Ellen R F
J Hist Behav Sci. 1976 Oct;12(4):303-324. doi: 10.1002/1520-6696(197610)12:4<303::aid-jhbs2300120402>3.0.co;2-d.
Although there have been studies of both Dutch colonial policy in the Indies and the development of anthropology in the Netherlands, there has been no systematic examination of the historical relations between them. This paper attempts this for a period of 160 years from the collapse of the Dutch East India Company to the birth of an independent Indonesian state. During this time, the need of successive governments for information on subject peoples was matched by the requirements of scholars for suitable conditions and locations for their work. As Dutch anthropology emerged in the nineteenth century and developed in the twentieth it was closely related to the prevailing political climate--state capitalism, liberal, and ethical policies. The analysis shows how there is a 'fit' between these and certain dominant anthropological styles and interests, principally in the form of empiricism, customy law studies, "Leiden" structuralism, and functionalism.
尽管已经有关于荷兰在东印度群岛的殖民政策以及荷兰人类学发展的研究，但尚未对二者之间的历史关系进行系统考察。本文试图对从荷兰东印度公司解体到独立的印度尼西亚国家诞生这160年的时间段进行此项考察。在此期间，历届政府对有关被统治民族信息的需求，与学者们对开展工作的合适条件和地点的要求相契合。随着荷兰人类学在19世纪兴起并在20世纪得到发展，它与当时盛行的政治气候——国家资本主义、自由主义和道德政策密切相关。分析表明，这些政治气候与某些占主导地位的人类学风格和兴趣之间存在一种“契合”，主要表现为经验主义、习惯法研究、“莱顿”结构主义和功能主义的形式。
