EARLY INDONESIAN COMMERCE

AND

THE ORIGINS OP SRIVIJAYA

O, W. Walters

A/thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

in the University of London

1962
 ProQuest N um ber: 11010441

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is d e p e n d e n t upon the quality of the copy subm itted.

In the unlikely e v e n t that the a u thor did not send a c o m p le te m anuscript

and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if m aterial had to be rem oved,
a n o te will ind ica te the deletion.

uest
ProQuest 11010441

Published by ProQuest LLC(2018). C opyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

All rights reserved.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C o d e
M icroform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1346
 , ■/ ~ X
/V ;
[o' # /\ BI!!!
1
 The origins of the famous maritime empire of Srlvijaya

in southeastern Sumatra, a name first recorded in 671, belong

to the history of early Indonesian commerce^ In the third

century A.D. Ko-yingJ?fV , situated on that coast and

the chief trading kingdom in western Indonesia, was not on

the shipping route between India and China, but in the fifth

century, when southern China depended on overseas trade for

luxury imports, voyages from Indonesia to China had become

habitual. By about A.D. 500 Sumatran pine resin and benzoin

were known to southern Chinese writers as Po-ssu j flg 4 ^

resins, not as Laufer thought because they came from a South

Eaot Asian country transcribed as Po-ssu but because they

were regarded as ’Persian-type’ substituted for frankincense

and myrrh and part of the ’Persian 1 trade in western Asian

produce, which came via western Indonesia to China. The

evidence suggests that Indonesian ships, operating from south­

eastern Sumatra, had obtained a major share in carrying this

merchandise and that, in the fifth and sixth centuries when

the first tributary missions came from Indonesian kingdoms to

China, the leading commercial kingdom on this coast was

Kan-t'o-li ^ VJ

Thus Srlvijaya came to the fore on the coast whose

inhabitants had pioneered Sino-Indonesian trade. To protect

 3,

the commercial intereets which it inherited from the past

Srlvijaya was compelled to forestall the first signs of

competition from ports on the Straits of Malacca* It did

so before the end of the seventh century by dominating the

Straits with its fie t* One of tho main themes of the

subsequent 500 years of Srlvijay&n history is the attempt

to compelt with diminishing success* foreign merchants and

seamen to conform to a system of maritime communications

:vhich had been created by a trading situation older than

Srlvijaya itself*
 CONTENTS

Chapter one

Some problems of SrXvijayan history

Chapter two

Early Asian trade routes and South East Asia

Chapter three

A glimpse of western Indonesia in the third

century A.D.

Chapter four

Early Indonesian trade with India

Chapter five

The development of Asian maritime trade from

fourth to the sixth century

Cha ter six

The vintage texts

Chapter seven

The pine resin of the southern ocean

Chapter eight

The gupgulu of the southern ocean

Chapter nine

The •Persian’ trade

Chapter ten

The shippers of ’Persian’ cargoes

Chapter eleven

The early ’tributary’ kingdoms of western

Indonesia
Chapter twelve

Inhospitable coasts in western Indonesia in the

fifth and sixth centuries A.D* 361
Chapter thirteen

The favoured coast of early Indonesian commerce U16

Chapter fourteen

The heritage and rospects of Srivijaya 501

Appendix A

The Lo yang chla lan chi as a source on ?Co-,ying 5h9

Appendix B

The Chinese ranscriptions of the names of the

tributary kingdoms 55h

Bibliography 556

Map 1 General map of western Indonesia 595

Explanatory note to Map 2 596

Map 2 Maritime tr^de routes of South East Asia

(c • A*D* 250) 597

Explanatory note to Map 3 596

Map j The tributary 1 kingdoms of South East Asia

(A.D. U30 - A.D. 610) 601

Explanatory note to Mar? h 602

Map Western Indonesia in A.D* 695 60U

Map 5 General map of South East Asia 605

CHAPTER ONE

SOME PROBLEMS OP gRTVTJAYAN HISTORY

This study is offered as a contribution to the early

history of western Indonesia* It is an attempt to

describe the economic background to the rise of the

south-eastern Sumatran empire of Srlvijaya in the second

half of the seventh century A.D* This empire played an

important part in medieval Asian trade during its career

of more than five hundred years, andf after its

resurrection by historians in modern times, has become

famous in Indonesian history and especially among

Indonesians, who honour it as a great naval power and the

earliest empire in their national history*

Not the least interesting feature of Srlvijaya is

the suddenness of its appearance and expansion* A

Chinese Buddhist pilgrim, I Tsing, was the first to leave

a record of it when he described his voyage in 671 from

Canton to Palembang, the residence of the Srlvijayan ruler

at that time (l)* Within the twenty-four years when

I Tsing was overseas the kingdom must have become powerful*

Drawing on his knowledge of Indonesia acquired before he

(l) Chavannes, M&moire* 119*

returned to China in 695, the pilgrim states that Kedah on

the western coast of the southern Malay Peninsula was a

dependency of Srlvijaya (l)* By 775 its power was such

that
A
fle roi seigneur de Qrlvijaya, seul roi supreme de
tous les rois de la terre entibre <2)#,

was able to erect some religious buildings near Ligor on

the isthmus of the Malay Peninsula, a meritorious act which

has led historians to infer that the ruler now exercised

authority in that area* Thus, with a port on the Straits

of Malacca and influence further north on the Peninsula,

Srlvijaya within a century of I Tsing1s first reference to

(1) Mftlasary53tlv5da-ekasatakarman. Taishd Tripitaka, vol*

2kf no, 1U5^, kl7o* On his outward voyage in 671-2 I Tsing
gives no hint that Kedah, though used by srlvijayan ships,
was dependent on Srivi^aya, In the Hula •*. he^escribes
the voyage from TamraliptI thusj'fjt ft* $)' >A,
i iff <3% z- Q-
’From here (Tamrallpti) one sails south-eastwards for two
months and reaches Chleh-ch*a (Kedah), This place belongs
to Fo-shih (Srlvijaya)* The time when the ship arrives is
the first or second month1• Takakusu translates the passage
differently: 1sailing from here two months in the south-east
direction we come to Ka-cha. By this time a ship from
Bhoja (the rendering of Fo-shih in 1896) will have arrived
there. This is generally in the first or second month of
the year1; Record, xxxiv, Takakusu may have read the
passage as: 'f&'!&-' X ^ £. = <1
* lfthiB 1belonging to Fo-shihT ship arriving time should be
the first or second month*1, But if I Tsing had wished to
mention a 1Fo-shih ship*, surely he would have used some
expression such aaXt % W S L K a t'\ 1 ^ 4 and not if (% $5.
■1‘J J- * tty amended translation has a bearing on the chrono­
logy of the early 3rlvi;)ayan expansion and I return to it on
page*f^3 , where I translate the whole of the passage in
question. For the identification of Chieh-chfa with Kedah,
see Wheatley, Golden Khersonese, h6-h7, where this
conventional identification is discussed and accepted,
(2) Coed&s 1 translation from the Sanskrit original, fLe
royaume de QrTviJaya*, BEFEO, 18, 1918, 6, 31*
 8*

it had become a much more extensive empire than there is

reason to suppose had ever previously existed in Indonesia#

The rapid expansion of grlvijaya could hardly have

been the result of a casual process# It is more likely

that there were special circumstances favouring the rise

of a maritime empire of these dimensions. It is not

unreasonable to suspect that there was an economic background

in South Bast Asia and perhaps elsewhere in Asia which over

the centuries had been preparing the way for the eventual

triumph of grlvijaya. The purpose of the present study is

to explore that background#

Two reasons for this kind of study have recommended

themselves to me. The first is that, in spite of the fact

that the first century in grlvijayan history is the most

amply documented one and is the only century for which

grlvijayan inscriptions are available, the historian has

been able to establish little more than an Impression of

the power of the kingdom at that time 5 the motives and

policies of its rulers remain a matter for conjecture# The

second reason is that until one knows more of the way

grlvijaya traded at the outset of its career one lacks a

satisfactory background for interpreting later and generally

meagre evidence of its commerce and for measuring the

changes in its activities and fortunes brought about by

the passage of time. Our ignorance of what grlvijaya once

 9

had been is a handicap in assessing in more than general

terms its unquestionably important impact on Indonesia,

No study of the evolution of any empire can be complete

when it is unknown how it originally evolved* Here

perhaps is the chief justification of an attempt to re­

create the past from which Srlvijaya emerged.

For the first century of Srlvijayan history the student,

has at his disposal several important Old-Malay inscriptions

from southern Sumatra and especially from Palembang and

Bangka island* They were issued in tho years 683 - 686.

In addition there are the works of I Tsing. Finally

there is a short account of the kingdom in the Hsin T*ang

shut compiled in the middle of the eleventh century, and

a few references in the early eleventh century Tsfe fu

yuan kuei encyclopaedia to embassies to China between 702

and 742 (l).

Within their narrow limits these sources provide a

remarkably consistent picture of early drlvijaya* The

records of I Tsing and especially some of the technical

expressions in the inscriptions indicate that the ruler was

(1) The reader is referred to Coedbs, *Le royaume de

(Jrlvijaya*, Ferrand, fL fempire >Sumatranais de (Jrtvijaya*,
Nilakanta Sastri, History of Sri Vijaya. and de Casparis,
Frasasti Indonesia. II. 1-46* In the last three chapters
I shall return to~the sources for the first century of
Srivijaya.
 10 .
influenced by Buddhism, probably MahSySna. Again,

Srlvijaya clearly possessed ships; in 672 I Tsing sailed

from Srlvijaya to India in a ship belonging to the ruler

(l), while the Kedukan Bukit inscription from Palembang

in 683 refers to a voyage undertaken, according to

Professor Coedks, by the ruler himself (2). Moreover,

in these years exciting political developments were

happening. I Tsing notes that Malayu, in the Jarobi region

on the south-east coast of Sumatra, *was now Srlvijaya1•

Whatever this mysterious statement means, it certainly

refers to something which happened between 672, when I Tsing

sailed from Malayu to Kedah and India, and 692, when he had

completed the works in which his notes appear (3)* But a

much more definite hint that these were disturbed times is

conveyed by the inscriptions. The undated Telaga Batu

(1) Ta T yang h s l y u ch'lu fa kao sen# chuan. TaishTT Tripitaka,

vol. 51* no* 2066, 7c-8a. The ruler helped him on his way from
Srlvijaya to Malayu. He returned to the,king*s ship at Ke<
(at Srlvijaya)^ Ji-§ £ ^ U L ^ ^ ’
^ ^ ^ See Chavannes, M^mojre. 119
(2) The most recent discussion of this inscription, with its
weather-beaten last syllables, is in de Casparis, Prasasti, II,
12-13. The intention of this journey is still unknown. The
inscription may in fact refer to th&se journeys*
(3) The statement is in the passage quoted in note (1) above.
1 yj, It also appears in Nan hai chi ftuei nel fa chuan. Taishd
Tripitaka, vol. 5U* no. 2123/; Takakusu. Record. 10. This
passage is a note listing Indonesian countries; the list begins
withJ'Barus* in northern Sumatra.- The text is:
% gl n V Mi) ft 5 ijf m For the
acc^ptea^Ldentlrication or Malayu with Jambi see Rouffaer,
?Was Malaka emporium vaor 1U00 A.D. genaamd Malajoer 7 f, Bicjd.
77, 1921, 11-19.
 IX*

inscription of Palembang seems to be an exceptionally

lengthy version of an oath* accompanied by drinking

1imprecation water*, which the ruler*s subjects were

required to take to ensure their obedience (!)• An

abbreviated form of the oath is contained in the undated

Karang Brahi inscription found near a river in the middle

of southern Sumatra and also in the Kota Kapur Inscription

of 686 erected on the island of Bangka (2), The Telaga

Batu oath sets forth a long list of potential or perhaps

real enemies of the Srlvijayan ruler, ranging from *sons

of kings* to washermen and slaves* Naval captains and

merchants were among those regarded as possible traitors*

Evidently the ruler was at that time concerned with the

problem of keeping under control a disturbed realm,

possibly Including recently conquered territories (3)*

There is also, in the Kota Kapur inscription of 686, a

reference to an expedition about to begin against bhumi Java*

which had not submitted to Srlvijaya* It is Dr* de

Casparis* opinion that this campaign, like the magical oath,

was part of the ruler*s effort to maintain a newly won

(1) See de Casparis Prasastl* 11, 15-U6, for a detailed study

of the Telaga Batu inscription.
(2) These inscriptions have been studied by several scholars*
See Coedbs, *Les inscriptions de (Jrtvijaya*, EEFEO. 30, 1930,
29- 60.
(3) I follow Dr. de Casparis* understanding of the back­
ground to these inscriptions; Prasasti* II, 6-7 > 9 note
51, and especially 31-32.
 12

empire ( 1)*

Finally* there are two pieces of evidence which make

it abundantly clear that, in spite of the political

difficulties reflected in the inscriptions, by the second

half of the eighth century Srlvijaya had succeeded in

becoming a c reat empire* The Hsin T*ang shu states that

fSrlvi 3aya is a double kingdom and the two parts have

separate administrations1« The *western kingdom* was

called Lang-p*o-lu-ssu (2 )* hangup *o-lu-ssu is usually

understood to be one of the transcriptions of *Barns* in

the northern half of Sumatra (3)* The date of the

achievement of the *double kingdom* is unknown, but it

is unlikely to have been after 7k2f which was the year of

the last recorded Srlvijayan embassy to China before the

beginning of the tenth century and therefore the last

normal opportunity before then for political intelligence

to reach the Chinese court from Crlvijaya* The other piece

of evidence has already been mentioned* It is the Ligor

inscription found on the isthmus of the tfalay Peninsula

I) Privately communicated to me,

S 2) HTS, 222 f- , 5a: p A
I\
■*«. &
'
G \% 'fk
> *
(3) In chapter/ W m I consider the significance of the
toponym *Barus* which, in my opinion, does not represent
the modern port of Barus oh the north-western coast of
Sumatra,
 13.

and containing a date corresponding to 775* In the same

area, and also further north on the isthmus, have been

found archaeological remains for which has been coined the

term fthe art of SrTvijaya 1 (l).

But this summary of miscellaneous evidence contains

notable gaps* I shall content myself with calling

attention to those gaps which have interested me. The

chief one, of course, is an absence of information about

the impulses which brought Srlvijaya to the fore. Scholars

have drawn on Krom's sketch of the reasons why Palembang,

a harbour state in south-eastern Sumatra, should have come

to control the other harbours on that coast and also on

the Straits of Malacca (2)* Krom emphasized the geogra­

phical advantages enjoyed by these ports as places for

resting and revictualling, available for ships engaged in

the growing trade between India and China, and the

competition which must have existed between harbours with

similar natural advantages. In his opinion the quest for

undisputed sea power in the area inevitably led to the

(1) Coedfes, *Les collections arch^ologiques du Musee National

de Bangkok*• 25•
(2 ) Hindoe-Havaansche geschiedenls, 1931* 110-llU, 120,
Krom amplified considerably Professor Coedes* hints in 1918
in his pioneer study of Srlvijaya, fLe royaume de Crlvijaya1,
25. Professor Coedbs in turn quoted Krom in hes etats
hindouisds. 221, professor Sastri did likewise; History
of Sri Vidays, 37. Ferrand*s important study of Srlvijaya in
1922 threw no new light on the economic aspects of the subject,
 Ik
establishment of a single dominion. He mentioned in

general terms Srlvijaya t6 products but so casually that it

is difficult not to suspect that the picture of the Sumatran

ports as transit centres for Chinese and Indian goods was

foremost in his mind when he reconstructed the basis of

grivijaya's economic power (l). In 1936 he defined the

situation only a little more specifically by adding that

products from 1other isolated parts of the Archipelago 1

were shipped to China and India from these half-way stages

on the Sumatran coast (2).

Kromfs sketch is, I have come to recognise, reliable

as far as it goes. Nevertheless, it remains a statement

of belief which accounts for the rise of Srlvijaya only in

general terms. In particular it evades several questions.

It does not disclose the contents of the trade appearing in

western Indonesian waters and using these harbours. To

v/hat extent, for example, was the transit trade in foreign

goods more important in the seventh century than Indonesian

exports, and what had been the position in the earlier

centuries ? And where were the major foreign markets on

which early Srlvijaya throve ? Were they in India, western

(1) The manner in which this picture has influenced non­

historians writing about South East Asia is Illustrated in
Sokol, 1Communication and Production in Indonesian History1,
and Robequain, Malaya. Indonesia .... 195h. 67#
(2 ) Geschiedenis van Nederlandsch Indie. I , lh-9•
Asia, or China ? Is it possible to be more precise about

the identity of the ships which carried the cargoes and in

particular the extent to which Indonesian ships played a

part in the growth of the harbours ? Finally, why was

Palembang qualified to become the base from which ^rlvijaya

expanded ? Krom contented himself with stipulating as

necessary qualifications protection against its hinterland,

a fHInduisedf society, and a safe river-mouth anchorage*

One geographer, however, has been surprised that Palembang,

some way south of the Straits and without a particularly

rich hinterland, should have become the major entrepot in

the region (1).

A similarly vague definition of the original commercial

power of Srlvijaya is provided by Van Leur, the most

prominent writer in modern times to concentrate on the

economic history of Indonesia. Van Leur was content to

interpret the origins of Srlvijaya in terms of the situation

which obtained in the northern Javanese ports of the 17th

and 18th centuries, when traders from different parts of

Asia operated under the shadow of the ruler and his nobles.

This aristocratic community amassed its wealth from personal

trade, levies on transit trade, war and plunder (2). But

(1) Sion, fSur l fEthnographic de l fIndochine et de

l fInsulinde*, 390-2.
(2) Indonesian trade and society. 105-6. The essays in this
volume arc abbreviated translations of research accomplished
In the 1930ies. Van Leur’s Srlvijayan evidence was in the
form of quotations from much later Chinese sources.
Van Leurfs views are as much a statement of belief as

Krom*s. Neither Krom nor Van Leur take one much further

than Professor Coedfes* inspired statement in his pioneer

study of Srlvijaya In 19181

’S*!! n*a laiss^ qu*un nombre insignlfiant de

monuments arch<5ologiques et £plgraphiques, c ^ s t
apparement que ses rois dtaient plus occup^s h.
surveiller le commerce des Betroits qu* h construire
des temples ou & faire graver leurs pandgyx-iques sur
la pierre (1)*f

In addition to these economic questions there is another

matter on which the records of the first century of Srtvljayan

history have so far provided inconclusive answers. Where

in Indonesia were SrlvIJaya's most important seventh century

neighbours, rivals, and victims ? In the first half of that

century, before records about Srlvijaya begin, several

Indonesian kingdoms were sending tribute to China (2)*

Where were they ? Were they trading centres whose independence

was later extinguished by Srlvljaya ? Can we see in any of

them SrlviJaya's predecessor as the main commercial kingdom

of the region ? Scholars have tended to be fascinated by

the Jig-saw puzzle challenge of the Chinese evidence of

Indonesian toponyms, but in spite of numerous and Ingenious

studies it is still impossible to draw a map of western

Indonesia on which are plotted the kingdoms of the seventh

(1) *Le royaume de Qrlvijaya*, 25*

(2 ) They are discussed in chapters thirteen and fourteen*
 17*

century. Dr* de Casparis has wryly described the

embarrassment or the university teacher in Indonesia when

he has to explain to his students that S h e - p ^ ^ ,

frequently mentioned in Chinese sources, may have been in

Java;Sumatra, or the Malay Peninsula (l).

The vagueness of the economic and political background

to the rise of Srlvljaya is also a handicap in studies of

later periods in the history of the empire, and here, I

suggest, is the chief justification for an examination of

its origins. I came to realise the extent of the handicap

when I once attempted to investigate SrTvijayan history at

the end of the 10th and the beginning of the ilth century.

At that time Srlvijaya, which was sending frequent trading

missions to China, was in conflict with the Javanese and

Tamils* Both groups of enemies claim to have raided its

capital in 992 and about 1025 respectively. What were the

reasons for this tension ? To what extent may the economic

pretensions of Srlvijaya have led to warfare ? Unfortunately,

I could find no convincing statement of Srlvijayan

commercial activities in those years, nor did I have at my

disposal a description of the kind of trading kingdom it

once had been. In these circumstances I felt that I could

not usefully consider whether the belligerency evidently

(1) Historians of South-east Asia, edited by D.G.E. Hall, 15U*

 18.

provoked by Srlvijaya was to some extent the result of* an

old trading policy which was becoming an anchronism,

irritating to foreigners, or of a new and more ambitious

policy which Srlvijaya was devising to meet changed

conditions of trade.

It was when I realised how unsubstantial was our knowledge

of Srlvijayan commerce in about 1000 that I began to take

greater interest in the first century of Srlvi^ayan history

and became aware of the gaps in the evidence to which I hnve

drawn attention. I then went back even further in time, but

only to discover that not merely was there no agreement about

the location of the first kingdoms presumed to be Indonesian

but that there were also sharp differences of opinion about

the handling of the earliest Indonesian foreign trade. The

tradition has grown up thrit foreign rather than Indonesian

shippers and merchants usually played the significant role.

Though in recent years there has been more readiness to believe

that Indonesian ships visited India in ancient times as well

as Indian ships visiting Indonesia, the manner in which trade

was conducted in the centuries immediately preceding the rise

of Srlvijaya has remained a mystery. This was my introduction

to the famous controversy of the Po-ssu >dl Sf'J ships, traders,

and products, a problem to which much of this study ?/ill be

o
devoted. Were the Po-ssu. as Hirth thought, Persian middle­

men operating in South East Asia before the seventh century,

Vi
for Po-ssu was the Chinese transcription of Sassanid Persia
 19.

from the fifth century onwards ? Or was Laufer correct when

he argued that the term then and later sometimes referred to

a South East Asian and probably Indonesian people (l) ? The

Po-ssu problem seemed to me to be a major obstacle to the

understanding of pre-seventh century Indonesia! trade and

therefore to the background to the rise of Srlvijaya. Thus

it was that in the end I decided to make it the basis of a

study of the early commerce of the region*

There has not been much research into Sumatran proto­

history (2), and Srlvijayan studies have tended to look

forward from the time of I Tsing*s visit in 671 rather than

backwards*

The first and Indispensable phase of Crlvi^ayan studies

was that of actually identifying this empire in references

to it contained in several Asian literatures in order to

supply a simple cadre hlstorlque* The first stages of the

process of discovery were by means of Arabic and Chinese

sources, a reflection of the earliest established activities

of European orientalists, and it was only as late as 1918

lj I summarise this controversy in chapter

f2) In addition to a few archaeological reports, I am aware
of only three studies: J* Przyluski, *Indian colonisation in
Sumatra before the seventh century1, JGIS. I, 2, 193^*
92-101j Sir Roland Braddell, *Malayadvipa: a study of early
Indlanisation1, MJTG« 9 # 1956, 1-20$ R. von Heine-Geldern,
*Le pays de P fi-K*ien, le roi au grand cou et le Singa
Mangaradja*, PEFEO. U9# 2, 1959# 36l-UOLu Among the
archaeological literature attention is drawn to A.N.J. Th. h
Th* van der Hoopfs Megallthlc remains in South Sumatra,
Zutphen, 1932, which describes affini ties be tween these
remains and the early metal culture of Tongking*
 20.

that Professor Coedbs was able to bring into play Indonesian

sources and to show that the name of the empire was

Srivijaya (1). Arabist scholars were the first to become

aware of it when Renaudot in l?l8 translated an Arab text

of 851 and brought to light an empire known as ’Zapage* (2).

Langlbs* translation of the same text in 1811 was published

and discussed by Reinaud in l8i+5 (3)# But later in the

19th century the range of source material was greatly

widened as Chinese writings began to be tapped. Julien in

1861, through a study of Chinese transcriptions of Sanskrit

words, reconstructed I Tsing*8 Shlh-li-fo-shih t f-'l <$

as ^rjbhodja (U). In 1876 Groeneveldt identified

a Sung and Minf toponym, with a port

on the Palembang river and suggested that it was the

(1) fLe royaume de Jrlvijaya*. The early interest of

Arabists and Sinologues In Srlvijaya was merely a consequence
of its maritime Importance, acknowledged long before its real
name was known.
(2) Anciennes relations. 75-8* His text was the *Ahbar as*
Sin wa 1-Hlnd. translated by Sauvaget in 19^8.
(jr^eiations des voyages. Reinaud also translated from
Abti Zayd Hasan*s work written about 916. Reinaud1s notes
on fZabedJf may be regarded as the ddbut of Srlvi^aya in
modern scholarship, for he called attention to the important
fact of this vast ’Javanese* empire based on Java and Sumatra,
one of whose islands was called ’ZabedJ*; lxxiil-iv.
(U) Method©, 103» no. 299* He found the name In I Tsing*s
Han hai chi kuel nel fa chuan, later to be translated by
Takakusu. (Jrlthodja was subsequently rendered as ^rlbhoja
or Crlbhoja.
 21.

’Sarbaza* mentioned by Arabs in the ninth century (1). Xn

1883-1886 Beal, whose interest was Sino-Indian Buddhist

relations, was the first to demonstrate the long span of

what was later to be known as 1£?rlvi jayan1 history when he

extended the equation of toponyras. He accepted Yulefs

view that Marco Polofs *Malaiur1 was Palembang, observed that

I Tsing had said that *Mo-lo-yu was the same as Shih-li-fo-

shih*, and suggested that Shih^11-fo-shih was the same as

San-fo-ch* i . ^Sarbaza*, and Palembang (2). Pelliot

reviewed the evidence in 1904 and accepted the conclusions

of his predecessors, though he was unable to establish the

location of Shlh-li-fo-shih in relation to Malayu and

Palembang before the beginning of the eighth century. His

work remains to this day the basic study of the foreign

nomenclature for Srlvijaya (3)*

In 1918 Professor Coed&s made the decisive contribution

when he examined the Srivijayan Inscription of Ligor

(1) Notes on the Malay Archipelago. 76 , f8arbaza* was in

fact first mentioned by Abu Zayd Hasan in the early tenth
century translated by Reinaud^ _93* It was described as one
of the possessions of the Maharaja of ’Zabadj*.
(2) #Some remarks respecting a place called Shi-li-fo-tsai*,
251-3• I do not intend to involve myself in the question
why the Sung Chinese changed the transcription from Shlh-11-
fo-shih to San-fo-chyi . The name tSrIvijaya* survives the
transcription Shih-li-fo-shih. and San-fo-ch*i was on the
same south-eastern coast of Sumatra as both drjvijaya and
Shih-li-fo-shih.
*Deux itin^raires1, 348.
and established that the T*ang transcription Shih-li-fo-shih

was ’Srlvijaya* and not *$Sribhoja* (l). Calling attention

to Indian inscriptions of the 11th century, also referring

to Srlvijaya, he was able to provide the first sustained

account of the history of this empire, extending from the

seventh to the 13th century.

Henceforth scholars shared two impressions. Srlvijaya

began as a kingdom in the second half of the seventh century

but its history was Intelligible only from the end of that

century after certain political changes had taken place

which gave It hegemony in Southern Sumatra. The second

impression was that by about 700 the headquarters of the

empire was at Palembang, though there has been no agreement

about its earlier relationship with Malayu-jambi, a subject

bedevilled by I Tsing*s mysterious statement that Malayu

was *now* Srlvijaya. A few attempts have been made to

(l) *I.e royaume de frlvijaya*. The first note on the Llgor

inscription was by Pinot in 1910, Boon after it had been
recovered. Two other Srlvijayan inscriptions had been found
in 1892 and 1904* and the Kota Kapur one, discovered In 1892,
was studied by Henrik Kern and Brandes, two distinguished
Dutch historians of early Indonesia. Until Coedfes* article,
however, it was thought that *i3rXvijaya* was the name of a
king. One of Coedbs* reasons for equating Shlh-11-fo-shlh
with 5rlvijaya was that Fo-Shlh was the Chinese name for the
later Cham capital of Vijaya on the coast of Annam, an
equation which was not in doubt. A survey of the early
literature on the Old-Malay inscriptions is contained in
Coedbs, *Les inscriptions Malaises le (JrXvijaya* > BKFEQ» 30
1930, 29-80#
 23.

upset the view that Palembang was the original headquarters

and to look for it in the Itfalay Peninsula, but this form of

heterodoxy has never found favour with the veterans, and

indeed in 1936 Professor Coedhs felt moved to comment on

*the strangest vicissitudes of the history of Srjvijaya in

these last few years* and to call for a halt to the tendency

to look for its original seat anywhere except at Palerabang(l)*

His advice was not immediately heeded, but today there is,

outside Thailand, little inclination to break with

traditional thinking on this subject*

Since 1918 there have been further studies of the

^rtvijayan inscriptions of the second half of the seventh

century (2), but the chief gains in our knowledge of early

Srlvijaya have been a result of research into central

(l) propos d fune nouvelle thdorie** I glance at heretic

views, recently reinforced by a Thai scholar, in chapter /3
iteMi* I am on the side of the veterans. Professor
Coedks had, however, called attention to the way in which
scholars, including himself, lost sight of his originally
cautious attitude in 1916 concerning Palembang as the
permanent site of the Srlvijayan capital; *0n the origin of
the Sailendras*, 63 note 1*. Pelliot and Professor Sastri
are among those who believe that the capital in the Sung
period was more likely to have been in jambi than in
palembang! fLes grands voyages maritime© chinois au ddbut
de XVe siecle*, TP, 30, 1933, 376-7; History of Sri Vi jaya,
90-1. Professor Wheatley has recently seen the force of
this view; Geographical notes on some commodities1,
JVERAS. 32. 2. 1939. 11-12*
References to studies of these inscriptions are made in
Coedbs, *Lea inscriptions Malaises de (Jrlvljaya*, BEFEQ. 30,
1930, 29-60, and de Casparis, Prasastl, II, note 1.
 2k.

Javanese history in the eighth and ninth century. The

reason for this was the need to explain the political

relationship between the islands of Java and Sumatra,

which at different times were ruled by the Sailendra dynasty.

The ^ailendra dynasty is mentioned on the reverse and

undated side of the Ligor inscription, a surprising

circumstance which has provoked an immense amount of study*

This dynasty is also mentioned in the Kalasan inscription

of Central Java, issued in 778# and in other inscriptions

from that area during the next forty years. The M l a n d S

inscription of Bihar province, however, which was issued

about 860, described the ruler of SuvarnadvXpa. or Sumatra,

as a descendant of the ^ailendras in a manner which makes

it clear that the Javanese Sailendras were meant. It is

natural that scholars should have investigated this problem(l).

Today we know more of the nature of the Sailendra link

between the two islands. A member of this dynasty, expelled

from Java by rival dynasty about 856, established himself

shortly afterwards in unknown circumstances in Sumatra (2)*

(1) The first major reaction to Professor Coedbs* study of

1918 was Kromfs inaugural lecture in which he proposed a
Sumatran period of Javanese history. Ten years later
Stutterheim proposed a Javanese period in Sumatran history,
(2) De Casparis, Prasasti. II, 258-260, It is also possible,
though by no means proved, that there was some form of alliance,
perhaps by marriage, between the Javanese Sailen&ras and the
Srlvijayan ruling family in the second half of the eighth
century, as a result of which the Cailendra face on the Ligor
inscription was engraved. The latest discussion of this face
is by Professor Coedfes, fL finscription de la stkle de Llgorj
dtat present de son interpretation1, Oriens Extremus, 6, Z,
1959 • 42-1+8.
 25

Nevertheless, the gains from this research, valuable

though they are, have not increased our knowledge of the

origins of Srlvi;jaya. The most recent contribution of

importance to the first years of SrXvijayan history is Dr.

de Casparis# study of certain inscriptions of the later part

of the seventh century, which has thrown a vivid light on the

religious practices of the ruler and the restless condition

of the young empire (1). But there remains a need for

further enquiry into the background to its rise, even though

the earliest Srlvijayan and Indeed Sumatran inscription so

far discovered is not earlier than of 683*

What, then, are the documents available for such a

study ? It is true that there are several undated

inscriptions from Java and Borneo, usually attributed to

the fifth century A.D., but they do not take this study

very far* Faute de mleux I have had to rely on foreign

documents.

The paucity of Indonesian literary records before the

seventh century is unfortunate, and especially so is their

complete absence as far as Sumatra is concerned* This

Island figures prominently In my study. It should be

borne in mind, however, that as far as Sumatra is concerned

the only certain explanation for the absence of epigraphic

material is at present a technical one; not enough digging

(l) Prasasti, II, 1-1+6.

 26*

has been undertaken. The expense of bringing labourers

from Java to assist archaeologists Is postponing the day

when many riddles may be solved by the spade. Eight years

ago a survey of southern Sumatra gave a hint of what might

be achieved by large-scale field work (l). The results of

future archaeological research in Sumatra and elsewhere may

provide a check on the correctness of some of my conclusions

and especially of my understanding of the location of the

coast which had a major share of the foreign trade before

the rise of Srlvijaya. It is unlikely that Inscriptions

will be found which deal explicitly with commercial matters;

the earliest ones so far discovered are unhelpful in this

respect. On the other hand, the sites and dating of new

inscriptions, their religious details, and above all the

names of kingdoms mentioned in them could confirm or upset

my conclusions.

In default of Inscriptions I have relied chiefly on

Chinese sources. The Chinese connexion with the Archipelago

before the seventh century was still not very intimate, and I

suspect that additional information from their literature

will come to light by chance discoveries made by students

primarily interested in the history of southern China. I

have unearthed nothing startiingly new. On the other hand,

I have tried to widen the range of reference by admitting

(i) The report of the expedition to southern Sumatra is

contained in Amerta, 3t 1955» Jakarta, 1-i+O.
 27.

to the study of Indonesian proto-history Chinese information

from the third century A.D. and also other types of

information, chiefly botanical and pharmacological, which,

in my opinion, constitute source material about Indonesia.

Inevitably I have consulted the well-thumbed chapters on

the 'barbarians* in the Chinese imp rial histories from the

fifth century onwards, and I have noted a few passages which

seem to have special significance for my subject. I have

also male use of several fragments from geographical works

now lost. They have been attributed to the third century

A.D. and are preserved in later encyclopaedias and especially

in the T fai p ying yii lan. compiled in the late tenth century

(l). To the best of my knowledge the information in some

of these fragments has not so far been studied from the

point of view of early Indonesian history, though it is more

illuminating than anything available in early Indian or

Greek and Roman literature, the conventional sources for

Indonesian proto-history. These third century fragments

are also important because, studied in conjunction with

Chinese records of the following centuries, they indicate

that there was no significant change in the location of the

important Indonesian trading centres known to the Chinese

from the third to the seventh century. From this long span

(l) I have used the reprint of the Han f£n lou ^

facsimile of a Sung print, Chung hua shu chu,
Peking, I960.
 28.

of records I have tried to reconstruct a framework, of

historical geography as the setting for the economic

developments I discuss, I do not imply, of course, that

cultural progress was not achieved elsewhere in the region;

it is merely that the Chinese heard chiefly of trading

centres and that the location of these centres did not

greatly change.

But it has to be remembered that my third century

sources are only fragments from lost books* To some extent

it is possible to assess their truthfulness in the light of „

what is known about the nature and extent of the Chinese

interest in South East Asia at that time, but some doubt

must always remain concerning their authenticity. The need

always to justify the use of fragments from lost books has

to be e phasised even more in connexion with some fragments

I use from books, no longer available, probably written in

the fifth or early sixth century. They are Kuo I-Kung

*s Kuang chlhffi * Ku Wei

Kuang chou chi , and Hsii P i aof^ fs Nan chou

chi $1 '['|*| • The fragments, which deal with plants

and other natural products, are quoted in a materia medica.

usually attributed to Li Hsun ^ 1^) of the eighth century.

Unfortunately, Li Ilsur* s work is also lost, and it is

possible that this materia medica was written by some one

who lived not earlier than the tenth century. Its fragments,

containing the quotations from the fifth or sixth century

 29.

texts, are quoted in the Ch’ung hsiu cheng ho chin# shih

cheng lei pel yung; pen tsyao {$} $. ^ ^ ?

a revision of T ’ang Shen-tffei ^ "\%, ’s materia medica

of 1116 undertaken in 12k9 (l).

I am conscious of, and do not want to disguise, the

vulnerability of a historical reconstruction based on texts

which are'today only available in this unsat ^factory form.

It means that nothing which they say can be taken for

granted (2)* A sound instinct may have led my predecessors

to ignore them or use them with extreme caution# Yet these

fragments purport to deal with a period in time for which

there is practically no other form of documentation at present

available for Indonesian proto-hiatory with the exception of a

few inscriptions, some vague and undatable Indian references

to the region, an occasional reference in Mediterranean works,

a few scraps of archaeological evidence, and the slender

chapters in the Chinese imperial histories# If these

fragments are acceptable evidence, they throw useful

light on early Indonesian commerce. Three texts are

involved, and, apparently independently, they reflect an

identical trading situation# If errors have crept in, all

of them have been affected* But my chief plea on their

behalf is that their information makes sense in terms of two

fl} Jen min wei sheng ch’u pan she, Peking, 1957*
(2) In chapter six I discuss what I call the ’vintage texts’ of
Kuo I-kung, Ku Wei, and Hsu Piao*
 30#

contexts which I have sought to elucidate.

The first of these contexts is a pharmacological one.

I shall deal with some tree resina mentioned in the fragments.

Their medical functions have been analysed in the Chinese

or materia medica. and can be compared with

the functions attributed to certain resins in the materia

medica of ancient India and Europe# In this way the

botanical identification of the resins mentioned in the

fragments can be reasonably well established# They were,

in particular, frankincense and a variety of myrrhs. I

hope to show that there are good reasons for believing that

they were known in southern China before the seventh century

A#D* and that references to them in my fragments are by no

means surprising. A pharmacological analysis also seeras to

show that, in the wake of the original maritime trade which

brought frankincense and myrrhs to southern China, substitutes

appeared for them in the form of two Indonesian resins; pine

resin and benjamin gum. The substitute resins are supplied

by vegetation which flourishes only in certain parts of

Indonesia, and especially in Sumatra. In Sumatra too, though

also in Borneo, are found the crystals of tree camphor, perhaps

the most famous of all v/estern Indonesian natural products.

Because the records about camphor are reasonably precise and

well dated, the history of the early camphor trade provides a

valuable cross-check on the inferences I shall make about the

 31.

resins mentioned in the fragments (1). The pharmacological

aJISQ
context^ introduces questions of* botanical geography, and in

this way one begins to think in terms of Indonesian sources

of production and the extent to which the latter may have

coincided with centres of International trade.

Though the subsequent commercial importance of these

resins and of camphor has been recognised, in the western

mind they have never had the romantic associations of cloves

and nutmegs from eastern Indonesia. Every school boy has

heard of the fabulous spice islands, but I suspect that the

jungle of western Indonesia and especially of Sumatra

originally played a more important role in stimulating

foreign interest in the Archipelago, Sumatran produce was

to a large extent the basis of the earliest Indonesian

exports to China,

The other context I have invoked is the movement of

trans-Asian trade before the seventh century A.D., which, in

my opinion, is the essential background for the study of

early Indonesian commerce as well as the background which

(1) The reader is referred to Van Steenis 1 maps on leaf seven

of the Atlas van Tropisch Nederland (Uitgegeven door het
Koninklijk Nederlandsch aardrijkskundig ...•), The Hague,
1933, It will be seen that pine trees are found today only
in the extreme north of Sumatra. The Styracaceae family, a
member of which produces benjamin gum, is represented in most
parts of Sumatra, Borneo, and the Malay Peninsula but only in
the extreme west of Java. The Dryobalanops family, which
includes the camphor tree, grows in a number of areas in
Sumatra, the southern Malay Peninsula, and Borneo, but not
in Java.
 32.

makes sense of the fragments preserved from the Kuang chih.

the Kuang chou chi, and the Nan chou chi. Owing to an

absence of adequate indigenous evidence the student of early

Indonesia inevitably takes the risk of trespassing into

unfamiliar fields of study far away from that country in order

to find a reflection of Indonesian activities in foreign

literatures. I have had to look for synchronisms of events

happening in different parts of Asia before the seventh

century in order to explain the expansion in Indonesian trade

with China in the fifth and sixth centuries. Especially

significant for me are the circumstances affecting communica­

tions between the markets of western Asia and China. By

fwestern Asia1 I mean the Arabian Peninsula, Persia and also

modern West Pakistan, for West Pakistan was under Sassanid

influence in this period. The trade between western and

eastern Asia was of great antiquity, and it provides the

perspective for studying howwestern Indonesia emerged as an

important centre of international commerce.

By means of these two contexts I have tried to interpret

the information contained in the fragments of the fifth or

early sixth century. If I sometimes seem to accomplish this

too confidently It is because I do not wish to burden the

narrative with frequent reservations.

The chief conclusion I have reached from a study of

early Indonesia based on foreign sources, a conclusion which

perhaps justifies my trespassing into a variety of specialised

 33.
fields of research, is that two distinct periods can be

distinguished before the seventh century. In the first

of the periods, extending into the third century, western

Indonesia was not yet trading with China. In the second

period, already visible by the early fifth century, Sino-

Indonesian trade was tinder way.

I hope that this chronological framework may be helpful

In subsequent studies of early Indonesia. The need for

such a framework becomes clear when one reads the somewhat

featureless accounts of pre-seventh century Indonesian

history such as are exemplified in Kromfs Hindo-Javaansche

geschiedenis (l). Krom1sdifficulty in writing this section

of his book was that he lacked established and significant

dates and themes around which to organise his narrative. All

he could do was to list data which he believed to belong to

these centuries. Thus he mentioned the few Sanskrit

inscriptions from Borneo and Java and a miscellany of

archaeological remains, also chiefly from the two Islands.

These details he supplemented with a catalogue of foreign

notices, regarded by him with a varying degree of conviction

as possible references to the region. He even eked out his

narrative by noting the Indian-like names of the tribes of the

Sembiring Bataks of northern Sumatra as a possible illustration

of early Indian influence there. For his purpose was

(l) Second edition, 1931> 5U-103#

 3k.
primarily to provide some form of explanation for the

situation which revealed itself in the fuller evidence of

the seventh century. This situation was conceived as one

in which Indian culture had already made a considerable impact.

The earlier centuries were therefore the time when Indonesians

were absorbing Indian culture. Yet there is hardly any

evidence of what the Indians did after they arrived or even

when they first arrived. Because few landmarks by way of

actual happenings were available to Krom, he had to fall

back on a largely hypothetical statement of the development

of Indian influence, supported by vague references to an

expanding trade, to make this part of his history

comprehensible.

By reducing these centuries to two phases of Indonesian

foreign trade, possibly corresponding to periods of political

and cultural development, I hope that a number of items in

Krom*6 catalogue of evidence such as the Sanskrit inscriptions

may become more meaningful, especially when they are brought

into relationship with other evidence I shall suggest, which

was not at Krom’s disposal. I have also tried to show that

some Indonesians, far from always being the passive

recipients of foreign influences, had the wit to turn

changing circumstances elsewhere in Asia to their advantage

by means of their seamanship and commercial acumen.

I wish to end this introductory chapter by acknowledging

help I have received. To Berthold Lauferfs pioneer work in

 35.

1919 I am greatly indebted (l). His study of Asian products

reaching China and his systematic botanical identifications

have been invaluable; though I have parted company with

him on matters relating to Indonesia, his perception of the

commercial practice of substituting one kind of product for

another first suggested to me the possibility of undertaking

the present study* Dr. Wang Gungwufs fNanhai trade1 has

the merit of interpreting Chinese notices about South East

Asia in terms of the ever-changing background in China

itself, an approach which has been insufficiently invoked

by South East Asian historians (2). Dr. Wangfs work is

an indispensable handbook for anyone interested in early

South East Asian trade, Professor Paul Wheatley1s meticu­

lously documented account of the historical geography of the

Malay Peninsula up to A.D. 1500 has provided me with a firm

basis of topographical Identifications as a point d fannul

for the study of western Indonesian historical geography (3).

A reliable statement of the centres of settlement on the

Peninsula, sometimes mentioned by the Chinese as departure

points for ships bound for Indonesia, Is an aid which others

working before me lacked. I have exploited It. Finally,

fl) Sino-Iranica.
(2) T fhe Naiihai trade*, JTO.RA3. 31* 2, 1959, 1-135.
v3) The Golden Khersonese. Kuala Lumpur, 1961. Before this
work was published I availed myself of Professor Wheatley1s
The historical geography of the Malay Peninsula before A.D.
1500. a Ph.D. thesis presented to the University of London,
1957.
 36.

I mention with respect the towering figure of Paul Pelliot,

whose scattered foot-notes on early Chinese texts can be

neglected by students of early South East Asian history only

at their peril (i). I have been conscious of and have

tried to benefit from the contributions of many scholars,

but for my kind of subject the debt to Pelliot is the

greatest.

To Professor Hall, my former supervisor, I am grateful

for continuous discussion and encouragement• I am grateful

to Professor Basham for taking over the supervision of this

thesis and for the benefit of his experience of the problems

of medieval Asian research. Dr. de Casparis has made

available an unrivalled knowledge of early Indonesian history.

I have been advised on botanical matters by Dr. Howes, of the

Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, who allowed me to handle

specimens of the resins I shall be describing. Others who

have helped me will be mentioned In the following chapters.

But above, all I have to thank Dr. Katherine Whitaker for

giving up much of her time on my Chinese texts and: preventing

me from making elementary errors of translation. Her lack

of professional interest in Indonesian history has guaranteed

her freedom from bias in textual Interpretation.

(i) it is a matter of great regret that I have been unable to

consult Pelliot*s notes on fPersia1 in the still unpublished
second volume of his Notes on Marco Polo. I made two
unsuccessful attempts to obtain a preview of this article.
Its impending publication is the Damocles’ sword hanging over
my study.
 37#

The study falls into three parts# The next three

chapters are concerned to establish the probability that as

late as the third century A.D. the foreign trade of western

Indonesia did not extent beyond India and Ceylon# At that

time the Chinese neither traded with western Indonesia nor

were very interested in the region, and I shall not linger

long on a subject which belongs more properly to those

familiar with Indian sources* The next part of the study,

comprising six chapters, deals with the problem of the

I o-ssu trade in the fifth and sixth centuries. This

problem is the heart of the matter, and I remain convinced

that until it is resolved no satisfactory understanding of

these centuries of Indonesian history can be reached. I

shall try to identify the chief factors responsible for an

expansion in Asian maritime trade, factors which coincide in

time with the first appearance of Indonesia on the trade

route between the Indian Ocean and southern China. I shall

then seek to assess the effects of this trade on western

Indonesia by examining the resins which were travelling to

China by sea, I conclude this part of the study with what

I believe is a fair and likely description of the rSle of

u
the Indonesians in the Po*»ssu trade during the x^ifth and

sixth centuries* In the last four chapters I shall

consider the impact of the trade on the different coasts in

the region In order to sketch the development before the

seventh century of what I have come to regard as the favoured

trading coast. By way of conclusion I shall interpret the

rise of Srlvijaya In the seventh century against the

commercial background of earlier tines In order to define

its heritage from the past and to enquire how far this

heritage was likely to stand Srlvijaya in good stead in the

future*
 39*

CHAPTER TWO

EARLY ASIAN TRADE ROUTES AND SOUTH EAST ASIA

When the first account of SrXvijaya was published by

Professor Coedbs in 1913 scholars were prompt to agree that

the power and prosperity of this empire were derived from

its mastery of the Straits of Malacca, a famous ocean

thoroughfare in the history of trade* One recalls the

vision of Raffles, who saw in Singapore at the southern

entrance to the Straits a harbour superlatively placed astride

the international shipping lines and also capable of attracting

to itself the fcountry trade1 of South East Asia* Perhaps no

one has described in more ringing language than Tom<§ Pires

the advantages of a port commanding the Straits:

’Whoever is lord of Malacca has his hand on the throat

of Venice. As far as from Malacca, and from Malacca
to China, and from China to the Moluccas, and from
the Moluccas to Java, and from Java to Malacca and
Sumatra, (all) is in our power (l)*1

But there may be a danger of being dazzled and misled

by the later prestige of the Straits and of imagining that

as soon as traders in ancient times succeeded in reaching

these calm waters they were able before long to complete the

maritime route between India and China. The evidence

reviewed in this chapter will make it clear that the voyage

(1) Suma Oriental* 2, 287* Pires arrived in Malacca in 1512,

less than two years after the Portuguese conquest.
across the Bay of Bengal to Indonesia through the Straits and

the voyage from Indonesia to China were two distinct feats of

navigation, achieved at different times* The former

preceded the latter by several centuries and, even when the

all sea route had come into being, the journey from the Bay

of Bengal to China still normally took the form of two

separate voyages. The customary itinerary is shown by

I Tsing in the seventh century, who describes the journey

from TSmraliptX to Kedah and T.falayu and then only to China (l).

Ships were then making their way to Sumatran harbours lying

some distance south of the Straits rather than by the shortest

sailing route to China which passes the neighbourhood of

modern Singapore. The circumstance that cargoes reached

Sumatran harbours for eventual shipment to China does not

contradict the fact that for shipsthe Straits led immediately

to Sumatra and not to China.

Although the stages of this itinerary are well known,

historians may have given insufficient attention to the

relatively late development of the voyage from Indonesia to

China in comparison with the voyage from the Indian Ocean

through the Straits to Indonesia (2). Yet, because it was

(1) Mulasarvastivada~ekagatakarman. U77c; Takakusu, Record,

xxxiv. I translate this passage on p a g e ^ f .
(2) I suspect that Ferrand’s influence is why little attention
has been given to this point. Perrand believed that a ’Roman1
embassy travelled to China via Indonesia in A.I). l66j fLe
K ’ouen-louen*, JA^Juil-AoSt. 1919* 19-20. He was even
prepared to believe that the return journey of a Chinese
mission from India at the beginning of the first century A.D.
was through the Straits; ibid. 60. I shall suggest below that
it is most unlikely that the itineraries were as Perrand
imagined them to be.
 hi.

the voyage from Indonesia to China which alone made possible

the creation of entrepot centres in Indonesia, the history of

early Indonesian commerce is unintelligible unless one

remembers the different origin in time of the two sections

of the all sea route* The subsequent pioneering of the

voyage from Indonesia to China was, I believe, the major

event in early Indonesian commerce* When did it happen ?

How much later was it than the opening of the Straits to

traffic from the Indian Ocean ?

There can be little doubt that the Straits, providing

access to Indonesia from India, were used for this purpose in

the first centuries of the Christian era, but unfortunately

there are no means of knowing when this first happened (1)*

Indians would have been in the best position to give the

(l) There is no reliable evidence that the Sunda Straits wer

ever used In early times* Perrand quoted a statement by
/(fcC Chofct Ch* Q-/in 1178 that ships from the Indian Ocean used this
route to China; fLe K fouen-louen1, JA, Jull-Aout, 1919* Ul-2
and note 1 on U2. Yet the text merely cays that these ships,
and also ships from Java and the countries to the east, always
made their way to China by way of the territories of £rlvijaya;
9$; A | LWTT. 2, 22# The territories in question are
not indicated* Perrand guessed that pilgrims in the fifth
century travelled through the Sunda Straits; ibid, 50, One
reason for his belief in the early use of the Sunda Straits was
because he thought that the ancient toponym fBarusf referred to
a port on the north-west coast of Sumatra, and this led him to
make heavy weather of a straightforward Chinese itinerary of
about A,D#/S00; ibid, 57 note 3* I return to this itinerary
in chap ter/%W* By Pires1 time the Sunda Straits were used,
though pilots considered that the route down the west coast of
Sumatra was fnot very clean1; Suma, 1, 162* The Sunda Straiti
would have come into their own when Moslem shippers were
competing with Portuguese for the Java trade in the 16th
century*
 U2*

information, but their literary genius expressed itself in

less humdrum ways. The evidence of the^gpfoa* and the

Buddhist canon does not take one very far* The Jltaka

ta$es describe dangerous voyages to Suvannabhumi* fthe Gold

Country1# which LSvi prudently suggested was no more than the

countries to the east of the Bay of Bengal (!)• The Kiskindhl

Kanda in the Ramlyana refers to Suvaryadvlpa. which in later

Centuries certainly means Sumatra (2)* The Tamil narrative

poem Patftlnappllai^probably composed in the early centuries

A.D*, describes a flourishing trade between southern India

and Ka Iagain* usually identified with Kednh (3)* But from the

historian’s point of view the usefulness cf these sources is

compromised by the fact that he does not know when the present

versions of the texts were written, how ancient was the

information about foreign countries originally made available

by sailors, or how far, if at all, the writers of these texts

had any idea of the significance of the geographical terms

they incorporated. Only further textual criticism can throw

light on these problems* Even of the Pattlnappaial* one of

the earliest Tamil poems, all that may be said of it is that

fit cannot be placed much later than the end of the second

century A.D. or the beginning of the third century1(J+) • Of

1} fPtol£m£e, Le Niddesa et la Brhatkatha*, 29.

2) Chapter hO of the RSmayana.
3) Discussed by Nilakanta Sastrifin JGIS. V, 2, 1938, 128-130*
!*) Nilakanta Sastri, ’The Tamil land1, 26*
 U3.

all the ancient Indian texts I have most confidence in the

information contained in the geographical list in the

Mahlviddasa. a commentary of the A^thavag/^a* This list

contains a number of Far Eastern place names thought by

Levi to reflect a state of knowledge available in the

second and third centuries A.D* (i). One of the places it

mentions is Yavadifta. or *Javaf# We do not know when the

Mahanfiddesa1s toponyms were first known in Indian ports*

Nevertheless, if Levi’s conclusion Is correct, it gives us

a terminus ante quern for these toponyms*

Perhaps a Greeic text provides the earliest certain

reference to traific across the Bay of Bengal, though it

cannot be inferred from it beyond doubt that ships were then

also sailing into the Straits of Malacca* The reference is

supplied by the Periplus of the Er.ythrean Sea, probably a

compilation of material acquired throughout the second half

of the first century A.D* (2) • It is the well known passage

which refers to ships sailing from ports on the south-east

coast of India.

1 those (ships) which make the voyage to Chr.yse

and to the Ganges, they are called colandla and are
very large (3)*f

(1) ’Ptol^nle, Le Niddesa et la BrhatkathS1, 51#

(2) The literature on the dating of the Periplus is summarised
in Wheatley, ’The Malay Peninsula as known to the West before
A.D. 1000’. 8, note 1*
(3) Schoff’s translation, W>* Some have wondered whether the
liolandia were South East Asian ships, for Chinese sources
refer to K*un-lun-tan (Ships); Stein, fLe Lin-yi#, 61+-7i
Christie, 1An obscure passage from the Periplus1•
 kk*

Chryse is usually understood to mean South East Asia and

perhaps the Malay Peninsula* But the author of the

Periplus also describes the flourishing overland silk route

from China through Bactria to Earygaza in western India and

by way of the Canges (l)f and one suspects that, in comparison

Y/ith the overland route, there was still very little commerce

between China and India via any route through South East Asia

in the first century A.D. There is certainly no Mediterra­

nean evidence concerning the use of the Straits of Malacca at

that time, though this does not of course mean that Indians ..

were not occasionally sailing to the Strait8.

The Chinese, like the Greeks and Romans, were capable

of writing matter-of-fact accounts of foreign parts. Moreover

they were much closer to South Fast Asia. Yet the

usefulness of their accounts also has its limit, and I shall

suggest later in this chapter why the earliest Chinese records

about Indonesia a-e so disappointingly uninformative. There

is, however, a well known passage In the Chflen Han shu to

7/hich significance has been attached by eomo historians. It

purports to describe a mission sent by Han Wu Ti (lhl - &7 B.C.)

^ .
to Huang-chih % 3L (2). I find it difficult to conclude

(1) Schofffs translation, I4.8 .

(2) CHS, 28, 37a~38a. The most recent translation is In
Wang Gungwu, *Hanhai trade*, 19-20. The passage may be a
later ^< n (y £V-.
 k5.

from this passage that the Straits were open to foreign

shipping as early as this time and even less that voyages

were then already being made from southern China to the

Straits. The value of the evidence iB vitiated by the

uncertainty of the location of Huang-chih. Ferrarxd recon­

structed the name as Kancl. inland from the Coromandel

coast (l), but there is no certain evidence in southern

Indian records that KaRct was a toponym at so early a date (2).

But even if Huang-chih was Kancl. there is still no reason

for believing that the Chinese envoys crossed the Bay of

Bengal from the Straits of Malacca or that they had first

sailed to the Straits across the South China Sea. The

(1) fLe K fouen-louen*, JA, Juil-Aout, U5-50. II© relied on a

communication from Henri Maspero that Huang>chlh would have
been pronounced as vuan-tsi. a phonetic equivalence which
Duyvendak thought was imperfect; Africa. 11.
(2) Kancl appears in Pallava inscriptions attributed to the
fourth century A.D. In A.D. 2 the ruler of TTuang-chih sent
a living rhinoceros to Wang Mang, the Chinese usurper, and
this fact has led writers to identify Huang^chlh with Abyssinia,
Atjeh in northern Sumatra, and the Malay Peninsula. The
literature on the subject has boen summarised by Wheatley,
JMDRAS. 30$ 1# 1957, 80-81. I regard as fragile any argument
based on the rhinoceros, My colleague, Dr, «T.R, Marr, knows
of no early references to the rhinoceros In southern Indian
literature* The Chinese associated this animal with northern
India* HITS. <48, 16b. I am attracted to Bagchi#s view that
Huang-chih meant Qanga in the sense of the valley of the
Ganges; A comprehensive history of India, ed. Nilakanta
Sastri, Bombay, 1957* vol. 2, 772. A voyage up the Burma
coast is more likely to have been within the competence of
Indian Ocean sailors in the first century B.C. Northern
India was known by repute to the Chinese of the Earlier Han
period and might have been the object of a mission.
 *4.6.

evidence in fact points to the opposite conclusion* The

list of places en route from southern China to HUGng-chIh

presumably the envoys1 itinerary though it is not

specifically described as such, includes Pu*kan*tu~Iu

the port for H u a n ^ c h i h * But Fu-kan-tu-lu was

reached after a short journey by land.

4 t H $ %
i%_ i ff — A i£ £ $
’Travelling on foot for over ten days (from Shen-li
reached after a voyage of over twenty days) , there
is the kingdom of Fu-kan-tu-lu. From Fu*kan*tu*lu.
going by boat for over two months, there is the
kingdom of Huang*chlh. (l)*

Professor Wheatley has concluded that the land journey was

over the Peninsula. This is a reasonable construction of

the itinerary, which makes it impossible to believe that

Wu Ti*s envoys visited the Straits (2),

Equally unsatisfactory is the evidence in the same

passage of the Ch’ien Han shu about a mission sent to Huang*

chih by the Chinese usurper Wang Hang in A.D. 1 - 5* The

envoys are said to have returned via P* i-tsung v|p. *

Ferrand thought that the name could have been a transcription

of the Malay word pisang. or fbanana’, and therefore a

r-eferexice to an islet in the southern end of the Straits

(l) As translated by Wang Gungwu, ’Nanhai trade*, 19#

(2/ Golden Khersonese, 10*11,
 hi.

mentioned in a Ming dynasty sailing direction (1). P* i-tsung

may have meant pi sang and have been in the Malay-speaking

world, but it is extraordinary if one of many small islands

known to be in South East Asia in Ming times was chosen to

plot the envoy*s return journey (2). The passage is

certainly not incontrovertible evidence that the Journey was

from the Straits across the South China Sea (3).

The earliest Chinese references are therefore no more

helpful than the Indian or Mediterranean ones for fixing the

time when the Straits irere first used by foreign ships. It

must remain a matter of opinion whether Han Wu T ^ b mission

inaugurated a continuous maritime trade between India and

China (h)# though as evidence of trade between Indonesia and

(1) *Le K fouen-louen*, J£, Juil-Aout, 1919* U6-7, 60. Perrand

quoted from the Hsi yang Chyao kung tlen lu, written by Huang
Sheng-t8*&ng in 1520.
(2) Professor Wheatley thinks that it is not unlikely that
P*1-tsung was a kingdom in the Malay Peninsula or a neighbouring
island; Golden Khersonese. 11-12. I do not agree with him
that Wang Mang*a envoys* Journey was wholly by sea. P* i-tsung
could have been astride the Peninsula, One wonders whether
P*i-tsung was in an area inhabited by Malay-speaking Drang;
Laut on the Tenasserim coast.
(3) Lamster thought that P f1-tsung was near the Karimata Strait
south of the equator in western Indonesia, whence the voyage was
made to China during the south-west nonsoon; 1Handelsreizen in
Oost-Indie*, 991-96* But he also believed tkat the rhinoceros
evidence In connexion with Hnang-chih meant that the latter was
in Atjeh in northern Sumatra* As an example of what I regard
as an exaggerated view of the significance of the Huang-chih
evidence I quote Duyvendakts misleading comment that the
cription of the organisation of the trade in the first century
B.C. ... might apply partly a3 late as the Ming dynasty1;Africa,
9#
(if) If Wu Ti’s enterprise was followed by frequent missions from
the barbarian countries mentioned in this passage, as the CHS
states, it is curious that there is no evidence of them with the
exception of a mission from Huang-chih in A.D* 2; C H S . 12, Ij-b.
 48.

China the Huang-chih episode is completely worthless.

Nevertheless, one may imagine that in the first and second

century A.D. Indian ships were occasionally sailing down the

Straits to Indonesia, possibly from southern India as well

as from the Ganges and down the coast of Burma.

But when one considers the voyage from Indonesia to

China there are grounds for believing that it began much later

than the voyage from India to Indonesia, implied in the evidence

of the Periplus and the Mahanifldesa commentary. The first

certain evidence for the voyage from Indonesia to China is in

fact not earlier than the fifth century A.D. Moreover it

Is possible to indicate a time later than the second century

A.D. when merchants reaching iiestern Indonesia from India were

still unlikely to have found their way to China by any all-

sea route. The evidence points to some date between the

third century and the fifth century when the voyage across

the South China Sea was first undertaken by merchant,ships.

I Y/ish first to mention briefly the sailing situation as

It had developed by the early fifth century, It Is reflected

in the records of two pilgrims, Fa ITsien and Gunavarman. The

former returned from Ceylon to China in U1U and travelled by

sea all the way; the latter, a prince from Kashmir, a few

years later travelled to China from the Indian Ocean by the

same means. Fa Hsien sailed in May from Yeh-p* o-t*i

Indonesia to China. Yeh-pyo-tyi has always

been taken to mean Yavadvlpa, though not necessarily the island

 k 9*

known today as ’Java’; this is not the only time a ’Java-

like1 toponym in foreign records has caused confusion in

early Indonesian studies (1)• It has been argued that Pa

Hsien’s sailing directions make it possible that the harbour

he called Yeh-p’o-t’1 . perhaps in the sense that it was in the

Yeh-pyo-tf1 region, may not have been very far south of the

equator, for his ship sailed 1north-east’ at a time when the

south-western monsoon \7as blowing in the South China Sea. If

he had sailed from the island of Java, his ship would first

have travelled with the south-eastern monsoon behind it until

it reached the neighbourhood of the equator (2)* Fa Helen’s

illuminating evidence, however, is the anxious conversation

of the merchants on board who, after more than a month at

sea, endured about UO days of stormy weather.

(1) For the Arabs the ’Java-like1 toponym of Zabag meant

Sumatra rather than the island of Java.
(2) Giles’ translation, second impression, 1956, 78. This
point has been stressed by Mr« Grimes, a professional
metereologist who studied Giles’ translation of Fa Hsien’s
records; ’The journey of Fa-hsien’, 78, According to Mr.
Grimes Pa Hsien must have sailed from a harbour north of the
equator to have had the south-western wind behind him at the
beginning of the monsoon period. He admitted, however, that
the voyage could also have taken place x’rom somewhere between
the Bangka Straits and Singapore, presumably from a harbour
in south-eastern Sumatra. It is possible, however, that
mistakes in Fa Hsien’s directions have crept into the text.
 50.

fThe ordinary time lor the voyage to Canton (from

Yeh-pto-t>l) is about fifty days. We have now
exceeded that limit by many days; must we not have
gone out of our course ? (l)f

There is no hint in Fa Hsien1s account that the ship intended

to break its journey at an intermediate port* and it is clear

from the comments of the unhappy merchants that a non-stop

voyage was habitual. They had hoped to reach Canton in about

50 days, a sailing time which may be compared with Tom£

Pires* voyage to Canton from Malacca in June to August, 1517»

which took at least L 5 days (2 ).

Gunavarmanfs evidence is equally helpful. He sailed

from She-p*o Pff) , the best known Chinese transcription of

•Java* (3)* The Liu Sung emperor Wen Ti (U2h — U53) had

ordered a ship to fetch Gunavarman,

m 9 but before it arrived the

monk, •having no fear of voyaging 1* boarded a merchant ship

(1) Kao seng Fa Hsien chuan. TaishS Tripitaka, vol. 51* no.
2035* 866a-b. Giles 1 translation is on page 79• Provisions
had been taken on board for fifty days.
(2) Suma Oriental. 1* xxx. Arabs in the ninth century
estimated that the voyage from Pulau Tioman, off the south­
eastern coast of the Peninsula, to Canton took 60 days;
Sauvaget, Relation. 9 . In 992 envoys from Java reached
Ningpo in <30 days; 3S, Z4.8S, 17a.
(3) Chavannes* translation of^this passage is in TP, V, 1901+,
198-9* The text is in Kao seng chuan, No. 3* Taisho
Tripitaka, volume 50* no. 2059 1 2!±OCs
%jc. j# ^ hr ;# )f_ ft !ii£ # £ IW. # A £
%ii 1k ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ‘H’l
with the intention of making for *a small kingdom1. The

wind, however, was found to be favourable and the ship sailed

non-stop for China. The 1small kingdom’ may have been

Champa on the Annam coast or instead some harbour in western

Indonesia, but the original Intention of the captain is

immaterial;he was clearly capable of sailing direct to

China provided the wind was favourable, and it is hardly

likely that he had never done so before. Gujjavarman* s

evidence is therefore consistent with Fa Hsien’s; in both

cases ships made an unbroken voyage across the South China Sea#

Kor should it be ijrgotten that the Liu Sung emperor was

A
prepared to send aship to She-p1o . though the creT
w who would

have manned it are unknown. The same emperor also sent

envoys to three Indonesian kingdoms in kk9 to confer titles on

the rulers (l)# Thus there is some evidence that in the

first half of the fifth century the voyage between Indonesia

and China was being undertaken regularly.

Can one discover the tigs when this important development

began ? The date of the first voyage is certainly unknown,

but it is possible to indicate a relatively late period when

it had not yet taken place. This was in the first half of the

third century A.D., and this period can therefore be regarded

(1) Sun;: shu. 97. 8a. The kingdoms were Ho-lo-tan 4

Ph n -hnang ^ , and P* an-ta ^ • I shall return to
them in chapter# o m I eleven#
 52.

as a terminus post ouetn for searching for the reasons which

later brought the voyage into being for merchant ships some

time between then and the early fifth century* Within these

150 years the conditions of Indonesian commerce must have

changed out of all recognition*

The Chinese evidence which supplies this terminus post

quern also provides, though pnly casually, the first certain,

if fleeting, glimpse of western Indonesia. The glimpse is

sufficiently clear to enable one to test the authenticity of

any reference to early contacts between China and the Indian

Ocean which has been construed to mean that Indonesia was in

maritime communication with China before the third century

A.D* The chief western Indonesian kingdom known to the

Chinese in the first half of the third century was Ko-ying

^ .t, *
^ A. , or Chia-yln&^fl , but it must be emphasised

that the Chinese did not know of it because its ruler sent

tribute or because its trading ships visited China. They

knew of it only because they had more knowledge of Funan, a

kingdom on the lower reaches of the Mekong river in the

southern part of m o d e m Vietnam, known until recently as

Cochin-China. As a consequence of Chinese interest in Funan

they were able indirectly to learn something about other parts

of South East Asia, presumably from traders in Funan.

I analyse what is known about Ko-ylng in the following

chapter. In the rest of this chapter I shall consider

briefly why the Chinese were interested in South East Asia at

all during the first half of the third century A.D. In my

opinion the Chinese were at that time scarcely aware of the

natural wealth of the region and probably knew nothing of the

wealth of Indonesia, with the exception of the clove in the

eastern Archipelago* I am concerned to avoid misunderstanding

on this point. Chinese foreign trading interests were

originally further afield, and I believe that it is only when

their traditional commercial priorities are recognised that

one begins to approach the subject of early Indonesian commerce

in the correct perspective. The earliest Chinese interest in

South East Asia, apart from their province of Tongking, was on

account of a trade route which passed through Funan and across

the Malay Peninsula, but not through western Indonesia, and led

to the Indian Ocean* Communication with more distant parts of

Asia and not the resources of nearby South East Asia was the

reason for their earliest connexion with parts of South East

Asia* The natural wealth of Indonesia was no more the

occasion for the earliest Indonesian trade with China, beginning

as I have suggested some time between the third century and

about A.D. U00, than was the natural wealth of Funan for the

trade between Funan and China in the third century A*D. The

relationship between China and Funan in the third century is

therefore a preview, as it v/ere, of the factors which later

brought western Indonesia into contact with China, and for

this reason it is helpful to say something of Funan#

 Funan was the name given by the Chinese to the kingdom

in the lower Mekong valley, and it is to them that we owe

much of our information about it (l). Its dynastic traditions

reach back perhaps to the first century A.D. As a con­

sequence of Khmer pressure from the north Funan began to

disintegrate in the second half of the sixth century and

finally collapsed in the seventh century. Little is known

of the extent of its influence on the mainland, but there

can be no doubt of its commercial importance in the first ~

centuries of the Christian era. In addition to miscellaneous

details in Chinese texts about its links with India, its

ships, and its embassies to China, the Chinese description

of its maritime possessions and archaeological discoveries

from Oc-Eo in the traus-Bassac region of Cochin-China reveal

that it lay astride and eventually controlled much of the

earliest international trade route through South East Asia.

Especially noteworthy is the fact that at the beginning of

the third century A.D. a Funanese ruler conquered the

northern part of the Malay Peninsula and brought under his

control Tun-sun t a small but prosperous entrepot at

the head of the Peninsula which formed a trading link between

Persia, northern India, Funan, and the Chinese province of

(1) Pelliotf8 compilation of the Chinese sources on Funan

is still the basic study of this kingdom; fLe Fou-nan*,
BBFEQ. Ill, 1903, 2i+8-303.
 55.

Tongking (l) . The Oc-Eo discoveries in Cochin-China confirm

the cosmopolitan nature of Funan* s foreign contacts, though

the archaeological evidence does not indicate when Oc-Eo was

at the height of its prosperity (2)* In addition to the

products of local industries, there are objects from India,

western Asia, and the Mediterranean, and a few from China#

From the Mediterranean came a gold bracelet of the reign of

Antoninus Pius and a medal with a date corresponding to A.D#

152# The Iranian remains include a glass disc with a bust

recalling an effigy on a Sassanid coin. Of special interest

is the script on some rings which reminded Professor

Pilliozat of the script on documents from central Asia

belonging to a period earlier than the fifth or sixth century,

and suggested a northern rather than a southern Indian

(1) The description of Tun-sun is in LS, 5*1, 7a* and on pages

7i-7r I give my reasons for attributing this passage to third
century information# For a reconstruction of the Funanese
dependencies see Wheatley, Golden Xhersonese, Figure k6* The
guler who conquered Tun-sun also conquered Ch1u-tu-k*u n & M?
S £§.» 5U* 9a# Tlen-sunffi. in this part of the |jS
is a variant of Tun-sun which I discuss later in this chapter.
Professor Qtein has suggested that Ch*fi-tu-k’un was Ptolemy’s
Cattigara and situated near Cap St. Jacques in the Saigon
regionj fLe Lin-yif, 108-23# If Professor Stein is correct,
the commercial importance of Funan would be even more enhanced,
(2) The publication of Malleret’s L farchdologle du delta du
Mekong, vol. Ill, is still awaited. In it he will deal with
the international aspects of the sites he excavated. In the
meantime one can consult Malleret, ’The buried town of Oc-Eo*
ABIA, 15, 19^0-7, li-lvl, and Coedbs, ’Fouilles en Cochinchine*,
AA, 10, 19*4-7* 193-9.
 56.

derivation (l). One suspects that Funan often saw the

same kind of merchants as were using the trade route through

the oasis cities of Turkestan in the early centuries of the

Christian era.

Funan and its dependencies were beyond all doubt in

communication with India and western Asia, and this must have

been why the Wu government of southern China (222 - 280) sent

Chu Ying and K ’ang T ’ai^t as envoys to Funan.

Their records are the basis of our earliest knowledge about

the kingdom. Though there are no surviving texts which

specifically state the envoys* brief, I am convinced that the

Wu government was interested in the trade which passed through

Funan rather than in Funan itself. I have already stressed

the importance of the ^arly Chinese commercial priorities as

the proper background to a study of early Indonesian trade not

only in the third century but even later, and it is necessary

lor me to indicate why I have been led to this conclusion.

The Chinese became interested in South East Asia long

after they had been in contact with the non-Chinese world of

central and western Asia (2). The centre of their civilisa-

(1) Reported by Professor Coed&s in *Fouilles en Cochinchine*,

196. But in 19U9 Professor Filliozat stated that the Oc-Eo
BrShml script was slightly later than that of Virapatnam on the
Coromandel coast and could even be as late as about the eighth
century; *Les dchanges^ 23-U.
(2) I do not pretend to bring forward new material on China’s
early relations with central and western Asia. Among the works
I have consulted are: Hirth, China and the Roman Orient: y
Shiratori, ’Chinese ideas reflected in the Ta-ch*in accounts;
Wang Gungwu, ’The Nanhai trade’ Ch’Sn Chu-t*ung, Liang Han
ho hai yu teng ti ti chinp; chi wen hua chlao liug Chang Wei-
hua, Lun Han Wu T i .
tion was in northern China, and the South East Asian ’barbarians

v/ere not originally their neighbours, but only the neighbours,

and perhaps kinsmen, of the ’not yet Chinese’ inhabitants of

the territories on and south of the Yangtse (l). This was the

situation even when the northern Chinese dynasties of Ch’in

and Han began to acquire influence and eventually political

control in the Tongking area from the end of the third century

B.C., for their hold there was never so strong that they were

able to extend their power further south than Tongking* On

the contrary, the Chinese only began to consolidate their

position south of the Yangtse in later centuries when they

had to move their capital and migrated south in many thousands

to escape invading nomads in the north. In Tongking itself,

to which a taste for luxurious articles had led the emperors

to leapfrog over the still unassimilated inhabitants of

southern China, the government had to cope with frequent

revolts from the Vietnamese and the Chams, the southern neigh-<

bours of the Vietnamese. The continued Chinese occupation of

the region depended to a large extent on an increasingly

sinicised Sino-Viet ruling class, who provided personnel for

the local administration. In the sixth century a Vietnamese

official in the Tongking government, described in local

(1) Professor Stein’s ’Le Lin-yi* contains a number of comments

on the way the early Chinese seemed to regard the population of
southern and coastal China and of northern Indo-China as a
single ethnic unit.
 56#

tradition as the descendant in the seventh generation of a

Chinese refugee to Tongking, attempted to establish himself

as an independent ruler (i).

It is true that the Han emperors were interested in the

sea produce, ivory, and aromatic woods from their Tongking

territories and possibly in the famous gharu wood of the

Chams (2). But it is difficult to believe that accessto

South East Asia, represented by the Chinese conquest of

Tongking, led to an extensive trade in the produce of other

parts of South East Asia, There is little in the records of

the third century to suggest that the Chinese realised that

the region contained great natural wealth. There are only a

few casual references to the vegetation of the countries on or

close to the Funanese-dominated trade route through South East

Asia, Tun-sun on the Malay Peninsula had a market for

fragrant flowers, but there is no suggestion that tho flowers

were exported to China (3)* Tu-k’un^ & , a dependency of

Funan, produced the mysterious huo-hslangffi , but there is

(1) Durand, fLa dynastie des ant£rieurs d ’apr&s le Viet lien

u linh tap’. BEFKO. I*!*., 2, 195U, 1*37-8#
(2) On the products of Tongking see Wang Gungwu, ’The Nanhai
trade’, 25. The third century Nan chou i wu chlh mentions
Cham gharuwood; TPYL. 982, **3U9B# This work is discussed on
ages 9 * It is an important source for Ko-ving.
f3) TPYL, 981, l4-3i|4a, quoting K ’ang T ’a i ’s Fu nan chuan.
passage in fact states that these flowers were used by the local
population for religious purposes:
The

fyb 3 * \% K J-'A % % 4 * ^
 59.

no evidence that the Chinese traded in it (!)• Nor is there

any evidence that the Chinese were by now trading in Indonesian

produce, with one possible exception. This was the clove, if

one can believe that the chl-she perfume % was an

early name for ting hslang i , or clove (2). K*ang T fai

heard of the chi-she perfume from the Ma—wgl islands j£) iL )i‘H ,

to the east of Funan, which are a possible early reference to

the famous spice islands of the eastern Archipelago (3) • If

cloves reachtflChina in the third century, the trade was

probably through Funan (h)#

The meagre description of South East Asian produce in the

Chinese texts of the third century implies that the Wu

government was interested in an entirely different type of

(1) Ibid, 982, h3U8a, quoting K ,ang T ^ ^ s Wu Qhlh wai kuo

chuan* The text is simply: vhv >S- j*- </^ lU ^ ^ ^
I avoid the problem of the
identity of huo-hsiang, which Laufer thought might have been
fmalabathron1*; Juil-Aout, 1918, 5 — h9#
(2) Chang Yu-hsi*^ fa , author of the 1057. materia medica.
notes that, according to the C h fl mln yao shu ^ Q, & fax >
people considered that chi-she looked likejnails and that
therefore they called it ting tzu perfume: {i % & A it

FTKM> 3ht 136Ua. The Civ i min yao shu was written in the
beginning of the Eastern Wei period (534 5*4-9) ; Wang Yu-hu,
Chung kuo nung hsfieh shu lu . Shanghai, 1957, 31*
T^T TPYL. 787. 3U85a. Ma- is omitted from the name which is
given in its full form in LS, 5h, 8a. Va-wu is located in
terms of Chu-ooj ^ \ \ , which I shall later identify with
north-eastern Borneo*' Chu-po helps to fix the position of
Ko-ying and I return to it on pages •
(U) On pages <jo I note instances of Funan1s trade with the
eastern Archipelago.
 60.

produce to be found in the port of Punan and therefore available

for re-shipment to southern China. This produce comprised

luxury goods from western Asia and the Middle East. The

Wu government needed them as re-exports from Punan because

it was deprived of the conventional access to the markets of

western Asia when the partition of post-Han China in the early

third century left the Wei dynasty in control of the approaches

to the overland trade route through Turkestan*

The earliest form of foreign trade known by the Chinese

of the Yellow river basin had been with western Asia, and the

value they attached to it Bet the tone of their foreign trade

during most of the period covered by the present study. The

origins of this trade may reach back at least as early as the

middle of the sixth century B.C., when the Achaemenid empire

of the Persians was established, and it is likely that Han

Wu T i ’s (Ihl - 87 B.C.) conquests merely increased the scale

of a trade of great antiquity (i). Nevertheless, as a result

of Li Kuang-li’s victories in Ferghana at the end of the

second century B.C., this trade increased in importance for

the princes of northern China. Hsiung-nu influence in

western Turkestan in the first half of the first century A.D.

must have damaged it, but there was a revival later in that

century after Pan Ch#aofs victories and again in the first

half of the second century after Pan Yungfs victories in

(l) Masp^ro, ’Influences occidentales en Chine avant les Han1,

51.
Turkestan. It was towards the beginning or the Later Han

dominion in central Asia that the name and reputation of

Ta-ch’in ^ began to reach northern China, probably between

A.D. 91 and A.D. 97 (l). Though the derivation of this

toponym remains a mystery, there is general agreement that it

represented the Roman provinces in the Middle East and also,

no doubt, other Middle Eastern countries with which Roman

citizens from the eastern Mediterranean traded (2). Ta-»ch’in

superseded Li-kan ^ 0 (which with its variants probably

means Alexandria) from the end of. the second century B.C. as

the main focus of Chinese interest in ’the western regions’,

for, in the words of the IIou Han shu.

’The precious and rare objects of all foreign countries come

from (Ta-ch’In)(3) . ’

The wealth and rare luxury produce of the western regions,

invested by Taoists with magical associations, are likely to

have made a considerable impression on educated Chinese during

the ear^y centuries of the Christian era. In comparison, South

East Asia would have seemed a barbarous and poor region. Two

examples can be given of the prestige of western Asia not only

in northern China but in Asian trading circles in general.

Both are of the early third century A.D., one from northern

li Shiratori, ’Geography of the western regions’, 96 .

!2 ) A fairly recent affirmation of this view is by Professor
Demieville in a review of Professor Stein’s fLe Lin-yi’; T P .
kO, 1951, 357. It was ’the Roman world’.
(3) HHS.1$8. lha. This statement follows a long list of
Ta-ch’in products.
 62.

China and the other from southern Chinese sources. Wei Wen

’The places of origin of precious things are always

China and the western regions; the products of
other countries cannot be compared with them (l)*f

K fang T ’ai picked up similar sentiments during his visit to

Funan, for in his writings there appears the following passage:

1There is a saying in foreign countries that there are

three abundances: the abundance of men in China, the
abundance of precious things in Ta-ch* in. and the
abundance of horses among the YGeh-chih (2).1

Some of the ’precious things’ from western Asia were

tree resins (3). There were also textiles, coral, pearls,

and amber, and one suspects that the Han Chinese attached

considerable value to manufactured goods and especially to a

variety of glass-ware in the form of imitation jewellery and

ornaments of coloured glass from the factories of Alexandria,

Tyre, m d Sidon. Han Wu Ti is said to have sent envoys by

(l) TPYL. 820, 3614.9a# apparently quoting the Wei lueh of the
first half of the third century A.D. I follow Pelliot who
believed that the position of this text between two passages
from the Wei lGeh meant that it could only refer to this
emperor; Marco Polo. I, 1449*
(2; Chang Shou-chieh’s eighth century commentary in the Shlh
chi, 123# 4b. Pelliot could not decide whether the saying
originated in India, but it was not a Chinese one; ’La
th£orie des quatre fils du Ciel#, lhl-3*
(3) See pages for some evidence for the early Chinese
trade in western Asian resins.
 63.

sea to buy glass-ware (l). The prestige of Mediterranean

gems was such that an imitation industry may have been

established by the first half of the first century A.D. near

Virapatnam on the Coromandel coast (2). According to one

version of the Wu li /ft , the first Funanese mission

to China in A.D. 225 brought glass-ware (3).

The northern Chinese interest in Ta-ch' in produce is

reflected in their accounts of central and western Asiaf

written on the basis of Information gathered when Chinese

influence was strong in Turkestan. Probably using Pan Yung#s

report to the emperor in A.D. 125 or a little before, Fan

Yeh, compiler of the chapter in the Hou Han shu on the

western countries, notes that the north-west coast of India

was in communication with Ta-chfin. whose precious things

were to be found there (4). In Parthia, also in communication

(1) TPYL. 808, 3591a, quoting from the geographical monograph

of the CHS* Thie may be a reference to the mission to Hnang-chlh.
(2) E.E.M. Wheeler and others, 'ArikamedfcL. An Indo-Roman trading
station on the east coast of India11 Ancient India. 2, 19*4*6 ,
17, 101.
(3) Pelliot, fDe Fou-nanf, 283. The discoveries at Begram in
Afghanistan have yielded considerable quantities of glassware,
with a terminal date for production of perhaps about A.D. 250.
These remains have been interpreted as the dues collected in
transit trade between the eastern Mediterranean and the Far
East. On Begram see R. ^hirshman, 'Begram: recherches
arch^ologiques et historiquea sur leB Kouchinsf, M^moires de
l'Instltut Francais d fArch^ologie Oriental#, du Caire, vol. 79,
Cairo, 19*4*6. * The Begram findings are summarised by Sir Mortimer
Wheeler in 'Archaeology and the transmission of ideas1%
Antiquity, 26, 1952, 180T192.
(4) HHS. 188, l6b. The part deals with India;
v7cj A ^ ;J)_ $ ^
 64#

with Ta-ch’In, were to be found the precious things from the

region west of the ocean beyond Parthia (l). The Wei lueh

states that Ta-ch1in needed Chinese silk and therefore

frequently traded by soa with Parthia and other countries (2)*

This sea trade was also mentioned in the Ifou Han shu, which

stressed the profits to be made from it (3)*

The references to shipping routes in the western Indian

Ocean, not much later than similar information contained in

the Perlulus, probably describe the maritime communications

which interested the Han emperors when they controlled

Turkestan* Lying between north-western India and the Red

Sea, these routes were an additional means of bringing the

riches of Ta-ch* in to China by means of the overland route

through central Asia. Han Wu T i ’s mission to Huang-chih. if

it ever took place, is an even earlier example of the way the

Chinese originally regarded the sea as a link between themselves

and western Asia, for it is noteworthy that the mission was

sent to buy ’bright pearls, glass, rare stones, and strange

things Q ft 3.4k | (2*). Wang Hang’s

(1) HH S . I$8, 12b: ^

(2) SKCWet chlh. 30 . 33a: 4? M 4 '12

(3) HHS> II8. ^ Cq &

(h) CHS. 28£, 37h. Dr.^Wang Gungwu suggests that the merchants
of the pearl ports of Hsu wu and IIo p ’u in southern China
encouraged the despatch of this mission because they wanted to
supplement their own supplies with foreign specimens$ ’Nanhai
trade’, 21.
 65.

motives for trading with Huang-ohih would have been more

urgent than Wu Tifs,for Wang Mang had no influence on the

overland route, temporarily lost to the Hsiung-nu.

As a result of disturbances in central Asia during the

second half of the second century A.D. the function of the

maritime route was extended from the western Indian Ocean to

the Far East, though it is impossible to decide what was the

v o :ume of the trade. All one can do is to note some details

of tributary missions to China. With the exception of the

Huang-chlh mission in A.D. 2, these missions had come overland

until as late as the second century A.D. Han Wu Tl*s

successes in Ferghana about 100 B.C. stimulated them (1). In

A.D. 87 and 101 Parthia sent mis£ions (2), and several missions

were sent from northern India between A.D. 89 and 105 (3). But

in 159 snd 161 missions from northern India arrived by sea

because of the severing of communications in the western

regions (h)♦ And in 166 Ya-chyln itself despatched by sea its

(1) CHS.
2) HH3.
3) Ibid,, 16b, in tho passage on^.
on ^ .
tt) HUS. (A3, 16b:
 66.

only mission in Han times. It purported to cone from An-tun

& of Ta-ch* i n , but Fan Yeh (339 - Uh5) * compiler of

this part of the Hou Han shu. suspected its authenticity for

the significant reason that the envoys brought no jewels

with them (i). Valuable gifts were needed to prove to a

Chinese historian that the mission in fact came from the

Ta-ch* in ruler (2).

The first tributary missions to travel by sea therefore

came not from nearby South East Asia but from much further

away. The sea continued to be useful for the same reason in

the early third century, when the Wu government was depending

on maritime trade for western luxuries much more seriously

than any Han government had done. In 226 a Ta-ch'in merchant

visited the Wu capital on the lower Yangtse and was cross-

examined by the emperor Sun C h fuan, who sent an official to

accompany him on the return journey (3)*

the Wu governor of Tongking, seems to have played a specially

Important role in advertising the southern Chinese interest in

maritime trade, for soon after 226 he sent an envoy *to the

The mission came via the Annam coast.

(2) Hirth suggested that the #envoys* were enterprising Roman

subjects, embarrassed by the Parthian war, who came to trade
direct with China, probably on foreign ships, and offered
'tribute1 in the form of tropical goods bought on the way?
China and the Roman Orient. 173-176*
{5) h S » 5h« 22a-b. The Chinese official died on the journey.
 67.

south1 (l). Between 226 and 231 tribute was sent from Funan

and the Chains, and the emperor congratulated LG Tai on his

'meritorious performance*, presumably in stimulating these

missions (2).

With the arrival of these Funanese and Cham envoys missions

were at last beginning to come from South East Asia, nearly

70 years after the first mission from northern India came by.

sea along the coast of Funan and Lin-yi. By now, however,

Funan was suflicientlyImportant to justify a visit by the

Wu envoys, Chu Ying and K*ang T'ai, between 245 and 230 or

perhaps about twenty years earlier (3)» The reason for the

$ -ff & 'f *- I

%o> it ^ This passage is in L&

Tai's biography.
(3) Since Pelliot1s study in 1S03 it has generallybeen accepted
that this mission went between about 245 and 250;'Le Fou-nanf,
303. Pelliot maintained this view in his posthumously published
Notes on Marco Polo. I, 448. Later, however, two attempts have
been made to argue that the mission v?as in fact sent by Lti Tai
shortly after 226 and in the early years of the Wu dynasty,
presumably when it first realised its dependence on maritime
trade; Hsiang Ta, T*ang tai Ch'anre an yu hsi ,vu w&h ming. 566-Qj
Sugawnoto, Tonan Ajla shi kenkyu. (English translation)7 /06. I
do not propose to enter into a discussion of this problem, and I
ai content to regard K'ang T'ai's evidence as information
available in the first half of the thiid century. Nor do I
want to speculate on his Identity beyond noting, with Pelliot,
that his surname suggests that his ancestors came from Sogdiana
and that is would not be surprising if, like the Puddhist K fang
Seng-hui's father, one of K'ang T ,ai,s ancestors had come by
sea to Tongking as a trader; Pelliot, *La th£orie des quatre
fils', 123-4. Certainly an envoy with this background would
have made an excellent commercial observer.
 68.

visit can hardly have been because the Chinese suddenly

discovered that the local products of Funan v/ere very valuable.

The pattern of Chinese foreign trade up to that time makes it

certain that these envoys went to Funan to investigate, from

a convenient observation post within South East Asia, the way

in which the western Asian trade through the region was being

handled. An additional motive may have been to help the Wu

ruler decide whether to protect this increasingly important

trade by conquests down the coast of Annam to Funan (i).

K ’ang T ’ai’s fragments contain more than details about

Funan. They record, for example, information about Ta-ch’in (2)

and the river system of northern India (3)* But rerhaps the

most significant insight into where his real interests lay is

provided by his description of exactly the sane shipping route

'which is contained in the Hou Han shu. the route between north­

western India and Ta-ch* in. Though he only visited distant

Funan in Cambodia, like Fan Yung and the other Han agents he

wanted to record Information about the route which actually led

fl) Dr. Wang Gungwu’s suggestion; ’Nanhai trade’, 33.

(2; For example TPYL. 696 , 3105b, on the corded trouser belts
worn by the Ta-ch’in people ? 767# 3U03b, on
the crystal t i l e s ' - ( c Z L in Ta-ch* in: 816,3628b, on
the woven gold thread^ Both Ta-ch’In and northern
India; 971# h306a, on dates and other fruits of Ta-ch’in etc.
(3) Shui chlng chu, I, l6b-17a. On his ignorance of the
relationship between the Indus and Ganges river systems see
Petech, northern India. 2h.
 69*

For or Chia-na-t’iao he writes:

#South-west of Chia-na-t’lao one enters a great bay*

It is about 700 or 600 li T?av/ay) * Then one
reaches tho great estuary of the Chih-hu-li river.
One crosses the river and continues west and (in
the end) arrives at Ta-ch 1In (l).1

This passage must have been an excerpt of an account of a

voyage towards and beyond Chla-na-t’iao and thence to Ta-ch1in

from an undisclosed centre south of Chia-na-t’lao. Another

of his fragments gives additional information about the same

voyage•
#fe.¥ 4r -M
0 A A '•'UiD
’From Chia-na-t’iao chou one boards a great merchant
ship. Seven sails are unfurled. With the seasonal
v/ind (with the monsoon behind one) one enters Ta-ch* in
in a month and some days (2 ).f

The sailing time mentioned by K ’ang T ’ai may legitimately be

compared with Pliny’s estimate of the length of the voyage

from Ooelis near Aden to Muziris on the Malabar coast, which

was ,0 days with the monsoon (3). Unfortunately no records

exist of the Mediterranean Ariters’ estimate of the return

journey, but it has been suggested that from Muziris to

-Q Shut ching chu, 1 , U3b. ,

2) TPYb. 77}* 3U’19a. The text gives instead of S p -
. I have translated it as -na. The TPYL text
gives b ir instead of 'K Ta-ch’in.
(3) Natural i?istory. VI, xxvi, IOJ4 (Loeb Classical Library,
translation by H. Rackham) .
 70.

Alexandria took about the same time as the outward Journey (1)#

Chia-na-t’iao could hardly have been anywhere else than on the

west coast of India. That this was in fact its location is

indicated by a further statement of K ’ang T ’ai which seems to

be a description of part of western Asia as far east as

northern India:

$ £ £ . M & * - £ 1> M HI!

%
’K ’ang T ’ai says: An-hsi (Parthia-Persia), Yueh-ehih.
(and) T fien-chfi (northern India) ao far as Chla-na-t’iao
all depend on this salt (2),’

The salt in question came from the Indus (3).

Chia-na-t’iao must have been fairly close to one of the

estuaries of the Indus (U)» and K ’ang T ’ai’s plotting of its

position on the western Indian Ocean sailing routes is a vivid

reflection of the kind of commercial Intel ligence with which

1) Warmington, Commerce. 51*

2) Shui ching chu, 1, llb-12a* ^
3) TP YL7 59» 2 SUb. quotes Wan Chen’s Nan chou i wu chih ao
foiioisT £5 £ % 1 ‘I-2- * ~ kn ----
T' ^ 15 Vifan Chen: a contemporary of K ’ang T ’ai# also
confuses the Ganges and the Indus but makeB it clear that the
latter contained ’genuine salt’.
(k) Pelliot did not commit himself about Chla-na-t’lao’s location;
’Textes chinois’, 251-2. Professor Petcch wonders whether the
name can be reconstructed as Ganadvlpa. possibly in South East
Asia; Northern India« 53. I ask whether the name is connected
with Ptolemy’s ’harbour of Kanthi’, which would correspond to
the Prakrit Kantha and the harbour in the Gulf of Outch known
today as Kanthaka. I owe this suggestion to Mr. B.N. Mukherjee#
The transcription is not perfect, but one cannot expect K ’ang
T ’ai’s informants always to have exactly rendered foreign place
names.
 71.

the southern Chinese were at that time concerned* The same

orientation of interests is revealed in the evidence about

Tun-sun, at the northern end of the Malay Peninsula.

The following description of Tun-sun appears in the

Liang shu (i).

fMore than 3*000 li from the southern frontier of Funan

is the kingdom of Tun-sun. which is situated on a steep
headland* The land is 1,000 11 in extent; the city is
10 jji from the sea. There are five kings who all
acknowledge themselves vassals of Funan. The eastern
frontier of Tun-sun is in communication with Chiao chou
(Tongking) the western with T yien-chu (northern India),
and An-hsi (Parthia)« All the countries beyond the
frontier come and go in pursuit of trade, because
Tun-sun curves round and projects into the sea for more
than 1,000 JLi. The Chang hai (South China Sea) is of
great extent and ocean-going junks have not yet crossed
it direct* At this mart east and west meet together,
so that daily there are innumerable people there.

(1) !£„ 5k, 7a.

 72.

Precious goods and rare merchandise - there is nothing

which is not there (I).’

This passage seems to me to epitomize the reasons >vhy the

Chinese were interested in South East Asia in the first half

of the third century A.D. The Funanese dependency of Tun-sun

was an essential trading link between the western Indian Ocean

and southern China. Before, however, I note the implications

of the evidence about Tun-sun for the history of early

Indonesian commerce it is necessary to dispose of a difficulty.

The Liang shu is the history of the southern Chinese dynasty

which ruled from 502 to 556. Is it proper to regard this

passage as a description of Tun-sun in the first half of the

third century ?

(1) Here I reproduce Professor Wheatley*s translation in Golden

Khersonese. 16. He places Tun-sun at the head of the Malay
Peninsula; itid.^Fig. 1*6. I have, however, altered his
translation of in the first sentence* He followed Dr.
Waley’s advice in amending to read or focean
stepping stone1. Yifith respect I feel that the amendment is
unnecessary. Three other examples of the use of or
’steep headlands’ occur in third century accounts of maritime
South East Asia, and this suggests to me that the term was
conventionally used in connexion with Tun-sun. These other
examples are contained^in TPYL. 767* 3565a, where K ’ang T ’ai
describes P ’u-lo-chung tS J in TP Y L . 988, W 7 2 a , where Wan
Chen describes the shipping' hazards in the South China Seaj in
TPYL, 790, 3501a, in a passage about Chu-chih 1(4%. • In TPYL
768, 3589a, the compiler of this encyclopaedia, quoting from the
Nan shih on Tun-sun in a passage identical with parts4of the
Liang shu passage quoted by me above, explains thatdj^ means
rcrooked cliffs ^ W *• The description of Tun-sun does not
suffer by the removal of the vivid expression ’ocean stepping
stone*. Tun-sun clearly filled that role.
 73.

K ’ang T ’ai certainly knew of Tun-sun (l) , and this place

/\
was also known to his contemporary Wan Chen, the author of the

. an c'uju i wu ehih (2). Moreover the Liang shu1s account of

Funan refers on several occasions to K ’ang T ’a i ’s visit and

observations, and it is not difficult to believe that the

account of T u n - s u n „ included in the account of Funan, was

based on K ’ang T ’a i ’s works, for K ’ang T ’ai was particularly

interested in sea itineraries.

(1) T P Y L . 9^1, 1+344a# where K ’ang T ’ai, the author of the^

Fu nan c h u a n , describes the fragrant flowers of Tun-sun yVg
(2 ) TPYL. 7 § 6 . 3469a, where Wan Ch£n describes the conquest of
T i e n - s u n by Fan ManV^t ^ of Funan. The same event
is referr^d'ToT in the LS, 54, 9a, where Tun-sun appears as
T l e n - s u n ift . Here is an instance of the way the passage
. on F u n a n in the Liang shu incorporates information|sources,
1°^ perhaps in this case from the Nan ehou i wu c h i h . The NCIWC
is consistent in its transcriptions of T u n - s u n . In T P Y L . 790,
3501a, in a passageA0***** Chu-chih <aj . the NCIWC gives Tien-yu
jffi 9 wLei-e I assume that - y u ^ s a 6criLal error for
-sun’ . J[n TPYL, 982, i+348a, tKe NCIWC seems to give
cFHg-Burf'ffi , though this part of the passage is in small
characters as~~thouph the compiler of 1 he TPYL added it
himself; c h ’li must be a scribal error for tlen
Profe; sor Wheatley accepts the identification of Tun-sun with
T i e n - s u n . w ich seems to me to be certain on two grounds. In
the first place, the entrepot of Tun-sun was on the Jhang hai
( the South China S e a ) , and Fan Man had to c ross the Chang hai
to attack T i e n- sun . In the second place, the T P Y L , 786,
3469a, .uotes the 'T’ang sh u’ that T u n - s u n $ | '3r produced
h uo- hsi ang , whj.le the N C I W C , in TPYlT 9^27 1+348 . s t a t e s that
C h ’ti^sun ah (in «rror for T i e n - s u n Qf' ) p. oduced
huo-hsiang. " p r o f e s s o r Wheatley’s discussion of the problem
is in Golden Kh ers o n e s e . 15-19.
 Ih*

One will be able to Judge at the end of the present study

whether Tun-sun, far away from the Straits of Malacca, would

have been so important an entrepot in the sixth century. In

the meantime I shall note three considerations which make it

impossible for me to believe that information about Tun-sun

a gearing in the Liang shu refers to any time than the first

half of the third century. In the first place* the Llanp ehu

has separate passages on two kingdoms on the Malay Peninsula.

f reasonably satisfactorily located on the

isthmus of the Peninsula (i), began to send embassies to China

in the fifth century (2), while Lang-ya-hsiu

even more satisfactorily located in or near the Patani region

further south on the east coast of the Peninsula (3)* began to

send embassies in the sixth century (I4.) • If Tun-sun still

existed as a well known place name in the sixth century, why

did not the Liang ahu supply a separate passage about it as it

did for P *an-p 1an ? I suspect that the reason was that its

territories had been incorporated by one of its neighbours and

that it had lost its identity as Tun-sun. In the second place,

I note that Tun-sun was said to trade with An-hsi. But An-hai

(ll Wheatley, Golden Khersonese. 50.

(2) LS, 15b-l6>a" P *an-p*an seems to have been the base for
a coup d*£tat in Funan at the beginning of the fifth centuryj
LS, 5*4-« 10a, in connexion with the arrival of the second
Kaundinya ^ ^ 0 to Funan.
(3) Wheatley, Golden Khersonese. 252 - 267*
{k) LS, 5 kP I8a-19a.
 75.

liras no longer the name for Persia during the period of the

Liang dynasty, and the Liang shu has a section on Persia under

the heading of Po-ssu (l). In the third century,

however, before either the northern or southern Chinese had

occasion to alter their name for Persia, An-hal, the name for

pre-Sassanid Persia.was still current. It seems clear to me

that^Liang shu was in fact incorporating older information in

its account of Tun-sun (2). My final reason for believing

that this was the case is that, according to the Liang shu,

Tun-sun was an important trading centre because the Chang hai.

the South China Sea, was not crossed by ships. This statement

would be an obvious inaccuracy if it refers to the situation

in the sixth century, for we have seen in this chapter that

early in the fifth century, a hundred years before the

accession of the Liang dynasty, Pa Ilsien and Gunavarman were

sailing from Indonesia to China by a route which Involved no

stops on the way.

For these reasons I am satisfied that the evidence about

Tun-sun refers to the third century, and I am inclined to

attribute it to K fang T fai, the Chinese expert on trading routes

1) LS, 5U, 1+Ua-b.

2) Another incorporation from earlier sources is indicated
by a comparison of LS,2 1b , w i t h HHS,1$8. ^ b . l /
The former states: ^ &

The latter statest & jJuL *$)

Both passages deal wit; the trading connexion between western
India and Ta-chyIn and w&sfrprobably based on a common source.
 76.

who transcribed Tun-sun with the characters which appear in

the Liang shu passage.

The evidence about Tun-sun, familiar to students of South

East Asian history, has a close bearing on the conditions of

Indonesian commerce In the third century. Three important

Chinese observations can be disentangled. The first is that

the Peninsula, on which Tun-sun was situated, was a long one;

f... Tun-sun curves round and projects into the sea for
more than 1,000 li.’

This sentence reads like a description of the Malay Peninsula

in which the statement that Tun-sun ’curves round1 indicates

the south-eastern tilt* The Liang shu says that Tun-sun

had ’five kings1, and it is reasonable to interpret the account

of the Tun-sun entrepot as a reference to only one of the

kingdoms* The name therefore has a double meaning: it means

the leading kingdom and also the •eninsula to which the kingdom

gave its name.

The second and significant Chinese statement about

Tun-sun is as follows:
 77

’The Chang hai (South China sea) is of great extent and

ocean-going junks have not yet crossed it direct (l)#’

For me this passage means that in the first half of the third

century ships did not sail across the South China Sea from the

Indo-Chinese Peninsula to ports on the southern part of the

Malay Peninsula or In western Indonesia; if they had wanted

to visit these ports, they would have made their way down the

east coast of the Peninsula from the Gulf of Siam, probably via

Tun-sun (2). But this would have been a circuitous journey,

and the third Chinese observation about Tun-sun is therefore

by no means unexpected:

(1) Under } the K ’ang hsi tzu tien defines the Chang hai
as the 1southern ocean ^ Professor Wheatley
considers that in the third century A.D. the expression referred
only to tbat part of the South China Sea separating the Indo-
Chinese mainland from the Malay Peninsula or, in other words,
the Gulf of Siam; Golden Khersonese. 15, note 2# Provided
that he understands the whole of the east coast of the
Peninsula to be on the shores of the Gulf of Siam I have no
objection to his translation of the expression Chang hai. I
have, however, used the term ’South China Sea1 instead of ’Gulf
of Siam’ in the passage about Tun-sun translated above because
the Gulf of Siam seems to suggest merely the waters enclosed by
the northern Malay Peninsula and the eastern coast of the Indo-
Chinese Peninsula as far south as Cochin-China* LS, 5U, 8a,
makes it plain that the Chang hai could refer to the ocean east
of Funan * southern Vietnam. Hsouth China Sea’ indicates the
area further south to the equator across which ships subsequently
sail’d from western Indonesia.
(2) This is also Professor Wheatley’s understanding of the
situation; Golden Khersonese. 288. He does not commit himself
on the subject of whether the sea-route, avoiding the journey
over the Peninsula, was being used at that time#
 78*

’The eastern frontier of Tun-sun is in communication with

Chiao chou (Tongking), the western with T'len chu
(northern India), and An-hsl (Parthia) (!)’•

One objection may be raised against my view that this

evidence implies that in the first half of the third century

foreign traders preferred to cross the Peninsula rather than

sail up and down the east coast of the Peninsula and the

Straits of Malacca* Attention can be called to a passage in

Liang shu concerning the voyage of a Funanese prince in

that period*
%, <9^ i k % £ id

fIn the time of the Wu (dynasty) the Icing of Funan,

Fan-chan, sent one of his relations, Su-wu, on an
embassy to this kingdom (India). From Funan, r;oing
to the port of Chu-11* he (then) followed the sea
into a large bay* Directly to the north-west he
entered and passed through the bay, on the shores
of which were several kingdoms. In rather more
than a year he reached the mouth of the river of
India (2) .♦

Su-wu’s itinerary could have been down the coast of the

U ) Nor is it surprising that the ancient P ’ong Tuk site at

the head of the Peninsula should have yielded a Ptolemaic lamp;
Coedfcs, 'Ths excavations of P ’ong Tftk1* J S8. 21, 1927* 195-209;
C. Picard, 'La lampe alexandrine de P ’ong Tuk', AA, 18, 1955*
137-149* The oldest Mon inscription so far discovered has
come from this region; the script suggests that It is not older
than about A.D* 600; Coedbs, 'A propos de deux fragments
d'Inscription r^cemment d£couverts k Pra Fathom1, Acad. Inscrfpt,
belles lettres* Paris, 21 Mars, 1952, 146-150*
(2) LS* 54. 22b. Golden Khersonese* 24.
 79.

Peninsula and into the Straits, represented by the expression

#great bay1* Chu-11 was a little way south of the Tun-sun

entrepot and probably somewhere on the isthmus of the

Peninsula (1). The passage seems to mean, however, that the

ship entered the large bay soon after leaving Ch5-li and took

a north-western course (2). I suspect that Chu-11* like the

Tun-sun entrepot, had harbours on both the east and west coast

and that it was from the west coast port that Su-wu went in a

north-western direction to India (3). The ’large bay’ was

probably the Gulf of Martaban and the ’several kingdoms’ were

early Mon settlements* The envoy’s trading ship must have

visited them, which would explain why the journey to the Ganges

took ’rather more than a year’*

(l^ See Golden Khex^sonese, 23-25 for a discussion and location of

Chu-li * known in the N a n c h o u i wu chih as Chu-ehih
The NCIfl/C Btates that ChS-chih //as 600 li south of Tlen-yu
Van error for Tien-sunlS
(an Tien-su: 3jrvi» ") with a headland Jutting into the
Chang hai (South China SeaJ'; TPYL* 790, 3501a* According to
the Liang shu* 5U, 9a Chiu-chlH 71
__________________ was one
on of the conquests
of Pan-man at the beginning of the ’third century. The TPYL* 788,
31*91b, quotes the Sui shu to the effect that Chu-li-ffilj^ was
one of fourkingdoms situated southwards beyond the great bay of
Chin-1 in's the passage contains a note to the effect that
one rendering of this name is Chiu ya 'jl ^n£ *
(2) In the Shui ching chu* 1, i*3b, K lang T ’ai is quoted as saying
that ’on leaving the port of Ch3-li, one enters a large bay*
Going directly north-westwards, in rather more than a year one
reaches the mouth of the river of India* fl ^ kk ^ ^ *
i'S i ^ -K 4> jL » it A r% \ T# ^ > J- 0
This is another example^ of the way the compiler of the Liang shu
drew on third century sources for his account of Funan.
(3) This was Professor Wheatley’s conclusion: Golden Khersonese*
25.
 ao.

