Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T00:41:30.839Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Khmer Empire and the Malay Peninsula

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2011

Lawrence Palmer Briggs
Lawrence Palmer Briggs
Affiliation:
Washington, D. C.
Get access

Extract

A. The peninsula before the conquests by Funan. The first known contact of the Khmer Empire or any of its antecedents with what is now called the Malay Peninsula1 occurred when Fan Shih-man of Funan conquered a considerable portion of that peninsula early in the third century; although it is believed, from the terms in which the account of his voyage are expressed, that Hun-t'ien, or Hun-shen (Kaundinya), who conquered the native queen, Liu-yeh (Willow Leaf), and founded the kingdom of Funan about the middle of the first century, came from an Indian settlement on the eastern side of that peninsula.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , May 1950 , pp. 256 - 305
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1950

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

* Mr. Briggs is a specialist on the Indochinese Peninsula, especially Cambodia. He has published numerous articles in the Quarterly, Journal of the American Oriental Society, T'oung pao, and other scholarly journals. His book, The Ancient Khmer Empire, is to be published in the near future.

1 The term Malay Peninsula as used in this article means the peninsula from where it sets out from the mainland in about 15° 30 N. latitude.

2 Pelliot, Paul, “Quelques textes chinois concernant l'Indochine hindouisée,” Etudes asiatiques (Paris, 1925), 2:243–49 (hereafter EA).Google Scholar

3 Cooper-Cole, Fay, The people of Malaysia (New York, 1945), 4–5, 46-47Google Scholar; Kroeber, A. L., Anthropology (New York, 1923), 46–48, 486.Google Scholar

4 Pater P. W. Schmidt considers the Sakai, like the Nicobarese of the near-by islands, as speaking an Austro-Asiatic language, earlier and less developed than Mon-Khmer; “Les peuples Mon-Khmers,” Bulletin de I'Ecole Française d'Extrême-Orient (hereafter BEFEO), 7 (1907), 213-63, and Die sprachfamilien und sprachenkreise der erde (Heidelberg, 1926), 135-40.

5 For a discussion of the racial and language affinities of the Semangs and the Sakai, see Skeat, W. W. and Blagden, C. O., Pagan races of the Malay Peninsula (London and New York, 1906), 1:19–31; 2:466-72.Google Scholar

6 Coedès, George, Les états hindouisés d'Indochine et d'lndonésie (Paris, 1948), 72.Google Scholar

7 Coedès, , “Le royaume de Crivijaya,” BEFEO, 18, no. 6 (1918), 11–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 Pelliot, , “Le Fou-nan et les théories de M. Aymonier,” BEFEO, 4 (1904), 406–08.Google Scholar

9 Gerini, G. E., Researches in Ptolemy's geography of Eastern Asia (Further India and the Malay Peninsula). Asiatic monographs, no. 1 (London, 1909), 92–93.Google Scholar

10 Gerini, 92.

11 Sylvain Levi, “Ptolemée, La Niddesa et la Brhatkatha,” EA, 2:26; Coedès, “Le royaume de Crivijaya,” 15-18.

12 Wales, H. G. Quaritch, “Archeological researches on ancient Indian colonization in Malaya,” Journal of the Malayan Branch, Royal Asiatic Society, 18, no. 1 (1940), 1–17, 67-68; Coedès, Etats hindouisés, 72-73.Google Scholar

13 When French translations of Chinese are quoted in English, the Chinese names are transcribed according to the Wade-Giles system.

14 Pelliot, , “Le Fou-nan,” BEFEO, 3 (1903), 266. Tien-sun is another orthography for Tunhsün.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15 Ibid., 266, note 2.

16 Luce, G. H., “Countries neighboring Burma,” Journal of the Burma Research Society (hereafter JBRS), 14, part 2(1924), 144–45Google Scholar. The most probable identification of Ch′ü-tu-k′un, or Tu-k′un seems to be Tun-hsün, in spite of the mention of both in the same paragraph of the Liang shu. The Liang shu says that Tu-k′un is noted for its perfumes (hsiang). A Chinese work cited by Berthold Laufer says that only Tu-k′un produces a particular perfume called ho-hsiang (Journal asiatique, 115, no. 12 (1918), 26). Laufer cites other Chinese texts to show that the ho-hsiang is found at Tun-hsiin and shows how the name Tu-k′un could easily be a corruption of Tun-hsün (ibid., 27-28). R. A. Stein (who calls it Ch′ü-tu), from an intimate study of Chinese documents, identifies it with Kattigara and locates it near Baria, on the coast of what is now Cochinchina (Coedès, , Etals hindouisSs, 71; Briggs, review of Coedès in Far Eastern Quarterly, 8 [May 1949], 374-76. The author has not examined Stein's argument, but does not see how it can be reconciled with the statement of the Chinese that both Ch′ü-tu-k′un and Tun-hs′n were 3,000 li south of Funan, and with other information.Google Scholar

