De los Atributos Colectivos

5.2

5.2

5.2 The Khmer corpusThe Khmer corpusThe Khmer corpus of inscriptionsThe Khmer corpus of inscriptions of inscriptions of inscriptions

5.2.1

Context

The textual evidence of the Pre-Angkorian and Angkorian periods is gained from over 1200 inscriptions. Although the majority of these inscriptions have been found within the area defined by modern Cambodia, and in particular near the capital of Angkor, they have a wide distribution across much of mainland Southeast Asia, corresponding, in the main, to the limits of Khmer influence and authority during the period 6th _{to 15}th _{century CE. They are most}

(at temples or ashrams), recording gifts to the gods on these occasions and specifying the requirements for the foundation’s maintenance. The inscriptions are found mostly on edifices and stelæ in temple precincts. Others are associated with the roadside rest houses and hospitals of Jayavarman VII. Minor, generally smaller texts are also on boundary markers, statues or precious objects offered to temples, and refer to ownership of property or mention a donor.

Published texts have been transliterated into Roman script and most have been translated into French as well, the majority in the early 20th _{century. Barth and Bergaigne (1885-1893)}

published two volumes of Sanskrit texts from Cambodia and Champa, and Aymonier (1900- 1904) translated or summarised three volumes of Khmer texts from Cambodia and the Thai provinces. Many inscriptions, notably translated by Cœdès and Finot, were published in the Bulletin de l'École française d'Extrême-Orient (BEFEO) (1901-) and some of these were later republished (Cœdès 1937-1966; Cœdès 1989). In addition, there are the transcribed inscriptions of Majumdar (1953), the translations by Pou (2001) and occasional translations by scholars which appear in miscellaneous journals.

Of the total corpus of Khmer inscriptions there are about 1050 in published lists (Cœdès 1966; Jenner 1980) and Jacques (unpublished) lists a further 195 mostly unpublished registered inscriptions.86 _{Inscriptions range from perfectly preserved to illegible markings on an eroded}

surface. In some instances, only a few words or a single word can be discerned. A large number of inscriptions, stored in museums or conservation areas, have not been published. There are rubbings for some of these. Approximately 970 inscriptions are post 802 CE, i.e. of the Angkorian period (about 860 published). Over 230 of the inscriptions are Pre-Angkorian87

(roughly 190 published). Fifty-one of these are, by date or style, post Angkorian (after 1431 CE).

This study will include dated texts up to 1350 CE, as well as undated texts whose average estimated date is less than 1350. In addition there are a few inscriptions written in Old Khmer, but not produced in areas under Khmer administration, i.e. texts from provinces in ‘Siam’; these are included in order to examine Angkor’s trade and communications, on the assumption that they represent some form of Khmer occupation or influence at the site, regardless of who controlled the territory. This is discussed further in Section 6.2.

86 _{Forty five are listed in a supplement to Cœdès (1966), in BEFEO (1971, Vol. LVIII: 177-195). The exact number of}

inscriptions is difficult to determine. EFEO is currently registering the texts, including recent discoveries, and in the process eliminating duplications.

87 _{The oldest known dated Khmer language inscription is K. 600/ 533 śaka (611 CE). The number of Pre-Angkorian}

Table 1 below summarises this statistical information. It is stressed that the figures are estimates. Total inscriptions (approximate) Pre-Angkor period (approximate) Angkor period (approximate) No estimated date Known inscriptions 1200-1300 230 970 Texts published 820-850 190 645

Inscriptions used in study (up to ca. 1350 CE)

979 235 628 116

Table 1 Inscription data for study

The inscriptions are unevenly distributed over time. For example, in the period 791-877 across the transition between the Pre-Angkorian and the Angkorian periods (802 CE), there were only four accessible inscriptions. Also, there are many more extant Pre-Angkorian inscriptions from the 7th _{century (130 accessible), than from the more recent, slightly longer period from the end}

of the reign of Suryavarman II to the start of the Jayavarman VII period (77 inscriptions accessible) (Vickery 1998: 93).88 _{Spatial distribution is also markedly uneven, with higher}

densities of inscriptions and monuments at and around Angkor, to its north-east and north- west, and in the south of Cambodia.

