The ‘Second Golden Age’ and the reorientation of scientific societies in The Netherlands, 1867–1914
This page contains an old chapter of my Ph.D. dissertation dedicated to the scientific society ‘Fysica’ in Leeuwarden, Netherlands. I took this down some time ago, but because a lot of pages still linked to it, I put it up again. However, please be advised that this is the 1999 version of the chapter, which has since been reworked extensively. I hope to put up something new soon.
A diachronal digression: the case of Leeuwarden
In our present survey of societies, the ‘Natuurkundig Genootschap’ in Leeuwarden is without question the least significant. Having said that, its enmeshment with especially the cultured classes of Leeuwarden’s ‘High Society’ shows something of the general appreciation for the sciences among the higher bourgeoisie of that city after 1850.
Leeuwarden, 1850-1914
In 1887, the director of the Leeuwarden city hospital, Philip Kooperberg (1849-1917), put together a report describing the sanitary conditions in the city. The report was the winner of a prize contest by the Provincial Utrecht Society, and followed an inventory that had been compiled some eighteen years before. In his conclusion, Kooperberg stated that Leeuwarden could consider itself to be one of the healthiest cities in the Netherlands.
“Taken together, one may say of Leeuwarden and its population that it takes a place of honour among provincial capitals, and in many respects rivals the larger towns of the country”.
However, he made one exception: the condition in medical institutions, one of which was under his own responsibility, was well below the national average, and reflected, in the author’s opinion, Leeuwarden’s backwardness the field of science and medicine. The Frisian capital had suffered some serious setbacks since the mid-eighteenth century, and had descended from a proud and influential city into provincial obscurity. The Stadholder’s court had moved to the west, and the abolition of the nearby university in Franeker in 1811 and its successor, the State Athenaeum in 1843, caused a significant ‘brain-drain’ to other parts of the country. By the mid-nineteenth century, Leeuwarden had become little more than just one of many medium-sized Dutch cities.
This tranquillity may partly explain why the development, which the Frisian capital went through in the second half of the nineteenth century, differs significantly from that of most other Dutch cities. Only limited population growth occurred, and there was but a limited degree of industrialisation. As a consequence, the existing social structures remained relatively intact into the twentieth century in the absence of a significant working-class influx. The city continued to be economically focused on the provision of commercial services to an expanding area. Unlike Groningen, Leeuwarden also had to contend with fierce economical competition from other towns in the Frisian hinterland, like Sneek, Bolsward, Harlingen, Franeker, and, starting in the early years of the twentieth century, Heerenveen and Drachten. These became industrialised much faster and drew away much potential from the capital.
That did not mean that nothing changed at all. There was a significant expansion of infrastructure, with rail and road traffic replacing diligences and the towboat system. Also, the town’s network for the distribution of water, gas, and electricity was established and enhanced. Socially, Leeuwarden was not untouched by the emancipation movements of the day: Calvinists, Catholics and social democrats all came to claim their portion of political influence. Until the turn of the century, however, Leeuwarden political life remained to be very much dominated by liberals from the highest income brackets. After that, opposition to the liberals grew, both in quantity and quality, as party politics became more and more important. This caused the municipal council to lose much of its closed, club-like character.
Education in Leeuwarden
The Leeuwarden Rijks Hoogere Burgerschool (HBS) opened its doors in 1867, four years after the passing of the secondary education law that called this type of school into being. Other cities, such as Groningen and Sneek, had acted much quicker and established HBSes two years before Leeuwarden did. The main reason for the delay was financial, with the city council and the national government, represented by the then minister of the Interior, Thorbecke, bickering over the question who was to carry the costs of the new institution, and more in particular those of the new building at the southern side of the Zaailand, Leeuwarden’s central market square. Also, there was the question of administrative competence. The city wished to retain some hold over the new school, which replaced the old ‘French day school for young gentlemen’, an institution that had been run by the city. Its status as a state school, however, placed it under the control of the Department of the Interior, which at that time also handled education. When a local supervisory board called up the first director of the HBS, the mathematician Prof. Combertus Pieter Burger sr. (1825-1908), to give testimony about the conditions in his institution, the latter refused with the argument that only a representative of the national authorities were allowed to call upon him . The board took the matter high, yet the ensuing controversy could alter neither Burger’s resolve nor the unquestionable validity of his assessment. Eventually, the committee was forced to admit defeat after the intervention of the minister of the Interior, Fock.
