An article written on the first day of the Year of the Cockerel, 2017
As we welcome the Year of the Cockerel in the Chinese zodiac, let us take a look at some miscellaneous events related to the cockerel in the history and culture of Singapore and Southeast Asia.
Did you know that Singapore’s first two British Residents licensed cockfighting and cockpits, but that Raffles wished to ban it?
Or that there was a Malay legal code with laws concerning chickens and cockfighting in the 1300s?
Or better yet – you could have watched cockfighting in London pubs or with the King in the 1600s!
‘A’ for Ayam: Eating chicken and betting on the fighting cock
The Malay Archipelago’s jungle fowl counts among the early ancestors of the chicken that we eat worldwide today. In fact, when the ancestors of the Polynesians and Micronesians migrated out into the Pacific, they brought the ayam from the Malay Archipelago with them (along with the Southeast Asian pandan or screwpine, pandanus amaryllifolius, yams, bananas, breadfruit, sago, and yes the betel-nut/areca nut or pinang!). But the ayam is not just good as food. It became the basis for a sport as well. The male cockerel was bred to become a fine fighting champion – the ayam laga or ayam sabung, of which there are now several breeds. The sport is known as cockfighting – sabung ayam. The institution of the cockpit, or sabungan, was an entrenched one among Malayo-Polynesian societies, with betting forming an integral part of the contest. Royal Cock Pit, London, 1808 – about which more, below!
Fines for chicken-stealing and revenue from cock-fighting in a medieval Malay legal code, AD 1300s
The idea of taxing or deriving state revenue from the betting that took place on cock-fighting must have soon emerged. For any governing polity, revenue from gambling and betting would always be a most welcome source of funds. The oldest surviving Malay manuscript that has been discovered dates from the 1300s, and is a legal codex bearing a modified version of the Sanskrit term for a law code, the Nitisarasamuccaya (‘Compendium/Codex of the Essence of Policy/Governance’). The language of this codex is Malay (with a section in the Kerinci language of highland Jambi, Sumatra), written in two scripts, Kawi and Sumatran Kerinci ‘Rencong’, on indigenous paper called in Javanese daluang / dluwang, made from the mulberry bark. It had been kept in the vicinity of the site of the last capital of the Melayu kingdom at Dharmasraya in southern Sumatra, where the king of the Melayu kingdom was based before he had to migrate (or flee) to Minangkabau (highland West Sumatra) to escape Javanese incursions. The legal codex reflected the cultural mores of the Malay lands. For example, it provides a detailed breakdown of the fines for stealing dogs (this was pre-Muslim Malay society) and—yes, you guessed it—chickens from different classes of people!
More importantly, this medieval Malay legal code also stated that unlicensed or unauthorised cockpits were categorised as part of offences against public order, and was subjected to a fine of 1 ¼ tahil of gold! (The word ‘tahil’ is a Malay weights measure adopted into English as tael, now an obsolete word). This was the second highest penalty, with the highest penalty being a fine of 2 1/4 tahil of gold for offences against the regent, or violence and manslaughter. This is an indication of the importance of revenue to be generated from the cockfight, and that cockfighting was a regulated activity in early Malay society. The 1300s was the period during which a Malay-ruled port settlement flourished in the town of Singapura, Temasek Island, as indicated by archaeological finds at Fort Canning Hill as well as the Padang vicinity, as well as a number of historical notices from passing traders and neighbouring polities – including the Javanese at Majapahit, as we shall return to later. Like the kingdom of Melayu in Sumatra, Singapura was also Buddhist by religion. Were similar laws in force here too? We have no way of telling but it is compelling to think so.
Raffles, Farquhar, and Crawfurd on cockfighting in Singapore, 1819-1823
If the medieval Malay kingdom had so many regulations governing stealing chickens and a fine for illegal cockfighting, what was it like for early colonial Singapore? Leaving aside specific penalties on chicken theft, which does appear a tad idiosyncratic, did the East India Company also regulate and levy a tax on cockfighting? Was cockfighting even happening here?
