‘Identity is not singular but plural – identities are conflicting, multiple, and intersecting.’
– Stuart Hall (1932-2014); a Jamaican-born British cultural theorist, sociologist, and public intellectual
The Iban-English Dictionary by Anthony Richard, on page 70, defines ‘DAYAK’ (formerly ‘Dyak’) as ‘upcountry’ or ‘inland’.
In Kalimantan, the Dutch, the former colonizers, referred to all pagan upriver people as Dayaks. In Sarawak, East Malaysia, the term Dayak can refer to the Sea Dayak (Iban) and/or Land Dayak (Bidayuh). The Sea Dayak traditionally reside in the lower parts and are river people, while the Land Dayak are typically confined to inland areas. However, these definitions no longer accurately describe the identities and habitats of these two tribes, who now prefer to be called Iban and Bidayuh, respectively. The modern-day definition of the word Dayak is far removed from its colonial definition, as we will see later.
Other sources provide different definitions for Dayak (also Dyak). The World Book Dictionary, on page 656, states that Dayak (also Dyak) refers to a group of Indonesian people living on Borneo Island and speaking a Malayan language – the language of the Dyaks’. The New Shorter Oxford defines Dyak or Dayak as ‘Malay-up-country, a group of aboriginal people inhabiting parts of Borneo and Sarawak; the language of these people … Sea Dayak – IBAN’.
During my time in Brunei, which lasted approximately seven years, I realised that these varying interpretations of the word Dayak may have contributed to incorrect perceptions of the identity and status of the Dayak and Iban within the sultanate, under the rule of its absolute monarch. This confusion arises from the fact that local Ibans are granted the status of citizens rather than tribal natives, while Dayaks are considered tribal natives of Brunei, even though people in this group can be Ibans and Bidayuhs. No one is born in Brunei as a member of the ‘Dayak’ race specifically. Government forms only have columns for Dayak, without separate categories for Iban or Bidayuh, leading to prime confusion within the sultanate.
In my view, the term ‘Dayak’ conveniently defines a group of non-Malay natives, first by the Brookes and later by British colonialists in the 1830s. The designations ‘Sea Dayak’ for the Iban and ‘Land Dayak’ for the Bidayuh were merely for the convenience of the rulers and do not accurately define these two tribes. The Iban, in fact, never ventured out to sea and generally stayed further inland compared to the Bidayuh. Therefore, the geographical division of these two tribal groups was arbitrarily chosen based on perceived rather than actual physical existence.
In Malaysia, there is no ethnic group called Dayak; only Iban, Bidayuh, and other ethnic groups exist. It has been officially declared that Dayak is a community comprising Iban, Bidayuh, and Orang Ulu groups, which include Kelabit, Kayan, Kenyah, and other minor tribes. This is the present-day scenario. Official government forms do not include a race column for Dayak but only for Iban, Bidayuh, Non-Malay Bumiputera, Malay, Melanau, Chinese, Indian, and others. In our identity cards, we are identified as Iban, Bidayuh, Kayan, Kenyah, Kelabit, or other racial groups, but not as Dayak, Sea Dayak, or Land Dayak.
However, this does not mean that Dayak people no longer exist because, as previously mentioned, Dayak refers to a community comprising different ethnic groups. These are the people who celebrate the annual Dayak Festival or Gawai Dayak on June 1, which is now a declared public holiday.
Nationalism has played a significant role in redefining the word Dayak as a race in Malaysia. The Bidayuh, who speak various parochial or regional variations of the Bidayuh dialects, prefer to be called Bidayuh instead of Land Dayak. The same sentiment is shared by the Iban, the largest ethnic group in Sarawak. We all speak one language, namely Iban, which is universally understood by any Iban worldwide, regardless of whether they are from Sarawak, Sabah, Brunei, or Kalimantan. Of course, there are accents, similar to those in the English language, Malay, and other languages. Now that the Iban language is taught in Malaysian schools and universities, most Ibans would likely be offended if referred to as Sea Dayak, especially considering the outdated definition of Dayak as ‘a group of uncivilized people in the inland of Borneo’ found in a particular dictionary from the 1970s.
During my seven years in the sultanate, I extensively travelled to Ulu Belait, Ulu Tutong, and Temburong, which are the main areas where the Brunei Iban reside. Our counterparts in these regions are mostly immigrants from Sarawak, some of whom have strong accents from places like Betong or Saratok. Geography and history have placed us in different perspectives, directions, fates, and destinies. However, it is crucial to correct any Western or colonial perspectives and notions regarding the Iban and Dayak.
It is important to note that Iban is both an ethnic group and a language, whereas Dayak is neither a language nor an ethnic group but rather a collective term for the Iban, Bidayuh, Orang Ulu, and other groups who consider themselves Dayak.
Currently, the Sarawak Dayak National Union (SDNU) and its sister organization, Sarakup Indu Dayak Sarawak (SIDS), serve as the umbrella body for unity within the Dayak community. Their activities focus on social, educational, and cultural domains.
The views expressed here are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of the New Sarawak Tribune.
