Representing Cultural Diversity: Non-Western Ethnographic Collections in the Culturally Diverse Netherlands

(1)

Laura Verstappen

10889302

Representing Cultural Diversity

Non-Western Ethnographic Collections in the Culturally

Diverse Netherlands

Master Thesis

University of Amsterdam

Humanities Department

Arts and Culture: Cultural Analysis

Supervisor: Elmer E. P. Kolfin

2

nd

Reader: Thijs Weststeijn

(2)

(3)

Introduction

Two years ago I was living in the multi-cultural South of London and working as an intern in the ethnographic department of the British Museum. I became aware of a parallel between the Museums’ ethnographic collection and the cultures of local immigrants and asked to what extent the British Museum concerned itself with this context.

Upon inquiry Harvinder Bahra of the Community Partnership Team of the British Museum told me that they had recently started to address the Museum’s relation to local communities, including immigrant populations of cultures that were represented in the collection. She told me her team had been instated in 2009 as part of a new trend in museums. Specialized divisions as well as existing departments had started investigating and developing relations with local population sub-groups (Bahra).

When I moved back to the Netherlands, I exported my interest. Visiting Dutch museums always gave me a great sense of pride of the Dutch cultural history, art, scientific accomplishments, taste and the seeming willingness to acknowledge less admirable qualities. An image, of course, that is carefully directed by the museums: ‘conductors of our national memory.’1 Nevertheless, they shaped my cultural self-image and how foreign friends perceived my culture. I have always assumed that other cultures need similar points of reference for their (self-)image and sense of community. It follows that immigrant populations who had left the prime examples of their cultural heritage in their homelands would have difficulty defining their own culture, and so would ‘others’ in their new environment. What then, of the foreign ethnographic collections that are already in the Netherlands? Can they serve as a cultural backbone for the immigrant populations and as a repository for their new hybrid cultures? It is an ambitious question with many facets, too ambitious in fact for a one-year master program in the Department of Literature.2_{Still, I would like to make a start. In this thesis I investigate whether}

ethnographic museums in the Netherlands have the capacity to represent the cultural background of the immigrant population with ethnographic collections.

Leaving many issues out, I have formulated four questions that will be answered in four respective chapters:

1_{De Jong ,“Dirigenten”.}

(6)

1. What is the current composition and origin of ethnographic collections in ethnographic museums in the Netherlands?

2. What is the current composition and origin of the Dutch immigrant population?

3. How do ethnographic museums represent the immigrant population with their ethnographic collection?

4. Discussion: Is there room for improvement?

At the outset of my research I expected to find less correspondence between the collections and the population than in the British Museum. Based on previous visits to ethnographic museums in the Netherlands I was sceptical about the prominence of the cultures of the immigrant population. My initial impression was that the ethnographic museums were preoccupied with the far and wide and had little interest in the different cultures that lived right under their noses.

Parameters of the questions

A museum, in the definition of the International Council of Museums (ICOM) is ‘a non-profit,

permanent institution in the service of society and its development, open to the public, which acquires, conserves, researches, communicates and exhibits the tangible and intangible heritage of humanity and its environment for the purposes of education, study and enjoyment.’3 An ethnographic museum specializes in material and immaterial culture that is relevant to the systematic study of people and cultures also known as ‘cultural anthropology’ (Kottak 5,9). 4 This thesis looks at explicitly

ethnographic museums, volkenkundige musea in Dutch.5_{Their practices will be analysed in light of}

their history and a changed demographic. The research questions could be applied to any type of museum, but because ethnographic collections are inherently linked with the study of cultures the question of cultural representation seemed all the more poignant there.6_{In order to make a comparison}

with museums with other types of collections the focus will be only on their ethnographic collection.7

3_{Museum is an unprotected term (Museum Vereniging “Museum Definitie”), this is the updated definition} according to the ICOM Statutes, adopted during the 21st General Conference in Vienna, Austria, in 2007. 4_{Anthropology is the study of mankind in general. It includes biological or physical anthropology and cultural} anthropology. Ethnology is the comparative analysis of multiple cultures (Kottak 5,9).

5_{In reality the translation of ‘ethnography’ is not as straightforward. A more refined definition relevant to the} Netherlands will be given in Chapter 1.

6_{Most art museums in the Netherlands also hold small to significant ethnographic collections, but have been left} out of the equation because of their art historical, rather than ethnographic, approach.

(7)

The four research questions will be discussed in four respective chapters. The first two chapters treat the composition and origin of the subjects. First those of ethnographic collections in ethnographic museums in the Netherlands; second, those of the Dutch immigrant population. I will also discuss the historical and political contexts, which I presumed to be important factors.

The discussion of the composition of the immigrant population will be subject to the categories that are used in the field of human geography and will therefore be defined mostly in terms of nationality. In the Netherlands an immigrant is defined as a person born outside the Netherlands. The Dutch term

allochtoon is used to describe people who were born outside of the Netherlands or who have one or

two parents that were born outside the Netherlands (CBS “Begrippen”). English literature generally does not distinguish the allochtoon population, but differentiates between first and second generation immigrants – second generation referring to children of immigrant parent(s). I will adopt the English term immigrant to refer to both generations of the allochtoon population.

In the third chapter I ask how the composition of ethnographic collections in Dutch ethnographic Museums is related to the current composition of the country’s immigrant population and interpret the findings of the first two chapters. How museums represent immigrant cultures is discussed against the political background. This chapter makes use of policies and reports to surmise the discourse and activity that originate from the museum and its collection. Initiatives originating from the immigrant population are not included unless they are organized as a museum. This was necessary because I was unable to access sufficient information on the specific input and perspective of representatives from all the immigrant populations, and its discussion would have surpassed the range of this thesis.

The final chapter was conceived to vent my passion for the subject after a strenuous journey through museums, libraries and piles of documentation. It presents arguments for the relevance of cultural representation in ethnographic collections. Furthermore, it compares the findings with existing literature and with the way another museum deals with immigrant cultures. In answer to the fourth research question it critically assesses the capacity of the museums to provide a cultural backbone for the immigrant population.

Parameters of the research

The question that I had on the outset – can ethnographic collections serve as a cultural backbone for the immigrant population? – beckons far and wide answers, but I have had to confine the research field with more specific questions. Nevertheless, in dealing with an interdisciplinary subject I have taken on an interdisciplinary approach. During my bachelor degree I touched upon anthropology, sociology, museum studies, psychology of ethnic relations and art history. All of these proved relevant to the subject, but I was faced with my limited experience in each of them. In order to grasp what was going on I had to catch up with the field, especially museum studies. My present master program in Arts and

(8)

Culture: Cultural Analysis teaches critical theory and comparative analysis that mostly informs abstract thinking. First, however, I want to ground this thesis in facts about the composition of ethnographic collections and the population and in evidence of the activities and discourse of the museum. My interpretation and analysis would ideally come second. In practice the two inform each other.

