Was Hang Tuah a real person?

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:

1. Bai-li-mi-su-la (拜里迷蘇剌) (Parameswara) (1405);
2. A-bu-la Jia-xin (阿卜剌賈信) (1409);
3. Bai-li-mi-su-la (拜里迷蘇剌)(Parameswara) (1411);
4. Xi-li Sa-ma-lan-zha-ya (西里撒麻剌扎牙) the nephew of Bai-li-mi-su-la (Parameswara) (1412);
5. Sai-di-la-zhe (賽的剌者), nephew of Bai-li-mi-su-la (Parameswara) (1413);
6. Mu-wo Sa-yu-di-er Sha (Megat Iskandar Shah) son of Bai-li-mi-su-la (Parameswara) (1414);
7. Sa-li-wang-la-zha (撒里汪剌查), younger brother of Mu-gan Sa-yu-er Sha (Megat Iskandar Shah) (1418);
8. Duan-gu Ma-la-shi-di (段姑麻剌什的) (Tuanku …?) (1420);
9. Xi-li Ma-ha-la-zhe (西哩麻哈剌者) (Sri Maharaja Muhammad Shah) (1424);
10. Na-la-die-ba-na (那剌迭扒那) (1424);
11. Yi-si-ma (一思馬) (MSL: Ismail) (1426);
12. Xi-li Ma-ha-la-zhe (西哩麻哈剌者) (Sri Maharaja Muhammad Shah) (1433 & 1434);
13. La-dian Ba-la (剌殿把剌) (MSL: Raden…) younger brother of Xi-li Ma-ha-la-zhe (Sri Maharaja Muhammad Shah) (1435);
14. Mo-jia-zhe-la-zhe Man-da-li (末加者剌吒滿達利) (MSL: Megat DiRaja Menteri?) (1439);
15. Song-na-di-la-ye ( 宋那的剌那) (Sri Nara Di Raja?) (1444);
16. Mo-zhe-na (謨者那) (1445);
17. Ma-na-hong (馬哪吽) (1455);
18. Duan-ma-gu Ling-ding (端麻古凌釘)(1455);
19. Su-dan Mang-su Sha (蘇丹茫速沙)(Sultan Mansur Shah) (1459):
20. Ba-la-si (八剌思) (1468);
21. Duan-ya-ma-la-di-na-da Wei-zhe-ran-na (Tuan Laksamana DiRaja (Sang Bija Ratna?))(1469);
22. Duan-ya-ma-la-di-na-zha (端亞媽剌的那查) (Tuan Laksamana DiRaja) (1481)
23. 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:-

1. Wu-bao-chi-na (巫寶赤納) (1431);
2. Nai Ai (柰靄) (1456). He was recorded to have committed rape in Guangdong and subsequently committed suicide;
3. 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. 

Laksamana Hang Tuah Bertemu Leonardo Da Vinci?

Jambatan Ponte Vecchio di Florence dibina pada tahun 1345. Ia menyeberangi Sungai Arno dan mempunyai beberapa buah kedai, tempat kawalan dan kubu pertahanan di atasnya. Lihat lakaran bandar Florence sekitar 1493 (Gambar 1 dan video).

Gambar 1: Florence pada tahun 1493. Sumber: Hartmann Schedel's Nuremberg Chronicle.

Berukuran 285 kaki panjang dan 105 kaki lebar, ianya boleh diakses pelayar yang tiba di pelabuhan Pisa, Tuscany, yang berdekatan muara Sungai Arno.  Lihat gambar jambatan Ponte Vecchio tersebut yang masih kukuh hingga kini (Gambar 2).

Gambar 2: Jambatan Ponte Vecchio, Florence, Itali.

Untuk ke Kota Florence melalui Sungai Arno, pelayar akan bertemu dengan Kota Pisa yang juga ketika itu mempunyai jambatan kubu (Gambar 3).

Gambar 3: Pisa pada tahun 1493. Sumber: Hartmann Schedel's Nuremberg Chronicle.

Kota Florence adalah tempat Leornado da Vinci (1452-1519) dilahirkan (Gambar 4). Beliau juga menetap dan berkarya di Florence sebelum berpindah ke Milan sekitar tahun 1482 untuk berkhidmat sebagai Jurutera Tentera dibawah Duke of Milan iaitu Ludovico Sforza. Setelah tamat berkhidmat dengan Duke of Milan, beliau pulang ke Florence pada tahun 1500. Florence juga dikatakan sebagai tempat beliau menghasilkan lukisan Mona Lisa sekitar 1503-1506 (Gambar 5 & video).

Gambar 4: Leornado da Vinci.

Gambar 5: Mona Lisa

Sekiranya benar rombongan pembesar Kesultanan Melayu Melaka bersama 1,600 orang bala tentera pernah membeli bedil di Rum (Turki Uthmaniyyah) sekitar 1482, (Lihat Artikel), maka Kota Florence hanya lebih kurang 1,800 km jaraknya dari Constantinople iaitu ibu negeri Turki Uthmaniyyah. Ianya adalah 90-100 hari perjalanan darat, atau 15-20 hari melalui jalan laut. Lihat lakaran grafik keadaan bandar Constantinople ketika itu (Gambar 6).

Gambar 6: Bandar Constantinople yang dikuasai Turki Seljuk (Kesultanan Seljuk Rum) pada abad ke-13, dan kemudian dikuasai Empayar Turki Uthmaniyyah pada 1453.

Mungkinkah rombongan Melaka ini telah sampai ke Itali? Mungkinkah persenjataan Eropah dan jambatan-jambatan kubu dari Pisa ke Florence telah menjadi sumber ilham kepada seorang "Malaccan Noble" yang dikatakan bertemu Leonardo da Vinci dalam misi memperkukuh pertahanan Melaka ketika itu?

