We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 August 2009
In late May 1904 a small band of people led by a certain Kasan Mukmin, a kyai or rural religious teacher, mounted an uprising in the village of Kebonpasar in Gedangan district of Sidoarjo regency, East Java. It was a single incident in a series of protests involving small groups of affluent peasants in Java between 1880 and 1920 which are difficult to explain in terms of the “moral economy” perspective. J.C. Scott has suggested that increasing intrusion of market economic forces into the indigenous economic life in the process of capitalist economic transformation eroded the subsistence margin of peasants instigating them to mount uprisings. This view may well explain some major peasant uprisings in Southeast Asia, but as Mukmin's uprising illustrates, numerous small rural protests in Java after 1880 occurred in relatively prosperous areas and involved affluent peasants. They were not caused by violation of peasants' perception of moral economy.
I am grateful to Professor J.J. Fox and Dr W. Keeler at the Australian National University, Dr H. Dick at the University of New Castle, Professor C. Fasseur at the University of Leiden and an anonymous reader for the Journal of Southeast Asian Studies for their comments on this paper. They are, however, not responsible for the views expressed in this paper.
1 These uprisings are briefly discussed by Ricklefs, M.C., A History of Modern Indonesia (London: Macmillan Press, 1981), pp. 123–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The best account of uprisings is Kartodirdjo, Sartono, Protest Movements in Rural Java (Singapore: Oxford University Press, 1973), pp. 64–105Google Scholar. Kartodirjo, Sartono has also written a succinct survey, “Agrarian Radicalism in Java: Its Setting and Development”, in Holt, C. (ed.), Culture and Politics in Indonesia (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1972), pp. 71–125Google Scholar.
2 Scott, J.C., The Moral Economy of the Peasant (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1976)Google Scholar.
3 Telegram, Resident Lange to the Governor-General, 27 May 1904 no. 196, Mail Rapport (hereafter MR) 1904 no. 494; telegram, Resident of Surabaya to Governor General, 27 Apr. 1904 no. 11, MR 1904 no. 494, Archief Ministerie van Kolonien (hereafter AMK) Verbaal (hereafter V) 16 Jul. 1904–6, Algemeen Rijksar-chief, The Hague (hereafter ARA).
4 “Kort verslag omtrent de voorgevallen onlusten in de afdeeling Sidoardjo” [by Th.A. Smulders, Assistant Resident of Sidoarjo], 5 Jun. 1904, MR 1904 no. 543, AMK V 13 Aug. 1904–30, ARA.
2 Koloniaal Verslag (hereafter KV) 1904, p. 4; KV 1905, pp. 4–5.
6 “Het oproer te Sidoardjo”, De Locomotief, 2 06 1904Google Scholar.
7 Summaries of newspaper reports on the uprising are found in “De rust op Java”, Indische Gids (hereafter IG) 26, 2 (1904): 1238–39Google Scholar; “Hadji-vrees”, IG 26, 2 (1904): 1367–69Google Scholar; “Grieven van Inlanders”, IG 26, 2 (1904): 1545–46Google Scholar; “Het oproer te Gedangan”, IG 27, 2 (1905): 1532–33Google Scholar; “Nog eens de Gedangan-zaak”, IG 27, 2 (1905): 1712–14Google Scholar. A series of small pieces by reporters and correspondants appeared in Soerabajasch Handelsblad, (hereafter SH). Most important among them are “Het gevolg van den assistent-wedono van Gedangan is vermoord”, SH 27 05 1904Google Scholar, “Van het terrein van het oproer”, “De houding van het bestuur in Sidhoardjo”, “Het oproer in Gedangan”, SH 30 05 1904Google Scholar, “Na het oproer”, SH 31 05 1904Google Scholar, “De onlusten in 't Sidhoardjo”, SH 1 06 1904Google Scholar, “Het ambtelijke verslag van het oproer in Gedangan”, SH 3 06 1904Google Scholar and editorial SH 4 Jun. 1904. See also Moll, J.F.A.C. Van, “De onlusten in Sidoarjo”, Archiefvan Java Suikerindustrie 13, bijblad 33 (1905): 579–605Google Scholar.
