New Theory on Angkor, Who were the last Varman kings? Options

[Leeporter]

Because there is a gap of almost 100 years!!!! Haha, what a dumb logic you use

What gap????

Jayavarman IX took the reign between 1328 - 1337
Nippean Bat took the reign between 1341 - 1347.

He took the reign around 5-10 years after Jayavarman IX died.

If Khmer are so proud of their great Angkorian kings, why they didn't put Jayavarman IX and earlier kings in the original Chronicle of Cambodia?

[Leeporter]

Here is a paraphrased excerpt of the translation of Chau Ju-kua's Chu-fan-chi by Hirth and Rockhill regarding Sanfotsi. Notice the directions given for voyages to that country:


"Sanfotsi lies between Chenla and Toupo. Its rule extend over fifteen chou. It lies due south of Tsu'an-chou. In the winter, with the monsoon, you sail a little more than a month and then come to Lingyamon (Lingayen?), where one-third of the passing merchants before entering this country of Sanfotsi.

A large proportion of the people are surnamed P'u (Apu?). The people either live scattered about outside the city, or on the water on rafts of boards covered over with reeds, and these are exempt from taxation.
They are skilled at fighting on land or water. When they are about to make war on another state they assemble and send for the such a force as the occasion demands. They appoint chiefs and leaders, and all provide their own military equipment and the necessary provisions. In facing the enemy and braving death they have not their equal among other nations.

During most of the year the climate is hot, and there is but little cold weather. Their domestic animals are very much like those of China. They have wine of flowers, wine of coconuts, and wine of areca nuts and honey, all fermented, though without any yeast of any kind, but they are so intoxicating to drink."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chou Ku-fei has pretty much the same thing to say about Sanfotsi:

"Sanfotsi is in the Southern Ocean (South China Sea). It is the most important port-of-call on the sea-routes of the foreigners from the countries of Toupo on the east and from the countries of the Arabs and Kulin (Thailand?) to the west; they all pass through on the way to China.

The country has no natural products, but the people are skilled in fighting. When they are about to fight, they cover their bodies with a medicine which prevents swords wounding them (anting-anting?). In fighting on land or on water none surpass them in impetousity of attack; even the Kulin people come after them. If some foreign ship, passing this place, should not enter here, an armed party would certainly come out kill them to the last."

Examining the accounts above we find that Sanfotsi was to the south of China, and was, in fact, due south of the port of Ts'uan-chou. This is supported by an official historical document describing the trade routes of the South, which mentions the voyage from Sanfotsi to China.:

"Sanfotsi is an important thoroughfare on the sea-routes of the foreigners on their way to and fro. Ships (leaving it for China) sail due north, and having passed the Shang-hia-chu islands and the sea of Kiau-chi (Tongking), they come within the limits of China."

If we study the map below (not to scale), we see that Ts'uan-chou is located by most geographers on the South China coast adjacent to northern Taiwan. It is generally reated either with present-day Fuzhou or Xiamen at about 120 degrees East longitude.


Obviously, if we head due south of Ts'uan-chou, we will be heading on a course for the Northern Philippines, or at least the northeast coast of Borneo. It may be that in this same area was the land known as Foshi by the Chinese Buddhist pilgrim, I-Ching. Foshi is often related linguistically to Sanfotsi, and it was reached by a 20 day journey to the south from the ports of Canton or Ts'uan-chou during the winter monsoon. This closely matches the description of travel to Sanfotsi. Here is the description of the voyage to Foshi by Kie Tan:

"From Kuang-chou (Canton) towards the southeast, travelling by sea for 200 li, one reaches Mount T’un-mon. Then, with a favourable wind going westward for two days, one reaches the Kiu-chou rocks (Hainan). Then southward, and after two days one reaches the Siang-shi, or Elephant Rock. Then southward after three days, one comes to Mount Chan-pu-lan, this mountain is in the sea at 200 li east of the country of Huan-wang (Tongking). Then southward, after two days journey, one reaches Mount Ling. Then, after a day’s journey one comes to the country of Montu. Then after a day’s journey one comes to the counry of Ku-tan; then after a day’s journey one reaches the territory of Pon-to’o-lang. Then after two days journey one comes to Mount Kun-t’u-nung. Then after five days journey one comes to the strait the Barbarians call Chi. From the south to the north it is 100 li.. On the northern shore is the country of Lo-yue, on the southern coast is the country of Foshi."


Toupo, Entrepot of the Southeast


Toupo was Sanfotsi's main competitor in the South China Sea. Both were great island empires that thrived on trade. Here is a description of the journey from Toupo to China from the official Chinese documents:

"Ships coming from Toupo go a little northwest but when they have passed the Shi-ir-tzi rocks, they take the same route as the Sanfotsi ships from below the Shang-hia-chu isles."


