Since taking over as prime minister of Malaysia in 2009, Datuk Seri
Najib Razak has been promoting a particular vision of
nation-building, encapsulated in the catchy slogan ‘1Malaysia’. In
an interview in 2010, the prime minister explained that he aims to
strengthen Malaysian society by encouraging a spirit of tolerance
that would gradually lead to the acceptance and, finally,
celebration of Malaysia’s significant cultural diversity. According
to official publications, 1Malaysia seeks to strengthen the
relationships and cooperation among the country’s multi-ethnic
peoples. While critics say that the concept merely re-packages old
Malaysian ‘moderate’ values into a new public-relations tool for
the Barisan Nasional, the ruling coalition, many others believe
that if properly implemented, the campaign could be a step in the
right direction. While a clear roadmap of how this pluralistic
society – where ethnic identities are endemic and political – can
achieve such an ideal has yet to emerge, Malaysia’s experience is
of interest to countries across South and Southeast Asia for its
capacity to maintain a fragile ethnic balance and minimise ethnic
conflict.
In Malaysia, it has been rare for
hybrid identities to survive into the modern period.
For economic expediency, the British divided the
indigenous Malay, Indian and Chinese diasporas by occupation and
therefore also by geographic location. In part, this was similar to
the divide-and-conquer policies used by the British elsewhere in
the colonies, including between the Hindu and Muslim communities in
India. In
Malaysia, the Indians were employed in the rubber estates and other
plantations, the Chinese in the tin mines, while the Malays
remained in agriculture and fishing. Inevitably, this resulted in a
society deeply divided along ethnic lines.
Against this complicated background,
the forefathers of Malayan independence confronted the daunting
task of maintaining the fragile multi-ethnic balance within the
framework of the Constitution of Malaya, as the country was called
prior to independence (not including ‘East’ Malaysia, consisting of
the Borneo states of Sabah and Sarawak). After the Japanese
occupation from 1942 to 1945, Britain’s overriding concern was to
unite Malaya under one federation. Ironically but unsurprisingly,
British efforts at crafting a constitution for an independent
Malaya were hampered by the ethnic cleavages they themselves had
created. As a
consequence, the build-up to independence saw the growth of Malay
nationalism and the emergence of three ethnically exclusive
political parties: the dominant United Malays National Organization
(UMNO), the Malayan Chinese Association (MCA) and the Malayan
Indian Congress (MIC).
Though Malaya gained its independence from the British in 1957, the
Federation of Malaysia only came into existence in 1963 with the
amalgamation of Sabah and Sarawak as well as Singapore (which left
the federation shortly thereafter). From the start, the political
stability of multi-ethnic Malaysia was premised on the numerical
majority and political primacy of the ethnic Malays, who together
with the indigenous populations of Sabah and Sarawak were entitled
to special constitutionally enshrined rights
as bumiputeras – sons of the soil. At the same
time, the Constitution guaranteed protection of the genuine and
legitimate interests of the non-Malay communities. Since then, both
at the federal and the state levels, Malaysian politics has been
organised around ethnicity and race.
Today, most Malaysians continue to define their identity primarily
by race. Indeed, it is rare to come across hybrid Malaysian
communities that practice multiculturalism and do not classify
themselves as solely Malay, Chinese or Indian, particularly because
the state’s distribution of resources is based on race. In other
words, no one wants to be left behind with respect to access to
government employment, scholarships or education, sectors that have
race-based quotas.
Hindu
amalgam
Yet unknown to many Malaysians, for the last 600 years a small
community (today about 700 people) known as the Melaka Chittys has
been quietly practicing the values espoused by 1Malaysia, imbibing
neighbouring ethnicities, languages and cultures to create a hybrid
identity. Malaysia’s ethnic politics and cultural diversity have
long drawn the attention of scholars from around the world, but
even 54 years after independence this society continues to be
viewed primarily through the prism of its most dominant and visible
ethnic communities. Its numerous smaller hybrid communities,
meanwhile, remain largely unknown. In fact, in official parlance
they are often classified under the vague category of ‘Others’,
though the Chittys themselves are lumped together with the
‘Indians’.
