cultural development: the archaeology of kalimantan …

Naditira Widya Vol. 6 No. 2/2012- Balai Arkeologi Banjarmasin 153

Cultural Development: the Archaeology of Kalimantan Tengah and Kalimantan Selatan 153-169

CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT: THE ARCHAEOLOGY OFKALIMANTAN TENGAH AND KALIMANTAN SELATAN

Vida Pervaya Rusianti Kusmartono*

Artikel masuk pada 14 Februari 2012 Artikel selesai disunting pada 23 September 2012

Abstrak. PERKEMBANGAN KEBUDAYAAN: ARKEOLOGI KALIMANTAN TENGAH DAN KALIMANTAN

SELATAN. Selama 1993-2010, lebih dari tujuh puluh lima situs arkeologi di Provinsi Kalimantan Tengah dan

Provinsi Kalimantan Selatan telah diteliti. Bukti-bukti arkeologi memberikan informasi penting tentang okupasi

prasejarah, diaspora Austronesia dan tradisi penguburan, perkembangan kebudayaan India dan Cina, daerah

aliran sungai dan pemukiman rawa, arsitektur Islam dan kolonial, perencanaan kota dan pemakaman, sistem

benteng kolonial, perdagangan keramik, tradisi pembuatan tembikar dan logam, serta arkeologi bawah air. Namun

demikian, karakteristik arkeologis masing-masing daerah tersebut menunjukkan kekhasan; Arkeologi Kalimantan

Tengah menyajikan informasi tentang kontinuitas tradisi pemakaman prasejarah, sedangkan Arkeologi Kalimantan

Selatan berkaitan dengan perkembangan kebudayaan Islam di bawah hegemoni Kesultanan Banjar dan okupasi

Belanda.

Kata kunci: tradisi alat batu, kapal karam, tradisi pemakaman, Lawangan, Maanyan, Ngaju, Austromelanesid,

benteng, Kesultanan Banjar, candi, masjid, tembikar, pengerjaan logam, toponimi

Abstract. During 1993-2010, over 75 archaeological sites in the Provinces of Kalimantan Tengah and Kalimantan

Selatan have been extensively investigated. The archaeological evidences provide significant information on

prehistoric occupation, Austronesia Diasporas and burial tradition, development of Indic and Chinese culture, river

catchment and swamp settlement, Islamic and colonial architecture, urban planning and cemetery, colonial

fortification system, ceramic trade, pottery and metalworking tradition and underwater archaeology. Nevertheless,

archaeological characteristics between the two regions indicate distinctiveness; Kalimantan Tengah present more

information on the continued prehistoric mortuary tradition, whereas Kalimantan Selatan relates to the development

of Islamic culture under the hegemony of the Sultanate of Banjar and Dutch occupation.

Keywords: stone tool traditions, shipwreck, mortuary traditions, Lawangan, Maanyan, Ngaju, Austromelanesid,

fortress, Sultanate of Banjar, candi, mosque, pottery, metalworking, toponymy

Balai Arkeologi Banjarmasin, Jalan Gotong Royong II, RT 03/06, Banjarbaru 70711, Kalimantan Selatan;Telepon (0511) 4781716; Facsimile (0511) 4781716

* presented at the First International Seminar “Bornean Archaeology: The Past, Present and Future Prospects”, held by theSarawak Museum Department in collaboration with the Department of National Heritage, the Ministry of Tourism andHeritage Sarawak and Malaysia Archaeology Association in Miri during 27-31 October 2010

** Penulis adalah Peneliti Madya pada Balai Arkeologi Banjarmasin, email: [email protected]

Naditira Widya Vol. 6 No. 2/2012- Balai Arkeologi Banjarmasin154


Kalimantan1 is the largest island in theSoutheast Asian Archipelago. Administratively,21.03% of the total width of the island, whichis known as Borneo, is under the governmentof Malaysia and Brunei Darussalam. And, theremainder is within the authority of theRepublic of Indonesia, which consists of fourprovinces i.e. Kalimantan Selatan, KalimantanTengah, Kalimantan Timur, and KalimantanBarat. Before 1993, archaeological researchin Kalimantan was scarce and only a numberof sites have been introduced to the publicsuch as Awangbangkal (Kalimantan Selatan),Muara Kaman (Kalimantan Timur),Kotawaringin Lama (Kalimantan Tengah) andBatu Pait (Kalimantan Barat). And, since theCentre for Archaeology (for Kalimantan) wasestablished in Banjarmasin in July 1993, alarge number of archaeological researcheshave been carried out extensively in the fourprovinces and present abundant data whichprovide significant information on culturaldevelopment that occurred in Kalimantan inthe past.

1 743,330 square kilometer in width; Treacher (MBRAS 1889) assumed the original name of Kalimantan was Sago Island,because sago grow very well in this island; moreover, the indigenous name of sago is lamantah or sago mentah (rawsago). On the other hand, Muljana (2006:88) asserts that Kalimantan was a Sanskrit loan word, Kalamanthana, whichmeans island that burns; (kal[a] is season or time; and manthan[a] is to burn). Since the vocal [a] in kala and manthanais commonly unarticulated, therefore, kalamanthana is pronounced kalmantan or klemantan or quallamontan, and eventuallybecame Kalimantan. Meanwhile the Nagarakrtagama text written in 1365 CE indicated that the indigenous people ofSarawak and Sabah called the island as Klemantan.

