Kamalanka
Kamalanka, variously recorded in Chinese sources as Chia-mo-lang-chia, Lang-chia, and Lang-ya-hsiu, elsewhere as Kolo, in Ptolemy’s Geographike Hyphegesis as Balangka or Kalonga, in the Tanjore Inscription as Mevilimbangam, and in the Bhavavarman II inscription as Sambuka, was a Dvaravati polity in the western Chao Phraya basin of central Thailand. Established in the late 1st or early 2nd century CE, it endured until 1058, when its capital at ancient Nakhon Pathom was likely destroyed by Anawrahta of Pagan during his invasion of the Lavo Kingdom. Regarded as the successor of Tun Sun, its first embassy to China in 515 CE claimed a foundation some four centuries earlier, and subsequent embassies were dispatched in 523 and 531. The polity remained known in later tradition, with 20th-century Chinese settlers still referring to the western Chao Phraya region, specifically the Meklong-Tha Chin Basins, as Lang-jia-jiu, while the Lan Na Yonok Chronicle recorded Ayodhya of the pre-Ayutthaya era as Guru Rath, closely resembling the Chinese name Kolo.
By the 7th century, southern Kamalanka was incorporated into Pan Pan, while its northern territories merged into the Dvaravati sphere alongside neighboring polities after the collapse of Funan. Though once identified with Langkasuka, Chinese geographic descriptions place Kamalanka in the lower central plains of Thailand. Attempts to identify it with the Mon kingdom of Thaton, whose existence before the 13th century is questioned by Michael Aung-Thwin, remain disputed, particularly in light of Xuanzang’s account of Kamalanka as it was hemped mountains and rivers. Piriya Krairiksh has argued that early Indianized Nakhon Pathom first served as Pan Pan’s port at Mueang Uthong before the Mon shifted power to Nakhon Pathom, which was later recorded as Ge Luo She Fen in the Cefu Yuangui and as the Ge Luo Kingdom in the New Book of Tang.
Kamalanka declined in the 12th and 13th centuries, with its center likely relocated to Sambukapattana in present-day Ban Pong district, Ratchaburi province. Concurrently, breakaway polities emerged, including Chen Li Fu in Suphanburi and Phrip Phri in Phetchaburi. Chen Li Fu developed into Suphannabhum, while Phrip Phri expanded northward in 1224, subsuming both Chen Li Fu and Kamalanka. All three were later consolidated into the Ayutthaya Kingdom in the 14th century. Certain Thai traditions ascribe a far earlier origin, claiming that nobles of the Anuradhapura Kingdom of Lanka established Kamalanka in 216 BCE, with a related group founding Langkasuka in 217 BCE in present-day Pattani as its sister polity.
Records
Based on references in the book of I Ching and the seventh-century travel records of the Chinese monk Xuanzang, Kamalanka has been equated with Lang-ya-xiu or Lang-chia-shu. The Liáng Shū records that this polity measured thirty days’ journey from east to west and twenty days from north to south, situated 24,000 li from Guangzhou. The settlement of Balangka or Kalonga, mentioned in Ptolemy’s Geographike Hyphegesis in the 2nd century CE, may also correspond to Kamalanka, being described therein as a “metropolis.”Epigraphic evidence from Nakhon Pathom reinforces this association. A terracotta seal inscribed in Prakrit with Brahmi script, deciphered by Jiraphat Prapanwittaya and Varindra Vasishtha, refers to varapata, meaning “the glorious port city.” Saritpong Khumsong has proposed that during the Angkorian period, Nakhon Pathom was possibly designated Sambuka or Sambukapattana, as attested in the Preah Khan inscription. Following hydrological changes, the principal settlement is believed to have shifted westward to Mueang Sa Kosi Narai on the east bank of the Mae Klong River, while retaining its earlier appellation.
The designation Sambukapattana translates as “the port city of Sambuka.” One interpretation of Sambuka identifies it with the asura—a class of divine antagonists in Hindu mythology—while other meanings include a devotee named Shambuka or a generic reference to a conch or bivalve shell. The asura interpretation is particularly striking in view of the neighboring polity described in seventh-century Chinese sources as Xiū Luó Fēn, or “the country of the asura,” since 修罗 is a shortened form of 阿修罗, meaning asura. This parallel suggests a possible cultural or symbolic correspondence in the regional nomenclature of polities during the period.
Lanka records
The Tanjore Inscription, dating back to 1030, contains a list of the ports on the Kra Isthmus to the Malacca Strait that were raided by a fleet sent by King Rajendra Chola I. The following are the ports located on the Kra Isthmus; some cannot yet be precisely identified.- Mevilimbangam – Kamalanka, has beautiful walls as defense.
