|
View: 5342|Reply: 31
|
Real Guns (not firelance) were invented by the Malay Zabag Empire and used in 12
[Copy link]
|
|
|
Edited by DELT0ID at 17-9-2018 06:36 PM
Real Guns (not firelances) were invented by the Malay Zabag Empire and used against Ceylon in 1247
Guns being discussed here do not include rockets,firecrackers,bombs, flame throwers or even firelances.
And the year could be as early as 1233 depending on when King Parakramabahu II was deemed to have started his reign.
One contemporary Ceylonese document named Kandavuru Sirita mention 400 guns being fired simultaneously signalling the beginning of a battle during that king's reign while another Ceylonese manuscript called the Dambadeni Asna specified the battle as between Ceylon and Malay invaders from Zabag empire they called Javaka and led by the emperor's main man named Chandrabanu, a vassal king within the empire. Two years before this war the Dambadeniya kingdom was fighting a war to drive out Kalinga Magha. And throughout the 13th century they fought many more wars. But guns in that century was accorded by a ceylonese manuscript only to the war with candrabanu. This tell us about which side the actual user was.
The Dambadeniya Asna compiler enumerated nine type of guns deployed in that battle :
1)dum wedi - smoke gun
2) saera wedi -arrow gun
3) muna wedi -??? gun
4)yaturu wedi -machine gun
5)gal vedi -rock gun
6) gini vedi -flare gun
7) sabda vedi -sound effect gun
8) vala wedi -high precision gun
9) maha wedi -big gun
The vala vedi could also be a rocket (trailing vedi).
And the fact that some of the vedi mentioned can shoot arrows and rocks proves that vedis are true guns and has to be made of metal. Not some type of firelance or rocket because firelance cannot shoot arrows more than 100 feet. An army will only bother to field firearms that shoot arrows the same distance as the bow. More than 500 yards and this can only be achieved by real guns. Not firelance. Rocket can be counted out because rockets cannot carry rocks . And if you make a large enough firelance to fit a rock inside, it wont even leave the barrel when you light up the powder.
Anyway, wedi/vedi is definitely derived from the malay word "bedil". Before that era throughout many parts of asia, vedi either means altar or some magical weapons of Hindu gods.
The iron pellet spewing fire lance used in 12th & 13th century China was at best nothing more than bamboo and metal versions of Roman candle fireworks. Chinese were decades behind. In 1259 for instance they were still using firelance and were fascinated by the loud noise and relatively high velocity of a pellet wad that shot out of a fire lance.The first gun used in china was documented by the Ming shih. It refers to a mongol attack using a single seemingly imported phao on the Jurchen city of Tshai Chou in what appears to be an uprising at the beginning of the mongol yuan dynasty. That would be in the 1280s. The Yuan shih seems to confirm this. Reporting of several huo phao carried by commander Li Thing to defeat unidentified enemies from late 1287 -after quelling the Nayan rebellion- through 1288. As can be understood, the huo phao of the 13th century is no longer the grenade or trebuchet of previous centuries. A handgonne discovered in Heilongjiang was surely one of those huo phao from Li Things army. The Ming Shih testimony can be further backed up by a 1264 report in the Yuan Ching Shih Ta Tien Hsu Lu mentioning two new weapons created in a western region. One is called phao. The other is che tueh nu (folded in layers crossbow) which most likely was the repeating crossbow. Its not unusual for the Malay region to sometimes be referred as a western region by a chinese document. For instance in a 13th century chinese scientific book, Malacca which at that time was the only place where spectacles were made was considered by its author to be in the western region. So you see, the gun invented by Malays around 1240 went from being noticed by China in 1264 to being imported and then copied by mongol Yuan dynasty China of 1280s. Speaking of repeating/magazine crossbows, they were clearly reported in the Culavamsa as being used by the troops of Chandrabhanu. It was described as poison arrows shot at high rates by a machine. Innovative weapons deployed by Chandrabanu's army such as this not only prove that the vedi firearms mentioned in the invasion of Ceylon were borne by the Malay side but also the fact that the magazine crossbow was invented by Zabag/Savaka/Javaka malays of that era as well. If you look up chinese arguments you will only find some writings from the 3rd century BCE onwards about crossbows that launch several arrows in one shot being claimed as the magazine crossbow; and also a winch fitted to a queer looking wooden box found in a third century tomb trying to pass as a magazine crossbow despite it not having prods. Furthermore, something important but easy to reverse engineer like the magazine crossbow would have been in widespread use throughout europe and asia by the beginning of the first century if it was really invented in 4th century BCE china.
