J. I. (Hans) Bakker
In order to understand better the nineteenth-century history of Java we must attempt to examine all available sources of information, including the extensive records left by the Dutch colonial government. However, in doing so we must be wary of the danger of Euro-centric bias attached to the use of colonial administrative documents. This is especially true if we are concerned with the question: "In what specific ways did
Dutch colonial policy and administration contribute to the 'development' and 'underdevelopment' of Java?" The danger inherent in using the documents left by the colonial "exploiters" themselves is apparent. That danger becomes obvious, even to someone not trained in historiographic methods, when we attempt to use the administrations of the governor-generals as a "mirror" of nineteenth-century Dutch colonial policy and administration. Why study the governor-generals? Why not study the Javanese instead?
If it were a question of either/or then it would indeed be better to concentrate on Indonesian materials. The contributions to our knowledge which that approach has provided are evident in the work by Carey (1974), Hoadley (1975), and Sutherland (1975), to mention only a few leading scholars. However, it is not a matter of choosing either one approach or another. A division of tasks is possible. Several writers have shown that the use of exclusively Dutch colonial sources
does not necessarily lead to a Euro-centric bias. We have learned a great deal from Wright (1952), Reinsma (1959b), Wertheim and Wertheim (1968), Reid (1969), Knight (1975) and Fasseur (1975). The scholarly contributions by Robert Van Niel are especially well known.
Therefore, in this paper I would like to suggest that the use of Dutch colonial sources, especially archival sources, is a fruitful approach to the study of nineteenth-century Javanese history, not merely to the study of Dutch colonial history. If the materials are used critically, it is possible to learn much that is of value to contemporary Indonesian society. This is especially true of the problem of "development and underdevelopment." To understand adequately Indonesia today it is important to understand as much as we can about Indonesia's colonial legacy. The Netherlands and Java were so closely intertwined during the nineteenth century that shying away from Dutch source materials because such evidence may involve a Eurocentric bias is likely to involve a significant loss to our knowledge of how Indonesia has become the way it is.
The bias against use of colonial source materials is especially strong when the purpose for using such evidence is to gain insight into broader sociological issues, i.e., issues concerning sociological history. That attitude creates a blind spot which precludes a full understanding of Indonesia's current situation. The use of colonial source materials for purely historical description is deemed worthwhile, but such materials are not felt to be of any value for understanding economic and social development and underdevelopment. This is partially accounted for by the fact that in many textbooks the use of colonial materials has not advanced beyond that found in Meinsma (1872-1873) or Lekkerkerker (1938). Clifford Geertz broke away from the older attitude to colonial source material; he used several Dutch studies of the 1920s to illustrate his description of Java as suffering from "involution." More systematic use of colonial materials recently by Fasseur (1975) and others has not always been translated into theories of the sort advanced by Emmerson (1976) and Jackson (1978).
We have come a long way since the pioneering efforts of the Yale historian Clive Day (1904). Yet the strides that have been made in historical and sociological research based on Dutch colonial sources have not always been reflected in current theoretical work, much less in current textbooks. In this 'paper I examine the administration of Sloet van de Beele in order to illustrate the general principle that there is much to learn from a thorough examination of colonial documents. This paper itself only begins the re-examination of Sloet's term in office. But it should be evident from the details which follow that generalizations about nineteenth-century Java often fail to take into account a very detailed set of historical events. As you read about Sloet, reflect on the fact that his administration is rarely even mentioned by historians dealing with Java in the nineteenth century, much less historians dealing with the sweep of Java's history or sociologists, anthropologists, political scientists, etc., studying "Indonesian" modernization (i.e., development and underdevelopment).
Sloet's Administration As A Mirror
Because of the manner in which Governor-General Sloet van de Beele clearly represents the times in which he lived, a "snap shot" of his administration (1861-1866) is the basis for a more rounded picture of changes within Dutch colonial policy and administration during the middle period of the cultivation system. These changes, in turn, represent significant modifications of the social and economic situation in Java at midcentury, modifications which probably affected large numbers of Javans (Javanese, Madurese, Sundanese, and Balinese living in Java). Sloet carried out a number of Liberal reforms, particularly after Fransen van de Putte was chosen Minister of Colonies (i.e., after February 2, 1863). He is a representative figure of his age.
Sloet's administration has been generally ignored, however, even by academic scholars primarily interested in the study of Java's history during the nineteenth century. That is because writers commenting on the cultivation system (kultuUrstelsel) have mainly been concerned with:
1. the initial stages of the early cultivation system (1830-1836+), when Johannes van den Bosch and Jean Chretien Baud were Governor-Generals;
2. early failures of the cultivation system, such as migrations, famines, abuse of compulsory services by regents, small-scale revolts, etc.; and
3. the abolition of the cultivation system in the Dutch parliament (i.e., Staten-Generaal) during the late 1860s.
These issues were largely defined by the debate between Conservatives and Liberals in the Dutch parliament. Early Liberal writers like Feist (1865), Mol van Otterloo (1859) and others (e.g., Anonymous, 1863b) discussed these three topics. Subsequently, historians continued to investigate these issues (e.g., Brumund, 1854; Meinsma, 1872-1873). The cultivation system was not evaluated as a whole, throughout the span of its history, but in terms of the issues originally raised in parliament. Naturally Liberal members of parliament were more disposed to examine certain aspects of the cultivation system rather than others. They paid special attention to early failures and abuses, for example (e.g., Salak, 1860). Viewpoints
of Liberal parliamentarians were later implicit in the work of many historians. This can be seen especially clearly in Clive Day's well known, "classic" work, The Policy and Administration of the Dutch in Java (1904, reprinted 1966).
Consequently, Sloet's administration, which represents a period of Liberal reform, has generally been ignored. Conservatives in parliament had little interest in chronicling Sloet's reforms, and Liberals were more concerned'with stressing abuses of the system than with pointing out what had already been accomplished. It is somewhat ironic that one of the major Liberal governor-generals has been ignored largely because it was Liberals who initially established the perspective from which most of the historical accounts of the cultivation system have largely drawn their inspiration. We can now correct that error and begin to view Sloet's administration with more impartiality.
Let us, therefore, begin our actual review of Sloet's administration with a brief inquiry into his life. Once we have introduced Sloet the historical actor, then we can move on to interpretation ml his role in the cultivation system during the 1860s.
Ludolf Anne Jan Wilt baron Sloet van de Beele was born at Voorst on March 28, 1806, the son of Jan Adriaan Joost baron Sloet and Johanna Jacoba Sara Visscher. He was born into the Dutch minor aristocracy and had all of the advantages that such high birth implies. He was educated at the Kinsbergen school (instituut) at Elburg and went from there to the University (hoogeschool) at Utrecht. He became a student of Dutch law and received his degree of "Meester in de Rechten" (abbreviated Mr. in Dutch) six years later. (He studied at Utrecht from June 16, 1824 to March 17, 1830). It was customary at that time for a candidate for the Meester in law to write a thesis (proefschrift). In his thesis, the young baron revealed his interest in old Dutch (and Flemish) law (vaderlands recht). (The title of Sloet's thesis, written in Latin, was De differentiis in Francici et novis Belgici ratione testamentorum, 1830).
These facts are recorded in a brief article by H. Brugmans (1921: 751-753) which is largely based on a short biographical sketch by H. Kern (1891). I have compared these two secondary sources. Continuing with a loose translation of Brugman's and Kern's summaries we learn that Sloet moved to the city of Zutphen and took up the practice of law for a brief period beginning in August, 1830. From November 2, 1830 to October 9, 1831, he was also active in the Civic Guard (schutterij). It is unclear whether his work was completely interrupted by his service in the Civic Guard of the Province of Gelderland. However, he was able to devote some time to the study of archival materials concerning the city of Zutphen. One of the results of that early scholarly work was "Het kondichboek der stad Zutphen" (published in Nederlandsche Jaarboek voor de Rechtsgeleerdheid, 1845). Sloet subsequently published many articles on, historicallegal subjects.
