1In September 1903, following a Dutch military expedition, Kerinci was conquered and an assistent-resident under the governor of the west coast of Sumatra was appointed (van Aken 1915: 56–57). Kerinci thus became part of the Netherlands East Indies until the Japanese occupation in 1942. As in other regions of the archipelago, colonialism had an impact not only on the politics but also on the culture of Kerinci society, including the practices of copying and preserving manuscripts.
2Since their arrival in insular Southeast Asia, Europeans collected luxury items and manuscripts from the societies they colonised, including from Yogyakarta, Bone, Palembang and elsewhere (Gallop 2020b, Mulaika 2022). These included manuscripts from south Sumatra; as Voorhoeve (1971: 6–7) reported, there are 171 Rentjong manuscripts in institutions outside Indonesia, most of which were collected during the colonial era. A scholar of linguistics, Malay, and Batak studies, Voorhoeve completed his doctoral study at Leiden University in 1927. He subsequently worked as head of the Malay section at Balai Pustaka (1927-1933), librarian of the Bataviaasch Genootschap (1934-1937), and linguist for the Zelfbesturende Landschappen (autonomous territories) of Simalungun in North Sumatra (1937-1939). In 1940, he was appointed as taalambtenar voor Sumatra (government linguist for Sumatra) (Teeuw & Uhlenbeck 1997). A comprehensive study of Kerinci manuscripts in Kerinci itself was carried out by Voorhoeve in 1941 (Voorhoeve et al. 1941; Voorhoeve 1970).
3Only eight Kerinci manuscripts were collected during the colonial era. They are: an Incung manuscript on horn (PNRI MS E 79), a bamboo manuscript (now lost), fragment of lontar manuscript from Seleman (PNRI MS E 80), fragment of lontar manuscript from Sanggaran Agung (PNRI MS E 81), a manuscript of laws (PNRI ML 396A), an Incung scroll manuscript on paper (PNRI MS E 91), an Incung manuscript on tree bark scrolls (Leiden University Library KITLV Or. 239), and an Incung manuscript on bamboo (PNRI MS E 92). Of these, four were collected by H.K. Manupassa, the controleur of Kerinci; one was collected during a Dutch military expedition in inland Jambi (1901-1903), and another was collected by B.J.O. Schrieke in 1929 (a fuller discussion of these eight pusaka manuscripts is found later in this article and in the Appendix). Compared to other places in the Netherlands East Indies, the number of manuscripts collected from Kerinci is very limited. Why was Dutch collecting so restricted in Kerinci? This is the main question addressed in this article.
4The Kerinci region lies in the highlands of western Jambi Province, Sumatra, where valleys are surrounded by hills and mountains, and traversed by many rivers. The highest peak in this area is the Kerinci volcano, rising 3,805 m above sea level and still active today (Fig. 1). At the centre of the valley is Lake Kerinci, which serves as the outlet of the Batang Merao river. Over time, villagers have settled throughout the valley, converting parts of it into paddy fields and making the region well-suited to agriculture. Human occupation of Kerinci dates back to prehistoric times, with archaeological evidence showing that Kerinci was inhabited 3,500 years ago (Bonatz 2009; Aziz 2010; Tjoa-Bonatz 2012). Though there are prehistoric jar burial sites and unique megalithic stones, little evidence has been discovered of Hindu-Buddhist influence in later times (Bonatz, Neidel and Tjoa-Bonatz 2006; Bonatz 2009; Aziz 2010). A notable exception is the well-known Tanjung Tanah manuscript, the oldest known Malay-language manuscript, produced in the 14th century during the period of the Melayu kingdom in the upper Batanghari river region (Kozok 2006; 2015).
- 1 These manuscripts are written in Incung or local Kerinci script.
5With the rise of Islamic polities in Sumatra in the 17th century, the rulers of Kerinci established relations with the neighbouring kingdoms of Jambi, Inderapura, Muko-Muko, and Minangkabau. The Jambi Sultanate appears to have exerted a more dominant political influence in Kerinci than other kingdoms, based on the discovery of more piagam from Jambi than from Inderapura or Minangkabau in Kerinci (Sunliensyar 2020b). The piagam in this context is a royal charter manuscript issued by the Jambi Sultanate to the heads of villages or depati in upper Jambi, containing the legitimation of depati authority, the establishment of the borders of their territory, and the laws, legal decisions, and prerogatives of the king, and the obligations of depati (Gallop 2009; 2013). In Kerinci, piagam together with Incung manuscripts,1 certain Jawi manuscripts, and adat regalia are preserved as pusaka (heirloom) collections of clans (kelbu or luhah) (Kozok 2006: 31). The pusaka manuscripts include royal letters in any script, and genealogical or local historiography manuscripts (tambo). However, certain Islamic manuscripts are not recognized as pusaka because they have no significance to the adat community.
Fig. 1 – The Kerinci landscape viewed from the 1915 map of the Afdeeling Koerintji, Residentie Djambi. The area inside the square is the region where the eight manuscripts were collected during the colonial era. See Fig. 3 for the enlarged view of the region in the square. Shelfmark D D 20.6.
