Need to rewrite history to capture the splendour of the Kedah empires [to help educate raptor-ish Moolah-crazy Fei-Lo]

Need to rewrite history to capture the splendour of the Kedah empires

By Prof Ramasamy Palanisamy



ACADEMICIANS like Prof Dr Ahmad Murad Merican of the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) gives a lot of credit to the British for recognising Kedah’s sovereignty over Penang rather than Siam.

He takes umbrage with the spokesperson of Penang Heritage Trust (PHT) Clement Liang for interpreting colonial history by using Thai sources.

Murad is aghast that Liang would use Thai sources to understand Kedah’s history in coming to the conclusion that the state was ceded to the British rather than leased.

I find it objectionable that an academic like Murad would go to the extent of terming Liang’s historical interpretation as something “treacherous” and “seditious”.

It is unfortunate that such threats coming from a scholar is not acceptable.

Past history is often subject to various interpretations giving rise to healthy debates and exchange of views.

Alternative historical interpretations cannot be subject to threats and intimidations.

In this respect, Murad behaves like a right wing politician.

Relationship between feudal powers in the northern states of the Malay Peninsula was not clear-cut.

Even if Siam held sway over Kedah and by definition Penang, the British might have found it more expedient to deal with Kedah rather than Siam over Penang.

Close proximity might have given the impression that Kedah was the state that had control over Penang.

But Kedah remained the vassal state of Siam but virtue of the payment of bunga mas.

The British simply didn’t follow rules in why some territories were brought under its control and not others.

If Britain had imperial interests in acquiring territories, it did not care as to which power had the sovereignty over Penang.

In fact, Penang was ceded to the British for a payment in return for the protection against Siam.

Siam might have been an imperial feudal power in the north and east but like all other feudal kingdoms, it lacked effective control over its territories.

Penang could have been administered by Siam through Kedah.

However, such a state of affairs did not preclude the fact that Kedah considered Penang its territory.

In fact, Penang was a de facto territory of Kedah.

However, with the Sword of Damocles hanging over its head (constant Siamese threat), Kedah might have turned to the British to ward off the Siamese by ceding Penang.

In other words, Penang was ceded for an amount of money in Spanish dollars yearly.

Much later upon independence, the new government of Malaya merely honoured the colonial agreement with the British by giving a yearly stipend to the state of Kedah.

It was not an acknowledgement that Penang was leased from Kedah, but the fact that Penang was ceded for a certain sum of money.

Kedah Menteri Besar Muhamad Sanusi Md Nor, given his lack of understanding of history and why the Federal Government is paying a yearly stipend in perpetuity to Kedah, naively thinks that Penang was leased to British.

Sanusi is terribly wrong and so are his supporters in making a veiled claim on Penang.

As for Murad, I agree that Kedah was the most powerful Malay Kingdom, long before the arrival of the British.

Under the Srivijaya and Chola empires, Kedah flourished to the extent its ports had attracted seafarers from far and wide.

The Cholas administered Kedah (or Kedaram) for 66 years, about a thousand years ago.

This was following the defeat of the Srivijaya kingdom along the shores of the Malacca Straits.

I strongly believe that there is need to rewrite the history of Kedah from ancient times to acknowledge that it was the first Malay Kingdom.

One should definitely not rewrite history to prove the non-existent fact that Penang was leased from Kedah. – Nov 1, 2021


Ramasamy Palanisamy is the state assemblyperson for Perai. He is also deputy chief minister II of Penang.