Setakat ini tiada bukti yang sahih berkenaan butiran perjumpaan tersebut dan tentang siapakah "Malaccan Noble" yang dikatakan bertemu dengan Leornado da Vinci tersebut. Juga tidak pasti apa yang dipelajari "Malaccan Noble" tersebut dari Leornado da Vinci yang juga merupakan pereka pelbagai peralatan senjata dan kubu pertahanan. (Lihat Artikel The Vintage News).

Tetapi apa yang kita pasti, dari laporan Mao Qiling, 30,000 tentera Annam (Dai Viet) yang lengkap dengan istinggar dan rentaka telah dikalahkan oleh tentera Melaka sekitar 1483. Melalui catatan Portugis pula, pada 1511 Melaka dikatakan mempunyai 8,000 senjatapi pelbagai jenis termasuk meriam bombard, bedil dan istinggar di mana 3,000 darinya dijumpai Alfonso de Albuquerque di Melaka. Senjatapi ini ada yang dikatakan canggih setanding buatan Eropah, dan ada yang lebih baik dari buatan Portugis sendiri.

Seterusnya kawasan pantai berhampiran muara sungai Melaka dipasang perangkap besi tajam ("caltrops") dan diletak periuk api ("gunpowder mines"). Portugis juga menjumpai rumah bergerak saiz 23 x 90 kaki yang menakjubkan mereka di mana ia mempunyai 30 roda setiap satu sebesar tong wain.

Melalui catatan Alfonso de Albuquerque, Portugis juga mengalami kesukaran dalam menawan Jambatan Melaka yang dikatakan diperkukuh "stockades", dipertahan oleh pemanah, istinggar dan meriam. Jambatan Melaka tersebut juga dikatakan agak tinggi kedudukannya dari paras air. Akibatnya, ianya sukar dicerobohi melalui jong yang digunakan Portugis untuk menghampiri dan menawan kedudukan strategik jambatan tersebut.

Apa yang menarik adalah menurut catatan Manuel Godinho de Erédia (1613), walaupun Forteleza dan A'famosa dikatakan dibina Portugis dari batu yang diperoleh dari kawasan masjid dan makam DiRaja, tiada butiran tentang pembuatan jambatan Melaka oleh Portugis. Erédia hanya mengelarnya jambatan batu besar apabila merujuk tentang jambatan yang menyeberangi Sungai Melaka tersebut.  Juga di dalam lukisan Portugis sekitar 1563 (Gambar 7 & 8) jambatan tersebut adalah lebih panjang dan mempunyai beberapa tiang dan bahagian (segment) di mana Kota A'famosa telah dibina disebelah jambatan tersebut bagi tujuan menyokong fungsi asal jambatan tersebut sebagai jambatan kubu yang diperkukuh pertahanan. Kemungkinan besar Portugis hanya membaik pulih jambatan sediada yang dibina di zaman Kesultanan Melayu Melaka.

Gambar 7: Lakaran pengepungan Kota Portugis Melaka 1568 oleh Aceh yang disimpan di Biblioteca Nacional do Brasil.

Gambar 8: Fokus bahagian Jambatan dalam Lakaran pengepungan Kota Portugis Melaka 1568 oleh Aceh.

Dari rekod zaman Belanda pula, kawasan sungai Melaka telah dikecilkan dan aliran sungai telah diubah untuk tujuan pertanian, mengelak hakisan sekitar Bastion Victoria (St Domingo), dan pengairan sistem kunci air bagi 'moat' sekeliling Kota Melaka. Jambatan Melaka ketika itu telah ditukar kepada jambatan gantung yang lebih pendek bagi mengawal ketat kemasukan kapal dan perahu kedalam Kota Melaka (Gambar 9 & 10).  Juga lihat kajian seorang peminat dan pengkaji sejarah Aabirissabeel Wayfarer berkenaan pengubahan aliran dan pengecilan Sungai Melaka semasa pemerintahan Belanda (Gambar 11).

Gambar 9: Cetakan George Cooke berdasarkan lukisan E. H. Locker bertajuk "Draw-bridge at Malacca" (1807).

Gambar 10: Jambatan Melaka yang digambarkan dalam lukisan bertajuk 'Aanzicht Malakka' (Pemandangan Melaka) oleh Jan Keldermans (1764).
Sumber: Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.

Gambar 11: Kajian Aabirissabeel Wayfarer berkenaan pengubahan aliran dan pengecilan Sungai Melaka semasa pemerintahan Belanda.

Masalah utama yang mungkin timbul dalam hipotesis tentang lawatan ini adalah pemusuhan yang sedang berlaku antara Turki Uthmaniyyah dan Eropah dan khususnya Itali sekitar 1480an. Ketika itu, peperangan Oranto di selatan Itali baru sahaja berlaku antara Turki Uthmaniyyah dengan Kingdom of Naples. Jadi mungkin boleh dipersoalkan lojik disebalik perjalanan rombongan pembesar Melaka dari Turki yang dibenarkan masuk ke Republik Florence tanpa apa-apa tentangan di zaman Perang Uthmaniyyah tersebut. 

Pada saya ianya tidak mustahil sekiranya rombongan Melaka tersebut menggunakan status Kesultanan Melayu Melaka sebagai negeri-negeri dibawah lindungan Kerajaan Ming yang ketika itu mempunyai jalinan diplomatik dengan Papal States, Republik Venice dan Kerajaan-Kerajaan lain di semenanjung Itali secara amnya. Berbekal dengan suratcara formal bersama pakaian khas yang menunjukkan pangkat taraf Menteri Ming yang diperoleh Laksamana Melaka pada tahun 1481 (Lihat Artikel), saya rasa tidak mustahil Kerajaan-Kerajaan Itali menerima baik rombongan pembesar Melaka sepertimana rombongan diplomatik mereka diterima baik oleh Kerajaan Ming.

