KONINKLIJK INSTITUUT

VOOR TAAL-, LAND-EN VOLKENKUNDE

TRANSLATION SERIES 20

VAN VOLLENHOVEN
ON
INDONESIAN ADAT LAW
Selections from
HET ADATRECHT VAN NEDERLANDSCH-INDI~
(Volume I, 1918; Volume II, 1931)

edited by
J. F. HOLLEMAN

with an Introducdon by
H. W. J. SONIUS

Springer-Science+Business Media, B.V. 1981

Translation by:
J. F. Holleman
Rache! Kalis
Kenneth Maddock

The translation of this work has been made possib'e by a

generous subsidy from the Netherlands Organization for the
Advancement of Pure Research (ZWO) at The Hague.
For its publication a substantial contribution was received
from the former Adatrechtstichting.

© 1981 by Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

Originally published by Martinus Nijhoff1981.
Softcover reprint ofthe hardcover 1st edition 1981
All Tights TeseTved, including the Tight to translate
OT to TepToduce this book OT paTts theTeof in any form.

ISBN 978-90-247-6174-6 ISBN 978-94-017-5878-9 (eBook)

DOI 10.1007/978-94-017-5878-9
 CONTENTS

Foreword by J. F. Holleman . IX
Acknowledgements . . XXIV
Editorial notes XXV
Orthography, XXV; Abbreviations, XXVI
Introduction by H. W. J. Sonius . . . . . XXIX
Notes, LXV; Works cited, LXVI
Chapter I Adat, Adat Law, Native Law 1
Chapter II The Elements of Adat Law . 7
Chapter III The Study of Adat Law 24
Chapter IV Law Areas . . . . 41
1. Genealogical groupings . . . 45
2. Territorial and genealogical groupings 48
3. Territorial groupings without genealogical communities . 49
4. Voluntary corporate associations . . . . . . . . 51
Chapter V Aceh 54
Sources, 54; Delimitation, 55; Jural communities, 56;
Individuals, 60; Executive, judicial, legislative powers, 62;
Justice, 71; Indigenous legislation, 78; Inter-local law,
78; Law of kinship, 79; Marriage law, 81; Law of
succession, 91; Land law, 95; Law of chattels, 106;
Wrongs, 113; Legal remedies, 118; Developments, 119
Chapter VI The Minangkabau Law Area. . . . . . . 123
Delimitation, 123; Law of kinship, 124; Jural commu-
nities, 126; Individuals, 127; Executive, judicial, legis-
lative powers, 128; Justice, 132; Indigenous legislation,
Contents VII

133; Inter-locallaw, 134; Law of marriage, 134; Adat

pusako, adat kamanakan, 135; Law of succession, 136;
Land law, 137; Law of chattels, 140; Wrongs, 141;
Legal remedies, 143; Developments, 144
Chapter VII Central and East Java, with Madura . . 145
Delimitation, 146; Jura! communities, 147; Individuals,
155; Viilage government, 159; Law of kinship, 165;
Law of marriage, 169; Land law, 179; Law of chattels,
198; Wrongs, 210; Legal remedies, 212
Chapter VIII The Maintenance and Development of Indo-
nesian Adat Law 213
1. Voluntary observance . 213
2. Attested observance 222
3. The role of the Courts . 230
4. Binding character of adat law . 256
Chapter IX Epilogue . . . . . 260
Annex A Guide to Adat Research (1910) . 262
Annex B Publications on adat law by C. van Vollenhoven
(A) Het Adatrecht van Nederlandsch-Indie
Table of Contents:
Vol. I (1906-18) . . . . . . . 266
Vol. II (1924-31) . . . . . . . 267
Vol. 111 (Essays on adat law, 1901-1931) . 271
(B) Other publications 275
Notes 276
Bibliography 282
General Index 291
Index of places, ethnic groups, and languages 303
 CHAPTER IV

LAW AREAS
[June, 1907]

