Archival Science2:87–109, 2002.© 20

Archival Science
2:
87–109, 2002.
© 2002
Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.
87
Colonial Archives and the Arts of Governance
ANN LAURA STOLER
Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI 48109-1382 USA
(E-mail: [e-mail])
Abstract.
Anthropologists engaged in post-colonial studies are increasingly adopting an
historical perspective and using archives. Yet their archival activity tends to remain more an
extractive than an ethnographic one. Documents are thus still invoked piecemeal to confirm
the colonial invention of certain practices or to underscore cultural claims, silent. Yet such
mining of the
content
of government commissions, reports, and other archival sources rarely
pays attention to their peculiar placement and
form
. Scholars need to move from archive-as-
source to archive-as-subject. This article, using document production in the Dutch East Indies
as an illustration, argues that scholars should view archives not as sites of knowledge retrieval,
but of knowledge production, as monuments of states as well as sites of state ethnography.
This requires a sustained engagement with archives as cultural agents of “fact” production, of
taxonomies in the making, and of state authority. What constitutes the archive, what form it
takes, and what systems of classification and epistemology signal at specific times are (and
reflect) critical features of colonial politics and state power. The archive was the supreme
technology of the late nineteenth-century imperial state, a repository of codified beliefs that
clustered (and bore witness to) connections between secrecy, the law, and power.
Keywords:
archives, archiving, bureaucracy, colonial archives, ethnography, knowledge
Genealogy is gray, meticulous and patiently documentary. It operates on a
field of entangled and confused parchments, on documents that have been
scratched over and recopied many times.
1
This essay is about the colonial order of things as seen through its archival
productions. It asks what insights about the colonial might be gained from
attending not only to colonialism’s archival content, but to its particular and
sometimes peculiar form. Its focus is on archiving as a process rather than to
archives as things. It looks to archives as epistemological experiments rather
than as sources, to colonial archives as cross-sections of contested knowl-
edge. Most importantly, it looks to colonial archives as both transparencies
on which power relations were inscribed and intricate technologies of rule
in themselves. Its concerns are two: to situate new approaches to colonial
1
Michel Foucault, “Nietzsche, Genealogy, History”, in Daniel Bouchard (ed.),
Language,
Counter-Memory, Practice: Selected Essays and Interviews by Michel Foucault
(Ithaca:
Cornell University Press [1971] 1977), p. 139.
88
ANN LAURA STOLER
archives within the broader “historic turn” of the last two decades and to
suggest what critical histories of the colonial have to gain by turning further
toward a politics of knowledge that reckons with archival genres, cultures of
documentation, fictions of access, and archival conventions.
2
Epistemological scepticism, archives, and the “historic turn”
Some four decades after British social anthropologist E.E. Evans-Pritchard’s
unheeded warning that anthropology would have to choose between being
history or being nothing, and Claude Levi-Strauss’ counter claim that
accorded history neither “special value” nor privileged analytic space,
students of culture have taken up a transformative venture, celebrating with
unprecedented relish what has come to be called “the historic turn.”
3
Some
might argue that anthropology’s engagement with history over the last two
decades, unlike that recent “turn” in other disciplines, has not been a turn
at all, but rather a return to its founding principles: enquiry into cumu-
lative processes of cultural production. but without the typological aspirations
and evolutionary assumptions once embraced. Others might counter that the
feverish turn to history represents a significant departure from an earlier
venture, a more explicit rupture with anthropology’s long-standing complicity
in colonial politics.
4
As such, one could argue that the historic turn signals
not a turn to history per se, but a different reflection on the politics of knowl-
edge – a further rejection of the categories and cultural distinctions on which
2
On the “historic turn,” see the introduction to Terrence J. McDonald (ed.),
The Historic
Turn in the Human Sciences
(Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1966). This essay
represents a condensed version of Chapter 1 from my book in progress,
Along the Archival
Grain
(Princeton: Princeton University Press). Parts of it are based on the 1996 Lewis
Henry Morgan Lectures delivered at the University of Rochester entitled “Ethnography in
the Archives: Movements on the Historic Turn.” A different version of this piece appears in
Carolyn Hamilton (ed.),
Refiguring the Archive
(forthcoming).