It is not worthwhile to enter too deeply into Sloet's life story, of course, since that constitutes a digression from our main theme, the value of studying Sloet's administration as a "mirror" on the cultivation system. However, the few facts mentioned thus far are important for understanding how Sloet happened to become a governor-general of the Netherlands Indies. We can-see that his birth and ascribed status enabled him to enter university and study law at a time when few Dutchmen could aspire to such goals. Also, we can note that Sloet developed into something of a scholar of Dutch law, not merely a lawyer. These two facts are important for understanding his administration. Few previous Dutch governor-generals had been privileged "gentlemen," much less "scholars." The governor-generals during the V.O.C. period (1601?-1789?) were generally men who had risen from the ranks of sea captains and merchants. Governor-General van den Bosch, the founder of the cultivation system, although a descendant of a mildly prosperous family, had risen in the ranks of the Indies army.
In November, 1847, the Estates (Staten) of Gelderland appointed Sloet a registrar of the Province. In 1848 he published a major book. This was followed by a series of articles on the history of Gelderland. (The title of the book is Het jagtbedrijf onzer voorouders and the articles are titled Bijdragen tot de kennis van Gelderland). Nothing else of significance seems to have happened at this time, however. Sloet was merely a successful provincial lawyer.
However, in the early 1860s Sloet was suddenly thrust into national roles. As a result of his earlier appointment as Provincial Registrar, Sloet was named chairman of a Council that was set up to supervise state railroads. This national appointment (on May 31, 1860) brought him into prominence at the time a major series of decisions were being made and he was soon appointed (August 24, 1860) as a regular member of the Commission for State Railroads. It is not clear what connection there is between his earlier position as Chairman (voorzitter) for the Council of Supervision (Raad van Toezicht) and his membership in the Commission. There is no necessary reason why the one position need have meant that he be appointed to the other. This type of question can perhaps be cleared up through an examination of archival source materials. The question is extremely important to Indonesian history because it was only very shortly after his appointment to the Railroad Commission that Sloet was appointed, on June 23, 1861, as Governor-General of the Netherlands-Indies. A provincial lawyer was suddenly catapulted into a position of national significance which would have many implications for the subsequent pattern of events in JAYA.
Sloet's Administration (1861-1866)
Without question, Sloet's appointment by the King as Governor-General is intimately connected with the importance at the time of the railroad concessions which were being granted to Dutch entrepreneurial firms for the construction of the first railways in Java. Sloet was not chosen as Governor-General because of his knowledge of Java; that is clear. What is not clear in the secondary sources is exactly why Sloet was chosen, rather than a number of other possible candidates. Was it felt that he would be a "straw man" Governor-General who could easily be manipulated by the home government? Was it because his outstanding qualities as an administrator were recognized by the Commission for State Railways? Did it have anything to do with Sloet's personal connections with leading industrialists interested in investing in Java railways? These questions remain unanswered.
Sloet's most important early task as Governor-General was to preside over the granting of concessions for the railroad lines which were built from Semarang, on the north coast of Java, to the Vorstenlanden towns of Central Java and from Batavia (i.e., contemporary Jakarta) to Buitenzorg (i.e., contemporary Bogor). We shall discuss these railroad concessions in some detail below. However, many other events occurred during Sloet's administration. His legal training and scholarly mind made him a particularly appropriate administrative Governor-General during a period when the process of what I have called "the bureaucratization" (in Max Weber's sense of administrative rationalization according to the norms of Zweckrationaliat, a "utilitarian calculus" based on a sort of "cost benefit" calculation). Javanese society, which had traditionally been patrimonial.was experiencing some bureaucratic norms superimposed upon it.
The emphasis on bureaucratization, or rationalization of the administrative apparatus, is especially clear during Sloet's term of office. This is a consequence, in part, of the fact that Sloet was not as independent a Governor-General as some of his predecessors had been. Compared to Governor-General Johannes van den Bosch, who was much more patrimonial in his conduct of affairs, Sloet is much more bureaucratic. Sloet was not as independent in his actions as previous governor-generals had been. Communications with the Ministry of Colonies in the Netherlands had been improved; therefore directives from the Minister took less time to reach the Governor-General and Sloet had less freedom of action. Even more importantly, however, we can conjecture that Sloet was the man chosen by a certain group within the Dutch elite (i.e., the prominent, rising bourgeoisie and their friends) to carry out their wishes. He was chosen to work out instrumental solutions to broader schemes initially selected by others. The status of this conjecture, however, is primarily
that of a hypothesis (in the non-statistical sense); it is subject to further analysis.
The evidence that we now have available simply does not permit us to say definitively whether Sloet's actions were in any sense controlled by his alliance with elite entrepreneurs in the Netherlands. It may be that Sloet was no more controlled by the factions which placed him in power than, for example, Baud was by van den Bosch and King William I. In any case, many of the reforms that Sloet carried out were instituted by Fransen van de Putte, and Fransen van de Putte was not selected as Minister of Colonies until February 2, 1863. (Sloet had been appointed one and a half years earlier, on June 23, 1861, when van Hall was Prime Minister). Changes which occurred in Conservative and Liberal governments during Sloet's administration do not suggest support for a conspiracy view of history.
Abolition of Indigo Cultivation in 1865
To appreciate fully the significant reforms which occurred during Sloet's administration we can begin with one example, abolition of the forced cultivation of indigo in 1865. Why was indigo cultivation removed from the list of cultivations under government control? Was it because Sloet personally decided to end this cultivation?
As is sometimes cynically noted, the official abolition of indigo cultivation in 1865 was due as much to the relatively unprofitable nature of indigo cultivation at that time as it was to a weakening of the principles upon which the cultivation system was based. Indigo was not dropped because the government in Java wanted to reform the kultuurstelsel. It was definitely not a private decision made by Sloet personally. Indigo was taken off the government cultivations because it was becoming increasingl y viewed as less profitable than sugar cultivation, with which it interfered. Indigo cultivation ceased to be a government monopoly although it continued to be grown under private supervision on the so-called private estates (particulierelanderijen). Forced labor was no longer used, at least in principle, in the growing of indigo. (It was not clear to what extent forced labor continued to be used for processing indigo).
It might be argued that the abolition of indigo as a cultivation crop under the government's kultuurstelsel contributed to the amelioration of the cultivation system in the eyes of the peasant farmers (petani), but this is far from clear. There is little question that the abolition of indigo cultivation affected a significant number of peasant households, at least in certain districts. It is also clear that the petani did not like the work involved in processing the dye and that indigo stole vital nutrients from the soil or padi.
However, it is not at all clear to what extent the legal decree of abolition of indigo cultivation affected petani in the years immediately after 1865. We tend to assume, along with nineteenth-century Liberal parliamentarians and writers, that such a change was definitely an improvement. However, no one has carefully examined the exact effects of indigo cultivation on petani in selected districts of Java in 1865. These peasant farmers may, for example, have had difficulties switching to sugar cultivation. We tend to forget that indigo cultivation had continued for over three decades and that it accounted for between five and nine percent of the total value of all cultivation crops grown for export under the cultivation system in these early decades of the kultuurstelsel.
All of the reforms which occurred during Sloet's administration must be examined in this same critical fashion. We cannot simply take it for granted that the effects of such reforms were immediately translated into benefits for the petani. We tend to accept uncritically the implicit framework of the nineteenth century Liberals and to ignore logic and evidence. We do not even know conclusively if changes in the world market for indigo made it more unprofitable in the 1860s than it had been in the 1850s. We also do not know to what extent administrators were concerned with the supposed dislike that peasant farmers had for indigo cultivation, if indeed it was universally disliked. The problems which indigo production involved probably go far beyond the issues discussed by such Liberal writers as Feist (1865) and Brumund (1854). Outside of the scholarly community at least, our view of the cultivation system has been shaped by such Liberal views as are reflected in Clive Day's analysis of secondary sources (1904). Scholars like Fasseur (1975) no longer make such errors, but works not specifically devoted to the cultivation system readily jump to unwarranted conclusions on the basis of scanty evidence indeed!
Other Reforms During Sloet's Administration
In addition to the abolition of forced indigo cultivation by the government, Governor-General Sloet van de Beele also carried out a number of other significant reforms during his administration (1861-1866). If we keep in mind the provisos mentioned in the discussion of indigo above, then we can simply list these reforms, noting that their consequences for the average peasant farmer in Java are subject to further analysis. To the extent that previous literature mentions these reforms at all, it is simply assumed that they were good, i.e., that they had positive consequences for the peasantry, at least in the short-run. If I re-introduce them at this time it is not because I think they were unambiguously good, either in the short or the long-run, but because I think they are worth re-examination, especially on'the basis of archival (i.e., primary) materials.
