In a study guide written in 1651, Gisbertus Voetius (1589–1676) reported that libraries had been subjected to no fewer than three purges over the course of the previous centuries. The first was when, due to new ideas during the Renaissance, the works of many medieval writers were considered worthless and removed. Subsequently, old copies of books were deemed obsolete when the typographically outstanding editions of publishers such as Aldus (Venice), Estienne (Paris), Gryphius (Lyon), Plantin (Antwerp) and Wechel (Paris) emerged onto the market. And, lastly, the Council of Trent triggered a clear-out of books considered heretical.1
Voetius, an orthodox Calvinist, chose not to mention that Protestants too, in their hatred of Catholics, had had a hand in the destruction of books. Thus, in 1573 the Abbey of Egmond, the oldest and most important abbey of Holland during the Middle Ages, was torched by William of Orange’s men after the monks had been expelled to allow for the billeting of 600 soldiers. The library was plundered and its rich collection broken up. During the Iconoclastic Fury, the library collections of other monasteries and churches were similarly destroyed. Books, particularly liturgical books, were sold off to wholesalers as waste paper. In Leiden in 1574, liturgical books were used to glue together thick paper boards so that emergency coins could be punched out of them.2 Manuscripts, charters, chronicles or annals were occasionally spared, ending up in the hands of historians who published them.3
Other collections were confiscated and handed over to new city or university libraries, particularly the city libraries of Amsterdam and Deventer and the university libraries of Utrecht and Franeker. Monasteries were proscribed in the Republic of the Seven United Provinces, but the Jesuits, Dominicans, Franciscans, Augustinians, and Carmelites served a number of staties or city parishes as pastoral ministers and created small statie libraries there. Monasteries were permitted in the enclaves of North-East Brabant that fell under the jurisdiction of Catholic foreign princes. On 3 January 1812, however, Napoleon issued the decree that suppressed all religious orders in the departments united to the French Empire and declared all their property forfeit to the state. This also applied to the monasteries in the department of the Bouches-du-Rhin, which was comprised of the districts of ’s-Hertogenbosch, Eindhoven and Nijmegen. Inventories had to be drawn up of all books, paintings and statues owned by the monasteries. Many books from the monasteries of Sint Agatha, Megen, Uden, Velp and Boxmeer were transferred in 1812 to ’s-Hertogenbosch, the departmental capital, to make up the planned new departmental library that was to be housed in the city hall. These plans were abandoned after Napoleon’s fall, and it is unclear what happened to the books that were taken from the monasteries. A Crosier Father from Sint Agatha anticipated the confiscation and took clandestine measures to safeguard the most valuable volumes.4
The forced breaking up of monastic libraries that took place elsewhere in Europe as a result of the French Revolution and of secularisation of church property had few repercussions in the Northern Netherlands, simply because there were almost no monasteries left. The libraries of the enclave monasteries were the oldest Dutch monastic libraries that were still in their original location.
In 1840, the new king William II allowed existing religious communities to accept new candidates, while other communities were able to return to the country and new communities founded. New foundations were made primarily in the traditionally Catholic southern provinces of North Brabant and Limburg. New monasteries needed books, for “a monastery without books is like a city without walls” (“Monasterium sine libris est sicut civitas sine opibus”), as the medieval dictum went. First and foremost, they needed liturgical books for mass and the divine office, and devotional literature and books for meditation to cater to their members’ spiritual lives. The houses of active congregations – and these were the institutes that experienced most of the growth in the second half of the 19th century – usually did not require large study libraries. Their main requirement were handbooks in the fields of their apostolate, like education, healthcare or care for the disabled. Institutes built up their libraries through donations from friendly priests, learned neighbours or monasteries abroad. There was often very little budget for purchasing from booksellers or antiquarians, particularly during the early stages.
Monasteries that served as houses of studies did need proper study libraries; the old statie libraries frequently formed the nucleus of a fonds ancien. The secular seminaries established after the restoration of the hierarchy (1853) similarly needed libraries: the diocese of Utrecht first in Culemborg (Kuilenburg), and from 1857 onwards in Rijsenburg; the diocese of ’s-Hertogenbosch in Haaren; the diocese of Roermond in Roermond; the diocese of Breda in Hoeven, and the diocese of Haarlem in Warmond. This latter college was the continuation of a seminary founded in 1799 for the clergy of the Northern Netherlands, and this enabled the library of Warmond to become the largest seminary library in the country.5
The so-called “Rijke Roomse leven,” the flourishing of organised, socially and culturally segregated Catholicism in the first half of the 20th century also saw rising vocations to the religious life and the priesthood, and consequently occasioned the expansion of monastery and seminary libraries. A contributory factor was the consciousness that Dutch Catholics were behind in the intellectual field. In 1899, the Catholic literary scholar M.A.P.C. Poelhekke (1864–1925) gave a lecture to the Amsterdam Catholic electoral association on “The Catholic deficit in science,” in which he appealed to his co-religionaries to close the gap. This endeavour required academically trained professors in the seminaries and houses of studies, and that in turn necessitated better-stocked libraries. As the Franciscan Fr. Bonaventura Kruitwagen (1874–1954) wrote in 1912 in the daily De Maasbode in reference to the library of the envisaged Catholic university, “the Library … is the arsenal, from which scientific weapons must be provided.”
The existing buildings were not always well suited for heavy bookcases. In 1893, the collection of the Franciscan library of Alverna monastery in Wijchen had grown so large that the floors in the recently constructed building began to sag under the weight of the books. One wall of the library had to be fitted with anchors.6
During the first half of the 20th century, the study libraries of the main orders and congregations expanded into imposing and sizeable collections. This was true for the ‘central’ libraries of the Redemptorists in Wittem, the Jesuits in Maastricht (the ‘Canisianum’), and the Dominicans in Nijmegen (the ‘Albertinum’). The Brothers of Maastricht, a teaching order, established a Central Library in 1930 to provide study books to teachers who were taking secondary or academic degrees. It also served as a repository library for the books discarded by the house libraries of the congregation.7 Other orders, like the Franciscans and Capuchins, maintained separate libraries in the various monasteries, but created central catalogues so that they would have oversight over their collections. Thus the Franciscans set up a General Provincial Catalogue (‘Algemene Provincie Kataloog’ or APK) in 1931. The Capuchins entrusted the task of compiling a central catalogue to Fr. Theobald van Etten, OFMCap (1909–1998), who went to Rome and Vienna to take courses in library studies in preparation for his duties. He had to leave Vienna in the summer of 1938 after the Anschluss, the annexation of Austria by Germany. Upon his return home, he began work on the central provincial catalogue in ’s-Hertogenbosch, arranging all Capuchin libraries according to the same subject-based system (the Dewey decimal classification system). The introduction of provincial catalogues by the Capuchins and Franciscans meant that their librarians had to visit every friary in the country to catalogue the books on site. By 1970, the Capuchin central catalogue comprised a total of 110,000 titles.8
The growing riches of the libraries of Dutch religious also attracted the attention of outsiders, particularly in the Royal Library in The Hague. Philipp Christiaan Molhuysen (1870–1944) was appointed librarian of the Royal Library in 1921. Following the example of central catalogues in Berlin and Frankfurt, he began creating a Dutch Central Catalogue (‘Nederlandse Centrale Catalogus’ or CC) in 1922, to acquire greater insight into the various holdings spread across the country.9 The creation of the CC was possible because participating libraries sent doubles of their catalogues to the Royal Library, either in the form of one-sided printed sheets that were subsequently cut up to form catalogue cards, or of printed catalogues, out of which the titles were cut to be pasted onto cards. The cards were then arranged into a single alphabetical system. In 1931, Molhuysen estimated that the catalogue then contained 600,000 titles. The number of participating libraries grew to about forty in 1937, most of them of Protestant origins, such as the great university libraries of Leiden, Utrecht and Amsterdam.10 The library of the Roman Catholic University of Nijmegen had only been founded in 1923 and was a work in progress. But Molhuysen was keen to expand the Catholic presence in the CC. In 1930 he was able to report that the Jesuits of the ‘Berchmanianum’ in Nijmegen regularly sent titles to the Royal Library by the hundreds, “so that this great library of Jesuit material is now also available to scholarship.”11 In late 1936, Molhuysen visited the Franciscan monastery in Venray to ask whether the APK might be included in the CC, as he wanted to increase the presence of Catholic material in the CC before he retired. The Franciscans consented, and soon titles from the Franciscan libraries began to appear in the CC.12 Leendert Brummel (1897–1976), Molhuysen’s successor, similarly tried to increase the Catholic presence in the CC. In 1938, he wrote that it was important that the monastery libraries should be included in the CC, given the “special [nature] of their collections.” He reported that the Dominicans and the Jesuits of the ‘Canisianum’ in Maastricht had now also agreed to participate,13 and soon the cards of the Capuchin central catalogue were included in the CC too. These various efforts to enhance the CC ensured that at least part of the rich collections of Dutch religious became known outside the confines of their monasteries. Books in the participating libraries could be requested through the Royal Library. The Franciscans received 40 requests in 1940, with the number rising to more than 2,000 in 1962.14
Capuchin fathers Theobaldus van Etten (r) and Eduardus van Asten (l) with their card catalogues
Fotocollectie Paters Kapucijnen, TilburgThe growth of the monastery libraries necessitated a certain professionalisation, including with regard to the material care of the books. In 1911, the sister charged with cleaning the library of the Carmel of ’s-Hertogenbosch was instructed to remove dust and cobwebs at least once a month, and to take measures against damage done by ants and other insects.15 But such cleaning activities were only the start of it.
