Austronesian Studies

Facebook Groups

2011-07-18T05:49:00.003-10:00

This blog is connected with the following Facebook group:

Austronesian / Malayo-Polynesian / Nusantao Community

as well as the following chat groups:

Austronesian Melayu-Nusantara-Madagasikara;
Austronesian Heritage and Polynesia;
Austronesian Heritage and the Philippines;
Austronesian Peoples;

This blog and its information are copyrighted by the authors. Any group not listed above is in no way, shape, or form associated with this blog or its authors.

"Thank You"

2011-01-23T03:24:00.003-10:00

For many people, the words "thank you" shows a level of politeness and is part of communal harmony. So here are some ways to say "thank you" in various Austronesian languages.

Aklanon-- Saeamat kimo

Atayal (Taiwan)-- Muhuway su / Hway

Bahasa Indonesia/Malaysia-- Terima Kasih

Balinese-- Matur Suksema/Sukseme

Bunan (Taiwan)-- Uninang

Bisaya - Cebuano -- Salamat

Chamoru/Chamorro -- Si Yu'us Må'åse' (lit. "God have mercy")

Dusun (Sabah)-- Pounsikou

Fijian-- Vanaka

Futuna (Wallis and Futuna)-- Malo

Hawaiian-- Mahalo

Helong (Timor, Semau)-- Nodan Mamomamo

Ilocano-- Agyamanak

Ilonggo Salamat

Itbayaten (Batanes)-- Dios mamaxes dimo (lit. God bless you)

Ivasayen (Batanes)-- Dios mamajes dimo (lit. God bless you)

Javanese (Central)-- Matur nuwun / Kesuwun

Kadaza (Sabah)-- Kotohuadan

Kapampanga (Philippines)-- Salamat

Kankanaey (Philippines)-- Salamat

Kosraean (Micronesian)-- Kulo Maluhlap

Malagasy-- Misaotra

Maori-- Tika hoki / Tika hoki/ Ka Pai

Marshallese-- Kommol

Minangkabau-- Tarimo kasih / Makasi yo

Nias (North Nias) (Indonesia)-- Sauha golo

Nias (South Nias) (Indonesia)-- Sowo golo

Niuean-- Fakaaue / Ha ia

Paamese (Vanuatu)-- Hihuri / Namasmasuk

Paiwan (Taiwan)-- Malimali / Masalu

Palauan-- Sulang / Masuulang / Ke K'mal Mesaul

Pohnpei (Micronesia)-- Kalangan

Puyuma (Taiwan)-- Tayu'an

Rapa Nui-- Maururu

Rarotonga-- Meitaki

Rotuman-- Noa 'ia

Rukai (Taiwan)-- Maulanenga

Samoan-- Faafetai lava

Sasak (Indonesia)-- Matur tampiasih'

Sundanese-- Hatur Nuhun

Tagalog-- Salamat

Tahitian-- Mauru'uru

Tetum (East Timor) -- Obrigadu (male) / Obrigada (female)

Tongan-- Malo

Toraja-- Kurre Sumanga

Tuvalu-- Fakafetai

Uvean (Wallis and Futuna)-- Malo

Vanuatu-- Tangkiu

Yami (Taiwan)-- Ayoi

Yapese-- Kam Magar

The Importance of Language And Culture:

2011-01-04T00:32:00.005-10:00

Communication

There are two forms of communications--verbal and non-verbal. Non-verbal can include art, sign language, facial expressions, street signs and instrumental music. Verbal of course is restricted to sounds from our throats but these sounds from information. Specific sounds sends us encoded messages or signals which we call words. When a listener picks up the sounds the listener then begins to decode the messages from the sounds and formulates an image in the brain. When we write down these sounds, we again encode these messages. This is one of the reasons why most alphabets in the world are phonetic meaning are written through sounds. When grammatical rules, lexicons, specific terminology, codified voice patterns and associated behavior are also involved in these sounds, it becomes a language.

Cultures

Now when in the process of human civilization, we have developed "societies". Societies are ever changing yet are shaped by events, histories, politics, economies, networks, values, ideas and religion. The values, ideas, ethics, morals, and world view that is formed and generally agreed upon is "culture". Culture in turn shape our behavior, our reactions, and our outlook on the world.

Cultures must be learned. They have to be transmitted, that is to say, be passed on from one person to another. Therefore, language is used to transmit cultural information. This is the primary reason why one needs to pay attention to the meaning of words, the origin of words, and one of the markers of a shared cultural heritage. Cultures simply can not exist without being passed on and passing on one's culture always involves language. Due to the closeness of language to culture, both influence each other into what information is passed on and affects other areas of life including art, politics, economics, technology and decision making. In addition, every experience and every concept that is seen, heard, thought about, felt, debated, or philosophized about has a word or a way of explaining that experience. Language determines how a person processes information and helps to formulate or sculpt their ideas because it carries culture. For example, Filipinos have words chronicling every stage of rice production and rice itself. In English, rice is simply called rice and some of the terms for the production of rice in Filipino are difficult to translate into English. From this example we can discern the importance of rice in Filipino culture just by the terminology and can then make certain conclusions.

Civilization

The term "civilization" is often used interchangeably with the word "culture". Depending on the academic discipline, "civilization" can mean a culture which has developed cities, hierarchies, and institutions. That is the most common definition in liberal arts studies. In the 19th century, in particular, to be "civilized" therefore meant to be urban and any culture which was not urban was therefore neither civilized nor a civilization.

Others, notably Oswald Spengler, Bernard Lewis, and recently Samuel Huntington and Abdulkarim Souroush began to formulate the idea that civilizations (note the "s") are composed of cultural and religious groups that share similar inner ideas, languages, values, or geography. Hence you have the discussions about "the clash of civilizations". For example, Huntington postulates that there is a Western European civilization which would be composed of the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Spain, Greece, etc. In this case, although these countries are composed of various languages, they all supposedly share deep similar ideas about democracy, religion, and certain values. In addition, there is a common cultural element in most European countries--the colonization or legacy of Rome--is still shows in their institutions and world view.

However, this is a very simplistic and naive notion of cultures. Most cultures belong to more than one civilization because of historical, religious, linguistic and economic ties. Albania and Turkey for example are both Islamic and European but do not share linguistic ties with each other. Therefore although Turkey and Albania are both predominately Muslim and are geographically part of Europe, the way both societies process information and react would be very different because of how their cultures and their world views clearly seen in their respective language. They both would also have certain common traits because of the fact that both adhere to Islam but the way they would frame decision-making, understand concepts, and relate to each other, again would be through language.

Cultural Spheres of Influence versus Cultural Imperialism

In addition to civilizations, there are also cultural spheres of influence. This happens when another culture exerts influence over another culture which at times can cause conflict and at other times causes a blending of ideas. This happened with Indonesia which was under the cultural sphere of India for hundreds of years. Hinduism and Buddhism did not eradicate the indigenous cultures but blended elements together and formed a unique form of Hinduism. Cultural imperialism is when a sphere of influence deliberately tries to replace the existing culture, that is to say it is imposed. This imposition is traditionally either as a prelude to conquest, as a result of conquest, and/or as a means of maintaining social inequalities. The difference between cultural imperialism and cultural sphere is the element of imposition. When it is forced upon a population, it is a form of cultural imperialism. When it is freely adopted, then its a cultural sphere of influence. Religion can also be a form of either cultural sphere of influence or a form of cultural imperialism. The early history of Christianity in Latin America and the Philippines, for example, is a rather depressing story of cultural imperialism because conversions were often imposed on the indigenous peoples by Spain.

Language is Power

This is also one of the reasons why understanding language is important. As Ngugi wa Thiong'o, a Kenyan author said in his essay on "The Language of African Literature":

...The real aim of colonialism was to control the people's wealth...[but] economic and political control can never be complete or effective without mental control. To control a people's culture is to control their tools of self-definition in relationship to each other. For colonialism, this involved two aspects of the same process: the destruction or the deliberate undervaluing of a people's culture, their art, dances, religions, history, geography, education, orature and literature, and the conscious elevation of the language of the colonizer. The domination of a people's language by the language of the colonizing nations was crucial to the domination of the mental universe of the colonizers... [emphasis mine]

In the Pacific, this meant: the replacement of place of names with European ones (i.e. the Philippines, the Society Islands, Easter Island and New Zealand); creating geographical divisions where none traditionally existed (i.e. Micronesia, Melanesia, Polynesia, South East Asia, etc), creating new terms of self-definition through pseudo-scientific terms (i.e. Orang Asli, Deutro-Malay, Proto-Malay, indio, etc), through blood quantum (i.e the case of Hawai'i) or through religious affiliation (i.e. bhumiputra); along with the devaluation of anything indigenous using the terms like "folk", "ethnic", "backward", "primitive", "inferior" and "native" in derogatory ways. This has basically helped the create the impression that we should be ashamed of our roots and should look elsewhere (i.e. Europe, the US, Saudi Arabia, etc) for inspiration instead at looking at own selves and at each other. The fact that most people in the Pacific with advanced degrees are often more fluent in English or French than their mother languages and most education systems themselves do not teach anything about Austronesian languages shows the extent of the mental universe of the colonizers in the region.

Austronesian Perspective

In the case of Austronesian languages, nearly all Austronesian languages share the same matrix of cultural and technological ideas because all Austronesian languages share a common ancestral language--not to mention common DNA factors. All of our modern languages started as a dialect of that single ancestral language and that single language embedded its concepts and grammar into all of the modern Austronesian languages and therefore carries over even into our modern cultures. For example, the abstract concept of a spiritual energy or charisma inherited from ancestors and often termed mana or variations (pamana, aina, jiwa, etc). Then there are our cultural concepts such as the difficulty in saying "no". All of this can still be found in our modern languages because it has carried over. The major differences between Austronesian languages have occurred due to variations caused by: the fact that we are separated into islands; time; the adoption of foreign vocabularies (i.e. Sanskrit, Arabic, Chinese, etc) and religions (i.e. Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, etc); and certain historical events such colonialism which has lead to changes in our societies. But again the core values, perception and traits are still there because all of our languages evolved from the same ancestral source or ancestral voice. Even the word "voice" itself--ex. leo (Hawaiian), reo (Maori), feo (Malagasy), etc--shows that connection. So it is possible based on the study of various Austronesian languages to formulate an Austronesian perspective or an"Austronesian civilization" if we uncover the concepts of the words and rediscover our own past.

De-Arabization of Islam

2010-12-31T21:01:00.000-10:00

Repost
Soheib Bencheikh:We Need Dearabization of Islam

Oleh: Redaksi

My civilization as an Arab-Muslim laid not on the obligatory of wearing headscarf, furthermore niqab and burqa. I had left shallow perception about standard of civilization based on artificial matters. I dream about civilization that preserves morality.

Islam is in the midst of rapid growth in France. However, the rise of the puritan and ideological Islam has been specific concern there. Dr. Soheib Bencheikh, the former mufti of Marseille who established French Institute for Islamic Science, said that Islamic dearabization is necessary in order to fit better into French culture during his 10 days visit in Indonesia to Novriantoni from Liberal Islamic Network, Saturday (25/11/2006).

What is your impression about your visit to Indonesia?

I was first impressed by the warm reception from individuals and institutes I visited in Indonesia. I found the jovial face of Islam in Indonesia. I also found the spirit of thinking (at-tafkir) as well as the absence of thinking (‘adamut tafkir) among people I have met. I raised many questions about Islamic challenges in Indonesia and found less answer. It seems that there is lack of knowledge about the basic concept and notion of the modern world, such as the concept of citizenship, secularism, and democracy.

I used to perceive secularism as the state’s “administrative neutrality’ (hiyadatul idarah) toward all religions and beliefs. Democracy is an undeniable system and it needs no additional attribute like Islamic democracy, Christian democracy, or ecological democracy. In the end, these attributes will corrupt and extract the democracy. Democracy has no color, smell or identity because this is an open space for every citizen to express him or herself. The formula is this: the most persuasive and the most rational one will be chosen.

Are you happy with the fact that Indonesia is a democratic state?

I am glad that Indonesia is the first Muslim country that applied democracy and the principle of secular state. This climate will provide every group the opportunity to express their selves. Unfortunately, there are psycho-linguistic barriers for accepting secularism in Indonesia and many other Muslim countries. Psychological barriers exist because secularism originated from the West, and some people are skeptical upon western things. Linguistic barrier happens due to the semantic problem in translating secularism into our languages.

Perhaps the Arab Christians were the first translators of the word secularism into Arabic word, al-‘almaniyyah (refers to the nature, world or le monde), because their holy book, in particular the New Testament, said that Jesus is not part of the nature. Devil is the real ruler of universe. They perceived secularism as the emptiness and the lack of religion.

Others translated secularism as al-‘ilmaniyyah which refers to science. I think this word refers to scientism. The Arabic books that blemish secularism, like Sheikh al-Qardlawi’s book, use to begin with the explanation of the history of secularism from the ancient Greek atomism and materialism, to the 19th century where the influence of scientist (al-ilmawani) strengthened among society.

Scientism claims that science is the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth. Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. However, this view gradually declined in France where many scientists belonged.

This philosophy developed afterward into positivism, as had been initiated by August Comte. The positivists reached the notion that science will not develop unless we are skeptical upon the used methods. Therefore, science is not absolute, but it reaches particular stage of human reason’s achievement. Science is not definite and final as well. That is why a scientist cannot say that he reached his final conclusion. This attitude will close the gate of science and knowledge.

Later, the scientists focused on the epistemology of knowledge or how knowledge is acquired. This discussion became independent from philosophy. It deals with the means or method of production of knowledge. I think that Muslim thinkers who reject secularism are actually rejecting scientism and its claims. They attack the wrong target.

What is your personal perception in regard secularism?

To me, secularism is not a complicated philosophy. In France, laicite is nor religion neither ideology. This is a simple idea about administrative neutrality in managing relation between state and religion. Once state declares itself as a secular state, it must give every citizen freedom to accept religion or not. In a more concrete way, secularism is separation between state and religious affair. It benefits both religion and state.

Every religion will be under the protection of state, which is neutral, rational, and susceptible to critique, because it is not a part of sacred institution. Every party in the secular state can be criticized, evaluated, reformed, and even substituted by parties that may be able to lead and prove that they are capable of doing better things.

State institution becomes neutral, profane, have no divine mandate or sacred values as the claim of every religion. State is liberated from dogmatism. Besides, religion will be free from political intrigues in order to gain the power. This is the fact in countries where secularism has established.

What about the theocratic or semi-secular countries?

In countries such as Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, and other Arab countries, you will find the fact they are not bright and there is no hope for an overhaul. The task of these states seems on one thing, that is safeguarding the sacredness of religion and the power of authority. They only want to preserve the conservative and backward religiosity and utilize it to maintain their power.

On the contrary, political parties that act as oppositions and critics against the government also wanted to gain the power by using religious idioms in order to revive people’s religious sentiment. Religious sentiment of the Muslim majority, for instance, is at stake within political intrigues which sometimes immoral.

Why do you advocate secularism?

I must say that people who raise their voice on the importance of separation between religion and state were sincere in their religiosity. I have particular reason to advocate secularism. As a Muslim, I can practice Islam proudly in France under the authority of secular state. If only the French politic is up to the procedure of democracy which sometimes side with the power of majority (Catholic majority in case of French, ed), definitely we would not be free living there.

Providentially, that shallow understanding of democracy has gone. French constitution guarantees the sustainability of secularism, including protection of the rights of individuals and minorities. Therefore, I suggest anyone who mock secularism to live in France and America for about five years. I believe they will prove that secularism protects them from shallow religious sentiment.

The opponents of secularism perceived it as something more than administrative neutrality. They saw secularism as an ideology that marginalize and eliminate religion out of human life. What do you think?

It’s a big lie to say that secularism will marginalize religion from every aspect of life. Secularism is simply about administration of the state therefore it will not be easily influenced by cheap religious sentiments. In the west, it is up to you to embrace a religion or not. One’s obedience or disobedience is a private matter between him or her and god. It is different with what happens in the Arab countries, the secular as well as the theocratic ones.

In Saudi Arabia or Algeria, I feel that the inquisitional institution is surrounding me. Hence, my prayer, my worship, my life and death is no more for God. Everything I do, I do it for the institution that spies my move and observance. Everything we do is not for God, but for maintaining the authority’s stability or positive image before public.

In France, my little obedience is apart from such motives. I am sincere in my worship despite of the fact that I am not a very obedient person. No one coerces me to apply Islam. This is the essence of Islam; it is offered (yu’radl) and not coerced (yufradl). My consistent Islamic practice is not for gaining Muslims’ favor or for obtaining particular position throughout concoctive clothing.

The Islamic state advocates claimed that the establishment of Islamic state will guarantee minority rights far better than the secular state does. What do you think?

How can we to eliminate the concept of ahlu dzimmah (the protected non-Muslims in Muslim countries with certain concessions, ed)? Frankly speaking, I and most of Muslims in France have never wanted to be ahlu dzimmah of the French Catholic majority. We always want to be French citizens whose rights are equal with any other legal citizen. The advocates of religious state used to forget that religious barriers have melted in many ways. You can find a Christian Indonesian and a Muslim Sweden who live in the modern secular state. If this positive achievement develops, we will find a state where the majority does not claim as majority.

Revolution in science and knowledge, and the modern medium of telecommunication and transportation enable us to interact with others without knowing their primordial identities. Every idea becomes accessible. An Arabic article that discredits Christianity will be read and understood by the Vatican, and vice versa. Therefore, in order to propose Islam as an active participant of the future world revolution that unites us in humanity despite of different language and culture, we must reform our Islamic discourse and prepare ourselves to leave the old conceptions about this religion.

You seemed to dream about the assimilation of cultures rather than clash between civilizations. Is this a realistic idea?

Actually, a clash of civilization does not exist in reality. What happens everywhere is clash between open groups (munfatihin) and closed ones (munghaliq). There is no clash between West and East. We must remember that the first who condemned against the American invasion upon Iraq was the belated Pope John II, while the first who closed his eyes about this tragedy was Sheikh al-Azhar.

The most persistent opponent against the war was France and Germany that bear the consequence up to now. Meanwhile, the facilitator of the invasion and provider of the military base for the US was the Arab countries. Hence, clash between civilizations is a mere imagination of America and it proves that throughout its vicious actions in many parts of the world.

Some Muslims observed that the ban of wearing headscarf, niqab (face veil in which woman’s eyes are visible) or burqa (veil covering the whole face) in several west countries is a form of western secular state’s confrontation against Islam. Is there a clash of value between Muslims in the west and the western culture in general?

The Qu’ranic prescription to “draw their veils over their bosoms” was for Arab rural and nomadic women who were already veiled in early Islam but left their bosoms open. Hence, we must perceive that the verse commands Muslims to dress in a modest fashion. That is the universal value of the Quranic verses on veil.

So, you do not regard this as primary Islamic teaching.

