〇 220 豆尾 . ・んビ roo な可な″た一 CO な 0 〃なビ S 6 尾 0 た / 〃 g / 〃 tO g 記ん砒花乃・ 0 ん〃 . 292 lt was probably also in the fourteenth century that the four doorways 0f the central shrine 0f Angkor Wat were walled up, and the stones used for this were sculpted with large standing Buddha figures, thus transforming the shrine into a kind 0f 立〃 20 which has remained in worship ever S1nce. The very few subsequent historical documents available, mainly consist Of the varlous verslons Of the Royal Chronicles. lt is Often forgotten, however, that these were only written down from the beginning Of the nineteenth century onwards, and that they should not be read without a good measure 0f critical judgement. They all agree on the fact that the Khmer King Chau Ponhea Yat 'abandoned' Angkor, though they give a wide range 0f dates, from 1377 t0 1508. He did so after the final attack by the Thais, fleeing to take up residence in the south: first at Basan in the province Of Srei Santhor, then at Phnom Penh, and finally at Longvek. Good arguments have been advanced tO cast doubt on this 'abandonment' ofAngkor, and it is not merely because the ChronicIes are the only 'historical' documents that are available that they should be considered as definitively authoritative. The American scholar Michael Vickery has carried out intensive research which ShOWS that it is in fact difficult tO give them any credence when they deal with this period 0f Khmer history. He is quite right t0 conclude that it would be surprising if these texts, which recount く hmer history from its beginnlngs tO the fifteenth century and are unanlmously considered tO be legendary, could miraculously become 'historical' at the precise moment when the lnscriptlons almost entirely vanish. The writers Of the Chronicles were working in the nineteenth century on the basis Of documents which have never been published, and they tried tO reconstruct a coherent く hmer history.They had no qualms about rewriting var10LIS chapters when the source material was t00 scarce, WhiCh was Often the case over the wh01e period. Whatever the truth of the matter, it is very doubtful that the kings of Angkor fled from their capital because Of Thai onslaughts, (they were any case fewer than claimed in the Chronicles) in order tO take up residence in Phnom Penh. lt is at least as credible that, in fact, the king 0f Angkor never 'abandoned' the city, but that a descendant from a different royal lineage, or perhaps from another branch 0f the family which reigned at Angkor, installed himself as a rival in the Phnom Penh region WhiCh was growing lll econom1C importance because Of the burgeoning Chinese trading activity in South-East ASia. ln contrast tO the vanous theories advanced over the years with more or less plausibility, Michael Vickery's hypothesis is well worth considering, namely that it was the growlng econonmc importance Of Phnom Penh as a port, and ー even more ー that 0f Ayutthaya, capital 0f Siam, which endangered the power 0f Angkor and finally led t0 its downfall. lt f0110WS from thiS' that ー contrary t0 received opinion ー the 'restoration Of Angkor t ' may well have had nothing tO dO with the kings of Longvek, Satha, or elsewhere. The two kings wh0 left inscriptions at
C ん 4 なア怩 ANGKOR IN THE 1 ITH CENTURY lmmediately after the death 0f Jayavarman V around 1000 AD, and at the same time that his close family disappears from the Khmer historical record (none 0f its members are ever mentioned in subsequent lnscnptions), the emplre was once 1 れ ore plunged intO great turmoil. At first the inscriptions give the name Of a king, Udayadityavarman l, crowned in 1001. His mother was the sister of one of Jayavarman V's spouses, which certainly did not Of itself give her son the right tO the supreme throne as S01 e have maintained. The argument is that this woman was descended from the 'line 0f the kings Of sreshthapura' but this isolated reference tO an ancient legend only serves tO shOW clearly and simply that the new king had no direct link with his immediate predecessors. His maternal uncle had been a general under Jayavarman V and it is possible that this very uncle could have helped him tO mount the supreme throne' doubtless obtained through bitter conflict. There