This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Raj of Sarawak article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 24, 2009, September 24, 2010, September 24, 2017, June 14, 2018, September 24, 2019, September 24, 2021, and September 24, 2022. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
hi, Does anyone have the book - "Silvia, queen of the head hunters"? Can I have the page number with the picture of the state crest on the doorway with the Jawi transliteration of Dum Spiro Spero (written as "Haraplah, selagi bernafas"). This is just to stop people from changing the wording to "Berharaplah, Selagi Bernafas" - Thanks -- Bukhrin ( talk) 05:07, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure if a state ruled by a Raja should be described as a Kingdom. Gerard von Hebel ( talk) 22:43, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
I entirely concur with this - the title is wrong unless anyone can produce any substantial evidence for Sarawak ever being referred to as a Kingdom rather than a Raj, or just Sarawak, (before Wikipedia came along, anyway)? I very much doubt that he Brookes would ever have referred to themselves as Kings (some tabloid newspapers may have referred to Vyner's daughters as Princesses, and Charles, privately, wooed Margaret to be 'his Queen', but I don't think that's enough). In terms of British Court etiquette, the Rajahs were pretty low down, and probably typically addressed as Sir, or perhaps with His Highness the Rajah... (In fact, the only letter I have seen from Buckingham Palace to the 2nd Rajah addressed him as 'My dear Brooke' - not very regal) Battang ( talk) 23:37, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Actually Spenser St John has a whole chapter on the Kingdom of BRUNEI... but, ruled by a Sultan, it is surely better referred to as a Sultanate? Similarly, Sarawak under the Brookes was customarily referred to as a Raj (or Rajahate - https://archive.org/details/cu31924078409673 ). Sultans and Rajahs being somewhat exotic to a British readership, Spenser (certainly not knighted in 1863) was doubtless trying to convey the meaning of Rajah and Sultan with the more familiar English term of King... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Battang ( talk • contribs) 12:22, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
"Raj of Sarawak" would seem the most appropriate title to me. Sarawak under the Brookes can certainly be described as a monarchy, its just that the monarch was a Rajah, not a Sultan, and not formally styled as a King (not least in deference, I suspect, to the Queen of the United Kingdom etc, of whose realm the Rajah was a subject). Incidentally, the 1868 'book' referred to above is an article in a monthly magazine called Temple Bar (later copied as a chapter in a book, too): it does use the word kingdom, but I would again suggest that this was an informal usage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Battang ( talk • contribs) 18:40, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kingdom of Sarawak. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:32, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
The current opening sentence is a bit unclear and I think it can be improved.
I suspect that this topic will be controversial, there are so many conflicting secondary and tertiary sources, I'd like to build consensus around the following paragraph before editing the main page and filling in the citations from appropriate secondary sources:
The Raj of Sarawak was initially a tributary state under the Sultanate of Brunei, located in the northwestern part of the island of Borneo. The Raj was founded when James Brooke was granted political authority to rule the government on 24 September 1841. The original concession of territory from Brunei was defined as extending from Tanjung Datu in the west, extending eastwards along the coastline to include all the rivers up to the mouth of the Samarrahan river. It gained de facto independence from Brunei after the capture of Brunei 8 July 1846 and gained de jure independence via an agreement with Sultan Mumin in 1853. [insert map of this concession]
Through a series of further concessions the James Brooke expanded the boundaries of the Raj eastward at the expense of Brunei. Several major rebellions occurred against his rule, causing him to be plagued by debt incurred in countering the rebellions, and the sluggish economic situation at the time. His nephew, Charles Brooke, succeeded James and normalised the situation by improving the economy, reducing government debts and establishing public infrastructure. In 1888, the Raj acquired protectorate status from the British Government whilst avoiding annexation. By 1905 the Raj had expanded to its largest size, and this area now forms the Malaysian state of Sarawak.
To gear up economic growth, the second Rajah encouraged the migration of Chinese workers from China and Singapore to work in the agricultural fields. With proper economic planning and stability, Sarawak prospered and emerged as one of the world's major producers of black pepper, in addition to oil and the introduction of rubber plantations.
He was succeeded by his son Charles Vyner Brooke but World War II and the arrival of Japanese forces ultimately brought an end to the Raj and the Protectorate administration, with the territory placed under a military administration on the Japanese capitulation in 1945, and ceded to Britain as its last acquisition as Crown Colony in 1946, in contravention to the Atlantic Charter
It's a super dense definition in the opening paragraph so let's discuss by referring to points individually.
a) 1842 agreement only gave James the right to rule.
b) 1843 agreement gave James the right for his heir to rule after him - provided they paid a top-up fee, Britain rejected taking on Sarawak on a colony specifically because the treaty did not cede the land to James Brooke. James replied that the Bruneians only 'nominally held' the rivers and that a cession would be easy to acquire.... but he didn't get one.
c) 1845 Brooke tried to buy out the rights to rule for his lifetime instead of annual payments for $7000. He also described the status of Sarawak to Henry Wise as: "I hold Sarawak under the Crown of Borneo… I do not desire to hold Sarawak on any other terms ; for I cannot sport an independent monarchy, and the Rajahs of Borneo are a convenient shield."
