Tuesday, June 30, 2015

Chapter2: Cambodia Before Angkor

Chapter2:  CAMBODIA BEFORE ANGkOR


For most people, the ancient city f Angkor is synonymous with Cambodia but the Angkorean Empire dates only from 802 AD, when king Jayavarman 11 moved upstream from the Mekong Valley to found a new capital on higher ground near the north western tip of the Great Lake, the Tonle Sap. The country however was inhabited long before that. Stone Age remains indicate human presence in what we now call Cambodia for tens, perhaps hundreds, of thousands of years. We cannot say if these people were the distant ancestors of the present day Khmers, but it does seem that the Khmer Mon people settled in the area between Burma and the South China Sea some time before the third millen nium BC, after migrating from the north. For most of this gulf of unrecorded time, the inhabitants were hunter gatherers, nomads who roamed the forests and marshlands in search of game and vegetable foods. It is likely also that others practiced swidded, or slash and burn farming, much as the Khmer loeu tribes or hill peoples still do today cutting and burning clearings in the forest and growing crops for a year so before moving on when the soil is exhausted.
There is archaeological evidence to show that some of these nomads began a more settled, agriculturally based existence around 3000BC, particularly east of the Mekong near the present day settle –ments Chup and Snuol. At some stage during this process, rudimentary state societies must have replaced the primitive communism of these people’s ancestors, which if like the simple societies of the hill peoples today was based around a collective, non –state way of life. The early sedentary people used copper and bronze tools, in sophisticated social systems made possible by the creation of a social surplus product based of efficient agriculture and animal husbandry.
It is highly unlikely that there was any single unified state during this period; probably there were numerous petty principalities, ruled over by local chieftains, of Pons. It might be tempting to impose the idea of Cambodia on to the distant past, but all the evidence indicates that there was on unitary Cambodian state until after the foundation of Angkor at the beginning of the ninth century AD. Moreover, there is no hard evidence to prove that these early inhabitants were Khmers at all it is not until the seventh century AD that stone inscriptions in the Khmer language began to occur. It is entirely possible that the inhabitants of the early settlements were ancestors of the modern Chams, or of some other people who might have died out or been pushed out by later settlers. After all, by way of comparison, until the fifth century AD, with the onset of the Dark Age and the Saxon invasions, the inhabitants of what is today England were Romanized Celts, the ancestors not of the modern English but of the Welsh and Cornish.
Ancient Funan
     Whoever they were, by the beginning of the first century AD. The inhabitants of Cambodia had achieved a high level of civilization, influenced by the culture of India. One polity (or perhaps group of polities), known to us as Funan, has left an extensive record of its existence and way of life. The pre Angkor scholar Michael Vickery had warned against assuming that Funan was a unified state—it is possible that it was a loose alliance of port towns in the lower Mekong delta. However, the existence of large canals suggests a strong state power capable of planning and managing the large numbers of labourers required for such projects. Such workforces would have depended of regular food supplies, produced by efficient agriculture and tax collection system. On the other hand, we know that the city states of Ancient Greece and Renaissance Italy were capable of building public works and large monuments without direction by overarching national or supra national polities, so Vickery is probably right about pre Angkorean Cambodia.
The Chinese chroniclers claim that the first king of Funan was a man called Fan Shih Man, but we have no way of telling whether that was his real name or if indeed he was the first king, or if he ruled over a much greater territory than the other Pons or petty chieftains of the time. The name Fan Shih man bears no relation to any of the South East Asian languages; it is a Chinese corruption of an indigenous name, but the question is, a corruption of what? The American scholar Lawrence Palmer Briggs believed that ‘Fan’ might have been a corruption of the Sanskrit suffix ‘Varman’, which means protector, and which was appended to the names of many subsequent kings and petty kings in Cambodia. Michael Vickery argues more plausibly that, ‘Fan is a corruption of the Khmer Mon Pon, which died out before Angkor.
            Again, we have no way of knowing the ethnicity of the inhabitants of Funan although of Vickery is right in his speculation about the origins of words such as pon, perhaps we might call them proto Khmers. What language they spoke in everyday life we do not know. Although Funan was a literate, Indianised society, all trace of the book in what the Chinese described as impressive libraries have disappeared in the heat and humidity and all stone inscriptions from before the seventh century are in Sanskrit. Indeed, we have no way of knowing even what the Funanese called themselves; Funan itself is a Chinese word, and although scholars have suggested it might be a corruption of the Khmer word phnom, this will remain speculation unless further evidence cones to light. On the other hand Khmer folklore has it that the Cambodian people built a town at Angkor Borei, in the Mekong delta, around the time of Funan. However, folklore cannot put precise dates on paces and events and there is no evidence to support the existence of Khmer speakers in the lower delta until the seventh century (although this does not mean that they did not exist).
            What we do know of Funan comes from three sources: Chinese dynastic chronicles, Sanskrit stone inscriptions and the archaeological record. The earliest account of the kingdom in contained in the history of the Chin Dynasty, from 265—419 AD. Its reliability is a matter of debate, given that the writers often wrote hundreds of year after the events they were describing and on the basis of hearsay and second-hand reports. Nevertheless, the chronicles do give us some tantalizing details of a long-gone civilization. They tell us that the common people originally went naked, even in the streets of their towns, and that they were ugly black and fuzzy haired’ ---a common (and unfair) criticism by the ethnocentric Chinese, who valued light skin colouring and spurned the barbarians of the tropical lands. Puzzlingly, the Funanese are also described   as being peaceful yet warlike, honest yet cunning. Probably, like human being in general, they were a mixture of traits, although the discrepancies perhaps point to multiple authors, poor editing or muddled data available to the writers.
            The Funanese , unlik its authority  the later Khmers, appear to have been keen seafarers, trading with India and China and sending tribute to the Chinese emperors. If Funan were a unitary state its capital is not known, with conflicting claims made by modern writers for Vyadhapura, Angkor Borei, Banteay Prei Nokor and even Prey Veng, all situated in the Mekong delta or reasonably close to it. Another Funanese centre, the port town of Oc Eo in what in today called the Camay peninsula, was excavated by the French archaeologist Louis Malleret before World War II.
            Or Eo was laid out geometrically which suggests that it was planned---again by a strong state power, however limited the extent of might have been. The found of some brick buildings remain; stone is rarely found in the alluvium of the delta and the wooden or bamboo houses of the common people have long since disappeared. The brick buildings’ were probably temples and /or mausoleums, but they are of a simple design and d not appears to have housed bas-reliefs (stone friezes) as in the later temples of Angkor. One intriguing building at Oc Eo was a square brick structure, called Edifice A’ by malleret. He speculated that perhaps it was a tower of silence similar to the raised platforms on which the Parsees of India to this day leave out their dead for consumption by vultures. Other writers have disputed this, noting Chinese accounts that the Funanese dead were cast into the delta waters and presumably eaten by the crocodiles.
            As elsewhere in Cambodia further exploration of archaeological sites was interrupted by the subsequent decades of war domestic upheaval and international isolation. It is likely that what we know of Funan will be greatly enhanced by the correct word of the lower Mekong Archaeological Project (LOMAP) coordinated by the University of Hawii


                                         www.khmer4ubloggspot.com



No comments:

Post a Comment