Challenging a specifically Dutch historiographical tradition

The staggering variety of objects found in the Intan Wreck exhibits how misinformed historical writings can be used to legitimize grave injustices and how a less Eurocentric approach focused on the objectivity of objects can be used to debunk colonial myths and help to adjust historical injustice.

To do this we first have to take a look at the influence of historiography on actual history. In other words: how can history writing be used to legitimize things in the present? A good case-study is the Dutch colonial history-writing of the nineteenth century. The following quote is a description of the area around the city of Palembang in modern day Indonesia – then part of the Dutch East Indies – by the Dutch nineteenth century civil servant W.L de Sturler:

´´The lack of any form of coinage in an area, where no desire for wealth in foreign objects exists, [..], and no need for native industrial production, which could prompt coin circulation there, can be seen as evidence that the indecisive spirit of the population is in need of being woken up, if one wants to expect increase of welfare and prosperity.’’

This quote is very representative for the Dutch historiographical tradition concerning their most important colonial asset; Dutch historians regarded the social and political backwardness of the locals in combination with the lack of the stable relations necessary for modern capitalism as the driver behind their countries’ take-over of trade-relations in the Indonesian archipelago. Furthermore, local sovereigns were deemed either not powerful enough to control their ‘greedy subjects’, or too powerful to not seize the properties of their subjects themselves.

As we have read, the cargo of the Intan Wreck included several hundreds of coins and other forms of currency. This contradicts De Sturler´s assumption about the indigenous lack of a desire for wealth and a subsequent lack of coinage in the Sumatran economy. Apart from the actual coinage found in the Intan wreck, other finds enable more insight in the ´´monetization´´ of Southeast Asian trade in the tenth century. Based on a lack of archaeological evidence (coin finds), the majority of the area seemed to have not been monetized. However, the huge diversity of goods on the Intan wreck substantiates the presumption that traders in Southeast Asia would have been in need of some form of currency to enable their rich trade-efforts over such a large geographical area. The finding of the silver Chinese Ingots onboard the Intan ship seems to be the missing link. The ingots formed a stable currency for the traders of the Intan-wreck to pay for the great diversity of goods they assembled.

How was the varied cargo of the Intan assembled? The answer to this question reveals a lot about the scale and method of sea-trade in Indonesia in the 10th century and can be found in the great harbor of the seafaring empire of Srivijaya, Palembang. For the observant reader, this is the exact area on Sumatra that De Sturler described in his report in the introduction of this text. It is no miracle De Sturler shows a stunning lack of awareness of the great commercial history of the area, as the city had long been a mystery clouded by a lack of archaeological evidence. The wooden houses of the city were completely erased by the tropical climate, the capital of the Srivijaya was moved after the tenth century and literary evidence of its existence mainly exists in Arabic and Chinese writings. The Chinese monk Chou Ch’-fei traveled to Palembang in the ninth century and noted:

“[Palembang] is the most important port-of-call on the sea-routes of the foreigners from the countries of Java (She-po) in the east and from the countries of the Arabs (Ta-shi) and Quilon (Ku-lin) in the west; they all pass through it on their way to China.”

This observation combined with the evidence of the Intan wreck prompts Wade to describe the Sumatran port as the ‘‘trade-polity par excellence’’ fulfilling an important hub role in the ‘‘early Asian age of commerce’’, which seems to have been a time of intensive trade connections between Persia, the Arab peninsula, India, Southeast Asia and China. Palembang functioned as a so-called ‘‘entrepot-port’’ where all kinds of goods from throughout this extensive trade-network came together and were put aboard ships like the Intan-wreck, accounting for the astonishing variety of the cargo.

After its stopover at Palembang, the Intan-ship proceeded its journey towards the probable final destination: Java. Contrary to De Sturler’s observation that the people of Palembang lacked a spirit for local industrial production, the cargo included many objects that were produced or modified in Sumatra: low value votive tablets, simple oil lamps, tripod pot stands and a huge number of door-knockers meant for Javanese Buddhist temples. More extravagant products were also included: expensive jewelry and intricately decorated Buddhist artifacts and statues.

