Hikayat Tuah

8/6/2019 Hikayat Tuah

1/14


2/14

American Malay scholar L. Andaya (Andaya 19 78 ) helps to confirm theseconclusions and enables a more complete characterization of the objec-tives pursued by the author of the hikayat - al1 of which contributes toa more reliable dating of the work.The contents of the Hikayat Hang Tuah suggest obvious connectionswith events in Johor history between the late 165 0s and 168 0s, above all,the conflict between Johor and the South Sum atran principality of Jambi.In the description of the confrontation between Malacca and Majapahit,which runs through most of the hikayat (Ahm ad 196 8), Malacca features,in our view, as a natura1 symbol for Johor, while Majapahit stands forJambi, since the rulers and aristocrats of this principality bore Javanesenames and titles2 and the principality itself was a vassal of the Javanesestate of Mataram (Andaya 1978:86).The history of the Johor-Jambi conflict had its beginning in the year1659, when the heir to the throne of Johor, Raja Muda, arrived in Jambi,accom panied by a splendid retinue, and was married there to the daughte rof the ruler, Pangeran Ratu, an even t which at first glance seem ed to holdout a promise of a mutually beneficia1 relation between both states (An -day a 1978234). Corresponding to this historica] event is the account ofHan g Tuah's and the Malaccan ruler's first trip to Majapa hit and the latter'smarriage to the Majapahit princess in the hikayat (Ahm ad 196 8:11 4-67 ).

Raja Muda's marriage for him opened the way to power, which couldnot fail to alarm the Sultan of Johor, Abd al-Jaiil, and the abov e-mentionedLaksamana Abd al-Jamil, who had vigorously supported the sultan'saccession to the throne. Consequently both men made every effort toprevent the prince's wife from coming to Johor and, moreover, to put theblame for this on Jambi. In 16 60 , using the nationa l navy, they forciblyremoved the Raja Muda from the court of Jambi's ruler. But Raja Muda,upon his return to Johor, promised his father-in-law that he would send forhis wife as soon as he could 'buiid a house for her'. Yet, shortly therea fterthe Raja Muda b ecam e engaged to the laksarnana's d aughter. Th e delaysin the princess' removal to Johor and Raja Muda's new marriage angeredPangeran Ratu and pushed the two states on the brink of war (Andaya1978:85,87).The first naval encounter between Johor and Jambi occurred in 16 66 ,when R aja Muda brought h is fleet to the island of Lingga . As interpretedin Johor, the incident boiled down to the following: the Raja Mud a set outfrom Johor motivated by his love for his father-in-law and his wife, and,upon his meeting near Lingga with an armada led by none other thanPang eran Ratu himself, sailed toge ther with it to Jambi to pick up his wife.As they proceeded on their journey, the Jambian s committed several actsof provocation as a result of which the Raja M uda, who remained steadfast2 For example: Pangeran Ratu, Pangeran Purba, Pangeran Adipati Anom , Pangeran DipaNegara, Raden M as Kulup, etc. (see Andaya 1978:88, 122).


3/14

Hikayat Hang Tuah: Malay Epic and Muslim Mirror 401throughout the journey, was forced to ch ang e his initia1 plan. Meanwhile,using a Dutch mediator, the Sultan of Johor sought to assure PangeranRatu, concerned about his daughter's fate, that Raja Mu da w as sending hislaksamana to Jambi with instructions to convey his wife to Lingga, wherethe Raja Muda would be waiting for her (Andaya 1978:87-9).These events and their interpretation in Johor are apparently reflected

