Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Ancient Indian Colonies in the Far East (Vol. I: Champa; Vol. II: Suvarnadvipa) v2.c14: Book IV

Ancient Indian Colonies in the Far East (Vol. I: Champā; Vol. II: Suvarṇadvīpa) v2.c14

Language
English

Contents

Book IV

v2.c14.1

DOWNFALL OF HINDU KINGDOMS IN SUVARṆADVĪPA the *Gesta Romanorum*, the *Legenda Aurea* of Jacobus de Voragine, and the *Speculum Historiale* of Vincent of Beauvais. These were the books that fed the imagination of the Middle Ages, and they were the books that the Church, in its wisdom, provided for the instruction and edification of the faithful.

v2.c14.2

But the Church did not merely provide books; it also provided the means of their dissemination. The monastic scriptoria, where monks labored in silence to copy the sacred texts, were the precursors of the printing press. And when the press finally arrived, it was the Church that first harnessed its power, using it to spread the word of God to the corners of the earth. The Gutenberg Bible, the first major book printed in Europe, was a testament to the Church's commitment to the written word.

v2.c14.3

Yet, even as the Church championed the spread of knowledge, it also sought to control it. The *Index Librorum Prohibitorum*, or List of Prohibited Books, was a tool used by the Church to suppress ideas it deemed dangerous or heretical. This tension between the desire to educate and the need to control would define the Church's relationship with literature for centuries to come.

v2.c14.4

It is a complex history, one that is marked by both enlightenment and suppression. But it is a history that cannot be ignored, for it is the history of the very foundation of Western civilization. The Church, in its role as the guardian of knowledge, has shaped the way we think, the way we write, and the way we understand the world around us.

v2.c14.6

END OF HINDU RULE IN SUMATRA

1. Rise of Malayu

v2.c14.t1.1

The disintegration of the Śailendra empire loosened the bonds which united politically the petty states of Sumatra and Malay Peninsula. But there shortly arose a new power in Sumatra, which sought to rival the exploits of the decaying empire, and revive it on a new basis. This was Malayu, which is usually identified with Jambi in the eastern coast of Sumatra. The existence of this kingdom in the seventh century A.D., and its ultimate absorption by the neighbouring kingdom of Śrī-Vijaya, have already been noted above. Since then Malayu disappears as a separate political unit until the eleventh century A.D., when it sends two embassies to China in 1079 and 1088 A.D.¹ But in the thirteenth century it was conquered by the Javanese king Kṛtanagara. We have seen above how the tragic end of Kṛtanagara enabled Malayu to throw off the yoke of Java, and it soon felt powerful enough to enter into a contest with Siam for the possession of the petty states in the southern part of Malay Peninsula.

v2.c14.t1.2

¹ J.A., 11—XII, p. 65, f.n. (1). In B.E.F.E.O., Vol. IV, p. 346. Pelliot gives the date of the first embassy as 1179, evidently a misprint for 1079.

v2.c14.t1.3

This rivalry is reflected in the Chinese annals. Malayu had sent envoys to China in 1281 A.D.² and when in 1293

v2.c14.t1.4

² Pelliot, B.E.F.E.O., Vol. IV, p. 326. Ferrand thinks that ‘Malayu’, from the 13th century onward, refers to Malacca and not to Malayu or Jambi in Sumatra. (See chapter on Malacca ).

v2.c14.t1.5

Yi-k'o-mu-su, one of the leaders of the Chinese expedition against Java, sent envoys to king of Malayu, he sent his son (or younger brother) in token of his allegiance.¹ During the same period Siam had also sent several envoys to China to pay allegiance.² The Chinese annals say that Malayu and Siam had been fighting with each other for some time and so in 1295 the emperor sent an order to Siam to ‘desist from further hostilities, and to hold to its promise’.³ This remarkable evidence confirms the view, held above, that there was a rivalry between the two states over the possessions of San-fo-tsi in Malay Peninsula. In 1297 we hear of Malayu sending a mission to China.⁴ It may be noted that in 1299 envoys from Siam and Malayu met at the imperial court.⁵ A further embassy was sent from Malayu in 1301.⁶

v2.c14.t1.6

¹ Groeneveldt—Notes, p. 30., Pelliot, op. cit., p. 327. Perhaps another embassy was sent from Malayu in 1294. See below.

v2.c14.t1.7

² Pelliot, op. cit., p. 243.

v2.c14.t1.8

³ Ibid. This evidently shows that some time, anterior to 1295 A.D., Malayu had sought the protection of China, and the latter forced Siam to promise that it would abstain from further hostilities against Malayu.

v2.c14.t1.9

⁴ Rockhill, T'oung Pao, Ser. II, Vol. XV (1914), p. 443. fn.

v2.c14.t1.10

⁵ Pelliot, op. cit., p. 328.

v2.c14.t1.11

⁶ Ibid.

v2.c14.t1.12

Thus the end of the thirteenth century A.D. saw the decline of the Śailendras and the rise of the new kingdom of Malayu which sought to occupy the position so long held by the former. As we have seen above, the new kingdom owed its existence to Java, and for a long time there was a close attachment between the two states. When the Javanese army retired from Malayu after the death of Kṛtanagara, two princesses of Malayu accompanied it to Java. One of them Dara Peṭak was married to the Javanese king. The elder daughter, Dara Jingga, married one ‘Deva’ and had by him a son named Tuhan Janaka who afterwards became king of Malayu. He was also known as Śri Marmadeva and Haji Mantrolot. Thus Marmadeva may be regarded as the successor of Maulivarmadeva who was ruling in 1286 A.D. as a vassal of Kṛtanagara. The account of Marco Polo shows that in 1292 A.D. Malayu (Malaiur) was a flourishing kingdom and a prosperous centre of trade and commerce.

v2.c14.t1.13

The next king of Malayu known to us is Ādityavarmadeva. A beautiful image of Mañjuśrī, which once stood in the temple of Caṇḍi Jago, contains two Sanskrit inscriptions.¹ The one on the front says that the image was set up in A.D. 1343 in a Buddhist temple by Āryavangśādhirāja. The inscription on the back informs us that in the kingdom of Rājapatnī, the minister Ādityavarman, belonging to her family, built a beautiful temple at Jinālayapura in Java, in the year 1343 A.D., for securing the highest religious merit to his parents and relations.

v2.c14.t1.14

¹ For a full discussion, cf. Rouffaer, B.K.I., Vol. 77 ( 1921 ), pp. 194-201.