The Dambadeni Asna was composed in the reign of king Parakramabahu III 1287-93 because his name is the most recent to be written in it.Which means roughly 40 years elapsed before accounts of the battle was written. A lot of people who conveyed the oral tradition applied their own spin on it; including the author himself who unconvincingly tried to link vedis with the lanka army instead of the invaders. Never mind the fact that he and other Lankan authors of the 13th century never wrote about vedis in lanka anymore even in the final years of that century. Unless their mothers had been working as maids at the commandants' residents of weapons testing facilities on the malay peninsula and then returned to tell them about it, there was no way royal scribes and other inhabitants of ceylon would have known about vedis/guns other than witnessing or hearing of Chandrahanu's troops using them and being on the receiving end.
As one 20th century researcher commented : "The confused account in the Dambadeni-asna of the foreign invasions by sea during the reign of Parakramabahu II is based on the memories of these events which were prevalent among the people a century or so after the time in which they took place. These popular versions, garbled and confused though they be, are not the products of pure imagination, but due to transmission orally, from one narrator to another, of a story which at the start would have been rational and sober."
The Dambadeni Asna author's tongue in cheek claims of vedis being deployed by the Lankan army can easily be dismissed on grounds of credibility. This is the same author who made wacky statements such as Chandrabhanu was killed and buried in this battle when other ceylonese chronicles reported at least one more and as many as twelve more attacks by Chandrabanu....the Ceylonese army was led by the king and not his nephew....Tambralinga is Tamil and different from Javaka army that came afterwards....
After all, panegyrics like Dambadeni Asna are issued by kings just for the purpose of sucking up to the dynasty.
The only facts that can be derived from Dambedeni Asna is the above mentioned list of guns and the first time on recorded human history fully functional true guns were ever operated in combat.
And the only reason those guns mentioned can be accepted as the truth is because guns were not suppposed to exist yet in the mid13th century. Somehow the authors , especially that of Kandavuru Sirita still knew about it. How else if it wasnt for their introduction to him by the Savaka/Javaka invasions ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by DELT0ID at 17-9-2018 09:31 AM
The frequently violent interactions between Sinhalese, Indians and Malay invaders on the island have led to some new words for guns being created there other than wedi. The term bondikula which is another local word for gun must have been initially a Ceylon Tamil transliteration of bedil. Later on it became a Ceylonese word as well. Then the Arabs/Saracens who according to Marco Polo were hired to be soldiers by the "poor cowardly creatures" Ceylonese got introduced to the gun in Ceylon.
Bedil(Malay)--->Bondikula(Ceylon Tamil)--->Bondikula(Sinhalese)--->Bunduq(Arabic)
In 1302 the king of Lanka granted tax exemption including for gun licenses to two individuals. Pardon my prejudice but Lankans were not clever enough to invent any type if gun. Those matchlocks could only be obtained from a nation which created them. And who else other than the Malay peninsula which invented handgonnes and artilleries five decades before? Those hand guns which they call tuvakkuva can only be the malay short blunderbuss called terakul. From that ceylonese document we can therefore surmise that musket type weapons were already invented by Malays circa 1300.
Terakul(Malay)--->Tuwakku(Sinhalese)--->Tufak(Turkish).
Meanwhile the long barreled blunderbuss was called "pamboras".
Pamboras/pemuras -----》blunderbuss
China acquired musket type firearms only after conquering Annam in 1410. By that time the Arabs and Turks already were manufacturing them after acquiring this Malay technology through Ceylon.The arrow gun was produced by China in the 14th century.
The core people of the Zabag empire which was created by the peninsular country called Kedah on the other hand had a long history of technological excellence througout the history of the peninsula. Inventing the balance lug sail which is the worlds first sail type to allow sailing into the wind (tacking), outrigger, crucible steel, blowgun, double action piston bellows, fire piston,spectacle frame, kite, satin, glass mirror and the aforementioned magazine crossbow.
Furthermore, ships of over 1000 and 2,000 tonnes displacement were built only by Malays in the first millenium.
Snapping mechanism of matchlocks seems to have been invented separarely by 15th century Malaccans and Bohemians who coined it Schnap Lunte. Trigger and trigger guard found fitted on Malaccan matchlocks by the Portuguese in 1511 clearly testify to their invention by Malacca. As we all know this format is still used by guns to this day. Up till then the rest of the world used a lever which must be squeezed with a hand as trigger; except Bohemians who fitted buttons on the side to activate the Schnap Lunte mechanism.
Swords made in Kedah were the best in the world. Thats why even the fabled sword of King Arthur myth in far away Britain was named after Kedah.
"Kalah Bar" means "country of Kedah" in Arabic. Excalibur therefore simply means "exported from Kedah country" .
Leonardo da Vinci invented the first self propelled vehicle in the world based on sketches he made after meeting a nobleman from Malacca |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The motive behind this aggression is a bit of mystery up till this age. It doesnt make sense for Zabag emperor to attack his own vassal just to gain possession of the Buddha tooth relic as claimed by certain Ceylonese sources.