Thus, the ships from Toupo sailed northwest toward Sanfotsi, which after passing, they headed due north along with ships from that port. Chau Ju-kua states about Toupo:

"The kingdom of Toupo also called P'u-kia-lung is in a southeasterly direction from Ts'uan-chou, whence ships start, as a rule, during the winter, for sailing continually with the north wind, they arrive within about a month."
The winter monsoons mentioned for travel both to Sanfotsi and Toupo blow from South China towards the southeast, the opposite direction of the typhoons of the rainy season during the summer.


According to most Chinese geographical works, the journey from Toupo to the China coast first involved a journey of about two weeks heading northwest before reaching Poni (Panay?), then you resume a northwest heading arriving in a about a week at Mai (Mindoro), from here the journey still continues northwest before reaching Sanfotsi in a few days. From here you head either due north for Ts'uan-chou or a bit northwest for Canton. Clearly, Toupo was well to the southeast of the South China coast. J.L. Moens believed that the capital of Toupo was the city of Toubouk, the old name of Cotabato in Mindanao.

While Sanfotsi was considered the major port of the South, and Toupo of the Southeast, ports at Tongking and Cambodia were considered the major markets of the Southwest from the port of Canton near modern Hong Kong. Clearly from this we can see that both Sanfotsi and Toupo are located to the east of Cambodia and Tongking.


The Muslim Accounts of Zabag and Wak-wak



The Chinese accounts of Sanfotsi and Toupo started from about the 10th century and 5th century respectively, and both continued up until about the late 1200's. During most of this time, the Muslim geographers also wrote on the same area, basing their accounts on the tales of merchants, ambassadors, etc., to the region. Most scholars are in agreement that Sanfotsi was known to the Muslims as Zabag, while Toupo was known as Wak-wak.

Al-Biruni, a noted writer during this period who travelled to India wrote that Zabag was placed on the eastern side of the Sea of Sanf (Champa or coastal central/south Vietnam). This is confirmed by another famous geographer, Mas’udi, who stated Zabaj was oriented toward Khmer, which comprises modern Cambodia and South Vietnam, as Ceylon is oriented toward Madurai in South India. It was known as an island rich in gold mines.
Mas'udi noted that this kingdom had on its east side an ocean of unknown extent, which was basically the same as the Great Eastern Ocean-Sea of the Chinese. The latter ocean was also located to the east of Sanfotsi and Toupo, and it was here that the weilu was located, where waters began to go "downward." It is interesting to note that the Muslim writers mention some interesting flora and fauna when describing the main island of the kingdom of Zabaj. Among them were the dwarf buffalo, the python and the giant camphor tree. Now the dwarf buffalo must be either the tamaraw of Mindoro, or the anoa of Celebes. The python is native to both the Philippines and Borneo, as are the giant camphor trees, although these are more common in Borneo.

The Muslims had much to say about these islands but we will confine ourselves to a few quotes:



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In the sea of Champa (off central/south Vietnam) is the empire of Maharaja, the king of the islands, who rules over an empire without limit and has innumerable troops. Even the most rapid vessels could not complete in two years a tour round the isles which are under his possesssion. The territories of this king produce all sorts of spices and aromatics, and no other sovereign of the world gets as much wealth from the soil." (Mas'udi, AD 943)


"the eastern islands in this ocean (Sea of Champa), which are nearer to China than India, are the islands of Zabaj, called by the Hindus, Suvarnadvipa, i.e. the gold islands*... because you obtain much gold as deposit if you wash only a little of the earth of that country." (Al-Biruni, 1030 AD)

"On its shores (i.e. of the sea of Sanf or Champa), are the dominions of a King called Mihraj, who possesses a great number of populous and fertile islands, covered with fields and pastures, and producing ivory, camphor, nutmeg, mace, clove, aloeswood, cardamom, cubeb..." (Idrisi, 1150)

"The gold is plentiful, the horse bits, the chains and necklaces of monkeys, dogs and other beasts are of gold. The chiefs used golden bricks for their houses and forts and official decrees are engraved upon golden paper." (Hordadzbeh)

"Some people told me they had seen a man who had been to Wak-wak, to do business there. He had told of the riches of the country and the islands. I do not mean that their country is so important, but that the people of Wak-wak are numerous. Among them are men who look like Turks. Of all God's creatures none are more capable or clever in the arts; but they are sly, cunning, deceitful and very quick and knowledgeable in everthing they undertake." (Shariyar, 10th century)

*On the subject of the gold of Wak-wak, Pigafetta stated that when he reached the Philippines that even the common people had massive gold ornaments and that everyone ate from gold plates and partly covered their houses with gold. The Philippines still has world-class gold reserves.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


References

Most of the translations of Chinese texts are quoted from Hirth and Rockhill, while the translations of Muslim texts come mostly from Majumdar.