The professionalisation of monastery and seminary librarians received an important boost in 1947 when the ‘Vereniging van Seminarie- en Kloosterbibliothecarissen’ (Association of Seminary and Monastery Librarians, VSKB) was founded. According to its bylaws, the organisation was to facilitate mutual contacts between the librarians, as well as further “the practice of library science and of the related sciences and skills.” It did this for example by organising courses comprising written lessons and assignments as well as a series of oral lectures given during a number of weeks in the library of the Catholic university in Nijmegen. Participants were also required to take a one- or two-week traineeship in an academic library. The course was concluded by an exam supervised by clerics as well as a number of librarians.16
Learning how to catalogue according to the official rules was an important aspect of the course, as was the proper care of books, especially old books, of which there was an abundance. In his brochure De Seminarie- en Kloosterbibliotheken in Nederland (The Seminary and Monastery Libraries of the Netherlands), Fr. Bakker, SSS proffered an explanation for the large number of old editions: “Their [= the seminary and monastery libraries] book collection consists primarily of works from the Catholic theological sciences or related disciplines, while classical and Christian philosophy is also strongly represented everywhere. A striking consequence of this theological orientation is that the ‘average age’ of the books, even in the more recent libraries, is considerably higher than elsewhere.”17
One of the purposes of the VSKB courses was to teach monastery and seminary librarians to be more careful in their handling of old books. There were good reasons for including this in the curriculum, as monastery collections often contained valuable manuscripts and old editions that were not always receiving proper care. Fr. Piet Cools, MSC (1904–1973), one of the founders of the VSKB, wrote a practical guide Over het conserveren van boeken (On the conservation of books) in 1948, which gave practical recommendations. In the VSKB’s journal Mededelingen van de VSKB (VSKB Notices), Cools’ confrere Fr. Jac. Nouwens, MSC (1912–1992) described a number of incidents that he had witnessed during research for his doctoral dissertation De veelvuldige H. Communie in de geestelijke literatuur der Nederlanden vanaf het midden van de 16e eeuw tot in de eerste helft van de 18e eeuw (The Frequent Reception of Holy Communion in the Spiritual Literature of the Low Countries from the Mid-16th Century up to the First Half of the 18th Century), which had required visits to many monastery libraries. He mentioned not only the ubiquitous stamps placed on the frontispieces even of old editions, but also ‘temptations’ of cleaning. Certain books were regarded as worthless because their binding was damaged. And he learned that one anonymous convent had burned a number of cases containing 17th- and 18th-century pious literature as part of a “great clean-up programme.”18 Careless treatment of old library possessions is a perennial problem. In 1853, Dirk Groebe, the custos of the Amsterdam city library, was summarily dismissed after an inquiry by Frederik Muller found that the library’s rooms were dirty and smoke-filled, and the manuscripts were treated carelessly: “lectures were given using manuscripts, which were therefore subject to wear, and what is more, were in danger of being stained by ink pots that are toppled over.”19 Moreover, valuable manuscripts and archival material certainly also disappeared from monasteries. Thus the Crosier monastery in Sint Agatha, which has been the home of the ‘Erfgoedcentrum Nederlands Kloosterleven’ (Heritage Centre for the Religious Life in the Netherlands) since 2006, whose purpose is to be a safe treasure house for monastic heritage, sold three of its six medieval graduals between 1855 and 1863. In 1911 the Nederlandsch archievenblad (Dutch Archives Journal) reported on the “incredible fact” that the Crosier Fathers had sold part of their archives (“a chest with old deeds of purchase and other papers, including some dating from 1450”) for a risible price, or even for nothing.20 Many more monastic heritage items probably disappeared in a similar way, but of course we have no knowledge of things that are no longer there.
For the Dutch Catholic church, the 1960s were marked on the one hand by a revival brought about by the Second Vatican Council, and on the other by the beginning of the numerical decline of religious and the first closures of monasteries.21 The Second Vatican Council (1962–1965) opened the windows not only of the church, but also of monastery libraries. Its decree Perfectae caritatis explicitly called for this. Religious “should be properly instructed, in keeping with each one’s intellectual calibre and personal bent, concerning the behaviour patterns, the emotional attitudes, and the tough processes of modern society. … All through their lives, religious should endeavour assiduously to perfect their spiritual, doctrinal and technical culture. Superiors, as far as they are able, should provide for them the opportunity, assistance and the time for this.”22 This also implied that monastery libraries should open their shelves to a wider range of books.
Libraries always occupied a lot of physical space in the monasteries, and as space became scarce, the question often arose: “Must we really keep everything?” If the reply was in the negative, then the follow-up question was, “What do we throw out?” One of the first monasteries to be confronted with shortage of space was the ‘Albertinum’, the Dominican house in Nijmegen. Drastic improvement and expansion required money. A plan was drawn up in 1961 to obtain the necessary funds by selling “certain old manuscripts and editions that have no or little value for the study of theology, but that bibliophiles regard as very valuable.” According to estimates, the collection might even raise 500,000 guilders. These precious objects, the argument went, were a valuable possession, but they were not used, “they are shown to curious visitors, twice or three times a year at most.” Nor were they kept in a fireproof location. According to the friars of the ‘Albertinum’ – with the exception of Fr. Joseph Cools, OP (1898–1975), who was opposed on principle – a sale would “not be a crime against culture; on the contrary, it would be doing culture a service by transferring these precious objects to an institute where they can be used.” Feelers were put out in America, and a professor not mentioned by name at Harvard University said he expected that Harvard would be prepared to pay the desired sum of 500,000 guilders. If not, he believed it would be possible to find a market in the US for your manuscript and book collection.23 The sale to an American library never transpired, but a few years later twelve manuscripts, include the 11th-century Nijmegen Gospel Codex, were sold by the Dominicans to the Royal Library in The Hague for 74,750 guilders, a sum that included 50,000 guilders for the masterpiece, the Nijmegen Gospel Codex.24 The transaction caused outrage, especially in Nijmegen. In the journal Numaga, the historian L.J. Rogier (1894–1974) fumed against the sale of what he regarded as Nijmegen cultural heritage that should have been kept in the city, and specifically in Nijmegen university library.25 Fr. W. Driessen, OP (1920–1993), the prior of the ‘Albertinum’, defended the decision in an official statement: “The most important reason that motivated us to sell, is the conviction that these manuscripts would go to an internationally known repository of manuscripts, where they would be preserved and cared for to a much higher standard than would ever be possible in the Albertinum.”26 He said that the community had come to its decision in the spring of 1963, after the cold winter of 1962/63 when melting snow had seeped into the building and damaged one of the manuscripts. Nijmegen university library did not at the time have a manuscript collection to speak of and had therefore not been a serious candidate for the Dominicans.27 In 1970, Fr. S. Wolfs, OP asserted that it could be positively proved of none of the 12 manuscripts that they had been in the possession of the Dominicans before the 19th century.28 Reports of the transaction to the Royal Library, which Rogier described as a vanishing act on the quiet through private sale, made the national press. It would not be the last time that the ‘squandering’ of monastic heritage appeared in the newspapers.
Fr. Gerlach Schummer (1901–1987), archivist of the Capuchin monastery in ’s-Hertogenbosch, referred to the Dominican manuscript sale in a speech he gave “On the usefulness, meaning and value of old holdings in seminary and monastery libraries” at the VSKB’s general meeting on 2 and 3 November 1966. His purpose was to understand the motives for sifting out old holdings in monastery and seminary libraries. He dismissed as irrelevant the Dominicans’ argument that the manuscripts they sold to the Royal Library would be “of greater service” to the community there. If treasures held ‘at home’ were not receiving the attention they deserved, they should be given greater publicity. Fr. Gerlach’s premise in 1966 was still that the sifting out and discarding of old holdings was undesirable: “Your old holdings represent not only cultural, but also material value. If you discard or sift them out, you will diminish your library, as well as your community, at whose service you are.” If the shortage of space was acute, it was of course necessary to make a selection, but Fr. Schummer gave more criteria for keeping books than practical advice for getting rid of them.29 Fr. Herwig Ooms, OFM (1914–2010) spoke at the same meeting and treated the “specialist documentalist libraries” that the various houses of studies required, and which had little use for old editions. In a reply to Fr. Schummer, Fr. Ooms argued that a distinction should be made between an “up-to-date specialised library” and the central library of a religious institute. The central library’s task was to “compile a reasoned arsenal, that should nevertheless be as complete as possible, of religious and scholarly life, not only in the present, but also in the past.” This could serve as repository library for old editions. The old holdings were not to be discarded, but neither did they have to be tied absolutely to a particular place.30
In retrospect, Ooms’s invitation to have the audacity to move old library holdings was a harbinger of countless relocations of library collections to come. In 1964, the VSBK submitted a grant application to the ‘Rijkscommissie van Advies inzake het Bibliotheekwezen’ (National Libraries Advisory Committee), so as to compensate libraries that participated in the Central Catalogue for the costs they incurred while making their collections accessible to external parties.31 The ‘Rijkscommissie’ was receptive to the request, but preferred to await a report that would make recommendations. A subcommittee was established to this end, and it reported in March 1966. Its conclusion was that “it would render greater service to the public good if the VSKB libraries can be made more accessible.” The minister was asked to disburse almost 60,000 guilders to the VSKB with a view to compiling a central catalogue of the seminary and monastery libraries that were not yet participating in the Central Catalogue of the Royal Library, and whose joint collections were estimated to comprise 2 million books.32 However, developments within the Catholic church soon overtook the minister’s decision. In a concluding memorandum drafted by the subcommittee, Fr. Mehring, OFM wrote: “In the first half of 1967 it is becoming ever clearer that many church libraries in the Netherlands are adrift … The observation that the libraries affected by the concentration of seminaries are in full development due to relocation, mergers, liquidations or reorganisations, leads us to conclude that the situation has changed to such an extent that the basis underlying the plan of the VSKB’s CC subcommittee has been swept away. In the current situation (which is still evolving), there is little use in reproducing the (local) catalogues of the (former) seminary and monastery libraries, as a central catalogue that cannot guarantee the accuracy of the indicated location is useless.”33 The subcommittee was relieved of its duties in September 1968.
In the second half of the 1960s, the decline in the number of new candidates for the religious life and the priesthood was steep indeed. This also had an impact on the houses of studies and their libraries. In 1953, there were no fewer than 79 houses of studies in the Netherlands, belonging to 35 religious institutes, which often had separate philosophates and theologates, in addition to five diocesan major seminaries.34 All these institutions had their own library collections, which they had carefully built up over the years. Their collections were intended first and foremost for their own residents (religious and students), but as has been seen, some of the larger libraries participated in the Royal Library’s Central Catalogue, and were therefore also accessible to external readers.
The second half of the 1960s saw the concentration of seminaries in five ‘Katholieke Instellingen voor Wetenschappelijk Theologisch Onderwijs’ (Catholic Institutions for Academic Theological Education, KIWTOs), in addition to the theological faculty of the Catholic university of Nijmegen. The KIWTOs were located in Amsterdam, Eindhoven, Heerlen, Tilburg and Utrecht. The ‘Theologisch Instituut Eindhoven’ (Eindhoven Theological Institute) closed its doors already in 1970, due to falling student numbers.35 The closing of many houses of studies also entailed the relocation of their collections. Often the books moved to the new seminary, or other institution of theological learning. Thus the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart, the Missionaries of the Holy Family, the Divine Word Missionaries and the Capuchins joined forces to form the Tilburg Theological Faculty. The study libraries of the three first-mentioned institutes moved to Tilburg as a kind of start-up capital, to which were added the relatively small (5,000 volumes), but very specialised library of the ‘Nederlands Liturgisch Centrum’ (Dutch Liturgical Centre) in Nijmegen in 1970, the library of the major seminary of Haaren in 1974, and the collections of the Capuchin monasteries in 1975.36
In Utrecht, the diocesan major seminary Rijsenburg and the Franciscans established the ‘Katholieke Theologische Hogeschool Utrecht’ (Catholic Theological University, Utrecht, KTHU), which soon decided to integrate with the theological faculty of the university of Utrecht. The libraries of Rijsenburg and of the Franciscans were eventually sold to the university in 1971, albeit not without many difficulties, including a threat by the occupiers of Rijsenburg that they would torch the books if the police attempted to evict them.37
Many more books were taken off their shelves and placed in moving boxes around 1970. Most of the Jesuit library in Maastricht went to Amsterdam, as the Jesuits participated in the Catholic theological university of Amsterdam. A smaller part remained in Maastricht and became part of the library of the new state university of Limburg.
