En privé & en public: The Epistolary Preparation of the Dutch Stadtholders

In his educational treatise, the Instruction du prince chrétien (1642), André Rivet, the tutor of the future Willem II (1627-1650), presents his ideal of a virtuous prince well versed in the skills required to govern himself and his subjects. In the educational correspondences surrounding the future Dutch stadtholders we see some of these theoretical principles played out in epistolary practice. Reading the correspondence against the foil of Rivet’s treatise brings to the fore a number of characteristics of his ideal prince: the intimate educational nexus between tutor, parents, and pupil; the way in which the prince is taught to navigate the interrelated spheres of self, household, and society; and finally, the ways in which the dichotomy between public and private is at once dissolved and affirmed in the educational molding of an early modern prince. Downloaded from Brill.com06/24/2021 10:27:41AM via free access 254 Green, Nørgaard and Bruun Journal of early modern history 24 (2020) 253-279

The first dialogue outlines a basic vision of princely authority and describes how different forms of principality depend on different historical circumstances.6 It explains that the prince is at the same time elevated above others and a servant of God and is thus obliged to secure the common good for his subjects. Next to historical circumstances, the prince shares the general postlapsarian condition. Neither his family name nor the splendor of his kin divests the prince of sin, and the director offers ample evidence to support his claim that the sinful nature of humanity makes even its most influential actors weak in body and spirit. Although a noble bloodline generates a natural disposition for virtue, many princes have committed great misdeeds.7 In the second dialogue, Rivet develops this tension between sinfulness and princely elevation.8 If the prince is to keep society in a virtuous state, he must offset his natural sinfulness by training himself and making himself virtuous (se evertuer).9 Dialogues six to sixteen elaborate on this task. They constitute the main part of the Instruction and deal with justice, prudence, courage, and temperance, respectively.10 The argumentative structure thus rehearses the Ciceronian idea of honestas as the embodiment of the four cardinal virtues.11 6 Dialogue I: Rivet, Instruction, 1-15. 7 Rivet, Instruction, 9. 8 Dialogue II: Rivet, Instruction, 15-33. 9 Rivet, Instruction, 31. Virtue in the Instruction signifies an active stance based in the soul and its principal faculties of cognition and the will. To the philosophical background of this theory and its neo-stoic profile, see Matthijs Wieldraaijer, "Onderwijs aan het Oranjehof in de 17de eeuw," Holland 41, no. 2 (2009): 80-100 (81-87). 10 Rivet treats justice in Dialogues VI-VIII: Rivet, Instruction, 130-224. Prudence is the topic of Dialogue IX: Rivet, Instruction, 225-254. This reflection on prudency spills over into a discussion of lying in Dialogue X: Rivet, Instruction, 254-285. In the early modern period, the question of political foxery was closely tied to chapter eighteen of Machiavelli's Il Principe (1513/1532), cf. Michael Stolleis, Staat und Staatsräson in der frühen Neuzeit. Studien zur Geschichte des öffentlichen Rechts (Frankfurt am Main, 1990), 21-36. Courage is treated in Dialogue XI: Rivet, Instruction, 285-321. Like Dialogue X on lying, which is a kind of afterthought to Dialogue IX and its elaboration of prudency, Dialogue XI on courage is followed by discussions of princely liberty in Dialogues XII-XIII: Rivet, Instruction, 321-368. Finally, Rivet discusses temperance in Dialogues XIV-XVI: Rivet, Instruction, 368-437. The latter two dialogues engage with bodily pleasures of, e.g., eating and sexual adventures. 11 This is the conclusion of Wieldraaijer who, however, sees "clemence," "constance," and "liberalité" as separate themes in Rivet's treatise; Wieldraaijer, "Onderwijs aan het Oranjehof in de 17de eeuw," 84. Scrutiny reveals that the four virtues are the structural core of the work, and that the discussion of princely clemency is an elaboration of justice; the treatment of lying is an afterthought to the section on prudence; liberty follows from the elaboration of courage; while constancy is described as a form of temperance.

