Buddhist King with Muslim Names

7/30/2019 Buddhist King with Muslim Names

1/21

These Buddhist Kings with Muslim Names...

Dr Jacques P. Leider

12/28/2008

A discussion of Muslim influence in the Mrauk-U Period

Shut off from Burma by a hill range, Arakan has a separate history, but it is the same in kind, isone of those unhappy generalizations of Geoffey, Harvey, the British colonial historian, which are

waiting to be shaken by thorough research.

If Arakanese history were the same in kind, why should we care to study it in lengthy detail? Itmight turn out to be a case study of general Myanmar history and as such be local history. But can

Rakhaing history be reduced to be a case study of Myanmar history?

If Arakan has a separate history, while having a common past with the country it belongs to, Iwonder why there has been so little interest in Arakanese history.

Lets go back to the colonial historians. Arakanese history makes up to ten percent of Phayres

History of Burma. In Harveys History of Burma there is a chapter on Arakanese history whichmakes up about 5% of the whole book and in D.G.E. Halls History of Southeast Asia, Arakanese

history deserves a whole chapter.

Whenever I have read anything about Arakanese history in general history books, it is reduced tobe a by-side of Burmese history and it is mentioned only in connection with major political events.

For decades, interest in Arakanese history has remained not with properly trained historians, but

with collectors of coins, local chronicles and amateur historians from Arakan or the Chittagongarea.

There has been in fact no thorough research on modern Arakanese history among Western

scholars? Even if you look at the early colonial period, nobody did for Arakan what John S.Furnivall did for Tenasserim, namely an analysis of the beginnings of British government and

administration.3

As a result, there are fewer reference to Arakan in the recent Cambridge History of Southeast Asia(two volumes) produced by some foremost specialists of SE Asia (in 1992) than in Professor

Sanjay Subrahmanyams remarkable, medium-sized book on The Portuguese Empire in Asia1500-1700, which was published in 1993. The conclusion is that the sheer existence of an

independent Arakanese kingdom over several centuries is virtually ignored by Southeast Asianhistorians.

This is indeed sad news which I do not however evoke to complain, but to stress that research onArakanese history can certainly be considered as a field for pioneering studies. With a contributionon Arakanese history I am pleading for study of Arakan not as by-side of the history of the

kingdoms of the Irrawaddy valley or Bengal, but as a thing of interest of its own. I do not believethat Arakanese history and its study should be isolated from the history of its prominent

neighbours. Arakanese history forms an intricate part of the cultural and economic history of thewhole area we are dealing with. One example may be enough to understand my methodological

starting point. The main question is not to know if Arakanese Buddhism or Arakanese kingship


2/21

were something different from Buddhism or kingship elsewhere, but to understand how ArakaneseBuddhism, how Arakanese kingship integrated into political and cultural environment largelydominated by the Burmese, the Mon, the powers in Bengal and India and the actors from the

abroad (Portuguese and Dutch).

I will deal with subject of Muslim influence and presence in Arakan and more specifically at theArakanese court. The influence of the Islamic culture on the court of Arakan is in fact one of the

very few subjects of Arakanese history that arose some interest among historians, especiallyBengali historians. Arakan was a Buddhist kingdom which had a Muslim minority for several

centuries. There is no doubt about the influence of the Sultanate of Bengal on Arakanese kingship.The open debate is about the nature and the importance of the influence exercised. Interpretations

reach from political ascendancy over intermittent cultural prevalence to virtual rejection of anyspecific cultural identity.

The period under consideration loosely extends from the beginning of the 15th to the end of the

18th century.

During the first three decades of the 15th cent. the Burmese of Ava and the Mon of Pegu wererivals for the control of Arakan. Mrauk-U founded in 1430, remained the capital of Arakan until

the conquest of the independent kingdom by king Bodawphaya in January 1785.

In the middle of the 15th century a thriving Arakanese kingship grew more and more powerful andpushed its military expeditions up to Chittagong. The end of the 15th and the beginning of the 16th

century mark a period of drawback and short reigns; but in the middle of the 16th century, thereign of king Mong Ba (1531-1553), the builder of Mrauk-Us walls and the defender of his capital

against Tabinshweti, marks a culminating point of the history of the kingdom. The century ofArakans greatness and splendor extends from 1580 to about 1690, from the conquest of

Chittagong, a pivotal center of power of the kingdom, to the aftermath of its loss in 1666. It coversthe reigns of kings who fully profited from the weakness of their big neighbours and joined a keen

sense of alliances to a remarkable spirit of openness to foreign influences. The 18th century is dulyconsidered as a century of decline.

Now I should insist on the fact that while dealing with Islamic influences in Arakan during the

Mrauk-U period, I am not concerned with the question of the so-called Rohingyas and the verycontemporary problems of refugees on the Bangladesh-Myanmar border. My paper is but

indirectly concerned with the origins of any Muslim community in Arakan. It can be confidentlyassumed that the contemporary problems are linked to the colonial period for more than to

Arakans past history.

On the other side, I cannot hide the fact that articles written on the refugee question by westernamateurs contain a painful lot of historical errors.4

**************

While discussing the question of Muslim influence on the Arakanese court, we should bear in

mind two major facts.

First, the political relations between the sultanate of Bengal, later a Mogul province, and thekingdom of Arakan, were conflictual all over the period under review. The atmosphere was mostly

hostile and the state of relations can be best described by a status of permanent war, a fact which


3/21

has been emphasized by all Bengali and English authors. In the Muslim sources, the Arakanesenavy is generally presented as an awful bunch of pirates infesting the rivers of southern andsoutheast Bengal. The most prominent economic activity of the Arakanese, the so-called Mugs or

Maghs, in Bengal has up to now been described as slave raids.

The answer of Bengals sultans and governors to the Arakanese incursions has been a tenaciouswarfare against the Arakanese and, in the long run, the extension of Muslim power to southeastern

Bengal and the conquest and control over the Chittagong area. Rivalry among the regional powersimplicated as well local powers like the Hindu kingdom of Tripura and the semi-autonomous

Portuguese communities around Chittagong.

The other fact that has not sufficiently been appreciated by historians concerns the poorly studiedcommercial relations between Bengal and Arakan. Arakan has always been a part of the

commercial network of the Bay of Bengal and the Indian Ocean. Over centuries traders from Indiaand Southeast Asia have come to Arakan. Many of these traders were Muslims. They did not come

as enemies, they come for peaceful trade and they were welcome.

Let me shortly recall the arguments on which several authors have built their thesis of Musliminfluence on the court of Rakhuin pran kri:, as the chroniclers call their home country.

The exile of King Man: Co Mwan in India and the reconquest of his throne with the help ofMuslim soldiers.

The use of Muslim names by an important number of Arakanese kings between the first half ofthe 15th and the beginning of the 17th century.

Arakanese silver coins issued between the 15th and the beginning of the 17th century imitate the

Bengali coins and contain Persian inscriptions. The Arakanese coins are monolingual, bilingualand trilingual, using Bengali, Persian and Arakanese.

The presence of two famous Bengali poets at the court of Arakan, Dawlat Kadi resided for several

years at the court of King Thirithudhamma (from 1622 to 1638) and Sayyid Al-Awwal flourishedat the court of King Sa tui: (from 1645 to 1652). At the court of Rosang (as they call Arakan),

they were patronized by ministers which are introduced in their poetry with typical Muslim namesand titles.