t in the episodes of the Hikayat Hang Tuah which describe the marriagebetween the Malaccan sovereign and the Pah ang princess Tun Teja, whowas escorted to him by Laks am ana Hang Tuah; the an ger of the Majapahitbatara on this account; Ha ng Tuah's dip lomatic efforts to resolve the crisisby peaceful means; and the extremely dangerous second visit to Majapahitby the Malaccan sovereign and Hang Tuah (Ahmad 196 8:18 5-20 8,23 4-280) - an episode that is not found in the Sejarah Melayu, the chief sourcefor the hikayat.Th e hostilities between Johor and Jambi which flared up after the 16 66even ts consisted in sporadic atta cks by the fleets of the two states on eachother's territory. In one such raid in 1673 the Jambi forces looted andburned down Johor's capita1 and took countless prisoners of war, a s wel1as seizing the sultan's entire treasury (some four tons of gold) (Andaya1978:97-99).In 167 9, however, Lak sam ana Abd al-Jamil had his revengewhen he captured Jam bi's capita1 and forced the son of Pangeran Ratu,Pang eran Dipa ti Anom, who deserted his army at the height of the battle,to return al1 the gold looted from Johor and to make considerable repa-rations in addition. Following this victory, Johor established so close arelationship with the new ruler of Jambi that the two states actuallyconcluded an agreement on joint military actions against Palembang(Andaya 1978:120-2, 134).It is highly probab le that the historica1 events described abov e promptedthe inclusion in the hikayat of an episode in which the batara of Majapahitis shown to be not at al1 satisfied with the Malaccan sovereign's secondvisit, for which reason his Patih Gajah Mada sends the warrior MargaPak si and his brother to conquer M alacca. Having penetrated into the city,these men stole al1 the belongings of its wealthy merchants and looted theMalaccan sovereign's treasury as well. How ever, Ha ng T uah ultimatelygot the better of them and retrieved the treasu res of both the sovereign andthe merchants (Ahmad 196 8:27 8-28 5). Though the episode of the plun-dering of the city does occur in the Sejarah Melayu (Winstedt 1938b:1 39-40; Situmorang and Teeuw 195 8:188 -9), its interpretation an d signifi-can ce as given in the hikayat and in the chronicle are completely different.The 'Javanese part' of the Hikayat Hang Tuah ends with a mention of thedeath of the batara of Majapahit and the accession to the throne of Javaof Raden Bahar, who then establishes friendly relations with Malacca and,in fact, recognizes its ruler as his suzerain (Ahm ad 196 8:375 -7).It is only natura1 that the war enabled Laksamana Abd al-Jamil tostrongly consolidate his position in the state, firm enough though it had


4/14

already been. In al1 likelihood he received around the year 16 80 the titleof Paduka Raja, an honour that had previously been reserved strictly forbendaharas. Subsequently, he appointed his sons to key administrativeposts and, having definitely restricted the access to the sultan of othercourtiers, became in essence the sole actual ruler of Johor (Andaya1978 :130-5 , 140 -1). Al1 this could not fail to arouse the opposition of theJohor aristocracy and, above all, the ben daha ra, whose prestige had beengreatly undermined. It was not until the death of Sultan Ibrahim and theremoval of his juvenile heir to the bendahara's household, however, thatthis opposition openly challenged the laksamana. As a result, the benda-ha ra in 168 8 caused Abd al-Jamil to flee the capital, and later defeatedhis forces in a heavy n aval battle, in which the laksam ana w as killed. Thefollowing is the description of Abd a l-Jamil's en d from o ne of the sources:'A heavy fight took place which lasted from the evening til1 the nextmorning. Th e Pad uka R aja foug ht so fiercely and despe rately that, if it hadnot been for the flight of his brother A khir and his two sons the La ksam anaand the Temeng gong to Pahang , the Da to Bendahara's forces would havebeen defeated. He continued, nevertheless, to ward off his attackers, andwhen he ran out of shot, he used the Spanish rials he had on board his grabas missiles for his cannons. In this way he w as ab le to hold off the attac ker sfor quite some time be fore he was finally forced to go a shore to seek safetyin the jungle. It took the Bendahara's men ten days before they capturedthe Paduka Raja [. . .l When the Paduka Raja was captured, the DatoBendahara ordered a slave to kris him.' (Andaya 1978:155-6.)That Same slave stabbed one of Abd al-Jamil's sons with a kris; thesecond son was executed and his body thrown overboard as the ship inwhich he was sailing passed Pahang. The two remaining sons escapeddeath by fleeing to Pahang (Andaya 1978:155-6).Though in a modified form, most of these facts are to be found also inthe Hikay at Hang Tuah, while it describes the treason of Hang Jeb at andthe battle between him and Hang Tuah which followed, as was to beexpected, after the account of the latter's victory over Marga Paksi (Ah-mad 1968:290-329). One finds in the hikayat the mistreatment of thecourtiers and bendahara by Hang Jebat, appointed to the post of laksa-mana, in particular the fac t that they were not allowed to see the sovereign;the granting of the title of Pad uka R aja to Hang Jebat desp ite the warningsof Hang Tuah and Tun Teja; the flight of the sovereign from the palaceto the house of the bendahara after Hang Jebat had in effect usurped thepower in the state; the prolonged and fierce fight between the heroes inwhich Hang Tuah stabbed Hang Jebat w ith a kris; and even the passageof several days between the defeat and the death of Hang Jebat. Further-more, the rom ance tells US how Hang Tuah dispatches Hang Jebat's sonto Indrapura (i.e., Pah ang) a fter the Malaccan sovereign has ordered thechild to be drowned at sea. Most of these details, however, are not to befound in the episode of the Malay Annals which served as sou rce for this