3
E.E. Evans-Pritchard, “Social Anthropology: Past and Present, The Marett Lecture,
1950”,
Social Anthropology and Others Essays
(New York: Free Press, 1951), p. 152. Claude
Levi-Strauss,
The Savage Mind
(Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1966), p. 256.
4
For some sense of the range of different agendas of the current “historic turn,” see Nich-
olas B. Dirks, Geoff Eley, and Sherry B. Ortner (eds.),
Culture, Power, History: A Reader in
Contemporary Social Theory
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, [1983] 1994), Terrence
J. McDonald (ed.),
The Historic Turn in the Human Sciences
(Ann Arbor: University of
Michigan Press, 1996); specifically on history in the anthropological imagination, see Gerald
Sider and Gavin Smith (eds.),
Between History and Histories: The Making of Silences and
Commemorations
(Toronto: Toronto University Press, 1997). Also see Richard Fox’s “For a
Nearly New Culture History”, in Richard G. Fox (ed.),
Recapturing Anthropology: Working
in the Present
(Santa Fe: School of American Research Press, 1991), pp. 93–114, and James
Faubion, “History in Anthropology”,
Annual Review of Anthropology
22 (1993): 35–54.
COLONIAL ARCHIVES AND THE ARTS OF GOVERNANCE
89
imperial rule was once invested and on which post-colonial state practices
have continued to be based.
Engagement with the uses and abuses of the past pervades many academic
disciplines, but nowhere more than in this burgeoning area of colonial
ethnography. Over the last decade, students of the colonial have challenged
the categories, conceptual frame, and practices of colonial authorities and
their taxonomic states.
5
Questioning the making of colonial knowledge, and
the privileged social categories it produced, has revamped what students of
the colonial take to be sources of knowledge and what to expect of them.
Attention to the intimate domains in which colonial states intervened has
prompted reconsideration of what we hold to be the foundations of European
authority and its key technologies.
6
In treating colonialism as a living history
that informs and shapes the present rather than as a finished past, a new
generation of scholars are taking up Michel De Certeau’s invitation to
“prowl” new terrain as they re-imagine what sorts of situated knowledge
have produced both colonial sources
and
their own respective locations in
the “historiographic operation.”
7
Some students of colonialism are rereading
those archives and doing oral histories with people who lived those archived
events to comment on colonial narratives of them.
8
Others are doing so
with photography, engravings, and documentary art.
9
Some are attending to
how colonial documents have been requisitioned and recycled to confirm old
entitlements or to make new political demands. As part of a wider impulse,
we are no longer studying things, but the making of them. Students of coloni-
alisms in and outside of anthropology are spending as much time rethinking
what constitutes the colonial archive as they are reconsidering how written
5
See, for example, the introductions to and essays in Nicholas Dirks (ed.),
Colonialism and
Culture
(Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1992); and in Frederick Cooper and Ann
Laura Stoler (eds.),
Tensions of Empire: Colonial Cultures in a Bourgeois World
(Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1997).
6
See “Genealogies of the Intimate”, in Ann Laura Stoler and Frederick Cooper (eds.),
Carnal Knowledge and Imperial Power: Race and the Intimate in Colonial Rule
(Berkeley:
University of California Press, 2002).
7
See Michel de Certeau, “The Historiographic Operation” (1974), in
The Writing of
History
(New York: Columbia University Press, 1988).
8
On archives in relationship to popular memory, see Richard Price,
Convict and the
Colonel: A Story of Colonialism and Resistance in the Caribbean
(Boston: Beacon Press,
1998); Luise White,
Speaking with Vampires: Rumor and History in Colonial Africa
(Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000); Ann Laura Stoler and Karen Strassler, “Cast-
ings for the Colonial: Memory Work in ‘New Order’ Java”,
Comparative Studies in Society
and History
42(1) (2000): 4–48, and the references therein.
9
On the power of images in the making of colonial rule, see Elizabeth Edwards, guest
editor, “Anthropology and Colonial Endeavour”, in
The History of Photography
21(1) (Spring
1997).
90
ANN LAURA STOLER
documents collide and converge with colonial memories in the post-colonial
field.
If Evans-Pritchards’ warning some thirty-five years ago that “anthropolo-
gists have tended to be uncritical in their use of documentary sources” had
little resonance at the time, it certainly has more today. For however deep and
full the archival turn has been in post-colonial scholarship of the 1990s, what
is more surprising is how thin and tentative it can still remain.