The content of the inscriptions and their siting in the precincts of temples suggest that they were directed to a limited audience. While the general populace would probably have visited the temples on feast days (Jacques, 1999: 28), it is likely that only a small percentage of the population would have been literate enough to read them — if the largely illiterate society of pre-colonial Cambodia (Chandler 1996[1982]: 46) is an indication of the earlier Angkorian period. The form of the texts, where the Sanskrit and Khmer language sections employ contrasting genres, provides a partial answer. The Khmer parts generally contain political, bureaucratic or economic information, listing founders, donors, and donations of working personnel, land, animals and material goods, whereas the Sanskrit texts, always in verse, primarily eulogise kings and officials, and evoke gods. Nearly half of all inscriptions are solely in Old Khmer, one third in Sanskrit and a quarter are in both languages.

88 _{This suggests a relatively greater output of inscriptions in the Pre-Angkorian than in the Angkorian period (Vickery 1998:}

5.2.2

Sanskrit inscriptions

From the 4th _{century CE, the Indo-Aryan language Sanskrit began to replace the vernacular}

Indic languages (Prakrit) as the language expressing political power, and spread rapidly, not only on the Indian subcontinent, but across much of Asia (an exception being Sri Lanka). A form of the standard praśasti style had appeared by 400 CE. This included the genealogical succession, an elaboration of the kingly traits of the dynasty, the eulogy of the ruler and the donations, conditions for operation of the religious establishment, and imprecations against their violation (Pollock 1996: 211). Prakrit and Sanskrit mostly were employed for different textual contexts (ibid., 208). In the Khmer inscriptions, the Sanskrit might refer to the ruler’s role in rewarding officials, in allocating land, and in building or promoting the establishment and maintenance of foundations. However, it is rarely explicit about practical matters.89

In light of the uniformity of style and content of the Sanskrit ‘political poetry’ over such wide geographic areas, Pollock (1996: 198-99) has coined the term ‘Sanskrit cosmopolis’ to encompass the zone of cultural interaction between societies sharing similar assumptions about representing power in language. In this ‘cosmopolis,’ Sanskrit’s role in politics was as a vehicle of ‘aesthetic power’, to make ‘claims about the nature and aesthetics of the polity – kingly virtue and learning, the dharma of rule, the universality of dominion’ (ibid., 230).

The earliest extant Sanskrit texts, from Cambodia’s Funan period, are undated records from the 5th _{century: undated Khmer inscriptions appear about a century later. Dated inscriptions in}

Sanskrit and Old Khmer start from the early 7th _{century. The Pre-Angkorian Sanskrit texts}

were generally short ‘literary gestures’ (ibid., 219), but by the Angkorian period, they used very sophisticated poetry, employing polished orthography and grammar, as in India. These display knowledge of Indian intellectual and political thought and of literature including the metrics of poetry (Majumdar 1953: xvii-iii; Bhattacharya 1991: 2-4; Pollock 1996: 218-220; Dagens 2003: 217). Yet, although Indian Brahmins were occasionally brought in (Wolters 1982: 91), Sanskrit culture was generally indigenised, with local inflections present from the beginning. Khmer Brahmins are said to be the authors of major Sanskrit works such as the Ta Prohm and Prah Khan inscriptions (Pollock 1996: 220; 222). In Jacques’ (1986: 328) view, the elite that knew Sanskrit was very small and since the texts are found only on temple sites, this may suggest that the only audience for the Sanskrit inscriptions was the gods. Whereas the use of Sanskrit in public writing died out quickly in Burma and Java, it lasted up to the late 13th _{century in}

89 _{Exceptions are several important Sanskrit inscriptions, which include lists of gifts or temple supplies (e.g., inscriptions of}

the Jayavarman VII period – the hospital stelae; K. 273/ 1186, K. 908/1191 and K. 180/ 948; and the bilingual inscriptions, K. 254/1126 and K. 235/1052. In a few instances, Khmer authors use Sanskrit in the opening formulae of texts. In Pre- Angkorian texts, there may be short imprecatory passages, usually at the end, which are all or partly in Sanskrit.

Cambodia (Footnote 47). Its decline is linked with the spread of Theravada Buddhism (Houben 1996:11).

