Science on the edge of empire: E. A. Forsten (1811–1843) and the Natural History Committee (1820–1850) in the Netherlands Indies
2020; Wiley; Volume: 62; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1111/1600-0498.12346
ISSN1600-0498
Autores Tópico(s)Australian Indigenous Culture and History
ResumoCentaurusVolume 62, Issue 4 p. 797-821 ARTICLEOpen Access Science on the edge of empire: E. A. Forsten (1811–1843) and the Natural History Committee (1820–1850) in the Netherlands Indies Pieter van Wingerden, Corresponding Author Pieter van Wingerden pietervanwingerden.research@gmail.com orcid.org/0000-0003-4942-5109 Leiden Observatory, Faculty of Science, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands Correspondence Pieter van Wingerden, Leiden Observatory, Faculty of Science, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands. Email: pietervanwingerden.research@gmail.comSearch for more papers by this author Pieter van Wingerden, Corresponding Author Pieter van Wingerden pietervanwingerden.research@gmail.com orcid.org/0000-0003-4942-5109 Leiden Observatory, Faculty of Science, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands Correspondence Pieter van Wingerden, Leiden Observatory, Faculty of Science, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands. Email: pietervanwingerden.research@gmail.comSearch for more papers by this author First published: 09 November 2020 https://doi.org/10.1111/1600-0498.12346 Funding information: Leiden University AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Abstract Between 1820 and 1850, the Dutch government sent several scientists to the Netherlands Indies as part of the Natuurkundige Commissie (Natural History Committee). One of these was naturalist Eltio Alegondus Forsten (1811–1843), who was sent on a collecting mission to Celebes (Sulawesi). This paper explores the ways in which Forsten was in a relationship of mutual interdependence with four spheres of influence, two in the Netherlands (those of the Dutch government and the natural history museum in Leiden) and two in the Dutch East Indies (those of the governor-general and the local population of Forsten's collecting grounds). These four entities served as focal points for Forsten's practice, and tried to use his mission for their own purposes. At the same time, Forsten negotiated their demands deftly and turned them to his own advantage in order to serve his own future career. Throughout, I draw parallels with the experiences of various other members of the Natural History Committee. I ultimately propose that this case study of Forsten provides a glimpse of a possible pattern for the relationship between government-sponsored science and empire in the Dutch East Indies in the first half of the 19th century. 1 INTRODUCTION On January 26, 1841, Dutch zoologist Eltio Alegondus Forsten (1811–1843) wrote to his confidante in Leiden from his lodge in Tondano in the Menado region of North-East Celebes1: "then I will arrive back on Java, and then, and then, and then as soon as possible with the whole bunch to Holland, to hopefully never set foot in the Indies again."2 Forsten's letter betrays his eagerness to leave his sojourn in the Dutch East Indies and return to his home in the Netherlands.3 These two geographical areas played a defining role in Forsten's scientific practice. As David Livingstone put it, science "is a social practice grounded in concrete historical and geographical circumstances."4 In both geographical areas we can identify two spheres of influence with which Forsten had a relationship of "mutual interdependence."5 He was dependent on them for success in his intended tasks, but they also depended on him in various ways. For a long time, the language of "centre" and "periphery" shaped scholarly thinking about colonial science.6 In recent decades, we have come to the conclusion that this language was born out of Eurocentrism, and that the view that the European centre directed the science of the colonial periphery is no longer acceptable.7 As James Secord puts it, "divisions between center and periphery [have been] replaced by patterns of mutual interdependence."8 In this paper, I use the work of Eltio Alegondus Forsten as a case study to shed light on these patterns of mutual interdependence and bring out both the "specifically local character" of his work and the "increasingly global network" of which it was part.9 In the words of Frederick Cooper and Ann Laura Stoler, "metropole and colony" need to be treated "in a single analytical field" because the resulting transformations are "a product of both global patterns and local struggles."10 Forsten was a member of the "Natuurkundige Commissie voor Nederlandsch-Indië [Natural History Committee for the Netherlands Indies], established by Royal Decree in 1820 and disbanded in 1850."11 As we have seen, Forsten was aware of the fact that his life alternated between the two geographical spaces of the