10
Anthropolo-
gists may no longer look at archives as the stuf

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

Ilmu kearsipan2:87-109, 2002.© 2002Penerbit Kluwer akademik. Dicetak di Belanda.87Arsip kolonial dan seni pemerintahanANN LAURA STOLERDepartemen Antropologi, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI 48109-1382 USA(E-mail: [e-mail])Abstrak.Antropolog terlibat dalam studi pasca kolonial yang semakin mengadopsiperspektif sejarah dan menggunakan Arsip. Namun aktivitas arsip mereka cenderung untuk tetap lebihbahan galian daripada etnografi. Dokumen dengan demikian masih dipanggil sedikit demi sedikit untuk mengkonfirmasipenemuan kolonial praktek-praktek tertentu atau untuk menggarisbawahi budaya klaim, diam. Namun sepertipertambangan darikontenKomisi pemerintah, laporan, dan sumber Arsip jarangmemperhatikan penempatan mereka aneh danbentuk. Para ulama harus bergerak dari arsip-sebagai-sumber Arsip sebagai subjek. Artikel ini, menggunakan dokumen produksi di Hindia-Belandasebagai ilustrasi, berpendapat bahwa sarjana harus melihat arsip bukan sebagai situs penarikan pengetahuan,tetapi pengetahuan produksi, serta Monumen negara situs negara etnografi.Hal ini memerlukan keterlibatan dengan arsip sebagai agen budaya "fakta" produksi, daritaksonomi dalam pembuatan, dan otoritas negara. Apa yang merupakan arsip, bentuk apa itudiperlukan, dan apa sistem klasifikasi dan Epistemologi sinyal pada waktu tertentu (dan««««mencerminkan) fitur kritis kolonial politik dan kekuasaan negara. Arsip adalah Sang Mahatinggitechnology of the late nineteenth-century imperial state, a repository of codified beliefs thatclustered (and bore witness to) connections between secrecy, the law, and power.Keywords:archives, archiving, bureaucracy, colonial archives, ethnography, knowledgeGenealogy is gray, meticulous and patiently documentary. It operates on afield of entangled and confused parchments, on documents that have beenscratched over and recopied many times.1This essay is about the colonial order of things as seen through its archivalproductions. It asks what insights about the colonial might be gained fromattending not only to colonialism’s archival content, but to its particular andsometimes peculiar form. Its focus is on archiving as a process rather than toarchives as things. It looks to archives as epistemological experiments ratherthan as sources, to colonial archives as cross-sections of contested knowl-edge. Most importantly, it looks to colonial archives as both transparencieson which power relations were inscribed and intricate technologies of rulein themselves. Its concerns are two: to situate new approaches to colonial1Michel Foucault, “Nietzsche, Genealogy, History”, in Daniel Bouchard (ed.),Language,Counter-Memory, Practice: Selected Essays and Interviews by Michel Foucault(Ithaca:Cornell University Press [1971] 1977), p. 139.88ANN LAURA STOLERarchives within the broader “historic turn” of the last two decades and tosuggest what critical histories of the colonial have to gain by turning furthertoward a politics of knowledge that reckons with archival genres, cultures ofdocumentation, fictions of access, and archival conventions.2Epistemological scepticism, archives, and the “historic turn”Some four decades after British social anthropologist E.E. Evans-Pritchard’sunheeded warning that anthropology would have to choose between beinghistory or being nothing, and Claude Levi-Strauss’ counter claim thataccorded history neither “special value” nor privileged analytic space,students of culture have taken up a transformative venture, celebrating withunprecedented relish what has come to be called “the historic turn.”3Somemight argue that anthropology’s engagement with history over the last twodecades, unlike that recent “turn” in other disciplines, has not been a turnat all, but rather a return to its founding principles: enquiry into cumu-lative processes of cultural production. but without the typological aspirationsand evolutionary assumptions once embraced. Others might counter that thefeverish turn to history represents a significant departure from an earlierventure, a more explicit rupture with anthropology’s long-standing complicityin colonial politics.4As such, one could argue that the historic turn signalsnot a turn to history per se, but a different reflection on the politics of knowl-edge – a further rejection of the categories and cultural distinctions on which2On the “historic turn,” see the introduction to Terrence J. McDonald (ed.),The HistoricTurn in the Human Sciences(Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1966). This essayrepresents a condensed version of Chapter 1 from my book in progress,Along the ArchivalGrain(Princeton: Princeton University Press). Parts of it are based on the 1996 LewisHenry Morgan Lectures delivered at the University of Rochester entitled “Ethnography inthe Archives: Movements on the Historic Turn.” A different version of this