Among the events with which Sloet was concerned, then, are the following:
1. The end of forced cultivations of the secondary crops (i.e., crops which are secondary in importance, not secondary in the harvest cycle), like indigo and cinnamon, for all of Java (i.e., in those districts where these crops were still grown) in 1865;
2. The elimination of wood-cutting services (blandong -diesten) and the creation of regulations for the management of forests in Java and Madura (1866);
3. The establishment of Chambers of Commerce and Industry (1863) and a legal codebook (wetboek) for so-called European inhabitants. (Whether al7TTIFigitant was European rather than Chinese or native was a matter of legal definition. In .1 later period the Japanese were defined as legal European;
4. The revision of the passport system (passenstelsel) for natives and persons legally placed in the same category as natives in 1863. The passport system was not abolished at this time, however, but remained in effect until the cultivation system had been completely ended;
5. A regulation for postal services (1863) and communications by rail;
6. Curtailment of the right previously held by police magistra tes to decide personally whether corporal punishment should be given. The decision to inflict corporal punishment was separated from the persons who actually carried out the punishments, at least in theory. (It is interesting to question to what extent the petani were informed of this change); and
7. The formation of a training school (or college) for native teachers. This school was established in Bandung and had relatively few pupils.
All of these reforms of course are carried out to greater or lesser degree in various regions. However, they are all of some importance, and the decisions on corporal punishment and the passport system are definitely of long-range significance to the petani, even if immediate benefits were not necessarily felt uniformly in every district or region.
Most of the reforms mentioned are listed in a brief article in the Encyclopedie van Nederlands Indie (1919, III: 808-809) and can be traced to the Staatsbladen van Nederlandsch Indie (Boudewijnse and Van Soest's edition, for example). Wertheim and Wertheim (1968) have also attracted some attention to another decision made during this time, the banishment from Java of Sicco Roord van Eysinga. (Sicco was a good friend of that other notorious figure in Java's nineteenth-century history, Eduard Douwes Dekker, known as Multatuli). The vast detective work that went into the Wertheim's analysis of Sloet's banishment of Sicco from Java is also required in the further study of the seven examples listed above. I will attempt to illustrate that with the example of the question of railroad concessions, although I have not yet reached any definite answers (concerning Sloet's role in the railroad concessions) comparable to the conclusions reached by the Wertheims on Sloet's role in the banishment of Sicco.
Although the fact is not emphasized in any of the short biographical accounts available, it is clear that Sloet's appointment as Governor-General was related, first and foremost, to the railroad concessions. His career is the product of the times, and the times called for a rational-legal type of administration. His rapid rise to prominence, however, was probably not totally a product of purely rational-legal criteria. It is worth exploring to what extent the accusations made by H. J. Lion (1861) and others are indeed correct. No doubt the archives will provide a fuller picture of the extent to which Sloet's primary role in Java was to ensure the smooth acceptance of the concessions granted to certain individuals, against the interests of others.
As Meinsma (1873 II: 104) points out, one of the first things that I. D. Fransen van de Putte did when he became Minister of Colonies was to send a bill to Parliament concerning the granting of a concession for the construction of a railroad from Samarang to the Vorstenlanden. (Later a track was added linking Jogja to Tempoeran and Willem I). That was on February 2, 1863. The government had already promised a loan of 600,000 guilders, at 4.5 percent interest, on August 21, 1863. Hence, there was a great deal at stake. I have not been able to investigate the implications, but it is fairly certain that Stieltjes was not fired merely because of a personality conflict. Stieltjes refused to accept Sloet's grant of a railroad concession to someone other than those he supported, and he carried his actions against Sloet to the Staten Generaal. However, Stieltjes failed to gain Parliament's approval over the Governor-General's decision (Herwerden 1863, H. J. Lion 1861). During the pamphlet war of the 1860s the issue was raised repeatedly by various writers (e.g., W. Bosch, L. Vitalis, R.W.J.C. Bake, G.H. van Soest, J.J. Hasselman, C.H.F. Riesz). It is certainly worth further exploration. What exactly was Sloet's role? At present we do not have an adequate answer.
Sloet's Frequent Absences from Batavia
Although I have not been able to trace the question of railroad concessions as far as would be desirable for a more complete picture of Sloet's influence on Java's history, there is another question which is somewhat easier to examine, and which illustrates the principle of increased bureaucratization referred to above. Sloet was frequently absent from Batavia and Buitenzorg, especially during the later part of his administration. The frequency with which he went on "inspection tours" of various regions can be interpreted in various ways, of course. However, I tend to see it as a reflection of the increased formalization of rule during this middle period of the cultivation system.
Jean Chretien Baud also went on inspection tours, of course, and he was Governor-General during the height of the more patrimonial phase of the kultuurstelsel (cf. Bakker, 1978). But Baud's inspection tour of 1834 lasted a relatively short period of time. Moreover, most of the governor-generals subsequent to Baud (De Eerens, van Hogendorp, Merkus, van Twist, and Pahud) are not particularly noted for extended travels during the time they were governor-generals. (Merkus did range far and wide over the archipelago before and after his governorship). Even if Sloet's frequent trips do not indicate anything about the possible bureaucratization of the kultuurstelsel, however, and simply reflect Sloet's personal idiosyncracies - an equally plausible hypothesis - they are worth relating as historically interesting phenomena in their own right. They certainly tend to indicate that communications, especially travels, were relatively good, at least for someone who could muster the resources that the Governor-General had available.
Sloet's comings and goings can be traced through the official decrees in which the oldest member of the Council of the Indies (Raad van Indie), Mr. Ary Prins, was made acting (waarnemend) Governor-General. From September 2 to October 19, 1861, before Sloet arrived in Java, Prins was acting Governor-General, and this pattern was repeated during Sloet's subsequent absences. In Decrees (Besluiten) of July 19, August 18, and November 3, 1865, for example, Prins was made acting Governor-General repeatedly.
Samarang trip. From July 19, 1865 to early August, Sloet went to the residency of Semarang due to the earthquakes that had taken place in Ambarawa, Banjoe-Biroe, and Salatiga (Staatsblad, 1865 No. 68).
Bali trip. From November 14th to late December, Sloet visited Madura, Pasuruan, Probolingo, Bezuki, Banjuwangi, and Bali. Part of Sloet's motivation for this journey may simply have been a touristic desire to see these places. (He officially ended his governorship on October 25, 1866).
It could be argued that the appointment of Prins as acting Governor-General in each of these instances reflects increased formalization of the bureaucratic administrative apparatus. However, it could just as easily be argued that in a fully bureaucratized organization it is not necessary to select a replacement in such a formal manner. The official who takes the Governor's place is already known and accepted (i.e., a Vice-Governor or Lt. -Governor). Further archival study is needed to clarify why Sloet took these inspection trips, what he accomplished, and how his appointment of Prins was viewed.
Transportations must have been fairly good in the 1860s for the Governor-General to travel so easily across the breadth of Java in such a comparatively short period of time. Travellers who attempt to cross the 650+ miles of Java today will appreciate how relatively good the road system must have been. Of course, much of Sloet's travel must have been by sea, as Prins Hendrik's official visit to the Netherlands Indies had been.
One is also struck by the extent to which the Governor-General is well informed of much of what happened in Java. Even such details as the appointment of a Chinese interpreter in Surabaya or increases in contributions for widows and orphans in Semarang were the subject of official Decrees (Besluiten) in the Governor-General's name. (He may not have had much to do with each of these small decisions, of course, compared to earlier governor-generals, who were forced to attend to minute details because of a small staff and highly centralized decision-'flaking). Ever since the residents (i.e., heads of colonial residencies, or regions) had been made directly responsible to the Governor-General, rather than to regional Governors – a decision made under Daendals (1808-1811) - the responsibilities parried by the Governor-General demanded an unusually centralized flow of information. That tendency was further reinforced Dy Johannes van den Bosch's personal idiosyncracies when he was governor-General (1830-1833).
Naturally there was also a great deal happening in Java during this time that was never revealed to the colonial officials. However, it is fairly safe to say that most of what occurred at the regional level in Java and was known by colonial residents lid not escape the attention of the Governor-General. The resident, head of a residentie, generally passed along most information, important or not, to the government in Batavia-Buitenzorg.