5/14

Hikayat Hang Tuah: Malay Epic and Muslim Mirror 40 3particular section of the Hikayat Hang Tuah (Winstedt 1938b:112-4;Situmorang and Teeuw 1958:145).For al1 its limitations, the above comparative analysis suggests that theHikayat Hang Tuah reflects, in the a llegorical form of a pasernon3 of therivalry between Malacca and Majapahit, the real conflict between Johorand Jambi and the subsequent power struggle between the Johor laksa-mana and bendahara. It seems probable that Hang Tuah, said to have diedafter the victory over Marga Paksi, symbolizes Abd al-Jamil prior to the'usurpation', while Hang Jebat is his double after the,'usurpation'.4 In asmuch a s this supposition is correct, the Hikaya t Han g Tuah could not havecom e into being before the 16 79 victory over Jambi, and, most likely, wascomposed soon after the final triumph of the bendahara in his struggleagainst Abd al-Jam il, i.e., in 16 88 . Pointing to this dating is a tendency ,observed throughout the hikayat, to describe the relationship betweenHang Tuah and the bendahara of Malacca as one of uninterrupted close-ness and friendliness. Added to the allegorical character of the HikayatHang Tuah and the absence of variant versions of the hikayat (Parnickel1962:147), this tendency supports the view that the hikayat was createdal1 at once, and not grad ually . Finally, the fact that the hikayat is mentionedby F. Valentijn in 17 26 (probably som e ten years after he actually saw it,Skinner 196350) sets an upper limit to its dating. To summarize, theHikayat Hang Tu ah was probably composed in Johor on a single occasionsome time between 1688 and the 17 10s.One tends to believe that the Hikayat Hang Tuah h as won its exceptiona lplace in Malay literature not because it made skilful use of a literary deviceto attain a local politica1 object, i.e., to honour the m emory of Abd a l-Jam il,a prom inent statesman and conqueror of Jambi, subsequently to condem nhim as a 'traitor' and a 'usurper' and to pay tribute to the wisdom and grea tvirtue of the Johor bendahara, most probably Abd al-Majid (who died in1697 ) (Andaya 1978:180), but because of the hikayat's undeniable literarymerit and profound ethica1 message. Though the H ikayat H ang Tuah is,generally speaking, a national heroic epic, it is hard to define the genre towhich it belongs with greater precision. On account of its extremely variedand diverse sources, it may justly be considered an example of literarysynthesis, alongside many other works from the classica1 period of Malayliterature.The backbone of the hikayat is made up, as was already noted, of3 About the Javanese genre of pasernon - a systematic allusion to some event - see Ras

1976:65; about Javan ese 'political allegories', which provided an imp ortant link betweenmedieval literature and reality, see Berg 1938 a, 1938b:62-64; van Lohuizen-de Leeuw1956 . Th e Same phenomenon in classical Malay literature h as been treated by W instedt1938a; Hooykaas 1947:72-5; Braginsky 1983:124-5, 329, 404- 6, 409.4 The idea that Hang Tuah and Hang Jebat form 'two parts of a single "I" ' has beenexpressed also by Parnickel, who, however, interpreted it differently (see Parnickel


6/14


7/14

Hikayat Ha ng Tuah: M alay Epic an d Muslim M irror 405sists of two parts, the first of which presen ts the myth of the origin of theMalay ruling dynasty - the des ce nt of its founder on Mount S guntang- and the second the history, or rather the pseudo-history, of Malaccafrom the rise to the fall of this kingdom (this historical oveiview con tain smany anachronisms - another common feature of Malay historiography,which in the hikayat is connected with its pasemon character). Both thehikayat and the M alay Annals possess breadth and scope - a quality thatis lacking in some of the locally oriented later chronicles. The hikayat'splace of action e ncom passe s the entire Malay world, perceived as a single'Malay land' (see Parnickel 1959), as wel1 as 'far-off land s - Ma-japahit,Vijayanagar, China, Turkey a nd Siam. The hikayat is, moreover: &h indetails tht reflect specific aspects of the go v e rn ie n t and social structureof the Malay sultanates, of their court and urban everyday life, theirmarriage rituals and enthronement ceremony, receptions given by mon-a r c h ~ ,nd diplomatic etiquette (see Parnic kel 1978), various amusem entssuch as bal1 games, cockfights and chess, and even popular beliefs andsuperstitions - in a word, it presents a comprehensive, varied, lively andunique picture of medieval M alaya . All this on the one hand acce ntuate sthe kinship between the hikayat and the M alay A nnals, while on the otherhand it shows up the sharp distinction between the specific atm osphe re ofthe hikayat and the conventional, mostly extranatiohal background of thefantastic adventure romances, o r the foreign colouring of Malay interpre-tations of Javanese and Persian literary works.But for al1 the affinity between the Hikayat Hang Tua h and th e MalayAnnals, the two also have differences. Of these the m ost im vortan t is theabsence in the hikayat of the genealogical element - a must in the Annalswhich, moreover, immediately changes the entire character of the narra-tive. In the hikayat we find only one monarch, one bendahara and onelaksamana throughout the entire Malaccan history. Only one enemy - theJavanese - threatens the country at the time of itiearlydevelopmeht; andagain only one - the Portuguese - in its 'old age'. It is hardly conceivablethat the erudite a uthor of the hikayat (or th e com piler of its final version)did not know that Malacca was ruled by a series of sultans, assisted byseveral bendaharas and laksamanas, or that the situation Malac ca had toface in its earlier period was so unambiguous.7 Thus, the diachronic7 Tho ugh the description of the conflict between M alacca and Majapah it in the hikayat is,in fact, a pasemon, it does contain certain real historical elements: the destruction by theJavanese of Palembang and their banishment of its ruler, Parameswara, the rebelliousvassal of Majapah it who attem pted to revive the former glory of Snwijaya an d proclaim edhimself an avatara of Avalokitesvara. He enjoyed the backing of the chiefs of the 'sea-faring' Malay s, who constituted the main a rme d force in Sriwijaya and had long cherished

