Civilizations in Embrace: The Spread of Ideas and the Transformation of Power; India and Southeast Asia in the Classical Age

1. Introduction

1 IntroductIon the cultural influence of one people upon another requires no military occupation, nor the labours of missionaries, not even the peregrinations of hawkers and other traders. Jan Knappert, Myths and Folklore in Southeast Asia (1999: 4) In considering the imprint of cultural contacts, and the undoubted fact that ideas are imported along with goods, there is a need to develop a more supple language of causal connection than source and imitation, original and copy. the transfer of cultural forms produces a redistribution of imaginative energies, alters in some way a preexistent field of force. the result is usually not so much an utterly new product as the development or evolution of a familiar matrix. Stanley J. o’connor, The Archaeology of Peninsular Siam (1986: 7) understanding the impact of world views on general politics or foreign policy would require a broader comparative study of cultures. Judith Goldstein and robert Keohane, Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs, Institutions, and Political Chan (1993: 9) the interaction among civilizations, including the flow of ideas, culture, and institutions, among them, is increasingly recognized as a powerful force which has shaped world history and still shapes the contemporary international order. (Katzenstein 2010). Since the 2 Civilizations in Embrace time Samuel Huntington’s “clash of civilizations” thesis appeared (Goldstein and Keohane 1993; Huntington 1993; Huntington 1996), scholars in the social sciences and humanities have debated a number of questions concerning the diffusion of ideas. What is the relationship between ideas and power? can there be any power in ideas without them being the ideas of the powerful? do ideas spread peacefully? Where do local actors borrow foreign ideas from and what role do they play in the spread of ideas? And why do some ideas get accepted in a foreign locale while others do not? do ideas always clash as Huntington suggests? or do they also converge? What permissive conditions facilitate the convergence of civilizations? In this study, I urge scholars looking for answers to these questions to turn to a particular narrative in Southeast Asian historiography which can be summarized as follows: (or perhaps earlier) between the fourth and the fourteenth centuries, Indian culture, religions and political ideas played a significant role in the politico-cultural landscape of Southeast Asia (including Funan, champa, Pagan, Angkor, Srivijaya, Ayutthaya, and Majapahit). these ideas — not just abstract ideas about the divine authority and legitimacy of the ruler, but also specific rules of governance and inter-state relations — influenced the emergence of statehood and the inter-state system in Southeast Asia. Yet the process of their transmission was largely peaceful. there was no clash of civilizations or polities between the sources and the recipients of these ideas. the transmission was driven as much by the initiative of local actors as by the cultural entrepreneurship of outsiders. What was originally viewed to be a passive acceptance by Southeast Asian rulers of foreign, especially Indian ideas, has come to be regarded, thanks to archaeological discoveries and scholarly enquiry and debate, as a matter of proactive and selective borrowing by local rulers seeking to legitimize and empower themselves. In this view, Southeast Asian societies adapted and modified a whole range of foreign ideas and rules to suit the local context. this process 3 Introduction preserved and in some cases amplified local beliefs and practices while producing significant but evolutionary historical change in domestic politics and inter-state relations. this study is inspired by an interest to broaden our understanding of how ideas influence international relations, keeping in mind the statement that “understanding the impact of world views on general politics or foreign policy would require a broader comparative study of cultures” (Goldstein and Keohane 1993: 9). As a scholar of international relations, I use the insights from Southeast Asian historiography to illustrate how active borrowing and localization is fundamental to normative change in world politics and should receive greater attention from scholars of political science and international relations (Acharya 2009b). When civilizations meet, they do not necessarily clash but can cohabit and cooperate. they do not compete, but can learn from each other. the “classical” period in Southeast Asia constitutes an ideal case for understanding the diffusion of ideas in world civilizations. there is a fair basis to suppose that “ideas made the state” in classical Southeast Asia, just as war, as charles tilly famously put it, “made the state” in early modern Europe (tilly 1975: 42). to analyse...