Events that Mark Important Historical Milestones for the Dayak from 1957 to 2024
 |
| The illustration was created using AI based on text. |
Summarized by: Rangkaya Bada
Release date : June 6, 2025
Abstract
This report chronicles the key historical milestones of the Dayak people from 1757 to 2024, highlighting their cultural evolution, political struggles, and ongoing efforts to preserve identity. From the introduction of the term “Dajak” by Dutch colonial authorities to the Tumbang Anoi Peace Treaty, the establishment of cultural and political organizations, and recent advocacy amidst the development of Indonesia’s new capital (Ibu Kota Nusantara, IKN), the report underscores the resilience and unity of the Dayak people in navigating history.
1. Introduction
The Dayak people, indigenous to Borneo, possess a rich and complex history. From the colonial era to the present day, they have demonstrated resilience in maintaining cultural identity and political agency. This report outlines major historical events shaping Dayak history, based on the research of Masri Sareb Putra, M.A., and other sources.
Read The Confluence of the Sekayam River: A Stunning View and Rich Historical Legends
2. Timeline of Key Events
-
1757: Introduction of the Term “Dajak”
The term "Dajak" first appeared in a report by Hogendorph, a Dutch official in Banjarmasin. This marked the first colonial recognition of Dayak identity. 1894: Tumbang Anoi Peace Treaty
Convened by Damang Batu, this historic meeting of 152 Dayak tribes led to the cessation of headhunting and tribal warfare. The treaty demonstrated the Dayak’s capacity for unity and diplomacy, despite Dutch colonial attempts at control through resource restrictions like the "salt starvation" policy.-
1926: Formation of Pakat Dayak
The Pakat Dayak movement emerged to combat cultural marginalization and promote unity among Dayak communities. -
1945–1946: “Daya in Action” and Partai Persatuan Daya (PPD)
In 1945, a political awakening in Sanggau led to the formation of the PPD on January 1, 1946, marking a new era of organized political representation for the Dayak. -
1992: International Dayak Culture Seminar
Held in Pontianak by the Institute of Dayakology Research and Development (IDRD), the seminar standardized the use of the term “Dayak” and elevated the Dayak identity at the international level. -
2008: Founding of Majelis Adat Dayak Nasional (MADN)
MADN was established in Palangka Raya to formally preserve and promote Dayak customs. -
2017: International Dayak Culture Congress
The Bengkayang Declaration was issued, outlining seven key points to reinforce Dayak unity and rights. -
2019: Founding of Ikatan Cendekiawan Dayak Nasional (ICDN)
The ICDN was formed in Palangka Raya, with its first congress held in Samarinda. A national seminar at Bappenas marked 125 years since the Tumbang Anoi Treaty and addressed the implications of IKN for the Dayak. 2019: For the first time in history, a Dayak native, Alue Dohong, was appointed as Indonesia’s Deputy Minister of Environment and Forestry.
-
2023: Legal Advocacy and IKN Development Concerns
The amendment of Law No. 3 of 2022 through Law No. 21 of 2023 raised serious concerns among the Dayak, who were not adequately consulted in the development of IKN. They began organizing strategic efforts to protect their land and identity.
Read Kabinet tanpa Menyertakan Dayak : Perlu ada Partai Dayak (Lagi)
3. Discussion
The historical trajectory of the Dayak people from 1757 to 2024 is not merely a chronicle of isolated events but rather a dynamic interplay of cultural resilience, political agency, and evolving identity construction in the face of both colonial and postcolonial hegemonies. The Dayak experience, when examined closely, reflects a longue durée of indigenous assertion that challenges the linear, state-centric narratives of Indonesian nationhood. Each historical milestone functions as both a rupture and a continuity—a dialectical process through which the Dayak have negotiated their place in a rapidly transforming world.
3.1 Colonial Classification and the Birth of a Collective Identity
The earliest reference to the term “Dajak” in 1757 by Dutch administrator Hogendorph can be interpreted through the Foucauldian lens of power/knowledge. It marks the beginning of an epistemological violence wherein colonial powers sought to name and thereby control the indigenous “other.” Yet ironically, this colonial act of categorization also planted the seeds of a pan-Dayak identity. What was initially a European exonym became, over time, an anchor for internal solidarity. The Dayak, in appropriating and re-signifying this term, demonstrated an early act of cultural inversion, transforming a tool of domination into a symbol of cohesion.
From a Gramscian perspective, the Dutch deployment of “salt starvation” as a coercive technique during the Tumbang Anoi negotiations reveals the attempt to establish hegemony through the manipulation of essential goods. However, the Dayak’s successful convening of 152 tribal leaders in 1894 and their collective rejection of violent customs underscore an indigenous form of counter-hegemony. The Tumbang Anoi Peace Treaty becomes not only a cessation of internecine warfare but also a foundational moment in Dayak diplomatic history, an embryonic form of what might be termed a Dayak social contract. This demonstrates political maturity and moral foresight far ahead of its time, defying the persistent colonial tropes of the Dayak as “primitive” or “tribal.”
