¹ Berg, C. C., “Indonesia,” in Whither Islam?, ed. Gibb, H. A. R. (London, 1932), p. 262.Google Scholar

² Hurgronje, C. Snouck, The Achchnese, trans. O'Sullivan, A. W. S. (Leiden/London, 1906), I, 208–9Google Scholar. Bescheiden betreffende de buitenlandse politick van Nederland, Period 2, ed. J. Woltring, I (The Hague, 1962), 612. Danvers, F. C., The Portuguese in India (London, 1894), I, 480 and 534Google Scholar. Although in 1874 Turkey credited Sultan Selim I (1512–20) with having granted vassal status to Atjeh, this was most likely done in 1563, when the arrival of an Atjehnese embassy is recorded in the Ottoman archives; Voorhoeve, P., “Atjeh,” Encyclopedia of Islam, new ed. (Leiden/London, 1960), I, 743.Google Scholar

³ Simon, Gottfried, The Progress and Arrest of Islam in Sumatra (London, 1912), pp. 38–9.Google Scholar

⁴ The most recent of an impressive list of studies on this subject is Geertz, Clifford, The Religion of Java (Glencoe, 1960).Google Scholar

⁵ Vredenbregt, J., “The Haddj, Some of Its Features and Functions in Indonesia,” BKI, 118 (1962), 140–52.Google Scholar

⁶ Lavino to Read, July 21, 1873, Algemeen Rijksarchief, Consulaat Penang 100.

⁷ Hurgronje, C. Snouck, Mekka, in the Latter Part of the Nineteenth Century, trans. Monahan, J. H. (Leiden/London, 1931), pp. 220–30.Google Scholar

⁸ There were estimated to be 10,000 such residents in the 1920's, though an official count in 1937 revealed only 3,113, of whom 1,400 were students; Bousquet, G.-H., La politique musulmane et coloniale des Pays-Bas (Paris, 1938), pp. 38–9.Google Scholar

⁹ Snouck Hurgronje, Mekka, pp. 259–61.

¹⁰ van den Berg, L. W. C., Le Hadhramaut et les colonies arabes dans l'archipel Indien (Batavia, 1886), pp. 105–20Google Scholar. Morley, J. A., “The Arabs and the Eastern Trade,” JMBRAS, 22, Pt. I (1949), 156Google Scholar. Hurgronje, Snouck, “L'Arabie et les Indes Néerlandaises,” Revue de l'Histoire des Religions, 57 (1908) 74–5Google Scholar. Encyclopedia van Nederlandsch-Indië (The Hague, 1917), II, 3.Google Scholar

¹¹ Vredenbregt, pp. 98–103.

¹² Hurgronje, Snouck, Nederland en de Islam, 2nd ed. (Leiden, 1915), p. 73Google Scholar. A different motive for antagonism towards Holland among a small group of Western-educated Turks was revealed in the semi-official Constantinople newspaper La Turquie, in May–July, 1873. This dwelt less on religious grievances than on the evils of the forced cultivation system, in a manner similar to that of European liberals.

¹³ Van de Putte to Cremers, Nov. 1, 1864, Algemeen Rijksarchief, Kol.Kab. F¹¹, Dossier 5971.

¹⁴ For a discussion of this community see Roff, W. R., “The Malayo-Muslim world of Singapore at the Close of the Nineteenth Century,” JAS, XXIV, No. 1 (1964), 75–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁵ Van de Putte to Cremers, Jan. 4, 1866; also Read to Cremers, July 31, 1865; A.R.A., Buitenlandse Zaken Dossier 3076.

¹⁶ Read to Loudon, June 23, 1873, copy Koloniēn to B.Z., Sept. 6, 1873, Buitenlandse Zaken Dossier Atjeh.

¹⁷ Foreign Office to Colonial Office, Apr. 13, and July 20, 1885, C.O.273/137.

