The Bidayuh and being ‘Bidayuh’ in Sarawak

Posted by Welyne Jeffrey Jehom on April 30, 2003 at 15:28:09:

Welyne Jeffrey Jehom
Jabatan Antropologi & Sosiologi, UKM, Bangi.
wjj@pkrisc.cc.ukm.my

Introduction

This article attempts to discuss the impact and influence of the changing social and physical surroundings towards the Bidayuh identity. It focus specifically on the construction of the new Bidayuh identity as a result of drastic interaction with the others as well as reactions to the changing surrounding and high cultural change. The main issues that need to be addressed are such as: How the Bidayuh utilizes the new emerging identity for their survival? Also, to see if the element from the past that is the traditional set of criteria still influence the reconstruction of the new identity as well as if the new emerging identity still considering the element of the past as part of their identity. However, the limitation of this article is specifically among the Bidayuh in Kuching.

The ethnic identity

The delimitation of ethnic categories and groupings becomes extremely problematic in an area such as Sarawak when a variety of criteria used in combination, for example, political organization, economic activity, territorial proximity, and various aspects of culture such as clothing, ritual myth and language (King 1982:23-24). Although it is inappropriate to define ethnicity by such criteria, they can be used as an a posteriori justification: once people have been ascribed to an ethnic category, some traits can be adduced to justify this attribution (Rousseau 1990:50). Beside, the simultaneity and situational identity show that ethnic identity is a dependent variable (see Nagata 1975:2-3). This is so, “because identities depends very much on a ‘sense of otherness’ and is subject to the fact that identities can be created, reinforced, manipulated and changed” (King 1982:24, see Jehom 1999). Indeed, ethnic identity is fluid. As it is flexible and fluid, ethnic identity is never finished constructed. According to Cornell & Hartman (1998:80), the construction of ethnic identity refers not to one time event but to an ongoing project and the process of construction is an interactive one. Identities are made, but by an interaction between circumstantial or human assignment on one hand and by assertion on the other.

The ‘Bidayuh’ identity underwent the similar ongoing identity construction and the Bidayuh has multiple situational identities. The construction of identity is as a result of interaction between the external and internal forces. Among the Bidayuh, authority defined social reality which is the authoritatively defined through observation and interpretation of social reality by the people in the power structure, and everyday defined identities social reality which is experienced by the people in the course of their everyday life (see Shamsul 1996) are still crucial as the based of the making of their identity.

The Bidayuh category is recent. Since Sarawak’s political independence from Britain in 1963, the Bidayuhs are termed ‘Bidayuh’ and occasionally ‘Dayak Bidayuh’ indicating the cultural association with the other Dayak groups such as the Iban (Minos 2000:4). Initially, the Bidayuh were recognized as ‘Land Dayak’ and by authority defined identity and ethnicity, the ‘Land Dayak’ ethnicity was defined based on the set of criteria created by the colonial government. This set of criteria (ancestry, place of origin, a cultural practice, for example) was formatted during the Brooke rule where the ethnic groups at that time were not much influenced by foreign culture and ideas. Therefore, at that time, the boundaries sited based on this set of criteria were still quite clear distinguishing between ethnic groups. Nevertheless, the ‘Land Dayak’, preferably nowadays called the Bidayuh changes and the receptive response to the changing surroundings transformed the Bidayuh practices and values. Looking at the elements in that set of criteria and comparing it to the condition of the modern Bidayuh in general, it is no longer valid except the feelings of belongings and the remembrance of the old days that the older generation keep on reminding the new generations about. The Bidayuh has been so involved and become the participants in the changing modernizing society. New form of Bidayuh identity emerged and the construction of the new identity taking place at various sites, through continuous interactions with the others, also with the surroundings.

