In the Netherlands, without doubt more than elsewhere, the arrogance of Modern architecture for a long time eclipsed the richness and particularities of nineteenth-century architecture. The Dutch sobriety and austerity that Modern architecture so enthusiastically embodied seemed to be at odds with the “century of ornament.” The study of this period has thus proved to be somewhat hesitant: it was not until the 1990s that large-scale academic works and richly illustrated monographs on architects became available.Furthermore, a difficult historiographical problem had to be dealt with, that of the genealogy of Modern architecture. In the Netherlands, prevailing opinion was more or less the following: the neo-Gothic P. H. J. Cuypers and the “rationalist” Hendrick Berlage had been the two great captains of a century adrift, one that could not do without “useless” ornamentation. Both had set Dutch architecture on the road to the modernism of the 1920s. Over the last fifteen years, this somewhat static point of view has undergone a radical upheaval. Publications from outside the Netherlands have drawn attention to the modernity of nineteenth-century eclecticism such as it appeared after 1840. With their individualism, their capacity to adapt to modern demands, and their complete freedom of choice, were the proponents of eclecticism (and those of neo-Renaissance eclecticism) not in fact the real precursors of our era, much more so than the neo-Gothics and the Rationalists, prisoners of their search for “style” and their ideological links with society?The theoretical foundations of eclecticism, defined by notions of “truth” and “character,” were placed at the center of a pioneering study by Auke van der Woud. In the wake of this publication, research was dedicated to the French origins of eclecticism, to the German influence of the mid-nineteenth century, and even to that of the natural sciences on architecture, which created a scientific basis for the study of the past and transformed historicism into an aesthetic in its own right. Research likewise considered architects’ associations and the modernization of the profession. At the same time, a recent study nuanced the image of Cuypers by underlining the eclecticism in his work and by linking it with British progressive eclecticism. The prophetic dimension of his architecture has thus been heavily reconsidered, even if the immense talent Cuypers demonstrated in the area of religious architecture remains, for most specialists, unquestionable.