Variaciones de los lados derechos de las restricciones

The GPR survey was primarily conducted in the south-western flat part of the inner enclosure around the large rectangular reservoir. As the area was initially expected to be largely undisturbed by Post-Angkorian use, the goal was to seek more information about the configuration of buried structures within enclosures including a search for Angkorian settlement features.

FIG.[80]:CHAU SREI VIBOL - CLOCKWISE:(1) CENTRAL SHRINE (2) MASONRY REMAINS IN SURVEY AREA (3) MOAT (4) POND.

This area was divided into9rectangular grids. The survey, performed with a 250MHz antenna, covered an area of approximately 13098 m2 _{or over 1.3 hectares. The ground was even and flat} over most of the terrain, only areas close to the hill contained topographic obstacles. The north- western area was covered with small trees and bushes. While they hindered the survey path, the interpretation of results was only influenced to a small degree. The rest of the survey area had been cleared of small vegetation and only large trees remain. Several small structures were visible on the surface, see Fig. [80]. Masonry features of reused laterite blocks in the west (CSV1) and in the southwest (CSV2) were defined as staircases, south of the reservoir was a low rectangular platform surrounded by irregularly aligned laterite blocks (CSV3), see Fig. [81]. The survey left out areas too close to the partly collapsed enclosure wall. Several “Vietnamese bunkers”,835 _{which were located in the area, had to be bypassed in the survey. The masonry}

obstacles, termite mounds as well as large trees, which existed over the complete compound, were mapped within the outline of the grids to facilitate interpretation. Additional surveys were performed outside the enclosure walls, which are described in Chapter (3) regarding living patterns.

FIG.[81]:GPR SURVEY CHAU SREI VIBOL,~50CM DEPTH.

GPR Results and Interpretation

The survey area consists of mainly unconsolidated soil, providing a decent signal depth. Near the hill, the soil covers the natural andesitic rocks, which appear in the results as bright red non- geometrical anomalies that should not to be mistaken for structural remains. The most striking results were detected close to the surface at the western end next to the remains of stairs. Here several rectangular anomalies, only visible in the topsoil (CSV4), clearly indicate the remains of structures. The anomalies form a fork-shaped outline of 26m x 19m, opening towards the enclosure wall in the west attached to a stronger rectangular anomaly further south. Possibly other structural remains were also detected in the south-western corner. Local APSARA personal associated the laterite staircases and the discoveries, with a pagoda, that had been at this location approximately until the 1960s, when the buildings were moved from inside the enclosure to the north, where now a large pagoda is situated.836 _{The early descriptions by}

Aymonier, Lunet de Lajonquière showed no structure in the southwest corner, nor did any of the French researchers mention a modern pagoda in the enclosure. In his sketch, Marchal labelled the area in the southwest bonzerie, an old French word for monastery. The EFEO map of 1939 displays in the southern area inside the enclosure several buildings surrounding the trapeang, naming it Vat Trach; see Fig. [79]. It is likely that this wat was fairly modern was and had existed at this location only for a few decades before it was moved to the north of the compound. Those anomalies detected with the GPR are possibly the remains of this monastery and could be associated with the reused laterite blocks in this area that were used as staircases.

FIG.[82]:GPR SURVEY AT CHAU SREI VIBOL,~100CM DEPTH AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS.

Other stronger anomalies in the upper layers are either too small or in an irregular form to be clearly distinguishable as structural or masonry foundations. Some refer to the modern bunkers that were built from reused laterite stones. It is questionable if areas with more anomalies could refer to areas of more frequent use or deposited material. The subsurface of the area displayed very little evidence for Angkorian activity, see Fig. [82]. No connection, such as a linear feature referring to masonry, between the rectangular temple and the platform to its west was detected. Neither was there a linear feature between the rectangular temple and the southern gopura. Below calculated 100cm depth, the GPR returned a more chaotic signal that perhaps refers to bedrock, especially close to the hill.

The anomalies associated with the recently removed modern structures at Chau Srei Vibol complicate the interpretation of results. The features in the topsoil are possibly of modern origin, while evidence from the Angkorian period was detected at greater depth. There is, however, no clearly identifiable structural anomaly between the surface features and the potential natural rock formation, which means that remains have perished or simply did not exist. The investigation of Chau Srei Vibol can serve as a reminder to consider also the post- Angkorian and modern history of Angkor in the GPR surveys. The unexpected survey results show the importance of additional knowledge for the interpretation of findings and displays re- occupation of the temple area and abandonment in modern times. A search for settlement patterns should be started in the densely forested area within the moat on the east side of the inner enclosure, once it has been demined.

ii. B

S