CHAPTER 2. INTRODUCTION TO MAKASSAR HISTORY 19

The e a r l y h i s t o r y of Gowa u n f u r l e d w i t h i n a ma t r i x of analagous s o c i a l developments a f f e c t i n g South Sulawesi's southwest coastal p l a i n . Figure 2-1 maps the region's major and minor kingdoms, as w e l l as t h e i r palace centres, at around 1500 AD. The combined h i s t o r i c a l and archaeological evidence which allows me t o i d e n t i f y these and the other places shown i n the map, and t o p o s i t a r a t h e r d i f f e r e n t drainage regime from t h a t which a p p l i e s today, i s discussed i n the s i t e d e s c r i p t i o n s (Chapters 6 t o 12).^ The approximate areas r u l e d by the kingdoms are here reconstructed by the f o l l o w i n g conventions: drawing s t r a i g h t l i n e s separating adjacent palace centres; t r a c i n g h i n t e r l a n d boundaries where the coastal a l l u v i a l p l a i n f u l l y gives way t o the rugged i n t e r i o r ; and lea v i n g the polygons open t o the sea when the kingdom i n question would appear t o have enjoyed coastal access. With t h i s background we can now consider the h i s t o r i c a l sources.

2.1 The Makassar H i s t o r i c a l T r a d i t i o n

The Bugis and the Makassar have produced the bulk of South Sulawesi's indigenous h i s t o r i c a l works, although a few Mandar t e x t s i n a r e l a t e d s c r i p t are known (e.g. Muthalib et a l . , 1985-6). The Dutch l i n g u i s t Matthes founded the s c h o l a r l y study of the Bugis and Makassar t e x t s , p u b l i s h i n g h i s r e s u l t s i n a s u i t e of major p h i l o l o g i c a l and a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l works (e.g. Matthes, 1860, 1864, 1885). During the present century Dutch scholars have continued t o b u i l d on Matthes' foundations, j o i n e d by Bugis and Makassar scholars since

' The coastal p l a i n at the f a r n o r t h and south of Figure 2-1 f a l l s beyond the area I surveyed, so I would not t h i n k my re c o n s t r u c t i o n needs t o be very accurate t h e r e . For instance the Maros d e l t a has apparently prograded i n recent times, and may wel l have been prograding f o r c e n t u r i e s , such t h a t Marusuk (Maros) probably used t o l i e c l o s e r t o the coast. But I have no precise idea of where the Maros c o a s t l i n e was at C.1500 and so I use i t s modern c o a s t l i n e . S i m i l a r l y , I show Laikang, Bangkala and Binamu as independent kingdoms not because I have any d i s c r e t e evidence r e l a t i n g t o the period c.1500, but because they had emerged as important places by the 16th-17th c e n t u r i e s .

Indonesian independence, and most r e c e n t l y by n a t i v e English speakers (Andaya, 1981; Macknight, 1983; Caldwell, 1988).

The e a r l i e s t South Sulawesi s c r i p t s were deri v e d from the Indic-based s c r i p t s which preceded Arabic and L a t i n orthography i n i s l a n d Southeast Asia. Several l i n e s of evidence suggest t h a t i n the eastern i s l a n d s (South Sulawesi, the P h i l i p p i n e s , and p o s s i b l y Surobawa) the t e x t s were engraved on s t r i p s of palm l e a f which were sewn together i n t o a ribbon, and wound around two wooden spools f o r reading (Macknight, 1986). The Bugis and Makassar t e x t s are c a l l e d lontarak a f t e r the type of palm which would have u s u a l l y supplied the leaves. The name p e r s i s t s even though paper was pr e f e r r e d over palm leaves f o r some types of t e x t s by at least the 17th century (Cense, 1966).

The l o n t a r a k have been repeatedly copied, w i t h or without i n t e n t i o n a l a l t e r a t i o n s . Hence t h e i r use i n h i s t o r i o g r a p h y should be preceded by p h i l o l o g i c a l study. Thus Caldwell (1988) groups h i s Bugis t e x t s i n t o separate t r a d i t i o n s which he t h i n k s are descended from d i s t i n c t ancestors. Taking a group of r e l a t e d t e x t s he then r e c o n s t r u c t s the i n d i v i d u a l successions of copied t e x t s . This allows him t o i d e n t i f y the o r i g i n a l readings. So when he f i n d s the same i n f o r m a t i o n i n two separate groups of t e x t s , he can i d e n t i f y cases where the info r m a t i o n had been present i n the o r i g i n a l readings, and t r e a t the ot h e r s as cases of a s c r i b e having embroidered the t e x t he was copying w i t h i n f o r m a t i o n from a d i f f e r e n t source. Info r m a t i o n a t t r i b u t a b l e t o two or o r i g i n a l readings i s more r e l i a b l e as i t enjoys independent testimony.

Caldwell (1988) f u r t h e r notes t h a t the o l d e s t case he can f i n d i n which the f a m i l y r e l a t i o n s h i p s of the same person enjoy independent testimony, corresponds c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y t o a tremendous increase i n the q u a n t i t y of genealogical d e t a i l s . The j u n c t u r e can be i d e n t i f i e d w i t h the i n c e p t i o n of the Bugis lontarak t r a d i t i o n . Working back from known dates Caldwell (1988) can thus date the o r i g i n s of the Bugis l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n t o around 1400 AD.

This would appear t o make the Bugis s c r i p t over a century older than the Makassar s c r i p t . The development of Makassar w r i t i n g i s a t t r i b u t e d t o Daeng r i Pammatek, Gowa's

harbourmaster d u r i n g the r e i g n of Tumapakrisik Kallona (1511-1547), and the scanty i n f o r m a t i o n on an e a r l i e r Gowa king i s s p e c i f i c a l l y imputed t o the lack of lon t a r a k (Wolhoff and Abdurrahim, n.d.:12,18). Moreover, none of the Makassar Jontai-ak t o be discussed here suggests an e a r l i e r date.^

The breadth of the Bugis-Makassar l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n can be appreciated from Mukhlis' (1975) i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of 12 d i s t i n c t kinds of l o n t a r a k . However, not a l l kinds are of importance t o Gowa's e a r l y h i s t o r y , as can be shown by counting the number of times the references i n Mukhlis (1975) involve the various types of l o n t a r a k (Table 2-1). The preponderance of references t o Makassar works r e f l e c t s Mukhlis' focus on Gowa's pre-1667 a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . But note the key r d l e of the a t t o r i o l o n g i n Mukhlis' r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of Gowa's p o l i t i c a l h i s t o r y . Indeed three of the 21 lo n t a r a k he consulted - two c l o s e l y r e l a t e d Makassar " c h r o n i c l e s " , and the o l d e s t Bugis d i a r y composed by Bone's La T e n r i t a t t a Sultan Sahaduddin (Cense, 1966:422) - provide 56 of h i s 105 references.

