Running Around: Fenneke Sysling on Colonial History, Public Engagement and Navigating Different Universities

By Jan Douwe Brinkman & Thomas van Gaalen

Dr. Fenneke Sysling is a postdoctoral researcher attached to the Cultural History department at University Utrecht. Recently she has also attained a position as assistant professor at Leiden University, where she is involved with the Colonial and Global History research programme. Her research interests mostly lie in the field of the History of Science, specifically focusing on how science influenced, and was influenced by, the Western notions of empire and colonialism. For example, her 2013 PhD thesis addressed the way physical anthropologists in the Dutch East Indies from the 19th century onwards attempted to construct a system of racial classification to categorize the colonial population. In her thesis, she addressed the impact this construction of racial classification had on colonial societies and Western science in general. A similar topic comes to the fore in her 2016 book Racial Science and Human Diversity in Colonial Indonesia, which argues that European colonial notions about race were constructed on the ground through anthropological research in overseas territories. In the book, Sysling describes how the collection of human remains that were brought back to Europe played an important role in constructing racial categorizations.

Sysling’s interest in constructions of race on the ground partially motivated her move to Leiden University, since Leiden has large collections of such objects. “When you’re interested in colonial history”, Sysling says, “Leiden is a treasure trove of sources.” Sysling also notes that Leiden’s history department “…is more focused on colonial history and global history,” something that particularly fits her approach to research. However, Sysling also stresses more practical reasons for her move, addressing the lack of permanent positions at Dutch universities. She also notes that as a result of continuous moves between universities, “academic nomads” have grown in numbers.

Aside from her professional and scholarly publications, Sysling has been quite active working on popularising her field by writing opinion pieces for newspapers and organising workshops for the general public, encouraging them to engage with historical subjects they might otherwise not be easily exposed to. A particularly well-received public project is an article she wrote with Caroline Drieënhuizen for the Volkskrant in which they address the way natural historical museums, such as Naturalis in Leiden, display their collections of human remains and how they should deal with their links to our colonial past. They argue that instead of the ‘apolitical’ approach favoured by, for example, Naturalis, museums should critically engage with the history behind the collection and emphasise how colonialism motivated and facilitated the anthropologists who brought back human remains to Europe. The idea raised by the piece is very relevant to social discussion, especially in the light of the Amsterdam Museum’s recent choice to abandon the term ‘Golden Age’ in order to recontextualise historical Dutch colonialism and exploitation.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Sysling considers popular writing to be an important part of history. While some scholars see academic writing and popular writing as two extremes, Sysling believes the two to be perfectly complementary. “Not only do I want to engage in social debates”, Sysling stresses, “but popular debate also influences my research.” Sysling stresses how research does not take place in a vacuum, and how employing different types of publications allow scholars to generate more creative output, as well as the ability to reach a wider audience. As such, Sysling argues for a combination of public engagement and academic research, “although”, she says, “not everyone can manage running around like Maarten Prak.”