8 Kartodirdjo, Sartono, Protest Movements in Rural Java, p. 87Google Scholar.
9 Ibid., pp. 67–68, 80–93.
10 Ibid., p. 90.
11 “Verslag omtrent de 27 Mei 1904 in de afdeeling Sidoardjo der residentie Soerabaja voorgevallen onlusten”, MR 1905 no. 509Google Scholar, AMK V 28 Apr. 1906–33, ARA.
12 “Na het oproer”, SH 31 05 1904Google Scholar.
13 “Verslag omtrent de 27 Mei 1904 in de afdeeling Sidoardjo der residentie Soerabaja voorgevallen onlusten”.
14 “Kort verslag omtrent de voorgevallen onlusten in de afdeeling Sidoardjo”; “Verslag omtrent de 27 Mei 1904 in de afdeeling Sidoardjo der residentie Soerabaja voorgevallen onlusten”.
15 Ibid.
16 “De houding van het bestuur in Sidhoardjo”, SH 30 05 1904Google Scholar.
17 Geertz, C., Religion of Java (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1976), p. 134Google Scholar.
18 Geertz, C., “The Javanese Kiaji: The Changing Role of a Cultural Broker”, Comparative Studies in Society and History 2 (1959–1960): 228–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
19 Onderzoek naar de Mindere Welvaart der Inlandsche Bevolking op Java en Madoera [hereafter OMW]: Samentrekking van de Afdeelingsverslagen over de uitkomsten der onderzoekingen naar De Economie van de Desa in de Residentie Soerabaja (Weltevreden: Boekhandel Visser, 1909) [hereafter ED Residentie Soerabaja], p. 10Google Scholar.
20 Director of Internal Administration to the Governor-General, 8 Sep. 1904–219/A geheim, MR 1904 no. 908, V 28 Apr. 1906–33; OMW: ED Residentie Soerabaja, p. 27Google Scholar.
21 According to the regent of Sidoarjo, 21,371 out of 30,355 hectares of sawah were annually at the disposal of peasants and 5,283 hectares were leased by big landholding peasants at the time of the uprising. In the districts mentioned above, 3,566 out of 16,638 hectares of sawah were leased by big landholding peasants; “Verslag omtrent de 27 Mei 1904 in de afdeeling Sidoardjo der residentie Soerabaja voorgevallen onlusten”.
22 Ibid.
23 Schmalhausen, H.E.B., Over Java en de Javanen (Amsterdam: P.N. van Kampen, 1910), p. 10Google Scholar.
24 OMW: Samentrekking van de Afdeelingsverslagen over de uitkomsten der onderzoekingen naar de Vischteelt en Visscherij in de Residentie Soerabaja (Batavia: Landsdrukkerij, 1905) [hereafter VV Residentie Soerabaja], p. 10Google Scholar; OMW: ED Residentie Soerabaja, p. 15Google Scholar.
25 The tambak owners in Gedangan paid f.45,986 for the land rent in 1904; OMW: VV Residentie Soerabaja, p. 9Google Scholar.
26 There were 299 fishermen out of 1,069 with their own boats in 1903; OMW: VV Residentie Soerabaja, p. 12Google Scholar.
27 The number of haji in Surabaya residency rose from 175 to 3,110 between 1853 and 1874; de Waal, E., Onze Indische Financien, vol. 1 ('s Gravenhage: M. Nijhoff, 1876), p. 246Google Scholar.
28 van Moll, J.F.A.C., “De onlusten in Sidoarjo”, p. 585Google Scholar.
29 For information on the economic activities of haji in Surabaya region, see OMW: ED Residentie Soerabaja, pp. 26–27Google Scholar.
