Posted on 30 January 2012 - 05:08am

WITH reference to Khoo: Show me proof that Han !uah e"#sted$ %Jan 18&' ( cannot accept the comments of Prof )mer#tus Khoo Kay K#m that Han !uah' Han Je*at and Han +# Po d#d not e"#st, -e cannot depend on.y on off#c#a. h#stor#ca. documents to pro/e the#r e"#stence, P#ctures and d#ar#es wr#tten *y famous tra/e..ers a.so pro/#de c.ues, 0epend#n on wr#tten h#story a.one w#.. not ena*.e us to understand what too1 p.ace #n the past 2 for e"amp.e' we wou.d not 1now what K#r#n was unt#. we .oo1ed at a p#cture of #t and saw that #t was a #raffe that 3dm#ra. 4hen Hoe *rou ht from 3fr#ca to present to the Su.tan of 5a.acca, 6ther than the 5a.ay 3nna.s' are there any other h#stor#ca. records of Han !uah7 ( ha/e seen #n ah#story te"t*oo1 a photo of a .etter #n 4h#nese wr#tten #n the name of Han !uah to the K#n of 8yu1yu %now 61#nawa' Japan&' comp.a#n#n a*out the m#s*eha/#our of a roup of 8yu1yu sa#.ors #n 5a.acca, 6ther than that' ( was to.d *y my fr#end from 61#nawa that a keris *e.on #n to Han !uah was found #n a temp.e #n 61#nawa *y a restorer of the temp.e, 3.fonso de 3.*u9uer9ue ment#oned #n h#s d#ary that he wou.d not ha/e attac1ed 5a.acca #f Han !uah had sur/#/ed, 3nyway' ( than1 the professor *ecause he has st#mu.ated us to th#n1, ( am a.so of the op#n#on that #t #s #mportant to study the h#story of the 5#n 0ynasty *ecause there was ment#on of the tsunam#' whose occurrence was apparent.y per#od#ca. !h#s cou.d ser/e as a reference for us to p.an a a#nst natura. d#sasters, Goh Hoe Hoe via email Hang Tuah did not exist ( 8):)8 to Khoo: Show me proof that Han !uah e"#sted$ %Jan 18&, 0ur#n Har# 8aya 3#d#. :#tr#' a nephew who had passed the SP5 e"am#nat#on and was temporar#.y teach#n as a pr#/ate tutor' was s#tt#n w#th me en;oy#n 1etupat and rendan #n my apartment, He ea er.y responded when ( as1ed h#m a*out 5unsh# 3*du..ah,

He wrote H#1ayat Han !uah' was h#s answer, (n the 18th century' he cont#nued, <etween the 15th and 1=th centur#es' he answered when as1ed when the story too1 p.ace, 3 per#od of *etween 200 to 300 years had .apsed when 5unsh# 3*du..ah wrote h#s *oo1 and ( *e.#e/e there were no wr#tten references a/a#.a*.e, So ( assume the *oo1 was wr#tten *ased on ora. research, !a1#n 200 years and a human sur/#/a. per#od of 50 years then' the peop.e who had re.ated to the wr#ter the story of Han !uah wou.d pro*a*.y ha/e *een fourth enerat#on, (n pursu#n an ana.ys#s for a *etter p#cture of the e"#stence of Han !uah' one can on.y conc.ude that the story #s a myth,>our art#c.e on !an Sr# Khoo Kay K#m?s comment conf#rmed th#s, !han1 you !an Sr# and ( support your comment w#thout hes#tat#on, Han !uah was non-e"#stent and the Ku*ur Han !uah #n 5a.acca #s noth#n *ut a commerc#a. strate y to draw tour#sts, Che President Malaysia Ex-British rmy sso!iation Onn Neamat