Articles by alphabetic order
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
 Ā Ī Ñ Ś Ū Ö Ō
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0


Imagine Laṅkapura at Prambanan

From Tibetan Buddhist Encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search




Imagine Laṅkapura at Prambanan

Arlo Griffiths


Introduction


Fundamentally based on Walther Aichele’s refinement of Poerbatjaraka’s dating of the KR to make it contemporary with the important events referred to in the so-called Śivagṛha inscription of 856 ad, among which quite possibly the foundation of the greatest Śaiva monument of Indonesia, the main purpose of this contribution is to propose the hypothesis that this monument was called Laṅkapura.


The monument I am alluding to is the one that is at the center of attention in the contributions of Levin and Jordaan to this volume, and goes there variously by the name Prambanan or Loro Jonggrang. That the latter is not the original name of the monument is an evident and well-known fact, and there is no strong reason to believe the former is an ancient name either.2 In fact we know virtually none of the original names of the Central Javanese monuments 1. I am grateful to Roy Jordaan for comments on an earlier version. The transliteration used in this contribution adheres strictly to international norms for the transliteration of Indic script types. This means that I use v (not w) and that anusvāra/cecak is ṃ irrespective of its pronunciation. The only additions

to the internationally standard repertoire of signs are the raised circle (°) which precedes ‘independent vowels’ (namely vowels which form a separate akṣara) and the median dot (·) which represents virāma/paten. Since some (sequences of) phonemes can be spelt in more than one way, there is occasionally need to work with a normalized transcription. In this case I use ṅ for what is spelt ṅ or ṃ (phoneme /ŋ/); h for what is spelt h/ḥ (/h/) and rә for ṛ (/rә/). 2. See Jordaan

1996:9–12. Regarding the name Prambanan, I do not share Jordaan’s opinion that ‘‘it is not unlikely that the name derives from an old expression associated with the temple’’ (p. 9), for I do not know any cases where modern temple names have been convincingly explained in ancient terms, and find Jordaan’s own proposal (p. 11, note 1) to derive it from parambrahma(n) unconvincing for several reasons: the supposed phonetic development seems unnatural; the final n of Sanskrit stems in an (for example, brahman) normally disappears in concrete usage and would not be retained in any form that could have been the starting point of a Javanese derivation; and the supposed original name is entirely untypical of the known names of sanctuaries in ancient Southeast Asia. See my note 4 for some examples.


134 Arlo Griffiths now all indiscriminately designated as Candi. One exception that comes readily to mind is the Abhayagirivihāra that doubtless formed a part of the complex now known as Candi Ratu Baka.3 In comparison with contemporary monuments from elsewhere in the Hindu and Buddhist world, our ignorance of the original names of Central Javanese sanctuaries is an anomaly.4 The original name can tell us important things about the conception of a sanctuary, which fact explains the long but consistently unpersuasive history of attempts to explain such names as Borobudur and Prambanan. Any addition to the record is therefore welcome. The evidence in support of my hypothesis comes mainly from a group of inscriptions which I refer to here as the ‘Kumbhayoni corpus’. One of these is an unpublished Sanskrit inscription that was discovered in 1954 on the Ratu Baka prominence.5 Another is the Dawangsari inscription discovered on the Ratu Baka prominence in 1979, and published in an unsatisfactory manner in 1989, which contains only the second known example of extensive epigraphical Old Javanese poetry after the Śivagṛha inscription. The extreme rarity of Old Javanese poetry from this period suggests that the author (or authors) of this Kumbhayoni corpus is (are) likely to have been familiar with the contemporary literary monument, the KR. What I propose to do here is to read the Kumbhayoni inscriptions in the light of Poerbatjaraka’s (1932) and Aichele’s (1969) seminal papers on the KR, and of Andrea Acri’s new identifications of passages in the Kakawin that may be read allegorically (2010, this volume).6


The Kumbhayoni corpus


There is a group of inscriptions from the ninth century emanating from an aristocrat (raka) calling himself Kumbhayoni or equivalent synonyms of that Sanskrit epithet of the Ṛṣi Agastya. These are the Sanskrit and Old Javanese Pereng


3. See Sundberg 2003, 2004; Degroot 2006.


4. A few random examples may suffice: the Ta Keo at Angkor was called Hemaśṛṅgagiri; the Phnom Bayang in southern Cambodia was called Śivapura; the famous site Māmallapuram/Mahābalipuram of the Pallavas in South India, was already known as Māmallapuram in contemporary inscriptions.


5. See Dinas Purbakala, Laporan Tahunan 1954 (Djakarta 1962), pp. 18–9 and plate 2.


6. I am presently preparing for publication a substantial selection of Central Javanese inscriptions, to be presented as a book which will contain also the entire Kumbhayoni corpus, and I wish to avoid as much as possible duplication of what I will present in that book. For this reason, I attempt here to focus my discussion on the data relevant to the Laṅkapura hypothesis and the Rāmāyaṇa connection, requesting the reader’s patience until my book has appeared to see the complete epigraphical context of the passages presented in this contribution.

inscription of 863 ad; the six Sanskrit inscriptions of the Ratu Baka prominence each recording the installation of a differently named liṅga;7 and the metrical Old Javanese inscription of Dawangsari mentioned above.8 Following the example of De Casparis (1956:248ff., 341–3), I choose Kumbhayoni (and not any other of the equivalent epithets) as the designation for the corpus, since it is this name that occurs in the context of the Old Javanese prose portion of the Pereng inscription, lines 8–9: rake valaiṃ pu kumbhayoni. The names Kalaśaja, Kumbhaja, Kalaśodbhava are attested only in Sanskrit verse context, and therefore liable to have been dictated by the requirements of Sanskrit metre.


Arguably the most important of these inscriptions, and the first one to have been published, is the bilingual Sanskrit and Old Javanese inscription (Fig. 1) found in the village Pereng at the northern foot of the Ratu Baka prominence, just South of Prambanan.10 It bears a precise date in the śaka year 784, con-


7. These have been partly published by De Casparis (1956:244–79), as items Xa (A: ‘Kṛttivāsaliṅga’, Museum Nasional Indonesia D 104, currently not traceable at the museum, one may fear that it is lost), Xb (B: ‘Tryambakaliṅga’, BPPP Yogyakarta BG 533), Xc (C: ‘Haraliṅga’, BPPP Yogyakarta 355 / BG 529). In his Addenda c (De Casparis 1956:341–3), De Casparis reported on the discovery of the three other inscriptions of this group, namely ‘Śambhuliṅga’ (D: BPPP Yogyakarta 532; photo OD/DP 19399), ‘Pinākiliṅga’ (E: BPPP Yogyakarta 531) and a sixth inscription most probably also related to the foundation of a liṅga whose name is lost in a lacuna (F: BPPP Yogyakarta 603 = BG 352). The sequence indicated in capital letters is adopted here from unpublished work by Jan Wisseman Christie, while the nomenclature by liṅga names for the first five is that proposed/implied by Damais in his valuable notes on De Casparis’ readings and interpretations (1968:460–773 and 496–500), and adopted also in his list of Central Javanese inscriptions, which excludes E–F (Damais 1970:46–4). The inscriptions B–F are included in a 2007 publication of BPPP Yogyakarta (Pusaka Aksara Yogyakarta; Alih Aksara dan Alih bahasa Prasasti Koleksi Balai Pelestarian Peninggalan Purbakala Yogyakarta), which contains numerous errors of fact and of omission, and will therefore not be referred to in this contribution. Inked estampages of inscriptions B–F are available at the EFEO. It is the last inscription, F, that will mainly concern us here. 8. BPPP Yogyakarta 355; an inked estampage is available at EFEO. See Setianingsih 1989. 9 . All of these variants of the epithet refer to one aspect of Agastya mythology, namely that he was born from a Pot (kumbha or kalaśa). In repeatedly using the word jaladhi ‘ocean’, the incompletely preserved stanzas vii and ix of the inscription Ratu Baka F to be included in my forthcoming publication of the complete inscription may have alluded to another important aspect of Agastya mythology, namely that he had drunk the ocean (see Sanderson 2003–04:375, note 86, mentioning the epithet Pītābdhi ‘He who drank the ocean’, with abdhi a synonym of jaladhi, besides presenting a hypothetical reconstruction of the name Pātañjala/Pṛtañjala of the fifth of the five Kuśikas as *Pītañjala, which would have had the same meaning). If a reference to the ocean-drinking myth was indeed included in Ratu Baka F, before the stone got severely damaged, Aichele’s argument (1969:140) assuming the conscious non-mentioning of this second aspect of Agastya mythology in the KR must be reconsidered.

10. First published by A.B. Cohen Stuart and J.J. van Limburg Brouwer in 1872. See also Kern 136 Arlo Griffiths


verted by Louis-Charles Damais (1952:33) to 863 ad. Two of the above-mentioned liṅga inscriptions (A and B) are dated to the śaka year 778, without further specifications, and their date must thus have fallen between March 10th 856 and February 27th 857 ad.11 The remaining liṅga inscriptions lack an internal date. Only some of the liṅga inscriptions are completely preserved, while several of them are severely fragmentary and/or weather-beaten. But to the extent that their contents can be known, they share with the Pereng inscription the common feature of mentioning the name Kumbhayoni or equivalents thereof, and doing so in direct association with the toponym Valaiṅ (in various spellings, mostly dictated by the demands of Sanskrit metre). As stated above, I propose to consider these inscriptions as corpus including also the Dawangsari inscription, although this does not share the mentioned characteristic. The reasons for my proposal can only be summarized here.


In the first place, all of the inscriptions give a very uniform palaeographic impression. Secondly, the Dawangsari inscription shares not only the same physical features, but also agrees very nearly in its dimensions with the liṅga in- 1873 and the revised publication by Cohen Stuart (1875) as KawiOorkondenr. xxiii; readings are alsoofferedbyPoerbatjaraka(1926:45–51)andSarkar(1971:171–7); seeDeCasparis(1956:248– 58 and passim) and Damais (1964:121–33, 1968:498–500) for discussion of many issues in the interpretation of this inscription. In the currently predominant system of nomenclature introduced by Damais, which prioritizes toponyms internal to the epigraphical document in question, this is the ‘Wukiran’ inscription. I take the liberty of retaining the older nomenclature here.