F o r t u n a t e l y f o r i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s w i t h b a s i c a l l y no s k i l l s i n Makassar or Bugis, such as myself, only a small f r a c t i o n of the t e x t s are of much relevance i n r e c o n s t r u c t i n g Gowa's p o l i t i c a l h i s t o r y . A few have als o been made a v a i l a b l e t o a wider p u b l i c , but my access t o the others r e l i e s on secondary sources, i n p a r t i c u l a r Mukhlis (1975). Hence the Makassar sources can be discussed under two headings; ( i ) primary sources t r a n s l a t e d i n t o Indonesian, and ( i i ) the c i t a t i o n by secondary sources of i n f o r m a t i o n contained i n as yet u n t r a n s l a t e d l o n t a r a k . I n a d d i t i o n t h e r e are a few key passages which I cannot ascribe t o any s p e c i f i c l o n t a r a k , p o s s i b l y because they stem from o r a l t r a d i t i o n .

^ However, i t must be remembered tha t the modern s c h o l a r l y study of the Makassar works lags behind t h a t of the the Bugis t e x t s .

Respectively code-numbered Lontarak Nos 6, 7 and 9 by Mukhlis (1975:15-16).

22

TABLE 2-1 -NUMBER OF CITATIONS AGAINST LONTARAK TYPE IN MUKHLIS (1975)

Makassar Texts Bugis Texts T o t a l Lontarak attoriolong 50 26 76

("chronicles" and d i a r i e s ) Lontarak pau-pau (popular legends) 7 3 10 Lontarak paseng ( c o l l e c t i o n s 6 1 7

of f a m i l i a l i n s t r u c t i o n s ) Lontarak surek b i c a r a a t t o r i o l o n g 0 7 7 ( c o l l e c t i o n s of customary law) Lontarak u i u ada 3 0 3

(c o n t r a c t s and t r e a t i e s ) Lontarak pappangaja (advice from 1 0 1 the e l d e r l y t o f u t u r e generations) Lontarak rapang r i l a l e n g panua 0 1 1 ( c o l l e c t i o n s of l o c a l customary law) Lontarak pau-pau rikadong 0 0 0

(epic legends) Lontarak adek a i l o p i - l o p i n g 0 0 0 ( r u l e s f o r commerce and s a i l i n g ) Lontarak pau k o t i k a ( c r i t e r i a f o r determining auspicious times t o 0 0 0

undertake deeds) Lontarak surek e j a ( c o l l e c t i o n s 0 0 0

of poems and l y r i c prose) Lontarak surek bawang 0 0 0

( c o l l e c t i o n s of n a r r a t i v e s ) Total 67 38 105

N.B. I n h i s e x p l i c i t argument t h a t the Bugis and Makassar comprise a s i n g l e k o i n i , Mukhlis does not s p e c i f y whether the consulted l o n t a r a k are Bugis or Makassar, but t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n can be deduced from Mukhlis' other documentation. I f o l l o w Mukhlis i n using the Bugis r a t h e r than the Makassar words, as i s standard p r a c t i c e f o r c u l t u r a l terms which apply t o both c u l t u r e s .

23

2.2 Primary Sources Translated i n t o Indonesian

2.2.1 The "Sejarah Gowa"

The "Gowa c h r o n i c l e " i s the most widely used source on Gowa's early h i s t o r y . Noorduyn (1985) p o i n t s out t h a t a t le a s t ten complete or p a r t i a l manuscripts of the c h r o n i c l e are held i n public c o l l e c t i o n s . Indeed Matthes (1860, 1883) had access t o four manuscripts and published the v a r i a n t readings as notes to the main reading. The c h r o n i c l e was f i n a l l y made more widely a v a i l a b l e when Wolhoff and Abdurrahim t r a n s c r i b e d Matthes' v e r s i o n i n t o L a t i n s c r i p t and accompanied the Makassar t e x t w i t h a t r a n s l a t i o n i n t o I n d o n e s i a n . I n a d d i t i o n t o p o i n t i n g out a number of minor areas where Wolhoff and Abdurrahim might have improved t h e i r study, Noorduyn (1985) shows t h a t Matthes had u n f o r t u n a t e l y concentrated on a poor manuscript, and t h a t a proper p h i l o l o g i c a l study i s needed. While I take on board the s p e c i f i c improvements suggested by Noorduyn (1985) I am otherwise bound by the published Indonesian t r a n s l a t i o n . I n t h i s study I w i l l r e f e r t o Wolhoff and Abdurrahim's Sedjarah Goa w i t h the a b b r e v i a t i o n "SG".*

"* While the p u b l i c a t i o n of Wolhoff and Abdurrahim i t s e l f bears no date, Noorduyn (1985:34) i n f e r s a date of 1960, and Mukhlis (1975:119) s t a t e s 1959. Both the t r a n s c r i p t i o n and the t r a n s l a t i o n are reproduced verbatim by Mukhlis (1975:134-191). ^ Mukhlis has also had access t o several other versions of the same basic m a t e r i a l , e s p e c i a l l y t h a t described by him as Lontarak No.6 and Lontarak No.7 (Mukhlis, 1975:16). He s t a t e s that the f i r s t 261 paragraphs of h i s Lontarak No.7, th a t i s up t o and i n c l u d i n g the r e i g n of Sultan Hasanuddin, was composed by a Karaeng K a n j i l o i n 1670. This i s the same number of paragraphs and the same time span as found i n SG. In 1870, according t o Mukhlis, the t e x t was copied and extended t o 305 paragraphs by a Karaeng Beroanging. A sec t i o n , at l e a s t , of the o r i g i n a l manuscript (1670?, 1870?) was held i n 1975 by the descendants of the Gowa r o y a l t y , though l a r g e l y i l l e g i b l e . A copy, however, was kept i n the Yayasan Kebudayaan c o l l e c t i o n ( i d e n t i f i e d by Mukhlis as No.211, which appears t o be an e r r o r ) . U n f o r t u n a t e l y Noorduyn (9185) gives no d e t a i l s of the ve r s i o n from South Sulawesi a v a i l a b l e t o him i n Leiden on m i c r o f i l m . [Analysis by Campbell Macknight.]

