The history of the peninsula in folk-tales
R. O. Winstedt, a colonial administrator and collector of Malay oral literature, published this short article in the Journal of the S. B. R. A. Soc. in 1911, arguing that the folk-tales of the Malay Peninsula—long dismissed as mere entertainment—can supply supplementary evidence for pre-Malaccan Malay settlements along the coast. His thesis is that these tales, though riddled with anachronism and fiction, preserve genuine memories of early, now-forgotten settlements that antedate the founding of Malacca in 1400.
Summary
Winstedt writes in direct response to a historiographical debate in the journal between Mr. Blagden and Mr. Wilkinson. Blagden had cited a passage from the Javanese Nagarakretagama (composed 1365) listing numerous peninsular place-names—Pahang, Langkasuka, Kelantan, Trengganu, Tumasik, Kelang, Kedah, Muar, and a doubtful Sungai Ujong—but no Malacca, and used this to argue for widespread coastal settlement in the mid-fourteenth century. Wilkinson, by contrast, maintained that the southern peninsula was visited but never truly occupied by a civilized race until the Malays arrived around 1400, and found more conclusive evidence of powerful states like Langkasuka in the north than of any permanent colonies in the south. Winstedt sides with Blagden but concedes that a list of names of doubtful etymology is insufficient proof on its own; he proposes that the folk-tales, carefully sifted, may fill the evidential gap.
The methodological caution Winstedt exercises is notable. He acknowledges that the tales are pre-Muhammadan in origin, that they contain accretions from Hindu cosmogony and later historical incident, that the same narrative is transplanted across locations (Malim Dewa is prince of Pasai in the Achinese version but prince of Bandar Muar in the peninsular version), and that rhapsodists themselves declare historical sequence while admitting they have lost the connecting links. His criterion for historical value is therefore conservative: the tales must at minimum recount the adventures of Malay heroes and leaders of Malay settlers, and the places they name must correspond to identifiable locations. He points to the fragmentary remains near Pangkalan Kempas on the Linggi river (noted by Wilkinson) as a possible archaeological correlate, and to the tale of Raja Ambong (printed by Sir William Maxwell) which places a chief at Tanjong Bima and his cousin at Kuala Limau Purut on the Linggi.
Winstedt then appends a brief analytical catalogue of eight tales, extracting every place-name mentioned. The distribution is telling: the north (Kedah, Trengganu, Patani) yields far more tales than the south, which he reads as corroborating Wilkinson’s observation that the north had more powerful and better-attested states. The southern tales (Muar, Linggi, Negri Sembilan) are fewer and, according to the rhapsodists themselves, deal with comparatively recent events. The recurring appearance of Bengkalis, just across the Malacca Straits, in both northern and southern tales suggests a shared cultural horizon.
Key Findings
- The Nagarakretagama (1365) lists Pahang, Langkasuka, Kelantan, Trengganu, Tumasik, Kelang, Kedah, Muar, and a doubtful Sungai Ujong, but contains no mention of Malacca (p. 183).
- Wilkinson’s position, which Winstedt seeks to qualify, is that the southern peninsula “were often visited, they were never really occupied by a civilized race till the Malays came in A.D. 1400” (p. 183).
- Wilkinson finds “more conclusive evidence of powerful Buddhist states like that of Langkasuka in the North than of any permanent colonies in the South”; Winstedt observes that the folk-tales bear out this north-south asymmetry in quantity (p. 186).
- The rhapsodist identifies Nyiur Chondong in the Malim Dewa tale as Malacca, and the tradition that Lindongan Bulan is an old name for Kedah is “never questioned by any rhapsodist” Winstedt met (pp. 185, 188).
- The tale of Raja Ambong places a chief at Tanjong Bima and his cousin at Kuala Limau Purut on the Linggi river, near the fragmentary remains Wilkinson noted at Pangkalan Kempas (pp. 184–185).
- The new Perak territorial boundary had brought into prominence the river Langkasuka, and Winstedt hopes European officers entering the newly administered states will throw “fresh light on the forgotten history of primitive settlements” (p. 186).
Conclusion
Winstedt’s definitive takeaway is modest but methodologically significant: the collection of simple folk-tales is “not quite such an idle employment as it may at first sight appear,” and when read with appropriate caution—accepting only broad deductions, not precise identifications—they can add “additional weight” to the case for pre-Malaccan Malay settlement along the peninsula’s coast. He does not claim the tales will resolve the debate; rather, they constitute a body of evidence that, combined with the Nagarakretagama and future archaeological work in the newly administered northern states, may gradually fill the gap between the fragmentary remains and the well-documented history of Malacca.
Context
- Winstedt was serving as a colonial administrator in the Straits Settlements and Federated Malay States at the time of writing; his interest in folk-tales was part of a broader administrative-cum-scholarly practice of collecting “unconsidered trifles” in the field, and the article’s closing hope that “European officers” entering the new Perak territory will illuminate forgotten history reflects the contemporary assumption that colonial expansion would serve as an engine of historical discovery (p. 186).
- The article draws on collections by Sir William Maxwell (Numbers 18 and 19 of the journal) and by Mr. Skeat (for pawang sayings), situating Winstedt’s contribution within the small network of colonial-era collectors working in the peninsula at the turn of the century.