History of Malaysia

History is a very important branch of knowledge, whether viewed academically or in terms of national development. One of the proofs of its importance is that History has been made a compulsory subject in schools up to Form V.

This lecture is focussed on the interpretation and writing of History in the Malay language. Up to the 1960's, Malaysian history books like the Sejarah Melayu, the Misa Melayu and the Tuhfat al-Nafis were regarded as unacademic by most Western scholars. J. C. Bottoms, for example, wrote that the Malays, until the 20th century, considered History as entertainment. They could not, according to him, distinguish between fact and fiction.

But views such as Bottom's had been criticised by Malaysian historians, including a Western scholar, until Malay historical sources were accepted as academic.
It therefore comes as a surprise when a Malaysian historian in the 1980's holds a similar opinion as Bottoms. He considers the Sejarah Melayu as an unreliable historical source. Besides this, the interpretation that Malay nationalism was the result of British administration bringing the Malay Peninsula together, more or less, as a unit reermerged. We also come across a writer who claimed or was presented as the pioneer in questioning the generally accepted concept of `blind loyalty' in Malaysian history.

These tree topics, if left uncorrected, can give a misleading picture of the interpretation and writing of Malaysian history.
It is not easy to interpret History. Definitivenes is difficult to achieve. We try to reach truth, as closely as possible. For Malaysian history, there are additional proglems like the dearth of historical sources, time span, language proficiency, cultural differences and psychology.

There is still a large collection of historical materials on Malaysia in other countries which have not been acquired. The use of Mandarin and Tamil in Malaysia makes a comprehensive and correct interpretation of events difficult because most Malaysian historians master Malay and English only. An understanding of Malay culture is necessary in order to know the function of myth and legend in Malay historiography. With regard to psychology, it is extremely difficult to know for certain the thinking of a person at a particular moment.

In considering Malay historical writings, to accuse the Sejarah Melayu as a work that does not care for reality or respect truth and that it does not try to establish the factuality of historical events is unacademic. To regard the Sejarah Melayu as book that tries to create a form of sanctity around the royal family and the early rulers of Malacca reveals a lack of careful study of the work and an interpretation that is not in accordance with Malay culture.

The reliability of Sejarah Melayu as a very important source in the study of the Malay Sultanate can be attested by comparing its contents iwth Portuguese, Thai and Chinese historical sources. The comparison shows that several events and characters were similarly described or sketched. On the other hand, the Sejarah Melayu provides information regarding the rulers and the royal family that is far from sacrosanct.
The views that malay nationalism emerged because of the role played by British administration in bringing the Malay Peninsula together is incorrect. Malay nationalism had already existed during the Melaka Malay Sultanate and that the Sultanate had sway over the whole of the Peninsula. From the point of view of sovereignty and its relation to nationalism, Perak, for example, was an independent sovereign entity in the 18th century.

The writer who, in 1985, consoders himself as the pioneer in questioning the concept of `blind loyalty' is far from the truth since, as early as the 1950's, there existed already an interpretation that placed Hang Jebat as the hero, instead of Hang Tuah. In many aspects, the Sejarah Melayu can be regarded as a responsible work. A careful study of the Sejarah Melayu would reveal that the concept of sovereignty in those days was different from that of today. At that time, the concept of sovereignty was more related to the person of the ruler and the royal regalia than to the possession of a territory. This approach had an influence on the Malay concept of defence.
It is essential that the wiriting of Malaysian history be based on truth. Therefore it is necessary that Malaysian historical sources in other countries be obtained, with a definite timetable. The translation of research material in other languages, especially in Mandarin and Tamil, into Malay should be carried out extensively so that better understanding can be encouraged among peoples of different racial origins.

A National Historical Commission should be established to ensure that important historical topics are studied and written academically. With the establishment of such a Commission, the `uncertainties' that resulted from the `reappearance' of Dato' Bahaman and Mat Kilau could have been avoided.

The development of historical writing at present is satisfactory, especially at university level. In the early years of the foundation of Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, its History Department implemented a project of history writing through the graduation exercises of its Honours year students. Eight history books were published. The writing of history books at school level should be given a very serious attention because it is at schools that the healthy Malaysian attitude can be inculcated. Normally, knowledge of our own history could promote understanding, if not integration. More responsible steps should be taken if History is to play its role as the motivating factor in the search for truth, in the development of a critical attitude, in encouraging nationalism and in the creation of Malaysian national identity, InsyaAllah.(Zainal Abidin bin Abdul Wahid)