- Mayirudingan – the Je-lo-ting of the Chinese, surrounded by the deep sea as by a moat, the exact location remains disputed. Some placed it at the Sathing Phra Peninsular in Songkhla, where the Chinese called Rìluótíng in the 13th–14th century. Some says Chaiya.
- Talaittakkolam – Takkola of Ptolemy and the Milinda Panha, praised by great men versed in the sciences.
- Madamalingam –Tambralinga, capable of strong action in dangerous battles.
As ''Ge Luo She Fen'' and ''Gē Luó''
Thai scholar Piriya Krairiksh equates the kingdom of Ge Luo She Fen, recorded in the Cefu Yuangui, with the Gē Luó country of the New Book of Tang, placing both in the same region as Kamalanka. The Tongdian of 801 refers to this polity as Gē Luó Fù Shā Luó, known to the Chinese since the Han dynasty, comprising 24 subordinate states without provincial divisions. Its military organization was notable for the use of elephants in battle, each bearing up to one hundred soldiers. Tribute was first recorded during the reign of Emperor Guangwu of Han. Some scholars instead state Ge Luo She Fen is the corrupted term of Jiā Luó Shě Fú in Si Thep and the Phimai region, with the suffix fēn reflecting a variant of the Sanskrit pūra, denoting a town or city.The Tongdian describes Gē Luó as a fortified city whose ruler bore the surname Shǐ Lì Pó Luó and given name Mǐ Shī Bō Luó. Its capital featured stone walls, towers, and guarded gates, while the palace was roofed with grass. The society was distinguished by unique marriage customs, musical traditions, and funerary rites, including cremation with ashes placed in golden vessels submerged at sea. Geographically, the Tongdian locates Gē Luó southeast of Pan Pan. Earlier scholars identified it with Kalah on the southwestern Malay Peninsula, while later theories placed it on the Kra Isthmus or at ancient Nakhon Pathom. Others associate it with Bandon Bay, specifically Chaiya, which by that period was integrated into Srivijaya and later Tambralinga.
The Cefu Yuangui further notes that Gē Luó Shě Fēn bordered Duò Hé Luó to the east and maintained an army of 20,000 elite soldiers. Its king is named Pú jiā yuè mó. Along with Xiū Luó Fēn and Gān Bì, it sent tribute missions to the Tang court. These three polities shared similar institutions, though Xiū Luó Fēn possessed the largest military force, exceeding 30,000, while Gān Bì maintained only 5,000. A later Ming source, the, identifies the Malacca Sultanate as Gē Luó Fù Shā, also tracing its origins to the Han dynasty but noting its subsequent vassalization to Tun Sun.
In summary, two competing interpretations exist regarding the kingdom's location. One places it in the southern Malay Peninsula, linked with Gē Luó Fù Shā Luó and later traditions of Malacca; the other situates Gē Luó Shě Fēn in the northern peninsula, bordering Dvaravati, with possible centers at Nakhon Pathom, Mueang Uthong, and Si Thep.
Journey of Chang Chun
In the journey of Chang Chun as a Chinese envoy to Chi Tu in 607, Kamalanka was referred to as Lang-ya-xiu. It was said to be on the north of Chi Tu, another indianized state in the Singora Inland Sea.According to the location mentioned above, Thai scholar, Chand Chirayu Rajani, purposed Lang-ya-xiu was potentially located in the west Chao Phraya River basin, and strongly denied Paul Wheatley's assumption that equated Lang-ya-xiu with Langkasuka, which was located in modern-day deep south Thailand, and Wheatley's assumption has been continued by many scholars to the present day. Rajani additionally asserts that even Chinese people who settled in the west Chao Phraya River basin still called the area Lang-jia-jiu. There are also the islands named Lang-ya-jiew islands in Chumphon province, which expected to be the southern border of Lang-ya-xiu.
Tang records
The Old Book of Tang, dating 618 onwards, also indicates the location of Lang-ya-xiu, situated north of Pan Pan, aligning with Rajani's hypothesis. The text was translated by Paul Wheatley as follows.As per the text provided, since Pan Pan was placed at the area along the Bandon Bay in Surat Thani province, Lang-ya-xiu should be on the plain in lower Central Thailand; however, Paul Wheatley positioned Lang-ya-xiu to the south of Pan Pan. The location of both Pan Pan and Lang-ya-xiu given in the New Book of Tang, also sustaintiated Rajani's hypothesis. The text was translated by Peter Bee of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, as follows.