dreams of a strong authority that would guarantee their status and enable them to gainwealth, titles and privileges, as in the past. Of decisive importanc e for Param eswara wasthe assistance of the most powerful of the Malay chiefs, the ruler of the island of Bintan(see Wolters 1970:12 4-7, 138-40). Two centuries later this island became th e hom e of theSultan of Johor. It is possible that these events suggested to the au tho r of the H ikayat Han gTuah tha t Bintan should be given so prominent a part in his work.


8/14

406 KI. Braginsbsuccession of statesmen that is common in historica1 writing is purposelyreplaced in the Hikayat Hang Tuah with a synchronical grouping ofpseudo-historica1 characters/symbols. At the superficial semantic levelthese symbols appear to be used to form a pasemon; viewed in terms oftheir deep meaning, however, they compress history, projecting the distantM alaccan past onto the recent Johorese past and so conveying the com mo nmeaning of two 'pasts' and their lessons and experience.Such objectives were not at al1 unusual for Malay chronicles, but oneis unlikely to find so consistent a historical account as an integral epicbiography presented in them. The Hikayat Aceh, a similarly heroicizedbiography of Sultan Iskandar Muda of Aceh (see Iskandar 1 9 5 0 isperhaps the oniy work that bears any analogy to the Hikayat Hang Tuah.W hat w ere the most significant lessons of the 'two pasts' a s seen by the

l hikayat's author? The answer to this question can be surmised from theforewords to the hikayat, one of which contains the following significantstatement: 'This is the hikayat of Hang Tuah, whose dedication to hisI master was boundless and who has rendered him co untless services' (Ah-l mad 1968:1). Thus we have here a problem familiar to US rom the Hikayatl Raja Pasa i and the Malay A nnals on the one hand, and the Hikayat IsmaYatim and the Hikayat Bachtiar on the other - the problem of the1 relationship between the mo narch, the Sultan of Malacca, a descendant of

celestial beings, and his loyal vassal, Hang Tuah , son of a poor family fromthe River Duyung , who with his name 'The Lucky O ne' and 'The On e WhoBrings Fortune ' sym bolizes Malacca's happy destiny (Hooykaas 1947230).According to the established idea, the monarch is endowed, by virtueof his supernatural origin and divine preordination, with sacral energy o rpower, daulat, which m akes him a focus and a custodian of the social order.His subjects - both the people and the country -, symbolized by HangTuah, are linked to him in a kind o f sacral marriage . It is this inseparableunity between the sovereign, as the agent of a creative cosmic forceman ifested on the social level in justice (adilat), and his loyal sub jects thatguaran tees, in the interpretation of the hikayat's author, the state's politicalsuccess and prosperity until such tim e a s the wil1 of Allah wil1 put an en dto i t s very exi~tence.~If the concep tion described above provides an ideological focus for thehikayat that has repercussions for practically al1 its episodes (cf. Teeuw1964 :349), the structural co re of the work consists in the parallel biogra-phies of the sultan and Hang T uah, in w hose interaction the idea finds itsmost co mplete expression (cf. Ahm ad 1968:xiv-xv). The two lives person-ify the destiny of Malacca, and this is crucial for the artistic manner inwhich the hikayat is composed, a mode that blends spontaneous realismwith symbolic elements.8 Among the considerable body of literature dealing with this conception special rnentionshould be made of De Josselin de Jong 1964 and 1980.