piece appears inCarolyn Hamilton (ed.),Refiguring the Archive(forthcoming).3E.E. Evans-Pritchard, “Social Anthropology: Past and Present, The Marett Lecture,1950”,Social Anthropology and Others Essays(New York: Free Press, 1951), p. 152. ClaudeLevi-Strauss,The Savage Mind(Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1966), p. 256.4For some sense of the range of different agendas of the current “historic turn,” see Nich-olas B. Dirks, Geoff Eley, and Sherry B. Ortner (eds.),Culture, Power, History: A Reader inContemporary Social Theory(Princeton: Princeton University Press, [1983] 1994), TerrenceJ. McDonald (ed.),The Historic Turn in the Human Sciences(Ann Arbor: University ofMichigan Press, 1996); specifically on history in the anthropological imagination, see GeraldSider and Gavin Smith (eds.),Between History and Histories: The Making of Silences andCommemorations(Toronto: Toronto University Press, 1997). Also see Richard Fox’s “For aNearly New Culture History”, in Richard G. Fox (ed.),Recapturing Anthropology: Workingin the Present(Santa Fe: School of American Research Press, 1991), pp. 93–114, and JamesFaubion, “History in Anthropology”,Annual Review of Anthropology22 (1993): 35–54.COLONIAL ARCHIVES AND THE ARTS OF GOVERNANCE89imperial rule was once invested and on which post-colonial state practiceshave continued to be based.Engagement with the uses and abuses of the past pervades many academicdisciplines, but nowhere more than in this burgeoning area of colonialethnography. Over the last decade, students of the colonial have challengedthe categories, conceptual frame, and practices of colonial authorities andtheir taxonomic states.5Questioning the making of colonial knowledge, andthe privileged social categories it produced, has revamped what students ofthe colonial take to be sources of knowledge and what to expect of them.Attention to the intimate domains in which colonial states intervened hasprompted reconsideration of what we hold to be the foundations of Europeanauthority and its key technologies.6In treating colonialism as a living historythat informs and shapes the present rather than as a finished past, a newgeneration of scholars are taking up Michel De Certeau’s invitation to“prowl” new terrain as they re-imagine what sorts of situated knowledgehave produced both colonial sourcesandtheir own respective locations inthe “historiographic operation.”7Some students of colonialism are rereadingthose archives and doing oral histories with people who lived those archivedevents to comment on colonial narratives of them.8Others are doing sowith photography, engravings, and documentary art.9Some are attending tohow colonial documents have been requisitioned and recycled to confirm oldentitlements or to make new political demands. As part of a wider impulse,we are no longer studying things, but the making of them. Students of coloni-alisms in and outside of anthropology are spending as much time rethinkingwhat constitutes the colonial archive as they are reconsidering how written5See, for example, the introductions to and essays in Nicholas Dirks (ed.),Colonialism andCulture(Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1992); and in Frederick Cooper and AnnLaura Stoler (eds.),Tensions of Empire: Colonial Cultures in a Bourgeois World(Berkeley:University of California Press, 1997).6See “Genealogies of the Intimate”, in Ann Laura Stoler and Frederick Cooper (eds.),Carnal Knowledge and Imperial Power: Race and the Intimate in Colonial Rule(Berkeley:University of California Press, 2002).7See Michel de Certeau, “The Historiographic Operation” (1974), inThe Writing ofHistory(New York: Columbia University Press, 1988).8On archives in relationship to popular memory, see Richard Price,Convict and theColonel: A Story of Colonialism and Resistance in the Caribbean(Boston: Beacon Press,1998); Luise White,Speaking with Vampires: Rumor and History in Colonial Africa(Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000); Ann Laura Stoler and Karen Strassler, “Cast-ings for the Colonial: Memory Work in ‘New Order’ Java”,Comparative Studies in Societyand History42(1) (2000): 4–48, and the references therein.9On the power of images in the making of colonial rule, see Elizabeth Edwards, guesteditor, “Anthropology and Colonial Endeavour”, inThe History of Photography21(1) (Spring1997).90ANN LAURA STOLERdocuments collide and converge with colonial memories in the post-colonialfield.If Evans-Pritchards’ warning some thirty-five years ago that “anthropolo-gists have tended to be uncritical in their use of documentary sources” hadlittle resonance at the time, it certainly has more today. For however deep andfull the archival turn has been in post-colonial scholarship of the 1990s, whatis more surprising is how thin and tentative it can still remain.10Anthropolo-gists may no longer look at archives as the stuf

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 2:

Arsip Ilmu
2:
87-109, 2002.