v2.c14.t1.15

The interpretation, specially the relation of the two inscriptions on the two sides of the image, has given rise to some difficulty. Kern held that Āryavangśādhirāja and Ādityavarman both refer to one and the same person, and identified him as the king of Malayu, known from other records. Kern held that the king of Malayu calls himself Adhirāja (suzerain) of the Ārya clan in respect of Malayu, and assumes the lower title of Mantrī in respect of Java. On the other hand, Bosch has shown that Āryavangśādhirāja was the title of a high official in the court of Majapahit, and he holds that the two inscriptions really belong to two different officials of the court. He traces the name of Vṛddhamantrī Ārya Devarāja Śrī Āditya in another record of the period and identifies him with Ādityavarman of the inscription, who subsequently became a king in Sumatra.

v2.c14.t1.16

Whatever that may be, Ādityavarman of the inscription is generally recognised to be the same as the king of Malayu of that name, and the identification of Bosch would prove that he was holding some high offices in Java before he occupied the throne in Malayu. Krom holds that he successfully filled the posts of Āryavaṅśādhirāja and Vṛddhamantri Ārya Devarāja and thus refers both the inscriptions to him¹.

v2.c14.t1.17

¹ Krom—Geschiedenis, p. 389.

v2.c14.t1.18

A difficulty, no doubt, arises from the fact that Ādityavarman claims to be descended from the family of Rājapatni (tadbangśajaḥ). We have no evidence in support of this. It is true that one of the Malayu princesses was mother of the Javanese king Jayanagara, and Ādityavarman, for all we know, might have been the son of the other princess. But even this does not give him any claim to be descended from the family of Rājapatni. We may, therefore, take the expression to mean no more than that he was a member of the Javanese royal family, unless, of course, there was some relationship by marriage which is not yet known to us.²

v2.c14.t1.19

² Cf. B.K.I. (1931), pp. 32-35.

v2.c14.t1.20

We now turn to the inscriptions of Ādityavarman in Sumatra itself. In 1347 A.D. he engraved an inscription on the back of the image of Amoghapāśa, which was set up at Dharmāśraya by the Javanese king Kṛtanagara in 1286 A.D. (see ante, p. 299). The pedestal of the image, which contained the inscription of Kṛtanagara, was left where it was, but the image itself was removed by Ādityavarman and re-consecrated in a new temple with a new inscription. The image now stands at Rambahan near Lubuk Bulan in the Batanghari district, and possibly the temple of Ādityavarman was also erected there. The inscription³, written in corrupt Sanskrit, refers to the king as Śrīmat Śri Udayādityavarman (var. Ādityavarmmodaya) Pratāpaparākramarājendra Maulimālīvarmmadeva Mahārājādhirāja who set up the image of Amoghapāśa for the welfare of Malayapura⁴. The title Mahārājādhirāja indicates the rank of the king to be higher than that of Maulivarman in 1286 A.D.

v2.c14.t1.21

³ V.G., Vol. VII (1917), pp. 163-175.

v2.c14.t1.22

⁴ ‘Malayapura’ is the reading of Kern, but Krom thinks it is Malayu° (Geschiedenis, p. 390 f.n. 3).

v2.c14.t1.23

An inscribed stone, originally found at Kapala Bukit Gombak and now lying at Pagarrujung, near Fort V. D.

v2.c14.t1.24

Capellen, in upper Padang, gives the date 1347¹. Several inscriptions of Ādityavarman have been found in the neighbourhood. All these prove this locality, the heart of the later kingdom of Menangkabau, to have been the centre of Ādityavarman’s kingdom. One of these inscriptions, the large inscription of Pagarrujung² (originally of Bukit Gambak) dated in the year 1356, refers to the erection of a Vihāra by Mahārājādhirāja Ādityavarman Pratāpaparākrama Rājendramaulimaṇivarmmadeva. In another inscription at Kubu Raja³ the king is styled Kanakamedinīndra *i.e.* lord of Kanakamedinī (Golden land), a synonym of Suvarṇabhūmi. His father’s name is given as Advayavarman and his family is said to be descended from Indra (Kuliśadhara) while he is regarded as an incarnation of Lokeśvara. In the Pagarrujung inscription he is said to be Dharmarāja-kula-tilaka *i.e.* the ornament of Dharmarāja’s family.

v2.c14.t1.25

¹ Kern, V.G., Vol. VI (1917), pp. 249-257 ; O.V., 1912, pp. 34. ff.

v2.c14.t1.26

² Kern, V.G., Vol. VI (1917), pp. 261-275 ; O. V. 1912, pp. 51. ff

v2.c14.t1.27

³ Kern, V.G., Vol. VII (1917), pp. 215-221. The name of the place is Kuburaja and not Kubur raja as Kern thought (O.V, 1930, p. 150).

v2.c14.t1.28

Another inscription found at Suroasa⁴ is dated in the year 1375 A.D. Ādityavarman is here styled Surāvāśa-vān *i.e.* lord of Surāvāśa, and there is hardly any doubt that the name of the place has been preserved in modern Suroasa.

v2.c14.t1.29

⁴ Kern, V.G. Vol. VI (1917), pp. 252-261 ; O.V., 1912, p. 52.

v2.c14.t1.30

The name Śrī Suravāsa occurs in another inscription⁵ of Ādityavarman near Bandar Bapahat. This record is written in two scripts. On the left we find the usual script of the king’s records, *viz.*, the Kavi script with some local variations, while on the right the same thing was repeated in South Indian Grantha alphabet. This shows that South Indians formed a fairly large element of the local population.

v2.c14.t1.31

⁵ O.V., 1912, p. 46. Only a portion of the record, written in South Indian Grantha alphabet, was read by Mr. Krishna Sastri. But this agrees with the other portion.

v2.c14.t1.32

Among other inscriptions¹ of Ādityavarman, one refers to the crown prince ( Yuvarāja ) Anangavarman, ², one to a high official called tumanggung³, and two others refer to his Mahāsenapati Pamanan. Another inscription, with a date read tentatively as 1371 A.D., is perhaps to be ascribed to his reign.⁴

v2.c14.t1.33

¹ Inventaris—O.V., 1912, Nos. 20, 24, 29, 30, 41, 42,

v2.c14.t1.34

² Versl. Med. Kon. Ak. V. Wet. Afd. Lett., 5 : 2 (1917), p. 338.

v2.c14.t1.35

³ O.V., 1912, No. 28.

v2.c14.t1.36

⁴ Par., p. 122 ; O.V., 1914, p. 108.

v2.c14.t1.37

We may conclude from all these inscriptions that king Ādityavarman was a Tāntrik Buddhist, and that he ruled for at least 28 years (1347-1375 A.D.) over a fairly extensive kingdom, which comprised the central portion of Sumatra, and extended from the eastern to the western coast. According to the Javanese chronicle, Nāgara-Kṛtāgama, this kingdom of Malayu acknowledged the supremacy of the Javanese king. If that were so, it would really mean a sort of nominal allegiance. It is interesting to note that Nag. Kr. refers to Sumatra by the general name of Malayu, and thus gives an indirect evidence of the supreme position of that kingdom in Sumatra⁵.

v2.c14.t1.38

⁵ A comprehensive historical account of Sumatra, based upon both traditions and historical facts, is given by L.C. Westenenk in Congres I, pp. 1-39.

