instructions as to who was to be appointed to this position: it was not to be any random
caretaker, but preferably an “artist-painter or other connoisseur of the arts and sciences”.53 As
with the trustees and the societies, Teyler even suggested specific candidates to whom to offer
the job. All three were highly regarded in Haarlem, and even of national standing. His initial
first choice was Taco Jelgersma, who had painted one of only two known portraits of Teyler
himself, and who had also sat on the board of the Drawing Academy in Haarlem that Teyler
had helped establish with a generous loan in 1772, and of which he remained a lifelong board
member too. However, Jelgersma appears to have indicated that he was not interested in
serving the foundation in this function during Teyler’s lifetime already, because Teyler
replaced his name with that of another painter, Vincent van der Vinne, during a revision of his
testament.5 Van der Vinne, a well respected member of a long line of Mennonite artists from
Haarlem, then indeed accepted the position after Teyler had passed away.
The importance of this section of Teyler’s will can hardly be overestimated, at least as far as
the history of Teylers Museum is concerned. It is no exaggeration to say that this had
profound influence on the character and shape of the museum throughout the 19th century.
The reason being of course that Teyler had placed someone - more to the point, a fine artist —
in charge of the foundation’s collections; in fact he had done so in crystal clear terms too,
writing that the
“occupant of the house (in addition to the care of the house and the housekeeping at his
expense) shall have to look after and pay attention to the library, the curiosities and the
collections of medals, prints and drawings and everything that may be added from time to
time, arranging in proper order, conserving and preserving, as well as keeping for this purpose
a neat catalogue or register of everything;”
As already transpires from this passage, Teyler left no doubt that the collections could be
expanded too. A few lines above the passage just quoted, Teyler was more explicit, stating
that:
“the library and collection of medals, prints and drawings | ...] shall not be diminished, but
instead shall, by the said Trustees, in communication and consultation with the members of
the Societies, be enlarged, expanded and be brought to greater perfection.”56
He even indicated that the custodian was to be involved in the acquisition of new items.
Although he left no doubt that the collection was primarily for the use of the societies and
therefore of course also the trustees, stating somewhat circuitously that:
5 “konstschilder o f ander liefhebber van kunsten en weetenschappen”, Ibid., 199.
54 The other two painters Teyler suggested were: Hendrik Spilman and Comelis van Noorde. Ibid.
“bewoonder (booven de zorge van het in ordre houden van het huijs en huijshoudelijke ten zijnen kosten)
goede toeverzigt en agt zal moeten geeven op de bibiotheecq en liefhebberijen en verzaraelingen van medailles,
prent- en teekenkonst, die alien en het gunt van tijd tot tijd daarbij zal komen in behoorlijke ordre, schikkende,
conserveerende en bewaarende, mitsgaders ten dien eijnde van alles een nette catalogus o f register houdende;”
Ibid.
5 “de bibliotheecq en verzameling van medailles, prent- en teekenkonst [...Jgeenzints verminderd, maar wel
door gemelte Heeren Directeuren [the trustees], met communicatie en overleg van de leeden van die Collegien,
vermeerderd, uijtgebreijd en tot meerder volkomenheijd gebragt zal mögen worden;” Ibid.
“[...] all members of these Societies shall at all times have free admittance and access, as well
as [the right to] handle and use, be it only within the house, without being allowed to take the
least thing outside, to the Testator’s library and other collections of medals, prints etc.,
without any exception, both for their private interest and in order to enable them to debate and
assess matters that arise within the Societies as they ought to.”
Ironically, Teyler’s collections themselves did not constitute much to write home about. He
doesn’t even mention that he also owned a collection of stuffed birds and other natural history
specimens preserved in alcohol, an indication that he did not value them too highly, which
might go some way towards explaining why they were in such a dilapidated state by the time
of his death. The Foundation soon sold off the entire collection.58 His books too were not
deemed valuable enough to be kept59, and the paintings and prints and drawings were sold to
van der Vinne60. The only collection that was preserved was the one closest to Teyler’s heart,
his numismatic collection. This is the only part of his “gentleman’s cabinet” for which he
gave additional instructions to the ones quoted above: the coins and medals were only to be
taken out of the cabinet they were kept in when at least two trustees or four members of the
societies were present, and the key to the cabinet itself was always to be safeguarded by the
eldest of the trustees.61
5. Contextualising the Will: Mennonite Governors in Haarlem
The fact that his collections were in a poor state however is not as important as the fact that he
included them so explicitly in his will. Had he not done so, the foundation might never have
established Teylers Museum — which, as can also hardly be stressed enough at this point,
Teyler did not mention with so much as a word throughout the entire 39 pages of his will. As
will be illustrated in the next section, the whole idea of setting up Teylers Museum was
conceived after Teyler had passed away; and one reason that made this possible was a
somewhat liberal reinterpretation of his last wishes. This however would not have been
possible, or at least a lot harder, without the passages quoted above.
57 “[...] alle leeden van dezelve Collegien ten allen tijden zullen hebben de vrije toegang en acces mitsgaders de
behandelinge en ’t gebruijk, dog alleen binnenshuijs, zonder iets het geringste te mögen daarbuijten
medeneemen, tot, aan en van zijn Heer Testateurs bibliotheecq en andere verzamelinge van printkonst, medailles
etc., zonder eenige uijtzonderinge ende zo voor hunne particuliereliefhebberije, als omme hen in Staat te stellen
tot het verhandelen en beoordeelen der zaken ieder in zijn Collegie voorkomende als na behooren.” Ibid., 201.
58 “Directienotulen”, 12.11.1779, Haarlem, ATS, vol. 5.
9 Martinus van Marum: “Joumaal van mijne Verrichtingen ter verkrijging eener Bibliotheek in Teyler’s
Museum 1783-1790”, c. 1790, Haarlem, NHA, vol. 529, nr. lid , p. 3
60 “Directienotulen”, 11.01.1782, Haarlem, ATS, vol. 5.
1 Sliggers, De idealen van Pieter Teyler: een erfenis uit de Verlichting, 201. For more detail on Teyler’s
numismatic collection see also: Paul Belièn, “Waarom verzamelde Pieter Teyler penningen en munten?,” in De
idealen van Pieter Teyler: een erfenis uit de Verlichting, ed. Bert Sliggers (Haarlem: Teylers Museum, 2006),
93-115.