Netherlands and the Netherlands Indies. His scientific practice in the Netherlands Indies was shaped by both geographical regions, and he was dependent on four different spheres of influence, two from each region: (a) the Dutch government in The Hague; (b) the natural history museum in Leiden; (c) the colonial government in Batavia (present-day Jakarta, the administrative centre of the Dutch East Indies); and (d) a variety of local actors, both European and indigenous. As I outline in this paper, the relationships that Forsten had with each of these four spheres of influence were very different in nature, so much so that they almost defy a common terminology. A simple alternative framework for the centre–periphery dynamic has not (yet) been developed. Designating the influencing spheres with which Forsten had relationships as "centres" is too reminiscent of the Eurocentric centre–periphery language, and also does not do justice to the mutuality of the relationships. Calling them "nodes" or "nodal points" in a network is too simple in that it does nothing to qualify the relative strength or weakness of the relationship between the "nodes."12 As such, I have chosen to use the term "focal point," even though it also has its problems. The term works best from Forsten's perspective, since for him a "focal point" denotes a relationship that is strong enough to exert its influence on his daily practice, whether through a relationship of authority, with a convergence of goals, or towards mutual benefit. For the four "focal points" themselves, Forsten was certainly not always their own prime "focal point," but one among several similar ones. However, using the term reciprocally here allows me to better qualify the relationships that Forsten had with each of these spheres of influence. Further research along the same lines will show if there is any future merit in this terminology. In this paper, I show how the demands of these focal points, which were all trying to direct or make use of Forsten's scientific practice to further their own purposes, influenced his travels; how he negotiated their demands in the field; and how he used them to further his own career. I intersperse this narrative with similar experiences of other members of the Natural History Committee. I then conclude with an evaluation of how the case of Forsten sheds light on the relationship between government-sponsored science and colonialism in the Dutch empire in the first half of the 19th century. Comparisons with the work of other Committee members suggest that Forsten's case may be useful as a general pattern of how science functioned in the Indies in this period, and the parallels between them are striking enough to lean towards this. Forsten's diary, with its wealth of information, is not the only extant diary. There are at least four more diaries of Committee members, available in various archives, that have not been sufficiently studied. Further research into this complex world may throw some more light on the wider relevance of the general pattern that emerges from this case study. 2 THE NATURAL HISTORY COMMITTEE The most extensive treatment of the Committee's history as a whole, by H. J. Veth, dates from 1879.13 Veth's dissertation has served as a starting point for many further explorations of the work of the Committee.14 However, not all of these have consulted the original archival sources kept in Naturalis Biodiversity Center in Leiden.15 Gassó Miracle rightly concludes that "a more comprehensive history of the Natuurkundige Commissie has yet to be written."16 The present case study of Forsten's travels is a step towards deepening our understanding of the place of the Natural History Committee in the history of science in the Dutch East Indies. The Natural History Committee for the Netherlands Indies was founded on May 2, 1820 by Royal Decree.17 Never before had the Dutch government in the Netherlands so proactively organised scientific research in the colonies. In previous centuries, most natural history in the Dutch colonies was undertaken by (not necessarily Dutch) travellers and company officials, mainly because the colonies fell under direct control of the West and East Indies Companies. The Dutch East Indies Company (and not the Dutch government in the Netherlands) was involved in directing science to a certain extent in the east, mostly in the field of botany, but science without a direct commercial benefits was generally not supported.18 A notable exception (but certainly not the only one) was Georg Eberhard Rumpf, known as Rumphius (1627–1702), whose work did not exclusively support commercial enterprises, but who continued to receive Company sponsorship even after he went blind and left their service.19 When William I became king of the newly founded Kingdom of the Netherlands in 1815, natural history was part and parcel of his responsibilities.20 The European hubs of the British and French empires