30 Director of Internal Administration to the Governor-General, 8 Sep. 1904–219/A geheim.
31 “Verslag omtrent de 27 Mei 1904 in de afdeeling Sidoardjo der residentie Soerabaja voorgevallen onlusten”.
32 Director of Internal Administration to the Governor-General, 8 Sep. 1904–219/A geheim.
33 These regulations are contained in Staatsblad van Nederlandsch Indië (hereafter Stb.) 1895 no. 247.
34 Stb. 1900 no. 240.
35 OMW: ED Residentie Soerabaja, p. 87Google Scholar.
36 Some officials maintained that the rent paid for leased sawah was no less and in some cases even higher than the amount of land rent due on the land in question; “Verslag omtrent de 27 Mei 1904 in de afdeeling Sidoardjo der residentie Soerabaja voorgevallen onlusten”. In general this might have been true, but the rent paid for sawah in Sidoarjo was well below that in adjacent regencies so peasants are unlikely to have benefitted from the new scheme.
37 The new scheme was implemented in 1899. Over the next few years it was introduced in 325 villages out of 385 villages — over 84 per cent of all villages — in the controle-afdeeling of Sidoarjo; “Verslag omtrent de 27 Mei 1904 in de afdeeling Sidoardjo der residentie Soerabaja voorgevallen onlusten”.
38 Ibid.
39 Director of Internal Administration to the Governor-General, 8 Sep. 1904–219/A geheim.
40 “Verslag omtrent de 27 Mei 1904 in de afdeeling Sidoarjo der residentie Soerabaja voorgevallen onlusten”.
41 This incident was reported in Nieuws van den Dag voor Nederlandsch Indie, 6 Jul. 1904. A summary of the report is given in IG 26, 2 (1904): 1545–46Google Scholar.
42 Joyo Adi Ningrat was not entirely altruistic, because he allowed some sugar mills which made financial overtures to him to make new lease arrangements. Whether he made these sugar mills pay more to the peasants is not known, but he probably did something of the sort. He was generally opposed to the new scheme, because, as he told the Resident Lange to his face, it was less beneficial to the peasants concerned; Resident of Surabaya to the Governor-General, 23 May 1904–134, MR 1904 no. 917, “De geschorste wedono van Boelang, Regentschap Sidoardjo, Raden Djodjo Adi Ningrat uit 't Lands dienst is ontslagen”, V 28 Apr. 1906–33.
43 Director of Internal Administration to the Governor-General, 8 Sep. 1904–219/A geheim.
44 Geertz, C., Agricultural Involution (Berkeley & Los Angeles: California University Press, 1963), p. 88Google Scholar.
45 Calculated from the statistics in OMW: Samentrekking van de Afdeelingsverslagen over de uitkomsten der onderzoekingen naar den Landbow in de Residentie Soerabaja (Weltevreden: A.M. van Belkum, 1906), appendix 3Google Scholar.
46 Nota over den Invloed van de Particuliere Suiker-cultuur op de teelt van Inlandsche Voedingsgewassen (Batavia: Landsdrukkerij, 1900), p. 88Google Scholar.
47 Ibid., pp. 3–10.
48 In 1896, for instance, 60,290 out of 98,000 hectares of sawah (62 per cent of all sawah ) in Surabaya residency were planted with secondary crops, in addition to 2,323 hectares planted with rice in the dry season; Nota over den Invloed van de Particuliere Suikerrietcultuur, p. 86.
49 Ibid., pp. 23–36.
50 Ontwerp-ordonnantie tot Herziening der Regelen omtrent de verhuur van Grond door Inlanders aan Niet-Inlanders op Java en Madoera (Batavia: Landsdrukkerij, 1895), p. 75Google Scholar.
51 Nota over den Invloed van de Particuliere Suikerrietcultuur, pp. 88–89.
52 Quoted in Chief Inspector of Cultivations to Director of Internal Administration, 17 Feb. 1904–83, geheim, MR 1904 no. 908, “Resultaten van het onderzoek naar aanleiding van berichten over maatregelen van het beheer in Sidoardjo nopens de teelt van rijst en tweede gewassen en bevloeiing der velden”, V 28 Apr. 1906–33.