© 2002
Kluwer Academic Publishers. Dicetak di Belanda.
87
Colonial Arsip dan Seni Tata
ANN LAURA Stoler
Departemen Antropologi, Universitas Michigan, Ann Arbor MI 48109-1382 USA
(E-mail: [e-mail]). Abstrak Antropolog terlibat dalam pasca-kolonial Studi semakin mengadopsi perspektif sejarah dan menggunakan arsip. Namun aktivitas arsip mereka cenderung tetap lebih merupakan ekstraktif dari satu etnografi. Dokumen demikian masih dipanggil sedikit demi sedikit untuk mengkonfirmasi penemuan kolonial praktek-praktek tertentu atau untuk menggarisbawahi klaim budaya, diam. Namun seperti pertambangan dari konten dari komisi pemerintah, laporan, dan sumber-sumber arsip lainnya jarang memperhatikan penempatan aneh dan bentuk. Ulama harus berpindah dari arsip-sebagai-sumber untuk arsip-sebagai-subjek. Artikel ini, menggunakan produksi dokumen Hindia Belanda sebagai ilustrasi, berpendapat bahwa ulama harus melihat arsip tidak situs pengambilan pengetahuan, tetapi produksi pengetahuan, sebagai monumen negara serta situs etnografi negara. Hal ini membutuhkan keterlibatan berkelanjutan dengan arsip sebagai agen budaya "sebenarnya" produksi, dari taksonomi dalam pembuatan, dan otoritas negara. Apa yang merupakan arsip, apa bentuknya dibutuhkan, dan apa sistem klasifikasi dan sinyal epistemologi pada waktu tertentu adalah (dan mencerminkan) fitur penting dari politik kolonial dan kekuasaan negara. Arsip adalah tertinggi teknologi dari negara kekaisaran akhir abad kesembilan belas, repositori keyakinan dikodifikasikan yang bergerombol (dan menjadi saksi) hubungan antara kerahasiaan, hukum, dan kekuasaan. Kata kunci: arsip, pengarsipan, birokrasi, arsip kolonial, etnografi , pengetahuan Genealogi abu-abu, teliti dan sabar dokumenter. Ini beroperasi pada bidang perkamen terjerat dan bingung, pada dokumen yang telah tergores lebih dan recopied berkali-kali. 1 Tulisan ini adalah tentang tatanan kolonial hal seperti yang terlihat melalui arsip yang produksi. Hal bertanya apa wawasan tentang kolonial mungkin bisa diperoleh dari menghadiri tidak hanya untuk konten arsip kolonialisme, tapi untuk tertentu dan yang bentuk kadang-kadang aneh. Fokusnya adalah pada pengarsipan sebagai sebuah proses daripada arsip sebagai hal-hal. Ini terlihat arsip sebagai percobaan epistemologis bukan selain sebagai sumber, untuk arsip kolonial sebagai lintas-bagian dari diperebutkan pengetahuan tepi. Yang paling penting, itu terlihat arsip kolonial karena keduanya transparansi yang hubungan kekuasaan yang tertulis dan teknologi rumit aturan dalam diri mereka. Keprihatinan dua: untuk menempatkan pendekatan baru untuk kolonial 1 Michel Foucault, "Nietzsche, Genealogi, Sejarah", di Daniel Bouchard, (ed.) Bahasa, Counter-Memory, Praktek: Esai Terpilih dan Wawancara oleh Michel Foucault (Ithaca: Cornell University Press [1971] 1977), p. 139. 88 ANN LAURA Stoler arsip dalam yang lebih luas "turn bersejarah" dari dua dekade terakhir dan menyarankan apa sejarah kritis kolonial harus mendapatkan dengan memutar lebih jauh menuju politik pengetahuan yang memperhitungkan dengan genre arsip, budaya dokumentasi, fiksi akses, dan konvensi arsip. 