z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Isu Pemilikan Wilayah Pantai Timur Sabah: Satu Penelusuran Daripada Sudut Sumber Sejarah
Author(s) -
Eko Prayitno Joko
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
kinabalu
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 1394-4517
DOI - 10.51200/ejk.v20i0.130
Subject(s) - humanities , art , political science
Trouillot menyatakan permainan kekuasaan dalam penyusunan ceritacerita alternatif diawali dengan penciptaan fakta mahupun sumber sejarah (1995). Keadaan ini disebabkan penghasilan sesuatu penulisan sejarah sangat bergantung harap kepada keberadaan sumber-sumber institusional yang dikendalikan oleh negara, sama ada pada era kolonial mahupun semasa pascakolonial. Hasilnya, sesuatu peristiwa itu dapat dilihat dalam dua dimensi yang berbeza, iaitu sejarah tentang ‘apa yang terjadi’ dan ‘apa yang dikatakan terjadi.’ Perkara ini jelas terlihat apabila kita menelusuri sejarah penyerahan wilayah utara Borneo daripada Kesultanan Brunei kepada Kesultanan Sulu yang sememangnya jarang ditekankan dalam penulisan sejarah Sabah. Walhal, peristiwa ini memainkan peranan penting dalam konteks pembentukan geopolitik moden Sabah. Walau bagaimanapun, tidak mudah merungkaikan secara tepat berkenaan peristiwa yang terjadi memandangkan Kesultanan Brunei acapkali menafikan berlakunya penyerahan wilayah utara Borneo kepada Kesultanan Sulu (Tarsilah Brunei II: 1997). Pada masa yang sama pula, Kesultanan Sulu tetap dengan pendirian mereka bahawa telah berlakunya penyerahan tersebut bersandarkan Perjanjian 1878 antara Overbeck dengan Sultan Jamal Al-Alam (Graham Irwin: 1986). Justeru, penulisan ini bukan bertujuan untuk memberikan jawapan kebenaran berkenaan penyerahan wilayah utara Borneo kepada Kesultanan Sulu, sebaliknya hanya menampilkan sumber-sumber sedia ada yang merangkumi penulisan Barat, Kesultanan Sulu, Kesultanan Brunei dan Kesultanan Bulungan. Trouillot had percepted ‘the game of power in the arrangement of alternative stories began with the creation of facts and/or historical source’ (1995). This condition is caused by a creation of certain historical writings which is very dependent with the whereabout of institutional sources handled by a country, either from the colonial era or post-colonial. For the result, certain event can be perceived in two different dimensions; history about ‘what happens’ and ‘what is said had happened’. This matter is obviously stated when we went down the history of the capitulation of the northern region of Borneo by the Brunei Sultanate to the Sulu Sultanate, which is rarely pressed in the writings of the history of Sabah. Although, the event plays an important role in the context of the formation of modern geo-politics of Sabah. However, it is not easy to precisely elaborate about the actual event considering the Brunei Sultanate often denied the occurrence of capitulation of the northern region of Borneo to the Sulu Sultanate (Tarsilah Brunei II; 1997). At the same time, the cession is based on agreement 1878 between Overbeck and Sultan Jamal Al-Alam (Graham Irwin; 1986). Moreover, the making of this writing is not to give the true answer about the capitulation of the northern region of Borneo to the Sulu Sultanate, but only to present the current sources which include the Western, Sulu Sultanate, Brunei Sultanate and Bulungan Sultanate writings.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here