The "Dayak Kingdom" in West Kalimantan: earthly or spiritual?

Wadley, Reed L.

We have previously commented (Wadley and Smith 2001) on Research Notes by Djuweng (1999) and Sellato (1999) which referred to the existence ofa Dayak "Kingdom of the Headwaters" or "Upriver" (Hulu Aiq: HA hereafter (1)) in the interior of Ketapang District (Kabupaten), West Kalimantan. According to Djuweng (1999), the "kingdom" was a regional federation of Dayak groups, the seniority and historical prominence of which was acknowledged by the Malay sultanates in the area. Sellato (1999) proposed that the "kingdom" once controled large areas that extended northwards over the Kapuas, and that its strategic importance lasted until the Dutch took over control of the region in the 1850s. We, too, focused on the possible background of the "kingdom" in a historical context, i.e. as an area independent (or semi-independent) of the authority of the Malay rulers, and indeed possibly of later Dutch colonial authority.

A very different slant on the history and nature of the "kingdom" was given by John Bamba, Director of the Institut Dayakologi in Pontianak, in a wide-ranging discussion paper that related Dayak cultural values to ecosystem resilience in the face of profound changes in Kalimantan (Bamba 2000). According to Bamba, the "kingdom" still exists as a solely spiritual entity. Its "king" (Raja Hulu Aiq: RHA) "has no political power; he is not a king with a feudal government...." He is "the highest spiritual leader of the Dayak" in a region of Ketapang District, West Kalimantan, called Desa Sembilan Demung Sepuluh ("Nine Villages, Ten Customary Chiefs"). This area "is a territory of cultural binding that recognizes him as the highest leader of adat. RHA is believed by all the Dayak in Desa Sembilan Demung Sepuluh to be the one who was chosen to become the guarantor of the Dayak's good fate, especially in relation to farming activities. Therefore, the Dayak pay special tribute to the RHA by mentioning his name in prayers in farming rituals" (Bamba 2000: 37). Bamba also described the Meruba ritual (Maruba according to Djuweng) that is performed yearly to honor the sacred pusaka objects, inherited by the RHA's family, and only touched by the RHA. The objects include what Djuweng (1999) called the Besi Koling Tungkat Rakyat ("the Koling Iron Staff, the People's Champion"). In discussing the possible nature of this object, we commented that Spanish colonial authorities in the Philippines and Americas gave native agents canes or batons of office (Wadley and Smith 2001). Likewise, in the mid-1840s, Dutch officials in Borneo were authorized to distribute staffs (stokken) that were embossed with the arms of the Netherlands, as symbols of Dutch authority (Irwin 1955: 153). The first and second Brooke Rajahs gave staffs (tungkat) to native chiefs in Sarawak (C. Sather, personal communication: see also Editor's note). Wooden staffs of a very different kind were used in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries by the Batak priests of Sumatra as symbols of their power (Schnitger 1939: 85-100). They were about 1.7 m long, and their carvings sometimes depict an incestuous relationship between boy and girl twin siblings that echoes the story told by Djuweng (1999). Part of such a staff is illustrated in Barley (1999: Fig. 37). They had specially forged iron tips that were driven into the ground during ceremonies (Schnitger 1939: 85). More prosaically, iron produced in Matan, West Borneo, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, was transported in pieces about 20 cm long, 4 cm broad and I cm thick (Anon. 1827: 8). These dimensions are similar to those of the "Koling Staff' as given by Djuweng (1999: 105). Bamba's description of the "Koling Staff," however, is very different from any of the above objects. He describes it as a "yellow gold keris," or the remains thereof. The pusaka also includes a box and a plate, but the keris is the most powerful object. "Even RHA himself is not allowed to look at the keris when he cleans it during meruba ritual, or else he would go blind .... The pusaka is believed to possess the power of determining the course of nature" (Bamba 2000: 37-38). As a symbol of power, a keris seems very plausible, especially given Javanese traditions in the area (see Wadley and Smith 2001). The yellow-gold color--not mentioned by Djuweng--certainly suggests a strong connection to wider symbols of authority, both earthly and spiritual. According to Ave and King (1986: 19), examples of the "Majapahit keris," originally symbols of the authority of Majapahit in Java, have become ritual objects in various places in Central Borneo. Also, Harrisson (1966) described a golden keris handle of east Javanese origin, and possibly thirteenth or fourteenth century, from Balingian, Sarawak. However, such an origin was not claimed by Djuweng (1999), and his identification of the object as the remains of an iron staff fits uneasily with a keris handle. Djuweng had obtained his information from the nephew of the guardian of the object at the time, i.e. the nephew of the then RHA. Because the "Koling staff' and other pusaka objects are kept hidden, more detailed investigation may be impossible.

