Salakanagara, (Konon) Kerajaan Tertua di Indonesia & Polemik Naskah Wangsakerta

Summary

The video script delves into the historical debate over the oldest kingdom in the Indonesian archipelago. It challenges the long-held belief that Ancient Kutai is the oldest, introducing the lesser-known Salakanagara as a contender. Despite archaeological and foreign news supporting Salakanagara's existence, the video critically examines the historical sources, including the Wangsakerta Manuscript, which is suspected of being a dubious source. The script urges viewers to approach historical claims with skepticism and to respect the meticulous work of historians in validating historical narratives.

Takeaways

• 🏰 The Ancient Kutai Kingdom in East Kalimantan is traditionally considered the oldest in the Indonesian archipelago, founded around the 4-5th century AD.
• 🌟 The Salakanagara Kingdom, claimed to have existed in West Java before Ancient Kutai, challenges the status of the oldest kingdom with evidence from various sources.
• 🔍 Archaeological sites in West Java are suggested to be remnants of the Salakanagara Kingdom, but their connection is disputed due to stylistic inconsistencies.
• 📜 No inscriptions from the Salakanagara era have been found, which weakens its historical claim compared to Ancient Kutai and Tarumanegara.
• 🌐 Foreign historical sources like Claudius Ptolemaeus's Geographica and Chinese Chronicles mention places that might correspond to Salakanagara, but their reliability is questioned.
• 📖 The Wangsakerta Manuscript is the primary source attributing the history of Salakanagara, but it is criticized for its dubious origins and inconsistencies.
• 🕵️‍♂️ The Wangsakerta Manuscript is suspected to be a modern fabrication, possibly written between 1938 and 1970, due to its inclusion of theories and findings from those periods.
• 🗝️ The manuscript's discovery and acquisition by the museum raise questions about its authenticity and the motives behind its creation.
• 🏆 Despite the claims of Salakanagara's existence, the lack of strong historical evidence maintains Ancient Kutai and Tarumanegara as the oldest known kingdoms in the region.
• 📚 The video script emphasizes the importance of rigorous historical analysis and the need for stronger evidence to validate the existence of the Salakanagara Kingdom.

Q & A

Salakanagara王国是在何时何地被认为建立的？

Salakanagara王国被认为在公元130年左右在西爪哇建立。

Salakanagara王国的创始人是谁？

Salakanagara王国的创始人是Dewawarman，他是一位来自印度Pallawa王朝的旅行大使、商人和移民。

Salakanagara王国的文明区域与哪个现代文化区域相同？

Salakanagara文明区域与Sunda族（西爪哇的土著民族）的文明区域相同。

Salakanagara王国存在了多久？

Salakanagara王国从公元130年到公元362年存在，大约持续了232年。

Salakanagara王国的首都是什么？

Salakanagara王国的首都被认为是Rajatapura。

Salakanagara王国的名字有什么含义？

Salakanagara的名字来源于梵文，其中'salaka'意味着银，'nagara'意味着国家或城市，因此Salakanagara意为银国或银之城。

Salakanagara王国的历史记录有哪些争议？

Salakanagara王国的历史记录存在争议，主要是因为支持其存在的主要历史来源是Wangsakerta手稿，该手稿的有效性受到质疑。此外，考古遗址和外国历史记录并没有提供足够的证据来支持Salakanagara王国的存在。

Wangsakerta手稿是什么？

Wangsakerta手稿是一部在17世纪编写的文献，其中首次提到了Salakanagara和Dewawarman的名字。然而，这份手稿被认为是一个非常弱的历史来源，因为它是在Salakanagara时代大约1500年之后编写的，而且手稿的真实性和准确性受到质疑。

Salakanagara王国与Tarumanegara王国有什么关系？

Salakanagara王国被认为在公元362年左右被Tarumanegara王国所取代。Tarumanegara是由来自印度Calankayana的Maharesi Jayasinghawarman于公元358年建立的。

Salakanagara王国的历史在现代有什么意义？

Salakanagara王国的历史在现代仍然具有意义，因为它被认为是印尼最古老的王国之一，对研究印尼早期历史和文化有重要价值。尽管其存在性存在争议，但它仍然是印尼历史讨论的一部分。

