Of Penang, Bencoolen and Balambangan

Will today's state funeral of Queen Elizabeth II in London will go down as one of the most watched events on television in history? I should believe so. She had lived an incredible life, an incredibly long life, and for most people throughout the world, she was the only Queen that had sat on the throne in the United Kingdom. In fact, outliving many people. Stories abound saying that she had 15 British Prime Ministers serve under her and had seen 12 Presidents come and go in the United States during that time. Another small snippet of trivia is that since our country's Independence from Great Britain in 1957, there have been 16 rotational Yang di-Pertuan Agong during her time as Queen. 

Today, Penang will fly the state flag at half-mast to honour Britain's late Queen, following in the footsteps of Pahang and Selangor. [An update: All government departments and agencies in Penang and Negri Sembilan flew their state flags at half-mast today while Perak would do so for three days in respect of Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral.]

Meanwhile, I see many comments on facebook regarding this decision, not to much as to agree or disagree with it, but to say something else about Free Malaysia Today's write-up that "Penang became Britain’s first colony in Southeast Asia in 1786, with George Town later becoming the capital of the Straits Settlements, a group of territories that included Dindings (now Manjung, Perak), Melaka and Singapore." It's all very interesting.

Meljev Singh: "Britain's first colony in Southeast Asia was not Penang. It was Bencoolen in Sumatra. In fact Penang is not even the first British colony in Malaysia. That honour belongs to the island of Balambangan off the coast of Sabah."

Karpal Sekawan: (Replying to Meljev Singh) "Bencoolen, yes. The East India Company took it over in the 1680s and a century later it became a colony – a year before Francis Light "founded" Penang. Balambangan also began as a possession of the East India Company, but it was not a colony until it was subsumed into the Penang Presidency and then subsumed again into the Straits Settlements."

Meljev Singh: (Replying to Karpal Sekawan) "A colony simply means a group of settlers settling in an area that is under their political control. Bencoolen and Balambangan would have qualified as colonies from the moment the British acquired them in 1685 and 1762 respectively. As long as the British had a settlement, which they did in both places, they were colonies. If the area remained uninhabited, then they were not colonies. Balambangan became a Residency in 1785, not a colony."

Picture from facebook

Karpal Sekawan: (Replying to Meljev Singh's "A colony simply means a group of settlers settling in an area that is under their political control. Bencoolen and Balambangan would have qualified as colonies from the moment the British acquired them in 1685 and 1762 respectively.") "No, there were legal and other consequences when a possession was officially recognised as a colony. For example, all residents became British subjects, which they were not when their land was only a possession of the East India Company. These differences came into play every day. Legal status, privileges, and requirements were different even between the Straits Settlements (a colony) and the Federated Malay States (not a colony). As for this ("Balambangan became a Residency in 1785, not a colony.") Yes, as I noted above, Balambangan did not become (part of) a colony until it was subsumed into the Straits Settlements via Penang. Thanks for your remarks. I hadn't thought about Balambangan for some time. It's good to be reminded."

Meljev Singh: (Replying to Karpal Sekawan) "The staff of the EIC were British subjects to begin with. If I was to use the definition of a colony you have given, then Penang itself would have only qualified to become a colony when the EIC relinquished the island to the Crown in 1867. I think what you meant here is Crown Colony whereas what I mean is simply a British colony meaning a colony of British settlers. That may explain our difference in opinion. Crown Colony is an official status given to a place whereas colony simply means a group of settlers coming to a new place and assuming control of that place."

Karpal Sekawan: (Replying to Meljev Singh) "When I mentioned "residents" of a place becoming British subjects, I was not referring to "the staff of the EIC." Thanks again."

Meljev Singh: (Replying to Karpal Sekawan) "The staff of the EIC do not qualify as British subjects? In the case of any new British settlement, the first settlers would have been EIC staff. Being British subjects, their presence is enough to justify calling the place a colony. Why differentiate Penang from Balambangan or Bencoolen when all of them went through the same process? If you want to argue that all the residents of a place need to be subjects of a certain occupying power, then even Penang would not qualify as a British colony simply because not all of its residents at any one time were British subjects, even after 1867. There was no point in history that all of Penang's residents were British subjects. Some came from elsewhere to settle. Therefore, was Penang ever a British colony?"

Karpal Sekawan: (Replying to Meljev Singh's "The staff of the EIC do not qualify as British subjects?") "Not what I said, which was this: 'For example, all residents became British subjects, which they were not when their land was only a possession of the East India Company.' By "all residents" here I meant "native residents," as you can infer from "their land." I should leave it at that. Thanks again for your thoughts.

Meljev Singh: (Replying to Karpal Sekawan) "I think we both have a different set of definitions as to what constitutes a colony. For me, i take it from the dictionary implying that it is a group of non natives settling on a foreign land and taking political control of it. You have added a number of caveats to your argument, of which I don;t know your sources. As such, I cannot fully agree. Still, I respect your opinion. Thanks for sharing your knowledge."

Eugene Quah: (Replying to Meljev Singh) "May I add to this interesting topic. According to the research of David Kenneth Bassett of SOAS, Bencoolen (Bengkulu) was founded after the demise of the earlier Presidency of Bantam (Banten) in Java. I highly recommend the reprint of his thesis by USM. Fascinating read. “The Factory Of The English East India Company At Bantam 1600-1682 (HC).” James Lancaster himself help establish the Factory at Bantam in 1602 (elevated to presidency in 1617). Lancaster stopped at Pulau Rimau off Penang in 1593 for a few months to help his crew recuperate from scurvy."

Meljev Singh: (Replying to Eugene Quah) "I did a bit more reading yesterday. Apparently there is an older British possession in Southeast Asia which is the Run Island in Indonesia which was acquired by the EIC in 1616 and was a shortlived colony until the Dutch chased the British out. This was before the British had any colonies in India. Perhaps it is the oldest British colony in Asia. Other than Bantam, the British also had factories at Surat and Masulipatnam in India as well as at Kedah and Pattani by the start of the 17th century. All were founded in the 1610s. I am sure there were others I am not aware of. But what makes Run Island different is that the island was entirely acquisitioned by the EIC, similar to Penang and Balambangan whereas factories were simply a space granted by a local ruler to the EIC for trade or to conduct whatever activities they needed to conduct and not ownership of land. And yes, James Lancaster was the first Englishman to land at Penang, which he did in 1592. As far as I know, the first Englishman to reach Malaysia was Ralph Fitch who was in Melaka by 1588."