Slag bij Waterloo, ter ere van Willem Frederik George Lodewijk, erfprins der Nederlanden 1815

Editor: Here we have a commemorative medal from 1815 celebrating William Frederick George Louis, the Prince of Orange's role in the Battle of Waterloo. It’s a small, circular print made using metal relief and engraving. The classical style depiction of the Prince on horseback reminds me of ancient Roman coins. What catches your eye? Curator: The fascinating element to me is the transformation of the raw materials—the metals themselves—into objects of propaganda and commemoration. Think of the labor involved in mining, smelting, and then meticulously engraving this image. Who were the hands involved, and how did their own social positions influence the object’s creation? Editor: That's interesting. I was focusing on the Prince as a historical figure, but the process of creation gives a different perspective. Curator: Precisely! How does turning this brutal battle into a neatly produced object obscure the real cost of war? Consider how the medium – a coin-like object designed for mass production – helped disseminate a very particular narrative of the battle and the Prince's role within it. This seemingly simple object becomes a powerful tool for shaping public memory and national identity. What purpose was intended for this memento, who handled it, and who would be denied its representation? Editor: I see what you mean. It's a tangible object meant to carry and solidify a specific, potentially biased, account of history to an elite consumer. Curator: Exactly. By examining its production and circulation, we reveal how power operates not just through grand pronouncements, but through the everyday materials and objects that surround us. Even in commemorating this moment. Editor: So, thinking about its creation and materials unveils a more complex and critical understanding than just seeing it as a portrait of a war hero. Thanks for the new perspective. Curator: My pleasure. Remembering the tangible can add surprising depth.