Pada pendapat saya, selain dari memperoleh senjatapi dari luar, tujuan utama rombongan Kesultanan Melayu Melaka ke Turki Uthmaniyyah (dan mungkin kemudian ke Itali) adalah untuk mempelajari dan melatih 1,600 tentera Melaka untuk mempertingkat kecekapan dan memodenkan barisan tentera dan teknologi pertahanan.


Rujukan:

1. Comentários de Afonso de Albuquerque, (1557), t. A Bailo, Combra (1923).

2. Report of Governor Balthasar Bort on Malacca 1678, M. J. Bremner and C. O. Blagden, Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. 5, No. 1 (99) (AUGUST 1927), pp. 1-232.

3. Sejarah Melayu diusahakan oleh W.G. Shellabear, Fajar Bakti, (1978).

4. Hikayat Hang Tuah, Kassim Ahmad (ed.), Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, 1975.

5. Description of Malaca, Meridonal India, and Cathay (1613), Manuel Godinho de Erédia.

6. Mao Qiling. Mansi hezhi [A Comprehensive Record of the Aboriginal Chieftains]. Taipei: Guangwen Shuju, (1968).

7. https://www.thevintagenews.com/2018/09/01/da-vinci-weapons/

8. https://www.nst.com.my/node/115660/amp

9. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_da_Vinci

10. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponte_Vecchio

Di Manakah Hang Tuah Ketika Melaka Diserang Portugis?

Gambar hiasan. (Sumber: Shutterstock.com / Jasmadi bin Hanafi)

Pengkaji sejarah mengemukakan pelbagai faktor penyebab kejatuhan Kesultanan Melayu Melaka.  Ini termasuk faktor luaran iaitu Portugis yang lebih mahir dalam taktik pertempuran; dan faktor dalaman iaitu kelemahan pentadbiran dan juga perbuatan khianat pedagang terkaya Melaka iaitu Nina Chatu dan Utimutiraja.

Terdapat rekod dalam simpanan Maharaja Ming iaitu Ming Shi-lu (MSL) yang saya ingin kemukakan sebagai sebab utama kekalahan Melaka pada Ogos 1511. Ianya secara langsung menjawab persoalan mengapa Laksamana Melaka yang tangkas dan armada lautnya yang digeruni tidak mempertahankan Melaka dari serangan Portugis.

Gambar hiasan

Seperti yang pernah dirumuskan, Laksamana Melaka sekitar 1470-1481, yang juga dicatat sebagai Laksamana Hang Tuah dalam karya agung Hikayat Hang Tuah (HHT) dan Sulalatus Salatin / Sejarah Melayu (SM), berada di Ryukyu pada April 1481 dan kemudian di Cina dari Ogos hingga Sept 1481. Menurut rekod Rekidai Hoan (RH) dan MSL, agenda diplomasi Melaka ketika itu adalah untuk membuat aduan tentang tindakan agresif Annam yang telah membunuh Laksamana Melaka sebelumnya (MSL: "Duan-ya-ma-la-di-na-da  Wei-zhe-ran-na" / Tuan Laksamana DiRaja Sang Bija Ratna?) bersama-sama ahli rombongannya pada 1469, dan untuk mendapat keizinan Kerajaan Ming dalam melengkapkan bala tentera dengan senjata secukupnya bagi menyerang Annam.

Lihat:

1. Laksamana Melaka di Istana Ryukyu
2. Laksamana Melaka di Istana Ming
3. Peranan 'Hang Tuah' Dalam Kes Pertikaian Melaka - Annam

Berdasarkan HHT, Laksamana Hang Tuah dikatakan membeli 6 ekor gajah di Siam dan sebelum itu telah melawat Brunei. Jika dirujuk silang MSL, beberapa ekor gajah telah dibawa rombongan yang diketuai Laksamana Melaka dan telah dihadiahkan kepada Maharaja Ming pada 27.8.1481.  Berdasarkan HHT, terdapat catatan bahawa Laksamana Hang Tuah telah ke Turki Uthmaniyyah (Rum) sekitar 1482 untuk membeli 3,000 pucuk bedil dan pelbagai senjatapi, di mana beliau sempat menunaikan ibadah Haji pada musim haji 886H (8 hingga 12 Zulhijah) bersamaan 28.1.1482 hingga 1.2.1482. Melalui HHT juga kita maklum bahawa apabila belayar jauh, armada Melaka selalunya belayar dalam kumpulan 40 hingga 50 buah kapal bersama lebih kurang 1,500 hingga 2,000 anak kapal. Sebagai contoh, menurut HHT pelayaran Laksamana Hang Tuah ke Jeddah diiringi 42 buah kapal yang memuatkan 1,600 bala tentera.

Lihat: Kisah Hang Tuah Menunaikan Haji

Menurut catatan Mao Qiling, Melaka mempunyai bala tentera yang kuat. Direkodkan Mao Qiling juga bahawa 30,000 tentera Annam yang lengkap dengan istinggar dan rentaka telah dikalahkan oleh tentera Melaka di Lanxang sekitar tahun 1483.  Dari sudut garis masa, perperangan ini berlaku sejurus Melaka mendapatkan senjatapi dan bedil dari Turki Uthmaniyyah. Jadi, secara logik, semestinya tentera Annam telah diperangi Melaka dengan menggunakan 3,000 bedil dan senjatapi Turki Uthmaniyyah tersebut.

Menurut MSL lawatan ufti Melaka ke Cina yang berikutnya berlaku dari 29.12.1508 hingga 2.1.1509. Akan tetapi, kali ini ketua rombongan ufti Melaka membahasakan dirinya sebagai Tuan Haji (MSL: 'Duan Ya-zhi' (端亞智)). Saya berpendapat berdasarkan cerita Hang Tuah ke Mekah dalam HHT, sosok Tuan Haji ini dan ketua rombongan Melaka yang sebelumnya (April 1481) iaitu Tuan Laksamana DiRaja (MSL: 端亞媽剌的那查 / Duan-ya-ma-la-di-na-zha) adalah orang yang sama.

