
Rietveld-Van Wingerden, Vijf eeuwen opvoeden in Nederland. Idee en praktijk 1500-2000
(Assen 2010) 549-550.
15
“Het staatshoofd, de andere onderdelen van het politieke bestel, het leger, het onderwijs, de
godsdienst, de pers in zijn ruime betekenis, de kunsten, de riten en de symbolen vormen de
kanalen waarlangs dit waardenstelsel uitgedragen wordt door de producenten en de
verspreiders van de natievormende ideologie”. Translation by the author. Els Witte,
‘Natievorming onder Willem I. Een blik op de historiografie’ in: Rik Vosters en Janneke
Weijermans (red.), Taal, cultuurbeleid en natievorming onder Willem I. Verhandelingen van de
Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie van België voor Wetenschappen en Kunsten. Nieuwe reeks,
nr. 23 (Brussel 2011) 13-34, aldaar 14.
16
Witte, ‘Natievorming’ 32.
Financial support for young people who wished to be part of this body
of socio-cultural officials was necessary. The potential for spontaneous influx
in these occupational training programs was limited. Secondary and higher
education demanded enormous personal costs. Students did not only have to
provide for themselves and the costs of their education; also they were hardly
able to generate income during the period of their studies. Consequently,
especially since the eighteenth century, secondary and higher education had
become more and more exclusive domains for the wealthiest ranks of society.
Young men from these ranks were little inclined to spend their lives in the
service of religion, education or the arts. They preferred the study of law,
which gave them the best chances for esteemed positions in public
administration, the judiciary and the desired “free professions”. Other faculties
and schools depended more on young people of modest financial means.17 If
they were to attend at large scale, they had to be supported at a comparably
large scale.
In king William’s student grant policies, there was an almost exclusive
preferential treatment of students preparing for careers in education, in catholic
and protestant clergy and in the arts. Even at the universities, where all
academic faculties received their share, this image was clearly visible. The
faculties of philosophy & arts and of science had been newly established by the
new act on higher education, mainly as training grounds for high-quality
teachers for preparatory schools throughout the kingdom.18 This meant that 112
out of a total of 157 grants at universities were mainly reserved for students
with educational or ministerial ambitions. From this perspective, student grants
were instruments for ensuring a sufficient ‘supply’ of state educated
professionals in schools and churches, who could raise a new generation of
loyal and harmonious citizens.
State ideology in higher education and occupational training
In recent years historic research has shown the spirit of nationhood, loyalty and
usefulness that characterised the public occupational trainings for which public
student support was available.19 This was clearly visible, for instance, at the
new academic faculties of philosophy & arts, where qualified teachers for
preparatory schools all over the kingdom received their education. These
aspirant teachers could potentially reach the greater majority of future
university students, hence the political importance of a closely controlled
training. Professors of these faculties were well aware of their ideological task.
17
Willem Otterspeer, ‘Professionalisering in Nederland in de negentiende eeuw. Een
vergelijkend perspectief’ in: Bart van der Boom en Femme Gaastra (red.), Kerk, cultuur en
koloniën. Opstellen over Nederland rond 1900 (z.p. 2005) 78-96, there 88-91.
18
De Geer van Jutphaas, ‘De regeling van het hooger onderwijs’ 212-272; M. Groen, Het
wetenschappelijk onderwijs in Nederland van 1815 tot 1980: een onderwijskundig overzicht
Dl. II (Eindhoven 1987) 120; Beatrijs Borghgraef-Van der Schueren, ‘De universiteiten in de
zuidelijke provincies onder koning Willem I’ in: Mededelingen van de Koninklijke Academie
voor Wetenschappen, Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België (1973) 35, 17.
19
David Bos, In dienst van het koninkrijk. Beroepsontwikkeling van hervormde predikanten in
negentiende-eeuws Nederland (Amsterdam 1999); Guy Janssens and Kris Steyaert, Het
onderwijs van het Nederlands in de Waalse provincies en Luxemburg onder koning Willem I
(1814-1830). Niets meer dan een boon in een brouwketel? (Brussel 2008) 100-103.
