Wahyudi Akmaliah
What is ethnicity? Is it social construction or a part of an ancestral heritage? In what way is ethnicity significant in the Indonesian context? These are the questions Holy Rafika Dhona tries to answer in Subjek Sunda: Genealogi. Kelahiran, dan Kewilayahan. Specifically, he offers a perspective on the emergence of Sundanese identity by employing Michel Foucault’s concept (1973) of the genealogy of knowledge and Thongchai Winichakul’s notion (1994) of the geo-body of the nation. Rather than viewing Sunda as a pre-existing ethnic category predating colonial rule, Holy argues that it is a social construction shaped by the impact of colonisation, which sought to both dominate and govern the colonised society within the Dutch East Indies administration.
A contemporary impetus Dhona opens the book with a fundamental question: Was Sunda identity established as an ancestral heritage, or was it a colonial construction? This question arises from the frequent use of ethnic sentiment by political elites during recent national elections. For example, during her campaign for the West Java gubernatorial election in 2013, Rieke Diah Pitaloka emphasised her Sunda ethnicity, linking it to her ancestral heritage. In this context, Sunda as an ethnic identity is imagined in connection to the Parahyangan region, perceived as being inhabited exclusively by Sunda people. However, the diversity within the Sunda population—evident in their various dialects and the fact that many Sundanese people reside outside West Java—challenges the notion that Sunda ethnicity is purely an ancestral heritage. Instead, Holy argues that colonisation played a significant role in shaping Sunda ethnic identity.
Dhona discusses colonisation's impact in shaping Sunda identity through a close examination of Sir Thomas Stamford Bingley Raffles' work The History of Java (1817). Unlike previous works that integrated the Sunda people into the broader Javanese nation—defining Java primarily through the former Mataram Kingdom and distinguishing groups based on language—Raffles introduced a different approach. He classified the inhabitants of Java based on dialect, geographical location, and distinct characteristics, offering a more detailed and nuanced representation of the island's diverse populations. This detailed classification reinforced the distinct identity of the Sunda people as separate from the Javanese. Raffles' work was not solely based on his own observations; he synthesised and expanded upon earlier sources, particularly the works of Portuguese authors João de Barros and Diogo do Couto, who had previously mapped Java comprehensively. Dhona argues that Raffles played a crucial role in shaping the formation of ‘the Sundanese’ as a distinct ethnic group, and the Dutch government adopted this approach following their reoccupation of the Netherlands East Indies in 1816 after the brief British interregnum. As Dhona sees it, Raffles' map did not merely document the existence of the Sunda people but actively contributed to shaping their identity, sense of sovereignty, and geographic distinctiveness.
In chapter four, Dhona discusses the emergence of Sunda as a newly formed subject, explicitly examining the progress of the Sunda people in the early 20th century through an analysis of articles written by Sunda writers and published in Papaes Nonoman newspaper and its antecedent publication, Pasoendan, between 1914-1919. Dhona identified two significant words frequently used in the newspaper: nation (bangsa) and progress (kemajuan). The term nation reinforced Sunda identity and distinguished it from other nations, particularly the Javanese nation, which was perceived as its primary competitor. Meanwhile, ‘progress’ referred to how the Sundanese could advance by learning European languages as a marker of modernity and rejecting superstitious beliefs, which were prevalent among them. This shift aimed to replace superstition with rational thinking as a new intellectual and cultural development mode. By representing these two words, Sunda authors not only contributed to the formation of the Sunda subject but also reinforced the idea of distinct territorial boundaries as imagined homelands that differentiated the Sunda region from other nations.
The book examines the formation of the Sunda people as an independent entity, particularly focusing on the period when Sunda, as a nation, became a representative in the Volksraad, advocating for various groups within Dutch East Indies society. As a recognised nation, Sunda not only solidified its position but also differentiated itself from other nation groups, particularly the Javanese. Dhona cites Sunda authors who wrote about the politics of Pribumi Pasoendan (the Indigenous of Pasoendan). This term was deliberately used by the authors to emphasise Sunda’s identity as an independent nation amidst the establishment of the Volksraad on 16 December 1916. The Volksraad functioned as a People’s Council, representing the diverse voices of various nation groups in the Dutch East Indies and conveying both their political aspirations and feedback to the Governor-General.
This recognition enabled the Sunda people to voice their dissatisfaction with the colonial government, particularly regarding exploitative policies within the Dutch East Indies. This dissatisfaction was reflected in the emergence of the term ‘Kapitalist’ in Pasoendan. They criticised the exploitative policies of the colonial administration. The influence of Marxist thought introduced by the elites of Sarekat Islam and embraced by Sundanese intellectuals, marked a critical juncture in the relationship between Sunda as a new nation and the colonial administration, which had previously been seen as a force for progress. This evolving relationship was increasingly framed in terms of exploitation, positioning the colonial rulers as capitalist oppressors and fostering anti-colonial sentiment, as exemplified in an article by the Sunda writer Sotiesna Senjaya published in Pasoendan on 7 April 1919.
Overall, this book serves as an invaluable reference for anyone interested in studying the formation of the Sunda subject. It offers a novel perspective by integrating cultural studies, new historiography, and the genealogy of knowledge, contributing to a more articulate discussion of ethnic identity as a connection between the past and the present within the dynamic landscape of Indonesian politics. However, one minor point of caution is the author's examination of Raffles’ work, which appears to adopt a somewhat positive tone in portraying his role in reshaping Sunda identity through the creation of the map of Java Island. Undoubtedly, much of Raffles’ work has been instrumental in redefining nations and states in Southeast Asia. However, rather than solely contributing to the advancement of knowledge and science, his efforts were primarily driven by the interests of the British Empire.
The extensive data and information Raffles gathered to produce the map not only reflected an accumulation of knowledge aimed at accurately representing Dutch Indies society on Java Island, but also functioned as a tool of colonial domination. In this sense, without a comprehensive understanding of the local population, the British Empire would have struggled to effectively conquer and control them. Similarly, Farish Noor and Peter Carey have extensively examined Raffles’ map, demonstrating that the mapped areas in the Dutch East Indies were systematically marked as zones of colonial control.
Holy Rafika Dhona, Subjek Sunda: Genealogi. Kelahiran, dan Kewilayahan, Marjin Kiri, 2024.
Wahyudi Akmaliah (wahyudiakmaliah@gmail.com) is a PhD Candidate at the Malay Studies Department, National University of Singapore and a Researcher at the Research Centre for Society and Culture, National Research and Innovation Agency (PMB-BRIN), Jakarta.
