CHAPTER ONE:  INTRODUCTION

1.1. Introduction and research problem.

This M.A. thesis is based on field research done in Indonesia from August until early December 1996. During classes that I took in the previous years I became interested in the island Siberut. Siberut is the largest of the Mentawai Island situated approximately a hundred kilometres to the south-west of Padang, the capital of the province of West Sumatra. It is approximately 4,480 square kilometres wide, covered with tropical rainforest, and rather hilly. Rain falls almost every day causing large parts of the island to be swampy which makes travelling through the jungle on foot quite difficult. The island is interwoven by many rivers which form the main infrastructure. It is populated by about 22,000 Mentawaians and about 2,000 Minangkabau from nearby Sumatra, and smaller numbers of other groups such as Batak and Niassans.

Two of my professors, who have also done research on Siberut, told me about the tourism that had recently started to develop. Some groups deep in the heartland of the island have become the focus of organized tours from Sumatra. Minangkabau tour guides pick up tourists in Bukittinggi and take them by ferry to Siberut where they travel for about a week before returning to Sumatra[1].

My main research subject was: what are the social and cultural impacts of tourism on Mentawaian society?

This problem was restructured into several research questions:

• Who are the different parties involved, and what is their role?

• What internal differences in daily life on Siberut can be distinguished between the pre-tourist period and present day?

• How can these differences be explained?

• How is this tourism likely to develop?

1.2. The traditional situation.

In the following chapters I will frequently refer to what I for want of a better word choose to call 'the traditional situation'. With the term traditional situation I refer to the 'classic' Mentawaian way of life. It is not my intention to imply that any group on Siberut still lives in the way they did several hundred years ago. Several groups try to hold on to their traditional way of life as best they can but every group has been influenced by outside forces in one way or another. A short description of the traditional situation will now follow[2].

The Mentawaians are divided in patrilineal groups, called uma. Each group consists of 15 to 50 members, divided into several

families. Marriage is virilocal and brides are found among other groups. Each group has its own territory which usually borders on one or more rivers. The group builds one large communal house near the river, also called uma, where the members gather for rituals and feasts. When no such occasions are taking place most of the families live in sapou: family houses where pigs and chickens are kept. Usually these are situated in the jungle at some distance from the uma.

Inter-uma rivalry is closely interwoven in society, although traditional forms of rivalry (headhunting and armed warfare) were abolished early this century. Group status can still be achieved through the height of bride prices that a group receives and through the height of fines paid to solve inter-group disputes. Both bride prices and fines are not fixed but subject to a long process of negotiation[3]. Payment is made in sago palms, pigs, and chickens, complemented with imported goods[4].

Sago, taro and bananas make up the staple food, supplemented with the meat of domesticated pigs and chickens and that of wild animals caught in the jungle. The jungle also provides a huge variety of edible or otherwise useful products.

Traditional clothing consists of a loincloth made out of treebark for men and a skirt made out of banana leaves for women. Both sexes wear intricate tattooed patterns all over their bodies and chisel their teeth into sharp points. The tattoos and pointed teeth are signs that one has reached maturity. The hair is worn long and tied in a knot at the back of the head.

Everybody performs all different tasks possible. Labour specialisation is absent. Only two special functions can be distinguished; the rimata and the kerei, both relating to the traditional belief. This belief, called arat sabulungan, divides the world in to a world of the physically present and a world of spirits[5]. Both share the same spaces, but are usually not aware of each others presence. Spirits include souls of the dead, nature spirits and the souls of living creatures. In Mentawaian cosmology living people area kind of 'two-in-one' entities. Every person has a soul that sits on his head: a simagere[6]. This soul wanders off continuously, for example when a person sleeps, thus causing dreams. The simagere does not need the body to survive, but the body does need the simagere. If it stays away too long the body will fall ill and eventually it will die. Therefore it is necessary to make sure the simagere enjoys being with its body. The body is decorated with flowers, jewels and tattoos, one is pleasant to other people and avoids sudden changes in daily life that may unsettle the simagere[7]. Spirits may attempt to influence one's simagere. Therefore it is essential not to cause their anger and show them respect. For example, skulls of animals eaten are given a special place in the house. The idea is that this honour will make the souls of the animals killed forget about the 'crime' of killing and forgive the people who ate their bodies. It is hoped that the souls of the dead animals will like the house so much that they will call upon living relatives to join them, which means more meat for the inhabitants of the house.

Kerei are needed to maintain a good relationship between the two spheres. They are best described as shamans. Kerei are able to communicate with spirits. They return stray souls that have left their bodies, drive away evil spirits, and have an extensive knowledge of herbal healing. Both men and women can become kerei although most kerei are male.

When needed, a great ceremony is held that lasts for weeks: the puliaijat. The purpose of the ritual is to restore the situation in its proper condition after some great change has come to pass[8]. Parts of the time the uma is completely closed to foreigners. At these rituals the rimata is needed. He is the one with the greatest knowledge on the proper conduct of rituals and leads such occasions[9].

1.3. Indonesian policies on Siberut.

At Independence in 1945 Siberut swiftly was integrated in the new Indonesian state[10]. Developments were deemed necessary in the fields of nutrition, health, housing, education, and a sense of 'Indonesianness' had to be brought about. Much attention was given to the conversion of the Mentawaians to an official religion[11]. Individual local government officials turned the civilization process into a matter of personal prestige thus causing the applied pressure to fluctuate between extremities at irregular intervals. Some Minangkabau, both traders and government officials, actively promoted the introduction of Islam. The Italian Catholic missionaries were joined by German Protestant missionaries who in turn introduced their faith. At the time, no official national policy towards groups such as the Mentawaians existed but several elements of the traditional Mentawaian culture hampered the development process and a provincial policy to do away with these was developed:

- Founding larger villages while undoing the closed uma structure.

- Abolishing the traditional religion, together with all its customs and associated objects.

- Changing the traditional systems of justice and bridesprice payment.

- Raising the level of development by among others the introduction of rice cultivation.

- Prohibiting 'primitive heathen customs': pointing one's teeth, wearing loincloths or leafskirts, having tattoos made or men growing long hair (Persoon, 1994:227-9).

A police force of over 60 officers was stationed at the island to enforce the government policies. Pressing the population to change as quickly as possible.

New villages were founded by ordering all uma to leave their old territory and join in the construction of new communal villages at easily accessible spots. In this way all 300 uma in South Siberut were combined into 30 villages. If an uma failed to obey this order their old houses were demolished by the police.

In the villages daily life was controlled by government officials who had to look after the enforcements of the prohibitions and the

successful developing of modern Indonesian life on Siberut. The villagers were allowed to visit their old houses because they were still depending on their sago palms and pigs for daily nutrition. In practice this control left much to be desired. At locations all over the island the traditional way of life was continued up to varying extends. Some groups even returned to their old uma permanently, but these were few.

