decades — funds were made available for a better upkeep of state museums’ collections and
new acquisitions once again became possible;18 he lobbied for trade restrictions on artefacts
deemed to be of heritage value so that they could not be exported so easily;19 and he took the
initiative to establish the “Rembrandt Club” (Vereniging Rembrandt), which could provide
museums with interest-free loans to acquire items for their collection which exceeded their
annual budget.
A measure of the extent to which his ideas on cultural policy caught on, is the gradual
expansion of “his” department: when de Stuers arrived he had funding for one assistant, but
by the time he left the department consisted of five people, including its head.21 So he had
evidently also succeeded in having his ideals engrained within the bureaucratic apparatus of
Dutch government.
At this point it has to be said that Victor de Stuers of course did not perform the Herculean
task of changing an entire government’s decade-long policy entirely on his own. There can be
no doubt about the profundity of his influence, but it is also important to realise that he would
never have been able to effect so many changes if there had not been some sort of wider
consensus on the validity of his ideas and efforts.
That de Stuers was not some kind of lone warrior, but more of a figurehead of a far broader
movement, is in turn important to keep in mind when assessing what was happening at
Teylers Museum in 1870s and 1880s. More specifically, it provides the backdrop against
which the construction of the new annex to the museum during these years needs to be seen.
2. The New Annex to Teylers Museum
As with all the other sections of the museum building, frustratingly little archival material that
could throw some light on both the reasons for its construction and the process thereof, has
been preserved in the Foundation’s archives. According to the minutes of the trustees’
meetings, the first time they discussed a possible expansion of the museum premises was in
February 1877.22 Yet by this time they had already acquired three neighbouring houses, which
would eventually be tom down to make way for the new extension. It is unlikely that the
possibility of enlarging the museum would not have been discussed during the acquisition
process of these properties, i.e. before February 1877.
Be that as it may, by the beginning of 1877 the trustees clearly agreed on the fact that a new
wing should be added to the museum building. No details as to why this decision was taken
18 Duparc, Een eeuwstrijd voor Nederlands cultureel erfgoed, 146.
19 Ibid., 14-16.
20 Ibid., 8.
21 Ibid., 16.
22 T. van Gestel and A.W. Reinink, “Het ‘nieuwe museum’ van Teyler (1877-1885),” in "Teyler" 1778-1978
(Haarlem; Antwerpen: Schuyt, 1978), 224.
are provided in the relevant meetings’ minutes, but a handwritten, nine-page account of the
construction of the annex, which was compiled after the building works had been completed
in 1885, gives two plausible reasons. The first was that the trustees wanted to commemorate
the hundredth anniversary of the Teyler Foundation’s establishment in 1778, the second is
that the museum was bursting at the seams. The relevant passage in the account itself reads as
follows:
“Many problems had already arisen, because for many years a need had been felt for more
space; the physics cabinet was too small; by purchasing many books and particularly through
the acquisition of a large number of Journals as a result of exchange, the space in the library
had become too restricted; the palaeontological Cabinet became too small due to the many
acquisitions, and in particular there was a need 1° for a large auditorium for lectures, which
are usually held in winter, 2° for a room for meetings to examine works of art
[kunstbeschouwingen] and where drawings (or something else) can be permanently
exhibited.”23
In March 1877 an architectural competition for designs for the new annex was announced in
various newspapers.24 By September of that year 18 architects had submitted plans. They
were required to do so anonymously, and their plans had to meet a fairly long list of
requirements. The trustees had even provided a basic sketch of the arrangement of the various
sections of the building, which the architects were not to deviate from. The building was to
consist of two storeys, with room for an auditorium and library space on the upper floor, and
three large rooms on the ground floor, for the palaeontological collection and the scientific
instrument collection. Other requirements included an office for the museum’s caretaker, fire
precautions, and an entrance area with some sort of monumental staircase leading to the first
floor.
The construction of a new entrance area became possible because the private houses that had
been acquired to make room for the new museum building faced out onto one of the four
roads surrounding the block of houses that Teyler’s old town house formed a part of. Recall
how Pieter Teyler had stipulated that his town house was never to be demolished, and how the
original museum building, the Oval Room, had been constructed behind this town house and
was only accessible through Teyler’s former abode. Ever since the 1780s, Teyler’s former
front door had been the - accordingly inconspicuous - entrance to Teylers Museum.
With the acquisition of the extra properties, however, it had become possible to create a new
access route to the museum. What’s more, these properties opened out onto a different road
than the one Teyler’s former house was on - they opened out onto “the Spaame”, one of
23 “Er hadden reeds vele bezwaren opgedaan, want sedert vele jaren deed zieh meer en meer de behoefte
gevoelen aan meerdere ruimte; het physische kabinet was te klein; door den aankoop van vele boeken en vooral
door het aanschaffen van een groote aantal Tijdschriften ten gevolge van den ruilhandel werd de ruimte op de
bibliotheek te gering; het paleontologische Kabinet werd door de vele aankooen te beperkt, en vooral deed er
zieh eene behoefte gevoelen l a aan een groote auditorium voor de lezingen, welke gewoonlijk ’s winters plaats
hebben, 2fl aan een lokaal voor kunstbeschouwingen en waar voortdurend teekeningen (o f iets anders)
tentoongesteld zouden kunnen worden.” “Teyler’s Fundatie te Haarlem”, 1867-C.1887, ATS, vol. 78, fol. 199.
24 For the following information on this competition see: Gestel and Reinink, “Het ‘nieuwe museum’ van Teyler
(1877-1885),” 226-228.