had produced scientific research that not only illuminated the situation abroad, but also glorified the wisdom of the builders of empire. The presence of a benefactor, usually in the person of the monarch, was a catalyst for scientific research in the colonies, one that the Dutch had been lacking for centuries.21 The Netherlands, however, came very close to becoming a kingdom without colonies. After having been weakened by the Fourth Anglo-Dutch War in the late 18th century, and having lost their colonies in the late 18th and early 19th centuries to the British, who pre-emptively took possession of the Cape, Ceylon, and the Indies to keep them out of French hands, the Dutch colonial empire was reduced to virtually nothing.22 In the aftermath of the Napoleonic wars, the British felt the need to create a strong buffer state, in order to limit French ambitions in the future. And a strong state needed an empire.23 However, only the Indies were restored to the fledgling Kingdom of the Netherlands in 1816.24 Management of the colonies became the sole domain of the king and, as such, the direction of science in the colonies also became his responsibility. The Committee was not the first expression of the king's science policy. On January 11, 1815, he had already appointed Carl Georg Caspar Reinwardt (1773–1854) as Director of Agriculture, Arts, and Sciences of Java and the Neighbouring Islands. Reinwardt arrived in the Indies in April 1816 and left in mid-1822. His work in the Indies included a long inspection tour that led him all the way to the Moluccas and back (1821–1822).25 During his stay in the Indies, Reinwardt was exceedingly busy with his many tasks, and never felt he had enough time to collect natural history specimens. By the time he returned home, the king had already founded the Natural History Committee, following the advice of the director of the newly founded 's Rijks Museum van Natuurlijke Historie, Coenraad Jacob Temminck (1778–1858). Reinwardt's long absence prevented him from taking part in the decision-making process. Between 1820 and 1850, scientists, draughtsmen, and "preparators" were dispatched to the Indies for the express purpose of collecting and documenting specimens for 's Rijks Museum van Natuurlijke Historie in Leiden, the predecessor of what is now Naturalis Biodiversity Center, with only a few returning to the Netherlands.26 The members of the Natural History Committee fall into three broadly defined categories: (a) European members appointed in the Netherlands, (b) European members appointed in the Indies, and (c) non-European members employed in the Indies. The first category consisted of 14 members, all appointed by Royal Decree. On May 2, 1820, the king commissioned Heinrich Kuhl (1797–1821), Johan Conrad van Hasselt (1797–1823), Gerrit van Raalten (1797–1829), and Gerrit Laurentius Keultjes (1786–1821).27 The second set of appointments took place on December 5, 1823, and sent Heinrich Boie (1794–1827), Heinrich Christian Macklot (1799–1832), and Salomon Müller (1804–1864) to the Indies.28 When they departed in 1825, they were also accompanied by Pieter van Oort (1804–1834).29 The Committee's ranks were further bolstered on July 25, 1830 with the appointment of Pieter Willem Korthals (1807–1892), D. H. R. van Gelder, and B. N. Overdijk.30 Ludwig Horner (1811–1838) was appointed on February 23, 1835, followed by Eltio Alegondus Forsten (1811–1843) in 1838, and finally Carl Anton Ludwig Maria Schwaner (1817–1851) on January 9, 1842.31 The second category of European members connected to the Committee in the Indies included at least eight people: Antoine Meaurevert (dates unknown), Alexander Zippelius (1797–1828), Pierre-Médard Diard (1794–1863), Heinrich Bürger (1804 or 1806–1858), Auguste Jean Latour (dates unknown), Heinrich von Gaffron (1813–1880), Franz Junghuhn (1809–1864), and P. L. Comblen (dates unknown).32 It is possible that further archival research will unearth several more names.33 The third category comprised a number of local hunters, gatherers, and preparators who were employed by the Committee members to assist them.34 In the early years, the Committee members mainly traversed Java, the centre of Dutch power in the area. Kuhl and Van Hasselt never set foot outside Java. From the late 1820s onwards, expeditions to other areas of the Indies took place: to New Guinea (Macklot, Müller, Van Raalten, Van Oort, Zippelius, and perhaps Latour, 1828–1830), with a visit to Timor on the way back; to Sumatra (Müller, Korthals, and Van Oort, later joined by Van Gelder and Overdijk, 1833–1834/1835; Horner and Overdijk, 1837–1838); and to Borneo (Korthals and Horner, 1836; Schwaner, Von Gaffron, and Comblen, 1843–1847).35 Forsten's expedition was the first and only one to travel to Celebes. At this time, as with most of the Outer Islands, not all of Celebes was part of the Dutch empire. A unified Netherlands Indies was still far in the future. During