Archipel Études interdisciplinaires sur le monde insulindien 94 | 2017 Varia The Liangan Temple Site in Central Java Novida Abbas (ed.) (2016), Liangan. Mozaik Peradaban Mataram Kuno di Lereng Sindoro. Second Edition. Yogyakarta: Kepel Press. xi + 357 p., bibliographie. ISBN 978-602-1228-72-2 Véronique Degroot Electronic version URL: https://journals.openedition.org/archipel/456 DOI: 10.4000/archipel.456 ISSN: 2104-3655 Publisher Association Archipel Printed version Date of publication: 6 December 2017 Number of pages: 191-209 ISBN: 978-2-910513-78-8 ISSN: 0044-8613 Electronic reference Véronique Degroot, “The Liangan Temple Site in Central Java”, Archipel [Online], 94 | 2017, Online since 06 December 2017, connection on 27 August 2021. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/archipel/456 ; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/archipel.456 Association Archipel À PROPOS DE VÉRONIQUE DEGROOT1 The Liangan Temple Site in Central Java Novida Abbas (ed.) (2016), Liangan. Mozaik Peradaban Mataram Kuno di Lereng Sindoro. Second Edition. Yogyakarta: Kepel Press. xi + 357 p., biblio- graphie. ISBN 978-602-1228-72-2 1Candi Liangan was accidentally discovered in 2008 by inhabitants of the nearby village of Liangan, Temanggung, Central Java. The site was buried beneath meters of volcanic debris deposited by lahars, pyroclastic flows and ash falls. Organic materials had been burnt but at the same time the site had been sealed and preserved, waiting for archaeologists to unearth it. It is thus no wonder that Candi Liangan has yielded a wide range of archaeological material, from earthenware to plant remains and in situ wooden structures. Because of its exceptional state of preservation, Candi Liangan provides a unique perspective on the life of a religious community of 9th-century Central Java. In a field where scientific monographs are few and far between, we commend Novida Abbas, the Balai Arkeologi Yogyakarta and Kepel Press for presenting us with a useful volume about a site that is essential for Javanese archaeologists but widely unknown to the public. Liangan: Mozaik Peradaban Mataram Kuno di Lereng Sindoro was first published in 2014. Whereas the first edition was not intended for sale, the 2016 version is distributed nationwide through Gramedia bookstores. Those outside Indonesia will be pleased to know that the first edition can be downloaded from the book repository of the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture (http://repositori.perpustakaan. kemdikbud.go.id/). The volume is a compilation of eleven papers covering almost every aspect of the site. It includes studies in archaeology, geology, epigraphy, ceramology, 1. Senior lecturer in Southeast Asian history at the École française d’Extrême-Orient. Archipel 94, Paris, 2017, p. 191-209 192 Véronique Degroot architecture, paleobotany and paleoanthropology. Although it is overall a good book, Liangan: Mozaik Peradaban Mataram Kuno di Lereng Sindoro would have benefited from a more thorough editing process. The essays have been written as stand-alone papers and not as book chapters. Hence the reader encounters many unnecessary repetitions. For example, each essay begins with a general introduction about Candi Liangan, its location and discovery. Similarly, the two (very short) essays on local geology could easily have been merged into a single, more coherent chapter. Editing a book is a thankless task and the devil lies in the details. We note that the editor has not been able to ensure consistent spelling. Some reference lists are incomplete, while others contain works that are not mentioned in the text. The use of the copy and paste method in the architecture chapter has led to irritating repetitions of identical phrases within a single page. Although illustrations are plentiful, the print size is too small for the plans to be legible. Having said this, we may turn to the content of the book. I am hardly qualified to review all the papers, but I would like to comment on a few issues raised in this volume. In his essay entitled “Menggali Peradaban Mataram Kuno di Liangan Tahap Demi Tahap,” Sugeng Riyanto presents a history of the archaeological research at Candi Liangan, from the discovery of the site in 2008 until mid-2014. Besides giving a chronology of the excavation process, Sugeng Riyanto also explains the successive hypotheses proposed by himself and his colleagues from the Balai Arkeologi Yogyakarta regarding the function of the different areas of the site. Because of the amount and variety of the material unearthed, Liangan was first identified as a settlement site. Nevertheless, as excavations went on, it became clear that it was most likely a religious site: all three courtyards housed sacred buildings. The relative richness of the site compared to most Central Javanese temples was actually due to its exceptional state of preservation and not to a difference in original function. Whether or not the temple was coupled with a settlement is a question that deserves further research. Hence, it is slightly confusing that the authors of the book seem sometimes to forget their own conclusion and refer to Liangan as a kampung and to certain structures as houses, without any argumentation. Sugeng Riyanto interestingly compares the structure of Candi Liangan to that of a Balinese pura and associates its courtyards with the jaba pisan, jaba tengah and jeroan of Balinese architecture. As Balinese temples most often include a kitchen, this would of course explain the cooking utensils and remains of food found during the excavation. Sugeng Riyanto also presents the results of a survey of kecamatan Ngadirejo, identifying 13 sites dating back to the Hindu-Buddhist period.2 2. Both the text and the table (p. 56-57) mention 13 sites. Strangely enough, the pictures on p. 55 show sites that do not appear in Sugeng Riyanto’s list, namely Piyudan, Kramat and Limbangan. In the absence of information regarding desa and kecamatan, I was not able to plot the latter on a map. Archipel 94, Paris, 2017 The Liangan Temple Site in Central Java 193 Although the author does not state this explicitly, we suppose that he only lists the sites that are still visible today. To try to reconstruct the ancient religious landscape as completely as possible, it would however be interesting to mention all the known sites, including those that have vanished. If one credits N.J. Krom’s 1914 inventory, it appears that at least seven Hindu-Buddhist temples once stood within 10 km of Candi Liangan, and that twenty-five other sites have yielded archaeological material3 (see table below and fig. 1). The distribution of archaeological remains within the landscape suggests that Liangan was a few kilometers away from a road linking the Progo Valley to the region of Weleri, on Java’s north coast. Sugeng Riyanto’s remark that “Liangan did not stand alone” is thus an understatement.4 As often in Java, the chronology – either absolute or relative – of these archaeological sites has yet to be established. Nevertheless, the inscriptions discovered so far in the kabupaten of Temanggung point towards the 9th – early 10th century as the apex of the Hindu-Buddhist culture in the region.5 However, the Hindu- Buddhist presence in Temanggung is documented – although indirectly – as early as the middle of the 8th century. Indeed, the Wanua Tengah III inscription (dated 908 CE) tells us that, in 746 CE,rake Panangkaran gave land to the Buddhist monastery of Pikatan. The findspot of the inscriptiondusun ( Kedunglo, desa Gandulan, kecamatan Kaloran, kabupaten Temanggung), as well as the toponyms mentioned in it, suggest that the monastery was located in the Temanggung area. Data from the colonial period should not be overlooked. They can be quite useful to monitor potential archaeological sites. Contrary to what is said in the book under review (p. 165), Liangan did not suddenly appear in the archaeological literature in the 2000s. The village name is actually mentioned as early as 1911, in the Notulen.6 At that time, the Bataviaasch Genootschap 3. Stone sculptures, pedestals, bricks and/or stone blocks have been found in 19 of these sites. The other sites have yielded only small finds, such as metal objects, jewelry and/or ceramics. The amount of stones apparently found in Jamus, Nglarangan, Traji and Kentengsari suggest that those sites used to be temples as well. 4. In his list of 13 sites, Sugeng Riyanto mentions locations that are as far as 20 km from Liangan. In the present review article, I have limited the indexing to a radius of 10 km. For those wishing to know more about sites reported in the district of Temanggung during colonial times, see Krom 1914. Temples and presumed temple sites are also listed in Degroot 2009: 416-423. 5. To my knowledge, some 30 inscriptions are thought to come from the Temanggung area. The earliest is probably the Gondosuli I inscription (early 9th c.?), the latest the Wanua Tengah III inscription (908 CE) or, possibly, the Taji Gunung inscription (910 CE). For complete references, see Nakada 1982: I-9, 13, 15, 19, 21, 22, 31, 32, 49, 51, 52, 53, 61, 62, 64, 76, 95, 96, 97, 100, 104; Krom 1914, no 980; Sarkar 1971-1972 : cxi; Boechari 1985-1986: 52-57; Titi Surti Nastiti et al. 1982: 23-40; Wisseman Christie 2001. Note that the inscriptions of Mandang, Mulak, Kwak, Ra Tawun and Ra Mwi, mentioned by Nakada (1982) as coming from Magelang, actually come from the Temanggung area. 6. Notulen van de Algemeene en Directievergaderingen van het Bataviaasch Genootschap van Archipel 94, Paris, 2017 194 Véronique Degroot received a letter from the Resident of Kedoe, reporting the discovery, in a dry field indusun Liangan, desa Poerbesari, of a few objects made of copper alloy – namely a pot with a lid, three pairs of bracelets and one pair of rings (Quarles de Quarles & Wettum 1911: 48).