Mr. R. Braddell’s ancient times
R.O. Winstedt’s brief note is a point-by-point rebuttal of Roland Braddell’s “Study of Ancient Times in the Malay Peninsula” (JMBRAS Vol. XIV, Part III), defending Winstedt’s own interpretations in A History of Malaya and A History of Johore.
Summary
Winstedt challenges Braddell on several specific points: the identification of Ptolemy’s River Pelandas with Malay pelandok or melanda; the proposed link between Iskandar Shah and Skandasisya; the identification of Gangga Negara with Bruas; and the location of the commission for the Malay Annals, which Winstedt argues was at Pasir Raja on the Johore River rather than at Pasai (p. 142). He also corrects Braddell’s claim that Lenggiu does not exist, noting it survives as a river name, and explains van der Tuuk’s identification of Sang Nila Uttama with Tilottama on the basis of the standard triad of Indra’s nymphs (Suprabha, Tilottama, Menaka), arguing that a Malay scribe would naturally have interpolated the third name (p. 143). Winstedt further defends his suggestion that Bichitram Shah represents an interpolation in the Annals, pointing to the dual genealogies in Devic’s translation as evidence of textual confusion (pp. 143–144).