The presence of Persian archers in the royal guard. Their presence in Arakan has been attributed to

the arrival of Shah Shuja, the brother of the Mogul emperor who took refuge in Arakan inNovember 1660. Shah Shuja was killed in 1661 under circumstances which have led to different

interpretations as to who is to blame. As it seems, Shujas wealth arose the aim of dethroning theking. Many were killed in the ensuing massacres. A part of those men who survived were

integrated in to the royal guard.

Everybody will agree that we are in front of evidence of a very diverse nature. But these areactually the arguments which, put on a string, have generally served to justify the thesis that

Arakan has been subjected to Muslim influence since the 15th century.

The association of these elements is far from being self-evident as one may probably guess. Theuse of the so-called Muslim names extends from the 15th to the beginning of the 17th century

while the use of Persian legends on Arakanese coins was discontinuous between 1523 and 1638.


4/21

The arguments related to Shah Shuja and the archers of the Royal Guard pertain to the 17thcentury.

Appreciations and interpretations of the facts have varied according to the authors. In an articledating from 1925, the former British judge well-known for his romanticizing historical books,

Maurice Collis, interpreted the stay of King Man: Co Mwan at the court of the sultans of Bengal asa decisive turn in the history of Arakan. Having reconquered his throne thanks to the military help

of the sultan of Bengal, he turned away from what was Buddhist and familiar to what wasMohammedan and foreign. In so doing he loomed from the medieval to the modern, from the

fragile fairyland of the Glass Palace Chronicle to the robust extravaganzas of the Thousand Nightsand one Night.

On the use of Bengali-modeled coinage, Collis comments: In this way Arakan became definitely

oriented towards the Moslem States. And so our author concludes: Contact with a moderncivilization resulted in a renaissance. The countrys great age begon.5

Two years after Collis article in the JBRS, Bisvar Bhattacharya further developed Colliss views

and arrives at a most surprising conclusion. The author writes: As the Mohammedan influencewas predominant, the Arakanese kings though Buddhist in religion, became somewhat

Mohomedanised in their ideas.

The conclusion reads: .the dynasty under which Southern Bengal suffered such untold miseriesappears to have been essentially a Bengali dynasty..

In his article on the Muslim in burma6, Mohammed Siddiq Khan does not contribute any new

elements to the question and what he writes on the Muslims in Arakan is nothing more than acompilation of what you read in the books of Collis, Harvey and Sarkar7. Moshe Yegar, in his

important and well-known book on the Muslims of Burma follows to the letter the interpretation ofCollis and U San Shwe Bu. The Indian historian Ramesh C. Majumdar speaks of a decisive role of

the Muslims in the history of the kingdom of Arakan8 and Jamini M. Ghosh (writing in 1960)thinks that the use of Muslim names and the favours granted by the king to the Muslim poets

testify to the cultural affinity of the Arakanese and the Muslims9. Suniti b. Qanungo, startingfrom the gratuitous affirmation that Arakan had been dominated by Muslim powers, writes: The

Muslim subjugations of Arakan from time to time undoubtedly increased the Islamic influence inthat country.10

In two lesser known articles, A.B.M. Habibullah and S.M. Ali, are a good deal more sensible in

their interpretation of facts.

In his excellent article on Arakan in the pre-Moghol history of Bengal, published already in 1945,A.B.M. Habibullah used for the first time previously neglected Persian and Bengali sources.11 In

his contribution on the Arakanese government in Chittagong, S.M.Ali provides us with a useful

synthesis on the period from 1550 to 1666.12

Habibullah notes an increasing Bengali Muslim influence starting from the reign of Mong Saw

Mwan, but he does not exaggerate the role of Muslim officers at the Court.

Was Arakan politically dependent of the sultanate of Bengal after king Man: Co Mwans return topower? All the authors previously quoted are more or less affirmative on this point. But political

subjection of Arakan to Bengal at this time is indeed far from being a historical truth. Habibullah


5/21

does not hide his doubts when writing: In these instances of Bengals influence one cannot,however, read anything like proofs of Arakans continued political subjection. How long and inwhat form Meng-tsau-mums vassalage was given expression in detail will remain a

problem.And he joins a persuasive argument: Nor was Bengal, after Jalaluddins death, in aposition to demand its fulfillment.13

The opinion that the adoption of Muslim names by Arkanese kings betrays a strong Muslim

influence at the royal court of Arakan, seems to be still very popular in Bengal. So popular that in1986 professor Alamgir M. Serrajuddin (from the University of Chittagong) strongly argued

against it. This historian pointed- at last I should say- to the paradoxical fact that Muslim influenceat the court is most prominent at a time when the Arakanese kings were no more assuming Muslim

names and titles! We are talking about the first part of the 17th century.

The quality of Serrajuddins article suffers nevertheless from the prejudices of its author. Relationsbetween Arakan and Bengal are analysed as relations between a superior and an inferior culture.

Arakan qualifies as a little tribal kingdom14, the Arakanese are styled as tribal andbackward,Arakanese society is said to be primitive, the Bengal army escorting King Man: Co

Mwan on his way back to Arakan is characterized as host of adventures, fortune hunters andadmirers.15

The Italian traveler Nicole Manucci16 relates the rumour that Shah Shuja had been disgusted bythe table manners of king Candasudhamma17, a king who is generally considered as one of themost pious Buddhist kings of Arakan. Serrajuddin is using this gossip as a historical argument to

establish that the superior culture of the Muslims did not produce any major effects on the mannersand customs of the Arakanese kings. SO this authors interpretation is falling into another extreme.

Recently professor Snajay Subrahmanyam of the Delhi School of Economics presented a

diametrically opposite stand on the subject. He quotes Arakan as an example of the Persianisationof Southeast Asian courts. I do not favour this thesis which he bases on (what is termed) the

translation of a letter of king Sirisudhamma in the Baharistan-i-Ghaybi of Mirza Nathan and thepresence of Persian traders in Arakan18. I will put forward my arguments a little bit later.

It is quite astounding to see how far-reaching conclusions have been drawn for a century from such

scarce evidence. Most of what has been said and thought on Arakan history is founded on Phayresand harveys chapters on the country. Their major source was the rajawan of Na Man, a learned

Arakanese who wrote his chronicle in 1842 on the express demand of Arthur Phayre. Na Manresponded perfectly to Phayres demand of a comprehensive history barring most supernatural

digressions and making a choice among concurrent versions of a story.

What can actually be read in English are bare summaries of Arakanese history.

As far as other source material is concerned, the absence of any on-going research is a serious

hindrance to a revision of earlier assumptions. Arakanese coins have been collected but werepoorly studied.

Now it is time to expose my own hypotheses and present my arguments.

(1) It is still difficult to know anything clear on the relations between Bengali and Arakan in the15th century as the traditions we find in different Arakanese chronicles are contradictory and as

there are little Bengal sources on the question.


6/21

As I have previously said, the presence of Muslims at the court has been generally linked to theexile of king Man: Co Mwan in India. So let us turn to the biography of this king as it is found in

the Arakanese sources.

The tradition followed by Harvey and Phayre tells us that the king arriving on the throne in 1404,was chased by the Burmese in 1406 and after an exile of some two decades reconquered his throne

with the military help of the sultan of Bengal. In 1430 he founded a new capital, Mrauk-U,abandoning thus the old capital of Lon Krak.

