Our appetite for fantasy is a reflection of our need to reinvent the past. In doing so we bring hope into our present. Moral integrity, loyalty to our leaders, abiding by the law and defending the weak, form the cornerstone of how Hang Tuah's legend has been defined through the centuries. Nevertheless, the lack of primary sources, and embellishment of stories about Hang Tuah in secondary sources, led some to believe that he had never existed as a real person.
Historians agree that the Sultanate of Malacca and its palace near the Malacca river did exist. See:
1. The Real Location of Malacca Found?
2. Pelabuhan Kesultanan Melayu Melaka
 |
| 'Pelabuhan Melaka, c.1480' by Ismail Embong (1987). |
Historians also agree that local sources pertaining to the existence of Hang Tuah are secondary, compiled from memory and folklore and subsequently collated and published some 200 years after the actual event.
Firstly, there is the Hikayat Hang Tuah (Hang Tuah's Saga) of which text is believed to have existed before the 1700s. The actual manuscript is dated 1849 and it was first published in 1908, edited by Sulaiman bin Muhammed Nur and William Shellabear. It contains embellishment of stories about Hang Tuah where the warrior is described as having super-human and mystical powers.
Secondly, there is the Sejarah Melayu (Malay Annals) or Sulalatus Salatin written by Tun Sri Lanang around 1612. In Sejarah Melayu, Hang Tuah is mentioned in 19 out of its 28 chapters. Arguably Sejarah Melayu gives a more realistic account of Hang Tuah. Despite containing some myths and embellishments, it does contain some useful historical facts. One of them would be the fact that ‘Hang Tuah’ is not the real name of the legendary warrior. Instead, his real name was Daeng Mempawah and he was born in the district of Bajeng in Gowa, Makassar. It is written that when he was 12, he was sent by his father, a Raja of Bajeng, to Malacca to be trained as a soldier during the reign of Sultan Mansur Shah. It was Sultan Mansur Shah who gave Daeng Mempawah the nickname Hang Tuah.
Was Hang Tuah a real person?
We should not be blindsided by the argument of unreliability of local sources as we can always cross-refer with foreign sources. Thus, we should not shy away from using it to support primary and contemporaneous sources.
I personally think that Hang Tuah was a real person. Perhaps stories of heroism about him was combined with stories of person/s who held the post of Laksamana. I believe that the deeds of the following Laksamanas became known in time as the deeds of Hang Tuah:
1) Laksamana 'Wei-zhe-ran-na' (Sang Bija Ratna?) who led Malacca's tribute envoy to China in April 1469. (source: Ming’s History i.e. Ming Shi-Lu (MSL) as translated by Geoff Wade, 1994).
Clues:
(a) The title "Duan-ya-ma-la-di-na-da" (端亞媽剌的那大) is used to describe 'Wei-zhe-ran-na' in MSL. I believe it refers to 'Tuan Laksamana Di Raja';
(b) Records of his untimely death in Annam (now in Vietnam) can only be found in MSL. Therefore most Malaccans were unaware of the news of his murder that occurred on his return journey.
2) The unnamed Laksamana who led Malacca's tribute envoy to China in August 1481 (source: MSL);
Clues:
(a) "Duan-ya-ma-la-di-na-zha" ( 端亞媽剌的那查) to describe him in MSL which I believe to be 'Tuan Laksamana DiRaja';
(b) Laksamana Daeng Mempawah as referred to in Tun Sri Lanang's Sejarah Melayu fits the time frame;
(c) The eloquent and diplomatic characteristics of the Laksamana referred to in the 1481 visit to China (MSL) is reflected in the tribute & diplomatic exchanges between the Sultanate of Malacca and Ryukyuan Kingdom around 1480-81 as recorded in Rekidai Hoan (based on its translation by Atushu Kobata & Mitsugi Matsada (1969)). A few letters were recorded to be personally issued by the unnamed Laksamana. See: Laksamana Melaka di Istana Ming, Laksamana Melaka di Istana Ryukyu & Peranan 'Hang Tuah' Dalam Kes Pertikaian Melaka - Annam.
d) possibly the same unnamed Laksamana is referred to as “Duan Ya-zhi” (MSL: Tuan Haji) who led Malacca’s tribute envoy to China in 1508 (source: MSL). In Hikayat Hang Tuah, Laksamana Hang Tuah and Maharaja Setia were recorded to have performed Haj pilgrimage in Mecca. Perhaps the 1508 trip to China was made after completing his pilgrimage. See: Kisah Hang Tuah Menunaikan Haji.