Before Raffles arrived in Singapore, he had first been the Lieutenant-Governor of Java during the British Interregnum there from 1811 to 1816 (in fact this was a military occupation that involved the plunder of royal courts – and he led attacks on various kingdoms), and subsequently was assigned to be Resident at Bencoolen (archaic name Bangkahulu, or Bengkulu) from 1817 to 1824. In his dominion over Bencoolen, he had vowed to end cockfighting there, but he was never fully able to do so as it was an important source of revenue and the East India Company government in India appreciated the money. What good was a colony if it did not generate profit?
In Singapore, Raffles sought to implement his principles, and issued instructions to forbid cockfighting and gambling. Conveniently for him though, the actual running of the fledgling new port settlement at Singapore was left entirely to William Farquhar to manage – finances, land allotment, supply of food and materials, security, defence, and the like. Farquhar had previously been the Governor of Melaka from 1811 to 1818, and to be pragmatic about the finances of early Singapore, Farquhar issued licenses for cockfighting, as well as other forms of betting and gaming. As is well-known, this outraged Raffles – and for this and other reasons Raffles haughtily dismissed Farquhar from his position as Resident of Singapore effective 1 May 1823. To indicate his determination, Raffles issued Regulation No. IV of 1823, A Regulation prohibiting gaming-houses and cockpits, and for suppressing the vice of gaming of Singapore. He left Singapore for the last time on October 1823, but not before arranging for a successor, John Crawfurd, as the new Resident. Well, Crawfurd was as pragmatic as Farquhar. In August 1823 Crawfurd permitted the opening of a cockpit at Kampung Bugis, as well as ten gambling houses around Singapore Town. Cockfighting in Singapore was back in business. The name “Kampung Bugis” in the 1820s could refer to two adjacent places in Singapore Town – either the area around Hajjah Fatimah Mosque and the “Army Market” at Beach Road (also called “Kampung Rochor” in old maps), or the area between the estuaries of Rochor and Kallang River which still has a street bearing the name “Kampung Bugis” today. It is possible that the cockpit was located in the second Kampung Bugis, which at that time was the domain of Bugis Totok or those who trade to Singapore directly from South Sulawesi ports, rather than Bugis Peranakan of the Hajjah Fatimah Mosque area – Bugis Peranakan denotes those who were formerly domiciled in surrounding Malay ports and were in some cases intermarried with Malays. Hajjah Fatimah herself was a Bugis Peranakan from Melaka.
English cockfighting, a royal sport and “an essential part of a gentleman’s leisure pursuits”
And lest we fall into lazy mental backsliding (the colonial Anglophiles that we all are here in Singapore!) and assume that cockfighting must be a quaint native pastime indicative of general Oriental decadence and malaise, we ought to remind each other that this sport was also deemed a royal and noble pursuit in England. In the 17th century, there was a Royal Cockpit for the English royal house, with an illustration of “The Royal Cockpit in the Reign of Charles the First” (who reigned 1625-1675) preserved by the British Museum and now available for viewing online. “The Royal Cockpit in the Reign of Charles the First,” London 1625-75,.
And in the 18th and 19th centuries, cockfighting was still a favourite sport among Englishmen in London. A description provided by the British Library to a fine illustration captioned “Royal Cock Pit, London published 1 May 1808” describes cockfighting as “an essential part of a gentleman’s leisure pursuits. Cock-fights traditionally took place in inns and taverns, but were also held in specially adapted cockpits…”
Royal Cock Pit, London, published in Ackermann’s Repository of Arts, 1 May 1808 reads as follows:
“Traditional blood sports such as bear and badger baiting, bull running and dog fights were principal recreational activities during the 18th century that appealed to all the social classes. Cock fighting though always remained the most prominent blood sport, not least because it was considered both an important plebeian past-time and an essential part of a gentleman’s leisure pursuits. Cock-fights traditionally took place in inns and taverns, but were also held in specially adapted cockpits, that included a wooden platform on which the fight took place, surrounded by tiered wooden benches for the eager spectators. Birds were produced in hidden bags while bids were raised for and against the opponents, until such point as the animals were ready for the battle, each wearing silver spurs. The ensuing fights were blood-thirsty and violent. One report from the 18th century describes the feathers and blood that flew about, while all around were ‘great shouts of triumph and monstrous wagers’ among the spectators. ”
So much, then, for presuming the Oriental quaintness of cockfighting. I am sorry that we have to deny ourselves the relish of such fantasies. Cockfighting, gaming and gambling was only banned again in the colony of Singapore in 1827, a year after Crawfurd had ended his stint as Resident here and after Singapore had become part of a new entity called the Straits Settlements.