The information about Tun-sun makes it clear why it was

a busy centre* It lay on the conventional maritime trade

route, which took a short overland cut across the neck of the

Peninsula# Tun-sun1s function was similar to that of

Fu-kan-tu-lu, mentioned in connexion with Han iVu T i #s mission

‘to Huang-chih, But the long Peninsula, which was Tun-sun*s

advantage, was a positive hindrance to the use of the Straits

of Malacca by merchants with cargoes bound for southern China,

It is therefore not surprising that there is no evidence in

the records of the third century that any ships sailed from

western Indonesia to China or that any Indonesian kingdom

sent tribute to the Wu empire, Tun-sun. which had probably

owed its original importance to Indians sailing down the Bay

of Bengal from the Ganges, was ©till the customary base for

trading enterprises further east. Swift movement of cargoes

could hardly have been a consideration in these early times,

and the traders would have been content to lay up their

merchandise in the Tun-sun warehouses against the arrival of

ships from Funan. K*ang T*ai knew of a man from Tan-yang

who had traded from place to place and eventually turned up in

Funan (i), and this would have been the leisuredly pattern of

trading at that time#

(1) Shui chlng chu. 1, 30a:

 81

In the present chapter I have noted that there were two

major Asian trade routes in the first halfcf the third century

A*D. The route with the longer history led to northern

China through Turkestan from Roman Syria or from the Red Sea

via north-western India* The Wu government, faute de mieux*

had to rely on the other route which was from north-western

India, overland to the Ganges or to southern India and Ceylon,

to ports on the northern part of the Malay Peninsula (1). In

this system of international commerce the Straits had only

minor importance, and their relative isolation is the background

to be borne in mind when we now consider the evidence about

Ko-ylng and its trade.

(l) The maritime trade routes of South Eatt Asia in this period
are shown on map 2 at the end of the study*
CHAPTER THREE

A GLIMPSE OF WESTERN INDONESIA IK THE THIRD CENTURY A*P*

Ko-ying Is not mentioned in the Chinese imperial histories,

but K fang T*ai is not our only source of information about this

kingdom* It is also mentioned in a few fragments from the

lost Han chou i wu chlh ^ l[j | ^ ^ record of strange

things in the southern regions1 by Wan C h e n ^ * Wan Chen

was a Wu prefect of Tan yang, close to the modern Nanking, and

he served the same dynasty (222 — 280) as K*ang T fai served (l)*

Unfortunately nothing has been discovered about him since

Pelliot in 1903 showed that he lived in Wu times (2). Wan

Chen’s orlicial post and authorship of the Nan chou i wu chlh

are mentioned in the bibliographical chapter of the Sul shu and

also in the similar chapters of the two T fang histories (3)•

Chang Shou-chieh* s eighth century commentary to the Shih chi

(1) Wan Chen called Ko-ying^ A by this name* K fangA

T faifs transcription was Chla-ying jy> . Since Wan Chen
supplies slightly more information than n #ang T fai, I have
adopted his transcription* I have no guesses concerning the
word from which Ko-ying was derived*
(2) fLe Fou-nan*7 266, note 3* and 281, note 9* In fDeux
itindraires*f 277-S, published in 190U, Pelliot emphasised the
third century vintage of the information, for Chavannes had
noted that Ko-ying was mentioned in the sixth century Lo yang
chia lan chi*
(5) Sui'sHuT 33, 22a. CTS, Chlh no. 26, 29b} H T S . 58, 18b.
refers to fWan Chents Kan chou chih’ (l). The earliest

quotation from the Nan chou 1 wu chih so far brought to light

is in P fei Sung-~chihfs commentary to the San Kuo chi, written

in k29f where there is a quotation from the ’I wu chih* which

describes a volcano in Ssu~t* iao jt/l (2)# 8su-t’lao

is an important toponym in this chapter# Wan Chen’s interest

in it is established by a quotation in the T fal p ’lngr .vii lan

from *Wan Chen’s Nan fang 1 wu ehlh^ ^ o' (3), which

A
makes it reasonably safe to attribute to Wan Chen any text
j t
dealing with information about Ssu-t’lao and having the title

of Nan chou i wu chlh or a closely similar one. Thus the

Ch’l min yao shu. written in the beginning of the 53U - 5k9

period, probably quotes Wan Chen on the mo-ch’u tree^ J&i

o
Ssu-t* lao, though the source is only described as the

Nan chou i wu chlh (h) • The T yai p ’lng yp lan cites both

’Wan Chen’s Nan chou i wu chihf and ’Wan Chen’s Nan fang 1

wu chih’ and often quotes from the Nan chou i wu chlh without

giving the author’s name (5)*

Professor HSiang Ta has surmised that Wan Chen was

prefect of Tan yang between the beginning of the 222 - 228

(1) Shih chi. 123, i*b.

(2) SKCWei# k lb.
(3) 787, 3485b.
(4) C"Y3. 10, 104.
(5) TPYL. 59, 284b; 787, 3485b. The TPYL quotes the NCIWC
on Hlao-hu '/%*$ ; 787, 3480a. LI Hsien (651-684)*b
commentary 'to the HHS. 116, 74, gives part of the information
and attributes it to ’Wan Chen’s NCIWC .
 eu.

period and 23U# holding office between two other prefects

whose names and dates are known (l)* This was a time when

the Wu government was pursuing an active overseas policy, and

it is evident that Wan Chen knew something of foreign countries*

He knew of the great vessels of the foreigners who sailed the

seas south of China, and Pelliot considered that he supplies the

oldest surviving description of these ships (2)* He was

capable of writing about a country 7#000 11 or more north of

India with city walls and palaces similar to those of Ta-chfin

(3)* Yet the title of his work suggests that his chief

interest was southern China and the adjacent world of South

East Asia* K fang T*ai also knew something about South East

Asia, but it cannot be shown that Wan Chen borrowed from K*ang

T fai# Their place name transcriptions are certainly different

Y/e shall see in this chapter that Wan Chen describes

primitive people in South East Asia, and it is not surprising

that he also wrote of the L i {Q. barbarians near Canton (5) ♦

(1) T yang tai C h fan£ an* 568#

(2) TPYL* 7^9V~3lil2as 771# 3kl9&; 988, i+372a* Pelliot,
'Textes chinois1, 255* ^ ^ ^ ^ . e — * si
(3) Shlh chi. 123, 4bs ^ * ■ ^ ^ >'f»'SLvD -
W T T l ^ f ,
(h) K fang T ’ai: Tun-sun , Chili-llflfl. p\ f Chu-poi^?
Chla*»ylng j)& ’£*£> • fiWan Chens Tien-sun , ChH-chih
~\\ 'MK t Tu-po^t \% (Fa yuan chu lln* SsuTpu tsfung & an
collection, no# 103# ShangKaiTT^3^7Tf9T 585b) , Ko-^ying
(5) TPYL. 990, i+38lb. * d
 85#

Perhaps his information about distant lands was derived from

officials and foreign visitors who came to Chien yeh, the Wu

capital near his prefecture. Buddhists were also coming

there in this period (l). And if Professor Hsiang Ta fs

surmise about the time when he held office is correct, he may

even have met the envoys of Funan andLin-yi who arrived with

tribute in the 226 — 231 period. There seems to be no

reason to disagree with Professor Hsiang Ta that the Nan chou

i wu chih is based on facts (2).

The book was probably a well known one in the centuries

after Wan Chen's death. The references to it I have mentioned

above suggest the importance attached to it, and in my

opinion Yang H s u a n - c h i h ^ fjcj 2- incorporated parts of it

in the Lo yang chia lan chi \% , written in the

middle of the sixth century (3)* We shall have occasion to

(1) K fang Seng-hui visited Sun Ch'uan; Tran-van-Giap, BEFEO,

32. 1932, 213-h, translating the Kao seng chuan.
(2) The variety of titles and the existence of only one early and
specific attribution of the NCIWC to Wan Chen (in the Sui shu)
are unsatisfactory aspects of the text, and one can never be com­
pletely certain that every NCIWC fragment is based on early third
century A.D. facts. Pelliot referred mysteriously to a fpseudo-
NCIWC1; Polo. I, 14*58• Professor Hsiang Ta, however, has no
doubts about the authenticity of the text, in spite of its
different names. H e ^ s o notes that the fragments were always
writ en in the saine^ % \ \ style; T*ang tai Chfang an. 569.
(3) I reach the conclusion after comparing this part of the LYCLC
with NCIWC. The results are contained in Appendix fA f. Henri
Maspero noted how the NCIWC was used by later writers* *Un text©
Taoiste sur 1*Orient Romain1, Melanges posthumes. Ill, 99 and
note 2, 101. Fan Hsiang-yung, in his introduction to the LYCLC.
Ku tien wen hsuen Ch'u pan $h§, Shanghai, 1958, suggests that it
should be read as a novel, and notes borrowings from other works
in chapter five, dealing with the western regions, I suspect
that later Chinese references to primitive peoples in South East
Asia, used as slaves in southern China, owe something to the
NCIWC. On these references see Duyvendak, Africa. 23-h, and
Stein, 1Lin-yi*, 299-300. The NCIWC fragment inspiring these
accounts is translated on page below.
 86.

note how Yang Hsuon-chih, albeit only a northerner, came to the

conclusion that Ko-ylng was a remote country which never had

relations with China.

I shall first provide the texts which, in my opinion,

describe Ko~.ying as a western Indonesian kingdom and

sufficiently close to the Straits of Malacca for the information

a'out it to constitute evidence of the nature of the trade using

the Straits during the first half of the third century A.D. (l)

The texts fall into three groups.

The first group is in the form of quotations preserved

in later works of a statement originally appearing in K*ang

T ^ i ’s Pu nan t fu su chuan^j: -t , a statement which

brings Chia-ying (*= Ko~ying) into relation with Chu-po •

The most satisfactory, though not the earliest, quotation seems

to be provided by the T fung tien encyclopaedia of Tu Yu (735 -

812) (2) and copied in I!a Tuan-lin’s encyclopaedia, the Wen

hsien tyumr k yao. compiled in the 13th century (3)* It is

as follows:

(1) Pelliot left the subject of Ko-.vlng in 1925 when he wrote

that, because of various texts which it would have taken him too
long to discuss in the article which he was then writing, he
thought that Ko-ying lay somewhere in the southern part of the
Malay Peninsulaj VFextes chinois1, 250. I have attempted
without success to discover whether Pelliot left unpublished
notes on Ko-ylng.
(2) T£, 188, 1011.
(3) VVHTK. 332, 2607.
 87*

*Fire Mountain (Volcano) country# It was known in the

Sui period (581 - 618). It is 5,000 li east of Chu-po.
It has volcanoes. Even when it rains the fires are
not extinguished. In the middle of the volcanoes there
are white rats. The Fu nan tfa sa chuan states; The
Volcano Island is about a thousand and more Id to the
east of ?/a~wu island (l)* Heavy rain falls in the
spring months. When the rain stops the fire blazes.
The trees on the island in the rainy period have a black
bark* When they are affected by the fire the bark
becomes white. In the spring months the people In the
neighbourhood of the island collect the bark and weave it
into cloth or use it as a wick. When it is (a little)
dirty, it is thrown into the fire and it becomes clean
again* There is also a mountain to the north of Chla-
ying and to the west of Chu-po. It is 500 JLi in
circumference. A fire blazes from the fourth month and
cooes to an end in the first month. When it blazes the
shrubs and trees shed their leaves as in winter time In
China. In the third month the people go into the
mountain, take the bark, and weave It Into fire cloth.1

The same information appears in a slightly abbreviated form

in the T fai p*ing huan yu chi geography, compiled In the late

on page 59 in chapter two In connexion with

cloves.
tenth century (l). The following excerpt deals only with

the reference to Chia-ying*

i k {% ~ - 9. 1)° '££> (% A % %
$ OA f^] 3 - h J L ...
fThe Fu nan t’u su chuan states? **# There is also Chia-
ying country* It is to the west of Chu-po* There is
a mountain in (Chia-ylng) which is 300 li in circumference
• •*

Finally there is a statement in the Hsuan chung chi^x

a fourth or fifth century text preserved in the X wen lei chu

encyclopaedia compiled by Ou-yang IlsSn (557 - 6hl) (2). Here

K fang Thai's information on volcanoes east and west of Chu-po

has evidently been telescoped*

i <4 > i t o ^ ft ^ h 4 >^ r
i ^ Lb fjz & jL.- -
’The Hsuan chung chi states: In the southern region
there is a volcano* It is east of Funan, to the north
Chia-ying* and to the west of Chu-po. From the
fourth month a fire blazes ..**

Thus there were two volcanoes known to K #ang T*ai, They

were west as well as east of Chu-po. and this circumstance no

doubt explains why the word falsof appears in the text preserved

in the T fung tien in order to distinguish between the volcano

east and west of Chu-po*

The relationship‘between Funan# in modern Cochin-China, and

(1) TPHYC. 277, 8b*

(2) IWbC. 80, 2b.
 89.

Chu-po makes it certain that Chu-po was the name of a

prominent South East Asian geographical feature, and there

has never been any doubt on this matter (1)# Chu-po may

be another of the fJava-likef names, though less certainly

so than others, but, in addition to phonological difficulties,

it is difficult to believe that, for K#ang T yai in Funan,

Chu-po meant more than part of the major land mass, with its

offshore islands, lying south-east of Cochin-China. This

region can only hove been north-eastern Borneo (2). Chu-no*s

ieady accessibility from Funan is borne out by the fact that

two of Chu-roys offshore islands had trading relations with

they were Chu-yen , north-east

and north-west of Chu-po respectively. The Tan-lan islanders

brought iron in their ships to Funan (3)» while those of

(1} Pelliot, Polo. I,

(2) yap 2 at the end of the study incorporates my conclusions
concerning the regions in western Indonesia known to the Chinas
in the first half of the third century A.D. P* u-lo-chung and
P fu-lo. which are also shown in the map, are discussed on pages
and* 81-? below. Modern place-names are shown on maps 1 and 5<
In 190U Pelliot conceded the possibility that Chu-po could mean
Borneo rather than Java; yDeux itin^raires*, 270. Since then
Chu-po has been studied by Professor Stein in connexion with
the early historical geography of mainland South East Asia. He
concluded that it must have been Borneo or a large island in
the Philippines; fLe Lin-yi1, 121. On pagesi7/-37^ I suggest
that north-western Borneo was known to K #ang T ’ai by another name,
(3) TFYIi. 787, 3^85a, quotes K fang T fai that Tan-lan produced
iron. TPYL. 813. 36lhb. anotes the Nan f nn^'ts^ao wu chunngc
^an early Chin text but with interpolations)
 90,

ChtUyen sailed to Funan with large shell cups (l). One

imagines that the metals of these islands helped to supply

the workshops of Oc-Eo in Funan which, according to the results

of the excavations there, had no lack of raw materials.

Professor Stein has suggested that Chu-yen and Tan-lan were in

the Philippines, and this is not unlikely (2),

Chla-yin^. defined in terms of Chu-po. must, like Funan,

have been in South East Asia, and attempts to Identify it with

somewhere In southern India cannot be sustained in the presence

of the Chu-po evidence (3)# No Indian toponym would have

been described by its position in respect of Chu-po, Nor are

there volcanoes in India (4)# Nevertheless Ko-.vinp: was not

regarded as part of Chu-po, The T fung tlen text Indicates that

it was vaguely south-west of Chu-po. or north-eastern Borneo*

(l) TPYL, 787, 3485b. The heading of the passage is h-^j£L *

the toxt^is as follows: .... ^ ^ ^ ^

I take it that C h u - c h u a n - p o and Chu-chl lp_ are

errors for Chu-po and Chu-yenEf AJ£ respectively* Po-t* an
to the norwftwest of Chu-po exchanged gold with
foreign merchants for grain and other goods; TPYL, 787»3485a.
Pei-luxx. to the south-east of Chu-po traded its tin with
foreigners;'^'ibid, 787> 3485a, No doubt for all these islands
Funan must have been the chief customer,
(2} fLe Lin-yi*, 120-2.
(3) Fujita Toyohachi suggested Quilon and Su Chi-chfing Koyampadi.
These views are set forth in Fan Hsiang-yungfs edition of the
LYCLC. 238-240, Both writers argued from imagined phonological
correspondences between Ko-ying and the Indian place names,
(1+) it may also be noted that bark-cloth has been a common form
of Indonesian clothing. On the way the early Chinese confused
bark cloth with asbestos, see Laufer, 1Asbestos and Salamander*,
TP, 16, 1915, 299-373.
 91.

This orientation suggests that Ko-ying was either on the Malay

Peninsula or in Western Indonesia. That It was In the latter

region rather than on the Peninsula becomes^«iipii**i*l when we

examine the second group of texts, dealing with its more

immediate neighbours.

There was Chla-ch* en fl0- , 1south-west1 of Ko-ylng.

about which nothing is known (l). More interesting Is P fu->lel

, which was described by the Nan chou i wu chih in

the T*ai ^ i n g yii Ian*s passage on Ko-.ying (2),

*Ko-ylng is to the south of Chu-chlh. It takes about a

month to reach it. To the south (of Ko-yinff) there is
a bay called Wen. and in the bay there is a chou called
P fu-lei. Those who live there are all as black as
lacquer. Their teeth are quite white and their eyes are
red. Males and females (in this place) are all naked.*

The compiler of the T*ai pfIng yii lan added a note:

tK tang T*al Fu nan t*u su: They load up with great

quantities of supplies and go out (to sea). They
look for ships passing by and come flocking to them
with fowls, pigs, and jungle fruit in exchange for
metal articles,*

The people of P*u-lei were evidently primitive, but, like

(1} TPYL. 790, 3501a, quoting the NCIWC.

(2) Ibid. I discuss the first part of this passage on page
ft below.
 92.

the islanders off Chu-po. they were not so primitive that

they were unable to make a livelihood by trading with the

representatives of more sophisticated communities. Presumably,

they benefited from the shipping which converged in Ko-ylng.

The interesting piece of information about them, however, is

that they had *white teeth*. This probably means that they

did not blacken their teeth for ornamental purposes (1). In

tl'if? third century others in South East Asia, equally primitive,

were also characterised as having white teeth. The Nan chou j

wu chlh contained the following account of the Lei people

1In coves on the Funanese sea there are people like wild
animals. Their bodies are as black as lacquer and
their teeth are completely white. They shift their
abode according to the seasons and have no fixed place
of residence ... Water They only eat fish and meat
and know nothing of agriculture. In cold weather they
'wear no clothes but cover themselves with sand. Some­
times they collect pigs, dogs, and fowl ... Sometimes ...
Though they have the appearance of human beings, they are
as primitive as tame animals.*

(1) It is possible, however, that they had not cultivated the

habit of chewing betel leaf.
(2) 790, 3501b, I have omitted the tedious paraphrase
by the compiler of the TPYL. The text is broken, and I have
indicated the breaks thus: Water ...
 Professor Stein connects the name M l with the mouth

of the Lei river in the Lin-yi country on the northern Annam

coast (l), but his explanation is not consistent with the

fact that the Lei people were said to live in coves on the

Funanese coast. I prefer to regard Lei as literally meaning

’miscellaneous types’, and I suspect that such people as these

were scattered in many of the less accessible parts of early

maritime South East Asia, As far as the white teethed

P fu-lei people south of Ko-ylng are concerned, they may have

been a pre-Indonesian people who were still only partially

assimilated to the Indonesians, To call them fnegrito’ would

be begging the question* Perhaps they had marked ’Melanesoid’

traits; ’Melanesoid’ is a name sometimes given to the people

associated with the mesolithic cultures of South East Asia (2).

It seems certain that the primitive p ’n-lei neighbours

of Ko-ylng had South East Asian ethnic affinities. There is

no text which suggests that the Chinese regarded ’white teeth’

as an Indian feature. How far the P ’u-lei population lived

Ko-ying is unknown, but it is unlikely that the Chinese

would have heard of them if Ko-ylng; Itself was unknown, for

P fu-lel had no harbour and no communications between it and

other places are mentioned, I conclude that it was not far

(1) ’Le Lin-yi’, 302, note 369; 35.

(2; Callenfels, ’The Melanesoid civilisations of Eastern Asia’t
Bulletin of Raffles Museum, Series B, I, 1936, Ul~51* There ie
an interesting discussion on the relationship between these
people and the later dominant peoples of parts of the region in
Barth, ’The southern Mongoloid migration1, Man* 52, January,
1952, 5-8.
 94*

from Ko-ying itself. P fu-lel could have been anywhere in

maritime South East Asiaf but the other country in the world

Ko-ying is certainly an Indonesian one. It was Ssu-t*lao.

mentioned in the Han chou i wu chih (1).

’Ssu-t1lao is the name of an island in the middle of the

ocean. It is south-east of Ko-ying and about 3*000 11
away. In (that kingdom) there are cities with streets*
The land ia very fertile.1

Ssu-t’lao is a difficult toponym, and much has been written

about it. Pelliot, after originally identifying it with Ceylon

and then with Java, felt inclined in the end to return to his

first opinion that it was Ceylon (2). But Professor Petech

has recently analysed a large number of Ssu-t’lao texts and

comes to the conclusion that for Wan Cher,, though not for his

contemporaries K fang T ’ai and Chu Ying, Ssu-t’iao did not mean

Ceylon (3)* Indeed, Wan Chen’s text, quoted above, if

understood literally, locates it in Indonesia even more

unambiguously than Ko-ylng; it was almost as far south-east of

Ko-ying. itself vaguely south-west of Borneo known from Funan,

(1) TPYL. 787, 3i+85b. Professor Petech, whose study of this

subject is noted below, translates the passage In the sense that
Ssu-t’lao had 1three kings1.
(2) Pelliot summed up his changing views in a review of Fujita’s
study of early toponyms in Chinese texts; TP, 29, 1932, 181-2.
(3) ’Some Chinese texts concerning Ceylon1, The Ceylon Historical
Journal, 3, 1954, 3 and 4, 217-227*
 95.

as Funan was fwestf of Lin-yi in northern Annam (1). It is

possible that an error has crept into the direction of

Ssu-tTiao from Ko-ying. but what leads me to believe that this

was not so is the consistent way in which Wan Chen describes

Ssu-t1iao as an Indonesian-type country# It is not necessary

to agree with Ferrand that the mo-ch*u

also mentioned by the Nan chou i wu chih# was the roajapahit

tree of Java (2), but the association of Ssu-t*lao with a

volcano and with bark-cloth is exactly the type of evidence

one would expect of an Indonesian toponyo#

fn * it 4> i'tH % % jL
ife. U . * M f t K S. fh Sf.
*Ssu-t1iao also has a chou in its midst. In spring and
summer a fire blazes there# In the autumn and winter
it dies down# A tree grows in the middle of the fire.
In autumn and winter the tree withers and the bark is used
for making cloth (3)*f

Ssu-t*lao must have been an Indonesian neighbour of Ko-ying#

Its volcano and the fertility of the land as well as the

geographical hints about its location place it firmly in the

Archipelago#

The third geographically definitive group of texts contains

only one notice about Ko-ying. Once again it is a fragment

(1) According to the NCIWC Fuhan was 3f000 and more 11 •west1
of Lin-yi; TPYL. 7^7, 3^82b#
(2) fYe-tiao, Sseu-tlao et Java1 , JA, 1916, 522-521*# Read
identified the mo-ch*u tree as Sty rax .japonicas Chinese medical
plants, serial no* l66. Fujita Toyohachi thought it meant
msdhu or Madhuca long1foila# of south-eastern India or Ceylon.
i 5^ TPYL. 7&7# 3h$5bf quoting *Wan Ch&n’s Nan fang i wu chih1#
 96.

from the Nan chou i wu chih ( D .

*Ko-ying is to the south of Chu-chih. It takes

about one month to reach it.1

It was noted in the previous chapter that Chu-chih.

sometimes known as Chu~li. was probably on the isthmus of the

Malay Peninsula (2). Prom it Su-wu of Funan sailed in a

north-western direction to the mouth of the Ganges. According

to the Nan chou i wu chi Chu-chih was 800 11^ to the south of

Tien-sun, or about 200 miles south of the^head of the isthmus

(3). Because Ko-ying lay a monthts sailing beyond Chtl-chih (k) *

it must have been awfehiw at the southern end of the Peninsula

or somewhere in western Indonesia (5)* Either of these

alternatives is consistent with the information that Ko-ying

(1} TPYL. 790, 3501a.

(2) Page 79 nnd note 1. u.
(3J TPYL. 790, 3501a* I take Tien-yu^ to be a mistake
for Tien-sun Jk 1% ^ •
(h) I discount- the possibility of a journey by land, which is
impossible even today.
(5) The Lo yang chia lan chi, in its imaginary account of a
journey from Ko-ying to China, modifies Wan Chenfs statement that
Funan was 3,000 and more l,i from Lin-yi to read that it took a
month to reach Lin-yi from Funanj see Appendix ’A 1 • This may
suggest that it took a month to travel 3,000 or^more ljl and that
Ko-ying was therefore 3,000 and more li from Chu-chih, a calcu­
lation which might place it about 1,000 miles south of the
isthmus of the Malay Peninsula. It will be seen below that I
believe that Ko-ying was in fact about 1,000 miles south of the
isthmus, but I hesitate to invoke this calculation in aid of my
identification of Ko-ying. We do not know why the LYCLC
modified Wan Ch&nfs details about the distance between Funan and
Lin-yi, Nor is it wise to believe that the rate of sailing on
these coasts was always uniform.
 97.

provided access to Ssu-t1iao. lying 3,000 li to its south-east

and certainly an Indonesian toponym when it is used by Wan Chen,

Where, then, 7/as Ko-ying ?

It is important to remember that, according to K fang T*ai

quoted by the T fung tlen. Ko-ying was south of a volcano. The

volcano could have been on the Peninsula, but the Chinese knew

something of the Peninsula at that time and never mentioned

a w feew w * This is not surprising, for no volcanoes, active

or extinct, have been found there (i). This seems the

strongest reason for not following Pelliot in locating Ko-ying

on the Peninsula (2), Nevertheless the kingdom lay vaguely

south-west of Chu-po. or north-eastern Borneo, The exclusion

of the Peninsula from the field of enquiry narrows it down to

western Borneo, Sumatra, or Java. But we shall see later

that K ’ang T ’ai knew of land to the east of Chu-li (= Wan Chen1s

Chu-chih) under the name of P fu-lo-chung;% ^ ^ , which I

believe represents wwoHhtaiiwestern Borneo (3) • Moreover Ko-ying

was south and not east of the Peninsula centre of Chii-11, One

therefore looks for it either in Sumatra or in Java,

(1) Dobby, Southeast Asia, fifth edition, 1956, 90, in respect

of the country now known as the Federation of Malaya, Volcanic
ash is found in Pahang, in the Federation, but the volcano must
have become extinct in prehistoric times. Professor Dobby does
not mention even volcanic ash found elsewhere in the Peninsula.
(2) One naturally thinks of the ancient sites in Kedah, in the
southern Peninsula, but it has never been suggested that any of
the archaeological evidence there belongs to so early a time of
the third centuiy. Professor Y?heatley makes no claim to
Ko-ying as a Peninsula centre.
(3) See pages 17/ -57^ below.
 98.

In spite of the fact that the volcanoes in Sumatra are on

the main range of mountains and closer to the west coast than to

the east coast of that island, I do not believe that Ko-ying

was on the west coast of Sumatra. We shall see later in this

chapter that Ko-ying was an important trading centre, but there

is no evidence that any of the coasts of the island lying north

of the equator contained important trading centres in the third

century, or indeed before the seventh century (l). Moreover

the itinerary south-east to Ssu-t*lao does not make much sense

if Ko^ylng was on the west coast of Sumatra. Nor need the

volcano evidence be an argument against the location of

Ko-ying; on the east coast of Sumatra. In later centuries the

Arabs reported a volcano near JSvaga, the heartland of Srlvijaya

on the south-east c^ast of this island, though the volcano In

question must have been far inland (2).

One is left with the east coast of Sumatra and the northern

coast of Java as the remaining possibilities for locating

Ko-ying:. In making a choice between these two coasts one should

not neglect the distance which separated Ko-ying from Ssu-tylao.

It was about 3#000 11 and in a south-eastern direction. In

terms of third century Chinese reckoning this distance would

(1) See p a g e s b e l o w * K*ang T*ai seems to have heard of

a backward region in northern Sumatra under the name of P*u-lo
vts
(2) Sauvaget, Relation, 10, Javaga here means a kingdom, for
Kalah was said to be part of It; ibid, 8. But Kalah was on the
west coast of the Malay Peninsula and would have been a distant
dependency of Javaga. which was in south-eastern Sumatra.
 99.

have been rather less than 1,000 miles. The calculation or

the distance between the two centres cannot, of course, be

regarded as precisely accurate, nor does one know on what

information Wan Chen bases it. Nevertheless the distance is

recorded and it has to be taken into account. It means that,

i^ Ko^ylng was on the Sumatran coast immediately to the south

of the Straits of Malacca, the furthest possible location for

Ssu-t1iao would be at the eastern end of the island of Java,

A Javanese location for Ssu-t^ao is consistent with its

description as a fertile country. Furthermore, I am sure that

Ko-ylnff itself happened to be anywhere in Java the Chinese

in the third century would never have heard of a flourishing

kingdom 1 , 0 0 miles further east. Even in the seventh century

the islands lying to the east of Java were terra incognita to

them (l). By this process of elimination a harbour, probably

near the mouth of a river, on the east coast of Sumatra south of

the Straits and therefore south of Chu~chih offers itself as the

likely location for Ko-.vlng:, With this location It is possible

to believe that the Chinese were told of a volcano vaguely to

the north of the kingdom; similarly they could have been told

P* u-leiys bay, lying south of the same kingdom. But neither

(l) I give the evidence for this statement on pages h-Vk’kX'Zbelow*

It will be seen that the statement is supported by I Tsing, a
Chinese pilgrim who actually lived in western Indonesia for a
number of yiars and can be expected to have been reasonably well
informed about the geography of the region.
 100,

the volcano nor the bay make much sei se if Ko-ying was on the

northern coast of Java,

In deciding between Sumatra and Java I have been chiefly

influenced by the evidence about the volcano and the distance

and direction which separated Ko-ying from Ssu-t*lap. Though

the exact location of Ko-ying cannot be defined, I propose that

it lay on the east coast of Sumatra, but not so far north as

the northern end of the active volcano belt, marked today by

Sorik-merapi just north of the equator and extending south to

Gunong Dempo about four degrees south of the equator (1)*

The kingdom was somewhere on the south-eastern coast of Sumatra

below the southern entrance to the Straits of Malacca, with

(i) Atlas tropisch Nederland (Uitgegeven door het Koninklijk

Nederlandsch aardrijkskundig ••«), The Hague, 193$, leaf 5*
This map shows the volcanoes which have been active as from
about 1600,
 101,

P fu-lei a little further south (l), Ssu-tflao was probably in

Java,

One naturally looks for contemporaneous evidence to confirm

or contradict the map ofviestern Indonesia suggested by the

fragments of third century Chinese literature. The Indians

never mentioned a toponym which can be identified with Ko-ylng.

/ \ A 0-
(1) I have wondered whether the Wen ^ bay of P Tu-lei can be
identified with the northern entrance to the Bangka Straits,
dominated by the Menumbing hill (2+55 metres) at the extreme
western end of Bangka island. The sound of Wen would have
been miuan: Karlgren, Grammata serica recensa, second edition,
Stockholm, 1957, serial number l+75a. Alternatively, the name
may have been derived from Bangka itself, a toponym which may
appear as early as in the list of geogrq? hical names in the
Mahariiddeaa commentary in the form of Vafl^a or Vaftkamt Ldvi,
*Ptol£mee, Le Niddesa et la Brhatkathl*, 27-28, According to
Ldvi, 1je crois inutile d finsister sur 1*identity du b et du v * .
Dr, de Casparis notes examples of the way the Srlvijaya dialect
has an initial which corresponds to b- or v- in Malay and
Javanefc; Prasa]|ti, 2, 1+2, note 2+9. Assailing itinerary of
A,D, 1015, described in thg Sung shlh. 2+89, 22b, states that the
ship left San-fo-ch*iS-ffa (Srlvi jaya) and crossed the estuary
of the Man mountain river/^ cLj & O . This itinerary was
discussed by Ferrand, who dia not identify the Man mountain;
*Le K fouen-louen1 , JA, Juil-Ao6t, 1919, 2+0, The Man mountain,
apparently seen soon after leaving Srlvijaya, may also be the
Menumbing hill, a landmark noted by Floris as 1Manupin1 when he
left the Palembang river in 1612. In 1015 the capital of
^rlvijaya may have been on the same river; Peter Floris ,,,,
31-32, Pires knew this part of Bangka as 1Monombyrj Suma
Oriental, I r 157* It^also appears on an early Portuguese map;
ibid, l5S, note 1. Menumbing may have been an important
sailors1 landmark as soon as the Musi river was visited by
traders. If the Wen bay represents the northern entrance to
the Bangka Straits, Ko-ying, to its north, was probably at the
estuary of the Jarabi river. But the identification of Wen
with Menumbing is only hypothetical.
 102.

but in Ptolemy’s Qeographia there Is a passage, probably based

on the reports of Indian merchants, which resembles to a

surprising extent the information which reached Wan Chen.

Since Professor Wheatley entered the field of early South

East Asian historical geography some may have come to mistrust

Ptolemaic evidence purporting to be derived from second century

information (l). Students of Indian history, on the other

hand, have more confidence in Ptolemy, who mentions at least

one ruler who is known to have been alive in the second century.

This ruler is Gastana, called ’king Tiastanes’ by Ptolemy.

Tiastanes was ruler of the city of Ozene. It is most unlikely

that Gastana would have been familiar to any of those who later

expanded the Geograuhla in Constantinople in the tenth or

(1) Professor Wheatley’s views are contained in Golden Khersonese.

138-159* The study which has been most responsible for
upsetting confidence in Ptolemy’s Geographla is L, Eagrow, ’The
origin of Ptolemy’s Geographia’, Geografiaka Annaler. Stockholm,
27, 3-h, 1945, 318-387* It is worth noting, however, the way
in which Bagrow states his conclusion. "In the future, It will
always be necessary In using the material supplied by ’Ptolemy’s’
Geographia to compare it with other sources: the classical
authors, annalists, and archaeological findings. If ’Ptolemy’s’
data are the only source for us, we cannot merely on their basis
determine the time or the questions of migrations of peoples,
the existence of cities, et cetera.” Professor Wheatley
rejected Ptolemy as a second century source because Ptolemy’s
details about the river system of the southern Peninsula suggest
that they emanated from a period much later than the second
century, when the southern Peninsula had become better known to
the western world.
 103.

eleventh century (l). X do not question Professor Wheatley’s

conclusion alout the indifferent value of Ptolemy’s data as

information about the Malay Peninsula In the second century

A.D., but as far as Indonesia is concerned the description in

the Geographia of Iabadiou is so similar to Wan Chen’s

description of Ko-ving and 5.s&*t?iao that the former may have

been derived from sources as old as the end of the second

century A.D. (2)• One thing is certain: the Chinese evidence

of the early third century is consistent with Ptolemaic

evidence.

Iabadiou is probably derived from Yavadlvu. the PrSkrit

form of the Sanskrit toponym YdvadvXpa which, in its Pali form,

is at least as old as the second or third century A.D. because

it appears in the Mahlnlddesa commentary (3)* Iabadiou seems

to represent the civilised part of Indonesia, which Indian

traders reached after passing the cannibal ’islands’ of

Barousai and Sabadlbai (h)* Like Ssu-t’iao it was ’said to be

(i> Tiastanes is mentioned in Book 7> chapter 1, section 63* ' I

have used Renou’s La gdographle de Ptol£m£e. L ’Inde. Paris, 1925#
(2) Book 7, chapter 2, section29.
i3) Pege hl> above* •'
(2+) Book 7# chapter 2, section28. Barousai Isclearly connected
with the ’Barus' toponym/7of northern Sumatra, which Idiscuss at
some length in chapter t m . In the present chapter I am only
concerned to establish the general pattern of Indonesian trade in
the third century A.D. and I have therefore not mentioned the
possibility that K ’ang T ’ai, like Ptolemy, heard of wild people
in northern Sumatra: see pages 3 9 1 - If K ’ang T ’ai actually
wrote about P ’u-lo *W , the correspondence between Ptolemy
and the third century Chinese sources is even closer.
very fertile’. But the significant detail about Iabadiou is

that ’it has a city named Argyre. situated at its western

extremity ( D o Argyre« must have been the part of the

region best known to Indians because it was the chief trading

centre. Thus, if one compares the descriptions of Iabadiou

and the Ko-ylng - Ssu-tfiao complex, in both cases it Is the

western end of these regions which is said to contain the

important trading centre, for we shall see in a moment that it

wa3 Ko-ylng and not Ssu-t’iao in the Ko-ylng - Ssu-t’iao complex

whose communications led to India. Ssu-t’iao Y/as 3,000 li

south-east of Ko-ying. The similarity between Ptolemy’s

picture of Iabadiou and the Chinese picture of Indonesia in the

third century seems to be a point worthy of emphasis. The

correspondence exists in spite of the fact that both pictures

were based on second-hand sources derived from India and Funan

respectively. I therefore believe that the Chinese description

of Indonesia, with the chief trading centre in the west of the

region as they knew of it, is a reliable one, and it reinforces

rather than contradicts my conclusion that Ko-ylng was on the

south-eastern coast of Sumatra* I am not implying that Java

at that time was culturally less advanced than southern Sumatra.

(l) Arpyre is certainly an ancient toponym. ^liny mentions It:

’extra ostium Indi Chryse et Argyre’ - ’off the mouth of the.
Indus there are Chryse and Argyre’ j Natural History. 6. 23, 80,
translated by Rackham (Loeb Classical Library).
 105#

Nevertheless It was Ko-ylng. not far from the southern entrance

of the Straits of Malacca, which was better known to foreign

traders.

It is now necessary to consider the range of Ko-ylng’s

trading relations, which I interpret as the foreign trade of

western Indonesia in the first half of the third century A.D.

There is, I repeat, no indication that Ko-ylng traded with

China, unless it did so through Chjj-chih. Tun-suru and Funan.

There is emphatically no hint of a direct voyage being made to

China over the South China Sea, a practice which K ’ang T ’ai,

obviously interested in communications, would certainly have

recorded. It would not be surprising If Ko-ying traded with

the Funanese dependencies on the Peninsula; otherwise K ’ang

T ’ai would never have heard of it. It is most unlikely, however,

that foreign merchants chose to take the circuitous route to

China through the Straits and thence from Ko-ying up to Tun-sun

in the northern Malay Peninsula. Ko-ving was isoldted from

China, and this was the impression formed In the sixth century

by Yang ITsuan-chih, author of the Lo yang chia lan chi:

’In the south there is the country of Ko-ylng. It

is very far from the capital. This land is cut off
completely (from China). For generations there
has been no communication (between Ko-ying and
China)* Even In the period of the two Han
dynasties and the (third century) Wei dynasty it
 never sent embassies to China (l)#’

The impression I have formed of Ko-ying is such that I

• +1 s
cannot accept Ferrand's assumption that Yeh-t’iao ffil ^

which sent an embassy to China in A.D. 132, was in Java or

Sumatra, though I am unable to offer a satisfactory alternative

explanation of where Yeh-t’iao was (2). Professor Stein has

suggested that it was on the south-western borders of China (3)#

while Fujita Toyohachi wondered whether Yeh-tfiao was an

alternative form of Ssu-t’iao jt/j in the sense of being

Ceylon (!+)• It would not be surprising if a Sinhalese ruler

sent a mission to China in 132, for missions from northern

(1) LYCLC. 89 . The reference in this passage to the northern

Wei dynasty need not be interpreted as meaning that the southern
Wu dynasty, contemporary with the Wei, may have received
embassies. Yang Hsuan-chih was writing from the point of view
of a northern Chinese. In the same passage he refers to the
southern Liang emperor Wu Ti as Su Y e n ^ j f ^ •
(2) The reference to this mission Is in HHS. 6, 9b. In 1919
Ferrand thought that Yeh-t’iao was Java; fLe Kouen-louen’, «TA,
Juil-Aout, 1919» 5. This was already Laufer’s view; ’Asbestos
and Salamander’, TP, 16, 1915# 351;373? ’Se-tiao1, TP, 17,
1916, 390* In 1922 Ferrand decided that foreign Java-like names,
of which this seemed to be an example, more often referred to
Sumatra: ’L fempire Sumatranals’, 208* Pelliot in 1901+ had
suggested that Yeh-t’lao was an early transcription of ’Java1;
’Deux itindraires’, 266-269.
(3) fLe Lin-yi’, 136-11+2. Professor Demidvllle was not
convinced by Stein; TP, 1+0, 1951, 336. It may be noted that
’Java’ is also a mainland South East Aslan toponym; it appears
in Ham Khamhaeng*s inscription of 1292 In the context of modern
Laos; Coedbs, Recuell des inscrlntions du Siam ..., I, Bangkok,
1922+, 1+8 .
(1+) Ho Chien-min’s translation, Chung kuo nan hai ku tai chlao
t’ung ts’ung k ’ao, Shanghai, 1935, 51+1-57$ • Pelliot was not
convinced: TP, 19, 1932, 182.
 107.

India had begun, as early as 89 (1). But whatever is the

explanation of the meaning of Yeh-t’lao. I have come to the

conclusion that the system of trans-Asian maritime communications

up to and including the third century A.D* was such that a

western Indonesian embassy to China in that period would have

been improbable. If an embassy in fact went in 132, it cannot

be regarded, as Perrand though^ as evidence of established

trading relations between Indonesia and China accompanied by

voyages over the South China Sea.

Nevertheless Ko-ying was an important commercial centre,

and the reason was that it, and through it western Indonesia,

traded with India (2). Two more fragments of the third century

make this clear:

(i) Professor Petech has pointed out that a Chinese translation

of^the Bamvuktavadana of about A.D. 180 refers to Ceylon as
Ssu-ho-tieh: *Some Chinese texts concerning Ceylon’, 221-222*
t2) The LYCLC states that it ’was the greatest kingdom in the
south {§)JiiL * * LYCLC, 89. I follow the compilers
of the TPYL in regarding this passage as being a reference to
Ko-ying. though its position in the text may suggest Funanj
TPYL, 971, U305a. I believe that the LYCLC was quoting from
The same passage also mentions the products of
Ko-ying, which Yang Hsuan-chih could hardly have invented.
 108*

ft..-*,-
*K ’ang T ’ai’s Wu shih wai kuo chuan: The king of aifl-ylng
likes horses *' Yueh-chih merchants are continually
importing them to/lifr-yinp; country by sea. The king
buys them all* If one (of the horses) escapes from its
rein on the road (from the harbour to the palace) and has
to be held by its mane when it is shown to the king, the
latter still buys it at half price (l).’
& #1 4*4* /v * £ a,a
$> i f P & % - % # ® % & §
?f\ % % J<% h
% °,h W ^ ^ ^ ^

’Nan chou i wu chih: Ku-nu is about 8,000 11 from Ko-ylng*

There are more than 10,000 families (in Ku-nu). They all
use four-v/heeled carts driven by two or four horses.
People from all corners meet there* There are always
more than a hundred ships (in the harbour). The crowds
gathering in the market are ore than 10,000. Day and
night they do business* Drums and horns are sounded on
the ships* The clothes of these people resemble the
clothes of the Chinese (2).f

7/here was Ku~nu ? Was it the port used by the Yueh-chih

horse dealers ? The Yueh-chih, in spite of the waning of their

l/odXa,
political power in noi therr^ttMw, may still have been prominent
in a number of Indian ports in the early third century, and Ku-nu

could have been any of these ports* Its description does not

(1) TPYL* 359* 1650a. This translation differs slightly from

Pelliotrs in ’Textes chinois*, 250. The last sentence is
obscure* Pelliot suspected that the horse was dead when the
king bought it at half-price* Perhaps it was a frisky one which
had been confined to the ship for too long* Professor Heine-
Geldern has written on Yueh-chih horses and their influence on
the scenes on one of the bronze drums of South East Asia; ’The
drum named Pakalamau’, India Antigua. Leyden, 19k7$ 167^179*
(2) TPYL* 790, 3501b.
impress one as that of a South East Asian country. The mention

of horse-driven carts suggests somewhere in northern India,

while the clothes of the Inhabitants, likened to Chinese

clothes, may reflect the trousers and belts of a horse-riding

population, which are more likely to have resembled clothes

introduced to northern China from the steppes than the loin­

cloth and draped robes of the southern Indian. The comment on

the similarity between the Kn-nu and Chinese clothes need not

be taken as a fanciful guess, for Fa TTsien observed that the

clothes of the people of Udyana north of Taxila resembled those

of the Chinese (l). But I am not prepared to be more specific

in locating Ku-nu than saying that it was not likely to be

near the estuaries of the Ganges or the Indus. The former1s

port was known to K*ang T ’ai as Tlmraliptl^^ and in the

neighbourhood of the latter was Chla-na-tfiao (2).

Uncertainty about the exact location of Ku-nu does not

affect the conclusion that Ko-.ving. south of the southern entrance

(l) Giles* translation, 11.

(2; On Tamraliptl see Shui ehing chu. 1, h3b* On Chia-na-t*iao
see pages 69-70 above. Mr. B.N. Mukherjee winders whether Ku-nu
was Kayana. There may be a further reference to Ku-nu * Hu-li
^ ‘] country is ‘to the south-west of Nu-t* iao island. It is
on the side of the se a £ ££ ;1|-| * \ TPYL, 790,
3501b, quoting the NCIWC. That Ku-nn-fviao) was abbreviated as
Nu-t1iao is suggested by the statement in the LYCLC that formerly
there was Nu-tfiao country whose people used horse-drawn four-
wheeled carts; LYCLC. 89. Something may have gone wrong with
the text, Hu-li suggests the early Tamil name for Ceylon which
 110

to the Straits of Ifalaeca, appears in history as the most

western Indonesian trading settlement which was in touch with

India. It was a terminus for Indian shipping and a point of

departure for Indian trade goods, probably handled by local

middlemen, making their way further east into the Archipelago*

The products of Ko-ylng itself are known only through the

Lo-yang chia lan chi, probably drawing on information originally

available in the Nan chou i wu chih*

«$ & i 0 4k & 1% ^ & p 62. % & Q$ ^

i i ^ ^ it ^
1(Ko-yingy l ) is a kingdom of the southern barbarians.
It is a very powerful one* Its population is very
numerous. It produces bright pearls, gold, jade and
crystal rarities, and areca nuts*1

Gold and areca nuts are what one would expect of a Sumatran

port, and the other precious things may have come through trade
0.6$o
with foreigners. There was probably^ some trade in the collection

of local produce, stimulated by the needs of Indian merchants,

as was happening in the same period between Funan and the Chu-po

offshore islands*

The evidence about Ko-ying is coherent and gives a

straightforward picture of the direction of western Indonesian

foreign trade in the first half of the third century. Neither

(l) I quote from the LYCLC. 89, and regard the passage as
evidence about Ko-ying on the stx'ength of TPYL. 971* U305a. The
latter, quoting the LYCLC. begins:
the Straits of Malacca nor Sumatra and Java lay on the sea

route between the Indian Ocean and China, and efforts to construe

earlier evidence, such as the Huan&-chlh and Yeh-t*iao passages,

as Indications of Sino-Indonesian trade before the third

century must, in my opinion, be treated with caution. Ferrand

more than any other scholar has been responsible for creating

the impression that Indonesia traded with China at such an early

date. Ferrand was a distinguished Arabic scholar, an

enthusiastic compiler of sources in a variety of languages, and

an ingenious philologist* Unfortunately, he was capable of

making anachronistic use of his facts, inferring too confidently

that situations existed long before there was any reliable

evidence that they did*

I need not discuss in detail two other studies of early

Indonesia which have drawn on Chinese sources. Both Sir Roland

Rraddell and Professor Reine-Geldern have independently argued

that P yi-chien , known to K fang T*ai (l), was on the

south-eastern and northern coasts of Sumatra respectively (2).

Pelliot suggested long ago that ?*1-chien was on mainland South

(l) TPYL, 811, 3605a* The work cited is the Fu nan chuan.
Pelliot analysed the different title.® of K fang T ’ai^s work in
BKFKO, 3, 1903, 275 and in TP, 22, 1923, 121, note 1.
(IT) ’Malayadvipa*; *Le pays de P ^ - K * ten* * Pelliot18 trans­
lation of the long Liang shu passage about this kingdom {.LS, 5k,
7a-8a) is in *Le Fou-nan*, 26k*
 112*

East Asia, and I am certain that he was right (l)* Sir

Noland and Professor Heine-Geldern thought that, because this

place was beyond Tun-sun and an Island in the 1great ocean* (2),

it must have been in Sumatra* But chou does not only mean

*island*; it can refer to any land mass watered by the sea*

Moreover it was said to be 8,000 li from Funan, and it would be

strange if Sumatra was plotted by the commupications-conscious

Chinese in terms of its distance from Funan and not from a port

much closer such as Tun-sun or Chu-ehih (3). It is more

reasonable to picture F*1-chien as a remote place in the

hinterland of Funan* Its population were said to eat traders,

and their link with the outside world was in the form of

sending presents to the ruler of Funan* There was probably

some vassal relationship between the two countries, and this

would explain why the passage about P*1-chien found its way into

th® Liang shu*s account of Funan, in which it follows the account

(1) fLe Fou-nan*, 261*, note 1; *Deux itin^raires*, 2b0.

P*i-chien suggested the Bataks to Professor Heine-Geldern, but
cannibalism, attributed to the people of P*1-chlen, has not been
unknown on mainland South East Asia; for example, see JSS* 32,
I* 19U0, 9-10* Why not the Dayaks of Borneo ? Professor Heine-
Geldern did not explain the long neck of the ruler of P* i-chien»
The only reference to long necks known to me is the habit in
north-eastern Burma of elongating the necks of maidens to enhance
their charm; Seidenfaden, The Thai peoples* Bangkok, 1958* 1*8*
(2 ) LS, 5k, 7a:i£§ ^ ■%, ?[- 7^ ^ v|l| 4>
The text does not say that P*i-chien lay beyond Tun-sun*
(3) Lin-yang , believed to have been somewhere in Burma,
is similarly located by K*ang T fai in terms of Its distance from
Funan, from which it was separated by 7*000 li; TPYL* 787*
3i+85b*
 113.

of Tan-sun. The language of the people of i—chlen is said

to h e fa little different from that of Funan1 (i), and this

reads like a Funanese observation brought to the notice of

K farg T* ai ( 2) .

P f i-ehien must disappear from the early map of Indonesia,

leaving Ko-ving as the symbol of the earliest recognisably

Indonesian foreign trade. But Ko-ying*s Indian trade need not

have been the first commercial activities on the south-eastern

coast of Sumatra, for the hinterland near Korintji, Pasemah, and

Ranau has revealed traces of metal cultures which may be very

old (3). The art forms of these cultures have striking

affinities with objects associated with the early metal culture

of Tong king, v/hich was probably developing in the delta of the

Red river some time before the beginning of the Christian era,

I'Vestern Indonesia received its metal culture from the mainland,

and it is likely that the populations in the hinterland of

southern Sumatra were in touch at an early time with the outside

world by means of the extensive river systems of the "usi and

(1) M . 5U, 7b: jjt A

(2) The T F Y K , 959***^-^^ ** .• Quoti ng unknown source, says that
P Ti-chien was on a great river, which suggests the Fekong or
f-enam. P* 1-chlen was one of several states on the same large
chout TPYL, 790, 3501a, Quoting Chu-chih* s Fu nan chi.
nr H,R. van Heekeren, The Bronze-Iron age of Indonesia, The:
Hague, 1958, 20-1, L2-3, 63-7&> 83. lie seems to accept the view
of Callenfels and Professor Heine-Geldern that the Tongking metal
culture was under way about 300 B.C. but does not commit himself
on the age of the earliest Indonesian metal culturej ibid, 15.
 114.

the Jambi-Patang Hari, at whose estuaries small trading

settlements would have developed*

It is in the context of the problem of the dissemination

of the Indonesian metal cultures that the following passage in

the Huang-chih account may have some significance:

fThe merchant ships of the barbarians were used to

transfer them (the Chinese envoys) to their
destination (Huang-chih)♦ The barbarians also
profited from the trade and by plundering and
killing people (i).’

These barbarian ships may have helped to transmit the metal

cultures from southern China and Tongking, along the coast of

Indo-China and down the RTalay Peninsula, to western Indonesia*

The passage in the Chylen Han shu refers to a time when there

was already a flourishing metal culture in Tongking, and o n e .

can picture the shunting from harbour to harbour of metals,

artisans, and techniques in the form of primitive barter

exchanges. The rarity of the metals, and perhaps their magical

prestige as well, would have ensured the mobility of the metal

trade* Ko-ying could therefore have been at the receiving end

of the trade long before Indians first visited the south-

(i) CHS, 28lfo 37b* I hay© followed Dr. Wang Cungwu and other
Chinese scholars In rendering$_|L as ’transfer1; ’Nanhai trade*,
20. I have, however, translated the passage in the past tense
because I believe that the account was written in connexion with
the mission to Huang-chih*
eastern coast of Sumatra (l)*

Two further questions remain to be considered briefly

before we move on from this earliest period of western Indonesian

commerce* What were the business transactions which took place

in this Indian-orientated trade ? To what extent did these

transactions contribute to the later expansion of Indonesian

commerce, when the successors to Ko-ylng began to trade with

China ?

(1) In view of Dr. Wang Gungwu’s account of the limited nature

of Yueh shipping (’Nanhai trade’ , chapter one) I find it
diri'icult to accept Professor Heine-Geldern’e theory that
Yueh traders had small colonies in Indonesia, xhich became
diffusion centres for the metal cultures; Science and Scientists
in the Netherlands Indies, ITew York, 1945, 147*
 116.

I CHAPTER FOUR

EARLY INDONESIAN TRADE WITH INDIA

Ko-yirig imported Yueh-chih horses, and this is all the

Chineee evidence tells us about the contents of the trade between

western Indonesia and India in the early third century A.D. No

doubt by then it was already at least a century old and involved

much more than horse-dealing, but the Indian sources of

information are such that little can be said of it.

I shall not return to the problem of the antiquity of the

trade nor shall I consider the possibility of contacts between

Indonesia and pre-Dravidian India, suggested by certain

linguistic facts (l). Nor do I intend to enquire where were

the first Indian trading posts in the region. It is likely

that South East Asian toponyms appearing in the Indian religious

and epic literature xeve originally given by sailors only to a

few harbours. All that is safely known of the location of

these harbours is that Yueh-chih merchants visited Ko-ying.

which I have identified with the south-east coast of Sumatra.

Speculation concerning the earliest Indian trading posts in

Indonesia may rest on a firmer basis when we have noted later

(i) j. Gonda, Au 3trisch en Arlsch. Het belang van de kennis der

Austrische talen, voornameli.lk voor de Indische phllologie.
Utrecht, 193R.
 117.

in this study the uneven manner in which the different coasts

of western Indonesia subsequently developed as commercial centres

The regions in India from which the merchants originally

came and their motives must also lie outside the scope of

this Btudy. The Perlnlus* reference to colandla sailing from

the Coromandel coast to Chryse indicates that in the first

century A.D. there was already some trade between southern India
-tog
and parts of South East Asia# It is possible that^earliest

voyages were made from the ancient ports of the Ganges down the

coast of Burma. A search for gold has been regarded as an

important motive for the original Indian interest in South East

Asia, operating in the last centuries before the Christian era

when the movement of barbarians across central Asia deprived.the

Indians of Siberian gold and in the second half of the first

century A.D. when Vespasian cut off supplies of Roman bullion

to India (l)# SuvarnabhCmi and Suvarnadvlpa. ’the Gold Land*

and *the Gold Islands’, may have been colourful expressions

which exemplified the wealth of South East Asia, though it is

significant that Chinese records of the third century A.D.

mention several gold-producing areas in the region; these

references may reflect the genuine reputation of South East Asia

as an important source of gold (2 ).

(l) L^vi, ’K ’ouen-louen et Dvlpantara’, 627j Coedbs, Stats, 42-3.

C2J The following countries were connected with gold: P*i-chien
(TPYL. 811, 3605a, quoting K ’ang T ’ai); Po-t’a n ;^ Vi iTPYL.
7^7, 3485a, quoting K ’ang T ’ai), Funan, and Lin-yi.
 118.

On what terms was the early Indian trade conducted ? To

what extendt should the Indonesians be pictured as simple folk,

fascinated by foreigners and delighted to have the chance of

bartering their minerals and jungle wealth for Indian manufactured

goods (l) ? There has been a reaction among some historians,

though not among Indian ones, against the view that the original

trading contact was between people of greatly unequal cultural

status. Not only are the persistent identity and vitality of

Indonesian society now acioiov/ledged (2). The reaction against

the traditional rendering of early Indonesian trade has also

been reinforced by the economic historian, van Leur, who argued

that the Indian traders belonged to the lower social groups and

included foreigners from various countries (3)* They were

’pedlars*, and people such as these are unlikely to have been

carriers of Brahmanic culture.

The origins, character, and evolution of early Indian

influence in Indonesia will be discussed for many years to come.

Here I wish to cay no more than that I am sympathetic with the

(1) This is, in effect, the picture Ferrand describes; ’Le K ’ouei>
louen*, JA, Juil-Aout, 1919, 15-18.
(2) The reaction developed among certain Dutch writers in the
1930iQ8p Casparis, ’Historical v/riting on Indonesia’, Historians
of South-east Asia. 1961. 136-139.
nr Indonesian1trade and society. 89-110. Professor Bosch, the
oldest surviving Dutch writer on early Indonesia, has stressed
the probability that Indonesians themselves were chiefly respon­
sible for propagating Indian culture as a result of visits to
India; ” *Local genius” en Oud-Javaanse kunst’, Meded. Kon. Akad.
Wet. Afd. Lett, n.r., 15, 1952, 1-25.
 119

modern tendency not only to distinguish in time between the

original Indian trading contacts and the later Brahmanic

cultural contacts but also to avoid the assumption that the

latter were a direct consequence of* the former in the sense

that Indian mercantile communities in Indonesia were subsequently

reinforced by the arrival of Brahman priests and scholars* I

believe that* as far as the early trading kingdoms of Indonesia

were concerned, there was no question of Brahmanic cultural .

influence until long after the first Indian merchants arrived;

in the meantime, the rulers of these kingdoms, as a result of

growing prosperity and knowledge of the outside world, had

become capable of forming independent judgments on the practical

advantages of strengthening their institutions of government

by means of certain Indian kingship doctrines. As a result

of their own political initiative they came to employ educated

Indians, Buddhist as well as Brahman, and also Indonesians who

had studies in India. But this development, in so far as it

can be regarded as a form of 'Indlanlsation* , happened long

after the early Indo-Indonesian trade which I am considering in

the present chapter.

In the earliest trading period transactions between Indians

and Indonesians may before long have been conducted on terms of

equality, with Indonesians capable of driving bargains and even

of taking their trade to India. And in Indonesia as in India

foreigners would have come to terms with the local rulers. The

early Indian merchants in Indonesia have certainly left no

 120.

evidence of t. emselves. Nor did their colloquial languages

leave any impression on the Indonesian vocabulary, from which

the conclusion has been drawn that not only was there no

Indian political domination but that it is unlikely that there

were any permanent and powerfully organised Indian settlements

by the time the first inscriptions appear in the fifth centuiy

A.D* (l). To this extent the linguistic evidence does not

suggest that the Indians taugnt the Indonesians how to trade.

If the conclusio s reached later in this study are w e 11-founded,

tie initiative displayed by I.-donesian seamen in the fifth and

sixth centuries would make it surprising if the early Indian

trade h *d not encouraged Indonesians to handle most of the

collecting trade in their own country and also to send ships to

India itself (2). Not enough weight has been given to the

possibility that one motive in the early trade was the desire

of t.,e Indonesians for goods from India which led to their

saili g there to obtain them.

In one respect van L e u r ’s description of the Indian

’pedlars1 may be amplified. He did not take into account the

(1) Damais, fL--s Seri turesT , T31I, 30, U, 1955, 367. de

Casparis has noted that one of the few Indonesian terms in the
list of jutential traitors in Srlvijaya at t>e end of the seventh
century is uahavam or ’shippers1 ; Pr asa sti . 2, 20.
(2) One J a -.aka tale refers to the merchants of Suvaftnabhurnj who
visited Bharukaccha (Broach); no. h63- But wer: they Indian
or South East Asian ?
 121.

likelihood that some of them were sympathetic towards Buddhism

or were indeed Buddhists themselves (l). The Yueh-chih who

visited Ko-ying may have had Buddhist connexions, and in the

second chapter I remarked that the same type of merchant found

during the early centuries of the Christian era in the oasis

cities of Turkestan probably turned up in Funan as well. The

casteless and cosmopolitan influence of Buddhism would have

assisted in promoting tolerance among Indian merchants in their

dealings with South East Asian peoples (2).

But not only is there still uncertainty about the terms on

which the original commerce between Indonesia and India was

conducted. V7e are also ignorant of its contents. From

Indian sources there are no means of reconstructing a comprehensive

inventory of the Indonesian exports in this early period, and this

deficiency makes it difficult to decide to what extent the later

Indonesian trade with China was an expansion in volume of the

Indian-type trade or was entirely different in character. It

is significant, however, that the earliest Indian references

to South East Asian products have little to say about the goods

which I have come to regard as the basis of the later trade

between western Indonesia and China.

The early Indian texts mention gharuwood and sandalwood

as coming from foreign parts, presumably from South East

(1) On this point see Ldvi on the Indian merchants* cult of the
Buddhist saint Hanimekhala; 1’’Les marchands de mer”1 and
’Itfanimekhala1•
( 2)"professor Coed&s has made this point; Stats,
 122

Asia (l). Yet Indonesian gharuwood never became a famous

trade produce (2)* White sandalwood of e.stern Indonesia is

much more valuable (Santalum album Linn,), and it would not

be surprising if Indonesian ships brought it from Timor or

Sumba to entrepots in western Indonesia for trans-shipment to

India, In the fourth century A.D. the Chinese seem to have

known of ’red sandalwood

(Pterocarpus indicus Willd*)* It was said to come from

Funan (3)# The Chinese, like the Indians, called it ’sandalwood*

(U)* It is possible that by that time South East Asian traders

had learnt from the Indians the habit of giving the Angsana

tree the name of *sandalwood*; the Indians called their

Pterocarpus santalinus Linn, ’red* sandalwood.

The early Indian traders may have been anxious to obtain

cloves (Eugenia aromatica Kuntze), another excellent product of

(1) Gharuwood was sometimes known in Sanskrit literature as

anSrya.ja or fa product of the country of the barbarians*; Gonda,
Sanskrit in Indonesia, xviii. The Rlmayana refers to ’yellow
sandalwoodr from Mount Rgabha. 7/hich L^vi considered was a
reference to Timor or Celebes in eastern Indonesia; ’Pour
l ’histoire du RamSyana*. 10U-111 and especially 110*
(2) Chao Ju-kua in 1225 rated Grlvijayan and Javanese gharu wood
low in value among the South East Asian species; Hirth and
Rockhill, Chau Ju-kua, 20U,
(3) Ku Chin chu, £2, On this subject see E.H. Schafer, ’Rosewood,
Dragon1s Blood, and Lac*, 129-130.
(b) The Indians called it candana. For an example of the latter
see Avinash Chandra Kaviratna* s translation of the Caraka samhitS,
Part 21, 63S, note k, where it is stated that in the context of
’bitters’ only the red variety was used* ......
 123.

eastern Indonesia, The clove (lavaflga) of* the dvlpantara.

’the other island(s)t undoubtedly meaning the Indonesian

archipelago, is mentioned by Ktlldasa, who is generally

believed to have been alive about A.D, J4.OO (l). The clove

is also mentioned in the early medical treatise traditionally

ascribed to Caraka (2), Caraka was almost certainly the

physician of the Kusana king Kaniska, of the first or second

century A.D., though the extant version of Caraka1s sairhitS

was reconstructed much later (3)* It is probably safer to

regard Kalidasa’s reference to lavafiga from the dvlpftntara as the

first certain reference to the Indonesian clove* It is

unlikely that the Chinese owed their knowledge of the clove

to the Indians, for they probably obtained it from the Funanese,

who were trading with the islands of eastern Indonesia (k)•

Centuries later western Indonesia became famous as a pepper

1) Haghuvam^a. 6 , verse 57.

! 2} Caraka eamhita. Part 56, 1759» for treatment of diseases of
the mouth.
(3) On the Caraka samhita. q $ q Filiiozat. L ’lnde classique* 2.
1953, 150-151.
(if) There has been some etymological discussion of the word
lavaftga. the Indonesian as well as the Sanskrit word for the
clove, and it has been suggested that it was a loan word from
Indonesia; see, for example, Gonda, Sanskrit in Indonesia.
Nagpur, 1952, xviii* But it has also been suggested that the
word was originally used by Tamils for the flower and fruit of
the Indian cinnamon and was, perhaps in the first century A.D.,
transferred by them to the similarly smelling clove of Indonesia;
Yamada, Tozai koyaka shi. 91 , quoting Okamoto, Chusei Morukka no
Koryo. l ^ q i f . I b n Batuta Is invoked as saying that the clove,
nutmeg, and cinnamon came from the same tree.
 I2i+.

producing region, but in the ancient world the Indians had

ho rivals as pepper cultivators, users, and traders* One of

their medical recipes^involving the use of long pepper, was

adopted by Greek doctors before Alexander’s expedition to

northern India (l)* Innumerable medical preparations of

pepper are recommended in the samhltS o£ Caraka and Su^ruta (2),

and it would not be surprising if the pepper-conscious Indian

traders became Interested in the many wild-growing peppers which

flourish in the moist climate of western Indonesia* It is

even possible that they sometimes used Indonesian peppers to

boost their exports to Rome in booming trade years during the

first centuries of the Christian era (3)* Unfortunately there

is no evidence to prove that the Indians imported Indonesian

peppers* There is only one hint that western Indonesia before

about A.D* hOQ had acquired the reputation of being a pepper

growing area. The hint is contained In a passage in a Chinese

translation of the Sutra of the Twelve Stages of the Buddha

ill , undertaken by KHlodaka in 392* Here it is stated

that the king of She-yehffi] possessed both long and black

(1) Filliozat, Doctrine classlque* 211-212*

i2) On the Susruta samhlta see Filliozat, L fInde classique* 2, lk7*
(3) Both Professor Warmington and Professor Lohuisen-de-Leeuw
have foreseen this possibility; Commerce* 182; ’India and its
cultural empire*, W+f in connexion with trade products In general*
Sudruta states that long pepper (pippall) should be used only
after it had matured for at least a year; Sudruta samhita. 1 ,
339. It r/ould have been medically feasible to sell Indonesian
long pepper (Piper retrofractum Vahl.) to the Romans.
 125,

pepper, Ldvi thought that She-yeh ($1*ia/d£flas ^z^a/^a)

was a reference to 'Java* (i). The kingdom was certainly in

the maritime world of South East Asia.

I suspect that the wild growing cubeb pepper (Piper

cnbeba Linn*) has the best chance of any Indonesian pepper of

appearing in the early Indian trade. In the first half of the

eighth century the materia medica writer Ch fen Tsrang-chfi pjt

states that it grew inSrlvi^aya (Fo-shih-'fffi 'tfi )

&
and calls it Pi-teng-chla|? Ifo (2) * Laufer reconstructed this

word as a transcription of vidaAga, the Sanskrit word for Embelia

ribes Burm., a climbing bush found in India and eastwards as

far as Java (3)* Laufer pointed out that the seeds of Embelia

ribes are extensively used as an adulterant for black pepper

and he suggested that the Indonesian cubeb was given the name

vidaflga because it resembled Embelia ribes in appearance and

properties. Laufer*s explanation is the likely one, and it is

(1) TaishS Tripitaka, vol. h# no. 195# lh7b. I translate this

passage on page . Levi’s views on this passage are in fPour
l'histoire du HSmlyapa1* 82-85.
(2) PTKM. 32, 1321b. The Arab Ibn Roete, writing about 903#
attributes cubeb pepper to Sallhat» apparently on the north­
eastern coast of Sumatra$ Ferrand, Textes. 1, 79* Pigolotti of
Florence, in the first half of the lhth century, refers to both
cultivated and wild cubeb pepper, though he does not indicate the
source of production; La practica della mercatura. edited A. Evans
Cambridge, Mass., 1936, "2914.; ' 37U. Heyne notes that it was
cultivated in Java in the 19th century. When wild cubeb was in
demand, it was often adulterated with other wild species of
Plperaceae. and only in 1892 was a means discovered of distinguish­
ing between real and false cubeb; Nuttlge. I, 523-525#
(3) *VicJaAga and cubebs*, TP, 16, 1915# 282-288.
 126 *

significant that in Ku Weij||j Kuang chou chi, written

not later than the early sixth century, it is said that

1 % fid £z. % % $ jS tf\ M*- &
9Teng-chia grows in several ocean countries; it is a
tender black pepper (l)*f

The similarity between cubeb and black pepper is re-iterated

by Li Shih-chen, the author of the great materia medica of

the end of the 16th century. Li Shih-chen says:

,(A -k $ -i%%% m i 47i\ u
Hi
9A number of the foreign (countries) in the ocean to the
south have it (cubeb pepper)* It is a creeper. In
spring time a white flower unfolds. In£wtai®r time it
bears black fruit. Cubeb pepper and black pepper are
two species of the seme family (2 ).*

Cubeb pepper was certainly known to the Chinese by the eighth

century and, according to the Kuang chou chi, by the fifth or

sixth century, and in view of its having the Sanskrit name of

vlflanga^which was a substitute for black pepper, it is possible

that the Indians long before the eighth century had come to

(1) PTKM. 32, 1321b, quoting Li Hsun. Chiil'cL is written as

chih d: . But in the CLPT, 9* 235b, the quotation is attributed
to the‘JKuang chih. a text which could not have been written later
than 521. I consider the dating and reliability of both the
Kuang chou chi and the Kuang chih on pages •
(2) PTKM. 32. 1321b. Pi-teng-chia appears immediately before
black pepper in the list of • Champa tribute gifts to China in
1072; SHYK.tL ^ 7, 7855b.
 127*

regard it as yet another substitute for black pepper (l)* The

Indians may have been responsible for the original transaction

of substituting cubeb for black pepper, with the Romans, knowing

nothing of what had happened, as the victims of the deception Cl)*

The classical literature of Europe is, In fact, unhelpful

for supplementing the meagre Indian records of the contents of

the early Indo-Indonesian trade* In a negative way, however,

the classical records are of assistance* If the Indians were

tapping on a large scale the natural wealth of western Indonesia

in the first two centuries of the Christian era, one would

expect the Romans, with their taste for oriental luxuries, to

have known the backwash of the trade and to have mentioned such

characteristic Indonesian produce as camphor, benzoin, and cloves*

But it is an impressive circumstance that none of these

com oditles are mentioned in the earliest Roman sources analysed

(1) I am very doubtful whether the fblack pepper 1

attributed to She-yeh in Kalodaka’s translation of the Twelve
Stages of the Buijha was in fact Piper nigrum Linn* This plant
is indigenous to India and not to Indonesia, where it was
transplanted at an unknown time though before the 13th century,
for Chao Ju-kua attributes it to Sh£-p* o » Java*
(2) Professor Warmington considers that cubeb pepper reached
Europe much later than the first two centuries of the Christian
era; Commerce * 221. He concedes, however, that it may have been
known to the earlier Romans; ibid, 220. A late gloss on the
Tamil poeli Gilappafligaram that vasam (spiceg)^ mentioned in the
early trade between southern India and overseas, included cubeb
pepper Is a comment on the later Importance of cubeb imports and
not evidence that cubeb was coming to India in the early centuries
of the Christian era; this reference is quoted by Professor.
rTilakanta Sastri in JGIS. 11, 1, 19U4* 27*
 128,

by Professor Warmington (l). One has to conclude that if

these plant substances reached India, the scale of the trade

was still too small to permit re-exports to the Mediterranean

market. There i 3 even some doubt when the Romans first knew

the famous clove under the name of caryophyllum. though Cosmas

Indicopleustes, writing in the first half of the sixth century,

seems to make it clear that the clove was reaching Ceylon from

countries further east (2 ),

I suspect that only snail amounts of the most valuable

form of western Indonesian produce were arriving in India before

the fourth century A.D., and my reason for this suspicion is

the slight impact made by tree camphor on early Indian literature.

Karptira, or camphor, is casually mentioned In the Jiltaka

tales, in the Rlm5yana. in the Millnda-panha, and in the medical

works attributed to Caraka and Su£ruta (3). Because the

(1) Commerce. Part two, 180-234.

(2) Ibid, 199-200,
(3) J&taka tales no. 285 and 547 where camphor is regarded as a
luxurious or costly substance. HUmllyajQa. Book 4 of the Kiskindhg
Kapda, canto 28, in Ramies description of southern India in the
rainy season. Camphor trees do not grow there, Hsuan Tsang
also attributes camphor trees to this region. Professor Yamada’s
view is that the camphor-smelling cinnamon root and bark, known
by the Tamils as karua and karppu, was the tree in question;
Tozai koyaka shi, 97-&. Millnda-panha. chapter 3, verse 332,
where camphor is regarded as a 'desirable thing’. Caraka
sarahitS, Part 56, 1759* Su^ruta samhltS 1, 391; 1, 507; 2,
563. I note that SuirutaT s recipe incorporating camphor for
ailments of the mouth is similar to I Tsingfs account of the
monks’ habit of washing their mouths in the islands of the
’southern ocean’; Takakusu, Record. 48. In both cases camphor
appears with other Indonesian plants, and this may be a guarantee
that Sudruta’s karpGra was genuinely camphor.
 129*

Jataka tales cannot be dated later than the fourth century A*D*

in the form in which they are now available, it seems that by

about 400 the Indians were importing some camphor, But it is

noteworthy that thiB important drug, through which Sumatra was

later to have Asia-wide fame, has only a minor status in the

medical samhita associated with the names of Caraka and Su£ruta (l)

and was ignored by the early medical treatise known as the

’Bower manuscript’, written between the fourth and the sixth

century (2 ), It cannot therefore be easily claimed that

camphor made an early and important impact on the Indian materia

medica. and we shall see later that the impact wns even slighter

on western Asia and Constantinople, where the first notices of

it are not before the sixth century (3). Cosrnas did not mention

it, and this is perhaps the most eloquent argument for believing

that it was still an unimportant item of trade between India and

(1) The Caraka saijihltS mentions camphor once and the Su£ruta
samliita only rarely* Both prescribe it for the mouth* The
AstaAgahrd a y a . attributed to Vagbhata, only mentions it for use
against the 111-effects of heat in early summer; the passage is
quoted by Hoernle, The Bower Manuscript* 1, 13* note 14-
Professor Pilliosat thinks that the Astaftgahrdaya’s author may
have lived before the seventh century and certainly before the
tenth; L ’Inde classique. 2, 158*
(2) This is Professor Filliozat’s view in L ’Inde classique. 2,
157. In La doctrine classique* 11-12, he pdnts out that the
script of this manuscript is clearly older than what he describes
as the ’Kupapa’ script in the form it had assumed by about A*D*
640.
(3) Pages 3/**-“
5/? •
 130

Indonesia as late as the early sixth century. The gilappadigaram

includes camphor among the goods of Tondi brought to southern

India on the 9fleet of tall roomy ships1 , but this passage may

be as late as the sixth century (i).

An early Indian interest in camphor has been inferred from

the reference to Karptlradvlpa. ’the camphor land 1, mentioned in

the eleventh century Kathdsaritsamara of the Kashmiri Somadeva (2).

This work is believed to have derived some of its stories from

the lost Byhatkathd of Gunadhya. The reference to Karpuradvipa.

nowever, symbolises the difficulties in using Indian literature

for a chronologically satisfactory study of early Indonesian

history. In the first place, the date of the lost Brhatkathd

is in doubt. Professor De thinks that it would not be an

’unjust conjecture’ to assign it to the fourth century (3)t though

Winternitz once proposed that GujiatJhya perhaps lived In the first

century A.D. Secondly, there is even a doubt whether the

original Brhatkathd in fact referred to Karpftradvlpa at all;

Professor De thinks that It could have been a Kashmiri accretion^)

(1) IJilakanta Sastri’s view in JGIS, 11, 1, 19UU* 28. My

colleague Dr# f^arr is not certain that the Tondi mentioned in
this passage was in South East Asia, '
(2) The Ocean of Story, trans. by Tawney, London, 1925-8, volume
22^. Dr. Wheatley’s maps of the span of the early Indian
voyages include Karpftradvlpa, represented by north-west' rn Borneo;
Golden Khersonese. figures 3U and U5; also page 184*
H T D a s g n p t a and De, History of Sanskrit literature, I, 92,
(k) Ibid, 98-99.
 131.

Finally, it is uncertain whether the ’camphor land1 was

anything more than an invention of folklore (i).

This brief review of what is known of the contents of the

early Indonesian trade with India has been depressingly negative

In its conclusions. One is left with the feeling that the trade

could not have been considerable or one which comprised those

(1) This Is Ferrand’s suggestion; JA, Juil-Aout, 1919, 185, note

3# For similar reasons one hesitates to folloto) Tideman in
accepting the statement in the KathasarltsSgara about Kalasapnra
in Suvarnadvlpa as a very early reference to Kalasan in the
Pakpak Batak camphor-producing area of northern Sumatra; Hindoe-
invloed. 40. it is true, however, that the ?Tan.1vsrTmulakalpa
mentions Kalasavarapurai Ldvi, ’Prd-uryan et pre-Dravidien dans
l ’Inde1, JA, Juil-£ept. 1923* 40, but he believed that it was on
the mainland of South East Asia* I have found no convincing
evidence thut the Indians knew of benzoin in these early times*
In Monier-V7illiamsf Sanskrlt-Engllsh Dictionary. 1899, 277* the
work kalanusarln is translated as *benzoin’, and in the Susruta
samhita. 2 , 2/4> kalanusari is mentioned in connexion with the
treatment of wounds* I know of no means of proving that this
isolated reference is to benzoin. My guess is that the SuSruta
samhitfa is referring to a crude myrrh, a well-known styptic which
would have been available from species growing in India or
imported from the Middle East. Watt denies that the early
Indians knew anything about benzoin; Economic products of India.
6, part 3, 384. Amara’s lexicon includes several words which
modern translators have rendered as benzoin; N.G. Sardesai and
D.G. Padhye, Amara1s Namalingftnus Asanam* Poona, 1940, 44- But
it is not certain that Aiaara lived in the fifth century* The
origins of the Indian trade in benzoin awaits research by someone
who can study the Indian sources. Benzoin did not reach
Europe until the Portuguese took an interest in it; Heyd, Histoire
du commerce du Levant. 1923 edition, Leipzig, 2, 580-1. I
return to the subject of benzoin in chapter
 132

Indonesian goods which later becane the basis of western

Indonesia1s foreign commerce* Nevertheless I do not wish to

under-estimate the significance of the early Indian trade with

Indonesia* even though so little can be said about it. As a

result Indonesian merchants probably becane increasingly aware

of the commercial value of some of their natural produce in the

form of drugs. I suspect, though I cannot demonstrate it, that

Indians were interested in Indonesian plants with a medical

efficacy similar to their own plants* The 5lyurvedic medical

tradition was flourishing at the beginning of the Christian era,

and in India there was plenty of experience of the medical

functions of plants* Fresh specimens were often needed for

decoctions, and here would have been a practical motive for

rioting the presence of species overseas available for safeguarding

the health of Indian merchants and crews* But the subject

awaits someone qualified to study the surviving Indonesian

medical treatises and examine the extent of Indian influences

which they may reflect*

I prefer to emphasize another and more general reason for

the importance of the earliest Indian period of Indonesian

foreign trade. I believe that this was a period of apprentice­

ship for the Indonesians, when they learnt to looh across the

Bay of Bengal for commercial profits and the rewards of

adventurous sailing; even occasional visits by Indian ships must

have opened up new horizons for the coastal inhabitants of

 133.

Ko-yinR and stimulated among them a curiosity atout the homeland

of the foreign traders, a curiosity which eventually led to

Indonesian voyages to India* The habit of looking overseas,

acquired in the first centuries of the Christian era, helped to

mould a race of traders on the south-eastern coast of.Sumatra and

possibly elsewhere in western Indonesia. Although there is no

evidence in the records of this early period about the activities

of Indonesian merchants, the sequel will show that by the fifth

century they were sensitive to the changing circumstances of

Asian maritime trade and able to turn those circumstances to

their own advantage. Their commercial aptitude at that time,

backed by seafaring enterprise, is inexplicable unless for many

years before then they were becoming more confident travellers

overseas and had edged their way into the trade with India*

We have now reached the threshold of decisively Important

commercial developments affecting western Indonesia in the fifth

and sixth centuries. The evidence is somewhat more ample, but

unfortunately it spills into several fields and the extent of its

relevance to the subject of early Indonesian commerce is rarely

unmistakable* The way I have chosen to broach this evidence is

by investigating the reasons why certain Indonesian tree produce,

unnoticed by the Chinese in the third century, originally

appeared on the Chinese market. This development, coinciding

-.vith the use of the all sea route between the Indian Ocean and

China, including the voyage across the South China Sea, throws

light on the expansion of Indonesian commerce which took place

 134.

some time after the first half of the third century A.D. and

especially during the two hundred years before the rise of

Srivijaya.

i
 135*

CHAPTER FIVE
I

THE DEVELOPMENT OF ASIAN MARITIME TRADE PROM THE

FOURTH TO THE SIXTH CENTURY

The appearance of certain Indonesian tree products on the

Chinese market was, I believe, at first only an indirect and

minor consequence of adjustments in trade communications being

made by merchants in eastern and western Asia to changing

political circumstances affecting each others* markets* These

markets had long been linked through Turkestan* By the fifth

century, however, the sea was becoming more important, a

tendency already foreshadowed in the third century and especially

to the merchants of southern China* The routing and mechanism

of the maritime trade affected western Indonesia, and the

consequences will be examined in later chapters* In the present

chapter I wish to distinguish what seem to me the chief factors

likely to have increased the tempo of sea trade from the fourth

to the sixth century and, by implication, the importance of the

trans-Asian trade making its way through South East Asia.

By the end of the sixth century Sassanid Persia had acquired

great prestige among the Chinese as a source of wealth* Hsuan

Tsangfs biographer, probably writing between 664 and 667, states

that, before the pilgrim visited India, China had been known

there for a long time by hearsay and that there was a tradition
 136.

in India that the world was governed by four kings.

f,t If* - ;!H ©i M iS & i l ASS '

i a 1 1 ® >&|fj t ^ f -a # ■ % % f - c f e

i & z «l >c i % *■& i % •s

y.-

@ & in hx Va f!& & h

*In that country (India) it was always said that
Jarnbudvlpa was governed by Tour Icings. In the east
the country was China, whose ruler governed men. In
the west the country was Persia, whose ruler governed
precious things. In the south it was India, whose
ruler governed elephants. In the north it was
Hsien-yun (the Turks etc.), whose ruler governed horses.
Such was said to be the basis of the rule of each of
these four countries. This is the reason for the
saying (1).*

A similar saying was at least as old as the third century,

though then only three kings had been mentioned and It was

Ta-ch*in. the Roman Orient and the Middle East, which originally

enjoyed the reputation of being the source of precious things (2).

And for a more matter-of-fact assessment of the wealth which

Persia was believed to possess in the sixth century there is

an iupressive liBt of products attributed to that country in the

Ilou Chou shu. the records of the northern Chinese dynasty which

(1) Hsu kao seng chuan. k t TaishS Tripitaka, vol. 50, no. 2060,
i+5hc. On this subject s4e P^lliot, *Th<?orief , 125- Pelliot
pdhts out that Tao-hsuah?J^ 7? , the biographer, was one of
those who helped Hsuan Tsang in his translation work after the
latter returned to China. Tao-hsuan could therefore have had
the saying direct from Hstian Tsang.
(2) Page 62.
 137.

ruled from 556 to 581 (1). The list Includes not only genuine
!'

| Persian textiles and minerals but also precious objects such as

I
I
coral, pearls, amber, and especially glassware which had formerly

beer considered to be the characteristic wealth of Ta-chyin.

It is noteworthy that now black and long pepper, the produce of

India, were also attributed to Persia, though they were only

imports*

Eut the evidence in the Hou Chou shu reflects a late

impression of Sassanid Persia, when the dynasty was reaching Its

apogee. It can be compared with Theophanes1 description of the

luxury-packed Sassanid city of Dastgard, which Heraclius sacked

in 628 (2). Moreover the Hou Chou shu*s account is a northern

Chinese one and an echo of the reputation of Persia on the

overland trade route* As such it throws little light on the

extent of Persian commerce at sea by that time#

Singularly little is known of the history of Sassanid

maritime activity, and the absence of information is unfortunate

for two reasons (3)• In the first place we have seen that

(1) HCS, 50, 17a-b. The passage has been translated by Miller,
Accounts of western nations. 15-16. About forty articles were
enumerated. Shiratori has discussed the Chinese impression of
the wealth and prosperity of Persia in the fifth and early sixth
centuries; *A new attempt at the solution of the Fu-lin problem1,
181-185£ M M ,
(2) Christensen, I/Iran sous les Sassanides. i+63* Theophanes,
like the author of the Hou Chou shu, mentions pepper, silks,
luxurious clothing, and a great quantity of aromatic materials.
(3) H3L&I JJassn’e A history of Persian navigation* 1928, does not
take one very far. He had to support his account with such un­
satisfactory evidence as the presence of Persian shipping terms in
Arab texts of the ninth century. Christensen in 1936 had little
to say on the subject and merely quoted Reinaudfs Relations
politiQues et commerclales de 1*empire romaln. 1863*
 138.

about A.D. 1+00 the voyages of Fa Hsien and Gtnjavarman provide

evidence that a trade route between the Indian Ocean and China

was passing through western Indonesia. 7o what extent was the

merchandise described in the Hou Chou shu also carried by sea

to China ? How far may Persia have been responsible for

quickening the tempo of maritime commerce with the Far East ?

Secondly, we shall aee later that there are some southern

Chinese texts v/hich suggest that in the fifth or early sixth

century the maritime trade route was in fact being fed with

-ersian goods* Scholars have not been happy about the reliability

of these texts, and one would be more disposed to take their in­

formation seriously if there was independent evidence of the

growth of Persian shipping activity in the Sassanid period*

There can be no doubt that the Sassanids, from the foundation

of their dynasty in the early third century, had an unassailably

strong position in the organisation of continental trade between

China and western Asia. As a result of their occupation of the

former Kuga$a territories astride the Pamirs they controlled not

only the route through Persia from Turkestan but also its

diversion to the Indus, formerly tapped at Barbaricon by Roman

traders to offset Parthian exactions on the route leading to

Syria (1)* By means of Sogdian middlemen the Sassanids had

(1) On Shapur I (21+2-272) fs territorial claims see Iienning *The

Great Inscription of 5&p\ir I f and fTwo Manichaean magical text©1,
51+* Shapur claimed to control the region from Balkh to the
Stone Tower, the first stretch of the silk route eastwards*
 139.

access to the silk of northern China. Their merchants were

also able to exploit a number of botanical products, especially

species of myrrh (Commiphora) growing in the region once

controlled by the Kusanas, and especially in north-western India

a::d on the Makrdn coast of Baluchistan; this coast, known as

fGadrosial, had been famous for its aromatic resins as long ago

as the time of Alexander the Great (1). The existence of

valuable resins in the Sassanid empire needs to be emphasised,

for it will be seen later that they contributed considerably to

the reputation enjoyed by Persia among the southern Chinese in

the fifth and early sixth centuries.

The extent to which the early Sassanids were interested

in the sea is, however, by no means clear. Their conquest of

Persia seems to have been a southern Persian reaction against

Parthian ascendancy. The dynasty came from a region much

closer to the Persian Gulf than its predecessor had been, and

this circumstance probably led to an interest in maritime

affairs. Sassanid dynastic traditions relate that the first

ruler, Ardashir I (226/7 - 242), improved some of the ports

on the Gulf (2). The Pei shih states that Persia was the former

(1) Arrian, Anabasis, vi, 22, h 9 quoting Aristobulus (Loeb

Classical Library, translation by Robson).
(2) According to IJamza of Isfahan In the middle of the tenth
century; Kadi IJasan, Persian navigation. 61-63* According
to Tabari, quoted by ITourani, the pre-Islamic name of al-Ubullah
was ’FarJ al-Hind*, the ’marches of India*; Arab seafaring, i+1.
 li+o.
T fiao-chih ^ , or Mesene kingdom of the lower Tigris and

Euphrates known in Han times as a dependency of the Arsacid

empire, and here may be a vague acknowledgement by the Chinese

of the prominence of southern Persian influence in the

Sassanid period (l)#

No one has ever imagined that the Persians themselves

suddenly took to the sea, but among their subjects there were

those capable of navigation, Arabs on the western shores of

the Persian Gulf and the traders of the former Kus&na

• •
ports of

north-west India must have continued to do business under their

new masters j'ust as the population of the eastern Mediterranean

had done when their countries were annexed by the Romans# It

should not be forgotten that K fang T*aifs description of the

maritime route from north-west India to Ta-ch*in was written

during the first years of the Sassanid dynasty# Moreover

the former XusSna ports had trading links down the west coast

of India, and these would have been inherited by the Sassanid

empire, though the chronology of the earliest Persian influence

in southern India cannot be established by the Pahlevi inscriptions

found there (2)#

(1) Pei shih# 97, 16b; ‘!& 18 & & f'f- £ $ %

For the identification of T *iao-chih with
Mesene see Shiratori, fT*iao-chihf, 20-21#
(2) On the Nestorian crosses see Modi, 9A Christian Cross1,
J Bo mb ay BRAG # 2, 1, 1926, 1-18; Minors icy, JRAS, 19U2, 183# All
these crosses seem to be post-Sassanid# Nevertheless Cosmas
mentions Persian bishops at Calliana near Bombay and on the
Malabar coast; Christian tonography# 119*
 Ikl

Nevertheless the first satisfactory evidence of Persian

shix>ping on a considerable scale in the western Indian Ocean is

as late as the first half of the sixth century, when Cosrnas

Indieopleustes, drawing on information probably acquired in 522

or 525 or a few years later, describes how the Persians were

entrenched in Ceylon and enjoyed special privileges for their

horse imports (1). Procopius, writing of the 530 - 531 period,

refers unambiguously to the monopoly the Persians now had in the

disposal of the silk arriving in the western Indian Ocean from

China, a monopoly from which the Aksumites were unable to dislodge

them (2). Nor by this time were the Persian traders confining

their activities to Ceylon; according to the Greek version of

the Partyrdom of St, Arethas. their ships were trading with Aksum

itself (3)•

In view of what Cosmas and Procopius have to say it is

reasonable to believe that the fifth century saw a gradual

(1) Christian topography, 363-370. It is Interesting that the

name Cosmas uses for fChina 1 was probably based on a Bahlavi word.
Cosmos * word was 'Tzinista15 Pelliot, Polo. I, 268.
(2) History of. the Wars. I, xx, 12, 114-3*
( 3) Boissonade, Anecdota Graeca. vol. 5> 1833f hh-5#I am grateful
to Professor Beckingham for this reference. The passage deals with
the merchant ships commandeered by the Aksum king for the IJlmyarite
campaign in the early sixth century. 60 ships had arrived; they
belonged to the merchants of Byzantium, Persia, India and the
Farasan islands. Vasiliev’s quotation of this text omits the
reference to Persian ships; Justin the First, Harvard, 1950, 295*
 .
142

expansion in Persian maritime activity. Nothing is known in

that century about their rivals, the Aksumites, and it may be

that after the expansion of Aksum under its great king Ezana

in the fourth century there was a period of political depression

(1). It has never been suggested that Aksumite ships brought

silk to the Byzant ne ports at the head of the Red Sea on an

important scale, and the loan of ships by Justin I to Ella

Asbeha for the Bimyarite campaign in 523 may mean that Aksumite

sea pjwer was no longer considerable (2). Nor Is there any

evidence that the Persians had to fight the Aksumites for control

of the Ceylon silk trade.

But though Persian ships were no doubt obtaining a greater

Siiare of the trade within the western Indian Ocean during the

fifth century, it cannot be assumed that their merchants were

anxious to increase their maritime trade with China whether by

direct voyages or through middlemen. It is difficult to believe

that they ever regarded the sea as more than a supplementary

silk route. Even Cosmas, who mentions silk arriving in Ceylon,

is at pains to point out that overland was a much quicker means

of bringing silk to Persia (3)* 1 doubt whether the Persians at

(1) Rossini, Storla d'Etiooia. 1928, 167* For a recent summary of

the present state of knowledge of Aksum see Ullendorff, The
Ethiopians. i960 , especially 53-57* It is unlikely that shipping
from southern Arabia competed with Persian shipping in the fifth
century; Tibbetts, 'Pre-Islamic Arabia and South-east Asia1,
JNPR.A3, 29, 3, 1956, 203.
(2) Vasiliev, Justin the First. 294. He quoted the Arab tradition
that the Aksumite king complained that he had many men but no ships.
(3) Christian topography. 48-49*
 1U3

any time ceased to regard the Journey through Turkestan as the

normal one to China, in spite of periods when travelling

conditions were difficult* There was, for example, a collapse

of political authority in northern China early in the fourth

century and depression among the Sogdian middlemen as a result

of the sack of Lo-yang in 311 by the Huns. One Sogdian wrote

to a prominent merchant in Samarkand:

"And, Sir, it is three years since a Sogdian came from

’inside 1 (« China) **. And, Sir, if I wrote (and told
you) all the details of how China fared (what happened
to the China trade), it would be (a story of) debts
and woe; you have no wealth from it ( 1)##

Yet, in spite of this distressing situation, another Sogdian

letter in the same period states that in the three previous years

the road had been open not less than five times (2). It is

hardly likely that the overland route was ever closed for long

stretches of time. More probable is it that the volume of trade

was sometimes affected and that, in the fourth century, there was

a steep falling off in the demand for western luxuries in the

barbarian camps of northern China, though a little trade may have

male its way through Kansu and Szechuan to the capital of the

Eastern Chin dynasty on the lower Yangtse* The survival of the

overland route in that disturbed century is indicated by

(1) Henning, ’The date of the Sogdian Ancient Letters’, 605-7•

(2) Ibid, 611*
 144.

Aramianus Marcellinus, writing about 363, when he states that

beyond the Sogdians and the Sacae

’a very long road extends, which is the route taken by

the traders who journey from time to time to the land
of the Seres (2*) • *

Whatever interruptions there may have been in the fourth

century (2)* trade would certainly have picked up in the following

century with the return of more settled conditions in northern

China and eastern Turkestan under the Toba 7/ei dynasty. An

illustration of the persistent manner in which the trade was

’Many merchants of Su-tfe (north-west of K* ang-chu or

Sogdiana) had gone to the Liang country (Kansu in
north-western China) to trade. When the Wei captured
Ku-tsang (in 439), all (these merchants) were taken^
prisoner. At the beginning of (the Wei emperor) Wen
Ch’eng’s reign (he succeeded in 452) the ruler of
Su-tfe sei.t envoys and asked that the prisoners should
be ransomed* Iiis request was granted (3)*

(1) Res gestae. XXXII, 6 , 60 (Loeb Classical Library, RolfeVg ^

translation)* This passage was written in 363# Fu Chifcn
had by then established temporary authority in northern China*
(2) Monks may have suffered more than merchants. KumarajXva was
detained in Kansu from 335 to 401; Mather, Biography of Lu Kuanre.
California, 1959» 86- 87* Dharmamitra got as far as Kucha from
India but was not allowed to proceed to China; Bagchi, Canon
Bouddhlque♦ I, 388* Holy men were in demand among the rulers on
the trade route, but the rulers would have benefited from traders
passing through their dominions, from whom tolls could be
extracted.
(3) Pei shih* 97, 16a.
 145.

If there was an increased tempo of maritime trade in the

fifth and sixth centuries, I do not believe that it can be

explained as a diversion of traffic from the overland route

or by Persian resourcefulness in seeking an alternative

access to China. Instead the cause is more likely to be

found in the economic needs of southern China. Sooner or

later it would have dawned on merchants in western Asia that

there was now another important Chinese market as well as the

traditional one on the Yellow river and that its demand for

foreign produce could normally be met only by shipping. The

trading impulse during these centuries came from southern

China rather than from western Asia, and for this reason the

situation in southern China has a considerable bearing on

western Indonesian history.

When barbarians overran northern China in the early

fourth century a massive flight of Chinese southwards took

place. According to the Chin shu. from 3 H » when Lo-yang was

sacked, to about 335, 6C$ to 70?o of the upper classes moved

from the central provinces of northern China to south of the

Yangtse (l)♦ Among the 5migr3 population in the territories

of the Eastern Chin earlier standards of gracious living,

formerly familiar in the north, gradually revived as the

refugees recouped their fortunes on the new estates carved out

(1) Lien-sh$ng Yang, quoting the Chin sfau. ’Notes on the

economic history of the Chin dynasty1, HJA3, 9, 1945-7, 115.
 1U 6 #

for them in the fertile south. Though the Eastern Chin

dynasty (317 - U 20) was weak and there were several

rebellions, nevertheless it was possible for the last years

of the reign of the emperor Hsiao 7/u (372 - 396) to be described

as a peaceful period (l). In the fifth century conditions

continued to improve, and it lias been suggested that the

l\2 b - U 53 period was one of the relatively peaceful and

prosperous periods in southern China during the fifth and

sixth centuries (2 ). The Yangtse cities were becoming

important centres of trade and consumption, never having

suffered the cruel experiences of the northern cities in the

decades of barbarian civil war during the fourth century.

Internal trade developed and 7/as encouraged hy the government,

which relied on trade taxes for its chief source of revenue (3)-

But the southern dynasties, and especially the Liu Sung

0+20 - W79) suffered from one grave handicap. Their links

(1) Lien-sheng Yang, also quoting the Chin shuj <7^.

(2) Ho Tzu-chfuan, Wei Chin Nan Pei ch^ao shih lueh, Shanghai,
1933, 137* He bases his judgment on the Liu Sung shu. 92, lb.
This was the reign of W&n Ti, to whom a number of Indonesian
embassies were sent; see pages 3/ii* W i below.
(3) T*ao Hsi-sheng and Wu Ilsien-ch1ing, Nan Pei ch*ao ching
chih shih. Shanghai, 1937> 89-90 . According to Eberhard" rthere
is no .ucstion at all that the highest refinement of tiie
civilisation of the Far East between the fourth and the sixth
century was to be found in South China*; A history of China.
1955 impression, 165*
 .
147

with Turkestan were precarious and often severed* In 439

the northern Wei conquered Kaiisu in north-western China, and

thus the surviving bridgehead to southern China from the

overland route was lost* From Kansu it had been 7>ossible

to reach the Yangtse valley* When the northern and southern

dynasties were at war in the fifth and sixth centuries the

frontier between them was blockaded, and even when there was

peace private trade across the border seems to have been in

the form of smuggling (l)*

In these circumstances it is not surprising that the

southern dynasties wanted to attract sea-borne trade* The

dependence of the Liu Sung dynasty on maritime com unicatIons

(l) On the subject of border relations see T ’ao and Wu, 84ff*
They were sometimes very bitter, with captives from either
side enslaved: Wang Y u ~ t fung, ’Slaves and other comparable
social groups 16, 1953* 302, note 6*
 +.
11 8

'When the Chin dynasty moved south it was separated

from the Yellow river and Kansu by a great distance*
The barbarians (? of northern China) obstructed the
routes and the foreign regions were now as remote as
Heaven. Ta-chfin and India were far away in the
vastnesses of the west* (Kven) when the two Han
dynasties had sent expeditions these routes bad been
found to be particularly difficult and (some)
merchandise, on which (China) depended, had come
from Tongking; it had sailed on the waves of the
sea, following the wind, and travelling from afar to
(China). (in between) there are also range upon
range of mountains. There are numerous tribes with
different and strange titles* Precious things come
from the mountains and the seas by this way. There
are articles such as rhinoceros1 horn and kingfisher
feathers and rare articles such a s serpent pearls and
asbestos; there are thousands of varieties, all of
which the rulers eagerly coveted. Therefore ships
came in a continuous stream and merchants and envoys
Jostled ?/ith each other (l)*f

(1) I.lu Sung shu. 97> 29a~b. Other translations of this key
passage arc in Hlrth, China and the Boman Orient, i+6 , and Wang
Gungvvu, ’The Kanhai trade 1 , 1+6 and 53. ^ J^he present ^translation
differs in two respects. I translate^ (4) M v'|i '% fcti as
’and the merchandise, on which (China) depended, had come from
Tongking1. This sentence seems to be contained in Hirth’s ’yet
traffic in merchandise- has been effected, and goods have been
sent out to the foreign tribes1* Dr. bang’s version is: ’But
still the supply of merchandise has been kept up, being sent out
from the Chiao area (Chiaa-chou * Tongking) across the waves •
I have read ^ as ’merchandise, on which (China) depended
and I believe that the passage refers to imports from abroad and
not to Chinese exports* The imports would have been forwarded
from Tongking to the cities on the Yangtse. I am certain that
the only Chinese interest was getting goods into China. The
other difference in these translations is that Hirth and Dr.Wang
translate & *t£ jsftL ‘^ aa ?and also the doctrine of the
abstraction of mind (in devotion to) the lord of the world
(Buddha).’ I have taken Dr. Whitaker’s advice and rendered it
as ’because rulers coveted these things’. For me this trans­
lation is exceedingly important. It is a clear statement of
the cause of an increased tempo of maritime trade in the first
half of the fifth century*
 1U9.

This passage in the Liu Sung shu, written by Shen Ytieh

who died in 513 > is an important one. It explains clearly

the reason for the busy sea trade reaching southern China,

which was the shift of the Chin dynasty to the south, where

it was succeeded by ths Liu Sung. As a result the southern

dynasties lost their overland link with th*.; western regions,

No doubt some of the precious things 'coveted by the rulers 1

came from South East Asia, but the context of this passage

indicates that they care chiefly from much further afield.

Otherwise why should Ta-ch'in and India have been mentioned (i) ?

Fortunately there is some evidence about the tribute sent

by two kingdoms to the Sung emperor which makes it clear that

Indian Ocean produce was coming to southern China by sea. In

(l) Dr, Wang Gungwu ( 'Nanhai trade1, 38), while observing 1the
attractions of T* ien-chu and Ta-ch' in 1 indicated in the passage
^ust quoted, considers that 'the imports noticeably include the
products of mainland South-east Asia (rhinoceros horns and
kingfisher feathers) as well as those of India, Ceylon and
further west This is an Instance of the way he and I have
formed different opinions about the relative importance to the
Chinese of the western Asian and the South East Asian trade in
this period. For him the latter was only beginningto extend
into the Indian Ocean, But I do not believe that 'kingfisher
feathers' is evidence of South East Asian produce. The Liang
shu, f 37a-b, in an introductory.' passage about the 'north­
western' barbarians, uses the expression 'bright jewels and
kingfisher feathers01^ ^ '• I believe that the
reference to rhinoceros' horn and the other preciousarticles
is a literary flourish and not an exact Inventory of the chief
imports. Asbestos certainly came from the Roman Orient,
 150.

{Ql q O
U30 Ho-lo-tanC>°j t a western Indonesian kingdom, sent
a* r~) 1^1 ' -+

tribute (!)♦ It was in She-ofo V® 9 the ''Java1 region

from where Gunavarman had sailed to China a few years earlier.

°») fi % fiifl Sttl -e If-Mii-
§ m a if . Mfe % .fe * £ <fl a
% i I f is.ig * | % §9
Mio-lo-tan country rules in She-p 1o chou. In 430 it
sent envoys with tribute, (The tribute) comprised a
diamond ring, red parrots, white cloth from India,
cloth from GftlMhara (k), an^ such items (3 )#1

In !|ii9 P fu-huang *3Sf , another western Indonesian kingdom(U)

&% 4 - £ %A % ^ fk t ff'jLi Vd
1sent as tribute articles such as bezoar stones and also
articles such as turmeric (5)**

Ho-lo-tan u..questionably had access to western Asian produce,

and P fu-huang was probably in the same position (6)#

I therefore believe that it is in the needs of the

southern Chinese dynasties that one has to look for the

probable explanation of an increase in the use of the maritime

(1} I return to Ho-lo-tan in chapters eleven and thirteen*

(2) Pelliot uphold Chavannesf rendering of Yeh-po « Gandhara;
Polo* I, h39.
~3~)Liu Sung shu. 97, 5b~6a.
!h) I return to P 1u-huang in chapters eleven and thiiteen.

^5 TPYL* 787, 34&7&V quoting the Sung Yuan chia ch*! chu chu*
6) Bezoar stones are collected in Indonesia, but the Sui shu.
83 , 8b, describes them as a product of K 1ang^ country or
Samarkand. The Liang shu. 5U, 21b~22a, states that turmeric
came only from Chi-pien j%T,1 or Kashmir, whence merchants
sold it to other countries* The Hou Chou shu attributed
turmeric to Persia; 50, 17a.
 151.

route in the fifth and sixth centuries* The route served

a trade stimulated by southern China; the merchandise it

carried was what the Chinese wanted.

Bilk no doubt travelled vestwards to help finance the

trade, and there is one reference to silk exports in the

records of the Southern Ch*i dynasty (h79 - 502). The foreign

merchants in question came from South 2ast Asia. The passage

A
mentions Chang Ching-chen (AL

A- B3. ^ ^ fib %

•who calculated carefully the silks and brocades he

used to trade with (the merchants of) the X *un-lun
ships (l )•1
The Liu Sung dynasty controlled the silk-producing region of

north-eastern China until h69, when it lost it to the Wei, but

in the sixth century more relaxed political relations between

the southern dynasties and the hastern Wei (53U - 550) and

the Northern Ch*i (550 - 577) in north-eastern China would

(1) Nan Ch* 1 shu. 31, 6b, quoted by Wang Gungwu, 'Nanhai trade*,
60.
have ensured silk supplies for the south (l). Yet one

suspects that only in the second half of the fifth century

were the Persians becoming more interested in increasing

their silk imports from southern China, By that time the

H&phthalites were powerful in western Turkestan and had

established themselves in the commercial centres of Sogdiana

and Bactria. In 484 they were sufficiently strong to be

able to defeat and kill the Sassanid ruler Peroz. At the end

of the century they were in occupation of Gandhara, As a

result of their conquests they controlled Sogdiana, Khotan,

Kashgar, and Bukhara (2). Cosmas heard that they oppressed

the people* (3)# and Theophanes recalled that they deprived the

Persians of the trading centres used by the ’Seres* (4)* Here

(1) I have had difficulty in obtaining information on the subject

of sericulture in southern China during this period. The best
account is in Li Chien-nung, Wei Chin Nan Pei ch'ao • 50-54.
No doubt with the resettlement of northerners in the south new
mulberry & rowing areas came into production, but according to
Li Chien-nung, 51» cloth rather than silk was being paid as
taxes to the southern Chinese government. Yet there must have
been considerable progress in southern sericulture; according
to the Sul shu. quoted by Balazs, the Kiarjpi region was producing
four or five crops of silkworms a year; *Le traitS £conoroique
de Souei-chou*, reprint from TP, 42, 3-4, 33 ~
(2 ) Pel jjhtii. 97* 23b: a * % % % ? ! fif) i V

(3) Christian topography, 371.

(k) Muller, Fragments Histor. Graec., iv, 270, quoted in Yule-
Cordier, Cathay and the way thither, second edition, 1, 204-205#
(Iiakluyt Society, 1913-1916) •
 153.

is the immediate background to the situation in Ceylon

described by Cosmas and to Justinian’s attempt to persuade

the Aksumites to compete with the Persians in buying silk in

Ceylon,

As a result of the Hephtlialite occupation of central Asia

in the first half of the sixth century it is possible that

for some years southern China was the main access to the

outside world for much of northern China as well. The

dependence of north-eastern China on the overseas contacts of

southern China has been suggested in a recent study of the

origins of Gupta influence on Eudihist art in north-eastern

Chi-a in the first half of the sixth century (l ) , Styles of

Buddhist iconography in that region have been attributed to

the examples of Liang dynasty artists in southern China, who,

in touch with India or even with South East Asia, specialised

in copying Indian sculptural effects.

It would be fanciful to suppose that the maritime route

(l) A, Soper, ’South Chinese influences on the Buddhist art of

the Six Dynasties period’, BdfFEA, 32» I960, U7-112. The
conquest of Szechuan by the Later Chou in 553 would have
isolated southern China even more effectively from the overland
route via Szechuan to Kansu and Turkestan, Soper quotes the
case of the Northern ChTi scholar Wei S h o u ^ & p ^ho, in
562, sent his agents to the southern Ch’en empire to make contact
with a K ’un lun ship. In this way he obtained a great quantity
of valuable things; Pei C h ’i shu, 37, 13b-lUa, On the
reputation of the south as a source of valuable goods see T fao
and Wu, 87- 88,
 154.

in these centuries vras free of man-made obstacles to merchants.