17 Pelliot, ”Le Fou-nan,” 266, note 3.

18 S. Levi, “Deux peuples méeonnus: (1) Les Merundes,” Mélanges Charles de Harlez (Leyde, 1896), 177; Luce, 145-46; Pelliot, BEFEO, 4(1904), 386.

19 Pelliot, “Le Fou-nan,” 263.

20 For the various trans-isthmian routes and modern Mergui-Tenasserim, see Anderson, John, English intercourse with Siam in the seventeenth century (London, 1890), 5–8.Google Scholar

21 Coedés, , ”The excavations of P′ong Tük and their importance for the ancient history of Siam,” Journal of the Siam Society (hereafter JSS), 21, part 13 (1928), 195–209Google Scholar; Wales, , “Further excavations of P′ong Tuk,” Indian arts and letters, 10(1936), 42–48.Google Scholar

23 Briggs, Lawrence Palmer, “Dvāravatī, the most ancient kingdom of Siam,” Journal of the American Oriental Society (hereafter JAOS), 65(1945), 99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23 Said to be of the fifth century; Luce, 149.

24 Luce thinks K′un-lun here probably represents the old Khmer Kurung, which, he says, means “king, regent”; he quotes Pelliot (BEFEO [1904], 228-30). This is apparently true; but it scarcely accounts for the frequency with which the king and people of this region are called K′un-lun.

25 Pelliot thinks the term hu means merchants, to distinguish them from Brahmans.

26 Pelliot, “Le Fou-nan,” 279-80.

27 W. P. Groeneveldt, “Notes on the Malay Archipelago and Malacca,” in Rost, R., Miscellaneous papers relating to Indo-China and the Indian Archipelago (London, 1887), 1:240.Google Scholar

28 Luce, 169, note 1.

29 Pelliot, “Le Fou-nan,” 269.

30 Maspero, G., Le royaume de Champa (Paris, 1928), 71, note 4; Coedès, Etats hindouisés, 97.Google Scholar

31 Ma Touan-lin, Ethnographie des peuples étrangères à la Chine…méridionaux, traduit du Chinois par le Marquis d'Hervey de Saint-Denys (Paris, 1883), 464.

32 Ma Touan-lin, 466. Luce translates this sentence: “Aloes and camphor are especially abundant” (p. 163).

33 Ma Touan-lin, 464.

34 Luce, 170-71.

35 Ma Touan-lin, 463-64.

36 Ma Touan-lin, 477.

37 Pelliot, “Le Fou-nan et les théories de M. Aymonier,” 405.

38 Ma Touan-lin, 465.

39 Ibid., 471-75.

40 Rosny, Leon de, Les peuples orientaux connus des ancienne chinois (Paris, 1886), 198.Google Scholar

41 Pelliot, “Le Fou-nan et les théories of M. Aymonier,” 389.

42 Luce, 173. Ho-lo-tan may be Ho-ling in Java, although Rosny (199, note) suggests Kelantan. The other places mentioned are not identified and are probably not on the peninsula.

43 Ma Touanlin, 469.

44 Ma Touan-lin, 471-75; Luce, 173-75; Rosny, 205-12.

45 Abel-Rémusat, J. B., “Notice chronologique sur le pays du Tchin-la,” in Nouveaux mélanges asiatiques (2 vols., Paris, 1829), 2:78, noteGoogle Scholar; Aymonier, E., Le Cambodge (Paris, 1904), 3: 349Google Scholar; Pelliot, , “Le Fou-nan,” 272; Rosny, 197-221, 252, 254; Hirth and Rockhill, Chau Ju-kua (see note 88), 8.Google Scholar