According to Eriksen (1993) , ethnic groups who moved to towns and regional centers where they are brought into contact with people with other customs, languages and identities frequently enter into competitive relationships in politics and the labour market. These people who migrate nevertheless try to maintain their old kinship and neighborhood social networks in the new urban context, and both ethnic quarters and frequently ethnic political groupings emerged in such urban settings. Although the speed of social and cultural change can be high, people tend to retain their ethnic identity despite having moved to a new environment. In general, the Bidayuh has no exception experiencing this situation. Due to the changes of environments as well as with the changes in culture and the ongoing interaction between the Bidayuh with the other ethnic groups individuals, the Bidayuh identity is re-constructed and going through the same process repeatedly. Therefore, the important issues in looking at the Bidayuh identity is actually the issues of the kind of identity they are conform to, and to which category or set of criteria are they called Bidayuh, and to what extent they themselves feel as the Bidayuh or as a Bidayuh.

In relation to this, the cultural contexts of ethnic differences should not be ignored in description and analysis of the Bidayuh identity and ethnicity. For the people who are designated as members of the Bidayuh ethnic groups would disagree with anthropological accounts dealing with themselves. As Eriksen (1991) stated, “native views cannot replace analysis, but they should not be reduced to universal form either. In sum, if ethnic signs are seen as metonymic-metaphoric signifiers for ethnic difference, then we should pay some attention to the signified” . Ethnic signs signify the communication of cultural difference either as competitive strategies, or as techniques for the maintenance of a cultural identity or a way of life, or both. On the other hand, ethnic signs refer to systematic distinctiveness, which is in part being reproduced outside of the acts of communicating distinctiveness . I shall simply utilize this set of concepts to look at the reconstruction of Bidayuh identity.

The Bidayuh in general

By virtue of Article 161A of the Malaysian Constitution, the term 'Dayak' refers to and consists of two native groups in Sarawak, namely the Ibans, who are often referred to as Sea Dayaks, and the Bidayuhs, also known as the Land Dayak. It was James Brooke , the first Rajah of Sarawak, who used the term Sea Dayak to describe the “wandering and seafaring Ibans” of Sarawak. On the other hand he used 'Land Dayak' to refer to the settled and more passive groups of Kuching, Serian and Bau Bidayuhs.

The vast majority of Bidayuh who are living in the rural villages are still involved in agricultural pursuits, planting padi and cash crops such as pepper and cocoa, primarily small-scale self-subsistance basis. For those Bidayuh who resided close or within the periphery of town and urban area such as Serian and Kuching have become petty-traders selling their vegetables, fruit and other consumer items in Sunday markets. Those with secondary education (SPM and STPM ), worked as civil servants in various government ministries, departments, statutory bodies and private sector companies and enterprises throughout the country. The minority-educated professionals contributed their expertise in academic line and some managed to do their own practices as doctors, lawyers and accountants at urban areas.

Table 1 shows the total population of Sarawak according to the various ethnic groups from 1993 to 1997. In the context of Malaysia, the Bidayuh population makes up only 0.0037 percent of the total 21.67 million people in Malaysia in 1997.

Table 1: Mid-Year Population Estimates in Sarawak, by Ethnic Groups and Year.

Ethnic Groups 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
Malay 379,000 388,700 398,700 407,600 416,600
Iban 525,600 534,800 544.200 552,100 559,800
Bidayuh 147,000 150,100 153,400 156.600 158,700
Melanau 101,400 103,400 105,500 107,700 109,000
Other Indigenous* 108,100 109,900 115,500 112,900 114,000
Chinese 496,600 505,400 514,200 521,600 529,300
Other ** 16,100 16,600 17,000 17,500 17,800
Non - Malaysian Citizens 27,200 33,200 40,000 44,400 48,600
Total 1,801,000 1,842,100 1,885,200 1,919,300 1,954,300

*The other indigenous population includes the Orang Ulu (Kayan, Kenyahs, Kelabits and the Lun Bawangs, Punans, Bisayas, Muruts, Penan, Ukits, Selayan and etc.)
**Includes Indians and Eurasians