CHAU JU-KUA, Chau ju-kua: his work on the Chinese and Arab trade in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries : entitled Chu-fan-chi, translated from the Chinese and annotated by Friedrich Hirth and W. W. Rockhill. Taipei : Literature House, 1965.
MAJUMDAR, R.C., The history and culture of the Indian Peoples, Bombay, 1951.
__,Suvarnadvipa: ancient Indian colonies in the Far East, Delhi, 1986.
MOENS, J.L., "Srivijaya, Yava en Kataha," Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol XVII, 1940.

Wait, Chad. Don't tell me you are trying to say that Srivijaya was Philippine!


ha ha ha ... Last time I said SEAhistory would make it Papau New Guinea but I was wrong, he is making it the Philippines.

This post has been edited by Leeporter: Feb 20 2012, 08:57 AM

[Leeporter]

SEAhistory, thank you for bringing a good laugh to me tonight.

I am sleepy and I am going to bed now.

You stay here and explain to people why Srivijaya was in Philippines.

And Chad, you explain why "Sien-lieou" = Malayu.

Both of you are genius. ha ha ha .. Good night .

[SEAhistory]

SEAhistory,
1) Srivijaya center was at Chaiya, and if you still don't understand why, go back to read "Srivijaya toward Chaiya" written by Suzuki. He got plenty of evidences to show you.

2) And Chaiya never been Malay state.

3) If Malay became Sien-lieou (Sian-Lorhu) then where where was Siam?

There was no Siam and Chaiya was Malay from oldest evidence.

[SEAhistory]

Don't tell me you are trying to say that Srivijaya was Philippine!


ha ha ha ... Last time I said SEAhistory would make it Papau New Guinea but I was wrong, he is making it the Philippines.

The Chinese say it! Not me, haha. It's your Chinese friends!

The only thing the translation says it is located south and east of SEA, which coheres with a city of Srivijaya being in Cham territory.

[SEAhistory]

Srivijaya of course was the confederation of Malay states or rather, cities with the principal center being Palembang on Sumatra. The principal city did move from time to time to Jambi but Palembang was the main center of power for most of the times. From Palembang, Srivijayan influence radiated outward toward the Isthmus of Kra, western Borneo and central Java. It also controlled several areas on the bank of the Mekong until Jayavarman II declared independence to establish the Khmer Empire.

The nature of the Sailendras is more mysterious to me. They ruled over western and central Java, considerably far from Palembang but yet, they played a huge role in Srivijayan politics. Now, the question is, did the Sailendras exist independently of Srivijaya? Was Sailendra part of Srivijaya or merely a faithful and reliable ally? Was the Sailendra a kingdom or a noble family typical of a feudal society?

The background of several maharajas of Srivijaya further does not make the situation any clearer. The 8th century maharaja Dharmasetu was not a member of the Sailendras but he was mentioned as the head of Sailendra. Succeeding Dharmasetu as the maharaja was his son-in-law, a Sailendra. Samarantungga, another maharaja in Palembang, was a member of the Sailendras whom married Dharmasetu’s daughter, Dewi Tara.

The son-in-law which became the maharaja, known as Vishnu, was the one that started the construction of the Borobudur. Here is yet another question: Srivijaya was known for its Buddhism while the Sailendras were Hindus. Why a Sailendran would build not only a Buddhist monument, but the largest Buddhist monument in the whole wide world at its time?

More question: what happened before Dharmasetu? What was the nature of Srivijaya-Sailendra relationship before Dharmasetu and during Dharmasetu’s reign? Why did the Sailendra hold a special place within Srivijaya?

By the time of Vishnu, the one thing that I know is that the Sailendras married into the existing Srivijayan royal blood and from there on, they took over the helm of Srivijaya. After Vishnu, the Srivijayan throne went to Samarantungga, yet another Sailendran. His son Balaputra also became the maharaja of Srivijaya.

Balaputra began as a weak head of the Sailendra. During this time, the Sailendras saw their influence being challenged by the Sanjayas. Now, the relationship between the Sailendras and the Sanjayas is another issue lost in history. That notwithstanding, The Sailendras were forced to leave Java by the Sanjayas during a power struggle in the 9th century. The Sailendra retreated and settle in Palembang, the home city of Balaputra’s mother, Dewi Tara. After the overthrow of the Sailendras by the Sanjayas in Java, Balaputra became the maharaja of Srivijaya.

After Balaputra, somehow, the Sailendras ceased to come up in my reading despite the fact the Srivijaya lasted for at least another 400 years. This could be explained by the expulsion of the Sailendras from Java by the Sanjayas but this that would treat the Sailendras as a kingdom, and not a family, which is another cause for confusion.

But in any case, the Sanjayas continued to build the Mataram kingdom. They ruled of western and central Java until Srivijaya eliminated them in the 11th century. As a side note, the fall of Mataram led to the formation of a Javanese royalty by the name of Airlangga to build the kingdom of Kahuripan. This kingdom is the precursor to the kingdom of Singhasari which later led to the Majapahit kingdom. The Srivijayan empire came to an end when Majapahit occupied Palembang and Jambi in the 13th century.

It is worth noting that the rivalry between the Sailendras and the Sanjayas may well be the beginning of the famed Malay-Javanese rivalry.

To make matter more confusing, the Sanjayas were actually part of the Sailendra dynasty.

While the home of the Sailendra was central Java, they were not of Javanese origin. So for from my reading, they might have come from Sumatra, Funan or India. The strongest possibly in my opinion on the moment is that they came from Sumatra. The reason is that Old Malay instead of Sanskrit were extensively used in matter related to the Sailendras

[chadwarden]

If Srivijaya was Mon (Thai or Siamese as you want to claim), can somebody please explain me what happened to the Mon language in Srivijaya?? Why was there only Old Malay used?? Why did the Siamese language not appear in Srivijaya. Also, why don't the Pali inscriptions are anywhere found in relation to Srivijaya, and why is the Mon architecture never used in Srivijaya? And why is the Mon culture from pre-Dvaravati nowhere found in Cambodia, and why is the language of Mon people nowhere found in Cambodia. and why is the architecture never found in Cambodia?

yea ive been saying this all along. there is no proof of proto tai speakers written or otherwise in the region southeast asia we are tallking about. hes saying somehow they just accepted these mon origin lavo just accepted proto tai as their culture and language out of nowhere.

let me show you and lee how an ancient people get preserved


the chao bon people of thailand
The Nyah Kur language is an Austroasiatic language spoken by a remnant of the Mon people of Dvaravati, the Nyah Kur people, who live in present-day Thailand. It is known as Chao-bon (Thai: ชาวบน) in Thai.

The modern-day speakers of Nyah Kur are the descendants of the Mon who did not flee west when the Khmer overran their empire in the 9th and 11th centuries. Consequently, modern Mon and Nyah Kur have both developed directly from Old Mon independently for almost a millennium.

Nyah Kur was discovered by linguists early in the 20th century, but was not recognized as being related (in fact a "sister" language) to Mon for nearly 70 years.


These are the bones of the people found in your study lee porter. Funny how Ive never found a pocket of proto tai speakers anywhere in cambodia or yet thailand. because proto tai is probalby different than tai we know today.lee cant show any evidence of tai speakers or mon speakers in any of the places he talks about. there has to be some type of evidence.

[SEAhistory]

What gap????

Jayavarman IX took the reign between 1328 - 1337
Nippean Bat took the reign between 1341 - 1347.

He took the reign around 5-10 years after Jayavarman IX died.

If Khmer are so proud of their great Angkorian kings, why they didn't put Jayavarman IX and earlier kings in the original Chronicle of Cambodia?

Because of lack of documents. Its a common fact the Chronicles of Cambodia are picked up pieces together and hold no reliable information.

[SEAhistory]

Because of lack of documents. Its a common fact the Chronicles of Cambodia are picked up pieces together and hold no reliable information.

If Srivijaya was Mon (Thai or Siamese as you want to claim), can somebody please explain me what happened to the Mon language in Srivijaya?? Why was there only Old Malay used?? Why did the Siamese language not appear in Srivijaya. Also, why don't the Pali inscriptions are anywhere found in relation to Srivijaya, and why is the Mon architecture never used in Srivijaya? And why is the Mon culture from pre-Dvaravati nowhere found in Cambodia, and why is the language of Mon people nowhere found in Cambodia. and why is the architecture never found in Cambodia?

[chadwarden]

Err. you can assume that Sien-Lieou = Malayu, nobody prevent you to do so.

And I can also say that Sien-Lieou = Sian-Lorhu = Siam-Lavo.

People will judge which one is more likely to be.





If you mean multi-ethenic, yes, it is.



Siam-Lavo was the former name of Siam which is the former name of Thailand.

And yes, it consisted of Tai and Mon and several other ethenic. And it equal to Srivijaya and Funan.

And from this, I will prove to you that Chenla was under Srivijaya.



I've told you several times, they were there and some of them expanded up north and clashed with Chna to retreat back.

Why is is difficult for you to understand?



Why the Chinese didn't just document that the ruler of Chenla were Khmer? Why? and why you assumed them to be Khmer kings????



This is very simple, because Khmer slaves took the city of Yasodharapura in 1336. So Siamese king U-thong went to take it back and drove Khmer slaves to leave the city for today Phnom Pehn.

Didn't G. Coedes tell us that he can't find the link between the last Varman king (Jayavarman 9) and the first Khmer king (Nippean Bat)?

hm whats dificult for me to understand is that where are the Tai legends of a tai people being far south and coming back north then going back south again? could you show me those?

can u show me the evidence of a tai language being spoken so early in cambodia and southern thailand? no because there is none. and

dude its your job to prove to us all this including the faked khmer history and your new tai people history in funan and southern thailand. its not our job you prove it to us first but you havent yet. lol you come on the khmer former spamming some sien lieou stuff but have no backup from tai history sources at all? then when we ask you you freeze and go to well you tell us why this that bla bla.

again it is described as siam sacking angkor on the angkor inscriptions. why dont they go into more detail like u? possibly because it didnt happen

this is from the shan. or you saying that the shan now dont understand their own history or writings?

that makes sense to me the tai of china are yellow to golden skin.

