|
|
About
ANGKOR
The
story of finding Angkor is a long sequence. With a retinue of
bearers, eccentric French naturalist Henri Mouhot hacked his way
through the Cambodian jungle in January 1860, in search of beetles
and butterflies. Though his interest lay more in insects than
antiquities, he spent three weeks exploring the ruins of Angkor. He
arrive by way of Lake Tonle Sap, where, he noted, fish were so
abundant that they impeded the progress of his boat. As a collector,
Mouhot was entranced by butterflies with the size of soup plates
lazing on the stones. He was also intrigued by the stones
themselves. In his diaries he claimed Angkor’s ruins were grander
than those of ancient Greece or Rome. He raved about a monument
equal to the temple of Solomon, erected by some ancient
Michelangelo. The sight of the ruins, he wrote in his diary, made
the traveler “forget all the fatigues of the journey, filling him
with admiration and delight, such as would be experienced in finding
a verdant oasis in the sandy desert. Suddenly, and as if by
enchantment, he seems to be transported from barbarism to
civilization, from profound darkness into light.”
Mouhot was not the first European to visit Angkor. A long line of
traders, missionaries, and travelers had passed this way before him
in the 17th, 18th, and 19th
centuries. In fact, Mouhot’s visit was inspired by the travels of
French missionary Charle - Emile Bouillevaux, who visited in 1854.
For some reasons, the reports of others had gone unnoticed by the
West. Mouhot, traveling under the auspices of England’s Royal
Geographical Society, was the most publicity conscious of the
visitors. He died in Laos in 1861 from a malarial fever; his diaries
and tale correspondence was published posthumously 1863 in magazine
called “Le tour du Mond”, triggering European interest. More
writings, focusing as much on natural wonders as on archaeology,
appeared in a book “Voyage in Siam” in 1868. Englishman John Thomson
took the first photographs of Angkor in 1886, and the ruins
exercised a powerful hold on the 19th century European
imagination. The image of ruined temples emerging from thick jungle
vegetation became part of colonial romanticism the lost city
rediscover.
| |
 |
It was not until after World War II, when archaeologist Bernard
Groslier made aerial surveys of the area, that the full extent of
Angkor was realized. Angkor comprises 70 monuments scattered over an
area of 200 square Km. The complex tombs, temple, palaces, moats
reservoirs, and causeway was built over a period of 400 years; only
Egypt’s Nile Valley can compare to this array of monuments.
There’s nothing like Angkor in Southeast Asia. Only two monument
complexes come close: 9th-century Borobodur in Indonesia,
and 11th century Pagan in Burma. The French could not
imagine that the Khmer kings were responsible for such monumental
work. The theories as to who constructed Angkor’s monument ranged
from the ancient Romans to Alexander the Great. Indeed, the
structures echo styles from other monumental ruins. Angkor Wat is
built in classical Indian style, with elements of the Java ziggurat
of Borobodur, and yet the numerous bas-reliefs have a strangely
Egyptian character. The columns and arches at Preach Khan Temple,
evoke those of the Greeks and Romans, while the Pyramid of
Phimeanakas resembles those of the Maya at Tikal, Guatemala.
The inspiration for Angkor architecture come from a unique mix of
Hinduism and Buddhism. The early rules of Angkor promoted various
Hindu sects, mainly dedicated to Shiva and Vishnu. Shiva was
initially the most favored deity, but by the 12th
century, Vishnu had replaced him. At the same time the king
encouraged Buddhist scholarship; Jayavaman VII introduced Mahayana
Buddhism as the court religion by the end of the 12th
century. Layered onto these concepts was the tradition of
deification of kings in sculptural form. This mix resulted in
Angkorian structures that have no parallel, such as the fantastic
South Gate of Angkor Thom and the bizarre Bayon.
ANGKORIAN ARCHITECTURE
How were the colossal works constructed? The caste system of the
Khmers was similar to the hierarchy extant in ancient Egypt and
Mexico when the Pharaohs and Maya erected their Pyramids. There was
a line of kings, a class of priests and merchants, and a caste of
thousands of slaves (captives of war), laborers, masons, sculptors,
and decorators. Artisans, including architects, belonged to the
lower echelons of society. They remain anonymous-nothing is know of
the stone masons and sculptors who worked for the Angkorian kings.
Wooden buildings in Angkor area have not survived. The use of brick
or stone was reserved for sacred temples and monuments. Architects
must have worked with priests on the design of such buildings: a
number of temple-mountains representing the paradise of Mount Meru,
center of the universe in Hindu-Buddhist commonly. Rigidly geometric
and symmetric pattern radiating in concentric circles compose the
ground of plans of a number of Angkor buildings. The effect is
similar to a mandala or sacred diagram of the cosmos, with Mount
Meru at the centre. To translate these concepts into
three-dimensional form, Angkor’s architects probably worked from wax
models.
East Angkor buildings were made of large bricks, with mortar of
vegetable–based adhesive. From the 10th century on
sandstone foundations were laid, and laterite was used in walls.
Laterite is a red, porous material that is actually a kind of
iron-bearing soil. It is easily quarried up, cut into large blocks,
then left to harden upon exposure to the air. Angkor Wat and Angkor
Thom rest on laterite foundations; the temples were mostly fashioned
from sandstone quarried at Phnom Kulen, 45 km northeast of Angkor.
