¹ See Byrant, L. M., ‘La cérémonie de l'entrée à Paris au Moyen Age’, Annales: Économies Sociétés Civilisations 41 (1986), 513–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar; the lecture of Christian Jouhaud, ‘L'entrée royale’, presented at the Jacques Revel seminar at the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales in Paris on 28 November 1986; Boureau, Alain, Le simple corps du roi. L'impossible sacralité des souverains français XVe–XVIIIe siècle (Paris, 1988)Google Scholar; Kantorowicz, E. H., The King's Two Bodies (Princeton, 1957)Google Scholar; Boureau, Alain, ‘Les cérémonies royales françaises entre performance juridique et compétence liturgique’, Annales: E.S.C., 46 (1991), 1253–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

² See Dekker, J. J. H., Straffen, redden en opvoeden. Het ontstaan en de ontwikkeling van de residentiële heropvoeding in West-Europa, 1814–1914, met bijzondere aandacht voor ‘Nederlandsch Mettray’ (Assen, 1985)Google Scholar, Chapters 3, 4 and 5, for a more extensive treatment of this subject; see also my ‘Punir, sauver et éduquer’, Le Mouvement Social 153 (1990), 63–90.Google Scholar

³ Berigt 38 (Annual Report of the ‘Nederlandsch Mettray’ association for 1889), 3 (no. 2a of the Archives of the ‘Nederlandsch Mettray’, in the municipal archives at Zutphen, abbreviated as ANM 2a).

⁴ See Van Gennep, Arnold, Les rites de passage (Paris, 1909).Google Scholar Present-day anthropologists often use the work of Van Gennep as an important source. See for example Turner, Victor, The ritual process. Structure and anti-structure (New York, 1977)Google Scholar, and Celebration. Studies in festivity and ritual (Washington, D.C., 1982)Google Scholar, edited by the same author. See also Barbara Myerhoff, ‘Rites of passage: process and paradox’, in Turner, , Celebration, 109–35.Google Scholar On methodology, see Victor and Turner, Edith, image and pilgrimage in Christian culture. Anthropological perspectives (Oxford, 1978)Google Scholar, especially Appendix A. As an introduction, see Roger, and Keesing, Felix, New perspectives in cultural anthropology (New York, 1971)Google Scholar, especially pp. 214ff. I have assumed that the rites dealt with in this article also have significance beyond the domain of the rites themselves. The authors mentioned above, especially Van Gennep, make the same assumption. Frits Staal, the Berkeley philosopher and Sanscrit scholar, forcefully advocates a different opinion. See Staal, Frits, ‘De zinloosheid van het ritueel’, in Staal, Frits, Over zin en onzin in filosofie, religie en wetenschap (Amsterdam, 1986), 295–321.Google Scholar According to him ‘Ritual [is] pure action, without meaning or purpose’ (p. 304).Google Scholar Ritual is ‘self-contained and focussed on itself’;‘Ritual is an action first and foremost’ (p. 298). Staal developed this vision on ritual on the basis of his impressive theoretical and practical knowledge of the AGNI ritual, an Indian fire rite going back over three thousand years. In his opinion, this concept of rituals applies in general. Nevertheless Staal attributes rituals with some sort of ‘meaning’, and says that they may create spin-off effects (p. 307). In the present case the assumption has been made that rites can produce important results.

⁵ See Hallema, A., Geschiedenis van het Weeshuis der Gereformeerden binnen Delft te Delft (Delft, 1964), 446–55Google Scholar; Engels, J. Th., Kinderen van Amsterdam (Zutphen, 1989)Google Scholar; Dankers, J. J. and Verheul, J., Als een groot particulier huisgezin. Opvoeden in het Utrechtse Burgerweeshuis tussen caritas en staatszorg 1813–1991 (Zutphen, 1991).Google Scholar

⁶ See Gaillac, Henri, Les maisons de correction, 1830–1945 (Paris, 1971), 26ff. and the title of the first chapter.Google Scholar

⁷ Gaillac, , Les maisons, 41.Google Scholar

⁸ The term ‘panoptism’ (French: ‘panoptisme’) is used by Foucault, Michel in his Surveiller et punir. Naissance de la prison (Paris, 1975), p. 197Google Scholar and ff. Using this word (derived from Jeremy Bentham's Panopticon) Foucault describes a situation in which the Governor or Principal of a prison could observe the inmates individually twenty-four hours a day. To reach this situation, a cellular system (a prison with single-occupant cells) was considered originally as an ideal solution by such reformers as Charles Lucas and Willem Suringar, but they later tried to create the same situation by means of an agrarian colony. See also M. Perrot, ‘1848. Révolution et prisons’, in Perrot, M., L'impossible prison, Recherches sur le système pénitentiaire au XIX siècle (Paris, 1980), 277–312.Google Scholar

⁹ Carpenter, M., Reformatory schools for the children of the perishing and dangerous classes, and for juvenile offenders (London, 1851)Google Scholar; Wines, E. C., The state of prisons and of child saving institutions in the civilised world (Cambridge, 1880).Google Scholar

¹⁰ In Frégier, H. A., Des classes dangereuses de la population dans les grandes villes, et des moyens de les rendre meilleur (Paris, 1840), v.Google Scholar

¹¹ Disraeli, Benjamin, Sybil; or, the two nations (1st publ. London, 1845; Penguin edn, 1980), 96.Google Scholar

¹² See the titles in note 9, above.

¹³ See Röper, F. F. on Germany, Das verwaiste Kind in Anstalt und Heim: ein Beitrag zur historischen Entwicklung der Fremderziehung (Göttingen, 1976).Google Scholar

¹⁴ See Wines, , The state of prisons, 693Google Scholar; Jonker, A. J. Th., ‘Johann Hinrich Wichern’, Bouwsteenen 1 (1882), 288–315Google Scholar; Nolen, Th., Het Vraagstuk van de verzorging der verwaarloosde kinderenGoogle Scholar, commissioned by the Maatschappij tot Nut van 't Algemeen [Society for the General Good] (Amsterdam, 1898), 17.

¹⁵ See Dekker, , Straffen, 1–171.Google Scholar

¹⁶ For other aspects see Dekker, ‘Punir, sauver et éduquer’, passim.

¹⁷ Wines, , The state of prisons, 400.Google Scholar

¹⁸ See Suringar, W. H., Godsdienstig en zedekundig Handboek voor Gevangenen; geschikt voor: on- en feestdagen (Amsterdam, 1828)Google Scholar; and Suringar, W. H., My visit to Mettray [i.e. the French Mettray] (Rotterdam, s.d., c. 1850).Google Scholar A bibliography of Suringar's publications can be found in Laurillard, E., ‘Levensschets van W. H. Suringar’, Handelingen en mededeelingen van de maatschappij der Nederlandsche Letterkunde, over het jaar 1872–1873 (Leiden, 1873), 215–46.Google Scholar

¹⁹ See Huerne de Pommeuse, M. L.-F., Des colonies agricoles et de leurs avantages (Paris, 1832)Google Scholar; Carpenter, M., Reformatory schools (especially on the German Rauhe Haus near Hamburg), 335–8.Google Scholar Matthew Davenport Hill, follower of M. Carpenter, wrote about his impressions after a visit to the French Mettray as follows: ‘No Mahommedan … believes more devoutly in the efficacy of a pilgrimage to Mecca than I do in one to Mettray’ (cited in Owen, D., English Philanthropy 1660–1960 (Cambridge, Mass., 1964), 153).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁰ ANM 2a, Annual Report of 1852, 9–12.

²¹ I have not distinguished between rite and ritual in this text. Ritual could be regarded as a complex of interconnected rites. See the references given in note 4, above, and Skript, special issue on Rituals, 6:4 (1984).

²² Van Gennep, , Les rites, 2.Google Scholar

²³ Van Gennep, , Les rites, 24–33.Google Scholar According to Myerhof, ‘Rites of passage are a category of rituals that mark the passage of an individual through the life cycle, from one stage to another over time, from one role or social position to another, integrating the human and cultural experiences with biological destiny, birth, reproduction, and death’, ‘Rites of passage’, 109.Google Scholar

²⁴ For further details, see Dekker, Straffen, Appendix 3, 426–31.

²⁵ There was a similar institution for fallen girls, the ‘Asyl Steenbeek’, founded in 1848 by the Reverend Otto Gerhard Heldring.

²⁶ For a statistical overview, see Dekker, , Straffen, Appendix 1, 329–415.Google Scholar

²⁷ See my ‘Heropvoeding in de negentiende eeuw: cultuurdwang en cultuurconsumptie’, in Dekker, J. J. H., D'Hoker, M., Kruithof, B. and De Vroede, M. eds., Pedagogisch werk in de samenleving. De ontwikkeling van professionale opvoeding in Nederland en België in de 19de en 29ste eeuw (Leuven, 1987), 65–81.Google Scholar On the interaction between various cultures within a given society, see Chartier, Roger, ‘Culture populaire’, in André Burguière, Dictionnaire des sciences historiques (Paris, 1986), 174–9Google Scholar; Geluk, J., Woordenboek voor opvoeding en onderwijs (Groningen, 1882).Google Scholar

²⁸ ANM 1, Rules (version 1853), article 1.