I do not say that, but Islam does. Everyone knows that this matter is not a primary Islamic teaching because it is not one of the five pillars of Islam or one of six pillars of Iman. It is a branch of Islamic injunctions, namely to behave decently. Furthermore, there are many ways to behave decently in the modern era. For the nomadic Arab women, the way of obtaining respect and honor based on physical aspect. But most of Muslim women in France and England today emphasized on attaining as much knowledge and expertise as possible.

Is there any Islamic organization in France supporting the ban of religious attire like headscarf, mainly niqab and burqa?

Some political leaders want that Muslims do not reveal their religious identity, mainly with niqab and burqa. Nowadays, the security issues arise from the expose of such religious symbols, which are in fact secondary. I think the debate on this subject has coincidentally led Muslims to be busily engaged in artificial matters. There are many serious issues to discuss such as the education, poverty, and job opportunity.

We have to advocate Islam as a religion that exists within every individual’s heart and we should not demand the state to keep the sustainability of our religion. The matter of obedience or disobedience is not the state’s responsibility. This must be our direct relation with god without human intervention. The Islamic development, which is apart from the state’s power, is important because there is no clerical system in Islam.

Do you think that supporters of the wearing of niqab and burqa in western countries have failed to adjust with the Western Islamic culture?

In general, they are not capable to interact positively with the world civilization. A French intellectual who wrote a lot about Islam, Roger Garaudy, has reminded Muslims about the necessity to release their selves from the project of Islamic Saudinization (masyru`us sa’wadatil Islam). He observed that this tendency arises among many Muslims. To me, it would be very miserable if the clash with west is due to the issue of headscarf and niqab, and not because of substantial issues.

I am concerned about debate on this topic in Aljazeera television, moreover when British Muslims determined to hold a World Day of Veil (al-yaumul `alami lil hijab) which is a ineffective battle and stake for me. This religion is more than fourteen centuries old, but it still debates about what one should wear or not. I hardly imagine the Archangel Gabriel will come down to earth back and forth just to teach the Arabs and Muslims on how Muslims should dress, how long beard must be, and other trivial matters. Do not forget that the enemies of Prophet Muhammad were wearing bigger turban and maintaining longer beard than ours today.

Are you frustrated with Muslims’ failure in adjusting Islam with local tradition?

Adjustment is our right. Why do we coerce French Muslims to apply particular prototype of Islam, which will keep them away from French cultural milieu? I think they have the right to determine their own Islam ala French, with minimum requirement like believe in God and the prophecy of Muhammad. Why should they change their names with the Arabic ones or change their dress? Abu Bakr, Omar, Khadija and Ayesha did not change their names when they embraced Islam.

It is not necessary to separate between the Eastern and Western civilization. The boundaries have just determined by European countries in the colonial era, which Edward Said called as the imaginary geographic boundaries. Talking about the roots of Islamic classical thought, we find philosophy that originated from Greek, state administration from Persian tradition, the adoption of ‘urf principle (adat/tradition) from the Roman law. That is civilization, which give and take each other. European civilization would not advance if only they did not develop the Arab-Islamic civilization that nearly collapsed.

Now, we seemed facing the battle for authenticity. Muslims want Islamic authenticity as fundamentalist Christians do. What do you think?

Everywhere, those fundamentalist groups were minorities. However, the revival of Christian fundamentalists in western countries is understandable. They were narrow-minded, and they emerged out of the assumption that their democratic, secular, tolerant, and pluralist state has become a Trojan horse that potentially threats their comfortable lives. They already gave full freedom to Muslim migrants in their country, whom now regarded to disturb their existence. That is why those right wings emerged in Germany, Denmark, Holland and other European countries. But nothing to be worried about because they remain minorities.

Will Muslims be treated like Jews in former Germany or will they have bright future?

I always advice the Muslims to learn from the Jews, who realized about the threat of populism against their existence. Democracy has never detached of populism and even the constitution can change according to the public opinion. If we waste our strength to do pointless things and challenge the West in their home country, they will manipulate the public opinion about the Islamic threat in Europe. Fortunately, secularism protects us, and the liberal climate always gives protection upon minorities. Do not forget that Hitler had used populism and democracy to reach the power and create disaster.

I also suggest Muslims to take the lesson from the Jews on how to influence the centers of authority without noise. The Jews did it in France without denying their French history and identity, and they fight for the rights of minority in general. But it seemed that Muslims did not take it as if they did not have sufficient political awareness.

When Muslims came to France, they did not understand about the history of France. They came with high turbans and shout that they have the right to do this and that in the name of democracy. They did not know that French struggle to achieve secular state was throughout bloody ways. They did not understand that the harmonious interfaith relation in France produced from various bitter experiments.

Initially, the first generations of Muslim in France were welcomed with tolerance and compassion since they were minorities and oppressed in their home countries. But as the Muslims increased and became the extensions of ideological interest in their home countries, like Wahhabism and Ikhwanul Muslimin, the members of French Parliament became concerned on the potential conflict. That is because of the rise of religious intolerance like the excessive condemnation against Jews and Christian in France, and the wearing of religious attire like headscarf and niqab.

Are you concerned on the rising ideological Islam in France?

In general, I am not worried about the future of Muslims in France. But I am worried about the prototype of Islam which most of French young Muslims adhered and developed nowadays. They waste their times by adhering particular understanding of Islam, which impede them for building better social relationship with their neighbors. They waste their time by discussing about the length of beard, the size of trouser etc.

They forget that prophet Muhammad had utilized the best things in his period just like us in the modern era. As a Muslim thinker, I had been mocked for not applying the Prophetic tradition (Sunna) of their version. “You’ve never paid any attention to the Prophetic tradition!” they protested. “How come?” I asked. “Your daily life style and mainly the way you dress do not reflect your concern about the Prophetic tradition.” My answer is this: I perceive that one of the Prophetic traditions is that he had never deviated (syadz) from the culture around him.

In order to honor the Prophetic tradition, we must not act discordantly in the present day, particularly in pointless matters. Muslim must not deviate from the existing social order, a prototype described by the orientalists about Muslims. They portray Muslims’ exotic and weird image as the essence of Islam. I said this: “Those orientalists were describing Islam just as you were showing them.”

That was my experience of dealing with young extreme Muslims. Some dialogues ended at a deadlock, some others succeeded. Therefore, I suggested French decision makers to be wise in dealing with them. I explained that their attitude was not because of their deep understanding of Islam, but their shallow understanding. They were not immune from the virus of fanaticism. They invited fundamentalist Muslims to teach them about Islam and that is why they failed in building the positive social relation with French society and became marginalized.

How is the figure of an ideal French Muslim in your view?

I think a Muslim French will always be Muslim although the others doubt the purity of his Islam. However, God forbid us to judge one’s conscience and religiosity. To me, the ideal French Muslim is an open, brilliant, broad-minded Muslim who has high political sensitivity and observes contemporary thoughts. He or she must understand about the history of French and Europe since France has strategic position within Europe. On the other hand, he or she must learn the Arabic and Islamic thoughts, particularly before its decline phase.

I remember of one Indonesian student who was obsessed in reviving the glory of Islamic science and civilization by reviewing the works of Ibnu Sina (Avicenna), Ibnu Rusyd (Averroes) and Ibnu Khaldun. I said to him: “Do not stop on these figures, who were brilliant in their days. If you really want to seek science and knowledge, you must continue the achievement of modern science and knowledge. You may review the achievements of those Muslim thinkers, but you must add something new!”

Nowadays, the European countries had abandoned the medical books of Ibnu Sina, namely as-Syifa or al-Qanun fit-Thibb. They do not refer any longer to al-Khawarizmi and Abul Hayyan at-Tauhidi in order to understand physic. Indeed, history proves that modern achievement is not revealed from the sky, but it is accumulation of the never-ending achievements of preceding civilizations. I think that relying on Ibnu Sina, Ibnu Rusyd, and ibnu Khaldun is not sufficient at all.

What is your suggestion for the Islamic development in Indonesia?

I wonder why Indonesian Muslims who were hospitable and tolerant with other religions such as Catholic, Protestant, Hinduism and Buddhism, are now prosecuting Ahmadiyah. I think, nobody has the right to expel them out of Islam by monopolizing the Islamic view. Even If they (Ahmadis) were assumed to convert out of Islam, the valid principle will be this: unto them their religion, unto us our religion.

Many Muslims regarded Ahmadiyah as deviant and mislead. What do you think?

It does not matter how deep the different between your Islam and theirs is. Let God judge the differences between us. Some believe that they are defending the Islamic purity by attacking Ahmadiyah. I think that if you want to show the pure face of Islam, you must show it in peaceful way. Let the world know that even there are many differences between us, these are not the reason of conflict.

Dr. Soheib Bencheikh was born in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia in 1961, studied Islamic theology at Al-Azhar University and received his doctorate from the prestigious Parisian Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes (EPHE). Formerly the mufti of Marseilles, France, he is a member of the French Council for the Muslim Religion(1) and head of the French Institute for Islamic Science.(2) Recently, he announced his candidacy for the April 2007 French presidential election, and launched his election website (http://www.elanrepublicain.net). In addition, one of his supporters maintains a blog (http://soheib.bencheikh.over-blog.com) that includes interviews he has given to the press, as well as links to other French Muslim reformist websites.

Malay vs. Austronesian

2010-12-21T13:38:00.024-10:00

(The Royal Order of the Star of Oceania, founded by King Kalakaua in 1886 to promote Pacific brotherhood)

For the English speaking world, "Melayu" is often translated as "Malay" and hence we have the term "Malay race" and "Pan-Malayism" (sometimes "Pan-Malayanism").

So what is a "Malay"? The earliest known records of the term "Malay" comes mostly from Indian and Chinese written records. Indian records from the 3rd century BCE indicate a place called "Malayadvipa". Chinese records from the 7th century name a kingdom called Malayu. The word Melayu was inscribed with what corresponds with the year 1286 on the Padang Roco inscription statue on the Batang Hari river.

After that on 1347, King Adityawarman declared a new state established under the name of “Malayapura”. There is a debate, however, whether or not Malayapura or Melayu was a kingdom under the Sri Vijaya Empire (which was one of the first major empires in maritime South East Asia and is often credited for the development of Vajrayana Buddhism in Tibet and Japan), a totally independent state, a capital city, or another name for the Sri Vijaya Empire itself. At any rate, we know that eventually in 1377, the empire of Majapahit (centered on the island of Jawa-- or Java-- and from where the current Indonesian national flag derives from) conquered Melayu and its last ruler, Parameswara, fled and founded Melaka (Malacca). Parameswara eventually adopted the name Iskander Shah and may have adopted Islam (some claim he did what Roman Emperor Constantine the Great did—adopt the trappings but not the religion until his death bed). Melaka or Malacca would grow into one of the most powerful Islamic centers in South East Asia and become one of the major players in international trade. Tomas Pires, 16^th century Portuguese remarked that "Whoever is lord of Malacca shall have his hands on the throat of Venice. Due to the influence of Melaka, the term “Malay” began to be synonymous with being civilized, cultured, wealthy, pedigreed and educated. It also began to have the connotation of being Muslim since Melaka was Islamic. Eventually, Melaka’s wealth would attract the ambitions of foreign powers and it succumbed to the Portuguese in 1511 and became the first European colony in South East Asia. However, like Iskander Shah, the princes of Melaka would found sultanates of their own after the fall of their empire including Johor, Perak, and some believe Maguindanao.

As Europeans began to discover the Pacific—something that Austronesians had discovered 2,000 years earlier—they encountered a new race. In 1795, Dr. Johann Friedrich Blumenbach adopted the term “Malay” to describe the following group of people:

Malay variety. Tawny-coloured; hair black, soft, curly, thick and plentiful; head moderately narrowed; forehead slightly swelling; nose full, rather wide, as it were diffuse, end thick; mouth large. upper jaw somewhat prominent with the parts of the face when seen in profile, sufficiently prominent and distinct from each other. This last variety includes the islanders of the Pacific Ocean, together with the inhabitants of the Marianne [Micronesia], the Philippine, the Molucca and the Sunda Islands, and of the Malayan peninsula. I wish to call it the Malay, because the majority of the men of this variety, especially those who inhabit the Indian islands close to the Malacca peninsula, as well as the Sandwich [Hawai`i], the Society [Tahiti], and the Friendly Islanders [Tonga], and also the Malambi [Merina] of Madagascar down to the inhabitants of Easter Island [Rapa Nui], use the Malay idiom.

Around the same time, Joaquin Martinez de Zuniga, a Spanish historian in the Philippines wrote that Malays all spoke:

…Dialects of a mother tongue which is spoken in almost one half of the world, from the island of Madagascar up to Christmas Island, in all the islands of the South Seas, in New Guinea, in Australia, and in the Sandwich Islands.

Malay eventually began to be considered as a race by Europeans.

(Racial map based on Blumenbach from the early 20th century)

When the Pacific began to be partitioned in the 19^th century by European powers, it was eventually divided into five parts: Malaysia, Micronesia (which included the Philippines at one time because Spain ruled Guam and the Marianas through Manila), Melanesia, and Outer Polynesia (which included Fiji). Previously, the entire area was considered Polynesia including the Malay peninsula.

(maps from the 19th century and early 20th century showing the ever changing partitioning of Polynesia)

However, racially, those within Polynesia, Micronesia, and Malaysia were all considered “Malay” legally. In fact, there were attempts to re-unify the region through the names “Oceania” though the term “Malay race” as defined by Blumenbach and "Polynesian" was used interchangeably and accepted by King Kalakaua of Hawai’i, Apolinario Mabini, and other important figures in the Pacific. Many important figures including Queen Lili`uokalani, fought against the partitioning of the Pacific through her efforts in the Royal Polynesian Society and belonged to a camp that tried to restore the original meaning of Polynesia which included SE Asia.

It is important to note that such figures such as Queen Lili`uokalani firmly believed that Polynesians were part of the larger Pacific world and were part of a great civilization. This may seem trivial today, but during the time of the Queen, many believed that our ancestors were too primitive to sail across the Pacific and Indian Oceans. Many believed in “Polynesia Proper” was created when a lost continent sank and the inhabitants ran up the mountains, which, would become the islands of Polynesia. They are based on the belief that Polynesians—or rather Austronesians—were too primitive to navigate across the vast oceans. This is the real philosophy behind such fantasies like Mu and Lemuria. The Queen rejected these ideas and understood that Polynesians sailed and settled the islands. She knew the Hawaiian traditions of voyaging and part of her own personal attempt to connect her country to the other societies of the Pacific and to show the inherent intellectual abilities of her race is evident in her translation of the Kumulipo, one of the Hawaiian creation myths. She believed that Malaysians, Indonesian, Filipinos, Tahitians, Maoris, Hawaiians, etc were all part of a vast rich sea going ancient civilization which is evident in the charter and the research of the Royal Polynesian Society.

(The charter of the Royal Polynesian Society. Note: "The term 'Polynesia' is intended to include Australia, New Zealand, Melanesia, Micronesia, and Malaysia, as well as Polynesia proper")

After World War I, many of the countries within SE Asia intensified efforts to overthrow colonial regimes. Pan-Malayism became a rallying point to call attention to the fact that these countries were occupied by a completely foreign power and to bring about some sense of vision and direction. Pan-Malayism was extremely strong in Indonesia and the Philippines. To counter the rising tied of nationalism, the British, American and Dutch colonial administrations began to publish works by Thomas Stamford Ruffles, David Sparrows, Otis Beyer, and Conrado Benitez. Ruffles began to firmly tie the concept of Malay to being Muslim while Benitez and Beyer created new terms to describe the levels of “civilized” life and physical appearances—which sadly many still believe today. The theories of Beyer and Benitez in their classifying Filipinos in general is almost legendary because they based their classifications not on linguistics but solely on physical appearances and religious prejudices which they tried to match with sloppy archaeology. In addition, these historians were directly paid by the colonial powers who used these texts as a means of claiming that they here there in those countries to uplift the natives. However, their works were no different than other men of their era such as Dr. Eugen Fischer, the famed Nazi scientist who laid the scientific explanation for the “Final Solution”.

Seeing the political dynamics of the time, linguists and anthropologists coined a new word “Austronesian”. Austronesian derives from the Latin and Greek words for “southern” and “islands” by Dr. Otto Dempwolff. The term “Austronesian” was meant to be a neutral term to bridge the peoples of SE Asia, Madagascar, and “Outer Polynesia” (or “Polynesia Proper” as Queen Lili`uokalani referred to the region) and in a way as a subtle rejection to the theories of Ruffles and Beyer. It was also a subtle way of rejecting another emerging term “Malayo-Polynesian”. The term Malayo-Polynesian hints at a two part division in the region, which historically prior to 19^th century did not exist. In addition, it leaves out peoples such as the Micronesians, the Taiwanese aboriginals, and others who do not identify with either being Malay or being Polynesian. This term would not gain acceptance until the 1970s when the voyages of the Hokule`a would prove once and for all that "Austronesians" did have technical know-how to travel across the Pacific. In addition, the new research by such people as Peter Bellwood provided new insight into the region. So in that sense, the term "Austronesian" is loosely tied with the cultural renaissance in the Eastern Pacific and ironically with the death of Pan-Malayism.

The beginning of the death of Pan-Malayism came with the birth of Malaysia in 1957 (through a process which was completed in 1963) and the Konfrontasi war between Malaysia and Indonesia in the early 1960s. Upon independence, Malaysia adopted a constitution which not only made Islam the official religion but it tied bhumiputra (an Sanskrit word meaning “earth son”) or being Malay to Islam through Article 160. The rationale behind this was that the British were concerned about the rise of Communism in Malaya (who major support from Malay villagers, intellectuals, and many Chinese) and sought to empower the new state (particularly the sultans who are still nominally the head of Muslims in their domains) through religion. This means that for example if a Muslim Malay decided to convert to Christianity, under Article 160, he or she would would no longer be considered Malay. This is something that is not even done legally in most Arab countries--where many countries have sizable Arab Christian communities--and the only example that I know of that has some similarities to this scenario is in the Philippines where a Moro who converts to Christianity may no longer be considered "Moro" and if a Christian Filipino converts to Islam and even marries a Moro, he or she is also not "Moro" but a balik-Islam (reverter) while the children of such a marriage might be considered Moro or "part-Moro", depending if the father was a Moro or a balik-Islam. So in the Malaysian and to a degree the Moro case, converting out of a religion means losing an entire ethnicity--practices that critics point out are actually more similar to Orthodox Jews than to some of the ideas of Islam.

In going back to Pan-Malayism, with the independence of Malayan peninsula, the new nation adopted the name “Malaysia” instead of “Malaya” (as it was previously known as) which was the name Pan-Malayists had hoped would be the name of a new federation and a name that actually may have derived from the writings of Dr. Jose Rizal. Despite this, the Philippine president at the time, Diosdado Macapagal—who was a firm Pan-Malayist—tried to form a federation called MaPhilIndo (yes, not exactly catchy) which ultimately failed because of issues with Borneo. The issues with Borneo ended up escalating into a war between Malaysia and Indonesia known as the Konfrontasi.

