Malayu, the name

Name "MALAYU"

by C.O. Blagden - Source: JRASSB Vol. 32, June 1899, pg.211~213 (Journal of the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society)
Image: Charles Otto Blagden [source: WikiCommons]

Notes.

The name "Malayu."

The national name of the Malays is mentioned, if not for the first time in recorded history, at any rate with a distinct territorial denotation, as early as the 7th century of our era by I Tsing, a Chinese, Buddhist pilgrim, in two of his works, the Ta-t'ang-si-yu-Ku-fa-Kao-sêng-ch'uan or ‘‘Memoirs of Eminent Priests who visited India and Neighbouring Countries to search for the Law under the Great T‘ang Dynasty." and the “Record of the Buddhist Religion as practised in India and the Malay Archipelago."

This latter work, the original title of which is Nan-hai-chi-Kuei-nai-fa-ch'uan, literally “The Record of the Sacred Law, sent home from the Southern Sea," has been translated, together with part of the former, into English, by J. Takakusu, a Japanese scholar, and was publislied in 1896 by the Oxford Clarendon Press. The author, who visited the Malay Archipelago in the winter of A.D. 671 - 2 and remained for some time in Sumatra, speaks of the Mo-lo-yu country as being one of the islands of the South Sea in which Buddhism then prevailed. He fixes its position by telling us that it lay to the west of Shih-li-fo-shih (Sri Bhoja or Bhoja), which place appears to be certainly identified with the San-bo-tsai of other Chinese chroniclers and the Sarbaza of the Arabian geographers of the 9th century. I Tsing tells us that Sri Bhoja had, in his time or shortly before his visit, annexed the Mo-lo-yu country,

Sri Bhoja was at this time a great centre of Buddhism, and I Tsing’s object in visiting it was to study the sacred Canon and the Sanskrit language. After a stay of six months, he went on to the Mo-lo-yu country and then to India, but about A.D. 688 he returned to Sri Bhoja, and remained there about six years, so that he had ample opportunity for becoming acquainted with the circumstances of the country. From other sources* this

*See especially Groeneveldt’s “Notes on the Malay Archipelago,” etc,, Essays on Indo-China, etc, 2nd series, vol. 1.

p.211

place Sri Bhoja, San-bo-tsai, Sarbaza, etc., as it is variously called, has been identified with almost absolute certainty as being situated on the Palembang river in South-eastern Sumatra; and the Mo-lo-yu country can therefore be confidently regarded as placed immediately to the west or north-west, that is to say about the middle of Sumatra. I Tsing, who stayed in the Mo-lo-yu country for two months on his way to India, says that it was fifteen days’ sail from Bhoja, the capital of Sri Bhoja; and it must have been situated approximately under the Equator, for in the middle of the eighth month and in the middle of spring the sun cast no shadow there at noon. Moreover it was half-way on the route between Bhoja and Ka-cha (a place in or near Achin or Kedah, more probably the former, as it was south of the country of the Naked People, ie., the Nicobar and Andaman islands). From Ka-cha ships sailed in thirty days to Nagapatana (Negapatam), and I Tsing himself took ship there for Tamralipti (Tamluk), a port near the mouth of the Hooghly.

It seems therefore that the Mo-lo-yu country was not at this time a purely inland State, but had a coast line on the Straits more or less opposite to where Malacca now stands.

The language of the Mo-lo-yu country was that which served as a lingua franca in the Archipelago generally, and was known to I Tsing and other Chinese authors as the K'un-lun language. This term was derived, apparently, from the Chinese name of Pulau Condor, on the same principle on which slaves from these regions are often mentioned in Chinese chronicles as K'un-lun slaves, from whatever part of the Archipelago they might have actually been imported. The reason seems to have been that the Pulau Condor people were the first of the Southern islanders to come into contact with the Chinese, who afterwards loosely extended the term to the inhabitants of the Archipelago generally. This appears to be the meaning of the explanation I Tsing gives when, speaking of the Archipelago as a whole and after enumerating some of the principal islands, he goes on to say, “They were generally known by the general name of ‘Country of K‘un-lun’ since (the people of) K‘un-lun first visited Kochin and Kwangtung,”

That the language was really Malay appears from the fact that the "pin-lang fruit" is mentioned by I Tsing as being used

p.212

in the Sri Bhoja country and other islands of the Archipelago for chewing with nutmegs, cloves and Barus camphor, for the purpose of rendering the mouth fragrant. Pin-lang is of course the Malay word pinang, areca nut.

In I Tsing’s time, it seems therefore that the Malay country par excellence was in Central Sumatra, a fact agreeing very well with native Malay tradition on the subject, which derives the origin of many of the Malays of the Peninsula from the old Central Sumatran State of Menangkabau.

