著者
井東 猛
出版者
Japan Society for Southeast Asian Studies
雑誌
東南アジア -歴史と文化- (ISSN:03869040)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.1985, no.14, pp.44-66, 1985-06-01 (Released:2010-02-25)

In the study of Islamization, main interest of research has centred upon the questions as to when Islam came, from where and by whom it was brought to the region, and upon particular Islamic mystical teachings. Studies of these problems in the last one century have certainly presented us with new findings related to the Islamization of Southeast Asia in general. However, this does not mean at all that the question of the Islamization of the region has conclusively been solved. In fact, little is known about the establishing process of the Islamization or the position of Islam in various Islamic states in the region.The overall, establishing process of the Islamization may be studied from two view-points, apart from those mentioned above. One concerns the acceptance in indigenous society or state of Islam as religion and creed, and the role played by the rulers or state in its acceptance. The other is the acceptance of Islamic Law in the existing legal system, or the Islamization of the legal system of a given state.This paper aims to look at the administration of law and justice in seventeenth century Aceh as a case study of the establishing process of the Islamization from the latter point of view. As necessary background information for a better understanding of the present theme, the following may be noted.It is known that Bandar Aceh, the capital of the Sultanate of Aceh, presented the appearance of one of the major centres of Islamic studies in the Malayo-Indonesian world from the last quarter of the sixteenth century onwards. As a result of this, by the end of the century, at the latest, Islamic Law had become an established force, and consequently the prescriptions of Islamic Law had begun to exert their influence on the Acehnese, particulary on those in the capital. As for the relationship between Islam and the state, the Acehnese rulers used Islam to assert their ritual authority and supremacy. Just as Islam helped the rulers, the rulers also helped Islam by raising it to the position of a state religion, by supporting its institutions and by raising the clergy to influential positions.The present theme is divided into three. Section I takes up the legal system of the Sultanate. Section II examines various cases and punishment, both ‘criminal’ and ‘civil’ in nature. Section III looks at the royal edict of 1726 which offers how the Acehnese of the eighteenth century regarded the administration of law and justice in the seventeenth century.As a result of research, it can be concluded that Islamic Law exerted considerable influence upon the administration of law and justice through the efforts and influence of the senior religious figures of the realm, who were the rulers' religious and spiritual preceptors. This was particularly true for Acehnese social and family life in the urban area of the capital. The implementation of Islamic Law can be easily observed in a number of actual cases. In fact, the ruler as head of an Islamic state, and Islam as both creed source of law were inseparably linked, the ruler playing a central part in the judicature. Nevertheless, the Islamic legal system as such occupied a secondary position in the overall legal system of the Sultanate. The will, and often whim, of the sovereign was, in effect, the prime and ultimate law of the Sultanate, and administrative practices based on such precedents, i. e. the will of ruler, came in time to be regarded as ‘adat’ in the eyes of the Acehnese of the capital, ‘adat’ as ruler-made unwritten law and not traditional customary law and practice which have been defined as adat law by Dutch legal scholars. Furthermore, the degree of the rulers as law-givers and of the enforcement of Islamic Law largely depended on their political authority and religious conviction. As for the Kadi Malik al-'Adil as the representaive of the rulers, this position may perhaps best be seen as the head of the leg
著者
押川 典昭
出版者
Japan Society for Southeast Asian Studies
雑誌
東南アジア -歴史と文化- (ISSN:18837557)
巻号頁・発行日
no.23, pp.3-21, 1994

Daniel Defoe's novel <i>Robinson Crusoe</i> (1719), which tells how a castaway survived on a desert island and returned home after 28 years of solitude, as pedagogically recommended children's literature, the story of early capitalistic entrepreneur or the religious tale of how an impious man embraced the Christian faith, has been rewritten recurrently over 270 years by many authors in various ways. The Malay abridged version of Robinson Crusoe (hereafter abbreviated as MRC) is one part of the long and vast tradition of Robinson stories. This paper aims to examine how MRC was translated, what has been omitted or added, how it differs from Defoe's original text, in an attempt to provide a preliminary sketch on translated literature in colonial Indonesia, a subject that has been relatively neglected in the conventional study on the birth and development of modern literature in Southeast Asia.<br>MRC was translated from the Dutch text by A. F. Von Dewall (1834-1909), a Javaneseborn German philologist, and first published in Batavia in 1875. It can, therefore, be regarded as one of the earliest translations of European novels in Indonesia. The third edition of MRC appeared in 1882, the seventh came out in 1906, and an unknown Singapore edition was published in 1893. The Batavia and Singapore editions, 94 and 77 pages respectively, are the same except for the orthography. Judging from the book cover MRC seems to have been edited by the colonial government as reading material for students. This abridged edition follows Defoe's fundamental plots and settings, such as the shipwreck, Robinson's solitary life and hardship on a desert island, his adventures, fighting the savages, the master-servant relationship between Robinson and Friday, the escape and return to his homeland. But the style and some details of MRC are quite different from Defoe's text.<br>One of the most striking differences lies in MRC's narrative style. In contrast to Defoe's text, which is written in the first person, all the happenings, experiences and ideas in MRC are depicted in the third person, or told by the narrator, except for the conversations and monologues. This change of style occurs partly because MRC relies on a Dutch text, which is most likely based on J. H.Campe's German version, <i>Robinson der Jungere</i> (1779) written in the third person style. The more important reason, however, lies in the fact that MRC is written in the form of <i>hikayat</i>, the traditional narrative of the Malay world, which is unfamiliar with the first person style. And interestingly enough, if we eliminate the 'oral punctuation' from MRC's <i>hikayat</i> style, there will appear a very modern, or artificial, Malay language compared with colloquial Malay then prevailing in the newspapers and popular novels. Thus MRC is written in a blended form of traditional narrative style and modern Malay.<br>In its depiction of the character of Malay's Robinson too, MRC has some substantial differences. These occur because the main themes of Defoe's text, such as the philosophy of British middle-class life, inner conflict over the faith in Christ, or pertinent behavior of Robinson as the ideal type of emerging bourgeoisie, are almost totally left out of MRC. Here are mainly stressed the spirit of diligence, self-restraint and invention for surviving in more severe destitution than in Defoe's text.<br>MRC was most likely recited by school teachers to the class. The story of Robinson Crusoe in Malay, being deprived of the social, cultural and religious background of Defoe's text, and emphasizing pedagogical and ethical meanings, yet maintaining Robinson's supremacy over the island (colony) and Friday (native), was no doubt worthy of being introduced into the colonial society.