Why Tai are also called Shan? One of the suppositions concerning the origin of the name
“Shan” (oSsef;) is that, it derived from the word “Siam” (Hsian, Sein), which designates to a group of
mountainous people who migrated from Yunnan in the 6th century AD. Siam means agriculture or
cultivating. Most probably because they were people of farming. Another supposition is, when Kublai
Khan and his Mongol army conquered Nan Chao Kingdom in AD 1253 a second wave of Tai migrating
down south into many areas of Southeast Asia. Some migrating Tai became mercenaries for the Khmer
armies in the early 13th century AD as it was depicted in the walls of Angkor Wat. In those days the
Khmer called Tai as Syam, the word derived from Sunskrit meaning golden or yellow. The Tai at that
time had a yellow or golden skin color. Shan can be a corrupt word of Syam, a name given to Kshatriya
(warriors) (those warriors were said to be Shan) who were on duty for the Khmer Empire. A third
supposition suggests that Shan were the people named after the “Great Mountain Ranges of China”
from where they had migrated. Shan in Chinese is “mountain” or “hill”.10

[SEAhistory]

yea ive been saying this all along. there is no proof of proto tai speakers written or otherwise in the region southeast asia we are tallking about. hes saying somehow they just accepted these mon origin lavo just accepted proto tai as their culture and language out of nowhere.

let me show you and lee how an ancient people get preserved


the chao bon people of thailand
The Nyah Kur language is an Austroasiatic language spoken by a remnant of the Mon people of Dvaravati, the Nyah Kur people, who live in present-day Thailand. It is known as Chao-bon (Thai: ชาวบน) in Thai.

The modern-day speakers of Nyah Kur are the descendants of the Mon who did not flee west when the Khmer overran their empire in the 9th and 11th centuries. Consequently, modern Mon and Nyah Kur have both developed directly from Old Mon independently for almost a millennium.

Nyah Kur was discovered by linguists early in the 20th century, but was not recognized as being related (in fact a "sister" language) to Mon for nearly 70 years.


These are the bones of the people found in your study lee porter. Funny how Ive never found a pocket of proto tai speakers anywhere in cambodia or yet thailand. because proto tai is probalby different than tai we know today.lee cant show any evidence of tai speakers or mon speakers in any of the places he talks about. there has to be some type of evidence.

Yeah, it's a shame you havent been here from the beginning, because Ive put all found evidence (linguitically and cultrually) together and compared them. And my findings were that the Khmer language never was seen in Thailand before 550 AD (Isanavarman) and the architecture, Sanskrit and all other artifacts are never seen in Thailand before 550AD and there was only Mon language and culture. And also the architecture of Khmers is similar to Cham which has a lot of influence from Javanese architecture. There is no Siamaese/Thai/Mon source that is forrunner of Funanese and Kambojan culture. Also, now with examing the oldest kingdoms, it were Funanese who came to Malay Peninsular to set up trade ports, till Srivijaya was founded.

[PongThep]

lol you are a troll dude

lee porter guessed at it saying

sien lieou =siam lavo because somebody supposedly went to china and called san fo tsi sien lieou. siam lavo is lee porters own creation. trollproof.avi

He has an agenda against Khmer all over the internet. His other account is kensaizen.

He goes by Jae Boompen but his real name is pongthep Boonpeng who lives in Paddington UK and his pic is on my sig.

Hit me up if you want more info.

[SEAhistory]

He has an agenda against Khmer all over the internet. His other account is kensaizen.

He goes by Jae Boompen but his real name is pongthep Boonpeng who lives in Paddington UK and his pic is on my sig.

Hit me up if you want more info.

Hey man, don't need to know his personal info. I will disclaim him very soon. Let's keep it civillized. Name calling is one thing, but making it into a personal vendetta is something noone benefits from. Peace and love my brother

[PongThep]

Hey man, don't need to know his personal info. I will disclaim him very soon. Let's keep it civillized. Name calling is one thing, but making it into a personal vendetta is something noone benefits from. Peace and love my brother

I commend you for keeping it civil on your part but pongthep here has no interest in looking for answers. His goal is to disrupt the debate in his disrespectful manner, there's no need for him to call us names. I though if I put a face behind the coward he would realize what he is saying.

He also said he would kill all Khmers, trolling is one thing but giving threats and spewing racism is where I draw the line.
Child molesters like him should be dealt with in the same manner or worst but if you think you can civilize him I will back off.

[Sengto]

Hey man, don't need to know his personal info. I will disclaim him very soon. Let's keep it civillized. Name calling is one thing, but making it into a personal vendetta is something noone benefits from. Peace and love my brother

Someone need to get Pornthep in the UK. All he is doing is making stir around the Neitizen community.

[PongThep]

Someone need to get Pornthep in the UK. All he is doing is making stir around the Neitizen community.

Did you get the pongthep childmolesting video I sent you?

[feezy]

Did you get the pongthep childmolesting video I sent you?

damn. someone needs to call the child service agency and report it if that video do exist.

[SEAhistory]

This paper is complete bull$hit! Ive looked into it Ive seen somuch flaws in it! Take a look. This is only the beginning of the paper, so can not take it serious, lol.


Śrīvijaya―towards Chaiya 　　　　Renewed 05 Jan 2011
Takashi Suzuki

Introduction

The historical Outline of Śrīvijaya

Shih-li-fo-shi in the Tang（唐）times was well known as Śrivijaya. San-fo-chi (三仏斉)　which appeared in 904 at the last stage of the Tang Dynasty（618~907）was acknowledged by the Tang officials as Śrivijaya. And in the Song times, it was recognized as San-fo-chi, which according to Chau-Ju-ka（趙汝适）, started sending embassies to China since 904.
Between Shih-li-fo-shi (室利仏逝) and San-fo-chi (三仏斉), there was ‘new Kha-ling (Śailendra). They were all Śrivijaya. Śrivijaya consists of more than fourteen city-states most of them were ‘port states’ which more or less were taking part in international trade. The champion states of them were, in Shih-li-fo-shi times Chaiya, in Kha-ling times central Java and in San-fo-chi times Jambi and Kedah.　Through the three stages of the history of Śrīvijaya, all of the leading kings were probably Funan’s royal descendants who were devotees of Mahāyāna Buddhism.

The rulers of Funan (扶南), after kicked out from Cambodia, fled to their vassal state, namely Pan-pan (盤盤).

Uhh, how does he came up with that information? He doesn’t provide any evidence regarding this assumption. The kings of Srivijaya said to be descended from Javanese royalty, and other evidence supports points to Sumatran leaders as ancestors. How does he know they went to Funan? Speculation and assumption..

At the middle of the seventh century, they established a new state called Shih-li-fo-shi. Before making Shih-li-fo-shi, they merged other states in the Malay Peninsula. At the end of 670 A.D. only the name of Shih-li-fo-shi remained in the middle of the Peninsula, which was recorded in Chinese annals as tributary country. Before that Chi-tu (赤土), Tan-tan (丹丹) and Pan-pan（or Ban-ban盤盤） disappeared.
All the Funanese states disappeared with the rise of Srivijaya. So Srivijaya conquered the lands from Funan. Suzuki assumes these states were already in the hands of Srivijaya, or that Srivijayan descended from Funan.
Shih-li-fo-shi opened its window to the Strait of Malacca, after merged Kedah, which probably had been the capital of Chi-tu. It was necessary for Shih-li-fo-shi to control the Malacca Strait to purchase the western commodities coming across the Bay of Bengal. In the middle of the seventh century, the presence of the western countries, Persia and Arab, increased in the Tang court. This means comparative decrease of Shih-li-fo-shi’s status in the Tang court.

Where does he come with the idea that Kedah was the capital of Chi Tu? Probably?? Again, no source and assumptions. Kedah was a kingdom on its own: Reference to ancient Kedah was first mentioned in a Tamil poem Paṭṭiṉappālai written at the end of 2nd century A.D. It described goods from Kadaram "heaped together in the broad streets" of Chola capital. Other than Kadaram, Kedah was known with different names at varying times in Indian literature; Kataha-Nagara (in Kaumudi Mahotsava drama), Anda-Kataha (in Agni Purana), Kataha-Dvipa (in Samarāiccakahā), and Kataha (in Kathasaritsagara). In the middle eastern literature, ancient Kedah was referred as Qilah by Ibn Khordadbeh in Kitāb al Masālik w’al Mamālik, Kalah-Bar by Soleiman Siraf & Abu Zaid al Hassan in Silsilat-al-Tawarikh (travels in Asia), and Kalah by Abu-Dulaf Misa'r Ibn Muhalhil in Al-Risalah al-thaniyah. The famous Tang Dynasty Buddhist monk, Yi Jing who visited Malay archipelago between 688-695, also mentioned about a kingdom known as Ka-Cha in the northern part of Malay peninsular, which according to him was 30 days sail from Bogha (Palembang), the capital of Sribogha (Srivijaya).


Shih-li-fo-shi sent an expeditionary navy to put Malayu (末羅瑜), Jambi (占卑) and Palembang (浡淋邦) under its control in early 680s. After successful campaign Shih-li-fo-shi set up several inscriptions near Palembang and Jambi. Then Shih-li-fo-shi sent force in 686 from the base of the Bangka Island to Kha-ling (訶陵=Sañjaya), located central Java. The navy might have successfully landed at Pekalongan, a major port of Kha-ling. There Shih-li-fo-shi established the Śailendra kingdom. However Śailendra coexisted with the Sañjaya kingdom. At the end of the seventh century, the territory of Shih-li-fo-shi became the largest, covering the middle of the Malay Peninsula, the east coast of Sumatra and Java. At the same time, Shih-li-fo-shi started to control the traffic of the Malacca Strait.

He disregards the biggest evidence: According to the Kedukan Bukit Inscription, dated 605 Saka (683 AD), the empire of Srivijaya was founded by Dapunta Hyang Çri Yacanaca (Dapunta Hyang Sri Jayanasa). He led 20,000 troops (mainly by land plus a few hundred ships) from Minanga Tamwan to Jambi and Palembang.
And he contradicts himselve. He says Srivijaya was founded in 680, when Malay Peninsular became known only as Srivijaya. But according to the inscription of 605, he started out at Minanga Tamwan! How could he have stayed at Chaiya, went south through Malay Peninsular, started his conquest there and went north to find Srivijaya in Malay Peninsular????????????? If he stayed at Chaiya, he must have first conquerred Malay Peninsular and then ended up South in Minanga Tamwan!
Weird…..

However, around 745, Chen-la (Cambodia真臘) attacked the capital of Shih-li-fo-shi, and occupied Chaiya and Nakhon Si Thammarat. At the same time the control of the Malacca Strait collapsed.

WTF?? Where does he got that info from? From his imaginary? How does he know Srivijaya was sacked by Chenla?? If anything, Srivijaya conquered the city from Chenla, which explains the name “victory”. Also the Chinese spoke of original inhabitants being chased of by Kit Mow (Khmer court), and after the kingdom was taken back by original inhabitants (when Srivijaya emerged). The only reason why he says Chaiya was attacked by Chenla, because it explains why Srivijaya took it from Chenla, while Chenla and Funan were one. But he missed that boat.




Uncompleted Identification of the major states


Kedah was described as a kingdom by the Chinese. Chi Tu was described by the Chinese, how in hell can he conclude it was capital of the other, as the origin stories of both countries are described. Very weird conclusion..
Chi-tu was probably the successor to Kan-tuo-li (干陀利), which was Kandari and modern Kedah, but many historians agree, according to G. Coedès, it was in Sumatra.
Probably????

How can Chi Tu be the successor of Kantoli when they existed around the same time??? Very weird conclusion again..

Ho-lo-tan (or Kha-la-tan=訶羅単) is believed by many historians in Java, but in the fifth century, there was not so developed Buddhist state in Java. It must be Kelantan, now on the east coast of Malaysia. Tan-tan (丹丹) is not known, but it was probably Kelantan.

So Kelantan and Tan-Tan are the same????? Weird…

Lo-yueh (羅越) cannot be Johore, but at the north end of the Malay Peninsula for instance Ratburi (Ratchaburi) in Thailand.

Ow yeah, for instance, nice finding..

On the contrary, a few states were firmly identified. For instance, Kha-cha (羯茶) is Kedah. Pan-pan (盤盤) means a state at the Bay of ‘Ban Don’ in Thailand and its capital is Chaiya. Malayu (or Mulayu 未羅遊) is the estuary of Jambi. Dian-sun (典孫) is Tenasserim. Shepo (闍婆) is Java but the concept of ‘Java’ was ambiguous before the eleventh century.
With these basic uncertainties, we cannot discuss properly the history of ancient Southeast Asia. Many related historians seem to have been “building castles in air.” * Some of them talk about ‘Mandala’, but it explains nothing. What state was the center of Mandala, and where was it?
In this paper, I try to fix ambiguity as much as possible, and clarify the stream of the history of Śrīvijaya. The whole history of Śrīvijaya is divided by three phases as tributary states to China. The first is ‘Shih-li-fo-shi (室利仏逝)’, the second is ‘Śailendra (in the central Java=訶陵)’, the third is ‘San-fo-chi (三仏斉)’. Shih-li-fo-shi sent embassies during 670 to 741, Śailendra during 768~860 and San-fo-chi during 904~1178. At every stage, the descendants of Funan’s royal family probably dominated Śrīvijaya.

Probably???

My conclusion is that Śrīvijaya was a well organized ‘commercial oriented state (or empire)’ that tried to monopolize the tributary embassies to China from Southeast Asia. All of the subordinate states brought their commodities to the main port of Śrīvijaya, which were exported or ‘contributed’ to China. The function of Śrīvijaya looked like ‘sogo shousha (giant trading firm)’ in Japan. Its location of the capital was at the first stage, when I-Ching visited in 671, was Chaiya at the Ban Don Bay in Thailand. Chaiya was known as the capital of Pan-pan which had been historically a subordinate state of Funan. Śrīvijaya was organized by the elite of Funan who fled to Pan-pan, after they were defeated by Chen-la in the middle of the sixth century.

Again, source???


These political changes in the seventh century at the middle of the Malay Peninsula ware not mentioned in any chronicles, but the occupation of Chaiya by Chen-la and the revenge of Śrīvijaya was what really happened. The Ligor inscription dated in 775, suggested the events. At the same time, Śailendra invaded Cambodia and Champa in 767, 774 and 787. As a matter of course, the international political power of Chen-la declined after these events until the twelfth century. Perhaps Śrīvijaya put Cambodia under its control for long time. At the same time we cannot forget that Champa (Lin-yi=林邑) stopped sending embassies since 749. Champa was destroyed and probably under the control of Śailendra (Śrīvijaya) after their attack. From Champa area Huan-wang (環王) once sent envoy in 793. In 958, new kingdom (Zhan-cheng=占城) from Champ started sending embassies.

Hey, I stated this before as well!

Before construction of the Ligor inscription in 775, Śailendra might have conquered temporarily the southern part of Chen-la, and Mahāyāna Buddhism was forced to prevail in Cambodia. I-Ching recorded in the last quarter of the seventh century, in Cambodia Hinduism was strongly prevailed and no Buddhist monk was seen there. Probably most of Buddhist monks were expelled from the old land of Funan.　
Hey, I stated this as well!

Apparently the kings of Funan believed in Mahāyāna Buddhism, and the rulers of Chen-la hated Buddhism as the religion of the Funan kingship. The rulers of Pan-pan were Buddhists though they accepted Brahmans from India and gave them livelihood. Buddhism was necessary for Funan and Pan-pan, because the Chinese Emperors were keen devotees of Buddhism.

Haha, what makes you think that idiot?

Chen-la sent embassies to China in 780, 798, 813 and 814 perhaps under the auspice of Śailendras. However after 814 Chen-la completely stopped sending envoy to China for more than three hundred years. Chen-la (Angkor) resumed sending its own embassy in 1116, under the reign of Sūryavarman II (1113~52?), who built Angkor Wat.
The power of Śailendras did not decline at the end of the eighth century as far as Samaratuńgga, the Mahārāja of Śailendra dominated the central Java. Samaratuńgga was supposed to appoint Jayavarman II as the governor of Indrapura in the Mekong delta. Perhaps Jayavarman II was a sponsored king of Śailendras and his declaration of independence might have been a kind of ‘pretentious announcement’ for Cambodian people. After the declaration of independence, he had not been treacherous to Śrīvijaya.

Perhaps???? And how can he be not treacherous by declaring independence?? Also assumption? Why didn’t JVMII take any of Srivijayas culture or language with him???

Jayavarman II

Jayavarman II, whose parents might have been captured by Śailendras at Chaiya district and sent to Java, came back to Cambodia and declared ‘independence’ from Java in 802. Coedès says that the liberation of Cambodia from the suzerainty of Java was the work of Jayavarman II, founder of the kingdom of Angkor. But whether Jayavarman II was entirely free from Java is dubious. Coedès considers that Jayavarman II “no doubt took refuge in Java during the disturbances over the succession.” Coedès elaborates further “Jayavarman II’s return from Java, perhaps motivated by the weakening of Śailendras on the island, took place around 800, for we have abundant evidence that the effective beginning of the reign was 802.” *
Jayavarman II is said to have reigned since 802 until 850 (or 835?) how old was he when he became the king of Chen-la? When he declared independence he might have been very young. Did he really take refuge when he was a small boy? When Śailendra (Śrīvijaya) recovered Chaiya area, it was around 765. Around 800, he was sent to Cambodia by Śrīvijaya to become the king of Chen-la. My understanding is that before and after the declaration of independence, Jayavarman II had been still under the thumb of Śailendras and he did not seem to have taken refuge ‘voluntarily’ to Java.

Evidence already points out that jayavarman started his career in South-Cambodia, and after coming back from “java” he started out in South-Cambodia again. Again assumption that Srivijaiya sent him.


Funan sent the first mission to the Wu Dynasty (呉) in 225. In the middle of the third century, from the Wu Dynasty, two envoys Kang Tai (康泰) and Chu Ying (朱応), were sent to Funan. Kang Tai wrote that the first king of Funan was an Indian Brahman whose name was Khon-Tien (混填). Khon-Tien means ‘Kaundinya’, so some historians call him ‘Kaundinya I’.

Khon??? That sounds Khmer!

[LoveIsAllAround]

Kit Mow = Mon-Khmer???

Umm... Mow = Mon

what about Kit? Old name of Khmer is Kit?

[LoveIsAllAround]

Mow = Mon; this is very possible.

True pronunciation of Mon is Mown (moan, with short vowel sound). Old Chinese sound must have the final sound /n/. Same thing as Chen Lap (Siem Reap) changed to Chen La with the loss of final sound /p/.

What about Kit? Any related Khmer name to Kit?