The other often not talked about issue was Article 160 in regards to the failure of MaPhilIndo. The Philippines is a predominately Catholic country. Indonesia has large pockets of Catholics, Protestants, Hindus, Buddhists and animists. In fact in Indonesia, every major religion and sect are represented there. Indonesian President Sukarno, though a Muslim, had deep reservations because of his more secular orientation but also because he was part Balinese, who are predominately Hindu. Philippine President Macapagal was a devout Catholic. In communiqués between Kuala Lumpur, Manila, and Jakarta that this was an issue, however, it was later suggested that in a new MaPhilIndo charter, the issue of religion being tied with a classification of citizenship would be removed and that topic could come up in another conference which did not materialize because of the Konfrontasi.

Today, particularly with Malaysians, the term “Malay” is still associated with Islam in the same way that the term “Arab” is associated with Islam with Westerners. In fact, a cursory look at modern articles even on wikipedia on the “Malay race” shows that that connotation is very strong.

(From the wikipedia page on Malay race. The irony is that all of those featured are part-Arab, part-Chinese, part-Indian, part-Turkish, or part-Afghan, and entirely from Malaysia and Brunei and all Muslim)

In general, I think that unless Malaysia removes their own imposed religious connotations with the term “Malay” with being Muslim, Pan-Malayism or Malay unity outside of Malaysia and Indonesia is basically a dead issue. Filipinos, Polynesians, Micronesians, and Malagasy are predominately Christian and might feel uneasy about embracing an identity that is politically and legally tied to another religion or would tie "ethnicity" with religion. For these same groups, the term “Austronesian” might be confusing at first because it sounds like Australia (Australia, Austronesian, and Austria all derive from the Latin word for "south") but then there is still basically the non-political nature of the term which might be easier for them to accept than say Malay.

However, for certain groups of Polynesians, this would require deeper decolonization. Some might reject any form of unity because they harbor certain prejudices against Asians and feel that Indonesians, Filipinos, etc are all Asians. Some Filipinos themselves have a few prejudices against certain Asian groups. Some may even also have misgivings being, as mentioned before, basically because of religious prejudices against Islam itself though that is a more recent phenomenon except in the case of the Philippines. However, all of those above mentioned prejudices are prejudices inherited or picked up on through the colonial apparatus, in some cases by through church organizations themselves, still in place in most of the Eastern Pacific. As I mentioned before, it would require decolonization in the way we think, the way we understand our history, and how we define ourselves. But it would also renew our relationship with the ocean and with the epics of the voyagers who probably came from what is now South East Asia and who "fished" (a metaphor for "discovery") out the islands of Polynesia. When the colonial powers began to divide the Pacific, the biggest division they drew was the one in our minds. Unfortunately, it is it the divisions within the mind that often outlast divisions created by empires.

Others within those communities may feel threatened because they might think that certain indigenous traditions are being voided by claiming to be a larger community. However, the basis of being indigenous is the relationship to the land whom are tied with the ancestors. But when you look at the DNA studies, the languages, the plants, and the common traditions throughout the Pacific, it seems that there is a shared whakapapa (genealogy). It is just that perhaps the error of understanding tradition lies not within our kupuna (ancestors/elders) but within ourselves in how we have interpreted these traditions and tried to fit it in with what we were taught through an education system that was bequeathed (or imposed) to us by another foreign power. Therefore by acknowledging such ties across the Pacific and in Madagascar, is it not actually an affirmation of how advanced and skillful the ancestors were as well as showing to the world that we have a more than 4,000 year old continued and continuing existence in these oceans? For Malaysians and perhaps Indonesians, the preference might be to continue to use the terms Melayu or Malay but then Malaysians need to ask themselves deeply whether or not Islam is universal therefore does not need to tied with any ethnicity (agama sejagat vs. agama suku) and whether or not Malaysians themselves are ready to embrace a larger keluarga (family). This does not mean that a Malay in Malaysia should choose between being Malay and being Muslim, but rather, not make Islam compulsory and downgrade the religion itself to a mere legal or ethnic status. Nor should a religion requirement be imposed on other groups. A Malay can be Muslim and Malay without it having to be dictated by government policy. Islam has and is very able to blend its message with indigenous cultures in various Austronesian societies. The Minangkabau in Sumatera (Sumatra) are proof of that.

However, in all of the above mentioned cases, change is not impossible. After all, are we not the same population that settled 1/3 of the surface of the world and created such structures in Borobudur, Nan Mandol, Mu'a, and the mo'ai in Rapa Nui (Easter Island)? We should remove the divisions that kept us as "islanders" and realize we are collectively the heirs to a great and vast civilization.

Article Repost: "Wilhelm von Humboldt’s Study of the Kawi Language: The Proof of the Existence of the Malayan-Polynesian Language Culture"

2010-11-11T05:02:00.004-10:00

Article repost on Humboldt's Study of the Kawi language.

Ed. Note. The author believes that there exist a connection between Austronesian (Malayo-Polynesian) languages which was rejected by Humboldt and by most trained linguists, archaeologists, and anthropologists today. I am repost the article because of the context of Humboldt's original findings.

Wilhelm von Humboldt’s Study of the Kawi Language:
The Proof of the Existence of the Malayan-Polynesian Language Culture

by Muriel Mirak Weissbach

If Wilhelm von Humboldt were alive today, he would be delighted with the discovery of Maui’s inscriptions, and would throw himself into studying it, with every fibre of his being. In a certain sense, the deciphering of these inscriptions, which shows that the Maori language was a common language or part of a language group in Polynesia, itself confirms Humboldt’s own findings. For it was Wilhelm von Humboldt who was the first to rigorously examine the languages of this part of the world, and to establish scientifically that all the languages of the region, from Madagascar to east of Pitcairn Island, were part of one language culture.

The last and greatest work by Humboldt, entitled Über die Kawi-Sprache (On the Kawi Language), deals with this. The work, published posthumously in 1836-39, is prefaced by a lengthy introduction, entitled “Über die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaues und ihren Einfluss auf die geistige Entwicklung des menschengeschlechts,” (in English, “On Language: The Diversity of Human Language-Structure and Its Influence on the Mental Development of Mankind”). This introduction, perhaps his greatest work on the general theory of language, is well-known, having gone through numerous editions, and translations into other languages. But, this is only the introduction! The three volumes of the work that actually apply his theory to the particular case of the Kawi language, have remained a matter for specialists, available only in the reading rooms of libraries. (In one English translation of “On Language,” it is even stated that the planned three volumes never appeared—an outright lie!)

Humboldt’s work opens with the following words:

If we consider their dwelling-place, their mode of government, their history, and above all their language, the peoples of Malayan stock stand in a stranger connection with peoples of different culture than perhaps any other people on earth. They inhabit merely islands and archipelagoes, which are spread so far and wide, however, as to furnish irrefutable testimony of their early skills as navigators. ... If we take together the members of these ethnic groups who deserve to be called Malayan in the narrower sense ... we find these people, to name only points where the linguist encounters adequately studied material, on the Philippines, and there in the most richly developed and individual state of language, on Java, Sumatra, Malacca, and Madagascar. But a large number of incontestable verbal affinities, and even the names of a significant number of islands, give evidence that the isles lying close to these points have the same population too, and that the more strictly Malayan speech-communityextends over that whole area of the South Asiatic Ocean which runs southwards from the Philippines down to the western coasts of New Guinea, and then west about the island chains adjoining the eastern tip of Java, into the waters of Java and Sumatra, up to the strait of Malacca.

Humboldt goes on, to assert that

East of the narrower Malayan community here delineated, from New Zealand to Easter Island, from there northwards to the Sandwich Islands, and again west to the Philippines, there dwells an island population betraying the most unmistakable marks of ancient blood-relationship with the Malayan races. The languages, of which we also have an exact grammatical knowledge of those spoken in New Zealand, Tahiti, the Sandwich Islands, and Tonga, prove the same thing, by a large number of similar words and essential agreements in organic structure.

He also writes that

In many places we find among them fragments of a sacred language now unintelligible to themselves, and the custom, on certain occasions, of ceremoniously reviving antiquated expressions, [which] is evidence, not only of the wealth, age, and depth of the language, but also of attention to the changing designation of objects over time.

Humboldt believed that the people of this region “seem never to have attained to the possession of writing, and thus forgo all the cultivation dependent on this, although they are not lacking in pregnant sagas, penetrating eloquence, and poetry in markedly different styles.” Such literary works must therefore have been recorded in writing at a later time. Humboldt saw these languages not as a degeneration, but as representing the original state of the Malayan group. What he accomplished was to subject the main languages known to comparative analysis, to establish their membership in one language family. As for the ethnic stock, Humboldt specifies that in both the broad areas identified, the people belong to the same stock. “If we enter more accurately into color differences,” he says, they constitute “the more or less light-brown among whites in general.” In addition to this stock, he mentions a group similar to Black Africans, particularly in New Guinea, New Britain, New Ireland, and New Hebrides. Given that the languages of these people had not been recorded, Humboldt could not include them in his study—except for the special case of Madagascar, which will be treated later.

The manner he chose to go about this enormous task, was not to take the vocabularies of all the languages involved, and compare them, as if running them through a computer. Rather, Humboldt seized upon what was an egregious characteristic within the languages, a singularity, which was the very strong Indian influence. A glance at the map [See Figure 1] explains why it would be obvious for people from India to travel to the islands and populate them.

FIGURE I

Yet, as Humboldt saw, this is not uniform throughout the region. The overwhelming Indian influence, not only in language, but also in religion, literature, and customs, he found to have affected the Malayan circle “in the narrower sense,” that is, the Indian archipelago per se. It is here that an alphabetic script was found, and of the Indian type.

The questions posed by the extraordinary Indian influence, for Humboldt, were two: He asked himself “whether ... the whole civilization of the archipelago is entirely of Indian orgin? And whether, also, from a period preceding all literature and the latest and most refined development of speech, there have exitsed connections between Sanskrit and the Malayan languages in the widest sense, that can still be demonstrated in the common elements of speech?” Humboldt’s tendency was to answer the first question negatively, and to assume that there had been “a true and indigenous civilization among the brown race of the archipelago.” He saw no reason to think that “the Malayans should be denied a social civilization of their own creation.”

As to the second question, Humboldt tended to answer in the affirmative, that the Indian-Malayan contact had been ancient and continuing:

Without yet mentioning Tagalic, which incorporates a fair number of Sanskrit words for quite different classes of objects, we also find in the language of Madagascar and in that of the South Sea Islands, right down to the pronoun, sounds and words belonging directly to Sanskrit; and even the stages of sound-change, which can be viewed as a comparative index of the antiquity of mingling, are themselves different in such languages from the narrower Malayan circle, in which, as in Javanese, there is also visible an influence from Indian language and literature that was exerted at a much later date. Now how we are to explain this ... remains, of course, extremely doubtful. ... [H]ere it is enough for me to have drawn attention to an influence of Sanskrit upon the languages of the Malayan stock, which differs essentially from that of the mental cultivation and literature transplanted to them, and seems to belong to a much earlier period and to different relationships among the peoples concerned.

To conduct his research, therefore, Humboldt focussed on that area of greatest Indian influence, which was manifest in the “flowering of the Kawi language, as the most intimate intertwining of Indian and indigenous culture on the island that possessed the earliest and most numerous Indian settlements,” which was the island of Java. Humboldt went on:

Here I shall always be looking primarily to the indigenous element in this linguitsic union, but will take an extended view of it in its entire kinship, and will pursue its development up to the point where I believe I find its character most fully and purely evolved in the Tagalic tongue. In the third book [he concluded], I shall spread myself over the whole archipelago, return to the problems just indicated, and so try to see whether this way, together with that discussed hitherto, may lead to a more correct judgment of the relations among peoples and languages throughout the entire mass of islands.

His method, therefore, was to penetrate to the innermost the Kawi language, which represented the highest expression of the Indian-Sanskrit language cultural influence, but from the standpoint of the “indigenous element,” which Humboldt recognized must be the basis of the identity of the language group as a whole. What he asked himself was, essentially, what is the underlying, indigenous language beneath the Sanskrit influence? What relationship does it bear to the languages in the strictly Malayan group, and, then, what is their relationship to all the languages of the vast island world?

From its very name, the Kawi language betrays its deep debt to Sanskrit (Skr.). Derived from the root ku,which means “to sound,” or “resound,” in Sanskrit it means “poet,” and, in derived forms, a “wise, educated man.” The generic name given to the syllabic meter in Kawi poetry, is sekar kawi, which means “flowers of the language,” and is derived from the Skr. sekhara, “garland”. Sekar, “flower,” is the usual expression for poetry. And in the “Brata Yuddha,” the poem which Humboldt used as the basis for his study of the Kawi language, the related word kawindhra means “a good singer.” The “Brata Yuddha” itself, which means “war [from Skr. Yudha] of the ancestors of Bharata,” is inspired by the great Indian epic poem Mahabharata (which contains the “Bhagavad Gita”). The names of the main characters are the same, and it recounts the process of the war in seven battles. It is just one example of the way in which Kawi culture assimilated the Indian religious culture, which is also evident in its great architecture.

The Indian influence in the Kawi language and culture is also manifest in the characteristic method of counting years in dates, by using words for numbers, a method known as “Chandhra Sangkala.” (Chandra sangkala is from Sanskrit, with the second term meaning “collection, quantity, addition,” from the root kal,“to count,” and the first element meaning, “method”; thus, “counting according to the method.”) For example, to signify the date 1021, the Sanskrit expression would be sasipakshakhaike. The syllables are read left to right, but they refer to the date read from right to left. Thus, 1 is expressed by sasin, which means “moon.” There is only one moon, therefore the correspondance. Paksha means wings, and stands for 2, for obvious reasons. The other syllables, kha and eka, are number words for 0 and 1, respectively.

When this usage was taken over in the Kawi language, it was in a certain sense further developed, such that not only syllables strung together stood for the date, but the syllables constituted a phrase, which had to do with what the date recorded. For example, there is the story of a Muslim king who had travelled to Java, in hopes of converting the King of Majapahit, to whom he had promised his daughter, to Islam. The enterprise ran into difficulties, many of the entourage fell ill and died, and his daughter herself became very sick. The king prayed to the Almighty, that, if the venture were destined to succeed, his daughter should be saved, and if not, not. His daughter died in the year 1313, and the date was recorded as follows:

Kaya	wulan	putir	iku
3	1	3	1

Kaya means “fire,” which, as in Sanskrit (agni) stands for 3. Wulan is the Javanese word for “moon,” again for 1. Putri is Sanskrit for “daughter of the prince,” and stands for 3, for reasons which even Humboldt could not fathom. Finally iku or hiku, is the Javanese pronoun for a distant person (“she, over there”), and corresponds to 1. Thus the phrase would be translated “Like unto the moon was that princess,” in Humboldt’s rendition. The numbers would be 3131, read from right to left, the date 1313.

Another, more obvious example, denotes the legendary date 1400, when the state of Majapahit was conquered by Muslims. This date is rendered as follows:

Sirna	ilang	kirti-ning	bumi
0	0	4	1

Sirna is the Sanskrit passive particle from the verb sri, sirna, meaning “destroyed,” and it therefore corresponds to nothing, 0. Ilang or hilang is Javanese for the same thing, “lost,” and also equals 0. Kirti-ning means “well-water” and in Sanskrit means also “fame.” The original root of the word is kri, which means “flow, bubble,” like water or fame. The Sanskrit and Javanese words for “work,” something that has been created, also apply, from the root kri (whence our verb “create”). In Java, the word karte, was used to denote a state with an orderly administration, that is, where a state of quiet and peace reigns. It is used to designate 4, from its meaning as “water,” since there are four oceans in the world. Finally, bumi,corresponding to Skr. bhumi, means “earth,” or “world” (in extended sense, “land”), of which there is only one. Thus the phrase would read, “Lost and gone is the work [pride] of the land,” certainly an appropriate way of characterizing the event.

The penetration of Sanskrit into “Javanese”—what must have been the language of the people of Java when the Indian settlers arrived—goes far deeper, however. As Humboldt shows through an incredibly thorough examination of vocabulary, word-formation, and grammar, the influence is determining. The following examples make the point.

In the process of the creation of Kawi, Sanskrit words entered the Javanese language, almost always in the form of a substantive, specifically in the nominative case singular, which were then transformed, according to the Javanese laws of word-formation, into verbs, adjectives, etc. Sanskrit verbs or roots never enter the langauge as such, but only in a nominative form. Thus, for example, Skr. bhukti (which refers to the act of eating) becomes b-in-ukti, or, with consonant shifts, ma-mukti; dwija (“bird”) becomes dwija, ordhwijangga, through duplication, a process often used for poetical reasons, to lengthen the syllables. Thus also rana (“battle”), which becomes rana, or ranangga, or rananggana, etc. The plural in Kawi is formed often by repetition, thus Skr. wira, for “warrior,” becomes wira wira, “warriors.”

As for the verb, it is formed from the Sanskrit nominative, in various ways. For instance, the syllable um is inserted right before the initial consonant, or after the initial vowel: thus, the noun tiba, meaning “fall,” becomes a verb, “to fall,” as tumiba; lampah, “trip,” becomes a verb, “to walk,” as lumampah. Or, the verb can be distinguished from the noun, through a different initial consonant: thus, neda is “to eat,” whereas teda is “food”; nulis, “to write,” and tulis, “writing”; nitik, “to prove,” and titik, “proof.”

As a result of the emphasis on the noun or substantive form, verbal expressions are often in the passive voice. For instance, one would say literally, “my seeing was the star,” to indicate, “I saw the star.” The passive is formed through the prefix ka-. Since, in Kawi, there is no inflexion to the verb, as opposed to Sanskrit’s highly developed inflectional system, the meaning of a sentence must be grasped through word order and context. However, Kawi does have tense distinction, with a past, present, and future, as well as some differentiation of moods, especially the imperative and subjunctive. The following gives an idea of how difficult it may be to figure out how a sentence should be read.

Thus prayer his to three-world be spoken victory in battle

This actually means:

Thus was his prayer spoken to the three worlds, for victory in the battle.

If there is difficulty in grasping the sense, owing to the row of words without grammatical indicators, there is, on the other hand, as Humboldt emphasizes, a “noble brevity and a stronger impact of the poetical images which follow one another immediately.”

Wilhelm von Humboldt concludes from his study of Kawi, that it was “an older form of the Javanese national language, which however, in the elaboration of scientific knowledge transplanted there from India, assimilated an indeterminable number of pure Sanskrit words, and thereby, as well as owing to the peculiarity of its exclusively poetical diction, became a closed form of speech, deviating from the usual form of speech.” It was, however, the language of the educated population, which gradually fell out of use, following the emigration of the last Brahmins out of Majapahit to Bali, in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth centuries.