¹⁸ So called by Europeans, presumably because they first heard the Islamic party described by analogy with the priests of the Portuguese. Contemporary Malays referred to them only as orang puteh, in reference to the white robes commonly associated with Muslin fervor. A recent Indonesian work refers to the “Padris” only as kaum muda Islam, thus associating them with modernism; Dawis Datoek Madjolelo and Ahmad Marzoeki, Tuanku Imam Bondjol (Djakarta/Amsterdam, 1951), pp. 61–2 and passim.

¹⁹ Johns, A. H., “Muslim Mystics and Historical Writing,” Historians of South East Asia, ed. Hall, D. G. E. (London, 1961), p. 42.Google Scholar

²⁰ Madjolelo and Marzoeki, pp. 46–7. Kern, R. A., “Padri,” The Encyclopedia of Islam, III (Leiden/London, 1936), 1018Google Scholar. Schrieke, B., “Bijdragen tot de Bibliografie van de huidige godsdienstige beweging ter Sumatra's Westkust,” TBG, 59 (1919–21), 249–57Google Scholar. Schrieke's emphatic contention that the “Padris” were not Wahhabis is no doubt strictly correct, in view of the paucity of communication with Arabia and the very different conditions with which reformers in Menangkabau were faced. His argument does not, however, appear to destroy the orthodox view that the three Menangkabau hajis were to some extent inspired by the example of the Wahhabis, then threatening Mecca and Medina from their base in Nejd.

²¹ As so often the case, the military aspect of the war has received voluminous treatment, though the “Padris” remain in the shadows. See H. M. Lange, Het Nederlandsch Oost-Indisch Leger ter Westkust van Sumatra (1819–1845), 2 Vols. ('s Hertogenbosch, 1852). de Stuers, H. J. J. L., De Vestiging en uitbreiding der Nederlanders ter Westkust van Sumatra, 2 Vols. (Amsterdam, 1849–50)Google Scholar. More balanced are the series of articles by Kielstra, E. B. in BKI, 36 (1887), 7–163Google Scholar; BKI, 37 (1888), 216–380Google Scholar; BKI, 38 (1889), 161–249, 313–79, 467–514Google Scholar; BKI, 39 (1890), 127–221, 263–348Google Scholar; BKI, 40 (1891), 254–330, 622–706.Google Scholar

²² de Klerck, E. S., De Atjeh-oorlog (The Hague, 1912), pp. 145–51, 163–6.Google Scholar

²³ Schrieke, pp. 262–6. The importance of the Naqshibandiyah-tariqah in fostering more exclusive attitudes during the second half of the nineteenth century is clearly very great, though Schrieke is virtually alone in treating the subject in a systematic manner. Its growth in Bantam during the 1880's was almost certainly connected with anti-Dutch movements there. The Dutch Consul-General in Singapore noted with anxiety that the order was gaining strength there in the late 1880's, when it counted about 500 members; Verzameling van Consulaire en andere Verslagen en Berigten, 1889, 56–7.

²⁴ de Klerck, E. S., History of the Netherlands East Indies (Rotterdam, 1938), II, 279–84Google Scholar. Once more the international connection is not well established. The Dutch did, however, take action in 1857 against a rumor circulated in Sumatra by returning hajis, to the effect that some ulama in Mecca had received a revelation that the Prophet was weeping over the advance of the Christian Powers in Asia; Cavenagh, Orfeur, Reminiscences of an Indian Official (London, 1884), pp. 355–6.Google Scholar

²⁵ Note by Bureau A: “Turksche bemoeijing in den N.I. Archipel,” n.d. (1864), A.R.A., Kol.Kab. H¹⁰, Dossier 5970. Rochussen to Van Goltstein, Sept. 4, 1858; Van Zuylen van Nyeveldt to Goltstein, Sept. 30, 1858; A.R.A., B.Z. Dossier 3076. Tideman, J., Djambi (Amsterdam, 1938), pp. 31–3.Google Scholar

²⁶ Encyclopedic van Nederlansch-Indië I, 135–6 and 274. W. A. van Rees, De Bandjermasinsche Krijg van 1859–1863 (Arnhem, 1865), pp. 31–51, 165–6, 180–3, 284–6.