Before becoming director of the Leeuwarden HBS, Burger had served in a variety of educational capacities, among others as a professor of mathematics at the Polytechnic School in Delft, a title he maintained after obtaining the post of director in Leeuwarden. He was a figure of some weight, which becomes evident from his long-standing chairmanship of the Dutch association of teachers in secondary education (Vereeniging van leeraren aan inrichtingen van M.O.) and his participation in several exam committees. Pieter Jelles Troelstra, a pupil of the Leeuwarden HBS and later a leading figure in the Dutch social democrat movement and, expressed his high opinion of Burger, to the cost of the other teachers, in his memoirs of 1927:
“This man had great pedagogic gifts, which most teachers were wanting. In my opinion it would serve a purpose to demand of teachers at institutes of secondary and higher learning that they possess at least the same knowledge of pedagogics as is required of common teachers”.
Another difficult point was the relation between state-run HBS and the communal primary schools. In 1873, a primary-school teacher, De Ruyter, complained to the city that the HBS did not take the level of training into consideration when admitting students, and that consequently many of his pupils had difficulty adjusting to their new school. De Ruyter therefore attempted to persuade them to receive their training in private lessons from him, a move which greatly infuriated Burger. In this case, Burger counted on the help of the alderman in charge of education, Baron W.J. Van Welderen Rengers. However, Rengers was unable to be of much assistance, which sparked some animated discussion between them. It is typical in this case and others, that these professional disagreements never pervaded their personal relationship. The fact that such affairs were generally played out rather low-key, was not illogical when one comes to consider that as members of the Leeuwarden ‘High Society’, both men met one another on a regular basis in a variety of capacities.
One of these was their mutual membership of the local learned society. This ‘Natuurkundig Genootschap’ was established in the closing days of the Dutch Republic. Although the first set of regulations mentions 1795 as the year of establishment, the first efforts to found a scientific society in the capital of Friesland go back to approximately 1792. In those days, Friesland was one of the richer provinces of the Dutch Republic, and had steered through the political unrest of the 1780s and 1790s with relative ease. It possessed a university and later an Athenaeum in Franeker which, however, was to be disbanded in 1811, leaving it largely dependant upon Groningen for academic training. This created significant ill feeling in Friesland towards the French regime. Also, it caused a marked loss of interest in the affairs of the Society. There was a slight revival at the end of the 1820s, but when the Franeker State Athenaeum went the same way as its predecessor in 1843, higher education effectively disappeared from Friesland and the society suffered another heavy blow.
Statutory development of the society
The first laws of the society were issued in 1795, and another set was not to follow until 1830. After that, also, statutory changes were few and far between. The statutes of 1830 contained the following statement of purpose:
“The purpose of the scientific society of Leeuwarden is the teaching and spreading of useful knowledge in the several disciplines of the natural sciences and of other sciences relating to it”.
The first major overhaul of these statutes was to be undertaken in 1851, at which time the society’s purpose was also slightly altered:
“The purpose of the society is the practice of the natural sciences”.
This was to remain unchanged after that time. The statutes of 1851 further offered members the opportunity to meet in summer and winter, when experiments could be conducted and lectures held. They were invited and expected to divide the latter among themselves. For that purpose, members had a collection of scientific instruments and the contents of the society’s library at their disposal, plus an allowance of three guilders. A difference was made between ‘working’ members, i.e. those that actively participated in the scientific discourse of the society, and others. Everyone above the age of eighteen was allowed membership, which had to be approved by two-thirds of the other members.
