Johannes Kurz

Journal of Asian History, Jahrgang 57 (2023), Ausgabe 1-2, Seite 81 - 115

Translations from premodern works play a major part in the understanding of China. Very often these translations lead to interpretations that are not supported by the evidence provided by the source material. Scholars rarely challenge interpretations by re-evaluating the source material. In cases where the information is extremely limited, scholars fill the lacunae with assumptions to make up deficient information. The present example – of “Arabs” and “Persians” invading Guangzhou in 758 – illustrates the vagaries of this commonly accepted process, as writers over a span of 150 years could not only not agree on one common point of view but rarely knew that different perspectives on the topic existed.

Keywords: Problematic interpretations; Guangzhou 758; Hainan pirate base in the Tang; speculative history.

Johannes Kurz

Journal of Asian History, Jahrgang 55 (2021), Ausgabe 1, Seite 67 - 88

The present text challenges two assumptions by Gabriel Ferrand (1864–1935) and George Coedès (1886–1969), the founders of “Srivijaya” history in Southeast Asian studies, concerning Chinese source material. While Ferrand reconstructed a new reading and understanding of a geographical term, Coedès was instrumental in inserting mention of a Javanese polity into Chinese records. Both intentionally changed the records in their quest to prove, firstly, that “Srivijaya” was a historical entity that could be documented via Chinese texts, and secondly, that the assumed state of “Srivijaya” pursued an expansive policy in the late seventh century towards their western neighbour Malayu in Sumatra, and their eastern neighbour Taruma in western Java. Neither Ferrand's nor Coedès' textual interventions, however, can be maintained upon closer inspection of the sources, and therefore the “Srivijayan” irredentism they sought to base on Chinese sources should be discarded.

Johannes Kurz

Journal of Asian History, Jahrgang 54 (2020), Ausgabe 1, Seite 157 - 184

Since the inception of modern diplomatic relations between the Sultanate of Brunei Darussalam on the northwest coast of Borneo and the People's Republic of China on September 30, 1991, writers on both sides of the South China Sea have worked on a history that links the two countries in the distant past. Brunei and China have employed the resulting account for specific purposes: In Brunei specific dates culled from Chinese records have informed the historical part of the “national philosophy” Melayu Islam Beraja (Malay Islamic Monarchy), whereas China has consequently supported Brunei's claim to be the oldest Muslim monarchy in Southeast Asia in order to secure a foothold in the region. This essay traces the gradual creation of this bilateral history and argues that it is influenced to a large degree by the political agendas of both Brunei and China and only based to a lesser degree on factual evidence.