46 May, R. S. Le, A concise history of Buddhist art in Siam (Cambridge, 1938), 55–56.Google Scholar

47 See especially the recent archeological finds of H. G. Q. Wales, note 12.

48 Chhabra, B. Ch., “Expansion of Indo-Aryan culture during Pallava rule, as evidenced by the inscription,” Asiatic Society of Bengal, journal and proceedings, 1, no. 1 (1935), 16–20; R. C. Majumdar, Suvarnadviīpa (Calcutta, 1937-38), 82, 89-90.Google Scholar

49 Pelliot, , ”Deux itinéraires de Chine en Inde à la fin du viii siécle,” BEFEO, 4(1904), 231, note 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

50 Chhabra, 18; Luce, 178; Coedès, Etats hindouisés, 89. Majumdar would put Raktamrittikā in India; Majumdar, 82-83.

51 This name does not occur elsewhere. Rosny thought (p. 221) that Ma Tuan-lin abridged his Po-li-lo-cha to Po-lo-cha. Pelliot has pointed out (BEFEO [1904], 398) that Aymonier thought this might be the Po-lo-sa, which the Sui shu placed to the west of Ch′ih-t′u; and as they all thought Ch′ih-t′u was in the Menam valley, Po-li-lo-cha was naturally placed in the Meklong valley to the west of it. The presumed mission from Po-li-lo-cha during the period 627-49 was probably identical with that from To-ho-lo in 638.

52 Rosny, 198.

53 Luce, 179-80; Pelliot, “Deux itinéraires,” 360. note 1.

54 Luce, 180, note 3.

55 Lang-yahsiu probably included the Chantabun (Chanthaburi) region, or at least the northern part of it, to the border of Funan; for we are told that its east-west extent was one and a half times its north-south extent. But three inscriptions early in the seventh century-one of which mentions Isānavarman of Chenla (about 610-635)-found near Chantabun (BEFEO [1924], 352-58), indicate that this region-or at least the southeast part of it-had probably been absorbed by Chenla.

56 Beal, Samuel, Su-yu-ku. Buddhic records of the Western world, translated from the Chinese of Tsiang, Hsuen (London, 1884), 2:200.Google Scholar

57 Takakusu, J., A record of the Buddhist religion, as practised in India and the Malay Archipelago (A.D. 671-695), by I-Tsing (Oxford, 1896), 9.Google Scholar

58 Chavannes, Edouard, Mémoire composé àpoque de la grande dynastie T′ang sur les religieux éminents qui allèrent chercher la loi dans les pays d′occident, par I-tsing (Paris, 1894).Google Scholar

59 Chavannes, 69 and note; Luce, 179.

60 Pelliot, “Deux itineraires,” 222-23.

61 Coedès, , Recueil des inscriptions du Siam: (2) Inscriptions de Dvāravatī, de Crīvijaya et de Lavo (Bangkok, 1929), 1–4, 15, 17-19, 33; Pierre Dupont, “Art siamois les écoles,” Bulletin de la Commission Archéologique de I'Indo-chine (hereafter BCAI), 1931-34, 51.Google Scholar

62 The Mons of Burma are called Talaings.

63 Coedès, , “La extension du Cambodge vers la sudouest au vii siécle,” BEFEO, 24(1924), 352–58.Google Scholar

64 Rosny, 220-21.

65 Beal, 2:200, note 33.

66 Chavannes, 203; for the Siamese custom of incorporating the name of a capital into that of the succeeding capital, see Coedès, , Etats hindouisés, 369, and Briggs, “The Hinduized states of Southeast Asia: a review,” Far Eastern Quarterly, 7 (August 19-18), 390-91.Google Scholar

67 Aymonier, , “Le Siam ancien,” Journal Asiatique, 105 (March-April 1903), 229–30.Google Scholar

68 Gerini, 176.

69 Pelliot, “Deux itinéraires,” 227.

70 Briggs, “Dvāravatī,” 103.

71 Coedés, , Recueil des inscriptions du Siam, 2:1–4Google Scholar; Coedés, , “Les collectiones archéologiques du Musée National de Bangkok,” Ars asiatica, no. 12 (Paris, 1928), 19–36Google Scholar; Coedès, , “The excavations at P′ong Tük,” JSS, 31, part 3(1938), 195–210Google Scholar; Briggs, “Dvāravatī,” 106; Coedès, , Etats hindouisés, 131–32.Google Scholar