Sloet's Administration and the Stelsel As A Whole
All of the information reported, although not widely known, is available in secondary sources (especially Kern, 1891; Van Rhede van der Kloot, 1891; Brugmans, 1921). We need to further our knowledge of these specific historical questions (e.g., abolition of indigo cultivation, revision of the passport system, curtailment of corporal punishment, railroad concessions, and character of the administrative system) through a more careful analysis of the archival materials available, following the paths initiated by Wright (1952), Fasseur (1975) and Van Niel. The variety and quantity of primary source material available for such investigations is summarized by Jaquet (1970).
However, even if we accept the value of further investigation of issues such as those listed, we must also examine the administrations of specific governor-generals in terms of the cultivation system as a whole. If we do so, two general problems emerge. The first is a problem that has been tackled by Fasseur in his book: Kultuurstelsel en Koloniale Baten. De Nederlandse Exploitatie van Java. 1840-1860 (1975a). The second is the question of periodization, the selection of specific subperiods during the cultivation system. Both of these questions are aspects of the cultivation system as a whole that cannot be easily answered through an inductive investigation of one particular figure, no matter how representative, nor through a study of one region, no matter how significant.
The problem tackled by Fasseur (1975a) is the political situation existing in the Netherlands at the time of the cultivation system in the Netherlands Indies. A few brief comments on this question are in order if we limit the discussion to aspects of Sloet's administration. What were the external political influences on Sloet's administration? How did what was going on in the Netherlands affect the choices made in Java?
To have a sense of conditions in the Netherlands at the time of Sloet's appointment, it is important to note that the Government Regulation of 1854 (Regeeringsreglement van 1854) had made important legal changes in the official policy of colonial state intervention, especially through Article 62 on landownership. The period immediately preceding Sloet's administration reflects the change in policy indicated by the Regulation of 1854.
A number of changes occurred in the Minister's portfolio just before Sleet's appointment, as I have intimated above. These were due in large measure, it may be speculated, to the conflicts which existed between the old bourgeoisie and aristocracy, on the one hand, and the rising new bourgeoisie, on the other. (It is a subject of dispute to what extent one can speak of an aristocracy in the Netherlands in the 1850s). Jonkheer J. P. Cornets de Groot van Kraaijenburg was Minister of Colonies briefly (January 9, 1861 to March 14, 1861) under Prime Minister Van Hall, but he was replaced by Mr. J. Loudon (March 14, 1861 to February 1, 1862) with the Van Zuylen government. (Both Van Hall and Van Zuylen were Conservatives). Loudon was replaced, in turn, by G. H. Uhlenbeck (February 1, 1862 to January 3, 1862). The rapid changeover in ministries and in Ministers of Colonies relects the volatile political situation in the Netherlands at the time. These changes have been studied in some detail by Fasseur (1975a).
After a short interim Minister, Mr. Isaac Dinesen Fransen van de Putte became Minister of Colonies on February 2, 1863. It is that date which marks the most significant change in terms of Sloet's administration as Governor-General. Fransen van de Putte, as Minister of Colonies, and later as Prime Minister, ably defended the Liberal position in Parliament. Sloet's role as Governor-General cannot be understood without some appreciation of Fransen van de Putte's role as Minister of Colonies, and this in turn requires some understanding of the political struggles in the Netherlands during Fransen van de Putte's term in office. This may seem like a long , digression from events in Java in the 1860s, but given the nature of the colonial tie at the time, it is absolutely central. The colonial question was of major concern in the Parliament in the 1850s and 1860s. Thus, the study of Dutch parliamentary history (e.g., Fasseur, 1975a) becomes very important for the full understanding of Java during the nineteenth century (e.g., Fasseur, 1975b).
To summarize very briefly, the fall of the moderate Conservative ministry under Van Zuylen, organized under the motto "liberal in the Netherlands, conservative in Indie" led to the recall to power of Thorbecke as Prime Minister. Fransen van de Putte, Thorbecke's second choice as Minister of Colonies, did not agree with all of Thorbecke's views. The disagreement between the two men caused Thorbecke's resignation as Prime Minister. Fransen van de Putte maintained his power in the face of moderate Conservative opposition for awhile (Day, 1904: 334), but eventually the Conservative coalition was able to defeat Fransen van de Putte's proposed Cultuurwet (Cultivations Law). A new government was formed under the joint Prime Ministry of Van Zuylen-Heemskerk (1866-1868). The important point to note here is that reforms carried out during Sloet's administration were proposed and formulated, to a large extent, by Fransen van de Putte. The tie between these two historical figures resembles the earlier tie between the founders of the cultivation system, van den Bosch and Baud.
Thus, although Sloet himself was more likely to side with the moderate Conservative government of Van Zuylen, under which he had been appointed originally, he was placed in a position where he had to carry out reforms that were initiated by a Liberal Minister of Colonies, Fransen van de Putte. This placed Sloet's dismissal of Stieltjes even more in question. Lion's accusations against Sloet had been made in 1861, long before the changeover in governments in the Netherlands. To my knowledge no one has explored the altered position Sloet found himself in, when having been appointed by a Conservative government in order to carry through the initial stages of railroad construction, he was placed under a Liberal Minister of Colonies.
The rapidity with which changes took place in the late 1850s and early 1860s is symbolized by a series of events. These events indicate that Sloet's administration took place soon after a period of rapid change in the Netherlands. On June 27th, 1859 one of the staunchest defenders of the early cultivation system in Parliament, Jean Chretien Baud, died. This symbolizes a break with the traditions established directly by Johannes van de Bosch in 1830. In 1860, Eduard Douwes Dekker, mentioned above, wrote his famous novel Max Havelaar (see Conley, 1960: 156 ff.) Slavery was abolished for all of Java in the same year, although of course this official abolition did not prevent continuation of the practice of slavery for many years afterwards. Moreover, the percentage of the total export crops grown on private estates was slowly beginning to climb, though in 1856 the total exports of government "forced" cultivations was valued at 64 million guilders while private cultivations totalled only 34.5 million guilders. These and many other changes suggest that we should regard reforms carried out during Sloet's administration largely as the product of larger socio-economic and political changes, rather than as the result of his own personal administrative rule.
Nevertheless, the value of studying Sloet's administration in some detail does not require assuming that Sloet was personally responsible for the changes which took place. We can use the administration of Governor-General Sloet van de Beele as a "mirror" of the broader changes. This point, which has already been made, is repeated here because it is important to consider a second problem that linked Sloet's administration to the cultivation system as a whole. Having discussed the importance of understanding the broader political and socio-economic background in the Netherlands (as in Fasseur's work, especially Fasseur, 1975a), we can turn now to a discussion of the question of periodization.
The second broader question which we need to tackle, and which is illustrated here through a discussion of Sloet's administration, is the problem of periodization in Java's history during the era of the cultivation system. It has been widely recognized that the kultuurstelsel varied a great deal from one region (residentie) to the next, as well as from one district (regentschap) or sub-district (assistent-regentschap) to the next. It has not been as widely recognized, even among scholars of nineteenth-century Java, that the kultuurstelsel also varied a great deal from one historical sub-period to another. The problem of periodization, when applied to sub-periods within the period of the cultivation system, like the problem of socio-economic and political changes in the Netherlands, cannot easily be investigated in the same historically-descriptive manner as the earlier questions we have discussed (e.g., abolition of indigo cultivation).
Nevertheless, anyone who attempts to understand the cultivation system in Java through the colonial documents available, especially through documents which pertain to specific administrations, will be faced with the problem of periodization. Any explicit periodization of the cultivation system will tend to reflect the writer's theoretical and methodological biases, of course, but the only alternative is to leave periodization implicit or to ignore it altogether. The result of relying on these alternatives is that writers who make use of conclusions based on primary materials will often jump to over-hasty conclusions that might have been avoided.
It may be fruitful to examine one possible schema for periodization of changes within the period of the cultivation system. Such a schema requires a compromise between considerations of historical detail and other considerations of social science theory. If we wish to emphasize administrative changes, for example, for the sake of historical accuracy, then we may have to sacrifice a better understanding of some sociological changes that were occurring over a longer span of time.
The internal periodization of the cultivation system suggested here is a breakdown into: (1.) Early (1830-1854), (2.) Middle (1855-1866) and (3.) Late (1867-1883) cultivation system periods. It should be strongly emphasized that these are intended merely as heuristically-fruitful categories. Other historians and social scientists may have reasons for breaking down the kultuurstelsel's history in other ways.