At the same time the persecution of arat sabulungan started. Both by the government and the missionaries arat sabulungan was seen as an obstruction to any form of modernization. It formed the essence of the traditional way of life and therefore was the key to change. The main focus was on the kerei who were seen as informal leaders that undermined government rule. They were supposed to keep the population ignorant, scared and non-productive while enriching themselves through the fees they received for their services. If they could be abolished, the entire system of enormous feasts and long periods of 'extreme laziness' would collapse[12].

Arat sabulungan was officially forbidden in 1954. In that year every Mentawaian had to choose between Protestantism and Islam within three months. Arat sabulungan had to be destroyed if need be by the police[13]. Objects related to the religion were burned. Because of the importance of pigs in Mentawaian society many people chose to become Protestants.

Giving way to the pressure the old faith was denounced although often only nominally. Ceremonies were moved to the uma and sapou out of sight of the authorities. Infrequent attempts were made by the authorities to do away with this. Objects found relating to arat sabulungan were confiscated and burned while people that took part in ceremonies were punished. Depending on the level of persecution of the moment arat sabulungan rituals were carried out more or less openly.

Later, the Indonesian government developed a nationwide policy to modernize the 'backward' communities living within the state. These groups were classified as masyarakat terasing; 'isolated groups'[14]. This policy listed the following goals:

-Permanent settlements in sufficiently large social units.

-Increase in production capacity.

-Expansion of social life outside the family group.

-Enhancement of rational and dynamic mental capacities.

-Uprooting of the tribal world view and way of life.

-Development of norms similar to the rest of the country.

-Increased consciousness of state and nation.

-development of a monotheistic religious life.

(Persoon, 1998:290)

The Department of Social Affairs was responsible for bringing about the changes required. This was done through successive projects with a five year time span. The base of these projects was formed by resettlement villages; newly built villages where the area's inhabitants were assembled to facilitate contact and control. The resettlement project villages founded by the Department of Social Affairs were known as PKMT villages[15]. As soon as the villages were built and inhabited the introduction of the development program was started under the guidance of government officials.

On Siberut the PKMT projects started in 1971[16]. Villages were constructed by workers from Sumatra and consisted of one or two straight roads with uniform houses on either side at a set distance, a church, a mosque, a school, and a market building.

Every family was given agricultural tools, some seedlings and a supply of medicines. The success of the projects largely depended on the individual willingness of the Mentawaian villagers to cooperate. Most of these villages had a larger or smaller nucleus of permanent inhabitants. The other villagers mainly lived in their old houses in the jungle, occasionally returning to the village.

This situation was possible because the official local control intended was virtually non-existent. The officials left in charge of the villages lived in a difficult situation, being muslims and non-Mentawaian they were socially isolated in the villages. Many of the officials spent as little time as possible in their villages, preferring to stay in Muara Siberut or Padang.

Due to difficulties such as these it usually takes more than five years for the programs to reach their goals. If the goals are reached the department leaves the responsibility for the area to the local and regional government.

Meanwhile extensive logging projects had started. The logging industry in Indonesia is an economical sector of importance with companies all over the archipelago[17]. The primary rainforest covering Siberut soon attracted their attention and around 1973 the entire island had been given out in concessions. Most of the employees came from outside Siberut. Only few Mentawaian men worked in the logging industry[18].

Another development organisation, the OPKM[19], was started by the governor of West Sumatra in 1970. This organisation was deemed necessary for multiple reasons: the development of the population still needed much work, the progress of the logging needed to be secured and the military strategic position of the islands required swift modernization. As part of their activities eight other resettlement villages were built with money made by the logging[20]. The OPKM villages are outlined similar to the PKMT villages, and here an official was appointed for the further development of the community as well. In 1981 the OPKM was abolished again because its governmental structure proved to difficult to maintain.

From the seventies onward Siberut slowly became internationally known as documentaries and publications reached the Western audience[21]. The importance of Siberut as the resort of various endemic species of monkeys made the island unique even within the vast amounts of nature that abound on the Indonesian islands[22]. It was felt that Siberut's unique nature and culture made conservation desirable[23]. A small nature reserve of 6,500 ha was established in 1976. In 1980 a World Wildlife Fund project proposal "Saving Siberut: a Conservation Master Plan" was presented[24]. This plan aimed at conserving Siberut's nature and culture while opting alternative means of socio-economic development. One of the options mentioned was tourism (pp 102-7). The plan was discussed at a symposium in Padang in 1981 with government officials, scientists, and representatives of Siberut's population attending. Possible negative effects were acknowledged, as was the need for the indigenous people to partake in tourism and share in its revenues[25]. Siberut was even declared a Man and Biosphere reserve by UNESCO in the same year. The involvement of the World Wildlife Fund and international interest the nature reserve was extended to 132,900 ha in 1982. However, after international attention decreased the Indonesian department for Nature Conservation proved incapable of coping with the powerful logging companies and logging went on with little respect for the boundaries of the nature reserve. Other plans considered Siberut a good location for transmigration or for the establishment of oil palm plantations.

Tourism slowly started to develop, but lack of transport, bureaucratic formalities that had to be taken care of in Padang and the grim character of the government's presence on the island made it hard for tourists to experience the traditional Mentawaian culture they came looking for. Around 1987 tourism to Siberut changed considerably. Ferry departures took place on a regular base, while young Minangkabau entrepreneurs began to take tourists from Bukittinggi and Lake Toba to Siberut. This quickly became a success, as many tourists proved interested in a short tour. Rules for visiting the island became more supple. Visiting permits could be obtained in Muara Siberut and the police escort was abolished. Control of 'primitive customs' was lessened, as these were the main aspects that attracted tourists. Even though tourism developed mainly outside of government control -notwithstanding the extensive planning that took place- financial benefits and the international positive appreciation this policy earned the local government appeared sufficient to allow the situation to continue.

In 1992 president Suharto surprised the world by withdrawing all logging concessions and declaring roughly half the island a national park. Various alternative sources of economic revenues were suggested to replace the cancelled logging activities. Suggested sources include improved agroforestry and agriculture, improved animal husbandry, ecotourism, and handicraft production (Ministry of Forestry, 1995b:51-61). In 1992 the Asian Development Bank made a large loan available for biodiversity conservation in Indonesia. the Ministry of Forestry and the Asian Development Bank started a biodiversity project on Siberut and Flores, supported with additional funds from the Indonesian government. During 1994 teams of consultants came to the island to develop an integrated management plan for Siberut based on the Integrated Protected Area approach: linking conservation aims with local development needs through a process of participatory planning (see Ministry of Forestry, 1995b:3-8). Several activities were mentioned in the plan to upgrade tourism including the training of local guides, improving tourism facilities on the island, providing information about the island and the establishment of a conservation and development fund to ensure that the entire population would benefit from the tourism and not just the settlements that were regularly visited. In 1995 the project was implemented. An extensive complex of buildings in Maileppet make up the project centre. However, during my fieldwork in 1996 I did not notice any impact from the project.