[In this section Van Vollenhoven elaborates the concept of 'law areas'
(rechtskringen), the function and place of which in the systematic,
historical and comparative study of law, as he conceived it, he had
indicated earlier (p. 34, above).
The existence of significantly different patterns of adat law within
a distinctively Indonesian 'law region' (rechtsbekken) - which, he
believed, extended well beyond the Dutch East-Indian archipelago -
made it necessary for him not only to delineate geographic areas of
substantial legal homogeneity, but also to indicate the kind of criteria
on which he based these subdivisions. He considered that 'Linguistic
and ethnological similarities (-) do not yet warrant the expectation
of similar adat law; but they are nevertheless suggestive' (133). The
important thing, however, was to have a clear idea of what, in the
nature of adat law, constituted similarities or differences. Otherwise,
he feared, the situation might be thought to be the same as in western
Europe. 'In Warmond something may be punishable which has not
been made an offence in Voorschoten; in Germany other heirs are
recognized than in the Netherlands; Antwerp's municipal electoral
law differs from that of Rotterdam; but nevertheless all the law of
continental western Europe is largely patterned after the same
model' (134).
This could not be said of the Indonesian archipelago, where different
areas presented different problems of classification. Where it was
evident that in one part of the Indies rules of adat law applied which
were clearly different from those of a second or third area, these dif-
ferences could, of course, profitably serve as a basis for sorting out
the variety. Some territories - like those of the Minangkabau, the
Toraja, the Balinese - would then readily present themselves as
discrete law areas. In other cases, however, there were grounds for
hesitation, especially where colonization of one area from another
42 Van Vollenhoven on Indonesian Adat Law

(with a different adat law) had taken place. Should, for instance, the
Minangkabau colanies in Aceh, or the Balinese settlements in (Sasak)
Lombok, be regarded as discrete law areas? Or as extensions of their
home areas? Or as foreign enclaves in another law area? Moreover,
there remained certain islands and other peripheral areas of which
too little was known for their adat law to be identified with that of an
adjacent larger law area without danger of distorting the reality of the
situation. Finally, as regards some law areas - West Java as against
Central and East Java including Madura - there was little doubt that
to analyse them separately would bring out their distinctive features;
and yet it could not be denied that they had similarities sufficiently
important and numerous to justify their inclusion within one law area.
For almost a decade Van Vollenhoven had systematically and pain-
stakingly sifted the vast amount of historical, ethnological and other
materials available - for a good part unpublished and scattered - in
search of reliable adat law data. * The yield was uneven and often of
doubtful quality. But it did enable him to suggest, 'for the time being',
a division of the Indonesian archipelago into nineteen law areas (see
below).
Although he had thus established a basic cultural and geographical
framework for the comprehensive and comparative study of lndonesian
adat law,l Van Vollenhoven did not proceed immediately to cast his
successive area studies into this structure. Instead he devoted the
larger part of the section on law areas to a description of the charac-
teristic features of the four major types of indigenous community
which he thought to distinguish in the Indonesian law-scape, past and
present.
Van Vollenhoven was writing this part at a time when evolutionism
still preoccupied many scholarly minds, and though he firmly rejected
the idea that social institutions had developed unilineally he could
nevertheless not resist the temptation to dip occasionally into a hypo-
thetical past. Most of these passages have been excised from this
edition. Another matter of editorial concem is Van Vollenhoven's use
of stam in the sense of either 'clan' or 'tribe' (contrary to more recent
Dutch usage, which has freely adopted the ward clan as distinct from
stam which is reserved for tribe, he usually seems to imply the former

* [Chapter five of Van Vollenhoven's Adatrecht (Vol. 1:92-129; not reproduced

here) is devoted to a broad and systematic review of the written and un-
written sources of adat Iaw, and to a critical evaluation of the materials he
examined. - Ed.]
IV Law Areas 43