2 before 1957, Kalimantan Tengah was an integrated part of Kalimantan Selatan under the Government of KalimantanSelatan

3 late Pleistocene civilization, Austronesian civilization, early Nusantara civilization, Classic (Hindu-Buddhist) civilization,Islamic civilization, Colonial cultural influence, and other specific research interests such as ethnoarchaeology, urbanplanning, underwater archaeology and archaeologial resource management

By examining archaeological reports andtopographic maps, and carrying out fieldobservations and literature studies, I willdiscuss leading archaeological discoveries inKalimantan Tengah and Kalimantan Selatan;

A. Introduction

Among the four provinces, KalimantanTengah and Kalimantan Selatan (Figure 1)has a shared-regional-establishment

background2 (Rusan 2005, 120-135) andshow common physiography of flat coastallowland, swampy basin, highland andmountain covered with equatorial forest andferns, and sliced by a large number of naturalrivers and waterways. Due to the commonphysiographical environment, it is inevitableto discuss and refer both regions as southernKalimantan. More than six3 majorarchaeological research themes have beencarried out in over 75 sites and present diversearchaeological information among others onprehistoric occupation, Austronesia diasporasand burial tradition, development of Indic andChinese culture, river catchment and swampsettlement, Islamic and colonial architecture,urban planning and cemetery, colonialfortification system, ceramic trade, pottery andmetalworking tradition and underwaterarchaeology. Nevertheless, the characteristicof cultural development in Kalimantan Tengahand Kalimantan Selatan indicatedistinctiveness.



Fig

ure

1. .S

tudy a

rea i

n K

alim

anta

n T

engah (

red d

ots

) and K

alim

anta

n S

ela

tan (

blu

e d

ots

; m

odif

icati

on o

fG

oogle

Map-K

ali

mantan.p

hp)



thereafter, the cultural phenomenon will bedescribed with respect to the topography anddistinct quality of culture in each region tounderstand the variability of cultural processthat had occurred in Kalimantan Tengah andKalimantan Selatan in the past.

B. The Archaeology of KalimantanTengah

Kalimantan Tengah is the second largestprovince in Kalimantan with the highland ofthe Schwäner-Müller Mountain stretching onthe northern region, while most areas in themiddle to the south is covered with vastswampy basin formed by nine major rivers4

flowing in parallel from the north and emptiesinto the Java Sea in the south. Based onarchaeological researches carried out inKalimantan Tengah, important discoveries onthe northern region were found in Muara JoloiI (one) and Muarateweh. Both sites lie at thesouthern foot5 of the Schwäner-MüllerMountain in the northern Barito Basin; they aredescribed as follows:

4 Barito, Kapuas kecil, Kahayan, Sebangau, Katingan, Sampit, Pambuang, Arut and Lamandau5 at the altitude of 100-200 meter above sea level

Presently, Muara Joloi I is the northern-most site found in Kalimantan Tengah. Muara

Joloi I is an open site which lies in the eastcatchment of the Barito River to the north of

Purukcahu. The name ‘Muara Joloi I’ wasgiven by the Bakumpay people who estab-lished the village in mid 19th Century (Budhi2005; Hindarto pers.comm 2010), which formsa linear pattern along the Barito River. Archaeo-

1. Muara Joloi 1 (MLJ)

logical remains which was found on theriverbank and cultivation comprising: 1) stone

adze (andesite and basalt) showing unfinishedsurface; 2) bark cloth beaters (andesite) show-ing engraved patterns; 3) red-slipped, plainand decorated potsherd with burnished orunburnished surface indicating the use of sand

as temper; and 4) microlith. Oktrivia(pers.comm 2010) assumed the stone tool tra-ditions occurred in the upperstream of Baritois similar to that of the Kapuas (KalimantanBarat).

2. Muarateweh (MTW)

Approximately 3 kilometer downstream ofthe Barito River, is the wreck site of the Onrust;the Dutch patrol boat (steam boat; Koestoropers.comm 2010) commanded byCommander Van der Velde, which wasattacked and drowned by Antasari,Temenggung Surapati and their men duringthe Battle of Banjar on 26 December 1859(id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perang_Barito). The2006 underwater survey had mapped the exactlocation of one part of the ship, yet it was notpossible to determine whether it was the bowor stern of the ship due to excessive underwatersedimentation (Koestoro pers.comm 2010).

Notable discoveries on the middle andsouthern region were found in Bipakali,Ugangsayu and Patas 1, Haringen, Magantis,Pulang Pisau, Pendahara, Keleka Nahan Biruand Keleka Natay Kunang. The nine sites liein the southern and southwestern Barito Basin;they are described as follows:



Bipakali, Ugangsayu and Patas 1 lie onthe lowland of the eastern Barito Basin andinhabited by the Lawangan people. Until today,the Lawangan people still practice mortuaryritual comprising two forms of mortuarytreatment; primary mortuary treatment ispracticed by burying the deceased in aninterment, whereas secondary treatment isexercise by exhuming the remains of thedeceased, cleansing by way of consecratingwithout cremation and storing disarticulatedskeleton into jars and small wooden casket.Wasita (2006, 12-14; Fajari pers.comm 2010)assume the materialization of eschatology ofthe Lawangan people is similar to that of theprehistoric people which is indicated by fourcharacteristics i.e. two forms of mortuarytreatment, the use of container in secondaryburial, grave good furnishing and storagelocation in mountain fissure; in terms of theLawangan people the container is placed onelevated platform or crowning a pole.

