By Humphrey de la Croix – 

The loss of the Indies after handing over sovereignty to Soekarno’s, Indonesia in 1949, must have affected Dutch political leadership, business, and veterans to such a degree that two generations of historians and political scientists considered the postcolonial era as a ‘no-go area’. The third imperial nation (after Great Britain and France), had to face the humiliation of a Japanese defeat, followed by an unfortunate war of decolonization against Indonesian nationalists, and finally the enforced exodus of citizens—events that all became too painful and dramatic occurrences to revoke.

A major effect of this ‘only-looking-forward’ state of mind has been a lack of significant historical research during the last 40 years. In the meantime, Indo immigrants or ‘repatriates’ (many arrived in a country they had never seen before) had to undergo the Dutch policy of cultural and social assimilation. In a period of unprecedented and sustained economic growth, the newly arrived immigrants were able to share in, until then unknown, prosperity. For many Indos, this waiting state of mind was worth not looking back to the good old days or ‘tempo dulu’.

Later, Indos realized the price paid for this focus on future prosperity, may have been too high. The easy assimilation into the dominant monolithic Dutch society made them forget the government still had outstanding bills to pay. Former prisoners of war and interned civil servants are still waiting for salaries and pensions to be paid. Owners whose real estate, shares, bonds, works of art, and loans that were destroyed or confiscated by the Japanese or Indonesians, have never been financially compensated. This is the so-called ‘Indisch rechtsherstel’. It was recently revealed that the Dutch government had been sloppy in informing former workers of the Birma, Siam railroad about the financial compensation Thailand paid in 1954. Finally, the loss of Indo cultural and ethnic identity, as a result of successful integration into Dutch society, should be emphasized.

The Indos authentic culture, which was born out of over three centuries colonialism in the Indonesian archipelago, was silenced after its arrival in the Netherlands. Indos were prevented to manifest political and social discomfort. This explains why the backpay and rechtsherstel issues are still pending.
Worse, is the Dutch government’s reluctance in supporting critical research of decolonization and its aftermath—an action that actively neglects Indo history. Indos don’t feel acknowledged by the Dutch government. The real pain is the impersonal, ‘cold’, and clinical approach Indos experienced after arriving in the Netherlands. Some felt considered as a ‘lesser kind’ of Dutch citizen. Most of them kept silent (‘Indisch zwijgen’) and worked hard to be successful in a low profile manner.

The silence of first generation Indo migrants prevented the next generation access to their Indo history and roots. The third generation, surrounded by many new ethnic groups, started to search for their roots and identity. Helped by the rich resources of the Internet, people were able to learn about the history of their ‘opa’ and ‘oma’, or their other family members.
The fourth generation of Indos, despite the availability of (online) historical resources in general, is showing less interest in their Indo heritage. For those younger generations who speak English, first hand resources in Dutch and Indonesian are not accessible. Their own history is becoming more invisible and even more undetectable.

Discovering and spreading historical knowledge is a humble, but necessary, step to halt or slow down this process. Bringing history to younger generations requires one to admit the facts and events exposed by appropriate design. In this digital era, where you can experience history by pictures, movies, and audio is as important as reading books and articles. This is why a concise and online timeline should contain essential texts as audio-visual content as well. The creators and administrators of the timeline believe in the power of Indo communities all over the world to adjust, add, and improve this timeline version ‘1.0’. So I hope, particularly The Indo Project and it’s sympathizers, will help to develop the timeline into a tool forwarding Indo history to next generations.


About the author and creator of the timeline:
Humphrey de la Croix (Modjokerto 1957) is a Dutch historian specialized in the history of the former Netherlands Indies. His father was an Indo from Madiun and his mother a Jombang born Javanese. After graduation, Humphrey de la Croix was appointed as legal and historical researcher for the public retirement fund ABP. In this office, he had interviews with thousands of former victims of the Second World War in the Netherlands Indies and other regions of the Far East. Humphrey de la Croix is the editor-in-chief of, an online historical magazine. encourages older Indos to tell the stories of their life in and after the colonial period, and supports them to record their information by publishing or directly forwarding stories to their children and grandchildren.


  1. Mr. de la Croix does not express some knowledge of modern International law, like the proklamasi on the 17th of August. He conforms himself with the Dutch colonial view that 27th December 1949 is the birthday of Indonesia, while Indonesians celebrate 17 August as National Birthday.

    Further I doubt his story-telling about the IEV Indisch Europees Verbond. He does not explain why the IEV was active before 1949 but after 1949 was non-existent. Maybe he can explain the suspect role of IEV and their leaders during the Soevereiniteitsoverdracht.

    If Mr. de la Croix. talks about Tjalie Robinson or Jan Boon, the inspirator of the imagined Indo-society, why he does not talk about Marion Bloem, especially her book; “niet gewoon een Indisch meisje”. More than 200.000 copies are sold until now, that means that nearly every Indo or Indische has read the book.

    The time-line is the expression of the personal opinion of a certain Mr. de la Croix., it is written from a Dutch post-colonial point of view, has nothing to do with facts, there is no criteria why Mr. de la Croix has chosen certain events.

    • Peter van den Broek, thank you for your posts. Your criticisms have been noted. But rather by leaving it as only criticisms, maybe you could enlighten us of your perspective by writing YOUR own historic timeline of the Dutch East Indies. I very much look forward to reading it!

  2. Besides the error of the Dutch surrender to the Japanese was NOT on the 7th but the 8th of March 1942,the time line is written from a Dutch, colonial point of view.

    Mr de la Croix may explain to this audience why in the USA the end of WWII is celebrated on the 2nd of September (surrender in the Bay of Tokyo on board of the USS Missouri) and not on the 15th of August.,take into account that in the documents of surrender the speech of the Emperor of Japan is not mentioned by President Truman.

    Maybe Mr. de la Croix can indicate why the Emperor does not use the word Surrender in his speech of the 15th (exactly the 14th of August 1945) or does that word not exist in Japanese? I have to remember that Japanse language is not that exact: e.g. comfort woman is a Japanese expression for forced prostitution/rape of also underaged girls.

  3. Humphrey writes:The loss of Indo cultural and ethnic identity as a result of successful integration into Dutch society should be emphasized.This is not true as we have so many happpenings and so on in Holland.The magazine Tong-Tong,now Moesson, already more than 50 Years, the many clubs and societies,with their own printed info, the many Pasar Malams in whole Netherlands each year, already houses for the old,especially for people from our former colonies and the so many popular Indonesian restaurants.Moesson always writes about the younger generation to not forget their history and origin.And let us not forget the many writers.

  4. I was born Jakarta (Batavia) 1946. Just after the war my mom and my 5 siblings were interned in Japanese prison camp on java. My dad a prisoner of war building a railroad on Sumatra . There is a book out regarding his camp. after the war my dad build STM Skola Tecknic Menega (SP?) one on Bornea (Samarinda) and another on Sumatra, Padang. Both my parents are buried in Zaandam and I still have 2 sisters living in Zaandam. I went to California in 1967 following my 2 sisters and 1 brother who were here wit the Walter Pastore Act in the early sixties. My 3 kids are bron here and it seems that my kids generation will probably the last connection to my Indo culture.

  5. I just finished writing my sister and my past history of our Indonesian heritage for our children. Born and raised in Indonesia.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post comment