The Southeast Asia Connection

Trade and Polities in the Eurasian World Economy, 500 BC–AD 500

Sing C. Chew

• Publisher: Berghahn Books
• Year: 2018
• Print ISBN: 9781836950622, 9781785337888
• eBook ISBN: 9781785337895
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Anthropology
• Index: Social Sciences

The contribution of Southeast Asia to the world economy (during the late prehistoric and early historic periods) has not received much attention. It has often been viewed as a region of peripheral entrepôts, especially in the early centuries of the current era. Recent archaeological evidence revealed the existence of established and productive polities in Southeast Asia in the early parts of the historic period and earlier. This book recalibrates these interactions of Southeast Asia with other parts of the world economy, and gives the region its due instead of treating it as little more than of marginal interest.

CHAPTER 1

Early Southeast Asia

Southeast Asian populations during the Neolithic and early metal periods also contributed much to human achievements in agriculture, art, metallurgy, boat construction and ocean navigation.

—Ian Glover and Peter Bellwood,
Southeast Asia: From Prehistory to History

As a region, Southeast Asia is diverse in its physical landscape. Comprised of a mainland, a peninsula, and an archipelago, the mainland terrain is traversed by five major rivers: the Mekong, the Red, the Irrawaddy, the Salween, and the Chao Phraya. Throughout history, these rivers with their respective tributaries have provided the major river valleys and deltas suitable for agriculture and fishing, especially for human communities that were transitioning from hunting and gathering to sedentary systems. Beyond the lowlands, the Southeast Asian mainland landscape is also lined with extensive mountain chains connected to the mountains in Yunnan to the northeast and to the Himalayas in the north and northwest.

From archaeological evidence unearthed to date, human habitation of the Southeast Asian terrain has occurred in the mountainous highlands, river valleys, and the coastal plains. Climate and sea level changes have also conditioned human adaptation to this landscape. Besides the weather, rises in sea level have reduced the coastal areas and, over time, have led to acreage losses of the coastal plains in Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, the Malayan peninsula, and some areas of the archipelago. With the socioecological processes at work, the temporal spatio-social orderings may change in a manner that could undermine and erode the particular supposed permanences that we often conceived as givens. Because of this, the spatial pattern of human occupation of the deltas and coastal lowlands is quite different six thousand to eight thousand years ago than what it is now. Within the ambit of these natural parameters, starting from the mountainous highlands, we find human habitation on mainland Southeast Asia occurring primarily in caves, especially for those communities involved in hunting and gathering. According to archaeological and anthropological reasoning, these caves provided protection and shelter from adverse climatic and other environmental conditions. Over time, with the spread of the use and fabrication of metals such as bronze and iron, and the acquisition of knowledge of rice cultivation in the river valleys and coastal plains of Southeast Asia through interactions and exchange with other social groups, the demographic contour became populated with various communities.

As with other regions of the world, these human innovations and interactions thus naturally led to population increases and, as well, increases in complexity in the area of social organization and structure. Conventionally, according to most archaeologists and historians, a developmental sequence of this nature leads to the emergence of a hierarchical order in the form of chiefdoms—the next “universal” stage in the transformation of human social organization, structure, and governance—without delving into the discourses and debates on the evolution of human societies, and stages of socioeconomic and political transformations. State formation and more complex political systems of governance usually follow chiefdoms or “Big Man” systems. There is less attention, however, paid to the networks of trade relationships and interactions within and between the Southeast Asian trading complexes with other regions of the world during late prehistory. Nevertheless, it is within such historical, social, and environmental parameters that the land use typology of Southeast Asia has been analyzed and explained by archaeologists, anthropologists, and historians. They have sketched out the contours of the history of human socio-organizational practices in Southeast Asia—keeping in mind the geological and natural environmental factors as described above—by utilizing the sociohistorical organization transformation models that have framed the examination of civilizational studies in other parts of the world, such as the Fertile Crescent, China, India, and Europe, looking for parallels or differences in the timing of social evolution (see, e.g., Bellwood 1997; Coedes 1966, 1968; Glover and Syme 1993; K. R. Hall 2011; Higham 1989, 1996, 2002, 2014; O’Reilly 2007; Van Leur 1967; Wheatley 1983; Wolters 1982). Furthermore, these studies have adjusted their analyses accordingly, adapting their conceptualizations to the local environmental variables that have had an impact on the cultural assemblages that have been unearthed. In this light, even though the studies framed their analyses vis-à-vis the local environment, they also continue to follow the arc of a socioeconomic developmental trajectory by mirroring their analyses in relation to frameworks adopted elsewhere by archaeologists and anthropologists on the socioevolutionary trajectory of long-term social change in the river valleys of the Euphrates/Tigris, the Nile, the Indus, and the Hwang Ho.

