Article

The lost manuscript of the Hikayat Abdullah “Munshi”

From Munshipedia, the MBRAS digital historical encyclopedia

The lost manuscript of the Hikayat Abdullah “Munshi”

H.F.O’B. Traill’s 1982 article examines the 1843 original manuscript of the Hikayat Abdullah, long considered lost but discovered in the Library of Congress by Professor A. Teeuw in 1967. Working from a microfilm held at the University of Malaya Library, Traill conducts a comparative survey of the 1843 autograph copy against the 1849 lithographed edition, identifying significant textual differences that illuminate Abdullah’s racial self-identification, his birth date, the missionaries’ editorial influence on the revised text, and several previously unknown historical details.

Summary

The article traces the provenance of the 1843 manuscript, which was copied “from the autograph” by a Bugis scribe named Husin and sent to the Library (now the Library of Congress) by the missionary Alfred North in October 1843, as documented in a letter attached to the volume (p. 126). Traill notes that the manuscript comprises 209 pages with no chapter headings, far fewer paragraph divisions than the 1849 text, and only three headings in total: the traditional “Bismillah al-rahman al-rahim” opening, the storyteller’s formula “Al Kesah” marking the beginning of the narrative proper, and “Ini Salasilah Asal Penghulu Naning” (p. 127). The physical layout also differs: the 1843 text uses the eighteenth-century practice of printing the first word of the following page beneath the last line of the current page, a feature abandoned in the 1849 edition (p. 128).

The most consequential findings concern Abdullah’s self-presentation. In the 1843 text, after naming four Writers of Malacca including his own father, Abdullah explicitly states that “all of these were entirely Peranakan Keling,” a phrase excised in 1849 (pp. 129–130). Traill reads this as part of a broader pattern in which Abdullah systematically revised the text to assimilate himself to the Malay community—removing “Keling” from references to his father’s language, and changing “The Malays” (orang Malayu) to “We Malays” (kita orang Malayu) in the postscript section (p. 130). The 1843 text also resolves the long-standing question of Abdullah’s birth date: where the 1849 text ambiguously links his birth to “the moment mentioned above,” the 1843 version simply states “I was born at the time mentioned above,” leaving only one referent—the English capture of Malacca on the morning of 18 August 1795 (pp. 130–131).

Traill also highlights the missionaries’ evident editorial hand in the 1849 revision. References to Roman Catholicism were removed or substituted: the cross on St. Andrew’s Church in Singapore was excised, and the old church on the hill at Malacca Fort was changed from “gereja orang Sarani” (the church of the Catholics) to “Portuguese” (p. 132). Abdullah’s scathing characterisation of the missionary Thomsen—describing him as coarse, thick-tongued, and speaking “inwards to himself”—was substantially softened, though the 1849 text retains enough to show Abdullah’s deep irritation (p. 132). Conversely, the 1843 text reveals a less flattering portrait of the much-respected Alfred North, who during Abdullah’s severe illness in Singapore replied to his request to return to Malacca with “How can you go back, for I have a great deal of work still waiting to be done” (p. 133).

Key Findings

  • The 1843 manuscript was copied by a Bugis scribe named Husin “from the autograph” and dispatched by Alfred North to the Library in October 1843; it was identified in the Library of Congress by Professor A. Teeuw in 1967 (p. 126).
  • The 1843 text explicitly identifies Abdullah’s family as Peranakan Keling (Tamil), a statement deleted in 1849; Traill concludes this “puts Abdullah’s race as a Tamil (Peranakan) beyond doubt” (p. 130).
  • Abdullah’s birth date is confirmed as 18 August 1795 (the morning of the English capture of Malacca), correcting the previously accepted date of 1797 derived from his erroneous statement of being 46 in 1843 (pp. 130–131).
  • In the 1843 text, Raffles addresses the Pengiran and the Tengku Panglima Besar using the Chinese bazaar Malay pronoun lu, a detail softened to engkau in 1849 (p. 131).
  • The “Bab yang kedua” of the 1849 text is not the beginning of a second volume but a censorious postscript already present in the 1843 draft; Shellabeare was misled into treating it as volume two (p. 128).
  • The 1843 text preserves an account of Sultan Husain Shah’s installation of Tengku Saiyid as Temenggong Seri Maharaja of Muar, including the junjong duli ceremony and an incident in which the new Temenggong backed into and shattered a glass lamp while withdrawing backwards (p. 134).

Conclusion

Traill’s survey demonstrates that the 1843 manuscript, while containing no “world-shattering surprises,” yields a “fair sprinkling of gold-dust” that materially revises our understanding of Abdullah’s ethnic identity, his birth date, the missionaries’ role in shaping the published text, and several episodes of early colonial Malacca and Singapore (p. 127). The article establishes the 1843 text as an indispensable witness for any future critical edition of the Hikayat.

Context

  • The study draws on a microfilm of the Library of Congress manuscript held at the University of Malaya Library, and on the 1849 Jawi lithograph in the same collection (p. 134).
  • Traill’s article builds on his own earlier JMBRAS contributions (1979, 1981) and on Teeuw’s 1967 discovery report and Skinner’s 1978 publication of North’s accompanying letter, positioning this survey as a preliminary guide to the full critical study he explicitly leaves to specialists (p. 127).

References