Image in the public domain, Leiden University Libraries Digital Collections: http://hdl.handle.net/1887.1/item:813595
6As Kooreman (1893: 184–185) reported, based on information from a Kerinci trader in west Sumatra, Hadji Abdoerrahman, these pusaka were kept in the upper attics of traditional houses and no one was allowed to touch them except for female priests and wives of depati.The pusaka would be shown only during specific rituals such as the kenduri sko or kenduri pusaka (Kozok 2006: 31–32), when offerings would be made and chants sung. In the ritual, the pusaka was taken down from the storage place, removed from the wooden box, cleaned, carried around the village, and then returned to the upper attics of the house (Kooreman 1893: 185). This ritual would be held when a disaster occurred, during the coronation of a new depati, or during the harvest feast (ibid.: 185). Since the pusaka manuscripts were considered to have magical powers, people would be afraid to display them, or at other times would deny that they keep pusaka manuscripts at all. Therefore, Hadji Abdoerrahman advised Kooreman that he would be unable to collect pusaka manuscripts from Kerinci (ibid.: 184).
7The 17th century saw Kerinci’s neighbours build political and trading relations with Europeans. At the same time, the Dutch entered into trade contracts with the Inderapura Sultanate, adjacent to Kerinci (Kathirithamby-Wells 1976; Drakard 1993). The Sultanate of Jambi to the east had established good relations with the Dutch through a Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie (VOC) trade partnership since the early 17th century (Andaya 2016). Meanwhile, through the East India Company (EIC), the British had established trade contracts with local rulers in Bengkulu since 1685 (Kathirithamby-Wells 1973: 240). British political power even reached Menjuto which borders directly with Kerinci. However, Europeans did not enter Kerinci itself until the early 19th century because of political protection from its neighboring countries.
8The first recorded European in Kerinci was the British Charles Campbell in 1800 (Kathirithamby-Wells 1986: 15). Campbell’s report was included by the British orientalist William Marsden in his History of Sumatra (Marsden 1811: 304). During his journey, Campbell recorded ethnographic features of Kerinci society, such as their houses, clothes, food, music, and customs. Following Campbell was Thomas Barnes, a British official (Barnes 1858; Kathirithamby-Wells 1986: 15), who started his journey from Moco-Moco, Bengkulu, on 15th September 1811, and travelled through some villages in Kerinci to Pangkalan Jambi, arriving on 19th October (Barnes 1858). Like Campbell, Barnes wrote about the environment and social conditions of the places that he visited, including villages, plantations, gold mines, and trading posts.
9In his Miscellaneous works, Marsden claimed that Kerinci was a “unique” country in the Malay Archipelago because, in his view, the language little deviated from the genuine Malay language (Marsden 1834: 18). Marsden further noted that Kerinci had its own alphabet that was not connected to Arabic characters but derived from Nagari like other Sumatran scripts. To illustrate his point, Marsden included twenty-nine Kerinci alphabet characters which he described as similar to Rejang characters (ibid.: Plate I).
- 2 In 1858-1903, Sultan Thaha of Jambi, who had been forcibly dethroned by the Dutch, resisted the Dut (...)
10Though a Dutch proposal for an expedition to Kerinci was rejected by the government because of the political situation2 in 1877 (van Hasselt & Snelleman 1881: 8), the Dutch tried to document the geography and ethnography of the Kerinci region through Kerinci traders who traveled to the west coast of Sumatra. The reports by P.J. Kooreman (1893) and E.A. Klerks (1897) are examples of such early documentation efforts. Kooreman, at the time assistent-resident based at Painan in West Sumatra, included an interview with the Kerinci trader Haji Abdoerrahman in an article entitled “Aanteekeningen betreffende de Korintjische adat” (Kooreman 1893: 183), which describes how Kerinci society preserved manuscripts considered pusaka.
11Klerks’ report provided more detailed information about Kerinci. He explained the social organization, traditional leadership system, the division of villages and indigenous government system, material culture, economic system, religion and legends (Klerks 1897). Kerinci was reported to shelter the largest population in Jambi. There were many villages (dusun) that were led by depati. The dusun were united by a federation system called mendapo or mandapo (Klerks 1897: 22–36). Klerks also mentions pusaka in Kerinci, which, according to him, were usually weapons that formed part of adat regalia. Interestingly, Klerks’ report included a print reproduction of a Jawi manuscript describing the early relationship between Kerinci and Indrapura. This may be the earliest printed copy of a Kerinci manuscript (see Fig. 2).
12A series of conflicts between the colonial government and Kerinci society triggered its annexation. Kerinci traders had been allowed to do business in West Sumatra. However, the Dutch authorities held them in suspicion because Kerinci people supported Sultan Thaha Syaifuddin of Jambi, an enemy of the Dutch (van Aken 1915: 49). The peak of this conflict occurred in the middle of 1902 when an agent of the colonial government was killed in Kerinci (ibid.). However, people from Kerinci were reluctant to hand over and punish the perpetrators. This situation triggered a military expedition in 1903, leading to the conquest of Kerinci and its annexation to the Netherlands East Indies that same year.