2 epistemologis skeptisisme, arsip, dan "turn bersejarah" Beberapa empat dekade setelah antropolog sosial Inggris EE Evans-Pritchard peringatan diabaikan bahwa antropologi harus memilih antara menjadi sejarah atau menjadi apa-apa, dan Claude Levi-Strauss 'klaim counter yang diberikan tidak "nilai khusus" sejarah atau ruang analitik istimewa, siswa budaya telah mengambil usaha transformatif, merayakan dengan menikmati belum pernah terjadi sebelumnya apa yang telah datang untuk disebut "pergantian bersejarah." 3 Beberapa mungkin berpendapat keterlibatan bahwa antropologi dengan sejarah selama dua terakhir dekade, seperti yang baru-baru ini "giliran" dalam disiplin lain, belum giliran sama sekali, melainkan kembali ke prinsip-prinsip pendiri: penyelidikan cumu- proses mendapatkan kursi di produksi budaya. tapi tanpa aspirasi tipologis dan asumsi evolusi sekali memeluk. Orang lain mungkin melawan bahwa giliran demam sejarah merupakan keberangkatan yang signifikan dari sebelumnya usaha, pecah lebih eksplisit dengan keterlibatan antropologi lama dalam politik kolonial. 4 Dengan demikian, orang dapat berargumentasi bahwa sinyal giliran bersejarah tidak giliran sejarah per se, tetapi refleksi yang berbeda pada politik pengetahuan tepi - penolakan lebih lanjut dari kategori dan perbedaan budaya yang 2 Di "gilirannya bersejarah," lihat pendahuluan Terrence J. McDonald, (ed.) The Historic Aktifkan di Human Sciences (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1966). Esai ini merupakan versi kental dari Bab 1 dari buku saya berlangsung, Sepanjang Kearsipan Grain (Princeton: Princeton University Press). Bagian itu didasarkan pada 1996 Lewis Henry Morgan Kuliah disampaikan di Universitas Rochester berjudul "Etnografi di Archives:. Mutasi pada Turn Bersejarah" Sebuah versi yang berbeda dari bagian ini muncul di Carolyn Hamilton, (ed.) Refiguring Arsip (akan datang). 3 EE Evans-Pritchard, "Antropologi Sosial: Dulu dan Sekarang, The Marett Kuliah, 1950", Antropologi Sosial dan Lainnya Esai (New York: Free Press, 1951), p. 152. Claude Levi-Strauss, The Savage Pikiran (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1966), p. 256. 4 Untuk beberapa arti dari berbagai agenda yang berbeda dari saat ini "giliran bersejarah," melihat Nich- Olas B. Dirks, Geoff Eley, dan Sherry B. Ortner (eds.), Culture, Power, Sejarah: Sebuah Reader kontemporer Teori Sosial (Princeton: Princeton University Press, [1983] 1994), Terrence J. McDonald (ed.), The Historic Hidupkan dalam Human Sciences (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996); secara khusus pada sejarah dalam imajinasi antropologis, melihat Gerald Sider dan Gavin Smith (eds.), Antara Sejarah dan Sejarah: Pembuatan Diam dan Acara peringatan (Toronto: University Press, 1997). Lihat juga Richard Fox "Untuk New Sejarah Budaya Hampir", di Richard G. Fox, (ed.) Merebut kembali Antropologi: Bekerja di Hadir. (Santa Fe: Sekolah Amerika Penelitian Press, 1991), hlm 93-114, dan James Faubion, "Sejarah Antropologi", Annual Review of Anthropology 22 (1993):. 35-54 ARSIP COLONIAL DAN SENI TATA KELOLA 89 kekuasaan kekaisaran pernah diinvestasikan dan di mana praktek negara pasca-kolonial terus didasarkan. Engagement dengan penggunaan dan penyalahgunaan masa lalu meliputi banyak akademik disiplin, tapi tak lebih dari di daerah ini berkembang kolonial etnografi. Selama dekade terakhir, siswa dari kolonial telah menantang kategori, bingkai konseptual, dan praktek pemerintah kolonial dan negara taksonomi mereka. 