As to the time frame, when the Indian influence was first introduced to Java, Humboldt had no clear records. The annals of Java begin with the era of Ari Saka, who was reputed to have brought the era from India, in the year A.C.E. 74 or 78. This coincides with the period of the Brahmin figure named Tritresta, who was said to have built the first state on Java, after it had been taken under the rule of Vishnu. The massive impact of Sanskrit on the language, greater than that on any other language in the Malayan group, led Humboldt to conclude that the Indian colonists who settled there must have used Sanskrit as their living, spoken language, which places the settlement far back in time.

The dating of the “Brata Yuddha” is also controversial; one version puts it at A.C.E. 706, another, at A.C.E. 1079. The alphabet in use for Kawi must have been introduced by the Indians, and taken up by other languages as well, like the Biscaya and Tagalic. This alphabet, Humboldt takes to be the same as modern Javanese, but written in different signs, with numerous sounds in common with Sanskrit. However, it is not simply the Sanskrit alphabet, becase it has many fewer consonants, lacking the entire array of aspirated consonants, for example. Whether or not a pre-Kawi alphabet for Javanese existed was not known to Humboldt, but he did not exclude it.

The question to be raised at this point is, what is Javanese? If one puts to one side all the Sanskrit elements of Kawi, and examines the remainder of the language, which Humboldt called the non-Sanskrit Kawi, would it be the same as modern Javanese? To answer this question, and the related one—what is the entire Malayan language group, and what are its relations to the other great language groups of the world?—Humboldt broadened his study, to cover all those languages which were known from the region.

He was the first to do this, and it was not only a monumental task philologically: it also constituted a direct challenge to the language studies that had been conducted up to that point. Significantly, prior to Humboldt’s efforts, the only studies that existed on the Kawi language, were those of British and Dutch colonial agents. The first, Sir Thomas Stamford Bingley Raffles (1721-1826), was an English East India administrator and Lieutenant governor of Java from 1811-1815. He is credited with having secured Singapore for the East India Company in 1819. John Crawfurd was resident at the court of the Sultan on Java, and the author of a History of the Indian Archipelago (1820). It was Raffles’s 1817 History of Java, and Crawfurd’s work, which provided Humboldt basic information on Java, as well as texts of the “Brata Yuddha” poem.

Needless to say, Raffles’s approach was not disinterested. His leading aim appears to have been to falsify the record, especially to deny the possible existence of an independent Javanese civilization and language. He considered the Kawi language to be an artificial idiom used by a priest caste, essentially a dead language used only ritually. The version of the “Brata Yuddha” which he made available, contained only 139 of the original 719 four-line stanzas. Humboldt, eager to have a better version, finally got one from Crawfurd, who had generously added 19 stanzas. Raffles, it appears, had decided to omit anything which he found objectionable, which was clearly a lot.

But, in addition to such obvious manipulations, both Raffles and Crawfurd, in Humboldt’s view, had committed ghastly errors of method. Most importantly, they had neglected to consider languages from the standpoint of the entire language area in question, and limited themselves to very small areas. Crawfurd, in his history, considered only the area from Sumatra to New Guinea, and from 11° to 19° latititude, as the area of Indian influence. Most important, Humboldt writes, is the fact that Crawfurd thus ignores the basic demographic facts of the region: that, in the small area he had carved out for study, there lived side by side black-skinned people with curly hair and whites with straight hair, whereas the blacks no longer lived in Java and Sumatra. Furthemore, on Madagascar, there lived at the time of these studies blacks of African extraction, as well as Malayans and Arabs together, and they all spoke the exact same language. As Humboldt stressed, this extraordinary fact meant that the common language they shared must go very far back in antiquity, since it had effectively replaced any other languages which would have been specific to the black African population. On these grounds alone, in Humboldt’s view, it is absolutely outrageous to leave Madagascar out of the area of study.

Furthermore, he complains, the “English scholars” utterly ignore the Tagalic language, which lies in the area. (Another Briton, William Marsden, had acknowledged the importance of Tagalic, but had, said Humboldt, nonetheless excluded it from his word analysis in the Archaeologia Britannica.) For Humboldt, on the other hand, the Tagalic language was of absolutely crucial importance, because (1) it shows a very broad agreement with Malaysian; (2) of all the languages in the group, it has the richest grammatical development, such that the grammars of the others can be understand only from this standpoint—just as Greek can be best understood from the standpoint of Sanskrit; (3) neither Arabic nor Indian religion or literature have altered Tagalic’s original color; and (4) there is no other language of the group which has so many research aids, like dictionaries and grammars, largely thanks to the work of Spanish missionaries.

Perhaps the English scholars did not want to discover the truth about the languages and the peoples of the great ocean civilization; Humboldt, however, did. In fact, he even rejected the name Polynesian to designate this category, on the grounds that it was geographical and limited, and preferred to it the term Malaysian, meaning not only the language culture, but the people.

The linguistic material that Humboldt considered was vast. He examined vocabulary, which showed “not only that these peoples designed many concepts with the same terms, but that they also took the same route to shaping the language, creating words with the same sounds according to the same laws, and that they possess therefore concrete grammatical forms, borrowed from one another.” But he went beyond vocabulary, since “[o]ne cannot consider languages as an aggregate of words. Each is a system, whereby sound is linked to thought. The business of the language researcher is to find the key to this system.”

In this spirit, Humboldt assembled a list of over one hundred words, from Malaysian (proper, i.e. as spoken in Malacca), Bugi, Madecassian (or Malagasy), Tagalic, and the Polynesian languages: Tonga, New Zealand, Tahiti, and Hawaiian. The comparative tables, completed by his student Buschmann, show striking similarities, as the following few examples demonstrate. (The large number of examples for Madecassian derive from the fact that several sources were consulted, including dictionaries and the translation of the Holy Scriptures):

TABLE 1. Comparison of vocabulary words within the Malayan-Polynesian language family.

	Mal.	Jav.	Bugi	Mad.	Tag.	Tonga	N.Z.	Tah.	Haw.

to die	mati	mati pati (death)	mate mate	matte matte fatte matē fate (death) mattē	matay matay patay (death)	mate	mate	māte	make

fruit	būah	woh	buwa	voa voha voua	bongaa auoy	taon	tow		makahiki

year	tāun	tahun	taung	taoune taun tau taonne	taon	tow			makahiki

fire	āpi	hapi genni gni Kr. latu K. hapuyi, bahning	api	afou af affe mottē langourou	apuy	afi	ahi ai	auahi	ahi
	(Kr. designates the elevated language, and K. stands for Kawi.)

But, not only are the words similar. Grammatically, the pronoun for the first person singular, I, is also the same: New Zealand ahau, Mad. ahe, ahy; the /h/ sound is transformed in the other languages (except Tahiti) into its corresponding hard sound, in gua, co, aco, ku, aku, very much in the same way that Latinego is constructed from Skr. aham, or in the way that English “I,” differs from German “ich” or “ik.” Also, in the third person singular, there is an extraordinary similarity, especially in the possessive form, “his”: Mad. ny mpiana’ny, which means “his young ones”; Mal. kapala-nia, meaning “his head”; Tag. ang yna-niya, meaning “his mother”; Tah. to’na ahu, “his dress”; NZ. tônatoki, “his axe”; Tong. ana falle, “his house.”

The relationship among these languages is also transparent in number; and so on and so forth, for the process of word-formation, syntax, and other aspects of the language.

In the final part of his monumental study, Humboldt moved yet farther eastward, to examine the languages of the South Sea Islands [See Figure 2] And, here again, by comparing the basic vocabulary, the laws of grammar and syntax, he was able to demonstrate the nature and degree of relationship among them, as well as between the eastern and western branches of the Malayan group.

The method Humboldt applied is truly wonderful, because he focussed on identifying the crucial example to prove the general law. In the case of the verbal particles, Humboldt himself says that “this discovery is one of the most important discoveries that I have made in my striving to present the whole Malayan language group as a unity of system and sounds, and would by itself suffice to justify this work of mine and its tendency.” This discovery was to establish the link between the two branches.

The word Humboldt is referring to is an adverb of time; if this verbal particle functions as an adverb of time, he says, then it is certain that other verbal particles will also have that function. “The Mal. juga andjua, ... is an adverb of very varied and complicated meaning, often meaning ‘empty,’ this means one can hardly attribute a meaning to it.” However, he goes on, “in the meaning of ‘still,’ it functions as the sign of the present and imperfect tenses.” The single example he gives for this is a phrase which means: “a huge blustering rose up in the sea, such that the little ship was covered with waves.” The original is tetapi iya tidor juga. Another example given is tiada juga, meaning “not yet,” which had the function of placing the verb in the perfect tense (as in English, “it has not yet happened”). Another example shows it as the sign for the pluperfect, in the meaning of “already” (as in English, “it had already occurred”). Humboldt notes a curious fact, which is, that the verbal particle always appears after the word it modifies in the western branch of Malayan, and always comes before the word, in the eastern branch. Humboldt draws up a chart showing the overview of the word for the whole language family.

TABLE 1I. Overview of the verbal particle of time for the entire Malayan-Polynesian language family, as presented in “On the Kawi Language.”

		Adverb	Verbal Particle		Pronoun
Mal	juga jua	“also” 2. “only, along” 3. “so” 4. “however; moreover” 5. “still” 6. “already” (lama juga already long since”) “only” 2.“so” 3. “still”	juga	sign of present imperfect, perfect, pluperfect	itu juga “the same” (m) sama and sama juga “the same” (m)

Kawi	juga	“only”

Jav.	huga	“also” 2. “only” 3. “so” 4. “yet, however”			hiyahika huga “the same” (m) (hiyahika “this one”)

Mad.	coua	“also” 2. “yet” 3. “more” (davantage, plusque cela)			isicoua “the same” (n) [isi, “this one” (m.)] zanicoua “the same” (m. & n.)

Tonga	gua loa	“before, long ago	gua	sign of present sometime of preterite

N.Z.			koa	sign of perfect

Tah.			ua	sign of present preterite, future of imperfect conj	taua, ana “this one” (m)

Haw.			ua	sign of present, imperfect,perfect	ua “this one” (m)

Having reached this point, Humboldt takes one further crucial step, and considers the entire group which he has established as the Malay family, in comparison with, first, the Chinese language, and then, with the native languages of America. With Chinese, the group has much in common: The South Sea Islands languages have the habit of forming different words by making very slight sound changes, almost imperceptible to the untrained ear. And, “these languages recall the Chinese, in that the words which indicate a grammatical relationship, follow or precede the expression of the concept separately from it, such that they, more than the other languages, could be written in a script similar to Chinese.”

In his detailed analysis of three languages in the South Sea Island group (Tonga, New Zealand, and Tahiti), Humboldt identified several characteristics which they shared with Chinese, such that they could be written in Chinese characters. These are: that each word which can be considered by itself, exists in the word order by itself, including words which indicate a grammatical relation; that none of these words undergoes any changes in the context of the phrase; and, that the grammatical words do not fuse with others.

(See box on Humboldt’s Discovery Today)

* In this connection, Humboldt also noted the findings in Kentucky and Tennessee, of ancient graves showing burial practices similar to those in the Sandwich, Caroline, and Fiji Islands, and the conclusion drawn by one Hr. Mitchell, that colonists had arrived there from the Malaysian-Pacific region.

By the same token, he identified several aspects which they shared with American languages, but specified that the overall grammatical construction of the two groups had very significant differences. One key feature of American languages is their use of the first person plural pronoun, “we,” in both the exclusive and the inclusive form: one says either “we” (and you) or “we” (without you). This characteristic, which had been thought unique to America, Humboldt showed to be shared by the languages in the Malayan group, those in Malaysia proper, as well as in the Philippines and Polynesia.*

Humboldt was very clear about how such phenomena came into being in the course of human history: On the one hand, he saw the ocean, not as a hindrance, but as a connecting factor among peoples. On the other, he recognized that when such contacts occurred, as between the Indian civilization and the island populations, “the predominance of a civilization so ancient and so cultivated in every branch of human activity as that of India was bound to attract to it nations of an alert and lively sensitivity. This was more a moral change,” he writes, “however, than a political one,” and he refers to the way Hinduism “struck roots among the Malaysian people,” showing “that as a spiritual force, it again excited the mind, set the imagination to work and became powerful through the impression wrought upon the admiration of peoples capable of development.”

Considering this, what would Wilhelm von Humboldt have said, had he seen the cave drawings from Santiago de Chile, and those of his beloved Java, and those of Pitcairn Island? Upon hearing that the name of the captain of the ship was Rata, he most certainly would have exclaimed, “Aha! You know, that is fascinating! Because the name Ratu, was used as the word for ‘king’ or ‘prince’ in Javanese.” As he noted, “It was so explicitly treated as a Javanese word that it developed forms with indigenous sound changes and form changes, like ngratu, meaning ‘to recognize or acknowledge someone as king,’ and ngratonni, which meant ‘to govern, to rule.’ ” The same word, Humboldt pointed out, is found in Malaysian proper, as ratu, in Sundanese on Madura and Bali, and also in Tagalic as dato. Not only, but there are legends in Polynesia, about the white god who created the place, named Maui.

Humboldt would have been intrigued by the idea, that Egyptians had travelled through the ocean islands and left their inscriptions everywhere. He, too, in his great work, had cited “obscure reports” about Egyptians who had been banished or otherwise left their homeland for the islands in the eastern oceans.

But, what would have thrilled him the most, is the idea that there was indeed one language, Maori, which was documented at least as early as the Third century B.C.E. from the northern coasts of Africa, to Java and eastwards as far as Pitcairn Island. Maori, still spoken today on New Zealand, is the modern form, indeed very different, but the same language genealogically, as the ancient Maori in which Rata and Maui wrote their inscriptions. Whether the roots of Maori were planted into the soil of the ocean islands at the time of the Egyptian expedition, or much earlier, the fact is, that Maori is one of the dialects of the vast language group of so-called Malayo-Polynesian, which Humboldt named the Malayan family.

From the archaeological and historical records which have emerged since Humboldt’s time, it is probable that the islands of Malaysia and Polynesia were populated by waves of settlers from India and Egypt, going back to as early as the Third millennium B.C.E. in the case of India, and the Second millennium B.C.E. in the case of Egypt. The records of gold mining conducted on the island of Sumatra in the Second millennium B.C.E. point to probable Egyptian explorers. Most probably, it was settlers of Dravidian stock from India, who may have been the dark-skinned people referred to in the early records of the islands; some affinities of the Dravidian languages with those of Papua New Guniea, have been researched. Following the Dravidians, who went to the islands, or stayed in southern India, came the Aryans of Sanskrit language culture, who had entered India from Central Asia, and thence, travelled on to the islands. Thus, the continuing waves of settlements from India, which Humboldt hypothesized, as well as from Egypt, would explain what Humboldt found: the existence of a deep layer of Sanskrit in the Malayan family, even beneath the Sanskrit assimilated in the Kawi language. Furthermore, such waves of migration from Egypt, would explain the similarities which become manifest in the inscriptions by Maui, comparable to those in Libya and other sites in northern Africa.

Most unfortunately, Wilhelm von Humboldt died in 1835. Just six years later, in 1841, one of his greatest students, Franz Bopp, published a work entitled Über die Verwandschaft der malayisch-polynesischen Sprachen mit den indisch-europäischen (On the Kinship of the Malayan-Polynesian Language to the Indo-European), a work for which he came under attack. Bopp was the genius who had virtually invented the science of comparative philology (See Box on Philology) with his ground-breaking work on the conjugations systems of Indo-European languages. (On the System of Conjugations of the Sanskrit Language in Comparison to those of the Greek, Latin, Persian, and German Languages).

Then, in his 1841 work, Bopp had dared to assert an affinity between those languages which Humboldt had reunited into one family, and the Indo-European group (of Sanskrit, Persian, Greek, Germanic, Italic, etc.). Bopp was thus undertaking the task which Humboldt did not live long enough to tackle, to examine the organic relationship between Sanskrit, as primary among Indo-European, and the Malayan family. And, in 1890, another follower of Humboldt’s, Carl Abel, went so far as to propose a relationship between ancient Egyptian and Indo-European, which, in light of Maui’s inscriptions, is rich with implications.

Abel recounts in a famous lecture he delivered presenting his findings, that, if the Nineteenth-century European classicists—those dedicated to the study of Greek and Latin, etc.—had been destabilized by the discovery of the relationship of the classical tongues to an ancient Indian language, Sanskrit, which was a far older, more developed and perhaps actually parent tongue to theirs—(a discovery universally accepted!)—it was partially out of a sense of cultural superiority. The “Hellenists and Latinists,” he said, “had always impatiently borne their dark-skinned cousinship,” and balked at the idea that everything had to be explained from the standpoint of Sanskrit grammar. Now, continued Abel, “After such precedents, it was not the least to be wondered at, that when the Egyptian began to ask for admission on its own behalf into the Indo-European circle, the same cold reception was repeated which Sanskrit originally experienced” (speech to the Ninth Congress of Orientalists, London, 1891).

Philological study, at least in the tradition of the great minds like Humboldt, Bopp, Grimm, Abel, and others, has never been an academic pursuit, to win recognition or power. It has been a passionate endeavor, to plumb the depths of the human mind, in its uniquely human capacity to create language, and to trace out the process through which human populations have moved about the earth, to populate and develop it, in fruitful communication with one another. Humboldt understood philology in this vein, as contributing to the process of the perfection of mankind, as he wrote in On the Kawi Language:

If there is one idea which is visible in all of history in ever more extended value, if ever one [idea] proves the frequently contested, but even more frequently misunderstood, perfection of the entire species, then is it the idea of humanity, the striving to lift the limits which prejudices and one-sided views of all types place hostilely between men, and to treat humanity as a whole, without regard to religion, nation and skin color, as one great, closely fraternal group, one existing whole, for the achievement of one aim, of the free development of internal strength. ...
Language enclasps more than anything else in men, the whole species. ...

Philology: The Science of Language and History

What manifestation of human activity best expresses the uniqueness of man, as distinct from all other species? What activity, at the same time, demonstrates the multiplicity of human society, diverse cultures developed by different human civilizations? How is it possible to reconcile the vast multiplicity in the world and throughout history, of such diverse cultures as the Chinese and the Greek, showing them to be two manifestations of the same human spirit?

These are questions which the science of philology, the study of languages in their historical development, answers. Wilhelm von Humboldt was the founder of the the Nineteenth century German school of philology, the greatest school of philology the world has ever known. Other great names associated with Humboldt and this school include Franz Bopp, Rasmus Rask, and Jacob Grimm.

Wilhelm von Humboldt, who was a close collaborator of Germany’s national poet, Friedrich Schiller, approached the study of language from the standpoint of the humanist spirit which pervaded all his work: seeing in man the highest product of creation, Humboldt identified in language the most universal expression of the capacities of the human mind. To understand how man conceptualizes the universe, and how man organizes social relations, one must, Humboldt realized, examine the way in which man develops language. Through his study of numerous languages—well over fifty, ranging from Basque, to the Native American languages, from Sanskrit to Chinese—Humboldt succeeded in demonstrating the universal principles of language in general.