sense); and it is clear that his use of familie may reach beyond the
extended family of modern usage to denote 'lineage'. Where his
meaning appears tobe clear, modern usage has been substituted for his.
More important, however, is his introduction of two juridical
conceptions which, with their respective technical terminology -
rechtsgemeenschappen and beschikkingsrecht - were to become
methodological and conceptual cornerstones of his oeuvre, and of all
adat law studies that followed his lead.
He had already emphasized the importance of rechtsgemeenschappen
(lit. law communities) in his inaugurallecture at Leiden (1901), when
he argued that the problems of identifying the true nature and the
historical sources of law would be greatly eased if, in every instance,
first priority were to be given to analysing the structure of the com-
munity concerned. He never defined the concept strictly, but its
meaning is clear from the consistency of his usage. The term is here
rendered as 'jural communities', and technically refers to those (larger
and smaller) constituent corporate units of an organized indigenous
society which, in Van Vollenhoven's conception, derive their distinct,
legal autonomy in domestic affairs from the fact that each has a) its
discrete representative authority, and b) its discrete communal pro-
perty, especially land, over which it exercises control.*
The term beschikkingsrecht (Iit. 'right of disposal'), which poses a
semantic problern in Dutch as well as in English, is here rendered as
'right of avail'. 2 In Van Vollenhoven's conception it is the fundamental
right of a jural community freely to avail itself of and administer all
land, water and other resources within its territorial province (be-
schikkingsgebied, 'area of avail') for the benefit of its members, and
to the exclusion of outsiders, except those to whom it has extended
certain limited, and essentially temporary, privileges. The right of avail
is thus conceived also as the basic communal source of a whole range
of discrete and more or less individualized user rights, which are vested

• [In bis authoritative treatise on Indonesian adat law, Ter Haar defines
rechtsgemeenschappen as 'organized groups of permanent character having
their own authority and their own material and immaterial property' (1939:
14). The term has no exact equivalent in English. 'Autonomous community'
is the term used (though not quite consistently) by Hoebel and Schiller in
their English edition (1948) of Ter Haar's book. Though discrete intemal
autonomy (sovereignty pertaining only to the largest embracing polity) is
undoubtedly a crucial aspect, 'jural community' has been selected in the
present translation in order to convey the distinctive legal character of this
autonomy by which Van Vollenhoven sought to distinguish these communi-
ties from other, more or less cohesive, social groupings. - Ed.]
44 Van Vollenhoven on lndonesian Adat Law

in persons or groups by virtue of their membership of the commu-

nity.- Ed.]
(--)
[134] Although an accurate delimitation of the different law areas
can obviously only be made after adat law everywhere in the Indies
has been thoroughly investigated and evaluated, for the time being a
[135] division into nineteen such areas may be recommended:
1. Aceh (excluding the Gayo- and Alaslands)
2. The Gayo-, Alas-, and Bataklands
3. The Minangkabau territory
4. South Sumatra
5. The Malay territory, that is, the east coast of Sumatra (excluding
the Batak area) together with the Riau-Lingga archipelago, of
which the Malayan peninsula could be regarded as the British
moiety
6. Bangka and Belitung
7. Borneo excluding Serawak and North Borneo
8. The Minahasa
9. The territory of Gorontalo
10. South Celebes, together with the Buginese west coast of the
island.
11. The Toraja territory
12. The Ternate archipelago
13. Ambon and Moluccas (Seram, Buru, etc.)
14. Dutch New Guinea
15. Dutch Timor with its archipelago
16. Bali and Lombok
17. Central and East Java, with Madura
18. The central Javanese Principalities
19. West Java (Pasundan)
As said before, it would be wrong to assume that the difference
between these Indonesian law areas is confined to differences of rule
and precept within identical frames or patterns of law. On the con-
trary, it is the very frame or pattern itself which, time and again, shows
a different shape - though the difference is less than between Dutch
and English law, or Roman and Germanie law. This difference is
largely due to the diverse structures of the jural communities found in
the various parts of Indonesia, structures with which all other adat
law is inextricably bound up, an aspect that usually receives too
little attention. lt is true that cultural anthropology has revealed the
IV Law Areas 45

particular kinship structures of the various areas (divisions into tribes

or clans, families, households) and the set of rules by which they are
governed (collective or individual kinship relationship; matrilineal,
patrilineal, cognatic principles). But it is juridical science that must
ascertain the significance of these kinship groupings in terms of legal
authority. It must point out that the legal significance of the family
in Minahasa or Minangkabau territory is entirely different from that
of the family in Java; and that nowhere in Indonesian adat law does
the individual hausehold appear to have the status of an autonomaus
jural community. And jurisprudence must also find out what types of
territorially determined autonomaus communities exist to-day. Rules
of kinship are undoubtedly of great importance everywhere, but while
in some instances they come to the fore with the very first outline
sketch of the legal order, in other cases they are only of secondary
importance (-).
[136] The genuine jural communities can be divided into four
distinctive groups, but there is an urgent need for an accurate report
on their present state in Indonesia. (-)