The renown Utrecht philosopher Filips Willem van Heusde, believed it to be
his duty
“To plant and to nourish in the generation which is bound to succeed us, and that is
ripening in our academies, patriotism and all high feelings connected with it, in order
to fulfill our south and north, conform the wish of all true Dutchmen, with one single
spirit and to tie them closely together.” 20
At these faculties, the course “Hollandic literature and eloquence” was
introduced. The professors appointed for this course were selected for their
loyalty to the crown and their support of cultural unification. J.M. Schrant in
Ghent pressed for national pride and obedience to the law with publications
such as Lecture on true nation’s glory and Lecture on the duties of subjects
towards the civil government. Professor Kinker in Liège demanded of his
French speaking students the ability
“To assure, with the expected amount of knowledge, that he understands as much
Dutch as needed to make conversation in that language, and that his soul is filled with
warm feelings towards the king, the fatherland and the language of the fatherland.” 21
This national spirit could especially be found at the faculties of Dutch reformed
theology. No wonder: according to a prominent member of king William’s
government there was
“(…) no position of such importance for society as the position of clergyman, no
position of greater influence on the minds of citizens. Therefore, it is of great
importance for civic authorities to keep watch over the training of future
clergymen.”22
At the faculties of reformed theology at northern universities the new course
“Hollandic style and eloquence” was introduced. Students preparing for a
future as minister in the Dutch reformed church, dominant in the north and
newly established in the south, had to learn a standard pronunciation based on
the dialect spoken in the province of Holland. Above all they were taught in the
tradition of the trinity “God, Netherlands and Orange”. The official description
20
“(…) om in het geslacht, dat ons opvolgen moet, en thans op onze akademiën rijpt,
vaderlandsliefde met alle de hooge gevoelens, die daarmede verbonden zijn, op te wekken of te
voeden, en zoo ons zuiden en noorden voor het vervolg, naar den wensch aller echte
Nederlanders, met éénen geest te bezielen, en hecht te verbinden.” Translation by the author.
Philip Willem van Heusde, Brieven over den aard en strekking van hooger onderwijs (Utrecht
1829) voorwoord.
21
“(…) met kennis van zaken kunnen verzekeren, dat de kandidaat reeds zooveel Hollandsch
verstaat als noodig is om een gesprek in die taal te kunnen volhouden, en dat hij voorts met
goede gevoelens voor den Vorst, het vaderland en de vaderlandsche taal bezield is.”
Translation by the author. H.T. Colenbrander, Gedenkstukken der Algemeene Geschiedenis van
Nederland van 1795 tot 1840. Deel 8, band 2. Rijks Geschiedkundige publikatiën (Den Haag
1906) 319. Kinker aan Falck, 2 juli 1822.
22
“Nu is er geen stand van zoo veel gewigt voor de maatschappij als die van
Godsdienstleeraars, geen die grooteren invloed uitoefent op de gemoederen der ingezetenen.
Het is daarom van veel belang, dat het burgerlijk gezag een wakend oog hebbe op de opleiding
van toekomstige Godsdienstleeraars.” Translation by the author. Verslag der Handelingen van
de Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal 1826-1827 Bijlagen XXI 2. Verslag van den staat der
Hooge-, Middelbare- en Lagere scholen over 1825 525.
of the tasks of ministers now included the “guarding of order and unity, and the
breeding of love for King and Fatherland”23
Mobilizing the Dutch reformed church for spreading the message of
unity and obedience to the state institutions was relatively easy, given the close
historic ties between reformation, the sixteenth century Dutch struggle for
independence and the House of Orange. Much more difficult to obtain was the
involvement of the roman catholic church, serving three quarters of the
inhabitants of the new kingdom. In long and difficult negotiations, the royal
government tried to get a grip on the training of preachers. It wished to inspire
them with national ideology, and it planned to put “general knowledge, taste
and enlightenment”24 in place of traditional catholic scholasticism. After years
of fruitless talks with unwilling papal negotiators, the royal government lost
patience, closed down the episcopal ‘small seminaries’ and replaced them with
a public preparatory training school for roman catholic clergy, the so called
Collegium Philosophicum. The curriculum of this institute resembled that of
the public faculties of reformed theology. Since Rome did not acknowledge
this institution, it was difficult for it to attract a sufficient amount of students.