the active years of the Dutch East India Company, the Dutch gradually extended their influence over Celebes from their base on the nearby island of Ternate. By 1750, they had a dozen forts on Celebes, mostly in the northern area. The economic value of the area lay in "small quantities of rice, gold, iron, turtleshell and forest products."36 This was the general pattern for the Dutch Indies in the early 19th century: "effective Dutch colonial authority outside Java was restricted to the Moluccas and a few ports and their immediate hinterlands."37 The city of Menado in North-East Celebes was one of these ports and, as such, experienced a limited form of control by the Batavia government.38 From the number of times Forsten mentions travelling through coffee plantations, it can be inferred that coffee was most likely the most important cash crop in his immediate environment.39 3 ELTIO ALEGONDUS FORSTEN (1811–1843) Forsten applied for membership of the Natural History Committee himself, an unusual move in the history of the Committee. What was his motivation for doing this? A closer look at his life story sheds some light on this. Eltio Alegondus Forsten (Figure 1) was born in Middelburg on July 2, 1811, to Jacob Antoon Forsten, a medical doctor and postmaster, and Johanna Gijsberta Knibbe.40 Young Eltio attended the local Latin school. We can follow his progress there in the news bulletins of the Latin school in the Middelburgsche Courant, which reports that he started in April 1824 and finished on August 26, 1829.41 The natural science content of Forsten's education was fairly high. He successfully took exams in natural history, anatomy, physiology, medicine, and chemistry (which included medical botany and apothecary skills).42 The final project at the Latin school consisted of a public oration on a topic of the pupil's own choice. Whereas the other four pupils spoke on entirely different topics relating to what we would now call the humanities, Forsten's topic was "De vita et meritis Caroli Linnaei" ("On the life and works of Carolus Linnaeus"), revealing that he had already been bitten by the natural history bug at a young age.43 FIGURE 1Open in figure viewerPowerPoint Portrait of Eltio Alegondus Forsten, NBC. Photograph by Karien Lahaise, used with permission Just as his father had done in Harderwijk, Forsten went on to study medicine at Leiden University. A few events from his time in Leiden stand out. At the age of 20, Forsten entered a prize contest organised by the university, which opened on February 8, 1831.44 His 54-page essay won the prize and was published in 1832 as Responsio de aethere et naphthis, answering the question: "Expand on the chemical history, scientific knowledge, nature and use of ether and naphtha, as well as of the other remaining material products of the action of putting acids in alcohol."45 Forsten concluded his studies in Leiden with a dissertatio botanico-pharmaceutico-medica discussing the tree Cedrela febrifuga, now Toona ciliata M. Roem, commonly known as the red cedar and widespread throughout south Asia, including Java. Rumphius, the well-known naturalist of the 17th-century East Indies, already knew about the medicinal properties of this tree's bark.46 Carl Ludwig Blume (1796–1862) published an extended paragraph on the wider family of the Cedrela febrifuga in his Bijdragen tot de flora van Nederlandsch Indië in 1825.47 In his dissertation, Forsten shows that he has read quite widely on the topic and quotes publications by Rumphius, Blume, and American naturalist Thomas Horsfield (1773–1859), who collected extensively in the Indies. Forsten successfully defended his work on December 16, 1836.48 This dissertation already points to Forsten's future, and the topic was chosen in line with his interests and hopes. How better to qualify as a member of the Natural History Committee of the Netherlands Indies than to write about one of the most useful trees from that area? It was this thesis that accompanied Forsten's application to the king for a post on the Natural History Committee.49 Given his previous education and the choices he made, it is no surprise that Forsten was first in line when an opportunity arose to go to the Indies to collect specimens. An additional reason that will certainly have helped in drawing Forsten to the Indies was that both his grandfathers had held government positions in the Dutch East Indies. His maternal grandfather, Theodorus Knibbe (d. 1814), was Councillor of Justice in Batavia, while his paternal grandfather, Jacob Balthasar Forsten (1757/1758–1825), was a member of the supreme court of the Netherlands Indies.50 Stories of the Indies would have been told often in the Forsten family home, painting pictures of the tropics to an impressionable boy. 4 NEGOTIATING FOUR FOCAL POINTS Forsten emerges from this narrative as a keen naturalist, with an intrinsic motivation that served as the prime driver for his collection work