1. Bipakali, Ugangsayu, and Patas 1(BUP)

2. Haringen (HRG)

Haringen lies in the lowland of thenortheastern Barito Basin. Maan Wada andAriun (pers.comm 2000) claims that prior tothe fall of Nansarunai Kingdom in the 14th

Century, the people of Haringen hadestablished 19 villages, and Haringen is the22nd. Presently, the village is inhabited by theMaanyan people who uphold the PajuSepuluh values. The investigated site ofHaringen lies to the southeast of Sirau River6

surrounded by cultivation and rubber

6 tributary of the Barito7 Yuan Dynasty (13th-14th Century), Ming Dynasty (early 15th-16th Century), Qing Dynasty (17th-19th Century), Annamese

(14th Century) and Chinese-made-European ceramic (18th-19th Century)8 Trowulan type (Nitihaminoto 1998/1999:19)

plantation. Archaeological remains foundwithin the compound comprise of Chinese,Annamese and European ceramic7, potsherd(cooking pot), ironslag and debitage (Wasita2002, 16-19; Kusmartono 2008, 51). Presently,Haringen is acknowledged as an old abandonMaanyan settlement site dated back from thetransitional period of Hindu civilization intoIslam (or Colonial).

Magantis lies to the east of Sirau River onthe southernmost region of Magantis villagesurrounded by cultivation. Presently, theinhabitant of Magantis is the Bakumpaypeople. Archaeological findings in Magantiscomprise of potsherds (plain and decorated),fragment of wooden artefact, fragment of metalbowl, glass beads, baked clay bricks, Chineseceramic (plates), charcoal that associate withcremation, and a concentration of jar burialwhich was found by the villagers (Wasita 2002,22-29). Wasita (2002, 31) assumed theunearthed findings have close associationwith burial activity in Magantis in the past. Heassumed also that Chinese ceramic plateswere used as lid to cover the jar opening, andspatial setting of the burial jars does notindicate specific pattern or randomly buried.

3. Magantis (MGT)

Pulang Pisau is located in the upperstream of Palawi River surrounded by swampscrubs, rattan, rambutan (Nephelium) andmango (Nitihaminoto et.al.1998/1999, 2-3).The archaeological remains unearthed were1) potsherd (local and imported8) i.e. cooking

4. Pulang Pisau (PPS)



Pendahara lies in the lowland of thesouthwestern Barito Basin, exactly to east of

Katingan River (Sulistyanto 2004, 20) andpresently, inhabited by the Ngaju people.

Similar to the Lawangan people in Bipakali,Ugangsayu and Patas 1, the Ngaju inPendahara recognize two forms of mortuary

treatment, primary and secondary, and

cleansing by way of consecrating without

cremation. However, instead of storingdisarticulated skeleton into jars and smallwooden casket on elevated platform, the

Pendahara Ngaju placed the remains of thedeceased in small wooden casket which then

is stacked in a wooden house-like vault withthe remains of other individuals. Therefore, itcan be inferred that generally, the

materialization of eschatology of thePendahara people is similar to that of the

Lawangan people.

pot, lid and lid handle, bowl with footring,decorated carination, plate, jar, water pitcher(kendi); 2) terracotta fragments (roof ridge); 3)ceramics from China, Thailand and Annam;4) glass beads; 5) grinding stone; 6) fragmentsof metal artefact; 7) ocher; and 8) resin. Basedon the ceramics, Nitihaminoto (1998/1999,36-38) assumes Pulang Pisau as a 15th-16th

Century settlement site, which forms a linearpattern along the Danau Layang River andinhabited by fishermen and merchants.

5. Pendahara (PND)

Keleka Nahan Biru is an old abandonvillage that lies on top of a small hill on thewest bank of the Cempaga River surroundedby swamp and forest of ulin (Bornean ironwoodEusideroxylon zwageri; MacKinnon 1997,130), rattan and rubber. The investigated areais overgrown with thick immature prickly rattan.One sandong9 structure and the remains ofanother were found aligned north to southparallel to the course of the Cempaga River.Both sandong were established after the Dutchbegan to steadily occupy Kalimantan in theearly 1800s. The sandong are accompaniedby sapundu gapit10, sapundu kurban11, andsanggaaran12.

6. Keleka Nahan Biru and Keleka NatayKunang (KNK)

9 wooden house-like vault on poles10 paraphernalia in the form of wooden post crowned by human figure11 wooden post crowned by human figure used for tethering sacrificial animal12 decorated post symbolising the Tree of Life

Keleka Natay Kunang lies near the oldpier of Natay Kunang close to the junction ofthe Raku and Rinjau Rivers in the southern

region of the Barito Basin. The environment ofthe surveyed region is secondary forest, which

is cleared to cultivate rain-fed rice and tubersin rotation. Among these crops are also grownlong-term timber species such as bamboo,jackfruit, ulin, rattan, and rubber trees. Twoclusters of old sandong, Sandong Marotan

and Sandong Rami, were separated by arelatively small river, the Raku, which flowsnortheast and joins the Rinjau and eventually

the Seranau River. The sandong and itsparaphernalia are assumed as the continuedmaterialization of the Ngaju eschatology which



Among the four provinces,Kalimantan Selatan is the smallest, but it isalso the most populated region13. The MeratusMountain stretches from north to southsplitt ing the province into two differenttopographies, which are the highland in theeast region and the swampy basin formed bythe Barito River in the west. Importantarchaeological discoveries in the highland arethe Bukit Batu Buli and Mentewe Cavecomplex. The two complexes are describedas follows:

13 36,985 square kilometer; 88 inhabitants per km2

associates with the mortuary tradition of theAustronesian-language-speaking people

(Kusmartono 2005, 28).

