A valley of megaliths in West Sumatra. Mahat (Schnitger’s Aoer Doeri) revisited
John N. Miksic, in a 1986 article in the Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, revisits the megalithic valley of Mahat in West Sumatra—first described in literary terms by F. M. Schnitger in the 1940s and 1960s—to provide a preliminary archaeological and ethnographic account of its stone monuments and burial practices, arguing that the valley represents a significant but still poorly understood component of Sumatra’s pre-Islamic cultural landscape.
Summary
The article addresses a gap in the archaeological record of West Sumatra. Schnitger’s earlier account in Forgotten Kingdoms of Sumatra (1964) was poetic rather than analytical, and the precise location of the site he called “Aur Duri” had become obscure. Miksic’s own 1982 survey failed to locate the site, but a map in a separate 1940 Schnitger article eventually placed it on the upper Batang Mahat, a tributary of the Kampar Kanan. The Indonesian National Research Centre for Archaeology subsequently dispatched a team that conducted test excavations at Bawah Parit in September 1985, recovering human skeletal material beneath two upright carved stones (p. 27).
Miksic provides a general description of the valley’s geography, access, population composition, and the distribution of stone monuments across multiple sites. The stones occur in varied contexts—scattered over fields, along ridge tops, in alignments, and as isolated individuals—and the most common form is the “kris hilt” shape (p. 30). The 1985 excavation revealed burials in a specific orientation: individuals laid on their sides, feet to the southeast, hands crossed over the genital area, with no grave goods. Miksic cautions against assuming all stones served as grave markers, noting that oral traditions suggest the stones continued to hold cultural significance well into the modern period (p. 32).
The article is explicitly provisional, anticipating a more detailed publication once further surveys and excavations are complete. Miksic’s core argument is that the Mahat valley’s megalithic tradition was not an isolated phenomenon but part of a broader regional pattern of stone monument construction across pre-Islamic Sumatra, and that the complexity of the valley’s material and oral heritage will make any reconstruction of West Sumatra’s pre- and proto-history correspondingly complex (p. 32).
Key Findings
- Test excavations at Bawah Parit (September 1985) recovered human skeletal material beneath two upright carved stones; the deceased were placed on their sides facing southwest, feet oriented southeast, hands crossed over the genital area, with no grave goods or associated artifacts (p. 27).
- The Mahat valley contains an estimated 1,000 standing stones, though many have been lost to road construction and incorporation into rice field bunds within living memory (p. 30).
- The valley is approximately 5 km in diameter, roughly circular, and surrounded by mountains including Bukit Dingin (1,597 m) and Gunung Gedang (2,060 m) (pp. 27, 30).
- The population comprises six suku in decreasing order of presence: Melaya, Doma, Piliang (and Caniago), Kampai, Ketopang, and Mandeling; the first three are described as original inhabitants who entered from the northwest, the latter three as pendatang (newcomers) (p. 30).
- Schnitger’s 1940 map identified the site on the upper Batang Mahat, which joins the Kampar Kanan downstream from the brick stupa at Muara Takus in Riau province (p. 27).
- The bones recovered in 1985 were in a state of near-complete disintegration, making radiocarbon or comparative dating currently impossible (p. 32).
Conclusion
Miksic concludes that while firm dating and functional interpretation remain premature, the evidence confirms that the population of Mahat devoted considerable attention to erecting stone monuments at some period before the introduction of Islam, and that this tradition formed part of a broader regional pattern of megalithic construction across Sumatra. The rediscovery of sites first reported nearly fifty years earlier underscores that any reconstruction of West Sumatra’s pre- and proto-history will be complex, fitting the complexity of the cultures that have inhabited the province (p. 32).
Context
- The article draws on Schnitger’s 1940 and 1964 publications as the primary earlier source, supplemented by Miksic’s own 1982 field survey and the 1985 National Research Centre for Archaeology excavation at Bawah Parit.
- Historiographically, the piece marks the transition from Schnitger’s literary-ethnographic approach to a more systematic archaeological framework, and it situates the Mahat megaliths within the broader context of Sumatran pre-Islamic stone monument traditions.