Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:31:45.615Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Towards the History of Malayan Society: Kuala Lumpur District, 1885–1912

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

J. G. Butcher
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Colonial Malaya is one of the classic examples of a plural society. In Furnivall's memorable words, it was a society in which “each group holds its own religion, its own culture and language, its own ideas and ways”, a society made up of different groups “living side by side, but separately, within the same political unit”. It is perhaps because of this all-important characteristic that social historians have tended to focus on one or another of the groups in Malayan society. There have been excellent studies of the Malays, the Chinese, and the Indians, and more recently historians have begun to look at smaller groups such as the Europeans. These studies have tended to emphasize the political history of the various groups, the effects of British policies, the history of immigration, and (for the Chinese) the workings of secret societies, but some attention has also been paid to important social changes such as the emergence of new organizations and elites. A very rewarding field has been the history of Malay education, which has revealed the ways in which the different forms of education were responsible both for reinforcing traditional Malay social structure and for introducing change. Clearly, the study of particular ethnic groups has been extremely fruitful. And a great deal more remains to be done.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , March 1979 , pp. 104 - 118
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1979

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 Furnivall, J.S., Colonial Policy and Practice (New York, 1956), p. 304.Google Scholar

2 Ping, Lee Poh, Chinese Society in Nineteenth Century Singapore (Kuala Lumpur, 1978)Google Scholar.

3 In a recent article C.A. Coppel has made a similar point with respect to research done on the Chinese in Indonesia. Much of what he has to say in this article merits serious thought by historians of Malaya. “Studying the Chinese Minorities: A Review”, Indonesia, no. 24 (1977): 175–83, esp. 181–83.Google Scholar

4 Hobsbawm, E.J., “From Social History to the History of Society”, Daedalus 100 (1971): 20–45Google Scholar.

5 Larkin, J.A., The Pampangans: Colonial Society in a Philippine Province (Berkeley, 1972), p. xiiGoogle Scholar. See also Cruikshank, Robert Bruce, “A History of Samar Island, the Philippines, 1768–1898” (Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin, 1975), pp. 9–11, 216–21.Google Scholar

6 As we are reminded by McIntyre, W.D.: “Malaya from the 185O's to the 1870's, and Its Historians, 1950–1970: From Strategy to Sociology”, in Southeast Asian History and Historiography: Essays Presented to D.G.E. Hall, ed. Cowan, C.D. and Wolters, O.W. (Ithaca, 1976), pp. 262–84.Google Scholar

7 Andaya, L., The Kingdom of Johor, 1641–1728 (Kuala Lumpur, 1975)Google Scholar; Wake, C.H.H., “Nineteenth Century Johore: Ruler and Realm in Transition” (Ph.D. diss., Australian National University, 1966)Google Scholar; Trocki, C.A., Prince of Pirates: The Temenggongs and the Development of Johor and Singapore, 1784–1885 (Singapore, 1979)Google Scholar; Andaya, B., “Perak, The Abode of Grace: A Study of an Eighteenth Century Malay State” (Ph.D. diss., Cornell University, 1975)Google Scholar; Ahmat, S., “Transition and Political Change in a Malay State: A Study of the Economic and Political Development of Kedah, 1879–1923” (Ph.D. diss., University of London, 1969)Google Scholar.

8 Khoo, , Western Malay States (Kuala Lumpur, 1972), p. 227Google Scholar.

9 Smail, John, “On the Possibility of an Autonomous History of Modern Southeast Asia”, Journal of Southeast Asian History 2 (1961): 100CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Ken, Wong Lin, “The Economic History of Malaysia: A Bibliographic Essay”, Journal of Economic History 25 (1965): 244–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Drabble, J., “Some Thoughts on the Economic Development of Malaya under British Administration”, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 5 (1974): 199–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11 Hobsbawm, op. cit., pp. 22, 25. See also pp. 28–29 and 31–32 in the same article, and Gallman, Robert E., “Some Notes on the New Social History”, Journal of Economic History 37 (1977): 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12 Ken, Wong Lin, The Malayan Tin Industry to 1914 (Tucson, 1965)Google Scholar; Jackson, J.C., Planters and Speculators: Chinese and European Agricultural Enterprise in Malaya, 1786–1921 (Kuala Lumpur, 1968)Google Scholar; Drabble, J., Rubber in Malaya, 1876–1922: The Genesis of the Industry (Kuala Lumpur, 1973)Google Scholar.

13 Sadka, E., The Protected Malay States, 1874–1895 (Kuala Lumpur, 1968)Google Scholar. Unless otherwise indicated, information concerning European social life and relations between Europeans and the Chinese comes from my doctoral thesis, “A Social History of the British in Malaya, 1880–1941” (University of Hull, 1975), which is to be published by Oxford University Press, Kuala Lumpur.

