Interestingly enough, the collections soon appear to have attracted some unexpected
additional attention - certainly after the Oval Room was constructed. In May 1783 van der
Vinne complained about the “many requests” he was receiving to view the museum and the
collections. The impression arises that he was talking of strangers not in any way involved
in the Foundation’s work. This prompted the trustees to decide on a “provisional Rule” to
regulate access to what they referred to as “the Musaeum”: all those in some way affiliated
with the Teyler Foundation and anybody accompanying them were to be allowed to enter “at
all times” (except at night, presumably); the same rule applied, in principle, for “well-known
inhabitants of this City, or other well-known Groups”, although the trustees granted van der
Vinne the right to ask them to return at some other time which happened to suit him better;
finally, van der Vinne was allowed to send away “strangers or unknown Groups”, and point
out to them that “the Musaeum” had not been completed yet.1 5
This distinction between three visitor categories - beneficiaries of Teyler’s will, citizens of
Haarlem, and “strangers” — was upheld over the course of the following decades, and provides
a glimpse of the terms in which the trustees defined “the public”. That interested third parties,
i.e. members of the public, were granted access was to gain huge significance as the decades
progressed, because even though the basic rule that interested members of the public were to
be granted access to the museum essentially never changed, the definition of what constituted
that “public” did change profoundly, as did the expectations of members of “the public” as to
what a museum was to provide them with. This inevitably had an effect on the entire character
of Teylers Museum. As yet however, visitors from outside Haarlem were evidently still turned
away.
Once van Marum had been appointed director of the new museum and the electrostatic
generator installed in the Oval Room, however, he lost little time in requesting that the
trustees decide on fixed opening hours for the new museum.166 What they came up with in
December 1784 was that residents of Haarlem could enter the premises on one day of the
week - van der Vinne was allowed to decide which day — between the hours of 10am and
lpm. Visitors from outside Haarlem were to be granted access every day between noon and
lpm, and could obtain special dispensation to enter the building at a different time of day if
their sojourn in Haarlem was only brief. No entry fee was required, but tickets had to be
picked up at van Marum’s, who could therefore screen the visitors.
On December 24th the trustees convened again. Van der Vinne had let them know that
Tuesdays would suit him best as the day on which residents of Haarlem could visit the
museum. At the same time, however, he protested strongly about the “burden, difficulty and
lack of freedom” the new regulations would cause him, pointing out that he had not expected
anything like this when he accepted the position the Foundation had offered him.167 He
therefore requested that the museum remain closed on Sundays, which the trustees complied
164 “veelvuldige aanzoeken”; “Directienotulen”, 23.05.1783, Haarlem, ATS, vol. 5.
“provisioneelen Regel”; “het Musaeum”; “bekende bewooners van deeze Stad, o f andere wel bekende
Gezelschapen”; “vreemden o f onbekende Gezelschappen”; Ibid.
166 “Directienotulen”, 17.12.1784, Haarlem, ATS, vol. 5.
“last, moeijlijkheid en onvrijheid”; “Directienotulen”, 24.12.1784, Haarlem, ATS, vol. 5.
with. But his frustration was exacerbated by the fact that van Marum had eagerly started
experimenting with the new electrostatic generator - “even at night” (ook al des avonds), as
van der Vinne lamented. If one takes into account that this electrostatic generator could
generate sparks of up to 300.000 volts, one can imagine the noise the discharge must have
made, not to speak of the electric field this induced. Van der Vinne must, quite literally, have
been bristling, and his complaints were a harbinger of his imminent departure, in May 1785.
14. You Say Musaeum, I Say Museum...
Van der Vinne’s complaints not only reveal his own frustration with van Marum, but of
course also prove that van Marum had been serious when he included the passage on
conducting experiments as director of Teylers Museum in his contract. Although van Marum
was soon forced to postpone his work with the electrostatic generator because of the “humid
weather” 168, he eagerly set to work on a series of experiments on electricity whenever he
could, wasted no time in getting the results published, and went to great lengths to distribute
copies of the resulting treatise amongst even the most famous of his fellow researchers. (He
managed to present Benjamin Franklin with a copy of his work, for instance. )
This is interesting on two levels. Firstly, van Marum’s work and the electrostatic generator s
sheer size did a lot in putting Teylers Museum on the map. But what is more important here is
that, secondly, the museum became known because of the experiments performed there even
though it had not originally been conceived as a place where such experiments were to be
performed - or at least weren’t supposed to take centre stage. Recall how the building was
initially referred to as a “bookhall”, how there was never any question that books were to be
included in the collections, how the entire design of the building resembles a library from the
late Renaissance more than anything else, and how the trustees were at first reluctant to accept
van Marum’s proposal of buying instruments and models for the collectionflj albeit that they
did give their full support to his efforts once they had been approved, and had not hesitated to
provide considerable funds for the geological collection.
It has repeatedly been pointed out how there is very little concrete evidence as to what the
trustees had in mind when they commissioned the Oval Room. But aside from the snippets of
information that have been provided so far, there is one last major point that warrants closer
scrutiny. That is the issue of what names were used to refer to the institution that eventually
became Teylers Museum.
' “vochtige weder”; “Notulen Tweede Genootschap”, 04.02.1785, Haarlem, ATS, vol. 1382.
169 Martinus van Marum, “Journal Concerning Physics and Natural History, and My Communications with
Scholars During My Stay in Paris in July 1785 (Journal Physique de Mon Sejour ä Paris 1785),” ed. E. Lefebvre,
J.G. de Bruijn, and R.J. Forbes, vol. 2, Martinus van Marum: Life & Work (Haarlem: Tjeenk Willink & Zoon,
1970), 221.