Caught in the act of cockfighting, Campong Manila in Singapore, 1852
It appears that the penchant for cockfighting and betting continued despite the ban however, for in 1852 we hear of the following curious incident, probably one among many. In the equivalent of the ‘Crime Watch’ television program for early colonial Singapore, The Singapore Free Press and Mercantile Advertiser carries a section on local police matters, and in the 21 May 1852 edition reported, that on 17 May,
“Duffadar [ie. Officer] Ameer with 3 peons broke into a house in Campong Manila between 1 and 2 o’clock yesterday afterwards where many persons were cock fighting. The people escaped, leaving behind them 2 cocks which were taken possession of. ”
The Singapore Free Press and Mercantile Advertiser, 21 May 1852.“Duffadar” was the term for a low-ranking police officer and Ameer was likely an Indian Muslim in the employ of the Singapore police force of the time. Meanwhile, “Campong Manila” here refers to Manila Street, which was also known as Campong (Kampong) Serani, or Eurasian Compound/Ward, being near the Portuguese church of St Joseph.
It is not known what became of the two fighting cocks that were confiscated by the police. It is also not known who were involved in the clandestine cockfighting club at Campong Manila – Malays, Bugis, Portuguese Eurasians, or perhaps even Manila men, for it is well known that cockfighting is a popular sport among the Tagalogs of Luzon!
Who knows, given the location of Campong Manila within the general district for European Town and the popularity of the sport even in London, that some Englishmen or Scotsmen may well have been part of the ring…
It should be duly noted that, in the neighbouring kingdom of Riau on Bintan Island south of Singapore, the erstwhile rulers of Singapore had meantime instituted a ban on gambling and cockfighting in the 1850s as part of efforts to enforce higher moral standards and Islamic piety.
Cockfighting show fit for a Maharajah and Duke, 1869
The outlawing of cockfighting in Singapore and in Riau, however, did not mean that it was wiped out as a sport among the Malays. In fact, a very royal cockfight was presented to Queen Victoria’s second son, the Duke of Edinburgh – not in Singapore [not in Riau], but in Johor Bahru, during the Duke’s much-publicised visit to the “Mahajarah of Johore. ” A note needs to be inserted here regarding the “Maharajah of Johore” at that time, Abu Bakar (later Sultan of Johor). The Maharajah, who was actually the Temenggong of Singapore to whom Johor was a fief (and the Maharajah in question is the great-grandfather of Johor’s current Sultan) was walking a tightrope of diplomacy to maintain the independence—or at the very least the autonomy—of his dominion in Johor in the face of British encroachment, and was adroit at presenting to the British the air and trappings of civilisation as understood by European gentlemen and aristocracy. To this end, he organised a grand feast and opulent festivities to receive the Duke in a manner that received glowing praise on the front page of The Straits Times the following day, 11 December 1869. We are informed that following an exchange of flowery accolades, a most sumptuous meal, and a traditional match between a tiger and a buffalo (a duel which received a very extensive account in the article and which is typically conducted as royal entertainment at Javanese palaces), different classes of boats provided entertainment in the afternoon. Then, we read simply that
Excerpt from the front page story in The Straits Times, 11 December 1869, on the reception and entertainment hosted the day before for the Duke of Edinburgh by the Maharajah of Johore (later Sultan Abu Bakar, the son of Singapore’s Temenggong Daeng Ibrahim).“This, with cockfighting, concluded the afternoon’s sports. ”
How ironic then that an event outlawed in Singapore concluded a fine fête fit for royalty! At this moment you would no longer be wondering: why on earth was cockfighting presented for an event with a royal guest, by royal hosts? We already know that cockfighting was also a royal and noble pastime in London. But there is still more to be known about the sport here in the Southeast Asian cultural context…
Cultural significance of cockfighting and the cockerel
To understand the significance of the cockfight we would need to recall that it has a ritual and symbolic dimension over and above a profane one. For instance, in a Balinese temple complex one of the great halls in the first, outermost and hence public, community-oriented courtyard is the wantilan which is where cockfighting matches, called tajen (from taji, the cockspur), are held. The cockfight is here incorporated as part of the temple’s outer layer of activities, though at a distance from the sacred innermost courtyard for the deities. The seventeenth-century Pura Taman Ayun, a temple and water garden of the former royal house of Mengwi, South Bali features a reconstructed wantilan with a diorama of a cockfight.