24 2.2.2 The "Sejarah T a l l o k "

As pointed out by Noorduyn, the "Sejarah Gowa" was c l e a r l y compiled t o t w i n w i t h a c h r o n i c l e c o n c e n t r a t i n g on the kingdom of T a l l o k . On several occasions the "Sejarah Gowa" advises the reader of f u r t h e r p a r t i c u l a r s , t o be supp l i e d , which indeed can be found i n the c h r o n i c l e known as the "Sejarah T a l l o k " (Noorduyn, 1985). Rahim and Ridwan (1975) have published a L a t i n t r a n s c r i p t i o n and Indonesian t r a n s l a t i o n of the Makassar t e x t under the t i t l e Sejarah Kerajaan Tallo' (Suatu T r a n s k r i p s i L o n t a r a ' j . They used a t e x t then held i n the p r o v i n c i a l government c o l l e c t i o n but do not comment on the r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the v e r s i o n published by Matthes. While I have few d e t a i l s on Rahim and Ridwan's published v e r s i o n of the "Sejarah T a l l o k " (here c a l l e d "ST" f o r s h o r t ) , I imagine t h a t the same s o r t s of cautions apply as discussed by Noorduyn (1985) w i t h regard t o SG.^

2.2.3 The r o y a l d i a r i e s

The down-to-earth, almost j o u r n a l i s t i c nature of the Bugis and Makassar c h r o n i c l e s a l s o c h a r a c t e r i s e s the d i a r i e s (Noorduyn, 1965). W i t h i n the Indonesian c o n t e x t , the h i s t o r i c a l t r a d i t i o n of d i a r i e s i s apparently unique t o South Sulawesi and some areas i n f l u e n c e d by the Bugis and Makassar. The d i a r i e s were w r i t t e n on European paper i n l o c a l s c r i p t w i t h e n t r i e s dated according t o both the C h r i s t i a n and Islamic calendars (Cense, 1966).'' The o l d e s t i n i t i a t e d d i a r y , t h a t of the Gowa and T a l l o k k i n g s , was f i r s t t r a n s c r i b e d i n t o L a t i n s c r i p t by L i g t v o e t (1880) who f o l l o w e d the e n t r i e s up t o 1751 and added a Dutch t r a n s l a t i o n . Recently an e d i t o r i a l s t a f f headed by Drs Kamaruddin has produced another L a t i n t r a n s c r i p t i o n , along w i t h a t r a n s l a t i o n i n t o Indonesian. T i t l e d Pengkajian ( T r a n s l i t e r a s i dan Terjemahfn) Lontarak BHang Raja Gowa dan Tallok (Naskah Makassar), the work f o l l o w s the d i a r y e n t r i e s up t o the end of 1700 (Kamaruddin

Mukhlis ( 1 975) appears not t o have used t h i s source. A l l these p o i n t s seem t o suggest t h a t European ideas had a

profound i n f l u e n c e on the formative development of the Makassar h i s t o r i c a l t r a d i t i o n , even i f the Makassar used t e x t s t o record t r a d i t i o n a l concerns r a t h e r than t o address i n t e l l e c t u a l issues.

et a l . , 1985-6). This book ("LB" f o r s h o r t ) i s the basis f o r my understanding of the Gowa and T a l l o k r o y a l d i a r i e s , although I w i l l o c c a s i o n a l l y need t o disagree w i t h the book's explanatory notes.®

Before 1600 the e n t r i e s are scarce and dated only by the year. E n t r i e s accompany only about h a l f of the years between 1600 and 1630, and then w i t h dates of v a r i a b l e s p e c i f i c i t y . Only the years from 1631 have numerous e n t r i e s annually, dated by the day. This coincides w i t h the coming of age of Gowa's Sultan Mohammad Said, born i n 1607 ( r . 1639-1653), who i s described as having been knowledgeable i n the Arabic s c r i p t and masterly i n Makassar w r i t i n g (SG:70). Hence he may have inaugurated or at le a s t c o nsolidated the t r a d i t i o n whereby the Gowa and T a l l o k r o y a l t y kept d i a r i e s .

2.2.4 Three s u b s i d i a r y t e x t s

While I was on f i e l d w o r k i n Ujung Pandang (as Makassar i s c a l l e d today). Campbell Macknight sent me copies of three short Makassar t e x t s , published by Matthes (1883), t o have t r a n s l a t e d there- On t h e i r own the t r a n s l a t i o n s are of l i m i t e d value, but f o r t u n a t e l y the two of them used here i n t e r s e c t s u f f i c i e n t l y w i t h SG and ST f o r the main p o i n t s t o become c l e a r . Here I adopt the names f o r these t e x t s given by the t r a n s l a t o r , which are I n i Adat Lama d i Sanrabone ("lALS"), I n i Adat Lama d i Maros ("lALM"), and the t e x t which I was unable t o use, I n i Adat Lama d i Turatea ("lALT").*

2.3 Main Secondary Sources and Other I d e n t i f i a b l e l o n t a r a k

F i r s t published i n 1959, and f r e q u e n t l y republished since, Patunru's Sejarah Gowa i s the c l a s s i c , broad h i s t o r i c a l o u t l i n e of Gowa. However, the genre appears t o have been i n i t i a t e d by Hamzah Daeng Tompo, a man wko had held a high o f f i c e i n the l a s t Gowa government. I n 1948 he wrote a

^ Mukhlis (1975) made only l i g h t use of the Gowa and T a l l o k royal d i a r i e s . ^ Matthes (1883) pp.203-5, pp.205-7 and p.207 f o r Sanrabone, Maros and Turatea r e s p e c t i v e l y . Ian Caldwell, then i n Ujung Pandang on a f i e l d w o r k t r i p , was k i n d enough t o organise the t r a n s l a t i o n of the t e x t s i n t o Indonesian. The t r a n s l a t o r must have taken the job as a minor commercial c o n t r a c t because the t r a n s l a t i o n s stand out as rushed.

26 manuscript, apparently unpublished, which Mukhlis (1975:64) c a l l s Sejarah Keraja.a.n Gowa. Mukhlis f r e q u e n t l y r e f e r s t o t h i s work, and "Lontarak No.8" i n Daeng Tempo's possession, under circumstances which touch on Gowa's t r a d i t i o n a l s o c i a l o r g a n i s a t i o n , and the s t a t u s of the p o l i t i e s which f e l l w i t h i n Gowa's j u r i s d i c t i o n at various j u n c t u r e s . The comparison i m p l i e s t h a t Daeng Tempo's v e r s i o n of Gowa's h i s t o r y was d i s t i n g u i s h e d p r e c i s e l y by t h i s emphasis made possible though h i s d i r e c t access t o Lontarak No.8.

The other source of importance t o Mukhlis' r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of Gowa's g e o p o l i t i c a l o r g a n i s a t i o n i s "Lontarak No.6". Mukhlis describes i t as a c o m p i l a t i o n , t r a n s c r i b e d together i n 1873 on the request of Matthes, of three works o r i g i n a l l y w r i t t e n between the mid-16th and l a t e 17th c e n t u r i e s . Mukhlis adds t h a t the o r i g i n a l manuscript i s held by the l a s t Gowa ki n g , but does not comment on whether the work has been published (Mukhlis, 1975:15).

2.4 External Sources on Ea r l y Bugis-Makassar H i s t o r y

South Sulawesi's docuroention by e x t e r n a l sources remains sparse u n t i l the e a r l y 16th century. We have only disconnected fragments of i n f o r m a t i o n , such as the c i t a t i o n of a few toponyms i n the 14th century Javanese poem Nagar akertagama, and Tomi Pi res confused accovint of South Sulawesi, d e r i v e d from t r a v e l l e r s ' t a l e s , w r i t t e n i n 1511 (Pelras, 1981; Reid, 1983a; 11.8 and 13.4.1 o f t h i s t h e s i s ) .

