Department of History, National University of Singapore

Recent Malaysian Historiography

Author(s): Khoo Kay Kim
Source: Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, Vol. 10, No. 2 (Sep., 1979), pp. 247-261
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of Department of History, National
University of Singapore
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20070303
Accessed: 23-09-2016 10:46 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Cambridge University Press, Department of History, National University of Singapore

are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Southeast Asian
Studies

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Recent Malaysian Historiography

KHOO KAY KIM

Considering that, except for the initial period of the Emergency, Malaysia as
a country attracted far less attention internationally than most of the other countries

in Southeast Asia, it is somewhat surprising to find that many foreign historians

did not hesitate to make Malaysian history the subject of their scholarly works. L.A.

Mills wrote in 1924, 1942, and again in 1958; Rupert Emerson in 1937. In 1935,
a Ph.D. thesis was completed by M.I. Knowles in the University of Wisconsin.1
In 1943, Virginia Thomson wrote Postmortem on Malaya. The post-1950 situation
was even more exciting. Numerous theses on Malaysia were written in various
universities in the world ? among them SOAS, ANU, Hong Kong, California,
Columbia, and Duke. Of course, by far the greatest volume of work was done in the
University of Malaya (Singapore) itself where, between 1951 and 1961, more than a
hundred theses were completed at both the graduate and undergraduate levels.2
Understandably, in the mid-sixties, there was a growing feeling that the field was
being exhausted.
In Malaysia itself, national history was first emphasized in the local schools in
1957 when the country achieved its independence. Malaysians born after 1945 who
have studied in government or government-aided schools have all been "educated"
in Malaysian history. Until recently, Malaysian history, as taught in the schools
and universities, has been largely episodic. Its scope is relatively narrow. Since most
authoritative works have been based mainly on British administrative records, they
tend to focus on colonial administrative problems and personalities. The result is
that few, even among Malaysian intellectuals today, can conceive of history beyond
this ken.

It is well known now that, in the fifties and sixties, even as historians were
furiously trying to establish the why and how of British colonial policies, heated
debates flared up between those who wanted a "more autonomous" history of Asia/
Southeast Asia and the "defenders of the faith". The debates were refreshing but
not always enlightening. Within the context of Malaysian historiography, there was
a great deal of feeling generated but few positive results. For years now, in Malaysia,

there have been continual calls for the re-writing of Malaysian history.3 But even
among the more vocal, there has been little understanding of what "re-writing"
entails.

1 "The Expansion of British Influence in the Malayan Peninsula, 1867?1885".

See K.G. Tregonning (ed.), Malaysian Historical Sources (Singapore, 1962), pp. 70?77.

This is common when seminars are held from time to time and the press periodically highlights
the speeches of politicians.

247

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

248

Khoo Kay Kim

What exists in Malaysia is a rather anomalous situation. There is a general

consensus that Malaysians should be made more aware of their own history, hence
the periodic call for the re-writing of history. At the same timq, the relevance of
history is questioned. There is a widespread preoccupation with technological change
and economic growth. Not many are convinced that there is a role for history in
the making of the "new society".4

Even among those who share the view that Malaysian history must be carefully
re-written, there are at least two perceivable opinions. One advocates that more should

be written on Malaysian heroes because history is primarily about great people.

The other is a more academic view and is shared generally by scholars regardless
whether they are historians.

The first view took root many years ago. As the political situation changed after
the Second World War and political activities grew in intensity in the late 1940s,
local historians turned their attention towards "nationalistic" history.5 This was not
entirely inconsistent with traditional Malay historiography because old heroes were
not forgotten while new ones were added to the list.6 Alongside the works which
dealt with freedom fighters of the British era, those which continued to focus on
"rulers and realm" were not neglected.7 This pursuit of heroes reached its peak
in late 1969 when the press blazed the news that Mat Kilau was alive.8 No sooner
had the fever subsided than another story appeared in the press about the discovery
that Datuk Bahaman too was alive.9 At one stage, it looked probable that more heroes,
In Malaysia, the more popular expression is "the restructuring of society".

See, e.g., I.K. Agstja (Ibrahim Yaacob), Sedjarah dan Perjuangan di Malaya [History and
Struggle in Malaya] (Djokjakarta, 1948); Syahba, Pesaka Naning [The Legacies of Naning] (Kuala
Pilah, 1951); Zainal Abidin Daud, Sejarah Malaya Merdeka [History of Independent Malaya] (Kuala
Pilah, 1957 ?); and Yahya Abdullah, Peperangan Tok Janggut atan Balasan Derhaka [The War of
Tok Janggut or Requital for Treason] (Kota Bahru, 1955).

6 Among the heroes popularized after 1945 were Tok Janggut (Kelantan), Datuk Bahaman
(Pahang), and Datuk Maharaja Lela (Perak). In a work' entitled Orang Besar Tanah Ayer [Great
Men of the Nation], published in Penang in 1958, the author (Darus Ahmad) drew up a list of
23 names which included Hang Tuah (of the Melaka Sultanate), Tun Seri Lanang (presumed author
of the Sejarah Melayu), Phra Ong Mahawangsa (from the Hikayat Merong Mahawangsa), Dol Said
of Naning, Haji Abdul Rahim Kajai (the most respected of Malay journalists in the 1930s), Sayid
Syeikh Al-Hadi (of Kaum Muda fame), Datuk Bahaman, and Datuk Maharaja Lela.
See, e.g., Shahrom Hussein, Tawarikh Johor [History of Johor] (Singapore, 1950); Abdullah Haji

Musa, Sejarah Perak Dahulu dan Sekarang [History of Perak Before and Now] (Singapore, 1957 ?);
Haji Mohd. Mokhtar bin Haji Mohd. Daud, Singgahsana Negeri Pahang [The Throne of the State

of Pahang] (Pekan, 1957?); and Misbaha, Mengkaji Sejarah Trengganu [A Study of Trengganu
History], 3 vols. (Singapore, 1954).

Mat Kilau was one of the leaders of the anti-British uprising in Pahang in the early 1890s.
Among the principal leaders of the uprising were Datuk Bahaman, one of the eight major Chiefs
(Orang Besar Berlapan) and Tok Gajah who held the very distinguished title of Orang Besar Raja
(a status on par with that of the 4 major Chiefs or Orattg. Besar Berempat). Tok Gaj?ri was the
father of Mat Kilau. The Acting Superintendent, Pahang Armed Police, R.W. Duff (later to found
the Kelantan Duff Syndicate) had reported, tn 1896r that Mat Kilau was killed by the Siamese in..
Kuala Rek, Kelantan. Apparently, first "Mat Kilau had his head split open with his own sword".
Later, "the torturing was renewed, and finally To Nai, a Siamese official, by sheer force twisted Mat
Kilau's neck and broke it". (See Foreign Office Papers [printed] No. 100, CO. to F.O., 22 July 1896,
End. 2, Duff to Acting British Resident, Pahang, 24 Apr. 1896, pp. 102-7.)

Datuk Bahaman was reported to have died in Siam while in exile. (See CO. 273/402, Letter
of Prince Devawongse dated 12 Aug. 1913.)

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Recent Malaysian Historiography

believed long dead, would be found to be alive.10 At a history congress sponsored
by the state government in Melaka, as recently as 1977, certain persons laid claim
to being the direct descendants of the royal house of Melaka and wanted the congress
to support their demand for the restoration of the sultanate in Melaka.