Juga saya rujuk silang HHT & SM di mana ketika itu jawatan Laksamana telah diserahkan kepada penjawat seterusnya iaitu Laksamana Khoja Hassan dan kemudiannya Laksamana Hang Nadim.  Juga terdapat cacatan dalam SM di mana Laksamana Melaka pada sekitar tahun 1492 (anggaran) adalah Laksamana Hang Nadim dalam kisah beliau membawa lari Tun Teja dan bertempur dengan perahu tentera Sultan Pahang di Pulau Keban (kini Pulau Aceh di Mersing).

Seperti yang kita maklum, kedatangan Portugis pertama pada September 1509 tidak mendatangkan hasil malah 20 laskar Portugis telah ditahan. Dalam kejadian lawatan pertama Portugis itu, HHT ada menyebut kewujudan seorang Laksamana tetapi beliau tidak diberi nama. Ketika itu, jika dibanding rekod MSL, Laksamana Melaka terdahulu yang ketika itu digelar Tuan Haji sedang dalam pelayaran ke Cina. Berpandukan jadual pelayaran berdasarkan angin monsun, beliau dianggar bertolak dari Melaka sekitar Ogos-September 1509 dan tiba di Guangdong pada Oktober-November 1509.

Portugis tidak putus asa dan telah kembali ke Melaka pada 1.7.1511. Ketika itu, Alfonso de Albuquerque mencatat hanya 4,000 tentera Melaka yang bersedia untuk perang (battle ready). Jadi kemana pergi yang lainnya? Juga amat pelik apabila Albuquerque mencatat terdapat jumlah senjata yang melebihi jumlah tentera. Iaitu terdapat antara 3,000 senjatapi pelbagai jenis yang ditinggalkan sejurus Melaka tumpas. Ini tidak termasuk senjata yang dibawa semasa berperang dan berundur ke Johor yang dianggar dalam jumlah 5,000.  Albuquerque juga bersetuju dengan anggaran hasil risikan Nina Chatu dan Rui de Araújo yang menyatakan Kesultanan Melaka mempunyai lebih kurang 8,000 senjatapi.

Berbalik kepada rekod MSL yang ingin saya ketengahkan, terdapat catatan yang dibuat pada 2.3.1510 bahawa "Tuan Haji" iaitu pegawai tertinggi dalam rombongan ufti Kesultanan Melaka telah dibunuh oleh seorang bekas jurubahasa Cina bagi delegasi Melaka. Bekas jurubahasa tersebut bernama Huo-zhe Ya-liu (火者亞劉) (‘Haji Ya-liu' / Haji Melayu?) dan nama asal beliau adalah Xiao Ming-ju (蕭明舉) dari  Jiang-xi, Cina. Beliau dicatat Cina sebagai bekas penjenayah dan pernah berkhidmat sebagai jurubahasa dibawah 'Tuan Haji' dan kemudian dinaikkan pangkat sebagai ketua rombongan ufti Melaka pada sessi ufti 1509. Memandangkan beliau juga bergelar Haji, boleh dirumuskan beliau juga menyertai rombongan Haji dari Melaka pada tahun 1482.

Dicatat bahawa pembesar Melaka seramai 21 orang termasuk Tuan Haji telah dibunuh di "Postal Relay Station" ('yi'  驛  atau  'yizhan'  驛站) di Guangdong oleh Haji Ya-liu dengan bantuan beberapa orang yang diketuai Peng Wan-chun. Perkara ini mungkin berlaku lebih kurang antara Oktober hingga November 1509 kerana rombongan ufti ini belum sempat bergerak melalui jalan darat ke Kota Larangan di Beijing.

Lukisan bertajuk 'Peristiwa Lima Bersaudara Menyelamatkan Bendahara Melaka Dari Amukan Penjahat' oleh Nazli Hamzah. (Sumber: Hang Tuah Centre, Melaka)

Dicatat bahawa Haji Ya-liu, Peng Wan-chun dan kuncu-kuncunya telah ditangkap, dibawa ke ibu negeri di Beijing dan dihukum bunuh oleh Maharaja Zhengde atas kesalahan memberontak, membunuh, mencuri, memberi rasuah, dan menipu Kerajaan Ming untuk mengeluarkan dokumen kapal & mohor palsu dalam percubaan menipu dan mendapat barangan berharga dari Kesultanan Brunei melalui penyamaran sebagai wakil Kerajaan Ming.

Setelah dua kali siasatan dibuat, Haji Ya-liu dikenakan hukuman dihiris hidup-hidup (slow slicing / lingchi), manakala Peng Wan-chun dan beberapa orang yang lain dikenakan hukuman pancung. Kepala mereka telah diletakkan di perkarangan Kota Larangan.

Illustrasi Hukuman Lingchi (Slow Slicing) terhadab mubaligh Perancis c. 1858 (Sumber: Wikipedia / Le Monde Illustré, 1858)

Beberapa pegawai Kerajaan Ming yang terlibat didapati hanya bersubahat dalam memalsukan dokumen dan telah dikenakan hukuman ringan. Mereka terdiri dari:

