I saw this image popping up and being shared on social media. The company that posted it is from Thailand. Can anyone clarify if the information in the photo is either wrong or correct?
Diversity of Angkorian King?
-
- I've got nothing better to do
- Reactions: 5
- Posts: 70
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 4:09 am
Not correct.
Jayavarman II was a Khmer king who, according to the inscriptions, only spend time at Java before he came to Cambodia, which is also believed to could have been Champa. There is no evidence to support Jayavarman II was anything else than Khmer. There are numerous inscriptions that mention that Jayavarman II made sure that the country of Cambodia became independent from Javanese control. This indicates he was not Javanese, but a Khmer king who brough Cambodia back under control of a Khmer dynasty since the time of Jayavarman I, with himself as an independent Khmer king. It's possible that he was related to a dynasty from Indonesia or Champa, but this is pure speculation.
Jayavirahvarman could have been of Tamil descent. He was a usurper king, and it's possible he came from the Malay Peninsula. However, this is just speculated.
Suryavarman I was by some historians regarded as having Tamil ancestry and coming from Southern Thailand, but prof. Vickery has shown how he came from Eastern Cambodia. There are also strong indications he could have been of Kuy descent, or, at least, had a big Kuy army to his disposal.
Interestingly, the French writers of the 19th century wrote that Kuy people were admixed with Indians in ancient times. It's possible that Suryavarman I had some Tamil ancestry, which would explain his strong relationship with the Tamil dynasty of India, which would also explain his military and architectural accomplishments. However, this relationship is unclear. He did come from a non-royal Khmer bloodline, and he was a Hinduist who expanded the control of Hinduism in disadvantage of the Buddhist communities who lived there for centuries.
Jayavarman VI could have been of Mon descent, but since the Mon at that time already heavily intermixed with Khmer people, he most likely was mixed of Mon/Khmer descent, as there are numerous Mon and Khmer inscriptions speaking about intermarriage between Mon and Khmer dynasties.
I do understand what the poster is trying to say. The Cambodian history is much more admixed than is given credit to. The ancient Khmer people are often presented as a homogenous ethnic group with a unified language and homogenous culture. However, this was never the case.
We can see from the isncriptions that from early times other ethnic groups were already incorporated into the Khmer populations. In the time of Funan, it were the Khmer people who descended from Austro-Asiatic people and Austro-Melanesian people, who then mixed with the Austronesian people who also founded Champa, and who then further mixed with Austro-Asiatic people like the Brau and the Mon, according to the most ancient inscriptions. This is how the Khmer people became increasingly Austro-Asiatic, and they then also admixed with all the other groups of people they encountered in modern day Thailand and Laos. All the people of South East Asia are heavily admixed, and almost every person in South East Asia is related to people from surrounding countries.
Funny that the poster comes from Thailand. I think they are solely responsible for creating a unified Thai identity in which the identities of other ethnic groups have totally become invisible, or deemed as historical enemies. I would therefore not just blaim it on the French colonial period, but also on the nationalistic efforts to create a unified Thai society.
However, also Cambodia has made many efforts to create a unified Khmer society, and have ignored the ethnic communities who were heavily involved within the ancient Khmer civilization, like the Pearic people, the Kuy people, the Chong, the Lao, etc.
Also, the Khmer historians have therefore also viewed history too much from the lens of a unified Khmer history. For instance, the king Jayavarman VII was most likely of (mixed) Cham descent. He is seen on the walls of Angkor wearing a Cham garment. His father, Dharanindravarman, was most likely a Cham king. This is also shown by the title 'Dharanindravarman', which was a title only used before by Cham and Indonesian kings. He also became king when Suryavarman II was killed by, most likely, the Cham people during a rigid war between Angkor and Champa that took place at the time.
When a Khmer professor brought forward that Jayavarman VII was actually indeed of Cham descent, a lot of Khmer people were in outrage. I personally don't understand why people would care what ethnic or cultural background the ancient Khmer kings had, since ethnicity never seemed to have been a problem in the past. Does it make Jayavarman VII less of a king if he had some Cham ancestry? He created a unified Khmer army that made the whole country Buddhist, had two Khmer wives who were highly educated and respected, and he created a completely new society that emancipated the Khmer commoner people.
For these reasons, I do agree to view the Cambodian history with a much more open-minded view in regards to ethnicity. However, to do that by making a poster that makes assumptions about the (debated) ethnic origin of some Cambodian kings is kind of odd, and to blaim it solely on the French colonial period is a bit dishonest if it comes from Thailand. Wasn't it Thailand who claimed that the ancient Khmer people were of a different ethnic stock called 'Khom', who then magically became extinct?
2
2
- Lucky Lucan
- K440 Knight Captain
- Reactions: 761
- Posts: 22525
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 12:24 pm
- Location: The Pearl of the Orient
It's ridiculous trying to attach racial characteristics to these obviously stylized and idealized forms. The statuary was heavily influenced by Greco-Hellenistic works from the early years of the first millennium, and they don't look much like Afghans either.
1
1
Romantic Cambodia is dead and gone. It's with McKinley in the grave.
I totally agree with your statement, especially at the end. I do remember the Khmer professor talking about King Jayavarman the 7th is Cham descent. I think I read it from the Phnom Penh Post or another Khmer news media. You mentioned about King Naresuan in the other thread, Is he a Khmer descendent? I feel the Ayutthayan family treeline is a bit confusing.SEAhistory wrote: ↑Sat Apr 10, 2021 7:36 pmNot correct.