The professional historians often find themselves in a quandary when confronted

by such situations. Usually, upon the immediate discovery of a past hero, there would
be a group jealously encircling him. Those from outside cannot easily have access
to him. The press would be entertained, but questions put to the man might be
answered by other people. Such actions would be justified on the ground that the hero
had taken a vow and therefore could not speak freely. Indeed, he himself might possi
bly lay no claim to being the person that he was supposed to be. It would be added
too that he had ilmu batin (extra-natural powers) which is a symbol of prowess.
Many would come to seek his blessing. Professional historians who approach such
heroes with a battery of questions in mind cannot easily obtain full satisfaction
from their investigations. Even suggestions that the hero should be medically examined
to ascertain his age fall on deaf ears. But to lend credence to local popular claims,
professional historians are often called upon to give their support.

As regards the second ? the more academic ? view of the scope of Malaysian
history, it may be said that an important turning-point occurred from about the late

1960s. Two developments were especially significant. The first was the growing fami
liarity with the social sciences, especially social anthropology and sociology. It is
imperative to note that until the early 1960s, there was no department of social
anthropology/sociology or political science in the University of Malaya (Singapore).
Some elements of social anthropology were taught in the Department of Malay
Studies in conjunction with the study of Malay culture.11 The basic principles of
politics or government were taught by the Department of History. The University of
Malaya in Kuala Lumpur, which was established in 1959, also did not cater speci
fically for social anthropology/sociology or political science. The present Department
of Social Anthropology/Sociology in the University of Malaya is only a few years old.
The greater awareness of the social sciences was a direct result of the growing
familiarity with the curriculum of universities in the United States. Until then,
Malaysian scholars were more inclined to work for their higher degrees in the United
Kingdom. The influence of the social sciences sparked off an interest in social history.

But it soon threatened to degenerate into a mere fad because few people really
understood what "social history" meant.12

At this juncture ? in May 1969 ? a serious racial riot occurred in Malaysia.

It was not the worst the country had experienced for the 1945/46 racial clashes were
more severe. But in 1945/46, Malaysia was not yet a nation; the implications were

1 There was some talk in 1977 that Tok Sa'gor was alive in Perak. Tok Sa'gor was one of the
Perak chiefs believed to have been involved in the killing of J.W.W. Birch at Pasir Salak. According
to official report, he was hanged at Matang (Larut) together with another chief, Datuk Maharaja
Lela, on 20 Jan. 1877.

n J.M. Gullick's Indigenous Political Systems of Western Malaya (London, 1958) was a prescribed
text for students of Malay culture; it was not well known to history students.

12 See W.R. Roff, "Social History and Its Materials in Malaysia*', in Peninjau Sejarah 3, 1
(1968): 13?20. This was a paper presented at a seminar (1967) held specifically to update the school
teachers' knowledge of history in general and Malaysian history in particular.

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

249

250

Khoo Kay Kim

quite different. Moreover, in 1969, the riot occurred in Kuala Lumpur, the national
capital. The question of national integration all at once became a subject of paramount
importance. It was felt that some effective solutions must be found soon for the
country's serious racial problems. In attempting to find a formula for bringing about
national integration, various parties began to look for available data. It became obvious
that the task at hand was a difficult one since there was a near absence of good
descriptive literature on the historical development of the Malaysian society.13

Even the existing historical writings on each of the three major races of Malaysia
reveal an element of imbalance. Up to the 1960s, there had been greater attention
given to the Chinese and the Indians than to the Malays. Also, historical sources
on the Chinese14 and Indians15 are abundant. There exists, of course, a large corpus
of writings on Malay dynastic history; and British administrators in the past had
contributed quite immensely on Malay folklore and folk culture. But Malay society was

considerably more complex than had been depicted by those officials cum scholars.
W.L. Wheeler's The Modern Malay (London, 1928) is a good example of the simplistic

At a session discussing the subject of "National Integration" during the International Conference
on Southeast Asian Studies (held in the University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 23?26 February 1972),
the participants unanimously agreed that there was urgent need for good descriptive works on Southeast

Asia societies.
14

Materials on the Chinese are particularly numerous. British administrative papers alone contain
invaluable information on many aspects of Malaysian Chinese society, ranging from social problems
(such as prostitution, opium smoking, the Mui Tsai question, etc.) to secret societies and political
organizations. In Taipeh too can be found a large collection of records on overseas Chinese. (See Yen

Ching Huang, The Overseas Chinese and the 1911 Revolution (Kuala Lumpur, 1977), Bibliography).
For further information about writings in Chinese and Japanese on overseas Chinese, see also V. Purcell,
The Chinese in Southeast Asia (Oxford, 1965), Bibliography, pt. II, "Works in Chinese and Japanese".
As for scholarly works in English, a useful list appears in Joseph-john Nevadomsky and Alice Li,
The Chinese in Southeast Asia: A Selected Bibliography of Publications in Western Languages, I960?
1970 (Berkeley, 1970), pp. 29-94.
There is a great deal more written on the Malaysian Indians than most people realize. Among
the published works in English, the following may be mentioned: T. Geoghegan, Emigration from

India (Calcutta, 1873); N.E. Majoribanks and A.T. Marakkayar, Report on Indian Labour Emigration
to Ceylon and Malaya (Madras, 1917); A.V. Moothedeen, Our Countrymen in Malaya (Trivandrum,

1932); R.B. Krishnan, The Indians in Malaya (Singapore, 1936); M.N. Nair, Indians in Malaya

(Koduvayur, 1937); V.S. Srinivasa Sastri, Reprint of Reports on the Conditions of Indian Labour in

Malaya (Kuala Lumpur, 1937); Ram Manohar Lohia, Indians in Foreign Lands (Allahabad, 1938);
K.A. Neelakandha Aiyer, Indian Problems in Malaya (Kuala Lumpur, 1938); S.A. Das and K.B.
Subbiah, Chalo Delhi: An Historical Account of the Indian Independence Movement in East Asia
(Kuala Lumpur, n.d.); N. Gangulee, Indians in the Empire Overseas (London, 1947); C. Siva Rama
Sastri, Congress Mission to Malaya (Tenali, 1947); S.K. Chettur, Malayan Adventure (Mangalore, 1948);

S. Nanjundan, Indians in the Malayan Economy (New Delhi, 1950); C. Kondapi, Indians Overseas,
1839-1947 (New Delhi, 1951); N.V. Rajkumar, Indians Outside India (New Delhi, 1951); N. Raghavan,
India and Malaya: A Study (London, 1954). Note that many of these works were published in India.
Among the more recent and more scholarly works are: Usha Mahajani, The Role of Indian
Minorities in Burma and Malaya (Bombay, 1960); K.S. Sandhu, Indians in Malaya: Immigration and
Settlement, 1786?1957 (Cambridge, 1969); S. Arasaratnam, Indians in Malaysia and Singapore (London,
1970); and R.K. Jain, South Indians on the Plantation Frontier in Malaya (New Haven, 1970).

British administrative records also contain ample data on Indian labourers. Some of these, in
the form of investigation reports on abuses in the plantations, provide a graphic picture of Indian
life in the estates. Before the Second World War, newspapers in India (particularly Madras) devoted
much space to problems of Indian labourers overseas. The most informative of these papers was the
Swadeshamitram (Madras).

