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

[SEAhistory]

Okay, Here, another big part of evidence of Malays bringing cultrue to Angkor. The Sanskrit inscirption of 775 AD in Chaiya is used by Sanskrit used by the Javanese and Old Malay contains many characters of this type of Sanskrit. I have it in my book, but I have to scan it in soon. I will soon study the Sanskrit used by Khmer people, Cham people and Mon people adn we will found out the connection from one more angle.

[SEAhistory]

and vice versa...

yeah, but in this case Kamboja was on the losing side. See how much mon language has changed since the domination of Khmers. I already posted a link to a book to read anout this, and I already posted a linguistic study before. I suggest you read it.

[SEAhistory]

Have you finished this research about Chaiya/Srivijaya? What I got from this work. Chaiya is Sri Bodhi. Sir Bodhi is Early Srivijaya. So Early Srivijaya is Funanese-Mon, not Malay.
http://www7.plala.or.jp/seareview/newpage6Sri2011Chaiya.html

It doesn't matter what this article says. The connections are clearly Malay, but you are trying to say they were Mon-Malay, lol. I can't find any evidence of Mon being in Langkasuka. Can you? I do can find some clear connections wit Malay culture though. Hmm..

[PeaceMan]

yeah, but in this case Kamboja was on the losing side. See how much mon language has changed since the domination of Khmers. I already posted a link to a book to read anout this, and I already posted a linguistic study before. I suggest you read it.

Losing what? It's all political games of the ruling class...they have their rise and falls...while the regular people were alocated, blended and related to each other. Even in Funan or Angkor themselves many of their Kings were from different races from majority of their people...

[SEAhistory]

Losing what? It's all political games of the ruling class...they have their rise and falls...while the regular people were alocated, blended and related to each other. Even in Funan or Angkor themselves many of their Kings were from different races from majority of their people...

All royal bloodlines are of mixed ancestry, just like European kings, Greek kings, Latin kings, etc. So, what are you trying to say?

[PeaceMan]

All royal bloodlines are of mixed ancestry, just like European kings, Greek kings, Latin kings, etc. So, what are you trying to say?

You were complaining that you're on the losing side,weren't you?Ah...forget it! just continue on your debate...sorry for the interruption...

This post has been edited by PeaceMan: Feb 10 2012, 07:42 PM

[SEAhistory]

Ow yeah, another linguistic evidence. Java from the inscription, if it was Chaiya, as you claim,

Why would Jayavarman II not name it Jaya? Jaya as in SriviJaya is the same word as in Jayavarman and pronounced Jaya. If the inscription spoke about Chaiya, he would have named it Jaya, and not Java. i think it comes from the word Chvea, which similar names have been used for Champa.

Or it comes from Lavo, the Mon-kingdom conquered by Isanavarman.

Why I think it's Champa, because when Water-Chenla was taken by the Malays (they were seafarers, so could conquer the coasts, and that's why it was called Water-Chenla, since it was a maritime expedition) Jayavarman II had to flee. According to the inscriptions, etc. it is already proven that Jayavarmans career started in South-Cambodia and when he came from "Java" he also started in South-Cambodia. If Water-Chenla was in the south, Jayavarman II had to flee. As he came back with the temples show a increased influence of Javanese and Cham architecture. The Cham have shown a large influence from Javanese even more in time and explains that the Khmers inherited aspects of the Javanese style. So Lavo is less likely to be the place he fled to. Champa however, could gain a lot of power by being allies with the Khmers and fighting of the Malay conquerers of Water-Chenla, and explains the attacks of the Javanese/Malays on Champa after. It also explains why Jayavarman II didn't attack Champa and Champa didn't attack Angkor, but Jayavarman II moved westward. Another even that happened in 780AD, I believe holds a strong relation with Jayavarman II becoming king:

A stele dated 781 AD indicates that the Cham King Satyavarman regained power in the area of "Ha-Ra Bridge", and that he restored the devastated temple. From this inscription can be deduced that the area previously had come under temporary foreign dominion, and that foreign vandals had damaged the already existing temple. Other steles indicate that the temple had contained a mukhalinga decorated with jewelry and resembling an angel's head. Foreign robbers, perhaps from Java, "men living on food more horrible than cadavers, frightful, completely black and gaunt, dreadful and evil as death" had arrived in ships, had stolen the jewelry and had broken the linga.[2] Though the king had chased the robbers out to sea, the treasure had been lost forever. The steles also indicate that the king restored the linga in 784 AD.