In the Netherlands ten museums proliferate themselves as ethnographic museums.8 Three of these have been omitted because of a strictly local focus that excluded the incorporation of other cultures.9_A

fourth was omitted because of its restricted access and independent nature.10 I was left with six museums in six different locations across the country:

• Museon, Den Haag (Zuid-Holland)

• Universiteitsmuseum, Groningen (Groningen) • Wereldmuseum, Rotterdam (Zuid-Holland)

The following museums are part of the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen (National Museum for World Cultures)

• Afrika Museum, Berg en Dal (Gelderland)

• Rijksmuseum Volkenkunde, Leiden (Zuid-Holland) • Tropenmuseum, Amsterdam (Noord-Holland)

Each of the museums was investigated separately, with exception of the current policy of the

Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen.

The first objective of the research was to compile a general profile for each of the ethnographic museums that would inform Chapters 1, 3 and 4. The profile was based on museum publications and museum visits on which I recorded their layout, programming, and presentation. Eventually it included a history of each collection and museum, the general composition of their ethnographic collection, the composition of their permanent display, an inventory of relevant recent events (including exhibitions)

8_{The museums profiled themselves as volkenkundig, etnografisch, volkskundig or with descriptions related to} these terms in their marketing, website, mission and/ or collection plan and are registered as volkenkundig with the CBS.

9_{The Zuiderzee Museum, Limburgs Museum and Nederlands Openluchtmuseum were excluded because their} collections focus solely on regional and national culture. This type of local ethnography distinguishes them as

volkskundig in Dutch, see also Chapter 1.

10_{Natuurhistorisch en Volkenkundig Museum Oudenbosch has been excluded because it opens only two days per} week on average and cannot be accessed using the Museum Jaarkaart, which grants free access to cardholders and accounts for a large part of museum visits.

(9)

that pertain to the ethnographic collection, observations made during visits and statements by the museum.

Based on public documentation I established priorities in the discourse and practice of the museum. I then inquired about specific information that could not be retrieved from public sources. An inquiry according to the format reproduced in Appendix 1 was sent to representatives of all museums.11_{I also}

requested meetings with members of staff who were involved with the subject of my research. This resulted in one interview in person, with Koos van Brakel of the Tropenmuseum and currently of the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen.12 It also resulted in a correspondence with Marielle Pals, of the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen and its ‘Diversity Team’, and with Eveline Kevenaar of the Wereldmuseum.13 Furthermore a long interview was conducted with professor Ad de Jong, formerly of the Openluchtmuseum, whose experience and knowledge were most insightful.14_{Unfortunately,}

some important figures responsible for the very subject of interest were impossible to reach or unwilling to comment. However, their behaviour was also an illustration of the present relevance of, and uneasiness about the subject.

To find out how the organizational structure of the museums operated I reviewed documentation including the museum websites and publications, year reports from 2011 onwards and the most recent

Collectieplan, Profiel or Beleidsplan (Collection Plan, Profile or Policy).15 I chose a window of five

11_{The inquiry was also sent to the Openluchtmuseum. A number of respondents asked that I do not publish the} correspondence, therefore only the blank inquiry is reproduced. The Wereldmuseum, Universiteitsmuseum and Openluchtmuseum responded and the Tropenmuseum and Museum Volkenkunde of the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen referred to an answer from their joint department. The inquiry was sent out in Dutch. Irrelevant questions were omitted per museum and in some museum specific questions were added. The length of the answers was not specified. In some cases follow up questions were sent in a continued correspondence. The used responses are listed under ‘correspondence’ in the Bibliography. The Afrika Museum did not respond; instead the answer from the joint department was used. The Museon did not reply either, but some information was found on a repeat visit and through an informant, Michiel van Harskamp, intern in the educational department of the museum.

12_{The interview was voice-recorded and semi-structured with questions based on key-words (‘merger’,} ‘departmental structure’, ‘cultural diversity’, ‘community partnerships’, ‘priorities’, ‘national population’, ‘political influence’, ‘significance’, etc.).

13_{The correspondence with Marielle Pals and Eveline Kevenaar provided the basic structure for the inquiry.} 14_{The interview was recorded in notes and semi-structured around three themes: Openluchtmuseum, Policy, and} Collections & Immigrant Populations.

15_{The collection plan or policy is a standardized document used by most museums to inventory the extent,} management and use of their collection and to plan their objectives and responsibilities on a three to five year basis.

(10)

years to review the ‘current state of affairs’ in terms of policies and programming. A relatively broad window was necessary because in some cases the most recent information was unavailable. Reports for 2014 and 2015 were not published yet, and more importantly the timing of my investigation coincided with a reorganization in most of the museums, in response to changes in government policy. Again, it proved difficult to gather information about the ongoing process.

Furthermore, I took note of regulations on a national level. The museums within my research are members of the Museum Vereniging (MV, Museum Association) and the Stichting Volkenkundige

Collectie Nederland (SVCN, Foundation Ethnographic Collections Netherlands), the latter with

exception of the Wereldmuseum. Both organizations coordinate policies and articulate and monitor standards. In addition the museums have to answer the local and national government. This led me to an investigation into Government policy and the effect thereof.

For material about the immigrant population in the Netherlands (Chapter 2) I obtained statistics from the Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (CBS, Central Bureau of Statistics). Their history and present situation was surmised using socio-historic and socio-economic literature, respectively. Literature from museum studies and general history was used to inform Chapter 1, while government and professional publications from the cultural sector were used for Chapter 3. Specialized literature pertaining to cultural subpopulations and cultural heritage were left out at first but eventually incorporated to contextualise the findings in its academic field in Chapter 4.

The investigation zoomed out instead of in, focussing on an overview and comparison of the six museums and their position in society. This meant disregarding the particulars of cases in the

museums that had been recorded in the initial stages of the investigation, but allowed me to regard the joint capacity of the museums. Instead of discussing the interpretation of the ethnographic objects or collections I chose to discuss the discourse that precedes an encounter with an object or collection. I found that more often than not the cultural parameters of the research questions did not match with the discourse used in the museum or politics. Nevertheless, I have maintained my original premises because the absence of a certain discourse turned out to be an important finding as well.

It was a challenge bringing together information in so many different forms, requiring different tactics of interpretation, but in this thesis I hope to have surmised a complex subject that intersects many fields of study and parts of society.