11. See Damais 1952:31. In a later publication, Damais (1970:46) narrowed down this bracket claiming that the date of the two liṅgas must have have fallen in 856 ad before that of the Śivagṛha inscription, which is November 12th, 856. He stated in his pertinent note 5 that the text of the Śivagṛha inscription implies by its context that it was composed after the liṅga inscriptions Ratu Baka inscriptions A–F, but did not explain why this would be the case. As long as this point is not really proven, the wider dating bracket earlier admitted must be given preference. In his final (posthumously published) statement on the matter, Damais (1970) did not give any reference to his earlier discussion of it (Damais 1964:135), which is also quite terse, but if I have understood it correctly depends strongly on his being influenced by De Casparis translations of two Sanskrit compounds, valaiṅgagoptrā (Ratu Baka A, stanza iii) and valaiṅgajetrā (B, st. iii), as meaning ‘by the protector of V.’ and ‘by the victor of V.’ (that is as tatpuruṣas), to the exclusion of the possibility, equally permissible in grammatical terms, that these compounds are rather to be interpreted as karmadhārayas, namely as ‘by the protector [named] V.’ and ‘by the conqueror [named] V.’ . These latter interpretations seem to me at the present stage of my investigations of the Kumbhayoni corpus better to suit all the available data. I am thinking especially of Pereng st. iii bhaktir valaiṅnāmnaḥ, which must mean ‘devotion of the one named Valaiṅ’ (see De Casparis 1956:253, note 47). See also Damais’ posthumously published review (1968:472) of De Casparis 1956 for a fuller discussion of the same compounds, again ignoring the possibility of a karmadhāraya interpretation, and without reference back to his own discussion of 1964. scriptions A and C. Thirdly, all of the inscriptions have been found on or at the foot of the Ratu Baka hillock, some of them (including the Dawangsari inscription) in the desa Sumberwatu, which is also home to a stone image of Gaṇeśa, whose dimensions have been reported to be 3.40 × 3.10 × 2.15 m (Figs. 2a, 2b), and at whose side the Dawangsari inscription was reportedly once placed.12 Now the Dawangsari inscription is a metrical hymn of praise to Gaṇeśa, under the name Vināyaka, as he is found ‘on the mountain’ (di parvata), which there seems to be no reason to doubt must be none other than the colossal Gaṇeśa image still found on the hillock, and referred to as saṃ hyaṃ vināya in line 11 of the Pereng inscription.

Figure 1: The inscription of Pereng (photo Isidore van Kinsbergen, nr. 182)

12. I rely here on the information cited by Setianingsih (1989:143).

Figure 2a: Arca Ganesa at Sumberwatu (photo Marijke Klokke, July 2009)

Figure 2b: Arca Ganesa at Sumberwatu (photo Marijke Klokke, July 2009)


I am hesitant to claim any first discovery concerning an inscription that has prominently figured in as abundant (and unwieldy) secondary literature as has the Pereng inscription, but I am presently not aware that interpretation of this deity as Vināyaka, now strongly supported by the Dawangsari inscription, has been previously proposed.13 The omission of the last syllable in the Pereng inscription might seem to be a problem, but in fact the same form is found not only elsewhere in Old Javanese epigraphy14 but also in Old Javanese literature,15 and even beyond the Archipelago in Khmer epigraphy, where the bilingual inscription K. 1185 of Prasat Ta Muean Thom in Thailand shows a correspondence between Vināyaka in the Sanskrit portion and Vināya in the Khmer,16 and again in the Campā inscription C. 4 of Cho Dinh (in Phan Rang) dated to śaka 1149.17 The frequency of the form Vināya suggests that we should not consider it as an error, but as a variant of the name Vināyaka accepted widely in ancient Southeast Asia. The fact that the Pereng and the Dawangsari inscription share a close association with the cult of Vināyaka, to whose former importance in the vicinity the Gaṇeśa image is a magnificent witness,18 is my fourth argument. The fifth and last is the metrical shape of the Dawangsari inscription. It is entirely composed in the Anuṣṭubh metre, that is the most common verseform found in Sanskrit literature. The oldest dated epigraphical instance of the use of this verse-form in Old Javanese language is again found in the Pereng


13. Ignoring the long vowel ā, earlier scholars (for example Sarkar 1971:173 with note 30, going back to Poerbatjaraka 1926) have assumed a most unlikely connection with vinaya ‘(Buddhist) discipline’.


14. See the entry ṣaḍwināya, ṣaḍwināyaka at OJED 1590; reference is there made to an attestation of ṣaḍvināya on plate v verso, l. 7, of the inscription ‘Waharu iv’ = Museum Nasional inv. nr. E. 20, published as Kawi Oorkonden vii and in Prasasti Koleksi Museum Nasional, pp. 60–5; I have confirmed the published reading by checking the rubbing of E. 20 kept in the Kern Institute, Leiden, and its facsimile in Kawi Oorkonden.


15. See Teeuw 1998:380–1.


16. This inscription is undated but may be assigned to the first half of the 11th century ad. For its text, see Chaeam Kaewklai 1999:80–1. The published reading being debatable at many points, I have checked the EFEO estampages n. 1682 and 1683 for the facts mentioned here.


17. The inscription has not yet been properly published, but extracts have been presented by Aymonier (1891:50–2), who misread the passage in question as ṅap rumah mandi rumah śrī vinaya. My reading ṅap rumaḥ nandi rumaḥ śrī vināya ‘built a shrine for Nandin and a shrine for Gaṇeśa’ is based on inspection of the inscription (National Museum of Vietnamese History, Hanoi, B 2, 15 = LSb 21166) and EFEO estampage n. 143.


18. The dating of the Gaṇeśa image can probably not be determined with any exactitude, but may safely be presumed to agree with the dated Kumbhayoni inscriptions, and hence, in the interpretation advocated here, with the Dawangsari inscription.

inscription, where the final stanza is an Anuṣṭubh in Old Javanese language.19 No other epigraphical instances of vernacular language epigraphical compositions in the form of the Anuṣṭubh metre are known to me from Indonesia at this time, except the unique ‘Mañjuśrīgṛha’ inscription of 792 ad, also from Central Java, which is composed in Old Malay prose and verse.20 In fact no other vernacular epigraphical poetry is known at all, besides that found in the Śivagṛha inscription (which contains no Anuṣṭubh-stanzas), and this very rarity again speaks in favour of a close association of the Pereng and Dawangsari inscriptions, the one with the other, insofar as they both contain Old Javanese Anuṣṭubhs, and of course in a more general sense of these two inscriptions with that third record of epigraphical Old Javanese poetry, the Śivagṛha inscription, which figures prominently in Hunter’s and Acri’s contributions to this volume. All cases of epigraphical Old Javanese poetry date from a period of only two decades, the 850–860s ad, and there is every reason to consider that their composition at precisely this period, presumably contemporary with the Kakawin Rāmāyaṇa, was no coincidence. This was in all likelihood the birth period of Kakawin as a genre.


Laṅkapura as the Prambanan Śiva Sanctuary


I have just referred to the fact that the Pereng inscription, dated to śaka 784, which consists of three Sanskrit Āryā-stanzas, followed by ten lines of Old Javanese prose, followed by two more Āryā-stanzas in Sanskrit, is concluded by one Anuṣṭubh-stanza composed in Old Javanese language. This sixth stanza, as I said, must be the oldest dated Anuṣṭubh stanza in the Old Javanese language. It runs as follows: vi. Anuṣṭubh


(21) tuṅgaṃ davәt laṅka sә°ṛḥ vulakanni21 valā valaiṃ lo(22)dvāṃ vanvaniraṃ dhīmān· kumbhayoni ṅarannira || ◉ || 19. Even after Krom (1919:19) correctly identified the last two lines of the Pereng as an Old Javanese stanza, this fact was ignored by some subsequent scholars, who took these lines as prose. For example, Damais (1964:133, note 3 and apparently also Damais 1968:499) still assumed these lines to be prose.


20. This inscription has not been properly published and will also be included in my forthcoming publication of a selection of Central Javanese inscriptions. Sundberg (2006:106–9, 125–7) has rightly criticized existing readings and the theories built thereon, but his own readings and statements are also not entirely reliable.

21. Damais (1964:133) prefers the interpretation vulakann i, with the type of consonant doubling that is attested also elsewhere in contemporary Old Javanese epigraphy.


InhisCorpusoftheInscriptionsofJava, volumei, HimansuBhusanSarkartranslated this stanza as follows: Tunggang, Davĕt, Langka, Sĕrĕḥ, waterfall of Valā, Valaing, Lodvāng are the desa-s of the wise one whose name is Kumbhayoni. As far as I know, no scholar has ever taken special notice of the name Laṅka that we find in the Pereng inscription among several toponyms. It first drew my attention when I was trying to decipher one of the unpublished Ratu Baka inscriptions (Fig. 3).22 In the present context, I need present only one of the stanzas that I am best able to reconstruct, namely its stanza vi, which is composed in the long Śārdūlavikrīḍita metre. vi. Śārdūlavikrīḍita


[ˉ ˉ ˉ ˘ mahe](6)ndrasatkaruṇayā tuṅgaṃ davā(kh)yaṃ puraṃ pūrvvaṃ laṅkapuraṃ sa pāti matimān tāmvo[la ˉ ˉ ˘ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˉ ˘ ˘ ˉ ˘ ˉ ˘ ˘ ta](7)(thā) tan nirjjharākhyaṃ śubhaṃ nākaṃ (v)ṛ(tra)ri(pu)r yyathā kalaśajo vālaiṅgasaṃjña[ś ca yaḥ ||] Indeed, I am not the first to have noticed the parallels between these two stanzas. Based on the place names cited from the Sanskrit stanza by De Casparis (1956:342), ‘the lofty Dava (tuṅgaṃ dawākhyaṃ puraṃ), then Laṅkapura, further Nirjjhara and, finally, Walaing’, Damais had observed the correspondences between the two stanzas and presented his understanding of these correspondences. It is piquant in the present context to recall that he considered that Laṅkapura does not require any explanation. It is just certain that this city must be situated in Java, unfortunately we do not know precisely where.23 Since Damais could only argue on the basis of the limited elements cited by De Casparis, it is only natural that his interpretation leaves scope for improvement, now that we have at our disposition all readable remains of the stanza. We therefore have to return to these correspondences before taking up the issue of the localization of Laṅkapura.


22. As stated above (p. 135, note 7), all of the inscriptions D, E and F, whose discovery was reported in 1956 by De Casparis, were included in Pusaka Aksara Yogyakarta, but this publication is so unreliable, especially where Sanskrit inscriptions are concerned, that its very lacunose transliteration, which does not display the slightest trace of understanding of what is being transliterated let alone of its metrical form, cannot be counted as a publication of this inscription.