While emphasizing the universal principles, whose existence is manifested in the fact that any language can be translated into any other, Humboldt focussed on the particular characteristics of a language, in order to identify its specifically national character. Since language is the most immediate form of activity which man invents to communicate with others, and to investigate the universe, then the form in which a people shapes its language most immediately expresses the national character of that people. Hence, in Humboldt’s work it becomes clear that language provides the key to the character of the nation.

In Humdoldt’s view, language was not a fixed system, as some modern linguists might think. Language is a living organism, a form of energy, which changes, develops, and also in some cases, degenerates, in the course of a people’s evolution. The achievements of a language, such as Greek in the Classical period, denote the more general progress of that people and culture; thus, for Humboldt, the teaching of Classical Greek and the study of Greek culture, must be the means through which to develop the mind. It was Humboldt’s extraordinary education program, which he elaborated and introduced in Prussia, based largely on the study of Classical languages, to shape the character of the student, which laid the basis for the flowering of science and culture in Germany, in Europe, and even in the U.S., in the Nineteenth century.

In looking at the multiplicity of language, Humboldt used a comparative approach, to see how different peoples succeeded in solving the same task, of expressing concepts. At the same time, the comparative approach made it possible to establish scientifically the relationship among different languages and therefore, historically, among different peoples. The groudbreaking work in this direction was done by a collaborator of Humboldt’s, Franz Bopp, who discovered the existence of the Indo-European language group. Bopp had compared the verbal systems of languages, including the Sanskrit of ancient India, Classical Greek and Latin, and various Germanic languages, among others. By showing that such apparently distant languages had verbal systems, conjugations, which obeyed the same laws—and hence, shared the same “geometrical” structure—Bopp showed that the languages must have been related also in their historical development.

Other philologists, among them Jacob Grimm, had studied the way in which, through time, certain sound differences in words of distant languages, which have the same meaning, can come about. By comparing groups of roots in different languages, which are used to designate the same actions or things, one can discover the laws of change in sound. For example, if in Sanskrit the word for “father” is “pitr,” and the word for “father” in Germanic, is “Vater” (modern English “father”), and if such examples can be shown to exist consistently, then it appears that the “p” sound in Sanskrit corresponds to the “f” sound (spelled v) in Germanic, and so forth.

The study of philology as conducted by Humboldt, was not an academic exercise, but a passionate search to discover the laws governing the creative processes of the human mind. For Humboldt, there was nothing more joyful than to discover and learn a new language. In 1803, he wrote, “The internal, mysterious, wonderful coherence of all languages, but above all the extreme pleasure of entering with each new language into a new mode of thinking and feeling, exerts an infinite attraction on me.”

—Muriel Mirak Weissbach

Humboldt’s Discovery Today

The following excerpt from a modern linguist shows the long-term impact of Humboldt’s groundbreaking “On the Kawi Language,” published in 1836-1839. The implications for the even earlier development of man’s maritime culture have not been pursued by this contemporary author, however.

The Austric language family [Malayan-Polynesian-Ed.] of Southeast Asia consists of four sub-families; Austoasiatic, Miao-Yao. Daic, and Austonesian, the last two of which appear to be closest to each other....Austonesian languages are found on Taiwan, which is probably the original homeland of the family, but also on islands throughout the Pacific Ocean, and even on Madagascar, in the Indian Ocean close to Africa...About 6,000 years ago [populations from China or Southeast Asia] crossed the Strait of Formosa (now the Taiwan Strait) and became the first inhabitants of Taiwan. And from Taiwan these shipbuilding agriculturalists spread first southward to the Philippines, and then eastward and westward throughout most of Oceania. The archeological record indicates that the northern Philippines were reached by 5,000 B.P. , and 500 hears later these migrants had spread as far south as Java and Timor, as far west as Malaysia, and eastward to the southern coast of New Guinea. By around 3,200 B.P. the expansion had reached Madagascar, far to the west, and had spread as far east as Samoa, in the central Pacific, and the Mariana Islands and Guam, in Micronesia. During the next millennium the expansion spread to encompass the remainder of Micronesia. The final step in this vast human dispersal was the occupation of the Polynesian islands; by A.C.E. 400 the Hawaiian Islands and Easter Island—the most northern and eastern islands of Polynesia—had been occupied; while New Zealand—the most southern island group in Polynesia—was not reached until around A.C.E. 800.This bare-bones account is based on the archaeological record, as worked out by the English archaeologist Peter Bellwood (1991) and others, and of necessity presents little more than a relative chronology of one of the broadest dispersals in human prehistory. Unmentioned are the extraordinary navigational skills these peoples developed, and the remarkable boats they constructed to facilitate transoceanic voyages across hundreds, even thousands, of miles of open water.

—from Merritt Ruhlen,
The Origin of Language:
Tracing the Evolution of the
Mother Tongue, 1994

Iā ʻOe e ka Lā: Around the World with King Kalākaua Part 1

2010-11-03T00:10:00.010-10:00

Iā ʻOe e ka Lā: Around the World with King Kalākaua

[This is Part One of an essay I wrote and which was originally published in the O'iwi Native Hawaiian Literary Journal V. 2. I'm posting this part since this deals with a forgotten part of the history of the Pan-Malayan Movement and therefore is a precursor to this Austronesianist blog. "Iā ʻOe e ka Lā" means "To You the Sun"]

Honolulu 1881. The smoky salons of the city are filled with rumors about King Kalākaua's next course of action. Over the past couple of months, the King had fought several political battles with the white business community, in particular over his right to appoint a cabinet of his choice. But now that he had survived these attacks, many were wondering what he would do next. It was always rather hard to tell what the King might do. Like his canoe-voyaging Polynesian ancestors before him, he had an adventurous spirit coupled with an idealistic, romantic, inquisitive, nationalistic, and flamboyant mind and soul. Kalākaua never ceased to surprise his political rivals. After months of suspense, the King announced to the legislature: "Now that my troubles are over, I mean to take a trip AROUND THE WORLD (Dougherty 1992:147)".

Indeed the King had had much to worry about. Since the day of his election in 1874, Honolulu had become a divided community. Divided among race. Divided among class. Divided among religion. But the one unifying symbol was the monarchy, though each section of Honolulu had a different idea of how much of a symbol the monarchy should be. King Kalākaua had gained a throne shaken by the passing of the Kamehameha dynasty, which the native Hawaiian people looked upon with nostalgia and adoration. Kalākaua also became the head of a monarchy that the small but wealthy American community in the islands viewed as headed by someone between the oppressive English King George III of the American Revolution and the savages who had killed Captain James Cook. Furthermore, King Kalākaua's prestige had been damaged by the outrage many native Hawaiians felt when the National Legislature elected him as sovereign over the popular Queen Emma.

To add to this tapa cloth of troubles, his people, the native Hawaiian people, already decimated by foreign diseases, were continuing to die out as foreigners increased in population and political force throughout the island kingdom. Having lived through the British takeover of the islands in 1843, the King did not want to see a foreign flag fly above his own Hawaiian flag ever again. Kalākaua needed to rehabilitate his people and ensure the independence of his country.

But how?

He decided that he would visit the exotic countries of the East, handpick people he felt were culturally compatible with his native Hawaiian people, and bring them to his realm. In this manner, the King felt that introducing more tolerant peoples to his kingdom would counterbalance the American Calvinist missionaries and their descendants, make Hawaiʻi a multi-ethnic nation, and thereby create a larger population loyal to Hawaiʻi and the Hawaiian people. In a speech to the legislature before departing the King said:

Around this table are gathered people

of many nations. In common with my

predecessors, I desire the best welfare of

all who gather under our flag in my

dominions, and I believe that you who

come from other lands, bringing with

you the wealth, enterprise and intelli-

gence of those lands, sympathize with

me in my desire to protect my native

Hawaiian people, and strengthen my

nation.

To do this we must work in harmony

under the Constitution and Laws, and

recognize cheerfully the fact that

Hawaii as one of the family of nations

must be governed in accordance with

the ideas which control Constitutional

Governments.

We have many difficult questions to

settle out of our peculiar situation, they

demand the best statesmanship and

patient investigation. I am in hopes,

while absent, to gather some ideas

which shall aid in their solution.

If there have been mistakes in the past,

let us profit by the lessons of experience,

and with honesty of purpose let us press

on to a future which I trust may be

bright with prosperity and hopefulness.

(Kuykendall 1967:228)

"Home" for many of the peoples of the Asia-Pacific region had become colonies of some faraway Western nation or, as in Japan and China, were facing tremendous cultural revolutions. Even European countries were facing internal problems, where commoners had few civil rights. What if the King could make these peoples see Hawaiʻi as a refuge and, furthermore, the Hawaiian monarch as more benevolent and democratic than their own rulers? That could give the Crown more political leverage and popularity. Still one further advantage: If native Hawaiians married these Asiatic peoples, might not their offspring inherit an immunity to the diseases that were killing off their full-blood Hawaiian relatives? The intermixing could create a new Hawaiian race that would be strong enough to maintain Hawaiʻi's nationhood in the face of foreign invasion. The

King bluntly remarked to Colonel ʻIaukea, then acting Secretary of Foreign Affairs, that one ofthe goals of his trip was, in ʻIaukea's words, "...to introduce British subjects and other nationalities to balance the predominant influence of the Americans, who by reason of the preponderance of United States interests in business were secretly working for the overthrow of the Monarchy (Iaukea 1988:43)", though this was not known beyond court circles.

The largely European and American plantation owners, on the other hand, saw an advantage to themselves: since native Hawaiians were dying off, more workers were needed to tend the canefields. More labor meant more capital, more capital meant more production, which in turn meant that they could afford their homes in Mānoa and Nuʻuanu Valleys and their children's tuition to Punahou School and Oʻahu College, and to universities in the United States. After all, the King was already noted for his regal ease with dignitaries. Why not send him to dazzle them, thereby hopefully securing a favorable treaty that would bring in more laborers? This would also give the plantation owners a chance to get rid of the King for a couple of months and to try to favorably influence the next in line for the throne, Kalākaua's sister Princess Liliʻuokalani. It was a win-win situation for everyone.

Some of the more stingy Calvinist government officials (descendants of the first American missionaries to Hawaiʻi) saw the trip as expensive and extravagant, two words that would be used critically against Kalākaua throughout his reign. To appease these factions, the King selected two men closely tied to the missionary community to accompany him on his trip, Attorney General William Nevins Armstrong (who would proclaim himself "Minister of State" for this occasion) and Chamberlain Charles H. Judd.

The famed prophet and high chiefess Nāhinu of Kauaʻ,iwho was the cousin of Kalākaua's Queen, Kapiʻolani, wrote a new chant to wish Kalākaua success and happiness in his journey and performed it for him. It was called Iā ʻOe E Ka Lā E ʻAlohi Nei:

Iā ʻoe e ka lā e ʻalohi nei

Ma nā welelau o ka honua.

Hōʻike aʻe ʻoe i kou nani,

I ka mālamalama ʻoi kelakela.

Nāu i noiʻi nowelo aku

Pau nā pali paʻa i ka ʻike ʻia.

ʻIke ʻoe i ka nani o Himela

Ka hene waiʻolu lawe mālie

Mauna i lohia me ke onaona,

Kaulana ē ka nani me ke kiʻekiʻe.

Kiʻekiʻe ʻo Kalani noho mai i luna.

Nāu i ʻaʻe nā kapu o Kahiki.

Hehihehi kū ana i ka huku ʻale

I ke kai hālaʻi lana mālie.

Kiʻina ʻia aku nā pae moku,

I hoa kuilima nou e Kalani.

Ma ia mau alanui malihini

Āu i ʻōlali hoʻokahi ai.

ʻO ka lama o ke ao kou kōkua,

Hōkūloa nō kou alakaʻi.

Lilo i mea ʻole nā ʻenemi,

Lehelehe ʻeuʻeu hana loko ʻino.

He ola ʻo Kalani a mau aku,

A kau i ke ao mālamalama.

Haʻina ʻia mai ana ka puana

No Kalākaua nō he inoa.

To you, O sun shining down

Throughout the ends of the world.

Show forth your beauty,

The greatest of all lights.

It is you who delve and seek

Till the solid cliffs yield their secrets.

You'll see the beauty of the Himalayas,

The gentle slopes as you pass by,

A mountain rich with fragrance,

Famed for its beauty and height.

High above sits my royal chief,

You who tread the sacred places of

Kahiki,

Treading on the rising billows

And over the calm, tranquil sea.

Reach out to the other lands,

For companions to go hand in hand

with you,

Over those unfamiliar trails

That you undertake to walk alone.

The light of the day shall be your help,

The morning star your guide,

That your enemies be turned to naught,

The heartless ones with jabbering

mouths.

Long may you live, O heavenly one,

Till you reach the world of light.

This is the end of my chant

In honor of Kalākaua.

(Pukui 1995:128ā“131)

On the 20th of January 1881, Kalākaua embarked on his journey, beginning with a ten-day state visit to the cities of Sacramento and San Francisco in California. In Sacramento, he met most of the country's prominent political leaders. General Upton, a Civil War soldier, remarked that the King's knowledge of military matters no doubt exceeded that of most American militia officers (Armstrong 1977:15). Not to be outdone, several senators in the California State Assembly predicted a Pacific united under the rule of King Kalākaua, the Colossus of the Pacific (15). In San Francisco, a banquet was given at the Hang Fen Lou restaurant by the Consul-General of the Empire of China. The event was the costliest dinner ever given in the 19th century by Chinese in the United States (16). The Consul-General praised Kalākaua for the fair treatment of Chinese subjects in Hawaiʻi, compared to the attitude in California, where the State Legislature had just passed the first Chinese Exclusion Act. Minister Armstrong then turned to Kalākaua and whispered, "You may be a pagan king, and I the Minister of a pagan king; but our first important experience in a foreign land is the gratitude, expressed in this grand banquet, to your government for its justice; and it is done on the soil of a nation that deliberately does injustice to the Chinese (17)". After many honors and dinners, the King and his suite embarked for Japan.

It was at first decided that he would travel incognito, simply as Aliʻi [Chief] Kalākaua, but the Japanese were informed by diplomatic agents in California of the King's intended visit (Kuykendall 1967:228). Much to the King's surprise, as his steamer, the Oceanic, entered Yedo (Tokyo) harbor, it received a 21-gun salute from all vessels at dock, the Hawaiian flag was hoisted next to the red-and-white Japanese standard, and "Hawaiʻi Ponoʻī " [the Hawaiian National Anthem] was enthusiastically played onshore. This was a king and he would be received as such. Kalākaua was the first foreign sovereign of any country to visit Japanese soil.

While in Yedo, the King met with Emperor Meiji and suggested several matters: marriage between the King's niece (Princess Kaʻiulani) and Prince Higashifushimi no Miya Yorihito (Komatsu); an Asian Federation of States which the Emperor would head; elimination of the unequal treaty provision granting extraterritoriality to foreigners in Japan; and emigration of Japanese to Hawaiʻi.

To the marriage proposal, the King would later receive a letter written by the Prince himself stating:

Through the Reception Committee, I

was informed of your generous kind-

ness, in asking me, if it would be my

happiness to be united to your Royal

niece in marriage, I am at a loss to

express fully my appreciation of this

honour as I am still under age [Princess

Kaʻiulani was five-and-a-half and the

Prince 15], I have consulted my father,

and I am very reluctantly compelled to

decline your distinguished proposal for

the reason that I am already betrothed

to my future companion in life; so I

sincerely trust that your Majesty will not

be disappointed at what duty compels

me to do. (230)

A follow-up letter was then given by the Japanese Foreign Minister to King Kalākaua on behalf of Emperor Meiji that the emperor "has been led to say that your sincere desire to bring the relations of the Imperial and Royal Courts to one of a close friendship has deeply moved his heart. In thus being compelled to decline your proposition my Sovereign has experienced a very great pain (230)".

To the second matter of an Asian Federation, the Emperor personally wrote:

I highly agree with Your Majesty's

profound and far-seeing views. Your

Majesty was also good enough to state

that I might be the promoter and chief

of this Federation. I cannot but be

grateful for such expression of your love

and confidence in me.

The Oriental nations including my

country have long been in a state of

decline and decay; and we cannot hope

to be strong and powerful unless by

gathering inches and treasuring foots

gradually restore to us all attributes of a

nation. To do this our Eastern Nations

ought to fortify themselves within the

walls of such Union and Federation, and

by uniting their power to endeavor to

maintain their footing against those

powerful nations of Europe and

America, and to establish their indepen-

dence and integrity in future. To do this

is a pressing necessity for the Eastern

Nations, and in so doing depend their

lives.

But this is a mighty work and not easily

to be accomplished, and I am unable to

foretell the date when we shall have

seen it realized.

In the face of the internal administra-

tion of my government being of such a

pressing nature I have not a heart to

turn my face from it, and leaving my

country, to devote myself mainly to the

work which more directly concerns

other nations. In this is found the

difficulty of my initiating at present

the work of the Federation of Asian

Nations....

In each laying out the course of the

future policy to the other by interchang-

ing our views, if it happily at a future

time happen to help us, it cannot only

be the fortune of Japan and Hawaii but

also of whole Asia. (Kuykendall 229 to 230)

While Emperor Meiji wholeheartedly agreed with the idea of an Asian Federation, he realized the realities of the world around him. There was much work that needed to be done within the empire. He himself was Japan's first constitutional monarch, and his constitution was barely 14 years old. At the same time, his country was busy Westernizing and militarizing in the hopes of avoiding colonization like her Asian neighbors, who were slowly being plucked by European hands. Japan needed foreign investment and materials. Japan was not prepared for an embargo or war with the U.S. if they allied with Hawaiʻi, who was under the U.S. sphere of influence.

Although the majority of Kalākaua's proposals were declined, one important proposal was ratified--immigration. The Emperor had been wary that his subjects not toil in the same kind of conditions that the Chinese coolies in the United States were enduring. The King convinced the Emperor that should he ratify a treaty of emigration, Japanese subjects would be treated as if they were Hawaiian subjects, and they would be allowed to naturalize if they so desired. The Emperor consented and the treaty was ratified.

After meeting the Emperor and other important dignitaries, the King also toured Kobe, Osaka, Kyoto, and Nagasaki. Throughout his visit to Japan, he was fêted as if he were the ruler of the greatest kingdom on earth (Kuykendall 228). Standing alongside the Emperor, he witnessed a 10,000-troop military review.

The Emperor conferred upon Kalākaua the Imperial Order of the Chrysanthemum along with several hundreds of dollars' worth of gifts such as vases, kimonos, and other Japanese items much coveted in the West.

The front pages of the Japanese newspapers were covered with articles about Hawaiʻi and its monarchy throughout the duration of Kalākaua's visit. Nightly fireworks displays were given in his honor. A steamer provided by the well-known Mishi-Bishi Company (Mitsubishi in modern spelling) took him from Tokyo to Nagasaki and Kobe (Armstrong 1977:79).