So, the king provided a record-breaking amount of student grants by taking the
ecclesiastical funds that once benefited the closed down seminaries. These
coercive measures caused a great deal of anger among Catholics.25
Outside the universities, public schools were established for training
future teachers in lower education. This form of education reached most
echelons of society, and the spreading of the national ideology was one of the
main reasons for its expansion, especially in the south. According to an
education inspector teachers were assigned with the task of “(…) modelling the
minds of students in a moral fashion and dinning into them love of the
fatherland and esteem towards the national government and laws.”26
Policy results
Although the evaluation of policies was not the main aim of this research, it is
revealing to dedicate a few words on the effectiveness of these measures.
Did these financial provisions contribute to the training of any considerable
body of professionals that could leave lasting marks on the public attitude
towards nation and state?
Some training programs became quite popular. The occupational
training for teachers in lower education received more applications than it
could handle.27 In the north, the part of the kingdom with a protestant majority
23
“(…) de bewaring van orde en eendragt, en de aankweking van liefde voor koning en
vaderland.” Translation by the author. A.J. Rasker, De Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk vanaf
1795. Geschiedenis, theologische ontwikkelingen en de verhouding tot haar zusterkerken in de
negentiende en twintigste eeuw (Kampen 2004) 29; David J. Bos, ‘’Dienaren des Woords’.
Godgeleerden in de negentiende eeuwse Nederlandse letterkunde’ in: De negentiende eeuw
(1997) 21 3 153-182, there 158.
24
Colenbrander, Gedenkstukken deel 8, band 3 177. Goubau aan Falck, 28 oktober 1823.
25
Janssens en Steyaert, Het onderwijs in het Nederlands 107; Albers, herstel 144-145.
26
“(…) de gemoederen der leerlingen zedelijk te vormen en […] hen liefde voor het vaderland,
eerbied voor ’s Lands regering en wetten in te scherpen”. Translation by the author.
27
R. Turksma, De geschiedenis van de opleiding tot onderwijzer in Nederland aan de
openbare, protestants-christelijke en bijzonder-neutrale instellingen (Groningen 1961) 47.
and the most stable historic ties to the House of Orange, universities saw their
student numbers tripled in 15 years. Theologian faculties had a large share in
this success. Around 1830 even a large surplus of recently graduated but
jobless ministers appeared.28 However, the available student grants seem not to
have been the decisive factor behind this success. Student numbers in the
faculties of philosophy & arts and of science were disappointing. The
availability of grants did not sufficiently solve shortages of students. Regularly
the amount of applicants was too low for all available scholarships to be
granted. In those cases, the remaining grants were transferred to other
faculties.29
In the south, where much more persuasion was needed to turn
inhabitants into convinced and loyal Dutch citizens, students hardly responded
to the incentives at all. In general, they chose the studies of law and medicine.
At Leuven university, only ten students graduated in philosophy & arts
between 1818 and 1830, while no more than six students graduated in science
during this period. Peculiar, given the amount of ten available grants each year
at both faculties.30
The results at the Collegium Philosophicum, the state controlled
training institute for roman catholic clergy, were simply dramatic. The pope
did not recognize this institute and bishops refused to allow its graduates into
the episcopal seminaries, where priests normally completed their education. As
a result, clergymen all over the kingdom advised young men against enrolling
at this institute, and urged them to look for training abroad. Students that did
enroll, did so largely without any ecclesiastic ambitions. In 1827 the dean of
the Collegium complained that “a substantial number” of students was using
this opportunity of well-paid education as preparation for a career in lower
education instead of the clergy.31 After king William recognized the failure of
this policy, he abandoned the mandatory character. Since the government now
feared a complete desertion of the Collegium, it announced that it would stop
all support to people who avoided the institute.32 This coercive policy was even
less successful. After 1827 enrollment numbers dwindled from 208 in 1826 to
only 8 in 1829. Soon the accursed institute was closed.33 King William learned
that financial terms were not sufficient instruments for tempting people into
new attitudes towards his regime and their religious lives. His interferences in
the education of roman catholic clergy were experienced as fundamental
violations of religious life by many of his catholic subjects, and turned out to
be some of the major causes of the Belgian revolution and the complete
separation of the United Kingdom in 1830-1839.
