Hybridity on Architecture and Urban Spaces in the Colonial Tin Mining Town of Muntok-Bangka

This paper concerns the importance of socio-cultural hybridity in the process of architecture and urban development. It confronts spatial particularity occurring between the discourses of colonialism and multiculturalism. As a result of centuries of dynamic interaction amongst several ethnic groups including Malay, Chinese and European, Muntok as the colonial capital town of Bangka Island before 20thcentury offers various architectural edifices and urban forms. The scope of this paper focuses on the intersection between colonial history and hybridity itself and the research analyses its material represent through architecture and urban form. The methods of the research are conducted through a combination of a qualitative and a quantitative approach involving direct interviews, data collection, and typological analysis. Hybridity becomes a critical tool to reveal the dynamic process of architecture and urbanism. The research found that hybrid architecture is not only about the existence of physical aspects of buildings, but also most importantly about the integration and dialectical relationship between its materiality and the socio-cultural processes that lie behind it. Keywords: architecture,culture, hybridity, urbanism


Introduction
Muntok is the capital city of West Bangka regency, which from the 18thcentury Palembang Sultanate period until the 19thcentury and the early 20thcentury Dutch colonial occupation in the East Indies, was the main town on the island of Bangka. The rich deposits of tin mines contributed to creating a very distinctive hybridity of architectural typology and city morphology. Muntok was an administrative centre for the tin mining and smelting industries. This administrative capacity was combined with the cultural heritage of several ethnic groups, namely Malay, European, Chinese and other Asian. The British Army firstly annexed Bangka Island in early 19th century. Under the Governor-General Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles, Muntok was considered as an alternative centre for the British East India Company, which eventually was turned into Singapore as the colonial administrative centre. Until the postcolonial era, the Tin Mining Town of Muntok remained an important centre for trade in the region, especially as the largest tin smelting centre in Indonesia. Muntok also became an important city in the history of national struggle to maintain independence after 1945, as a place of exile for the Indonesian Independence leaders. When the second Clash Action with the Dutch colonial army occurred in1948, Soekarno and Hatta were exiled there.
Moreover, Muntok people have been living in harmony amid diverse ethnic groups for centuries. The interethnic marriage and the adoption of children from other ethnic groups have become part of a strong tradition in the community of Muntok. Therefore, this study raises the hybridity and diversity theories (H. Bhabha, 1994) as important concepts for the development of architecture and urban spaces in the tin mining town of Muntok. This paper argues that the subversive strategy of local people from different ethnic groups, namely European, Malay, and Chinese, spurred the emergence of a hybrid architectural style. In the context of historic preservation, Lefebvre, a Marxist Socialist, revealed that social spaces were often ignored when the designer and conservationist planned to develop or protect areas of the city. This observation underscores the importance of diversity in the development of a hybrid architectural identity.
This paper questions the claims made by some scholars (Nas, 1986) that Muntok was a Chinese town. "In what representation did the cultural mixtures between European, Chinese and Malay communities occur in Muntok?""Did hybridity come afterwards and did hybridity in Muntok only appear physically?" Therefore, this paper has objectives to locate Muntok'scolonial history as a multi-cultural city in the mainstream of important history in Indonesia, especially to raise an awareness about the importance of history and heritage of it. It is hoped that hybrid identities that are represented in the architecture of Muntok can be an example of multicultural co-existence and tolerance in Indonesia.

Methods
As there islack of human resources who understand the importance of history and cultural heritage in Muntok, the purpose of this research is to raise awareness of the strategic role of Muntok as an important cultural city on Bangka Island. Its strategic location as a port city for the tin mining operations positioned Muntok within the network of colonial and postcolonial cities, resulting in not only the migration of people, but also the transmigration of pattern types between the Orient and the Occident, the East and the West. Representing the notion of hybridity, these cultural artefacts are apparent in the physical manifestation of architectural elements such as Doric columns, Islamic calligraphy, and Chinese dragons, reflecting the cultural diversity and the overlay of the European colonial elite, the Arabic traders, Malay indigenous people, and the Chinese migrant craftsmen. The methodology of the research is through intersection of history (time-space spectrum) and the paradigm of socio-cultural hybridity (political aspects and identity). For architecture, it includes a typological and morphological analysis of housing and building types ranging from the governor's house, to Malay-styled stilt houses to colonial bungalows to shop houses, reflecting within the urban morphology and in relation to the geographical features the segregation of different ethnic groups into distinct districts.For social hybridity, this paper explores what could be considered, according to Homi Bhabha, as a subversive strategy between various ethnic groups and architectural style in this case acts as a kind of cultural glue. For power (politics), this paper analyzes the importance of politics (power) in influencing and in making particular social hybridity.