Flourishing trade would have encouraged piracy at sea and

exactions by officials in the ports, Tabari states that the

governor of Ul-Uballah had to fight Indian pirates (l). Fa

ITsien complained of pirates in the Bay of Bengal (2), The

Chams were probably a major nuisance off the coast ofAnnam

until the Liu Sung government punished them in 446 in a

campaign which reflects the concern of that government to

protect shipping in the waters approaching southern China (3)*

Grasping officials in most harbours on the route must have been

a frequent cause of increased trading costs, and not least in

the harbours of southern China (4). But none of these

difficulties could have weakened the attraction of trading with

an increasingly populous, prosperous, and productive southern

China,

The i creased tempo of maritime trade inevitably improved

the fortunes of those countries with harbours along the sea

route and this is borne out by the little that is iuiown of

Sinhalese commerce in these centuries.

(1) Quoted by Hourani, Arab seafaring. 41•

(2) Giles 1 translation, 77*
(3) The campaign against the Chans is summarised with references
in G. Maspero, Le royaume de Champa, Paris, 1928, 70-7U.
Valuable booty was captured. These events are related in
Liu Rung shu, 97* 2b,
(1+) Dr, Wang Gungwu notes how ambitious officials in Kuangtung
and Tongking used these wealthy areas as bases for attempts on
the. imperial thronej ’Nanhai trade1, 46- 50 .
 155.

The great port of Ceylon was VahHtittha, and it is

unfortunate that the results of the excavations there by

Hocart in 1925 - 1928 have not been published In detail (l ) ,

But there is other evidence of the commercial status of Ceylon

in this period. in the fifth century Roman coins were being

used as currency (2) and have been found at almoKt every little

port on the island with the exception of Trincomalee. The

most numerous issues are of the eastern Roman emperor Arcadius

(355 - 408) and of his predecessor and successor, Before the

reign of Valentinian I (364 - 375) there are only a few

isolated coins (3). Evidently in the fifth century middlemen

in touch with Byzantium were trading with Ceylon*

But Ceylon was an important commercial centre long before

that time. The following passage appears in the T ’ai p ’lng

yu lan

(l) S. Sanmuganathan, Report on the Archaeological Survey of

Ceylon for 1950* Colombo, 1951* G.15.
(2; Codrington, Ceylon coins and currency (Memoirs of the
Colombo Museum, Series A, no* 3, Colombo, 1924) 9 31-32.
Godrington called attention to the fact that many of them were
found at SIgiriya, which was the capital only during the reign
of Kassapa I (? 479 - U97); 33.
(3) Professor Warmington has discussed these coins; Commerce.
120-125. One of the reasons whicn he considers responsible
for their presence in Ceylon is the trading activity of
Aksunite and Persian middlemen after the foundation of the
Byzantine empire. The same writer also thinks that in the
latter part of the fourth century the sea route was encouraged
by disturbances on the land route and the loss of ’Roman 1
influence in the regions of the Caspian aiid the Persian Gulf;
ibid, 140.
 156.

L> y
’The T ’ang tzu states: Shlh-tzu country (Ceylon)
produces cinnabar, mercury, hsun-lut turmeric, storax,
costus and such perfumes (i)T1

According to the Sui-shu the author of the T ’any tzu was the

Taoist T fang P ’a n g ^ , who lived under the l7u

dynasty (222 - 280) (2)* Shih-tzu is the name used by Pa

Hsien for Ceylon at toe beginning of the fifth century, and

its use as early as the third century is unexpected* K ’ang

T faifs name was Ssu-t1iao (3). But there can be

no doubt that the list of products associated with Ceylon

included sj>me from the Middle East, and this persuades me that
j M
Shlh-tzu in this passage is in fact Ceylon* The 7lrei lueh*

in its account of the products of Ta-ch*in mentions hsun-lu.

turmeric, and storax (h)» and these articles must have been
inports of Ceylon Known by hearsay to the southern Chinese in

the first half of the third century, a coiment on the growing

trade of that island.

The maritime route between western Asia and China, in

which the V7u government and K fang T ’ai were interested, could

(1) TPYL. 9^2, h3U7b* This passage seems to have been overlooked
by students of Ceylon. Hsun-lu is discussed in detail in chapter
seven. , ^ n 1
(2) Sui shu. 3U, h-a: ^ 5 ~T
(3) TPYL. 787, 3 W 5 b ? 811, 3605a; 699, 3120a. I agree with
Professor Petech that these references can only be to Ceylon;
•Some Chinese te±tsf, 223*
(U) SKC£ei, 30, 33b*
 157.

not fall to involve Ceylon, and already by that time southern

China would have been receiving goods which passed through

Ceylon. With the increase in the tempo of maritime trade, the

importance of Ceylon increased, and it is not surp islng that

by the early fifth century Ceylon was in direct touch with

China. Envoys were sent to the Eastern Chin at the beginning

of the U05 - hlS period and to the Liu Sung in U28, 1+29 f and

U35 (l)* Both Fa osien and Ounavarman sailed from Ceylon to

Indonesia and thence to China (2)*

By the first half of the sixth century Persian traders had

established themselves in Ceylon, where they received the Far

Eastern trade arriving at that island. One naturally

enquires when the Persons first became interested in Ceylon

trade, and for this reason a Chinese fragment, noted by Pclliot,

deserves to be quoted.

The fragment comes from Liu Kci n-c hfi

Chiao chou chi ‘ill .

'The Po-ssu (Persian) king asked for the hand of the

daTighter of tne king of S s u - t *iao (Ceylon) and sent a
gold bracelet as a ( betrothal) present ( 3 ; . 1

(1) Liang shu.5h» 21+b, in respect of the m i s s i o n to the Chin,

it was said to be tho first ever sent to China:3f
^ Liu Sung shu. 97 , 10a; LS, 5U-> 25a; LSS,97,10
(2) Falisten wept with homesicKness when he saw a Chinese fan in
Ceylon; Giles* translation, 68 .
(3) Li ng nan 1 shu. 55; collected fragments of the Chiao chou
chi, chapter 2, lb. The fragment is also preserved in the
T P Y L . 718, 3183b.
 158.

The Chiao chou chi, or 1Records of Tongklng1

^ is lost.

The Chinese tradition is that its author lived under the Chin

dynasty (265 - U20), and because he mentions a date corresponding

to 380 he must have been writing towards the end of that

period (1). Henri Maspero was prepared to believe that

Liu Hsin-ch’i wrote in the last years of the fourth century (2),

but Pelliot, cautious as usual, thought that the text could not

be later than the first half of the fifth century (3).

We saw in an earlier chapter that in the Nan chou 1 wu chih

Ssu-t*iao appears as an Indonesian toponym (4). K fang T fai,

however, uses the same name for Ceylon, and its persistence in

the Chiao chou chi is surprising in view of the fact that Fa

Hsien knew the island as Shih-tzu. On the other hand, T fang

P fang in the third century called it Shlh-tzu. and one has to

conclude that both names were current. That Shih-tzu was

not the only name for Ceylon in Chin times is indicated by

the fact that Chih Seng-tsai^ knew it as Ssu-ho-t* iao

(5). Indeed, only the Nan chou i wu chih uses

(1) Such is the attribution in the Ling nan i shu. The

authority for 380 as the date of the event described is given
as the T ’ung chien; Ling nan i shu^ chapter 2, la. The
passage also appears in the TPYL. U9. 2^2b.
(2) BEFEO, 18, 1918, 3, 22, note 2.
(3) Polo. I, 5U2.
(k) Pages 94-95.
(5) For instance TPYL. 701, 3130a. Petech points out a perfect
parallelism between K*ang T tai,s reference to Ssu-t* iao (TPYL.
§9§» 3120a) and his fellow-envoy1s , Chu Ying*s, reference to
SBu-ho-»tflao. contained in the Pel t’ang shu ch’ao. Both
references are to a curtain sent by the king as a present for the
gods of India; ’Some Chinese texts’, 223. Hsiang Ta considered
that Chih 8£ng-tsai was a Yueh-chih monk of Chin times; Tlang
tai Ch’ang an, 571 •
 159*

Ssu-tyiao to mean anything other than Ceylon, and I feel that

it is safe to regard the name in the Chiao chou chi as a

reference to Ceylon* But what of po-ssu and my translation of

this term as ypersiay ?

VJ>
Po-ssu was certainly used by the northern Chinese to

transcribe yPersiay, and the earliest instance of this in

northern texts is in connexion with the first Sassanid mission

to the Wei dynasty in 1+55 (l). The name is believed to be

derived from Plrsa* the region of southern Persia associated

with the Sassanids, and Pelliot suggested that the form the

transcription took indicated a Sogdian pronunciation (2)* When

Po—8su became current as the name for 1Persia1, the earlier

word An^hsi , probably derived from Arsak or

fArsacidy and meaning yParthiay , was abandoned. But there is

no reason for believing that the change took place among

northern Chinese writers before 1*55, though the Sassanid

dynasty was by then already established for more than 200 years*

Until 1+55 it was probably assumed that An-hsi ?/as still the

appropriate name for the Iranian empire. A screen of middlemen,

on whom the northern Chinese depended for political intelligence,

would have kept them in ignorance. But when the Wei dynasty

got into its stride, some Chinese influence returned to central

Asia and foreign missionSj including Persian ones, came with

(-0 Wei shu* 5, 5b.

(2) In a note to Ferrand published in £A, Avril-Juin, 1921+, 21+1,
note 1*
 160 •

up-to-date information (1). Thereafter An-hsl survived, though

only as the name for Bukhara west of the Oxus river* It should

not, however, be assumed that the use of Po-ssu for •Persia1

depended on when the northern Chinese adopted the transcription,

The southern Chinese, with a different system of commercial

access to western Asia, could have heard of Plrsa earlier*

One need not doubt that this was the meaning of Po-ssu in

the Chiao chou chi merely because the text may have been written

before 1+55# when the northern Chinese first heard of Po-ssu*

It is therefore possible that gossip about Persians in

Ceylon was reaching China by the sea route early in the fifth

century (2). The passage in the Chiao chou chi is a useful

one because it makes it less improbable that additional

information about the Po-ssu (Persians) was reaching southern

China in the fifth century, and I shall later invoke Liu

Hsin-chfi in support of the truthfulness of other early

southern Chinese texts dealing with the Po-ssu* In the first

half of the fifth century Persian merchants operating in the

western Indian Ocean may have been already responding to the

needs of the southern Chinese by bringing goods as far east as

Ceylon for re-shipment to China*

(1) Professor Petech notes that as a result of missions to the

Wei the northern Chinese heard of new names for old countries;
India, 73-U*
(2) I do not attempt to connect the evidence in the Chiao chou
chi with the claims of £abari and Hamza that Chrosroes I ( 5 3 1 -
578) invaded Ceylon or with Tabari »8 story that Bah ram V (1*20 -
i*38) had an Indian wife; HSdl Hasan, Persian navigation, 65-68,
 161.

In this chapter I have dealt briefly with some general

factors likely to have promoted maritime trade from the fourth

to the sixth century. I have stressed as the main factor the

influence of the southern Chinese market certainly from the

early decades of the fifth century, if not earlier. In the

second half of the fifth century the Persians would also have

had reason for looking to the sea for access to Chinese silk,

and one should not ignore the existence of the Indian market

for Chinese silk in this period. According to KalidSsa,

Chinese silk was one of the most fashionable textiles among

the richer sections of society (1), Not all the silk would

have come to India by the overland route, and there is evidence

in the Tamil poem 5ilappadlglram. composed in the early

centuries of the Christian era, that silk was arriving in

southern India by sea (2). But I do not believe that either

the Persians or the Indians were so dependent on sea trade for

luxuries as the southern Chinese were, and the statement in the

Liu Sung shu that 1the rulers coveted1 precious goods suggests

better than any evidence I have been able to discover the

economic background to the expansion in Indonesian commerce

which I shall describe.

Because of the Chinese dependence on maritime trade for

(l) Kum^rasambhava, VII, 3, quoted by Maity, Economic life of

northern India in the Gupta period. Calcutta, 1957, 134«
{2) Nilakanta Sastri, 1The Tamil land and the Eastern Colonies’,
JGIS, 11,1, 19kkf 26-28.
 162.

their luxury imports it is reasonable to suppose that news about

centres of production in western Asia reached them by means of

the merchants who brought the precious cargoes to their shores.

They could therefore have known by hearsay of the Persians, or

subject peoples trading under the name of P e r s i a n s 1, certainly

as early as 530 - 531* when Procopius describes the Persian

monopoly of the silk trade in Ceylon, and there is a chance that

in the Chiao chou chi fragment one has an illustration of the

way a century earlier news about the Persians was already

u
trickling through by sea. Evidence atout the Po-ssu is likely

to be increasingly authentic information about the Persians the

closer in time it is to the beginning of the sixth century.

I have been careful, however, to refer to hints of Persian

shipping activity no further afield that the western Indian

Ocean. I have deliberately avoided considering how the sea

trade was organised and especially the identity of the traders

who were bringing southern China and western Asia into touch

with each other. I believe that the handling of the trans-

Asian maritime trade in these centuries has an important

bearing on the expansion of early Indonesian commerce, but

there is no text in any language in which it is satisfactorily

described.

Before I broach the question of the organisation of the

maritime trade through South East Asia I wish to examine some

o
of the goods which travelled by sea under the label of Po-ssu
 163.

natural products. They will take us to western Indonesia

and reveal a connexion between that region and the western

trade bound for southern China, The goods are mentioned in

fragments of lost texts which bring into a curious juxta-

position two expressions? ’southern o c e a n ’ and

’Po-ssu* ?£& *• The products were Po-ssu but they grew in

t h e ’southern ocean1• The term ’southern ocean* was

conventionally used to describe the maritime region immediately

to the south of China, and in the sixth century two Indonesian

kingdoms were said to be in *the southern ocean1 (l). If

•j
Po-ssu always meant ’Persia*, a country conventionally believed

to be in the ’western regions* (2), the juxtaposition of the

two terns creates a problem, and in its solution lies, I

believe, the basis for reconstructing the history of western

Indonesian commerce in the fifth and sixth centuries.

o
Whatever extended or different meaning the term Po-ssu

may have had,there can be no doubt that It normally meant

’Persia* or ’Persian*. To the end of his life Pelliot insisted

on this, and he therefore rejected Laufer’s view, formulated

in 1919» that the Chinese before Sung times (960 — 1279) were

(1) Liang; shu. 5 k 9 l6b and 19a, on Kan-t

P ’o-li vjg respectively.
l2iff Pfe
M 311(1
The Peninsula Kingdom of Lang-ya-
hslu jffc Jfr was similarly described; ibid,u18a.
(2 ) The Liang shu. 5k 9 37a and includes Po-ssu » Persia
among the countries of ’the north-western Jun# barbarians’.
 16U •

capable of using the expression to mean somet ing other than

’Persia1 (l) . I shall later explain why I am convinced that

Pelliot was right*

Yet when, on botanical grounds, Laufer called attention to

certain South &ast Asian aspects of the usage of the expression

o
Po-ssu* he was making a useful contribution to the history of

early Indonesian commerce (2). I therefore propose to re-open

the discussion of the Po-ssu question, and I shall do so by

o
examining the Po-ssu products in the sequence which, in my

opinion, most readily elucidates the significance of the

expression in the context of Indonesian history* I shall begin

with y/hat seems to be the clearest example of an Indonesian

reaction to the maritime trade between western and eastern

Asia, a trade which in this instance was old enough to be

associated with Ta-ch’in, the Ilan toponym for the Roman Orient

(3)« I shall then provide a further, though less distinct,

example of the same reaction (!+)• In both cases western

Indonesian tree resins came on to the southern Chinese market

as substitutes for western Asian resins* It will then be

necessary to establish the nature of the trade in Po-ssu natural

(1) Pelliot, Polo* I, 87; Laufer, Sino-Iranica. especially

U68-U87.
(2) Pelliot never studied the Po-ssu products from the ’southern
ocean1• I imagine that the article on ’P ersif in the second
volume of his Notes on Marco PolOj posthumously published, will
do so*
(3) Chapter seven*
(k) Chapter eight#
 165.
o
producta and the sense in which Po-ssu was used during the

fifth and sixth centuries (l)* Then, and only then, do I

believe that it is possible to explain ho\7 it was that a

o
connexion came into being between western Indonesia and Po-ssu

or ♦Persia*. By treating the subject in this way some progress

may be made in exposing the special contribution of western

Indonesia to Asian maritime trade in the centuries before the

rise of Srlvijaya.

The chief reason wliy Laufer-s pioneer study in 1919

o
not bring out more clearly the significance of the Po-ssu

problem in early Indonesian history was because he did not give

sufficient prominence to the earliest southern Chinese texts to

o g
mention the Po-ssu* Instead he chose to regard the T ang

period and especially the eighth century as the period providing

the evidence about the problem most susceptible to solution*

For me, on the other hand, the earliest texts, which I shall

assign to the fifth or early sixth century, are the basis of

the problem* Yet to say of them that their usefulness cannot

be taken for granted is an under-statement of the student*s

difficulty when he begins to handle them* I have, therefore,

to ixitroduce them and plead their credentials*

(l) Chapter nine*

CHAPTER SIX

THE VINTAGE TEXTS

These texts survive in the form of fragments from Kuo

I - kung^ f ’b Kuang chi h i# * , Ku Weij|| *b

Kuan;; chou chi » and Hsu Piao *s Nan chou

chi For the sake of convenience I shall refer to

them as the fvintage texts* for the ro-s8u problem*

The three texts were lost long ago (l)* Later writers

quoted from them, but one can never be certain that they

actually possessed copies and were not merely repeating

mutilated quotations from earlier works incorporating parts of

the vintage texts or were even inventing the quotations. Worse

still, one is not only dealing with fragments of lost texts.

The moot important source contai the fragments of interest

to me, Li Hsua ^

also lost and there is even an uncertainty whether Li HsUn

was in fact the author of this work. Fragments of the Hai yao

p^h ts*ao have been preserved in the Ch'unp; hslu cheng ho

(1) The KC fragments have been collected in the 19th century

Yu han shan fang chi i shih shu, no# 7U# by Ha Kuo-han, but an
important fragment which I use is omitted from this collection*
The KCC fragments have been collected in the Shuo f u , Chekiang
edition, 1~U6, no* 668, but here again an important fragment has
been omitted*
 167.
chins shlh chens lei pel yuns pen ts'ao
{%?) ® 9 which is a revision, undertaken in
121+91 of T*ang S h e n ^ w e i ^ i'ik materia medica of 1116,
known as the Cheng ho hsin hsiu cheng lei pei yung pen tsfao
& fib ® and are also preserved
in Li Shih-chfen ^ ,9ft 1s Pen tsfao kang mu ^ bl|l£l ‘
3 (2)
Li Shih-chen died in 1593#
Three questions have worried me* When were the vintage
texts written ? Whea didthey disappear ? What assurance is
there that the fragments, in the form we have them today, do
not contain interpolations and, in particular, that the word
u
Po-ssu a+ypearing in them was in fact written by their authors ?
The text which can be dated least inexactly is the Kuang
chih. It has never been suggested that anyone other than Kuo
I-kung wrote this ;vor;<, and a terminus post quem for its
composition is provided by a reference iAl it to the Wei

(1) I have used the 1957 Jen min wei sheng ehfu pan she edition,
which is a facsimile reprint of the 121+9 edition* I refer to it
as the CLrT . But T ’ang ShSn-wei also wrote a materia medica in
1108, known as the (Ta Kuan) Ching shih ch§ng lei pei chi p£n
was block-printed in 1211,
and a facsimile reprint was l&ougnt out in 190h by K fo Feng-shih
. I am grateful to Dr* K.T* Wu, of the Orientalia
Division of the Library of Congfess, for verifying that the
important pass gee from the KC and the KCC on jju and An-hsl
perfume respectively (pages 1S 5-6 below) also appear in K^o’s
reprint of T fang*s earlier work* Laufer (Sino~Iranica, 201+)
stated that he consulted the 1521 and 1587 editions of the *Cheng
lei p£n ts'ao* * The latter is merely a reprint of a 11+68 reprint
of the 121+9 revision, and I suspect that the 1521 edition is
really a 1523 reprint of the 11+68 edition. Dr* Kaiming Chiu, of
Harvard, has been good enough to check that the KCC passage on
An-hsi perfume appears in the 1587 edition, while Dr. Wu, of the
Congress Library, has checked that it also appears in the 1523
edition. Iido not know why Laufer missed this important passage
(see page 179# note i+^below) • A /v
(2) I have used the Jen min wei sheng ch’u pan she' facsimile of
an edition of 1885# Peking, 1957. The editors have corrected
it against an edition, the printing of which began in Li Shih-
Ch9nrs lifetime#
 168.

emperor Wen Ti (220 - 226) (1). For its terminus ad qucm

there is the circumstance that Liu Chun^'j , author of the

commentary on the Shih shuD hsln .vu “(ft , quotes

it (2). Liu Chun died in 521. Pelliot, in his posthumously

published Notes on Marco Polo, could not make up his mind about

the age of the Kuan# chih. He thought that it w a s written

about A.D. hOQ, in the fourth or fifth century, or fperhaps

not before the sixth century 1 (3)* At all events it was

written before 521. The Kuan# chih throws helpful light on

the Po-3su problem. Provided that the fragment I shall later

examine is not corrupt, this text supplies one of the chief

reasons for believing that the trade in Po—ssu products was

under way by the beginning of the sixth century.

fKu Weifs Kuang chou chi1 is quoted several times in the

C V i min yao su. written in the beginning of the 53k ~ 5k9

period (k) • This text, which has an important bearing on the

Po-ssu problem,could therefore not have been written much later

than the latest possible date for the Kuang chih. and it is

li kely that its information also reflects a situation under way

(l) It is contained in the Sung period Hsiang n yu ^ ,

attributed to Hung Ch’ujJt ^ , X, 9. w£n Ti is said to have
written a prose poem , and Dr. Whitaker informs me that the
emperor in question must have^been the third Century Wei Wen Ti*
(2l Shih shuo hsin yu chu. Ssu pu pel yao edition, f , 27b.
(3) Palo. I* 555* U51. h£>7. Pelliot rejected as groundless the
C h fing tradition that Kuo I-kung lived in Chin times (265-U20)*
(U) Chyi min yao su, chapter 10, 92; 105 etc.
 169*

by the beginning of the sixth century. I prefer to commit

myself no further in dating the Kuamr chou chi (l). I wish,

however, to remove one source of doubt concerning the author

of the Kuang chou chi quoted in the pen t 3 yao. Chia Ssu-hsieh,

in his C h ’i min yao bu . distinctly refers to Ku Y/eifs name in

connexion with descriptions of plants contained in the Kuan#

A
chou chi. The pen tsfao writers, on the other hand, while

often quoting the Kuang chou chi on botanical subjects, rarely

mention the author's name, and this is one reason why Professor

Yamada refused to take notice of a fragment to which I attach

, y. o
importance (2). Chia Ssu-hsieh, however, makes it clear that

(1) In 1918 Henri Maepero quoted the Sui shu as his authority
for assigning Ku Wei to the Liu Sung period; BEFEQ» 18, 3 , 1918,
26, note 2. He gave no Sui|shu page reference. Pelliot did not
disturb this dating but gave as his authority the Sui chlng chi
chih kTao cheng. 6 , 31a; Polo. I, U62. I have consulted this
authority (E r h s h i h wu shin pu pien, reprint of the K ’ai ming shu
tien edition, 1956, 6 , h 9^8j and have failed to understand why the
KCC has been attributed to the Liu Sung period* The T5h5 Bunka
kenkyu-jo kanseki bunrul mokoroku. 1, 222, follows the Shuo fu
tradition in regarding Ku Wei as a Chin period author. The Pu
Chin shiL1 wen chih. repringT of the K fai min edition, 3» 26,
states that Ku Hui|^ , author of the Kuan# chou chi, lived in
Chin times and that his father was an official in the early part
of the) fourth century. This family came from southern China, and
in the Chin shu biography of the father, Ku Yung (68 , laj it
is stated that Ku was a famous surname in the south. The charac­
ter for ’h u i f * is very similar to that for ’, and it
may be remotely possible that Ku Wei lived in Chin times. In view,
however, of the number oftimes the Kuang chou chi refers to
Po-ssu I cannot believe that this text is earlier than the fifth
century*
(2) Yamada, ’Introduction of An-hsi-hsiang in China’, I, 22.
Professor Yamada .could hot believe that so early a text referred
to An-hsi hsiangjr ^i from South East Asia, and he thought
that the passage was either an interpolation or from another book
of the same name. For there Is also a KuanR chou chi by P ’ei Yuan
, quoted in the Shul ching chu. whose author
died in 527. I return to the problem of An-hsi hsiang in chapter
eight.
 170.

Ku Wei was interested in plants, and I have round no other

author of a Kuang chou chi who shared this interest# It is

not surprising that the bibliography at the beginning of

T ’ang Shen-wei’s pen ts’ao also mentions Ku Wei, describing

his work as the K^ang chou chi (l) ♦ The least of the problems

connected with the vintage texts is whether Ku Wei was

responsible for the Kuang chou chi fragments which I shall be

using. I have no hesitation in believing that all references

to this work in my study are to Ku Wei’s work*

I have least to say about the date of the Nan chou chi.

There can be no dispute, however, concerning the author’s name,

which is frequently quoted in the pen ta’ao literature# ’Hsu

Piao’s Nan fang chih f) ^ ’ appears in the I wen lei chu

ty
(2). This encyclopaedia was compiled^Ou-yang Hsun (557 -

641) and others (3)* I content to regard the Nan chou chi

as another source reflecting a situation not significantly

later than the situation described in the other two texts.

The southern Chinese origin of two of the texts Is

indicated by the titled1 of the Kuan# chou chi (’Records of

Canton’) and the Nan chou chi ( ’Records of the Southern Regions’)*

We shall see that all three authors refer to the ’southern

(1) CLFT. 4*
(2) I w § n lei chu* 84, 5b.
(3) Laufer states that the C h ’i min yao su quotes the Nan chou
chi but^gives no reference? Sino-Iranica# 247» note 7* Na
Nien-tsu, in his index of titles of works quoted in eight old
Chinese texts, does not supply an earlier reference than the
I wen lei ch&s Shul ching chu ••#, 57*
 171.

ocean’• Though none of their works can be classified as

A*
pen ts'ao literature, ail of them mention plants so often that
A
they attracted the interest of pen ts’ao writers in later times,

and it is reasonable to believe that these authors were influenced

by the growing access of southern China to foreign products

coming by sea and the knowledge of foreign countries which

o
accompanied the trade. Provided that the term Po-ssu is not

a later interpolation, there is no reason for supposing that

u
any of them were writing about Po-ssu products immediately after

the latter began to arrive in southern China, More likely

is it that the products in question were already fairly familiar

in order to come to the notice of these writers, I would not

be surprised if the texts were written earlier rather than

later in the fifth century, for it is curious that none of

their surviving fragments refers to camphor. Not even the .

A,
author of the Hai yao pen tsyao, with his great interest in the

vinta., e texts, claims that any of them mentioned camphor* Yet

 172.

T*ao Uunfc-chliit; ( 52 - 536 o r 1+56 - 5 U 0 ) |S j j u j ( 1 ) not

only knew of camphor but incorporated it in Lis revision of

the natorio rr dies (2)« It would to extraordinary if Kuo

I-kung and the others, with their evident interest in foreign

plant life, knew of bet did not mention this famous tree

which Ajade go early an Impression on the southern Chinese*

r'ut there ■unt bo a U n i t to speculation al out the time

the vintage texts were written* The situation they describe

may havo been at least fifty years earlier than A*I>* 500, but

(1) For details un pen to* no writers I have consulted? Ch’en

Tang-hclea, Chun;: L^uc T T T ^ e h shih, Shanghai9 1957 editionj
Huard and wong v *Bio-bi tliographie de la m^dcclne chinoise,
!’
-r >t * 31, 3» 1956* 181-21*6} ITu&rd and ’
wong, Evolution de in
mtTiifere r.!dieale chlixOiao* Leiden, 1958 (reprixxted from Januo*
Vol* U7), T*aa Hung-ching is an illustrious n me in the
history of the Ghineee ~.n ter la mo d 1c a * Tlis commentary to the
Shoo nnnr p^n tsfao ch Inn ^ ^ brought the rater la
redlca up to date by raising Bhe number of entries from 36$'to
730* T ^ o ’s work is exter.sively quoted in later pftn t s ^ o
and I hove had to assume that the quotations arc accurate* Like
other scholnrs of hio time hr* was interested in longevity*
He is dit cussed by ’V a i Chi g-feng in Chung kuo ku tai k*o
hisueh chia* 83-87* and by ;?.!*. Barnee and H* ;*~Yuen, 1T *ao7 the
recluse * * M b i x * 23-U* London, 19^6, 138-lh7* His llography
has been translated in Giles, A Gallery of Chinese Immortals,
London, 19^8# 106-109* A
(2) CLPT» 13* 3^1b, quoting the hal y a o , Li Shih-chen quotes
T faorB ^?lng i pleh lu in connexion with the us© of camphor in
cases of difficult childbirth; TTK^* 3d, 1377a*
 173.

I propose to regard them as potential evidence of a situation

which had come into existence by about A.D, 500.

My next worry is when the texts disappeared. None of

them are mentioned in the Ssu k*u ch*uan shu. compiled between

1773 and 1783, though in the addition 3*^ to the Ssu kfu

chien rning mu lu piao chu there is a statement to the effect

that the catalogue of the Ching yun loufo^jl ^ /J^ library

possessed a Kuan# chih (1). Nor are the imperial histories

helpful in determining how long the vintage texts survived.

Only the Kuang chih. in two chuan. appears in the bibliographical

chapters of the Sui shu and the H3ln T*anr shu (2). I believe,

however, that editions of the Kuan# chih were still available

at the end of the tenth century because there are numerous

quotations from it in the T fal Twinge yu lan. completed in

933 , though it is not included in the bibliography. But in

that bibliograph: mention is made of *Ku \7eifs Kuang chou chih

(& ) 1 and fHsu Piao1s Nan fang chih fo (3) * Both these

works are quoted in the T*ai p ying yu lan and are also listed

in the bibliography at the beginning of the revision of

Cheng lei pen tsfao (h). I am prepared to believe that

copies of these texts were still available by about A.D. 1000,

(1) Edited by Shao Chang, Commercial Press, 1959, 570#

(2) Sui shu. 3h, 7b; HTS, 59, 9b.
(3) TPYL bibliography, l6 b; 15a. JTa Ming k , a late tenth
century p£n tsfao writer, quotes Hsu Piao on psoralea ^ 4) ‘ty (\% )
PTK¥. lht 817a. It is encouraging to hay® an example of a
writer quoting a vintage text other than the author of the Hal yao
pen ts*ao.
PI) CLPT. Ub.
 1 7 k.

though in reaching this conclusion I have been influenced by

the use made of them in the T*ai p'ing yu lan.

The problem of the survival of the texts is important for

one reason in particular. Li Hsun, conventionally regarded as

the compiler of the Hai yao pen tsfa o . makes considerable use
* .
of them, and it is on the quotations from the Hai yao pen ts'ao

that I rely for much of the material in the following chapters#

Naturally I have had to ask myself whether *Li Hsun’ actually

handled copies of the vintage texts# and common sense suggests

that he did. There is no evidence that any one before him#

whom he could have quoted without acknowledgment# made such

extensive use of them, and I can think of no other explanation

for his frequent quotations except that he possessed copies

and realised that their contents were peculiarly relevant to his

specialist interest in ^maritime drugs*.

The problem is connexion with fLi Hsun* is not whether

he actually handled these texts but who was 3,1 Hsun and who
* .
wrote the work attributed to him. Li Shih-chen*s information

on these points is specific:

k# %l $ f
t tvi
& ^ ft & & * ? * 3
X. £ 2Q S>ft % ^ f t A. 4 ^
,j(- & $ s L 1 1 , f ^ 4>

*!jfc % % ■? •f
 175 ♦

^ a i yao pen ts*aos (Chang) Yu-hsi (l) says: the ITan hai
yao p fu is in two chapters* The compilers name is
unknown. It is a miscellaneous record of the provinces
and districts in the southern regions which produce
medical materials and the medical efficacy of those
materials* It is not in a very good sequence* Shih-
chen says: this (work) is in fact the Hai yao pen tstao*
In all it has six^chapters. Li Hsiin of the T fand pe ri od
compiled it. Hsun lived in the reign of Su (Su Tsung,
756 — 762)• His collection of maritime drugs was quite
detailed. There is also Ch£hg Chian* s Hu pen ts*ao in
seven chapters. This dealt (mainly) with barbarian
drugs. It is no more extant (2) •*
A
There are those, however, who disagree with Li Shih-chen and
A -
believe that the pen ts*ao writer in question was of Persian

extraction and lived in the tenth century (3)« Pelliot, on

a B
the other hand, noted that the Hai yao pen ts'ao was not

attributed to a Persian Li IisQn in the Wen hsueh chia ta tz*u

a .u
tien or in the Fen mln ta tz'u tlen, and he preferred to leave

in abeyance the authorship and authenticity of the works

attributed to Li HsSn (1+) *

The text from which I shall be quoting is called the Hal yao

(l) This v/riter assisted in the compilation of a materia medlca

which was published in 1057. Li Shih-chen discusses it in
FTKM. 1 -t- , 33Ub-335a.
T2[~PTKM* l x , 333b-33Ua.
( 3) Yamada ( introduction of An-hsi-hsiang in China*, 1, 2U)
quotes Hsiang Ta, Chung wai chlao t*un^ hsiao shlh. Commercial
Press, 19U-7, 25-26, in connexion with a Li family of Persian
origin which escaped to Szechuan after Huang C h ,ao,s revolt in
878 and traded in drugs. But there does not sgem to be any
evidence that a member of this family wrote a pen ts*ao*
(k) Polo# I# 5hb* Ch*en Pang-hsien merely regards Li Hsun as a
T*ang writer. Huard and Wong accept Li Shih-chen*s evidence
about Li Hsfin.
 A A A
in T fang 3hen-weifs Cheng lei pen tsyao and is attributed to
A
Li Hsun by Li Shih-chen, Whenever possible I shall quote the
a A
Lai yao from the Cheng lei pen tsyao of the early 12th century

rather than Li Hsun from the l6th century Pen tsfao kang mu.

It is obviously preferable to quote the earlier copyist; less

time could have passed for errors to slip in, and I believe that
A A
T ’ang Shen-wei had access to a copy of the Hai yao pen ts*ao

which enabled him to quote from it so frequently (l), Pen

tsyao writers, in comparison with scholars dealing with the

Confucian classics, are unlikely to have quoted from memory

and would normally have consulted their texts^-}. Pen tsfao

literature was no part of the gentlemants cultural equipment,

which a scholar would have absorbed at an early age. Moreover

A
the pen ts'ao writers were scientists, anxious to establish

their facts accurately

a a
The bibliography of the Cheng lei pen ts'ao makes separate
references to the Nan hai yno p fu and to the Hai yao (3), and

both sources are quoted in this work (h). I shall, however,

follow the general practice and regard Li IlsQn as the author

A
of the Hai yao pen ts,a o <> though only because a more suitable

(1) T fang Shen-wei took a great number of quotations from the

Hal yao and listed them systematically. He could hardly have
done this if he did not possess the text,
(2) I owe this observation to Dr, Whitaker*
(3) CLPT, 3-4.
(h) In the section on camphor both the Nan hai yao pyu and the
Hai yao are quoted* CLPT. 13, 321b,
 177

attribution is not available. I shall limit my comments on

this text to one point, w ich is the important one of* when its
•a
author lived* He certainly wrote after the time of Ch en

Tsfsng-ch1i because he quotes C h ’en (1)* This

means that he was writing later than the 713 - 7^1 period. I

have also observed that on two occasions the Hai yao purports

to quote from the Ling piao lu i ^ jbrjk JjL , written by

Liu Hsun^'J about A.D* 900 (2). These borrowings suggest

that the Hai yao oen ts’ao could not have been written earlier

than the tenth century, and this may explain v/hjr its author

refers to the emperor T ’ai Tsung (62h - 6U9) as being of fthe

T ’ang p e r i o d ^ A- ^ 1 (3)# a statement which seems to

have been made by a post-T’ang dynasty writer. The tenth

century or later as the date for the composition of the Hai yao

pen ts’ao brings it closer in time to the composition of the

K K
Cheng lei pen ts'ao Mid reduces considerably the likelihood that

(1) PTKM. lu, 828a, on the subject of jLouhanthus rugosus or

LysimachiR slkokiana. For this identification see Read, Chines^
medicinal plants, no, 127 and no. 192. I base my identifications
of Giants o n Read’s unleBS I have occasion to disagree.
(2) CLPT. kp 109b, on the subject of Chintthsieh \ jk and LPLI,
Jl , 2-3. CLPT. 13. 327b (quoting the Ling piao chi5s& ^ }
on PopuluG balsarnlfera 4 6 ) i £. a n d 'LPLI 1 '.
“ T s ? * The
former CLPT quotation, though it helps to settle one matter,
makes an irritating contribution to the Kuang chou chi question,
for it records that text as mentioning the Ta^shih , or
Arabs, It is out of the question th:t ?a-shlh should have been
known to Ku Wei, and I suspect that the word is Ta-ch*in jy. jfr *
(3) CLPT, 13> 321b, A bibliographical note in t h e Chfung hsiu
cheng ho ching shih ch&ng lei pci yung pen tsfa o , 1 , i^O, on the
Nan hai yao p ’u , states that the author’s name is unknown and
that it seems, to have been written by some one at the end of the
T ’ang period {‘l/'A ]% A Pfl # This is a more likely attribu*.
tion than Li Shih-chen’s eighth century date for Li Hetin.
T ’ang Shen-wei was not quoting from a copy in his possession*
A
ITor does a later date for the Hal yao pen ts*ao necessarily mean

that its author could not have had access to the vintage texts;

the l^ai p*lnr: yu lan, completed in 9^3* often quotes them.

The problem of the identity of Li Hsun, though.an untidy one,

o
does not, I think, bedevil a discussion of the Po-ssu question.

None of the obscurities surrounding the vintage texts

which I have noticed so far are, in my opinion, absolute bars

on their use as evidence relating to about A.L, 500* My main

worry has been on other grounds. Has there been tampering

with the texts and, in particular, was the expression Po-ssu

interpolated by Li Hsun himself ? In default of the texts

themselves, the only means of disposing of doubts on this score

would be by comparing Li Hsun,s rendering of the passages in

question with the same passages quoted independently in other

works. Unfortunately this degree of textual verification can

u
be applied to only one of the Po-asu products with which I

shall be dealing. Li TlsUn quotes the Kuang chih on the

NO
important subject of a Po-ssu pine resin known as ju perfume

6) (l) . The same passage and attribution to the

are found in three Sung period works; the Hsiang n fu

, attributed to $ung C h * u i ^ ^ who wa3 alive in

(l) CLPT; 12, 309b under the heading of ju perfume:

"aJL fk -a
 179.

1126, quotes it (l), and so uoes..Ch,en C h i n g f ^ . ^ 1s Ilain

tauan hs i ang p1u , a work compiled by a Sung

writer (2)* Moreover Su Sungjl^f , compiler of the

T fu ching pen ts*ao t^)| of the eleventh century, also

quotes it (3) • All these writers could, of course, have been

merely quoting Li Hsun on the Kuan# chih, yet none of them

follow either Li Hsun or the Kuang chou chi on the subject of the

An-hsi perfume^# , another important resin with which I

shall be dealing (1+). I feel that the Kuang chih?s passage on

The Ssu k*u tTi yao states that C h fen Ching lived in Sung times,
though another authoi'ity ascribes him to the Yuan period* Chylen
tsun wang tu shu mln chfiu chi chiao ch§ng. Chang yu, 2 ^ , 9a*
Pelliot thought that he
lat l lived
ie; i i VCU at
cit the
(,I1 end
U OiiU. of
OX the
U1 Sung
C O period;
ullg pul 10(1J

Polo * I f 35.
(3) CLPT. 12, 303a: £ * $ it in € Pu* PJp)l% %
Kai is omitted
■ed afteirtne
_ fourth character.
_ __
w The Kuang chou chi passage on An-hsl perfume is found in CLPT.
13, 530b. The PTKM, 34-. 1375a, suppresses the reference to the KCC.
Laufer and Peng Ch’eng-chun quote from the PTKM and not from the
CLPT in respect of An-hsi perfume; Sino-Iranica, U65,l+79; Chu fan
chih hsiao chu, 100. Laufer1s omission to invoke the CLPT on the
subject of An-hsi perfume was one reason why he conceived the Po-
ssu problem as posed by Li Hsunfs use of the term Po-ssfr ratherthaa
by my vintage texts. I am not particularly concerned by the PTKM1s
omission to mention the KCC in Li Hsunfs passage on An-hsi perfume.
I suspect that Li Shih-chen relied on the CLPT for his Li Hsun
references and was sometimes inaccurate in quoting them. The same
kind of omission occurs in respect of amomumf e ! & : the CLPT. 9,
232b, quotes the Hai yao as quoting Ch*'&j7(Tsyahg-chfi), but the
PTKH, 1U, 8l2b, only quotes Li Hs3n; in respect of the marking nut
T r a i l , the CLPT.
~ ~ ll|,
'■ 358b, quotes the Hai yao as quoting Hsu
-................. *■ ■ ■

(Piao) / whereas the PTKp, 35 T- , lUlla, only quotes Li Hsun.Finally

in respect of cassia[5jl0 %f), the CLPT> 12,_J>12a, quotes Chfen
Ts#ang-ch,i in respect of F.o-shihfffi"Wh (arivijaya), while the PTKM,
31, 1311b, mentions Fo~llrrifl instead. Pelliot rightly observed
that the PTKM contains many misquotations; Polo. I, 5U1|#
the Po-ssu ,ju must be regarded as authentic and a statement of

knowledge available in southern China in about A.D. 500*

But this is the limit of textual verification which I have

been able to achieve, I have not concealed the danger of taking

the vintage texts at their face value, and an obligation remains

to justify their use* I hope to do so by showing that their

contents h:ove the flavour of the fifth or sixth century. I

shall show, for example, that not only Kuo I*-kung, author of

the Kuang chih. but also T ’ao Hung-ching distinguished the

separate identity of two otherwise similar resins, jiu perfume

rnc^ hsun-lu p e r f u m e . In later centuries the distinction

v/as lost, but it was certainly observed at about A.D. 500, and to

this extent the Kuang chih reads like a text written at that

■ime. This seems to me to bo consistent with the fact that

the Kuang chih ¥/as quoted in the commentary to the Shill shuo hsin

.vu by Liu Chun, who died in 521. Again, I shall show that the

Kuaug chou chiys reference to an An-hsl perfume is not an

isolated one in early Chinese literature. A perfume with this

name was known in northern China at least as early as the

beginning of the fourth century and was also mentioned in a

text quoted in the Liu Sung shu. the history of the southern

dynasty in the fifth century. Moreover the descriptive

language of the Kuang chih and the Nan chou chi is identical in

one important respect* These two texts liken foreign resins

to pine resin. I shall show tlu*t the pine resin analogy would

have been particularly meaningful to southern Chinese in the

 181.

fifth and sixth centuries on account of Taoist influences

working on the development of Chinese medicine.

Nor am I disconcerted by the appearance in the vintage

\j
texts of the expression Po-ssu. Though the Kuang chih only

uses it once (1), the Kuang chou chi uses it several times (2),

and the Nan chou chi at least twice (3)# Moreover the Nan

Yueh chih zL of Shen Kuai-yuanj'yt » a southerner, also

used it (4)J Pelliot believed that this author lived in the

third quarter of the fifth century (5)* In the previous

chapter we saw that Po-ssu appears in the Chiao chou chi, (Records

of Tongking), perhaps written in the first half of the fifth

o
century. Po~ssu missions from Sassanid Persia visited the

southern Liang dynasty in the 530 - 535 period, and in 520 the

Kephthalites sent Po-ssu brocade to the Liang emperor Wu Ti (6).

In view of these numerous examples it cannot be argued that the

o
word Po-ssu was known only in northern China when the vintage

texts were written and that its appearance in the texts dis­

credits them.

l^ In connexion with the perfume.

i2) The passages are discussed in chapter nine.

3) The passages are discussed in chapters eight and nine.

4} ChPT. 4* 110a. I return to this passage in chapter nine,
5).Polo. I, 456-7. This author is mentioned in the Pu Sung
i wen chih. reprint of K fai raing shu tien edition* 1 9 5 ^ 7 3 7 ^ 3 0 4 *
and in the Sul ching chi chih k*ao cheng. 3 * 5276#
(^) Liang shu. 3. 16a and 17a: LS. 54. U4bs L 3 . 54, 40b* LS,
54, 40b, states that in 520 Hua jlT sent Po-ssu brocade as
tribute. '™
 182*

Something else can be said in favour of the authenticity

of the fragments I shall use* The Kuang chih, on the subject

of ju perfume, mentions both #the southern ocean1 and Po-s.su (l) ,

and the four writers who quote the Kuang chih on this subject

all agree that ’the southern ocean* appeared in the passage.

The use of the term *southern ocean* in this context is the hub

of the Po-ssu question, for it at once introduces the problem of

a ’Persia* outside western Asia, If the curious expression

occurred only in the Kuang chih, there would be justifiable

doubt concerning its authenticity. Fortunately, the Kuanp: chou

chi also uses it in a passage which mentions Po-ssu (2), Because

the two texts independently mention the ’southern ocean* in the

context of Po-ssu* I think that it is unlikely that both fragments

are corrupt. Moreover, it seems that an eccentric usage of

o A .A
Fo-esu created a problem for later pen tsTao writers. Ch en

Ch* eng P i , in his Pen ts’ao rich shuo $ % M iTjL of

about 1090, felt it necessary to distinguish between a western

and a southern M s the former came from India and the latter

from Po-ssu (3)* There could have been no doubt in this

writer’s mind that Po-ssu normally meant ’Persia*; nevertheless,

A
he makes this strange distinction. Li Shih-chen even volunteered

an extraordinary definition of Po-ssu;

(1) The text is given in note 1 on page *1$ above.

(2) CLPT. 13, 330b* The text is given on page l9^ below*
(3) EEKM. 34, 1371b:

& A $ tfi t o # r $
J
 183.

*F *o—la—men (Brahman) is £he name of a country in the

western regions# Po-ssu is the name of a country
of the south-western barbarians (l)#f

Why did he not assume that Po-s3u = fPersia* was also in the

western regions, as Persia certainly was as far as the Chinese

were concerned ? The reason must be that he was aware of an

earlier and esoteric usage of Po-ssu by pen ts'ao writers,

A. A •
probably preserved in the Cheng lei pen to ao quotations of

Li Hsun, themselves often incorporating passages from the

vintage texts#

My final Justification for using these texts is that I

believe that their contents, after botanical and pharmacological

analysis, disclose a pattern of information which is consistent

with the way maritime trade was developing in the fifth and

sixth centuries# That trade was primarily a trade between

China and Western Asia ana not Indonesia, and the same emphasis

is reflected in the Po-ssu passages in the vintage texts*

It is on these various grounds that I Justify my use of

these fragments* It is safe to associate their authors with a

period not later than the beginning of the sixth century.

There are no reasons for suspecting tiiat the texts had disappeared

by the tenth century, when^the writer of the Hal yao pen tsyno

A
(l) PTKM. 31, 1311a, on the subject of cassia pods.Li Shih-ehen
had occasion to quote the T fang period Yu yang tsa tsu gj 0&
the Po-ssu tsao chieh# * jji ^
an 1 the compilers of the T ’ai p ’inr. yu lan consulted them, and,

whatever mutilation has occurred in the fragments as we have

them today, I consider* that’

tie crucially important juxtaposition

of ’soutnern ocean’ and Po-ssu in the Kuang chih and the

Kuang chou chi creates a problem which cannot be shirked by

casting doubt on the reliability of the two fragments. The

sequel will show whether my faith in these texts is misplaced*

CHAPTER SEVEN

THE PINK RESIN OF THE SOUTHERN PC E M

The vintage texts began to become significant when I

noticed how some of the natural products they mention were likened

to pine resin either by the authors of these texts or in another

text not later than the seventh century* A fragment of the

Kuang chih has survived in the following form:

•3 % ■ g L £ 5 •% Wr% - a

•i iif *£ m
*Hai y a o * Ju t'ou perfume* I note that the Kuang chih
says that it is produced in the southern ocean and that
it is (a) Po-ssu pine resin (l)**

Hsu Piao, author of the Nan chou chi, also knew of a pine resin:

& i t xk ftA %ill il£ & tn <$I tix®

fHai yao (on the jro d r u g ^ ^ * )• * note in HsS Piaofs
Nan chou chi that it grows in the Po-ssti country. It
is a pine resin of that place (2)*1

Ku Wei, author of the Kuang chou chi, does not describe An-hsi

perfume as a pine resin:

'A & i i Wl ie-a * t 3* ® i n 4>Hi tn

(1) CLPT. 12, 309b.

(2) Ibid, 13, 330a.
 186*

*Eal yao* I note that according to the Kuang chou chi

it grows in the southern ocean (and that it is) the
resin of a Po-ssu country tree (l)*1

The compilers of the T ang pen tsyao in the middle of the

seventh century (2), however, say of An-hsi perfume:

$ 0 £
fIt comes from the western Jung (barbarians) and its
appearance is like that of pine resin (3)«

Moreover in the T fang pen tsrao even camphor, known to the

Chinese at least as early as the beginning of the sixth century,

is now likened to pine resin:

(1) CLPT. 13* 330b* I once thought that this passage meant that
An—hsi perfume came from a tree which grew in the 1southern ocean
Po-'ssu country1# It is clear to me now that Po-ssu was never
described in this way, and I have therefore amended the translation
to make it conform with the fragment from the Kuang chih on ,1u*
translated above* Both jju and An-hsi perfume grew in the
•southern ocean1 but were also described as Po-ssu resins.
(2) In 657 Su C h i n g ^ presented his Hsin hsiu pen tst.ao*
bringing up to date' the materia medica of T *ao Hung-ching"Tof the
early sixth century* The work was edited by a number of officials
and doctors and convicted in 659# ^he items in the materia
medica now stood at 850* Li Shih-ch&n. calls this work the T y.ang
oijxi t'sfao* a title which I shall follow for convenience. Li
always associates it with Su Kung^Sf. ^ , who is never mentioned
by modern Chinese writers on pen tsyao subjects. Wherever
possible I shall quote from afacsimile of a T ’ang manuscript;
Hsin hsiu pen * Chung kuo ku tien 1 hsueh ts,ung
shu series, Shanghai, ly5$*
(3) H3in hsiu p£n tsya o . 1, lh5; CLPT. 13* 330b.
 137.

1Camphor perfume and ointment . come from P ’o-lu

(» ’Barns1) country. In appearance'it is like white
pine resin •« (1)*’

The ’pine tree resin’ clacsification is interesting* It

is difficult to believe that it was a casual one, for the

evergreen pine tree was one of their veneralle trees, admired

from early times for its size and firm stance and regarded as a

symbol of endurance. Confucius said:

yio/V
’Only when thep fiwm* grows cold do we see that the pine
and the cypress are the last to fade (2).’

Its prestige was specially great in Taoist circles, where it was

regarded as a source of vitality for the same reasons which

guaranteed its long life and ability to retain its foliage in

winter. Pine resin was one of the drugs which the Taoists,

seeking immortality, took to strengthen their bodies when they

starved in an effort to rid themselves of the corrupting effect©

of the ’Five Cereals J L f» rice, millet, corn, oats, and

(1) Hsin hsiu pen ts’ao, 1, 11+6. The same text is reproduced
exactly in the CLPT♦ 13, 321b, even though it is thought that T ’ang
Shen-wei could not nave seeri a copy and that the TPT hadAbeen trans­
mitted in the Shu pen ts’a o laPj % ; Hsin hsiu pen ts’ao
2, #5* The manuscript and tne CbfT also agree, with insig­
nificant differences, in their rendering of the passage about An-hsx
perfume. The correct reproduction of the T ’ang p£n ts’ao in the
CTjPT illustrates the careful way the pen tsT ao writers preserved
their predecessors’ work. At the end of the passage in the CLPT
there appears the statement T ’ang pen c h u , or ’commentary
on the T ’ang pen (ts’aoV. The commentary appears in the manu­
script and I take it that it represents a contribution by the
committee which edited Su Ching’s work in 657-659*
(2) Analects. 9 f 27, Dr. Waley’s translation, Ihk* Dr. Waley
noted that Confucius was only repeating a proverb. The Chinese
altitude towards the pine is discussed by Stein in ’Jardins en
miniature d ’Extreme-Orient’, BEFEO. U2, 19U2, 83-82*.
beans (l). The Sher nun.gr ucn tsfao c h i n g pj* ^ t the

earliest Cbinose materia nedica, believed to have been compiled

in Han times from earlier sources, included it among the

& °
’Superior products/^ aO f and recorded its life-prolonging

efficacy (2). Ko Hung ^ , the famous Taoist alchemist

and philosopher (281 - 3I4-I), describes a miraculous cure from

pine resin as a result of which the patient lived to a ripe old

age (3)* T fao Hung-ehing (h52 - 536 or k5& - 5*4-0) observes

that the pine tree was used in Taoist starvation techniques:

ti% \m rrz- A % <i

*The pine and the cypress both have resins. The cold
winter does not wither them. Therefore they must be
fine substances. Those who practise starvation techniques
make much use of them, but most people take little notice
of them ( b ) . ’ ' *

Su C u n g ^ J , author of the 11th century T ’u chin/r oen t s ’ao

\§ H * % , makes a similar observation:

A (\$L ^ ^ ^ I*9 ^ ft il= ^

ft *\ %

(1) On the subject of techniques for resisting the decay caused by

the ’Five C e r e a l s ’ see H. Maspero, ’Le T aoisme’ , f l a n g e s posthumes
...... 2, 1950, 100-102. Maspero discussed the subject at much
greater length in ’Les proc£des de "nourrir le principe vital” ...f|
JA. 1937, 2 and 3, 177-252, 313-U30.
(2) Chung kuo ku tien i hsueh ts’ung han edition, 1955* 28. See
t. is studyg^. , Iff. on the way the work was preserved in the
later p^n ts’ao.
3) PTKM. 3^. 1352a.
18 5k, 1352a.
 139.

’Taoists, preparing their special diet, sometimes mix

fu ling (1), pine and cypress seeds, and chrysanthemum
flowers into pills. (But pine resin) may also be taken
alone (2)*1

Li Shih-chen, at the end of the 16th century, summed up the

tradition when he stated that pine leaves and seeds were

essential for •starving* in the Taoist sense of the term (3)*

But the pine tree had other and less esoteric properties

which could still be recognised when the quest for longevity

had ceased to excite scholarly minds. As early as the

A A
Shen nung pen tsfao chin# it was realised that

•pine resin *.* cures ulcers and evil sores, ulcers on

the head and baldness* the itch, and vapours. It
calms the five viscera (heart, liver, spleen, lungs,
and kidneys) and expels heat (U)*f

According to T*aa Hung-ching among its properties was the

removal of M e a d flesh^i fyfL 9 (5). The Yao hsing pen tsTao

^ , attributed by Li Shih-chen to Chen Ch'uan

who was alive in the early seventh century (6), also had

much to say in favour of pine resin:

(T) Fu ling is usuallyidentified with Pachyma cocos Fries. It

is a fungus growing on oine tree roots.
(2) PTKM. 3 U f 1352a.
(3) Ibid: fa ^ jSfr !//§
(k) 28.
(5) PTKM. 32, 1351b.
(6) On t h i B author see PTKM, l r 333« ChenCh’uan*s biography
is in CTO f \ , 1U1, 2b,
 190.

'When fried it produces flesh and stops pain. It clears

u p pus and. removes wind. It is pasted over various
kinds of boils, pus-filled and suppurating ulcers. (l).f

There is no tiling surprising in the application of ine

resin for ulcers and other forms of bodily eruptions. The

Greek p h y s i c i a n s used it for these ailments (2). The alleged

fumigatory functions are more interesting. The belief that

pine resin expelled wind dwelling inside the body was probably

derived from the Taoist view that the 'Five Cereals1 # like

everything else, had their 'air ^ , the lingering effects

of which had to be removed even after the seeker for

immortality had begun to abstain from eating these harmful

substances (3).

The prestige of the pine tree was shared by amber and

the fu ling fungus, both of which were intimately connected

with the pine tree*. Amber was recognised at an early date

ac fossilised pine resin and therefore presumably the

quintessence of hardy old age and the benign influences making

(1) PTKM. 32, 1351b~1352a.

(2) I return to the Greeks later in this chapter.
(3) hr. Needham has occasion to discuss early Chinese notions
on 'air’ in Science and Civilisation. Cambridge, 1956, 2, and
especially 21-21+.'1 In the context of neo-Confucian philosophy
he defines chTi as 'matter energy of which everything is
composed* and he also gives early examples of the way in which
plants were endowed with ch* i . Acupuncture was based on the
technique of removing air from the pulse.
 191.

Tor Its achievement, while fu which actually grows on

pine roots, was readily believed to be immune from decay and

another transformation of pine resin (l).

It w a s , therefore, with distinct ideas about pine resin

that the Chinese writers classified the Po-ssu fpine resinsf.

For then pine resin was a styptic and fumifuge, or disinfectant*

Evidently they considered that the foreign resins, listed at the

begin.,ing of the chapter, had similar properties.

Foreign plant life, however, had additional associations

for the Chinese. After the establishment of Han influence

in Turkestan in Wu Ti fs reign (11*1 - 87 B.C.) they began to

hear of valuable shrubs and trees in north-western India,

Persia, and the Middle East. No doubt botanical produce was

brought as tribute to Chfang-an and, li we believe stories of

Wu Ti’s reign, some of this produce attracted attention for

its magical virtues. Several texts refer to an outbreak of

disease in Ch*ang-an early in the first century B.C. which

was checked, according to one lost text, when Yfieh-chih envoys

recommended that shen perfume % , stored as tribute in

the imperial warehouses, should be burnt (2). The story

(1) Li Shih-chen quotes a work on fu ling: it was the air of

the sacred soul of the pine tre a sjU rfi ^ * PTKM. 37?1^6%
(2) According to the Jui ying 1 quoted in the flsin
t sun a hsiang p yu . 1, 25a. The Jui yinx t*u is listed in the
Sul shu bibliographical chapter. Other texts mention the same
Episode. Background informationon products reaching Han China
may be found in Chang Wei-hua, hun Han Wu T i. Shanghai, 1957,
and Ch#en Chu-tfung, Liang Han ho hsi yu teng ti ti chlng chl«•.,
Shanghait 1957.
 192.

was probably embroidered by later writers who combined the

Tacts of Chinese expansion in central Asia during IVu Tifs

reign with the tradition of the emperor1s Taoist inclinations*

For Wu Ti fs conquests had been in lands which were believed to

lie close to the 1western regions1, honoured by Taoists as a

place where supernatural powers held sway. Chinese ideas about

the western regions were crystallsed in popular beliefs about

the 1Western Queen Mother 3:^ f who lived in the neighbour­

hood of the K fun~lun mountains. Originally she had been

regarded as the goddess of epidemics, but for the Taoists she

became the Queen of the Immortals and the supplier of drugs

for long life and other drugs (l). As a supplier of drugs

she was mentioned in the Huai nan tzu of the second century

r.c. (2 ).

During the Later Han period (25 - 220) the demand for

(1) Maspero, *Le Taoisme1, 127. ,

(2) As quoted in TPYL. 961+, l+356b-^ % %

A consequence of the early trade in foreign plant products was

the introduction of incense burners to northern China in Han times
The classic study on this subject is Laufer*s Chinese pottery of
the Han. Leiden, 1909, 17U-198* A recent discussion of the
introduction of foreign plant substances for incense purposes is
in Yamada, Tozai koyaka shi. 315 ff. I recognise the influence
of Buddhism in propagating the use of foreign plant substances
as incenses, especially during the Northern and Southern
Dynasties of China (fourth - sixth century), but I have chosen
to make the drug trade the basis of rny study because I believe
that the medical affinities of the resins in question, likened
to the Chinese pine resin, explain the way in which western
Indonesia was caught up in China*s maritime trade. The early
Chinese interest in the pine tree was an indigenous one, and to
this extent their interest in foreign #pine trees1 did not
depend on foreign cultural influences*
 193 •

western goods continued, and it was now that the prestige of

Ta-chyin was beginning to make an impact on the Chinese

imagination. The Wei lueh and the Hou Han shu mention two

countries which possessed vegetal wealth, They were India*

which produced 1various kindB of perfumes 1 and also

black pepper (l) and above all Ta~chyin:

i.% $ 't5 A 8 & >t& a i ^ W A

f a % (fi s f* a -to
fIt is said that to the west of this country are the Jo
river and the quicksands, near the place where the Western
Queen Mother lives and where the sun goeB down (2),y

The Wei lueh notes that there xvere twelve kinds of perfume to

be found in Ta-chyin (3). Moreover

% *- -*{9 ^ H \ t*p M +$
5) ^
yhere are (to be found) the pine tree, the cypress, the
sophora tree (4), the catalpa kaempferi tree, bamboos,
reeds, the willow tree, the caTophyllum inophyllum tree,
and a hundred plants (3)#f

Now at last 7/e have a reference to foreign pine trees,

Shiratorl thought that the botanical description of Ta-chyin

was partly inspired by romantic ideas of the vegetation which

the' idealised regions of the west would be expected to possess

1) HHS, 118, 16b.

^ HHS, 118, 14b. ~ *
SKCWel. 30, 33b: + — fM. %
, For the identification of thesetreesI^havefollowed the
T z yu hai and the Chung kuo yao hsueh tatz*u tien, Peking, 1956,
<51 SKCWel. 30, 32b.
 19k.

(1)* This may be so, but subsequent views of the Chinese

on the properties of one plant drug attributed to I!a-chfIn

suggest that a more than romantic acquaintance with Ta-ch’in

vegetation developed.

This drug was the su-ho perfume^J Qr storax, believed

to have been supplied in classical times by Styrax officinale

Linn. (2) and attributed by the Wei lueh and the Hou han shu

to Ta-ch’in (3)« The Chinese do not seem to have been

certain whether su-ho was a single substance or a synthetic

one, composed of several drugs, and T ’ao Hung-ching even thought

that it was lion dung (k). But the identity of this drug is

less significant than the medical properties which the Chinese

attributed to it. The first technical description is

provided by T ’ao Hung-ching:

/ v»>
’It drives out evil and kills devilish semen. It destroys
fever, poison, and convulsions and gets rid of the three
worms. It expels pernicious (influences). It enables
one to avoid nightmares. By following this diet one
shares the potencies of the gods, lightens the body, and
lengthens one’s years (5).*

(l) ’Chinese ideas reflected In the Ta-ch’in accounts’, i+9-72 and

especially 65*66.
(2; On the history of storax see D. Hanbury, Science Papers.
London, 1876, 127-150, and Burkill, Dictionary. I, Il7-il8.
(Styrax grows in a number of areas in the Middle East.) In the
sixth century A.D. Styrax officinale was beginning to be over­
taken in value by Liquidambar orientale Linn.
*3) SKCWel, 30, 3 3 b . H H S .~ li5. TSaI
« Si 1 ^ * if ia St. § - 1
 195

Storax was clearly valued for its fumigatory powers and as a

means of practising longevity techniques* In this way it had

something in common with pine resin* The expression]^ ,

which I have translated as *expelling pernicious influences1 f

was used by Ta Ming Sf] , author of a tenth century pen

ts*ao* on connexion with pine resin (l)*

But a much more important plant drug than storax came from

Ta-chfin and in the third century there are several references

to it In Chinese texts# This drug was hsun-lu «

Pelliot once suggested that haSn-lu became known in China

as a result of sea-borne trade in Chin times (265 - U20),

probably in the fourth century (2), but there are references

to it which show that it was already known in the third century*

The Wei lueh* believed to be written in the first half of the

third centuryf attributes it to Ta-ch*in (3)# There is also

*
the statement in the T yang tzu. quoted i n / , 1 p r e v i o u s chapter,

that hsun-lu came from Ceylon (h)j it is mentioned with certain

(1) PTKM* 1352a^ _ One of the attributes of storax was that

it fdrove out evilfe+ij^ ** It la interesting that a perfume
with a similar namej£4 vt}j> ^ was said to come as tribute to
China since the time of the two Han dynasties; Hsiang p fu , _k_ ,
9 f quoting the Tu yang pieryjxpj* * The story of the sh&n
perfume which cured an outbreak or disease in Wu Tifs reign is
in effect about a disinfectant, for the substance was burnt as
Incense, Though I do not know what weight should be attached
to these accounts of early perfumes, we shall see that the
Chinese realised later that perfumes from the western regions
had a strong aroma*
(2) In his review of Hirth and Rocfehill’s Chau Ju-kua* T P * 13,
1912, 1+75-9 •
(3) SKCWel * 30, 33b*
(U) TPYL. 982, U3i+7b* PageB 155-156*
 196.

other products ascribed in the Wei lueh to Ta-ch*in. There

is no evidence that they grew on that island and they must

A
have been imports* Finally, even Wan Chen, author of the

Nan chou i wu chih and an authority on Ko-ying, seems to have

heard of It as a Ta~ch* in product (l). References to it

continue in the following centuries. Ko Hung, who died in

the early fourth century, mentions it (2). A kingdom in

south-eastern India, known to the Chinese as ,Kaveri’^ ® ^ ^ - *,

sent it as tribute to the Liu Sung dynasty in 1*28 (3)* It

is also mentioned in the Kuang chih* one of the vintage texts:

'If f- it k ft] * 4t 'A ’i | A # til I ^

i) f S. % f ^ 3 * i i.
*Chi-lu comes from Chiao chou (Tongking). It also comes
from Ta-ch1in. The people by the side of the sea gather
it and exchange it with merchants for grain. If there
are no merchants, they take it and eat it (4).

Hsun-lu would have been available in Tongking as an export

from Ta-chfin* as it was in Ceylon according to the T'ang tzu.

(1) CLPT. 12, 309a, quoting Chang Yfi-hsi and others (e* 1056).
The passage first quotes the Nan fang tsfao mu chuang* attributing
hs%n-lu to T a - c h ^ n . and then adds: 'Note. The Nan fang i wu
chih is the same
it is like peach
In TPYL* 982, 1*3 __________________________
and followed with: *The Nan chou i wu chih is the same. It
differs only must be an error fQ£/fe ) in saying that in
appearance it is like peach
(2) TPYL< 982, U3U7b. ' -
(3) Liu Sung shu* 97, lib. It is called ma-loJ Q 3$)
which is one of the alternative names for hsun-Iir provided by Li
Shih-ch&nj PTKM. 3k$ 1371a. Pelliot ignored it because he was
uncertain when it was first en vogue: T P * 13, U77*
Ik) TPYL* 982, U3U7b. The heading of this section of the TPYL
is hsun-iu* and Chi-lu is an irregular transcription.
 197.

And, though the references are not numerous, hsun-lu was

clearly sufficiently well known in southern China for T*ao

Hung-ching to incorporate it in his revision of the materia

medica (1).

The compiler of the Sui shu included the T*anp: tzu in

his list of Taoist book3* Ko Hung, who also mentions hsun-lu,

was a Taoist, and T*ao Hung-ching had Taoist inclinations* I

believe that the Taoists were largely responsible for the

assimilation of hsun-lu to the materia medica* During the

third and following centuries the influence of Taoism in

southern China was accompanied by important developments in

Chinese medicine when its followers were ceasing to be

exclusively concerned with devising recipes for immortality

but were extending their researches to finding new cures for

diseases (2)# Their aptitude for experimentation led them to

investigate the properties of an increasing number of plants,

and the more inaccessible the habitat of a plant the more

was it thought likely that the plant ivas a useful one* It

was in this period that T fao Hung-ching doubled the entries

in the materia medica. An empirical approach to pharmacy

would have provided a favourable background for the acceptance

by Chinese physicians of foreign plant products, and

(1) I analyse below T ’ao's interest in it.

(2) I have relied on Ch*en Pang-hsien, Chung kuo 1 hsiieh shih,
chapter five*
 196.

indeed the literature of the Southern and Northern Bynasties

includes several works on foreign drugs (l).

The evidence about h8un-lu makes it practically certain

that the Taoists were responsible for the reception it received

in China, and the reason for its success \7as simply that they

regarded it as a superior form of pine resin, no doubt

hallowed by its western origins. Prom a practical point of

view, according to T ’ao Hung-ching, it could be used for curing

poisonous swellings , eruptions , and the itch

^ ...
(2). According to the seventh century T ’ang pen ts’ao

it cured ulcers (3)* Ulcers, evil sores, and the itch were

among the ailments for which the Sh&n nung pen ts’ao ching

recommended pine resin, But perhaps equally important were

the fumigatory properties of hsun-lu, for T ’ao also notes that

(1) Titles ar^ mentioned by Ch’en Pang-hsien, 131. Two of the

Liu Sung emperors and one Liang emperor wrote books on medical
and pharmacological subjects. I regret th t Dr. Needham’s study
of Chinese medicine in his Science and civilisation in China
series did not appear when I was preparing this study. Enough
has been written, however, by him to make clear the high regard
in which he holds the Taoists as scientists.
(2) firra. 3kt 1371b. The passage is as follows: ’Hsun-lu: it
deals with wind, water, and poisonous swellings. It expels evil
air. It prevents infection from eruptions, scabies, and the
poison of corpses! i f£] >K-j& % Kf. J ffc &
(3) CLPT. 12. 309a# It expels evil'air and evil ulcers A
■fe *• ^he only reference to hsun-lu in the T ’ang pen
ts’ao manuscript is under the heading of gharu wood
Ilsin hsiu pen ts’ao . 109-110, where the same attributes are
given.
 199.

it expelled evil air (l). It is not surprising that Li Hsun

should have said or it that

fthe immortals (the Taoists) use it in their starvation

techniques to rid their bodies of the effects of the
Five Cereals (2),*

But hsun-1u was believed to have even more in common with

pine resin. Its tree resembled the pine tree to the extent

of its appearance. The Nan fang 18*80 mu chuang provides a

hint of this when It states that the branches and leaves of the

hsun-lu tree were 1 just like^t 1 those of an ancient pine

tree, presumably a pine tree which had proved its virtue by

successfully weathering old age (3). Li Shih-chen notes that

there were several statements that the jjii tree, the later name

?or hsun-1u. was similar to fan old pine tree1 (4). T fao Hung-
ching may have mentioned hsun-lu in an account of the remedies

(1) See note (2) on page 198. x +

(2) PTXM. 3kt 1372a. I have paraphrased the e x p r e s s i o n s ^ : *
Ta Ming £ of the tenth century says of pine resinj fThe
practitioners of old made much use of it to rid their bodies of
the effects of the Five Cereals % % $ J Z PTKM. 3k>
1352a. ^ *
(3) Commercial press edition, 1955*9 * 7. The passage is as
follows: fe -*1® -S
Hirth translate. as *straight llke’j China dnd the Homan Orient
268, note 1. In view of the comparisons made by later Chinese
between the hsun-lu tree and the pine tree I feel that f3ust like1
is the appropriate translation. The NFTMC is believed to
contain interpolations, and one cannot be certain that this
passage is as old as about A.D. 300#
Ik) PTXM, 3k$ 1371b:
 *
200

achieved by different species of pine (1). At all events, by

■H A*7
Su Sung ^ 4) fs time in the eleventh century it was

possible to say that the pine resin used by druggists was aB

# as hsun-lu (2 )* TTsGn-lu now set the

standard of quality by which pine resin was judged.

But here we have to consider a complication, for by

Su Sungfs time hsun-lu had lost currency as the only name for

this resin and was being bracketed with and eventually super­

seded by another name* The alternative name was tyou

perfume % or fmilk nipple perfume1 , often known merely

as perfume.

I wiBh to emphasise the fact that jju perfume was originally

something distinct from hsun-lu* The earliest reference to it

is in the Kuang chih quoted in the Cheng lei pen t s ^ o s

(l) My authority for this statement is TPYL. 982, i+347b. The

passage deals with hsun-lu and the comments of the ITan fang
tstao mu ehiro and Nan chou i wu chih. Then it says: *The
Tien shu also says the same* It states, however, that in
T #ao*s system of pine and cypress (remedies)*1 one does not
drink it# If one eats it one attains the potencies of the

According to the Bui shu. 3k, 29b, the Tien shu was written by
Chien P 1tog-wang^S i f ^ of the Liu Sung period, and his biography
is in thcLlu S u n g s h u . 72#
(2) CLPT* 12, 291* 'Pine resin is produced in the mountain
valleys of the T'ai Shan# Today it is found everywhere. ^ The
resin is used today because it is as transparent as the hsun-lu
perfume
 201

yHai y a o * Ju tfou perfume* I note that the Kuang chih

says that it is produced in the southern ocean
and that it is (a) Po-ssu pine resin (!)•

The corresponding passage in the Pen ts*ao kanr mu is somewhat

different*

*Hstin says* X note that the Kuang chih states that hsun-lu
perfume is the scaly part of a tree bark* When it is
removed it grows again* Ju-t*ou perfume grows in the
southern ocean* It is a Po— ssti pine resin (2)**

Tke Hslan&jpju* Hsin tsuan .hsiang n fu * and the T*u chlng pen

ts*ao * however, do not include the sentence about the scaly

part of the tree bark in the passages they attribute to the

.Kuang chih (3), ond I do not believe that it ever appeared in

that text* Instead it was probably introduced by the author

of the Hal yao pen tsfao. and this must be why the Hsin tsuan

hslang p*u attributes it to the Hai yao pen tsfao (k) •

We have seen that the Euang chih states that hsun-lu came

from Ta—ch* in* the country to which a number of other early

texts attributed hsun-lu (5)* Since the Kuan# chih also

states that the j u perfume was produced in fthe southern ocean*,

it is clear that Kuo I-kung regarded hsQn-lu and ju as different

substances. Moreover, if Li Shih-chen is to be believed*

T fao Hung-ching did likewise, for he is quoted as saying that

(1) CLPT, 12, 309b*

(2) PTKM, 3k, 1371a.
(3) I quoted these passages on page , ajoK3
(k) Hsin tsuan hsiang p*u, 1, 10a*
(5) Page 1^ *
 202 *

hsun-lu and ju were different but had the same efficacy (1)*

But the best authority on the separate identity of hsun-lu and

;lu is Ch’en T s fang-ch#i* writing in the first half of the

seventh century, who states unambiguously that ju was a species

of hsun-lu X ?? l^£i ^ & (2)# Li Shih-chen sums up the problem

of nomenclature by remarking that the Sung Chi a yu yen is*

^ kept hsun-lu and ju tinder separate headings but that

in his own period the various authorities amalgamated them (3)*

That these two resins were originally separate substances

is also borne out by the fact that there is no early text

which indicates that came from Ta-ch*in. the source of

Bupply for hsun-lu. Similarly the Hou Chou shu and the

Sul shu attribute hsun-lu to po-ssu « *Persiaf (k) » but never

is j^u mentioned in the context of Persia in spite of the

statement of the Kuang chih that it was a Pq-bsu pine resin.

Thus there seems to be clear evidence that originally

hsun-lu and ju were different resins from different parts of

the world, though very similar because in Chinese eyes they

both resembled pine resin* In attributes and appearance hsun-lu

reminded them of the pine, while was specifically described

(1) PTKM. 3171b. T fao gives the functions of hsun-lu

and a d d s s ^ u ^ • Unfortunately this passage does not
appear in the CLPT
(2) CLPT, 12, 309bj PTKM. 3 k t 1371a.
(3 ) Ib id , 1371b; % t£ST7 % $ fa
(Ij.) Hou Chou shu, 50, 17a rendered as Igt .7 ^
Sui shu. ^3. 13a. rendered asl£ p*
1^
 203 .
as a pine resin. The distinction between the two substances

is one of the few aspects of the Po-ssu problem which can be

confidently stated. Equally evident is the fact that hsGn-lu

was known to the Chinese before they knew of j u (1)$

Hsun-lu from Ta-ch* in was already known to Wan Chen. Sometime

within the next 250 years, however, Kuo I-kung not only knew

of hsun-lu but also of from the fsouthern ocean*,

On the basis of this evidence I shall now formulate a

hypothesis, and its substantiation is one of the chief themes

of this study. I shall postpone awhile an explanation of the

significance of the description of ju as a Pb-ssu resin,

preferring to concentrate on the statement that it was

produced in the 1southern ocean1, I suggest that, some time

after hsun-lu first arrived by sea in southern China, a sub­

sidiary trade with China in a similar product, represented by

3came into beings from a country in the *southern ocean* on

the route by which hsun-lu travelled. The reason was that

those responsible for pioneering the ju trade realised that

there was an established and profitable market in China for

hsun-lu and believed that ju would be equally acceptable to the

(i) Yamada, in his study of the history of aromatics, does not

bring out the original distinction between hsun-lu and ju;
Tozai Koyaka shi. 2nd edition, Tokyo, 1957» 327.
 204 .
Chinese* That the judgment of the ju traders was sound is

indicated by the way the Chinese came to regard ju as a

species of hsun-lu and both these substances as similar to

or identical with pine resin* It is possible that the 1southern

ocean1 merchants at first surreptitiously insinuated their

j u into cargoes of Ta-ch* in hsun-lu and palmed it off on the

Chihese as genuine hsun-lu* ’Long distances make long lies1,

as D ’Orta once remarked in connexion with stories about camphor,

but it would only have been a question of time before it urns

safe to disclose the identity and origin of ju* The

disclosure must have occurred before 521, the last possible

date for the composition of the Kuang chih. and it is likely

that for some decades before 521 ju imports were becoming a

feature of China’s maritime trade* Thus I am led to believe

that in the later decades of the fifth century ’southern ocean’

ju was reaching China. The quantities may have been small,

but the hsun-lu trade was sufficiently important to spark off a

trade in the substitute (l).

Before I consider where waB the region which manipulated

this successful deception I wish to establish the nature of

the resins in question. Their identity is the chief reason

(i) Laufer foresaw the likelihood that a demand for one type of
product created a demand for similar products; fllno-T^ n ± a a f
464, on costus. He noted the fragments on hsun-lu and j u but
contented himself with commenting on Sung texts to the effect
that *a kind of incense*, as he translated ju, was produced
among’the Malayan Po-ee*; i+io-ihit.
 205 ♦
for my hypothesis that ju waa a deliberate substitute for

hsun-lu and takes us a considerable way towards distinguishing

the region which produced the is*

In modern China j u is a trade name for m s tic and also for

frankincense (1). Foreign students of Chinese drugs working

In China during the last century had to rely on analyses of

specimens bought at the local shops in order to identify in

botanical language the products they were studying* They

were therefore the victims of chance purchases. Tatarinov

in 1851 sent I S to Horanlnov in Russia and it turned out to

be sarxdarac fCallltris spp, Tetraclinus articulata) (2).

Bretschneider sent i s to FlGckiger, who identified it with

Boswellla or frankincense (3)* Father Roi has identified it

with mastic (Pistacla spp) (4)* Laboratory analyses are

clearly not helpful in trying to establish the nature of the

j u which, fifteen hundred years or so ago, came to China

alongside hsun-lu.

(1) Read, Chinese medicinal plants **., no. 313* According to

Laufer the Chinese learnt of mastic in Mongol times under its
Arabic name of mastakl 0^ # Li Shih-chfen knew so
little about it that included it as an appendix to his notes
on Cummin; Slno-Iranlca. 252,
^2) Catalogue medic^mentorum Slnenslum. St. Petersburg, 1856,

(3) Botanlcon Sinicum *.*, Part 3> 1895, 462* He noted that
Cleyer in l6Q2 (Specimen medlcinae sinicae. 210) reached the
same conclusion*
(4)fTrait£ des lantes medicinales Chinoises*, 208-9*
 In 1885 Hirth identified hsun-lu from Ta-ch’in as

’frankincense’, partly because Li Shih-chen had said that it.

was the same as ju, a modern name for frankincense, and partly

because he thought that the name was derived from the Turkish

ph.vunluk;. the name for frankincense in that language (1)*

Pelliot and Laufer rejected Hirth1s philology and Insisted that

hsun was merely a Chinese word for ’fragrance* and could not be

safely understood to mean anything more than a general term

for ’incense* (2). Neither :>f these scholars derived any

assistance from the alternative words supplied by LI Shih-clien

as Sanskritic names for the product* Laufer noted, however,

the essential point that j u grew in the ’southern ocean’, though

he made the curious observation that this could not refer to

Po-ssu » ’Persia* because no incense was produced In Persia (3)*

J u , according to Laufer, might ’very well be’ a species of pine,

as indeed the Chinese said it was.

I have come to the conclusion that hsTSn-lu was frankincense

and a pine resin. The evidence which convinces me that

(1) China and the Roman Orient. 266-8. In Hirth and Rockhill’s
Chau Ju-kua. 196, note 1, hsun-lu was derived from the Arabic
kiindur.
( 2) T P . 13» 475-9> Slno-Iranlca. 470, note 3»
(3) Cruder species of Boswellia grow in north-western India,
which was under the SasBanids. ’Incense* is an unsatisfactory
term, for other resins as well as frankincense are burnt for
this purpose. Laufer translated the passage from the Kuang
chih about ju in the sense of meaning *Po-se in the Southern
Sea’, a translation which I m m reject; see p a a b o v e .
Laufer considered that Po-ssu In the context of ju was the name
of a South East Asian country, a hypotheses whicir"he was
concerned to establish.
 .
207

this is the correct identification is not philological (l)

but simply that the Chinese originally regarded them as

similar resins. The Chinese description of the hsun-lu tree

Ta-ch*in as being s i m i l a r t o a pine tree, though

consistent with its being frankincense (Boswellla spp), was

based only on hearsay (2), But the manner in which they came

to couple hsun-lu and ju, apparently two distinct resins,

makes sense only if these were species of Boswellia and

Pinaceae respectively. One can be even more explicit#

Frankincense is the only resin which one can imagine as an

acceptable and indeed superior substitute for the Chinese pine

resin, as the pen ts*ao accounts of its attributes show that

it originally was. Similarly the ’southern ocean* ju,

described as a ’pine resin*, could have been a feasible sub­

stitute for frankincense only if it was in fact a pine resin#

P I Pelliot may have changed his views about the derivation of

hsun-lu and considered the possibility that it was derived from
an Old Persian form corresponding to kunduruk or kundrukt
Hygaloff, ’Disseifetion sur le montage et le doublegeT " JA. 236,
1948, 107f note 2# Pelliot in 1912 had pointed out that the
early sound of -lu p^ was -«2uk. This seems to be confirmed
by the variant character -lu ^ in the name given in the Hou
Chou shu, 50, 17a, and also in the Kuanp^chlh’s variant in TPYL,
982, '4347b, Boodberg considers that hsun-lu was an early loan­
word from the Sanskrit kunduruka » ’frankincense’, The same
writer also says that hsun-luk is attested since the third eentuzy
B*C,, but he provides no references; HJAS. 2, 1937, note 60#
(2) Marco Polo similarly compared the frankincense tree, which
he never saw, witii a small pine tree; A,C, Moule and P# Pelliot,
Marco Polo #*#, 1, London, 1938, 444# Chao Ju-kua says that
hsun-lu came from the Arab countries of Murbat®^Shihr, and
Dhofar; Chu fan chih. 93#
 208

Chemically both frankincense and pine resin, though of

different botanical families, produce a turpentine-yielding

oleo-resin (l), The smell of these resins is similar (2)*

The higher grades of pine resin have & pale yellow colour not

unlike frankincense (3)* hi Ilsun, quoting the Kuang chih. said

that jju had the fpurple-red ^ 1 colour of cherries (4), but

not too much weig.it should be given to the descx'iptions of the

colour of either* of these resins. In the ancient world

frankincense was often adulterated, and pine resin was the

common adulterant. Dioscorides in the first century A,D, notes

this (5), while Pliny says that pitch pine provided a resin

interspersed with white drops so closely resembling frankincense

that when the two were nixed they were indistinguishable to the

eye; for thin reason adulteration of frankincense was practised

in the perfumers* street in Capua (6)#

(1) T,II, Barry, Natural Varnish Res i n s . London, 1932. 145,

describing frankincense* For a description of pine resin see
Howeo, Vegetable gums and resins. 104*
(2) Dioscorides refers to the resins of pitch pine and the fir
tree which excelled because they had a sweet smell and resembled
frankincense in their odour; The Greek Herbal of Ploscoridea
* *•, 50#
(3) Howes describes Boswellla resin as being usually i)ale yellow,
but often with a reddish or greenish tinge; Vegetable rums and
resins. 152* Similarly the Chinese pine resin has been
described as pale yellow; Hanbury, ’notes on the Chinese materia
medical Pharmaceutical Journal. 3» 1862, 423* Pliny refers to &
reddish fran incense, not so pure as the white one; Natural
History (Loeb Classical Library, translated by Nackham), XII,
xxxii, 60*
(^) CLPT, 12, 309b.
(5) Tho Greek Herbal. ’*5-6• ?
(6) Natural History. XVI, xviii, 40,
 2ut not only In appearance, smell, and colour have

frankincense and the better types of pine resin much In common*

!!ore relevant for understanding why the Chinese were able to

regard both of them as *pine resins* is the circumstance that

Greek and other doctors recognised both substances as containing

detergent and astringent properties equally capable of healing

wounds and ulcers. Dioscorides recommended frankincense

for bil l i n g up the hollowness of ulcers1 (1) and pine resin

for superficial ulcers, boils and wounds (2). Celsus in the

first century A.D* said that frankincense stopped the flow of

blood and pine resin filled up ulcers (3)* These notions,

based on the genuine styptic properties of the two resins,

persisted during the middle ages and found expression in

Culpeper*s translation of the pharmacopoeia Londlnenals in l6U?#

In this work frankincense was one of the substances prescribed

for *green wounds*, filling up hollow ulcers with flesh, and

stopping the bleeding of wounds, fPitch*, the resin of a

species of pine, mollified hard swellings, brought boils and

cores to suppuration, broke carbuncles, and cleansed ulcers of

corruption and filled thorn with flesh (h). These cures are

identical with those attributed by the Chinese to hsun-lu and ,1u.

(1) The Greek Herbal, h5#

(2) I ’
did, 1+7-8.
(3; Celsus, Of Hedicine, translated by JT. Grieve and revised by
G* Putvoye, London, third edition, 1837, 207, 213«
(h) Pharmacopoeia Londinensls or the London Dispensatory. London,
1653 e d itio n , l6S7 102.
 210.

One more property, chared by frankincense and pine resin,

was matched by the properties of hstbi-lu ana ju, and X shall

mention it briefly. All these four substances had potent

aromas# *7e have seen how hst3n—lu and ,1u were regarded as

fumifuges. Syneon SetB, the Byzantine doctor of the 11th

century, noted that frar.kiiicense prevented pestilence ( « • a

statement which may be compared with T fco Hung-ehing'e recom­

mendation that hsun-lu and j u expelled evil air 4 .

But pine resin Qiao has a strong aroma, and in ancient times

it was used in English churches as a substitute for the more

expensive frankincense (2).

Such then are my reasons for identifying hsun-lu and Ju

with frankincense and pine resin respectively. No other

explanation is consistent with the medical qualities of these

resins.

I have now to consider the source of supply of ju - pine

resin# I cannot believe that j u came from southern ArabiOL or

Somaliland, where the best kind of frankincense was produced*

No doubt pine resin was often nixed with frankincense in order

to increase supplies for export, but pine resin would have bean

an adulterant aud wot a separate commodity. Iforeover every

effort would have been made to conceal its presence. The

Chinese, however, knew it as a distinct substance* Nor do I

(1) .,fGtod in Adams, The Seven Books of Paulus Aeginita. printed

for the Sydenham Society, London, 161^-7 111,217* A doctor
serving under the Duke ofBuckingham early in the 17th century
tried to free a ship in Plymouth from infection by 1perfuming1
it with tar and frankincense: J.J.Keevil. Medicine and the Navy.
Edinburgh and London, 1957* 1, 163.
(2) PlQckiger and Hanbury, Pharmacorraohla. 2nd edition* London
1879, 608. ,r ------
 211*

believe that jjS came from India, though pines resins are mentioned

In the early Indian medical treatises* There are Indian

species of Boswollia in northwestern and western India, but

they are regarded as inferior sources of the resin (i) and

seem to have been known as hsun-lu and not Ju in the seventh

A
century* The T fang pen ts*ao of that century states;

*Haun-lu comes from India and Han tan* It is like

the yellow-white colour of pine resin. The Indian
product Is chiefly white; the Han tan one Is green-
streaked in colour and not very fragrant (2)*#

No surviving fragment of the T fon& pen ts>ao makes any mention of

d u « and I attribute this omission to the fact that the compilers

were working under Imperial orders in northern China and, a9

far as frankincense was concerned, were familiar with the

resin which reached China by the overland route* Ju, a pine

resin from the fsouthern ocean1, was probably only known in

southern China in the seventh century, though by the eighth

century Ch*en T s lang-ch,i, also a northerner, knew of it* I

(1) The Indian frankincense cones from Boswellio serrate, Rox^b*

The trees in Arabia and Somaliland arc P"carter! and bT frorcana*
On the Indian Boswollia ©errata see Wattn commercial products.
173-174*
(2) 2kEE* 309a* Han tan is in Hopei province, and I do not
understand how it could be regarded as a source of hsun-lpj «
frankincense* The reference to tho green streaks in its
frankincense suggests that the writer had in nind the Indian
p. serrata* with its greenish resin; Hovves, Vegetable guns and
resins* 133#
 212*

doubt, therefore, whether Ju came from India as a distinct

substance* Thus the range of possibilities is narrowed down

to South East Asia as the only other pine-growing region which

lay astride the frankincense route to China by sea and produced

lu in the v/ake of the hsun-lu trade*

The pine most commonly found in South East Asia is jPlnus

nerkusll Jungh (i). It grows In the mountainous regions of

northern Luzon, in the mountains of western Tongking, in the

southern Shan states, in the Martaban region of Lower Burma,

and in northern Sumatra to about as far south as Korintji* Any

of these areas could have contained the J u pine tree* But

Tongking is one of the amply documented parts of early South

East Asia, for it was a Chinese province until the early tenth

century, and there is no evidence of any kind to associate it

either with the J u tree or with the Po-ssu* Nothing is known

of the early history of the Philippines, which would hardly

have been on the trade route from the Indian Ocean to China*
u
The expression Po-3su sometimes appears in Chinese literature

in connexion with Burma, though In much later records, and there

is a slight possibility that Ju TO3 q Burma pine, but only if

it can be shown that the western Asian trade with southern

(1) On South East Asian pine trees I have consulted Howes,

Vegetable rums and resins; Bobby, Southeast Asia: Robequain,
Malaya * **; Heyne, Be Nuttlge ..*
 213

China normally made its way through the mountain passes of

Burma Into China (1) *

The northern Sumatran P.inus merkusli is the only South

East Aslan pine tree against which none of these objections

are valid* It also happens to be a splendid tree. In 192i*

it was studied by Dutch scientists, though only as a potential

source of turpentine and not for the sake of Its colophony,

nevertheless the scientists were able to report that the resin

had a pale yellow colour and a sweeter smell than that of some

European pine resins. They also made the significant point

that It compared favourably with the American pines (2), which

I assume Is a reference to Plrms teed a and Pinna palustria, of

the south-eastern seaboard region of the United States. These

American pines have produced a colophony marketed under the

trade-namo of •common frankincense* or Pum Thus on account

of its resemblance to frankincense; in the nineteenth century

English drug shops used it as •common frankincense* (3)* I

(1) It has been suggested that the Burma road was not open before
T*ong times; 7?, Liebenthal, *The ancient Burma Road - a Legend*,
JUIS, 15, 1, 1956, 1-15* The Kuanfl chih mentions a number of
wild Elu5fSi. on Yunnan-Burna frontier (TPYL, 791, 3503b-
3509a) ana also the £liao^Njf5v\, or Pyu, of Burma (CLPT. 8 , 21^b ;0
PTKM. 1U, 823b*) On page 3^3 I eliminate Burma from the Fo-ssu
discussion,
(2) ’Terpentijn van Sumatra*, B^rlchten van fle ..Afdeellnft Handels-
nuseum van dc Kon». Verecniplnr Kolonlgl Instttuut (Overdcdrukt
uit T Pe ri r ^ van 10 on l i 'AprilV 1925), 5, 9, 30*
Keyne sums up the nature of this pine by stating that chemically
and physically it is of the same value as the American pine but
that it possesses a strong and different odour; Euttl&e* 1 , 120,
(3) On the American pine a see Flflckiger and Hanbury,
Pharmacokraoh1a * 2nd edition, 1879# 6OU- 6O 8 ,
 21Iu

suggest, therefore, that the least that can be said In favour

of identifying J u with the Sumatran pine la that, aa far as

quality is concerned, the Gumatran pino would have had every

chance of being sold as a species of genuine frankincense* The

stands which attracted the attention of the Butch botanists were

in the neighbourhood of Atjeh at the extreme north of the

Island# These trees prefer high altitudes but have been

known to grow at sea level# Junghulm in the nineteenth century

met them in the Eatak lands and In Gajoland, which are also in

northern Sumatra# The continuous rainfall, humidity, and even

temperature of the region seem to encourage the trees1 rapid

growth, with the result that there has been natural regeneration

in areas burnt down for human settlement#

That a pine resin, apparently from South hast Asia rather

than from western Asia or Indio, was used by southern Chinese

doctors in the sixth century as a species of frankincense seems

oasonnbly certain# Moreover, by a process of elimination

Sumatra seems to be the o^t likely source of supply of this

false frankincense# One naturally looks for later evidence

of ihia trade. It is hardly surprising that the later

European records provide no trace of a Sumatran or any other

South East Asian trade in false frankincense, for India and

Europe possessed the genuine article (1)# The Ju trade wan

(i) To,mS Fires and Marsden referred to *pitch* and damar from
Sumatra; Sums.# I, Ik&t 1J+8, 152, 153; History of Sumatra. 1811
edition, 158-:?*
 *
215

essentially part of the China trade, and as late as Bung times,

v/hen the imports of frankincense were enormous, there may still

have been opportunities for a substitute. Srlvijaya was then

the great frankincense trade centre in Couth East Asia

Hsin tsnun hslan# pfu in its notes on Ju, now meaning

frankincense, contains the following quotation from Teh T'ing-

fTho Arabs bring their ,oods by ship to Ban-fo-ch*1

(Srlvijaya) and exchange the fa for o tlier goods, Thus
this perfume is usually found in great quantities at
San-fo-ch'l. Each year great ships leave Qan-fo-ch1!
ror Canton or Ch'uari chou. At these two ports the
shipping (officials) examine the amounts of perfume
and establish its value ( D r

Yeh T flng-kuei goes on to describe the 13 grades of

frankincense. The best was fthe selected p e r f u m e % 1f

but some of the grades were very Inferior. The ,iu t*a 3d.

grade consisted of Ju nixed with sand and pebbles from the

ground. The flrlvi^ayan merchants would have had every

opportunity of adding pine rosin to the China-bound frankincense,

but by this time J u was replacing hsun-lu as the general name

(l) 1, 5b# Ju was now the general name for frankincense* On

frankincer.se imports In Sung times see Wheatley, 'Geographical
notes on some commodities # * • % JbERAB. 32, 2, 1959# U7-9*
for •franxincense* and there is no means of distinguishing the

presence of pine resin in the product* There is one passage,

however, in the Sung records which may conceal the existence

of a persisting trade in the substitute* In 1QSS the Arab3

sent envoys with quantities of tribute which included ftrue

frankincense f (1)* Perhaps we have here a distinction

between the genuine article and the substitute (2).

But with the great expansion in maritime trade during

Bung times, and especially of the trade in Arab goods, there

was probably less scope for the substitute* One imagines

that the last phase of the Sumatran pine resin trade was as an

adulterant for the cheapest kinds of frankincense rather than

as a separate commodity* There was plenty of scope in the

great Srlvijayan entrepot for the practice to take place* It

is Interesting that jju, the name of the substitute, eventually

replaced hsun-lu* Perhaps this is a comment on the important

part played by the Sumatran hahbours in the handling of the

frankincense trade*

(1) Bnnr hut yao lrao*35 , 7» 7355b* In 116? in connexion

with Champa a distinction is made between 20, 1*35 katieo of
•white frankincense ^ f and 80, 295 kattles of fnixed
up frankincense s£ti *j ibid, 786ab*A
(2) The T!sln tsuan hslang T)>u . 1, 10af cnotes Wen Shih on a
false frankincense* *There are many foreign drugs in Canton*
kost are false* There is the lain-, frankincense. It is
produced by mixing It op with maple resin. Then it Is burnt
the smoke disperses with much noise* This is It* True
frankincense is like the fu ling fungus* Then it is chewed It
IVfS t-(*Y* ^

/i 1 A1 1 tL I ^ ^ ^
t fi'J A
 217*
There is one Blight piece of evidence which may reflect

an ancient Interest in the Sumatran pine by foreigners or

Indonesians in touch with foreign traders. In the Achinece

region, where the pine 3 were studied by the Dutch., the local

name for Finns merims11 is sain, though among other northern

Sumatran peoples the pine Is known as oc jan or toenan (1).

In Sanskrit sUla Is more commonly used as a name for the

Shorea tree (2), but It In also one of the numerous Sanskrit

names for pine resin and appears In the expression sHla-

vest ah or 'the of the oala tree • It is curious that

the Achinese pins tree alone should have a name derived from

Sanskrit, and one wonders whether It was because of an early

and Indian-inspired medical Interest in this excellent tree.

There are several references to pine resin in Carakafs ssmhita

under the names of tnllsa. suflfedgru. devndflru. and saraln.

Sarala, meaning rinus lonrifolia. was, like sallakl or Indian

£ rsnkincense IBor we111a serra ta), a treatment for afflictions

of the nostril (3)*

I have tried to establish in this chapter the probability

that the sea-borne frankincense trade, already under way in the

(1) Keyns, huttlge* I, 113; Hosein Djnjadlningat, At.lehsch—

Ilederlandsca hoordeubook. Batavia, 1934» Ilf &33*
( 2 ) 1 n AvInash_Ctandra Kaviratna^ translation of the Caraka
sr nliita it Is Identified with Shorea robnsta.
nr Caraka samhlta. XXI, 648*
 213.

third century, later provoked a reaction in the form of a trad©

in a pine resin substitute for frankincense. The transaction

was possible only because western Asian cargoes had been taking

a route to China through or near some pine-growing region, a

circumstance which caused the comparison to be m. de between the

appearance and properties of frankincense and pine resin. I

belicvo that the substitute came from South Kast Asia rather

than from the Middle East or India and more likely from northern

Sumatra than from Burma or any other pine-growing area in South

East Asia* My hypothesis stands or falls on the original

relationship between hsen-lu and jtj, I am satisfied that,

botanically and medically, JJS could be regarded as a species

of hsun-lu If they were pine resin and frankincense respectively,

I am also satisfied that the Chinese attitude towards pine reain

would have provided a favourable background in China to the

substitution. Everything depends, however, on whether or not

■he fragments of the Chinese texts in fact distinguish between

hsun-lu and ju, and it is on this point that my hypothesis must

stand up to criticism. In the meantime I recapitulate the

evidence which has impressed me. I have noted that ju, is

mentioned as a resin considerably later than hsPn-lu and was

never associated with either Ta-ch* in or Tersia In the western

regions, though hsun-lu was. Kuo I-kung knew only hsdin-lu

a3 coming from Ta-chylru I have seen a consistent distinction

made between hsun-lu and ju by Kuo I-kung, T fao Hung-chlng, and

 219 *
Ch*©!! To1ang-ch*!* all writing before the mi-idle of the eighth

century* That something curious had happened to the maritime

frankincense trade seems to be acknowledged by Ch*en Ch*eng#

writing about 1090f when he distinguishes between a •western*

ju from the land of the •Brahmans1 and a 'southern1 j u from the

Eq-bs^ country (1)* The least that can be inferred from

Ch*en C h #eng is that in his day there was still a tradition of

two sources of ffrankincense*, for ju had then become the

general term for all kinds and grades of frankincense, and that

one of these sources *&s from a southern and not a western

country. Finally, I do not see how one can avoid tho problem

set by Kuo I-kung?s use of tho expression •southern ocean1

unless one wishes to explain It away as an interpolation. If

it was In fact an interpolation, it was incorporated In Hung

0 h fu f6 Hsiang p'u and Chfeiig Ching's I1sin tsuan hsiang p fu .

'Southern ocean* cannot refer to the w e b tern Indian Ocean, the

cradle of the frankincense trade. It may be that an objection

against my understanding of whnt happened, apart from the

general criticism that my fragments are unreliable as historical

evidence, will be that already by the fifth century grades of

purity in frankincense had been noticed in southern China and

that when, though only according to the Pen tafao kang m u .

Li H.rjn quotes the Kuan.r chih to the effect that hsun-lu was tha

(1) Gee page 182.

 220,

scaly part of a tree bark, Kuo I-kung was referring to what is

known as the 1scrape1 or resinous drippings on the bark of the

tree after the tree has teen tapped for frankincense, Ju, or

1milk*, might then represent a purer grade of resin. This

argument implies that originally inf'erior grades of frankincense,

known as hsun-lu* wore exported to China and that it was only

by Kuo I-kung*s times that purer grades, known as Ju, wore

coming on the market. But it is difficult to see how a dirty

resin would have kept its place in the early Chinese materia
A
medico. And why did the T fanp pen tsfao not mention the superior

Ju grade ? Why, too, v/as only hsun-lu used as the name for

frankincense in the Hou Chou dhuf8 account of the products to

be found in Persia ? Nor is there any reliable evidence that

Kuo I-kung regarded hsttn-lu as the scaly part of the tree*

I have dwelt at some length on the reasons wliy I think

that there was a trade in an Indonesian pine rccin substitute

for frar.kin cense, X'or they lead me to enquire whether this act

of substitution was unique or a symptom of a more general

commercial practice in western Indonesia before the seventh

century. I shall now suggest that the sea-borne trade in

western Aslan myrrhs produced a similar reaction*

CHAPTER EIGHT

THE GUGGULU OP THE SOUTHERN OCEAN

There is a possibility that by about A.D. 500 western

Indonesian benzoin (Styrax spp.), popularly called benjamin

gum, was not only regarded in southern China as a substitute

for the myrrh (Commiphora mukul EngL), known in Sanskrit as

fiupKUlu and as bdellium in the classical world, but may perhaps

have overtaken it as a superior fumifuge. There are no

technical objections to this possibility, for both resins

possess a powerful aroma, especially when burnt, and have there­

fore been regarded as suitable substances for fumigatory

purposes. If the transaction took place it would mean that

the maritime trade between western Asia and southern China was

responsible for bringing into commerce an Indonesian resin which,

unlike pine resin, was destined to become a permanent and

valuable trading commodity not only in China but also, though

much later, in western Asia and Europe as well*

I wish to argue this development as being no more than a

reasonable possibility. The passage which provides the basis

for my argument is a fragment from the Ruang chou chi of Ku Wei,

preserved in a quotation by Li Hsun incorporated in the 12h9

revision of T'ang Shen-weifs Cheng lei pen tsfa o . I have

found it in no other text, and it is unfortunate that the

 222.

A „
parallel passage quoted in the Pen ts’ao kang mu omits the

attribution to the Kuang chou chi. The passage in the Cheng

lei yen t3*ao concerns An-hsl perfume ^ ^ and is as follows:

* § tjh i i + £ £ 'H'l it x £ $ 13 ^ tfr

d3 41 tl
yHal yao. I note that according to the Kuang chou chi
it grows in the southern ocean (and that it is) the
resin of a Po-ssh country tree (l).#

Several comments on this pas. age may be made at once.

In the first place one early translation of An-hsi perfume

Is available In the form of guggulu# the Sanskrit term for the

bdellium - myrrh of north-western India and the Makr&n coast of

southern Persia. I Tsingfs translation of the Golden Sutra

states that An-hsi perfume Is c h u - c h u - l a , a

transcription of guggula or guggulu (2), But it is equally

(1) CTjPT. 13f 330b: , % ^ s ~\ jl+ jl A\

PTKM. 3k, 1375a: iSj & &K '21 A sA 4*
Gee note I on page /% for my justification of this translation,;
Laufer, translating from the PTKM. understood the passage to mean
fthe southern sea and In the country Po-sey, and he thought it
likely that here was a hint of the Malaya.* Po-se rather than pf
Persia; Sino-Iranica. *4-65. He similarly regarded the Kuang chifr11
reference to jju as a reference to a Po-se country in the southern
ocean; see note 3> P&g® ZoG* . , ^
(2) Tripitaka, Kokuyaku daizokyo, 1919-23, vol. 26,^ 7^
3. 55* In the Stein collection of TunhuaHg manuscripts
in^xhe British Museum (Stein No. 6107) the same transcription is
given. Fllllozat unhesitatingly identifies guggulu with bdellium;
La doctrine classlque. 109-110. I identify bdellium with the myrrl
resin from Commiphora mukul KngJL, having consulted Howes,Vegetable
gums and i*eains. 133; V/att, Commex^clal products of India/ hOQ.
According to Howes *the various bdelliums which resemble myrrh are
believed to be derived in the main from species of Commiphoraf.
Commiphora is the name of the family of myrrh-producing trees#
Guggulu is identified with Balsa:nodendron mukul (the alternative
name for Commiphora mukul) in Avinash Chandra Kaviratnafs trans­
lation of the Caraka samhitl. On these Identifications see
Pelliot, TP, 13, 1912, W O .
 223*

certain that An-hsi perfume has come to mean benjamin gum and

nothing else (l), though it has never been established when

the Chinese first transferred the name for gurgulu to the resin

of the Styrax tree* In the third place, one cannot easily ignore
* # o
the juxtaposition of fsouthern oceanT and Fo-ssu in the Kuang

chou chi fragment; it is not a solitary one, for it also

appears in the Kuang chih1s fragment on ju which was reproduced

by several writers who quoted the &iangr chih (2). The

Tsouthern ocean1 in connexion with seems to point to northern

Sumatra, and it is in fact northern Sumatra which has produced

the most famous species of Indonesian (renzoin (3)* No

explanation of the Kuan# chou chi fragment which fails to take

into account the reference to the ’southern ocean1 can be

regarded as satisfactory*

Finally, it is noteworthy that Ku Wei, unlike Kuo I-kung,

o
refers on a number cf occasions to the Pp-ssu, though hever again

in connexion with a 1southern ocean’ product. About the cummin,

for example, he is quoted in the Hal yao pen ts’ao as follows:

(1) For example Read, Chinese medicinal plants no* 185;

Chung kuo yao hsueh ta~ tz*tt tienV I* 500* "An-hsl perfume «.
benzoin was first mentioned in British pharmaceutical circles in
1862; T-Janbury, ’Notes on Chinese materia medical Pharmaceutical
Journal* 3# 1862, h23»
(2) Pages 178-179.
(3) See pageiwy-^for an account of the Sumatran benzoin trees*
 22k.

1Hai yao; I note that according .to the Kuang chou chi
(the cummin) grows in the Po-ssu country* Celery is
of a black colour and heavy* Cummin is of a dark
brown colour and light (l)#*

The cummin (Cuminum Linn#) is a genuinely western Asian herb,

and I can see no reason why in this instance Ku Wei should not

be understood to mean that he considered the cummin to grow in

Po-ssu * Persia (2)*

Thus, literally, the Kuang chou chi fragment refers to a

guggulu which grew in the southern ocean, presumably somewhere

in South East Asia, and may have been called a fPersianT tree

resin* This explanation, however, is nonsense if the resin

was gugRUlu* for Commiphora does not grow in South East Asia*

The alternative explanation which offers itself is that benzoin

was already known as An-hsi perfume by about A.D* 500, but it

does not explain why the perfume should have been regarded as

a Persian resin#

No one has imagined that the Chinese knew of benzoin as

(1) CLPT, 9, 236b; PTKM. 26, 120Ua.

(2) On the subject of cummin see Purkill, Dictionary. I, 701,
who describes it as ’a native of the Levant1 , and La'ufer, Sino-
Tranlca. 383-U. Laufer suggested that shih-loi*& was
derived from the Persian fEira *= ,cummin# and that the loan word |
reached China overland# He ignored the possibility that it could
have travelled along the sea route. According to Laufer cummin
was known to Cyrus. Cunmin seeds are today imported from Persia
to J’alaya; Gimlette, Dictionary of Malayan medicine. 95. Heyne
states that Indonesia imports them from India; Nuttige, 2, 1212.
According to tatt the cummin is probably not indigenous to India;
Commercial products. kk-2* Lauf&r thought that the cummin was
transmitted from Persia to India; Peal *.Ohihese medicinal plants,
no* 227, identifies shlh^lo with dill, which grows wild in Persia,
 225.

early as A.D* 500. Laufer, and Fang Chfeng-chun after him,

only noted the passage as it is rendered in the Pen tsvao kang

mu, where there is no mention of the Kuan# chou chi and the

passage is instead attributed to Li Hsiin, conventionally

regarded as a T #ang writer (l) , Professor Yamada observed

A
the Cheng lei pen tsfao version of the passage, with its

reference to the Kuang chou chi, but felt that it was meaningless

(2), To the best of my knowledge no one has drawn attention to

the fact that the Xuanp; chih as well as the Knang chou chi used

the expression *southern ocean* to describe the region which

produced a Po-ssu resin.