Wantilan pavilion for cockfighting in the front court of the royal temple and water gardens complex of Pura Taman Ayun, Mengwi, Bali with a life-sized diorama of a cockfight. The temple complex was originally completed in 1740. Alas the wooden structure you see here is a modern one full of clamps and trusses, not the elegance of traditional construction that would require far fewer structural members, and would have given a neat, clean finish. A real pity! Apparently the hall we see here was the result of rebuilding in 1949, following an earthquake in 1917, the royal house of Badung being among those brought within the fold of the Dutch campaign of colonial conquest in Bali in 1906. Photographs taken in July 2013.In the Philippines meanwhile, the cockpit or sabungan continued to be a central socio-cultural institution and remained popular in Tagalog, Bisayan and other Filipino societies. It was not usually connected to the Church, but the cockpit hall was invariably found in the centre of the settlement in the older towns and because of its design as an arena, was often also used for social and political meetings and events (and there is one instance of a Methodist church making use of the cockpit hall for its services!). In Java too, the cockfight had symbolic and ritual associations and featured in folklore and royal epics alike. For instance, a story is recorded of Java’s 13th-century King Anusapati (r. 1227-48), second ruler of Singasari, the Javanese empire that preceded Majapahit, and who was the son of the legendary Queen Ken Dedes, progenitor of the Singasari and Majapahit kings. When Anusapati attended a royal cockfight as part of the royal festivities, at the capital of Singasari near modern-day Malang in East Java, he obeyed the regulation that forbade the carrying of weapons into the cockpit, despite the fact that his mother had implored him not to part with his heirloom kris. As a result, his half-brother Tohjaya was able to kill him by using Anusapati’s own kris. Tohjaya was avenging the death of his father, whom Anusapati had murdered using the very same, cursed kris (curse laid by the krismaker, who was murdered by Tohjaya’s father in a fit of impatience). Anusapati’s act was in turn done to avenge his own father’s death at the hands of Tohjaya’s father, who had used the same kris. Very complicated situation indeed, with a tragic event in the cockpit. Candi Kidal, from the Singasari period, East Java, completed circa 1248 and believed to be associated with a dedicatory image of King Anusapati portrayed, or deified, as Shiva. The Singasari kings were both Buddhist and Saivite. Photo taken in September 2009.
Hayam Wuruk, the ‘Learned Rooster’ – king of Majapahit during Singapura’s 14th century port history
In addition, the cockerel was seen as an admirable creature with a fighting spirit. The king of the East Javanese kingdom of Majapahit who reigned 1350–1389 was named Hayam Wuruk, which literally means ‘Learned Rooster’. Majapahit in the 1300s was a culturally sophisticated and wealthy polity with its capital at Trowulan, East Java, that expanded its political ambit across the Archipelago, sending expeditions to places from Pasai (in Aceh province, northern Sumatra) to the Moluccas (Maluku, the Spice Islands). Hayam Wuruk’s reign coincided with the period of the kingdom of Singapura/Temasek indicated by the archaeological remains at Fort Canning Hill and the Padang area. The name “Tumasik” (Temasek) denoting Singapore was mentioned in the long poem Nagarakrtagama, composed by Majapahit’s court poet Mpu Prapanca in 1365, as one of the places to be conquered. A general view and detail of the ruins of Candi Ngetos in East Java, presumed to be a temple dedicated to to Hayam Wuruk (Learned Rooster), King of Majapahit from 1350 to his passing in 1389. Photographs from the web.