Outlines

00:00

🏰 The Emergence of Salakanagara: A Challenge to Ancient Kutai's Legacy

This paragraph introduces the historical debate over the oldest kingdom in the Indonesian archipelago. Traditionally, Ancient Kutai in East Kalimantan is recognized as the oldest, dating back to the 4-5th century AD. However, the Salakanagara kingdom, said to have existed in West Java before Ancient Kutai, has emerged as a new contender. The paragraph recounts the story of Dewawarman, an Indian knight from the Pallawa dynasty, who married into the local leadership and subsequently founded Salakanagara in 130 AD. It also mentions the lack of inscriptions and the dubious nature of archaeological evidence attributed to Salakanagara, questioning the kingdom's existence and its impact on the historical narrative.

05:02

🔍 Debunking the Historical Claims of Salakanagara

The second paragraph delves into the critical analysis of the historical sources that are purported to support the existence of the Salakanagara kingdom. It discusses the absence of inscriptions and the unreliability of archaeological evidence, which do not align with the cultural and religious practices associated with Dewawarman. The paragraph also addresses the weaknesses of foreign sources like Claudius Ptolemaeus's 'Geographica' and the Chinese Chronicle of the Han dynasty, which are not considered strong evidence due to their lack of direct connection and the potential for misinterpretation. The discussion highlights the importance of robust historical sources in validating historical claims.

10:03

📜 The Wangsakerta Manuscript: A Dubious Historical Source

This paragraph scrutinizes the Wangsakerta Manuscript, which is the primary source claiming the existence of the Salakanagara kingdom. It points out various inconsistencies and anachronisms within the manuscript, such as its use of modern paper, its detailed and seemingly impossible historical accounts, and its incorporation of theories that were developed long after the alleged compilation period. The paragraph raises serious doubts about the authenticity of the manuscript, suggesting that it may have been fabricated in the 20th century, and thus cannot be relied upon as evidence for Salakanagara's history.

15:03

🏛️ The Enduring Legacy of Ancient Kutai and Tarumanegara

The final paragraph concludes the discussion by reaffirming the historical primacy of Ancient Kutai in East Kalimantan and Tarumanegara in West Java, which are supported by stronger historical evidence. It emphasizes the importance of rigorous historical research and the need for credible evidence in establishing historical narratives. The paragraph also calls for patience and restraint in attributing new archaeological findings to Salakanagara without solid proof, advocating for an honest and evidence-based approach to history.

Keywords

💡Ancient Kutai

Ancient Kutai refers to one of the oldest kingdoms in the Indonesian archipelago, believed to have been founded around the 4th-5th century AD in East Kalimantan. It is historically significant as it represents an early Indianized state with evidence from inscriptions and archaeological remains. The video discusses Ancient Kutai in the context of its historical precedence and compares it with the emerging claim of Salakanagara as an even older kingdom.

💡Salakanagara

Salakanagara is a kingdom that is claimed by some to be the oldest in the Indonesian archipelago, potentially predating Ancient Kutai. The video explores the historical validity of Salakanagara's existence, examining various sources such as archaeological remains, foreign news, and ancient manuscripts. The term is used in the script to highlight the controversy and the need for stronger historical evidence to support its claim as the oldest kingdom.

💡Archaeological Remains

Archaeological remains are physical evidence of past human activity, such as artifacts, structures, and features, which are used to study and interpret history. In the video, archaeological remains are discussed as a primary source for validating the existence of historical kingdoms like Salakanagara. The absence of direct archaeological evidence linking to Salakanagara is a point of contention in the video.

💡Inscriptions

Inscriptions refer to texts or symbols inscribed on various materials like stone, metal, or clay, which provide historical and cultural information. The video mentions inscriptions as a crucial form of primary historical evidence. It contrasts the well-documented inscriptions of Ancient Kutai with the lack of similar findings for Salakanagara, casting doubt on the latter's historical claims.

💡Foreign News

Foreign news in a historical context refers to accounts or reports about a region or kingdom by external observers or travelers. The video discusses foreign news as a secondary source of historical evidence, citing examples such as Claudius Ptolemaeus's 'Geographica' and Chinese chronicles. These sources are analyzed for their reliability and relevance to the existence of Salakanagara.