23. Damais 1968:499. Here and below, citations from Damais are given in my translations from his French.

Figure 3: The inscription Ratu Baka F (Photo OD/DP 19471, LUB) Even at first sight, two parallels with the quoted stanza from the Pereng inscription are evident: the consecutive Sanskrit sequences tuṅgaṃ davākhyaṃ puraṃ and pūrvvaṃ laṅkapuraṃ evidently correspond to the consecutive words tuṅgaṃ davәt laṅka in the first verse quarter of the Old Javanese stanza. We notice that one of the two correspondences (davākhyaṃ) is couched in the form of a compound with the structure X-ākhya meaning ‘named X’.24 Moreover, De Casparis (1956:341–2) had already observed a similar correspondence between the Pereng inscription and another still unpublished Ratu Baka inscription, which contains the toponym musalākhyarāṣṭra, literally meaning ‘the land named Pestle’.25 As De Casparis rightly observed, this is a direct translation of the toponym Halu, meaning ‘pestle’, found in the title saṃ ratu °i halu of Kumbhayoni’s great-grandfather (Pereng l. 9, see Damais 1968:499). We thus


24. The discrepancy between davәt (Old Javanese) and dava/davā (Sanskrit) still is in need of an explanation. Damais (1968:499, note 3) admitted this difficulty but proposed no solution. His attempt to argue that tuṅgaṃ in the Sanskrit ought to be considered not as an acc. sg. form of the Sanskrit adjective tuṅga- ‘lofty’, as De Casparis took it, but rather as an untranslated Old Javanese word tuṅgaṅ (glossed ‘to mount, ride on, sit on’ in OJED 2070), which might according to Damais mean ‘slope’ in the context of this toponym, relied on the assumption that davā, which he assumes could mean ‘long’ besides its normal meaning ‘length’ (OJED 379), is the underlying form. It is hardly possible in the Pereng stanza to explain the final -t as the pronominal complementizer (a)t or as the morpheme t- in imperative function, so I consider Damais’ argument rather unconvincing.


25. Ratu Baka D / Śambhuliṅga, line 9; OD/DP photo 19399. have tentative grounds to hypothesize that the Kumbhayoni corpus is marked by Sanskrit-Old Javanese translations, with the Sanskrit correspondents sometimes marked by the quasi-suffix ākhya. This hypothesis is borne out by the rest of our Śārdūlavikrīḍita stanza from Ratu Baka F, where we see one more such ākhya-compound in the preserved portion of the inscription (nirjjharākhyaṃ). If we realize that nirjhara is a Sanskrit word for waterfall, we immediately think of the Old Javanese word vulakan in the Pereng inscription.26 The correspondences thus far have already been noticed and explained in the manner indicated above by Damais (1968). We can, however, no longer retain his suggestion (Damais 1968:500) that


Laṅkapura corresponds to Laŋka Sәrәh […] in Javanese, which might designate two different toponyms. This is probably not the case. For this interpretation was made without knowledge of the fact that the Sanskrit stanza contains a separate translation of the Old Javanese sә°ṛḥ, that is sәrәh, which means ‘betel’. The most common Sanskrit word for the same is tāmbūla, which, despite a small discrepancy, seems to correspond so closely to the last two syllables preserved of line 6, that I do not feel any hesitation in restoring at least the la of a presumptive spelling variant tāmvola.27 We thus end up with at least four topographic correspondences between the Old Javanese and the Sanskrit, and can attempt a translation of the Sanskrit stanza: And he, the wise Pot-born one who also bears the name Valaiṅ,28 rules the Lofty city called Dava (or: the city Tuṅgaṅ Davā), the eastern City 26. OJED 2323 glosses ‘well, spring, source’, but all the quoted examples also seem to permit the translation ‘waterfall’, which Poerbatjaraka (1926) and, following him, both Damais (1964:133, 1968:499–500) and Sarkar, actually chose in the case of Pereng, st. vi.


27. I do not know any other attestations of the Sanskrit word for ‘betel’ with the o that is evident on the stone and that I thus retain in restoring tāmvo[la]; but, in the light of the types of spelling variations that are widespread in Sanskrit manuscripts and inscriptions, the assumption that such a variant might have existed somewhere in the Sanskrit tradition does not seem altogether far-fetched either. Perhaps more pertinently, I may refer here to Damais’ important discussion (1968:450) of spelling variants ū/o in Old Javanese words, for example in the proper name pu manukū also found spelt as pu manuko.


28. Given the parallel in Pereng, st. iii valaiṅnāmnaḥ ‘of the one called Valaiṅ’, and given the occurrence of an equivalent compound ending in saṃjñaka in Ratu Baka C, st. iv (the stone quite clearly shows kalaśodbhavasaṃjñakaḥ instead of De Casparis’ reading kalaśodbhavasaṃjñitaḥ), and given finally the unmistakable appearance of the syllables saṃjña before the lacuna starts in line 7, I have no doubt that a compound like vālaiṅgasaṃjñaś must be restored. As far as I can see, De Casparis’ words (1956:342–3) ‘At least it follows from the new discovery [that is Ratu Baka F] that Walaing was the last of the four residences of king Kumbhayoni, undoubtedly connected with his final victory’ represent an erroneous interpretation. The toponym Valaiṅ of Laṅka, the […] Betel, […] and that beautiful [city] called Waterfall, and does so with the compassion of Mahendra,29 as Vṛtra’s enemy (that is, Indra) [[[Wikipedia:rules|rules]]] the heaven.


I have somewhat facetiously rendered the Sanskrit element pura here with the default translation ‘city’, although this was quite certainly not the precisely intended meaning. The word pura is used here as equivalent of the Old Javanese vanua,30 a phenomenon we also observe, for example, in the Sanskrit portion of the important but still not properly published inscription ‘Wanua Tengah iii’,31 which nicely illustrates in one document the same phenomenon of translation we have just observed between two Ratu Baka inscriptions on the one hand


(D, F) and the Old Javanese portions of the Pereng inscription on the other.32 Compare the Old Javanese prose portion on plate i verso:33

patiḥ °i pikatan saṃ vanu°a tṅaḥ pu culiṃ, saṃ (iB11) tuṅgal aṅin pu ra mvat, lekan pu glam, saṃ ra gunuṃ pu °intap,

The patihs of Pikatan: Sir Vanua Tṅah, Lord Culiṅ; Sir Tuṅgal Aṅin, Lord Ramvat; the lekan, Lord Glam; Sir Ra Gunuṅ, Lord Intap.

With the fourth of the Sanskrit stanzas that follow on the same plate, where instead of the expected compound maddhyapure we find an inversion, which reinforces, if any such reinforcement is required, the impression that we are dealing with a direct calque upon the Old Javanese:34


is in our context applied to the ruler Kumbhayoni alias Kalaśaja (see De Casparis 1956:48 and Damais 1964:124 on this type of transposition of names). Contrary to what one might expect given the prima facie inclusion of Valaiṅ on a par with the other toponyms in Pereng st. vi, the words of the inscription Ratu Baka F precisely fail to put Valaiṅ on a par with the other toponyms that it mentions. Hence my decision to retranslate vulakanni valā valaiṃ as I do below (p. 145), which means Valaiṅ itself is not among the localities being listed. This is another small point to be corrected in Damais’ interpretation.


29. Note that the restoration of the name Mahendra is fully hypothetical, only the last syllable actually being preserved on the stone. 30. The epigraphical data from Java eloquently support Kulke’s interpretation (1993:171) of vanua in the Old Malay inscriptions of Śrīvijaya as equivalent of pura or nagara.

31. This inscription is also to be included in my forthcoming publication of a selection of Central Javanese inscriptions.


32. This phenomenon of translation would seem to be the precursor of such correspondences as Majapahit = Bilvatikta or Variṅin Pitu = Variṅin Sapta still found centuries later on Java. 33. Translit. from the original set of plates held at BPPP Jawa Tengah (inv. nrs. 1118 and 1119). 34. The inverted compound puramaddhye recurs in the same metrical position in st. x of the same inscription.


iv. Anuṣṭubh puramaddhye culiṃsa(ṃ)jñaḥ, ramvat· tuṅgalaṅin· tathā, glam·sa(ṃ)(iB14)jñaḥ35 tathā lekan·, °intap· saṃ ra gunuṃ punaḥ || So we have reduced the problem of the translation of Sanskrit pura in the inscription Ratu Baka F to the observation that it must have been intended to mean the same as vanua. Rather than trying to determine the precise meaning in which that Old Javanese word was used, we will simply accept here the usual translation ‘village’, and return to the Pereng stanza with which we started. Just as that Old Javanese stanza helps to restore and interpret the Sanskrit stanza from Ratu Baka F, so also the Sanskrit helps us to refine our understanding of the Old Javanese. A revised, though still partly tentative, translation of the Pereng stanza cited on p. 140 would then be as follows: The Lofty Davәt (or: Tuṅgaṅ Davәt), Laṅka, Betel, the waterfall of Valā Valaiṅ36 [and] Two Banyans (lo dvā)37 are the villages of the wise one whose name is Kumbhayoni.


Summing up the findings concerning the toponym Laṅka(pura), we now have two closely related attestations of it, both of them dating from the ninth cen- 35. Read gәlamsaṃjñaḥ m.c.

36. On the interpretation of the sequence vulakanni valā valaiṃ, and especially the possible meaning of valā (possibly m.c. for vala), see the long but inconclusive note of Damais (1964:133, note 3, also Damais 1968:500).


37. It seems to me very likely that the final nasal before vanvaniraṃ represents the enclitic article (just as does the final nasal of vanvaniraṃ itself), whereas all predecessors have interpreted the name as Lodvāṅ (and it is recorded thus in Damais 1970:714, although the structural classification as ‘‘l d w/b’’ there might indicate that this author implicitly agreed with the analysis advocated here). Moreover, as my translation makes clear, I propose to interpret the place name as a new example of the combinations of tree-names with numbers to form toponyms that we see in many modern place names (Sala Tiga, Duren Tiga, Mangga Dua, Kelapa Sepuluh) and in epigraphic Poh Pitu, Variṅin Pitu (Damais 1970:743–4, 599–600). OJED 1042 cites two attestations of the spelling lo of a tree-name denoting a type of Banyan (Urostigma) from relatively recent texts, whereas two attestations from KR (16.44, 25.83) are cited in OJED 1070, but the tree-name is there spelt lva (apparently not only metri causa). As regards the second element dvā (that is, dva—there is no metrical reason for the occurrence of a long vowel here, and this spelling perhaps simply reflects the fact that the vowel in question is metrically heavy by force of the two ensuing consonants, unless it indicates use of the irrealis morpheme -a) rather than normal Old Javanese rva, a comparable appearance of a Malay form with d for r occurs elsewhere in the Kumbhayoni corpus (di parvata in st. iv of the Dawangsari inscription). I am not aware of any specific explanations that might have been proposed for this type of toponym, and do not wish to exclude with the chosen translation the possibility that it is to be interpreted in a different manner, for example as ‘Banyan-2’.

tury ad, both appearing in direct association with the ruler Kumbhayoni, and both hailing from the (immediate vicinity of the) Ratu Baka prominence. One of them is further specified as the ‘eastern’ Laṅkapura. Moreover, Damais’ Répertoire onomastique (1970:740) lists several other attestations of the same toponym from the Central Javanese Period, suggesting that it may have been a relatively important locality.38 And furthermore, in his 1964 article Damais proposed to identify one of the toponyms in the Sanskrit and Old Javanese stanzas we have been discussing with a modern place name from the eastern extremity of Central Java, at about 80 km distance from the Ratu Baka prominence.39


We may hence ask ourselves if any other of the toponyms from the Kumbhayoni corpus can be positively identified with localities still known today in the immediate or wider vicinity of the Ratu Baka prominence. I will focus here only on the possibilityof identifying Laṅkapura in that part of Central Java, and, as a subsidiary question, on what the significance of the qualification ‘eastern’ could have been. My answer to the latter question is that it explicitly indicates the type of geographical transposition of South Asian toponyms onto the Southeast Asian landscape that we know well, for instance, from the corpus of Khmer inscriptions,40 namely that we are dealing with the ‘localized’ Javanese counterpart of the more westerly Laṅkā famous from Vālmīki’s Sanskrit Rāmāyaṇa, but also, of course, from the Old Javanese KR, to which I now finally turn. Aichele (1969:139–42 and again 163–6) discussed the significance of the KumbhayonicorpusinrelationtotheKR,focusingspecificallyontheepisodeat the beginning of sarga 25, where Rāma and Sītā fly over the Vindhya mountain

38. I do not have the impression that anything useful can be drawn from these other attestations for my present purposes, so I do not give any details here. It may however be noted that at least two of these attestations cite the apanage Laṅka in close association with that of Halu (see above, p. 142), and that in most cases it appears in immediate association with the toponym tañjuṅ.