The Melaka Chittys live tucked away in Gajah Berang, a small
village on the shores of the famed Melaka Strait that was given to
them by Dutch colonisers in 1781. Now it is located in the heart of
the historic town of Melaka. Also known as the ‘straits-born
Hindus’ or the ‘Indianperanakans’ (the Malay word for
‘local born’), the heterogeneous Chitty community was born of a
long history of inter-marriage between women from the local Malay,
Javanese, Chinese and Batak communities and Indian traders from
Kalinga (presumably in modern-day Orissa and Andhra Pradesh, though
most today claim to be of Tamil origin). These latter settled in
Melaka during the heyday of the spice trade in the early 15th
century, long before the arrival of the European colonisers. In
fact, the Chittys trace their roots back to the days of the founder
of the Melaka sultanate, King Parameswara (1344-1414).
While the Chittys went on to assimilate an extraordinary mix of
cultural practices due to these mixed marriages, two distinct
features continue to define them 600 years later. First is their
steadfast adherence to Hinduism; second, a local Malay patois that
is their lingua franca. Local sources at Gajah Berang suggest that
while the Indian men remained loyal to their religion over hundreds
of years, their local wives introduced a host of local practices,
food and clothing into their households. The results have been
fascinating. The Chittys unwaveringly observe Hindu festivals and
auspicious days with much fanfare, but the offerings made to the
gods – nasi lemak, kuih-muih,
chili achar – are obviously influenced by Malay
cuisine.
Chitty wedding attire is another striking example. The groom wears
traditional South Indian outfits, while the bride holds her own in
an ethnic Baba-Nyonya headdress and the Malay baju kebaya
panjang labuh. In fact, the Baba-Nyonya are themselves a mixed
community, emerging as a result of Chinese-Malay intermarriages.
Locals in Gajah Berang suggest that the Baba-Nyonya and
Chittys also bonded due to intermarriage; as a result, the Chittys
borrowed the Baba-Nyonya bridal headdress for their own wedding
ceremonies. The baju kebaya, meanwhile, is the
traditional clothing for Malay women;
the panjang (long) labuh (loose)
refers to the types worn by Malay women in the neighbouring state
of Johor.
It is interesting to note that despite their mixed heritage and
dilution of their Indian ethnicity, the Chitty community is still
generally seen as Indian in Malaysia. Yet in a country where an
overwhelming majority of Indians speak Tamil, the Chittys stand out
as having consistently used the Malay language for six centuries.
In fact, most Chittys speak no Tamil whatsoever except for
religious purposes, and even then it is sparingly used. At the same
time, it is very common in a Chitty home today to find members
belonging to an array of ethnic communities. Chitty cuisine is also
indicative of all these multicultural influences, particularly of
the Malays.
How has Chitty culture survived in spite of frequent intermarriage?
The answer, simply, is that when a Chitty man marries a non-Chitty
woman, the bride is required to ‘adapt’ to the Chitty way of life,
embracing Hindu practices, the Malay language and a host of other
Chitty cultural practices. At the same time, the woman is free to
introduce additional cultural practices of her own into the house,
especially when it comes to food and dress (and historically, the
locally spoken Malay language). Some believe that such compromises
have allowed the Chitty way of life to continue despite dwindling
numbers and constant intermarriages.
Now, however, many older Chittys lament that members of the younger
generation are quickly leaving behind their unique heritage and
assimilating into the mainstream Tamil Indian culture of Malaysia.
This may be particularly true for those who marry ethnic Indian
women, adopt mainstream Tamil Indian cultural traits, send their
children to Tamil-language schools and seek to recover what they
see as a ‘lost’ language and culture. On a deeper level, this
‘return’ to their original ‘pure’ ethnic ancestry could be regarded
as an attempt to belong to the mainstream ethnic communities by
shedding the image of marginalisation. There are others, however,
who believe that the unique Chitty identity must be maintained at
all costs.