72 Chavannes, 105, 117-21, 125, 144, 158.

73 Ibid., 105.

74 A few years ago, Chavannes edited and published the two oldest Chinese maps. They were dated 1137 A.D. AS a preliminary to this work, he made an inquiry into the development of Chinese cartography. He found that, at the end of the eighth century, Chia Tan, “the most celebrated cartographer of the T′ang dynasty” (Chung-kuo jen-ming ta tz′u-tien [1933], 1331.2, says he was Prime Minister), was ordered by the emperor to make a general map of China. In 801, he completed his work, called, “A map of China and the barbarians within the seas.” It was an enormous product, 30 feet long and 33 feet high. (A Chinese foot at that time is said to be equivalent to 10 inches.) This gigantic work is said to have disappeared without leaving any trace (Chavannes, E., “Les deux plus anciennes specimens de la cartographie chinoise,” BEFEO, 3[1903], 244–45). But the Hsin T′ang shu has preserved, in a form perhaps a little abridged, a short geographical memoir prepared by Chia Tan. This memoir is in the form of a series of itineraries from China to Korea, Central Asia, India and Baghdad. Chavannes made use of a part of the itinerary to Central Asia. Pelliot used and commented on the two to India (Pelliot, “Deux itineraires,” 131-132).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

75 Pelliot, “Deux itineraires,” 372-73.

76 Pelliot suggests one of the Brouwers' islands; ibid., 349.

77 Wales, “Archeological researches,” 2, note 12.

78 Pelliot, , “Deux itinéraires,” 350; Ma Touan-lin, 414-16; Luce, 183-84. Groeneveldt (241) says its customs were like those of Ch′ih-t′u. Luce says they were like those of Ch′ih-t′u and To-ho-lo.Google Scholar

79 Groeneveldt, 241; Gustav Schlegel (T′oung pao [hereafter TP], 9[1898], 369) identifies Kora Besar with Malacca.

80 Gerini, 105-06.

81 Ferrand, G., “Le Kouen-Louen et les anciennes navigations interoceaniques dans les mers du sud” JA, 115(1919), 237.Google Scholar

82 Ibid., 237.

83 Luce, 182, 185, 179-80.

84 Pelliot, “Deux itinéraires,” 360, note 1.

85 Ferrand, 234.

86 Luce, 183, thought the statement of the Hsin T′ang shu that Kalasapura was southeast of P′an-p′an was an error for southwest (but see above).

87 Pelliot, “Deux itinéraires,” 232; Luce, 186-87.

88 Pelliot, Review of Hirth and Rockhill's translation of Ju-kua′s, ChauChu-fan ch′i, TP, 12(1912), 455.Google Scholar

89 Coedès, “Le royaume de Çrīvijaya,” 15.

90 Review of the history of religion, 34(1896), 51–52.Google Scholar

91 Pelliot, Review of Chau Ju-kua′s Chu-fan-chϊ, 454-55; Pelliot, “Deux itinéraires,” 324 ff.

92 Ferrand, , L′empire sumatranais de Çrīvijaya (Paris: Paul Geuthner, 1922), 157–62; Chavannes, Mémoire…par I-tsing, 119, 125Google Scholar; Coedès, , ”Inscriptions malaises de Çrīvijaya,” BEFEO, 31 (1931), 29–80; Coedès, Etats hindouisés, 141-48.Google Scholar

93 Takakusu, xxv, xlvii, 10-11; Chatterjee, B. R., India and Java (Calcutta, 1933), 2:20–40; Chhabra, 31-37Google Scholar; Pelliot, , “Deux itinéraires,” 225Google Scholar; Krom, N. J., Hindoe-Javaansche geschiedenis (The Hague, 1931), 102–09, 123-27; R. C. Majumdar, Suvarnadvīpa, 103-15, 233-54; Coedès, Etats hindouisés, 136-39, 152-61.Google Scholar

94 Maspero, G., Champa, 97–104.Google Scholar

95 Coedès, , Receuil des inscriptions du Siam, 2:35–39.Google Scholar

96 Vogel, J. P., “Het Koninkrijk Śrīvijaya,” Bijdragen tot de taal-, land- en volhenkunde van Nederlandisch-lndie (hereafter BKI) (1919), 629–37; Majumdar, Suvamadvīpa, 150-52.Google Scholar

97 Majumdar, R. C., “Les rois Śailendras de Suvarnadvīpa,” BEFEO, 33(1933), 120–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

16 See note 94.

99 Briggs, , “A sketch of Cambodian history,” Far Eastern Quarterly, 6 (August 1947), 349–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

100 Ferrand, , L'empire sumatranais, 52–63.Google Scholar

101 Twenty-five years later (943), Masudi says the empire of the Maharaja, which is Sribuza, has extended its domination over all the sixth sea, or sea of Champa; see also Masudi's statement in the paragraph above.

