journal De Gids in November 1873.5 In this essay he used witty sarcasm to point out what he
saw as the detrimental long-term effects of the liberal laissez-faire policy the Dutch
government had adopted over the course of the previous decades.
Inevitably, his accusatory article contained many exaggerations — in complaining for example
that the Rijksmuseum’s current housing at the Trippenhuis in Amsterdam was inadequate, he
failed to mention that others before him had consistently struggled in vain to secure state
funding for a new building and, instead, de Stuers described the museum’s board of trustees
as a group of elderly men, some of whom were so frail they were “unable to reach even the
first floor” of the Trippenhuis for their annual meetings.6 Yet at the same time, his main
arguments were largely irrefutable.7 De Stuers had identified something that had the potential
to shame the Dutch nation, and he skilfully played this card, exclaiming for instance that he
had almost felt too ashamed to admit he was Dutch when he saw a Dutch work of art on
display at the South Kensington Museum.8
It is striking just how often the South Kensington Museum is mentioned in de Stuers’ essay. It
is clear that he is deeply impressed by this institution created by Henry Cole and Prince
Albert. In fact the most prominent example he uses to illustrate the systematic damage caused
by what he sees as ignorance of the value of the Dutch nation’s cultural heritage has a link
with the museum in London: de Stuers describes how the Renaissance rood screen at St
John’s Cathedral in ‘s Hertogenbosch had been dismantled for practical and aesthetic reasons
IS and was acquired by the South Kensington Museum, where de Stuers claims to have been
utterly stunned to find it on display.9
There are more indications that de Stuers was impressed by what he saw in London. In a
section of the article in which he praises British museum policy for instance, he mentions that
there are refreshment rooms in the buildings”, even using the English term “refreshment
rooms” in the Dutch text - what he presumably had in mind while writing this, is the
restaurant at the South Kensington Museum.10 Recall how this was the very first museum to
include an area offering culinary refreshments.11
What makes de Stuers’ enthusiasm for the South Kensington particularly relevant is that he
clearly endorses the ideals that led to its establishment, as was described in the previous
chapter. Although it has been suggested that de Stuers primarily attached importance to
museums as places for professional and scientific studies12, various passages from the 1873
5 Victor de Stuers, “Holland op zijn smalst,” De Gids 37, no. 4 (1873): 320-403.
On the inadequacy o f the caricature painted by de Stuers see: Ellinoor Bergvelt, Pantheon der Gouden Eeuw:
van Nationale Konst-Gallerij tot Rijksmuseum van Schilderijen (1798-1896) (Zwolle: Waanders, 1998), 202.
The relevant passage reads: “De Raad van Bestuur, die eens in het jaar vergadert, bestaat uit vier personen,
waarvan twee door hun hoogen ouderdom (83 en 72 jaren) buiten Staat zijn zelfs de eerste verdieping te
bereiken.” Stuers, “Holland op zijn smalst,” 341.
Frederik J. Duparc, Een eeuw strijd voor Nederlands cultureel erfgoed (The Hague: Staatsuitgeverij, 1975), 66.
Stuers, “Holland op zijn smalst,” 372.
9 Ibid., 367-373.
10 “er zijn refreshment rooms in de gebouwen aanwezig”; Ibid., 341.
See the previous chapter or: Krzysztof Pomian, “The South Kensington Museum: A Turning Point,” in Art and
Design fo r All: The Victoria and Albert Museum (London: V&A Publishing, 2011), 42.
Duparc, Een eeuw strijd voor Nederlands cultureel erfgoed, 67.
essay make clear that he would have agreed fully with Henry Cole’s idea that museums
should have a civilizing, educational function, while also helping bolster the nation’s
economy. As de Stuers puts it himself, previous Dutch governments had not understood
“that museums are one of the most indispensable and most powerful driving forces for the
development of the people, for the promotion of art and industry, and finally for the increase
of general prosperity.” 1
A few pages earlier he had left no doubt about the fact that he thought the fine arts could have
a civilizing effect, saying:
“we shall not dwell for long upon the beneficial influence that the pursuit of the fine arts will
have on the general refinement and development of the people.”
And the nobleman de Stuers also clearly stated that he thought museums could have a
civilizing effect on the uneducated, lower classes “ again echoing Cole’s sentiments when he
laments that Dutch museums are not open as long as their British counterparts. De Stuers
proposes opening all museums on Sundays:
“On Sundays, I think, access should be made available as widely as possible. Lower-class
people, unfortunately, don’t know what to do with their leisure time, and it would be a highly
moral endeavour to give them the opportunity to uplift their hearts and minds when they see
the splendid products of the Creator and of men.”15
Crucially, De Stuers found himself able to actively work towards the implementation of these
ideals in the Netherlands when, less than two years after he published his famous essay, a new
department of the arts and sciences was set up at the Dutch ministry of the interior (Afdeling
Kunsten en Wetenschappen) and none other than de Stuers himself was instated as the head of
this new department and was awarded the rank of senior civil servant. He was 31 years old at
the time, and remained on in this position for more than a quarter of a century, until he was
placed on “non-active” status when he was elected a member of the Dutch parliament for the
town of Weert and its surrounding regions in the Southern Netherlands.16
Through this position and his skills at playing the state bureaucracy, he was able to exert huge
influence over the government’s handling of cultural matters. To name just some of the most
important examples: he was intricately involved in the establishment of the Rijksmuseum at its
new building and its overall acquisition policy;17 he helped ensure that - for the first time in
13 “dat de musea een der meest onontbeerlijke en der krachtigste hefboomen zijn tot ontwikkeling van het volk,
tot bevordering der kunst en der industrie, en ten slotte tot verhooging van de algemeene welvaart.” Stuers,
“Holland op zijn smalst,” 337.
14 “Wij zullen niet lang stilstaan bij den gunstigen invloed dien de algemeene beschaving en ontwikkeling van
het volk ondervinden door de beoefening der schoone kunsten.” Ibid., 322-323.
“Op Zondag zoude het - dunkt mij - zaak zijn de toegangen zoo wijd mogelijk open te stellen. De mindere man
weet helaas dan met zijn ledigen tijd geen raad, en men zou een zeer moreel werk verrichten wanneer men hem
in de gelegenheid stelde zijn hart en zijn geest te verheffen bij het zien van de heerlijke voortbrengselen van den
Schepper o f van de menschen.” Ibid., 338.
16 Duparc, Een eeuw strijd voor Nederlands cultureel erfgoed, 6-7 & 16.
For examples o f his involvement see: Bergvelt, Pantheon der Gouden Eeuw: van Nationale Konst-Gallerij tot
Rijksmuseum van Schilderijen (1798-1896), 223-224.