Kalākaua met most of the prominent political and religious leaders of the empire. He visited the Shinto temples of Shiba and learned how the Emperor was a descendent of the Gods (the Sun Goddess to be specific), much like Hawaiian rulers (Armstrong 85). He visited Buddhist temples and inquired about bringing priests to introduce Buddhism to Hawaiʻi (Armstrong 84). Didn't the Japanese themselves merge their old religion with Buddhism without conflict? In fact, it helped preserve their culture and provided a balance of ideas. The King also visited the Protestant Church of Yokohama, one of the first legalized Christian churches in Japan, received a copy of the New Testament in Japanese, and was reminded that the church was partially built by Hawaiian Christians (Armstrong 63).

After a month in Japan, Kalākaua was ready to depart. As he stepped onto his ship, a huge decoration with the word ALOHA spelled out in flowers was unveiled onshore and Hawaiʻi Ponoʻī was played.

From Japan the King went to China (where he met with Viceroy Li Hung Chang and learned about Confucianism), British Hong Kong, then Siam (arriving in late March 1881). As the King's ship approached Bangkok, his retinue shouted, "This is Hawaii! (Armstrong 119)". Of all of the places the King was to see, Siam would be the most familiar to him, with its expansive coconut tree groves, lush green mountains, and sandy beaches.

King Chulalongkorn Rama V of Siam (Thailand)

Kalākaua's remarked to the Siamese King that "Polynesians had Malay blood", King Chulalongkorn replied, "The Siamese are partly Malay; we are related (Armstrong 126)". While there a young Thai foreign affairs officer asked Armstrong, "Is it true that the civilisation of Europe is due to Christianity?" To the reply that such was the belief of church leaders, the Siamese officer said, "Then if Christianity is the cause of European progress, is it also the cause of the fleets and armies with which they are ready to destroy one another? (134-135)". Another embarrassing question which had been posed while the royal suite was in Japan resurfaced when a Siamese Prince asked Minister Armstrong, "Is your King in the hands of foreigners? Why does he not bring his own people with him instead of white men [referring to Armstrong and Judd]? Does he do what you tell him to do? (132)". As in Japan, the King and his suite avoided the question.

From Siam, the King continued to Singapore, Johore, Malaya, and the British Indian Empire (including Pakistan and Burma). The Maharajah of Johore [Sultan Abu Bakar] and the King compared common legends and common words (such as api in Malaysian and ahi in Hawaiian for fire; alima in Malaysian and lima in Hawaiian for five), concluding that Malays and Polynesians were long-lost Malay brothers (Armstrong 144). This expression would later be part of the Pan-Malaysian movement led by such imminent scholars as Dr. José Rizal, Philippine Representative Wenceslao Vinzons, and President Diosdado Macapagal (father of the current president of the Philippines). The idea of "long lost brothers" of a great Pan-Pacific Malay maritime civilization stretching from Malaysia to Hawaiʻi would become a major theme in the national liberation struggles of Southeast Asia until today.

The King was also introduced to Islam from the Maharajah of Johor who also gave him a green and gold copy of the Qu'ran (Armstrong 145). In letters from Malaysia, the King remarked to his sister how Malays looked very similar to native Hawaiians and that the Maharaja looked exactly like Prince Leiohoku, the late husband of Princess Ruth Ke`elikolani. The King described the Maharajah as:

...The Maharaja is a splendid man. He is liked and beloved by all nationalities here in Singapore espeically the ladies. He is a fine looking man and resembnles the first Leleiokhoku very much. If he could have spoken our language I would take him to be one of our people the resemblance being so strong.... (letter of King Kalakaua to Princess Lili'uokalani, May 12th, 1881)

The Maharaja/Sultan of Johor, Abu Bakar

Prince William Pitt Kina`u, son of Prince Leleiohoku I

Prince David La`amea Kawananakoa (nephew of the King) and Sultan Ibrahim (son of Sultan Abu Bakar of Johor)

In British India and Burma, Kalākaua met many members of the British administration of those two colonies. In Calcutta, Minister Armstrong asked a colonial secretary of Bengal Province how 50,000 British soldiers kept 250 million Indians under British rule. The secretary replied, "They cannot agree among themselves; if they did, our rule would end instantly (Armstrong 159)". Kalākaua was also given the rare honor of being brought into the caste system and made a Brahmin [through a temporary adoption supposedly through the help of a lawyer who may have been Motilal Nehru, father of Jawaharlal Nehru] so that he might view more thoroughly the sacred Hindu shrines. Before leaving, the King, expressing a desire to secure a souvenir of India, selected a picture of Buddha and told his suite that this would remind him and his people that other great civilizations also worshipped "idols" like Hawaiians once did (Armstrong 169).

As the King made his way to Egypt, he passed though the Holy Land of Palestine and viewed Mt. Sinai. Kalākaua asked, if the mountain was sacred to Christianity, why was it in the hands of the Muslim Ottoman Turks (who controlled much of the Middle East)? A British officer replied that Ottoman rule was not challenged because trade with Turkey was more important than religious sentiment. The King then remarked that it seemed Christians did not show respect for sacred places as he had been told (Armstrong 175). As a guest of the Ottoman Empire, Kalākaua was entertained by the Khedive (Viceroy), who showed the King the Pyramids, along with other ancient sites, including places that Egyptian Pharaohs, as well as Alexander the Great, Cleopatra, Mark Anthony, and Julius Caesar, had once lived in or visited. At several lodges in Cairo, Kalākaua gave impressive speeches reciting the history of Masonic fraternities. In a discussion with the King, the Khedive remarked:

Europe will make drunkards of the Mussulmans [Muslims] within a century. There is much good in Christianity, but if it prevailed in Asia, it would free the people from direct responsibility to God. Do the Christians of Europe obey the teachings of Christ? I have lived in England and I have not seen obedience. There is more wickedness in London than in all of Asia Minor or Arabia and Egypt. Christianity suits them, but Islamism is best for our people. If Christianity is better for us, God will send it here; he knows best what we need, and he gives us what is best for us. (179-80)

While on the Khedive's steamer riding up the Suez, a funny incident occurred. As they approached the Canal station, the Khedive ordered a telegraph to be sent stating, Prepare lunch for the King of the Sandwich Islands [the European name for the islands of Hawaiʻi]. The station's kitchen received the telegraph as Prepare Lunch for the King. Sandwiches (177). Needless to say, when they arrived the Khedive was very upset. Nonetheless, he continued to show Kalākaua the wonders of Egypt, including a tranquil ride up the Nile on a barge perhaps very similar to one used by Cleopatra herself.

From Egypt the King went to Rome, another city of antiquity. He was entertained in Italy and the Vatican, and was toasted by King Humberto, who pledged Italy's friendship and assistance to Hawaiʻi should it ever be required (Iaukea 1988:100). Queen Margherita of Italy had then turned to the King and asked how Italians and Catholics were treated in Hawaiʻi. The King responded that Italians were treated fairly and that a good many Hawaiians were devout Catholics, which pleased the Queen (Armstrong 1977:202).

Throughout his Italian tour, Kalākaua witnessed military reviews and was courted by many Italians wanting a souvenir from the King. He also called upon the Vatican for an interview with Pope Leo XIII in the richly painted chambers of the Holy See. The Pope asked the King about the presence of Judd and Armstrong, to which the King replied that they were white Protestant Hawaiian subjects. One of the Cardinals in the room chuckled and replied, "Then they are in the opposition". Leaning towards the King, the Pope then asked, "Do my [Catholic] people in your kingdom behave well?" Kalākaua replied, "Yes, they are good subjects." The Pope then inquired, "If they do not behave, I must look after them. Why do you have a white Minister in your government?" The King, surprised at the question from the Pope, deferred it to Minister Armstrong, who replied that Hawaiian kings appointed men based on merit rather than race. The Cardinal then asked, "Are there any Catholics in your government?" Armstrong simply answered, "No, the American Protestants entered the country before the Catholics did, and have kept control of public affairs; but no efficient Catholic is excluded from high office by reason of his faith (208-209)". After 20 minutes, the King kissed the Pope's ring [of St. Peter] and the audience was over. The King continued making diplomatic calls.

References

Armstrong, William N. 1977 [1903]. Around the World with a King. Rutland, VT: Charles E. Tuttle.

Dougherty, Michael. 1992. To Steal a Kingdom. Waimanalo, HI: Island Style Press.

Iaukea, Curtis Piʻehu and Lorna Kahilipuaokalani Iaukea Watson. 1988. By Royal Command. Ed. Niklaus R. Schweizer. Honolulu: Hui Hanai.

Kalakaua [King]. 1881. Letter to his sister Liliuokalani. 12 May. Hawaiʻi State Archives. honolulu

Kalakaua [King]. 1881. Letter to his sister Liliuokalani. 10 Aug. Hawaiʻi State Archives. Honolulu.

Kuykendall, Ralph S. 1967. The Hawaiian Kingdom, Volume III, 1874ā“1893: The Kalakaua Dynasty. Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press.

Pukui, Mary Kawena, trans. 1995. Nā Mele Welo: Songs of Our Heritage. Ed. Pat Namaka Bacon and Nathan Napoka. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press.

Pukui, Mary K. and Alfons L. Korn, trans. and eds. 1973. The Echo of Our Song: Chants & Poems of the Hawaiians. Honolulu: University of Hawaiʻi Press.

Seiden, Allan. 1992. Hawaiʻi: The Royal Legacy. Honolulu: Mutual Publishing.

Arab City: Remaking European Enclaves

2010-11-02T21:30:00.009-10:00

Some weeks ago a friend of mine sent me a shocking link to a development project called "Arab City". (http://www.myarabcity.com/). At first I thought perhaps this would be like a theme park until I began to read more about the project. The project was endorsed by Melaka chief minister Datuk Seri Mohd Ali Rustam and would include "...The third phase of the Arab City will comprise an Arab Village on a 6.5 acre site (2.6ha) in Kampung Jawa (http://beachfrontpropertyforsale.blogspot.com/2010/02/arab-city-melaka-to-cost-more-than-rm1.html)" This means that there would be residences created for Arab City geared towards foreign company owners at prices that most Malays would not be able to afford on land that was a traditional Malay village in an area that is a national historical area not just for Malays but for the entire Dunia Melayu (the Malay world). Furthermore to add insult to injury, the businesses will all be Arab and foreign owned (except McDonalds and Western businesses will not welcomed--which may or may not be such a bad thing except that it also excludes Malaysian businesses as well). According to http://www.malaysiapropertynews.com/2009/02/golden-corporate-awaits-nod-for-arab.html
even the food will cooked by Arabs directly imported from the Middle East and Malaysian food would be excluded. Malaysian women will also be excluded as they plan to bring in Arab women (http://www.eturbonews.com/16054/malaysia-targets-arab-female-tourists) The development company responsible for this plans to build more Arab Cities in every major Malaysian city. The Malaysian government considers this a great opportunity to bring in Middle Eastern currency into Malaysia and to showcase Islamic brotherhood. From the Arab perspective, the major complaint is that Malaysia is not Arab enough for their tastes and want to see more of their homelands.
Firstly, the land being used to build "Arab City" in Melaka and other places are historical areas and should be preserved not just for the good of Malaysians but for future generations within the Dunia Melayu and by extension all Austronesian speaking peoples. Melaka was one of the great Austronesian empires. In addition, traditional kampungs or villages in Malaysia are rapidly disappearing as cities grow and lifestyles changes. It is important that we maintain traditional kampung as a way to remember one's roots. To make a city catering towards an alien population on land that was a traditional kampung in an area of great significance to the Dunia Melayu seems rather counter-nationalistic. One might use other colorful adjectives to describe people willing to sell their national identity but I will leave it to the reader.
Secondly, building an area in the name of trade that caters exclusively to a foreign population and in which Malays will not even own businesses in that area seems exactly like the British and European enclaves in China and in SE Asia in the last two centuries. The Chinese economy would never have established itself what it is if it did not dismantle the European enclave system in the 1949. The enclaves were a source of corruption, illegal smuggling, and a plight on Chinese sovereignty. In addition, closer to Malaysia, the Dutch began their colonization of Indonesia through creating enclaves.
Thirdly, since businesses are going to be Arab owned and the managers will be Arabs, how will that ultimately benefit Malaysians? The argument of the government is that it will create 1,000 jobs for Malaysians. But the question is what type of jobs will be created and what type of trade will be conducted. When a foreign business establishes itself in a new country, one of the major considerations will be how to remit profits. Empires and businesses are not charity organizations. They need to look at the bottom line. The major purpose of an Arab businessman establishing a business in Malaysia or anywhere will be the profit margin. Ultimately, these businesses since they are owned by non-nationals will remit their profits back to their Middle Eastern countries therefore contributing to their own economies. Malaysia may get 1,000 people being hired as menial laborers, stock boys and dishwashers--since cooks, waiters, hair stylists, and spa helpers will be imported Arabs--but the bulk of the profits earned will be remitted back to the Middle East. This seems like short sighted planning on the part of the Malaysian government and not in the interest of national economic planning or for that matter, national security, when you consider what is occurring in the Middle East. Economics is an extremely important consideration in these matters because poor economic planning leaves one's political decisions vulnerable to economic pressures and the nation's future handicapped. Having these Arab cities in major Malaysian cities is nothing more than a modern version of European enclaves of the last century.
Fourth, there seems to be some misconception among a few Malaysians (and Muslim Filipinos for that matter) that Arabs are not capable of capitalist exploitation and colonialism because they share the same religion. Greed and the lust for power is not the monopoly of the US and European nations. Greed is found in every society and the thirst for power can be found in the histories of every religion and every nation. Arabs are not beyond exploiting other nations in the same way they were once exploited by the Turks, the British and the French. Arabs also have a long history of exploiting both Muslims and non-Muslims just as Europeans have a long history of exploiting Christians and non-Christians. At times Europeans and Arabs worked together in exploiting other peoples. For example, most of the slave trade in Africa was carried out by Arab rulers, especially in Zanzibar and , and sold indigenous Africans to the Portuguese and the British. The result was that Arab rulers and the Europeans both enslaved more than 9 million Africans and exterminated nearly 10 million more. In addition, the simple fact that both Malaysians and Arabs are both Muslim does not also mean there will be no exploitation because of the feeling of a shared Islamic heritage. Christians have exploited one another and waged war upon one another for the last one thousand years. Likewise, there have been wars waged by Muslims against other Muslims for the last one thousand years and Muslims have exploited one another. Sunni exploited the Shiia. Shiia exploited the Sunni. Arabs exploited the Persians. Arabs exploited the Turks. The Turks exploited the Arabs and so forth. Unfortunately, greed and power (which is the basis for colonialism) are found in every human society. More unfortunately, some of the worst atrocities and human rights violations have been done in the name of religion.

If it was truly in the name of Islamic solidarity and cultural exchange, then why are there no "Malay City" in Dubai or Yemen? Why are there no reciprocal cultural centers? Why are they importing their own cooks and even hair dressers? Is it because Malaysians are not capable of cooking "authentic" Arab cuisine after the supposedly 1000 years of cultural exchange? Or are they implying that Malays are dirty cooks and are "impure" as Muslims? That Malay culture is somehow inferior to Arabic culture? Where is their respect for Malay traditions? Would a Malay Muslim be allowed to wear a baju Melayu in even Yemen or Oman? No, they would be told to follow the adat (customs and traditions). Yet in Malaysia, the Arabs are re-enforcing their adat by building their own enclave? Doesn't that sound exactly like what Europeans used to do during the height of the Age of Imperialism?
Malaysians should be proud of their history. They are part of the larger Austronesian civilization. But they should study history very carefully and not forget the lessons learned by Indonesians and Chinese and not be blinded by feelings of religiosity. Malaysians need to safeguard their sovereignty--both economic and political--and their cultural identity for the sake of future generations of not just Malaysians but all Austronesians.

Honoring Filipino Ancestors: Building Balangay

2010-08-02T05:59:00.003-10:00

Article Repost

Honoring Filipino Ancestors: Building Balangay

from:

http://www.adaphobic.com/honoring-filipino-ancestors-building-balangay/

The Voyage of the Balangay has just started last June 2009. In Manila, the Balangay landed near Harbor Square, Manila Bay. We conquered the stormy weather just to experience the great ancient vessel: the Balangay.

Balangay was used by our ancestors to sail across the the oceans. I’ve seen it personally and I can say that this kind of boat is amazing and built faithfully. It is huge, and looks invulnerable to ocean waves.

The main objective of The Voyage of Balangay is Boat Building. The authentic Balangay will be crafted by master boat builders from the Island of Sibutu and Sitangkay in Tawi-Tawi, whose skills had been handed down through generations.

This will not only showcase the capability of the Filipino boat builders but would also be our way of instilling and propagating the idea among the present Filipinos, particularly the youth, that the Filipinos have been world-class boat builders even before the coming of the Western colonizers.

These are the sailing route of Balangay based on the projected timetable.

2009 The Philippines
2010 Southeast Asia
2011 Micronesia and Madagascar
2012 Sail across the Pacific onward to the Atlantic, all the way around the world
2013 Back home to the Philippines

The Philippine Mt Everest Team. Left to Right: Noelle Wenceslao, Carina Dayondon, Dr. Voltaire Velasco, Art Valdez, Leo Oracion, Pastour E

The Balangay Building will be headed by the Philippine Mount Everest Expedition. Their team leader Art Valdez has an organizational expertise and rich experience that can serve as the guiding light in the accomplishment of this project, his new “Everest.”

The Balangay will become the catalyst to stir up historical consciousness among Filipinos today. Without that keen knowledge of history, our people will continue to suffer as our national hero, Dr. Jose Rizal, aptly described, “Ang taong hindi lumilingon sa pinanggalingan ay hindi makakarating sa patutunguhan.”

Kaya ng Pinoy!

Hawaiian Lua or Martial Arts

2010-07-28T01:50:00.000-10:00

Hawaiian Traditional Weaponry

2010-07-28T01:48:00.000-10:00

The Making of a Keris

2010-07-28T01:46:00.000-10:00

A Short Documentary about the Hokule'a

2010-07-24T02:07:00.001-10:00

A short documentary about the Hawaiian voyaging canoe, Hokule'a.

Dayak Traditional Dance

2010-07-24T02:04:00.001-10:00

A traditional Dayak dance from Borneo

A short clip about Madagascar

2010-07-24T02:02:00.002-10:00

Short clip showing people from Madagascar

Ang Hari Unang Hari [ng BangsaMoro]

2010-07-22T23:22:00.001-10:00

ARTICLE REPOST

http://www.elaput.org/pinsuhri.htm

Ang Mga Unang Hari [ng BangsaMoro]

Kung ayaw lumapit ng bundok kay Mohammed
Si Mohammed ang lalapit sa bundok!
- sinabi raw ni Mohammed

TOTOO man o hindi ang Maragtas, kung may 10 datu ngang tumakas mula
Borneo, bago pa sila nag-ati-atihan sa Panay, nakarating na sa
Pilipinas ang mga Arabe.