In the rajawon of the minister Wimala, in Pandis Dhanawati rajawon sac19 and in Na Mans

rajawon, the three texts I am using here, the king assumed the name under which he is generallyknown only after he reconquered his throne. And the minister Wimala whose text is one of the

oldest Arakanese historical texts (dating from 1536) joins Mong Saw Mwan to the names of allthe kings reigning from 1430 to 1525. So I think that this is not a name but an epithet, very

probably honorific.20

So what was the proper name of our king? One tradition calls him Naranu, the other one Naramit-hla. The tradition which calls Naranu the king who ascended the throne calls his younger brother

Naramit-hla, the future governor of Sam twe.21 The tradition which calls Naramit-hla the king,

presents Naranu as a younger step-brother and future governor of Sam twe.22

The source do not even agree on the name of his father.23 Even the date of the kings accession to

the throne is variously indicated as 1401 or 1404. It seems however that the last date has beenmore generally accepted. I should mention that in the Maharajawan of U Kala, the date of

accession of the king is given as 1403, but the kings name is given by U Kala as Thora.

To appreciate what kind of influence Bengal Muslim culture should have had on the king on hiscourt and maybe on Arakan generally, we should know these dissimilar and partly overlapping

traditions tell us on the kings stay in Bengal.

A. Tradition according to Wimala-

At the death of his father in 1401, Naranu ascended the throne and called his younger brotherNaramit-hla to administrate Sam twe. According to this tradition, king Rajadaruik offered to the

king of Arakan one of his ministers daughters, called Shwe Chum. This lady, once she hadbecome queen, provoked conflicts between the king and his Arakanese ministers until the king

exiled his ministers to Sam twe, the province governed by his younger brother. At the same time,three Mons Phon Teja, Lakya Kri24, and Mon Khawn were appointed as ministers and advisors to

the king. Once they were in charge, they invited king Rajadaruik and their fellow compatriots toinvade the country.

King Naranu, says the tradition, fled to Rum pashya who governs the royal city of Delhi in thecountry of Indriya. Naranu asked him for military assistance and Rum pashya offered him acoalition treaty, the king of Arakan should submit to his authority after reconquering Arakan and

cede to him the twelve towns of bengal. Thus our author implies that Bengal belonged to Arakan.

While Naranu was marching at the head of 10,000 soldiers against Lon Krak, the capital ofArakan, his brother Naramit-hla supported the attack with 10,000 men from Sam twe. Once the

country was free from the Mons, Narunu Saw Mwan reigned under the authority of Rumpashya


7/21

strating from 1405.

(Naramit-hla succeeded to the throne at the death of his elder brother in 1432. He was then known

as Naramit-hla Mong Khari.25)

It might strike us that this is a totally different story than the one which is generally known. It isnot only different from the story we know from Phayre and Harvey, but it is indeed different from

what U Kalas chronicle suggests. We learn next to nothing about the stay of the Arakanese king inIndia. Even without anticipating a comparison with other traditions, we can easily see the

improbabilities of this tradition.

The expression Rum pashya residing in the city of Dili should evidently refer to the MoghulSultan. AAround 1398-1399, Timur invaded and sacked Delhi, and the last sultan of the Tughluq

dynasty, Nasir ud-din Mohmud, and his minister Mallu Iqbal were strictly not in the measure toretrieve the lost territories. under the Sayyid dynasty (from 1414 to 1451) the disintegration of the

Delhi Sultanate went on. The request for armed assistance of the Arakanese king is thus entirelycontradicted by the historical context. The Turkish Sultan of Delhi, being unable to reestablish his

own authority, could surely not pretend to conquer Bengal and to help the exiled king.26

B. Tradition according to U Pandi-

When Naramit-hla became king in 1404, he appointed his brother as governor of Sam twe. Hemarried Rhwe Chum, the daughter of Rajasu, the governor of Malwan and appointed his father-in-

law as chief of the royal guard. By her immoral behavior and intrigues Queen Rhwe Chumincurred the dislike of the people and the former ministers of the kings father. Some of these old

ministers and chiefs fled to Naranu, the kings brother and governor of Sam twe, and tried to pushhim to revolt against his brother. But the good-hearted Naranu refused.

Naramit-hla heard of the intrigues of those ministers, distrusted his brother and wanted to go and

attack him. He even distrusted his brother when Naranu warned him against the imminent attack ofthe Burmese under the crown prince Man: Co Mwan, son of king Mong khon.27 Naranus

messenger was considered as a spy and tortured.

After the conquest of Arakan by the Burmese in 1418, Naramit-hla took refuge in the 12 towns ofBengal, to employ the frequent expression of our author.

After thirteen years of Burmese government under Narathaa, who was married to the Burmese

kings daughter Rhwe pran khyam: sa, it was Naranu, Naramit-hlas brother, who thanks to acoalition with the Mon king Rajadhiraj28 , reconquered Arakan from the Burmese, it was Naranu

who called back his brother from exile and put him back on the throne.

So the tradition reported by U Pandi does not mention the stay of Naramit-hla in India at all. The

reconquest of the throne is not at all put into relation with Bengal forces and it is not even relatedto the exiled king. The dates given by U Pandi do not match with those given by Phayre, Harveyand other writers as they do not match with the tradition of Wimala we just mentioned.

So once more we do not find any solid evidence which we could use as a proof for any kind of

Muslim immigration, presence or even just influence on the court.

C. Tradition according to Na Man


8/21

While turning to the third tradition, I am not either confident to say that it is more reliable than anyof the other traditions. Once again the names are not the same, the story is a different one and the

dates do not match.

There is not need to completely retell the story as it is given in Phayres article on the history ofArakan, which is a convenient, though imperfect translation of the Na Man chronicle. I would

above all stress one point as regards Na Mans narration while dealing with this kings reign.

The chapter on king Man: Co Mwan, as Na Man calls the king from the beginning, might bedivided into three parts. First the chronicler explains the reason of the kings exile. According to

Na Man, the governor of Talak asked for Burmese help to dethrone the king who had raped thegovernors sister. Secondly the chronicler tells us what happened in Arakan during the 20 years

extending from 1406, the year of conquest, to 1426, the date of the first attempt to reconquer thethrone. This part of the story is quite laconic in style (as the chronicles mostly are) but gives

detailed events and precise dates.

The third part is concerned with Man: Co Mwans stay in Bengal, which is called the country ofthe king of Suratan. The name king of Suratan is another standard expression in Arakanese

historical literature for Bengal. The etymology which has been suggested is Sultan. This part of the

story on which a whole line of arguments has been built as regards Muslim presence and influenceon the country, is the vague narration of adventures that the Arakanese king should have gonethrough Bengal.

Since this narration does not contain any proper name, nor any date, nor any geographical

reference allowing to replace the adventures into a general historical setting of Bengals history ofthat time, even a superficial reading of these adventures must lead a critically-minded reader to

throw heaps of doubts on the reliability of the stories.

Na man is boasting our exiled hero as somebody who teaches the Bengalis how to tame elephantsand devises stratagems for the defence of their land while definitely ignores that the only enemy

who confronted the Bengal sultan at that period was not the king of Dili, but Ibrahim Sharqi, thesultan of Jaunpur. Thus it has been repeated that the actually read in Na Man chronicle is more a

kind of anecdotes than historical accounts. When the army of the Sultan was blocked by a forest ofbamboos, Man: Co Mwan told the Sultan to throw thousands of coins into the forest so that the

local population would cut the bamboos and free the way.