2. Rise of Islam

v2.c14.t2.1

The downfall of the Śailendras led to many other important consequences besides the rise of Malayu as a great power. Sumatra was now divided into a number of petty states which paid a nominal allegiance, some time to Java and some time to China, as suited their convenience, but all the while indulged in internecine wars and jealousies. This paved the way for the gradual establishment of Islam as a political power which was destined in the long run to overwhelm nearly the whole of Malayasia.

v2.c14.t2.2

The first definite information of this changed political condition is obtained from the account of Marco Polo¹. Marco Polo calls the island "Java the less", and says that it had eight kingdoms and eight kings. Of these he gives detailed account of six kingdoms "that lie at this side of the land" and were visited by him. These kingdoms were Ferlec, Basma, Samara, Dagroian, Lambri and Fansur. Marco Polo says nothing of the two other kingdoms "at the other side of the island" as he never visited them.

v2.c14.t2.3

¹ "The Book of Ser Marco Polo",—Translated by Yule, Vol. II, pp. 284. ff.

v2.c14.t2.4

Of the six kingdoms, Ferlec is undoubtedly Perlak on the north-east, and Lambri the same as Lamuri or Great Atjeh (Acheh), on the north-west. The three kingdoms named between these two were apparently situated in the intervening region. Thus Basma may be identified with Pase, and Samara with Samudra. Dagroian cannot be identified with certainty. Fansur, the sixth kingdom, is undoubtedly Barus. Most of the details given by Marco Polo are concerned with peculiar manners and customs of the people, but he throws valuable hints on the political and religious condition of the kingdoms he describes.

v2.c14.t2.5

The kingdoms had their own kings, but all, except Ferlec, called themselves subjects of the Great Khan *i.e.* the Chinese emperor Kublai Khan. The subjection, however, was more nominal than real, as would appear from the following statement of Marco Polo: "They call themselves subjects of the Great Khan but they pay him no tribute; indeed they are so far away that his men could not go thither. Still all these islanders declare themselves to be his subjects and sometimes they send curiosities as presents." Marco Polo’s statement is corroborated by the facts that an envoy of the kingdom of Samudra visited China in 1286 A. D.² and that embassies were sent by the generals of Kublai Khan, after reaching Java, to some of the Sumatran states including Lambri and Sumatra, *i.e.* Lamuri and Samudra,¹ in 1292 A.D.

v2.c14.t2.6

² Rockhill, T'oung Pao Ser. II, Vol. 15 (1914), pp. 440-1.

v2.c14.t2.7

¹ Groeneveldt—Notes, p. 30. Rockhill, op. cit., p. 442. Pelliot, B.E.F.E.O., Vol. IV (327). Pelliot amends Ki-mo-la-mao, name of one of these states, into Malayu.

v2.c14.t2.8

The people of all the kingdoms except Ferlec were idolators, and evidently belonged to a very primitive state of civilisation. Many of them were cannibals and great believers in sorcery and magic.

v2.c14.t2.9

About Ferlec Marco Polo observes as follows: "This kingdom is so much frequented by the Saracen merchants that they have converted the natives to the Law of Mahomet—I mean the townspeople only, for the hill-people live for all the world like beasts, and eat human flesh, as well as all other kinds of flesh, clean or unclean. And they worship this, that and the other thing, for in fact the first thing that they see on rising in the morning, that they do worship for the rest of the day".

v2.c14.t2.10

This picture of the primitive people of Sumatra shows us what they were when they came into contact with the Hindu civilisation, which evidently had not made its influence felt in the northern parts of the country, even so late as the 13th century A.D. Evidently Islam was slowly spread among these people by the Muhammadan merchants, before any Muhammadan kingdom was established.

v2.c14.t2.11

Thus Perlak was the only Muhammadan state in Sumatra in 1292 A.D. when Marco Polo visited the island. Tradition places its foundation at an earlier date than that of the Muhammadan state of Samudra. Now Sultan Malik al-Saleh, who founded this state, died in 1297 A.D. The foundation of the Muhammadan kingdom of Samudra must thus be placed between 1292 and 1297 A.D.²

v2.c14.t2.12

² The date of the Sultan's death is known from his tomb-stone inscription. For this, as well as the tradition concerning Perlak, cf. Moquette in Rapp. Oudh. Dienst., 1913, pp. 1-12.

v2.c14.t2.13

Sumudra, Lamuri, Perlak and some other less known kingdoms are also referred to by Rasid-ad-Din (1310 A.D.), but he does not give any detailed account beyond stating that Lamuri was a large state under an independent king.¹ Other Arab writers also refer to some towns or states, in Sumatra, but do not in any way indicate that they possessed either political or commercial importance.

v2.c14.t2.14

¹ Ferrand—Textes, Vol. II, p. 361.

v2.c14.t2.15

About 1345-6 A. D. Ibn Baṭuṭa² visited the kingdom of Samudra, which he calls Sumutra, in the island of Jāva, which here undoubtedly means Sumatra. He was welcomed by the Muhammadan ruler of the place, Sultan Malik az-Zāhir³. Ibn Baṭuṭa describes him as one of the most illustrious and generous kings, but says nothing definite about the extent of his kingdom. But that there were Hindu kingdoms on all sides is quite clear from his statement that the Sultan frequently fought with and defeated the infidels who lived in the neighbourhood, and they paid him tribute for living in peace.

v2.c14.t2.16

² For Ibn Baṭuṭa's account, cf. Ferrand—Textes, Vol. II, pp. 438 ff. Ferrand is inclined to reject the whole account of Ibn Baṭuṭa as pure fabrication on the ground that his itinerary is an impossible one.

v2.c14.t2.17

³ Malik az-Zāhir was a title borne by nearly all the Sultans of Samudra. Sultan Muhammad Malik az-Zāhir died in 1326. He was followed by Ahmad and Zain-al-Abidin, both of whom carried the same title. Ibn Baṭuṭa must have met one of these, probably the former.

