It is probable that the overwhelming majority of those people who engaged in the prosecution of the Albigensian crusade found little need to justify their participation to others, least of all to themselves. That the pope had called for a crusade against the Albigensians was more than adequate justification in itself and in most cases it is more likely that an excuse, rather than a justification, was sought before joining the crusade. Justification, if it concerned any, was perhaps used mostly by those who sympathised with the Albigensian Cathars and found themselves compelled, for one reason or another, to take part in their attempted eradication.
However, the extent to which the eradication of heresy was a prime motive for taking part in the crusade is difficult to elucidate as so many different motives applied at the time. These included the broader political interests of France and Spain (Aragon) but at a lower level, motives were contingent upon the position the person or group in question occupied in the social strata, the beliefs of individual participants, the enticements they were offered and the threats of punishment for non compliance.
With the news that Peter of Castelnau had been murdered - allegedly by an associate or vassal of the Cathar sympathiser Count Raymond VI of Toulouse[1] - Pope Innocent III's call for a crusade against the Cathar heretics of Languedoc was not at first greeted with much enthusiasm by those whom he hoped would be willing and eager take up arms against them. There was, from the church's point of view, ample justification for the prosecution of the crusade. Its leaders seem to have sincerely believed that unless the heretical iniquity in Languedoc was soon overcome, the whole of Christian Europe would come under its corruptive influence.[2] Indeed the Church believed that it was combating principles that could lead directly not only to the ruin of Christianity, but to the very extinction of the human race.[3]
However, the church's conviction that heresy should be eradicated did not mean, ipso facto, that the actual participants in the crusade went along with or even cared about the church's justifications or that they needed any self justification to embark upon a crusade. Any participant, if called upon to justify his participation, could simply fall back on the excuse that the pope had ordered it and he was unlikely to be challenged by anyone. Indeed, who would the participant need to justify his actions to? there being no higher authority than the pope. This state of affairs, it is easy to imagine, left the crusader almost impervious to criticism or prosecution and gave him considerable leeway when it came to plunder, pillage and the acquisition of booty.
It should be borne in mind that crusades were so recurrent in the 13th century as to be almost a way of life. In his book The Albigensian Crusades Joseph Strayer[4] makes the point that
"….Almost every year during that century [13th] a Crusade was being planned or was actually being waged…"
There were a variety of reasons why men embarked upon these crusades but for the most part there had to be some benefit, material or otherwise, to make a man leave the known relative security of his home for a term of military service in some far flung place, the outcome of which seemed uncertain to say the least.
The benefits and inducements offered by the pope in return for military service in the Albigensian crusade were virtually the same as were usually given to those who took part in a fully fledged crusade to wrest Jerusalem from the "infidel" and must have been recognised by all to have been easier to come by. A crusade in one's own country where, if the worst came to the worst, the crusader could pack up and walk home after a 40 day stint[5] must have presented itself as a golden opportunity compared with an indeterminate period away in a foreign country with only something like a 40% chance of returning home at all.
It is impossible to estimate what proportion of those who took the cross did so to gain remissions of their sins but Innocent made it so easy for the participants to fulfill their crusading vows that we can safely assume that it was sizeable. The lands of Languedoc were comparatively rich and the crusade was the most attractive ever. William of Tudela writing at or near the time tells us
"Then, once they knew that their sins would be forgiven, men took the cross in France and all over the kingdom. Never in my life have I seen such a gathering as that one they made against the heretics…"[6]
Participation in the crusade could replace any other form of penance, any loot taken had a good chance of returning home instead of being lost en route from the Holy Land and after 40 days one could return to the farm and take over from one's brother or father who could then go off and gain remission for his sins also. This was the closest the man on the land was ever likely to get to automatic entry into heaven and all for 40 days work. The eradication of heresy as a prime motive for taking the cross must have diminished somewhat in the light of these terms and conditions.
All of the foregoing reasons applying to those at the lower end of the social order applied too, to those on the next rung up the ladder - those from knightly families. Here the inducements made the venture even more worthwhile. This was the age of chivalry and the quickest and easiest place to be knighted was in the field immediately prior to a battle when many of the lengthy formalities and qualifications associated with gaining knighthood were dispensed with.[7] Thus, in this crusade more than any other, young knights could distinguish themselves in battle against opponents not known for their fighting skills[8] and aspirants stood a good chance of being knighted. If all this was not enough to induce, there was also the possibility for the knight that he may be awarded land confiscated from the heretics. Ambition and self aggrandisement as motives for taking part must have ranked high on the list of the young knight or noble. Those of the landed gentry and nobility who might be disadvantaged at home while they were away in the south were also catered for - the church, in effect, contracted to protect their estates while they were away.[9]
Innocent found it necessary to offer these rewards simply because of the lukewarm response to his call for the crusade, the import of which being that people were less than enthused by the idea of eradicating heresy. Such was Innocent's plight with regard to his inability to enthuse the nobility that he found it necessary to threaten those who refused to take up arms with excommunication and interdict.[10] From this we must assume that some of the nobility went on crusade because they were fearful of the consequences should they fail to do so. This fear was reinforced in 1215 when at the Fourth Lateran Council, which granted privileges and indulgences to those who would take the cross, vassals were virtually invited to quit their allegiance to rulers who were negligent in their attempts to eradicate heresy.
Canon 3 on Heresy stated:
"….But if a temporal ruler, after having been requested and admonished by the Church, should neglect to
cleanse his territory of this heretical foulness, let him be excommunicated by the metropolitan and the other bishops of the province. If he refuses to make satisfaction within a year, let the matter be made known to the supreme pontiff, that he may declare the ruler's vassals absolved from their allegiance and may offer the territory to be ruled by lay Catholics, who on the extermination of the heretics may possess it without hindrance and preserve it in the purity of faith…"[11]
In the face of such a declaration from the all powerful church - and a simultaneous preaching mission which helped ensure that vassals knew what had been agreed at the Council - some of the nobility no doubt took the cross in order maintain the status quo on their estates.
During the first decade of the crusade the church appealed to, or threatened, every sector of society in its attempts to get the campaign underway and continued to do so in order to maintain its momentum once it had overcome the initial inertia of a populace who were not greatly interested in stamping out heretics on religious grounds. These appeals and threats included both direct and indirect approaches to the kings of France albeit not with a satisfactory outcome in the initial stages
When Henry the abbot of Clairvaux wrote to Louis VII proposing royal intervention in the crusade, Louis consulted with Henry II of England (the two kings had only recently agreed on a cessation of hostilities between their respective countries) and replied that his intervention would not be as productive as an implied threat of force from a mission of ecclesiastics with a military escort.[12] Louis' son Philip II (Augustus) however, recognising that the crown would profit from the destruction of the Albigensian Cathars, somewhat reluctantly became involved in the crusade and allowed 500 knights and their accompanying foot soldiers to enter the fray, but he would not go himself. He told Innocent III that he had too much on his hands to participate personally.[13] The victories gained by Philip's vassals against the Albigensians though, prepared the ground for the eventual annexation of southern France by King Louis IX.
By the time that Philip's successor, Louis VIII, was approached in 1224 a new pope was in office, Honorius III. It took some time for Louis VIII and Honorius III to strike a deal but when the loose ends were eventually tied up Louis committed a considerable and overwhelming force to the war in the south. However, the king's motives had little, if anything, to do with the eradication of heretics. He had been excommunicated and he needed to make his peace with the church.[14] With a great deal of stealth, deceit and political manoeuvering the church managed, in 1226, to offer Louis VIII too attractive a package to refuse, including as it did his right to posses the lands of Count Raymond VII,[15] of Toulouse and a substantial bonus in the form of one tenth of the ecclesiastical revenues of the French clergy for a period of five years.[16] The killing of heretics under such circumstances must have been viewed as little more than a by product of a self financing war waged to gain territory.
At the outset the Albigensian crusade was heavily politicised and it was to become more so over the next two decades. In 1209 when Raymond VI of Toulouse (who had been excommunicated) was taken back into the church, he took the cross in the crusade. This was an adroit political move which placed his lands under the protection of the church. However, a crusading army which was on its way to attack Raymond at the time refused to disband and, instead, headed for the lands of Raymond's rival and neighbour, Viscount Raymond-Roger Trencavel. Trencavel had never been accused of heresy but nevertheless, when confronted with an army on his doorstep, deemed submission to be preferable to valour and submitted totally. By this time the crusading army seems to have forgotten that their professed motive for joining up was the eradication of heresy, for they captured the Trencavel town of Beziers and slaughtered all the inhabitants - Cathar and Catholic alike.[17]
By contrast, according to William of Tudela, when Carcassone was captured by the same crusading army, all the inhabitants were allowed to leave and the invaders simply went ahead and collected the booty into a single heap and began to share out the city's livestock.[18] In this instance however, they were brought to heel by the Abbot of Citeaux who announced that the church would excommunicate and curse them if they took so much as a piece of charcoal which did not belong to them. This would seem to indicate that the motives of the bishop and the army did not coincide. The church's motive did therefore, at least on the surface, appear to be the eradication of heresy, but whether it was an eradication based on purely religious grounds as opposed to financial gain is a subject for conjecture.[19]
The political ramifications of the crusaders next move brought into play outside forces with a new set of motives barely related to heresy. The Abbot of Citeaux offered the rule of the conquered Trencavel lands to the Counts of both Nevers and St. Pol but neither would accept the offer on principle.[20] Eventually, with no other takers, it was offered to Simon de Montfort who accepted.[21] The overlord of the Trencavals was Peter II of Aragon and de Montfort, delighted at the prospect of consolidating and expanding his new territories, did not bother to consult or even contact Peter II. Worse, once established in the Trencaval lands he began to attack the lands of Peter's vassals in the Pyrenees which caused Peter to complain to the pope. Alarmed at the unexpected course the crusade was taking, Innocent III began to equivocate, calling an end to the preaching of the crusade and ordering Peter's lands to be restored.
This led to a war between Aragon and the crusade which, in turn, led to wars of conquest and re-conquest in which heretics were all but forgotten. The ensuing long term settlements of land disputes were based on primogeniture involving the contemporary practice of marriage through betrothals and landholders dying without heirs. The agreements in place by the time of the Peace of Paris in 1229 ensured that the French crown was the major beneficiary.
The religious result of the Albigensian crusade had been negligible and its effectiveness in eradicating the Cathar's is questionable. Certainly it caused the majority of Carthars living in Langeudoc to go underground or move to countries where they felt less threatened.[22] Nevertheless, given that crusading armies were present in the region for the most part of the two decades it would seem reasonable to assume that Cathars could have been easily eradicated if the religious will of the participants had been anything more than token.
Throughout the Albigensian crusade there had been little need for the participants to justify their actions. Justification weighed heavily on the popes, particularly Innocent III who was sincere in his beliefs, who would have preferred to have won the Cathars over by preaching and whose inclinations to show mercy were strong.[23] These values also applied to many of the clergy who did participate but collectively they were few in number. No doubt there were some among secular society, particularly from the outer regions of France, who felt it their moral and binding duty to combat the perceived threat of heresy and justified their participation by their own religious convictions. These were people who had heard the church's proselytising propaganda, which doubtless included a good measure of exaggeration, and made an honest decision to take part in the interests of the protection of Christendom.
The eradication of heresy does not seem to have been a prime motive for participating in the Albigensian crusade but motives per se were thick on the ground. At the top of the social strata we have seen that national politics - the prospects of power and more land for the French crown - played a major role, and from this flowed a plethora of subsidiary, although no less important, motives. These came into being as inducements to participate were offered to the knights and peasantry who formed the overwhelming majority of the "soldiery" who took part. In the context of the times when just the acquisition of an extra mule to pull the family plough could make an enormous difference to one's lifestyle, the prospect of taking booty together with a plenary indulgence for one's sins must have been an attractive proposition and one which few peasants could afford not to consider. When combined with and a moratorium on their debts it was simply too good an opportunity to pass up when payment in full was a mere forty days of half hearted military service close to home.
Bibliography
1. Primary Sources
Books:
William of Tudela and an anonymous successor, The Song of the Cathar Wars; A history of the Albigensian Crusade, tr. Shirley, J. Aldershot: Scolar Press, 1996.
Electronic media:
Medieval Sourcebook: Bernard Gui: Inquisitorial Technique (c.1307-1323) http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/heresy2.html
Medieval Sourcebook: Evolution of Crusader Privileges, 1095-1270: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/cde-privs.html#albi
Medieval Sourcebook: Fourth Lateran Council: Canon 3 on Heresy 1215:
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/lat4-c3.html
2. Secondary Sources
Books:
Barber, R. The Knight and Chivalry, Ipswich: Boydell Press Ltd, 1974.
Hamilton, B. The Albigensian Crusade, London: Historical Association, 1974.
Strayer, J.R. The Albigensian Crusades, New York: The Dial Press, 1971.
Wakefield, W.L. Heresy ,Crusade and Inquisition in Southern France 100-1250, Berkley: University of California Press, 1974.
Electronic media
Encyclopedias on CD:
Encyclopedia Britanica, Britannica Inc [CD] 97. New York, 1997.
Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia [CD]. Grolier Electronic Publishing. Inc. Novato, California. 1995
Encarta 99 Encyclopedia [CD]. Microsoft Corporation. North Ryde, 1999
World Book Multimedia Encyclopedia [CD]. World Book Inc. San Diego, 1998
Web sites:
Alphonse: http://kids.infoplease.lycos.com/ce5/CE001587.html
Catholic Encyclopedia, Heresy: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07256b.htm
Catholic Encyclopedia, Philip II (Augustus): http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12001a.htm
History Early Years: http:// kids.infoplease.lycos.com/ce5/CE001180.html
Library: Historical Documents: Joseph Mccabe: Religious Controversy: Chapter 23:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/joseph_mccabe/religious_controversy/chapter_23.html#1
Montfort, Simon de: http://kids.infoplease.lycos.com/ce5/CE035213.html
Philip II or Philip Augustus: http://lycoskids.infoplease.com/ce5/CE040629.html
Raymond VI: http://kids.infoplease.lycos.com/ce5/CE043401.html
Raymond VII: http://kids.infoplease.lycos.com/ce5/CE043402.html
The Albigensian Crusade by Elizabeth Crouch:
http://gray.music.rhodes.edu/musichtmls/MHDocs/albi.html
The Cathars by Nicole Brogan:http://www.millersv.edu/~english/homepage/duncan/medfem/cathars.html
The Ecole Glossary: http://cedar.evansville.edu/~ecoleweb/glossary/cathari.html
[1] Peter of Castelnau, a papal legate, had excommunicated Raymond in 1207 for failing to take up arms against the heretics in Languedoc. W.L. Wakefield, Heresy, Crusade and Inquisition in Southern France 100-1250, (Berkley,1974), p. 88.
[2] Ibid,. p. 68.
[3] The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume I: IV. Attitude of the Church: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07256b.htm.
[4]J.R. Strayer, The Albigensian Crusades, (New York, 1971) p. 45.
[5] In an effort to recruit manpower Innocent offered all the indulgences usually granted to participants in the Holy War in return for only 40 days service against the Albigensians. This was decreed at the the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 "…Catholics who have girded themselves with the cross for the extermination of the heretics, shall enjoy the indulgences and privileges granted to those who go in defense of the Holy Land.... ".
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/lat4-c3.html. Medieval Sourcebook: Fourth Lateran Council: Canon 3 on Heresy 1215
[6] William of Tudela and an anonymous successor, The Song of the Cathar Wars; A history of the Albigensian Crusade, tr. Shirley, J. (Aldershot, 1996), p. 14.
[7] R. Barber, The Knight and Chivalry, (Ipswich, 1974) p. 41.
[8] The word Cathar was not as likely to strike fear into the hearts of men as were Saracen or Turk. In this crusade men would be fighting a known enemy and in the siege warfare which they would have expected to be engaging in, it was unlikely that they would meet with a force as well disciplined as the Mamelukes or the Anatolian Turks.
[9] http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/cde-privs.html#albi: Medieval Sourcebook Evolution of Crusader Privileges, 1095-1270: PRIVILEGES GRANTED FOR THE CRUSADE AGAINST THE HERETICS IN LANGUEDOC (FOR THE ALBIGENSIAN CRUSADE), 1207-1208 .
Since those who fight for liberty of the church ought to be fostered by the protection of the church, we, by our apostolic authority, have decided that our beloved, who in obedience to Christ are signed or are about to be signed against the provincial heretics, from the time that they, according to the ordinance of our legates, place on their breasts the sign of the quickening cross, to fight against the heretics, shall be under the protection of the apostolic seat and of ourselves, with their persons and lands, their possessions and men, and also all of their other property; and until full proof is obtained of their return or death all the above shall remain as they were, free and undisturbed…
[10] Wakefield, Op. Cit. p. 88.
[11] http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/lat4-c3.html:Medieval Sourcebook: Fourth Lateran Council: Canon 3 on Heresy 1215.
[12] Wakefield, Op. Cit. p. 84.
[13] http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12001a.htm: The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume I.
[14] http://lycoskids.infoplease.com/ce5/CE040629.html.
[15] Raymond VII was Raymond VI's son and successor.
[16] Strayer, Op. Cit. p. 129.
[17] B. Hamilton, The Albigensian Crusade, (London,1974) pp. 84-85.
[18] William of Tudela and an anonymous successor, Op. Cit. p. 26.
[19] It should be borne in mind when considering this point that the Albigensian Cathars had been less that enthusiastic about paying church tithes and if they were to be replaced by Catholics under a committed Catholic lord there would be an incremental effect upon church revenues. In all probability the Abbot wanted to keep the booty in the city until a Catholic lord was in place to ensure its even distribution among the new inhabitants.
[20] William of Tudela and an anonymous successor, Op. Cit. p. 26. "…He [the Abbot of Citeaux] called on the count of Nevers to accept this task, but the count absolutely refused to stay in that country on any terms, and so did the count of St Pol who was chosen next. They both said they had plenty of land in the kingdom of France where their fathers were born, however long their lives might be, and they did not wish to take another man's inheritance. There was no one present who would not feel himself utterly disgraced if he accepted the fief…."
[21] Simon de Montfort was the titular earl of Leicester and an extremely able commander well respected at the French Court. In the Albigensian crusade he managed to hold together his army despite an almost complete change of manpower every forty days.
[22] Hamilton, Op. Cit. p. 30.
[23] Wakefield, Op. Cit. p. 94.
Buddhism and salvation
QUESTION: The Mahayana tradition in Buddhism better satisfies the human need to worship a deity and offers a more hopeful path to salvation than does the Theravada tradition. Discuss this claim paying particular attention to the continuing popularity of the Therevada tradition in several Southeast Asian countries.
This essay will show that whilst the claims contained in the first part of the question are undoubtedly true, Mahayana popularity cannot be explained by these two reasons alone. Its rise to predominance over the Theravada school owes as much to the fact that it was transplanted first to China - the dominant culture of which served as a vehicle to propel it to two other countries - as to its inherent doctrine.
Further, that only by allowing itself to be corrupted almost beyond recognition has it managed to gain as many adherents as it has.1 In some cases, it will be observed, the determining factor as to which school of Buddhism a country eventually followed depended on which king as “defender and promoter of the faith,” chose which particular school, or, which form of the religion first arrived in the country.
The Mahayana school of Buddhism differs from its Theravada counterpart in a number of fundamental ways but the most appealing difference in its philosophy is the premise that salvation is open to all; the notion of group salvation as opposed to individual accomplishment; that it is possible for all people to reach an enlightened state and work towards that goal. There is thus a path for the laity to follow in the knowledge that life is not hopeless - they can, by behaving in the appropriate manner, eventually reach nirvana. 2
The Theravada school by way of contrast maintains that enlightenment can only be attained by a select group of religious figures and scholars. Borrowing from the Hindu caste system, Theravada monks believe that the status a person is born to is an indication of the state of that person's soul. 3
1 Renowned Buddhist scholar Christmas Humphreys writes of the Chinese ...”it was the Mahayana School whose doctrines they were asked to accept, and which they accepted only after a modification so profound as all but to create a new form of Buddhism”. C. Humphreys, Buddhism, Cassell & Company Ltd. (London 1972)
2 A. Verdu The Philosophy of Buddhism: A “Totalistic” Synthesis., Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (London 1981) passim pp. 81 -93
3 What is Theravada http://www.askjeeves.com/MetaAnswer.asp?MetaEngine=Lycos&logQID=2892826&qCategory=GODS&qSource=0&frames=yes&site_name=Jeeves&scope=web&r=x&MetaTopic=Buddhist+Viewpoints+on+Mahayana%2C+Theravada+%26+Vajrayana+Buddh&MetaURL=http%3A%2F%2Fhawaiian.net%2F%7Edsparks%2F&EngineOrdinal=5&ItemOrdinal=1&MetaList=http%3A%2F%2Fhawaiian.net%2F%7Edsparks%2F&Go_to.x=15&Go_to.y=5
The idea of the soul differs from the Christian concept in that at the point of death the soul/life force dissembles into five aggregates which, in varying proportions reassemble at the point of rebirth into the different soul of the new person.
Therefore it would be all but impossible for anyone other than a monk to even approach enlightenment. Moreover, to achieve enlightenment and enter nirvana one must pursue one’s cause alone and attain it by merit involving the student in a lifetime of selfless devotion. Theravada, then, can be construed by the outsider, and particularly the followers of the Mahayana, as being selfish and elitist.
This contrast, the one school offering salvation to all, the other to only a select few would lead most to view Mahayana as being the more friendly, easier path to
follow. At base, it is this “user friendliness” which is seen as the reason for Mahayana attracting more followers than Theravada.
Theravada Buddhists believe that they practice the original, pure form of Buddhism as it was handed down to them by the Buddha. They believe that the Buddha was a historical person who, on his death, ceased to exist. Theravada holds unswervingly to the notion of the Buddha as a single historical figure, not one of many in a continuing line. Theravada theology derives from a strict interpretation of religious texts said to be literal translations of the Buddha’s own words and, by holding so rigidly to this doctrine, it has little room to move or to accommodate other ideas or interpretations of its canon.
Theravada does not, cannot, cater to the human need to worship a God of any sort - “there was only one Buddha, he was not divine, and he is no longer extant.”
Mahayana however, addresses this most basic of human needs. The Buddha in Mahayana becomes deified as a sort of universal spiritual soul/being. No longer human he can be worshipped as a God. 4
4 In speaking of Mahayana, Christmas Humphreys in his book Buddhism, op. cit. p. 66 says ...“Certainly within a hundred years of the death of Asoka [c. 268-233 b.c.], the change was profound and all but complete. From being a human being the Buddha had become a super-human Being, and his spiritual Essence had entered a pantheon nearly as large as that of the Hinduism from which it derived.”
The central figure in Mahayana is that of the bodhisattva, (“he who has the essence of Buddahood”) a compassionate and loving saviour who, rather than selfishly abandoning this world, pauses at the threshold of Nirvana to reach down to help all mankind to attain liberation from sorrow and rebirth through his grace.5
The bodhisattva is a teacher, a helper of any who wish to attain enlightenment. In Theravada bodhissattvas do not exist, the person is on his own in the quest for nirvana. In Mahayana anybody can become a Buddha - in Theravada none but the most devout have the chance.
The school of Mahayana began as a reaction against the Theravada school - which its followers saw as selfishly restricting - and it’s method of establishing its credentials has something of a parallel in Islam. Just as Islam followed the basic tenets of Judaism and Christianity without denying their rightness so does Mahayana follow Theravada.
Mohammed, who claimed to have received the teachings of his God some six hundred years after the birth of Christ, was believed to be the last prophet. All that had gone before was not condemned, disputed or denied, in fact the Koran can in many ways be seen as something of an extension to the Christian bible. Likewise with Mahayana which does not deny, dispute or contradict anything in the older Theravada canon. The followers of Mahayana insist that the Buddha appeared in ...”a non-physical form and personally founded the Mahayana himself.” 6 Theravada, in the eyes of the followers of Mahayana is merely incomplete - the Mahayana is the extension of the Hinayana, not its replacement. 7
The Buddha, having founded Mahayana after Theravada was already established, thereby sanctified this branch of the religion - the last word of the Buddha; similar to the last word of Muhammed.
5 S. Wolpert. A New History of India. Oxford University Press. (New York. 1997) p. 72
6 P. Bishop & M. Darton (eds) “Mahayana Buddhism”, in The Encyclopaedia of World Faiths,: Macdonald Orbis, (London 1987 ) p. 232
7 Humphreys, op. cit. p. 50. The word Hinayana is used here to mean the scriptures of the Theravadins.
This claim to legitimacy put Mahayana Buddhism in a different sphere where it was free to adapt, to include and modify without the necessity of having to re interpret the Theravada canon and run the risk of loosing credibility; it was open to permeability and could accept other deities and customs.
An indication of how much the Mahayana school has been effected by the subsequent infusion of ideas can be gained by the size of its scriptures. In Theravada Buddhism, there are three groups of writing considered to be holy scriptures, known as the “Three Baskets” The total volume of these three groups of writings is about 11 times larger than the Bible.
In Mahayana Buddhism, the scriptures are much more voluminous. They have multiplied to the point where standard editions of the Chinese canon can encompass over 5 000 volumes.8
In fact the sutras of the Mahayana, many of which were written long after Buddhism had entered China, came from the minds of scholars who lived from three to seven hundred years after the Buddha’s death.9
The spread of Mahayana to China and thence to Korea and Japan is of interest in the light of contrast with Theravada. Mahayana “travels” well. It is doubtful that Buddhism would ever have spread to China if the Mahayana movement had not occurred. 10
The monastic order of Theravada lived almost in seclusion, removed from the mass of the laity whose participation in it was minimal - conduct which did not lend itself freely to proselytising. 11
8 op. cit. What is Theravada http://www.askjeeves.com/MetaAnswer.asp?MetaEngine=Lycos&logQID=2892826&qCategory=GODS&qSource=0&frames=yes&site_name=Jeeves&scope=web&r=x&MetaTopic=Buddhist+Viewpoints+on+Mahayana%2C+Theravada+%26+Vajrayana+Buddh&MetaURL=http%3A%2F%2Fhawaiian.net%2F%7Edsparks%2F&EngineOrdinal=5&ItemOrdinal=1&MetaList=http%3A%2F%2Fhawaiian.net%2F%7Edsparks%2F&Go_to.x=15&Go_to.y=5
9 Humphreys, op. cit. p. 14
10 D. Ikeda. Buddhism the First Millennium, Kodansha International Ltd. (New York 1977) p. 80
11 Ibid
The Buddha himself had allegedly sent his first five converts away with instructions to spread the word but the Theravadins who followed in their footsteps remained to some extent aloof from the mass of the population and displayed none of the missionary zeal of the Mahayanas.12
In the case of China was Mahayana which arrived on the scene first and so took root, tenuous at first it suffered many setbacks over the centuries but the mere fact that it was there first ensured that if Buddhism was to survive it was to be the Mahayana branch. Buddhism travelled to China from the north west of India during the time of the great Kushan empire (1st - 3rd centuries AD) using the vehicle of trade and, being from the north west it was mainly of the Mahayana school.
The Kushan king, Kanishka, was himself a Buddhist but it was not through military conquest that the religion spread to China from his kingdom. Instead it was that his subjects often acted as carriers to the great trading caravans which regularly left India for China. 13
These expeditions could take up to three years to make the round trip and Hindu merchants were loath to embark upon them without being accompanied by their Brahman priests. The Brahman priestly caste however, in accordance with their religion, could not leave their homes.
As a result, Hindu merchants either converted to another religion or, as was more often the case, hired the local Mahayana Buddhists.14 Buddhist monks were not prohibited from travel and, over time, as Buddhist trading communities began to coalesce, used these trading posts as bases from which to promote their religion.
12 The 1995 Grolier Multimedia Encyclopaedia. Grolier Electronic Publishing Inc. (California 1995)
13 W. Theodore de Barry (ed), Sources of Indian Tradition Volume 1, Colombia University Press, (New York 1958)
14 W. Eberhard. A History of China. 4th edition, Routledge & Kegan Paul. (London 1977) p. 108
Thus we see one reason why one branch of Buddhism travelled and began to take root abroad.
Theravada, it must be mentioned, also travelled to China but without the support which Mahayana received at the outset and without the enthusiastic proselytising inherent in Mahayana. Mahayana was in China with a support base and a line of supply back to India; on the ground floor, willing to be flexible and to accommodate elements of the local religions and philosophies of the most populous nation on earth. This, latter reason should not be overlooked when comparing Mahayana’s success in terms of numbers.
Even so, Mahayana would probably not have survived as a significant force in China were it not for the fall of the Han dynasty and the social disruption that followed in its wake. 15
Unlike Kanishka the Indian Emperor Asoka (c. 268-233 b.c.), who converted to Theravada Buddhism after viewing the number of dead left on the battlefield after one of his successful campaigns, became enthused with the missionary spirit. So enamoured with his new religion was he that he sent his own son to Sri Lanka to preach the religion there. A mission so successful that Theravada has been unshakeable in that country ever since.
Here we see another example of one branch of the religion being in on the ground floor first and remaining dominant.
Parallels can be seen in the spread of western religions. Southern Ireland has remained an isolated pocket of Catholicism despite the Protestantism of her fellow countrymen to the north. Catholicism was already in Southern Ireland before England introduced Protestantism and it has remained immoveable. South America, it will be noted, is overwhelmingly Catholic because the Catholic powers of Spain and Portugal arrived there first.
15 P. Bishop & M. Darton op. cit. passim. 244-254.
Had the conquistadors been of the Protestant faith it is reasonable to assume that South America would today be overwhelmingly Protestant. 16 The point to be made is that in the cases of China and Sri Lanka the branch of Buddhism which was adopted owed little to the appeal of the doctrines offered by either school. Whilst it is possible to propound the statement that Mahayana “better satisfies the human need to worship a deity and offers a more hopeful path to salvation”, this has clearly had no effect on the religion of Sri Lanka over the past two thousand years. Theravada was first in, an alternative choice was not offered at the time and it therefore became entrenched.
There have been times in Buddhism’s history when its adoption by a country was a result of a direct political decision. A case in point is Tibet where in the eighth century A.D. King Trisong Detsen imported not only Buddhism but a complete culture from India.17
He made Buddhism the state religion which, though it has undergone many changes through the centuries, has withstood even the assaults of Communist China. While it may be true that King Trison Detsen chose to import one school of Buddhism over another, it is also the case that no opposing Buddhist sect has had any influence in Tibet ever since.
Theravada has remained strong in Southeast Asia where it is the dominant religion in Thailand, Cambodia, Laos and Burma. The reason for this is probably that Theravada reached these countries early and found that it could transplant itself without the need to change a great deal. In all of these countries the Indian culture met with an inferior and less sophisticated culture where the existing religions offered little competition. Although Cambodia at one stage in its history contained a mixture of Mahayana and Theravada it wasn’t until the 13th century that Theravada Buddhism became the dominant school. The reasons for this are unclear.
16 In the case of Spain’s colonies the population were often forced to adopt Christianity on pain of death but nevertheless they still remain staunchly Catholic. In C.P. Fitzgerald, China: A Short Cultural History, 3rd ed., Frederick A. Praeger, (New York 1961) p. 476, Fitzgerald says of the Iberian conquerors ”Conversion or the sword became with them a Christian doctrine, which in America was ruthlessly enforced.”
17 P. Bishop & M. op. cit. p. 253.
This importation of a religion is not an isolated case. At almost the same time as Trison Detsen was converting his kingdom to Buddhism, the Khazar empire was converting to Judaism. The Khazars, a Turkic people, created a commercial and political empire that dominated substantial parts of South Russia during much of the 7th through to the 10th centuries. During the 8th century the Khazar King, under constant pressure to side with either of his warring neighbours in Constantinople and Baghdad, imported Judaism which he established as the state religion. The Khazars established their capital at Itil (or Atil), in the Volga delta, and for four centuries thereafter this Jewish empire held the balance of power between the Christian Byzantine Empire and the Muslim Caliphate. In his book The Thirteenth Tribe: The Khazar Empire and its Heritage, Hutchinson, (London 1976), Arthur Koestler describes how, after the diaspore of the Khazar Jews which extended through Europe and concentrated in Poland, the descendants of these “pseudo Jews” came to make up the majority of Israeli population after WWII. Thus, says Koestler, the Jews of Israel owe more to the seed of Ghengis Khan than to that of Abraham.
When Mahayana entered China it faced a culture at least the equal of India and in technology China was further advanced. China already had sophisticated bureaucratic institutions, a written language and an advanced knowledge of mathematics. Consequently the entering stream of Buddhism was modified to co-exist with prevailing Confucian and Taoist beliefs. Buddhism gained its foothold in this environment by absorbing Chinese philosophical concepts and abstractions and expressing them in Buddhist terminology.18
Mahayana Buddhism travelled to Japan using Korea as a conduit. Before the end of the 4th century, Buddhism entered an already highly Sinicised Korea with the southward expansion of the Kingdom of Koguryo which was initially based in Southern Manchuria.19
In 522 A.D. a Korean King seeking a military alliance sent an envoy to Japan with presents which included a Buddha image. Although the expedition was not a success as far as achieving its desired military aims were concerned it sowed the seeds of Mahayana Buddhism. With the incorporation of Shinto ideas and beliefs and centuries of small but compounding modifications it became today’s Zen.
Mahayana’s success in Japan was not a result of competition with Theravada but derived from from its being allied to the dominant culture of the region.
In summation, in terms of numbers Mahayana is without doubt the most popular form of Buddhism. Its doctrine is easier for the layman to follow than is the original, purer strain of Theravada. It offers salvation for all who care to avail themselves of it as opposed to what would appear to be a rather selfish, aloof and almost class based Theravada alternative.
18 P. Bishop & M. Darton op. cit p.243
19 S. Dutt. Buddhism in East Asia. Indian Council for Cultural Relations. (New Delhi 1966) passim pp. 159-162
Nevertheless, Mahayana does not appear to have gained many converts at the expense of its counterpart; the populations of those countries which began in the Theravada tradition have remained there. In the case of Cambodia, where both schools existed side by side, Theravada eventually predominated. In China, Korea and Japan it would seem that it was only because Mahayana rather than Theravada was introduced to them that they in time became Buddhist.20
Bibliography
C. Humphreys, Buddhism, Cassell & Company Ltd. (London 1972)
C.P. Fitzgerald, China: A Short Cultural History, 3rd ed., Frederick A. Praeger, (New York 1961)
A. Verdu The Philosophy of Buddhism: A “Totalistic” Synthesis., Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (London 1981)
What is Theravada http://www.askjeeves.com/MetaAnswer.asp?MetaEngine=Lycos&logQID=2892826&qCategory=GODS&qSource=0&frames=yes&site_name=Jeeves&scope=web&r=x&MetaTopic=Buddhist+Viewpoints+on+Mahayana%2C+Theravada+%26+Vajrayana+Buddh&MetaURL=http%3A%2F%2Fhawaiian.net%2F%7Edsparks%2F&EngineOrdinal=5&ItemOrdinal=1&MetaList=http%3A%2F%2Fhawaiian.net%2F%7Edsparks%2F&Go_to.x=15&Go_to.y=5
The 1995 Grolier Multimedia Encyclopaedia. Grolier Electronic Publishing Inc. (California 1995)
P. Bishop & M. Darton (eds) “Mahayana Buddhism”, in The Encyclopaedia of World Faiths,: Macdonald Orbis, (London 1987 )
W. Eberhard. A History of China. 4th edition, Routledge & Kegan Paul. (London 1977)
S. Wolpert. A New History of India. Oxford University Press. (New York. 1997)
W. Theodore de Barry (ed), Sources of Indian Tradition Volume 1, Colombia University Press, (New York 1958)
D. Ikeda. Buddhism the First Millennium, Kodansha International Ltd. (New York 1977)
S. Dutt. Buddhism in East Asia. Indian Council for Cultural Relations. (New Delhi 1966)
This essay will show that whilst the claims contained in the first part of the question are undoubtedly true, Mahayana popularity cannot be explained by these two reasons alone. Its rise to predominance over the Theravada school owes as much to the fact that it was transplanted first to China - the dominant culture of which served as a vehicle to propel it to two other countries - as to its inherent doctrine.
Further, that only by allowing itself to be corrupted almost beyond recognition has it managed to gain as many adherents as it has.1 In some cases, it will be observed, the determining factor as to which school of Buddhism a country eventually followed depended on which king as “defender and promoter of the faith,” chose which particular school, or, which form of the religion first arrived in the country.
The Mahayana school of Buddhism differs from its Theravada counterpart in a number of fundamental ways but the most appealing difference in its philosophy is the premise that salvation is open to all; the notion of group salvation as opposed to individual accomplishment; that it is possible for all people to reach an enlightened state and work towards that goal. There is thus a path for the laity to follow in the knowledge that life is not hopeless - they can, by behaving in the appropriate manner, eventually reach nirvana. 2
The Theravada school by way of contrast maintains that enlightenment can only be attained by a select group of religious figures and scholars. Borrowing from the Hindu caste system, Theravada monks believe that the status a person is born to is an indication of the state of that person's soul. 3
1 Renowned Buddhist scholar Christmas Humphreys writes of the Chinese ...”it was the Mahayana School whose doctrines they were asked to accept, and which they accepted only after a modification so profound as all but to create a new form of Buddhism”. C. Humphreys, Buddhism, Cassell & Company Ltd. (London 1972)
2 A. Verdu The Philosophy of Buddhism: A “Totalistic” Synthesis., Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (London 1981) passim pp. 81 -93
3 What is Theravada http://www.askjeeves.com/MetaAnswer.asp?MetaEngine=Lycos&logQID=2892826&qCategory=GODS&qSource=0&frames=yes&site_name=Jeeves&scope=web&r=x&MetaTopic=Buddhist+Viewpoints+on+Mahayana%2C+Theravada+%26+Vajrayana+Buddh&MetaURL=http%3A%2F%2Fhawaiian.net%2F%7Edsparks%2F&EngineOrdinal=5&ItemOrdinal=1&MetaList=http%3A%2F%2Fhawaiian.net%2F%7Edsparks%2F&Go_to.x=15&Go_to.y=5
The idea of the soul differs from the Christian concept in that at the point of death the soul/life force dissembles into five aggregates which, in varying proportions reassemble at the point of rebirth into the different soul of the new person.
Therefore it would be all but impossible for anyone other than a monk to even approach enlightenment. Moreover, to achieve enlightenment and enter nirvana one must pursue one’s cause alone and attain it by merit involving the student in a lifetime of selfless devotion. Theravada, then, can be construed by the outsider, and particularly the followers of the Mahayana, as being selfish and elitist.
This contrast, the one school offering salvation to all, the other to only a select few would lead most to view Mahayana as being the more friendly, easier path to
follow. At base, it is this “user friendliness” which is seen as the reason for Mahayana attracting more followers than Theravada.
Theravada Buddhists believe that they practice the original, pure form of Buddhism as it was handed down to them by the Buddha. They believe that the Buddha was a historical person who, on his death, ceased to exist. Theravada holds unswervingly to the notion of the Buddha as a single historical figure, not one of many in a continuing line. Theravada theology derives from a strict interpretation of religious texts said to be literal translations of the Buddha’s own words and, by holding so rigidly to this doctrine, it has little room to move or to accommodate other ideas or interpretations of its canon.
Theravada does not, cannot, cater to the human need to worship a God of any sort - “there was only one Buddha, he was not divine, and he is no longer extant.”
Mahayana however, addresses this most basic of human needs. The Buddha in Mahayana becomes deified as a sort of universal spiritual soul/being. No longer human he can be worshipped as a God. 4
4 In speaking of Mahayana, Christmas Humphreys in his book Buddhism, op. cit. p. 66 says ...“Certainly within a hundred years of the death of Asoka [c. 268-233 b.c.], the change was profound and all but complete. From being a human being the Buddha had become a super-human Being, and his spiritual Essence had entered a pantheon nearly as large as that of the Hinduism from which it derived.”
The central figure in Mahayana is that of the bodhisattva, (“he who has the essence of Buddahood”) a compassionate and loving saviour who, rather than selfishly abandoning this world, pauses at the threshold of Nirvana to reach down to help all mankind to attain liberation from sorrow and rebirth through his grace.5
The bodhisattva is a teacher, a helper of any who wish to attain enlightenment. In Theravada bodhissattvas do not exist, the person is on his own in the quest for nirvana. In Mahayana anybody can become a Buddha - in Theravada none but the most devout have the chance.
The school of Mahayana began as a reaction against the Theravada school - which its followers saw as selfishly restricting - and it’s method of establishing its credentials has something of a parallel in Islam. Just as Islam followed the basic tenets of Judaism and Christianity without denying their rightness so does Mahayana follow Theravada.
Mohammed, who claimed to have received the teachings of his God some six hundred years after the birth of Christ, was believed to be the last prophet. All that had gone before was not condemned, disputed or denied, in fact the Koran can in many ways be seen as something of an extension to the Christian bible. Likewise with Mahayana which does not deny, dispute or contradict anything in the older Theravada canon. The followers of Mahayana insist that the Buddha appeared in ...”a non-physical form and personally founded the Mahayana himself.” 6 Theravada, in the eyes of the followers of Mahayana is merely incomplete - the Mahayana is the extension of the Hinayana, not its replacement. 7
The Buddha, having founded Mahayana after Theravada was already established, thereby sanctified this branch of the religion - the last word of the Buddha; similar to the last word of Muhammed.
5 S. Wolpert. A New History of India. Oxford University Press. (New York. 1997) p. 72
6 P. Bishop & M. Darton (eds) “Mahayana Buddhism”, in The Encyclopaedia of World Faiths,: Macdonald Orbis, (London 1987 ) p. 232
7 Humphreys, op. cit. p. 50. The word Hinayana is used here to mean the scriptures of the Theravadins.
This claim to legitimacy put Mahayana Buddhism in a different sphere where it was free to adapt, to include and modify without the necessity of having to re interpret the Theravada canon and run the risk of loosing credibility; it was open to permeability and could accept other deities and customs.
An indication of how much the Mahayana school has been effected by the subsequent infusion of ideas can be gained by the size of its scriptures. In Theravada Buddhism, there are three groups of writing considered to be holy scriptures, known as the “Three Baskets” The total volume of these three groups of writings is about 11 times larger than the Bible.
In Mahayana Buddhism, the scriptures are much more voluminous. They have multiplied to the point where standard editions of the Chinese canon can encompass over 5 000 volumes.8
In fact the sutras of the Mahayana, many of which were written long after Buddhism had entered China, came from the minds of scholars who lived from three to seven hundred years after the Buddha’s death.9
The spread of Mahayana to China and thence to Korea and Japan is of interest in the light of contrast with Theravada. Mahayana “travels” well. It is doubtful that Buddhism would ever have spread to China if the Mahayana movement had not occurred. 10
The monastic order of Theravada lived almost in seclusion, removed from the mass of the laity whose participation in it was minimal - conduct which did not lend itself freely to proselytising. 11
8 op. cit. What is Theravada http://www.askjeeves.com/MetaAnswer.asp?MetaEngine=Lycos&logQID=2892826&qCategory=GODS&qSource=0&frames=yes&site_name=Jeeves&scope=web&r=x&MetaTopic=Buddhist+Viewpoints+on+Mahayana%2C+Theravada+%26+Vajrayana+Buddh&MetaURL=http%3A%2F%2Fhawaiian.net%2F%7Edsparks%2F&EngineOrdinal=5&ItemOrdinal=1&MetaList=http%3A%2F%2Fhawaiian.net%2F%7Edsparks%2F&Go_to.x=15&Go_to.y=5
9 Humphreys, op. cit. p. 14
10 D. Ikeda. Buddhism the First Millennium, Kodansha International Ltd. (New York 1977) p. 80
11 Ibid
The Buddha himself had allegedly sent his first five converts away with instructions to spread the word but the Theravadins who followed in their footsteps remained to some extent aloof from the mass of the population and displayed none of the missionary zeal of the Mahayanas.12
In the case of China was Mahayana which arrived on the scene first and so took root, tenuous at first it suffered many setbacks over the centuries but the mere fact that it was there first ensured that if Buddhism was to survive it was to be the Mahayana branch. Buddhism travelled to China from the north west of India during the time of the great Kushan empire (1st - 3rd centuries AD) using the vehicle of trade and, being from the north west it was mainly of the Mahayana school.
The Kushan king, Kanishka, was himself a Buddhist but it was not through military conquest that the religion spread to China from his kingdom. Instead it was that his subjects often acted as carriers to the great trading caravans which regularly left India for China. 13
These expeditions could take up to three years to make the round trip and Hindu merchants were loath to embark upon them without being accompanied by their Brahman priests. The Brahman priestly caste however, in accordance with their religion, could not leave their homes.
As a result, Hindu merchants either converted to another religion or, as was more often the case, hired the local Mahayana Buddhists.14 Buddhist monks were not prohibited from travel and, over time, as Buddhist trading communities began to coalesce, used these trading posts as bases from which to promote their religion.
12 The 1995 Grolier Multimedia Encyclopaedia. Grolier Electronic Publishing Inc. (California 1995)
13 W. Theodore de Barry (ed), Sources of Indian Tradition Volume 1, Colombia University Press, (New York 1958)
14 W. Eberhard. A History of China. 4th edition, Routledge & Kegan Paul. (London 1977) p. 108
Thus we see one reason why one branch of Buddhism travelled and began to take root abroad.
Theravada, it must be mentioned, also travelled to China but without the support which Mahayana received at the outset and without the enthusiastic proselytising inherent in Mahayana. Mahayana was in China with a support base and a line of supply back to India; on the ground floor, willing to be flexible and to accommodate elements of the local religions and philosophies of the most populous nation on earth. This, latter reason should not be overlooked when comparing Mahayana’s success in terms of numbers.
Even so, Mahayana would probably not have survived as a significant force in China were it not for the fall of the Han dynasty and the social disruption that followed in its wake. 15
Unlike Kanishka the Indian Emperor Asoka (c. 268-233 b.c.), who converted to Theravada Buddhism after viewing the number of dead left on the battlefield after one of his successful campaigns, became enthused with the missionary spirit. So enamoured with his new religion was he that he sent his own son to Sri Lanka to preach the religion there. A mission so successful that Theravada has been unshakeable in that country ever since.
Here we see another example of one branch of the religion being in on the ground floor first and remaining dominant.
Parallels can be seen in the spread of western religions. Southern Ireland has remained an isolated pocket of Catholicism despite the Protestantism of her fellow countrymen to the north. Catholicism was already in Southern Ireland before England introduced Protestantism and it has remained immoveable. South America, it will be noted, is overwhelmingly Catholic because the Catholic powers of Spain and Portugal arrived there first.
15 P. Bishop & M. Darton op. cit. passim. 244-254.
Had the conquistadors been of the Protestant faith it is reasonable to assume that South America would today be overwhelmingly Protestant. 16 The point to be made is that in the cases of China and Sri Lanka the branch of Buddhism which was adopted owed little to the appeal of the doctrines offered by either school. Whilst it is possible to propound the statement that Mahayana “better satisfies the human need to worship a deity and offers a more hopeful path to salvation”, this has clearly had no effect on the religion of Sri Lanka over the past two thousand years. Theravada was first in, an alternative choice was not offered at the time and it therefore became entrenched.
There have been times in Buddhism’s history when its adoption by a country was a result of a direct political decision. A case in point is Tibet where in the eighth century A.D. King Trisong Detsen imported not only Buddhism but a complete culture from India.17
He made Buddhism the state religion which, though it has undergone many changes through the centuries, has withstood even the assaults of Communist China. While it may be true that King Trison Detsen chose to import one school of Buddhism over another, it is also the case that no opposing Buddhist sect has had any influence in Tibet ever since.
Theravada has remained strong in Southeast Asia where it is the dominant religion in Thailand, Cambodia, Laos and Burma. The reason for this is probably that Theravada reached these countries early and found that it could transplant itself without the need to change a great deal. In all of these countries the Indian culture met with an inferior and less sophisticated culture where the existing religions offered little competition. Although Cambodia at one stage in its history contained a mixture of Mahayana and Theravada it wasn’t until the 13th century that Theravada Buddhism became the dominant school. The reasons for this are unclear.
16 In the case of Spain’s colonies the population were often forced to adopt Christianity on pain of death but nevertheless they still remain staunchly Catholic. In C.P. Fitzgerald, China: A Short Cultural History, 3rd ed., Frederick A. Praeger, (New York 1961) p. 476, Fitzgerald says of the Iberian conquerors ”Conversion or the sword became with them a Christian doctrine, which in America was ruthlessly enforced.”
17 P. Bishop & M. op. cit. p. 253.
This importation of a religion is not an isolated case. At almost the same time as Trison Detsen was converting his kingdom to Buddhism, the Khazar empire was converting to Judaism. The Khazars, a Turkic people, created a commercial and political empire that dominated substantial parts of South Russia during much of the 7th through to the 10th centuries. During the 8th century the Khazar King, under constant pressure to side with either of his warring neighbours in Constantinople and Baghdad, imported Judaism which he established as the state religion. The Khazars established their capital at Itil (or Atil), in the Volga delta, and for four centuries thereafter this Jewish empire held the balance of power between the Christian Byzantine Empire and the Muslim Caliphate. In his book The Thirteenth Tribe: The Khazar Empire and its Heritage, Hutchinson, (London 1976), Arthur Koestler describes how, after the diaspore of the Khazar Jews which extended through Europe and concentrated in Poland, the descendants of these “pseudo Jews” came to make up the majority of Israeli population after WWII. Thus, says Koestler, the Jews of Israel owe more to the seed of Ghengis Khan than to that of Abraham.
When Mahayana entered China it faced a culture at least the equal of India and in technology China was further advanced. China already had sophisticated bureaucratic institutions, a written language and an advanced knowledge of mathematics. Consequently the entering stream of Buddhism was modified to co-exist with prevailing Confucian and Taoist beliefs. Buddhism gained its foothold in this environment by absorbing Chinese philosophical concepts and abstractions and expressing them in Buddhist terminology.18
Mahayana Buddhism travelled to Japan using Korea as a conduit. Before the end of the 4th century, Buddhism entered an already highly Sinicised Korea with the southward expansion of the Kingdom of Koguryo which was initially based in Southern Manchuria.19
In 522 A.D. a Korean King seeking a military alliance sent an envoy to Japan with presents which included a Buddha image. Although the expedition was not a success as far as achieving its desired military aims were concerned it sowed the seeds of Mahayana Buddhism. With the incorporation of Shinto ideas and beliefs and centuries of small but compounding modifications it became today’s Zen.
Mahayana’s success in Japan was not a result of competition with Theravada but derived from from its being allied to the dominant culture of the region.
In summation, in terms of numbers Mahayana is without doubt the most popular form of Buddhism. Its doctrine is easier for the layman to follow than is the original, purer strain of Theravada. It offers salvation for all who care to avail themselves of it as opposed to what would appear to be a rather selfish, aloof and almost class based Theravada alternative.
18 P. Bishop & M. Darton op. cit p.243
19 S. Dutt. Buddhism in East Asia. Indian Council for Cultural Relations. (New Delhi 1966) passim pp. 159-162
Nevertheless, Mahayana does not appear to have gained many converts at the expense of its counterpart; the populations of those countries which began in the Theravada tradition have remained there. In the case of Cambodia, where both schools existed side by side, Theravada eventually predominated. In China, Korea and Japan it would seem that it was only because Mahayana rather than Theravada was introduced to them that they in time became Buddhist.20
Bibliography
C. Humphreys, Buddhism, Cassell & Company Ltd. (London 1972)
C.P. Fitzgerald, China: A Short Cultural History, 3rd ed., Frederick A. Praeger, (New York 1961)
A. Verdu The Philosophy of Buddhism: A “Totalistic” Synthesis., Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (London 1981)
What is Theravada http://www.askjeeves.com/MetaAnswer.asp?MetaEngine=Lycos&logQID=2892826&qCategory=GODS&qSource=0&frames=yes&site_name=Jeeves&scope=web&r=x&MetaTopic=Buddhist+Viewpoints+on+Mahayana%2C+Theravada+%26+Vajrayana+Buddh&MetaURL=http%3A%2F%2Fhawaiian.net%2F%7Edsparks%2F&EngineOrdinal=5&ItemOrdinal=1&MetaList=http%3A%2F%2Fhawaiian.net%2F%7Edsparks%2F&Go_to.x=15&Go_to.y=5
The 1995 Grolier Multimedia Encyclopaedia. Grolier Electronic Publishing Inc. (California 1995)
P. Bishop & M. Darton (eds) “Mahayana Buddhism”, in The Encyclopaedia of World Faiths,: Macdonald Orbis, (London 1987 )
W. Eberhard. A History of China. 4th edition, Routledge & Kegan Paul. (London 1977)
S. Wolpert. A New History of India. Oxford University Press. (New York. 1997)
W. Theodore de Barry (ed), Sources of Indian Tradition Volume 1, Colombia University Press, (New York 1958)
D. Ikeda. Buddhism the First Millennium, Kodansha International Ltd. (New York 1977)
S. Dutt. Buddhism in East Asia. Indian Council for Cultural Relations. (New Delhi 1966)
Early History of Bali
Qiuestion: Discuss the history of Bali to about 1400 AD. What are the main themes of this history? What sources are available to us?
Balinese written history begins with the first copperplate inscription so far discovered on the island which is dated at 882 A.D; even so, from this date up until fourth decade of the 14th century its history remains sketchy and difficult to elucidate. Bali's prehistory is even more difficult to throw light upon mainly because of scant archaeological evidence - to date too few archaeological digs have taken place to provide anything like a continuous narrative. The sources available to the modern day historian are either very general, as in the case of the finds from archaeological digs or, as in the case of inscriptions, very specific.
This essay will examine the sources which historians are able to employ in their attempts to piece together a chronological record of what went on in Bali before the end of the 14th century and explain what themes these sources have so far helped to make known in relation to the history of that island.
Bali's climate, unlike say, Peru's dry mountainous climes or China's Taklamakan desert[1], is particularly destructive of substances such as paper and textiles on which records are often kept. Thus, whilst we have records from other cultures and regions of the earth dating back in some cases over many hundreds of years, centuries old written records from tropical monsoonal regions are almost completely lacking. In the Malay Archipelago most records were written on palm leaves and subject to the ravages of insects and bacterial decay.[2] To preserve the written word in this form required the copying of records every century or so in a part of the world subject to earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and, of course, warfare.
Archaeology, therefore plays a very important role in shedding light upon Bali's past events, not least because of the simple fact that it is able to unearth durable items. Inscriptions which have been unearthed or otherwise discovered both on Bali, or in other parts of the Malay archipelago but which refer to Bali, form the main anchoring points in a (so far) sketchy historical outline. For the most part, however, archaeology is incapable of furnishing us with sufficient detail because dating methods, such as the radiocarbon (carbon 14) method are not precise enough to enable the historian to accurately pinpoint past events.[3]
It follows that when there are gaps in the historical record, from time to time our view of the history of a place is "stood on its head" by a new discovery.[4] One must therefore be careful not to jump to conclusions when attempting to apply linkages obtained from the extrapolation of scraps of archaeological evidence to the known facts. In addition to the above it must be borne in mind that Bali is one of the most fertile places on earth. Its profusion of natural, tropical vegetation quickly covers neglected monuments, cities and the remnants of even large civilisations. Thus, Java which has been civilised longer than England[5] is practically devoid of records other than those in bronze and stone. The same must therefore apply to Bali which has very similar climatic conditions.
Modern scholars of South East Asian history have found that the pre Indic inhabitants of Bali were Austronesian speakers originating in Taiwan who, by the time they reached Bali, belonged to the Hesperonesian language sub group;[6] a conclusion arrived at by the study of glottochronology.[7] (see diagrams 1 & 2 on page 3)
The Austronesian speakers almost certainly drifted into Bali in small groups over a long period of time and did not coalesce into large groups with single identities for centuries. Rather, they would most likely have remained in scattered groups about the coasts and rivers whilst coexisting with the indigenous populations. The 200 or so languages within the Western, or Indonesian, branch of the Austronesian family attest to them having remained independent for a considerable period of time.
The length of time between the arrival of Austronesian speakers and recorded history on Bali (in stone or bronze), is in all probability upwards of four thousand years. At Gilimanuk in the west of Bali, stone sarcophagi have been excavated in contexts dating to approximately 1,500 - 2,000 years ago. Similarly, from sites close by, came bronze, gold, glass and carnelian items which have been C14 dated to between 200 BC and 300 AD.[8] During the centuries preceding these latter finds, it seems fairly safe to assume that the main theme running through Balinese history has been the transformation of small groups of Austronesian speakers from marine orientated societies to that of a more sedentary village life and the slow process of integration with neighbouring groups. This transformation would, perforce, have involved the domestication of animals and plants and the development of the technologies which go hand in hand with these practices - irrigation, selective breeding and so forth; it follows that small harbour kingdoms would eventually have emerged in the process.
Another source of information about prehistoric South East Asia comes from study of the distribution and manufacturing points of bronze kettledrums and from this it is possible to glean some information about the history of Bali.[9] Four main types of drums have been found spread across vast expanses of South and South East Asia and are generally classified as Heger l, II, III, IV after F. Heger, an Austrian archaeologist. These highly decorative drums were cast in bronze and were much valued objects which were traded over almost the whole of South East Asia and travelled with people when they migrated. The Heger I (sometimes referred to as the migratory drum) was largely a product of the Vietnamese Dongsonian civilisation which reached its cultural apogee in 4th century B.C. and continued to flourish until the 1st century A.D.[10]
During this period, and for a variety of reasons, the Heger I drums spread throughout the Malay Archipelago and have been unearthed in many small and remote islands in the region. It is interesting to note that while no Heger I drums have ever been found on Bali, Balinese Pejeng type metal drums of the same age have been unearthed in Central Java. This would seem to indicate that Bali was already casting its own metal drums by the time that Heger I types were undergoing their southward migration. Further, the manufacture of Pejeng type drums employed a different technology to all four types of Heger drums in that they were cast (lost wax method) in two pieces whereas the Heger drums were all cast in one piece. [11]
The import of this information lies in the inference that on Bali during the five hundred years under discussion, there already existed sophisticated artisans capable of the independent development of a fairly complex casting technology in a society which had no need for the widely distributed - and therefore widely accepted - Heger style drums. The Pejeng drums, according to Bernet Kempers, ..."formed an essential part of pre-Hindu Balinese developments". Certainly, Pejeng type metal drums manufactured on Bali were not mere one-offs or prototypes; fragments of stone imprinting molds for impressing the decorative patterns upon the wax layer for the drums casting have been found on the island.[12] However limited, this bespeaks of a production run.
Any serious study of history must, of course, make use of an amalgamation of different kinds of evidence and in Bali's case this amalgam, thus far, comprises non specific archaeological finds, specific inscriptions (usually the results of archaeological finds) and documents from other, more distant, areas in the region which refer to Bali. Undoubtedly as more archaeological digs take place, more will be uncovered to add to the loosely woven fabric which today is regarded as Balinese history. However, some areas of study such as a comprehensive dating of potsherds are yet to be undertaken and others, such as the study of ancient textiles, can not be undertaken because the evidence has decomposed.
Inscriptions whilst being an invaluable source to the historian must also be examined with caution by the epigraphist. Reasons for producing inscriptions are manifold and do not necessarily relate to actual events or happenings; there being no reason why legends or myths can not be inscribed on bronze or stone. Inscriptions, when they do provide useful information, are not necessarily accurate throughout their narrative. Mpu Prapanca's panegyric Desawarnana - a primary source written in the 14th century begins with "hail to the King! Homage be to thee!" and goes on with a list of superlatives describing the Majapahit King, his master, who he describes variously as being Siwa and Buddha, a universal soul and lord of the lords of the world.
Undoubtedly the Desawarnana, whatever its intended general audience, was also written to be read by, or related to, the king and when Prapanca later describes the conquest of Bali he tells us that the king of Bali was evil and base. Had the king of Majapahit taken Bali by deceitful and treacherous means and the king of Bali been kind, considerate and in other ways an exemplary monarch, it is extremely doubtful that Prapanca would have recorded this information accurately.
All the dated information regarding Bali prior to the eighth century comes from Chinese sources[13] which were not written as geographical guides and often refer to places in descriptive terms relating to the products which were there obtainable. In T'ang historical records Bali is mentioned alongside the kingdom of Ho-ling as being a place from whence came embassies between the years 637-649 A.D.[14] Bali is also referred to by the Chinese as P'o-li, the ruler of which was a king of the Kaundinya family who sent embassies to China in the 6th century A.D.[15]
According to Hall the Balinese had embraced Hinduism by the 7th century AD, by which time Bali was visited, at least intermittently, by Chinese traders and Indian literati.[16] The Indianization of South East Asia probably began around the first century B.C. and by the fifth century A.D Indian culture was widely known in the region with relatively large Indianized states appearing in Java, Cambodia and Vietnam as well as in smaller districts such as Kalimantan and Sulawesi.[17] It is therefore probable that Hall's estimate regarding the Balinese and their first contact with Hinduism errs on the side of caution. Bellwood, however, writing in 1997 opined that archaeological evidence for Indian-Southeast Asian trade contact in the period from 200 BC to AD 500 was strong "especially for Thailand and Bali."[18]
An East Javanese source, the Kubukubu inscription, issued by the Javanese king Balitung in A.D. 905 appears to refer to Bali under the name Bantun. [19] This inscription comprising seven copperplates is a copy made shortly after AD 905 and makes mention of rewards given by King Balitung to two men because they were successful on an expedition to Bantan. The "expedition" referred to is generally taken to mean a conquest.
A later Javanese text also records a successful conquest of the island by the first known Central Javanese king, Sanjaya. This text puts the date of the conquest of Bali at A.D. 732 and also claims that Sanjaya conquered Sumatra, Cambodia and even India and China[20] - a claim dismissed by the majority of scholars. However, as this text was written at a much later date than the happenings it describes, it can not be regarded as reliable information. Neither is it known what motivated the author to write it.
Direct evidence of Bali's history from Bali itself does not appear until the earliest copper plate (bronze) inscriptions dated from A.D. 882-914 which mention the building of a hermitage at Sukawana on Mt. Penulisan and the laying of the foundations of a temple in the village of Trunyan.[21] Here begins the second major theme of what scant knowledge we have of Bali's history prior to the 15th century - one of a succession of invasions, usually associated with conquests, by the people of neighbouring Java and the absorption by the Balinese of a degree of Javanese culture.
The first dated inscription on Bali making mention of a king is that of Ugrasena (915-942) who was a contemporary of king Sindok of East Java. Ugrasena was the founder of the Warmadewa dynasty and was followed by three kings and a queen whose exploits and achievements are largely forgotten.[22] An earlier inscription (making no mention of royalty) records a Hindu Balinese society, different to that of Java, professing both Hinduism and Buddhism and speaking a dialect peculiar to Bali.[23]
Bali was conquered again in the late tenth century by the Eastern Javanese king Dharmawangsa (989-1087) who, after subduing the island, placed his sister (perhaps sister-in-law) Mahendradatta on the throne beside or above the Balinese king Udayana.[24] Balinese inscriptions from 989-1022 bear the names of Udayana,[25] and his queen, Mahendradatta, who was the great-grand-daughter of Sindok and the mother of Airlangga, who ruled Java from 1019 to c. 1049 and under whose rule many Javanese Hindus migrated to Bali.[26]
Conqueror as he was, Dharmawangsa is also said to have been a great enlightener who employed scribes to copy and translate parts of the Indian epic, Mahabharata into the Javanese language. Javanese priests added to existing Balinese shrines and temples as well as building great new temple complexes at Goa Lelawah, Gelgel, Sasih and Pejeng. The Balinese seem to have been both enchanted and enamoured by their conquerors and adopted much in the way of architecture, sculpture and art from the Javanese.[27]
Airlangga, the first Balinese or, at least half Balinese, personage of which we have a reasonable amount of evidence seems to have been a well respected and moderate ruler. A reasonable relationship between ruler and villagers may be seen in a Balinese inscription of 1025 that records the king's sale of his hunting land to a village after the villagers had complained of their lack of land. In the same inscription we are told that village elders sat with the officers of royal law in order to guarantee fair trials and verdicts reflecting the consensus of local opinion.[28] Airlangga married a Javanese princess, became king of Java and made Bali a part of his empire. Before he died his Javanese realm was divided and plundered leaving Bali free.
The next king to take Bali (1284) was from the Singhasari kingdom and named Kertanagara; he invaded Bali and took away the king as prisoner.[29] Kertanagara, however, was killed in a court rebellion only three years later prompting the Balinese, once again, to expel their Javanese masters and under their own (Pejeng) kings, break away from Singhasari. So, by the turn of the century the most powerful force in Bali was, once again, a domestic one presided over by king Daiem Bedaulu based in, or near, Ubud.[30] Bali managed to cling to its independence until it was invaded by Majapahit forces in 1343 at which time it was ruled by Paduka Ashtasura Rata Bumi Banten.[31]
During Kertenagara's reign on Java he had behaved unwisely by slashing the faces of two Mongol messengers sent by Kublai Khan to demand tribute from the Singhasari kingdom. This prompted a Mongol invasion fleet to exact retribution but by the time the fleet arrived, Kertenagara was already dead and his throne was occupied by his son in law Raden Vijaya, later known as Kertarajasa, who used the Mongols to his own advantage against his principal enemy and then forced them to withdraw in confusion.
Raden Vijaya founded his capital at Majapahit so beginning an empire that was to conquer Bali and bring forth what became known as the Golden Age of both Bali and Java. For some years both Raden Vijaya and his son, who regarded themselves as successors to Kertenagara, had to suppress rebellions in Java and it was not until 1319 that Majapahit's authority was firmly established with the aid of the renowned soldier and statesman Gajah Madah.[32] The primary source for this information comes from the Desawarnana of Mpu Prapanca in which appears seven references to Bali.[33]
Gaja Madha was made mapatih, or prime minister, of Majapahit and it was whilst occupying this position that he planned and led the military expedition that conquered Bali.[34] An entirely successful expedition, it effectively crushed Balinese resistance and, under Hyam Wuruk's reign, the "Javanisation" of Bali intensified. Recognising what they determined to be a superior culture to their own, the Balinese rulers and nobility who had survived the conquest began to find ways of joining their family trees with Majapahit ministers and priests. Bali-Aga, "original Balinese", was no longer a term demanding respect as the Balinese readily accepted Majapahit culture - even down to another story of creation.
Hardly anything in Bali remained untouched by the new Javanese culture - ways of thinking, beliefs, customs, language7, technology, art, music, literature, and traditions. All that came from Majapahit was eagerly accepted and gradually changed beyond recognition. Javanese culture was absorbed and turned into a manifestation of classical Balinese culture as the Balinese came to think of Majapahit as being their culture of origin.[35] This absorption of other cultures has, in itself, been a major theme of Balinese history[36] despite the existence of a distinctly inward looking culture created from a mixture of animist and Hindu beliefs.
Thus it can be seen that there are three main themes running through the history of Bali prior to about 1400 A.D.; the transformation of the Austronesian seafaring immigrants into settled societies, the succession of invasions from neighbouring Java and the selective absorbtion of cultures from other places.[37]
The sources available to us in our quest for historical knowledge on the subject are, so far, inadequate in that they cannot provide the kind of sustained narrative sought. They are nevertheless valuable. Archaeology, inscriptions, the study of Austronesian languages and the geographic distribution of the Heger drums, early texts from other countries and what can be assumed or inferred from our knowledge of other Austronesian societies in the Malay Archipelago all play their part. Certainly, from what is known of the history of Bali prior to 1400 A.D. it is evident that there is much more that is not yet known.
Bibliography
Bellwood, P., Prehistory of the Indo-Malaysian Archipelago, Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1997.
Bernet Kempers, A.J., Monumental Bali, Singapore: Periplus Editions, Inc, 1991.
Bosch, F.D.K., Selected Studies in Indonesian Archaeology, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1961.
Chatterji, B.R., History of Indonesia Early and Medieval, Meerut: Chandra Prakash for Manohar Sahitya Niketan, 1967.
Durant, W., The Story of Civilization: 1. Our Oriental Heritage, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1954
Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc. Britannica [CD] 97. New York
Grolier Multimedia Encyclopaedia. Entry under "Indonesia" California 1995
Grant, B., Indonesia and Islamic Southeast Asia, Carlton: Melbourne University Press, 1996.
Hall, D.G.E., A History of South-East Asia, 4th edition, Basingstoke: MacMillan Education, 1981.
Internet site: www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/7374/INDONESIA.HTML. ASIA WEB
Internet site:http://www.askjeeves.com/FinalAnswer.asp?qCategory=GEOG&Link=http%3A% 2F%2Flcweb2%2Eloc%2Egov%2Ffrd%2Fcs%2Fidtoc%2Ehtml&Title=Library+of+Congress+Country+Studies&Answers=1&ajparam_list1=38&ajparam_fillers=%7C38%5B963%5D%7C&ajparam_qid=426&site_name=Jeeves&scope=web&ask=Where+can+I+find+extensive+historical%2C+economic%2C+and+political+information+about+the+country+Indonesia%3F
Internet site: http://history1900s.miningco.com/library/weekly/aa051698.htm Indonesian History
Internet site: htp://www.gimonca.com/sejarah
Jones, A.M.B, Early Tenth Century Java From The Inscriptions, Dordrecht: Foris Publications, 1984
Lamb, A., "Indian Influence in Ancient South-East Asia", in A.L. Basham (ed.), A Cultural History of India Oxford : Clarendon, 1975.
Mrazek, R. & Forman, B., Bali The Split Gate to Heaven, London: Orbis Publishing, 1983.
Osborne, M.E., Southeast Asia: An Introductory History, Sydney: George Allen & Unwin, 1979.
Prapanca. M., Desawarnana (Nagarakrtagama); transl, (from the Javanese) by S. Robinson, Leiden: KITLV Press, 1995.
Reader, L. & Ridout, L., Bali & Lombok: The Rough Guide, London: Rough Guides Ltd, 1996.
Rickleffs, M.C., A History of Modern Indonesia Since c. 1300, 2nd ed., Basingstoke: Macmillan Education, 1993.
Vlekke, B.H.M., Nusantara A History of Indonesia, The Hague and Bandung: W. Van Hoeve Ltd, 1959.
Wayland Barber, E., The Mummies of Urumchi, in The Australian Magazine March 13-14, 1999.
Zainu'ddin, A., A Short History of Indonesia, Melbourne: Cassell Australia Limited, 1968.
[1] E. Wayland Barber, The Mummies of Urumchi, in The Australian Magazine March 13-14 1999. Wayland Barber tells us that in the Taklamakan desert Chinese archaeologists have recently uncovered graves of Tokharian people so well preserved in the salt sands that the fingerprints of their naturally mummified bodies are easily read, that the textiles they were buried in still retain their colour and their facial features, in some cases, are so well preserved as to make them identifiable. These mummified bodies are 3,000 years old.
[2] A.J. Bernet Kempers. Monumental Bali. (Singapore 1991), p. 35
[3] Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc. Britannica [CD] 97. "The carbon-14 dating method was developed by the U.S. physicist Willard F. Libby about 1946. It has proven to be a versatile technique of dating fossils and archaeological specimens from 500 to 50,000 years old. The method is widely used by Pleistocene geologists, anthropologists, archaeologists, and investigators in related fields."
[4] Perhaps good examples of this are Schliemann's discovery of Homeric Troy in 1874 or Bouchard's discovery of the Rosetta Stone in 1799. A latter day Schliemann excavating in Bali at some future point could, in one excavation, conceivably change the course of what we now perceive to be the history of that island.
[5] B. Grant. Indonesia and Islamic Southeast Asia (Carlton 1996) p. 2.
[6] P. Bellwood. Prehistory of the Indo-Malaysian Archipelago (Honolulu 1997), pp. 107 - 121.
[7] Britannica Inc. Entry under Glottochronology. "The study of the rate of change occurring in the vocabularies of languages for the purpose of calculating the length of time (time depth) during which two related languages have developed independently. Glottochronology rests upon statistical comparison of the basic vocabulary shared by two or more related languages and on the assumption that the rate of vocabulary replacement is constant over sufficiently long periods of time. A number of linguists do not accept the methods or findings of glottochronology, for two reasons: the difficulty of compiling a culturally unbiased basic vocabulary list and the belief that the rate of linguistic change is not the same for all languages and is not constant for any single language.
....Glottochronological estimates indicate that diversification of Austronesian languages began around 4,000 to 5,000 years ago in the New Hebrides, in New Caledonia, and in the Solomons, and earlier still in the region of New Guinea.
The classification of Western Austronesian languages is not completely agreed upon.... The name Hesperonesian has recently achieved some acceptance as a convenient label for this grouping. Disagreement centres around the place of the Austronesian languages of Taiwan and east Indonesia, including the western end of New Guinea. Many linguists regard these languages as being most closely related to Hesperonesian, and, in particular, treat the Formosan languages of Taiwan as a branch of Hesperonesian .....The Hesperonesian group is generally regarded as dividing into two main branches, Western Indonesian, includes the languages of Malaya, Sumatra, Java, Madura, Bali, and Lombok, south Borneo, Madagascar, and probably the Chamic group of Vietnam and Kampuchea. The other, Northern Indonesian, encompasses the Philippine languages, some of the languages of north Borneo and the northern Celebes, and possibly the Formosan languages. "
[8] Bellwood, Prehistory, p. 295.
[9] Bellwood, Prehistory, pp. 277-281
[10] Bernet Kempers, Monumental Bali, pp. 18-22
[11] Ibid. pp. 16-17.
[12] Bellwood, Prehistory, P281.
[13] A. Zainu'ddin. A Short history of Indonesia. (Melbourne 1968), p. 20.
[14] B.R. Chatterji. History of Indonesia Early and Medieval. (Meerut 1967), p. 7.
[15] Chatterji, History, p. 35.
[16] D.G.E. Hall, A History of South-East Asia, 4th edition, (New York, 1981), p. 351.
[17] A. Lamb, "Indian Influence in Ancient South-East Asia", in A.L. Basham (ed.), A Cultural History of India (Oxford 1975). P. 444
[18] Bellwood, Prehistory p. 276
[19] Bernet Kempers, Monumental Bali. p. 37. Bernet Kempers states that the name Banten, in the context of this inscription (The Kubukubu inscription from East Java), obviously refers to Bali and not to Banten or Bantam in West Java.
A.M.B. Jones. Early Tenth Century Java From The Inscriptions. (Dordrecht) 1984. P. 166. Jones is not as certain as Bernet Kempers. She states that Bantun (called Banten by Bernet Kempers) could well be Bali but this is not certain due to the paucity of information.
[20] R. Mrazek & B. Forman. Bali The Split Gate to Heaven. (London 1983). p. 19. Mrazek and Forman dismiss Sanjaya as being mythical. However, Kempers in Bernet Kempers, Monumental Bali. p. 37 tells us that this information comes from the Carita Parahyangan text and that "...indigenous sources in both Cambodia and the then Chinese province of Tonkin actually do record Indonesian intervention in local affairs during the 8th century."....
[21] Bernet Kempers, Monumental Bali, p. 35.
[22] Mrazek & Forman, Bali The Split Gate, p 19
[23] Chatterji, History, p. 35.
[24] Mrazek & Forman, Bali The Split Gate, p. 20
[25] ASIA WEB Internet site: www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/7374/INDONESIA.HTML. Udayana, father of Airlangga, was born in A.D. 990.
[26] The 1995 Grolier Multimedia Encyclopaedia. Entry under "Indonesia" (California 1995)
[27] Mrazek & Forman, Bali The Split Gate, p. 21
[28] Grolier, Entry under "Indonesia Government and politics" tell us that " From 1017 to 1019 he lived with hermits, probably practicing asceticism. In 1019 he was hailed as ruler of the small principality of Pasuruan near the Brantas delta, but he could not take the military offensive until 1028 and his final success was not before 1035. His victories gradually established his claims to divine power. Airlangga dispatched his last enemy by provoking an uprising against him in the manner taught by Kautilya, the master of Indian statecraft who recommended the use of subversion against an enemy. In his "Calcutta" inscription Airlangga expressed the hope that all in the land would now be able to lead religious lives................... Officials made a circuit of the country and visited village elders. Royal rule was probably not harsh; the protests that have been preserved were probably prompted by unusually weak government."
In Internet site Op. Cit. ASIA WEB. We learn that "1025.Airlangga takes rule in eastern Java, founds Kahuripan kingdom, makes peace with Srivijaya, protects both Hindus and Buddhists. He extends his rule over central Java, eastern Java, and Bali. Airlangga is remembered in today's Indonesia as a model of religious tolerance.
A further account is given in: Internetsite:http://www.askjeeves.com/FinalAnswer.asp?qCategory=GEOG&Link=http%3A%2F%2Flcweb2%2Eloc%2Egov%2Ffrd%2Fcs%2Fidtoc%2Ehtml&Title=Library+of+Congress+Country+Studies&Answers=1&ajparam_list1=38&ajparam_fillers=%7C38%5B963%5D%7C&ajparam_qid=426&site_name=Jeeves&scope=web&ask=Where+can+I+find+extensive+historical%2C+economic%2C+and+political+information+about+the+country+Indonesia%3F
"Meanwhile, the island of Bali was ruled by King Airlangga, known as a wise and strong ruler. He had water-works built along the Brantas River that are still in use today. Before his death in 1409 AD he divided his kingdom into the kingdoms of Janggala and Daha or Kediri. These were to be ruled by his two sons."
[29] Chatterji, History, p. 37.
[30] L. Reader & L. Ridout. Bali & Lombok: The Rough Guide. (London 1996). p. 346.
[31] Bernet Kempers, Monumental Bali, p. 166.
[32] Grolier, Entry under "Indonesia-The Majapahit era."
[33] Prapanca. M., Desawarnana (Nagarakrtagama); translated, (from the Javanese) by S. Robinson, (Leiden) 1995. p. 44, canto 28 appears to show Bali as a vassal state: "When he [the Javanese King] had been some time in Patukangan, The officials from Bali and Madura arrived....Out of devotion they brought gifts, competing with each other...."
p, 76, canto 70 refers to the year 1363 ...."When the King returned...he was concerned with the illness of the minister...Gajah Mada.... [who] had been his companion in bringing about an increase in Java's power in the past; In Bali and in Sadeng was the proof of his success in wiping out enemies."
[34] Prapanca, Desawarnana, P. 59. Canto 49:
"Further, in the Saka-year...(1265, AD 1343)
The king of Bali was evil and base-
He was attacked with an army, broken and completely crushed
Every kind of evildoer was fearful, and made off quickly....
[35] Mrazek & Forman, Bali The Split Gate, p. 23.
[36] Bernet Kempers, Monumental Bali. p. 33. According to Bernet Kempers " As a people the Balinese engaged everything with which they came into contact, carefully choosing what they wanted and rejecting what they did not want after trying it out, thus creating a civilisation of their own. They apparently did this repeatedly; besides the western connections there were also relations with the north and with Neolithic Japan..."
[37] It is interesting to note that the Balinese did not absorb cultural baggage from all and sundry. They did not for example, take anything from Islam, found no need to import the Heger drums and do not seem to have taken in anything worth remarking upon from China.
Balinese written history begins with the first copperplate inscription so far discovered on the island which is dated at 882 A.D; even so, from this date up until fourth decade of the 14th century its history remains sketchy and difficult to elucidate. Bali's prehistory is even more difficult to throw light upon mainly because of scant archaeological evidence - to date too few archaeological digs have taken place to provide anything like a continuous narrative. The sources available to the modern day historian are either very general, as in the case of the finds from archaeological digs or, as in the case of inscriptions, very specific.
This essay will examine the sources which historians are able to employ in their attempts to piece together a chronological record of what went on in Bali before the end of the 14th century and explain what themes these sources have so far helped to make known in relation to the history of that island.
Bali's climate, unlike say, Peru's dry mountainous climes or China's Taklamakan desert[1], is particularly destructive of substances such as paper and textiles on which records are often kept. Thus, whilst we have records from other cultures and regions of the earth dating back in some cases over many hundreds of years, centuries old written records from tropical monsoonal regions are almost completely lacking. In the Malay Archipelago most records were written on palm leaves and subject to the ravages of insects and bacterial decay.[2] To preserve the written word in this form required the copying of records every century or so in a part of the world subject to earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and, of course, warfare.
Archaeology, therefore plays a very important role in shedding light upon Bali's past events, not least because of the simple fact that it is able to unearth durable items. Inscriptions which have been unearthed or otherwise discovered both on Bali, or in other parts of the Malay archipelago but which refer to Bali, form the main anchoring points in a (so far) sketchy historical outline. For the most part, however, archaeology is incapable of furnishing us with sufficient detail because dating methods, such as the radiocarbon (carbon 14) method are not precise enough to enable the historian to accurately pinpoint past events.[3]
It follows that when there are gaps in the historical record, from time to time our view of the history of a place is "stood on its head" by a new discovery.[4] One must therefore be careful not to jump to conclusions when attempting to apply linkages obtained from the extrapolation of scraps of archaeological evidence to the known facts. In addition to the above it must be borne in mind that Bali is one of the most fertile places on earth. Its profusion of natural, tropical vegetation quickly covers neglected monuments, cities and the remnants of even large civilisations. Thus, Java which has been civilised longer than England[5] is practically devoid of records other than those in bronze and stone. The same must therefore apply to Bali which has very similar climatic conditions.
Modern scholars of South East Asian history have found that the pre Indic inhabitants of Bali were Austronesian speakers originating in Taiwan who, by the time they reached Bali, belonged to the Hesperonesian language sub group;[6] a conclusion arrived at by the study of glottochronology.[7] (see diagrams 1 & 2 on page 3)
The Austronesian speakers almost certainly drifted into Bali in small groups over a long period of time and did not coalesce into large groups with single identities for centuries. Rather, they would most likely have remained in scattered groups about the coasts and rivers whilst coexisting with the indigenous populations. The 200 or so languages within the Western, or Indonesian, branch of the Austronesian family attest to them having remained independent for a considerable period of time.
The length of time between the arrival of Austronesian speakers and recorded history on Bali (in stone or bronze), is in all probability upwards of four thousand years. At Gilimanuk in the west of Bali, stone sarcophagi have been excavated in contexts dating to approximately 1,500 - 2,000 years ago. Similarly, from sites close by, came bronze, gold, glass and carnelian items which have been C14 dated to between 200 BC and 300 AD.[8] During the centuries preceding these latter finds, it seems fairly safe to assume that the main theme running through Balinese history has been the transformation of small groups of Austronesian speakers from marine orientated societies to that of a more sedentary village life and the slow process of integration with neighbouring groups. This transformation would, perforce, have involved the domestication of animals and plants and the development of the technologies which go hand in hand with these practices - irrigation, selective breeding and so forth; it follows that small harbour kingdoms would eventually have emerged in the process.
Another source of information about prehistoric South East Asia comes from study of the distribution and manufacturing points of bronze kettledrums and from this it is possible to glean some information about the history of Bali.[9] Four main types of drums have been found spread across vast expanses of South and South East Asia and are generally classified as Heger l, II, III, IV after F. Heger, an Austrian archaeologist. These highly decorative drums were cast in bronze and were much valued objects which were traded over almost the whole of South East Asia and travelled with people when they migrated. The Heger I (sometimes referred to as the migratory drum) was largely a product of the Vietnamese Dongsonian civilisation which reached its cultural apogee in 4th century B.C. and continued to flourish until the 1st century A.D.[10]
During this period, and for a variety of reasons, the Heger I drums spread throughout the Malay Archipelago and have been unearthed in many small and remote islands in the region. It is interesting to note that while no Heger I drums have ever been found on Bali, Balinese Pejeng type metal drums of the same age have been unearthed in Central Java. This would seem to indicate that Bali was already casting its own metal drums by the time that Heger I types were undergoing their southward migration. Further, the manufacture of Pejeng type drums employed a different technology to all four types of Heger drums in that they were cast (lost wax method) in two pieces whereas the Heger drums were all cast in one piece. [11]
The import of this information lies in the inference that on Bali during the five hundred years under discussion, there already existed sophisticated artisans capable of the independent development of a fairly complex casting technology in a society which had no need for the widely distributed - and therefore widely accepted - Heger style drums. The Pejeng drums, according to Bernet Kempers, ..."formed an essential part of pre-Hindu Balinese developments". Certainly, Pejeng type metal drums manufactured on Bali were not mere one-offs or prototypes; fragments of stone imprinting molds for impressing the decorative patterns upon the wax layer for the drums casting have been found on the island.[12] However limited, this bespeaks of a production run.
Any serious study of history must, of course, make use of an amalgamation of different kinds of evidence and in Bali's case this amalgam, thus far, comprises non specific archaeological finds, specific inscriptions (usually the results of archaeological finds) and documents from other, more distant, areas in the region which refer to Bali. Undoubtedly as more archaeological digs take place, more will be uncovered to add to the loosely woven fabric which today is regarded as Balinese history. However, some areas of study such as a comprehensive dating of potsherds are yet to be undertaken and others, such as the study of ancient textiles, can not be undertaken because the evidence has decomposed.
Inscriptions whilst being an invaluable source to the historian must also be examined with caution by the epigraphist. Reasons for producing inscriptions are manifold and do not necessarily relate to actual events or happenings; there being no reason why legends or myths can not be inscribed on bronze or stone. Inscriptions, when they do provide useful information, are not necessarily accurate throughout their narrative. Mpu Prapanca's panegyric Desawarnana - a primary source written in the 14th century begins with "hail to the King! Homage be to thee!" and goes on with a list of superlatives describing the Majapahit King, his master, who he describes variously as being Siwa and Buddha, a universal soul and lord of the lords of the world.
Undoubtedly the Desawarnana, whatever its intended general audience, was also written to be read by, or related to, the king and when Prapanca later describes the conquest of Bali he tells us that the king of Bali was evil and base. Had the king of Majapahit taken Bali by deceitful and treacherous means and the king of Bali been kind, considerate and in other ways an exemplary monarch, it is extremely doubtful that Prapanca would have recorded this information accurately.
All the dated information regarding Bali prior to the eighth century comes from Chinese sources[13] which were not written as geographical guides and often refer to places in descriptive terms relating to the products which were there obtainable. In T'ang historical records Bali is mentioned alongside the kingdom of Ho-ling as being a place from whence came embassies between the years 637-649 A.D.[14] Bali is also referred to by the Chinese as P'o-li, the ruler of which was a king of the Kaundinya family who sent embassies to China in the 6th century A.D.[15]
According to Hall the Balinese had embraced Hinduism by the 7th century AD, by which time Bali was visited, at least intermittently, by Chinese traders and Indian literati.[16] The Indianization of South East Asia probably began around the first century B.C. and by the fifth century A.D Indian culture was widely known in the region with relatively large Indianized states appearing in Java, Cambodia and Vietnam as well as in smaller districts such as Kalimantan and Sulawesi.[17] It is therefore probable that Hall's estimate regarding the Balinese and their first contact with Hinduism errs on the side of caution. Bellwood, however, writing in 1997 opined that archaeological evidence for Indian-Southeast Asian trade contact in the period from 200 BC to AD 500 was strong "especially for Thailand and Bali."[18]
An East Javanese source, the Kubukubu inscription, issued by the Javanese king Balitung in A.D. 905 appears to refer to Bali under the name Bantun. [19] This inscription comprising seven copperplates is a copy made shortly after AD 905 and makes mention of rewards given by King Balitung to two men because they were successful on an expedition to Bantan. The "expedition" referred to is generally taken to mean a conquest.
A later Javanese text also records a successful conquest of the island by the first known Central Javanese king, Sanjaya. This text puts the date of the conquest of Bali at A.D. 732 and also claims that Sanjaya conquered Sumatra, Cambodia and even India and China[20] - a claim dismissed by the majority of scholars. However, as this text was written at a much later date than the happenings it describes, it can not be regarded as reliable information. Neither is it known what motivated the author to write it.
Direct evidence of Bali's history from Bali itself does not appear until the earliest copper plate (bronze) inscriptions dated from A.D. 882-914 which mention the building of a hermitage at Sukawana on Mt. Penulisan and the laying of the foundations of a temple in the village of Trunyan.[21] Here begins the second major theme of what scant knowledge we have of Bali's history prior to the 15th century - one of a succession of invasions, usually associated with conquests, by the people of neighbouring Java and the absorption by the Balinese of a degree of Javanese culture.
The first dated inscription on Bali making mention of a king is that of Ugrasena (915-942) who was a contemporary of king Sindok of East Java. Ugrasena was the founder of the Warmadewa dynasty and was followed by three kings and a queen whose exploits and achievements are largely forgotten.[22] An earlier inscription (making no mention of royalty) records a Hindu Balinese society, different to that of Java, professing both Hinduism and Buddhism and speaking a dialect peculiar to Bali.[23]
Bali was conquered again in the late tenth century by the Eastern Javanese king Dharmawangsa (989-1087) who, after subduing the island, placed his sister (perhaps sister-in-law) Mahendradatta on the throne beside or above the Balinese king Udayana.[24] Balinese inscriptions from 989-1022 bear the names of Udayana,[25] and his queen, Mahendradatta, who was the great-grand-daughter of Sindok and the mother of Airlangga, who ruled Java from 1019 to c. 1049 and under whose rule many Javanese Hindus migrated to Bali.[26]
Conqueror as he was, Dharmawangsa is also said to have been a great enlightener who employed scribes to copy and translate parts of the Indian epic, Mahabharata into the Javanese language. Javanese priests added to existing Balinese shrines and temples as well as building great new temple complexes at Goa Lelawah, Gelgel, Sasih and Pejeng. The Balinese seem to have been both enchanted and enamoured by their conquerors and adopted much in the way of architecture, sculpture and art from the Javanese.[27]
Airlangga, the first Balinese or, at least half Balinese, personage of which we have a reasonable amount of evidence seems to have been a well respected and moderate ruler. A reasonable relationship between ruler and villagers may be seen in a Balinese inscription of 1025 that records the king's sale of his hunting land to a village after the villagers had complained of their lack of land. In the same inscription we are told that village elders sat with the officers of royal law in order to guarantee fair trials and verdicts reflecting the consensus of local opinion.[28] Airlangga married a Javanese princess, became king of Java and made Bali a part of his empire. Before he died his Javanese realm was divided and plundered leaving Bali free.
The next king to take Bali (1284) was from the Singhasari kingdom and named Kertanagara; he invaded Bali and took away the king as prisoner.[29] Kertanagara, however, was killed in a court rebellion only three years later prompting the Balinese, once again, to expel their Javanese masters and under their own (Pejeng) kings, break away from Singhasari. So, by the turn of the century the most powerful force in Bali was, once again, a domestic one presided over by king Daiem Bedaulu based in, or near, Ubud.[30] Bali managed to cling to its independence until it was invaded by Majapahit forces in 1343 at which time it was ruled by Paduka Ashtasura Rata Bumi Banten.[31]
During Kertenagara's reign on Java he had behaved unwisely by slashing the faces of two Mongol messengers sent by Kublai Khan to demand tribute from the Singhasari kingdom. This prompted a Mongol invasion fleet to exact retribution but by the time the fleet arrived, Kertenagara was already dead and his throne was occupied by his son in law Raden Vijaya, later known as Kertarajasa, who used the Mongols to his own advantage against his principal enemy and then forced them to withdraw in confusion.
Raden Vijaya founded his capital at Majapahit so beginning an empire that was to conquer Bali and bring forth what became known as the Golden Age of both Bali and Java. For some years both Raden Vijaya and his son, who regarded themselves as successors to Kertenagara, had to suppress rebellions in Java and it was not until 1319 that Majapahit's authority was firmly established with the aid of the renowned soldier and statesman Gajah Madah.[32] The primary source for this information comes from the Desawarnana of Mpu Prapanca in which appears seven references to Bali.[33]
Gaja Madha was made mapatih, or prime minister, of Majapahit and it was whilst occupying this position that he planned and led the military expedition that conquered Bali.[34] An entirely successful expedition, it effectively crushed Balinese resistance and, under Hyam Wuruk's reign, the "Javanisation" of Bali intensified. Recognising what they determined to be a superior culture to their own, the Balinese rulers and nobility who had survived the conquest began to find ways of joining their family trees with Majapahit ministers and priests. Bali-Aga, "original Balinese", was no longer a term demanding respect as the Balinese readily accepted Majapahit culture - even down to another story of creation.
Hardly anything in Bali remained untouched by the new Javanese culture - ways of thinking, beliefs, customs, language7, technology, art, music, literature, and traditions. All that came from Majapahit was eagerly accepted and gradually changed beyond recognition. Javanese culture was absorbed and turned into a manifestation of classical Balinese culture as the Balinese came to think of Majapahit as being their culture of origin.[35] This absorption of other cultures has, in itself, been a major theme of Balinese history[36] despite the existence of a distinctly inward looking culture created from a mixture of animist and Hindu beliefs.
Thus it can be seen that there are three main themes running through the history of Bali prior to about 1400 A.D.; the transformation of the Austronesian seafaring immigrants into settled societies, the succession of invasions from neighbouring Java and the selective absorbtion of cultures from other places.[37]
The sources available to us in our quest for historical knowledge on the subject are, so far, inadequate in that they cannot provide the kind of sustained narrative sought. They are nevertheless valuable. Archaeology, inscriptions, the study of Austronesian languages and the geographic distribution of the Heger drums, early texts from other countries and what can be assumed or inferred from our knowledge of other Austronesian societies in the Malay Archipelago all play their part. Certainly, from what is known of the history of Bali prior to 1400 A.D. it is evident that there is much more that is not yet known.
Bibliography
Bellwood, P., Prehistory of the Indo-Malaysian Archipelago, Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1997.
Bernet Kempers, A.J., Monumental Bali, Singapore: Periplus Editions, Inc, 1991.
Bosch, F.D.K., Selected Studies in Indonesian Archaeology, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1961.
Chatterji, B.R., History of Indonesia Early and Medieval, Meerut: Chandra Prakash for Manohar Sahitya Niketan, 1967.
Durant, W., The Story of Civilization: 1. Our Oriental Heritage, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1954
Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc. Britannica [CD] 97. New York
Grolier Multimedia Encyclopaedia. Entry under "Indonesia" California 1995
Grant, B., Indonesia and Islamic Southeast Asia, Carlton: Melbourne University Press, 1996.
Hall, D.G.E., A History of South-East Asia, 4th edition, Basingstoke: MacMillan Education, 1981.
Internet site: www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/7374/INDONESIA.HTML. ASIA WEB
Internet site:http://www.askjeeves.com/FinalAnswer.asp?qCategory=GEOG&Link=http%3A% 2F%2Flcweb2%2Eloc%2Egov%2Ffrd%2Fcs%2Fidtoc%2Ehtml&Title=Library+of+Congress+Country+Studies&Answers=1&ajparam_list1=38&ajparam_fillers=%7C38%5B963%5D%7C&ajparam_qid=426&site_name=Jeeves&scope=web&ask=Where+can+I+find+extensive+historical%2C+economic%2C+and+political+information+about+the+country+Indonesia%3F
Internet site: http://history1900s.miningco.com/library/weekly/aa051698.htm Indonesian History
Internet site: htp://www.gimonca.com/sejarah
Jones, A.M.B, Early Tenth Century Java From The Inscriptions, Dordrecht: Foris Publications, 1984
Lamb, A., "Indian Influence in Ancient South-East Asia", in A.L. Basham (ed.), A Cultural History of India Oxford : Clarendon, 1975.
Mrazek, R. & Forman, B., Bali The Split Gate to Heaven, London: Orbis Publishing, 1983.
Osborne, M.E., Southeast Asia: An Introductory History, Sydney: George Allen & Unwin, 1979.
Prapanca. M., Desawarnana (Nagarakrtagama); transl, (from the Javanese) by S. Robinson, Leiden: KITLV Press, 1995.
Reader, L. & Ridout, L., Bali & Lombok: The Rough Guide, London: Rough Guides Ltd, 1996.
Rickleffs, M.C., A History of Modern Indonesia Since c. 1300, 2nd ed., Basingstoke: Macmillan Education, 1993.
Vlekke, B.H.M., Nusantara A History of Indonesia, The Hague and Bandung: W. Van Hoeve Ltd, 1959.
Wayland Barber, E., The Mummies of Urumchi, in The Australian Magazine March 13-14, 1999.
Zainu'ddin, A., A Short History of Indonesia, Melbourne: Cassell Australia Limited, 1968.
[1] E. Wayland Barber, The Mummies of Urumchi, in The Australian Magazine March 13-14 1999. Wayland Barber tells us that in the Taklamakan desert Chinese archaeologists have recently uncovered graves of Tokharian people so well preserved in the salt sands that the fingerprints of their naturally mummified bodies are easily read, that the textiles they were buried in still retain their colour and their facial features, in some cases, are so well preserved as to make them identifiable. These mummified bodies are 3,000 years old.
[2] A.J. Bernet Kempers. Monumental Bali. (Singapore 1991), p. 35
[3] Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc. Britannica [CD] 97. "The carbon-14 dating method was developed by the U.S. physicist Willard F. Libby about 1946. It has proven to be a versatile technique of dating fossils and archaeological specimens from 500 to 50,000 years old. The method is widely used by Pleistocene geologists, anthropologists, archaeologists, and investigators in related fields."
[4] Perhaps good examples of this are Schliemann's discovery of Homeric Troy in 1874 or Bouchard's discovery of the Rosetta Stone in 1799. A latter day Schliemann excavating in Bali at some future point could, in one excavation, conceivably change the course of what we now perceive to be the history of that island.
[5] B. Grant. Indonesia and Islamic Southeast Asia (Carlton 1996) p. 2.
[6] P. Bellwood. Prehistory of the Indo-Malaysian Archipelago (Honolulu 1997), pp. 107 - 121.
[7] Britannica Inc. Entry under Glottochronology. "The study of the rate of change occurring in the vocabularies of languages for the purpose of calculating the length of time (time depth) during which two related languages have developed independently. Glottochronology rests upon statistical comparison of the basic vocabulary shared by two or more related languages and on the assumption that the rate of vocabulary replacement is constant over sufficiently long periods of time. A number of linguists do not accept the methods or findings of glottochronology, for two reasons: the difficulty of compiling a culturally unbiased basic vocabulary list and the belief that the rate of linguistic change is not the same for all languages and is not constant for any single language.
....Glottochronological estimates indicate that diversification of Austronesian languages began around 4,000 to 5,000 years ago in the New Hebrides, in New Caledonia, and in the Solomons, and earlier still in the region of New Guinea.
The classification of Western Austronesian languages is not completely agreed upon.... The name Hesperonesian has recently achieved some acceptance as a convenient label for this grouping. Disagreement centres around the place of the Austronesian languages of Taiwan and east Indonesia, including the western end of New Guinea. Many linguists regard these languages as being most closely related to Hesperonesian, and, in particular, treat the Formosan languages of Taiwan as a branch of Hesperonesian .....The Hesperonesian group is generally regarded as dividing into two main branches, Western Indonesian, includes the languages of Malaya, Sumatra, Java, Madura, Bali, and Lombok, south Borneo, Madagascar, and probably the Chamic group of Vietnam and Kampuchea. The other, Northern Indonesian, encompasses the Philippine languages, some of the languages of north Borneo and the northern Celebes, and possibly the Formosan languages. "
[8] Bellwood, Prehistory, p. 295.
[9] Bellwood, Prehistory, pp. 277-281
[10] Bernet Kempers, Monumental Bali, pp. 18-22
[11] Ibid. pp. 16-17.
[12] Bellwood, Prehistory, P281.
[13] A. Zainu'ddin. A Short history of Indonesia. (Melbourne 1968), p. 20.
[14] B.R. Chatterji. History of Indonesia Early and Medieval. (Meerut 1967), p. 7.
[15] Chatterji, History, p. 35.
[16] D.G.E. Hall, A History of South-East Asia, 4th edition, (New York, 1981), p. 351.
[17] A. Lamb, "Indian Influence in Ancient South-East Asia", in A.L. Basham (ed.), A Cultural History of India (Oxford 1975). P. 444
[18] Bellwood, Prehistory p. 276
[19] Bernet Kempers, Monumental Bali. p. 37. Bernet Kempers states that the name Banten, in the context of this inscription (The Kubukubu inscription from East Java), obviously refers to Bali and not to Banten or Bantam in West Java.
A.M.B. Jones. Early Tenth Century Java From The Inscriptions. (Dordrecht) 1984. P. 166. Jones is not as certain as Bernet Kempers. She states that Bantun (called Banten by Bernet Kempers) could well be Bali but this is not certain due to the paucity of information.
[20] R. Mrazek & B. Forman. Bali The Split Gate to Heaven. (London 1983). p. 19. Mrazek and Forman dismiss Sanjaya as being mythical. However, Kempers in Bernet Kempers, Monumental Bali. p. 37 tells us that this information comes from the Carita Parahyangan text and that "...indigenous sources in both Cambodia and the then Chinese province of Tonkin actually do record Indonesian intervention in local affairs during the 8th century."....
[21] Bernet Kempers, Monumental Bali, p. 35.
[22] Mrazek & Forman, Bali The Split Gate, p 19
[23] Chatterji, History, p. 35.
[24] Mrazek & Forman, Bali The Split Gate, p. 20
[25] ASIA WEB Internet site: www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/7374/INDONESIA.HTML. Udayana, father of Airlangga, was born in A.D. 990.
[26] The 1995 Grolier Multimedia Encyclopaedia. Entry under "Indonesia" (California 1995)
[27] Mrazek & Forman, Bali The Split Gate, p. 21
[28] Grolier, Entry under "Indonesia Government and politics" tell us that " From 1017 to 1019 he lived with hermits, probably practicing asceticism. In 1019 he was hailed as ruler of the small principality of Pasuruan near the Brantas delta, but he could not take the military offensive until 1028 and his final success was not before 1035. His victories gradually established his claims to divine power. Airlangga dispatched his last enemy by provoking an uprising against him in the manner taught by Kautilya, the master of Indian statecraft who recommended the use of subversion against an enemy. In his "Calcutta" inscription Airlangga expressed the hope that all in the land would now be able to lead religious lives................... Officials made a circuit of the country and visited village elders. Royal rule was probably not harsh; the protests that have been preserved were probably prompted by unusually weak government."
In Internet site Op. Cit. ASIA WEB. We learn that "1025.Airlangga takes rule in eastern Java, founds Kahuripan kingdom, makes peace with Srivijaya, protects both Hindus and Buddhists. He extends his rule over central Java, eastern Java, and Bali. Airlangga is remembered in today's Indonesia as a model of religious tolerance.
A further account is given in: Internetsite:http://www.askjeeves.com/FinalAnswer.asp?qCategory=GEOG&Link=http%3A%2F%2Flcweb2%2Eloc%2Egov%2Ffrd%2Fcs%2Fidtoc%2Ehtml&Title=Library+of+Congress+Country+Studies&Answers=1&ajparam_list1=38&ajparam_fillers=%7C38%5B963%5D%7C&ajparam_qid=426&site_name=Jeeves&scope=web&ask=Where+can+I+find+extensive+historical%2C+economic%2C+and+political+information+about+the+country+Indonesia%3F
"Meanwhile, the island of Bali was ruled by King Airlangga, known as a wise and strong ruler. He had water-works built along the Brantas River that are still in use today. Before his death in 1409 AD he divided his kingdom into the kingdoms of Janggala and Daha or Kediri. These were to be ruled by his two sons."
[29] Chatterji, History, p. 37.
[30] L. Reader & L. Ridout. Bali & Lombok: The Rough Guide. (London 1996). p. 346.
[31] Bernet Kempers, Monumental Bali, p. 166.
[32] Grolier, Entry under "Indonesia-The Majapahit era."
[33] Prapanca. M., Desawarnana (Nagarakrtagama); translated, (from the Javanese) by S. Robinson, (Leiden) 1995. p. 44, canto 28 appears to show Bali as a vassal state: "When he [the Javanese King] had been some time in Patukangan, The officials from Bali and Madura arrived....Out of devotion they brought gifts, competing with each other...."
p, 76, canto 70 refers to the year 1363 ...."When the King returned...he was concerned with the illness of the minister...Gajah Mada.... [who] had been his companion in bringing about an increase in Java's power in the past; In Bali and in Sadeng was the proof of his success in wiping out enemies."
[34] Prapanca, Desawarnana, P. 59. Canto 49:
"Further, in the Saka-year...(1265, AD 1343)
The king of Bali was evil and base-
He was attacked with an army, broken and completely crushed
Every kind of evildoer was fearful, and made off quickly....
[35] Mrazek & Forman, Bali The Split Gate, p. 23.
[36] Bernet Kempers, Monumental Bali. p. 33. According to Bernet Kempers " As a people the Balinese engaged everything with which they came into contact, carefully choosing what they wanted and rejecting what they did not want after trying it out, thus creating a civilisation of their own. They apparently did this repeatedly; besides the western connections there were also relations with the north and with Neolithic Japan..."
[37] It is interesting to note that the Balinese did not absorb cultural baggage from all and sundry. They did not for example, take anything from Islam, found no need to import the Heger drums and do not seem to have taken in anything worth remarking upon from China.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)