53 Van Lawick's report is enclosed in Chief Inspector of Cultivations to the Director of Internal Administration, 17 Feb. 1904–83 geheim. Numerous enclosures of van Lawick's report are no longer found in the dossier. I am relying on van Lawick's summary of the contents of the missing documents.
54 Director of Internal Administration to the Governor-General, 8 Sep. 1904–219/A geheim.
55 Ibid. Van Rees, citing letters of Bedier de Priarie, claimed that the peasants in Krian and Bulang districts were late to turn their sawah over for cane cultivation; Director of Internal Administration to the Governor-General, 8 Sep. 1904–219/A geheim. This claim is doubtful, because, after a close examination of test harvesting records, van Lawick found that nearly all land could have been turned over by mid-May; Chief Inspector of Cultivations to the Director of Internal Administration, 17 Feb. 1904–83 geheim. After writing this report, however, van Lawick said that his conclusion that the flooding of secondary crops was due to the pressure of sugar mills to get land back early was perhaps incorrect; Chief Inspector of Cultivations to Director of Internal Administration, 24 Feb. 1904, nota geheim, MR 1904–908, V 28 Apr. 1906–33. This change of views on the part of van Lawick was probably a result of pressure brought upon him by the supporters of sugar industry among his colleagues and hence should not be taken seriously.
56 Van Rees took pains to impress upon his superiors in Batavia that the decision to change cultivation plans was made after consulting all the officials concerned, particularly the irrigation officials; Director of Internal Administration to the Governor-General, 8 Sep. 1904–219/A geheim. Only one official from the irrigation service in charge of the Brantas irrigation division attended the meeting and he was coaxed to consent to the decision. In such a weighty matter, van Lawick argued, the engineer in charge should have been consulted. The engineer Otto de Vries reported to van Lawick that Bedier de Priarie, who allied himself with the regent of Sidoarjo, rang him up several times soon after the July meeting to warn him of crop failures if the water level became low; Chief Inspector of Cultivations to the Director of Internal Administration, 17 Feb. 1904–83 geheim. It was clearly an effort to put pressure on the irrigation officials to comply with the decision. Otto de Vries also said that fortunately a crop failure did not occur only because of the early rainfall in 1903.
57 “Between 1890 and 1895, the area of land planted with peanut rose from 29 per cent to 56 per cent of all land planted under the secondary crops in Surabaya residency. According to van Rees, who possibly under-estimated the value of crops to support his claim that the peasants did not suffer a considerable financial loss, this crop usually brought f.6 per bouw of land, but under favourable conditions would have brought from f.15 to f.20 per bouw of land; Director of Internal Administration to the Governor-General, 8 Sep. 1904–219/A geheim. The current peanut crop would have brought peasants an income larger than usual due to the persistent dry weather highly favourable for the crop.
58 Bedier de Priarie made this estimate on the basis of information provided by the wedono of Bulang; Chief Inspector of Cultivations to the Director of Internal Administration, 17 Feb. 1904–83 geheim.
59 Chief Inspector of Cultivations to the Director of Internal Administration of 4 Nov. 1903–38,238, MR 1904 no. 908.
60 The correspondence exchanged between the wedono and the regent is cited in Chief Inspector of Cultivations to the Director of Internal Administration, 17 Feb. 1904–83 geheim.
61 This inquiry was confined to questioning all supra-village native officials and village heads at a meeting held in Krian on 31 October. There all those minor native officials denied the claim of crop destruction. Fifteen village-heads also denied it upon questioning by the regent during his trip across Bulang district; Chief Inspector of Cultivations to the Director of Internal Administration, 17 Feb. 1904–83 geheim.
62 The report on accusations against the ex-wedono of Bulang is enclosed in Resident of Surabaya to Governor-General 23 May 1904–134 geheim.