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Recent Malaysian Historiography

view of Western scholars regarding Malay society. Manifestly, J.M. Gullick's Indi
genous Political Systems of Western Malaya and W.R. Roffs The Origins of Malay
Nationalism (New Haven, 1967) are, by comparison, vastly superior. But even these
have to be substantially reinforced before it is possible to obtain a clear picture of
developments in Malay society over the last 150 years.

Not so long ago, in Malaysia itself, there were but a few professional historians
equipped to work on Malay society. To undertake an in-depth study of Malay society
in transition was therefore an extremely difficult task. Time was another vital factor.

It may be mentioned here that in 1966 the Department of History, University of

Malaya, had made a preliminary survey in the Lower Perak area in an attempt to
discover the feasibility of doing projects based on oral sources. It was evident even
then that the generation of people who could provide reliable information on the late

nineteenth century had disappeared. However, within the context of what had to
be done, the situation was not particularly critical. Malaysia's plural society is a
phenomenon of comparatively recent origin. Although the Chinese had begun coming
in large numbers in the second half of the nineteenth century, the most important
phase of Indian immigration took place just before the First World War.

However, it may be said, at the risk of over-simplification, that Malaysia's

"racial problems" commenced precisely at the point when political consciousness
began to germinate within each of the three major racial groups in Malaysia. The
Chinese here had formed branches of China's political parties by the early twentieth
century.16 The Al-Imam, in 1906, took the first step to propagate the need for
Malay-Muslim unity in order to. contain and combat the threat of foreign political
economic domination.17 The Indians began to stir a little later ? on the eve of
the First World War. But they alarmed the British most because the commotion
here was an extension of the revolutionary anti-British movement in north India; also,

because the north Indians in Malaysia then were mostly sepoys or members of the
police force. The fear was justified when, in early 1915, Indian sepoys attempted to
seize Singapore.18 Political consciousness tended to lead to a closing of ranks among
people of the same ethnic group; consequently, it emphasized the differences among
racial groups. As it spread, it sharpened racial division among Malaysia's population.
But the study of national integration within the Malaysian context involves more
than merely understanding the three major racial groups. Each of the groups itself
is heterogeneous. In the case of the Chinese and Indians, the heterogeneous character
of each group derived from the land of its origin. This was reinforced in the land
of its adoption. For example, the Chinese of Penang do not have a close affinity

with the Chinese of Selangor or that of Johor; and the Indians in the estates
have little in common with the Indians in the urban areas. None the less, for the
period up to at least 1945, the situation in China or India can be used by scholars
as a reference for an understanding of the Chinese or the Indians in Malaysia.

1 See Yen Ching Huang, op. cit.

1 See Abdul Aziz bin Mat Ton, "Al-Imam Sepintas Lalu", in Jemal Sejarah, 11 (1972/73):

29-40.

18

I have dealt with this subject at some length in my Ph.D. thesis, "The Beginnings of Political
Extremism in Malaya, 1915?1935" (University of Malaya, 1973).

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

251

252

Khoo Kay Kim

On the other hand, the study of the Malay society has to be almost wholly
internally orientated.19

It is often forgotten that until after the Second World War, Malaysia (Malaya
then) was not one country. Since there were nine rulers, there were indeed nine
countries. Administratively, however, owing to the presence of the British protectorate,

there were three divisions ? the Straits Settlements, the Federated Malay States,
and the Unfederated Malay States. Scholars of Malaysian history tend to be oblivious
of these facts. Yet, even today, "parochialism" is recognizably a common feature
of Malaysian politics. It is certainly true, for example, that developments in Kelantan
cannot be used as an index of developments in Kedah or Johore, etc.

Therefore, in the early seventies, in launching the programme for the collection
of data on Malay society as a necessary prelude to the in-depth study of the Malaysian

society as a whole, paramount importance was attached to the fact that there were
(and still are) significant local variations between one area of Malay concentration
and another. As mentioned earlier, because of the propensity, in the past, to see
Malaysian society as being composed of just three major divisions, Malay society was
assumed to be one entity, and the following are some of the common generalizations
made about the Malays. They were said to be found in the rural areas. They were
steeped in traditional customs. Malay society was basically agrarian and economically
backward. A large proportion of the Malays had only very elementary education,
either in the Malay vernacular schools or in religious schools where they were merely
taught to read the Quran. Admittedly, these impressions are not all entirely erroneous;
they are just too simplistic and therefore can result in a distortion of reality.

Recognizing that the programme to be launched was an ambitious one and a

handful of scholars could not be expected to cover the length and breadth of the
country within a period of a few years, even assuming that they could concentrate
fully on research, it was decided then to mobilize the undergraduates to assist in
implementing the programme. Moreover, the time was opportune. In the early
seventies, Malay medium students were for the first time admitted in large numbers
to the university. It was also convenient from another point of view. Malaysians
on the whole are suspicious of strangers asking them penetrating questions about
themselves and their activities. Research methodologies applicable in Western societies
are far less successful in Malaysia. The students, on the other hand, come from
all parts of the country. They have no problem doing research in their own towns
or kampung; they are a part of the community which they have to study.

This is not to imply that no part of the Malay society was made up of people, .from outside the

Peninsula. Up to 1941, a large proportion of the Malay population was indeed composed of people
from various parts of Sumatra. But, historically, Sumatran society has been just as little studied as
the Peninsular Malay society. Historians of Malay society cannot therefore expect much help from
Sumatran historiography. Also, in the principal areas of Malay concentration (Kelantan and Kedah),
migration from Sumatra had been negligible, the existence of a distinct Acehnese community in Kedah
notwithstanding. Above all, what has to be borne in mind is that when speaking of the Malay society

in historical terms, the present political boundaries should not be allowed to impinge on cultural
reality. The Malay world was of course a larger unit than just the Peninsula. Patani, for example,
may be considered foreign territory today by Malaysians; culturally, it was very much a part of the
Malay world. Therefore, what is meant here is that the orientation has to be towards the Malay
Archipelago but, at the same time, recognizing the fact that there were (and still are) important
local variations within the larger Malay culture.

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Recent Malaysian Historiography

It is now over four years since the programme was initiated not only in the
Department of History, University of Malaya, but also in the Department of History,

Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.20 Altogether, at least a thousand research papers

(including graduation exercises) have been completed in both the departments.21
The majority of the research is based on field-work. The main objective of the students

has been to collect data which they subsequently have had to collate and compile.

At the undergraduate level, the students are apt to be ill-equipped to make

profound analysis of their data. They have therefore concentrated on providing careful
descriptive accounts of situations which they have studied.
Basically the following types of subjects22 have been most popular:
(a) Local History: mostly the study of villages and small towns with special reference
to the founding of these villages or towns, the main occupations of the inhabitants,
and social relationships where the inhabitants are made up of various racial
groups or people of the same racial group but of different territorial origins
(Air Bangis, Mendeling, Danau, Bangkahulu, Kurinchi, etc.).23
One of the graduation exercises of the Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia has been published;
see Nabir bin Haji Abdullah, Maahad II Ihya Assyariff Gunung Semanggol, 1934?1959 (Kuala Lumpur,

1976).