Green, Nørgaard and Bruun
Journal of early modern history 24 (2020) 253-279 Before the Instruction reaches this culmination, however, the third dialogue turns to the princely education required to support the training in virtue.12 Rivet presents a two-fold educational program which partly develops skills that are necessary to the princely office and partly launches a hermeneutics of the self that prompts the prince to compare himself to past rulers. The prince must be versed in the languages of allies and business partners so as to navigate commercial and political negotiations fluently. Latin remains key, and Latin studies come with the added benefit of giving access to important works from Antiquity in the original. Historical works are crucial princely mirrors which allow for the contemplation of the deeds of past princes, be they virtuous or sinful.13 Cosmography and cartography are useful at war and in peacetime. Dialectics enable the prince to distinguish between truth and falsehood, to regulate what is confused, and to underpin his opinions with good arguments. Finally, dialectics is helpful when it comes to "the manner of leading the good life, whether in regard to oneself, to one's domestic life or in the civic life [vie civile]."14 The art of discretion must finally inform his rhetorical education: the prince need not wax eloquent on figures and tropes, but must be able to write and deliver a speech.15 While the encouragement to model himself on past rulers introduces a contemplative element, the prince is clearly not to withdraw from the world in order to become virtuous. Knowledge should not be pursued for its own sake.
The last part of the educational framework turns to ethics, economics, and politics. The prince may study general rules in books, but should rely, above all, on his tutor. Casting political reasoning as a diabolic enterprise that upsets divine order, the tutor prepares for the dialogue on religion as the source of moral guidance.16 The prince must constantly remind himself that his authority depends on divine will, both as a service to God and as an insight into the divine.17 He gains an understanding of God's will through avidly reading the Bible, ideally two chapters a day, and through a constant focus on Christ as the key source of true knowledge of God.18 In accordance with this biblical 20 What seems at a first glance to be a distinction between private and public is in fact a convergence: the prince must everywhere behave as befits a prince. Rivet structures the components of this princely behavior in three registers: self, court, and country.21 With regard to his own person, the prince must live prudently, study piously, and abstain from impiety. As for his staff and ministers, he must avoid people who are debauched, proud, or scheming. Finally, he must be sure to execute justice in a diligent and exact manner, purging his lands of people who pose a threat to the city of God. Psalm 101 is a common reference in Protestant discourses on princely authority.22 Particularly 19 Rivet, Instruction, 456-500. 20 Rivet, Instruction, 457. The key verse is Ps 101:2: "I will walk with integrity of heart within my house" (NRSV). This private register of princely preparation should neither be confused with that of the private person (personne privée) raised to power, whom Rivet contrasts with those born to be princes, nor with the vie privée that he defines as the withdrawn contrast of public affairs, cf. important in our context is the meditation on this psalm published in 1594 by the Huguenot theologian Philippe Duplessis-Mornay (1549-1623), who had links both to the house of Orange-Nassau and to Rivet.23 Duplessis-Mornay states that the psalm expresses David's decision to become a good prince by first endeavoring to become "a good man, by regulating his person and his private life" (vie privée).24 Rivet follows Duplessis-Mornay in distinguishing the work on the self from the concern with the household or court and subsuming both under the general notion of a spotless life (via immaculata, Ps. 101:6). Indeed, he seems even more concerned with the ideally seamless transition between the prince at home and the prince in public. He thus explains that since God tests the mind and the heart (cf. Ps. 7:10), the prince must strive to be pure of heart "everywhere, in public and in private" (par tout, en public & en particulier). Rivet latches on to the biblical wording "au millieu de ma maison" (in the midst of my house), explaining that the house of a prince is public, and nothing within it is secret.25 In this idealized notion of the prince's development, the ongoing work on virtue and the turn to the divine will prompt him to live, in public and in private, as if he were constantly watched by the world, because he is everywhere watched by God.26 The princely education seeks to prepare him for this surveillance, with the surveillance of tutor and parents serving as an intermediary stage to which we shall now turn.

