Edited by system_failure at 13-6-2019 05:06 PM
Aku masih lagi nak carik pasal dgn bang pokai..
Masih tak puas hati lg nih....
Ni adalah point2 yg diketengahkan oleh dr.takashi :
Accoring to Coedès, the Kudukan Bukit inscripion is dated 683 CE、However, unfortunately the "Xin (New) Tang Shu" says the first tribute of Si-li-fo-shi (Srivijaya) was during 670-673, and Yi-Jing recorded that he went to Shi-li-fo-shi in 671.
so..
batu bersurat Kedukan Bukit tak layak dijadi kayu pengukur yg tepat. Sejarah adalah ditulis oleh org indons busuk.. maka perlu cross check dgn sumber catatan pihak lain..
According to the “Zhu-fan-zhi“(諸蕃志=”Records of BarbaricNations”) written by Chau-Ju-ka (趙汝适,1225), Palembang was one of fifteen dependencies of San-fo-chi and not San-fo-chi itself.
Yi-Jing (義浄)and the “Xin (New) Tang Shu (新唐書)” wrote that Shih-li-fo-shi was located in the northern hemisphere, in other words in the 'Malay Peninsula'
so..
rekod dari Itsing dan Xin Tang Shu sendiri kata --> hemisfera utara
Ho-lo-tan(or Kha-la-tan=訶羅単) is believed by many historians in Java, but in the fifth century, there was not so developed Buddhist state in Java. It must be Kelantan, now on the east coast of Malaysia.
Kalau betul la bang pokai ni cikgu cikgi...
so.. baca la sendiri hasil kajian dr.takashi.. --> http://www7.plala.or.jp/seareview/newpage6Sri2011Chaiya.html
aku tak fhm knpa bang pokai mengagung2kan fakta bahawa srivijaya = bermula dari benua indons..
Hasil kajian oleh Georges Coedes (yg digunapakai byk historian indons) tu dah lapuk dan byk mistakes...
Guna la hasil kajian dr.takashi yg lebih uptodate..
|