Vat Prasat (Prasat Sek Ta Tuy)

Located around 8km southwest of Beng Mealea, in Siem Reap province, it is an ancient temple complex also known as Prasat Sek Ta Tuy, Prasat Trapeang Thnal, while most locals will know it as Prasat Wat Prasat albeit there is no monastery. It’s an extraordinary site, at least in my mind, exhibiting precise craftsmanship and execution of the well-balanced plan set out by the ancient architect. Speaking of the layout, you’ll immediately notice its similarity to Prasat Trapeang Khyan.

It’s also a significant site for holding inscriptions revealing the use of the Chhankitek and referred to inscriptions as Nakastra, a calendar system utilising 12 animals, similar to that used elsewhere across Asia, China most notably of course, but unique and whose true origin seems unclear. From the inscriptions here, it is known that this system was in use by at least the early 11th century. More in the inscription notes further below. The inscriptions also link the site with Banteay Srei Temple and the guru, Yajnavaraha.

Site Layout

The site features an outer laterite enclosure, about 50 m x 30 m, with the remnants of an entrance gopura on the east. Inside, and to the south of the central axis, two east-west orientated halls, perhaps ashrama, can be seen, one with a single entrance and the inner hall featuring several small sandstone entrances or non-balustered windows. These are mirrored in the north but heavily overgrown.

A few more steps west along the central axis and there are the remains of another collapsed and overgrown gopura and a dividing wall. Inside this area, the remains of the two libraries can be seen along with the incredible central shrine.

The central shrine is a beautiful square brick prasat featuring a very grand laterite forebody extending its eastern entrance. Noting the refinement of the molding and shaping and fitment of each of the laterite blocks, and the brickwork, all displaying precise workmanship that is not seen in temples of later eras. Above the false doors of the central shrine, you can make out the flame-bordered arch of the pediment that was common in brick temples of the era. The laterite forebody likely had a corbelled brick roof and features three chambers, the largest of which features niches carved into its interior walls.

Quirks abound, and we can only hope archeological work will one day reveal much more.

The overgrowth is quite heavy, especially out the eastern side which I did not explore and will leave that for when authorities clear the site, historical notes suggest that there is a bollarded causeway and two laterite-lined basins. The site rises on a slight elevation that looks across the fields with views of the Phnom Kulen to its north.

Note: As of 01/23, the site is reasonably easy to access but still holding onto winter growth with a foot trail around and through the site making it possible to view different aspects. A dirt road in reasonable condition leads off east road 64, a little after crossing the new airport arterial, and then north directly to the temple’s western side.

Inscriptions

• K. 617 – gopura II, south doorjamb – 30 lines of Khmer – Finot 1928, p. 56
• K. 618 – gopura II, north doorjamb – 46 lines of Khmer – Finot 1928, p. 56
• K. 619 – gopura II, east door – 34 lines of Khmer – Finot 1928, p. 51
• K. 620 – central passage between gopura I & II – 32 lines of Khmer – Finot 1928, p. 51

Rubbings of the inscriptions can be seen here. Coedes notes the site in L’Origine du Cycle des Douze Animaux au Cambodge. A translation from French (please read the original) of Finot’s reading of the inscriptions follows

THE INSCRIPTIONS OF SEK TA TUY.

The temple of Sek Ta Tuy, located about ten kilometers west of Ben Mälä, was reported for the first time by Mr. Parmentier in 1928. The east gopura of the 2nd enclosure has 4 inscriptions: 2 on the side walls of the East entrance, 2 on the side walls of the West interior door.

I. Frames of the exterior door. It is a single inscription, which begins on the south side wall and ends on the north side wall. It is entirely in Sanskrit and in çlokas, each hemistich forming a line. The first jamb contains 17 stanzas and 34 lines, the other 16 stanzas and 32 lines. The entire inscription therefore comprises 49 stanzas. The top of the two side walls is badly damaged and 8 to 10 lines have almost completely disappeared.

The act commemorates the erection by the guru of the king Yajnavaraha, from a linga associated in income (micrabhoga) with another god named Tribhuvanamahecvara. It bears no date; but the details he gives on the relations of the founder with several kings allow an approximate dating.