²⁷ Hasselman to Van Zuylen van Nyeveldt, Sept. 6, 1867, A.R.A. Kol.Kab. X⁹, Dossier 5994. De Atjeh-oorlog, pp. 294–5. Kroesen, C. A., “Geschiedenis van Asahan,” TBG, 31 (1886), 107n.Google Scholar

²⁸ Heldewier to Gericke, June 19 and 26, 1873, Buitenlandse Zaken Dossier Atjeh.

²⁹ De Atjeh-oorlog. pp. 216–7.

³⁰ Ibid., pp. 461–2. Alexander, , “Korte levensschets van de Arabier Habib Abdoe'rRahman Alzahir,” De Indische Gids, 2 (1880), Pt. II, 1008–20.Google Scholar

³¹ Keun to Roest van Limburg, Dec. 2, 1868 and Feb. 3, 1869, A.R.A., B.Z. Dossier 3076.

³² Woltring, p. 420.

³³ Ibid., p. 541. Davison, R. H., Reform in the Ottoman Empire 1856–76 (Princeton, 1963), p. 276Google Scholar. Constantinople press clippings of May-July 1873 in Buitenlandse Zaken, Dossier Atjeh.

³⁴ Elliot to Granville, May 8, 1873, F.O. 78/2267.

³⁵ Woltring, pp. 612–4. Heldewier to Gericke, July 7 and 23, 1873, Buitenlandse Zaken, Dossier Atjeh.

³⁶ Heldewier to Gericke, Dec. 1, 6, 15, 1873, Buitenlandse Zaken, Dossier Atjeh.

³⁷ Maier to Loudon, Nov. 22 and Dec. 14, 1874, copies to Lavino, Algemeen Rijksarchief, Consulaat Penang 99.

³⁸ Davison, p. 276. Heldewier to Gericke, July 11, 1873, Buitenlandse Zaken, Dossier Atjeh.

³⁹ Lavino to Read, Sept. 5, 1873, A.R.A., Consulaat Penang 100.

⁴⁰ Enclosures in Governor-General to Koloniën, Sept. 27, Oct. 7, and Oct. 15, 1873, A.R.A., KoI.Kab. D³³, Dossier 6042. Series of letters, July–September 1873, in A.R.A., Consulaat Singapore 100.

⁴¹ Tramp to Loudon, Nov. 26, 1873, copy Governor-General to Koloniën, Dec. 19, 1873, A.R.A., Kol.Kab. A⁹, Dossier 6047.

⁴² Secret Report of K. H. Hall, July 30, 1873, copy Governor-General to Koloniën, Aug. 16, 1873, A.R.A., Kol.Kab. Q³⁰, Dossier 6040.

⁴³ Read to Loudon, Dec. 17, 1873, copy Governor-General to Koloniën, Aug. 16, 1873, A.R.A., Kol.Kab. Q³⁰, Dossier 6040.

⁴⁴ Harris to Granville, July 22, 1873, F.O. 37/534.

⁴⁵ Woltring, p. 586.

⁴⁶ Circular to Consuls in Muslim countries, Aug. 22, 1873, F.O. 83/414.

⁴⁷ Government of India to Argyll, Oct. 2, 1873, copy India Office to Foreign Office, Nov. 3, 1873, F.O. 37/519.

