Blik met opschrift: Gewapende Dienst gedenkschrift Waterloo. 1815. 1815 - 1865

Editor: Here we have a metal box from the Rijksmuseum collection, dating between 1815 and 1865. The inscription reads “Gewapende Dienst gedenkschrift Waterloo. 1815.” It’s aged, almost distressed. What strikes you when you look at this object? Curator: Immediately, I think about the production. This wasn’t crafted as 'high art' but rather as a functional object, probably made en masse. Its materiality – the base metal, the method of printing – speaks volumes about the industrializing forces and their connection to commemorative culture. Editor: Commemorative culture? Curator: Yes, this box wasn't created in a vacuum. Think about the social context. Waterloo was a watershed moment. How was it consumed, memorialized? The material provides clues about the economics of remembrance: who could afford such a memento, and what materials were used for what kind of audience? Do you think the choice of a metal box versus a painting impacts the experience? Editor: Definitely. It seems more utilitarian, perhaps meant for soldiers or their families. It could hold something – memories, tangible objects. The wear and tear even enhances its historical weight, making it less about pristine artistry and more about lived experience. What do you make of that? Curator: Precisely! The aging amplifies the material's narrative. This isn't just about the battle; it's about the prolonged impact, the material residue of a defining event echoing across generations. Consider the labor involved: the mining, refining, shaping. Every scratch, every faded letter, is a trace of human effort, a process far removed from the battlefield but deeply connected. Editor: This is interesting. Looking at it that way shifts my perspective completely, focusing on the 'making of' rather than just the event itself. Curator: Exactly, shifting our focus towards a more material, a more earthly examination can reveal the power, labor and loss tied to even this small memorial object.