3.2 Ethno-political Awakening and the Shift from Cultural Defense to Political Mobilization
The emergence of Pakat Dayak in 1926 and the subsequent establishment of the Partai Persatuan Daya (PPD) in 1946 should be understood within the broader context of indigenous ethno-political awakening during late colonial rule. These movements are not merely reactive phenomena but strategic articulations of identity and power. Drawing on Benedict Anderson’s notion of imagined communities, one can argue that the Dayak began to imagine themselves not just as fragmented tribes but as a coherent political subject—a people with shared history, culture, and destiny.
This political awakening coincided with the rise of Indonesian nationalism. However, unlike the Javanese-centric nationalist movement, Dayak political consciousness often emerged from the margins. The struggle, therefore, was twofold: to assert autonomy against colonial rule and to resist internal peripheralization within the emerging Indonesian state. The creation of the PPD in the early days of independence represents a rare instance of indigenous political agency asserting itself at a national level, suggesting that the Dayak were not merely passive recipients of independence but active participants in its formulation.
3.3 Institutionalization of Cultural Identity and the Global Discourse of Indigeneity
The institutionalization of Dayak identity through entities such as the Institute of Dayakology Research and Development (IDRD), the Majelis Adat Dayak Nasional (MADN), and the Ikatan Cendekiawan Dayak Nasional (ICDN) reflects a conscious strategy to embed Dayak cultural sovereignty within formal, bureaucratic, and scholarly structures. This mirrors what James Clifford refers to as the articulation of indigeneity—the deliberate positioning of indigenous identity within both local and global contexts.
The 1992 International Dayak Culture Seminar, for instance, did not merely standardize the spelling of “Dayak”; it reasserted the right to self-definition. It was a semiotic and ontological act—one that reclaimed cultural authorship from external narrators. Similarly, the 2017 Bengkayang Declaration outlined a comprehensive vision that synthesized cultural preservation with political advocacy, echoing the aspirations of other indigenous movements across the globe—from the Māori in Aotearoa to the First Nations of Canada.
These moments represent what might be termed rituals of modernity, points where the Dayak engaged modern institutions, technologies, and discourses not as subjects to be assimilated, but as agents capable of shaping their own futures. Such developments defy the narrative of traditionalism often ascribed to indigenous groups, demonstrating instead a savvy engagement with the tools of modernity for cultural and political self-determination.
3.4 The Challenge of IKN and the Struggle for Ontological Security
The development of Ibu Kota Nusantara (IKN) in East Kalimantan and the passage of Law No. 21 of 2023 mark a critical juncture in Dayak history, one where the very notion of ancestral land is under existential threat. This is not merely a spatial or economic issue; it is a matter of ontological security. The Dayak do not relate to land as a commodity but as a sacred continuum of identity, memory, and cosmology. The absence of meaningful Dayak involvement in IKN planning constitutes a profound form of symbolic erasure, a negation of their place in the national imaginary.
Yet, the Dayak response has not been one of despair but of organized resistance and strategic positioning. ICDN’s engagement with national agencies like Bappenas, its scholarly mobilizations, and its invocation of historical legitimacy (e.g., the Tumbang Anoi Treaty) all point to a sophisticated praxis of resistance. This resistance is not predicated on isolationism but on the demand for inclusion on equitable and dignified terms.
Frantz Fanon once wrote that “each generation must, out of relative obscurity, discover its mission.” For the contemporary Dayak generation, this mission appears to be the safeguarding of cultural sovereignty in an era of extractivist development. Their advocacy seeks not only legal recognition but a reconfiguration of the Indonesian development paradigm, one that moves beyond Java-centrism and embraces the archipelago’s true pluralism.
3.5 Toward a New Social Contract
The Dayak experience compels us to rethink the structure of Indonesian nationhood. If Indonesia is to evolve into a truly inclusive state, it must move beyond tokenistic multiculturalism and toward what Charles Taylor calls deep recognition, a recognition that does not merely tolerate difference but sees it as foundational to national identity. The Dayak, as co-architects of the nation, must be accorded not just space in policy but voice in shaping its epistemologies, priorities, and values.
This implies a new social contract, one in which indigenous epistemologies are not subordinated to developmentalist rationalities but engaged as alternative frameworks of sustainability, governance, and ecological ethics. The tembawang (customary forest gardens), for instance, are not “backward” practices but sophisticated models of permaculture that modern agronomy has only recently begun to understand.
The Dayak historical journey from colonial classification to contemporary cultural diplomacy reveals a pattern of strategic adaptation, epistemic resilience, and political innovation. Their narrative, oo often marginalized, offers profound insights into how indigenous communities can thrive not despite modernity, but by reshaping it on their own terms. As Indonesia looks toward its future with IKN, it must do so with a reverent acknowledgment of the histories and aspirations of its first peoples, the rightful heirs of Borneo.
4. Conclusion
From colonial classification in 1757 to contemporary struggles for inclusion in the development of IKN, the Dayak people have consistently asserted their rights and identity. Their journey illustrates not only the challenges faced by indigenous peoples but also their determination to remain central in the narrative of Indonesia’s history and future. Recognizing the contributions and rights of the Dayak is essential to building a just and pluralistic Indonesia. *)