Bamba (2000) emphasized that respect paid by the Malay sultans--recorded in the Dayak oral traditions in the Ketapang district (see also Djuweng 1999)--arose from the spiritual power of the RHA, despite the oppressive rule imposed on the Dayak by the Malay rulers that extended into the Dutch colonial era. His account of the genealogy of the RHA (Bamba 2002) mentions disputes between village heads and successive RHAs that run counter to accepted beliefs that earthly and spiritual authorities in the lndo-Malay world are inextricably entwined. In fact, Bamba has given no indication that the RHA has ever held significant political power: hence the title of this Research Note. The present RHA, Singa Bansa, was sworn in as RHA in June 1997 (it is an interesting personal name, meaning in Malay "lion of the nation or people"). According to Bamba (2000), Singa Bansa believes that the (spiritual) territory of Desa Sembilan Demung Sepuluh covers wide areas in Borneo, naming the nine "villages" (or groups of villages) as Kayung-Tayap, Jalai-Pesuagan, Jekaq-Laur and Bihaq-Krio (all in Ketapang District), Mahap-Sekadau (Sanggau District), Desa Darat Pantai Kapuas (in the Kapuas river system), Buliq-Belantiq and Puring-Katingan (Central Kalimantan) and, as one desa, Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei Darussalam (Bamba 2000:38). The last of these nine areas, at least, seems an unlikely ambit claim, and one that other Dayaks distant from Ketapang would have some difficulty accepting. Several of the other eight desa are well beyond the territory described by Djuweng (1999), which included the northern half of Ketapang District, and possibly parts of Sanggau District south of the Kapuas and the southwest of Sintang District. The use of desa here is also interesting as the term is a largely Javanese concept of village (i.e. single villages) rather than "village clusters" as used by Singa Bansa (according to Bamba 2000), and the modern Indonesian administration. The influence of Java on western Borneo is, of course, quite ancient, and the "nine desa" may well have referred originally to a more localized village cluster in the north of the Ketapang District. This was the area on which we focused (Wadley and Smith 2001). An examination of the Dutch archives might help address this issue.

An important feature of Bamba's account (2000) is the information about the "coming out" of the RHA since the fall of Suharto. When the latter was in power, the RHA had disappeared from the lives of most Dayak: "he only existed in history." Nevertheless, the RHA "still regularly visited the Dayak in Meliau-Sanggau District where he received fair treatment and homage" (Bamba 2000: 41-42). It should be emphasized here that Djuweng's paper was first drafted before the fall of Suharto, in 1995 (see Sellato 1999) or even earlier: Bamba (2000) cites it as an unpublished paper of 1993. By 1998, however, the situation had changed dramatically. The new RHA appeared at a Tolak Bala ritual held in Ketapang that was organized by a local priest, Father Juli, and attended by many Dayak adat chiefs and shamans. This ceremony is traditionally held to restore the balance of nature and bring about peace, good harvests, etc. The version in 1998 was obviously politicized. On behalf of the Dayak people from the Desa Sembilan Demung Sepuluh, the RHA rejected the authority of the Adat Council set up by the Suharto regime (Bamba 2000: 41). As a result, Father Juli was fined by the Adat Council for not informing them or involving them in the ritual. This event resulted in the erection of a monument on supposedly sacred ground in Ketapang (also mentioned in an article in the Indonesian newspaper "Kompas" [Semua Etnis di Katapang Berikrar Hidup Damai: 22 March 2001]). This article also reported another Tolak Bala ritual held on 21 March 2001 which was designed not to make peace but to keep the peace, to avoid the inter-ethnic conflict then erupting in Central Kalimantan (2) These quite recent events suggested that the Dayak "kingdom" may now be evolving from its largely hidden spiritual basis to an open, more political role. However, according to Bamba (2002), the RHA has not become a more prominent personality. This seems to be due to different perceptions among the Dayak people of his importance, in both ritual and political terms. Bamba (2002) comments on the lack of respect given to the present RHA, Singa Bansa, even by the local people among whom he lives.

