Search

This article explores the teaching of Ottoman history and the image of the Ottomans through a close and critical reading of Malaysian secondary history textbooks used between 1989 and 2022. It argues that Malaysian secondary history textbooks focus mainly on the political and military aspects of sixteenth-century Ottoman history. They do not, consciously or subconsciously, make detailed reference to political and socio-economic turning points in nineteenth-century Ottoman history. Sejarah Tingkatan 2 (History: Form 2), one of the history textbooks examined in the article, exceptionally discusses the impact of Ottoman pan-Islamism and Turkish nationalism on the political and religious thought of the Malays. Nonetheless, history textbooks published after the 2000s have not touched on these important issues. In history textbooks, the Ottoman Empire is regarded as one of the significant states of the Islamic world; therefore, Ottoman history is analyzed within the framework of Islamic history and Islamic civilization. The portrayal of Ottomans is positive and favourable. There are no distortions, biases, or stereotypes concerning Ottoman history in Malaysian secondary history textbooks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For decades, the Malaysian national history is in a stable condition and not being challenged by anyone. The enhancement of national history is constantly progress through educational system starting from primary school to university level. The consciousness of national history is the foundation for the unity of the people and country development. Though, from time to time, the status quo starts to face the challenges and disputes which began with small scale and got bigger. This could trigger a national issue. Thus, this study focus on the date of Independence Day amongst Sarawak citizens. As one of the states that form the Federation of Malaysia in 1963, the history of Sarawak as a separate nation with the history of Malaysia has been detected. The consciousness of Merdeka Day for Sarawakian is more to refer to the establishment of the federation rather than the date of August 31, 1957 as the day of independent. To add, this research is to identify the level of consciousness in revising the national history amongst Sarawakian. This study also delves the understanding of “Merdeka” from Sarawakians’ point of view and discuss whether the nation history is proportionate for the Sarawakian. For the methodology, this study applies quantitative and qualitative approaches, a concurrent triangulation mixed method design. The phases of data collection are two including surveys and focus group discussions. Generally, the result shows that the Sarawakian have a new consciousness of the national history. Type of Paper: Empirical

Ibn Khaldūn and his Muqaddimah is a continuing project on the European intellectual map. For a long time, most of his works was studied by the French. The same cannot be said of the Malaysian intellectual Malaysian landscape. Ibn Khaldūn, of course, makes an attractive option for academic courses and readings in a variety of disciplines. This essay attempts to recast Ibn Khaldūn in the Malaysian intellectual landscape viz discourses on global history and approaching the study of civilization from a sociological and historical perspective. The sentiment echoes more of the Western engagement with the polymath. Malaysian university campuses are ambivalent. The Khaldunian corpus is almost non existent. The West has attempted to modernize Ibn Khaldūn. Some have construed this as "denaturing" him, accusing the thinker of "anticipatory plagiarism." The Muslim world has been subdued in defending such accusations against him. There is no worthy defence. This essay uses the framework from Robert Irwin in his Ibn Khaldun: An Intellectual Biography. We ask who was Ibn Khaldūn writing for? For the state and authority? Or for himself? Some of the earliest beneficiaries of the Khaldunian corpus was the Ottoman state. This essay notes the disconnect between Ibn Khaldūn and the practice of modern history and social science. The Muqaddimah has largely been ignored as course or as text in the various social science disciplines. The corpus is not seen as providing an alternative form of knowledge. Irwin, however, provides a critical examination of Ibn Khaldūn's magnum opus, and the political and intellectual climate that he thrived on. As a scholar, Ibn Khaldūn was partisan and certainly close to political institutions. Objective and universal knowledge is not blind to the human condition. Even when deciding to take a reprieve in writing, he sought the protection of a powerful tribe in the hinterland, the Awlad 'Arif in what is now western Algeria. This essay serves as a contribution to the discourse on the Khaldunian history and sociology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper seeks to examine the corpus of Mevlana Jalaluddin Rumi (d. 1273) in light of establishing new ways of constituting the Human and Social Sciences. It is based on the assumptions that the existing social and human sciences are anthropocentric in nature, and were produced within a culture and civilization that placed man as the centre and the measure of things. That crucible which has become the origin for the production of knowledge operated within a chaotic West in the early modern and the modern periods. Thus, knowledge produced has been secular and disenchanted and sees man as a material object par excellence. As a result, modern man has lost his sense of origin, why he lives and whither he is going. The Infinite Wisdom to Man does not return to the Primordial, but develops a Faustian trajectory. This paper reattaches Rumi's corpus to academic and intellectual levels as it informs daily life and consciousness. We need to reconsume the tenets of a 'devolutionist' History, Art, Sociology, Anthropology and Philosophy. It asks what the Mathnawi and the Fihi Mafihi can contribute to the Humanities from the Islamic perspective. How can they be used to restructure another mode of knowing? What disciplines can the Rumi corpus produce (or reproduce)? The significance of this paper is that it suggests a universalization, and thence, a deethnicization of the Social and Human Sciences, thus embracing the universal while mitigating the uniqueness of man in both his microcosmic and macrocosmic environments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the representation of George Town Heritage within the context of George Town Heritage sites, and the annual George Town Festival (GTF). It explores the heritage sites of the various communities in Penang, Malaysia. It argues beyond the Eurocentric hegemony and representations of Penang history anchored on the British occupation of the island in 1786. There also exist other levels of hegemony and various forms of representations of the heritage in Penang. This is expressed by the narratives/historical representations of various settler communities such as the Chinese, Chinese Peranakans, Indian Muslims and the Eurasians. To showcase the manifestations of these various levels of representations of heritage, the paper adopts the method of combining historiography, participant observation and document study. The article applies Hall's (1997) notion of representation as its theoretical framework. Halls's theory articulates the asymmetry between the dominant discourse and the local discourse of Penang heritage. This asymmetry reveals absence, and alienation of certain local narratives of historical relevance. The paper interrogates the following: What sort of historical consciousness do the two-spaces of analysis espouse regarding the history of Penang? What are the historical imbalances and omissions in the representation of George Town Heritage? How can the local/oral history serve as a prognosis to the historical imbalance in the narration and depiction of the history/heritage of Penang? The paper recommends the need for the GTF, and George Town Heritage Sites to commemorate the historical journey that emerged in Penang before 1786. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The representation and embodiment of Malay identity are certainly complex. How we know ourselves and how we have selected that knowledge determine the facts accumulated about us. What do the Malays make out of media? One assumption says that the Malays are averse to print and more attuned to orality and aurality. There is nevertheless also the category of baca, membaca and cerita which may not fit within the understanding of the European mind. Locating the categories of communication and media in the contexts of meaning, culture and thought may illustrate that the Malays do not share Euro-American presuppositions; at the same time, however, efforts to localise and indigenise the minda, concepts and practices only reattach them to the matrix of globalised modernity. Who represents what? Who represents media to Malay thought? What is being represented and at what levels? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]