01/04/2026

WEDNESDAY | APR 1, 2026

11

COMMENT by Assoc Prof Dr Nasha Rodziadi Khaw

Power of connectivity in maritime trade I N Malaysia, the story of maritime power is often narrated through the rise of Melaka in the 15th century. Its China Sea. This shift proved decisive for Ancient Kedah. foreign. Material culture reflects this hybridity – imported ceramics circulated alongside local pottery, Brahmi–derived scripts coexisted with oral traditions and religious architecture blended Indic

As earlier exchange hubs waned, Kedah’s position near the entrance of the straits enabled it to rise in prominence. Its development was gradual and cumulative. Disparate coastal and riverine settlements coalesced into a network of interconnected nodes, each specialising in trade, production or ritual. This transformation coincided with a broader shift in global commerce from elite luxury goods towards bulk commodities such as ceramics, metals, forest products and beads. Ancient Kedah was well positioned to meet this demand, functioning as an entrepôt and a producer. Historical sources across Asia attest to Ancient Kedah’s importance. Early Tamil literature refers to it as a source of valued goods while Sanskrit and Buddhist texts describe it as a prosperous port. Arab geographers between the ninth and 14th centuries CE knew Ancient Kedah, often called Kalah, as a key maritime stopover rich in tin and forest products. The merchants came from Persia, Arabia and India. Notably, these accounts are ambiguous, Ancient Kedah appears variously as a port, a kingdom or a broader region depending on perspective. This ambiguity reflects the reality of a maritime polity – the influence of which was defined less by fixed borders than by shifting networks of interaction. Archaeological evidence from the Bujang Valley substantiates these accounts. Excavations have revealed iron-smelting remains, jetties, bead-making workshops, pottery assemblages, imported ceramics and Hindu-Buddhist ritual sites. These findings demonstrate that Ancient Kedah functioned as a port industry, a site of exchange and production. Iron smelting at Sungai Batu, indicates not only technological capability but also integration into regional economic systems. Ancient Kedah was not a passive intermediary, it was an active node within wider networks of exchange, production and distribution. The cultural landscape of Ancient Kedah reflects a similarly pragmatic cosmopolitanism. Hindu and Buddhist monuments, constructed using local materials such as laterite and clay display austere yet distinctive architectural forms. While Indic religious traditions were clearly present, their adoption was hardly uniform. These practices remained concentrated in littoral and riverine zones where foreign interaction was most intense while interior communities seem to have retained indigenous belief systems. Cultural exchange was, therefore, selective, situational and spatially uneven. What emerges is not a rigidly “Indianised” society but a fluid cultural environment shaped by movement and negotiation. Identity in Ancient Kedah was relational rather than fixed, shifting across contexts, coastal and inland, ritual and commercial, local and

diplomatic sophistication, legal traditions and global trading networks have dominated academic discourse. Yet, such a focus obscures a deeper historical trajectory of maritime connectivity on the Malay Peninsula. Centuries before Melaka, an earlier polity known today as Ancient Kedah, appeared to have been deeply engaged in the dynamics of exchange, negotiation and strategic adaptation within a complex regional system. Its experience reminds us that Malaysia’s engagement with the wider world did not begin with colonialism or early modern empires but was rooted in a far older and more enduring tradition of maritime statecraft. Ancient Kedah emerged between the second and 14th centuries CE along the northwestern coast of the Malay Peninsula, with the Bujang Valley as its economic and cultural core. At that time, the Sungai Merbok formed a broad, sheltered bay facing the Bay of Bengal and the entrance to the Straits of Melaka. River systems such as the Sungai Muda and Sungai Bujang connected the coast to resource-rich interiors, enabling movement through a landscape where dense forests and rugged terrain limited overland transport. Gunung Jerai, then situated closer to the shoreline, served as a prominent navigational landmark. Geography was not merely a passive backdrop; it constituted the foundation of Kedah’s strategic advantage. Long before Ancient Kedah appeared in Indian, Arab or Chinese sources, indigenous communities in the peninsula were already embedded in regional exchange networks. Archaeological evidence from the late prehistoric period – such as bronze drums, pottery, beads and iron objects – points to sustained interaction among coastal and riverine societies across maritime Southeast Asia. These early networks cultivated navigational knowledge, commercial experience and social openness. When foreign merchants later arrived, they encountered societies already accustomed to exchange, rather than isolated communities suddenly drawn into global trade. These developments coincided with wider transformations across Asia. From the early centuries CE, maritime commerce linking the Mediterranean, India and China expanded significantly. Advances in shipbuilding and monsoon navigation enabled sailors to move beyond cautious coast hugging routes towards more direct open-sea crossings. By the third to sixth centuries CE, this reconfigured maritime geography: older trans-peninsular routes near the Kra Isthmus declined while the Straits of Melaka emerged as the principal corridor, linking the Indian Ocean and South