is however no trace Of those whO would have counted among hiS main adversarles: the close relations or direct deSCendantS Of Jayavarman V, Of WhOI れ there must have been many. However, as no trace remalns Of Udayadityavarman S presence at Angkor it IS not even sure that he ever went there as king. At く .Oh く er an inscription records an edict of his, dated Friday 13 February 1002. Might it have been in this former capital that he tried tO make his seat in order tO strengthen his challenged rule? Whatever the facts Of the matter, he was tO die soon after thiS date in unknown C1rcumstances. お″ dd ん〃〃 r naga わロんお叩加〃 style, 2 〃 d ん住グ 可ビ〃〃リ , B 0 〃 . いパ G 襯ビリ 〇 220 . ・ Ba なん SC ビ〃、〃 0 川子一 / 〃 d ″ん ge 〃ビ〃な〃 C ビ カ砒 , 市 0 〃 , B 叩〃 . 123
PREFACE The first edition of this book was published in French only by Editions Bordas in France in 1990. The text 0f this edition has been thoroughly revised and updated t0 take intO account the new discovenes and theories WhiCh have appeared since and the illustrations are almost completely new. Essentially this is a new bOOk and is the first of my books to be available in English, having been admirably translated by Tom White who spent several years in Phnom Penh. Despite certaln setbacks, Cambodia has made a courageous recovery 仕 01 れ the cataclysm of the 1970s, although much indeed remains t0 be done. The 'park' 0f Angkor has been reopened for research and for tourist access. From 1986 t0 1992 , lndia had already made a significant contribution towards itS rehabilitation' whilst the lnternational Co-ordination Committee tO safeguard the monuments Of Angkor' under the j0int presidency 0f France and Japan, thanks t0 the invaluable suppOrt 0f UNESCO which provides its secretariat, has spared no effort in setting up pro)ects for research, restoratlon and Site clearance, With teams and support 仕 0n1 France, Germany, Hungary, lndonesia, ltaly, Japan and Luxemburg. Since the 、で st discovered this marvellous complex Of monuments there has been a considerable volume 0f research, mainly carried out by the French scholars Of the ECOle franqaise d'Extréme-Orient. Prominent among these was George WhO with 0ther experts sketched the first outlines 0f the history Of ancient Camb0dia on the basis 0f their reading 0f the epigraphs. The wh01e story 0f the political and social life of the ancient Khmers is however still far from being ん 11Y known or understood. Nevertheless, the reopemng 0f Angkor affords new opportumties for the research community tO test the more or less fanciful theories which have been propounded' inevitably from afar, during the t00 many 'dark years' which Camb0dia has had t0 endure. This bOOk presents a provisional account Of ongolng research, and attempts tO glve a clearer picture Of the facts than was possible at the time when our predecessors were conducting their invaluable pioneermg investigations. I would like tO thank René Dumont for his contribution tO the sculpture sectlon and Tom White for his sensitlve translation. lt is t0 the undying memory 0f George CCdés, wh0 kindly requested that I should pursue his research, that I dedicate this b00k. CIaude Jacques Paris, 1997 0 カ 2 . ・ D ビ ta ″ 0 川 0 6 砒ビ〃ら B の , 0 〃 .
OTHER TEMPLES IN THE ANGK()R 、 VAT STYLE There iS no mentlon in the inscriptions Of the 'minor' temples Of ThOI 1 れ anon and Chau Say Tevoda on either side 0f the causeway which ran between the royal palace 0f Angkor Thom and that 0f Jayavarman V. From a detailed stylistic study it appears that the former dates 仕 om the early years 0f Suryavarman's relgn, and the latter was built towards its close. lt should not however be forgotten that at the ⅱ 1 れ e these temples were built, this 'royal way' was not a significant feature, S1nce the centre Of the emplre was undoubtedly on the site of Angkor Wat. N0thing indicates that they had been symmetrically planned from the outset, as they are not closely similar and Chau Say Tevoda seems somewhat the later Of the tWO. Far from there, and near the east bank of the East Baray, the very fine monument 0f Banteay Samre must have been erected in the same period by a high dignitary. However, Ⅵ℃ have no more documentary evidence on thiS temple than on the ()thers. lt iS sited