When you grow up in Pella, Iowa, you have an automatic version of heritage that adheres to you at birth. We all knew the story of Pella: 800 religiously persecuted refugees led by Hendrik Peter Scholte, their “Dominie,” who had seceded from the state church of the Netherlands in 1834.
That was the only story we heard in our school years, booming from overhead speakers as we marched in parades; written in black and white in the pamphlets we handed out while staffing volunteer spots at the Scholte House; taught in the fifth-grade field trips by local schools.
In 2016, I accepted the position of Executive Director of the Pella Historical Museums, I knew this story. I had lived this story. I had fully absorbed this story.
What I discovered later is that what I had been taught was part of the story.
Being on staff at a historical museum gives one certain perks in being able to look at primary documents. I was struck by the divisions that took place immediately upon building the city of Pella—churches splitting (what is it in our Dutch genes that seems to mandate church splits?), cliques of settlers made up of residents’ native provinces, negative attitudes and comments toward Scholte and his wife, Maria, who was deemed “too beautiful” to be a Dominie’s wife. (Scholte’s sardonic reply to his elders who broached the subject—“What would you have me do with her, gentlemen? Drown her? Poison her?”)
In 2022, Pella celebrated the 175th anniversary of its 1847 founding. As part of that, I was invited to speak at a conference in the Netherlands that looked at the emigration from the Dutch perspective—why did they go? What was their experience? How did a little town on the Iowa prairie settled by 800 dissidents survive?
I was stunned that some of the leading historical scholars in the Netherlands were attending a conference in the tiny town of Noordeloos in South Holland, talking about Pella, Iowa. I sat, amazed, in the back of the conference room with my translator, watching slides of Pella’s WalMart with its Dutch front; our local Pizza Ranch (which for some reason, they found incredibly amusing); and a band that marches in red wooden shoes from our hometown. I noticed that my interpreter quit giving me the translated info; I surmised that the comments weren’t all that complimentary.
But equally surprising was the reaction of some of these folks, many of whom had family members who had left with Scholte. They were a bit sarcastic, a little chip-on-the-shoulder-ish: “After all, you guys were the ones who left,” one old man told me. “You were the troublemakers.”
I had the feeling they would have been thrilled to hear that our little town had withered on the vine.
But later, reflecting, I realized I had never considered it that way. I guess we were the deviants, the rebels, “the wretched refuse of your teeming shore,” as Emma Lazarus put it.
By 1840, the religious situation had greatly ameliorated in the Netherlands; a new King was granting more religious liberties, and Scholte had agreed with the terms of these new laws. It looked for a while that he wouldn’t be leading anyone out of the country. True, the economy was in terrible condition, especially for the poor, and the iron-clad social hierarchy meant that anyone born into poverty would most likely stay there. There were those who wanted to leave for that reason alone.
More study at the National Archives in The Hague and back in Pella gave me a few more jolts. The archivists in the Netherlands had showed me page after page of letters Scholte had written while in the Netherlands, mostly to wealthy benefactors. In one of them, dated October 1846, Scholte describes why he’s decided, finally, to pull the trigger on emigration: A widow in his congregation had allowed Scholte’s church to meet in her large house. Laws at the time declared groups of more than 20 have an official permit to gather. The widow was fined, and Scholte appeared with her in court.
The letter is plaintive and expresses the complaint that he (Scholte) is no longer respected by those in the upper echelons of the justice system or the government. “There is nothing else I can do here,” he writes, adding, “It is time for us to leave.” In short, Scholte was no longer the big frog in the pond. Adding to that, I suspect, were the other contemporaries of his time, Revs. Antonie Brummelkamp and Albertus Van Raalte, who were leading their own groups overseas. The seed of competition had been planted.
In his booklet Dutch Emigration to North America 1624-1860, written in 1940, Bertus Harry Wabeke, writes:
To distinguish clearly between material and spiritual causes of the emigration is impossible, for the emphasis changed with the individual case. With the majority of emigrants, famine, unemployment, cut-throat competition, excessive and unevenly distributed taxation was the chief consideration…others shared in the general desire for greater freedom—freedom of worship and education as well as freedom from oppressive supervision and compulsory military service.
To strengthen this argument, in 1848 the Dutch government published, in the Staatscourant, statistics about those who had emigrated in 1847—the single largest year of emigration from the Netherlands prior to the years following World War II. The survey probed the reasons Dutch citizens had chosen to leave. Of the 2,334 heads of families and single persons emigrating that year, only 439 listed a desire for greater freedom of worship among their reasons for leaving. Of these, only 149 said religious reasons were the sole reason for emigration. The lure of land and a better life was the strongest desires among those surveyed.