v2.c14.t2.18

One of these Hindu kingdoms called ‘Mūl Jāva’ was visited by Ibn Baṭuṭa. After leaving Samudra, he sailed along the coast for 21 days, and reached the capital of this kingdom. Ibu Baṭuṭa here relates a story which throws some interesting light on the political condition of Sumatra. It runs as follows :

v2.c14.t2.19

‘The Sultan of Samudra had a nephew (brother’s son) who married his daughter and was appointed governor of a province. This nephew was desirous of marrying the daughter of an Amir, but the Sultan chose the girl for himself. The disappointed lover waited for his opportunity. Once the Sultan had gone to fight the infidels, who lived at a distance of about a month’s journey. The nephew entered the city of Samudra, which had no walls, declared himself the Sultan, and was accepted as such by one section of the people. As soon as the Sultan heard of this revolt he marched towards the capital. His nephew, however, took as much money and other valuables as he could lay hands on, and the girl of his choice, and then took shelter with the infidel king of Mūl Jāva. The Sultan now built walls round the capital city to guard against future revolts of this kind.’

v2.c14.t2.20

The location of Mūl Jāva has not been determined with certainty. Ibn Baṭuṭa says that its length was two months’ journey, and it produced excellent perfumes, named after Kākūla and Kamāra, two of its districts. Van der Lith identified Kākūla with Angkola¹, but Ferrand rejects it on philological grounds². Pelliot identifies the same place with Ko-ku-lo, which is mentioned by the Chinese traveller Kiantan (c. 800 A. D.), and is to be located to the west of Kedah³. Rouffaer places it in Sumatra itself, in Menangkabau⁴. In view of these wide differences of opinion it is difficult to suggest any identification, but the fact that the rebels from Samudra took shelter in it seems to refer to some place in Sumatra itself. Malayu-Jambi would perhaps not be an unacceptable theory, in view of the great power and prestige of that Hindu kingdom. If it were to be located outside Sumatra I would suggest Java itself. Mūl Jāva would mean, in Sanskrit, the original Java, as distinguished from Java, the less, named after it⁵. Wassāf-i-Hadrat, writing towards the close of the 13th century A.D.⁶, refers to Mul Śāva (=Mul Jāva) as one of the islands conquered by Kublai Khan in 1292 A.D. He also refers to aloe and Girofle as products of the locality, as does Ibn Baṭuṭa in respect of Mūla-Jāva. Now Java was conquered by Kublai Khan in the year 1292-1293 A.D., and so this would be a point in support of the proposed identification. But the details in respect of the conquest of Mul-Śāva as given by Wassāf do not agree with those given in official Chinese history as recorded above.

v2.c14.t2.21

¹ Merveilles (1883-86), p. 240.

v2.c14.t2.22

² Textes, p. 431.

v2.c14.t2.23

³ T'oung Pao, Ser. II. Vol. 13 (1912), p. 455. Ferrand opposes this view in J.A., Vol. 11-XX (1922), p. 24.

v2.c14.t2.24

⁴ B.K.I., Vol. 77 (1921), p. 78. note.

v2.c14.t2.25

⁵ Schlegel, though interpreting it in the same way, identifies it with Sumatra (=Prathama Yavabhu) T'oung Pao, Ser. I. Vol. IX., p. 368.

v2.c14.t2.26

⁶ Ferrand—Textes, p. 359.

v2.c14.t2.27

On the whole, Ibn Baṭuṭa's account shows the gradual spread of Islam as a political factor in northern Sumatra. There is no doubt that India, and not Arabia, served as the base from which the stream of colonisation carried the influence of Islam towards the Far East¹. An examination of the tombstones of the Sultans of Samudra-Pase reveals a close resemblance to those found in Gujarat, and there is hardly any doubt that they were imported from the latter place². We may thus presume a brisk trade activity between Gujarat and Sumatra, and this indirectly led to the furtherance of Islam in the Far East.

v2.c14.t2.28

¹ Snouck Hurgronje—'Arabië en oost Indië' (pp. 15-17).

v2.c14.t2.29

² Moquette in T.B.G., Vol. 54 (1912), pp. 536. ff. The Sejarah Malayu (chap. VII) furnishes confirmatory evidence of the custom of bringing tomb-stones from India to Malayan countries (J. Str. Br. R.A.S., No. 77, p. 171).

v2.c14.t2.30

The Chinese book Tao-i-che-lio, written by Wang Ta-yuen in 1349 A.D., refers to some of the states in northern Sumatra such as Pañcur, Tamiang, Batakland, Lambri, and Samudra, but says nothing of the political condition or of the spread of Islam. It also refers to San-fo-tsi and Kieu-kiang (Palembang) as two separate states under two kings³.

v2.c14.t2.31

³ Rockhill—T'oung Pao, Ser. II, Vol. XVI (1915), pp. 134-35.

v2.c14.t2.32

But the Nāgara-Kṛtāgama, composed in A.D. 1365, gives us a very comprehensive list of the petty states in Sumatra which all acknowledged the supremacy of Java. As we have seen above (see p. 330) the list includes Samudra, Lambri, and Perlak, *i.e.* the northernmost states, referred to above. The statement of Nāgara-Kṛtāgama may be true, and perhaps all these states now recognised the king of Java as their suzerain in more or less the same way that they acknowledged Kublai Khan in 1292 A.D. as noticed by Marco Polo.

v2.c14.t2.33

But with the decline of the Majapahit empire in the beginning of the fifteenth century A.D. the states of Northern Sumatra again returned to their allegiance to China, and at the same time a further progress of Islam is noticeable in this region. We get a fair idea of both these changes from the Chinese annals, specially the History of the Ming Dynasty and the writings of Ma Huan (1425-1432)¹.

v2.c14.t2.34

¹ For the Chinese account that follows, cf. Groeneveldt—Notes, pp. 85-92. Rockhill, op. cit., pp. 146 ff. Schlegel—T'oung Pao, Ser. II, Vol. II. pp. 329 ff.

v2.c14.t2.35

According to Ma Huan the state of Sumatra, or Samudra, was the most powerful in northern Sumatra. It was bounded by the sea on the north and the mountains on the south. To the east was a small state Aru, and towards the north, two other smaller states, Na-ku-erh and Li-tai. According to Schlegel the name of this great state is preserved in that of a miserable village of the present day, called Samudra.²

v2.c14.t2.36

² T'oung Pao, Ser. II, Vol. II, p. 338.