The main thesis is to underscore the importance of hybridity or the blending of heterogeneous elements into a homogeneous postcolonial architectural style and urban identity.
The debate about hybridization in architecture has begun amongst Indonesian theorists for more than a decade. Hybridity (mixing two elements to produce a third element) is generally understood as a biological term, so these debates clearly demonstrate the incongruity of incorporating social homogeneity into heterogeneous architectural symbols and forms. Therefore, architectural hybridity becomes synonymous with aesthetic syncretism. However, this outlook only observes the physical results and ignores the social processes of cultural hybridity itself.
In order to address this problem we consider thecaveats delivered by Hernandez (2002), that, firstly, because of the ambiguity in hybridity, we need to specify the manner and context in which the term hybridization is used; and secondly, because this term is widely used in the realm of postcolonial, cultural theory, hybridity cannot be reduced to a univocal and unidimensional term, and thirdly, due to the fact that hybridity is a theoretical tool, this term contains subversive values (Hernandez, 2002: 78).Homi Bhabha's diversity theories become main references in Hernandez critiques. Bhabha's theories are taken specifically in the context of British colonial practices in India as its main references, they need certain mechanisms to fit within other cultural contexts. Therefore, we have to look at Dutch colonial practices in the East Indies in order to discuss hybridity from a different perspective. Dutch colonial government in the East Indies hindered social cultural hybridity and it only happened in a rather limited manner. We know only a few cases of legitimate intermarriage between Dutchmen and Native women in the East Indies, even though it occurred secretly. Dutch was criticized by the left-wing political parties for not concerning the rights and importance of local cultures to develop its Netherlands Indies colony. In terms of architectural representation, the merger of cultural differences was always ambiguous.
At the beginning of the 19th century and before, there was a stereotypical view that 'other' culture that was absorbed in the European tradition was something 'alienated and potentially threatening to its European origin through the production of polymorphously perverse people who are, in Bhabha's phrase, white but not quite.' The purification of the European culture to protect it from assimilating with local cultures occurred in the Dutch Indies, even until the end of the colonial period. Conversely, the strict colonialism in the Dutch Indies archipelago did not totally bring about the displacement of indigenous culture. This was because, as Kusno, 2000 identified, the Dutch did not encourage the natives to absorb Dutch culture and language, so the Dutch let the ordinary natives live traditionally and distanced themselves from modernity. There are four issues on social hybridisation in colonial times, which made the hybridisation process in Bangka became ambiguous. 1) The social hybridisation between Dutch cultures with other races was very selective. The Dutch only allowed a few number of Native or Chinese, mostly from elite groups, to engage with the Dutch culture, as long as it did not harm the integrity of Dutch culture; 2) Interaction between Dutch culture and other races, thus, occurred informally; 3) The Dutch encouraged social hybridisation between the Native and Chinese, and perceived most Chinese women as being native, so it was thought that they would not harm one another if these two cultures were intermingled as they were perceived as being a similar race; 4) In the economic field, in fact, the natives were isolated from the transfer of economic knowledge.
The beginning of the 20th century was marked by the ethical policy and decentralisation of colonial administration that started to acknowledge the existence and the rights of local inhabitants. Close interaction between the colonial inhabitants and the natives (as well as the Chinese) community began to emerge, even though it was still limited in scope. In terms of colonial architecture and urban-planning, these early twentieth century changes brought new perspectives of architectural styles. Indo-European architecture or Indies architectural typology representing new morphological hybridity was introduced.