If one trend is to be discerned from the statutory evolution of the society, it is a gradual decrease in the intensity of its activities and the demands on its members. Following the statutes of 1851, members were supposed to attend meetings in summer and winter, to deliver lectures using the society’s collection of objects and books, and to actively contribute to the expansion of that collection. The summer meetings were abolished in 1872, since
” Usually this brought little and was limited to a cosy chat or some microscopic observations”.
In 1883, speakers from outside were given the opportunity to deliver as well, and from 1901 onwards this honour was granted to invited speakers only. This, and the sale of the collection from 1908, effectively reduced the society to a lecture forum.
Indeed, during the last decade of the nineteenth century this was generally perceived to be the most effective method of furthering public knowledge, and, although the statutes were less explicit on this point, the feeling among the board was very much that popularising science was one of its main aims. On the other hand, there were frequent complains that the membership failed to lived up to intended standards:
“One can, when treating this or that subject, only proceed from a very modest starting point, without being able to proceed much”.
However, judging from the number of members, the choice for external speakers eventually reaped its rewards.
The collection was another sensitive point. After the closure of the Franeker University, a large part of that institute’s collection was donated to the society in Leeuwarden, including one of Eyse Eysinga’s planetariums. Extensive investment in the collection took place in 1878, when a dynamo-electric machine, an electric lamp and a two-horsepower gas engine were purchased to fill the society’s new quarters on the Zaailand.
By the end of the century, however, the collection had lost much of its utility; the invited speakers did not use it in any case, and most of the items had become seriously outdated. Those that were not, showed an uncanny tendency for developing defects:
“Dr. van Rijn declares to have found, together with Dr. Groneman, that the gas engine possesses a leak, the repair of which with a new foundation would cost no less than ƒ95. The dynamo is in order, but not from this time […] Dr. Kappers again points at the costs of maintenance, which are colossal. Mr. Vogel remarks, that the arc-lamp is also defective”.
It was not until 1908, however, that the decision was taken to sell the entire collection. The library had been disposed of long before that time.
An important development for the society was the introduction of guests to the meetings. The statutes of 1872 first gave members the opportunity to take along inmates for a fee of three guilders, offering a welcome source of additional income to the society. This possibility was opened further through the years, until after 1910 the number of guests far exceeded the number of regular members.
Membership
As discussed, by the third decade of the nineteenth century the society was in some trouble, with its membership reduced to no more than ten, four above the statutory obligation for disbandonment. In 1829 a modest revival occurred, with numbers rising from 10 to 28. This induced the society to limit the membership to forty, since its modest quarters would not allow for more occupants.
Membership generally continued to grow through the latter half of the nineteenth century, but the society encountered several crises in that time. The first serious setback occurred in 1859, when a cholera epidemic once again reduced the ranks of the society. Contributing factors were also the competition from the ‘Vereeniging Nijverheid’ and complaints about the height of the yearly subscription and the admission fee, which was seen as excessive in a time of economic stringency.
A more structural problem was presented by the lessening enthusiasm of the members themselves to give talks on meetings. During the 1860s, there were increasing problems to fill the programme, and in the years between 1870 and 1872 no meetings were held at all because of a lack of speakers. These problems were addressed at a meeting in 1872, originally intended to abolish the society altogether. However, a proposal to this effect was rejected in favour of one to re-structure the organisation. Summer meetings were abolished, and a separation was made between scientific meetings and domestic meetings, all of which were to take place between October and March. Furthermore, the membership fee was drastically reduced from an annual ƒ 10,- to ƒ 5,-, and the admission fee done away with entirely. The effects were immediate, with numbers rising to almost 60 by 1875, well above the limit of 40 and well above the capacity of the society’s quarters. Having found new confidence, it was decided that new rooms were necessary, and in 1878 the old building of the municipal savings bank at the Zaailand, in the centre of Leeuwarden, was purchased. This also offered the possibility to extend the collection with a few experimental instruments, the use of which remained problematic, as we have seen.
