120 likes | 209 Views
X School Paper. Causes of Maria Hertogh Riots. Question 1a Study Sources A and B. How similar are the two sources? Explain your answer. Need to close an open question with the issue: “Causes of the Maria Hertogh Riots”
E N D
X School Paper Causes of Maria Hertogh Riots
Question 1aStudy Sources A and B. How similar are the two sources? Explain your answer. • Need to close an open question with the issue: “Causes of the Maria Hertogh Riots” • The two sources are similar in that they show that the central issue about the Maria Hertogh case stems from the disputed ‘adoption’, but they differ greatly about who was to blame. • Source A blames Aminah for refusing to return Maria, as Aminah did not keep her promise to Adeline Hertogh and “never showed up” to hand over Maria. Hence Adeline Hertogh was essentially accusing Aminah of abducting Maria against the will of the parents. • Source B however gives different testimony, and blames Adeline Hertogh for going against her word. In contrast to Adeline Hertogh’s testimony about allowing Maria to stay with Aminah in Bandung “for three or four days”, Aminah insists that “Mrs Hertogh had given Maria to (her) for adoption in late 1942.”
Question 1a • Moreover, they disagree about the situation that transpired after Maria’s supposed ‘adoption.’ • Source A was very specific about the provision of dates, as seen from “Aminah arrived on 1st January 1943 to fetch Maria…” and “I borrowed a bicycle on 6th January and set out to retrieve my daughter” and said that she was subsequently interned by the Japanese, and therefore was unable to retrieve Maria. • In contrast, Source B provides only vague dates “…in late 1942”, and gave the impression that Mrs Hertogh was fully aware of the adoption and even supported it as they “continued to visit each other frequently after the adoption until Mrs Hertogh left for Surabaya to look for a job at about the end of 1943 or the beginning of 1944.”
Question 1a • Their perspectives are similar as both are one-sided and biased and are intended to elicit sympathy from the judges. • Source A’s portrays Aminah as a liar, and tries to justify her own actions by claiming that she was interned by the Japanese. • Source B too tries to portray herself as being a loving and devoted foster mother who had the full support of the biological mother.
Question 1a • Ultimately their purposes are similar, as in trying to elicit sympathy for themselves and to create a negative impression of the other they are both trying to convince the judge and the wider public that the custody of Maria should be awarded to one of them.
Question 1b: Study Source CHow useful is this source as evidence of the causes of the 1950 race riots in Singapore? EYA. • Useful in explaining causes of the race riots in Singapore. -Points to the failure of the British authorities in failing to prevent the situation. Security was lax as seen from how “the press was not barred from entering the convent grounds”, which also showed that the British had not realised how potentially volatile the situation was. L3/2 -Secondly, it is useful as it explains the role of the Media (both English and Malay language newspapers) in blowing the issue out of proportion and using it to pursue their own agendas. This is seen from how the reports are described as “nothing shy of sensational.” L3/3
Question 1b • However, it is limited in its utility as… • Even though it tries to portray the situation from a largely objective perspective by blaming different parties for causing the riots, it betrays its bias in attributing greater blame to the Malay press. L4/4 • This is seen from how it used the loaded word ‘retorted’ to describe the reaction of the Malay press, as opposed to a more neutral word ‘responded.’ To ‘retort’ suggests that the Malay Press was taking measures that were intended to spite the English press, and therefore puts the former in a bad light. Moreover, there seems to be a measure of sarcasm when it quotes the paper about “Maria’s ‘lonely and miserable’ life in the convent.” L4/5
Question 1b • Cross-ref to determine credibility • Although there are some limitations, I would think that it is ultimately very useful as evidence, as when I cross-refer to Source D, it does reinforce the point that the Malay press was more to blame, as ‘the Dawn’ which was set up by the “Nadra Action Committee” had politicised the issue, and Karim Ghani the leader of the organisation was in fact calling for a jihad, which introduced the notion of using violence to obtain their goals, hence leading to the outbreak of the violent riots. L5/6 • Finally, this source does not have a hidden agenda, and its expressed purpose is to present the conflicting reports by the local newspapers, and is most probably an assessment made by a historian (although the actual provenance is not specified). Hence, it is very useful as evidence as it not only identifies key factors in causing the riots, but has also provided the reliable perspective that the Malay Press was more to blame for causing the 1950 race riots. L5/7
Question 1c: Study Source DWhat does this source tell you about the cause of the riots? Explain your answer, using details of the source and your own knowledge. • It tells me that the cause of the riot was due to the hijacking of a private custody battle by radical Muslims who sought to politicize the issue for their own advantage. L2/2 • This is seen from the fact that they gave extremely high profile to the custody battle, and even set up an organisation called the “Nadra Action Committee” and used its newspaper “the Dawn” to publicise the issue and to rally Malay support. L3/3 • Furthermore, its leader even made an open speech at the Sultan Mosque calling for “the use of violence as a final resort.” I know from my contextual knowledge that the call to jihad was made so as to rally anti-colonial sentiments amongst the Malay community, and to stir up their emotions such that they are ready to take concrete actions against the British authorities. L4/4
Question 1c • The purpose of this source is to pin the blame on the radical Muslims/nationalists for blowing the situation out of proportion and to illustrate how they went about mobilising Malay support using demagogic means, and thus possibly to absolve other parties such as the English Language Papers and the British authorities from blame.
Question 1d: Study Source EDoes this source prove that the British colonial government was responsible for causing the outbreak of the riots? EYA. • Prove = prove beyond a doubt. This question is testing you on reliability. • Looking at source in question: Although the source shows the British colonial government’s culpability in causing the riots, it does not prove that they were solely responsible for it, as there was another more active and potent force that should take greater responsibility for the riots. L3/3 • The source does blame the British colonial government for their insensitivity as seen from “unbelievably, the court threw out the appeal within 5 minutes” and that its “brevity” indicated that “the colonial legal system was biased against Muslims” which thus led to the Malay mob taking matters into their own hands. L3/4
Question 1d • However, there is a sense that the source also identifies a more insidious player that caused the riots. That would be the leaders of the Malay mob, which was described as being ‘restive’ (meaning impatient) had grown to 2,000 to 3,000 in number. That the crowd had grown so quickly is revealing, as it shows that there was some background orchestration that was involved. L4/5 • Cross-reference: This is reinforced by cross-reference to Source D, which identifies the leaders of the Malay mob to be Karim Ghani who had made “an open speech at the Sultan Mosque on 8th December in which he mentioned the use of violence as a final resort.” L4/6 • Purpose: Therefore, the source does not prove that the British government was responsible for causing the outbreak of the riots, as it is written by a historian, and the account is a lot more nuanced than simply to prove that the British government was responsible. Instead, its purpose, rather than to blame one party solely, would be to explain how the confluence of factors, both British insensitivity and Malay belligerence, that led to the outbreak of the riots. L5/7