The state of the art in this research is to raise the issue of hybridity in the tin mining process and how it has influenced the development of the town. Preliminary studies that had been carried out have raised issues outside the scope of architecture and city planning, such as the history of colonial Bangka (Horsfield, 1848), ethnography (Heidhues, 1992), social culture (Erman, 2009), tin mining (Sujitno, 1996), nationalism (Husnial Husin, 1983), and the classic history of Bangka (R. Ahmad, 1936). This paper is part of ongoing recent research on the history of architecture in Muntok, (Kurniawan, 2004(Kurniawan, , 2006(Kurniawan, and 2011. People from various cultures within a certain time period have occupied and imbuedvarious spaces with different meanings and functions. The city becomes a group of entities that is communally forming its own identity and collective history. According to Cohen (Cohen, 2001: 43), each town was built and contained different types of web configurations or network connections (a net). This web is basically derived from the line between both natural and man-made worlds. According to Cohen, if revitalization becomes an 'urban tool,' then it means as an urban plan it envisions a better city. Initial quantitative data such as population density, size, and concentrated functions of the city are needed.
In the realm of the heritage of the city, there are two important objectives to focus on and to consider. They are cultural monuments and unique districts. Monuments of the city, according to Cohen, were built because the city is the centre of where the presence of symbols and memories can be found. From the description of the physical potentiality and visual representation of the city regarded as the object of heritage conservation, the role of society and the political forces behind it are central to the discussion. It happens particularly because social forces involved in the everyday dynamics of a city determine the attitude towards heritage conservation. Meanwhile, the authorities determine policy to control the city.
If we try to explore these social spaces, contemporary debates about the built environment, history and culture take place in the competitive discourse related to issues of race, gender and social class must be dealt with economic and environmental problems (Hayden, 1997: 6). While the urban landscape becomes increasingly less attractive, more claims are made to burnish historical and public cultural resources. In terms of Hayden (Hayden, 1997: 9) the 'power of place' (the power of ordinary urban landscapes to nurture citizens' public memory, to encompass shared time in the form of shared territory) still does not draw attention to the working or lower middle class in most cities in America. In order to recover from this anomaly such a situation is not an easy process, because the references through open social history provoke newer, wiser, and wider perspectives. These can embrace social classes who have been marginalized as part of the transformation process. According to Hayden, A socially inclusive urban landscape history can become the basis for new approaches to public history and urban preservation.... A more inclusive urban landscape history can also stimulate new approaches to urban design, encouraging designers, artist, and writers, as well as citizens, to contribute to an urban art of creating a heightened sense of place in the city (Hayden, 1997: 12).
The hypothesis raised in this paper is that hybrid architecture is not only about the existence of physical aspects of buildings, but also more importantly about the integration and dialectical relationship between its materiality and sociocultural process that lay behind it. Hybridity becomes a critical tool to reveal the dynamic process of architecture and urbanism. Therefore, in order to prove the above hypothesis, the character of this research reflects a study of the sociopolitical and cultural history of architecture and city planning. The approach to research methods was through a method of Exploratory Research in order to explore Hybridity in Muntok especially during Dutch Colonial period, and to discuss its dynamic development. In relation to artefacts and historiography, the analysis was made through an interpretative approach in order to reconstruct and to read the history of transformative processes in architecture. The research was based on the dialectical relationship between history (time-space spectrum) and the paradigm of sociocultural hybridity (political aspects and identity). The characteristics of hybridity in a region are significant factors in formulating the policies to save historical areas.
Types of research activities for this paper included data colection, theoretical studies (literature review), and field surveys, which were supported by the overview of historical documents/artefacts, interviews with resource persons, such as those who were concerned with the preservation of cultural heritage. After the research analysis, we formulated a conclusion for the initial outcome.
Data collection techniques involved the collection of primary data from the field tripson location. Data wasrecorded through photographs and sketches, and interviews with resource persons. Primary data was collected from old archives and historiography, which were essential for the reconstruction and revitalization effort. Secondary data was collected through literature searches for theoretical and non-archive data. Data analysis techniques combined qualitative and quantitative data analysis. Critical studies were conducted through the realm of meaning, which would be analyzed through a qualitative approach and in the academic context of the realm of facts.
Resource persons for this research included historians, Muntok Heritage Community, the head of Muntok's Metallurgy Centre, Muntok's economic actors and the local community. Respondents were not given questionnaires. Instead, there were more intensive direct interviews about their daily life, space utilization, and their concerns about history. The number of respondents chosen were twenty people from the local government and the local community (common community and Muntok Heritage Community) and 10 people from Muntok academic historians and building owners.