13Before the annexation of Kerinci, the Dutch attempted to collect manuscripts there. This was recorded in a correspondence of W.J. Ankersmit, with the Batavian Society (Bataviaasch Genootschap). In a letter dated 28th June 1880, he wrote of the possibility of obtaining an inscribed bamboo from Kerinci called Bamboe Batoewah Hadjimat (der Kinderen & van Wijk 1880a: 104). But on 8th October, he acknowledged that he had not succeeded. In its place, Ankersmit offered another inscribed bamboo from Mandailing in north Sumatra (der Kinderen & van Wijk 1880b: 137). Bamboe Batoewah Hadjimat was probably a pusaka item, and as such would have been difficult for Ankersmit to collect.
Fig. 2 – Excerpt from printed copy of a Jawi manuscript from Kerinci in Klerks’ report (1897: 115).
14However, efforts to collect artifacts from Kerinci did not stop there. As the Bataviaasch Genootschap had no ethnographic objects from Kerinci, in 1881, B. van Zutphen, the Resident of Bengkulu was invited to seek opportunities to collect material (der Kinderen & van Wijk 1882a: 109). A year later, van Zuthpen was successful in obtaining some artifacts which he sent to Batavia (der Kinderen & van Wijk 1882b: 37–41). Of the 40 artifacts listed in his inventory, only one was a manuscript, a Jawi manuscript on Kerinci adat law (der Kinderen & van Wijk 1882a: 41).
15After the annexation of Kerinci in late 1903, efforts continued to collect more artifacts (Fig. 3). In 1904, H.K. Manupassa, the controleur from Indrapura who was assigned to Kerinci, sent ethnographic objects and four manuscripts to Batavia that he had collected during June-November 1903 (Hurgronje & Stuart 1905: 106–107), namely an Incung manuscript on goat’s horn (MS E 79), an inscribed bamboo (now missing), a fragment of a lontar manuscript from Seleman (MS E 80), and fragments of lontar manuscript from Sanggaran Agung (MS E 81) (ibid.: 107, CCXI; Hurgronje and Stuart 1906: 8, CVII; Voorhoeve 1970: 396).
16Voorhoeve (1970: 396) transliterated the text on horn (MS E 79). Though the item was lost after 1941, the transliteration was preserved. It contains an agreement between Hambuk Kalingan, a clan member of Dipati Hiyang, and Anak Samana, about the resolution of a conflict between Riya Mandara and Kihi Muda by Radin Temenggung. Although Voorhoeve does not record a place of origin, it is likely that this manuscript was collected from Mendapo Hiang because it mentions the name Dipati Hiyang. According to Morison (1940: 17–18), the Dipati Hiyang was a leader of five clans in Dusun Hiang Tinggi, Mendapo Hiang.
17The fragments of lontar manuscripts MS E 80 and MS E 81 are written with a unique type of Rencong script in the Malay language (Fig. 4). MS E 80 was collected from Mendapo Seleman. Its content is unclear but mentions the names Raja Putih and Raja Hitam. MS E 81 was collected from Sanggaran Agung. According to Voorhoeve (1970: 388–389), these fragments also contain six characters similar to Javanese aksara. The text also uses Javanese words like ingsun which is spelled isun, but the meaning is unclear. Voorhoeve (1970: 396) assumed that the two fragmentary manuscripts originate from letters from the Jambi Sultanate to depati in Kerinci.
18A bamboo manuscript is reported to have been sent with Manupassa’s other items (Hurgronje & Stuart 1905: 107), but does not appear in the records of the Bataviaasch Genootschap. Voorhoeve noted that this manuscript was obtained by Manupassa from the pusaka collection of Depati Serah Bumi Serah Mato, Dusun Seleman, Mendapo Seleman. It seems that Manupassa borrowed the manuscript in Batavia for inspection, but never returned it (Voorhoeve 1970: 383). This manuscript remains untraceable.
Fig. 3 – Afdeeling Koerintji (partial). Place names with white squares correspond to manuscript collection by Manupassa during the annexation of Kerinci in 1903; place names with yellow squares correspond to post-1903 collections during the colonial period. Shelfmark D D 20.6.
Image in the public domain. Leiden University Libraries Digital Collections. http://hdl.handle.net/1887.1/item:813595
19In early 1905, the composite manuscript MS ML 396 was sent as a result of a follow-up request from the Bataviaasch Genootschap to Manupassa in October 1904 (Hurgronje & Stuart 1906: 8; van Ronkel 1909: 310–311; Voorhoeve 1970: 370, 397; Iskandar 1999: 670–671). Photographs of this item were sent to the Leiden University library and recorded with the number Cod.Or. 12.326 (Voorhoeve 1970: 396). MS ML 396 contains several documents: a manuscript of Kerinci laws (ML 396 A), handwritten copies of two letters from the king of Minangkabau to depati in Kerinci from Seleman (ML 396 B, Fig. 5), three handwritten copies of Jambi piagam from Seleman (ML 396 C), three handwritten copies of Jambi piagam from Sanggaran Agung (ML 396 D), and a handwritten copy of a letter from Inderapura to Kerinci (ML 396 E) (Voorhoeve 1970: 397–399). An Incung manuscript on a narrow paper scroll (MS E 91) was also found in this composite manuscript (Voorhoeve 1970: 396).