Ang mga una ay hindi pa Muslim, nagkakalakal lamang, ngunit bandang
1300, nagkaroon na ng daungan sa Jolo ang mga Muslims, Arabe, Malay
at mga taga-Indonesia, sabay sa pagbagsak ng kaharian ng Majapahit
sa Java. Mula Malaysia at Indonesia, hindi sa Arabia, ang Islam na
pumasok sa Pilipinas nuong 1350, nang nagkaroon ng sultan o hari sa
lungsod ng Malacca sa Malaysia. Mabilis ang paglawak ng Islam sa mga
pulu-pulo, ang isang dahilan ay ang paggamit ng kanyon. Ang mga
kahariang Muslim ay sa mga kapwa Muslim lamang naglalako ng kanyon.
Sa Malacca nanggaling si Makdum [ama sa wikang Arabe], ang unang
nagturo ng Islam sa Sulu. Duon siya namalagi hanggang mamatay nuong
1380, at nalibing sa Tawi-Tawi. Siya ang kinikilala ng mga Tausug na
simula ng kanilang kasaysayan sa Sulu.

Ipinagpatuloy ang pagtuturo ng Islam sa Sulu ni Rajah Bagginda, mula
naman sa Sumatra, Indonesia. Napangasawa ng anak niya si Abu Bakr,
isang lagalag mula Arabia na, nang mamatay si Rajah Bagginda nuong
1450, ay hinirang ang sarili niya bilang sultan ng Sulu.

Siya ang unang hari sa Pilipinas.

Gumaya sa kanya si Mohamed Kabungsuwan, isang maharlikang tumakas
mula sa Malaysia nang sakupin ng mga Portugis ang Malacca nuong
1511. Pagkarating sa tinatawag ngayong Malabang nuong bandang 1515,
pinangasawa niya ang mga anak na babae ng ilang datu sa gitnaang
Mindanao, pati na ang mga Iranun at mga Maranao. Isa sa mga
napangasawa ay si Putri Tunoma, prinsesa sa Cotabato, at duon
itinayo ni Kabungsuwan ang kanyang kaharian ng mga nakararaming
Maguindanao.

Siya ang pang-2 hari sa Pilipinas.

Siya ang nakaluklok sa Mindanao nang dumating sa Pilipinas ang mga
unang Espanyol, sina Ferdinand Magellan, nuong 1521. Isa sa mga anak
niya kay Angintabu, princesa naman ng mga Iranun, si Saripada
Makaalang, ang sultan ng malawak na kaharian sa kalagitnaan ng
Mindanao nuong 1543 nang dumating ang isa pang pangkat ng mga
Espanyol, sina Ruy Lopez de Villalobos, ang nagpangalan sa
Pilipinas.

Pagkasakop ng mga Espanyol sa kalakihan ng Visayas at Luzon, nuong
panahon na ni Miguel Lopez de Legazpi, tinangka nilang simulan ang
pagsakop sa timog Pilipinas ngunit napasama sila sa labu-labo ng mga
Tausug, mga Maguindanao at ang mga Iranun at mga Maranao ng Buayan.
Nagdigmaan pa ang mga taga-Buayan laban sa mga Maguindanao nuong
1619 hanggang 1621 bago naging pangunahing sultan si Kudarat, kilala
ng mga Espanyol sa pangalang Corralat at ng mga Dutch bilang
Guserat. Sa kanyang 50-taon paghahari mula nuong 1619 hanggang 1671,
naging makapangyarihan ang kaharian ng mga Maguindanao, umabot mula
sa Davao hanggang Dapitan, sa hilagang dalampasigan ng Zamboanga.

Sa pamumuno ng mga sultan o hari sa Pilipinas, naging malakas at
magilas ang mga Muslim sa Mindanao at sa ilang pulo ng Visayas.
Nagsisimulang dumanak ang mga Muslim sa Luzon nang dumating ang mga
sundalong Espanyol ni Legazpi nuong 1565; malamang naakit o nadaig
nila ang buong kapuluan kung hindi sila sinupil ng mga Espanyol. Ang
mga Muslim ang unang nagpasok ng maraming kanyon sa Pilipinas.

Ang mga unang Muslim, at unang "naghari" sa Mindanao ang mga Tausug,
ang mga tao ng usug o agos [ng dagat]. Nagkakalakal, nagpupuslit
[smuggling], nang-aalipin [slave trading], mapusok, pala-away, mga
tunay na lalaki. Sa tingin nila sa sarili, nakatataas sila sa lahat
ng tao sa Mindanao. May 3 sapinan ang kanilang lipunan, - ang
maharlika, ang karaniwang mamamayan, at ang mga alipin. Lubha nilang
ikinararangal ang kanilang pangalan, ayaw mabahiran ng anumang
pintas lalo na ng pagkaduwag. Kumpol-kumpol ang mga magkakapit-bahay
sa mga dalampsigan; sa looban, kalat at magkakahiwalay ang mga
bahay. Ang mga bahay nila ay karaniwang nakasampa sa mga tukod na
puno, 2 tao ang taas ng sahig mula lupa, at may batalan papuntang
likuran o kusina. Upang makapasok ang araw sa umaga, hanggang maaari
ay inihaharap nila sa silangan ang pintuan ng bahay sapagkat
karaniwang walang durungawan ang mga bahay, mga siwang lamang ang
nasa mga dingding. Para daw madaling maipagtanggol, at para maikubli
ang kanilang mga dalaga.

Malaki ang mga sala nila, mahilig silang magkabisita. Isang dingding
sa sala ay karaniwang buo at duon nakasalansan ang kanilang mga
banig at kutsong kapok na gamit sa pagtulog. Madalas may taklob na
nakasabit sa kisami.

Mahilig magnga-nga at magbihis ng magara ang mga Tausug, lalo na
kung may pagdiriwang - may nakasulsi pang ginto-ginto sa damit. Ang
mga babae ay nagsusuot ng pantalong maluwag, tinatawag na sawal
[salawal sa Tagalog] at balot ng patadyong na maaaring gamiliting
balabal, kumot o kung kinakailangan, duyan. Ang mga lalaki ay
nagpapantalon ng makipot, tinatawag na salway kuput [makipot na
salawal] na hanggang binti lamang ang haba. May balot na malaking
panyo sa ulo, ang putong, na maaaring gamiting sisidlan o supot. Ang
tinitignan nilang kayaman ay ginto at alahas. Karaniwang nagmamana
ng mga alahas ang mga babae; alahas din ang inaasahang handog ng mga
lalaki sa kanilang asawa paminsan-minsan. Ang mga lalaki ay
mapagmahal sa kanilang mga sandata, lalo na ang mga baril.

Ang mga Maguindanao ang sumunod na naging Muslim, at sumunod
naging "hari", mga taga-Central Plains ng Cotabato. Sila ang
pinakamalaking tribo sa Mindanao, mga magsasaka at mangingisda,
naging mga mandirigma at makapangyarihan sila dati sa buong
kapuluan. Kulang-kulang 100 taon pagkarating ng mga Espanyol sa
Pilipinas, ginapi at pinalayas nila ang mga Espanyol sa Zamboanga at
sa buong Mindanao nuong 1663, sa pamumuno ni Sultan Kudarat. Nakipag-
ugnay at nakipagkalakal pa sila sa mga taga-Holland, ang mga Dutch
na sumasakop nuon sa Maluku [Moluccas, Spice Islands] at kalakihan
ng Indonesia.

Ang mga Maranao sa paligid ng Lanao Lake ang pinakahuling naging
Muslim. Bantog sa kanilang magagandang ukit sa kahoy, nag-aaway-away
sila-sila. Kalapit sa mga Maguindanao, maraming pinaghawig ang 2
tribo; mahilig din sila kapwa sa awit at sayawang sinasaliwan sa mga
gong.Kahit na sila ang huling naging Muslim, masugid ang mga Maranao
sa pagsampalataya. Ayaw nilang makipag-ugnay sa mga hindi Muslim;
makaluma sila at magalang, away pasaling, umabot man sa patayan.

Ang mga Maranao ay may kapangkat, ang mga Iranun o Ilanun sa
hilagang libis sa baybayin ng Illana. Inaangkin nila na mga takas
sila, o ang mga pinuno man lamang nila, mula sa mga kaharian ng Sri
Vijaya at Majapahit sa Indonesia. Bagaman naging mga Muslim, patuloy
na ginamit ng kanilang mga pinuno ang parangal na rajah mula sa
India sa halip ng sultan na mula sa Arabia. Nasalaysay na dati
silang naninirahan sa Misamis Oriental, napilitang lumikas nang
sumabog ang bulkang Hibok-hibok sa pulo ng Camiguin. May kasabay pa
raw na dambuhalang alon [tsunami or tidal wave]. Ang sabi, ang iba
sa mga Iranun ay humiwalay at sa Lanao nagtuloy.

Sa mga naging Muslim, ang mga Samal ang pinakahirap, sunud-sunuran
sa ibang tribo sa paligid. Kumpol-kumpol sila sa mga kubong
nakapatong sa mga tukod na nakatarak sa dalampasigan ng dagat o
tabing ilog. Isda at gulay lamang ang kinakain nila; madumi ang
tingin nila sa karne ng mga hayop sa lupa. Madalas silang makihalo
sa mga espiritista at naniniwala sila sa mga bathala at diwani ng
mga ilog, batu-bato at malalaking punung-kahoy.

Kaugnay sila ng mga Badjao, ang mga palaboy ng dagat. Sukdulang
naninirahan sa kanilang mga bangka o vinta, umaahon lamang sila sa
lupa upang mailibing pagkamatay.

Sa pulo ng Basilan naninirahan ang munting tribo ng mga Yakan,
nagsasaka at nagpapastol ng hayop, naghahawi ng tela at banig.
Tahimik at malumay, hindi gaanong makulay ang kanilang mga damit.
Kagawi at malamang kauri nilang malapit ang mga Tagapulong
Magdaragat [Polynesians] na sumakop sa Hawaii at iba pang pulu-pulo
ng Pacific Ocean. Nagtatanim sila sa mga gulod at gilid ng bundok ng
kamote, gabi, buko at gulay. Magkakalayo ang kanilang bahay-bahay na
karaniwang malapit sa simbahan ng mga Muslim [mosque] gayung matumal
ang kanilang pananampalataya, nahaluan ng dati nilang pagsamba sa
anyito at mga kaluluwa sa pali-paligid.

Inaangkin na mga Muslim din daw si Rajah Suliman, ang huling
katutubong pinuno sa Manila na sinakop ng mga Espanyol. May ilang
kanyon si Suliman, pahiwatig na sinusulsulan siya ng mga Muslim na
sumasarili nuon sa mga kanyon sa kapuluan. Ngunit walang ulat ang
mga Espanyol na Muslim ang mga taga-Manila na dinatnan nila. Masugid
ang mga Espanyol sa pagtuus sa mga Muslim, kaya mahirap paniwalaang
hindi nila napansin kung Muslim sina Suliman. Ang nababakas lamang
sa mga lumang ulat ng Espanyol ay bagong salta sina Suliman at hindi
pa nagtatagal ang pagsakop ng pangkat niya sa Manila nang dumating
ang mga Espanyol. Ang mga katutubo sa paligid ng Manila nuon ay
nagtangkang kumampi sa mga Espanyol dahil nais nilang gapiin sina
Suliman. Pahiwatig ito na hindi nagkaroon ng sapat na panahon si
Suliman na pagbuuin at patatagin ang kapangyarihan niya sa pali-
paligid.

Madagascar and the Future of the Nusantarian World

2010-07-22T23:20:00.001-10:00

ARTICLE REPOST

MADAGASCAR and the FUTURE
of the NUSANTARIAN WORLD
from http://www.lemurdolls.com/manusa.htm

At the dawn of the third millennium, the world seems to look
for a new direction. The development of globalization is threatening
the very foundation of the old empires based upon nation-state
centralism. Oppositely, new alliances based on more natural
affinities, especially ethnic-based affinities which had been
neglected or even prohibited, are now taking place. On the one hand,
it is the fear of depersonalization that ignites the rehabilitation of
one's ancestral identities. On the other hand, the need to join with
competent partners to face the present frontierless world requires a
connection with those sharing the same fundamental interests. From now
on, as distances constitute little barrier to exchanges, the prospect
of new alliance can be invoked.

One immediately does realize how much this new situation can
be advantageous to the Nusantarian World. Until now, direct
communications between the various countries belonging to this human
group, spreading throughout two oceans over thousands years, were
hindered by the distances. Moreover, during the last centuries, the
European colonization and its aftermath discouraged us from pursuing
such unity. For each newly independent country, the consolidation of
national unity was its prime concerns.

In order to better define the role and the significance of
Madagascar within the future of the nusantarian world, it is necessary
to begin by recounting some of the major features of that world.

The Nusantarian Motherland

Among the major ethnolinguistic groups in the world, the
nusantarian family (also called "Malayo-Polynesian" or "Austronesian"
by western authors) undeniably occupied the largest geographical
territory prior the modern era. From east to west, this vast territory
covered the area from Rapa-nui (Easter Island) to Madagascar,
approximately 60% the circumference of the earth. From north to south,
it included the island of Taiwan (Pekan, for the Nusantarian natives),
the archipelago of Hawaii (from "Hava-iki" or "Little Java", to
recollect the ancestral homeland of the Polynesian), and New Zealand
(Aotearoa in Maori language). Beyond this heartland, other regions
were frequented by Nusantarians navigators, including the major part
of the Pacific Ocean (to South America) and the Indonesian Ocean, as
far as East Africa. [1]

Today, there are approximately 300 million Nusantarians.
Their communities are traditionally present in 34 officially
recognized countries in Southeast Asia (including Taiwan and Hainan
where the Cam Utsat people live), Oceania, and the Indonesian Ocean.

In recent years, many authors concluded that the
Nusantarians originated from the present coastal area of eastern China
(well before the rise of the Chinese Empire).[2] Understandably, it
was by seafaring, approximately 6,000 or 7,000 years ago, that our
ancestors began to slowly occupy their historical territory. In so
doing, they precociously mastered an extraordinary technique of
navigation. Indeed from the beginning of our era, it is known from
testimonies found in Chinese texts that the Nusantarians of Southeast
Asia were using ships (the Chinese *b'ak, related to the *bangkah of
Melayu) capable of transporting several hundred of tons of goods and
hundreds (or even a thousand) passengers.[3] That is hardly surprising
if we know that in Oceania the big double canoes (waka or pahi,
corresponding to bagan and to ancient bandung of Indonesia), although
a lot less equipped in terms of tools, were capable of transporting
together up to 500 persons.[4]

Subsequent to this common origin, the Nusantarian heritage
is characterized by three affinities, namely linguistic, cultural and
racial.

Throughout the Nusantarian domain, the basic vocabulary and
many typologic resemblances are preserved in all languages, among
which three major sub-sections can be distinguished: a) the archaic
language group of Taiwan; b) those of the western nusantarian world
and countries of Southeast Asia, from Madagascar to the western part
of Micronesia (Marianas, Guam and Belau/Palau Islands); c) those of
the oriental nusantarian part, including the whole of Polynesia and
the major part of the Melanesia.[5]

The Nusantarian civilization is characterized by many
common features found in their social organization, technology,
beliefs and artistic expressions. Finally, from the anthropological
point of view, the majority of the Nusantarians (the Melanesians
excepted) are sharing the same human form, characterized by the
"classic Melayu" model : in which the skull is mesocephalic or
moderately brachycephalic, the brown skin color or sawo matang, the
wavy hair, less or not at all slit eyes, etc.[6]

Taking account of these elements, we should re-appraise the
status and the importance of Madagascar in the Nusantarian domain.

Madagascar, a part of Southeast Asian history

Within the Nusantarian World, Madagascar stands apart for
many reasons. First, geographically, this island is the farthest from
any other Nusantarian territory. Its closest neighbors, the islands
around Sumatra, are more than 6,000 km distant. It is thus the only
part situated in the western Indonesian Ocean, close to the African
continent. Also by its size, Madagascar is relatively large. Among all
the Nusantarian islands, it is second only to Kalimantan. However, its
most surprising originality is found in its cultural and historical
aspect.

In all likelihood, the island was discovered in the first
centuries of the common era by seafarers from central Indonesia,
related to the ancestors of the present people of Southeast
Kalimantan.[7] One wonders what drove them so far to the west. In the
current state of knowledge, there is obviously no answer to that
question. However, it is likely that those people were not the only
Nusantarians who frequented the western part of the Indonesian Ocean
during that era. In fact, the Melayu traders (namely, the Melayu
speaking Nusantarians kingdoms, the most prominent being one named
"Funan" by Chinese authors) traded between the Sea of China and the
coastal countries of the Indonesian Ocean, as far as the Roman empire,
to the northwest.[8] And probably, presence of Melayu in that region
might have contributed to the process of hinduization of Southeast Asia.

While the Merina's ancestors slowly undertook the
exploration and colonization of Madagascar, others Nusantarians traded
actively with the African coasts and the Middle East. The items traded
were mostly spices, ivory, cowries, pearls, hides, slaves, and perhaps
silk. It is highly probable (as referenced in some Arabic texts) that
Melayu trading posts were established on the coasts of Africa.[9]

The presence of Melayu in western Indonesian Ocean began to
decline from the 8th century under the pressure of the emerging Muslim
competition. However, by the 10th century, the Malays tried to
reconquer the African coasts with an enormous expedition (Arabic texts
talk about a thousand ships) but without success.[10] Since then, they
had ceased to frequent the region. It should be mentioned that even
their old maritime hegemony in Southeastern Asia - represented at that
time by the empire of Srivijaya - was then contested not only by the
new power of the southern Indians of Chola, but also, by a growing
Chinese power. Concurrently, the Merina's ancestors began their
migration to the highlands of Madagascar to avoid the threat of the
Islamized emigrants and their numerous African slaves who rapidly took
control of the northern and eastern part of Madagascar. In respect to
several traditions, their prime motive for leaving the coastal areas
was their refusal to mingle with their new neighbors.[11]

It was from that time that the Merina, as a people
completely isolated from Southeast Asia, started on a different
historial path. Meanwhile, some Nusantarians, especially the Bugis -
as mentionned in the epic of Sawerigading of La Galigo -, might have
continued to sporadically visit the region.[12] Also by the 13th
century, the Melayu of Tambralinga (present southern Thailand)
organized a certain number of expeditions to the Southern India and to
Ceylan for reasons related to Buddhism.[13] But to our knowledge,
there is no indication that any of those late nusantarian expeditions
might have influenced the course of Madagascar's history.[14]

However, during the entire first millennium, the history of
Madagascar is simply integrated with the presence of Southern Asian
Nusantarians in the western part of the Indonesian Ocean. Therefore,
it is difficult to isolate that island. Perhaps in the future, the
progress in archaeological research and the advance of cultural and
linguistic studies will help us to better understand that past.