Data analysis was conducted in the Laboratory of the History of Architecture Research in the Department of Architecture FTUI, while the research for field data collection was conducted in Muntok, Jakarta and Depok. In Muntok, the research was conducted in two areas, namely: Chinese Kampong and Malay Kampong (Kampung Dalam) area. In the meantime, the search for archive data was conducted at ANRI and National Library in Jakarta. The literature search related to the theory and method of the history of architecture was obtained through the Library of University of Indonesia. Other historical data was searched through the KITLV in Leiden.

Results and Discussion
Geographically, the city of Muntok directly faces the Bangka Strait, which separates it from Sumatera Island. Palembang becomes the nearest town in the direction of the sea. In the northern part, Muntok directly faces Natuna and South China Sea, which was one of the strategic shipping routes towards the Nusantara archipelago in the past. The close relationship between Muntok and Palembang is not only geographically, but also politically and historically. From the very beginning of its formation, the history of Muntok cannot be separated from the existence of the Palembang Sultanate, which was the protector of this region in its glorious time before it finally fell under Dutch colonial rule.
During the colonial era, Muntok held an important position as the capital of Bangka Belitung Residency, before the capital was movedto Pangkal Pinang in 1913 during the era of Resident J. Englenberg. The distance between Muntok and Pangkal Pinang as the capital of the province is 123 kilometres, which can be reached in approximately two hours via land routes. Muntok also becomes the sea gateway to Bangka Island from Sumatera Island (Fig. 1). There is a ferry coming from and going to Palembang, the nearest town in Sumatera Island on a daily basis. Previously, inter-island shipping was done through a port located right in Muntok city centre, but now it has been moved to Tanjung Kelian Port, which is located further to the west.
As a coastal city and hill town, Muntok has a uniquely contoured topography. Its coastal beaches are quite steep and some of the local people refer to the hills as mountains. This condition makes the weather in Muntok cooler.
According to the local government's statistical data records, the West Bangka region is an area with Type A tropical climate with average air pressure of 1009.6 mb. The average temperature is 27.30 °C. The lowest temperature is 24.70 °C; while the highest temperature is 31.23 °C. Rainfall in this region is also quite high, reaching an average of 155 mm. As the result, the humidity levels can reach up to a level of 77%.
Muntok is also a safe city, since there has never been any violence in this very heterogeneous city. Most of Muntok people have settled in Muntok for generations, especially those originating from Chinese and Malay ethnic groups, who had inhabited Muntok long before the tin mining workers were brought in by the Dutch at the beginning of the 19 th century. After the regional autonomy era started atthe end of the 20th century, there are now many migrants coming from other regions, especially from Palembang and Padang.
Besides tin mining, the prosperity of Muntok is derived from the city's landscape. As a natural tourism destination, Muntok has some beautiful beaches, such as Tanjung Kelian Beach, Tanjung Ular Beach, and Batu Rakit. Thesecould be improved with better management. Besides beaches, another interesting destination point is Batu Belah, a big stone cluster resembling a megalithic cultural heritage, a story which has yet to be told. Muntok is also located on the foothills of the Menumbing Mountain, which does not only offer a beautiful natural forest, but also, as a place, it is awitness to history, when the freedom fighters who proclaimed Indonesian independence, namely, Soekarno and Hatta as well as other national movement leaders, such as Ali Sastroamidjoyo and Sutan Syahrir, were put in exilethere.
The origins of Muntok were predicted at the beginning of the 18thcentury, which was marked by the arrival of Malay noble people from Siantan Island in the Anambas Islands, which is a part of Johor Sultanate and it has a kinship relation with Palembang Sultanate. The noble people formed the embryo of the Muntok city development by building settlements in the coastal area. They also became the first entrepreneurs to commercialize tin mining in Bangka Island, especially in Muntok, with the help of Johor Sultanate's emphasis on science and technology.
One of the main characteristics of Malay settlements in Muntok is the existence of a mosque, which has become a part of the Malay identity. Another characteristic is the establishment of a fortress. The location of the origins of Muntok was reputedly in the cliffs located on the west coast. Even though official records cannot be found to confirm it, the prediction was based on the existence of 'Kota Seribu', which is a cluster of the noble people's tombs in the cliffs located on the western side of the city centre. Previously, Kota Seribu was a fortress that protected the city from pirate attacks, which were abundant in the seas around Bangka Island. The fortress also protected the residents from the rebellions related to Chinese immigrants. Besides the fortress, we can still find, although there are not so many left, the remains of Malay upper class houses, as an indication of previous elite settlement locations.