9/14

Hikayat Hang Tuah: Malay Epic and Muslirn Mirror 407The romance begins with the supernatural birth of both of its heroes;their youth is coincidental with the founding of Malacca, their maturity

with its flourishing. On the sam e unfortuna te day when the monarch dropsinto the sea his crown , a sym bol of his sacral power, Hang Tuah parts w ithhis kris, which has ensured his and M alacca's good luck and invincibility.Thereafter both the sovereign and Hang Tuah fa11 ill and are henceforthconstantly tormented by fever and debility - maladies which equallyaffect Malacca, now past its prime and showing signs of decrepitude. Oneof these signs is the defeat suffered in the Portugu ese a ttack on the country,which follows in the wake of the heroes' illness and leaves the previouslyinvulnerable Hang Tuah with a serious wound. The second is the subse-quently more dominant religio-mystica1 mood, which for the author evi-dently also is a sign of old a ge, of the heroes as wel1 as their co untry. Thehikayat concludes with the simultaneous departure of the sultan and HangTuah from Malacca to become dervishes. The link between them is se-vered for good now, while M alac ca, having reached the end of the periodallotted to it by fate, is captured by the Portuguese.The symbolism inherent in the hikayat manifests itself not only in thekey episodes, but also in several scenes of a m ore subsidiary nature. Tw oof the latter deserve special a ttention (cf. Teeuw 1964 :350- 1). In the first,the most unusual victory of a white pelanduk (mousedeer) (albinos werethought to possess enorm ous magic power) over the powerful hunting d ogsof a Javanese prince in the very place where M alacca was to be foundedseem s to be a distant portent of Malacca's future trium ph over Majapahit.In the second, this trium ph is proved inevitable by a victory scored by H angTuah over the greatest of Java's warriors, Tam ing Sari, and his acquisitionof the latter's kris, a weapon imparting invincibility to its owner, which inthis instance symbolizes the fact that Majapahit's good fortune is nowpassing on to Malacca. Incidentallyj towards the end of the hikayat, an-other albino animal, a white crocodile, steals this kris from Hang Tuah,thus be tokening the fa11 of M alacca; in this conn ection it wil1 be recalledthat the crocodile is a constant adversary of the moused eer in Malay fo lk-tales and in the literary Hikayat P elanduk Jinak a (Winstedt 19 6 1:1 116; Klinkert 1893 ).Because they are permeated by a single conception, the kaleidoscopicsuccession of episodes in the hikayat is similar to that in the novelettes(exempla) illustrating particular notions from the didactic 'Mirrors'(vorstenspiegel).Moreover, the hikayat itself appea rs to be a kind of 'Mirror'in terms of its inner content, where history beco mes a m entor. In dealingwith the relationship between the ruler and the ruled, this Mirror is pre-dominantly concerned with the role of the ruled, while the duties whichthe didactic treatises usually distribute am ong various groups of courtiershere are imposed on only one cha racter - Hang T uah. Th e man is a great(the greatest) military commander, a wise counsellor, a sophisticateddiplomat capable of defending his sovereign's honour, and a Muslim


10/14

408 i? . Braginskyascetic informing his monarch about the torment of sinners in the here-after.

To gain a more profound understanding of its character, the readershould take into consideration the didactic aspect of the Hikayat HangTuah. The hikayat not only engages the reader's attention with its masterlydescription of the heroic exploits of the laksarnana and his adherents, butalso offers him a correct solution, from the traditional Malay point of view,for the entire range of problematic situations in which its central idea ismanifest. This helps to explain in par ticula r the alleged 'belittlement' ofthe Sultan of Malacca, which is a stumbling-block for some scholars.9It is noteworthy that the image created of this sultan does not includesuch conventional traits of a tyrant as sexual promiscuity, massive cruelty,and rapaciousness. Fo r al1 his weaknesses, his rashness and his credulou s-ness, the sultan is not presented as a tyrant - rather a regular way ofportraying rulers in Malay literature (Hikayat Raja Pasai, the MalayAnnals, Hikayat Aceh, Hikayat Marong Mah awangsa). A ccordingly, thefa11 of Malacca should not be attributed to his evil nature ; instead, fully inaccordance with the hikayat's conception of the emb odiment of the coun -try's destiny in the combined destinies of the sultan and Hang Tuah, thedisintegration of Malacca is represented as being the result of natura1 agingcaused , in turn, by the termina tion of a span of time allotted by A llah. Thisnotion, which is not alien to Javanese historiography (see Rickleffs1974 : 176ff.), is ch aracteristic of the historica1 consciousness o f later Islam ,with its doctrine, evolved partly under the influence of Sufism, of cyclicaldeve lopm ent: rapid growth in the early phase, consolidation in the m iddlephase, and decrepitude and disintegration in the final phase (Braune1971:47-50). The idea of the inseparable unity of the monarch and hissubjects and the cyclical conception of history explain the immediatereplacement in the hikayat of defeated Malacca by a strong Johor.The ambiguity and variability in the portrayal of the monarch areconditioned not so much by the 'realism' and symbolism inherent in theauthor's style, as by the didactic objectives he was pursuing. It is asunjustified to expect this character, an 'immobilis mobile' of the plot, topossess strict integrity and consistency, as it is to try to construct a con-sistent picture of the monarch on the basis of different stories in the'Mirrors', which aim a t resolving a specific, unconnected problem in ea chinstance. Any reasonable and justified actions taken by the m onarch in thehikayat not only point to his greatness, but als0 enable Hang Tuah todisplay his courage and statesmanship. Conversely, his weaknesses andwhims make it possible to represent 'in persons' such important notionsas the need f o ra monarch to listen to his wise counsellors, to avoid rashnessand to turn a deaf ea r to slander. Even more imp ortantly, these weaknesses9 This interpretation of this character is basic for Parnickel, who regards the principalcollision in the hikay atas being th e usual epic confrontation between a warrior and a ' l ight-minded and cruel ruler' (Pamickel 1974:278).