v2.c14.t2.37

According to the History of the Ming Dynasty³ the Chinese emperor sent envoys to this country in 1403 and 1404. The latter also sent tributes to China before a third imperial envoy, Cheng Ho, came in 1405. About this time the neighbouring king of Na-ku-erh defeated and killed the king of Sumutra. The widowed queen, having no grown-up son to avenge the foul crime, offered to marry any one who could do so. Thus an old fisherman who defeated and killed the king of Na-ku-erh became king of Sumutra. The emperor issued an edict appointing this fisherman, named Tsai-nu-li-a-pi-ting-ki¹ king of Sumutra, and gave him a seal, a commission, and a court-dress of coloured silk. In 1409 this fisherman king came and offered tribute at the imperial court. But before 1412 he was murdered by the son of the late king, and his son Su-kan-la (Sekander) fled into the mountains. But the Chinese supported the cause of the old king's son and defeated Su-kan-la. According to Hsing Cha Sheng Lan, Su-kan-la usurped the throne in 1413, but was defeated by the Chinese troops. The new king of Sumutra was grateful for the imperial favour and came to the imperial court in 1415 to offer tribute. He regularly sent tributes to China till 1434, when he sent a younger brother to the court.² The brother represented that the king was already old and could not manage the affairs any more, and now asked permission to cede the throne to his son, called A-pu-sai,³ who was accordingly appointed king of the country. From this time the envoys from Samudra became gradually more rare. The last embassy was sent in 1486. The Chinese accounts seem to show that Samudra had become the most important centre of trade and it was also politically the most important. Ma Huan says that the neighbouring state of Li-tai was a dependency of Sumutra. Schlegel identifies Li-tai with the state named Lide by Barros and situated between Pedir and Pirada, which lay west of Pacem.⁴

v2.c14.t2.38

³ For the account that follows, cf. Groeneveldt—Notes, pp. 85-93. For various corrections and suggestions, cf. Pelliot, T'oung Pao, 1933 (pp. 275, fn. 2, 290-294 ). The discovery of a new Chinese source makes the whole story of the fisherman extremely doubtful (T'oung Pao, 1934, p. 313).

v2.c14.t2.39

¹ Pelliot points out that the name is really 'Tsai-nu-li-a-pi-ting' which corresponds to Zaynu-l-Abidin,' well-known in the history of Acheh (T'oung Pao, 1933, pp. 275-6, fn. 1).

v2.c14.t2.40

² According to the History of the Ming dynasty this brother died in China, and some time later the king of Sumutra sent another younger brother. As Pelliot suggests, perhaps the reference to two brothers is due to some confusion (T'oung Pao, 1934, p. 294, fn. 1)

v2.c14.t2.41

³ Pelliot reads the name as A-pu-sai-yi-ti and restores it as Abu Said. (Ibid).

v2.c14.t2.42

⁴ T'oung Pao, Ser II, Vol. II, p. 347.

v2.c14.t2.43

Another important state, Lambri, had in 1412 sent envoys, with those of Samudra, to China to carry tribute. The envoys were presented with court dresses and the king got a seal, a commission, and silks. It sent tribute every year till 1424. Ma Huan writing in 1416 A.D. notes that the king of the country and its people are all Muhammadans.¹ The king who sent tribute in 1412 is called Maharasa.²

v2.c14.t2.44

¹ Groeneveldt—Notes, pp. 98-100.

v2.c14.t2.45

² Schlegel reads it as Mahama Shah (T'oung Pao Ser. II, Vol. II, p. 357). Pelliot restores it as Muhammad Shah; T'oung Pao, 1933, p. 296.

v2.c14.t2.46

To the east of Samudra was another kingdom, Aru, which similarly sent envoys to China in 1411, 1419, 1421 and 1423. Here also the king and the people were all Muhammadans by 1416 A.D.³ The memory of this state is preserved in the name of the Aru Islands.

v2.c14.t2.47

³ Groeneveldt—Notes, pp. 94-6.

v2.c14.t2.48

Another kingdom, Nakur, situated to the west of Samudra, consisted of only one mountain village and about a thousand families. The people tattooed their faces with three pointed green figures, and for this reason the king was called the king of tattooed faces. Their language, manners, and customs were like those of Sumutra.⁴

v2.c14.t2.49

⁴ Ibid, p. 96.

v2.c14.t2.50

Thus by the beginning of the fifteenth century A.D. the northern states of Sumatra passed from the sphere of influence of Java to that of China, and gradually adopted the Islamic religion. The importance of Sumatra as a centre of Islam was no doubt due to the fact that Pasai (Sumatra) had succeeded Kedah as the chief centre of trade. In the fifteenth century Malacca succeeded Pasai and played the rôle of the leading Muslim state, as we shall see in the next chapter. After the fall of Malacca at the beginning of the sixteenth century, Acheen in northern Sumatra became the chief centre of trade and of Islam. "From Acheen Islamic faith spread to Ulakan, from Ulakan into Menangkabau. In the seventeenth century the people along the coast of the Lampong district began to be converted, and in the eighteenth Islam spread to the up-country. In the middle of the sixteenth century a missionary went from Palembang to Borneo and made converts at Sukadana and Madan. In 1606 A.D. a Menangkabau trader converted the Raja of Pallo in Celebes.”¹

v2.c14.t2.51

¹ J. St. Br. R.A.S., No 77, pp. 171 ff. to which the reader may refer for a detailed account of the introduction of Muhammadan faith in Malay Peninsula and Malay Archipelago. Cf. also ‘Encyclopaedie van Nederlandsch Indie’ *s.v.* Mohammedanisme; and B.J.O. Schrieke—‘Het Boek van Bonang.’

v2.c14.t2.52

END OF HINDU RULE IN MALAY PENINSULA

1. Malay Peninsula after the disruption of the Śailendra Empire

v2.c14.t3.1

The Mediaeval history of Malay Peninsula forms really an essential part of the history of the Śailendra empire which we have related above. The peculiar geographical position of the Malay Peninsula invested it with a special commercial importance, as it controlled the trade-route to East Indies. By the conquest of Sumatra and the Peninsula, the Śailendras obtained that commercial supremacy to which the Arab writers bear eloquent testimony. Henceforth the greater part of the Peninsula formed an important part of the empire, referred to by the Arabs as Zābag, and its fortunes rose and fell with Zābag. The Arabs refer to Kalāh as the principal port, and it has been identified with Keddah or Krah.¹

v2.c14.t3.2

¹ J. A., II-XIV (1919), pp. 214ff.

v2.c14.t3.3

As soon as Java rose to political importance, her eyes were naturally turned to the Malay Peninsula, as its possession was the key to the commercial supremacy over eastern waters. The details of the early stages of the attempt, on the part of Java, to obtain a footing in the Peninsula are somewhat vague and obscure. Rouffaer has advanced some arguments to show that king Siṇḍok of Java sent a naval expedition against the Malay Peninsula in the second quarter of the tenth century. Although Rouffaer's arguments are far from convincing, yet the hypothesis is not an improbable one.²

v2.c14.t3.4

² B. K. I., Vol. 77 (1921), p. 114.

v2.c14.t3.5

There are references to some Hindu states in Malay Peninsula during the period of Śailendra supremacy. In the first place, we may mention that Schlegel locates Ho-ling or Kaling of the Chinese writers in Malay Peninsula, and not in Java.¹ If we accept his view we find an important state in the Peninsula, whose history we have included in that of Java.

v2.c14.t3.6

¹ T'oung Pao, Serie I, Vol. IX, pp. 273ff.

