In the heart of Prambanan lies a hidden gem of Indonesia’s
ancient past, Candi Plaosan. Often overshadowed by its grander neighbor, the
Prambanan Temple, Candi Plaosan tells a quieter yet equally compelling story of
rediscovery, resilience, and the mysteries of history. This article explores
the journey of its rediscovery and the contributions of 19th-century scholars
to preserving this remarkable site.
In 1854, Jan Frederik Gerrit Brumund, a Dutch pastor stationed in Surabaya, set out to explore the Prambanan region. Despite having little expectation, Brumund found more than he imagined. His journey, recounted in Indiana: Verzameling van stukken van onderscheiden aard, over Landen, Volken, Oudheden en Geschiedenis van den Indischen Archipel Jilid II, describes a hidden temple complex cloaked in overgrowth. “Candi Plaosan was in a nearly collapsed and neglected condition,” Brumund wrote, likening it to a hill overtaken by trees and reeds.
Brumund’s visit wasn’t the first. In 1845, J. Munnich had
documented the temple in Eenige bijdragen to het onderzoek der oudheden op
Java. However, it was Brumund’s more detailed observations that captured
the temple’s state and laid the groundwork for future studies.
Candi Plaosan remained absent from early 19th-century
accounts, including Colonel Colin Mackenzie’s reports and Thomas Stamford
Raffles’ History of Java. This absence underscores the temple’s
obscurity in colonial records. Brumund’s exploration, followed by visits from
scholars like J.W. Ijzerman and R.D.M. Verbeek, brought Plaosan to academic
attention.
Ijzerman, a prominent archaeologist, visited the site in
1891 during his tenure as Chairman of the Archeologische Vereeniging. By then,
parts of the temple had collapsed, possibly due to an 1867 earthquake. However,
the site was cleaner, and Ijzerman meticulously documented the temple’s layout
and decorations. His contributions corrected and expanded Brumund’s initial
findings.
R.D.M. Verbeek, in his 1889 report Oudheden Van Java,
echoed Ijzerman’s observations. He noted that key artifacts, such as the stone
stele mentioned by Brumund, had been moved to the Batavia Museum. These
collective efforts preserved a snapshot of the temple’s condition during its
rediscovery phase.
Candi Plaosan is believed to have been constructed during
the Mataram Kuno period, but its precise origins remain debated. Short
inscriptions found on smaller temples (candi perwara) within the Plaosan Lor
complex mention figures like Rakai Pikatan and Sri Kahulunan, suggesting a link
to their reign. This connection supports the theory that the temple was built
in the 9th century. However, historian Boechari and others argue that such a
massive project would require more time, possibly extending beyond Rakai
Pikatan’s rule.
N.J. Krom offers a different perspective, proposing a later
construction date in the 10th century. His analysis focuses on the materials
used, particularly the white stones sourced from the abandoned Ratu Boko site.
This theory suggests that the temple reflects a transitional phase in Java’s
architectural history.
Rediscovered in a state of neglect, Candi Plaosan symbolizes
the impermanence of human achievements. Like many ancient structures in
Indonesia, the temple was abandoned by its community, leaving it vulnerable to
natural decay. However, 19th-century records have provided invaluable insights
into its history and condition. These early efforts by Brumund, Ijzerman, and
Verbeek ensured that Plaosan’s story survived for future generations.
Today, Candi Plaosan stands as a testament to Indonesia’s
rich cultural heritage. Its intricate carvings and harmonious layout remind
visitors of a bygone era of artistry and devotion. While questions about its
origins remain, Plaosan invites us to embrace its mysteries and honor the
scholars who brought its story back to life.
Comments
Post a Comment