“to bring to your attention, what essential knowledge can be derived here by philosophical
observers, and what additional insights into the very early works of the creation they may
occasion in us.”120
Tellingly, van Marum did not restrict such statements to situations in which he might have felt
obliged to make them in order to pacify his audience. As was described in the previous
section, van Marum for instance gave a series of lectures before a larger audience after the
French Revolutionary Armies had conquered the Dutch Republic. Although he emphasised
the utilitarian aspects of his research and science in general in these lectures, he did not omit
frequent references to the Creator. (Although, interestingly, they became ever more frequent
as the years progressed and French influence began to wane.) During his second lecture for
instance, after having demonstrated an experiment concerning the properties of air, he stated:
“You [unreadable] see therefore from this first example (and you will many times be able to
observe the same in the following lessons), You see therefore, I say, from this first example of
the limitation of our mind that the study of Physics [Natuurkunde] is particularly suited to
induce man to form humble [unreadable] conceptions of his intellectual powers, and thus to
guard him from priding himself overmuch in his cleverness or his deep insight into the true
nature of things.” 121
And while this could still be construed as a general appeal to be humble in view of nature’s
complexity, just a few sentences later van Marum left no doubt as to whom he thought was
behind this complexity:
“The Creator has endowed Man with such intellectual powers, to be able to understand the
Nature of things to such an extent as can be useful for the satisfaction of his needs and the
augmentation of his pleasures in the present life.”
Although he was then quick to emphasise how the study of nature could lead to practical
applications, perhaps also in view of the French occupiers’ penchant for utilitarianism:
“Let us therefore continue to devote part of our time to this science, and in particular to the
most useful and the most applicable parts of it.”
12° onder het oog te brengen, welke wezentlijke kennis hier uit voor wijsgeerige beschouwers te verkrijgen
is, en tot welke verdere inzichten in de zeer vroege werken der schepping, zij ons aan leiding geeven kunnen.”
“Geologische Leszen bij Teylers Stichting 1798-1803”, 22.03.1799, Haarlem, NHA, Archief van Marum, vol.
529, nr. 6, fol. 39.
121 “GijE [unreadable] ziet dus uit dit eerste voorbeeld (en dergelijken zult Gij i n ’t vervolg van deeze lessen
veelmaalen kunnen op merken) GijE ziet dus zeg ik, uit dat eerste voorbeeld der beperktheid van ons vemuft dat
de beoeffening der Natuurkunde eigenaardig geschikt is om den mensch zieh van zijne verstandlijke Vermögens
nedriee [unreadable] begrippen te dien vormen, en hem dus te behoeden van zieh niet al te veel op zijne
schranderheid o f diep doorzicht in den waaren aart der dingen te laaten voorstaan.”; below: “De Schepper heeft
den Mensch wel zo veel verstandlijke Vermögens ingelegd, om de Natuur der dingen in zo verre te kunnen
inzien, als ter vervulling zijner behoeftens, en ter vermeerdering zijner genoegens in dit tegenwoordige leven kan
nuttig zijn.”; “Laat ons dan voortgaan een gedeelte van onzen tijd aan deeze wetenschap, en bijzonderlijk aan de
nuttigste en meest toepasselijke deelen van dezelve te besteeden.” “Openbare lessen in 1795 & 1796”,
11.11.1795, Haarlem, NHA, Archief van Marum, vol. 529, nr. 12.
Similarly, van Marum would not have had to quote Priestley in the closing remarks of his
short autobiography, which he published as the introduction to the catalogue of his plants in
1810. In addition to what was already quoted in the previous section, van Marum adopted the
following words by the English chemist:
“The more we see of the wonderful structure of the world, and of the laws of Nature, the more
clearly do we comprehend their admirable uses to make all the percipient creation happy: a
sentiment, which cannot but fill the heart with unbounded love, gratitude, and joy.”
In fact the only indication that at some point during his life van Marum might have had
second thoughts about his Christian beliefs can be found in the diary of a fellow member of
the Second Society and prominent resident of Haarlem, Adriaan van der Willigen. Writing
after the death of van Marum, he summarised: “The deceased was actually a sceptic, as^he
showed many times, but he tried to convince himself of the main tenets of Christianity. It
is of course conceivable that van Marum grew ever more sceptical as he grew older, but at the
same time van der Willigen emerges from his diaries as an opinionated man, whose
statements naturally have a very personal ring to them, and therefore occasionally need to be
taken with a pinch of salt.
3. What You See is What You Get
What makes van Marum’s professions of faith even more plausible is the fact that a physico-
theological stance chimed well with his empiricism. The point is that at heart van Marum
appears to have been an 18th century natural historian in the sense that his approach to the
study of nature was a predominantly descriptive and classificatory one, and did not include
any kind of search for a final cause of the patterns and laws governing the natural world - on
the contrary, he would have put this off as “speculation”. Put differently, van Marum’s
empiricism manifested itself in two ways: firstly, he believed in the value of observation and
experiments as the basis for any claim about the workings of nature, and secondly, he
deplored any form of speculative theorising.
It should be emphasised that van Marum was not alone in adopting such views. In fact he fits
in well with a typically Dutch tradition of focusing on empirical data and adopting a sceptical
stance towards all forms of speculative theorising, which had already been propagated by
122 Marum Catalogue des plantes, cultivées au printems 1810; dans le Jardin de M. van Marum à Harlem, vm.
I23“De ovèrledene was eigenlijk een scepticus, zooals hij meermalen deed blijken, maar poogde zieh van de
voomaamste Stellingen des Christendoms te overtuigen.” As quoted in: Bert s liggers, “De kwalen van Van
Marum- uit het dagboek van Adriaan van der Willigen (1831-1839),” Teylers Magaztjn 33 (1991): 10. The
statement is taken not from the published diary o f van der Willigen’s, but from some separate personal remarks
and reminiscences on the Second Society which he had penned, and which were published m the aforementioned
article.