I know that it might first feel a bit strange to some people to be discussing places which today lie within the borders of another country. But history is history, n Malay history will always be Malay history.

W.r.t. that, Ligor n Pattani were both quintessential Malay kingdoms, both powerful in their time. So both Ligor n Pattani will always be a part of ancient Malay history. Even if today they're both in the territory of Thailand.

Pattani is still called Pattani. While Ligor, which was previously called Tambralingga, is now called Nakhon Si Thammarat, which is the Thai rendition of Nagara Sri Dharmaraja, the new name given to it when it was first conquered by or submitted to Khmer Funan-Chenla hegemony.

So, for the history nuts, I think it's time for a thread on this region's ancient history.

So let's begin: (courtesy of SonOfGunongJerai's thread posted in the "Kedah Kingdom" thread)

* * * * *
The kingdoms that was once exist in Southern Thailand on Malayan Peninsula according to Thailand sources are:

เตี้ยนสุน Tien Sun

Chinese records stated that this kingdom existed in the Malay Peninsular, around the Tapi River in modern day Surat Thani province. The kingdom was supposedly a supply and trading port for ancient mariners, between India and Indochina. The kingdom was Hindu.

ผั่น ผั่น Pan Pan

This kingdom prospered from 300 – 500 AD, Chinese records showed that this kingdom was also situated near the Tapi River, in Surat Thani Province. The ruling dynasty could have been Indian or from modern day Thai central plains. Chinese records stated that a Funan ruler came to rule Pun Pun as well, he was overthrow in Funan, and the people in Pun Pun did not accept the new Funan ruler. The new ruler then invaded Pun Pun, and also invaded the modern day Chao Phraya basin. Chinese records also stated that the Pun Pun kingdom also sent envoys to the Chinese court. Pun Pun was a Buddhist kingdom with Hindu influence, Bhrmans from India have a lot of influence in the court. Pun Pun disappeared around 558 AD, with the beginning of the Tambralingga Kingdom.

เซียะโท้ Chieh Tou

This kingdom was situated south of Tambralingga, with the capital at modern day Kalantan or Pattalung, Thailand. Sui Dynasty records in 608 AD stated that an envoy led by Zhang Sun (Zhang Jin?) and Wang Jin Cheng visited the kingdom. The kingdom existed during Pan Pan’s existence, and also sent envoys to the Chinese court.

ลังกาสุกะ Langgasukah

This kingdom was situated in the south of the ‘Tambralingga’ kingdom, near modern day Pattani and Trung in Thailand. The capital is believed to be in Pattani. The kingdom developed around AD 450 – 550, and was supposedly an East-West center in the area (Kedah in the West, Patani in the East), due to trade. The kingdom was supposedly also a center for spreading Buddhism and Indian culture throughout SEA. The kingdom was also part of Funan for a time. The fall of the kingdom was as a result of either invasion from Cambodia or Malacca, or a plague. Around the 1200s the Kingdom was absorbed into the ‘Tambralingga’ Kingdom, and eventually became a part of Sri Vijaya. In 516 AD, the kingdom supposedly sent an envoy to China. Ma Tuan Lin’s record around the 11th Century also provided details to the Kingdom.

* * * * *

To me, Pan Pan was likely like the new edition of Tun Sun.

The very, very first Funanese conqueror of Semenanjung/Segenting Malay kingdoms was probably Fan Shih Man (Sri Mara) in late 2nd century AD.

The next Funan ruler who re-absorbed Tun Sun/Pan Pan (around mid or early 6th century) into his kingdom's orbit could have been Rudravarman, one of the 3 sons of Jayavarman Kaundinya/Preah Thong who married the Naga king's daughter Nagi Soma. Rudravarman was himself a usurper of his father's kingdom, n some guys reckon he drowned his very young half brother Gunavarman, who was the rightful heir, in order to steal the throne.

Anyway, Rudra was eventually overthrown by Bhava(varman) n Chitra(sena), the twin sons of his other half brother Viravarman. After Bhava gained the throne, he went about staging a re-invasion of nearby kingdoms formerly under Funanese hegemony which tried to break away, including Malayu (to which maybe he gave the alternative name Jambi), Acheh etc.

As for Chi Tu/Raktamrittika/RedEarth/TanahMerah, there is mention of someone called a Maha Navika (Great Mariner) called Buddhagupta, who came from a place in India/Bengal, also called Raktamrittika (meaning Red Earth). He probaby named his new adopted homeland with the same name as his old homeland in India/Bengal.

There was also a Buddhagupta among the kings of Gupta empire in Bengal/Magadha. Records about him in Gupta-related history is a bit scarce. Either he wasn't regarded as an outstanding Gupta king or he suddenly went out of favour for some reason or other.

Maybe this Buddhagupta eventually was exiled or got fed up with war n then went away to the far eastern lands to find peace, n eventually landed in Semenanjung/Isthmus n founded a new kingdom. Which he also called Raktamrittika. So the Chinese called it Chi Tu n the locals called it Tanah Merah.

For the record, there is fairly good chronological (i.e. time) agreement between the Buddhagupta who came to Semenanjung's/Segenting's Chi Tu (Tanah Merah) n the Buddhagupta who was a king of Gupta empire.

Anyway, the Buddhagupta of Gupta empire was supposed to have reigned from 476 to 495, so he could have reached Chi Tu, his new Raktamrittika, late 5th century (nearly 500 AD). Some guys also believe Chi Tu to be the earliest version of Langkasuka (like its first birthplace).

In otherwords, Chi Tu later expanded to become Langkasuka, whose king Bhagadatta was said to have sent the envoy to China in 516 AD. Bhagadatta (Bhaga Datta) was actually a title meaning Divine Envoy/Ambassador/Messenger (Datta/Dutta = Envoy/Ambassador/Messenger) used by several Khmer kings.

My guess is Buddhagupta eventually became the 1st king (Bhagadatta) of Langkasuka.

There r several likely candidates for the old Chi Tu, i.e. Tanah Merah (Kelantan), Pattalung (Songkhla) or even Tambralingga itself (Tam means Red, while Tamba means Copper).

The name "Langkasuka" was also mentioned in Malay and Javanese chronicles. Tamil sources name "Ilangasoka" as one of Rajendra Chola's conquests in his expedition against the Srivijaya empire. It was described as a kingdom that that was "undaunted in fierce battles".

Further embassies (utusan) were sent to China in 523, 531 and 568. The later embassies could have been sent by another Bhagadatta, probably a successor of Buddhagupta, perhaps a son or son-in-law. Langkasuka remained under Funan-Chenla hegemony until it came under the dominance of new SEA regional power Srivijaya in around 800 AD.

Patani's ancestral population -- The Langkasukans ..... Who are they?

Book Excerpt
The early inhabitants of Langkasuka were probably an eclectic assemblage of early Malays, Mons and Khmers. The maritime nature of the polity alludes to Austronesian (the greater Malay group) dominance. Significant Sumatran Malay acculturation commenced with the Sri Vijayan conquest of the Kra Isthmus in the 8th century. The Langkasukans were certainly not T’ais. At that time, the ancestral T’ais were still in the hills and river valleys of Yunnan prior to being displaced to Indo-China by the Han Chinese. Linguistically, Sri Vijayan rule, which flourished in the 9th and 11-13th centuries, signified the gradual eradication of Austro Asiatic languages (including Mon-Khmer) and early Austronesian tongues by High Malay, Sri Vijaya’s language of administration. By the 13th century, Malay language, culture and identity had subsumed other populations of the peninsula’s northern half up to the Kra Isthmus. The last vestiges of the old Mon-Khmer language are today found in the native vernacular of the aborigines of Malaya and south Thailand, the so-called Aslian Group.

The coming of Islam further cemented the affiliation of the Isthmian Malays to the people of the Nusantara. However, the arts and culture of the Patani-Kelantan region (historically, extending northwards up to present-day Phatthalung) till this day carry a distinct flavour of Khmer courts of old, exemplified by Wayang Kulit, Mak Yong, Menora and Petri (respectively, traditional shadow play depicting adapted Ramayana-Mahabhrata epics; a royal court theatre combining dance, opera, drama and comedy; a complex rhythmic dance drama depicting ancient pre-Islamic folklore; and the cryptic musical-dance spiritual cleansing ritual), all often inaccurately attributed to a “Thai” or “Siamese” origin. The T’ai (or Thai) themselves adopted and emulated these high culture from the courts of Cambodia when they rebelled against their Khmer rulers in the 13th century and formed their ancestral polities in the central Chao Phraya basin. See Geoffrey Benjamin’s “Ethnohistorical Perspectives on Kelantan’s Prehistory” in Kelantan Zaman Awal, 1987, pp.108-46, for a fascinating discourse on the linguistic-cultural evolution of the northern peninsula Malays, particularly the Patani-Kelantanese group. His hypothesis somewhat reaffirmed the socio-cultural specificities of the Patani-Kelantan Malays and their intrinsic distinction from other Malays of the peninsula.

courtesy: http://krismanreality.blogspot.com/

Patani VS Siam/Thailand ........ When and How It All Began.

Book Excerpt
Patani's ancestral state of Langkasuka was already a growing regional power a thousand years before the progenitor T’ai state of Sukhothai emerged in the central Chao Phraya basin from the shadows of the Khmer Empire. Indeed, during the early Langkasukan period, the T’ais were still languishing in their southern China homeland on the verge of being displaced to Indochina (and incrementally to present-day Thailand by the 10th century) by the southward expanding Han Chinese. A millennium ago, present day Thailand north of the Kra Isthmus was dominated by the Hinduised Mon-speaking Dvaravati Kingdom and later the Khmer Empire while the Malay Peninsula from Kra southwards was under the suzerainty of Srivijaya.

Centred near today’s Yarang (Jerang or Binjai Lima in the original Malay) district 15km inland from Patani town, Langkasuka dates back to at least 200AD based on historical records and archaeological evidence. This state prevailed through recorded history for 1,200 years until the 1400s. At its zenith, Langkasuka stretched coast-to-coast from the Kra Isthmus in the north to present-day Kedah and Kelantan in the south. Contemporary Chinese accounts defined an empire 30 days march east to west and 20 days march north to south. The annals of China’s Liang Dynasty, the 7th century Liang-shu, recorded the establishment of relations when Langkasuka’s King P’o-ch’-ieh-ta-to (transliterated generally as Bhagadatta) sent an envoy, A-ch’e-to, to present a memorial to the Emperor in 515 AD. Langkasuka sent further diplomatic missions in the years 523, 531 and 568 and Langkasuka-China relations flourished during the tenure of Liang Dynasty Emperor Wu (Liang Wu Ti, 502-549AD).

Patani’s Langkasuka legacy is well-documented, with multiple references to the Langkasuka toponym and geographic inference to today’s Patani Region in contemporary Chinese, Indian, Javanese and Arab historiographies. Chinese archival records and ancient coastline navigation maps placed Langkasuka on the coast stretching from present-day Phatthalung to Kelantan (and centred near the estuary of the Patani river). The Chinese transliterations for Langkasuka in various dialectical spelling variants from the 7th to 14th centuries include Lang-ya-hsiu, Ling-ya-ssu-chia, Lang-hsi-chia and Long-sai-ka. The Rajarajesvara temple inscriptions of Tanjore, India memorialized an attack by the Chola King, Rajendra I in the year 1030 on key states of the Sri Vijayan empire, including Ilangasoka, extolled as “undaunted in fierce battles.” The Nagarakertagama, an epic poem composed in 1365 by Mpu Rakawi Prapañca mentioned Langkasuka (in a list of Malay Peninsula entities) as a tributary of the Javanese Majapahit empire, although this was more reflective of a poet obliged to eulogise his benefactor, the Majapahit King, Hayam Wuruk (Prabu Sri Rajasanagara), than political realities of that era.

Langkasuka was a member of the Sri Vijayan Thalassocracy from c.800-1300AD. During this period, the Kingdom was prominent in Chinese, Indian, Arab and Javanese historiographies, with territory extending from the frontier of Nagara Sri Dharmaraja (Ligor) in the north to incorporate present-day Kelantan in the southeast and Kedah in the southwest. The T’ais reached the central Chao Phraya basin by 1000 AD, having displaced the Mons and subsequently fought the domination of the Khmer Kambujadesa Empire. Sukhothai emerged from the last vestiges of Khmer rule and became the first T’ai kingdom in the late 13th century, adopting the finer elements of Khmer court culture and traditions. Patani-Thai relations, in their various incarnations, date back at least 800 years when Patani’s ancestral Langkasuka Empire and subsequent Sri Vijayan overlords took note of the fledgling T’ai polities in the Chao Phraya basin emerging from the last vestiges of Khmer rule. The collapse of Sri Vijaya saw Langkasuka’s fragmentation into several northern Malay kingdoms, of which Patani rose to prominence by the late 14th century. Sukhothai itself was overshadowed and finally absorbed by the Ayutthayan kingdom downriver also by the late 14th century.The two nascent kingdoms of Patani and Ayutthaya began to expand their spheres of influence and conflict was inevitable.

Hence, began 600 years of conflict between the peoples of these two great civilizations -- the Malays of Patani and the T'ais of Ayutthaya/Thonburi/Krung Thep/Siam/Thailand. Indeed, conflict is not a new phenomenon in Patani. The current insurrection represents the latest manifestation of a long series of warfare and revolts over six centuries by the ethnic-Malay populace against Siamese/Thai political machinations that led to the incremental subjugation of the Patani Kingdom, culminating in final annexation in 1906.

courtesy: http://krismanreality.blogspot.com/

Good thread, Perisai. Well done.

Here's my first contribution.

Sejarah Awal Langkasuka dan Patani
Dari sudut persejarahan, Negeri Patani memiliki sejarah yang cukup lama, jauh lebih lama daripada sejarah kerajaan-kerajaan Melayu di Semenanjung Tanah Melayu[1]. Patani telah lama wujud sebagai sebuah kerajaan yang agung dan maju dalam pelbagai bidang[2].

Langkasuka dan Patani
Terdapat bukti-bukti yang menunjukkan kerajaan Melayu purba bernama Langkasuka telah diasaskan sekitar kurun pertama masihi.[3] Paul Wheatly turut menyatakan bahawa Langkasuka terletak di Patani sekarang. Pendapat beliau dikuatkan dengan temuan kepingan batu-batu purba peninggalan kerajaan Langkasuka di daerah Jering dan Pujud.[4]

Kerajaan lama ini menguasai satu kawasan yang luas di sekitar Segenting Kra dan di kawasan dimana Patani sekarang berada.[5] Ini dijelaskan dalam sumber-sumber China sekitar abad ke-6 seperti Lang-ya-hsiu yang merekodkan bahawa telah wujud sebuah kerajaan yang telah diasaskan 400 sebelum itu. [6] Turut dinyatakan dari sumber yang sama bahawa kerajaan tersebut merupakan sebuah kerajaan yang makmur dan ramai penduduknya. [7]

Sejarah lama Patani turut merujuk kepada kerajaan Melayu tua berpengaruh Hindu-India bernama Langkasuka ini sebagaimana dikatakan oleh Paul Wheatley[8]. Ini disokong oleh seorang ahli antropologi sosial di Prince of Songkla University di Patani, Seni Madakul bahawa Langkasuka itu terletak di Patani.

Ini ditegaskan juga oleh John Braddle yang menyatakan bahawa kawasan timur Langkasuka meliputi daerah pantai timur Semenanjung, mulai dari Senggora, Patani, Kelantan sampai ke Terengganu, termasuk juga kawasan sebelah utara negeri Kedah.[9]

Kawasan ini telah didatangi pedagang dari Arab, India dan China sejak sebelum masehi lagi[10]. Seorang pengembara China menyebutkan bahawa ketika kedatangannya ke Langkasuka pada tahun 200 masehi, ia mendapati negeri itu telah lama dibuka[11].

Sebelum menjadi negeri Islam, Patani atau Langkasuka waktu itu terkenal sebagai kerajaan Hindu Brahma[12]. Rajanya yang terkenal adalah Bhagadatta yang telah membuat hubungan diplomatik dengan kerajaan China pada tahun 515 M[13]. Ketika kerajaan Sriwijaya berjaya menakluki Nakorn Sri Thamarat (sekarang Ligor di Thailand) pada 775 M dan kemudian mengembangkan kekuasaannya ke selatan (Patani), penduduk Patani mula meninggalkan agama Hindu dan memeluk Buddha[14]. Sebuah berhala Buddha zaman Sriwijaya yang ditemui dalam gua Wad Tham di daerah Yala membuktikan transmisi pertukaran agama dari Hindu ke Buddha[15].

Ketika di bawah pengaruh Sriwijaya inilah Patani mulai menampakkan kemajuan, dengan penduduk yang ramai serta menjadi sebuah kerajaan yang terkenal. Hasil negeri Patani pada waktu itu banyak berasaskan pertanian dan perniagaan. Beberapa pengetahuan bernilai seperti teknik membajak dan berdagang diterima oleh orang Patani dari orang Jawa. Terdapat bukti yang menunjukkan bahawa kerajaan Sriwijaya inilah yang membawa dan mengembangkan bahasa Melayu ke Patani. Nilai ufti yang tinggi yang diberikan pada setiap tahun kepada kerajaan Sriwijaya menunjukkan bahawa Patani ketika itu amat kaya dan makmur.

Abdul Rahman Abdullah berpendapat selepas lenyapnya nama Langkasula, wujud sebuah kerajaan bernama Wurawari yang membawa maksud air jernih. Adalah dipercayai bahawa Raja Bharubhasa dari Langkasuka terpaksa menyerahkan kekuasaannya kepada Siam pada tahun 1345. Baginda telah berundur dan mendirikan kerajaan di Kelantan. Apabila angkatan tentera Gajah Mada berjaya mengalahkan tentera Siam di Temasik pada tahun 1536, baginda mengambil kesempatan untuk menyerang tentera Siam di Langkasuka. Menerusi serangan tersebut, Raja Bharubhasa berjaya merampas semula Kota Mahligai. Menurut rekod, nama Langkasuka ditukar terlebih dahulu kepada Wurawari antara tahun 1357-1398.[16]

Terdapat dua pendapat berkenaan penubuhan Patani. Di dalam buku sejarah negeri Kedah, Hikayat Merong Mahawangsa, ada menyebutkan bahawa negeri Langkasuka diasaskan oleh orang-orang dari Kedah[17]. Dalam pada itu, Phonsawadan Muang Patani atau Hikayat Patani menyatakan seorang raja yang tidak diketahu namanya dari Kota Mahligai bertanggungjawab mengasaskan negeri ini.[18]

Ibrahim Syukri turut menyokong versi Kota Mahligai ini. Beliau menyatakan bahawa seorang raja dari Kota Mahligai tersebut telah membangunkan sebuah kampung pinggir pantai yang kecil ke sebuah pelabuhan yang besar dan sibuk hingga mengorbankan kemakmuran kota itu sendiri. Akhirnya, Kota Mahligai telah ditinggalkan kerana aktiviti perdagangan lebih tertumpu kepada pelabuhan yang baru. Kawasan atau pelabuhan baru itulah dikenali dengan nama Patani.[19]

see: http://www.geocities.com/unit_pm_dan_bk/en_hamdan/Artikel/patani.htm?20081

New founding on Ligor, according to Indian Epigraphy written by D.C Sircar page 203-204.

The foundation of Ligor was ascribed to one of Ashoka's descendents who fled from Magadha of Southern Bihar (Hindi speaking area today), and embarked on a vessel at Dantapura lying near modern Srikakulam in the ancient Kalinga country comprising wide areas of the coast lands Orissa and Andhra Pradesh. The story preserved in the Javanese chronicles as well as in the traditions of many other islands regarding the colonization of the lands in question by the people of Kalingga (Keling).

North versus South

Malay scholars have tended to date the beginning of Peninsular Malay civilisation from the birth of the Melaka Sultanate on the west coast in 1402. They justify this on the premise that as far as existing materials permit, Peninsular Malay Kingdoms only take off from the period of Melaka Sultanate. There were three important historical documents on Melaka: Sejarah Melayu (Malay Annals), Undang-undang Melaka (Melaka Digest) and Undang-undang Laut (Maritime Laws), and these three provide much needed information on the nature of the Melaka polity and society. However this information applies largely to the Malays of the south and west coast of the Peninsula — it leaves open the question of what was going on in the north and east. The "History Began with Melaka" formulation is flawed, for it leaves out the story of civilisation up north along the Isthmus.


We get some indication of the situation in the north from the fact that the Melaka sultanate in its less than one hundred years in power tried but failed to conquer Kelantan in the mid-1400's. Melaka could not do so as Kelantan received military help from the Pattani Kingdom, known for its sophistication in war strategy. Hang Tuah, the famous Melakan warrior, who served in the court of three sultans, visited Pattani, probably after the first war between Melaka and Kelantan. It is not sure when he visited Pattani — either on his way to China or on the way back. In one account, Hang Tuah was supposed to have attacked Pattani but found out that the state of war art of Pattani was far greater than Melaka. Hang Tuah saw hundreds of canons surrounding the fort of the palace.


From Hang Tuah's description, it is clear that on the Isthmus, powerful and well-established kingdoms such as Kelantan and Pattani preceded the founding of the Melakan Sultanate. Melaka did manage to defeat Kelantan on its second attempt and ended with a marriage of the Kelantan Princess, Onang Kuning, to Mahmud Shah, the last Sultan of Melaka. Their prince, Muzaffar Shah became the first sultan of Perak in 1531. Mahmud Shah, escaped to Johor when the Portuguese conquered Melaka in 1511 and established a new sultanate in Johor. He then fled to Riau-Lingga island, and finally went into hiding and died in Kampar, Sumatera. The war, ending in marital alliance, is typical of the political give-and-take between north and south. Such relations go back a long way and are underscored by recent archaeological evidence of trans-peninsular routeways of Melaka-Kelantan and Melaka-Perak-Pattani. These routes have been traced though the discoveries of various proto-historic settlements.


One noteworthy aspect of the wars between Kelantan and Melaka is the fact that in the Malay world of those days there was a blurred line between conquest and alliance. We can see this in the fact that the "defeated" Kelantan dynasty, through Princess Onang Kuning, ended up establishing marital ties with the sultanates of Melaka, Johor, and Perak. Another example would be the Sumateran kingdom of Sri Wijaya, centered at Palembang. In 685, the Chinese pilgrim Yiqing reported that Kedah had "become Sri Wijaya", which suggests that Sri Wijaya conquered Kedah. At the same time, other Chinese accounts referred to Sri Wijaya as a "double kingdom" with a capital in the north (identified as Kedah, or more likely, Kelantan) and a capital in the south (Palembang). It is not clear who was ruling who. This blurred line between conquest and alliance is important to keep in mind when reviewing the rise and fall of kingdoms and dynasties on the Isthmus, as described below, because it suggests that external political changes, such as apparent changes in rulers, may not have influenced local culture so much as we might imagine. Dynasties came and went; local polities (i.e. political structures n systems) survived.

The Beginnings

Critical to the history of the Segenting (Isthmus) is sheer geography. This narrow bridge of land was the nexus between China and India, between Siam and the Malay-Indo world, and it became as a result the natural landing place for Indian, Islamic, and Chinese traders, as well as the ever-fluid travels of the Malays themselves. What we might call the "Isthmian Malay region" stretched roughly from the area of Chaiya in present-day Thailand down to Kedah and Trengganu in Malaysia. This stretch of land, blessed with ports opening on oceans east and west, was the doorway to the natural riches of the "Golden Kersonese", and for this reason it became a jewel fought for and constantly attacked by Siam, Jawa, Sumatera, and Melaka. Given its strategic position, it is not surprising that the first accounts of ancient empires on the peninsula are centered on the Isthmus region.

As for what existed before the Melakan Sultanate, local Malay traditions and recent archaeological findings point to the existence of ancient pre-Melaka states such as Gangga Negara, in the Bruas-Dinding area prior to the foundation of the sultanates of Perak Sultanate, Trengganu and Kedah. Chinese r ecords of the Sui Dynasty onwards also speak of the existence of Kelantan and Pahang kingdoms in the pre- Melaka period. Not all the evidence is conclusive; in many instances there are far fetched speculations about the possible location of particular places, the names of which are available only in renditions of foreign languages such as Chinese and Arabic.

However, there is no doubt that a series of distinct kingdoms ruled the Segenting from at least the first century, and by the 3rd century Chinese records give the names of about a dozen small states. From the 3rd until the 6th century, the Isthmus fell under the sway of Funan, an empire extending along the lower Mekong River in what is now Vietnam. Funan was the word the Chinese used to refer to the proto-Khmer Kingdom unified in the third century. This Hinduized empire imposed authority on the whole of the Isthmian section of the Malay Peninsula and the overland trade route, lasting for three hundred years.

The Isthmian Malay states regained their independence in the middle of 6th century after the Khmer Prince of Kambuja conquered Funan. From this time onwards important Malay states begin to appear in Chinese annals. Of the states mentioned, Tambralinga, another name for Ligor (present day Nakhorn Sri Thammarat), was situated near the northern limit of the Malay world. It is around this time that the Kingdom of Langkasuka first appears. Langkasuka (which the Chinese called Lang Ya Shiu) was the largest and most prosperous of these early kingdoms, and may have covered the full width of the Segenting, lying to the south of Ligor and to the north of the present Malay Peninsula.

Courts of Isthmian Malay kingdoms in the early 7th century showed a high standard of elegance and luxury. Accounts describe Buddhism as the religion of the country, while Brahmans held positions at court. Throughout the first millennium of the Christian era, the Malay Kingdoms of Langkasuka and Ligor continued to appear in Chinese records, which described the Malay city states as prosperous n reaching a high level of economic and cultural development.

Sri Wijaya vs the Isthmusian Malay Kingdoms

Through conquest — and also subtly through alliance and defeat — the Isthmian states managed to survive in various guises and flourish from the 6th until the 14th centuries. From the beginning their history was intricately interwoven with more powerful empires to the north and south. To the north they alternately warred against and allied with the Khmer, and later the Sukhotai and Ayudthaya empires of Siam; to the south with the Sri Wijaya, and later the Sailendra and Majapahit empires in Sumatera and Jawa; to the west with the Chola empire in India.