Tattering
history
The history of the Melaka Chitty has yet to be recorded by
professional historians. This lack of scholarship rests primarily
on the absence of written records within the Chitty community, as
most such documents have been lost over the last six centuries.
Most Chittys feel that over time they have also lost their sense of
community and their connection to their history and culture; old
traditions of oral history and storytelling are fast
disappearing.
A local group, the Chitty Cultural Association, has taken the
initiative to locate, collect and preserve the few historical
sources that remain. A small museum in Gajah Berang appears to be
the community’s most complete and perhaps its only local repository
of historical narrative. The association believes that some
relevant primary documents still survive in archives in India,
Indonesia and Portugal; the Chittys in Singapore, who migrated to
the island soon after its separation from Malaysia, also possess
some historical photographs. At the moment, however, the exact
whereabouts of this potential documentation is unknown. If located,
preserved and made accessible, such documents would be invaluable
to the study of Melaka Chitty history – and could also offer
today’s Malaysians an increased sense of their shared past and
identity.
Consequently, today very few Malaysians are even aware of the
existence of this unique community, and often confuse the Chittys
with the better-known Indian trading caste,
or chettiars. In the early Melaka period, the Chittys
had wielded considerable influence in the court, and even held high
offices like that of the syahbandar (harbour
master) andbendahara (a position almost equal to the
prime minister). However, they later earned a degree of
unpopularity for indirectly siding with the Portuguese conquest of
Melaka in 1511 in return for trade privileges, as part of a power
contest with the Indian Muslims who also wielded considerable power
under the Melaka sultanate. Over the years, however, the Chittys
have become less visible due to decreasing numbers, intermarriages
as well as migration to Singapore, where many have converted to
Christianity.
While the Chittys themselves believe that their history provides
valuable lessons for today’s 1Malaysia campaign, this diminishing
community today faces a serious identity crisis. Even as many
Chitty men marrying Indian women now identify less with their
Chitty roots, some continue to hold on to their unique ways and
practices, which have historically merged with original Tamil
culture to create something exceptional and truly Malaysia. In
recent years, as Malaysian Indians have asserted their own
identities more strongly, the Chittys have remained generally
untouched by this process. In fact, the Chitty Cultural Association
recently made a request to the government, noting that due to the
community’s unique heritage and historical roots in Melaka state,
it should be granted the status
of bumiputera like the other mixed communities,
such as the descendants of the early Portuguese settlers in
Melaka.
Among the Chittys, the notion of 1Malaysia exists and already has a
history. Whether this history can be replicated once again in a
country that has been practising ethnic politics since its
independence remains to be seen. But given their minuscule numbers,
rapidly diminishing identity and lack of visibility, it is highly
unlikely that their unique heritage can be held up as an example of
how ‘unity in diversity’ can be achieved through the creation of
new communities through inter-marriage. Furthermore, as long as the
historically created ethnic-based political parties continue to
exist in present-day Malaysia, the three major races will continue
to cling to their own identities, thus effectively negating any
historical gain that may have been made by such hybrid
communities.
~ Anindita Dasgupta is an associate professor of history at
Taylor’s University in Kuala Lumpur.
~ K Nadarajan Raja is secretary of the Chitty Cultural
Association and a former chairperson of the Chitty Museum in
Melaka.
http://www.himalmag.com/component/content/article/5035-.html
The Chitty are
a distinctive group of Tamil
people found
mainly in Malacca and Singapore,
who are also known as the Indian Peranakans.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chitty
Harry Lee Kuan Yew is a hakka
peranakan. There are also indian peranakans. Both are peranakans. I
am curious as to the views of Harry Lee Kuan Yew towards the indian
peranakans.
Hakka peranakans like Harry Lee Kuan Yew and Lee Hsien Loong can
become prime ministers of Singapore. Indians cannot be prime
minister of Singapore.
What about indian peranakans? Can they be prime ministers of
Singapore?