28
G. Jensma en H. de Vries, Veranderingen in het hoger onderwijs in Nederland tussen 1815
en 1940 (Hilversum 1997) 172, 185.
29
Marchand, Onderwijs mogelijk maken 45.
30
Universiteit Leuven, De universiteit te Leuven 1425-1975 (Leuven 1975) 203-204;
Borghgraef-Van der Schueren, ‘De universiteiten in de zuidelijke provincies’ 17.
31
Letter of dean Roelants to secretary Van Gobbeschroy, 21 August 1827, included in: Jan de
Nooij, Eenheid en vrijheid in het nationale onderwijs onder koning Willem I (Utrecht 1939)
177-179.
32
Nederlandsche Staatscourant 29 June 1829
33
Albers, hiërarchie 144-145.
Concluding remarks
The study of public policy history requires a broad perspective, encompassing
not only the narrow domains of political institutions or specific policy areas,
but also the wider social and cultural contexts in which they existed. In this
paper, early nineteenth century Dutch student grant policies were taken as an
example to illustrate this point. The broader perspective provided an additional
interpretation of public student support. It appeared as a steering instrument,
used by the royal government to create a sufficient ‘supply’ of young men and
women willing and able to spread king William’s messages of national unity,
obedience and diligence. The assigned role of schools, churches and the arts in
the formation of nation and state was a known historic phenomenon. Now, the
systematic use of financial incentives for the training of sufficient professionals
for a successful build-up of these institutions can be added to it.
This instrumental use of financial temptations is a new illustration of
the enormous amount of confidence king William I put in his capability to
influence public attitudes, and to change society as a whole. In his mind, his
policies should be rational, instrumental and useful, since they all had to
contribute to the unity and prosperity of his kingdom. However, he believed
these instruments to be much more effective than they turned out to be in
practice. Cultural and political cleavages could not be bridged by money. His
confidence was based on enlightened optimism rather than practical experience
or cautious realism. In retrospect, his steering grant policy can be marked as a
failure.
Sources
Albers, P., Geschiedenis van het herstel der hiërarchie in de Nederlanden. Eerste deel
(Nijmegen 1903)
Bakker, Nelleke, Jan Noordman en Marjoke Rietveld-Van Wingerden, Vijf eeuwen opvoeden
in Nederland. Idee en praktijk 1500-2000 (Assen 2010
Blom, J.C.H. en E. Lamberts (red.), Geschiedenis van de Nederlanden (Baarn 2003)
Boekholt, P. e.a., Tweehonderd jaar onderwijs en de zorg van de staat. Jaarboek voor de
geschiedenis van opvoeding en onderwijs (z.p. 2002)
Borghgraef-Van der Schueren, Beatrijs, ‘De universiteiten in de zuidelijke provincies onder
koning Willem I’ in: Mededelingen van de Koninklijke Academie voor Wetenschappen,
Letteren en Schone Kunsten van België (1973) 35
Bos, David, In dienst van het koninkrijk. Beroepsontwikkeling van hervormde predikanten in
negentiende-eeuws Nederland (Amsterdam 1999)
Bos, David J., ‘’Dienaren des Woords’. Godgeleerden in de negentiende eeuwse Nederlandse
letterkunde’ in: De negentiende eeuw (1997) 21 3 153-182
Caljé, P.A.J., Student, universiteit en samenleving. De Groningse universiteit in de negentiende
eeuw (Hilversum 2009)
Colenbrander, H.T., Gedenkstukken der Algemeene Geschiedenis van Nederland van 1795 tot
1840. Deel 8, band 2. Rijks Geschiedkundige publikatiën (Den Haag 1906)
Geer van Jutphaas, B.J.L. de, ‘De regeling van het hooger onderwijs in Nederland in 1814’ in:
Nieuwe bijdragen tot regtsgeleerdheid en wetgeving XIX (1869) 212-272
Groen, M., Het wetenschappelijk onderwijs in Nederland van 1815 tot 1980: een
onderwijskundig overzicht Dl. II (Eindhoven 1987)
Janssens, Guy and Kris Steyaert, Het onderwijs van het Nederlands in de Waalse provincies en
Luxemburg onder koning Willem I (1814-1830). Niets meer dan een boon in een brouwketel?