In Nijmegen, the Roman Catholic university founded in 1923 had inspired many orders and congregations to establish monasteries and houses of studies in this city, earning it the moniker of ‘Monnikendam on the Waal’, a humoristic reference to the town of Monnickendam (‘monks’ dam’). The library of the theological faculty was moved to the ‘Albertinum’, the Dominican priory, in 1970, and the Dominican library was opened to staff and students of the faculty. Nijmegen university library purchased the sizeable collection of the Redemptorist monastery in Wittem for 2,400,000 guilders in 1975, as well as the libraries of the Jesuit Canisius College and the diocesan minor seminary of Apeldoorn. In 1995, the Dominicans decided after much deliberation to donate their entire library to the Catholic university. Like all goodbyes, this was a painful one. The provincial council of the Dominicans announced the transfer to the friars as follows: “We recognise the feelings of disappointment, of sadness also, that we are about to make a decision on whether to maintain and curate our own library. Letting go of such a beautiful library and transferring it to others is painful. All the more so for our order, [an order] of preachers who study and meditate on reality, as it sets great store by the right to own books. Even individually, we are reluctant to let go of our own libraries, let alone of a library built up by generations of Dominicans.” But it was no longer seen as financially or logistically viable to keep the library. At the formal handover on 25 April 1996, Fr. David van Ooijen, OP said: “We are now … handing over our library to the Catholic university, so that it may continue to be available in the future for the practice of the sacred disciplines.” The fact that Nijmegen university had to pay the Redemptorists handsomely for their library in 1975, while the Dominicans donated theirs in 1995 for free is telling of the changes that had taken place in twenty years’ time. In fact, the collection came with funds made available by the Dominicans for the purchase of Dominican-interest books for the coming decade.38
Library of the Redemptorist monastery at Wittem
Erfgoedcentrum Nederlands Kloosterleven, collectie RedemptoristenThe fact that so many books went adrift from the mid-1960s onwards was cause for some concern. At its annual meeting in October 1969, the VSKB decided to ask the Dutch bishops and the ‘Stichting Nederlandse Priesterreligieuzen’ (Association of Dutch Priest Religious, the Dutch conference of clerical religious orders) to set up a committee “to assess what the needs and possibilities are with regard to church libraries and to make recommendations on future policy to the owners.”39 The resulting ‘Commissie Kerkelijke Bibliotheken’ (Church Libraries Committee), established in May 1970, set to work compiling a global inventory of the 2.5 million books in the existing Dutch monastery and seminary libraries, “an essential section … of the total Dutch patrimony of books,” “spread across dozens of depots and in the possession of almost as many owners.”40 The ‘Rijkscommissie van Advies inzake het Bibliotheekwezen’ was represented on the ‘Commissie Kerkelijke Bibliotheken’ by three library science experts. The committee concluded that the concentration of the seminaries had resulted in a dichotomy between libraries used for educational purposes on the one hand, and repository libraries on the other. The latter were described as follows: “They have often grown out of old residual collections and have incorporated all kinds of things: libraries of former monasteries and staties, bequests from former professors or members of the community, or from external friends.” They had lost their role in the training of new members and “will therefore have to be put to other uses in serving the community,” according to the committee. The repository function of these libraries was not limited to theology, but also included “books from adjacent disciplines that have only a tenuous direct link with [theology] or none at all, such as history, literature and philology, and incidentally other varied fields of interest, though mainly in the humanities.”41 The variety of subjects in these collections can be easily explained. Every monastery had to be self-supporting, and this was reflected in the monastery library: all knowledge that its inhabitants needed had to be drawn from the collection. The committee advocated keeping library collections intact as much as possible, because every collection in its own way is unique and has its own features. Monastery libraries are “entities with their own character, specifically oriented conglomerates of interlinked collections.”42 The historical value of these collections could be preserved only if they were kept intact.
The committee could only make recommendations – and so it did –, but ultimately the decision was up to the owners. Dioceses and religious institutes eventually all made their own choices on what to do with their collections and archives. Thus the diocese of Breda sold the entire library of its major seminary of Hoeven to the Free University of Amsterdam in 1970, despite a previous undertaking to give the theological faculty of Tilburg, in which the diocese participated, first choice.43
As regards seminary archives, most dioceses chose to deposit these in what are currently known as ‘regional historical centres’, the former regional branches of the national archives. To ensure the preservation of the archives of orders and congregations, the ‘Katholiek Documentatiecentrum’ (Catholic Documentation Centre, KDC) in 1990 founded the Dienstencentrum Kloosterarchieven Nederland (‘Monastery Archives Services Centre of the Netherlands’) in Nijmegen. This centre later became the ‘Erfgoedcentrum Nederlands Kloosterleven’ (Heritage Centre for Religious Life in the Netherlands), which has been housed in the Crosier monastery in Sint Agatha since 2006. The archives of about a hundred religious institutes have since been deposited and made accessible there. Other orders and congregations decided to entrust their archives to their motherhouse in Rome, Paris or elsewhere, and a number preferred a public archival repository instead. Monastery archives also contain library material: publications published by or for an order of congregation. These journals, commemorative publications, constitutions, vocational material, prayer books etc. belong in the archives of the religious institute in question. Very often, they also contain scripta, collected works of their own members. Especially for the older orders and congregations, the material in question is often historically valuable and unique.
It proved difficult to keep intact the seminary and monastery collections that were not absorbed by the new theological institutes. The problem was less acute for substantial, older collections. Thus, the Redemptorist libraries were sold in their entirety to Nijmegen university library in 1975. The manuscripts, incunabula and special works which the Capuchins had retained when they donated their central library to the theological faculty in Tilburg in 1975, were transferred to Tilburg after all in 1998.44 And, incidentally, the purchase of a complete library often did not prevent the new owner from deduplicating the collection.
All in all, it proved impossible to prevent the break-up of collections. The 1973 report of the ‘Commissie Kerkelijke Bibliotheken’ had already pointed out that disassembly of collections was not uncommon in the past, particularly when seminaries were split into separate theology and philosophy institutes.45 And the tradition that new monasteries were endowed with books from the motherhouse was even more venerable.46
Speaking with the possible dismantling of collections in mind, Fr. Gerlach Schummer had made an urgent appeal at the general meeting of the VSBK in 1966 to preserve the old catalogues of monastery libraries. He contended that these catalogues could serve as sources to gauge “the spiritual condition of the religious.”47 He set a good example himself, because the Capuchin archives, of which he took excellent care, contain the catalogues of the libraries of Amsterdam, ’s-Hertogenbosch, Handel, Helmond, Tilburg, Velp and the noviciate in Udenhout.48 The report of the ‘Commissie Kerkelijke Bibliotheken’ similarly emphasised that the catalogue of a collection was important as “a unique document to reconstruct the library and study its historical perspective.” The ‘Katholiek Documentatiecentrum’ declared its willingness to accept catalogues.49 A number of older catalogues in book form have in fact been preserved, but many card catalogues were dismantled together with their libraries and are now lost.
As more monasteries and formation houses were closed, the question what to do with their book collections came to the fore. Solutions were increasingly difficult to find as the market reached saturation point, particularly in respect of run-of-the-mill material: books on theology, church history, meditation, philosophy and reference works that were present in so many collections. Whenever the ‘Katholiek Documentatiecentrum’ and the ‘Dienstencentrum Kloosterarchieven Nederland’, later the ‘Erfgoedcentrum Nederlands Kloosterleven’, were consulted, they recommended that owners should look out particularly for special or unique material. Such items are often humdrum – what is small and undistinguished can very well be unique.
André Maes, the librarian of the ‘Katholiek Documentatiecentrum’, was often asked whether the centre was interested in books that were being discarded. His answer was that the clean-up should be done as follows: there should be two boxes, one labelled ‘Keep’ and the other ‘Wastepaper’, and once the boxes are full, the labels should be switched. The underlying idea was that many copies of beautiful books that look important have been preserved, but material that looks undistinguished may well be unique and absent in other collections.50
As it became more difficult to find new destinations for books, owners frequently considered antiquarians and second-hand bookshops. There was a certain risk that these might abuse the sellers’ lack of expertise. The diocese of Roermond had warned as early as 1940 that “There appear to be certain antiques dealers who are doing the rounds and who are taking advantage of the current circumstances to get a good deal. On the pretext that valuable objects are currently at great risk of being lost or destroyed, they attempt to convince the Rev. Fathers Parish Priests to part with these objects.”51
From the late 1970s onwards, ‘Antiquariaat De Schaduw’ in Tilburg (founded in 1976 as ‘Antiquariaat Nillco’) made a business of buying up monastery libraries wholesale or in part. Superiors received communications like the following 1987 circular letter: “I am writing to you because I suspect that your monastery contains a library; a library that is possibly being used only in part (for example, only one section), or that will not be used at all anymore in the future because the monastery will be closed.” The company offered to buy up monastery libraries wholesale or in part: “You surely also feel it would be a waste to discard these books as wastepaper.” The same dealer, now trading under the name of ‘De Refter’, wrote again to the superiors of houses in 2004: “The religious world is in full flux: closures, new construction and relocations are happening on a daily basis. Once a monastery is closed, it often becomes an acute problem to find a suitable destination for surplus inventory and books. ‘De Refter’ can help find an effective solution. In addition to ageing and closure, we are also seeing new beginnings and growth. What may no longer be needed in one part of the Catholic church, may be in great demand elsewhere. We supply to pious private customers, to religious and monasteries at home and abroad.”52
Many books and journal series have found new homes in the Netherlands or elsewhere through the intervention of this and other antiquarians and second-hand bookshops. There is nothing surprising about this; it is part and parcel of the fluctuating trend of creation and disaggregation of book collections. Bubb Kuyper was one of the antiquarians involved in the dismantling of one such collection in the late 1970s: the library of Hageveld, the former minor seminary of the diocese of Haarlem. The decision to dismantle and sell this library was taken in 1979. Books on the history of Hageveld and the diocese of Haarlem were kept on site, and everything else was sold to the new antiques dealership set up by Franklin Winston (a.k.a. Bubb) Kuyper, a former Dutch teacher at Hageveld. Hundreds of books were deemed to be unsellable and were thrown into a skip, from which they were subsequently salvaged by pupils. The local, and later national, press heaped obloquy on this squandering of books: “Seminary library liquidated. Book burning causes turmoil” (De Telegraaf, 12 July 1979), “College chucks out books” (De Volkskrant, 12 July 1979), and “Expensive books tossed in rubbish dump” (Het Vrije Volk, 12 July 1979). The number of books discarded was exaggerated in press reports, growing from several hundreds to eight thousand.