The importance of Madagascar in the future of the Nusantarian World

The exceptional importance of Madagascar in the history of
ancient nusantarian navigation in the Indonesian Ocean is perfectly
known here. Moreover, it remind us that for 4,000 to 5,000 years,
untill around the 10th century, the nusantarian peoples were the
greatest navigators of the world. It is true that similars achievement
can be attested to the peoples of the Oceania, but, as far as it
concerns the Southeast Asia, Madagascar is ethnologically and
historically closer to them. Oceania indeed belongs to the prehistory
of Southeast Asia, while Madagascar is an integral part of its "old",
or more exactly, pre-modern history; from the glorious period prior
the Islamisation, the arrival of Chinese emigrants and the influx of
European colonizers. Furthermore, unlike the Indo-Javanese culture for
example, the civilization of Madagascar developed out of the sole
ethnic ingenuity of the Nusantarians, without any direct foreign
influence. Even if words of sanskrit origin are found in Madagascar's
native languages, they all seem to have been borrowed through the old
Malay.[15] Similarly, the Arab-African influence on the Merina people
is, not only very limited, but also considered as a corruptive rather
than formative late addition.

In this regard, Madagascar constitutes one of the best
examples demonstrating the dynamism and the potentiality of
traditional nusantarian civilization. Even if the countries of
Southeast Asia had not borrowed from foreign cultures, they would have
been quite able to achieve extraordinary status. To us, it is
significant that the king Andrianampoinimerina (who ruled from 1783 to
1809), was a pure bearer of the traditional Merina civilization. He no
doubt could be considered as one of the greatest nusantarian
sovereigns of all time.[16]

In conclusion, the rediscovery of Madagascar represents to
the South Asia nusantarian countries a kind of an encounter with their
own history. The look of a Merina should remind them how great
navigators were their ancestors, and how they were proud of their
identity that they really did matter to preserve it above anything
else.[17]

But the most startling is that besides recalling the
Nusantarians' past, Madagascar is holding great promises for their
future. As already pre-announced by the creation of the APEC
(Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation), indicators suggest that the
Pacific basin will be the real economic heart of our planet, and also,
to a larger extent, its cultural and political heart. In these
conditions, those countries occupying the most propitious locations
are suceptible to play highly decisive roles.

From now on, it is for the interests of the Nusantarian
countries of Southeast Asia to contemplate themselves, not as being on
the periphery of Asia and the Pacific Ocean, but as in the very heart
of the oceanic domain. The Pacific Ocean itself is not an empty space,
but a crossroad and a field of expansion for the peoples from its
bordering continents, a territory for self-development for the peoples
who occupied it for millennia, and who beforehand were Nusantarians.
So, it is timely that Melayu, Javanese and Tagalog peoples, among
others, reassert their real attributes, as representatives of the
Nusantarians, the Islands people, traditional masters of the Ocean,
and not just a mere variety of "non-typical" and marginal Asians. For
that purpose, they absolutely have to position themselves in regard to
their own "peripheric surroundings", and also determine the boundaries
of their actual inner dimensions.

For that matter and for their interest, the Nusantarians of
Southeast Asia should integrate in their world vision as well as their
political policy that the Merina, on the one hand, and the
Micronesians and Polynesians, on the other hand, are in fact the
extensions of their own identity.

These indeed are the peoples testifying their own history,
especially the most authentic part of it. There is scant need to
mention that for these "peripheral" Nusantarians, the new interest
brought by their South Asian kin will finally help them to exit out of
their isolation and to take control of their own destiny. Henceforth,
with the support of their kin, they will no longer be considered as
just small islanders, lost in the middle of the ocean. They will no
longer be the coveted objects by those foreigners thinking only of
taking advantage of their vulnerability, but a member of a vast
community of peoples sharing the same ancestors, the same basic
identity, and together, sharing the same hopes in planning their own
future.

In other words, within that perspective, Madagascar somehow
might also have within it the actual keys to the future of the
Nusantarian world.

Andriantefinanahary & Yanariak (October, 1997)

NOTES

[1] Cf. BELLWOOD, Peter, Man's Conquest of the Pacific. The
Prehistory of Southeast Asia and Oceania, Auckland : Collins, 1978.
SLAMETMULJANA. Asal Bangsa dan Bahasa Nusantara. Jakarta : Balai
Pustaka, 1975. (Back to Text)

[2] Among others, cf. LING, Shun-sheng. A Study of the Raft,
Outrigger, Double, and Deck Canoes of Ancient China, the Pacific, and
Indian Oceans. Taipei: The Institute of Ethnology, 1970. BELLWOOD,
Peter. Prehistory of the Indo-Malaysian Archipelago. Sydney: Academic
Press, 1985 et "A Hypothesis for Austronesian Origins", Asian
Perspectives, XXXVI,1, 1984-1985: 107-117. BLUST, Robert. "The
Austronesian Homeland: A Linguistic Perspective", Asian Perspectives,
XXXVI,1, 1984-1985: 45-67. REID, Lawrence A. "Benedict's Austro-Tai
Hypothesis - An Evaluation", Asian Perspectives, XXXVI,1, 1984-1985:
19-34. ZHANG Guang-zhi. "Archaeology in the Southeastern Coastal China
and the Origin of the Austronesian", Nanyang Minzu Kaogu, 1987, 1:
1-14. XING, Gongwan. "On the Genealogical Relationship between Han
Language (Chinese) and Austronesian Languages", Minzu Yuwen, 3, 1991:
1-14.(Back to the text)

[3] MANGUIN, Pierre-Yves, "The Southeast Asian Ship: An
Historical Approach", Journal of South-East Asian 0Studies, IX, 2,
1980: 266-276; "Sewn-plank Craft of South-East Asia. A Preliminary
Survey", in Sewn Planked Boats, Archaeological and Ethnographic
papers, S.McGrail & E.Kentley, eds. Oxford, 1985:319-343. DORAN, Edwin
Jr. Wangka: Austronesian Canoe Origin, Texas A .& M. University press,
1981. (Back to the text)

[4] HADDON, A.C. & HORNELL, James, Canoes of Oceania,
Honolulu: P.Bishop Museum, 1975. LEWIS, David, We the navigators. The
Ancient Art of Landfinding in the Pacific, Canberra: Australian
National University Press,1972. NEYRET, Jean. Les pirogues
océaniennes, Paris: Musée de la Marine, 1976-1977. (Back to Text)

[5] WURM, S.A. & HATTORI, Shiro, eds. Language Atlas of the
Pacific area, Canberra: Pacific Linguistics, 1981. KERAF, Gorys.
Linguistik Bandingan Historis, Jakarta: Gramedia, 1984. (Back to Text)

[6] Cf. HOWELLS, William. The Pacific Islanders, London,
Weidenfield and Nicolson, 1973. BELLWOOS, Peter. 1978, op.cit. GLINKA,
J.: "Racial History of Indonesia", in Rassengeschichte der Menschheit,
8, Lieferung Asien I: Japan, Indonesien, Ozeanien, München:
Oldenbourg, 1981: 79-113. (Back to Text)

[7] Cf. DAHL, O.C. Malgache et Maanjan. Une comparaison
linguistique. Oslo, 1951 et "La subdivision de la famille Barito et la
place du malgache", Acta Orientalia, 38, 1977: 77-134. (Back to Text)

[8] WHEATLEY, Paul. The Golden Khersonese: Studies in the
Historical Geography of the Malay Peninsula Before AD 1500, Kuala
Lumpur, University of Malay Press, 1961. WOLTERS, Olivier W. Early
Indonesian Commerce: A Study of the Origins of Srivijaya, Cornell U.P.
1967 et The Fall of Srivijaya in Malay History, Oxford U.P. 1970.
MILLER, J.I. The Spice Trade of the Roman Empire 29 B.C. to A.D. 641,
Oxford, 1969. Nia KURNIA SHOLIFAT IRFAN, Kerajaan Sriwijaya, Jakarta:
Girimukti Pasaka, 1983. (Back to Text)

[9] FERRAND, Gabriel. "Le K'ouen-louen et les anciennes
navigations inter-océaniques dans les mers du sud", Journal Asiatique,
1919, XIII:239-333, 431-492; XIV: 5-68, 201-241. "L'empire sumatranais
de Srivijaya", Journal Asiatique, 1922, 1-104, 161-246. (Back to Text)

[10] MAUNY, Raymond. "The Wakwak and the Indonesian invasion
in East Africa in 945 A.D.", Studia (Lisboa), 1965, 15, pp.7-16.
MOLLAT, Michel. "Les contacts historiques de l'Afrique et de
Madagascar avec l'Asie du Sud et du Sud-Est: le rôle de l'Océan
Indien", Archipel, 21, 1981: 35-53. (Back to Text)

[11] Cf. Tantara ny Andriana eto Madagascar, Antananarivo,
1908 : 62-64 et DELIVRE, Alain. L'histoire des rois d'Imerina.
Interprétation d'une tradition orale, Paris: Klincksieck, 1974. (Back
to Text)

[12] KERN, R.A. Catalogus I. Catalogus van de Boeginese, tot
de I La Galigo-cyclus behorende handschriften v. Jajasan Matthes te
Makassar, Makassar, 1954. (Back to Text)

[13] PARANAVITANA, S. Ceylon and Malaysia, Colombo, 1966.
SIRISENA, W.M. Sri Lanka and South-East Asia: Political, Religious,
and Cultural Relations from A.D. c. 1000 to c. 1500, Leiden 1978.
(Back to Text)

[14] Concerning others approaches, cf. ADELAAR, K.A. "Malay
Influence on Malagasy: Linguistic and culture-historical
Implications", Oceanics Linguistics, 28,1, 1989: 1-46. DAHL, O.C.
Migration from Kalimantan to Madagascar, Norwegian University press,
1991. (Back to Text)

[15] DAHL, O.C. op. cit. 1951, 1991. BERNARD-THIERRY,
Solange. "A propos des emprunts sanskrits en malgache", Journal
Asiatique, 1959: 311-348. (Back to Text)

[16] On king Andrianampoinimerina and his works, cf. Tantara
ny Andriana eto Madagascar, Antananarivo 1908. (Back to Text)

[17] Cf. NAZIF, Mohamed. De val van het Rijk Merina. (La
chute du Royaume de Merina), Buitenzorg (Bogor), 1928. TASRIF, S.
Merina. Pasang surut Keradjaan Merina. Sedjarah sebuah negara jang
didirikan oleh Perantau² Indonesia di Madagaskar. Jakarta : Balai Buku
Media, 1966.

Announcement: New Austronesianists Facebook Group

2010-07-22T03:43:00.001-10:00

Hey if you're on Facebook, please join the "Austronesianists" group. Just search "Austronesianists" and voila. Thanks!

Discussion Board Up

2010-07-10T02:53:00.002-10:00

Thanks to the help of a particular person, there is now a free discussion board for people who want to interact and post questions not covered in the articles or posts.

The address is:

www.austronesian.info

Note: All posts will be moderated in order to help ensure that the posts are respectful as well as to avoid bots and spam.

Balinese and Hawaiian Social Systems

2010-06-18T22:05:00.017-10:00

For most of the twentieth century, people had assumed that the "caste system" in Bali was a direct result of Indian influence that came with the Hindu religion. However, anthropologists now wonder if the caste system in Bali was always there but with different names. The reason for this is that anthropologists have now began to look at other Austronesians--mainly Samoan and Hawaiian societies--and saw remarkable similarities with Bali. In many ways, Balinese and Hawaiian societies mirrored each other very closely.

We know that in the case of Samoan and Hawaiian societies there was a strong class division that developed without any influence from other foreign civilizations. In the case of Hawai`i in particular, by the time of Captain Cook's voyage in 1778, the Hawaiian class system resembled Balinese caste system. In Bali, while it is called a caste system, the classes do intermingle and there is some upward social mobility under certain circumstances. However, there is still difference to rank and this rank caste comes from a genealogical relationship with a god. This is not the case in India where it is a true "caste" system meaning that there is no upward social mobility. A person of the Dalit or Untouchable caste can be a billionaire but he or she will never be able to marry someone of the Brahman caste or to be anything except a Dalit. In the case of Bali, there is some ways to improve your caste standing, mainly through intermarriage.

This was also the case of Hawai`i. While the ali`i or nobility was the top class, they could intermarry with someone of a lower class. There is the famous story of `Umi-a-Liloa who was the son of an ali`i and commoner but was able to become king due to his personal charisma and due corruption (both politically and spiritually) of the king, his half-brother, at the time. In other words, in Austronesian class systems, there is some flexibility. On the other hand, Dr. Stephen Oppenheimer wonders if perhaps it was Austronesians who influenced early Indian society and brought with them to India their notions of class divisions.

In Bali, there are four main castes or varna: Sudras (peasants); Wesias or Vaishyas (merchants); Satrias or Kshatriyas (warriors and nobility); and Brahman (priests). According to Balinese themselves, the varnas simply modified the existing social order. Each caste has a particular dialect though this is disappearing in public as more people have adopted Bahasa Indonesia as means to speak to people of various classes without offending them. Among the Brahman, the language used is called "High Balinese" which is old Javanese mixed (Kawi) with Sanskrit--somewhat similar to the language used in the "Laguna Copperplate" found in the Philippines. This language is also used as the language of temple ceremonies. There is also a "Middle Balinese" which is a language that can be used between the different classes but this sometimes troublesome as some terms may have a different meaning between people of the same class and therefore may lead to some offense. Thus, Bahasa Indonesia has become a neutral language of communication.

In certain parts of Bali, mainly in the Aga (non-Hindu Balinese, literally meaning "original") villages of Tenganen and Trunyan, there is also another social system. This social system is divided into three main class: peasants, nobility, and priests. The Aga system is very similar to the Hawaiian system. The Hawaiian social system also hadthe same three classes--nobility or ali`i, kahuna or priestly, and the maka`ainana or commoners--though periodically there was another extremely small social sub-class known as the kauwa. The kauwa was akin to the alipin of the Philippines meaning while both terms are translated as "slave", they had rights and were regarded as extensions of a nobleman's household. However, in Hawai`i this class of people was extremely small--small enough that no European explorer noticed them, Hawaiian mythology does not mention them, and they were eventually abolished in 1810. Normally in Hawai`i, a person would become a kauwa if they were in debt or had lost a war which means that the kauwa were actually drawn from the nobility itself since in Hawai`i--like in Bali--only nobles were allowed to carry weapons and to fight in wars. This could explain why there was no explanation in Hawaiian mythology.

In both Bali and in Hawai`i, the class systems have today largely become simply symbols of the past. In the case of Hawai`i, it was due to the Hawaiian religion being abolished under Premier Ka`ahumanu in 1819 and later with the American take-over in 1893. With Bali, the Dutch colonial experience largely enforced the class system as the Dutch found it easier to control thesudra--though many Balinese refused to submit and to collaborate with the Dutch and there were several mass suicides as late as 1908. Later on, with the democratization of Balinese society after Indonesian independence, the rise of Dadias, and Christian missionaries trying to convert the Balinese, the class system became less enforced. Nowadays, the Brahman are only ones who still retain some of their traditional role. Some Balinese, however, worry about the Brahmans becoming too influenced by India and there are movements to try to retain the distinctive Austronesian-ness of the Balinese Hinduism.

Another aspect of the social system is kinship. In Bali, there are two types of kinship: public kinship; and private kinship. The private kinship is sometimes called the "Hawaiian kinship" or the "Generational kinship" by anthropologists. In old Hawai`i, family relations depended on what generation you were born into. For example, uncles, aunts, and parents in old Hawai`i were all called makua (parent) because they were of the same generation. Likewise, your first cousins may refer to you as their brother or sister because you were both born in the same generation of the family line. Your second cousins (even if they are older than you), however, may refer to you as a makua since you are above them genealogy-wise. Of course with the adoption of Western family ties, this was replaced with the European model.

In the public kinship system, all Balinese belong to various Dadia. A dadia is a kinship relation where several families (sometimes consisting of several thousand people) are bound together in a clan or block because of a common ancestor. Traditionally, the dadia was important because of marital relationships. It was preferred that people marry within the same dadia and during times of trouble, an entire dadia was bound to help each family member out including in warfare. Likewise, under this system, there are no orphans as every member of a dadia would be obligated to help that child and adoptions within a dadia used to be common--like with the Hawaiian system of hanai. The dadia members also normally lived close to each other, share the same family shrines (gede), share in planting and harvesting of crops, participate in the same ceremonies and attended the same temples. Today, dadia are important politically because they are voting blocks and some say a source of corruption. A Balinese politician would try to court dadia family heads in order for ensure that the entire dadia would vote for him or her. Likewise, when a Balinese politician is elected, one of his or her first acts would be to ensure spoils to the dadia that voted for him.

With Hawaiians, there was a concept similar to the dadia called `alaea which for the most part was a clan composed of the commoner class. However, there has not been too much research on this aspect of Hawaiian society since anthropological research tends to be centered around the ali`i since there's more resources. In addition, one can argue that organizations (particularly the so-called "ali`i societies") like Ka Mamakaua or the Daughters and Sons of Hawaiian Warriors (photo below of a Ka Mamakaua ceremony from the 1930s) and the Order of Kamehameha are forms of dadia.

In regards to the Balinese dadia--though in Mindanao, you will find something similar among T'boli, the Tausugs, and especially the Maranao (which they sometimes call agakhan). One can also wonder if the barangay (town or canoe) system with the Tagalogs also had originally operated like the dadia. In addition, the dadia seems to also have striking similarities with the iwi (normally translated as tribe) of the Maori of Aotearoa-New Zealand and the way certain Samoan fale (houses) operate. This seems to suggest that the dadia is something indigenous to various Austronesian societies.

Austronesian Studies

Facebook Groups

"Thank You"

The Importance of Language And Culture:

De-Arabization of Islam

RepostSoheib Bencheikh:We Need Dearabization of Islam

Oleh: Redaksi

Malay vs. Austronesian

Article Repost: "Wilhelm von Humboldt’s Study of the Kawi Language: The Proof of the Existence of the Malayan-Polynesian Language Culture"

Article repost on Humboldt's Study of the Kawi language.

Ed. Note. The author believes that there exist a connection between Austronesian (Malayo-Polynesian) languages which was rejected by Humboldt and by most trained linguists, archaeologists, and anthropologists today. I am repost the article because of the context of Humboldt's original findings.

Wilhelm von Humboldt’s Study of the Kawi Language:The Proof of the Existence of the Malayan-Polynesian Language Culture

Philology: The Science of Language and History

Humboldt’s Discovery Today

Iā ʻOe e ka Lā: Around the World with King Kalākaua Part 1

Arab City: Remaking European Enclaves

Honoring Filipino Ancestors: Building Balangay

Hawaiian Lua or Martial Arts

Hawaiian Traditional Weaponry

The Making of a Keris

A Short Documentary about the Hokule'a

Dayak Traditional Dance

A short clip about Madagascar

Ang Hari Unang Hari [ng BangsaMoro]

Madagascar and the Future of the Nusantarian World

Announcement: New Austronesianists Facebook Group

Discussion Board Up

Balinese and Hawaiian Social Systems

Repost
Soheib Bencheikh:We Need Dearabization of Islam

Wilhelm von Humboldt’s Study of the Kawi Language:
The Proof of the Existence of the Malayan-Polynesian Language Culture