MYSTERY OF KOTA GELANGGI

1881: DUDLEY FRANCIS AMELIUS HERVEY

That is a fascinating piece of Southeast Asian archaeological history. Dudley Hervey's report is often cited as one of the earliest "modern" accounts of Kota Gelanggi, a site shrouded in the folklore of the Malay Annals (Sejarah Melayu).

Who was Dudley Hervey?

Dudley Francis Amelius Hervey was a prominent British colonial administrator who served as the Resident Councillor of Malacca. Unlike many of his peers, Hervey was a serious scholar of Malay language and culture. His interest in local legends led him to investigate the historical reality of places mentioned in classical literature.

The 1881 "Discovery"

In 1881, Hervey traveled into the interior of Johor and Pahang. During this expedition, he reported finding the remains of an ancient city, which he identified as the lost city of Kota Gelanggi.

According to his accounts:

• The Site: He described seeing stone structures and fortifications deep in the jungle.
• Historical Context: In the Sejarah Melayu, Kota Gelanggi is described as a great city of the "Ganggayu" kingdom that was conquered by Rajendra Chola I of the Chola Empire in the 11th century.
• The Impact: Hervey’s report suggested that the "lost kingdom" was not just a myth but a tangible historical site related to the ancient Srivijaya or Khmer spheres of influence.

Modern Skepticism and the 2005 Controversy

While Hervey was convinced of his find, the exact location remained a mystery for over a century. The story resurfaced in 2005 when independent researcher Raimy Che-Ross published a paper claiming to have "rediscovered" the site using aerial photography and Hervey’s original notes.

However, the Malaysian Department of National Heritage later conducted excavations and concluded that many of the "structures" identified by Hervey and later researchers were actually natural limestone formations (caves and outcrops) rather than man-made ruins.

Summary of the Debate

Perspective	Arguments
The Believers	Early accounts like Hervey's and the Sejarah Melayu provide too much detail to be entirely fictional; they likely represent a pre-Islamic Hindu-Buddhist civilization.
The Skeptics	Lack of clear architectural ruins (bricks, statues, inscriptions) suggests the "city" was actually a series of inhabited caves or a cultural memory of a site elsewhere.

Hervey's 1881 account remains a primary source for anyone studying the historiography of early Malaya, as it represents the first attempt by a Western official to bridge the gap between Malay oral tradition and archaeological science.

2005: RAIMY-CHE ROSS FINDINGS

In 2005, independent researcher Raimy Che-Ross published findings that reignited the debate over Kota Gelanggi. His work combined literary analysis with "aerial archaeology" to pinpoint a potential site in the dense jungles of Johor, specifically near the Linggiu Reservoir.

Core Evidence and Findings

Raimy's research, published in the Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society (2004/2005), centered on the following:

• Manuscript Research: He spent 12 years studying ancient texts, most notably the Raffles Malay 18 version of the Sejarah Melayu (Malay Annals). He identified the city as Perbendaharaan Permata (Treasury of Jewels) and linked it to the Srivijaya Empire (c. 650–900 AD).
• Aerial Observations: Using aerial photography and satellite imagery, he identified "unusual formations" that he believed were man-made. These included:
• Double-walled structures: Patterns suggesting concentric walls protecting an inner city.
• Square platforms: Possible remains of temple stupas or earthen mounds.
• Trench systems: Indications of an advanced irrigation or defense network.
• Orang Asli Testimony: Raimy consulted local Orang Asli (indigenous) elders who shared oral traditions about "big buildings" and a "black stone fort" (Kota Batu Hitam) in a taboo area of the jungle. One elder claimed to have seen a 40-foot square fort with window-like holes in the 1930s.

Significance of the Claim

Raimy argued that if confirmed, Kota Gelanggi would be:

1. Older than Angkor Wat (Cambodia) and Borobudur (Indonesia).
2. The first capital of the Srivijaya Empire on the Malay Peninsula.
3. A major center for sacred learning and trade, potentially containing Hindu-Buddhist statues and granite inscriptions.

The Response from Authorities

Following the media coverage of Raimy's claims, the Malaysian Department of National Heritage conducted a month-long expedition in July 2005.

1. The Verdict: The department’s lead archaeologist, Khalid Syed Ali, stated in 2006 that they found no physical evidence of a "lost city."
2. Counter-Argument: They suggested the "structures" seen from the air were likely natural geological formations or old timber logging tracks.
3. Controversy: Raimy later criticized this expedition, claiming they did not consult him on the precise coordinates and investigated the wrong area.

THE BLACK STONE FORT

In the Sejarah Melayu (Malay Annals), specifically the Raffles Malay 18 manuscript used by Raimy Che-Ross, the "Black Stone Fort" is a central piece of evidence for the existence of the ancient city of Kota Gelanggi (also referred to as Ganggayu or Klang Kio).

Here are the specific details of the fort as described in the text and by modern researchers:

1. The Description in the Sejarah Melayu

The text, compiled or revised by Tun Seri Lanang in 1612, describes a city of immense grandeur:

• The Material: The city is explicitly described as having a fort made of black stone (kotanya daripada batu hitam).
• The Location: It is placed at the headwaters of the Johor River. Tun Seri Lanang even notes that the ruins "still exist to this day" (referring to his time in the early 17th century).
• The Name: The Annals explain that the original name was the Siamese Klang Kio, meaning "Treasury of Jewels" (Perbendaharaan Permata), which was mispronounced by Malays as Ganggayu or Gelanggi.
• The Fall: The city was reportedly the seat of Raja Chulan, a powerful king whose domain spanned the "lands below the wind." It was eventually sacked by Raja Suran (the legendary representation of Rajendra Chola I) during his 11th-century expedition.

2. Raimy Che-Ross’s "Rediscovery"

When Raimy Che-Ross conducted his research in 2004–2005, he looked for physical features that matched the "Black Stone" description:

• Satellite & Aerial Clues: He identified what appeared to be double-walled circular or square structures in the Johor jungle. He hypothesized that "black stone" might refer to basalt or laterite blocks, which turn dark/black when weathered and covered in lichen.
• The "Kota Batu Hitam": Raimy linked the Annals' description to local Orang Asli lore about a Kota Batu Hitam (Black Stone Fort) located in a taboo part of the forest near the Linggiu Reservoir.

3. Orang Asli Eyewitness Accounts

One of the most compelling parts of the 2005 findings was the testimony of an Orang Asli elder, Tuk Batin Abdul Rahman (then 85 years old):

• He claimed to have seen the fort personally in the 1930s while foraging.
• He described a structure approximately 40 feet square with "three holes like windows" along the walls.
• He and other elders (Tuk Batin Daud and Tuk Batin Adong) insisted the walls were made of a dark, solid stone, distinct from the surrounding landscape.

4. Historical Context: Srivijaya or Khmer?

The mention of a stone fort is historically significant because most classical Malay structures were built of wood. A stone city would suggest:

• High Civilization: Influence from the Srivijaya (Sumatra/Malay Peninsula) or Khmer (Cambodia) empires, both of which used stone and brick for religious and royal centers.
• Strategic Hub: A defensive position controlling the inland trade routes and the water sources of the southern peninsula.

Despite these descriptions, the 2005 government expedition claimed the "walls" were likely natural limestone or granite outcrops, leaving the "Black Stone Fort" as one of Malaysia's most enduring archaeological mysteries.

Copied:

Google Gemini AI

12 January 2026: 11.22 p.m