Years later, Bubb Kuyper admitted in retrospect that it was inexcusable that these books had been thrown into a skip, but he argued that the library in itself, apart from its emotional history, was not particularly valuable: “It was a very heterogenous collection … This was a common seminary library – in the true, positive meaning of that word –, with the usual division into sections, without any particularly rare subcollections. Liquidations of this type of library have taken place on a great scale across Europe in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, often in ways so savage as to make the Hageveld skip debacle look very minor.”53
The dismantling of a book collection assembled with care and surrounded for years by a studious and hallowed atmosphere in some library hall, always elicits emotions. Kees Fens wrote in 1970 with characteristic nostalgia about the auctioning off of the library of the Urmond Conventual monastery at the Amsterdam publishing house of Paul Brand: “They could have treated all these pious books with a little more respect in Urmond. Certain things shouldn’t be up for auction.”54 Fr. Piet Schreurs, the former librarian of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart in Tilburg, expressed his emotions at the sale of his library to ‘Antiquariaat De Schaduw’ as follows, “It’s as if you are losing a daughter because she’s getting married. But the big difference is that your daughter would still come to visit, whereas these [the books] will be gone.”55 In sharp contrast with such emotions, decision makers advance rational arguments, for example that a particular collection is no longer consulted anymore, or that the space which it takes up is needed for other things, and sometimes they admit frankly that the money that a sale might raise is a welcome addition to revenues.56 The Dominicans who proposed selling a number of manuscripts acknowledged this already in 1961. And Fr. Piet Schreurs, MSC, who has just been mentioned, said in the interview quoted from the regional newspaper Brabants Dagblad that the sale had raised 150,000 guilders, a sum that was put to good use as “the costs for our ageing community are growing and income is falling off.”
Fr. Rudolf van Dijk, OCarm (1935–2015), for many years the secretary of the ‘Vereniging voor het Theologisch Bibliothecariaat’ (Association of Theological Librarians) responded to the Hageveld library affair in the library journal Open. He also addressed the 1973 report of the ‘Commissie Kerkelijke Bibliotheken’, which he called “a neglected report.” It made recommendations for libraries that had to be liquidated, but Fr. Van Dijk contended that this report had not been sufficiently disseminated. A new Church Libraries Committee was established in 1975, again at the behest of the bishops and the ‘Stichting Nederlandse Priesterreligieuzen’. Again, the committee was charged with providing assistance, encouragement and consultancy in processes of dissolution and repurposing of church collections, but once again the committee was given too few powers to be able to act decisively.57
Fr. Van Dijk’s argument that church policy on libraries could be changed by giving the ‘Commissie Kerkelijke Bibliotheken’ greater powers has gone unheeded. Owners continue to be responsible for decisions about the continuation or repurposing of their libraries. Any recommendations made by the ‘Commissie Kerkelijke Bibliotheken’, the ‘Katholiek Documentatiecentrum’ or the ‘Erfgoedcentrum Nederlands Kloosterleven’ may be accepted, but also ignored or simply never solicited.
A third Church Libraries Committee that was due to be set up in 1987 probably never advanced beyond the stage of writing a draft text.58 Relocations and liquidations of monastery libraries have continued apace into the first two decades of the 21st century. Religious continue to seek new destinations for collections that monasteries no longer want and which they can no longer accommodate. The Brothers of Maastricht offered their “spiritual library” for sale in the periodical KNR-Bulletin in the summer of 2021 due to the sale of their monastery, De Beyart: “1,700 books, from the 1980s up to the present.”59
Many religious expended a great deal of effort on building up library collections. Others were charged with repurposing or disassembling them. Certain individuals lived long enough to deal with both tasks. The personal file of Fr. Theobaldus van Etten, OFMCap, mentioned above, summarises his active life as follows: “He worked for 22 years to build up the library work (1939–1962) and then, up to c.1978, to ‘dismantle’ it again.”60
Bibliography
Bakker, SSS, J.D. De Seminarie- en Kloosterbibliotheken in Nederland. Nijmegen: Administratiebureau der V.S.K.B., 1953.
Brummel, L. “De Nederlandsche Centrale Catalogus.” In Handelingen van het Vijfde Wetenschappelijk Vlaamsch Congres voor Boek- en Bibliotheekwezen: Leuven, 22–25 April 1938, 159–172. Gent: Vyncke, 1938.
Bulletin voor Nederlandse Dominicanen 30, no. 12 (1995): 173–175; 31, no. 5 (1996): 68–69.
Catalogus van de gedrukte werken afkomstig uit de bibliotheek van het Groot Seminarie te Hoeven (N.B.): (stand medio 1983). 2 vols. Amsterdam: Bibliotheek Vrije Universiteit, 1984.
Clemens, Theo. De godsdienstigheid in de Nederlanden in de spiegel van de katholieke kerkboeken, 1680–1840. 2 vols. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press, 1988.
Coutumier du Carmel de Bois-le-Duc. [1911].
Damstra, Richtje. “Van ‘Nederlandsche Centrale Catalogus’ tot Nederlandse Centrale Catalogus: De afdeling Centrale Catalogi.” In Opstellen over de Koninklijke Bibliotheek en andere studies, edited by P.A. Tichelaar, 85–103. Hilversum: Verloren, 1986.
Dellepoort, J.J. De priesterroepingen in Nederland: Proeve van een statistisch-sociografische analyse. The Hague: Pax, 1955.
Dijk, OCarm, R.Th.M. van. “De liquidatie van de Bibliotheca Hageveldensis.” Open 12 (1980): 299–312.
Divendal, Joost. “Het laatste uur van de bibliotheek.” Jaarboek / Stichting Reünisten Hageveld (2000): 51–74.
Douma, H. Inventaris van het archief van het kruisherenklooster Sint-Agatha 1371–1887. 3 vols. ’s-Hertogenbosch: Rijksarchief in Noord-Brabant, 1972.
Eijkens, Joep. “Congregatie verkoopt bibliotheek: ‘Het is alsof je dochter gaat trouwen’.” Brabants dagblad, circa 1996.
Evers, G.A. “De bibliotheek van het Departement der Monden van den Rijn te ’s-Hertogenbosch, 1812–1816.” Het Boek 7 (1918): 49–57, 208–229.
Fens, Kees. “De zuivere leer onder de hamer.” De Volkskrant, 20 October 1970.
Fontaine Verwey, H. de la. “Een verzwegen hoofdstuk uit de geschiedenis van de Universiteitsbibliotheek.” In Historische sprokkelingen uit de Universiteit van Amsterdam aangeboden aan mevrouw dr. M. Feiwel bij haar afscheid als conservator van de historische collectie van de Universiteit van Amsterdam, 93–107. Amsterdam: Universiteitsbibliotheek, 1985.
The Golden Age of Dutch Manuscript Painting. Stuttgart: Belser Verlag, 1989.
Jacobs, J.Y.H.A. Werken in een dwarsverband: Een portret van de gezamenlijke Nederlandse priesterreligieuzen 1840–2004. Nijmegen: Valkhof Pers, 2010.
