Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Ismail.ali

Ismail.ali

Ratings: (0)|Views: 42|Likes:
Published by Icas Phils

More info:

Published by: Icas Phils on Aug 23, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/11/2012

pdf

text

original

 
TAWARIKH:International Journal for Historical Studies,
1(2) 2010
139
Observation and Discussion onthe History of Maritime Archipelago
Ismail Ali
 ABSTRACT:
Traditionally, ocean is seen as the source of inspiration in the quest  for truth that denies the theory of worldview which is always related to myths and superstitions. Ocean has its advantage to tie relationship between nations, to formthe will of togetherness, to understand each other as well as to generate wealth. It is priceless treasure which cannot be traded and changed. On the contrary, oceancan also be regarded as a con
 f 
lict zone that has brought the fall of many ancient traditional civilizations and caused the distant relationship between nations. Inrelation to this, this article will review the importance of observation relating tomaritime aspects of this region and the ability of maritime in re-uniting moderncountries of South East Asia that have destroyed due to past colonization. To realizethe mission and vision of uniting the nations of this region, a paradigm shift in the government policy as well as in the mind of the people should 
 f 
irst be done, i.e. tosee oceans as an uniting factor not as separator. In a bigger framework, all nationsof this region should instil the determination and awareness that the historical and cultural maritime of Southeast Asia belongs to everybody and it is the joint heritageof every states and nations in this region.
KEY WORDS 
: Ocean, united nation, islands of South East Asia, archipelago, and thehistory of maritime.
INTRODUCTION
Ocean is known as
samudera
in the Malay language and it derives froma Latin word,
oceanus
, which is originated from an ancient Greek word,
okeanoe,
which means ocean that separates European and African landsand it does not consist of Middle Sea. Traditionally, ocean or sea has becomean inspiration for humans to seek for truthfulness and it has successfullydenied human’s worldview which relates to myths and superstitions. It iscapable to unite nations, to form togetherness as well as understandingand to generate wealth. Ocean is our priceless asset that cannot be traded
 Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ismail Ali
is a Lecturer at the Programme of History, School of Social Sci-ences UMS (Malaysia University of Sabah), Jalan Beg Berkunci 273, 88999 Kota Kinabalu,Sabah, Malaysia. He can be reached at: ismailrc@ums.edu.my
 
ISMAIL ALI,
Observation and Discussion on the History of Maritime Archipelago
140and transformed. Ocean can also act as the conlict zone and cause thefall of ancient traditional kingdoms as well as estrange the relationshipbetween nations.It is undoubtedly that the main oceans such as the South East ChinaSea, Sulu Sea, Celebes Sea, Java Sea, Banda Sea and others, which are in theregion of Hindi and Paciic Oceans play an important role in the building anoceanic nation in the Malay archipelago. Through sailing and expedition inHindi and Paciic Oceans, world sailing route map, trading routes, religiondissemination and conquering of new territories happen. According to OngJin Eong and Gong Wooi Khoon:
For centuries these easily navigated waters have been at the heart of, irst, Southeast Asian and then later world maritime trade. These trade brought waves of tradersand travellers from China, India and further a ield including Arabia and Europe,all of which have inluenced the cultures and traditions that developed throughout the country (Ong Jin Eong & Gong Wooi Khoon, 2001:8).
FRAMEWORK OF REVIEW
The historical sources during the traditional era until the occurrence of 2
nd
World War (1939-1945) are mainly relied on the notes and records doneby sailors, merchants, oficers and Western missionaries. Generally, thesenotes and records are based on observation and judgements of the note-takers which took place on the deck of a ship or even on land. For instance,a well known English sailor and merchant, Alexander Dalrymple (1808:499-578), wrote a note about his meeting with a group of Bajau ishermen doingdiving and pearl collection during his sail from Balambangan Island to Jolo(Philippines). Thomas Forrest (1969:221), in his journey from Calcutta toMergui Island, witnessed and made a note on the making of coarse salt bythe Samal, Samal Sea Bajau and Kalibungan people in Kabug during thereign of Sulu Sultanate.On the contrary, the British Navy Oficers such as Captain EdwardBelcher (1848), Captain Henry Keppel (1874), and Captain RodneyMundy and few others pictured the Sea Dayaks at the estuary and headof Sungai Batang Lupar and Sungai Batang Saribas of Sarawak (Borneoand Kalimantan), who were famous for their “head hunters” culture, asuncivilized, wild and dangerous. In southern Philippines, Captain Silverdescribed the Iranun (Ilanun) as “so poor was the early eighteenth centuryimage of the Iranun […] branded them murderers and man-eaters”; andThomas Forest pictured this group of people as “dangerous people” (citedby Warren, 2002:42).
 
TAWARIKH:International Journal for Historical Studies,
1(2) 2010
141All in all, these descriptions, reports and notes by the Westernerson the various matters of this region traditionally and up until the timebefore the occurrence of World War II are mainly based on spontaneousobservation and judgement and also from the West perspective and colonialinterest, and none of these reports, descriptions and notes are based onthe perspective of this region.After the end of the war, mainly during the 1960s and 1970s, we cansee the change in the rewriting of the history of South East Asia. In otherwords, the writings and observations of the Western scholars are no longerconined to the Western sources and colonial records but revolve around thelocals’ records too. From the themes, observation frameworks and writings,they are more focused on the questions of centricity and arguments of thefacts and historical reality from two different views. Among the scholarsare D.G.E. Hall, John R.W. Smail, John Bastin, W.F. Wertheim, J.C. Van Leur,James C. Ingram, Harry J. Benda, O.W. Walters, Clifford Geertz, Micheal Adas,Martin J. Murray, John A. Larkin, Benedict John Kerkvliet, and others.These scholars started to argue the truth and originality of the historicalfacts written by the scholars before World War II, which they assumed asmore Western centric or bias – the facts were written from the perspectivesof the writers themselves and colonial interest by ignoring the importanceof understanding the local history. This problem is acknowledged by a Dutchscholar, J.C. Van Leur with a strong statement stating that “[…] much of Asiahistory has in the past bee observed from the decks of European ships,from the ramparts of the fortress, the high gallery of the trading-house”(Van Leur, 1960). In Indonesia, this problem is further stressed by AdrianB. Lapian (2009:1). He proposed that 
“[…] pendekatan hendaknya bersifat Indonesia-sentris […] sejarah dari dalam juga berarti pendekatan melalui geladak kapal pribumi”,
which means that the writings of Indonesia historyshould be based on the Indonesian-centric and it should be viewed throughthe eyes of the locals. The same problem was also raised in Malaysia byMohammad Raduan Mohd Ariff and Shahril Talib (1995). According tothem:
Satu persoalan yang telah menjadi pokok perhatian adalah di antara kesahihanilmu sejarah dan realiti sejarah. Sejarah yang dimaksudkan di sini bukanlahsejarah kronologi yang sempit tetapi sejarah dalam erti kata yang lebih luas yangmenyingkap masa lampau dengan menitikberatkan proses-proses sosial, politik dan ekonomi […] dan juga tidak bijak menganalisa sejarah dengan pendekatan satu-satu negara bangsa […]. Ini dilakukan atas kesedaran dan keinsafan bahawa wadahilmu berhubung sejarah negara bangsa jauh berbeza dengan keadaan sebenar yangberlaku (Mohammad Raduan Mohd Ariff & Shahril Talib, 1995:131).

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->