1.4. Masyarakat terasing.

Within the Indonesian state live several groups that are described as 'suku terasing' or 'masyarakat terasing'[26], here translated as isolated communities[27]. As mentioned before the population of Siberut is regarded as such. In this paragraph this term and the national policies towards groups regarded as masyarakat terasing are discussed.

The Department of Social Affairs has issued several definitions of the term that all more or less come down to the same. Used here is the one cited by Koentjaraningrat (1993:9):

...[isolated communities are] communities that are isolated with limited capacities of communication with other communities that are more developed, the nature of which is that they are getting behind and staying behind in the process of developing life economically, politically, psychologically, culturally, religiously and ideologically...[28]

Persoon points out how the groups that are regarded as the combined masyarakat terasing are what are defined in most other countries as 'tribal societies'. This term is used for groups that live in the margins of the national society. They are economically, culturally, religiously and politically self sufficient and thus retain a certain amount of independence (Wertheim, 1993:21-2; Kloos, 1991:22-4; Persoon, 1994:2-5).

The isolation that is spoken of in Koentjaraningrat's definition should therefore not be understood as geographical isolation. Hardly any of the groups considered masyarakat terasing are still isolated from the rest of the world in this sense, although their habitat often takes the form of jungle, or rugged mountain terrain. Traders, government representatives, health workers, and tourists have reached the masyarakat terasing and frequent contact with the outside world is maintained. The isolation meant is isolation from the Indonesian cultural main, although isolated groups do not experience this as such. As a result of this isolation, the government argues, the groups in question are incapable of recognizing how primitive their way of life really is (Schefold, 1998:270).

The definition given and the criteria used cause the groups labelled masyarakat terasing to be culturally and ethnically diverse[29]. It has been tried to combine individually unique groups through mutual similarities into one big group, thus separating Indonesian society into two parts: a modern, and a not yet adapted part, instead of distinguishing between a multitude of culturally and ethnically diverse groupsin the not yet adapted group.

National identity is favoured by such a rudimentary division of society, but it hampers a truly precise difference. The current division allows for backward communities of modernized ethnic groups to adhere to the definition of masyarakat terasing as well, although the group as a whole may well be considered to be modern (Koentjaraningrat, 1993:11-2; Persoon, 1994:65-7).

To establish whether a group is an isolated community, government departments consider several criteria such as housing, food, health, education, clothing and religion. The Department of Social Affairs is responsible for the proper incorporation of these societies into the modern Indonesian society. A copy of the program used states four points:

• Improvement of the social and cultural circumstances of the masyarakat terasing through resettlement programs, thus providing for a more fixed and better daily life.

• Improving social-economical circumstances by obtaining a fixed mode of existence, productive labour and the introduction of the market system.

• Introducing a system of government within the context of one people and one state.

• Protecting the environment through sedentary settlement[30].

• (Persoon, 1994:72).

The quality of life of the masyarakat terasing should be improved to such a degree that it is equal to the standard set by the majority of the Indonesian population. First attention is given to basic human needs as food, health, housing and education. This policy is introduced through the PKMT program noted in 1.3. The success of the methods used is however disputed. A publication of the Indonesian Ministry of Forestry argues that to allow for a successful introduction of the policy close assistance should be given to the people in question not only by the Department of Social Affairs but also by other sectors involved with the points of the policy (Ministry of Forestry,1995b:98-9). At least for Siberut this is not the case.

1.5. Location of the research.

My research was conducted on the Indonesian islands Sumatra and Siberut.

On Sumatra preliminary research was done in the cities of Padang and Bukittinggi. I returned to both cities in between stays on Siberut.

On the Mentawai islands my research was limited to South Siberut, due to the short time available and the practical fact that most tourists only visit the Rereiket area in South Siberut. In and around this area I visited several villages and settlements.

On Siberut I first went to Salappa, a village to the northeast of the Rereiket area. Salappa was built about ten years ago. The people inhabiting the region were ordered to abandon their houses and come to a resettlement village close to Muara Siberut. This met with much resistance and discontentment. They would be too far away from their sago and pigs to easily supply in daily nutrition. The villagers offered to build a village themselves on a spot near the river. This was allowed provided they would keep their pigs outside the village. There are about 30 houses built along two streets that cross each other in the middle of the village. The houses are mostly built according to Mentawaian architecture. The catholic missionaries have built a school and a church, whereas a mosque built by the government is in a state of disrepair.

Salappa has a population of about 450; 150 adults and 300 young children. Most of the older children are missing because they are at school in Muara Siberut or Padang. They only return to Salappa during the holidays.

Salappa is visited by tourists about two times every month. Only a few guides go there. Although many people wear Western style clothes most older men and all kerei wear loincloths and many old people have tattoos. In the vicinity the groups now inhabiting the village still have their uma and many families have sapou.

The main source of income in Salappa is the sale of sago trees to a factory near Puro. The revenues are used to buy daily needs in Muara Siberut and to pay the school fee of the children that are in Muara Siberut or Padang.

From Salappa we went on to Tatebburuk. Tatebburuk is not a village but an area. Until 1983 the people here lived in uma and sapou spread through the area. In 1983 everybody was summoned to come to the newly built resettlement village Puro I. Most did, but some went only halfway, where they built a little village near the river. Some years later another resettlement village was built next to Puro I: Puro II. The village Tatebburuk was abandoned and everybody moved to Puro II. Life in Puro II proved hard without money and many people longed to return to their sapou and uma. Many of the inhabitants of Puro I and Puro II chose to spend as much time as possible back in Tatebburuk. Some have gone as far as to live there again almost permanently, only returning to fulfil their gotong royong duties[31].

Tatebburuk is on the route of tourists going to Salappa. Three houses in the area are visited by tourists who stay mostly just one day to continue to Salappa the next.

Built along the Siberut river Puro I and Puro II were the next villages I visited. Two resettlement villages of 100 identical, government built houses along a long straight footpath. The footpath leads to Muara Siberut, which is only half an hour on foot away. Since the difference between the two villages is strictly administrative they will be considered as one village called Puro (as it is in daily life) from this point onwards.

The villagers have different lifestyles. Here live people from Tatebburuk and the Rereiket area who are rarely in the village, and there are those who have become pious Christians, both Catholic and Protestant, and broke with tradition. These people work in Muara Siberut or in the sago factory making them economically independent from their former jungle homes. Some have completely sold off their sago palms to the factory. The recent toleration towards Mentawaian tradition has created a third group of inhabitants that is in between the first two groups. In Puro every form of Mentawaian culture is allowed by the kepala dusun[32]. Although it is rare to see men in loincloth many young men wear tattoos albeit not the traditional patterns but tattoos depicting more concrete images. Kerei are frequently called upon in case of illness and ceremonies are held. During my stay members of the Samarurok uma had started the construction of the first uma to be built in the village.