1. Genealogical groupings
In some areas the only jural communities are genealogical groups,
based on and continued by descent from common ancestors. As far as
lndonesia is concerned the most elementary of these are of a hypo-
thetical character (-).
[137] (a) Of the existing types of Indonesian blood-communities the
first to be mentioned is the nomadic or sedentary clan or, in its stead,
the lineage, within which not families but individuals carry rights and
duties. Broadly speaking, legal authority - but only in the sense of
upholding the adat, since chiefs are here no more than the first among
equals - is vested in the clan or lineage authorities, no legal authority
being vested in the family or hausehold as such. Legal sanctions are
not confined to expulsion, but include other punishments as weil. The
clan or lineage is to a !arge extent responsible for its members' conduct.
Communal property still exists, but individual property is becoming
pre-eminent. Barter between individuals is already important, but has
a diminishing significance between clans or lineages. Marriage is a
purely individual matter. Only after their close relatives are dead do
children become a charge upon the clan or lineage. Adoption by the
clan is possible; but not by the family as it is not an autonomaus
46 Van Vollenhoven on Indonesian Adat Law

community. The rules of inheritance are most elementary. The ad-

ministration of justice with regard to individuals is in the hands of
the clan or lineage authorities. Taxation exists only in a most rudimen-
tary form.
The villages, in which such clan or lineage members are often found
living together, therefore do not constitute autonomaus groups but are
merely localities of common residence, because only the clan (lineage)
has a corporate legal existence. This contrast is insignificant when an
entire clan (lineage) is Iiving together as an exclusive unit under one
roof, as for instance among the Dayak; but it is evident where each
clan is distributed over a number of villages within its own territory;
or where clans are living together in such a manner that a given village
shelters people of different clans.
This structural form - i.e. the absence of any jural community
other than clan or Iineage - is found among the Gayo. There the
village (kampöng) is merely a place where families live together,
whether they belong to one or more than one clan. Neither the family
(sometimes called suku, kuru) nor the household has its own authority
or property, except in a purely domestic sense. (The territorial chiefs
and divisions in Gayoland are institutional oddments derived from
elsewhere.)
The same applies to the Dayak of the interior of Borneo. As a rule
each entire clan Iives in one long house (clan house, umä), in which
the families have their separate rooms. If there are homesteads which
merit the name of 'village', they are formed either by a clan house
with annexes or by a clan house with the dwellings of more or less
dependent squatters from other clans. As a rule, clans keep to them-
selves, even if they live in close proximity to each other. The headmen
of the clan houses appear to be the only local authorities.
Timor also seems to belong to this variant. Here the population
unit is the clan (fukun, under a clan head or tumukun) which, mingled
with other clans, occupies a certain territory. The clan here is dis-
persed over a number of villages and hamlets, but these villages
[139] (supervised by headmen, matas) are not, apparently, jural
communities. Various clans occupying the same territory are often
grouped together under one head, who is a representative of the
princely government; but these groupings have no local authority or
common property of their own.
(b) As a second variant may be mentioned the case in which the clan
itself, though well known and recognized as an institution, does not
IV Law Areas 47

function as a jural community. That function is fulfilled exclusively by

co-residing smaller groups of fellow clansmen, the clansmen's villages.
Thus - according to information from A. C. Kruyt - each of the
clans (e.g. To Pebato, To Lage) in the Toraja area lives in its own
territory (lemba), but legal authority rests with the groups of clansmen
living tagether in villages (lipu) under genealogical headmen (kabo-
senya). These communities have the right of avail (and common pro-
perty), and the spirit hause (lobo) here also serves as village council
hause. The clan territory comprises a number of such villages, but
there is no jural community superior to them, except in those areas
where chiefdoms and chiefs have emerged, such as those of Tojo,
Sausu, Parigi (-) and Luwu. Nor do families and households con-
stitute jural communities, although each is conscious of its own identity
(a single dwelling usually contains more than one household, and some-
times from ten to fourteen).
A similar situation is found in those parts of the Ternate achipelago
where the process of establishing village communities on a territorial
basis has not yet begun. Here, too - according to Hueting - the only
jural communities are the clansmen's villages (soa, hoana, soana, etc.)
with their temples (salu, ha/u, etc.; seri), each comprising fellow clans-
men under the control of genealogical headmen (elders: mahimo, etc.).
Smaller units, however, like the family and household, have no legal
authority. Nor do the clans themselves (e.g. the Tobaru, Loda, Galela,
Tobela) possess such authority, although it is common for closely
neighbouring clansmen's villages - here, too, clans have their own
territories - to be represented by one headman (sangaji), appointed
both to promote their local interest with the sultanate and to carry out
the sultan's instructions.
(c) Finally there is a third variant of genealogical community, in
which not only the clans (lineages) function as jural communities, but
[140] also their component families, within which, in turn, individual
members carry legal rights and duties. Even if no examples of this
variant were still to be found in the East Indies it would still deserve
mentioning, because the social order in both Minangkabau and Mina-
hasa (see section II, below) must have known it in the past. But
current examples do exist: on the islands of Buru and Seram the family
(etnate, soa) functions as a jural community above its individual
members; above the family is the clan (in Buru, fenna; in Seram,
amani) with its own territory; and above the clan, the confederation of
clans (in Buru, fugmolin).
48 Van Vollenhoven on Indonesian Adat Law