63 Two participants of Mukmin's uprising, Kyai Astaman and Haji Mohamad Israd, stated that Mukmin wanted to appoint Joyo Adi Ningrat as the regent of Sidoarjo once the revolt was successful. Two other participants, Singorejo and Imamrejo from the village of Katrungan, stated that Mukmin visited Surabaya by tram on 25 May to meet the ex-wedono. Several others stated that, on 14 May, the ex-wedono visited Mukmin at his home while some others claimed he visited Mukmin again on 21 May. According to Djiam from the village of Ketajen in Gedangan district, the ex-wedono questioned several villagers about the planned uprising on 23 May. On the day of uprising, the ex-wedono's carriage was reportedly seen nearby and the ex-wedono himself was said to have been present in the vicinity. These statements are quoted in “Verslag omtrent de 27 Mei 1904 in de afdeeling Sidoarjo der residentie Soerabaja voorgevallen onlusten”.
64 For a discussion on this subject, see Sutherland, H., The Making of a Bureaucratic Elite (Singapore: Heinemann, 1979)Google Scholar. For pictorial evidence of the changing life style of pangreh praja, see de Nijs, E. Breton, Tempo Doeloe (Amsterdam: Querido, 1961), pp. 107–111Google Scholar.
65 Kartodirdjo, Sartono, Rural Protest Movements, p. 75Google Scholar; Kartodirdjo, Sartono, “Agrarian Radicalism in Java”, p. 88Google Scholar.
66 The following account is, unless otherwise stated, based on the information in “Verslag omtrent de 27 Mei 1904 in de afdeeling Sidoarjo der residentie Soerabaja voorgevallen onlusten”.
67 Moll, , “De onlusten in Sidohardjo”, pp. 580–81Google Scholar.
68 One such link was with Tirtowijoyo, the wedono of Krian. This link was maintained by Tirtowijoyo's son, Prawirowijoyo, who was the mantri of irrigation in the village of Botokan near Mukmin's home at the time of unrest. This official was implicated in the unrest as a Mukmin sympathizer and subsequently transferred to Jombang regency.
69 de Hollander, J.J., Handleiding bij de beoefening der Javaansche Taal- en Letterkunde (Breda: Gebroeders Nys, 1848), pp. 173–83Google Scholar, cited in Kartodirdjo, Sartono, Protest Movements in Rural Java, p. 78Google Scholar.
70 On the night of 25 May, the wedono of Sidoarjo dispatched a police officer, mas Sontarjo, and a mosque official, Prawirejo, to Mukmin's home to ascertain their plans. They could not get admission at first and once admitted found little; controleur of Plumbon to the Resident of Surabaya, 29 May 1904–573/1, enclosure, Acting Resident of Surabaya to the Governor-General, 10 Jun. 1904–189 geheim, MR 1904 no. 542, V 13 Aug. 1904–30. The regent of Sidoarjo admitted that he could not command Mukmin's crowd, even through influential haji, when the regent was urged to do so by the Assistant Resident of Sidoarjo; “kort verslag omtrent de voorgevallen onlusten in de afdeeling Sidoarjo”.
71 There are slight differences in detail and emphasis in the letters sent to various native officials. Translated letters are enclosed in Acting Resident of Surabaya to Governor-General, 10 Jun. 1904–189 geheim, appendix S.
72 This account is based on information from Smulders, “kort verslag omtrent de voorgevallen onlusten in de afdeeling Sidoardjo”, 30 May 1904, appendix J and “Aanvulling van het verslag omtrent de op 27 Mei 1904 in de afdeeling Sidoardjo voorgevallen onlusten”, appendix K, Acting Resident of Surabaya to Governor-General, 10 Jun. 1904–189 geheim.
73 controleur of Prambon to Resident of Surabaya, 29 May 1904, appendix M, enclosed in Acting Resident of Surabaya to Governor-General, 10 Jun. 1904–189 geheim.
74 Schmalhausen, , Over Java en de Javanen, pp. 11–12Google Scholar.