MatSallehSesat ( talk) 03:28, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
an anonymous user has just changed all protectorate mentions to protected state - there is a difference in the definition of the two - but I think the actual status of protectorates and protected states was purposely left ambiguous at the time
Hopefully the user can provide citations for Sarawak's status? both beginning in 1888 and what it was in 1946 before the handover.
There seems to be a pattern of starting as a protected state and evolving into a protectorate without official declarations.
I suspect Sarawak was turned into a Protectorate in 1928 when Charles Vyner was granted a GCMCG - but I haven't looked into it thoroughly or know secondary sources that back it up.
This source from the College of Arms is answering enquiries about the formation of the Order of the Star of Sarawak - and he refers to Sarawak as a Protectorate.
http://archive.brooketrust.org/DA/showObject.php?id=MPS83.18.?
And Bertram writing to Vyner mentions in passing that their new channel of communication is the Colonial Office. So did Sarawak move from Protected State under the Foreign Office to a Protectorate under the Colonial Office in 1928?
As far as I can tell G.C.M.C.G.s come with strings attached, it would explain how and why Vyner got his award.
Charles got his GCMCG when he signed the 1888 protected state agreement.
MatSallehSesat (
talk)
00:19, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Jeremy Kusumatmadja made an interesting point by adding that Sarawak occupied part of Brunei. From 1888-1935.
It had nothing to do with the Brunei gov falling apart, as is his claim in the edit summary.
It would have been nice if he had given a reference...
Charles bought the concession of Brooketon & Muarra coal mines - as well as bought back the coal rights for all of Brunei from Cowie.
But I don't think we can call this Sarawak territory - one of the restrictions to the concession was that Charles Brooke was not allowed to raise the Sarawak flag. So I'm not sure if you could actually call it Sarawak territory if he didn't have full sovereign rights.
The territory was ceded back to Brunei in 1935 by Charles Vyner.
Here's a letter from Charles explaining the whole history: http://archive.brooketrust.org/DA/showObject.php?id=CBLB_8_241 MatSallehSesat ( talk) 04:59, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Raj of Sarawak article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 24, 2009, September 24, 2010, September 24, 2017, June 14, 2018, September 24, 2019, September 24, 2021, and September 24, 2022. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
hi, Does anyone have the book - "Silvia, queen of the head hunters"? Can I have the page number with the picture of the state crest on the doorway with the Jawi transliteration of Dum Spiro Spero (written as "Haraplah, selagi bernafas"). This is just to stop people from changing the wording to "Berharaplah, Selagi Bernafas" - Thanks -- Bukhrin ( talk) 05:07, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure if a state ruled by a Raja should be described as a Kingdom. Gerard von Hebel ( talk) 22:43, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
I entirely concur with this - the title is wrong unless anyone can produce any substantial evidence for Sarawak ever being referred to as a Kingdom rather than a Raj, or just Sarawak, (before Wikipedia came along, anyway)? I very much doubt that he Brookes would ever have referred to themselves as Kings (some tabloid newspapers may have referred to Vyner's daughters as Princesses, and Charles, privately, wooed Margaret to be 'his Queen', but I don't think that's enough). In terms of British Court etiquette, the Rajahs were pretty low down, and probably typically addressed as Sir, or perhaps with His Highness the Rajah... (In fact, the only letter I have seen from Buckingham Palace to the 2nd Rajah addressed him as 'My dear Brooke' - not very regal) Battang ( talk) 23:37, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Actually Spenser St John has a whole chapter on the Kingdom of BRUNEI... but, ruled by a Sultan, it is surely better referred to as a Sultanate? Similarly, Sarawak under the Brookes was customarily referred to as a Raj (or Rajahate - https://archive.org/details/cu31924078409673 ). Sultans and Rajahs being somewhat exotic to a British readership, Spenser (certainly not knighted in 1863) was doubtless trying to convey the meaning of Rajah and Sultan with the more familiar English term of King... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Battang ( talk • contribs) 12:22, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
"Raj of Sarawak" would seem the most appropriate title to me. Sarawak under the Brookes can certainly be described as a monarchy, its just that the monarch was a Rajah, not a Sultan, and not formally styled as a King (not least in deference, I suspect, to the Queen of the United Kingdom etc, of whose realm the Rajah was a subject). Incidentally, the 1868 'book' referred to above is an article in a monthly magazine called Temple Bar (later copied as a chapter in a book, too): it does use the word kingdom, but I would again suggest that this was an informal usage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Battang ( talk • contribs) 18:40, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kingdom of Sarawak. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:32, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
The current opening sentence is a bit unclear and I think it can be improved.