There is no clear indication about who the original local leader in the area was; some say that he was known as Mento. Since 1720 Mento had led this community, before the arrival of Malay noble people from Siantan. The most widely known Malay leader was Wan Abdul Jabar, also known as Datuk Dalam, together with Wan Akup and Wan Serin. This trio possibly led Muntok during the period of1734-1750s, and many indigenous people claim themselves as being one of Datuk's Dalam direct descendants, especially those who hold the title of "Abang" for men and "Yang" for women. These titles are commonly used by Malay noble people in Muntok. After taking over Muntok, the Dutch colonial government still kept some of British military buildings, such as the military barracks, which were better known as 'tangsi' and also the harbour. The first thing that the Dutch did in this city was to build the infrastructure networks, especially for transportation. However, the British did not get the chance to build these facilities due to their very short occupation period. The Dutch colonial government built roads suitable for vehicles, such as trains or cars that could connect all of the districts in Bangka Island. The new urban areas were also opened according to the tin mining interests of the Dutch government.
In the map created in 1859, the shape of Muntok started to look clear (Fig. 2). According to the description in the map, there were three different settlement typologies, which were for the Europeans, Chinese and Malays. The Europeans and Chinese occupied a more organized city centre, while the Malays occupied rural areas. The Dutch colonial government records mentioned that there were four Malay settlements around Muntok at that time. A Malay community was led by a Tumenggung, the title of a Malay community leader.
The map shows that the fortress was built in the peninsula of Muntok, while the camp and housing settlements for the Europeans were built on the top of the hills in the northern part of the town. The Chinese immigrants, who were already quite numerous at that time, occupied a part of the peninsula which has now become an area for Muntok's markets and economic centre. Based on this map, the Malay communities occupied "Kampung di Bawa" (Kampung located in the lower terrain), which was in the eastern coast known as Teluk Rubiah. The eastern coast is located directly on the border of a cliff that separates the beach from the European area. There is no specific information about the Kota Seribu fortress, but the map shows that there were two roads parallel with the row of buildings on the western coast.
Since the 19 th century the number of Chinese immigrants in Muntok began to increase for two reasons. The first reason was that they were brought in by the Dutch colonial government as blue-collar workers in Bangka Island. Most of them were contracted by Dutch tin enterprises as tin mining workers. This Chinese ethnic group was known as singkek or Chinese immigrants. The second reason was that many Chinese foreigners came to Muntok with their own money. They became freelance labourers or traders who fulfilled the needs of Muntok people and workers.
The life of these Chinese immigrants, including the tin mining coolies, was more prosperous than the majority of Malay local people, especially because they became part of the Dutch monopoly for tin exploitation. Inside the city of Muntok, they were located in the town centre with better facilities compared to Malay local people, most of whom still lived in traditional kampongs or kampong forests that had poor infrastructure located on the outskirts of the city.
Besides Chinese immigrants, there was also a small group of Arab immigrants. Generally, they were traders who came to Muntok for trading activities, but some of them permanently settled in Muntok. They lived in the city centre inside Chinese Kampong, and others lived in groups near Malay Kampong. They were commonly inter-island traders and usually engaged in trading between Muntok and the cities in the Malacca peninsula and Singapore.
During this period, due to the Dutch monopolistic practices, there was a high incidence of resistance from the local people. A very famous rebellion came from Depati Bahrin and his son, Depati Amir. As the result of the increasing number of rebellions, the Dutch colonial government focused on Muntok's defence by building a fortress and big military camps. Besides that, as a part of their defence system, from the approximately 500 Dutch armysoldiers based in Bangka Island, more than 200 were located in Muntok, along with artillery equipment and other supporting facilities, which were much more complete than other districts in Bangka Island.