Early Period. The early period of the cultivation system can be dated as beginning in 1830, with the arrival of Johannes van den Bosch, and ending in 1854, with passage of the Regeeringsreglement of that date. This early period should be clearly distinguished from antecedents of the stelsel such as. the Priangan system (Preangerstelsel), even though there are sociological similarities.
Middle Period. After the Government Regulation of 1854 there
were a number of Liberal reforms passed in Parliament and introduced,
at least as policy, into the cultivation system. (The extent to which the policy was actually carried into practice is problematic). It is this middle period with which this paper has been most concerned. We have stressed the Administrative reforms of Governor-General Sloet van de Beele, but we might just as well have discussed his immediate predecessor, Charles Ferdinand Pahud, who was Governor-General from 1856 to 1861. However, the beginnings of real reforms which took place under Fransen van de Putte as Minister of Colonies are somewhat more interesting than the reforms which took place under Pahud, in which the influence of the regenten was somewhat curtailed and percentages for government cultivations were not as widely distributed to civil servants. Note that Fasseur, who does discuss Pahud, does not discuss Sloet. His only reference to Sloet (Fasseur, 1975as 265 note 3) concerns the railway concessions.
Late Period. While the kultuurstelsel is usually spoken of as ending in 1870, the year in which the Agrarian Law was passed, it took some time for the Agrarian Law to be translated into practice. For example, even under the terms of the Law itself the forced cultivation of sugar would be gradually eliminated over a twelve year period, beginning in 1876. Hence forced cultivation of sugar continued in Java (or, at least, in some districts of Java) until well past 1870. The Agrarian Law of 1870 is merely the beginning of the end, not the end of the cultivation system altogether, as is usually assumed, or at least implied, in secondary sources. The government was still officially and legally engaged in forced cultivation of sugar in Java in 1888. It is commonly pointed out that coffee cultivation continued under the stelsel, in some districts, until 1912, or after. In areas outside of Java the kultuurstelsel may have continued in practice far later.
Mr. Pieter Mijer, Sloet's successor (1866-1872) continued to carry out some of the characteristic measures of the cultivation system, even under a Liberal prime minister (Fock, 1868-1871). But, with the arrival of Mr. James Loudon in 1872, a more Liberal system was firmly implanted on Java's soil.
hese types of considerations may seem pedantic and unnecessary. Why do we need to distinguish between the early, middle and late cultivation system periods? We need to differentiate periods and sub-periods precisely because it is the lack of clear differentiation which has made for much of the confusion found in the secondary literature on the cultivation system. Because these relatively simple distinctions have not been made, generalizations continue to be made about the cultivation system as if it were a homogeneous whole. In particular, empirical evidence concerning one aspect of the cultivation system (say a riot in 1831 in Ceribon) is used to speculate on the influence of the stelsel as a whole.
We can recognize that the cultivation system has some sociological unity over and above the regional and chronological differences that make regional and periodic study important. However, to arrive at such sociological generalizations about the kultuurstelsel requires learning as much as possible about the historically-specific features of the cultivation system as possible. The very term cultivation system (kultuurstelsel, stelsel van kultures) is to some extent nothing but a sociological "ideal type" for a complex set of processes which were occurring in Java. This ideal type cannot be subsumed in statements concerning Java's development and underdevelopment without much further specification. Rather than discuss this in the abstract, however, I have attempted to encourage understanding of the complexities of the cultivation system by briefly examining aspects of the, administration of one relatively obscure Governor-General, Sloet van de Beele.
In the course of examining the usefulness of colonial sources for Java's nineteenth-century history, we have touched on many topics concerning the administration of one governor-general. We have pointed to the ways in which Sloet's administration can serve as a mirror of Dutch colonial administration in Java during the middle period of the cultivation system. We have not attempted to analyze any of the historical questions raised in anything other than a preliminary fashion. However, we have gone deeply enough into some of the historical and sociological problems that confront anyone interested in studying the life and times of Sloet van de Beele to be able to conclude that Sloet's term of office as governor-general provides much more information about the cultivation system than is generally recognized.
Since the historian or other social scientist interested in nineteenth-century Java cannot make use of the same kinds of source materials that scholars interested in later periods can utilize, we cannot afford to ignore the colonial records left by the Dutch. Use of colonial documents and books does not necessarily indicate an Euro-centric bias in which all of Java's history is written from the perspective of the exploiters. Faced with the further problem of describing complex dynamic changes in terms of relatively static categories, we can only begin to capture aspects of tha dialectical process if we remain continually aware of the fallacies which result if we attempt to over-generalize on the basis of incomplete historical analysis. If I have convinced you that the administrations of Dutch governor-generals can serve as "mirrors" of significant changes in Java during the nineteenth century then this paper has accomplished its principal goal.
This paper reviews some of the available secondary materials concerning the administration of the Liberal Governor-General L. A. J. W. Sloet van de Beele. It is a preliminary investigation for a long-term project in which I hope to interest others: the intensive and systematic description of Java during the kultuurstelsel period (1830-1870+) on the basis of archival sources. In particular, Sloet's administration provides a mirror on the middle cultivation system period, when it had been in operation for some time but was still a long way from its demise. Examination of the period from 1861 to 1866, when Sloet was Governor-General reveals a variety of important issues and events.
A large number of reforms were carried out during Sloet's administration. The small cultivations (indigo, cinnamon, tobacco, etc.,) were abolished as government forced cultivations. Percentages on cultivations were curtailed. Blandong (wood cutting) forced labor was abolished. Some of the worst aspects of corporal punishment were eliminated from the laws. A training college was founded, and other administrative reforms were instituted. It was also during Sloet's administration that concessions for the Samarang-Vorstenlanden and Batavia-Buitenzorg railroads were granted. This last aspect is one of the most controversial issues of Sloet's administration. Some questions concerning Sloet's connections with members of the Dutch bourgeoisie are raised. I also look at the large number of trips outside of Batavia-Buitenzorg that Sloet took, on the basis of the Staatsbladen and other evidence. The whole discussion is placed within the context of issues of periodization and Eurocentrism in Java's nineteenth-century history.
Table 1. Governor-Generals.
Table 2. Ministers of Colonies (in the Netherlands) since 1848.
1. A previous version of this paper was presented at the Indonesian Studies Summer Institute, "Lives as Mirrors," August 7-9, 1978, University of California, Berkeley. This paper is written on the basis of information collected while the author was recipient of an I.D.R.C. doctoral fellowship. Helpful comments from Peter Ananda, Ron Grant, Bill Liddle, Bill O'Malley, Joke Moeliono, Jim Rush, Jean Ta y lor, Gordon Temple, and Greta Wilson are acknowledged. I am particularl y indebted to earlier criticisms of the Weberian paradigm of "patrimonialism" from P. Creutzber, C. Fasseur and R. Van Niel.
2. Most of the Dutch governor-generals were men who were more like Jan Pieterszoon Coen (1587-1629) than Dr. Laurens Rael (1583-1637), whom Coen replaced as governor-general in 1618-1619, a scholar who was acquainted with Galileo's work and wrote on magnetism. Coen's background , was an apprenticeship with the Pescatore Company in Rome (de firma Justus de Visscher). Dr. J. A. A. van Doorn spoke at the General Meeting of the K.I.T.L.V. (May 21, 1977) about the high percentage of academically-trained engineers, doctors, and lawyers working in the Netherlands-Indies in the 1930s. During the course of Java's domination by the Dutch the administrative apparatus gradually became more "rational-legal" and "bureaucratized," in Weber's sense. Van Doorn refers to "totok-ization."
3. Lord Napier distinguishes between "Reactionary Conservatives," "Liberal Conservatives," and "Liberals" in his letter of December 12, 1860 to the Home Secretary, and counts 18, 20 and 34 in each group, respectively. Napier's letter is printed in an appendix to the excellent chronology of Dutch history compiled by Pamela and J. W. Smit, The Netherlands, 57 B.C.-1971. (Dobbs Ferry, N.Y.: Oceana, 1973). It is briefly discussed in Conley (1960: 111-112), which is a good basic introduction to the Dutch politics of the era, a topic not frequently written about in English. Indigo cultivation became a particularly important issue in parliamentary debates and S. van Deventer devotes many pages to reprinting various memorandums concerning the introduction of indigo cultivation by the colonial government in Priangan and Ceribon (van Deventer's Bijadragen tot de Kennis van het Landelijk Stelsel op Java, Vol. II, 1866, pp. 147-180, where sugar cultivation in other residencies is also discussed; also see pp. 148, 215-217, 336, 346, 385-386, 559-560 and so forth).