(11)

Chapter 1 The History and Composition of

Ethnographic Collections in the Netherlands

Collections are formed through the act of collecting material and immaterial items that are selected for their utilitarian or aesthetic qualities, or to ‘complete’ the collection. In addition they are formed deliberately or unconsciously around themes,16 in this case: ethnography. However, ethnography: ‘the systematic study of people and cultures’ had not always been systematic (Kottak 5). Instead the early ethnographic collections were formed out of curiosity and the objects of fancy thus called curiosa. Ethnographic collecting in the Netherlands, like in the rest of Western Europe, began in the 16th

century (Kistemaker et al. 8, Effert 15). The explorations of the previous century had expanded the horizons and explorers started collecting curiosa from the discovered areas (Buchli). The curiosa were placed in ‘curiosity cabinets’ where they could be kept and displayed under naturalia – objects from nature, and artificialia – manmade objects. The artificialia included the material culture of unfamiliar peoples (Kistemaker et al. 19).

The Netherlands was a trading nation that harboured large trading companies. The largest company, the VOC (United East Indies Company), was unequalled in the East Indies or anywhere around the world. Between 1600-1800 the company employed a million Europeans overseas and established European port towns. The territories they controlled were named the Batavian Republic with Batavia (now Jakarta) as its capital. The WIC (Dutch West India Company) established trade ports in Brazil, Surinam, the Antilles, Guyana, Cape of Good Hope and along the African coastline. They were responsible for a large part of the 17th century slave trade. When the VOC went bankrupt at the end of the 18th_{century and the WIC could no longer defend its monopoly, the Dutch East Indies, Surinam and}

the Netherlands Antilles were annexed by the Netherlands (Prak 125-36, see Figure 1.1).

The systematic study of culture and peoples emerged in tandem with Europe’s curiosity cabinets. The 18th_{century was the time of the Enlightenment or ‘the Age of Reason’ and the world was under}

scrutiny of analytical minds. Although no such field of study was yet defined, some people took

(12)

special interest in the analysis of exotic artificialia. In the Netherlands Nicolaes Witsen (1614-1717) amassed an important collection as an ambassador and through a network of traders in Amsterdam, to feed his interest in ethnography (Kistemaker et al. 153). He was among the people who recognized that the artificialia were not just fanciful objects, but evidence of different ways of life. In the course of the 17th_{century detailed accounts of cultural practices and beliefs as well as physical data (the field}

of physical anthropology) were added to the collections (Kistemaker et al. 153-192).

In the 18th_{century collections and related sciences began to specialize (Kistemaker et al. 19). Initially}

collections related to foreign peoples consisted of material culture and prints based on travel accounts, but as the field of ethnography developed immaterial culture such as familial and social relations, traditions and language became of interest as well. 17 Expeditions often recorded observations about the people they encountered in travel logs. The Dutch physician and geographer Olfert Dapper (1635/6-11689) used witness accounts from the archives of the VOC and WIC to describe cultural phenomena such as a ceremony (Kistemaker et al. 157). With the study of immaterial aspects the early ethnographers distinguished themselves from archaeologists who derive human biology and culture based solely on material evidence (Kottak 10).

In the first half of the 19th_{century the first professional titles related to ethnography appeared in the}

Netherlands and in 1851 the research institute Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land-, en Volkenkunde (Royal Institute for the study of Language, Land and People) was founded (Effert 3). Until then the study of people and cultures had to rely on the indiscriminate accounts and collections that had been accumulated by a wide range of ‘amateur anthropologists’: missionaries, tradesmen, scientists, rulers, private persons, government workers, travellers and explorers. But with its professionalization ethnographic collecting would happen in an increasingly systematic manner.

Exclusive at first, their collections entered the public sphere of the Netherlands in the 19th_century.

They were housed in museums and began to be used for the education of the public (Belk). The first museum with ethnographic material was the Koninklijk Kabinet van Zeldzaamheden (Royal Cabinet of Curiosities), which opened in Den Haag in 1816 (Effert 11). The first specialized ethnographic

museum, the Rijks Ethnographisch Museum (National Ethnographic Museum), was opened in Leiden in 1859 and exists to this day as the Rijksmuseum Volkenkunde (National Museum for Ethnography). In 1883 the Museum voor Land- en Volkenkunde (Museum for Geography and Ethnology, now the Wereldmuseum) in Rotterdam was founded on the collection of members of the Royal Yacht Club who collected curiosities on their trips out of the Rotterdam harbour (Wereldmuseum,

“Meerjarenbeleidsplan”).

17_{When the collections became specialized in different fields, coins and medals, antiquities, art and rarities} (hybrid forms), were separated from objects related to exotic people and cultures (Kistemaker 13-14).

(13)

The displays in these types of early ethnographic museums and institutes illustrated how civilized European societies had evolved from ‘primitive’ people (Buchli 3-7). Western technology, art and culture exemplified superior civilization while those from the rest of the world were seen as

backwards. The more remote, scattered and isolated the people, the more primitive they were believed to be. Along the lines of these evolutionary theories ethnographic collections were also part of zoos. One of the oldest ethnographic collections still in the Netherlands is perhaps the former Artis

(Amsterdam Zoo) collection.18_{Collecting began around the time of the zoo’s opening in 1838 and was}

done by a wide range of people, typical of 19th century European collectors. In 1861 the collection got its own Ethnografisch Museum in Artis to represent mankind: ‘the most advanced creature known to zoology’ (qtd. in Wijs).

The early ethnographic museums in the Netherlands were established in consequence and in service of colonialism (Effert 6-7). Most countries in 19th century Western Europe were in an imperialist race to expand their empires and secure trade (Kottak 556). The Netherlands expanded the East Indies to include most of Indonesia and took over coastal areas that were under control of the WIC, including Surinam and the Netherlands Antilles. Figure 1 shows the areas that were colonised by the

Netherlands and the main historical trading posts. The Dutch East Indies formed the largest colony and were the pride of the nation. As foreign territories were brought under Dutch rule, foreign objects in the ethnographic collections became part of the Kingdom.

A primary task for ethnographic museums was to represent the cultures of the Dutch Empire. The museums demonstrated the nation’s expanses for the entertainment and education of its citizens. They also showcased the economic prospects of the colonies.19 In Haarlem the botanist Frederik Willem van Eeden had amassed so many curiosity collections, particularly from Indonesia, that he was able to open a Koloniaal Museum there in 1871 (Tropenmuseum, “Bezoekersgids” 11, Van Brakel and Legêne 7). Its growing collections provided illustrative and research tools for the preparation of missionaries, tradesmen, immigrants and government officials for their missions in the colonies (Effert 4). 20_{Upon their return they expanded the colonial collections yet further. In museums like the former}

18_{Most of the old curiosity cabinets and earliest ethnographic collections in the Netherlands no longer exist in} their original composition because they were disbanded by the heirs and through sales, scattering the objects over many countries and museums (Kistemaker et al.).