De Katholieke Kerkelijke Bibliotheken in Nederland: Rapport van de Commissie Kerkelijke Bibliotheken uitgebracht aan het Nederlands Episcopaat en de Stichting Nederlandse Priester-Religieuzen. Breda: Secretariaat Commissie Kerkelijke Bibliotheken, 1973.
Krul, Annemie et al. Het Berchmanianum: Van studiehuis tot academiegebouw. Nijmegen: Vantilt, 2019.
Laeven, A.H. “Mijlpalen van een bibliothecariaat: De Universiteitsbibliotheek Nijmegen tussen 1965 en 1995.” In Capita selecta uit de geschiedenis van de Universiteitsbibliotheek Nijmegen: Aangeboden aan mr. G.G.A.M. Pijnenborg bij zijn afscheid als bibliothecaris, 45–69. Nijmegen: Universiteitsbibliotheek, 1995.
Langereis, Sandra. Geschiedenis als ambacht: Oudheidkunde in de Gouden Eeuw: Arnoldus Buchelius en Petrus Scriverius. Hilversum: Verloren, 2001.
Lankhorst, Otto S. “Over kaartenbakken en centrale catalogi van Nederlandse kloosterbibliotheken.” Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse Kerkgeschiedenis 22, no. 1 (2019): 253–259 [= pp. 37–43].
Leesen, Tessa. Tussen hamer en aambeeld: De Theologische Faculteit Tilburg op het snijvlak van wetenschap, kerk en samenleving. Nijmegen: Valkhof Pers, 2014.
Lem, Anton van der. “De priesterbibliotheken in de Universiteitsbibliotheek Leiden.” In Om het boek: Cultuurhistorische bespiegelingen over boeken en mensen, edited by Wim van Anrooij et al., 377–382. Hilversum: Verloren, 2020.
Molhuysen, P.C. “De Nederlandsche Centrale Catalogus.” Bibliotheekleven 15 (1930): 197–204.
Mulder, Hans and Pierre N.G. Pesch. “De bibliotheken van de franciscanen in Nederland.” In Bibliotheken van het Aartsbisdom en van de Franciscanen: De collectie Thomaasse in de Utrechtse Universiteitsbibliotheek, edited by Pierre N.G. Pesch, 19–34. Utrecht: Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, 1992.
Nissen, Peter. “Katholieke theologische bibliotheken in Nederland van de negentiende tot de eenentwintigste eeuw.” Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse Kerkgeschiedenis 22, no. 1 (2019): 225–238 [= pp. 9–22].
Nouwens, MSC, J. “Het snuffelen naar oude boekjes op stoffige bibliotheken: Mijn ervaringen met bibliothecarissen, bibliotheken en boeken.” Mededelingen van de Vereniging voor seminarie- en kloosterbibliothecarissen 3 (1951): 65–86.
Ooms, OFM, H. “Marginalia bij Drs. Gerlach ofmcap ‘Over zin, betekenis en waarde van het oud-bezit op seminarie- en kloosterbibliotheken’.” Mededelingen van de Vereniging van seminarie- en kloosterbibliothecarissen 19 (1967): 13–17.
“Perfectae caritatis: Decree on the Adaptation and Renewal of Religious Life,” no. 18. In Vatican II: The Basic Sixteen Documents, edited by Austin Flannery, OP. Northport and Dublin: Costello and Dominican Publications, 1996.
Pesch, Pierre N.G. “Overdracht van de bibliotheken aan de Universiteitsbibliotheek.” In Bibliotheken van het Aartsbisdom en van de Franciscanen: De collectie Thomaasse in de Utrechtse Universiteitsbibliotheek, edited by Pierre N.G. Pesch, 35–39. Utrecht: Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, 1992.
Pol, Arent and Bouke Jan van der Veen. Het noodgeld van Leiden – waarheid en verdichting: 3 Oktoberlezing 2007. The Hague: Sdu Uitgevers, 2007.
Polman, OFM, P. Alverna: Het klooster en zijn bewoners 1887–1962. N.p., 1962.
“Prof. Dr. L. Brummel en de V.S.K.B.” Mededelingen van de Vereniging van Seminarie- en Kloosterbibliothecarissen 12 (1960): 12–14.
Rapport van de subcommissie over het onderzoek van de subsidie-aanvraag door de Vereniging voor Seminarie- en Kloosterbibliothecarissen, March 1966 (in KDC-library).
Rogier, L.J. “De onsterfelijke Ezau.” Numaga 12 (1965): 81–89.
Rogier, L.J. “De ontheemde handschriften.” Numaga 12 (1965): 117–118.
Schummer, OFMCap, G. “Over zin, betekenis en waarde van het oud-bezit op seminarie- en kloosterbibliotheken.” Mededelingen van de Vereniging van seminarie- en kloosterbibliothecarissen 18, no. 3–4 (1966): 43–55.
Selm, Bert van. “Mogelijkheden en beperkingen van fondsreconstructie.” In Inzichten en vergezichten: Zes beschouwingen over het onderzoek naar de geschiedenis van de Nederlandse boekhandel, 12–31. Amsterdam: De Buitenkant, 1992.
Soeters, P.C. “Hoe de Nederlandse Centrale Catalogus begon.” Bibliotheekleven 47 (1962): 590–593 [= Opstellen op het gebied van bibliotheekwezen aangeboden door vakgenoten aan prof. dr. L. Brummel bij zijn afscheid als bibliothecaris van de Koninklijke Bibliotheek te ’s-Gravenhage].
Ubachs, W. “De centrale bibliotheek op ‘De Beyart’ te Maastricht.” Mededelingen van de Vereniging voor seminarie- en kloosterbibliothecarissen 20, no. 1 (1968): 18–19.
“Verkwanselde archiefstukken.” Nederlandsch archievenblad 20 (1911/12): 159.
Verslag omtrent de Koninklijke Bibliotheek, 1965, 17–19: “Verzameling handschriften uit het Albertinum te Nijmegen.”
Voetius, Gisbertus. Over de noodzaak van het opsporen, verzamelen en bewaren van Oude Drukken. Amstelveen: Eon Pers, 2007. Translation by Jos van Heel of a part from Gisbertus Voetius, Exercitia et bibliothecae studiosi theologiae. Editio secunda, priore auctior et emendatior. Utrecht: Ioh. à Waesberge, 1651.
“Vraag en aanbod: Bibliotheek Broeders van Maastricht.” KNR-Bulletin (2021): no. 2, 29.
Wely, OFM, Daniël van. “De Algemene Provincie Kataloog en de Centrale Catalogus in Den Haag.” Neerlandia seraphica 30 (1960): 469.
Wierda, Lydia S. Catalogus van de handschriften, incunabelen en postincunabelen uit het bezit van de Orde der Minderbroeders-Kapucijnen in Nederland, nu aanwezig in de Bibliotheek van de Theologische Faculteit Tilburg. Leuven: Peeters, 2006.
Wolfs, OP, S.P. “Het vroegere handschriftenbezit van het Albertinum.” Numaga 17 (1970): 21–22.
Archives
Erfgoedcentrum Nederlands Kloosterleven (Heritage Centre for Religious Life in the Netherlands): Archief Dominicanen, inv. nos. 2450, 4797, 8451; Archief Kapucijnen, inv. nos. 4701–4706, 5364, 9358.
Katholiek Documentatie Centrum (Catholic Documentation Centre): Archief van de Vereniging voor Seminarie- en Kloosterbibliothecarissen (VSKB), inv. no. 256.
Translated by Brian Heffernan.
Gisbertus Voetius, Exercitia et bibliothecae studiosi theologiae. Editio secunda, priore auctior et emendatior (Utrecht: Ioh. à Waesberge, 1651), 262. It is thanks to Jos van Heel that I quote Voetius. He edited part of this text anew, translated it and offered it to Willem Heijting at his departure as curator of VU Amsterdam University Library: Gisbertus Voetius, Over de noodzaak van het opsporen, verzamelen en bewaren van Oude Drukken (Amstelveen: EON Pers, 2007).