4. Mr. (meester in de rechten) Ary Prins is a good example of a fairly typical civil servant in mid-nineteenth century Java. As head of the Hooggerechtshof (i.e.,Chief Justice of the Supreme Court) he was sent as a special commissioner to various trouble spots (e.g, Riouw in 1849, West Borneo in 1853). His participation in the May-movement (Mei-beweging) in Batavia in 1848, which was led by W. R. van Itoevell, may have prevented his being considered as a permanent governor-general. It would be interesting to know more about the May movement and the careers of participants in that off-shoot of liberal movements in Europe in 1848. Perhaps the material to be found in the Stamboeken van de Burgerlijke Ambtenaren in Nederlandsch-Indie will - as Fasseur has pointed out - reveal more information.
5. Raffles was Lt.-Governor in Java, not Governor-General, because Lord Minto was the Governor of British India, and Java was administered as part of the India possessions. That is why comparisons between India and Java for the period 1811-1816 are particularly relevant. There was no bureaucratically appointed successor to Raffles, however, despite his title. Van des Bosch solved the problem of succession by having himself appointed Commissioner-General and designating Baud as interim Governor-General. It is worth noting that van den Bosch only served as Governor-General in Java from January 16, 1830 to July 2, 1833. He was named Commissioner-General on January 17, 1832 and assumed that title on June, 1833. He left Java on February 2, 1834 and never returned. Hence, during his term as Governor-General, van den Bosch merely initiated a new policy. It was Baud who mainly had the burden of carrying out the policy, between July 2, 1833 and February 29, 1836, and always merely as ad interim Governor-General. Hence, the correspondence between Minister of Colonies van den Bosch and Governor-General Baud is of utmost importance for understanding the initial stages of the introduction of the kultuurstelsel. That correspondence has been published under the editorship of J. J. Westendrop Boerma (1956), Briefwisseling (Utrecht: Kemink en Zoon).
6. This important book, originally Fasseur's doctoral dissertation, was published by Leiden University Press; a second printing came out in 1978, but there is no English translation as of yet. It does have a short summary, printed in Bahasa Indonesia and English (Fasseur, 1975: 282-289). A large number of articles have been published by Fasseur on the same subject; see Fasseur, 1975b, 1976a, 1976b, 1977a, 1977b, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981.
7. Various writers have deplored the "tendency for abstract presuppositions to run in to cover up the observance of direct experience ..." to quote the British historian of British India, Erik Stokes. See the collection of previously published articles printed in 1978 as The Peasant and the Raj. , Cambridge University Press. That is the standard historiographic position. In addition to this statement (Stokes, 1978: 267), however, Stokes goes on to admit that the peasantry is largely "unreachable through the intimacy of shared experience and its accompanying intuitive understanding, ..." and therefore "has to be approached through mental surrogates, through generalizations, concepts, models, and theories." Not only the study of "peasants" themselves, but also many other aspects of colonial policy and administration, require conceptual models. I have argued (Bakker, 1978) that Weber's "ideal type" methodology is particularly relevant and that, furthermore, the specific ideal type of "patrimonialism" is particularly relevant to the study of Javan history. Historians too often tend to underplay the importance of the ideal type approach, in my opinion, which is not to deny, however, the continued importance of the narrative historical approach. Both are heuristically valuable.
8. Isaac Dignus Fransen van de Putte made a fortune as administrator of the sugar factory "Pandji" in Besuki, East Java. The sugar contract had been granted to John Francis Loudon, who in turn sold his rights to his younger brother James Loudon and J. H. Cremer, both lawyers in Batavia. Even though Fransen van de Putte made his fortune as a sugar contractor under the cultivation system, he was one of the parliamentary "Liberals" who challenged the official colonial policy. See Fasseur (1975b) for a fascinating account of his career between 1849-1862. Van Deventer's Bijdragen, a principal source of documentation for the kultuurstelsel, was compiled as part of Fransen van de Putte's campaign against the Conservatives and was discontinued when Fransen van de Putte resigned in 1866. Publication of the Sloet van de Beele - Fransen van de Putte correspondence for 1863-1866 would clarify a crucial watershed period in much the same manner as the letters of Baud and van den Bosch reveal historically-specific aspects of an earlier period.
9. Adriaan Goedhart's De Onmogelijke Vrijheid (Utrecht: A. Oosterhoek's Uit. Mij., 1948) is one of a number of dissertations written under the direction of Professor C. Gerretson, who emphasized the advantages of the kultuurstelsel for maintenance of traditional village life. Nevertheless, this dissertation. contains much interesting information, partially because of its reliance on the 1865 study (Enquete-1865) of Priangan. The report by Otto van Rees of October 30, 1867 is particularly important. I am indebted to Professor Wertheim's suggestion that I consult Goedhart's thesis and I am particularly grateful to Rogier Nieuwenhuys for sending me a photocopy of the unpublished portion of van Rees' report (Verbaal 18 Maart, 1870 No. 14b, Bijlage 1). See Otto van Rees "Overzight van de Geschiedenis der Preanger Regentschappen." Verhandelingen Bataviaasch Genootschap, XXXIX. -
1. Aa, A. J. van der, 1839-51, Aardrijkskundig Woordenboek der Nederlanden. Gorinchem: J. aoorduys. 13 volumes.
2. Aa, A. J. van der, 1852-78, Biographish Woordenboek der Nederlanden, door A. J. van der Aa, yoortgezet onder redactie van K. J. R. van Harderwijk en G. D. J. Schotel. Amsterdam; B. M. Israel.
3. Anon., 1863a, De Concessie Samarang-Vorstenlanden in de Tweede Kamer. Leiden. (This pamphlet discusses the granting of the concession to W. Poolman et. al., by the law of July 6, 1863, Staatsblad No. 110).
4. Anon., 1963b, "Afschaffing van het passenstelsel," Tijdschrift voor Nederlandsch Indie, 1, 2: 236 ff. Cited by Day 1904: 275.
5. Brooshooft, P., 1901, De Etische Koers in de Koloniale Politiek, (pamphlet). (This attack on the "Old Liberals" stresses the fact that "free labor" benefited Dutch investors rather than the indigenous population; he estimates 'taxation' at twenty-five percent of earnings).
6. Brugmans, H., 1921, "Sloet van de Beele," in Nieuw Nederlandsch Biografisch Woordenboek. Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff, vol. 5: 752-3. (Volume 5 is edited by L. Knappert and P. J. Blok).
7. Brumund, J. F. G., 1854, Indiana, of Verzameling van Stukken, enz. Amsterdam: P. N. van Kampen. (Brumund worked with members of the Maatschappij van het Nut voor 't Algemeen in Oost Indie and is cited extensively in Woordenboek 1861).
8. Carey, Peter, 1974, The Cultural Ecology of Early Nineteenth Century Java. Singapore: I.S.E.A.S. Occasional Paper No. 24. Diponegoro and the Java War. Carey based his work on interpretation of three babads, including Diponegoro's own. Also see Fabricius 1977 for a Dutch translation of Diponegoro's Babad).
9. Chijs, J. A. van der, 1894, "Bijdrage tot de Geschiedenis der suikerfabricatie op Java," Tijdschrift voor de Taal, Land en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch Indie, 37: 1-26.
10. Congres, 1921, Handelingen van het Eerste Congres voor de Taal, Land en Volkenkunde van Java, to Solo, 25-26 December, 1919. Batavia? (The tradition of this type of Congress is represented in Indonesia since merdeka by the two Seminar Sedjarah held in Jogjakarta).
11. Day, Clive, 1966, The Policy and Administration of the Dutch in Java. New York: MacMillan Co. (A reprint is available, published by Oxford University Press, 1966. Day's work is a valuable source because of the insight it gives to liberal, laissez-faire bias concerning "progress" in colonial administration).
12. Deventer, C. van, 1899, "Een Ereschuld" De Gids. (Deventer estimates that the. revenue gained by the Netherlands from exploitation of Nederlandsch Indie was 200 million guilders, after the end of the batig slot politiek, i.e., 1867-1899).
13. Eijkman, A. J. and Stapel, F. W., 1930, Leerboek der Geschiedenis van Nederlandsch Oost-Indie. Groningen, Den Haag en Weltebreden: J. B. Wolters Uitg. Mij., N.V., zesde herziende druk. (This high school text clearly illustrates the Neerlandocentric bias. The first edition appeared in 1917. Stapel's influence on Indonesian students may not have been that great).