The manner which he instructed his army to act in Ceylon appears to be that of a pissed off emperor who has not been getting the annual tribute due to him. While claims of victory on the Ceylonesd side was merely made by the not so reliable Culavamsa. As you read further down you will realise that the culavamsa not only frequently got the facts skewed up but sometimes they completely leave out some events or humiliations that befell their somewhat pitiful people altogether from records. Chau Ju Kua made it clear in 1225 that one of the two factions in
Ceylon was paying tribute to Sanfotsi/Zabag and this faction could only be the Dambadeniya kingdom but the Culavamsa never conceded this fact .By failing to acknowledge this reality, the Culavamsa only mark itself as being in denial. So its not surprising that it also denied the total defeat of Dambadeniya to Chandrabhanus forces. Upon learning that Zabag/Javaka army are leaving ceylon after completely devastating it , the Culavamsa conveniently translate such sensible deed as a defeat.The most sensible assumption would be that Zabag forces left Ceylon when they were finally satisfied with the "punishment" they meted out on their ungrateful Ceylonese vassal. I say ungrateful because there is ample reasons to think that there was no way those Ceylonese could have driven out Kalinga Magha a few years earlier when they were reduced to hiding in the mountains other than by the aid of their Zabag overlord who definitely would have sent troops and weapons to defend their vassal. Zabag had done this favour before in 1045 when they drove the Cholas out of Ceylon and the Ceylonese became its vassal ever since. By 1225 Chau Ju Kua also said that another faction of Ceylon was a vassal of the Malabaris. This faction can be none other than that of Kalinga Magha.
While the liberation of Ceylon by Zabag in 1045 was documented in the Madirigiri inscription, the Zabag rescue of Ceylon in the 1220s was not recorded anywhere. Apparently the ungrateful nature of 13th century Ceylonese not only made them recalcitrant about remembering their saviours but also made them neglectful in paying annual tribute as well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by DELT0ID at 17-9-2018 08:03 AM
Beating the primitive softy loincloth clad Pandyans would have been a walk in the park for any Javaka/Zabag army with their huge ships, superior weaponry, stronger physique and sheer guts. Chandrabanu most likely died of disease or infirmity during the Ceylon campaign and caused his overlord, the king of Kedah to come replace him as the field marshall. This event allowed the wimpy Pandians decided to do what they do best which is claiming to have killed the recently deceased Savaka king in battle, appointing his son as successor and having him pay tribute in jewels, elephants and whatnots. Furthermore, the so called victories by the pandiyans over the Savakas in that period were not backed up by any Ceylonese source. Those deluded Pandyans are the same people who claimed that Sinam/China was one of the countries paying tribute to them. In 1264 or 1265 the king of Kedah(Zabag emperor) decided to return quickly to his homeland as soon as he has straighten out the situation in Ceylon to tend his crumbling empire. Once again his defeafed foe in Ceylon , the weakling Pandians did what Tamils like them and the Cholas before them do best. Claiming to defeat a nation they were never able to beat. Dreaming up ridiculous&ludicrous propaganda such as defeating the king of Kadaram(Kedah). After laughing at the loinclothed pandyan king and his scribe we can glean factual information from this fantasy; which is: the king of Kedah cum Savaka/Javaka/Zabag emperor was conducting military operations in Ceylon early 1260s. Having defeated the Lankans and the Pandyans, he installed puppet regimes in both Sinhalese and Tamil countries within Ceylon.
In Jaffna the son of a Savaka native named Arya Chakravatti was placed in charge of Jaffna and was dubbed Savakamaindan by the Tamils. This Savakamaindan is the Sendemain that Marco Polo cited as king of Ceylon and was "tributary to nobody". Which is not surprising since Zabag collapsed by itself in the 1260s. The underclass of Jaffna were Tamils who go around naked. These Savaka ruling class of Jaffna several years earlier apparently made a pact with the Pandyans in which the Savakas were to conquer & plunder Sinhalese territories. Consequently some of the spoils including the Buddha tooth relic were sent to their ally the Pandyans. Under these circumstances it was easy for the victims including authors of Culavamsa and Rajaratnacari to think that the Arya Chakravarti of Jaffna was working for the Pandyan kings. Despite such obvious & frequent testimonies of Savaka superiority over Pandyans and Lankans, imbeciles right down to this day try to make it appear otherwise just because the pussy pandyans and sinhalese manifested their fantasies in written form. Never mind them not being able to explain how on earth savakamaindan/ sendemain was in control of lanka in 1292 and was tributary to no one. Arya Chakravartis of Jaffna who lorded over the entire island of lanka from the late 13th century onwards were the same ruling clan as Sendemain/Savakamaindan. In other words, the title Arya Cakravarti and Sendemain/Savakamaindan can be used interchangeably. Where did some people get the wacky idea that a clan called arya chakravatti had to be from india ? Arya simply means noble. Between the warlike technollgically advanced Malays and the meek servile indians and lankans which people is noble ? The name Chakravatti also signifes a Buddhist origin. The word vat/wat denoting buddhist house of worship while chakra means discus. Chakravatti was an ordinary name in the northern part of the Malay peninsula back then. The name obviously spread to India and Lanka during this centuries long age of malay Zabag conquest being discussed here. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by DELT0ID at 17-9-2018 08:06 AM
There has been moronic opinions suggesting that the Chaiya Inscription indicated Tambralingga was already independent by 1230. That inscription only said Chandrabanu was the lord of Tambralingga, good looking, from Lotus dynasty, matching Asoka in political skills etc. What makes some people think the Chaiya inscription can be a testimony of Tambralinga's independence ?Is it because he was revered in a neighbouring county's vihara ? Or is it because the name Sriwijaya or Zabag was not mentioned?
