Malay in the Ancient World
The concept of "Malay in the Ancient World" encompasses the historical and cultural developments associated with the Malay people from ancient times through significant periods such as the Neolithic and Metal Ages. The Malay language is rooted in the Austronesian linguistic family, and the term "Malay" has evolved to signify not only a linguistic identity but also a distinct phenotype characterized by specific physical traits. The ancient Malay region saw the emergence of horticulture around 1100 BCE and the Neolithic Age by 800 BCE, marked by the domestication of various plants and animals, alongside hunting and fishing practices.
Cultural evolution in the Malay region was influenced by neighboring civilizations, including significant Chinese interactions. Notably, the Ban Kao culture, active from 3000 to 900 BCE, reflects a unique adaptation of Austronesian innovations and local materials, despite the absence of metal artifacts. The subsequent Metal Age, starting around 1000 BCE, introduced bronze and iron tools and saw the construction of megalithic structures, indicative of increased social complexity. Over the centuries, the Malay chiefdoms played various roles within emerging regional states and empires, often serving as vassals or allies, contributing to the rich tapestry of Southeast Asian history.
On this Page
Malay in the Ancient World
Date: 8000 b.c.e.-700 c.e.
Locale: Malaysia and Southeast Asia
Malay in the Ancient World
Over time, the term “Malay” (muh-LAY) has conjured up various connotations and usages in the context of world history. The Malay language once formed half of a former linguistic family, Malayo-Polynesian (now called Austronesian); it was also used to denote a phenotype. This phenotype is characterized by a light brown skin color, medium to short stature, black and straight or wavy hair, and broad cheekbones. Distinct from the classical Mongoloid phenotype associated with populations in north China, Manchuria, and Siberia, the Indonesian-Malay phenotype is also known to physical anthropologists as that of the generalized Mongoloids. Being Malay also meant the trusteeship to the source of Southeast Asian spices or being a Muslim in Southeast Asia. Colonial and postcolonial partition relegated the term to the inhabitants of peninsular Malaya, if not the entire republic. The geographical consolidation of the republic makes Malaysia both mainland and insular Southeast Asia, and it embodies the respective cultural traditions of both.
Entrance into the Neolithic Age is indicated by three criteria: the presence of pecked or ground stone adzes, pottery, and horticulture. Although the Chinese influence on Southeast Asian cultural history is still acknowledged, greater recognition is being made of the creative and independent contribution of Southeast Asia to its own cultural history. Horticulture probably began around 1100 b.c.e. on the mainland, and by 800 b.c.e., the Neolithic Age was established in the Malay region. The sequence of cultural development was not uniform, however, varying with the site and locale. Also, the familiar cultural sequencing that accompanies events such as the start of agriculture or metalworking often does not apply in this area.
The late phase of the Hoabinhian tradition (c. 13,000-c. 5000/4000 b.c.e.) continued into the Neolithic period. Hoabinhian stone tools, mostly of the late phase and some bearing similarity to those in northern Vietnam, have been found at more than sixteen sites in Malaya. Cord-marked pottery, pounding and grinding stones, bone tools, burials, and red ochre are frequent finds. However, many sites in Malaya have no stratigraphic sequence, so interpretations of development must be based on comparisons of information from neighboring cultures with that from local sites. In Malaya, the Neolithic Age was characterized by the domestication of indigenous tubers, breadfruit and other fruit trees, fowl, and pigs, undoubtedly supplemented by hunting, gathering, and fishing.
Domestication of rice followed later; the earliest dates given are 4000-3300 b.c.e. for China and 3500 b.c.e. for Thailand. Rice cultivation was noted at Thailand’s Non Nok Tha site, judged to be Neolithic, although bronze had begun to be used. (The appearance of metal generally signals the end of the Neolithic period.) Modest by comparison, the Malayan Ban Kao culture (c. 3000-c. 900 b.c.e.), derived from various sites, gives rise to some puzzling interpretations. No metal was reported, and Ban Kao pottery differs from Non Nok Tha’s and appears to be connected with the Chinese Longshan tradition. The main Ban Kao site dates later than Non Nok Tha.
The Ban Kao site produced bark-cloth beaters, spindle whorls, and fishing equipment. Bark-cloth beaters are Austronesian innovations; their use on the prehistoric mainland is limited to southern Vietnam and Malaya. Both areas are Austronesian settlements, the result of Austronesian expansion from insular Southeast Asia around 4000 b.c.e. This expansion continued until around 1000 b.c.e., as people migrated eastward into the Philippines, Indonesia, Hawaii, and New Zealand, and westward into Madagascar, spreading Southeast Asian culture as they traveled.
The following metal age, beginning about 1000 b.c.e., was rich, with various sites producing fine bronze and bronze-and-iron objects such as plowshares, axes, spearheads, fishhooks, ornaments, and bronze drums. Between 100 b.c.e. and 100 c.e., the projected start of Indianization in the Malay region, megalithic structures were constructed. In the following centuries, various states and empires arose in the region, with Malay chiefdoms often playing the role of vassals or weaker allies.
Bibliography
Bellwood, Peter. Man’s Conquest of the Pacific. New York: Oxford University Press, 1979.
Beri, K. K. History and Culture of South-East Asia: Ancient and Medieval. New Delhi, India: Sterling Publishers, 1994.
Sorensen, P. “Neolithic Cultures of Thailand (and North Malaysia) and Their Lungshanoid Relationships.” In Early Chinese Art and Its Possible Influence in the Pacific Basin, edited by N. Barnard. New York: Intercultural Arts Press, 1972.