Temple and King: Resource Management, Rituals and Redistribution in Early Bali

Abstract

This article discusses the intricate relationship between economics, temples, rituals, and king and kingship in early Bali. So far the anthropological representation of the organization of the pre-colonial or early colonial Balinese state and society has oscillated between the 'theatre state' in which 'power served pomp' and the alleged disjunction of the state from an economy based for the most part on irrigated agriculture (rice). This article suggests that regional lords as well as kings had a substantial share in the economy as well as in the ritual organization of irrigation agriculture. This involvement functioned on both the local or regional level, with its corresponding irrigation associations (subak) and their rituals, and on the transregional level, with its major temples -which also acted as redistribution centres -and their authorities.

Studies of the Subak: New Directions, New Challenges

“…Like their Indonesian colleagues, they have moved increasingly away from the mere description of the organizational elements of subak to train their sights on intra-subak, intersubak and subak-state dynamics (e.g., Hobart 1978Hobart , 1980Poffenberger and Zurbuchen 1980;Spiertz 1990Spiertz , 1991Spiertz , 2000Jha 2001Jha , 2002bJha , 2004Hauser-Schäublin 2005).…”

“…Historians and archaeologists have been particularly engaged in seeking answers to deeply perplexing questions about the nature of links between the agricultural and sociopolitical systems that have evolved on Bali (see van Setten van der Meer 1979;Wisseman Christie 1992Schoenfelder 2000;Hauser-Schäublin 2005). In the process, many of them have contributed to our understanding of the ancient origins of the subak and of Balinese agricultural management practices (Ardika 1994;Çantika 1986: 36-37;Purwita 1986: 4-5;Sudarta 1987: 58-60).…”

Re-examining balinese subaks through the lens of cultural multilevel selection

“…Politics and religion were closely connected and water temples were described as political tools that could be harnessed by royal families (Hauser-Schäublin 2003, 2005). Kings organized rituals, made decisions about water use and distribution, and adjudicated disputes among subaks.…”

“…A king’s authority was derived from his ability to command subjects to join an annual pilgrimage to honor important deities (Hauser-Schäublin 2003, 2005). These pilgrimages made visible the boundaries of the regencies and territories and provided an indicator of the size of the population that was loyal to a lord or king (Hauser-Schäublin 2003).…”

“…These pilgrimages made visible the boundaries of the regencies and territories and provided an indicator of the size of the population that was loyal to a lord or king (Hauser-Schäublin 2003). The pilgrimages also strengthened social bonds and a sense of community (Hauser-Schäublin 2005), which can be important for collective action. Allegiance to a king was partly based on the degree to which he was perceived to channel the power of the gods to ensure the fertility of the populace and their crops (Hauser-Schäublin 2003, 2005).…”