Zoudenbalch
The Zoudenbalch family was one of the most prominent families of Utrecht throughout the Middle Ages to the age of the Dutch Revolt. They occupied all posts of importance in the city government, possessed various lordships in the vicinity and played a leading role in the history of the Sticht. The Zoudenbalchs were also Lords of the island of Urk in the Zuiderzee for over a century, and as such played a key role in the life of that community during troubled times in the 16th century.
Introduction
The Zoudenbalch family dominated the medieval history of Utrecht by the longevity of their influence in the temporal and spiritual life of the city. The evidence of their past glory is still evident in modern Utrecht. The ancient ancestral castle of the Zoudenbalchs still dominates the Oudegracht running through the city centre and the facade of their gothic palace continues to stand proudly in the Donkerstraat. Although their chapels in St. Marie and the Dom have been destroyed and the St. Elisabeth Gasthuis and Chapel which they founded no longer exists, eloquent testimony to their faith and influence still remains in less tangible form. Ever since 1491, when Evert Zoudenbalch founded the first orphanage in the Netherlands, the Zoudenbalch coat of arms has continuously guarded over the orphanage complex on two locations in the city as a mute tribute to the fact that their charity has funded half a millennium of social work in Utrecht.The Zoudenbalchs are first mentioned in the city government of Utrecht in the early 13th century and continued to hold important posts there until the sixteenth. This was in stark contrast to the other great families of Utrecht, such as the Fresingers, the Lockhorsts and the Lichtenbergers, whose apogee was of far shorter duration.
Origins in medieval Utrecht
Utrecht was the principal metropolis of the northern Netherlands for the duration of the Middle Ages. The court of the Prince-Bishop, the wealth of Utrecht's many religious institutions and its location on the crossroads of various trade routes drew together the ancient blood nobility from the surrounding territories, aspiring ministerials in the service of the Prince-Bishop and all manner of free and unfree men seeking security and prosperity within the city walls. Many noble families engaged in commerce in Utrecht whilst serving in the plutocratic civic government of Utrecht together with prominent commoners; marriages between the nobility and wealthy burgher families regularly took place, blurring social distinctions intra muros.The origins of the Zoudenbalchs within this socially dynamic environment has not been clearly defined. They clearly belonged to the honestiores cives, the urban elite, which exercised effective power within Utrecht. The family gathered its power and fortune during the course of the 12th century and rose to prominence from the beginning of the thirteenth. In all early genealogies of the family mention is made of marriages with damsels belonging to the Uten Goye Viscounts of Utrecht, the Lords of Langerak and the Van Damasche family – all of impeccable noble blood − yet the family's first appearances in recorded history suggests they were prominent citizens of Utrecht rather than members of the nobility.
Amongst the first Zoudenbalchs cited in Utrecht are:
- Petrus Soldenbalch, cited 1227, Alderman of Utrecht 1230–31.
- Jacobus Soldenbalch, cited in 1230 as burgher of Utrecht, subsequently as Councillor and in 1245 as Alderman of Utrecht.
- Jacobus die Soudenbalch, cited 1290.
- Frederick Soudenbalch, cited mentioned 28 August 1278 together with other noblemen of the Sticht who signed a treaty with the Count of Holland; he was Alderman of Utrecht. He is considered to be the progenitor of the prominent Zoudenbalchs of later date.
The Zoudenbalchs in the Schism of Utrecht
Despite their prominence the family does not appear to have played a key role in the party feuds which erupted in Utrecht, as they did elsewhere in the Netherlands and France, during the course of the 14th century. This changed radically in the 15th century when the Zoudenbalchs took a leading role in the various partisan struggles which continually rocked the political and religious life of Utrecht.