some 450 metres east Of the 64r4J , , towards its south-east corner, and is like Angkor t in having an entrance causeway crossed by flights 0f stairs. The causeway is 200 metres long, and, again like Angkor t , the temple is preceded by a cruciform terrace. This author tends tO believe that the terrace should be dated tO the thirteenth century, but the causeway indicates that the temple was at the centre Of a town, extending perhaps over some 80 hectares. On the road from Angkor in present-day Thailand, some 60 kilometres before it reaches Phimai, there is the foot of an elongated hill which is called (for this reason) Phnom Rung. At least 仕 om the reign of Rajendravarman this hill had been a refuge for ascet1CS WhO had built several shrines on it. But in the twelfth century Narendraditya, a first cousin Of Suryavarman, retired there after a glorious military career, and it is tO him that is owed the (a)01A part Of the Phnom Rung temple, whose restoration was completed by the Thai Fine Arts Department in 1988. lts siting at the top of Phnom Rung, the long causeway which leads to it, and the quality of the building, make it an important site in the former Khmer lands. Apart from this, the large 6 の extending at the foot of the hill and the temple 0f Muang Tam dating 仕 om the prevlous century, are an eloquent tribute tO the former wealth Of this reg1011. lt is probably in Suryavarman's reign t00 , that the building Of the great temple 0f Beng MeaIea was at least begun. lt lies at the foot of the southern cliff of Phnom Kulen, some 40 kilometres east ofAngkor, 51 the road towards the great Preah Khan' which is some 60 kilometres further on, and is both a town and a temple complex whose history is virtually unknown. Beng Mealea is also on the way tO KOh Ker, and was also the starting point of a canal which led to the Great Lake, and which, significantly, was also probably used t0 float the stone blocks from the nearby quarries, downstream tO Angkor. をにー , 4 〃 apsaras 、つ〃 7 T ん 0 〃 7 〃 70 〃 0 〃 . 0 カカ 0 朝 . ・ 7 ' んビビ立ビ〃な〃じビ tO P, ん〃 0 襯″〃 g,. 190
political situation, Suryavarman gave greater prlority tO ensuring his defences than tO building a grandiose state temple. ln comparlson with other pyramid temples, Phimeanakas is smaller than Pre Rup ( 50 metres on one side) and Ta Keo ( 60 metres square) and is a rectangle 0f only 35 by 28 metres at its base. lt rises very steeply, however, S1nce above three laterite levels totalling twelve metres in height, the dimenslons 0f the summit are still 30 by 23 metres. で find here, as at Ta Keo, a continuous covered gallery which in this case allows for circumambulation, but is tOO cramped tO house statues of the gods as it is only one metre wide. At the cardinal points it has gate-lodges with two W1ngs and a single tower each, and at the angles the roof is slightly higher. At the centre there is scarcely the space for a single tower, built on a cruciform base two and a half metres high. This central shrine opened t0 the four quarters through gates which each had a pro)ecting fore-part. The architect of Phimeanakas re-utilised 01d jambs to frame the door of the central shrine, and these carried inscription Sanskrit く recording the merits Of a minister Of Yashovarman I. Even if there are indications that there were later additions tO the shrine after Suryavarman's reign, the fact that these jambs were incorporated and le 仕 in this privileged position leads this author t0 suppose that there was a link between the minister and the king, since their siting could not have been a ををンイこ Guardia 〃 / / ( ) 〃〃 d 〃尾 2 の立ビビ 2 ー〃℃ as Q P, ん / 〃 7 ビ〃た a & ん . ・ The が〃可 P ん〃た as. 」 III IIIIII 翡第 20m Angkor ⅲ the llth Century 133