The etymological signification of the national name Malayu has been a subject of much dispute. I Tsing does not throw any additional light upon it ; but he makes it quite clear that the word had in his time a local significance, and denoted the particular region from which a large part of the Malays of the modern Tanah Malayu love to trace their origin.

C. 0. Blagden.

p.213

Origin of the Malays & Migration

by William Marsden - Source: "The History of Sumatra", 3rd Edition, 1811 - Chapter 18, "Menangkabau", pp 325-326

ORIGIN OF MALAYS.

It has hitherto been considered as an obvious truth, and admitted without examination that, wherever they are found upon the numerous islands forming this archipelago, they or their ancestors must have migrated from the country named by Europeans (and by them alone) the Malayan peninsula or peninsula of Malacca, of which the indigenous and proper inhabitants were understood to be Malays; and accordingly in the former editions of this work I spoke of the natives of Menangkabau as having acquired their religion, language, manners, and other national characteristics from the settling among them of genuine Malays from the neighbouring continent.

It will however appear from the authorities I shall produce, amounting as nearly to positive evidence as the nature of the subject will admit, that the present possessors of the coasts of the peninsula were on the contrary in the first instance adventurers from Sumatra, who in the twelfth century formed an establishment there, and that the indigenous inhabitants, gradually driven by them to the woods and mountains, so far from being the stock from whence the Malays were propagated, are an entirely different race of men, nearly approaching in their physical character to the negroes of Africa.

MIGRATION FROM SUMATRA.

The evidences of this migration from Sumatra are chiefly found in two Malayan books well known, by character at least, to those who are conversant with the written language, the one named Taju assalatin or Makuta segala raja-raja, The Crown of all Kings, and the other, more immediately to the purpose, Sulalat assalatin or Penurun-an segala rajaraja, The Descent of all (Malayan) Kings. Of these it has not been my good fortune to obtain copies, but the contents, so far as they apply to the present subject, have been fully detailed by two eminent Dutch writers to whom the literature of this part of the East was familiar. Petrus van der Worm first communicated the knowledge of these historical treatises in his learned Introduction to the Malayan Vocabulary of Gueynier, printed at Batavia in the year 1677; and extracts to the same effect were afterwards given by Valentyn in Volume 5 pages 316 to 320 of his elaborate work, published at Amsterdam in 1726. The books are likewise mentioned in a list of Malayan Authors by G.H. Werndly, at the end of his Maleische Spraak-kunst, and by the ingenious Dr. Leyden in his Paper on the Languages and Literature of the Indo-Chinese Nations, recently published in Volume 10 of the Asiatic Researches.

The substance of the information conveyed by them is as follows; and I trust it will not be thought that the mixture of a portion of mythological fable in accounts of this nature invalidates what might otherwise have credit as historical fact. The utmost indeed we can pretend to ascertain is what the natives themselves believe to have been their ancient history; and it is proper to remark that in the present question there can be no suspicion of bias from national vanity, as we have reason to presume that the authors of these books were not Sumatrans.

The original country inhabited by the Malayan race (according to these authorities) was the kingdom of Palembang in the island of Indalus, now Sumatra, on the river Malayo, which flows by the mountain named Maha-meru, and discharges itself into the river Tatang (on which Palembang stands) before it joins the sea. Having chosen for their king or leader a prince named Sri Turi Buwana, who boasted his descent from Iskander the Great, and to whom, on that account, their natural chief Demang Lebar Daun submitted his authority, they emigrated, under his command (about the year 1160), to the south-eastern extremity of the opposite peninsula, named Ujong Tanah, where they were at first distinguished by the appellation of orang de-bawah angin or the Leeward people, but in time the coast became generally known by that of Tanah malayo or the Malayan land.

William Marsden's Map of Sumatra

CC Brown's MA: Melayu river

by CC Brown - Source: "Sejarah Melayu or The Malay Annals", October 1952 - JMBRAS Vol. 25, No. 2/3 (159), p. 24 (Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society)

Here now is the story of a city called Palembang in the land of Andelas. It was ruled by Demang Lebar Daun, a descendant of Raja Shulan, and its river was the Muara Tatang. In the upper reaches of the Muara Tatang was a river called the Mĕlayu, and on that river was a hill called Si-Guntang Mahameru.

J Leyden's MA: Sungey Malayu

by John Leyden - Source: "Malay Annals: translated from the Malay language", 1821, p. 20

There is a country in the land of Andalás named Paralembang, which is at present denominated Palembang, the raja of which was denominated Damang Lebar Dawn, (Chieftain Broad-leaf,) who derived his origin from Raja Sulan, (Chillan ?) whose great-grandson he was. The name of its river was Muartatang, into which falls another river named Sungey Malayu, near the source of which is a mountain named the mountain Sagantang Maha Miru.