The interplay with Indonesia is the most important of all influences, especially in the early period before the rise of Siam. Sri Wijaya, based in its early years at Palembang in Sumatera, was the mother empire of the Indonesian archipelago, the one from which all the others in Sumatera, Java, and Bali later sprang. It continued in different guises and locations from the late 7th century until the 14th century, and at various times exerted hegemony over the Malay peninsula.

By the 8th century a rival kingdom was thriving in central Jawa known as the Sailendras; they too controlled the Isthmus for a brief period. The Sailendras were related to the old kings of north-central Jawa as well as to the Sri Wijaya ruling house in Sumatera. Prince Patapan (Balaputra) fled from Jawa to Sri Wijaya in 832 to ascend the throne, with the result that the Sailendra line was extinguished in Jawa but continued in Sri Wijaya on Sumatera. The history of Sri Wijaya is inextricably linked with the ruling houses of the Malay peninsula. For example, in the 15th century, Parameshwara, a Sri Wijayan prince fled from Sumatera to Singapura Temasek before he became the sultan of Melaka.

The Javanese, however, deny that Parameshwara had true Sri Wijayan blood, which is traced ultimately to Sri Lankan royalty. They say instead that he was a grandson of Adityavarman, ruler of Pagar Ruyung, by a Javanese mother. Adityavarman was appointed to his position by Majapahit on the recommendation of Gajah Mada. Adityavarman himself may possibly have been a descendant of the royal house of Malayu Dharmasraya from Jambi who had conquered Palembang, the seat of Sri Wijayan power, in 1088, and thereby had become the new masters of late Sri Wijaya, which lasted until 1288, when it was invaded and defeated by the Javanese kingdom of Singhosari.

After Prince Patapan moved to Sumatera in 832, power in Jawa shifted from the centre to the east of the island. The Sailendras yielded to a series of dynasties in east Jawa who thrived from the 9th until the 15th century, most important of which was the Majapahit, dated usually from 1292 until about 1500. During the heyday of the Majapahit in the 14th and 15th centuries, the Malay Isthmian states appear at times to have been a part of the Majapahit empire. The subtle shifts of power along the Isthmus are very complicated and not many scholars have looked into this thoroughly. Meanwhile there were powerful influences from Chinese, and in later centuries, Islamic traders.

In about 1025, Rajendra Chola of South India attacked and subjugated Kedah, with the result that the Kedah region flourished with a Hinduized civilisation which has left the largest pre-Islamic monuments on the peninsula. Meanwhile, it was recorded in Pali chronicles of the 15th century that Sujitaraja, the Buddhist Malay Raja of Ligor had married a Khmer princess in the second half of the 10th century. The close association between 10th and 11th century Khmers and Isthmian Malays at the highest level provides many reasons that the ancient culture of the two peoples has much in common. The Malay rulers of Ligor acquired strength and ambition from their Khmer association.

So important is Sri Wijaya to the history of the Isthmus that there have been several attempts by scholars to place its capital there. Thai academia has a long tradition of adopting neighbouring dynasties as their own, viz. the identification of the original Thai nation with the Dali Empire of Yunnan. In similar fashion, Thais have claimed Chaiya or Cahaya (which in Malay means light), as the site where Si Wichai (Sri Wijaya) was. On the other hand, J.L. Meons (1937) believed that early Sri Wijaya was located in Kelantan and K.A. Nilakanta Sastri (1949) supported the idea. The Kelantan theory may not be far-fetched, since Chinese Sui Dynasty annals of the 7th century describe an advanced kingdom called Chi Tu ("Red Earth") as being in Kelantan. The ancient name for Kelantan was "Raktamrittika", meaning "Red Earth" — this was later changed to "Sri Wijaya Mala". The capital of Sri Wijaya Mala was called "Valai", and it was situated along the upper Kelantan river of Pergau, known for its rich gold mines.

The controversy over the true location of Sri Wijaya arises because of the fact that after the death of Maharaja Sri Jayanaga around 692, during the mission to capture Jawa Island, Sri Wijaya seems to have been divided into two states. The eldest son Maharaja Dipang ruled over Amdan Negara, that is, the Malay Isthmus, probably Kelantan/Kedah. The second son, Maharaja Dhiraja, ruled the islands (Sumatera and other islands of the Indonesian archipelago), based at Palembang. After the division into east and west, the name of Sri Wijaya remained in Sumatera, but on the Malay peninsula, a poetic title emerged for the Kelantan/Kedah area, namely, Tanah Serendah Sekebun Bunga (Valley of Flower Garden Land). This title is still found in traditional performing arts such as Mak Yong dance, Wayang Kulit puppet theatre, etc. By 730 the capital of Sri Wijaya in Sumatera moved from Palembang, known as Langkapura, to Kota Mutajap near the river mouth of Jambi in Sumatera.

It is reasonable to speculate that some elements of the Sri Wijayan culture originated in Sumatera, but later spread to other parts of South East Asia from Kelantan/Kedah. Yawakoti meaning Jawa Point, is situated at Bukit Panau hill along the upper Kelantan river near Pergau; some believe this place to be from which Jawanese politics and culture spread out.

Al Tabari states that the word Jawa or Jva was used more widely in ancient times. Jawa in those days meant "Jawanese culture", including its centres on the Isthmus, as compared to now when Jawa only refers to Jawa Island in Indonesia. According to one tradition, the Jawanese moved down from Kemboja and spread out to the archipelago.

Where was Langkasuka exactly?

Langkasuka is the name used, from very early times, for the kingdoms of the Isthmus. However, there are many conflicting theories concerning exactly where the kingdom of Langkasuka was situated. Hikayat Merong Maha Wangsa and The History of Kedah or Kedah Annals described Langkasuka as covering the Isthmus from sea to sea, from the port of Pattani to Kedah, with Gunung Jerai as the centre of the kingdom.

Notable among Chinese records is the Chi Tu Guo Ji, "Record of the Kingdom of Red Earth", written by the Sui Dynasty envoys after a visit to the peninsula in 607-610. This is the most important documentary evidence of an inland kingdom known as Chi Tu "Red Earth". There are a number of good arguments giving credence to the theory that the kingdom was situated in Kelantan. Upriver of the Kelantan area, Gua Cha is known for its early settlement some 8000 years ago. The Dabong-Pergau rivers are known for their clay deposits and witnessed the making of old black pottery; Tanah Merah (Red Earth) is the name of a place upriver of Kelantan. The capital of the kingdom was described in the Chinese annals as having triple gates more than a hundred paces apart painted with images of bodhisattvas and hung with flowers and bells ... to the rear of the king's couch there is a wooden shrine inlaid with gold, silver and five perfumed woods, and behind the shrine is suspended a golden light ... several hundred brahmans sit in rows facing each other on the eastern and western sides.

Chinese records written by Chang Chun during the reign of the 7th century Sui Emperor Yang Di, spoke of a kingdom called Lang Ya Shu in Chinese, identifiable as Langkasuka in Malay. Chang Chun described Langkasuka as one of the earliest individual states in South East Asia, a Malay Kingdom. Slightly earlier, the History of the Liang Dynasty 502-566 seems to support a Malay tradition that Langkasuka was founded at the end of the first century in the neighbourhood of what was later called Pattani. Lang Ya Shu proved to be of great economic importance, partly due to the existence of an overland trade route or portage across the Isthmus.

But which of these states is Langkasuka: Kedah, Kelantan, Pattani, or Ligor? Many scholars have come up with various theories, based on archaeological evidence, linguistic clues, or traditions from dance and folklore. Archaeologists point out that the Sungai Pattani River flowed from Kedah to Pattani with another route to Sungai Merbok, Kedah. They are trying to prove that the Bujang valley in Kedah, was the centre of Langkasuka, and the important ruins of Hinduized temples found there make it a strong candidate. Others have sought the origins of Langkasuka in its similarity with the names of Langkapuri, Langkapura, Langkawi and Alangkah Suka, the land of the legendary 17th century Princess Saadong. Paul Wheatley in Golden Kersonese insisted that Langkasuka was in Pattani. While we cannot be sure that Pattani was the capital of Langkasuka, Wheatley was not far wrong in pointing out that Pattani was a famous port of Langkasuka and later became a city-state in its own right before being subsumed as a province of the Thai Kingdom.

Stewart Wavell went seeking for Langkasuka in his romantic voyage depicted in The Naga King's Daughter, a cultural travel journal from Pahang in Malaysia to Chaiya in Thailand in 1963. Wavell described his excitement on meeting a girl named "Golden Naga" in Pattani. Golden Naga was a Manora dancer who described Manora as:

..the oldest of all magic from the land of Lakawn Suka. We merely pay our respect to the Princess Saadong.

Wavell drew together Lakawn Suka, the Pattani Malays' fairyland equivalent of Langkasuka, and Princess Saadong from the folk stories of Kedah. Golden Naga described Lakawn Suka as being near the hill of Bukit Sangkalalili in Pattani and placed the palace of Princess Saadong on the hill. Wavell discovered an old ruin at Yarang (Binjal Lima in Malay). His findings at this old Pattani monastery included:

Buddhas with cylindrical head-dresses of the Sri Wijaya style, carved with the naturalistic impulse of those Sailendras artists who worked such wonders at Borobudur in Central Jawa ... more interesting were the Dvaravati Buddhas of pre-Thai period, possibly prior to the 7th century when Langkasuka would have passed out of the orbit of Funan into the temporary vassalage of the Mons at Thaton before Sailendras spread their power over the former territories of Funan...

Wavell's comment on Funan is significant, because it lends credence to speculation that some of the earliest forms of Malay culture are to be found in Funan. Funan was Southeast Asia's earliest Indianized state, and it is known that Funan controlled the Isthmus from the 3rd to the 6th centuries. From there such influences could easily have spread south to Sumatera and Jawa.

Wavell wondered whether Yarang might even have been the capital of Langkasuka. However, H.G. Quaritch Wales and the Fine Arts Department of Thailand later asserted that the site was the northern capital of Sri Wijaya. Though Wavell knew that he could not make a clear archaeological connection between the Yarang ruins and Langkasuka, he insisted on linking Pattani with the tales of Langkasuka as they appear in folklore: the Story of King Merong Maha Wangsa, the Bukit Sankalalili hill, and the fabled Princess Saadong as revealed in Pattani Manora dance. H.S.H. Princess Piya Rangsit of Thailand believed in a variation of Wavell's theory, placing Langkasuka further north at Ligor/Tambralinga (Nakhorn Sri Thammarat) but she did not manage to fully research her discovery, as she was killed in a helicopter accident during a coup in the 1970's. Today, the Pattani people still believe that the old site of Yarang in Pattani is the site of the Langkasuka Kingdom, the same story they told Wavell nearly forty years ago.

The Chermin Empire and Majapahit II

While the history of the earlier periods is obscure, the later 14th and 15th centuries were a high point of the Langkasuka civilisation. Raja Sang Tawal the son of Raja Sakranta of the Melayur Empire, based at Ligor, moved to Kelantan after he was defeated by Siam in 1295 and lost Singgora (the old name for Songkhla). Kelantan then became the base for unified Langkasuka. In 1339, Raja Bharubhasa (Sultan Mahmud Syah) replaced his father Raja Sang Tawal as king of Langkasuka, and succeeded in grouping the Isthmus, Champa in Vietnam, and Samudra-Pasai in Sumatera into a new empire known as the Chermin Empire.

The period of the so-called Chermin Empire, reaching from Sumatera to Vietnam, was the zenith of Langkasuka power. Raja Bharubhasa captured Kedah from the mad king Raja Bersiong (Maha Prita Daria) and incorporated Gangga Nagara (the old kingdom of Perak) as part of the Chermin Empire. The Raja's sister, Dewi Durga ruled Lamuri, later known as Aceh. In 1345, the Siamese mounted a major attack on the Isthmus, with the result that Raja Bharubhasa was forced to offer gold and silver trees as tribute to the Kingdom of Sukhotai. The offering of tribute to Siam was a symbolic turning point, the "little weft within the lute" that centuries later was to end with Siam permanently capturing the northern portion of the Isthmus. Raja Bharubhasa moved upriver to another area in Kelantan called Bukit Panau, and named his new capital Jeddah, meaning "Jewel". The jewel capital of Raja Bharubhasa was situated very near the very site of the "Red Earth" kingdom of the 7th century — the original Langkasuka.

From this time onwards a tug-of-war with Siam ensued. In 1357 Gajah Mada of the Majapahit empire in Jawa defeated Siam and joined in a coalition with the peninsular states to successfully attack Ayudthaya. Gajah Mada declared Jeddah the capital of West Majapahit, with Jawa island being known as East Majapahit. History repeated itself, following the same pattern of Sri Wijaya when it split in the 7th century, and also located one capital at Kelantan/Kedah and another in Sumatera.