I propose in this chapter to ignore the problem created

o
by the description of An-hsi perfume as a Po-ssu tree resin and,

instead, to consider what is known about its attributes and

affinities.

An-hsi perfume, meaning guggulu-bdelllum, does not come

from Indonesia, It is the resin of one of the myrrh-producing

Commiphora trees, sometimes known as the Balsamoderidron family*

These trees grow in western Asia and -east Africa, and the myrrh-

producing species are far more numerous than the species of

Poswell!a producing frankincense. They .are found in southern

(l) Sino-Iranlca. 4&U-U67; Chu fan chih hsiao chu, 100.

(2; *A study on the introduction of An-hsi-hsiang in China and
that of gum benzoin in Europe*, Report of the Institute of World
Economics. Xinki University, 5, 195k, 22. Yamada considered it
as a possible reference to benzoin but rejected it on the grounds
that it was too early and that the text was not a safe one to
use.
 226.

Arabia and Somaliland and also in the dry and rocky parts of

Baluchistan and northern and central India. Their resin is

accompanied by gum, and for this reason it is practicable to

adulterate myrrh with inferior species. The process of

adulteration is especially associated with the Indians, who

mix their local Commiphora resin with the higher grades from

Arabia and Africa. Pliny notes that there were many varieties

of myrrh and that the adulteration most difficult to detect was

that which was practised in respect of the Indian myrrh, the

most inferior of all myrrhs (1)» Pure and impure myrrh were

distinguished In the classical world by the colour of the resin;

the purer the resin, the paler It was. Dioscorides mentions

a myrrh which was the colour of pitch and therefore unprofitable

(3).
The myrrh of Commiphora mukul seems to have had a special

reputation in the ancient world* It grows in Arabia and east

Africa, but of particular interest to us is the north-western

Indian representative, which Pliny calls 1the highly esteemed

bdellium* from fBactria* (3)* It flourishes on the Makran

coast of southern Persia and in Baluchistan, and it was one of

the important trees of Sassanid Persia. It is not surprising

1) Natural history. XII, xxxv, 71.

2) The Greek Herbal.. U3*
3) Natural History. XII, xlx, 35#
 227.

that in China it should have acquired the name of An-hsl. the

early term for the Iranian kingdom* According to the Periplus,

the Makrdn coast, known as Gedrosia, contained nothing except

bdellium trees (l).

Commiphora mukul has been described as fa small tree or

shrub1 (2). The trees which produce benzoin are larger and

grow only in parts of South East Asia and in Bolivia, In

Indonesia they are Styrax sumatrana J*J* Smith and Styrax

benzoin Dry* (3). The specimen which produces the best resin

is S* Sumatrana: it needs fertile soil and grows only in north­

western Sumatra from about 1,000 feet above sea-level and

especially in the hinterland of the Tapanuli coast* This is

also the camphor area par excellence, and Batak tappers have

been known to put camphor in the wounds of benzoin trees in

order to stimulate production* S. benzoin grows in both

northern Sumatra and in the hills behind Palembang and occasionally

(l) Schofi^s translation, p* 37.

(2; The Wealth of India* 2, 313-4 (Council of Scientific and
Industrial Research, Delhi, 1951)*
(3) On Sumatran benzoin see Marsden, History of Sumatra. 154-5;
Van tfuuren, fDe handel van Baroes1 , Ti.idschrift aard. 25, 6, 1908,
1389-1402; and especially Heyne, Nuttlge* 2* 1255-1262* Heyne
mentions as trading ports Sibolga and Barus on the west coast and,
to a minor extent, Medan on the north-east coast* The prestige
of the west coast ports had overshadowed the reputation of the
north-east coast as a centre of the benzoin trade. Yet both Ma
Huan and Pires comment that benzoin was exported from the Aru
area; Ying yai sh§ng lan* 27; Suma Oriental* 1, 14&*
 228

In the extreme west of Java* Both trees grow wild, though in

modern times the profits from the Sumatran benzoin trade have

bean so considerable that it has been worth while to introduce

a plantation industry In both the north and south of the island*

Heyne has described the western Javanese tree as reaching to

about 18 metres and the Sumatran trees as considerably higher (1)*

But though bdellium and benzoin are the products of entirely

different trees they have one feature in common. Their resins

are capable of providing a powerful aroma, and for this reason

both trees have been famous*

No doubt it was the resin of Commiphora mukul which

Alexander’s soldiers used for fumigating their tents and beds (2)*

Guggulu. or gulgulu* the Sanskrit name, appears in the Atharvaveda

as an aromatic Bubstance suitable for driving out bad Influences

(3)* In the more practical context of the Caraka samhita the

same property of rcugrgulu was recognised; it was one of the

substances to be used for fumigating clothes and beds m l used

by newly-born babies (U)* A similar reputation attached to

(1} Burkill describes Styrax as fairly tall; Dictionary, 2, 2103*

(2; Strabo, Geography* 15# 2, 3 (Loeb Classical Library, H*L*
Jones1 trans*)
(3) Pilliozat# La doctrine classlque. 109-110* Pilliozat draws
attention to one of the Atharvaveda hymns addressed to the
fbdellium1 of Sind, but Professor Basham tells me that the word
for Sind should probably be rendered as •riverine1 or fby seaf•
It is Hymn No* XIX# 38*
(I+) Kavlratna*s translation, XXVIII, 867-8*
 229

myrrh lingered on in Europe, and even Culpeper regarded myrrh

as a fsovereign preservation against the pestilence1 (l)*

The attributes of guggulu-bdellium were also recognised in

early China* Although An-hsi perfume is not mentioned in the

k * •
pen tsTao literature until the seventh century, when the T Tang
a
pen tsfao lists its properties, its perfume was evidently

recognised as possessing magical properties as early as the

beginning of the fourth century. The first reference to it so

far discovered relates to the 329 - 333 period and is contained

in the Chin shu. The context of the following anecdote is

northern China*

fIn Shih L o fs time a water stream at the city of the

Hsian country suddenly dried up. Lo enquired of
(Fo-tfu)-teng (what should be done)* Teng replied:
one must first ask a dragon to obtain water. Then
he sat on a hammock and burnt An-hsl perfume. He
recited mantras for three days. A little water then began
to flow. A small dragon, five or six chA* ih long, came
with the flow out of the water, and then there was a great
flow of water (2)*f

l) Pharmacopaela Londlnensla. 10h*

i2) Chin shu* quoted in TPYL* 962, U3U7a. Bhih Lo ruled in
southern Hopei from 329 to 333; Eberhard, A history of China.
London, third impression, 1955» 128-131* This passage appears
in the biography of Fo-t#u-teng* On Fo-tfu-t^hg see A.F. Wright,
HJAS, 11, 1914-6# 321-^371. The monk may have learnt the art of
magic spells in Udyana.
 230.

An~hal perfume is also mentioned in an early book on ’mixing

perfumes1 in order to bring out the maximum aroma. The book

is quoted in the Liu Sun# shu’s biography of Fan Y e h j £ (zi

an official of this dynasty who lived for some time in Canton?

ffit

1Rosemary , etorax, An*»hsl %turmeric, and nal-to~ho-lo «•

perfumes of thi3 kind ~ are all valued in foreign countries
but do not count for much in China CD-*

Yet storax and turmeric had been kno?m to the Chinese in the

third century* while rosemary is mentioned in the Kuanrr chih (2)f

an! because An-hsl perfume occurs in the Chin shu as early as

the early fourth century 1 suspect that it was more familiar

in southern China than the quotation in the Liu Sung shu

suggests.

The properties of An-hsl perfume are not mentioned by T ’ao

TTung-ching, but in the seventh century T ’ang pen ts’ao there is

a reference which matches well the reputation of bdellium in

western Asia and India as a fumifuge.

(1) m i l Suns? shu. 69 1 20b,

(2) CLPT* 9. 23&b. The Kuang chih attributes it to Ku ts’ang
in Kansu*
 231.

’it works on evil air in the system and devilish

(pestilences)• It comes from the western Jung
(barbarians) and its appearance is like that of
pine resin. It is in the form of blackish yellow
lumps. The fresh product is also strong and
pliable (l).f

In this passage western Asia is indicated as the source of the

resin. In the same century I Tsing transcribed auggulu as

An-hsi,perfume. and there can be little doubt that it was a

bdellium myrrh which was incorporated into the T ’ang pen ts’ao.

According to other texts it came from JSguda, Kebud, and Kucha

(2). Kucha is in eastern Turkestan, and there An-hai perfume

was probably an import on its way to China through middlemen (3)*

In Indonesia* as well as In Europe* India* and China* myrrh

was known as a fumifuge. Mr. Burkill has drawn attention to

the fact that the insignifleant Indonesian gandarusa plant

(Acanthaceae. Gendarussa Nees) has a name derived from an

Indian name for myrrh (U). It is said to have vitality and

ab8i to resist evil influences. In Malaya species with a

(1) Hsin hsiu pen ts’ao. I* lh5; CLPT. 13, 330b. Ta Ming
in the late tenth century recommended both pine resin and An-hsi
perfume for expelling bad air from the system; PTKM. 3U# 1352a
for pine res^Ln (pfc T1 ) and 3kp 1375a for An-hsl perfume
P bad air and sprites)#
(2) For J3guda> % Pel shlh. 97, 29b; for Kebud* TPfL.982.
h3h7a, quoting the ang shu’ ? for KuehajfS Jft* * Sui shu, 83*
11a. The TPHYC. 182* lib* attributes it to Kashmir ^ .
3) There iB no evidence that Commiphora grows in Turkestan#
S1+) Dictionary. I* 1065-1067.
 232.

violet-crimson sap are usually chosen for medical purposes, and

sometimes its leaves are used with other medicine in cases of

possession by an evil spirit. Dutch writers have reported its

use in alleviating pain (l), but I suspect that it owes its

’myrrh1 name to the circumstance that it is believed to expel

evil influences.

But the great fumifuge of Indonesia is benzoin, which has

so powerful an aroma that the Arabs, in spite of the fact that

they lived in the centre of an aromatic-producing region, have

honoured it with the nickname of lubSn iawl. ’the frankincense

of Java’ (2). In Indonesia benzoin is used internally for

syphilitic ulcerations of the nose and for shingles, and

externally for muscular rheumatism (3), and Marsden states that

benzoin was used in Europe for ’healing green and other wounds*

(4) . But in Indonesia benzoin is chiefly famous for its smell.

Medicinal leaves, perfumed with the sweet smell of burning

benzoin, are used in the mystic treatment of serious kinds of

fever. It is also used in many ceremonies. It is burnt in

(1) Heyne, Nuttlge. 2, 1380-1381. For its uses also see Gimlette
Malayan medicine. o2-3.
(2) There is only a little production of benzoin in the island of
Java, and the extended use of the term ’Java* to mean Sumatra in
Arab writings is an instance of the occasional ambiguity of the
term ’Java*. Bontius, a Dutch doctor working in Java in the 17th
century, knew a local species of benzoin; An account of the
diseases, natural history, and medicine of the East Indies,
translated from the Latin, London, 1775, l W *
3) Gimlette, A dictionary of Malayan medicine. London, 1939, 94*
S4) History of Sumatra, lo5T The vTurlington balsam*, well
known in Marsden*s day, was based on benzoin.
 233.

the mosque before prayers and by magicians in incantations at

spirit-calling stances (l).

This brief review of the fumigatory reputation of both

bdellium and benzoin suggests that there is nothing inherently

improbable in the Chinese acceptance of benzoin as a form of

bdellium* One is left with the impression that it can hardly

be a coincidence that in China benzoin has come to have the

name by which I Tsing knew guggulu - bdellium. If I am right

in believing that pine resin was brought to China as a

substitute for frankincense, a similar transaction involving

the magnificent benzoin would certainly not be surprising. The

trade which brought frankincense to southern China must have

brought other resins as well; we shall see later in this

chapter that other kinds of myrrh were known in southern

China before the seventh century, and a reference to a sea­

borne trade in putchuk before the seventh century will be noted

in the following chapter (2),

But there is a difficulty in assuming that the Kuang chou

chifs ’southern ocean1 An-hsi perfume was benzoin. The first

reasonably convincing description of the Btyrax tree is as late

as Tuan C h feng-shih *>SYu yam? tsa tsu

Tuan died in 863 (3). The passage is as follows:

(1) Gimlette, 116-117; Burkill, Dictionary. 2, 210U.

l2) Page V]<f •
(3) Giles’ Chinese Biographical Dictionary. 788.
 23k.

o
’The An-hsi perfume tree. It comes from the Po-ssu
country* The Po-s3u call It the tree that wards off
evil influences. The tree grows to a height of thirty
feet# The bark is of a yellow-black colour and the
oblong leaves do not wither in the winter. It flowers
in the second month of the year* and the colour of the
flowers is yellow. The heart of the flower is somewhat
green and does not bear fruit# When one scrapes the
bark of the tree a syrup-like gum appears; it is called
An-hsi perfume. It hardens in the sixth and seventh
month of the year, and then it may be taken for burning
in order that one may attain the potencies of the spirits
and ward off all forms of evil (l)*

Mr# Burkill is content to take this as a description of the

benzoin tree (2), Laufer felt that it was a fMalayan Po-se*

* *
plant but not benzoin, because Tuan Chfeng-shih seemed to be

writing of too tall a tree (3)* Yet the benzoin tree is a

larger tree than Commiphora mukul. the only other candidate#

Professor Yamada is satisfied that the description is closer

to the Sty rax than to the bdellium tree, and he notes Tuanfs

statement that the gum hardens from exposure to the air as

consistent with what happend to benzoin (4)# Tuan was capable

(1) yu yang tsa tsu. 18, 100. This passage is translated in

Sino-Iranlca. * and in Yamadafs fStudy on the introduction
of An-hsi-hsiang in Chinaf ,2 0 .
(2) Dictionary. 2, 2102#
(3) Sino-Iranica. lj.66#
(k) *Study on the introduction of An-hsi-hsiang in C h i n a * 21-22.
 235.
of describing Indonesian trees, for he has also given an account

of the camphor tree which is similarly attributed to the

?o-ss\ji (1)* Without being completely certain, I feel that

the Yu yang tsa tsu mentions St.vrax*

No one is disposed to doubt that benzoin was imported

into China in Sung times (2)* Though a problem then arises

owing to the existence of an additional name for benzoin, which

I shall note below, it is usually believed that, when Yeh T ’ing-

kuei in the 12th century states that An-hsi perfume came from

Srlvijaya, he was referring to benzoin (3). This writer was

concerned with incenses and only had occasion to note that

benzoin was a ’fixer1 used to bring out the aroma of other

perfumes (i+). In 1225 Chao Ju-kua, a trade official in

southern China, reproduces Yeh T flng-kueifs information and does

not suggest that this perfume came from anywhere else but
A.
Srlvijaya (5)* It i8 not surprising that Li Shih-chen should

have recorded it as the product of SrTvijayafg) #SrTvi*;aya no

longer existed in his day, and he was merely repeating what was

Yu yang tsa tsu, 18, 100,

iil The most recent agreement has been expressed in Wheatley*
’Geographical notes on some commodities involved in Sung
maritime trade1, 55-59. Professor Wheatley followed Professor
Yamada’b study of the An-hsi perfume problem*
(3) Hsin tsuan hslang p fu t 1, 10b*
(U) The passage is as follows:
to fa fa % &

Lp) Chu fan chih* 99.

f X £ZESf"3^TW1375a, He also mentioned an ’Annam* species. I
f S r L S r 1**" Cr*lb *M 8 ,, crzt* fro.
 236#

accepted fact in his authorities. There is only one qualifica­

tion concerning the usage of the term An-hsi perfume in Sung

timesf and it was made by Professor Yamada, Occasionally

tribute came to China from Turkestan* and An-hsi perfume was

offered. It is likely to have been bdellium from western

Asia (1)*

That An-hsi perfume eventually became the name for benzoin

is not in doubt. The question is rather when this happened.

First, however, I wish to dispose of two objections against

the possibility of an early trade in benzion#

The circumstance that benzoin was Simrt known in the Middle

East much later than the fifth and sixth centuries is not, in my

opinion, an argument that it could not have been known to the

Chinese at that time, Thej^Mwwi reference to it in sources

emanating from countries west of Indonesia seems to be as late

as Ibn Eattutah in the lhth century (2) and it was known in

Europe even later (3)* These considerations led Mr, Burkill to

conclude that benzoin came into trade late and that the Arabs

(1) study on the introduction of An-hsi-hsiang In China*, 2, 3.

The Sung hui yao kfao states that it was sent as tribute from
Khotan in 107I+ and 1077J SHYK.1& , 7, 7856a,
12) Ferrand, Textes. 2, U3$T m ^
(3) Heyd attributes the origins of the benzoin trade in Europe
to the Portuguese; Histoire du commerce du Levant. 1923 edition,
Leipzig, II, 580-1.
 237.

were responsible for making it an important trading commodity

(l). Professor Yamada, while suggesting that the Arabs knew

...
of benzoin earlier than Ibn BattUtahfs time, believes that the
w

Chinese did not know of it before the end of the eighth

century and that the Arabs established a monopoly in the trade

in the subsequent centuries (2) . Both these views are similar

in that they attribute to the Arabs the major role in the early

benzoin trade (3). But there may be too much concentration on

Arab cources as the basiq for the study of early Indonesian

commerce* I have already indicated my view that the first

important impetus to the trade in the valuable natural wealth

of v/estem Indonesia came not from India or western Asia but

os a backwash of western Asian trade with China which resulted

in China1s accidental interest in certain Indonesian trade

products resembling those of western Asia, The origins of

the pine resin trade seem to be a clear example of the process.

A more serious objection to the view that the Chinese knew

of benzoin before the seventh century is that it is not

A
mentioned by T rao Hung-ching, the pen tsfao writer of the early

sixth century* In fact the first pen tsfao reference to it

(l) Dictionary* 2, 2102. He followed Fluckiger and Hanbury#s

account of the history of benzoin: PharmacoMraphia. 2nd edition
1879, l4.OIj.-UO5 .
(2} fA study on the introduction of An-hsi-hsiang1 , 2, 18-29,
(3) Professor Wheatley has recently accepted Yamada1s chronology
of the benzoin trade; Geographical notes1, 55~59*
 238*

is probably by LI Hsun itself, who quotes what could hardly

have been very common medical uses for it; it was a remedy

for women who saw demons in their dreams, for involuntary

male emissions, for warming the kidneys, and as a general

fumifuge* It seems to have been burnt as an incense (1)# But

Li Hs&nfs dates are uncertain; he may have been writing as

late as the tenth century* If this Is so, the first authentic

reference to b e n z o i n ^ w w M be In the Yu yang tea tsu. whose

author died in 863*

Yet the force of the objection is less than at first

appears* It may originally have been valued chiefly as an

Incense or for bringing out the aroma of other perfumes, the

functions ascribed to it In the fourth century account of Shih

Lo (2) or in the book quoted in the Liu Bung shu relating

to the fifth century (3)* Indeed, apart from the T*ang pen

ts*ao and Li Hsun, only one T fang writer is mentioned in the

Cheng lei pen ta'ao in connexion with any An-hsi perfume; he

is Su Pinglfil $ author of the SstUsheng pen t s ^ o ^23

""t
ip* of whom nothii g is known except that he lived in

T fang times (k) *

4k A jM .**>* $ W >S jfc7-tiK% A

<x> * 3s -11 & M S u U
C U T . '13, 330b. ^ A T '^r
2} Pagelzf .
3) Page W o . A
.U) The authority is Li Shih-chen, PTKM. 1_£ , 33Ua. Su Ping
came from Kiangsu. He wrote for students and this may suggest
that An-hsi perfume was no longer an unfamiliar resin.
 239.

All that Su Ping had to say of it was that, when burntt it

*expelled demons and brought the benevolent spirits* (1)# I

therefore suspect that An-hsi perfume, whether meaning bdellium

or benzoin, remained on the fringe of the Chinese materia

medica and was a magical rather than a medical substance. The

longest description of its usee is provided by Ta Ming at the

end of the tenth century:

*Por evil air, sjjrites, demons in the womb and foul

blood, warding off poisonous cholera, pain from violent
wind, involuntary emissions by males; it warms the
kidneys and cures menstrual stoppages and post-natal
bleeding (2)#1

Another point to be borne in mind to account for the late

impact of benzoin on the materia medica of China is that the

compilers of the T*angr pen tsyao were working in northern China

and may have been more familiar with bdellium than with benzoin

arriving in the southern ports. A northern outlook on the

part of these writers is reflected in the fact that the T yang

A
pen ts*ao mentions only hsun-lu - frankincense and not of j s -

pine resin.

(1) CLPT. 13, 330bj

(2) PTKM, 3hf 1375a# This^ prescription is very similar to that
contained in the Hal yao pen tsyao« quoted above. If Ta Ming
was quoting that work, it makes it almost certain that it was
written in the tenth century. In the CLPT. 1, 40a, the author
of the Nan hai yao p*u was thought to have been someone at the
end of the T fang period/ft A “J. K v I have given my
reasons for suspecting that the Hai yao pen tsyao was written
not earlier than the tenth century; page 177#
 240.

The case against the early appearance of benzoin as a

substitute for bdellium would be stronger if there was no

evidence that any other kind of myrrh was known in China before

the seventh century* Bdellium is only one of the myrrh resins

and it is hardly likely to have come to China unaccompanied by

dll
other specimens. Fortunately there are references to/_ myrrh

ew &kmmm at this time, which make it probable that bdellium too

was known.

In China today rnyrrh is known as the mo d r ug;^ *

Laufer thought that the word was derived from a Semito-Persian

prototype, and he noted in this connexion the Arabic murr and

the Persian mor (1). In the 13th century Chao Ju-kua

described the mo drug as the product of a pine-like tree from

Ma-lo—mo a name which has been reconstructed as the

ancient Murbat on the southern coast of Arabia. Ma-lo-mo was

certainly in that region. Chao also mentioned the Berbers

coast of Somaliland as a source of supply (2). When the

Chinese first knew of myrrh is unknown, and I have found no

third century references to it as there are to frankincense,

but it was certainly known in northern China before the seventh

(1) Read, Chinese medicinal plants..... no. 340; Bino-Iranlca.

461# Laufer remarked that^if the transcription could be
carried back to T fang or earlier times* the assumption was in
favour of an Iranian origin of the word.
(2) Chu fan chih. Feng C h #eng-chun*s edition, 95, 55, These
passages have recently been discussed by Wheatley, 'Geographical
notes', 73#
 2 m *

century. The Pel shih states that JSgutfa y$j north of

the Pam.'rs , had the mo drug (l)• According to the T fai p ying

huan y5 chi, Kashmir which sent powerful perfumes as

tribute in 637, also had it (2 ). Cosmas mentions the Persian

trade in natural products of Aksuro, and the rao drug of J$guda

and Kashmir probably included rryrrh from Africa as well as

the Middle East (3) • I suspect, however, that myrrh exported to

the Par East waB frequently adulterated with feNtoitimr myrrh from

north-western India, then controlled by the CassanidB (1+) •

The first pen tstao reference to myrrh is contained in a

fragment f rom the Yao hsing lun j‘

-r oft) * quoted by Chang

Yu-hsi^ n<^ Preserye^ IR

- Cheng11lei peii tsyao.
The author of the Yao hsing lun was Chen Ch*uan j$k

a Sui official who lived on to the middle of the seventh

1) Pei shih. 97, 29b.

!2) TPHYC. 182, 11b.

3) Christian topography. 51.

k) In modern times attention has been called to other substances
found in the mo drug reaching China; G.A* Stuart, Chinese
materia medica. Shanghai, 1911, 61. Father Hoi also found it
d i f f i c u l t to determine the origin of the Commiphora ^hich
yielded the myrrh sold in China; jTralt<S~des planteB*, 202.
(5) Page 189, note 6. Li Shih-chen states that the Yao hsing
lun was also known as the Yao hsing pen tsfao.
 2k2 .
*It is for breaking up blockages in the internal organs,
for bloody contusions, for sprained joints and bones,
for bruises and unendurable pain* For all these
complaints drink it with wine (i).

Ta Ming in the late tenth century prescribes the mo drug for

obstructions in the bowels, stoppages of the bloody and for

dispersing poisonous contusions (2)* Whether taken internally

or used as an ointment it was efficacious for troubles

affecting the blood, and this property was eventually summed

a
up by Li Shih-chen as follows:

fThe perfume (frankincense in Li Shih-chen1s day) moves

the blood. The mo drug disperses it. Both these
substances have tEe power of stopping pain, removing
contusions, and causing flesh to grow, For this reason
the two drugs are always used together (3)*f

The statement that the mo drug 1caused flesh to grow1 is

consistent with its being myrrh, an important styptic in earlier

times. Lioscorides recommended it for its astringent

qualities, for ulcers in the eye, and for removing scabies (U),

while Celsus said that it fagglutinated1 wounds as well as

promoted suppuration (5)# Paul of-Aefeina-nbted that it

(1) CLPT, 13, 330a. ^ , .

(2) Ibids M m . *,V5 fg &L. M i
(3) PTKM. 3k, l373a-b. *
(U) The Greek Herbal, h3.
(3; Of Medicin e. 2o5.
 2U3.

*agglutinated* wounds (l)* Centuries later the same opinions

were held# and Culpeper recommended myrrh for wounds and

ulcers (2). In early India, too, similar properties were

associated with myrrh, though in this case it was the myrrh

of the bdellium tree, Guggulu helped to cure sores created

by bad blood, and one of the cures for urustarabha, or

’carbuncles of the thigh^ was to drink ctptctIu soaked for

one night in cowfs urine (3)« The fact that the first reference

in the Chinese materia medica, in the Yao hsl ng lun, mentions

the mo drug for treating bloody contusions jiH makes

its identification with myrrh a safe assumption*

It is therefore not surprising that one of the vintage

texts also mentions the mo drug. In the Hai yao pen tsfao*

in connexion with the mo drug, there appears the following

quotation from the Nan chou chit

/&<■ %
f a t&m
fHai yao (on the mo drug) • I note in Hsu Piao*s Nan
chou chi that it grows in the Po-ssu country*
It is a pine resin of that place T ^ ) \ 1

1) The Seven Books. 3* 3U3*

2) Pharmacopoeia Londinensls. 62-3* The expression used by
Culpeper - 1breeding "flesh4 - is exactly matched by Li Shih-
ch£nfs expression £ , which I have translated as fcausing
flesh to grow* #
(3) Kaviratna^ tx^anslation, Part LVI, 1779*
(b) 13, 330a, The quotation is also attributed to HsQ.
Piao in PTKM* 3b, 1373a.
 2'pk.

Po-ssu. here appears without any reference to the 1southern

ocean* and I propose to translate it as *Persiar (1)* I

have already explained why there is nothing surprising in

the transcription in the fifth and sixth centuries, when the

Nan chou chi was written, and no other rendering of the term

in this passage makes sense* The description of the tree as

a *pinef is consistent with Chao Ju-kuafs analogy, quoted

above, and also with the Taoists* habit of classifying foreign

styptic resins as pine resin* The myrrh in question probably ,

came from a number of production centres in Africa, the Middle

East, and northern India, but in Hsu P i a o ^ opinion it was

associated with Persia, probably because the Persians had

become prominent myrrh merchants in the western Indian Ocean*

We therefore have a southern Chinese reference to myrrh as

well as to An-hsi perfume, and^within the limits of this meagre

evidence, one may believe that the background to the substitution

of benzoin for bdellium was a resin trade from western Asia

(l) This is one of the vintage fragments which worried Laufer,

and he qualified his reference to it by adding *if we may
depend on the Hai yao p§n tsfao. in which this extract is
contained*; Sino-Iranica * U&Q* He was prepared to accept
the mo drug in question as myrrh but suspected that the Chinese
were incorrectly attributing it to a South East Asian people,
whom he chose to call •the Malayan Po-se*; ibid, U62. He
was unable to believe that the Chinese at this early time knew
Persia* as Po— ssu*
which brought not only frankincense but also myrrh (l).

There is, however, another reason for believing that the

Kuang chou chi was referring to benzoin and not to bdellium

when it mentioned the An-hsi perfume of the ’southern ocean*.

The information in the Kuang chou chi must also be studied in

the light of what is known about the trade in other Indonesian

resins at that time# We have already examined the facts

concerning pine resin.. In the same period, too, there is

evidence that the camphor tree, the jungle neighbour of the

benzoin tree in the literal sense (2), was supplying its

crystals to the Chinese, and it would be surprising if the

aromatic virtues of benzoin were overlooked at a time when it

was known that a demand existed in China for foreign resins#

(1) Ma ChihJ| d* in the tenth century says that the Po-esu rao :2
drug was black in colour like An-hsi perfume i t A g.
'fuA % | PTK'!« 3kf 1373a# This statement once led me to
believe that the Po-ssu mo drug was a crude benzoin, for the
benzoin I have handled in Kew is very dark in colour; •The
*Po-ssu pine trees*” , BCOAS, X X III, 2, i960, 337-338* Now,
however, I think that Ma Chih may be comparing the appearance of
myrrh with benzoin# Su Sung in the 11th century says that the
congealed pieces of the mo resin are *a kind of An-hsi perfume
'£ & % f; CIJPT* 13, 330a. Uo too may be referring to
similarity in appearance of myrrh and benzoin, which originally
helped in the substitution of benzoin for the bdellium myrrh.
The T*ang pfen tsfao describes An-hsi perfume » bdellium as being
fin the form of blacKish-yellow lumps* (see pagel^/ above), and
here may be another reason why the Chinese believed that benzoin
and bdellium were similar substances*
(2) Van Vuuren points out that the port of Barus on the north­
west coast of Sumatra has served not only the camphor trade but
also the benzoin trade, for the chief stands of both these
trees are in the immediate hinterland of Barus; *De handel van
Baroes*, 1389-1U02,
 21+6.
The camphor tree (Dryobalanops aromatlea Gaetn# f#) is

the giant of the dipterocarp jungle of western Indonesia# It

grows only in Sumatra, Borneo, and southern Malaya, though its

fossils have been found in western Java (i). In southern

Malaya It is sometimes found today In Trengganu, Pahang,

Johore, and Selangor, though it may have been more widely

distributed there in ancient times (2). Owing to its great

economic value as a source of camphor crystals and the

wasteful process of tree felling, the areas of production have

probably shrunk considerably* It is also found on the north

coast of Borneo, and it was known to come from Borneo by Sung

times, In Sumatra it Is essentially a product of the north­

western half of the island# Marsden reported that it was

not found south of 3 degrees north of the equator# This is

not entirely correct. A few trees have been found on the

east coast and further south than Marsden indicated (3)* But

(1) For information about the camphor tree I have relied on

Heyne Nuttlge# 2, 1099-1105; Burkill, Dictionary# I, 862-867;
van Steenis, ’Hoofdlijen van de verspreiding * #. , 193-208# I
have also consulted Mhrsden and Crawfard#
(2) It was described as a product of Lanpr-ya-hslujfpi 3f r^j *
which Professor Wheatley has shown was probably In the Patani
area of the east coast of the Malay Peninsula; Golden Khersonese
252-265.
(3) They have been found from north of the Batang Hari river to
south of the Rokan river, on Bengkalis island, on the Lingga and
Riao islands, and in the Siak hinterland# For a note on the
Siak tree see F. Kehding, ’Notice of Notes on the Sultanate of
Siak by II.A. Hymans van Anroij*, JRASSB. 17. 1886#151-7*
 247 •

with nowhere in Sumatra has the production of camphor been

more persistently associated than with the north-western coast

between Singkel and Ayer Pangis, where the trees flourish on

the hill slopes from 200 to 1,200 feet above sea-level*

The Liang shu. the records of the southern Chinese dynasty

which ruled from 502 to 557, states that one of the products

of Lang-ya-hsiuJj& $ on the Peninsula was the P* o-lu

(■0* P fo-Xu is a transcription of ’Barus*

a famous northern Sumatran toponym as old as Ptolemy, and it

appears in the Yu yang tsa tsu of the early ninth century as

part of a transcription of kanur barus, the Malay word for

’camphor1 (2)* That ’Barus* in Sumatra had already given its

name to camphor in Chinese records of the early sixth century

is shown by the fact that T ’ao Hung-ching not only knew of it

but also included it in his revision of the materia medica.

According to the Cheng lei pen ts’ao

’Hai yao: I note that according to T ’ao Hung-ehing it

(camphor) grows in the western ocean Lu country*
It is the resin of the Po-lu tree ( 3 ) ^

(!) 54, 18a.

(2) Yu yang tsa tsu. 18, 100* I analyse the geographical
significance of the ’Barus’ toponym in chapter twelve*
(3) CLPT. 13, 321b* Lu and Po-lu are both errors for P* o-»lu»
In T rang times camphor was attributed to Po-ssu* If Li Hsun
was in the habit of adding the word Po-ssu to all old texts, why
did he not do so here ? This passage not only helps to make
Li Hsun*s references to Po-ssu products in the vintage texts more
reliable. It also illustrates his interest in early texts in
addition to the vintage ones*. ,Be also quotes from Hauan Tsang s
Hsi vu chi (CLPT. 3. 966, on % L£ ) and from the fifth century
Iflan YheK'^chiKTgLPT. 4, 110a*). ^
 21{-8,

T fao prescribed it as follows:

fThe Ming i pieh lu (written by T*ao Hung-ching and

quoted in the Hai yao) states: when women are enduring
difficult childbirth take a little camphor and grind it
into a fine powder and swallow it down with newly drawn
water. The efficacy will be immediate (l).*

The T fang pen tsfao also mentions camphor, (2) and subsequent

references to it are unbroken. It is the earliest Indonesian

trade product known to the Chinese about which the evidence is

beyond doubt, and it is significant that the records about it

are from the beginning of the sixth century. It cannot be

convincingly argued that there were physical reasons such as

difficulty of access to the jungle which make it improbable that

benzoin, unlike camphor, reached China when the Kuang chou chi

was written. Nor is there force in another argument advanced

for the late appearance in trade of benzoin. Mr, Burkill

suggests that, because benzoin extraction is a special art

involving the wounding of the tree, the quantities collected

would be very small (3)* But camphor-extraction is also a

special art, accompanied by a complicated magical procedure (h)*

(1) CLPT. 13# 321b.

(2) Hsin hsiu o£n tsyao. 1, lh5-lU6. It came from P yo-lu
%% count ry * *Barusf.
(3) Dictionary, 2, 2102.
(k) An account of the ritual involved in the search for camphor-
yielding trees is contained in J. de Ligny, fLegendarische
herkomst der Kamfer Baroesf, Tiidschrift, 63# 1923# 5U9-555*
 21*9

In spite of this, camphor was reaching the outside world by

about 500* The camphor trade, on account of its satisfactory

documentation, provides a chronological framework within which

to assess the likelihood of an equally early benzah trade,

sparked off by the knowledge that the similarly aromatic

bdellium was finding a market in southern China*

Pine resin and camphor were not, however, the only other

natural products of western Indonesia to reach China by the

seventh century at the latest. There was also 1unicorn

desiccate I^Hji ♦ It was mentioned in the T fang pen tsfao*

a materia medica composed under imperial instructions in northern

China, which suggests that by the middle of the seventh century

1unicorn desiccate1 was reasonably well known in China* Here,

then, is a further circumstance which makes it difficult to

believe that the ’southern ocean1 An-hsl perfume was not benzoin.
A A # , A ,
The Cheap, lei pen ts'ao quotes the T an# pen ts'ao as follows:

fLac gui;] (l)* Unicoivi desiccate ... It works on the

five viscera and on evil air inside the body. It stops
pain and breaks up accumulations of blood. It works on
ulcers and creates flesh* Lac gum and unicorn desiccate
are two very similar substances (2).1

(1) Lac gum is a product of mainland South East Asia and is

discussed by Laufer, Sino-Iranica. 1*75-8*
(2) CLPT, 13, 320b.
 250.

'Unicorn desiccate is today the name for dragon's blood,

the resin of various Indonesian species of Daemonorhops Blume,

or climbing rattans (1)« They are members of the Palmae

family and grow In many parts of Indonesia. Europe became

interested in Indonesian dragon's blood relatively late, and

it is only with Marsden's generation at the end of the 18th

century that the rattan was regarded as a source of dragon's

blood (2). Thereafter the east coast of Sumatra and south­

western Borneo were known as the chief centres of supply (3).

Though in the seventh century unicorn desiccate was

known in China as a styptic, the T'ang pen ts'ao does not state
■*2* A 'T
the country which produced it. Su Sung ^ , compiler

of the T'u ching pen tB'aol^l in the reign of the

Sung emperor Jen Tsung (1023 - 1063) (U), notes that in the

(1) On this subject see especially Schafer, 'Rosewood, dragon's

.jftoi, blood a.d lac'9fJJ» 2, 1957* 129-136. There is a full
- description o f Daemonorhops In Burkill, Dictionary. I, 7U7-753*
(2) Tome Pires does not mention Indonesian dragon's blood.
Varsden's reference is contained In History of Sumatra. 159-160.
He was sceptical about its merits and had been told by a friend
that white damar was mixed with it and may have provided it with
a resinous quality.
(3) Anderson, Mission to the East Coast of Sumatra in 1823 **♦>
pj. 29hf in respect of rattans on the coast between Diamond Point
and Siak; Crawfurd, History of the Indian Archipelago, 3, k2Qm
Crawfurd noted Jambi, Palembang, and Banjarmasin as the main
\ centres o f .production. Banjdrmaeln is in south-west Borneo. In
Cravifurd' s Descriptive Dictionary. 123» he notes that in the Jambi
region it was collected by the primitive T^ubu of south-eastern
Sumatra. K A
(1+) Li Shih-chen states that, for the preparation of this pen ts'ao
drugs were called for from all parts of the empire; PTKM, I JL ,
335*
\
 251.

past the countries producing this drug were not recorded (l).

lie himseil' merely stated that it came from various countries

of the southern barbarians* Nevertheless he made a helpful

’The resin flows from the tree (2) and drips down like
sugar gum in appearance. After a time it becomes
hard and forms a desiccate which is red like the colour
of blood. For this reason it is also said to be blood
desiccate (3)

Thus TM o o d desiccate’ was an alternative name for *unicorn

desiccate1 and there are several references to it in Sung

records. It was sent as tribute by orivijaya in 1018 and 1156

(«*>, and in view of Su Sung’s statement that it came from the

’southern barbarians’ it i that the blood desiccate

(1) CLPT,13, 3 2 1 a £&.£$> f, t b M l I 5 & %% '§&J%jU

This passage is omitted in the rTKl?.^5U. 1373b. The Hal yao pen
tsyao quotes the fifth century^Nan Yueh chlh _as describing \micorr/
desiccate as the resin of the M a c gum* tree A ^ 'i.
fjk'fQ 5 CLPT, 13, 321a. In fact the latter~ia^^gummy
deposit secreted on trees by the female lac insect Tachardia lacca
Linn; it was later regarded as a Cambodian product! Laufer,
Slno-Iranica. 475-8. The Kuan^ chou chi mentions ’lac gum’ of
vthe' southern ocean1; CLPT. 13, 321a. Probably before the
seventh century somethin, was known of the Indonesian dragon’s
blood rattan, which would explain why it \7as mentioned in the
T ’ang pen ts’ao.
(2 )' In fact "the resin forms on the surface of the immature fruits
of the rattan. It is not surprising that the pen ts’ao 7/riters
should have been ignorant of this nice point.
(3) CLPT. 13, 321a.
(h) SHYK.|i ^ j , 7805a; ibid, 7863b.
known in Sung times included Indonesian dragon’s blood as

well as the Socotran product from Dracaena cinnabar! Balf. f.

which was said by Chao Ju-kua to come from the Arab countries (i).

Mihr shih. probably incorporating material obtained during

Cheng H o ’s voyages in South East Asia during the first half

of the 15th century, states that Banjermasin tf ^ ^

produced blood desiccate (2), In Crawfurd1s day this place

was known to produce dragon’s blood, and it may be regarded

as certain that blood desiccate in Ming times and earlier was

a name for the Indonesian as well as the Socotran product (3)*

Su Sung’s identification of blood desiccate with unicorn

desiccate helps to bridge the gap in references to the latter

between the T ’ang pen ts’ao and Li Shih-chen (k).

(1) Chu fan chih. §6* In the same oasssge Chao Ju-kua refers to
iakawood as ’false blood desiccate f• Li Shih-chen
specifically states that lakav^uod renin could be used as a
substitute for unicorn desiccate (which is the same as blood
desiccate), and here one has an example of an Indonesian substi­
tute for an Indonesian product; PTKH, 3U, 1367a* Such were the
ramifications of the trade in substitutes, on which I believe was
based the original Indonesian trade with China. Li Shih-chen’s
observation axiswers Professor Wheatley’s criticism of Chao Ju-kua
for confusing the wood of Iakawood with a resin; ’Geographical
notes’, 111* The drugs were substitutes in spite of the fact
that they came from different botanical species.
(2.) M.i.ng s n i h . d <^3»2la#
(3; Nevertheless ’unicorn desiccate1 also appears in Ming records.
It was sent as tribute by Su-men-1a-1 a P^l % = Pasai in
northern Sumatra in 1U33; Mjng shiK, 325» 11a*
(U) Professor* Wheatley was worried by the lack of references to
Indonesian drago i’s blood in the works of Chou Ch’u-fei (1176)
and Chao Ju-kua (1225)5 ’Geographical notes’, 109-111* Professor
Schafer made a distinction between Socotran blood desiccate and
Indonesian unborn desiccate; ’Rosewood, dragon’s blood and lac*,
133* In view of Su Sung’s statement that the two were the same
I feel that the distinction cannot be upheld*
 253.

Professor Schafer believes that the Chinese used chieh

pg(<j , or ’desiccate , in the name for dragon’s blood because

o
it -//as also a transcription of getah, the Indonesian word for

’gum* (1). If this surmise is correct, it provides an

additional reason for believing that by the seventh century,

7/hen the T ’ang pen ts’ao was being compiled, this Indonesian

resin was being imported by the Chinese*

I wish in parenthesis, to call attention to two details In

connexion with dragon’s blood not as evidence with a bearing on

the remote times I am considering but as illustrations of the

way in which it is possible to compare the properties of one

plant with those of a completely different one* The first

e: ample links dragon’s blood with myrrh and the second links

11 '■/ith benz oIn *

At the end of the 15th century Li Shih-ch&n writes as

follows about ’unicorn desiccate’:

’Unicorn desiccate is the resinous sap of the tree. In

appearance it is like the blood of a man ••* Frankincense
and myrrh, although they work on diseases of the blood,
also enter the breathing system* This drug (unicorn
desiccate),•however, specialises on the blood system (2)*’

(1) ’Rosewood, dragon’s blood and lac’, 133#

(2) I 2 M t 3h, 137ha.
 25k.

That blood desiccate and myrrh had something in common is

also indicated in another passage by Li Shih-chen* He is

riting on lakawood|f. (if. % (Dalbergia parviflora Roxb.)

iLS A ~o\ \$\

...T’ang Shen-wei (writing in 1105) first added it to

(the materia medica) ,,, It is said that it may be
used as a substitute for myrrh and blood desiccate (l),’

In this example we probably have a reference to the astringent

properties of myrrh, shared by dragon’s blood. But the

Indonesians have seen the affinities of dragonrs blood in a

different way. One of their nicknames for it is men.1am me rah

or ’red benzoin* (2), Both dragon’s blood and benzoin contain

benzoic acid which is reflected in the aroma emitted from their

resins. Thus the Indonesians have compared dragon’s blood with

benzoin, which I believe first reached the Chinese as a

substitute for the myrrh known as bdellium. In a curious way

dragon’s blood has brought us back to myrrh in both Chinese and

Indonesian associations of ideas*

I have dealt briefly with the Chinese evidence about

Indonesian dragon’s blood because it suggests that by the

seventh century this resin was becoming known in China, When

one also takes into account that the Chinese were already

(1) PTKH. 3kf 13$7a, T ’ang Shen-wei was the author of the
nel pen ts’ao.
(2) Heyne. Nuttlge» 1, 35k* The rattan in question is D. ruber.
Dragon’s blood is also used internally for pains of the stomach*
Gimlette, Dictionary of Malayan medicine. 9h,
 255.

familiar with camphor and, I have suggested, with pine resin

as well, it becomes much less improbable that they knew of

Indonesian benzoin in the same period and that the Kuanp; chou

chi’s reference to the An-hsi perfume of the southern ocean

should be understood to mean benzoin. But the information

about dragon’s blood and camphor provides an even more

revealing co nent on the expansion of western Indonesian trade

by the seventh century. It is noteworthy that, though the

Chinese from early in the Christian era were receiving natural

products from the Middle East, there is no evidence to suggest

that they knew of the Socotran dragon’s blood even as late as

T ’ang times. Thus they first kn w of the Indonesian product

in its own right and not as a substitute for a western Asian

one. The same may be said of camphor; there is nothing to

suggest th.t the Chinese ever regarded it as a substitute. I

therefore believe that the evidence about dragon's blood and

camphor indicates the progress being m d e in the sixth and

seventh centuries in the range and prestige of Indonesian

products known in China, and it is reasonable to conclude that

the pioneering period of Sino-Indonesian trade was in the

fifth century, when the frankincense trade provoked the trade

in the pine resin substitute. A similar transaction in respect

of guggulu-bdeIlium and benzoin, equally valuable disinfectants

and fumifuges, should not be regarded as odd when one remembers

the expansion in Indonesian trade before the seventh century.

 256

I therefore believe that An-hsi perfume^ originally the

name for guggulu-bdellium, was transferred to benzoin by the

southern Chinese in the fifth or sixth century, I hold to

this view in spite of Professor Yamada’s recent study of the

benzoin trade. It is his belief that benzoin was first called

An-hai perfume in Inter1T ’ang times and that the name originally

had nothing to do with An-hsi » Parthia* Instead it was an

attempt to render an indigenous name, corresponding to some sound

such as raenam or kaminan from which the modern aalny word

kernenyan and similar words in mainland South East Asia are

derived (l), though Professor Yamada seems to admit that the

Chinese later associated their clumsy transcription of the

indigenous word with ’Parthia’; this, however, was ’nothing

but the product of the imagination of the learned men of

Chi^a, after the establishment of this word among merchants

and traders (2),’ In Sung times benzoin was given a further

name in the form of chln-yen perfume^ . % * This was a

new and independent transcription of the same indigenous name

for benzoin, derived from the fccmenyan-type word (2),

Writers have been perplexed by the name An-hs1 perfume*

Chao Ju-/:ua tried to explain it by quoting a passage from the

(1) ’A study on the introduction of An-hsi-hsiang1t 2, 1-10*

(2) Ibid, 9*
(3) Yamada was not the first to explain the derivation of chin-
.yen perfume, Elagden did so in 1897; JRASSB, 30$ 1897# 306-7*
 257.

T ’ung tlen that An-hsl was the name of a kingdom of ’the

western Jung barbarians’ which sent tribute in the 557 - 580

and 605 - 617 periods. Because of this evidence he assumed

that the resin took its name from the kingdom of An-hsi (l).

But An-hsi in the sixth century only meant Bukhara, while

An-hsi perfume was already known to the Chinese in the early

A
fourth century. Li Shih-ehen noted that An~hsl was the name

of a country, but he preferred to give a fanciful explanation

by suggesting that the name of the resin, an-hsl ,3 - or

’pacifying1, was derived from its power to ’drive out evil

(influences)’ (2). In modern times Feng C h ’eng-chun has

suggested that an African myrrh was exported to China by the

Persians and that it was given the name of An-hs1, but he did

not explain how benzoin acquired the same name (3). Laufer

suggested as a hypothesis that the name was derived from a

place called An-hsi, mentioned in T ’ang texts as somewhere on

mainland South East Asia (4).

Professor Yamada’s theory that An-hs^ perfume derived its

name from an indigenous word is based on his assumption that the

name was given to benzoin in late T ’ang times. My objection

is that I do not understand why, if the Chinese were able to

(1) Chu fan chih, 99.

(2) PTKM, 1374b.
(3y In his edition of Chu fan chih. 100#
\k) Slno-Iranica, 466* No one seems to have noted the essential
point that both guggulu-bde111um An-hsl perfume and benzoin An-hsi
perfume have enjoyed the reputation of being potent fumifuges.
 253.

transcribe the indigenous name competently in Sung times as

chin-yen. they could not render it more accurately than An-hsi

in late T ’ang times* I suggest that the real reason for the

appearance of the name of chin-yen perfume in Sung records is

simply that by then Chinese merchants were themselves travelling

overseas more frequently and discovered the local name for

benzoin.

There is, however, a problem in connexion with the name

chin-yen for benzoin. Chao Ju-kua states that it came from

both Cambodia and the Arab countries; the latter product was

the inferior one and was a re-export from Srlvijaya. The

better product, from Cambodia, was white and the inferior one

dark (l). An-hsi perfume, on the other hand, was associated

by Chao Ju-kua only with Srlvijaya, and I accept Professor

Yamada*s view that it was benzoin (2). Why was it that there

a ere- now two names for Sumatran benzoin, An-hsi perfume and

chin-.ven perfume ?

(l) The Cambodian benzoin came from S. benzoides*Craib. growing

in Laos. It has been suggested that the Arab3 took Sumatran
benzoin to the Middle East, adulterated it, and brought it back
to Srlvijaya; Wheatley. ’Geographical notes’, 58-59* In view
of Pires’ reference to ’black* benzoin, which I quote below, I
believe that, though the Arabs handled the benzoin trade, Chao
Ju-kua’s inferior product was in fact a low-grade Sumatran benzoin.
(2j Chao Ju-kua seems to haveguoted Yeh T ’ing-kuei’s account of
An-hsi perfume; Hsin tsuan hsiang p ’u . 1, 10b, For Yamada’s
identification of this resin with benzoin see ’A study on the
introduction of /n-hsi-hsinng*, 2, 3# He refers to the
comparison of its resin with the appearance of the edible part of
the walnut, a comparison to which I return below.
 259

I think that the answer to this question is connected with

ih‘
3 existence of a variety of grades of Sumatran benzoin,

Tomd Firec* evidence io helpful# He states that a ’very white1

resin came from the northern ports of Barus, Tico, and Priaman#

Another resin care from Falesbang; it was fblack1 and had it«

only market in eastern Indonesia (1)# The difference in

colour reflects to some extent the presence of Styrax sumatrana

in the Jungles of northern Sumatra but also, I think, the

established practice in northern Sumatra of producing a high

i-rude benzoin, m.nixed with inferior grades of Sty rax benzoin

which has a reddish-brown colour (2)# The name for the high

grade benzoin would have been An-hsi perfume, the grade which

had originally competed with bdellium to which the honourable

name of An-hsi stuck and the only type of benzoin mentioned in

rn tBfao literature# Yeh T ,ing-kucif co;;ied by Chao Ju-kua,

maKes the point that An-hsi perfume resembles the kernel of the

walnut in shape and colour (3)# and I see here a vivid

( 161 > 156# Ma Iluan in the early 15th centur;

moations white and black grades of Chln-yln perfume^ % in
Palembar.g and alao Chin-yin perfume from Aru on the north-east
coast of Sumatra; V.?nx yai Shenpjlnn# 17, 27*
(2) Burkill points out that benzoin represents several grades and
that the Sumatran product varies more than the mainland one;
Dictionary# 2, 2102* Heync describes in some -tail the process
of adulteration; in Java, for example, benzoin is even nixed
with damar; Nuttlge# 2, 1261. In Sung, times Chinese merchants
travelling; overseas would have become familiar with different
grades of benzoin# ,( . , _ , _ ^
(3) Ha in teuan haiang p tu . 1, 10b! Jg g ?£$ W 'fH
.^■L.£an.£^. 99: -£ f/^ £ ^
 260.

description of high-grade benzoin with its lumpy appearance

and prominent #tears1 of white resin* An-hsi perfume was

probably the name of the best Sumatran product to which the

name An-hsi obstinately stuck, while Sumatran chin-yen perfume

was the ,blackT type mentioned by Pires and was naturally

inferior to the ’white1 kind of chin-yen perfume which Chao

Ju-kua says came from Cambodia# In Sung times Chinese merchants

in South East Asian ports would have become familiar with new

centres of benzoin production and also with different grades

of resin*

In this chapter I have examined the possibility that

benzoin was substituted for bdellium in the fifth or sixth

century and that the 1southern ocean1 An-hsi perfume mentioned

in the Kuang chou chi should be understood to mean benzoin and

not bdellium# It is true that there is no reference to benzoin

in the seventh century T ’a n g pen ts’ao, but this may mean no

more than that the compilers were interested Instead in

bdellium reaching them in northern China by the overland route.

I took into account evidence that the Chinese have regarded

bdellium and benzoin as equally admirable fumifuges, just as

they considered frankincense and pine resin to have comparable

styptic and furnigatory value# The background to these

substitution transactions was the trade in western Asian

frankincense and myrrh. An Indonesian source for both pine

resin and benzoin is suggested by the expression ’southern

ocean1, and the suggestion becomes even more probable ?/hen one
remembers that Indonesian camphor was known to the Chinese

by the early sixth century and by the seventh century dragon1s

blood as well* Pine resin, benzoin, and camphor are found as

a botanical complex only in the northern half of Sumatra, a

region which happens to lie reasonably close to the maritime

trade route between the Indian Ocean and China* Geographical

circumstances evidently had something to do with the origins

of the trade in substitutes*

On these grounds I submit that there is every likelihood

that Indonesian benzoin was being exported in small quantities

to southern China by the sixth century, probably as a magical

incense rather than as a drug* The Buddhists may huve played

their part in making it known in southern China, for they

were travelling by the sea route in these centuries.

Some conclusions about the early Indonesian trade with

China are now beginning to take shape* As far as the produce

is concerned, the Indonesian component was probably originally

less important than the western Asian one* On the other hand,

the ’southern ocean* region, which must be identified with

Sumatra in particular, seems to have been linked In some special

way with the trade in foreign resins* It is tempting now to

o
begin to enquire what was the significance of the term Po-ssu

in juxtaposition with the ’southern ocean1 of western Indonesia,

But one more matter needs to be considered first* What was the
o
conventional meaning of Po-ssu when It Is used in the vintage

texts to describe natural products ?

CHAPTER NINE

THE ’PERSIAN1 TRADE

We shall see in this chapter that, as far as the authors

of the Kuan# chou chi and the Nan chou chi were concerned,

Po-ssu natural products normally had no connexion with

Indonesia or with any other part of South East Asia* In both

these texts Po-ssu is used to describe the products of western

Asia* Though the Kuang chih mentions no Po-sau product with

the exception of the ’southern ocean j u f, it is safe to assume

that its author understood the term to have the same meaning os

it had for the authors of the other two vintage texts. The

two Po-ssu resins of the southern ocean therefore seem to have

o
an unusual status In the catalogue of Po-ssu products mentioned

in these texts, a status which is consistent with the view I

have developed that they were at first only a by-product of

a very different kind of trade.

Unless the nature of the majority of the Po-ssu products,

known in the fifth or early sixth century, is taken into

account a solution of the Po-ssu problem in the context of

western Indonesian history Is impossible. Laufer was

reluctant to acknowledge the importance of any of the pre-

T ’ang references to Po-ssu products, and least of all the

references to those which came from outside South East

Asia (1).

Laufer, concentrating on T ’ang and therefore much later

examples of the use of the term, which included a reference

in the Yu yang tsa tsu to Po-ssu camphor, committed himself

to an impossible attempt to prove the existence of a South

East Asian Po-ssu country or people, whose name had nothing

to do with ’Persia’* His study in 1919 gave new life to the

troublesome hypothesis, already formulated nearly fifty years

before him, that the South East Asian Po-ssu was an early

reference to the harbour state of Pasai on the extreme northern

coast of Sumatra (2).

Thus everything depends on where one considers was the

normal habitat of the Po-ssu plant when the vintage texts were

written, and it is not difficult to conclude that in terms of

botany and also of mineralogy as well as in terms of diplomatic

missions to China Po-ssu never meant anything other than ’Persia’

The botanical evidence, though not abundant or helpful In

establishing the size of the Po-ssu trade, is convincing as far

as centres of production are concerned*

We have already seen that for Ku Wei, author of the Kunng

o
chou chi* Po-ssu was the name of the country which produced

$1) See pagegMf-'Mff below for a criticism of Laufer’s treatment

°£ the Po-ssu problem.
(2) At the teginning^of the next chapter I summarise earlier
studies of the Po-ssu problem*
 264*

the cummin# a typical Persian plant (l)# The same text

also mentions the stinking elm (TJlmaccae racrocarpg Hce ):

i* <§ i % 'I'l l * -2 i * i ®-k }*.&% %

fHal yaos I note that the Kuarp; chou chi states that it
(the stinking elm)" grows "lij the Ta-ch*In
country* It is the Po-asu stinking elm (2),f

The tree grows in China and Korea, (3) tut not In South East

Asia, Ku Wei evidently heard that It m m m grew in the Middle

East (Ta->chfin) and was also known os the P q ~ s s u stinking elm#

He could only have meant that it was a tree associated with

the Persians#

The Kuarg chou chi mentions another Po-ssu product, in

this case a mineral# and Laufer chose to regard it as a South

East Asian substitute for a western A 3ian product and therefore

u , .
evidence of a South East Asian country .mown as Po-asu (U)*

Tho text, quoted by Li Iloun, mentions two kinds of alum (5) 5

iff. $h & %_ ,|,|-]5 ffi i.* | g a Js I? 54
i “
ok 'HI -&-Z& 4J -rfcl jSA
^ 'fa) J l

(1) ^
(2) CLPT* 13# 322b, Li Shlh-chen makes only a par sing reference
to tHis^tree under the heading of ,elmt; PTX^> 35 "f # lhl7»
Read, Chinese medicinal nlrmtn •*.# no, 6 o z ;—
3) T ’ao Hung-ching knew of a Korean snccies: CLPT, 13# 322,
h; H!no«»Xranlca, 2*7h««*5# '
5j Alum la the double sulphate of aluminium and potassium*
 265.

’The Po-ssu white alum. The Kuan# chou chi states that
it comes from Ta-ch’in country* Its colour is white
and bright (l).*

’Gold thread alum5 The Huang chou chih states that it

comes from Po-ssu country **, When its contents are
striped with gold thread it is of a superior quality (2).1

Laufer thought that the Po-ssu ’gold thread1 alum was an impure

alum which came from South Hast Asia, though there is no hint
A ,
in the pen ts’ao references to it that it was regarded as an

inferior mineral. In fact the text I have just translated

gives the opposite impression. Alum is not found in Persia,

but Laufer observed that it exists in upper Burma, and here he

thought was the source of the ’gold thread’ alum. Pliny,

however, mentions a number of sources of alum in Europe, Egypt,

Armenia, and Africa (3), and it would not be surprising if the

Persians imported various types of alum as dye fixers in their

A*
weaving factories* Li Shih-chen at any rate interpreted Li

Hsun’s two passages on alum as references to the same Po-ssu*

though he does not mention the Kuangchou chi as Li Hsun’s

A
authority* According to Li Shih-chen
Ciqa) & 10 £ & 5b J*
^ tb i 1*1 —

(1) CLPT, 3, 96b*

(2) Ibid* Laufer was aware of these quotations from the KCC.
which he believed was written In the Chin period (265-419)# 0
’when the name of Persia was hardly known in China’* Po-ssu
therefore referred to the ’Malayan’ Po-ssu; Sino-Iranica, 475.
(3) Natural History. XXXV, LII, lSi|. (Loeb Classical Library,
Rackham’s transl ation)•
 f(Li Hsun states) that Po»ssu and Ta-ch* in produce a 0
white alum* Its colour 'is white and bright «*• Po-ssu
also produces a gold thread (type) • •* (l),#

It is true that one can be certain only that the Kuan# chou chi
u
mentioned a Po-ssu gold thread alum. The white alum* according

to this text, came from Ta-ch* in. The reference to the

*Po-ssu white alum* may have been Li JIsunfs, though we have

o
seen that the Kuan/: chou chi said of the Po-ssu stinking elm that

it came from Ta-chfjn, the Middle East, On the other hand,

there Is no text which associates the gold thread alum with

South East Asia, and I consider that the K fun-lun tmud alum

% % 1, mentioned by Li Shih-chen, is more likely to be

an impure alum from South East Asia (2). There is certainly

o
no reason to suppose that the Kuang chou chi refers to a Po-ssu

alum from South East Asia*

One more Kuang chou chi product is available for

establishing the sense of Po-s3u, The product is sulphur*

According to T fao Hung-ching, rock s u l p h u r ^ was

produced in the Tung hai prefectureand the best kind came from

there and Lin-yi, the Cham kingdom; he also knew of the ft*un-

lun yellow kind and one which came from foreign countries via

Szechuan (3). By the eighth century the Chinese were using

1) PTKM. 11, 707a.

2) Ibidr -j£

(3) Ibid, 11, 702b.

 267*

sulphur from the western Jung barbarians (l), while centuries

A
later Li Shih-chen, recapitulating a number of sulphur-producing

countries, included P yan-py *Q volcanoes and a

volcano near Kao-ch* ang ^ as sources of supply (2).

Both P fan-p*an and Kao-ch1anq appear in pre-Tfang sources as

countries in the western regions*

Because sulphur was known by the eighth century as

coming from both South East Asia n& western Asia the following

quotation by Li Hsun from the Kuan# chou chi is not an

unexpected one:

*The Kuang chou chi states that it is produced in the

K yun-lun countries and in the Po-ssu country (3)*f

The importance of this fragment is that ifc distinguishes

between the K yun-lun, or South East Asian world^and Po-ssu,

Po-ssu could only have been Persia (1*). It was the country

(1) CLPT, 3* 9&a£ This section of tlje chapter contains drugs

mentioned by C h yen Ts,ang-ch,i, the pen tsfao writer in the first
half of the eighth century, A
(2) PTKM, 11, 703a. Li Shih-chen quotes the Wei shu in respect
P fan-pyan and Chang Hua^Jk fl. ys Po wu chih^j] -dr
in respect of Kao-chyang. ^ ^ °
(3) PTKM, 11, 702b. This passage is not in the CLPT, which only
quotes Chfen^chfi on sulphur; Chfen lived before Li Hsun* Su
Sung In the 11th century states that in his time it only came
from the 1southern ocean barbariansy; ibid.
(4) At the end of the quotation from Li Hsun there is the state­
ment that the ship-borne product is better than a Szechuan one. I
assume that here Li Hsun and not the Kuang chou chi is^being
quoted. I have changed m./ mi on the meaning of Po-ssu sulphur
since I wrote in BSQAS, XXIII, 2, I960, 340,note §7 "When I thought
that it referred to the South East Aslan product.
 268 .
which we hare seen was also associated by Ku Wei with the
*1
cumain, the stinking elm, and alum#

There is, however, one Fo— ssu product, mentioned by the

Kuan# chou chi» which does not seem to conform to this pattern

of nomenclature# Li HstLn is quoted in the Fen ts*ao kang mu*s

section on the betel plant

fThe Kuan# chou chi states that it comes from Po-ssu

country. In appearance its fruit It like the fruit
of the mulberry tree# The red-coloured type is
esteemed# The black type comes from old roots and is
inferior. But recently there are many of the black
fyltKiW type; the red type is rarely seen# Kweichou also has
1 them# TheJv appearance and taste/are the same bwfcfo
H n p w (l).f ^
The same passage appears In the Chen# lei pen tsfaog
III 3 & # r & ^11
it % f-& t & fa-*-Jr % % * *£.#§ & 4 &#■
M 4^ 04 ...£ #j.g jyif-i) t % $
fThe Hao yao states: I note that the Kuan# chou chi says
that the Po-ssu country*s striped fruits are in appearance
like the mulberry fruit# The red-coloured type ia the
best# The black-coloured type is old and inferior*
Kweichou province also has them# Their appearance and
taste are the same .#* Recently there are many of the
black type; the red type is rarely seen (2)#*

(3-) 1U# 8l6a# I suspect that the quotation from the KCC
ends with f.## Is inferior **
(2) CLPT# 9, 229a*
 269.

The betel vine (Piper betle Linn*) likes a moist climate and

flourishes in South East Asia* It is not a Persian plant*

Why then, should Ku Wei have described it as a Po-asu product ?

I am not certain that he was in fact referring to the betel,

for he refers to ffruits’, whereas it Is the leaf of the betel

which has always been esteemed. Nor do I think that this

unidentifiable plant grew in South East Asia; there is a

passage In the T ’arajperi ts’ao. quoted In later texts, which,

though apparently dealing with the betel vine, mentions a

plant with the same name in western Asia:

7)4 ^ H ^
fThe western Jung sometimes also bring a small and
hitter one. It is said that there are two kinds (l).f

The ’western Jung’ are not likely to have traded in betel.

Though the evidence about the Po-ssu ’betel1 is obscure,

I do not think that it contradicts the conclusion that Ku Wei

always understood ?o-ssu to mean ’Persia’. In four cases

he certainly did, and he therefore conforms to the usage of

HsS Piao, author of the Nan chou chi. Hsu Piao mentions the
o o
Po— ssu mo drug, or myrrh, and also another Po-ssu plant which

is well known in Persia. It is the pistachio nut. In a

A a
section of the Cheng lei pen ts’ao devoted to drugs mentioned In
A. .
the Hai yao pen ts’ao there appears the following passage:

(1) Ibid; PTKffl. 11*, 815b

 fI note that according to Hsti Piao*s Nan chou chi (the
Nameless Tree) grows in the mountains and Talleys of
Kuang nan (southern China) £.# Its fruit is called the
nameless fruit. The Po-ssu people call it a-yfieh-hun.
In appearance it is like the hazel nut (l)#f

The a-vueh-hun nut is the pistachio nut, attributed by Chfen

Tsfang-chfi in the eighth century to the western countries (2),

Three species of Pjstacia are native to Persia and grow in

Sogdiana and Khorasan, Theophrastus knew of the fBactrianf

pistachio, and there is a text of the first century B#C. which

refers to 1these terebinth-eating Persians1 (3)* It is a well

known fruit of Persia, and TPersiaf is what Hsu Piao here meant
o
by Po-ssu,

One further illustration can be given of the same use of

U ^ \ft*
Po-ssu by Hsu Piao, He refers to the marking nut ^

tree.

fThe Hai yao says: I note that Hsft states that it grows
in the western ocean Po-ssu country.
It is like the Chinese willow tree (I*)#1

(1) CLPT,12, 311a-b; PTKM, 30, 1294a#

(2; FTKH.30, 1294a, Read follows Laufer in Identifying this
product; Chinese medicinal plants *#♦, no* 314#
(3) Laufer", Sino-Iranica, 2 4 6 - 2 4 7 1Terebinth-eating Persians1
were mentioned in the first century B.C. by Nicolaus of Damascus#
Tavernhr in the 17th century described the Isfahan region as the
great centre of pistachio nut production; Preyerfs Hast India
and Persia, Hakluyt Society, 1909-1915; volume 2, 2^0, note 1,
Laufer believed that HsU Piao provided a Sassanid or early Middle
Persian word corresponding to *aftgwlz etc# or fnut of pistachio1.
(4) CLPT.14, 358b. The PTKM, 35 f , 1411a, omits the reference
to the Nan chou chi.
 271.

In this passage ’western ocean’ evidently refers to Persia (!)•

The marking nut.(Semecarpua anacardium Linn f*) is a small

tree which grows in northern India and has somewhat sparingly

spread eastwards of India (2). Parts of northern India were

under the control of the Sassanlds when the Nan chou chi was

Y/ritten, and HsEt Piao could not have meant anything except Persia

when he mentioned the marking nut*

Indeed there can no longer he any mystery about what Ku

Wei and lieu Piao understood by Po-ssu. The term had for them

the same meaning that it had for the compilers of the ’barbarian’

chapters in the imperial histories* In all cases it was ’Persia’

and nothing else, as Pelliot insisted (3)* There is no reason

to doubt thit it had the same meaning for Kuo 1-kur.g, author of

the Kuang chih* and for Liu Hsin-ch’i, the author of the Chlao

chou chi* who mentions the betrothal of the Po-sau king and the

Ceylon princess (h) * There is also another text which conforms

(1) The TPYL. 961, L*268a, quotes the T ’ang shu as describing A
Persist as being ’on the western ocean* in connexion with the erh
tree ^ • 1^ was now *-n country of the Ar^b king. I
have changed my mind about the ’western ocean P q - s b u ’ since I
v/rote pages 3 W - 3 U 1 in BS0A3, XXIII, II, I960. It is true that
Sumatra could also bo described as being on the ’western ocean’)
’Barus’ was so described. I hove come to realise, however, that
the vintage texts always understood Po-ssij as ’Persia1.
(2) burkill, Dictionary. 2, 1991*
(3) Polo. I, W l
(k) Page 157.
 272*

« A
to the same usage. It is the Nan Yueh chih of Shen Huai-yuan

ilL 1 , which Pelliot considered was written in the

third quarter of the fifth century (l)«

This list of genuinely Persian or Persian-handled products

o #
suggests why the two Po-ssu resins, growing in the Tsouthern

ocean', were also called Po-ssu. Because there are no grounds

for believing that the vintage texts understood the term to

mean anything other than *Persian*, one has to continue to

render the term in the same way* The two 1southern ocean*

resins were originally substitutes for resins from western

Asia, and I therefore believe that they represent isolated

o
examples in an Indonesian context of an extended use of Po-ssu

to mean *Persian* in the sense of *Persian-type' resins j the

f1) J+56-/. See note 5 on page 181. CLPT, k, 110a:

(the Hai yao) I note that according to the Nan Yueh chih it
(StB * silver leaf) comes from the Po-ssd country. Thereif
a natural medical silver* The Po-ssu country (people) use it as
tB 1£k

The CLPT * 1U, 3U6a, quotes the Hal yao as quoting Hsu Chang ^
^jL *8 Nan chin# chlj/ft that Po-ssu had the wu-dhih-tzu
(oakgaiis), another typical Persian product, ascribed to
FBTQli
bookj
quoted
Altem; „ ___
chou chi vj |.| * Sheng Hung is described in the Sui Shu*
23# 21b, as writing in the Liu Sung period. In either case here
may be another early reference to Po-sau « Persia* Laufer,
discussing oakgaiis, only quoted from the PTKM* which does not
throw light on the real name of the Nan chin# chi mentioned in
the CLPT: Sino-Iranica, 367-369*
 273.

Chinese may even have imagined at first that these two trees

were exactly the same trees which grew in Persia itself. There

is nothing extraordinary in this usage , for v/e have seen in this

chapter that the stinking elm, growing in Ta-ch’i n . was the

Po-ssu stinking elm. Perhaps, too, the Khang chou chi refers
o
to the Po-asu white alum which came from Ta-ch* in. The term

was evidently used very loosely, for it was given to myrrh,

which comes from a number of regions in western Asia, The

Chinese probably imagined that most valuable and interesting

produce of western Asia was to be found in Persia.

Because pine resin and benzoin from the southern ocean

were regarded as ’Persian-type’ resins, thdr substitution for

frankincense and guggulu-blellium had obviously succeeded.

But South East Aslan sulphur was known as K Tun-lun and not
o
Po-ssu, in spite of the fact that a western Asian Bulphur,

associated in the Kuang chou chi with Persia, was also known.

Apparently the South East Asian kind of sulphur was not regarded

as a Persian-type sulphur and it therefore remained merely a

K fun-lun mineral. The South East Aslan species was associated

j
with the Annam coast, which has no Po-ssu associations in the

vintage or any other Chinese texts* If the sulphur had come

from Sumatra, perhaps we would hear ol1 a ’southern ocean’ sulphur

which was ’Persian*•

We have now gone some way in defining the significance of

Po-ssu in the vintage texts* It meant ’Persia*, a country

 274.

which was regarded as an important producing and trading

region and gave its name to the produce of western Asia in

general* Ta-ch* in once had this reputation* but now Persia

was considered to be the source of the wealth of the western

regions. I do not suggest that every ’Persian* product was

imported in quantities in pre - T ’ang times; some were known

only bg hearsay and the information about them arrived in

Chinese with cargoes of frankincense, myrrh, and luxurious

manufactured goodB* The produce of the factories of Persia

A
lieSoutside the scope of this study, and the pen ts’ao writers

were not interested in it* It is sufficient to recall that

the Hephtjalites gave the Liang emperor Po-ssu brocade (i).

Some of the rich clothing material made in Persia and mentioned

in the H o u Chou shu no doubt came with the resins to southern

China.

But whatever may have been the range and scale of the

imports from wester*. Asia to southern China in the fifth and

early sixth centuries, one conclusion seems certain* The fact

th;jt ’PerBian-type* resins from the ’southern ocean* were

recorded means that the southern Chinese recognised the existence

of a specifically ’Persian* trade, to which had been assimilated

western Indonesian resins* If frankincense and myrrh had not

been in demand in southern China, no one would have wished to

(i) Ltang s h u . 54, 40b*

 275.

offer substitutes.
O
A n objection may be raised that my definition of Fo-ssu

in tho vintage texts as a general name for produce coming from

or known to exist in western Asia does not take into account

the fact that there are no references in these texts to either

u o
a Po-ssu frankincense or a Po-ssu bdellium* How is it

possible to regard the substitutes as 1Persian-type’ resins if

the prototypes were not associated with Persia ?

I do not think that this is a serious objection. As far

as bdellium, or An-hsl perfume, is concerned, it is probable

\j
that the trade-name was established before the Po-ssu »

’P e r s i a n ’ trade made an impression on the imagination of the

southern Chinese. v/e have seen that it was known in northern

China early in the fourth century (l)* Trade-names are not

lightly abandoned, and it would have been pedantry if the

Chinese had dropped the old name for Persia (An-hsi) in favour
\j
of> Po-ssu as the name for bdellium* Moreover, if there was

any trade in Persian goods, bdellium from the Pakr&n coast

must have been part of it, and its substitute, which I believe

was benzoin, would clearly have been a Persian-type resin* I

believe that benzoin competed successfully with bdellium in the

maritime trade, and this may be another reason why v/e do not

hear of an An-hsi perfume from Po-ssu » Persia in the vintage

(1) PageUp*
 276.

o
texts. Only the cruder Po-ssu a Persian myrrh was mentioned.

Frankincense, though mentioned in the Bou Chou shu of

northern China as a Persian product, was regarded by the

southerners, Kuo I-kung and T*ao Rung-ching, as coming from

Ta-ch*in. the Han name for the Roman Orient* Moreover there

was another resin in addition to frankincense which the pre-

T*ang Chinese associated with Ta-ch*in. This was storax

There is, I think, a straightforward explanation for the

existence of Ta-ch* in products within the framework of the

♦Persian1 trade of the fifth and sixth centuries. Frankincense

and ©torax, like bdellium,were known in China before there was

V->
any question of a Po-ssu trade. Ttorax is mentioned as a

product of Ta-ch* in in the Wei Lueh (l), and we have seen that

there are several third century references to frankincense (2),

Because of the gre<t prestige which Ta-chfin enjoyed as a source

of wealth it is likely that products originally attributed to

Ta-ch* in continued to be known as such. That an ancient label

stuck to frankincense is not a reason for inferring that it was

not also regarded as part of the Persian trade, capable of

(1) SKOTei. 30, 33b. Kuo I-kung also knew of Ta-ch1in storaxj
TPYL. 962 . !*3iLi7a. I have formed the impression that Kuo I-kung
was more of an antiquarian than either Ku *¥ei or KsQ Piao; he
quotes, for example, from sources which must be as old as K fang
T fai in the third century. Here may be an additional reason why
he hung on to the Ta-ch1in label for frankincense.
(2) Pages
 277.

producing a •Persian-type1 substitute in the form of the pine

resin from the southern ocean. T a -chyIn frankincense and

storax,like An-hsi perfume, survived merely as time-honoured

trade-labels which the conservative-minded Chinese were

unwilling to abandon. P o - r b u became the trade-label for

products which were unknown in Han times such as myrrh (the

mo drug) and the substitute resins of the southern ocean#

o
I am convinced by what was excluded from the list of Po-ssu

goods as well as by what it contained that in the fifth and

sixth centuries Po-ssu had become the trade name for western

Asian produce. The term did not represent foreign maritime

trade in general but probably only the cream of the trade,

associated by earlier generations with Ta-ch* in. The authors

of the vintages certainly use the term in an exclusive manner,

u
The Po-ssu label was not attached in&iscrirninatingly to foreign

plants.

In 1919 Laufer called attention to the fact tlia t he did

j
not know of any case where Po-ssu was used to describe Indian

and Sinhalese goods (1). The clearest example is provided by

pepper. Though the Hou Chou shu includes black and long peppery

two of the most famous Indian plants, among the products of

u
Persia, the vintage texts never describe pepper as a Po-ssu

product. The Nan chou chi merely says that black pepper grew

(1) Slno-Iranica. i±87*

 276.

in a number of southern ocean countries (1) and that long

pepper was produced in the southern ocean (2).

I doubt whether there was much trade in foreign peppers

in pre-Tfang China. The Chinese were probably still satisfied

with their own *pepperish* plants, known as chiu 7)^9^

and belonging chiefly to the family of Zanthoxylon Linn (3)*

The warming properties of the chiu were recognised in early

A a #
times, and the Shen nun# pen ts ao chin# states that two

Chinese chin had the power of prolonging life (b) • Yet the

magical qualities of the Chinese peppers were not transferred to

foreign peppers, and the trade in the latter was probably

boosted later simply by the pleasing pungency of pepper in

i\;Od* Thus, although the Hou Han shu records black pepper

among the products of India (5), T fao Hung-ching ignores it.

A
Black pepper made its first appearance in -pen ts'ao literature

in the seventh century T*an# pen ts>ao (6 ) and long pepper a

A A
little later in Ch*en T s fang-chfI 1s -pen t s ^ o . which

attributes it to Po-ssu (7). It is not surprising that foreign

(1) CLPT. Ibt 5k9b. This passage is omitted in the PTK*h 32,
1320a.
(2) CLPT. 9 , 229a. This passage is also omitted in the PTKM.
ibt SIhb-8l5a.
(3) Laufer, Sino-Iranica. 37U.
{h) Shen nung pin ts *ao^chlng t b3> 86 . 0 They were the Ch* in chiu
^ and the Shu (Szechuan) chiu .
(5) Hou Han shu. 118, 16b.
( 6) 32 , 1320b. fIt reduces air, warns the inside, and
expels^hl^gm^jL. ^mcges^cold air from the system Tp jju-

(7) CLPT. 9, 228b; PTOT, lb, 815a!

 279.

O
peppers were excluded from thePo-ssu trade. They had not

become sufficiently important to be connected with Persia*

Putchuk, or Costus (gauss urea DC) , is another plant which

was associated with India at an early date but never regarded

\j
as a Po ~ b s u product. I am not certain, however, whether
o
its exclusion from the category of Po-ssu products was

because it was regarded as an Indian plant or because it was

still an unimportant trade commodity in pre-Tfang times. It

was known as the ch*ing mu perfume^ , which was attributed

to India in the Nan chou i wu chih (l). Here is probably a

reference to the genuine putchuk which grows in Kashmir and

would therefore have been found in Sasoanid Persia, Nevertheless

it continued to be associated with India, for the Kuang chih

' i \
states that it came from India and Tongking (2). Laufer

has suggested that chfing mu perfume was a general name for a

variety of aromatic roots, and indeed T*ao Hung-ching refers to

a sea-borne trade in it asialso a specimen from Yunnan (3)*

The genuine putchuk grows in Kashmir and would therefore

have been in the Sassanid empire. There are two other

o
Sassanid plants which one would also expect to be called Po-ssu

in the vintage texts. Nevertheless they were excluded from

1) ZtYk* 982, U3h7b.

2) Ibid.
3) Sino-Iranlca, ipSi+j CLPT. 6, 160a.
 280.

the category, and again the reason may have been either that

they were associated primarily with India or that they had

not yet become sufficiently important to the southern Chinese

to be classified as Po-ssu. The first of these is the

rnyrobalan %*\ (Terminalla Linn.), described by I Tsing

as abundant in India (i) and frequently recommended in the

early Indian medical treatises. The Pei shih states that

it was found in Persia (2), but the Nan chou chi merely notes

that it grew in a number of southern ocean countries (3)* The

o
omission of a Po-ssu attribution in the Nan chon chi is

interesting, for Li Iisun, who quotes this text, associates the

myrobalan with Po-ssu (U). If he had special reasons for

boosting Persia as a source of natural wealth, he might have

o
inserted Po-ssu into the statement by the Man chou chi. But

he did not do so. The T tang pen tstao Is the fir3t materia

medica to mention this product (5)*

The other plant which grow in Sassanid Persia but was

u
not called Po-ssu is asafoetida (Ferula Linn.), which I Tsing

states was abradant in the western limits of India (6). It

was known to Kuo I-kung, author of the Xuang chih, as a-wei

(1) Takakusu, Record, 128.

(2) Pei ehih, 97, lSb*
(3) CLPT7 ~ m . 3*4-2b.
Ibid. K
(5} TTsin hslu pen t3fao, 173*
(G) Takakusu, Recordt 128-129#
 281,
"V^ yf ^
1a] f a name which Laufer believed was derived from an

Iranian word an&u or anp;wa (l), Kuo I-kung says that it came
a
from the K ’un-lun country (2). The ? fang pen ts’ao is the

first text to attribute it to the *western barbarians* as well as

to the K yun-lun (3)*

Black and long pepper are essentially Indian plants, and

o
their exclusion from the Po-ssu category is the best illustra­

tion of the way the term was narrowly used, Putchuk,

myrobalans, and asafoetida grow in both India and Sassanid

Persia, Whether they were excluded from the category because

they were thought to be on the fringe of the Persian trade or

on the fringe of Persia itself is uncertain* I prefer to

believe that they were not regarded as characteristic examples

of 'Persian* produce. But the uncertainty about them does not

o
affect the conclusion that Po-ssu, far from being the name for

all foreign produce, v/as reserved for only certain items,

apparently coming from regions west of the Indian sub-continent.

The final illustration of the limited scope of the

definition is the way in which South East Asian plants were

normally excluded from it. The Kuan/? chih mentions the clove,

but not as a Po-ssu plant (if). The same text also mentions

cubeb pex;per, which grew in ’several ocean countries’ (5), and

(1) Sino-Iranica, 361, Laufer ignored the CLPT reference to

the Kuans chih: ibid, 359* note 1*
(2) CLPT, 9# 22la; PTKM. 3b $ 1379a. It could hardly have been
asafoetida.
(3) PTKM, 5k, 1379a.
( W PTKM, 3b, 136Ua, quoting Su Sung of the 11th century,
(5) CLPT. 9, 235b, It was a tender black pepper.
 282*

the n u t m e g ^ , Thich grew In 1ChfIn country and K *un-lnn

: (l)# The Kan chon chi mentions lakiawood,

which grew in the southern ocean (2). The Kuanp; chot?. chi

mentions lac gum of the southern ocean (3) » a product later

associated with Cambodia. The Than Yu eh chih mentions

funicorn desiccate^)& * from the southern ocean (h).

But the best example of the way an Indonesian tree product,

though important, van excluded from the scope of the definition

u
~-p-scq is supplied by the camphor tree, taown by about A.D. 500

but never called Po-snu until the Yu, yanr toe t~u was written

about 300 years Inter* The reason must have b en because,

togetnur with the other non*'Po~ssu products of South Hast Asia,

it was never considered to be a ’Persian-type* product*

I have been concerned in this chapter with establishing

o
the meaning of Po-ssu in the vintage texts. -JVc h ve seen that

In the /Tuan/? chon chi and the Vn n ol'jon chi the term was normally

used in connexion with articles which either came from Persia

or from western Asia, probr*bly from the Ta-ch* in region rather

L>
anywhere alee* The K uan/? chih only mention© one ?o-ssu

product, the pine resin of the southern ocean, but I see no

reason for doubting that Kuo I-lcung’s understanding of the

(1) CT.-PT. 231a#

(2) Itid, 1Z, 310a.
(3) Ibid. 13, 321a.
(L.) i u a , 13, 3 2 1 a.
 283.

term was the same as Ku Wei’s and Hsu Piao’s. Indonesian

o
pine resin and An-hsl perfume qualified as Po-ssu products

merely because they resembled ’Persian’ frankincense and myrrh*

The term Po-ssu was not used for Indian articles such as

pepper* Nor was it normally used for South East Asianones,

of which camphor is the best example*

The attribution of a variety of natural products to

Persia can only mean that i-ereia was believed to be an important

centre iii western Asia where these products were to be found

and from where frankincense and myrrh were despatched to

foreign countries. 7/hat is not clear la the extent to which

southern China traded in ’Persian’ goods other than aromatic

resins, though the knowl. d, e of what Persia possessed reaching

southern China is itself evidence of communications between

the two regions, created by commerce* I suspect that expensive

raiment came to China* 7/e have seen how TTo-lo-tan in

western Indonesia sent Gandhara cloth in U30 (l). Asbestos,

known in Han times and mentioned in the Liu Sung shu as one

of the things coveted by the Chinese rulers (2), would have

continued to come by sea. Amber, pearls, and the gems of

Page 130*
Page 1U8.
 2Qk.

the eastern Mediterranean, all attributed to Ta-ch* in in Han

times, were probably exports to China* Unfortunately the

Chinese expression •precious and rare things*, used in the

Liu Sung shu (l), is a comment on the value and not on the

contents of the trade, and we know more of the reputation of

Persia as a source of wealth than of its produce which

frequently reached China (2 ). But at least the background

and the nomenclature of the trade are reasonably clear* The

Liu £3ung shu states that ships came to southern China because

the overland trade x'oute was blocked ( 3) , while the x'esin

substitutes reveal that frankincense and myrrh, though they

came from a number of regions in Africa as well as in western

Asia, were called ’Persian*. I do not think that it will be

misleading to adopt in the remaining chapters the expression

’Persian trade* as the name for the valuable part of the southern

Chinese imports during the second half of the fifth century

and in the sixth century*

How, then, did the *Persian trade* reach southern China ?

„Vere the cargoes brought by Persians operating in the Far East,

by the Indians who had been trading with Ko-ying in the third

century, or by the Indonesians of the southern ocean, whose

1angle provided the resin substitutes ?

(1) Page H 4-8 .

(2) Pages 136-137.
(3; Page 1U8.
CHAPTER TEN

THE SHIPPERS OP*PERSIAN1 CARGOES

For nearly a hundred years there has been a fitful interest

o
in the Po*ssu problem, and very different opinions have emerged

to explain an apparent ambiguity in the term when the Chinese

used it in a South East Asian context*

u
There have been those who believed that Po-ssu could never

mean anything but ’Persia1* For them references to ’Persia1

in South East Asia implied a reflection of Persian shipping

activities there and perhaps even trading settlements*

Bretschneider in 1871 fathered this way of thinking when, in

a comment on a statement in the Sung shih that the commercial

products of Ta-Bhih^> > the country of the Arabs, were

brought to San-fo-ch’1 or Sumatra (l), he added that it was

certain that the Arabs, and also the Persians, carried on a

great trade with Sumatra during the Middle Ages and probably

had colonies there too (2). Bretschneider went on to say

that it was therefore easy to understand the passage in the

17th century Tung hsl yang k’ao that Su-^en-ta~la|& 9

fl) San-fo-ch11 had not yet been identified as Palembang and

srlvi jaya*
(2) On the knowledge possessed by the ancient Chinese ** •, London
1871, l6 and note 1.
 286.

regarded In his day as Atjeh (l), was ’formerly called Ta-shih

L>
and was probably situated to the west of Po-ssu1 (2). **or
A
Bretschneider, who also read the pen tsfao. there was no
o
doubt that Po-ssu always meant 1Persia1, and in 1895 he

described i s and An-hsi perfume as P e r s i a n 1 products (3).

Though not everyone was prepared to believe that there ware

Persian colonies in northern Sumatra, Groeneveldt, Beal, Chavsmes,

and Takakusu consistently translated Po-ssu as ,Persianf (I*)#

Hirth reinforced this view in 1911 when he stated that the

non-Persian goods attributed to Persia in the Wei shu and

Sni shu meant that Persian traders brought them to China (5)*

But in I869 , two years before Bretschneider1s article was

written, Phillips, apparently the first to draw attention to

the Po-ssu problem, had expressed a different opinion, which

o
was to give rise to the uneasy feeling that the obvious Po-ssu
. . 0
» fPeraiaf formula did not explain everything; Po-ssu might

also be a transcription of a South Bast Asian toponym.

(l) Phillips had identified 8u-men-ta-la with Atjeh; 'Notes on

Sumatra and the Po-szu1, Notes and Queries on China and Japan,
3,.6, 1869, 90-2.
Sinological Series, 1937, 1*» k3t
1*6 0 , 1*6 6 .
Groeneveldt quoted from the Sung shih. The others quoted
from I Tsing1s works in the seventh century. Groeneveldt, Notes
on the Malay Archipelago. 1876, 18; Beal, fSome remarks1, 1S83-
5» 251-3; Chavannes. M^rndre, I89I*; 116; Takakusu, Record,
xxviii and note 8.
(5) Chau Ju-kua . 7 - 8 , 18 note 1* On page 196, note 2, Hirth
says that hsun-lu was 1brought to China on Persian ships1.Perrand
Laufer, and HadI $asan all regarded Hirth as the advocate of pre-
T fang Persian shipping with China; Textes, I, 1-3; Slno-
Iranica, 1*70, note 1*, and especially i*87; Persian navigation.
78-63•
 287,

Phillips, quoting the Tung hsi yang k1a o . suggested that

* *
Po-ssu might be fPasalT on the extreme northern coast of

Sumatra (1). The theory received further support in 1899

when Tsuboi Kumazo noted a Japanese tex$ of the beginning of

o
the 12th century which provides a list of Po-ssu numerals very

similar to Malay ones; from this fact Kumaza inferred that

Po-ssu meant ^ a s a i 1 (2). In 1909 Gerini, faithful to his

passion for identifying South East Asian toponyms from Chinese

transcriptions, modified the Pasai theory in favour of

equating Po-asu with Z a m b e s i 1, a village near Atjeh (3)# But

a more serious topographical complication had been introduced

_ o
by Parker in 1893, when he discovered a reference to a Po-ssu

in the Hsin T*ang shufs account of the Pyu mission to China at

the beginning of the ninth century; in this instance Po-ssu

was evidently in Burma (h)«

It will be observed that since 1869, when Phillips

o
inaugurated Po-ssu studies, scholars had managed to bring into

play Chinese texts from an enormous span of centuries, ranging

from the imperial histories referring to the sixth century to

cs late as the Tung: hsl yang k* ao of the 17th century. It

(1) fNotes on Sumatra and the Po-szu*, 90-2.

(2) Actes du douzi&me Congr&s International des Orlentalistes,
II, 1899. 121. note 1. The Japanese text was the Kodansho, 1
whose author died in 1111 2 JA, 1935, I, 92.
3) Researches on Ptolemy*s Geography. 1909* 682.
(h) Burma with special reference to her relations with China,
Rangoon, 1893, 1U* "" Laufer in 1919 made use of Parker1s study;
Sino-Iranica. U69«
 288,

was not until Laufer entered the field in 1919 that the

discussion began to be focused on a narrower range of texts,

chiefly T ’ang and Sung* Laufer was also the first to break

with the tradition that it was sufficient to provide commonsense

\j
but unargued explanations of the Po-ssu problem#

Laufer criticised the obsession of Bretschneider and Hirth

o . .
with the Po-ssu « ’Persia1 equation and emphasised the fact

that a number of so-called Po-sau products were in fact South

East Asian in origin* He boosted the number of these products

by quoting from the Yu yang tsa tsu, a T ’ang text, and noted,

but only casually, a few references in the vintage texts as an

o
argument that Po-ssu was also known at an early date when it

could not have meant ’Persia1, He then sought to establish

two quite different meanings for the term. In addition to

being ’Persia1 it also meant a South East Asian country, whose

peo le were producers in their own right. He did not attempt

to reconstruct the original name or to locate it precisely;

o
he merely suggested without great conviction that these Po-ssu

may have migrated from Burma to Sumatra, for this would account

for the appearance of the term in texts dealing with Burma as

well as with such Sumatran products as camphor and benzoin.

The text which he thought gave the chief clue to the original

home of the Po-ssu was the Man shu of the ninth century, which

states that Po-ssu was on the borders of P* laot P flao

was seventh-five days journey south of the city of Yung ch’ong

in south-western China (1)#

Laufer1a study has been the main event in the history

v>
of the Po-ssu discussion* Thereafter a number of scholars,
u
though by no means all, agreed that Po-ssu could have a

(l) The title of his chapter on *The Malayan Po-se* is

misleading in view of his suggestion that a migration from
Burma to northern Sumatra took place* He had to take into
account the statement of Chao Ju-kua about a Po-ssu country
which 1leaves no doubt that the tribe in question is one of
Malayan or Negrito stock1 ; Sino-Iranica* U72. Yet his
insistence on the Man shu as the key text for locating the
Po-ssu (S1n o -I ran 1c a . U7 U ) implies that the numerous references
in T fang texts to Po-ssu products are connected with Burma and
not with the 1Malayan Po-se1* I doubt whether Laufer ever
intended to achjeve more than a challenge to the prevailing
view that Po-ssu always meant fPersian1 * Slno-Ira’nica was
written, as its title shows, on an entirely difrerent subject*
 290

double meaning (l), and Ferrand immediately revived the Pasai

(l) I shall content myself with summarising the views subsequently

expressed. They are no more than comments on Laufer’s work.
Kuwabara in01929 agreed with Laufer that there was a South East
Asian Po-ssu but found it difficult to assign certain Chinese
texts to them; *0n Pii Shou-keng*, Mem. Toyo Bunko. 2, 1928, 54*
Feng Ch’eng-chiln in 1934 guardedly saw merit in the identification
with Dassein and perhaps with Pasai; Hsi yu nan hai shih ti k ’ao
cheng i ta’un#. Commercial Press, 1934, 91-109* Sauvaget in
1947 was sufficiently impressed by Laufer to conclude that it was
not yet possible to use the T ’ang texts as evidence of Persian
maritime activities in the Far East before the eighth century;
Relation, xxxvi. Dr, Wang Gungwu has argued that Hirth*s pre-
T ’ang texts could not be used to prove more than that the Persians
were beginning to be the middlemen of central Asia in the China
trade in respect of the products of the countries of the Arabian
sea; ’Nanhai trade*, Appendix B, But there have also been
critics of Laufer, Chang Hsing-lan thought that he was being*too
scientific* and *too accurate*, and he doubted whether the Kuang^
chih was a reliable text on which to bcse any views of the Po-ssus
Chung hsi chiao t’ung shih liao huai plen. Peiping, 1930, 4, 188.
Uadi Hasan, the historian of Persian shipping, could hardly ignore
Laufer, against whom he defended Hirth on the ground that Hirth
was a$ least aware of Chao Ju-kua’s refersice to a ’negrito*
Po-ssu country; History of Persian navigation. 1928, 81-3*
Hourani suspected that Persians sailed to China £n the Sassanid
period and was certain that in T ’ang times Po-ssu meant *Perslan*;
Arab seafaring, 46-7, 62-3. Moeos, in a posthumously published
article, revived the ’Persian colonies* theory and argued that
Persian colonists played an important part in the development of
Atjeh and Pasai in the middle ages; rDe Noord-Sumatraanse rijken’,
Tjjdschfift. 83, 4, 1953-7, 353-5* Professor Yamada denied that
Chinese scholars would have called two countries Po-ssu and
regarded T*ang references as references to0Persian Middlemen; for
him ’Ran hai Po-ssu* (Southern ocean Po-ssu) meant the *New
Persians coming across the Malayan Sea* T n T*ang and later times;
1A study on the introduction of An-hsi-hsiang*, 1, 23* The latest
treatment of the subject is by Professor ‘ tfhe&tley, He considers
that Po-ssu originally meant ’Persia* but became increasingly
associated with products which found their way to China along the
southern Sea route, so that by T ’ang and Sung times the old
association of the name with the Middle Eastern country had been
forgotten and it came to s fand as a collective name for the
countries of the South Seas and the Indian Ocean, though not for
the Indian subcontinent; ’Geographical notes*. 14-15* In view of
this sharp difference of opinion about Laufer’s views it is not
surprising that Po-ssu doos not appear in the standard histories
of South East Asia such as Coedfes* Les <5tats and Hall’s A history
of South-East Asia.
 291.

theory (l). Pelliot, however, was always cautious and

committed himself no further than saying that there was a Malay

Po-Bsu^nosslbly meaning 'Pasai', in Sung times but certainly

not before then (2),

If Laufer had not written his chapter on the fMalayan

# u
Po*-se' the Po-ssu problem might never have matured* In the

event, however, the problem was imposed on Laufer*s successors,

and I wish to call attention to the two assumptions which those

who were influenced by him have unconsciously accepted*

The first of these assumptions was that, when the vintage

o
texts were written, the Chinese had not yet adopted Po-ssu

as the name for 'Persia* (3). Laufer regarded both the Kuang

chou chi and the Kuang chih as Chin texts (265 - U20) and

thought that the first example of Po-ssu meaning •Persia' was

1+61 (1+)# Pelliot could not understand why he made this

(1) In his review of Slno-Iranlca, JA, 1921, 279-93# He also

thought that it sometimes meant Bassein in Burma* A few years
later, however, he wrote an article which suggests that he had
abandoned his earlier supuort for Laufer and returned his
allegiance to Hirth; JA, 192U, I# 21+1-2.
(2) Pelliot's views are to be found in TP, 1923# 196-7; fitudes
asiatiques, 2, 21+7# note 1; Notes on Marco Polo* 1, 87# I
await with interest his notes on Persia in the second volume of
Notes on Marco Polo.
(3) Sino-Iranica, 1+71 (in connexion with the Kuang chih on the
oak, a doubtful passage to which I refer later in this chapter);
1+75 (in connexion with the Kuang chou chi on alum); 1+85 (in
connexion with the Ku chin chu ^ >5 on ebony; this is
another of Laufer*s Chin texts to which I refer below).
(U) Sino-Iranica* 1+71# He took this date from Deveria,
Centenaire de iMgcole des Langues Orientales, 306.
 292.

assumption (1). But because of it Laufer showed little

interest in the possibility that the vintage texts sometimes

described plants from western Asia as Po-ssu. He ignored the

passages in the Kuang chou chi about the stinking elm and

sulphur and misconstrued the reference in the Nan chou chi

o
to myrrh, which he thought was called Po-ssu because the trade

in myrrh made its way to China though the Malay Archipelago (2).

Surprisingly, however, he observed in a footnote that the

Nan chou chi gave what seemed to be a Persian name for the

pistachio nut (3)* but he avoided the implications of this

passage by remarking that the name must have travelled overland

to China, and thus safeguard&lhis view that at that time Po-ssu

could not mean ’Persia’$ the Po-ssu even here ^/ere South East

Asian and not Persian.

But Laufer1s second assumption was more misleading. For

o
him the Po-ssu problem was most susceptible to solution in

terms of the evidence in T ’ang and Sung texts. This has led

(1) Polo. I, 87*

(2) 8ino-Iranica. U&2, h80.
(3) Ibid, 21*8 and note 1. He qualifies his statement by saying
’if it is correct that the transcription of a-yue-hun was already
contained in the Nan #ou ki (which is impossible to prove, as
we do not possess the text of this work)1 • Another example of
his demotion of the vintage texts is provided by his treatment
of the marking nut (Sino-Iranlca, i+82). He Gays that our
earliest source of information is Li Hsunj only as a footnote
does he observe that in the CLPT Li Hsiin is quoting the Nan chou
chi. My understanding of this passage is on page tyo *
 293.
in subsequent studies to a neglect or suspicion of the vintage

texts and a failure to examine the circumstances which

o
originally created a Po-ssu association with South East Asia.

It is as though the origins of the title of 1Homan Emperor1

were studied, in the period of Charlemagne and not of Augustus*

The reason for Laufer*s false bias in his handling of the

Po-ssu problem was simply that he chose to regard Li Hsun, for

him an eightkcentury writer, as the chief authority on Po-ssu

products and a writer who ’almost invariably* referred to the

AJ
South East Asian Po-ssu (l). Laufer failed to emphasize that
u
the great majority of the Po-ssu products mentioned by Li Hsun

had already been given that name by the vintage authors centuries

earlier* In T*ang times, therefore, Laufer believed that there

o
was a Po-ssu country in South East Asia, and he was able to

assemble a number of miscellaneous but late Chinese references

to it (2). It was natural that those who followed him should

have wondered whether Bassein or Pasai was the original form

of the transcription.

Some examples may be given of the difficulty which Laufer1s

T ’ang bias caused him. We have seen that Li Hsun quotes the

Kuang chou chi to the effect that the cummin grew in the Po-ssu

(1) Ibid, 38U; U79-hBO; U33* An example of Laufer*s attitude

is: *Po-se appears on the horizon of the Chinese as early as
from the seventh to the ninth century under the f ’ang and probably
even at an earlier date*; ibid, k7k»
(2) I mention the important later referenceS on pages If/- loo below.
country (1)» Laufer was aware of this passage and even
•Jr*
reconstructed shlh-lo as a word derived from the Persian

2ira* In spite of this he concluded that the cummin in question

did _ot come from western Asia but was a South East Asian plant,

and the reason for his belief was that Li Hsun, the expert on

South East Asian drugs, mentioned it (2) * Myrrh, too, though

grown in western Asia, was called Po-ssu in the Kan chou chi

because the myrrh trade made its way to China through the

Malay Archipelago (3). He also concluded that the Kuang chou

* o
chi’s reference to a Po-s9u gold thread alum must have been to

a Malaysian* product (h) *

My chief criticism of Laufer is his promotion of Li Hsun

at the expense of the authors of the vintage texts as the

authority for the Po-ssu problem. The result has been to

take the problem out of its rightful historical context. The

T ’ang and Sung references to the Po-ssu in South East Asia,

which he cited at the beginning of his chapter on ’The Malayan

Po-se end its products’, are an additional problem, to be tackled

only when the original usage of the term in the fifth and sixth

l^ P a g e U p above,
i2) Sino-Iranica, 3&^«

3) Ibid, L-&2; U30,

U) Ibid, U75. Laufer here introduced the notion that the
Malayan Po-ee’ was also ’the transit mart for the pure white
alum brought from western Asia by way of India to China1, He
thought that the mart gave its name to western Asian produce. My
view is just the opposite*
 295*

centuries has been established, Li Hsun, or whoever was the

k ,
author ox" the Hai yao pen ts’ao. merely revived earlier
o
references to Po-ssu products, and, because he was waiting

about foreign drugs, it is natural that he should have consulted

the earlier texts, I reject Lauferfs view that the expression

Po-ssu - ’Persia* became known to the Chinese only as a result

of information reaching them by means of the overland route (l).

The term also reached them independently by sea. For me, as

for Pelliot, Po-ssu already meant P e r s i a 1 when the vintage

texts were written.

In the previous chapter I defined the sense of the term

o
Po-asu as far as the vintage writers were concerned. It meant

1Persian1 and was used to describe a valuable trade reaching

China by sea. The trade in prototypes and substitutes was

regarded as one trade, and it was natural that the name for

the more important part of it, represented by g^ods from western

Asia, should have been given to the two western Indonesian

u
resins which the Po-ssu trade brought into commerce. I shall

now, by way of hypo thesis, take the definition one stage further

by suggesting that the expression Po-ssu « 1Persian’ was not

only extended to the two Indonesian resin substitutes but that

later it also became a i>ickname for those whom the southern

(i) Sino-Iranica. 38U*

 296*
Chinese knew as prominent middlemen in the 1Persian1 trade,

actually bringing the cargoes to the shores of China* The

trade was regarded as a single activity, though a variety of

middlemen operated it, and it would have been natural for the

name 1Persian* to be attached to all who were connected with

it* Further, I suggest that in the Far East the middlemen

came from the same region in the fsouthern ocean* a3 the #Persian#
o
substitutes* This region was western Indonesia# Thus Po-ssu*

originally the name of a trade, 7/as transferred to the western

Indonesians who handled the trade on the final stage of its

journey to China.

In lator times there was clearly a shift in the meaning

o
°£ Po-ssu from the precise sense it had in the vintage texts,

and Laufer1s T ’ang and Sung texts reflect this shift. Camphor,
o
for example, waa regarded in about A*D. 800 as a Po-ssu product

(1)* The shift may h-ve occurred much earlier, for Chang Yu-hsi

and the other compilers of the Chia yu pu chu pen tsfa o ^ ^

(c.1056) Btate:
0. % yi
’We note that according to the Yao hslng lun it is sajd
that the cardamon (Amomum spp.j comes from the Po-ssu
country (2)*f

(1) Yu yang tsa tsu* 18, 100* It was also said to come from
P fo-ll ♦ Which I take to be an error for P ’o-lu i^
» fBarus*, the centre of camphor production.
(2) CLPT, 9, 232a*
 297,

The cardamon does not grow in Persia, but there are a number
, , A
of species in Indonesia (1)* Li Shih-chen considered that

Chen Ch*uan'1^^|^ was the author of the Yao hsing lun and

lived in Sui and early T ’ang times (2).

o
But the clearest evidence of a shift in meaning of Po-ssu

is in much later texts, and the only credible explanation of these

late references is the background of an earlier ’Persian* trade,

the circumstances of which had left on the minds of the Chinese

the impression that the Indonesians had a special connexion

u m
with the Po-ssu » ’Persians.

The Pei hu lu I Lp , written about 875 and dealing with

the products of Kuangtung, Annam, and the countries south of

China (3) » mentions a fcrescent-shaped walnut'fjj^ iffil 1

which grew in Chan-pci countryh ^ ; it was shaped like a

half-m^on and was athered and eaten by the Po-ssu (U).

According to the Ling piao lu , written in 889 -

$0^* Pi-chan ^ £ (« Chan-pl) country produced it and the

hu people gathered it and sent it to Chinese officials as

’curiosities 3/// ’ (5)* These curiosities must have

been sent with the embassies from Chan-gei ^ ^ in 852 and

1} Heyne, Nnttige. 1, J4.8I4.-U87 .

2) PTKM, 1 Jl , 333b*
3) Pelliot# BEFKQ. 9, 1909* 223^ , Vl ,A , * A
4} Pei hu l u . 3 , UOs ^ ^ ^ tti ^

(5) Ling piap lu 1 , 12; h ty ^ N^-'g’

 298.

871 (l)* But the name Chan-pel appears in the Sung hui yao kao*

which states that in 1082 ygrlvl jay a/Chan-pei 2. /fj|> 1

sent tribute in the form of camphor and pieces of cotton (2).

I think that there can be no doubt that Chan-pei . mentioned by

the Pei hu lu. was Jambi on the south-eastern coast of Sumatra,

whose inhabitants were nicknamed Po-ssu (3).

The same nickname seems to be revealed In a passage in the

Sung shih* In 992 envoys from She-pfo ® the island of Java

arrived at Ting hai district on the Chekiang coast* They

approached the Trade Superintendent Chang Su , who sent

a report about them to the emperor* This was the first She-p*o

mission since the 6 6 0 - 673 period (b)f and Chang Su evidently

felt it necessary to comment on the envoys in order to Identify

them. He said:

i a i & .M f %a | m
’The envoys were dressed Just like those of the Po-ssu
who had formerly brought tribute (5)*1

(1) p Y , 100, 1795, and TPIIYC. 177, 15b, for 852} TVT, 100, 1795,
for 871. In 852 the Chinese ordered the envoys to return home
?i°TB$Lt§lyA ere not happy in China:f ^ $ & %
(2 ) SfTYKM 4 a7. 7857b. The Ling wal tai ta. 2, XX $ refers to
Chan-pel $ missions in 1079 and lOSS.
(3) These Jamoi missions in the ninth century are Important in
reconstructing the history of Srlvijaya. 851-870 Includes the
time when the Oailendra Balaputra, driven out of central Java, was
ruling in 5rIvi;Jaya; see da Casparis, Frasaatl, 2, 293-297* It is
curious that there are no records of missions from Shlh-li-fo-shlh *
Srlvijaya at any time in the ninth century. The next reference to
a Srlvijayan mission in 90U/905 under the name of Fo-ch* i'/fl ^ \
TH Y . 100, 1799* It is possible that the capital of the empire had
n o V b e e n transferred fr»om Palembang to Jambi.
lb) For the 860-873 mission see HT3. 222 ^ , Ua.
v5) SunR shlh. 489, 17a*
I cannot believe that he meant genuine Persians. A mission

had come from the Po-ssu Nestorians in 98U (l) , but Chang 8u

would hardly have been refexvring to them, a d it is significant

that Po-ssu ships are omitted from the list of foreign shipping

which came to Canton in 971, when the establishment of Sung

authority permitted a resumption of overseas trade (2). Much

more likely is it that he was comparing Javanese clothing with

the eiothi^g of some other South Sast Asian envoys, and no

o
envoys are more likely to have been called Fo-ssu than those

who came from the coast where Jambi lay. On this coast lay

Srlvijaya which sent missions in 960, 562, 971, 972, 97U, 975,

980, and 983 (3).