Long-distance and regional trade connections played an important role in the Javanese economy of the tenth century. A boom in the export of rice and other organic materials prompted by a huge population move to the coastal areas of the Island and the implementation of double cropping accounted for a huge increase in Javanese wealth. This wealth was - among other things - used to build huge stone temple complexes, the most famous being the enormous Borobudur. This development accounts for the significant number of Buddhist artifacts found on the Intan ship. Other important Javanese import items included gold, silver, metal utensils and Chinese ceramics, all of which have been found in significant quantities on the Intan ship as well.

The story of the Intan wreck is a great testimony of a time long gone, its prosperity, international connections and dark secrets. It is a story told by a staggering variety of objects that debunk the colonial narrative of Dutch nineteenth century historiography - a historiography that legitimized actual policy decisions in the nineteenth and early twentieth century. This text used a quote from W.L. de Sturler to structure its criticisms of Dutch colonial historiography, but one has to be aware that De Sturler was a product of his own time and place, subconsciously caught in a colonial frame of thought.

The objects found in the Intan ships’ cargo are not held back by frames of thought and objectively reveal their information on the international trade connections once present in Southeast Asia, even indicating the minting of indigenous coinage on Sumatra in the tenth century. A minting of coinage that may very well have been prompted by ‘a desire for wealth in foreign objects and native industrial production’. The cargo showcases how Palembang used to be a center of prosperous international sea trade; a stacking market not unlike the Dutch capital of Amsterdam had been during the seventeenth century. Long gone glory when De Sturler published his work back in the Netherlands in 1843, as was the glory of Palembang. The lack of evidence of the long gone prosperity of Palembang and Southeast Asia is in no way indicative of an ‘‘Indonesian’’ incapability for prosperity. Which – according to De Sturler - was caused by a lack of desire and determination. An idea that has been undeniably used to legitimize Dutch rule over their ‘‘indecisive Indonesian subjects’’.

The story of the Intan wreck shows how historical findings can be used to debunk myths, but also highlights how historical arguments have been used to construct new realities. Something to think about in relation to Xi Jinping’s recent references to the glorious history of Asian trade connections when trying to legitimize China’s belt and road initiative for today and the future.

Further reading:

M. Flecker, The archaeological excavation of the 10th century: Intan shipwreck (Oxford 2002).

W.L. de Sturler, Proeve eener beschrijving van het gebied van Palembang,(zuid-oostelijk gedeelte van Sumatra) (Amsterdam, 1843).

P. Geyl, Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse Stam (Amsterdam, 1934) 229-230. W.R. van Hoevell, Reis over Java, Madura en Bali (Amsterdam, 1851-1854).

G. Wade, ‘An early age of commerce in Southeast Asia, 900–1300 CE.’, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 40:2 (2009): 221-265.

J. Wisseman Christie, “Money and Its Uses in the Javanese States of the Ninth to Fifteenth Centuries A.D.”, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 39:3 (1996).

D.Twitchett and J. Stargardt, ‘‘Chinese silver bullion in a tenth-century Indonesian wreck’’, Asia Major 15:1 (2002): 23-72.

J. Guy, ‘‘The Intan Shipwreck: A 10th-Century Cargo’’, (Colloquium, Art and Archaeology in Asia no.22, University of London, June 16-18 2003).

C. Salmon, ‘Les Persans à l’extrémité orientale de la route maritime (IIe AE - XVIIe siècle)’, Archipel, 68 (2004): 23–58.

J. Wisseman Christie, “Javanese Markets and the Asian Sea Trade Boom of the Tenth to Thirteenth Centuries A.D.”, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 41(3) (1998) pp.344-381.

P. Wheatley, “Geographic Notes on Some Commodities Involved in Sung Maritime Trade”, Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. 32(2) (1959) pp.5-140.