From 1511 u n t i l the end of the 16th century the Portuguese maintained a p e r i p h e r a l i n t e r e s t i n South Sulawesi, r e s u l t i n g i n sporadic commercial and missionary e x p e d i t i o n s and a number of r e p o r t s , p a r t i c u l a r l y concerning places of successful p r o s e l y t i s i n g . During the mid-16th century, the period of heightened missionary a c t i v i t i e s , the Portuguese concentrated t h e i r a t t e n t i o n on the west coast n o r t h of Maros (Jacobs, 1966; Pelras, 1977). While much of value can be gleaned from these accounts, notably as developed by Pelras (1977, 1981), the narrow geographical focus of the Portuguese

27 cautions against e x t r a p o l a t i n g broader perspectives on South Sulawesi's p o l i t i c a l and economic situation.^°

From the e a r l y 17th century onwards, a f t e r T a l l o k ' s Sultan Abdullah had developed Makassar i n t o a major entrepdt, the external sources s t a r t t o provide a sound coverage of South Sulawesi, i n c l u d i n g sketches of Makassar. P a r t i c u l a r l y a f t e r the Dutch East I n d i a Company (VOC) e s t a b l i s h e d a dominant presence i n Makassar, t h e i r records become very good, and include a d e t a i l e d map of the peninsula (Andaya,1981:Map 9 ) . I have not consulted the o r i g i n a l t e x t s myself but they are comprehensively summarised elsewhere by Boxer (1967), Reid (1981; 1983a) and e s p e c i a l l y Andaya (1981).

There are also some t e r m i n a l 17th and 18th century accounts of South Sulawesi, notably by Gervaise (1688) who based h i s account on r e p o r t s by Makassar refugees, but also by V a l e n t i j n (1724), F o r r e s t (1792) and Stavorinus (1798). While not q u i t e contemporary w i t h the p e r i o d d e a l t w i t h here, they can be valuable i n e i t h e r d e s c r i b i n g the immediate aftermath, or rescuing f r e s h memories from the subsequent r o t of time.

2.5 Chronological Framework Provided by the Sources

2.5.1 General c h r o n o l o g i c a l determinants

The primary Makassar sources u s e d ^ e r e cover the kingdoms of Maros, Gowa, T a l l o k and Sanrabone; broadly speaking, the

An example can show the dangers of not recognising the l i m i t a t i o n s of the Portuguese accounts. The primary sources on the voyage of a c e r t a i n Father Viegas include a reference to h i s having baptised the pri n c e of a s t a t e neighbouring Siang some time between 1545 and 1547. A secondary source w r i t t e n i n the e a r l y 17th century asserts t h a t Father Viegas had baptised the k i n g of T a l l o k i n 1555 (Pelras, 1977:232). However, Pelras (1977:232-233) argues, given t h a t Viegas had l e f t Sulawesi f o r good i n 1547, the secondary source must have misdated the baptism; t h e r e f o r e T a l l o k would appear to be the s t a t e neighbouring Siang whose k i n g had been baptised between 1545 and 1547. The t r o u b l e w i t h Pelras' reasoning i s that Siang then lay some 25 ki l o m e t r e s from T a l l o k , separated by the kingdom of Marusuk ( c f . Figure 2-1). Hence the "s t a t e neighbouring Siang" mentioned by the primary sources would have been some kingdom other than T a l l o k , and the secondary source w i t h the erroneous dates appears also t o have erred i n s p e c i f y i n g T a l l o k .

28 coastal p l a i n between Maros and Takalar kabupaten (Figure 2-1). A l l four kingdoms are represented by " c h r o n i c l e s " s t r u c t u r e d according t o the r o y a l succession. The shor t t e x t s , lALS and lALM, provide a t h i n l y annotated genealogy from the kingdom's founder(s) t o the l a s t r u l e r before Gowa's absorption of the throne (Chapter 4 ) . SG and ST are also s t r u c t u r e d by r e i g n , even i f the l e v e l of annotation and genealogical d e t a i l i s f a r more comprehensive. The d i a r i e s (LB) of course observe a c a l e n d r i c a l s t r u c t u r e , but they too show more concern w i t h t r a d i t i o n a l f a m i l i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s than the kingdom's other a f f a i r s . Hence t o b r i n g the sources together the overarching scheme has t o take r e i g n s as the fundamental c h r o n o l o g i c a l u n i t , i n p a r t i c u l a r Gowa's reigns which c o n s t i t u t e the longest and best dated succession.

As discussed by Noorduyn (1965), SG and ST provide c h r o n o l o g i c a l explanations on p o i n t s such as r e i g n lengths and the elapse between r e l a t e d events, c a l c u l a t e d by the C h r i s t i a n r a t h e r than the Muslim calendar. But minor inco n s i s t e n c i e s can accompany the dates, as f o r instance i n the year of gr e a t e r Gowa's adoption of Islam, v a r i o u s l y c i t e d as 1603, 1605 and 1606. I n t h i s case Noorduyn (1965) can po i n t out copying e r r o r s by comparing the C h r i s t i a n and the Muslim dates, and hence e s t a b l i s h 1605 as the date which the sources had intended. Other i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s have not been resolved along the same l i n e s , ^ ^ and my own i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the chronology i s based on f i n d i n g the gr e a t e s t harmony i n the dates r a t h e r than on any p h i l o l o g i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s (Tables 2-2 and 2-3).^^

Notably, the 43 years length of Alauddin's r e i g n (SG:61) cannot be squared w i t h the other d e t a i l s given on Alauddin.

Note t h a t I date the beginning of Tunipasuluk's r e i g n t o 1590, based on the year i n which h i s predecessor T u n i j a l l o k died, r ather than 1591, which Noorduyn (1965:150) c a l c u l a t e s from the statement t h a t Tunipasuluk r u l e d only two years before h i s expulsion ( i n 1593). However, a r e i g n between 1590 and 1593 could e a s i l y be estimated as two years, based e i t h e r on the nearest number of years ( l a t e 1590 t o e a r l y 1593) or on the number of years completed (any i n t e r v a l up t o two years 364 days). Backdating Tunipasuluk's i n a u g u r a t i o n by a year solves a minor inconsistency Noorduyn noted i n Tumapakrisik Kallona's inauguration; t h a t i t had supposedly occurred by when the Portuguese conquered Melaka (1511), but Noorduyn's own c a l c u l a t i o n s brought i t no e a r l i e r than 1512.