Confronting the three traditions is not giving us a definite clue to recognize facts and fiction. Itcould be admitted that the king, after having been in exile somewhere in India and most probably

in Bengal, came back after some years with support of arms and men to recover his throne. Stillthe circumstances of his exile, the extent of his stay, the conditions of his return to Arakan and the

question who exactly gave him this support remain unknown and bound to speculation unless other

sources confirm part of the tradition.

Another major problem related to the personality of Man: Co Mwan is the alleged dependence or

vassalage of Arakan to Bengal after the reconquest of the throne.

Wimalas assertion is categorical: Arakan was subject to Musalaman Rum Pashya29 for 125years from Man: Co Mwans return from Bengal, dated 1401 to 1525.30 We could possibly

understand that the Arakanese king was under an obligation to the sultan, but the fact is that we do


9/21

not have any proof of it. Man: Co Mwan is precisely the king who did not adopt a Muslim nameand who did not mint any coin on the Bengal model! His direct successors lead a policy ofreconquest of the area south of Chittagong which does not conform to the idea of recognizing

ones suzerainety. No Muslim source confirms the hypotheses of any military aid from Ghiyas-ud-din Azam Shah (1389-1410) to Man: Co Mwan and the suzerainty of Bengal over the kings of

Arakan. Habibullah thinks, as we mentioned, that the sultans were hardly able to provide such ahelp and to enforce their rule.

If the Bengal intervention happened at the end of the second decade of the 15th century (following

the Na Man tradition), Jalal-ud-din, the son of Raja Ganesh converted to Islam under the pressureof the nobles would have been the one to provide the aid. He controlled by then the thriving port of

Chittagong.31 Would geographical proximity render more probable a military intervention?

The origins of a first Muslim community in Arakan have been as well related to the name of thefounder of Mrok U (Mrauk-U). The mercenaries at his disposal would have built the Santikan

mosque at the Mrok-U. But this attribution to the 15th century seems to belong to the populartradition, According to Forchhammer, the construction technique of the Santikan mosque is closely

related to the Dukkanthein and Chitethaung pagodas which date from the first half of the 16thcentury.32 it is precisely at this period that we have a first written account of a Muslim religious

mission at the Arakanese court.

Let me draw a first conclusion to this expedition into the evidence of Arakanese source material. Ido not reject the Arakanese chronicles as sources of information, either do I completely reject the

possibility of an Indian exile of our king. But I do not think that on the available written evidencewhich is, as I have shown, extremely controversial, one can build any argument testifying Muslim

or Bengal influence on the Arakanese court.

2. The fact that an impressive number of Arakanese kings were apparently using so-called Muslimtitles and names has been used as a most convincing argument to prove that there has been a

steadfast Muslim influence at the Arakanese court.

But even for someone acquainted with Arakanese history it is difficult to quote spontaneously suchMuslim names of Arakanese kings. They have been very popular and making a list of these so-

called Muslim names has been a painstaking task for me. The list I have compiled can nowhere befound in such a complete form. I is an artificial compilation put together from a large range of

sources, mainly dynastical lists joined to the chronicles.

Even those authors who, like Collis overestimated the Muslim influence, were unable to quotemore than four names. Phayre gives none and Harvey mentions just three. Phayre observed in 1844

that they (the kings) assumed foreign nameswhich are now frequently applied to them, thoughthe some Indian names are not always applied to the same individual kings, even by the best

informed among the Arkanese.33

Some of the names are known by the coins. The Arakanese written sources mention themerratically. As Arakanese numismatics have been insufficiently studied until now, a few general

remarks must be sufficient to support my point which is: the use of Muslim names on the coinsseems to be a political one, it may be interpreted as the expression of political overlordship over a

Muslim community in the area south of Chittagong and maybe in parts of Arakan as well; but theavailable evidence leads me to think that the importance of the use of Muslim names should not be

overrated. (See detailed list at the end of this paper!)


10/21

From this I infer that no major cultural influence can be related to the use of such names whosespelling has frequently been commented on as curious by Bengali authors.

The 15th century is considered as a great time of Bengali coinage and it is not surprising at all that

the Arakanese kings some time later tried to imitate their prestigious neighbours and started to usesilver coins using a similar device. Incidentally it should be interesting to point out that it has not

been established yet who did the coinage and where the silver used for it, come from, since it wasnot locally produced.

If we provisionally accept that the Arakanese kings were using coins with so-called Muslim names

and Persian legends to demonstrate their overlordship over their Muslim subjects, in the same wayas did the Bengal sultans, there are nonetheless many puzzling facts that hardly conform to his

candid explanation.

We should first notice of the fact that Bengal authors commenting on the coins have spoken ofcurious Muslim names. It is indeed not easy to find out what original name the names of the

coins are derived from. As my list shows, this is sometimes of the order of pure speculation.

-It is equally worth pointing out that these names are never mentioned in any Bengali sources as

the names of the Arakanese kings.

- Little attention has been paid until now to the inscriptions in the nagari script on the coins.

Difficult to read or even quite unreadable, no conjections have been formulated until now. Whenwe look at Patons strange list of Arakanese kings, we might be puzzled at first at the way the

names of the kings were written. There is no doubt for me that Paton transcribed the list with thehelp of a Bengali Muslim interpreter. But with the exception of one name, not a single Muslim

name in the list is known from a coin.

- The Arakanese kings of the 15th centuries to whom Muslim names are attributed, did not allcontrol the Chittagong area where a majority of Muslims may have lived.

- A trilingual coin is attributed by U San Tha Aung to king Cakrawate: (1564-1571) though this

king did not have a Muslim name and he lost Chittagong.

- There are only two Arakanese kings whose Muslim names may be found on the coins and in thedynastical lists of the chronicles. These are two of the warrior kings: the famous Mong Razagri

(1593-1612) and his equally famous successor Mong Kha Moung (1612-1622).

- While the Arakanese control over Chittagong extended until 1666, Arakanese kings did not useMuslim names any longer after 1622. Futhermore, after 1634, the coins did not bear Persian

inscriptions any more.

When we analyse the history of Arakanese coins from the middle of the 15th to the 18th century,we get a clear picture of its evolution. In the middle of the 15th cent., inscription were in Persian

only. in the middle of the 16th cent., a hundred years later, we find bilingual and trilingual coins.But starting from 1634 as I just mentioned inscriptions on the coins were in Arakanese only.

It is a striking fact to see that at the time when Arakanese kingship was at its peak and Muslim

presence at the court and in the kingdom was prominent (a point I will stress later), the kings of


11/21

Arakan did not feel compelled to use Muslim names any more to state their power. We aredefinitely dealing with self-conscious Buddhist kings, proud of their power, governing andemploying Muslim subjects without resenting any Muslim cultural dependence.

There is only one Arakanese king whose Muslim name was more popular than his Arakanese

name. He is the brother of king Naramit-hla/ Mng Saw Mwan, a prince always appearing in a veryfavourable light in the sources: a good-hearted, pious and virtuous man. One might speculate about

any Muslim influence on the king. Might this king, reigning from 1434 to 1459, indeed have beena subject of the Bengal Sultan? Besides the fact that the thesis of subordination of Arakanese kings

to Bengal sultans is difficult to uphold (there is not a single Bengal source affirmative on thispoint). King Ali Khan is said to have reconquered the territories north of the Naf river up to Pan

Wa, i.e. Ramu. The famous meeting between the assembled court of Arakanese king and the courtof king of Ava, Thuparum dayaka Narapati Mong, on mount Bhui: khon nway khyui (1454),

shows the power and prestige of the Mrok U: dynasty34 at this time.

