Military Capability and the State in Southeast Asia’s Pacific Rimlands, 1500–1700
and the Timor group, “sea power” was almost non-existent. In the other
areas, fighting at sea did play a role in the sense that boats for amphibi-
ous warfare were used, particularly to raid other coasts. These swift and
maneuverable galley-like vessels, often of the type of outrigger canoes
- most probably of local design – were well constructed and adapted to
the shallow coasts on which they were supposed to operate. They had
crews of oarsmen as well as warriors. Neither the oarsmen and nor the
warriors were professional mariners. They only served on board for a
limited time of the year, in the framework of a maritime “militia duty”
to their community and its leadership. They were not paid in money.
In these hardly monetized economies, their remuneration could be
booty, human heads, or hostages, when the action was successful.
Individual warriors sometimes carried firearms, while the vessel itself
might be equipped with one or two pieces of light artillery. The caliber
of such guns was probably not large enough to sink an enemy vessel. At
best, they served to keep an attacking enemy at a distance and hence
prevented boarding. Some of the political entities in Visayas, Mindanao,
the Moluccas and Amboina had enough of these large oared vessels to
speak of “fleets”, capable of an action radius of a few hundred kilometers.
Beyond that limit, the galley-like ships lost their value for action. On the
longer haul, vessels depending on sail were more appropriate, because of
their more efficient carrying capacities of men and supplies.
Turning to the land, armed forces could hardly be called “armies”,
because their level of professionalization was not really “advanced” as far
as organization, training, and armament were concerned. These forces
mainly consisted of warriors rather than paid soldiers. A “noble” or some
form of other elite was generally present, and played a role in the or-
ganization, but this did not develop into a band of “knights” forming
the core of the armed forces. Once again, the warriors were people who
served their community and its leaders on a temporary militia basis.
Modern army-like specializations such as gunmen and horsemen did
not occur. In principle, every warrior was a “foot soldier”. Training, inso-
far as it took place, was every individual’s responsibility. Here again, the
remuneration for serving was booty or, in some cases, heads or captives.
Actions on land covered short distances. An armed force only attacked
nearby villages or, in case of an amphibious action, a fortified place a few
kilometers uphill from a landing point. Artillery was not used in such