1. Senior Interpreter Wang Yong. Setelah siasatan kedua dijalankan, hukuman bunuh beliau telah dikurangkan kepada denda 300 shi (18,000 kg) beras;
2. Usher Zhang Zi dibuang negeri ke sempadan dan dijadikan askar;
3. Pegawai 'Ministry of Rites' Hou Yong dibuang negeri ke sempadan dan dijadikan askar;
4. Battalion Commander Dong Yuan diturunkan 2 kenaikan pangkat;
5. Director Qiu Rang didenda 300 shi (18,000 kg) beras;
6. Menteri 'Ministry of Rites' Bai Yue dan lain-lain dihukum penggantungan gaji selama 3 bulan;
7. Guangdong grand defender, grand coordinator, pegawai dari 3 pejabat utama, dan pegawai-pegawai kawasan yang terlibat didenda 200 shi (12,000 kg) beras setiap seorang;
8. Pan Zhong pegawai 'Maritime Trade Supervisorate' telah diampunkan,
9. Pegawai-pegawai dari Jiang-xi (tempat asal Haji Ya-liu) dikatakan tidak berintegriti di mana 50 darinya telah dibuang kerja serta merta; dan catatan dibuat untuk tidak menaikan pangkat walau mereka tidak terlibat, juga catatan supaya calon daerah Jiang-xi tidak diambil bagi posisi kerja di Beijing, dan juga secara amnya mengurangkan calon pekerja dari daerah Jiang-xi tersebut.

Jika dilihat, pembunuhan delegasi Melaka ini dilakukan dengan terancang dan dengan bantuan penuh pegawai-pegawai Kerajaan Ming di Postal Relay Station di Guangdong. Motif pembunuhan adalah dicatat berpunca dari pergaduhan antara Haji Ya-liu dan pembesar-pembesar Melaka, di mana Haji Ya-liu kemudian berkomplot untuk membunuh dan mencuri dari mereka. Saya percaya bahawa pembunuhan tersebut dilakukan dalam keadaan terdesak iaitu dalam motif untuk menutup perbuatan jenayah Haji Ya-liu yang telah didapati bersekongkol dengan pegawai Kerajaan Ming dalam mengeluarkan mohor palsu bagi menipu Kesultanan Brunei.

Memandangkan ketua dan pembesar mereka telah dibunuh, armada Melaka yang berlabuh di Guangdong tidak sempat pulang mengikut jadual pelayaran iaitu pada Disember 1509 hingga Januari 1510. Mereka perlu menguruskan pengkebumian pembesar-pembesar Melaka di Guangdong; dan kemudian mengikuti siasatan dan menunggu keputusan perbicaraan dan hukuman Haji Ya-liu dan lain-lain pesalah sekitar Februari 1510 di Beijing, dan kemudian menerima pesanan dan utusan Maharaja Ming untuk dipersembahkan kepada Sultan Melaka. Direkodkan perjalanan darat dari Guangdong ke Beijing mengambil masa 140 hari pergi dan balik.

Dalam catatan MSL dua pembesar Melaka yang terselamat iaitu "Po-jie-ya-ban" dan "Dun-du-si" (Tengku Sri?) telah diarahkan untuk membawa balik laporan penuh siasatan dan butiran hukuman yang telah dijatuhkan terhadap kes pemberontakan Haji Ya-liu tersebut kepada Sultan Melaka.  Armada Melaka kemudian perlu menunggu pertukaran angin seterusnya untuk belayar pulang. Akan tetapi tiada rekod dalam MSL tentang bila mereka memulakan pelayaran pulang.

Dirujuk silang dalam HHT & SM, adalah jelas bahawa Laksamana Hang Tuah tiada di Melaka semasa serangan Portugis pada Julai hingga Ogos 1511. Catatan Albuquerque pula menyatakan armada Melaka tiba disekitar perairan Melaka tapi tidak bertindak apabila mengetahui Melaka telah ditawan. Berdasarkan rekod MSL ini, adalah jelas kenyataan Albuquerque tentang Laksamana berumur 80 tahun yang dikatakan ingin kembali ke Melaka dan difitnah ingin berkhidmat dengan Raja Portugal adalah bukannya merujuk kepada Laksamana Melaka yang dibunuh di Guangdong (i.e. bukan Laksamana Hang Tuah menurut HHT & SM).

Pada pendapat saya penduduk Melaka yang menjadi asas teks penceritaan HHT dan SM tidak tahu sebab sebenar mengapa Laksamana dan armada Melaka tidak pulang untuk mempertahankan Melaka. Malah sehingga kini tidak diketahui kemanakah armada Melaka tersebut pergi setelah ditugaskan Maharaja Ming untuk memaklumkan kepada Sultan Melaka tentang tragedi yang menimpa 21 orang pembesar dan wakil Melaka di Cina.

Nota: Catatan ini hanyalah sekadar pendapat peribadi saya. Rekod-rekod MSL seharusnya diteliti dan dikaji lebih lanjut oleh ahli akademik dan mereka yang pakar dalam bidang kajian sejarah.

Rujukan:

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. Sejarah Melayu diusahakan oleh W.G. Shellabear, Fajar Bakti, (1978).

4. Hikayat Hang Tuah, Kassim Ahmad (ed.), Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, 1975.

5. Mao Qiling. Mansi hezhi [A Comprehensive Record of the Aboriginal Chieftains]. Taipei: Guangwen Shuju, (1968).

6. Comentários de Afonso de Albuquerque, (1557), t. A Bailo, Combra (1923).

7. The postal stations (yizhan  驛站) in Ming  China, Ralph Kauz in 'Trade and Transfer Across the East Asian "Mediterranean", Angela Schottenhammer (2005).

Blair’s Harbour in Mersing

Before the founding of Singapore (1819), the British had actually established a harbour in an area north of Mersing in 1790. They named it ‘Blair’s Harbour’ in honour of its founder, Lieutenant Archibald Blair (1752–1815).