Stamford Raffles map of Sumatra [source- National Library Singapore]

GP Rouffaer's Early History

by RO Winstedt - Source: "Early History of Singapore, Johore and Malacca; an outline of a paper by G.P. Rouffaer" 1922, p. 257-260

Jour. Straits Branch R. A. Soc., No. 86 1922

In the Bijdragen tot de Taal- Land - en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indie (Deel 77), 1921, G. P. Rouffaer, who first identified tanah Mĕlayu as the basin of the Jambi, has published a startling paper on the geography of the Malaya Peninsula. It is probable that his surmises as to the situation of Langkasuka and several other theories will not be accepted, but his paper should be in the hands of every serious student of Peninsular history.

Roufiaer brushes aside G. Ferrand’s recent theory (Journal Asiatique , 1918) that Malacca existed, as the unreliable Gaspar Correa wrote, for 700 years before the coining of the Portuguese, under the name Malayu, Marco Polo’s Malayur. Malayur is only a Tamil form of Malayu, the original home of the Malays in Jambi. Would Fra Odorigo van Pordenone and Ibn Batutah have been silent over the existence of such an early Malacca? Would the Nagarakretagama (1365 A.D.), recording the conquests of Hayam Wuruk, the famous ruler of Majapahit, have then referred to the Peninsula simply as Pahang?

On the other hand it is hardly likely that in 1403 Malacca "belonged to Siam," as the Ming annals say; from 1405-1413 was a Hindu state under Permaisura and becoming Muslim under Gujerati influence in 1414 suddenly won trade and empire. The Pararaton mentions two Malay princesses captured at the fall of Jambi and one Tuhan Wuruju (= Bongsu), a dewa-putĕra (i.e. son of a Ksatriya dewa) of Pamelekahan or "Malacca lands," a captive in Majapahit in 1328 A.D. Again Gerini tells how Siamese laws enacted in 1360 A.D. cite as tributary to Siam "Ujong Tanah, Malaka, Malayu, Worawari" (Researches, 1909, pp. 531-2). Probably Barros (1553 A.D.) and the Sĕjarah Mĕlayu are right in saying that Malacca existed as early as the middle of the XIIIth century A.D. and became a commercial centre about 1400 A.D. owing to immigration of Malays from Singapore or Tumasik, the "sea-country.”

Barros (1553), the most reliable of Portuguese chroniclers, relates how one Sangesinga (? Sangyang Singha) ruler of Singapore was murdered by his guest Permaisura, who was a fugitive from East Java owing to disturbances on the death of Pararisa (= 0. J. Bhra Wicesa, who ascended the throne of Majapahit in 1389 A.D. and ruled some 40 years). The king of Siam attacked the usurper who fled to Pago on the Muar. His whilom followers, the Cellates (= Orang Laut) opened Bertam near Malacca.

p.257

D ’Albuquerque (1557) relates how, when Malacca was founded, a Bhatara ruled Tumapel in Java and the Permaisura fled to Singapore , murdered its chief and ruled it for five years, until the ruler of Patani, brother of the murdered chief, drove him to Muar, whence he went to Bintao (Bertam) and founded Malacca. The reference to Tumapel is valuable.

The Sĕjarah Mĕlayu (Chapters 5 and 10) give the Malay tradition of Singapore’s relationship with Java. The end of chapter 10 refers to its destruction by Hayam Wuruk after 1338 A.D. when according to the Pararaton, Gajadmada took his famous oath not to eat palapa until 10 countries including Palembang, Pahang and Tumasik had been subjected to Majapahit and before 1365 A.D. when the Nagarakretagama tells how all the islands and states in the east and west of the Malay Archipelago had been subdued. The lettering on the fragment of the Singapore monolith, now in Raffles’ Museum, is said by Dr. Krom to resemble Majapahit characters and to antedate somewhat 1360 A.D. Dr. Krom is studying a cast of the fragment.

How old is Singapore? I’Tsing mentions in 690 A.D. a state "Mo-ho-hsin” at the south of the Peninsula = Mahasin “the great Salt state,” which Rouffaer identifies with a Malay land "Hasin” recorded in a Majapahit inscription of 1034 A.D. to have been conquered by Erlangga, a prince in East Java (born 991 A.D. — reigned 1019-1042 A.D.). Probably it is Ibn Khordadybeh’s "Schalahit" (Sĕlat). According to Rouffaer it was Tasik = Temasik (of the 14th century) = old Samudra = Singapura (of the 15th cent.), while on the mainland was Wura-wari (old Jav. = "clear water") from the 10th to 11th centuries = Ganggayu i.e. Gangga ayu (O.J. = "fresh water") before 1450 but still known at the time of the Sĕjarah Mĕlayu (1612 A.D.) = Johor of the XVIth century. An inscription of 1006 A.D. in Sanskrit and old Javanese, in the Calcutta Museum, tells how Wurawari had brought disaster to Java, and the Siamese laws of 1360 A.D. count it among places subject to Siam. In the Tanjore inscription of Rajendracola I (1030 A.D.), Kadaram = Kedah, Srivijayam = Palembang, Malayur = Jambi, and Rouffaer suggests Mayirudingam = Great Yirudingam = Chao Ju Kua’s Great Ji-lo-t’ing = Mahasin = Singapore; Ilangacogam = Langkasuka = Ganggayu = Wurawari ; Ma-Ppappalam = ? Pahang or Penang, and Mevilimbangam "the walled" may be the Dindings or Klang. Langkasuka = Chao Ju Kua’s Ling-ya-ssi-kia (1225 A.D.) = the Negarakretagama’s Langkasuka (1365) = I-Tsing’s Lang-ka-su (692) = Langgasu or Langga of the Chinese annals of the Liang dynasty (502-556) = ? the Lanka of the Ramayana. The Calcutta inscription speaks of Luaram (= lwah O.J. "river, water" and ram Skt. = rama "sweet, charming") as its capital.