Some of the more concise research papers (hereafter abbreviated RP) as well as extracts from
graduation exercises (hereafter abbreviated GE) have been published. See, for example, Mohamad bin

Ismail, "Suara Benar ? Akhbar Melayu Terawal di Melaka" [Suara Benar ? Earliest Malay Paper
in Melaka], Jernal Sejarah (JS) 11 (1972/73): 49-54; Shamsuddin bin Mohd. Nor, "Sejarah Kampar
(Perak) 1890an-1930an" [History of Kampar [Perak] 1890s-1930s], JS 13 (1975/76): 8-14; Mohd.
Pawazi bin Mohd. Basri, "Perkembangan Ekonomi dan Infrastruktur Batu Pahat 1880?1917" [The
Development of Economy and Infrastructure in Batu Pahat, 1880-1917], JS, 12 (1973/74): 22-35;
Abdul Manaf bin Saad, "Haji Wan Sulaiman bin Wan Sidek, 1874-1935", JS 15 (1977/78): 104-16;
Oong Hak Ching (Universiti Kebangsaan), "Perjuangan Partai Malaya, 1956?1957" [The Malayan Party's
Struggle, 1956-1957], Malaysia in History (MH), 18, 1 (1975); Zulkepley Dahalan (Universiti Kebangsa

an), "Syarikat Kerjasama Melayu Perak: Penubuhan dan Perkembangan Awal" [The Perak Malay
Co-operative Society: Formation and Early Development], MH 18, 2 (1975); Yahaya Abu Bakar,
"Kebangkitan Tok Janggut Menentang Jepun" [The Tok Janggut Uprising against the Japanese],
MH, 19, 1 (1976).
Two graduation exercises of the University of Malaya have also been published. See Abdul
Latiff Abu Bakar, Ishak Haji Muhammad: Penulis and Ahli Politik Sehingga 1948 [Ishak Haji
Muhammad: Writer and Politician until 1948] (Kuala Lumpur, 1977); and Alias Mohammad, Intelijensia
Melayu Kelantan: Satu Pandangan Awal [The Malay Intelligentsia of Kelantan: A Preliminary View]
(Kota Bharu, 1977).
22
There are also many studies which do not fit the categories mentioned here. A few examples
will suffice: Rofithah Haji Hashim, "Sejarah dan Peranan Rejimen Askar Melayu Diraja" [The History

and Role of the Royal Malay Regiment], GE, 1974; Mohd. Sanuani bin Kaimi, "Suku Banjar:
Dari Kelantan Tenggara ke Sabak Bernam" [The Banjarese: From Southeast Kelantan to Sabak
Bernam], GE, 1975; Abdul Rahman Hussin, "Perkembangan Persatuan-persatuan Peladang di Negeri
Sembilan, 1960?1973" [The Development of the Planters' Associations in Negeri Sembilan, 1960?1973],

GE, 1976; and Hamsan Omar, "Persaudaraan Sahabat Pena Malaya" [The Malayan Fraternity of
Pen-Friends], GE, 1977.
E.g., Ismail bin Abdul Hadi, "Sejarah Mukim Gadung" [A History of Mukim Gadung], GE,
1973; Mohd. Jais-Jais Sarfan, "Bandar Temasha dan Jugra", GE, 1974; Shamsuddin Haji Zayadi,

"Sejarah Kampung Bagan 1860-1940" [A History of Kampung Bagan, 1860-1940], GE, 1975;
Fadzlullah Zakaria, "Masyarakat Jeram dalam Transisi, 1800?1920an" [Jeram Society in Transition,
1800?1920s], GE, 1976; Badriyah Haji Salleh, "Pembukaan Kampung Haji Sallen dan Perkembangan
Madrasah Saadiah-Salihiah, Temoh, Perak, 1914?1959" [The Opening of Kampung Haji Salleh and the
Development of the Madrasah Saadiah-Salihiah, Temoh, Perak, 1914-1959], GE, 1977, Zainuddin Haji
Zainal Abidin, "Sungai Choh: Pembukaan Perkembangan, Perpecahan, 1900?1950" [Sungai Choh:
Foundation, Development, Disintegration, 1900-1950], RP, 1973.

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

253

254

Khoo Kay Kim

(b) Education: emphasis is given to the development of religious schools, from the
simple Quranic schools to pondok schools and ultimately the madrasah, for the
simple reason that the subject has been totally neglected in the past.24

(c) Newspapers and Periodicals: these form the most valuable written sources on
Malay society; a careful analysis of their content provides a vivid perspective
of the thinking and aspirations of Malay intellectuals; also important are reports
on happenings in the Malay society which are often neglected in the English
press or in official reports.25

(d) Racial Conflicts: with some exceptions the emphasis so far has been on die 1945/
46 clashes,26 mainly because the conflicts of that period have left almost indelible

marks on race relations today and also, from a commonsense point of view, the
subject has been badly neglected, important as it is.27
24

E.g., Rahim bin Abdullah, "Perkembangan Institusi Pondok di Kelantan" [The Development of
the Institution of Pondok in Kelantan], RP, 1973; Md. Jani Nairn, "Perkembangan Institusi Pendidikan
Ugama Islam di Daerah Sabak Bernam" [The Development of Islamic Educational Institutions in the
District of Sabak Bernam], GE, 1974; Jaafar Mat Sani, "Madrasah Al-Yahyawiyah, Padang Rengas",

GE, 1975; Khairiah Bahari, "Madrasah Al-Taufikiah Al-Khairiah", GE, 1976; Abu Bakar Haji

Abdullah, "Sejarah dan Perkembangan Persekolahan Melayu dan Ugama di Mukim Langgar, Kedah"
[The History and Development of Malay and Religious Schools in the Mukim of Langgar, Kedah],

GE, 1977; Mohd. Noor bin Sulong, "Madrasah Al-Saniah Lil-Banat, 1934-1970", RP, 1977; and

Saniyah bte Abas, "Al-Madrasah Al-Alwiyah Al-Madiniah, Arau, Perlis, 1933?1967", RP, 1977.
There are also valuable studies on the development of secular schools: Zainuddin bin Leman,
"Perkembangan Pelajaran Melayu di Selangor, 1875?1930" [The Development of Malay Education in

Selangor, 1875-1930], GE, 1972; Abdullah bin Abdul Rahman, "Perkembangan Pelajaran Sekolah
Melayu di Kelantan Sebelum Perang" [The Development of Malay Vernacular Education in Kelantan

before the War], GE, 1973; Abdul Rahim Abdullah, "Sejarah Pendidikan Orang Melayu Melaka

Zaman British" [A History of the Education of Melaka Malays during the British Period], GE, 1975;
Mohd. Idris Abdullah bin Abdullah Sani, "Perkembangan Pelajaran Melayu Negeri Johor hingga Tahun

1940" [The Development of Malay Education in Johor until 1940], GE, 1975; and Ibrahim Haji
Abdul Rahman, "Perkembangan Pelajaran Inggeris di Kelantan" [The Development of English Education
in Kelantan], GE, 1977.
Many Malay newspapers and periodicals have been examined; among them are: Pengasuh, Bulan
Melayu, Utusan Melayu, Seruan Rakyat, Fikiran Rakyat, Melayu Raya, Qalam, and Pelita Malaya.

Until recently there have been only two known studies on the subject. See Kenelm O.L.