C. The Archaeology of KalimantanSelatan

1. Bukit Batubuli Complex (BBC)

There are more than 41 caves found atthe foot of Bukit Batu Buli on the northernmostregion of Meratus Mountain. Among the caves,Gua Babi and Gua Tengkorak presentsignificant archaeological data. Each cave islocated on different sides of the hill; Gua Babiis on the east and Gua Tengkorak on its west.The archaeological remains found in GuaBabi comprise of 1) stone tools i.e. scraper(basalt and chert), borer (basalt and chert),points (basalt, chert, limestone and fossilizedbone), tanged-point, which is similar to that ofTimor (Glover 1973 in Widianto et.al. 1997,18), flakes and blades (basalt and chert), core(silicified rock), hammerstone (basalt), pestle

(basalt), anvil (basalt), chopper (basalticandesite), chopping tool (basaltic andesite),hand axe (basaltic andesite) and debitage; 2)bone tools i.e. points (macro and micro-fauna)and double points, spatula (femur of Macacasp.) and ornament (pendant); 3) potsherd(bowl and cooking pot); 4) mollusk14 andanimal remains15 (alimentation andornaments); 5) shell-bed; and 6) humanremnants (Widianto et.al. 1997, 17-29; 2003,30-43). On the other hand, archaeologicalremains found in Gua Tengkorak were 1)stone tools i.e. scraper (basalt and chert),flakes and blades (basalt and chert), core(silicif ied rock), chopping tool (basalticandesite), and debitage; 2) mollusk and animalremains; 6) human remains (Widianto et.al.2003, 23-24).

Widianto (et.al. 2003, 46; 48; 60) claimsthe human remains in Gua Tengkorak wasassociated with primary burial with flexedposition, which was identif ied as anAustromelanesid individual, who hadpracticed lithic culture in the region of BukitBatu Buli. Therefore, he assumed thechronology of both caves is approximately8.000 BP. Further, he asserts the inhabitant ofGua Babi had obtained daily nutrition,especially Gastropod, from the naturalresources surround the cave; however, theyhad walked as far as 1.5 kilometer to Uya Riverin search of raw material for stone tool making.In regard to cave signification, Gua Babi wasrecognized as dwelling, whereas GuaTengkorak a burial site.

14 Cycloporidae, Planorbidae, Trochomorphidae, Achadae, Thiaridae, Lymnaeidae, Ampulariidae, Pupinidae, Cypreae andUnionidae

15 Ordo Artidactyla, Carnivora, Chiroptera, Rodentia and Primata



Mentewe cave complex comprise of anumber of caves which scattered on thesouthernmost region of Meratus Mountain.Intensive investigation was carried out in GuaSugung, Gua Payung (Kusmartono 2006) andLiang Bangkai (Sugiyanto 2008 and 2010).The archaeological remains unearthed in thethree sites are relatively similar comprisingmollusk and faunal remains (alimentation),potsherd (plain and decorated), stone tools(flakes and blade), core and debitage. Basedon the artefacts, it is assumed that GuaSugung and Gua Payung were inhabited byhumans employing Mesolithic technology,whereas Liang Bangkai indicates the use ofmeso-neolithic technology (Sugiyantopers.comm 2010; Herwanto pers.comm2010).

2. Mantewe Cave Complex (MTC)

Major archaeological discoveries in theflat coastal lowland and wetland are Tabanio,Patih Muhur, Kuin, Tendean, Oranje Nassau,Candi Laras and Pematang Bata, Banua Halat,Nagara, Jambu Hilir and Candi Agung. Thetwelve sites are described as follows:

16 investigated intensively by Sonny Wibisono during 1995-199917 45-50 centimeter in diameter18 25-30 centimeter in diameter

Tabanio16 lies to the west of Tabanio Riveron the westcoast of Silat Peninsula. A structureof the foundation of Fort Tabanio wasunearthed in association with artefacts suchas baked clay bricks, shingles and tiles ofterracotta, potsherd, ceramic (Chinese,European and Singkawang), fragments ofbottles and glasses, metal and marble. Thestructure is assumed to be approximately6.700 square meters in width with bastion

erected in every corner of the structure. A smallcanal was made surrounding the site which isassumed to prevent enemy from easilyentering the fortress.

1. Tabanio (TBN)

The Dutch archive describes theestablishment of Fort Tabanio in 1789, andbecame the ‘silent’ witness of the Banjar Battlein 1859. But, there has not been anyinformation on the depiction of its architectureand layout. The unearthed structure itself didnot provide sufficient data to construe thearchitecture above it. Nevertheless, Sonny(et.al. 1995, 9) asserts the technology forbuilding the fortress’ foundation had used acombination of raw materials of lateritic rocks,coral, baked clay bricks, ulin poles and sand.

2. Patih Muhur (PTM)

Patih Muhur lies on the swampy lowlandhemmed in by the Barito, Patih Muhur andHandil River (Wasita 2007, 17). Theexcavation unearthed two structures of a largenumber of ulin poles. One structure wassystematically arranged in interval consistingover 100 huge poles17 that were implanted inthe earth as deep as 4-6 meters. Based on thedimension, volume and weight of the ulin, thesoil bearing capacity and the quantity of poles,Wasita (20007, 42) assumed that a massivearchitecture was constructed over thestructure. The other structure wassystematically arranged in a row consistingsmaller poles18 forming an undergroundretaining wall encircling the first structure. Theretaining wall was erected to prevent erosioncaused by the current of Barito River. Wasitaalso reports the chronology of Patih Muhur is



19 erected in 1526 CE20 Suriansyah died in 1550 CE

Kuin lies on the northeastern Kuin Basin,approximately 1.5 kilometers to the east ofBarito River. Presently, the archaeologicallandmarks of Kuin are the old mosque19 of thefirst Sultan of Banjar, Suriansyah, and his familycemetery20. However, interestingly, the Sultan’sfamily cemetery was establish over a largestructure of large bricks which is assumed asthe remains of a worshipping platform datedback from the Classic period (Hindu-Buddhistperiod). The 2004-2006 research whichaimed to find the location of Sultan’s palaceobtained toponymy such as jagabaya,pangeran, sugaling, pinarangbaya andtembokbata (Gunadi 2004, 6).