Huguenot Education
Rivet's employment as tutor to the future Prince of Orange formed part of a general trend in early modern Europe. The French Huguenot scholars personified a unique combination of Protestant conviction and a widely recognized intellectual prowess with their native French language.27 The Huguenot pedagogical influence on Dutch princes took hold when Louise de Coligny, fourth wife of Willem I of Orange (1533-1584) and mother of Frederik Hendrik, sought educational advice from Philippe Duplessis-Mornay, and Frederik Hendrik followed this trend when he had his son, the later Willem II, brought up in Huguenot traditions under Rivet's watchful eye.28 The primary task of the stadtholders in the United Provinces was to command the military, but they also acted as defenders of the Reformed faith and, as the highest nobility in the country, they were expected to demonstrate all aspects of courtly decorum. The princely education targeted this triple end. Courtly civility included the mastery of both written and spoken French.29 The Orange and Nassau courts in The Hague and Leeuwarden shared the general European penchant for French as a mark of status for the nobility and the 27 See for example: Green, "The Orange-Nassau family"; Green, Huguenot Jean Rou, chapter 5. bourgeoisie, and as a language for communicating between members of noble families that, in their capacity as vehicles of political, military, and dynastic alliances, were international.30 Letters were a crucial pedagogical tool for teaching French. The correspondences show children struggling with and parents overseeing their acquisition of grammar and syntax. Hendrik Casimir II found this particularly challenging and his mother, Albertine Agnes, constantly admonished him to improve his grammar: "I return to you the aforementioned letter [that you sent me]," she wrote, "so that you can note the mistakes you had made and be wary of making them another time."31 She even mentions that her son's head-tutor, Jean de Morel, Sieur de Longval, has given up checking his letters because of Hendrik's poor grammar.32 Willem II and Johan Willem Friso fared a shade better; perhaps they had a greater aptitude for learning languages, but much depended on the tutors.33 Rivet was one of the most prominent Huguenot tutors. He was a renowned theologian, an internationally recognized authority in exegesis, a university professor, and he was the court pastor before becoming head-tutor in 1632 and being charged with the creation and administration of William II's educational program.34 While it is nowhere stated in his commission, the correspondence Rivet's corrections should be moderate, so as to leave Willem's original wording and intention visible to his father.37 This example shows, at a glance, how letters were circulated among, and were evaluated by, father, secretary, and tutor, but it also indicates that letters were perceived as a reflection of character and assessed as such. Alongside letters in French, Willem II also wrote several letters to his father in Dutch.38 These convey his love for rabbit hunting, billiards, and mathematics. Thus, also when writing in his mother tongue, Willem shows a predilection for activities that, as we shall see, are perfectly fit for scrutiny within the framework of a proper princely education.

Epistolary Zones of Privacy
The correspondence between pupil, tutor, and parents molds the princely self, and requires in turn that the prince demonstrate that such a self is emerging. It also presents the first-person voices of the conscientious tutor and parents concerned for their offspring. The educational correspondence thus lends itself to a study informed by the research regarding the evidence conveyed by egodocuments. According to Presser's 1950 definition, egodocuments are texts where "an ego intentionally or unintentionally discloses, or hides itself."39 Thirty years later, Dekker specified that egodocuments are "autobiographies, memoirs, diaries, personal letters and other texts in which an author explicitly writes about his own affairs and feelings."40 We can define the letters exchanged between pupil, tutor, and parents as personal letters, since they were not intended for the wider public. But, we may ponder, as indeed we shall below, whether they can be considered private. In any case, neither personal nor private letters offer an unmediated attestation of a self. Following Dekker, such letters do not grant unmediated access to the thoughts, feelings, or interests of their authors.41 Indeed, documentation pertaining to the self often involves the simulation of experiences that, historically speaking, have no basis in reality, but which remain essential to the act of self-expression. This essential character hinges on the ways in which these personal testimonials tap into a shared language-use that determines the meaning of even the most private utterances.42 Egodocuments thus generally require that we take notions of privacy and the private into critical reconsideration. With regard to princely education, such documents are particularly relevant since, as we saw in Rivet's Instruction, the ability of the prince to govern-and, we may add, expresshimself, determines his ability to govern others. The educational purpose of the correspondence is supported by an affective register. For example, Frederik Hendrik's letters to the young Willem seem to display a fatherly affection that intensifies proportionately as William became more mature. This seems clear both in the style of address and the reward system deployed. The early letters address the six-or seven-year-old "Wilempie," while the 1640-letters speak to the early teenage "Wilhelm."43 The following year, the father addresses the still teenage but now married prince as "My dear child."44 This development is accompanied by a promise of paternal reward that evolves in step with the expectation of the prince's ascent in virtue and honnêteté. The