Fig. 4 – Lontar fragments (MS E 80 – top two lines, and MS E 81 – fragment at the bottom) collected by Manupassa between 1903 and 1904, and the envelopes in which they were kept in the collection of Perpustakaan Nasional Republik Indonesia
Photograph by Hafiful Hadi Sunliensyar, 2025, image used courtesy of Perpustakaan Nasional Republik Indonesia
20The manuscript of Kerinci laws (ML 396 A) was obtained from Dusun Koto Majidin, Mendapo Kemantan. It contains a compilation of the Minangkabau laws (undang-undang), Jambi laws (teliti), and accounts of Rajo Tigo Silo from Jambi and Sultan Salapan from Minangkabau (Sunliensyar & Azizah 2024: 21–22). In van Ronkel’s catalogue, this manuscript is titled Lohok Tiga Laras, the same title used by Sitanggang and Sjamsidar in their transliteration (van Ronkel 1909: 507; Sitanggang & Sjamsidar 1995). Voorhoeve (1970: 398) argued that this manuscript is a book of Minangkabau law, and its title should be Undang-Undang Luhak nan Tiga Laras nan Dua. We have retransliterated this manuscript and titled it as Kitab Kesimpanan Adat based on its content (Sunliensyar & Azizah 2024).
21In my transliteration of copies of the two Minangkabau letters (ML 396 B) and Jambi piagam (ML 396 C) from the composite manuscript ML 396 / Cod.Or. 12.326, I argue that the original manuscripts of ML 396 B and two piagam of ML 396 C may have been written in the late 17th century AD (Sunliensyar 2019). No date was found in the Minangkabau letters (ML 396 B), but Sultan Ahmad Syah or Yang Dipertuan Sakti, king of Minangkabau in the 17th century, is mentioned. In one letter, Sultan Ahmad Syah mentions the succession conflict between Sultan Maharaja Batu and Sultan Kiyai Gede from Jambi, in which Sultan Ahmad Syah supported Sultan Maharaja Batu as the successor of the Jambi Sultanate. Sultan Ahmad Syah asked the depati from Kerinci to support Sultan Maharaja Batu (Sunliensyar 2019: 173–175). Two handwritten copies of Jambi piagam in ML 396 C were addressed to Depati Suta Menggala in Tanah Seleman, Kerinci. One of them is dated in 1106 H/1694 AD and mentions Pangeran Sutawijaya as sender (Sunliensyar 2019: 167–168). The other has no date but mentions Sultan Ingalaga, sultan of Jambi between 1679 and 1687 (Sunliensyar 2019: 168–169).
22ML 396 D consists of three handwritten copies of piagam. One of them mentions the command of Pangeran Sukarta Negara of Jambi to depati in Kerinci to strengthen hukum syara’ (Islamic law) in Kerinci. In another, the date 1119 H/1707 AD appears, as well as the fact that it was forbidden to pray to stones, statues, or trees, for men and women to dance together, to drink arrack, and to play music during burial rituals. The complete transliterations of the three piagam can be seen in Voorhoeve’s Tambo Kerintji (TK 229, TK 230, and TK 231) (Voorhoeve et al. 1941: 163–164).
23The final text in the composite item, ML 396 E, is a handwritten copy of the document attached to Klerks’ report (see Fig. 2) and to van Aken’s 1915 book. The original document is a letter sent by Seri Sultan Muhammad Syah Johan Berdaulat from Inderapura to Depati Raja Muda Pangeran in Kemantan, Kerinci in 1246 H/1831 AD (Voorhoeve et al. 1941: 102; Sunliensyar 2020b: 80). This letter was kept by a depati of Mendapo Kemantan (Voorhoeve et al. 1941: 102; Iskandar 1999: 671). It tells of the political relations between Kerinci and Inderapura, beginning with the Bukit Paninjau Laut agreement by Tuanku Berdarah Putih from Inderapura, Depati Raja Muda from Kerinci, and Pangeran Temenggung Kabul di Bukit from Jambi (Voorhoeve et al. 1941: 102–104; Sunlienyar 2020b: 80–85). The agreement was renewed in 1022 H/1614 AD by Sultan Firmansyah from Inderapura and Depati Raja Muda from Kerinci at Pulau Persumpahan, Inderapura. It seems that Sultan Muhammad Syah Johan Berdaulat included this story of the prior agreement in his letter to Depati Raja Muda Pangeran in 1831 to strengthen political relations between Inderapura and Kerinci (Sunliensyar 2020b: 80-81).
Fig. 5 – A copy of Sultan Ahmad Syah’s letter to depati in Kerinci (MS ML 396 B; collection of Perpustakaan Nasional Republik Indonesia).
Photograph Hafiful Hadi Sunleinsyar, 2025; image used courtesy of Perpustakaan Nasional Republik Indonesia.
24The Incung manuscript (MS E 91) contains a letter titled Surat Pamayin. Though Voorhoeve (1970: 397) claimed that this manuscript is a letter from a beginner student to his master, it is more likely that the word guru in the text does not refer to a master but to the ancestors, as is usual in Kerinci (Sunliensyar 2016; 2018). Based on Iskandar’s catalogue (1999: 671), this manuscript was obtained from Sekungkung, Mendapo Depati Tujuh.
