Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T20:37:18.934Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Malay Nationalism, 1896–1941

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

Radin Soenarno
Get access

Extract

The political concept of the Malays was essentially a product of the society they lived in. Before the British intervened in the Malay States in 1874, the Malay society was a feudal society par excellence. The Ruler, known as the Sultan, was eminently feudal and autocratic. He was responsible to none. He was assisted, in his capacity as Ruler, by senior and minor chiefs whose number varied from State to State. For example, in Pahang, there were four Major Chiefs, known as Orang Besar Ber-Empat. Under them there were the Orang Besar Lapan, the Eight Chiefs, and this group was followed by that of sixteen and thirty two. This was essentially a Hindu political pattern. In other Malay States this regular arrangement did not exist, but the main principle remained, namely, that there ran in descending order, from the Sultan downwards to the Penghulu, the village headman, an absolute autocracy. Each chief or Penghulu in his respective capacity was a sultan miniature.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian History , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , March 1960 , pp. 1 - 28
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1960

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. For a detailed examination see Gullick, J. M.Indigenous Political Systems of Western Malaya. (London, 1958).Google Scholar

2. Wheeler, L. R., The Modern Malay. (London, 1928). p. 102.Google Scholar

3. See De Josselin De Jong. Minangkabau and Negri Sembilan. (The Hague, 1952) for a sociological study of this.

4. For some comment on this, see: Thomson, V.The Landward Side of Singapore, (pub. in Pacific Affairs. Vol. xiv. No. 1, 03 1941) p. 32.Google Scholar

5. Stoney, B. O., The Malays of British Malaya. (pub. in 20th Century Impressions of British Malaya) p. 277.Google Scholar

6. Wheeler, L. R., The Modern Malay, p. 176.Google Scholar

7. Van Der Kroef, J. M. The Role of Islam in Indonesian Nationalism and Politics. (pub. in The Western Political Quarterly. 03 1958) p. 33.Google Scholar

8. Thomson, V.The Landward side oi Singapore, (pub. in Pacific Affairs, Vol. xiv, No. 1, 03 1941) p. 32.Google Scholar

9. Van Der Kroef, J. M., p. 36.Google Scholar

10. Nik Ahmad b. H. N. Hassan. The Malay Vernacular Press (A Dissertation submitted for the Degree of B.A.(Hons). Singapore, 1958. p. 10.

11. Gibb, H. A. R.Modern Trends in Islam. (Chicago Uni. Press 1947) p. 42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12. Van Der Kroef, J. M., p. 38.Google Scholar

13. From Editorial, Neracha, Jan. 8, 1913, (Quoted by Nik Ahmad in Malay Vernacular Press) p. 13.

14. Silcock, T. H. and Ungku, Aziz. Asian Nationalism and The West. Ed. Holland, W.H. (N.Y. 1953) p. 284.Google Scholar

15. Thomson, , V. Postmortem, on Malaya, p. 304.Google Scholar

16. Wheeler, L. R. The Modern Malay. 176.Google Scholar

17. Thomson, , V. Postmortem, On Malaya, p. 303.Google Scholar

18. Gullick, J. M.The Malay Administrator. (pub. in Merdeka 05 1957, Vol. 1, No. 1, Singapore) p. 78.Google Scholar

19. Seruan, Azhar. 10, 1927, p. 17.Google Scholar

20. Abdullah, T.. What is The Meaning of Freedom? (pub. in Seruan Azhar, 12 1926.)Google Scholar

21. T. Abdullah.

22. For this, see the Party History by Osman, Hasan (Ed.) Berita Pergerakan Kesaruan Melayu 1926–1937. (Singapore 1937) p. 5.Google Scholar

23. Silcock, T. H. and Ungku, Aziz. p. 285.Google Scholar

24. Straits Times. 27 January 1948.

25. Quoted by Al-Ikwan, , 16 02 1931, p. 182.Google Scholar

26. Mujallah, Guru, Editorial, 08 1931.Google Scholar

27. Quoted by Mujallah, Guru, 03 1930, p. 47.Google Scholar

28. Quoted by Mujallah, Guru, 06 1931, p. 42.Google Scholar

29. Mujallah, Guru, 03 1930, p. 48.Google Scholar

30. Mujallah, Guru. Editorial, 12 1928.Google Scholar

31. Seruan, Azhar. 12 1926.Google Scholar

32. Gullick, J. M.The Malay Administrator. (pub. in Merdeka Outlook 05 1957, Vol. I No. I, Singapore) p. 81.Google Scholar

