J. E. de Sturler was a late-nineteenth-century Dutch colonial historian whose monograph Grondgebied van Nederlandsch-Indië (“Territory of the Netherlands Indies”) collected, with commentary, the principal diplomatic instruments by which the boundaries of the Dutch East Indian empire had been fixed. The work is cited by Van der Kemp as J. E. de Sturler’s „Grondgebied Nederlandsch-Indië”.
Cited by Van der Kemp
De Sturler appears in a footnote on page 45 of Van der Kemp’s article on Raffles’s Acheh agreement of 1819. The note enumerates the printed sources in which the exchanged notes — that is, the diplomatic correspondence accompanying the treaty of 17 March 1824 — are to be found, “partly with, partly without the treaty of 1824”. Van der Kemp lists, successively, Van Hogendorp’s Bijdragen (2nd ed., vol. V, p. 236), Elout’s Bijdragen of 1863 (p. 228), E. de Waal’s Nederlandsch-Indië in de Staten-Generaal (vol. I, p. 82), De Sturler’s Grondgebied van Nederlandsch-Indië (p. 344), and J. J. Meinsma’s Geschiedenis van de Nederlandsch Oost-Indische Bezittingen.
The point of the enumeration is to give the reader a single handy key to the exchanged notes that, with the treaty itself, regulated Anglo-Dutch relations in the archipelago for the next half-century. De Sturler’s volume belongs to a series of late-nineteenth-century documentary compilations — alongside those of Van Hogendorp, Elout, De Waal and Meinsma — that made the archives of the colonial state accessible to historical scholarship.
Significance for Acheh studies
The exchanged notes that De Sturler reproduced are of central importance for the Acheh question, because they contain the famous Acheh reservation. Under Article 2 of the 1824 treaty Britain undertook not to establish any office on Sumatra or to conclude any treaty with the native princes of that island; the Dutch, in their exchanged notes, promised in turn that this stipulation would not be construed so as to affect the independence of Acheh. It was this Acheh reservation that became the legal basis for the long British veto on Dutch expansion over the sultanate — the veto that the Sumatra Treaty of 1871 finally lifted.
De Sturler’s role in the present article is therefore that of a documentary source. As one of the editors whose compilations Van der Kemp cites, he shares the stage with Van Hogendorp, Levyssohn Norman, Hoek, Netscher and Jeekel — the network of Dutch colonial historians on whose editorial labours Van der Kemp’s own researches were built.
See Also
Source
Raffles’ Atjeh-overeenkomst van 1819, by P. H. van der Kemp, in Bijdragen van het Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indië, 6e Volgr., Deel VII (1900), pp. 159-239. Universiteitsbibliotheek Vrije Universiteit, LS.08781.
J. E. de Sturler was a late-nineteenth-century Dutch colonial historian whose monograph Grondgebied van Nederlandsch-Indië (“Territory of the Netherlands Indies”) collected, with commentary, the principal diplomatic instruments by which the boundaries of the Dutch East Indian empire had been fixed. The work is cited by Van der Kemp as J. E. de Sturler’s „Grondgebied Nederlandsch-Indië”.
Cited by Van der Kemp
De Sturler appears in a footnote on page 45 of Van der Kemp’s article on Raffles’s Acheh agreement of 1819. The note enumerates the printed sources in which the exchanged notes — that is, the diplomatic correspondence accompanying the treaty of 17 March 1824 — are to be found, “partly with, partly without the treaty of 1824”. Van der Kemp lists, successively, Van Hogendorp’s Bijdragen (2nd ed., vol. V, p. 236), Elout’s Bijdragen of 1863 (p. 228), E. de Waal’s Nederlandsch-Indië in de Staten-Generaal (vol. I, p. 82), De Sturler’s Grondgebied van Nederlandsch-Indië (p. 344), and J. J. Meinsma’s Geschiedenis van de Nederlandsch Oost-Indische Bezittingen.
The point of the enumeration is to give the reader a single handy key to the exchanged notes that, with the treaty itself, regulated Anglo-Dutch relations in the archipelago for the next half-century. De Sturler’s volume belongs to a series of late-nineteenth-century documentary compilations — alongside those of Van Hogendorp, Elout, De Waal and Meinsma — that made the archives of the colonial state accessible to historical scholarship.
Significance for Acheh studies
The exchanged notes that De Sturler reproduced are of central importance for the Acheh question, because they contain the famous Acheh reservation. Under Article 2 of the 1824 treaty Britain undertook not to establish any office on Sumatra or to conclude any treaty with the native princes of that island; the Dutch, in their exchanged notes, promised in turn that this stipulation would not be construed so as to affect the independence of Acheh. It was this Acheh reservation that became the legal basis for the long British veto on Dutch expansion over the sultanate — the veto that the Sumatra Treaty of 1871 finally lifted.
De Sturler’s role in the present article is therefore that of a documentary source. As one of the editors whose compilations Van der Kemp cites, he shares the stage with Van Hogendorp, Levyssohn Norman, Hoek, Netscher and Jeekel — the network of Dutch colonial historians on whose editorial labours Van der Kemp’s own researches were built.
See Also
Source
Raffles’ Atjeh-overeenkomst van 1819, by P. H. van der Kemp, in Bijdragen van het Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indië, 6e Volgr., Deel VII (1900), pp. 159-239. Universiteitsbibliotheek Vrije Universiteit, LS.08781.