The successor of Ali Khan was his son Ba Co Phru (1459-1482). The Arakanese conqueredChittagong probably at the beginning of the reign, but lost the town a few years later. Around

1474, it was under the control of sultan Rukh-ud-din Barbak Shah (1459-1474), one of the greatconquering sultans of Bengal.35 Ba Co Phru surprisingly adopted the title Kalima Shah, but coins

bearing this title cannot be safely attributed to him.36 Owing to this title, the hypothesis was

expressed that coins wearing the kalima (known since the 16th century only) had already beenminted since the middle of the 15th century.37 It is at the court of Ba Co Phru that the ministerAdu Mong Nyo38 composed the famous Mok-to-ekhran39, the first poem of the Burmese

literature we know. The king, a pious Buddhist, is equally known as a builder of pagodas.4

Under the leadership of these two kings, the dynasty reached thus first political and cultural apogeewhile showing its military strength. The control exercised by the kings over a Muslim population

in conquered territories and assuming a slightly growing influence of the prestigious Bengalsultanate can give us a satisfying answer to the adoption of Muslim titles.

Between 1474 and 1515, the Arakanese kings did not possess Chittagong. After the reign of Ba Co

Phru until 1501, Arakan was governed by weak and insignificant kings. In Bengal however Ala-ud-din Husain Shah reigned since 1493, hailed as the greatest of the independent sultans of Bengal.

In 1513 the king of Tripura took control of Chittagong and invaded, according to the Rajamala41,Arakan. But the invaders were rapidly repelled. Around 1515, Man: Raja (1501-1513/23)

conquered Chittagong, but the heir-apparent of Bengal, Nasir-ud-din Nusrat Shah, retook the placein 1517 and the city remained under the Husain Shahi sultans until 1538.42 When Sher Khan Sur

had it occupied by one of his generals.43

It is under the reign of Nasir-ud-din Nusrat Shah (1519-1532) that happened an episode whichperfectly illustrates the influence of the prestigious court of Gauda: the arrival of a religious

mission from Bengal aiming at converting the Arakanese to Islam. Wimala reports that the

ambassadors kadi, Musha et Honumya, having arrived in 1525, were preaching to the crowd,founding schools, Some Buddhist Arakanese were converted. The king receiving presents is said tohave had much sympathy for the missionaries.44 if this mission and its results, which can not be

traced in any other chronicle, are a historical fact, it is according to my knowledge the onlyavailable written instance to fix an origin to an indigenous Muslim community.

It is not clear which king the mission actually arrived. Mong Co the Old, became king at the age of

60 and reigned only 6 months. The foundation of three pagodas is attributed to him.45 His


12/21

successor Sajata 91525-1531), crowned at the age of 52, is said to have minted a unlingual(Persian) coin with the kalima.46 The use of the Kalima deserves attention. It was Jalal-ud-din(1418-1433), the son of Raja Ganesh converted to Islam, who used the kalima for the first time in

Bengal on his coins; this was interpreted as a symbolic gesture directed towards the Muslims togain their support.47

While the use of the kalima on Arakanese coins can hardly be interpreted as an instrument of

religious policy., it may possibly be looked upon as something on the court of the Arakanese kingsis sensible through numismatic evidence and equally probable in the context of that period, we are

still left with the problem of the Bengal-Arakan relationship at that time. The fact that thedependence of Arakan from the Bengal should precisely have stopped at the movement the

mission arrived, as Wimala put, is quite inconsistent. The reign of this quite insignificant king isbadly known. He was dethroned in 1531 by king Mong Ba, the greatest of the Arakanese kings of

the 16th century.

Drawing a tentative conclusive to the analysis of the so called Muslim names or titles and thenumismatic evidence, we might sum up like this. The imitation of Bengali coinage over a fairly

long period of time is a remarkable sign of influence of the splendid court of the Sultans of Bengalon the tiny but wealthy Arakanese court. The use of coinage is linked to the kings prestige,

demonstration of power, overlordship and glorification. The use of the so-called Muslim names of

the kings can hardly be interpreted as a proof of stronger Bengali Muslim influence as these nameswere neither very popular in Arakan, nor were they apparently used by the Bengalis themselves.Exceptions are Ali Khan and one of the warrior kings previously mentioned (Mong Raza Gri)

whoseMuslim name is well known through the Portuguese sources (Xalamixa, that is Salim Shah).

Analysing the numismatic evidence, we can see clearly that the influence of Bengal on the court ofArakan was declining from the early 16th to the 17th century. but even in the 16th century, when

Bengal Muslim influence may have been prominent, there is no conspicuous proof of politicalauthority or cultural ascendancy on our Buddhist Arakan.

3. The Muslim in Arakan and at the royal court. What do we actually know about the Muslims

living in Arakan between the 15th and the 18th century? Which kind of Muslim communities orindividuals can possibly be identified?

Slaves Through a Dutch source of the 17th cent., we know that the majority of the countrymen

abducted from Bengal to be sold as slaves were hindoos, but it can be supported that an increasingnumber of those country-folk were Muslims. I would rather believe that these simple people about

whom we do not have much information, formed the majority of the Muslims in Arakan. Englishsources from the end of 18th and early 19th century pretend that in some areas of Arakan, these

Bengalis represented up to a quarter of the population. But in fact these estimations arecontradicted by the more reliable figures of the early British period (after 1825) which do not

confirm the former opinions.

Traders. Traders came mostly from Bengal ports48, Orissa and the Coromandel. They definitelybelonged to all the nationalities and races of India and the Middle East trading in the Bay of

Bengal49. Most of them were Muslims. The importance of the Muslim traders in Arakan has beenlargely underestimated until now. The reasons for this are quite clear: lack of sources, little interest

of the western trading companies in Arakan, lack of information on the traders going to Arakan,the fact that the Arakanese themselves did apparently not visit South Indian ports etc.


13/21

Manrique mentions their presence specifically in Urac ton (Orietan) and Ton bhak che: (Dobazi50)Where there are settlements of merchants of various nationalities most of them being Maumetanswith a captain of the same faith.51 Incidentally Dutch sources contain information on the Muslim

traders in Arakan.52 According to Schouten, the numerous Muslim traders in the kingdom, comingfrom Persia, from Surat, Golconda (port of Masulipatam), Pulicat, Orissa and Bengal, were trading

in cloth, precious stones, elephants and spices.53 Only a few had been born in Arakan; most ofthese traders did not settle in the country. Schouten specially notes that they were all under a strict

control of the Arakanese authorities.

Since when Muslim traders had come to Arakan, we do not exactly know. I do not wholly agreewith my Arakanese friends who think that Muslim traders only came to Arakan during the Mrauk-

U period, nor do I easily accept that Arab traders had settled in Arakan since the 8th or 9th century.

Pretending that Arab traders had come to Arakan since the 8th or 9th century, as has been upheldby those who want to stress the antiquity of Muslim presence in the area, is just a matter of

speculation. As far as I understand those who have been arguing the problem, this precise questionis linked to the early history of Chittagong. if you sustain that the Arab Sadkawan can be

identified with Chittagong, you can speculate on the presence of Arab traders in the area.

Western Bengal had been under Muslim control since the beginning of the 13th century, but it took

much more time to extend and to strengthen the sultans control over southeastern Bengal. Anincreasing number of Muslim traders may have taken part in the coastal trade from that periodonwards, without necessarily settling in the Arakanese kingdom.

