Agricultural networks in the Netherlands in the 19th

Agricultural networks in the Netherlands in the 19th century – the
embodiment of enlightenment progress. State, civil society and
agriculture in the Netherlands, 1750 -1900
Anton Schuurman, Rural and Environmental History, Social Sciences Group, Wageningen University
I Prologue
IN the second half of the 1970s two former colleagues of my had to write a chapter on
agricultural developments in the Netherlands for a prestigious multi-volume publication on the
General History of the Low Countries. The one – Henk Roessingh wrote about the 18th century
(Roessingh, 1979), the other Godaert van der Poel about the 19th century (Van der Poel, 1979).
Both were specialists in their fields and fine researchers. Roessingh demonstrated in his chapter
how agriculture before 1800 was everything but static. There were a lot of things going on in 18th
century Dutch agriculture – mainly intensification under pressure of market forces – and there
were many regional differences caused by different answers to the same process (Schuurman,
1996). He was focussed on the introduction of new crops and new ways of managing the fields
and new combinations of crops and other rural activities. He hoped that Van der Poel would take
this vibrant state of things as his starting point. Quod non. Van der Poel sketched, as he always
did, a first half of the nineteenth century in which did not happen a lot. Only in the middle of the
nineteenth century this started to change. What started to change: mechanization of agriculture,
the use of fertilizers, formal agrarian education. In other words – he was focussed on what was
seen from the twentieth century as modernization and change.
Why do I tell this story? To remind us that there were more knowledge networks active at
the same time; and that it may be attractive to tell a narrative as if the development happened
from local networks to national and global networks, this is often a development in the eye of the
beholder. In the 18th century most knowledge networks were perhaps local, but some were
certainly international – as we would call it today -, while others were vertical. I told you the
story also to let you know that I know my Roessingh, although I will tell you the story of Van der
Poel. What does this mean? I will focus on those who left many written resources and not on
those whose activities were as real but traces of which were mostly ephemeral.
II 1800-1840 Top down
ALTHOUGH there were in the 18th century as elsewhere some learned societies in the Dutch
Republic that were interested in economic affairs and thus in agriculture, there influence was
negligible. Like in other countries they held competitions and published the best answers to their
questions in their transactions. The direction of agricultural development at the time, however,
was mostly influenced by changes and differences in markets, ecological circumstances,
geography and institutions. The relative importance of the countryside had increased in the
second half of the 18th century (De Vries & Van der Woude, 1996; Brusse & Mijnhardt, 2011).
With the appointment of Jan Kops (1756-1849) in 1800 as “secretary general” of
agriculture for the first time someone was in charge with agricultural policy at the national level
(Baert, 1943; Van der Poel, 1949). Kops did four important things:
1) He started to collect data on agriculture through an enquiry (Van der Poel, 1953, 1954, 1955);
2) he established in each province a committee of agriculture that came together once each year
in Den Haag (Van der Poel, 1949);
1 of 9
© Anton Schuurman, SchuurmanLeuvenKnowledgeNetworks 22-08-14, 14:53
Rural and Environmental History (RHi) in the Department of Social Sciences
Leeuwenborch 2034, 2nd floor, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN Wageningen, the Netherlands
tel. 0317-482292, e-mail:[email protected], http://www.wageningenur.nl/rhi
3) he began a ‘Journal of national agriculture’ (Magazijn van Vaderlandschen Landbouw) (Kops, 18041814), in which since 1806 statistics on Dutch agriculture (Staten van landbouw) were published;
4) he created an Permanent exhibition of (agricultural) machines (Kabinet van landbouwwerktuingen).