1310 CE, which suggest its establishment was216 years earlier to the founding of theSultanate of Banjar.

3. Kuin (KUN)

4. Tendean (TND)Tendean is the name of a street that

stretches along the eastern bank of MartapuraRiver in Banjarmasin. Prior to excavation, theships’ rudder was already seen above the mud-covered bank (Widianto et.al.1997, 2). Sixtypes of artefact were found during the 1997-1998 research i.e. components of the ship,iron and brass artefact (non-ship-component),VOC coins, glass fragments (bottle, glass,bowl and prismatic object), Germanstoneware bottle, ceramic (Chinese, Vietnam,Thailand, Dutch, British, other Europeancountry and local) and potsherd (basin,cooking pot, jar, shingles, stove, pontil). Theship material and technology is typical 20th

Century and locally made in Indonesia(Koestoro pers.comm 1997), although it was

used by the Dutch for patrolling the waterssurround Fort Tatas, the Dutch resident,Kampung Kraton, Chinatown and docks asthe centre of political and economic activity.

5. Oranje Nassau (ONS)

Fort Oranje Nassau lies at the westernfoot of the Meratus Mountain to the west ofRiam Kiwa River. The archive of GovernorGeneral Rochussen states that the fortress wasestablished by the Dutch in 1849 to protecttheir coal mine (Sugiyanto 2007, 26). Theresearch discovered three structures of bakedclay bricks which associate with the miningactivity, office for administration and particulardefense structure.

6. Candi Laras (CDL) and Pematang Bata(PMB)

Candi Laras lies on a wetland grown withsago and galam (Melaleuca Cajuputi;MacKinon et.al. 1996, 130) hemmed in byNagara, Tapin and Amas River. During 1970-1987, the local office carried out a survey andfound fragment of a stone inscription, goldjewelry, VOC and Chinese coins, preciousstones and a bronze Buddhist figure. Presently,these findings are housed in the LambungMangkurat Museum in Banjarbaru. During1997-1998, researches carried out by theCentre for Archaeology, Banjarmasin, in CandiLaras unearthed two structure of ulin poles.The result of radiocarbon dating on ulin inCandi Laras is 1330 CE (Sulistyanto 2000, 36).

On the other hand, Pematang Bata,known to the local as ‘Tjandi’, is located to theinterior of the wetland, which is to the south ofBata River. Besides baked clay bricks,potsherd, ceramic, chunks of quartz and



Banua Halat is the name of an oldmosque which lies to the west of Tapin River.Usman (2000, 26 in Cynthia 2007, 8) claimsthe mosque had once benefitted by SultanMuda Abdurrahman as the basis to fight theDutch in 1840 CE. The mosque was burneddown by the Dutch in 1890, but immediatelyrebuilt by the people of Banua Halat. And, in1935, the wooden floor was replaced byceramic tiles. Cynthia (2007, 30) informs theexistence of an oral tradition relating to theestablishment of the mosque of Banua Halatby Datu Ujung or Palui Anum, a Bukit peoplewho once was an adherent of Kaharinganbefore converting to Islam, yet the identity anddate of establishment remains in question. Aradiocarbon dating has been carried out withsample taken from an ulin (Eusideroxylonzwageri) bar, which was assumed as theremains of the mosque prior to 1890 fire;however, the result21 does not comply with thecharacteristic of the mosque (Gunadi 2006,6).

limestone and fossilized wood, significantamount of charcoal was found (Rangkutiet.al.1999, 15). Based on the charcoal, thechronology of Pematang Bata is 1140 CE(Sulistyanto et.al. 1999, 23).

7. Banua Halat (BHT)

8. Nagara (NGR)Nagara lies on the eastern Barito Basin,

which is to the east of the Nagara River. Thisvillage is known as the main manufacturer ofpottery and metalworking for centuries. Thefinest clay resource for pottery making isprovided abundantly in Nagara and pottery

21 4720-4370 BCE22 searching raw material, making process and marketing

production is made for daily use comprisingsmall stove, cooking pot and pot lid, basin,mortar, water vessel (kendi), large jar, incenseburner, molding pot, vase, piggy-bank and toys.On the other hand, metalworking is dominatedby goldsmithing and ironsmithing whichproduce gold plated jewelry, iron propeller,irons hook and cookie cast (Hartatik 2006, 2-

15).

Craftsmanship has been passed on fromone generation to the other and it has beenalso the primary occupation in Nagara(Sulistyanto et.al. 1999/2000, 20). Interestingly,professionalism22 in pottery and metalworkingis highly considered rather than labordifferentiation based on gender. In regard tomarketing, the distribution of Nagara potteryand metalwork is by means of Pasar Apung(floating market) in Kuin and Lok Baintan,which then is circulated further by smallermerchants.

9. Jambu Hilir (JBH)Jambu Hilir lies on the former Sungai

Rangas-Tatau riverine plain, which was atributary of the Amandit (Nasruddin 1996/7 inAnggraeni 2008, 120). The 2007 excavationyielded potsherd (decorated and red-slipped),iron fragments (blade, ironslag), baked claybeads and pellet, charcoal, red ochre, andunworked siliceous pebbles. Anggraeni (2008,125) reports the chronology of Jambu Hilir is970 BCE, which is considered the oldest datefor Metal Age site in Indonesia. She alsoclaims that Jambu Hilir was occupied untilthe Dutch period.