19_{For example in the Museum voor Land- en Volkenkunde (Bremer).}

20_{In Delft the director of the Indische Instelling (Indonesian Institute) advertised with a request for donations of}

objects of cultural heritage for the purpose of educating potential civil servants. Thus he formed the collection of the former Ethnographic Museum Nusantara, Delft, founded in 1864 (Wentholt).

(14)

Fi gu re 1 .1 : M ap o f t he c ol oni es , tr ad e p os ts a nd m ain co un tr ies o f o ri gi n of th e im m ig ra nt p op ul at io n

(15)

Tropisch Landbouwmuseum Deventer (Tropical Agricultural Museum)21_{researchers sought to}

innovate the foreign artificialia for the efficient production and mining of naturalia in the colonies.

1900-1990

In the late 19th_{century the industrial revolution brought about rapid changes. People from the}

countryside moved to growing cities to find new jobs in the industry and mass-production quickly replaced common objects with new ones. For fear of losing local cultures local museums and locally oriented collections were founded. One of them was the Nederlands Openluchtmuseum (NOM, Dutch Open Air Museum) that opened on 24 april 1912 to collect and display a ‘memory of daily life’ in the Dutch country side (De Jong “Dirigenten” 13, Nederlands Openluchtmuseum, web.). At the same time the Open Air Museum was a way to forge national identity by showing cultural aspects that were supposedly specific to the Netherlands (De Jong, int.).22 The industrialisation not only replaced objects, it also led to a homogenization of material culture. To counteract this European countries chose local instances of folklore to distinguish their nation, for example on the World exhibitions that were held around the turn of the century (De Jong, int.). Imperialism was accompanied by nationalism and a new branch in ethnography was established.

Ethnography had predominantly been concerned with the world outside Europe, but facing the rapid disappearance of local cultural heritage, attention was turned inward. The anthropologists behind evolutionary theories of human kind and civilization had looked at people in remote areas to find their own origin; now, local European ethnographers went into the countryside to find communities

unaffected by modernization that could represent the nation’s heritage (De Jong, “Dirigenten” 13-14). In the Netherlands, this caused interest in the more traditional and isolated communities. This type of ethnography was called volkskunde (Roodenburg) became an institutionalised discipline in the 20th

century (De Jong “Dirigenten” 18). The term is closest to the English ‘folklore’ or what has been described as ‘European ethnography’ (De Jong, int., De Jong “Dirigenten” 18). The geographical area of study defines the distinction between what European ethnography (volkskunde) and plain

ethnography (volkenkunde).23 The former collects and studies local cultures inside of Europe; the latter

21_{Their collection is now part of the Universiteitsmuseum Groningen.}

22_{In an interview with the author professor Ad de Jong recalled the main points supported in his PhD} dissertation Conductors of Memory (English title), published in 2001. De Jong is emeritus professor at the University of Amsterdam, specialized in national museum collections in relation with national identity. Furthermore, he was an important informant for this thesis on the practices of the Openluchtmuseum where he was head of research and collecting between 1981-91 and scientific member of the board until 2010.

23_{The distinction was conceptualised in Germany and became associated with nationalism, but that connotation} has worn off (De Jong, int., De Jong “Dirigenten” 17-8).

(16)

continues to do so for the rest of the world. The subtle difference between the two Dutch words demarcates a resounding division in field, represented by different types of ethnographic museums. The museums that will be discussed in this thesis are volkenkundig.

After the Second World War colonial museums were under threat of disappearing amid

de-colonisation. Museums needed to carve out a new name for themselves. The Koloniaal Instituut in Amsterdam, once founded on and for the profits of the colonies, no longer wished to be associated with colonialism. It changed its name to Indisch Instituut (Indonesian Institute), though only until Indonesia became a sovereignty and the name was changed to the more generic Koninklijk Instituut

voor de Tropen (Royal Institute for the Tropics) (Van Brakel and Legêne 9, Tropenmuseum,

“Bezoekersgids” 13-4). The ethnographic museums in Leiden, Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and Den Haag widened their scope from the cultures of the colonies and the trade routes to the world at large and shifted their interest from produce to culture. The collections were extended with material from other regions such as Africa and South America, bought from local dealers by the museum staff

(Tropenmuseum “Bezoekersgids” 13-4, Wereldmuseum, web., Schotanus, Arnoldus-Schröder and De Jonge).

Based on their more significant collections the museums had become important institutions with specialized fields of study.24 At the same time, however, the government – most museums were state funded – wanted to prioritize the public function of the museum, which had long been second to the collecting function. This ‘democratisation of museums’ was implemented during the 70s and meant that the composition and research of ethnographic collections became less important, while their attraction and educational value became more important (De Jong, int., Tropenmuseum,

“Bezoekersgids”).25

During the twentieth century another process played out and made its mark on ethnographic collections. At the start of the century ethnographic material that was considered ‘primitive art’ had gained the interest of artists and art collectors (Belk), in the Netherlands the interest peaked in the post-war period thanks to the Cobra movement (Grootaers and Eisenburger 50). Subsequently

ethnographic objects had entered art collections and museums for aesthetic reasons and were seen with renewed interest in the context of ethnographic collections. In fact, the Western aesthetic had always influenced collectors in their choice of objects and caused attention of ethnographers and museum to be lopsided towards the more elaborate, artful or familiar designs (Pasztory 8-12).

24_{The institutes that were part of the Koloniaal Instituut focussed on particular colonies and collected from there.} Their collections are now in the Tropenmuseum (Van Brakel and Legêne 8).

25_{Koos van Brakel is currently Head of Collections at the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen. In an interview} with the author he also related his knowledge of the Tropenmuseum where he was curator between 2000 and 2011.

(17)

In the eighties the public function of the museum had been highlighted and now the message that was to be conveyed to the public came under scrutiny of the government. The public exhibitions were no longer outmoded, but the narratives were deemed out-dated. The governmentwanted to educate the public on the poor state of the world. 26 The old evolutionary theories were replaced by a new one: ‘primitive people’ were renamed inhabitants of ‘third world countries’ and developmental and social anthropology replaced a pure cultural anthropology. The ethnographic collections were to illustrate the backward and deprived situation in the third world so that the nation would become aware of regions in need. Museums started collecting quotidian objects from the ‘disadvantaged’ areas and acquired large quantities of inexpensive objects that were later seen as insignificant (Van Brakel, int.). All of the ethnographic museums adopted this policy to an extent.