3) Laksamana Hang Nadim (Source: Sejarah Melayu).
Clue:
Overlapping identity i.e. Sejarah Melayu recorded that it was Laksamana Hang Nadim who 'kidnapped' Tun Teja and battled Pahang's chase at Pulau Keban (now Pulau Aceh) in Endau, Mersing. According to Hikayat Hang Tuah, it was Hang Tuah who pursuaded Tun Teja to elope to Malacca.
Was Hang Tuah a Chinese?
I do not think so. Records in MSL pertaining to the visit of two Laksamanas in 1469 and 1481, as well as Duan Ya-zhi (MSL: Tuan Haji) (1508) indicates they were described as fan [foreign] people. I believe that the following envoy leaders as recorded by MSL as “Melaka Affiliation” were local Malaccans:
- Bai-li-mi-su-la (拜里迷蘇剌) (Parameswara) (1405);
- A-bu-la Jia-xin (阿卜剌賈信) (1409);
- Bai-li-mi-su-la (拜里迷蘇剌)(Parameswara) (1411);
- Xi-li Sa-ma-lan-zha-ya (西里撒麻剌扎牙) the nephew of Bai-li-mi-su-la (Parameswara) (1412);
- Sai-di-la-zhe (賽的剌者), nephew of Bai-li-mi-su-la (Parameswara) (1413);
- Mu-wo Sa-yu-di-er Sha (Megat Iskandar Shah) son of Bai-li-mi-su-la (Parameswara) (1414);
- Sa-li-wang-la-zha (撒里汪剌查), younger brother of Mu-gan Sa-yu-er Sha (Megat Iskandar Shah) (1418);
- Duan-gu Ma-la-shi-di (段姑麻剌什的) (Tuanku …?) (1420);
- Xi-li Ma-ha-la-zhe (西哩麻哈剌者) (Sri Maharaja Muhammad Shah) (1424);
- Na-la-die-ba-na (那剌迭扒那) (1424);
- Yi-si-ma (一思馬) (MSL: Ismail) (1426);
- Xi-li Ma-ha-la-zhe (西哩麻哈剌者) (Sri Maharaja Muhammad Shah) (1433 & 1434);
- La-dian Ba-la (剌殿把剌) (MSL: Raden…) younger brother of Xi-li Ma-ha-la-zhe (Sri Maharaja Muhammad Shah) (1435);
- Mo-jia-zhe-la-zhe Man-da-li (末加者剌吒滿達利) (MSL: Megat DiRaja Menteri?) (1439);
- Song-na-di-la-ye ( 宋那的剌那) (Sri Nara Di Raja?) (1444);
- Mo-zhe-na (謨者那) (1445);
- Ma-na-hong (馬哪吽) (1455);
- Duan-ma-gu Ling-ding (端麻古凌釘)(1455);
- Su-dan Mang-su Sha (蘇丹茫速沙)(Sultan Mansur Shah) (1459):
- Ba-la-si (八剌思) (1468);
- Duan-ya-ma-la-di-na-da Wei-zhe-ran-na (Tuan Laksamana DiRaja (Sang Bija Ratna?))(1469);
- Duan-ya-ma-la-di-na-zha (端亞媽剌的那查) (Tuan Laksamana DiRaja) (1481)
- Duan Ya-zhi (端亞智) (MSL: Tuan Haji) (1508).
According to MSL, Malacca did have Chinese tribute envoy leaders and categorized as “Chinese affliation” in MSL which are as follows:-
- Wu-bao-chi-na (巫寶赤納) (1431);
- Nai Ai (柰靄) (1456). He was recorded to have committed rape in Guangdong and subsequently committed suicide;
- Huo-zhe Ya-liu (火者亞劉) originally named Xiao Ming-ju (蕭明舉) who was an interpreter for Duan Ya-zhi (Tuan Haji) and later worked in Malacca. Huo-zhe Ya-liu became Malaccan envoy leader for 1509 & 1510. MSL recorded that he was involved in criminal rebellion, murdered Duan Ya-zhi (Tuan Haji) and the Malaccan delegates, and was sentenced to death by slow slicing. See: Di Manakah Hang Tuah Ketika Melaka Diserang Portugis?
Hang Tuah or Hang Tua?
I do agree with the proposition that "Tuah" in "Hang Tuah", at the time when stories about him were written, did not mean "luck". This is so as the 17th & 18th century Malay word for "luck" was "oontoong". See extract from 'A Dictionary: English and Malayo, Malayo and English' (1701) by Thomas Bowrey.