In 1395 Siam re-attacked the southern peninsula and captured Temasek in 1401. The power of Siam was on the rise. Sultan Iskandar Shah (Kemas Jiwa) was called from Jawa to come back and rule Kelantan, though he was married to the Majapahit Queen in 1427. Basing himself in Kelantan, Iskandar Shah proclaimed his kingdom as Majapahit II (1432-1502) with the capital called Kota Mahligai (Fort of Heaven). In 1467, Siam of Ayudthaya conquered Majapahit II, and Sultan Iskandar Shah fled to Champa and died there. His nephew Pateh Aria Gajah, who had served as Iskandar's prime minister, moved to Pattani. Later, Iskandar's son known as Mansur Shah briefly revived the Majapahit II kingdom in Kelantan. Majapahit II under Mansur survived a short time until defeated by Melaka in 1499.

As we can see from the fact that Iskandar Shah named his Kelantan kingdom "Majapahit II", the Majapahit empire of Jawa was inextricably connected to the history of the states of the Isthmus. Majapahit was known as the greatest empire of all states in insular Southeast Asia from 1300 onwards, claiming political control over most of the archipelago, but declining in the 15th century. Essentially, the relationship that earlier had existed between Sri Wijaya and the Isthmus evolved into one between Majapahit and the Isthmus.

Pattani

The final fall of Majapahit II in 1502 is sometimes taken by historians as the end of Langkasuka. However this defeat no more marked the end of Langkasuka than all the other victories and defeats, rises and falls of dynasty recorded earlier. The royal courts and culture of the region continued to thrive after 1500 — in fact the culture of the Isthmus reached its highest flower in the years that were to come. However, two important changes occurred at this time in the history of Langkasuka: First, with conversion to Islam by the Sultan of Pattani in 1500, the culture became Islamic. Second, the locus of Langkasuka shifted away from Kelantan, pulled higher up the Isthmus in a response to the growing power of Siam. From 1500 until 1900 power on the Isthmus was located in Pattani and Ligor (Nakhorn Sri Thammarat). This was the era of maritime power, and Pattani had an advantage over other states because of its important natural harbour.

Pasir Putih (meaning "white sand") is another name for Gresik, an earlier kingdom in Pattani history. It is the name of an old place in East Jawa, possibly during the Majapahit Kingdom. Gresik later became Pattani, and its importance grew after the beginning of the 14th century when Siam began to expand downwards and Ligor became a Siamese dependency. Pattani appeared in the records of the Ming Admiral Cheng Ho, who led a Chinese fleet to Melaka in the early 1400's. With the decline of the Majapahit and the Chermin empires after the 15th century, Pattani eventually gained hegemony over the Isthmus, and it maintained its independence long after Siam absorbed other northern Isthmian Malay states.

The glory of the Pattani Kingdom dates from the rule of Sultan Ismail Shah (1500-1530), who founded the Malay Muslim kingdom known as Pattani Darul Salam after he converted to Islam. It was believed that Islam in Pattani came way before Melaka (1412) and Trengganu (1303/1368), as Pattani was a seaport through which traders came and went, the source of Islamic teaching and cultural forms.

Pattani as the name of a city state may have been changed after the ruler converted to Islam. There is some dispute about the origins of the name, one theory being that the name derives from Pantai Ini in standard Malay language. At the same time, the people of Pattani, Kelantan and Besut (the northern part Trengganu) speak a very distinctive dialect in which the sounds Patta Ni mean "This Shore". Today, the Thais denote the language of the people in the south of Thailand is "Jawi", where Malaysians use Jawi to refer to the written script of the Malay language adapted from Arabic script. This script is thought to have originated in Pattani.

Pattani's Golden Era came after the fall of Melaka to the Portuguese in 1511. Four Queens ruled Pattani during this time: Queen Green (1584-1616), Queen Blue (1616-1624), Queen Purple (1624-35) and Queen Yellow (1635-86). Around 1688-90, the rule of Pattani shifted to the Kelantan royal line, and this scenario was reversed around 1730 when the Pattani royal line came to rule Kelantan. The last sultan of Pattani, Sultan Abdul Kadir Kamaruddin's (1899-1902) son Tengku Seri Akar was married to the daughter of Sultan Muhamad IV of Kelantan. Through the 16th century to the 19th century we can trace many Pattani royal sons and daughters married into the ruling families of Kelantan, Perlis, Trengganu, Pahang, Johor, Melaka and Kedah.

After the four Queens, the power of Pattani gradually declined. Where the rulers of Pattani had once commanded the whole Isthmus, their domains shrank to cover only the four provinces of Pattani, Narathiwat, Yala, and Sathun. Eventually they controlled only the area covered by the modern Thai province of Pattani, only to be swallowed up by Siam in the early 20th century. As Pattani declined, the Sultan of Ligor (Nakhorn Sri Thammarat), although still under Siamese suzerainty, regained a measure of independence, and it is from this that confusion has arisen as to the true location of Langkasuka.

The Thais tend to favour theories that place the centre of Langkasuka farther up north along the Isthmus, at Ligor, rather than at Pattani. Local historians in Nakhorn Sri Thammarat (Ligor/Tambralinga) believe that there were 12 states under the rule (or loosely federated with) the King of Nakhorn Sri Thammarat, before he was captured by the last King of Ayudthaya. This group of 12 states included Kelantan, Trengganu, Pahang and Kedah. At the end of the 18th century, King Taksin of Siam moved his capital to Thonburi after the Burmese sacked the city of Ayudthaya. As part of Taksin's military feats, he captured Ligor. King Taksin removed the King of Ligor and installed him as the Governor of Nakhorn Sri Thammarat.

Ligor is now called Nakhon Si Thammarat, which is the Thai rendition of its original name Nagara Sri Dhammaraja. Ligor used to be a powerful Malay kingdom in its time. It had close links with Prey Nokor, i.e. the Angkorian Khmer kingdom.

Unlike Kedah n Pattani, however, Ligor did not fully convert to Islam. Although quite a large number of its citizens became Muslim, Ligor is believed to have remained as a mainly Buddhist kingdom until it was eventually invaded n conquered by Sukhotai.

LIGOR (NAGARA SRI DHARMARAJA) IN 11TH CENTURY

Introduction
A Chinese text recorded that at the end of the tenth century, a Srivijayan ambassador sent to the court of China reported the attack from Java and requested protection. During the winter of 992, it was learned from Canto that this ambassador, who had left the capital of China two years before, had learnt that his country had been invaded by She-po (Java) and as a consequence, had remained in Canton for a year. In the spring of 992, the ambassador went to Champa with his ship, but since he did not hear any good new there, he returned to China and requested that an imperial decree be promulgated placing San-fo-chi under the protection of China. About the same time, the Chinese court received Javanese envoys that brought corroborative information to China. They reported that their country was continually at war with San-fo-chi, but what they did not say was that the aggression came from them.

In 995, the geographer Masudi spoke in grandiloquent terms of the "kingdom of the Maharaja", king of the islands of Zabag; among theirs exploits were Kalah (Kedah) and Sribuza (Srivijaya).

At 999 it appears that a Sri Vijaya king had moved his court to Vijaya court at Prey Nokor (i.e. Angkor) by judging from his incomplete coronation name "Yang Pu ku Vijaya Sri" found in an inscription of the region. This “movement” is believed to refer to the “relocation“ of his throne from Ligor to Lavo. This Srivijayan king is believed to be Sujitaraja, also titled Jayaviravarman, Preah Botomvaravamsa n also Sri Kshetraindraditya. He was King of Nagara Sri Dharmaraja (Ligor). He was a Ligorian Malay prince with Srivijayan blood. He also married a Khmer princess. At that time, the Srivijayan realm had sort of split into 2 sub-realms, i.e. the mainlandic Angkorian realm n the islandic realm. Nagara Sri Dharmaraja (Ligor) as well as Kedah had then become a sort of bridge connecting the 2 sub-realms. Looked at in another way, they had also become contested territory, sort of a battleground, between Angkor n Palembang, with the Chola Tamils n their Javanese allies also coming in as interested, competing outsiders.

Sri Vijaya's attack on the Cakravartin (Angkorian) Empire
At the same time, the Mon tradition recalled the conflict between Lavo and Haripunjaya. The story is reported in various Pali chronicles composed in Chiangmai. The Chamadevivamsa, written at the beginning of the fifteenth century, and the Jinakalamali, finished in 1516, contain the following account:

"A king of Haripunjaya named Atrasataka went to attack Lavo where Ucchittachakravatti reigned. At the moment when the two sovereigns prepared for battle, a king of Sri-dhammanagara named Sujita arrived at Lavo with a considerable army and fleet. Confronted by this surprise attack, the two adversaries fled in the direction of Haripunjaya. Ucchita arrived first, married the queen and proclaimed himself king.

Sujita, the king of Ligor, established himself as master of Lavo. At the end of three years, his successor, or perhaps his son, Kambojaraja, went to attack Ucchita again at Haripunjaya, but was defeated."

The conflict between Lavo and Haripunjaya mirrors the feud between the Javanese and the Sri Vijaya that grew in a bigger scale to become the dynastic crisis of the Cakravaltin establishment. Under the Javanese attack, the Srivijaya was obviously looking for an escape and in a twist of destiny, the Angkorian site became their target.

Scholars have mistaken this attack as a conquest of the mighty Angkorian Empire over its weaker neighboring states, Lavo and Haripunjaya. On the contrary, it was the Angkorian court that was under attack since the story clearly indicates that the conqueror was from Sri Dhammaraja or Ligor.

The ruler of Lavo, Ucchittachakravatti, was quoted as a Chakravati, a reference to the Angkorian Monarch of the time. He was either Jayavarman IV or a successor of him. As Lavo was the military command post of the Cakravatin Empire, the control of Lavo resulted in the capture of the Angkorian throne.

The Viravamsa Dynasty
After the reign of Jayavarman V, inscriptions appear to show three kings, Udayadityavarman, Jayaviravarman and Suryavarman were reigning concurrently at the Angkorian site. Scholars speculated that they were contending over the Angkorian Throne.

While in fact, they were all belonged to the Ligor court and were joined in their fight to take control of the mainland. A passage of the Khmer chronicle (RPNK: Botomvaravamsa) shed some light to the enigma.

There was a nephew of Maharaja who, arranged by Prah Dhammavidhi rsiphatta, wedded the late queen and ascended the throne under the name of Botomvaravamsa. He commissioned Virauraja as his Obyuvaraja and Udayaraja as his Obraja. After the death of Botomvaravamsa, Prah Virauraja who was Obyuvaraja ascended the throne. After the reign of Virauraja, Prah Udayaraja who was commissioned as Mahaobjraja ascended the throne.

According to the passage, arrangement had been established by the Angkorian high priest to accommodate the new leadership. Jayaviravarman (Preah Botomvaravamsa) who was the nephew of the late Angkorian King and was set to ascend the Angkorian throne while Suryavarman (king Virauraja) became his Obyuvaraja (second king) and Udayadityavarman (Udayaraja) became his Obraja (army marshal).

We shall see that Jayaviravarman and Udayadityavarman were brothers and were related to the court of Chrestapura (Lavo) and despise their true origin from Ligor, they were no strangers to the Angkorian court. They were the collaborators of the younger Suryavarman I, who was the son of Jayaviravarman (also called Sujita, Preah Botomvaravamsa n Sri Kshetraindraditya) who alone would be the ultimate ruler of the Angkorian throne.

Jayaviravarman (1002-1006)
He was the elder brother of Udayadityavarman and was mentioned in the inscription of Prasat Khna as Sri Narapativiravarman. His title indicates that he was then Narapati or ruler of Lavo and army marshal of Jayavarman V. The inscription of Ta Praya (Stele de ta Praya), confirms that he hold the position since 962 during the reign of Harshavarman II. The same inscription indicates that he was the brother in law of Jayavarman V and served as his army general, thus an insider of the Angkorian court. The Inscription of Prasat Trapan Run (BEFEO28: Nouvelles Inscriptions du Cambodge: La Stele du Prasat Trapan Run) introduces him as the Mala king (Maulimalaraja), connecting (i.e equating) him to the Sri Vijaya king Sujita of the Mon chronicle.

Obviously Sri Vijaya of the Malay archipelago (i.e. islandic Srivijaya) was a cardinal state of the Angkorian Empire, and as part of the Cakravatin establishment its ruler could hold an important function for the Middle country. The fact that he was himself the army general (senapati) of the Angkorian Empire explains why king Sujita had a large army at his diposition to overrun Lavo and the Angkorian throne. The part B of the inscription mentioned that he ascended the throne at 1002 and still reigning on 1006 when he granted a piece of land in Aninditpura (Dvaravati) to his master priest Kavindrapandita. The chronology set him as a contemporary king of Suryavarman I who according to many inscriptions was also reigning at 1002 AD. Other inscriptions reveal his active role in the state affair during his late reign that ended in 1006, obviously during his old age.

Suryavarman I (1002-1050)Many inscriptions attest the reign of Suryavarman, as early as at 1002 AD (Saka 924). If the date is exact, Suryavarman was crowned at the same time as king Jayaviravarman that leaded to the speculation that either the twos were contending the Angkorian throne or was only one king using different titles. We shall see that neither speculation is true. To start, the inscription of Phimanakas (BEFEO XIII, K292, P 12) make it clear that for his ascension on 1002 AD (924 caka), Suryavarman I was ascending Sri Dharmaraja throne.

