RECONCEPTUALIZING Wolters and Mabbett's suggestions seem INDIANIZATION: closer to the real situation, and that Southeast Asia has its own typical A STUDY OF THE ART civilization. OF THE LOCAL FEMALE 1 DEITIES Introduction Rattanaporn Poungpattana 2 In the past, when talking about the civilizations of Southeast Asia, almost all observers, or even scholars, looking from Abstract outside the region, might have thought of the term "Indianization". What was worse It was formerly known and agreed was that the term might have been coined generally that the earliest Southeast Asian for Southeast Asia in particular. people did not create their own civilization, but adopted models from In earlier times, almost all people thought India. Accordingly, civilization in of Southeast Asia as 'the farther India' as Southeast Asia is called "Indianization". if the region had no identity of its own. Yet there are three mains schools of While some Southeast Asians might have giving different views of the tho~ght silently disagreed, it would have been in characteristics of Southeast Asian vain to openly complain: "Don't say that! civilization. While the first school, led by we have our own cultural identity that Coedes, points out that civilization in cannot be found anywhere else even in any Southeast Asia is not so different from its other Southeast Asian state." Indian models, the second school, led by Wolters, suggests that Southeast Asian It cannot be denied that the civilization of civilization is completely different from Southeast Asia came mainly from Indian the Indian one due to the process called influence. But to claim that this influence 'localization' . Compromisingly, the last is eternal and unchangeable is to overstate school, led by Mabbett, proposes the the case. harmonious living of the two cultures in local societies. As the debates are still uncompromised, the article offers the For a long time, discussions on this topic examination of the case study of female have involved two questions: Whether Indian influence left in Southeast Asia is deities in an attempt to compromise those debates. According to the observation on pure or not, and if not, what is the extent of Indian influence on local cultural the case study, it can be summed up that materials. Coedes' view that "to study Southeast 1 The writer would like to thank her teacher, Dr. Asia gives us only further knowledge of Snnait Chutintranond, director of the Southeast 3 Asian Studies, Chulalongkom University, for his India," clearly shows that, in his opinion, kindness and his patience. Without him, the paper would not have been completed. 2 A Master's Degree student of Southeast Asian 3 Coedes. 1968. The Indianized states of Studies, Chulalongkom University. Southeast Asia, p. 34. Downloaded from Brill.com10/09/2021 11:37:43PM via free access Reconceptualiiing lndianization the two cultures, or the cultural materials In this paper, 'I will first summarize of India and Southeast Asia, are alike. earlier scholars' debates on Indianization in Southeast Asia, relating to the two After Coedes' day, more and more questions I have raised initially. Then, I scholars took an interest in this topic. will focus on each local goddess. In the Later scholars who focused their attention third part, I will analyze them and present on Southeast Asia, opposed Coedes other scholars' views in order to determine fiercely. One might agree with Coedes if whose interpretation is more credible. glimpsing only at the surface of those Finally, I will discuss why the degrees of material, or at their veneer. However, Indian influence 1eft i n each c ase are not Coedes' view has been debated by many equal. other scholars. Thus, between Coedes' view which we can observe with our own Debates on lndianization in Southeast eyes, and the view of many other Asia scholars', which is completely opposed to Coedes', whose view should we believe? All scholars have unanimously agreed that Indian influences spread into Southeast The aim of this paper is to find out the Asia and had a major impact on local answer to this question. We will look cultures. However, the debates that follow through our own eyes, before accepting still arise. the suggestions of scholars, and conduct our own analysis through a case study of local Southeast Asian goddesses. 1.1 The debate on whether Southeast Asia cultural materials resemble the The local goddesses I choose to analyze Indian originals: include Mae Phosop, the Thai and Tai ethnic groups' rice goddess; Po Nagar, the Coedes' view is the c ause o f this debate. Cham's mother goddess; Wathoundaye Actually, he too accepts that the and Mae Thauranii, the Burmese and Thai indigenous Southeast Asians who adopted earth goddesses; and other three local Indian cultural materials, adapted or deities of the Burmese, including the localized them, as he believes that "each 4 Golden Face, the Lady Three Times people possessed its own local genius." Beautiful, and the Little Lady. However, he still believes that the localized materials cannot be very The reason I choose to analyze these different from the original ones as, "Their goddesses is that the local goddesses are culture never lost the family 5 representatives of what Mabbeth calls resemblance." 'inferior culture', and as such received the big impact from the input of the superior culture, namely Indianization. Thus, focusing on them, we can see the relationship and level of interaction between the two cultures from the 4 Wolters. 1982. History, Culture, and Region in beginning of the process to the end. Southeast Asian Perspectives, op. cit. Coedes, in p.45. 5 Ibid. 15 Downloaded from Brill.com10/09/2021 11:37:43PM via free access MANUSYA: Journal ofHumanities 7.2, 2004 Coedes also views the Indian influence in All scholars unanimously agree that the Southeast Asia as a legacy with strong indigenous societies of Southeast Asia had roots even today. He says: cultures of their own long before the arrival of the Indians. Even Coedes Even in the countries where himself agrees: indigenous traditions reacted most strongly and splintered the Indian The Indians were not confronted veneer; however, such was the by uncultured 'savages', but on force of the penetration of Indian the contrary, by people endowed culture that its legacy is far from with a civilization that had traits being negligible. This legacy in common with the civilization includes 'the system of writing', of pre-Aryan Indian.8 'the virtually unchanged cosmogonic myths', 'the great In a sense, the local earth god cult~ that epic themes of the Ramayana spread throughout Monsoon Asia should and Puranas', 'certain artistic be included in the civilization mentioned formulas' ...6 above by Coedes. Paul Mus, as quoted in Mabbett, has stated that in pre-Aryan India This idea is reiterated in his other work. and pre-Indian Southeast Asia the [earth 9 And it is also quoted with disapproval by god] cults were alike. Thus, what Mabbett: happened in Southeast Asia had been happening in India where "Hindu culture George Coedes has aJso given developed from contact between Aryans weight to indigenous initiative in and pre-Aryans .. " In other words, what the process and to the continuing happened to the cults in Southeast Asia vitality of indigenous culture; can be explained by the following however, he sees Indianization message: overall as a transplant rather than a mere graft: 'Indian culture put These localized indigenous cults down its roots in a new soil, and assumed more elaborate forms, changed without losing its adopted .. .and acquired universal 7 identity.' values, without losing their essence. 10 Coedes' hypothesis has not been accepted by many other scholars, including Mabbett This assertion gives credence to the idea, and Wolters. They used logic to oppose proposed by Mabbett and Mus in the assertion and support their own novel opposition to that of Coedes. In this suggestion. This logical process will be matter, they and also Wolters believe that explained in the section that follows. 8 Coedes. 1968. The Indianized states of 6 Coedes. 1968. The lndianized states of Southeast Asia. p.IS. Southeast Asia. p.34. 9 Mabbett. 1978. Kingship in Angkor, op. cit. 7 Wolters. 1982. History, Culture, and Region in Mus in p.49. Southeast Asian Perspective.s Op. cit, Coedes in p.45. 10 Ibid. 16 Downloaded from Brill.com10/09/2021 11:37:43PM via free access Reconceptualiiing Indianization the cultures of Southeast Asia that adopted welcomed and 'lived' without Indian influences are not so pure as consciousness of change. 13 The claimed by Coedes, and that local essences two levels of cultures [therefore] . continued to exist. lived in each other and were not consciously distinguished.14 In his "Kingship m Angkor", Mabbett concludes: "Thus, an examination of the Meanwhile, though Wolters also opposes nature and extent of Indian influence Coedes' view that "the 'states' of suggests that it didn't drive out local Southeast Asia were continuously shaped traditions in any Southeast Asian and sustained by Indian cultural Kingdom."11 influences," his suggestion is similar to Mabbett's though not entirely the same. However, scholars differ on the extent of He claims that the local genius causes a Indian influence. Their differences · are process he calls "localization", . in which discussed briefly in the section that "the Indian materials tended to be follows. fractured and restated and therefore 15 drained of their original significance ••• 1.2 Different ideas on the extent of The materials, including their words, Indian influence sounds of words, book, or artifacts had to be localized in different ways before they could fit into the local complexes ... and While Coedes sees Indian influence as still 16 strong and not much changed, Mabbett belong to a new cultural whole." views this matter differently.