When Burger, then chairman, wrote his short history of the society on account of its centennial in 1895, he did so with little confidence in a very much prolonged existence:
“Times have changed [...] Criticism at lectures is rising and attendance decreasing, because one does not have to take into account that one is judged oneself. Moreover, there is heavy competition from other forms of ‘entertainment’ in theatres, music halls, etc.”.
This is another indication that the society had come to see its raison d’existence in the spreading of scientific knowledge among the public at large. As such, it had to compete with alternative forms of ‘entertainment’ in the city. This was a kind of competition radically different with that with the ‘Nijverheid’ society in the 1860s and 1870s.
It was not only to external factors that the demise of the society was contributed, though: a very lively board meeting in 1896, organised once again to discuss proposals for abolition, reveals that the board was also questioning its own ways of furthering science. Again, a proposal to suspend activities was brought to the table and rejected. To modernise the organisation and to bring it in line with the ‘changing demands of our time’, the decision was taken to invite talented speakers from outside, and thus give the audience the opportunity to acquaint itself with the very latest scientific developments.
That this course was not without success, becomes evident from the rise in the number of members thereafter. From 1895 onward, the yearly programme of the society was limited to six or seven lectures a year, attended by members and paying guests. The statutes of 1908 further institutionalised their admission, and from that time on their number can be seen to exceed the number of regular members.
We have little indication of the precise composition of the society’s membership before 1910. The older lists of members mention academic and aristocratic titles, and every so often a member’s profession insofar as relevant for his membership (e.g., pharmacists).
In his dissertation about the economic development of Leeuwarden in the years between 1850 and 1914, Rolf van der Woude published a list of people in Leeuwarden’s highest income brackets. Comparison of these data with the membership lists demonstrates, that no clear correlation exists between the society and the financial élite of the city, with a few notable exceptions (e.g., W.J. van Welderen Rengers). However, many of the top incomes went to people that were either retired or living off interest; a group not conspicuous for their social involvement. What is apparent is the prominent place of the nobility on the membership sheet. Virtually all (male) members of the most important noble families in Leeuwarden (i.e. Van Eijsinga, Van Welderen Rengers, Van Harinxma thoe Slooten, and Van Haersma Buma) were members of the society at one time or another, which doubtless enhanced its social status and defined its upper-class character. This impression is reinforced by the evident overlap between the membership and the composition of the city council. However, to represent the society as a kind of salon for the aristocracy would be a mistake. Aristocrats, for instance, seldom filled board positions. Instead, the teaching body of the local HBS left its mark on the board from the founding years of the school onward, supplying three of its most prominent chairmen: C.P. Burger, J.J. van Rijn and J. Ariëns Kappers.
The political identity of the society – if there is one – is difficult to establish, but one thing that is clear is the conspicuous presence of hygienists. Especially the physicians Jacob Baart de Lafaille (1839-1918; also referred to as Baart de la Faille), Simon Coronel Sr. (1827-1892), and the aforementioned Philip Kooperberg, were active in this liberal movement for the improvement of sanitary conditions for the people. Starting in the summer of 1886 these men founded a ‘health colony’; excursions for children of the poor to more healthy surroundings, usually on the isles of Schiermonnikoog or Vlieland. The driving force between this undertaking was its longtime chairman Baart de Lafaille, who also served as a city council member from 1874 to 1911. His involvement in the area of public sanity even brought Leeuwarden some national fame as a place of initiative in this field. One such undertaking was the introduction of health studies into the curriculum of a future HBS for girls. In the city council, support for Baart de lafaille’s initiatives usually came from its non-patrician members, who had most to gain from these measures. Others were far less enthusiastic about his capital-consuming schemes, and a proposal to introduce water sanitation was duly rejected. The actual achievements of the movement therefore remained limited.