11/14

Hikayat Hang Tua k Malay Epic and Murlim Mirror 409help to test a subject's loyalty to his sovereign. Were it not for H ang Tuah'swillingness to carry out any assignment for his sovereign, both on thelatter's orders and voluntarily (and irrespective of whether it involves amatter of importante to the state or such absurd requests as to pick somefruits from a palm tree ab ou t to collapse, to rescue a horse from a cesspit,or to bring new s from the next world), he would not have becom e a livingemb odim ent of this loyalty, implicit an d ab solute, precisely because onlythen can such loyalty, according to medieval M alay ideas, ensure peace,order and prosperity for the whole state. As for the consequences ofdisloyalty, these a re illustrated in the hikayat by the outc om e of the tragicrebellion of Hang Jebat, Hang Tuah's adopted brother and the second-strongest warrior in Malacca.The moral of the abo ve episode can be sum marized in the words of thewell-known Mirror T aj as-Salatin (T he C row n of Kings), i.e., the wil1 ofeven an unjust ruler must be done, not out of admiration for him, but outof the bitter necessity to avoid disturbances and revolts, which may dragthe country int0 chaos and take the lives of countless subjects, bothinnocent and gu ilty (Roorda van Eysinga 1827 :49 , 224). This is exactlywhat happens in the hikayat when the monarch, egged on by slanderers,orders the execution of Hang Tuah and hands over his powers as wel1 asthe famous laksamana's kris to a new favourite, Hang Jebat.

Hang Jebat is overcome with confusing and conflicting feelings andpassions. Th e first of these, arising immed iately after his accession and hisacquisition of the kris, is the intoxication with his power, which he w as onlyable to acquire after Hang Tuah's ousting. But Hang Tuah had foreseenthis and foretold the advent of bad tim es for Malacca. U pon realizing this,al1 of Hang Jebat's fo rmer friends and associates renounce him. Th e secondof these passions, which grows in intensity a s his raptu re aba tes, is Han gJebat's profound grief at the loss of a friend and his desire to take hisrevenge upon those who have brought him to ruin. Unrestrained, as befitsa truly epic hero (Parn ickel 1960), these passions break loose from thecommand of reason - the highest virtue in the Mirror literature (Roordavan Eysinga 182 7:169 -77), fully embod ied in the person of Hang Tu ah -and engulf Hang Jebat. Once this happens, the author, irrespective ofwhether noble or base passions are involved, can only regard the man asan agent of destructive demonic forces.Starting off by slighting the courtiers and with self-aggrandizement(while the Taj as-Salatin considers the highest attribute of reason to behumility, which is so clearly manifest in Hang Tuah, cf. Roorda vanEysinga 1827: 170), Ha ng Jebat eventually proceeds to open revolt a nd theusurpation of power. How ever, this usurpation bears the m arks of madnessand, were it not for the cha racte r of the usurper and the tragic consequen-ces of his action, even has a comical tinge. Having driven the sovereignout of the palace and donned the royal attire, thus profaning the sultan'sregalia, Han g Jebat becomes the ruler not of Malacca, but of seven hundred


