the journal of policy history, V ol. 26, No. 2, 2014. © Donald Critchlow and Cambridge University Press 2014 doi:10.1017/S0898030614000050 abdillah noh Malay Nationalism: A Historical Institutional Explanation In his tour of the Malay States on the east coast of the Malay peninsula in 1838, Munshi Abdullah, a Muslim scholar, described an apathetic Malay polity, where there existed “all kinds of taboos” between the ruler and the ruled and that the Malay population could not “criticise the unreasonable conduct of kings without the risk of being sentenced to death.” 1 Slightly over a hundred years later, in 1946, the Malay masses were throwing their weight against their rulers in reaction to the British-proposed Malayan Union. Te Malays felt that the Malayan Union would efectively spell the end of Malay political dominance because it would grant non- Malays citizenship status, employ equal citizenship rights, and revoke Malay special status. By agreeing to the proposal, they felt, the Malay rulers had short-changed Malay political rights. 2 Reacting to the event, Ayob Abdullah, a political activist, reminded the Malay rulers of their responsibility toward the Malay masses. 3 He also urged Malays to form political organizations since “they could no longer rely on their Rajas to defend their society.” 4 Te transformation of the Malay masses from political apathy to political activism surprised even the drafers of the Malayan Union. Edward Gent, the main architect of the Malayan Union proposal, wrote to the State Secretary of the Colonies expressing his surprise at Malays’ opposition to the Union, saying the Malays “showed considerable apprehension of any substantial admission of non-Malays to citizenship rights.” 5 What contributes to the transformation of the Malay masses from polit- ical apathy to a determined and cogent portrayal of Malay nationalism in the twentieth century? Was the show of Malay nationalism in 1946 an ad hoc