If Baart de Lafaille’s political orientation might be a bit too much to the left for some, the same could be said with even greater justification of one of the society’s more remarkable chairmen. Having started out a liberal, the physician and teacher Vitus Jacobus Bruinsma (1850-1916) soon found himself sympathising with the socialist movement spearheaded by Ferdinand Domela Nieuwenhuis’ Social Democratic Union, of which he was a member for a short time in 1893. Likewise, his other activities show his activism: together with his elder brother he wrote a pamphlet against quackery, and in 1882 he founded the ‘Vereeniging tegen de kwakzalverij’, a society devoted to the combat of medical malpractice. Bruinsma headed the Leeuwarden society from 1886 until 1890, at which point he left both the society and his own ‘Vereeniging tegen de kwakzalverij’ in reaction to what he considered to be a inexpertised judgment by the Leeuwarden court in an anti-quackery case. However, Bruinsma seems to have presented the political extreme of the society (which makes his election to the chair all the more remarkable) and in any case his political convictions are not noticeable in his society work, apart from a logical preference for hygienist viewpoints.
The printed membership lists that appear after 1910 contain addresses and thus give us some insight into the social environment from which the organisation drew its members. A fairly large portion of them comes from new districts erected on the east side of the city. Leeuwarden only expanded beyond the city walls shortly after the turn of the century, with the single exception of the Schrans, a quarter directly adjacent to the south side of the city, but administratively separate. The Spanjaardslaan in the west, and the area around the Vliet and Emmakade in the east of the city, contained relatively expensive new housing for the bourgeoisie. In 1914, out of a total of 149 members, 51 lived in these areas. Another 59 had their residence in the more prosperous areas of the inner city, along the large canals. This means that well over two-thirds of the members must have been fairly prosperous.
The share of academically trained members is also difficult to establish precisely, since until the late nineteenth century most graduates were not awarded a prefixed title, which remained reserved for doctors, vicars, and lawyers. However, if we take the number of titled members (those with Mr. or Dr. attached to their name), the trend is towards a greater participation of academically instructed members towards approximately 1890, and a decrease thereafter. A reason for this relative decrease may be found in the diminishing opportunities for members to take part in scientific activities within the society. Conversely, the membership as a whole continued to grow, as did the absolute number of academically trained members.
It is far more difficult to obtain information about the provenance of the guests. From 1908 on, however, they are categorised according to profession and age. Whereas attendance from the different profession varies somewhat, there is a stable factor in the slowly growing number of youth guests. Also, the sharp decline in member and guest numbers which the society experienced in 1916 is not reflected in the amount of younger guests, as they were predictably less influenced in their daily routine by the difficult circumstances of war times than older people.
Objects of study
The records of the society are not complete with regard to the subjects treated in talks and lectures. Complete information can be given for two time periods: 1857 to 1870, and 1890 to 1916. In the former period, all of the talks were conducted by working members of the society, in the latter mostly by invited speakers. Closer inspection reveals that the relative attention to individual subjects is more or less the same in both batches, with one notable exception. The slight decrease in attention compared to other areas is almost exclusively to the favour of talks on applied science, i.e. industry and technology. Also, after 1890 there is a definite tendency to devote less attention to theoretical matters (especially in physics), and more to the more tangible aspects of science. This means that the emphasis on application is also carried through in the treatment of other sciences.
There is little doubt about two related tendencies that can be observed in the development of the Natuurkundig Genootschap in Leeuwarden during the period between 1850 and 1914. The first one is a gradually diminishing intensity of the society’s activities, and of the individual members’ involvement in those activities; the second one is the steady rise in numbers during the period. Van Rijn’s complaint in 1895 that the standard of knowledge among members was falling may well have been justified in the sense that the steadily rising membership lowered the average level of scientific awareness and involvement. Also, the evident shift of interest from theoretical aspects of science to more practical application can be seen to reinforce this notion.
From what can be gathered from the available sources, membership was widest among the prosperous bourgeoisie and nobility, those who could afford to live in the more expensive quarters of the inner city, and in the newly-built mansions to the east of the old city. It is difficult, nonetheless, to define a single social and political identity for the ‘average’ society member.