⁴⁸ Lavino to Van Lansberge, Nov. 25, 1875; Maier to Van Lansberge, Nov. 16, 1875; A.R.A., Consulaat Penang 102 and 99 resp. The only phenomenon in the Peninsula bearing a resemblance to the type of Islamic movement described in this paper was the rebellion led by Orang Kay a Bahman in Pahang (1891–5). Beginning, as so often, with the personal grievance of a chief, the movement gained considerable popular support even in neighboring Trengganu and Kelantan as the result of a religious appeal against the British. This appeal certainly owed much to the inspiration of a famous Trengganu religious leader, Ungku Sayyid, and some Pahang hajis, but on the other hand Malaya's East Coast was isolated from the main stream of the nineteenth century Muslim awakening. On the popular level magical charms and mystical formulae appear to have been more important than Islamic solidarity. See Linehan, W., “A History of Pahang,” JMBRAS, 14, Pt. 2 (1936), 139–68Google Scholar; and for some colorful anecdotes Clifford, Hugh, Bush-whacking (Edinburgh/London, 1901), pp. 64–8.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Maier to Willebois, Sept. 18, 1875, Buitenlandse Zaken Dossier Atjeh. Read to Van Lansberge, Mar. 16 and Apr. 17, 1876, copies to Lavino, A.R.A., Consulaat Penang 99.

⁵⁰ Maier to Read, May 8, 1875 (private), extract in Bylandt to Willebois, June 12, 1875, Buitenlandse Zaken Dossier Atjeh.

⁵¹ Maier to Van Lansberge, July 24, 1875, copy to Lavino, A.R.A., Consulaat Penang 99. The rumor apparently derived from Turkey's announcement of its intention to appoint an ambassador to Peking to protect Chinese Muslims.

⁵² Sultan Daud to Alsagoff, 18 Ragab 1307H (Mar. 10, 1890), trans. Governor-General to Koloniën, Sept. 12, 1890; Van Assen to Van Teijn, Sept. 13, 1890, copy G-G. to Koloniën, Sept. 26, 1890; A.R.A., Kol.Kab. H¹⁶, Dossier 6198.

⁵³ Deijkerhoff to Pijnacker Hordijk, Mar. 17, 1893, copy G-G. to Koloniën, Mar. 30, 1893, A.R.A., Kol.Kab. N⁸, Dossier 6219. Enclosures in Smith to Meade, May 30, 1892 (private), and Smith to Ripon, Oct. 19, 1892, C.O. 273/180 and 273/183.

⁵⁴ Ambtelijke Adviezen van C. Snouck Hurgronje. ed. Gobée, E. and Adriaanse, C. (The Hague, 1957–9), I, 153–7.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Arnold, T. W., The Caliphate (Oxford, 1924), pp. 173–7Google Scholar. Hurgronje, C. Snouck, The Holy War “Made in Germany,” trans. Gillet, J. E. (New York, 1915), pp. 23–7.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Weld to Kimberley, May 18 and 28, 1881, C.O. 273/108.

⁵⁷ Weld to Kimberley, Aug. 27, 1881, CO. 273/109.

⁵⁸ The Dutch Consul-General in Singapore, W. H. Read, always suspicious of Alsagoff, had a similar impression. He pointed accusingly at the hospitality the Sayyid had extended to some of the Palembang conspirators and to the anti-Dutch leaders in Djambi, and alleged that he had promised support to the latter; Weld to 's-Jacob, Oct. 4, 1881 (most confidential), private Singapore letterbook III, Singapore Museum.