In 1423 a struggle arose within the Sticht between the pro-Burgundian and anti-Burgundian parties. Following their usurpation of the comtal rights to Holland the Burgundian dynasty aimed to place a client Prince-Bishop in the see of Utrecht, with the intent of consolidating their territorial grasp on their Netherlandish domains. The Burgundian candidate, Zweder van Culemborg, failed to secure the support of the greater part of the nobility and clergy of the Sticht despite the support of the Pope. The Chapters of the Sticht elected Rudolf van Diepholt as their Prince-Bishop, and civil war broke out. The Pope excommunicated all those who supported Rudolf, but the notables and population of the Sticht stood firmly by their candidate who ruled effectively as Prince-Bishop until peace was made and the Duke of Burgundy and the Pope also recognised Rudolf as such.
During this struggle, known as the Schism of Utrecht, Hubert Soudenbalch, firmly supported the pro-Burgundian party of Zweder van Culemborg. In May 1427 he participated in Zweder van Culemborg's failed coup in Utrecht and as a result was banished from Utrecht with his family. The Zoudenbalchs were obliged to remain in exile for almost 7 years and stayed in Leiden where they are mentioned in 1430. Following the reconciliation between Rudolf van Diepholt and the pro-Burgundian party the Zoudenbalchs were able to return to Utrecht, where they are cited again from February 1435.
The Zoudenbalchs in the struggle between Brederode and Burgundy
Following the death of Prince-Bishop Rudolf van Diepholt in 1455, the Burgundian dynasty once again set out to place a client bishop on the vacant see of Utrecht. Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy, therefore put his bastard son, David of Burgundy, forward as candidate with the support of the papacy. As was their right however, the Chapters of Utrecht in their turn once again elected an own candidate, Gijsbrecht van Brederode, as Prince-Bishop. The simmering party feud between the anti-Burgundian and largely aristocratic "Lichtenbergers" and the pro-Burgundian "Lokhorsten" broke out again with renewed intensity and civil war loomed. Philip the Good was not prepared to tolerate any resistance to his expansionist dynastic policy and promptly invaded the Sticht, laying siege to Utrecht. Under threat of violence Bishop-Elect Gijsbrecht van Brederode was forced to renounce his rights to the see and David of Burgundy was enthroned in the Dom of Utrecht.The Zoudenbalchs had been staunch supporters of Gijsbrecht van Brederode and continued to remain close to him after his deposition. Gijsbrecht was given various highly profitable and prestigious clerical titles and prebends to compensate for the loss of his bishopric, including the right to retain his prestigious office of Provost of the Dom of Utrecht. As Provost he appointed his friend and ally against Burgundy, the Dom Canon Evert Soudenbalch, to act as his Socius and Officius. Furthermore, in 1470 Evert also succeeded Gijsbrecht in his office of Provost of Sint Servaas in Maastricht.
Evert's brother, Gerrit Zoudenbalch, had married Geertruida van Zuylen van Natewisch, daughter of Johan van Zuylen van Natewish, Lord of Natewisch and Zuylenstein,. This Johan was at one time Mayor of Utrecht and a key supporter of Gijsbrecht's bid for the bishopric. Johan was a principal figure amongst the nobles and clergy who swore fealty to Gijsbrecht at Rhenen on 9 April 1456 four months prior to the Burgundian coup. Although Johan later reconciled himself with the Burgundian party and at one time acted as Councillor to David of Burgundy, this alliance between the Zoudenbalchs and the Zuylen van Natewisches pre-figured and certainly influenced Gerrit's key anti-Burgundian stance in the Utrecht Civil War over twenty years later.
David of Burgundy was thus finally accepted as Prince-Bishop by the Chapters and nobility of the Sticht under Burgundian force-majeure but the latter parties continued to jealously guard over the local privileges and usages of the Sticht. Over the following years David's authoritarian style of government and his attempts at centralisation led to ever-worsening conflicts with local church notables, the aristocracy and the patriciate. The aristocratic "Lichtenberger" party in the city of Utrecht, under the leadership of Gerrit Zoudenbalch, came to align itself more and more with the Hollandish "Hook" party which was intent on resisting the Burgundian drive to centralisation in the County of Holland. By the last quarter of the 15th century the two parties -commonly known as Hooks- were acting with one accord in resisting Burgundian hegemony with political guile and occasional violence in both territories.
The Zoudenbalchs and the outbreak of the Utrecht Civil War
The unexpected death of Duke Charles the Bold in 1477, who was succeeded by his young and inexperienced daughter Maria, opened the floodgates of latent anti-Burgundian sentiments in the Netherlands. In the Sticht a vicious civil war broke out between the States and Bishop David regarding the Episcopal High Court which had replaced the various local courts, in contravention of the traditional rights of the States. David of Burgundy was no longer welcome in the city of Utrecht or in the other cities of the Sticht and he retired with his partisans to his favourite castle in Wijk bij Duurstede.Simultaneous to this battle of wills in the Sticht, civil war broke out in Holland between the anti-Burgundian Hook and the pro-Burgundian Cod parties. Archduke Maximilian I of Habsburg, who had married the Burgundian heiress, Mary of Burgundy, shortly after her father's death, faced threats to the Burgundian heritage from all sides and was initially unable to intervene decisively in Holland. The Hook party in Holland was led by Reinier van Broeckhuysen, a nephew of the former Bishop-Elect Gijsbrecht van Brederode. In 1481 Reinier managed to shortly capture Leiden with an army of Hook exiles but was ultimately forced to abandon the city to the more powerful Habsburg forces. He and his army then sought refuge in the Sticht where they stood under the protection of the energetic and ferocious Viscount January of Montfoort, leader of the anti-Burgundian forces in the bishopric. The Viscount, with the support of the Zoudenbalchs and other anti-Burgundian notables, then effectively staged a coup in the city government of Utrecht, ejecting the pro-Burgundian regents from their offices and thus ensuring that the council was fully committed to the Hook cause. War between the Burgundian's Habsburg heirs and the Hooks of Holland and Utrecht became inevitable.
Gerrit Zoudenbalch had played an active role from 1459 in the civic life of Utrecht as Mayor, Alderman and Councillor. Like many noblemen in Utrecht he complemented his revenues by commerce, trading in wine with his cousin Floris van Pallaes. As the conflict with Prince-Bishop David of Burgundy worsened, he became an ever more outspoken leader of the anti-Burgundian faction. Prior to and during the Civil War he was Mayor of Utrecht and at the height of the Civil War he occupied the powerful and critical post of Sheriff of Utrecht. Gerrit's brother, the Dom Canon Evert Zoudenbalch, had become the most powerful clergyman in Utrecht following the death of his friend Gijsbrecht van Brederode, and he shared his brother's fierce Sticht patriotism. The two brothers stood side by side with Viscount January of Montfoort in the struggle for the Sticht's autonomy.
In late 1481 the forces of Archduke Maximilian, under the leadership of Frederik van Egmond, Lord of Egmond and IJsselstein, began to ravage the Sticht and the countryside around Utrecht in particular. In order to secure finances to fund Hook mercenaries to counter the Habsburg forces, Gerrit Zoudenbalch barricaded all monasteries, convents and religious institutions in Utrecht and refused to allow any clergy to leave until they had handed over their treasures. This heavy-handed action led to loud protests from the clergy and he was forced to back off.
The Hooks of Utrecht realized that they stood little chance against Maximilian's might and so decided to search for a compromise with the Archduke. In September 1481 Gerrit Zoudenbalch led a delegation of the Sticht to Antwerp to meet with Maximilian. He was accompanied by his brother, Evert Zoudenbalch, who came as ambassador of the First Estate of the Sticht. Gerrit Zoudenbalch presented a long list of grievances against Prince-Bishop David, which were later countered by David's plenipotentiary, Jacob van Amerongen. Maximilian chose to believe Van Amerongen and refused to accommodate the requests of the Sticht's delegation.
Despite some initial military successes under Viscount January of Montfoort the Hooks of Utrecht were well aware of the weakness of their position and they thus sought an alliance with King Louis XI of France, the arch-enemy of Maximilian – but ultimately all to no avail. The Hooks also sought to draw John I, the ambitious Duke of Cleves into the conflict. The Duke supported the cause of the Utrecht Hooks cautiously but not outrightly, sending his younger son, Engelbert, to join the Hook forces as a figurehead generalissimo.