Given such directions, our understanding and appreciation of Southeast Asia are organized around this optic of viewing the socioeconomic development of Southeast Asia in relation to what archaeological and/or historical/literary evidence exists to account for the historical timing and developmental trajectory of the formation of chiefdoms, mandalas, and urbanization patterns compared to other parts of the world system, such as India, China, the Fertile Crescent, and Europe. On such a basis, if there is an absence in the social organizational features of kin relations or governance within a given historical time frame in comparison to what has occurred in other parts of the world—and notwithstanding a lower level of archaeological excavation initiatives for Southeast Asia in contrast to other parts of the world (Stark and Allen 1998)—the region would therefore be viewed as less transformed politically, socially, and economically, or its developmental trajectory would be seen as having been determined by external powers/regions that were more developed by then (see, e.g., Christie 1990). Evaluations based on this supposedly universalistic modernization scale have resulted, for example, in the categorization of Southeast Asia’s role and function in the world economy by some—such as Abu-Lughod (1989), K. R. Hall (1982), Leong (1990), etc.—as a marginal region fulfilling the function of an entrepôt in global trade connections, or one playing a peripheral role in world trade. To this extent, studies such as that of Coedes (1968) and others (e.g., Wheatley 1983) have refined further the typology of the socio-organizational pattern of the Southeast Asian landscape with social and political analyses categorizing and summarizing Southeast Asia’s developmental trajectory as being infused or conditioned by Indian or Chinese influences—thus determining the arc of socioeconomic transformation of Southeast Asia within the context of the Indianization of Southeast Asia motif. This acceptance of social evolution or development along a “universalistic” (Eurocentric) modernity approach thus frames most of the past analyses, and has even added a modernocentric bias to the Indocentricity that has already existed in various accounts of the long-term development of Southeast Asia. The results have been that they have limited our understanding of long-term change, and have precluded alternative visions of our global past,¹ and Southeast Asian histories’ place within a world history of human civilizations.

Should this be the case for our understanding and perception of Southeast Asia’s place in world history? Or should we apply a different optic that will recalibrate our knowledge and understanding of Southeast Asia’s role in world history and its overall developmental trajectory compared to other regions of the world economy? What can be done to reorient such established accepted understanding and conception? Rather than engaging in a debate on “centrisms,” a more appropriate and fruitful engagement will be to provide a revisionist, world historical, materialist account (empirical study) of Southeast Asia’s long-term historical transformations, and to identify the global trade linkages that Southeast Asia had with other regions of the world during its prehistory and early history. Coupled with this will also be an attempt to trace the networks of communication and interactions that occurred. An intensive sweep of recent archaeological and historical literary accounts of early Southeast Asia can give us a different view of what we have been informed about it to date. Furthermore, we need to trace the evolution of a Eurasian world economy during late prehistory and Southeast Asia’s part in this global formation and transformation. The mapping of the evolution of this global historical trade system will allow us to move away from regional or localized analyses that most often result in privileging the country, empire, or civilization under study, leading most often to criticisms of the many labels of “centrisms” that have been applied to the many studies done to date.²

Prehistoric Southeast Asia

The landscape contours of mainland Southeast Asia are formed by the river basins of the five major rivers (Irrawaddy, Salween, Chao Phraya, Mekong, and Red) and their tributaries, with high relief in the north intervened by alluvial plateaus trending southward to low-lying river plains and deltas. Out of this topographical landscape, we find human habitation of highland regions and coastal/riverine areas. This pattern of human habitation also occurred for the peninsula and archipelago parts of Southeast Asia. Climate-wise, Southeast Asia lies within the tropical and subtropical zones, with almost uniformly high temperatures except in the highlands of the region. The peninsula part and the archipelago have a nonseasonal weather pattern, with rainfall and high temperatures occurring throughout the year. On mainland Southeast Asia, outside of the equatorial zone of the region, the rainfall tends to occur during certain months, with the winter season being much drier.

Ecologically, within such a climatic zonation, species diversity predominates in the tropical rainforests. The cultivation of crops following forest removal requires constant human attention due to the hot humid conditions that foster weed growth that would compete with the sown crops. The topsoil of the forest floor is thin in terms of fertility, and hence most agricultural cultivation in the prehistoric period was undertaken in the low-lying fertile river plains and deltas. Besides the tropical rainforest being a source of food in terms of animal biomass, the coastal areas provided bountiful amounts of bivalves and aquatic life for protein. Within this natural environment, the availability of food was abundant for hunting and gathering systems. These ecological parameters conditioned the socioeconomic development of human communities in Southeast Asia. Human habitations tended to cluster in the river valleys and lowland areas, and in certain cases were grouped in the highland plateaus of mainland Southeast Asia.

