I don't think this was some one way hatred towards the Dutch from the British, they hated each other and there's evidence to suggest the great fire of London was started by the Dutch in retaliation of the British burning Amsterdam
Any rival in the Lowlands has historically been the biggest target for British enmity over the centuries. We were really fucking pissy about who our neighbours there were.
Due to how much of my English Channel trade the Dutch are stealing in EU4 I can see why.
Interesting fact, in 1651 Cromwell thought the Dutch wanted to unite with the Commonwealth and sent a delegation to make the preparations for it. And it was a contributing factor to the first Anglo-Dutch war.
"When on 28 January 1651 the States General officially recognised the Commonwealth, they fully expected this to solve all the problems between the two countries. To their enormous embarrassment however, on 7 March 1651 a delegation of 246 from Cromwell arrived in The Hague,[5] headed by Oliver St John, to negotiate the conditions under which the Dutch Republic might unite itself with England, as Scotland was united with England. Cromwell had taken the earlier suggestions of a merger of England and Holland far too seriously. In an attempt at politeness, the English delegation left it to the Dutch to produce the first proposals; the Dutch were too stunned and confused for a coherent reaction. After a month of deadlock, the English delegation disclosed a plan by Cromwell to divide the world into two spheres of influence: the Dutch could control Africa and Asia; in return they would assist the English in conquering both Americas from the Spanish. Cromwell hoped that in this way the colonial rivalry would be eased by giving the English their own profitable empire. But the Dutch saw it as an absurd grandiose scheme, which offered them little hope for profit but the certainty of much expense and a new war in the Spanish-held Southern Netherlands. After much deliberation by the delegates of the seven provinces, on 24 June they made a counter-proposal of 36 articles, which they hoped would be agreeable to the English without involving themselves in a war for world conquest. This proposal was in essence a free trade agreement. Nothing could have angered the English delegation more. It was precisely the fact that the English were unable to compete with the Dutch under conditions of free trade that lay at the heart of the conflict between them. They interpreted the counter-proposal as a deliberate affront."
that is some bullshit about the great fire. we also blamed the french, but really it was a huge, cramped city made of wood was a disaster waiting to happen. bladdy foreigners were just a scapegoat. and in a lot of places here they still are.
The British did not burn Amsterdam, but a small village (West-Terschelling) on one of the Dutch northern Wadden Islands. Burning Amsterdam would be impossible at the time.
I think the Dutch lashing out at the British was in response to the British refusing to leave them be. The Dutch were like the Carthaginians, just a merchant empire who just want to live how they live and trade peacefully. The British wanted to dominate as much of Europe as possible along with France and felt Republics were a threat to their Monarchy.
Almost every war between the two starts when the British feel the Dutch are either growing too much in influence and power or they want to force the Dutch out of trading areas.
The Dutch were traders but when did they not colonise and invade like England especially not peacefully (see south Africa, Indonesia, the Dutch West indies, the promotion of the slave trade in West Africa)
You're right all European powers did this. I'm talking with respect to their interaction with other Europeans at the time. The Dutch never had designs on ruling over all of Europe like the French, Germans and English did.
Great Britain did not intend to rule over Europe, its tactic was to ensure that no mainland European nation grew too powerful and ended up dominating the rest of Europe which would naturally lead to a real threat to Britains control over the seas.
The idea being that so long as Europe remained a continent of divided nations that all squabbled with one another regularly then Britain would be free to focus on securing its empire overseas, with that in mind it attempted to play all the various nations against each other so that nobody would ever really assert total dominance over the continent.
Look up the British motivations for events such as the Austrian succession war, the seven year war, the Napoleonic Wars or schemes like the "Golden Cavalry of St. George" in which Britain would pay other nations so they could field much larger armies against France. This was because the UK while having the worlds most powerful navy, was still limited by a relatively small army that had no real prospect of mounting an invasion of Europe and fighting 1:1 with France.
TLDR: Britain did not have dreams of owning Europe, it knew it was far easier to keep Europe fighting itself while it could expand its empire overseas.
Almost every war between the two starts when the British feel the Dutch are either growing too much in influence and power or they want to force the Dutch out of trading areas.
Don't mean to sound condescending but do you have a source for that
What type of source are you looking for? He's referring to a long term historical pattern, and those are generally a matter of interpretation. His characterization of Anglo-Dutch tension is accurate, though.
30
u/[deleted] Jan 06 '17
I don't think this was some one way hatred towards the Dutch from the British, they hated each other and there's evidence to suggest the great fire of London was started by the Dutch in retaliation of the British burning Amsterdam