What kind of influence these traders may have had on the court and on the country generally, is -

for the movement equally a matter of speculation.

Muslims at the Arakanese court. Friar Manrique mentions the presence of Moorish officers andmany others of the latter faith at king Sirisudhammas crowning ceremony in 1634. But that is

above all that we can learn about Muslims at the court of the Arakanese kings in this authorsbook.54 We should bear in mind that Manrique, an Augustine monk and advocate of Portuguese

interests, was always ready to vilify the Muslims of the good cause of propagating the truth of hisown faith. The best example is in chapter 31 the false preceptor, a Mohammedan who according

to our Catholic author prompted the king to commit murders and holocausts to become invisibleand obtain the vast empires of Delhi, Pegu and Siam.55 The fact is that Manrique had never any

reason of complaining about conflicts with Muslim officers at the court.56 From the evidence ofManriques book, we can not conclude that any important functions at the court were held by

Muslims. M. Collis inferred from Manriques scant remarks on the palace that there was aseraglio, suggesting in way that the courts style matched a sultans or nababs court. But there is

nothing in Manriques text to support such an assumption. While talking about ceremonies e.g.,Manrique specifically speaks about the true Magh style57.

A.B.M. Habibullah writes that a large number of offices in the court and government appear tohave been held by Bengali MuslimsArakanese sources do not provide us with usefulinformation on this question, but Dutch sources confirm the presence of these Muslim offices. The

shabandar, (master of the port) of the capitals port fro instance, was a Muslim until 1785, whenthe Burmese conquered Arakan.

The presence of Muslim officers is testified as well by the works of two Bengali poets who lived at

the court in the 17th century. Those Muslim ministers are presented as patrons of arts and letters.


14/21

The two Bengali poets were Dawlat Kazi and Ali Awwal. Both are extremely famous and in aBengali general history or a history of Bengali literature, one may find a chapter on Bengaliliterature at the court of Arakan. Dawlat Kazi who lived at the court of Surisudhamma (1622-1638)

is the author of Sati Maynamati written for Asraf Khan, his patron at the court.

Al Awwal wrote his magnus opus padmavati at the request of Magan Thakur whom the poetcharacterizes as the principal minister of the king. He lived at the court of Narapati Gri: (1638-

1645) and Sa tui (1645-52). Born in 1600, Al Awwal, a poet and a musician, fled to Arakan afterhaving escaped Portuguese pirates and spent some years as a horseman in the kings cavallery.

The presence of these foreign poets at the court, the protection given to them by the kings as much

as the description of the court ceremonial by Dutch writers are an ample demonstration of thesplendor of the Arakanese palace. This brilliant and refined court in its marvelously situated capital

was at peak of its greatness in the middle of the 17th century, powerful and self-conscious, tolerantand open to foreign influences. The presence of Muslim artists and officers at the court at this time

is just another sparkling element of cultural refinement at the Arakanese court.

Muslim mercenaries. Their role may sometimes have been exaggerated in the same way than theimportance of the Portuguese pirates was exaggerated by travelers like Bernier.

While approaching this point, we should bear in mind that Buddhist Arakan and Muslim Bengaliwere rivals in the area for centuries. They were not the only competitors as you know. The littlekingdom of Tripura and the semi-autonomous Portuguese communities were at times bold and

staunch opponents. The Chittagong area was at the core of this rivalry. Once the Arakanese kingshad done away with the Portuguese peril after the first decade of the 17th century, they were

employing an impressive number of Portuguese mercenaries in their armies. I think it is unlikelythat the same time i.e. in the three following decades up to the middle of the 17th century, they

would have employed an important number of Muslim mercenaries.58

The presence of Muslim mercenaries in the Arakanese palace guard has generally been connectedto the flight to Arakan of Shah Shuja, the brother and rival for the throne of Emperor Aurangzen.

Shah Shuja fled with his followers to Arakan at the end of 1660. There he met with the hospitalityof the Arakan king. it seems that he greed of the court for the incredible fortune of Shah Shuja and

a conspiracy premeditated by Shujas attendants were the cause of the subsequent massacres ofwhich Shuja himself ultimately became a victim. It is said that one part of the survivors among

Shujas followers were integrated into the Royal Guard, other survivors were didtributed indifferent parts of the kingdom. Lands and implements of husbandry were assigned to them, and

they were further encouraged to marry with the women of the country.59 They were calledKamanchis, a Persian word referring to their prior occupation as archers. Harvey writes that the

end of the 17th century they, the Muslim archers, murdered and set up kings at will, roomingover the country, carrying the fire and sword wherever they went.

This is an oversimplification of Na Mans text. it seems to me that just as the Arakanese marinewas not onlyu composed of Portuguese pirates, the Arakanese royal guard was not only made up ofMuslim mercenaries. The major political problem of the period 1685 to 1710 were the revolts of

the native populations north of the Naf river and the rebellions of the Mons that the royal guardproved unable to tackle .

The communities of Kamanchis were progressively integrated into Arakanese society fitting their

behaviour to their surroundings, as English sources of the first half of the 19th century testify.60


15/21

It has been correctly said I think that the Muslim mercenaries received fresh arrivals from Indiaafter the conquest of Chittagong. But it is quite possible that even long before the fall of

Chittagong, at the time of Islam Khan. Turco-Afghan soldiers losing ground in Bengal, fled theirdeadly enemies, the Moghuls, and took refuge in Arakan where they found employment at the

royal court.

The historical content and the political situation in southeastern Bengal in the first half of the 17thcentury would, according to my opinion, favour such a hypothesis.

The arrival of three Sinhalese embassies (1693, 1696 and 1697) is mentioned by the chronicles and

bears testimony to Arakans outstanding prestige as a Buddhist country in Ceylon, the cradle ofTherawada Buddhism.

Recently Professor S. Subrahmanyam has tried to prove his thesis of persianisation in the Bay of

Bengal by quoting extracts of the Baharistan-I Ghaibi of Mirza Nathan (17th century). Mirzapresents an exchange of letters between Mir Abd-us Salam Mashhadi (Islam Khan), the subahdar

of Bengal, and the king of Arakan, Thirithudhamma. I think it is an error to treat these documentsas an original correspondence and interpreting them like this. S. Subrahmanyam thinks that the

formulation of the letter where references are found to Persian heroes gives evidence of a Persian

influence at the court of Arakan. I disagree with this point of view as the letters were very probablyrearranged according to the gusto of the Persian author.

G. Bouchon and L.F. Thomaz published a letter of the king of Arakan to D. Manuel dated around1518 and written in Portuguese.61. We evidently cannot deduce from this letter that the royal

chancery of Arakan was using the Portuguese language and Portuguese diplomatic turns ofphrase.62 The (rare!) letters of Arakanese kings that I came across do not use either Portuguese or

Persian diplomatic terminology. Grandiloquent and sophisticated, they display in sumptuous Paliexpressions the Buddhist conception of kingdom.

The study of Arakan, a small Buddhist kingdom situated on the fringe of a predominantly Muslim

cultural area, needs still further attention. Conceptually speaking, this study implicates an analysisof the interactions between military and cultural resistance, tending to a relative isolation, and the

insertion into a socio-economic network of the Bay of Bengal, implementing a gradual opening toinfluences form abroad.

Appendix

Introduction

Mong Saw Mwan never adopted a Muslim name. Among the eighteen kings by whom he was

succeeded, there were fifteen to whom Muslim names were attributed.