Malay and Bugis treatises on fighting cocks!
Finally, the people of the Archipelago were dead serious about their fighting cocks. We know that there were treatises and written works on these matters, because some of these old manuscripts have survived. There is for instance a Perak Malay treatise on fowls, in no less than 18 chapters, that was collected by W. E. Maxwell in Larut, Perak in 1882 while he was serving as Assistant Resident in Perak from 1878 to 1889. Schools to tackle a new mandate tvo homework help teaching about u. We hear of another text, Jilid tuah ayam sabung or ‘Volume on the Fortunes of Fighting Cocks,’ said to be from Perak, again collected by Maxwell (Ricklefs et. al. , pp. 146 and 166). Then there is also the following work in the Bugis language, catalogued as ‘Treatise on signs of fighting cocks’ (Ricklefs et. al. , p. 33). This manuscript comes from the kingdom of Boné in South Sulawesi, part of the collection of texts kept in the palace library amassed by John Crawfurd (yes, Singapore’s second Resident) when he participated in the British sacking of the Bugis court of Boné in June 1814 at the behest of the British administration of Java under Raffles (Ricklefs et. al. , p. xxiv). Malay and Bugis treatises and works on fighting fowls, ayam sabung. Listed in the catalogue produced by Merle C. Ricklefs, Peter Voorhoeve, and Annabel Teh Gallop, Indonesian manuscripts in Great Britain.
The world premiere of the Bugis epic La Galigo in Singapore – without the cockfight
The cockfight also appears in the Bugis epic La Galigo, which is among the longest epics in the world – there are claims that it is longer than even the Mahabharata, since the twelve volumes that have been compiled and kept in the Leiden University Library in the Netherlands merely forms the first part of the epic and this already amounts to 300,000 lines (the Mahabharata has altogether 100,000 couplets or 200,000 lines). In the La Galigo, which is a myth of origin written in the Bugis lontara’ script in verse form to be sung at ritual occasions, a cockfight becomes the occasion of a dispute between the semi-divine protagonists that then triggered a (short-lived) cosmic battle, for the combatants soon realised they were related. This epic inspired an adaptation to a contemporary theatrical performance by Robert Wilson, and the world premiere of the “I La Galigo” was staged in Singapore, at Esplanade Theatre, in 2003 – though, regrettably, without featuring the cockfight. Enough talking about the cockerel – this ode to the ayam has come to an end.
May your year of the rooster take flight to a feisty, fighting-fit one! *Huat ah!*
References / Further Reading
Chia Joshua Yeong Jia & Nor-Afidah Abd Rahman. “Gambling farms in the 19th century. ” Infopedia. Kern, Rudolf Arnold Kern. Catalogus van de boegineesche, tot den i La Galigo-cyclus behoorende handschriften der Leidsche universiteitsbibliotheek, alsmede van die in andere europeesche bibliotheken. Leiden, Universiteitsbibliotheek, 1939. Kozok, Uli. A 14th Century Malay Code of Laws: The Nītisārasamuccaya. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2015. Ricklefs, Merle, et. al. Indonesian manuscripts in Great Britain: a catalogue of manuscripts in Indonesian languages in British public collections. Jakarta: Ecole franc̦aise d’Extrême-Orient, Perpustakaan Nasional Republik Indonesia, and Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia, 2014. “Sejarah Sabung Ayam Di Nusantara Bukan Sekedar Permainan Semata. ” Phesolo, 2 Dec 2011. “The Prince at Johore. ” The Straits Times, 11 December 1869, page 1.
Leave a Reply