Categories
History & heritage

[1219] Of why Malacca but not Srivijaya?

A majority of Malays are content to look only as far as the Sultanate of Malacca in the 15th and the 16th century, apparently accepting the era as the golden age of ancient, classical or medieval Malay civilization. Thanks to the education I received through the Malaysian system, I had the same perception too and I do think even Malaysians as a society in one way or another accept Malacca was the greatest civilization in ancient, classical or medieval Malaysian history. My love for history has allowed me to delve far beyond Malaysian textbooks. While Malacca was a great empire, a greater civilization was Srivijaya, an empire that was almost forgotten. I truly believe that Srivijaya was that brilliant light that stayed bright from nearly a millennium. Malacca was a just spark, though brilliant as it may be.

The Malaysian education system fails to give Srivijaya the respect it deserves. So many Malaysian textbook pages concentrate on Malacca and successive minor Malay states but ignored that one large Malay empire that spanned from the Isthmus of Kra all the way down to Central Java and, at one point in time, even the banks of the Mekong. Admittedly, Srivijayan border was porous unlike modern states but its sphere of influence was far wider than that of Malacca or even of Malaysia.

Perhaps part of the reason why the Malays stress so much on Malacca is the fact that so little information is known about Malay history earlier than the 14th century. Relatively modern Malays have been so ingrained with the notion that their history starts with Malacca. That misconception pushes Srivijaya into that one book in a section of a library that nobody goes to.

Srivijaya, despite its status, was only discovered by historians in the early 20th century. The reason why it was so easy to overlook Srivijaya’s existence is the material used for Srivijayan architecture; many of Srivijayan structures were made out of wood. In harsh tropical climate, wood would not last for too long, definitely not for one thousand years. Malacca itself did not leave too much behind to be marveled at by tourists and so, one could not hope too much for Srivijaya. The rain and the sun conspired to erase a chapter of a history book, hushing Srivijaya from history to myth to total obscurity.

That does not mean Srivijaya failed to leave its mark in history. The Sailendra, under the auspice of the Srivijayan Emperor Samaratunga, constructed the Borobudur which still stands today in the middle of Java. But even that monument was only rediscovered in the 19th century by Stamford Raffles. As for the Sailendra, the East Javanese pushed them out of central Java, causing the Srivijayan ally to migrate to the west and built a new hope under the protection of Srivijaya. The royal court of Sailendra was finally eliminated by Srivijayan Emperor Culamanivarmadeva after the Sailendra betrayed the emperor. That act led to the loss to Srivijayan capital, Palembang, to the East Javanese in the early 11th century. Palembang was reconquered by Culamanivarmadeva but by that time, Srivijaya had gone over its hill. It was dusk time.

Notice the names? Yes. The Malays were Hindus then. And Buddhists, and animists, despite whatever the religious conservatives might assert, despite how our history is being rewritten by those that have no respect for truth.

The Sultanate of Malacca itself was founded by an heir to the Srivijayan throne. The struggle between the Malays and the Javanese continued well into the 14th century and sometimes by the late 1300s, Parameswara, a Malay Srivijaya prince, fled Sumatra when Majapahit finally crushed the last remnant of a Malay empire that started humbly by the Musi River.

In a way, Malacca was the successor of the glorious Srivijaya. If Malacca could be seen as a sultanate that later led to Malaya and Malaysia, then Srivijaya could be seen as such as well.

While I was in Bangkok, I visited some of the museums there. It is truly sad to find out that the Thais are more appreciative of the Malay empire than the Malays and Malaysians in Malaysia themselves. Perhaps, that could be explained by the presence of Srivijayan temples, biaras, in Thailand, reminding the Thais of an empire long ago. In Malaysia, almost nothing.

Almost nothing but the Bujang Valley which was under the control of Old Kedah, a state within the realm of Srivijaya. Is it not odd that Bujang Valley, itself being far richer in historical terms, has been outshone by relatively young ruins (if it could be called as such) of Malacca?

Something must explain this bias that sides with Malacca. Could it be religion?

By Hafiz Noor Shams

For more about me, please read this.

40 replies on “[1219] Of why Malacca but not Srivijaya?”

Dear Kukuman,

Just as Majapahit was the most cultured and advanced empire in its time, so was Srivijaya in its time.

But I am not sure what is your beef with the Malays though. Are we talk about Srivijaya/Majapahit or Malays/Javanese?

Nevertheless, before Majapahit, there were many other older Javanese kingdoms that succumbed to Srivijaya. In fact, in the 10th/11th century, Maharaja Culamanivarmadeva razed the strongest Javanese empire of that time, Dharmavamsa. Subsequent Javanese empires like Airlingga avoided Srivijaya in order to not share the same fate. That clearly shows that neither the Malays nor the Javanese had always been in the top.

Talking about the kris that cannot be defeated, don’t you find it odd that the undefeated were defeated, hence ownership change of the kris?

You have to remember, Majapahit only were formed after Srivijaya was weakened by raids by Rajaraja of Cholas from India and the abolition of tributary system by the Chinese empire.

And it is untrue that before Malacca, the Malay Peninsula was worthless. Langkasuka, founded in the 2nd or 3rd century, was a large modern kingdom of that time even before it was incorporated into Srivijaya in the 7th century. Langkasuka reached its peak in the 9th century, coinciding with Srivijaya’s own golden age. Langkasuka’s control of trans-isthmus trade route made it the entrepot between Chinese and Funanese with the Indians and the Arabs.

Finally, it is wrong to think that Majapahit was the sole source of Srivijaya’s downfall. As mentioned earlier, the Cholas and the Chinese played crucial roles in the downfall of Srivijaya. Only after both that occurred, already weakened, did Singhasari come to being, the predecessor of Majapahit, claiming its sovereignty from a fading Srivijaya.

To menj:

That’s probably because the Srivijaya capital was in JAVA ISLAND, and not anywhere in Peninsula Malaysia. Duh. I bet that education you received in low-class University of Michigan did not benefit you in Malaysian history.

And your remarks about my level of education did not escape me. FYI, I am a Staffordshire University undergraduate. And Staffordshire University is #3 in the UK.

Dude, Srivijayan capital was Palembang. Palembang is on the Musi River, in Sumatra.

Anyway what remark did I make?

But Staffordshire University as #3? You are kidding me…

Then where would you put Cambridge, Oxford and London? Or Nottingham or Bath or Warwick etc? Not that I am degrading Staffordshire but you are making up stories.

Besides, what would I care if you are going to Staffordshire? Oddly, you are transfixed that I graduated from Michigan.

I have discussed about the issue in a community blog last time. But it was written in Chinese.

http://mmucls.com/wp/?p=59

We see the term of “Kesultanan Melayu Melaka” so frequently but we have never seen “Kerajaan Melayu Srivijaya” before.

The Malay identity has to be bundled with the religion.
Without the religion, Malay will no longer be Malay.

This is quite ridiculous to the Chinese. No matter what religion we believe, may we be Taoist, Buddhist, Traditional Folk religion practitioner, Christian or Muslim, we’re still Chinese.

Majapahit was the most culture, advance and most condense place of the Malay archipelago. even up till now, Java has a superior number and other advancement than the ‘Malay’.

It had a more advance agriculture and farming then the more casual ‘Malay’ culture of Sriwijaya or later Malacca. even if the environment favor the Malay.

It empire actually defeated the horde from Mongol of Kublai Khan cosing them to leave Java.

And the Malacca empire was really afraid of them, hence the need of protection from China. And the mystical TamingSari is from Java a place where the Malay cannot conquere! So comes the legend of that undefeatable keris .

Malay King always pay homage to a Superior Malay King. By the Malacca time the king from sumetera/minang and others small Malay king Pay their homage to the more superior King the Melakan Kings.

but even at it glorious day’s The Hang Tuah and Melaka Sultan knew the suicidal nature to go against the Majapahit empire to the south with its vastly superior technology and strength. No Homage was done to the Malaccan.

Sriwijaya had to play homage to Majapahit(the later dynasty). and later were destroy by KertaNagara and successsor when they try to rebel against them. at the end they were wipe out by a more advance empire rather than self-destroyed

While it may be argue that previously, Sriwijaya had a larger empire, the fact was that in those day only Sumetra and Jawa were consider the valuable real estate at that time. Malay Peninsula was consider to be a useless inhabitant with no significant civilization(sure the were some small ‘Malay’ kindom near the north to Thailand ).

Only by the time of Malacca did the Malay Peninsula gain any significant importance. That is why Malaysia have a small population because the Malay Peninsula actually started to gain ‘proper’ history and civilization only by that time.

Sriwijaya biggest flaw was it was never able to suppress or conquered totally the Older Java. Kingdom

Haha, I think I understood “successor” in a different way. It’s true that Parameshwara was a Palembang prince. I was thinking more about the chronology of the major empires in island SEA – Srivijaya, Sailendra, Majapahit and Malacca.

Great discussion you have going on. Thanks for the link to my site, I’ve added you to my blogroll as well. =D

Dear Kukuman,

The large empire in the Malay Archipelago was Srivijaya, not Majapahit. To say it again, Srivijaya\’s realm of influence ranged from Isthmus of Kra (near Chaiya, including Langkasuka and Old Kedah) all the way down to where the Saleidra ruled (point of interest – the Borobudur). That included most of the Malay Peninsula. So, Srivijaya did play crucial role on the Malay Peninsula. In fact, Old Kedah/Langkasuka reached their height under Srivijayan influence!

Majapahit\’s rule only covered Java and Sumatra. It did not get to the Peninsula first because of Siam and later, Malacca.

And no, Majapahit was not Malay. They were Javanese.

The Biggest and most shinning Empire in the Malay archipelago was the Majapahit empire!
Sriwijaya was always under threat from Majapahit!
And later there were a Satelite sate under the control of Majapahit!

You can see there legacy uptill now.

Off course they live in a more industrial land/enviroment with a more industrial culture.

But they were not true or proper Malay…
They were Javanese!
You can say maybe the same serumpun..

hence the term Pamalayu(Perang sama Malayu) went about everytime when Sriwijaya try to rebel against the Majapahit.

Anyway

The Reason why Sriwijya is not popular among Malaysian historian is because
Palembang(Sriwijaya) is not part of Malaysia!
And the Sriwijaya never play a part in Penisular Malaysia!

Penisular Malaysia only became really significant only by the Time of Malacca Empire!

You want to know more about Sriwijaya… Read the Indonesia history book!

Dear Noel,

Indeed that Malays were Hindus and Buddhists prior to the coming of Islam is an uncomfortable fact to the power that be. That however does not make it any less untrue. And yes, the center of Malay culture, the origin at least centered around Palembang and Malayu (otherwise known as Jambi, as I believe you would agree).

And yes, there are many kingdoms on the Malay Peninsula. Sadly, information on them is very limited. Even when a large chuck of Srivijayan history is unknown to us, what hope could we learn about the smaller ones?

Finally, I respectfully disagree that the successor of Srivijaya is Majapahit. I do think Osborne, Wolters and Munoz have pointed out quite clearly that Malacca is the successor of Srivijaya. The prince of Malacca came from the court of Srivijaya. In fact, that blood still flow in the house of Perak and Pahang today!

Insightful read, Hafiz, and I think you’re onto something there when you talk about a bias towards Malacca due to religion. I think the dominant (government?) discourse is that Malacca is the first Islamic sultanate – and you’ll find that Malacca is described as the golden age of Malay culture.

Whether or not that is the case is really a matter of perception. Within Srivijaya was the first “Malayu” people (whose territory lay somewhere in the vicinity of Palembang), which is politically incorrect to point out now, especially since it means the Malayu came from Indonesia, and also, they were Hindu-Buddhist.

Within the Malayan peninsula itself, you might be interested in two kingdoms that were contemporary to Srivijaya: that of Langkasuka, which occupied much of what Kedah is today, before it was invaded by the Cholas of South India (and left their architectural remains in Bujang Valley); and also the kingdom of Chi Tu, or Tanah Merah, whose possible location is what is now known as Kelantan. Chi Tu was described by the Chinese Sui Dynasty in the 6th century as an advanced kingdom!

So there is certainly a lot of archaeological and historical richness in Malaysia before Malacca, and besides Srivijaya. However, I must point out it would be more accurate to say Malacca was the successor of the Majapahit empire in Java.

That’s probably because the Srivijaya capital was in JAVA ISLAND, and not anywhere in Peninsula Malaysia. Duh. I bet that education you received in low-class University of Michigan did not benefit you in Malaysian history.

And your remarks about my level of education did not escape me. FYI, I am a Staffordshire University undergraduate. And Staffordshire University is #3 in the UK.

– MENJ

Thanks for the info. As a Chinese, I can easily get the information about Chinese history, and there is historian working on “modern” Malaya history. But Malay history are rather intriguing.

In Malaysia history text book, it seems Malay empire suddenly pop out from the stone. And the worst part : Malacca empire literary information are pretty poor. Why a a “golden era” empire failed to build up a literary cultures.

Leave a Reply to AnonymousCancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.