The following list has been compiled from various dynastic lists and chronicles. One does not finda manuscript listmentioning all the Muslim names. Nor does any of the English-language articles

quoted in the bibliography mention all the names.63 This list is only fairly identical with U SanTha Aungs review of the Arakanese kings in his book on Arakanese coins64, but for one

exception. San Tha Aung counts 19 kings for the period under consideration. The succession of theArakanese kings from 1501 to 1531 has not yet been accurately established. Modern Arakanese

authors attribute to the reign of Mong Raja65 a length of 12 years while Phayre, Harvey and Collis


16/21

say 22 years.

All the lists do harmonize on the length of the three succeeding reigns. The gap of ten years

between 1521 and 1531 (the undisputed date of the accession to the throne of the great Mong Ba)resulting from the first hypothesis is filled by the reign of a king variously called U: Don Raja,

Mong Khoung Raza or Ton Raza.66 As no Muslim name is attributed to this king and as far asthe existence of the king himself has not been firmly established, I felt no need to join him to the

list.

Names of the kings are presented in the following order:

Transliteration of the Arakanese name: the usual English transcription between (brackets):varieties of the Muslim names found in the Arakanese sources: various transcription of Muslim

names in secondary works in [square brackets]; comments on the names and kings.67

Mong Kha Ri (Minkhari); Ali Khan, Ali Khan, Ali na khan, Alac Khan [Ali Khan].

Younger brother of Mong Saw Mwan68 whose youth name would be Naranu or Naramit-hla,according to one or the other source discussed. He is the only Arakanese king better known by his

uslimname than by his Arkanese name. Curiously enough Wimala, does not mention his

Muslim name.

Ba Saw Phru (Basawpyu); Kalama shya, Kalama shya, Kalamra rha:, Kulama69 rha70: [Kalima

Shah]. Kamoola tha is a transcription of a 19th cent. English author.71 Son of his predecessor.This king,well known by his Muslim name (a curious Muslim name says Habibullah72),is the

first of the so-called Dhanawati dynasty to whom coins are tentatively attributed.73 The attributionis rather doubtful in my eyes.74

Do Lhya, Do Lhya, Do lya, Do lya, (Dawlya): Po Khu rha, Mo khu shya, Mon khu shya [Mokhu

shah75, Mokhusya76].

Bha Co Nui, Na Ce nui, Mom nui (Basawnyo); Maha rhok rhi rha, Maha mok shya, Mahamat shya[Maha Moshah78, Mahamauk tha, Mahamosya].

Ran On, Ram On (rare) (Yanaung); rhi rha:, Non shit shya, Rhi shya [Nan Sheet tha].

Son of Do lya. I did not found in any source available to me No ri shyagiven by San Tha Aung.

Ba Shin has (Norisya) which he reads as Nuri Shah.

Ca Lan Ka Su, Ha Lan Ka Su, Ca Lan Su, Sin ga su (Salingathu): Do la shya, Sak khon ton rha:,Sak khon do lo shya [Sakkokdolasya; Secunder Shah].80

Maternal uncle of his predecessor. Ba Shin reads the name as Sheikh Abdulla Shah.81 I wouldrather derive the name from the Persian Sikandar.

Mom raja (Mong Ra Za); Bhali rha:, I shya [Pelee tha, Ili Shah, Illisya].82

Son of Ca Lan Ka Su. Should be read as Ilyas Shah according to Ba Shin.

Gajapati (Kasabadi), Ganhapati83; Ila shya.


17/21

Son of Man raja, Ba Shin does not mention this king. Serrajuddin includes him in his list of kingswith Muslim names and interpretes the name as Ilyas Shah.84

Given the identity of names of this king and his predecessor, we are strongly reminded of Phayre

who observed in 1844: they [the kings] assumed foreign names . which are now frequentlyapplied to them, though the same Indian names are not always applied to the same individual

kings, even by the best informed among the Arakanese.85

Mam Co (the od), Mam Jo, Mam Jo Si ri su (Mongsaw-O); Jalatta mam, Jala shya, Jala rha: [JalShah, Jalasya].

Younger brother of Ca Lan Ka su, paternal uncle of Mam raja, Ba Shin reads as Jalal Shah.

Sajata, Sajata, Sahajata, Sahatajata (Thatasa86); Ala shya [Itali Shah, Ilisya].

Sajata was the son of Do lya87. Okkantha presents the curious reading Itali Shah.88 Ba Shin

interpretes Ilisya as Ali Shah89, a name given as well by San Tha Aung. According to anArakanese source, he was also called Kamala tha.90 An undated coin with Persian inscription on

the two faces, with the kalima on one face and the title Sultan Ali Shah, father of the victorious, on

the other, is attributed to him (1525).91

Mam ba:, Mam ba, Mam pa, Mam pa (Mongba); Kok Pok rha:, Jok Pok shya, Jok Bhok shya

[Zabuk Shah, Zabauk Shah, Zubbur].

Son of Mam raja. Habibullah considers the name as apparently a misreading either for Mubarakor Barbok.92 Undated bilingual coins (Persian/Arakanese and Bengali/Arakanse) have been

quoted as proofs for Mam Bas control of Chittagong.93 Phayre read Jatkane as Chatiganu, i.e.Chittagong.

(the three kings whose reign stretches from 1553 to 1571 did not assume Muslim names.)

Mam pha lom (Mongphaloung94): Shyok kyindra shya, Shyo kindra shya raja, Rhok kannara rha:;

[Secundra95, Sekendar Shah, Sikandar Shah96]

Uncle of his predecessor, called sive Mam cakkya sive Cakrawate:, and son of Mam ba.Robinson ascribes to his king a monolingual coin with the name Sikandar.97 San Tha Aung does

not transcribe the Persian and Bengali text on a trilingual coin that he refers to this king. TheArakanese text on the coins variously reads as Naradhipati urito mahasisura98 or.. .urito siri

shya.99 The kings Pali name was Sirisuriyacandra mahadhammaraja.100

Mam raja kri: (Mongrazagri)101; Thin lin rha:, Cho lim shya, [Salim Shah].

Son of Mam pha loung. Contemporary Portuguese sources quote the king by his Muslim nameXilimixa.102 First dated coin according to Robinson. On his trilingual coins the titles Lord of the

White Elephant, Naradhibbati Cholim Shya and Shah Sultan are found.

Mam kha mom (Mong Kha Moung)103; U: Shyon shya, U Shyon rha [Hosein Shah, HuseinShah].


18/21

Son of Mam raja kri:, his trilingual dated coins are close to those of his predecessor. A coin quotedby Robinson reads Lord of the White Elephant Waradhammaraja U: Shyo:, shya.104 San ThaAung presents a coin with the increasingly ncomplex title Lord of the White Elephant, Lord of the

Red Elephant Mam : tara kri: U: Shyon Shya.

Sirisudhamma raja (Thirithudamma).

Son of Mam Kha moung:, Some authors call him Salim Shah II not to confuse him with Mam rajakri:, but the attribution of this name may eventually be erroneous.105 The only authority to my

knowledge mentioning his name as Salim Shah is Manrique who calls him twice Xalamiza, thesecond of that name106. The trilingual coins of Sirisudhamma shown by Robinson and San Tha

Aung bear an unread Persian inscription107, which apparently is not Salim. Habibullah writes:For the next two kings, Narapadigri (1638-1645) and Thirithudhamma (1622-1638), no Muslim

titles which undoubtedly were designed to represent their Muslim oppellations.108. The coinissued at Sirisudhammas crowning ceremony is monolingual (in Arakanese)109, the king

assuming the prestigious titles of Lord of the White Elephant and Lord of the Red Elephant. Datingfrom Narapati kris reign, all the Arakanese coins were monolingual110.