102 In the middle of the thirteenth century, the kingdom of Sribuza seems to have corresponded to the early kingdom of Zābag, for Ibn Said says its area was 160 by 400 miles and gives its latitude as 3° 40′, approximately that of Palembang (Ferrand, 70-71).

103 Ferrand, 50, note 1; “(Kalāh-bar) = literally, the maritime country of Kalāh = Kera, or Kra, on the west side of the Malay peninsula.”

104 Coedès, , Etats hindouisés, 183–86, 214-20; Pelliot, “Deux itinéraires,” 286.Google Scholar

105 Lawrence Palmer Briggs, “The origin of the Śailendra dynasty. Present state of the question,” to appear in JAOS, June 1950; Coedès, ibid.

106 In 904-07, according to Chau Ju-kua′s Chu-fan-chϊ; in 905, according to the Sung shih (Ferrand, L′empire sumatranais, 14, 17).

107 San-fo-ch′i was apparently a later Chinese name of the empire of Shih-li-fo-shih (Śrivi-jaya); but the capital of the kingdom of Malayu (Jambi), instead of that of the state of Śrivi-jaya (Palembang), may at times have been at the head of the empire of San-fo-ch′i.

108 Ferrand, op. cit., 17-22, 162-68.

109 Tamil inscriptions, dated by Coedes in the 5-6th and 7-9th centuries and in the epoch of the Chola dynasty, have been found at or near the ancient sites of Tambralinga and Takola. They have been noted by Aymonier (Le Cambodge, 2:76), who thought they were Sanskrit; by Finot (BCAI [1910], 147-63; [1912], 157-61), and by Coedès, who translated them into French (Inscriptions du Siam, 2:55, 49-50, 57-59).

110 The inhabitants of Chenla (not Funan) are said by their legends to have been the real Kambuja, or Khmers (Coedès, , “La site primitif de Tchen-la,” BEFEO, 18[1918], 1–3.Google Scholar

111 Maspero, G., ”La géographie politique de I′Indochine aux environs de 960 A.D.” Etudes asiatiques, 2:79–125.Google Scholar

112 Ma Touan-lin, 484-85.

113 G. Maspero, op. cit., 80.

114 Briggs's, review of Coedès's history of the Hinduized states of southeast Asia, Far Eastern Quarterly, 7 (August 1948), 377, and Briggs, “Dvāravatī,” 105–06.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

115 Ma Touan-lin, 487-88.

116 Gerini, 524, note.

117 Pelliot, , “Mémoires sur les coutumes du Cambodge, par Tcheou Ta-kouan,” BEFEO, 2 (1902), 125Google Scholar. In 1178, Chantabun may have been an integral part of Cambodia, which it seems to have remained until the Siamese conquest of the lower Menam (Briggs, , “Siamese attacks on Angkor before 1430,” Far Eastern Quarterly 8[Nov. 1948], 4–6); but in 960, it seems to have been a dependency.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

118 Hirth, F. and Rockhill, W. W., Chau Ju-kua: his work on the Chinese and Arab trade of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, entitled Chu-fan-chϊ (St. Petersburg, 1911), 56, note 10Google Scholar; Pelliot, , “Mémoires,” 173.Google Scholar

119 Coedès, , Etats hindouisés, 251Google Scholar; Coedès, , “Documents sur l'histoire politique et religieuse du Laos occidental,” BEFEO, 25 (1925), 23–25, 80, 158 (hereafter “Laos occidental”); C.Notton, Annales du Siam, chronique de La-p'un (Paris, 1926) 34–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

120 Ma Touan-lin, 584.

121 Barth, A., Inscriptions sanscrites du Cambodge (Académic des Inscriptions et BellesLettres: Notices et extraites des manuscrites [Paris, 1885]): 15. Prea Kev A, st 10, and 17. Lovek, st 1.Google Scholar

