The short version
Borobudur is traditionally dated to around the late 8th and early 9th centuries CE, and is associated with a ruling family of central Java known as the Sailendra. The dating comes from the study of inscriptions of the period, from the carving style and from comparison with other monuments, because no text found at Borobudur itself records who commissioned it or when. Anything more precise than “roughly the 8th to 9th centuries” should be treated as an estimate.
The setting: Java in the early medieval period
In the centuries when Borobudur was built, central Java was home to several kingdoms with Indian-influenced religion, writing and court culture. Inscriptions were written in Sanskrit and in Old Javanese, and both Buddhist and Hindu patrons built in stone. The older name sometimes used for the main polity of the area is Mataram. The region’s fertile volcanic plains supported rice farming, and this agricultural base helped pay for large building projects.
Contact by sea linked Java with India, the Malay Peninsula, Sumatra and beyond. This is part of the broader story of the southern transmission of Buddhism, and it helps to explain why Javanese art shows echoes of Indian styles. Chinese pilgrim monks, who travelled by sea in this period, also left descriptions of Buddhist learning in maritime Southeast Asia, including in Sumatra; see Chinese pilgrim monks for the wider context.
Who were the Sailendra?
The name Sailendra is generally translated as “lord of the mountain” or “king of the mountain”, though the exact sense is debated. It appears in inscriptions from central Java and elsewhere, and it is used for a lineage of rulers who supported Buddhism, particularly Mahayana Buddhism.
Several inscriptions are central to the discussion.
- An inscription found near Kalasan, dated to 778 CE, records the building of a shrine for the female bodhisattva Tara and mentions the Sailendra. This is one of the earliest firmly dated documents linking the family to Buddhist foundations.
- An inscription from Kelurak, dated to 782 CE, refers to a shrine connected with Manjushri.
- The Karangtengah inscription, dated to 824 CE, mentions the dedication of a sacred structure and a ruler often identified as Samaratungga. Some scholars link it to Borobudur, although the connection is an interpretation and not a certainty.
Taken together, these suggest that Buddhist building in central Java was active across several generations in the late 8th and early 9th centuries. The traditional view is that the work on Borobudur was spread across a period of decades, perhaps ending in the early 9th century. Some scholars give slightly different ranges.
Links beyond Java
The name Sailendra also occurs in documents outside Java. A well-known copper plate inscription from Nalanda in eastern India records a grant by a local ruler in support of a monastery established there by a king of Suvarnadvipa, an old name for the islands of Southeast Asia, who is described as a member of the Sailendra lineage. This is evidence of Indonesian involvement in the great monastic centre described under Nalanda Mahavihara. Note that the document refers to a later generation than the main building era of Borobudur.
Because of this, some historians connect the Sailendra with the maritime kingdom of Srivijaya, centred in Sumatra. How the two relate is not agreed.
Where scholars disagree
Several questions remain open, and a cautious account should say so plainly.
- Dating. The range given above is common, but some studies argue for slightly earlier or later phases of construction, and the monument was altered during building.
- The Sailendra and the Sanjaya. A traditional view treated the Buddhist Sailendra and a Shaiva line known as the Sanjaya as two rival dynasties. Others suggest that the two shared power or that they were aspects of the same ruling circle, since both Buddhist and Hindu foundations were built in the same area at the same time.
- Origin of the Sailendra. Proposals place their origins in Java, in Sumatra, or in connection with Indian or mainland Southeast Asian courts. None has won full agreement.
- Purpose and patron. It is not certain which ruler began or completed the work, or whether it was meant as a royal shrine, a teaching monument or both.
What kind of Buddhism was it?
The art and inscriptions point to Mahayana Buddhism with some elements that are sometimes described as early Esoteric or tantric. Terms such as these are applied after the fact, and the Buddhism of ancient Java was probably more varied than any single label suggests. The monument’s relationship with the three major Buddhist traditions is better treated as a question than as a settled fact.
Why the history matters to visitors
Knowing the setting helps in reading the monument. The building of Borobudur was the work of a society that connected Java with the wider Buddhist world, drew on texts such as those described under Mahayana sutras and expressed ideas in a distinctly Javanese style. Our article on the Borobudur mandala design discusses how the plan itself may be read. For what happened after the building era, see the account of the Borobudur restoration and rediscovery.