The first half of the 19th century saw a continuous stream of criticism vindicating national literature as the nation’s soul and essence. The best-known manifesto for the establishment of Dutch national literature was David Jacob van Lennep’s 1827 lecture on “The importance of Holland’s land and antiquities for our sensibility and imagination” (Het belangrijke van Hollands grond en oudheden voor gevoel en verbeelding); he invoked the work of Walter  Scott and advised Dutch authors to evoke the national past in their literary work. He also composed a list of suitable historical topics, with an emphasis on the medieval past.

Van Lennep’s call had been preceded by several inaugural lectures by newly installed professors in Dutch literature, such as M. Siegenbeek (Leiden, 1797), B.H. Lulofs (Groningen, 1815), C. Fransen van Eck (Deventer, 1817), J.M. Schrant (Gent, 1818) and G.J. Meyer (Leuven, 1822). Moreover, a considerable amount of disquisitions had adressed the role of theatre in nation-building. Willem Bilderdijk’s Het treurspel (1808) advocated the writing of tragedies about the national, preferably medieval, past. In 1817, Siegenbeek requested governmental subsidy to improve Dutch national theatre in his “On the establishment of a national Dutch theatre” (Over de vorming van een nationaal Nederlandsch tooneel, published in 1823). P. van Limburg Brouwer also argued that national-historical plays could be used as an instrument of nation-building in his “Treatise on the question of whether the Dutch have a national theatre and drama” (Verhandeling over de vraag: bezitten de Nederlanders een nationaal tooneel met betrekking to het treurspel?, 1823). L.G. Visscher, professor at the Collegium Philosophicum in Leuven, pointed out that “national” nearly always applied exclusively to the Northern (Dutch) part of the country, which from 1815 until 1830 occupied the entire Benelux territory, including Flanders. In his essay “On the restoration and the establishment of the Dutch language” (Over het herstel en de invoering der Nederlandsche taal, 1825) he argued for Dutch national literature, including drama, which would appeal to both the Northern and Southern provinces.

The call for the awakening of Dutch national literature was reflected in the appearance of the first Dutch literary histories, the earliest being Hendrik van  Wijn’s “Historical and literary soirées” (Historische en letterkundige avondstonden, 1800), which was followed by Jeronimo de Vries’s “Response to the question concerning the advances and neglect of Dutch poetic literature during the 18th century as compared to previous centuries” (Antwoord op de vraag: welke zijn de vorderingen, welke is de verachtering der Nederduitsche dichtkunde gedurende de achttiende eeuw, in vergelijking met vroegere tydperken, 1808-09), N.G. van Kampen’s “Concise history of literature and learning in the Netherlands” (Beknopte geschiedenis der letteren en wetenschappen in de Nederlanden, 1821-22), Siegenbeek’s “Concise history of Dutch literature” (Beknopte geschiedenis der Nederlandse letterkunde, 1826, written 1801-09), Jacob van Dijk’s “Treatise on the origin, progress and present state of Dutch poetry” (Verhandeling over den oorsprong, voortgang en tegenwoordigen staat der Nederduitsche dichtkunst, 1832, but already written in 1790) and B.H. Lulofs’s “Handbook on the earliest flourishing of Dutch literature” (Handboek van den vroegsten bloei der Nederlandsche letterkunde, 1845). These works were written with educational-rhetorical aims and in a strongly normative, judgemental style. Their net result was to consolidate the reputation of the 17th century as the Golden Age of Dutch literature. The 1850s saw the professionalization of Dutch studies. Literary history was now being approached academically, i.e. with a strong emphasis on philological activities. Groundbreaking works were written by the medievalist W.J.A. Jonckbloet, author of a “History of medieval Dutch poetry” (Geschiedenis der middennederlandsche dichtkunst, 1851-55) and an authoritative “History of Dutch literature” (Geschiedenis der Nederlandsche letterkunde, 1868-72).

Non-academic criticism was most notably continued by Everardus Potgieter, who continued to elaborate on the link between literature, especially 17th-century works, and the essence of the Dutch nation, and Conrad Busken Huet, whose many essays concerning Dutch national literature and its characteristics were collected in 26 volumes (Litterarische fantasieën en kritieken, 1881-88). In Het land van Rembrandt (1882-84) he celebrated 17th-century Dutch painting as a superior expression of the Dutch national character. In theatre criticism, a new nationalist impetus was given in the 1860s by the critical writings of H.J. Schimmel (1823–1906), who also founded the Dutch theatrical society, Het Nederlandsch Toneelverbond, in 1870.