With these four initiatives Kops had set an important step forward – then these initiatives
were the roots of the agricultural statistics (1), agricultural organisations (2), agricultural press (3)
en agricultural education (4). He had created a national knowledge network from above. These
initiatives, however, were fragile. When the Netherlands were incorporated in 1810 in the French
empire, they were discontinued. When Napoleon was defeated and a Dutch monarchy was
installed, the situation did not improve much. Within the new monarchy agricultural policy
became a competence of the provinces and no longer of the central state. Kops resigned and
became in 1815 professor in botany and agriculture in Utrecht. In the same year the physician
J.A. Bennet became professor in agriculture in Leiden and the reverend J.A. Uilkens in
Groningen (Veldink, 1970). The agricultural committees remained in place but had now a
relationship with the provincial government. The ‘Reports on Dutch agriculture’ that had been
incorporated in the ‘Journal of national agriculture’ were continued – not by the government –
but by the Dutch Economic society which descended from a 18th century learned society and
was renamed in 1836 in the Dutch Society for Industry (Lans, 2002)1. The Permanent
Exhibition moved in 1833 from Amsterdam to Utrecht. In order words, the project of Kops did
not disappear completely, but they continued in far less favourable circumstances.
The Dutch Society for Industry paid a lot of attention to agriculture. This was no
coincidence. Since 1832 this society published the ‘Journal for the advancement of industry’
(Tijdschrift ter bevordering van nijverheid) . This journal was founded by Gerard Wttewaal, a successor
of Bennett in Leiden, and two important editors of this journal were Anthoni Hendricus van der
Boon Mesch and Herman Christiaan van Hall who were respectively the successors of Wttewaal
in Leiden and Uilkens in Groningen. Apart from these more organized activities there were a lot
of other private and individual projects. The three professors published several books like the
‘Lexicon of Dutch agriculture’ (Handboek van vaderlandsche landhuishoudkunde) by Uilkens (Uilkens,
1819). Foreign literature was translated in Dutch by for example Jacob Serrurier (Serrurier &
Thaer, 1825) or distributed in journal articles by the same Serrurier in his journal ‘Countryfolk’
(De buitenman) (Serrurier, 1820) or by Evert Cornelis Enklaar who had started in 1837 the journal
‘Friend of the farmer’ (Vriend van de Landman). This journal would continue to appear until 1873.
Enklaar himself was supported by Frederik Louis Willem van Brakell van der Eng, an aristocrat
who lived in the Betuwe where he did a lot of experiments in order to improve the productivity
of agriculture (Van der Poel, 1959). He was a typical exponent of the enlightened landowner. He
published about these experiments in the ‘Journal for the advancement of Industry’.
There were many more like him: noblemen that believed in progress by applying science.
Sometimes they seem to us a bit other-worldly. Kops wrote in his Journal the story that since
November 1806 the aristocrat Strick van Linschoten tot Linschoten organized two weekly
meetings with farmers at which they discussed agricultural literature. Van Linschoten himself
explained what he aimed for. “Enlightenment, distribution of knowledge to the farmers, review
of theoretical notions to practical experience, new ways of doing agriculture were the goals of
these meetings” (Kops, 1807, p. 452).
We may conclude that at the end of this period from 1800 until 1840 due to Jan Kops
there had been important top-down initiatives to establish an agricultural knowledge network.
But, as always, its strength was its weakness. As soon as the central government no longer
supported these initiatives they broke down or, at the least, lost momentum. What remained were
1
In fact, it is a bit more complicated – Kops also published the Reports until 1828.
2 of 9
© Anton Schuurman, SchuurmanLeuvenKnowledgeNetworks 22-08-14, 14:53
Rural and Environmental History (RHi) in the Department of Social Sciences
Leeuwenborch 2034, 2nd floor, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN Wageningen, the Netherlands
tel. 0317-482292, e-mail:[email protected], http://www.wageningenur.nl/rhi
diverse, private initiatives. The most organised activities were devoted to agriculture within the
context of the economy as a whole. There was no longer a real agricultural network.
