Good morning. It is a pleasure to return to my alma mater, the National University of Singapore, to open this two-day conference on Singapura before Raffles. Eighteen scholars from around the world will present their latest research on the subject of precolonial Singapore and its links to the maritime trade network, which stretched from the Indian Ocean to China and the Spice Islands of Indonesia.

When Singapore became independent, scholars thought that Singapore had been nothing but a fishing village and a lair of pirates until 1819. They believed that the stories of ancient Singapore found in Malay literature were purely myths; Where was the supposed lion which roamed the Padang? How could a strongman have thrown a boulder from Fort Canning to the mouth of the Singapore River? How could sharp-snouted fish have attacked the city?

Nevertheless, in 1984, the National Museum sponsored an excavation at Fort Canning, also known as Bukit Larangan in Malay, the “Forbidden Hill”. The legendary palace of Singapore’s ancient kings was supposed to have stood there. In just 10 days, archaeologists found evidence that Fort Canning had been inhabited 700 years ago, and that the people who lived there surrounded themselves with exotic luxury goods from India, China, and Thailand. Since 1984, many more excavations have been conducted, and we now know that the ancient Lion City stretched from Fort Canning to the sea. Its people were traders who used money, and artisans who forged raw materials imported from other places into tools, weapons, and jewellery.

Suddenly, Singapore came into a new focus. While we will never know for sure whether a prince came here in 1299 and founded a kingdom, we do know that ancient Chinese, Javanese, and Vietnamese records about Longya men and Temasek do make reference to this place we now call Singapore. This port had a multi-ethnic population, a ruler, and a reputation for honesty. Beneath the surface of downtown Singapore, many more remnants of a prosperous kingdom firmly connected to other ports stretching thousands of kilometres east and west may still remain to be discovered. The Malay Annals’ depiction of Singapura as a great 14th-century port turns out to be true.

University students from Singapore and other parts of the world now come here to study the remnants of the ancient trading network of which ancient Singapore was a key member. Some of them are now experts in their own right and will present their new discoveries over the next two days. Other scholars will present new information about their research on other segments of the ancient Silk Road of the Sea, which connected Singapore to all of maritime Asia.

This conference is being held in the context of the Singapore Bicentennial. It would be strange indeed if the year 2019 were to pass without some reference to the fact that it is now 200 years since Singapore’s history began a new chapter. It is equally true that the British decision to set up a trading post here was by no means a foregone conclusion.

Six months before Raffles arrived on Singapore’s shore and was greeted by the Temenggong, Col. William Farquhar had sailed to this area on a similar mission. He focused his attention not on Singapore, but on Karimun, 40 km west of Tuas. Karimun had a lot to recommend it; it lies right in the middle of the south end of the Straits of Melaka. Nobody can enter or leave the Straits without being seen from there. The island of Bintan was another possibility; it is three times the size of Singapore and has two estuaries well sheltered from the northeast monsoon.

Raffles has been credited with the gift of prescience to foresee that Singapore, with no resources and a limited land area, possessed advantages which nobody else at the time could appreciate. The area from Melaka to Palembang is littered with the remains of ancient ports, which at various times had risen to become a vital link between east and west. The major kingdoms of Kedah, Srivijaya, and Melayu all were located on rivers which formed highways for the export of valuable produce from the hinterlands to the coasts. What evidence was there to suggest that Singapore could join the list of such illustrious names?

After Raffles’ arrival, Singapore had numerous opportunities to fail. The Dutch could have attacked and wiped out the fledgling outpost. Pirate attacks could have driven merchants away. The blight which wiped out the nutmeg plantations could have spelled Singapore’s end. The beginning of steam power destroyed the reliance behind the “lands below the wind”, which necessitated a stopover in the Straits of Melaka. At each critical point, Singapore could have taken a wrong turn and been replaced by another port located somewhere between Jakarta and Penang or Aceh.

That this did not happen cannot be assigned to the wisdom of any one person. The study of history in the early 20th century was still mainly a search for “great men” who were considered to have determined the course of events. Since then, more historians have come around to the view that it is groups of people, not individuals, who are responsible for the rises and falls of civilisations and cities. Recently, several other statues were added to the one of Raffles, which stands near the Asian Civilisations Museum. These represented the early settlers who came the same year as Raffles and contributed to the success of Singapore as a port town, as it was in ancient days.

The Bicentennial has provided not just scholars but also the general public with an opportunity to put the year 1819 in a longer-term perspective. The last two centuries are a distinct period in history, but it is impossible to put them into perspective without considering the five centuries that preceded 1819. Everything that happened after 1819 was contingent on what went before. Raffles was not a perfect person, but he was unusual among his British contemporaries because he understood that the key to the future was an understanding of the past. History is not a predictive science, but it is at least a guide to what the future might become.

Since Singapore’s independence in 1965, much more data on precolonial Singapore has come to light. In 1965, it was still logical to assume that the Malay Annals’ depiction of Singapore as a great port in ancient Malay history was a myth. Archaeology has forever altered this perception. We now know more about 14th-century Singapore than any other port of that period in Southeast Asia. That century was significant in many ways. The Silk Road of the Sea was flourishing. Islam was spreading in the region, and the Chinese were beginning to settle in Southeast Asian ports. While the overland Silk Road has long been romanticised in history and fiction, the story of the maritime Silk Road is only now beginning to be reclaimed from the ignorance and false assumptions which have long obscured it.

We are only now coming to appreciate the extent to which Singapore and the Straits of Melaka have been a major contributor to the world maritime trading system. In 1515, the Portuguese author Tome Pires had a clear understanding of the interdependence of ports when he wrote that “Whoever is lord of Melaka has his hand on the throat of Venice.” Singapore’s role in helping formulate the UNCLOS agreement on the Law of the Sea is not an aberration. It is a new example of how Singapore and the population of this region have not been merely passive bystanders in the development of this network.

This is the second scientific conference on ancient harbours to be held in Singapore. The first was held in 2004. Since then, the study of Southeast Asia’s maritime culture has made significant progress, and I hope that this conference will succeed in stimulating further research and collaboration between scholars working on sea trade and its importance to world history. I also hope Singapore will continue to build on its position as a centre of maritime trade to develop a better understanding of how seaports have evolved over the centuries.

I am sure that this conference will provide new evidence of the ways in which Singapore and its regional partners have been proactive in shaping the institutions which facilitate the movement of people, goods, and information. Old frameworks and networks are now under pressure, and new ideas have to be found to keep them working and become even more efficient. This is one instance where greater understanding of the past may help people of the present to stand by their convictions in the face of negative criticism and figure out how to keep alive the values which have sustained the Silk Road of the sea for two thousand years. More than just the existence of Singapore depends on success in this endeavour. I look forward to seeing the results of your conference and to the possibility that Singapore will host more such events in the future.