v2.c14.t3.7

Schlegel further identifies Ts'ien'-chi-fuh, also called Pean-chi-poah (=Pañca-pur, pur meaning island), near Kaling, with the five islands viz. P. Rupat, P. Bancalis, P. Padang, P. Pandjore and P. Rantau, lying opposite Malacca.² He also quotes a passage from the New History of the T'ang Dynasty which "distinctly says that the 'Five Islands' in the Straits of Malacca were originally tributary states (or colonies) of Southern India". On this Schlegel observes: "There is no doubt that all these islands, as also Kaling on the main, were founded by Kalinga or Kling colonies who gave the name of their own country to the new settlements."³ This, in a way, corroborates the view put forward above on p. 227, viz. that the Śailendras came from Kalinga coast and conquered the Malay Peninsula.

v2.c14.t3.8

² Ibid, p. 279, fn. 25.

v2.c14.t3.9

³ Ibid, p. 287.

v2.c14.t3.10

We do not, however, know any particulars about the history of these "Five Islands", and, as noted above, the identifications, proposed by Schlegel, are extremely doubtful.

v2.c14.t3.11

In 983 A.D. we get a definite reference to another kingdom in Malay Peninsula. The Chinese pilgrim Fah-yu, leaving for India in or shortly after 983 A.D., received from the emperor letters of introduction to the kings whose territories he intended to visit. Among these are mentioned the king of San-fo-tsi and Sseu-ma-ki-mang, king of Ko-ku-la. Ko-ku-la has been unanimously located on the western coast of the Malay Peninsula. The fact that the king of San-fo-tsi and king of Ko-ku-la are mentioned separately in the same sentence does not necessarily prove that the latter was an independent king,¹ though it is not unlikely.

v2.c14.t3.12

¹ The information is given in the History of the Second Han Dynasty. The relevant passage, translated by E. Chavannes (Revue de l' histoire des religions, t. XXXIV, 1896, p. 52), has been reproduced in Ferrand's atricle in J. A., 11-XX (1922), p. 22. Krom, quoting the same passage, gives the date as 963 A. D. (Geschiedenis²-p. 227). For the name of the king, cf. discussions by Pelliot (B. E. F. E. O., Vol, IV, p. 311).

v2.c14.t3.13

Indeed, according to the theory of Rouffaer, there were about this time several powerful states in Malay Peninsula which figure so prominently in connection with the overthrow of the Javanese kingdom of Dharmavaṁśa in 1007 A. D., and against which Airlangga had to carry on a bitter and prolonged fight. But we have already discussed this point (Bk. III, chap. II) and need not refer to it again.

v2.c14.t3.14

It is in connection with the invasion of Rājendra Cola, early in the eleventh century A. D., that we for the first time obtain a list of states in the Malay Peninsula which formed a part of the empire of the Śailendras. Chau Ju-kua also gives us a similar list of states at the beginning of the thirteenth century A. D. The names and identification of these states have already been discussed above (pp. 175 ff, pp. 193 ff.).

v2.c14.t3.15

By a combination of these two lists we may form a general idea of the petty states that flourished in the Malay Peninsula.

v2.c14.t3.16

The kingdoms of Grahi, Mā-ppappālam, Talaittakkolam, Tāmralinga, Māyiruḍingam, Pa-t'a, and Ts'ien-Mai formed the northern group. The northernmost state was Grahi, which separated Kambujadeśa from the Peninsular dominion of San-fo-tsi. The southern group was composed of Beranang, Pahang, Trengganau and Kelantan. Between these two groups lay Kaṭāha or Kaḍāram and Lengkasuka which probably occupied both the eastern and the western coasts of the Peninsula.

v2.c14.t3.17

These principalities did not enjoy equal power or importance. Kaṭāha or Kaḍāra was no doubt the chief of these, as testified to by the Cola records which generally refer to the Śailendra emperor as king of Kaṭāha or Kaḍāra. Rājendra Cola does not refer to any state of the southern group, and even omits the last two of the northern. Chau Ju-kua, too, gives a detailed notice only of Tāmraliṅga, Kaḍāram, Lengkasuka, and Beranang.

v2.c14.t3.18

Although a vassal state of the Śailendras, Tāmraliṅga sent an embassy to China in 1001 A. D.¹

v2.c14.t3.19

¹ Études Asiatique, Vol. II, pp. 108-110.

v2.c14.t3.20

The decline of the empire of San-fo-tsi during the latter half of the thirteenth century A. D. brought about a great change in the political condition of the Malay Peninsula. Java, the successful rival, now regarded the empire of his enemy as her legitimate prey. Thus Kṛtanagara conquered Pahang, one of the vassal states of San-fo-tsi. The tragic end of Kṛtanagara did not allow him to carry on this direct process of conquest any further. But Malayu, the vassal state of Java, which was planted by Kṛtanagara as the out-post of Javanese authority in the heart of Sumatra, continued the task and conquered many of the vassal states in Malay Peninsula. About the same time the king of Siam entered the stage and by 1292 A. D. had established his authority as far as Ligor. The lost Peninsular empire of San-fo-tsi thus proved a bone of contention between Siam and Malayu, as we have already noticed above (Bk. IV, ch. I). According to the ‘Koṭ. Monthīerabān (Kaṭa Maṇḍira-pāla) or Palatine Law of Siam, enacted in A. D. 1360, Ujong Tānah (Johor), Malaka, Malayu, and Worawārī were vassal states of Siam.²

v2.c14.t3.21

² Gerini—Researches, pp. 531-2.

v2.c14.t3.22

But with the growth of the empire of Majapahit Java pursued again the policy of re-conquering the Malay Peninsula. By 1365 A. D. nearly the whole of it was included within the empire of Java, as would appear from the detailed list of states given in the Nāgara-Kṛtāgama. (Bk. III, ch. VI).

v2.c14.t3.23

With the downfall of the Majapahit empire at the beginning of the fifteenth century A. D., Siam must have again tried to consolidate its authority in Malay Peninsula. But now the Malay states tried to shake off the yoke of both Java and Siam. We have already seen above, in connection with the history of Java, that China took advantage of the downfall of the Majapahit empire to pose as the protector of its vassal states, and thereby play an imperial rôle in the affairs of the Malay Peninsula and Malay Archipelago. The Peninsular states thus naturally turned towards China, specially as the authority of China was more nominal than that of either Java or Siam. This is clearly indicated by the fact that various states like Pahang, Kelantan, and Malacca now send tributes to China.

v2.c14.t3.24

The History of the Ming Dynasty gives us the following information about Pahang, the old court-name for which was Indrapura, evidently the name given by the old Indian settlers.¹

v2.c14.t3.25

¹ J. Str. Br. R. A. S., No. 81, p. 30.

