QUOTE (Weareallone @ Sep 20 2011, 07:42 AM)
you could write a scholarly paper on the history of angkor supported by references. I'm sure many would be interested to read such discoveries.
debating til the point of ad nauseum does nothing for your research.
I am not a historian. stewpid???
And history is not science. History is not necessary fact. So most of the time, history starts with "It is believed that ... ". Same as Khmer history, which is created by French colonial scholars. Reading French-made Khmer history books, you'll find "It's believed that the first Khmer king of current dynasty was the direct descent of Angkorean Varman dynasty. LOL Just one question, Can you provide the solid evidence that connect Post-Angkor Khmer dynasty and Angkorean Varman? Many people here are really interested in this critical observation which totally ignored for a hundred year.
If you have new evidence then you have new history, and then you got the history that are closer to fact, which must be appreciated by everybody. But what Khmer wants? A truth or a lie? Khmer love to believe in lies, by blinding themselves with French hands?
QUOTE (Leeporter @ Sep 13 2011, 08:55 PM)
Thai never called themselves "Siamese"
Khom who migrated from Yasodharapura after 1336 when Khmer slave Trasok Paem made a coup over Khom's Varman dynasty and eliminated them all.
Then Khmer started a new dynasty with the first Khmer Nippean Bat as mentioned in the first Chronicle of Cambodia.The famous French historian George Cœdès said after years of studying about Varaman dynasty and Khmer kings after Angkor period. He was trying to link the last Varman king and the first Khmer king mentioned in the Chronicle of Cambodia but failed to do so.
You can read the whole book here:http://books.google.com/books?id=Wk4_ICH_g...mbu&f=false
Page 196 in his book says:
"No link has yet been found between Jayavaramaparameshvara (Jayavaraman IX, the last Varman) and the first kings mentioned in the Cambodia Chronicles,
which begin around the year 1350 with a name that is presumably posthumous: Nirvanapada (Nippean Bat).
Not only is there are complete break between the kings formerly mentioned in the indsciptions and the kings later listed in the chronicles, but there are no reliable dates for these later kings except those of embassies and changes of reign recorded in the Chinese history of the Ming Dynasty. Unfortunately this history refers to the Cambodians kings by their reign titles (Samdach, Chao Ponhea), never by their personal or posthumous names, so that it is difficult to identify them with the kings mentioned in either the Cambodian or the Siamese chronicles, which in any case rarely tally."