Patent instituting the Council One of these measures was the institution (9 September 1567) of a council to investigate and punish the events described above. This council was only later to become known as the "Council of Troubles," as for the moment it was presented as just an advisory council, next to the three collateral Habsburg councils (
Council of State,
Privy Council, and
Council of Finances), and the
Great Council of Mechelen. The fact, however, that it superseded these preexisting councils for this express purpose, and that the new tribunal (as it turned out to be) ignored the judicial privileges enshrined in such constitutional documents as the
Joyous Entry of the ancient
Duchy of Brabant (which Philip had affirmed on his accession to the ducal throne in 1556), shocked the constitutional conscience of the Regent, and the Dutch politicians. and
Philippe de Noircarmes (as vice-presidents). Members were a number of prominent jurists, recruited from the Councils of the provinces, such as Adrianus Nicolai (chancellor of Guelders), Jacob Meertens (president of the council of Artois), Pieter Asset, Jacob Hessels (councillor of
Ghent), and his colleague Johan de la Porte (
advocaat-fiscaal of Flanders). Jean du Bois,
procureur-generaal at the High Court became chief prosecutor. The most influential members were reportedly two Spaniards, who came with Alba from Spain: Juan de Vargas and Luis del Río. Jacques de la Torre (a secretary of the Privy Council) became the principal secretary of the new council. Only these Spanish members apparently had the right to vote on verdicts.
Organization and procedure depicting a noble family in front of the Council of Troubles At first, the council acted as an advisory council of the Duke, who decided on all verdicts himself. As the number of cases grew into the thousands in the years following the early sensational trials, this was not practicable. Alba therefore instituted two criminal and two civil Chambers for the Council in 1569, and expanded the number of councillors appreciably, at the same time replacing a few councillors (like the Burgundian Claude Belin), who had shown an undesirable degree of independence. The most important of the new members was the new secretary Jeronimo de Roda, who received the same powers as Vargas and Del Rio. The criminal cases were apportioned to the two criminal chambers on a regional basis. The civil chambers were charged with the many appeals against confiscations of the material goods that were usually part of the death sentences or sentences of perpetual banishment. The management of these forfeited possessions was also an important task of the civil chambers. The case load was nevertheless so overwhelming, that at the time of the formal abolition of the council a staggering 14,000 cases were still undecided. Aside from judicial functions, the council also had an important advisory role in the codification of criminal procedure in the
Criminal ordinances of 1570. However, the government did not leave the prosecutions to chance in the lower courts. From the beginning, commissioners were sent out to the provinces to actively pursue heretics and political undesirables. Those commissioners were an important source of cases, and they also functioned as provincial annexes of the central council in Brussels. The trials were conducted completely in writing. Written indictments were produced that had to be answered in writing by the defendants. The verdicts were in writing also. The verdicts generally had little basis in law as it was understood at the time. The accusation was usually
crimen laesae majestatis or high treason. This, of course, was a crime well-founded in
Roman law (which was still followed in the Netherlands at the time). The content was nebulous. The councillors (and Alba himself) made it up as they went according to the exigencies of the situation. Many contemporaries viewed the proceedings as purely arbitrary. The fact that the proceedings seemed to have been guided only by verbal instructions of Alba did little to ameliorate this impression.
Notorious cases The most notorious cases were those of the political elite of the Netherlands. Alba indicted most members of the former Council of State in late 1567. Most indictees (like
William the Silent) had gone abroad for their health, but two prominent members
Lamoral, Count of Egmont and
Philip de Montmorency, Count of Horn were apprehended in September 1567. Despite the fact that they were members of the
Order of the Golden Fleece, and claimed the privilege to be tried by their peers, Philip denied this claim, and they were tried and convicted by the Council of Troubles. As regards the first objective: four days before the execution of the Counts of Egmont and Horne there was the wholesale execution of eighteen lesser nobles (among whom the three brothers Bronckhorst van Batenburg) in Brussels. Many other nobles, especially from Holland, where a large part of the
ridderschap had been implicated in the League of Nobles, fled abroad (still forfeiting their lands). Among those were Willem Bloys van Treslong (who in 1572 captured
Den Briel), Gijsbrecht van Duivenvoorde (who would be a prominent defender in the siege of Haarlem in 1573), Jacob van Duivenvoorde (later a prominent defender of Leiden in 1574) and
Willem van Zuylen van Nijevelt (a Utrecht iconoclast). But members of the urban patriciate were also persecuted. The Advocate of the
States of Holland, Jacob van den Eynde was arrested, but died in captivity before his trial ended. In Haarlem
Dirck Volckertszoon Coornhert was arrested, but he managed to escape,
Lenaert Jansz de Graeff from Amsterdam fled to
Bruges and later became captain of the
Sea Beggars in the
Capture of Brielle. Others, including
Jan van Casembroot (from Bruges) and
Anthony van Stralen, Lord of Merksem (Mayor of Antwerp) were less fortunate. Many more lesser-known people were engulfed in the wholesale condemnations that the Council issued like clockwork. The first were 84 inhabitants of
Valenciennes (then still part of the Netherlands) on 4 January 1568; followed on 20 February by 95 people from several places in Flanders; 21 February: 25 inhabitants of Thielt and 46 of Mechelen, etc. Thousands somehow related to Calvinism fled to more hospitable places, including such Amsterdam families as
De Graeff,
Bicker,
Laurens Reael, Huydecoper van Maarsseveen, , Hooft, and Middelburg (
Boreel, Van der Perre and Van Vosbergen) who would later become prominent
Regent families in those cities. The exodus proceeded in two main waves: in the spring of 1567 (those who did not await Alba's arrival), and again after a round of wholesale arrests, in the winter of 1567/68. The total number of people involved has been estimated at 60,000. Alba hoped the confiscations that accompanied the condemnations would be an important source of income for the Crown. However, Philip directed him to pay new pensions from the proceeds to people who had served the Crown well in previous years. Also, the council's civil chambers were swamped with claims concerning the legality of the confiscations. Nevertheless, the proceeds reached half a million ducats annually according to a letter from the Spanish ambassador in France to Philip in 1572.
Abolition After Alba's replacement with Requesens as governor-general the Council continued its work but it became increasingly clear that its proceedings were counterproductive in combatting the Rebellion. Philip therefore authorized Requesens to abolish the Council in 1574, if the States General were prepared to make adequate
political concessions. After the promise of a large subsidy by the States General the council was formally abolished by Requesens on 7 June 1574, contingent upon payment of the subsidy. ==Aftermath==