young Wilempie is promised a horse, "if you continue to be honnête and to study hard."45 The somewhat more mature Willem is encouraged by the prospect of fatherly love: "I pray to God that he preserves you for many years to come and that he will grant you the grace of becoming as virtuous and wise as I desire it, if you want that I love you."46 When his wedding approaches Journal of early modern history 24 (2020) 253-279 in 1641, however, the said paternal love is stated as a reality: "With all my affection, I will always love you."47 Contrary to this, in all of the surviving letters, Hendrik Casimir II is addressed by his mother Albertine Agnes as "mon trescher fils" (my dearest child),48 and by his grandmother Amalia van Solms as "mon trescher petitfilz,"49 without developments based on his age. The letters display an understanding of parenthood that is anchored in the social arena of ambition and acclaim. Rather than undermining the affective statements, the avowals related to rewards contribute to the establishment of a strong sense of social selfhood in chiming with the demands mustered in Rivet's Instruction. 50 The tutor is instrumental in the creation of this social selfhood. As an external voice, he disrupts any assumption of an intimacy that is exclusive to the nuclear family. As a trusted member of the household, he is granted access to, and agency in, a private sphere where crucial dimensions of the virtuous princely self is molded and expressed, preparing him for his public office. Rivet and his colleagues' monitoring of the princely epistolary self-expression and not least their correction of the letters of their young charges create an educational zone where the princely pupil hovers between his position in the family and his position in society-still private in the sense that he is not yet in office. On a terminological level, Rivet's exposition of Ps 101:2 contrasts privé and public, in an echo of the Ciceronian distinction between civic duties and private existence.51 The message conveyed by Rivet, however, is that the prince must remain of one virtuous piece: the same in both realms. Thus, the contrast between private and public is at once dissolved and affirmed. The letters aim to shape the prince away from the public gaze, so that he may become fit for his exposure to that gaze, and the educational nexus between tutor, pupil, parents, and secretaries constitutes a private sphere in the sense that this, too, is 267 The Epistolary Preparation of the Dutch Stadtholders Journal of early modern history 24 (2020) 253-279 segregated from the public arena. This private sphere, however, is neither an isolated microcosmos, nor the diametrically opposite of the public sphere: the tutor is a link in intimate familial relations, but his supportive efforts secure a private interaction that abides by public standards. The letters speak to an experience of selfhood that is neither entirely personal nor entirely collective, but rather straddles the two spheres, aiming to shape the entire being of an early modern prince en privé et en public.

Navigating the Zones of Princely Education
Although parents fussed over the grammatical perfection of their sons' letters, content was key. Expressing and eliciting the right kind of information serves the preparation of the princely ability to scrutinize himself, his court, and the wider society acutely in order to act wisely in all three respects. He is to learn to observe his own inclinations and activities, and thus Frederik Hendrik commands his son Willem II to "inform me about what you do all day-in your studies as well as in your leisure time-and in what you take the greatest pleasure."52 This examen de soi gives the father some access to his son's personal traits and allows him to correct possible deviations.53 Willem obliges, reporting that he is engaged in mathematics, but prefers partridge hunting and billiards.54 Perhaps this self-reflection is supported by withdrawal; at least on one occasion, Willem II informs his father that he has gone to his room to write to him.55 While generally short and rather repetitive, ritually promising better behavior and more diligent studies, sometimes the children's letters show the 52 RHA, A15 XI A-1, letter from Frederik Hendrik to Willem II, n.p., n.d. [possibly 1639 or 1640]. 53 Already Erasmus stressed the import of the personal interests of the child in his De pueris instituendis. This idea was also well-known in seventeenth-century educational circles. other side of this intermingling of affection and educational progress. Hendrik Casimir II thus writes to his mother: I find myself in despair because my writing did not satisfy Your Highness: the next time, I will try to make You more content; not only in this [act of writing] but also in everything else that I will address to You during Your absence. Indeed, I find this [absence] most difficult, because Your Highness is the kindest person to whom I have dedicated all my affections and with whom I desire to be […].56 The close monitoring of the princely self is above all associated with the cultivation of qualities such as honesty, virtue, and wisdom.57 The injunction to become an honnête homme resounds throughout, while the fear of God is also readily invoked.58 Such directions take us back to Rivet's ideal that the virtues adding up to honestas ideally inform princely action with regard to the self, the courtly household, and the state. Reading the letters against the foil of the Instruction further reminds us that although we tend to associate honnêteté with the courtly ideal expressed in Castiglione's Il Cortegiano (1528), which was in the stadtholder's library together with the French (1592) and Dutch (1603) translations of Stefano Guazzo's La Civil Conversazione (1574) and other similar works, we should not disregard the link of the term honnêteté to the Ciceronian ideal of the vir honestus who embodies the four cardinal virtues. 59