III 1830-1880 Bottom up
FROM the 1830s/1840s we are entering a new period. The Belgium uprising and independence
had made clear what the future of the Low Countries would be – two separate nation states each
with their own history as old as 1648, if not older. In 1840 William II succeeded his father as
second monarch of the Netherlands. Already in the 1830s some local or provincial agricultural
organizations had been established. In 1834 the ‘Frisian association for experimental agriculture’
(Vriesche genootschap van proefondervindelijke landbouw) was the short-lived first one. In 1837
gentlemen-farmer in the province of Groningen founded the ‘Association for the advancement
of industry in Onderdendam’ (Genootschap ter bevordering der Nijverheid te Onderdendam). As the name
demonstrates this was really a local association. Moreover, it did not restrict itself to just
agriculture. The same was true for two organisations that were created in 1841: the ‘Society in
Overijssel for the development of provincial prosperity’ (Overijsselsche Maatschappij tot ontwikkeling
van de provinciale welvaart) and the ‘Society in Northern Brabant for the advancement of trade,
agriculture and industry’ (Noordbrabantsche Maatschappij ter bevordering van handel, landbouw en
nijverheid). In 1841 there was also made an association in Utrecht: ‘Association for agriculture and
botany’ (Genootschap voor landbouw en kruidkunde). This one was clearly devoted to agriculture but
stood still firmly in the tradition of eighteenth-century learned societies.
The first new society that was established is the one from Zeeland in 1843: ‘Society for
the advancement of arable farming and livestock breeding in Zeeland’ (Maatschappij ter bevordering
van Landbouw en Veeteelt in Zeeland). This society was followed by similar ones in in Drenthe
(1844), Gelderland (1845), Holland (1847), Limburg (1849), Overijssel (1851) en Friesland (1852).
The main actors behind these new societies were members of the still existing provincial
agricultural committees. These committees had become isolated. They had no longer a function
at a national level and just could advice the provincial governments but they had to provide their
own stimuli in which some were more successful than others (H. K. Roessingh & Schaars, 1996).
Moreover, the activities of the provincial government were limited too. Therefore the committee
from Zeeland decided to create this agricultural society (Bouman, 1946) because they observed
that they functioned in a vacuum and that therefore their activities had almost no effect. With the
society they had created a kind of support group.
These societies all functioned more or less in the same way with the same goals. They
wanted to promote the interests of agriculture (as a sector in its own right apart from trade and
industry). They were convinced that the application of science (mainly of chemistry, physics,
biology, geology, but also economics) could drive the progress of agriculture. They wanted to
increase scientific knowledge as opposed to just empirical knowledge and to distribute this
knowledge. Their means were the traditional ones like lectures at meetings, the foundation of a
library with relevant publications, the publication of their own reports of meetings and lectures
and the organisation of exhibitions of machines, implements and cattle. Apart from that they sent
petitions to provincial and nationals governments in order to promote agriculture (Visschers,
manuscript).
Besides the provincial organisation local branches came into being. Half of the
contribution that members paid (often five guilder per year) went to the provincial organisation,
the other half was for the local branch. Members were mostly patricians and aristocrats,
landowners and gentlemen farmers. In the rural towns often mayors and aldermen as well as
notaries and lawyers were member. At the meetings of these local organisations they discussed
not only strictly agricultural interests, but also broader economic ones. At the time it was
3 of 9
© Anton Schuurman, SchuurmanLeuvenKnowledgeNetworks 22-08-14, 14:53
Rural and Environmental History (RHi) in the Department of Social Sciences
Leeuwenborch 2034, 2nd floor, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN Wageningen, the Netherlands
tel. 0317-482292, e-mail:[email protected], http://www.wageningenur.nl/rhi
computed that there were in 1862 11 societies with 15.000 members and that there was one
agricultural or horticultural society for every 273000 inhabitants of the Netherlands with a mean
income per societies of 4200 guilders for the promotion of agriculture (Staring). This is thus no
small matter. Within thirty years a network of local and regional knowledge networks was created.
The crowning steps in pace with these developments were two initiatives in the second
half of the 1840s: the establishment of the ‘Dutch Agricultural Congress’ (Nederlands
landhuishoudkundig congres - NLHC) in 1846 by mr Bartholomeus W.A. Sloet tot Oldhuis, and the
‘Agricultural newspaper’ (Landbouwcourant) in 1847 by dr Jan Wttewaal, the son of Gerard
Wttwaal and an agricultural scientist in his own right. Both were initiatives to create a network at
the national level. The Congress was the physical meeting place and showroom (Schuurman,
2011), the Agricultural newspaper became the newsletter of this new agricultural community.
Since 1846 (and until 1966!) the Dutch Agricultural Congress convened in June of each year in
one of the provinces. The first conference was organized by sending Dutch agronomists a
circular in April 1846. In this invitation circular several reasons were listed why it was helpful to
meet:
• it advocated a scientific approach to agriculture, ie more attention to chemistry, physics,
engineering, and geology
• it sought to establish a greater knowledge of local and regional agricultural practices:
domestically there was ignorance of what was happening in the field of agricultural and abroad it
is worse
• they wanted to create a meeting place between the people that were interested in agriculture in
order to become better acquainted with each other and work together.
More concise one cannot formulate the congress program: science, knowledge, information and
communication. The initiators of the congress demonstrated with this statement their scientific
Enlightenment roots.
Two objective were not stated explicitly in the circular but must have been certainly a key
objective of the initiators. The first hidden objective is that they wanted to defend and promote
the interests of agriculture as a separate sector. The initiators as well as the other members of the
congress came – like the members of the provincial agricultural societies - from the upper middle
class, the aristocracy, landowners and farmers. They were generally the people who were closely
involved with the provincial and local government, and often had a seat in the Lower or Upper
House in the Hague. Although they had administrative and social influence as individual persons,
the voices of trade and industry were louder in the economic domain than agriculture. Therefore
they deemed it necessary that specific agricultural organizations gave voice to its interests.
Although the goal was to create organizations that addressed agriculture, the participants also
came from the city, commerce and industry. It would be a mistake to think that at this time there
was a sharp contrast between town and countryside. The town elites and organizations had major
interests in rural areas and in agriculture (Smith, 1776).
A second (hidden) objective that has to be mentioned is that the initiators wanted to
establish a national network. From the beginning of the creation of the NLHC they grumbled at
the regional divisions that still existed in the Netherlands and were in fact embodied by the
provincial agricultural organizations. The NLHC wanted to promote national interests. Hence
one met in a different province each year. This had the additional advantage that the congress
could not be claimed by a city or region and that each year a different province with its own
agricultural characteristics stood in the spotlight. The congress discussed regularly the formation
of a national organization, but until the eighties, this was futile.
The congresses were a collection of individuals. The invitations were not directed to
organizations but to the general public. Nevertheless, an important portion of the visitors to the
congress were regulars. They were almost always involved in the organization and participated in
4 of 9
© Anton Schuurman, SchuurmanLeuvenKnowledgeNetworks 22-08-14, 14:53
Rural and Environmental History (RHi) in the Department of Social Sciences
Leeuwenborch 2034, 2nd floor, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN Wageningen, the Netherlands
tel. 0317-482292, e-mail:[email protected], http://www.wageningenur.nl/rhi
the debates. Until his death in 1884 Sloet was rarely absent. Other important members of the
knowledge network like Wijnand Staring (we will meet him shortly), Louis Mulder (editor of the
Agricultural Newspaper), Van Ackersdijk (an economics professor), Van Amersfoordt (farmer
and landowner in the Haarlemmermeer) were often present. The congresses developed into a
forum, spokesperson and showroom of the agricultural movement. At the conferences they
talked about agricultural education, agricultural statistics, the abolition of tithes and other barriers
to agriculture, the organization of agriculture, new crops and techniques. Along one took motions
to submit to parliament and the king. Agricultural exhibitions were organized to promote and
propagate best practices.