On® more reference, this time in a Japanese work, makes

it certain beyond doubt that the inhabitants of the south-*

u
eastern coast of Sumatra were known as P&ssu. Oe Tadafusa,

\ho died in 1111, compiled a list of Po-ssu numerals which

include some obviously Malay ones (1+) . Malay is the language

of the first Srlvi^ayan inscriptions of the second half of the

(1) STTYK. H % 7 . 78U5.

(2} Sung shih. 186, 19b.
(3) Coedes. U t a t s. 223-22h. N s,
(k) Tsuboi Kumazo, Actes du douziemeCongres International. 2,
18§9, 121, note 1. The list includes sasaa, toa, rlma.namu.
sa-i-bira. and these words may be compared with the Malay satu (l)
dua (2 ) 9 lima (5)# enam (6). and sembllan (9)* Laufer claimed
to have identified Malay words, attributed to the Po-ssu, in the
Yu yang tsa tsu* s accounts of ivory and riiinocerus horn; Sino—
Iranica. U751 YYTT. 16, 91.
seventh century (l).

In T ’ang times ships and merchants from the Persian Gulf

were also travelling to China and were known as Po-ssu (2),

and there is plenty of scope for confusion about the meaning

of the term (3)# Nevertheless the three passages which I

have just considered seem to contain recognisable references

to the population of south-eastern Sumatra in the days when

Srlvijaya was the overlord on that coast. There is no

evidence that there was ever a kingdom called Po-ssu in that

region (1+), and the explanation of the usage has to be found

u
in the persistence of Fo-ssu a6 a nickname for the people

whose ancestors played a prominent part in the handling of

the •Persian1 trade in the fifth and sixth centuries. Thus,

when Laufer proposed his theory of the ’Malayan Po-se country1,

he was in fact falling to distinguish between two separate

sources of information on the subject. There was the

(1) The YYTT. 18, 101, compares the K fun-lun and the Fo-ssu lac.
Laufer translated the passage; Slno-Iranica. 1+76-7* The K*un-
lun envoys seem to have come from Chen-1a ~*Canbodla; the
country of the Po-ssu envoys is not specified, but I believe
that they came from "Sriv ijay a ; 0
(2) A Tunhuang t xt describes how the Po-ssu sailed to the K ’un-
lun countries and Canton; it was written by Hui ChfnoM:
about 727 and is translated by Hirth in JAOS. 33, 1913, 205.
(3) As Kuwoibara saids^ ’On Pta Shou-keng*, Mem. Toyo. Bunko. 2 +
1S28 t Li-Shih-chen’e attempt to define Po-ssu as a country
of the south-western barbarians is an example of the way the
Chinese themselves v/ere later confused by the double significance
of Po-ssu; see page 183•
(1+) In the remaining chapters I deal with the important
Indonesian kingdoms from 1+30 to the beginning of the eighth
century.
 301.

information of ?L1Hs3nf ,who was merely repeating the vintage

o . t
texts dealing w i t h Po-ssu in the sense of a ^Persian* trade.

There was also thelater information in the T ’ang and Sung

texts when the term meant both P e r s i a ’ in the sense of Persian

Gulf traders and a nickname which had settled on western

Indonesia as a result of an indirect traie with the Persian

Gulf as old as the vintage texts themselves. L a u f e r 1e

attachment to fLi Hsun* prevented him from distinguishing his

o
sources for the Po-seu problem*
d
If my understanding of the genesis of the Po-ssu nickname

is correct, the inhabitants of south-eastern Sumatra would

hardly have come to be known as *Per s i a n s 1 if their contribution

to the ’Persian* trade had been limited to the supply of two

A
substitute resins. Their trading role must have been more

important than this*

It is unfortunate that there are no satisfactory references

to Po-ssu ships which can be interpreted as references to

Indonesian ones. Laufer notes two, but neither is helpful.

In the Ku chin chu 'p t written by Ts*ui Pao ^ ^

in the 290 - 306 period,.it i3 stated:

fe*. * tt ^ - t - 4 > h ^ AM %
’Ebony comes from the Po-ssu country. It is brought
whenever a ship comes* Its black streaks (in the
wood) stand out clearly ( l)#f

(1) Ku chin c h u . supplement|Yj , 3 0 *

But this is far too early a reference to the Po-ssu in any

geographical content, and Pelliot was certainly right in

regarding it as of doubtful date and authority (l)# It must be

o
excluded from the discussion of the pre-T’ang Po-ssu problem#

Laufer also noted that the Kuang chih,quoted by Li Hs&n,

states that the oak treo grew in southern China

o
and that Po-ssu people used oak for making ships (2)* In

the Cheng lei pen tsTao# however, the passage is different. In

a list of drugs mentioned by Ch'en Ts’ang-ch’i is included oak

bark, and at the end of the passage it is stated that fthe

southerners uso it for making their large ships (3) .* Then

there follows a quotation from Li Kotin:

*The Hai vao states: I note that the Kuang chih states
that it grows in the mountain valleys of Kuang nan
(southern China)# The Lin hai chih states that Jt is
the mu-nu tree #.#.♦ It came from the old Po-ssu
families who used it for making ships (h)#f

I take it that the Lin hai chih is an abbreviation of the Lin

hai t yu shui i wu .chih^ n , listed in the

(1) Polo# I, 102* Pelliot thought that African ebony could have
come to China on Persian ships from the sixth to the tenth ^
century. For Laufer this was an example of the use of Po-ssu
as a South Hast Asian toponym; Slno-Iranica, U85~W6#
(2) Sino-Iranica# ij.71. The PTKM* 35 J » 11+22$., seems to
attribute the statement about the Po-ssu to the Kuang chih.
(3) CLPT. Ik, 36la
(i+> Ibid.
 303.

bibliographical chapter of the Sul shu (1) and quoted in the

I wen lei chil encyclopaed!a,compiled between 557 and 641 (2),

o
There is every chance, therefore, that the Fo-ssu ships in

question were known in the sixth century. Oak trees (Quercus

spp.) grow in both Persia and Indonesia, and strictly speaking

u
Po—sau should here refer to the Persians, but In this Instance

it may be more reasonable to believe that a reference was

being made to ships constructed in nearby Indonesia rather than

in the distant Persian Gulf.

But this is not a convincing passage, and I believe that,

when the Chinese mentioned K yun~lun ships, they were including

Indonesian one3. They called them (3)* That they

were substantial is implied in the fact that Pa Hsienfs ship

from Yeh-pyo-tfi to China carried over 200 persons on board (4).

Pelliot collected several references to foreign ships

described by the Chinese (5)« The Nan chou i wu chih speaks

of thorn as being more than 160 feet long, capable of carrying

(3-) Sul shu, 33, ?2b, which adds • It was written

by Sh§n Jung .
(2) I w&n lei chu, 82, 11a, where it is known as the Lin hai i
wu chih.
(3) Thus the K fun-lun ships known to Chang Ching-chen and Wei
Shou were £ 0 ; pages 151 and 153*
(4) G^lee1 translation, page 78, This ship was also a pot
Kao sen# Fa TTsien chuan, TaishS Tripitaka, vol# 5 1 , .no# 2085,
865a. ~ Gunavarman similarly sailed on a j doj Kao sen# chuan,
no. 3, Taish.5 Tripitaka, vol. 50, no. 2059, 340c.
(5) ’Textes Chinois’, 252-260.
600 to 700 men and the equivalent of more than a ton of

merchandise (l)# The same text also refers to their four

sails, which enabled then to tack with the winds and sail

swiftly (2). One cannot be sure that these third century

descriptions included Indonesian ships, though it has been

pointed out that Wan Chen's statement that 'seen from afar they

resemble covered galleries'^ (3)f is similar to

Marryat's description of the Sea Dyak war boats of Borneo,

which had fa flat strong roof, from which they fight * (!*)• One

would, however, be happier if the descriptions contained some

reference to the outrigger which distinguishes Indonesian

craft (5).

But Pelliot also called attention to the K yun-lun po ^

, mentioned in Iiui-lln 1s I chfieh chlng yin 1

, compiled in 817 (6). Ku—Inn/is said in the

1) 'Textes chinois*, 255-6, quoting TPYL, 769, 3hl2a.

2) Ibid, 255-257, quoting TPYL. 7 7 l / 3 a 9 a .
3) TPYL, 769, 3U12a.
J4 ) Christie, fAn obscure passage from the Feriplus* , 3k9*
Christie quoted from F,M. Mariyat’s Borneo and tKe Indian
Archipelago, London, 182+6# "...."" '
(5) Paris believed that he had discovered a reference to the
Indonesian outrigger in Straboj 'Notes sur deux passages de
Strabon et de T^Ine dont l'interet n ’est pas seulement nautique**,
JA, 239, 1951, 22-25, Strabo, Geogr, XV, 115.
(b) fTextes Chinois*, 257-260.
 305.

same text to be the current form of K fun-lun * the

word which I Tsing in the seventh century used to describe

the language used in Srlvi^aya. The passage to which I wish

to draw attention is as follows:

t\' 3% % A*'S.4i
M n to

1These ships are also called X 1un-lun p o < The crews

who man them are for the most part Kunlun •«•». Sails
are hoisted for using the wind* Mere human strength
cannot move these ships (l).f

Pelliot concluded that in T ’ang times these ships, no matter

whether they were owned by Indians, Persians, or Chinese, were

manned by Indonesians (2), and I consider that Hui-linfs

passage throws light on the identity of the shippers who were

most active on the run from Indonesia across the South China

Sea to China in the fifth and sixth centuries* They were

the Indonesians themselves, and their seamanship is reflected

in K fang T ’ai’s fragments about the off-shore islanders of

Chu-po in the eastern Archipelago who sailed with their cargoes

800 miles and more to Punan in the third century (3)*

Nevertheless, in spite of Kul-linfs evidence, the Chinese

references to Indonesian ships and crews are unsatisfactory,

and I intend to defend on other grounds my hypothesis that the

(1) fTextes Chinois*, 237-260.

(2) Ibid, 257.
(3) Pages 85-90,
 306#

Indonesians were/j3alled Po-ssu because theyvjere prominent

middlemen during the early ’Persian’ trade with China in the

fifth and sixth centuries, First, however, I wish to indicate

within what limits I believe that the Indonesian trading

contribution should be sought.

If the Indonesians had an active share in the trade, it

would have been on account of their shipsf for their resin

substitutes were too few to win them the name of ’Persians*,

Their contribution in the early dhys of the trade would have

bean in the form of transport facilities for other peoples*

produce, and for this reason I shall refer to them as ’shippers1.

They may often have carried foreign traders on board, and this

possibility should not be excluded (1), Even the occasional

Persia:: or Persian subject may have travelled on them# It iB

ulso possible that foreigners sometimes chartered Indonesian

(i) references have been made in the past to an Arab colony in

Canton in the fourth century; for example, Van Leur, Indonesian
trade and society. III, He quotes Horne11, Memoirs of the
Asiatic Society of Benrtal, VII* no, 3* 1920, 1 9 9 No authority
is for this statement, It may be derived from the Kan
fan/? ts’ao mu chuan.£-, written about 30^, which states that there
were hujfl from Ta-ch* in in Canton, But this text is believed
to contain interpolations; Aurousseau, KEPEQ, 1U, 191U, 10,
Dr* VTang Gungwu notes that this evidence is not confirmed In othej
information of this period; ’Kanhai trade’, 1+L}-? note 53* The
Ku chin chu, quoted by the TPYL, 961, i*268a, refers to people
corning from the Po-ssu country to Hu chou in order to get the
bark of the chih tree,^) ^ * I cannot trace this passage in
this text or in its supplements; Ku chin chu, C ung hua ku
cnin chu, ^ Su shih yen i . Commercial Press, 1956, According
to the T z ’u hai Hu chou was a Sui dynasty (589-618) toponym in
Chekiang province#
 307.

ships and crews (l) ♦ But in spite of these reservations the

Indonesian ships would have been indispensable in the conduct

of the early Persian trade, Just as the camels were in

Turkestan,

I shall now consider how far ny hypothesis of the Indonesian

A"
ship ing role in the fifth and sixth centuries makes sense in

the light of what is known about shipping, in the Par East in

the fifth and sixth centuries. It is especially important to

consider what is known about the extent of genuinely Persian

shipping activities in this period, and the evidence makes it

impossible to believe that Persian ships were yet sailing to

China, 1Persian1 produce must have been carried on the ships

of others. Otherwise, why should Coamas, drawing on his

experiences between 522 and a few years later, have emphasized

the 1central position1 of Ceylon in the trade between the

western Indian Ocean and the Far East, a position which made it

an important centre for the exchange of goods (2) ? The

explanation can only be that it was common commercial knowledge

that in Ceylon goods were available from many parts of southern

Asia, Ceylon was the entrepot where these goods were trans-

(1) Pelliot called attention to a passage in the fifth century

I yuan 0. ^ , in which there is mention of ship-hiring by
the Funanese; fTextes Chinois1, 254-55* It is clear from Fa
Helen*s account that sometimes considerable numbers of merchants
we he travelling on a single ship. There would hove been profits
in making shipping space available.
(2) Cosmas, Christian topography. 365-366*
 308,

shipped. But if 'ersian ships sailed beyond Ceylon, it

A
would surely have ceased to be so famous an entrepot,

Procopius provides an even clearer indication of the limits

of Persian shipping activity in the Sassanid period. According

to this writer, who though he did not travel as far as Ceylon

was writing on a subject of grave moment to Justinian, 'Persian

merchants1 did not go further east than the ports used by

'Indian* ships. Nor does he suggest that the Aksumite allies

of Justinian were expected to sail to China to fetch silk.

Procopius even explains why the Persians had a monopoly of the

'Indian* trade; they enjoyed the geographical advantage of

living in a country close to the harbours which received the

silk cargoes (l). But if Persian merchants were content to

buy from 'Indians', it is impossible to believe that Persian

ships were more adventurous and were sailing to the Par East.

Hirth did not quote the evidence of Cosmas and Procopius

when he argued in 1911 that the Persians were middlemen in the

South East Aslan trade with China in the sixth century (2).

Hadl Hasan referred to the Byzantine evidence but Ignored its

implications (3)* Instead he noted a number of Arabic words,

believed by Ferrand to be of Persian derivation and connected

(1) Procopius, History of the Wars. I, xx, 12 (Loeb Classical

Library, Dewing1s translation).
(2) Chau Ju-kua ..., 7-8,
(3 ) Persiannavigation 68- 69 .
 309

shipping and Par Eastern place names (1), as evidence that

Sas^.anian navigation extended to China (2). I cannot see the

force of this philological argument which, as Sauvaget has

pointed out, means no more than that Persians were sd Xing in

the southern seas in the ninth century when Ferrand’s texts

were written (3)# It is surprising that HSdt Hasan should have

«
confessed that ’why it was left to the Sassanlans to push ahead

to China has not yet been investigated (U)#f There is in fact

no evidence that they did, and HadI fjasan posed an unreal

problem*

The evidence of the Byzantine writers about the limit

of Persian shipping in the early sixth century becomes especially

significant when one recalls that the ’Persian* trade^reflected

in the vintage texts, was already established by 521, the last

possible date for the Kuang chih* This implies that others

than Persian shippers roust then have been bringing/ W m tmmmimm

to southern China* The southern Chinese heard of the

’Persian* trade well in advance of any Persian ships reaching

China and probably at a time when the Persians themselves

were still making an effort to obtain the chief share of the

maritime trade in the western Indian Ocean.

1) Textes* I, 1-3*
1
2 j Persian navigation* 77*
35 Relation, xxxv•

U) Persian navigation* 85.

 The improbability th*t Persian ships were reaching China

in the first half of the sixth century is strengthened by

evidence which Dr. Wang Gungwu has rightly stressed in his

criticism of Hirth (l). During the fifth and sixth centuries

Sassanid envoys visited southern China on only three occasions,

all during the 530-535 period and coinciding in time with

Ju s t i n i an’s attempt to persuade the Aksumites to compete with

the Persian merchants in Ceylon (2). During these years the

northern Wei had lost control of eastern Turkestan, and it was

temporarily possible for missions to travel overland to southern

China (3)• It is likely that the Sassanid envoys took this

route, for them the conventional one to China. If they went

by sea, why is it that Persian missions did not visit the

southern dynasties more frequently ?

There is, in lact, no evidence of any kind f o r the

presence of Persian shipping in the Far East when the ’Persian =

P o - s s u ’ trade was first known to the southern Chinese, and one

(1) ’Nanhai trade’ , 12U-127.

(2) These missions are mentioned in Liang s h u , 3, 16a; 17a;
5h# UUb; ’Naiihai trade’ , 125-126.
(3) Dr. Wang Gungwu thinks that the Persians originally meant
to visit the Wei court but went south on account of the struggle
for power among Wei princes and generals. Other missions from
central Asia were visiting the Liang in this period, and it is in
conceivable that they ent by sea. The Liang shu mentions, for

5*1 in 521 (5U, J±2b) , and Tash-kurghan \fh .^*3 frff)

 311.

has to look elsewhere for the shippers who handled it east

of Ceylon# I think that the Chinese themselves can be safely

eliminated from the search. Scholars sometimes quote Tabari,

who mentions fthe ships from China1 at Ul-Uballah at the time

of the Moslem conquest, but the expression can equally well

mean #ships on the China-run1, or, pfcrhaps, ships with China-

type merchandise (l)# Pa Hsien would certainly have mentioned

Chinese merchants or ships at Ceylon, yet it was only a silk

fan which made him homesick# Chang Ching-chen and Wei Shou

met K*un-lun and not Chinese ships. But the clearest evidence

that the merchandise was brought to China by foreigners rather

than fetched by the Chinese is provided in the passage from

the Liu Sung shu, quoted in an earlier chapter, which states

that because the emperor wanted valuable goods

•ships came in a continuous stream and merchants and

envoys jostled with each other (2)#*

To this passage may be added a similar one, describing the

situation at the beginning of the 502 - 519 period?

(1) Hourani has dismissed the alleged evidence for Chinese

shipping in the Persian Gulf in pre-Moslem timesj Arab
seafaring, 1+6-50.
(2) ^ ?age 1U8. Hirth1s translation of this passage (China
and the Roman Orient. k&) led Hourani to conclude that Chinese
shipping went as far as India; Arab seafaring. 1+8# I
examined Hirth1s translation in note 1 on page 11+8*
 312

\At the Nan hai prefecture « Canton) there were often

Kao-liang live produce (l) and ocean vessels which
came several times each year* Foreign merchants came
to trade* In former times the local officials bought
the (foreign) goods at half-price and then sold them,
and their profits were several times more (than the
market price would otherwise have allowed)* Under the
previous regime this was normal practice (2)*f

It is evident that Chiha attracted shipping rather than sent

it out in the fifth and sixth centuries* and even the Bui

envoy Ch1ang Chun ^ ^07 - 610 went no further

overseas than western Indonesia (3)•

The Arabs are sometimes thought to have been adventurous

Far Eastern sailors in ancient times, and not everyone has

noted Pelliot1s correction of Bealfs translation of ^

as tSabaeansl (h). The passage occurs in Fa Hsien18 account

of Ceylon, and sa-po means no more than sarthavSha or 1chief

of the merchants1* But Indian and Sinhalese ships may have

(1) The population of Kao-liang are described by Dr# Wang Gungwu

as YUen people from the district west or south-west of Canton;
fNanhai trade1, 1*9« This passage does not lead one to suppose
that YtLeh shipping was going overseas at that time*
(2) Llann shu, 33# 2b-3a * The passage appears in the biography
of Wang Seng-ju, v/ho was the prefect of Canton for a short time
in the 502-505 period; my translation is slightly different from
Dr* Wang1e on page U9 of the 1Uanhai trade1•
(3) I consult ChTang Chun1s evidence in the following chapters,
{kj For speculation about Sabaean activities in South East Asia
see Braddell, «T¥BRAS* 20, 2, l$k7 9 1. Pelliot1s correction is
in EEFEOt k$ 1901*, 356, note 1, and repeated in TP, 13# 1912,
U56* Pelliot pointed out that sa-po often appeared in Buddhist
texts in connexion with merchants, Hourani quoted Fa Hsien in
support of Sabaeans in Ceylon; Arab shipping* 38* Tibbetts
points out that by Fa Hsien1s time southern Arabian trading wa9
on the decline; fPre-Islamic Arabia1, 203*
been sailing across the Bay of Bengal and perhaps as far as

China. In T ’ang times Sinhalese ships had a reputation for

being large (1)# and Cosmas remarks that Ceylon sent ships

out (2). Yet recent studies of early Sinhalese shipping and

tr-.-i.e reveal no evidence which leads one to suppose that in

the fifth and sixth centuries the islaid had become an important

shipping centre in its own right (3)* Indian shipping was

probably more active, and one cannot ignore the fact that
C 3
Procopius refers to Indian ships in his account of the Persian

silk monopoly at Ceylon. But would Procopius have known the

real identity of the shippers arriving in India from the Par

East (4)^ Moreover the Chinese, while mentioning K ’un-lun

ships, do not refer to Indian ones. And if the Indians had the

A ^
(1) T ’ang kuo shih n u » Ku tien wen hsueh chfu pan she, Shanghai,
1S57, 7' . 63.
(2) Christian topography. 365*
(3) Nicho las,” ’fSinhalese Naval Power1, University of Ceylon
Review, 1 6 9 3—4» 1958* 78-92; Perera, *The foreign trade and
commerce of ancient Ceylon1, The Ceylon Historical Journal. I,
2-4, 1951-52.
(4) It has been said of Procopius that he had a real knowledge
of current affairs and fundamental ignorance of matters long
known to Roman merchants (i.e. the geogr^> hy of the Red Sea).
His account of Justinian’s policy in negotiating with Aksum is
partial and superficial, but correct in intention; Sidney Smith,
’Events in Arabia in the 6th century A.D*’, PSOAS, 16, 3* 1954*
427-428. I consider that Procopius knew Justinian’s objectives
but little about the way silk reached the p^rts of India and
Ceylon. Gunavarman sailed to China from She-pfo with the
merchant called ’the Indian Nan-t 111 Kao seng chuan. no, 3*
TalshQ Tripitaka, vol. 50, no. 2059* 340c. The passage is:
|'5> A 2- In chapter 13 we shall see that
Indonesian kingdoms in the same century sent ’Indian’ envoys to
China, and Nan-t’i and these envoys may have been of alleged
Indian descent. But Nan-t’i is described as a merchant and not
as the captain of the ship. If he was really an Indian, he may
have hired the ship. This passage is certainly not evidence
that Gunavarman sailed to China on an Indian ship.
 314*

greatest share of the Persian carryihg trade in the Par East,

one would expect Indian pepper and other trading articles to

have been dubbed Po-ssu.

There is one more reason for believing not only that

Indian ships were not very active in the ’Persian’ trade east

of Ceylon but that Persian and Indian merchants sailing on

foreign ships were also not numerous* Otherwise one would

expect the merchants who took benzoin and camphor to China

to have brought them westwards too. The contrary happened.

The benzoin trade was only ’

with China, and it is unlikely that

great quantities of camphor cams west.

Evidence about the adoption of camphor as a drug provides

a useful guide for checking the direction of Indonesian trade

In the fifth and sixth centuries. Camphor is briefly mentioned

in the saffhitSs attributed to Caraka and Sudruta and may have

been known in India on a small scale In the early centuries

of the Christian era (1). For this reason one would expect

that, as a result of the medical exchanges between the Indians,

Persians, and Nestorian Syrians at Jundi-Shapur, exchanges

traditionally ascribed to the sixth century, camphor was made

(1) Pages 128-130,

 315#

known to Persian and Greek doctors (l), Yet it seems that

even in the later Sassanid period camphor was still chiefly

regarded as a rare perfume for the imperial palace rather than

as a drug in common use (2), it is true that the Greek doctor

*
Aetius of Amida (502 - 578) refers to camphor in a decoction

for the shoulders and ears, a treatment unknown to the Indians,

but it is surely significant that he adds fif an abundance is

available ' (3). An Arab in tho sixth century also knew of it.

(1) The biographer Ibn Abi-Osaibi has written about the knowledge
brought by Indian doctors to Jundi-Shapur in pre-Ielamic times;
Filliozat, ’Medecine ^lnaoue’, Hlstolre gen^rale de la m£declne
I, Paris, 1936, U&7-8* Also see 8.G . Browne. Arabian
medecine, being the Fitzpatrick Lectures •«, Cambridge, 1921,
21, I srr; aware of no Persian materia medica for this period*
There is the Syriac Book of Medicines, which shows great
familiarity with camphor; E*A. Wallis Budge, Syrian Anatomy,
Pathology, and Therapeutics or ’The Book of Medicines ••*, 2 vols,
London, 1913# But the text at present available is undated, and
Budge, who picked it up by chance, believed that it was a 12th
century manuscript,
(2) Camphor is also mentioned in the Qur’an, but only as a
luxurious article, ’The righteous shall drink of a cup tempered
at the Camphor Foundain, a gushing spring at which the servants
of Allah will refresh themselves’; N.J. Dawood’s translation in
the Penguin Classics, 1956, 18. References to camphor in the
imperial palaces at the end of the Sassanid period are contained
in Christensen, L 1Iran sous les Sassanldes, )|71# a
(3) Aetius Amidenus, At'fiou 'A/*Tfiwoo ix<uV r*/*oS Tooftfft
fi / f i h<tA 2>*tu» "it/v
Venetiis, 153h, I, 1026. I have used the Latin translation,
which is si caphurae cppia fuerit’« The passage occurs in
the Tetrablllon IV, sermo 1+, chapter Ilk, Schoff has discussed
the difiusion of kno ledge about camphor among the Byzantine
doctors; ’Camphor’, JAOS. U2, 1933, 355-370* Pie mentioned four
doctors ’in the fourth to the sixth centuries’, though in fact
only Aetius lived in this period, I note the other doctors beloi
 316*

for the Hadramaut poet Iraru al-Kals, who was summoned to court

by Justinian for service against the Persians, mentions it in

a poem (i). He died between 530 and 540. On the other hand*

the Arabs who sacked Madan on the Tigris in 638 mistook the

quantities of camphor among the treasures of Chrosoes II for

salt and found it insipid in their food (2 ). And after Aetius

there is a long silence concerning camphor among the Greek

doctors, Paul of Aegina (615 - 690) does not mention it (3)*

The next reference is by Leo Medicus, a shadowy figure who

may have lived in the eighth century* He prescribes it once

in connexion with complaints of the eyes (4)* Then there is

further silence until the time of Symeon Seth in the middle of

the 11th century, who prescribes for several diseases (5)*

But by then the Arab doctors had made it well lenov/n* Already

(1) I have.been unable to check the reference and have had to

rely on Pl'uckiger and Banbury, Pharmacopraohia. 1879 edition, 511
where they refer to Sprengerfs information about a description
of Arabia by I bn Haqik el Hamdany, f • 170 of a manuscript at Aden.
(2) G* Weil. Geachichte der Challfen, Mannheim, 1846, I, 75*
(3) Schoff (page 339) 'seems to be mistaken in believing that Paul
mentioned camphor. In Adams1 translation, Sydenham Society,
181+4-7, volume 3* 427-9 1 camphor is mentioned, but only in a
discussion by Adams of the Substances introduced into the
Materia Medica by the A r a b i a n s T h e r e is no indication that
Paul himself mentioned it.
(i0 F.Z. Ermerlns, Anecdota medica Graeca e codiclbus mss
exoromfelit. Lugduni Batavorum, 1&40, 129♦ For Leo’s period see
F.L.E* Brunet, *Les Medecins Grecs1, 452* Leo is another of the
Greek authors invoked by Schoff as evidence for camphor from the
fourth to the sixth centuries.
(5) Simeonis Sethi, Syntagma de alimentorum facultatlbus. Lipslae,
1868, 61. Brunet notes his borrowings from the Arab doctors;
fLes Mddecins Grecs*, 457-8*
 317*

in the writings of Serapion in the tenth century there is

an account of the Sumatran camphor tree and the properties of

its crystals (i). Thereafter the fame of camphor gradually

grew until it reached the medical schools of Salerno and Paris

several centuries later#

Aetius* mention of camphor may be less significant than

its absence in the works of Alexander of Tralles (525 *+ 605),

another famous Greek doctor# The latter mentions a number

of eastern drugs, and he may have dedicated his essay on

fevers to Cosmas Indicopleustes (2)# Cosmas, like Alexander,

is also silent on the subject of camphor, and his failure to

mention it is perhaps the most eloquent argument for believing

that it was still a relatively unimportant item of trade between

Indonesia and western Asia in the early sixth century# The

volume of Indonesian trade westwards could not therefore have

been greatly stimulated by the trade which passed througli Indo­

nesia from Ceylon to China, and this suggests that traders

(1) Ferrand, Textes. I, 112-3*

(2) Brunet# Oeuvres m£dic&les d*Alexandre de Tralles# Le
dernier auteur classiqus des grands md&ecins Grecs de l fantlquitd
four volumes, Paris, 1933-7* For Brunet's discussion of the
problem of the identity of •Casmas*, mentioned by Alexander,
see ibid, I, 2k~5» Camphor is not mentioned in Justinlan*6
Law Digests, though a number of oriental articles are listed in
connexion with customs dutiesj Corpus Juris Civllis (Mommsen*s
edition, Berlin, 1889)* 1 9 606 (Pi gen tae xxxvill« h# 1617)*
 318 *

operating in western Indonesia were not specially concerned

to expand their trade with Indian Ocean countries. Otherwise

we would hear more of camphor and something of benzoin in

Ryzaiitine literature at that time# In China camphor was

known as a product of ’Barus 1 in the sixth century and had

been incorporated in the materia medica, but for Cosmas the

range of the trade-goods coming to Ceylon from the east seems,

as far as tropical produce is concerned, like a continuation,

of the trade between Indonesia and India In the third century:

’And from the remotest countries, I mean Tzinista and

other trading places, (Ceylon) receives silk, aloes,
cloves, sandalwood, and other products (l),’

None of this evidence suggests that Persian or Indian merchants

played a prominent part in the P q - s b u trade in western

Indonesia (2) •

The trade in substitutes is the final consideration which

leads me to believe that the ’Persian* middlemen were not

Persians or Indians, It is hardly likely that either of these

1) Christian topography, 365-6,

!2) This interpretation of the early western Indonesian export
trade can be compared with the trade during the period of the
East India Companies* In both cases China was the chief market
for Indonesian produce, European interest was limited primarily
to cloves and nutmegs and bulky wood for ballast In the spice
ships on their homeward journey. As far as resins and peppers
were concerned Europe had sources of supply nearer at hand than
Indonesia* The chief motive of the Europeans in South East
Asia was to get a share of the valuable trade between South East
Asia and China*
 319.

would have taken the Initiative in bringing into trade rival

sources of supply from a country much nearer to China, thereby

reducin* the value of western Asian produce*

The southern ocean ’Persians’ were certainly not the

Persians themselves. They may sometimes have been Indiana,

though the exclusion of Indian produce from the definition of

’Persian’ goods arriving by sea, in spite of the fact that

pepper was associated with Persia in the Hou Chou shu of the

northern Chinese, and the lack of evidence that the ’Persian’

commerce with China was accompanied by a c o n espending

expansion in the range of Indonesian goods traded westwards make

It difficult to assign to the Indian merchants a prominent share

in the ’Persian* trade which reached southern China.

Inevitably one looks for the southern ocean ’Persians’ in South

East Asia. I Ignore without hesitation the possibility that

traders from mainland South East Asia, such as the Funanese,

participated in the trade in Indonesian waters. The Funanese

would have been too far from their home bases to protect

themselves from the retaliation of the Indonesians, which an

attempt to share this profitable trade would have provoked*

Moreover in the later years of the fifth century the Funanese

were being attacked by the Chams and had lost touch with

Tongking (l). One turns, therefore, to the Indonesians and

(1) See page 316" below*

 320*

recalls the concentration of pine resin, benzoin, camphor,

and eventually dragon1s blood in western Indonesia and

especially in Sumatra* I conclude that the ’Persian* middlemen

came from that region and not from Persia, India# Ceylon,

Funan, or China. This is the only conclusion consistent with

the evidence, and I propose that it is with the western

Indonesians, and especially with the coastal Malays of south­

east Sumatra^ speaking the language of the seventh century

Srlvijayan inscriptions and nicknamed Po-3su in T ’ang and Sung

texts, that the ’Persian* shippers of the fifth and sixth

centuries should be identified.

In additional support of this conclusion I wish to cite one

piece of evidence, hitherto neglected by scholars, which seems

to contain a specific reference to Indonesian traders and

shipping In China in this period.

We have noted several times that by klU$ the year when

Fa Hsien left Indonesia for China, merchat ships were sailing

from Ceylon to Indonesia and from Indonesia to China* We

have also noted that in 1*30 an Indonesian diplomatic mission

a /Ti 00 yV. 0 \A % /+•
was sent to China from Ho-lo-tan0CJ frtj 4* *n She-o’o m >)g,

or ’Java1, and that the tribute included cloth from India

and Gandhara, which may suggest that tho ruler liras advertising

the range of his trading connexions. This mission arrived

in the fourth month (l)* But in the seventh month of the

(l) Page 150* The month^is given In the Liu Sung shu. 5, 9b,
and the transcription i s ^ ^ ^ *
 321.

same year a kingdom called Ho-lo-tfo ^ Q\ ^ also sent

tribute (1). Pelliot considered that this name was an erroneous

duplication for Ho-lo-tan and that there was only one kingdom,

whose real name was Ho-lo-tan (2). No more is heard of Ho-lo«»

tVo, and I believe that Pelliot was right. It would not be

the only instance when the final character in the transcription

Vs* hu) *
was changed; the Bui shu states that Ho-lo-tan"|aj

was south of Ch* lh T*u , and in the T*ung tlen the name is

given as TTo-lo-chieh °Q] (3). Ho-lo-tan was also

called Ho-Io-chiin (4). troreover, though this

is not a decisive argument, the ruler of Ho-lo-t*o in U3Q and

Ho-lo-tan in U3& sent an envoy with the same name* he was

? fi-na ffj} , described in U36 as a very loyal man (5).

I regard Ho-lo-tVo as a variant of Ho^lo-tan, a kingdom

(1) Ho-io_-tfoys mission is recorded in Liu Sung shu.5# 9b

fjjji X<% ), and 97, Ua.
(2) Polo. I, U39*
(3) Sul shu. 82, 3a; T funq tlen. 183, 1009.
(1+) Liu Sung shu, 5* ll+a, in connexion with anembassy in h3U#
(5) Liu Sung shu. 97, 5a; 7b. We shall see that Ho-lo-t* o
needed help from the emperor, and this may explain why two
missions were sent in four months. The identity of the two
toponyms could be settled beyond doubt if we knew the name of
the ruler of Ho-lo-tan in *4*30. In that year the ruler of
Ho-lo-t*o was Chien-kanl^ 3$ t Liu Sung shu. 97, 5a. In
i+33 the ruler of Ho-lo-tan Wafe P fi-sha-pa-matitefc M (the
last two characters representing -varman) : ibid, 6a .^ An
illustration of the confusion arising from these similar names is
provided in TPYL« 92U, Ul03b, which quotes the Nan shih in
connexion with a mission from Ho-lo-t’o in i*30. The details of
the tribute show, however, that the name of the kingdom in both
the Liu Sung shu and the Nan shih was Ho-lo-tan: Liu Sung shu.
97 , 5 b-6>a: Nan shih. 73, lib.
 322.

A
S h e - p ^ and therefore in Indonesia* The ruler in 1+30

sent a letter to Wen Ti, the Liu Sung emperor, in which the

following passage appearsj

•Formerly my population was numerous and prosperous* Our

country was never bullied by other countries. But now
the situation is different and we have become weak* Our
neighbours vie with each other in attacking us. We beg
Your Majesty to extend your protection from afar* We
also hope that there will be no trading restrictions which
will affect the coming and going(of our merchants). If
you pity us we hope that you will send missions ordering
these countries not to maltreat us so that Your MajestyTs
reputation as the protector of the weak will be known
everywhere* We are now ~ sending to you two trustworthy
officials. We hope that you will instruct the Canton
officials to send back our ship and not permit them to
rob and hurt (our ship). We wish hereafter to send
missions every year ... (i).’

This is an important passage for two reasons. In the

first place, it is a hint of a disturbed political situation

among the western Indonesian kingdoms at that time, and I

(l) Liu Sung shu, 97, 3b.

 323*

suspect that competition Tor commercial supremacy in the

’Persian’ trade was one of the causes# I believe that

* a .
Ilo-lo-t o was rlo-lo-tan and therefore in She-pyo , and

confirmation of this kingdom1s difficulties may be provided

by the fact that in 1+21+ the king of She--pyo sought advice from

the pilgrim Gunavarman on the action he should take in dealing

v/ith attacks from his enemies (l). She-p’o ’s difficulties

evidently continued..(2) * It is not surprising that Ho-lo-tan

sent no more missions after 1+52 ( 3)# though -weshallsee that

this toponym persisted into the seventh century.Buteven

more interesting is the evidence that this kingdom, at the

time of its first mi 6sion, was apparently already trading with

China and sending ships there. The reference to the fear of

trading restrictions can hardly be interpreted as implying

that only in 1+30 did the trade begin. Much more likely is

it that the trade was already under way, that it had been the

experience of the ruler that difficulties were sometimes put

in the way of hiB merhhants, and that he nov; decided to make

a direct request to the emperor that measures be taken to prevent

(1) Kao senq chuan. no. 3# Tripitaka Taish5, vol. 50, no. 2059#
340B7fciTpfnriE Qnw*&iff i
%% ||
"P 1i ^ ti% t i jl%% % ii -p # $
(2) In 1+3& P y1-sha-pa-ma reported to the emperor that his son
had seized the kingdom and sought help from China; Liu Sung shu.
97# 7b. The ruler’s reliance on China is consistent with the
request of the ruler of Ho~lo~tfo in 1+30J on both occasions it
would appear that in Ho-lo-tan/14o there was hope that China
would be a benefactor in times of trouble, though the ruler in
436 was not the same man as the ruler in 1+30 #
(3) Liu Sung shu. 5, 33b.
 321**

this vexation*

The rivalries among the Indonesian kingdoms and the

corruption of Chinese officials in Canton at the expense of

Indonesian merchants are what one would expect in times of

flourishing trade, and I conclude that early in the fifth

century Indonesian shippers were already sailing to China and

providing the last link in the chain of communications between

western Asia and China. I would not be surprised if both Fa

Hsien and Gunavarman sailed on their ships. The middleman trade

would have continued throughout the fifth century until the

time came when the middlemen were able to insinuate into it

two of their own resins and also camphor* It has been suggested

by one scholar that, while this trade flourished at the

beginning of the century, it fell off later as a result of .

piracy and that the ancient trade route across the Peninsula

and through Funan picked up again (1)* This is most

Improbable* There is no reason to believe that Fa Hsien was

(l) L.P. Briggs, The Ancient Khmer Empire. Philadelphia, 1951,

23. He relied on Fa Hsien’s statement that there were pirates
in the Bay of Bengal; Gilesf translation, 77* Br. Wang Gungwu
associates himself with this view; fNanhai trade*, 56. The
latter writer also believes that the account of Tun-sun. the
flourishing entrepot at the head of the Malay Peninsula, should
be assigned to the fifth and sixth centuries; ibid, 53-U* In
chapter two I gave my reasons for believing that the description
of Tun-sun was based on early third century conditions, probably
known to K fang T fai, The trade between Ho-lo-tan/tto and
China, as well as Fa Hsien1s voyage, clearly contradict the
statement in the Liang shu about Tun- 3un that ships did not
cross the South China Sea.
 525

referring to pirates in the neighbourhood of the Straits of

Malacca, and anyhow piracy is a symptom of flourishing trade.

Moreover there is evidence that in the fifth century it was

Funan and not the western Indonesian kingdoms which was losing

contact with China. Funan had sent a mission at the

beginning of the 357 - 361 period (1)* The next one did not

come until U3U (2)* It was followed by further missions in It35

and 1*38 (3 )$ but after that there was a long interval until

U 8it (h)* In h81* the motive was to obtain help from the Ch 1i

dynasty of southern China against the Chams (5)# and it is

significant that, according to the Nan C h 1i shu. Funan was

being often attacked by the Chams in this period (U79 - 502)

and was therefore not in safe communication with Tongking (6).

It is unlikely that Funan was in a position to trade regularly

with China in the fifth century, and the activities of the ,

Chams off the coast of Annam provide the most likely

(^) Chin s h u . 97# 10b,

(2) L i u Sun& s h u . 5# lha.
(3) Ibid, 15a; 16b,
tk) N a n Ch*i s h u . 58, lib,
(5)_The long petition presented through the DuddhiBt monk
Nagasena, contained In the N a n Ch*! shu, was translated by
Pclliot in *Le Fou-nan1, 2 5 7 - 3 £ o 7 ~ ~ ~ ^
( 6 ) N a n Ch1! shu. 58# 15a-b:
 326,

explanation (1), But the route across the South China Sea

from Indonesia would have given the Chams a wide berth (2).

In comparison with the -unanese record the list of missions

from western Indonesia is impressive. Between h30 and 1+73

t u Wty
there werej^iaimfirtmmb of them (3)*

(1) Nothing 1b known of internal conditions in Funan between the

accession of Kaundlnya II early in the fifth century, and
Nagasena’s petition in 1+81+J Coed^s, tftats hindouisds. 97#• 99-100,
Bhadravarman*e Cho-dinh inscription, usually attributed to the
fifth century, comes from as far south on the Annam coast as Cap
Varella; Maspero, Royaume de Champa, 63# note 2, The same ruler^e
nsme appears on inscriptions in the Tra-kleu area near Hud, which
is much further north. Here may be evidence of the growing
power of the Chams on that coast, bringing with them a threat to
coastal shipping* It will be recalled that the Liu Sung dynaaty
felt it necessary to chastise this turbulent people; page*. 15h*
(2) There Is one instance of the way in which ships from Indonesil
sought to avoid sailing close to the Cham coast, though it belong
to a later period. The Brunei ruler of northern Borneo sent
envoys in 977 &nd prqmieed to send them every year. fBut when I
do so, I fear that my ships may occasionally be blown to Champa
and I therefore hope Your Majesty will send an edict to that
country with orders that, if a ship of Hiang-ta (the Brunei ruler)
arrives there, it must not be detained1; Grosneveldt, Notes on
tho.Malay Archipelago. 110, quoting the Sung shih. 1+89# 19b,
(3) I have here drawn from Dr. Wang Gungwu' s useful list of
missions; fNanhai trade*, 120-121. I realise, of course, that
I am at present begging the question that Ho-lo-tan. P*o-ta.
P fo-huanff, Kan-tto-li. and P* o-ll are western Indonesian kingdoms,
I hope to succeed in establishing their right to be regarded as
such in the following chapters, For the present it is
sufficient to note that Professor Wheatley, In his recent and
extremely thorough study of the historical geography of the Malay
Peninsula (Golden Khersonese) , has found no evidence of any kind
to indicate that they were on the Peninsula. The coasts of
Funan and Champa, the other possible sites for these kingdoms,
are relatively well-documented in Chinese sources, and none of
the kingdoms I believe to be Indonesian hive ever been placed on
the Annam coast* There has been general agreement that they
were in Indonesia; the debate liaa been whether they were in
Sumatra, Java, or Borneo*
 327.

It therefore seems certain that v/estern Indonesian ships

were sailing to China early in the fifth century. They are

the only foreign ships for which there is any evidence at that

time, apart from the occasional Funanese ones, and I believe

that western Asian cargoes were on board* Indonesianships

need not have been the only ones engaged in the trade, but in

the course of timethe scale of their activities became

sufficient to earn them the nickname of ’Persians*,

What had happened to bring the Indonesian shippers to the

fore ? The evidence at present available does not enable us

to do more than guess when the first Indonesian voyages to

China occurred, and wo certainly do not know what were the

circumstances in Indonesia Itself .which led to this Initiative*

V/e only know that voyages to China v/ere not undertaken in the

first half of the third century A.D,, when Ko-ying was flourish­

ing, Nor are they likely to have taken place as long as the

Chin dynasty controlled northern as well as southern China

and enjoyed access to the overland trade route* This brings

us into the fourth century* I suspect that it was during the

second half of that century that the needs of the Eastern Chin

empire began to attract the first Indonesian middlemen to

China, By that time, one supposes, they had already become

accustomed to sailing to India and especially to Ceylon (i).

(l) Fa Hsien describes how Ceylon had become an important trading

centre ’with merchants going backwards and forwards’; Giles*
translation, 66-67. In the T fang hui yao, 99» 1769> there is a
brief section on Ceylon, embodying Fa Hsien*s account of the
wonderful jewel which attracted traders to the island; these
merchants were said to come in merchants ships from the ’islands*
\ Jjfc vl’li ±. % h,
This may conceal a reference to Indonesians from the Archipelago,
If the reference in the Chiao chou chi to the king of Po-ssu

» Persia and the Sinhalese princess can be assigned to the

early fifth century (l) , it is possible that by that time the

southern Chines^ were beginning, through Indonesian middlemen,»

to be aware of the Persian presence in the western Indian Ocean.

Perhaps, if the Persians wore then becoming interested in the

Ceylon entrepot, the volume' of the trade was increasing and

could no.'.longer be handled by Indians alone. Alternatively

Indian shipping activities may have dwindled. One has to take

into account the fact that the v/ay to China now lay not only

across the Peninsula but also throughfthe Stx*aits of Malacca

into Indonesia and thence to China. The latter Itinerary

meant that Indian ships, carrying their valuable cargoes, would

have been at the mercy of the coastal Malays cruising among

the islands at the southern entrance to the Straits. One is

not being uncharitable to the Malays if one imagines that they

were not px^epared to allow most of the profits of shipping

goods to China to remain in foreign hands. Foreigners would

have been at their mercy, and for this reason Indian merchants

may have choeen to hire space on Indonesian ships, at least

from Indonesia to China, If 200 merchants wanted to sail

from Ceylon to Indonesia with Fa Hsien, there must have been

(l) Page 157.

 329 •

a demand for shipping,aand it is here, as I have already-

remarked, that I see the chief contribution of the Indonesians

to the ’Persian* trade. I certainly cannot imagine that

Indian sailors pioneered the voyage across the South China Sea.

Whether the Indonesians first became aware of new

trading opportunities with China from their contacts with

Indians and Sinhalese or with the southern Chinese themselves

is also something which cannot at present be knowtf. Buddhist

.pilgrims in India and traders in Funan, familiar with the

situation in Tongking, may have been sources of commercial

intelligence. Much, In fact, rental:.8 to be established, but

I think that it is safe to believe that Indonesians were

cax*rying western produce to China some time before the trade

they represented acquired the name of Pp-ssu.

I have now proposed a timetable for the expansion of

early Indonesian commerce. As late as the first half of the

third century A.D. there was still no question of Indonesian

trade with China; Indonesians were trading with India alone*

But during the fourth century, when southern China was settling

down under the Eastern Chin, Indonesian ships were probably

pioneering the voyage across the South China Sea; their cargoes

were of foreign origin, and some of the passengers may have

been foreigners too, but the ships and crews were Indonesia^.

This voyage was becoming habitual In the early fifth century

and was available to pilgrims from India. By h30 Ho-lo-tan/t*o

 330,

was one of the western Indonesian kingdoms benefiting from

the trade, and we have seen tliat its tribute that year

included foreign goods and that it was being attacked by its

neighbours. The carrying of the western trade was probably

becoming a source of friction among competing harbours in

the region* Meanwhile the Liu Sung dynasty was increasing

the momentum of the trade, and at the end of the century a

’Persian* trade was recognised in southern China. By 521,

the last possible date for the composition of the Kuang chih,

Indonesian middlemen had established a market for Sumatran

pine resin as a species of frankincense, and there are reasons

for believing that by about the same time they had also

introduced the Chinese to Sumatran benzoin as a substitute

for bdellium. The China trade in Sumatran camphor was

certainly launched by then. The fifth century would therefore

hrve been a tine when western Indonesian commerce made a leap

forward, benefiting from circumstances beyond the control of

the Indonesians themselves but also by putting their seamanship

to good use*

Such, then, are the general conclusions to which I have

been led by examining xhat is known about Ko-ying in the ....

third century, by analysing the Po-esu products in the vintage

texts and identifying the ’Persian* trade, and by considering

shipiling evidence in the fifth century, None of the sources

I have used ever describe these developments in an unmistakably

clear way, but I hope that I have interpreted the evidence on

reasonable lines.

In the concluding chapters an attempt will be made to

define and describe the Indonesian coast from which the middlemen

sailed. This enquiry will provide an opportunity for

evaluating the impact of the *Persian1 trade on the general

historical development of the region. I shall be concerned

with a number of kingdoms which sent tribute to Chiria in the

fifth and Bixth centuries and with the events which preceded

the emergence of Srlvijaya in the second half of the seventh

century. But where were these kingdoms ? Their location is

j
a problem as old as the Po-sau problem.
 332.

CHAPTER ELEVEN

THE EARLY *TRIBUTARY* KINGDOMS OF WESTERN IITDONSSIA

The search for the bases in the southern ocean, where

the •Persian1 trade was handled, is a search for harbours and

coasts and not, as Laufer thought, for a kingdom with an

indigenous name from which Po-ssu ^ras derived. It is true that

in 1178 Chou Ch*G-fei mentioned a Po-ssu country which was not

•Persia*, though he gave no geographical details which help to

identify it, but he was writing 600 years later than the

•Persian* trade ?/ith which we have been concerned (l). Nor

o
is it possible to take seriously the suggestion that Po-ssu

is a transcription of *Pasai* in northern Sumatra. The Po-ssu

term in the fifth and sixth centuries always meant *Persiaf,

nor is there even any confirmation that Pasai existed as a

toponym before the first half of the lhth century. Moreover

when the kingdom later known as Pasai is first mentioned by

the Chinese in 1282 it is called Su-mu-tu-la ^ ^ (2)

Similarly Ferrand*s suggestion that Po-ssu might represent the

(1) Lin# wal tai ta. 3 , 2*t * Chao Ju-kua makes use of
this passage in his Chu fan chih of 3225; Peng Ch* eng-chiin* s
edition, 7U#
(2) Yuan shlh. 210, 18a# Blagden made this point; *Some
remarks on Chau Ju-kua*s 6hu fan chi*, JRAS, 1913# I# 168.
Pelliot was prepared to consider the possibility that in Sung
times Po-ssu was a transcription of Pasai; Polo. 1, 87 *
 333.

relatively recent name of ’Bassein’ in the Irrawaddy delta

of Burma can be ignored (l). Chinese texts dealing with

Burma mention a Po-ssu (2), but they are not earlier than

T ’ang times, and I find it impossible to believe that the

•Persian* trade in pre-Tfang times, attracting to itself

Sumatran resins, made its way through the Pyu settlements on

the Irrawaddy and then into the tribal ’no man’s land* on the

fringe of south-western China (3). No rich trade would have

survived the dangers of the journey (!*)•

(1) Professor Hall has drawn my attention to the fact that the
first European references to Bassein in the early 16th century
call it ’Cosmin’. Bassein is derived from the Burmese fPa-thein’
and must therefore be late# fCosminf is thought to be a
corruption of its classical name Kusima.
(2 ) Laufer quoted from the Man shu: Sino-Iranica. h68. The name
also occurs in the HTS, 222 ^ , 6b. oIt is clear that the
Chinese believed that there was a Po-ssu toponym connected with
the territories of the P ’iao , the Tiboto-Burman language
speaking Pyu of early Burma. " ' .
(3) According to Liebenthal, the Burma Road was not opened to
traffic until between 791 and 858; ’The ancient Burma Road - a
legend ?’, J M S , 15, 1, 1956, 1-15.
(k) My colleague, Hr. H.L. Shorto, has supplied me with a note on
Burmese aspects of the Po-ssu toponym. The Kalyani inscription
(second half of the 15th century) and other later Mon texts men­
tion a BasI, later Pasl. which was a district headquarters and the
titular seat of a prince in the Pegu kingdom of lower Burma; it
was probably approximately in the same region as Twante and Hmawbi
in the Irrawaddy delta. There may also have been a Basl/Pael In I
the region of the ghiengraai border. The explanation for the
T'ang period Po-ssu in a Burma context may be found in a similar
toponym. Pashu is a Burmese word for ’Malay*; it is a loan­
word, and Its origin has never been explained. The Mon Pase
(=z the Burmese Path!) are modern words for M/foslera’ but may have
some antiquity. It is tempting to guess that they are derived
from ’Pasai’ in northern Sumatra, an important trading and
aggresively Moslem centre In the lUth century, whichhad contacts
with trading ports in Burma. This Is only surmise, though
Mr. Shorto does not reject the possibility.
 33k •

U
Po-ssu in the context of pre-Tfang South East Asia was

the name given to a trade, and notices in the chapters of the

o
imperial histories about a South East Asian kingdom of Po-ssu

are therefore inevitably absent* Nevert eless, these same

histories, in their accounts of South East Asian 1tributary1

kingdoms on the sea, supply a few details which seem to me to

be significant against the background of the P e r s i a n 1 trade*

In the fifth and sixth centuries there were two kingdoms which

were anxious to maintain or develop their trade with China*

One of them was Ho-lo-tan* which we have already met (l). The

other was known as Kan-tfo-li ^ p|fo» ^ ‘J (2)* The former is

mentioned for the first time in 430 and the latter in 441* In

the same two centuries four other kingdoms are also mentioned.

They are P fo-ta , P yo-huang ^ , P fo-ll ;jL %'[ » and

Tan-tan ^ (3). All of these six tributary kingdoms, with

the exception of Tan-tant are generally considered to have been

in Indonesia* If they were indeed in this region, the fact

that the Chinese did not hear of them before the fifth and sixth

centuries would not be surprising, for the western Asian trade

through Indonesia led to the first regular Indonesian contacts

with southern China, The coincidence of the first missions

(1) See page 3?~| above, where I suggested that Ho-lo—tyo and
Ho-lo-tan wore the same kingdom*
(2) I give the trading Information in connexion with Kan-tyo-ll
on page 3^4 below.
(3) Variant forms exist for all these names. In order to avoid
burdening the text with an intolerably long note I have listed
and discussed the variants in Appendix fB f*
 335.

from these kingdoms with the development of the Indonesian

middleman trade with China suggests that the P e r s i a n 1 trade

was making some kind of impact on Indonesia, But were these

kingdoms in Indonesia ? In my opinion all of them were, and

I wish to indicate briefly ?/hy I think so, I shall consider

later to what extent they may be plotted on the map,

A location in Indonesia for Ho-lo-tan, P*o-ll. and Tan-tan

can hardly be in doubt. The Capital of Ho-lo-tan was stated

in the Liu Sung shu.to be in She-p* o (l), and there is no

Chinese text which gives any reason for believing that this

toponym, meaning *Java1, was elsewhere than in the Archipelago.

The position of Ho-lo-tan is also indicated by the statement

in the Sul shu that It was south of Ch* ih T* u (2), Ch1lh T fu

has been satisfactorily Identified with the north-eastern corner

of modern Malaya (3)# and Ho-lo-tan* s southern position in

(1) Liu Bung shu, 97. 5b: ^ [§$ f£\ jf|-|

Kao noted that the contemporarySung YuaM Chia ch*i chu chu (TPYL,
787# 3U8?a) records this as *She-p*o chou. Ho-lo-tan country
M4l oal Irk (S) 1f while the Nan shibu 78, lib, has ,
*Ho-lo-tan couhtry. capital She-p*o chouflg\ \/Q fjj *;
*A primary Chinese source1# J.MBRA8 . 29, 1, 19557 16k* % vlew of
these passages I think that it is right to assume that the Liu
8ung shu indicates that Ho-lo-tan ruled In and not over She-pTo , 1
stie-pvo"g ’Java* is a region and not a kingdom, and I doubt whetha
any king would have pretended to the Chinese that he ruled the
whole of *Java*. . . ^
(2) Sui shu. 82 , 3a: jgj § & J L !U ,
(3) Professor Wheatleyhas studied exhaustively the Chyih T Tu
evidence; Golden Khersonese, 26-36, His reasoning, based on the
details of Chfang ChSn*s voyage to and also from Ch*lh T*u,is
convincing.
respect of Ch*lh T'u is a straightforward reference to a kingdom

in the Archipelago. The clearest evidence concerning ?*o-ll

and Tan-tan is provided by the seventh century pilgrim, I Tsing,

who lived for some years at Srlvijaya in Sumatra and can be

presumed to have first-hand knowledge of the region. He gives

a list of islands in the southern ocean enumerated from the

which I shall frequently consult (l). The

first toponym in this list is 'Baras1 in north-western Sumatra

(2), and it io followed by Mo-lo-yu^ * Malayu. I am

not disposed to disagree with the universally held view that

'Malayu 1 is synonymous with Jambi, a town not very far up the

Jambi river on the south-eastern coast of Sumatra and a little

further north of the Musi river, on which Palembang lies (3).

Srlvijaya is not given as a specific location in I Tsing's

(1) Han hai chi kuei nei fa chuan. Taisho Tripitaka, vol. 5*4, no.
2125, 2014-b; Takakusu, Record. 10. My translation of this
passage is on p a b e l o w .
(2) Map Ij. contains I Tsing*s toponyms. I discuss 'Baras' on
pages
(3) The study which led to the identification of 'Malayu' with
Jambi was Rouffaer's 'Was Malaka emporium v 66r 1U00 A.D. genaamd
Malajoer , Bi.jd. 77, 1921, 11-19* Rouffaer noted that the
Tanjore inscription of about 1030 described 'Malaiyur* as being
on a hill; there is a hill at Jambi, on which a palnee once 1
stood. Near this hill is Solok village, where an inscription of
106U has been found and also Buddhist remains. On pages 177-$
I quoted Chinese reference's to Chan-pel& ^ and similar transcrip­
tions, beginning with the ninth century, v?hich have been taken to
be 'Jambi*. On pagek*«-? I note/,1 'Smimrfm account of a voyage
from Srlvijaya to Kampe, a little south of Kedah and on the
north-eastern coast of Sumatra, which is consistent with I Tsing'e
Malayu*s being at Jambi.
 337.

list, and I have come to the conclusion that the reason waB

that the pilgrim, writing this passage in the city of Srlvijaya

Itself (1), automatically began his list of countries with

those to the 'west* of where he was living and thought it

unnecessary to mention Srlvijaya, either because he was

living there or because it was too well known to need

geographical identification. I am convinced by the evidence

of the earliest Srlvijayan inscriptions and by I Tsing1s own

evidence that in the 671-695 period the city of Srlvijaya was

at Palembang (2). I Tsing*s list therefore places Tan-tan

an& P fo - H vaguely east of #Barus#, Malayu-Jambi, and Srlvijaya-

Palembang, and I hope to succeed in establishing the truthfulness

of I Tsing*s sequence of toponym3 , including Tan-tan and

P* o-ll. as a description of the political nomenclature of the

eastern coast of Sumatra and the northern coast of Java in the

second half of”the seventh century. I am satisfied that both

Tan-tan and P*o-ll lay considerably deeper in Indonesia than

Malayu-Jambi and Srlvijaya-Palembang.

The evidence concerning Kan-t'o-li, P*o-ta. and P*o-huang

is much more meagre. Hone of them are ;provided with any form

of geographical description which helps to fix their position*

(1 ) On the dating of I Tsing*s Record and Memoirs see Takakusu,

Record, liii-lv.
(2) P a g e s J r f / •
 338.

Kan-tfo-li*g claim to be in Indonesia rests on a passage in

Ming shlh which states that it was formerly called.

San-fo-ch 11 JE 'fjjj) the Sung and Ming name for Srlvijaya (l).

This is obviously a flimsy basis for establishing the

identity of Kan-tfo-ll. nor is it greatly strengthened by

Ferrand’s discovery in the gawiya of Ibn Majid in li+62 that the

port of Sinkel, on the north-west coast of Sumatra, was called

Sinkel Kandarl, which Peri and construed as *Sinkel of the

country of Kandar# * Sumatra (2)* Kan-t*o-li is an acceptable

transcription of Kandari, but the Liang shu merely says that

it was on an iBland in the southern ocean (3)* P* o-ta is the

most obscure of all these countries nnd only sent missions

under that name in I4I4.9 and h51. It may have been the same king­

dom described in the Liu Sung shu as Sh^-p*o-p>o-ta ^

which sent a mission in k35 (J+) • In the Nan shlh She-p 1o-p^-ta

is written as Shfe-pyo-ta^ ) (5). Perhaps P yo-ta

was another abbreviation* I have wondered whether the real

name known to the Chinese was She-pyo-ta > meaning

(1) Ming shih. 32k, 2hb: ^ ft)

(2) JA, Sept.-Oct*, 1919# 238-21*1. Perrand wrote in error that
Singkel was on the north-eastern coast of Sumatra. Pelliot
never doubted that Kan-tyo-ll was in Indonesia; BEFEQ« 190U#
U01-2; TP, 1923, 215," note 2,
(3) Liang shu. 5k, 16b:
Ik) Liu Sung sk u . 97, 9a.
(5) Nan shlh. 78. 12a. Inthe two ac ounts the names of the
ruler are given as fa % (i§S) andkfjb ob\
1fe %li (US) * which makes it certain that there was only
one ruler in question.
 339.

*a capital city in She-p 1o y (1)* The ruler of P*o-ta was

recognised as fkingf by the Chinese emperor in Mi9 (2). The

kingdom could h rdly have become suddenly important, and its

prestige in 2+2+9 is consistent with.its having sent an earlier

mission in U35 under the names of She-p*o-p* o-ta and She-p*o-ta#

If I am correct in believing that P yo-ta was in She-p*o# it

would, like Ho-lo-tan* have been-in *Java* and therefore

somewhere in Indonesia (3).

P*o-huang# the sixth of these tributary kingdoms, may mean

*Bawan<^# The T fai p ying huan yu chi, referring; to a kingdom

called Chin-ll-p* 1-shih^ known in the seventh century,

mentions the toponym of To-lang p*o-huang ^

which Perrand suggested meant fTulang Bawang* on the south­

eastern coast of Sumatra and south of the Palembang river*

(1) I am on weak grounds in regarding -ta ^ as a transcription

of thana = *capital*• The sound used for that purpose was -tan
( i^ i=L ); see Peng Ch*eng-chun*s Hsj yu tl ming under
Bajistan, Cinasthana, Gostana etc#) All that is possible is
that the n was lost# Dr# de Casparis notes that in Old-Javanese
the negative particle tan seems to be a more recent form than tag
Prasasti, 2, 22, note 23# ,
(2) Llu~"Sunp shu# 97, 8b, in connexion with P yan-ta j
N an shiti* 7o# 12a* in connexion with P yQ-ta#
O ) In the ruler*s name in 2+35 there appear the two characters
P*o-ta ^ # I have wondered whether the name of the kingdom
was included In the king*s name# Ferrand noted this usage in
connexion with the name of the Srlyljayan ruler in 1017; *La
plus ancienne mention du nom de l*ile de Sumatra*, JA, 1917»
331-335; *L*empire Sumatranals*, 19, note 3. The name was
Haji Sumatrabhnmi'fgLi^| % ^ \^ and appears in Sung
shlh, i|89 * lUa# *-
n r r t p h y c * 177, 13a.
 3U0*

I remain open-minded concerning this identification# lb

Mb W b b The little known about To-lang-p 1o-huan& is not

inconsistent with its being in south-eastern Sumatra (l). On

the other hand fBawang 1 is a common Indonesian place-name,

while today Tulang Bawang is not a particularly important part

of Sumatra. Like Plo^ta, P*o-huang does not figure prominently

in this study, though we shall see that during its short

career in the middle of the fifth century it sent numerous

missions to China*

One general reason may be given for regarding these

kingdoms as Indonesian ones, and it is not so unsubstantial as

may at first appear# As a result of the interest of the

Chinese in the third century in the international trade route

through South East Asia, and also because their Tongking

province xvas continually being harried by the Chams, they

came to acquire reasonably accurate geographical knowledge of

the leading countries on the coastline of mainland South East

Asia as far west as the northern head of the Malay Peninsula*

Moreover, they knew something of the Peninsula as well* We

noted thdr interest in it during the third century (2 ), and

(1) Pages i f b e l o w *
(2; In chapter two* I discussed the circumstances of their
interest in the coast of mainland Stbuth East iteia#
 3U1#

in the fifth and sixth centuries they were in communication

with ■^1 % and Lang-ya-hslu

later records these two kingdoms are described with sufficient

precision to justify their inclusion on the map of the

Peninsula (i). Unless, therefore, one looks towards the

Archipelago, it is difficult to see where the six tributary

kingdoms I am discussing could have been# Moreover I hope

to show that some of them were not insignificant places, to

be squeezed faute de mleux into some part of the mainland coast

unoccupied by Champa, Funan, P fan-o1an# and Lang-va-hsiu#

The origins of these Indonesian kingdoms are unknown#

Their history begins only when the Chinese first heard of them#

We have seen that Ho-lo-tfo/tan claimed in 1{.30 to have been in

the past an important country (2). Nothing is known of the

antecedents of P >o-»tat Kan-tyo-li* P* o-huanp;» and Tan-tan# When

the Chinese enquired about the origins and age of the ruler of

P yo-ll they were told that there were no records, though it

(1) I again refer the reader to Professor Wheatley1s Golden

Khersonese, ij7-51 (P fan-o* an) and 253-267 (Lang-ya-hsiu «
LangkasukaJ and also his map on 290, which includes, however,
Tan-tan on the Peninsula* Tan-tan is the only one of my six
kingdoms which Professor Wheatley has appropriated# For \7hat
it is worth, it may be noted that the ruler of Sh£-nfo-p*o-ta
in h35 felt that he was a long way from China: 1although we are
cut oif from von by the sea, we feel, at a distance, that we are
your- vassals fA E 1%. (5 XL * J Liu Sung shu.
97, 9b. Similarly the emperor vfen Ti seams to connect Ho-lo-tan
P yo-ta, and P fo-huang with distant countries when he says of them;
1 they have continually crossed the distant sea tJS f;
nr*
ibid, 8a# ‘V 2 '— - J
(2) Page 1,XX *
 31+2,

was said that the Buddha’s mother came from that country (!)♦

The first mission came from P ’o-11 ^transcribed as

) in 1+73, but Pelliot drew attention to evidence

which showed that the kingdom was known to the Chinese before

1+1+3 (2), It would be misleading to assume that any of these

six kingdoms acquired importance only when the Chinese first

received missions from them*

Yet their recorded history begins with their missions* In

the years from 1+30 to 1+66 Ro-Io-tan, P yo-ta, and P ’o-huang

regularly paid their respects to the Liu Sung emperors,

Ho-lo-tan sent tribute in 1+30, 1+33* 1+3U, 1+36, 1+37, and 1+52, and

received imperial recognition in 1+1+9* After 1+52 no more is

heard of this faithful vassal until it is mentioned in the

early seventh century, though not in connexion with a mission (3)<

P ’o-ta rendered its duty in 1+35, 1+1+9, an& 1+51* P ’o-huang’s

short record Is more impressive; its missions arrived In 1+1+2,

1+1+9, 1+51, 1+55, 1+56, 1+59, 1+61+, and 1+66* Thereafter no more
were ever sent* Kan-t’o-Ii started its career as a tributary

(1) Liang ghu* 51+, 20a;^j S fife 5. ^ ^

(2) TP, M B 19, Jf***1920, 267 and 1+33* Pelliot^called attention

to a passage in Hui-yen’s biography in the Kao seng chuan (TaishS
Tripitaka, vol. 50, no, 2059* 368a) about a man of P ’o-li
who came to China in Hui-yen’s lifetime, Hui-yen died in 1+1+3*
(3) For references to these missions the reader may consult Dr,
Wang Oungwu’s helpful list In ’Nanhai trade’, 120-122, I have
added the Kan-1’o-ll missions of 1+1+1 and 560 (TFYK, 9oS, 11381b
and 11387a]T and the Tan-tan missions of 666 and 670 (TFYK* 970,
lll+Olb).
 343.

kingdom in 441J another mission was sent in 455# and. then

there was an interval until 502* Further missions were sent

in 518? 520, 560, and 563. ? fo-li began later. Its first

mission was not until 473# followed by further ones in 517#

522, 6l6, and 630. Finally there was Tan-tan, whose first

recorded mission is as late as 530* In the following years#

however, it was the most prominent of the tributary kingdoms,

sending missions in 531# 535# 571# 581, 585# 617# 666, and 670.

The catalogue of X P missions between 430 and 473# involving

five kingdoms, is impressive, and I have already compared it

with Funan1s faltering tributary record in the same period (l).

In these years Pj an-p*an on the Peninsula sent only two

missions (2), while L a n g - y a-hsiu. also on the Peninsula, sent

none. The suddenness and persistence of the Indonesian

missions suggest that there were special circumstances accounting

for them.

Historians have always regarded missions from South East

Asia as important evidence, if only because the names of the

kingdoms and their rulers and the accurately recorded dates

are a valuable reinforcement of the cadre hlstorique. based

on Inscriptions. I think, however, that one should be

cautious in explaining why they were sent. Ma Tuan-iin,

(1) PageJif.
(2) In 455 aud in the 457-464 period; Liu Sung shu. 6, 11a, and
hi am* shu. 54# 15a.
 344.

early in the 14 th century, commented that the foreign countries

sent tribute because they wanted trade and imperial presents,

and there may be a tendency to assume that missions were

.ormally instruments of commerce (l)* It is true that the

years when these numerous Indonesian missions came coincide

with a period when Sino~Indoneslan trade was getting into Its

stride. Most of the missions took place after 439, the year

when the Northern Wei captured Kansu and deprived the Liu Sung

ruler of his last access to the overland route, and to this

extent it is possible to explain the active Indonesian

diplomacy as a response from the rulers to growing opportunities

of profitable trade with China* On the other hand, only two

of these kingdoms can confidently be regarded as interested in

tr.de. They are Ho-lo-t^/tan. whose ruler in 430 was

concerned to avoid trading difficulties (2), and Kan~tfo-ll#

In 502 the ruler of Kan-tyo-li had a dream, and a Buddhist

monk appeared and gave hie advice

yIn China there is now a holy ruler. In ten years1 time

the Law of the Buddha,, will prosper# If you send envoys
with tribute and pay your respectful duty, your land will
become rich and happy and merchants and travellers will
multiply a hundredfold (3).*

(1) Wen hsien tfimg kyao# 331, 2602, Grocneveldt thought that
this was a fsensible observation1j Notes on the Ifalay Archipelago
61, note 1* Groeneveldt believed that missions were normally
trading measures; ibid, 4#
(2} Page 311 *
(3) Liang shu. 54, l6b-17a#
 3k5,

Kan-tyo~ll began its •tributary1 career in hhl* In the closing

years of the fifth century the short-lived and weak Southern

Ch*i dynasty ruled in southern China, and the volume of trade

may have declined. 502 was the year when the Liang dynasty

succeeded the Southern Ch*i, Wu Ti, the founder of the new

dynasty, was a ferv&nt Buddhist as well as the head of a

government which for some years was able to take the offensive

against the now weakened northern Wei empire* There was every

promise of stability in southern China, and with stability

would have come a resumption of the prosperous trading conditions

of the Liu Sung dynasty in the first naif of the fifth century*

We have seen how in the firstjryears of the Liang dynasty ships

were coming regularly to Canton (l). Though the circumstances

of the Kan-t* o-ll ruler*s dream are unknown, the Buddhist monk

seems to have played the part of a soothsayer, and his advice

is unambiguous; the sending of tribute would lead to increased

trade for K a n - ^ o - l i * Missions from this kingdom continued in

518, 520, 560, and 563* an(^ I think that one can safely assume

that it remained an important trading country during most of the

sixth century. Its mission in 560 may have been to enable the

ruler to pay his respects to the new Ch fen dynasty In southern

China.

The rulers of Ho-lo-tan and Kan-tfo-li were definitely

interested in trade, but there is no evidence about the motives

(l) Page 312•

 3k6.

of the rulers of P fo-ll and Tan-tan, who were also sending

missions in the sixth century. The absence of such evidence

becomes more significant in view of the fact that the rulers

in question cent long letters to the emperor in which their

commercial aspirations could h;ye been reflected, Our

knowledge that Ho-lo-t*o/tan and Kan-t*o-ll were trading

kingdoms is contained in similar letters. But the only topic

on which the rulers of P*o-li and Tan-tan were concerned tO/(

praise of the Chinese emperor for his Buddhist zeal (1). I

have considerable doubt whether these kingdoms were associated

with the middleman trade in these centuries. The map of

western Indonesia which will emerge later shows that both of

them lay on the confines of the Indonesian world known to the

Chinese, They may represent an extension of the trading coast,

tut this cannot be proved* I therefore prefer to make a

distinction between those 1tributary* countries which are

known to h ve traded with China und those whose rulers*

intentions in sending envoys are undisclosed. The motives

of the latter are likely to be explained in terms of general

political developments in western Indonesia as a whole, no

doubt stimulated by increasing foreign contacts and t h e ‘

(i) Groeneveldt has provided a translation of the P* o-ll ruler*s

letter in 518; Notes on the Malay Archipelago, 8 l - $ 2 * T h e
Iiang emperor would have been delighted with this obsequious
memorial, and the embellishments were probably supplied by Chinese
civil servants. To Judge from its contents, China must have
seemed a magnificent country to the ruler of P* o-li.
 3k7.

circulation of wealth which accompanied the growth of trade with

China* The earliest Indonesian inscriptions of the fifth and

perhaps the sixth century indicate that this was a time when

some kings were winning supremacy over their neighbours (l) , and

it would not be surprising if successful overlords wished to

cap their achievements with recognition of their status by the

Chinese emperor# Not only would they thus be demonstrating

their political importance; they may also have been

safeguarding themselves from future attack against their

neighbours, for it will be remembered that the Ho-lo-1yo/tan

ruler hoped that the emperor would at least give him moral

support in is difficulties with his neighbours* China was

still unfamiliar to the Indonesians, and the emperors were

probably invested with a certain amount of glamour and felt to

be a new and important factor in the affairs of the region.

The fifth and sixth centuries seem to have been a time of

innovation in Indonesia, when the Inscriptions indicate that

Brahmans were now in the service of the kings* Recognition

of the rulers* titles by the emperors would have been yet

another means of enhancing royal power and prestige#

I am therefore reluctant to explain every mission as

being in aid of commerce* I am also reluctant to assume that

when a trading kingdom was not sending frequent missions its

(1) Pages *
 3U8.

trade with China was declining. The contrary assumption seems

more likely, Ho-lo-t*o/tan began to send its missions only when

it was in trouble, and it is likely that the cessation of its

missions in U52iras because it had lost its independence. By

now Kan-t*o-ll was the only recognisable commercial kingdom

in the field, and I imagine that it was so powerful that it could

trade with China without much interference from Its rivals and

therefore had no need to remind the Chinese of its existence

by frequent missions. In the last chapter of this study I shall

compare the situation after the first half of the fifth century

with the situation after the first half of the seventh century,

and we shall see that both these periods are conspicuous for

their lack of missions. Yet they had been preceded by some

decades when a number of kingdoms were Bending envoys to China#

In the second half of the seventh century Srlvijaya established

Itself as the dominant trading power in western Indonesia, and

it is x*easonable to suppose that in the second half of the

fifth century Kan-t*0-11 enjoyed a similar position.

Thus, if my understanding of the significance of the

mission sequences is correct, it means that the principal

objective in describing the historical geography of western

Indonesia in the fifth and sixth centuries must bo to discover

the location of Ho-lo-tan and especially of Kan-t*o-ll.

These two kingdoms are the only ones whose fortunes can with

assurance be connected with the development of the *Persian*

trade#
 349.

This is not* however, the limit of the usefulness of

he missions in throwing some light on the impact of the

'Persian1 trade on Indonesia* With the missions went tribute,

and, though the imperial histories give very few details about

the nature of the tribute, we have seen that its contents

reflect a connexion between Indonesia and western Asia;

Ho-lo-tan in 430 sent cloth from India and Gandhara, and

P fo^huang in 449 Bent bezoar stones and turmeric (l), There

are also references to 'local products ', and in 449

P'o-huanfl sent no less than 41 kinds (2). But in the early

sixth century a new and significant term is used in connexion

with the tribute from Indonesia, 'Perfumes and d rugs^

were now being sent, In3520 Kan-t'o-li sent 'various perfumes

and drugs' (3)* In 522 p'o-li offered 'several tens' of

goods which included manufacture! articles and 'perfumes and

drugs' (4). In 528 Tan-tan sent manufactured goods and

and perfumes and drugs (5).

In 527 P' an-p'an on the Peninsula sent gharu wood and

sandalwood (6). The tribute from Lang-ya-hsiu in 515, 523#

and 531 is not specified, though the produce of this country

3) Liang.shu, 5k, I8aj |||_ %

k) Ibid, 20b—21aj ^ + 4
5) Ibid, 16b. H 1
6) Ibid, 16a.
 350,

in the southern Malay Peninsula was said to be similar to that

of the ’south’ and included much gharu wood and camjihor (l)*

Both these countries, and also Lin-yl on the Annam coast * had

access to rich supplies of gharu wood (Aquilaria app*), a famous

aromatic tree which had been known to the Chinese in Tongking

early in the Christian era (2)* One can therefore imagine

that P ’an-n’an and Lang>ya-hsiu made much of their gharu wood

when they sent tribute* But what would have been the ’perfumes

and drugs’ from the Indonesian kingdom© ? I believe that the

term represents Persian and Persian-type resins, including

frankincense, myrrh, and storax from western Asia and also pine

resin, benzoin, and camphor from western Indonesia. They were

sent as tribute because it was known that they were valued in

China and would please the emperor.,

There is one detail about Kan~t’o-li. a supplier of

perfumes and drugs’, which is particularly significant in

suggesting the nature of some of the trade goods which it

handled. The bibliographical chapter in the Sul shu reveals

that two medical books were written in China about fKan-tfo-li’s

(1} Ibid, iGa.

(2) See Wheatley, ’Geographical notes’, 68, for a map of the
gharu wood regions of South East Asia known to the Chinese in
Sung times.
 351#

methods of expelling demons* (l)» The only othorjlQCO which

night h iv© been meant by Krn-t*o-ll would be Gandhara, but

Gandhara was never transcribed with a —11 at the end or

the name; instead -lo ^ 4 *'?ao used (2)* I see no reason why

these medical books should not have been written about fumigabry

practices used in Kan-t1©-11* of western Indonesia, and nado

known to the Chinee© when the western A3ian and Indonesian

resins ware brought to China by traders from Kan-t^o-ll* We

lave seen in earlier chapters that both pine resin and benzoin

were regarded as funifuges. T fao Jlung-ching noted that

frankincense* (hsun-lu) expelled evil air and that, pine resin

(jju) had tho b w e properties (3)# And in the T fanrr nen tefaots

analysis of An-hsl perfume (bdellium) there appears an attribute

which resembles the titles of tho two books written about

Knn-t,o—lifs medical practices*

(1) Bui shu» 3 ‘ d# 32b* Their titles v;erej'$/l ^ ^ ^

in ten chapters*^ in four chapters* Ch*en Pang-
hsi 2i considered ihat these books, with other ones mentioned in
the Gul shu bibliography* were evidence of Indian and Buddhist
influenced on Chinese medicine; Chung kuo l.hsueh shih. 151#
Pilgricfe ..vorc passing through Indonesia in these centuries, and
it is likely that Buddhist influences were extended to matters
of medicine* But I am more concerned with the mechanism of
trade which brought both commodities and cultural influences
from western Asia, via Indonesia, to China in the fifth and sixth
centuries*
(2) I hive consulted Feng Ch#eng-*chfin*a HbI yu yl ning 7h
'i'fl , Commercial Pre s, 1957/ 29-30. It is true that
Knn-tTo- is transcribed as P'tL and not aorf or-f-nS
tho characters used in the imperial histories for Kan-tfo-ll. but
I regard the presence of -11 and not -lo as the fact which
determines the identity of this name*
(3) m i l , 3k, 1371b.
 352.

*It works on evil air in the system and devilish

pestilences (l)#?

I have suggested that by the end of the sixth century Indonesian

benzoin, an equally famous fumifuge associated with the mystic

tre,-itment of fever and used in incantations. had overtaken

bdellium in importance in the maritime trade of southern

Chinat For these reasons I am inclined to regard tho two

books mentioned in the Sui shu as a comment on the fame6 one

of the Indonesian kingdoms enjoyed in the sixth century in

providing southern China with aromatic resins*

The notices about the fperfumes and drugs* sent by the

tributary kingdoms deserve to be emphasized, for they are

consistent with the existence of the tPersiant trade and are

a significant feature of the accounts of Indonesia in the

imperial histories of the fifth and sixth centuriep. The

appearance of fperfumes and drugs1 in the tribute of P fo-li

and Tan-tan» though not evidence that these kingdoms were

directly concerned in the trade with China, suggests that the

merchandise in the China trade was circulating in Indonesia and

that these rulers were aware of its Importance to the Chinese

emperors, whom they wished to please.

Where, then, in western Indonesia were the tributary

(1) CLPT, 13, 330b.

 353.

kingdoms ? Where were the coasts from which the ,Persianf

traders operated ?

If there is any activity which exposes one to the danger

of being banished to the lunatic fringe of early Indonesian

studies, it is the attempt to draw a detailed map of Indonesia

on the basis of the information in the Chinese imperial

histories# One illustration will reveal the extraordinary

diversity of opinions which have been held by scholars working

in this field# P yo-li has been located in Borneo by

Bretschneider (1), on the northern coast of Sumatra by

Groeneveldt (2), and at Asahan on the north-east coast of

Sumatra by Schlegel (3)* Pelliot Identified it with Bali (4),

Gerlni with the west coast of the Malay Peninsula (5), Moens

with southern Sumatra and also with Java (6), Obdeijn with

Bangka off the south-eastern coast of Sumatra (7)# and Hsu-*#

(1) On the knowledge possessed by the ancient Chinese •«*, 1871,

18.
(2) Notes on the Malay Archipelago •«#, 80# On page 84 he
observed that all Chinese geographers understood p G - l l to be
there.
(3) Geographical notes1, £P (old series), 9, 1 898, 276#
(4 ) ’Deux itindrairesy, 283. He seems to have been influenced
by the sound of the name# Pelliot never made another suggestion
in respect of P yo-li. and Bali has remained tho respectable
identification; Coedbs, $tats# 92* Coedbs notes, however, that
Pelliot regarded Borneo as the next best chqipe. Pelliot
corrected an error of translation by Schlegel, who had said that
Kaling (Holing) was yeast1 of F yo-llt TP (old series), I898,
273-4, quoting the Chiu T yang shu# In fact P yo-li was feastf
Ho-llng. For Pelliot Ho-llng was in Java.
(5) Researches on Ptolemy1s Geography ###, Loudon, 1909, 494.
(k) T5rlvi.1aya# Ydva en Kataha # J BRAS# 17, 2, 1940, 28ff. For
Moens the P fo-ll of the sixth century was in Sumatra and of the
seventh century in Java#
(7) yGegevens ter ldentificaering van oude Sumatraansche toponie-
Ti.idaard# 44, 1944, 50.
 35k.

YQn-ts’lao with Panel on the north-eastern coast of Sumatra (l).

Sir Roland Braddell identified it with Borneo (2) and thus

completed the cycle of identifications where Bretschneider began

as long ago as 1871 (3)*

What is the explanation of the elusiveness of early

Indonesian historical geogrqphy in comparison with the much

more confidently plotted map of the coastline of mainland

South East Asia and the Malay Peninsula which scholars have

reconstructed in the last sixty years ? The explanations are

simple ones. In the fifth and sixth centuries the imperial

histories provide no geographical details at all. In the

seventh and eighth centuries there is some information, but

(1) ’Notes on Tan-tan*, JMBRAS. 20, I, 19k7, 55. He had in mind

archaeological remains in the hinterland of Panel.
(2) ’A note on Sambas and Borneo’, J TOR AS > 22, Ij., 19U9» 1-15*
(3) Of the six tributary kingdoms only P ’o-ii has attracted this
amount of interest, and the reason has been that in T ’ang sources
its ’western1 neighbour is said to be Ho-ling. Ho-ling was an
important kingdom, sending missions in the eighth and ninth cen­
turies when the Chinese sources are silent about SrXvijaya.
P ’o-ll has therefore benefited from the Interest scholars have
shown in Ho-ling. There has been much less study of the other
kingdoms except among those, like Gerini and Moens, who have
used translations from the Chinese sources to reconstruct maps
of South East Asia and Indonesia on an ex ‘ravafently ambitious
scale. Gerini placed Ho-lo-tan on the west coast of the
Peninsula, Kan-tyo-li on the east coast of the Peninsula, and
Tan-tan off the west coast of the Peninsula or on the east coast
of Sumatra; Researches. U69j 603} 585# Moens placed Ho-lo-tan
on the north-east coast of Malaya and Kan-tfo-ll at Atjeh;
’Srlvijaya 1@-19. ’Be Noord-Sumatraanse rijken’, 3U2-345*
Hsu YSn-ts’iao, followed by Wheatley, places Tan-tan on the
north-east coast of Malaya} ’Notes on Tan-tariT , 63, Golden
Khersonese. 55. I shall not analyse every study ever undertakei
on the historical geogr£phy of early Indonesia but shall limit
myself to those which I think have a fruitful bearding on the
subject.
 355

it is vitiated by the circumstance that no geographical

feature has been identified with complete confidence as a

fixed point or landmark which helps to supply even an

approximate position for the other toponyms* In the study of

mainland South Bast Asian historical geography Tongking, Lin-yi,

Funar, and the Malay Peninsula are all recognisable in the

Chinese sources, through which other places mentioned in

connexion with them cease to be entirely meaningless* For

Indonesia, on the other hand, the situation is entirely

different. The break between the Peninsula and the Archipelago

is an obvious one on the map, but it was not mentioned by the

Chinese until about A,D, 800 (1). Bji this time the names of

the tributary kingdoms of the fiftli and sixth centuries had

disappeared from Chinese records. Nor is She-p*o an

alternative fixed point, Ho-lo-tan and possibly P ^ - t a were

*n She-n'o. and P fo-ll in later records was said to be east of

Ho-llng;. a country whose alternative name was She-p*o.

a t
Pelliot long ago confirmed that She-p* o was a transcription of

•Java1 (2), Fernand, however, showed that, among Arab writers,

Z^ba£, derived from *Java*, meant the island of Sumatra rather

l) See page3?6 below.

i2) *Deux itindraires*, 287-288,
 356.

than of Java (l)» and Pelliot thereafter was content to render

She-pfo as fSumatra-Java1 (2),

Studies in early Indonesian historical geography do not make

for exciting reading. The earliest ones, more than fifty years

ago, lacked a background of Indonesian history provided from

other sources of information, and when one reads them today

they seem fanciful. A place of honour must be reserved, however,

for Groeneveldt, who in 1876 translated and published numerous

long passages from the Chinese histories and geographies (3)#

Not all his identifications are acceptable; nevertheless

scholars have gratefully used his translations. But in the

early years the favourite technique was to search modern maps

for names which seemed to correspond in sound with the Chinese

transcriptions. Schlegel (U) and Gerini (5) were conspicuous

(1) *L*empire Sumatranais*# 170-177, Ferrand pointed out that

the /rabs called the Sumatran empire of Srlvijaya ZSbag. Yet he
do^s not seem to have been so convinced that the Chinese word
She-p|o invariably meant Sumatra. Ho-ling. also known as
Sh^-p^o. was central Java; ibid, 37*
(2) ’Textes ChinoiB*, 1925, 250,
( 3 ) Nntea on the Malay Archipelago and Malacca compiled from
Chinese sources. Batavia, 18767 He also published *Snpplementazy
jottings to the "Notes on the Malay Archipelago111 .TP, old s@riesf
7, 1396, 113-134. U. ~
(4) Schlegel published several articles in TVL\mibmmm 1898 andfSfa.
Iftife I list then in the bibliography,
(5) Gerini, Researches on Ptolemy1s Geography London, 1909#
A curious feature of an altogether curious book is the scant use
Gerini made of Pelliot1s ’Deux itinSraires’, published in 1904*
He preferred to quote from Groeneveldt and from Hervey de Saint-
Denys’ translations from Ma Tuan-lin’s Wen hsien t’un# k’ao,
Ethnograahie des peunles Strangers h la Chine, Geneve, 2, 1883*
 357*

practitioners of this technique. Pelliot’s approach in 1904

was immeasurably superior (1)* He collected all the texts

he could find and contented himself with explaining their

geographical implications with scholarly caution. Only on the

A
subject of She-pTo and Ho-llng was he emphatic; the former was

the island of Java and the latter was on the same island* In

subsequent decades, when further progress was made in the study

of early Indonesian history from inscriptions, scholars have

often consulted Pelliot’s pioneer work (2). But Pelliot’B

translations have also created the opportunity for speculation’

*

and Moens made the most of it by reading into them ingenious

implications (3)* Sir Roland Braddell, the descendant of an

East India Company merchant, introduced a more practical

a proach by stressing the importance of navigational questions

such as trade winds, a line of enquiry which led him to give

prominence to Borneo as the island which he believed was often

(1) ’Deux itindraires’. This is unquestionably the most

important study ever made of the Chinese geogrip hlcal sources
relating to ear.iy Indonesia.
(2) Ferrand’e study in 1919 is probably the most important
successor to ’Deux itin£rairesff fLe K ’ouen-louen et les
nnciexmes navigations’, JA, Some of my conclusions are similar
to Ferrand’s
(3) 'grlvijaya, Yava en Kajaha, Ti.jd. 77, 1937, 317t U86. (I
have used the abbreviated translation in JWBRAS.) This is a
patchy and often irritatingly aggressive study, but I have found
myself in agreement with Moens on two Important points. fDe
Noord-Sumatraanse rijken der parfums en specerijen In Voor-
Moslimse ti jd’, Ti.jd (?*ad,1alah) . 85, 4, 1955-7, 325-364* A
feature of this study is the importance Moens attached to
evidence about the aromatic products of northern Sumatra* His
approach to the subject was excellent but he distorted Pelliot’s
translations to suit his own purposes*
 358*

concealed by the Chinese tox^onyms (l). Finally in recent

years M* Louis Damais, an Old-Javanese scholar as well as a

sinologue, has been producing valuable results by investigating

the indigenous words represented by the Chinese transcriptions .

(2). His interests are not limited to geographical terms

but also include the titles of officials.

The record of the study of early Indonesian historical

geography is therefore a long one, and I do not pretend to

have succeeded in solving for all time the mysteries which have

worried my predecessors, I have certainly not attempted to

plot all the kingdoms on the map with exactness. Only

inscriptions will enable us to do this* I have, however,

tried to break new ground in several directions*

In the first place I have investigated some Chinese geo­

graphical passages of the third century, based on K ’ang T ’ai’s

writings. K ’ang T fai visited Funan and, if not a visitor to

Indonesia, probably met those who traded there. His fragments

have not hitherto been used in the context of early Indonesian

history. By using this evidence it is possible to invoke

a span of information from the third to the eighth century which

(1) ’Notes on Ancient times in Malaya1, JMBRAS. 24, 1, 1951#

18-27.
(2) ’Review of Poerbatjaraka, Riwaiat Indonesia’. BEF E O * 48, 2#
1957, 607-649J’Etudes gino-tndonesiennesv* B S F E Q . 50, 1, 1900#
1-35* I have been able to borrow a manuscript by this author on
the subject of the kingdom of Ho-ling. to which I refer on page
42.3, note I *
 359*

deals with several parts of the region. The results show that

there is unlikely to have been a shift in the location of the

chief harbours during this long period* In this way one is on

S*KS
gaod ground when one eliminates certain areas as the^3M»@fcen of

the trading kingdoms in the fifth and sixth centuries. If in

both the third and the seventh century the prominent trading

centres were in approximately the same place, it is unreasonable

to suppose that in the intervening period they had languished*

In the second place, I have paid particular attention to

three of the tributary kingdoms whose names survive into the

better documented records referring to the seventh century.

They are Ho-lo-tan. Tan-tan* and P ’o-li. I have noted that

the information about Tan-tan and P fo-li revealB a surprising

degree of consistency. This consistency, reinforced by the

fact that some of the passages in question owe their origin

probably to Chfang Chun and others certainly to I Tslng^has

encouraged me to describe with some confidence the region in

western Indonesia represented by Tan-tan and P fo-li. Both .

C h ’ang Chun, who visited Indonesia between 607 and 610 (l), and

I Tsing, 7/bo was there at intervals between 671 and 695, were

eye-witnesses, and the coherence of their information is an

aspect of the evidence which deserves attention. These two

(l) On Ch1ang C h & n ^ see P a£®361 •

 360*

writers seem to me to provide the fixed point on the map from

inhere one can proceed with more assurance in narrowing down

the possibilities for the remainder of the tributary kingdoms*

I have come to have a high regard for the accuracy of I Tsing*s

evidence*

In the third place, I have called attention to two vintages

of information about Ho-llng. a toponym which co-exists with the

last references to F ’o-li and Tan-tan and therefore cannot be

excluded from the subject. The location of Ho-llng may have

a bearing on the location of one of the tributary kingdoms of

the earlier period*

The consequence of these lines of enquiry is an outline

map of western Indonesia as it was known to the Chinese in the

fifth and sixth centuries (l ) . It is not the map which I

imagined would emerge when I first became interested in the

subject, for it includes Java and I had not imagined that

Javanese kingdoms sent tribute to China in that period. On the

other hand, the ma|\ does not contradict the impression created

by the examination of the ’Persian* trade, which was that

Sumatran ports flourished on account of the trade which made its

way to China close enough to the jungle areas of northern

Sumatra to stimulate a trade In substitute resins* This is the

(1) My conclusions are summarised in Map 3 at the end of the

study*
 361.

geographical conclusion which seems to have the chief bearing

on the origins of Srlvijaya, a problem with which the remaining

tart of this study will be increasingly concerned#

The early historical geography of western Indonesia is

largely a study of coasts, and I shall be dealing with the

following coasts: those of northern and western Borneo, both

of which had access to the South China Sea, while the west

coast of Borneo is only about l+OO miles from the southern

entrance to the Straits of Malacca; the coasts of northern

Sumatra, by which I mean the weot coast of the island north

of the equator, the northern coast from Atjeh Head to Diamond

Point, and the east coast on the Straits of Malacca; the south­

eastern coast of Sumatra south of the Straits; and the northern

coast of Java (l). In the following chapter I deal with the

coasts of Borneo and northern Sumatra, and I have come to

the conclusion that in the fifth and sixth centuries they were

inhospitable ones, unlikely to have provided harbours for the

’Persian* trade. I shall first consider the evidence about

Borneo.

(1) The reader can refer to Map 1 tefoich contains modern place-
names.
 362

CHAPTER TWELVE

INHOSPITABLE COASTS IN WESTERN INDONESIA IN THE

FIFTH AND SIXTH CENTURIES

Two Chinese travellers, one in the third century and the

other at the beginning of the seventh, have described what they

believed lay east of the Malay Peninsula, and a comparison of

their evidence leads to the impression that none of the

tributary kingdoms/tagr on the coast of Borneo*

The seventh century description is clearer and more

convincing# In 607 Chfang ChQn'^p , an envoy of the Sui

emperor Yang Ti, was sent to South East Asia to fopen up

commu ications % on behalf of the dynasty (l)# His

first port of call was on the coast of Chtlh 5— $ a

kingdom which Professor Wheatley has convincingly located as

being somewhere south of Patani on the south-east coast of the

Malay Peninsula (2). Chfang Chun, who did not return to China

until 610, visited other parts of South East Asia south of

Ch*ih T yu > and we shall have occasion to consult further records

which may be attributed to his expedition (3)* The Sul shu

contains a long account of C h fang Chunfs visit to Chfih T yu #

(^) Sul shu# 62fl+(L

(2) Golden Khersonese# 26-36#
(3; As a result of the mission there appeared the Chfih T*u kuo
chi jh ju 9 in two chuan: H T S # 58, 19a, It is ascribed to
Chrang Chun and others.
 363.

and It is to the envoy that I attribute the following passage:

f- '§i l-'l <S ft t?4 ' % § i'J

it i l i-l ©
’To the east (of Chfih T ’u ) is the country of Po-lo-la.
to the ivest that of P*o»lo*-60 ; and to the south that of
Ho-lo-tan, To the ;orth it borders on the sea (1).'

Later texts, reproducing this information, give slightly

different transcriptions of Po-lo-las Po-lo-ch’a ?

P ’o-Io-la ^ $'1 (3). Since Po-lo-la appears in the

earliest source, it is the form I shall use,

C h’ang Chun’s itinerary to the Peninsula has been recorded.

He sailed down the Annam coast and his last glimpse of land

was at Ling-ch’leh-po-pa-to 1$)Q , facing Champa

on the west, and taken to be a transcription of Lingaparvata

island (k) * Po-lo-1a could therefore not have been on or

off the mainland coast, for it was not included in Ch’ang Chun’s

itinerary to Ch’lh T ’u , Instead it must have been in an

eastern direction from the Peninsula, and a glance at the map

suggests that in fact it lay to the south-east (5)* Po-lo-la

1) Sui ehu, 82, 3a,

2 ) T fung tien, 188, 1009.
3) TPYL, 737, 3U-37a, quoting the Bui shu, P ’o- and Po- are some­
times interchangeable in transcribing foreign place-names. The
TFYK, 968, 11381a, renders 8h&-p’o as Sh§-po, T ’ao Hung-ching,
quoted by Li {j§$n, rendered P ’o-iu (’Barus’) as po-ln: CLPT, 13#
321b, There is no aspirate in the Indonesian languages and P ’o
instead of Po would have no significance,
(k) Perrand, J£, volume 13, 1919, 308,
(5) In note j on page fg.75 I observe how in a carefully plotted
itinerary Java is said to be ’east’ of the southern end of the
Malay Peninsula, I believe that the Chinese conventionally regar­
ded western Indonesia as lying due ’south’ of China and that their
geographical orientations should therefore be tilted accordingly,
’East’ in connexion with Chin-li-p’i-shlh seems to be ’south-east’
rather than ’east’ of the southern Malay Peninsula.
coaid only have been the Anambas or Natuna islands or on the

western coast of Borneo. It was not, however, the only place

Known to be 1east1 of Ch* ih T*u. There was also Chln-Ii-p* 1-

which appears in the T fai p ying huan yu chi

as follows:
1 f'l <$)
~ ^ & > -fe 3\ 2- ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
ifi t'«? A <*5$

fgc #. ? f f <8 § ?9 rS) ^ 3g

4.^3. & 6)
1Chin-li-r>f i-shih is more than h0,000 11. south-west of the
capital (of China) ... To its east is Chlh-wu. 2,000 li
away. To its west is Chfih T yu . 1,500 li away. To its
south Is Po-li. 3,000 ll away. To its north is Liu-ch*u.
In this country (Chin-li-p*i-shih) there are cities and
houses. The clothes worn (?) on top of their white cloth
are the colour of tte morning clouds. For every meal
they first lay a mat on the ground, oh which food is
spread, and they then sit down. The name of the ruler
is ?*TO-to-yanf:-ya♦ Soldiers march in front of him. They
have weapons, armour, and helmets. The utensils (of the
people of this country) are mostly made of tree bark.A
Their customs and products are similar to those of Chen-la
(Cambodia) (l)*f

(1) TT-HYC. 177, 13&-b* In this passage there Is also an alleged

itinerary from Chin-li-pfi-shlh to China. I translate It on
p a g e , where its contents are more suitably discussed. The
T yang hui y a o . 100, 1791, transcribes the name of this kingdom as
Chin-li-p1i-chia& foj , but Pelliot considered that the
account in the TPHYC was the more accurate one; fDeux
itin£rairesy 324 ' f note 5, It is tempting to regard h l u - c h ^
^9 as a rp^erence to the Liu chui islands called in the
Sui shu Liu-ch* iu ^ • I© P&n-to ± fa in the rulerfs name
connected with the Indonesian title flapfcinta hiyamj_which occurs
for example in the Kedukan Bukit inscription of Srivijaya in
683 ?
 365.

Scholars haye sometimes seized on a casual suggestion by

Pelliot that Chln-li-p* i-shih was a transcription early in the

seventh century for f{3rlvi3ayaf, or Palembang, before

Shih~li-fo~shih was adopted ( l) • If this is

time, the statement that Chin-ll-p1l-shth was feastf of Ch*ih

T*u has to be ignored, unless one wants to argue thr^t Srlvijaya

was originally in Borneo. The necessary ernendment of the

position of Chin~ll-p* i-shih to read 1south1 instead of *cast1

must also be reconciled with the circumstance that the Bui shu

in fact mentions a country which was south of Chfih T fu : it

was Ho~lo~tan (2). I cannot see why the straightforward

position of Chin-li-pyi-shih. probably, supplied by Chfang Chun

himself, should not be accepted, and I find myself In agreement

with Moens on the direction where it should be found, though

he ventured a specific location for this kingdom, called by

him Girivi.jaya, in the country known today as Sarawak (3).

It is true that n ’l-shlhffi- is a transcription ot

(1) ’Deux itin^rairee*, 3214.-5 , note 5} Ferrand, JA, feg.ra-Avril

1919, 293} Luce, JBRS. 1U, 1925, 176j Coedfes, fltats. 138.
(2) Sui shu. 82, 138.
(3) 1Srlvijaya, Yava en Kataha’ i 32-33.
 366 #

’Vijaya* (l), but I am satisfied that this ’Vijaya1 was the

name of a kingdom which had no connexion with the famous Srlvi^jaya*

The proof, which Moens also noted, is that later in the same

century I Tsing mentions a ’VijayapurG* under the form of

Fo-3hlh-p'u-lo'{| ^ (2) . The mms* name occurs in his

list of countries ’enumerated from the west1, beginning with

’Barus’ and Malayu in northern and south-eastern Sumatra

respectively (3). Vijayapura and Srlvijaya therefore co­

existed in western Indonesia, (Chih-li4ofi-shih and Fo-shih

(-p’u-lo) both contain fvijaya* in their name; Chin-li ^

is probably the honorific Sri and p*u-lo certainly merely means

fcity’ « I therefore regard them as two separate transcriptions

of the same name# And any remaining doubt that this is so is

removed by the circumstance that, according to the T*ai p ’ing

(1) p m & is used to supply the v sound in Chinese transcriptions

of foreign sounds: e#g. Chia-p’1-1 i\j)0 * Kaveri in
Liu Sung shu, 97* 10b.^ The ruler of Kan-t*0-11 in 513 was
P fi-hsiTiaY-pa-mo Qi& which is usually rendered as
1Vijayavarman^; Coedbs, Etats, 95# P fi A IS in fact a closer
rendering of vi- than t h e f o - 7 % in the name of the famous
SrTviJaya, where the vi- sound seems to become bu by a process
of labialisation; Coed&s, ITSPEO, 18, 6, 1918, 2lJ# ShihhiTr
appears in the transcription of the Palembang Srlvijaya, I
Toing uses it for ;je,. in jeta and jjLi in o.jiihane# Chin-1is
is probably Shlh-lj7%^J , and where Chin *5. has been confused
with Shih ^ ♦ These transcriptions we're exhaustively discussed
by Coedbs* in his pioneer study of 1918, when he identified the
real name of Shih-li-fo-shih as fSrIvijayaf and, following
Pelliot’s hint, regarded Chin-ll-pfi-shih as an earlier form of
-the name; ibid, 23-25*
(2) Nan hai chi kuei nei fa chuan# T a i s M Tripitaka, vol# 5*+# no#
2125, 205b; Takakusu, Record# 10# The characters Fo-shih are
those used in the name of the famous Srlvijaya# P*u-lo is the
conventional transcription for -pura, of which several examples
are given in Feng Ch 1eng-Chun’s Hsi mings e#g# under
Isanapura, Anandapura etc#
(3) The text is given on pagej$y #
 367.

huan yu chi, F*o-li ) (= P ^ - l i ^ ) (l) was

situated close enough to Chi.n-li^p* i-shih to be chosen to

describe the region south of it, while in I Tsing*s list from

^est* to fea8tf P fo-li ^ separated from ffo-3hih-p,u~

lo only by Chfieh~lun * a wor<i which was not a

toponym but an ethnic term referring to a primitive population

east of P yo-li (2)* It is true that I Tsing does not describe

P yo-li as ysouth* of Fo-shih-o1u-lo. but the sequence of his

toponyms malcea it reasonably certain that I Tsing was referring

to the place known as Chin-li-py1-shlh in the T yal p yIn# huan

yu chi as #eaaty of the Malay Peninsula, The consistency

between the two statements about this yViJayay country is too

close for there to be much doubt that the same fViJayaf was being

described. If the parallelism in these two groups of evidence

is rejected, it is unlikely that any map of western Indonesia

in the seventh century will be reconstructed on the basis of the

(1) I follow Pelliot in accepting Po-li in this passage as the

equivalent of P fo-li: yJ)eux itinSraires1, 326, note 5* It is
unthinkable that there should have been two countries with such
similar names; one also takes into account the fact that P yo-li
had an existence at least as early as the first half of the
fifth century and would have been a well known toponym.
(2) The significance of Chuen-lun becomes clear when one notes
that other accounts of P*o-lfr state that feasty of it was the
country of the bo~chfa A « rgkgasas a primitive people.
I Tsing elsewhere uses Cnuen-lun as an ethnic term for the more
primitive population of the Archipelago. The consistency of the
evidence about the population beyond P yo-li is therefore complete,
This is another and the last point where I find rnyeelf in
agreement with Moens; fSrlviJaya, Java en Kat&ha, 36-37. I
discuss this matter further on pages
 368.

Chinese evidence so far available (l). For me, this place

was somewhere in western Borneo, and I shall henceforth refer

to it by I Tsing*s name of Vijayapura in order to distinguish

it from the famous Srlvijaya at Palembang,

There is no reference to any embassy to China sent by

Vijayapura, in spite of the fact that it was apparently the

chief kingdom known to Chfang ChQn in the region lying east of

(l) The clarification of the historical geography of early

western Indonesia depends, in my opinion, on the recognition
of the existence of Vijayapura somewhere in western Borneo.
As a result one can identify most of the toponyms which occur
from h30 to the end of the seventh century with either Borneo,
Java, or Sumatra and thus bring to an end a situation in which
P*o-ll. for example, has been identified with the Malay Peninsula,
Sumatra, Java, Bali, and Borneo. It will be observed that I
agree with Moens* understanding of the Chln-li-pf1-shlh evidence,
and it may be asked why his conclusion has not been recognised
by other scholars. One reason, perhaps, is because Moens
reconstructed his map on'the bakis of other scholars’ trans­
lations, but I fear that the chief reason is that Moens has never
been taken very seriously. ’Srlvijaya, Java en KatUha* contains
some fantastic notions such as the transfer of the capital of
Srlvijaya from the Malay Peninsula to two centres on the east
coast of Sumatra. His work abounds in hypotheses and is often
so unreal that one becomes suspicious and abandons it. I have
to confess that I did not realise that he had anticipated me in
connexion with Chln-ll-p*1-shih until I had formed £my own
conclusion. It is a pity that Moens spoilt his article by
including in it fanciful reconstructions.
 369.

the Malay Peninsula (l). From this I infer that as late as

about A. D. 600 rulers in Borneo had no direct contacts with

the Chinese emperors (2). I do not, of course, suggest that

there had been no commercial or cultural developments in Borneo

by that time. There are Sanskrit inscriptions of fifth

century vintage found as far away as Kutei in eastern Borneo

(3). In the ninth century Po-ni 'pb )]\^ , or Brunei in

northern Borneo, was a trading centre, and in 977 it sent its

first mission to China (4). Obviously theie must have been

(1) It is uncertain for how long Ch*ih T*u was known to the
Chinese by that name. Though I Tsing mentions Lang-.ya-hsiu
as Lang-chia-shu f?? J?u , he does not mention C h rlh T ru .
which was only a little way south of Lang-chia-shu. Ch* ih T 1u
sent missions in 608, 609, 610. Attention has been called to
a^ statement in the Y u h a i . 16, 6, concerning the Ch u xan hsing chi
> written in the 674-5 period and purporting to be
a,, account in one chapter of a Chinese mission under Hung T *ung
. which travelled from Ch* ih T* u to Ch* u-na- ? Jj/x •
and visited 36 countries; H. Wada, TA Chinese Embassy to the
southern sea countries at the middle of the 7th century1 , Toyo
Gakuho Reports of the Research Department of the Oriental Society.
Tokyo, 33# 1, December, 1950, 64-74. Professor Wheatley does not
quote this reference to Ch* ih T* u . IToing, who would have been
Hung T ’ung’s contemporary, does not mention Ch* ih T* u , though he
knew of Lang-chia-shu. Ch*ih T * u *s neighbour. I feel that
Ch*ang Chun, who is known to have visited Ch* ih T fu . is the only
certain source of information about this country and the neigh­
bouring re, ions. He spent th.ee years overseas and wrote a book
when he returned; this book is mentioned in the Hsin T*ang sh u.
For me any re ference to Ch* ih T* u is probably a reference to
information of the 607-610 period.
(2) The first half of the seventh century was a time when a
number of missions were sent from South East Asian states, yet
none came from \ ijayapura. I mention these missions, together
with the trading background, on pages s"oV<T/6 •
(3) I mention the Kutei inscriptions on page 4 -<2^-.
(4) The 977 mission is in Sung s h i h . 489# 19a. This account says
that in former times missions had not bee/i sent,and as a result
Po-ni was not mentioned in the historiesfy) 1^ ^ J
ibid, 19a._ For the identification of Po-ni ,witn Brunei, s e e ^
P lliot, H o j a . 267# note 346.
steady progress for centuries on the coasts of Borneo. Moreover

on the Xapuas (Kapoeas) river in western Borneo Hindu and

Buddhist remains have been found; the Buddhist relics have

been described as unlike Javanese art, though later than the

Kutei remains. Ballava-type inscriptions have also been found

on the Xapuas river. Unfortunately, it has been impossible to

date any of these pieces of evidence {l). The Kapuas is a

navigable river, and it would be surprising if its inhabitants

did not trade with the outside world. I do at think, however,

that it traded with China in the fifth and sixth centuries.

Its produce would have been re-exported through the more

advanced centres in the region.

In view of the evidence about Po-lo-la and C M n - l i - p Tj-shlh

I am unable to accept Sir Roland Braddellfs view th.t early

foreign references to ’Java* included western Borneo, even

though harbours on that coast :;ere close to the trade route from

the Straits of Malacca to China. * ir Roland was impressed by

the mineral wealth of Borne j, the archaeological discoveries,

and Mr. Grimes* metereological reconstruction of Fa Usien’s

voyage which seemed to place Yeh-pfo-ti in western Borneo (2).

(1) The Kapuas remains are discussed in Krom, Hlndoe-Javaansche

geschledenis. 75-76. Remains have also been found at Sambas;
see several articles in JMBRAS. 22, 4, 1949, by Nilakanta Sastri
and others. These remains are at present under examination in
the British Museum, and I understand that they may be later than
the period with which I am concerned.
(2) Sir Roland’s views are contained in ’A note on Sambas and
Borneo1, JMBRAS. 22, 4, 1949, 1-12, and ’Notes on Ancient Times
in Malaya’, JMBRAS, 24, 1, 1951, 18-27*
 371.

For me the absence of missions from the region ’east’ of

Ch’ih T fu is the decisive argument against believing that any

of the tributary kingdoms of earlier times were on that coast#

My impression of the relative backwardness of this region

is not contradicted by the Chinese evidence of the third century.

Though there is no evidence that K ’ang T ’ai actually visited

the Malay Peninsula, he knew something of Chu-ll on the

isthmus of the Peninsula and not very far north of the country

later known as Ch’lh T ’u (l)# Chu-11 was a Funanese dependency,

and K ’ang T ’ai must have spoken to Funanese merchants acquainted

with Ch5-li (1). To some extent, therefore, both K ’ang T ’ai and

C h ’ang Chfin were describing South East Asia as known from the

same coast# According to K ’ang Thai’s Fu nan t’u tsu

’One goes due east of Chu-11# If one goes to the end

of the rugged headlands (one will find) that there are
inhabitants on the sea shore. These people have
tails five or six ts’un long# The place is called
P ’u-lQ-chunp:# It is the custom of the people (there)
to ert'- human beings (2)*’

The reference to the inhabitants’ ’tails1 does not discredit

this passage# An explanation is available In the ceremonial

dress and bird plumage worn by the men depicted in the famous

(1) Chu-li is the placeknown in the Nan chou i wu chih

QS Chti-chlh fo\ • See page 79# note 1.
(2) TPYL, 787, 3U85a.
 372*

bronze drums of early Bouth East Asia (l). There nay be a

connexion between the bird plumage and tho practice of head-

hunting (2)* The people of E^u-lo-chunp: p/ere eaid to be

cannibals* and one of tho motives of cannibalism in Indonesia

has been to acquire the spiritual power reposing in the head*

Students of the scenes on the bronze drums have also

taken note of the similarity between the ships on the drums and

the Borneo Dayak ’ships of the dead*, wall-paintings of which

have recently bee . found in a Sarawak cave (3). The Bayaks have

been headhunters, though by no means tho only ones in South

East Asia* K ’ang T ’ai’s description of tho people of P ’u-lo-

chunp; is therefore not inconsistent with their being in Borneo*

Loth P fu-lo-chun.r and ?o-lo-la were said to be ’east’ of more

or leas the same part of the Palay Peninsula* In neither case

does the accompanying detail suggest that the region was

oarticrlarly advanced*

Professor Stein has argued that V;’n-lo-cbunr may have

been Pulo Con&ore, a email island oil the coast of Cochin-China*

(l) I o/e this suggestion to Professor von PUrer^FIaimeridorf, The

non nsn snn* n o , 230-243 * s a y 3 o r tne ^gai-rao;^ ^ Daroarxans
of south-western China* ’They tattoo their bodice with ^patterns
like t ase.on dragons and theirclothes all have tails^i A ^ ^ J
4 X
(2) Schuster. ’Head-huntinn svn; oiler,: on the bronze drums of the
•i cient Dongson culture and In the modern Balkans’ Actes IV connr*
intern* Be, Anthrop* ct Ethnol*, 1952* II, 1953, 27&-282* ' " H " " ™
(3) Sec Tom Harrison, '’The Caves of Uiah: A history of Prehistory
The Sarawak aeum .journal* 8, December, 1953, 5U9-595 and
especially 58$~590V
 373*

His translation of the K ’ang T ’ai passage is thus:

’*». quand on va droit h 1 ’Est de Pao (rjfi9 faute graphiaue

Xjour kiu't^] ou;f6] ) -li on attaint comme pointe extreme
une montagne Isolde (K’i-t’eou, une Jle-montagne escarp^ej*
Les habitants bord de la mer ont tous une queue de 5 &
6 pouce. (L’ile) s’appele Royaume de P ’ou-rlo-tchong
•••* (2)*
His understanding of the location of P ’u-lo-chimg was influenced

by his conclusion that Ptolemy’s Cattigara. ’the port of the

Sinai1, was in the neighbourhood of Cap St* Jacques near

Saigon, for he saw a special significance in the word

as meaning ’un pole, I1extremitd d ’un orient’, and wondered ..

whether the term could be explained by the fact that Cattigara

was at the very edge of Ptolemy’s map and therefore the ’extreme

point’. By a complicated process of reasoning he was led to

enquire whether P ’u-lo-chung. with its tailed men, was Ptolemy’s

’Three Islands of the Satyrs’, situated in front of Catti#ara

and therefore Pulo Condore, not far from Cap St. Jacques.

This is an Interesting theory, but it does not convince

me. I do iiot wish to comment on Professor Stein’s views about

Cattigara. but K ’ang T ’ai obviously knew very much more about

South East Asia than Ptolemy did. No foreigner, whose

records survive, knew more of Funan than he did. One therefore

asks why should K ’ang T ’ai have described Pulo Condore, a little

group of islands lying east of Cochin-China, in terms of their

(1) ’Le Lin-yi’, 115*

 37U.

location from the Malay Peninsula and not from Funan. Pulo

Condore could hardly have been a sailors1 landmark on the route

;cross the Gulf of Siam to Qc-Eo, o n the west coast of Cochin-

China and perhaps the most important of the Fujjanese harbours.

Instead I prefer to identify P ’u-lo-chung as lying In a south­

eastern direction from C h O - l i « just as Po-lo-la In fact lay In

a south-eastern direction from C h fih T ’u * P fu-lo-chung could

have been the Anambas or Natuna islands or western Borneo

itself. Perhaps the ’rugged headlands1 were these islands,

with P ’u-lo-chung lying beyond on the Borneo coast#

The horizon east of Chu-lj was certainly a bleak one#

Nowhere comparable with Ho-vlng or S s u - t 1jao was known there,

and the continued isolation of the area as late as C h ’ang C h u n ’s

time is not surprising. This part of Indonesia-is in fact

mentioned in early Chinese records only because two Chinese

visited South East Asia. When C h ’ang Chun went home, the

curtain again fellon Borneo until the island began to be known

o
in the ninth century# The tributary kingdoms and Po-ssu bases

were not there*

I shall now examine the evidence about the coasts of the

northern half of Sumatra* The northern and north-western coasts

of this island lie on the Straits of Malacca, while the jungle

in the interior contains trees whose aromatic resins found a

place in the ’Per s i a n 1 trade# For these two reasons alone

these coasts wouid appear to have enjoyed commei'cial advantages

 375

in early timesf Yet this was not so*

In later and better documented centuries trading centres

grew up on three parts of the northern coasts of Sumatra.

During the period extending from the time of the ninth century

Arab writers until that of Tojti£ Pires early in the 16th century

there are continuous references to the most northern part of

the island from Atjeh Head to Diamond Point* The Arabs knew

« which was bounded by two seas; the sea of Harkand

and the sea of Salaht. The former was the Bay of Bengal and

the latter is believed to be derived from the Malay word

selat or S t r a i t s * * R&mnI therefore seem© to be a general name

for the extreme north of Sumatra (i). The name survived and

eventually had a more restricted meaning, for Sulaym^n al-Mahrl

in the first half of the 16th century refers to fthe port of

Pedir under the LSmurX mountain1 (2). LamurX is one of the

names for which the Arab Ramnl is an equivalent. Torad Pires

is even more specific and tolls us that 1Larabry is right next

(1) It was probably a fairly large area because it was said to

have several kings; Bauvaget, Relation. U. The same paragraph
gives its position between the two seas. For the equivalents
of Ramnl in other languages see note 2 on page 37 of Sauvagetfs
study and also Cowan, Bi.1d« S09 1933* 1+21-U2U.
(2) Ferrand, fL fempire Bumatranais', 102. Yet Buzurg in the
tenth century refers to ’the valley of Lamer!1, which suggests
a specific region; Le livre des merveilles de l ylnde. Van der
Llth (French translation by Devic)» 66.
 376.

to Achin* (l). There are numerous references to the L&murl

name. XlHmurldgdam was raided by the Tamils in 1025 (2). Chou

Chfu-fei in 1173 and Chao Ju-kua in 1225 mention Lan-11

an& Lan-wu-11 1 ^ ^5. jp respectively, and according to

Chou Ch*&-fei Chinese ships wintered there; by that time it

must have been an important trading centre (3)* Marco Polo

in 1292 mentions Lambri among a number of places in northern

Sumatra (h)» while the Javanese poem Hagarakptagama describes

Lamuri as a dependency of the Javanese kingdom of Majapahit (5)*

Early in the 15th century Ma Huan knew of Hann^o-li JL

and said that it was where H h e western ocean actually began*

(6). 1'a Huan also knew of Su-men-ta-la^ ^ 9 or

Samudra-Pasai further east on the same extreme north coast of

the island. Finally Pires mentions a number of centres on the

same coast. Fedir had once been important, but in his day

Pasai was the chief port (7)*

There is a similar continuity of notices about centres

on the north-eastern coast of Sumatra from Diamond Point to the

southern entrance of the Straits of Malacca. In the 16th

(1) Suma Oriental. I, 133* *Achin is the first country on the

channel side of the island of Sumatra1) ibid. Thus Pires knew
Atjeh an& Lambry as being on the Straits of Malacca, the Sal&ht
sea of the Arabs,
(2) Hultzsch, South-Indian Inscriptions. II, 105) Eplgr. Indica.
IXt 231*
(3/ Ling waj.tal ta. 1 W | Chu fan chlh. 20.
(I*.) Moule and Pelliot, Marco FolOn 1, 376*
15; Pigeaud, Java in the Ihth century. The Hague, 11.
(6) Yi nr yai Bh&ng Ian. 32-33l
(7) Buna Oriental. I, 135-145*
 377*

century none of them were as important as Atjeh on the extreme

northern coast, and very little is known of them before that

time. This coast corresponds to the country known to the

Arab writers as SalSht, which, according to Ibn Khurdadbih,

was a centre for sandalwood, Indian nard, and cloves (l)* The

Tamils in 1025 raided Pannal. which has been taken to mean

Panai on this coast (2). Chaq Ju-kua mentions Pa-tya %

possibly meaning the Eatak lands known to Conti as fBateth,

the man-eaters*, and to Pires as Fata on the same coast (3)#

Chao Ju-kua also mentions Chien-pel ^ , which seems

to correspond to the ffampe of the Nagarakgtagama and the Kan-pel

anchorage of the Wu pel chlh ^ ^ sailing

charts, identified with Aru Bay (4)* Ma Huan mentions A r u ^ ^ L

, while Wang Ta-yuan in 1349 mentions Tan-yang ,

believed to be the mouth of the Tamiang river Just north of

Aru (5)* Finally Pires mentions Aruf Arcat, Rokan, and Siak

as well as Bata on this coast (6)*

(1) Ferrand, Textes, I, 28. Ibn Roste, writing about 903 and
perhaps basing his information on a more complete form of Ibn
Khurdadhbih*s work, says that cubeb was one of the perfumes of
this island; Textes. I, 79. On Ibn Roste see Sauvaget,
Relation, xxiv*
(2) See note X on page 37& above. Pane is mentioned in the
N aga rakc ta ga ma.
13j Chu fan chih, 13) Buma Oriental. I, 145-146.
\4) Chu fan chih. 13; Pigeaud, Java in the 14th century, 11;
for the reference in the Wu pel chlh I am grateful to Mr, J.V.
Mills. l
(5) Ying yal sheng lan. 26j Rockhill, TP, 16, 1951, 143* Aru
is also mentioned by Rasid ad-Din in 1310; Ferrand, Textes, 2.
361.
(6) Suma Oriental. I, 145-150,
 376

There is an equally continuous string of references to

the west coast of Sumatra from Atjeh Head southwards, but this

coast seems to have become a prominent trading region later

than the other two coasts I have just described. In the

ninth century the Arabs know of Fansur as a famous camphor-

producing area and one of Buzurg’s informants, an Oman merchant,

visited it in the first half of the tenth century and reported

that tailed man-eaters lived between Fan3ur and Lamuri (1)*

Fansur is almost certainly the name of the village of Pansur,

in the immediate hinterland of Earus on the north-west coast

(2). The Arabs seem to have regarded Fansur merely as an

appendage of itSmnl and in a wild area* Pansur rather than

Barus is the name which a.;pears in most of the accounts of

Sumatra before Pires’ Suma Oriental. Chao Ju-kua speaks of

PTn-su ^ (3), Marco Polo of Fansur (h), while the Wu

pel chih sailing directions, probably compiled on the basis

of Cheng Ho’o voyages in the first half of the 15th century (5),
v

mentions Pnn-tsu 3r'):£- ££■ in a long list of landmarks known

(1) Le livre des mervellles de l’lnde. 125* For the dating of

Buzurg's informants see Sauvaget, ’Sur d ’anciennes instructions
nautiques arabes pour les mers de l fInde’, JA, 236, 1946, 11-20.
(2) For the geography of this region see Van Vuuren, ’De handel
van Baroes’, Ti.1d. aard. 24, 1369-11*02.
(3) Chu fan chih. 91, in connexion with camphor*
(4 j Moule and Pelliot, Marco Polo. 1, 376.
(5) According to Mills this map indicates the eea-routes taken
by the ships of the imperial fleets sent out by the early Ming
emperors; J.V* Mills, ’Chinese coastal maps’, Ima/go Bfundi* XI,
1954, 154.
 379.

to mariners on the west coast of Sumatra (l). The toponym

fBarus1 is far less certainly used. Ibn Khurdadhbih states

that Kilah, on the west coast of the Peninsula (2), was two

days from ’Balus*, inhabited by man-eaters and a source of

excellent camphor (3)» but this reads more like an alternative

name for northern Sumatra as a whole than a reference to the

port today called Barus and near Pansur* The Nagayakrtggama

mentions ’Barus1 as a dependency of M&Japahit (U), but in this

case it may mean in fact the Pansur region as distinct from

Lamuri further north, which is mentioned in the same source.

Evidence of an early trading settlement on the north­

western coast is very indistinct. Buzurg’s informants visited

it but did not describe any important centre there. The

Tamils do not claim to have raided it in 1025,for neither

Pansur nor Barus appears in the list of 13 places attacked that

year. In 1088, however, a Tamil trading corporation erected

an inscription inland of Barus, which suggests that by that

time foreign merchants were visiting it more frequently (5)*

But it is only with Pires that one has the first authentic

account of a flourishing port on the north-west coast of

Sumatra (6).

(1) I am again grateful to Mr. Mills for this information.

(2) Professor Wheatley has located Kilah, usually known as Kalsth,
on the Tenasserim coast; Golden Hrrsonese. 223-22Lu
(3) Ferrand, Textes, I, 27.
(/+) Pigeaud, Java in the lhth century. 11.
(5) Nilakanta Sastri, 1A Tamilmerchant-guild in Sumatra1, Ti^d.
72, 1932, 31U-327.
(6) Suma Oriental* I. 161-2, ’Sumatra calls it Baros’, whereas,
accordmg to f ires, the foreigners called it Panchur,
 330.

I do not deny the possibility of occasional visits by

foreign ships to this coast of man-eaters, behind which grew

tkOVLfik
the camphor and benzoin t r e e s , I suspect that the port

known today as Barus became busy only when the Menangkabau

country in the highlands to its south-west was developing,

Pires implies that Barus, Priaman, and Tico were important

because they gave access to the Menangkabau (l). But the

chief conclusion which I draw from these scanty references to

the north-west coast is the absence of certain evidence before

the 16th century that 1Barus1 was the name of a port there.

The Ming sailing chart is especially significant on account

of its wealth of topogi’aphical detail.

The picture which has emerged of the trading coasts of

the northern half of Sumatra from the ninth century onwards

therefore suggests that the extreme north coast contained the

chief harbours, that there were also 6ome centres on the

north-east coast, but that the north-we3t coast, though

occasionally visited by enterprising foreigners, was better

known as a camphor-producing area than because it possessed an

(1) Ibid. fThese three kingdoms ... are the key to the land of
Menangkabau, both because they are all related, and because they
possess the sea coast ...f The origins of the Menangkabau
kingdom in the interior of central Sumatra are unknown. There
is an inscription of 1286 of Padang Rocho on the upper Batang
Hari which refers to the country of Malayu; Krom, Versl. en Med.
Kon. Akad. Wetens.. Letterk* 5, 2, 1916, 306. Deutz relates
the tradition thut Hindus were established at Barus first and
succeeded in the area by Bataks. Later Malays came and founded
a village at Barusj Tl.1dschrjft. 22, 1875, 157.
 381.

important harbour. This picture has to be borne in mind

when we consider what is known of northern Sumatra before about

A*D, 800, Until that time foreigners seem to have been aware

of only two trading centres. Where were they ? To what extent

were they trading with India and China in the fifth and sixth

centuries ?

The earliest reference to northern Sumatra is contained

In Ptolemy’s Geographia. Ptolemy, probably drawing on the

experiences of Indian merchants, records the existence of the

man-eaters of the ’five Barousai islands’ and the ’three

Saladibai islands’, two areas which would have been avoided

when the Indians made their way to the civilised region of

Iabadiou (l). In Ptolemy’s book the ’Barousai islands’ appear

as the most western toponym which can be associated with

Indonesia, though it is not mentioned in the list of place-names

in the Nlddesa commentary, probably because it was not somewhere

sought out by merchants intent on gain.

The T ’ang sources make it clear that the ’Barus’ toponym

continued to be identified with northern Sumatra, but first I

wish to consider a much earlier Chinese reference to northern

Sumatra, though not under the name of ’Barus’• In an earlier

chapter I observed the way the Ptolemaic picture of western

Indonesia corresponded with that revealed in the Chinese

records of the third century (2), In both cases the prosperous

(1) Book VII, chapter 2, section 28* Renou’s text, 59*

(2) Pages 103-lOh.
 382 ,

region, visited by Indians, wa3 conceived as being at the

weBtern end of Iabadiou and the Ko-.vlng - Ssu-t'lao complex

respectively. The same correspondence may now be taken a

stage further, Not only did Ptolemy know of savage lands

which lay between the Indian Ocean and Iabadiou, K fang T fai

also seems to have heard of northern Sumatra in similar terms,

for the following pas* age appears in the T fai p M n g yu lan.

The first part of it is a repetition of part of the information

about F*u-lo-chung quoted earlier in this chapter.

*(Kfang T fai*s) Fu nan tfu tsu chuan. East of Chu-li

are the ? fu-lo-chunp; people* They all have tails
five or six ts*un long, Their custom is to eat men,
I note that this place (P fu-lo-chung) and also the south­
western F fu-lo are probably place-names of the Mei-
(tailed)~p*u ll) .f

Who wrote fI note* ? The T fal p fing huan yu chi reproduces

the same passage, including the fI note (2)f, Both this work

and the T yai p ,ing.vu lan were written in the 976 - 983 period of

the Sung dynasty and, in the absence of any evidence that the

authors of either of these works borrowed from the other, it

seems that they were independently quoting K fang T fai on the

fsouth-western P yu-lof, The section in the T fal p ,ing yS lan in

(1) TPYL. 791, 3508b.

(2) TPHY&. 179, 15a-b,
 333.

which the passage occurs deals with wild tribes on the frontiers

of China, and the compiler© may huye felt that it was appropriate

*o mention K*nng T*ai on P*n-lo, whose inhabitants, like those

living much, nearer to China Itself, had tails ?-;nd therefore

resembled the *Tailed P*u** one of the tribeS on the south­

western border of China (l).

But what did K*ang T*ai mean by the expression fsouth­

western1 P*u-lo ? Professor Btein, who was unable to decide

who wrote 11 note1 in tho T fai p*lnp: yu lan passage given above,

translates this passage as follows;

fJe note: ce tetritoire cst englobd dans le Sud-ouest

(entendez?dans le classenent des Barbaras, section Sud-
ouest)* P*ou-lo est cans doute un noia de lieu de3 P*ou
h queue (2),*

Pingjjjl^ . becomes a verb 1to b?3 comprised in*, •south-west* is

detached from F *13-10 and understood to m-?an a category of •bar­

barians* , while u-lo is taken to be a shortened form of P*u-

lo-chung* which is mentioned at tho beginning of this passage*

In support of Professor ntein*s translation it may be observed

that, in the following passage in the encyclopaedia, Liang

(1) lam not considering the possibility that K*ang T*ai compared
fr*8 P 1u^lo people with the vel-p*u* though it is curious that
both the TPYh mid the TPTPfC give this passage in identical
language, including the expression fI note^i#* 1 • I have not
found, bovver, any other K*ang ?*ai fragment where it can be
shown that K*ang T ’ai is quoted as •noting**
(2) *Le Lln-yi*, 11U-115.
 38*4.

Tsu’s Wei kuo t* ung ^ is quoted as Baying that ’in

the south-west there are barbarians who are called Tailed

P* u* (1). Here •southwest1 is certainly an orientation from

some centre in Yunnan, and in the same chapter of the encyclo­

paedia the Kuam; chih describes the ’Black F ’u who

were ’south-west* of Yung ch’ang (2),

Yet I prefer to render ping p_ and kai as fand also*

and ’probably* and to believe that K fang T*ai l e f t r e c o r d

P*u—l o t which he describes as being ’south-west* of some

pl;ce. Since he has already supplied what lay east of Chu—11

in the form of P ’u-lo-chung and also mentioned Ko-ving. known

to V7an Chen as south of Chu-chih ** Chu-li* it would not be

unexpected if he completed his account of the environs of

Chu-li with a reference to somewhere south-west of it* Further,

ifI am correct, he must have said that the P*u-lo people had

tails and possibly that they were man-eaters as well, and for

this reason the compilers of the T ’al p ’ing yu ..lan and the T* ai

p ’ing huan yu chi seised on his information and added it to

their accounts of the ’Tailed P ’u** The fierce population of

northern Sumatra were sufficiently well known to find a place

into Ptolemy’s Geographic* and K ’ang T ’ai io as likely to have

heard of them (3)*

(1) TPYL. 791, 3508b: & & % % % * &

(2) TPYL . 791, 3509a.
(3) References to ’tailed men’ in northern Sumatra are not
unknown in later literature; Yule’e Marco Polo* 2, 1871, 2Ulff.
 385.

I have a further reason for believing that P ^ - l o \ %

represented an ancient Indonesian toponym. As long ago as

1897 L£vi discovered a passage in K&lodakafs translation of the

Shih erh yu cning^Jl. of 392 (l). It is as follows:

i& 4> fa z~ f JL S
1 <Q & X
— £ • &> ji^ w * \ Q - "fe ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
ft *• *& ^ ^
4 #> (^1 ftp * Ha $2:
^ ^ jl i dJ^ ^ 11 5^
jL *- A. 51&.’
J’ Atl

fIn the sea there ere 2,500 countries, of which 180 feed
on the Five Cereals (? t have a civilised diet.) 330
countries eat fish and tortoise. There are five rulex*s
of kingdoms, and each ruler rules overo500 cities. The
first ruler is called (the king of) Ssu-ll country. This
land is very faithful to the Euddha and does not serve the
gods of the heretics. The second ruler is called (the
king of) Chla-lo. This land x^oduces the Seven Jewels.
The third ruler is called (the king of) Pu-lo. This
land produces i\2 kinds of perfumes and ^hite glass. The
fourth ruler is called (the king of) She~veh* This land
produces long pepper and black pepper. The fifth ruler
is called (the king of) Na-o. This land produces the
white pearl and glass of seven colours. The people in
thecities of these five great kingdoms are generally
black and short in stature. These countries comprise
65,000 ljl of space. Beyond them there lies only sea and
no people (2 ).f

(1) JA, 1897, I* 2h♦ He returned to this passage in fPour

lfhistoire du RSmayapa1, JA, 1918, 1, 82~8i+. Pelliot noted it
in TP, 22, 1923, note 1, and 10*1- 106.
(2) TaishS Tripitaka, vol. I4., no, 195, l*4-7b. Levi’s translation
is in fPour lfhistoire du Rum&yana*, JA, Jan- F^v., 1918, 83.
 386.

It will be observed that these five kingdoms were maritime ones

and their population were dark and short# Llvi was certainly

right to regard them, with one exception, as South East Asian

u •
countries. His exception was Ssu-1&. which he understood to

be Ceylon, the equivalent of Cosmas, Sielediba and obviously a

devout Buddhist country (l) # Ghia~lo» or K51a may represent

the place later known to the Arabs as Kalah on the west coast

of the Malay Peninsula (2)# L^vi had no suggestions for Pu~lo.

A
but he thought that She<-yeh. with its peppers, was a confusion

for yJava*. She-yeh transcribes literally Ya-ya. and L3vifs

reconstruction seems reasonable,

The sequence in which these names appear is significant.

First comes Ceylon, then a country on the west coast of the

/S
Malay Peninsula, and then Pu-lo and She-yeh. If one is

prepared to Identify K yang T yaifs ysouth-western P yu-loy.

somewhere in nortiiern Sumatra, with Pu-lo the list of names

reads like an itinerary from Ceylon Into Indonesia. The

botanical wealth attributed to Fu-lo is consistent with its

having access to the aromatic trees of northern Sumatra, and

so is its position between Ohia-lo and She-yeh.

The same toponym, with a similar location, may even appear

in the Mahaniddesa commentary. In that commentary appears

(1) Christian tonography. 383* Coamas says that this is the

Indian name for Taprobane#
(2) The Arab toponym Kalah is discussed by Wheatley, Golden
Khersonese. 216-22U*
 387.

Marapapara. but L£vi pointed out that the manuscripts also

give the name as Fftrapura. Parapura. Parapflra. and Parammukha (l)

This place comes in that list immediately after Kalamukha, which

i3 similar in name to the Chia-lo '^4 » Ka-la of the Shih erh

yu chin#, and two places before Java (2). There is also a

sixth century glossary, the Fan fan yu ^ ^ . which explains

Pu-lo v ijfo , appearing In a lost stitra, as meaning ’city

ify> 1, which is the equivalent of pura (3). It is

therefore possible that Pu-lo. if it in fact conceals pura.

corresponds to PUrapura and the alternative names in the

Mahaniddesa commentary. Whether K ’ang T ’ai, when he mentioned

the 1south-western P ’u-lo j^| » was also referring to this

place must depend, however, on whether one is prepared to

overlook the different sounds of P *u ^ and Pu /f (U). But

one thing seems likely. K ’ang T fai, as well as Ptolemy and the

authors of the Mahaniddesa commentary, realised that before one

(1) #Ptol£mde, Le Niddesa et le BphatkatHa’, 25* Ldvi had made

no suggestions about this toponym.
(2) Ibid, 23-25# The Fan fan yu glossary of the sixth century,
referring to Chia-lo and Pu-lo mentioned in the lost T ’al tzu wu
men# c h i n ^ ^-ft t>1& , states that Chia-lo means ’black’,
which indicates that*' it was thought to be derived from kala «
’black1| Taish5 Tripitaka, vol. 5h, not 2130, 1011c. "Levi
discussed this glossary in J£, 1915$ I » 200.
(3) Fan^fan y u .^lQllc# %^
(*4-5 25 *P^Sg/pi£u; P ’u y « ^b’wo/b’uo. I have followed
Karlgren’s reconstructions. It should be remembered, however,
that Pu is found in a Chinese translation of a Sanskrit sutra,
while P?:u may be K ’ang T ’ai’s crude attempt to transcribe a place*
name mentioned by Funanese Informants. One is tempted to think
that somewhere in these transcriptionsappears the Malay word
pulau » ’island’.
 388*

reached, the civilised land of Ko-ying-Ssu-t’iao (« Iabadiou#

and ’Java’) one had to pass a much wilder territory somewhere

in northern Sumatra*

But | whatever the meaning of P*u-lo and Pu-lo, it cannot

have been a transcription of the region known to Ptolemy as

’the Barousai islands1 unless one ignores the second syllable

of ’Barus’* The earliest Chinese transcription of ,Barusf

appears in the Liansr ahu in the expression P ’o-lu perfume ^

^3 , or the perfume (camphor) pf ^Barus’ (l)* T ’ao Hung-

ching also refers to ’Barus’ in his references to the resin of

1the Po-lu trpe ’ (2). It is curious, however,

that K fang Tfai does not mention ’Barus1 but only P*u-lo* which

cannot mean ’Barus’*

Thus by about A*D* 500 two toponyms, both apparently

associated with the northern half of Sumatra, were known to

foreigners* There was ’Barus’, mentioned by Ptolemy*

W SSSSNSKfr the Liang s h u . It T/as a cannibal area west of

Iabadiou* but by the sixth century associated with camphor*

There wao also P*u-lo* possibly also known as Pu-lo * which was

lor K ’ang T ’ai another cannibal land ’south-west’ of Chu-li

on tho Malay Peninsula, though in the Shlh £rh yu ching it appears

as a centreof perfumes and one of the five kingdoms (3)* But

(1) Liang shu* 5k> 18a*

(2) CLPyr 13t 321b. On pag©36!> note 3 » I gave another example
of how Po has sometimes been used for P ’o *
(3) I have no suggestion to make in connexion with Ptolemy’s
’Sabadibai islands’*
 389.

neither of these places can be identified with any of the

tributary kingdoms, and I conclude that their camphor and

'perfumes■ found their way to the outside world through other

ports in the civilised region of Indonesia, known to Ptolemy

o #
as Iabadiou, to K'ang T Tai as the Ko-ying - Ssu-t iao complex,

and to the pilgrims of the fifth century as She-p*o « ’Java1♦

One pictures northern Sumatra as a rich but dangerous country

on the fringe of the Indonesian world known to foreigners.

This picture of two early centres in northern Sumatra

is confirmed and becomes clearer in the T #ang period records,

fBarusf is the centre which is most frequently mentioned. It

appears as P fo-Hk-shih ^ ^ and the first of I Tsing f8

list of countries beginning from 1the west 1 of Srlviiaya

fAn enumeration from the west. There is P fo-ln-shlh,

Mo-lo-yu chou which is now Shlh-li-fo-shih kingdom
(^rlvijayaV, Mo-ho-hsin chou, Howling chou, Tan-tan
chou, F ' e n - p ^ n chou, P'o-li chou, Chueh-lun chou,
Fo-shlh-p *u-lo~chou (wKich I translate as '^Viijayapura1
in iwwfftowwe stern Borneo) (1) , O-shan chou, and Mo-chia-
man chou. There are also some small chou which cannot
be all recorded (2 ),*

f1) Page 36$ above•

(2) Nan hai chi kuei nei fa chuan, Taishd Tripitaka, vol, 5b-, no,
2125, 205b; Takakusu, Record, 10,
 390.

Since 1897 P.'o—lu—shih has been accepted as a transcription

of 'Barus' (l), and not only the sound of this name (B'ua-luo-sl)

but also its position in front of Mo-lo-yu * Malayq/Jarabi, on

the south-east coast of Sumatra, make the equivalence a reasonable

one to accept (2)# But by I Tsing's time in the second half

of the seventh century this wild region had progressed, for it

now had a harbour In communication with the outside world

beyond Indonesia, I Tsing states that two Korean monks died

there, and I assume that they were awaiting a ship to take them

to the holy places in India (3), The Koreans' harbour is

likely to have been that mentioned by Chia Tan about A.D, 800

as the final port of call in or close to the Straits of Malacca

before ships made their way across the Indian Ocean, He

calls it P'o-lu )!| (b-)* Ferrand in 1919 was more

(1) That year Kern suggested that P'o-lu-shih was a perfect trans­
cription of 'Barus'; 'Een Ghineesch reiziger op Sumatra'
(reprinted in Verspreide reschrlften, 6 , 1917, 216). In 190b-
belliot accepted Kern's explanation as the only satisfactory
restitution of the word so far proposed, and there the question
has rested ever since; 'Deux itinlraires', 3b-0,
(2) For the earlier sounds of Chinese words I follow Karlgren,
Grammata Serica recensa. Stockholm, 1957. The character -lu
is used by Ilsxian Tsang, earlier in the seventh century, to
transcribe the -ru sounds in the Sanskrit sturuka (storax)
i p a % 5fis. . it appears in his translation of the
Yogac%ryabhtiml£astra. chapter 3jt Laufer, Sino-Iranica, b-57*
(3) Ta T'anre hsl y u c h ' i u kao seng chuan, TaisHo Tripitaka, vol.
51, no, 2060, page 2c, P To-lu-shlh is^described as 'west1 of
Shih-li-fo-shlh, which is consistent with its position in I Tsipgt
list of countries translated above: , ^
)1\, 1 % M it S& ® ^
Chavannes, Mfeolre. 36-37*
(b) I translate this passage on page below.
 391

confident than Pelliot in 190^ that P *0- 1x1 was a shortened

transcx^ption of *Barus*, meaning the port of that name on

the north-west coast of Sumatra (l)* The absence of the

final —j3 in the transcription is not an isolated case, for it

is also lacking in the Yu yang tsa tsu*s transcription of

kapur barus (ku-pu-p*o-lu \%] ^ ^ ) f or *chalk of

Barus* *» camphor (2). Moreover there are precedents for the

equivalence of -lu and -lu (3)* I accept Chia Tan* s

port of P*o-l«u as being a place known as *Baruaf , probably

taking its name from a much more extensive region in northern

Sumatra known by the same name, but I shall show later why I

disagree with Ferrand*s identification of it with the port of

Barus on the north-west coast of Sumatra.

Two further T*ang period references to *Barus* have to

be noted. The HaIn T*ang shu describes Srlvijaya as *a

double kingdom*, of which the western one was called Lamx-p*o-

lu-ssu ^ (h) • Chavannes in I89U was the first

(1) Ferrand, *Le K*ouan-louen*, JA, Juil-Aout 1919t 53> note 3#

and 56-57# Pelliot* s view was that the modern port of Barus
on the north-west coast of Sumatra was too far from the Straits
of Malacca for it to be likely that Chia Tan*s port of P*o-lu
represented this Barus; *Beux itin£raires*, 3k2*
(2 ) 18 , 100, 0 . ^ ^
(3) In audition to the case of Lang-p*o-Iu-ssu 3S7 ,
noted immediately below, there is the case of a kingdom in
north-western India known in the Hsin T*ang shu (221 f , 5b) as
Ta P*o-lu ^ and also as Pu-lu Zh •
(b) Hsin T*ang shu. 222 7 # 5a. The text Is given in note
2 , page 12 .
 392.

to connect this toponym with I Tsingfs P*o-lu-shih, and Pelliot

accepted their identity (l). In addition to the similarity

of the names (2) both toponyms are consistently described as

being fwestf of grlvi^jaya, for I Tsing, in his account of the

two Korean pilgrims, says that F yo-lu-shlh was fwest* of

Srlvi;jaya (3)* Finally there is Varusaka. a Sanskrit reference

to this place, represented by the Chinese transcription of

Po-lu-sa '/»/ * Po-lu-sa appears in the Chinese

translation of the Arya Manju&r'Imftlakalpa. completed between

980 and 1000 (4). The date of the Sanskrit original is

unknown, but, according to Przyluski, it was written sometime

between the early eighth century and the end of the tenth

century (5)*

l} Chavannes * Mdmolre. 37; Pelliot, fDeux itindraires*, 3*4-0*

! 2) P fo-lu name Chia Tan used for the final port in
the region before ships sailed into the Indian Ocean.
(3) See note 3 on page 3^0 above*
(Lj.) Before the Sanskrit original was found Ldvi thought that this
transcription represented parusya or Farusas JA, Avr.-Juin, 1921,
332. He co rected this in 1923;^ JA, Juil-Sept#, 1923, 38-39* I
Tsing, a Sanskrit scholar, uses % in his transcription of fBaru^
and in this translation from the Sanskrit the same sounds %> is
used. In the official accounts, represented by the HTSys account
of Srlvijaya and by Chia Tan, was preferred*
(5) yLes Vidylraja *.*y, BEFFO, XXIII, 1923, 308. For the sake of
completeness I have to mention F yo-3mv£ in the tTfal ping huan
ot- .vttcchi * s itinerary fi*om Vijayapura to Canton; 177, 13a. Pelliot
^•#0 /.amniNi that this toponym was yet another transcription of fBaru^
^eux itindraireeT mm to* mm Fa Hsien transcribes Purusamra
as '% 1 while Hsvian Tsang uses the form#) i'tyjFeng civeng-
chunks Hsi yu tl ming. 59*^jL and3^ both represent -ru. On the
other hand we shall st-e in The following chapter that this Itin­
erary is not so confused as Pelliot imagined* It proceeds from
east to west until it reaches Malayu-Jambi, and P*o-lou appears
before Malayu. I have wondered whether P ^ - l o u has anything to do
with the ? fo-lu-chia-»B3uM /i$Q ji/T which is mentioned in the
HTB* s account of Ho-llng-fo ; see page l<& for the itinerary
and page if7/ for The HTS’s account of Ho-llng.
 393.

The oth-r northern Sumatran centre known in T*aug times

figures much leuc prominently than fBarusf* In SU2 and 669 a

kingdom known as P yo~lo^ ^ sent missions to China (i).

According to the Ha In T*anr? shu

% 2 . ®
*T£ one enters the sea south-west of Cfoylh T*u one
reaches Pto-lo (2).1

Chyih T yn was on the south-east coast of the Malay Peninsula*

and In vie?/ of the statement in the Hsin T fan|y shu it is

impossible to accept the suggestion in the early 17th century

Tung hoi van;: I^ q q , followed by Groenaveldt, thut it was the

same as B r u n e i ^ ^ in northern Sumatra (3)* It is much

more likely to be the place described in the Sui shu as

Pio-lo-sojJ, 3^. and test* of C h fih T*u (U)« P to-lo-so

muct have been known to Ch* ng Chun, who visited C h tih T fu *

and I suspect tint the additional information about F yo-lo

was a result of one of Its missions to China* In the parallel

account in the tlen of the passage in the Sul shu the name

becomes Lo-o*o (5)f L o -t^ o la also the name which

appears In the Ts*e fu ySan kuel in connexion with the mission

of 669, viiich, according to the Hsin T fan& «hu*. came from

(l) Tsfe fu yuan kuel, 970, 11399a* in respect of the 61+2 missioq
f 222 * 2a* for the 669 mission*

f K T S ♦ 222 T» * 2a*

Basic Sinological Scries, 1937# 5# 6 7 J Grooneveldt* Notes

on the Malay Archipelngro* 101,
(U ) Sui shu* 62* 3a*1 The passage is tra?slated on page3tt above,
(5; T~*'img tien* 186, 1009.
 394*

P yo-lo (1)* I therefore think that one is justified in

grouping together the passages about P yo-lo-so and P ro-lo

as information about one and the same place* Both the Sui shu

and the Hsin T yang shu indicate that this place was known to

be west or south-west of the southern Malay Peninsula, while

the latter text refers to a voyage in order to reach it. This

is consistent with a location in northern or even north-eastern

Sumatra. The Hsin T yang shu1a statement that it was *south­

west1 of C h yih T yu also recalls what I believe was K yang T faiys

statement that P yu-lo was a ysouth-western1 country known from

Chu-li. on the same coast as the later Chyih T fu though somewhat

further north. The transcription P yo-lo certainly does not

mean fBarusy# any more than K yang T yaiys P yu-lo can mean yBarus#.

Instead I consider that P fu-lo of K yang T yai, Pu-lo of the Shlh

erh yu ching. and ? fo-lo-( b o ) may represent a continuous string

of references to another centre in northern Sumatra.

By the beginning of the seventh century, therefore, two

areas in the northern half of Sumatra had become dimly known

(i) TPYK. 970, llU02b. This passage gives the ruler1s name as
Ta-po , while in the HTS his name is Chan-ta-po .
There can be no doubt that the ruler in both texts was the same
person. Lo-pyo Is therefore a link between P yo-lo-so and
F fo-lo. Apart from Groeneveldt1e identification of P yo-lo
with Borneo there has been very little interest in this place,
Krom in 1931 noted the possibility that It might be Borneo;
Hindoe-Javaansche, 96 . Pelliot in 190J+ thought that Its
position would be determined when that of Chylh T yu was known;
BEPEO, h, 19OU., i|04. In the event Pelliot tb surmise was correct
He certainly refused to believe that it has any connexion with
Brunei; Le H5.1a. 267, note 3U6. In 1929 Sei Wada also rejected
the Borneo theory by calling attention to the statement in the
HTS that P yo-lo was south-west of ChyIh T yut yThe Philippine
Islandsy ---------
 3951

to foreigners. Somewhere in the north-western highlands

overlooking the sea, was the wild *Barns* land. Perhaps south­

east of ’Barus* was the area which I shall call P*o-lo. Because

so little about these places was known before the seventh

century one forms the impression that their coasts were

inhospitable, though their hinterland was rich. Camphor, and

not missions, came from 1Barus*, while P *o-lo. under the name

EHzISL* possessed %U2 kinds of perfume*, but also sent no

missions. Yet what is known about the ’Persian* trade of the

southern ocean has suggested that the resources of northern

Sumatra contributed to Indonesian trade in the fifth and

sixth centuries, and we shall see in the final chapter that

northern Sumatra played its part in the origins of the

Srlvijayan empire. I therefore wi8h to describe a little more

exactly where the main harbours of the region are likely to

have been.

It is Chia Tan » writing about P* o-lu ^ , who

provides the clearest indication of where the port known as

*Barus* was* The port may have had another name but was known

as ’Barus* by foreigners because that was the name of the

region as a whole. Chia Tan’s evidence is in the fora of the

itinerary foreign ships took about A.D. 800 from Canton to the

Indian ocean during the north-eastern monsoon at the end of

the year, From Pulo Condore off the coast of Annam (l) to the

(1) Known to Chia Tan as Chun-tu-lunp: % 4 * It is

derived from ’Kundurung*; Pelliot, Polo, I, h-OU.
 396

Bay or Bengal the route was as follows

♦And then five days to a strait which foreigners call

chlh (l). Prom north to south it is a 100 li in
width* On its northern shore is Lo-yueh country*
On its southern shore is Fo-shlh country (flrlvi3aya).
If one goes by sea to the east from Fo-shlh country
for four or five days one reaches ITo-ling country,
which is,the largest island in the south. Proceeding
westwards fi'om the Btrait one reaches in three days
Ko-ko-sehg-chih country. It is a separate island
lying off the north-western corner of Fo-shih. Many
of its people are robbers and those who sail in ships
fear them. The shore to its north is Ku-lo country.
To the west of Ku-lo is Ko-ku-lo. Proceeding for four
or five days from Ko-ko-s^nK-c>iTh one reaches Sheng-
tcmg chou. Proceeding westwards for five days one
reached P fo-lu country. Proceeding for six days one
reaches Chia-lan chou of P ’o country (2).f

The •strait1 was evidently a short strip of water and riot

the Straits of Malacca* It probably represented the waters

off Singapore island and the entry to the Straits, and Professor

(1) Pelliot in 190*4- suggested the possibility that chih was

derived from the Malay selat. or •strait1, and no one has
questioned this since; •Deux itin£raires*, 231# note 5*
(2) HTS. 1*3 7^ 9 18b, Translations of this itinerary are
available in Pelliot,s ’Deux itin^raires*, 372-373# Wang Gungwu^s
fNanhal trade1 , 101*-105, and, partially, in Wheatley’s Golden
Khersonese. 56-57*
 397.

Wheatley believes that Lo-ySeh on its northern (*= eastern shore)

was a southerly part of the Malay Peninsula (1). Pelliot

identified the Ko-ko-seng-chih island with one of the

Brouwers islands lying opposite the state of Johore at the

tip of the Peninsula (2). The Identification of Ku-lo and

Ko-ku-lo on the Peninsula does not concern us (3). Pelliot’s

^ A
suggestion for Sheng-teng ^as the region of Deli and Langkat

further up the east coast of Sumatra (U)*

For the identification of p ’o-lu the important evidence

in this itinerary is the time it took to reach P ’o-lu

•proceeding westwards from the strait1« This was 12 or 13

days* Is Chia Tan’s evidence reliable ? If so, what are its

geographical implications ?

Chia Tan was certainly in a position to be well informed

(5) ♦ He served in the Hung lu ssu)^k ^ , the responsi­

bilities of which office included the reception arrangements

for foreign envoys and recording details about their countries*

l) Golden Khorsonese* 58-59*

i2) ’Deux itindrairc's1, 5k9.

3) They are discussed in Wheatley’s Golden Khersonese* 55-60*

h) ’Deux itin£rairesf, 35h*
(5) For information about Chia Tan see the biographies in the
Chiu T ’ang shu* 9 5b-8a, and Hsin T ’ang shu* 166
la-2a. Also see Wang Yung2 . ^ , Chung kuo ti t ’u shlh kang
mj fautj Peking, 1958, I*4-h9> and Chavarnes, *Les deux
plus anciens specimens de la cartographie Chinois©1, BEFEO* 3#
1903, 2hh« Information about the Hung lu ssu Is contained in
es Rotours, Traits des fonctlonnaires *•*, Leiden, 19*J7, I,
especially l4.O8-l4.i3* Chia Tan lived from 730 to 805*
 398,

On the basis of information received from the envoys maps

were presented to the emperor, Chia Tan is said to have cross-

examined envoys sent to the •barbarians’, the fbarbarian envoys1,

and others* His reference to the ay in.which shippers feared

the people of Ko-ko-seng-chih indicates that he also had

access to mercantile sources of information. In 801 he

presented to the emperor his Ku chin chun ftuo tao hslen sbu 1 shu

IS ^ ^ * To it was attached a map.

Neither of these documents have survived. The extant itinerary

contained in the Hsin T fanr? shu comes from the Chen yuan shih tao

, dealing with information of the divisions of

the empire in the 785 - 805 period* It may have been a

condensation of his great work of 801, which he began in 785*

The least, however, that may be said of Chia Tan is that he was

a responsible civil servant who had privileged sources of

information.

Also in 2ile favour is that the time he gives for the

voyage from Canton to the Straits of Malacca bears comparison

with other times given for* this voyage, thereby creating a

presumption that he was reasonably well served for his account

of the voyage in the Straits of Malacca, His voyage from Canton

to the ’strait’ took 18^ days, C h ’ang Chun took 20 days to

reach Ch ’lh T fu on the southern Malay Peninsula from Canton,

I Tsing in 671 took less than 20 days to reach Srlvijaya in-,--

 399.

southern Sumatra from Canton (l).

Chia T an’s concern for detail is shown in the care he

took to provide his itinerary with details about the course

the ships took. Seven of the 13 stages between Canton and

P ’o-lu are accompanied by directions south or west as the

case may be. The first five stages involved continuous

changes in direction, but from the Lingj*li mountain on the

Annam coast (2) to the ’strait* none are supplied. No change

was there necessary; the north-east monsoon took care of the

ships (3)#

For these general reasons one is encouraged to pay

attention to Chia Tan’s description of the voyage through

the Straits of Malacca. In it one notes that after the ships

had entered the Straits no change in direction is indicated

until they reached Chia-lan. or the Nicobars (h)* In particular

(1) C h fang Chun’s voyage is given in Sui shu. 82, i+b, and I
Tsing’s In Ta T*ang hsi yfl chfiu fa kao a&ng chuan, TaishD
Tripitaka, vol. 51* no. 20(S(>.' 7c g ‘ ChavannesTM^molre, 119*
(2) Identified by Pelliot as perhaps Cap Sa-hoi, north of Qu±
Nhon; ’Deux Itin^raires’, 217*
(3) An error appears, however, in Chia Tan’s account of the
voyage to Ceylon. Pelliot proposed to correct ’four days to
the north* from the Nicobars to Ceylon to read flU’ or ’2h’ days
without any change of direction; ’Deux itin^raires*, 355-356*
(k) I am assuming with Pelliot that the Chia-lan islands should
be identified with the Nicobars; ’Deux itln^raires’, 35U-355*
It i3 curious that these islands should be stated to belong to
P yo . which probably means P yo-lu * ’Barusf. The Arabs knew the
Nicobars as Langbalus. which seems to correspond to Lang-o’o-lu-
ssu, the name of the western kingdom of Srlvijaya in the H T8, I
cannot explain the significance of Lang- in the HTS. Can it
represent (Da)lam, meaning ’the within* in the sense of the royal
residence ? L a m , indicating a ’village’, is used in Atjeh today.
 koo.

there is no evidence that the ships had to change direction

after reaching the extreme north of Sumatra in order to make

their way to a port on the west coast of the island.

This is the crux of the matter. Are we to believe that

the text as we have it today includes an error and omits to

give this change in direction, which v/ould represent a change

of course at the tip of Sumatra southwards down the west coast

to the modern Barus, represented by P ’o-lu ? Thereis one

important reason for believing that this is not so*It is

difficult to believe that the eri'or has crept Into the text

unless one is also prepared to believe that the text is so

corrupt that it has misquoted the time taken to reach the

Nicobars from the southern entrance of the Straits of Malacca.

According to Chia Tan this took 18 or 19 days. But this

duration would have been incredibly brief for a voyage which

included about 600 miles from the corthern tip of Sumatra to

Barus and back. Peter Mundy took 17 sailing days in January

and early February, 1638, during the same monsoon period, to

proceed from the Strait of Singapore only as far as Atjeh; in

addition to these 17 day© he was held up for a further five

days by ’shoals, calms, tides, etc. 1 (1).

Sailing conditions in the Straits of Malacca during the

(l) The travels of Peter Mundy in Europe and Asia* 1608-1667*

The Hakluyt Society, 191S, 3, 320-329. I Tsing took 15 days
from Malayu-Jarabi to Kedah; Chavannes, Mdmolre* 119*
north-east monsoon at the end of the year are such that Chia

Tan’s aaccount of the voyage, if it is accepted at its face

value, has to be interpreted as a slow one over relatively

short distances rather than a quick one over long distances.

There would have been detours to avoid the pirates of Ko-ko-

seng-chlh or the sand banks off the north-east coast of Sumatra,

but the main factor slowing up the speed of the voyage was the

weather. Though storms are rare, passages uninterrupted by

Intervals of slow sailing or even of calm are unusual (l). The

India Directory notes that ships sometimes get through the

Straits ’without anchoring aboveonce or twice’ (2). The

prominent feature of the weather is that there is no single

prevailing wind; local and variable winds normally predominate

in the Straits. In the inter-tropical monsoon front at the

southern end of the Straits, with its upward movement of air,

the north-east inonsoon ceases to be vigorous and the vacuum

is filled by light land and sea breezes, whose variety is

stressed by the sailing directories. Off the north-east

Sumatran coast in December north-west winds blow against ships

making northwards. Even at the northern entrance to the

(1) For navigational conditions in the Straits during the north­

east monsoon see J. Horsburgh, Memoirs ..., London, 1805; The
India Directory, or .directions fox* sailing to and from the East
Indies .... 6th editionTLondonT lS6ht Malacca Strait Pilot ~
(Hydrog -aphic Department, The Admiralty, London)",T"19&5; W.L.
Dale, ’Wind and drift current in the South China Sea’, MJTG, 8,
1356, 1-31.
(2) Volume 2, 75.
 k02.

Straits, where the north-east monsoon is strongest, the monsoon

is liable to veer to the north or north-west, while westerly

breezes ofcne or two days duration have been experienced in

every month when the north-east monsoon should prevail* The

current in the Straits can also slow up shipping. Though it

tends to flow northward3 all the way, it can flow southwards

from the Aru islands, while at the southern entrance to the

Straits the floodtide flows in a south-eastern direction as

far as the Karimun islands between Singapore and the east coast

of Sumatra u > *
If Chia Tan’s ? ’o-lu had been Barus on the west coast of

Sumatra, his ships would have performed an extraordinary feat

of navigation. Not only would they have raced through the .

Straits but they would also have accomplished the Barus ditour

with remarkable speed. It took six days from F yo-lu to the

Nicobars, a voyage of approximately 600 miles. The voyage

from Pulo Condore off Cochin-China to the island of Singapore

is the same distance. Chia Tan’s ships took five days from.

Pulo Condore to the ’strait’, but they had behind them the

maximum benefit of the north-ea3t monsoon* The navigational

(1) The voyage of ;eter Floris in November, 1613* in respect

of the part which lay from the Strait of Singapore to the Aru
islands, illustrates in an extreme way how delays could be
caused by unfavourable tides and lack of wind. He left th$
Strait on 10 November and was off Malacca nine days later;
Peter Fiords The Hakluyt 3ociety, 193U, 10U-105.
 k03♦

situation off the west co'iSt of Sumatra io very different* Xn

December th© journey from the equator to Atjeh Head has been

described as *often :>edious1 on account of baffling north-

ivest winds and southerly currents (l), while in January the

winds blow from the north (2)* On the other hand, six days

from a port on the northern coast of Sumatra to the Nicobars

is not an improbably duration* For Na Huan the journey

from one of the islands o:f Atjeh to tho hleob&rs took three

days v/ith a *fair wind1 (3)# But on the seas between northern

Sumatra and the Nicobars the north-east monsoon sometimes gives

way to a variety of winds which blow ships off their course*

The monsoon itself may ven veer to the west* A voyage ox*

six days does not appear to be unusually long from the northern

coast of Sumatra to the Hicobaro*

Chia Tan1© port of p fo-lu » •Barus1 is therefore unlikely

to have been further on the Sumatran coast than somewhere between

Atjeh Head and Diamond Point. From tho facts given in his

itinerary it could not h;vo been on the west coast, nor could

it have been the port of Barus, which ToinS Pireo knfcw.

(1) India Directory* I, 766*

(2) Sea, for example, the map on page 28 of the English trans­
lation of Hobequainfs ffalaya. Indonesia. Borneo* and the
Phlli pninesf London, 193h, or the map facing page xvlii of
#heatleyfo Golden Khereonese*
(3) Ylnr ynl rh^ng fan. 3h* Ma Huan knew the Kicobars as
T s ful-lan mountain ^
 kOk*

Nevertheless errors may have crept into the Hsln T*ang

shu1s account of Chia Tan1s itinerary so as to render its

Jetails unreliable (l) * All that can be done is to consider

the facts as wo have them In the light of independent

evidence. If ? ?o-lu was somewhere between Atjeh Head and

Diamond Point two matters become more meaningful. In the

first place, if that port had b en down the north-west coast

of Sumatra, why is it that the Arab accounts of the ninth

century and therefore only about fifty years later than Chia

Tan Jo not give the Impression that Fansur. their name for

the modern Barus region, was a flourishing trading centre from

which the Korean pilgrims in the seventh century are likely to

have sailed to India and the point of departure for ships

bound for Ceylon, as Chia Tan describes P yo-lu ? (2) Are

we to suppose that some dramatic political change took place

shortly after Chia Tan wrote and that as a result the west

coast port of Barus suddenly fell Into the obscurity which

(1) Ferrand, who believed that Chia Tanfs itinerary was through
the Sunda Straits and up the west coast of Sumatra, thought that
the text was in bad shape; fLe K fouen-louen*, JA, Juil-Aout,
1919» 57, note 3#
(2) Sauvaget considers that the compiler of the work of 851,
known under the same of Suleyman, used as his informants
merchants who hid resided -for a long time in foreign ports.
This would have lent authenticity to the contents of the
Relation de la Chine et de llIndet Relation, xxxiii.
 k05

surrounds the region known to the Arabs as Fansur ? Much

more probable is that Chia Tanfs P* o-lu was the main port

which served the northern region of Sumatra, known to the

Arabs as ftaran1» and that it had considerable antiquity.

The other piece of evidence which becomes more meaningful

is contained in the Hsin T ’ang shu*s account of SrlviJayaj

j-'a - rfi 9 1g » 3 ff i t % ifj 7? fa
i £ i 1 @n -
’This country (grlvljaya) ... is divided into two
kingdoms, and they have separate administrations*
The western one is called Lang-p1o-Iu-ssu* It
(hnng-pro-lu-ssu) has much gold, mercury, end camphor.
At the summer solstice if an eight chrlh sundial post
is erected, the shadow lies to the south of the post and
is two ch*ih and five tsfnn long. The country (of
Srlviiaya) has cany males .., (I).1

In this translation I hove attributed the sentences about the

products and the sundial reading to Lang-p^-lu-ssu and not

to Srlvi^aya, as has been done in the past (2). This sundial

reading has never been taken seriously. Correctly estimating

the height of the sundial as 80 Chinese *inches1, $erini

calculated the latitude as 5-50* north (3). Owing to the

blurred shadow on the ground from the rays of the upper and

lower edges of the sun, the error of uncertainty may be about

+ 20* (i+) . But 5* 50* north of the equator has seemed an

(1) KTS, 222 I , 5a,

(2) Pelliot remarked of the sundial reading that *cette
observation prise & la lettre, est inadmissible1) fDsux
itin<Srairesf, 33U» Most writers have preferred to ignore
the sundl&l reading.
(3) Researches, t|.82-b83* Gerini understood that the reading
indicated the northern-most limit of the land of Bhih-11-fo-shlh
(Srlvijaya)•
(h) An exercise in sundial-reading is contained In an appendix
±o a t M n * s »LeL l n - . v l * . ________
impossible latitude for the capital of SrXvijaya, associated

by most scholars with the south-eastern coast of Sumatra.

Only Moens1 fertile mind was not mystified, and he proposed

that the first capital of ^rlvijaya was in the Kc-lantan

region on the east coast of the Malay Peninsula, the area known

as O h 1lh T ya at the beginning of the seventh century (X) • Biit

if my interpretation of the text is acceptable, it means that

the capital (2) of 1Barus1 should be sought somewhere on the

extreme northern coast of Sumatra from Atjeii Point to a few

miles east of Cap Pidie (Lat. 5° 30’ K ) .

Sinologues may agree with me that the passage which I

have just quoted from the Hain T fam/ shu is ambiguous. In

support of my interpretation it should be noted that the

attribution of gold and especially of camphor to the northern

(1) *3rlvijaya, STava en Kataha*, 12.

(2) On $ note 4- , above I suggested that hang- might
be an abbreviated form of (Dallam, meaning the seat of the
royal residence. This would be consistent with the specific
position given to Lang-p1o-lu-ssu as the headquarters of the
*western* kingdom. Whether the Achinese language was spoken on
the const of northern Sumatra as long ago as the seventh or
eighth century is something which cannot be determined. It is
curious, however, that one of the features of Achinese, which
distinguishes it from ibalay. is not to sound the ~j3 at the end
of words. huch a word is 'Barus* itself, which in Achinese is
pronounced Baroih; Koesein Djajadiningrat, A t.1shahsch^
Nederlandsch Woordenboek. Batavia, 193U, If l£3* It 1?ill be
recalled that in ccyuicxion with the Chinese name for 1camphor*
(P fo-lu perfume 'Ai ft % ) the -s, included in I Tsingfs P'o-lu-
ghih ^ , is absent. Could it be that the trade name
for camphor was oicked up from the speech of the inhabitants of
tne camphor port of fBarusf on the northern coast of Sumatra ?
 k07.

half of the island is what is to be expected (l). My

interpretation also gives force to the word 1country *,

a pear ng after the sundial reading; it se ms to resume the

account of the double Kingdom after the parenthesis about

the products and location of the ’western one1 (1)* *t is

certainly surprising that the Chinese annalists should have

giver the location of the subordinate capital, but it is

noteworthy that they omit to ive the name of the 'eastern1

kingdom* Nor do we know how the section of Srlvijaya in the

Hsin T'arw shu was put together.

I believe that ray location of the harbour of 'Barus' on

/K<jufbv*^
the basis of this b w lial/i* consia ant rith both Chia Tan's

account of ?'o-lu in terms of sailing distances and with the

description of R&mni in Arab accounts as the centre of a number

(l) Indragiri on the e st coast slightly south of the e uator

was later a famous export centre for gold fr.>m the Menangkabau
land in the interior, but it has never been known as an important
camphor-exporting region. pires said that gold came from the
interior to Pedir, the harbour close to dap# Pedi“; Suma
Oriental , I, lhO. In 1727 Ale ander Hamilton wrote: ^tch- en
affords nothing of its own Product fit for Export but Gold Dust,
which they have pretty plentiful, and of the finest Touch of any
in those Parts ••• They do not dig for it, but catch it in
gullies or little ^ v m e t c , as it vasb.es off the Mountains, and
one particularly, a very high Mountain’; A new account of the
Eo-t Indies* 1727, N.w, Penzer edition, 1930, II, 38. Schrieke
ha;. sse bled the sources attributing gold exports to Atjeh;
Ruler and leal in early Java . 1937 translation. 336, note 55.
X2Y The* rest of the account deals with the animals of Srivijaya,
the royal name (Ho-mi,^ ), and 3rlvi;jayan embassies to China.
 W>8.

of kingdoms.(l ) . Particularly significant is the fact that

the position indicated by the sundial reading is identical

with the exoctest location ever attributed to Lamuri (- Ramril),

It is provided by Tomd Piresj

’Achin is the first country the channel side of the

island of Sumatra, and Lambry is right next to it and
stretching inland (2).’

The hint that Lambry stretched inland is reminiscent of the

Arab picture of RamnI as a large region which extended as far

as Fansur in the south (3). Here may be a vestige of the

link which once existed between the ancient harbour of ’Barus1

and its camphor-producing hinterland (h)*

Such are the reasons why I consider that the main port

of the ’Barus’ region of northern Sumatra lay between Atjeh

H ad and Diamond Point and was not the port ori the west coast

C D ’Ramnl: this island is shared between several kings; its

size, they say, is eight or nine parasanges* Much gold is found
there and a place called Pansur, which produces an abundance of
good quality camphor’; Sauvaget, Relation, U, with the restora­
tion of Sauvaget’s hambri to the Ramrii which appears in the
original text, Gold and camphor are here attributed to northern
Sumatra.
(2) Suma Oriental. I, 138*
(3) A last glimpse of Lamuri is contained in the writings of Sidi
All Celebi of 155?*» which refer to ’the former Lamuri on the east
coast (of the Bay of Bengal)1; Ferrand, Textes. 2* 522.
(h) Rouffner reconstructed the Ramnl - Lamurl name as Lrimbaroe or
Lambaroeehs ’Beeidende Kunst in Kederlandsch-Indie’, BiidT""^.
1932, note 1* Schrieke Identified it with Larobarieih: Ruler
and vealm, 256, Neither explained how he <.-ame to this conclusion
which seems to embody the name of ’Barus’ in the Arab name. It is
tempting to look foro/phonological connexion between the name as
the Chinese knew it as late as about A*D, 800 and the name as it
appears when the Arabs wrote shortly afterwards, but I doubt whe­
ther this can be done, I prefer to be guided by the Nagarakrtamme
which mentions both Barus and Lamuri. I think that the former was
a regional name in my period which conveniently lent itself as
the name of the region’s chief port in Chinese records,
 hos.

now known as Barus. The ^ort in Chinese records took its

name from the region. It would have been close to the stands

of Pinus merKusli and in communication with the camphor and

benzoin jungle further south.

* o
The other northern Sumatran centre was P o - I*, and I am

unable to locate it exactly. It must have been on Chia Tan1s

itinerary, but the only place-name other than P*o-lfct is Sheng-

> ven or eight sailing days from the southern

entrance of the Straits and tentatively sited by Pelliot in

the Deli area.In Ming tines the Chinese knew of Aru here*

On the other hand, the Tamil inscription of 1030 - 1031

mentions Pa&sai. which is also mentioned in the lUth century

ffagarakyt§gama as Pane. The mcdern Panoi has river access to

the interior, where the Padang Lawas site has yielded

archaeological remains, some of which have been dated not later

than the tenth century (l). In the ninth century Ibn

Khurdadhbih writes of Sal&ht. the country of the •Straits*, and

somewhere on the Sumatran side of the Straits of Malacca a

small trading centre must have existed in much earlier times*

Of only two things am I certain. p*o-lo was not on the west

coast of Sumatra, nor did it send tribute to China before the

(l) Bosch, #Verslag van een reis dooi' Sumatra*, Pud he id kuncl 1g
Vers lag. 1930, lip. Prom G-unong Tuwa 1. Padang Lawas has come
an inscription with a date corresponding to A.D* 102*4. But the
north-easter:; coast of Sumatra south of Medan is well-served
with rivers, and P yo-lo could have been on any of them. In the
lgth century there was a fBara* on this coast, and P fo-lo would
render Bara admirably. But why is nothing heard of Bara before
the 19tli century ?
 Uio.

seventh century.

Though neither *Barusf nor P*o-lo were among the

tributary kingdoms in the fifth and sixth centuries I have dwelt

on their location in order to show that fBarus* was a port on

the Straits of Malacca and that F* o~lo was unlikely to have

been anywhere else. In particular I want to emphasise the

coast on which fBarusf lay. In later times the extreme

northern coast of Sumatra, as a result of trading with Indian

Mosbms, became a famous commercial centre, and ns early as 1178

Chou Ch#G-fei writes that ships from Canton wintered there before

proceeding to the Indian Ocean (l)• In subsequent centuries

its easy access to international shipping routes (2) and its

rich hinterland guaranteed the prosperity of a succession of

small harbour kingdoms there. But before the 12th century

practically nothing is known of the region except for the few

foreign records which have been quoted in this chapter. Perhaps

Moslem fanaticism in modern times has been responsible for the

destruction of fpagan1 inscriptions and temples. Nevertheless

one enquires when these geographical advantages first began to

exert their influence on the commercial development of the

(1) Ling wai .ta ta. 2, 2 3 : ^ ^ t 3 £'J

(2) Ma Huan expressed vividly the situation of Su~men-ta-la «
Pasai when he said that fit was the hig: road for the Western
OeeanU^ & 'J Ylngjral .BhfnfcJ.an, 27.
 *

northern coast* hitherto P*o-lo has been ignored by

historians, while the *Barus* port known to the Chinese writers

has been lost on the west coast, chiefly as a result of

Ferrand*s studies. But we shall see at the eaS of this study

that the commerce of the kingdoms on the Straits of Malacca

was developing in the seventh century and that the rulers of

SrTvijaya were aware of this#

Before the seventh century, however, the harbours of

northern Sumatra, like those of Borneo, can be eliminated as

the bases for the middlemen in the trade with China. Instead

Indonesians from elsewhere collected and carried northern

Sumatran produce. Some general reasons may be suggested to

account for the relative backwardness of the region*

The phycical geography of the northern half of the island

is to a large extent responsible. Except in the alluvial

lowlands south of Medan on the Straits the mountains are never

far from the coast, and the northern coast is separated from

the Gajo highlands by a broad stretch of uninhabited mountain

territory* The highlands occupied by the Gajo, Alas, and the

numerous Batak peoples contain plateaux, the soil of which

has been nourished by lava deposits and is fertile and capable

of supporting a large population. As a result the inhabitants

of the mountainous hinterland havo tended to dominate the

 412 #

coastal population (l), and it is even probable that in early

times there was little ethnic difference between those who

lived on the coastland and in the highlands (2).

Nothing is known of the early history of the peoples of

the interior (3)# but there are scraps of evidence from later

times which reflect what was probably an age-long vulnerability

of the coast to attack from the interior, a threat which ?;oul3

have been a discouragement to trade. Va Huan relates that a

ruler of P sal had been killed by tho tattced people in the

interior (4)# Pires heard that the ruler of Bata on the north­

east coa^t was often at war with, the people of the interior and

that the latter sometimes disagreed with Paeai 1because of the

crops of pepper, silk, and benzoin; but they affirm that in the

(1) Robequain notes that in Sumatra the centres of civilisation

fire inland and that tho cultural preponderance of the highlands
over the lowlands is rare enough in tropical Asia for it to d e ­
serve special mention; Malay. .Indonesia ... # 145-146.
(2) Legend has it that the original population of Atjeh were the
Orang tfantir, who were long ago driven out by the Pataks; Van
Langen, fDe inrichting van bet Atjehsche staatsb^stdi r onder het
Sultanaat*, Bijd. 1833, 384. In Loeb?s opinion the original
population of Atjeh was probably similar to the present mountain
population of Gajo and Alas; Sumatra. Its history and People.
Vienna, 1935# 219.
(3) There are traditions of early. Indian settlements on the coast
of northern Sumatra but there are no grounds for assigning the
settlements to the pre-seventh century period#; Van Langen, fDe
inrichting1, 384-386. Heine-Geldern has recently attempted a
reconstruction of early Batak history from the seventh^centuiy,
based on Chinese records of ?* l-chyien kingdom®£(: wq in
pre-T1ang times; B3T?E0. 49# 2, 1959, 361-404* But-V l - c h * l e n
was certainly not in Sumatra; see pages 111-113* Heine-Geldern
traced Buddhist traditions in Batak culture, which he tried to
connect with the Buddhist kingdom of P* i-ch* ien. He admitted,
however# that many of his conjectures were hypothetical.
(4) Yin# yai shfeng Ian. 27-28.
 413.

quarrels their wishes prevail over Pase* ( l) . The reluctance

of the inland people to respond to influences from the coast

s ind1cated by Ibn BattHtal/

« • •
s gtat em ent in the 1 U th century

hat Paeai used force to impose Islam on them (2; . According

•o II e ilikayut Pa,la Raja baaa.!, the Gaio people fled inland

in or. er to avoid lel&n (3)* Even at the height, of its

i.ower in the 17th century the Sultanate of At 3eh remained no

non: than a harbout king' o*i, with little power ix* tixe interior.

The only inference that can be drawn from the few foreign

accounts of the population of northern Sumatra over a period

of many centuries is that they were considered to be dangerous.

From the time of Ptolemy and K ’ang T fai onwards the man-

eating theme recurs monotonously. Only the T *ang Chinese do

not mention it, and this can be explained by the fact that

they never visited the region. In A r a b literature the most

eliable evidence is provided by the tales of Buzurg, which

seem to have been based on information brought back by the

occasional visitors to those shores. One of them reported

that there were ’tailed manea*ers who lived between the land

ot‘ Fansur and the land of L a m e r i f (4). Karoo Polo, who stayed

(1) Suma Oriental. I f 143.

(2) Ferranti, Tex se>, II, 440.
(3) J.P* Mead, ’Hikayat Rajo-Raja P a s a i 1, romstnized text, JSBRAS.
66, 1914, 12.
(U)L,c Livre d e s iot- rveilles de 1 ’I n d e , 125.
 414.

some time at Saraudra, took special measures to protect himself

against the cannibals (1). Barbosa heard that the people of

A r u were eaters of human flesh, fand every foreigner whom they

can take they eat without any pity whatsoever1 (2). Pires

heard of the population behind Singkel on the north-west

coast as ’strong, savage, bestial people who eat m e n 1 (3).

It need not be concluded that the inhabitants of northern

Sumatra were markedly more primitive than those in some other

regions of South East Asia in early times# The reports about

their cannibalism may have been deliberately encouraged by the

inhabitants themselves to keep the foreigners out of their

lands. But the first Indian traders to Indonesia are not likely

to have traded regularly with the harbours of this region.

Moreover they would have discovered that, until they reached

the coast south of Medan, harbour facilities were poor and that

there were no easily navigable rivers up which protection could

(1) Moule and Pelliot, Marco P o l o . 1, 373* Referring to Ferlec

he says that Islam had Tieen introduced among the townspeople, but
the hill-people lived like beasts and ate human flesh? ibid, 371*
(2) The Book of Duarte Bar b o d a . edited by Dames, (Hakluyt Society,
v o l . xlix, 1921), 2, 168.
(3) Suma Oriental# I f 163*
 415.

be provided from the sea (l). For all these reasons it is

difficult to believe that there were busy Indian trading

settlements in northern Sumatra, and as a result wider horizons

would not have been opened up for the population. Instead,

these people evolved in Isolation (2)# It was only in subsequent

centuries that the coast of P ’o-lu attracted Indians and Arabs,

Malays and Javanese, and produced the mixed Achinese population

who live there today. The foreigners came later not because

the local population had become more friendly but because

Srlvljaya was now weak and could not prevent them from trading

with this rich region. In the fifth and sixth centuries,

however, the favoured trading coast of western Indonesia lay

elsewhere.

(1) The Malacca Strait Pilot, third edition* 1946, 51, describes
the northern coast of Sumatra to Diamond Point as ’inhospitable
and without conspicuous landmarks; in places the cliffs rise
precipitously from the sea to a considerable height, crowned by
dense vegetation South of Medan live the Karo Batfcks,
whoBe social organisation is distinguished by features often
described as Hindu; -they are summarised by Loeb, Sumatra, 20-21,
and discussed by Krom, Hlndoe-Javaansche Oeschiedenis. 1931> 85-
86. As historical evidence these ’Hindu* features haveno valuer
but one wonders whether the better harbour facilities on the
north-east coast of Sumatra resulted in more frequent Indian
trading visits than to the extreme north of the island. It is ]
on this coast that I am inclined to locate K ’ang T ’ai’s P ’u-lo.
Pu-lQ of the Shih erh yu chin# (-translated at the end of the
fourth century), and the seventh century P ’o-lo which sent two
embassies to China* One suspects that this place was slightly
more advanced than ’Barus’ before the seventh century.
(2) I borrow the expression ’evolution in isolation’ from Dobby,
Southeast Asia. 208.
 4i6.

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

THE FAVOURED COAST OF EARLY INDONESIAN COMMERCE

The tributary kingdoms of Indonesia in the fifth

and sixth centuries lay south of the Straits of Malacca

somewhere on the coast of south-eastern Sumatra and northern

Java, This conclusion will surprise few students of early

Indonesian history. They will be more curious to know where

on this coast*I believe the kingdoms were. I think that at

least two and perhaps three of them were in Java and that

certainly one and perhaps two were in Sumatra. The most

important Sumatran kingdom was almost certainly g a n - t >o - l i .

K a n - t 1o-ll lay at the western end of the tributary c o a s t »

and I consider that it was on the hub of the trading coaBt

in these centuries. It is the kingdom which can be

described with most confidence as the predecessor of

Srivljaya, and this is in fact h o w it was described in the

M i n g shih a thousand and more years later (1.)

(1) M i n g s h i h . 324» 24b j

 \
417.

The method I have adopted in identifying these

kingdoms is to consider first what is known of those whose

names survive in the somewhat fuller records referring to

the seventh century and especially in the works of I Tsing*

a visitor to the region whose information I have come to

regard as accurate and illuminating (1)* I shall hegin with

Tan-tan and P ,o - l i t and the evidence about them indicates

that they are likely to have been in Java,

In spite of the unsatisfactorily vague description

of P 1o - l i 1s position in the first account of it provided b y

I*lang s h u , later accounts make it certain that it lay on

the eastern confines of what the Chinese regarded as the

culturally more advanced part of Indonesia* The Liang shu

mere l y statesi

(1) I T s i n g fs life and travels are discussed In T a k aku s u f

R e c o r d , xxv-xxxviii, Takakusu establishes the date of the
composition of I T s i n g f Record and Memoirs as not later than
692; ibid, liii-lv*
 •It is to the south-east of Canton and a maritime
region in the ocean* Canton is two m o n t h s ’ journey
*rom P * o - H (!)• It takes *50 days to travel from
P ’0-11 *a eastern boundary to its western one and 20 days
from its southern boundary to its northern one* It
has 136 settlements (2)*«

But in the seventh century more information becomes available

about# its position 1 for the Sul shu contains a passage which

shows how one reached P*o-lt from Chinat

•Dne sails south over the ocean from Tongking and travels
via C h ’lh T*u (on the south-eastern Malay Peninsula) and
tfan-tan and then reaches this country (P ^ - l l )* It
takes four months to travel between the eastern and
western boundaries of P ’o-ll and 15 days between its
southern and northern boundaries (3)«f

(1) The time taken is consistent with the length of the voyage
from Y e h-T^o-t’i to Canton in Pa H s i e n f8 time.
(2) Liang shu» 5 4 1 19a-b.
\3) Sui s h u * 82, 7b#
 1^9.

P ’o-ll was obviously some distance from the Peninsula, and I

believe that Ch'ang Chun visited it b y means of this itinerary

some time between 607 and 610 when he was overseas. Ihe

evidence for Ch'ang Chun*s visit is not Implied in the

following passage in the T'al p'ing yu l a n . quoting the Sul shu

on Lo-ch*a, which gives, however, the impression that P'o-li

was at the limit of the civilised world.

 1+20*

’L o - c h ’a country is to the east of F * o - l i * The

people of L o a c h ’a are extremely crude* They have
red hair and "black skins* They have the teeth of
wild animals and the claws of eagles* When they
trade with the city people, they always do so at
night* In day time they hide their faces* In
6 0 7 1 during the reign of (Sui) T a n g Ti, C h ’ang Chun
and others were sent as envoys to C h H h f >u » Thus
L o - c h ’a country was made to recognise “the power of
China i l ) . ’

Information about C h ’ang C h u n ’s visit to the eastern borders

of P ’o-li is indicated more clearly in the T ’ang hui y a o *

It probably came from a common source, based on C h ’ang C h u n ’s

memoirsI
a % .a . f a s . ;

( f l. # ^ 1-k PS -

(1) T P Y L , 788, 3490b* I have accepted Dr* Whitaker’s

understanding of the last sentence* The TPYL passage does
not appear in the Sui s h u * The compiler of the latter savs
that in the 606-616 period more than ten (of the countries)
of the southern region came with tribute but that the details
about them were lost* % 'P # & 1 =$ i ‘S ^ fefl
Sul s h u , 82, la* I doubt, however, whether so primitive a
country as L o - c h ’a ever sent tribute, and I am inclined to
attribut^em the information about it to C h ’ang C h u n ’a visit
F ’o - 1 1 * The TPYL passage is reproduced in the T ’u n g j i e n ,
188, l C l O , end in the T ’ai p ’lng hua n y u chi, 177, 5b*” Boih
these works state that Lo-ch'a traded with ’Lin-yi'/fcN g, A •
and not with*the city people S6 ’* I feel that the TPYL
contains the correct information, unless L o - c h ’a , which t
shall define below as the name for the population of eastern
Indonesia in general, here means the inhabitants of the
Moluccas or Philippines who traded with the Chams of Lin-yi
(on the Annam coast). HTS, 222 T , lb, states that in the
627-649 period P ’o-li and L o - c h ’a sent missions to China, but
this must be a mistaken reference to the P ’o-11 mission in
630, mentioned in CTS* 197, 2a* The confusion between
P ’o-11 and Lo-cha is also contained in T H Y , 99, 1769, which
states that the £in-yi envoys of 630 brought a flashing pearl '
to China but were unable to say whether it came from L o - c h ’a
or Ceylon* Here the confusion m a y have been increased by
the association of L o - c h ’a (rakgasas) with Ceylon*
 f 630* the fo u rth month* The envoy reached th e P’ o - l i
boundary* There Is Lo-ch’ a country* I t s people are
extrem ely crude .*« (TJ71
I b e lie ve th a t Ch’ ang Chiin v is ite d P’ o - l l and th a t the
fa c ts about both P’ o - l l and Lo-ch’ a are derived from f i r s t ­
hand knowledge and th e re fo re represent an advance on what
was known in the s ix th century and recorded in the Liang shu*
The new fa c ts describe P’ o - ll as being a t the edge o f the
c iv ilis e d p a rt o f Indonesia known to the Chinese in th e e a rly
seventh century* The envoy is u n lik e ly to have had occasion
to tr a v e l beyond P’ o - l i in the discharge o f h is duty o f
b rin g in g the southern barbarians in to communication w ith
China* Beyond P’ o - li la y p rim itiv e people, a p p ro p ria te ly
c a lle d Lo-ch’ a , which is only a tra n s c rip tio n o f the
S a n skrit word rakgasa* meaning a class o f demons, but
apparently o fte n used to describe the non-Hinduised peoples
o f In d ia * T his contemptuous expression may have been
c u rre n t among the people o f P’ o - l l i t s e l f (2)*

(1) THY, 99, 1769* I have followed the punctuation in the

Commercial Press edition# Ch’ang Chun’s visit to Lo-ch’a
may also be referred to in HTS, 222 T , 2a, though I am
not so certain as Pelliot that hereafter Lo-ch’a entered Into
relations with China; ’Deux itindralres’ ,' 28l* The passage J
$ $ % i_ 55 ■&'a »% 44 if ■*&•••
I feel from the context that it was Ch’ih T ’u and not Lo-ch’a
which entered into communication with China*
(2) Coedes has noted the contemptuous names given to slaves
In Khmer inscriptions; Jtats, 205*
 There 1 b , however, nothing in C h ’ang Chun’s evidence

quoted so far which enables one to place P ’o-li on a map.

”Te have to turn to I Tsing for an indication that P ’o-li

was not only on the fringe of the civilised world but was

at its eastern limit.

The key text is I Tsing’s list of countries which

begins with 'Barus* in northern Sumatra:

’An enumeration from the west. There is P*o-lu-shih

( ’Barus'), Mp-lo-yu chou which is now Shih-li-fo-shfh
(LCalayu which is now brivijayal, Mo-ho-hsin choul
Ho-ling chou, Tan-tan chou, P ’en-p *£n chou 7 £'o-li
chou, Chueh-lun chou, Po-shih-p’u-lo"~chou (which 1
translate as 'Vijayapura* in Western Borneo (l))t
O-shan chou, and L'o-chia-man chou. There are also
some small"chou which cannot all be recorded (2).’

In this list, as in C h ’ang Chun’s itinerary, Tan-tan appears

before P ’o-li. But equally noteworthy are the two names

which appear after P 'o-li: Chueh-lun and

Fo-shlh-p*u-lo. Neither of them are there by accident.

I am certain that the reason why Chueh-lun lies

immediately beyond P ’o-li is because it corresponds to the

Lo-ch’a country east of P ’o-li, mentioned in the T ’ai

p ’ing yix lan quotation from the Sui shu translated above.

Chueh-lun must be a variant of Ku-lun ^ t a name

given in Hui-lin’s I ch’ieh ching yin i — 40 •%

of 817 for a wild people living in maritime South East Asia,

(1) Page 3^-^(,<3 .

(2) I have provided the text on page Z<i<j
 U23.

otherwise known as ^ ( D * Hui-lin, writing

in connexion with I Tsingfs Memoirs, states that the K run-lun»

or Ku-lun, like the rakqasas, ate hum m flesh and were very

black. Chueh-lun and Ku-lun in T*ang times were very similar

a
sounds; chueh-lun was pronounced as gHuat-liuen and Ku-lun

as kuat-l^uen (2).

It may be that I Tsing himself regarded Chueh-lun as an

ethnic term, for there is the following obscure passage:

m f a 'Hi 1
(1) This passage is translated and discussed by Pelliot in
fTextes Chinois’, 261-263. Uoens came to a similar conclusion
concerning the identity of Chueh-lun and Lo-ch*a, which helped
him to identify I Tsing#s P ^ - l i with eastern Java; fSrivijaya,
Yava en Kataha1, 36-37* Unfortunately he did not believe that
the sixth century P*o-li was the same as I T s i n g ^ P *o-li.
He thought that the earlier one was at Palembang. His reason
was simply that it seemed to be a Buddhist kingdom, while
Palembang contained Buddhist remains. Moens no doubt wanted
to protect his extraordinary theory that Srivijaya was
originally a kingdom on the Malay Peninsula, which conquered
Palembang.
(2) I follow Karlgrenfs phonological reconstructions.
 k2h.

"Some of these countries (in the southern ocean) are

■100 or several hundred 1± or a hundred yojana in
circumference. In the great ocean, though it is
difficult to calculate distances, those travelling in
merchant ships certainly know that this part is (called)
Chueh-lun* When (the southern ocean people) first came
to Tongking and Canton they were given the general
name of (the people of) the K ,un-lun countries. But
these K*un-lun (people) are curly-headed and have black
skins. The inhabitants of the other countries (in
the southern ocean) are similar in appearance to the
Chinese (1).*

I Tsing seems to suggest that the genuine K fun-lun people

are dark and have curly hair (2), and he may be implying

that they were to be found in the uncharted Chueh-lun region.

If this is so, it means that he considered that Chueh-Itm was

inhabited by the more primitive element in the southern ocean.

This would be consistent with the fact that he places

Chueh-lun beyond P *o-li, which is exactly the position given

to Lo-cl^a in other texts in relation to P *o-li. Moreover

Hui-lin compares the K run-lun/Ku-lun people with Lo-chfa a or

raks.asas. I think that it ir.. fair to conclude that Chueh-lun

an(^ Lo-chfa were general terms for the people in the terra

incognita of the eastern Archipelago and that the limit of the

(1) Nan hai chi kuei nei fa chuan, 205b. Takakusu also
found this to be an obscure passage; Record, 11 and note 1.
(2) I see here a vague reference to'J‘the more pronounced
•Melanesoid* features of the inhabitants of the eastern
Archipelago, where the rate of assimilation to the Indonesian
population was slower.
 U25.

Chinese knowledge of eastern Indonesia is represented hy

P*o-ll (1).
In view of I Tsing's evidence it would not be

surprising if P fo-ll was somewhere in eastern Java or in Bali,

where Pelliot located it# The cultural development of eastern

Java within a century of his lifetime is reflected in the

Dinaya inscription in Sanskrit, found north-west of Malang

and of 760 (2)# It is the oldest dated inscription recovered

from eastern Java and mentions the foundation of a sanctuary

of Agastya# Earlier still, though undated, is the Tuk Mas

rock inscription of central Java, assigned to the seventh

century on palaeographic grounds (3)# There is also a

Buddha image from Jember in eastern Java, which Dupont thought

might be of the fifth or sixth century (4). But there is

a further piece of Chinese evidence, provided not only by

I Tsing but by another source as well, probably Ch'ang Chun,

which in my opinion makes it almost certain that P*o-li was

somewhere in the eastern halt of Java. I refer to the place

(1) Takakusu thought that Chueh-lun meant the Pulo Condore

islands off the coast of Cochin-China; Record, xlix. Groeneveldt
and Schlegel identified it with the Nicobar islands. Pelliot
made no specific identification; *Deux itinlraires1, 281.
Perrand suggested that the word was a transliteration of Gurun,
a name which appears in the 14th century Nagarakrtagama and an
island in the eastern Archipelago. As a result he thought
that I Tsing*s Po- shih-p^-lo would have been even further to the
east; JA, Mars-iYril, 1^19, 301-302.
(2) P.D.K. Bosch, *De Sanskrit inscription op den steen van
Dinaja (682 caka)1, Tijd, 57, 1916, 410-444; •Het Lingga-
Heiligdom van D i n a j a ^ Ti.ld, 64, 1924, 227-286.
(3) The literature of the Tuk Mas inscription has been
assembled by de Casparis, Prasasti, 2, 50, note 7*
(4) *Les Buddhas dits d *Amaravatf en Asie du Sud-est1,
BEFEO, 49, 2, 1959, 633-634.
 1*26,

mentioned by I Tsing as lying beyond Chueh-lunr Fo-shih-p*u-lo t

or Vijayapura,

In the previous chapter I gave my reasons for

identifying Fo-shth-p 'u-lo and Chin-li-p *i-shih with a

kihgdom known as Vijayapura somewhere on the western coast

of Borneo (1)# In I Tsing's list Chueh-lun is merely

terra incognita» inhabited by primitive peoples. His next

specific kingdom after P'o-li is Vijayapura, and this

suggests that the sequence of toponyms curves northwards

towards Borneo• That this was in fact I Tsing1s intention

js borne out by evidence, again likely to be Ch'ang Chun's,

which describes F 'o-li (in the form of Po-li) as 'south'of

Vijayapura. According to the T'ai p'ing yu lan, quoting

the lost T ' r n g thu,

(1) Page® ,
 U2 7*

•1500 li to the west of (Chln-ll-p1i-shih) is Ch'ih T yu«

3000 TT south of Chin-li-p'i-shih is ?o~ll* fciu-ch'u
country 3,000 li (l) • *

Thus (hin-li-p'i-shih and Po-li are not only brought into

relationship in the same way as I Tsing's P 'o-li and

Fo-shih-p'u-lo, but an orientation is also supplied, A glance

at a map is now sufficient to convince one that P fo-li could

hardly have been anywhere but in Java* Somewhere in Java,

and possibly in eastern Java, was the kingdom of the fifth

and sixth centuries which represents the limit of the

tributary coast of Indonesia* Its length from east to west

(i) TPYL, 788, 3491b-3492a. In the THY's account of

Chin-Ii-p*i-chia, 100, 1791» thero is a break in the text which
leaves out the reference to Po-li, but it is to be found in
the TPIIYC, 177, 13a* Professor Wheatley understands references
to the f a n g shu to mean the T'ang shih lun tuan_j& ^ •
a critical study of the history of the T'ang dynasty written
in the eleventh century; Golden Khersonese, 18, note 3.
suggests that It had a considerable coastline (1)*

(1) Pelliot, chiefly for phonological reasons, identified

^•o-li with Bali, though he admitted the possibility of Borneo;
•Deux itineraires1 , 285* Ferrand accepted Bali; JA ,Mars-Avril{?*?
290. Other identifications are listed Ika jm A* on pages
above. I wasted a long time before I reached my conclusion
concerning P yo-li because I was obsessed with the possibility
that the P fu-lei of the Nan chou i wu chih was an early tar
transcription of P yo-li» which would mean that P ^ - l i was on
or off the south-eastern coast of Sumatra, I was influenced
by the way in which the sound represented by P yu in the third
century seems to have been superseded by P*o- in the fifth and
sixth centuries * * . * . 5 •
connexion with ^ which became P ’o-huang;(i
Moreover the TPHYC , 27b, lib, renders P ’o-li as P'u-ll jig. 2,\
I was less certain about the -lei = -li equation.
I did not entirely free myself “from this oFsession until I
came to realise the accuracy of I Tsingys information and its
implications for locating*?•o-li, I have a special reason
for being grateful to I Tsing. He places Ho-ling to the
west of P fo-li, m d other texts also describe Ho-llng as
P*o-lifs v-estern neighbour; eg CIS, 197, 3a. But llo-ling
» with Srivijaya^is the most important Chinese
toponym in the records relating to the seventh and eight
centuries. The usual view is that Ho-llng was the major
Javanese kingdom in the eighth century, the time when the
failondrao were building the magnificent Barabudur of central
Java. It would have been foolish to argue that Ho-llng> on
the strength of an assumed P yu-lei = P *o-li equation, was in
Sumatra and not in Java. Moreover I understand from a private
communication from Professor Goedes that M.Damais believes
that Ho-llng is a transcription of a Javanese toponym,
probably Walaing, while Dr de Caoparis believes that Gaining
may be associated with the Ratubaka plateau in central Java;
Prasasti, 2, 254-255* Y/hen the implications of the evidence
about Ho-llng have been studied, considerable light may be
thrown on early Javanese history. I make my modest
contribution to the Ho-llng question on pages^ 6 ^ ' ^ below.
 I Tsing evidently chose to list the countries on

the three shores of the Java Sea. On these shores have

been found all the sites which have so far yielded evidence

of early Buddhist and Hindu cultural influences, with the

exception of the Kutei archaeological remains of Eastern

Borneo, and it would be surprising if I Tsing, who was only

interested in the extent of Buddhist influence in Indonesia,

had occasion to describe any other form of periplus.

Moreover I suspect that he was looking at the map of Indonesia

in the way foreigners had become accustomed to do for

several centuries. LIy suspicion is based on a vaguely similai?

perlplusvcontained in the commentary of the Mahahld.de sa,

incorporating second or third century information available

in India.
 1+30.

The list of place-names in the Mahaniddesa commentary

is a long one, and I have indicated in capital letters the

names which show the general direction this periplus took:

•Gumba, TAKKOLA, Takkasila, Kalamukha, IvLARANAPARA,

Yesunga, Verapatha, JAVA, Tamili, VANGA, G^avaddhana,
Suvannaltuta, SUVANNABHUMI, TAMBAPANNI .♦. (I ).1

Nothing i 3 knov/n of Gumba (2), but with Takkola one is on

firmer ground. Professor Wheatley, developing the ideas of

Levi, believes that it was a port on the north-west coast

of the Lialay Peninsula (3)* There are no cafe identifications

of Takkasila or Kalamukha; Levi thought in terms of the

Chittagong region and somewhere further to the east (4).

One won:ars, however, whether there is a connexion between

Kalamukha and the Chla-lo Md *3 mentioned in the

Shih erh yu ching^s list of maritime countries (5)* But

with Marahapara, under the form of Purapura or Parapura, we

may be in the presence of a place-name in north-eastern

Sumatra (6 ). Levi thought that Yesunga and Verapatha were

in the Peninsula (7), but he has not been followed by

Professor V/heatley. Java, the next name, brings us down to

Indonesia, while, if Vanga is Bangka island (8 ), it is not

(1) Levi, •Ptolemee, Le Niddesa et la Brhatkatha*, 2.

(2) Ibid, 3*
(3) Golden Khersonese, 268-272* _
(4) •Ptolemee, Le Niddesa et la Brhatkatha1, 22-25*
(5; Page 3*8f above.
(6 ) Page 3$7 above.
(7) •Ptolemee*. 22.
(8 ) Ibid, 27-28.
 k3l.

entirely out of place at this stage of the list. Tamali,

which Levi identified with Tambalinga on the Malay Peninsula (1),

is, however, completely out of place. Elavaddhana cannot

be identified (2). Then there follows Suvannakuta,

Suvannabtiumi, and Tambapanni. Tambapanni is Ceylon, while

Suvaimakuta and SuvaimabbEumi seem to be mainland toponyms (3).

I realise that the parallel between the list in the

Mahaniddesa commentary and I Tsing*s list cannot be taken too

far. The former mentions mainlanud South East Asian places,

which I Tsing reserves for another passage (4). Moreover the

appearance of Tamali between Java and Vanga is inexplicable,

and one can hardly avoid the problem by suggesting that an

error has crept in. But, at least as far as the South East ■

Asian toponyms are concerned, the earlier list begins and ends

with mainland ones, and in between there is a loop comprising

Indonesian topbnyms.

(1) Ibid, 26-27.

(2; Levi (ibid, 28-29) noted that eja = Sanskrit eda means
the long-tailed sheep, which figures among the marvels of
India. Vardhana means •breading1 but the word may have been
bandhana, meaning •strap*♦ Levi noted Ptolemy*s ‘three islands
of the Satyrs1, lying beyond Iabadiou. K*ang T fai heard that
east of Chu-li, and apparently in western Borneo, there were
tailed men; page 37/ above. There is a faint possibility
that Elavaddhana may be an obscure reference to this region,
but I make the suggestion without confidence.
(3) fPtol6mee*, 29-36*
(4) Page^ below.
 k32•

I have identified P *o-li as probably being somewhere

in the eastern half of Java* I now wish to consider the

position of Tan*-tant on the route to P^o^li according to the

itinerary from Ch*ih T*u and separated from P 1o-li only by

A /\ A A
P en-p1en A ■ in I Tsing1s list* If P 1en—p 1en wast

as Takakusu suggested, the same as P yu- ^*1*0 ,

mentioned by I Tsing as north of Ho-Iing, Tan-tan may have

been contiguous with P 1o-li, for Howling was west of Tan-tan*

A A
Nothing more is known of P 1en-p1e n , and it was evidently of

little importance (1)* The proximity of Tan-tan and P*o-li

is also reflected in an itinerary from Vijayapura to Canton,

which, in spite of its obscurities, seems to be another

periplus of the countries on the three shores of the Java Sea,

differing from I Tsing*s list only in that it proceeds from

east to we3t. I follow Pelliot in regarding the passage in

the T*ai p*ing huan yu chi as more accurate than the parallel

passage in the T*ang hui yao (2).

/ \ A
(1) P*u-pen is mentioned in the Ta T*ang hsi yu ch_*iu
fa kao s t e chuan, 5a; Takakusu, Record, xlix* Takakusu
thought that P*en-p*fen represents Pemtuan on the southern
coast of Borneo* Ferrand identified P *en-p *en with Madiera
island; JA, 1919 1 Mars-Atfril, 301*
(2) *Deux itineraires*, 324 and note 5*
 U33.

-krt.st
yChin-li-p*i-shih is 40,000 and more 11 f from the capital
(of China). WEen one travels (to the capital of China)(1)
one passes through Tan-tan, Mo-ho-hsint To-lUng,
Chih-mi, P yo-lout To-lang-pyo-huang, Ho-lo-shih (2),
tShen-'la (Cambodia) f Lin-yi (the' Cham kingdom on the
Annam coast), and then reaches Canton (3).f

Tan-tan is here the centre which appears next to

Chin-li-p1i-shih = Vijayapura in western Borneo* The list of

names \vork3 its way to Malayu in south-eastern Sumatra, and

this suggests that the itinerary began in a southerly direction,

which is consistent with the fact that P fo-li is elsewhere

described as south of Vijayapura (4) and that Tan-ton was

(1) I do not consider that the existence of this itinerary

is evidence that missions were sent by this routS..from
Vijayapura to China* It i3 merely an attempt to plot its
position, and I suspect that the information came from
C h fang
(2 ) Mo-lo-shih/ir
Malayu _ _ ___
has Mo-lo-yu.
(3) TPHYC, 177, 13a. The THY version inserts Ho-ling between
Tan-tan and tMo-ho c o u n t r y ^ ^o) ff$) 1 and fIIsin country i/^j)
y. The’ latter two trust mean Mo-ho-hsin, mentioned by
I Tsing in his list. The position given to Ho-ling is
consistent with the sequence of Mo-ho-hsin, Ho-ling, and
Tan-tan in I Tsingys list, enumerated from west to east.
But I am not certain whether Ho-ling appeared in the original
account of this itinerary, which I attribute to the early
seventh century. Ferrand reached a similar conclusion to
mine about the consistency between the information of the
itinerary and I Tsing1s list, but it would have been better if
he had paid less attention to Ho-ling in the THY*s itinerary
and more attention to Chin-li-p*1-shih.
(4) In the account of Chin-li-p1l-"sTTih. See page 3^^ •
west of ?*o-li In I Tsing*3 list* Ton-tan would therefore

have been vaguely couth-wect of Vijayapura* Though the

Itinerary does not mention P 1o - l i » .Vo-ho-hnln is mentioned

after Tan*»tan» which is in the soma order as in I Tsing*a

list framed in the rovers© direction. Ten-tan therefore does

not seem to have been located haphazardly in thio itinerary,

ferrand in 1919 rightly stressed the consistency of the

evidence about Tan-tan aa a guarantee of its position somewhere

in the eastern part of the Java !-.‘e a f and he could have

emphasised its consistency even further if he had not fallen

for Pelliot*s suggestion in 1304 that Chln-li-p*1-ohlh was

a transcription of Srivijaya-Palemhang (1). I know nothing

of To-ltog and Chlh-mi (C), and I admit that, if P*o-lou

incans •idiruo*, the list unaccountably moves on to northern

Sumatra (3). On the other hand, if To-lang-p*o-huana is

Tulanr; Parang in south-eastern Sumatra, it ccr.es satisfactorily

into position between Tan-t n , a neighbour of P*o-li In Java,

(1) JA, lAarc-Avril, 1319, 293♦ ?orrandfs views on Tan-tan

are in the same article, 29G~3CO*
(2) Perrond hndlno Vi ere on To-ltog but thought that
Chih-rti might be connected rltTTlTTaHbal toponym in the
ToTerbang nreaf JA, Mars-Avril, 1919, 304*
(3) On pagGift.iJT’l suggested casually that the nave may
hove ;-or.othing to do with the|?*o-In-chia-ssix % W\
mentioned in the HTf *e account of ilo-lln % "if so, it would
at leant bring P *d-jou into a probable, position in this
itinerary.
 h35.

and Ho-lo-shih = Malayu, or Malayu-Jambi (1). Finally

comes Malayu, closer to Cambodia than Tan-tan; in I Tsing's

list Malayu is west of Tan-tan. Thus there is nothing in the

itinerary which modifies I Tsing*s statement of Tan-tan*s

position in respect of ? *o-li or contradicts the view that

Tan-tan was not very far from P*o-li. The geographical

details about Tan-tan are always consistent, and I conclude

that Tan-tan, like P*o-li, was in Java but not so far east

on the island as P*o-li was.

Tan-tan has never attracted much attention from the

historical geographers. Bretschneider thought that it was

the Natuna islands, but only because he believed that P*o-li

was in Borneo (2). Takakusu seemed uncertain of this, but

he gave no alternative identification (3). Pelliot expressed

no opinion on the subject of the exact position of Tan-tan,

though he brought together the different Chinese variants of

the name (4). Gerini discovered a number of similarly

sounding modern place-names in Sumatra, Borneo, and the

Peninsula; for I Tsing*s Tan-tan he chose an island called

Teutau or Trotto in the Langkawi group off the Kedah coast

or Datu Point either on the north-east coast of Sumatra or

(1) Ferrand believed that To-lang-n1o-huang represented

the eastern basin of the Tulangbawang river in south-eastern
Sumatra; *Malaka, le Malayu et Malayur*, JA, Juil-Aofit, 1918,
477, note 2. Damais seems to think that TrtTis is possible
and notes that Tulang Bawang appears in the Wu pel chih;
review of Riwajat Indonesia, BEFEO, 48, I, 1956,
Yet To-j? does not readily supply the Tu- sound.
(2) The knowledge possessed by the ancient Chinese, 18-19.
(3) Record, xlviii-xlix.
(4) *Beux itineraire3*, 284; 325, note 1.
 4-36.

on the same coast at the equator (l). Ferrand on good

grounds contented himself with suggesting that it was in

the eastern part of the Java Sea (2)* In 1947 Professor

Hsu Yun-ts’iao was the first to make a detailed study of

Tan-tan, and he decided that it was in the neighbourhood of

the modern state of Kelantan on the south-east coast of the

Malay Peninsula (3)* He noted that there was a village

called Tendong ten miles from the mouth of the Kelantan

river. Professor Wheatley considered that the most

informative scrap of evidence was its association with

Ch* ih T fu in the itinerary which I have attributed to

Ch#ang Chun, Ch*ih T fu probably represented Kelantan;

Tan-tan, which Professor Wheatley thought was # just beyond*

Chyih T t u , would then be on one of the kualas farther south,

possibly the Besut or the Trengganu (4)* Finally Professor

Hsu Yun-ts’iao has re-affirmed his conviction that Tan-tan

was Kelantan (3)* He noted that in the 1765 addition to

the Wen hslen t*ung k yao the section on Johore states that

Trengganu, Tan-tan ^ , and Pahang, all on the southern

Malay Peninsula, were dependencies of Johore, This seemed to

strengthen the likelihood that Tan-tan was Kelantan, He could

have used another reason for locating Tan-tan on the Peninsula,

fl) Researches, 565*

(2) *Le K 1ouen-louen* , JA, Mars-Avril 1919» 299-300,
(3) 'Notes on Tan-tanf, JMBRAS, 20, 1, 1947, 47-63#
>4; Golden Khersonese, 51-55#
(5) Ma-lai-a shih, Singapore, 1961, 94-96,
 437.

The geographical monograph of the Chiu T )ang shn states:

^4 ^ -Hi A vlpi'M$ f.- ;*|H H\ff +

Q %
fTan-tan country* It Is a chou in the? sea south-east of
Chen chou (Hainan)* A ship in ten days reaches there (l)#

But the satr.o source says that it took more than lh days to

reach Chfih T*tu * Tan-tan could not have been closer to

China than Chfih T tu , and I believe that both these passages

were carelessly copiccl from Ch*&ng Chun* a book*

Opinions aboutthe location of Tan-tan have therefore

wavered between the Peninsula and Indonesia* I think that

a location on the Peninsula is out of the question* I do

not believe that a country close to Ch* ih T yu would have been

mentioned by the Sul .Shu in an itinerary to oo distant a

country as F^o-li* Nor do I believe that I Tsing was so

unmethodical as suddenly to switch to the Peninsula In a

list of identifiably Indonesian countries* Moreover, if

I Tsing had vanted to include a Peninsula country in that

list, why did he not also mention V.»nr-chla-^hu f f f j o ft (2)

0i' Chieh-ch,a » Kedah, both of which countries were known

to his pilgrim contemporaries ? Ify final reason for rejecting

U) % 21, 50b*
(2) Identified by Wheatley as Langkasuka In the Patanl area north
of Kelantan; Golden Khersonese* 252-265*
 i+38.

the Peninsula as the location of Tan-tan is that I Tains

elsehwere describes the regions on the mainland from Srlksetra,

on the Irrawaddy, and says that Lang-chia-shu waB south-east

of Srlksetra (!)• Why was Tan-tan not tacked on to this

passage ?

I have insisted on the Indonesian location of Tan-tan

because I believe that the records about it may be helpful

in reconstructing the early history of Java, for it is in

Java that I locate Tan-tan* V7e have seen how consistently

the evidence places it en route for and close to P fo-li,

which was the fringe of the civilised world of western

Indonesia and south of Vijayapura in north-western Borneo*

Tan-tan could not have been on the site of grlvijaya on the

Palembang river because, together with Srlvijaya, it was

still known as a toponym in I Tsing*s day (2), It could

conceivably have been somewhere further south in Sumatra or

even on Bangka island, but the description of it in the T*ung

tien suggests that it m 3 a large, populous, and fertile land,

entirely consistent with its being in Java,

(1) Nan hai chi kuei nei fa chuan, 205b, for which a recent
translation is in Wheatley, Golden Khersonese, 256*
(2) I justify the location of drlvijaya Yvith"Paleinbang on pages
belo?/*
 •The kingdom of Tan-tan was heard of during Sui times*
it is situated north-west of To-lo-mo and south-east of
Chen chou (Hainan)(l)# The king's family name is
Sha-li t his personal name Shih-ling-chia* There are
something over 20#000 families in the capital* Chou
(provinces) and haien (districts) have been established
to facilitate administration and control. The king
holds audience for two periods each day, in the morning
and the evening# He has eight high officers of state,
known as Pa-Tso, who are Brahmans. The king often
daubs his person with fragrant powder. He wears a
t*ung-t'ftien-kuan (2), hangs a variety of previous
ornaments about his neck, clothes himself in garments
of the colour of the morning clouds (3)# and wears
leather sandals on his feet. When he travels a short
distance he is carried on a litter; on longer journeys
he rides on an elephant. In battle conch-shells and

(1) I take it that 1south-east* refers to the direction the

ship took sailing down the east coast of Hainan.
(2) Professor Wheatley defines this as a type of headgear
with exaggerated comers; Golden Khersonese# 51# u. 6#
(3) Professor Wheatley quotes Pelliot t o t h e effect that
this term was used in Sui and T'ang times for a certain cloth;
Golden Khersonese# 52# note 1*
 kko.

•drums are sounded while banners and flags (are waved).