12/14

410 V l . BraginsSipalace women (cf. Parnickel 1974:281), hence the lord of a 'kingdomturned inside out' (see Likhachev and P anch enko 197 6:16 -26), as it were,in w hich the death and life of its subjects is governed not by law and justice,but by the arbitrary will of its ruler alone. Passions rather than reasongovern the relationship between the ruler and the subjects of such akingdom - for instance, the amorous obsession of the palace women andthe disturbed feelings of the rebel. The 'interior policy' of this kingdom isuninterrupted orgy; its 'foreign policy' is an equally endless battle with thesoldiers led by his former comrades in arms, now sent against Hang Jebatby the Sultan of Malacca. It only stands to reason tha t such a kingdom ofchaos is doom ed to co llapse, and that the unbridled wilfulness of its 'ruler'will inevitably result in the death of its subjects. This is what happens infact when H ang Jeba t kills al1 the palace women before going to do battlewith Hang Tuah, who turns out to be ali've after all, his life having beensaved by the bendahara. Thus, despite the noble impulse to avenge hisfriend which subdued the other passions in Hang Jebat's soul, the fightbetween the heroes ,assum es the dimension of a symbolic battle betweenthe forces of harmony and those of chaos, between reason and blindpassion. It is not fortuitous that, while und erstanding his adopted b rother'smotives, Hang Tuah must inevitably fight him, and yet tries to convincehim of the need to carefully w eigh each step, or that H ang Jebat accep tshis challenge, convinced that o nce he h as become a rebel he has to remaina rebe1,steeped in blood. Nor is there anything accidental about thejuxtaposition of the calm resolve of Hang T uah during the fight and thenervousness of Hang Jebat, who is incapable of con trolling his fury. Evenwhen mortally w ounded, H ang Jeba t is still prone to the raging forces ofevil unleashed by his uncon trollable passions. Em body ing the idea of theMirrors that divine wrath will strike the country that has given birth to arebel (Roorda van Eysinga 182 7:22 4;cf. Zahoder 19 49 :l l), he runs amo k,raging across Malacca and piling the bodies of his dead victims in thestreets of the city.But the au thor wou ld not have been the outstand ing writer he was if hehad forgotten for a moment the former virtue of his hero, a virtue whichwas previously evident from al1 his words and deeds. Th is being the case ,Hang Tuah, after striking dow n the rebel, spends three days in m ourningand silence, Han g Jebat is given a chance to die in the a rms of his adoptedbrother, and Hang Kestun weeps over the dead body of the man he hasrenounced only a moment before. And, as a kind of epitaph for the slainman, Hang Tuah observes that nothing is simple in life.To summ arize, the Hikayat H ang Tu ah is a strongly national exam pleof the artificial historical-heroic epic, in which history, in the medievalMalay sense of the term, is unfolded as a biography of a hero. In theprocess, its hidden didactic message is revealed.


13/14

Hikayat Hang Tuah: Malay Epic and Muslim Miwor 4 1 1BIBLIOGRAPHYAhmad, Kassim, 1964, Characterisation in 'Hikayat Hang Tuah'. Kuala Lumpur: DewanBahasa dan Pustaka.Ahm ad, Kassim (ed.), 19 68, HikayatHang Tuah. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.Andaya, Leonard Y., 1978, The Kingdom of Johor 1641-1728. Kuala Lumpur: OxfordUniversity Press.Berg, C.C., 19 38a , De A qun awi wah a: Er-Langga 's levensloop en bruiloftslied?' BKI97:19 -94 .-, I938b, 'Javaansche geschiedschrijving', in: F.W. Stapel (ed.), Geschiedenis van Neder-landsch-Indi 11, pp. 1 - 148. Amsterdam: Joost van den Vondel.Braginsky, V.I., 1983, Istoriya mahyskoy literatury VII-XIX vekov [A history of M alayliterature from th e 7th to the 19th century]. Moscow: Nauka.Braune, W., 19 71, Historical consciousness in Islam', in: G.E. von Gru ne ba um (ed.), Theologyand h w in Islam, pp. 39 -52 . Wiesbaden: Harassowitz.Hooykaas, C., 194 7, Over Maleische literatuur. Leiden: Brill.Iskandar, T., 1958, De Hikayat Afjeh. 's-Gravenhag e: Nijhoff.Josselin de Jong, P.E. de, 1964, 'The character of the Malay Annals', in: J. Bastin and R.Roolvink (eds), Malayan and Indonesian Studies; Essayspresented to Sir Richard Winstedton his 85th birfhday. Oxford: Clarendon Press.-, 196 5, 'The rise and decline of a national hero', JMBRAS 38-2:140-55.-, 19 80 , 'Ruler and realm : Political myth in Western Indonesia', MKNAW AL 43-1: l -19 .Klinkert, H.C., 1893, De pelandoek djinaka of het guitige dwerghert. Leiden: Brill.Kratz, E.U., 1989, 'Durhaka', Pa pe r delivered at the Persidangan A ntarabangsa PengajianMelayu, Universiti Malaya, 21-23 Ogos 1989.Likhachev, DS ., and A.M. Panchenko, 19 76, 'Smek hovo y mir' Drevney Rusi ['The world oflaughter' in Old Russia]. Leningrad: Nauka .Lohuizen-d e Leeuw , J.E. van, 195 6, The beginning of Old Javanese historica1 literature', BM112:383-394.Ov erbec k, Han s, 1 92 2, 'Vorwort', in: H. Over beck (transl.), Die Geschichte von Hang Tuah.Mnchen: M uller.Parnickel, B.B., 1959 , M aloissledovanniy pamya tnik m alayskoy literatury ("Povest' o HangTuahe")' [An insufficiently studied work of Malay literatu re (T he rom an ce of Han gTuah)], Vestnik istorii mirovoy kultury [Review of the hi st ov of world culture] 2:87-105.-, 196 0, 'Opyt traktovki tsentralnyh ob rasov malaysk oy "Povesti o H ang Tuahe" ' [A nattempt a t interpretation of the main characters in the Malay Hikayat Hang Tuah]. Pap erpresented a t XXV Mezdunarod niy Kongress Vostokovedov [25th Congress of Oriental-