The resettlement houses are small measuring only five by six metres. The people that live here permanently have added new rooms to the back of their houses or have constructed new houses altogether, pulling down the resettlement houses first. Others, who are rarely there take little care of their houses. As such, the village is a mixture of large, inhabited houses and small empty ones.

The sago factory[33] makes Puro a busy place. People from the interior of the island come to the factory to sell sago and shop in Muara Siberut.

Schoolchildren make up a large part of the population. They go to any of the schools in Muara Siberut and rent the houses of those families that live in the jungle[34].

The villages are not very interesting for tourists. Consequently they are never visited by any although the Puroans see all tourist speedboats pass by over the river.

Nearby Muara Siberut is the biggest harbour village on the island. Around 1,000 people live here, mostly Minanangkabau fishermen and traders. No Mentawaians live in the village. Several small shops can be found in the village, as can a few restaurants, all governmental services for South Siberut, and all schools above the level of sekolah dusun[35]. It is an altogether different world from the rest of the island. Probably because the focus of the Minangkabau population is more on West Sumatra than on Siberut.

At the edge of the village, on the way to Puro, the Italian Catholic mission is located. The mission runs a hospital and a school complex. A German Protestant mission used to be situated near the Catholic one, but is now abandoned.

Muara Siberut is the place where all tourists arrive on the island, and where they leave again. Most tourists do not see more of the village than the restaurant where they await the ferry on the night of departure.

The Sakaliou area is like a different world from Muara Siberut. Theoretically it does not exist, its history is somewhat like Tatebburuk. Sakaliou is the name of the uma inhabiting the area. The group numbers 58 members divided over six extended families: five brothers and one uncle. Theoretically, the Sakaliou live in the resettlement village of Madobag, about an hour's walk away[36]. As soon as they dared they left again and returned to their old houses. they built one uma and five major sapou. Now all the group lives in the jungle, some families have left children in their houses in Madobag where they go to school. The Sakaliou are visited by tourists almost daily. Each house is visited by up to as much as three groups a week for the busiest household. The Sakaliou consider themselves and the Sakuddei the most traditional uma on the island.

1.6. Research methods used.

During the research I continuously worked together with an interpreter, Yulianus Saguluw[37]. A native Mentawaian who was born in Tatebburuk near the Rereiket area. Yulianus's company was very useful. He had been all over South Siberut and knew the places and people I wanted to visit well. Yulianus often worked as a 'local guide' for the Minangkabau tour guides, of which he knew many personally.

An interpreter was essential since many, especially the elder, Mentawaians do not speak Bahasa Indonesia. The groups in Rereiket that try to continue their traditional way of life often keep their children away from the schools in the villages. Here an interpreter proved invaluable[38].

Most information I collected through verbal communication, Both everyday conversation and interviewing. The favourite pastime of most Mentawaians is to sit on the porch of the house, smoke, if available drink coffee, but above all: talk! Every conceivable subject proved interesting to start a conversation. Being a foreigner yet able to speak Bahasa Indonesia was a big advantage; both on Siberut and in West Sumatra people were eager to engage me in conversation. Especially in the beginning I learned a lot by ordinary conversations. In Padang I talked to many people about Siberut, tourism, and tourism to Siberut. In this way I formed a theoretical base on the Minangkabau view of the matter. My first weeks on Siberut I repeated this, but now with mostly Mentawaian informants. Often, on Siberut, I used this method to ask questions without giving the impression that something as 'official' as an interview was going on.

The interviews that are printed in chapters four to six were all conducted in an 'official' way, by which I mean that the informants knew that I conducted an interview and for what purpose. Instead of recording everything I wrote down all sentences that were said in keywords, which I used to write out the entire interview directly after the session had finished. This method worked remarcably well. The necessity of interpretation ruled out the possibility of capturing the informant's exact words yet Yulianus' translations were sufficient precise to capture the exact meanings[39].

The second method I used was unstructured interviewing. I had a list of topics that I covered with every informant. Questions were phrased on the spot. I felt it would be a shame to miss out on information because I did not ask the right trigger question in a structured interview.

I needed people to open up. Western people are often seen as tourists and indirectly linked to the Minangkabau tourist guides. It is feared that if these guides find out that a Mentawaian complained about them to a tourist, that Mentawaian will be excluded from the tourist business. I needed to gain people's trust, firstly by making sure it was understood that I was not a tourist, secondly by explaining that I was not there to report to any Minangkabau guide.

The best way to gain people's trust proved to be through participant observation. I lived with Mentawaian families, shared their food, and sometimes helped out with the daily work. I tried to become as much as possible an ordinary member of the household although I miss the skills to be truly useful in most of the daily work done by Mentawaian men. I am a terrible hunter, far too noisy and too slow, but I sometimes chopped firewood, provided company when the chicken needed to be fed, or assisted in activities like playing domino or chess. While staying with the Sakaliou I helped in the construction of a new house. I took part in daily life as much as I could, witnessing ceremonies, deaths, helping out with illnesses and sharing in the spoils of successful hunts.

Next, I used the unorthodox method of covert observation on three occasions. Here I mean observing a group of people without letting them know that they were being observed. I had not planned on this, but it was unavoidable. Later I will return to this method in detail.

I started to collect everything I could find related to tourism on Siberut, both with regard to the Mentawaian vision and to the image shown by the Indonesian government. A method I used to bring an informal conversation to the subject of tourism was to show postcards that I bought in Padang and Bukittinggi that depicted Mentawaians in traditional dress and uma. Everybody would have an opinion about those and gladly discuss tourism.

Citra Mandiri in Padang keeps a record of all the newspaper articles published regarding the Mentawai Islands. I spent time doing literature research both at their office and at the library of the Universitas Andalas (UNAND).

Some informants clearly could offer more information than others and some situations proved so important that I gave them special attention. Of these I made case studies of which several will be discussed in the following chapters.

1.7. Division of the thesis.

After the introduction of Siberut in this chapter, the theoretical assumptions used regarding tourism and ethnicity are next discussed in chapter two. An attempt is made to explain tourism as a social phenomenon and to distinguish between different groups involved in the process, each group with its own specific role. This distinction of different groups is used throughout the following chapters to create an image that is as complete as possible.

Chapter three deals with the initial implementation of the different roles in tourism regarding the situation on Siberut. This is done from a historical point of view in which the development of social relations between the different groups is the main focus of attention. Images of the other groups are introduced using this historic context.

In chapters four to six all four groups distinguished in chapter two are separatedly discussed. Chapter four relates the role and views of the Mentawaian population regarding tourism. Explanations of tourism, benefits and losses are discussed, as are images of the self and of the other groups involved. No tourism survives without tourists: they are discussed in chapter five. Attention is given to their expectancies, experiences and impressions afterwards. A discussion of the type of tourist that visits Siberut concludes this chapter.