we happen t0 betray, and fail tO remalll true tO this act Of fidelitY' may he send us tO be reborn in the 32 hells as long as the sun and 1 00n remain. "lf we act in accordance with this oath, which is pure, may the K1ng decree the protectlon 0f our PIOus works, 0f our villages and 0f our landS' and the support 0f our families for we have loved the feet 0f our Lord lQng Suryavarman wh0 enjoys fully the august kingship according t0 the Dharma in the year 924 覊々砒 As t0 the fruits 0f those wh0 have the grateful love 0f their master, may they remaln ours fror れ this world tO the next. lt cannot be affirmed that such a procedure had been unknown until thell' but the solemnity which the king had obviously wished tO confer on this ceremony was doubtless unprecedented, and it is clear that he wished thereby tO ensure the unqualified allegiance Of those whO were in his servlce, and had drawn his conclusions frOI prevlous events. However, the fact that a significant number Of names were struck 0 仕 from vanous lists leads us tO believe that not everyone was as faithful as he wished them tO be. A curiously similar oath t0 the king used t0 be sworn annually by the whole CiVil servlce in Phnom Penh in recent times. AIthough he had mastered Angkor and indubitably won great prestige' Suryavarman's troubles were by no means over. There are distinct traces Of in the capital, and he still had t0 gain the rest 0f the empire' especially t0 the south. lt seems that this was not t00 difficult a task now that he had asserted his strength and for a while he maintained order in the country. 者当・、、を一ヂら冫 1 み、・こに幺退 し , 朝 .2 ・ 乍三←、 」。繆第つ , 「 0 - ト い 0 物 , - いャ 0 〃ビ可ビ 65 〃面立 0 〃砒〃 the / 0 ″記可 P a ん防ん . 犬 / lg . ・ Pa な可ビ r ゆ〃市〃 g the 0 砒ん可 a 能 g 〃“ 〃 d ビ〃川 Of OS ビん 0 22rm0 た / な立 0 ビ〃 g. 第ソジ 1 刈 , 7 を 130
ん e North K んん〃 g パ earlier 〃ビ〃夜・〃 0 〃ビ . 'Gateway of the Dead' ー which had of course not yet been built. This does not imply that the causeway was not already in exlstence. lt iS not improbable that this was the enclosure 0f the capital designed by Jayauravarman. The plan also shows that subsequently the north wall was breached to allow the Siem Reap rlver tO flOW through, thus bringlng it ontO its present course. Nothing suggests however that the wall was breached before the 16th century. But if the hypothesis is correct, it would indicate a state temple well away frOI the centre Of the capital city, which is unusual. AS we have seen, this was already the case when Jayavarman V initiated the temple, SO Jayaviravarman had tO adapt somewhat rapidly tO a pre-existing state Of affairs. ln seeklng tO protect themselves more effectively, both kings could well have had to set aside to an extent the symbolic prescriptions which demanded that the state temple, representing Mount Meru ー the centre 0f the world - be situated in the centre Of the capital, itself the image Of the world. 第を豸市 : をい第 物い人 Angkor ⅲ the llth Century 125
was a gate 'facing four ways', meaning it had four entrances. lt was probably built Of perishable materials since nothing remains. Apart from the fact that this was the shortest way tO the island (entry was conventionally from the east), the reason for this anomaly could be that the king had created a dike-causeway 仕 om his new capital to the north—west corner Of the lndratataka reservorr. C 砌な記カ 0 可〃れ訪 0 盟 g ル市 4 0 れんな el 印ん 月耘 22 砒測ん [ 測 0 simhas d な go g makaras 0 〃 d も ん 0 んえ As gu 市〃可 e e ら d れ 222 0 れ こんな朝可花襯がお . , えス The First Angkor 77
: で第をを ! 4 ・三み を第籾毎リど ' 新ど当 イ毳二 - っ要立ラ」の . : ぎ」叮 : - ・ず 5 当・三し The 立ビん可 Pra ん記 ( K44 の , 面 d 7 069 , co 〃取わパ ge 怩記 00 可 I< ん川 kings 〃 d な″〃″記 co d ″ん尾〃イ可 S ん 4 〃 d んな CO 〃 SO U 川 0. as ーじ or 〃ビ r Q ービ〃 arro 立イ rro ″〃 d / 〃 g ga ″ビり ,. 134 mere chance occurrence. Moreover, the recent discovery on either Side Of Phimeanakas of the bases of huge wooden pillars at a level which probably corresponds tO that 0f the tenth century, shows that there were large dwellings at this site; possibly the mimster's palace. A 、 VIDE VARIETY OF OTHER FOUNDATIONS Beyond Angkor itself, Suryavarman's 0ther foundations ー or at least those dating from his relgn ー were considerable. TO the south is the notable temple Of Suryadri or Suryaparvata, 'the mountain Of Surya', now called Phnom Chisor; t0 the north there is the aforementioned Preah Vihear temple where he revived a former religious centre which seems to have been founded by a son of Jayavarman Ⅱ . From this reign (though not necessarily as direct C01 れ 1 れ lsslons Of the king) there are buildings at the great town of Preah Khan ()t what is now called Kompong Svay) which is some hundred kilometres due east of Angkor. Nearer Angkor the temple 0f Chau Srei Vib01 (also known as Prasat Wat Trach) also dates from the period. lt could well be