In the 1990s the government began pushing museums into independence (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 6), causing many ethnographic museums to disappear and burdening the remaining museums with their collections.27_{In 1993 the Museum Volkenkunde in Leiden absorbed}

the Volkenkundig Museum “Justinus van Nassau” that had been founded in 1956 to exhibit the

ethnographic collection of the military academy in Breda (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 7-14). In 2013 Volkenkundig Museum Nusantara in Delft, specialized in Indonesia, could no longer compete with other Indonesian collections and closed for the public (Wentholt).28 The collection of the former Amerika Museum in Cuijk was given to the Wereldmuseum (Bremer). The Museum Gerardus

van der Leeuw was placed in the depot of the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen (Schotanus,

Arnoldus-Schröder and De Jong). And, most recently, the Moluks Historisch Museum Maluku in Utrecht closed and dispersed its ethnographic collection to other museums. Almost half of the ethnographic

(volkenkundige) museums have disappeared, leaving six ethnographic museums in the Netherlands. In the 21st_{century the financial crisis demanded yet more rigorous budget cuts from cultural}

institutions. Even though the remaining ethnographic museum’s had become more independent in the recent decades, they are still leaning on government funding and have been on the verge of keeling over. In 2013 the Tropenmuseum, Museum Volkenkunde and the Afrika Museum in Berg en Dal had to merge their institutions into the Nationaal Museum Wereldculturen to sustain a foothold. To generate money the government advised museums to become more commercial, and to save money

26_{Initiative of the then minister of Ontwikkelingssamenwerking (Developmental collaboration) Berend Jan} Udink (Tropenmuseum, “Bezoekersgids” 14, 47).

27_{In the early 1990s the government still formulated the Deltaplan voor Cultuurbehoud (Deltaplan for the} Preservation of Culture). It introduced an assessment system to prioritize a fundamental Dutch collection (‘Collectie Nederland’) and offered financial support for its conservation, see Chapter 3.

(18)

made it possible to de-acquisition of less significant collections. For the first time in their history the ethnographic museums are looking to reduce, rather than expand their collections.

Chapter 3 will go deeper into the recent government policy and its implications for policy in the ethnographic museums. The end of this chapter is a brief overview of the different origins and compositions of the ethnographic collections in the museums under discussion, in order of their founding dates.

Museum Volkenkunde, Leiden (Zuid-Holland)

Museum Volkenkunde is the oldest ethnographic museum in the Netherlands, and among the three

oldest ethnographic museums of scientific origin in the world (Museum Volkenkunde,

“Collectieprofielen” 3). Its collection started with a number of private collections that had an emphasis on Japan, most importantly that of dr. Philip Franz von Siebold. The museum opened in 185929 as the

Rijks Japansch Museum Von Siebold (National Japanese Museum) (Effert 11). The colonial

collections extended in tandem with the expansion of the Dutch Kingdom.30 At the same time, the museum also made efforts to collect from other regions, such as the South Sea, Africa, America, Tibet and Siberia (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 5). With the addition of other collections the outlook was deliberately made more generic and in 1864 the museum changed its name to Rijks

Ethnografisch Museum/ Rijksmuseum van Etnografie. The most important addition was made in 1883,

when the museum merged with the ethnographic department of the Royal Cabinet of Rarities in Den Haag (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 4-5). In the post-war period museum staff went on expeditions all over the world, applying a range of observational anthropological methods and

collecting and recording cultures (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 5). With 200.000 objects it is now the largest ethnographic collection in the Netherlands, notwithstanding photographs (Museum Volkenkunde, web.).

The Insular South-East Asian collections (including Japan) remained the largest and most significant, especially the Indonesian sub collection, which is its largest and one of the most important in the world (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 7-14). Leiden houses many other significant collections that overshadow those in the Netherlands and beyond. The Africa collection is relatively important on the national scale, both in quantity and quality, in part thanks to the addition of the

29_{The collection was already accessible since 1837 under the names Verzameling Von Siebold and Japansch}

Museum, but was only officially merged with the Royal Cabinet of Curiosities in 1883. The present museum

maintains 1859 as its official founding date (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 4-5).

30_{The museum obtained the Dutch contribution to the International Colonial Exhibition held in Amsterdam in} 1883 (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 19-20).

(19)

African collection that was moved out of the Tropenmuseum, Amsterdam when it became the Indisch

Instituut (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 34-5, Van Brakel and Legêne 9). Furthermore

Leiden holds the largest collections of objects from China, Korea, Japan and the Americas in the Netherlands (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 51-80).

The photographic collection contains 13.000 photographs taken all over the world by Western photographers for ethnographic purposes (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 82), including unique collections from Iran, China, Japan, and West Asia (Museum Volkenkunde,

“Collectieprofielen” 89).

Wereldmuseum Rotterdam, Rotterdam (Zuid-Holland)

The Wereldmuseum (Worldmuseum) is located in the building of the former Prince Hendrik’s Royal Yacht Club (Bremer 17). The exhibition space on the second floor was purpose-built to show the combined collections of scientists and tradesmen who were members the Club, and later contributions by shipping companies and missionaries. When the Prince died in 1879 the Club was disbanded, but the Museum remained and was officially opened in 1885 as the Museum voor Land- en Volkenkunde (Museum for Geography and Ethnology). The objective of its first director was to acquaint young tradesmen with the lives of ‘exotic peoples’ so they would be more inclined to see for themselves and be equipped to locate produce effectively (Bremer 23). The collections that were added in the 19th

century consisted of ethnographic objects from the vicinity of Dutch trade routes to Asia and objects pertaining to maritime professions, showed in a separate museum on the first floor. In the course of 20th the museum abandoned its maritime collection and became representative of cultures around the world (Wereldmuseum, “Meerjarenbeleidsplan” 1). The museum sent its own ethnographic

expeditions to North Africa and Asia (Bremer 29). Between the 1970s and 80s the museum actively addressed the ‘homelands’ of the immigrant population and collected many objects of daily use from countries including Morocco and Turkey (Bremer 31). The building underwent a number of rigorous refurbishments and expansions and was re-named Wereldmuseum in 2000. When it re-opened last, in 2009, it had restored its attentions towards the Rotterdam elite and proclaimed its Asian sub collection to be its most significant. With the 200.000 objects it is the third largest ethnographic collection in the Netherlands, though half of these are photographs (Wereldmuseum, “Meerjarenbeleidsplan” 1).

