Why was the Netherlands such a cultural epicenter in 17th c.?

Question

I mean, I get that they were a major international port, and that there was money, both of which tend to contribute to a flourishing of the arts and sciences. But come on, Rembrandt, Vermeer, Van Leuwenhoek, and--I know I'm going to misspell this--Van Huygens, all in one century? What gives?

(I'm no chauvinist by the way--I have no Dutch blood. And the legacy of Dutch colonialism ain't pretty, but as an American, I have more than enough to explain and to apologize for.) Just looking for opinions. Thank you.

Answer 1

I am guessing that the calvinist movement might have also had something to do with it (I know that was a bit earlier, but certainly gave openings to more insight) However, I think that was the true highwater mark for all of Europe in light of the Enlightenment along with Romantics following, The netherlands were right there in the forefront...sorry, but I guess I don't know exactly but I would say all of Europe was in there.

Answer 2

When a society is very wealthy and stable, then it will have some amazing artists. It's the same with Florence in the 15th and 16th centuries. More money than they knew what to do with and the results: Donatello, Michelangelo, Ghiberti, Botticelli, etc. If the Netherlands didn't have the strong economy it did in the 17th century then Vermeer, Rembrandt, and company would have had few comissions and all that talent would've gone to waste.

Answer 3

Probably because a part of the population were so rich that they could afford to pay their painters. Meanwhile other people were struggling to survive.
You have also famous painters from other country's.
By the way, talking about colonialism, how do you think white people came into America ?

Answer 4

good question

Answer 5

it wasnt