25After Manupassa’s consignment of manuscripts to Batavia, further efforts to investigate Kerinci manuscripts continued for ten years. The naturalist Edward Jacobson, who visited Kerinci in 1915, showed an interest in the Kerinci pusaka manuscripts. He copied 23 Incung manuscripts from Mendapo Sungai Penuh, Rawang, Hiang, and Semurup (Fig. 6) (Iskandar 1999: 343–348). The handwritten copies of all these manuscripts were sent by Jacobson to L.C. Westenenk. In 1922, Westenenk published transliteration and translations of only two of Jacobson’s copies. These two copies originated from the pusaka held by Datuk Singarapi Putih, Mendapo Sungai Penuh. They contain the history of migration of the female ancestors Puti Unduk Pinang Masak and Dayang Baranay from Pariang Padang Panjang to Kerinci. The manuscripts also describe the children of Dayang Baranay with her husband Siak Langin. Unfortunately, Westenenk did not publish the remainder of Jacobson’s manuscript copies, but these together with Westenenk’s transliterations were donated to Leiden University in 1934 (Iskandar 1999: 343).
Fig. 6 – Jacobson’s illustration and trancription of a horn manuscript pusaka of Rio Bungsu Gedang from Mendapo Rawang (N.15), 17 September 1915.
Leiden University Library Or 6662 A. Courtesy of Leiden University Library.
26In 1929, B.J.O. Schrieke presented an Incung inscription on bamboo to the Bataviaasch Genootschap (later numbered MS E 92) (Voorhoeve 1929: 166). Schrieke obtained this object from a Kerinci haji during his research in Kerinci in 1928 (Voorhoeve 1929: 166). He also reported the existence of piagam manuscripts said to contain the resolution of a conflict between dusun by Jambi that he was unable to obtain. Voorhoeve notes that the manuscript contains an explanation about sisik tuah ayam, detailing how to select a rooster for cockfighting, by interpreting the scales on its feet for propitious signs (Voorhoeve 1970: 397).
27During two short visits to Kerinci (7-11 April and 2-17 July 1941) (Fig. 7), Voorhoeve recorded 258 manuscripts and transliterated around 240 manuscripts collected from 10 mendapo (Kozok 2006: 35). He also transliterated three Kerinci manuscripts from the collection of the Bataviaasch Genootschap (Voorhoeve et al. 1941). The Kerinci project was supported by H. Veldkamp, the controleur of Kerinci-Indrapura, who had negotiated with the depati holding the pusaka manuscripts and organised their meeting with Voorhoeve (Voorhoeve et al. 1941: ii). Besides Veldkamp, Voorhoeve was assisted by his wife, M.J.C. Voorhoeve-Bernelot Moens, and his secretary, N. Ooster, to copy the manuscripts. For the transliteration, he was assisted by Poerbatjaraka for Javanese script and by A. Hamid for Jawi. The result of their transliteration work was an unpublished manuscript titled Tambo Kerinci (TK).
Fig. 7– A procession of heirloom manuscripts in Tanjung Tanah; photograph taken by Voorhoeve and team. KITLV 34898.
https://digitalcollections.universiteitleiden.nl/view/item/808904. Image used courtesy of Leiden University Library.
28Voorhoeve’s secretary typed six copies of Tambo Kerinci, of which two were sent to Kerinci, namely to the controleur’s office and to the keeper of pusaka manuscripts (Voorhoeve 1970: 371). Voorhoeve believed that these copies had gone missing during the Japanese occupation, but a copy was recovered in 1975 by Watson, an anthropologist, during his research in Kerinci (Kozok 2006: xi). Watson subsequently retyped and later distributed photocopies of Tambo Kerintji to the adat communities in Kerinci. Kozok published the retyped Tambo Kerinci online in 2006.3
- 4 Voorhoeve (1970: 382) mentioned that this manuscript was written on “a rectangular piece of a horny (...)
29Based on the scripts, Voorhoeve divided the Kerinci manuscripts into three categories (Voorhoeve et al. 1941: ii). Eight were supposedly written in Old Javanese script on palm leaf (lontar) and mulberry bark (dluang). However, Voorhoeve later confirmed that only two manuscripts were in Old Javanese, the others being in modern Javanese script (aksara Jawa Baru) (Voorhoeve 1970: 387–388). One of them, on dluang, is a law text from Tanjung Tanah, Mendapo Seleman (TK 214), now confirmed as the oldest known Malay manuscript, and the other in Old Javanese, on lontar, is a mantra text from Dusun Koto Baru, Mendapo Hiang (TK 188). The remaining six items, in modern Javanese script, date from the Islamic period and are related to letters from the Jambi Sultanate (Voorhoeve 1970: 389). The second group comprised 134 manuscripts in Incung script, written on horn, bamboo, bark, European paper, bone, lontar, and tapak gajah.4 These manuscripts contain the history and genealogy of the ancestors (tambo), lover’s laments, letters of agreement, debt certifications, and magical charms (Sunliensyar 2020b). Incung manuscripts on horn contain genealogy and contracts, while Incung manuscripts on bamboo, bark, and European paper contain spells, love charms, and laments (Voorhoeve 1970: 395; Sunliensyar 2020b: 35). Voorhoeve transliterated approximately 79 horn and 22 bamboo or paper manuscripts (Sunliensyar 2020b). The third group was Jawi texts: 121 manuscripts on paper and animal skins. Of these, 34 manuscripts are Jambi piagam and 11 are Indrapura royal letters. Other Jawi manuscripts contain genealogies (tambo), prayers (kitab doa), and sermons (surat khutbah). Voorhoeve’s research was the last and most comprehensive of the colonial period, since the Japanese invaded the following year, and Indonesia gained independence in 1945.
30In his last writing about Kerinci manuscripts, Voorhoeve noted there was one Incung manuscript held in KITLV, recorded as Or. 239 or D Or. 239 (Voorhoeve 1970: 372, 394; 1971: 6). This manuscript is written on three scrolls5 with illuminations. Voorhoeve published the transliteration with a photograph in 1970 (Voorhoeve 1970: 394–395, plate 4). It contains a love charm and a prose lament by a lover to his beloved. The writer (si katib) mentions Dara Padang as the name of his beloved and describes her as salayang burung sanggun tahuray (a flying bird and unravelled hair-bun). He also cited a pantun termed a nyanyi (song) and mentioned Negeri Samurut or Semurup (the village of Semurup).
31Iskandar’s catalogue (1999: 535, 851) only describes the transliteration and reproduction of MS Or. 239. However, the online catalogue of the Leiden University Library states that Or. 239 is part of a composite Jambi manuscript, Or. 146,6 obtained by the Dutch during a military expedition to Jambi in 1901. Based on Velds’ 1909 report (Velds 1911) the military expedition to Jambi started in 1901 and lasted until 1903. In 1901, it only managed to occupy the Sarolangun region, around 250 km southeast of Kerinci (ibid.: 44–78), before moving to inland Merangin (1902) and entering Kerinci in 1903 (ibid.: 79–99; van Aken 1915). If Or. 239 was truly obtained in 1901, it could have been obtained from a native of Kerinci who lived in the Sarolangun region. However, it is also possible that the manuscript was obtained in 1903 during the occupation of Kerinci, but was not included in Manupassa’s collection.
32As noted above, during the 40 years of colonial rule in Kerinci, colonial agents only managed to obtain eight original pusaka manuscripts. To return to the question raised in the introduction—why the Dutch were so unsuccessful in their collecting efforts in Kerinci?—one reason is the change in attitude and the policy of the colonial government, and the other is the strength of adat regulations against displaying pusaka within Kerinci.
33Unlike the colonial wars of the early 19th century that brought many insular Southeast Asian manuscripts into European hands, the annexation of Kerinci a century later was less violent. Though there was resistance in the south of Kerinci, most of the dusun in the north were annexed without significant bloodshed (van Aken 1915: 52–57). Most of the depati accepted the colonial authorities. Efforts to collect items representative of the material culture took place in the early years of the presence of colonial agents in Kerinci. As controleur of Kerinci, Manupassa managed to collect ethnographic items, including five pusaka manuscripts and some copies of piagam manuscripts. Although information about Manupassa’s mode of collecting is limited, it appears that he aimed to collect not just manuscripts but all kinds of ethnographic items, and these were obtained not through military intervention or looting but through diplomatic negotiation. This way of collecting was confirmed by a pusaka custodian, Depati Serah Bumi Serah Mato from Seleman, during Voorhoeve’s research in 1941 (1970: 383). If Manupassa had acted using military forces, he presumably would have been able to acquire many more than five manuscripts.
- 7 Sometimes written “Sandaran Agung.”
34Moreover, most of depati—who were also the keepers of pusaka— were mendapo heads (mendapohoofd), and therefore also part of the colonial authority (Morison 1940: 66–69). Four of the six pusaka manuscripts obtained by Manupassa originated from Mendapo Sanggaran Agung, Seleman, and Hiang (Voorhoeve 1970: 397). Mendapo Sanggaran Agung7 was the regional centre of the colonial authority at the time and therefore the location of Manupassa’s office (van Aken 1915: 38–39). Mendapo Seleman and Hiang were the closest mendapo to the north. Jacobson seems to have followed the same way of collecting through negotiations. In fact, he did not collect any manuscript but copied 23 Incung manuscripts and sent these copies to Westenenk. In 1929, Schrieke collected only one Incung manuscript from a Kerinci haji (Voorhoeve 1929: 166), while Voorhoeve and his team photographed and transliterated 252 manuscripts but did not attempt to collect any.
- 8 For example, the Jambi curse in Depati Atur Bumi from Dusun Hiang’s piagam manuscripts (TK 205) sta (...)
35During the final period of Dutch colonial rule, the government recognised the adat institutions, their authority, and their laws that applied to Kerinci society. Indeed, the depati, or adat officials, were legitimated by the colonial authorities with the purpose of establishing social control in Kerinci. The depati accepted the situation, but faced a dilemma when the colonial agents requested access to pusaka. As government officials, they were required to be obedient and loyal to the colonial authority, but on the other hand, as community leaders, they had to ensure adat laws and regulations were preserved, including that the pusaka were not to be displayed outside ritual occasions. In Kerinci society, violation of adat laws would be punished by depati and other adat officials (Morison 1940: 72–74), through the payment of fines or social sanctions such as “excommunication” (dibuang sepanjang adat). In addition, the pusaka were believed to be sacred and to possess supernatural powers, also strengthening social obedience to adat regulations. Kooreman (1893: 185) reported that the custodians of the pusaka manuscripts would avoid revealing that they were owners or keepers, perhaps out of fear of being cursed by the supernatural powers of the pusaka. Indeed, Jambi piagam manuscripts include curses and some Incung manuscripts warn violators of their regulations8 (Sunliensyar 2020b: 56–57).
36It appears that the depati chose a compromise to solve their dilemma. They allowed the colonial agents to observe and photograph their pusaka manuscripts, but also followed their adat regulations and rituals by preventing the manuscripts to be taken from the custodians. Moreover, the depati themselves had a strong desire to learn the contents of the pusaka manuscript, mainly Incung manuscripts which they could no longer read. As Kooreman (1893) and Voorhoeve (1970: 370) reported, their curiosity about the contents of the pusaka manuscripts won out over their anxiety about the curse of the pusaka. They supported the government researchers to study their pusaka so that they too would know the contents. Therefore, during the late colonial era, the implementation of adat regulations regarding pusaka manuscripts seems to have been less strict than in Kooreman’s time.
Fig. 8 – Heads of the adat community showing their pusaka manuscript collections during the visit of the Resident of Djambi in 1922.
Photograph in the public domain, from the Leiden University Library, KITLV 119906. https://digitalcollections.universiteitleiden.nl/view/item/890884
- 9 A note with the photograph explains: “Ter herinnering eerbiedig aangeboden door het districtsbestuu (...)
37The important role of the depati and the support of Kerinci society in displaying their pusaka manuscripts appear in photographs (Fig. 8). Paper and horn manuscripts can be seen held by three of the seated men. The photograph shown above was taken in 1922 during the visit of H.L.C. Petri, Resident of Djambi.9 The enthusiasm of the Kerinci society seems apparent from the crowd lining the path of the procession of a pusaka manuscript in 1941 (Fig. 7).
- 10 Though Bickmore (1868: 471–472) claimed there was a reformist movement led by three Kerinci haji fr (...)
38Thus, it seems that the impact of colonialism on pusaka manuscript collections in Kerinci was limited. Very few manuscripts were collected, and to a great extent, the adat regulations regarding pusaka objects continued to be observed. Nevertheless, another factor appears in the case of Schrieke’s collection of a pusaka manuscript from a Kerinci haji (Voorhoeve 1929: 166). Schrieke’s success may be related to the rise in Islamic reformism in the early 20th century (Tago 2009: 43–44), as pilgrims from Kerinci not only performed the haj but also studied in Mecca (Watson 1985; Hurgronje 2007: 248). Moreover, during the 1920s an increasing number of people from Kerinci studied Islam in Islamic schools in West Sumatra (Tago 2015: 7–8). Some were influenced by Islamic reformism and brought these ideas back to Kerinci, such as opposing pre-Islamic ritual practices like the sanctification of pusaka manuscripts.10 This desacralisation of pusaka may have led to the illegal (in the eyes of adat law) removal of pusaka from clan to individual ownership, and thence to Schrieke’s hands.
39The change in status of the pusaka manuscripts continued after Indonesian independence. The Museum Siginjei Jambi holds five Incung manuscripts. One, written on buffalo horn (inv. nb. 07.02), is particularly interesting in this regard because its last owner was an individual named Dasri, from outside Kerinci (Fig. 9) (Sunliensyar, 2018; Amallia, 2019). However, this item was a pusaka manuscript of Mangku Sukarami Indropuro from Dusun Koto Teluk, Mendapo Rawang that was recorded by Voorhoeve in 1941 as TK 90 (Voorhoeve et al. 1941: 71). The same manuscript was copied by Jacobson in 1915 (N.15), who stated that it was the pusaka of Rio Bungsu Gedang from Dusun Koto Teluk, Mendapo Rawang (see Fig. 6) (Iskandar 1999: 346). The four other manuscripts, written on bamboo, contain spells and laments and were obtained from both within and beyond Kerinci (Sunliensyar 2018).
40Thus, only thirteen pusaka manuscripts have been deposited into museums and library collections over the past century: eight during the colonial period and five since 1945. This figure needs to be compared with the known number of manuscripts kept in their original context as pusaka. Based on Voorhoeve’s records, there were around 254 pusaka manuscripts held by traditional owners or keepers. In 2002, Kozok (2006; 2015) successfully rediscovered the pusaka manuscripts documented by Voorhoeve, including the 14th century Undang-Undang Tanjung Tanah, the oldest known Malay manuscript, which is still kept as the pusaka of Luhah Depati Talam Tuo. In addition, the Endangered, Archives Project “Digitizing sacred heirlooms in private collections in Kerinci, Sumatra, Indonesia” (EAP11711), carried out in 2007 also documented pusaka manuscripts from Voorhoeve’s list (Gallop 2014; 2020a).
Fig. 9 – Horn manuscript 07.02 in the collection of Museum Siginjei Jambi
Photograph by Hafiful Hadi Sunliensyar, 2025; image used courtesy of Museum Siginjei Jambi
41They include, for example, the pusaka manuscripts of the Depati Singalago Tuo (EAP117/2/1/1-4) and the pusaka manuscripts of the Depati Anum Muncak Alam (EAP117/44/1/6) (Sunliensyar 2020a; 2021). Several digitized manuscripts are new discoveries that need to be studied further. Thus, the number of manuscripts removed from pusaka traditional contexts to museums or libraries remains extremely small compared to the manuscripts assumed to still remain with their customary custodians.
42The brief period of Dutch colonisation of Kerinci had a limited impact on the pusaka manuscripts. In the post-annexation period, Dutch colonial officers collected eight pusaka manuscripts, together with other indigenous regalia and ethnographic items, in order to provide ethnographic material from Kerinci to Batavia. In the early 20th century, efforts by Jacobson (1915), Westenenk (1922), and Voorhoeve (1941), shifted away from collecting, moving towards scholarly investigation through copying, photographying, and transliterating. In addition, the position of the depati as representatives of the colonial administration and their curiosity about manuscripts they could not read, led them to support this colonial research. The colonial authorities and agents, at the same time, recognised the adat institutions and followed the adat regulations of Kerinci society during their studies of manuscripts there. Compared to precolonial times, during which access to pusaka was limited to ritual contexts, the colonial era saw depati permitting their pusaka collections to be observed and researched as long as adat regulations were followed and the items were not removed from their customary keepers. This resilience of adat explains why the vast majority of Kerinci manuscripts remain preserved in their original context as pusaka until today.
43This article was first presented at the “Colonialism and manuscript libraries in island Southeast Asia” workshop at SOAS University of London, in May 2023, organised as part of the Leverhulme Trust-funded Research Leadership Award Mapping Sumatra’s Manuscript Cultures. Special thanks to Dr. Mulaika Hijjas for accepting my article in her workshop project and for editing my article to be published. Special thanks also to Mr. Muhammad Haidar Izzudin and Mr. Arman AZ, from the Leiden University Libraries collection, for sharing data about the Kerinci manuscript archives.
|
Inv. nb.
|
Title or genre of manuscript
|
Scripts/languages/material
|
Year of acquisition
|
Place of origin
|
Place of preservation
|
|
D Or. 239
|
Love charm prose
|
Incung/Kerinci/three scroll papers
|
During Dutch military expedition to inland Jambi 1901-1903
|
Kerinci, but no detail on location
|
KITLV, then Leiden University Libraries
|
|
MS E 79
|
Contract
|
Incung/Kerinci/horn
|
1903
|
Possibly from Mendapo Hiang
|
Sent to the Bataviaasch Genootschap but missing after the war. Only its transliteration is preserved.
|
|
-
|
-
|
Incung/Kerinci/round yellow bamboo
|
1904
|
Pusaka of Depati Serah Bumi Sirah Mato from Mendapo Seleman
|
Sent to the Bataviaasch Genootschap but missing during the colonial period
|
|
MS E 80
|
Fragment of lontar manuscript
|
Incung/Malay/lontar
|
1903
|
Mendapo Seleman
|
Formerly at Bataviaasch
Genootschap. Now in Perpustakaan
Nasional Republik Indonesia
|
|
MS E 81
|
Fragment of lontar manuscript
|
Incung and modern Javanese scripts / Malay and Javanese languages / lontar
|
1903
|
Sanggaran Agung
|
Formerly at Bataviaasch
Genootschap. Now in Perpustakaan
Nasional Republik Indonesia
|
|
MS E 91
|
Praise to ancestors
|
Incung/Kerinci/narrow scroll paper
|
1904
|
Sekungkung, Mendapo Depati Tujuh
|
Formerly at Bataviaasch Genootschap. Now in Perpustakaan Nasional Republik Indonesia.
|
|
ML 396 A
|
A book of Kerinci adat law, also titled Undang-Undang Luhak nan Tiga Laras nan Dua
|
Jawi/Malay/European paper
|
1904
|
Koto Majidin, Mendapo Keramantan
|
Formerly at Bataviaasch Genootschap. Now in Perpustakaan Nasional Republik Indonesia.
|
|
MS E 92
|
Sisik tuah ayam (roosters’ scale propitious signs)
|
Incung/Kerinci/bamboo
|
1929
|
Kerinci
|
Formerly at Bataviaasch
Genootschap. Now in Perpustakaan
Nasional Republik Indonesia
|
|
07.02
|
Contract
|
Incung/Kerinci/buffalo horn
|
1981
|
Possibly from Dusun Koto Teluk, Mendapo Rawang
|
Museum Siginjei Jambi
|
|
07.04
|
Lament
|
Incung/Kerinci/bamboo
|
1984
|
Kerinci
|
Museum Siginjei Jambi
|
|
07.05
|
Lament
|
Incung/Kerinci/bamboo
|
1984
|
Kerinci
|
Museum Siginjei Jambi
|
|
07.07
|
Lament
|
Incung/Kerinci/bamboo
|
1986
|
Koto Buayo, Batang Hari Regency
|
Museum Siginjei Jambi
|
|
07.08
|
Lament
|
Incung/Kerinci/bamboo
|
1986
|
Koto Buayo, Batang Hari Regency
|
Museum Siginjei Jambi
|