How To Sink A Theory: Inside The Academic Takedown Of Malaysia’s Roman Shipbuilding Claim

Subscribe to our FREE Newsletter, or Telegram and WhatsApp channels for the latest stories and updates.

A Malaysian professor’s theory that ancient Romans learned how to build ships from Malay sailors has been thoroughly debunked by another academic, who says the timeline simply doesn’t add up.

Dr Azizi Othman from Asia e University recently published a 15-page paper on ResearchGate, taking apart the claims made by Associate Professor Solehah Yaacob from the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM).

The paper, titled “A Mediterranean Meltdown: Evaluating IIUM’s Associate Professor Dr Solehah Yaacob’s Claim That Romans Learned Shipbuilding from Malays,” highlights a fundamental issue: the Romans were already building advanced warships hundreds of years before they had any significant contact with Southeast Asia.

According to Othman’s research, the Romans began developing their navy during the First Punic War, which took place between 264 and 241 BCE—that’s over 2,000 years ago.

However, serious contact between the Mediterranean region and Southeast Asia did not begin until around the 1st century CE, which is several hundred years later.

“The most fundamental challenge to the thesis that Romans learned shipbuilding from Malays derives from chronological analysis,” the paper states, noting that Roman naval traditions emerged during the First Punic War (264-241 BCE).

How Could They Meet Before They Met?

At the same time, “sustained documented contact between Mediterranean regions and Southeast Asia concentrates in the 1st century CE and beyond.”

Put simply: How could the Romans learn from the Malays if they weren’t even in contact yet?

The timing problem gets worse.

Roman shipbuilding reached its peak between the 6th century BCE and the 4th century CE.

Meanwhile, records of advanced Malay ships, such as the jong, only appear from the 7th century CE onwards—hundreds of years after Roman naval power had already been established.

This time gap of several centuries “fundamentally undermines claims of knowledge transfer from Malays to Romans,” according to the research.

Missing Records Raise Red Flags

Othman also points out that neither the Romans nor Southeast Asians wrote anything about sharing shipbuilding knowledge with each other.

This is significant because both civilisations kept detailed records and often wrote about learning from other cultures.

“No Roman author attributes shipbuilding knowledge to Southeast Asian sources or mentions learning such techniques from distant maritime peoples,” the paper states.

If such an important exchange of knowledge had happened, surely someone would have written about it.

The academic criticism comes at a difficult time for Professor Solehah, who is also dealing with a separate, unrelated issue: a fake video circulating on social media.

The doctored video falsely shows her claiming that Sayyidatina Khadijah, the wife of Prophet Muhammad, was Malay.

She has filed a police report about the manipulated clip, which went viral on TikTok.

Malay Maritime Skills Are Real—But This Claim Goes Too Far

Othman’s paper makes clear that he’s not dismissing Malay achievements at sea.

He acknowledges that “Southeast Asian maritime achievements require no exaggeration to merit recognition,” praising the sophisticated navigation, extensive trade networks, and advanced technology of Malay sailors as “genuine historical accomplishments worthy of scholarly attention.”

The problem, he argues, is making claims that lack evidence to support them.

The paper warns against “presentist revisionism,” arguing that “when historical claims lack evidentiary foundation, they invite dismissal of legitimate historical scholarship.”

In other words, when people fabricate or exaggerate historical claims without evidence, it actually undermines the credibility of genuine historical achievements.

The research also suggests that unconstrained revisionism “unmoored from evidence undermines the credibility of genuine historical correctives”—meaning that false claims make it harder for people to take real historical corrections seriously.

Questions About University Standards

The paper also raises concerns about IIUM itself, questioning how such claims could be presented without proper evidence.

The paper raises questions about institutional quality control, noting that “when institutions host presentations containing claims that depart substantially from established historical evidence without adequate evidential support, questions arise regarding institutional quality control and commitment to rigorous scholarship.”

Historians generally agree that while Malay maritime traditions were indeed sophisticated—with advanced navigation skills and clever construction techniques, such as the use of wooden pegs—Roman shipbuilding drew from Phoenician and other Mediterranean traditions, rather than from Southeast Asia.

The controversy has garnered attention both in Malaysia and internationally, with major newspapers such as The Straits Times and the South China Morning Post covering the story.

Othman’s full paper is available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/397381149

Share your thoughts with us via TRP’s Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or Threads.