Ancient Indian Colonies in the Far East (Vol. I: Champa; Vol. II: Suvarnadvipa) v2.c13.s2.t1: § 1
Ancient Indian Colonies in the Far East (Vol. I: Champā; Vol. II: Suvarṇadvīpa) v2.c13.s2.t1
- Language
- English
§ 1
v2.c13.s2.t1.1
The present views about the greatness of the Śailendras have been gradually developed during the last twenty years.
v2.c13.s2.t1.2
It was Dr. Coedès who first set the ball rolling. In an article, which has now become almost classic, he sought to prove that Śrī-Vijaya is the original form of the name which has been rendered variously as Fo-Che, Che-li-fo-che, Fo-tsi and San-fo-tsi by the Chinese, and Sribuza by the Arabs. As these places could be positively located at Palembang, Śrī-Vijaya also must be identified with that place.²
v2.c13.s2.t1.3
² B.E.F.E.O., Vol. xviii, No. 6.
v2.c13.s2.t1.4
M. Coedès then naturally inferred from the Ligor Inscription that the authority of Śrī-Vijaya had extended to the northern part of Malay Peninsula by the end of the eighth century A. D. He further assumed that the king of the Śailendra dynasty, referred to in face B of the Ligor Ins., was the same as king of Śrī-Vijaya referred to in face A of that inscription.³
v2.c13.s2.t1.5
³ M. Coedès States : "Although I had not formulated this hypothesis in a sufficiently precise manner in 1918 (i.e. in article referred to in the preceding footnote) I willingly recognise my part of the responsibility for the identification of the Śailendras with the kings of Śrī-Vijaya" (op. cit., p. 64).
v2.c13.s2.t1.6
A Śailendra empire, with Palembang as capital,¹ and including Sumatra and Malay Peninsula, was thus the logical conclusion of M. Coedès' studies. He also regarded as probable the views of Chavannes and Gerini, that this empire was identical with the one described by the Arabs as Zābag. Ferrand² went a step further, and declared this identity to be beyond all doubt, by equating Zābag with San-fo-tsi. The Śailendra dynasty of Palembang thus came to be regarded as the ruler of a mighty empire in the Pacific, of which glowing descriptions have been preserved by so many Arab writers.
v2.c13.s2.t1.7
¹ M. Coedès has made the following observation in his recent article (op. cit., p. 63, f.n. 4).
v2.c13.s2.t1.8
² G. Ferrand—L'Empire Sumatranais de Śrivijaya,' J. A., II-XX, pp. 1-104, 161-244 ; cf. specially pp. 163. ff.
v2.c13.s2.t1.9
Further light on the greatness of the Śailendras was thrown by Krom³ and Vogel.⁴ These two scholars, writing independently almost at the same time, brought out the important part which the Śailendras must have played in Java. The Kalasan and Kelurak inscriptions clearly indicated Śailendra supremacy in Java in 778 and 782 A. D. Starting from this basis, Krom pointed out the great influences which the Buddhist Śailendras must have exerted on the art and religion of Java. In short, he held the view that these Śailendras imported the Mahāyāna form of Buddhism into Java and were instrumental in building
v2.c13.s2.t1.10
³ Krom—De Soematraansche periode in de Javaansche Geschiedenis, Leiden, 1919. A French summary of this article appeared in B.E.F.E.O., Vol. XIX, No. 5, p. 127.
v2.c13.s2.t1.11
⁴ J. P. Vogel—'Het Koninkrijk Śri-vijaya' B. K. I., 1919, pp. 626 ff.
v2.c13.s2.t1.12
"Everybody (including myself) has had difficulty in losing sight of a note in my first article on Śri-Vijaya (B.E.F.E.O., XVIII, 6, p. 3, note 5) where I cautiously said, 'This expression, 'The kingdom of Palembang' which will frequently occur in course of the present article, is a convenient designation : in employing it, however, I do not wish to affirm that the capital of this State was always at Palembang.'"
v2.c13.s2.t1.13
such famous structures as Barabuḍur, Caṇḍi Mendut and Caṇḍi Kalasan. Thus originated the hypothesis of a Sumatran period in Javanese history, with far-reaching consequences in the political and cultural history of Java.
v2.c13.s2.t1.14
The table was, however, completely turned by Stutterheim,¹ who amazed the world of scholars by his bold hypothesis, that the Śailendra dynasty belonged to Java, and, later, conquered Śrī-Vijaya. Thus, instead of a Sumatran period in Javanese history, we should, in his opinion, think of a Javanese period in Sumatran history.
v2.c13.s2.t1.15
¹ W. F. Stutterheim—A Javanese period in Sumatran History, Surakarta, 1929.