• 张鸿南（印尼“棉兰王”张耀轩）
  张鸿南（1860年－1921年），字耀轩（张耀轩作Tjong Yiauw Hian），人称张阿辉（Tjong A Fie），[1]南洋富商，广东省梅县人，客家人，在印尼第三大城棉兰致富，是实业家、银行家、荷兰殖民政府委任为华人领袖甲必丹，家族在苏门达腊创建了庞大的事业。
  张鸿南建立的产业雇佣了超过10,000名工人。由于其在经营上的成功，他同德利苏丹国（英语：Sultanate of Deli）的统治者们维持了良好的关系，这些统治者中包括德利苏丹马克蒙·拉希德（Makmun Al Rasjid）以及荷兰殖民当局。1911年，张鸿南被任命为棉兰的华人社区的甲必丹（Majoor der Chineezen），以接替其兄张煜南（Tjong Yong Hian）。作为华人社区的最高领袖，他被当地人尊崇，因为他同该城的经济和政治系统联系密切。他投资于种植园、橄榄油厂及糖厂、日里银行、中华银行、潮汕铁路。

  2022年9月24日

• 张弼士（南洋巨商、实业家张振勋）
  张弼士（1841年－1916年），名振勋，原名肇燮（乡下称兆燮），字弼士，以字行，大清国广东潮州府大埔县人（今属梅州市大埔县）。大清国及中华民国实业家，马来西亚华侨领袖。
  张弼士16岁一个人下南洋谋生。先从印尼雅加达米店勤杂工做起，经过辛苦打拼，先后在苏门答腊、爪哇创办垦殖公司，在马来西亚槟城、印尼雅加达、亚齐等地开办远洋轮船公司，并在新加坡、雅加达、香港和广州开设药行。
  1893年，张弼士晋身仕途，成为“大清国驻槟城第一任副领事”。他于光绪21年（1895年）在烟台种植葡萄，后成为张裕葡萄酒创始人。他当时号称“南洋首富”，资产高达8000万两白银，而那时的清朝国库年收入也才8000万两。被美国人称作中国的“洛克菲勒”。
  由1890年代起，张弼士将大量资金调入中国，在广州创办过张裕安堂药行、广州亚通机器织布厂，置有靖海路的张裕安堂和广州河南新安里的五知堂等府第，广州朝天路的孝友街以其原建张孝友堂而得名。
  1900年黄河决口之后，张弼士发起募集到了百万余来赈灾。1907年4月，张弼士被任命为督办铁路大臣，主管粤汉铁路及其支线的事宜。可惜，大清国为贷款在1911年将铁路权抵押予外国财团。仅发回民间投资者原有股本六成，粤、湘、鄂与南洋绅商捐失惨重。
  在张弼士的发动下，新加坡、马来西亚两地相继创建了8所华文学校。

  2022年9月24日

• 「粱祖禄 1910.6.5」
  1910年6月5日，南洋劝业会在南京正式开幕，各界代表5000多人参加了开幕典礼。其中海外华侨的代表有：三宝垄代表林嶔㟄、测水代表潘炼精、渤良安代表游作舟、望加锡代表林渊源、西贡代表吴显禄、谏议里代表徐博兴、苏门答腊日里代表张煜南，巴达维亚的代表多达5人：梁祖禄、蔡奇风、陈富毛、陈沧浪和蔡金源。这些代表到达南京后，清政府官员事前与他们进行了会晤。当时的谏议里代表徐博兴，由于在筹办出品的过程中，“积劳成疾．抵宁数日遂病，于六月初七病故”。为此江督和商部联合向清廷上奏，要求从优抚恤。
  在开幕式上，侨商代表还被安排特别致词。尤其值得注意的是当时对劝业会第一号入场券的竞夺，有外国人拟以6000金购之，侨商粱祖禄闻讯，则“亟昂其值，出而购之”，最后出银1万元承买下来。
  在最终的评奖结果中，有3名华侨的展品获一等奖，新加坡王帮杰的各种印花布及斜纹布，巴达维亚梁祖禄的全分制茶器及研薯粉器、黄辉才的各种男女帽、粱瓒的四色木制小橱、梁连进的各种花柜、李金隆的蚕种、蚕茧及蚕丝，三宝垄曾昭光的香皂、李长茂的各种皮靴鞋，泗水叶兆辉的万年池酒、卫生酒及药酒等．都在获奖之列。

