For something like this, we ought to learn historiography, not history. Historiography is different from history. Historiography talks about how the history itself is formed, or “approach to history”. It’s like investigation about historical “facts” or data itself: Who is Malahayati? What is the first manuscript mentioning Malahayati? Is it recorded in its supposed era or in the later era? Is there a contemporary (from their era) source supporting their existence?
- Indra Patra Fortress Complex located in northern part of Sumatra island, created by Lamuri a Hindu Kingdom … created in 7th century.
Wikipedia cites a tourism website, which is not a reliable source for history articles. As an example, several Indonesian tourism websites stated that the Pinisi ship was already used in the 14th century while in reality, no earlier than the 19th century. The website itself did not cite any source. The claim of 7th-century origin seems to have stemmed from the supposed existence of the Lamuri Kingdom (7th century), however, the Lamuri Kingdom itself was only recorded in the 9th century and beyond.
Indonesia-tourism.com states “In the Main fortress there are two stupas or a building that takes after an arch where the inside or under the vault there are wells or water sources, which (at the time), utilized by Hindus for ablutions as a part of the religion service arrangement.” – The existence of the stupa seems to indicate that this fort must be built pre-Islamic arrival, but those are not really stupas, they’re domed structure built to protect water source, and domed structures only appeared in Nusantara after the 19th century: In indigenous Indo–Malay–Filipino mosques, where domes should be applied, they used stepped pyramidal roof derived from Meru shape instead.
What people usually miss is that Indo-Malaysian Hindu-Buddhist structures are symmetric. The overall plan of the fort and the position of the stupas are not symmetric, it is placed in a seemingly random location inside the fort. The fort also has noticeable cannon/gun ports. By all available evidence, the second information in the Wiki is more accurate: It’s a 17th-century fort. It could even be later, post-17th century.
- Inong Balee Fort. Inong Balee is the widow army raised by Admiral Keumalahayati to avenge the death of her and other widows husband who is killed by the Dutch in the 16th century.
Keumalahati has been investigated by Acehnese, Malaysian, and even Western scholars. All evidence pointed out that she was a character that was “invented” in the 20th century, taken from Marie van Zeggelen’s book Oude Glorie (1935). It is possible that Marie van Zeggelen based that character on an oral story of an Acehnese heroine, but that doesn’t mean she existed. Malahayati’s feats cannot be collaborated with Dutch records. The fort itself cannot be reliably dated from the 17th century (the 1600s), the closest structure indicates 19th-century origin.
The most important thing in historiography to prove that some people existed is to find out the source mentioning their name in their respective era. Can’t really prove Brawijaya existed if the indicated source only mentions “O Rei de Java” – the name “Brawijaya” itself must be recorded in that sentence. Can’t really prove Hang Tuah existed if the source only mentions “lesomana” or “lassemane”, because it could be anyone. While John Davis mentioned a woman admiral in Alauddin Riayat Shah’s court, he did not record “Keumalahayati” or “Malahayati”. Where do these names come from? From Marie van Zeggelen’s book Oude Glorie (1935). Van Zeggelen was mistaken by author(s) as a “Historian” .
The closest “fortification” that the devs could use to base the model on should be Muaro Jambi complex since several temples did have outer walls to mark the boundary of the temple’s mandala. It is not a castle per se — medieval Malay people did not build castles, the most prominent Malay fortification consists of palisade/stockade made of wood and bamboo. It means that the structure in the Malay Castle’s model should be using red brick instead of white stones. As I said before, Indo-Malaysian pre-Islamic structures are symmetric, while the current Malay Castle is not symmetric.