I suspect that this topic will be controversial, there are so many conflicting secondary and tertiary sources, I'd like to build consensus around the following paragraph before editing the main page and filling in the citations from appropriate secondary sources:
The Raj of Sarawak was initially a tributary state under the Sultanate of Brunei, located in the northwestern part of the island of Borneo. The Raj was founded when James Brooke was granted political authority to rule the government on 24 September 1841. The original concession of territory from Brunei was defined as extending from Tanjung Datu in the west, extending eastwards along the coastline to include all the rivers up to the mouth of the Samarrahan river. It gained de facto independence from Brunei after the capture of Brunei 8 July 1846 and gained de jure independence via an agreement with Sultan Mumin in 1853. [insert map of this concession]
Through a series of further concessions the James Brooke expanded the boundaries of the Raj eastward at the expense of Brunei. Several major rebellions occurred against his rule, causing him to be plagued by debt incurred in countering the rebellions, and the sluggish economic situation at the time. His nephew, Charles Brooke, succeeded James and normalised the situation by improving the economy, reducing government debts and establishing public infrastructure. In 1888, the Raj acquired protectorate status from the British Government whilst avoiding annexation. By 1905 the Raj had expanded to its largest size, and this area now forms the Malaysian state of Sarawak.
To gear up economic growth, the second Rajah encouraged the migration of Chinese workers from China and Singapore to work in the agricultural fields. With proper economic planning and stability, Sarawak prospered and emerged as one of the world's major producers of black pepper, in addition to oil and the introduction of rubber plantations.
He was succeeded by his son Charles Vyner Brooke but World War II and the arrival of Japanese forces ultimately brought an end to the Raj and the Protectorate administration, with the territory placed under a military administration on the Japanese capitulation in 1945, and ceded to Britain as its last acquisition as Crown Colony in 1946, in contravention to the Atlantic Charter
It's a super dense definition in the opening paragraph so let's discuss by referring to points individually.
a) 1842 agreement only gave James the right to rule.
b) 1843 agreement gave James the right for his heir to rule after him - provided they paid a top-up fee, Britain rejected taking on Sarawak on a colony specifically because the treaty did not cede the land to James Brooke. James replied that the Bruneians only 'nominally held' the rivers and that a cession would be easy to acquire.... but he didn't get one.
c) 1845 Brooke tried to buy out the rights to rule for his lifetime instead of annual payments for $7000. He also described the status of Sarawak to Henry Wise as: "I hold Sarawak under the Crown of Borneo… I do not desire to hold Sarawak on any other terms ; for I cannot sport an independent monarchy, and the Rajahs of Borneo are a convenient shield."
MatSallehSesat ( talk) 03:28, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
an anonymous user has just changed all protectorate mentions to protected state - there is a difference in the definition of the two - but I think the actual status of protectorates and protected states was purposely left ambiguous at the time
Hopefully the user can provide citations for Sarawak's status? both beginning in 1888 and what it was in 1946 before the handover.
There seems to be a pattern of starting as a protected state and evolving into a protectorate without official declarations.
I suspect Sarawak was turned into a Protectorate in 1928 when Charles Vyner was granted a GCMCG - but I haven't looked into it thoroughly or know secondary sources that back it up.
This source from the College of Arms is answering enquiries about the formation of the Order of the Star of Sarawak - and he refers to Sarawak as a Protectorate.
http://archive.brooketrust.org/DA/showObject.php?id=MPS83.18.?
And Bertram writing to Vyner mentions in passing that their new channel of communication is the Colonial Office. So did Sarawak move from Protected State under the Foreign Office to a Protectorate under the Colonial Office in 1928?
As far as I can tell G.C.M.C.G.s come with strings attached, it would explain how and why Vyner got his award.
Charles got his GCMCG when he signed the 1888 protected state agreement.
MatSallehSesat (
talk)
00:19, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Jeremy Kusumatmadja made an interesting point by adding that Sarawak occupied part of Brunei. From 1888-1935.
It had nothing to do with the Brunei gov falling apart, as is his claim in the edit summary.
It would have been nice if he had given a reference...
Charles bought the concession of Brooketon & Muarra coal mines - as well as bought back the coal rights for all of Brunei from Cowie.
But I don't think we can call this Sarawak territory - one of the restrictions to the concession was that Charles Brooke was not allowed to raise the Sarawak flag. So I'm not sure if you could actually call it Sarawak territory if he didn't have full sovereign rights.
The territory was ceded back to Brunei in 1935 by Charles Vyner.
Here's a letter from Charles explaining the whole history: http://archive.brooketrust.org/DA/showObject.php?id=CBLB_8_241 MatSallehSesat ( talk) 04:59, 19 August 2023 (UTC)