• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

SOAS Bulletin of Burma Research, Vol. 3, No. 2, Autumn 2005, ISSN 1479-8484 Editorial Note One goal of the SBBR is to make available the unpublished M.A. theses that abound in university libraries but rarely reach the general academic audience. One concern might be that the thesis, especially if published many years after its submission will be taken and critiqued as a representation of the latest in one’s body of research. Clearly, understandings and abilities change over time. To offset this, the original month and year of submission in theses published in the SBBR will be included in the title in parantheses. Citation of a thesis so published in the SBBR must include “(as submitted in month + year)” to be considered a fair use of the material. Of course, this also requires that the thesis printed here must be in its original, unedited form (with the exception of minor spelling or format changes). I have included my M.A. thesis as the first, in order to encourage others to follow course. The thesis was written in 1992-1993 under the supervision of William H. Frederick and Elizabeth Collins at Ohio University and defended in June 1993. By that time, I had only studied Thai, French, and Spanish at the university level and, using Spanish, proceeded to study Portuguese on my own. Thus, while Iberian sources are used here frequently, Burmese sources were not, save for in translation (my study of Burmese would not begin until SEASSI in the summer of 1994 at Wisconsin-Madison). Another piece, an article based again on Iberian sources was written in 1993 and published in the Journal of Asian History in 1994.1 Thereafter began a long struggle with Arakanese chronicles and revised interpretations of Arakanese history. The major problem in writing the thesis, however, was that other than several useful pieces by Pamela Gutman on art history, numismatics, and an inscription, and a study of Buddhist art by U San Tha Aung,2 all focused 1 “The 1598-1599 Siege of Pegu and the Expansion of Arakanese Imperial Power into Lower Burma.” Journal of Asian History 28 (1994): 39-57. 2 See Pamela Gutman. “The Ancient Coinage of Southeast Asia.” Journal of the Siam Society 66, pt. 1 (January, 1978): 8-21; idem, “Symbolism of Kingship in Arakan.” In David G. Marr & A. C. Milner (eds.). Southeast Asia in the 9th to 14th Centuries. (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1986): 279-88. Pam’s dissertation was still unavailable to me at the time I submitted my thesis; San Tha Aung, The Buddhist Art ©1993 & 2005 Michael W. Charney SOAS BULLETIN OF BURMA RESEARCH 975 on a period far earlier than the one I was examining, almost nothing had been written on Arakan, aside from Burmese-language studies unavailable to me at the time, since 1967, or about twenty-six years earlier, and, moreover, very few items had been published since the 1920s. Without a strong body of secondary work to provide theory to bounce off of or a linear narrative to provide context, much of 1992 and early 1993 was spent charting unfamiliar waters. Readers interested in the Portuguese role in Lower Burma and Arakan are also directed to the work of Maria Ana Guedes who published a study on this topic in Portuguese in 1994. In the next few years, with Vic Lieberman’s guidance, I further developed my understanding of Arakan through indigenous texts, leading to a study of river boats in Arakan and Burma in 1997 (Oriens Extremus) and two articles written in 1995 and 1997 that provided a more balanced and farther-reaching examination of the rise and fall of the Mrauk-U state (both articles were published in 1998, one in Journal of Burma Studies and the other in the Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient).3 These provided the rough structure for my doctoral study of Arakanese Buddhism, especially aranyavasi and gammavasi monastic rivalry, and Islam submitted to the University of Michigan in 1999 (“Where Jambudipa and Islamdom Converged: Religious Change and the Emergence of Buddhist Communalism in Early Modern Arakan (fifteenth to nineteenth centuries)”). While I work mainly on the Irrawaddy Valley today, my interest in Arakan continues. In a forthcoming issue, we will include an annotated list of Arakanese chronicles I compiled in 1995-1996 while on extension from the University of Michigan for language study at Northern Illinois University. This list tentatively identified the ‘lost’ Do We chronicle and mapped out the different chronicle traditions of Arakanese history.4 A fuller examination of this chronicle (‘Rakhine Mìn-raza-grì Arei-daw Sadan’. [Palm-leaf manuscript, number 1632] AMs, 1784 [1775], National Library, Ministry of Culture, Yangon, Union of Myanmar) was published in Michael W. Charney, “Centralizing Historical Tradition in of Ancient Arakan (An Eastern Border State Beyond India, east of Vanga and Samatata), Rangoon: Government Press: 1979. 3 ”Rise of a Mainland Trading State: Rakhine Under the Early Mrauk-U Kings, c. 1430- 1603.” Journal of Burma Studies 3 (1998): 1-35; “Crisis and Reformation in a Maritime Kingdom of Southeast Asia: Forces of Instability and Political Disintegration in Western Burma (Arakan), 1603-1701.” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 41 (1998): 185-219. 4 I provided the major portion of the text of the ‘Do We’ chronicle and the annotated list of Arakanese chronicle traditions to Jacques P. Leider, then of Chulalongkorn University and now of the EFEO, in 1998. With the increased interest in Arakan, it would probably be useful to make both available to the general scholarly community, and thus the text of the chronicle and translation will be published in the SBBR as well as the annotated list of Arakanese chronicle traditions in the near future. SBBR 3.2 (AUTUMN 2005):974-1145 976 ARAKAN, MIN YAZAGYI, AND THE PORTUGUESE Precolonial Burma: the Abhiraja/Dhajaraja myth in Early Kòn-baung Historical Texts” (South East Asia Research 10.2 (2002):185-215, see pp. 193-196) and idem, “A Reassessment of Hyperbolic Military Statistics in Some Early Modern Burmese Texts” (Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 46.2 (2004): 193-214, see pp.197-201). M. W. C. _________ ARAKAN, MIN YAZAGYI, AND THE PORTUGUESE: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE GROWTH OF ARAKANESE IMPERIAL POWER AND PORTUGUESE MERCENARIES ON THE FRINGE OF MAINLAND SOUTHEAST ASIA 1517-1617 (as submitted in 1993) A thesis presented to the Faculty of The College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts Michael W. Charney (June 1993) Introduction The Portuguese shipmen were a mere handful...but as they were unopposed on the sea, they found themselves in command of it...But it was not enough to be in command of the sea; some point d’appui on land for trade and refitting was essential...The Arakanese, their wits sharpened by experience, saw that here was one of those chances given to nations and individuals, which if boldly exploited yield a great profit. It seemed that a mutually agreeable understanding could be arranged. While the Portuguese were able to provide mastery of seamanship, with a modern knowledge of arms and fortification, the Arakanese could throw into the bargain territorial concessions and trade openings. M. S. Collis and San Shwe Bu5 5 Maurice Collis and San Shwe Bu, “Arakan’s Place in the Civilization of the Bay,” Journal of the Burma Research Society 15, pt. 1 (1925): 41. SBBR 3.2 (AUTUMN 2005):974-1145 SOAS BULLETIN OF BURMA RESEARCH 977 The History of the different Kings that reigned in Burma, during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries...is a round of wars and revolts, of treacheries and murders. Its chief interest is derived from the appearance of Europeans upon the scene. Two adventurers, a Portuguese and a Spaniard, played important parts in Burma during the early years of the seventeenth century. The story of their lives is worth telling. It shows how easily lawless Europeans could establish a rule over timid Asiatics by a display of reckless audacity. Albert Fytche6 These two quotations indicate a controversy over the relationship between the rulers of the Burmese region and the Portuguese mercenaries whom they employed. In order to evaluate the situation adequately, several questions must be answered. Which of the two partners, the Arakanese (the example I have chosen) or the Portuguese mercenaries, was dominant in their relationship and why? If the Arakanese were dominant, then why were two groups of Portuguese mercenaries able to revolt against Arakanese rule during the reign of Min Yazagyi, the king of Arakan? If the Portuguese were dominant, then why were these rebellious mercenaries defeated after a decade or so of independence? There are many difficulties in finding an answer to these questions. I would now like to discuss what these difficulties are and how I propose to overcome these problems. Historiography of Arakan The history of Arakan has long been overlooked by scholars of Southeast Asian history.7 This problem exists not simply at the regional level, but 6 Albert Fytche, Burma Past and Present with Personal Reminiscences of the Country, 2 vols., (London: C. Kegan Paul & Co., `1878): vol. I, 50-51. 7 It should be noted that authors on Southeast Asian history largely fall into two groups. The first group are historians who have examined the role of Southeast Asians in Southeast Asian history. Perhaps it would be clearer to say that this first group of Southeast Asia historians deal with the history of Southeast Asians rather than simply being a history of events which may have taken place in Southeast Asia, but really had little to do with Southeast Asians.

Load more

  172

Copy Link