5 Mempertanyakan pembuatan pengetahuan kolonial, dan kategori sosial istimewa itu diproduksi, telah dirubah apa siswa dari kolonial dibutuhkan untuk menjadi sumber pengetahuan dan apa yang diharapkan dari mereka. Perhatian terhadap domain intim di mana negara-negara kolonial intervensi telah mendorong peninjauan kembali dari apa yang kita pegang untuk menjadi fondasi Eropa otoritas dan teknologi kunci. 6 Dalam merawat kolonialisme sebagai sejarah hidup yang menginformasikan dan membentuk hadir bukan sebagai masa lalu selesai, baru generasi ulama mengambil undangan Michel De Certeau untuk "mencari mangsa" medan baru membayangkan kembali saat mereka apa macam pengetahuan terletak telah menghasilkan baik sumber kolonial dan mereka masing-masing lokasi di "operasi historiographic." 7 Beberapa siswa kolonialisme yang membaca ulang mereka arsip dan melakukan sejarah lisan dengan orang-orang yang tinggal mereka diarsipkan peristiwa mengomentari narasi kolonial dari mereka. 8 Lain melakukannya dengan fotografi, ukiran, dan seni dokumenter. 9 Beberapa menghadiri untuk bagaimana dokumen kolonial telah alih dan didaur ulang untuk mengkonfirmasi tua hak atau untuk membuat tuntutan politik baru. Sebagai bagian dari dorongan yang lebih luas, kita tidak lagi mempelajari hal-hal, tetapi pembuatan mereka. Mahasiswa coloni- alisms dalam dan di luar antropologi menghabiskan banyak waktu memikirkan kembali apa yang merupakan arsip kolonial karena mereka mempertimbangkan kembali bagaimana ditulis 5 Lihat, misalnya, perkenalan ke dan esai di Nicholas Dirks (ed.), Kolonialisme dan Budaya ( Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1992); dan di Frederick Cooper dan Ann Laura Stoler (eds.), Ketegangan dari Empire: Budaya Kolonial di Bourgeois Dunia (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997). 6 Lihat "Silsilah dari Intim", di Ann Laura Stoler dan Frederick Cooper (eds.), Carnal Knowledge dan Imperial Power: Ras dan intim di Colonial Rule (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002). 7 See Michel de Certeau, "The historiographic Operasi" (1974), di The Penulisan Sejarah ( . New York: Columbia University Press, 1988) 8 Pada arsip dalam hubungan dengan memori populer, lihat Richard Price, Narapidana dan Kolonel: A Story of Kolonialisme dan Perlawanan di Karibia (Boston: Beacon Press, 1998); Luise Putih, Berbicara dengan Vampir: Rumor dan Sejarah di Colonial Afrika (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000); Ann Laura Stoler dan Karen Strassler, "Cast- ings untuk Colonial: Memory Bekerja di 'Orde Baru' Java", Studi Perbandingan dalam Masyarakat dan Sejarah 42 (1) (2000):. 4-48, dan referensi di dalamnya 9 Pada kekuatan gambar dalam pembuatan pemerintahan kolonial, lihat Elizabeth Edwards, tamu redaksi, "Antropologi dan Kolonial Endeavour", di The History of Photography 21 (1) (Spring 1997). 90 ANN LAURA Stoler dokumen bertabrakan dan menyatu dengan kenangan kolonial di post-kolonial lapangan. Jika peringatan Evans-Pritchards 'beberapa tiga puluh lima tahun yang lalu bahwa "anthropolo- gists cenderung menjadi tidak kritis dalam penggunaan sumber dokumenter" memiliki sedikit resonansi pada waktu itu, tentu memiliki lebih hari ini. Untuk namun dalam dan penuh pergantian arsip telah di beasiswa pasca-kolonial tahun 1990-an, apa yang lebih mengejutkan adalah bagaimana tipis dan tentatif masih bisa tetap. 10 Anthropolo- gists mungkin tidak lagi melihat arsip sebagai stuf yang