33. Hidop, Melayu, (Ipoh 1946), p. 27.Google Scholar

34. Hidop, Melayu. p. 27.Google Scholar

35. Hidop, Melayu. p. 28.Google Scholar

36. Gullick, J.M. p. 81.Google Scholar

37. Saudara, . 7 11 1931.Google Scholar

39. Silcock, and Aziz, . p. 285.Google Scholar

38. Umno — Ten Years, 1946–1956.

This pamphlet records, “The Persaudaraan Shahabat Pena appeared by its name, as a literary organization, the main aim of which was the improvement or the Malay Language; but in reality it was a political movement, believing in “Hidup Bahasa, Hidup-lah Bangsa” (Alive the Language, Alive is the Nation). Their political activities were hidden behind the facade of their literary activities” p. 7.

40. Haji Zainal Abidin bin Ahmad, formerly Head of the Department of Malay Studies, University of Malaya, was the honorary Adviser of the Association from its date of inception till the outbreak of the War. (From an interview).

41. Utusan, Melayu. Editorial, 10 11 1939.Google Scholar

42. The Straits Times. 27 January 1948.

43. Ibrahim, Yaacob. Sekitar Malaya Merdeka. (Jakarta, 1957) p. 21.Google Scholar

44. Ibrahim, Yaacob. Nusa dan Bangsa Melayu, (Jakarta 1951). p. 48.Google Scholar

45. From Inche Kamaluddin bin Mohammad, Ishak's associate, in an interview.

46. The youth Movements in Java and Sumatra etc., formed in 1914, which fused in 1929 to form the “Indonesia Muda”. This movement, however, was mainly on ‘individual or self-reliance’ rather than on organized or party basis — Ki-Hadjar Dewantara.: dari Kebangkitan Nasional sampai Proklamasi (Jakarta 1952) p. 69.

47. Ibrahim, Yaacob. Nusa dan Bangsa Melayu. p. 59.Google Scholar

48. Ibrahim, Yaacob. Sekitar Malaya Merdeka. p. 26.Google Scholar (150 seemed to be too big a figure for all the leaders of K.M.M. This figure might include those who were dangerous but not necessarily members of K.M.M.).

49. Ibrahim, Yaacob. Sekitar Malaya Merdeka. p. 26.Google Scholar

50. Ibrahim, Yaacob. P. 29.Google Scholar

51. Ibrahim, Yaacob. p. 32.Google Scholar

52. Free Press, Singapore. 22 March 1938.

53. Ishak bin Haji, Mohammed. Bersatu Sekarang. (Johore Bahru 1956) p. 61.Google Scholar

54. Dato Husain was the late father of Dato Razak the present Deputy Prime Minister and was one of the four Major Chiefs of Pahang. He held the Vice-Presidency of the Pahang Malay Association.

Tengku Abdul Kadir was Vice-President of the Singapore Malay Union, and was a descendant of former Sultan Husain of Johore.

55. See Kahin, G.M.T., Nationalism and Revolution in Indonesia p. 47Google Scholar, for comments on this.

56. Pauker, C. J. (Quoting Niel, R. V. in his Ph.D. Thesis on Development of the Indonesian Elite in the early Twentieth Century, Cornell Univ. 02. 1954, p. 322)Google Scholar Far Eastern Survey, Sept. 1958, D. 129.

57. Majelis. 23 November 1938.

58. ‘Raja Muda’ is the Malay title for the Heir Apparent to the Throne. ‘Titah’ is the Royal Command.

59. British Malaya Journal. June 1930.

60. Free Press. 27 June 1930.

61. Free Press. 22 March 1938.

62. Free Press. Editorial, 24 March 1958.

63. Dato Onn said that the Malay Nationalist Party in 1946 (representing the peak of the activities of Malay leftist movement) had only about 6,000 members among more than two and a half million Malays. He added that the membership was confined largely to the unemployed and disgruntled youths, (in an interview).

64. Van Der Kroef, J. M., The Role of Islam in Indonesian Nationalism and Politics, p. 33.Google Scholar

65. Actually there was no change in Islamic political doctrine. Islam enjoined the deposition of unwise and corrupt rulers and the event in Turkey was merely a vigorous application of what had been hitherto only an idealistic political belief. But to the Malays it clashed with both their religious and traditional concept of politics.