Abstract

Janse, A. e.a. (eds.), Johan Huyssen van Kattendijke-kroniek. Die historie of die cronicke van Hollant, van Zeelant ende van Vrieslant ende van den Stichte van Utrecht (Den Haag 2005).In search of the author of the 'Kattendyke Chronicle'Dutch medieval history has always remained very much in the background and so have its chronicles. The latter are few and far between and rarely of high quality. The only really important ones are Melis Stoke’s Rijmkroniek (ca. 1300) written in Middle Dutch and Johannes de Beke’s Chronographia (ca. 1350) in Latin with its Middle Dutch anonymous sequels (the first one of which went as far as 1393). Works of comparable originality are absent for the 15th century, when chroniclers mostly confined themselves to repeating both Stoke and Beke, their trusted authorities, and expanding on them, mostly succinctly, to reflect upon their own times. The majority of these manuscripts still have to be edited. What a surprise it was then when the newly-discovered ‘Cronicke van Hollant, van Zeelant ende van Vrieslant ende van den Stichte van Utrecht’ suddenly appeared after lying undisturbed for centuries in the possession of a Dutch aristocratic family who have now given permission for this beautifully illustrated manuscript to be edited by an interdisciplinary team of scholars. In some major respects the Kattendyke chronicle is disappointing: although written in 1492 it fails to add any substantial new information of either a factual or ‘cultural’ nature. But given the scarcity of well-edited medieval Dutch chronicles we should appreciate the Kattendyke chronicle as a product of intellectual history and as a serious undertaking of a so far unidentified Dutchman during the crucial years of expanding Burgundian rule. The editors have done a remarkable job but may have given up too readily on solving the mystery of the chronicler’s identity, for which the present reviewer offers a suggestion.

Highlights

  • Works of comparable originality are absent for the 15th century

  • van Zeelant ende van Vrieslant ende van den Stichte van Utrecht' suddenly appeared after lying undisturbed for centuries in the possession

  • beautifully illustrated manuscript to be edited by an interdisciplinary team of scholars

Read more

Summary

Naar aanleiding van

Het valt op dat de drie auteurs Janse, Van Anrooij en Biemans veel moeite doen om hun kroniekschrijver van Haarlem los te maken en daartoe onder meer diep ingaan op de eerder door Tilmans veronderstelde Brederodeconnectie (Santpoort), die inderdaad niet sterk is.[33] Maar er zijn andere argumenten die de onbevangen lezer toch wel sterk in Haarlemse richting duwen. Is het dan niet heel toevallig dat de Haarlemse stadssecretaris Scheen Wissenzoon, de overschrijver van een aantal kronieken die ook door de Kattendyke-schrijver zijn gebruikt,[44] zich ‘van Kerckwerff’ noemt? Want onze Scheen Wissenzoon van Kerckwerff zou dus niet alleen Kattendyke hebben geschreven, maar ook al veel eerder al die andere kronieken hebben afgeschreven, en dat afschrift bestaat nog.[46]. Ook het agressieve mercantilisme waarmee Frankrijk en Engeland voortaan hun eigen markten afschermden, belemmerde de uitvoer van Zuid-Nederlandse luxeproducten.[4]

Gebruikte afkortingen
Lees als inleiding
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call