v2.c14.t3.26

‘Pahang is situated to the west of Siam. In the year 1378 the king Maharaja Tadjau sent envoys with a letter, written on a golden leaf, and bringing as tribute six foreign slaves and products of the country. They were received according to the established rules.

v2.c14.t3.27

‘In the year 1411 the king Pa-la-mi-so-la-ta-lo-si-ni ( Parameśvara Darśana ? ) sent envoys carrying tribute. In 1412 Cheng Ho went as an envoy to their country, and in the year 1414 they sent tribute again. (The name of the envoy sent in 1411 is rendered by Schlegel as Somaka Mantri).

v2.c14.t3.28

‘In the year 1416 they sent tribute and Cheng Ho was again ordered to go there.’²

v2.c14.t3.29

² Groeneveldt—Notes, p. 137. Schlegel-T'oung Pao, Ser. I, Vol. X, pp. 41ff.

v2.c14.t3.30

Later, Pahang became a vassal of Siam, and its ruler Maharaja Deva Sura was defeated and captured by Sultan Mansur Shah of Malacca, and thus ended the Hindu royal line of Pahang.³

v2.c14.t3.31

³ Winstedt-History of Malaya, p. 47.

v2.c14.t3.32

As regards Kelantan we read in the same Chinese History : “In the year 1411 the king Maharaja K’u-ma-r sent envoys to bring tribute, and in 1412 Cheng Ho got orders to bring him an imperial letter praising his conduct and to present him with different kinds of silk.”¹

v2.c14.t3.33

¹ Groeneveldt—Notes, p. 139.

2. Rise and fall of Malacca

v2.c14.t4.1

Of the independent states in Malay Peninsula that rise into prominence about the beginning of the fifteenth century A.D., the most important was undoubtedly that of Malacca, which rapidly grew to be the leading commercial centre in that region. The early history of this kingdom is involved in obscurity,² as we have to depend mainly upon indigenous traditions, either recorded in native chronicles or handed down by Portuguese writers. Ferrand has collected together all these traditions which seek to trace the history of the kingdom since its foundation.³ It is needless for our present purpose to examine all these in detail. Leaving aside the incredible accounts of Gaspar Correa who places the foundation of Malacca in the eighth century A. D., the remaining authorities date the event in the thirteenth, fourteenth, or the beginning of the fifteenth century A.D. As to the details, those given in ‘Commentaires d’Albuquerque’ are supported in a general way, and particularly as to the names of kings, by Jean de Barros and Godinho de Eredia. They are also confirmed to a certain extent by the Chinese Annals.¹ We may, therefore, begin with the version of Albuquerque² regarding the history of the kingdom of Malacca.

v2.c14.t4.2

² This is, of course, on the assumption that Malaiyur or Malayu is the same as the old state of that name in Sumatra, viz. Jambi. The contrary view is maintained by Ferrand (J. A. 11-XI, pp. 391ff. XII, pp. 51ff) who holds that from 13th century onward Malayu denotes Malacca, and who, therefore, ascribes to Malacca what has been said in the last chapter regarding Malayu from 1281 A. D. Ferrand’s view has been challenged by Rouffaer (B. K. I. Vol. 77, pp. 1ff, 359ff ; Vol. 86, pp. 139ff., 193ff.). I have followed Rouffaer’s view which is generally held.

v2.c14.t4.3

³ Ferrand—J. A., 11-XI (1918), pp. 407-467. For a critical interpretation of indigenous sources, cf. Blagden—Notes on Malay History (J. Str. Br. R. A. S., No. 53, pp. 139ff.).

v2.c14.t4.4

¹ J. A. 11-XI ( 1918 ), pp. 393-405. Groeneveldt—Notes, pp. 123-134.

v2.c14.t4.5

² Ferrand, op. cit., p. 411.

v2.c14.t4.6

There reigned a king Bataratamurel ( Bhaṭāra Tumapel ) in Java, and a king Parimiśura ( Parameśvara ) in Palembang. As there were frequent fights between the two they came to an agreement. Parimiśura married the daughter of the king of Java, called Parimiśuri (Parameśvari), and agreed to pay tribute to his father-in-law. He, however, soon repented of his decision, and refused to pay either homage or tribute to the king of Java. The king of Java thereupon invaded Palembang, and Parimiśura, being defeated, fled with the wife, children and some escorts to Singapura ( Singapore ). It was then a large and wealthy city under Siam and its governor hospitably received the royal fugitive. Parimiśura, however, killed his host and made himself master of the city. On hearing this news his former subjects of Palembang, numbering 3000, came to Singapore. Parimiśura welcomed them and lived there for five years, pillaging, with his fleet, the ships that passed through the Strait of Singapore.³ ‘Then Parimiśura was attacked by the chief of Patani, brother of the governor of Singapore whom he had so foully murdered. Being defeated, Parimiśura fled with his people to the mouth of the Muar river inhabited only by a few fishermen. About this time 20 or 30 fishermen invited him to settle in their village, which was very fertile and yielded all necessaries of life. Parimiśura, being satisfied by an examination of the locality, removed there with his family. The pirates in the sea touched at this port to take water, and being aided and encouraged by Parimiśura they came there to sell their stolen goods. Thus it grew to be a commercial centre, and in two years the population rose to 2000. Parimiśura named the settlement Malacca. Gradually merchants from Pase (in Sumatra) and Bengal came to trade there, and its importance rapidly increased. Parimiśura died seven years after his settlement at Malacca, leaving a son called Xaquendarxa (Sekandar Shah). Although the prince was a Hindu, he had married the daughter of the king of Pase who had adopted the Muhammadan religion a short while ago. Either at the request of his wife, or at the instance of his father-in-law, it was not long before he himself became a convert to Islam. After he had several children, the king, named Sekandar Shah, paid a visit to the Chinese emperor. He became the vassal of China, brought home a seal as a token of his vassalage, and obtained permission to coin tin money. He died shortly after his return and was succeeded by Modafaixa (Muzafar Shah). He conquered Kampar (in E. Sumatra), Pam (Pahang), Dandargiri (Indragiri), and other countries, and converted their kings by force to Islam. He raised Malacca to a great power, and under his son Sultan Masrusa (Mansur Shah) and grandson Alaoadim (Alau d din) the kingdom became one of the richest and most famous.

v2.c14.t4.7

³ There has been much speculation about the early history of Singapore. Scholars have sought to identify it with Mo-ho-sin of I-tsing, Salahat of Ibn Khordadzbeh, Malayur of Marco Polo, and Ma-li-yu-eul of the History of the Yuan Dynasty ; but these are all very problematical. The account given in Malay Annals is a curious jumble of myths and traditions. The identity of Tumasik and Singapore is universally accepted, and as such we find a reference to it in Tao-i Chih lio of Wang Ta-yüan. Reference has already been made above to the conquest of Tumasik by the Javanese about the middle of the fourteenth century A.D. Reference may be made in this connection to the famous 'inscription at the mouth of the Singapore river' which was destroyed by the Public Works Department about a century ago. For a brief account of the old history of Singapore, cf. Winstedt—A History of Malaya (1935), pp. 31-36.