cosmology with local techniques. Cosmopolitanism here was not ideological but lived, embedded in everyday interactions across diverse communities. Political organisation mirrored this fluidity. Ancient Kedah did not resemble a centralised territorial state. Instead, it functioned as a polycentric maritime polity composed of coastal and riverine nodes linked through trade, ritual and alliance. Authority rested less on territorial control than on the capacity to manage flows of goods, people and knowledge. Legitimacy emerged through relationships rather than boundaries. This structure allowed Ancient Kedah to adapt to shifting trade patterns, fluctuating demand and changing regional dynamics over more than a millennium. From a structural or realist perspective, Ancient Kedah operated within a system analogous to what international relations theory describes as anarchy. No overarching authority governed the maritime world – multiple powers interacted within a competitive environment marked by uncertainty. In such a system, survival depended on positioning rather than domination. Ancient Kedah’s strategy of engaging multiple partners, across India, China and the wider Indian Ocean resembles a form of balancing behaviour. Yet, unlike classical realist models centred on military power, Ancient Kedah’s balancing was achieved through connectivity that diversified relationships to avoid dependence on any single external actor. This insight resonates strongly with contemporary geopolitics. Today’s Indo-Pacific is similarly characterised by strategic competition among major powers, particularly the United States and China. Southeast Asia, including Malaysia, occupies a position not unlike Ancient Kedah, situated at a critical junction of maritime routes and economic flows. Regional states must navigate an environment where alignment with one power risks vulnerability while disengagement risks irrelevance. The response, as seen in Asean centrality and Malaysia’s foreign policy posture, is not rigid alignment but strategic hedging, maintaining multiple and multifaceted partnerships while preserving autonomy. Yet, structural conditions alone cannot explain Ancient Kedah’s historical trajectory. Agency-based perspectives remind us that outcomes are shaped by decisions made within constraints. The organisation of specialised nodes, industrial centres such as Sungai Batu, ritual site such as Bukit Choras and trading settlements

Connectivity is not merely infrastructure or trade; it is a form of power, one that enables smaller polities to remain central, adaptable and resilient within an ever changing world. – PIC FROM WIKIPEDIA

strategy, structural

one

that

balanced human socially

across the Bujang Valley, reflects deliberate choices rather than automatic responses to geography. Local elites, merchants and other actors actively shaped Ancient Kedah’s role within regional networks. These decisions parallel modern foreign policy processes, where states respond to domestic considerations and external pressures. Ancient Kedah’s development was thus the product of continuous negotiation between opportunity and constraint, mediated by actors across multiple levels. At the same time, constructivist perspectives illuminate the importance of norms, identities and shared meanings. The selective adoption of Indic religious and cultural forms suggests that interaction was shaped not only by material incentives but by evolving social understandings. The “international” environment of Ancient Kedah was as much social as it was material, structured by shared symbols, rituals and practices that facilitated exchange. Identity was not imposed but negotiated and power was exercised not only through control of resources but through participation in shared cultural frameworks. Taken together, these perspectives reveal that Ancient Kedah’s success emerged from the interplay between structure, agency and meaning. Its ability to remain central within shifting maritime networks was not simply a function of geography or material capability but of its capacity to operate across these dimensions simultaneously. Connectivity, in this sense, was not a passive condition but an active

constraints,

decision-making

and

constructed norms. This framework offers a deeper historical lens through which to understand Malaysia’s contemporary foreign policy. In an increasingly multipolar world, Malaysia operates within structural constraints defined by major power competition, global supply chains and strategic chokepoints. Yet, it retains agency in shaping its engagements, pursuing diversified partnerships, participating in multilateral institutions and advancing cultural diplomacy. At the same time, its commitment to Asean norms, dialogue and coexistence reflects a constructivist dimension rooted in shared regional identity. Ancient Kedah thus provides more than historical precedent that offers conceptual continuity. It demonstrates that autonomy in a complex international system does not arise from isolation or domination but from the strategic management of connectivity. In an era defined by contested sea lanes, technological competition and shifting alliances, this lesson remains highly relevant. Connectivity is not merely infrastructure or trade; it is a form of power, one that enables smaller polities to remain central, adaptable and resilient within an ever changing world. AssocProf Dr Nasha Rodziadi Khaw is senior lecturer at the Centre for Global Archaeological Research, Universiti Sains Malaysia. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com