Arent Pol and Bouke Jan van der Veen, Het noodgeld van Leiden – waarheid en verdichting: 3 Oktoberlezing 2007 (The Hague: Sdu Uitgevers, 2007), 9.
Sandra Langereis, Geschiedenis als ambacht: Oudheidkunde in de Gouden Eeuw: Arnoldus Buchelius en Petrus Scriverius (Hilversum: Verloren, 2001), 164–165.
G.A. Evers, “De bibliotheek van het Departement der Monden van den Rijn te ’s-Hertogenbosch, 1812–1816,” Het Boek 7 (1918): 49–57, 208–229.
On the creation of monastery and seminary libraries in the 19th century, see Peter Nissen, “Katholieke theologische bibliotheken in Nederland van de negentiende tot de eenentwintigste eeuw,” Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse Kerkgeschiedenis 22, no. 1 (2019): 225–238 [= pp. 9–22].
P. Polman, OFM, Alverna: Het klooster en zijn bewoners 1887–1962 (n.p., 1962), 33.
Cf. W. Ubachs, “De centrale bibliotheek op ‘De Beyart’ te Maastricht,” Mededelingen van de Vereniging voor seminarie- en kloosterbibliothecarissen 20, no. 1 (1968): 18–19.
On the Franciscan and Capuchin central catalogues, see Otto S. Lankhorst, “Over kaartenbakken en centrale catalogi van Nederlandse kloosterbibliotheken,” Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse Kerkgeschiedenis 22, no. 1 (2019): 253–259 [= pp. 37–43].
On the Central Catalogue, see P.C. Soeters, “Hoe de Nederlandse Centrale Catalogus begon,” Bibliotheekleven 47 (1962): 590–593 [= Opstellen op het gebied van bibliotheekwezen aangeboden door vakgenoten aan prof. dr. L. Brummel bij zijn afscheid als bibliothecaris van de Koninklijke Bibliotheek te ’s-Gravenhage] and Richtje Damstra, “Van ‘Nederlandsche Centrale Catalogus’ tot Nederlandse Centrale Catalogus: De afdeling Centrale Catalogi,” in Opstellen over de Koninklijke Bibliotheek en andere studies, ed. P.A. Tichelaar (Hilversum: Verloren, 1986), 85–103.
To quote Anton van der Lem, curator of Leiden university library: “Leiden university library does indeed stand in a Calvinist tradition that deprioritised Catholic material. But there were also librarians and curators whose fear of Catholic material was like the devil’s fear of holy water.” (Our translation. Henceforth, English quotes from Dutch sources are translations made by the translator.) Cf. Anton van der Lem, “De priesterbibliotheken in de Universiteitsbibliotheek Leiden,” in Om het boek: Cultuurhistorische bespiegelingen over boeken en mensen, ed. Wim van Anrooij et al. (Hilversum: Verloren, 2020), 377–382, at p. 377.
P.C. Molhuysen, “De Nederlandsche Centrale Catalogus,” Bibliotheekleven 15 (1930): 197–204, at p. 204. The Berchmanianum, the newly built Jesuit house of studies in Nijmegen, was opened on 7 February 1929. On its library, see Annemie Krul et al., Het Berchmanianum: Van studiehuis tot academiegebouw (Nijmegen: Vantilt, 2019), 61–62. The collection already comprised 30,000 titles on this date.
Daniël van Wely, OFM, “De Algemene Provincie Kataloog en de Centrale Catalogus in Den Haag,” Neerlandia seraphica 30 (1960): 469.
L. Brummel, “De Nederlandsche Centrale Catalogus,” in Handelingen van het Vijfde Wetenschappelijk Vlaamsch Congres voor Boek- en Bibliotheekwezen: Leuven, 22–25 April 1938 (Ghent: Vyncke, 1938), 159–172, at p. 161.
Hans Mulder and Pierre N.G. Pesch, “De bibliotheken van de franciscanen in Nederland,” in Bibliotheken van het Aartsbisdom en van de Franciscanen: De collectie Thomaasse in de Utrechtse Universiteitsbibliotheek, ed. Pierre N.G. Pesch (Utrecht: Bibliotheek der Rijksuniversiteit, 1992), 19–34, p. 29.
Coutumier du Carmel de Bois-le-Duc, [1911], 173: “Elle [= la Bibliothécaire] veillera à la propreté de la bibliothèque, en ôtera la poussière et les toiles d’araignées, au moins une fois par mois; mais surtout elle procurera les remèdes contre les insectes et les fourmis.”
“Prof. Dr. L. Brummel en de V.S.K.B.,” Mededelingen van de Vereniging van Seminarie- en Kloosterbibliothecarissen 12 (1960): 12–14.
J.D. Bakker, SSS, De Seminarie- en Kloosterbibliotheken in Nederland (Nijmegen: Admini- stratiebureau der V.S.K.B., 1953), 2–3.
J. Nouwens, MSC, “Het snuffelen naar oude boekjes op stoffige bibliotheken: Mijn ervaringen met bibliothecarissen, bibliotheken en boeken,” Mededelingen van de Vereniging voor seminarie- en kloosterbibliothecarissen 3 (1951): 65–86.
H. de la Fontaine Verwey, “Een verzwegen hoofdstuk uit de geschiedenis van de Universiteitsbibliotheek,” in Historische sprokkelingen uit de Universiteit van Amsterdam aangeboden aan mevrouw dr. M. Feiwel bij haar afscheid als conservator van de historische collectie van de Universiteit van Amsterdam (Amsterdam: Universiteitsbibliotheek, 1985), 93–107.
The Golden Age of Dutch Manuscript Painting (Stuttgart: Belser Verlag, 1989), no. 25: Festal Evangelistary, 85; Nederlandsch archievenblad 20 (1911/12): 159: “Verkwanselde archiefstukken.” The Dutch national archives purchased these monastic charters from the Nijmegen antiques dealer J. Grandjean in 1912. Cf. H. Douma, Inventaris van het archief van het kruisherenklooster Sint-Agatha 1371–1887, vol. 1 (’s-Hertogenbosch: Rijksarchief in Noord-Brabant, 1972), XV.
One of the first houses that had to be closed due to declining numbers of novices was St. Henry’s convent in Beers, of the Sisters of Charity (Schijndel), as early as 1959.
“Perfectae caritatis: Decree on the Adaptation and Renewal of Religious Life,” no. 18, in Vatican II: The Basic Sixteen Documents, ed. Austin Flannery, OP (Northport and Dublin: Costello and Dominican Publications, 1996), 398.
‘Erfgoedcentrum Nederlands Kloosterleven’ (Heritage Centre for the Religious Life in the Netherlands) (ENK), Archief Dominicanen, inv.no. 2450: Rapport m.b.t. de verbouwing en het budget van de centrale bibliotheek, March 1961.
De Tijd – de Maasbode, 11 September 1965. The 12 manuscripts are mentioned in: Verslag omtrent de Koninklijke Bibliotheek, 1965, pp. 17–19: “Verzameling handschriften uit het Albertinum te Nijmegen.”
L.J. Rogier, “De onsterfelijke Ezau,” Numaga 12 (1965): 81–89 and “De ontheemde handschriften,” Numaga 12 (1965): 117–118. The violence of Rogier’s response was perhaps not unrelated to a certain bias against the regular clergy which is sometimes visible in his work.
Algemeen Handelsblad, 1965, 11 Sept. and De Gelderlander, 1965, 10 Sept.
Fr. Driessen pointed out that the university guide of September 1963 was the first to mention a manuscript collection in the university library. After the death of Prof. P. van der Meer, OP (1895–1963), the Dominicans decided in 1964 to sell his collection of books on the Near East to Nijmegen university library rather than to a German library or antiques dealer, even though these were likely to offer more, as “there [is] much to be said for not looking primarily for economic benefit.” Cf. ENK, Archief Dominicanen, inv.no. 4797: Verslagen van de vergaderingen van het ‘concilie’, 28.1.1964. Fr. Van der Meer’s clay tablet collection would be sold, together with Fr. J. Cools, OP’s collection, to the Catholic university in 1975 for the sum of 20,000 guilders. Cf. ibid., inv.no. 8451.