Burridge, "Racial Relations in Johore" Australian Journal of Politics and History 2, 2 (1957): 151?68;

and Goh Kim Guat, "Sino-Malay Relations in Malaya, 1945?1955", GE (University of Malaya,

Singapore, 1960).
There has been at least a preliminary survey of every one of the areas where racial violence

occurred in 1945/46. Among the more valuable studies are: Ghazali Basri, "Hilir Perak: Sejarah
Hubungan Ras Zaman Pendudukan Jepun sehingga Pemerintahan Tentera British, 1942?1946" [Lower
Perak: A History of Race Relations during the Period of Japanese Occupation * until the Period of
British Military Administration, 1942-1946], GE, 1974; Kamaruddin Mohd. Piah, "Kampung Bekur

sejak 1900: Satu Kajian Sejarah Tempatan dengan Rojokan Khas kepada Trajedi 6 Mac 1946"
[Kampung Bekur since 1900: A Study of Local History with Special Reference to the Tragedy of 6
March 1946], GE, 1974; Musak Mantrak, "Sejarah Masyarakat Majmuk di Mukim VII, Batu Pahat,
Johor, 1900-1945" [The History of a Plural Society in the 7th Mukim, Batu Pahat, Johor, 1900
1945], GE, 1974.
The more general studies include the following: Mat Karim bin Ujang, "Komunis dan Hubungan
China-Melayu di Kuala Pilah" [The Communists and Sino-Malay Relations in Kuala Pilah], RP, 1975;
Mohd. Daim Dahalan, "Hubungan China-Melayu di Mukim Layang-Layang, Park, Perak" [Sino-Malay
Relations in the Mukim of Layang-Layang, Park, Perak], RP, 1975; Ahmad Anuar Abdul Hamid,
"Konflik Perkauman di Baling selepas Percubaan Bintang Tiga untuk Berkuasa" [Communal Conflict

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Recent Malaysian Historiography

(e) Malay historiography: although J.C. Bottoms some years ago compiled a useful
list of Malay historiography,28 the information provided is inadequate especially
because the list includes only a few of the works written in the twentieth
century29 and even the more recent historical works in Malay have been left
in limbo for so long that they are fast disappearing.30
(f) Biographies: there was, until recently, a crisis in terms of the absence of scholarly

biographical studies of Malaysian personalities; only names have been mentioned

from time to time ? Abdul Kadir Adabi, Abdullah Dahan (the Datuk Undang

Rembau), Shamsuddin Saleh, Ibu Zain, Haji Wan Sulaiman bin Wan Sidek,

Tokku Paloh, Tok Kenali, Abdul Rahim Kajai, Sultan Zainal Abidin III,
Za'ba, and many others ? and it is clear that in one way or another such
persons have had an impact on Malay society either "nationally" or in a particular
locality.31

(g) Politics at the grass-root level: it is beyond dispute that Malaysian politics,
since the 1950s, has attracted a great deal of attention; there have been numerous

writings in learned journals,32 and even books on Malaysian politics are not
scarce, but in the large majority of the published works, discussions are confined
to the centre rather than the periphery; very little indeed is known about politics
at the grass-root level.33

in Baling after the Three Stars attempted to seize Power], RP, 1975; Norani bte Mohd. Sallen,
"Perang Parang Panjang, Batu Pahat, 1945" [The War of the Long Parang, Batu Pahat, 1945], RP,
1976; Samsudin bin Abdul Rahman, "Hubungan Kaum: Satu Tinjauan Ringkas ke atas Pekan Simpang
Rengam, Johor" [Communal Relations: A Brief Survey of Pekan Simpang Rengam. Johor], RP,
1975; Izham bin Ismail, "Peristiwa di Bukit Junun dan di Alor Setar" [Incidents at Bukit Junun
and Alor Star], RP, 1975.
28

"Some Malay Historical Sources: A Bibliographical Note", in An Introduction to Indonesian

Historiography, Soedjatmoko, Mohamad Ali, G.J. Resink, and G.McT. Kahin (New York, 1965),

pp. 156-93.
29

I have been able to list slightly over 60 titles of historical works in Malay written by local/
non-academic historians between 1900 and the early 1970s. Except for a few, the rest are not found
in Bottoms' list.
30

In an attempt to recover these works, the students have industriously searched for surviving

manuscripts or books. Several of? these works have been romanized (if the origins are in jawi),
edited with annotations, and submitted as graduation exercises. E.g., Ibrahim bin Haji Yaacob,

Melihat Tanah Air (Kota Bharu, 1941); Mohd. Ali bin Abu Bakar, "Tarikh Al-Marhum Sultan
Zainal Abidin III" (unpublished manuscript, 1963); Zainal Abidin Daud, Riwayat Tanjong Malim
(Kuala Pilah, 1947); Abdul Aziz bin Ishak, Katak Keluar dari Bawah Tempurung (Singapore, 1959);
and Arifin Abdul Rashid, Ringkasan Sejarah Kelantan (Kota Bharu, 1963).
All the persons mentioned above have already been studied.

32 See, e.g., T. Bauer, "Nationalism and Politics in Malaya", Foreign Affairs 25, 3 (1947):
503?17; Francis G. Carnell, "Communalism and Communism in Malaya", Pacific Affairs 26, 2
(1953): 99-117; Gerald P. Dartford, "Malaya: Problems of a Polyglot Society", Current History 34,
197 (1958): 346?51; Lawrence S. Finkelstein, "Prospects for Self-Government in Malaya", Far Eastern

Survey 21, 2 (1952), 9?17; Ian Morrison, "Aspects of the Racial Problem in Malaya", Pacific
Affairs 22, 3 (1949): 239-53; R.A.W. Naksih, "Malaya's Racial Problems", United Asia, 1958;
David R. Rees-Williams, "The Constitutional Position in Malaya", Pacific Affairs 20, 2 (1947): 174-78;
Max Seitelman, "Malaya in Transition", Far Eastern Survey 16, 10 (1947): 109-111; and T.H. Silcock,
"Forces for Unity in Malaya", International Affairs 25 (1949).

E.g., Safar Haji Awang, "Penubuhan Parti-parti Politik dan Pilihan Raya Umum di kalangan

Orang-orang Melayu Besut, 1945?1969" [The Formation of Political Parties and the General Elections

among Malays in Besut, 1945?1969], GE, 1975; Ramli Naam, "Sejarah Penubuhan UMNO Bahagian

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

255

256

Khoo Kay Kim

As mentioned earlier, the first task of the students has been to collect data or
at least to make a preliminary survey of various aspects of local history which are
as yet little known. The results have been most enlightening. Although a great
proportion o? the data have still to be systematically processed ? in some instances

there is need for careful verification ? there are now several aspects of Malay
society which have become quite clear. Without dwelling on the subject at great
length, a few of the more interesting findings may be discussed here.

Contrary to popular belief, Malay society, especially in the inter-war years, was
deeply concerned with the subject of change. This was, for example, reflected in
the development of religious schools. Hitherto, it has not been clear how these
schools were organized and what their curriculum was like. It is now possible to
discern that there were roughly two important stages of development from the original

Quranic schools which had been in existence for a long time. The Quranic schools
were comparatively very simple; classes were usually held in the houses of the teachers

or in the sur au. Apart from learning how to read the Quran {tajwid), the pupils
were also given instruction on certain elements of religious observances (fardhu fain).

It was towards the end of the nineteenth century that pondok schools began to
appear in the Peninsula. It is quite certain that they first appeared in .Kelantan
and Kedah, almost simultaneously. There were three possible sources of influence ?

Patani, North Sumatra, and Kalimantan (Indonesia). The pondok schools were
residential schools. The students came from various places to study under a particular
teacher, and they built little pondok (huts) in the vicinity to stay in. There was
no age limit; many of the students were adults and often studied for more than
ten years. In a pondok school the students sat on the floor in front of the teacher
who taught and explained religious texts to them. Not unlike the Quranic schools,
there was no dialogue between teachers and students. The school curriculum, however,
was more elaborate than that of the Quranic schools. Apart from reading the Quran,
the students were also taught subjects such asfikah (Muslim jurisprudence), tauhid
(doctrine of the unity of God), mantik (logic), tafsir Al-Quran (explication of the

Quran), hadis Nabi (traditions of the Prophet), as well as religious observances.