Source: Department of Statistics, Sarawak Branch, 1997
Today, the Bidayuh live mainly in Kuching and Samarahan Divisions, which comprise of the Districts of Serian, Kuching, Bau and Lundu, conveniently referred to as the Bidayuh Belt. According to the latest official figures , there were 164,500 Bidayuhs in 1999 or 8.4 percent of the Sarawak population of 1.97 million or less than one percent of Malaysia’s total population of 22.71 million (Minos 2000:4). There is an increasing numbers of Bidayuh since the estimation of Bidayuh population from 1997 figures.

Table 2: Distribution of Bidayuh population in Sarawak

Kuching Division
Kuching District 50,147
Serian District 42,851
Bau District 24,413
Lundu District 9,278

Divisions
Samarahan 1,538
Miri 2,753
Sibu 1,471
Bintulu 1,338

Total
135,595

Source: Yearbook of Statistics Sarawak, Department of Statistics, Malaysia (Sarawak Branch) 1999.

Table 2: Number of villagers and dialects spoken by the Bidayuh according to Districts

Name of District No. Of Villages Dialect Spoken
Serian 126 Bukar-Sadong
Kuching 84 Biatah/Penyua/Bipuruh
Bau 43 Bau- Jagoi
Lundu 41 Salako Lara

The construction sites of Bidayuh identity

Although Bidayuh identity construction may occur in any part of a society and as aspect of virtually any set of social relations, I focus in this article on four critical construction sites: land ownership under Native Customary Land Rights, the village community where communal living is inspired, culture that revived through the effort of Dayak Bidayuh National Association, and within the intermarriage household.

Native Customary Right Land (NCR)

The Bidayuh obtained their land ownership through the Native Customary Rights created under the Sarawak Land Code. The Native Customary Rights Land could be obtained if, before the 1st January 1958, a Bidayuh family went to a virgin jungle, cut the trees, made a farm and thereafter used the land now and then over the years. However, the land rights can be extinguished under section 5 and 6 of the Land Code, presumably when Government decided to develop the land. Like any other indigenous throughout the country and the world, the Bidayuh treat and regard their land with awe and respect. According to Minos (2000:82-83) the Bidayuh extend a considerable amount of reverence to their land, almost of a religious nature and NCR land is seen by the Bidayuh as a direct and basic source of sustenance and a provider of life. Thus, to the Bidayuh, a piece of land is not just a piece of property or a commercial item of value. The land is very much associated with their culture and history. The land is also regarded as a family property and the attachment to the land shown when there are over-lapping claims and co-ownership, and at times ending in family land dispute. Up to early 1950’s the land to the Bidayuh was indeed the center and focal part of their lives and until now for over 75 percent of them who are in the villages are still engaged in agricultural activities.

Land is viewed by many as more than an economic concept where it is the basis of the cultural identity , and its permanency providing a link between the past , current and future generations as well as the fundamental source for cultural and spiritual survival as native people (quoted from Minos 2000:84). In the case of Bidayuh, there is no exception. To acquire the Bidayuh land for the infrastructure development and amenities therefore require a lot of discussion and convincing on the part of the relevant Government officials.

However, there are also some Bidayuh in a few districts that convinced by the more intensive usage of land other than utilized the land for self-subsistence farming. Since 1990, the government and land development statutory body, SALCRA has been developing oil palm estates in many Bidayuh villages in Lundu, Bau and Serian districts. In the beginning, the Bidayuh in these areas were hesitated to participate in SALCRA, as they feared to lose their land to the Government and to the development scheme. However, the Bidayuh accepted the proposal after fully understood that even though SALCRA is planting oil palm on the land but the Bidayuh are still the landowners of their land and that they received dividends from the land that they listed to be in the scheme. By the law (Ordinance) it was set up that SALCRA is compelled to conduct the survey and get the Land and Survey Department to issue land titles to all such landowners for their land-holding in SALCRA’s oil palm schemes (Minos 2000:96).