As regards expanding the reach of the ch r o n o l o g i c a l reckonings, s c a n t i l y dated m a t e r i a l i s u s u a l l y f i x e d i n time by d a t i n g reigns back from the o l d e s t r e l i a b l y dated r e i g n , assigning them a per i o d between 25 and 33 years (Caldwell, 1988:165). However, t h i s convention does not help w i t h some of my genealogical sequences as they do not in v o l v e r e i g n s . In a d d i t i o n , the average r e i g n lengths of Gowa and T a l l o k r e s p e c t i v e l y are 18.0 + 15.2 and 20.25 + 10.9, or 19.8 + 13.1 when combined; even though punctuated re i g n s have been combined i n t o the same r e i g n length, these f i g u r e s f a l l below the g e n e r a l l y used range. The discrepancy increases w i t h the l a t e r Gowa kings between Sultan I s m a i l and Andi I j o Muhammad Abdul Kadir (Patunru, 1983:146-7) f o r whom the average r e i g n length was 14.4 t 16.4 years.

Now SG, lALM and lALS present the i n t i a l r e i g n s as fath e r - t o - s o n i n h e r i t a n c e s , so r e i g n length here i s a special case of male generation l e n g t h . Here our estimates are 26.4 + 6.7 and 33.1 + 11.8 f o r Gowa and T a l l o k r e s p e c t i v e l y , or 29.5 t 10.1 when combined. C r o s s - c u l t u r a l p o p u l a t i o n studies also i n d i c a t e t h a t males tend t o have o f f s p r i n g at a median age of around 30 years (see L e s l i e , 1985^.66-7), and 30 years can be used as a rule-of-thumb estimate of generation length i n palaeodemographic s t u d i e s (e.g. Acsadi and Nemesk6ri, 1 970:236) . ̂ M a l e generation lengths also provide t i g h t e r estimates than r e i g n lengths, as can be seen from the standard d e v i a t i o n s involved and e s p e c i a l l y the c o e f f i c i e n t s of v a r i a t i o n ( i . e . S.D. d i v i d e d by the average; see Tables 2-2 and 2-3). Hence the use of average male generation length as an estimate of the act u a l f i g u r e i s l i k e l y t o have a smaller e r r o r attached, whether one stage or several are

The c a l c u l a t i o n depends on c o r r e c t i n g c e r t a i n typographical e r r o r s i n Patunru's dates.

Peter Bellwood p o i n t s out t h a t 25 years i s the f i g u r e used f o r royal male generation lengths i n Polynesian genealogies. The d i f f e r e n c e would l i e i n the succession of f i r s t - b o r n males i n the Polynesian case, r a t h e r than i n the usual succession i n Gowa and T a l l o k of the male born by the king's highest s t a t u s w i f e (Chapter 3 ) .

1

TABLE 2 - 2 . 1 6 t h - 1 7 t h CENTURY REIGN LENGTHS OF GOWA AND TALLOK Gowa Ruler Reign Reign Length Sources

GIX Tumapakrisik Kallona 1 5 1 1 - 1 5 4 7 3 6 SG :19 GX Tunipalangga 1 5 4 7 - 1 5 6 5 1 8 SG:23 GXI Tunibatta ( 4 0 days) 1 5 6 5 0 S G : 3 5 GXII T u n i j a l l o k 1 5 6 5 - 1 5 9 0 2 5 L B : 8 7 ; S G : 4 0 GXI 1 1 Tunipasuluk 1 5 9 0 - 1 5 9 3 3 L B : 8 7 ; S G : 5 4 - 5 GXIV Sultan Alauddin 1 5 9 3 - 1 6 3 9 4 6 S G : 5 6 - 7 ; L B : 1 0 0 GXV Sultan Mohammad Said 1 6 3 9 - 1 6 5 3 1 4 L B : 1 0 0 , 1 1 6 GXVI Sultan Hasanuddin 1 6 5 3 - 1 6 6 9 1 6 L B : 1 1 6 , 1 3 7 GXVII Sultan Amir Hamzah 1 6 6 9 - 1 6 7 4 5 L B : 1 3 7 , 1 4 8 GXVIII Sultan Mohammad A l i 1 6 7 4 - 1 6 7 7 3 L B : 1 4 9 , 1 5 6 GXIX Sultan Abdul J a l i l 1 6 7 7 - 1 7 0 9 3 2 L B : 1 5 6 ;

L i g t v o e t p.182

Average (n=11 ) 1 8 . 0 + 1 5 . 2 ( C o e f f i c i e n t of v a r i a t i o n 0 . 8 4 )

T a l l o k Ruler Reign Reign Length Sources TIV Nakkoayang 1 5 4 7 - 1577 30 S T : 10 TV Karaeng Balnea 1 5 7 7 - 1590 13 S G : 4 9 TV I Tunipasuluk 1 5 9 0 - 1593 3 L B : 8 7 ; S G : 5 4 - 5 TVII Sultan Abdullah 1 5 9 3 - 1 6 2 0 ; 29 L B : 8 7 , 9 5 , 9 7 ;

1 6 3 4 - 1636 S T : 2 4 - 5 T V I I I Sultan Mudhaffar 1 6 2 0 - 1 6 3 4 ; 19 LB:117;

1 6 3 6 - 1641 S T : 2 5 - 6 T l x Sultan Mahmud 1 6 4 1 - 1654 13 L B : 1 1 7 TX Sultan Harrunarasyid 1 6 5 4 - c . 1 6 7 3 19 L B : 1 1 9 , 1 4 0 TXI Sultan Abdul Kadir c . 1 6 7 3 - 1709 36 L B : 1 4 0 , 1 5 5 ;

L i g t v o e t p. 181

Average (n=8 ) 2 0 . 2 5 + 1 0 . 9 ( C o e f f i c i e n t of v a r i a t i o n 0 . 5 4 )

Combined Average (n=18 ) 1 9 . 8 + 1 3 . 1 ( C o e f f i c i e n t of v a r i a t i o n 0 . 6 6 )

N.B. Reign lengths are c a l c u l a t e d here simply by s u b t r a c t i n g the year of i n s t a l l a t i o n from the year of dethronal or demise, and need not be accurate t o the nearest twelve month per i o d . Tunipasuluk, who r u l e d both Gowa and T a l l o k d u r i n g h i s b r i e f career, i s included i n both k i n g l i s t s but only once i n the combined count. The v a c i l l a t i o n of the T a l l o k throne between Abdullah and Mudhaffar i s demonstrated by a c l e a r reference t o Alsdullah's r e - i n s t a l l a t i o n i n 1634 (LB:9 5 ) . The p o i n t l e t s us come w i t h i n one year of the otherwise p u z z l i n g f i g u r e s given i n ST:24-26: i . e . t h a t Abdullah reigned 30 years; t h a t he stood behind Mudhaffar on the throne f o r 13 years; t h a t Mudhaffar f i r s t r u l e d T a l l o k at the age of 2 5 ; and t h a t he r u l e d T a l l o k f o r 18 years i n a l l , i n c l u d i n g h i s l a s t two years d u r i n g the r e i g n of Gowa's Mohammad Said (pace Reid, 1 9 8 1 : 2 0 ) . ST stops at Mudhaffar's death and so t o estimate the r e i g n length of Mahmud ( b e t t e r known as Karaeng P a t t i n g a l l o a n g ) I assume he r u l e d between Mudhaffar's death and h i s own.