⁵⁹ Bantam, like Atjeh, inherited the legacy of a flourishing seventeenth century mercantile emporium and Muslim center. Conquered by force alone in 1682 and again after a revolt in 1751, the inhabitants of the northern coastal plain in particular were ever prone to express their discontent over miserable economic conditions by revolting under religious leadership. The minor outbreak of 1881 was one of several, marking a gradual rise in tension from the preaching of Haji Abdul Karim in 1872, and the activity of the Naqshibandiyah-tariqah, to the violent climax of July 1888, when all the European men in Tjilegon, including an Assistant-Resident of Serang, were assassinated. Most of the leaders of the revolt were hajis, one of them a son of Haji Wachia. The effect of the Tjilegon affair on contemporary Dutch opinion was considerable; it cost “not only the lives of a small group of Europeans established there, but also the normal working of the intelligence of a much more important number of Europeans in the Indies”; C. Snouck Hurgronje, “Vergeten Jubilé's” (1923), Verspreide Geschriften (Bonn/Leipzig, 1924–6), IV, ii, 429. Also Encyclopedic van Nederlandsch Oost Indië (The Hague, 1918–38), I, 166. Snouck Hurgronje, Verspreide Geschriften, IV, i, 249–56. A similar incident had occurred in the supposedly “pacified” part of Djambi in May 1885, when three Europeans had been killed by two hajis.

⁶⁰ Lavino to Rochussen, Aug. 22, 1881, Buitenlandse Zaken Dossier Atjeh.

⁶¹ Ambtelijke Adviezen, II, 1617, 1619–20, 1737–8.

⁶² Ibid., p. 1662.

⁶³ Ibid., pp. 1740–1. Bescheiden betreffende de buitenlandse politiek van Nederland, Period 3, ed. C. Smit (The Hague, 1957–), I, 166–7, and II, 250–1, 280–1. Mitchell to Chamberlain, Jan. 6, 1899, GD/C 7, Singapore Museum. Enclosures in C.O. to Singapore, July 14 and 19, 1904, COD/C 41, Singapore Museum. After the death of Haji Attaoullah in 1903 and the subsequent British veto of Kiamil, successive German Consuls acted as Turkish Consuls-General in Singapore.

⁶⁴ Trans, in C.O. to Singapore, Mar. 30, 1899, COD/C 31, Singapore Museum.

⁶⁵ Ambtelijke Adviezen, II, 1620–42.

⁶⁶ Ibid., pp. 1647–52. Enclosures in B.Z. to Koloniën, 11 Mar. 1899, A.R.A., Kol.Kab. P⁴, Dossier 6260.

⁶⁷ Swettenham to Chamberlain, July 6, 1900, GD/C 8, Singapore Museum.

⁶⁸ Ambtelijke Adviezen, II, 1640.

⁶⁹ Koloniaal Verslag, 1905, p. 43. Encyclopedic van Nederlandsch–Indië, I, 612. At the same period four Turkish instructors were reported to be assisting in the defence of Boni (Celebes); Ambtelijke Adviezen, II, 1743.

⁷⁰ Ibid., pp. 1741–4. Musurus Pasha to Lansdowne, June 29, 1904, copy C.O. to Singapore, July 6, 1904, COD/C 41, Singapore Museum.

⁷¹ Ambtelijke Adviezen, II, 1662.

⁷² Smit, II, 271–4, 328–9, 364–6, 443–5.

⁷³ We are still in need of a full appraisal of the work of Snouck Hurgronje for a better knowledge of the foundations of the ethical policy. The excellent essay of H. J. Benda in The Crescent and the Rising Sun. Indonesian Islam under the Japanese Occupation, 1942–1945 (The Hague, 1958), pp. 19–31 would appear somewhat to exaggerate the obscurantism of Dutch policy-makers before Snouck Hurgronje.

⁷⁴ The Holy War “Made in Germany,” X, p. 27.

⁷⁵ Nederland en de Islam, 2nd ed. (Leiden, 1915), p. 99Google Scholar and passim. Also “Over Panislamisme,” 1910, Verspreide Geschriften, ed. Wensinck, A. J. (Leiden, 1922), I, 378 and passim.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Particularly those of Benda, op. cit., Van Niel, Robert, The Emergence of the Modern Indonesian Elite (The Hague/Bandung, 1960)Google Scholar. van Nieuwenhuijze, C. A. O., Aspects of Islam in Post-colonial Indonesia (The Hague/Bandung, 1958).Google Scholar

⁷⁷ The Crescent and the Rising Sun, p. 31.