The congresses were visited by hundreds of people, even though the actual meetings
attracted rather around fifty persons. But also the absentees remained informed. Each year an
account from the previous congress was published and already during the congress itself
extensive reports appeared in newspapers, general ones as well as more specialized like the
Agricultural Newspaper. This newspaper would appear biweekly till 1892 and can be regarded as
the national newsletter of the agrarian network. In the Agricultural Newspaper readers could find
extracts from the reports of the activities of the provincial societies and their local branches. In
addition abstracts of articles from foreign agricultural magazines were published. Moreover the
newspaper informed about innovations in the field of crops, cattle, implements and machines.
Finally, it published relevant price data and other statistics. To this end the newspaper had a
series of official and semi-official contributors. In fact, there was a standing invitation to all the
readers to participate in the newspaper. Many of the provincial and local agricultural
organizations had a subscription to this journal in order to facilitate its distribution (Schuurman,
manuscript).
The Agricultural Newspaper and the conferences together ensured the emergence of a
national discussion community in the field of agriculture. But in addition, people could get their
information from mainstream newspapers or magazines like the Guide and The Economist.
Agriculture was in the nineteenth century such an integrated part of overall social and economic
life that general and certainly regional and local newspapers and magazines paid much attention
to it. When people wanted more factual information on agriculture they could consult the
provincial and municipal reports that were issued annually, as well as the Report of Agriculture –
which was much improved since Jan Wttwaall had taken care of it in 1851 and again in 1861
when Wijnand Staring succeeded Wttwaall. Part of the information from the Report of
Agriculture was published in the agricultural almanacs ("Almanak voor den Zeeuwschen
landman," 1863; "Almanak voor den Utrechtschen landman," 1863; "Almanak voor den
Nederlandschen landman," 1863; "Almanak voor den Gelderschen landman," 1863; "Almanak
voor den Noord-Brabantschen landman... ," 1863) in popularized form. Moreover, the
Agricultural Newspaper was not the only periodical specialized on agriculture. The provincial
agrarian societies also published regular report and, for example, the Friend of the Farmer by
Enklaar and the Journal for the promotion of industry continued to appear.
In the 1860s Wijnand Staring had become in a sense the successor of Kops, although
there were many other persons important and influential in the agricultural network like Mr. J.P.
Amersfoordt, I.G.J. van den Bosch, F.L. W. baron van Brakell van den Eng, E.C. Enklaar, and
B.W.A.E. Sloet tot Oldhuis. Staring was at that time secondary school inspector, composer of the
yearly Report on Agriculture – which was the most important Dutch agricultural publication at
the time - , writer of the Almanac for farmers, regular participant in the NLHC, etcetera. So he
combined public with private tasks and by informing the agricultural community he was one of
the best informed people himself. He was also a good scholar. In the 1850s-1860s he made an
Atlas of Dutch soil. He used this atlas to create ‘agricultural areas’ (landbouwgebieden). These
agricultural areas became the unit for his statistics instead of the provinces – in doing so he not
5 of 9
© Anton Schuurman, SchuurmanLeuvenKnowledgeNetworks 22-08-14, 14:53
Rural and Environmental History (RHi) in the Department of Social Sciences
Leeuwenborch 2034, 2nd floor, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN Wageningen, the Netherlands
tel. 0317-482292, e-mail:[email protected], http://www.wageningenur.nl/rhi
only improved his statistics but also helped to construct a more national statistic. At his death in
1877 he was not succeeded by another person, but by an organization: the national agricultural
school in Wageningen, because the director and teacher of this school continued his Report on
Agriculture and his almanac. Moreover, as the national agricultural school they were the
embodiment of what Staring had been striving for and practiced his whole life: scientific
education and research.
IV 1870-1920 Bottom up and Top down
IN the preceding period a national agricultural community had been formed on the basis of
private initiative that had succeeded the top down initiatives in the beginning of the 19th century.
They had been successful in shaping the agricultural agenda, in defining agriculture as a
professional activity, and in attracting attention to agriculture in the public domain. This national
agricultural community had still shortcomings in order to be effective: being a network they
spoke with many, different and conflicting voices; the majority of the farmers themselves were
not included in this network and the national government still did not want to engage itself with
agriculture (or economics as such). In other words there practical influence was still limited.