²⁹ I was able to compare the 1850, 1853, 1881 and 1913 versions (the General Rules of 1856 were missing) (ANM 1). The Orders date from about 1900 (ANM 123). However, written instructions were also used before 1900, as can be seen from the minutes of the Board of Governors (ANM 75–9). The latter and the annual reports (ANM 2a) show that the contents of the Orders of 1900 had already been functioning for decades.

³⁰ The Head expressed the gratification that was generally felt when they were successful ‘in saving the city lads from evil, which is inherent to the nature of our largest towns’ (ANM 2a, yr 5, 1856, 20).

³¹ See Dekker, , Straffen, 36–55.Google Scholar

³² In the periods 1851–1862, 1863–1873, 1874–1884, 1885–1895, 1896–1905 and 1906–1914 respectively 39.7, 44.2, 56.0, 54.9, 68.4 and 64.5 per cent of the pupils came from Amsterdam, Rotterdam and the Hague.

³³ In the periods 1851–1862, 1863–1873, 1874–1884, 1885–1895, 1896–1905 and 1906–1914, respectively 41.3, 34.8, 19.8, 8.5, 21.9 and 33.5 per cent returned to a city, though not always to their native city. There was some degree of mobility, but the great transfer from city to country did not take place.

³⁴ ANM 2a, J51, 1902, 11.

³⁵ See n. 28, above, especially source ANM 123, the Orders.

³⁶ ANM 2a, J22, 1873, 15–16.

³⁷ See the minutes of the Board of Governors for 1869–1884 (ANM 77) for this and the following data and the documents submitted to the Commission in 1883 and 1884 (ANM 84).

³⁸ ANM 87, letter dated 26 January 1883.

³⁹ ANM 115. The letter was discussed in the meeting of the Board of Governors on 29 January 1883 (ANM 77).

⁴⁰ Reports on the state of pupils placed by the Hague department, 1852–1904, ANM 611.

⁴¹ The average length of stay in the periods 1851–1862, 1863–1873, 1874–1884, 1885–1895, 1896–1905 and 1906–1914 was respectively 4.7 years (N = 360), 4.0 (N = 398), 3.1 (N = 245), 4.3 (N = 353), 3.7 (N = 282) and 3.7 (N = 248), while no information was available about 1, 4, 111 (the period of crisis), 0, 7 and 7 boys for these periods, respectively. In my view, this shows the chaotic situation in the period 1873–1884, in reeducation practice as well as in record-keeping (which was realized efficiently in the ‘normal’, stabilized situation). In the periods mentioned, respectively 27.5, 43.5, 61.5, 45.6, 47.9 and 30.8 per cent of the pupils left the colony prematurely. See Dekker, , StraffenGoogle Scholar, Tables M20 (length of stay) and M27.3 (form of departure).

⁴² I have already published the complete text of this source under the title ‘“Lieg niet”. “Ik help u”. Een episode uit de geschiedenis van de zedelijke opvoeding omstreeks 1850’, Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Opvoeding, Vorming en Onderwijs, 2: 2 (1986), 80–7.Google Scholar The source is in the archives under reference ANM 2a (1858).

⁴³ There is an old saying which goes: ‘II n'y a que la première fois qui compte.’ And a little further, ‘Le second acte n'offre plus rien de nouveau et marque le début de l'automatisme.’ See Van Gennep, , Les rites, 249 and 254.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ The account continues but is not relevant in the present context.

⁴⁵ See ANM 2a, J17, 1868, 79–80.

⁴⁶ See ANM 2a, J5, 1856, 58–60, for information on the departure procedure.

⁴⁷ For a thorough overview of the information on the results during the first four years following release, see Table M30, pp. 409–15, in Dekker, , Straffen.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ ANM 1, 1853, art. 59 (cf. 1850, art. 41; 1881, 1898 and 1913, art. 57).

⁴⁹ ANM 2a, J1, 1852, 22.

⁵⁰ ANM 2a, J4, 1855, 75. See the text on ‘childhood faults’ by Geluk, , Woordenboek.Google Scholar

⁵¹ ANM 2a, J35, 1886, 5.

⁵² ANM 2a, J37, 1888, 21; J38, 1889, 20; J39, 1890, 18; J40, 1891, 14.

⁵³ See further on this subject Steutel, J. W., ‘Deugdzaamheid als opvoedingsdoel’, in Steutel, J. W. ed., Morele Opvoeding, Theoretisch- en historischpedagogische opstellen (Meppel, 1984), 39–67.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ See for example van Engelen, D. O., De verwaarloosde jeugd en dejeugdige misdadigers met betrekking tot onze wetgeving (Haarlem, 1895), 65.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Dekker, J. J. H., ‘The fragile relation between normality and marginality. Marginalization and institutionalization in the history of education’, Paedagogica Historica, new series 26 (1990), 13–29.Google Scholar