Under the criminal code all robbers and thieves,
irrespective of the seriousness of their crimes, suffer
execution. The products of the country are gold,
silver, white sandalwood, sapan-wood, and betel-nut.
The only grain is rice. The domestio creatures*
include deer, goats, pigs, fowl, geese, duck, musk-
and other deer. The birds include the hornbill and
the peacock. Tree fruits and small fruits include
grapes, pomegranates, melons, gourds, water chestnuts
and lotus seeds. Vegetables include onions, garlic
and rape-turnips (1).*

This description resembles that of a Javanese country. From

early times Java produced rice, but south-eastern Sumatra was

never an important rice-producing area; the terrain is too

swampy. White sandalwood is a product of eastern Java and

the islands beyond. The long list of fruits suggests a

developed agricultural system. Tan-tan must also have been

large enough to require sub-division into small administrative

units. Its population seems to have been considerable, as

one would expect in a rice-producing country. The reference

to the •Brahmans1 is also significant. •Brahmans1 are

mentioned in inscriptions from western Java as early as the

fifth century. There may have been Brahmans in south-eastern

Sumatra, but the traditions of the region are Buddhist rather

than Hindu. The strict enforcement of the law in Tan^tan

may also suggest that justice was not tempered with Buddhist

compassion.

(1) I have availed myself of Professor Wheatley1s admirable

translation in G-olden Kersonese. 51-52. The T *ung tien
reference is 188, 1010. A somewhat shorter account appears
in the TPYL. 788. 3489b. attributed to the Sui shu. To-lo-mo
 ttl*

There is one strange omission in the account of

Tan-tan* The sea is not mentioned* The people of P fo-li ,

further to the east and a country whose length from west to

east impressed the Chinese in the sixth century (l)*

collected coral from the sea (2), hut T£n-tan seems to have

been an agricultural rather than a maritime countryf and

its heartland may have been in the interior of Java* It is

noteworthy that a number of I Tsingfs fellow pilgrims sailed

to and from Ho-llng * sometimes on their way to India, but

never to and from Tan-tan (3)* Some have followed Moans*

(1) Liang shu 54* 19a-b« ^ ^ a

(2; Sui shu~ 8 2 , 8a: ^ . The Liang shu
&% at e s that the re were two rice crops a year:
l|jv, ; Liang ehut 54, 19b. This is also consistent
with P*o-ll*8 being in Java. M.Lamais may one day recover the
Javanese words represented by TfeUho-hsieh-na
(d*Uk-Xa-ia-na) and Tii-ho-shih-na ^ tx. '
(d ,ftk-Xfa-?ie-na), the titles of the P*o-li officials. One is
tempted to find Tuflan here.
(3) References to these pilgrims are J'ouppl in Chavannes*
Memoire under the names of C h ,ang-min '% , Ming-yuan
Bt] , Hui-ning % ^ , and Tao-lin
Their ships must have been merchant ships.
 Ub2m

surmise that To-lo-mo $ * described as being south-east

of Ton-tan, is a transcription of Taruma (l)f the name of

a kingdom mentioned in inscriptions of the second half of the

fifth century, or even later, found in the extreme west of

Java (2). But M. Damais has rightly pointed out that -lo

renders -ra and not - -ru (3)* Moreover two more inscriptions

of Purnavarman, ruler of Taruma, have been found in recent

years, including one on a rock about forty miles from the

west coast of Java (4)* If Tan-tan was a Javanese kingdom,

as the geographical notices about it indicate, it is difficult

to find room for it if it lay north-west or west (5) of

Taruma = To^lo-ma, Another objection against placing Tan-^tan

north-west of Taruma is that I Tsing describes Ho-ling,

assuredly a Javanese kingdom, as west of Tan-tan. Por a

brief time Tan-tan co-existed with Ho-ling; in 666 both of

them sent missions to China (6). But only Mo-ho-hsin

(1)_ First proposed in Tiid, 77, 1937# and translated in

'Srivijaya, Yava en Kataha•, 31.
(2) Vogel, fThe earliest inscriptions of Java1, Public.
Oudheidk. Dienst Nederl. Indie, I, 1925# 15-35-
(3) cKeview of Aiwa.jai Indonesia! BEFEO, 48, 1, 1956, 611.
The transcription would correspond to *!i.rarama or *Talama. We
have seen how fjjit and were used to transcribe the -ru
of fBarusf; page 3>4l • ^
(4) ^-Review of Rlwajat Indonesia, 610, note 1.
(5) H T S , 222 , 5 b , states that Tan-tan was at the west
of To-lo-mo.
(6) Ts*e fu yuan kuei, 970, 11402b.
 kh3*
separates Ho-ling from Malayu of Sumatra in I Tsingfs list (1).

This, too | suggests that Tan-tan \7as further east in Java*

Nevertheless it is impossible to locate Tan-tan more accurately

than as a Javanese kingdom. I suggest, though only by way

of hypothesis, that it was somewhere in the interior of

central Java*

Two of thfefjeingdoms of the fifth and sixth centuries,

whoso names survive in seventh century records, therefore

seem to have been in Java and at the eastern end of the[part

of Indonesia in tributary relationship with China* The

names of two more of the earlier kingdoms also survive into

the seventh century; they are P *o-huang and Ho-lo-tan* There

is little to be said of P *o-huang. Its name may be

incorporated in the To-lang-p*o-huang of the Yijayapura

itinerary (2), and if this is so its position in the

itinerary is not inconsistent with its being Tulang Bawang

in south-eastern Sumatra, a toponym at least as old as the

early 15th century (3)* P *o-huang was probably a small

(1) Takakusu suggested that Mo-ho-hsin might be the

modern Eanjarmasin on the southern coast of Borneo; Record,
zlvii. In the Ming shih, 323» 21a, this toponym is rendered
as W^h-lang-ma-hsTn eU7 % * l(&m certain that
Mo-ho-hsin was not in Borneo. There is a system in I Tsingrs
list which does not permit this* Damais notes a number of
suggestions for the identification of Mo-ho-hsin with
Javanese toponyms but postpones his own preference;^Review
of Riwa.jat Indonesia0, 614-619*
(2) See note 44^ on page •
(3; It appears in the Wu pei chih*
 Ukk.
kingdom which made the most of its opportunities in the

interval between the fall of Ho-lo-tan and the ascendancy

of Kan-t1o-ll. Though the extreme south of Sumatra never

had much political importance in later times, it lies

between the Jambi-Palembang coast and western Java and, to

this extent, it was in a region which, as we shall see, was

a trading centre in the seventh century*

Ho-lo-tan is a more important topbnym, since we have

seen that by 430 this kingdom, rendered as Ho-lo-t1o « was

sending ships to China (1)* It was therefore a trading

kingdom as well as a tributary one* Moreover it was in

a
, the word for •Java*, and from She-r^o

Gunavarman sailed on a trading ship to China in the early

fifth century. Its last mission was in 452, but in the

early seventh century it was said to lie south of Ci^ih T fu (2).

I Tsing does not mention it, but there is an obscure

fs . *»

statement in the Ts*e fu yuan kuei:

(1) Page ^ q
(2) Sul shu« 82, 3a, and is written as —
 445.

'In the first month of the third year of the ts'ung chang
period (27 January - 24 February, 670) Lin-yi, Ceylon,
Ho-lo, and Tan-tan countries' all sent missions with
■tribute (l)T1

At first sight this seems like a careless reference to

Ho-lo(-tan) and Tan-tan# But while Tan-tan lami sent a mission

as recently as 666, Ho-lo-tan had not sent one since 452.

It would he extraordinary if it did so again after an interval

of two hundred years.

About Ho-lo-tan*s geographical position practically

nothing is known; it was in She-p1o « 'Java* and was south

of Ch'ih T'u on the Peninsula. The latter detail may

suggest that it was on the south-eastern coast of Sumatra

or in Java. If it was in Java, it has to be remembered

F'o-li and Tan-tan were also there; Ho-lo-tan may have

been further west on that island. But before we consider

where Ho-lo-tan was, it is helpful to analyse what can be

discovered about the early kingdoms on the south-eastern

coast of Sumatra. The western end of the tributary coast

of the fifth and sixth centuries is much more obscure than

the eastern end but not, I believe, impenetrably so.

It will be recalled that, in the first half of the

third century, Ko-ylng was somewhere on that coast (2).

(1) TFYK, 970, 11402b.

(2) Pages 98-101.
 U46.

Ko-.yiftg came the Yueh-chih horse-dealers (1), and from

Ko-ying lay the route to Ssu-t*iao, a fertile land with

cities which seems to correspond with the island of Java (2).

Thus one is justified in describing the south-eastern coast

of Sumatra as the favoured trading coast of western Indonesia

in the third century, and its advantages are symbolised in

the statement that Ko-ying was in communication with the

thriving port of Ku-nu in India (3)* This coast can therefore

be regarded as that part of Indonesia with the oldest

recorded trading history, and this is a fact of fundamental

importance for understanding the growth of the trading

o
kingdoms of the region. Ko-ying and ndt Ssu-t *lap was

described as being in touch with India* And because four

hundred years later the same coast was the centre of the
/ —
empire of Srivijaya, it is very likely also to have been

the coast with the longest continuous trading record by the

end of the seventh century. It is difficult to believe
/ —
that during the centuries separating Ko-ying from Srivijaya

something happened to deprive the coast of its commerce*

Ivluch more probably the 'Persian* trade enhanced its prosperity*

There is certainly a strong presumption that at least one

of the tributary kingdoms was there*

(1) Page 108.

(2) Page 94.
(3) Page 108.
 kU7.
Unfortunately after the third century it is not until

the seventh that the political geography of the coast becomes

clear. Though both Jambi and Palembang have yielded a

few archaeological remains, it is impossible to attribute

them with confidence to a time earlier than the seventh

century (1). But in the second half of that century it is

evident that there were two centres on that coast in the

form of the harbours of Palembang and Jambi (2)f and the

evidence is again provided by I Tsing:

(1) I am content to follow Professor Coede^' understanding

of the archaeological results of Palembang; Ptats, 147.
Buddha images found at Palembang may be earlier than the
seventh century, and similar images found at Jambi may be
of a seventh art style# Because, however, of the uncertainty
which exists about the dating of the images, I prefer not to
invoke these discoveries as evidence of ancient centres at
Palembang and Jambi. It is sufficient to observe that by
the second half of the seventh century Palembang wa 3 a
thriving Budc3hist centre; see page •
(2) Malayu cent a mission in 644; TilY, 100, 1790# JCalayu
also appears in the Vijayapura itinerary, which I attribute
to the beginning of the seventh century.
 •(I Tsing) sailed without interruption (from Canton) for
20 days and reached Fo-shlh (= Srivijaya), He stopped
on his way there (to India)' for six months and made a
beginning in studying the Sabdavidya (Sanskrit grammar).
The ruler (of ?o-shih) extended him support and sent
him on his way to Ivjalayu (which is now changed to
Shlh-li-fo-shih = 1Srivijaya)• I Tsing again broke
his journey for two months and then returned to his
ship (1) and made his way towards Chieh-ch1a (= Kedah).
It was not until the 12th month (» 6 January - 4 February,
672) that the sails of the ship were hoisted and he
returned to the king's ship and gradually made his way
to the Eastern Heavens (= India) (2).»
x _
The travelling distances between Srivijaya and Malayu and

Malayu and Kedah are indicated in I Tsing's account of the

identical voyage made by the pilgrim Wu-hsing 3 IT s

^ fQ iR ^ - 1=) k'\ 'Iel f'l 'lit) i£ il-

? i - - -

j.

y\\] X X & k ‘J % (Q IL ®

(1) I.Iocn3 understoo 43-t to mean 'changing direction' of

the course at Malayu, an interpretation which assisted him in
arguing that the location of Srivijaya at that time was in the
Kelantan region of the south-eastern Peninsula, Thislocation
was also suggested to Moens by the sundial reading in the HTS
account pf_Srivi jaya_, to which_I referred on page ^ o £ above;
Moens, 'Srivijaya, Yava en Kataha1, 12, Moens was relying on
Chavannes' translation of I Tsing's Memoirs, which was 'je
changeai de direction pour aller dans le" pays Kie-tch'a';
M'emoiref 119* I reject completely the view that the capital of
Srivijaya in I Tsing's time was anywhere else than at Palembang.
Nor do I believe that any geographical significance should be
attached to the expression#.^ • I think that it means no
more than 'transferring himself' (on to the ship). I Tsing
left Srivijaya with the help of the ruler and left Kedah on the
ruler's ship, and it is clear to me that he travelled from
Srivijaya to India on the same|3hip. Wu-hsing, mentioned in
the next passage Itranslate, had the same experience,
(2) Ta T'ang hsi yu ch'iu fa kao seng chuan, 7c-8a;
Chavannes, M§moire, 119.
 Uh9*

•On an eastern wind (the north-east monsoon) he sailed

(with Chih*-hung ^ ) and reached Shlh-li-fo-shlh
in a month# The ruler received them with great ceremony
••• When the ruler learnt that they came from the
country cf the Son of Heaven (China), his respect
towards them doubled# Later they boarded the ruler's
ship and travelled for 15 days via Malayu chou». In
another 15 days they reached Chieh-ch'a (= Kedah)# At
the end of the winter season they returned to the ship
and sailed westwards (1 )*

The time taken to reach Kedah from M a l a y u may be compared

with a statement by Chao Ju-kua that with a favourable wind

one could sail in 15 days from San-fo-ch'i = Jambi (2) to

San-pei £3 = Kampe, near Aru on the north-eastern coast

of Sumatra (3)*

(1) Ta T'ang h 3i yu ch'iu, 9b; Chavannes, Ilemoire t ,144#

(2) The problem of the location of the capit?vl of Srivijaya
in the early 13th century is outside the scope of this study.
It is sufficient to note that Chao Ju-kua mentions Pa-lin-feng
as a dependency of San-fo-ch' i t the Sung word
for Srivijaya; Chu fan chih, 13« Professor Y/hea11 ey has
summarised the opinions of a number of scholars, including
Pelliot '3 on this point; 'Geographical notes', 11-12#
(3) Chu fan chiht 20#
 450.

There have been no serious doubts among scholars that I

Tsing's Malayu was Jambi (l), but not everyone has been prepared

to believe that Srlvijaya was already based on Palembang in

671 (2)* The 15 days for the voyage from Palembang to Jambi

seems excessive and only partly explained if some days of the

voyage were spent travelling slowly down the Musi river from

Srlvijaya to the sea and up the Jambi river to Malayu (3)*

(1) The study which has had the greatest influence has been
Rouffaer's 'Was Malaka emporium v<56r 1400 A*D. ,#*' See note
3 on page 336*
(2) Dr* Quaritch Wales once thought that the presence of
Srlvijayan-type art remains in the isthmus of the Peninsula
suggested that the empire was at one time based there; IAL, 9»
1935, 1-31* Moens, by an ingenious use of translations by
Chavannes and Pelliot, proposed that the capital was first on
the south-eastern coast of the Peninsula, then at Kampar on
the east coast of Sumatra, and finally at Palembang; 'Srlvijaya,
Yava en Katdha', JMBRAS. 17, 2, 1940, 8-20* Recently a Thai
writer, Mr# Thammathat Phanit, has identified 1 Tsing's city
as Bodhi Chaiya, on the isthmus of the Peninsula; Illustrated
Booklet of Instruction #♦*, Chaiya, 1961, 4#
(3) Sir Roland Braddell explained the length of the voyage from
srlviJaya-Palembang to Malayu-Jambi in terms of difficult
sailing conditions created by off-shore Islands* 'Navigation
would have to be cautious and sailing by night would be most
unlikely'; JMBRAS * 24, 1, 1951, 15- It has also been
suggested that in the seventh century the coastline of this
part of Sumatra may have been different and the present belt
of coastal swamp narrower; Soekmono, 'Early civilisations of
Southeast Asia', JSS, 46, 1, 1958, 1§.
Nevertheless I an convinced that the country known to I Tsing
y" _
as Srivijaya had its capital at Palembang and nowhere else.

In support of this location there is an impressive consistency

between the epigraphic evidence and I Tsing’s records. The

inscriptions argue in favour of Palembang a 3 the site of the

capital, while I Tsing shows that in the 671 - 695 period

the capital was always in the same place.

All the early inscriptions of ^rivijaya, issued

during or about the 683 - 686 period, have, with two exceptions,

been found in or near Palembang; the two exceptions are based

on the text of the Telaga Batu inscription of Palembang (1).

(1) The Palembang inscriptions are : Kedukan Bukit (683)5

Talang Tuwo (684); Telaga Batu (undated but clearly belonging
to this period); five fragmentary inscriptions (similarly
of this period). The exceptions are: Karang Brahi (undated),
found in the centre of southern Sumatra; Kota Kapur (686),
found on Bangka island% Moreover a number of siddhiyatra
stones have been found at Palembang. On Kedukan BukitI
Talang Tuwo, Karang Brahi, and Kota Kapur, see Coedes,
'Les inscriptions malaises de Criyijaya*, BEFEO» 20, 1930,
29-80. On Telaga Batu and early Srivijayan epigraphy in
general, see J.G-. de Casparis, Prasasti Indonesia, 2, 1956,
1-46. Note 1 on page 1 of the latter study "contains the
bibliography from 1930 to 1956.
The Talang Tuwo inscription of Palembang, issued in 684,

records the foundation of a park by the ruler in order to

earn religious merit, and it is possible to infer that he

chose his capital for this deed# But a much more

convinving consideration, in my opinion, has been advanced

by Dr de Casparis in connexion with the Telaga Batu

inscription of Palembang# This inscription contains a

lengthy oath formula administered to the civil service of the

empire as well as to members of the royal household, and it

seems likely that the ceremonies were held at the capital

before the officials were sent to their posts in order to

secure their obedience to the ruler (1). This inscription

at Palembang is precisely the kind one would expect to find

in the capital of the empire. There can hardly be any

doubt that in the 683 - 686 period the capital was at

Palembang (2).

(1) Prasasti, 2, 29* 0

(2) It has been suggested that the Palembang Telaga Batu
inscription, with its threat against the royal enemies, is
hardly likely to have been erected in the royal capital;
Soekmono, ’Early civilisations of Southeast Asia1, 20. This
writer uses the inscription as an argument against the view
that the capital was at Palembang. He preferred Jambi#
 I T s i n g ^ evidence is in the form of pilgrim voyages

to and from Srivijaya during the period 671 and 6959 and he

makes it clear that never in this period was the ruler, always

a friendly patron of Chinese Buddhists, to be found anywhere

except where he was in 671, the site later known as Palembang#

/—
Though Srivijaya became the name of a large empire, for I Tsing

it was a specific place* It was a •fortified c i t y ^ f - ^ f f(l)

and it was on a river (2)• I Tsing met the ruler for the

first time in 671 and was assisted on his way to Malayu.

The ruler also gave a warm welcome to TCu-hsing and helped

him to reach Malayu (3)* The date of Wu-hsingfs voyage is

unknown, but it must have been before 685 when I Tsing parted

from him in India (4)* In 683 Ta-chin ^ ^ ♦

followed

a Chinese imperial envoy to the fmaritime region x'H’i 1 of

^ —
Srivijaya and studied there (5)t and sometime after 685 I Tsing,
^_
returning to Srivijaya from India, met him. I Tsing's

information now coincides with the period of the Old-LTalay

^—
inscriptions of Srivijaya, which indicate that the capital

was then at Palembang. If the capital had by Ta-ehinfs time

been transferred from some unidentifiable place to Palembang,

Ta T fang hsi ch* iu , 11a ; Chavannen, Memoire, 176.

Ta T *ang tisi yu ch*iu 9b ; Cha v a n n e s , Mdmoire« 144.
Ta T^ang hsi yu ch* iu lb ; Cha v a n n e o , kemoire, 10 .
Ta T ’ang Hsi yu ch* iu 10b 5 Chavannes, Mgmoire. 159.
I Tsing would certainly have said so (1). In 689 I Tsing

left for a short visit to China, and after his return the
/—
same year he remained at Srivijaya until 695 > when he finally

returned to China. Thus from 671 to 695 I Tsing mentions a

/ —

number of voyages to and from the port of Srivi;Jaya, but

never once does he suggest that the ruler's headquarters had

shifted. I regard it as certain that when he was overseas

the capital was always at Srivijaya - Palembang, the site of

most of the inscriptions of the 683 - 686 period.

Therefore in the second half of the seventh century

there were two trading centres on the south-eastern coast of

Sumatra. Srivijaya - Palembang v;a3 obviously flourishing.

The importance of Malayu is reflected in the fact that

/—
Srivijayan ships called there on their way to India and also

in the statement that the pilgrim C h ’ang-min^ sailed

on a ship 200 C h 1!** long from Ho-ling to Malayu; unfortunately

the chip was overloaded and sank not long after leaving

Ho-ling (2).

But what were the names of the harbours of Malayu-Jambi

and £rivijaya - Palembang before 671 ? This coast,

represented by Ko~ying. had a trading history at least as old

I T s i n g ’s occasional statements that Malayu was ’now'

Srivijaya indicate that he was aware of political changes
taking place in the region when he was overseas
(2) Ta T ’ang hsi yu c h ’iu. 3a ; Chavannes, M e m o i r e . 43*
 U55.

as the third century, and it must be assumed that before

the rise of Srlvijaya there were kingdoms there* Malayu

had sent a mission to China in (l) and its name appears

in the Vijayapura *itinerary*, which I have attributed to

the early seventh century* Can we recover anything of the

political history of this coast In the fifth and sixth

centuries ?

Only for the name of the proto-Ialayu can an acceptable

suggestion be made, though whether Malayu originally meant

Jambi, Palembang^or both cannot be settled* It cannot have

been T an-tan or P fo-li* for both these places appear alongside

Malayu In I Tsing*s list and were in Java* Nor is it likely

to have been P*o~huang, an insignificant centre whose name

more probably survived in Tu*lang>p*o^huang mentioned in the

Vijayapura *itinerary1* By eliminating these names we are

left with Ho~lo-tan* P*o-taf and gan-tfo-ll* Ho-lo-tan was

described in the Sul shu was being south of Ch*lh T*u* This

location would be consistent with its being Malayu, but there

is one good reason for believing that this was not so: Malayu

is mentioned in the Vijayapura Itinerary, the details of which

seem to stem from Chfang Chun*s mission which also supplied the

information about Ho-lo-tan*s position south of Ch*ih T*u«

(l) T*ang hul yao* 100, 1790*

Ho-lo-tan and Malayu were therefore contemporary toponyms.

For this reason I am inclined to eliminate Ho-lo-tan as the

proto-Malayu, and we are left with P*o-ta and Kan-t *o-li *

P*o-ta sent missions only from 435 to 451 (1)» There is

some evidence that its name was associated with She-p1o *

or lJaval (2)f and I have found no cause for believing that

She-p*o meant anything than the island of Java* It would

certainly be dangerous to invoke the P ’o-ta evidence as an

argument that She-p1o could sometimes mean Sumatra as well*

P*o-ta may have been an insignificant place, like P^-huang,

which benefited from troubled times in the middle of the

fifth century* Alternatively, it may have been an important

place which was later known under another name. If the

latter surmise is correct, its later name could only have

been Tan-tan; the names of P *o-li, P 1o-huang, Ho-lo-tan, and

Ka.n-t♦o-li all co-exist with P'o-ta (3). A connexion with

Tan-tan, a Javanese kingdom, would explain why She-p *o (•Java*)

seems to be associated with its name*

(1) Page *
(2) PageS 3M-1 .
(3) P to-ta>s maximum mission period was from 435 to 451 •
The name of P ^ - l i appears by 4^3; P *o-huang and Ho-lo-tan
Sent missions in the same period as P*o-ta'. Kan-i *O-li sent
its first mission in 441. The dates of these missions are on
pages Hi-St and the earliest reference to P 1o-li,noted by
Pelliot, is on page 3^1 •
 U57

By this process of elimination I consider that only

Kan-t*o-li can he considered to be the name of the proto-

Malayu. Its missions continued until 563* which is within

50 years of the first reference to Malayu in the Vijayapura

itinerary. The details about its ruler’s dream in 502 make

it certain that it was a trading kingdom (1), while the

two books written in China about its medical practices (2)

suggest that its shippers handled drugs and perfumes in

the ’Persian* trade. Its tributary career from 441 to 563

indicates that it v/as a well-established kingdom, and the

absence of frequent missions during this long period probably

means that it® trade with China was on a secure basis (3)*

(1) Page 3 ^ •
(2) Pages KoM •
(3) Page 3V3 * There is one piece of evidence which links
Ko-yingt the proto-Malayu of the third century, with
Kan-t*o-li♦ which I regard as the proto-Malayu of the fifth
and sixth centuries. According to the lo yang chia lan chi,
Ko-ying produced areca nuts; see Appendix According to the
Liang shu« 54, 16b, Kan-t’o-li *s areca nuts were the best of
all countriesi

It is safe to believe xnai; n o - y m g 's areca nux® were

sufficiently famous to be mentioned, and it is likely that the
information about them was recorded in the third century
Nan chou i wu chih, the text on whic& the Lo yang chia lan chi
drew for its facts; see Appendix fA f. Areca nuts are, of
courset common to many parts of South East Asia, but in the
case of Ko-ying and Kan-t?o-li they seem to have had a special
fame.
 U58.
Scholars have already had two reasons for suspecting

that Kan-t1o-ll was once an important toponyra. Perrand

noted that Ibn MSjld In 11*62 refers to Singkel, In north­

western Sumatra, as ’Sinkil Kandarl*, which could be rendered

as Singkel in the country of KandSr* (1). Kan-t1o-li is an

acceptable transcription of Knndarl, but I do not know what

other weight should be attached to Ferrand*s suggestion. The

other reason for suspecting the importance of Kan-t*o-li is

that the Ming shlh states that Kan-t^-li was the former name

of Ran-fo-ch*i , or Srlvljaya (2). This text

understood San-fo-ch1! to be Palembang, though in the 13th

century, when Srlvi^aya was in the decline, it is probable

that Jambi was its capital (3)* Unfortunately, it is

unknown why the compilers of the tilng shih made this

remark, and no more can be implied that that they thought that

(1) JA, Sept-Oct, 1919» 238-21+1. In 1922 Fernand thought

that the only Indigenous name which corresponded remotely to
Kandari and K*an-t’o-ll was ’An&alus* in the southern part of
Sumatra; 1L fempire Sumatranais1, 5 1 * I think that there is
nothing to be said in favour of this suggestion.
(2 ) Min& Bhih. 32h, 21+b. The text is provided on page^/^+j.|
(3) Note £ on page .
Kan-t1o-li had once been sufficiently famous to justify the

identification (1)*

I have now given my reasons for believing that

that was a trading kingdom at Jambi or Palembang in the

fifth and sixth centuries and why Kan-t1o-li t of the six

tributary kingdoms of this period, has the best chance of

being its name* It was probably strong enough to control

both Jambi and Palembang* If, however, Kan-t1o-li, the

proto-Malayu, was only Jambi or Palembang, the problem arises

of identifying the name of the other harbour* The name

which is obviously available Is Ho-lo-tan* Except for the

possible reference to it in the obscure statement that in

• were among the countries

which sent missions that year (2), there is no evidence that

(1) A further instance may be provided of the survival of

the name of Kan-t*o-li in the Chinese memory. Han Yu about 820
mentions Champa / Cambodia, and Kan-t *o-li as being among the
countries in the ocean; Parker, -The island of Sumatra1,
Asiatic Quarterly R e v i e w , 1900, 128* He gives no reference.
Parker acknowledges k a n - t *o-li as the first Chinese reference
to Sumatra on the strength of the Ming shih identification.
The rest of this article deals with Sung and later texts. Moens
had no right to assume that Kan-t *o-li existed as the name of a
kingdom as late as 820; ’De IToord^umatraanse rijken', 342. He
believed that it was Atjeh, and he was influenced by the fact
that its ruler in 502 sent drugs and perfumes as tribute;
’Srivijaya, Yava en Kataha’, 43* I wish I could suggest from
what word Kan-t’o-li wa.3 derived. I am attracted to a word _
beginning with riandha, or 'perfume'. The transcription Gandhari
is perfect and reflects the type of trade which passed through
Kan-t *o-li. But there is no evidence of such a kingdom in
Indonesia.
(2) Page
 460.

Ho-lo-tan survived as a toponym as late as the time of

/—
Srivijaya. Yet it could have been the name of the

Palembang city at the beginning of the seventh century,

though I feel that Malayu at that time must at least mean

Jambi. One scholar has observed that in 434 the ruler of

Ho-lo-tan was actually called 'Sri Vijaya/2^ (i)t

/ —
and he drew the inference that Ho-lo-tan and Srivijaya may have

been one and the same place. This is an attractive theory,

but I have decided to reject it. We have seen that Vijaya

was not an unique name in western Indonesia in early times;

there was also a Yijayapura in western Borneo. I prefer to

think that Kan-t1o-li in its days of greatness ruled both

Jambi and Palembang and gave its name to all that coast. These

two harbours are not far apart, and the same ambition which
/ —
later brought both under Srivijaya-Palembang would have operated

under the impact of the 'Persian1 trade (2). I an satisfied that

Kan-t'o-li was on this coast, and it is^in my opinion, safer to

believe that it comprised both harbours, with its capital in

one of them.

(1) Kao, 'A primary Chinese source^, JMBRAS, 29# If 1956, 170.
12) It is curious that I Tsing's Tamralipti itinerary
(translated on page^ftf-jOdoes not mention Srivijaya as a port
but only Malayu, 'now Srivi jaya', as a chou | . It is
possible that even in his day 'Malayu' could sometimes mean
more than Jambi.
 There is another approach to the problem of the

location of Ho-lo-tan and it leads to the same conclusion

that Kan-t'o-li in its prime controlled both Jambi and

Palembang. I Tsing does not mention Ho-lo-tan in his list

of toponyms. We have seen how much of the nomenclature

and sequence of his kingdoms is capable of verification, and

I believe that his failure to mention Ho-lo-tan should not be

regarded as an error on his part but definite evidence that

the name no longer existed in his time. Because in the first

half of the fifth century Ho-lo-tan occupied a region in western

Indonesia which enabled it to engage in foreign trade, I think

that one can fairly presume that the region had not lost its

advantages in I Tsing1s day. It had merely changed its name.

This is only an assumption, but it is interesting to see where

it takes one. Ho-lo-tan Gould not have been Tan-tan or P'o-li,

for the three names co-exist in the early seventh century.

— •
Between Malayu 'which is now Srivijaya' and Tan-tan I Tsing

only enumerates Mo-ho-hsin and Ho-ling (1). But Mo-ho-hsin

appears in the Vijayapura 'itinerary', which I have so often

(1) I Tsing was almost; certainly well informed about Ho-ling.

The pilgrim Yuan-ch'i\^. ^ was a disciple of Jnanabhadra,
ajnonk of Ho-ling; Ta t*ang hsi yu ch'iu, 4a;^_Chavanned,
.empire, 6TI But the same^iiaMfc also lived in Srivijaya, and
I Tsing says that 'he is living there today and is aged about
30 years'; Ta T 1ang hsi yu ch 'JLu, 4a; Chavannes, Memo ire , 64.
I Tsing probably knew him at orlvijaya and discussed Ho-lTng
with him.
had occasion to quote, and this evidence seems to be of 607 -

610 vintage, co-existing with Ho-lo-tan itself. One is

therefore left with the possibility that Ho-lo-tan occupied

the region later known as Ho-ling. If this is so, Ho-lo-tan

could not have been Palembang, a conclusion which reinforces the

suggestion that in its prime Kan-t *o-li controlled both Jambi

and Palembang and was the foremost trading kingdom on the

south-eastern coast of Sumatra during the fifth and sixth

centuries.

The possibility that Ho-lo-tan and Ho-ling w ere one

and the same place brings U3 to the threshold of a major

problem of Indonesian historical geography from the seventh

to the ninth century. This problem is the identification

Ho-ling, a toponym as fugitive as P'o-li.

Ho-ling has been placed on the Ualay Peninsula (1)

(1) Schlegel believed that P'o-li was Asahan on the north­

east coast of Sumatra. By an error of translation he thought
that Ho-ling was east and not west of P'o-li, which would place
it on the Malay Peninsula; TP, old series, 9» 1898, 285-286.
Gerini, noting that Ho-ling was* according to Chia Tan (see
page If {> ), east of Fo-shih (£rivijayan Sumatra), placed it on
the Peninsula; Researches,"- 474-475- Moens, believing that
She-p'o = 'Java', was originally the Malay Peninsula, also
located Ho-ling there; 'Srivijaya, Yava en Kataha', 22ff. The
identification of Lo-ling withfche Peninsula lingers on.
Recently, for example, Professor S.Q. Fatimi, in an unpublished
paper in my possession, has argued in it3 favour.
 kS3*

in Borneo (I), in Sumatra (2), and in Java (3)# The usual

choice has been Java, and until recently the word has been

derived from Kallnga, a kingdom in eastern India from which

migrants to Java were believed to have come in early times (4).

The basis for the view that Ho-ling was in Java was a

statement in the Hsin T'ang shu that Ho-ling was also called

She-p *o = 'Java,1 (5)» aad it was Pelliot who argued most

strongly in favour of its being a Javanese toponym (6).

\ ^ —1
Since 1918, when Professor Coedes resurrected Srivijaya, the

study of Ho-ling has been stimulated by the circumstance that

that it sent two series of missions to China; the first was

?/e6\
in 640, 648, and 666 and the second in 767, 788, 813 1 815 and/

8fc6

(1) Braddell was impressed by Chia Tan's statement that

Ho-ling was east of Po-shih = Srivijayan Sumatra; the voyage
took four or five days, far too short a time for a voyage from
Palembang through the Bangka Straits to northern Java; JI£BRAS,
24, 1, 1951, 16-27.
(2; Obdeijn thought that it was Palembang; its name sounded
like Palembang; 'Gegevens ter identificeering', 55*
(3) Groeneveldt also misread the notices in the CTS and HTS
as meaning that Ho-ling was east of P'o-li; for him P'o-li
was in Sumatra, and therefore Ho-ling was in Java; Notes on the
Malay Archipelago* 12-15. Pelliot corrected the translation
and argued at great length in favour of identifying Sh§-p'o
(according to the HTS an alternative name for Ho-ling) with
Java*j'I)eux itineraires', 279-295*
(4) This explanation of the name was first proposed by
Mayers in 'Chinese explorations', China Review, 4t 184. I am
grateful to Professor Coedes for the loan of a manuscript by
M. Damais in which the latter gives reasons for reconstructing
Ho-ling as a transcription of a Javanese toponym corresponding
to Walaing or Waleng, appearing in inscriptions from the ninth
c e n t u r y ^ ^ ^ t 3 b : <9 f e . %
1 <9 ijt, •

(6) 'Deux itineraires', 279 - 295*

(7) The references are provided by Dr. Wang Gungwu in
'Nanhai trade', 122-123.
 U64.
Thereafter Ho-ling, under the name of She-p*o * sent further

missions in 820, 831, and in the 860-873 period (1).

Obviously it was an important kingdom and, because the

/—
mission sequences proceed and follov/ those from Srivijaya,

which came from the 670-673 period (2) to 742 (3)» some have

wondered whether there was some special relationship between

the two countrieSjaccounting for the fact that their missions

never overlapped (4). But a more interesting aspect of the

Ho-ling missions i3 that the second series coincides with the

period in central Javanese history when the Sailendra dynasty

was ruling and when the Barabudur wa3 built, a period about

which more is now known than ever before (5)«

(1) Ibid.
(2) HT S . 2 2 2 ^ , 5a, states that Srivijayasent missions
from the 670-673 reign period to the 713*742 period. In fact
the first mission for which thejre is evidence is 702; TFYK,
970, 114030b. Nevertheless Srivijayan envoys were among
those for whom ratiohs were given by a decreeof 695to help
them return home; THY, 100, 1798.
(3) Wang Gungwu, •11'anhai trade’, 123•
(4; This point was specially made by Stutterheim, A
Javanese period in Sumatran history, 1929, 20-22.
(Y) F.H. van Naerssein, *The Cailendra interregnum’, India
Antigua, 1947, 249-253* end especially J.G. de Casparis,
Inscripties uit de (jlailendra tijd, Bandung, 1950, and Prasasti
Indonesia, 2, 1$5&» It is now known that the last male
representative of the Sailendra dynasty was defeated by an
usurper about 856, expelled from Java, and became ruler of
Srivijaya.
 U65

An examination of the Ho-ling* problem is outside the

scope of the present study, but it is impossible to ignore it

entirely when describing the historical geography of western

Indonesia in the seventh century, the century which not only

/ —
saw the rise of Srivijaya but also the survival alongside

Ho-ling of some of the toponyms of the fifth and sixth

centuries* I shall therefore limit myself to one geographical

aspect of the Ho-ling problem, avoiding embroiling myself

in matters of historical reconstruction which may arise from

my identification of the region 10107.11 as Ho-ling,

In the seventh century, when I Tsing was writing,

Ho-ling was a trading kingdom with extensive maritime

communications (1), It was also a Buddhist centre* Hui-ning

went by ship to Ho-ling and studied there three years

under the monk Jnanabhadra (2). Nor was the ruler of Ho-ling,

when he had the opportunity, less well disposed towards the

/— L,
pilgrims than the ruler of Srivijaya; Tao-lin V) Sypp

was treated by him in a friendly fashion (3)* But in the

earliest account of Ho-ling, other than the passing references

to it by I Tsing, this kingdom does not give one the

impression that it was particularly important. The earliest

(1) See note i on p a g e ^ / • x

(2) Ta Tjang h si yu ch'iu, 4a; Chavannes, Memoir e , 60*
(3; , "6c 5 Chavannes, k§motre, 99 •
Ta T *ang hsi'. yh chl iu’
 W6.
source is the T*ung tien, compiled by Tu Vu (735 - 812). The

information contained in this work covers the period down to

755 9 with the exception of additional material from 755 to

801 contained in interlinear notes (1). Only one gtinor note

is found in the passage on Ho-ling, and I conclude that the

last possible date for the T*ung tien*s information about

Ho-ling is 755* One can probably date the material even

more narrowly. The normal means by which the Chinese knew

about foreign countries was through missions to China, where

kj ,/\«£
the envoys were cross-examined by the Hung lu ssu

and reports prepared for the emperor. The reports were

later filed and became available to historians. The only

missions from Ho-ling before 755 were in 640, 648, and 666.

I therefore believe that the description of Ho-ling in the

T >ung tien is of seventh century vintage and may be as old

as 640.

^ /\
(1) Ssu-yu Tcng and K. Biggerstaff, An annotated
bibliography of selected Chinese reference works,Harvard'
Yenchirig Institute Studies, volume 2 (Revised edition),
Harvard University Press, 1950, 148-149*
 467.
The passage in the T*ung tien is as follows:

I* <8■S.8-% 1 D ifg>l
ft £ ® + * * * $ * i t £ fif) A w. + % * 8 1 P J # jl*

* $ 1 0 ® i .4
t i t <5 & v® 4 £ . i 4 " # ^ d J ,? \ . ^ > * i 3 p t i i i | ^ ' S l A S s
1 $, & M k i $
_t_ S-f% iia x 5. £ <$ Jr SS-9t-^4 >Si jt
j| I * 8fft i &-
T^'T' £
1Ho-ling country lies to the south of Chen-la (Cambodia).
In the 627-649 period it sent envoys with gold flowers
and such articles. The ruler’s residence is in a
compound surrounded by a wall of wooden stakes* Large
houses and pavilions of several storeys are covered with
coir palm. Couches are all made of ivory. When they
eat they use their hands (Interlinear note: Huan is
pronounced ku and huan) They also use the flowers of the
coconut palm for wine. When one drinks (this wine) one
may even become intoxicated. In the mountains there are
caves from which salt oozes out. The people of this
country collect the salt and eat it. In this country
there is a special group of poisonous people. If they
lodge with ordinary people the result is that the bodies
(of the ordinary people) come out in ulcers. If
sexual intercourse takes place, the result is death.
If the saliva of the poisonous people falls on plants
and trees, (they) wither. The corpses, however, of
these people heither rot nor stink ( l ) * 1

(1) T ’ung tient 188, 1011. An abridged form of this

passage appears in the T 1ang hui y ao, which supplies in
different columns the missions of 8l3 and 818; THY, 100,
1782. The first compilation of information on which the THY
was based contains material down to 804; Teng and Biggerstaff,
160.
 U68.

It will be noted that the ^ u n g tien refers only to missions

in the 627-649 period, and it is in fact to the seventh

century that I attribute this information. It will also be

noted that there is no reference to Ho-ling^ neighbours.

On that subject the only evidence from sources other than

I Tsing which can be attributed to the seventh century also

. A
comes from the T*ung tien in connexion with (To-)p *o-teng

( country, whose eastern neighbour is

said to be Ho-ling (1). To-p^-teng sent a mission in 647

and nothing more is heard of it after that year; one has to

assume that its position vis-a-vis Ho-ling was established

in 647. For additional geographical information about

Ho-ling one has to turn to I Tsingfs list:

tP >o-lu-shihA("Barus1)t Malayut Mo-ho-hain, Ho-ling,

Tan-tan, £ 1en-p*en, P^o-li, Chueh-lun, Fo-shih-p*u-lo
(in western Borneo;.1

(1) T'unfi tien, 188, 1011: & ll. 4^ f\ 4^2 *501^

The same information is in the two T ’ang histories, where the

country is called To-p^-t^rig; CTS, 197 1 3a; PITS, 222 f , 4a.
In this list Mo-ho-hsln takes the place of To-p^-t^ng (1)#

To the east of Ho-ling lie* Tan-t^n and P *en-p1en and finally

P 1o-li. Ho-ling was evidently considered by I Tsing to lie

closer to Jambi and Palembang than either Tan-tan or P to-li>

z' —
Srivijaya - Palembang is not mentioned in the list because, as
/—
I have already suggested, Srivijaya - Palembang was where

I Tsing wo® A was writing.

But when v;e come to the information about Ho-ling in

the two T fang histories we find new facts. The Chiu

T 1ang shu1s account introduces bo new information about the

customs of the country but mentions missions in 768, 815» and

818. It also adds the following significant detail*

fHo-ling country is a maritime region in the ocean of

the southern regions. On its east lies P^o-li, on its
west To-pfo-teng, to its north is Chen-la (Cambodia),
and its south is on the great ocean (2),*

(1) Damais remarks that To-p1o-teng may be a Sumatran

toponym and was certainly not Bali, as Groeneveldt thought;
BEFJEO, 48, 2, 1957, 612, I have no views on T o-p^-teng,
1*2] CTS, 197, 3a.
 k7Q,

A
The detail about To-p*o-tenr is consistent with r/hat wo

already know, but H o-ling *r> position vis-a-vig P ^ - l i is very

different from the situation reflected in I T s i n g *8 list,

A A
when Ho-ling was separated from P *o-li by Tan-tan and P 1c n - p 1en.

The inclusion of the eighth end ninth century missions in

the Chiu T*ang shu account suggests the period when tho new

information became available* The Ilsln T*an& shu provides

even more additional information about Ilo-ling ant of^ which

is in striking contrast with the earliest account contained

in the T*ung t i e n * According to the Hsin T*ang s h u :

 471.

rEo-ling. It is also called She-p*o and She-p*o. It

is in the southern ocean. To its east lies ?*'o-li.
To its west lies To-p*o-tehg. Its south is adjacent
to the southern ocean and its north to Chjehi-la (Cambodia)•
The city wall is made of wood. Though the buildings
are large, they are also covered. The couches are made
of ivory and resemble mats. The country produces
tortoise shell, yellow and white gold, rhinoceros, and
elephants. The country is exceedingly rich (Then there
follows the passage about the salt caves and the
intoxicating wine). They have a script and understand
atronomy. When they eat they do not use spoons and
chopsticks. There are poisonous women here. If one
consorts with them one gets ulcers. The corpses do
not rot. The ruler lives in the (capital) city of
She-p*o. His ancestor Chi-yen (1) moved eastwards to
the' city of P *o- lu- chi a- ssu. On the borders (of Ho-ling)
there are 28 small countries, all of which owe allegiance
to (Ho-ling).. There are 32 great ministers and the
Ta-t so-kan-hslung is the chief of them. On the top of
a mountain ther e i s the province of Lang-pi-ya. The
ruler frequently ascends this mountain to gaZ.0 at the
sea (2).f

Here we are in the presencd of a much more important

Ho-ling than emerges in the records of the seventh century,

and the inference must be that something had happened in the

meantime to account of its new stature. One consequence

of the change was that its eastern borders now adjoined P yo-li .

(1) Damais has suggested that chi-yen may be derived from

(r a )kryan;cReview of Rljawat Indonesiaj B E F E Q , 48, 1956, 646-7#
This title seems to have been reserved for an oligarchy of
princes of more o£ less equal status. It is a Javanese title
and, if Damais is correct, it provides an additional reason
for regarding Ho-ling as a Javanese kingdom. The same passage
from the HTS also provides a sundial reading for Ho-ling, which
locates it some way north of the equator. I am certain that it
is erroneous and it has been ignored by all who have identified
Ho-ling with Java. I Tsingrs list placing Ho-ling east of
I\lalayu7 is sufficient to discredit it.
(2) HTS, 222 'f , 3b.
 *472.

There is no reference to Ho-ling; in any account of F ^ - l i ,

which sent its last mission in 630 (1). Ho-ling,1s position

is also different from what it was when I Tsing knew it.

ivioreover it may he significant that the Hsin T*ang shu also

contains a story of the queen who began to rule in 674 (2).

674 is eight years later than the last seventh century mission

of 666, and this is probably why the story did not find a

place in the earliest account of Ho-ling contained in the

T fung tien. The new information was surely a result of the

second series of missions which began in 767.

One searches for an explanation for the discrepancy

between the accounts based on seventh and eighth or ninth

century information, and the one which most readily comes to

hand is the statement in the Hsin T*ang shu that an ancestor

moved eastwards; if this is considered with the other

statement in the HsinT^kng shu that the country was also called

She-p*o and controlled 28 email countries, one has to conclude

that in the eighth century Ho-ling, for some undisclosed reason,

became a much greater country than it had been when I Tsing

knew of it. In the course of the expansion the ruler shifted

his capital. Chia Tan, writing about 800, also indicates that

Ho-ling was an important country:

(1) C TS, 197, 2a.

(2) H i ? , 222 This passage is translated by
Groeneveldt; Notes on the Malay Archipelago, 14.
 -73.

•If, one goes by sea to the east from Fo-shih country

(Srivijaya) for four or five days one reaches Ho-ling
countryf which is the largest island in the south (I;*1

It is not the purpose in this study to relate the expansion

Ho-ling to what is known of Javanese history in the eighth

century. It is sufficient if I have indicated reasons

for believing that Ho-ling represented two distinct locations

(1) Page IJQ ^bove* Sir Roland Braddell considered that the
direction •east1 of Fo-shih = eastern Sumatra was a reason for
placing Ho-ling in western Borneo; JMBRAS, 24» 1* 1951t 16.
I do not jjhink that this orientation is a problem. Chia Tan
places Srivijaya on the fsouthern shore1 of the 'strait'•
Just as •southern1 should be corrected to 'west1, so should
•east* be corrected to 'south*. I suspect that the Chinese
conventionally regarded this part of South East Asia as lying
•south1 of China in the southern ocean. Centuries later
L:a Huan states that if 'one goes due south from Champa1
ft d ifij, '£) $ to Lung-ya-mln f 1
and then goes west for two days, one reaches Malacca;
Ying yai sheng lant 22. The Chinese of course knew better than
this. It was merely that for ordinary purposes they seem to
have regarded western Indonesia as 'south1 of China.
 h7k*

in the seventh and eighth centuries. In terms of I Tsing’s

toponyms the expansion must have been at the expense of the

kingdom known as Tan-tan, which I placed in Java and possibly

in the interior of the islandx(l),

I therefore believe that in I Tsingys time Ho-ling

was somewhere in the western half of Java. The islands

which I Tsing implies were north of Ho-llng on the voyage to

Kedah are likely to be the Sumatran off-shore islands (2).

How far to the west of Java Ho-ling originally wa3 must depend

on the location of Ko-ho-hsin, separating it from Itfalayu and

Srivijaya-Palembang. If Mo-ho-hsin and To-pyo-teng as well

(1) Pelliot quoted later texts which state that in the 742-
755 period the capital of She-p1o fead transferred to P ^ - l u -
chia-sstl, but he did not know what was the source of the
information; yDeux itineraires* 225t note 2, and 413*
(2) Ta T yang hsi yu chylut 10a; Chavannes, Memoire, 158*
 U75,

were in Java, Ho-ling could not have been at the extreme

western end of the island.

Because Healing in I Tsing’s time was a trading centre

of some importance, a commercial kingdom may have existed

there in the fifth century. If Ho-lo-tan was not situated on

/ _
the future site of Srivijaya at Palembang, which I think is ,

improbable, its most likely site would seem to be the region

later known as Ho-ling. In favour of this identification it

can be argued that Ho-lo-tan was described as being in She-p*o»

or 'Java1 (1). I have found no reason for associating the

•Java1 toponym with Sumatra as far as the Chinese sources are

concerned. If Ho-lo-tan was in fact on the island of Java,

it must have been the most western kingdom of importance,

for we have seen that Tan-tan and P*o-li occupy the region

further east. If Ho-lo-tan was in the western half of Java,

one looks td Tan-tan as the cause of its fall in the second

half of the fifth century. The ruler of She-pyo complained

to Gunavarman that his neighbours were attacking him, and

Tan-tan, which sent a number of missions in the sixth century,

(1) The island of Java was certainly known as 'Java1 in 732,

for the word appears on the Changal inscription of central
Java issued by Sanjayaj Kern, Versp. Gesch., VII, 115-128.
 U76.

seems an eligible cause of the decay of Ho-lo-tan (1).

In no circumstances do I believe that Ho-lo-tan survived as

the name of a kingdom in the middle of the seventh century;

^ **
the ambiguous statement in the Ts*gr fu yuan kuei that

*Ho-lo-tan-tan ^ • sent missions in 670 shottld,

in my opinion, be corrected to mean that Ho-ling p|^

00 oo
and Tan-tan ^ ^ did so*

I cm attracted to the conclusion that Ho-lo-tan was in

western Java, In later centuries this region was fatuous

for its peppers (2), and one recalls that the Chinese

translation of 392 known as the Shlh erh yu ching says of

She-yeh, probably meaning •Java', that it produced long and

black pepper (3)* Ho-lo-tan was in She-p1o , or 'Java1.

(1) It is tempting to identify Tan-tan as the expanding

country ruled by Purnavamian, ’lord of the city of Taruma1,
known from inscriptions recovered from the western end of
Java. I quote one of his inscriptions on page * Hr de
Casparis tells me that he would not be surprised if the
inscriptions were written in the sixth century, which would
coincide with the time when Tan-»tan was sending missions to
China. Tan-tan, according t o the ¥ *ung-t ie n , had Brahman
ministers, while Brahmans were promTnent T n Taruma. I wish,
however, to avoid committing myself to an opinion on the exact
location of Tan-tan beyond saying that I am certain that it was
in Java.
(2) Chao Ju-kua mentions black pepper in the mountains of
Sunda, the name for western Java; Chu fan chih, 19.
(3) Page3 $£ . Levi thought that b'h'fe-yeh' was 1Java1»
 477*

In l?ter times western Java, sometimes known as Sunda, was

famous for its traders* Pires, writing on western Java, states:

tSunda is (a land of) chivalrous, seafaring warriors -

they cay more so than the Javanese, taking them all in
all *«« The people of the sea coast get on well with
the merchants in the land* They are accustomed to
trade* These people of Sunda very often come to
Malacca to trade (1).*

At the beginning of the 13th century Sunda wa3 a dependency

/ ^—
of Srivijaya (2), and it is probable that the Srivijayan

rulers had for a long time kept this trading coast under

their control. The Kota Kapur inscription of 686, found on

Bangka island, refers to an expedition about to be launched

against *the land of Java1 which had not submitted to

Srivijaya (3), and it would not be surprising if the object

of tho expedition was to punish rebels in Sunda Java.

(1) Suna Oriental, 1, 167« Pires describes several trading

ports in Sunda.
12) Chao Ju-kua, Chu fan chih, 13* v
(3) See BEFKO, 30, 1930, 49« for Coedes1 translation.
 473.

My iran of western Indonesia from the fifth to the

seventh century is at last complete (1). By way of a

summary of my conclusions I wish to compare its essential

features with the versions of my pred^ssors.

I have found no reason to disagree with Pelliot's

major conclusion in 1904 which was that the Chinese knew

only of the island of Java by the name of 'Java1 (2),

Students in Indonesia need not, in my opinion, be perplexed

by the variety of views expressed on the meaning of fho~p*o (3).

Any attempt to search for the She-p1o these centuries

elsewhere than in Java must bo based on new evidence9while

the suggestion that She-p1o was sometimes used as the name

of a kingdom on the Malay Peninsula must be regarded as

extravagent* The Arabs, and perhaps the inhabitants of

mainland South East Asia, may have understood ’Java* in a

different sense, but not so, apparently, the Chinese v7ho

recorded details about the tributary kingdoms.

(1) See map 3.

(2) Though by 1925 Pelliot, influenced by Ferrand, changed
his mind and translated Sh£-p*o as •Sumatra.-Java1;
•Textes Chinois*, 250.
(3) Page 17♦ Note 1.
 k79.

But my understanding of what is meant by She-p*o

has not been particularly helpful in locating these kingdoms.

At the best it is a slight argument in support of my

conclusion that Ho-lo-tan and perhaps P*o-ta were in Java*

An outline map of Java began to emerge when, like Ferrand,

I was impressed by the consistency of the evidence about

Ton-tan and P ’o-li (1), which can only mean that their

juxta/position corresponded with the real situation. Moens

anticipated me in spotting the nonnexion between L o - c h ^ *

P 1o-li93 eastern neighbour, and Chueh-lun* also P 1o-ll1s

eastern neighbour* Both names represent a people and not

a specific kingdom* B'oens also realised that Vijayapura

was in western Borneo, and I am satisfied that this part

of this study is sensible. The evidence about L o - c h ^ and

ChUfch-lun is important because it helps to anchor f o - l i ,

south of western Borneo and west of an indistinctly known

population, to the eastern Javanese fringe of the civilised

world of Indonesia as the Chinese were aware of it in these

centuries.

(1) Though Ferrand agreed with Pelliot that P 1o-li was Bali.
 480

As for the map of Sumatra I believe that I have

provided a more sharply defined outline than my predecessors^did^

partly by exploiting what is known about Java but chiefly

because I brought into play the geographical information of the

third century which enabled me to approach the sequel with

more confidence* I was aware that already by the third

century south-eastern Sumatra, represented by K o - y i n g , was

ahead of northern Sumatra in the field of foreign c o m me r c e f

and this made it impossible for me to take seriously Keens*

v i e w that Kan-t *o-li should be identified with Atjeh. The

authentic toponyms of northern Sumatra were merely the

shadowy *Baras* and P fo - l o , neither of which were tributary

kingdoms in the fifth and sixth centuries in spite of the

wealth of their hinterland. I identified the port of *Barus*

with the extreme northern part of Sumatra, and I hope that

F e r r a n d 1□ view that it was the flodem port of Baras, on the

north-western coast of the island, will be abandoned.

P » o - l o , which I confidently introduce as another northern

Sumatran kingdom, cannot be located with certainty, but I

believe that it wa3 somewhere on the Sumatran side of the

Straits of Malacca. The foreign trade of both these centres,

and also of Vijayapura in western Borneo, was probably in

the hands of other Indonesians in the fifth and sixth

centuries. The kingdom most likely to have handled it is

 43l,
K a n - t *0-11, and I gave my reasons why I believe that the

assumption that it was in south-eastern Sumatra is correct*

I approached the problem of identifying K a n - t 1o-li by

eliminating competitors for a place on that coast* Only

P 1o-huang may also have been there, and even this exception

tests to some extent on the assumption that its name is

connected with Tulang Bawang mentioned in the Wu pei c h i h *

Unless it can be proved that Ho-lo-tan in •Java* was at

Palembang, it seems safe to regard K a n - t 1o-li as the master

of both Palembang and Jambi in the fifth and sixth centuries*

Kan-t *o-li is certainly the only one of the tributary kingdoms

which can be identified as the proto-Malayu. Finally,

I gave ny reasons for rejecting the view that ^rivijaya

emerged anywhere else than at Palembang.

I have not concerned myself with the exact locations

of the Javanese k i n g d o m s , nor have I worried about z^inor

toponyms such as Llo-ho-hsin or To-p"o-teng. Nor, with the

exception of Vijayapura, have I dared to suggest the real

names of any of these kingdoms. Their exact location and

their names will become apparent only when new inscriptions

are found* On these inscriptions I depend for a reliable

check on the accuracy of my outline map.

This exercise in map-making has been for a purpose.

I want to identify the neighbours of seventh century

Srivijaya, but more important is the identification of the

kingdom which flourished in south-eastern Sumatra in the

 482,
X- _
interval of four hundred years between Ko-ying and Srivijaya(l).

In the fifth and sixth centuries this kingdom was Kan-t1o-li,

which was definitely a trading kingdom and on a coast which

had been and was to be the major trading coast of western

Indonesia. Its only competitor in this period seems to

(1) My map has been prepared for a much more limited

purpose than my predecessors set themselves. In 1904 Pelliot
v/ished to establish the nomenclature of the South East Asian
countries from the earliest records down to the 15th century.
Using Chia Tan's itineraries as a peg on which to hang his
subject, he produced a massive work which has remained until
today the indispensable basis for the study of early South
East Asian historical geography. In 1919 Ferrand undertook
an equally extensive study but for a different and more
ambitious purpose. He wished to present the case for the
migration of Indonesians from the mainland of Asia to the
Archipelago and thence over the Indian Ocean to Madagascar
and East Africa. His summary of the key evidence is in JA,
Sept.-Oct, 1919, 202-2. The people v/hose maritime activities
he was investigating were called K 'un-lun, and variants of that
name, and this led him to consider many toponyms which
appeared in texts alongside K 1un-lun. Moens' intentions
in 1937 were equally ambitious, but within the field of
Indonesian history. He was abreast of the progress in
Indonesian historical research, and he attempted a synthesis
of the evidence then available to propose a fundamental
revision of the location and history of the kingdoms
mentioned in all kinds of records. For example, he created
a country of Sht-p'o, later called Ho-lin^, at Kedah on the
Malay Peninsula, which was conquered by Urivijaya, then
situated at Kelantan on the opposite coast of the Peninsula.
The Kataha tpponym, usually associated with Kedah, was
transferred to Java. There is much that is fantastic in
Moens1 study, and I bell.eve that, from his views on
Chin-li-p'i-shih and Chileh-lun, I have extracted what is of
permanent value. One notable feature of the works of
Pelliot, Ferrand and Moens is that, although their evidence
is often made available as the result of trade between
Indonesia and other parts of Asia, the trading background itself
is never studied.
 ^33.

have been the unhappy Ho-lo-tan. I therefore conclude that

Kan-t *o-li was the heir to the prosperity of Ko-ying and the

predecessor of Srivijaya. Its inhabitants performed a great

service in the expansion of western Indonesian commerce when,

in response to the needs of the ’Persian1 trade, they

developed the Indonesian link with the markets of southern

China.

It is unfortunate that so little is known about the

internal affairs of Kan-t’o-li (1), Something, however,

is known of the political background of Indonesia in these

centuries, which seem to have been a time when powerful

kingdoms were taking shape and when rulers were experimenting

with new techniques of government. To some extent, therefore,

it is possible to recover the developments in which

Kan-t'o-li shared.

(1) The only account is in Liang shu, 54, I6b-l8a. Host of

it deals with the ruler's dream in 502 and an obsequious
letter his successor sent to China in 51$. The accountwas
translated by Groeneveldt, Notes on the Llalay Archipelago,
60-62. The most interesting part concerns the dream, which
I discuss below.
 484*

The clearest Indication of what was happening io

provided by the inscriptions of Borneo and Java, which

indicate that powerful coua ries were coning to the fore*

’Hlavarman of Kutei in eastern Borneo, perhaps the second of

his li^e to adopt an Indian-type name, evidently ruled an

expanding kingdom* His inscriptions are undated but are

usually attributed to the first half of th n fifth century#

One of them states:

•The illustrious monarch vulavarmaa, having conquered

(other) kings in the battlefield, made them his
tributaries, as did king Yudhisthira. At Vaprakeovara
he donated 40,000 »** (this part of the inscription
cannot be deciphered) The yirpa (sacrificial post) has
been erected by the Brahmans who have coma here (from)
different (parts) *
This inscription suggests that in some mysterious way the

Brahmans were connected with the ruler*s successes in war* One

ictures Indians, or Indonesians who had acquired a priestly

education in India, parading their magical powers and seeking

out royal patrons, to whom they introduced novel sacrifices

(l) B* Ch. Chhabra, fThree mo/e yupa inscriptionsof King

Mulavarman from Koetei (E. Borneo),f JOXS* 12, 1945, 39* It
has been suggested that the posts may also have been connected
with nou-Hindu religious practices; buffaloes may have been
attached to them at sacrifices at the Feast of the Dead# The
Sanskrit inscriptions engraved on them would have been an
instance of the easy way in which foreign influences blended
vtI th the indigenous culture; Damais, BEFRQ* UP, 2, 1956, 357*
note 1.
 U85

for enhancing the royal power and prestige. Tan^tan* s ministers

were Brahmans. A Taruma inscription, perhaps a century

later, from wostern Java reveals a similar situation:

•Illustrious, munificent, correct in conduct (was) the

unequalled king who in^the past (ruled) in Taruma - by
name the illustrious PUrijavarman, whose famous armour
was impenetrable by the arrows of his numerous enemies -
this is his pair of footprints, always skilful in
destroying enemy cities, which were salutary to princes
devoted (to him, but) turned like darts against this)
enemies (I).1

(i) I am grateful to Professor Basham for this translation.

One of FBrnavarman1s inscriptions refers to the digging of a
canal. The Taruma inscriptions were first edited by
Vogel; Public. Oudheidk. Bienst Nedorl. Indie, I , 1925$ 15-35.
Vogel drew attention to the fact that they were found in the
same part of Java where centuries later the Butch established
their first factories. lie suggested that the geographical
situation of this coast in relation to Sumatra and India and
the special advantages v/hicji its configuration afforded to
both navigation and commerce were circumstances which might
account for both the importance of Taruma and the Butch
factories. It is in this region that I have suggested that
Ho-ling originally lay and perhaps Ho-lo-tan as well.
 W 6.

There are a few hints that in Kan-t 'o-li too

foreign influences were making themselves felt in the royal

circle* In 518 the ruler's name ended with -varman (1)*

In 455 the ruler had sent the 'Indian Liu-t*o ^ ^ Pfi? =(?)
Rudra as an envoy to China (2). In 502 the ruler was addressed

hy a Buddhist monk in a dream and advised to send tribute to

China. It is possible that Buddhist soothsayers were

employed in the court, and the advice given on this occasion

may be compared with the advice which Gunavarman of Kashmir

A
gave the ruler of She-p *o in 424; the latter asked whether

it was proper for him to fight his enemies, and he was told that

he should do so (3)* As a result Gunavarman's fame as a

royal adviser was such that other king3 in Indonesia sought

his services. In both cases Buddhists made a practical

contribution in the affairs of state. Buddhists as well as

Brahmans would have been appointed to positions of confidence

in order to strengthen these kingdoms in an age of political

(1) -varman is rendered as J^ •

(2) Liu Suhg shu, 97» 12a; repeated in Liang shu, 54, 16b.
The text has • M • in front of the envoy's name; it
must mean 1 Jz. • , or 'Indian' , though not necessarily a
genuine Indian. In the same century the ruler of Funan
sent the Buddhist Nagasena to China to complain about Lin-yi
attacks; See page 3^b .
(3) Page 111 .
and economic development (!)•”

(1) I have found no means of identifying the form of

religion en vogue in the tributary kingdoms* Nagasena's
description of Funan indicates that both Sivaite and Buddhist
cults flourished side by sidet and there was also^a mountain-
top cult which may have been indigenous; Coedes, Etats, 100,
3>06# Coede3, however, identifies the mountain-top cult with
Siva-worshipf For a recent study of the form of Buddhism
practised in Funan, see Kalyan Sarkar, •Ivlahayana Buddhism in
Funan', Sino-Indian Studies, 5, 1, 1955, 69-75* But I wonder
to what extent any foreign cult was more important than the
indigenous ones# The best-known statement of the way the
latter survived under the form of Hinduism is Paul Ivdus's
•L'lnde vue de l'Est# Culte3 indiens et indigenes au Champa',
BEFEO, 33, 1933, 367-410# Professor Coedes has hinted that
the mountain temple cult in Angkor had affinities with the ,
cult of the god of the soil in China; 'Le culte de la royaute
divinisce #..•, Serie Orientale Houa, 5, 1952, 17-23# Hindu
and Buddhist culis probably co-existed peacefully in the
South East Asian countries in the early centuries of the
Christian era. The Ta Prohm inscription of the sixth
century Funan begins with two verses in honour of the Buddha
and then refers to the son of a Brahman whom the ruler had
employed as an official; Coedes, BEFEO, 31, 1931, 11*
In the fifth and sixth centuries lio-lo-tan, P'o-li, and the
other countries were in the habit of sending memorials to
China couched in Buddhist terms# I suspect that this does
not mean that the rulers in question were fervent Buddhists
but that they sought to send letters to the Chinese emperors
which would curry favour# Buddhists sailing through the
region in those centuries would have made it clear that the
southern emperors wero patrons of Buddhism# Even Tan-tan,
where the ministers were said to be Brahmans, professed to
honour the Buddhist faith; Liang shu, 54, 16a# Though the
P 'o-li ruler claimed to be related to the Buddha's family,
the Sui shu, 82, 8a, merely says of the customs of P 'o-li
that they were similar to those of Funan# Przyluslii suggested
that the fact that the ruler of Kan-t'o-li in 455 employed
•£he 'Indian Rudra' seemed to show that the king favoured the
Siva cult; 'Indian colonisation in Sumatra before the
seventh century', JGIS, 1, 2, 1934, 97-98. I do not see the
force of this argument# The evidence implies no more than
that he had a Saivite in an important post#
 U83.

One of the marks of a powerful kingdom in those days

would have been the size of its population* The ruler of

Ilo-lo-t,o/tan in 430 told the emperor that

fmy country once had a large population and was prosperous

(l).f
The Javanese kingdom of Tan-tan seems to have had a large

population* In the fertile island of Java manpower was

needed to cultivate rice and swell the armies of those who

aspired to become overlords (2)* The rulers of Kan-t*o-li

would also have been concerned to increase their population,

but not for agricultural purposes. Their concern would

have been to attract to their harbours the Malay shippers

engaged in the China trade. In the early days of the trade

with China many of the coastal Malays who operated it

probably owed permanent allegiance to no one. They would

have been organised in small group3 under a trusted leader.

(1) Page 3*2. ♦

(2) In early South East Soia the preoccupation of the rulers
was lack of manpower and not of agricultural land. Wars
were waged to capture peasants rather than territory.
Without adequate labour resources irrigation schemes were
impossible* The classic example is provided by Angkor,
situated in a plain which became fertile only when the
rulers were able to control a large cubject population.
 k&9.

Their situation must have teen similar to that of the

companions of the founder of Malacca at the beginning

of the 15th century. In the words of Barros, the

1Collates• (1) lived afloat rather than on land. Their

sons were b o m and bred on the sea and had no fixed baso

ashore (2). On the south-eastern coast of Sumatra there

arc many creeks giving temporary shelter to ships. Off

the same coast lie innumerable islands# some of which Pires

describes as the haunts of the Collates (3). In the fifth

and sixth centuries the ancestors of those whom the

Portuguese knew could hardly have been men of more settled

habits. They would have been sea-rovers, often practising

piracy as well as trading with China# For the ambitious

ruler of iCan-t1o-li they would have been a nuisance and

sometimes a danger.

(1) •Collates*, a Portuguese word, is believed to be derived

from the Malay word sclat or •strait1 in the sense of the
seafaring population of the Straits of Malacca and the
neighbouring islands. For Tome Piren the word was §tho
Malay for sea robbers*; Suma Oriental, I, 149• Ke refers to
thejGellates as •robbers,'and they are brought up on the
sea and are great rowers*; ibid, 149•
(2) Feeado, II^Book VI, chapter 1, 7t quoted in Ferrand,
•Maluku,' le Malayu et Malayur*, JA, Mai-Juin, 1913, 435*
(3) Suma Oriental, 1, 156—157*
 USO.

But the ruler of Kan-11o-li had one means at his

disposal for diverting the energies of the coastal Malays

to commercial activities "based on his harbours. The monk

who visited the ruler in the dream in 502 said:

•If you send envoys and pay your respectful duty, your land
will become rich and happy and merchants and travellers
will multiply a hundred fold (l).f

This passage may be no more than a literary flourish, but I

suspect that it reflects the background on the trading coast

at that time. The ruler, unlike the free-lance traders,

was able to send missions to China, establish his Ability to

supply the goods in demand there, intercede on behalf of

shippers in trouble, and receive a seal of office or imperial

presents as a token of his standing with the emperor. His

privileged status in China, with it3 commercial implications,

could then be dangled a3 a bait to attract independent

I/Ialay shippers to his harbours; they would be reminded of the

advantages of trading in the name of a ruler who had won

imperial favour.

(i) Page 3ifJ+ .

 On these lines, therefore, I am inclined to interpret

the statement in the Kan-t *o-li ruler’s dream that a mission

to China would result in a great increase in the number of

merchants and travellers in the kingdom. When the number

of shippers frequenting one harbour became considerable it

was possible to muster fleets to compel pirates to keep the

peace and to bring in further shippers. In a similar way

Malacca became great and prosperous in the 15th century.

The Malay chief, followed by his Cellates, sought refuge

there. The settlement prospered and traders were 'welcomed.

According to d 1Albuquerque *s son, writing in the 16th century

but drawing on local traditions, even pirates with stolen

goods were made welcome there, with the result that within

two years there v/ere 2,000 people In Malacca (1). The

next stage was the use of force to compel ships in the 0traits

to call at Malacca instead of Singapore (2). In the meantime

the ruler and his successors had the wisdom to submit to the

Ming emperors in order to obtain a degree of protection against

Malacca's chief enemy, the Thai.

(1) Commentaries, vol. 3, chapter 17, 87 quoted by Ferrand

in ^gjalaka, le Malayu et Malayur' , JA, Mai-Juin, 1918, 418.
Tome Pires1 account of Malacca makes continuous reference
to the rapid way the population geew. For a trading kingdom,
be it Kan-t'o-li or Malacca, the index of success was first
and foremost the size of the population attracted to its
harbour*
(2) Barros, Decade, 2, book 6, chapter 1, 9* quoted by
Ferrand, $A, 1918, 437.
 k92*

Srlvijaya was also an assiduous sender of missions to

China, and I have no doubt that the mission technique was

something which the Palembang Malays who controlled Malacca

inherited from Srlvijaya* The origins of the technique as a

commercial instrument are probably as old as the 1Persian*

trade of the fifth and sixth centuries, when Kan-t*o-li

sent occasional missions* Xt served three purposes. It

placed the trading state under some degree of protection*

The tribu"e served to advertise the kind of trade goods

handled by the kingdom’s merchants# Thirdly, I believe that

originally it was also used to persuade the coastal Malays

to concentrate their activities on established trading

settlements# But I doubt whether the Malay shippers felt

any special loyalty to Kan-t*0-11# They were attracted by

the prospects of trading advantages when that kingdom was

strong# As Barros says, tvhen Malacca became strong and used

force Singapore began to lose its merchants, who went to live

in Malacca (l)# Similarly, according to the ?*ing shih* after

Palembang was conquered by the Javanese the country became

poorer and few trading vessels went there (2). The

mobility of the coastal Malays would have hastened the rise

and fall of the trading kingdoms on the favoured coast and

played its part in the passing of ascendancy from Kan-t*o-li

(1) Pecstde 2, Book 6 , chapter 1, 10, quoted by Ferrand, JA,

19187W# “
(2) Ming shih. 32k, 27b#
 h$ 3.

— fi'alayu — Janbl to Srlvijaya - Palaisbang. Tho finr nhth*s

account of the population of Palembang must describe a very

oil situation:

•TThen they nsnt to go elsewhere, all they have to do le

to pull up their poles (from their house© on river rafts
and this require© little money or labour (l )*1

For this reconstruction of the social development of

Kan- J U s a U during the #Persian 1 period I have hud to draw on

account□ from much later times. As far as the south- east

coast of Sumatra is concerned I am unlikely to have

misrepresented what happened# This coast has little to

commend it except it© harbours, safe anchorages, river systems

providing communication with the hinterland, and tho belt of

? <K/K <1
swamp reaching a considerable way/ssnd giving protection against

attack Iron the interior (2)* Tee highlands, unlike those

of northern Sumatra, are far from the caaet, and tho

primitive tribes living in clearings in the coastal cramps

(1) Ibid, 32h, 27b.

(2) Defence against attack from the hinterland is one of tho
reason© Krom suggested for the success of Palembang in the early
period of Srlvijaya.
 k3k.

would have heen no threat to the harbour dwellers (1 ).

The terrain, repellent from so many points of view, could

be exploited only by a sea-faring race# In addition to

its harbours it possessed one further natural advantage,

which its inhabitants were also capable of exploiting#

Of all the coasts in western Indonesia it is the one which '

i
provides the easiest navigational access to China, It lies j
!
reasonably close to the equator, beyond which operates the !

monsoon system over the South China Sea# Moreover there is J

the south-eastern monsoon which operates south of the eauator 1

j
in the summer months and prevails as far north as the Rhio !

Archipelago (2), This monsoon blows up the Bangka Straits

and is available for northward bound ships, anxious to reach

the equator in order to sail with the south-west monsoon to

China. It was with this wind that Peter Floris in 1612 was able

to sail from the estuary of the Palembang river to Pulau

Tioman, off the south-east coast of the Malay Peninsula, in

five days (3). The south-east monsoon is, however, unpredic­

table and does not blow regularly. Ships waiting for it

can anchor comfortably in the harbours of south-eastern

(1) I have only spent half an hour in Palembang, but I have

flown from Jakarta to Singapore and had a panoramic view of
this coast. Its dreary flatness and serpentine rivers reminddd
me vividly of parts of the west coast of Malaya, which I know
well,
(2) Eastern Archipelago Pilot, first edition 1927» vol,IY, 6 ,
(3) Peter Floris, His voyage to the East Indies, 31-32#
 h95.

Sumatra or oven avail themselves of the ‘Sumatra 1 gusts, some­

times reaching gale force and blowing from the west or

south-west from April to October. •Sumatras* arc

especially developed in the Rhio and Lingga islands (1).

It would have been an advantage for enterprising

shippers to sail to China as early as possible in the mid­

year months| and there is one piece of evidence which

illustrates how shippers from the south-east coast of

Sumatra were able to benefit from being on the spot to enjoy

the sudden arrival of a favourable wind to take them up to

the equator. In 689 I Tsing went on board a ship in the

^ — r-
Srivijaya river bound fnr China in order to hand a merchant

a request for supplies of paper and ink from Canton.

•Just at that time the merchant found the wind favourable

and raised the sail to the utmost height. I was thus
conveyed back (to China), although not myself intending
to go home. Even if I asked to stop, there would have
been no means of doing so (2).1

1) Eastern Archipelago Pilot, IV, 6 . j

2) Ta T*ang hsi yu ch 1i u , lla ; Chavannes, Memo ire, 176-177
This wind may be compared with the wind which took
Gunavarraan from She-pfo non-stop to China. See page 51*
 496*
Other navigational advantages were enjoyed by ships

leaving Palembang and Janbi. Ships would have been able

to make straight to open sea through the channel between

the Lingga Archipelago and Bangka island. Ho off-shore

islands, with sailing snags and local breezes, stood in

their way. For ships proceeding from these ports up 1the

Straits of Malacca in the end-of-year period the Lingga

islands provided protection against the heavy seas and a

swift southerly current (1 ).

But none of these natural advantages would have been

commercial assets if there were no sailors*, capable of

exploiting them. A geographer once asked why should

Srivijaya in south-eastern Sumatra have become so important

a. trading centre (2). It seemed to him to lie off the

main trade route between India and China. Geographically

Palembang and Jambi are certainly some way south of the

Straits, but these ports owed their prosperity not primarily

to geographical circumstances but to their seafaring

population. In the fifth and sixth centuries the Malays

had made this coast the essential link between the Indian

Ocean and China when the needs of the southern dynasties of

China for western Asian produce increased the tempo of

(1) Eastern Archipelago Pilot, IV, 163*

(2) Sion, *Sur 1 'ethnographie de l'lndochine et de 1*
Insulinde1, Annales de Geographic, 1924 9 391*
 k97 .

trans-Asian maritime trade. In the Srivijayan period the

same coast continued to provide the link between the

Indian Ocean and the South China Sea, while the Straits of

Malacca remained merely part of the voyage to southern

Sumatra. The intrusion of Jambi and Palembang into the

tradd route to China may seem to a geographer to be an

unnatural prolongation of the voyage, but sailors as late as

the ninth century would have disagreed., By them this coast

was not regarded as too far south from the Straits of Malacca

but as close to China. Their attitude of mind is well

illustrated by Abu Zayd Hasan, writing about 916*

•Nous comraencons par la mention de la ville de Djawaga,

vu que sa situation est en face de la Chine et qu*entre
cette ville et la Chine il y a la distance d*un mois de
route par mer, et meme moins que cela lorsque le vent
est favorablea).*
Later Arab writers elaborated this description but never

lost sight of what had once been the essential point: one

normally reached China from south-eastern Sumatra. Perhaps

occasionally ships from the Persian Gulf followed the

a) Ferrand, Textes, I, 82. This passage contains another

reference to the •favourable winds 1 from the south-eastern
coast of Sumatra. The •town of Djawaga* is the capital of
Srivijayaf In 1922 Ferrand preferred to transcribe •Djawaga*
as •Zabag1; 1L*Empire>Jumatranais*, 56. He showed that it
was based on the word •Java* and meant Sumatra.
 U98.

itinerary described in the account of Suleiman of 851 (1)*

which led from the Straits of Malacca immediately into the

South China Sea, but in the second half of the seventh century

the route unquestionably led first to south-eastern Sumatra;

This is made clear by I Tsing

♦From here (Tamralipti) one sails south*eastward3 for

two months and reachg s ,Chi eh-ch *a (Kedah)* This place
belongs to Fo-shih (Srivijaya)♦r The time when the
ship arrives is the_ first or second month* If (one
goes from Tamralipti) to Ceylon one makes onefs way
by chip in a south-western direction. It is said to
be seven hundred stages (yojana) away. One remains
hero (Kedah) until the winter season. Then one sails
by ship southwards for about a month and reaches

(1) Sauvaget, Relation, 8-9.

 499.
LTo-lo-yu chon (Malayu). It is now the Fo-shlh-to
kingdom* The time of arrival is also the first or
second month. One stays there till the middle of
summer and (then) sails to the north. After
travelling for rather more than one month one reaches
Canton. The journey (lit. voyaging and stopping) is
ouch that one reaches Canton in the middle of the year a ) . '
/ _
This was the way to China as long as Srivijaya could compel

ships to use it. It is noteworthy that I Tsing states that

it took as long to reach Malayu from Kedah as it took to

reach Canton from Kalnyu; in both case3 the voyage was one

month. The passage chows very clearly that ships in the

Straits were by no means on the threshold of China. Abu

Zayd emphasises the distance of the important trading centre

of Ealah* on the west coast of the Malay Peninsul^ from China

by saying that it was half-way between China and the land of

the Arabs (2).

(1) Mulasarvastivada-ekasatakarman, Taisho Tripitakn, vol.

24| no. 1453 1 477c. I referred to this important passage in
note 1 on page 7, fwfm my translation differs from Takakusu'c
in respect of the second sentence. Yy translation also
differs from his in respect of the later reference to Fo-shlh,
which he translates as 'there are many states (under itJP;
Record, xxxiv. The characters are:
i Tsing may have intended to say what Takakusu attributes
to him, but the text does not say so. My own translation,
though meaningless is literal.
(2) Ferrand, Textes, I, 83•
 500.

Such was the key position on the trade route to China

—
which Srivijaya in south-eastern Sumatra inherited at the

beginning of its long history* In the third century, before

there was any question of trade between Indonesia and China,

Ko-ying had attracted Indian traders to the same coast. In

the second half of the fifth century and in the sixth century

it seems to have been controlled by Kan-t *o-li, when the

breaking of the 'Persian11trade on Indonesia guaranteed its

continued importance. It would have been extraordinary if the

y" —

empire of Crivijaya had risen elsewhere, for here was the

favoured commercial coast of western Indonesia.

In the final chapter I shall sketch briefly the efforts

/—
Srivijaya made at the beginning of its career to preserve

for its oral coast the advantages inherited from the past.
 501
CHAPTER FOURTEEN

THE HERITAGE AND PROSPECTS OP SRIVIJAYA

/ —
The seventh century ended with Srivijaya as the

foremost commercial power in western Indonesia. With their

capital at Palembang and masters of Jambi, its rulers

inherited the communications and trade of the coast with the

oldest and longest history in the region. But one important

circumstance was to distinguish the seventh century from

the earlier centuries which we have been studying, for by

/—
A ,D . 700 Srivijaya had acquired a territorial outpost on the

south-western Malay Peninsula, which gave it a commanding

position on the Straits of Malacca. This expansion in it3

maritime influence is something for which there is no

precedent in the records we have so far examined. Thus,

with the events immediately connected with the foundation

of the Srivijayan empire, we are at the beginning of a new

chapter in the history of early Indohesian commerce, very

different from its predecessor which began when Indonesian

sailors first used the South China Sea to trade with Tongking

and Canton. Prom the watershed of the seventh century v/e are

able not only to review the factors which had prepared the

way for the riso of Srivijaya but also to look into the

future at the prospects which awaited this extensive empire.

The seventh century, which saw the origins of Srivijaya, is

the historian1s opportunity to consider in general terms the

 502.
S—
kind of impact which Srivijaya was likely to make on the

commerce of Indonesia in the future and also the problems

/ —
which Srivijaya itself would face.

What were the reasons which led the rulers of

Palembang to the Straits of Malacca ? They must have been

urgent ones. In the Mulasarvastivada-ekasatakarmant written

by I Tsing after he had returned to China in 695i there is an

account of the stages of the voyage from Tamralipti to

Canton (1). In it Kedah is clearly described as a

dependency of ^rivijaya (2). I Tsing was drawing on

knowledge he acquired before he left the region, possibly

based on his own observations when he returned to Srivijaya

via Kedah from India sometime after 685 and certainly before

689» when he was already back in Srivijaya. Perhap 3 it was

within as short a period as 20 years from our first reference

to Srivijaya by I Tsing in 671 that it obtained an outpost

on the Straits. There must have been tremendous impetus

behind this swift advance northwards#

In the events of the seventh century the first thing

which catches one*s eye in seeking for an explanation of the

^ _
sudden expansion of Srivijaya is a similarity in one respect

with the events of the fifth centuyy. In both periods

(1) Translated on page if7$ •

(2) I/Iy comments on Takakusufs translation are in note 1 on
page 7 .
 503.

several decades of missions from a number of kingdoms are

followed by a time when only one kingdom remains in

diplomatic relations with China* Between 430 and 473 five

kingdoms had sent 20 missions; of these, six had come from

the trading kingdom of Ho-lo-tan, eight from P *o-huang, a

kingdom which may have been wedged somewhere between the Jambi-

Palembang coast and western Java, and two from Kan-t*o-ll (1)*

But after 473 the only unmistakably trading kingdom to send

missions was Kan-t*0-11, and I suggested that the paucity of

its missions in the sixth century should be regarded as a

/ —
sign that the power of this proto-Srivijaya was such that it

had little need to remind the Chinese of its existence by

frequent missions* It probably enjoyed a monopoly of the

China trade* The pattern of the mission record of the

seventh century is very similar. The total number of

missions was not so great, but again several kingdoms were

originally in communication with China and afterwards only

one remained. Tan-tan sent missions in 617, 666, and 670 (2).

I doubt whether it was a trading kingdom, but the others

were almost certainly so* Ho-llng, unquestionably a

(1) Pages vi .
(2) Gui shu, 82, 8a; TFYK, 970, 11402b*
 50k♦
trading kingdom and probably in the western half of Java,

sent envoys in 640, 648, 666, and probably in 670 (1).

T o - p ^ - t e n g , Ho-ling*s western neighbour, sent one in 647 (2)

and Kalayu in 644 (3)* But the mission record also reveals

a striking new development in the range of countries now

aspiring to diplomatic recognition by the Chinese emperor.

In the first half of the seventh century countries on or

very close to the Straits of Kalacca were at last beginning

to send missions. Ch^ih l^u, sufficiently important to be

visited by C,h*g,ng Chur;, sent missions in 608, 609 1 and 610 (4)*

In 638 Kedah ijfa sent a mission (5)* ULSzlfi* which was

certainly somewhere in northern Sumatra, sent missions in

642 and 669 (6). It is even possible that the port of

•Baras1, which I located on the extreme northern coast of

(1) CTS, 197, 3a; THY, 100, 1782; TFYX, 970, 11402b;
TFYK,~570, 11402b, IrTthe name of Ho^To ^ , which I
take to be an error for Ho-ling; see page Ltf £

4) Sui shu. 3. lib 1 12b : 15b

;erature connected with
Chinese transcriptions of Kedah is summarised in Wheatley,
Golden Khersonese* 46-47*
W) TFYK, 970 m 3 9 9 a ; H T S , 222 T , 2a.
 505,

Sumatra, sent a mission in the 627 - 649 period (1) .

But after 670 a blanket falls on the mission history

✓—
of all these kingdoms, and Srivijaya, like Kan-t*0-11

before it, is left alone in the field. The IIsin T fang shu

states that the Srivijayan missions began in the 670 - 6 7 3

period (2). The first year to which a mission is specifically

attributed is as late as 702 (3)* fcut already by 695

/—
Crivijayan envoys were on the Chinese rations list for

assistance in getting back home (4)# The fact that a

Chinese envoy visited Srivijaya in 683 may b© taken as

another sign that some form of official relations between

China and the now foremost trading kingdom in western

Indoner3ia had begun (5)* Henceforth missions were sent in

702, 716, 728 and 742 (6). I cannot explain why they came

to an end in 742 and were not resumed until 904/5 (7)» but I

am certain that a trading empire based on south-eastern

Sumatra continued to exist in the interval. The Nalanda

(1) The author of the I-Iao yao states that in the time of the
T*ang emperor T*ai Tsung (6^7-649)cthe western ocean Lu country
sent camphor as tribute. This is why one knows that camphor
came from t h e r e ^ j ®
CLPT, 13*
321b. I have been unable to verify thie mission.
(2) HTS, 222 , 5a.
(3) TFYK, 970, 11403b.
(4) M 7 100, 1798.
(5) This envoy is mentioned by I Tsing. See page IfSS •
(6) TFYK, 970, 11403 6-3 971, 11411b.
CD T£L2* , T H 7 t loo
 506

/
inscription of about 860 refers to the Cailendra ruler of
/
Suvarrjadvfpaf or Sumatra, and •Eailendra* was still the
/ —
family name of the rulers of Srivijaya at the beginning of

the 11th century (1). Moreover the Arab travelogues of the

ninth century testify to the greatness of Zabag, their name

for this empire (2). The cessation of missions may be

attributed either to troubled times in China when the T fang

dynasty became weaker or, equally likelyt to the fact that

/—
the trade between Srivijaya and China was too well

established to require diplomatic boosting.

Two explanations suggest themselves for the multiplicity

of states sending missions in the first half of the seventh

century. The first is that there were now exceptionally

favourable trading opportunities for western Indonesia, when

the demand for Indonesian produce was ceasing to be merely

for substitutes for western Asian produce. The second

explanation is that temporarily there happened to be no

single kingdom capable of monopolizing the trade with China.

a) For the latest discussion of the dating of the Nalanda

inscription see de Casparis, Prasasti, 2,260._ #The Great
Charter of Leiden1, issued by the Cola king Bajendracola I,
describes the £ing of Srivijaya as the descendant of the
family of the Sailendras; Eolgr. Ind. f 22, 229* >—
(2) On page 20, note 1, I observed that the fame of Srivijaya
first reached the notice of European orientalists through
Arab works.
 507.

There may have been an interval between the decline of

/—
Kan-tyo-li and the rise of Srivijaya when, as in the days

of the decline of Ho-lo-tan in the early fifth century, it

was possible for a number of states to share the trade*

As usual the prosperity of the trade depended to a

large extent on conditions in China, where the prospects had

never been more promising* In 618 the short-lived but

powerful Sui dynasty, which had sent Ch'ang Chun overseas,

was succeeded by the great T fang dynasty* The capital,

as under the Sui, was now in northern China, but this

circumstance did not mean that the trading connexions of

southern China, built up during the fifth and sixth centuries,

became obsolete. On the contrary southern China was a

source of wealth for the whole empire, and Yang chou on the

lower Yangtse was not only the commercial focus of southern

China but also the main centre for the transmission of

merchandize to the north by means of the Grand Canal, constructed

under the Sui dynasty (1). It is true that in the seventh

century the T #ang government exercised authority in Turkestan,

and as a result the ancient overland route prospered for the

(1) Dr Wang Gungwu provides a summary of the facts about

Yang chou and its position in the internal communications of
China; fNanhai trade1, 71-72*
last time before the establishment of the Mongol empire in

the 13th century (1)* But great Changes were now taking

place in western Asia, and these are likely to have affected

the ability of the merchants in the Persian Gulf to send

regular supplies of goods to China by land or by sea* In

637 Ctesiphon was sacked by the Arabs and the days of the

Sassanid empire were numbered* Sauvaget has expressed the

opinion that, from the fall of Ctesiphon until the foundation

of Baghdad by the CAbbasid dynasty in 762, there was no

important urban centre in that region capable of sustaining

long distance commerce* Instead there was disorder and

political agitation* Nor would the Umayyad caliphs in

Syria have stimulated a great demand for oriental goods,

certainly not for goods brought by sea*. For these reasons

there would have been a marked regression in navigation based

on the Persian Gulf (2). The new political conditions in

V/estern Asia must have affected considerably the volume of

the tPersian* trade, and as a result producers in western

Indonesia would have noticed that they had less competition

in supplying the flourishing Chinese market with foreign

produce. The days of the substitute status of Indonesian

(1) Dr 7*'ang Gungwu notes that in the Sui period 'the tribes
of the western border ••• were to be enticed by the prospect
of generous commercial profits and then persuaded to come to
pay homage at court*; 'Nan hai trade*, 70, note 33» quoting
the Sui shu*
(2) ReTatton, xxxvii*
 509.

vegetation were drawing to a close, and more than ever

before were profits to be made by those who could bring

local goods to China.

It is impossible to measure in quantities of produce

shipped to China the scale of the trade now encouraged by

external circumstance^, but its expansion is reflected in

the range of articles mentioned in Chinese records. Two

pieces of evidence may be suggested. The first is the way

in which Su Kung, one of the revisers of the T'ang pen ts'ao

and a northerner, was familiar with K'un-lun drug 3 . He knew

of the K'un-lun cloves (l) and of a K'un-lun *costu3 ' which

was better than the plant which came to China by means of

the 'western hu ' overland from western Asia (2). He

also knew of a K'un-lun 'storax', which Laufer identified with

Altingia (3 ). Moreover Su Kung is the first of the materia

medica 'writers to refer to 'unicorn dessicate', the 'dragon's

blood* from the rattan palm (4)* I do not suggest that there

was an expansion only in Indonesian trade, but it is clear

that South East Asian plant substances as a whole were now

(1) PTIfvl, 34, 1364a.

C2) CLPT, 6 , 160a.
(3 ) Hsin hsiu ACto h'&o 121; Sino-Iranlca, 459«
(4 ) Page It+y • J
 510.
becoming more familiar to Chinese doctors, which probably

means that there was an increase both in the volume and range

of produce coming from Indonesia. That this was so is

supported by the second piece of evidence which I wish to

mention in connexion with the expansion of western Indonesian

tra de in the early T'ang period. It is significant that

camphor, a valuable Indonesian product, was now being

included in the tribute sent by non-Indonesian rulers, a

comment not only on the value attached to camphor in China

but also on the way it must have become one of the major export

items from Indonesia. Ch'ih T'u had offered camphor as

tribute in Ch'ang Chun's time, and it may have been a local

product (1). hut in 643 the north-western Indian kingdom

of Uddiyuna sent it as tribute (2). In 647 the little

mainland Couth East Asian kingdom of T fo-yiion pjjn *

probably a former dependency of Funnn , also sent it (3).

(1) Cut chu, 82. 5a. > In the IIsin tsuan jtsisng p'u, 1, 31b,
the Chu Tan chi ^ is quoted as saying that Ch 'lh
T *u produced 'rare perfumes ^ ^ This may be a
Quotation from Ch'ang Chun'sTjook on Ch'ih T'u.
(2) 1'FYi:. 970, 11399a.

U) TPYK, 970, 11400a.

 511.
It was sent from Tongking at the end of the 742 - 756 period (1).

I do not suggest that there was a trade boom for

western Indonesia in the first half of the seventh century

merely because the producers there enjoyed a temporary

monopoly of the trade with China, though I think that the

volume of exports had never been greater. There would still

have been profits from the transit trade in goods from the

Indian Ocean. A few Indian missions made their way to China

in this period, though it is unknown what route they took. (2)

In the same century references begin in the Chinese materia-

medica to foreign peppers, and it is likely that the Indian

pepper trade with China was now beginning to get under way (3).

(1) YYTTj 1, 10. A propos of this notice it is stated that

the Po-ssu gave an account of the part of the tree which
produced the best crystals. Ouch familiarity with the
product can only be attributed to the Indonesians themselves,
and the passage should be added to those adduced by Laufer
as evidence of the South East Asian Po-ssu in T'ang times. I
discussed similar Po-ssp texts on pages Z1imtqq . vv a 4 A
(2) Ch'ien-ssu-fo \ $ (?Kanci), Shlh-li-chun % %
and Mo-la ft in 658; TFYTI , 970, 11402a. See Pelliot,
'Deux itineraires * , 361. ssu)-fo and Mo-la sent further
missions in 662; ibid, 11402a. 'Southern India ^ 1
sent a mission in 692; THY, 100, 1787*
(3) CIPT♦ 14, 349b. Su Kung mentions long pepper and
attributes it to the Po-ssu = Persians'; PTKL1, 14, 814b.
 512*

The story is told of the diarrhoea striken emperor T'ai Tsung

(626 - 649) who failed to respond to expert treatment. He

was cured by a preparation of milk and long pepper, and as a

result long pepper was often tried with success for •cold*

conditions of the stomach (1). Su Kung mentions black

popper of the western Jung barbarians, the Indian Piper nigrum

brought overland to China. It must have come by sea too, and

a likely consequence of the growing demand in China for black

pepper was a boost to the trade in the wild-growing Indonesian

cubeb pepper, regarded by the Chinese as similar to black

pepper (2). C h fen T s ,ang-chli, in the first half of the

/ -
eighth century, mentions the cubeb pepper of Srivijaya (3)t &

statement which may provide a terminus ad quem for the

origins of the Indonesian cubeb pepper trade with China.

(1) PTX?J, 14. 8l5a, quoting Su Sung of the 11th century

2; I mentioned Chinese views on cubeb pepper on pages

125r 126.
(3) PTKiq, 32, 1321b Srivijaya is called Fo-shih
This passage appears in the CLf?, 9* 235b without any
attribution.
 513.

A background of busy trade would therefore have been

the first reason why a number of missions went to China in th$

earlier decades of the seventh century. The second reason

was a political one* The emperor T'ai Tsung as early as

626 had enquired, a propos of a mission from the unknown

K'un-lun country of Kan-t*ang

north of the Pamirs, why these missions were

arriving:
f & Q &
%MiG
'■&0 & X fa 4 ft# j ^ JL ^1*1
UH &111 flrt£ ^ ^
rT rai Tsung enquired of all his ministers: the people of
the southern wilderness and the western regions come
from afar. Why should this be so? Fang Yiian-ling
replied: China is now at peace and the imperial virtue
extends to distant parts. T'ai Tsung said: what you
say is correct. When in the past China was unsettled,
what reasons would these people have had for coming ?
How do I deserve this ? When I see these barbarian
envoys, I become more and more frightened. I rely on
you, gentlemen, to repair my deficiencies (1).'

Tho power of T'ang China would certainly have attracted

foreign missions, but in the same period the temporary

absence of strong maritime kingdoms in South East Asia was

probably also responsible for them. On the coast of

mainland South East Asia, as a result of the collapse of

Funan, there was a political vacuum. One symptom of this

situation was that in 662 two small maritime countries,

(1) THY, 99, 177 5-*1776.

 51k.
A ** A
de«oribed in the Ts*e fu yuan kuei as neighbours of Chen-la

(Cambodia) and Lin-yi (Champa)t were able to come with

tribute (1). Another consequence of the fall of Funan may

be the missions in 638 and 649 from the Ivlon kingdom of

Dvaravati at the head of the Gulf of Siam (2).

The fall of Funan was the consequence of attacks from

Khmero in the north, but one can only surmise what had

happened in western'Indonesia between the disappearance of

/ -
ICnn-t1o-li and the rise of Srivijaya to enable missions to

be cent from so many kingdoms* There may have been

temporary political weakness on the south-eastern coast of

Sumatra, symbolised by the fact that only a single Mission

was sent by Ivlalayu in 644. But one thing seems evident. In

the seventh century an entirely new political situation had

come into being in 'Western Indonesia, creating a threat to the

(!) TFYK, 970, 11402a-b They were Hsiu-lo-fenfl'fc ^

and Kan-pi "ft Jp, • Dupont has suggested that the Khmer
kingdom of Chen-la never conquered the eastern coastal territories
of Funan; fLe bud indochinois aux VIE et VILE. Siecled1,
nS3I, 24, 1, 1949, 18-24. - _ „
(2) CTS, 197, 3s-. The kingdom v/ao known as To-ho-loljfo ^
I have given my reasons for identifying it with Dvaravlrti irf
•Chen-li-fu. A state on the Gulf of Siam at the beginning of
the 13th century1, JSS* 48 , 2, I960, 12. One of jits exports
was a famous 3pecies of rhinoceros horn. Dvaravati was
sufficiently important to justify a mission from the T*ang
government, though the date is not known* The mission took
place in the seventh century, and a monk living in DvaravafT
returned with it. Hie life was described by I Tsing, who
provides the evidence of this mission; Ta Than# hsi yu c h ^ U t 4b;
Chavannes t flfeioire t 69.
 515.
favoured trading coast on a scale which Kan-t *o-li had

never known. The significant feature of the decades

/—
immediately preceding the appearance of Srivijaya are the

missions from Ch'ih T ' u , Kedah, P'o-lo, and perhaps from

'Bams' too, all taking place between the years 608 and 669.

These missions make it^clear that ports on or close to the

Straits of Malacca were at last beginning to stake a claim

to direct trade with China, which they were able to back by

their advantageous position on the sea route to China and

their access to the jungle wealth of northern Sumatra. The

expanding trade in aromatic tree produce had brought

commercial opportunities to these ports, and the rulers and

traders were now beginning to make good their opportunities.

Those missions to China are a token of a determination to

trade their produce to China without relying so much on

middlemen from elsewhere in Indonesia (l).

It is to this period that I am inclined to attribute

the information in the Ho in 'fang shu about Lo-yueh

a kingdom which Chia Tan describes at the extreme southern

end of the west coast of the Malay Peninsula. (2).

(1) The TFYK, 969 t 11391a, mentions missions from a P'o-lo

'1 *n 502 in 507. This kingdom should not be
confused with the P'o-lo which lay west of Ch'ih T'u. The
sixth century P'o-lo sent missions to the Northern Wei
dvnasty, and P 'o-lo was described as ’Southern India.'
(2) See pageTfl •
 516.

•Traders passing back and forth meet there (at Lo-yiieh)

The customs are the same a_s those of To-lo-po-ti
(another name for Dvaravati)* Every year merchants
embark on junks and come to Canton, whence the news of
their arrival must he passed on (!)*•

One cannot imagine that, when Srivijaya controlled Kedah ,

at the end of the seventh century, this form of independent

trading would have been tolerated*

It is now possible to define in general terms the

commercial situation in western Indonesia on the eve of the

l- ' ■
.
appearance of Srivijaya. As a result of an expansion in

the China trade, with a new prominence given to Indonesian

produce, promising opportunities were being created for all

harbours capable of sending ships to China. Kedah had

probably long been a landfall harbour for ships from the

Bay of Bengal making their way to Yavadvfpa further south (2).

(1) PITS, 222 'f , 5b. This passage is tacked on to the

account of Tan-tm, I have followed Professor 'Aheatley's
translation, Golden Khersonese, 58*
(2) Professor Nilakanta Sastri believes thajt Kedah was
known as Ifalagam in the Tamil poem Pattlnappalai #
representing information not later than the third century A.D.;
•Kataha*, JGIS, 1938* 128-129* Professor Coedes is doubtful;
•Le'royaume de (JJrivijaya*, BEFEO, 18, 1918, 20* Professor
Wheatley also seems doubtful,1"and he observes that a gloss
on the oilappadlkaram mentions both Kidaravan and Kalagam;
Golden khersonese, 279* Kalagam means ~*black*, and the j?an
fan yu gloss on Chla-lohfo states that it means •black1;
Taisho Tr i p i t a k a v o l . 54, ho. 2130, 1011c. The gloss is on
the T•ai tzu wu meng ching, but Chia-lo also appears in the
Shlh &rh yu ching of 392.
 517
The numerous archaeological remains from Kedah indicate that

there was an ancient settlement there, though the chronology

of the remains is still in dispute (1). A Sanskrit prayer

/V
in Pallava-type script has heen found tart anwrttl wf Kedah;

it asks for the success of a voyage about to be undertaken

by a sailing master, Buddhagupta, who dwelt in Raktamgttika,

'the Red Land* (2). P'o-lo, in northern Sumatra and possibly

on the north-ea3tern coast, has much more obscure antecedents*

It may have been the 'south-western P'u-lo'* known to IC'ang

T'ai as a cannibal land (3)* It io more certainly the Pu-lo

famed for its many perfumes as early as 392 (4)

P'o-lo's missions in 642 and 669 reflect the progress which

had taken place there by the seventh century. As for the

port of 'Baras', apart from the unverified mission in the

627-649 period, all that can be inferred about its development

is that tv;o ^orean monks died there in the seventh century, a

circumstance which I understand to mean that they had intended

to sail to India (5)* By that time its harbour would there­

fore have had access to the main shipping lines, a

(1) I have in mind the recent publications of Dr Alastair Lamb

and especially his 'Report on the excavation and reconstruction
of Chandi Bukit Batu Pakat, central Keda,hr, Federation
Museums Journal, V, I960, 1-103*
(2) This inscription was first published by Low in JASB,
17, 1848, 62-66. The literature on it is listed by Wheatley
in Golden Khersonese, 274, note 1*
(3) Page
14) Page S •
(5) Page •
 516,

considerable advance when one recalls the unenviable

reputation the 'Barousai islands1 enjoy in Ptolemy's Geographia,

The embassies from Kedah and P'o-lo and possibly from

'Barus' represented a threat to the hitherto privileged

commercial status of the coast which had prospered from the

China trade in the fifth and sixth centuries, and the threat

provoked a political crisis in western Indonesia of which

^—
the outcome was the empire of Srivijaya. IJy understanding of

the situation is that by an assertion of naval power in the

/ —
Straits of Llalacca the rulers of Srivijaya successfully nipped

in the bud the challenge from the newcomers to the China trade

and safeguarded the south-eastern Sumatran coast's preponderance

in[m trade, which had by now become more valuable than ever

before. By 695 at the latesty and perhaps a few years before

then, Kedah became a dependency of Srivijaya. The swiftness

of Srivijaya'b reaction makes it ^almost certain that P 'o-lo

sent no further embassies after 669 because its rival fleet

in the Straits made it impossible to do so (1). No date can

(1) One writer has stated that ?'o-lo sent a further

mission in 712; Sei Yv'ada, Kemoirs of the Research Department
of the Toyo Bunko, 4, 1929* 1£8. wada quoted from the Ts1^
fu yuanIcuei. In the 1754 printlhg of the 1672 edition,
970, 19b, it is stated that -lo country sent a mission in
712. The character immediateTy preceding -lo is missing, but
the recently published ttMtftwmf Sm m u text of the TFYK (Chung
hua shu chu, Peking, I960), 97Q, 11404a, supplies the
missing character; it is Hsin , and the country which
sent the mission in 712 was korea and not P'o-lo* A P'o-lo
mission in that year would have been most improbable in vie?/
of Srivijaya's control of Kedah by that time and ability to
dominate the opposite coast of the Straits of Llalacca.
 5X9.
be assigned to the creation of the 'double kingdom', of

which 'Barus* was the western one (1), but it would not be

surprising if thi3 had taken place before the end of the

seventh century* I conclude, therefore, that by the end

X*—
of that century the victories of Srivijaya, probably

chiefly in the form of naval battles, had effectively

protected the prosperity of the traditional trading coast

of western Indonesia, on which it had its roots, and as a

consequence Srivijaya had bedome a greater empire than ever

before existed in western Indonesia* It was only a matter

of time before the authority of the ruler reached as far

north as the isthmus of the Peninsula;where he was able to

erect religious buildings in 775 (2).

The history of the favoured trading coast of south­

eastern Sumatra, which I have sketched in this study, has

thrown some light on two aspects of the immediate origins of

X* — .
Srivijaya. It shows, I hope, that the base of the empire could

hardly have been anywhere else in western Indonesia (3).

(1) For this passage of the HTS see page 12, note 2.
(2) Page 7 1 note 2*
(3) I reject completely Professor Y/heatley'a view that the
original settlement of Srivijaya was sundered from the_great
trade-routes of South East Asia and that only after Srivijaya
had bedome a South East Asian power could it reap the full
fruits of its nodality in the southern ocean; Golden
Khersonese, 293* Iu my opinion earlier generations on that
coast had defied geographical factors and created it3
international commerce.
 5>o.

The western coast of northern Java may, in the days of

Ho-lo-tan,have been a flourishing centre of trade as it

seems to have been under Ho-llng in the second half of the

seventh century, but the evidence is by no means so clear

as the evidence about the Sumatran coast at the time of

Ko-ying and later under Kan-t1o-li. The other aspect of

the origins of Srivijaya which I have suggested is that its

rulers had abundant motive for extending their authority

into the Straits of Malacca. If they had not acted as they

did, their commerce would have suffered and Lameri or some

other centre on the Straits would have come into prominence

centuries earlier. The Ilsin T ,ang shu states that Srivijaya

ha d 14 cities (1), and I suspect that a number of then were

rivals before Srivijaya struck them down.

✓—
One need not wonder that the rulers of Srivijaya had the

power as well as the motive to create this extensive empire.

Though we are ignorant of the political hiBtory of south­

eastern Sumatra in the years immediately precetding I Tsing's

arrival in 671, the Paler/bang city could not have suddenly

become powerful. The fact that I Tsing spent six months fout

on preliminary studies suggests that the city already enjoyed

considerable contacts v/ith India, which only trade would

(1) IITS, 222 T , 5a.

It is an interesting coincidence that the Tanjore
inscription of 1030/1031 claims that 13 centres of the
ruler of Kajaram = Srivijaya were captured.
 521.
have made possible. Clearly, too, ito rulers had a reqdy

weapon for enforcing their authority on their rivals. The

striking power of Srivijaya depended mainly on ships. The

kings had their ships, and one pictures the ’P e r s i a n 1 shippers

gathering from their mangrove swamps and neighbouring islands

(1) in order to reinforce their r u l e r ’s fleet in defence of

their trade (2). In the same way the merchants of Devon

rallied behind Elizabeth in 1588. Though Srivijaya was on

a water-logged and under-populated coast, it was able to

draw its manpower from coastal Malays scattered among

innumerable maritime settlements couth of the Straits of

Malacca. Palembang was merely a trading focus, serving the

population on and off this coast.