This founder, Yajnavaraha, was son of the Brahmin Damodara, son-in-law of King Harşavarman, son of Yaçovarman. He was guru of a king Jayavarman, which can only be Jayavarman IV (928-942 A.D.) or Jayavarman V (968-1001 A.D.). There is no compelling reason to prefer one over the other. The only clue that could be found in favor of the first is that Javavarman IV is praised by the inscription of Prását Kok as conqueror of Campå and the four corners of the horizon and that the Jayavarman of Ta Tuy also seems to have had problems with the Champa. But this detail is inconclusive. In any case, this temple is from the 10th century and is placed between the constructions of Yaçovarman and those of Süryavarman I.

The inscriptions of Bantay Srei had already made known to us a temple erected to the god Tribhuvanamabeçvara during the reign of Jayavarman V and where statues were erected by a royal guru also named Yajnavaráha, but who apparently lived. three centuries later. There are disturbing coincidences here.

Let us first recall the passages from the Bantay Srei inscriptions which place in time the Yajnavaraha they mention:

a) Madhurendrapandita or Madhurendrasüri was minister of royal graces under Jayaparamecvarapada (Jayavarman VIII. 1243-1296 A.D.) and the voice of his successor Crindravarman (1296-1308): now he is said to be “obedient with intelligence to the royal preceptor Yajnavaraha” (narendraguru-yajaavaraha-dhimad-vacya).

b) This same Madhurendrasari recommends to royal benevolence the foundation of Icvarapura and he is supported in this request by Dharanindrasari, who receives a royal order in 1304 A.D.

So Madhurendrapandita surely lived at the beginning of the fourteenth century, under Crindravarman and if he obeyed the royal preceptor Yajnavaraha, it seems to follow that Yajnavaraha was guru of the same king.

To be able to identify the Yajnavaráha of Bantay Srei with that of Sek Ta Tuy, it would be necessary to reason thus the founder of the temple of Sek Ta Tay says in the Sanskrit inscription of this temple that he erected many lingas and statues: the Tribhuvanamabeçvara of Bantay Srei could be one such foundation; and when Madhurendra is said to be “obeying the royal preceptor Yajnavaraha”, one must understand that he is obeying the intentions of the founder of the temple, guru of Jayavarman V, who lived three centuries before.

This hypothesis seems implausible. First, nowhere in the Bantay Srei inscriptions does it say that this temple was founded by Yajnavaraha, only that he erected a Vagicvari and two Vidyaguru there. Secondly, one can strictly admit that an approach by Madhurera in favor of the temple of Isvarapura was considered an act of obedience to the intentions of the distant founder. But the stanza in question does not mention any particular act of this personage: it has no other object than to praise his high position as the king’s favorite (ativallabhaç çrīçrīndrādhi-pasya), as a favorite of the people (mahajanamata) and finally as an investil a final qualification which, like the two others, can only be of a general nature, that of narendraguru-dhimad-vaśva, that is to say, no doubt, assistant and guru of the royal preceptor. In the insert. 4, 1. 7, called anvaya of the vraḥ guru Yajñavaraha, anvaya being apparently synonymous with vaçya. Finally, when it is a question of the “king” without any specification, it can only mean the reigning king, and the “king’s guru” can only be the guru of the sovereign who was then on the throne, Çrindravarman.

The conclusion of the above is that the guru of Crindravarman must have taken up the title held three centuries earlier by the guru of Jayavarman IV (or V), that of Yajnavaraha. The case is not, moreover, unique. On a pedestal of the north sanctuary of Bantay Srei we read in a votive inscription: “He who, relative and spiritual friend of Yajñavaraha, received the name of Cri-Prthivindra-pandita”. Now this name of Prthivindrapandita is that of the minister of justice of Süryavarman (1002 -1049 A.D): it must therefore be admitted that it was taken over by a mandarin from Crindravarman, the onomastics, one cannot be very surprised. One cannot deny however that the appearance of the name of Yajñavaraha on the side walls of Sek Ta Tuy does not complicate with a new element the question of Bantay Srei.

As we have seen above, the linga erected by Yajnavaraha, and which receives no particular name, is said to be micrabhogu co-participant of another god named Tribhuvanamaheçvara, of which we are told nothing more. Although the god of Bantay Srei bears the same name, there is no need to identify them, one reason for the remoteness of the two temples. That of Sek Ta Tuy was probably the idol of a nearby shrine.