This post has been edited by SEAhistory: Feb 10 2012, 08:24 PM

[Kdaw_Tmaw]

All evidence about Indianized culture lead to the Malays. Tattooing, Muay Boran/Bokator, architecture, Sanskrit, seafaring, Mahayana Bhuddism, Shivaism, canal digging, etc. And all evidence you show of mon culture before 550AD in Thailand has nothing to do with Khmer culture. The ethnicity of the Khmer kingdom is Khmer/Mon-Khmer, Austronesean and is found all over the teritory of the Kamboja kingdom (Khmer Krom, Khmer Surin, Khmer Kampuchea, etc.)

The only evidence you can provide are Chinese words that predate Thai words and are not derrived from Thai words. Chinese always used their own language to describe names. Like Fu-nan, whe Fu is a word for holy people and Nan means south. And Hun Tien, wich means something like Lord Veda.

The second evidence you show is legends. How do we know that these legends are not copied from khmer books after the siege of Angkor? How do we know that they are not corrupted to show a sacred heir, because Thais have been obsessed with that till now.

Also, there are many cultural traditions that were taken from Khmer, so we can't know if the Khmer take it from Siam, or Siam take it from Khmer.

Also, the country of Langkasuka was inhabited by Malay people. The ethnicity there is still primarily Malay, while the Malays there have lost power since 14th/15th century.

Sri Vijaya is related to Sailendra, and is a Malay connection.

To prove you are right, why don't you show me some important evidence, and no assumptions?
All your claims are misproven by the evidence we provided you with. Why don't you show me something Mon before 550 AD in Cambodia? Why don't you show me something Khmer before 550 AD in Thailand?

It was already hard enough trying to take the opposing side seriously and with all those silly emoticons wasn't really helping either. I'm starting to think the one Chinese guy is just here to force us to believe all of his assumptions. It's also quite funny how they say the French is writing our history and then when their history contradicts some of their findings, they go blame it on the French - LMAO!!!

[LoveIsAllAround]

It doesn't matter what this article says. The connections are clearly Malay, but you are trying to say they were Mon-Malay, lol. I can't find any evidence of Mon being in Langkasuka. Can you? I do can find some clear connections wit Malay culture though. Hmm..

I'd be matter if you really have read it. Early Srivijaya or Sri Bodhi (Chaiya) was not Malay yet. Mon Dvaravati had flourished, they reached to far south of Pattani. Lannggsukha, is believed to be Nagara Sri Dhmmaraj and Pattani. These land was inhabited by ancient Mon. Malay didn't come to in the picture yet. Srivijaya became more and more Malay becos the rulers move southward to Sumatra island.

Chaiya inscription was written in Sanskrit, not Malay, and it used Pallava script not Ancient Malay (Kawi) script. Why becos Malay script hadn't invented yet, Malay Language hadn't become Lingua franca yet. No malay influenced but Funanese-Mon. Jayavarman II must be from these rulers, Funanaese-Mon.

This guy is native people of Kedah. You can read what native people think about Langgasuka

Why should you be ashame with Phnom (Phnong), it is just pronounced that way and isn't it means Mountain and also the name of the ancient Kingdom? What is wrong with Mountain, isn't it the Kingdom that was Centralized in Cambodia? Nobody trying to degrade Khmer people here, if we degrade you that means that we also degrade ourselves. I am not Khmer, I am a Mon-Khmer, I don't say that I am a Khmer because Khmer is special to Cambodian (Khmers), I had told you that we are related more to Mon people (Nyah Kur people in Thailand). The Kingdom Dvaravadi, Nakhorn Prathom, Tambralinga, Langgasukha, Lopburi, Ramannadesa (South Myanmar) were all Mon related Kingdom.

Mon-Khmer is just the reference name of Austroasian people. I've told you that Khmer are the Cambodians means that I won't claim anything from Cambodia as ours since it is obviously in Cambodian territory. Fine, if you feel offended with that term, Phnom then I will always remember to use Cambodians to refer to Khmers, maybe I am not enough sensitive with the terms since Mon-Khmer people were colonized by others and not as lucky as Khmers (Cambodians) who still can maintain their native traits, thanks reminding. We are South East Asians, traditional culture of respect will always be our priority.

Speaking Thai doesn't mean that we are Tai ethnic. Speaking Malay doesn't mean that we are Malay (Indonesian). Speaking English does make you an American, an Aussie or a Briton? In Malaysia, we are not like Thailand or Cambodia. If you are an Indian, then you are an Indian with Malaysian citizenship, not a Malay. If you are a Chinese then you are a Chinese with Malaysian Citizenship, not a Malay. If you are a native Siamese (Mon-Khmer, the aborigine of Siam Empire as myself), then we are the Native Siamese. Siam is not ethnic name but an ancient Nationality but nowadays being our ethnic identity in Malaysia, it indicates our past identity, since our ancient City-States being defeated and absorbed into Siam Empire.

Well, Khmer did attacked Mon people (basically not really Mon, but Nyah Kur people who are related to Mon of South Myanmar) in Thailand. Those ruins of course were build by those who attacked us. I am not a Thai citizen but Malaysian citizen, we were just absorbed into Siam Empire in 13th C AD. I had met few Cambodians here working, I never insult them or trying to hurt their feeling. I am not a rich person either. I don't feel like it is good to mock others and that is not a good way to treat others.

Pattani people were Mon to begin with, they were Buddhist. They were Malay-ized in the period of Middle Srivijaya. They became to be Muslim (some still be Buddhist). Right now Thai Muslim in Pattani and nothern Malaysia and Northern Malaysian Muslims who were not Malay, they are same people.

[LoveIsAllAround]

Yes, it spoke a similar language to Mon. If they spoke the same language they would have said they speak the same language. So, if it was a language related, but not the same, it would have been Khmer! Thank you. The city was named Tun Sun, which mean five cities. And there was a Mon kingdom with five kings. So it once again points to Khmer.

Mon-Khmer languages doesn't comprise of only 2 language, Mon and Khmer. And there were many Mon related kingdoms from Burma to Malaysia. There was no Khmer related kingdom. Khmer only spoken in Mekong delta area.

[LoveIsAllAround]

You only show me that the people indeginous were not Khmer before 550AD but were ruled by Khmer after.

what?

These ancient Mon people already had their own art and culture before Kambujadesa was created. Don't you think your Khmer art look like this Mon Dvaravati?

[Leeporter]

Do you wanna here alternative history about ZDG?
v
v
ZDG's Siam was Lavo and Xian federation. They attacked Angkor Thom (Yasodhrapura), which was ruling by Tai speaking king, Indravarman III, he was also known by Khmer slaves by Khmer native name 'Pya Krak พญาแกรก'. Sukhothai, back then was allied with Angkor, Since Sukhothai king and Angkor Indravarman III were brothers. So (Siamese) Lavo attacked both (Tai) Angkor and (Tai) Sukhothai (Sukhothai were attaced by Khom Sabad Lamphong). Indravarman III brought Theravad Buddhism to Angkor, Khmer slaves were allowed to be Buddhists and monks, they realized in Dhamma, they finally knew that their king was not god, but a human and they also human. This Thervada made Khmer slaves prepared to stage a coup form slavery. But epidemic had happened, in the time of Angkor king U-Tong who married the woman heir of grandson of king Indravarman III. King U-Tong had to evacuate his court and people. He decided to move west to Lavo, Siam. Finally, the great Khom exodus occurred, millions of people moved to their new capital at Ayuttaya in Siam. They left Angkor as disordered city, there were looters and the city was burnt to the ground, Trosok Peam, a Jarai (Cham) pow led his Khmer fellows, declared to be the new king of Angkor. 15 years later, Ayutthaya king sent his army to defeat the 'Rebel' Khmers in Angkor. The Khmers were defeated and retreated southeast to Jatumuk, present Phnom Penh.

300 years later, Ayutthayan King Narai claimed to be descent of Yasodhrapura. Siamese is actually Khom. Khmer is Cham+AA tribes

Well done! You put every jigsaws together nicely and the shape start to appear.

I think they fit together well.

What we have to do now is to find a hole in it using other evidences.

If we can't contadict it with other evidences, then it's a perfect theory.

If we find a hole, then just rearrange it a bit to fit the new evidence, then we will have a better picture.

But I think the outline of your theory of the history during the transition period between Yasodharapura to Ayudhaya is quite correct. Only a few detail may need adjustment.

It's better than the Royal Chronicle of Cambodia where they have King Nippean Bat as the first king of Cambodia who had no trace. He came out of no where and be king of Yasodharapura because Khmers don't want to talk about his background on how he became the king after Jayavarman IV.

BTW, I think King U-Thong moved to Lopburi first then moved down to Ayudhaya?

[Leeporter]

How is that mysterious. Angkors language is influenced a lot of Thai. That happens if a country is oppressed by another country.

??? You mean Khmers were oppressed by Tai-speakers so they switched to use "Kun" and "Kun Luang"

When did that happen? Since Funan?

[Leeporter]

The only evidence you can provide are Chinese words that predate Thai words and are not derrived from Thai words. Chinese always used their own language to describe names. Like Fu-nan, whe Fu is a word for holy people and Nan means south. And Hun Tien, wich means something like Lord Veda.

Then you have to explain other names like Pan Wang, Pan Chan, Pan Chang etc.

SEAhistory, don't be idiot, Chinese never interpreted the name of people into Chinese, they just recorded what they heard which is the pronounciation of the name!

The second evidence you show is legends. How do we know that these legends are not copied from khmer books after the siege of Angkor?

Because such legends are shared among Tai-speakers in Isaan, Laos, upto Tai Lue in Sibsongpanna.

Why don't you show me something Mon before 550 AD in Cambodia?

Idiot, because you label everything in the territory of Cambodia (and in most part of Thailand) with the name "Khmer" and how could you have anything left as "not-khmer"?

That's why I said you didn't prove anything, what you did is to label everything as "Khmer" and say "see? you have no influence in Cambodia, only Khmer architecture/art found"

Idiot!

[SEAhistory]

I'd be matter if you really have read it. Early Srivijaya or Sri Bodhi (Chaiya) was not Malay yet. Mon Dvaravati had flourished, they reached to far south of Pattani. Lannggsukha, is believed to be Nagara Sri Dhmmaraj and Pattani. These land was inhabited by ancient Mon. Malay didn't come to in the picture yet. Srivijaya became more and more Malay becos the rulers move southward to Sumatra island.

Chaiya inscription was written in Sanskrit, not Malay, and it used Pallava script not Ancient Malay (Kawi) script. Why becos Malay script hadn't invented yet, Malay Language hadn't become Lingua franca yet. No malay influenced but Funanese-Mon. Jayavarman II must be from these rulers, Funanaese-Mon.

This guy is native people of Kedah. You can read what native people think about Langgasuka


Pattani people were Mon to begin with, they were Buddhist. They were Malay-ized in the period of Middle Srivijaya. They became to be Muslim (some still be Buddhist). Right now Thai Muslim in Pattani and nothern Malaysia and Northern Malaysian Muslims who were not Malay, they are same people.

He can say whatever he wants, statistics don't lie. Look for ethnicity in the area, and you see he speaks bull$hit because he dont want to be jungle-tai from yunnan.

[SEAhistory]

Idiot, because you label everything in the territory of Cambodia (and in most part of Thailand) with the name "Khmer" and how could you have anything left as "not-khmer"?

That's why I said you didn't prove anything, what you did is to label everything as "Khmer" and say "see? you have no influence in Cambodia, only Khmer architecture/art found"

Idiot!

[/quote]

I will explain to you what I mean, so you understand it. youre not very bright, are you? With Khmer I mean the unique style which resembles all the temples of the Varman kings: the Chenla, Funan and Cham had a similar but distinguished architecture which is found from 6th century up on to 14th century, and I would like you to show me where this style is seen in Thailand before 550AD. Or show me one of the many Mon sculptures, inscriptions, temples, before 550AD in Cambodia. Do you get it now? Show me please!

[SEAhistory]

[quote name='Leeporter' date='Feb 10 2012, 10:26 PM' post='5000932']
Then you have to explain other names like Pan Wang, Pan Chan, Pan Chang etc.

SEAhistory, don't be idiot, Chinese never interpreted the name of people into Chinese, they just recorded what they heard which is the pronounciation of the name!


yeah right, the Chinese never used their own words, like Funan, Water-Chenla, Land-Chenla, Chenla, Yin Li, I can go on and on and on.. Your such a liar.

[LoveIsAllAround]

He can say whatever he wants, statistics don't lie. Look for ethnicity in the area, and you see he speaks bull$hit because he dont want to be jungle-tai from yunnan.

What's statistics?

You have no idea that area between Thailand and Malaysia today, were inhabited by Mon speaking people, before Malay (Middle Srivijaya) and Tai (Thai Sukhothai) came. Some Mon speaker fled to mountains in Malaysia. Langgasuka started with Mon, they were Buddhist. Then Malay came, and mixed but they were still Buddhist, Until Muslim spread by Persians and Arab in Malay Malacca state, Southern Malaysia. This made Langgasuka became Pattani with more Malay and Islamic heritage, but they still same people, who had Mon ancestor. The more south in Malaysia, the more Malay they are. I think Cambodian people need to learn more. I have read some Cambodian member here think that Malay people are Arab (becos Malay are muslim). LOL

[LoveIsAllAround]

Well done! You put every jigsaws together nicely and the shape start to appear.

I think they fit together well.

What we have to do now is to find a hole in it using other evidences.

If we can't contadict it with other evidences, then it's a perfect theory.

If we find a hole, then just rearrange it a bit to fit the new evidence, then we will have a better picture.

But I think the outline of your theory of the history during the transition period between Yasodharapura to Ayudhaya is quite correct. Only a few detail may need adjustment.

It's better than the Royal Chronicle of Cambodia where they have King Nippean Bat as the first king of Cambodia who had no trace. He came out of no where and be king of Yasodharapura because Khmers don't want to talk about his background on how he became the king after Jayavarman IV.

BTW, I think King U-Thong moved to Lopburi first then moved down to Ayudhaya?

Every parts are supported by evidences!

---

Zhou Da Guan, Thanks for your work and inspiration.

This post has been edited by LoveIsAllAround: Feb 10 2012, 09:50 PM

[Jin4life]

^
And when was Siamese ever was apart of the Tai family ethnic?