Zabag emperor Diwakara financed the reconstruction of a monastery in China and the monks carved eulogies of him on a slab. Does that mean he was king of China ?
And if a church in California commemorate the huge financial contribution by some Arizona governor with a plaque you can be sure there would be nothing on the plaque that says California and Arizona are both part of the USA. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by DELT0ID at 17-9-2018 08:10 AM
Chandrabhanu was a vassal king given the mandate by the emperor of Zabag to command the expedition to Ceylon. The army he led was part of the zabag army and equipped with standard imperial issued weapons. He may have gone there with some feudatory kings of his own. A vassal king having feudatory states of his own is not unusual within the Zabag empire. The Javanese vassal kingdom of Zabag named Holing by the chinese was said to have 28 kingdoms of its own. A 12th century Nestorian christian zabag emperor who called himself Prester John told the Pope and european kings in his letters to them that many of his vassal kings have sub-kings of their own. Centuries earlier the king of Tambralingga also conquered Lawo but it is unclear if he did it on behalf of the emperor or for himself. Kulothunga the Malay puppet king ruling Chola on behalf of Zabag from 1070 to 1119/22 conquered Malabar in 1083/4 and this territory just like Lawo could be counted as both under Zabag emperor as well as the respective vassal king who conquered them.
God knows what other revolts the emperor and his main men like Chandrabanu had to deal with in the final decades of Zabag. One thing is for sure. None of them were recorded by any party except this Ceylonese one. Kedahs empire did not end with Zabag. I made a topic five years ago entitled
Kedah Altered its Imperial name from Zabag to Java in mid 13th century
There are discussions on relevant subjects in it such as how kedah grew its empire through hostile takeover of Srivijaya Empire, why kedah hijacked the name Srivijaya, when it changed its imperial name to Zabag, the empire extending from western african coast to australia and the pacific including alaskan west coast, why it use the alias Waqwaq, evidences proving Prester John was a Zabag emperor and Kedah not caring one bit when Palembang its former vassal adopted the name Zabag they picked from the gutter where Kedah discarded it early on. |
Rate
-
1
View Rating Log
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by DELT0ID at 17-9-2018 07:27 AM
Rain would render those guns useless but Zabag troops would still have prevailed through sheer superiority in fighting prowess. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Those guns are the real deal. Their inventors are only either ceylon and javaka/zabag. If ceylonese think they were using it in 1247 then they should announce to the world like what I am doing now |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If ni betul, betul la story yang famous dekat IIUM Confessions ke apa tu yang orang Melayu dulu2 pun ada buat senjata/senapang macam ni. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maksud anda IIUM Convention agaknya. Mereka ada sebut apa apa kah tentang penciptaan senjata api jenis bedil oleh bangsa melayu ? Atau mereka sekadar bincang tentang pembuatan bedil sahaja oleh orang melayu selepas kurun ke 13 ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author |
Post time 17-9-2018 10:13 AM
From the mobile phone
|
Show all posts
|
The sinhalese Savulu dynasty definitely originated from a Savaka governor appointed by the zabag/savaka maharaja just as the name Savulu itself implies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author |
Post time 17-9-2018 03:36 PM
From the mobile phone
|
Show all posts
zzyytt replied at 17-9-2018 02:40 PM
nike shox
kobe 9
air max 2018
Tak mau ahh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Owlknight
Bedil adalah ciptaan paling penting dalam peradaban manusia. Itu sebabnya kita melayu tak boleh biar saja kaum lain gampang mendapat nama hasil dari ciptaan bangsa kita |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author |
Post time 17-9-2018 05:09 PM
From the mobile phone
|
Show all posts
|
Credit for a lot of malay inventions were mistakenly given to other people but I let it slide; except for guns. Their invention is the most important in humanity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Post time 17-9-2018 06:40 AM
变色卡
