Article

The early history of Singapore, Johore and Malacca: an outline of a paper by G.P. Rouffaer

From Munshipedia, the MBRAS digital historical encyclopedia

The early history of Singapore, Johore and Malacca: an outline of a paper by G.P. Rouffaer

R.O. Winstedt’s 1922 outline in the Journal of the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society presents the core arguments of G.P. Rouffaer’s 174-page paper on the early geography and history of the Malaya Peninsula, published in Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indie (Deel 77, 1921). Rouffaer, who had previously identified tanah Melayu as the basin of the Jambi, attempts to reconstruct the political and commercial evolution of Singapore, Johore, and Malacca from the seventh to the fifteenth centuries by cross-referencing Chinese, Javanese, Tamil, Siamese, and Portuguese sources. Winstedt’s summary is framed as a guide for English-speaking readers, acknowledging that some of Rouffaer’s identifications—particularly regarding Langkasuka—may not gain universal acceptance.

Summary

The central problem Rouffaer addresses is the chronological and geographical confusion surrounding the earliest polities of the southern Peninsula. He rejects G. Ferrand’s 1918 theory that Malacca existed for seven centuries before the Portuguese arrival, arguing instead that the name Malayu (Marco Polo’s Malayur) referred originally to the Malay homeland in Jambi, not to the Straits settlement. Rouffaer proposes that Malacca existed as a minor polity by the mid-thirteenth century but only became a significant commercial centre around 1400, following immigration of Malays from Singapore or Tumasik. This reconstruction draws on the Pararaton, which records a captive from Pamelekahan (“Malacca lands”) in Majapahit in 1328, and on Siamese laws of 1360 that list Malaka among Siamese tributaries.

The paper’s most ambitious element is its attempt to trace a continuous toponymic chain for Singapore from the seventh century onward. Rouffaer identifies I-Tsing’s Mo-ho-hsin (690) with Mahasin, a Malay land recorded in a Majapahit inscription of 1034 as conquered by Erlangga, and equates this with the later Tasik or Temasik of the fourteenth century and Singapura of the fifteenth. Similarly, he links Wurawari (Old Javanese for “clear water”) of the tenth and eleventh centuries with Ganggayu and ultimately with Johore. These identifications are supported by the Tanjore inscription of Rajendracola I (1030), the Calcutta inscription of 1006, and a 924 inscription of Sri Wijayaloka mentioning Ujong Galoh. The paper further argues that Kertanagara’s failed expedition against Palembang (c. 1275) destroyed old Mahasin and drove sea Malays to Bintan, Muar, and the “Malacca lands,” while Majapahit’s dominance of the Straits from 1328 to 1389 preceded later Siamese suzerainty.

Winstedt closes with a brief note on neolithic celts from Singapore and Kota Tinggi held in Raffles’ Museum, and a separate short identification of the burong olok-olok as the Brown Gannet (Sula sula), contributed by A.W. Hamilton.

Key Findings

  • Rouffaer’s full paper spans 174 pages in Bijdragen Deel 77 (1921) and is explicitly stated to be “to be continued further” (p. 260).
  • The Pararaton records a dewa-putera named Tuhan Wuruju of Pamelekahan (“Malacca lands”) as a captive in Majapahit in 1328, providing early evidence for a polity in the Malacca region (p. 257).
  • Siamese laws enacted in 1360 cite “Ujong Tanah, Malaka, Malayu, Worawari” as tributary to Siam (p. 257).
  • The Tanjore inscription of Rajendracola I (1030) lists Kadaram (Kedah), Srivijayam (Palembang), Malayur (Jambi), and Mayirudingam, which Rouffaer equates with Mahasin/Singapore (p. 258).
  • A Sanskrit and Old Javanese inscription of 1006 in the Calcutta Museum records that Wurawari “had brought disaster to Java” (p. 258).
  • The Singapore monolith fragment in Raffles’ Museum bears lettering that Dr. Krom judges to resemble Majapahit characters and to antedate 1360 (p. 258).

Conclusion

Rouffaer’s definitive argument is that the early political geography of the southern Peninsula cannot be understood through the lens of later Malay or Portuguese sources alone; rather, a synthesis of Javanese, Tamil, Siamese, and Chinese evidence reveals a complex sequence of Javanese expansion (Erlangga, Kertanagara, Majapahit) that shaped the settlement patterns from which Singapore, Johore, and Malacca eventually emerged as distinct polities in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.

Context

  • The article draws on a wide range of primary sources: the Pararaton, Nagarakretagama, Sejarah Melayu, Siamese laws (via Gerini’s Researches, 1909), Portuguese chronicles (Barros 1553, D’Albuquerque 1557), the Tanjore inscription, the Calcutta inscription of 1006, and the 924 inscription of Sri Wijayaloka.
  • Historiographically, the paper represents a Dutch colonial-era attempt to reframe Peninsular history through Javanese and South Asian source traditions rather than relying on the Sejarah Melayu or Portuguese accounts, and it directly challenges the then-dominant French school (Ferrand) on the antiquity of Malacca.

References