(d) Clansmen's villages with families functioning as jural com-

munities are apparently unknown.

2. Territorial and genealogical groupings

The second category exhibits as its main feature a territorial jural
community which embraces genealogical jural communities and their
individual members.
First comes the territorial unit in question, which may be a district
or a village, conceived not merely as a geographically defined area but
as an autonomaus legal body with goveming powers and common
property. Govemment rests with a territorial authority; the district
(village) owns property or has the right of avail over the community's
domain; and it can conduct legal transactions. Under the district or
village, the family is a distinctive jural grouping with similar features:
family authority, family property, family transactions, etc. A clear
example of this was formerly provided by the Minahasa (the pattem
is changing nowadays): at the top, the district (pakasaän, the territorial
tribe); next - and after the more recently ernerging village com-
munity - the family, ruled by its elders, with its family property, its
laws of adoption, guardianship and inheritance; and finally the indivi-
dual. Neither family branches nor single households are here corporate
units.
In part of the Ambonese law area (Ambon itself, but compare the
Kei Islands) the picture is that of families (dati; now rather meaning
'co-owners of land') within territorial villages, above which one may
sometimes find a confederation of villages. Similarly, according to
Hueting, in those parts of the Temate archipelago where the clans-
men's villages have fallen apart (though kinship ties are not forgotten),
property has become consolidated as family property, and a local
village authority has come into existence. In other words, the territorial
[141] village has developed here as a jural community, with families
(asal) as smaller jural communities under the control of their elders.
The family property or estate is here called pusaka.
The same picture is to be seen in Minangkabau. Here the list of jural
communities reads from below upwards: the family (buah paruik)
living tagether in one hause (rumah); the section of the clan (suku)
living in the one village; the territorial village itself (nagan), consisting
of two or more suku-sections; often, a federation of villages; and some-
times, finally, a confederation of village federations.
IV Law Areas 49

Some reports on Bali speak of family property and family lands, but
this is merely an abbreviated way of saying that members of a particu-
lar branch of a family are entitled to the profitable use of certain lands
belanging to a desa or village association (Liefrinck, 1890:410{.). The
family in Bali is no more a jural community than the hausehold
(kuren) is.
The converse of the above-described situation, that is, territorial
jural communities subordinate to genealogical communities, does not
occur. lt is, in fact, difficult to see how the greater unit could be held
tagether by ties of kinship if the lesser units were created purely on
the basis of common residence.

3. Territorial groupings without genealogical communities

To the third category belang the territorial jural communities
which do not have subordinate genealogical communities, but
whose constituent components are either subordinate territorial units
with their respective individual members or individuals with legal
capacity.
(a) In many regions of Java and elsewhere there are villages (known
by various indigenous terms), functioning as jural communities over
individuals with legal capacity. The function of the village, however,
still closely resembles that of the genealogical communities. Recruit-
ment and expulsion of members may still be significant matters for a
village authority; the village possesses landed property of considerable
importance, the use of which is not confined to the provision of
administrative facilities, such as council haUs, etc.; the village assumes
responsibility for orphans, has a right of inheritance, and is entitled
to abandoned property. The families in such villages, although re-
cognized as distinctive units, are merely kinship groupings and not
jural communities.
[142] The Javanese desa with a communal or mixed tenure of land
usually belongs to this category. The sametype also exists in the Batak-
lands. Unlike the suku-section in Minangkabau, that part of a Batak
clan (marga) which happens to live in a particular village is no Ionger
a jural entity with a distinctive authority and, perhaps, property of its
own - however important it may remain for an understanding of the
village structure. In the Bataklands the jural communities are: first,
the territorial village (huta, kuta); and often, above the village, the
federation of villages (partahian, urung). A similar situation exists in a
50 Van Vollenhoven on lndonesian Adat Law