Tourist guides are the subject of chapter six. The opportunities of the profession and the image of guides in Minangkabau -and to a lesser extend, Indonesian- society. The organisation of guides in Bukittinggi and on Siberut is explained, as are the working conditions of the Siberut guides in general. Images considering Mentawaians and tourists are discussed, as is the image of Mentawai as found in Minangkabau society.

In line with the expanding view of the situation -from Siberut to west Sumatra- Siberut is discussed as a part of the Indonesian state in chapter seven. National policies regarding tourism and tribal societies are briefly explained, and the image of Siberut as a tourist destination as given in Indonesian media is explored. The control of "unity" over Indonesia's "diversity" is discussed regarding tourism. The implementation of alternative development plans for Siberut and possible consequences conclude this chapter.

Chapter eight consists of the final conclusions. Here findings and theoretical assumptions as discussed in chaper two are compared.

 CHAPTER TWO. TOURISM: WHERE OPINIONS DIFFER

"Tiele, turis!![40]", upon arrival in a new Mentawaian village or house, we inevitably were greeted with these words, expressing amazement, joy and expectation all in one. A 'turis' in the Mentawaian context, is a white person, both male or female. Obviously, I was explained, white people are tourists. Why else would they be on Siberut?

This train of thought immediately words a frustration that many present day anthropologists have to deal with[41]. The times of undisturbed communities that had limited contact with the Western world before an anthropologist arrived to set up camp and write an ethnography are over. Nowadays an anthropologist striving to become accepted into a community first has to lose his immediately ascribed image as a tourist by patiently and frequently explaining his motives to newly met people. Tourists and anthropologists do however have one major similarity: a shared interest in 'the other'; places and cultures that are different from one's own society.

Only in the last decades of this century travelling became accessible to large groups of Western society due to increasing economic prosperity in most industrialized nations and an ever expanding infrastructure. The number of tourists is growing rapidly.

In the present day few places on earth indeed are not yet discovered as tourist destinations[42]. Huige (1995) wrote[43]:

While you are reading this, accountants from Amsterdam are crawling over weak rope bridges in Yucatan, mailmen from Aberdeen are floating on hang-gliders over Alaska, and nurses from Kansas are hurdling themselves into swirling rivers on Kalimantan.

Tourism has many faces and comes in many different varieties[44]. Here emphasis will be placed on the up and coming tourism to 'pristine' hard to reach, remote destinations. Tourist interest for unspoiled nature and unspoiled cultures is growing. Western (1993:7-8) considers this to be a logical development. Tourists from the industrialized and urbanized Western countries are looking for "the great frontier" between civilization and wilderness. Travels to far away destinations in search of this frontier are not new in Western culture, but have for a long time only been possible for an elite group. A hundred years ago people undertaking a safari in Africa where not likely to run into each other, whereas a friend of mine who works as a guide on photo safaris in Africa told me how often three or four jeeps filled with tourists are parked around one sleeping, bored lion.

As a consequence of such tourism fragile ecosystems become endangered or are even destroyed. From a conservationist's approach such tourism is considered a harmful development. Few countries are however in the position to declare part of their territories protected nature areas. Economic interests often outweigh conservation attempts. Ecotourism was developed as a reaction to the potential destructive dangers brought about by tourism. Western cites the definition given by The Ecotourism Society:

"Ecotourism is responsible travel to natural areas which conserves the environment and improves the welfare of local people[45]."

Specific focal points must receive attention in the development of ecotourism. Western mentions:

• Ecology: how many visitors can an area handle? Tourism is developing much faster than the ability to measure the damage done to the area visited.

• Aesthetics: Apart from ecological damage impact can be measured by what tourists will tolerate. When an area becomes too crowded it will loose its "wild frontier" attraction. Tourists paying high prices for their travels are not willing to compete with other tourists over a good spot to photograph a lion.

• Economy: are the revenues of maintaining a protected area for tourism purposes worth keeping up the protection? How depending is the national economy on tourism revenues? Tourism is a vulnerable industry that is easily influenced by wars, terrorism or environmental disasters.

• Social focus: conservation and tourism that denies the rights and concerns of local communities is self-defeating. Tourism can destroy ancient cultures, ruin indigenous economies, and can easily be disrupted by a few angry locals.

Following the slogan of "nature, use it or loose it" (Persoon, 1998a:317) ecotourism aims at a simultaneous combination of environmental protection and economical profit generation by developing tourism while keeping its impact as low as possible (Western: 8-10; Persoon, 1998a:317-9). As a consequence, the number of tourists admitted to an area is low and admittance fees are high. Low numbers cause an area to be experienced as exotic and pristine with a high 'great frontier' level, while high prices ensure profit. Many such destinations are located in development countries whose main interest is not conservation but economical development. Profit therefore is a main requirement.

The combination of environmental conservation and tourism remains subject to discussion: the initial idea might work yet constant quality needs to be maintained. Haywood's (1986) warnings how tourism areas tend to change for the worse over the years are a good example of the dangers that opponents of ecotourism foresee:

-Pristine beauty becomes soiled with tacky development.

-Highbrow tourists are replaced by lowbrow tourists.

-Residents initially enamoured with the industry become disenchanted.

-Eventually tourism with all its inherent promises self-destructs.[46]

Another kind of tourism that focuses on the authentic conditions at the final frontier is ethnotourism; tourism aimed at visiting societies that continue their traditional way of life as much as possible despite globalization or governmental attempts at modernization. Such groups often are ethnic minorities in a larger nation state. So-called 'tribal societies' qualify easily for ethnotourism. The point of ethnotourism is not so much that people put on a show to please an audience that afterwards returns home or goes to the beach. In ethnotourism the ethnicity of the group visited is the main purpose of the trip. It is tourism that needs the uniqueness of the culture visited to survive, and might in this way even be psychologically beneficial and protecting to the culture visited as such.

In my opinion successful ethnotourism needs the same conditions as ecotourism does: small numbers of visitors disrupt life as little as possible and high prices make what is only too often officially considered a backward community economically important to the state[47].

Ethnicity as a concept sprang to life when it became obvious that different cultural groups would not dissolve into one homogeneous blend. Schefold writes how:

"...the old 'melting pot' theory had proved wrong; many indications pointed to the fact that forms of social life which tended to be regarded as relics of an earlier age, and therefore as doomed to extinction, were capable of renewing and transforming themselves...this phenomenon...soon was to be labelled 'Ethnicity' (Schefold, 1988b:231)."

