The 23rd IPPA Congress
The 23rd IPPA Congress
S55
From Riverine Polities to Port -Rivers Network: Revisiting Jhon N. Miksic Archaeology of Connectivity Through the Batang Panai-Barumun Rivers and Panai Polity at 11th –14th Centuries
Asyhadi Mufsi Sadzali*, Agus Aris Munandar, and Ali Akbar
Department of Archaeology, University of Indonesia, Indonesia; *asyhadi.mufsi@ui.ac.id
This paper revisits and develops John N. Miksic's academic legacy in the study of Southeast Asian historical archaeology by applying the concept of the Port-River-Network (PRN) model, with a case study on the connection between the hinterland of Northern Sumatra to the maritime network between regions in the 11th to 14th centuries CE. Miksic highlights that Southeast Asian archaeology must expand beyond the maritime bias in external sources and focus on the connectivity between hinterlands, rivers, and ports. Accordingly, this paper questions how the political network and regional connectivity of Panai with other regions. The Port–River Network (PRN) model was developed as an analytical framework to analyse the political structure of the Panai region based on a river network integrated into four main nodes: Production Hinterland Nodes, Riverine Control Nodes, River Mouth Port Node, and External Maritime Links, and will be analysed using the CII (Connectivity Intensification Index) with the formula (CII=M (material)+K (commodity)+S (spatial)/3), which results in calculating the level of network intensity and temporal changes. High scores (1-10) indicate significant connectivity and integration with global connectivity, while medium scores indicate integration with regional connectivity, and low scores indicate integration with local connectivity. The analysis results indicate the Kingdom of Panai is founded on a river-based commodity network polity, not a centralized maritime authority, with an integrated network on a regional scale in Sumatra and Java. Panai developed thru the intensification of river networks, not from port dominance. In addition, this study not only reformulates Miksic's concept within a more structured framework but also offers an alternative path for network archaeology and heritage studies in Southeast Asia.