For the Bidayuh who involved in SALCRA development, the land concept and perception has not change much because they are working on their own land the same way they were working on it when self-subsistence farming was still very much prominent before the SALCRA development. In addition, they generate more income by fully utilizing their land under SALCRA oil palm scheme. Thus, the fear of losing their identity as Bidayuh for such development and changes does not really occupy their mind . As stated by a Bidayuh headman in Tebakang, Serian district; a Bidayuh is what they are and changing the style of generating income in their land does not mean that they are changing their identity as Bidayuh but to be a change Bidayuh. The others who have not participated in SALCRA, their NCR land is left unutilized because they either farmed on small areas for pepper and cocoa or rotating from one area to another area of their land for hill rice planting. Some land that is not developes and not commercially used most certainly sold off legally or illegally especially when in need of cash for medical bills and education of the children.

Among the Bidayuh in Kuching, particularly the Bidayuh in Penrissen area, whose villages resided only between 10 to 20 kilometers away from the urban area, small scale and self-subsistence farming are still very much in practice. These Bidayuh are majority working in Kuching and near town area around Kuching as teachers, police and general or labor workers, working at the private sector and enterprises. The farming is done during the weekends and school or public holidays. They mainly grow maize, vegetables, pepper and cocoa and some plant hill rice. The production is also as a source of side-income for the family and the whole family members contributed their energy to work in the farm. Nevertheless, according to a schoolteacher , the main purpose of working on the land is to keep the land occupied and to avoid the trespassing of people from other villages or even from the same village on the land and claim it as their own. Indeed, as the Bidayuh land is of NCR status, there is no written title or formal legal document for such land. It is depends very much on NCR landowners to prove the ownership on the land and with verbal and written proof by the respective village headman or the Penghulu. The schoolteacher also noted that if a Bidayuh live without a piece of land in the village, then not only he is considered poor but he also lost the landmark within the village community. Therefore, every Bidayuh (male and female) would want to own a piece of land in the village even if it is just for one lot to build a house on it as a landmark.

The village community

As any other ethnic groups in Sarawak or Malaysia, the Bidayuh is also a community that value village life and the communal gatherings in the village especially during Gawai festival. In the past, by 1900, the Bidayuh settled in the Kuching division after the cooling off rebellion and head hunting activities among other ethnic groups particularly the Iban (see Pringle 1970, Geddes 1954). It was in the village that customs and traditions as well as traditional rituals, festivals, prayers and homage to the land, rice etc were conducted and learnt. In fact, the village among the Bidayuh is more than just a dwelling place.

In the past, as it is now, a Bidayuh village is led by a village headman (Ketua Kaum or Tua Kapung in Bidayuh term) who is appointed by the local government. The village headman is assisted by a group of committee members chaired by the Chairman of the committee elected by the villages. This committee is responsible to care for the welfare of the villagers and the village as well as become the contact party when there is proposal of government projects and development.
In the past, when traditional belief (animism) still in practiced, the traditional and festival priest played a dominant role as a reference person for the villagers when there is time of difficulties, dangers and disease outbreaks. The traditional ceremonial round-house or also called as headhouse (Baruk or panggah) was the communal meeting place and was the center of decision making for implementing informal rules and regulations in the village. Tourism is one of the bases in promoting the baruk or panggah apart from it as an ethnic Bidayuh emblem for present-day Bidayuh who, while seeking modernity dan development, also worry about the loss of their customs and distinctiveness (Winzeler 1996:2). In general the baruk or panggah symbolized the communal life and the communion of Bidayuh but since that traditional ceremonial activity has not been a common practiced nowadays; the Bidayuh built a different meeting place, which they call Balai raya. Since the Bidayuh are majority embracing Christianity, traditional Gawai ceremonial is no longer in practiced. The Christian religious rituals are conducted in the church during Gawai festival, followed by the communal gatherings for eating and drinking in the balai raya.
According to a few Bidayuhs , the act of participating in Gawai in the village and having communal gatherings in the balai raya on that day is the opportunity for the Bidayuh to express and show that they are the Bidayuh even though the traditional Gawai ceremonial is not conducted anymore. Besides, since the construction of the good infrastructure around the rural areas, especially in Penrissen area, Kuching, it has become a trend for the Bidayuh who work in Kuching city to commute from the village. Many of the Bidayuh from this area give up their rented house in Kuching to build their own house in the village. By living in the village, the housewife able to generate extra income for the family by farming a small scale of pepper and cocoa or self-subsistence farming such as planting padi, maize or vegetables.
However, the main reason for moving back to live and build house in the village since the road construction implemented in many areas in Penrissen in early 1990’s was because the Bidayuh prefer to live a communal village life. According to a Bidayuh housewife , she feels secured living in the village in their own house which she build with her husband and living in a village she feels that she can keep the Bidayuh style. To my interpretation, whatever that ‘Bidayuh style’ is, it is probably referring to the sense of belonging to the community in the village.