Possibly the most famous of the pondok teachers was Tok Kenali of Kelantan, who
first opened his school in 1910.34
The madrasah35 emerged in the Peninsula during the period of the First World War;

it was also generally referred to as Sekolah Arab (Arabic school). The two earliest

Kuala Pilah serta Kegiatan dan Perjuangannya sehingga 1955" [A History of the Formation of the Kuala

Pilah Division of UMNO as well as Its Activities and Struggle until 1955], GE, 1976; Muhamad
Sidek bin Khalid, "Parti Negara di Kawasan Dusun T?a" [Parti Negara in the Area of Dusun Tua],
RP, 1976; Zulkepli bin Ahmad, "UMNO Kuala Kubu Baharu, 1974-1976", RP, 1976; Abdul
Shani bin Ariffin, "Kemunculan dan Kejayaan PAS Negeri Kedah dalam Pilihan Raya 1969" [The
Emergence and Success of PAS, Kedah, in the General Elections of 1969], RP, 1976; Idris bin Ahmad,

"Sejarah Ringkas Perkembar, Batu Pahat, 1946-1971" [A Short History of UMNO, Batu Pahat,
1946-1971],
RP, 1977.
34
See Muhammad bin Abdullah, "Tok Kenali: Ulama Besar dan Tokoh Pendidikan Kelantan"
[Tok Kenali: Eminent Ulama and Leading Educationist of Kelantan], RP, 1973; also, Abdullah Al-Qari
bin Haji Salleh, Sejarah Hidup Tok Kenali (Kota Bharu, 1967.)
It must be pointed out that some sekolah pondok also used the name madrasah-, e.g., Madrasah

Ahmadiah in Bunut Payung and Madrasah Diniah Al-Badariah in Pasir Tumbuh, both in Kelantan.
But, as mentioned earlier, from the point of view of pedagogical approach and curriculum content,
there were important differences between the pondok schools and the madrasah.

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Recent Malaysian Historiography

known madrasah in the Peninsula were both founded in 1917 ? one in Bandar
Kaba Melaka (Sekolah Al-Hadi) established by none other than the now well-known
Sayid Syeikh bin Ahmad Al-Hadi; the other, in Kota Bharu (Madrasah Muhamma

diah), was instituted by the Majlis Ugama Islam dan Istiadat Melayu Kelantan.

These two were followed by the Madrasatul NJashhur Al-Islamiah (Penang, 1918),
the Madrasah Khairyah Muhammadiah (Melaka, c. 1920), the Sekolah Al-Dinniah

(Kampung Lallang, Padang Rengas, Perak, 1924), and Ma'ahad II Ihya Assyariff
Gunung Semanggol (Perak, 1934), and many others. The madrasah were comparable
to modern Western-type schools. Apart from Islamic studies, the curriculum often

included secular subjects such as science and mathematics; in certain madrasah

(e.g., Madrasah Muhammadiah, Kota Bharu) English was also taught. In the Sekolah
Al-Dinniah (Kampung Lallang) vocational education was an important part of the
curriculum. Kaum Muda influence was particularly strong in many of the madrasah.36

It is often assumed that the religious schools were unprogressive and that they
produced students who were unable to cope with the demands of modernization.
Yet from the eve of the Second World War to the late 1940s, the more radical
Malay political organizations (the Kesatuan Melayu Muda or Union of Malay Youths,
the Malay Nationalist Party, the Angkatan Pemuda Insaf or Generation of Conscious

Youths, and the Angkatan Wanita Sedar or Generation of Conscious Women)

obtained the strongest support in areas where religious schools had flourished before
the War, such as Penang, Padang Rengas (Perak), Gunung Semanggul (Perak), and

Melaka.37 In Kedah too, a state well known for its religious schools, a radical

organization was founded after 1945 with the name Saberkas.3S Kelantan also had
its radical elements, the two most prominent among them were Abdul Kadir Adabi
and Asaad Shukri bin Haji Muda, both of whom were graduates of the Madrasah

Muhammadiah.39

Reformist ideas had been more effectively disseminated than is generally realized.
What misled most people was the lack of success on the part of the Kaum Muda
in their attempts to wipe out what they considered khurafat (superstitious practices)

and bidaah (innovations inconsistent with traditions) in the observance of Islam in

Malay society. But the Kaum Muda were successful in other respects; they effectively
promoted political consciousness by appealing to Islamic solidarity in the face of
foreign (non-Islamic and non-Malay) threat. In the madrasah which they founded,

6 In Melaka the Kaum Muda encountered strong resistance from the Kaum Tua, in a proselytizing

sense. For many years, the madrasah established by the Kaum Tua were more influential. Two of
the better known ones were the Madrasah Khairyah Muhammadiah and the Madrasah Nurul Dinniah
(Paya Rumput).
See Yusof bin Jusoh, "Gerakan Politik Kiri Orang Melayu Pulau Pinang, 1945?1948" [Penang
Malay Leftist Political Movement, 1945-1948], RP, 1977; Mukhtar bin Ramli, "Angkatan Pemuda

Insaf', GE, 1975; Abdul Malek -bin Md. Hanafiah, "Sejarah Perjuangan Kesatuan Melayu Muda
1937-1945" [A History of the Struggle of the Union of Malay Youths], GE (Universiti Kebangsaan),
1974; Ahmad Boestamam, Merintis Jalan ke Puncak [Pioneering the Way to Independence], (Kuala
Lumpur, 1972); Nabir bin Haji Abdullah, op. cit., pp. 154?201.

See Baharuddin bin Abdul Majid, "Saberkas: Pergerakan dan Perjuangannya 1944?1956"
[Saberkas: Its Development and Struggle, 1944-1956], GE, 1976.

See Abdul Rahman bin Haji Mohamad Daud Al-Ahmadi, "Satu Kajian dan Perbandingan

Riwayat Hidup Kadir Adabi dengan Asaad Shukri" [A Comparative Study of the Careers of Kadir
Adabi and Asaad Shukri], (M.A. thesis, University of Malaya, 1978).

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

257

258

Khoo Kay Kim

they altered the whole approach to religious education by introducing dialogues

between teachers and students. Teachers were brought in from the Middle East and
Indonesia. Oratory and debates were also given an important place in the curriculum
in order to stimulate intellectual development. They managed to impress on Malay
society the need for social change. Yet by the 1950s it was quite evident that even
politically they could achieve no major breakthrough. No simple explanation can be
given for this. But one plausible explanation is that their influence was thwarted
by the fact that they had to operate in a plural society which was also under colonial
rule. Consequently, power eventually fell into the hands of the Malay bureaucratic
elite supported by the entire administrative-legal machinery which had been pains
takingly assembled by the colonial government.