23 approximately 75 meters to the southeast of the structure and 140 centimeters below ground24 6-7 meters in length

Candi Agung lies in the lowland of theeastern Barito Basin approximately 5 metersto the northeast of Malang River, a tributary ofthe Nagara. Presently, the site is located in themiddle of the densely populated town ofAmuntai. The archaeological discoverycomprise of two interesting characteristics.First, which associate directly with the nameof the site is the brick structures dated backfrom the 728 CE, and second, a 20-centimeter-thick layer of solid charcoal associated withpotsherd23 dated back from 350 BCE. Suchfindings denote the repeated land use of thesite for settlement and later for ceremonialpurpose (Kusmartono et.el. 1998, 23).

The archaeological information aboveprovide a general description on the distinctive

quality of what had occurred in the past, whichare: 1) the continuous prehistoric tradition

practiced by the Lawangan, Maanyan and

Ngaju people in Kalimantan Tengah,especially involving mortuary treatment,combined with more recent pattern affected

by the Hindu and Islamic culture; and on theother hand 2) the strong Islamic and Colonialinfluence signified by Kuin and Banua Halat

mosques, and the establishment of twofortresses of Tabanio and Orangje Nassau tocontrol the political and economic policy andactivity in the Sultanate of Banjar in KalimantanSelatan. Nevertheless, there are two main

consecutive causal factors to explain thedistinct quality of cultural development in each

10. Candi Agung (CDA)

D. Cultural Development

region i.e. natural environment which affectedthe development of civilization.

Geographically, Kalimantan Tengah andKalimantan Selatan have similarphysiographical condition, identified assouthern Kalimantan, yet administratively, eachregion present dissimilar topographicaldivision. Kalimantan Selatan which is 36.985square kilometer in width is divided into twolandscapes by the Nagara River and formsthe swampy lowland in the west and highlandto its east. On the contrary, the width ofKalimantan Tengah is 427.15% larger thanthat of Kalimantan Selatan; the region is slicedby nine enormous rivers creating vast swampylowland and leaving the upland secluded inthe north. Until the turn of the century, bothregions had been occupied by theAustromelanesid and Austronesian-language-speaking people, yet there has been no recordindicating both group had met in a certain pointof time and space. Considering the naturalenvironment then, one may imagine thedifficulty of both groups to survive, let alonemake social interaction. Nevertheless, it isreasonable to assume that they had chosenthe highland to survive rather than the swampylowland which was occupied by devious watercreature, especially the estuary crocodiles24.

The oldest date relating to the existenceof early civilization in southern Kalimantan isrepresented by Gua Tengkorak (8,000 BP) inTabalong. And, later evidences of prehistoriccivilization in Kalimantan were found in NangaBalang (3,000 BP) in Kapuas Hulu, Mentewe(ca. 3,000 BP) in Tanah Bumbu, Jambu Hilir(2,920 BP) in Hulu Sungai Selatan, Liang Jon



The civilization in Kalimantan developed

progressively since the world (India and

China; Wolters 1967, 31) began to take interest

in Kalimantan’s rich natural resources of gold,

camphor, resin, aromatic products and

precious stones (Munoz 2008, 76-84). The

desire to exploit Kalimantan’s natural

resources was encouraged by the tale of

‘Suvarnabhûmi’ which literally means the

land of gold, political change in Mediterranean

and Central Asia, development of vessel

technology and the expansion of Buddhism

(Wheatley 1983, 263-272). As a result old Hindu

kingdoms began to flourish such as

Mû lavarmman (500 CE) in the eastern

Kalimantan and Pu-ni (ca. 400 CE) in northern

Kalimantan26 (Slametmulyana 1976, 146;Kusmartono 2000, 15). Strangely, there wereno further historical records in regard to thedevelopment of both kingdoms.

(ca. 2,500 BP) in Kutai Timur and Candi Agung(2,300 BP) in Hulu Sungai Utara. Between thegroups, the Austronesian-language-speakingpeople was considered to be moresophisticated than the Austromelanesid, sincethey have the knowledge to practiceagriculture, domesticate animals andnavigate. The Austronesian’s skill to navigate25

had outmoded the Austromelanesid andenabled them to travel frequently and explorenew places, either inter-island or intra-island.

25 including making boats26 reported by the T’ang Dynasty (618-906 CE)27 inscription of Candi Laras and figure of Buddha Dipamkara

29 Kalimantan Tengah and Kalimantan Timur30 Kalimantan Timur

28 Salasilah Kutai and Hikayat Banjar

300 years later, a Buddhist ‘mantra’, BatuPait, was engraved on a monolith erected inthe Kapuas Basin in western Kalimantan,possibly denoting that a group of priests wereconduting ritual activity. Another one wasengraved on a smaller stone plate and broughtto southern Kalimantan27. Later in 1365 CE,the Nagarakretagama text, written byPrapanca, mentioned the existence of vassalstates in Kalimantan comprising Kapuas-Katingan, Sampit, Kota Lingga, Kota Waringin,Sambas, Lawai, Kadandangan, LandaSamadang, Tirem, Sedu, Barune (ng), Kalka,Saludung, Solot, Pasir, Barito, Sawaku,Tabalung, Tanjung Kutei and Malano(Slametmulyana 1979, 144-146 and 280). Atthe same time, two oral traditions28 mentionthe existence of Hindu kingdoms of KutaiKartanegara, Martapura and Pantun in easternKalimantan and Nagara Dipa and NagaraDaha in southern Kalimantan.