The inscription begins with the eulogy of a king whose name has disappeared from the praçasti, but is found in another stanza: Jayavarman. This king can be identified, as we have said, either with Jayavarman IV or with Jayavarman V.

The panegyric is banal and consists only of literary cliches, with the exception of one stanza that is unfortunately incomplete and obscure, from which it seems that this king refrained, out of generosity, crushing the King of Champa.

The rest of the inscription is devoted to the panegyric of the royal guru Yajñavaraha. His father Damodara, son-in-law of King Harşavarman I, was versed in the study of Rgveda. He himself was a renowned cival doctor and he was even the king’s cival teacher (çaivacārya). But he was no stranger to other systems: he had studied in particular the Yoga of Patanjali and the Buddhist doctrine. He spoke several languages. Finally he knew medicine; and a stanza of his eulogy would even seem to signify that he had opened a sort of dispensary in his house where he gave the sick consultations and medicines.

This learned and pious Brahman had built many lingas, founded acramas, dug sacred basins and ponds. The temple of Sek Ta Tuy, raised to a linga, is one of its foundations: it was sanctioned by King Jayavarman (IV or V).

II. Interior door pillars. The sides of the interior door are even more damaged than the previous ones: large chips have removed a large part of the engraved surface and, even in the preserved parts, the mediocre quality of the writing, added to the difficulties of a language still little known, makes the understanding of the text too uncertain for it to be possible to attempt a consistent translation. We will confine ourselves to extracting the most interesting information from it.

Let us first observe that, unlike the exterior jambs, these bear inscriptions independent of each other: each begins with the sign that marks the beginning of a text, and, in the north one, this sign is also followed by a date in figures. But they are nevertheless from the same period and concern the same subject. This object is donations to a god referred to several times by the name of Kamraten jagat vnam brāhmaṇa “the god of the mount of the Brahmans” (or: of the Brahman). This is apparently the common name of the idol whose scholarly name was Tribhuvanamaheçvara.

Both inscriptions are in Khmer.

The first is not very instructive. It is about land purchases (jau bhumi), the creation of basins (jyak travan), donations from serfs responsible for guarding the açrama. Rice provisions (runko), are stipulated, some daily (pratidina), and others payable at the beginning of each year (sankranta). There are several successive foundations (kalpana); and each time a presiding judge (sabhapati) is responsible for setting the boundaries (san gol).

The second inscription, that of the north abutment, is much more interesting, less because of its subject, which is almost the same, it is always a question of various donations to the god of the Mount of the Brahmans than thanks to the chronological data that it contains.

It begins with a date çaka of 3 digits; and, despite the scratches in the stone there, it is almost certain that they must read 961, or 1039 A.D. This date takes us to the middle of the reign of Saryavarman I (1002-1049 A.D.). which is confirmed by the rest of the text, as we will see presently.

The number of the çaka year is followed by the following details: “the day of the full moon of the month of Caitra, Thursday, year of the Tiger” ([pur)nami ket caitra brhaspatibara khal naksatra).

To appreciate what is new and even unexpected in the mention of the year of the Tiger. we must briefly recall the history of the duodenal cycle in Indochina.

Until recently, the oldest testimonies of the use of this cycle in Siam and Cambodia were the inscription of Rama Khamheng and the relation of Tcheou Ta-kouan, both from 1295-1296.

But, while the Sukhodaya inscription gives to the years the names of the cyclic animals, which differ from those of the real animals, the Chinese envoy collected at Ankor a list of names borrowed from the native language. In truth, he only gives four, but they suffice to characterize the series: the horse, the rooster, the pig, the egg are designated by the words pou-sai, louan. tche-lou, ko, which correspond to Khmer seḥ, man, cruk, kò, whereas the same animals are named, in the cycle, momi, roku, kör, chlau.

It could be concluded from this that at the end of the XIII century, the Thai used the duodenal cycle with the current terms, while the Cambodians used it with indigenous names.

The question was at this point when in 1918, Mr. G. Coedès made known a bronze Buddha found in a pagoda in Jaiya (Malay Peninsula) and whose base bore an inscription in Khmer. According to this text, the statue was melted by order of the governor of the country of Grahi, a country of Khmer language and civilization, as the inscription indicates, but probably belonging to the Sumatran kingdom of Çrīvijaya. Now this dedication is dated 1105 çaka, year of the Hare (thoḥ naksatra). Thus, as early as 1183 A.D., the duodenal cycle was used in the Malay Peninsula, on the borders of Cambodia and with the terms currently in use.