in the Indies. No one needed to spur him on in his quest to find new and unknown species, but he did need an infrastructure to pursue his personal interests. He was given the perfect platform for this when he was appointed by (a) the Dutch government to collect specimens of natural historical value for (b) 's Rijks Museum van Natuurlijke Historie in Leiden, under the orders of (c) the governor-general of the Dutch East Indies and supported by (d) a variety of local actors, both European and indigenous. The same paradigm applied to all Committee members appointed by the king. They all received an official appointment that placed them under the orders of the governor-general, and they all had strong connections with the Museum in Leiden. However, collecting specimens was not necessarily the goal of all the people and institutions involved in the Committee's work. In what follows, I look in more detail at how Forsten's four focal points sought to direct his science in the field and how he was affected by this. It is a story of competing interests and of how an astute scientist negotiated and deftly manoeuvred between multiple focal points, carving out his own career path that should have led to a respected position in the European scientific establishment after his return, while at the same time keeping those in positions of authority over him satisfied.51 4.1 Forsten and the Dutch government in The Hague Forsten himself initiated contact with the Dutch government, his first focal point, when he applied for a position on the Committee in 1837. He was told that there was no current vacancy, but that he would be considered for the next one if he gained practical experience in natural history by working at the Museum in Leiden. Forsten dutifully carried out this task until he was indeed appointed as a member of the Natural History Committee on February 4, 1838.52 Previously, Committee members had ordinarily been appointed on the recommendation of Temminck, the Museum's director. Most of the Committee members were recruited from the Museum's staff. Forsten was the first "outsider" to apply directly to the king for a position, though his affinity with natural history had undoubtedly led him to visit the Museum on a regular basis during his studies. To become an "insider," he needed to hone his practical skills at the Museum, making that his second focal point. On his appointment, Forsten received instructions written by the Ministry of Internal Affairs.53 This document was to be the basis of and the rationale behind Forsten's practice of natural history in the colonies. The instructions cover eight pages and consist of 13 articles. In them, Forsten is charged with a zoological mission, but he is strongly encouraged not to pass up any opportunity to collect botanical and geological specimens (article 1). He is to be assisted by Committee member Van Gelder as draughtsman and by a certain number of "natives" as collectors and preparators (article 2).54 He is to concentrate his own work on zoology and ensure that his collected specimens are transported to the Netherlands "on a regular basis and as soon as possible" (article 3). He will follow the precepts of the directors of the two "musea" on matters of how to collect, prepare, and keep his specimens, and correspond with said directors to avoid sending too many copies of the same specimens (article 4).55 The main focus of his collection should be specimens not yet held at the Museum, which is why he will visit parts of the Indies that have not been visited, or only casually so, by other natural scientists (article 5). He will give each specimen an individual label with its scientific and local names and its collecting location (article 6). He will keep a diary of his observations and discoveries, not just of a taxonomical nature, but also pertaining to the specimens' way of life, feeding habits, habitat, and so on (article 7). He will send a semi-annual summary of his notes to the Indies government, accompanied by descriptions of hitherto unknown specimens, for publication in the Netherlands (article 8). The drawings of new species should be in such a format that they can be published without having to be redrawn (article 9; Figure 2). He will not publish any of his descriptions in a foreign language or send them to a foreign society, unless after they have been published in the Netherlands (article 10). All his specimens and field notes will be the property of the government and, in the case of his death, will be sent by the governor-general to the Department of Colonies (article 11). The length of his stay will be decided after the ongoing consultation on this topic has delivered its results (article 12). He will be awarded the sum of 1,000 guilders to purchase necessary equipment, which, on his return, will be left in the Indies for the use of the remaining members of the Committee (article 13). FIGURE 2Open in figure viewerPowerPoint Drawing