Kalah was the earliest recorded settlement of Muslims in this part of the world, and from Arab and Persian descriptions of it from the middle of the ninth to that of the fourteenth century, it was undoubtedly an important port in South East Asia.
But where was it actually located? The problem has baffled some of the best minds of the east and the west. It has been debated since 1718. During this long period eminent historians, geographers, Arabicists, Indologists and Sinologists have made an effort at solving the riddle, but at best they have succeeded only partially. Earlier attempts at identification were very much wide of the mark. Abbe Renaudot (1718) who initiated the debate identified it with Malabar, while Gildemeister (1838) located it in Coromandel, and Reinaud (1845) equated it with Galle in Ceylon. Alfred Maury (1846) was the first to realise that the search for it must be made in the Malaysian region and he suggested Kedah. Walckenear (1852) made this equation famous by accepting it in his commentary on the story of Sindbad the sailor. P. A. van der Lith (1883–6) gave massive support to it in his elaborate and erudite discussion on the subject in his annotation and edition of Buzurg bin Shahriyār's Book of the Marvels of the Indies. It seemed that van der Lith had clinched the issue by getting the philological support from no less an eminent authority on the subject than M. Kern, who stated that the Malay d was pronounced very like an Arab 1. And then followed a galaxy of great Arabicists, like de Goeje (1889) and G. Le Strange (1905) all of whom accepted this equation. Pelliot (1901) and other Sinologists, and Coedes (1918) and other Indologists found it handy in their own search of Malaysian place-names.