Now, the inscription of Sek Ta Tuy proves to us that a century and a half earlier, from the first half of the 11th century, and in the very heart of Cambodia, the duodenal cycle was already used to date the acts and that the cyclic animals there had the same names as today.

After the date comes the enumeration of the donations, starting with that of the land of Stuk Khlin in Lohendrapuri. Services include paddy (measured in thlvan), hulled rice, sesame and broad beans. Mention is also made of pewter vessels (bhajana trapu) which, together with a silver khnvat (?), seem to have been part of the purchase price of the land.

The serfs (khňum) given to the god serve for fortnights (pratipakṣa) under the direction of chiefs called tumrvac or khlon vala. The donation is confirmed by S. M. Suryavarman (vrah pada kamraten kamlvan añ Çri-Suryavarm-madeva vraḥ karuna) who has the boundary stones (sun gol) laid and prescribes various measures for the guarding and upkeep of the temple. It is Suryavarman I, as evidenced by the almost certain date that opens the inscription and the title kamraten kamtvan añ, particular to the protocol of this king.

Nouvelles inscriptions du Cambodge, Louis Finot, 1928

Historical Notes

Provided below is a crude translation from French (excuse the mistakes!) of Henri Parmentier’s site report published in 1939 along with some of the superb diagrams from the same publication. It is always interesting to read the first written reports which provide a fascinating insight into the temple all those decades ago. You can find an original version here if you are a French reader. A brief note on the site by Henri Marchal can be found here.

Prásat Sek Tà Toy 213.2 (M. H. 736)

At 5 km. east of the Damrei Kón militia post, i.e. 7 km west of Ben Malà, west of the new road that leads to the famous monument, at the point where it crosses two earthworks in quick succession, there is a fairly large temple that was not reported until 1928 and to which the north levee leads, about 200 m from the road. Between the two levees is a pond called by the vague name of Trapân Thnal, “the pond of the levee” and the monument is often designated by this vicinity: Prasat Trapan Thnal. The road starts to the east of the road, 100 m. approximately of this one, of a mound of rocks in laterite which, on 100 m. further to the east, presents nothing special. When one comes from this extreme point and 50 m. after crossing the road, you pass on the causeway between two laterite stepped basins; that of the South would be the Trapăn Thnal, that of the North the Trapan Tráč; 100 m. further still, a cut in the roadway seems to reveal the presence of an old culvert. This causeway was lined with laterite bollards of the usual elongated curvilinear pyramid type. Another 50m. and we are at the temple.

The monument presents the special plan of the beginnings of classical art, and its enclosures follow each other in two adjoining courtyards to which two gopuras, the only access to these enclosures, give entrance.

If we continue to advance in the same direction, we enter through gopura II into courtyard II which contains two galleries extending from the gopura and leaning against the east wall and four buildings in length in the east-west direction. The gopura I opens the main courtyard I, occupied in its center by a sanctuary preceded by an important room equipped with a vestibule and accompanied by two completely ruined libraries. The monument is built of three materials, sandstone, bricks and laterite: the latter clearly dominates, even in roles of range that the Khmers don’t usually use it. The whole, well oriented, forms a rectangle more than 50 meters long and nearly 30 wide. The front courtyard II, less vast, is further reduced by the advance towards the east, in the centre, of the dividing wall. Here again, the east-west is slightly moved to the benefit of the right part, that is to say south which has .5m more, or 1/60 of the whole. Perhaps the gopura are subject to the same law; because their southern part is 25. to 30 cm longer than that of the north.

The whole is very ruined and all the vaults, which were of brick, encumber the various closed parts with their debris. The central tower is a very sober, square brick prasát, with barely marked recesses and false doors on three sides. The interior cannot be usefully studied.

Outside, the sanctuary and the nave are supported by a basement of laterite with coves. Only the main body of the tower remains. The base is invisible; the cornice, if it still exists, is lost under the foliage. Only the walls of the tower appear: they are bare with the edge, not very marked, of the step. Their only decor, moreover very sober, consists in the false doors which hardly project. The junction between the tower and the room appears inside only by the top of its walls. One sees in the wall east the top of the arc of relief on the door. The laterite walls must have carried a brick vault, due to the nature of the rubble and the appearance of a stone in place, the projection of which seems to have formed part of the extrados and which is cut into courses of brick. Outside, the laterite walls of this connection are lower than the body of the tower, also lower than the body of the hall, but higher than its false lower naves.