On 12.6.1789 a meeting of the British governor-general in Council took place in Calcutta at which Lieutenant Archibald Blair was present (See: Archibald Blair - Wikipedia). The British decided to colonize the Andaman islands in order to gain a safe harbour from which to check the activities of Malayan pirates, to serve as a refuge for shipwrecked people, a watering station, a shelter from storms for all shipping and a naval base in case of hostilities with other powers. See 18th century Malayan pirate ship:-

A survey of the Andaman Islands was initially conducted by Archibald Blair around 1788 to 1789. Port Blair of the Andaman Islands was in fact named after Archibald Blair being its founder. See Port Blair’s 1885 map:-

Around 1790, few months before the annexation of Penang, Blair found his second safe harbour to counter the threats of Malayan pirates. This second safe harbour is located at the east coast of Malaya and was named Blair's Harbour. See Plan of Blair's Harbour (published in 1793):-

Source: National Library Board, Singapore.

Blair’s Harbour is described in the said Plan as follows:-

"It is very secure being screened from both monsoons, and is easy of access the bottom a stiff clay. The water is good and may be had in abundance by making wells 5 feet deep 20 or 30 yards from high water mark.

Thereafter, “Blair’s Harbour” or “Blair Harbour” appears on British Admiralty maps and often identified as the area between the south of Keban Island or Akban (Now Pulau Aceh), Tanjung Penyabong and Teluk Sari, north of the district of Mersing, Johor. See map:-

Source: National Library Board, Singapore.

In August 1937, HMS Herald surveyed the area wherein Lt Cdr K St B Collins produced a sketch of the general view of Blair's Harbour. See his Admiralty chart titled "Selat Penyabong, View A-Malaya-East Coast-Johore". 

Source: National Archives, UK.

Since time immemorial, this area is known to sailors to provide protection from strong wind and high waves during the monsoons. There is an earlier account of the area found in the Sejarah Melayu (Sulalatus Salatin). Around 1492, when the Sultan of Pahang learned that his fiancée Tun Teja had been spirited away by Hang Nadim (according to Sejarah Melayu) or Hang Tuah (according to Hikayat Hang Tuah). See clip from the movie ‘Hang Tuah’ (1956) which is based from ‘Hikayat Hang Tuah’:

Also see clip from the movie ‘Tuah’ (1988) which is based on the story of a time travelling Hang Tuah:

According to Sejarah Melayu, about 10 of Sultan's boats gave chase, and caught up with the captors south of Pulau Keban / Akban (now Pulau Aceh). Due to the captor's archery skill, the Sultan's men were defeated and gave up the chase. Thus Tun Teja was brought to Malacca and was married to Sultan Mahmud. See Artist’s impression of Tun Teja:-

Calm seas within the natural harbour became a strategic place for Hang Nadim / Hang Tuah to launch a counter attack against the Sultan's men. According to folklore, Teluk Sari (which later became part of Blair’s Harbour) derived its name from Hang Tuah's kris 'Taming Sari'. The word 'Sari' (SAH-ree) means 'shield'. It is named "Teluk Sari" to honour the area which protected Hang Tuah from strong wind and high waves which enabled him to fend off his foe. See: Mersing - Wikipedia Bahasa Melayu, ensiklopedia bebas

See aerial view of Blair’s Harbour. Untouched by development, it probably looked the same as it did during the 1492 Battle of Keban and when the British first set foot on its shores in 1790:-

From the 'Hikayat Hang Tuah', this is the second time Hang Tuah sailed the waters of Mersing. His earlier trip was made when he was a teenager where pursued a pirate vessel into Pulau Tinggi. To this very day, the battle site still stood among old graves that by the island's folklore was the gravesite of the fallen pirates.

Folklore also has it that the clear skies between Teluk Sari and Pulau Tinggi bear witness to Tun Teja's final plea and declaration of her undying love for Hang Tuah. It is said that the skies between Teluk Sari and Pulau Tinggi remained the same to this day allowing clear view of the stars and constellations. It is currently a popular site for stargazers, astrophotographers and amateur astronomers who flocks the area from May till August each year. See photographs of the Milky-way taken above north of Mersing:

Source: Greychow.com 

Source: Greychow.com 

Credit to Milkywaychasers.com

Laksamana Melaka di Istana Ryukyu

Gambar Hiasan - Poster Filem "Melanchong Ka Tokyo" (1964).

Pada tahun 2002 sebilah keris 9 lok telah dijumpai ditanam di dalam tembikar bersama artifak-artifak lain di Jepun (Gambar 1).

Gambar 1

Ia dipercayai digunakan sebagai suatu persembahan dalam suatu upacara pemujaan di kuil Engaku-ji iaitu di bahagian utara kompleks Istana Shuri di Okinawa (dulu Ryukyu) (Gambar 2).

Gambar 2

Professor Kurayoshi Takara dari University of the Ryukyus secara peribadi berpendapat bahawa keris tersebut mungkin berasal dari Melaka kerana menurut catatan Rekidai Hōan orang-orang Ryukyu telah berlayar sebanyak 10 kali pelayaran ke Melaka dari 1463-1511.


Istana Shuri (Gambar 3) adalah istana bagi Kerajaan Ryukyu yang diasaskan oleh Raja Shō Hashi yang telah mengabungkan 3 wilayah utama Ryukyu iaitu Chūzan, Hokuzan, dan Nanzan.

Gambar 3

Istana Shuri ini digunakan sebagai tempat kediaman dan juga pusat pentadbiran bagi Dinasti Shô pertama dari tahun 1429 hingga 1469, dan kemudian bagi Dinasti Shô kedua dari tahun 1470 sehingga 1879.  Kuil Engaku-ji pula adalah kuil keluarga Dinasti Shô kedua yang dibina pada tahun 1492 oleh Raja Shō Shin (1465–1527) (Gambar 4).

Gambar 4

Struktur asal kuil Engaku-ji dan Istana Shuri sebenarnya telah musnah semasa perang dunia kedua dalam 'Battle of Okinawa' sekitar tahun 1945. Kedua-dua bangunan ini telah dibina semula berdasarkan rekod-rekod dan gambar lama. Istana Shuri telah dijadikan kampus bagi Okinawa Prefectural University of Arts dan kemudian diangkat sebagai 'World Heritage Site' oleh UNESCO. Manakala kuil Engaku-ji masih didalam proses restorasi.

