Malay Jakuns of the Peninsula, and another is the Naga, who as Sesha, the thousand-hooded cobra, formed the couch of Vishnu. Even the Buddha himself became a Naga. There is thus clear evidence from Batak religious beliefs of an 'Indonesian' substratum and an Indian overlay. More than sixty years ago Kern drew attention to the five sub-divisions of the Simbiring tribe of Karo Bataks, Choliya, Pandiya, Meliyala, Depari, and Pelawi, in which he recognized the South Indian names of Chola, Pandya, Malayalam, and Pallava. Depari still remains a mystery. The Keling, that is, South Indian, origin of the Simbirings is recognized as a fact by all the Other Karo Bataks.

Enough has been shown, therefore, to prove a strong Indianization at one time amongst the ancestors of the Bataks, who were fundamentally 'Indonesian'. It will be appreciated that this term 'Indonesian' is used in a very loose sense and merely as one of convenience. In point of fact, there is no agreement among anthropologists as to what the term means or to what physical groups it should be applied, and it is often used as though it were the same as 'Proto Malay' or 'Pre-Malay'. In the present state of knowledge it is impossible to define what exactly an 'Indonesian' is either physically or culturally. But what does seem to emerge is that Indianization in Malaysia and Indo-China was accepted by various culture-groups amongst whom there was a general pattern of similarity, and the term 'Indonesian' is applied in this paper to any peoples or tribes who can be said to fall within that general pattern, even though not exactly within it. The early Chinese records into T’ang times recognize this general similarity of pattern in the South Sea and call it K'un-lun, speaking of K'un-lun slaves, K'un-lun country, K'un-lun people, K'un-lun language and K'un-lun ships.

If the Raksasas of Malayadvipa were the people of the Pasemah plateau, the people of the Batak highlands would be among the Mlecchas; and, if these interpretations are correct, Chapter 48 of the Vayu-Purana shows that Indianization in Sumatra began in the northern half of the island and reached the southern half later. If Professor- Heine-Geldern's view is accepted that Hindu-Sumatran culture took birth at the very latest during the second century A.D., that date can be applied to the Indianization in the northern half of the island. But, if Malayadvipa is accepted as having indicated Sumatra, that date cannot be applied to the southern half in view of the statements about the Raksasas, provided that they were the Pasemah people. There cannot be any possible doubt that these Pasemah people fell fully, and properly within the orbit of the 'Indonesian civilization’ and that its Dong-s'on phase was present among them, nor can there be any possible doubt that the Dong-s'on