161 years later, the Sultanate of Banjarwas founded under the reign of SultanSuriansyah. The Sultan’s sovereigntyencompasses smaller kingdoms in southern29

and eastern30 Kalimantan. However, Islamiccivilization had made an impact in Kalimantanprior to the establishment of the sultanate,which is evident by the ‘keramat tujuh’indicating seven typical Majapahit ‘Tralaya’tombstones written with Old Javanese letterbearing the date of the deceased.Simultaneously, the Dutch began also toexercise its political and economic policy by



The archaeology between KalimantanTengah and Kalimantan Selatan showssignificant variability. The material cultures inKalimantan Tengah tend to present evidencesof continuous mixed tradition of prehistoric,Indic and Islamic culture of mortuarymanagement. On the other hand, thearchaeological evidences discovered inKalimantan Selatan indicate definite existenceof prehistoric civilization from approximately6000 until 400 BCE, the influence of Indic

building fortresses and Christian missionariesbegan their mission by traveling to the interiorof western, central and eastern Kalimantan,whereas Islamic civi lization flourishsignificantly in the southeastern region.

The civilization in Kalimantan seemsto be developing irregularly, appearing anddisappearing from time to time. I assume themain reason for such condition to occur iscaused by how people in the past initiallyperceived Kalimantan whether mainly as aresource which can be exploited indefinitelyor a place to interact, survive and buildcivilization.

E. Conclusion

culture between 800 and 1400 CE, and thesupremacy of Islamic and Colonial influenceduring 1500–1900 CE. Nevertheless, theecological differences in the southern region,which administratively is encompassed withinthe provinces of Kalimantan Tengah andKalimantan Selatan, had influenced the levelof human requirement to perform socialinteraction in order to survive. Theachievement of such interaction depended onthe standpoint of cultural perception of everygroup of people. Furthermore, humancapability to interact had affected the growthof demography in a certain region andspecialization in economic and social sector.The highest level of social interaction inKalimantan Tengah and Kalimantan Selatanis the existence of Sultanate Banjar’ssovereignty in both regions. Conclusively, thecharacteristic of cultural development in thesouthern region of Kalimantan depends onhumans’ perception toward their naturalenvironment either upperstream-downstream,fertile-infertile, marshland-desert, highland-lowland, which then developed into culturalconstructed environment as, either sacred orprofane landscape, and benefitted as theirinteraction cauldron.



Referensi

Anggraeni and Sunarningsih. 2008. ThePrehistoric settlement at JambuHilir, South KalimantanProvince, Indonesia, EjournalBulletin of the Indo-PacificPrehistory Association Vol. 28,120-126.

Airun, Maanyan. 2000. (Personalcommunication, 15 May 2000).

Budhi, Setia. 2005. Melacak jejak suku DayakBakumpai. Kompas, 9 Juli 2005.

http://www.kompas.com danht tp: / /www. ju rnal i sme.org/

Forums/viewtopic/t=70.htmlCynthia, Fakhriah. 2007. Karakterisktik masjid

keramat Banua Halat,

Kabupaten Tapin, KalimantanSelatan. Undergraduate thesis.

Yogyakarta: Universitas GadjahMada. unpublished.

Fajari, Nia Marniati Etie. 2010. (Personal

communication, 1 August2010).

Glover, I. G. 1973. Late stone age traditions inSoutheast asia. FirstInternational Conference of

Southeast Asian Archaeology.London: Gerald Duckworth &

Co. Ltd.Gunadi. 2004. Melacak sisa-sisa Kerajaan

Banjar di kawasan Kuin danKayutangi, Kalimantan Selatan.Laporan Penelitian Arkeologi.

Banjarbaru: Balai ArkeologiBanjarmasin. unpublished.

__________. 2006a. Kajian arkeologi situs

masjid keramat Banua Halat.Laporan Penelitian Arkeologi.Banjarbaru: Balai ArkeologiBanjarmasin in collaborationwith Dinas Kebudayaan dan

Pariwisata Kabupaten Tapin.unpublished.

___________. 2006b. Survei Kapal Onrust diHulu Sungai Barito. Laporan

Penelit ian Arkeologi.Banjarbaru: Balai Arkeologi

Banjarmasin in collaborationwith Dinas Pariwisata,Kebudayaan, Seni Budaya,

Informasi dan KomunikasiKabupaten Barito Utara.

unpublished.Herwanto, Eko. 2010. (Personal

communication, 9 August

2010).Hindarto, Imam. 2010. (Personal


http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalimantanhttp://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perang_Barito)Koestoro, Lucas Partanda. 2010. (Personal


Kusmartono, Vida Pervaya Rusianti and HarryWidianto. 1998. Ekskavasi situsCandi Agung, Kabupaten HuluSungai Utara. Berita Penelitian

Arkeologi no. 02. Banjarmasin:Balai Arkeologi Banjarmasin.



Kusmartono, Vida Pervaya Rusianti. 2000.Posisi Candi Laras dan CandiAgung pada kerangka sejarahbudaya Masa Klasik diKalimantan Selatan. Naditira

Widya no. 4. Banjarbaru: BalaiArkeologi Banjarmasin. pg. 11-17.

___________. 2005. The sandong of theNgaju: mortuary variability in

southern Kalimantan. Thesis.Canberra: the AustralianNational University. unpublished.

___________. 2006. Penelitian hunian gua

prasejarah di Kabupaten TanahBumbu. Laporan Penelit ian

Arkeologi. Banjarbaru: BalaiArkeologi Banjarmasin.unpublished.

___________. 2008. Permukiman kuna dansistem penguburan Haringen.

Berita Penelitian Arkeologi vol.2 no. 1. Banjarbaru: Balai

Arkeologi Banjarmasin. pg. 43-

68.MacKinnon, Kathy, Gusti Hatta, Hakimah

Halim and Arthur Mangalik.1997. The ecology ofKalimantan. Indonesian Borneo.