Environmental parameters do change over time, as we have also observed elsewhere, and do not maintain a “natural” permanence. In Southeast Asia’s case, rising sea levels resulted in the loss of the coastal land mass. This loss is contingent on the different periods of glaciation when there is a rise and fall. The last glacial maximum eighteen thousand years ago produced a sea level of about 100 to 130 meters below the present (Chapell and Thom 1997). Eight thousand years later, the sea level was between forty and sixty meters below its current level. Between eight thousand and six thousand years ago, the sea level rose from –12.8 meters to +1.2 meters on the Southeast Asian mainland. The sea level rose even further by 2.5 and 5.8 meters higher to the present level between five thousand and six thousand years ago (Geyh, Kudrass, and Streif 1979; Higham 2002, 2014). What this means is that in the lowland areas of the coasts of Southeast Asia, a significant amount of land was lost to rising sea levels. It is said that the sea level fluctuations submerged any evidence of coastal human settlement onto the Sunda shelf (Higham 2014; Tjia 1980). Estimations suggest that the depth of thickness of the soil covering such settlements could be as deep as fourteen meters. Deepening it further, the amount of siltation produced by land clearance and deforestation that has taken place to date in Cambodia, Thailand, and Vietnam have further added to this siltation process. Therefore, human habitation complexes in existence five thousand or more years ago located on the coast might have been either been washed away or submerged or, if they still exist, if excavated are now located right on the coastal areas. Such changes can be a factor in interpreting the state and level of socioeconomic transformation and urbanization of archaeological assemblages that have been excavated in Southeast Asia, especially those sited now near coastal areas. This further adds to the complexity and difficulty in assessing excavated assemblages in terms of the socioeconomic transformation and attainment that these communities have achieved.

Figure 1.1. Mainland Southeast Asia: Bronze Age Sites. Courtesy of Annie Thomsen, Cartographer.

Mainland Southeast Asia

The prehistory of mainland Southeast Asia can be divided initially into four main periods (Higham 1989). Besides the periods of early hunter gatherers from 10,000 BC to the establishment of coastal settlements from 5000 BC onward, settlement expansion started around 3000 BC in places such as Non Nok Tha, Ban Chiang, etc. (see figure 1.1). During this latter period (Period A), social ranking was not as pronounced; the agricultural base was developed, but there was no sign of metallurgical production. By 2000 BC (Period B), communities had developed a more defined hierarchical ranking, and bronze working was in existence. The beginning of the adoption of Bronze technology in Southeast Asia has been determined based on two models (Higham 2015; Higham, Douka, and Higham 2015). The long chronology model has dated this adoption around 2000 BC while the short chronology model has identified it as around 1200 BC–1000 BC (Higham 2015; Higham, Douka, and Higham 2015; White and Hamilton 2009, 2014). From 500 BC (Period C) onward, we find the transition to iron making and the development of centralized systems. From AD 200 (Period D) onward, we find the rise of states or mandalas. Such was the periodization of the prehistoric period of mainland Southeast Asia that Higham (1989) proposed almost three decades ago. With recent radiocarbon dating, Higham (2014) has periodized Neolithic settlements at Ban Non Wat starting from the seventeenth to fifteenth centuries BC, and Ban Chiang on the Korat Plateau from 1600 to 1450 BC (Rispoli et al. 2013).

The early prehistoric assemblages in Southeast Asia were human foraging groups developing flake stone technology. Examples of such communities have been discovered as early as thirteen thousand years ago, ranging geographically from mainland Southeast Asia to the Malayan peninsula, Sumatra, Sabah, Sulawesi, Timor, Moluccas, and the Philippines (Bellwood 1978, 1997; Higham 1989, 2014; Tan 1980). One of the earliest was the Hoabinhian material culture, with origins from eighteen thousand years ago, and the Bacsonian, dating back to ten thousand years, discovered in Vietnam. Other cultural groupings were comprised of the Nguom, Dieu, and the Son Vi, with even earlier chronologies. These earlier groupings in some cases, such as the Son Vi, later developed into the Hoabinhian in some regions of Vietnam (Tan 1997).