large part of southem Sumatra, where the territorial village (dusun,

tiuh) is, or was, subordinate to the territorial village complex (marga,
mendapo, mega). Also the islands of Bangka and Belitung, as well as
the neighbouring Malay territory of eastem Sumatra, should apparently
be classified under this category.
This type of territorial jural community presents a peculiar variant
in south Celebes. The most important social grouping in this area is
the gaukang society. It is a group of people which was brought together
- according to native belief - by a gaukang, a fetish or relic of
miraculous power. Occupying a complex of villages and stretches of
land, it recognizes the authority of the custodian of the fetish as its
karaeng or arung. lf such miniature states - some of which are
completely disintegrated - happen to be loosely federated, the most
important among the custodians is often regarded as a 'regent' by our
administration (as distinct from the others, who are called galarang,
matowa, etc.), and supported by a sulewattang (a high-ranking execu-
tive) in the administration of his own little domain or of that of the
village confederation. Occasionally, however, such gaukang societies,
or confederations of little gaukang states, are tied together into a
firmly established political superstructure, a union, of which the states
of Gowa and Boni are illustrations. Intermediate forms between loose
federations and unions are also found.
It seems that in these little gaukang states neither the villages nor the
families constitute jural groupings with discrete authority and common
property. The population is largely dispersed; the subordinate head-
men are followers and counsellors of the 'regent' or of the galarang,
and are usually the heads of groups of villages originating from the
first gaukang settlements. The gaukang societies and the unions of
gaukang states are the only jural communities.
[143] (b) There are, however, areas where such territorial com-
munities function only in an administrative capacity, with little respon-
sibility in financial matters, and without right of inheritance or right
of guardianship, and without landed property of their own. A more or
less pure example of this is found in Aceh, where the jural communities
are the village (gampöng), the chiefdom, and sometimes the federation
of chiefdoms (sagi, etc.). Other examples occur in Madura, andin Java
in areas with individual land tenure where the village (desa; in the
Priangan highlands, kalurahan) is the only jural community.
The difference between types (a) and (b) in this category of territo-
rial communities is often blurred.
IV Law Areas 51

4. Voluntary corporate associations

Fourthly and finally must be mentioned - or at least noted for future
reference - the situation in which indigenous jural communities based
on contract between interested individuals coexist with any of the
three categories discussed above. Societies or associations of this kind
have as yet only rarely reached a state of maturity in indigenous law,
but they may ultimately become of great importance within the Indone-
sian legal order. They seem so far to have been found mainly in
different parts of Java (including perhaps Madura) and in Bali and
Lombok, though in Java they serve only a few customary needs instead
of a wide range of conceivable purposes. (-)
The Javanese adat associations are especially, if not exclusively,
concerned with mutual aid, particularly in connexion with the prepara-
tion of ritual feasts. They are called sinoman or arisan, and have their
own executives and property. The desa association (sekaha-desa) in
Bali and Lombok - the group of persons, with a discrete governing
body and common property, which constitutes the core-group of the
geographical desa - should probably be regarded rather as a natural
Balinese form of village settlement than as a voluntarily created society.
But the subak (irrigation) association may definitely be regarded as a
private society equipped with its own authority and property. Although
a product of private initiative, it nevertheless requires the sanction of
the local authorities, and is functionally as much a 'public utility
[144] corporation' as the water-corporations in Holland. There are,
however, in Bali countless other societies for utilitarian or recreational
purposes, or both (Liefrinck, 1886: 1038). Many if not all of these have
the character of minor jural communities, each with its own authority
and property. If for this reason it is suggested that, in this respect (as
in so many others), the Balinese law area appears tobe legally the most
developed, this is no undue derogation of the fact that in the Minahasa,
as in other Christian areas in Java and elsewhere, there are Christian
parish communities, for the vast majority of the latter have been
established under European influence. lt is, moreover, highly doubtful
if such parishes can be qualified as corporate associations (-).
In the preceding survey only casual reference has been made to monar-
chical forms of government, which established themselves over the
indigenous jural communities in Java, Sumatra, Borneo, Celebes and
elsewhere, but subsequently either faded away, or were replaced or
kept alive by our administration. Such monarchical rule (p. 32, above)
52 Van Vollenhoven on Indonesian Adat Law