122 Coedès, , “Etudes cambodgiennes: 5. Un inscription d'Udayādityavarman,” BEFEO, 11 (1911), 400–04.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

123 Coedès, , ”Ta Kev: 3, epigraphie,” BEFEO, 34(1934), 420–27.Google Scholar

124 Pierre Dupont believes Sūryavarman's campaign against Yaśodharapura (Angkor) was made from Korat, apparently after the conquest of Louvo. “La dislocation du Chenla et la formation du Cambodge angkorien (vii-ix siècle),” BEFEO, 43 (1943), 72.Google Scholar

125 Nothing has been known of either Udayādityavarman or Jayavīravarman before they came to the throne of Cambodia nor of their ultimate fate. In a recent study, the eminent Dutch scholar, Dr. F. D. K. Bosch, has advanced the very reasonable theory that Udayādityavarman was Udāyana of Bali; that through fear for her sons, the infant Narapativīravarman and the unborn Udayādityavarman, their mother fled to East Java about 970, where her sons grew up and the younger married Mahendradattā, became the father of a son, Airlangga, who was to become one of the great kings of Java; that with Mahendradattā, Udāyana ruled Bali from 889 to 1001, when the death of Jayavarman V called him to the throne of Cambodia; that after he abandoned that throne he returned to Bali and again ruled that island from 1011 to 1022 (Bosch, “De laatste der Pandawa's,” BKI [1948], 541-71). The writer of this article believes that Jayavīravarman was Narapativiravarman and that after his defeat by Sūryavarraan I in 1010 or 1011, he too returned to Bali, helped his brother regain his throne and, under the name of Norottama, became the great minister of his nephew, Airlangga (see the author's The ancient Khmer Empire, soon to appear).

126 Coedès, , “L′extension du Cambodge vers le sudouest au vii siècle,” BEFEO, 24 (1924), 352–58.Google Scholar

127 Coedès, , “Une nouvelle inscription d'Ayuthya,” Journal of the Thailand Research Society, 35, pt. 1 (1944), 73–76; Dupont thinks this inscription refers to the dynasty of Bhavapura, who presumably were vassals of Cambodia ruling in the upper Mun valley (Dupont, 46). The author of this article prefers the former view.Google Scholar

128 The conquest of the Menam valley is placed after that of Cambodia by this writer, chiefly because the Pali chronicle relating the account of it says Sūryavarman was called Kambojarāja “because of his previous exploits (deeds?)” (see note 131).

129 The term Śrī Dharmarāja nagara was not applied to Tambralinga until the inscription of Rama Khamheng in 1292, although Śrī Dharmarāja was applied to Chandrabhānu in the inscription of Jaiya of 1230 (Coedès, , Recueil du inscriptions du Siam, 2:41–43); the Pali chronicle containing the above account is dated 1516.Google Scholar

130 Coedès, , “Laos occidental” BEFEO, 25 (1925), 23–25, 80.Google Scholar

131 Ibid., 159.

132 Coedès, , Etats hindouisés, 244–45Google Scholar; Krom, N. J., Hindoe-Javaansche geschiedenis, 241–42.Google Scholar

133 The Sung shih mention embassies from San-fo-ch′i in 1003 and 1008, sent by kings whose names correspond to those given above. See Coedès, , “Le royaume de Çrīvijaya,” BEFEO, 18, no. 6 (1918), 1–16, especially 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

134 Sastri, K. A. Nilakanta, The Colas (Madras, 1935), 1:142–290Google Scholar; Sastri, , “Śrī Vijaya,” BEFEO, 40(1940), 280–85Google Scholar; Aiyer, K. V. Subramanya, ”The larger Leyden plates of Rājarāja I,” Epigraphia Indica, 22(1933-1934), 213–66; Coedès, op. cit., 5Google Scholar; Majumdar, R. C., Suvarnadv012B;pa, 167–90.Google Scholar

135 Coedès, , Etats hindouisés, 242.Google Scholar

136 E. Hultzsch, South Indian inscriptions: Tamil inscriptions of Rājarāja, Rājendrachola and others, in the Rājarājeśvara temple at Tanjavur (Tanjore), 2, pt 1, no. 20, Ins. of Rājendrachola, 108-9; Ferrand, , L′empire sumatranais, 44–45; Śastri, “Śri Vijaya,” 289.Google Scholar