Tropenmuseum, Amsterdam (Noord-Holland)

The collection of the Koloniaal Museum in Haarlem (1871) got its character from its founder F.W. Van Eeden. Besides being a botanist Van Eeden was Secretary of Trade and had a particular interest in Indonesia. The collection was initially made up of raw materials and natural products and featured ethnographic objects to exemplify ‘local techniques’, mostly from the colonies, and Indonesia in

(20)

particular (Van Brakel and Legêne 7). At the turn of the century the museum became a general ethnographic museum through additions by government officials, tradesmen and trade societies, but especially through the acquisition of the Artis collection in 1921 (over 11.000 objects, Van Duren 23, Wijs). The museum outgrew its location and moved into the new Koloniaal Instituut (Colonial Institute) in Amsterdam, which had an Ethnographical Department (Tropenmuseum, “Bezoekersgids” 11, Van Brakel and Legêne 7). In 1950 the Institute was renamed once more as Koninklijk Instituut

voor de Tropen (Royal Tropical Institute). The museum became the Tropenmuseum and began an

active collection policy in regions that were underrepresented in the collection, including countries in Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America (Van Brakel and Legêne 9). The ‘East-Asia’, ‘Latin American’ and ‘Sub-Saharan Africa’ collections date from after the 1950s, and were extended as part of the focus on ‘development countries’ (ontwikkelingslanden) during the final quart of the 20th

century (Van Brakel and Legêne 9, 11, 16-9). Still, the collection dates predominantly from the colonial period (Van Brakel and Legêne 12). At present the collection contains 485.000 items, of which 170.000 are objects, and the remainder photographs.

The Tropenmuseum’s exceptionally large photographic collection is almost entirely concerned with the Dutch East Indies (see Figure 1), which make up 75%, followed by 10% from Surinam and 5% from the Netherlands Antilles (Aruba). The remaining 10% are fragmented collections from areas along Dutch travel routes (Van Brakel and Legêne 19).

Museon, Den Haag (Zuid-Holland)

The Museon opened in 1904 as a Museum ten bate van het Onderwijs (Museum for Education). Out of the six case studies it is the most broadly oriented museum, with a scientific, natural and ethnographic collection. The total collection is organized according to themes, with no specific department for ethnography. Just as the rest of the collection, the ethnographic objects were used as an educative tool. Its ethnographic collection was purposely purchased by staff on excursions and expanded with loans and bequests. Overall the collection has always had a worldly orientation with no specific regional acquisition policy, though it includes many objects from Indonesia. The prominent collections were acquired on opportunity. One of these is the Inuit collection of Dutch arctic explorer Willem Barentsz (1550?-1597). The Inuit collection is considered significant and one of the few cultural areas which the museum intends to complement (Van Harskamp, Museon, web.).

Afrika Museum, Berg en Dal (Gelderland)

The Africa Museum was founded in 1954 by missionaries (‘Spiritans’) of the Holy Spirit and the Immaculate Heart of Mary to inform their congregation about the ‘living experience’

(21)

10-11, Afrika Museum, web.). The mission began expeditions to Africa in 1843, starting in the region that is now Senegal (Grootaers and Eisenburger 378). Missions were in the habit of organizing travelling exhibitions of objects that were collected by the missionaries (Afrika Museum, web.). In response to much interest the mission opened a permanent exhibition in 1954 in one of their out-houses in Berg and Dal. Father Jan van Croonenburg became director in 1955 and implemented an aesthetic

perspective (Grootaers and Eisenburger 13). In 1958 the museum moved into a custom location with an ‘African village’ that was exhibited at the World Fair in Brussels of that year. Since 1985 the museum has been expanded with three more such villages and has proliferated itself as an outdoor museum (1987) where visitors can experience African life (Grootaers and Eisenburger 46-7, 12). The most important collections pertain to the Fon, Aja, and Yoruba cultures in the Benin and Nigeria region (Grootaers and Eisenburger 12, 203). The museum moved away somewhat from the artistic perspective towards the incorporation of their collection in a narrative about development (Grootaers and Eisenburger 12, 51). Nevertheless, the museum still places much emphasis on the aesthetic aspects of their collection and in 1968 began collecting modern and contemporary African art by African artists living in the Netherlands and other Western countries (Grootaers and Eisenburger 20-21), which was presented as such in the indoor facility while the more ethnographic approach was maintained outside. Today it is no longer a missionary museum, but an ethnographic museum with a regional focus that engages in collecting, research and education. Not including simulacra in the outdoor museum, the ethnographic collection contains 8000 objects.

Universiteitsmuseum Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Groningen (Groningen)

The collection that is currently in the Universiteitsmuseum, Groningen was brought together in the 1960s out of four pre-existing ethnographic collections. The founding collection was that of Theodoor Pieter van Baaren (1912-1989), a professor of theology, poet, artist and also collector of ‘primitive art’. He bequeathed his collection of ‘primitive art’ to the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen under the condition that it would be exhibited. In effect it was a collection of intricately crafted ethnographic objects from Oceania, especially New Guinea (Schotanus, Arnoldus-Schröder and De Jonge 1). In the first decade the collection was expanded with a long-term loan of 600 objects from the Dutch Indies from the Princessenhof in Leeuwarden and with the collection of the Tropisch Landbouwmuseum

Deventer. The latter consisted of 3000 objects of use from the former Dutch colonies. The majority of

objects from the Colonies is from New Guinea. The collection reached beyond the colonies when the private collection of E.F. ten Houten, formed of objects from Borneo (Dayak) and West and Central Africa were given on long term loan (Schotanus, Arnoldus-Schröder and De Jonge 1). Together they formed the set on which the ethnographic museum was founded, and opened in 1978 as Museum

(22)

Gerardus van der Leeuw31_{under supervision of an anthropologist. The collection continued through a}

policy of accumulation and grew to include the Australia, South and Southeast Asia, the Southern Oceans, West, Central and South-Africa, North, Mid and South America, so that its collection came to cover the whole world outside Europe in a general sense (Schotanus, Arnoldus-Schröder and De Jonge 3).

The museum struggled financially and the local government could not see much use in the museum’s mission of ‘ethnographic education’. The museum had to close in 2003, but the collection of some 8000 objects was kept in the National University of Groningen. Since then the collection has been exhibited sporadically in the Groninger Universiteitsmuseum (Schotanus, Arnoldus-Schröder and De Jonge 1).