14. Emmerson, Donald K., 1976, Indonesia's Elite; Political Culture and Cultural Politics. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
15. Fabricius, Johan, 1977, Dipanegara: De Java Oorlog van 1825 tot 1830. Den Haag: Leopold. (This is an easily available source of important archival materials and of Diponegoro's Babad, in Dutch).
16. Fasseur, Cees, 1975a, Kultuurstelsel en Koloniale Baten: de Nederlandse Exyloitatie van Java, 1840-1860. Leiden: Leiden University Press.
17. Fasseur, Cees, 1975b, "Van Suikercontractant tot Kamerlid, Bouwstenen voor een biografie van Fransen van de Putte (1849-1862)." Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis 88: 333-354.
18. Fasseur, Cees, 1976a, "Some Remarks on the Cultivation System in Java," Indonesia-Netherlands Historical Conference. Noordwijkerhout, 19-22 May. Mimeographed. (See Fasseur, 1978).
19. Fasseur, Cees, 1976b, "Indische Persperikelen, 1847-1860," Bijdragen en Mededelingen betreffende de Geschiedenis der Nederlanden 91 (1): 56-75.
20. Fasseur, Cees, 1977a, Organisatie en Sociaal-Economische Betekenis van de Gouvernements -suikerkultuur in Enkele Residenties op Java omstreeks 1850," Bijdragen ... Taal, Land en Volkenkunde 133: 261-93.
21. Fasseur, Cees, 1977b, De Geest van het Fouvernement. [Bede Uitgesproken bij de Aanvaarding van het Ambt van Bijzonder Hoogleraar.) 21 October 1977. Leiden: Universitaire Pers, (University Press).
22. Fasseur, Cees, 1978, "Some Remarks on the Cultivation System in Java,"
23. Fasseur, Cees, 1979, Acta Historiae Neerlandica X: 143-62. "Het Indie van Multatuli," Over Multatuli 3: 1-14.
24. Fasseur, Cees, 1980, Geld en Geweten. Hague: Nijhoff. (A Reader edited by Fasseur).
25. Fasseur, Cees, 1981, "The Cultivation System and Its Impact on the Dutch Colonial Economy and the Indigenous Society in Nineteenth Century Java." Paper presented at the Second Anglo-Dutch Conference on Comparative Colonial History. 23-25 September, 1981, Leiden, typed.
26. Feist, B., 1865, De Werking van het Cultuurstelsel op Java en de Nieuwe Cultuurwet. Amsterdam: J. C. Schlomann. (This 32 pag pamphlet is similar to many written in the 1860s in order to argue in favor of free rather than forced labor).
27. Filet, P. W., 1895, De Verhouding der Vorsten op Java tot de Nederlandsche Indische Regeering. 's Gravenhage: M. Nijhoff.
28. Heijden, J. van der, 1922?, lndisch Pretenboek. Amsterdam: J. H. de Bussy. (The color plates of watercolor paintings in this little book reveal "better than a thousand words" the prejudices of the Dutch colonialists. The "tukang," "baboe," etc., are depicted as colorful and slightly quaint curiosities, or as sentimental aspects of tempoe doeloe).
29. Herwerden, J. D. van, 1863, De Spoorweg-kwestie op Java. 's Gravenhaag: No Publisher? (This is one of many pamphlets written about the question of railroad concessions).
30. Hoadley, Masoc C., 1971, "Continuity and Change in Javanese Legal Traditions: The Evidence of the Yayapatra," Indonesia, 11 (April): 95-109.
31. Hoadley, Masoc C., 1975, Javanese Procedural Law, A History of the Cirebon-Priangan Jaksa College, 1706-1735. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Ph.D. thesis.
32. Hoadley, Masoc C., 1977, "The Javanese Royal Privilege of Sentana and Dutch Fiat" Indonesia, 24 (October): 157-183. (Every student of nineteenth-century Java should read these excellent studies for background on the eighteenth-century situation in Cirebon).
33. Jackson, Karl D., 1978, "Bureaucratic Polity: A Theoretical Framework for the Analysis of,Power and Communications in Indonesia," in Karl D. Jackson and Lucian W. Pye (eds.) Political Power and Communications in Indonesia. Berkeley: University of California Press: 3-22. (Jackson's view of "patronage" in the several articles published in this book is similar to my view of "patrimonialism,° as discussed in Bakker 1978).
34. Jaquet, F. G. P. (comp.), 1970, Guide to Sources in the Netherlands Concerning the History of the Netherlands Indies/Indonesia, 1816-1942. Leiden: K.I.T.L.V. (This "guide" is invaluable for anyone wishing to do work in the Netherlands. Jaquet is currently working in Jakarta to improve the cataloguing of the Arsip Nasional and help train a group of young Indonesian archivists).
35. Kern, H., 1891, "Levensbericht van L.A.J.W. Baron Sloet van de Beele," Jaarboek van de Koninklijk Akademie van Wetenschappen, p. 39.
36. Kleijn, Rudolf Hubert, 1889, Het Gewestelijk Bestuur op Java. Leiden: P. Somerwil. Published dissertation, Leiden.
37. Knight, G. R., 1975, "John Palmer and Plantation Development in Western Java during the Earlier Nineteenth Century," Bijdragen van het Koninklijk Instituut voor de Taal, Land en Volkenkunde (van Nederlands Indie), 131: 309-337. (Knight studied estates in Java during the 1812-1834 period, before the kultuurstelsel became significant).
38. Kol, H. H. van, 1902, Land en Volk van Java. Amsterdam: Rood Front.
39. Kol, H. H. van, 1905, Uit Onze Kolonien. Amsterdam: Wolters. (These works are by the leading Socialist spokesman in the Staten Generaal. They reveal the conservative reformist position of Dutch Social Democracy at the turn of the century. Van Kol did not accept the possibility of Indonesian independence, despite his Socialism).
40. Kroef, Justus Maria van der, 1948 "Abraham Kuyper and the Rise of Neo-Calvinism in the Netherlands," Church History, 17: 316 ff. (Kuyper's role in the Anti-Revolutionary Party in 1880-1900, reveals the moralism of the "ethical" position).
41. Kroef, Justus Maria van der, 1953, "The Background of the Ethical Policy," Chapter une in Dutch Colonial Policy in Indonesia, 1900-1941.
42. New York: Columbia University, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, 12-51 deal with 1830-1900.
43. Kroef, Justus Maria van der, 1963, The Dialectic of Colonial Indonesian History. Amsterdam: C. P. J. van der Peet. (This book takes a very global view of the whole sweep of events, from 1798 to 1942. As a "philosophy of history" it is very suggestive).
44. Lekkerkerker, C., 1938, Land en Volk van Java. Groningen en Batavia: J. B. Wolters. (Brief mention of Sloet on pp. 486, 490-91. Valuable for descriptions of the 1930s).
45. Lion, H. J., 1857, Prospectus voor eene Stoomvaart tusschen Batavia, Samarang, Soerabaya en tusschen liggende plaatsen. Soerabaya.
46. Lion, H. J., 1861, Hoe Indie Geregeerd Wordt. Met zes (zeven) Bi)lagen over Spoorwegen in Nederlandsch Indie en Britsch Indie. 's Gravenhage: (publisher?) (These works are cited in Rouffaer and Muller 1908: 157 no 5).
47. Mangokoe Nagoro, Pangeran Adipati Ario, 1866, Welkomst-adres aan Gouverneur-Generaal Sloet van de Beele, bij zijn komst te Soerakarta. Soerakarta: (publisher?).
48. Meinsma, J. J., 1872-73, Geschiedenis van de Nederlandsch Oost Indische Bezittingen. Delft: Joh. Ijkema. Twee deelen. (In volume II, Chapter 13: 103-127 there is a valuable discussion of Sloet and Mijer, 1866-1872. In some ways these two Governor-Generals complimented one another, with Mijer continuing reforms initiated by Sloet).
49. Melville van Carnbee, P. Baron de, 1855, Atlas van Nederlandsch Indie. Batavia.
50. Moes, J. E., 1958-59, The Economic Development of the Indigenous Sector of the Indonesian Economy During the Colonial Perio Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley, Ph.D. thesis.