Based on the 1813 census, the population of Muntok was 1,546 people. From this number, the population of European people was estimated to be only 48 people. This census only calculated the number of people and workers in the Dutch tin mining enterprises and did not include the soldiers who lived in the "tangsi" (barracks) in Muntok. The more developed shape of Muntok can only be seen from the 1935 map (Fig. 3). In this map, the pattern of Muntok was very similar to what we can observe today. The road pattern and the town zoning organization did not change much. The development of Muntok was much bigger and well-organized. This development could be attained only after the local rebellion had been suppressed and the Dutch colonial government could concentrate on developing the city's facilities.
Compared to the 1859 map, the city's major physical change can be seen in the sedimentation that occurred along Teluk Rubiah. Because of this, the coastal beach of Teluk Rubiah was almost at the same level of Muntok's peninsular area. The city elements that disappeared first were the fortress and then the buildings related to the military posts and housing settlements in the "tangsi" area. These elements were replaced by office buildings and houses owned by Banka Tin Winning (BTW), a tin mining enterprise owned by the Dutch colonial government.
Muntok seemed to be divided into two main regions, the lower part and the upper part of the city, following the city's natural topography. The upper part of the city was designed to be an elite area, inhabited mostly by Europeans (Fig. 4). This European area was likely built from 1860 onwards on land that the Dutch colonial government bought from H. Nuh, one of Muntok's native prominent Malay figures.
In order to connect the upper part and the lower part of the city, the government made a road axis that formed an imaginary line connecting the sea with the Menumbing Mountain. It seems that the only reason for this was for the sake of a vista because then the government built a house for Bangka's Resident at the highest point of Muntok (Fig. 5). The upper part of the city was specifically designed for the comfort of European people who settled in Muntok. The pattern resembled the concept of a garden city with lots of open spaces, large parks and villa-styled houses (Fig.8). The Resident was, according to the colonial government hierarchy was the supreme ruler of Muntok and Bangka, both in government and business administration. The Resident's House (Fig.18)  In order to control the Malay and Chinese communities, as well as to prevent the reoccurrence of local peoples' revolts, the Dutch colonial government established a settlement policy. They forbade the local people to stay and settle in the forests or plantations as they used to do. They were forced to settle in kampongs on the outskirts of the city, which were built along the main roads connecting inter-districts in Bangka Island. The Dutch colonial government also built some settlements on the outskirts of the city for the Chinese tin mining workers.
From1850 to 1913 was a period of enormous change in Muntok. There was significant development of public facilities, including the construction of roads, bridges, harbours and alight house tower. Muntok itself had slowly transformed from a big kampong into an Indies town.
The development of botanical research conducted in Muntok also affected the changes of the urban landscape. Deep forests around Muntok were turned into green, neatly organized town parks. The development of town parks was not only to make the city look beautiful, but also to create a healthier urban environment (Fig.6). The existence of deep forests around the city was feared to bring about outbreaks of diseases such as malaria and beriberi.
Entering the 20 th century, during the period between 1913 and 1942, a new development phase occurred in Bangka Island. The implementation of the ethical politics by the Dutch colonial government had driven liberalization in the corporations owned by the government. The management of tin enterprises, which was previously under the same management as the Bangka Belitung Residency administration, was separated. Due to this separation, the position of Muntok was changed and Muntok was no longer the centre of Bangka Belitung residency. In 1913, Engelenberg, the Resident at that time, moved the capital of Bangka Belitung Residency to Pangkal Pinang.
Frequently, the organization of settlement areas in many East Indies archipelagic cities, which were parts of the Dutch colony, separated the settlements according to ethnic groups. The same thing happened in Muntok. The separation was based on three major groups, namely Malay, Chinese and European settlements (Fig. 7). The topography of Muntok consisted of hills, cliffs and rivers that indirectly became geographical separators between the European settlements, the Chinese and Malay settlements.
Urban areas inhabited by the Europeans were located in the upper part of the city centre on the northern side. Some of them were former "tangsi" areas and some others were in the expansion areas heading towards the North. Bounded geographically by Muntok's hillsides and river, these areas were remote from other parts of the city. The European region had a very wide area with low density.
Following the garden city concept, which was the trend for urban landscape at that time, the houses of the important European people and their families were built in the villa style with a large garden. It can be said that the city of Muntok was the miniature of Buitenzorg or Bogor. These areas also were also provided with complete facilities compared to other settlement areas. Some of themwere churches, schools, societeit buildings and large town parks. The more complete facilities also showed the higher status and privileges of the European people compared to other ethnic groups.