"Dhati vrah pada kamraten kamtvan an cri suryavarmmadeva ta sakata svey vrah dharmarajya nu 924 caka."

The same inscription mentions that he was lined from the Suryavamsa dynasty and inherited the title of "Kamtvan", a reverence to a Kam king. It is reflecting a strong connection with the Kambojean court of Tambralinga. These evidences support the Khmer tradition that Suryavarman I (Virauraja) had served as the second king (Obyuraja) to king Jayaviravarman (Botomvaravamsa). Some sources mentioned that he was in fact the son of king Sujita or Jayaviravarman himself. While the latter was ascending the Angkorian throne in 1002 AD, Suryavarman I was anointed at the same time to rule Sri Dharmamaraja. It was only after the death of Jayaviravarman that Suryavarman I ascended the Angkorian throne, presumably on 2007 AD.

He was obviously the Kambojaraja of the Chamadevivamsa and the Jinakalamali chronicles that went out to attack the Lavo court forcing them to settle at Haripunjaya. Inscriptions of his name were more numerous in the western site that suggests his involvement in the conquest and reestablishment of Lavo. It was not clear that he received immediate support from the Angkorian court. The inscription of Ta Prom mentions his marriage to the princess Viralaksmi of Chrestapura. Descended from Yasovarman of the pre-Angkorian line, princess Viralaksmi was clearly a ticket of legitimacy to the Angkorian throne. According to the Khmer chronicle, she was the queen of the last Angkorian monarch, presumably Jayavarman V or his immediate successor whose reign was cut short by the crisis.

The inscription of Tep Pranam (JA March-Apr: Le Stele de Tep Pranam, George Coedes) contains a small addition in Khmer Language by Suryavarman to the Sanskrit part of king Yasovarman I to commemorate his involvement in the building of Saugatasramas in the royal palace (vrah Thlvain). This could be an attempt to show his support for the past Angkorian tradition and at the same time to stress on his relationship with Yasovarman I whose legitimacy over the Angkorian throne was incontestable. To command their loyalty, he had Angkorian dignitaries to sworn in the oath of allegiance, and as a reminder, he had their names engraved on the inner surface to the entrance of the Royal Palace. He received his Devaraja cult from the chaplain Jayendrapandita. His support for Buddhism earned him the posthumous name Nirvanapada at the time of his death in early 1050.

Udayadityavarman II (1050-1066)
He received his Devaraja cult from the same chaplain Jayendrapandita. His crown name indicates that he might be a direct descendent from Udayadityavarman I. His reign was particularly plagued with internal crisis. During his sixteen years reign, Udayadityavarman II had to cope with a series of uprisings. The repression of the unrest, entrusted to a General Sangrama, is recounted in epic style by a Sanskrit stele placed at the base of the Baphuon, the temple of the royal linga to which Sangrama made a gift of his booty.

The first revolt took place in 1051, in the south of the country leaded by Aravindahrada. Well trained in the archery, leader of an army of heroes, he was vanquished by Sangrama and fled to Champa. Another revolt took place at 1065 in the northwest. A valiant hero of the king named Kamvau, becoming an army general, secretly planned the attack and left the city with his troop. During the fight with Sangrama, he wounded the latter in the jaw but was killed by three arrows. The last revolt took place in the east, by two brothers named Sivat and Sidhikara with the accomplice of a third warrior named Sasantribhuvana. They were put-down by the same general Sangrama.

Harshavarman III (1066-1080)
Harshavarman III, who ascended the throne in 1066, kept himself busy with repairing the structures ruined in the wars of the preceding reigns. The inscription of Ta-Prohm (BEFEO VI, La Steles de Ta-Prohm, George Coedes) identified him as a descendant of King Bhavavarman I and the queen Kambojarajalakshmi. This connection proved his origin from Sri Dhammaraja even-though we know nothing about his relationship with either Suryavarman I and Udayaditya II. Between 1074 and 1080, he himself was involved in the quarrel with Champapura.

Through one of his inscription, the Champa king Harivarman IV claimed to have defeated the troops of Cambodia at Somesvara and seized the prince Sri Nandavarmandeva who commanded the army with the rank of Senapati. Perhaps it was during this battle that the prince Pang, younger brother of the king of Champa, and later king himself under the name of Paramabodhisatva, went to take the city of Sambhupura (Sambor). After destroying all its sanctuaries he gave the Khmer war prisoners to the various sanctuaries of Sri Isanabhadrasvara (at Mison) as servants. He received the posthumous name Sadasivapada. (ESSA:The Mahidharapura dynasty of Cambodia).

... to be continued.

What the above is saying in outline, is that:

A Malay king of Ligor named Sujita, alternately also titled Jayaviravarman, Preah Botomvaravamsa n Sri Kshetraindraditya, actually became king of the Angkorian empire in 1002 AD, after capturing Lavo (now Lopburi in Thailand), which was like the military HQ of the Angkorian realm. He was able to achieve that incredible feat because he was then Chief Commander of the Angkorian army.

At the same time, Suryavarman I, who was his son by a Khmer princess, became King of Ligor cum Young King (Regent) of Angkor. While his younger brother, Udayadityavarman I, became the new Chief Commander of the army.

When Sujita died in 1007, Suryavarman I became the new Angkor king, while his nephew, Udayadityavarman II (grandson of Udayadityavarman I), became the new King of Ligor cum Young King (Regent) of Angkor.

When Suryavarman I died in 1050, Udayadityavarman II then moved up to become new King of Angkor.

When Udayadityavarman II died in 1066, Harshavarman III, another King of Ligor moved up to become King of Angkor.

Thus a succession of 4 Malay kings of Ligor actually became kings of mighty Angkor, n the Ligor kingship became for a while a sort of stepping stone to becoming king of Angkor.

Good one.., Melayu has more than 2000 years civilization starting from Kelantan, Kedah, Trengganu and Patani which this area called Langkasuka and expand the influence to all Malaya Peninsula, Borneo, Brunei, Indonesia and till to southern Philippines.

You forgot to mention Ligor. Ligor was in fact the most powerful of them all, with 4 of its princes/kings, starting with Jayaviravarman in 1002, having actually ascended the Angkorian throne.

Actually, you might be surprised, if you get a map drawn by Greek cartographer Claudius Potolomey in 150 AD, it showed our Semenanjung as "Khersonesos Aureus" (Semenanjung Emas). On this map was written the name of 2 kingdoms: Langkasuka n Gangga Negara.

Trouble is, many Malaysians today, including Malays, I'm sad to say, r under the WRONG impression that the first proper kingdom in this Semenanjung was Melaka in 1408. Now, THAT can't be FURTHER from the truth.

Many Thai speaking people in Kedah including Muslims claim ancestry from Ligor. Some of them are from Satun and Songkhla provinces. I have Thai-Ligor ancestry and some of the words that we use in Thai corresponds to old Kelantanese-Patani people dialect in Malay such as Sakar (Sugar), Tokkei (Chameleon), Gon (a hemp of stone, a bumper, ball), pai duoy (follow you, literally means pergi sama) etc.

Thai speaking people in Kedah be they Muslims or Buddhists are identified as Bumiputera because they have Langkasukan ancestry. Langkasuka as what we notice covers a vast area from Suphannaphum (Suwarnabumi, Golden Khersonese) near the bay of Siam, northern Malaysia parts of Perak which is Gangga Nagara. Muslim Thai speaking people are comfortable with the term Malay for theirselves, but some younger generations particularly in Kedah tend to be influenced with modern Thai culture as it is popular there in Kedah, I found too that some of the younger generations who are not fluent in Thai are trying too switch back to Thai.

Strictly speaking, the ethnicity/language was originally spelled "T'ai", wasn't it?

Whereas, "Thai", is more of a reference to nationality/citizenship. That's what I've been made to understand anyway, from friends in AF.

It's like, the Thailand government's strategy to 'unite', or 'cover up', the different ethnicities that make up the current Thai nation, including non T'ai peoples like Mon, Khmer n Malay peoples.

I heard also that the current Thai king is actually of Mon royal lineage, but the royal court has to play down/cover up this thing cos it's a bit awkward politically.

Now then, if we next speculate/theorise that Mon is actually closely-related to Malay, that means that ...

... ...

...

He he he.

What do you think?

2. Speaking of Mon-Malay relationship, could it be possible that the name "Mon" is actually a T'ai/Thai rendition/pronunciation of the name "Mal" or "Mala"?

Cos T'ais/Thais tend to have difficulty pronouncing the "l" n "r" sounds at the end of a word. So they change "l" or "r" to "n". Also they like to remove the "a" vowel at the end, while changing the "a" before the last consonant to "o".

For example, "Nagara" (Nagar) becomes "Nakhon".

Therefore, "Mala" (Mal) becomes "Mon"?

I think you are correct about Thai is a nationality rather than indicating a certain ethnicity. It should be spelled T'ai when it comes to the people who's ancestors were driven away from southern China by the Hans. They had formed their own ancient kingdoms like Sukhothai and Lanna Thai.

People down Suphannaphum are not T'ai anyway. I have my friends from Cambodia who recognize Kedah ancient kingdom and other ancient kingdoms in Southern Thai region as Malay in ethnicity. The complexity of history happens when the T'ai moving further south and the non-muslim Malay like in the ancient kingdom of Chayya cooperate with T'ai since their religion are the same. Also the language that the South Thais are using is actually interspersed with Malay vocabulary.

Again you are correct about the pronuniation of "l" and "r" sounds in the end of the end of some words. This also happened to Kedahans older generation. Thai speaking people too can't pronounce "s" at the end e.g polis or police became pulist, they change "s" sound with "t". The sound of Kedah dialect spoken by Thai speaking people too is in nasalized sound.

Some people in Kedah can speak Thai like their counterpart in Thailand due to being educated in Thailand and some of them had ancestry from behind the borderside so the language is not too far from the language used in Thailand. That is why the language spoken is known as Thai.

There are two kinds of Thai-speakers in Kedah. One of them is the people called the Samsams. They are Malay-Muslims. The Samsams were classified as one of sub-ethnic groups of Malay in the census in 1911. [Cavendish 1911] The name can be seen in the Journals of English explorer of 19th century, and later as an official name in the annual reports of Kedah and Perlis. The census of 1911 is the only one official census thatinformed about the Samsams population and residence distribution. The population of the Samsams had 5 % of the Malay population in 1911. Most of them were paddy farmers and their village concentrated in northern districts; Kubang pasu, Padang Terap, and the center district ;Kota Setar ( including Pendang district in it). It is hardly find in the southern district cultivated comparatively later. - Kuroda

Try checking this link, it is informational to understand "Malays" who speak Thai in Kedah:
http://209.85.175.104/search?q=cache:qN2DF...;cd=2&gl=my

2. Your assumption is amazing, we can make research about the Mon, they are hardly visible today and not easy to find them speaking Mon language even in Myanmar. I believe that Malays in Suphannaphumi had contacts with the Mons.

The Mons, to me, r unfortunate folks facing the typical problems of a conquered nation, i.e. subtle oppression, forced absorption/asimilation, political submergence etc. etc. They were conquered by T'ais n Khmers in Thailand, n by Bhama in Myanmar.

I've heard that still many 'Thai's today, indeed a significant proportion, r actually Mons who hv been 'rebranded' as Thais, discouraged from speaking Mon n calling themselves as Mon. Just like Khmers n Malays still living in Thailand (except Pattani). If even the "Thai" king is rumoured to be Mon, then let alone many of the "Thai" people. If the whole of Thailand was Mon in 11th century, they couldn't have all dissappeared into nowhere in a mere 1,000 years.

Right now I'm just keen to establish evidence of ethnic linkage between Mon n Malay. Maybe you could also try to find out if there is such a word as "mon" in old Khmer or old 'T'ai, n if there is, find out what it means.

I even heard a Khmer researcher say that Mons were actually Malays who came from Semenanjung Melayu (maybe Ligor), via Hamsavati (Hongsavatoi). Hamsavati itself, according to Mon legend, was founded by princes Samala and Vimala, who our Khmer 'friend' says were indeed Malay princes, judgin from the 'Mala' at the end of their names. See extract below:

* * * * *
The foundation of Hamsavati
A chronicle sets the date of the foundation of Pegu (Hamsavati) approximately at 825 AD. It credited two twin brothers, Samala and Vimala as the founder of the city of Hamsa named after the spiritual bird, appeared at the place where the city was built. The chronicle specifies that the two brothers were from Takkaxila and set themselves out westward to carve their own empires. It is interesting to note that their names ended with "Mala", an indication that they were lined from the Mala kings of Malayu.

This origin of the Mon people of Hamsavati from Malayu indicates that Sudhammavati or Sri Dharmaraja which according to the Mon Tradition was the origin of theirs race, was the same as Dvaravati of the Menam Valley. The Mon identity emerged first as a people of the Hamsavati and the attribution of the Mon origin at Sudhammavati should be at Malysia (read: Malay Peninsula) and not at Tathon. They called themselves Ramen (Rmen), a derivation of "Ram-mana" (Ram-man, or the "Ram people") that later became "Mon".

Ethnically they are the same people of the Menam Valley, speaking the Mon-khmer family of Language. We shall see (Rammanadesa) that Tathon was instead the original site of the "Talaing" identity. This reference to the Medieval Mon's identity originated from their new line of kings of the Tribhuvanaditya lineage explains the Mon's connection with the Chola Empire of South India.

* * * * *

If I am not mistaken Takshila or Taxila is a place in Eastern Punjab. Taksha is the founder of Takshila kingdom. Taksha was the son of Bharata and Mandavi, and they are the characters who appear in the epic Ramayana.

In Mahabharata, Kuru the son of Parik$hit the son of Uttara the son of Matsya princess and Abhimanyu the son of Vrishni son of Arjuna was enthroned in Takshila.

Ahmad Hasan Dani and Saifur Rahman Dar trace the etymology of Taxila to a tribe called the Takka. According to Damodar Dharmanand Kosambi, "Taxila" is related to "Takṣaka," which means "carpenter" and is an alternative name for the Nāga.

According to tradition The Mahabharata was first recited at Takshashila by Vaishampayana, a disciple of Veda Vyasa at the behest of the seer Vyasa himself, at Janamejaya's (Parik$hit's son) 12 year-long Sarpa-Satra Yajna (Snake Sacrifice).

Again, the term Naga evoked. Is Naga the alternative name for Malay people, Khmers, or Mon? Or maybe it is the super-stratum of Malay and other related native tribes in SEA mainland and India? The Khmers are claimed as the distant relatives of the Mon. If we try to elaborate the Naga things with the legends of SEA natives such as the Soma princess battle with Brahmin Prah Tong legend of Cambodia or the Naga Tasik Chini?

The kingdom of Takshila was annexed by Darius the Great and absorbed into Akhaemed Empire of Persia in 518 BC.

The original places called Takkasila, Srikshetra, Dvaravati, Champapura were all in India. But Indian adventurers, merchants, aristocrats, warriors etc. who reached various places in SEA got homesick n therefore named their new adopted homelands in SEA in remembrance of their favourite places in India.

So you also have Takkasila in old Semenenanjung/Segenting, Srikshetra in old Burma, Dvaravati in old Thailand n Champapura in old Vietnam (Champa).

I have a sneaking suspicion that Naga , like you say, is the general all-encompassing 'brand' for all indigenous peoples of of SEA n nearby regions, including eastern India, Bengal etc. Maybe they're all related peoples.

Some article about the culture of Nakon Si Thammarat reflected in modern society, it is about the talisman Chatukam which is popular few years ago in Thailand:


Chatukam Ramathep is the Thai pronunciation of the Pali Catugamaramadeva, meaning God Rama of the Four Villages. This is near nonsense as no ancient literature, Buddhist or Hindu, connects Rama to "Four Villages". Thus the name seems to have been created out of thin air.

However, the talisman is connected in the popular imagination to the Great Stupa of Nakhon Si Thammarat. According to respectable tradition preserved in an ancient document (see Wyatt, DK, "The Crystal Sands: The Chronicles of Nagara Sri Dharmmaraja", Cornell) the relics enshrined in the Great Stupa there came from Sri Lanka and the stupa was established with the assistance of traders from Sri Lanka, where Buddhism has always been protected by Hindu gods.

(The evidence is in the Mahavamsa and in folk religion to this day.)

Here is the evidence as far as I have been able to trace it from credible physical and documentary sources:

At the Great Stupa at Nakhon Si Thammarat, the stairs leading up to the circumambulatory terminate in a narrow stage with four images of gods. To the extreme left and right are two gods in brick and plaster with no attributes. However inscribed stone plaques (in apparently old lettering) announce that they are Lord Khattugama and Lord Ramadeva.

The door in the centre consists of two wooden leaves each carved with a deity in high relief. One is obviously Vishnu with his disc and conch, but he also holds a bow, indicating that he is the Rama incarnation.

The other deity has four visible faces and so has been identified as Brahma, but he holds weapons (unlike Brahma who holds sacrificial implements).

If one counts the invisible faces (at the back of the relief) one gets six. The six faces and the weapons indicate the god Skanda (known in Sri Lanka as Kataragama) who has six faces and holds all weapons as Commander of the Heavenly Forces.

A 16th century Pali chronicle (see Penth, H Jinakalamali Index, Pali Text Soc, 1994) tells the following tale: the King of Sukhothai had heard of the fame of a Buddha image in Sri Lanka and he desired to acquire it. He sent an emissary to the king of Nakhon Si Thammarat, who reported that Sri Lanka was invincible as it was protected by four gods, namely Khattugama, Rama, Lakkhana and Sumana.

In Sri Lanka, today, popular tradition claims that the island is protected by four great deities, among whom are Kataragama (Khattugama in Pali) and Rama under the tittle Upulvan (the Blue God or Vishnu) but as he holds a bow we must suppose he is the Rama incarnation.

All this information may seem confusing to those unfamiliar with Hindu-Buddhist mythology and iconography, but from this respectable evidence we may construct a credible history.

In the late 12th century Sri Lankan Theravada Buddhism became established in mainland Southeast Asia together with its relics, footprints, Bodhi trees, texts and protective deities.

These were most faithfully recorded and remembered at Nakhon Si Thammarat. However in modern times, tradition has been forgotten. People lack knowledge of the texts to which I have referred. As a result they have confused the two guardian deities, Khattugama and Ramadeva, and conflated and corrupted their names, producing Jatukam Ramathep, a single deity without a historical background.

http://www.ifih.org/SouthIndianInfluencesintheFarEast.htm

Could Funan hv been founded n ruled by princes from Eastern Langkasuka?

Fu-Nan: the 1st Kaundinya
In the early Christian era, the country that later became Kambujadesa was divided into two political entities known to us only by their Chinese names of Fu-nan and Chen-la. Both the States claimed an Indian origin and cherished foundation legends of a very similar character—the rulers of Fu-nan tracing their descent from the union of Kaundinya of the Somavamsa (lunar line) with the nāgī Somā, and those of Chen-la from that of Maharsi Kambu of the Sūryavamsa (solar line) with the apsara Merā. [50]

Fu-nan, it has been pointed out, is the Chinese representation of the word which has survived to this day as Phnom, meaning hill or mountain; [51] the underlying idea is that the capital city of a State, the residence of its king, occupies the same place in the kingdom as Mount Meru, the abode of the Gods, does in the Universe.

Fu-nan occupied the lower valley of the Mekong, the area now designated Cambodia and Cochin-China. Its capital was probably Vyādhapura, or modern Ba Phnom. [52] It was a strongly Hinduised land from the earliest times in which we begin to hear of it. Here is the oldest account of the introduction of Hindu culture into Fu-nan given by K’ang T’ai, a Chinese writer who visited Fu-nan about A.D. 245-250.

“In the beginning Fu-nan had a woman named Lieou-ye (Liu Yeh) (Willow-leaf) for ruler. In the country of Mo-fou there was a man Houen-chen (Hun Tien) (Kaundinya) by name who offered worship to a spirit with great love and ardour. The spirit was touched by his extreme piety, and one night Houen-chen dreamt that a man gave him a divine bow and asked him to embark on a boat and set out on the sea. Next morning, Houen-chen entered the temple and found a bow at the foot of the tree which was the home of the spirit. He then got into a large boat and set sail. The spirit so guided the wind that the boat reached Fu-nan. Lieou-ye wished to rob the boat and capture it. Houen-chen raised the divine bow and shot; the arrow pierced the barge of Lieou-ye through and through; she became afraid and submitted, and Houen-chen thus became master of Fu-nan.” [53]

The divine bow is part of the folklore which has been traced by Goloubeuw to Herodotus’ account of the Scythians. The cult of the spirit is the Chinese way of referring to Brahmanism. The location of Mo-fou is unknown, though the east coast of the Malay Peninsula has been suggested; if this is correct, Fu-nan received its Hindu culture at second-hand from one of the earlier colonies of the peninsula. It seems possible in any event that this story preserves the name of the leader of the first band of Hindu colonists to reach Fu-nan, a leader, whose name and country of origin might well have been preserved by tradition two or three centuries after the event.

http://www.ifih.org/SouthIndianInfluencesintheFarEast.htm

Could Funan hv been founded n ruled by princes from Eastern Langkasuka?

Fu-Nan: the expansion
This early kingdom has left some traces behind in the form of inscriptions and monuments which are being discovered and identified by the progress of modern research. As in many other sections of Indo-Chinese archaeology and history, Cœdès leads here also. Pelliot has collected all the Chinese texts on Fu-nan and provided an illuminating commentary on them. [54] With their assistance, let us review the early history of Fu-nan from our standpoint.
Under the successors of Kaundinya, Fu-nan seems to have become a great kingdom commanding several vassal states. It is fairly certain that from the second century A.D. at the latest, relations were established between India and China by way of the Isthmus of Kra and of the Malacca Strait; Fu-nan was on this route and must have served as a necessary stage in this long voyage.

Fan-che-man (Fan Shih Man) (Sri Mara), at first commander of the troops of Fu-nan, and later king, was the founder of the greatness of Fu-nan. He subjugated neighbouring kingdoms and reduced them to vassalage; he fitted out a navy and conquered a good part of the Malay Peninsula; he was the first to assume the title of ‘Great King of Fu-nan’. He fell ill in the course of an expedition against Suvarnabhūmi, doubtless Lower Burma, and died soon after, sometime in A.D. 225-230 or perhaps a little earlier.

The celebrated Sanskrit inscription of Vo-Canh from South Annam, engraved in a definitely South Indian alphabet has been assigned, on palaeographical grounds, to an age not later than the third century A.D. And recently Cœdès has suggested that this most ancient inscription of Campā must be taken to have been the work of a ruler of Fu-nan, and that Srī Māra mentioned therein as the ancestor of the king was no other than Fan-che-man, Fan being the -varman ending which the Chinese took to be a family name. [55] The Vo-Canh record is Buddhist in inspiration, but we shall see that Buddhism was known and practised in Fu-nan under the successors of Fan-che-man (Fan Shih Man) (Sri Mara).

Fan-che-man (Fan Shih Man) (Sri Mara) was followed on the throne, according to the Chinese sources, by Fan-Tchan, his elder-sister's son who murdered the legitimate heir Fan Kin-cheng. The reign of this usurper is important because it witnessed the commencement of direct official relations between Fu-nan and the princes of India. From a Chinese who had travelled from the west across India to Fu-nan, Fan-Tchan heard of the glories of India and sent one of his relations, Sou-wou by name, as ambassador to India. He embarked from Takkola, which is evidence of the authority of Funan over the west coast of the peninsula, reached the mouths of the Ganges, met the king of the Murundas in the interior, and returned with a Hindu companion and a present of four horses from the king of the Indo-Scythian country. Sou-wou was absent for four years on this mission (c. A.D. 240-4) and these years witnessed many political revolutions in Fu-nan.

http://www.ifih.org/SouthIndianInfluencesintheFarEast.htm

Could Funan hv been founded n ruled by princes from Eastern Langkasuka?

Fu-Nan: the 2nd Kaundinya
Fan-Tchan was assassinated by the second son of Fan-che-man (Fan Shih Man) (Sri Mara) who had come of age, and was in his turn removed by General Fan-siun. It was in the reign of Fan-siun that the Chinese mission of K’ang T’ai and Tchou Ying visited Fu-nan (A.D. 245-250), and from this time regular missions were sent from Fu-nan to the court of China. Fan-siun is credited with a long reign, but a period of confusion seems to have followed. In 357, the Hindu Tchou Tchan-t’an, we learn, ‘called himself king’ and sent an embassy to China. Another three-quarters of a century passes before we hear of the next embassy in 434. But this interval is said to witness another complete transformation of Fu-nan by the arrival of a 2nd Kaundinya from Pan-pan (Pattani/Kelantan) who reformed the institutions of Fu-nan on the model of those of India, and completed the Hinduisation of the land; this occurrence may be placed at the end of the fourth or the beginning of the fifth century A.D.

Of the reign of one of the successors of this 2nd Kaundinya, who then ascended the throne as Jayavarman, we are somewhat better informed. He sent some merchants to Canton who, on their return, were shipwrecked on the coast of Campā together with the Hindu monk Nāgasena who then gained Fu-nan by land. In 484 Nāgasena was sent by Jayavarman with presents to China and a request for aid against Lin-yi (Campā); the emperor received the presents thankfully but declined to help against Campā. From the account of the embassy we learn that Nāgasena told the emperor that there was in Fu-nan a mountain called Motan on which Mahesvara descended incessantly and where the plants never withered. To this cult of Siva must have belonged the images with two heads and four arms, or four heads and eight arms, and holding an infant, an animal, the sun and the moon. It is possible that some were Vaisnava images; for the presence of that creed in Fu-nan is attested by inscriptions of the time, as we shall see later. Buddhism was also practised side by side. This becomes clear also from the fact that two monks, Sanghapāla and Mandrasena, who were employed in translating Buddhist texts into Chinese at this time are said to have come from Fu-nan. Let us note in passing that though the Sanskrit texts translated into Chinese by these monks were Mahāyāna texts, we have no reason to conclude from this fact that the Buddhism practised in Fu-nan was of that variety. [56] Jayavarman sent another embassy to China in 503 and got in turn the title ‘General of the peaceful South, King of Fu-nan’.

http://www.ifih.org/SouthIndianInfluencesintheFarEast.htm

Could Funan hv been founded n ruled by princes from Eastern Langkasuka?

Fu-Nan: Rudravarman
Jayavarman Kaundinya died in A.D. 514 and was followed on the throne by Rudravarman, his eldest son by a concubine. Rudravarman put to death the younger son of Jayavarman by his legitimate queen. He sent many embassies to China.

The legitimate queen and her unfortunate son have left behind one inscription each, both Vaisnavaite in character, and both engraved in correct Sanskrit verses in South Indian characters of the fifth century A.D. or so. The queen's inscription calls her Kulaprabhāvatī, the chief queen (agramahisī) of Jayavarman; its purpose is to record the foundation by her of a hermitage, tank and temple (ārāmam satatākam ālayayutam). The opening verse of the inscription is a fine invocation of Visnu anantasāyin in Sārdūlavikrīdita metre. [57]

The prince who was deprived of his rights by Rudravarman may well be identified, as Cœdès has suggested, with Gunavarman of the Thāp-muoi record. In this inscription, Gunavarman is said to have been appointed by the king to a religious office in spite of his tender age (bālo’pi) on account of his character (guna), an allusion to his name, and valour (gunasauryyayogāt). In this capacity, Gunavarman consecrated the feet of Visnu under the name Cakratīrthasvāmi, with the aid of Brahmins who were versed in Vedas and Vedāngas and were equal to the gods (vedāngavidbhir amarapratimair dvijendraih, Srutisu Pravināh), and performed an eight days’ ceremony for the purpose. The part of the mother in the function which is alluded to is not clear owing to a gap in the record; we have only the phrase: ātmajananīkarasampra …… How completely the technical phraseology of Vaisnavism is adopted in this record is clear from some other words like padam Vaisnavam, bhāgavataih, and Visnoh paramam prāpya padam. [58]

Close upon these Vaisnava records of Kulaprabhāvatī and her son Gunavarman comes the Buddhist inscrition of Rudravarman himself. The inscription, a long record of eleven Sanskrit verses in different metres, is too damaged for us to understand even the general import of the matters recorded. But enough of it survives in the beginning to attest its Buddhist character (the first two verses are in praise of the Buddha), its authorship (the third and fourth verses praise Rudravarman), and the relation of the author to jayavarman (tat pitrā Jayavarmanā, v. 5). [59]

The last embassy of Rudravarman to China was in 539 when he sent a Buddha relic in the form of a hair twelve feet long.

After Rudravarman, we hear of no other king of Fu-nan, but the annals proceed to narrate the conquestof Fu-nan by Citrasena, the king of Chen-la, whose son Īsanasena sent an embassy to the Souei court of China A.D. 616-17. And the inscriptions of Kambuja reveal us a predecessor of Citrasena, by name Bhavavarman who has left a number of inscriptions, all undated, but most probably belonging to the second half of the sixth century.

* * * *
Rudravarman is generally considered as the last king of sovereign Funan. Funan was conquered by brothers Bhavavarman n Chitrasena, princes of Chenla n sons of Viravarman, another brother of Rudravarman, n therefore nephews of Rudravarman.

The possibility is there, definitely.

Indian princes, adventurers, mercenaries n traders, v possibly including Kambojas among them, reached the Langkasukan kingdoms of the Malay Peninsula first before they ventured further eastwards. Some of them would hv married into local Langkasukan royalty on both Western Langkasuka (Kedah, Bruas, Manjung) n Eastern Langkasuka (Ligor, Pattani, Kelantan).

Some of their mixed-blood (Indian-Malay, Kamboja-Malay etc.) royal offspring, on their fathers' exhortations, may then hv ventured further eastwards to explore n found new lands on the SEAn mainland, carrying along with them the Hindu-Buddhist customs n practices of their pure Indian or pure Kamboja forefathers.

Lands in ancient Cambodia (e.g. Funan) n ancient Vietnam (e.g. Champa) would hv been quite distinct possibilities.

The first Kambojagama (Kamboja stronghold) in SEA was in fact founded in Ligor. When Ligorian mixed Kamboja-Malay princes conquered Lavo (Lopburi), another Kambojagama was set up there. Funan was then like more or less the 3rd n biggest Kambojagama in SEA.

Both Kaundinya I (Hun Tien, 1st century AD) n Kaundinya II (Prah Thong a.k.a. Jayavarman Kaundinya a.k.a. Sri Kambu, 4th century AD) could well hv come from Langkasuka rather than India.

Glad that the flow of discussion on ancient Malayan Peninsula still going on.

Beruas and Manjung are both in Gangga Nagara, located in Perak today. I think I had read somewhere that Gangga Nagara had been established by Raja Sarjuna Ganjil from Kedah. Others had the opinion that Gangga Nagara had been established by Khmers of Cambodia. But I think here, people in ancient Malayan Peninsula who live in the "Hulu" area are actually of Mon-Khmeric stock.



Now how are we going to determine the period of Raja Gangga Johan reign in Gangga Nagara?



Again, this Kingdom is believed as still exist in when the time Cholan Tamils attacking the Peninsula. So, this area too were actually included under Srivijayan Empire?



Merong Mahawangsa is actually of Khmer stock? Kedah in ancient time covers Northern part of Kedah, and those bordering areas of Malay-Thai.

Yes. After Funan collapsed in 550 AD, our small, not so strong Langkasukan kingdoms sort of drifted from the Funan orbit into the Srivijayan orbit. But they pased into the Chenla orbit first, cos Srivijaya only really rose up in 682 AD under Jayanasa.

The possibility in fact is also there of Langkasukan kingdoms having formed the wellspring (i.e. original source) of both Srivijaya n Sailendra kingdoms.

A book I read titled "Sejarah Kelantan" claimed that Srivijaya in fact first started in Kelantan as Srivijaya Mala. The kingdom later spread to Sumatra n sort of came into full bloom (berkembang mekar) in Palembang. Still, the COMMERCIAL centre of Srivijaya shifted back again to Kedah in the 11th century, when the Cholan invasions occurred, i.e. 1017, 1025 & 1068 AD.

I also hv read that after the 1025 invasion, Rajendra Chola may hv married a princess of Gangga Negara, maybe a daughter of Raja Gangga Shah Johan. That could explain why the name "Raja Chulan" is v popular in Perak.

When Jayanasa king of Palembang Srivijaya grew old, he is said to hv split his expanded Srivijaya kingdom into 2 for his 2 sons. Elder son Raja Dipangkara (sometimes called only Raja Dipang) got the Semenanjung, while younger son Raja Adhiraja was given the Srvijayan territories in Sumatra n Java.

Sailendra has often been proposed to be a descendant kingdom of Funan. But then, when Funan first collapsed, the heirs of the vanquished Funan court may hv first reconstituted their kingdom in Ligor, Pattani or Kelantan, before they finally moved to Java.

Anyway, during Funan's time (collapsed 550 AD), ship technology was still under-developed, n not may guys would hv dared to sail direct from Funan to Java, especially in poor weather. It would definitely hv been much safer, although slower, to sail hugging the coastline of mainland SEA all the way from Funan to the southern tip of the Semenanjung, n then only cross the Straits to Sumatra or Java.

A kampong pastime is yakking under the chikku tree. The women work and the men yak yak yak.

Fukk you. You yak turd from Khitay.

Thats if you know what a Khitayan yak is.

The Chinese kopi kedai pastime is no different. The Ah So works n cleans up, while the Ah Pek plays cards or mahjong or talks bull n goes ha ha ha non stop with his cronies.

Just thought you might wanna hv a glance at what it was like in 12th century SEA.

The trade routes n kingdoms of that time.

Who made all this up?

...did you see that name in the right corner? if you only knew...

Made the map up?

The same guy who made you up from some shhitty, stinking, disgusting drops of crappy fluid that came from your mum n dad.

Or rather made up the self-initiating, self-sustaining, sef-governing biochemical processes that built you up from some shhitty, stinking, disgusting drops of crappy fluid that came from your mum n dad.

He also made up the self-initiating, self-sustaining, sef-governing biochemical processes that built your mum n dad up from some shhitty, stinking, disgusting drops of crappy fluid that came from their mum n dad.

But of course, guys like you will prefer to believe that those processes invented themselves, created themselves.

Word.

Anyway.... This thread is very interesting to read. Thanks, guys! I especially find the theory that Malay language came from South Sumatra is interesting. Not because I don't believe in it, I do. I just find it funny (and somehow ironic), because Palembang dialect of Malay today is one of the most Javanese-influenced Malay dialects in Indonesia.

Geeeeeeeeee. Wowwwwwww.

We're beginning to get Indos reading Mala/Malay history now. Even if they mostly dont seem to be so impressed by it.

You know la. Cos they had much bigger n much more powerful kingdoms than our small ones. With all those huge glorious temples. So their history must be grander lor. Hor? He he he.

They even believe, n how ERRONEOUSLY, that ALL of us came here to this Semenanjung from THEIR side of the Selat, i.e. Sumatra n Java. He he he.

Seriously though, you're welcome to pop in, guys. Well as long as ya all dont condescend too much. He he he.

Well our Southern Sumatra origin hypothesis for the Malay language is just premised on there having been a "Malayu" kingdom in Jambi, regarding which we believe "Malayu" came from "Mala Yu" meaning "Mountain Kingdom" or "Mountain Country". As for Sungai Malayu, we believe the sungai derived its name from the kerajaan/negeri, not the other way around. That does happen, quite often, in fact.

Regarding which in turn we believe that the "Mala Yu" kingdom was first founded by "Mala" (meaning 'Mountain") people who first crossed over to Southern n Eastern Sumatra from our Semenanjung n maybe further up in ancient Burma n ancient Thailand, where they called themselves "Mon" in place of "Mala" simply due to a difference in accent.

The rationale for this further theory being that Thais of today as well of earlier times, many of whom actually had Mon ancestry, pronounce the word "Nagara" as "Nakhon". For instance, the ancient Malay Buddhist kingdom of Nagara Sri Dharmaraja centred at Ligor is rendered in Thai as Nakhon Si Thammarat, the name by which the city of Ligor is known today. So Thais, n by extension the Mon ancestors of some modern Thais, would hv pronounced "Mala" as "Mon".

Our friend SonOfGunongJerai has mixed Malay-Thai ancestry n he can write n read Thai, n he will vouch for this reasoning.

FYI, guys from Pattani plying their trade serving Thai-influenced Pattani Malay food in hawker-style stalls in Malaysia pronounce "epal" (apple) as "epen". There is also a border town in the north just inside the Thai border, which Malays call "Setul", it's called "Satun" by Thais. Even some northern Malays in Kedah n Perlis today still pronounce the endings "ul" or "ol" in a word as "un" n "on".

What this means is that our ancient "Mala" ancestors who first inhabited this Semenanjung, especially the northern half of it, were of ONE n the SAME stock as the Mon people. The guys who first settled much of ancient Burma, in Sudhammavati (Thaton) n Hamsavati (Pegu), as well as the entire ancient Thailand in the form of numerous kingdoms bunched together as Haripunchay, Lavo (now Lopburi), Leang Na n Dvaravati.

But they just called themselves as "Mala" in the Semenanjung n "Mon" further up in ancient Burma n ancient Thailand.

Just a matter of accent.

You know, your Javanese-influence theory fits in exactly with mine. Well in one sense.

You see, I believe that the early "Malayu" language that arose out of Jambi n later became the official language of the entire Srivijayan realm developed first out of the mixing n interaction between the original Mala/Mon language of the ancient immigrants from the Semenanjung n the Javanese-influenced languages of the local Sumatran islanders, spiced up further with generous helpings of Sanskrit, Pallava, Pali etc.

As for today, with Javanese n pseudo-Javanese constituting over 65% of the total Indonesian population as well as forming its political core of power, I'd expect ever increasing Javanisation of Bahasa Indonesia, which ironically is founded on the old Malayu language.

But I dont hv much knowledge about the "Berunai" island yet, so I cant talk that much in relation to the people there. All I know is that the modern day Brunei state still considers Bahasa Melayu as their original n official language, n their people still consider themselves as Orang Melayu.

I would say that the Sabahan n Sarawakian Malays feel the same too. Maybe you as a native of Berunai island can shed more light on this.

Just hv a look of these ...

These young Mon lads look just the same as those from any Malay kampong in Kelantan, my home state.

These young Mon girls too.

A young Mon couple. Reminds me of a pic of my uncle n my aunt in their young days.

Now some Indos might find this interesting. I dont know.

It's from: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/kusalasaya/wheel085.pdf

From 1002 to 1182 A.D. kings belonging to the Suryavarman dynasty ruled supreme in Cambodia. Their empire extended over the whole of present-day Thailand. Being adherents of Maháyána Buddhism with a strong mixture of Brahmanism, the Suryavarman rulers did much to propagate and establish the tenets of the Northern School. There is an
interesting stone inscription, now preserved in the National Museum at Bangkok, which tells us that in about 1017 A.D. (B.E. 1550) there ruled in Lopburi (Lavo), in central Thailand and once a capital city, a king from Nakon Sri Thammaráth (Nagara Sri Dharmaraja) who traced his ancestry to Srivijaya rulers. The king had a son who later became the ruler of Kambuja (Cambodia) and who, more or less, kept Thailand under the suzerainty of Cambodia for a long time. During this period there was much amalgamation of the two countries’ religions and cultures. The stone inscription under consideration probably refers to one of the Suryavarman kings who had blood relationship with the Srivijaya rulers.

* * * * *
That king was Jayaviravarman a.k.a Sujita a.k.a. Sri Virauraja. The northern Mons called him "Maulimalaraja" (King of the Mala people?). When his queen's (she was a Khmer princess) uncle Jayavarman IV, Maharaja of Angkor died there ensued a power struggle. Sujita was then Narapati of Lavo, which was then the military HQ of Angkor. He was also Senapati (army chief) of the entire Angkor empire.

He, his brother Udayadityavarman n his son Suryavarman invaded n conquered Lavo, n thereby effectively seizing the throne of Angkor in 1002. When he died in 1006, his son ascended the Angkorian throne as Suryavarman I.

My guess is that Sujita was descended from either Samaratunga the Sailendran who conquered Ligor n made it his first peninsular territory in 775 AD, n perhaps married a Ligorian Malay princess, or from Balaputra the Srivijayan son of Samaratunga from his Palembangian wife Dewi Tara, daughter of Dharmasethu, Maharaja of Srivijaya.

We are all related to each other actually, we are not the same to each other but we are related since our region is the same. Of course Malay and Javanese had similarities in certain way. Like from the Batu Bersurat. I call Batu Bersurat as Sila Charouk. Sila means Batu and Charouk means written, scribbled, etc.

Javanese say Opo for What, thus Old Malay say Apo. Still visible in those Pagar Ruyung, Minang, and others in Sumatera. In Javanese Sopo is who right? In Old Malay is Sapo. Those are the elements that exist in our dialects in North. We live far from Javanese, but those in South like Minang in Negeri Sembilan had came from Sumatera later than Srivijaya Conquest.

The Malay that we mean here is not modern Malay or classical Malay, those tow kind of Malay had different developments. It is Old Malay or Melayu Tuha, the language that had been used in Talang Tuwo.

We in Kedah still have our native words which correspond to Khmer and Mon language in North. Like Ph'ung for Stomach, Boran for Ancient, Srahkthap for Listen Up, Phrah for Holy and Distinguishable things, Wang for King, Prayot for benefit, Semor (Sokmo) for Always, Duoy for Together, Relaiy for Crushed and etc. These are all not original Thai. They are native and some were borrowed from Sanskrit, our language too had helped the development of modern Thai language and Thai language had absorbed the vocabularies. Those vocabularies in modern Thai that come from our native languages being classified as coming from Ancient Khmer language while it is precisely ancient Mon. It is not only the language of Northern people in Malayan Peninsula, but also the language of Mon and our distant cousins, Khmer people.

These people in Kelantan, Terengganu and Kedah are not speaking the language influenced by Siam. They are mixing the Old Malay language that had been inherited from the Srivijaya Conquest around 7th C with their native languages (ancient Mon). It is not that Kelantanese saying "Senyum Sokmo" (Smile Always) means that they are influenced by Thai, they are those Native Siamese, the aborigines in Siam, Thai people had absorbed their language.

"In Burma or Myanmar the Mon are called as Talaing. In Myanmar the Mon identity is being consumed by the Burmese except in the Southern Mon State, Southern Mon State today is bordered with Southern Thailand, you can see the continuation of the natives inhabiting spots. In Thailand whilst the Mon lost their identity to the Tai , the Tai adopted many cultural, social and religious features of the Mon, most importantly, the Buddhist religion which they first adopted from Ceylon in the 5th C."

Because of ancient wars, ancient Mon people around Thailand ranging from Central area to Southern Thai had been first assimilated into Khmer community. Later by Thai ethnic, and some in deep south which are in Northern of Malayan Peninsula by Srivijaya (Old Malay).

Check out tis video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7BR_w0yrLw...feature=related

Mukundha Krishna, a Tamil Song about Shri Krishna who is a character in Mahabharata in a Tamil Movie with the actor Kamal Hassan playing 10 characters. Of course the title of this movie is Dashavataram means 10 incarnations of god Vishnu. Interestingly, these Agraharam Brahmin Tamil ladies had been playing the Wayang Kulit. What do you think?

Those old Brahmin ladies still have their head coverings like those Brahmin ladies in Kashmir. Agraharam Brahmins are those Brahmins who live in Palakkatu (Palaikat) colony in Northern Kerala, South-West India.

This one is out of the topic, just sharing a video about a Hindi film with the title Dor. About a Muslim girl who seek the family of her husband's friend for their forgiveness after the friend were killed in an accident in Saudi and her husband were accused as murdering the friend, she need the family to forgive them in order to release her husband from prosecution in Saudi Arabia. The friend of her husband is a Hindu from Agnivanshi Keshatria tribe (Rajaputr). The Muslim lady is from Himachal Pradesh (Northwest India) traveling herself to Rajasthan in a far difficult journey and facing challenges. I watched this movie in my first year when I enter the Varsity, haha.

Dor movie video, song

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbZyrAW2DPE&NR=1

This film is based from real life incidents. You can see the review of this film. This film had shown how a Hindu widow being treated by their traditional family. And how those two women from different faith had teach and learn from each other. The Muslim lady had taught the Hindu lady that she should not abide herself to traditional customs which had made her being jailed without any reason.

Dor movie review

http://www.radiobajao.com/movie_dor.html

Initial native city-states in modern Malaysian Peninsula:

1. Langkasuka (2nd C-14th C)

2. Gangga Nagara (2nd C-11th C)

3. Kedah Tua (630 C-1136 C)

City-states in modern Malaysian Peninsula post-Islam arrived

Kedah Sultanate (1136 C - 2008 C). The first Muslim King is the same person with the previous last King, he embraced Islam.

Kelantan Sultanate (18th C - 2008 C), this state had their history binded with Patani or Pan Pan in Thailand.

Terengganu Sultanate (1708 C - 2008 C)

Perak Sultanate (1528 C - 2008 C), began from Malacca dynasty by the eldest son of Sultan Mahmud Syah, Raja Muzafar Syah.

Pahang Sultanate (18th C - 2008 C) by bendahara dynasty of Johor-Malacca Malay Sultanate.

Malacca Sultanate (1402 C - 1511 C) by Parameswara from Shailendra dynasty of Srivijaya empire.

Johor Sultanate (1511 C - 2008 C), now under Temenggung dynasty from Bugis tribe.

Negeri Sembilan (15th C - 2008 C), Minang people ruled Negeri Sembilan under protection from Malacca and Johor around 15th C.

Selangor Sultanate (1740 C - 2008 C), began by Raja Lumu from Bugis tribe.

Initial native city-states in modern Thailand today:

Suvarnabhumi, it happened to exist since BCE, many theories about the location.

Dvaravati (6th C - 11th C)

Lavo, developed since bronze age by a Taxila King which is BC to 16th C.

Haripunjaya (661 C - 1292 C)

Singonavadi (757 C - 17th C)

Pan Pan (Patani) (3rd C - 7th C), a Hindu Kingdom but later became Muslim Kingdom around 8th C.

Raktmarttika (Chih Tu or Tanoh Meroh), developed around first Century - 7th C.

Langkasuka (2nd C - 14th C).

Tambralingga (Nakon Sri Thammarat), initially a Hindu Kingdom began around 2nd C - 10th C.

In Southern Peninsula areas bordering Thai-Malay, Srivijaya had intervened around 772 CE under the Srivijaya King Dharmmasetu Conquest. Around 10th C Raja Raja Chola attacked the City-States in Southern Peninsula along with those other City-States under Srivijaya in Northern Sumatera. Around 11th Rajendra Chola attacked again the City-States in Southern Peninsula and Northern Sumatera areas. Around 12th C, Po Khun Ramkhamhaeng from Sukhothai Kingdom had absorbed those in Kedah, Kelantan, Terengganu and a big part of Southern Thailand area today into his Mandala. In 13th C, Sukhothai was defeated by Sri Ayuttaya from Chiang Saen. Sri Ayuttaya developed Siam and capturing entire Southern Peninsula area under Siam Empire after Srivijaya Empire fallen. Those people in the ancient Kingdoms are known as "Native Siamese." The aborigines who had been civilized and already embraced religions like Islam, Hindu and Buddhism.

Daulat Tuanku!

Sugeng dalu, Son of Gunong Jerai. Asma panjenengan sinten? Bingah sanget saged pinanggih panjenengan. It's an honor to know a man of knowledge like you here in Malaysian Chat. Of course I understand that we are all related, we are Austronesian speaking people after all. But I mean was modern Palembang Malay we have nowadays is a product of a long process in which involves huge amount of Javanese influence.

They use "wong" instead of orang, "iwak" instead of "ikan", etc. It's because Palembang's proximity to Java. Just like my hometown Banjarmasin. We were heavily influenced by Javanese language because of our location. We can understand Malay quite well, but we say "iwak abang" and not "ikan merah".

I do understand that it's much more complex in the peninsula. I wonder if there is already a research on the remaining Mon-Khmer influences in local dialects?

Hahaha, I don't really understand Javanese actually . I just know some words by watching Indonesian Sinetrons which had flooded Malaysian TV. Not Indonesians faults anyway, Malaysian TV themselves who do not have national identity had brought them in. Well, at least I can learn something from Indonesian. Also some of the Javanese words had been absorbed in Classical Malay texts that I had read.

I think there are researches made, but you know Malay things had been implied as the unification benchmark of native people in the states in Malaysian Federation since Malacca period. Thus everything ancient here too had been classified as Old Malay or Proto-Malay, it is very hard to change it after our historians who had Sumateran ancestry had been writing our national textbooks and the brand had been implied as native national identity.

As for myself, I am still with the idea of "the Great Langkasuka" which links us to our past and patching us to our future. Tunku Abdul Rahman had done things wrongly in my opinion. Our Kedah lands too had been broken to Perlis, Kubang Pasu and Satun in South Thailand, but luckily Kubang Pasu land agree to be again under Kedah and Kedah had been included into Malaysia as a state with autonomous administration handled by our previous King descendants and a Chief Minister. Perlis became separate entity and Satun became a state in South Thailand. In positive side, our City-State's royal family can still survive in Malaysia, while if we enter Thailand, we will have to obey only to the Maharaja from Chakri dynasty.

Before 13th C, the term Malay or Siam did not yet arise. Until now too we had problems with native Muslims and native Buddhists in Kedah, Perak and Kelantan who had been classified under Malay and Siamese identification. It is like another brand had been imposed on us piling on our ancient identity. Those Buddhist natives said that people who had been branded with Malay as the descendants of the foreigners from Sumatera, and those Muslim natives say that those Buddhist natives who are branded as Orang Siam as foreigners from Thailand.

Kelantanese until today had been reviewed as different from other people in Southern Malaysian Peninsula. Also the Terengganu people and the Kedah people especially those from Northern and Eastern part of Kedah state. They have distinct languages, which is different from those in Thailand and also in other part of Southern Malaysian Peninsula. Some of the words spoken by them can be checked in the Thai archaic language dictionary and classified as ancient Khmer. We also realize that we have similarity after talking to people from Cambodia and from other part in Thailand while our same ancient Kingdoms are beyond today International borders.

I agree that there are significance Malay from Sumatera influence in Malayan Peninsula, and further more there are evidence that Srivijaya had open up another colony in Southern Thailand area after their expansion of power around 7th C. We still can see those Temples in South Thailand with Srivijaya architecture. People here only got Buddhism around 5th C, before that they are all Hindu in religion. There are also ancient Indians who had settled and inter-married with local natives, they had set up Kingdoms too like in the Lavo Kingdom case in Thailand today.

Most people thought that Malacca Sultanate had already finished yaarr after Johor Sultanate which had been the continuation of Malacca had been handled by Temenggung of Bugis tribe without realizing Perak still have the heritage of Malacca

You know, because many west coasters, especially southerners, r still not familiar with the Kelantanese accent, they think many Kelantanese words sound like Thai.

In fact, sometimes Kelantanese youngsters themselves cannot explain the derivation of many simple Kelantanese words that form part of normal everyday conversation.

For example, "sokmo" is not a Thai word. It's not even Thai-influenced. Not at all. It's just the Kelantanese way of saying "seumur", meaning "sepanjang umur".

In standard Malay, it may be translated to "sentiasa" or "selalu".

So, "senyung sokmo" means "senyum sentiasa".

I am not really clear on how people in Kelantan interprete those simple words, we in Kedah are using those words in "Cakap Siam." Like "Sokmo," we use it in many occasions which means always, often, or frequently. It also means even, equal, and level. We pronounce it as "Surmor" and written as "เสมอ." Sometimes we use it with "Duoy" ด้วย. Yes, you are right, they are not Thai influenced and native to us. I believe that those words are our heritage from Langkasuka. These words are still visible in South Thai dialect and some of them are used in Standard Thai.