💡Wangsakerta Manuscript

The Wangsakerta Manuscript is a historical document that is central to the discussion of Salakanagara's existence. The video scrutinizes the manuscript as the primary source claiming Salakanagara's history, highlighting its controversial nature and the doubts surrounding its authenticity and the timing of its creation. The manuscript's role is pivotal in the debate over Salakanagara's historical standing.

💡Historical Sources

Historical sources are materials used by historians to study and write about the past. They can include a wide range of materials, from written documents and inscriptions to oral traditions and physical artifacts. The video discusses the hierarchy of historical sources, emphasizing the need for strong, primary sources to validate historical claims. It critiques the reliance on secondary sources for the history of Salakanagara.

💡Dewawarman

Dewawarman is a figure mentioned in the context of the Salakanagara kingdom as a leader from India who is said to have founded the kingdom after marrying into a local royal family. The video uses the story of Dewawarman to illustrate the narrative around the establishment of Salakanagara, while also questioning the historical accuracy of this account.

💡Tarumanegara

Tarumanegara is another ancient kingdom in Indonesia, contemporaneous with Ancient Kutai, and mentioned in the video as a comparator to Salakanagara. The existence of Tarumanegara is better documented with inscriptions and archaeological evidence, which the video contrasts with the disputed history of Salakanagara.

💡Historiography

Historiography is the study of the methods used by historians to research, analyze, and write history. The video touches upon historiography when discussing the process of evaluating historical sources and the construction of historical narratives. It emphasizes the importance of critical analysis in historiography, especially in evaluating the claims about Salakanagara.

Highlights

Ancient Kutai is traditionally considered the oldest kingdom in the Indonesian archipelago, founded around the 4-5th century AD.

The Salakanagara kingdom is a new contender for the title of the oldest kingdom, claimed to have existed in West Java over 200 years before Ancient Kutai.

Archaeological remains, foreign news, and ancient manuscripts are used to support the existence of Salakanagara.

The story of Dewawarman, a knight from India, is central to the Salakanagara narrative, with his marriage to a local leader's daughter and the subsequent founding of the kingdom in 130 AD.

Salakanagara's end is linked to its defeat by Tarumanegara, another ancient Javanese kingdom, but no victory record exists in Tarumanegara's inscriptions.

Dewawarman's descendants are said to have founded both Tarumanegara and Kutai kingdoms, suggesting complex historical connections.

The existence of Salakanagara is questioned due to the lack of inscriptions and foreign news, unlike other ancient kingdoms.

Archaeological sites in West Java, such as Cihunjuran and Cipeucang, are considered by some to be relics of Salakanagara, but their connection is disputed.

Claudius Ptolemaeus' Geographica and Chinese Chronicles of the Han dynasty are cited as foreign news supporting Salakanagara, but their reliability is debated.

The Wangsakerta Manuscript is the primary historical source for Salakanagara, but it is criticized for its dubious age, content, and discovery.

The manuscript's use of modern Dutch historical theories and its detailed, anachronistic content raise questions about its authenticity.

The discovery of the Wangsakerta Manuscript in the 1970s and its purchase by a museum head for a significant sum is surrounded by mystery.

Critics argue that the manuscript was likely written between 1938 and 1970, based on the historical knowledge available at the time.

The absence of the manuscript's supplier and the untraceable origin add to the skepticism regarding the Salakanagara narrative.

Historians emphasize the importance of strong historical sources and the need for caution in accepting new archaeological findings as evidence of Salakanagara.

The video concludes that until stronger evidence is found, Ancient Kutai and Tarumanegara remain the oldest known kingdoms in the archipelago.

The video calls for honest historical inquiry and respect for the meticulous work of historians in validating historical sources.

Transcripts

In school, we are taught that

the oldest kingdom in the archipelago is Ancient Kutai,

which was founded in East Kalimantan around the 4-5th century AD.

However, recently a new candidate has emerged,

namely the kingdom of Salakanagara,

which is said to have existed in West Java for more than 200 years. before.

Various archaeological remains, foreign news, to ancient manuscripts

were used to prove this kingdom really existed.

Will Ancient Kutai be ousted from his throne as the oldest kingdom?

Okay friends, we are still in Indonesia,

and we will uncover the facts, hoaxes,

and scandals behind the Salakanagara kingdom.

Come on!

A peaceful fishing village on the edge of the Sunda Strait,

suddenly went into a commotion.

A group of pirates came to raid people's homes

and looted their property.

Fortunately, at that time, a group of knights from India appeared,

led by Dewawarman, from the Pallawa dynasty.

They immediately beat the ungodly,

and the pirates ran helter-skelter.

The villagers were very grateful,

and Aki Tirem, the village leader,

then married Dewawarman to his daughter, Pwahaci Larasati.

Dewawarman's men also married local women,

and settled in the village.

Well, the people of Aki Tirem are then told to change their beliefs

and embrace Indian culture.

After Aki Tirem died, Dewawarman became ruler

and founded the kingdom of Salakanagara in 130 AD.

On the basis of this story,

Salakanagara is considered the oldest kingdom in the archipelago.

Here, the kings of Salakanagara.

This kingdom is said to have ended after being defeated by Tarumanegara,

a kingdom in West Java that emerged around the same time

as Ancient Kutai in Kalimantan.

But, strangely enough, the Tarumanegara kingdom did

not record this victory at all in the inscription.

In fact, it is said that it was Dewawarman's own son-in-law who founded Tarumanagara.

And, it is said again,

that Dewawarman's son, Aswawarman,

went to Kalimantan and became Kundungga's son-in-law,

then founded the Kutai kingdom.

This is even more strange,

because in the Muara Kaman Inscription we have discussed

in the link above or in the description

Aswawarman is Kundungga's biological son,

not his son-in-law.

The Ancient Kutai Kingdom also had no connection whatsoever with West Java.

So, does the Salakanagara kingdom really exist or not?

Come on, let's put on our detective hats

and start investigating!

Every historical claim must be supported

by a strong historical source.

If the source is weak and dubious,

the truth is doubted.

And it turns out that historical sources have different values, you know.

This is, here, the ranking of historical sources.

The higher you go, the stronger.

The lower you go, the weaker you get.

Let's explore the historical sources that support Salakanagara.

First, the inscription.

Well, unlike Tarumanegara & Ancient Kutai,

no inscriptions have been found from the Salakanagara era.

Second, archaeological evidence.

In West Java, there are several sites that are considered to

be relics of the Salakanagara kingdom.

For example, the Cihunjuran

site, the Cipeucang stone bed

site, the Lebak Kosala

site, the Lebak Sibedug site,

and most recently,

a statue of an elephant head which is thought to be a statue of Ganesha

in Pandeglang, Banten.

Third, contemporary foreign news.

Claudius Ptolemaeus (c 100 - c 170 AD) in the Geographica

mentions a place called Argyre Chora,

or the Land of Silver.

Well, this is considered suitable with Salakanagara,

because salaka means silver, and nagara means country.

In addition, the Chinese Chronicle of the Han dynasty (131 AD)

records a place called Ye Diao

with its king named Diao Bian.

Ye Diao is also considered a term for Jawadwipa,

and Diao Bian is equated with Dewawarman.

Actually there is one more source from within the country,

but we will discuss it later.

Let's dissect the sources first.

First, all the archaeological sites mentioned above,

unfortunately have nothing to do with Salakanagara.

Some are remnants of the megalithic era,

which are purely Austronesian in style.

So it doesn't work,

because Dewawarman is a native Hindu from India.

Well, some other remains,

including the Ganesha statue in Pandeglang,

are actually very trimurti-style.

In fact, if it is true that Salakanagara is still related to Ancient Kutai,

surely the Dewawarman family still embraces early Vedic Hinduism

and worships angsuman, the Sun God,

like the kings of Ancient Kutai.

The worship of the Trimurti itself

was only detected in the Sundanese region in the 7th century,

so that any archaeological remains of the Trimurti pattern,

even though they are located in West Java,

cannot be associated with Salakanagara.

Second, Ptolemaeus had never been to Southeast Asia.

He simply continued the work of previous geographers,

plus news from travelers.

The world he knew also did not describe Southeast Asia.

Even if we insist that the Argyre Chora is a translation of Salakanagara,

we need to know

that what Ptolemy called not only the Argyre Chora,

but also the Chryse Chora, or the land of gold.

The location is not mentioned, not

even the characteristics,

so it's a bit random if it is associated with Salakanagara.

Third, in the Han Dynasty chronicles,

Diao Bian does not have to be translated as Dewawarman,

because the name Dewawarman comes from a secondary source,

which we will discuss in a moment.

I myself do not find Han Dynasty records on Java

in Groeneveldt's book.

Now, let's compare the three old kingdoms,

namely Ancient Kutai, Tarumanegara, and Salakanagara.

Ancient Kutai and Tarumanagara both inscriptions and archaeological remains exist.

Tarumanagara is also in Chinese chronicles.

So, the existence of these two kingdoms was quite strong.

What about Salakanagara?

There are no inscriptions, and no foreign news.

So it is clear, yes,

the existence of Salakanagara is not supported by strong historical sources.

Then how the story of this kingdom can stick to the surface?

All because of the Wangsakerta Manuscript.

Come on, prepare your detective hat

to investigate with me:

The real story behind the Wangsakerta manuscript

which is the only historical source of Salakanagara.

And is it true that this manuscript was deliberately concealed

so that it would not be damaged and distorted by the Dutch?

But before that, don't forget to SUBSCRIBE, LIKE, AND SHARE

Also click the link above if you want to support us in terms of funding,

to develop a channel that will enrich your perspective.

It is said that in the 17th century,

Prince Wangsakerta from the Cirebon kingdom

gathered a number of scholars.

For 21 years,

starting from 1677 to 1698,

they tried to compile the history of the kingdoms in the archipelago.

Their hard work resulted in the Wangsakerta Manuscript,

which consists of 5 books.

One of them is the Rajya-Rajya i Bhumi Nusantara Library.

Well, in the book "Rajya-Rajya" this is

the first time the names Salakanagara and Dewawarman are mentioned.

If this statement is correct,

it means that this manuscript was only written 1,500 years after the Salakanagara era.

So, the Wangsakerta Manuscript is actually a very, very weak source!

And, many people don't know,

maybe you too,

that this script has so many oddities.

Want to know?

Inappropriate Age of Manuscript

The Wangsakerta manuscript uses ancient Javanese language and script,

but strangely, according to Epigraph Boechari, it

was written on manila paper.

Historian MC Ricklefs (1943 – 2019)

also mentions that this manuscript is not from the 17th century,

because the writing is rough.

The National Archives of the Republic of Indonesia have tested the paper material,

and as a result,

this manuscript is about 100 years old,

so the oldest is in the 19th century AD.

So it does not match

the initial recognition that the Wangsakerta Manuscript was written in the 17th century.

The existence of the Wangsakerta Committee, No Makes sense

According to the information in the text,

the compilers, or the Wangsakerta Committee,

came from all over the archipelago,

and each region sent 70 delegates.

Imagine, how many regions are there in the archipelago times 70?

So there are hundreds or even thousands of people

who have gathered in Cirebon for 21 years

to compose the manuscript.

Wow!

Historian Nina Lubis was also surprised,

how come such a large deliberation was not recorded in the VOC records?

In fact, the VOC was still paranoid about the crowd

after the Trunojoyo rebellion which was exhausting for body and soul.

The Content of the Manuscript is Too Detailed

Well, this is what most makes historians shake their heads.

The Wangsakerta manuscript is so detailed that it describes the history of Indonesia,

from the creation of the world, classical

kingdoms to 17th century kingdoms,

like a modern history book.

Even ancient times that contained ape-men were discussed.

Is it logical that in the 17th century,

when our nation was not familiar with modern education

and fossils of ape man had not been found,

there were thousands of indigenous scholars who had historical memories so far?

The poet of the Babad Tanah Jawi alone,

who is only 45 years from the Wangsakerta committee,

is unable to remember the history of Majapahit accurately.

Javanese society in the 17th century

also only knew legends

that were out of sync with modern historical narratives.

So, isn't it strange that in the 17th century,

in Cirebon, thousands of Bumiputras gathered

with such complete historical references?

Starting from prehistoric times to the time of the sultanate, it was cleared away.

Which is only possible

if there is Doctor Strange on the Wangsakerta Committee.

Pro-Foreign Historian Manuscripts?

The Wangsakerta manuscript is also considered odd

because a lot of Dutch historians' thoughts were absorbed there,

complete with all its mistakes.

According to the epigrapher Boechari,

there are many historical errors in this manuscript

which actually came from the Dutch historian's mistake

in reading the inscription.

For example, the Wangsakerta Manuscript mentions

that the wife of King Airlangga was originally from Sriwijaya,

and was named Sanggramawijaya.

This is clearly CC Berg's theory from 1938.

Epigraf Boechari later debunked that theory

and identified Sanggramawijaya as the son of Airlangga.

This is more in line with community tradition,

which equates Sanggramawijaya with Dewi Kilisuci,

Airlangga's daughter who became a hermit.

Even more strange,

the Wangsakerta Manuscript describes the history of the Srivijaya kingdom in detail.

Even though this kingdom has been lost for hundreds of years from historical memory,

and its existence was only revealed by George Cœdès

in 1918.

The Wangsakerta committee also knew the history of the ancient Kutai kingdom,

even before the Muarakaman inscription was discovered in 1879.

Wow…

could there really be Doctor Strange among them ? they.

Uniquely, the effort that the Wangsakerta Committee has put in place for 21 years

involved thousands of people from all over the archipelago,

only resulting in a pile of manuscripts

that no one had accessed

for hundreds of years,

and only appeared in the 70's,

and even then, only copies.

You see, Mas Asisi,

this manuscript was deliberately hidden

because if the Dutch found out, it would have been destroyed

so that our history could be easily distorted.

Well, it's even weirder.

Why did the Dutch destroy the Wangsakerta Manuscript,

whose contents were in line with the thoughts of Dutch scholars?

So obviously yes,

the Wangsakerta Manuscript, is a dubious historical source,

even considered a fake.

So, when was the wangsakerta actually written?

Epigraph Boechari in his criticism of this manuscript

mentions that all archaeological finds above the year 1970

are not in the Wangsakerta Manuscript.

So, the Wangsakerta Manuscript is only able to compile history

based on findings under 1970.

Then, with CC Berg's theory being picked up from 1938

regarding the relationship between Airlangga and Sanggramawijaya,

Surely the Wangsakerta Manuscript was written after 1938. It's getting

more and more revealed, isn't it, now?

Most likely,

the Wangsakerta Manuscript was written by modern people

between 1938 and 1970.

Well, at that time our history was quite well established.

So that the author of the Wangsakerta Manuscript can easily

draw on various sources

to support the existence of Salakanagara.

The Mystery of the Discovery of the Wangsakerta Manuscript

In a paper entitled Controversy About the Wangsakerta Manuscript

written by historian Nina Herlina Lubis, is

described in detail the origin of the discovery of this manuscript.

A museum head buys Wangsakerta manuscripts through an intermediary.

And when I searched the news in 1988,

I found that each manuscript was priced at IDR 1 - 2.5 million.

According to philologist Ayatrohaedi, there are a total of 1700 manuscripts.

In the 70's, the money was really big.

And the funds are taken from the APBD or APBN,

people's money.

Unfortunately, when historians finally discovered the falsity of the manuscript,

the identity of the supplier was not traced,

even now.

But despite all that, now we know,

of course without reducing respect

for those who believe in the existence of Salakanagara,

the existence of the Salakanagara kingdom is still in doubt,

until stronger supporting evidence is found.

While waiting for the evidence,

for now the record for the oldest kingdoms in the archipelago

still belongs to Kutai Ancient in East Kalimantan,

and Tarumanagara in West Java.

Now my friends know

how carefully our historians work

to ensure the validity of historical sources.

What we have shared in the Source Critic video at the link above

is the simplest version.

The original was much more complicated

and involved many more disciplines. Many

of the old theories from Dutch historians have

been countered by our historians,

after new findings.

So, I wonder

if anyone accuses our history of being distorted by the invaders.

How could the invaders be deflected

when our historians are as competent and careful as this?

If you want to be honest,

it's actually a hoax, a logical fit, and an obfuscation of history, the

culprits are our own people.

Try sharing in the comments,

what hoaxes and matches do you often find on YouTube or on social media?

Even though some of us are currently

promoting Salakanagara as a historical kingdom,

we should give historians room to work,

without rushing to claim

every new archaeological finding in West Java

as a Salakanagara heritage.

After all, West Java still has Tarumanagara,

which still holds the title of the oldest kingdom in Java

and has a very proud history.

Let's be historic honestly, and as it is.

Because dishonesty,

although beautifully

and convincingly wrapped,

will always find a way

to be exposed.