Official colonial histories were copied verbatim and uncredited from annual reports

Evidence

In a modified version, this account becomes Deli’s official history, first as it is written in the official Colonial Annual Report (Koloniaal Verslag) of 1887 and then in the authoritative and much-cited narrative of W. H. M. Schadee, published in 1919, derived verbatim (but without bothering to note his source) from that account provided in the Verslag where the government issued its annual summary of statistics, developments, and events. — Ann Laura Stoler, Along the Archival Grain_ Epistemic…, 1223

Categorization

• QUESTION: What exactly did the 1887 Koloniaal Verslag itself say vs. Schadee’s copy — and why did the author still count as authoritative for 30+ years?
• XREF: Echoes Milgrom’s institutional info-loss theme and general archival-study questions about how official narratives get laundered into ‘history.’