The objective of the naval expeditions against Kedah

and the other rival harbours was not the winning of a

large territorial, empire. Like the Portuguese 800 years

later, the Srivijayan rulers were only concerned to occupy

strategic points of the main trade routes. The local chiefs

were probably often invested as vassals* The Ejsin T ’ang shu

(1) The Sung s h i h , 489, 12b, says of Srivijaya that the people
lived scattered outside the city and did not pay taxes.
(2) Van Leur noted the ad hoc arrangements for making wa t at
the end of Srivijaya&s career, and I imagine that there wa3
little difference in the seventh century. He quoted from
Ilirth and R o c k h i l l ’s translation of the Chu fan c h i h , 60:
•When they are about to make war on another state tliey assemble
and send forth such a force as the occasion demands. They
(then) appoint chiefs and leaders, and all provide their own
military equipment and the necessary pro visions’; Indonesian
trade and s ociety. 106. I find the statement that 1al 1 provide
their own military equipment' convincing. I imagine that
every ’Persian' shipper carried arms and was happy to use
them.
 522.

describes Srivijaya as *a double kingdom and the tv/o parts

have separate administrations l>A — l|j] ^ •(l)*

and this gives the impression that the empire was loosely

knit. Perhaps some of those who took the oath of allegiance

at Palembang (2) wtti conquered vassals, who were required

t6 render homage at Palembang. Of them the ruler of Srivijaya

would have insisted that ships making their way to and from

China were directed to call at the favoured coast and do

i?ost of their business there. In the seventh century this

stipulation would chiefly affect Indonesian shipping, but

later on foreign shipping also had to comply. Come ports

would have been regarded as redundant and their trade limited

to the sending of their produce to Palembang, Others,

such as Kedah in the seventh century, where hu from central

Asia were to be found (3), would have been nominated as

approved ports of call on the voyage to and from south­

eastern Sumatra.

(1) IITS, 222 "f , 5a. According to the *K'ang hsi tzu tien
tpg- , for which is a conventional scribal
substitute, means no more than^jfe •
(2) The oath in contained in the felaga Batu inscription;
de Casparis, Prasasti, 2, 15-46. There may be specific
references to *vassals' in the text of the oath in the form
rajaputra or bh up a t i ; ibid, 19; 37, note 4.
(3) 1 fsing^jnet one there; Ta t'ang hsi yii ch'iu, 7a;
Chavannes; Liempire, 105-6
 523.
/ _
The details of the campaigns which Srivijaya had to

conduct in defence of its privileged trade have disappeared#

The Old-Malay inscriptions of the 683 - 686 period refer to

hitter battles, hut the circumstances are not revealed# One

fragment states that 'much was their blood ( shed)1 , but it

is unknown whether this refers to the losses of the enemy or

of the a m y of Srivijaya (1)# The same fragment uses the

expression pauraviraktaf which Dr. de Casparis has translated

5
as rred with (the blood of) the citizenj^, referring to

either the coil or the big river (the Llusi on which Palembang
/—
l i e s ), and this may point to heavy losses of the Srivijayan

army as v/ell (2)# The Kedukan Bukit inscription refers to

/ * / —
an a m y of 20,000 men (3)* The early years of Srivijaya

were very definitely disturbed ones, and Dr de Casparis points

out that imprecations form more than half of the epigraphical

remains of Srivijaya (4)# The only safe conclusion which

can be d r a m from the epigraphic evidence is that by about

683 - 686 the ruler had already acquired an empire and now

faced the problem of controlling it and of suppressing

(1) De Casparis, P ra s a s t i , 21, 4#

( 2 ) Ibid. These references to battles found on the
Palembang inscriptions do net imply that the battles took
place at or near Palembang. _
(3) Coed^3, 'Les inscriptions de Crivijaya*, BEFEQ , 30,
„ 1930. 35 . JMWKIW*#''1 S ttsw* IWW»
(■#* jwtwwtaas# urn m m m * j m m i m t m m w m «« m
itcwMvtMndh &
m m w t u t m m m v pvmtttu
(4) P r a s a 3 t l f 2, 7.
 52k.

in te rn a l re v o lts (1 )*
Also obscure is the manner In which S rT vijaya o r ig in a lly
consolidated i t s p o s itio n on the sb&th-eastern Sumatran
coast a t the expense o f Malayu-Jambi. In 644, when a
m ission was sent to C hina^'M alayu1 may have meant Jambi
and Palembang, r u lin g from Jambi. I f so, Palembang recovered
i t s independence s h o rtly a fte rw a rd s. In 671 - 672 I Tsing
c le a rly d is tin g u is h e s between the two c itie s and one has to
b e lie ve th a t by th a t tim e Malayu o n ly meant Jambi* The
p o lit ic a l separation o f Malayu and ^ r iv ija y a is a lso im p lie d
in I Tsing*s statement th a t 'th e country o f Malayu is now
changed to & riv ija y a ' ( 2 ) , which can o n ly mean th a t the
amalgamation o f the two harbours under the r u le r o f ^ r iv ija y a -
Palembang was brought about fo r c ib ly . In view o f Is riv ija y a ’ s
occupation o f Kedah by 695 a t the la te s t, Malayu may have
been subjugated some years before I Tsing retu rn e d from In d ia
a fte r 685* Already in 686 there is a reference in the Kota
Kapur in s c rip tio n o f Bangka to the disobedient re b e ls o f
Java, which suggests th a t by th a t year ^ r iv ija y a had expanded.

(1 ) Here I fo llo w Dr de Casparis* understanding o f the

background to these in s c rip tio n s . The Telaga Batu in s c rip tio n
mentions the f army which is sent to a l l the fr o n tie r p ro v in c e s ';
P ra s a s ti . 2, 45* >
(2 ) tfa r'a n g h s i yu c h 'lu , 7c t Chavannes, Memplre, ll9 #
note I T. The xext I s sim ply i
 525.

Malayu is lik e ly to hare been an e a rly v ic tim * One

p ic tu re s the conquest o f Malayu as one more episode in
an ancient r iv a lr y between Palembang and Jambi fo r mastery
o f the favoured eoast. Perhaps K a n -t1o - li had been based
on Palembang, w ith Malayu as a v a s s a l, and had fa lle n because
Malayu-Jambi te m p o ra rily became stro n g , U n fo rtu n a te ly the
o rig in s o f ^ r iv ija y a in re la tio n to the e a r lie r h is to ry o f
Jambi and Palembang are a t present lo s t* Only in s c rip tio n s
may re ve a l the tr u th .
Even more obscure are i£ rlv ija y a f s e a rly re la tio n s w ith
H o -lin g in western Java. I t would be s u rp ris in g i f S riv ija y a ,
so determined to conserve i t s monopoly o f the China tra d e , was
content to a llo w H o -lin g to trade undisturbed. Nevertheless
several p ilg rim s s a ile d d ire c t from China to H o -lin g in
I T sing 1b life tim e , though the dates o f th e ir voyages are
unknown (1 ). I t may be th a t pressure on H o -lin g was not
exerted by ^ r iv ija y a u n t il the e a rly e ig h th ce n tu ry, and one
enquires whether the movement o f the H o -lin g r u le r to the
e a st, mentioned in the Hain T*ang shu. had anything to do
w ith a c tio n by ^ r iv ija y a ( 2 ) . There is a lso the Kota Kapur

(1 ) See note 3 on page . T a o -lin , whom I Tsing met in

In d ia , had passed through H o -lin g on h is way to In d ia a
number o f years before 68*u
(2 ) I t is p o ssib le th a t a reason fo r the tra n s fe r o f the
c a p ita l o f the c e n tra l Javanese kingdom to the east o f the
is la n d in the e a rly te n th century was s e c u rity against
S riv ija y a n a tta c k , in s tig a te d by the d is in h e rite d S ailendra
fa m ily now r u lin g in S riv ija y a s de C asparis, P ra s a s ti, 2,
296-297.
 526.

inscription of 686, with its reference to the rebels of the

•land of J a v a 1. I have found no evidence which suggests that

•Java1 in the seventh century meant Sumatra as well, and

m y guess is that tSrivijaya sometimes attempted to restrict

the trading activities of Ho-ling in western Java* But

*
this is only speculation#

Much more in faot remains to be discovered about the

immediate origins and early years of ^rivijaya# My

contribution has been limited to two matters# I believe that

its fleet moved against the Straits of Malacca almost at the

beginning of its recorded history* and that the reason was

economic necessity# iSriviJaya had to protect a privileged

trading system# But the remoter origins of Srivijaya are*

I hope, now clearer# I shall recapitulate them as they have

emerged in this study before I consider briefly their

implications for the prospects which the future held for

Indonesian commerce and above all for ^rivijaya*

The origins of Srivijaya must unquestionably be

explained chiefly in the circumstance that south-eastern

Sumatra and its offshore islands were the cradle of the

coastal Malays, the people whose language is written on the

/—
first inscriptions of Srivijaya and whose nautical

vocabulary, as Braudes pointed out nearly eighty year3 ago,

 527.
owes Wot hi nr, to India (1). They were an intrepid seafaring

race. whether Strabo and the author of the Periplus heard of

them is a matter of opinion (2). I prefer to bring them

hack to life by likening them to their fellow-Indonesian

contemporaries of the third century, the enterprising

islanders in the Philippines who were already capable of

sa i1ing to Funan with their o r o due e (3)• 1he Sumat ran Halays

themselves appear in history with the ruler of TIo-ying who

bought horses from the Yueh-chih and in the primitive people

P'u-lei who sailed out to sea in order to barter their

jungle produce with ships passing by (4). The first Malay

ships, of which there is unmistakable evidence, are^those of

the ruler of Isrivijaya which took I Tsing and 7/u-hsing to

India. There is, however, the testimony of llui-lin that the

crews of the K*un-lun po were for the most part composed of

tho Ku-lun people (5). fun-lun ships had been visiting

Tongking for centuries before Hui-lin*s time. Chang Ching-

chen traded with K*un-lun ships at tho end of the fifth

century (6). In the sixth century v;ei Shou*s agents brought

him great wealth from the same ships (7).

(1) 'lien jiayapattra of acte van een recht£rlijke ultspraak

van Caka 849's Tl.id. Bat. Gen., 32, 1889, 122ff.
(2) Page 3oi+ , note 5" 5 £age 43, Wote 3.
(3) Paces 89- 90.
(4) Page 91.
( 5) PageJoS’ .
(6) Pace 151.
(7) Page 153, Rote 1.
 528.
In prehistoric times Malays may have played their part

in the barter trade which brought knowledge of metal from the

coast of Indo-China to the hinterland of southern Sumatra (!)•

At the dawn of recorded Indonesian history their coast had

already become a trading centre. Here lay K o - y i n g t the

gateway to the developed Indonesian world further cast and

perhaps the centre known to Ptolemy as Argyre (2), The coast

must have been visited by Indian merchants as soon as they

emerged from the Straits of Malacca early in the Christian

era, v;hen Indians came to trade with them the Malaya began

to respond to new opportunities, and it may be confidently

assumed that in time their ships ventured into the Bay of

Bengal, attracted by the brilliance of Indian civilisation.

The origins of orivijaya must therefore be explained

chiefly in the long trading history of Southern Sumatra, whose

coastal population never earned the intimidating reputation

of the peoples of northern Sumatra,

The decisively important event in the centuries before

the rise of Srivijaya was the way in which the Malays captured

the China trade when it expanded after barbarians overran

northern China and drove the Chinese markets south. As a

result of events happening far from Indonesia itself, the

maritime communications of Asia c*une to assume an importance

which they never lost, and it was the population of south­

eastern Sumatra, and possibly western Java, who benefited in

South East Asia. As a result of the 'Persian* trade

China, Kan-t'o-li♦ unlike K o - y i n g , was in communication

with China and a new chapter in early Indonesian commerce

beg^n, The reconstruction of the 'Persian' trade led us into

fields far from Indonesia itself. V/e discovered the

activities of the Indonesians by studying what was known about

the trade in resins, a subject whose chronology is susceptible

to chronological examination, though the resins would have

been only part of the trade in 'precious and rare things'

which the Chinese rulers 'coveted' (1)* V/e saw why doctors

of southern China valued the styptic and fumigatory properties

of frankincense and myrrh. By the beginning of the sixth

century at the latest the frankincense trade had become

sufficiently important in value if not in volume to attract to

itself a subsidiary trade in pine resin from the southern

ocean, and the circumstances of this transaction are such

that it i3 probable that in the same period benzoin was

becoming a substitute for the bdellium myrrh. The likelihood

of both these transactions is strengthened by the certain

knowledge that about 500 the southern Chinese knew of and

were using the camphor of 'Barus', whose crystals earned a

place in the revised" m^teriay:me dica of T'ao Hung-ching (2).

By this time Chinese writers, interested in overseas flora,

had got into the habit of describing the most valuable element

in their maritime trade as 'Persian*. But the trade in 500,

 530,
0
when the term Po-ssu appears in the vintage texts to denote

•Persian' and 'Persian-type' produce, was no longer a new one#

It was at least as old as 430, some years after Fa Hsien and

his worried merchant companions sailed across the South China

Sea (1), and the year when the ruler of Ho-lo-t'o/tan asked

the Chinese emperor that no difficulties should be put in the

way of traders# A century and more separates 521, the last

possible date for the composition of the Kuang chih with its

information about frankincense and |line resin, from Fa Hsien's

voyage, and in the meantime the western Asian trade through

Indonesia had developed# There would have been setbacks

during periods of unrest in southern China, but in the fifth

century the Malays of the southern ocean were becoming

confident in their ability to handle the 'Persian' trade* They

probably began to be middlemen in western produce towards the

end of the fourth century when the refugees of the Eastern

Chin dynasty were re-establishing themselves in southern China#

A,
The role of the Malays is described in none of the

documents we have considered. I suspect that the Chinese

took their activities for granted. All we know for certain

is that the 'Persian' trade reached China, that only K'un-lun

ships are mentioned in Chinese texts, and that there was

communication, commercial and tributary, between western

Indonesia and China in the fifth century. Some may still

believe that the Malay 'Persian' shippers are a creation of

(1) Page 50•

 531*
the imagination which is 'too clever by h a l f 1f in spite of

the fact that the 'southern o c e a n 1 pine resin and benzoin

were originally regarded as 'Persian-type' produce, in spite

of the fact that South East Asian produce and Indian peppers

were never called Po-ssu in this period, and in spite of the

fact that a special connexion between the Indonesian shippers

and the conduct of the 'Persian' trade in the Far East was

remembered by the Chinese centuries later when the Inhabitants

o o
of Jambi wore called Po-ssu and when there were Po-ssu

Malay numerals#

The case for the activity of Indonesian ships in the

fifth and sixth centuries also rests on the fact there is no

evidence about other shipping reaching China at that time#

We noted that in the fifth century the ancient trade route

via Punan and up the coast of Indo-China wa3 being disturbed

by the piratical Chams, but I think that this would have

merely given a boost to the new route through western Indonesia.

There are good reasons for believing that ships from the

t Gctem Indian Ocean never ventured further east than Ceylon

before the sixth century, long after the first evidence of the

voyage across the South China Sea from Indonesia# I have

been careful, however, not to suggest that only Indonesian

merchants visited China in these centuries# Obviously the

Funanese were continuing to do so, and there is no reason to

suppose that Indians had ceased to visit China# The K'un-lun

ships would have been available, perhaps by hiring, for

merchants of all races and for the pilgrims as well. With

 532.
expansion of the trade between the Indian Ocean and China

more and more ships were needed, and the Indonesians, the
Soufk
leading seafaring people ofJ^SiH&wwfiwifci, were beginning to

take part in the trade shortly before A.D, 400. The

circumstances of their first voyage can never be known. All

we know is that by the end of the fifth century their produce,

and only their produce, was regarded as • P e r s i a n ^ t y p c p r o d u c e

from the southern ocean.

In the course of time the response of the Malay shippers

to the needs of the 'Persian1 trade brought prosperity to

the busy harbours on the favoured trading coast of south-*

eastern Sumatra and possibly also to western Java, if

Ho-lo-tan was in western Java as I have suggested. The Malays

who originally operated the trade may have come from many

centres on this coast, and this would explain why we have

evidence of the trade before missions begin. I believe that

the Malays were persuaded to concentrate their activities on

those harbours whose rulers could show that they had a

privileged position in the eyes of the Chinese government.

There can be no doubt that the most important of the trading

kingdoms before the rise of Srivijaya was Kan -t" o - l i , and I

hope that in future a place of honour will be given it in

histories of Indonesia. I inferred from the fact that it

sent relatively few missions to China that its trade was

sufficiently well established not to require protection in

this way. Otherwise we have to believe, in the absence

of any e v id enc e, that in the sixth century T a n - t a n , certainly

a Javanese kingdom, was the chief trading kingdom of that

 533.
time and dominated south-eastern Sumatra, a most unlikely

possibility. Not until the reign of Krtanagara in the

second half of the 13th century were the Javanese able to

do so.

Analysis also showed that missions were sent by groups of

countries in two periods:/stne first naif of tho seventh

century* Both these periods were when there was probably a

temporary disappearance of an overlord, which led to a tussle

for a share in the middleman trade* The earlier period gives

our first glimpse of western Indonesia since the time of

Ko-ying, and it was a time of disturbance; it came to an end

with the rise of K a n - t *0-11* The second period ends with the

hegemony of £rivijaya itoelf* If Ho-lo-tan was in western

Java, it3 decline after 452 may be interpreted as a victory

of the commercial interests of the south-eastern Sumatran

coast, consolidated under K a n - t *0-11* Y/hen Ho-ling in the

seventh century came to the fore as a trading kingdom, a

new challenge from the south threatened the Sumatran coast,

and it would not be surprising if ^rivijaya, so determined

to protect its interests against competition from the ports

on the Straits of Malacca, did not take measures to damage

the trade of western Java as well. But much more needs to

be known about the significance of Ho-ling in Javanese history

/ —
before its relations with Srivijaya can be understood. In

the meantime I have given my reasons for believing that

Ho-ling was in fact a Javanese kingdom.

 531+.

We can now define the origins of Srlvijayn more exactly

than Krom did (l)# Krom did not commit himself on the nature

of the trade which passed through the harbours of western

Indonesia or on the identity of the foreign markets on which

the harbours throve* We have now seen that the produce was

originally foreign to Indonesia and that the key market was

in southern China, though by the seventh century it is likely

that Indonesian exports were becoming an increasingly important

element in the China trade* The early Indonesian trade with

India, however, had long been overtaken as the chief form of

commerce practised on the favoured coast. The westward

expansion of Indonesian trade was to be a later development and

part of the history of Srlvijaya itself.

Nor did Krom commit himself about the Identity of the ships

whose activities brought these harbours to the fore (2). I

believe that up to and including the early years of Srlvijaya

the ships were normally Malay, based on Jambi, Palembang, and

the neighbouring email islands*

Finally Kron, In sketching the immediate antecedents of

tlrlvijaya, thought that there were a number of harbours,

equally suitable for the transit trade, in Sumatra and also

in the southern Malay Peninsula. My understanding of the

(1) Pages 13-15*

(2) Krom did not ignore the possibility that Indonesian ships
took part in the early trade, but his evidence was merely the
statement that Funanese ships came to China laden with glass
mirrors; Hlndoe-Javaansche peschiedenls. 113# note 2, quoting
Ferrand, JA* M a i u i n * 1919* 1-1+5 2♦ ^
 535.

situation is very different. There m?j have been many

suitable harbours from a geographical point of view, but I

believe that Jambi and Palembang were still the only

established trading centres; the others were interlopers and

a threat to the traditional interests of Jambi and Palembang.

The battles of early ^rivijaya were not to stake a claim to

become the only centre of trade in the region but to remain

30 by destroying its new rivals. Only in this way can the

rapid advance of ^rivijaya into the Straits of Malacca be

explained. '.Vith the assertion of its influence in the

Straits a nev/ chapter begins in the history of early

Indonesian commerce.

Krom v/as chiefly interested in explaining how

•Hinduisation* came about in these centuries. I do not want

to attempt to define what is meant by Indianisation. I am

more interested in the initiative responsible for the

appearance of Indian features in these centuries such as the

use of Sanskrit. I suspect that Indianisation was a

consequence rather than a cause of the progress Indonesia

was making. Increased w e a l t h t greater familiarity with

Xndi a and China, and probably a growing population would

have been accompanied by the rise of larger kingdoms, whose

rulers sought to assert themselves as regional overlords,

whether in the harbour world of southern Sumatra or over the

agricultural lands of Java. The evidence about Gunavarman (!)_,

(1) Page il\ .

 536.

the Kutei and Taruma inscriptions, and the letter from the

ruler of H o - l o - t •o/tan in 4-30 all Indicate that there was

warfare in the fifth and sixth centuries, and one can imagine

that the skills of Brahmans, Buddhists, and other workers of

magic would have been in demand among progressive and

ambitious rulers. v'ith the growth of larger and more complex

territorial units there would have been a place for l i t er ati ,

just as in tho Middle Ages in Europe members of the religious

orders staffed the royal chancellories (1) Tor all these

reasons Indian practices were probably introduced on the

initiative of the rulers themselves in order to further their

interests (2). There is no reason to suppose that the

commercial initiative of the coastal Malays in the •Persian1

trade was not matched by similar initiative in the affairs

of government, where tho influence of Indian ideas would have

been chiefly felt. One wonders, tooi^to what extent these

rulers borrowed ideas of kingship and government from the

Chinese, but this is a subject which has never been

investigated.

(1) I am attracted to the view once expressed by Bosch that

The functions of the Brahmans corresponded with those of the
•cl erk3* in medieval Europe; Ilet vraagstuk van de Ilindoe-
KolonioatiG van der Archipelt~l9~45~«
X?) Certain writer’s have insisted on the political motives
of the Indonesian rulers in adopting Islam; eg. Echrieke,
Ruler and Realm in Early J a v a , 230 ff; van Le«*r, Indonesian
Trade .and Society, 110 - ll6.
 lAy study has not pretended to be a contribution towards

an understanding of the processes of Indianisation. Perhaps,

however, by stressing the importance of the fifth and sixth

centuries in western Indonesian history, it has supplied part

of the background, to be taken into account in explaining

why at that time Indian features become apparent in Indonesia.

One thing is certain. The expansion in trade at that 'Lime

was an indigenous and not an Indian achievement.

Such in general terms was the heritage of ^rivijaya.

It was a rich one. In perspective the rise of ^rivijaya

appears as the latest phase of a historical process which

made it almost inevitable that from time to time there would

be such an empire in western Indonesia. The only new element

in the origins of Srivijaya was that, for the first time, the

straits of I,Malacca had constituted a threat to the prosperity

of the favoured coast of couth-eaSlem Sumatra.

/—
But v : .t proapects did the future hold for Brivija

and the commercial interests protected by its fleets ? I

rV-ll conclude ny study by suggesting how a sharper definition

✓ — >
of Brivijuyds origins may assist in understanding what

happened during the subsequent 600 years.

/—
At the beginning of the long history of Srivijaya the

harbours of Palembang and Jambi were western Ind one sia ’s

links with the markets of Asia. The system of

communications on which these harbours throve had been

created by their shippers at a time when no others, with the

possible exception of shippers operating from western Java,

could compete with them. The future of the system did not
 538.
depend, therefore, on the wealth of the hinterland of southern

Sumatra hut on the ability of the rulers of Jsnbi and

Palembang to insist that their harbours remained the

obligatory stages on the voyage to China (l)'j| The future of

/ —
the empire of frivijaya was inextricably bound up with the

survival of the ancient trade route which led from the Straits

of ralacca to south-eastern Sumatra and only then to China,

Let us glance at the general implications of this

situation* The trade route in question came into being

at a time when southern Sumatran shippers had enjoyed the

major share of the middleman trade with China; the route

led to Jambi and Palembang simply because these harbours and

the neighbouring region were the shippers1 home base. When,

however, £rivijayan ships ceased to carry the greater part of

the cargoes to China the nemesis of the location of the

favoured coast would become apparent. The day would surely

dawn v/hen foreign shippers realised that this coast was in the

wrong place for them. They gained nothing by the long haul

to southern Sumatra in order to buy Indonesian produce which

was available elsewhere and, in the case of ports oh the

*
Straits, much closer to tijsiii ccnijcs of production and also

on the shortest route to and from China. When foreigners

A
had come to realise the artificial nature of the entrepots

based on Jambi and Palembang, the ^rivijayan system of

communications must inevitably have been regarded as an

~ ----- -- ......... — — y --------------------
(1) Chou Ch'u fei makes the point that Srivijaya had no
products of its own but the people were -practised in wartfare;
LWTT, 2, 22.
irritating and costly impediment to international trade.
/ -

bhen thi3 happened the rulers of Srivijaya would bo forced on

to the defensive*
/ —
The threat to Srivijaya* d prosperity stemmed from:

the fact that foreign m er c h a n t s , travelling in their own

ships, would, whan they had become familiar with conditions

in western Indonesia, prefer to visit the regions which

supplied what there wanted, where they could buy from the

local exporters, develop local connexions at tho rxsense of

/—
their competitors, avoid paying dues to tho ruler of Srivijaya

and in general reduce costs. The instinct for free trading

would take the foreigners to almost every part of the region

except south-eastern Sumatra. Javanese popper and sandalwood

the cloves and nutmegs brought from the eastern islands to

the Br.nntas ports of eastern Java, and the aromatic resins

and camphor of northern fumntra and Borneo would have been

the chief bait to drag them from Jambi and Palembang. The

temptation to trade direct with the producers would have

become stronger as the scale and variety of Indonesian

production increased in the PrTvijayan period, when

successful trading voyages to China depended more and more

on profitable trading on the way to China in order to widen

tho range of goods offered on the Chinese market# Another

factor which would have encouraged tho free trade habit

would have been Improved sailing techniques and especially

tho construction of larger ships which wore capable of

sailing to China from the Indian Ocean on tho south-west

 5*40*
monsoon without stopping in Indonesia for the next sailing
/ —
season* Finally in the Srivijayan period Indonesian

produce began to go westwards in quantity as well ao to

China* The ninth century Arabs knew the value of camphor,

and in succeeding centuries they became aware of the value

of benzoin* Hero would have been another motive for visiting

centres of production rather than the entrepots of southern

Sumatra*

V/hen one :bears in mind these developments it becomes

obvious that sooner or later the foreign shippers would have

resented exceedingly the entrepot monopoly enjoyed by the

southern Cumatran harbours. Similarly, those who ruled

harbours much closer to centres of production would have found

/ — / —
the Srivijayan system intolerable. The rulers of Srivija ya

in their turn would have realised to their griof that they

could no longer take for granted the co-operation of

foreigner and vassals in conforming to the system of

communications which had created the prosperity of the

favoured coast* The r u l e r s 1 reaction must have been a grim

determination to protect themselves by the use of naval

power to compel ships to come to their harbours. Thi3 in

turn would have led to embittered relations with foreigners

and neighbours alike.

If my understanding of the prospects which awaited

/ — / —
Srivijaya is correct, studies of later Srivijayan history

should pay particular attention to evidence of the presence

of foreign shipping in ‘
w estern Indonesia and should seek to
establish when it is likely to have preponderated over
541 .
s—
Srivijayan shipping# One would note, for example, the

Tunhuang document of the eighth century which states that

u
Po-ssu, or Persian Gulf shipping, traded with the IC>un*lun

countries (1)# The participation of the Arabs in the sack

of Canton in 758 would also be of significance (2)# Especially

important are tho Arab accounts of the ninth century which

testify that Arab ships v/ere then visiting China# An Arab

states that the parrots of Zabag spoke many languages,

including Arabic, Persian and Greek, (3), and this may reflect

the cosmopolitan character of the ^rivijayan capital* The

ruler would have been delighted to collect harbour dues and

stapling charges from as mnny foreigners as possible to

swell his immense treasury (4)* The passing of the

urivijayan monopoly of the Catling trade would have caused

him no anxiety, provided that the newcomers kept to the

traditional system of communications*

But though in the eighth and ninth centuries it is

likely that Arab shipping was increasing (5), the major threat
/ —
from foreign shippers to Grivijaya's interesto probably came

Ll) Page 3oo

(2) CTS, 198, 15b.
(3) Perrand, Textes, 1*56-7, quoting ltd al-Falglh in 902*
(4 ) Arab accounts of Srivijaya made much of the treasures
of the rulers#
(5) Persian Gulf shipping may have declined in the tenth_
century owing to deteriorating conditions in the cAbbasid
empire; Sauvaget, *Gur d'anciennes instructions
Mautiques arabes1, JA, 1948, 19-20*
from other quarters and especially from tho southern Indians,

the Javanese, and finally the Chinese themselves* The

expansion of the mercantile marine of these three countries,

all much closer to Sumatra than the Arabs were, was destined

in time to lead to the downfall of the favoured coast*

/ —

Studies of later Erivijaynn history are hound to pay

attention to the activities of the Tamils under the Cola

rulers and especially in the eleventh century* Under this

powerful dynasty the Tamils made themselves one of the foremost

trading peoples of the east and were hound to be affected by

/— /\
the Srivijayan entrepot policy. Perhaps the origins of the
_ / —
Cola threat to Srivijaya are concealed in the assiduous way
/—
in which Srivijaya sent missions to the Cung dynasty from

960 onwards. If it is true that frequent missions from a

trading kingdom were a sign that things were not going well

for that kingdom, this series of missions is a further

/ —
example. Por a time Srivijaya may have tried to win the

goodwill of the Cola rulers, and about 1005 the latter in

fact made the revenue of a village available to upkeep the

Srivijayan temple at Ncgapatmn (1)* But the Colas were

iotennined to take an active part in the China trade, and

in 1015 they sent their first mission tOy(.emperor (2)*

In 1016 the Chinese recognised them as a major power (3).

(1) Epigr.Ind. , XXL1, 229.

(2) Oung s h T h , 489, 21b.
(3) ^ 7, 7849b. Tha status of the countries
sending tribute was measured by the size of the escorts
provided for them. The other countries, including Srlvijayam,
were also trading with China.
 5U3.

It is not surprising if the Tamils, with greater naval

resources at their command than the Arabs had, should have

/ —
decided to smash the Srivijayan monopoly of the produce

of Indonesia which prevented foreigners from trading where

they wished. It is clear that there was a fundamental

clash of interest early in the 11th century, and in perhaps

1017 and certainly in 1025 the Colas attacked the

Srivijayan empire. I interpret this action as being aimed

at the exclusive entrepot system which Srivijaya had maintained

throughout its history (1). It is true that the Tamils

also claim to have raided some countries which were not

Srivijayan dependencies (2), but it is equally certain that

/ —
the main target was Srivijaya itself* These raids were the

first important challenge, known from records, to the

favoured coast since the Straits ports tried to trade with

China in the first half of the seventh century.

But the end of the tenth and early 11th century was even
/ —

more critical for Srivijaya, and the period probably marks

end of the chapter in Indonesian commerce which began in

the second half of the seventh century with the Srivijayan

The Cola mission cf 1015 had to travel to China via

Srivijaya; Sung j§hih, 489* 22b.,_JDhe exciting events of this
period were my introduction to Srivijayan history, and
perplexity about t£e_economic background led me by stages
to the origins of Srivijaya.
(2) They attacked Ea dam alln gan , or Tamhralinga, on the
isthmus of the Ualay Peninsula, which I have argued was
then independent of Srivijaya; 1Tambralinga1 , BSOAS, 21,3,1958.
587 -607.
control of the Straits, a chapter characterised by the

acquiescence of the foreigners in the system of trade routes

/ — / —
stipulated by the rulers of Srivijaya* For in 992 Srivijaya

van invaded by the Javanese, and Javanese envoys in China

stated that the two countries were at war (1)* One imagines
/—
that the Srivijayan system had now become as intolerable to

the Javanese as it was to the Tamils* The threat from Java

warn temporarily averted after the destruction of the eastern

Javanese kraton in 1017, an event which may be a result of

/ — . .
the vengeance of Srivijaya (2). But I doubt whether

Javanese resistance ended. The later Sung accounts of Java

indicate that it had become an important commercial country.

" / —
Chou Ch fu-fei even says that it was richer than Srivijaya

and second in wealth only to the Arab countries. (3).

The final and perhaps fatal threat to the ancient

interests of Srivijaya came from the Chinese themselves, who

indirectly had done so much to build up the prosperity of the

favoured coast. fa Sung times Chinese merchants were going

overseas. From China ships could visit Indonesia by the

/—
eastern approaches and could avoid the Srivijayan trade routes,

(1) Sungshih, 489 , 13b 5 17a-17b.

(£.) 1016/1017 is LI.Damais* revised date for this event;
f£tudes d'opigraphie Indonesienno* , BKFEO, 46, 1, 1952, 64-5,
Note 2.
 5U5.

nor is it likely that Srivijaya would have dared to interfere

with Chinese ships. The Chinese seem to have been

specially interested in the Javanese pepper trade (1). By

1178 ships from Canton were wintering in Lamuri in northern

Sumatra (2). Y/ith the appearance in Indonesia of Chinese

merchants themselves the raison d*etre of Srivijaya, the

entrepot for the Chinese market, would have disappeared.

Henceforth the commercial future of Indonesia lay essentially

A
in its commodities, and entrepots for the convenience of

foreigners could only hope to prosper if they were situated

close to centres of production. Nov; as never before a

bright day was dawning for the Straits of Malacca (3), and

in 1225 Chao Ju-kua gives the significant information t h a t

Kan-pei , Aru on the Sumatran side of the Straits,

' /-
had recovered its independence from Srivijaya, that it was on

the sea route, and that many ships anchored there (4).

(1) Chao Ju-kua describes how Chineso merchants defied

imperial orders in order to buy Javnrose pepper; Chu fan c h i h ,
2/ ~
(2) LY'TT, 2, 2 3 .
(3) IdYioi in 1154 commented on the various perfumes of
Imvil (northern Cunatra) and how seme of the coastal
population swam out to ships passing by in order to se&l
ambergris; Ferrancl, Textes, 1, 181.
(4) CPC, 20: ^ -a „ -fe

% (S ‘jf Q^ ^ ® «
f£ £
 5U6,

Probably ever since the Cola raids at the beginning

of the 11th century Srivijaya had relied on nafal force to

prolong the economic prosperity of Jambi and Palembang.

One pictures the last two hundred years of its history as

a period of stubborn but hopeless resistance to a new

pattern of trade, in which foreigners could bo kept from

producers only by the use of force. A particular embarrassment

to Srivijaya must have been the restlessness of its vassals.

In 1058-1069 bhe Tamils claim to have suppressed a revolt in

Kedah on behalf of the ruler, presumably the ruler of

/ — , . /—
srivijaya, (1). But clearly Srivijaya was no longer able

to prevent foreigners from visiting the camphor country in

north-western Sumatra. In 1088 a Tamil merchant guild erected

an inscription at £abu fuwa near Pansur (2). The Cola raids

may have weakened Srivijaya and made it less easy for its

rulers to blockade the harbours of their vassals, the only

sure v.ay of denying foreigners access to them.

The evidence is such that we know more of the rise of

the ports of northern Sumatra to trading fame than of the

/ — / —
collapse of Srivijaya. One pictures Srivijaya losing control

of more end more harbours so that finally it was left with

only Palembang and Jambi, abandoned by foreigners and stranded

on its repellent coast. In the second half of the 13th century

tho Javanese kingdom of Gingasari exerted some form of

influence in southern Sumatra. Islam, coming in the wake of

(1) v The^evidencc for this curious episode is described in

Cocdcs, Jltats, 251.
(2) Nilakanta Sastri, ’A Tamil merchant guild in Sumatra1 ,
ti$&9 72 , 1932, 314.
 5H7.
the Indian trade, v;as making a modest beginning in northern

S uma tra , hut the rulers in the south of the island were

practising horrible Tantric rites. By the end of the

/ —
century the trading system which nourished Srivijaya had

vanished, and the great empire was no more (1). Even its

most loyal traders would have moved away to pursue their

business in more hopeful centres*

Such is my impression of the dismal prospect which

awaited the once favoured coast. During much of the long

history of Srivijaya its rulers v:ould have been trying to

defend an obsolete system of trade, bringing in its wake

bitter relations with their neighbours in western Indonesia.

But I do not wish to end this study with the time when

Srivijaya had become an obstacle to international commerce.

by concern has been with its origins, which'belong to an

honourable period in the history of south-eastern Sumatra,

when its inhabitants -played an essential part in the economic

development of southern China. Its ships helped Buddhists

£n their travels, and from its harbours many new ideas

would have penetrated other parts of western Indonesia.

In these ways this coast made a permanent contribution to

Asian history. Only in south-eastern Sumatra itself has

(1) Yet M ala yu-Jambi, probably the capital at this time, may
still have had an outpost on the Malay Peninsula, for the
Mongols in 1295 v^amed the Thai to desist ^from harming
Malayu; Coedes, E t a t s , 343, quoting the Yuan ehih. The
circumstances of tho final Sumatran withdrawal from the
Peninsula in the face^of Thai invasions are one of the
numerous problems of Srivijayan history awaiting further
elucidation.
'there been no permanent memorial of the civilisation which

once flourished there and made it possible for I Tsing to

/—
recommend Srivijaya as a suitable centre for Buddhist

students before they went to India (1)* The coast is

remembered today not by its temples or even by its own

literary records but in the literature of foreign countries,

whose merchants once enjoyed the trading facilities created

by its seafarers* The materia medico of China, in spite

of the stench of ulcers which it has evoked in those pages,

is not the least eloquent memorial to this co:

'.act.
APPENDIX A

THE LO YANG CHI A LAN CI1I AS A SOURCE ON KO-YING

Yang Hsuan-chih’s Lo yang chla Ian chi, written in the

middle of the sixth century, has occasionally been mentioned

as a source of information about South East Asia (l). There

seems to be no justification for this as far as the passage

on Ko-ying is concerned (2), The facts which this passage

incorporates are likely to have come from third century

information and especially from Wan Chen’s Nan chou is wu chih

(3)* An analysis of the passage shows that^the monk Buddhabhadrc

raa^e u*-ter statements much earlier than the

first half of the sixth century, when he came to China (h)*

(l) Chavannes in 1903 implied that Ko-ying was known in the sixth
century; JA, Nov-Dee, 1903# 530-531* Pelliot did not contradic1
him but insisted that Ko-ying was also known to Wan Ch£n in the
third century; *Deux itlneraires*, 277# note 2* Professor
Wheatley quotes from the Lo yang chia lan chi, though he does
not express an opinion on its historical reliability; Golden
Khersonese, 19; 23*
rST^Taishd Tripitaka, vol. 51# no. 2092, U# 1017c.
(3) Two recent editors of the LYCLC each noted a sentence^ which
was similar to a fragment of the Nan chou i wu chih but/not make
the point that this passage is almost entirely based on the Nun
chou 1 wu chih: Chou T 2u-mufs edition, K ’o hsueh £hfu gan shS,
1958, §9-90; Pan Hsiang-yungfs edition, Ku tien wen hsueh ch*u
pan she, 1958, 236- 7 .
Ik) Pelliot states that Buddhabhadra came to China in 509;
fDeux itin^raires*f 277# note 2.
 The passage In the Lo yang chia lan chi falls into four

parts* The first contains Yang Hsuan-chih^s comments on

which is transcribed in the form

A
adopted by Wan Chen:

fIn the south there is the country of Ko-ying;* It is

very far from the capital (of China)* This land is
completely cut off (from China)* For generations
there has been no communication (between Ko-ying: and
China) * Even in the period of the two Han dynasties
and the (third century) Wei dynasty it never sent
embassies to China*1

On page 105 I interpreted this passage as reflecting Yangfs

impression that Ko-ying was isolated from China*

Then follows the statement that Buddhabhadra came to

China for the first t i m e ^ ^ fa j| ^

The text implies that he came via Ko-ying and was the first

person to arrive in China with information about it#

The next part contains an account of the system of

communications between Ko-ying and other parts of South East

Asia* I have incluted in brackets the statements which are

borrowings from the Nan chou 1 wu chih* the fragments of whidh

survive in the T*ai t^lng yg. lan. It will be noted that on

A .
three occasions Yang modifies Wan Chen’s facts by expressing

distances in terms of the duration of the Journey instead of

keeping to Wan Chenfs Id calculations. The reason may be that

 551

A
Wan Chen had expressed the relationship between Ko~ylng and

Chu-chih as fa month1 and Yang wanted to be consistent in his

description of the other stages of the journey by mentioning

the time taken# There is no evidence that the times Yang

quotes are anything but his own invention, though it should

be remembered th-t Yang had access to all the contents of the

Nan chou i wu chih#

1(Buddhabhadra) said that he travelled north (from Ko-ying)

for a month and reached Xou-chih (I think that it can be
claimed that this transcription is based on Wan Ch£nTs
Chu-chlhfl ; TPYL, 790, 3501a. Yang prefers Wan
Chengs Ko-ying to K*ang T ' a ^ s Chia-ying j}0. ; in the
same way he prefers Kou-chih ® Chu-chih to K fang T*alf8
ChH-li 3X) 'JtJ # The NCIWC fragment is translated on page
96)• He ( then) reached Sun-tien in eleven days (evidently
Tien-shn. said by Wan Chen to be 800 jLi from Chu-chiht
TPYL# 790, 3501a). Prom Sun-tien he went north for 30
days to Funan(TPYL. 788, 3 ^ 9 a , where the distance between
Tien-sun and Funan is expressed as 3,000 and more 11)*
fKo~yin~) is 5,000 square 11 and is the most powerful of
the countries of the southern barbarians and has a large
population (There is no surviving fragment of the NCIWC
which, to my knowledge, contains the statement about the
5,000 square 11 in connexion with any country. I am
inclined to regard it as NCIWC information on Ko^ying# and
my reason is that the compilers of the TPYL attribute to
Ko-yinn the passage about itspowerfulness and large
population; TPYL. 971, 4305a). It IKo-ying) produces

%
 bright pearls, gold* jade* crystal* and many areea nuts
(This is also attributed to Ko-ying in the TPYL*s
quotation from theLYCLG in 9/if 4305a)„ (Buddhabhadra)
went north from Funan for one month and reached Lin-yi
(TPYL. 766. 3462b, where the distance is expressed as
3,000 li)*1

Yang then describes the monk* s movements in China* He

visited Yang chou and went on to Lo yang, where he was questioned

about the southern regions* He is supposed to have replied:

^Formerly there was jNu-tfIao* country (whose people)

rode carts driven by four Korses (TPYL. 790, 3501bt
on Ku-nu £ 9 , translated on page/o9 )# Ssu-
tyiao country produces asbestos, which is made from
tree bark* When the tree enters fire it does not
burn (TPYL. 787, 3465b, translated on page )*
(The inhabitants of) these southern countries live in
walled cities (I cannot trace the origin of this
statement; it reads like an adaptation of the NCIWC1s
passage on 3su-tyiao: TPYL.767. 3485b, translated on
page 103). They produce many rich things (This may
be a comment by Yang), The customs of the people are
honest and good. They are upright in their dealings
and uphold high principles (I cannot trace the origin
of this, but X suspect that it is an adaptation of the
HCI'TC*s passages on Lin^yang^ and Shlh-han fen 1% ,
contained in TPYL, 787, 3485B and 790, 3501aj in both
cases the >plo were said to be ’virtuous and good

The final part of this passage deals with the relations

between the southern regions and the western regions. The

nomenclature of the countries in the western regions also

suggests a third century source*

 553

^These southern countries) are also in communication

with the western regions, Ta-chfln, An-hsi, and Shfen~tu
(northern India), fSfcating on the waves and driven with
the winds it is possible in a hundred days to reach them
(on ships) with three or four square sails (The reference
to the sides of the sails may have come from the NCIWC1s
description of sailing ships contained in TPYL, 771 /
3U19a)• All these countries (? in the southern regions)
serve the Buddha, love living things, and hate to kill
(This seems like another borrowing from the NCIWC on
Lln-vang and Shlh-han: the people of the former place
honoured the Buddha, while those of the letter could not
bear to kill. One has to remember, however* that Yang
Hsuan-chih must have had access to the complete NCIWC. in
?/hich this passage and also the passage about the Ko-.ylng
products could have been contained,)

I think that the Lo yang chla lan chi can, on account of

its patent borrowing, be safely ignored as a source of informatioj

about South East Asia, The passage discussed in this note is

interesting only for two reasons. It suggests that the Nan chou

i wu chih was read by the educated public of China in the sixth

century, and it shows how a sixth century Chinese interpreted

Wan Chenfs information about Ko~ying and concluded that it was

out on a limb as far as China1s maritime communications were

concerned.
APPENDIX B .

THE CHINESE TRANSCRIPTIONS OP THE NAMES OF

THE TRIBUTARY KINGDOMS

The names of these kingdoms are known by a number of

variants,

Ho-lo-taq

On page 321 it was Baen that the first character was rendered

as and^^J * while the last character was rendered as

^ ^ t an& * 1 argued that H o ^ l o ^ t ^ -Voj »

which sent its single mission under that name in U30, was the

country usually rendered as Ho-lo~tsn,

Efo-ta

On pages 333-339 I enquired whether the real name of this

kingdom was She-pro-ta , meaning fa capital city in

She-p1o » Java1. The kingdom which sent a mission in U35

was certainly known both as She-plo-pyo-ta and Shen^o-ta (l).

On page I f . I enquired whether P fo~ta was later known as Tan-tan,

Neither of these suggestions can be proved, but, in view of the

short tributary career of P*o-ta, the uncertainty about the

(1) Note 5 on page 333

 555 •

correct form of the transcription is unimportant#

P fo-huang

The variants of the first character in this name provide a

g^od example of the different forms adopted for these trans-

criptions# The oldest form is F * u - h u a n g ^ ^ ; it is provided

by the Sunn Yuan Chia ch* i chii chu ^

contemporary court diary of the chief events in the h2U-U53

period (l) • According to this source P fn-huang sent tribute

in kk9* and certain tribute articles are mentioned# But>

according to the Liu Sung shu# the kingdom which sent tribute

in kh9 was P fo-huang: ^ (2) and P yan~huang ^ (3)*

The tribute of P fo-huanp; must have been particularly noteworthy,

for hi typos of 1local produce* were sent (4)* The equivalence

of P 1u~ x^ and P >o<* once made me wonder whether the

third century P yu«-lei j ^ (5) was later rendered as P yo-li

)/f%. 'I*') f a surmise which delayed the time when I realised that

P fo-li must have been in Java and not in Sumatra#

Kan-tfo-li

The Liu Sung shu states that in Ij-55 Chin-»tyo-li

l) TPYL, 787, 3U87a.

i
2) LSS, 5, 30a#

3) LSS, 97, 8a.

h) Ibid#
5) Mentioned on page 91#
 556.

sent tribute (l), and this is the rendering in the Tsf fu

yuan Kuej in respect of the mission of 1+i+l (2), though a

correction at the end of chapter 78 of the Ssu pu pei yao edition

of the Nan shih states that in the 1+53-U61+ period Kan-»tfo-li

•f ^*1 sent a mission. The Liang shu, also referring to the

S-53-U6U period, calls this kingdom Knn~tfo- u-f Pfe % , the

name by which it is known in the Liang shu (3)* The books about

its medical practice, mentioned in the Sul shu» contain yet

another variant in the form of Kan-t<o-li tfl] (k) •

P fo-li

According to the Liu Sung shu P ^ - l l sent a mission

in 1+73 (5)* The same history, however, describes the mission

of U73 as coming from P fo-li H (6). The

equivalence of and"^ is seen in the transcriptions ofthe

name of the rulers of P fan-ta and She-p1o-p1o-ta :

A.

Sri is rendered in the Liu Sung shu as and f a t e (7).

~Jr
The T*al pHnrr huan y5 chi on one occasion renders P ro—11 as

P'u-ll > ;p] (8) and on another occasion as Po-11 ^'\ (9i

(1) LSS, 6+ lib; 97, 12a.

(2) T F Y K . 668, 11381b.
(3) LS, 54, 16b.
(4) See note 1 on page 351.
(5) LS S . 9, 3b. This transcription was used before 443; see
page illz.
(6) LSS. 97, 12a. These two references in the Lin Sung shu
satisfied Pelliot that only one country was in question; T P .
19, 1920, 267 and 433.
(7) LSS, 97, 8b; 9a.
(8 ) T P H Y C . 176, lib.
(9/ T P H Y C . 177, 13a, in connexion with Vijayapura.
 557*

I Tsing writes P ^ - l i > (i)»

Tan-tan

This kingdom is first mentioned in the Liang shu as Q $

(2)* In the Sul shu it is also (3)* In the Hsin T fang

shu the name is ^ ^ (^)* I Taing knew it *

and the provision of a ^ suggests that he wanted to make

it clear that he was rendering a foreign name (5)* The T fai

p fing huan yG chi has ^ (6).

(1) Nan hai chi juei hei fa chuan. 205b. The passage is
•ranslated on page3$<? .
2) LS, 5h, 16a,

i3) Sul shu, 82, 7b#

4) h t s . £22 'F- , 5b,

5) Nan hai chi kuei nel fa ehuan, 205b.
6; TPHYC. 177. 13a. This passage is translated on page^-S^ •
 558.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abbreviations

AA Artlbus Aslae (Ascona)

ABIA Annual Bibliography of Indian ArQhaeology (Leiden)

BEFBO Bulletin de l ’ficole Fran^aise d fExtreme-Orient (Hanoi)

m m Bijdragen tot de Taal, Land- en Volkenkunde van

Hederlandsch-Indie, uitgegeven door het Koninklijk

Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde van

Hederlandsch-Indle (fs Gravenhage)

BSEI Bulletin de la Socidtd des Etudes Indochinoises (Saigon]

BQOAS Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies

(London)

CH S Ch'ien Han shu %

. A A*
CLPT Gh?ung hsiu cheng ho ching shih cheng lei pei yung

pen to’ao {'%, j / j f j $ £

C*/YS Ch'i min yao shu

KA Etudes Asiatiques publides h lfoccasion du vingt-

A
cinqui&me anniversaire de l’Ecole Franqaise d fExtreme-

Orient, 2 vols* (Paris, 1925)

HCS Hou Chou shu ^ i|

HITS Hou Han shu ^ n^

 559.

HJAS Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, Cambridge, Mass#

IITo Hsin T fang shu *fj^\ ^

IAL Indian Art ^nd Letters (London); later Arts and

Letters, India and Pakistan; later Arts and Letters,

the Journal of the Hoyal India, Pakistan and Ceylon

Society

s a Indian Historical Quarterly (Calcutta)

IWLC I wen lei chu ^7 Jjr jg

JA Journal Aslatique (Paris)

JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society (New Haven)

JPR3 Journal of the Burma Research Society (Rangoon)

JGIS Journal of the Greater India Society (Calcutta)

JMBRAS Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic

Society (Singapore)

JRAS Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain

and Ireland (London)

JRASSB Journal of the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic

Society (Singapore)

JSS Journal of the Siam Society

KC Kuang chih ^

KCC Kuang chou chi ^ *|*|-] ^ g

£3 Liang shu

LBS Liu Sung shu ^ ^

LWTT Ling wai tai ta ^ ^

LYCLC Lo yang chia lan chi

MJTG The Malayan Journal of Tropical Geography (Singapore)

 560.

MTB Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko

(Tokyo)

NCIWC Nan chou i wu chih ^ <o

ft t
PTKM Pen tsTao kang mu # ^ $18 a
ST]YK Sung hui yao kao t % %
SKC San kuo chih -S- =3
S3 Sung shih
$
TFYK Tefe fu yuan kuei

THY T ’ang hui yao

Tl.jd Tijdschrift yoor Indische Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde

uitgegeven door het Koninklljk Bataviaasch Genootschap

van Kunsten en Wetenschappen (Batavia, 1s Gravenhage)

Tl.jd aard Tijdschrift van het Koninklijk ITederlandsch aardrijks-

kundig genootschap (Amsterdam)

TP T*oung Pao • Archives concernant lfhistoire,

lea langues, la gdographie, 1*ethnographie et les arts

de l #Asie orientale (Leiden)

TPHYC T fai ; p fing huan hxi chi 7^ If' ^

TPYL T*ai p fing yii lan ^ if

TT T fung tien

Versp. H* Kern, Versprelfle Gcschrlften onderzl.jn Toeslcht

£esch1f
Verzameld, 15 vols. (*s Gravenhage, 1913-36)

WHTK Wen hsien t*ung k #ao

Dynastic histories

(Note: X have used the Po-na edition)

Shlh chi cjl

Ch* ien Han shu ft VS. I

Hou Han shu

San Kuo ehlh JL ^

Chin shu ^

Liu Sung shu

& i * i
Nan Ch*1 shu
$ t - #
Li an* shu

Pei Chf1 shu

Hou Chou shu

Sui shu

Nan shih

Pei shih

Chiu T*ang shu

Hsln T*ang shu

Sung shlh ^

Yuan shih % £
Ming shlh gq £
T*ang hui yao y3p> • Chung hua shu chu edition in three

volumes, Shanghai, 1957 impression.

 562,

^ O
Sung hui yao chi kao <yfj Photolithographic reprint

of the Chia yeh t fang copy in the Peking Library. 8

volumes. Chung hua shu chu, Peking, 1957*

Chlfc® . Chu fan chlh^ ^ ^ ^ , written in

1225. Chung hua shu chu edition, with commentary by

Feng Chfe n g - c h x i n x /J % Shanghai, 1956.

Chfen ChingJ * Hsln tsuan hsiang p * u ^ ^

Sung or Ydan)• Shih yuan tsfung shu collection.

Chi Han 'S . Nan fang ts’ao mu chuang

(Attributed to the end of the third or early fourth century)

Commercial Press, Shanghai, 1956.

Chia Ssu-haleh mln yao shn^Lf

(Beginning of the 534-U9 period). Ssu pu tsfung k’an

collection, no. 70, vol. 80, Commercial Press, Shanghai,

1936.

Chou ChfS-fei ^ ] - ^ zj 5 • Ling wai tal ta, written in 1176.

Reprint of the text in the Chih-pu-tsu t8*ung-shu* Ts’ung-

shu chi-chfeng collection, 3116/2 ~ 3 H 9 • 1935-37. ^

Fa Hsienj^ • Kao seng Fa Hslcn c h n a n ^ ^ $ ^lrst

half of the fifth century). Taish5 Tripltaka, vol. 51*

no. 2085.

Hui C h i a o ^ ^ • Kao seng c h u a , written in

519* Taish5 Tripitaka, vol. 50, no. 2059*

Hung Chfu ^ . Hsiang v ' u 'fc » (Attributed to the

first half of the 12th century). Reprint of the text in

the Ilsueh-ching t’ao-yuan. T s fung-shu chi-chfeng

collection, li+81/1. 1935-37.

I Tsing ^ * T& T ’ang hsi yu ch’lu fa kao seng chuan.

written in 691-2. Talshd Tripitaka, vol. 51* no. 2066*

Nan hai chi kuel nei fa chuan

TalshS Tripitaka, vol. 5U* no, 2125.

MHlasarvaBtlvgda-ekadatakarman;^! ^ ^ % T J^

v/ritten between 695 and 713. Taishd Tripitaka, vol. 21+,

no. 11+53.
Kalodaka ^fyp ^ \lg fyo (Translator). Shlh erh yu chin#

'(I) * translated in 392. TaishO Tripitaka, vol.

i+, no. 195.

Li Fang'j' and others. T ’al p ’lng yu lan jzSf ffif7 ,

completed in 983. k vols, Han fen l o u ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ facsimile

of a Sung print, Chung hua shu chu, Peking, I960.

Li S h i h - c h e n ^ • p£n ts’ao kang m u /j; £| ,

A A *
completed in 1578. Jen min wei sheng chfu pan she’s

facsimile of an edition of 1885, Peking, 1957.

Li Tao-yuan ^ , Shul chin; chu • (Late

“'U 1- —
5th or early 6th century). Sub-commentary by Yang Shou-

ching and edited by Hslung Hui-chen, his collaborator.

A
K ’o hsueh ch’u pan she, Peking, 1957.
 564*

Liu H s u n ^ J . Ling piao written about

A.D* 900* Commercial Press edition, 19U1*

Ma Huan^j^y^ . Ylng yai sheng 9pk , written

' m
in the first half of the 15th century. Chung hua shu chu

edition, with commentary by Peng Ch* eng-chun, Peking, 1955*

Ma Tuan-linf^ jjdt# .
Wen hsien tfung k tao* j z ,
A 1 '
completed about A.D. 1300. Wan~yu wen-kfu collection.

Ou-yang Hshnj^o ^ a n d others. I w^h lei c h u ^ L rj?

Ou-yang Ilstin lived from A.D. 557 to 641# Ming print.

Su Ching^^ *0 ] ^ others. Hsin hslu pen ts* ^ ^

completed in 659* Facsimile of a T ’ang manuscript, Chung

kuo ku-tien i-hsiieh tsfung~shu series, 1955*

T ’ang Sh en-wei^ • Chyung h3iu cheng ho chlng shih

cheng lei pel yung pen tstao ^ o‘

.^ ^

% {% $) % , being a 1249 revision of T ’ang Shen-

/\
wei*s 1116 materia medlca known as the Cheng ho hsin hslu
A A ,
cheng lei pel yung pen ts'ao. The text is a facsimile of

the 1249 text and is produced by the Jen min wei sheng chfu
7 v
pan she, Peking, 1957*

Tao-hsuan . Hsu kao seng chuan. 4, ^ »

written in the first half of the 7th century. TaishS

Tripitaka, vol. 50, no* 2060.

T8fui P a o ^ • Ku chin chu ^ ^ , written in the late

3rd or early 4th century. Commercial Press edition, 1956.

 565.

Tu Yu . T*ung tleri ^ ^ jfil . Tu Yu liv e d from A.D.

735 to 812. Wan-yu wen-k*u edition.

Tuan Ch’eng-shihJ^ ^ . Yu y a m tsa tsuiS |J^ i

compiled about A.D. 860. Ssu pu tsfung k fan collection

no* 100, Commercial Press, Shanghai, 1936*

Tuan K u n g - l u ^ ^ £v %^c: * Pei hu l u ’ihft , compiled

about A.D. 875. Reprint of the text in Shih-wan chuan lou

tsfung-shu. T s ,ung-shu Chi-ch*eng collection 3021/2.

Commercial Press, Shanghai, 1935-37.

Wang Chin-jo jf ^ and others. T s ye fu yuan kuei

9 completed in A.D. 1013. Facsimile of

the 12 vols. Ming edition. Chung hua shu chQ, Peking,

I960.
Wu P fu^3 ^ and others. Shen nung pen tsfao chin#

^ ^rd centurir A.D.) • Chung kuo

ku tien i hsueh tsfung kfan, Shanghai, 1955.

Yang Ilsuan-chih/jv^ • Lo yang chia lan chih

, written in the middle of the 6th century

A.D. Taishd Tripitaka, vol. 51, no. 2092* K fo hsueh

* A _
chfu pan she edition, 1956, with a commentary by Chou

Tau-rso.

Yu£h Shih ^ • T *ai p 1ing huan yu chi jn ^ £ i

compiled in the 976-83 period. Hung-hsing shan-fang

tsang-pan edition. Preface dated 1803.

Chang Hsieh 5 4 , Tung hsl yanp; k faoi ® i% %

written in 1617 or 1618. Basic Sinological Series, 1937.

Adams, Francis* The Seven Books of Paulus Acglneta. Translated

from the Greek with a commentary embracing a complete view

of the knowledge possessed by the Greekf Romans* and

Arabians on all subjects connected with medicine and

surgery* Three volumes, printed for the Sydenham Society,

London, 1844-7•

Admiralty Pilots. (Hydrographic Department, Admiralty, London):

Eastern Archipelago Pilot* vol. 4* including Sunda* Banka*

Gaspar* Carlmata* Rhio. Berhala. and Durian Straits*

first edition, 1927#

Malacca Strait Pilot, comprising y^alacca Straits and Its

northern approaches. Singapore Strait, and the west coast

of Sumatra, third edition, 1946.

Aetius Amidenus. ioO tS'*]\jol> Clnifjsj

To /m >S ^ oKlui
etc.

In aedibus haeredum Aldi manutii + Anclreae Asulani,

Venetiis, 1534*
Amerta. Warna Wart.a Kepurbakaiaan. Dinas Purbakala Republik

Indonesia (Archaeological Department of Indonesia): fKissah

perdjalanan ke Sumatra selatan dan D3ambif, Jakarta, 1955,

1-50.

Anderson, J. Mission to the east coast of Sumatra in 1823 •*»,

London, 1826.

Anonymous. ,Terpentljn van Sumatra*, Berichten van de

Afdealing Handelsmuseum van de Koninkli.ik Vereeniging

 Kolonial Instltuut (Overgedrukt uit De Indlsche ?4ercuur

van 10 en 17 April, 1925)*

Chung kuo yao hsueh ta tz*u tien tip ^ ,

A /v # A
Jen min wei sheng civ u pan she, 2 vols, Peking, 1956*

Arrian, Anabasis^ Alexanflri, Indlca, translated by E.I.Robson

(Loeb Classical Library), London, 2 vols, 1929-1933*

Atlas Troplsch Nederland (Uitgegeven door hat Koninklijk

Nederlandsch aardrijkskundig genootsehajk •«.), Batavia,

1938.

Bagchi, P.C. Le Canon Bouddhlque en Chine, les traducteurs et

les traductions, 2 vols, Paris, 1927-3&*

Bagrov?, L, ♦ *The origin of Ptolemy1s Geographla1, Georrafiska

Annaler, Stockholm, 27* 3-^* 19U5* 318-87.

Barnes, W. *Tfao Hung-ching, the recluse1 , Amblx, 2, 3-*h

19k&, 138-47.
Barry, T, Hedley, N atural Varnish Resina, London, 1932,

Barth, F, *The southern Tongoloid migration1, Man, 52, January,

1952, 5^8.

Beal, S. *Some remarks respecting a place called 3hi-li~fo-

tsai frequently named in the works of the Chinese Buddhist

pilgrim I-tsing, c. 672*, Livre des Mervellles de l*Inde

par le capitalne Pozorg bln Sahrlyar de Ramhormoz, trad•

par Marcel Bevie, texte arabe et notes by P.A, van der

Lith, Leiden, 1883-6, 251-3.

Blagden, C.Q. ’Notes and Queries: Benzoin1; Straits BRAS.

30, 1897, 306-307-

’Some remarks on Chao Ju-kua’s Chu fan chi*, JRA5, 1913,

1, 165-69.

To issonad e , J *F . Anecdota Oraeca e codiCibus reglls descriot-

sit, annotatlone illustravlt. 5 vols, Paris, 1829-33.

Bontius, J, An account of the diseases, natural history, and

medicine of the East Indies, translated from the Latin,

London, 1776.

Boodberg, P.A.. ’Some proleptical remarks on the evolution of

archaic Chinese*, HJAS, 2, 1937, 329-72,

Bosch, F.D.K. ’Verslag van een reis door Sumatra1, Oufl-

heidkufidlg Vers lag, Batavia, 1930.

Het vraagstuk van de Hlndoo-kolonicatie van den Archlpel.

Leiden, 1946#

’Local Genius en oud Hindoe-Javaanse kunst1, Mededellngen

der Koninkli.1ke Hederlandse Akademle van Wetenschappen.

afd, Letterkunde, nieuwe reeks, deel 15, no, 1, 1952, 1-25

fUit de grensgebieden tussen Indlsche invloedssfeer en

oud-inheems volksgeloof op Java*, Pijd, 110, 1954, 1-D.

Braddell, Dato Sir Roland. ’The ancient bead trade’, JMBRAS,

20 , 2 , 1947, 1-10 .
’ a note on Sambas and Borneo’, JHBRAS. 22, 4, 1949, 1-12.

’Notes on ancient times in Malaya: 8. Che-li-fo-che,

Mo-lo-yu, and Ho-lingf, JMBRAS, 24, 1, 1951, 1-27.

 fMalayadvipaj a study of early Indlanisation*, Malayan

Journal of Tropical G e og r a p h y . Singapore, 9, 1956, 1-20,

Br£hier, L, Le Monde Byzantln, La Civilisation Byzantine,

Paris, 1950,

Bretschneider, E, On the knowledge possessed by the ancient

Chinese of the Arabs and Arabian colonies and other

Western countries mention in Chinese books* London, 1871*

Botanicon Blnlcum, Note n Chinese Botany from native

and western sources* Par Bot-nical investigations

Into the materia medlca of the ancient Chinese, London,

1895*
Eriggs, L *P . The Ancient Khmer Empire, Transactions of the

American Philosophical Society, Nov/ Series, vol, 41, part

1, Philadelphia, 1951.

Browne, E .F • Arabian medicine* being the FitzPatrick Lectures

••• , Cambridge , 1921•

Brunet, F.L,E. Oeuvres m&jicales d fA lexandre de T r a l l e s .

Le dernier auteur classlque des grands med^Tcins grecs de

lfantiquitd* * 4 vols, Paris, 1933-7.

fLes med£cins grecs depuis la mort de Galien jusqu’a la

fin de 1* empire d* orient*^ H l s toire gdnerale de la rede cine

• • «, ourrapre nublld sous la direction du Professeur Lalgnel*

L a v a stine. Paris, 1, 1936, 433-63.

Budge, E* A, Wallis* Syrian Anatomy, Pathology* and Therapeutics

or ’The Book of Medicines’ ,,,, 2 vols, London, 1913*

 571.

Burkill, I#H* A dictionary of* the economic products of the

Malay Peninsula, 2 vols, London, 1935*

Buzurg of Rainhormii2»Kitabia>
1aib al-Hinfl: Llvre des mervcllles

de l*Inde par le capitalne Bozorg *•», trad, par Marcel

Devic, texte arabs et notes par P.A, van der Lith,

Leiden, 1883-6*

Callenfels, P*V* van Stein* 'The ftelanesoid civilisations of

Eastern Asia1, Bulletin of Raffles Museum, Series B, 1,

1936, i+1-51.
Caspar!s, J*G* de* Inscrlpties ult de pallendra tl.ld* Eandung,

1950*

Prasasti Indonesia II* Selected Inscriptions from the

7th to the 9th century A* P . * Bandung, 1956*

Caraka 8a%hit&* Translated by Kaviraj Avinash Chandra

Kaviratna in a number of parts, Calcutta, 1902 ff.

Cel sus# A.Cornelius Celdus. Of medicine* in eight books*

Translated* with notes critical and explanatory by James

Grelve *** Revised* with additional notes* by George

Futvoye* 3rd edition, London, 1837*

Chang Kslng-lan if ? * Chung hsl chlao t'ung shlh

liao huai pien vjj 6 vols, Peiping, 1930

Chang Wei -hua ^ fr.fi.*$£ * Lun Hon Wu ti^T;^ 4$ t

Shanghai, 1957*

Chavannes, E • Mdmoire compost h l f£ oque de la Grande Dynastie

* /
T'ang sur les religleux emlnents qul allkrent chercher la
 lot dans les pays d ’Occident, Paris, I89U.

’Gunavarman1, TP, 2e series, vol. 5, 190U, 193-206.

’Les pays d ’occident d ’aprbs le Ileou Han chon1, TP, 8,

1907, 1W-23U.
Ch’en Chu-t’ung (£)

-hna chiao
chi wen-hua chlao llu i& ^ ^ & *) VI- V*i$ &

, Shanghai, 1957*

C h ’en Pang-hslen
> » # % * Chung kuo 1 hsueh shlh
s ^ . *
Commercial Prees edition, 1957*

Chhabra, B. Ch. ’Expansion of Indo-Aryan culture during

Pallava rule aa evidenced by inscriptions’, Journal of the

Asiatic Society of Bengal.Lettera. 1, 1935, 1, l-6h*

’Three more yGpa inscriptions of King Mulavarman from

Kjtei (E. Borneo)’, JOIS, 12, 1, 19h5, U+-17.

Christensen, A. L ’Iran sous les Sassanldes. Copenhagen, 1936.

Christie, A. ’An obscure passage from the Perigljas: K o a a m a i o ^^Im -

TA TA
, PSOAS, 19, 2, 1957, 3U5-353

Cloyer, Andreas (ed.). Specimen Medicinao Sinlcae. Frankfurt,

1682
Codrington, H.W. Ceylon coins and currency (Memoirs of the

Colombo Museum, Series A, no. 3), Colombo, 192U*

Coedbs, G. ’Le royaume de Qrlvijaya’ t B E F S O . 18, 6, 1918, 1-36.

’The excavations at P ’ong Tuk and their importance for the

ancient history of Siam’, JS3. 21, 3, 1928, 195-210.

 573*

’Les collections arch£ologiques du Muede National de

Bangkok’, Ars Asiatica. 12, 1928, 1-36.

’Les Inscriptions malaises de Qrlvijaya’, BEFSO, 30* 1930,

29-80.
’On the origin of the Sailendras of Indonesia,’ JGIS # 1,

I93kf 2, 61- 70 .

’A propos d fune nouvelle thSorie sur le site de Srivijaya’,

JMBRAB, 1U, 3* 1936, 1-9*

’Fouilles en Cochinchine. Le site de Go Oc-eo, ancient

port du royaume de Fou-nan’, Artibus Aslae. 10, 13, 19U7,

193-9 *
Les £tats Hjndouisds d ’lndochlne et d ’lndon£si&. Paris,

19 W .

fL finscription de la stble de Llgor; £tat present de Bon

interpretation’, Oriens Extremus. 6, 1, 1959* U2-8.

Collet, O.J.A. Terres et peuples de Sumatra, Amsterdam, 1925.

Cortesao, A. The Suna Oriental of Tome" Pires, an account of the

East, from the Red Sea to Japan, written in Malacca and

India in 1512-5 Hakluyt Society, second series, vols.

39 and UO, London, 19U4.

Cosmas Indicopleustes. The Christian topography. Translated

from the Greek, and edited, with notes and introduction

by J.W. McCrindie, Hakluyt Society, London, 1897*

Cowan, H.K.J. ’Lamuru - Lambrl - Lawri - Ram(n)l - Lan-11 -

Lan-wu-li - Nan-po-li’ , Bl.1d. 90, 1933* h21-2h.

Crawford, J. History of the Indian Archipelago, Containing

an account of the manners« arts, lanRonpces, religions,

institutions, and commerce of Its Inhabitants • 3 vols,

Edinburgh, 1820,

A descriptive dictionary of the Indian Islands and adjacent

countries, London, 1856,

Crooke, V, A new account of East India and Persia, being nine

years1 travels, 1672-1681, by John Fryer, Hakluyt Society

second series, vole. 19, 20 and 39* London, 1909-1915.

Culpeper, N* Pharmacopoeia Lonainensis: or the London

dispensatory, , 1 6 5 3 *

Dale, *V.L. *Wind and drift currents in the South China Sea*,

The Valayan Journal of Tropical Geography, 8, JuneS, 1956,

1-31.
Damais, L.C. *Les £critures d*originc ir.dienne en Indon£sie et

dans le Sud-Est Asiatique continental*, BSEI, 30, i+, 1955,

365-82,
*Review of Rlwajat Indonesia by Poerbatjaraka, 1952*,

B E F E Q . 1+8, 2, 19571 607-61+9.

*Studea sino-indon^siennes*, BEFEO, 50, 1, I960, 1-35*

Dames, M,L* The book of Duarte Barbosa, an account of the

countries bordering on the Indian Ocean and their inhabi­

tants, written by Duarte Barbosa, and completed about the

year 1518 A,D,, Hakluyt Society, second series, vols, 1+1+

and 1+5, London, 1918,

 575#

Dasgupta, S#IT. and Do, S.K. A history of Sanskrit literature.

vol. 1, Calcutta, 19U7*

Demieville, P. 'Review of R.A. Stein's fLe Lin-yi', TP, 2+0,

1951, 336-51.

Deutz, G.g.J. 'Karos', T I M . 22, 18?5, 156-163.

Dioscorides.The Greek Herbal of D l o s e o r i d e c I l l u s t r a t e d by

a Bysantine, A.D. 512. Englished by John Ooodyer. A.D#

1655. Edited and first printed, A.D. 1933. by Robert T.

Gunther. Oxford, 193U#

Dobby, S.K.G. Southeast Asia. 5th edition, London, 1956.

Dupont, P. 'LeS Buddha dits d'AmaravAtl en Asie du Sud-est',

BEFEO. 1+9, 2, 1959, 631-636.

Duyvended, J.J.L. China's discovery of Africa. London, 19U9#

Elerhard, w. A history of China from the earliest times to the

present day. 3?*d impression, London, 1955#

Eerde, J.C* van. 'De oudste berichten octrent den Indischen

Archipel', Ti.ldschrift van het Koninklljk Nederlandsch

aardrl.1kskunflig genvOtschap. 2+5,-1926, 577-92#

Krmerins, F ,7»• Anecdota mediea Graeca e oodlybUs MSS expromuiti

Lugduni Batavorum, 182+0#

Pan Hsiang-yung V C ^ m Edition of the Lo yang chia

A
lan chi. Ku tien wen hstieh ch'u pan she, 1958*

Feng Ch1eng chun ~ P m Chung kuo nan yang chlao

t'un/r shih $ ^ £■ , Commercial Press, 1937.

Hsi yu tl rning fa , Commercial Press, 1957

 576

Ferrand, G* delations de voyages et textes g^ographiques

A
arabes, persans et turks relatifs & 1*Extreme-Orient du

VXIIe an XVIIe sibcles, 2 tomes, Paris, 1913-1^*

*Ye-tiao, Sseu-tiao et Java1, JA, 1916, 521-32,

A
fLa plus ancienne mention du nozn de lfile de Sumatra*,

JA, 1917, 331-5 *

**'ala*a, le Malayu et *£altiyur*, JA, 191&, 391-38U; 51-15U#

fLe K*ouen-louen et les anciennes navigations inter-

oedaniques dans les mors du sud* , JA, 13, 1919, 239-333;

U31-92; lh, 1919, 5-66; 201-Ul.

•Review of Laufer*s 8ino-Iranicaf, JA, Qct-Dec, 1921,

270-93.
*L*empire sumatranais de Crlvi;]ayaf,
« JA, 20, 1-10U; l6l-2i*6
wymmt

fL*element persan dans les textes nautiques arabes des

XV e et XVIe sibcles*, JA, 192U, 193-257.

Filliozat, J. fLa mddecine Indoue*, Histoire gdn&rale de la

mddecine . ouvrage publld sous la direction du

Frofesseur Lalgnel-Lavastine, Paris, 1, 1936, ^65-68.

La doctrine classlque de la mddeclne Indienne. Ses

origines et ses parallbles grecs. Paris, 19U9*

*Les dchanges de lfInde et de 1*Empire Remain aux premiers

si&cles de l*&re Chrdtienne*, Revue Historiquo, 201, 19^-9,

1-29 .
*Les sciences1, being chapter 9 of L fInde Classlque, 2,

Paris, 1953*
Pluckiger, F*A. and Hanbury, D. Fharmacographia, A history

of the Principal Drugs of vegetable origin met with in

Great Britain.and British India. 2nd edition, London, 1879*

Gerini, G.E. Researches on Ptolemy*s geography of eastern Asia,

London, 1909*

Giles, H. A Chinese biographical dictionary, London, 1899*

Giles, L . A gallery of Chinese Immortals, Selected biographies

translated from Chinese sources, London, 19U8*

Giles, L.H, (trans,) The travels of Fa-hsien (399-Ulh A,P.) or

Record of the Buddhist kingdoms, London, second impression,

1956,

Gimlette, J,F. A dictionary of Malayan medicine, Oxford, 1939*

Gonda, J. Austrisch en Ariseh. Het belanr; van de kennis der

Austrlsche talen, voornamell ,1k. voor de Xnilsche phllo ogie,

Utretch, 1932.

Sanskrit in Indonesia. Nagpur, 1852*

Grimes, A. *The journey of Fa-hsien from Ceylon to Canton1,

JMRRAS, 18, 1, 19hl, 76-92,

Groeneveldt, W*P, Notes on the Malay Archipelago and Malacca,

Compiled from Chinese sotirces, Batavia, 1876.

ITadl Hasan, A history of Persian navigation. London, 1928.

Hall, D.G.F*. A History of South-East Asia, London, 1955*

Hall, D.G.B, (edited) Historical writing on the peoples of

Asia. Historians of Southeast Asia, London, 1961*

Hanbury, D. ,Notes on Chinese Materia Medica*, Pharmaceutical

Journal. 3# 1862.

Science papers, chiefly pharmacological and botanical,

London, 18?6.

Heelceren, H#R# va*J. The Bronze-Iron age of Indonesia, The

Hague, 1953.

Heine-Geldern, R. von, fPrehistoric research in the Netherlands

Indies1, in Science and Scientists in the Netherlands

Indies, New York, 19U5, 129-167*

*The drum named Makalamau1, India Antique, Leiden, 19U7,

167-179*
*Le pays de P'l-K’len, le roi au grand cou et le Singa

Mangaradja*, FRFEQ. US 9 2, 1959, 361-U01+.

Henning, W.B* fThe Great Inscription of Sapur I*, BSOAS, 9#

1937-9, 823-U9*
fTwo Manichaean magical texts1, BSOAS, 12, 1, 19U7-8, 39-66

fThe: date of the Sogdian ancient letters1, BSOAS, 12, 3,

and k, 19U8, 601-615*

TIeyd, W. Hlstoiro du comnerce du Levant an noyen age, 2 vols,

1923 impression, Leipzig#

Heyne, K# De Nuttlge Planter, van Nederlandsch Indie, 3 vols,

Batavia, 1927#

Hirananda Shastri, *The Nalanda copper-plate of Beva-paladeva1,

Eplgra hia Indica. 17, 7, 192U, 310-27*

Hirth, F* China and the Roman Orient? researches into their

 579.

ancient and medieval relations as represented In old Chin­

ese records, Shanghai. 1835*

?The mystery of Fu-lin, 11, JAPS, 33# 1913# 193-208.

Kirth, F* and Rockhlll, ft.VI?. Chau Ju«kua« His work on the

Chinese and Arab trade in the twelfth and thirteenth

centuries* entitled Chti-fan~chl. St. Petersburg, 1911*

HoTzu-chfuan fi\ *** ^ « Bel Chin Han Pei C h fao shih lueh

% $ ifc , Shanghai, 1958,.

Hoernle, A.F.R. *The Bower Manuscript #..f# Archaeological

Survey of India* 22, 2 vols, Calcutta, 1893-1912.

Hoop, A.N.J. Th. a Th. van der. Megalithic remains in South

Sumatra, Zutphen, 1932.

Hooper, D. and Field, H. Useful Plants and Drugs of Iran and

Iraq. Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, 9, 3#

1937.
Horsburgh, J. The India Directory, or directions for sailing

to and from the Fast Indies, China. Japan, Australia, and

the interjacent ports of Africa and South America, 8th

edition, London, 1864.

Hosein D^ujadiningat. Atjehsch-Neflerlandscb Woordenboek. 2 vols,

Batavia, 1934*

Hourani, G.F. Aral; seafaring in the Indian Ocean in ancient and

early medieval times. Princeton, 1951.

Howes, F.N. Vegetable gums ?md resins. Mass., 1949.

Hsiang Ta /a) , T*ang tai Chfang~an yu hsi yu wen ?y.lng

fa ^ » Pekin£.
Hsu Yun-ts’iaoiff" ^ * fNotes on Tan-tan*,JH~'RAS, 20,

1, 19U7, *4-7-63*

Hn-lai-a shih ^ ^ik ^ » Singapore, 1961.

Huard, P. and Wong, M* fEvolution de la mati&re mddicale

chinoise1, Janus, U7> 1958#

?Bio-bibllographle de la m^deeine chinolse1, BSEI. 31# 3#

1956, 181-246.
La mddecine chlnol8e au cours des si£cles, Paris, 1959*

Hudson, G.F. Europe and China. A survey of their relations

from the earliest times to 1800. London, 1931*

Hultsche, IS. Archaeological Survey of India, South Indian

inscriptions. Tamil inscriptions of Ra;]ara#

1a, Ra.lendra-

Chola « and others . Madras, 1891.

Hummel, A.W. 'The Printed Herbal of 12U9T» Isis. 33# 1941»

439—U42 #
Jalaka. The Jataka or stories of the Eudaha's former lirths.

Translated from the Pali by various hands and edited by

E.B. Cowell, 6 vols., Cambridge, 1895-1913.

Julien, B . Mdthode pour de chlffrer et transcrire les noms

Banscrits qui se recontrent dans les livres Chinols ...

Invent£e et demontrde par M. Stanislaus J u IIg d . Paris, 1861

Justinian* Corpus Juris Civilia. Vol. 1: Instltutiones

Digests. Ed. Mommsen, Berlin, 1872-95*

Kao, \Y*T* 'A primary Chinese record relating to Ho-lo-tan,

and miscellaneous note© on Srivijaya and Fo-che', JMBRAS,

29, 1, 1956, 163-78*

Karlgren, B* Orammata Serlca recensa, second edition,

Stockholm, 1957*

Kehding, F* 'Notice of Notes on the Sultanate of Siak by

H.A. Hymans van Anroij*, JSERAS. 17, 1886, 151-7*

Kern, H. 'Een Chineesch reiziger op Sumatra (i-tsing 672-645

A.D*/, Versnrelde Geschriften, 6 , 1917, 211-220 (first

published in T I M * 1897).

K r o m , h .J * De Sumatraanlsche pcriode der Javaansche

geschie-deniB, Leiden, 1919*

Hlndoe-Javaansche geschicdenis, The Hague, second edition,

1931.
'Hot Hlndoe Tljdperk*, in Qesehiedenis van Nederlandsch-

Tndie, Amsterdam, 1933, ed* F.VV. Stapel, vol. 1.

fDe Ileillgdomen van Palembang', Hededeelingen der

Koninklijke Nederl ana ache Akadernie van Wetenachappen*

7, 1938, 397-423 *
^4 J. |
Kuwabara Jitsuzo* f0n P'u Shou-keng , a man of the
°i

western region who was the superintendent of the Trading

Ship's orfice in Ch'uan-chou towards the end of the Sung

dynasty MTB* no. 2, 1928, and no* 7, 1935*

Lamb, A. 'Report on the excavation and reconstruction of

Chandi Bukit Batu Pahat, central Kedah', Federation

Museums Journal. V, I960, 1-108*

 582.

Lams ter, J*C# *Handelare1sen in Ooot-Xndle voor 2000 Jaarf»

Tldd* vau het Koninkli.lk TTedftr* sard* qenootQ. U5, 1S28,

951—9 •
Langen, K#P*H. Van inrich ting’Van het Atjehsche otmats-

bestuur order het Oultanaat', Pi.Id* 37# 1888, 38l-h?l*

Laufer, B* *Asbestos and Salamander* An essay in Chinese and

Hellenistic folk-lore1, T P # 16, 1915, 299-373*

’Vidsi^a anl cuiebs*, T £ f 16, 1915# 2S2-288.

Sino-Iranlca: Chinese.contributions to the history of

civilisation in nneient Iran, with special reference to

the history of cultivated plants and products. FieId

Huseum of Hatur&l History, Publication 201 (Anthropological

Denies), vol* 5, no* 3, Chicago, 1919*

Leur, J*C* Vun* J; done a inn trade nnd society*Hr.says in

Aslan noctal nnd economic hlotor.v* The Hague, 1955*

Ldvi, 8# •Pourifhistoirc du PSmnvnpn*« £A, 1918, 1-160*

•Pr^-Ary^n et prd-Pravidion dsme l ’lnclo1, J£, «Xuil«-Sapt*

1923# 1-57*
1Ptol5u5e, Le Hiddcsa et la LphatkathS*, t u d A s 1alienee*

Paris, vol# 2, 1925# 1-55 and 1*31-2#

,HLes march-:.u-do de morM et leur role dans le bouddhieme

primitiff, Bulletin A^rocin.tlon Amis de lt0rient, 7# 1929,

19-39.
^Haplrnekhala, o divinity of the sea1, IHQ* 6, 1938, 597-6lh
 583.

#0n ManiraekhalS. H the guardian deity of the IHQ.# 7,

1931, 173-5; 371-6.

1K ’ouen-loucn et Bvlpantara1, Bi.ld. 88 , 1931, 621-7.

Li Chien-nung ^ ^ ♦ Wei Chin Nan Pel C h ’ao Sui T ’ang

chlng ehi shih kao %% ^ ^ ^

, Peking, 1959.

Ligny, J.R. *Legen&arische herkomst der kamfer Baraes*, T1 .id,

63, 1923, 549-55.

Loeb, Sumatra. Its history and people(in which is

included Heine-Geldern, R. von, The archaeology and art

of Sumatra, Vienna, 1935.

Lohaisen-de-leeuv?, J.E. van. fIndia and its cultural empire11,

Orientallem and History. Cambridge, 1954, 34-56.

Lu Ssu-mierj ^ .Lianjr Chin Nan Pel Chfao shlh+ '

t&i % $ it i*{\ , Shanghai, 1948.

Luce, G.H. ’Countries neighbouring Burma1, JBRS, 14, 2, 1925,

133-209.
Lung Po-ehien ^ . Hsln ts’un ten ts’ao shu lu ^

$t a , Jen min wei sheng ch* u pan she, Peking, 1957

?-Ta Nien-tsu • Shui chli 'R chu ten# ua chunn ku chi

yin yung shu mu hui pien >JC ^ \ ) $1

% $ % k.P\ , Shanghai, 195S.

Malty, Sachindra Kumar. Economic life of northern India in

the Gupta period. Calcutta, 1957.

Ma jumda r, R .C . Ancient Indian colonies in the Far Kaat; vol.2.

Suvarnadvlpa. Part 1. Political history (Dacca. 1937):

 58U.

Part 2, Cultural history (Calcutta, 193$)•

Malleret, L. *The buried Town of Oc-Eo and the Funanese

sites of Transbassac in Cochin-China*, ABIA, 15» 19U0-7#

51-6.

Marcellinus Ammianus* Res gestae, translated by J.C* Rolfe

(Loeb Cia sical Library), London, 3 vols, 1935-9*

Marsden, William* The history of Sumatra, containing; an

account of the government* laws* customs. and manners

of the native inhabitants, with a description of the

natural productions, and a relation of the ancient

political state of that island* 3rd edition, London, 1811*

Maspero, G. Le royaume de Champa. Paris, 1928.

Maspero, K. *L,exp^dition de Ma Yuan*, BEFEO, 18, 3# 1918#

11-28*

fLes proc^clds de "nourrir le principe vital,f dans la

religion taoiste ancienne*, JA, 1937# 2 and 3# 177-252,

313-U30.

Melanges posthumes sur les religions et I ’histolre de la

hlstolre de la Chine, 11, Le Taoisme, Paris, 1950.

’Influences occidentales en Chine avant les Han*, Melange3

posthumes sur les religions et I ’histolre de la Chine,

III: Studes historioues, Paris, 1950, 37-51*

Mather, H*B* Biography of Lu Kuang* Translated and Annotated*

University of California, 1959*

Miller, 'd•A . Accounts of western nations In the history of

the Northern Chou dynasty* University of California, 1959*

 585*

Minorsky, V* ’Some early documents in Persian (1)>, JRA3.

191+2, 181-91+.

Modi, J.J* ’A Christian Cross with a Pahlevi inscription

recently discovered in the Travancore State* f Journal of

Bombay Branch of the R.A.3., 2, 1, 1926, 1-18.

Moens, J.L. ’Srlvijaya, Jdva en KaJ&ha*, Tlrffl. 77# 3# 1937#

317-1+87* Abridged English translation by R.J. de Touchd,

JMBRAS. 17# 2, 19UO, 1-108.

*t>e Noord-Sumatraanse rijken der parfums en specerijen in

Voor-floslimse tijd*, Ti.jdschrift (Mad.jalah), 85# 1+#

1955-7* 325-6U.
Moreland, 17,H# Peter Floris. His voyage to the East Indies in

the ’Globe*, I6ll-l6l5* Hakluyt Society, second series,

vol. 74# London, 1934*

Moule, A.C. and Pelliot, P. Marco Polo; the description of

the world. 2 vols, London, 1938.

itus, P. *L*Inde vue de l*Est. Cultes indiens et indigenes

au Champfl.*, BEFEQ. 33# 1933# 367-1+10.

Naerssen, F.K. van. *The $ailendra interregnum*, India

Antigua. Leiden, 191+7# 21+9-253.

Needham, J . Science and civilisation in Chinaf Vol. 2. History

of scientific thought. Cambridge, 1956.

Nicholas, C.W, ’Sinhalese Naval Power*, University of Ceylon

Review. 16, 3-1+, 1958, 78-92.

Nilakanta Sastri, K.A. *A Tamil merchant-guild in Sumatra’^

 586.

Tiiid. 72, 1932, 314-27*

’The beginnings of intercourse between India and China1,

IHQ. 14, 1938, 380-7.

’Ka^dha’, JGIS. 5, 1938, 128-U6.

’Dvlpuntara’, JGIS, 9, 1942, 1-4.

#The Tamil land and the eastern colonies’, JGIS. 11, 1944#

26-8 .
History of Sri VI.laya (Sir William Meyer Lectures, 1946-

1947), Madras, 1949*

Obdei^n, V. fGegevene ter identificeering van oude

Sumatraansphe toponiemenf, Ti.1d aard. 61, 1, 1944, 40-66.

raris, P. ’Note sur deux passages de Strabon et de Pline dont

l ’intdret n ’est pas seulement nautique’, JA, 1951, 13-27*

Parker, E .K . Burma with special reference to her relations

■1th China. Rangoon, 1893*

fThe island of Sumatra’, The Imperial and Asiatic

Quarterly Review and Oriental and Colonial Record, Woking,

third series, 9# 1900, 127-144*

Pelliot, P. ’Le Fou-nan’, B E F E O . 3, 1903, 21+8-330.

’Deux itlndraires de Chine en Inde h. la fin du VIBe

sibcle’ , BEFEO. 4, 1904, 131-413*

’Review of F. Hirth and W.W. Rockhill’s ’Chau Ju-kua’j

TP, 13, 1912, 446-81.

fLi-Kien, autre nom du Ta-ts’in (Orient Mediterranean)1,

TP, 16, 1915, 690-1.

 ’Meou-tseu ou les doutes levds’, TP, 19, 1920, 255-433*

’La thdorie des quatre Fils du Cielf, TP, 22, 1923,

97-125*
’Quelques textes chinois concernnnt l ’Indochine hindouisde’,

EA, 1925, 2, 243-63.

•Review of Toyohachi Fujita’s MSur Yeh-t’iao, Szu-t’iao,

et Szu-he-t'iao etc’V , TP, 29, 1932, 181-1+.

’Les grands voyages maritimes chinois au ddbut do XVe

si&cle', TP, 30, 1933, 274-452.

fLe Hoja et le Sayyid Husain de 1 ’Histoire des Ming’,

TP, 38, 1948, 81-292.

Notes on Marco Polo, (ouvrage posthume), vol. 1, Paris, 195$

Penzer, N.M. The ocean of story; being C.H. T-wney’s trans­

lation of Somadeva’s Katha Sarlt Sagara. 10 vols., London,

1924.
Perera, B.J. ’The foreign trade and commerce of ancient

Ceylon, 1. The ports of Ancient Ceylon’, The Ceylon

Historical Journal. 1, 2, 1951, 109-119.

’The foreign trade and commerce of Ancient Ceylon, 11.

Ancient Ceylon and its trade with India’, The Ceylon

Historical Journal. 1, 3, 1952, 192-204.

’The foreign trade and commerce of ancient Ceylon. III.

Ancient Ceylon’s trade with the empires of the eastern

and western worlds’, The Ceylon Historical Journal,1,

4, 1952, 301-20 .
Petech, L* ’Some Chinese texts concerning Ceylon’ , The Ceylon

Historical Journals 3* 195k f 3 and 4, 217-227•

^Jndia according to the Shut chin# chu. Rome, 1950.

Phillips, G. ’Notes on Sumatra and the Po-szu’, Notes and

Queries on China and Japan. 3, 6 # 1869, 90-92.

Picard, C* ’La lampe alexandrine de P ’ong T3k*, AA, 18, 1955#

137-11+9.
Pigeaud, T.G. Th. Java in the 11+th century. A study in

cultural history. 1. Javanese texts in transcription.

3rd edition, The Hague, i960*

Pliny. Natural History. Translated by H. Rackham (W.H.S. Jones)

1938-1952 (The Loeb Classical Library), London, 9 vols,

1938-52.

Procopius. History of the Wars. Translated by IT.P. Dewing,

(Loeb Classical Library), 7 vols, London, 1911+-19UO.

Przyluski, J. ’Les Vidydra^a. Contribution h l ’histoire de

la magie les sectes mahayanistes, BEFEO. 23, 1923, 301-18.

’Indian colonisation in Sumatra before the seventh century’

JGIS. 1, 2, 193U, 92-101.

Read, B.E. (with Liu Ju-ch’ang), Chinese medicinal Plants from

the Pen Ts’ao Kang Mu. A.D. 1596 ... a Botanical. Chemical,

and Pharmacological Reference List, Peking Natural History

Bulletin, 1936.

Reinaud, J.T. Relations des voyages faits par les Arabes et les

Persans dans 1’Inde dans le IXe ai&cle de l ’&re chr^tlenne.

2 vols, Paris, 181+5*

 ’Relations politiqueo et comraercialec de l fempire romain

avec l ’Asie oriental’, JA, 6 s£rie, tome i, 1863# 93-23h;

297-W+l.
Renaudot, Abbe E. Anciennes relations des Indes et de la

Chine, de deux voyageurs mahomdtana qui y all&rent dans

le neuvibme sihcle. Paris, 1718*

Renou, L. La G^ographle de Ptol^m^e, 1 ’lnle (VII* 1-1+) . Paris,

1925.
Robequain, C. Malaya, Indonesia. Borneo, and the Philippines

(translated by E.D* Laborde), first edition, London, 195U.

Roi, J, and Ou Yun-joei* ’Le Taoisme de les plantes

d ’immortality’, Bulletin de 1 ’University l’Aurore*,

series 3 # vol. 2 , no. k$ 19U 1 , 535-51+5 .

’Traits des plantes mddicinales chinoiseB’ , Encyclopydie

blologique. 1+7, Paris, 1955.

Rouifaer, G.P. ’Was 1'alaka emporium voor 11+00 A.D. genaamd

Kalajoer ? Biid. 77, 1921, 1-17U* 359-569.

Rygaloff, A. ’Dissertation sur le montage et le doublage’,

JA, 191+8, 105-113.

Sanmuganathan, 8. Report on the Archaeological Survey of Ceylon

for 1950. Colombo, 1951, G 15.

Sauvaget, J. 1Ahbar as-Sin wa’1-Hinds Relation de la China et

de I ’lwde. redigye’ en 851. Paris, 19U8.

’Sur d ’anciennes instructions nautiques arabes pour le©

mers de l’Inde, JA, 191+8, 11-20.

 590.

Schafer, E.H* ’Rosewood, Dragon’s Blood, and Lac’ , JAOS, 77,

2 , 1957, 129-136.
Schlegei, G. ’Geographical notes’, TP;

(1) ’The Hicobar and Andaman Islands’, 9, 1393, 177-90*

(3) 'H o - l i n g W l Ka-ling', 9,1898, 273-87.

(11) 'Ho-lo-tan 0s) 1^1 ^ or Kllantan^ Q , Kalaatan

or Kelaritan’, vol. 10, I899, 159-63.

(13) ’Tan-tan $ or Dan-dan ^ , Dondin

10 , 1899, 459-63.
Schnitger, F.L!* The archaeology of Hindoo Sumatra, Leiden, 1937*

Forgotten kingdoms in Sumatra. Leiden, 1939*

Schoff, W.H* The Perlplus of the Erythraean Sea* Philadelphia,

1912 .
’Camphor’, JAOS, 42, 1922, 355-370.

6hrieke, B* Indonesian Sociological Studies. Part 2. Ruler

and Realm in early Java. The Hague, 195/.

Shiratori, K. ’A study of T ’iao-chih^fl afT B . 15,

1956, 1-23.

’Chinese ideas reflected in the Ta-ch’in^- accounts’ t

WTBf 15, 1956, 24-72.

’The geography of the western regions studies on the basis

of the Ta-ch’in account’, CTB. 15, 1956, 73-163.

Simeonis Sethi. Syntagma de alimentorum facultatibus. Lispiae,

1868.
 591

Sion, J, *Sur l ’ethnographie de l’Indochine et de l fInsulinde*,

Annales de Geographic. 33» 192U, 390-2.

Smith, S • ’Events in Arabia in the 6th century A.D.*, BSOAS.

X6, 3, 195Uf U25-U68.

Soekmono*. ’Early civilisations of Southeast Asia*, JS5. h6,

1, 17- 20 #

Sokol, A.E. *Communication and production in Indonesian

history’, Far Eastern Quarterly# 7> k* 19U8, 339-353*

Soper, A# ’South Chinese influence on the Buddhist art of the

Six Bynastles period*, Bulletin use urn Far Eastern

Antiquities, 32, I960, h7-H2.

Steenis, C#0.G.J# van. ’Hoofdlijnen van de Plantengeografie

van de Indische Archipel op grond van de verspreiding der

phanerogamenges^lachten*, Ti.jd aarfl.65# 2, 19U8, 193-208.

Stein, I<*A. *Le Lin-yi, ea localisation •#.*, Han-hiue,

Peking, 2, 1-3, 19U7, l-h/6#

’Jardins en miniature d*Extreme-0rient*, BEFEO. U2, 19k2,

1-10U#

Strabo. The geopvaohy. Translated by II.L. Jones, (t&ue Loeb

Classical Library), 8 vols, London, 1917-1932.

Stuart, G*A. Chinese materia medlca. Shanghai, 1911#

Stutterheim, W.F* A Javanese period in Sumatran history,

Surakarta, 1929#

Sugimoto, Nao^ird* Tonan A ,11a shl kenkyd, 1, Tokyo, 1956•

Susruta sat^iitlS. Translated by Kaviraj Kun;Ja Lai Bhishagratna*

3 vols*, Calcutta, 1507 ~ 1916* j

Takakusu, J. A record of the Buddhist religion as practised |

In India and the Malay Archipelago (671-695 A.D«) by ]

I-Tslm-* Oxford, 1896.

T*ao Hsi-sheng and Wu Iisleng-ch* ing PlQ j

Nan pel chyao chlng chi shih it , Shanghai, j

1937 . 1 3

Tatarinov, A* Cataloaus Nedlcamentorum Slnenslum* St. Petersburg

1856 *

Temple, R.C* The travels of Peter Mundy in Europe and Asia* i

1608-1667* Hakluyt Society, Series 2, vols. 17, 35, 45,

55, 78* London, 1914-36*

Teng Ssu-yu and Eiggerataff, K. An annotated bibliography of

selected Chinese reference works* revised edition,

Cambridge, Mass, 1950*

Tibbetts, G.R, 'Pre-Islamic Arabia and South-East Asia1, JMBRAS,

29, 3, 1956, 182-208* ;

Tsfai Ching-feng i t # • ’T ^ o Hung-ching H S ^>L % ' J

Chang kuo ku tal k*o hsueh chla $ 15 #^0 •T^'

fro hsueh chfu pan she, 1959, 83-87*

Tsuboi Kuraazo. *Cheu Chfufe#s auf zeichnungen uber die

fremden lander • *#*, A ctes du douzi^me conCT&s international

des orientalistes. Florence, 2, 1899, 69-125*

 593,

XJllen&orff, S* The Ethiopians. An Introduction to country

and people « London, 1960#

Vastliev, A#A* Justin the Firsts An introduction to the Epoch

of Justinian the Great, Harvard University Press, 1950#

Vuuren, L. van* fDe handei van Earocs, als oudste haven op

Sumatra1s we&tku; t, Yerklaard; en voor de toekomst

fceschouv/d* *■ Tiifl nnrd. 25, 6, 1908, 1389-1U02*

wada, H* fA Chinese Embassy to the wsouthern sea countries0

at the middle of the 7th century* f Toyo flakuhgt Eenortg

of the Research Department of the Oriental Society* Tokyo,

33, 1, 1950, 61+-7U.

wads, Sei* fThe Philippines Islands as known to the Chinese

before the Eing periodf r *rn~oirs of the Research

Department of the r‘oya Punko* h, 1929, 121-166*

Wales, H*o* Quaritch* •A n w l y explored route of ancient

Indian expansion*, TAP, 9, 1, 1935, 1-31•

Wang G n^vru* fTha Nanhai trade, A study on the early history

of Chinese trade In the Couth China Seaf, J VTP?AS* 31, 2,

195a, 1-135*

Pang Yu-kf4 i. * Chunjsr ktao rump: hsueh shu lu

$ % ^ , Shanghai, 1957.

Wang Yu-t#unf* S l a v e s and other comparable social groups

during the northern Dynasties (386-61B)1, T-tjA?, IS, 1953,

293-36h.
 594.

Wa rm ing to n , E .H • The commerce between the Roman Empire and

India, Cambridge, 1928.

Watt, G . A dictionary of the economic produc s of India,

6 volumes, Calcutta, I889-I 896.

The commercial products of India, Calcutta, 1 9 0 i,

Wheatley, P. ’Geographical notes on some commodities involved

in Sung maritime trade’, J ''BRAS, 32, 2, 1959, 1-11*0.

The Golden Khersonese. Studies in the historical veograohr

of the Malay eninsula before A.D, 1300* Kuala Lumpur, 196l<

Wheeler, Sir Mortimer, and others. ’Arikamedu. An Indo-Roman

trading station on the east coast of India’, Ancient

India, 2, 191*6, 17-121*.

’Archaeology and the transmission of ideas’, Antiquity,

26, 1952, 180-192.

Wolters, O.W. ’Tambraliftga’, PSOAS, 21, 3, 1958, 587-607.

’The "Fo-tisu pine trees'” , BOO A S , 23, 2, i960 , 323-350.

Wong, K. Chimin and Wu Lien-teh. astor-.y of Chinese Medicine.

Tientsin, 193-•

Yamada, K. ’Introduction of An-hsi-hsia .gin China and that of

Hum benzoin in Europe’, Report of the Institute of World

Economics, Kinki University, 195U-5, 5, 1-21*; 7, 1-30.

Tozai koyaku shi, second edition, Tokyo, 1957.

Yang Lien-sheng. ’Notes on the eco omic history of the Chin

dynasty’, TTJAS. 9 , 191*5-7, 107-85.

 ?.'ap I
len e r a l mao o: tern
Indo .e aia
P A T A N I

Ktf) A K $ L A N T A N

^I^LNpAMI)
f*Z WAT UK)A
l\A~i Pa r a N(j
•o-
act A * \ o A n a m fta 3 I
^ l ^ \ S? m P A N A I/OMAM t •'
6 A ( l o ^ / SiAK JOHOVtt

^ Woowt%.. O
M So(LU)4^k*,P|
0
_ S / w c a Po a g .
o
- k ■ S>RH 10 AH. CK
SAMftA^^
\
.; KA-m P k R R. KK f o Z h S
A A CA \ o'

fCort.1Kj*tjI
A <L Ac Kj Cf KAR ATA\ I
0A
M N 5 A N C K A
\
'' p f t IL Lt7 O #J

^ S ib**tkpT U L * ^ ftAWAWCj

ftA L f

0 /<o 300 If*0 6oo

..—A..*.. .in■I'nAiwr^.i miles approx. )
Land over 1,500 i'eet
M aritime trade routes of South Fast Asia (c. A.D. 250)

Explanatory note

(i) I have not committed myself to an exact location

£°r Ko-.ying on the south-eastern coast of umatra

(see pages 97-101);

u
(ii) my Justification for identifying Ss u- t 1iao with

all or part of t e island of Java is on page 95

and pages 98-101;

(iii) I have been guided by Professor Wheatley in

respect of Tun - s u n 1s position (Golden K h er sonese,

Fig. U 6 ) . The information about Chu-chih/Chu-li

is summarised on page 79 above.

 597.

^aritiine trade routes of Aouth.

Sast Asia (c . A.D. 250)
CAMTOW
Trans-Asian route

CHO-CH I'H /'CHO- LI

V -•*
O
w n 11
IfOO 6oo (.QOO
 590.

Wap 3

The *tributary* kingdoms of South East Asia (A.D. U30 - A.D. 610)

Explanatory note

In 430 Uo-lo~tan sent Its first mission to China. Ch*ang Chun

returned to China in 610. There is plenty of scope for

misunderstanding when one commits to a map the imprecise

geographical indications in the Chinese texts relating to this

period, and I wish to avoid being quoted as discovering the

exact sites of these toponyms.

(i) I have Indicated thus what I believe was

the major ocean highway in these centuries. Less

important sailing routes are indicated thus: ;

(ii) my conclusion concerning the location of the favoured

trading coast of Indonesia is marked thus: • ;

(iii) kingdoms known to the Chinese in this period, but not

as a result of missions from them, are enclosed in

brackets;

(iv) I have accepted 'rofessor Wheatley’s location of

P*an-pfa n , Lang-ya-hsiu. and Ch*lh T* u on the Malay

(Golden Khersonese. Pig. Ii7);

(v) I have assumed that Kan-tfo-li in its prime controlled

the adjacent harbours of Jambi and Palembang., Prom

the textB, however, it is not possible to conclude

 more than that it was the proto-Malayu in the sense

of Jambi, Talembang, or both (see pages );

(vi) my reasons for locating the port of P to-lu « fBarus*

at the extreme nort' of Sumatra are on pages 395-U08;

(vii) P yo-lo-so*s position is based on the seventh century

information about p*o-lo tsee pages 393-U nnd U09)*

This Is the location which seems most probable for

P* o-Io-so;

(viii) faute de mieux I have placed P*o~huang in the region

of Tulang Bawang (see pages 4 4 )5

(ix) there is no certainty for the location of Ho-lo~tan*

The choice seems to be between Palembang and somewhere

in western Java, and I have preferred the latter

alternative (see p a g e s )>

(x) there are very strong grounds for locating Tan-tan

an<i P*o-li in Java and in that order (see pages 4-/y -

I do not, however, want to be quoted as

suggesting that they should be associated with

particular archaeological sites in Java, though I

consider that P fo-li with its long coastline, was

al o-t certainly somewhere in the eastern half of the

island* The Chinese may even have thought that Bali

was part of the P fo-li kingdom, for it is difficult

to believe that the crude population of ho-ch*a

included the Balinese;

 oOO •

(x*) Lo-ch*a isa name connected by the Chinese with the

population of the eastern Archipelago (see pages

If it is objected that the Chinese would

not have described the people of Kutei in eastern

Borneo, with their Brahman3, as 1demons1, the reply

must be that the Chinese are unlikely-to have heard

of Kutei in the fifth and sixth centuries;

(xii) I do not give an exact location for Vijayapura in

•vestern Borneo, tut I regard its position there as

certain;

(xlii) I have not at empted to plot P*o-ta on the map. My

suggestion is that it was somewhere in Java (see

page^-Cfe ).
 -v.

iy-ap 3

•The 'tributai.y 1 Icin^donis o:

oouth East Asia

7 0 N q K/ tJ (j

FUNAN

A.-fa SI U

^KANTOll
»CO HUMJ
 >:o2 .

Western Indonesia in A.D. 695

Explanatory note

Here, too, I wish to protect myself from being quoted in support

of exact locations for* some of these kingdoms. On this map 1

indicate

(i) the location, but only in terms of islands, of the

prominent topanyms of western Indonesia in A.D. 695,

the year when I Tsing finally left the region for

China. I have assumed that ho-yueh on the Malay

Peninsula was a seventh century toponym which survived

Long enough to be recorded by Chia Tan (see page 396

and page ilb ). I have omitted certain minor toponyms

in order to reduce the element of speculation. These

are:

(a) Mo-ho-hsln« between Srlvijaya-Palembang and Ho­

ling; (page^S);
(k) To-lu-roo« mentioned in connexion with Tan-tan

(page 440. ) i

(c) To-p^-te. g * mentioned in connexion ,vith Howling

(page^63 ) }
(d) the places mentioned by I Tsing as lying beyond

Vijayapura (psge 339);

 503 .
(ii) the trading coast, offshore islands, and waters which

X believe were dominated by the fleets of Srlvijaya

In 695# But I do not know what was the relationship

at that time between Srlvtjaya and western Java. X

imagine that Srlvijaya attempted some form of

surveillance of the shipping activities of western

Java, and I have indicated this possibility by broken

liijes ;r - j

X do not suggest exact locations for Ho-lln&. Tan-tan, and

r yo-ll. ough I am confident that they e e all in Java and

that I have plotted them in their correct Juxtaposition*

Chueh-lun is the name of the population of the eastern

Archipelago (see pages ,

 504 .

M ap 4-

W e s t e r n Indonesia in A.D. 695

■- -■ I T .i ~ r
, - -... V
Ma.jor shipping routes:
vlinor shipping routes: -* —
Coasts and waters dominated by
the fleet of orivijaya:

CANTOM

J)V/ A HAv V A T |

CH£N-LA

a> G vn^ h '*-ShU'/

POR.T o p *r5>a. k jj 3-

0 ^ 0 «H

^ NAWO-JAMM
^ T v i J A^^PKLknbhU
 Sou'ch

'iUNN/KtJ

— CA N'To M

(OUTH C H Itv)A SEA

PWILI ppines

S O U T H C H I MA $ £A o
ULF
OF //G ST JACQUtS
SIA^
l I€
jO A V>ULO coMJoflf
»faico (Sa (L l

SOOTH CH I M / \ SEA,
6duwe r

OOdMliO

OANJAfciMASiM

JAI/A