Conclusions

The six remaining ethnographic museums in the Netherlands are characterized by a wide scope that purports to acquaint the visitor or user of the collection with the entire world or an entire continent. The shared history of the ethnographic collections has been of the essence to the quantity and quality of certain themes, regions, cultures and types of object. Taking inventory of the collections in the six museums under discussion reveals the bias towards Southeast Asia, the cultural region of the

Netherlands’ prized colony and the waters of its tradesmen (Kistemaker et al.). In the second halves of the 20th century Museums wanted to disassociate themselves from their colonial, trade and missionary motives. They redefined themselves as ‘world museums’ and made efforts to widen the scope of their collection.32 Later collection trends such as the quick and cheap accumulation of contemporary objects of use and photographs never matched the scale of the founding collections.

The historical developments of ethnographic collecting also resulted in a number of other overzealous interests. A preoccupation with ‘strange’ and ‘primitive’ cultures caused early collectors to overlook the urban cultures and those that were more similar to European ‘civilization’. Next to European ethnographers (volkskundigen), the colonial collectors were also inclined towards rural areas. Their interest in objects and modes of production led them to the countryside. This interest in what is considered ‘low culture’ runs parallel with a general tendency towards ‘high culture’ and ‘quality’. There has always been a bias for the finer examples of objects, the more aesthetic and significant, which could add to the status of the collection and the collector (Smith “Uses of Heritage”).

Subsequently these ethnographic collections do not represent the norm of a culture or people, but the norm in Dutch ethnographic museums.

31_{Gerardus van der Leeuw was a theologist under whom Van Baaren studied.} 32_{The Afrika Museum encompasses the entire African continent.}

(23)

In addition to these historical trends, the arbitrary nature of some of the collections is due to the whim of collectors. Similarly, museum acquisition policies have coincided with the interests and

specializations of its ethnographers. People started their collections accidentally and incidentally (Belk 318-20), often with an object from a certain region that they were in some way affiliated with (Van Brakel, int). The motives for collecting were varied, including hording, souveneering, scientific interest, curiosity and status (Effert 16). The collections that resulted from this individual behaviour and the historical context formed the founding collections for the ethnographic museums.

Previous typologies for ethnographic museums were based on the origin of the museums, such as ‘scientific’, ‘colonial’ and ‘missionary’ (Effert 9), but none of these can be used exclusively. Amid globalisation, the museums converted into ‘world museums’. In reality, the collections can only fulfil this profile in general terms. Furthermore, a certain region is completely overlooked. The collections of the ‘world museums’ are only concerned with non-Western cultures, while the ‘national museums’ such as the Openluchtmuseum, are only concerned with the Netherlands. The local-global division in the field that is also implied in the distinction between European ethnography (volkskunde) and ethnography (volkenkunde) neglects neighbouring cultures. Neither type of museum is interested in European collections and ethnography, and non-native cultures of North America are disregarded as well.33

How, then, do these non-Western collections compare with the non-Western immigrants in the Netherlands? And how did the composition of the Dutch immigrant population develop?

33_{For example, Museum Volkenkunde expanded its collection with modern Native American culture, but not} with ‘Western culture’ (Museum Volkenkunde, “Collectieprofielen” 295).

(24)

Chapter 2:

The History and Composition of

the Immigrant Population in the Netherlands

Ethnographic collecting preceded substantial immigration and was for a long time the only means by which the general Dutch population was acquainted with other cultures. In the course of the 19th

century contact with travellers and immigrants from outside Europe became increasingly frequent. In the twentieth century immigration increased exponentially and immigrant cultures began to form large, visible contingents in Dutch society. Currently the Netherlands is an immigration country, with more people moving in than away (Zorlu and Hartog 2), but migration has come in waves from different areas.

In the Dutch Golden Age between the 16th_{and 17}th_{century the Netherlands’ supposedly tolerant}

climate attracted political, social, religious and economic refugees from warzones and neighbouring regions with less tolerant regimes. At the time more people were immigrating to the Netherlands then there were emigrating (Zorlu and Hartog 2-3). When the Dutch Golden Age was over its height cultural and economic development of the country stagnated and so did immigration. From the mid 18th century immigration started to decline sharply and the existing immigrant population dissolved into society (Zorlu and Hartog 3). Immigration surpluses re-occurred for less fortunate reasons. During the First World War thousands of Belgian refugees flocked across the border, and before and during the Second World War opponents and people persecuted by the Nazi regime fled from Germany (Zorlu and Hartog 3). After a post-war period of emigration the Netherlands had 10 million inhabitants (Zorlu and Hartog 20).

In the second half of the twentieth century immigration flows fluctuated (Zorlu and Hartog 4) due to de-colonisation and economic and political unrest in specific areas of the world. Mobility had greatly increased and immigrants were arriving in large numbers from the peripheries of Europe and beyond, also from the far corners that had been explored in the Golden Age, along the trade routes and from the colonies. In order to examine parallels with the composition of ethnographic collections this chapter describes the history of their arrival and integration. The immigrants that settled in the Netherlands during the second half of the twentieth century and make up the current immigrant population are commonly described in three categories: from the former colonies, guest workers, and

(25)

refugees. Each of the categories will be discussed in terms of history, composition and integration. Then, the composition of the immigrant population will be given according to the country of birth of the first generation and the country of birth of one or both of the parents of the second generation.

Post-colonial immigrants

The header of this section is ‘post-colonial immigrants’ rather than ‘immigrants from the colonies’, so as to include the Netherlands Antilles, the only former colony that has remained part of Dutch

Kingdom.34 In his book ‘Postcolonial Netherlands: Sixty-five years of forgetting, commemorating, silencing’35_{on post-colonial immigrants in the Netherlands, Gert Oostindie defines immigrants as}

‘post-colonial’ in reference to the origin of the political, cultural and economic ties that resulted from colonisation by the Netherlands and led to immigration before, during and after decolonisation as well as from countries that remained part of the Kingdom (Oostindie 23-4). Henceforth, ‘post-colonial’ will be used to denote relations and practices that find their cause in historical Dutch colonialism.36

De-colonisation caused two large waves of migration from the former colonies: one from Indonesia around 1949 and another around 1975, from Surinam (Zorlu and Hartog 4). A third less abrupt wave came from the territories that remained part of the Dutch Kingdom (Oostindie 23). The ‘loss’ of other colonies before the twentieth century, such as the Cape, parts of Brazil, the New Netherlands and Formosa did not cause such immigration waves, since mobility across the Oceans was still limited (see Figure 1.1).

