Following the disintegration of the USSR in 1991, then Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao launched the Look East policy in 1992 as a means of strengthening India’s strategic partnership with Southeast Asia. Over the years, this policy has evolved to bolster India’s position as a major player in the Indian Ocean region and counter China’s growing influence over these nations. The policy was further strengthened in 2014 by the Narendra Modi government when Look East was upgraded to Act East to further deepen India’s relationship with the ASEAN through economic and security cooperation, among other things. Prime Minister Modi identified culture, commerce, connectivity, and capacity building as the four C’s of his government’s Act East Policy.
However, India’s ties with Southeast Asia are not a recent conception. Archaeological evidence suggests that human interactions between South and Southeast Asia can be dated back to prehistoric times. Southeast Asia, as a realm of influence for Indian culture and civilization, emerged much later in the middle of the first millennium CE. This period was characterized by the second stage of early state formation in the region. European scholars of the 19th century used Indian influence on Southeast Asia as a pretext to legitimize European colonization of the region and present themselves as successors of the erstwhile Indian predecessors. Indian nationalist scholars of the early 20th century also followed similar narratives of ‘Hindu Colonies’ in Southeast Asia to demonstrate the influence and hegemony of Indian civilization and the role it played in bringing out the Southeast Asians from ‘primitive barbarism’. However, recent scholarship has shown that the type of interaction between the subcontinent and Southeast Asia was strikingly different from that of the Europeans. Nor should the arrival of Indians to Southeast Asia be compared with Europeans arriving on the coasts of America in the discovery of new lands. The concept of Indian colonies also ceased to exist after Independence. These explanations had their limitations and were eventually replaced by newer interpretations. The more acceptable terms that attempt to explain Indian influence over Southeast Asia are ‘Indianization’ and ‘cultural convergence’.
A closer look at the processes and developments in Southeast Asia vis-à-vis the subcontinent will give a clearer picture of the nature of interactions between the two regions. It was not one of confrontation but of convergence. Inscriptional evidence from early Funan, Kalimantan, and Champa, dating from around the 5th century, suggests an evolution under ‘strong Indian influence’ from local chieftaincies to early local state formation. An important requirement in the development and exercise of royal authority is legitimation. These inscriptions highlight the role Brahmins from the subcontinent played in legitimizing royal authority through the performance of grand ritual ceremonies and functioning as administrators, among other things.
Another interesting development during this period in the subcontinent was the emergence of local states along the eastern coast of India in tribal or post-tribal societies. This period also witnessed the ‘Hinduization’ of tribal politics in India through the integration of tribal deities into the Hindu pantheon as tutelary gods. Therefore, a quick glance at the larger picture will help us to conclude that both Southeast Asia and eastern coastal India were undergoing a similar transformation in the socio-political domains. As recent scholarship has shown, the development of the new political culture lay in the proximity of communities along the Bay of Bengal coast, rather than the social divide between the imperial Indian states and the emerging Southeast Asian kingdoms. Or in other words, Indian culture and systems were not transplanted in Southeast Asia but emerged out of a complex web of relations.
This convergence can be manifested in three important developments during this period: temples built during this period, the flourishing of trade in the Indian Ocean region, and the development of Sanskrit as a cosmopolitan language for the region.
Firstly, this period witnessed the mushrooming of stone temples along both coasts of Bay of Bengal as temples started to be increasingly identified as the ritual assertion of power. The Khmer rulers built grand temples dedicated to Shiva and Vishnu, the two dominant (and often contesting) sects of Hinduism. Similarly, coastal India witnessed the construction of temples in Bhubaneswar, Aihole, Pattadakal, Mahabalipuram, and Kanchipuram. Regional styles of temple architecture developed along both coasts of the Bay of Bengal. Angkor Wat, one of the largest temples ever built, also came up during this time in Cambodia. And interestingly, temple-building activities coincided with the development of new policies in eastern coastal India and Southeast Asia.
Secondly, following the decline of the Roman Empire, India’s maritime trade shifted from the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean region. Trading networks were established between eastern coastal India and Southeast Asia. The two most important ports were Tamralipti and Gange, along with a network of other internal ports. Trade especially flourished under the Cholas, who oriented their state policy to promote and expand maritime activities in the Bay of Bengal. Visakhapatnam became an important mercantile centre
Thirdly, the first millennium CE witnessed the spread of South India and Southeast Asia, especially in Khmer and Java. Sanskrit, which had so far remained a language of liturgical and scholastic expression, entered the literary-cultural space to become the language of legitimization, and exercise of political power. Sanskrit, unlike Greek, Latin, Arabic, or Chinese, did not function as a medium for everyday communication or administrative functions but played a defining role in the articulation of aesthetic power. The cosmopolitan nature of Sanskrit was manifested in the similarity of expression by its users i.e., the political elites of the subcontinent and Southeast Asia. Thus, both coasts of the Bay of Bengal were characterized by the development of Sanskrit as the language of expression for this new distinct cosmopolitan culture. The spread of the Sanskrit epics, Ramayana and Mahabharata, into Southeast Asia, and their integration with the region’s culture is proof of the space Sanskrit occupied.
The influence of the dominant Indian political culture and a cultural convergence along both coasts of the Bay of Bengal was a continued process that roughly stretched throughout the first millennium CE, until political developments altered situations. The establishment of the Delhi Sultanate in India, and the Mongol invasions into Southeast Asia, gave birth to a new political culture. However, the impact of these interactions is still visible in the culture and art of Southeast Asia. The legend of lord Rama has been adapted into the region and given its own distinct character and continues to be an important element of Southeast Asian culture. The temples across both coasts of the Bay of Bengal stand witness to the interactions between the dominant political culture of the subcontinent and the emerging states of Southeast Asia.
Sharanyo Basu
Sharanyo Basu is an undergraduate student of History at Presidency University, Kolkata. He is a history enthusiast with interests in social and cultural history, literature and films, and histories of interactions, conflicts and accomodations.