Apart from external constraints, it is possible to discern some elements of self

contradiction in the exhortations of the Kaum Muda or, at least, an inability to
reconcile two major systems which they advocated. It is common to refer to the
Kaum Muda as reformists and, within the established religio-political traditions of
the times, even radicals. However, as Muslims they were fundamentalists. They
consistently called for a return to the Quran and Hadis. At the same time, they
were prepared to accept Western technological culture which, by stressing reason
and individualism, challenged the basic tenets of Islam. Their most difficult task

then was to explain how one was consistent with the other to a people whose
world-views were somewhat simplistic. And they never really did so, preferring most

of the time to speak in more tangible terms ? urging Malays to accept modern
education, to participate in commerce like the non-Malays, and to emulate Japan.
Not surprisingly then, they achieved greater success in a secular sense. But this was
also precisely the area where they were weakest, because they never really understood
the mechanics of the Western legal-economic systems.

One Kaum Muda, at least, came very close to achieving that ? Za'ba. He was
educated in Malay, English, and Arabic. He was, in his early life, a product of the
Malay vernacular school system. At the same time, he studied Arabic. He obtained
his English education, much against his father's wish, at St. Paul's Institution,
Seremban, and was very close to the Christian brothers. It is rather amusing to

find that one of the Brothers once advised him on the subject of how Malays
should be treated. In a letter dated 17 June 1916, Brother Edmund said:
Love is the key to all hearts; especially the Malays must be treated gently and patiently,
otherwise failure would inevitably be the result of harshness.

It was when he was teaching in Johor Bahru that Za'ba first became a pupil of
Syeikh Mohd. Tahir Jalaluddin of Kaum Muda fame. Coincidentally, when later
Za'ba found a place as a teacher in the Malay College, Kuala Kangsar, Syeikh
Tahir had also moved to the same town and Za'ba again studied under him. For
the greater part of his life, Za'ba, the reformer, became a very disillusioned man.
He found the British (R.O. Winstedt included) constantly obstructing him. He was
transferred out of the Malay College because the Political Intelligence Bureau dis
covered that he was "corrupting the minds" of the pupils.41 Later in his life, he
40

See Adnan Haji Mohd. Nawang, "Za'ba, 1896?1973: Satu Tinjauan tentang Kegiatan-kegiatan
nya" [Za'ba, 18%-1973: A Survey of His Activities], GE, 1977, p. 24. This is the first serious
biographical study of Za'ba.

See Khoo Kay Kim, "Keterlibatan Orang-orang Melayu dalam Persatuan-persatuan Sulit"
[Malay Involvement in Secret Organizations], Jernal Sejarah 14 (1976/77): 65.

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Recent Malaysian Historiography

259

found that, in attempting to uphold strictly the tenets of Islam, he could not adjust
to worldly realities. For example, he discovered that in politics there was little room
for honesty. And so Za'ba is known to posterity only as an expert on the Malay
language whereas between 1916 and 1920, he was practically the most vocal reformist

in the country contributing a few hundred articles in the Malay press discussing
Malay society and Islam. In 1917 he asked that university education be introduced
in Malaysia. He was possibly the first Malay to have done so.
Another interesting aspect of Malay society which has emerged from recent research

relates to the racial clashes of 1945/46. Admittedly, the work done so far is confined
very much to a Malay perspective of the subject. But at least in one instance, the
general conclusions arrived at confirm what had already been discovered from earlier
investigation.42 Race consciousness, as indicated earlier, became more and more
sharply defined with the growth of political consciousness in Malaysia. But until the
period of the Japanese Occupation, there was no outbreak of violence even though
there were frequent verbal and paper wars.

The situation changed radically by the end of the Occupation period. There is no
doubt now that the action of the Malayan People's Anti-Japanese Army (MPAJA),
led and controlled by the Malayan Communist Party (MCP), was the most vital
factor contributing to the outburst of violence. Sometime between mid-August (when

the Japanese surrendered) and early September 1945 (when the British returned to

Malaysia), the MPAJA were the de facto rulers. Their campaign of vendetta ?
the torture and execution of "Japanese running dogs and collaborators' ' ? alarmed

the Malays; and racial clashes occurred during the early period of the British

Military Administration.

The MPAJA had in fact obtained the sympathies of the people, irrespective of race,

mid-way through the Occupation because they continually harassed the Japanese who
otherwise ruled the country in an unbelievably inhuman manner. But, as the MPAJA
became increasingly powerful, they lost sight of the objectives of their struggle.
Instead of persuading, they coerced; instead of asking, they seized. And finally during

the "14 Days of Terror" they acted without any consideration for possible conse
quences. With a few exceptions, the MPAJA was composed of Chinese. In retaliating
against MPAJA atrocities, the religious leaders in Batu Pahat called for a jihad and
a Persatuan Muhammadiah with a military wing called Tentera Selendang Merah
(Red Scarf Army) was formed.43 The red scarf was symbolic of war, bravery, and
invulnerability. Subsequent Malaysian history was significantly affected by the events

of this period. It would make very little sense, for example, to discuss Malay
opposition to the Malayan Union in 1946 without directly relating it to the racial
42 This relates to the incident in Sungai Manik. I was in Teluk Anson in 1945, living about IV2 miles
from the scene of furious fighting, which was a railway bridge spanning the Bidor River which divides

Teluk Anson from Sungai Manik. Then in 1966 I interviewed two of the Chinese leaders of that period ?

Tan Poh Aun, head of the Chinese community in Teluk Anson, and the late Yeoh Guan Leong, head
of the Chinese community in Bagan Datuk (about 28 miles from Teluk Ans?n). Yeoh Guan Leong
was particularly informative. According to him, the MPAJA, having initially found acceptance among
the Malays, became complacent and insolent. For example, they became too free with the Malay
girls, thereby rousing the sensitivities of the Malays.

See Sapari bin Haji Yunus, "Suatu Peristiwa di Simpang KM, Batu Pahat" [An Incident at
Simpang Kiri, Batu Pahat], RP, 1973, p. 8; Ahmad Kamil Rahman, "Haji Abdul Latiff Rentah",
GE, 1977, p. 77. See also Salmah Sheikh Brix. "Panglima Sallen", GE, 1976.

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

260

Khoo Kay Kim

violence which occurred only a few months earlier. It is important to bear in mind
that the effects of the 1945/46 clashes were aggravated by the insurgency which

occurred in 1948. Again the MCP was dominated by Chinese whereas the local
government's armed forces were made up of Malays predominantly.
Reviewing the research programme, it may be said that perhaps its most important

result is the fact that it has made available now a very large corpus of literature
on Malaysian history. It is not a duplication of what is already quite easily accessible.
The new collection of literature will, in future, assist the historian to avoid over
simplification. It provides a broad perspective of Malay society as a whole; at the
same time, it gives a useful insight into community life in particular settlements,
making fine distinction, sometimes, between sub-ethnic groups.44

It should not be construed that this emphasis on Malay society necessarily

excludes research on other ethnic groups. Students who are equipped to work on
other ethnic groups are encouraged to do so, and there have been many valuable
studies.45 But the majority of non-Malay students are disinclined to major in History.
There is very little appreciation of Malaysian history among them.

It may be added, lastly, that a start has already been made to pursue various
other topics which are considered very important but, for some unknown reasons,
44

See Taslim bin Sarbini, "Sejarah Kehidupan Sosial Masyarakat Jawa di Parit Raja, Batu Pahat"
[Social History of the Javanese Community in Parit Raja, Batu Pahat], RP, 1974; Salim bin H. Tahir,

"Satu Kajian mengenai Kedatangan dan Masyarakat Jawa di Negeri Melaka" [A Study of Javanese
Immigration and Community in Melaka], RP, 1975; Ahmad Sukardi bin Aziz, "Masyarakat Jawa di
Kampung Jawa, Prai dan di Kampung Baharu, Simpang Empat, Seberang Prai ? Satu Perbandingan
Ringkas" [The Javanese Community in Kampung Jawa, Prai and in Kampung Baharu, Simpang Empat,

Seberang Prai ? A Brief Comparison], RP, 1974; Musa bin Bulat, "Sistem Pentadbiran dalam Adat
Perpateh khususnya Kedudukan Datuk Penghulu di Naning" [The Administrative System in the Adat
Perpateh with special reference to the Position of the Datuk Penghulu in NaningJ, RP, 1974; Mohd.

