Table of Contents
What was the Anabaptist Uprising in Amsterdam?
The Anabaptist Uprising of 1535 was a violent religious revolt in which a radical group seized Amsterdam’s town hall by force.
It is relevant for visitors because it explains why Dam Square became a focal point of civic authority and how religious conflict shaped the city’s governance.
The event is formally recorded as Window 7 of the Canon of Amsterdam, the official historical framework used in Dutch education.
On 10 May 1535, a group of Anabaptists carried out an armed attack on the town hall located on Dam Square, the political centre of Amsterdam at the time.
Why was Amsterdam religiously unstable in the early 16th century?
Amsterdam was officially a Catholic city in 1535, with civic authority closely linked to church structures.
Religious dissent existed but was tolerated only if it did not disrupt political order or public safety.
Anabaptism challenged this balance by rejecting infant baptism, denying the authority of established churches, and disputing the legitimacy of civic government.
Many followers believed that existing institutions were invalid and that a new religious order should replace them.
From an editorial-planning perspective, this background helps explain why authorities treated the uprising as a political threat rather than a theological dispute.
Who were the Anabaptists, and why were they considered heretics?
Anabaptists were members of a radical Protestant movement that supported adult baptism based on conscious belief.
This directly conflicted with Catholic doctrine and with many early Protestant practices.
By the 1530s, Anabaptists were viewed across Europe as dangerous not only for their beliefs but for their refusal to recognise state authority or swear loyalty oaths.
These positions led governments to treat them as destabilising rather than merely nonconforming.
What actually happened during the attack on the town hall?
The uprising involved a planned, armed seizure of Amsterdam’s town hall, not a peaceful gathering.
On the night of 9–10 May 1535, approximately forty Anabaptists disabled the guards, stormed the building, and took temporary control.
City militia regrouped overnight and launched a counterattack the following morning.
The fighting occurred inside and around the town hall at Dam Square, which remains a central location for visitors today.
This distinction is important because older summaries often mischaracterise the event as a protest rather than an armed assault.
What were the casualties and consequences of the uprising?
The battle resulted in deaths on both sides, including senior city officials.
Pieter Colijn, the serving mayor of Amsterdam, was killed during the fighting, along with roughly twenty militiamen and twenty-eight Anabaptists.
Surviving Anabaptists were captured and later executed.
Punishments were carried out publicly, with bodies displayed at city gates to discourage further rebellion.
From an editorial-planning perspective, this episode demonstrates that Amsterdam’s later reputation for tolerance developed only after periods of strict repression.
What was the February 1535 “naaktlopers” incident?
The “naaktlopers” incident was a separate event that occurred on 10 February 1535.
During this earlier episode, a group of Anabaptists ran through Amsterdam unclothed while proclaiming religious messages.
The act symbolised rejection of material possessions and belief that earthly society was corrupt.
It was not connected to the armed seizure of the town hall and should not be treated as part of the May uprising.
This separation is a frequent point of confusion for visitors encountering simplified summaries.
Did the Anabaptists originate the phrase “the naked truth”?
No, the phrase commonly translated as “the naked truth” predates the Anabaptists by many centuries.
Its origins lie in classical Greek literature and later Latin usage as nuda veritas.
While Anabaptists used the phrase during the February 1535 incident, they were adopting an existing expression rather than creating it.
How did events in Münster influence the Amsterdam uprising?
The Amsterdam attack was influenced by earlier Anabaptist control of the German city of Münster.
That episode involved the establishment of a theocratic regime led by Jan van Leiden.
After Münster was retaken, its leaders were executed and publicly displayed as a warning.
News of these events circulated widely and shaped expectations among Anabaptist groups elsewhere, including in Amsterdam.
Why is the uprising part of the Canon of Amsterdam?
The Anabaptist uprising is included as Window 7 of the Canon of Amsterdam because it represents a direct challenge to civic authority.
It marks a moment when religious radicalism resulted in armed conflict at the heart of the city.
The event helps explain why later Amsterdam governance emphasised order, regulation, and controlled tolerance rather than open pluralism.
How does this event connect to later Amsterdam governance?
The suppression of the uprising illustrates how 16th-century authorities responded to threats against civic control.
In later centuries, similar priorities were enforced through institutions rather than public punishment.
One example is the Society of Suriname, established in the late 17th century to administer colonial governance on behalf of Amsterdam’s ruling elites.
Although operating in a different context, it reflects continuity in the organisation and exercise of political authority.
FAQs
Q. Can visitors still see locations linked to the uprising today?
Yes. Dam Square remains the central location, although the original town hall no longer exists in its 16th-century form.
Q. Was the Anabaptist uprising a peaceful protest?
No. It was an armed attack involving the seizure of a government building.
Q. Did the Anabaptists control Amsterdam after the attack?
No. Control of the town hall was brief, and the uprising was suppressed the following morning.
Q. Is the “naaktlopers” event part of the same uprising?
No. It occurred three months earlier and involved different actions and participants.
Summary for Visitors
This guide is intended for visitors seeking to understand Amsterdam’s historical development beyond its physical landmarks.
The Anabaptist uprising explains why Dam Square became a focal point of authority and how religious conflict shaped city governance.
For trip planning, it provides historical context that enhances understanding of one of Amsterdam’s most visited public spaces.
From Religious Rebellion to Institutional Power
The violent suppression of the Anabaptist uprising illustrates how Amsterdam’s authorities responded to perceived threats against civic order during the 16th century.
In later centuries, that same emphasis on control and stability became embedded in formal institutions rather than enforced through public punishment.
One example is the Society of Suriname, established in the late 17th century to manage colonial governance on behalf of Amsterdam’s ruling elites.
While operating in a very different historical context, the Society reflects a continuation of Amsterdam’s approach to authority.
Political power is concentrated in a small group, exercised through a structured administration rather than through open conflict.
Understanding these shifts helps situate early events, such as the Anabaptist uprising, within a broader narrative of how Amsterdam’s governance evolved from repression to regulation.