Dari rekod Portugis, apabila mereka tiba di Melaka sekitar awal abad ke-16, mereka dapat menyaksikan orang-orang Ryukyu yang digelar "Gores" yang menjalankan urusan perdagangan di pelabuhan Melaka. Portugis amat kagum dengan disiplin dan kejujuran orang Ryukyu. Cara mereka berpakaian juga dicatat dan sama seperti yang direkod dalam Gambar 5 yang diambil sekitar era Meiji.

Gambar 5 - Lima orang lelaki Ryukyu zaman Meiji

Dicatat juga ketika itu Ryukyu menghantar 2 hingga 3 kapal setiap tahun. Kapal-kapal Ryukyu akan bertolak pada setiap bulan Januari, dan pulang ke Ryukyu pada bulan Ogos ke September. Barang dagangan yang dibawa mereka adalah terdiri dari jagung, kain sutera, tenunan emas, porselin, tawas, tembaga, ketulan emas, serbuk emas dan perak.

Melalui catatan Ryukyu pula, orang-orang Melaka juga telah sampai ke Ryukyu. Ini dibuktikan catatan dalam Rekidai Hōan seperti berikut:-

a) Mac 1480 : Seorang "Lo-Hsi-Ma-Na" (Laksamana) Melaka telah menulis sepucuk surat bagi pihak Sultan Melaka (Sultan Alauddin Riayat Shah? yang berumur 6 tahun) kepada Raja Shō Shin pada Mac 1480. (Tahun Cina: 16/2/?). Lihat catatan berkait.

b) April 1480 : "Lo-Hsi-Ma-Na" (Laksamana) Melaka berada di Ryukyu di mana beliau telah menulis surat bagi pihak Sultan Melaka kepada Raja Shō Shin pada 11.4.1480. (Tahun Cina: 16/3/2). Juga ditulis tentang risikan Melaka berkenaan sebuah kapal Ryukyu yang terdampar di utara Annam dan kemudian diserang oleh tentera Annam di mana 2 orang sahaja yang terselamat.

c) April 1481 -  "Lo-Hsi-Ma-Na" (Laksamana) Melaka berada di Ryukyu di mana beliau telah menulis surat bagi pihak Sultan Melaka kepada Raja Ryukyu pada April 1481. (Tahun Cina: 17/3/?)

Menurut rekod Dinasti Ming (Ming Shi-lu) pula, Laksamana Melaka berada di Istana Ming dari bulan Ogos - September 1481 untuk menghantar ufti, membuat aduan terhadap Annam dan mendapat perintah kebenaran melengkap & melatih bala tentera dan membalas jika diserang Annam. Lihat: Peranan 'Hang Tuah' Dalam Kes Pertikaian Melaka - Annam

Nota: Sebelum artikel ini siap ditulis, malangnya Istana Shuri telah musnah dalam satu kebakaran pada awal pagi 31.10.2019.

Rujukan:

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. Comentários de Afonso de Albuquerque, (1557), t. A Bailo, Combra (1923).

How did an 18th century Asian sword ended up in Wales?

I was in Cardiff for my postgraduate studies in 1995-96. At that time 19th century Sejarah Melayu and Hikayat Hang Tuah manuscripts were part of the collection of the University of Wales branch at Lampeter, which is about 73 miles away from the University's Cardiff campus. These manuscripts are rare as there are probably 20 to 30 of its kind still in existence around the world.

Fast forward to May 2017, a Welsh coracle fisherman named Andrew Davies found an 18th century sword while netting for fish along the River Towy near the town of Carmarthen. He said the sword would have probably got stuck to his net around the area between Carmarthen Bridge (A484) and Pont Lesneven Bridge (A40) near the B&Q DIY outlet. Carmarthen (Welsh: Caerfyrddin) (“Merlin’s Fort”) has been long associated with the Arthurian and Excalibur legend.

The 3ft sword was initially thought to be of Roman origin. A closer examination by the Carmarthenshire Museum concluded that it originated from the Southeast Asia. See photographs of the sword:

The Museum's curator, Gavin Evans, said it could have belonged to a sailor who had been travelling around the world. See news articles:

1. 18th century Asian sword found on a Welsh riverbed
2. 18th Century sword found in riverbed
3. 18th century Asian sword discovered in Welsh river
4. Boatman discovers an 18th century Asian sword in a Welsh RIVER

From its description and pictures circulated over the internet, I believe that it is a sundang sword (a.k.a. keris sundang) which is a traditional weapon for the Bugis and Suluk (Tausūg) people of the Malay archipelago. See map of the Malay archipelago:

I believe that the keris sundang may have some connection with the Malay manuscripts at Lampeter. My suspicion is based on the following:

1) the proximity between Carmarthen and Lampeter (23 miles). See picture of the University's main bulding at Lampeter:

2) the fact that there was a port along River Towy just before the Carmarthen Bridge (A484) that served as an inland port for ships coming from the Bristol Channel. See a painting of Carmarthen’s river port (c. 1840):

3) the fact that a keris sundang would have been a weapon of tradition for Hang Tuah. This is so as according to the Sejarah Melayu, Hang Tuah, whose real name was Daeng Mempawah, hailed from the Buginese district of Bajeng, in Gowa, Makassar. As a collector, Phillips must have known that a keris sundang would be true to Hang Tuah's Buginese ethnicity. It would have been part of his memorabilia connected to the two Malay manuscripts at Lampeter i.e. all related to the character of Hang Tuah, the Malay equivalent to Sir Galahad of the Arthurian legend. 