The anterior room is rectangular; it is made of laterite, walls and gables, and was covered with a brick vault. We see from the outside that this room was treated as a false building with three naves. The room was opened by a door with a complete decorative frame, the laterite pediment of which has not been chiselled, but the rest of the decoration of which is charming. It was sheltered by a porch, provided with open bays on the sides and opened to the east by another door of a rather special composition, but which today is unfortunately reduced to its frame. The brick vault over this shelter was sharply dihedral and without a ceiling.

Outside, the side face of the porch is complete, although dislocated. It is a large bare wall between the base and the cornice, under a frieze with hanging garlands, and this wall is occupied solely by the frame and the void of a free bay. The amount of the bay outside the frame, is, on the side of the room, made of laterite foundations which extend into the recess of the central body of this part of the building. Towards the facade of the porch, it consists of an enormous sandstone monolith which, on the side, is only later decorated with the small frieze with upper hanging garlands. But on the front, the block is adorned with two bands, forming a single pilaster, then recedes almost to the plane of the frame of the E. door of the porch. The outer band rises to the cornice and is interrupted only by the frieze angle with hanging garlands. The other band, that of the inside, well before reaching this height, ends obliquely under the wrenching of a cornice profile. The exterior door was therefore treated differently than usual. In the hollow of the monolith was placed a small column which had unfortunately disappeared; she. bore a lintel bare of the bands forming the pilaster, or perhaps even slightly projecting from their plane, and this lintel was crowned with a cornice which received the proper pediment of the door, supported by the side band in front of the porch gable.

The base that supports this succession of buildings offers the ogee profile around a smooth wall. Its form advanced and doubtless its escutcheons were adorned with lions.

At the sanctuary, the inner room is filled with the rubble of the superstructures and can only be reached by climbing its junction with the room before the tower, and slipping under the top of the vault of its unique entrance. The level of rubble is a little lower in the S. half where the natives excavated and punctured the false door. This excavation is about a meter deep and, if you go down there, you have the top of the wall at eye level. It is therefore impossible to give any information on this cella, the entire lower part of which is buried. At a considerable height above the ground was a ogee cornice which must have supported a ceiling; it is carved in brick. Higher up are 5 to 6 rows of smooth bricks, about 40 to 45 cm., then begins a slightly inclined corbel followed by a drum. The entrance vault intersected this cornice which it exceeds by about four rows (0 m. 30). The cornice is 38 cm. and the discharge from the gate drops still below 12 bricks, or o m. 90.

Outside, the bare pilasters of the false doors frame small columns reduced to a thin band; they enclose barely indicated false leaves. The lintel, with a slightly inclined plane, is in brick and has not been sculpted. It corresponds to the height of the pilaster cornice and bears a decorative band, following the profile rail. This cornice is cove. The whole supports a fronton, a square mass with rounded corners with the interior hook and the corner motif, a decorative spread that seems to be waiting for a naga here. The plane of the bare tympan is slightly inclined from back to front and from bottom to top.

The rubble now fills the entire anterior room. The west gable is in laterite on two courses higher than the start of the vault; the east gable on only one course, probably that of the cornice of the low wall. The relief arch of the eastern door ends in the third course below the brick vault. This began on the inner half of the wall. The side face, blind, is a lower nave façade with a small corner pilaster and half-gable. The base is cove; the wall is bare; the cornice repeats the base and carries the half-vault with a small band of stone on which the ends of false lotus tiles are carved. The half-vault stops on the central body by a half made; above rises the rather small low wall and its cornice. The half-gable has been preserved to the West, on the north side with the usual hook, and below the thin corner pilaster is profiled and counter-profiled in the base and cornice moldings. The main volte carried a made with ears, indicated only by their square mortises,

The libraries are in brick and so ruined that one can only make out buildings that are longer than they are wide, with a true or false door to the west, between round columns. The wall that encloses this courtyard is in laterite: it has a coping in bell cut. It has a simple base and cornice. Its returns to the east on its east face are each pierced by a well-preserved simple door to the north: its leaves turned towards the north; that is to say, the door closed from court I on front court II.