137 Ma Touan-lin, 586.

138 Aiyer, , “The smaller Leiden plates of Kulōttunga I,” Epigraphia Indica, 22 (1933-1934), 267–84.Google Scholar

139 Majumdar, , Suvamadvīpa, 183–87Google Scholar; Aiyangar, S. Krishnarvamin, “Rājendra, the Gangakonda Chola,” Journal of Indian history, 2(1922-1923), 317–69.Google Scholar

140 Sastri, , The Colas, 2:1–160.Google Scholar

141 Groeneveldt, 190-91.

142 Hirth and Rockhill, 52-57, 37.

143 ibid., 53.

144 Dupont, Pierre, “Le Buddha de Grahi et l′École de C′aiya,” BEFEO, 42 (1942), 103–08; Coedès, Inscriptions du Siam, 2:45.Google Scholar

145 Hirth and Rockhill, 56; Ma Touan-lin, 487-88. It was not unusual, in giving these directions, to say that two countries bounded each other when a body of water intervened.

146 Coedès, , “La stele de Palhal,” BEFEO, 13, no. 6(1913), 12–15Google Scholar; Coedès, , Un grand rot du Cambodge: Jayavarman VII (Phnom Penh, 1935), 11Google Scholar; Coedès, , “Quelques suggestions sur la methode à suivre pour interpreter les bas-reliefs de Bantay Chmar et la galerie intérieure du Bayon,” BEFEO, 37(1937), 80, note 1Google Scholar; Majumdar, R. C., Champa (Lahore, 1927), pt. 3, 203.Google Scholar

147 Pelliot, , “Mémoires,” BEFEO, 2(1902), 172–73.Google Scholar

148 Pelliot, , “Deux itinéraires,” 241–43; Briggs, “The appearance and historical usage of the terms Tai, Thai, Siamese and Laotian,”JAOS (1949), 71, 72. The Sung shih mentions Lo-hu and Lo-hua as twenty-five stops northeast of Tan-mei-liu (Pelliot, “Deux itinéraires.” 233).Google Scholar

149 Aymonier, Le Cambodge, 3:528.

150 Ma Touan-lin, 441, 485, note 48; Pelliot, “Deux itinéraires,” 212 and note 7.

151 Coedès, , Receuil des inscriptions du Siam, 2:6, 45–47.Google Scholar

152 Majumdar protests-with some reason, it seems to this author-that these names and titles are not necessarily exclusive to Malāyu and that it cannot be assumed that this king was of a Malāyu line simply because a Malayan king of the same name existed a century or more later (Suvarnadvīpa, 195-96).

153 Pelliot, “Deux itinéraires,” 233.

154 Hirth and Rockhill, 53, 56, 67-68.

155 Ma Touan-lin, 583-85.

156 Pelliot, “Deux itineraires,” 233.

157 Schlegel, G., “Geographical notes” TP (1901), 130; Gerini, 601; Hirth and Rockhill, 68.Google Scholar

158 Coedès, “Le royaume de Çrīvijaya,” 16.

159 Śastri, , “Śri Vijaya,” BEFEO, 40 (1940), 273.Google Scholar

160 L. P. Briggs, “Śailendra dynasty,” to appear in JAOS, June 1950.

161 Hirth and Rockhill, 65, 66, note 18.

162 Hirlh and Rockhill, 71-72.

163 Coedès, , Inscriptions du Siam, 2:6, 45.Google Scholar

164 Groeneveldt, 191.

165 Hirth and Rockhill, 23.

166 L. C. Wijesinha [L. C. Nijayasimka], The Mahavamia (Ceylon, 1889), ch. 83, p. 282, ch. 88, pp. 305-06; Geiger, W., Culāvamsa, being the more recent part of the Mahavamśa (London, 1929), 2:151–52.Google Scholar

167 Kern, H., “Twee krijgstoehten uit des Indischen Archipeltegen Ceilon,” BKI, 46(1896), 240–45.Google Scholar

168 Rouffaer, F. P., “Was Malaka emporium voor 1400 A.D. genaamd Malagoen…” BKI, 77(1921), 259–604.Google Scholar

169 Ferrand, G., “L'empire sumatranais,” 172–73.Google Scholar

170 Krom, N. J., “De ondergang van Çrīvijaya.” Mededeslingen der Koninklijhe Akademie van Wetenschappen-afdeeling letterkunde, Serie A, 58 (1925), 149–69.Google Scholar

171 The belief that Chandrabhānu was killed rested on the statement of the inscription of the tenth year (1264 A.O.) of the reign of Jatāvarman Vīra-Pāndya (a Pandya king of south India) that that king took “the crown and the crowned head of the Sāvaka (Jāvaka) king” (Ferrand, L'empire sumatranais, 48).