Brass (1985:17) proposes that ethnicity is a system of identification in which symbols are used by groups or communities to create internal cohesion and to distinguish the group from other ethnic groups. If we take his lead it follows that contact between differing ethnic groups is vital for ethnic identity. The aspects regarded as significant by a group can change according to the situation. Any form of interaction between different ethnic groups may cause changes of some kind in one or the other. Therefore ethnicity can not be explained by tradition only. Barth (1969:15) argues that the critical focus of investigation should not be on the "cultural stuff" defining the group, but on the ethnic boundary that encloses it. The ethnic boundary is the place where members of different cultures are confronted with each others systems, and where they are confronted with the contents of their own culture allowing for an objectivation of this culture and subjection of the culture to reflection, discussion, and conscious choice. Cultural identity and ethnicity are therefore seen as non-static, always changing and always contested manmade constructions that depend on a balance of impact of contact between various cultural groups on the one hand and tradition on the other[48]). This assumption is of great importance to this thesis as tourism and the reactions it causes may through this assumption be considered as belonging to certain cultures. Contact between Western tourists and the culture they visit is, especially on a frequent base, certainly a meeting of two or more ethnic groups. Therefore a process of mutual cultural influencing can be expected.

As such, attention should be given to the temporal dimension of tourism and the way in which it influences present day relationships[49]). Inter-ethnic relationships presently showing in tourism may have been in existence for a long time already. Trade relationships, traditional enemies, or colonial pasts may have had their consequences for present day tourism[50]).

In many ethnicity studies tourism stays ignored or is condemned as "bastardization and commoditization of previously authentic cultures", as Wood (1997:2) writes[51]). He goes on to conclude that within ethnicity studies tourist ethnicity is regarded as "phoney ethnicity", a show put on to demonstrate no longer existing rituals or present day ritual occasions taken out of context for a not understanding audience. It would however be too simplistic a representation of the situation to stop here. The discussions on tourism form around the nature of the activity and the consequences. Anthropologists are among the most fervent of critics and although a broad discussion of their criticism would lead us too far from the main topic, a comparison between anthropology and tourism offers an excellent opportunity to explore the nature of tourism. Anthropology is based on a genuine interest for 'the other', a way of life that the anthropologist wishes to understand, presumably by partaking in it, as completely as can be achieved by a cultural outsider. Tourists do not seek such an understanding of another culture. Their quest is a quest for the exotic where the exotic is excitingly unfamiliar and meant to stay as such on the risk of becoming tediously familiar. According to Boorstin (1963) tourists are looking for the confirmation of "myths and fantasies", images so to say, about the destination of their trip. These myths are created in Western countries and show an attractive, positive image of the destination. The image has to be uncomplicated yet show several traits that establish the uniqueness of the place. Boorstin calls these "pseudo experiences" that wrong the actual values of the culture visited. Selwyn (1992:30) goes as far as to warn for "Disneyfication" of places because of tourism. Lengkeek (1996:72-3) writes how in scientific discourse the idea has developed that tourism is based on a permanent state of euphoria caused by the confirmation of the myths brought from home. Tourists are looking at a culture with a "tourist gaze" (Urry, 1990), seeing not reality but an artificial image. Lengkeek warns for an oversimplification of the nature of tourism. He argues that for a full understanding the reason for the travelling should be properly understood. It follows that the reason for tourist travelling must be sought in a common 'cultural stuff' of the tourist group[52]). Turning our focus to the ethnic border separating the two groups some other observations can be made.

The 'mythical' image cultivated in the west has its consequences. Objective reciprocal contact between tourists and locals is hampered when tourists are living it up in their fantasy world[53]). Most tourists are limited in their abilities and desires to learn about the culture they visit; they stay a short time only, do not speak the language, are not necessarily willing to communicate, and do not know the codes of behaviour. It must however not be forgotten that for most tourists the holiday is meant for relaxation and not to live the lives of other societies.

If verbal communication is out, the only possible thing to do is to look at each other. Visual aspects are frequently used means to assert ethnic identity: aspects such as clothes, crafts, and the like, emphasize the uniqueness of a culture and allow for identification. Keyes and Van den Berghe (1984:340) call such aspects "ethnic markers". Tourism causes easily displayable and spectacular aspects of a culture to receive a lot of attention. Ethnic markers therefore are among the first traits of a culture that are used in tourism to create an image of the culture. Next, tourism may also pay attention to visual cultural aspects that is not in line with the position these aspects originally took within the framework of their culture. Although such aspects may play a minor role in their authentic context, they may focus prominently in the tourism image. I would suggested to regard this phenomenon as ethnic markers applied from the outside, in contrast to those from the inside by which I mean ethnic markers introduced by the culture itself.

Provided they are aesthetically pleasing and sufficiently representative to show the uniqueness of the culture visited, ethnic markers especially become much sought after souvenirs. Although other criteria of 'cultural pureness' are used then an anthropologist or art historian would require[54]). Tourism can become the source of a veritable industry of souvenirs[55]). Sometimes old handicrafts are rediscovered, other times they are newly invented. In Bali tourism brought new life to the wood carving trade, whereas stone carving in Zimbabwe was authenticated as ethnic culture when it proved profitable for tourism (Mamimine, 1997).

Appadurai (1986:13) talks about the "commodity situation" of objects: the situation in which their exchangeability for something else is their socially relevant feature. Here transactions between different cultural groups are not governed by any other standards and criteria of exchange than the price, meaning that the only inherent value agreed upon is the price paid for the object[56]). Any rules or practices regarding the object are left behind when it crosses the cultural boundary. As Appadurai proposes this theory for commodities I would like to suggest to take the theory a step further where tourism is concerned and propose a commodity situation not only for objects, but also for other displays of ethnicity that are likely to be in demand by tourists such as feasts, rituals, and dances. Examples of demonstrations where such occasions are taken out of context and performed solely for the sake of tourism can be found all over the world.

However, this is not a new thing. Eliade (1964:154) cites Donner who observed in the beginning of this century how Siberian shamans would demonstrate their rituals at the request of Russian officials. By leaving out certain essential magical attributes the shamans reduced the rituals to no more than "a parody principally intended to amuse the audience", thereby leaving the original rituals in their true context. It is justifiable to suggest that a demonstration given for tourist purposes is not the real thing, but real ceremonies may not be daily occurrences or tourists may not be welcome there.

Demonstrations can be a way to protect the authentic from outside interference; an adaptation of traditions in such a way as to allow them to survive in modern times. Referring to this phenomenon MacCannell (1973) speaks of "reconstructed ethnicity": a situation in which the cultural dialogue is closed and the interaction of tourists and hosts is divided into a frontstage and a backstage. In the front culture is staged for tourists. The desired ethnic images are presented to the visitors as if they were daily life. In many cases they are not. A culture evolves further and maintains living forms of authenticity not accessible to outsiders that are experienced In a private backstage. In time, the relentless quest for authenticity will drive tourists to discover the backstage and open it up, although what they may find might very well be a specially prepared new front region while the true back region is safely withdrawn behind this new wall. This process of 'cultural defence' in which visited groups live up to the images of expectancies received from a dominant other culture is known as transculturation (Pratt, 1992:7; Dahles, 1996:72).

