was therefore never “just” an art museum or a museum with scientific collections. Thirdly,
Teylers Museum was privately owned. To be precise, all its costs were covered by the Teyler
Foundation. As the 19* century progressed and state funding became increasingly important
in all matters pertaining to culture, Teylers Museum’s private ownership became increasingly
exceptional. The Foundation actually retained full responsibility for the museum almost until
the close of the 20th century. By 1982, however, the changes in the financial markets of the
previous decades had left the Foundation in a precarious situation, almost unable to pay for
the upkeep of its museum. At this point the Dutch government stepped in, Teylers Museum
was declared a monument of national importance, and an agreement reached by which
Teylers Museum effectively became a national, publicly funded museum, albeit that the
Foundation retained some influence on the way it was run.
Largely as a result of these changes in financial policy, by 1982 Teylers Museum had gone
through a long period during which little had been changed on both its collection and its
housing. This meant that essentially all of the original museum buildings - the Oval Room
and all further annexes that were added over the course of the 19th century, the last of which
was completed in 1892 - had been preserved in their original state - or at, at the very least, in
their late-19* century or early-20th century state. Guidebooks that had been written before the
turn of the century were still largely appropriate." So, by this time, in contrast with many
other museums Teylers Museum was not only of interest because of the collection it housed,
but had also had acquired an additional role as a “museum of museums”, reflecting earlier
architectural conventions and presentation techniques, and providing a tangible juxtaposition
of how they had changed over the 19th century. As has been previously said, “To enter
Teyler’s, especially the Oval Room, is to enter a “time-machine”.” 12
This, and the world-class quality of both its scientific collections and its art collection, began
to generate much scholarly interest, starting roughly during the period in which it became a
state museum.13
Such as, for instance, the guidebooks compiled by Tiberius Cornelis Winkler. See John de Vos and Joop van
Veen, “Honderd jaar oud en nog steeds te gebruiken,” Teylers Magazijn 37(1992): 5-7.
Gerard L’E. Turner, The Practice o f Science in the Nineteenth Century: Teaching and Research Apparatus in
the Teyler Museum (Haarlem: Teylers Museum, 1996), 11. Over the years, various English spellings have been
used to refer to the Museum: ‘Teyler’s Museum”, ‘Teylers Museum”, or “the Teyler Museum”. Note how
Turner refers to it as ‘Teyler’s Museum” in the quote, whereas it is referred to as “the Teyler Museum” in the
title o f the book from which the quote is taken. In Dutch, the consensus has emerged that the Museum should be
referred to as ‘Teylers Museum”, and not “het Teylers Museum” or ‘Teyler Museum”. Therefore, and because it
has been done before, the Museum will therefore be referred to by its Dutch name, i.e. ‘Teylers Museum”,
throughout this study.
13 The following publications are either devoted to the Museum’s history or contain sections which are: Trevor
H. Levere, ‘Teyler’s Museum,” vol. 4, Martinus van Marum: Life & Work (Leyden: Noordhoff International
Publishing, 1973), 39-102; Gerard L’E. Turner and Trevor H. Levere, “Van Marum’s scientific instruments in
Teyler’s Museum,” in Martinus van Marum: Life and Work, vol. 4 (Leyden: Noordhoff International Publishing,
1973); "Teyler" 1778-1978: studies en bijdragen over Teylers Stichting naar aanleiding van het tweede
eeuwfeest. (Haarlem; Antwerpen: Schuyt, 1978); Gerard L’E. Turner, ‘Teyler’s Museum, Haarlem, During the
Nineteenth Century,” in Nineteenth-century Scientific Instruments and Their Makers, ed. Peter R. de Clercq
(Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1985), 227-240; W. W. Mijnhardt, Tot heil van 't menschdom: culturele genootschappen
in Nederland, 1750-1815 (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1988); Peggy Bouman and Paul Broers, Teylers "Boek- en
Konstzael": de bouwgeschiedenis van het oudste museum van Nederland ( ’s-Gravenhage: SDU, 1988); Michiel
Plomp, The Dutch Drawings in the Teyler Museum: Artists Born Between 1575 and 1630 (Haarlem; Ghent;
This new account of Teylers Museum’s history was able to draw on all of these previous
studies on various aspects on the institution’s history. Far more than just a synthesis of these
previous works, however, it differs from them in three specific ways. Firstly, it asks some
more fundamental questions, as outlined above, and as is detailed in the following two
sections. Secondly, it covers a far greater period in history than any of the previous studies,
namely what could be described as the “long 19th century”, from about 1780 until about 1930.