Dayak Bidayuh National Association (DBNA)

Dayak Bidayuh National Association (DBNA) is taking the vital role in perpetuating and promoting the Bidayuh culture. The objectives of DBNA as enshrined in Article 4(1) of its Constitution are: To promote unity, mutual help, co-operation, understanding and friendship among Dayak Bidayuh. The objectives of the DBNA are:
• To promote unity, co-operation and goodwill with other races.
• To encourage self-reliance among Dayak Bidayuh.
• To help provide education and to encourage the Dayak Bidayuh to raise their living standard.
• To preserve and promote the culture of the Dayak Bidayuh.
• To provide charitable aid.
• To instill into the Dayak Bidayuh a sense of devotion and undivided loyalty to Malaysia.
• To promote the spiritual, mental, physical and social well-being of members of the DBNA and the Community as a whole.
• To encourage the Dayak Bidayuh to take their full measures of responsibility in civic affairs and to participate actively in nation-building.
• To work in close co-operation with the government for the welfare of the Dayak Bidayuh Community.

DBNA however, put a lot of effort to promote the Bidayuh culture among the Bidayuh themselves. Many activities were organized such as teaching the new generation of Bidayuh the traditional dance and playing the traditional music instruments. Cultural talks and seminars are also held in order to remind the Bidayuh of their cultural and historical heritage (Minos 2000:138). The ‘lost’ of the Bidayuh culture was blamed over “too Christianised to be bothered about cultures…. as well as because the village chiefs are not responsible ” by certain Bidayuh. Basically, the teaching of Christianity by Christian missionaries is blamed for confusing cultures with religion. Therefore, DBNA take the initiative to revive the Bidayuh culture by oraganising various cultural activities especially for the Gawai festival to enable participation from all of the Bidayuh villages in Sarawak. This annual event has inspired the Bidayuh to form a cultural troupe to represent their villages and the participation of the older generation is required to teach the youth to dance and to play music instrument.

Actually, performing traditional dance or the creation of the costume among the Bidayuh nowadays is a reconstruction of culture modeled from the past knowledge of the cultural heritage, or as Hobsbawn and Ranger (1999) put it “the invention of tradition”. Many of this knowledge gathered from the old folks but most of these old folks were born when Christianity has become a belief among the Bidayuh. Therefore, the knowledge of the cultural heritage is not as much accurate as what have written by many scholars (see Geddes 1954 for example).

Previously, the dance was performed for Gawai ritual for the deference of the rice and spirits. Nowadays, the dance is performed to remind the Bidayuh about the cultural heritage but without much understanding of its purpose. Most Bidayuh dance the traditional dance because of competition and cultural show without some understanding of the meaning of the dance except that they are claiming that it is the Bidayuh dance. Nevertheless, to the Bidayuh, by claiming the dance and the costume as Bidayuh culture, it does shows that this element of culture is one of many other aspects that give them an identity. By this, DBNA basically responsible for crafting such identity because its cultural events have inspired the Bidayuh to revived the forgotten cultural heritage.