(Brussel 2008)
Heusde, Philip Willem van, Brieven over den aard en strekking van hooger onderwijs (Utrecht
1829)
Jensma, G. and H. de Vries, Veranderingen in het hoger onderwijs in Nederland tussen 1815
en 1940 (Hilversum 1997)
Koch, Jeroen, Koning Willem I 1772-1843 (Amsterdam 2013)
Marchand, W.J., Onderwijs mogelijk maken. Twee eeuwen invloed van studiefinanciering op
de toegankelijkheid van het onderwijs in Nederland (1815-2015) (to be published, 2014)
Nederlandsche Staatscourant
Nooij, Jan de, Eenheid en vrijheid in het nationale onderwijs onder koning Willem I (Utrecht
1939)
Otterspeer, Willem, ‘Professionalisering in Nederland in de negentiende eeuw. Een
vergelijkend perspectief’ in: Bart van der Boom en Femme Gaastra (red.), Kerk, cultuur en
koloniën. Opstellen over Nederland rond 1900 (z.p. 2005) 78-96
Pots, Roel, Cultuur, koningen en democraten. Overheid & cultuur in Nederland (Nijmegen
2000)
Rasker, A.J., De Nederlandse Hervormde Kerk vanaf 1795. Geschiedenis, theologische
ontwikkelingen en de verhouding tot haar zusterkerken in de negentiende en twintigste eeuw
(Kampen 2004)
Slaman, Pieter, Staat van de student. Tweehonderd jaar politieke geschiedenis van
studiefinanciering in Nederland (to be published, 2014)
Turksma, R., De geschiedenis van de opleiding tot onderwijzer in Nederland aan de openbare,
protestants-christelijke en bijzonder-neutrale instellingen (Groningen 1961)
Universiteit Leuven, De universiteit te Leuven 1425-1975 (Leuven 1975)
Valk, J.P. de, ‘Landsvader en landspaus? Achtergronden van de visie op kerk en school bij
koning Willem I (1815-1830)’ in: C. A. Tamse en E. Witte (red.), Staats- en natievorming in
Willem I’s koninkrijk (1815-1830) (Brussel 1992) 76-97
Verslag der Handelingen van de Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal 1826-1827 Bijlagen XXI
2. Verslag van den staat der Hooge-, Middelbare- en Lagere scholen over 1825.
Witte, Els, ‘Natievorming onder Willem I. Een blik op de historiografie’ in: Rik Vosters en
Janneke Weijermans (red.), Taal, cultuurbeleid en natievorming onder Willem I.
Verhandelingen van de Koninklijke Vlaamse Academie van België voor Wetenschappen en
Kunsten. Nieuwe reeks, nr. 23 (Brussel 2011) 13-34
Wolffram, Dirk Jan, ‘Onze belastingcenten. Een pleidooi voor beleidsgeschiedenis’ in: G.
Voerman en D.J. Wolffram (red.), Kossmann Instituut. Benaderingen van de geschiedenis van
politiek (Groningen 2006) 62-67.
Zellizer, Julian E., ‘Clio’s lost tribe: Public Policy History Since 1978’ in: Journal of Policy
History 12 3 (2000) 369-394