the case that much more was achieved in this long reign 0f over forty years. This klng, Of whom SO little is really known, may turn out t0 be one Of the greatest Khmer royal builders. lt was probably he, and not his successor, wh0 carried out the construction Of the second great 60r0J at Angkor, now known as the 、 st Baray. lt iS even more astounding than the first, with measurements Of 8 kilometres in length by 2.2 in breadth. lt has often been stated that this vast lake had to be created because the East Baray had completely dried out. This is a dubious assertlon, since Jayavarman V had built a terrace to the east of his palace not long beforehand, and the landing stage leading t0 the temple 0f Ta Keo would also have been useless if it did not 100k out over the waters Of the East Baray. There is alSO an lnscription Of the thirteenth century which mentlons lt as still functioning. Other inscriptlons praise the king t00 for his achievements in building up the country's infrastructure. The fine road from Angkor t0 Preah Khan 0f Kompong Svay springs t0 mind, and there are bridges, travellers' shelters and numerous water tanks throughout his empire. Suryavarman I was indubitably one Of the great names in the civilisation Of Angkor. He died in 1049 in unknown circumstances, after a relgn 0f 47 years from his crowning in 1002.
Angkor in the second half 0f the sixteenth century d0 not appear t0 have had links with the kings of Longvek: could they not instead have been the last, or among the last, kings of Angkor? There is also the puzzle as t0 why any Khmer king should wish t0 take up residence afresh, and provlsionally, at Angkor. There is absolutely no evidence for this either in the inscriptions or in the Royal Chronicles. THE FIRST DISCOVERY OF ANGKOR BY 、 VESTERNERS Just about the years 1550 or 1551 , as the king 0f Camb0ja set 0 仕 t0 hunt elephant in the thickest forests which exist in the wh01e Kingdom, his beaters whO were thrashing their way through the bush came upon some lmposing buildings overgrown inside bY vegetation SO exuberant that they could not cut it dO 、 tO gain access. 、Ⅱ this was reported t0 the king, he went t0 the place and saw the extent and the height Of the outer walls. As he wished t0 see what was inside, he immediately ordered that the scrub be all cut down and burned. ' This is what the official chronicler of the Portuguese lndies, Diogo d0 Cout0' wrote in the second half Of the sixteenth century in what purports tO be a report on Angkor. According t0 him and other travellers, the Khmers 'discovered' their former capital around the year 1550. This 'discovery', recounted in more or less detail in a good number Of spanish and portuguese accounts 0f the period' is 0ften accompanied by the assertion that the く hmers were lgnorant Of anything which related tO the origln Of the ruins. For example, one Of them wrltes: "lt is an astonishing fact that none Of the natives Of this kingdom can survive there, and thus the place is inhabited only by wild and savage beasts. The tradition 0f these gentiles is that the city was built be foreigners The Spaniards and the Portuguese thus began t0 speculate as t0 wh0 had been the real builder 0f Angkor, and came up with the most astonishing names' such as Alexander or Trajan. They also imagined that it was the embodiment 0f "the figmentary city 0f Plat0's Atlantis, or even that 0f his Republic". lt is certain that these preposterous theories did not originate with the く hmers themselves; but they could not have been dreamt up unless the Khmers had insisted that they knew nothing 0f their past, and even less about the rt-llns. Quite evidently, this was not the as there are inscriptions engraved in stone at approximately the same periOd which contradict it. ln fact it was around the middle Of the sixteenth century that at least one く hmer king tOOk an interest in Angkor Wat. Between 1546 and 1564 , a king whose name remains obscure' ordered the carung 0f some six hundred square metres Of relief friezes on the east side 0f the north gallery and the north side 0f the east gallery which had remained blank since the twelfth 0 カ 2 . ・ CO / 2 記 d c 〃可ビ。〃″可 Da 〃 c ゞ砒 Ba 〃の , C んん〃ら〃ービ立 C のれ市 0. The 13th Century and After 295