Bibliography

Ali, S.M. 1967. Arakan rule in Chittagong Journal of the Asiatic Society of Pakistan, XII,3.

An: Cok Rajawan [Rakhuin mam can an: cok ca ran}] [s.l.n.d.]. Ram pran Ton kyon: pe mu.(Remree, menuscript).

BM Add. 26583. British Library (London). Western manuscripts.

BM OR 3465. British Library OIOC (London):

BN Indochinois 20. Bibliotheque nationale (Paris), Manuscrits orientaux.

BN Anglais 26. Bibliotheque nationale (Paris), Manuscrits occidentaux.

Bhattacharya, B. 1927. Bengali Influence in Arakan, Bengal Past and Present 33.

Bouchon, G. /Thomaz L.P. 1988. Voyage dons les deltas du Gange et de IIrraouaddy 1521, Paris:

EHESS (Collection du Centre dEtudes portugueses).

Candamalalankara 1943. Rakhuin rajawan sac kyam: (vol.2). Mantale: Hamcawati.

Chris. J.A. van der (ed.) 1885-1990. Dagh-Register gehouden int Casteel Batavia 1602-1811.

Batavia/ The Hague.

Collis, M. 1925. Arakans place in the civilization of the Bay, Journal of the Burma Research

Society XV,1.

De Jonge, J,K,J, 1865. De Opkomst van het Nederlandsh Gezag on Oost-Indie (1595-1610). s-Gravenhage.


19/21

De Barros. J. 1973. Da Asia: decadas III & IV. Lisboa: S. Carlos.

Fistie. P. 1985. La Birmanie-ou la quete de l unite. Paris: EFFEO.

Forchhammer, E. 1891. papers on subjects relating to the Archaeology of Burma.

Ghosh, J. M. 1891. Interferencia et integracao dos Portugueses na Birmaniac. 1580-1630. Lisboa:

Universidade Nova (Dissertacao de Mestrado).

Habibullah, A.B.M. 1945. Arakan in the Pre-Mughal History of Bengal Journal of the AsiaticSociety of Bengal (Letters 11).

Harbsmeier, M. 1982. Reisebeschreibungen als mentalitatsgeschichtliche Quellen: Uberlegungen

zu einer historisch-anthropologischen Untersuchung fruhneuzeitlicher deutscherReisebeschreibungen in: Reiseberichte als Quellen europaischer Kulturgeschichte. Aufgaben und

Moglichkeiten der historischen Reiseforschung (ed. A. Maczak/ H.J. Teuteberg). Wolfenbuttel:Herzog August Bibliothek.

Harvey, G.E. 1967. History of Burma. London: Cass.

Hossein, S. 1988. Art and the Vintage. A Catalogue of exhibits in the Chittagong UniversityMuseum. Chittagong: Chittagong University Museum.

Kawisara [Kawisarabhisiripawara Aggamahadhammarajadhirajaguru] 1881. Dhanawati Are: topum, Rangoon: Burmah Herald Steam Press.

Kyaw Zan Tha 1991. Background paper on the Rohingya Problem, Yangon (dactyl).

Khin Maung Saw 1993. The Rohingya, who are they? The origin of the name Rohingya

Berlin: Humboldt Universitat. (Contribution to Tradition and Modernity in Myanmar-Conference).

Leider. J. 1994, La route de Am (Arakan). Contribution a l etude dune route terrestre entre la

Birmanie et le golfe du Bengale Journal Asiatique 282.

Leifer, M. 1995. Dictionary of the Modern Politics of South-East Asia. London.

Tha Thwan: Phru 1981. Rakhuin pran nay tuin ran sa: lu myui: cu mya:. Yangon.

Majumdar, R.C. 1973. History of Medieval Bengal. Calcutta: Bharadwaj.

Na Man 1842. Rajawan. f*ka-ba.

Manrique 1926. Travels of Fray Sebastien Manrique 1629-1643. Vol.1: Arakan. London: HakluytSociety.

Okkantha, A.S. 1990. History of Buddhism in Arakan. Calcutta: University of Calcutta.

(unpublished thesis).

On Sa U:, U: [s.d.]. Rakhuin Rajawan Lhan Ku: mrui: Mraratana.


20/21

Paton, C. 1828. Historical and Statistical Sketch of Arakan Asiatick Researches, 16.

Phayre. A.P. 1844. On the history of Arakan, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1.Phayre.A.P. 1846. The Coins of Arakan: The Historical Coins, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,

3.

Phayre A.P. 1883. The History of Burma. London: Trubner.

Qanungo. S.B. 1988. A History of Chittagong (vol.1: From Ancient Times down to 1761).Chittagong: Signet Library.

Raymond, C. 1994. Religious and scholarly interchanges between the Singhalese sangha and the

Arakanese and Burmese theravadin communities: historical documentation and physical evidence,New Delhi: The Bay of Bengal in the Asian Maritime Trade and Cultural Network (16-20

December 1994). (dactyl).

Robinson, M./Shaw, L.A. 1980. The Coins and Backnotes of Burma. Manchester: Lancashire andCheshire Numismatic Society.

Roy, A.C. 1986. History of Bengal, New Delhi: Kalyani.

San Tha Aung. 1979. Rakhuin danga: Ran kun: Do Co Co.

Schouten, W. 1727. Voyage de Gautier Schouten aux indes orientales 1658-1665. Amsterdam:

Estienne Roger.

Serrajuddin, A. 1986. Muslim influence in Arakan and the Muslim names of the ArakaneseKings: a Reassessment, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bangladesh 31,1.

Sharif, A. 1966. On Arakan and the Arakanese in: N.K. Bhattasali Commemoration Volume (ed.

A.B.M. Habibullah) Dacca.

Siddq Khan M. 1937. Muslim Intercourse with Burma (c. Relations with Burma). IslamicCulture11.

Sinha, N.K./Ray, N.R. 1986. A history of India, Calcutta: Orient Longman.

Subrahmayam, S. 1992. Iranians abroad: India-Asian Elite Migration and Early Modern State

Formation The Journal of Asian Studies 51,

Subrahmanyam, S. 1994. Persianisation and Mercantilism: Two Themes in Bay of Bengal History

1400-1700, New Delhi: The Bay of Bengal in the Asian Maritime Trade and Cultural Newwork(16-20 December 1994). (dactyl.)

Tarafdar M.R. 1966. Bengal Relations with her neighbours, a numismatic study in: N.K.Bhattasali Commemoration Volume. (ed. A.B.M. Habibullah) Dacca.

Ton Kyon charato [Candamalalankara] 1931. Rajakamasankhepakyam:, Mantale: Gunawati.


21/21

Tun Shwe Khine 1992. A Guide to Mrauk-U, an Ancient City of Rakhine, Myanmar. Sittway: UTun Shwe.

U Kula: 1960. Maharajawankri:, Rankun: Hamcawati pitakat.

U Pandi 1910. Dyanawati rajawan sac. Rankun: Prankri: mantun pitakat.

Sa Thwan On 1927. Rakhuinmaharajawantokri:. Cac twe/Mrui hom.

Yegar, M. 1972. The Muslim of Burma. A study of a Minority Group. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Documents

Buddhist King with Muslim Names