It appears that the two Malay manuscripts were part of the 22,000 manuscripts and rare books donated by Thomas Phillips to St David's College at Lampeter (now University of Wales Trinity St David). Phillips also donated about 7,000 of his rare books to Llandovery College which is about 28 miles Northeast of Carmarthen. See portrait of Thomas Phillips:

Thomas Phillips (1760-1851) was an East India Company's surgeon. He spent most of his military career in India. He was a pupil of John Hunter (1728-1793), the founder of 'scientific surgery'.

According to his biography by Morgan-Guy (2010), Phillips was born in London but bred in Radnorshire, Wales. In 1817, Phillips retired a wealthy man and returned to London where he invested his money in a sugar plantation on the island of St Vincent for £40 000 (£3.3m at current rate of inflation). With the profits, he amassed 'what can only be termed an obsession for the purchase and distribution of books on a massive scale’ (Walters, 1999).

A recent check with the University's list of manuscripts established that the Malay manuscripts are no longer in the University’s care and custody. It appears to have been sold to the British Library.

Checks with the British Library's website reveals more details on Phillips' Malay Manuscripts. The Sejarah Melayu manuscript was produced around 1830 by a scribe named Husain bin Ismail in Tanah Merah, Singapore. It was made by copying an older version of the Sejarah Melayu manuscript belonging to Sultan Abdul Rahman Muazzam Shah (1785-1832), the 17th Sultan of Johor, and the 1st Sultan of Riau-Lingga. Whilst the Hikayat Hang Tuah was produced in 1828.

From British Library's records, both manuscripts were purchased in London by Phillips around 1835 to 1842 and were donated to St David's College in 1842. Both manuscripts remained in Lampeter for 164 years before it was acquired by the British Library in 2006.

See Phillips' Sejarah Melayu manuscript of which digitized copy is now available at the following British Library’s site: 

http://www.bl.uk/manuscripts/Viewer.aspx?ref=or_16214_f001r

See Phillips' Hikayat Hang Tuah manuscript of which digitized copy is now available at the following British Library’s site:

http://www.bl.uk/manuscripts/Viewer.aspx?ref=or_16215_f001r

According to Phillips' biography, 60 consignments of rare books and manuscripts began arriving in Lampeter in 1834 and continued until 1852, six months after Phillips’ death. The shipments were from London to the river port of Carmarthen. Upon arrival, the consignments would be carted the remaining 23 miles along rough roads to Lampeter. See Google map image showing the position of Carmarthen quay in relation to the two bridges.

Although there is no direct evidence by way of any cargo or ship’s manifest, I believe that the keris sundang was part of the 60 consignments from London to Lampeter via Carmarthen river port. Its final destination would have either been St David's or Llandovery College.

As to how it got into the river, I believe that the sealed crate or chest containing the keris sundang and perhaps other items may have fallen into the river during transportation or during unloading at the quay.

As to the actual origin of the keris sundang, we can only speculate that it was procured during the following events of Phillips’ life as established by his biography:

1. In 1796, when he visited Penang on his return journey to India from Australia. It is possible that he could have procured it from Penang traders;
2. In 1811, when he accompanied the British expeditionary force under Lord Minto which invaded and captured Java. Before departing for Java the fleet stopped in Penang and thereafter Malacca. Out of 30,000 troops, 1,200 of them fell ill and were ordered to be treated in Malacca. As a surgeon, Phillips could have been stationed in Malacca. The keris sundang may have been procured in Penang, Malacca or Java as it was widely used throughout the Malay archipelago;
3. In 1817–1842 London i.e. during his career as a sugar plantation owner. Is it possible that the keris sundang formed part of other similar artifacts collected by Phillips during the same time he amassed his cache of manuscripts and rare books;

To me, it would have probably been in London. As it is a keris sundang, I believe that Phillips may have procured it at the same time he procured the Malay manuscripts i.e. around 1835 to 1842. All three items strongly relates to the legendary character of Hang Tuah. Furthermore, Europeans were unaware of the Hang Tuah’s epic until the manuscripts were circulated in Penang around 1810.

Phillips died in 1851 at the age of 91 and he was buried in the crypt of St Pancras church, London, next to his wife Althea Edwards. At his death, 50,000 books were found in his home. As he had no children, the books and perhaps other residuary movable items including the keris sundang were designated for distribution in accordance to his last will and testament. As the books and manuscripts made its way to Lampeter 6 months after his death, it possible that the benefeciaries of his will remained the same i.e. the recipients of his charitable donations during his lifetime. Specific to the keris sundang, it would have been part of the Malay manuscripts directly bequeathed or formed a residuary estate for the benefit of St David’s College (now University of Wales Trinity St David).

Source:

1. Biography of Thomas Phillips
2. Legacies of British Slave-ownership
3. Two Malay manuscripts from Wales: Sejarah Melayu and Hikayat Hang Tuah
4. Bugis - Wikipedia
5. Tausūg people - Wikipedia
6. John Morgan-Guy, ‘Biography of Thomas Phillips: A Cultivated and Well-Stored Mind, Thomas Phillips MRCS, Benefactor of St David's College Lampeter’, 2010.
7. Gwyn Walters, ‘Books from the ‘Nabob’: the benefactions of Thomas Phillips at Lampeter and Llandovery’, Trafodion Anrhydeddus Gymdeithas y Cymmrodorion 1998 / Transactions of the Honorouble Society of Cymmrodorion. New series, Vol. 5, 1999, pp.36-61

Note: This was my answer to a question posed in Quora.com which was also referred to in the following news articles:

a) 'Historian sheds new light on sword found in river mystery', published by the South Wales Evening Post on 16.3.2019. Link:

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/south-wales-evening-post/20190316/281998968784955

b) 'Ancient weapon found in Wales, and it might be… a KERIS!?', published by Cilisos .my on 22.4.2019. Link: 

https://cilisos.my/this-british-fisherman-found-an-ancient-weapon-that-might-be-a-keris/

South Wales Evening Post, 16.3.2019