Gopura I is made of bricks. It is composed as a room carrying a tower, with single wings to the east and west, with double section on the north-south. axis; the south wing has retained a door or window post; its vault was dihedral. A stone ran across the wall with protruding lotuses that formed false tile abutments. The columns were circular.

Of the four buildings of the front courtyard, the closest to the axis are galleries whose internal face is pierced with five free windows: these galleries do not appear to open any door in the window wall and the three others are full; their entry is therefore a problem. The cornice. poses directly on the framing of the opening; it turns around on the end walls where a large molding supports the brick gable on the laterite wall. The building has a simple brick cornice inside and its roof was brick.

The buildings furthest from the axis are treated differently: they are in buildings with a triple false nave (fig. 29).

These buildings have a door with a decorative frame, with small sandstone columns and laterite pilasters, like the wall from which they stand. This door is part of the façade of a false lower nave with a laterite cove cornice and a half-bell-shaped roof. On the cornice a molded sandstone stone, without false-tile ends, forms the start of the half-vault. Contrary to what will become the custom later, the lower nave does not end with a half-gable (same fg. B and C). It rests on the wall of the fictitious central nave, the top of which is pierced by three recumbent windows with five balusters and ends at the ends with two gables. From this central nave stands out a final section that is a little less wide and a little lower. The vault of the side nave is turned over at right angles to the side face of this external section, of which it cuts the corn niche into a whistle. The wall bends inside, at the height of the half-vault of the lower false nave. The high vault was long and its terminal gable is at an acute angle. The fictitious composition, in plan, sections and perspective facade had to be something like fig. 29 C.

The perimeter wall retains the same appearance. It is interrupted to the east by gopura II in laterite and sandstone with brick covering; it is three passes.

The doors of the main axis, inscribed, are sheltered by porticoes of a special shape. The central room is lit by windows with five balusters. The side passage doors look simple. These passages are complete independent of the central room. They were covered by a visible ogival vault which appears, from the appearance of its occupations, to have been of brick. It is also the only material that shows up in the rubble. These passages were noticeably smaller than the central hall, as their cornice is much lower. The porticos are particularly interesting; they are made up of sandstone pillars that profile and counter-profile in a cornice-architrave with ogee. These pillars are bare and have no other decoration than their capital cornice and their similar base; they enclose an almost square space. The pillars are joined by their base interrupted by two steps in front. In front of the exterior door they stand out in pilasters decorated with chevrons and enclose small columns, lintel and door frame. This one is of the ordinary profile, rather nervous; the uprights are mitred with a third tenon; the circular columns on cubic dice are in five designs. The lintel has fallen forward. A beam in lining relieved the true lintel at the door as at the window (fig. 26 F). The interior door offers the reduced decorative composition with similar elements and a beautiful lintel, to the East as to the West.

This gopura is flanked laterally by two galleries with pillars and architraves of laterite where only the capital is of sandstone (pl. XXVIII, J). The front of pillars is continued by a solid wall, and this end closed on three sides does not appear to have constituted a small room with four walls, separated from the gallery itself by a partition pierced with a door. The problem is complicated by the fact that this part is very ruined on both sides; but the presence of bits of gallery similar to Koh Ker makes the first reading more likely. The architrave, molded on the outside, has an interior rebate, no doubt to receive a brick vault whose past existence is indicated by the nature of the rubble. Judging by part of the extrados in laterite on the cornice of the passage, the vault seems to have been in a rather acute dihedral. These galleries have the greatest connection with those of Pr. Trapan Khyan 561 (v. fig. 32 and ph. XLVI C and D). In the excavation of the east porch of the hall anterior to the sanctuary were found the feet of a divinity somewhat smaller than human height with rough reinforcement, end of an indistinct object, and heavy lotus anklets.

The decoration here appears very sober. The walls are bare and it is not to the possible fall of chiselled plaster that we can attribute this fact – bricks and laterite are not prepared to receive a plaster because the preserved sandstone parts do not exceed the surface of the rest of the masonry and they themselves are undecorated. We only see band-pilasters at the entrance to the porch of the anterior room I and at the door pilasters. The first show an unusual combination: they offer a double sinusoid of foliage framed and separated by a band of pearls (ph. XLVI A).

Porches and Galleries II show here a curious attempt at pillars and archways, in sandstone at the porches, in laterite, except for the capitals which would have been too difficult to carve out of this material in a happy shape. to the galleries. At the porches, the pillar is profiled and counter-profiled in the architrave molding which thus forms a capital, a system which will then be completely abandoned. The pillar of the gallery (pl. XXVIII. J) is more normal, although not chiseled, and consequently does not show the lotuses which will later form its classical decoration; they are also their power in their breakdown. The pillars are united by their base, a fairly frequent system in the first monuments.

In this temple, the frame of bays is of a frank design; the small columns are generally circular (gopura I and II, libraries I, rooms II) as in pre-Angkorian art and in the art of Roluoh. hall entrance preceding the sanctuary, also an accidental form in the cited arts. They are large nudes with only five motifs, the smooth nudes being accentuated at the ends by very fine and delicate friezes with important motifs.

The type III lintels are very rich and remarkably chiselled; featuring garlands of the inverted W system.

We don’t have any other pediment elements, apart from the pediments laterite with a square mass of the tower and the half-pediments of the lower nave of the front room I. than the sloping corner motif which undoubtedly comes from the east gable of the east porch in the front room. A volute emerging from the monster’s head supports the garland (fig. 30): this decoration thus completely replaces the usual naga. The pattern is accompanied on the back by the lotuses, about faux tiles.

The monument does not reveal by itself any modification during execution and thus seems to belong to a single era; it is fortunately indicated to us by the important inscriptions there.

Indeed, the gopura II E. offers four inscriptions, two on the right pieces of the interior door east, two on those of the interior door west. The side walls of the east door form a single text in Sanskrit, one with 34 lines, the other 32. The top of the two side walls is badly damaged and 8 to 10 lines have almost completely disappeared. The side walls of the west interior door are even more deteriorated. They are in Khmer; the side wall south. had 30 lines, it seems; they are very scaly; we cannot count those of the north pier of which only the last 10 are more or less complete. According to the readings of L. Finot and M. Cœdès, the first inscription commemorates the foundation of a linga by the guru of King Jayavarman V (968-1001). The inscriptions of the right rooms of the western gate, separate inscriptions, one of which is dated 1039 during the reign of Suryavarman I (1002-1049) are donations confirmed by this king.

The monument is very interesting by the trial and error it presents. It gives the impression of an art which seeks itself and which has not yet found the formulas of which it will no longer speak. It seems to mark an attempt to liberate the use of brick, which by tradition still shows itself here at the sanctuary when it is almost abandoned.

Everywhere else, except at points where its use is essential, such as the vaults where a special binder made it possible to create the reassuring pseudo-monolith Let us quote, to support this impression, the very composition of the plan. non-concentric; the return system of the lower naves around the central body to the buildings away from the axis in courtyard II (fig. 29), the special combination of the E. door of the porch of the front room I: the storage bands-pilasters on the main face of this porch and not on the side (v. ph. XLVIA); the slenderness of the corner pillars in the lower naves of the hall (v. fig. 28); the arrangement of the porches with their half-portico, half-window lateral composition made by means of the union of the pillars by the base, a system which we find in Bantay Srei and in other ancient monuments, but which will keep until Ben Mala by exception.

The religious destination of the monument is indicated by the inscriptions and by them alone: ​​it is a temple of the linga.

Its dating is provided quite precisely by these same inscriptions; the foundation dates from the reign of Jayavarman V (968-1001). like Bantay Srei which seems more developed at least for the sculpture. The monument’s inscriptions were studied and translated by L. Finot in his Nouvelles inscriptions du Cambodge, II.B.E., XXVIII. p. 46. ​​where the new temple was first mentioned.

Studies and light excavations to clear the inscriptions of gopura II were made on June 27 and 28, 1928; they required the displacement of the lin teau of the interior door east.; the same was done under the porch of the previous room I to ensure that the side walls were not inscribed and to recognize the lintel. The notice was drawn up the same year.

L’Art khmèr classique , monuments du quadrant Nord-Est, Henri Parmentier 1939

Rodney Charles LHuillier

Living in Asia for over a decade and now residing in beautiful Siem Reap. Rodney Charles L'Huillier has spent over seven years in Cambodia and is the author of Ancient Cambodia (2024) and Essential Siem Reap (2017, 2019). Contact via [email protected] - more..