51. Mol van Otterloo, J. de, 1859, De Vrije Arbeid te Rembang en Kediri. Utrecht: Kemink. (Van Otterloo argues that "free labor" was successful in Rembang and Kediri and should be extended to the other residencies).
52. Molhuysen, Philip Christiaan and Blok, P. J. (eds.), 1911-37, Nieuw Nederlandsch Biografisch Woordenboek. Leiden: Sijthoff. Ten Volumes. Cumulative Index in each volume.
53. Netherlands, 1902, Geschiedkundig Overzicht van de Behandeling van het Vraagstuk der Decentralisatie en Reorganisatie van het Indisch Bestuur van 1854 - 1894 bil het Department van Kolonien in Nederland en big de Indische Regeering. Batavia: Landsdrukkerij.
54. Nieboer, Herman Jeremias, (1900), 1971, Slavery as an Industrial System. 's Gravenhage, 1900; second edition 1910. (New York: B. Franklin, 1971 reprint). (This is an extremely important source on "forced" versus "free" labor in which the concept of "slavery" is studied within a comparative, sociological perspective. Nieboer was a student of Sebald R. Steinmetz, the founder of sociografie in the Netherlands. This work is inspired by the long controversy on colonial policy in the Netherlands).
55. Programma, 1862, Programma van de Feesten …. bijelegenheid van de
56. Door Z.E. den Gouv.-Gen. Mr. L. A. J. W. Baron Sloet van de Beele Voorwaardelijk Verleende Concessie tot Aanleg en Exploitatie van Een Spoorweg van Samarang Naar de Vorstenlanden. Semarang: Landsdrukkerij?
57. Quarles van Ufford, Jhr. Mr. J. K. W., 1863 Wat Is Voor Nederlandsch-Indie Noodig? Open Brief aan Jhr. Mr. W. T. Gevers Deynoot. 's Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff.
58. Reid, Anthony, 1969, "The Contest for the East Coast of Sumatra, 1858-1865," The Contest for North Sumatra: Acheh, the Netherlands and Britain, 1858-1898. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press: 25-51. (Reid cites the correspondence between Resident Elisa Netscher and Governor-General Sloet, and between Sloet and van de Putte, from Openbare, Geheime and Kabinets archieven at Schaarsbergen).
59. Reinsma, R., 1957a, "Brieven van I. D. Fransen van de Putte uit diens Planterstijd," Bijdragen en Mededelingen van het Historisch Genootschap, 71: 160-185.
60. Reinsma, R., 1957b "Sociaal-economische denkbeelden van Fransen van de Putte," Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis, 70: 62-75.
61. Reinsma, R., 1959a "Autobiografie van J. J. Rochussen," Bijdragen en Mededelingen van het Historisch Genootschap, 73: 55-138.
62. Reinsma, R., 1959b "De Kultuurprocenten in de Praktijk en in de Ogen der Tijdgenoten," Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis, 72: 57-83.
63. Rhede van der Kloot, M. A. van, 1891, "Mr. Ludolf Anne Jan Wilt Baron Sloet van de Beele," De Gouverneurs-Generaal en Connissarisen Generaal van Nederlandsch-Indie, 1610-1688, Historisch-Genealogisch Beschreven. 's Gravenhage: W. P. van Stockum & Zoon: 202-207. Also, especially, see articles on Prins: 199-201, 208.
64. Rouffaer en Muller, 1908, Catalogus.
65. Salak (pseudonym), 1860, De Deugdelijkheid van het Tegenwoordige Cultuurstelsel op Java. Amsterdam: J. C. Loman.
66. Sutherland, Heather, 1973, "Notes on Java's Regent Families," Indonesia, (October).
67. Sutherland, Heather, 1974, "Notes (cont.)," Indonesia, 17 (April): 1-42.
68. Sutherland, Heather, 1975, "The Priyayi," Indonesia, 19 (April): 57-78.
69. Thurlow, T. J. Hovell, 1869, Report on Java and Its Dependencies, Bluebook No's 5 & 6, Reports by Her Majesty's Secretaries of Embassy and Legation, 1868. London: H. M. Stationer's Office.
70. Tijdschrift, 1862, "Verslag der kommissie uit het Indisch Genootschap voor een onderzoek naar de wijze, waarop spporweger op Java kunnen worden aangelega," Tijdschrift van Nederlandsch Indie 24; 2: 201-226/324-329/.
71. Tuuk, H. N. van der, 1868, Les Manuscrits Lampongs en possession de M. le Baror Sloet van de Beele. Leide: publies par H. N. van der Tuuk.
72. Uljee, H.; Baayen, H.; en Kijlstra, C., 1947 Leerboek der Geschiedenis: Vierde Deel, De Geschiedenis van Nederland en Indonesie Binds 1814.
73. Bandoeng: Nix. Tweede druk. (Compare Eijkman and Stapel 1930).
74. Verwey, C. C., 1893 "lets over het Contractueel Pandelingschap en de Bestrijding dezer Instelling in de Nederlandsch-Indische Wetgeving," Bijdragen Koninklijk Instituut voor de Taal, Land en Volkenkunde, 20. (This is an interesting discussion of the abolition of slavery; compare Nieboer 1900).
75. Veth, P. J., 1898 Java: Geographisch, Ethnoldgisch, Historisch Deel Twee, Nieuwe Geschiedenis. Haarlem: De Erven F. Bohn, vol. II: 426-431.
76. Wertheim, Willem Frederick and Wertheim-Gijse Weenink, A. H., 1968, Ketters en Kwezels, Regenten en Rebellen. Drachten Laverman. (Professor Wertheim and his wife here deal with several questions, but the discussion of Sicco Roorda van Eysinga's banishment from Java by Governor-General Sloet van Beele is based on fascinating detective work in libraries and archives; Sicco was a good friend of Multatuli).
77. Winch, R. F., 1947 "Heuristic and Empirical Typologies," American Sociological Review: 68-75. (Winch argues that distinguishing categories and their subdivisions is a condition of all knowing and all doing; this is relevant for the argument concerning periodization made here).
78. Woordenboek, 1861 Aardrijkskundig en Statistisch Woordenboek van Nederlandsch Indie, Bewerkt Naar de Jongste en Beste Berigten. Amsterdam: P. N. van Kampen.
79. Wright, H. R. C., 1952 "Nuntinghe's Advice to Raffles on the Land Qu stion in Java," Bijdragen Koninklijk Instituut voor de Taal, Land en Volkenkunde, 108: 220-247. (The comparison between Raffles' administration in 1811-1816 and Sloet's administration in 1861-1866, exactly fifty years later, seems extremely apt because both men attempted to 'rationalize' administration, but under quite different circumstances).
In addition, the reader may wish to follow the argument made in:
1. Bakker, Johannes (Hans) I., 1978a "Bureaucratization of Patrimonialism: Taxation and Land Tenure in Java, 1830-1850," in Means, Gordon (ed.) Southeast Asia's Past in Perspective/Proceedings.
2. of the Conference of the Canada Council for Southeast Asian Studies, November 4-5, 1977.
3. Ottawa: C.C.S.E.A.S., 1978b Patrimonialism, Imperialism and Underdevelopment in Java: An Examination of the Influence of Dutch Colonialism on Indonesian Modernization, With Emphasis on the Cultivation System 1830-1870. Toronto, Ontario: Department of Sociology, unpublished Ph.D. thesis.
The archival research done in recent years by Robert Van Niel, Cees Fasseur, Anthony Reid, Peter Carey, and other promises to open up a much expanded understanding of the interaction between Indonesians, Chinese, Dutch, and English in the nineteenth century. The amount of material in the Dutch archives is a challenge to many researchers. All of the records for the period 1850 to 1900 are held in the depository in Schaarsbergen (near Arnhem) at present, although when the new archives in the Hague are completed some of the materials will be moved back. See Reid 1969 for a convenient description (pp. 299-303). A thorough description has been compiled by Jaquet 1970.
A more thorough test of the thesis presented in Bakker (1978a, 1978 b) will require cooperative work by many researchers, especially work on relatively short periods of time or relatively homogeneous districts and regions. There are many possibilities for Indonesian students and faculty members to do intensive archival research testing the "patrimonialism" thesis, or other explanations of Indonesia's political and economic underdevelopment, (e.g., Emerson 1976, Jackson 1978, Van der Kroef 1963, etc.).
J. I. (Hans) Bakker