Some asked me if my learning all of this destroyed my faith in the “Pella story.” Not at all. Despite learning that our city was founded, perhaps, more on economic and civil liberties than on religious ones, my view of Scholte was actually enhanced. Knowing that a man who had been put on the pedestal of my childhood was a real person, with all the faults and fallacies of the common man, was refreshing. This fuller story filled in the blanks of the pat script that I’d grown up with and presents a complex city founder as someone who was brilliant, driven, determined…as well as, at times, inflexible, arrogant, and needing to exert control.
If nothing else, it taught me that there’s hope for everyone.
What an interesting article and perspective. Thank you for writing this. The settlement of Pella is something that I have read a bit about but nothing in depth.
Blessings to you.
Thank you, Valerie. I, too, knew the Scholte myth well, and remember surprise at learning truths about Scholte’s and “his” people — truths that did not measure up to the myth. I have often wondered what really motivated my ancestors to make that trip with him. Like you, I appreciate knowing they were real people who struggled with day to day matters.
Helpful and hopeful. Thank you for this, Valerie. Those who ignore history are destined to repeat it. My primary takeaway is the invisibility of our own motives. The real reasons for both emigrants and those who scorned them were largely hidden from themselves. This spirit even carried over to those congregants who jealously questioned the appearance of the dominie’s wife. Absurdly comical! Too shallow an appreciation for the concept of universal sin, I suspect.
Thank you, Valerie. I appreciated all of this. Getting back stories and along side stories is always interesting.
I think the same can be said about the migration of the Hollanders from Marion county to Sioux county. It was not because the sanctuaries in Pella were maxed out. Neither was it because of theological dispute among the parishioners of Scholte’s church that sent migrants northwestward. It is well known that entrepreneurial farmers were attracted to the availability and the superiority of the soil in Sioux county. The controlled price and sales of real estate sent the prairie schooners on their way.
As I reflect on the above, I find it interesting that the two initial churches in Orange City have celebrated 150 years of existence as will NW Academy soon. Where as local farmer cooperatives proudly promote 100 years’ of stability as do manufactures and “century farms”.
You’re definitely correct. I have never found any documents that say the migration to Orange City was for any other reason than land. The Dutch had large families (my husband’s grandfather was 1 of 16!) and if the boys in that family wanted to farm, they needed land. And, I’ve never found anything that hinted that there was any discord or rancor about 50 families heading to northwest Iowa. It seems to have been extremely amiable.
I appreciated the statement “The lure of land and a better life was the strongest desires among those surveyed.” I think the same is true for those trying to enter the USA today. Perhaps we should be more sympathetic to their desires as our ancestors had the same hopes and dreams they do. As Mt 25 encourages us, “I was a stranger and you welcomed me” (or NOT). All people need refuge, freedom, and also opportunity.
Thanks for this. The Scriptures also hold “sacred” the preference that God has for the poor and oppressed, those suffering economic hardship under the heel of the wealthy. Almost certainly, my ancestors who went to Pella in the 1850’s did so partly for economic reasons. In my case, it’s perhaps too far back to know what role was played by the desire for religious freedom. If this is a “sacred cow” for some, then we need to be careful of those who hold it sacred. In India, if you kill a sacred cow, your life is in danger.
Great article, Val. I doubt that there was ever just *one* reason for emigrants leaving their homeland in the mid-1800s, never to see it again. The emigrants were leaving the only land they had ever known, and leaving behind homes, relatives and friends that they would never see again. This was not a decision to be taken lightly. I’m sure it was comforting in some instances to be accompanied by some immediate family members, but there were still parents, grandparents or siblings left behind that they would never see again. It is hard to comprehend today. At that time they had no phones, telegrams or internet to stay in touch. At best a letter took a month to six weeks to reach the recipient, and an equal time for a reply. Sending money overseas was a huge gamble, as there was no uniform currency exchange. It is amazing that events turned out as well as they did. And for that, I am grateful! Thank you Dominie Scholte and all of the Pella immigrants. I salute you!
Official government surveys of emigrants ought not be read without a measure of skepticism. It is quite likely that those surveyed would have believed that honest responses might have dire consequences. Both history and their own life experience would have taught them to be wary of any government that vigorously opposed their right to worship God as He decreed (or as their conscience demanded).
In many cases before and since, religious minorities have been driven to deceit (and worse) in order to obtain permission to emigrate. That some of our forebears might have done so I order to leave their ancestral homeland should come as no surprise.