ists], Moscow .-, 196 2, 'Johorskaya redak tsiya "Povesti o H ang Tuahe" ' [The Johor recension of theHikayat Hang Tuah], Narody Azii i Afnki [Peoples of Asia and Africa] 1:147-55.-, 1974, 'K voprosu o kollizii "Povesti o Hang Tuahe" ' [The problem of collision in theHikayat Hang Tuah], in: B.G. Gafurov et al. (eds), Istoriko-jlologicheskiye issledovania.Sbomik stateypamyati akademika N.l. Konrada [Studies in history and philology. Volumein commemoration of Academician N.I. Konrad], pp. 277-287. Moscow: Nauka.-, 197 6, 'An epic hero and an "epic traitor" in the Hikayat Ha ng Tuah', BKI 132:403-17 .-, 197 8, Diplomaticheskiy i literatumiy etiket v malayskom kn izhnom epose' [Diplom aticand literary etiquette in Malay written epics], in: P. Grintser et al. (eds), Pamyatnikiknizhnogo eposa [Written epics], pp. 141-6 1. Moscow: Nauka.Ras, J.J., 1 976 , The historica1 developm ent of the Javanese shadow theatre', RIMA 1 0 - 2 5 0 -

76.Ricklefs, M.C., 1974, Jogjakarfa under Sultan Mangkubumi 1749-1792. A history of thediviswn of Java. London: Oxford University Press.Roorda van Eysinga, P.P., 1827, Tadj as-Sah tin; De kroon aller koningen. Batavia: LandsDrukkerij.


14/14

V I. BraginskySalleh, Muh amm ad Haji, 19 83, Central values of the Malay hero, Hang Tuah', Tenggara 17118:74-97.Situmorang, T.D., and A. Teeuw, eds, 1958, Sedjarah Melaju menurut terbitan Abdullah.Djakarta: Djambatan.Skinner, C., 1963, Sja'ir Perang Mengkasar (The rhymed chronicle of the Macassar war) byEnfji' Amin. 's-Gravenhage: Nijhoff.Teeuw, A., 1960, 'De Maleise roman', Forum der Leneren Mei 1960:108-120.-, 1961, 'Hang Tuah en Hang Jebat; Nationalisme, ideologie en literatuurbeschouwing',Forum der Letteren Februari 1961:37-48.-, 196 4, 'Tentang p engharg aan dan pentafsiran H ikayat Hang Tuah', Dewan Bahasa 8-8:339-354.Winstedt, R.O., 1938a, 'The Keddah Annals', JMBRAS 16-2:31-5.-, 1938b, 'The Malay Annals or Sejarah Melayu', JMBRAS 16-3:l-225.-, 1961, A history of classical Malay literature. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press.Wolters, O.W., 1970, The fa11 of Srivijaya in Malay hisrory. New York: Cornell UniversityPress.Zaho der, B., ed. and transl., 19 49, Siasat-name. Kniga o pravlenii vazira X1 stolniya Nizamal-Mulka [The hook of governm ent by Nizam al-Mulk, a vizier of the 1 lt h century].Moscow: Akademia Nauk USSR.

ABBREVIATIONS USED:BK/ Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, published by the KoninklijkInstituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde.JMBRAS Journal of the Malay(si)an Brunch of the Royal Asiatic Society.MKNAW AL Mededelingen der Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen,Af-deling Letterkunde (Nieuwe Reeks).RIMA Review of Indonesian and Malayan Affairs.

Documents

Hikayat Tuah