Talk:Mataram Kingdom

comments
some wrong information --> Sailendra, with the same informations as the German article. The first King, who pushed the Sailendra away was probably Patapan or Pikatan (and not Sajaya) in the year 832 (and not 835). And "Sajaya" is the name of the whole dynasty, on which the Kingdom of Mataram is based on. --SoIssetEben! 21:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

And the Pandaram temple has, as this source says, not been build after 856. This article says in the reign of Daksa (910-919), which is also according to the German article wrong. May someone help? --SoIssetEben! 22:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm confused, I read in a German article that the temple has been built either by the Sanjaya dynasty or the Mataram dynasty. But I also read that "Sajaya" is the name of the dynasty, on which the Kingdom of Mataram is based on. Again: may someone help, please? --SoIssetEben! 22:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Perhaps Sanjaya was a dynastic title adopted later and Patapan or Pikatan was the actual personal name of the King? The dynasty of Mataram being used interchangeably with Sanjaya dynasty wouldn't be incorrect, I think, as they were the only dynasty to rule a kingdom called Mataram (unless you count the later Sultanate). --Grammatical error 19:17, 14 April 2006 (UTC)


 * thanks --SoIssetEben! 14:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Merapi
The mythology about merapi cannot be proved, and in the merapi talk page I have a long diatribe against the claim. It should be couched with very cautious claims, and unless someone comes up with a good source/reference, it should be either re-written or dropped!! User:SatuSuro 10:22, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Sailendra and Mataram
I've quite extensively edited this article to improve consistency and accuracy when compared with the sub-articles for the Kingdoms and Dynasties that make up the Kingdom of Mataram ie Sanjaya, Isyana, and Kahuripan, as well as the Kingdom of Sailendra which not only was roughly contemporary to the Sanjaya Dynasty, but also appears to have been the dominant Kingdom in the region at the time.

I have read all of these articles, compiled a timeline, and then cross-referenced them against the same articles on the Indonesian Wikipedia, and have now edited this article to reflect the information contained in all these sources.

Of course if other people find different sources which contradict this article, please feel free to edit again, but please cite the sources!! Cheers, --Sepa 14:28, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Uhoh
Someone - has changed the title - if anyone is watching - is this a regularly accepted title? If ther is silence and no attempt at reverts - suppose that is acqueisence! SatuSuro 01:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Mataram or Medang?
The already established (and popular) name of this kingdom's name so far is Mataram Kingdom, this is according to many old Indonesian history text-books. However according to latest studies on inscriptions and according to modern Indonesian historians, the correct name of the kingdom should be Medang on Mdaἣ. Mataram is just one (and the early) capital of this kingdom located in Yogyakarta-Prambanan vicinity. Later period the capital or palace shift to several other places: The identification of this kingdom with Mataram is an error of early Indonesian history writings and it is misleading, since Mataram only valid to identify Yogyakarta and its vicinity, while the later era of this kingdom witnessed the transfer of capital to east Java, and the kingdom still named as Medang. So I think it is right and historically correct if we transfer the article to Medang kingdom, instead of Mataram Kingdom. (Gunkarta (talk) 21:42, 20 May 2010 (UTC)).
 * 1) Medang i Bhumi Mataram (reign of Sanjaya)
 * 2) Medang i Mamrati (reign of Rakai Pikatan)
 * 3) Medang i Poh Pitu (reign of Balitung)
 * 4) Medang i Bhumi Mataram (reign of Dyah Wawa)
 * 5) Medang i Tamwlang (reign of Sindok)
 * 6) Medang i Watugaluh (reign of Sindok)
 * 7) Medang i Wwatan (reign of Dharmawangsa Teguh)


 * No responses for 20 days. So I take that there is no objections for my proposal to move this article to Medang kingdom(Gunkarta (talk) 16:41, 9 June 2010 (UTC)).

Mataram or Medang? (revisited)
Hi Gunkarta, I want to open a discussion with you about discussing the names of Mataram and Medang. First, i want to correct that the mention of "Rakai Mataram Sang Ratu Sanjaya" is found in the Mantyasih inscription, not the Canggal inscription.

The name Mataram in the inscription does not refer to an administrative area (capital city). In the inscription the name Mataram is referred to as "bhumi". The following is the arrangement of sentences on the inscription and the name of the royal capital, namely: Mamratipura, Poh Pitu, Tamwlang, Watugaluh
 * kaḍatwan i mḍaŋ i bhūmi mātaram i mamratipura (Shivagrha / 856 AD)
 * dewatā prasiddha maṅrakṣa kaḍatwan śrī mahārāja i bhūmi i mātaram kita (Wuatantija / 880 AD)
 * rahyaṅta rumuhun ri mḍaŋ ri poh pitu rakai mataram saŋ ratu sañjaya (Mantyasih / 907 AD)
 * kaḍatwan sri maharaja bhūmi mātaram kita pinakahurip niŋ rat kabaih (Turyan / 929 AD)
 * śrī mahārāja makaḍatwan i tāmwlaŋ (Turyan / 929 AD)
 * śrī mahārāja makaḍatwan i bhūmi mātaram i watugaluḥ (Paradah / 943 AD)

Of the many inscriptions found, the name Mataram is always mentioned as "bhumi" (royal territory) while the name Medang is referred to as "kadatwan" (kraton/palace). If Mataram is defined as a region (capital city) it is wrong. Because the name Mataram is always mentioned on the inscription.

Look at the same case regarding the names of the Janggala Kingdom and the Kadiri Kingdom: The names of Kadiri and Janggala are referred to as the bhumi region, in the epigraphy bhumi means the king's territory. Syzyszune (talk) 04.43, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * śrīharsawijaya parnnah pahulunan dai nira nararyya sminiṅrat inandelaken munggwiŋ ratnakanaka siṅhasana nkaneŋ bhūmi jaṅgala (Mulamalurung / 1225 AD)
 * jayakatyong saŋ wineh anusuka dharma sima swatantra nkaneŋ bhūmi kaḍiri (Mulamalurung / 1225 AD)
 * Hi, thank you for discussing. I think your argument is quite reasonable and interesting. Maybe you should also brought this Mataram/Medang naming issue to the article in Wikipedia Bahasa Indonesia. However, it is commonly known that the name Mataram has been associated with the region of the present day Yogyakarta (areas of Sleman regency, Muntilan subdistric, Yogyakarta city, and Bantul regency), thus linked with that region as the original area toponymy, as initially the location of the kadatwan/palace/center of administration can be warranted. I think both opinions of naming the kingdom as Mataram or Medang should be kept in the text, while adding your additional infos to back the argument that Mataram is actually bhumi that cover all king's realms as far as East Java. I'll move this talk to the article talkpage to invite wider response, cheers.  Gunkarta  talk 08:58, 29 November 2021 (UTC)