Thirdly, it focuses specifically on the museum, addressing aspects of the history of the other
institutions associated with the Teyler Foundation and the Teyler Foundation itself only in so
far as this is relevant to gain a better understanding of the museum’s history. This account is
not, for instance, a history of the library of the Teyler Foundation, although this was always
closely connected to Teylers Museum.
This account does not, however, purport to be comprehensive. Rather, the history of Teylers
Museum is told from the vantage point of its scientific instrument collection. More
specifically, it focuses on three curators that were in charge of this collection at different
times during the 19th century. The first of these is Martinus van Marum, the second Volkert
Simon Maarten van der Willigen, and the third Hendrik Antoon Lorentz.
Focusing on these three curators allows for a better illustration of certain fundamental changes
that occurred over the course of the 19th century. More to the point, this choice allows one to
highlight and contrast how these three individuals — all of them acknowledged members of
their generation’s scholarly elite - thought about the production and the consumption of
knowledge, and how this in turn affected their work at Teylers Museum. Put differently, it
allows for a juxtaposition of their concept of the value of knowledge: how should it be
gained? How could knowledge claims be assessed? How were these to be communicated and
to whom? Was there - or should there be - any practical use derived from the accumulation of
Doomspijk: Teylers Museum, 1997); Carel van Tuyll van Serooskerken, The Italian Drawings o f the Fifteenth
and Sixteenth Centuries in the Teyler Museum (Haarlem; Ghent; Doomspijk: Teylers Museum, 2000); Leslie A.
Schwartz, The Dutch Drawings in the Teyler Museum: Artists Born Between 1740 and 1800 (Haarlem; Ghent,
Doomspijk: Teylers Museum, 2004); Turner, The Practice o f Science in the Nineteenth Century: Teaching and
Research Apparatus in the Teyler Museum; Freek Schmidt, Paleizen Voor Prinsen En Burgers: Architectuur in
Nederland in de Achttiende Eeuw (Zwolle: Waanders, 2006); Marjan Scharloo, ed., Teylers Museum 1784-2009:
een reis door de tijd (Haarlem: Teylers Museum, 2009); Geert-Jan Janse, Heel de wereld in een zaal: de Ovale
Zaal van Teylers Museum (Amsterdam: Nieuw Amsterdam, 2011). In addition to this literature, a number o f
studies concerning individuals associated with Teylers Museum is available: E. Lefebvre, J.G. de Bruijn, and
R.J. Forbes, eds., 6 vols., Martinus van Marum: Life & Work (Leyden: Noordhoff International Publishing
(formerly Tjeenk Willink & Zoon, Haarlem), 1976); A. S. H. Breure and J. G. de Bruijn, Leven en werken van
J.G.S. van Breda (1788-1867) (Haarlem: H.D. Tjeenk Willink, 1979); O.H. Dijkstra, “Willem Martinus
Logeman,” Jaarboek 1974 Haerlem (1974): 138-159; Marijn van Hoorn, “Elisa van Der Ven and the Physical
Laboratory of the Teyler Foundation (Haarlem), 1878-1909,” Making Instruments Count: Essays on Historical
Scientific Instruments Presented to Gerard L'Estrange Turner (1993): 278-290; Marijn van Hoom, ‘The
Physics Laboratory o f the Teyler Foundation (Haarlem) Under Professor H.A. Lorentz, 1909-1928,” Bulletin SIS
no. 59 (1998): 14-21; Marian Stegeman, ,‘T C j Winkler En de Popularisering van de Natuurstudie: Een
Onderzoek Naar de Verschillen En Overeenkomsten Met Het Werk van Heimans En Thijsse” (master thesis,
Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, 2004); Bert Sliggers, ed., De idealen van Pieter Teyler: een erfenis uit de
Verlichting (Haarlem: Teylers Museum, 2006); Geertje Janssen, “Elisa van der Ven en het Teylers Museum”
(master thesis, Leiden University, 2007); Catherine de Jong, “Gerrit Jan Michaelis: Beperkingen En Vrijheden
van Een Kastelein in Het Teylers Museum” (bachelor thesis, Utrecht University, 2011). Finally, ever since its
first edition was published in 1983, Teylers Magazijn has regularly included short articles on various aspects o f
the Museum and its collections’ history.