31

TABLE 2-3. 16th-17th CENTURY GOWA AND TALLOK RULERS -MALE GENERATION LENGTHS

Gowa Ruler Generation Source Length

GX Tunipalangga (born 1511); son of GIX 7 SG:23 GXI Tunibatta (born 1517); son of GIX SG:35 GXII T u n i j a l l o k (born 1545); son of GXI 28 LB: 87 GXI 11 Tunipasuluk (born 1575); son of GXII 30 SG:54 GXIV Alauddin (born 1586); son of GXII 41 LB:87 GXV Mohammad Said (born 1607); son of GXIV 21 LB: 88 GXVI Hasanuddin (born 1631); son of GXV 24 LB:91 GXVII Amir Hamzah (born 1654); son of GXVI 23 •LB:118-9 GXVIII Mohammad A l i (born 1654); son of GXVI 23 LB:117 GXIX Abdul J a l i l (born 1652); son of GXVI 21 LB:114 Average (n-8) 26.4 + 6.7 ( C o e f f i c i e n t of v a r i a t i o n 0.25)

T a l l o k Ruler Generation Source Length \

TIV Makkoayang (born 1521) ? ST: 10 TV Balnea (born c. 1551); daughter of TIV 30 ST: 13 TVI Tunipasuluk (born 1576); son o f GXII 30 SG:54 TVII Abdullah (born 1573); son of TIV 52 LB: 87 T V I I I Mudhaffar (born 1593); son of TVI I 20 LB:87 T V I I I Mahmud (born 1600); son of TV I I 27 LB: 87 TX Harunarrasyid (born 1640); son of T V I I I 47 LB:102 TXI Abdul Kadir (born 1666); son o f TX 26 LB:131 Average (n=7) 33.1 + 11.8 ( C o e f f i c i e n t of v a r i a t i o n 0.36)

Combined Average (n=14) 29.5 + 10.1 (^Coefficient of v a r i a t i o n 0.34)

N.B. Tunipasuluk i s included only once i n the combined count. Although a female (TV) i s included, o n l y her year of b i r t h i s considered (as an example of the generation l e n g t h between her f a t h e r ' s year o f b i r t h and the year of b i r t h of the f a t h e r ' s r o y a l c h i l d ) and not the ages at which she h e r s e l f gave b i r t h . Note t h a t comparing the f i g u r e s i n Tables 2-2 and 2-3 we can also c a l c u l a t e t h a t the average age at which a Gowa or Ta l l o k r u l e r s t a r t e d t o r e i g n was 23.5 + 11.1 (range 7-48), i . e . around 25 years o l d .

dated back.^^ Consequently I date my genealogical r e c o n s t r u c t i o n s (Chapter 4 ) by t a k i n g the e a r l i e s t r e l i a b l e b i r t h date of a f i g u r e d male and d a t i n g back w i t h the rounded-off estimate of 30 + 10 years per male generation.^*

Having s a i d t h a t , I can appreciate Caldwell's use of r e i g n lengths. His Bugis genealogies are sometimes f u n n e l l e d through a p i c a l female r u l e r s - which i s not t r u e of the Makassar genealogies - and he i s d e a l i n g w i t h few cases of the s i b l i n g successions associated w i t h the shor t Gowa and Tall o k r e i g n s . From the f i g u r e s Caldwell ( 1 9 8 6 : 1 6 5 ) gives of 12 known Bugis and Makassar pr e - I s l a m i c r e i g n lengths, we can c a l c u l a t e an average r e i g n length of 2 4 . 7 5 + 1 7 . 5 ( 25 + 17 )

years, t o be used i n my r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of general Bugis-Makassar p r e - I s l a m i c chronology ( 1 3 . 4 . 1 ) . ^ ' '

2 . 5 . 2 The f i r s t , legendary phase of Gowa's h i s t o r y

Gowa's i n i t i a l phase apparently preceded the development of a Makassar s c r i p t ( 2 . 1 ) , and i s consequently associated w i t h pronounced mythical elements and the barest minimum o f genealogical d e t a i l s . The compilers of SG and ST make the po i n t themselves by p r e f a c i n g t h e i r n a r r a t i v e s w i t h d i s c l a i m e r s and commenting on the lack of genealogical i n f o r m a t i o n . SG f u r t h e r r e l e g a t e s Gowa's o r i g i n s t o r y t o a bare o u t l i n e s t r i p p e d of a l l but the e s s e n t i a l d e t a i l s . As reported there a heavenly nymph, Gowa's Tomanurung or the "one who descended",^® came t o e a r t h and married a shadowy mortal c a l l e d Karaeng Bayo. Before disappearing she gave b i r t h t o a mir a c u l o u s l y precocious son, (Tu)Massalangga

" Quite obviously a person's r e p r o d u c t i v e span i s b r i e f e r , i n the case of males r a r e l y s t r a y i n g beyond the 27 years between the ages of 18 and 45 (see L e s l i e , 1 9 8 5 : 6 6 ) , than the number of years d u r i n g which a r u l e r could r e i g n (0 t o 46 years i n Table 2 - 2 ) . '® Average female generation l e n g t h , which i s somewhat less than the male, cannot be c a l c u l a t e d from the data considered here and i s not used i n d a t i n g the genealogies. ' Caldwell a l s q a r r i v e s at an average of 2 4 . 7 5 years a f t e r r e j e c t i n g the s h o r t e s t (Tunibatta's) r e i g n from h i s sample. However, he has made an a r i t h m e t i c a l e r r o r and the f i g u r e stands c o r r e c t f o r h i s whole sample.

A c t u a l l y , Tumanurunga i n Makassar, but as w i t h other key c u l t u r a l concepts shared by the Bugis and the Makassar I use the Bugis word.

33 Barayang, who i n h e r i t e d the government along w i t h the three key items i n Gowa's r e g a l i a - a gold chain c a l l e d "Tanisaraanga" which the nymph had worn when she descended, and the short swords c a l l e d "Sudanga" and "Tanruballanga" which had been i n the r e s p e c t i v e possession of Karaeng Bayo and h i s brother Lakipadada.

F u l l e r versions of Gowa's Tomanurung myth can be traced i n some of t h e i r d e t a i l s t o Mukhlis' (1975:74-6) Lontarak Nos 6, 10 and 12. One ver s i o n s t a t e s t h a t the nymph descended i n response t o the prayers o f the nine members of an already e s t a b l i s h e d confederation o f Gowa under s t r a i n from attacks by Garassik, Ontia and Lambengi. I t f u r t h e r emphasises the "s o c i a l c o n t r a c t " s t r u c k between the p a r t i e s i n which the Tomanurung and Karaeng Bayo agreed t o stay and r u l e Gowa, according t o a set of e t h i c a l c r i t e r i a , i n exchange f o r the f u l f i l m e n t of t h e i r basic requirements (Patunru, 1983:3-6).^^ The myth thus sets out " a r t i c l e s " t o the e f f e c t t h a t ( i ) the r u l e r of Gowa deserves a p r i v i l e g e d p o s i t i o n i n r e c o g n i t i o n of the r u l e r ' s d i s t i n c t , "white-blooded" o r i g i n s ; ( i i ) the r u l e r should not however indulge i n u n e t h i c a l p r i v i l e g e s ; ( i i i ) t h i s form of government should be and i s i n the b e t t e r i n t e r e s t s of the s u b j e c t s ; and ( i v ) the i n t e r e s t s of the subjects can be represented by a c o u n c i l o f nine drawn from the kingdom's t e r r i t o r y (see Mukhlis, 1975:78ff.).