Perhaps even people can be given a commodity situation. Keyes and Van den Berghe (1984:345) write that "in ethnic tourism, the native is not simply 'there' to serve the needs of the tourist; he is himself 'on show', a living spectacle to be scrutinized, photographed, tape recorded, interacted with in particular ways". Abbink (1995) argues that local people are objectified by tourists: tourists look at them, take their pictures, and run off with their 'loot' before anything can be demanded in return.

Commodification like this is not disturbing to the 'tourist experience', perhaps it is even essential. When money is paid for a product (a holiday) to be consumed this product must meet the standards required (adhere to the exotic image) to be satisfactory. Commodifying aspects of a culture to meet with institutionalized, expected images is a way to secure the customers satisfaction. If we take into consideration that reciprocity in exchange relations is in most societies part of the idea of proper human behaviour the one way exchange of culture for money as is found in tourism must prove inadequate. Tourists do not legitimize their presence through social interaction but, as Abbink (1995) wrote: "financially redeem the aggravation of the local population".

Are anthropologists doing any better? Hopefully they are. Successful research requires a good personal relationship with the informants and a thorough study of the culture and local situation, something obtained by participating in the daily life of the group that is being researched[57]). Secondly, most anthropologists do not have the money to simply 'buy' their presence as tourists do, so again they will have to find a way to legitimize their stay in a way appreciated by the people they wish to stay with. Seen in the light of commoditization overruling social behaviour the negative attitude of many social scientists towards the ascribed tourist image -and tourism in general- is not hard to understand.

This aspect of tourism earned it the image of a corrupting influence in much anthropological discourse.

We established that the balance of power between tourists and host societies is not an equal one. A third party involved remains to be discussed: the authorities of the state the groups visited live in. As with ecotourism, ethnotourism should be sufficiently profitable to allow the continuation of the situation. On the other hand, the situation can be a self-solving problem. Technologically unsophisticated ethnic minorities are often considered a problem slowing down modernization or economic growth. Tourism might offer a solution to both, or it might be a way for fourth parties to cut into the profit. Minorities as described above are not prepared to deal with tourism, let alone run a functioning tourism industry. Other groups, finding a role as tourist guides offer their services here. Toraja, living in Sulawesi's heartland, complain of coastal Buginese and Makassarese guides who 'steal' the arriving tourists even before they visit Toraja country, leaving Toraja guides without work (Adams, 1997).

The fourth group often are no members of the ethnic group that makes up their livelihood. As a consequence, their knowledge of the culture, and their interest in the culture are often inadequate. Especially since many jump at the opportunity for economical reasons only.

When social contact in tourism is so much economically and politically controlled the reactions of the hosts remains to be discussed. If tourism causes foreign groups to 'gaze at' ethnic minorities, holds power over them and destroys their rituals and traditions, then how do such minorities react to tourists or foreign groups in general? Considering that every ethnic group, or culture, defines itself and the other through a process of reflection, the words of Levi-Strauss (1973:329) may provide a useful addition:

"The notion of humanity, which includes without distinction of race or civilization all the forms of the human species, appeared very late and in a limited way....Mankind stops at the frontiers of the tribe, of the linguistic group, and sometimes even of the village, to the extend that a great many of the people called primitive call themselves by a name which means 'men'....thus implying that the other tribes....have no part in human virtues or even human nature."

Few cultures are in a position to send anthropologists around researching the 'true culture' of other, in their eyes exotic groups. Perhaps the tourist's false expectancies can be considered not unlike a first attempt at cultural definition of the other. Foster (1982) sees the exotic as a symbolic-interpretive element that enables a group through the assimilation of cultural difference to understand another group that they consider different from themselves. The dialectic understanding of comprehended diversity that results is however distorted and true assimilation limited since exotic in itself implies unfamiliar, instead of one's own.

Many examples are known of ways in which foreign cultures were incorporated when their presences became in need of explanation. The Dogon of West-Africa adopted the physical role of a frequently visiting anthropologist in their mask dances. They made an anthropologist-mask and a wooden camera. The anthropologist dancer circles the other dancers while pretending to take pictures.

Cuna shamans in Central America stress the otherness of the Western world by guiding the souls of their dead to a realm that is nothing but a modern city with houses, ships, and radios (Kramer, 1989:119-20).

A Mentawaian myth stating how the various groups of people in the world emerged from different polls of reed was quickly expanded with more polls when the Dutch and later the Japanese entered the island.

Again, similar to the tourist's case, it must be stressed that it would be wrong to expect host societies to develop theories on the structure and meaning of the culture of other groups as anthropologists do. Where anthropologists seek understanding most groups will focus on the otherness, the difference that is plainly seen when contact is established[58]).

A phenomenon based on social interaction between different groups cannot be described through the eyes of one party only. The view taken is largely decisive for the way in which a situation is experienced. It must be attempted to take into consideration the view of every party involved; to use these "multiple narratives" (Dahles, 1996a:70) trying to give a description that is both complete and valid. Difficult as this might seem, an attempt might prove worthwhile.

Concluding remarks.

The above leads to some assumptions that will be used to explore the situation on Siberut. First, we must identify the four groups involved in the process and explore their mutual relationships. By assuming that culture adapts itself to new situations and is not static it can be suggested that such relationships may have changed over the years or may be subject to change at the present. The same assumption implies that a culture is not a mere defenceless victim to be 'overrun' by tourists, but has means to adapt itself. Such means of adaptation and the influence of tourism must be defined. To do so, ethnic markers and the self-image of the culture must be explored.

CHAPTER THREE. CONTACTS IN THE PAST; A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

In this chapter some of Siberut's history will be discussed. The focus lies on the contacts between Mentawaians and foreigners and -be it limited- on the early images formed of foreign groups. The Dutch colonial period, the following Japanese occupation and the tourism as it took place between Indonesia's independence and the start of present day tourism will be discussed. However, the discussion must stay brief as it is meant as background information for the understanding of the present day situation only.

3.1. Colonial history of the islands.

Although Indonesia has been colonized for hundreds of years the Mentawai Islands were virtually ignored for most of this period. Their existence was well known; they appear on old sea charts as the "Islands of Good Fortune[59]". As early as 1600 the Mentawai islands were visited by admiral Van Neck who landed to lay in fresh water supplies (Neumann, 1909:211). One of the earliest ethnographical accounts of the islands was written in 1799 by Crisp. Several early references to the islands can be found, but it was not until the end of the eighteenth century that travellers' reports started to appear.