has undoubtedly excercised a significant influence upon Indonesian

adat law. On the whole, however, it did not affect the social structure
of the indigenous jural communities, except in one, admittedly im-
portant, respect. Where a government displays the character of an
arbitral authority, the autonomy of the lower communities remains
largely untouched, for although it is equipped with powers trans-
cending the authority of the lower jural communities, it nevertheless
generally Iacks coercive power (or perhaps shows some other weak-
nesses). This is the position in Bali, and in some of the raia-states in
Minangkabau and Timor. If, however, such governments exert a more
powerful influence, the lower communities are often weighed down to
the extent of losing all or most of their autonomy, as has happened
under the pressure of certain Batak raia-states, the sultanate of the east
coast of Sumatra, the little states in south Celebes, and, especially, the
principalities in Java. Perhaps even Bangka and Belitung should be
mentioned in this connexion (-).

[145] If we now apply this classification of jural communities to the

nineteen law areas which we distinguished, the results are as follows:
- the genealogical structure is dominant in Dutch Borneo, the Toraja
territory of Celebes, Dutch New Guinea and West Timor;
- a partly genealogical, partly territorial structure prevails in the
Minangkabau and Minahasa;
- the territorial structure is dominant in Aceh, the Malayan territo-
ries, Bangka and Belitung, south Celebes, and the three law areas
comprising Java and Madura;
- a territorial structure with tendencies towards voluntary corporate
associations is found in Bali and Lombok;
- and each of the following law areas reveal a variety of these
structures: Gayo-, Alas- and Bataklands, south Sumatra, Gorontalo
etc., the Ambon area and the Ternate archipelago.
This classification is obviously not inconsistent with the fact that in
areas with a genealogical structure the needs of a territorial organisation
may already exist (e.g. the independent Dayak villages near the coastal
strip of Borneo); orthat there may be genealogical traces left in areas
with a territorial organisation. Nor can it be denied that, because the
transition from genealogical to territorial jural communities is almost
invariably a gradual process, it is sometimes impossible to draw a sharp
dividing line between the two.
(--)
IV Law Areas 53

[146] Before we conclude this outline, however, a waming should be

voiced against the belief that the adat law of the Indonesians differs
completely, not only from one of the nineteen law areas to another, but
even from one locality or village to another. If there were such endless
variety, it would indeed be a hopeless undertaking to investigate and
describe it, or possibly to accommodate it in legislation. Because of a
beneficent village autonomy various differences do occur from one
place to another, but only in minor aspects. Should one wish to know
the conditions of a contract of hire in Madura, one would find a good
many variations, but these concem such details as locally accepted time
limits. Should one wish to know the law of inheritance in Java, it
would be perfectly feasible to abstract from its great variety a common
denominator, because 'the law of inheritance is only seemingly wrapped
in as many covers as there are villages' (De Gelder, 1897, 11:307-13).
Those seeking an understanding of the law of kinship in south
Sumatra will, according to Wilken (1891: 153), indeed find a multitude
of different forms and modulations, but yet be able to 'separate the
essential from the incidental'. And should one wish to know about
marriage in the Padang highlands, Van Eerde (190 1: 388f.) has pointed
out that 'nowhere, (not) even in closely adjoining regions, is exactly the
same adat observed', its practice varying like bamboo measures cut
from different shoots; yet all these measures are cut from the same
bamboo, and this 'essential thing', regardless of its 'minor deviations
or variations', can perfectly well be observed and described.
Who, in fact, would refuse to write an essay on the Acehnese
or Batak languages because these are collections of dialects? While
the variety of adat law should therefore readily be acknowledged,
the problern should be viewed in its true and none too formidable
dimensions.
(--)