  2022年9月24日

• Borneo Post Online

  2022年9月24日

• 密码保护：1910年12月20日，孙中山、陈新政、庄银安在当时尚是英国殖民地的槟榔屿创设了《光华日报》。

  2022年9月24日

• 密码保护：Centre Asie du Sud-Est (CASE)

  2022年9月23日

• Chinese in Indonesia: A Background Study
  In this document we discuss the fourteen major varieties of Chinese which are reported to be spoken in the country of Indonesia, giving particular attention to the five largest communities: Hokkien, Cantonese, Hakka, Teochew, and Hainan. Additional sections discuss terms which have been used in the Indonesian context for referring to people of Chinese descent, overview of Chinese immigration into Indonesia over the previous centuries, and recent government policy toward Chinese languages and Chinese writing.

  2022年9月23日

• 密码保护：Indonesia Documentation Project

  2022年9月23日

• I chanced upon an inconspicuous album of paintings titled Lukisan Tradisional Tiongkok Karya Chiang Yu Tie (The Traditional Chinese Paintings of the Artist Chiang Yu Tie) in the digital recesses of the University of Sydney’s library catalogue. Piecing together scattered fragments of information, gleaned from Indonesian language blog posts, and just one journal article, I came to know the Chinese Indonesian painter Chiang Yu Tie (1916-2000).

  2022年9月23日

• Retracing and recovering their lost stories can be a difficult process. Very few women of Chinese descent are recorded in historical accounts of Indonesian modern art or in the collections and archives of Indonesian cultural institutions. Despite such obstacles, the importance of bringing to attention the forgotten stories and transnational experiences of women who held fluid cultural identities, however fragmentary, should not be overlooked. Not only are transnational women’s histories human histories after all, but their retelling also unveils the intersecting structures of patriarchy and nationalism that have for so long limited historical perspectives.
  (Portrait of Oei Sian Yok, photograph taken in 1953.)
  The difficulty of the process, and the elusiveness of women’s stories, means that it can feel remarkably fortuitous to come across their names in scholarship. My first encounter emerged from conversations with an academic mentor, who directed me toward the recently translated writings of a Chinese-Indonesian art critic, Oei Sian Yok (1926-2002). Between 1956 to 1961, Oei wrote hundreds of articles reviewing both international and Indonesian exhibitions for the Jakarta-based Star Weekly magazine, under the pseudonym Pembantu Seni Lukis Kita (Our Art Servant). At the time of publishing, the Chinese community in Indonesia faced discriminatory legislation that sought to address their ambiguous nationality status. Notably, the signing of the Sino-Indonesian Dual Nationality Treaty between China and Indonesia in 1955 forced Chinese Indonesians to choose to remain as citizens of just one country. In following years, the Chinese minority in Indonesia continued to suffer from repression and violence during the New Order era, which sought to efface all aspects of Chinese culture and language. Such a position of precarity can be discerned in Oei’s articles, which appeared to pave an alternative way of appraising art that overturned the binary antagonism between colonial and anti-colonial viewpoints. Contrary to the incendiary rhetoric of an Indonesia-centric, nationalist historiography of art, Oei wrote:
  “When we listen to foreigners talking about our own country, sometimes we don’t recognize what they say as something of our own anymore. They often hear or see something that we couldn’t perceive, because we have taken things around us for granted, as being ordinary; foreigners might rediscover things for us because they see with the “other eyes”.”
  Here in Oei’s writings, in which she acknowledges and affirms the contributions of “foreign eyes” to the Indonesian artistic imaginary, we glimpse a genealogy of transnational thinking in Indonesian art criticism. Implicit in her writings, is the provocation that the very idea of Indonesia as a modern nation has, and may very well continue to be, shaped by those who occupy ambiguous, transnational positions in the country—the internal “other”.

  2022年9月23日