Mentawaian colonial history is linked with that of Sumatra. Sumatra's west coast was ignored until 1714 when the British built their trading post Fort Marlborough, which was quickly followed by two more posts at Natal and Tapanuli[60] (Loeb, 1972:10-2). Between 1749 and 1757 the British attempted to establish pepper estates on the Mentawai islands but the attempt failed and the plans were abandoned (Bezemer, 1921:316).

In 1825 the British traded their possessions on Sumatra for Malacca, which was then occupied by the Dutch. Sumatra and its west coast islands became part of the Dutch East Indies.

Contact between the islands and Sumatra was mainly maintained by Minangkabau and Chinese traders. Sometimes trading disputes between these traders and Mentawaians resulted in bloody skirmishes and deaths have been reported on both sides. The Mentawaians quickly gained a fierce and warlike reputation among the population of West Sumatra, whereas they themselves considered the traders to be untrustworthy and bloodthirsty[61]. Contact with Dutch colonials was limited to navy boats that could infrequently be seen patrolling between the islands and that sometimes landed to take in supplies. Government influence was limited to incidental punitive expeditions after the pillaging of a trading vessel or the killing of a merchant. Structural governmental rule on Siberut was non-existent at the time.

In 1864 the decision was made by the Dutch to establish direct control over the islands, mostly out of fear of other colonial powers who might use the islands as a strategic foothold to the Dutch East Indies.

At the end of the nineteenth century the colonial government requested the assistance of missionary societies to 'civilize' the population. The request was honoured, and although slowly, missionary work took a start. The first missionary arrived in 1901 at North Pagai. Due to the troubles the population caused him his post was strengthened by a military force in 1905. Between 1907 and 1909 military posts on North and South Pagai brought these islands under Dutch rule. On Siberut and Sipora small military garrisons were stationed in 1905[62]. In 1911 the Mentawaian garrison moved to Muara Siberut which since then has remained the seat of local government.

The post's commanders did not have a concrete program to change daily life on the islands although they succeeded in abolishing traditional headhunting. In practice, a policy of non-interference was followed regarding religious and cultural matters, as long as these did not interfere with law and order. Some policy rules can however be distinguished:

- Continued suppression of headhunting.

- Establishing local rule by appointing village chiefs.

- Restricting traditional legal systems.

- Constructing roads and footpaths by means of compulsory labour.

- Stimulating missionary work and education.

- Protecting Chinese and Minangkabau traders.

- Moving the pigs out of the villages.

(Persoon, 1994:214)

At the same time Siberut became an open penal colony. The location was close to ideal with a large stretch of sea isolating the island from Sumatra and a hostile jungle inhabited by 'fearful savages' who would not accept runaways in their midst, thus excluding escape the other way. Around 1930 the colony was in full swing with about 250 convicts, all of them Indonesians, living in an encampment in Muara Siberut. The prisoners had to work on the construction of roads and harbour quays guarded by a garrison of 45 soldiers[63]. Other governmental personnel on the island consisted of a doctor, a military and a civil manager, and an administrator. Around the governmental centre a settlement of Sumatrans began to develop, many of them Minangkabau or Chinese who made a living as fishermen, farmers, or traders.

Contact between Mentawaians and the settlement at Muara Siberut was limited. Most Mentawaians only saw soldiers when they were visited by patrols or when they came to Muara Siberut to trade. Few attempts were made to establish a more frequent or intense contact. Older Mentawaians still remember the time when the Dutch lived in Muara Siberut[64]. They recall 'the good old days' when they got good prices while trading with the Chinese and Minangkabau traders, and when the Dutch doctors took good care of them when they needed help[65]. The tax system the Dutch introduced was less favoured although it was a vital link in trading. Taxes had to be paid in jungle products that had to be taken down to Muara Siberut, surplus was brought to be traded for goods that were taken back home. The Dutch rule was remembered as rather free, traditional clothing, tattoos, kerei and arat sabulungan were all allowed. The best remembered infringements upon Mentawaian life the Dutch garrison bothered with were the introduction of a new system of justice and the prohibition of war, killing and headhunting. Something the elder people remembered as a positive development. One old man told me:

"In the old days there were many 'people from outside[66]'; every uma controlled its own territory and if you went out of it you ran a big chance of being shot by other uma because they didn't know you. They thought you were a thief or that you came to kill somebody. Thus people often were shot by accident and then we would have raids against the uma who shot them. Sometimes traders got shot, but traders killed many Mentawaians as well. There often was a war between us Mentawaians and the traders. Dutch soldiers were shot by accident as well, but the Dutch never held vengeance-raids. They would use their justice system and only punish the people who shot the soldiers. If we were attacked by another uma we would go to the Dutch soldiers and they would punish that uma. After the Dutch came everybody could sleep at night without being afraid and we could travel around the island if we liked without being killed."

3.2. Early tourists.

At the beginning of this century traffic to the islands was limited to one monthly boat, bringing mail and supplies, and now and again taking a passenger who usually travelled on behalf of the government.

Although certainly not as frequently as nowadays, the Mentawai Islands were visited by people who could be described as tourists. These were mostly well-to-do travellers exploring the Indonesian islands or indeed South-East Asia. Even though travelling for pleasure was becoming an accepted pastime for the wealthy part of society, the Mentawai islands were seldom visited. Now as then the islands lay off the main travel route following the islands of Bali, Java and Sumatra lengthwise. The feared malaria, the still rather unknown Mentawaians with their ferocious reputation and the virtual isolation from the outside world made it a place most travellers shunned. Yet the beginning of the century had its explorers and adventurous travellers and some of the first tourist visits took place in this period. In 1912 Violet Clifton, an English lady who travelled through the Dutch East Indies together with her husband, wrote:

 "...A Fateful map spurred Talbot's desires towards the group of Mentawi Islands[67].

 The captain of the steamer, which once a month takes mails to the Military Comptroller, said, "You should not go; no traveller ever lands there, for the islands are under martial law. I have only taken there the Dutch Military Comptroller, Javanese soldiers, and Javanese convicts to cut down the jungle, and three German missionaries, of whom one died of blackwater fever, another was murdered by the men of Mentawi, and the third has not been there long. Lawless savages might kill you! You will be covered with sores!" Thus he admonished us..." (Clifton, 1927:106)

Van Beukering, who was a military doctor in Muara Siberut shortly before the Second World War wrote how one day he was visited by a group of Americans sailing through the archipelago. One of their number, a doctor, accepted his invitation to come ashore to have a look around. The others decided not to leave the ship but study the island with binoculars[68] for fear of catching tropical diseases (Van Beukering, 1978:31-3). Although the inhabitants were 'savage' and dangerous diseases were abundant a certain fascination for the islands and their inhabitants existed from the earliest contact onward. Unless encountered in a fight Mentawaians were described as peace-loving, gentle people. Early accounts of visits bear such titles as "Islands of Peace[69]", "On the Islands of Happiness[70]", or "With the amiable Savages