Under the influence of the agricultural crisis of the eighties and nineties of the nineteenth century
this changed. The national agricultural community became an organized institutional matrix
whose pillars were the national agricultural school founded in Wageningen in 1876, the (Royal)
National Agricultural Committee founded in 1884 and the Department of agriculture founded in
1898. With these three organizations the groundwork was laid for a public-private partnership of
science/education, market and government (Schuurman, 2013).
The NLHC continued its yearly congresses and kept hammering at its main points:
science should be used for the progress and efficiency of agricultural production in order to make
Dutch agriculture a competitive and qualitative strong sector; the government should support this
endeavour via subsidies for education and research and remove hindrances like the still existing
tithes or like some taxes; a national organization should be founded to become a solid partner for
the government; and a proper agricultural education system should be build (Schuurman, 2011).
The establishment of the national agricultural school in 1876 in Wageningen was a large
success for the NLHC. Within a few decades this school developed from an institution for
secondary education into a university – which it became officially in 1918 (Van der Haar & De
Ruiter, 1993). In the 19th century Dutch agriculturist studied biology or chemistry or another
study or went abroad, mostly to Germany to acquire a university degree in agricultural sciences.
From the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century onwards students from
Wageningen found employments in the new agricultural institutional matrix. They became the
executives, consultants and guides of the many organizations. The importance of Wageningen
can hardly be overestimated. The first director was Cornelis Jong Kindt Coninck, who has had
his education at the agricultural school in Groningen of Van Hall and from 1859-1876 was
Director of the ‘Colonies of Benevolence’. (Kolonieën van weldadigheid) The Wageningen
Agricultural experimental station was led by Adolf Mayer, a German educated in Heidelberg.
A weak point of the agricultural societies and of the NLHC has been the organization of
the farmers themselves, and especially the small farmers. The social distance between the
patricians and aristocrats with the farmers was probably too big, Besides, the societies were
reluctant in being more than knowledge networks, while the farmers needed practical
organization. At a local level they started already to organize themselves in village societies and
cooperatives, but the real change came with the establishment of the farmers alliances in the
1890s (Rommes, 2013). The farmers alliances were very active in the making of cooperatives.
Here the specific development of Dutch agriculture into a export agriculture dovetailed with new
6 of 9
© Anton Schuurman, SchuurmanLeuvenKnowledgeNetworks 22-08-14, 14:53
Rural and Environmental History (RHi) in the Department of Social Sciences
Leeuwenborch 2034, 2nd floor, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN Wageningen, the Netherlands
tel. 0317-482292, e-mail:[email protected], http://www.wageningenur.nl/rhi
agricultural organizations and the need of the new class of small farmers. It did not change the
agenda and discourse of the agricultural community – that remained a-political and worded in
scientific terms.
At the end of this period there was in fact no longer an agricultural knowledge network, it
had become a kind of self-governing corporation.
VI Conclusion
WE have discussed one large national knowledge network – the Dutch agricultural community in
the nineteenth century. It started with an abortive creation from above which did influence later
bottom up developments, although these can also be considered as new starting points. Can it be
called a network? It was open (everybody had access) and closed (its boundaries coincided with
the national frontier). It had a core of regular members who were not dependent on each other
nor was the core completely homogeneous. Within the network friends and foes were organized.
What united them was their pursuit of a national, scientific agriculture. At the end of the third
period it was no longer only geographically closed, but also professional – members were
engaged within the agricultural institutional matrix. Revealing is perhaps that the NLHC started
to send its invitations to organization instead of to individuals.