Yacob Haji Husin, "Masyarakat Majmuk di Kampung Behrang Station, Tanjong Malim" [Plural
Society in Kampung Behrang Station, Tanjong Malim], RP, 1973; Shaharuddin Abdul Majid, "Masyara
kat Majmuk di Beranang Hulu, Negeri Sembilan" [Plural Society in Beranang Hulu, Negeri Sembilan],,
RP, 1973; Suratin bte Omar, "Sejarah Penempatan dan Perubahan Komuniti Minangkabau di Kampung

Sungai Sekah, Nilai, Negeri Sembilan" [The Minangkabau Community in Kampung Sungai Sekah,
Nilai, Negeri Sembilan: A History of Settlement and Change], RP, 1977; Masbah bin Mohd. Taha,
"Sejarah Pertumbuhan dan Perkembangan Tradisi Gamelan Trengganu, 1900?1977" [A History of
the Growth and Development of the Gamelan Tradition in Trengganu, 1900?1977], RP, 1977; and

Hashim Embong, "Keseniari Rodat di Trengganu" [Rodat as an Art in Trengganu], RP, 1977.

45 See G. Palanivel, "A Study of the Background to Malayan Indian Politics, 1900-1941", GE,
1971; Kok Loy Fatt, "History of Ampang (1900?1914) with special reference to the Chinese Community",

GE, 1971; Ang Ing Ing, "A History of Pulau Ketam (A Chinese Settlement)", GE, 1976; Ranjit
Singh Malhi, "The Punjabi Newspapers and Sikh Organizations of Kuala Lumpur", GE, 1976;
Robert Lian, "An Ethno-History of the Kelabit Tribe of Sarawak", GE, 1976; Wan Jaafar bin Wan
Ahmad, "Asal-usul dan Kehidupan Orang-orang Siam di Kampung Baharu Naka, Kedah, 1948?1975"
[The Origins and Lives of the Siamese in Kampung Baharu Naka, Kedah, 1948?1975], GE, 1976;
Ngian Sillang, "The Social History of the Pre-Brooke Period in Sarawak", GE, 1977; V. Munian,
"Tamil Schools in Kedah: Beginning and Development, 1930-1974", RP, 1974; Daud bin Haji
Mohamed Noor, "Masyarakat Sikh di Segamat, Johor", RP, 1974; Subramaniyan A. Nambiar, "Hinduism

among the South Indians in Malaysia", RP, 1974; Husain bin Embong, "Sejarah Masyarakat China
di Kampung Manir, Trengganu, 1920an? 1970an" [A History of the Chinese Community in Kampung

Manir, Trengganu, 1920s?1970s], RP, 1977; Abdul Aziz Mamat, "Sejarah Kedatangan Orang China
ke Bandar Kota Bharu, Kelantan" [A History of Chinese Immigration to the Town of Kota Bharu,
Kelantan], RP, 1977; and Ibrahim bin Mat Din, "Satu Tinjauan Ringkas mengenai MCA Kelantan"
[A Brief Survey of MCA Kelantan], RP, 1977.

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms

Recent Malaysian Historiography

261

have been continually neglected. One such topic is the history of the Japanese
Occupation;46 another is the history of the Force 136.47 Attempts have also been

made to fill gaps in Malaysia's economic history with the emphasis on peasant

economy or rural economy,48 the formation of co-operative societies at the state or

district level,49 local administration,50 as well as the effects of the Emergency on the

local population.51
Because Malaysia's society is complex, its history cannot be simple. Any attempt

to see Malaysia's historical development as one continuous cohesive process is a

distortion of reality. Malaysia's history is necessarily made up of many parts which

at specific points in time do not conjoin. But it is this unique feature which
renders Malaysian history that much more colourful and intellectually very challenging.

E.g., Ismail Ibrahim, "Zaman Jepun di Pulau Langkawi, 1941?1945" [The Japanese Occupation
in Pulau Langkawi, 1941-1945], GE, 1977; Md. Isa bin Ariffin, "Sejarah Pemerintahan Jepun di
Jitra, Kedah" [A History of Japanese Rule in Jitra, Kedah], RP, 1977; Jaafar bin Hamzah, "Masyarakat
Tasek Gelugur di bawah Pemerintahan Jepun" [The Tasek Gelugur Community under Japanese Rule],
RP, 1976; and Mat Rofie bin Dolah, "Pasir Mas 1941-1945", RP, 1977.

47 See Jalaluddin Othman, "Haji Bahari Tokoh Pejuang Gerila" [Haji Bahari Ace Guerilla Fighter],
GE, 1976; Abdul Fatah bin Abdullah, "Haji Ahmad Payung Terjun dan Pasukan 136" [Haji Ahmad

the Parachutist
and the Force 136], RP, 1974.
48
See Mustafa Yasin, "Perkembangan Pertanian di Jajahan Bachok, 1960?1970" [The Development

of Agriculture in Bachok, 1960?1970], GE, 1976; Mat Nasir Mohamed, "Kelantan: Sistem Perhubungan
dan Perkembangan Ekonomi Perdagangan, 1903?1938" [Kelantan: The System of Communication and
the Development of Commercial Economy, 1903?1938], GE, 1977; Abdul Hamid bin Abdul Rahman,
"Perkembangan Pertanian Pekebun-pekebun Kecil di Batu Pahat, Johor, 1965?1975" [The Development
of Agricultural Smallholdings in Batu Pahat, Johor, 1965-1975], GE, 1977; Aman Ahmad, "Keadaan
Sosio-Ekonomi Pekebun-pekebun Kecil Nenas, Daerah Pontian" [The Socio-Economic Conditions of
Pineapple Smallholders in the District of Pontian], GE, 1977.

49 E.g., Habsah Samad, "Sejarah Ringkas Syarikat Guru-guru Melayu Melaka, 1926?1976" [A
Short History of the Malay Teachers' Co-operative Society, Melaka, 1926-1976], RP, 1976.

See Salahudin Abdul Rahman, "Kepentingan Penggawa Daerah dalam Birokrasi dan Masyarakat
Kelantan" [Significance of the District Penggawa in Kelantanis Bureaucracy and Society], RP, 1974;
Normadiah bte Ismail, "Sistem Pentadbiran Penghulu Daerah Jasin, Melaka, sebelum dan selepas
Merdeka" [The Penghulu Administrative System in the District of Jasin, Melaka, before and after
Independence], RP, 1977.

See Mohd. Nor bin Mohd. Amin, "Jenderam Korban Darurat, 1948?1958" [Jenderam, A
Sacrifice of the Emergency, 1948-1958], GE, 1977; Arifin bin Mohamad, "Hubungan Kaum di
Kampung Jenjarum, Kuala Langat, Selangor, 1948?1957" [Race Relations in Kampung Jenjarum,
Kuala Langat, Selangor, 1948-1957], RP, 1975.

This content downloaded from 103.18.0.16 on Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:46:42 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms