New Theory on Angkor, Who were the last Varman kings? Options

[SabaiSabai]

My god Here is another one for you lol

Kha Tdje (pronounced Kha Chae) could be the origin of Kha Mae lol

Kha Tdjae was the name the Siamese used to called all Austroasiatic tribes that revolted around 100 years ago. These included many tribes of AA people but all named under one umbrella term "Kha Tdjae".

Silly as it may be, if you replace only 1 letter (sound) becomes "Kha Mae" 100%. Somehow the more I look into this the more it looks like Kha Mae may just be a bastardised pronunciation of a Siamese word generically used to call AA people.

[SabaiSabai]

Bhavavarman married into the Kambuja line. Bhavavarman was not Funanese. Bhavarvarman took Funan into Chenla, not by force.

The king that followed Bhavarman was his brother Citrasena. Not his Son. So no relation to Funan.

We know that Jayavarman II was from Funan bloodline, you want me to prove that???

please do tell me, who exactly was he descended from? All I know is there is an inscription saying he was descended from a bloodline that is no longer present. But you know whats funny... Bhavarvarman married a Funan princess. Wouldn't his descendants be of the same line? lol how can it be that Bhavarvarmans descendants did not exist? it couldn't be an extinct line can it now lol what it more likely is, is that inscription is made up so that he seems legitimate to be on the throne. Its no uncommon for new rulers to connect themselves in some way to ancient rulers to be legitimate. We see it all the time in just about every country lol but please do tell... who was Jayavarman II descended from

You say there was never a Mon country? Siam was a Mon country. Siam appears way before Angkor was even built. I think you are getting confused with the time lines here. Mon are Khom, they were there when Chiang Saen was founded 100% as recorded. The legends of Phaya Khom also indicate that they were in Esan when Fa Daet Song Yang was founded. Khom is not Khmer, don't get confused.


Siam is legendary country. First Mon country was Dvaravati, based on Khmer structure. The Mon had a cultrue that developed seperatley from khmer cultrue. Can you show me common feature of Mon-poeple before 550 AD in Cambodia before 550 AD??? No, I thought so.

Theravada Buddhism Siamese language, Mon legends (Phra Thong) you should stop ignoring the evidences lol your too convinced everything is Khmer


Ok now let me break down the slaves issue for you. ZDG mentions 100 per rich family, 25 for average, none for poor. Bare in mind Angkor was a wealthy kingdom.

rich family = commoner?
Average = commoner?
Poor = commoner?

2/3 groups would have MORE slaves than family members. Slaves would outnumber the populace. ZDG mentions slaves as Chong. Chong outnumber the populace. This could mean that during that period there could have been a huge population of Chongs living in Cambodia.


Slaves outnumber the populace????? Did ZDG say this??? No, he described the common people as being almost all buddhists. He described the slaves as different people, i will scan some passages in for you. You know nothing about SEA communities. There are no countries were the majority are all slaves. And certainly not for 1400 years.

rich family = 100 slaves
average family 25 slaves
poor = no slaves

Angkor population. 1 million.

You do the math

As for no countries where the slaves outnumber the people? do you know how SEA kingdoms come about? A prince attacks a kingdom takes the people and makes a new kingdom. The people he takes with him become the rulers (usually soldiers and upper class and their families). The conquered people are the slaves. If a king attacks a city he enslaves the populace and brings them back or makes the kingdom a protectorate. You need to study more on ANCIENT SEA CULTURE. No use using a modern mentality with an ancient asian subject.

Phaya Yat needed military help and was told to seek the jungle people. Now if they were the Chong... how much military assistance can a few hundred chong give? lol ridiculous. The most likely outcome is that Chongs were domesticated and admixed with other ethnics and became Khmer people.


The CHongs are still recruited for armies and comprise out of thousand soldiers. How was that not able in the history? You are so dumb.

A thousand soldiers rebelling against the Royal Siamese army. Quite dumb isn't it. That kind of rebellion is bound to succeed. oh wait.. it didn't. And I think I know why.


Isanavarman was Citrasena's Son. What is the link with Funan to Isanavarman? if Dvaravati was part of Funan/Chenla... why did they attack it?????

When Funan ceased to exist suddenly here arrives Dvaravati... ????? coincidence? most likely Dvaravati is a breakaway faction of Funan. Isanavarmans conquest was retaking Dvaravati back into Funan/Chenla. MAYBE! lol


Coincedence? No, Dvaravati was Mon-culture with Khmer cultrue being integrated. Chenla was Funan culture. Didnt I say Dvaravati was an extension of Khmer? You dont really understande me.

Extension of Khmer? lol you still have yet to explain what is Khmer lol Have you even looked at Dvaravati culture? how can you even claim it as Khmer lol the art was different, the main religion was different (Bhavarvarman was a crazy Hindu the art style is different. Only thing similar to Cambodian art in 550AD was in Esan. The area of Ancient Chenla. Your a crack pot, you still think the culture came south to north lol Like I explained before. These princes of Chenla came from the north, from the time period that they ruled is the transition of Funan culture into Chenla culture. Its also the time the chinese stopped calling Funan, funan! Funan era had finished.. it is now Chenla era. Understand?????? I can see you trying to force Chenla as funan so you can connect it to Khmer lol doesn't work. If you want to do that you have to make Bhavarvarmans father a funanese king lol sadly he is not.

As for Khmer country? you still have not found out what is a Khmer. How can there be a Khmer country?

And the last part. If Phaya Kraek is a Khmer name. What does it mean in Khmer? lol it makes perfect sense in Siamese/Thai. Many places can be named anything in Cambodia. Cambodia has been using Siamese legends and Indian mythology for centuries. Note Udong Meanchai, does that sound Khmer to you too?

[SabaiSabai]

I have another interesting piece of evidence to bring to the table.

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=pzxVVCw...utput=html_text

The creation myth of the Tai

"There were 5 angels in heaven who looked down at the land and saw that the land was abundant and decided to create civilisation"

This can be interpreted as the land was abundant and right for creating civilisation.

"They turned themselves into a gourd and floated down to the land"

They traveled in a vessel to the land by water (as it was a water gourd)

"when they reached Thung Na Tao, it exploded and out came the first born Kha tdjae, second born Phu Tai Dam, third Lao phoong khao, fourth Haw and finally Kaew."

The first to reach the fertile land were the Kha tdjae (austro people) followed by the Tai, Lao, haw (Chinese) and finally viet. This coincides with the timeline of each groups migration into the area.

"to each was born a woman of their own kind"

Each people's through procreation grew in number. The female is the sign or fertility and birth.

"After a while they came down to bath and drink at the sacred stream nong hay nong hai. Anyone who bathes and drinks from the water becomes clean and their minds clear, enough for them to rule a country."

After some time the people's migrated to a sacred stream/lake or some body of water. Now something about this water or by accepting this water or what it signifies somehow makes the Tais believe that it will allow a people (not just themselves) to rule. Now I interpret this as the people's created their civilisations a long rivers. This is true of early SEA civilisations. The major kingdoms were all river based.

"As the first born Kha tdjae were afraid of cold water, they did not bathe nor drank from the water and remained black and had no country"

The Kha tdjae were not river based people and did not form kingdoms. They were either jungle or hill tribes but they did not form kingdoms, thus no country. They were considered uncivilised and stupid. Basically they are already classed as slaves as people fit for slave labour are uncivilised savages and stupid.

I think we found our origin of Khmer. It also tells us that the Kha were not civilised and were not kingdom builders. Funnily enough it also shows that Tai and Lao are different groups and that Tai came before Lao.

Now we know that Kha were the only group to not have built a kingdom. More importantly they were none of the people's who had river based kingdoms. This crosses out the main groups All the civilised people of the ancient world. Dvaravati, Chenla, Siam, Lavo were all based around major rivers.

The only link I see is the Chinese describing Funan as being populated by black curly haired people. Now I highly doubt these people were the rulers of Funan as we know Funan was ruled by foreign rulers.

Once again we see a description of a similar type at Angkor. What the Chinese call Chong the ancient people call "Kha tdjae". We now have a confirmed name for the black/ dark skinned slave class the Ancients used. The name is "Kha tdjae". You tell me which group of peoples name is almost an exact match.

Any thoughts?

This post has been edited by SabaiSabai: Feb 26 2012, 03:51 PM

[SEAhistory]

I've been looking and I see a lot of posts from this Leeporter aka Kensaizen. It comes to my attention that years before you were claiming a lot of different things, and keeps adjusting your story to fit Thai Nazism.

You are nothing but a troll. You go all over the internet to make Khmer people look stupid, without any evidence and an open mind to history. I think you need professional help. What I see on all your posts disturb me.

[AnybodyKiller]

AnybodoKiller, the history is almost 2,000 years old, it's not easy for me to explain it to you in one post, but I will try.

I said the founder of Funan was Tai-speaking people, judging from their king title "Kun" mentioned in Chinese record, which is the title of king and high-ranking officiers for Tai since ancient time.

The name like Kun Tian (Chinese: Hun Tien), Kun Pan Wang (Chinese: Hun Pankwang) etc. are Tai words without any doubt.

Funan started in Pan Pan (today Chaiya, Suratthani, southern Thailand) around 150 A.D. and expanded to central Thailand, NE Thailand and Cambodia + S. VN.

It moved its center from Chaiya to somewhere in today Cambodia during 230-250 A.D.

Hun-Tien (Kun Tien in Thai) sent his sons to establish a lot of kingdoms, including his Mon lineage in N.E Thailand, his Tamil lineage (Soma) in Cambodia & S.VN.

They were all related and the descendant of Kun Tien (Chinese called Hun-Tien)

357 A.D. a Brahmin Kontanya brought Indian ruling system to this region and that was when the Varma title started to be used.

During 590 - 610 A.D (Mahendravarman or Prince Chitasena), those descendants of Kun Tian started to break up. His Tamil lineage from the south took over Funan and became Chenla.

The losing rulers of Funan fled to Pan Pan (which is now not the center but a vassal of Funan) to established a new state called Shih-li-fo-shi and merged other states in the Malay Peninsula such as Chi-tu, Pan-Pan, Tan-Tan iand later Kedah into Shih-li-fo-shi (Sri Bodhi or Srivijaya) during 670 A.D.

Shih-li-fo-shi sent an navy to put Malayu, Jambi and Palembang under its control in early 680s. The cursing stone inscriptions you found in Palembang was made after Srivijaya conquered Palambang. That's why you see the king curseing his own people which is not possible if Palembang was the center of Seivijaya as the French claimed.

From this based in Palembang, Srivijaya sent its navy to put Java also into its control and this was the peak period of Srivijaya when it covered Malay Peninular (it's center capital at Pan Pan), Sumatra (regional capital at Palembang) and Java and completely controlled the trading route between china and india.

I-Ching had recorded about Srivijaya during that period while he was visiting Srivijaya to learn Sanskrit.

This is what he said:

“There are ten monasteries where Buddhist monks and nuns study their canon. They eat all types of meat but refrain from wine. There is also one monastery of daoshis who partake neither of meat nor wine. They study the classic of the Asura king, but they enjoy no great respect. The ordinary Buddhist priests are commonly called bhiku, the others "Tan”.

The word "Tan" is used by Tai to call monks. If you want to claim that Srivijaya was not in Chaiya, you have to explain why Malay called "Buddhist" monk as "Tan"

750 A.D. Chenla attacked Srivijaya and took over Pan Pan (Chaiya) and Nakorn Sri Dhammarat and tried to control the trading route. And that force Srivijaya to move deep south to as probably as Kehdah.

Nearly twenty years later, Srivijaya counter attacked Chen-la and recovered Chaiya and Nakhon Si Thammarat. And this was when we heard the name of one of the greatest king of Srivijaya called "Maharaja" who claimed himself as a King of Sailendra. His name and his story was found on stone inscription of Chaiya. This Maharaja was what known by the Arab as "Maharaja of Zabag"

Zabag = Javaka = Java and it located near Chaiya, southern thailand.

Srivijaya attacked Chenla (and also Champa) and took control of Chenla during 775 - 790 A.D.

Jayavarman II was sent from Srivijaya to rule Chenla in the city of Indrapura and started what is called "Angkor period" around 800 A.D.

This is what R.C. Majumdar says:

“Taking Java of the inscription to be identical with Zābag of the Arabian account, it is reasonable to refer the ‘old’ story of Sulaymān to the same period.” Sulaymān told that Zabag king invaded Chen-la with big navy and beheaded the king of Chen-la and afterwards returned his head which was well washed and embalmed, to the prince of Chen-la. *　This story sounds like fictitious, but the process of the history tells us the supremacy of Śrīvijaya over Chen-la for long time. Once Chen-la kicked out Funan from Cambodia and the lower Mekong delta area in the middle of the sixth century, but the descendants of Funan became very strong as Śrīvijaya at the middle of the eighth century and defeated Chen-la.

The influence of Srivijaya can be seen in 791 A.D., some rulers of Cambodia erected an image of the Bodhisattva Lokesvara at Prasat Ta Keam (near Siem Reap)

Also we can see that Chenla stopped sending ambassadors to China from 814 A.D. to 1116 A.D., a 300 years under Srivijaya!

During the same period, Srivijaya continued sending ambassador with tributes to China. It clearly show the power shifted from Chenla back to the former ruler of Funan which was then in Srivijaya in southern thailand.

In 961 A.D, Srivijaya sent ambassadors to China and reported that the kingdom of Srivijaya was also called Sien-lieou or Siam-Lavo.

50 years later, in 1007, a prince from Srivijaya at Nakhon Si Thammarat, named Sujita marched his army to Lavo (present day Lopburi, north of Ayudhaya) and established himself as the kinger of Lavo His son was "Kamboja Raja" who later became Suryavarman I of Angkor.

I think this was when Srivijaya (Siam-Lavo) started to shift its power back to the north.

In 1116 Suryavarman II started sending ambasadors to China again.

In the same period, Srivijaya stop sending abmassadors, signifying the complete power shift to the north.

During this period, Sien-Lavo (formerly Srivijaya) sent ambassadors to China in the name of Chenla (aka Angkor)

1295 A.D., we evidenced Indarvarman III who I've proved to be "Kun Pha Muang", another Tai-speaking king from Sukhothai who rule Angkor. I don't want to repost it, so read it here.

http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/index.php?...t&p=5060912

During 1350, the power of the empire was shifted again from Angkor to Ayudhaya when Sian merged with Lavo.

Khmer blood Kings (Trasok Paem or king Nippean Bat) took over Angkor during 1340's and Ayudhaya kicked them out to lower land in today Phnom Pehn and abandonned the city of Angkor.

That's the 2,000 year history in 5 minutes.

Thanks.

Thai are related very closely to Austronesian speakers by blood and language. Especially Filipinos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_peoples#Origin_of_the_Tai
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%...al.pone.0029502

I can't let this bias me though. I still think that the evidence of whether Tai founded Funan is inconclusive. The forensics I posted earlier showing ancient Thai inhabitants closer to Mon were done in Northeast Thailand which was not a part of ancient Funan. There did seem to be two waves of Tai migration that influenced the region greatly in terms of genetics. The culture is thought to be adapted from Austro-Asiatic speakers according to other sources I've read.

Finally there are the ethno-linguistic clusters of Burma and Thailand (and Laos). The former nation is dominated by the Bamar, a Sino-Tibetan population with origins in South China ~1,500 years ago. In Burma the Mon substrate persists, while the Shan people of Thai affinity reign supreme across the northeastern fringe of the nation. In Thailand and Laos the Mon-Khmer substrate has been marginalized to isolated residual groups.But it is notable that in both these polities the Mon-Khmer populations set the tone for the civilizational orientation of the conquering ethnicities. The Thai abandoned Chinese influenced Mahayana Buddhism for the Indian influenced Theravada Buddhism of the conquered populace. Despite the notional ethnic chasm between the Thai and the Khmer of Cambodia, the broad cultural similarities due to the common roots in the society of the Khmer Empire is clear.

1) First you have hunter-gatherer populations of broad Melanesian affinities in Southeast Asia.

2) Then Austro-Asiatic populations move south from the fringes of southern China. Some push west to India, while others leap-frog south to zones suitable for agriculture such as Java.

3) Then Austronesian populations sweep south along water routes, and marginalize the Austro-Asiatics in island Southeast Asia, though the not on the mainland.

4) The Bamar arrive from southern China over 1,000 years ago, and marginalize the Austro-Asiatics in Burma.

5) The Thai arrive from southern China less than 1,000 years ago, take over the central zone of mainland Southeast Asia, and make inroads to the west in Burma.

These are two parts of the article that really stood out to me in terms of the discussion. It seems like There were two waves of Tai people, the first one got absorbed, the second not so much. You guys can draw your own conclusions though, here's the article again. The blood difference in the end is very slight, it's politics.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/201...tipode-of-asia/

[SabaiSabai]

I've been looking and I see a lot of posts from this Leeporter aka Kensaizen. It comes to my attention that years before you were claiming a lot of different things, and keeps adjusting your story to fit Thai Nazism.

You are nothing but a troll. You go all over the internet to make Khmer people look stupid, without any evidence and an open mind to history. I think you need professional help. What I see on all your posts disturb me.

History changes with new evidence. Why do you seem so surprised? New tithe subject? Lol

Only idiots believe in a fixed history when there is so much evidence to contradict it. It's called turning a blind eye to evidence for political gain.

Khmers are actually the innocent party here. They had an identity created for them and fooled to believe it like a religion. I would blame the French colonialists. They did the same crap in Laos. If you haven't realised it by now, they separated greater Siam into Siam, Laos, Cambodia and then to keep them separated they invented new identities for the people. To gain more territory from Siam, they created a fake history connecting the modern populace with the ancient populace not realise the ancient people moved away a long time ago.

This is the political game that was played during the colonial era. They chose to misinterpret records and turn a blind eye to much evidence, even going as far as making up crap to create this "Khmer empire".

But of course France is a super power and we all know they never lie for political gain (if you believe that then you missed out on centuries of world history lol)

But I'm not here to convince anyone. I will lay down theories and evidence to prove it is all a massive lie, then in due time I will share it with the world.

Oh, ignore what I put on YouTube lol most of it is just to troll the trolls but congrats, now at least you see I have been researching the subject for years lol

[SabaiSabai]

Thanks.

Thai are related very closely to Austronesian speakers by blood and language. Especially Filipinos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tai_peoples#Origin_of_the_Tai
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%...al.pone.0029502

I can't let this bias me though. I still think that the evidence of whether Tai founded Funan is inconclusive. The forensics I posted earlier showing ancient Thai inhabitants closer to Mon were done in Northeast Thailand which was not a part of ancient Funan. There did seem to be two waves of Tai migration that influenced the region greatly in terms of genetics. The culture is thought to be adapted from Austro-Asiatic speakers according to other sources I've read.



These are two parts of the article that really stood out to me in terms of the discussion. It seems like There were two waves of Tai people, the first one got absorbed, the second not so much. You guys can draw your own conclusions though, here's the article again. The blood difference in the end is very slight, it's politics.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/201...tipode-of-asia/

I think the 2 wave theory fits quite well with the Tai creation myth. First were Phu Tai Dam, the black Tai. This could be the first wave that created (genetically) Austro-Tai people. The second wave were the Tai-Lao. The first group were assimilated into the Austro people, whereas the second group took over completely.

Explains a lot actually. Even explaining why there was trace of Tai language in Funan.

[chadwarden]

History changes with new evidence. Why do you seem so surprised? New tithe subject? Lol

Only idiots believe in a fixed history when there is so much evidence to contradict it. It's called turning a blind eye to evidence for political gain.

Khmers are actually the innocent party here. They had an identity created for them and fooled to believe it like a religion. I would blame the French colonialists. They did the same crap in Laos. If you haven't realised it by now, they separated greater Siam into Siam, Laos, Cambodia and then to keep them separated they invented new identities for the people. To gain more territory from Siam, they created a fake history connecting the modern populace with the ancient populace not realise the ancient people moved away a long time ago.

This is the political game that was played during the colonial era. They chose to misinterpret records and turn a blind eye to much evidence, even going as far as making up crap to create this "Khmer empire".

But of course France is a super power and we all know they never lie for political gain (if you believe that then you missed out on centuries of world history lol)

But I'm not here to convince anyone. I will lay down theories and evidence to prove it is all a massive lie, then in due time I will share it with the world.

Oh, ignore what I put on YouTube lol most of it is just to troll the trolls but congrats, now at least you see I have been researching the subject for years lol

first off yes you are trolling. if you three are so serious about this why waste your time in a cambodian chatroom louding displaying your historical prowess? take all your evidence and show people that it actually matters to. This is a university or whatever historical sites or an actual historical website of thailand. I dont know about you but if I found evidence of such lying by France and Cambodia I would want to correct it right away.

yea right sabai i forgot everyone is against poor little siam right? oh boohoo siam never have had any foreign aid in its whole existence
and everyone including france is against it. Thats why Siam or Thailand its inhabitants have never even given it 1 second to think all this "khmer" history is baloney. yea it shows your people are either 1 retarded to search their own history2 lazy to read and change history or 3 accept khmer history.

still have not seen any evidence from you thai trolls at all really.Everything you guys say is proposed, for the time being that doesnt mean it is true. Until you answer the things I said which of course were never answered or conveniently answered back with a question or answered by switching names of places around then you guys can go present it to a higher learning facility

lol in leeporters mind
well this looks like word looks like siam and this lool

dont waste time on a crappy forum like this go out and spread your vast wealth of history knowledge. You will become heroes to your great mutt nation. what are you waiting for ? chop chop

[SabaiSabai]

first off yes you are trolling. if you three are so serious about this why waste your time in a cambodian chatroom louding displaying your historical prowess? take all your evidence and show people that it actually matters to. This is a university or whatever historical sites or an actual historical website of thailand. I don't know about you but if I found evidence of such lying by France and Cambodia I would want to correct it right away.

Things don't happen overnight lol everything begins one step at a time lol

yea right sabai i forgot everyone is against poor little siam right? oh boohoo siam never have had any foreign aid in its whole existence
and everyone including france is against it. Thats why Siam or Thailand its inhabitants have never even given it 1 second to think all this "khmer" history is baloney. yea it shows your people are either 1 retarded to search their own history2 lazy to read and change history or 3 accept khmer history.

No one is saying everyone is against Siam lol Does this explain why Khmers have no idea what their true origins really are? Actually to be perfectly honest I've repeated it many times. I used to think Angkor and Khmer empire was all Khmer. Well until I actually started to look more and more into it. Too many things didn't fit or make sense. The further I look the further I see a lot of the stories are just made up to connect point A and B. There was no real evidence to suggest it belonged to Khmer. It is Kambuja Empire and history. What the hell is Khmer? You have still yet to answer this very important question.

still have not seen any evidence from you thai trolls at all really.Everything you guys say is proposed, for the time being that doesnt mean it is true. Until you answer the things I said which of course were never answered or conveniently answered back with a question or answered by switching names of places around then you guys can go present it to a higher learning facility

still have yet to see any evidence? self inflicted ignorance can't be blamed on anyone but yourself. Bring your evidence and case out in the open for people to see and if it is a strong enough case people will believe it. No use just flapping your mouth and ignoring evidence to force your issue. That's not how its done. A theory that ignores evidence to make itself credible is worthless. So bring out all you can find to disprove it. If there is no doubt at all that there was indeed a KHMER empire, it wouldn't be too hard to prove then would it lol

lol in leeporters mind
well this looks like word looks like siam and this lool

Do you have a better explanation for Sien-Lieou? is it by any chance Maleyu? don't waste your breath. You know its such a retarded comparison. If you cannot provide why it cannot be Sien-Lieou = Siam-Lavo and what Sien-Lieou should really be, then there is no argument. If you claim evidence as bogus but cannot say why... well then your just an idiot then aren't you.

dont waste time on a crappy forum like this go out and spread your vast wealth of history knowledge. You will become heroes to your great mutt nation. what are you waiting for ? chop chop.

Crappy forum? you would be surprised I give much credit to the people of this forum. They know a crap load more and are far more intelligent than most of the forums and websites I have been to lol Both Thai and Khmer sides have provided a wealth of information that is not found in Mainstream history and I do mean ALOT. This makes you wonder why mainstream history has ignored so much evidence but like I said, there is no need to rush... all in due time

This post has been edited by SabaiSabai: Feb 26 2012, 07:08 PM

[Leeporter]

I've been looking and I see a lot of posts from this Leeporter aka Kensaizen. It comes to my attention that years before you were claiming a lot of different things, and keeps adjusting your story to fit Thai Nazism.

Err... last time you made me Test, this time you made me Kensaizen.

Why do I have to use several names??? I have nothing to hide like you guy who disguised as an Indo to back yourself up.

SEAhistory, I've not had any profile on Youtube yet.

But since you requested for it, I will start making Youtube VDO to reveal the real history to the world.

Thank you for your suggestion.

My YouTube channel is coming soon.

[Leeporter]

first off yes you are trolling. if you three are so serious about this why waste your time in a cambodian chatroom louding displaying your historical prowess? take all your evidence and show people that it actually matters to.

dont waste time on a crappy forum like this go out and spread your vast wealth of history knowledge. You will become heroes to your great mutt nation. what are you waiting for ?

Don't worry. I am going to do it. Please stay tuned for my YouTube Channel, "LeeporterTube"

I will release my first documentary soon and hope you don't cry.


This post has been edited by Leeporter: Feb 26 2012, 08:37 PM

[Leeporter]

I have another interesting piece of evidence to bring to the table.

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=pzxVVCw...utput=html_text

The creation myth of the Tai

"There were 5 angels in heaven who looked down at the land and saw that the land was abundant and decided to create civilisation"

This can be interpreted as the land was abundant and right for creating civilisation.

"They turned themselves into a gourd and floated down to the land"

They traveled in a vessel to the land by water (as it was a water gourd)

"when they reached Thung Na Tao, it exploded and out came the first born Kha tdjae, second born Phu Tai Dam, third Lao phoong khao, fourth Haw and finally Kaew."

The first to reach the fertile land were the Kha tdjae (austro people) followed by the Tai, Lao, haw (Chinese) and finally viet. This coincides with the timeline of each groups migration into the area.

"to each was born a woman of their own kind"

Each people's through procreation grew in number. The female is the sign or fertility and birth.

"After a while they came down to bath and drink at the sacred stream nong hay nong hai. Anyone who bathes and drinks from the water becomes clean and their minds clear, enough for them to rule a country."

After some time the people's migrated to a sacred stream/lake or some body of water. Now something about this water or by accepting this water or what it signifies somehow makes the Tais believe that it will allow a people (not just themselves) to rule. Now I interpret this as the people's created their civilisations a long rivers. This is true of early SEA civilisations. The major kingdoms were all river based.

"As the first born Kha tdjae were afraid of cold water, they did not bathe nor drank from the water and remained black and had no country"

The Kha tdjae were not river based people and did not form kingdoms. They were either jungle or hill tribes but they did not form kingdoms, thus no country. They were considered uncivilised and stupid. Basically they are already classed as slaves as people fit for slave labour are uncivilised savages and stupid.

I think we found our origin of Khmer. It also tells us that the Kha were not civilised and were not kingdom builders. Funnily enough it also shows that Tai and Lao are different groups and that Tai came before Lao.

Now we know that Kha were the only group to not have built a kingdom. More importantly they were none of the people's who had river based kingdoms. This crosses out the main groups All the civilised people of the ancient world. Dvaravati, Chenla, Siam, Lavo were all based around major rivers.

The only link I see is the Chinese describing Funan as being populated by black curly haired people. Now I highly doubt these people were the rulers of Funan as we know Funan was ruled by foreign rulers.

Once again we see a description of a similar type at Angkor. What the Chinese call Chong the ancient people call "Kha tdjae". We now have a confirmed name for the black/ dark skinned slave class the Ancients used. The name is "Kha tdjae". You tell me which group of peoples name is almost an exact match.

Any thoughts?

Sabai, do you realize that that story is the same story of the Bottle Gourd and Kun Taan or Pya Taan, the legend of Tai-speaking people?

Remember when I said Hun Tien or Kun Tian could be Kun Taan or Pya Taan in the legend of the Tais?

[LoveIsAllAround]

What's going on to these khmers? Are they crying now?

I don't see the point that they are attacking Thai members personally or bashing on Thailand/Siam. Their late comments are all whining and insulting.

and I will ask you English speakers people again, if you don't wanna here the word 'slave' or even the 'Negrito'. What is the more proper words?

[LoveIsAllAround]

first off yes you are trolling. if you three are so serious about this why waste your time in a cambodian chatroom louding displaying your historical prowess? take all your evidence and show people that it actually matters to. This is a university or whatever historical sites or an actual historical website of thailand. I dont know about you but if I found evidence of such lying by France and Cambodia I would want to correct it right away.

yea right sabai i forgot everyone is against poor little siam right? oh boohoo siam never have had any foreign aid in its whole existence
and everyone including france is against it. Thats why Siam or Thailand its inhabitants have never even given it 1 second to think all this "khmer" history is baloney. yea it shows your people are either 1 retarded to search their own history2 lazy to read and change history or 3 accept khmer history.

still have not seen any evidence from you thai trolls at all really.Everything you guys say is proposed, for the time being that doesnt mean it is true. Until you answer the things I said which of course were never answered or conveniently answered back with a question or answered by switching names of places around then you guys can go present it to a higher learning facility

lol in leeporters mind
well this looks like word looks like siam and this lool

dont waste time on a crappy forum like this go out and spread your vast wealth of history knowledge. You will become heroes to your great mutt nation. what are you waiting for ? chop chop

Sure, Siam nation is mutt becos Siam is REAL EMPIRE.

But due to your friend SEAhistory, Khmer is a mutt too, a mutt of Chong and Champ. LMAO!

[LoveIsAllAround]

I have another interesting piece of evidence to bring to the table.

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=pzxVVCw...utput=html_text

The creation myth of the Tai

"There were 5 angels in heaven who looked down at the land and saw that the land was abundant and decided to create civilisation"

This can be interpreted as the land was abundant and right for creating civilisation.

"They turned themselves into a gourd and floated down to the land"

They traveled in a vessel to the land by water (as it was a water gourd)

"when they reached Thung Na Tao, it exploded and out came the first born Kha tdjae, second born Phu Tai Dam, third Lao phoong khao, fourth Haw and finally Kaew."

The first to reach the fertile land were the Kha tdjae (austro people) followed by the Tai, Lao, haw (Chinese) and finally viet. This coincides with the timeline of each groups migration into the area.

"to each was born a woman of their own kind"

Each people's through procreation grew in number. The female is the sign or fertility and birth.

"After a while they came down to bath and drink at the sacred stream nong hay nong hai. Anyone who bathes and drinks from the water becomes clean and their minds clear, enough for them to rule a country."

After some time the people's migrated to a sacred stream/lake or some body of water. Now something about this water or by accepting this water or what it signifies somehow makes the Tais believe that it will allow a people (not just themselves) to rule. Now I interpret this as the people's created their civilisations a long rivers. This is true of early SEA civilisations. The major kingdoms were all river based.

"As the first born Kha tdjae were afraid of cold water, they did not bathe nor drank from the water and remained black and had no country"

The Kha tdjae were not river based people and did not form kingdoms. They were either jungle or hill tribes but they did not form kingdoms, thus no country. They were considered uncivilised and stupid. Basically they are already classed as slaves as people fit for slave labour are uncivilised savages and stupid.

I think we found our origin of Khmer. It also tells us that the Kha were not civilised and were not kingdom builders. Funnily enough it also shows that Tai and Lao are different groups and that Tai came before Lao.

Now we know that Kha were the only group to not have built a kingdom. More importantly they were none of the people's who had river based kingdoms. This crosses out the main groups All the civilised people of the ancient world. Dvaravati, Chenla, Siam, Lavo were all based around major rivers.

The only link I see is the Chinese describing Funan as being populated by black curly haired people. Now I highly doubt these people were the rulers of Funan as we know Funan was ruled by foreign rulers.

Once again we see a description of a similar type at Angkor. What the Chinese call Chong the ancient people call "Kha tdjae". We now have a confirmed name for the black/ dark skinned slave class the Ancients used. The name is "Kha tdjae". You tell me which group of peoples name is almost an exact match.

Any thoughts?

According to Chad's Khmer race theory. Kha tdjae is Khmer. But according to SEAhistory, Kha tdjae is not Khmer. Damn these two cambodians are really confused!!!

anyway they (the all KhaXXX) were all slave caste, not the rulers.

[SabaiSabai]

Sabai, do you realize that that story is the same story of the Bottle Gourd and Kun Taan or Pya Taan, the legend of Tai-speaking people?

Remember when I said Hun Tien or Kun Tian could be Kun Taan or Pya Taan in the legend of the Tais?

Yes I know it's the same legend. And the amazing thing is how it fits so well into the Austro-Tai theory.

[LoveIsAllAround]

My god Here is another one for you lol

Kha Tdje (pronounced Kha Chae) could be the origin of Kha Mae lol

Kha Tdjae was the name the Siamese used to called all Austroasiatic tribes that revolted around 100 years ago. These included many tribes of AA people but all named under one umbrella term "Kha Tdjae".

Silly as it may be, if you replace only 1 letter (sound) becomes "Kha Mae" 100%. Somehow the more I look into this the more it looks like Kha Mae may just be a bastardised pronunciation of a Siamese word generically used to call AA people.

While Thai members are providing evidence that can't be found in mainstream history, the Cambodian side is quiet. I think they must hide something that they don't want the world to know. At this time I think Khmerboi is more useful to discuss about Khmer history than any seem-to-be-smart Cambodians like SEAhistory and Chad and more disguised accounts. !!!

[Leeporter]

I think they must hide something that they don't want the world to know.

I am also sure that SEAhistory has found something that contradicts to his previous belief, but he hid it from us.

For example, I think he realized now that in 961 A.D Srivijaya was changed to Siam-Lavo, not Malayu.



This post has been edited by Leeporter: Feb 26 2012, 08:58 PM

[LoveIsAllAround]

here, evidence that Khmer genetics among the people of Cambodia are homogeneous.

You never provide a source, only make assumptions and tell how genius your gay buddy Leeporter is. Why not show me some evidence once.

here, again some evidence from me concerning Khmer genetics:

Khmer genetics

It's contrast to your friend Chad's belief. He insists Khmer race came from south China!

French translations of these annals by Moura (1883, II, 4-11; 1971, 1-7) and Poree-Maspero (1950, 239-40):

A few months before his death, Buddha arrives at the island Kouk

Thlok [land of the thlok tree] and prophesies that a trakuot [a kind

of lizard] living there by a thlok tree would obtain rebirth as the

son of the king of Intakpath [Indraprastha] and later become king

of a new state at Kouk Thlok. In the year 1 of the Buddhist era

[commonly beginning with Buddha's death in 543 B.C.], the king of

the Chams is shipwrecked near the Dangrek Mountains, where he

forms a new state and also becomes ruler over Kouk Thlok. In

the year 100 of the Buddhist era, King Atichavong of Indraprastha

hands over portions of his kingdom to his sons; to the fourth,

named Preah Thaong, he gives the southern part. As a result of

disobedience, Preah Thaong is later exiled together with his people.

He arrives at Kouk Thlok, displaces the Cham ruler, and

himself becomes king. Later he meets the daughter of the naga

king on the beach. A marriage ceremony takes place in the subterranean

kingdom, after which the naga king creates a realm on earth

for his son-in-law by drinking up the ocean. The new land is

named Kampuchea. After nine months a daughter is born. In

the year 500 of the Buddhist era the Cham king comes with an

army from Laos, but they are beaten back. The daughter of Preah

Thaong and the naga princess then become pregnant by the god.

what does Kouk mean?

[LoveIsAllAround]

my assumption is that they were ethnically local people to Cambodia. I can not other than label them Khmer. But if you can agree that the ancestors of the varman kings were indeginous people (just like Chong for example) I can live with that too, and we don't have to label them as Khmer, but just as "another austro-asiatic" group.

So, Should it sill be 'Khmer Empire', if nobody are sure 100% they were all Khmer?

But for sure, those rulers call their kingdom as 'Kambujadesa'. I can live with 'Kambuja kingdom' or even 'Kambuja Empire'.