Madeleine Colani (1927) described the Hoabinhian communities as hunting and gathering systems living in northern Vietnam and fashioning stone tools from river stones. Mostly living in cave and rock shelters, the Hoabinhians’ diet was comprised of animals, fish, bivalves, and wild rice. The work of Colani (1927, 1930) has revealed the widespread hunting and gathering of local food sources from both the forested inland as well as from the rivers and coastal zones. Contact with coastal groups is also evident with the finding of marine shells in these Hoabinhian sites. Burial remains are rare for the earlier periods according to Higham (2002, 2014) other than a find at Lang Cao, where two hundred skulls were unearthed within an area of twenty-five square meters, buried with stone tools. Besides the technological advancement achieved in the grinding and polishing of the surfaces (edge grinding) of the stone flake tools, the making of fired pottery vessels was also undertaken by the Hoabinhians. Other hunting and gathering communities excavated in the province of Bac Son have yielded ground and polished stone implements. Such discoveries led to the postulation of a different type of grouping, which has been designated as Bac Sonian, with its origin ten thousand years ago. It has been suggested that the Bac Sonian had Hoabinhian roots, based on the archaeological discovery of common material practices. The fact that Hoabinhian and Bac Sonian sites have yielded tools and pottery that share both cultural origins and have been uncovered in different parts of Vietnam suggests that there were trading exchanges of goods as well as cultural and material practices between these two hunting and gathering communities. Other excavated sites on the coasts of Vietnam have yielded finds that can be traced to the Hoabinhians. Four other cultural types that resided on the coastal areas have been identified: Bau Tro, Hoa Loc, Ha Lang, and Cai Beo (Higham 1989; Tan 1980). Chronologically, these sites date back to 4500 BC.

West of Vietnam in the highlands of Thailand, excavation of caves in the uplands has shown human habitation sharing similar material patterns with the Hoabinhians. Stone flake tools have been unearthed. These early human sites exhibit hunting and gathering patterns between 9000–5500 BC (Spirit Cave) and 5500–3500 BC (Steep Cliff Cave), with some in continuous habitation from 3500 BC to even AD 900 (Higham 2014). The diet of these cave dwellers was comprised of marine life such as shellfish, and animals such as otters, langurs, badgers, porcupines, macaques and even leopard cats. In addition, plants were consumed (the remains of twenty-two genera were discovered). The plants were either utilized as food or as condiments and stimulants. The fact that hunting and gathering systems existed until AD 900 attests to the long-lasting survival of this socioeconomic system in Thailand. Other archaeological excavations at Tham Lod and Ban Rai further confirmed the long-lasting practice of this socioeconomic system (Shoocondej 2006; Treerayapeewat 2005).

There were also hunting and gathering groups located from peninsula Thailand to the Chao Phraya plains. Groups with Hobinhian lineages have been identified at Pak Om, Khao Khi Chan, Buang Baeb, and Khao Thao Ha on the Thai peninsula (Shoocondej 1996). These hunting and gathering communities might be located further inland instead of the coastal areas of the peninsula when they are unearthed. With the submersion of the coastal areas and the rise in sea levels as discussed in the previous pages, these excavated sites are now located nearer to the coast of the peninsula.

On the Korat plateau in northeast Thailand, evidence of human settlement at Ban Non Wat has been excavated. Located in northeast Thailand, it consisted of moated prehistoric settlements with initial settlement established at the mid-seventeenth century BC. Higham, an archaeologist, has suggested that at this site, the hunters and the gatherers came into contact with Neolithic groups who were already cultivating rice (Higham and Higham et al. 2011). Evidence of pig bones and chickens suggests they were reared at these sites, with Storey et al. (2012) confirming evidence of chickens via mitochondrial DNA signatures on Mainland Southeast Asia. It is also evident that besides domesticated animals as sources of food, the Neolithic settlements also exploited marine resources: abundant catfish and shellfish remains were found. The raw material for the making of adzes was not available within the vicinity of these settlements, and their presence indicates that these communities must have undertaken exchanges. Spindle whorls were also excavated, thus suggesting a weaving industry was in place. Burial remains were found within lidded pottery coffins. The refined motifs of these pots resembled those also found in other parts of Thailand and in Cambodia and Vietnam. There was very little evidence of jewelry, indicating perhaps that hierarchical structures had not evolved as yet. By the thirteenth century BC (and this phase, according to Higham [2014], lasted from 1050 to 1000 BC), transformations had occurred in the social structure; one can witness the change in the burial mortuary traditions. Instead of the refined painted pots, pots were placed beyond the head. The late Neolithic settlement ended about 1280 BC (Higham and Thosarat 2006). The Bronze Age sequence for this site is between 1280 and 400 BC, and Iron Age is from 40...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• List of Figures and Tables
• Preface
• Introduction. Southeast Asia in World History: Macrohistorical Considerations and World System History
• Chapter 1. Early Southeast Asia
• The Networks
• The Economy
• The Polities
• Methodological Reprise
• Bibliography
• Index