p.258

An inscription of 924 A.D. of prince Sri Wijayaloka of East Java speaks of Ujong Galoh = Ujong Putri = Jong Galoh or the Hujung Galoh of Erlangga’s inscription. Galoh 'jewel' = jauhar (Arabic) = Johore, and the name fits the honorific Ratna-parayana of the old Javanese Ramayana and the "Golden Chersonese" of Ptolemy, whose Sabana will correspond with the XVIth century Straits of Sabang and he the Karimuns, Hasin or Galoh. Was it from the Biduanda Kallang of Kallang river that the mysterious Kalangs, prisoners of war mentioned in old Javanese romance, came? Among the Solo regalia (upachara) are a Snake (Ardawalike) and a Roc (Garuda) ; among the Jokja regalia only the Snake. These must be symbols of the victory of Erlangga’s as Vishnus’s Garuda over the 'Snake' princes of Wurawari, Hasin, Langka, just as of the other regalia an Elephant symbolizes Patih Gajahmada, a Cock Hayam Wuruk and a Buffalo-Calf Java’s victory over Menangke(r)bau and so on. To this day a Garuda is the symbol of Hindu Bali (first conquered by Java in Erlaugga’s time), while the Muslim mosques and art of Java took a Snake as the symbol of Islam’s victory over Hinduism.

Apparently about 1135 A.D. Daha brought Galoh nearly to ruin. A Panji tale (Bij. Kon. Inst. 2, VII, 1863) speaks of a Klana Tunjong-Seta, prince of the island Kenchana, (= "gold" and ? the "Golden Chersonese"), who desiring to win a Daha princess, Dewi Angreni, (or Raden Galoh), attacked Java and failed, slain by Pangeran Klana Jayang Sari, alias Raden Panji Kuda Wanengpati, a prince of Jenggala in the service of the ruler of Kediri. The people of Kenchana and three princes were carried captive to Java. Perhaps the Sĕjarah Mĕlayu (chapters 14 and 19) show that Middle Java and Ujong Tanah once came to grips and that Malacca, or really Galoh, had to do with Daha in the Panji period.

Though the early Portuguese knew nothing of Galoh, Ganggayu or Langka, the Sĕjarah Mĕlayu (chapter 1) connects Ganggayu with Johore and interprets the word to mean "a treasure-house of jewels," which fits both galoh and jauhar.

Between 1275 when Kertanagara of Tumapel sent his ill-fated expedition against Palembang and Marco Polo’s visit in 1292, apparently Kertanagara had destroyed Mahasin i.e. old Singapore (Sĕjarah Mĕlayu. chapter 5). But Marco Polo mentions "Pentam" or Bintan, whither perhaps one band of fugitives had fled, and the Sĕjarah Mĕlayu records how the founders of the new town Tumasik came from Bintan. The Javanese name, Tumasik, may have been given by men of Tumapel, who, after Majapahit triumphed over their country in 1293 owing to the absence of Tumapel’s forces in Palembang, stayed in Sumatra and the Malay islands. Probably Kertanagara’s attack on Hasin drove sea Malays (wong asin) not only to Bintan but to Muar and "Malacca lands," opposite which were the "Five Islands" that in early Chinese charts take the place of Malacca. Majapahit’s attack about 1360 A.D. must have sent yet a further hand in the same direction. From 1328 down to the death of Hayam Wuruk, the great Majapahit conqueror, in 1389, the Malacca Straits would be under Javanese influence and only later under the Siamese suzerainty of which Chinese annals and Siamese laws speak.

p.259

Such in briefest outline is Rouffaer's paper, which fills 174 pages and is to be continued further.

Though it has no direct bearing on this paper, it is interesting to note that Raffles' Museum has not only a neolithic celt from Singapore but also several from Kota Tinggi in Johore: all made from local stone.

p.260

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse