Ancient Indian Colonies in the Far East (Vol. I: Champa; Vol. II: Suvarnadvipa) v2.c13.s2.t10: 4. Malay Peninsula
Ancient Indian Colonies in the Far East (Vol. I: Champā; Vol. II: Suvarṇadvīpa) v2.c13.s2.t10
- Language
- English
4. Malay Peninsula
v2.c13.s2.t10.1
Various states in Malay Peninsula such as Pahang and Kelantan now sent tributes to China (infra, Bk. IV. Chap. II). But the most important of them was the Muhammadan king dom of Malacca. This powerful state sought the protection of China against Siam, and in 1405 its king received investiture from the Chinese emperor.³ Gradually this state grew to be a great rival of Java as would appear from the following passage in the History of the Ming Dynasty.
v2.c13.s2.t10.2
³ Ibid, p. 129.
v2.c13.s2.t10.3
“At that time Palembang was under the domination of Java and the king of Malacca falsely pretended that he had an order from the emperor to claim this possession. When the emperor heard this, he gave an edict saying: “When lately the eunuch Wu-pin came back he reported that you (king of Java) had treated the imperial envoys in the most respectful way; now I have heard lately that the king of Malacca has claimed the country Palembang from you and that you have been very much astonished, hearing that this was my will: but I treat people in the most upright way and if I had allowed him to do so, I certainly would have sent an open order, therefore you have no reason to be afraid and if bad men make use of false pretences, you must not lightly believe them.”⁴
v2.c13.s2.t10.4
⁴ Ibid, p. 37.
v2.c13.s2.t10.5
This passage shows in a remarkable manner the change in the position of Java as an international power. The new state of Malacca openly hurls defiance at Java and feels powerful enough to wrest Palembang from her. The Chinese emperor appears on the stage as patron and saviour of Java. The very fact that the king of Malacca pretended to have an order from the Chinese emperor shows the position of China in the affairs of the Archipelago. Everything indicates that China is now by common consent the recognised suzerain, and although the emperor wants to assert his authority over Java he does not like another power like Malacca to occupy the position which Java lately did.
v2.c13.s2.t10.6
Java silently acquiesced in the new rôle of China and accommodated herself to the changed state of things. The episode of 1406 has been related above. In 1415 king Vikramavarddhana sent envoys to thank the emperor for his kindness (evidently shown by thwarting the designs of Malacca) and to bring as tribute products of the land.¹ In this connection the Chinese historian tells us that the king (Vikramavarddhana) adopted the name Yang Wi-si-sa, the Chinese form of the name Hyang Viśeṣa which we meet with in Javanese records.
v2.c13.s2.t10.7
¹ Ibid, p. 37.
v2.c13.s2.t10.8
The cordial relations between Java and the imperial court continued after 1415, as we can easily conclude from the following passage of the History of the Ming Dynasty².
v2.c13.s2.t10.9
² Ibid, p. 37.
v2.c13.s2.t10.10
"About that time (1415 A.D.) some followers of the Imperial envoys had been driven by a storm to the country Pantsur, and a Javanese, hearing this, paid a ransom for them and brought them to the place where the king lived. In the year 1418 the king sent envoys with tribute to the court and sent these men back at the same time; the emperor praised the king in an edict and sent also presents to the Javanese who had rescued them....The Javanese embassy again brought tribute in the year 1432 and presented a letter stating that their state was founded 1376 years ago....
v2.c13.s2.t10.11
"In the year 1436 the imperial envoy Ma Yung-lang presented a memorial to the emperor, saying that the former Javanese envoy Pa-ti, on coming to court, had got a silver girdle, and as the present envoy, A-liet,¹ was a man of the fourth rank, he requested a golden girdle for him; his request was granted.
v2.c13.s2.t10.12
¹ Pelliot corrects this as 'Ya-lie' and regards it as the shortened form of 'Ya-lie-ya-chö', the name of the Javanese ambassador to China in 1436 (T'oung Pao, 1934, p. 299). Pelliot further points out that two more embassies were sent from Java to China in 1436, and that Ma Yung-lang was probably a Javanese ambassador, and not an imperial envoy, as Groeneveldt supposes (Ibid).
v2.c13.s2.t10.13
"In the intercalary sixth month of the same year the envoys of Calicut, Northern Sumatra, Cochin, Arabia, Cail, Aden, Hormus, Dsahffar, Comari, and Cambodja were sent back together with the envoys of Java and the emperor gave a letter to the king of this country² of the following contents.
v2.c13.s2.t10.14
² The name of this king is "Yang-wei-si-cha" i.e. Hyang Viśeṣa, according to a Chinese authority quoted by Pelliot (T'oung Pao, 1934, p. 301). Pelliot further points out that Groeneveldt has, through inadvertence, omitted the name of Ceylon in the list of countries (Ibid, p. 302).
v2.c13.s2.t10.15
"You, oh king! have never been remiss in performing the duty of sending tribute in the time of my ancestors and now that I have come to the throne, you have again sent envoys to court; I am fully convinced of your sincerity. Now, in the reign of my predecessor (1426-35) Calicut and ten other countries have come to bring tribute, and as your envoys are going home, I have ordered those other envoys to go with them. I expect you will treat them kindly and send them back to their respective countries, in order to carry out my benevolent intentions towards those who live far away.
v2.c13.s2.t10.16
"In the year 1440 envoys who were going home, were shipwrecked by a storm, fifty-six men were drowned and eighty-three saved. They came back to Canton and the emperor gave orders to the authorities to provide for them, until there should be a ship in which they could go home.
v2.c13.s2.t10.17
"In the year 1443 the Governor of Canton presented a memorial pointing out that the continual tribute of Java caused great expenses and trouble, and that it was no good plan to injure China in order to benefit those distant people. The Emperor adopted his views and when the envoys of that country went back, he gave them a letter saying: "The different countries over the sea shall all bring tribute once in three years; you, oh king, must also have compassion with your people and observe this arrangement."
v2.c13.s2.t10.18
"In the year 1446 they brought again tribute, but afterwards it became gradually more rare".
v2.c13.s2.t10.19
The reign of Vikramavarddhana or Hyang Viśeṣa was thus inglorious both at home and abroad. In addition to the disastrous civil war, Java suffered terribly from a volcanic eruption in 1411 and a great famine in 1426. A new Prime Minister, Kanaka, carried on the government from 1413 to 1430. Like Gajah Mada, his name is associated with a law-book, the Ādigama. The king died in or shortly before 1429 A.D. and found his last resting place at Paramaviśeṣapura at Lalangon, probably the same as Viśeṣapura at Bhayālango, the cremation place of his great-grandmother Rājapatnī.
v2.c13.s2.t10.20
After the death of Vikramavarddhana probably his daughter Suhitā ascended the throne, as noted above. She thus superseded her two brothers, both called Bhre Tumapel. This was presumably due to her high rank on the mother's side, and as we know that Vikramavarddhana married the daughter of Prince Virabhūmi and Nāgaravardhanī, we may easily presume this lady to be the mother of Suhitā. Her accession to the throne was probably the result, to a certain extent, of the triumph of the party of that unfortunate prince. A significant indication of that is to be found in the express statement in Pararaton (Ch. XIII) that Raden Gajah was dismissed in 1433 A.D. because he had killed prince Virabhūmi.
v2.c13.s2.t10.21
We know of no important events during the reign of Suhitā. She died childless in 1447 A.D. and was cremated at Singhajaya, where her husband found his last resting place the year before.
v2.c13.s2.t10.22
She was succeeded by Bhre Tumapel, probably the younger of her two brothers of that name. The king was called Śrī Kṛtavijaya, and died after an uneventful reign of four years (1451 A.D.). He was cremated at Kṛtavijayapura. There were two volcanic eruptions during his reign.
v2.c13.s2.t10.23
The events immediately following the death of the king are not quite clearly intelligible from the account of Pararaton. We read that one Bhre Pamotan succeeded at Keling Kahuripan, under the name Śrī Rājasavardhana. This is followed by the statement that Sinagara died in 1453, and there was no ruler for the next three years. It would thus appear that Rājasavardhana was the same as Sinagara. But then the mention of Keling, perhaps in north-western part of Kediri, is obscure. Does it mean that the king did not rule in Majapahit? The relationship of the king with his predecessor is also not known. According to the Chinese History the "King Prabu (of Java) sent envoys to court with tribute in 1452".¹ Perhaps this king Prabu is to be identified with Rājasavardhana.
v2.c13.s2.t10.24
¹ Ibid, p. 39.
v2.c13.s2.t10.25
After the interregnum of three years, Bhre Vengker ascended the throne in 1456 A.D., under the name Bhra Hyang Pūrva-Viśeṣa. During his reign the Chinese history refers to two embassies from Java to the imperial court, one in 1460, and the other in 1465. In connection with the first the name of the king of Java is given as Tu-ma-pan.² The king died in 1466 A.D. and was cremated at Puri.
v2.c13.s2.t10.26
² Ibid, p. 39. Tum-ma-pan may stand for Tumapel or Eastern Java.
v2.c13.s2.t10.27
The next king, according to Pararaton, was Bhre Paṇḍan Salas, who ruled for two years at Tumapel (1466-68 A.D.) and then left the capital. Pararaton concludes his account of kings by referring to four sons of Sinagara (i.e. king Rājasavardhana), the youngest of whom Bhra Kṛtabhūmi is said to be "the uncle of the king who was cremated in the palace in 1478."
v2.c13.s2.t10.28
The preceding account of Pararaton about the closing period of the history of Majapahit can hardly be accepted as accurate. Its unreliable character is easily demonstrated by a copperplate found at Seṇḍang Sedati, south of Bajanegara.¹ The record was issued in 1473 A.D. by His Majesty Bhaṭāra Prabhu, whose personal name was Suraprabhāva, and the coronation name, Singhavikramavardhana. We can easily identify him with the person, bearing both these names, whom we meet with in Trabulan inscription², not as the ruling king, but as prince of Tumapel, the youngest son of His Majesty, and husband of Rājasavardhanadevi, princess of Singhapura. Now, according to Par., Bhre Paṇḍan Salas ascended the throne at Tumapel in 1466, and the same chronicle also refers (Chap. X) to a person of the same name as the husband of Bhre Singhapura. Dr. M. A. Muusses, therefore, suggests that king 'Singhavikramavardhana of the inscription is the same as Bhre Paṇḍan Salas of Pararaton.³ But the Pararaton definitely puts the end of Salas' reign at Tumapel in 1468, whereas the Seṇḍang Sedati inscription is dated in 1473. We may explain this discrepancy by supposing either that the dates given in Par. are wrong, or that the king issued the record after leaving Tumapel.
v2.c13.s2.t10.29
¹ O. V. 1922, pp. 22-27.
v2.c13.s2.t10.30
² O. V. 1918, p. 170. The record has been referred to the time of Vikramavarddhana, (Ibid, 1919, pp. 22-30, 153-155), but more likely belongs to the period between 1447 and 1466 (Ibid, 1923, p. 109).
v2.c13.s2.t10.31
³ Feest. Bat. Gen., Vol. II (1929), pp. 207-214.
v2.c13.s2.t10.32
Krom, however, offers a new view. He takes the concluding passage of Pararaton, quoted above, to mean that Bhra Kṛtabhūmi, the youngest of the four sons of Sinagara, was the king who ascended the throne in 1468, and died in 1478. He then identifies Singhavikramavardhana, referred to in the Trabulan inscription as "the youngest son of His Majesty”, with this Kṛtabhūmi¹ Whatever we may think of these different views, it is interesting to note that in the copper-plate of 1473 A.D. king Singhavikramavardhana is referred to as the sole ruler of Yavabūmi, comprising the two kingdoms of Janggala and Kaḍiri. How far this claim was justified, there is no means to determine. The probability, however, is that the kingdom of Majapahit had lost its position of supremacy, even in Java, and already showed alarming symptoms of final dissolution which was not long in coming.
v2.c13.s2.t10.33
¹ Krom—Geschiedenis[^2], p. 449.
v2.c13.s2.t10.34
The year 1478 A. D., the last year for which any political event is recorded in Pararaton, was an eventful one according to the Javanese tradition, for it was in that year that the Muhammadans conquered Majapahit and destroyed the Hindu kingdom in Java². That this tradition is not quite correct appears from the fact that several inscriptions, dated 1486 A. D., refer to a Hindu king, and Portuguese accounts of a later date also refer to Hindu kings in Java. But the inscriptions themselves indicate clearly that the king who issued them fought against Majapahit. The tradition may thus be correct to the extent that the fall of Majapahit took place in 1478 (or 1481 A.D. according to another version of the tradition), but then it was brought about, not by the Muhammadan conquerors, who came much later, but by a rival Hindu dynasty. Thus the overthrow of Majapahit in 1478 A.D. by a Hindu king and the establishment of Muslim authority at a later date have been confused together in the local tradition. It is, of course, quite conceivable that the Muhammadans had conquered Majapahit even as early as 1478 (or 1481), but then it was not followed by any serious result, and a new Hindu dynasty soon took the place of the old.
v2.c13.s2.t10.35
² According to some versions of the tradition, the date is A. D. 1481 ; cf. B.K.I., 1899, p. 117.
v2.c13.s2.t10.36
The stone inscriptions of 1486 all belong to the same group³, and were found in Dukuhan Dukuh (in Surabaya) and Jiju near Majasari. They were issued by a king whose proper name was Raṇavijaya, but who had the titles Bhaṭāra Prabhu Girindrawardhana and fought against Majapahit. One of the inscriptions refers to the gift made to the priest after the completion of the twelve-year Śrāddha of His Majesty the prince of Dahanapura who died at Indrabhavana. This shows that the king belonged to the dynasty of Daha and his father (at least predecessor) died twelve years ago *i.e.* in 1474 A. D. Now Pararaton tells us, as already stated above, that Bhre Daha became king (ratu) in 1437 A. D, and died in 1464 A. D. If we consider this last date a mistake for 1474 A. D., we can identify this ratu Daha with the predecessor of Raṇavijaya. Dr. Muusses, however, offers an altogether new solution. As already noted above, he identifies Singhavikramavardhana with Bhre Paṇḍan Salas, and then provisionally reconstructs the following history : "Sinagara made himself master in 1451. After his death in 1453 anarchy for three years followed. After Hyang Pūrvavīśeṣa's death Bhre Paṇḍan Salas became Prabhu, but he was forced to leave the Kraton two years later (1468). He betook himself to Kaḍiri where he issued the record of Seṇḍang Sedati (1473). One year after its publication he died ( 1474 ) and then there was a struggle among his sons for the throne. Ultimately Raṇavijaya came out successful in 1478. In 1486 he felt his position secure enough to offer a sacrifice in honour of his father who died twelve years ago"¹.
v2.c13.s2.t10.37
³ O.J.O., Nos. XCI-XCV. For a general account of the inscriptions cf. Introductory remarks to No. XCI.
v2.c13.s2.t10.38
¹ Feest. Bat. Gen., Vol. II, pp. 207-214.
v2.c13.s2.t10.39
Whatever we may think of this, there is no doubt that Raṇavijaya, king of Daha, overthrew Majapahit and made himself king of Java. He is referred to in the inscriptions as king of Śrī Vilvatikta, Daha, Janggala and Kaḍiri. This wording is somewhat curious, as Kaḍiri and Daha denote the same kingdom. The explanation of the singular phrase perhaps lies in the fact that Janggala and Kaḍiri were the conventional official names of the two parts of the kingdom of Java to which the king added the names of Vilvatikta ( Majapahit ) and Daha, the two real component parts of his newly established kingdom.
v2.c13.s2.t10.40
The inscriptions also refer to another member of the royal family, called Girindravardhana, with personal name Vijayakusuma, and the royal name Singhavardhana. But as he is called, not Prabhu, but only Bhaṭāra of Kling, he occupied probably only a lower position. The inscriptions mention that the priest Brahmarāja Gaṅgadhara, who performed the twelve-year Śrāddha, was well versed in the four Vedas. They also refer to the consecration of the images of Rāma and Ṛṣi Bharadvāja and also to worship of Rāma, Viṣṇu, Yama, and Durgā, thus leaving no doubt that the royal dynasty was purely Hindu.
v2.c13.s2.t10.41
Girindravardhana Raṇavijaya is the last Hindu king of Eastern Java about whom we possess any authentic details. But the Hindu kingdom continued there for 30 or 40 years more before it was finally conquered by the Muhammadans, as we shall see in a later chapter. The last Javanese embassy to China was sent in 1499 A. D.¹
v2.c13.s2.t10.42
¹ Groeneveldt—Notes, p. 39.
v2.c13.s2.t10.43
SUṆḌA
v2.c13.s2.t10.44
Before we proceed to discuss the Muhammadan conquest of Java, we must go back to the history of the Hindu kingdom in the western part of the island, *viz.*, Suṇḍa. We have seen above (Bk I. Chap. VI) that the Hindu culture and political authority in Java had its beginning in this region. But, since the days of Pūrṇavarman, our knowledge of the history of this region is very meagre. The existence, however, of Hindu culture and Hindu society in this region, in the tenth century A.D., is proved by an inscription found at Kebon Kopi¹. A more definite information is given by an inscription dated 1030 A.D., engraved on four stones found near Cibadak, above Leuvi Kalabang². It refers to the pious foundation of some holy footprints by a king of Suṇḍa called Śrī Jayabhūpati Jayamanahen Viṣṇumūrtti Samaravijaya Śakalabhuvāṇamaṇḍalesvaranindita Hāro Govardhana Vikramottunggadeva. The record lays down regulations forbidding the capture of fish or any other living being from the river within a defined area in the neighbourhood. The imprecatory formula at the end refers to Hāra Aṅgaṣti, evidently a corruption of Haricandana and Agastya of old Javanese inscriptions. The language and script of the record are both old-Javanese. As the king is expressly said to be the ruler of Suṇḍa, there cannot be any doubt that it formed a separate kingdom independent of Eastern Java, but it is equally clear that its culture and civilisation was entirely Javanese in character. It may be mentioned here that the inscription referred to above is the earliest document containing the name of Suṇḍa. Pleyte had discovered a pair of footprints on a block of stone lying on the top of Perbakti, north-west of Cicurug. It is locally known as Batu Tapak. As Sanghyang Tapak is the name given in the inscription for the pious foundation, the footprints referred to therein may be those discovered by Pleyte.
v2.c13.s2.t10.45
¹ O.V. 1923, p. 18, No. 6888. The date was doubtfully read as 932 A. D., but even if this reading be not accepted, the palaeography of the inscription refers it to the tenth century A. D. The contents of the inscription cannot be fully made out.
v2.c13.s2.t10.46
² T. B. G., Vol. 57 (1916), pp. 201-218. Pleyte's inference, from the name and titles of the king, that he fought with Eastern Java and was a predecessor of Airlangga, rests on too slender a basis (cf. Krom—Geschiedenis, p. 259).
v2.c13.s2.t10.47
It appears from the accounts of Chau Ju-kua that in the 12th century A.D. Suṇḍa was a dependency of San-fo-tsi. There was a good harbour in the land. The people were also given to agriculture and produced the best quality of pepper. But as there was no regular system of government, and the people were given to brigandage, foreign traders rarely went there.¹
v2.c13.s2.t10.48
¹ Chau Ju-kua, pp. 62, 70, 122,
v2.c13.s2.t10.49
The Nag. Kr. includes Suṇḍa among the vassal states of Kṛtanagara. There is no independent evidence corroborating this, and so we cannot be quite sure if Suṇḍa really became a dependency of the Eastern Javanese kingdom². Such a transfer of allegiance on the part of Suṇḍa could only be due to the decline of the power of San-fo-tsi and the gradual ascendancy of Java as a great international power.
v2.c13.s2.t10.50
² Krom-Geschiedenis, p. 335 ; Fruin-Mees, p. 116,
v2.c13.s2.t10.51
Similarly Pararaton includes Suṇḍa among the conquests of Gajah Mada during the regency of Tribhuvanottungadevi. Here, again, the statement cannot be corroborated by any other source.
v2.c13.s2.t10.52
Next in point of time is the tragic episode of A.D. 1357, regarding the marriage of Rājasanagara with a Suṇḍanese princess which has been related above. The attitude of the Suṇḍanese king and nobles, as explained in the Pararaton, negatives the idea that the king of Suṇḍa regarded himself as a vassal of Majapahit. The references in Nag. Kr. and Par. to the conquest of Suṇḍa, respectively by Kṛtanagara and Gajah Mada, also show that none of these conquests, even if it be regarded as true, really led to any decisive result. Taking all these things into consideration one is forced to the conclusion that Suṇḍa remained a separate kingdom during the century 1260-1360 A.D., and although its relations with Majapahit were never friendly, it had not been a part of that empire, at least for any length of time.
v2.c13.s2.t10.53
A stone inscription at Batu-Tulis¹, to the south-east of Buitenzorg, gives us some interesting information regarding three generations of kings. The king, who issued the record, was ruler of Pakwan Pajajaran. He had several names, Ratu Purāṇa, Prabhu Guru Devatasrana, and Śrī Baduga Mahārāja. He is said to be Ratu Devata who ruled in Pakwan. He was the son of Rahyang Devaniskala, who died at Guṇatiga, and grandson of Rahyang Niskalavastu Kañcana, who died at Nusa Larang. The inscription records a number of pious works of the king, and concludes with a date which is most probably A.D. 1333.
v2.c13.s2.t10.54
¹ This inscription, and the inferences to be derived from it, have formed subject of discussion by various scholars ; cf. Friederich, in T.B.G., Vol. 1 (1853), pp. 442 ff. ; Holle, in Vol. 17 (1869), pp. 483 ff. ; Pleyte, in Vol. 53 (1911), pp. 155 ff. Poerbatjaraka has discussed the whole question at length in Vol. 59 (1921), pp. 381 ff., and his views have been generally accepted. Cf. also Husein Jayadiningrat—Sajarah Banten, pp. 141 ff.
v2.c13.s2.t10.55
The inscription thus testifies to the existence of the kingdom of Pakwan Pajajaran as early as fourteenth century A.D. This kingdom in West Java continued down to the time of the advent of the Europeans, and is referred to in their reports. The ruins of Pakwan in the neighbourhood of Batu-Tulis, have been explored and described by Pleyte.² He has traced the ruins of the walls surrounding the Kraton (palace) on three sides. To its north lay the town proper extending as far as Buitenzorg to the north.
v2.c13.s2.t10.56
² Pleyte, op. cit., pp. 166 ff.
v2.c13.s2.t10.57
Three copperplates found at Kebantenan,¹ to the east of Batavia, also refer to the same line of kings. One of them refers to all the three kings, Rahyang Niskalavastu Kañcana, Rahyang Ningrat Kañcana, and Śrī Baduga Maharaja ratu haji di Pakwan Śrī Sang ratu Devata, who held his court at Pajajaran. It will be seen that the first and the third names are identical, while the second is different from the list given above. The two other records refer only to the last king.
v2.c13.s2.t10.58
¹ Pleyte, op. cit., pp. 169-171 ; Poerbatjaraka, op. cit., pp. 389-392.
v2.c13.s2.t10.59
A stone inscription at Kavali² in south Chirebon, in Galuh district, refers to a king Prabhu raja Vastu, who ruled in the town of Kabali, embellished the capital city Suravisesa ( Śūraviśeṣa ), and adopted ( evidently in his old age ) the life of a hermit. It has been suggested that this king who was called Prabhu raja Vastu in his lifetime was called Rahyang Niskalavastu after his death. If this identification be accepted we must hold that the family originally ruled at Galuh and then transferred its seat of authority to Pajajaran Pakwan which was founded³ by the third king, as mentioned in the Batu-Tulis inscription, referred to above.
v2.c13.s2.t10.60
² Pleyte, op. cit., pp. 167 ff.
v2.c13.s2.t10.61
³ The Batu-Tulis Ins. merely says that the third king ruled over Pajajaran—Pakwan, but if we are right in the inference that the family originally ruled at Galuh, he may be regarded as having founded the new capital city, particularly as his father is referred to as crown prince of Galuh in Carita Parahyangan, as will be shown below. Fruin-Mees (p. 117) has, however, referred to a tradition according to which the kingdom was founded at an earlier date by prince Kuda Lalean of Eastern Java, and Ratu Purana was called to the throne of Pajajaran by its king Sang Susuk Tunggal who had no legitimate heir.
v2.c13.s2.t10.62
The Batu-Tulis inscription is dated, but unfortunately scholars differ regarding the interpretation of the hundredth figure, and so the date has been read in various ways ranging from A.D. 1133 to 1533. Poerbatjaraka contends that the date should be interpreted as 1333, and assuming this to be true, we can refer the reign of the family at Galuh to have commenced not later than the beginning of the 14th century A.D.
v2.c13.s2.t10.63
Some traditions of this family are contained in a book called ‘Carita Parahyangan’. The passage runs as follows¹ :—
v2.c13.s2.t10.64
¹ Poerbatjaraka, op, cit, pp. 395 ff.
v2.c13.s2.t10.65
“He who died at Kikis reigned for 22 years. He who died at Keding reigned for 7 years; he begot Aji Kolot. He reigned for 10 years and had a son Prebu Maharaja. When the latter had reigned for 7 years he fell victim to a trap on the occasion of the marriage of his daughter, crown princess Tohaan. Many people went to Java as the Javanese did not wish to celebrate the marriage in Sunda. There was a fight at Majapahit.
“There was a son of Prebu Wangi named Prebu Niskalavastu Kañcana who died on the island of Larang, on the hill Vanakusuma.
* * * * *
“The crown prince of Galuh who died at Gunungtiga reigned for 7 years. Then he committed an offence by carrying on illegitimate amorous intrigues. He was succeeded by Nalendra Puja Premana, Ratu Jaya Devata, whose death was brought about by treachery. He reigned for 39 years.”
v2.c13.s2.t10.66
Now, there can be no doubt that the king who lost his life at Majapahit on the occasion of his daughter’s marriage must be identified with the Sundanese king, who met with a tragic end in 1357 A.D., as has been recorded above on the authority of Pararaton. There can also be hardly any doubt that Niskalavastu Kañcana who died on the island of Larang, and the ‘crown prince of Galuh who died at Gunungtiga’, are identical with Rahyang Niskalavastu Kañcana, who died at Nusa Larang, and his son Rahyang Devaniskala who died at Guṇatiga, according to the Batu-Tulis inscription. It would then follow that the last king mentioned in the above passage *viz.* Nalendra Puja Premana Ratu Jaya Devata has to be identified with Ratu Purāṇa of the Batu-Tulis inscription.
v2.c13.s2.t10.67
Now if we accept the date A.D. 1333 for the last named king, we must hold that Prebu Mahārāja, who lost his life at Majapahit, has been wrongly placed in the above passage. It has been suggested that, through mistake, his story has been divided into two parts, one portion being narrated before his grandfather Niskalavastu Kañcana, and another portion in its right place after that of his father, in both cases reference being made to his death by treachery. According to this view Niskalavastu Kañcana is the grandfather, and Deva Niskala is the father of Prebu Mahārāja, or Ratu Devata, or Śrī Vaduga Mahārāja, who founded Pajajaran, some time before 1333, the date of his Batu-Tulis Ins., and died at Bubat ( Majapahit ) in 1357 A.D. on the occasion of his daughter's marriage.¹
v2.c13.s2.t10.68
¹ The difficulty of accepting this interpretation is obvious. For example, we have to assume that the same text, Carita Parahyangan, gives different regnal years to the same person (*viz.*, 7 years to Prebu Mahārāja and 39 years to Ratu Jaya Devata who is to be identified with him). It is, however, possible to accept the text of Carita Parahyangan as it is, by interpreting the date of Batu-Tulis Ins. as 1433. In that case Prebu Mahārāja, who died in 1357 A. D., would be the predecessor of Niskalavastu. If we assign to the latter a reign of about 35 years, his grandson would be reigning about 1433 A. D., the assumed date of the Batu-Tulis Ins., as will be seen from the following table. Prabhu Mahārāja, 1350-1357 A D. Niskalavastu Kañcana, 1357-1392 A. D. Crown prince of Galuh, 1392-1399. Ratu Jaya Devata, 1399-1438 A. D. The ancestor of this royal family who died at Kikis would then have reigned from 1311-1333 A. D. and his two successors respectively from 1333 to 1340 and 1340 to 1350 A. D. The royal family was thus established at the beginning of the fourteenth century,
v2.c13.s2.t10.69
The inscriptions tell us that king Niskalavastu died at Nusa Larang and his son at Guṇatiga. Both these places can be easily located. In the lake Penjalu, not far from Kavali, lies Nusa Gede, popularly named Nusa Larang, which people still associate with king Hariang Keñcana. To the north of the lake a branch of the Candana river is still called Gunung Tilu. Nusa Larang may also be identified with Nusa Kembangan which belonged to Galuh even at the beginning of the 19th century A.D.¹
v2.c13.s2.t10.70
¹ T. B. G., Vol. 61 (1922), pp. 425 ff. De Haan, Priangan III, p. 70. Pleyte, op. cit., p. 165. T. B. G., Vol. 69 (1929), pp. 227 ff.
v2.c13.s2.t10.71
The history of Sunda for the next century is again obscure in the extreme. The defeat and death of the Sundanese king possibly extended the supremacy of Java over Sunda for some time. But the kingdom of Pajajaran must have regained full independence at the beginning of the 15th century when Majapahit was torn by internal dissensions. Since that time the two Hindu kingdoms of Java and Sunda, *i.e.* of Majapahit and Pajajaran, flourished side by side till both passed into the hands of the Muhammadan rulers in the sixteenth century A.D.