5.2.3

Khmer inscriptions

From its earliest appearance, the Khmer language adopted a great many lexical terms from Sanskrit (Bhattacharya 1991: 6; Pou 2003: 283). However, the content of the Khmer inscriptions differ markedly from the Sanskrit ones. They are not addressed to gods, but to a temporal audience: authorities and officials, relatives of the founders, and in their broad imprecations, to the world in general. The authors tend not to express a political agenda here, in that they do not praise or assert power. The Khmer inscriptions seem more like legal documents – they often record the history of endowments made to foundations and they establish the ownership of land, setting out the rights of the foundation and the founder’s family. Vickery (1985) has suggested that many such texts in the 10th _{and 11}th _{centuries have}

a certain political agenda on the part of the authors, who often appear to be concerned with their claims to titles and land.

The texts may list and describe in detail the property of the foundation, record the donors, the circumstances under which land was acquired, the price paid, and settlement of disputes by courts. They may note the weight, quantity and material of temple ‘treasure’ or objects used in exchanges, the rice production of foundation lands, sometimes their location and dimensions. Requirements for continuing support for divinities and temple personnel may be set out and personnel might be listed, sometimes by name, gender, dependents, duties or place of origin, or else as totals. The texts may also refer to imposts or immunities granted to the foundations. The king is frequently acknowledged in inscriptions authored by individuals other than rulers, and a date is often recorded. The king is depicted as having a key role in state administration, establishing inquiries and being at least nominally responsible for legal decisions, ordering building works to be initiated, etc. There is an emphasis on the role of the ruler or of his predecessors in giving land, granting permission to purchase it or materially supporting the foundation, presumably placing the founder and his relatives under some future obligations. The authors record the merit, accrued by the ruler through his generosity, which is mostly dealt with poetically in the Sanskrit texts. Inscriptions written by rulers in Old Khmer are edicts relating mostly to matters of law, temple administration or land allocation and taxation. The texts are somewhat formulaic, though of varying length. Presumably, wealthier temples had more resources warranting recording, and had more literate scribes to produce the texts.

Changes in the Khmer language over time, notably between the Pre-Angkorian and Angkorian periods, are observed in grammar, spelling90 _{(Jenner 1981: 2-5; Vickery 1998: 84-87) and}

lexicon. Vocabulary changes often concern administrative terminology, and probably point to institutional change (e.g. the disappearance of the title poñ and the land unit sare/ sanre after the early 8th _{century and the replacement of the Pre-Angkorianexpression} ājñā vraḥ kamratāṅ

añ by vraḥ śāsana in the Angkorian period as an expression of the concept of ‘royal order’. In addition, nearly all recorded names used for commoners change from the Pre-Angkorian to the Angkorian period (Vickery 1998: 84-87).

5.2.4

Other Khmer texts

Other writings have not survived, because they were on plant materials such as palm leaves, which deteriorated in the monsoonal climate, or because they were destroyed by fire or insects. The contents of Khmer temple libraries which may have been reproduced over the centuries, and the Khmer language royal chronicles, for which we have some evidence, are no longer extant (Jacques and Dumont [1990]1999: 17-18). This situation contrasts with that in some other parts of tropical Southeast Asia, where non-temple documents produced several hundred years ago still exist, having either been written on lasting materials such as copper plate or continuously reproduced (e.g. Wisseman 1977: 198-199; Aung Thwin 1985: 8-12; Wisseman Christie 1993: 180-181). These are sometimes able to provide alternative views of the society in which they were produced and can be compared with the temple inscription texts. In Burma, for example, the availability of a variety of historical text types (government archives, law codes, histories and administrative records, civil codes and chronicles giving narrative accounts) represent contemporary Burmese society somewhat more comprehensively (Aung Thwin 1983: 48; 1985: 8-12).

Sanskrit was used mostly for political poetry and there is little evidence that Khmer literature was produced until the Sanskrit literary culture ended in the 14th _{century (Pollock 1996 225).}

However, according to K. 485, which was written by Jayavarman VII’s first wife in 1200 CE, a Buddhist narrative jātaka was performed, at least in dance. It is not clear if the recitation was in Khmer. Further, some late narrative texts suggest the existence of earlier chronicles, a literary genre known from the post-Angkorian period (Dagens 2003: 215).

90 _{Some of these may be dialectical differences. Early Angkorian inscriptions (e.g. K. 809) still show Pre-Angkorian spellings}