Historical events like the French Revolution and the spread of the French empire, the
unification of Belgium and the Netherlands, the revolt of the Belgians, the agricultural crisis of
the 1880s played a large role in the explanation of what happened. So did the membership of the
network: many of them were born between 1805 and 1815, finished their studies between 1830
and 1840, and died between 1870 and 1885. They belonged to the elites of Dutch society, and
met each other at many different occasions: local, family affairs, political, governmental,
scientific. In the second period it seemed that the region in the east of the Netherlands around
the town of Zutphen dominated this network, but there were certainly competing groups and
many interactions between groups. In the third period the social elites started to be succeeded by
the practitioners from the different parts of the matrix, especially by the graduates from
Wageningen.
Its object was a national agriculture, but during all the periods of its development the
network was well informed and influenced by foreign practices and knowledge. Jan Kops told us
how strong he is influenced by John Sinclair and his boards of agriculture. The journals spill over
from articles from foreign countries, mainly the UK, Germany, Belgium and France, but also
Denmark and Switzerland and the USA. Members of the network visited foreign countries, but I
have no knowledge of the fact that someone found or studied correspondences with foreigners.
The influence of the network has been mainly institutional in the nineteenth century. It
strengthened the civil society character of Dutch agriculture. The twentieth century development
of Dutch agriculture (economical, cultural, political) cannot be well explained without the
construction of this 19th century knowledge network.
7 of 9
© Anton Schuurman, SchuurmanLeuvenKnowledgeNetworks 22-08-14, 14:53
Rural and Environmental History (RHi) in the Department of Social Sciences
Leeuwenborch 2034, 2nd floor, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN Wageningen, the Netherlands
tel. 0317-482292, e-mail:[email protected], http://www.wageningenur.nl/rhi
Bibliography
Almanak voor den Gelderschen landman. (1863). Zwolle: Tjeenk Willink.
Almanak voor den Nederlandschen landman. (1863). Zwolle: Tjeenk Willink.
Almanak voor den Noord-Brabantschen landman... . (1863).
Almanak voor den Utrechtschen landman. (1863). Zwolle: Tjeenk Willink.
Almanak voor den Zeeuwschen landman. (1863). Zwolle: Tjeenk Willink.
Baert, J. (1943). Jan Kops : pionier van Hollands landbouw. 's-Gravenhage: Nijhoff.
Bouman, P. J. (1946). Geschiedenis van den Zeeuwschen landbouw in de negentiende en twintigste eeuw en van
de Zeeuwsche Landbouw - maatschappij. 1843 - 1943. Wageningen: [s.n.].
Brusse, P., & Mijnhardt, W. W. (2011). Balans tussen stad en platteland: Towards a new template for
Dutch history : de-urbanization and the balance between city and countryside (B. Jackson, Trans.).
[Zwolle] [etc.]: Waanders [etc.].
De Vries, Jan , & Van der Woude, Ad. (1996). The First Modern Economy. Success, Failure, and
Perseverance of the Dutch Economy, 1500-1815. Oxford, 1996: Oxford Univ. Press.
Kops, Jan. (1804-1814). Magazijn van Vaderlandschen Landbouw. Haarlem: A. Loosjes.
Kops, Jan. (1807). Magazijn van Vaderlandschen Landbouw. Deel 3. Haarlem: A. Loosjes.
Lans, Nathalie (2002). 225 jaar Nederlandsche Maatschappij voor Nijverheid en Handel : per traditie
vernieuwend. [Den Haag :]: Nederlandsche Maatschappij voor Nijverheid en Handel.
Roessingh, H.K. (1979). Landbouw in de Noordelijke Nederlanden, 1650-1815. In?? (Ed.),
Algemene Geschiedenis der Nederlanden (pp. 14-72). Haarlem: Fibula-Van Dishoeck.
Roessingh, H. K, & Schaars, A. H. G. . (1996). De Gelderse landbouw beschreven omstreeks 1825. Een
heruitgave van het landbouwkundig deel van de Statistieke beschrijving van Gelderland (1826).
Wageningen: Vereniging voor Landbouwgeschiedenis.
Rommes, R. (2013). Voor en door boeren? De opkomst van het coöperatiewezen in de Nederlandse landbouw
voor de Tweede Wereldoorlog. Hilversum: Verloren.