of a crowned pigeon by Heinrich von Gaffron, dated August 21, 1840. This bird was gifted alive to Forsten by the governor of the Moluccas. Gaffron's drawings only reached Leiden after the publication of the Verhandelingen had already been completed, so they were never used. Natuurkundige Commissie (MMNAT01_NNM001000179), NBC. In the public domain In the accompanying letter to Temminck, Blume, and Reinwardt, some additional remarks were made.56 These three gentlemen formed a sort of advisory board or steering committee (appointed on September 11, 1837), and were designated the "triumvirate" by Forsten in his diary entry of April 6, 1841.57 This triumvirate advised the various ministries and the king on matters pertaining to the Natural History Committee. In the letter, they are charged with communicating the instructions to Forsten. After some financial remarks, the minister tells them that the Department of the Colonies has asked the governor-general to assign Celebes as Forsten's collecting location. This was undoubtedly in response to an earlier request made by the three gentlemen, as they had most likely also penned the instructions given to Forsten.58 It is striking that the instructions were actually not directed to Forsten personally, but were sent to him via Reinwardt, Temminck, and Blume as intermediaries. Direct contact between the Dutch government and Forsten was very limited. Besides his original application, the only other example I have found is that Forsten requested and was granted an audience with Jean-Chrétien Baud (1789–1859), at the time interim Minister of Colonial Affairs, in the weeks before his departure.59 As soon as Forsten was appointed, he was seamlessly incorporated into the existing mould for government communications with the Committee, and was safely obscured behind the triumvirate. Nevertheless, government decisions would still affect him. Forsten was not always a faithful and obedient subject of the king and would at times let his own interests prevail, as is clear from his response to the news he received, when already in the field, about the intended publication of the Verhandelingen. The manner in which the results of the Committee were to be published had always been a bone of contention that had never been satisfactorily resolved. Royal Decree No. 10 of February 10, 1839 finally settled matters and led to the publication between 1839 and 1847 of the Verhandelingen over de natuurlijke geschiedenis der Nederlandsche overzeesche bezittingen (Transactions on the Natural History of the Dutch Overseas Possessions), a 29-part series based on the Committee's findings.60 In a letter to Joannes Andreas Susanna (1795–1859), the administrator of the Museum, Forsten complains about these arrangements. He is not interested at all in contributing to the Verhandelingen, he writes, but is looking forward to publishing a separate volume on Celebes when he returns, just as Salomon Müller would publish a monograph on Sumatra in 1846.61 Forsten confides to Susanna that he will no longer communicate anything scientific in order to prevent his findings from being published in the Verhandelingen.62 The primary motive here, of course, was rather egotistical: Forsten was not interested in seeing his findings disappear anonymously in a larger work on colonial natural history. Publishing his own book under his own name would improve his chances of a good scientific career back in the Netherlands and might even result in royal honours, as had happened to fellow Committee members Salomon Müller (1809–1864) and Pieter Willem Korthals (1807–1892).63 It is beyond the scope of this article to outline the troublesome background behind the publication of the Verhandelingen. Suffice it to say that it was a longstanding debate and that the plan for the Verhandelingen as outlined in the Royal Decree represented a compromise for both the government and the Museum. Forsten's personal interests were clearly not in line with what those parties finally settled on, and he seems to have been prepared to take drastic action. Forsten shows that he could be quite subversive when it suited his own purposes. He confirms his critical mood when writing this letter by complaining about the king's financial policies and remarking that funds from the Indies will soon dry up "because Holland deals with the colony as a leech that sucks blood until she [the colony] expires."64 Forsten clearly decided not to pursue an immediate confrontation, since he spends more than half a letter to Temminck on zoological details.65 He probably realised that it would be rather unwise to bite the hands that feed him while still in the field. In the end, Forsten's untimely death prevented the conflict from arising in earnest.66 He may not have been happy with the fact that, despite his misgivings, some of his specimens were published in the Verhandelingen by Müller without his knowledge. 4.2 Forsten and '
Referência(s)