Most of the settlements of local people who commonly came from Malay ethnic group were located in the lower part of the city, especially in the western side and further to the south of the city centre. In the western part, the Malay people lived side by side with the Arabian traders who had settled in Muntok. The boundary between the two was a "surau" (a smallprayer house), which served as a unifier between the two ethnic communities based on the similarity of religious identity.
The Malay people usually built their houses in the form of a wooden stage house and most of them were high stage houses. Their houses were built close to one another, but they were not as crowded as the houses in Chinese settlements. Although the design still used the Malay traditional architecture, the construction process already used the services of contractors.
There were three Malay Kampongs located near the town centre, namely Kampung Tanjung (Fig. 9), Kampung Teluk Rubiah, and Kampung Pemuhun. The occupants of these kampongs were dominated by local people from Malay ethnic group, who had stayed in these kampongs for several generations. Some still stayed in the stage houses, even though there were not many left.
Most of the Malay houses that are still well-preserved can be found in Kampung Pemuhun. In Kampung Teluk Rubiah there is a Malay house which is claimed to be the oldest in Muntok. This house was built in 1227 Hijriah or 1885 AD. The year the house was built can be seen from the calligraphic panel placed on the wall inside the house (Fig. 10). The calligraphy was written in a basic Arabic alphabetic script and contained a prayer for the safety of the owner and occupants of the house. It also contained the year of when the house was built. The border between Chinese and Malay settlements, which were both located in the lower part of the town was not really clear. In the past, the border could be sensed through the shapes of the building and the density of the settlements, but current developments have created different markers.
In the town centre, the border between Malay and Chinese settlements was marked by the existence of a mosque that was built adjacent to a Chinese temple (Fig.  11).
Like the community leader's houses, the mosque and the Chinese temple were also under the influence of western architecture (Fig. 12), which can be recognized from the existence of Doric columns on their front façades. At the mosque, the condition of all elements wasstill original, while at the Chinese temple there were some changes such as the addition of a dragon carving at the column that hid its original shape as a Doric column.
From the beginning, the Chinese settlements located in the city centre had been designed to be close and attached to each other. There was almost no room for any extensions, so some building owners chose to add some stories above their houses and used them for business.
The hybridity issues, especially among people who experienced colonial practices, had become an interesting topic of discussion among many scholars, one of whom was Homi Bhabha. In 1994 Bhabha discussed how the colonized group imitated the colonizing group. This condition triggered the emergence of various hybrid cultures. The people being colonized frequently instigated "a subversive strategy of subaltern agency that negotiates its own authority through a process of iterative 'unpicking' and incommensurable, insurgent relinking." (Bhabha, 1994: 185). Therefore, the Chinese and Malay communities, as the colonized people, represented what Antonio Gramsci and H.K. Bhabha classified as subaltern people, or human beings without agency or power in a society. Consequently, the addition of classical architectural styles, such as Doric columns, to traditional Malay or Chinese buildings valorised and added to their credibility as architectural artefacts, thus mimicking the authority of colonial power. Moreover, "Bhabha's intricate view of hybridity and infiltration of cultural symbols, values, and practices and his emphasis on identities as heterogeneous provide an understanding of multiple, contradictory and fluid modern identities," (Hosagrahar, J, 2012: 73). Hosagrahar observes that by empowering cultural multiplicity, the postcolonial theorists accept hybridity in comparison with the singular narrative of modernity.
During the early Dutch colonial period, (early 19th century) the government ruled the tin mining business in Muntok. This was the period of the emergence of many Malay and Chinese buildings that used European architectural elements in the form of Doric columns (Fig.14). The existence of Doric columns was possibly due to the representation of western classicism as a status symbol and representation of power in the residential buildings during the colonial era in Indonesia. Does the use of European architectural elements become the symbol of European influence and controlling colonial power in Indonesia? Moreover, when these elements were used by non -European people, do these become a symbol of submission? Or could this be a form of a "subversive strategy" to negotiate with the non-European authority in the colonial climate? The same questions also emerged when there were many repetitions of geometrical shapes on the buildings that were built at the beginning of the 20thcentury in Muntok during the Art Deco period. Did these components exist for the same reason, or were there other reasons that could explain the emergence of these repetitive shapes in many buildings?