The largest segment of the post-colonial immigrants, and the first to arrive, were Indonesian. When Japan took control of the colony during the Second World War they overthrew and incarcerated the colonisers. In the following years Sukarno awakened a strong national sentiment for independence in the native Indonesians. Indonesia became independent under Sukarno in 1949. The events were loaded with resentment towards the colonisers and associates (Oostindie 26-7). The hostile situation led anyone who was classified as European to repatriate, out of disempowerment rather than willingness (Oostindie 26-8). From 1945 and in the decade after independence many people immigrated to the Netherlands. They were Dutch nationals and Indonesians of numerous ethnic minority groups that had

34_{Except for Aruba.}

35_{Original title: ‘Postkoloniaal Nederland. Vijfenzestig jaar vergeten, herdenken, verdringen’ is Oostindie’s}

publication on a 4 year research program under his supervision collaboration with the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW), The International Institute of Social History (ISSH), The Meertens Institute (MI) and the Royal Netherlands Institute of Southeast Asian and Caribbean Studies (KITLV).

36_{In this context, the term ‘post-colonial’ is not meant to indicate Western relations of subjugation in general, as} is often done.

(26)

been involved with the colonisers. Among them were many children of Dutch or mixed parents who had been born in Indonesia (Zorlu and Hartog 4).

Moluccans of a subpopulation that inhabited a central constellation of islands in Indonesia moved at a later stage. Almost all of the Moluccan immigrants were people who served in the Koninklijk

Nederlands Indonesisch Leger (KNIL, Royal Dutch East-Indian Army) and their families. They had

supported the coloniser and later the efforts for an independent Moluccan country (Republik Maluku Selatan, RMS) (Oostindie 28). The Dutch government backed out of the conception of the RMS when it backed out of Indonesia and demobilized the KNIL in 1951. Associated with the coloniser and without their own state soldiers of the KNIL were forced to leave their country. They came to the Netherlands in the hopes of returning (Oostindie 28, Zorlu and Hartog 4). Another sub-population that immigrated to the Netherlands from Indonesia after independence were Chinese who had immigrated to in Indonesia in the late nineteenth century (De Jong, int.).37

For a while the Dutch Government maintained hopes of re-establishing authority in Indonesia, but in 1960s gave up on its colonial policy. Thus Surinam gained independence in 1975. Part of the reason had been to halt immigration (Oostindie 33-4), but a large immigration wave from Surinam occurred immediately after (Zorlu and Hartog 5). Eventually the size of the Surinamese immigrant population in the Netherlands equalled a third of the Surinamese population and a representative section of its demographics (Oostindie 33).

Immigration from the Netherlands Antilles started up last. The ethnic composition of the Islands is varied, yet mostly descendant from Africans who were brought over by the Dutch slave trade (Oostindie 38). Even more extensive than with Surinam, the size of the Antillean population in the Netherlands was half as big as the population that remained on the Netherlands Antilles. With exception of Aruba (independent since 1986) the Netherlands Antilles are still part of the Dutch Kingdom and thus entitled to live in the Netherlands (Oostindie 36-7).

Immigrants from the former colonies were often already acquainted with the Dutch language and culture (Zorlu and Hartog 11), though to different effect. The perenakan enjoyed the same education as the Dutch and integrated exceptionally successfully (Oostindie 28-9). Despite familiarity with their (former) colonisers, the Surinamese and Antilleans profited little more in terms of education than immigrants who were less accustomed to the culture (Zorlu and Hartog 22). Surinamese integration was partially successful in terms of employment and education, but varied according to the standing of different ethnic groups in Surinam (Oostindie 35-6). Integration of immigrants from the Netherlands

37_{This group consisted of Indonesian-Chinese who maintained Chinese customs, and perenakan who adopted} Malaysian customs to bridge the difference between Chinese and Indonesian culture. Another group of Chinese immigrants, hakkas, arrived through Surinam.

(27)

Antilles has been ‘least successful’ and increasingly problematic (Oostindie 38, Zorlu and Hartog 13). The Moluccan integration used to be problematic and resulted in confrontation and terrorism (Zorlu and Hartog 22). As they intended to return to Indonesia or the RMS, which was never conceived, they initially did not to integrate in Dutch society (Zorlu and Hartog 4). At present the post-colonial

immigrant population (first and second generation) is 867.379 people strong. Including Indonesia, they account for almost half the non-Western immigrant population (Tables 2.1-2.2).

Guest workers

In the post-war boom of the 1960s there was a need for unskilled ‘guest workers’ (gastarbeiders). The Dutch government set up international treaties that facilitated migration of labourers, mostly from countries around the Mediterranean, to accommodate the demands of employers. The guest workers were recruited or came on their own account. The employers and government had intended them to leave after their employment, but only 30% returned (Zorlu and Hartog 9). The arrival of people from Italy, Spain, Portugal, Turkey, Morocco, Yugoslavia and Tunisia boosted immigration, which has outnumbered migration since. When unemployment rates became high in the 1970s because of the first oil crisis, return rates actually decreased (Zorlu and Hartog 5). The facilitating policies were halted, but inflow continued, especially from Turkey and Morocco (Zorlu and Hartog 21). In the 1970s the guest workers were joined by their families and in the 1980s and 1990s new families were formed with new immigrants from the guest worker’s countries of origin (Zorlu and Hartog 5). When a second oil crisis occurred in the early 1980s the economic position of Moroccan and Turkish immigrant populations were most affected (Zorlu and Hartog 12-3). For the guest workers from Turkey and Morocco the level of schooling is lowest and shortest. They are also at the bottom of the labour market, largely because of discrimination (Zorlu and Hartog 12, 13). Guest workers from South European Mediterranean countries have integrated better, at least in terms of the labour market position (Zorlu and Hartog 12). There were fewer immigrants from other Mediterranean countries after the first oil crisis, but Moroccan and Turkish immigration continued due to family reunion and formation. Immigration also continued to increase due to a new, third immigrant category of refugees (Zorlu and Hartog 5). At the moment, the size of the combined Turkish and Moroccan immigrant population is 771.410. The Turkish immigrant population is slightly bigger (Table 2.2).

Refugees

In the 1980s there was a sharp increase of asylum requests with people fleeing violence and

oppression in Turkey, Sri Lanka, Surinam, Poland, Ghana and Somalia. In the 1990s refugees came from Bosnia-Herzegovina, Iran, Irak, Sri Lanka, Yugoslavia and Somalia (Zorlu and Hartog 8). At present substantial numbers of refugees are coming from over thirty countries, many of them in

Representing Cultural Diversity: Non-Western Ethnographic Collections in the Culturally Diverse Netherlands

Laura Verstappen

10889302