Intermarriage: dispersion or reformation of identity?

What actually make the Bidayuh a Bidayuh? As much as the feeling and sense of belonging to the community or some sort of the consciousness of the ethnic boundaries (see Barth 1969) play an important role to determine the ethnicity and identity, the formal procedure basically contributes a major important part. In Malaysia, the offspring must be categorized in the same ethnic category as the father. Nevertheless, on the informal category as in self-ascription identity, intermarriage by right gives the opportunity to the offspring to be what they want to be and to identify them as what they preferred to be identified. There is always the advantage and disadvantage in intermarriages. On one hand it gives multiple identity to the offspring because of the possibility to adopt both parents’ cultural heritage and values but on the other hand there is also possibility to be dominated by a single strong cultural heritage. Intermarriages among the Bidayuh is a common practice but many Bidayuh view intermarriages as threats to the Bidayuh community because many offspring of intermarriages tend to purge themselves of being ‘Bidayuh’. This is happening mainly when the intermarriage is between a Bidayuh and Malay or with a Chinese .

The Bidayuh who are married to the Malay definitely lose the ‘Bidayuh’ appearance because they are assimilated into the Muslim Malay lifestyle and practices. The Bidayuh women who married Malay men dressed up as a Muslim women and this is not widely accepted within the Bidayuh community. Most of the time, the family ties are loosening because of many differences in values and practices especially when come to food as in halal and haram term. Some Bidayuh parents whose children married to Malay expressed their sadness because the children stop visiting them at the village. Obviously, cultural barrier between the Bidayuh and the Malay does not encourage the Bidayuh identity of the Bidayuh Muslim to expand. It is muted by the Islam practices and values, and the Bidayuh Muslim is a Bidayuh only by the official ethnic category.

Intermarriage between the Bidayuh and the Chinese is more tolerable. There is no barrier in religious values. However, the life style in the village normally does not suit the way the Chinese live in urban area. Thus, many Bidayuh who married to Chinese remain living in the main town and city of Kuching even though the village has changed face becoming an urbanized area. The relationship between the Chinese in-laws and the Bidayuh parents general is not always civil. Some Bidayuh parents who have Chinese daughter in-laws expressing their gloom because they cannot see their grandchildren often and their son have been ignoring them because the in-laws refused to visit them in the village even during Gawai festival. Most of the houses build in the Bidayuh villages that resided near Kuching are trendy and equipped with modern basic facilities. However, may be due to the perception on Bidayuh ‘village’ life style has not changed among the people who were born and bread in urban area, many intermarriages as such disregard the family in the village. Most of the offspring of this intermarriage tend to adopt the identity of the most obvious in their upbringing, which is the most common one to them. In the case of Bidayuh-Chinese intermarriage, obviously the children are influence mostly by the Chinese parent’s identity.

Conclusion

The Bidayuh changed because they desired an improvement in their living, economic status and not to be left out in the modernizing society in Sarawak. Social development and changing surrounding obviously have been the catalyst for the changes. However, in the process, the Bidayuh have to sacrifice many aspects of their traditional living and values. Embracing Christianity could be seen as a stepping stone for other changes to come about because it also exposed the Bidayuh to education, then to a different aspect of economic pursuit. Bidayuh as they have been known in the early days were the people who practiced swidden agriculture and self-subsistence farming, living in a longhouse, performing traditional ceremonial with elaborate rituals and taboos. Nowadays, the Bidayuh, as many other ethnic groups in Sarawak do not fix themselves into such set of criteria. Therefore, they are different, assuming that they do not have any culture that obvious to others to be the marker for their identification. However, without a traditional culture that is extensively practiced does not mean that the Bidayuh are becoming less Bidayuh compared to the earlier generation of the family or the community. Society is dynamic and the Bidayuh are not living in a vacuum. They are Bidayuh by what they identify themselves; self-ascription, sense of belonging to the community and the ethnic Bidayuh, their pride and recognizing the cultural heritage as well as speak Bidayuh language though in many dialects. To revive the cultural heritage and to learn about the past is a sign of being aware of the importance of one’s root. The material culture and the traditional dance and costume might not be as original as the original but these items give pride to the Bidayuh. Thus, in the end, in discussing identity, the signifier from the natives is most relevant because it communicate the distinctiveness.

