The so-called evidence is a written document from an unknown and unreliable author according to Bodohland’s Malay historians. Actually there are no concrete proofs or artifacts uncovered and linked to existence of Parameswara. Also no Melaka palace daily journals available to say Melaka Sultanate was a real history.
If the founding date for Melaka is 1262, then the history of China Ming Dynasty and Portuguese are all wrong.
China Ming dynasty history is the most proper documented archive in the world unlike Melaka history written by unknown authors a hundred years later.
Chinese archives hold key to Malacca’s founding
October 11, 2012
FMT LETTER: From NK Khoo, via e-mail
The Malacca sultanate’s existence is proven only through cross reference with other historical archives from China, Siam, Portuguese, etc. because all archives from the Malacca palace were believed to have been destroyed during the wartime.
Historians are fully aware that China’s Ming dynasty history is the most well documented archives in the world, unlike Malacca’s history which was written a hundred years later.
Ming palace records are still existence and can be accessed by researchers to verify when Parameswara visited Nanjing.
Parameswara’s visit to China in 1405 was well documented in the Ming palace official journals with the details such as of what food served to him and his delegation on a particular day.
If the founding date for Malacca is 1262, then the history of the Ming Dynasty and Siam are all proven wrong or at least the Ming Dynasty history has to be brought forward 150 years to synchronise with the new Malacca history as claimed by Malacca government. This is a very unlikely event!
Most world renowned historians will not accept a history announced by local government without proper research works done on the subject. History still has to substantiated with evidences like palace official documents, artifacts, cross reference archives, etc.
Which year was Malacca founded — 1400 or 1262?
I READ with dismay that Pos Malaysia is launching a series of stamps to “mark the 750th anniversary of the founding of Melaka”.
This “recognises” or “accepts” that the historical date of the founding of Melaka is changed from 1400 to 1262.
The Malacca Chief Minister made such an announcement this year.
Historical dates are important markers and have always been determined by historians and academia of international and local standing, aptly so as this falls within their field of research.
In the absence of such an announcement of the change in the year of the founding of Malacca by the appropriate body, can this be treated as being “official” by politicians and now Pos Malaysia?
I would appreciate if there can be some clarification on this.