The motives of Willem van Oranje were very honorful.At least if you look at the standards of his time (16th century) and social class (higher nobility)
Because of the centralization of the Burgundian Netherlands and the professionalization of the board, the nobility became more on a side track.Descent became less important and training and experience became more important to get a position in the board. Personal loyalty was replaced by an impersonal bond. States and delights were more and more Res publica, public possession, rather than property of a monarch, Duke or Earl.
The nobles oppose this erosion of their status, honor and wealth.The resistance of the nobles was, in their view, so honorable, namely the protection of old privileges against the new scam. When cities also threatened to lose their independence, they joined the resistance, the same applies to other disadvantaged groups such as non-Catholics.
Later historians have made a national struggle here.
He was a women’s versierder, he switched for political reasons a number of times between Protestantism (Luther) and Catholicism and, of course, he was, above all, an ambitious power politician.He was certainly not a Calvinistic saint.
Good question.If we could ask him, we could have had an idea of his personality.
What we do have are adverbs of others.Charismatic he was in any case though.
But the written words about him will have to be paid by someone.If you wrote then, that he was a Backstabb deceiver, your date was not paid for.
I think his motives were not all equally good, devout and heroic.He wanted to get the power in his hands. He certainly has to work hard for that, so the admiration is not completely undeserved.
You cannot say more about this, without research results.
History is written by the victors.
We feel the victors of the 80 years War, so we want the man who had the first part of that war to be in charge of a pedestal.
The Americans are doing that with George Washington.
He had a lot or four wives, and I don’t know how many minareses.So you can already take a piece of your antowwrd out of it. From the other side, that applies almost to every high-ranking man of that time.
Whether he was really pious and freedom-loving is interpretable.
What is characteristic, however, is that he sacrificed most of his family fortune before the war.And that he was never really a head of state, or real power that you could accomplish something with.
My conclusion is that he was probably far from perfect, but all in all though the Principieele man who became the face of the rebellion.
The Spanish version of this story is very different.We were annoying rebels who were absolutely not the greatest concern of the Spanish Crown. The role of the war is written down. And the result is shown more as a change in the peace of Munster because Spain was tired of having to deal with the insurgent areas again and again. Spain was, of course, very busy at that time to conquer and plunder large areas on the other side of the ocean. The Netherlands were ultimately just too expensive to try to maintain. Elsewhere it was much cheaper to outout.
As far as I am aware, Willem van Oranje was a person of nobility and has never had a fighter mentality and he was fortunate to have a legacy from his uncle to be elected by the people who adored him for his luxury position and his intelligent IE to Prince.In addition, I am well known that he is related to a genocide which then makes the dark side visible in the history book of the Low Countries. Think personally that he was fighting for freedom in religion and in the end he also got the title of father of the homeland. But there is certainly a dark page in the book of the Oranjes.