14 Jackson, J.C., “Population Changes in Selangor State, 1850–1891”, Journal of Tropical Geography 19 (1964): 51.Google Scholar

15 Calculated from figures in Sadka, op. cit., pp. 333, 410–12.

16 I have been unable to find out when this took place, but it is mentioned in the following sources: Editorial, Malay Mail, 28 Nov. 1904; Wright, Arnold and Cartwright, H.A., Twentieth Century Impressions of British Malaya (London, 1908), p. 160Google Scholar; Gullick, J.M., “Kuala Lumpur, 1880–1895”, JMBRAS 28, pt. 4 (1955): 47.Google Scholar

17 Speech by Dr. E.A.O. Travers, Malay Mail, 11 Dec. 1922.

18 Testimony of Ridges, H.C., Proceedings of the Commission Appointed to Enquire into the Disturbances in Kuala Lumpur and District at the Chinese New Year, 1912 (Kuala Lumpur, 1912), p. livGoogle Scholar. This source is hereafter referred to as “Riot Commission Proceedings”.

19 Gullick, op. cit., pp. 111, 114.

20 J.H.M. Robson, “Last Century Reminiscences”, Malay Weekly Mail, 7 Jan. 1931.

21 Annual Report of the Federated Malay States, 1897, p. 5.

22 Testimony of Wagner, Riot Commission Proceedings, p. lxiii.

23 Annual Report of Selangor, 1902, p. 28.

24 Wong, Malayan Tin Industry, p. 185.

25 Studies similar to the one done by Panglaykim, J. and Palmer, I. on the Kian Gwan Company of Java would be valuable: “Study of Entrepreneurialship in Developing Countries: The Development of One Chinese Concern in Indonesia”, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 1 (1970):85–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For another look at the same firm, see C.Coppel, A., “Liem Thian Joe's Unpublished History of Kian Gwan”(Paper presented at the First National Conference of the Asian Studies Association of Australia, Melbourne, 1976).Google Scholar

26 Hare, G.T., Federated Malay States: Census of the Population, 1901 (Kuala Lumpur, 1902), pp. 31 (quotation), 32Google Scholar; Pountney, A.M., The Census of the Federated Malay States, 1911 (London, 1911)Google Scholar, Table 31. The 1911 census subdivided the Hakkas (or Khehs) into “Kheh” (94% of all Hakkas in Kuala Lumpur district) and “Tie Chiu Kheh” (6%).

27 High Commissioner's Officer files (Arkib Negara Malaysia), 940/1909 (quoted passage from report by W.D. Barnes, 10 Aug. 1909). Two months before this incident Yap had had to pay $1,500 damages for influencing the wife of the chief clerk of the Federal Treasury, apparently a Eurasian, to leave her husband. Malay Weekly Mail, 20 May 1909.

28 See Hwang, Yen Ching, The Overseas Chinese and the 1911 Revolution (Kuala Lumpur, 1976).Google Scholar

29 Riot Commission Proceedings, p. ccxix.

30 Speech by Dr. Travers, Malay Mail, 11 Dec. 1922.

31 Malay Mail, 11 Nov. 1904, 24 May 1911.

32 Malay Mail, 22 May 1911.

33 See Lien-teh, Wu, Plague Fighter (Cambridge, 1959), pp. 222–31.Google Scholar

34 The Colonial Office records (CO 273 and 717) contain numerous petitions and other sources which would allow someone to give the subordinate services the same attention that has so long been lavished on the British elite. The Selangor Secretariat Files no doubt contain a great deal as well.

35 Malay Mail, 3 Apr. 1913.

36 Dunstan Aeria, Malay Mail, 10 Feb. 1905.

37 Here I have been influenced by the ideas developed by Wertheim, W.F. in his chapter on “The Changing Status System”, in his Indonesian Society in Transition (The Hague, 1959).Google Scholar

38 The second group should not be seen as completely distinct from the first both because of the ties between them and because a few individuals, such as Loke Chow Thye, might be regarded as belonging to both groups.

39 Harrison, C.W., Illustrated Guide to the Federated Malay States (London, 1910), p. 91.Google Scholar

40 “Japanese even in Japan do not sleep on planks,” observed the keeper of two brothels in Petaling Street, Kuala Lumpur, when explaining why, unlike Chinese prostitutes, her women did not make use of the accommodation provided at a private venereal disease clinic run by the State Surgeon, Dr. Travers. Statement by Ohana, enclosed in Anderson to Elgin, 11 of 16 Jan. 1908, CO 273/339. The fact that this quotation conies from the Colonial Office records is but another way of suggesting that we have not yet begun to take full advantage of this standard source.

41 Zeldin, Theodore, “Social History and Total History”, Journal of Social History 10 (1976): 238, 243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

42 “Caste, Social Change, and the Social Scientist: A Note on the Ahistorical Approach to Indian Social History”, Journal of Asian Studies 35 (1975): 63–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar