Article

Kedah-Siamese correspondence, 1890–1898 {with translations of 10 letters on the Perlis affairs

From Munshipedia, the MBRAS digital historical encyclopedia

Kedah-Siamese correspondence, 1890–1898 {with translations of 10 letters on the Perlis affairs

Kobkua Suwannathat-Pian’s 1982 article in the Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society examines a Thai-language manuscript of official correspondence between Kedah and Bangkok spanning 1890–1898, arguing that this decade represents the zenith of cordial Kedah-Siamese relations and revealing, through ten translated letters, the sustained diplomatic campaign by Kedah’s ruling house to recover the lost state of Perlis.

Summary

The article is built around a single primary source: the manuscript SPP/K/II;509/67, held at Arkib Negara, which Suwannathat-Pian identifies as a file of approximately 190 copied official letters maintained by the Royal Scribes Department of Kedah. The document records communications between Kedah and Bangkok, as well as with the intermediary provinces of Songkhla and Nakhon Sri-thammarat. The author corrects the previously accepted dating of the manuscript (1887–1895) to 1890–1898, based on the earliest legible entry (3rd day of Syaaban A.H. 1307 = March 25, 1890) and the latest (27th day of Syaaban A.H. 1315 = January 21, 1898). The correspondence is not strictly chronological and is significantly damaged, with the first few pages beyond repair.

The first part of the article situates the correspondence within the broader arc of Kedah-Siamese relations following the 1821 Siamese invasion and the 1839–1841 settlements that carved Kedah into separate political units. Suwannathat-Pian demonstrates that the period 1890–1898 was characterised by mutual understanding and personal intimacy between the two courts: Kedah royal children were educated in Bangkok, Sultan Abdul Hamid spoke Siamese, and the two rulers engaged in frequent reciprocal visits, including King Chulalongkorn’s 1891 tour of the Malay Peninsula which the Sultan accompanied in person. The author highlights the lengths to which Kedah rulers went to demonstrate loyalty—participating in the Brahmin-Buddhist Water of Allegiance Ceremony, promptly sending the bunga mas tribute, and offering military support during the 1893 Franco-Siamese crisis. On the Siamese side, Chulalongkorn elevated Sultan Abdul Hamid to the rank of Chao Phraya in 1896 and removed Nakhon Sri-thammarat as the intermediary overseer, a structural change that brought Kedah into direct communication with Bangkok.

The second part translates ten letters (1892–1897) that document the Perlis affair in detail. After the death of the second Raja of Perlis, Syed Ahmad Jamalullail, in February 1897, Sultan Abdul Hamid and his mother Wan Hajar launched an intensive diplomatic offensive, dispatching the Raja Muda Tengku Abdul Aziz and the Chief Minister Wan Mat Saman to Bangkok. The letters reveal a carefully calibrated strategy: Kedah leaders invoked historical precedent (the earlier return of Kubang Pasu and Setul), emphasised their loyalty, and offered concrete administrative arrangements for Perlis under Kedah’s supervision while preserving the existing Perlis ruling family in a subordinate role. The campaign succeeded when the Ministry of the Interior issued decree 1/748 on April 7, 1897, creating monthon Saiburi and appointing Sultan Abdul Hamid as its Superintendent Commissioner with supervisory authority over Kedah, Perlis, and Setul. However, the final letter (October 1897) reveals that the arrangement was already fracturing, as the new Phraya Perlis refused to accept Kedah’s administrative authority and ordered his officials to stop working.

Key Findings

  • The manuscript SPP/K/II;509/67 contains approximately 190 letters; the author corrects its dating from the previously recorded 1887–1895 to 1890–1898 based on the earliest and latest legible entries (p. 62, 67).
  • The bunga mas tribute, sent every three years, comprised: 3 pairs of spears with silver-gilded sheaths, 15 pairs of long swords with gold-gilded sheaths, 2 pairs of swords with carved-wooden sheaths, 10 pairs of knives with rattan sheaths, 40 rolls of white cloth (80 sawk length), 40 rolls of white cloth (50-sawk length), 80 rolls of white cloth (24-sawk length), and 60 rolls of white-saklad material (24-sawk length) (p. 68, n. 14).
  • In 1892–93, Kedah took a loan of 100,000 dollars from Bangkok, repayable within 5–6 years; this was part of a prolonged financial deterioration that eventually led to a loan exceeding 2,000,000 dollars and the acceptance of a Siamese Financial Adviser in 1905 (p. 62, 68 n. 3).
  • Monthon Saiburi was formally established by decree 1/748 dated April 7, R.S. 116 (April 7, 1897), appointing Sultan Abdul Hamid as khaluang thesaphiban (Superintendent Commissioner) with supervisory authority over Kedah, Perlis, and Setul (p. 67, 80–81, n. 73).
  • Nakhon Sri-thammarat was removed as the intermediary Phraya overseeing Kedah in 1896, after having been structurally redundant since the death of Chao Phraya Nakhon (Noi) in 1839 and the elevation of Sultan Ahmad Tajuddin II to Chao Phraya rank in 1872 (pp. 63–64).
  • The Anglo-Siamese Secret Treaty of 1897 partially relaxed the intense rivalry between Siam and Great Britain over the Malay Peninsula, providing the geopolitical context within which the Perlis settlement was negotiated (p. 63).

Conclusion

Suwannathat-Pian’s definitive takeaway is that 1890–1898 constituted the highlight of Kedah-Siamese relations, a period of genuine mutual understanding that stands in sharp contrast to the hostility of the first half of the nineteenth century and to the more adversarial dynamics Siam experienced with the Eastern Malay States. The Perlis affair, while ultimately only a temporary and illusory solution for Kedah’s territorial ambitions, demonstrated both the considerable influence Kedah leaders could exert on Siamese policy and Bangkok’s willingness to accommodate its most loyal tributary in order to maintain stability in the Western Malay States while confronting greater challenges elsewhere.

Context

  • The study is based on the single Thai manuscript SPP/K/II;509/67 at Arkib Negara, supplemented by references to British colonial records (F.O. 422 series), King Chulalongkorn’s published Royal Tour journals, and Thai chronicles including Prachum Phongsawadan and the Chronicles of the Third Reign.
  • The article contributes to the historiography of Siamese provincial administration and the thesaphiban reform by providing a rare Kedah-side perspective on the creation of monthon Saiburi, complementing Tej Bunnag’s (1977) Bangkok-centred account of the same process.

References