The Ecology of Indonesia Seriesvolume III. Singapore: OxfordUniversity Press.

Muchammad, Bani Noor and Ira Mentayani.2007. Anatomi RumahBubungan Tinggi. Banjarmasin:

Pustaka Banua.Muljana, Slamet. 2006. Sriwijaya. Yogyakarta:

LKiS.Munoz, Paul Michel. 2008. Early Kingdoms of

the Indonesian Archipelago and

Rusan, Ahim S. et. al. 2005. Sejarah Kalimatan

Tengah. Palangkaraya:Lembaga Penelitian Universitas

Palangkaraya dan PemerintahProvinsi Kalimantan Tengah.

Mulyana, Slamet .1976. Nagarakretagama

dan tafsir sejarahnya. Jakarta:Bhratara Karya Aksara.

Sugiyanto, Bambang. 2007. Situs BentengOranje Nassau. BeritaPenelitian Arkeologi vol. 1 no. 1.

Banjarbaru: Balai ArkeologiBanjarmasin. pg. 26-39.

__________. 2008. Ekskavasi Gua-guaMentewe tahap I. LaporanPenelit ian Arkeologi.


Malay Peninsula. Singapore:Didier Millet Pte Ltd.

Nasruddin et. al. 1996/1997. Ekskavasi situsJambu Hilir di Kabupaten HuluSungai Selatan. LaporanPenelit ian Arkeologi.Banjarbaru: Balai Arkeologi

Banjarmasin. unpublished.Oktrivia, Ulce. 2010. Survei eksplorasi gua-

gua hunian di KabupatenMurungraya. Laporan PenelitianArkeologi. Banjarbaru: Balai

Arkeologi Banjarmasin.

unpublished.Oktrivia, Ulce. 2010. (Personal

communication, 5 August 2010)Rangkuti, Nurhadi and Vida P. R. Kusmartono.

1999. Peneltian situs CandiLaras tahap IV. Laporan

Penelit ian Arkeologi.Banjarbaru: Balai Arkeologi

Banjarmasin. unpublished.



__________. 2010. Ekskavasi Gua-guaMentewe tahap II. Laporan

Penelit ian Arkeologi.Banjarbaru: Balai ArkeologiBanjarmasin. unpublished.

__________. 2010. (Personalcommunication, 9 August 2010)

Sulistyanto, Bambang and Siswanto. 1999.Pertanggalan radiokarbon situsPematang Bata. LaporanPenelit ian Arkeologi.Banjarbaru: Balai Arkeologi

Banjarmasin. unpublished.

Sulistyanto, Bambang. 1999/2000. Penelitianetnoarkeologi tradisi pembuatan

gerabah Nagara, KabupatenHulu Sungai Selatan. BeritaPenelit ian Arkeologi no. 5.

Banjarmasin: Balai ArkeologiBanjarmassin.

__________. 2000. Umur Candi Laras dalampangung sejarah IndonesiaKuna. Berita Penelitian Arkeologi

no. 07. Banjarbaru: BalaiArkeologi Banjarmasin.

__________. 2004. Upacara tiwahmasyarakat Dayak Ngaju diPendahara. Berita Penelitian

Arkeologi no. 13. Banjarbaru:Balai Arkeologi Banjarmasin.

Susanto, Nugroho Nur. 2010. (Personal

communication, 17 August2010)

Treacher, W. H. 1889. British Borneo.Malaysian Branch of the RoyalAsiatic Society (MBRAS) journal.

Wada, Maan. 2000. (Personalcommunication, 15 May 2000)

Wasita. 2002. Sistem penguburan danupacara Marabia pada

masyarakat Paju Sepuluh diKabupaten Barito Selatan.Berita Penelitian Arkeologi no.10. Banjarbaru: Balai ArkeologiBanjarmasin.

__________. 2006. Sistem penguburan umatKaharingan Dyak Lawangan.Berita Penelit ian Arkeologi:Etnoarkeologi Religi Dayak diKalimantan no. 16 Special

edition. Banjarbaru: Balai

Arkeologi Banjarmasin.__________. 2007. Ekskavasi permukiman

lahan basah di situs Gambutdan Patih Muhur. LaporanPenelit ian Arkeologi.


Wibisono, Sonny Ch., Novida Abbas, Vida P. R.Kusmartono and Harry Widianto.1995. Ekskavasi situs Benteng

Tabanio Tahap I, KabupatenTanah Laut. Naditira Widya no.

1. Banjarmasin: Balai ArkeologiBanjarmasin.

Widianto, Harry, Truman Simanjuntak adn

Budianto Toha. 1997a.Ekskavasi situs Gua Babi,Kabupaten Tabalong, Provinsi

Kalimantan Selatan. BeritaPenelitian Arkeologi no. 01.Banjarmasin: Balai ArkeologiBanjarmasin.

Widianto, Harry, Lucas Partanda Koestoro,

Bambang Sakti Wiku Atmojo andVida P. R. Kusmartono. 1997b.



Ekskavasi arkeologi di kawasanjalur hijau Jalan Kapten Piere

Tendean. Laporan PenelitianArkeologi. Banjarmasin: BalaiArkeologi Banjarmasin.unpublished.

Widianto, Harry and Retno Handini. 2003.

Karakter budaya prasejarah dikawasan Gunung Batu Buli,

Kalimantan Selatan:mekanismehunian gua pasca

plestosen. Berita PenelitianArkeologi no. 12. Banjarbaru:Balai Arkeologi Banjarmasin.

Wolters, O. W. 1967. Early IndonesianCommerce. A study of the origins

of Srivijaya. London: CornellUniversity Press.

cultural development: the archaeology of kalimantan …

Documents