One of the 20th century hybrid buildings in Muntok was the house of Lay A Bah (Fig.15). It was assumed to have been built between 1926 and 1930. The person who designed the house was unknown, but there is a great possibility that it was built by the family of Lay A Bah himself because his younger and older brothers were building contractors in Muntok at that time. The house consisted of three masses, which included the main building, a pavilion and a service building located at the back. An interesting part of this building is the shape of the roof on its main edifice that reminded us of the Indische architectural style that was popular at the beginning of the 20thcentury. The Indische style interpreted Indonesian traditional architecture combined with the western architectural logic (It was introduced by colonial architect Henry Maclaine Pont, as a form of an architectural hybrid that symbolized the unification of different architectural languages into a new one).
The impression of hybrid architecture appeared on the roof of its main edifice. The shape resembles the roof of the main aula of Technische Hooge-school in Bandung designed by Dutch colonial architect Henry Maclaine Pont. Besides the roof, the detail between thecolumns in the entrance area also looks unique, not only because of its shape, but also because this kind of shape was repeated and found in other buildings. The same shape existed and was repeated on other buildings, assumed to be built during the same period. This kind of shape emerged as a part of a growing architectural trend in Muntok. At the beginning of the colonial period, the most prevalent shapes were the elements of classical architecture, especially the use of Doric columns. Entering thebeginning of the 20thcentury, the architectural trend growing in Indonesia was the Indische architectural style and ArtDeco. These styles became the new trend and grew in Muntok, so the shapes that appeared most frequently were geometrical shapes as can be seen in the shown pictures (Fig.16).
The use of Doric columns as the main elements of Malay and Chinese residential buildings and also the use of new Indies roof in Muntok, has relevance to the hybridity theory of Homi Bhabha. Most likely, the Malay and Chinese officials used the European architectural elements to identify themselves as a colonial hegemony. Both the Malay and Chinese officials who owned the residential buildings received the ornamental trappings of power as a symbolic gesture related to their important role to support the Dutch colonial system. Another possibility was that, even though they were appointed by the Dutch colonial government, they used the European architecture elements as a kind of "subversive strategy" to negotiate their subliminal power and overt authority under the policy of the colonial government. Nevertheless, both the Malay and Chinese officials had a desire to show, in an elegant way, that they actually had an equal position with the European people. So, the use of European architectural elements was their way to demonstrate their desire to be at the same level, on par with the hegemonic authority and position of the colonial ruler.
Even though more proof is still needed to confirm these theoretical aspects, the use of European architectural elements (especially the Doric columns) in the Malay and Chinese residential buildings in Muntok, arean example of Bhabha's explanation of hybridity. It is a gentle form of subversive behaviour to raise the power of Chinese and Malay officials in the middle of a colonial climate. Although the Chinese and Malay ethnic groups had already had a good relationship with each other long before the Dutch ruled the Bangka Island, their architectural elements did not influence their respective cultures. Instead, they used the architectural elements of the colonial ruler, which represented the hegemony of the ruler ( Fig.13 and 17). However, on the other side of the coin, the architectural hybridity in Muntok also responded pragmatically. It is said that the building owners or designers chose a particular form or style just because they liked it or justto follow the trend at that time. When people used this simple reasoning or logic that subdues the political reasoning, the value of ornamentation changed into a kind of architectural hybridity in Muntok that is regarded as simplyan architectural style.

Conclusions
The image of Muntok cannot be separated from the history of itsdevelopment, which grew rapidly because of the tin mining and manufacturing activities supporting this town. The cultural mixture between European, Chinese and Malay communities is still ongoing after more than 150 years. This cultural interaction had created a unique hybrid architectural style, in addition to the traditional architectural style associated with each culture. Hybridity was not an afterthought, instead it was formed by the socio-cultural interactions along with the dynamic growth and development of the city during the colonial and postcolonial period. The hybridity in architecture did not directly appear physically, but more importantly it originated from the daily interaction of the Muntok people.
Cultural diversity (multiculturalism), together with the hybridity in architecture that had created a particular architectural tradition in Muntok for centuries, becomes an advantage to strengthen its image. This unique historical potentiality and hybridity can be regarded as not only a tool for critical analysis, but also as a main reference point for future heritage activities, such as preservation, conservation and revitalization efforts.