Although I agree that the word ‘Tuah’ in ‘Hang Tuah’ means ‘elder’ or ‘old’ (Malay: Tua) (Jawi: توه ), the original pronounciation and transliteration for the word was "Tooah". See extract from Thomas Bowrey's dictionary:
According to James Howison in 'A dictionary of the Malay tongue, as spoken in the Peninsula of Malacca, the islands of Sumatra, Java, Borneo, Pulo Pinang' (1801), "Tooah" was the transliteration of the Jawi word " تواه " as well as " توه ". See extract of James Howison’s dictionary:
The ‘Father of Modern Malay Literature’, Munshi Abdullah, in his book 'Kisah Pelayaran Abdullah ke Kelantan' (1832), transliterated the same word to "Tuah" which connotes the meaning of “ketua” (leader), as well as “tua” (old, aged or elder). See extract below:
I would therefore argue that “Tooah” (subsequently spelt “Tuah”) is the actual pronounciation of the Malay word for “elder” and “aged” and definitely not an error made during transliteration or as an attempt to suit the European tongue. As such, there is no necessity to change Hang Tuah’s name to "Hang Tua", "Hang Tuha", "Hang Toh" or "Hang Toha".
The existence of a new meaning i.e. luck for "Tuah", and the introduction of a new spelling i.e. "Tua" to replace "Tooah" or "Tuah" / " توه " or " تواه " should not corrupt the original pronounciation of the proper noun specifically given to the Laksamana of Malacca by both famous works of literature.
In my view, the etymology of the word "Tuah" (meaning: luck) originated from folklore and literature based on Hang Tuah which is synonymous with his position as Laksamana DiRaja (Royal Admiral). As a result of the portrayal of his bravery, diplomacy, loyalty, multilingual skills, and super-human abilities, he is considered to be “lucky” or “fortunate” by the 19th century readership to such an extent the word “Tuah” itself developed into a second meaning i.e. ‘luck’ or ‘lucky’ (Malay: ‘tuah’ or ‘bertuah’). Further, the prefix "Laksamana" itself originates from the Sanskrit word "लक्ष्मण" (lakSmaNa) which means “lucky” or “he who has the signs of fortune”. Whilst the Sanskrit word “लक्ष्मन्” (Laksman) means "chief". This, I believe, reinforced the linguistic development of the second meaning (luck) for the word “Tuah”, and its interchangeability with the meaning of the word "ketua" (chief or leader).
Conclusion
I believe we cannot be sure of everything in history. Human memories recorded in folklore and historical literature could be completely false, and often are. However, we can get pretty close. Some events, like our Malaysia Day and the exit of Singapore from Malaysia have so much well documented evidence that we can have as close to full certainty as is possible on them. Other events, like the existence of Laksamana Hang Tuah or the history of SriVijaya and Kedah Tua, have almost no contemporary evidence of their existence. However, we can still be reasonably sure they did exist based on secondary and non-contemporary sources that line up with other things.
Sources:
1. The Ming Shi-lu (veritable records of the Ming Dynasty) as a source for Southeast Asian history, 14th to 17th centuries, Geoffrey Wade (1994).
2. Ryukyuan Relations with Korea and South Seas Countries: An Annotated Translation of Documents in the Rekidai Hōan. Kobata, Atsushi and Mitsugu Matsuda (1969)
3. Mao Qiling. Mansi hezhi [A Comprehensive Record of the Aboriginal Chieftains]. Taipei: Guangwen Shuju, (1968).
4. Sejarah Melayu diusahakan oleh W.G. Shellabear, Fajar Bakti, (1978).
5. Hikayat Hang Tuah, Kassim Ahmad (ed.), Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, 1975.
6. 'A Dictionary: English and Malayo, Malayo and English' (1701) by Thomas Bowrey.
7. 'A dictionary of the Malay tongue, as spoken in the Peninsula of Malacca, the islands of Sumatra, Java, Borneo, Pulo Pinang' (1801) by James Howison.
8. 'Kisah Pelayaran Abdullah ke Kelantan' (1832), by Munshi Abdullah.
9. Spoken Sanskrit: http://spokensanskrit.org/index.php?mode=3&script=hk&tran_input=laksmana&direct=au&anz=100
This article is adapted from my answer in Quora titled 'Was Hang Tuah a real person?', August 2019.
.jpg)