This article examines whether seventeenth-century Dutch cities, which experienced large waves of immigration, are adequately referenced in modern discussions about immigration and diversity. In Dutch and international narratives, these cities are often portrayed as open, tolerant, and multicultural, thriving due to inclusive policies toward newcomers. They are thus presented as historical examples supporting openness today. Using specialized research on religious toleration and urban governance, this article reevaluates that view. It argues that peaceful coexistence between natives and newcomers depended not only on openness but also on regulation and institutional inequalities. Immigrants faced restrictions on welfare access, political participation, and civic recognition, while religious minorities were tolerated only under conditions of internal discipline and economic self-sufficiency. Social stability was maintained by protecting established residents from the perceived downsides of immigration. Seventeenth-century Dutch cities thus exemplify conditional toleration rather than open multiculturalism, complicating modern comparisons and indicating how institutional constraints shaped relatively peaceful immigration societies.
Steije Hofhuis (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: