The extent of Srivijaya’s influence abroad
H.G. Quaritch Wales published this article in 1978, revisiting the question he had first raised in his 1969 monograph Dvaravati: to what extent did the Mahayana Buddhist culture of Srivijaya (Sumatra and the Malay Peninsula, 8th–12th centuries) penetrate the art and religion of its northern neighbour, the Dvaravati kingdom in the Menam valley and Korat plateau. His overarching thesis is that Srivijayan influence abroad was far more limited than recent scholarship—particularly that of J. Boisselier—had claimed, and that much of what had been attributed to Srivijaya was better explained by direct Indian accretion or by Pre-Angkorian Khmer art carrying central Javanese features.
Summary
Wales opens by clarifying a persistent terminological problem: the sculptural style common to central Java and Srivijaya cannot be reliably distinguished, and the various labels proposed (his own “Indo-Malaysian,” Boisselier’s “Srivijayan,” Le Bonheur’s “Indonesian”) each carry drawbacks. This matters because Boisselier’s claims of Srivijayan influence in Dvaravati often rest on identifying features that are equally attributable to central Java. Wales then turns to the specific sites where Boisselier had located Srivijayan impact. At Nak’on Pathom, the 1968 discovery of bas-reliefs at Chula Pat’on had prompted Boisselier to revise his earlier scepticism and assert a period of Srivijayan Mahayanist influence in the late eighth and ninth centuries. Wales, drawing on Piriya Krairiksh’s detailed study of those reliefs, argues that all scenes are Jataka illustrations of the Hinayana school, comparable to those at Kizil in Central Asia, and that the figure Boisselier had identified as a Bodhisattva is in fact a yaksa (or Kuvera) whose crown style aligns with sixth-century Indian work at Bhumara rather than ninth-century Srivijayan production. No Mahayana sutra scenes or cult Bodhisattva images have been found at the site.
The second major line of argument concerns the bronze Bodhisattvas of the Korat plateau—the Prakhon Chai hoard of several hundred figures, the Ban Tahnot bronze, and the Ban Fai finds of 1971. Boisselier had dated these to the late eighth–early ninth century and identified “Srivijayan” influence in their jatamukuta (hair-loop crowns with central pearls). Wales contends that these bronzes belong to the Pre-Angkorian Kompong Prah style, which was itself strongly imbued with central Javanese features, and that the Mahayana religion they represent reached the plateau via Cambodia rather than directly from Srivijaya. The Si T’ep cave sculptures, which Boisselier had also linked to Srivijaya, are on the same logic better explained as an overspill of this Pre-Angkorian current along an old route from the plateau.
Finally, Wales takes aim at Boisselier’s 1974 volume La Sculpture en Thailande, which classified all mitred long-robed Visnus of the Peninsula and central Siam as Srivijayan. Wales invokes S.J. O’Connor’s earlier analysis showing that these figures represent a gradual accretion of Gupta, post-Gupta, and Pallava styles over the sixth to eighth centuries, building on the original conch-on-hip Chaiya Visnu (datable to no later than A.D. 400). He notes the telling absence of any mitred Visnu fragment from mainland Sumatra and observes that the cult’s disappearance from the Peninsula coincides with the expansion of Srivijayan Buddhism, of which Vaisnavism was not a feature.
Key Findings
- The Chula Pat’on bas-reliefs at Nak’on Pathom (discovered 1968 during road construction) depict exclusively Jataka scenes of the Hinayana school, with stylistic parallels to Kizil, Central Asia; no Mahayana sutra scenes or Bodhisattva cult images have been recovered (pp. 4–5).
- The Prakhon Chai hoard comprises several hundred bronze Bodhisattvas, including Avalokitesvara, dated by Boisselier to the late eighth–early ninth century A.D. and classed as Pre-Angkorian Kompong Prah style (pp. 5–6).
- The mitred long-robed Visnus of the Peninsula (e.g., the Takuapa Visnu, height 6 feet) represent accreted Indian styles—Gupta, post-Gupta, Pallava—accumulated from the sixth to eighth centuries over the original Chaiya Visnu type, which S.J. O’Connor dated to no later than A.D. 400 (pp. 9–10).
- No fragment of a mitred Visnu has been found on mainland Sumatra, undermining the attribution of these figures to Srivijayan production (p. 9).
- The cylindrical-mitred Visnu head recently found at Si T’ep (height 11½ inches) has been attached to a known Si T’ep torso, but Wales questions the original association on grounds of the torso’s short robe and pronounced hanchement, features inconsistent with the mitred Visnu type (pp. 10–11).
- Monks from Nak’on Si Thammarat introduced some Srivijayan architectural features to Subhodaya in the fourteenth century, but this postdates the political extinction of Srivijaya itself (p. 11).
Conclusion
Wales reaffirms the position he had taken in Dvaravati: scattered Srivijayan images found in Dvaravati centres evidence appreciation and collection, not cultural transformation. The Mahayana Buddhism of Srivijaya was not adopted in the Menam valley, and the art of the Korat plateau was shaped by a Mahayana current arriving via Cambodia in Pre-Angkorian guise, not by direct Srivijayan diffusion. The article thus serves as a sustained corrective to what Wales regards as Boisselier’s overextension of the Srivijayan label.
Context
- Wales’s arguments are grounded in his own fieldwork in the Malay Peninsula and eastern Siam (notably the 1956 excavations at M. Phet and Thamen Chai on the Korat plateau) and in close engagement with the published corpus of Dvaravati and Pre-Angkorian sculpture held in the Bangkok National Museum.
- Historiographically, the article represents a key intervention in the mid-1970s debate over the boundaries of Srivijayan cultural influence, positioning Wales against the expanding claims of Boisselier and aligning with the more cautious readings of Le Bonheur, O’Connor, and Krairiksh.