S.P. Wolfs, OP, “Het vroegere handschriftenbezit van het Albertinum,” Numaga 17 (1970): 21–22.
G. Schummer, OFMCap, “Over zin, betekenis en waarde van het oud-bezit op seminarie- en kloosterbibliotheken,” Mededelingen van de Vereniging van seminarie- en kloosterbibliothecarissen 18, no. 3–4 (1966): 43–55.
H. Ooms, OFM, “Marginalia bij Drs. Gerlach ofmcap ‘Over zin, betekenis en waarde van het oud-bezit op seminarie- en kloosterbibliotheken’,” Mededelingen van de Vereniging van seminarie- en kloosterbibliothecarissen 19 (1967): 13–17.
Katholiek Documentatie Centrum (KDC), Archief van de Vereniging voor Seminarie- en Kloosterbibliothecarissen (Archief AVSKB), inv.no. 256. The inquiry revealed the following recent loans statistics: approximately 80 per week from the Capuchins; 20 to 30 per month from the Dominicans; 24 per day from the Jesuits in Maastricht; 995 in 1963 from the Franciscans in Weert.
Rapport van de subcommissie over het onderzoek van de subsidie-aanvraag door de Vereniging voor Seminarie- en Kloosterbibliothecarissen, March 1966 (in KDC library).
KDC, Archief VSKB, inv. no. 256: memo “Gebeurtenissen en werkzaamheden m.b.t. de CC der VSKB na de derde (laatste) bijeenkomst van de Subcommissie,” 1 Dec. 1968.
J.J. Dellepoort, De priesterroepingen in Nederland: Proeve van een statistisch-sociografische analyse (The Hague: Pax, 1955), 33–36. In addition, there were 47 religious and 5 diocesan minor seminaries.
On the merger of the various institutions, see J.Y.H.A. Jacobs, Werken in een dwarsverband: Een portret van de gezamenlijke Nederlandse priesterreligieuzen 1840–2004 (Nijmegen: Valkhof Pers, 2010), 115–130 (par. 3.6: “Einde van de religieuze grootseminaries”).
On the creation of the library of the theological faculty of Tilburg see Tessa Leesen, Tussen hamer en aambeeld: De Theologische Faculteit Tilburg op het snijvlak van wetenschap, kerk en samenleving (Nijmegen: Valkhof Pers, 2014), 100–107.
On the sale of the Rijsenburg and Franciscan libraries, see Pierre N.G. Pesch, “Overdracht van de bibliotheken aan de Universiteitsbibliotheek,” in Bibliotheken van het Aartsbisdom en van de Franciscanen, 35–39.
On the purchases by Nijmegen university library, see A.H. Laeven, “Mijlpalen van een bibliothecariaat: De Universiteitsbibliotheek Nijmegen tussen 1965 en 1995,” in Capita
selecta uit de geschiedenis van de Universiteitsbibliotheek Nijmegen: Aangeboden aan mr. G.G.A.M. Pijnenborg bij zijn afscheid als bibliothecaris (Nijmegen: Universiteitsbibliotheek, 1995), 45–69. On the transfer of the Dominican library to Nijmegen university library, see Bulletin voor Nederlandse Dominicanen 30, no. 12 (1995): 173–175 and 31, no. 5 (1996): 68–69.
Mededelingen van de Vereniging van seminarie- en kloosterbibliothecarissen 22, no. 3 (1970): 48.
De Katholieke Kerkelijke Bibliotheken in Nederland: Rapport van de Commissie Kerkelijke Bibliotheken uitgebracht aan het Nederlands Episcopaat en de Stichting Nederlandse Priester-Religieuzen (Breda: Secretariaat Commissie Kerkelijke Bibliotheken, 1973), 3.
De Katholieke Kerkelijke Bibliotheken in Nederland, 15.
De Katholieke Kerkelijke Bibliotheken in Nederland, 15.
Cf. Leesen, Tussen hamer en aambeeld, 101–102; Catalogus van de gedrukte werken afkomstig uit de bibliotheek van het Groot Seminarie te Hoeven (N.B.): (stand medio 1983) (Amsterdam: Bibliotheek Vrije Universiteit, 1984), 2 vols.
Cf. Lydia S. Wierda, Catalogus van de handschriften, incunabelen en postincunabelen uit het bezit van de Orde der Minderbroeders-Kapucijnen in Nederland, nu aanwezig in de Bibliotheek van de Theologische Faculteit Tilburg (Leuven: Peeters, 2006).
De Katholieke Kerkelijke Bibliotheken in Nederland, 16.
Thus the Benedictines who came to Oosterhout from Wisques (France) in 1907 brought their library with them. When the French monks returned to France in the 1920s, half of the library remained in Oosterhout.
Schummer, “Over zin, betekenis en waarde van het oud-bezit,” 53.
ENK, Archief Kapucijnen, inv. nos. 4701–4706 and 5364.
De Katholieke Kerkelijke Bibliotheken in Nederland, 16–17.
Book historical studies show that a number of factors affected the chances of survival of books: size (the thicker the better the chances of survival) and price (the chances of survival of expensive books are double inversely proportional to that of cheap books, even if content and size are identical!). Theo Clemens, De godsdienstigheid in de Nederlanden in de spiegel van de katholieke kerkboeken, 1680–1840 (Tilburg: Tilburg University Press, 1988), vol. 1, chapter 3. And Bert van Selm has frequently pointed out that much printed devotional material intended for everyday piety, song books, school books and ephemeral material for temporary use has been lost. See Bert van Selm, “Mogelijkheden en beperkingen van fondsreconstructie,” in Inzichten en vergezichten: Zes beschouwingen over het onderzoek naar de geschiedenis van de Nederlandse boekhandel (Amsterdam: De Buitenkant, 1992), 12–31, at pp. 25–26.
Analecta voor het bisdom Roermond 25 (1940): 75.
The circular letters of ‘De Schaduw’ / ‘De Refter’ Antiques have been preserved in various monastery archives in the ‘Erfgoedcentrum Nederlands Kloosterleven’.
Joost Divendal, “Het laatste uur van de bibliotheek,” Jaarboek / Stichting Reünisten Hageveld (2000): 51–74, p. 69.
Kees Fens, “De zuivere leer onder de hamer,” De Volkskrant, 20 October 1970.
Joep Eijkens, “Congregatie verkoopt bibliotheek: ‘Het is alsof je dochter gaat trouwen’,” Brabants dagblad, circa 1996. Undated cutting found on the website of ‘Antiquariaat De Refter’, Hetisalsofjedochtertrouwt.pdf (refter.nl), retrieved on 12 July 2021.
Cf. the account given by the Franciscan provincial council of the sale of the Franciscan library to the university of Utrecht. The council gave three motives for the sale: “first, the sale will ensure that the books will be in a place where they will actually be used; more- over, dwindling communities and the ageing of the order will make it increasingly difficult to maintain large libraries in the future; and lastly, this sale – the council contended – will keep the collections together and thus preserve a part of Dutch cultural heritage,” Variant 3 (1969): 263.
R.Th.M. van Dijk, OCarm, “De liquidatie van de Bibliotheca Hageveldensis,” Open 12 (1980): 299–312.
This draft text (the memo Naar een derde commissie kerkelijke bibliotheken [Towards a third Church Libraries Committee], prepared by J. Resenk and R. van Dijk) is mentioned in Mededelingen van de Vereniging voor het Theologisch Bibliothecariaat 38, no. 1–2 (1987): 10. The text itself could not be located.
“Vraag en aanbod: Bibliotheek Broeders van Maastricht,” KNR-Bulletin (2021): no. 2, 29.
ENK, Archief Kapucijnen, inv. no. 9358.