The dawn at Angkor wat shows her glory by the time she rise ,but there is no clue how she fall
QUOTE
Tuesday, June 8, 2004 Posted: 11:24 AM EDT (1524 GMT) SIEM REAP, Cambodia (AP) -- After resisting Siamese invaders for years, Cambodia's greatest city and civilization -- temple-studded Angkor -- was dealt a death blow with its final sacking in 1431.
Or, so say the history books.
But an international research team now thinks its demise was set much earlier, by something that is the bane of many modern urban societies -- ecological failure and infrastructure breakdown.
Fletcher, a professor at the University of Sydney, theorizes that population pressures and water woes made it harder to trade and communicate. People began migrating south toward the area around what is now Phnom Penh, where subsequent capitals were set up.
The Greater Angkor Project's first goal was to determine how far out Angkor city spread before trying to determine what led to its fall.
They learned the metropolitan area extended far beyond Angkor Thom, the 700-year-old walled city that houses Angkor Wat. Angkor was home to about 750,000 people and covered some 1,000 square kilometers (386 square miles) -- much larger than any other preindustrial development and similar to the shape and size of modern cities, Fletcher said.
"It's like a Los Angeles. It's not like Hong Kong," he said. "Lots and lots of open space, big gaps around the houses, huge freeways, which are the canals in this case."
The city's economy was based on rice, and rice paddies spread along dozens of canals, at least one up to 20 kilometers (12 miles) long. A network of reservoirs, canals and bridges was created to move people and goods and to ensure there was enough water to grow rice.
Angkor engineers even changed the direction that some rivers flowed in what essentially was "a human-built landscape for growing rice," Fletcher said.
The system had three zones: catching water in the north, storage in the center, and dispersal in the south. The engineers also created a manmade river to join two natural ones.
As Angkor's population grew, so did the strains on its intricate water system, the scientists say.
"The more modifications they made, the more problems they ran into, and the harder and harder it became to implement solutions to the problems," said Evans, who uses aerial photos, NASA images and on-the-ground investigations to generate a computer map of the water system.
The growing population also forced people to venture into the nearby Kulen hills to cut down trees for fuel and to clear land for growing rice. That would have resulted in rain runoff carrying sediment down into the canal network, Evans said.
"Anything that happened to that water management system would have had a great deal of consequence for all of the people," he said.
There are signs of apparent breaches and fixes to the water system, although it's hard to tell if they happened during the Angkor era.
"If you think of the freeway and the railway system failing in a modern city -- it's like that," Fletcher said. "It's an infrastructure problem. Everything else might be working fine, but if the infrastructure goes, this thing can't function."
Or, so say the history books.
But an international research team now thinks its demise was set much earlier, by something that is the bane of many modern urban societies -- ecological failure and infrastructure breakdown.
Fletcher, a professor at the University of Sydney, theorizes that population pressures and water woes made it harder to trade and communicate. People began migrating south toward the area around what is now Phnom Penh, where subsequent capitals were set up.
The Greater Angkor Project's first goal was to determine how far out Angkor city spread before trying to determine what led to its fall.
They learned the metropolitan area extended far beyond Angkor Thom, the 700-year-old walled city that houses Angkor Wat. Angkor was home to about 750,000 people and covered some 1,000 square kilometers (386 square miles) -- much larger than any other preindustrial development and similar to the shape and size of modern cities, Fletcher said.
"It's like a Los Angeles. It's not like Hong Kong," he said. "Lots and lots of open space, big gaps around the houses, huge freeways, which are the canals in this case."
The city's economy was based on rice, and rice paddies spread along dozens of canals, at least one up to 20 kilometers (12 miles) long. A network of reservoirs, canals and bridges was created to move people and goods and to ensure there was enough water to grow rice.
Angkor engineers even changed the direction that some rivers flowed in what essentially was "a human-built landscape for growing rice," Fletcher said.
The system had three zones: catching water in the north, storage in the center, and dispersal in the south. The engineers also created a manmade river to join two natural ones.
As Angkor's population grew, so did the strains on its intricate water system, the scientists say.
"The more modifications they made, the more problems they ran into, and the harder and harder it became to implement solutions to the problems," said Evans, who uses aerial photos, NASA images and on-the-ground investigations to generate a computer map of the water system.
The growing population also forced people to venture into the nearby Kulen hills to cut down trees for fuel and to clear land for growing rice. That would have resulted in rain runoff carrying sediment down into the canal network, Evans said.
"Anything that happened to that water management system would have had a great deal of consequence for all of the people," he said.
There are signs of apparent breaches and fixes to the water system, although it's hard to tell if they happened during the Angkor era.
"If you think of the freeway and the railway system failing in a modern city -- it's like that," Fletcher said. "It's an infrastructure problem. Everything else might be working fine, but if the infrastructure goes, this thing can't function."
I just browse on the net and found this issue ,I feel abit disagree on it
But the guy from other forum who can read the scrib in this picture said
อฺนก ราชการฺยย (อ่านว่า อะ-หนึก-ราด-ชะ-กาน) Anuk rat cha karn = This is an officer
ภาค ปมญ (อ่านว่า พาก-ปะ-มน) Pak Pa Mon = This is an archer
นา สฺยำ กุกฺ ( อ่านว่า นา-เสียม-กุก) เชงฺ ฌาน ต (อ่านว่า เชง-ชาน-ตะ) Cheng chan ta = This is an cavary
แปลเป็นไทยได้ว่า " นี่คือผู้เป็นราชการ พวกนักยิง ผู้มีฝีเท้าเร็ว แห่งสยามกุก " Na Siem kuk = Of the Siem clans
So how do Khmae claim that the Siam is the one who behind the Angkor wat?
^
)