Jayavarman II was a Khmer king who, according to the inscriptions, only spend time at Java before he came to Cambodia, which is also believed to could have been Champa. There is no evidence to support Jayavarman II was anything else than Khmer. There are numerous inscriptions that mention that Jayavarman II made sure that the country of Cambodia became independent from Javanese control. This indicates he was not Javanese, but a Khmer king who brough Cambodia back under control of a Khmer dynasty since the time of Jayavarman I, with himself as an independent Khmer king. It's possible that he was related to a dynasty from Indonesia or Champa, but this is pure speculation.
Jayavirahvarman could have been of Tamil descent. He was a usurper king, and it's possible he came from the Malay Peninsula. However, this is just speculated.
Suryavarman I was by some historians regarded as having Tamil ancestry and coming from Southern Thailand, but prof. Vickery has shown how he came from Eastern Cambodia. There are also strong indications he could have been of Kuy descent, or, at least, had a big Kuy army to his disposal.
Interestingly, the French writers of the 19th century wrote that Kuy people were admixed with Indians in ancient times. It's possible that Suryavarman I had some Tamil ancestry, which would explain his strong relationship with the Tamil dynasty of India, which would also explain his military and architectural accomplishments. However, this relationship is unclear. He did come from a non-royal Khmer bloodline, and he was a Hinduist who expanded the control of Hinduism in disadvantage of the Buddhist communities who lived there for centuries.
Jayavarman VI could have been of Mon descent, but since the Mon at that time already heavily intermixed with Khmer people, he most likely was mixed of Mon/Khmer descent, as there are numerous Mon and Khmer inscriptions speaking about intermarriage between Mon and Khmer dynasties.
I do understand what the poster is trying to say. The Cambodian history is much more admixed than is given credit to. The ancient Khmer people are often presented as a homogenous ethnic group with a unified language and homogenous culture. However, this was never the case.
We can see from the isncriptions that from early times other ethnic groups were already incorporated into the Khmer populations. In the time of Funan, it were the Khmer people who descended from Austro-Asiatic people and Austro-Melanesian people, who then mixed with the Austronesian people who also founded Champa, and who then further mixed with Austro-Asiatic people like the Brau and the Mon, according to the most ancient inscriptions. This is how the Khmer people became increasingly Austro-Asiatic, and they then also admixed with all the other groups of people they encountered in modern day Thailand and Laos. All the people of South East Asia are heavily admixed, and almost every person in South East Asia is related to people from surrounding countries.
Funny that the poster comes from Thailand. I think they are solely responsible for creating a unified Thai identity in which the identities of other ethnic groups have totally become invisible, or deemed as historical enemies. I would therefore not just blaim it on the French colonial period, but also on the nationalistic efforts to create a unified Thai society.
However, also Cambodia has made many efforts to create a unified Khmer society, and have ignored the ethnic communities who were heavily involved within the ancient Khmer civilization, like the Pearic people, the Kuy people, the Chong, the Lao, etc.
Also, the Khmer historians have therefore also viewed history too much from the lens of a unified Khmer history. For instance, the king Jayavarman VII was most likely of (mixed) Cham descent. He is seen on the walls of Angkor wearing a Cham garment. His father, Dharanindravarman, was most likely a Cham king. This is also shown by the title 'Dharanindravarman', which was a title only used before by Cham and Indonesian kings. He also became king when Suryavarman II was killed by, most likely, the Cham people during a rigid war between Angkor and Champa that took place at the time.
When a Khmer professor brought forward that Jayavarman VII was actually indeed of Cham descent, a lot of Khmer people were in outrage. I personally don't understand why people would care what ethnic or cultural background the ancient Khmer kings had, since ethnicity never seemed to have been a problem in the past. Does it make Jayavarman VII less of a king if he had some Cham ancestry? He created a unified Khmer army that made the whole country Buddhist, had two Khmer wives who were highly educated and respected, and he created a completely new society that emancipated the Khmer commoner people.
For these reasons, I do agree to view the Cambodian history with a much more open-minded view in regards to ethnicity. However, to do that by making a poster that makes assumptions about the (debated) ethnic origin of some Cambodian kings is kind of odd, and to blaim it solely on the French colonial period is a bit dishonest if it comes from Thailand. Wasn't it Thailand who claimed that the ancient Khmer people were of a different ethnic stock called 'Khom', who then magically became extinct?
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
-
Pre Angkorian buddha in disguise at Longvek
by kke802 » Wed Feb 02, 2022 5:18 am » in Cambodian History and Culture - 1 Replies
- 522 Views
-
Last post by Wig worm
Thu Feb 03, 2022 6:42 am
-
-
-
Interesting looking map of Angkorian temples in Thailand
by The Steve » Fri Jan 27, 2023 1:00 pm » in Cambodian History and Culture - 2 Replies
- 837 Views
-
Last post by Anthony's Wiener
Mon Mar 06, 2023 6:56 am
-
-
- 5 Replies
- 2467 Views
-
Last post by Jep
Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:33 pm
-
-
DO NOT buy from The King Cat Pet Store
by thatclinicdude » Fri Jun 30, 2023 9:49 pm » in Buy and Sell - 19 Replies
- 2910 Views
-
Last post by Sid Singer
Sun Jul 02, 2023 6:09 pm
-