Schuurman, Anton. (1996). Mensen maken verschil. Sociale theorie, historische sociologie en
geschiedenis. Tijdschrift voor sociale geschiedenis, 22(2), 168-205.
Schuurman, Anton. (2011). Het Nederlands Landhuishoudkundig Congres van 1846-1896.
Forum en showroom van de Agrarische Republiek. In Theo Engelen, Onno Boonstra &
Angélique Janssens (Eds.), Levensloop in transformatie (pp. 318-335). Nijmegen: Valkhof
Pers.
Schuurman, Anton. (2013). Agricultural policy and the Dutch agricultural institutional matrix
during the transition from organized to disorganized capitalism. In Peter Moser & Tony
Varley (Eds.), Integration through subordination. The politics of agricultural modernisation in
industrial Europe (pp. 65-85). Turnhout: Brepols.
Serrurier, J. F. (1820). De buitenman. 's Gravenhage 1820-1829, 4dln.
Serrurier, J. F., & Thaer, A. D. (1825). Boeren goudmijn, of handleiding tot de kunst, om van verschillende
soorten van landerijen het meest mogelijke nut te trekken, meer vee te kunnen houden dan naar gewoonte,
...; benevens een aantal wetenswaardige bijzonderheden tot den landbouw betrekkelijk. Te Amsterdam:
bij S. de Grebber.
Smith, Adam. (1776). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Oxford 1976
(London 1776) Clarendon Press.
Uilkens, J. A. (1819). Handboek van vaderlandsche landhuishoudkunde. Te Groningen: bij J. Oomkens.
Van der Haar, J., & De Ruiter, M. E. (1993). Van school naar hogeschool, 1873-1945. Wageningen:
LU.
Van der Poel, J. M. G. (1949). Heren en boeren. Een studie over de Commissien van Landbouw, (18051851). Wageningen: Studiekring voor de geschiedenis van de landbouw.
Van der Poel, J. M. G. (1953). De landbouw-enquête van 1800. Deel I: Noord- en Zuid-Holland.
Historia Agricultura, 1, 48-194.
8 of 9
© Anton Schuurman, SchuurmanLeuvenKnowledgeNetworks 22-08-14, 14:53
Rural and Environmental History (RHi) in the Department of Social Sciences
Leeuwenborch 2034, 2nd floor, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN Wageningen, the Netherlands
tel. 0317-482292, e-mail:[email protected], http://www.wageningenur.nl/rhi
Van der Poel, J. M. G. (1954). De landbouw-enquête van 1800, Deel II: Zeeland, Noord-Brabant,
Utrecht, Gelderland en Overijssel. Historia Agriculturae, 2, 45-233.
Van der Poel, J. M. G. (1955). De landbouwenquête van 1800. Deel III: Drente , Friesland en
Groningen. Historia Agriculturae, 3, 105-171.
Van der Poel, J. M. G. (1959). Van Brakell van den Eng. Een Betuwse hereboer uit het begin van de 19e
eeuw. Wageningen 1959 Studiekring voor de geschiedenis van den landbouw.
Van der Poel, J. M. G. (1979). Landbouw in de Noordelijke Nederlanden, 1770-1840. In H.F.J.M.
Eerenbeemt, J. Hannes, J. A. Bornewasser & M. de Vroede (Eds.), Algemene geschiedenis der
Nederlanden (Vol. 10, pp. 159-183). Haarlem: Fibula-Van Dishoeck.
Veldink, J. G. (1970). W.C.H. Staring, 1808-1877. Geoloog en landbouwkundige. Wageningen 1970
9 of 9
© Anton Schuurman, SchuurmanLeuvenKnowledgeNetworks 22-08-14, 14:53
Rural and Environmental History (RHi) in the Department of Social Sciences
Leeuwenborch 2034, 2nd floor, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN Wageningen, the Netherlands
tel. 0317-482292, e-mail:[email protected], http://www.wageningenur.nl/rhi