Tunatangkalopi, the f i f t h d i r e c t descendent i n the Gowa lineage, had an e l d e r son c a l l e d Batara Gowa and a younger son c a l l e d Karaengloe r i Sero. The i n t e r n e c i n e squabble which developed between the b r o t h e r s r e s u l t e d i n the f l i g h t of the younger br o t h e r and h i s inauguration of the T a l l o k kingdom (12.2.1). The t a l e thus asserts an u l t i m a t e l y s i n g l e o r i g i n of Gowa and T a l l o k w i t h i n a framework where Gowa i s the senior kingdom, and T a l l o k i s Gowa's j u n i o r b rother (Reid, 1983a).

Also commenting on t h i s v e r s i o n of the myth, Reid (1983a:120 J notes t h a t the items which the Tomanurung and Karaeng Bayo promised not t o take from t h e i r subject d i d not include r i c e , which he uses as evidence t o recon s t r u c t a brackish backswamp environment f o r e a r l y Gowa. However, the items i n question - f o w l , eggs, coconuts and b e t e l n u t s -would not seem t o cover whatever had been the carbohydrate s t a p l e { s ) .

I n a d d i t i o n most copies o f the Gowa c h r o n i c l e s t a r t w i t h ten words so p u z z l i n g , they have been o m i t t e d from published t r a n s c r i p t i o n s , even though p h i l o l o g i c a l a n a l y s i s suggests the words were p a r t of the o r i g i n a l l y compiled t e x t (Noorduyn, 1985). The words are u s u a l l y i n t e r p r e t e d as a l i s t of the four Gowa kings who e i t h e r preceded, or were contemporary w i t h , the o r i g i n a l nine communities confederated w i t h i n Gowa (e.g. Patunru, 1983). Noorduyn (1985:8) t r a n s l a t e s these words as 'Bataru Guru, h i s b r o t h e r The One who was k i l l e d by T o l a l i , (and) King Whose House was F u l l of Slaves, were ( a l l of them) Lord of Katangka*. Noorduyn's reading reduces the number of i n d i v i d u a l s t o t h r e e and i d e n t i f i e s them not as the kings of Gowa, but of i t s smaller immediate predecessor which was c a l l e d Katangka.

Let us estimate the apparent a n t i q u i t y of these i n i t i a l events, d a t i n g back from T u n i j a l l o k ' s year of b i r t h i n 1545.^° The exercise dates the q u a r r e l between Batara Gowa and Karaeng Loe r i Sero t o the l a t e 15th century, the b i r t h of (Tu)Massalanga Barayang at around 1300, and the time of the Katangka l o r d s t o the 13th century (Figure 2-2). The p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t Tumassalanga Barayang had been born as l a t e as 1400 i s g r e a t e r than e i g h t o n e - t a i l e d standard d e v i a t i o n s , i . e . n e g l i g i b l e . H e n c e Reid (1983a:117) e r r s i n s t a t i n g '...we are probably not j u s t i f i e d i n p l a c i n g the foundation of the [Gowa] dynasty any e a r l i e r than 1400'; of course the e a r l y Gowa k i n g l i s t c ould be i n f l a t e d , c o n f l a t e d or t o t a l l y f a n c i f u l , but then the o r i g i n s of Gowa are simply undated. At face value the l i s t suggests a foundation date o f the Gowa dynasty at around 1300, which hypothesis can be t e s t e d against the archaeological record.

-•̂ I t would also be possi b l e t o use the average year of b i r t h of the two Gowa kings i n the generation preceding T u n i j a l l o k , i.e. Tunipalangga (born 1511) and Tunibatta (born 1517). The r e s u l t i n g f i g u r e , 1514, compares very c l o s e l y w i t h the f i g u r e f o r t h i s generation as dated back from T u n i j a l l o k (1515). ^' I t might be thought t h a t the estimated dates at such an ea r l y i n t e r v a l need not be very r e l i a b l e , even assuming a general c o m p a r a b i l i t y between the genealogical sample p r o v i d i n g the estimates (Table 2-3) and the genealogies being dated. However, as pointed out by Vansina (1985:184), the r e l i a b i l i t y of the estimates increases r a t h e r than decreases the f u r t h e r back we go.

35 Figure 2-2 also l i s t s the apparently e a r l i e s t toponyms

which, when p l o t t e d , would place the e a r l y a c t i o n at Gowa's palace centre (Figure 2-1). The e i g h t i d e n t i f i a b l e confederates or "founding f l a g s " form a very t i g h t c l u s t e r ^ ^ while four other e a r l i e s t toponyms - Katangka, Tamalate, Bonto Biraeng and Gowa - are v i r t u a l synonyms (Chapter 6 ) . The communities which sided r e s p e c t i v e l y w i t h Batara Gowa and Karaengloe r i Sero n e a t l y d i v i d e i n t o the Gowa and T a l l o k "polygons" (see also Figure 12-7). Garassik, Lambengi (/Lembangi?) and Untia, communities which had r e p o r t e d l y attacked the nine founding f l a g s . Lie t o the immediate south (Figures 2-1 and 3-1). To be sure, the supposedly e a r l i e s t toponyms undoubtedly c a r r y overtones which are b e t t e r dated t o c.1500 than the 13th-14th c e n t u r i e s , b u t at the very least they do not p o i n t away from "Gowa" shown i n Figure 2-1.

2.5.3 Later phases i n Gowa's p r e c o l o n i a l h i s t o r y

The second and t h i r d phases of Gowa's h i s t o r y broadly span the 16th t o mid-17th c e n t u r i e s , up t o the loss of the entrepdt of Makassar t o the Dutch. The e a r l i e r of these, more or less the 16th century, i s the p e r i o d when the kingdom of Gowa enjoyed i t s i n i t i a l and, indeed, most spectacular expansion. The apparent development o f the Makassar s c r i p t e a r l y i n the phase produced a quantum augmentation of the a v a i l a b l e documentary evidence. I t can be n e a t l y terminated w i t h the b r i e f i n t e r v a l when a Gowa k i n g , Tunipasuluk ("He who was e x p e l l e d " ) , usurped the T a l l o k throne i n 1590.