References

Geddes, W.R. 1954 TheLand Dayaks of Sarawak: a report on a social economic survey of the Land Dayaks of Sarawak presented to the Colonial Social Science Research Council. Colonial Research Studies, no. 14, London, H.M. Stationaery Office.

Monthly Statistical Bulletin Sarawak, Department of Statistics Malaysia (Sarawak Branch), December 1999.

Yearbook of Statistic Sarawak, Department of Statistics Malaysia (Sarawak Branch),
1999.

Thomas Hylland Eriksen 1993 Ethnicity and nationalism: Anthropological perspectives. London: Pluto Press at http://www.uio.no/~geirthe/Ethnicity.html

Minos, Peter 1993 “Socio-economic awakening among the Bidayuhs.” In Vinson H. Sutlive, Jr. (ed.) Change and development in Borneo: Selected papers from the First Extraordinary Conference of the Borneo Reseach Council, Kuching, Sarawak. August 4-9, 1990, pp.239-251. Borneo Research Council Proceedings Series.

Winzeler, Robert L. 1993 “The Bidayuh of Sarawak: A Historical overview with special reference to settlement patterns”. In Vinson H. Sutlive, Jr. (ed.) Change and development in Borneo: Selected papers from the First Extraordinary Conference of the Borneo Reseach Council, Kuching, Sarawak. August 4-9, 1990, pp.239-251. Borneo Research Council Proceedings Series.

King, Victor 1982 Ethnicity in Borneo: An anthropological problem. In Victor t. King and W.D. Wilder (ed) Ethnicity in South-East Asia. Southeast Asian Journal of Social Science.

Rousseau, Jerome 1990 Central Borneo: Ethnic identity and social life in a stratified society. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Shamsul A.B. 1996 “Debating about identity in Malaysia: A discourse analysis”. Southeast Asian Studies 34(3):P.p.566-600.

Pringle, Robert 1970 Rajahs and rebels. London: Macmillan.

Hobsbawn, E & Ranger, T. 1999 The invention of tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University press.

Cornell, S. & Hartman, D. 1998 Ethnicity and race: Making identities in a changing world. London: Pine Forge Press.

Minos, Peter 2000 The future of Dayak Bidayuh in Malaysia. Kuching: Lynch Media & Services.

Jehom, W. J. 1999 “Ethnicity and ethnic identity in Sarawak”. AKADEMIKA 55 (Julai):85-100.

Jehom, W.J. 2000 “Kedimanikan hubungan dan pluralisme etnik di Sarawak”. In Rahimah Abd. Aziz & Mohammad Yusof Ismail (eds.) Masyarakat, budaya dan perubahan di Malaysia. Bangi: Penerbit UKM.

Harrisson, Tom 1947. Classifying the people (Appendix X). In J.L.Noakes Sarawak and Brunei: A report on the 1947 population census. Kuching: Government Printers.

Nagata, Judith (ed). 1975 Pluralism in Malaysia: Myth and reality. Contributions to Asian Studies, 7, Leiden.

Tan Chee-Beng 1994 Communal associations of the indigenous communites of Sarawak: A study of ethnicity and national integration. Kuala Lumpur: Institute of Advanced Studies, University Malaya.