v2.c14.t4.8

‘Alau d din’s successor Sultan Mahamet (Muhammad) repudiated allegiance to Siam and Java, and declared himself a vassal to China. Thereupon, the king of Siam sent a fleet against him, but it was completely defeated. This took place 22 years before the conquest of Malacca by Albuquerque (i.e. in 1489 A.D.)

v2.c14.t4.9

‘A period of 90 years intervened between the time when Malacca became inhabited and its conquest by Albuquerque. At that time Malacca and its suburbs had about a hundred thousand inhabitants.’

v2.c14.t4.10

The account of De Barros varies a little from the above. He describes Paramisara as a fugitive noble from Java, instead of the deposed king of Palembang, and it was the invasion of the king of Siam, and not of the chief of Patani, that forced him to leave Singhapura. With this exception, the two accounts generally agree, except that De Barros places the foundation of the city 253 years before the arrival of the Portuguese in India. He also refers to hostilities between Siam and Malacca, and the acceptance of Siamese suzerainty by Sekandar Shah. This evidently explains the passage in Commentaires d’ Albuquerque that Sultan Muhammad repudiated allegiance to Siam.

v2.c14.t4.11

The Chinese accounts corroborate the above version, at least in its general outline. Thus, Ma Huan, writing in 1416, observes that the king and people of Malacca are Muhammadans¹, and as we shall see later, this refers to the reign of Sekandar Shah.

v2.c14.t4.12

¹ Groeneveldt—Notes, p 123. T’oung Pao (1915), p. 115.

v2.c14.t4.13

The most comprehensive account is given in the History of the Ming Dynasty from which we quote the following extracts.²

v2.c14.t4.14

² Groeneveldt—Notes., pp. 129ff. The account is supplemented by other sources, to which references will be made in the footnotes.

v2.c14.t4.15

‘In 1403 the emperor sent the eunuch Yin Ch’ing as envoy to this country with presents. There was no king in the country, and it was not called a kingdom, but it belonged to Siam, to which it paid an annual tribute of forty taels of gold. The chief, called Pai-li-mi-su-ra¹, sent envoys to the imperial court along with Yin Ch'ing.

v2.c14.t4.16

¹ The name is transcribed as Pai-li-su-ra by Groeneveldt, but it has been corrected as Pai-li-mi-su-la by Pelliot (T'oung Pao, Vol. XXX, 1933, p. 389).

v2.c14.t4.17

'In 1405 these envoys arrived at the imperial court. The Emperor praised their master and appointed him king of the country of Malacca. The envoys said that their king wished his country to be a district of the empire, bringing tribute every year. The emperor gave his assent.

v2.c14.t4.18

'The king of Malacca sent envoys with tribute in 1407 and 1408. In 1411 he came to the court with his wife, his son and his ministers.² His nephew visited the imperial court in 1412.

v2.c14.t4.19

² Rockhill has referred to slightly differing Chinese accounts of this event. He notes that Hsing Cha Sheng Lan places the voyage in 1415, but this is evidently an error according to Pelliot (T'oung Pao, 1933, p. 398).

v2.c14.t4.20

'In 1414, the king's son Mu-kan-sa-u-ti-r-sha came to court and said that his father had died. He was appointed to

v2.c14.t4.21

"T'ung hsi yang Kao says that in 1405, the ruler of Malacca, Si-li-pa-erh-su-la, sent a petition to the Ming Court asking to become a feudatory. It was in response to this request that Cheng Ho was sent in 1409. The king, his successor, who went to China in 1411, was called, the same work says, Pa-li-tieh-su-la".

v2.c14.t4.22

In this connection Ma Huan gives the following account :

v2.c14.t4.23

"In A. D. 1409 the eunuch Cheng-Ho notified the imperial command that Malacca was raised to the rank of a (Feudatory) kingdom and presented, in the name of the Emperor, to its head chief a silver seal, a cap and official robes and declared him king; on this it ceased to be a dependency of Siam. The king, taking with him his wife and son, proceeded to the capital (of China) to express his thanks for being allowed to offer tribute. The emperor granted him a ship to return to his country". (Rockhill—T'oung Pao, Serie II, Vol. XVI, p. 114 and fn. 1)

v2.c14.t4.24

Pelliot places the mission of Cheng Ho in 1408 A. D. (T'oung Pao, 1933, pp. 277ff.).

v2.c14.t4.25

succeed him and presented with gold and silks. After this time they brought tribute every year or every two years.

v2.c14.t4.26

'In 1419 the king came to court with his wife, his son and his ministers. He reported that Siam seemed inclined to attack his country and the emperor accordingly sent an order to Siam which that country obeyed.

v2.c14.t4.27

'In 1424 Sri ma-ha-la succeeded after the death of his father, and came to court with his wife, his son and his ministers.

v2.c14.t4.28

'In the year 1431 three envoys arrived, who said that Siam was planning an attack on their country. The emperor sent a decree to the king of Siam, ordering him to live in good harmony with his neighbours, and not to act against the orders of the court.

v2.c14.t4.29

'In 1433 the king came to court with his wife, his son and his ministers. In 1435 he sent his younger brother to court with tributes.

v2.c14.t4.30

'In 1445 envoys arrived who asked that the king Sri Pa-mi-si-wa-r-tiu-pa-sha might obtain a commission for ruling the country.

v2.c14.t4.31

'In 1456 Sulthan Wu-ta-fu-na-sha sent tribute and asked to be invested as king.

v2.c14.t4.32

'In 1459 this king's son Su-tan Wang-su-sha sent envoys to bring tribute.

v2.c14.t4.33

'In 1481 envoys reported to the emperor that the Annamese who had occupied Champa meditated the conquest of Malacca.

v2.c14.t4.34

'Some time afterwards the emperor sent two officers with a commission to invest the son of the late king Ma-ha-mu-sa as king of the country.

v2.c14.t4.35

'In 1508 an envoy came to present tribute.

v2.c14.t4.36

'Afterwards the Franks (Portuguese) came with soldiers and conquered the country. The king Sultan Mamat ran away and sent envoys to inform the imperial government of this disaster. The Emperor issued a decree upbraiding the Franks, told them to go back to their own country and ordered the kings of Siam and other countries to assist their neighbour in this need; none of these obeyed, however, and so the kingdom of Malacca was destroyed.’

First 164 of 465 passages. Read on

Linked texts (11)