172 Coedès, G., “A propos de la chute du royaume de Çrīvijaya,” BKI, 83 (1927), 459–72.Google Scholar

173 Majumdar, Suvarnadvlpa (Dacca, 1937), bk. 2, ch. 3 and Appendix.

174 Śastri, K. A. Nilakanta, “Śrīvijaya, Chandrabhānu and Vīra-Pāndya,” Tijdschrift voor Indische taal-, land- en volkenkunde, 77 (1937) 251–68.Google Scholar

175 Śastri, , The Pāndyan kingdom (London, 1929).Google Scholar

176 ŚrīVijaya, Śastri,” BEFEO, 40 (1940) 297–98.Google Scholar

177 G. Coedès, Etats hindouisés, 309-11, 301. The author of this article adds another argument to support the belief that from about this period, Srlvijaya was not completely in control of the west coast of the Bandon region: The Ling-wai-tai ta (1178) says Chenla was bounded on the south by Grahi, which seems to imply that Grahi, which was in the hands of Chandrabānu in 1230, extended across the peninsula at this time.

178 Briggs, “The appearance and historical usage of the terms Tai, Thai, Siamese and Lao,” JA OS (1949), 71.

179 Briggs, in his “A sketch of Cambodian history,” Far Eastern Quarterly, 6 (August 1947), 353Google Scholar, thinks Jayavarman VII died about 1215, basing his opinions largely on the disastrous campaigns in Champa and Annam in 1216 and 1218. Recent investigations of Coedès lead him to fix the date of his death at 1218 or 1219. “L'année de la Lièvre, 1219, A.D.,” India antigua (Leyden, 1947), 83-87; Coedès, , Etats hindouisés, 318–19.Google Scholar

180 Probably the governor of the old dependent state of San-lo.

181 Coedès, , “Les origines de la dynastie de Sukhodaya,” JA (13), 1920; 233-45.Google Scholar

182 Coedès now thinks Indrāditya came to the throne about 1220 (Etats hindouisés, 328).

183 Briggs, “Tai, Thai, etc.” 67; Ney Elias, Introductory sketch of the history of the Shans (Calcutta, 1876), 17-20.

184 Coedès, , “Laos Occidentales,” BEFEO, 25(1925), 98–99.Google Scholar

185 Coedès, Inscriptions du Siam, 1:44; Bradley, C. B., “The oldest known writing in Siamese,” JSS, 6, pt. 1 (1909), 25–26.Google Scholar

186 Burnay, J. and Coedés, G., “The origins of the Sukhodaya script,” JSS, 21, pt. 2 (1927), 87–102.Google Scholar

187 Coedès thinks the latter part of the inscription, enumerating the regions conquered, may have been a postscript added a little later than the rest of the inscription and that all these conquests may not have taken place before 1292.

188 Coedès, quoting Dutch documents, says that, in 1275, taking advantage of the decline of Śrīvijaya, Kritinagara of Singhasari (Java) sent an expedition which established Javanese suzerainty over Malāyu and some places in the Malay peninsula (Etats hindouisés, 332). He also says that this expedition was contemporary with the Tai expedition which Mon documents allude to before 1280 (ibid., 338; Blagden, C. O., “The empire of the Mahārāja,” JRAS, Straits branch, 81 [1920] 25).Google Scholar

189 Pelliot, ”Deux itinéraires,” 242.

190 Briggs, “Tai, Thai, etc.,” 72.

191 Pelliot, “Mémoires,” 131.

192 Briggs, , “Siamese attacks on Angkor before 1430,” Far Eastern Quarterly, 8 (Nov. 1948), 3-6.Google Scholar

193 Pelliot, “Deux itinéraires,” 242-44.

194 Coedés, , Etats hindouisés, 338–41. When Marco Polo passed through this region he says the eight states of Sumatra (which he calls Java Minor) which he enumerates each had a king of its own.Google Scholar