39. Damais’ article deals with the toponym Valaiṅ in a comprehensive manner. His hesitantly proposed modern identification—that seems quite plausible to me—is the desa Waleng, kecamatan Girimarto, kabupaten Wonogiri. Ninie Susanti has suggested to me that another choice might be the desa Wareng in Wonosari, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, but this is probably not acceptable on the grounds of phonological incompatibility of modern /r/ with ancient /l/ (personal communication from Sander Adelaar). De Casparis (1956:254–6), by contrast, identifies Valaiṅ with the Ratu Baka prominence itself, but decisive arguments in favour of this identification are lacking and in this case there is not even the argument of modern toponymy.


40. See Sanderson 2003–04:403 and following pages. From Java itself, one might add such cases as the names of the Serayu and Progo rivers (from Sanskrit Sarayu and Prayāga). But the phenomenon does seem to have been much rarer here. and Rāma not only points out to his wife the mountain’s name, but also repeats to her a specific element of Agastya mythology which Aichele interpreted as an allegorical reference to political affairs in ninth century Java. He also interpreted the name Vindhya as allegorically denoting the Ratu Baka prominence. Parts of Aichele’s 1969 observations will certainly have to be reformulated to the extent that they take as their point of departure the speculative historical narratives offered by De Casparis (1956) in Prasasti Indonesia II, which new epigraphical discoveries have since required to be fundamentally revised. But the attempt to link data from the KR with epigraphical data more directly reflecting the real world of the Central Javanese Period seems convincing, and can serve as inspiring model for further explorations in the toponymical domain.

Our KR contains many references to the toponym Lәṅkā or Lәṅkāpura.41 As is clear for example from the translation of KR 24.87–126 provided by Hooykaas in his 1958 article that bears the apt title ‘The Paradise on Earth in Lĕṅkā’, our text at various places paints a paradisiacal picture of this Lәṅkāpura. Moreover, in sarga 8, the Kakawin contains the by now rather famous description of a Śaiva temple (prasāda, from Sanskrit prāsāda) at Lәṅkā, which, as F.D.K. Bosch seems to have been the first to have noticed, is strongly reminiscent of specifically Central Javanese monumental architecture. Bosch’s idea was taken up by Poerbatjaraka as an important element in his persuasive attempt chronologically to situate the KR in the Central Javanese Period.42 The possibility that the KR is not describing the ideal type of a Central Javanese monument, but is describing specifically the Loro Jonggrang complex, seems to be very close to the surface throughout Aichele’s arguments (1969:159 and following pages) on the relationship between the Śivagṛha inscription and the KR, but, as far as I can see, everywhere remains implicit. In any case, the epigraphical attestations of the toponym on and around the Ratu Baka prominence play no role in Aichele’s argument.43 They strongly suggest that the toponym was not only an allegoricaldesignationin theKR,44 butin fact denoteda realplacein theancient


41. The spelling as Lәṅka/Lәṅkapura (with a for ā) is also well attested in the text, the metre in most cases clearly being the determining factor for which spelling was chosen.


42. See Poerbatjaraka 1932:161 and following pages; on the text passage in question, see also the important philological and historical observations of Aichele (1969:160–2).


43. And of course they hardly could have done so, since both Damais’ Répertoire onomastique and the text of Ratu Baka F that I present in this paper were still unavailable at the time, and the mere two syllables laṅka in the final stanza of the Pereng inscription are of course liable easily to escape notice.


44. As would be the case with the name Vindhya for the Ratu Baka prominence, if De Casparis’ hypothesis that the plateau’s ancient name was Valaiṅ, could be proven true. As is clear from my note 39 above, I do not expect that it will, so the possibility that the Ratu Baka prominence Central Javanese landscape. In fact Acri (2010:489–93) has tried to suggest a connection, based on his reading of KR 24.95–126 and the Śivagṛha inscription, between Vibhīṣaṇa in the poem and Rakai Kayuvaṅi, both king in Laṅkā, which means that, at the level of worldly realities, that toponym would have to be situated in Central Java.


The correspondence between the various pieces of epigraphical evidence presented above, on the one hand, and the textual evidence from the KR, on the other, naturally lead to the hypothesis that Laṅka(pura) indeed was the name of the ancient vanua corresponding to the modern desa Karangasem where the Prambanan complex is located. Since temple-names containing the element pura are well known both in Indonesia and elsewhere in Asia,45 it seems possible to go one step further and to propose that the complex itself bore this name.46


was actually known in ancient times as Vindhya cannot be excluded. The original (Sanskrit) name of the hillock was probably mentioned in st. viii of the Ratu Baka F inscription, but has unfortunately been lost in a lacuna.


45. See Sanderson (2003–04:402): ‘The pyramid-based state-temples built by the major Khmer rulersoftheAngkoreanperiodatthecentreoftheceremonialcapitals(puram)whosefoundation

markedtheirreignsweremostlytemplesofŚivasincorporatingtheruler’snameinstalledbyŚaiva officiants’. The practice (on which, see Sanderson’s note 195) of incorporation of royal names into names of temples seems however not to have been in vogue in ancient Indonesia.


46. To preempt one possible objection, let me point out, as did Aichele (1969:159), that the words śivagṛha and śivālaya in the inaptly designated Śivagṛha inscription, if indeed connected with the Prambanan complex at all, may only refer to the Śiva shrine within that complex and are in any case so general in meaning that they are no serious candidates as ‘names’ of any specific Śiva shrine. If one likes, one may speculate that the specific name of the Śiva installed in the main Prambanan shrine was Bhadrāloka (Pereng, st. iv: vihite kalaśajanāmnā bhadrālokāhvaye vivudhagehe) although this implies the identity of Kumbhayoni with the founder of the Śiva shrine of the Śivagṛha inscription, an identity that several historians including myself would currently no longer be willing to accept (see Wisseman Christie 2001:41–2).


Abbreviations

AdKIT Amsterdam, Koninklijk Instituut voor de Tropen
BCB Bundels C. Berg, portfolios, Leiden
BEFEO Bulletin de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient
BK Bhaṭṭikāvya
BKI Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde
BPPP Balai Pelestarian Peninggalan Purbakala (Yogyakarta)
Br Brandes Collection, Jakarta / Van der Tuuk Collection, Leiden University Library
CB Collection Berg, Leiden University Library
DW Deśawarṇana, or Nāgarakṛtāgama
EFEO École française d’Extrême-Orient
HKS Hooykaas-Ketut Sangka Collection, Balinese Manuscript Project
HSR Hikayat Sĕri Rama
IAIC International Academy of Indian Culture
IIAS International Institute for Asian Studies, Leiden
K Kirtya Collection, Singaraja
KBNW Kawi-Balineesch-Nederlandsch woordenboek, see Tuuk, H.N. Van der 1896–1912.
KITLV Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde
KR Kakawin Rāmāyaṇa
LOr Leiden Oriental (Codex Orientalis), Leiden University Library
LUB Leiden University Library
MS Manuscript
MW Monier-Williams Sanskrit-English Dictionary, see Monier-Williams 1899
NAK National Archives Kathmandu
NGMPP Nepal-German Manuscript Preservation Project
OD Oudheidkundige Dienst
OJED Old Javanese-English Dictionary, see Zoetmulder 1982
Ragh Raghuvaṃśa
TBG Tijdschrift voor Indische Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, uitgegeven door het Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen
UtK Uttarakāṇḍa
VR Vālmīki’s Rāmāyaṇa
Bibliography
Acri, A.
2008 ‘The Vaimala sect of the Pāśupatas; New data from Old Javanese sources’, Tantric Studies 1:193–208.
2010 ‘On birds, ascetics, and kings in central Java; Rāmāyaṇa Kakawin, 24.95–126 and 25’, BKI 167:475–506.
2011 Dharma Pātañjala; A Śaiva scripture from ancient Java; Studied in the light of related Old Javanese and Sanskrit texts. PhD thesis, Leiden University. Aichele, W.


1926 ‘Die Form der Kawi-Dichtung’, Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 29:933–9.
1931a ‘Oudjavaansche beroepsnamen’, Djåwå 11:147–58.
1931b ‘De vorm der Kawi-poëzie’, Djåwå 11:174–80. [[[Dutch]] translation of Aichele 1926.]
1969 ‘Vergessene Metaphern als Kriterien der Datierung des altjavanischen Rāmāyaṇa’, Oriens Extremus 16:127–66. Allen, P. and C. Palermo
2005 ‘Ajeg Bali: Multiple meanings, diverse agendas’, Indonesia and the Malay World 33/97:239–55.
Aymonier, É.
1891 ‘Première étude sur les inscriptions tschames’, Journal Asiatique 8e série 17:5– 86.
Bandem, I Made, I Nyoman Rembang, and I Nengah Medera
1983 Wimba wayang kulit Ramayana (Ketut Madra). Denpasar: ProyekPenggalian / Pembinaan Seni Budaya Klasik / Tradisional dan Baru.
Barrett, E.C.G.
2002 ‘Further light on Sir Richard Winstedt’s ‘‘undescribed Malay version of the Ramayana’’ ’, in: V.I. Braginsky (ed), Classical civilisations of South East Asia; An anthology of articles published in the Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, pp. 275–87. London: RoutledgeCurzon.
Basak, Radhagovinda
1959 Pravarasena’sRāvaṇavaha-Māhākāvyam with the commentaryof Setu-TattvaCandrikā. Calcutta: Sanskrit College.
1971 The Prākrit Gāthā-Saptaśati. Calcutta: Asiatic Society. Becker, J.
1993 Gamelan stories; Tantrism, Islam, and aesthetics in central Java. Tempe: Arizona State University, Program for Southeast Asian Studies.
Bedekar, V.M.
1967 ‘The legend of the churning of the ocean in the epics and Purāṇas; A comparative study’, Purāṇa 9:7–61.
Belvalkar, S.K.
1915 Rāma’s later history or the Uttara-Rāma-Charita; An ancient hindu drama by Bhavabhūti. Part 1, Introduction and translation. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Bernet Kempers, A.J.


1959 Ancient Indonesian art. Amsterdam: Van der Peet.
Bhattacharya, A.
1980 ‘The oral tradition of the Rāmāyaṇa tradition in Bengal’, in: V. Raghavan (ed) 1980, pp. 593–616.
Bisschop, P. and A. Griffiths
2003 ‘The Pāśupata observance (Atharvavedapariśiṣṭa 40)’, Indo-Iranian Journal 46:315–48.
Bizot, F.
1983 ‘The Reamker’, in: K.R. Srinivasa Iyengar (ed), Asian variations in Ramayana, pp. 263–75. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi.
Bloomfield, M.
1924 ‘On false ascetics and nuns in Hindu fiction’, Journal of the American Oriental Society 44:202–42.
Boisselier, J.


1966 Le Cambodge. Paris: Picard.
Bosch, F.D.K.


1931 ‘Notes archéologiques’, BEFEO 31:485–97.
Brandes, J.L.A.
1901 Beschrijvingder Javaansche, Balineescheen Sasakschehandschriften aangetroffen in de nalatenschap van Dr. H.N. van der Tuuk, en door hem vermaakt aan de Leidsche Universiteitsbibliotheek, Vol. 1. Batavia: Landsdrukkerij.
1903 Beschrijving der Javaansche, Balineesche en Sasaksche handschriften […], Vol. 2. Batavia: Landsdrukkerij.
1909 Beschrijving van Tjandi Singasari en de wolkentafreelen van Panataran. Batavia and ’s-Gravenhage: Nijhoff/Albrecht.
1913 Oud-Javaansche oorkonden; Nagelaten transscripties (edited by N.J. Krom). Batavia and ’s-Gravenhage: Nijhoff.
1915 Beschrijving der Javaansche, Balineesche en Sasaksche handschriften […], Vol. 3. Batavia: Landsdrukkerij.


1926 Beschrijving der Javaansche, Balineesche en Sasaksche handschriften […], Vol.
4. Batavia: Landsdrukkerij. Brockington, J.L.


1985 Righteous Rāma; The evolution of an epic. Delhi: Oxford University Press.


1998 The Sanskrit epics. Leiden: Brill.
2007 ‘Sītā Janakātmaja’, in: M. Nowakowska and J. Wozniak (eds), Theatrum Mirabiliorum Indiae Orientalis; A volume to celebrate the 70th birthday of Professor Maria Krzysztof Byrski, Rocznik Orientalistyczny 60 2:82–9.
 
Brockington, J. and M. Brockington
2006 Rāma the steadfast; An early form of the Rāmāyaṇa. London: Penguin Books. Bronner, Y.D.
1999 Poetry at its extreme; The theory and practice of bitextual poetry (śleṣa) in South Asia. PhD thesis, University of Chicago.
Brunner, H., G. Oberhammer and A. Padoux
2004 Tāntrikābhidhānakośa II; Dictionnaire des termes techniques de la littérature hindoue tantrique. Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Buitenen, J.A.B. Van
1973 The Mahābhārata, 1; The book of the beginning. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
1975 The Mahābhārata, 2; The Book of the Assembly Hall; The Book of the Forest. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
1978 The Mahābhārata, 3; The book of the effort. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Bulcke, C.
1953 ‘An Indonesian birth-story of Hanuman’, Journal of the Oriental Institute of Baroda 3:147–51.
Cadet, J.M.
1971 The Ramakien; The Thai epic illustrated with the bas-reliefs of Wat Phra Jetubon, Bangkok. Tokyo: Kodansha International.
Casparis, J.G. de
1956 Prasasti Indonesia II; Selected inscriptions from the 7th to the 9th century AD. Bandung: Masa Baru.
Chaeam Kaewklai
1999 ‘Inscription on Ancie[n]t Stone Temple of Tameunthom’, The Silpakorn Journal 42:70–92.
Coedès, G.


1911 ‘La légende de la Nāgī’, BEFEO 11:391–3.
Cohen Stuart, A.B.


1875 Kawi oorkonden; Inleiding en transscriptie. Leiden.
Cohen Stuart, A.B. and J.J. van Limburg Brouwer


1872 ‘Beschreven steenen op Java’, TBG 18:89–117.
Creese, H.


1981 Subhadrāwiwāha; An Old Javanese kakawin. PhD thesis, Australian National University.
1996 ‘Pieces in the puzzle; The dating of several kakawin from Bali and Lombok’, Archipel 52:143–71.
1998 Pārthāyaṇa; The journeyingof Pārtha, an eighteenth-centuryBalinesekakawin. Leiden: KITLV.
1999 ‘The Balinese kakawin tradition; A preliminary description and inventory’, BKI 155:45–96.
2004a Women of the kakawin world; Marriage and sexuality in the Indic courts of Java and Bali. Armonk, N.Y.: Sharpe.
2004b ‘Guide and index to the Hooykaas-Ketut Sangka Balinese manuscript collectionintheAustralianNationalUniversityLibrary’. epubs/bali/
2009a ‘Singing the text; On-air textual interpretation in Bali,’ in: M. Kilcline Cody and J. van der Putten (eds), Lost times and untold tales from the Malay world, pp. 210–26. Singapore: Singapore University Press.
2009b ‘Old Javanese legal traditions in pre-colonial Bali,’ BKI 165:515–50.
2009c ‘Judicial processes and legal authority in pre-colonial Bali,’ BKI 165:241–90.
Curtius, E.R.
1990 European literature and the Latin Middle Ages. Translated by W.R. Trask with a new epilogue by P. Godman. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Damais, L.C.
1952 ‘Études d’épigraphie indonésienne III; Liste des principales inscription datées de l’Indonésie’, BEFEO 46:1–105.
1958 ‘Étudesd’épigraphieindonésienneV;Datesdesmanuscritsetdocumentdivers de Java, Bali et Lombok’, BEFEO 49:1–257.
1968 ‘Bibliographie indonésienne XI; Les publications épigraphiques du service archéologique de l’Indonésie’, BEFEO 54:295–521.
1970 Répertoire onomastique de l’épigraphie javanaise (jusqu’à pu Siṇḍok Śrī Īśānawikrama Dharmottuṅgadewa). Paris: EFEO. Davidson, R.M.
2002 Indian esoteric Buddhism; A social history of the Tantric movement. New York: Columbia University Press.
De, Sushil Kumar


2006 History of Sanskrit poetics. Delhi: Oriental Book Centre. [First revised edi-
tion.] Degroot, V.
2006 ‘The archaeological remains of Ratu Boko; From Sri Lankan Buddhism to Hinduism’, Indonesia and the Malay World 34:55–74.
Doniger O’Flaherty, W.
1
973 Asceticism and eroticism in the mythology of Śiva. London and New York:
Oxford University Press.
Drewes, G.W.J.
1925 Drie javaansche goeroe’s; Hun leven, onderricht en messiasprediking. PhD thesis. Leiden: Vros.
Duijker, M.
2001 ‘The significance of Bhīma’s weapons in his stone representation; An art historical approach’, in: M.J. Klokke and K.R. Van Kooij (eds), Fruits of inspiration; Studies in honour of Prof. J.G. de Casparis, pp. 69–82. Groningen:
Egbert Forsten.
Ensink, J.


1967 On the Old-Javanese Cantakaparwa and its tale of Sutasoma. The Hague:
Nijhoff.
Evans, K.
1997 Epic narratives in the Hoysaḷa temples; The Rāmāyaṇa, Mahābhārata and Bhāgavata Purāṇa in Halebid, Belur and Amṛtapura. Leiden / New York /
Köln: Brill.
Fausbøll, V.


1903 Indian mythology according to the Mahābhārata, in outline. London: Luzac.
Fontein, J.
1989 The laws of cause and effect in ancient Java. Amsterdam: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen.
1997 ‘Preliminary notes on the narrative reliefs of Caṇḍi Brahmā and Caṇḍi Viṣṇu at Loro Jonggrang, Prambanan’, in: N. Eilenberg, M.C. Subhadradis Diskul and R.L. Brown (eds), Living a life in accord with dhamma; Papers in honor of Jean Boisselier on his eightieth birthday, pp. 191–204. Bangkok: Silpakorn University. Forge, A.

1978 Balinese traditional paintings. Sydney: Australian Museum.
Friederich, R.
1959 The civilization and culture of Bali. Calcutta: Susil Gupta. [Originally published in 1849–50 as ‘Voorloopig verslag van het eiland Bali’, Verhandelingen van het Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen 22:1–63 and 23:1–57.] Geertz, H.
1994 Images of power; Balinese paintings made for Gregory Bateson and Margaret Mead. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Gerow, E.


1971 A glossary of Indian figures of speech. The Hague: Mouton.
Gerth Van Wijk, D.
1891 ‘Iets over verschillende Maleische redacties van den Seri Rama’, TBG 34:410– 33.
Ghosh, M.
1950–67 Nāṭyaśāstra of Bharata, Edition and Translation. Varanasi: Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office. [Reprint edition.]
1981 Nandikeśvara’s Abhinayadarpaṇam; A manual of gesture and posture used in Indian dance and drama. Calcutta: Manisha Granthalaya Private Ltd. [Third Revised Edition.]
Goldman, R.P. and S.J. Sutherland Goldman
1984 The Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki; An epic of ancient India. Volume I, Bālakāṇḍa (introduction and translation by R.P. Goldman). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Goldman, R.P., S.J. Sutherland Goldman and B.A. Van Nooten


2009 The Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki; An epicof ancientIndia. VolumeVI, Yuddhakāṇḍa.
Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Gomperts, A.
2002 ‘Indian music, the epics and bards in ancient Java’, in: E. Hickmann, A.D. Kilmer and R. Eichmann (eds), Studien zur Musikarchäologie III: Archäologie für Klangerzeugung und Tonordnung; Musikarchäologie in der Ägäis und Anatolien, pp. 573–96. Rahden, Westf.: Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH.
Groneman, I.
1893 Tjandi Parambanan op Java, na de ontgraving; Met lichtdrukken van Cephas. Leiden: Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde van Nederlandsch-Indië.
Gupta, S.
1979 ‘Modesofworshipandmeditation’, in: S.Gupta, T.GoudriaanandD.J.Hoens, Hindu Tantrism, pp. 121–86. Leiden and Köln: Brill.
Hara, M.


1958 ‘Nakulīśa-pāśupata-darśanam’, Indo-Iranian Journal 2:8–32.
1994 ‘Transfer of merit in Hindu literature and religion’, The Memoirs of the Toyo Bunko, 52:103–35. Hiltebeitel, A.


1988 The cult of Draupadī. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Himmelmann, N.P.
2005 ‘The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar; Typological overview’, in: S.K. Adelaar and N.P. Himmelmann (eds), Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar, pp. 110–81. London: Routledge.
Hinzler, H.I.R.
1983 ‘The Balinese manuscript project’, Southeast Asian Library Group Newsletter 25:7.
1993 ‘Balinese palmleaf manuscripts’, BKI 149:438–74. Hoepermans, H.
1914 ‘Tjandi Panataran’, Rapporten van den Oudheidkundigen Dienst in Nederlandsch-Indië 1913, pp. 355–61. Batavia: Albrecht and Co.
Hoff, B.
1998 ‘Communicative salience in Old Javanese’, in: M. Janse and A. Verlinden (eds), Productivity and creativity; Studies in general and descriptive linguistics in honor of E.M. Uhlenbeck, pp. 337–48. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hooykaas, C.
1929 Tantri, de middel-javaansche Pancatantra-bewerking. PhD thesis. Leiden: A. Vros.
1955 The Old-Javanese Rāmāyaṇa kakawin with special reference to the problem of interpolation in kakawins. The Hague: Nijhoff.
1957 ‘On some arthālaṃkāras in the Bhaṭṭikāvya X’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 20:351–64.
1958a ‘The paradise on earth in Lĕṅkā (OJR xxiv.87–126)’, BKI 114:264–91.
1958b ‘From Lĕṅkā to Ayodhyā by Puṣpaka, being the Old-Javanese Rāmāyaṇa sarga xxv mainly’, BKI 114:359–83.
1958c The Old Javanese Rāmāyaṇa kakawin; An exemplary kakawin as to form and content. Amsterdam and London: North-Holland Publishing Co.
1958d ‘Four-line yamaka in the Old Javanese Rāmāyaṇa’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, October 1958:58–71 (Part I) and 123–38 (Part II).
1979 ‘Preservation and cataloguing of manuscripts in Bali’, BKI 135:347–53. Hudak, T.J.
1990 The indigenization of Pali meters in Thai poetry. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Center for International Studies.
Hunter, T.M.
2007a ‘The poetics of grammar in the Javano-Balinese tradition’, in: S. La Porta and D. Shulman (eds), The poetics of grammar and the metaphysics of sound and sign, pp. 271–303. Leiden: Brill.
2007b ‘The body of the king: Reappraising Singhasari period syncretism’, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 38:27–53.
forth. ‘A constant flow of pilgrims; kāvya and the early history of the kakawin’, in: Y. Bronner, G. Tubb and D. Shulman (eds), Innovation and change in the history of Sanskrit poetry. [In print.] Ikram, Achadiati


1980 Hikayat Sri Rama; Suntingan naskah disertai telaah amanat dan struktur.
Jakarta: Penerbit Universitas Indonesia.
Ingalls, D.H.H.
1962 ‘Cynics and Pāśupatas; The seeking of dishonor’, Harvard Theological Review 55:281–98.
Jákl, J.
2008 Hariśraya A: Cantos 1, 2, 3, 10 and 20; Edition and translation. MA thesis, Leiden University.
Janaki, Kumari S.S.
1965 Alaṅkāra-sarvasva of Ruyyaka, with Sañjīvanī commentary of Vidyācakravartin; Text and study (editedbyV.Raghavan). Delhi: MeharChandLachhman Das.
Jordaan, R.
1984 ‘The mystery of Nyai Lara Kidul; The Javanese goddess of the southern ocean’, Archipel 28:99–117.


1989 ‘A holy water sanctuary at Prambanan’, Amerta; Berkala Arkeologi 11:17–41.
1991 ‘Text, temple and tirtha’, in: Lokesh Chandra (ed), The art and culture of South-East Asia, pp. 165–81. New Delhi: IAIC and Aditya Prakashan.
1995 ‘Prambanan1995; Ahypothesisconfirmed’, IIAS Newsletter 6:7.Leiden:IIAS. 1996 ‘Candi Prambanan; An updated introduction’, in: R.E. Jordaan (ed), In praise of Prambanan; Dutch essays on the Loro Jonggrang temple complex, pp. 3–115. Leiden: KITLV. [[[Wikipedia:Indonesian|Indonesian]] translation: Memuji Prambanan; Bunga rampai para cendekiawan Belanda tentang kompleks percandian Loro Jonggran. Jakarta: KITLV and Yayasan Obor Indonesia, 2009.]
1999 The Śailendras in central Javanese history. Yogyakarta: Penerbitan Universitas Sanata Dharma.
2009 ‘The bridge of Rāma in Southeast Asia; The causeway reliefs of Prambanan and Phimai re-examined’. Paper presented at the international workshop ‘TheOldJavaneseRāmāyaṇa; Text, history, culture’, Jakarta, 26–28May2009. Jordaan, R. and B.E. Colless
2009 The Mahārājas of the isles; The Śailendras and the problem of Śrīvijaya. Leiden: Department of Languages and Cultures of Southeast Asia and Oceania.
Jouveau-Dubreuil, G.

1914 Annales du Musée Guimet, II; Iconographie. Paris: Geuthner.
Juynboll, H.H.
1902 Kawi-Balineesch-Nederlandsch glossarium op het oudjavaansche Râmâyaṇa. ’s-Gravenhage: Nijhoff.
1907–11 Supplement op de catalogus van de Javaansche en Madoereesch handschriften der Leidsche Universiteitsbibliotheek. Leiden: Brill. [2 vols.]
1912 Supplement op de catalogus van de Sundaneesche handschriften en catalogus van de Balineesche en Sasaksche handschriften der Leidsche Universiteitsbibliotheek. Leiden: Brill.
Kaelan
1960 Tjandi Lara Djonggrang; Petunjuk singkat. Jogjakarta: Tjabang Bagian Bahasa Kebudajaan, P. dan K.
Kale, M.R.
1981 Kālidāsa’s Kumārasambhava: Cantos I–VIII; Ed. with the commentary of Mallinātha, and literal English translation, notes and introduction. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Kam, G.

2000 Ramayana in the arts of Asia. Singapore: Select Books.
Kats, J.
1925 Het Rāmāyaṇa op Javaanse tempel reliefs / The Rāmāyaṇa as sculptured in reliefs in Javanese temples. Batavia and Leiden: Kolff.
Kern, H.
1873 ‘HetSanskritopeenensteenafkomstig(vanPereng), uit(debuurt)vanPrambanan (785 Çāka)’, TBG 20; in: Verspreide Geschriften 6:277–86 (1917).
1875 Wrtta-Sancaya; Oudjav. leerdicht over versbouw in Kawi-tekst en Nederlandsche vertaling. Leiden: Brill. [in: Verspreide Geschriften 9:67–190.]
Kieven, L.
2003 ‘Loving couples depicted in temple reliefs in east Java of the Majapahit time’, in: A.KarlströmandA.Källén(eds), Fishbonesand glitteringemblems; Southeast Asian archaeology 2002, pp. 335–48. Stockholm: Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities.
2009 Meaning and function of the figure with a cap in reliefs at temples of the Majapahit time. PhD thesis, University of Sydney. Klokke, M.J.
1986 ‘The hypocritical cat; A parody of the Guru?’, in: H. Hinzler (ed), Studies in South and Southeast Asian archaeology; Essays offered to Dr. J.G. de Casparis on the occasion of his retirement presented by colleagues and former students at the archaeological conference held on 2 June 1986 in Leiden, pp. 31–45. Leiden: H.I.R. Hinzler.


1993 The Tantri reliefs on ancient Javanese candi. Leiden: KITLV.
1995 ‘On the orientation of ancient Javanese temples; The example of Surowono’, in: P. van der Velde (ed), IIAS Yearbook 1994, pp. 73–86. Leiden:IIAS.
2000 ‘The Krsna reliefs at Panataran; A visual version of the Old Javanese Krsnayana’, in: M. Klokke (ed), Narrative sculpture and literary traditions in South and Southeast Asia, pp. 19–41. Leiden: Brill.
2006 ‘Hanuman in the art of East Java’, in: Truman Simanjuntak et al. (eds), Archaeology: Indonesian perspective; R.P. Soejono’s festschrift, pp. 391–405. Jakarta: LIPI Press. Kramrisch, S.
1976 The Hindu Temple. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. [2 vols.] Krom, N.J. and T. Van Erp.
1920 Beschrijving van Barabudur. ’s-Gravenhage: Nijhoff. [2 vols.] Krom, N.J.


1919 ‘Epigrafische bijdragen’, BKI 75:8–24.
1923 Inleiding tot de Hindoe-Javaansche Kunst, Vol. 2. ’s-Gravenhage: Nijhoff. Kuijp, L.W.J. van der
1996 ‘Tibetan belles-lettres; The influence of Daṇḍin and Kṣemendra’, in: J.I. Cabezón and R.R. Jackson (eds), Tibetan literature; Studies in genre, pp. 393– 410. Ithaca: Snow Lion Press.
Kulkarni, V.M.
1983 Studies in Sanskrit Sāhitya-Śāstra. Patan: Bhogilal Leherchand Institute of Indology.
Kulke, H.
1993 ‘ ‘‘Kadātuan Śrīvijaya’’—Empire or kraton of Śrīvijaya? A Reassessment of the Epigraphical Evidence’, BEFEO 80:159–80.
Lévi, S.
1931 ‘On Manimekhala ‘‘the guardian of the sea’’ ’, Indian Historical Quarterly 7:7– 9 and 371–6.


1933 ‘Kārakasaṅgraha’, in: Sanskrit Texts from Bali, pp. 87–88. Baroda: Oriental Institute. Levin, C.


1999 The Rāmāyaṇa of Loro Jonggrang; Indian antecedents and Javanese impetus.
PhD thesis, Institute of Fine Arts, New York University.
Liebert, G.
1976 Iconographic dictionary of the Indian religions; Hinduism-Buddhism-Jainism. Leiden: Brill.
Lokesh Chandra
1995 ‘NyaiLaraKidul: Goddessofthesouthernseas’, in: Cultural horizons of India; Studies in Tantra and Buddhism, art and archaeology, language and literature. Vol. 4, pp. 198–204. New Delhi: IAIC and Aditya Prakashan.
1997 ‘Chanda-karaṇa; The art of writing poetry’, in: Lokesh Chandra (ed), Cultural horizons of India; Studies in Tantra and Buddhism, art and archaeology, language and literature. Vol. 6, pp. 140–234. New Delhi: IAIC and Aditya Prakashan. Lorenzen, D.N.
1991 The Kāpālikas and Kālāmukhas; Two lost Śaivite sects. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. [Second revised edition.]
2000 ‘A Parody of the Kāpālikas in the Mattavilāsa’, in: D.G. White (ed), Tantra in practice, pp. 81–96. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press. Lunsingh Scheurleer, P.
2000 ‘Skulls, fangs and serpents; A new development in east Javanese iconography’, in: W. Lobo and S. Reimann (eds), Southeast Asian Archaeology 1998; Proceedings of the 7th international conference of the European Association of Southeast Asian Archaeologists, pp. 189–204. Hull: Centre for South-East Asian Studies, University of Hull.
Lutgendorf, P.


1994 ‘My Hanuman is bigger than yours’, History of Religions 33/3:211–45.
1997 ‘Monkey in the middle; The status of Hanuman in popular Hinduism’, Religion 27:311–32.
2004 ‘Hanuman’s adventures underground; The narrative logic of a Rāmāyaṇa ‘‘interpolation’’ ’, in: Mandakranta Bose (ed), The Rāmāyaṇa revisited, pp. 149– 63. New York: Oxford University Press.
2007 Hanuman’s tale; The messages of a divine monkey. Oxford and N.Y.: Oxford University Press. McCrea, L.
2008 The teleology of poetics in medieval Kashmir. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Menon, Ramesh


2001 The Rāmāyaṇa. New York: North Point Press.
Minkowski, C.
2004 ‘Sūryadāsa and the invention of bidirectional poetry’, Journal of the American Oriental Society 124:325–33.
Moertjipto and Bambang Prasetya


1997 The Kresnayana reliefs of the Visnu temple. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Kanisius.
Monier-Williams, M.


1899 Sanskrit-English dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Nihom, M.
1996 ‘Old Javanese Rāmāyaṇa 25.25 and 24.117ab; A study in literature and Pāśupata Śaivism’, Asiatische Studien/Études Asiatiques 39:653–71.
O’Brien, K.
2008 Sutasoma; The ancient tale of a Buddha-prince, from 14th century Java by the poet Mpu Tantular. Bangkok: Orchid Press.
Olivelle, P.
1987 ‘King and ascetic; State control of asceticism in the Arthaśāstra’. The Adyar Library Bulletin 50:39–59.
Olsson, R.A.
1968 The Ramakien; A prose translation of the Thai Ramayana. Bangkok: Praepittaya.
Olthof, W.L.


1943 Babad Tanah Djawi. ’s-Gravenhage: Nijhoff.
Pamit, I Wayan
2002a Kakawin Rāwaṇa; Kakawin miwah tegesipun. Denpasar. [2 vols.] 2002b Kakawin Nīla Candra; Kakawin miwah tegesipun. Denpasar.
2002c Candra Bhuwana; Kakawin miwah tegesipun. Denpasar.
2002d Candra Bhairawa; Kakawin miwah tegesipun. Denpasar. Paranavitana, S. and C.E. Godakumbura (eds)


1967 The Jānakīharaṇa of Kumāradāsa. Ceylon: Sri Lanka Sahitya Mandalaya.
Payne, R.B., M.D. Sorenson and K. Klitz


2005 The cuckoos; Cuculidae. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Perquin, P.J.
1916 ‘Uittreksel uit het verslag aangaande de oudheidkundige werkzaamheden in Oost-Java’, Oudheidkundig Verslag:133–47.
Peterson, Indira Wiswanathan
2003 Design and rhetoric in a Sanskrit court epic; The Kirātārjunīya of Bhāravi. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Phalgunadi, I Gusti Putu
1999 The Indonesian Rāmāyaṇa; The Uttarakāṇḍa. New Delhi: Sundeep Prakashan.
Pigeaud, Th.G.T.
1960 Java in the fourteenth century; A study in cultural history; The Nagara-Kĕrtagama by Rakawi Prapañca of Majapahit, 1365 AD, Vol. 1. The Hague: Nijhoff.


1962 Java in the fourteenth century […], Vol. 4. The Hague: Nijhoff.
1967 Literature of Java; Catalogue raisonné of Javanese manuscripts in the Library of the University of Leiden and other public collections in the Netherlands Vol. 1; Synopsis of Javanese literature 900–1900 A.D.. The Hague: Nijhoff.
1968 Literature of Java; […] Vol. 2; Descriptive list of Javanese manuscripts. The Hague: Nijhoff.
1970 Literature of Java; […] Vol. 3; Illustrations and facsimiles of manuscripts, maps, addenda and a general index of names and subjects. The Hague: Nijhoff.
1980 Literature of Java; […] Vol. 4; Supplement. Leiden: Leiden University Press. Poerbatjaraka, R.Ng.


1926 Agastya in den Archipel. Leiden: Brill.
1931 Smaradahana; Oud-Javaansche tekst met vertaling. Bandoeng: A.C. Nix.
1932 ‘Het Oud-Javaansche Rāmāyaṇa’, TBG 72:151–214.
1933 ‘Lijst der Javaansche handschriften in de boekerij van het Kon. Bat. Genootschap’, in: Jaarboek Koninklijk Bataviaasch Genootschap van Kunsten en Wetenschappen 1933, pp. 269–376. Bandung: Nix and Co. Pollock, S.
1985a ‘The theory of practice and the practice of theory in Indian intellectual history’, Journal of the American Oriental Society 105:499–519.
1985b Review of Kulkarni 1983, Journal of the American Oriental Society 105:184–5.
1996 ‘TheSanskritcosmopolis, 300–1300; Transculturation, vernacularizationand the question of ideology’, in: J.E.M. Houben (ed), Ideology and the status of Sanskrit; Contributions to the history of the Sanskrit language, pp. 197–247. Leiden: Brill.
2006 The language of the gods in the world of men; Sanskrit, culture, and power in premodern India. Berkeley: University of California Press.
2007 Rāma’s last act by Bhavabhūti. New York: New York University Press/JJC Foundation. Pott, P.H.
1966 Yoga and Yantra; Their interrelation and their significance for Indian archaeology. The Hague: Nijhoff.
Proudfoot, I.
2007 ‘In search of lost time; Javanese and Balinese understandings of the Indic calendar’, BKI 163:86–122.
Przyluski, J.


1925 ‘La princesse à l’odeur de poisson et la Nagi’, Etudes Asiatiques 20:265–84.
Putra, I Nyoman Darma
2009 ‘Kidung Interaktif; Vocalising and interpreting traditional literature through electronic mass media in Bali’, Indonesia and the Malay World 37/109:249– 76.
Rabe, M.D.
1997 ‘The Māmallapuram praśasti; A panegyric in figures’, Artibus Asiae 57:189– 241.
Raghavan, V.


1975 The Rāmāyaṇa in Greater India. Surat: South Gujarat University.
1980 The Rāmāyaṇa tradition in Asia; Papers presented at the international seminar on the Rāmāyaṇa tradition in Asia, New Delhi, December 1975. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi Rao, T.A. Gopinatha


1916 Elements of Hindu Iconography, Vol. 2. Madras: The Law Printing House.
Rassers, W.H.


1959 Pañji, the culture hero; A structural study of religion in Java. ’s-Gravenhage:
Nijhoff.
Robson, S.O.
1971 Waŋbaŋ Wideya; A Javanese Panji romance. The Hague: Nijhoff.
1972 ‘The Kawi classics in Bali’, BKI 128:308–29.
1981 ‘The Rāmāyaṇa in early Java’, in: S. Sahai (ed), The Rāmāyaṇa in South East Asia, pp. 5–18. Gaya: Centre For South East Asian Studies.
1983 ‘Kakawin reconsidered; Toward a theory of Old Javanese poetics’, BKI 139: 291–319.


1995 Deśawarṇana (Nāgarakṛtāgama) by Mpu Prapañca. Leiden: KITLV.
2008 Arjunawiwāha; The marriage of Arjuna of Mpu Kaṇwa. Leiden: KITLV. Rubinstein, R.
2000 Beyond the realm of the senses; The Balinese ritual of kekawin composition. Leiden: KITLV.
Sahai, Sachchidanand


1972 ‘Sources of the Lao Ramayana tradition’, Indian Horizons 21 2/3:70–81.
1996 The Rama Jātaka in Laos; A study in the Phra Lak Phra Lam. Delhi: B.R. Publ. Corp. [2 vols.] Sanderson, A.G.J.S.
1988 ‘Śaivism and the Tantric traditions’, in: S. Sutherland et al. (eds), The world’s religions, pp. 660–704. London: Routledge.
2002 ‘History through textual criticism in the study of Śaivism, the Pañcarātra and the Buddhist Yoginītantras’, in: F. Grimal (ed), Les sources et le temps; A colloquium; Pondicherry, 11–13 January 1997, pp. 1–47. Pondicherry: Institut français de Pondichéry / EFEO.
2003–04 ‘Śaivism among the Khmers; Part i’, BEFEO 90/91:349–462.
2006 ‘The Lākulas; New evidence of a system intermediate between Pāñcārthika Pāśupatism and Āgamic Śaivism’, Indian Philosophical Annual 24:143–217. Sanford, D.T.
1974 EarlytemplesbearingRāmāyaṇa reliefsin the Cholaarea; A comparativestudy. PhD thesis, University of California at Los Angeles.
Santoso, Soewito
1980a Rāmāyaṇa Kakawin. New Delhi: IAIC. [3 vols.]
1980b ‘The Old Javanese Rāmāyaṇa—its composer and composition’, in: V. Raghavan (ed) 1980, pp. 20–39.
1986 Krĕṣṇāyaṇa; The Krĕṣṇa legend in Indonesia. New Delhi: IAIC. Saran, Malini and Vinod C. Khanna


2004 The Rāmāyaṇa in Indonesia. New Delhi: Ravi Dayal Publishers.
Sarkar, Himansu Bhushan
1971 Corpus of the Inscriptions of Java (Corpus Inscriptionum Javanicarum) (up to 928 A.D.). Volume 1. Calcutta: KLM.
1980 ‘The migration of the Rāmāyaṇa story to Indonesia and some problems connected with the structure and contents of the Old-Javanese Rāmāyaṇa’, in: V. Raghavan 1980, pp. 103–21.
Sastri, Anantakrishna
1940 Pasupata Sutras with Pancharthabhashya of Kaundinya. Trivandrum: The Oriental Manuscripts Library of the University of Travancore.
Schlingloff, D.


1988 Studies in the Ajanta paintings; Identifications and interpretations. Delhi:
Ajanta Publications.
Schulte Nordholt, H.


2005 Bali; An open fortress, 1995–2005. Singapore: Singapore University Press.
Sears, L.J.
1986 Text and performance in Javanese shadow theatre; Changing authorities in an oral tradition. PhD thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Sears, L.J. and J.B. Flueckiger
1991 ‘Introduction’, in: Boundariesof the text; Epicperformancein Southand Southeast Asia, pp. 1–16. Ann Arbor: Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies.
Setianingsih, R.M.
1989 ‘Telaah Singkat Prasasti Dawangsari’, in: Pertemuan Ilmiah Arheologi V (Yogyakarta, 4–7 Juli 1989); II A. Kajian Arkeologi Indonesia, pp. 143–55. Ikatan Ahli Arkeologi Indonesia. Shastri, Hari Prasad


1970 The Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki, Vol. III; The Yuddha Kanda and Uttara Kanda.
London: Shanti Sadan.
Shulman, D.
2001 ‘Bhavabhūti on cruelty and compassion’, in: P. Richman (ed), Questioning Rāmāyaṇas; A South Asian tradition, pp. 49–82. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Singaravelu, Sachithanantham
2004 The Ramayana tradition in Southeast Asia. Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya Press.
Soekmono, Raden


1995 The Javanese candi. Leiden: Brill.
Söhnen, R.
1995 ‘On the concept and presentation of yamaka in early Indian poetic theory’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 58:495–520.
Stutterheim, W.F.


1925 Rāma-Legenden und Rāma-Reliefs in Indonesien. München: Müller. [2 vols.]
1928 ‘De plaatsing der Rama-reliefs van tjandi Lara-Djonggrang en de zonneomloop’, BKI 84:118–31.


1956 Studies in Indonesian archaeology. The Hague: Nijhoff.
1989 Rāma-legends and Rāma-reliefs in Indonesia. New Delhi: Indira Gandhi National Centre for Arts and Abhinav Publications. [2 vols.] Sudarshana Devi


1957 Wṛhaspati-tattwa, an Old Javanese philosophical text. Nagpur: IAIC.
Sugianti, Sri
1999 Ramayana reliefs Candi Siwa, Prambanan. Jakarta: Department of Education and Culture.
Suleiman, Satyawati
1976 The Pendopo Terrace of Panataran. Jakarta: Proyek Pelita Pembinaan Kepurbakalaan dan Peninggalan Nasional.
Sundberg, J.R.
2003 ‘A Buddhist mantra recovered from the Ratu Baka plateau; A preliminary study of its implications for Śailendra-era Java’, BKI 159:163–88.
2004 ‘The wilderness monks of the Abhayagirivihāra and the origins of Sino-Javanese esoteric Buddhism’, BKI 160:95–123.


2006 ‘Considerations on the dating of the Barabuḍur stūpa’, BKI 162:95–132.
2009 ‘Appendix A; The State of Matarām: A review of recent efforts to clarify its history’, in: M. Long, Caṇḍi Mendut; Womb of the Tathāgata, pp. 329–62. New Delhi: Aditya Prakashan.
Supomo, Suryo


1977 Arjunawijaya; A kakawin of Mpu Tantular. The Hague: Nijhoff. [2 vols.]
1985 ‘Kāmadidalamkekawin’, in:SulastinSutrisno, DarusupraptoandSudaryanto (eds), Bahasa-sastra-budaya, ratna manikam untaian persembahan kepada Prof. Dr. P.J. Zoetmulder, pp. 383–414. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.
1993 Bhāratayuddha; An Old Javanese poem and its Indian sources. New Delhi: IAIC and Aditya Prakashan.
2000 ‘Kāma in Old Javanese kakawin’, in: Lokesh Chandra (ed), Society and culture of Southeast Asia, pp. 263–81. New Delhi: IAIC and Aditya Prakashan.
2001 ‘Some problems in writing about contemporary life as depicted in the Sumanasāntaka’, BKI 157:113–29. Tagare, G.V.


1995 The Skanda-Purāṇa. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.
Teeuw, A.


1993 Review of T.J. Hudak 1990, BKI 149:187–8.
1998 ‘An Old Javanese poem on chronogram words’, in: M. Janse and A. Verlinden (eds), Productivity and Creativity; Studies in general and descriptive linguistics in honor of E.M. Uhlenbeck, pp. 369–92. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Teeuw, A. and S.O. Robson
1981 Kuñjarakarna Dharmakathana; Liberation through the law of the Buddha; An Old Javanese poem by Mpu Dusun. The Hague: Nijhoff.
2005 Bhomāntaka. The death of Bhoma. Leiden: KITLV Press. Teeuw, A. et al.
1969 Śiwarātrikalpa of Mpu Tanakuṅ; An Old Javanese poem, its Indian sources and Balinese illustrations. The Hague: Nijhoff.
Terwiel, B.J.
1996 ‘The introduction of Sanskrit prosody among the Thais’, in: J.E.M. Houben (ed), Ideology and status of Sanskrit; Contributions to the history of the Sanskrit language, pp. 307–26. Leiden/New York/Köln: Brill.
Toru, O.
1994 ‘The Burmese versions of the Rāma story and their peculiarities’, in: U. Gärtner and J. Lorenz (eds), Tradition and modernity in Myanmar, pp. 305–26.
Berlin: Berliner Asien-Afrika-Studien.
Tubb, G.
2003 ‘Kāvya with bells on; Yamaka in the Śiśupālavadha’. Working draft prepared for the Research Group on Sanskrit Poetry of the Institute for Advanced Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Tuuk, H.N. van der
1896–1912 Kawi-Balineesch-Nederlandsch woordenboek. Batavia: Landsdrukkerij. [4 vols.] Uhlenbeck, E.M.
1986 ‘Clitic, suffix and particle; Some indispensable distinctions in Old Javanese grammar’, in: C.M.S. Hellwig and S.O. Robson (eds), A man of Indonesian letters; Essays in honour of Professor A. Teeuw, pp. 334–41. Dordrecht, Holland and Cinnaminson, USA: Foris.
Vickers, A.
1979 Kerta Gosa; The ordered realm. BA (Hons) Thesis, Department of Indonesian and Malayan Studies, The University of Sydney.
1980 ‘I Gusti Madé Deblog; Artistic manifestations of change in Bali’, Review of Indonesian and Malaysian Affairs 14:1–47.
1982 ‘A Balinese illustrated manuscript of the Śiwarātrikalpa’, BKI 138:443–69. 2005 Journeys of desire; A study of the Balinese text Malat. Leiden: KITLV. Vogel, J.Ph.


1921 ‘Het eerste Rāma relief van Prambanan’, BKI 77:202–15.
Vries Robbé, A. de


1984 ‘Teja in de beeldende kunst van Indonesië’, BKI 140:276–88.
Weatherbee, D.E.
2000 ‘The Hyang Haji of the Gandasuli ii inscription’, in: Lokesh Chandra (ed), Society and culture of Southeast Asia; Continuities and changes, pp. 345–53. New Delhi: IAIC and Aditya Prakashan.
Winstedt, R.O.


1929 ‘A Patani version of the Rāmāyaṇa’, in: Feestbundel Koninklijk Bataviaasch
Genootschapvan Kunstenen Wetenschappen, pp.423–34. Weltevreden: Kolff.
Wisseman Christie, J.
2001 ‘Revisiting early Mataram’, in: M.J. Klokke and K.R. van Kooij (eds), Fruits of inspiration; Studies in honour of Prof. J.G. de Casparis, pp. 25–55. Groningen:
Egbert Forsten.
Witkam, J.J.
2006–07 Inventory of the oriental manuscripts of the library of the University of Leiden. [1] Worsley, P.
1986 ‘Narrative bas-reliefs at Candi Surawana’, in: D.G. Marr and A.C. Milner (eds), Southeast Asia in the 9th to 14th centuries, pp. 335–67. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
1996 ‘On the ordering of the narrative reliefs at Candi Surowono, East Java, a response to Marijke Klokke, ‘‘On the Orientation of Ancient Javanese Temples: The example of Candi Surowono’’, IIAS Yearbook 1994’, in: P. van der Velde (ed), IIAS Yearbook 1995, pp. 220–3. Leiden: IIAS.
2006 ‘Cosmopolitan Vernacular Culture and Illustrations of the Rāma Story at Caṇḍi Loro Jonggrang, Prambanan. Part 2: The marriage of the crown prince and the succession in polygamous royal households’, in: H. Chambert-Loir and B. Dagens (eds), Anamorphoses; Hommage à Jacques Dumarçay, pp. 227– 39. Paris: Les Indes Savantes. Wulandari, R.A.


2001 Hariśraya (A); A Balinese kakawin. MA thesis, Australian National Univer-
sity.
Zieseniss, A.
1963 The Rāma saga in Malaysia; Its origin and development (English translation by P.W. Burch). Singapore: Malaysian Sociological Research Institute Ltd.
Zoetmulder, P.J.


1974 Kalangwan; A survey of Old Javanese literature. The Hague: Nijhoff.
1982 Old Javanese-English dictionary. (With the collaboration of S.O. Robson). The Hague: Nijhoff. [2 vols.] Zurbuchen, M.S.
1987 The language of Balinese shadow theater. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
 
V E R H A N D E L I N G E N

VAN HET KONINKLIJK INSTITUUT

VOOR TAAL-, LAND- EN VOLKENKUNDE


From Laṅkā Eastwards
The Rāmāyaṇa in the Literature and Visual Arts of Indonesia
Edited by
Andrea Acri
Helen Creese
Arlo Griffiths
 
KITLV Press
Leiden
2011
Published by:
KITLV Press
Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde
(Royal Netherlands Institute of Southeast Asian and Caribbean Studies)
PO Box 9515
2300 RA Leiden The Netherlands website: www.kitlv.nl e-mail: kitlvpress@kitlv.nl
KITLV is an institute of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
(KNAW)
 
Typeset by Andrea Acri in ‘Adobe Minion Pro’ using XLATEX
Cover: Creja Ontwerpen, Leiderdorp
Cover photo: Rāmāyaṇa relief at Caṇḍi Śiva, Prambanan Photo by Andrea Acri (2003)
ISBN 978-90-6718-384-0
KITLVPressappliestheCreativeCommonsAttribution-NonCommercialNoDerivs 3.0 Unported License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-ncnd/3.0) to books, published in or after January 2011.
Authors retain ownership of the copyright for their articles, but they permit anyone unrestricted use and distribution within the terms of this license.
Printed in the Netherlands
CONTENTS
About the authors vii
Introduction xi
Part i
Old Javanese Kakawin and the Kakawin RāmāyaṆa
Hymns of Praise in Kakawins
The Rāmāyaṇa and Other Examples


Stuart Robson 1
Poetic Conventions as Opposed to Conventional Poetry?
A Place for kavisamaya-ādi in Comparative Kāvya/Kakawin Studies


Wesley Michel 11
Figures of Repetition (yamaka) in the Bhaṭṭikāvya, the Raghuvaṃśa, the Śiwagṛha Inscription and the Kakawin Rāmāyaṇa


Thomas Hunter 25
More on Birds, Ascetics and Kings in Central Java
Kakavin Rāmāyaṇa, 24.111–115 and 25.19–22


Andrea Acri 53
Rāmāyaṇa Traditions in Bali


Helen Creese 93
The Old Javanese Kapiparwa and a Recent Balinese Painting


Adrian Vickers 119
vi Contents
Part ii
The RāmāyaṆa at CaṆḌi Prambanan and CaṆḌi Panataran
Imagine Laṅkapura at Prambanan


Arlo Griffiths 133
The Grand Finale
The Uttarakāṇḍa of the Loro Jonggrang Temple Complex


Cecelia Levin 149
The Causeway Episode of the Prambanan Rāmāyaṇa Reexamined


Roy Jordaan 179
Hanuman, the Flying Monkey
The Symbolism of the Rāmāyaṇa Reliefs at the Main Temple of Caṇḍi Panataran


Lydia Kieven 209
Abbreviations 233
Bibliography 235
Index 253



Source