The Laksamana's daughters: 'Herstory' vs 'history'

KUALA LUMPUR - A few months back, I found out that I may be a descendant of one of the major figures in Malay history - Laksamana Muhammad Amin - through one of his hitherto unknown daughters with his first wife.

The Laksamana was one of the men accused of plotting the assassination of British Resident James W.W. Birch in Pasir Salak, Perak. It was a pivotal moment in the country’s history as the killing started a chain reaction that began with the erosion of the Perak sultan’s powers and ended with the British solidifying their control of the Malay states.

For his trouble, Laksamana Amin was exiled to Seychelles along with fellow conspirators Sultan Abdullah Muhammad Shah II, the 26th sultan of Perak; Syahbandar Uda Maamor; and Tengku Menteri Ngah Ibrahim, who was Laksamana Amin’s son-in-law. According to some researchers, Laksamana Amin’s first wife Fatimah Mohamad Tahar accompanied him, as the custom of the day dictated.

What has some historians in a tizzy is the possibility that he had two daughters - Ngah Teresah Muhammad Amin and Puteh Manjera Muhammad Amin - with Fatimah. They had married and lived in Kampung Kepayang in Fair Park, Ipoh, by the time the Laksamana was exiled in 1877. The elder daughter had married the son of Ngah Jabor, who may or may not have been Dato Panglima Kinta then.

While I am curious about the possible connection, I am mostly struck by how little information there is about the two sisters Ngah Teresah and Puteh Manjera. The Laksamana had many wives and children, with many descendants on record to this day. Why were the two sisters different, if they were indeed the Laksamana’s daughters?

The answer was shockingly simple: they were young married women with no living brothers in a time of turmoil and whose father was considered an enemy of the British.

NOT MUCH ‘HERSTORY’

Gender studies coordinator at Universiti Malaya Dr Ruhana Padzil said it was not a surprise that the two sisters, even if they were the Laksamana’s daughters, would have disappeared out of the community’s memories given their gender and the times.

"The community knows about them. But history doesn't recognise them. It’s not that they (actually) disappeared but in our historical texts, they’ve disappeared because women are not important in our (text) history,” she told me in an interview.

"It has never been discussed in our text history about the roles of our daughters and the wives,” she added.

She said this was because the Malays, prior to British occupation, seldom wrote anything down. They practiced oral tradition where memories, and family and community lore or history were related to the next generation through tales and conversation. There were few letters.

The oral history pays homage to women but the retelling gets confused or disappears down the line. Any historical documentation that has survived to this day is largely due to the British. And even then, such documentation would have required the locals to interact with the British administration, something anyone related to rebels was unlikely to do. Many family members also chose to keep to themselves and avoid attracting any attention.

British historical accounts described the Malays in Perak after the Perak War as "cowed, sullen and hostile”.

Ruhana said if at all any woman showed up in history, they were usually the exception that proved the rule.

She used the example of Toh Puan Halimah, who was the Laksamana’s daughter from another wife and wife of fellow exile Tengku Menteri Ngah Ibrahim, contrasting her with Ngah Ibrahim’s third wife Sa’eah. Both had refused to follow their husband to Seychelles and asked for a divorce.

She said Halimah appears in history books because she was willing to deal with the British while Sa’eah disappeared from history.

"It’s two different stories. Sa’eah chose to ask for a divorce because she was still young. She wanted to marry again. Because of this reason, she was granted a divorce. But Toh Puan Halimah, as the first wife, was supposed to follow him, and she refused,” she said.

She said Halimah appealed to Frank Swettenham, who was the British Resident after Birch, and argued she had to stay to take care of her sons and property.

"She was a very strong character. In the end, Ngah Ibrahim had to divorce Toh Puan Halimah, so she got her way,” Ruhana added.

Historians agreed that there was a gender gap in dealing with Malay history, which makes it even more difficult to trace ancestry if the ancestors were all women.

"If you read about our ‘pembesar’ (dignitaries) we do not know about their family members (unless they are part of the royal family). We don’t know (anything about) Tun Perak’s wife, for example,” said Associate Prof Mohd Samsudin, director of Institut Kajian Tuah.

He was involved in the research that found Fatimah and her two daughters.

WAYS TO FIND ORIGINS

Any son of a titled person in Perak history could inherit their father’s title so families with boys would usually have some genealogical record be it through stories or on paper. But as Fatimah only had two daughters, it is conceivable their line disappeared because there was little need to keep track of them.

"There is some truth in that. Usually, if the descendant is through the female line, they do not have a claim on any title. But only title, not property. Property is different,” said honorary Associate Prof Ahmad Jelani Halimi, chairman of the Perak branch of the Malaysian Historical Society.

He added it was good that there is a claim of possible descendants, saying it was a chance to increase more knowledge of Malay history.

The fact that women can inherit property under Malay culture is a silver lining. Ruhana said unlike British women at that time, women in Malay history were always able to inherit property.

It was the same with the two sisters Ngah Teresah and Puteh Manjera. Their claims were bolstered by a land grant with their full names on it, as well as their seeming connection to prominent families and persons in Perak at that time, including the Laksamana’s sister. On top of that, there was a letter requesting the British government to pay for the passage of Fatimah from Seychelles to Singapore. However, the documentation and other evidence may not be enough to conclusively prove lineage.

Given the dearth of historical evidence, one would think that DNA testing would be more popular. However, Mohd Samsudin said it was not that simple, using the example of Laksamana Muhammad Amin and Ngah Ibrahim, whose remains were interred in Bukit Chandan, Perak, in 2006.

News reports on the return of their remains from Singapore to Perak stated that Dewan Negara Perak was considering doing DNA tests on the remains. There were no reports on whether the tests were done.

Conducting DNA tests on old remains is difficult as it depends on the state of the remains, that is, the age and the condition of the remains, as well as the environment in which they were kept. Scientists say it is easier to get DNA from old bones in cold climes. Much like a refrigerator, cold and dry conditions preserve DNA better.

"The bones have been left for over 100 years in Singapore,” Mohd Samsudin said.

He added the process would also be time-consuming and expensive.

As things stand, there is little to do to make up for the lack of information on women in Malay history.

"We need to do more research,” said Ruhana.

She also added a wish before we ended this interview.

"I hope you’ll keep going. Find out more about our (history’s) missing daughters and wives,” she said.

I promised her I would try my best. - BERNAMA