The t h i r d phase coin c i d e s w i t h the p e r i o d when Makassar was a great entrepdt, and when the Gowa r o y a l t y became only one of several r u l i n g houses w i t h i n the l a r g e r p o l i t i c a l e n t i t y which I c a l l "greater Gowa". Other s a l i e n t developments include the adoption of Islam as the s t a t e r e l i g i o n and the spread of Gowa's su z e r a i n t y throughout the peninsula. The h i s t o r i c a l documentation i s expanded by the

Agangjeknek remains completely u n i d e n t i f i e d . For instance, i t i s g e n e r a l l y accepted t h a t the toponym

Garassik couples w i t h Gresik, a major p o r t on Java's n o r t h coast d u r i n g the 15th century. Gresik, however, was rep o r t e d l y not founded before the l a t e 14th century, and by Chinese r a t h e r than Makassar immigrants (see 11.5.1).

e x t e r n a l sources, which f o r the f i r s t time begin t o describe Gowa i n any d e t a i l , and by the i n c e p t i o n of the t r a d i t i o n of royal d i a r i e s . The phase can be terminated e i t h e r w i t h the establishment of the Dutch at Fort Rotterdam (Ujung Pandang) i n 1667, or w i t h the succession squabble over the Gowa throne which immediately f o l l o w e d .

2.5.4 Phases i n Gowa's c o l o n i a l h i s t o r y

A f t e r the Dutch e s t a b l i s h e d themselves i n F o r t Rotterdam, and r e s i t e d the more l u c r a t i v e t rade t o t h e i r doorstep (Bulbeck, 1990), Gowa was unable t o - d i s l o d g e them d e s p i t e some q u i t e potent campaigns (see Patunru, 1983). Given the u n r e l e n t i n g presence of f o r e i g n i n t e r l o p e r s at the s t r a t e g i c c e n t r e of greater Gowa, Gowa's h i s t o r y between 1667 and Indonesian independence i s p r o p e r l y c h a r a c t e r i s e d as c o l o n i a l . I n the sense t h a t no l o c a l power was ever able t o dominate the commercial centre of the r e g i o n , the same c h a r a c t e r i s a t i o n less s t r o n g l y a p p l i e s t o the peninsula as a whole.

I recognise a b r i e f f o u r t h phase l a s t i n g approximately one generation between 1667 and the s t a r t of the 18th century. This takes us t o the l a s t t i t b i t s of i n f o r m a t i o n given by SG and ST, and t o the end of LB's d i a r y e n t r i e s . I t also covers the m a j o r i t y of the Dutch records, as p a i n s t a k i n g l y summarised by Andaya (1981). The phase als o takes us t o the r e i g n of Sultan Abdul J a l i l (1677-1709), the l a s t i n the dynasty of Gowa r u l e r s who had i n h e r i t e d the throne i n unbroken p a t r i l i n e a l succession from Batara Gowa (Chapter 4 ) .

The present study groups the 18th t o 20th c e n t u r i e s i n t o a f i f t h , broad phase which l i e s o u t s i d e my c h r o n o l o g i c a l scope. The phase begins w i t h two handovers of the Gowa throne, f i r s t t o Sultan I s m a i l , the son of the Bone s u l t a n Alimuddin by h i s w i f e , the daughter of Abdul J a l i l , and s h o r t l y t h e r e a f t e r t o the then T a l l o k r u l e r . Sultan S i r a j u d d i n (Patunru, 1983). Confusion i n the succession t o the Gowa throne f o l l o w e d , r i g h t up t o the mid-19th century, but w i t h a c o n s i s t e n t t r e n d whereby the T a l l o k s u l t a n s e i t h e r acted as the r e a l f o r c e behind the Gowa throne or t e m p o r a r i l y absorbed i t (see Patunru, 1983:76-99). T a l l o k ' s domination of the Gowa throne was s t a b i l i s e d w i t h the lengthy r e i g n of Sultan Abdul Kadir

Muhammad A i d i d ( the grandson of the Tallok-Gowa r u l e r c a l l e d I-Mappatunru Karaeng Lerabangparang) and w i t h the succession of h i s d i r e c t descendents t o the Gowa throne between the l a t 19th and the mid-20th century (Patunru, 1983:91,97,100-127). The l a s t Gowa r u l e r , Andi I j o Daeng Mattawang Karaeng Lalolong Sultan Muhammad Abdul Kadir A i d i d , was pensioned of by the Indonesian government on 1 J u l y 1960 (Patunru, 1983:130).

/

BOUNCnRXBS OF COASTAL AIXUVXAL PLAIN

CKOTRBS OF MAJOR KINGEEMS AND FOLOrSANGKE?*: CCNFBDERATION

BOUNDARXES OF MAJOR KXNGDOKS AND POLCreANGXENC; CXI<FEDERATZCN

CBNTRBS OF MDJOR KINGDCMS

BOUNDARIES OF MTNOR KmODOMS

SUNQAI LAMPE

SIANG

OOM*'S FOUMUNG FLAGS (KIGHT OF NINE LOCATED)

COTMUNXnES WaCH SXDED WITH BATORA GO(«

MARUSUK

COMMUMTIES WHICH SIDED WITH KARAENGLOE R I SERO

TALLOK iSUNGAI )MAROS

GARASSIK

JAMARANG

KATINGANG

GALESONGMX

BANGKALA

20 J

BINAMU (TURATEA),

km LAIKANG

F - I C S U K E 2 - 1 . S O C 3 t 3 E S T E a D C S B O T O L I T I C M L , S I T U A T I C 3 I S I C, 1500 AD

E i t l M J t t d S i r t h y»4T Of M i l * I n d i u d d u i l s

1 3 t h C e n t u r y AD

R U I * T s

1275 + 10 AD

1305 + 10 AD

1335 + 10 AD

1365 + 10 AD

1395 + 10 AD

1425 + 10 AD

1455 + 10 AD

K

I -M

C

s

0 r

t

»

T

N «

K

n

T 0 D 0 n un s

I n c /M » $ s 4 -\ 1 '

M / 8 * r * w i n g \

L 1

V / \ / C I I I \

» /1 Pu i n g \ 9 . / t o» L»mbin<)\ L I E /\

/ \

R / c I g \

* / l u n i i - \ / t a b i n r i \ / \

0 1 F A / 6 V \

/ K * r - \ • H / r i Cow* \

•» '

1

A y i \ / T u n * - \ / t « n 1) k * k - \

/ 1 0 0 i \

K j t a n g k a

N i n * C o n f » d e T « t * s -T o r a b o l o k , L i k i u n g , imn »t a , P»ring-Pir*n<j, D * t i k , B i s e i , fl9*n9j»kn*k. K i l l i n 9, $«T0.

i aS) a i , \ al a t e J

B o n t o B i T a t n <),

J 0 n 9 9 0 4

Gowa

K a t a n g k a (?J

N u n » r a u s

FIGURE 2 - 2 . GOWA'S LEGENDARY PHASE (SEE TEXT)