In conclusion, despite the differences in detail between the accounts by Djuweng (1999) and Bamba (2000, 2002), they both give a valuable demonstration of continuity in Dayak beliefs and tradition in a region that has received little attention in the past by specialist researchers, especially from outside Kalimantan. It remains to be resolved whether or not the RHA ever had a strong political role in West Borneo that encompassed the traditional nexus between earthly and spiritual authority, as suggested by Djuweng (1999) and emphasized by Sellato (1999). More detailed investigation of these traditions may reveal some very interesting regional or even ethnic variation, especially coupled with any insight to be had from the Dutch colonial archives. As for the future, it is still possible that, depending on local politics and the personalities involved, the role of the RHA will evolve in the coming years as Dayaks in Ketapang confront their political possibilities in the new era of regional autonomy. It will be a most fascinating and potentially far-reaching endeavor.

Editor's Note:

The question of "staffs" or tungkat is an interesting one. For the Iban, at least, the term tungkat, in addition to its usual meaning of staff, prop, or walking stick, may also refer to a summons in the form of a stick. The use of a staff, or stick, as a summoning device appears to be an early one, predating colonial rule. The entry on tungkat in the newly published Encyclopaedia of Iban Studies gives an excellent summary of this use and its colonial appropriation:

 As a summons, tungkat were sent around to alert recipients that they
 were being directed to assemble at the sender's house or at some
 place he might designate. Tungkat might have attached to them a
 feather or a piece of charred wood to convey the urgency of a
 response, a piece of wood cut in such a way the curlings were peeled
 back (bungaijarau) to indicated some impending conflict, and a
 string with as many knots as the number of days before the recipient
 was required to appear (temuku' tali). After the imposition of
 colonial rule and the creation of the office of Penghulu, tungkat
 became official notices, and were kept in the District Office or in
 the house of a Penghnlu (Sutlive et al. 2001: 1916).

(1) Hulu Aiq: this is the name according to the Krio Dayak. There are variations such as Ulu Are in other Dayak languages of the area: see the Research Note by Bamba (2002) that follows this one.

(2) Bamba (2002) gives more details of the Tolak Bala rituals in 1998 and 2001.

REFERENCES

Anonymous

1827 Memoir on the Residency of the North-West coast of Borneo. IN: Moor, J.H. 1837 (ed). Notices of the Indian Archipelago and Adjacent Countries. Reprinted 1968. pp. 5-12. London: Frank Cass & Co. Ltd.

Ave, J.B., and King, V.T.

1986 The people of the weeping forest: tradition and change in Borneo. Leiden: National Museum of Ethnology.

Bamba, J.

2000 Land, Rivers, and Forests: Dayak Solidarity and Ecological Resilience. 1N: J. B. AIcorn and A. G. Royo, eds., Indigenous Social Movements and Ecological Resilience: Lessons from the Dayak of Indonesia, pp. 35-60. People, Forests, and Reefs (PeFoR) Program Discussion Paper. Washington, D.C.: Biodiversity Support Program. (Website: www. BSPonline. org)

2002 Re-emergence of Raja Hulu Aiq: motives and impacts. Borneo Research Bulletin 33 (this volume).

Barley, N., ed.

1999 The Golden Sword: Stamford Raffles and the East. London: British Museum Press.

Djuweng, S.

1999 Dayak Kings among Malay Sultans. Borneo Research Bulletin 30: 105108.

Harrisson, T.

1966 A golden keris handle from Balingian, Sarawak. Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 39/1 : 175-181.

Irwin, G.

1955 Nineteenth-Century Borneo: A study in Diplomatic Rivalry. Verhandelingen van het Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, deel XV. s'Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff.

Schnitger, F.M.

1939 Forgotten Kingdoms in Sumatra. Leiden: E.J. Brill. Reprinted 1989 Singapore: Oxford University Press.

Sellato, B.

1999 The Kingdom of Ulu Are in Borneo's History: a Comment. Borneo Research Bulletin 30:109-112.

Sutlive, Vinson and Joanne, gen. editors

2001 Tungkat, The Encyclopaedia of Iban Studies, Vol Ill, p. 1916. Kuching: The Tun Jugah Foundation in cooperation with the Borneo Research Council.

Wadley, R.L., and Smith, F.A.

2001 Dayak Kings, Malay Sultans, Oral Histories, and Colonial Archives: a Comment on Djuweng (1999) and Sellato (1999). Borneo Research Bulletin 32: 57-67.

F. Andrew Smith

Department of Soil and Water, Waite Campus, University of Adelaide, Glen Osmond 5064 Australia

Reed L. Wadley

Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri-Colombia, Columbia MO 65211 USA