The sandstone exhibits a wide range of coloration, from gray to
pinkish, yellowish buff to greenish. The sandstone was floated down
the Siem Reap river and dragged to the building site using ropes,
roller, and winches. A bas-relief in the west inner gallery of the
Bayon depicts the hauling and polishing of sandstone. The roughly
dressed blocks were perfectly fitted, smoothed off, and the surfaces
decorated with bas-reliefs. Some stones were held in place with
bronze clamps, others relied entirely on gravity.
WHAT SURVIVED?
The name of “Angkor” surfaced in the 16th century - the
place was called Anjog, Onco, Anckoor, Ongcor, Angcor, and Vat Nokor
by Western explores. Angkor is believed to be a corruption of the
Khmer Nokor (nakhon in Thai, and nagara in Sanskrit), meaning
the Royal City of the Khmer Empire. It was built between the 9th
and 14th centuries as the administrative and religious
center of the powerful Khmer Empire. Bas-reliefs like those at the
Bayon and Angkor Wat provide clues about life at Angkor.
This capital of the Khmer Empire, was undoubtedly as splendid as
many European cities. But much is missing today. No wooden buildings
have survived, and all the residential compounds have disappeared.
In 1431 the conquering Siamese killed, looted, and destroyed,
carrying off thousands of slaves, tripping the palaces and temples
of their statuary and ornaments encrusted with precious stones, and
removing the gold coatings from towers and rooftops. Gone are the
wooden palaces and dwellings with their terracotta roof tiles; gone
are the sumptuous carpets and furnishings, Chinese pottery and
ceramics, bronze weapons and cult objects, jewelry and utensils,
silk beds and parasols.
What remains are the huge sandstone blocks that could not be carted
away. Some artifacts-statuary, jewelry, ritual objects-are on
display at the National Museum in PhnomPenh. The rest-the vast
kingdom peopled by priests, celestial dancers, astronomers,
ministers, and generals, and the court of Angkor with its banquets,
music, dancing, rich tapestries and paintings, merchants coming and
going-is left for you to conjure. In the haunting contrast between
past grandeur and present decay lies the perverse pleasure of ruins.
ANGKOR HIGHLIGHTS
You could spend an entire week in Angkor, sunup to sundown, and
still not see it all. Siem Reap itself is slow-paced and relaxing,
with reasonable restaurants and lots of countryside. It’s a good
place to sit on the front porch, swap tales with other travelers,
and watch the geckos climb the walls.
Angkor and Siem Reap are the kind of places you have to tear
yourself away from. If your time is short, concentrate on the two
main complexes, Angkor Wat and Angkor Thom. Options vary on the
rest; everybody seems to have a personal favorite.
The soundest advice on touring Angkor is, in a word, variety. Avoid
concentrations on a series of temples in the same style, as your may
become blasé and won’t be able to remember one from the other later.
Angkor Wat is very different in style from Angkor Thom, and the
jungle-locked ruins of Ta Prohm and Preah Khan are worlds away
again. For a different perspective, hike up to a viewpoint, or visit
an artificial lake like Neak Pean. With more time you can spend a
day at the ruins, then take a day to visit the rural areas around
Siem Reap.
Following are the star sites :
Angkor Wat
: Large and classical, this awesome site is the world’s largest
temple, with the world’s longest bas-relief panels. On the second
terrace are friezes of celestial dancers. Expect to spend at least
half a day here, or make several visits.
Angkor Thom
:
This cluster of sites is another must-see, and will again easily
consume at least half a day. The spectacular South Gate is the
best-preserved entry to Angkor Thom. The central temple, the Bayon,
is small in scale, but bizarre, mysterious, and imaginative-the
favorite of many visitors. North of the Bayon are fine friezes at
the Leper King terrace.
Aerial Views
: A
hike up Phnom Bakheng affords fine sunset views of Angkor Wat. North
of the Bayon is a hike to a hilltop behind Baphuon temple. Both
hilltops give you a sense of jungle and forest vegetation.
Jungle-locked Ruins
: Preah Khan and Ta Prohm are romantic and spooky sites, covered by
centuries of vegetation. The French left Ta Prohm untouched to give
an impression of how Angkor looked in the 19th century,
with tree roots and foliage winding through the stonework.
Artificial Lakes :
To
get an idea of the waterworks in the Angkor region, visit the
ceremonial bathing sites of Neak Pean and Sra Srang or journey to
the West Baray for boating or swimming.
Rural
Living
: Take a road in any direction from Siem Reap and you’re in the
countryside. Best excursions are 13 km east to Rolous, where you can
view village life, or 15 km south to Lake Tonle Sap to see floating
houses waving over fish-holding pens.
ANGKOR ROUTE STRATEGIES
Angkor Archaeological Park consists of 70 ruins in an area of 200
square km, although the key ruins are clustered in a zone of some 60
square km. The French engineered routes of hard-packed earth around
the Angkor area in the 1920s to facilitate visits by car. Several
roads were later paved, and dubbed Le Petit Circuit (The Little
Circuit) and Le Grand Circuit (the Grand Circuit), but there are
really no set patterns. You can mix and match, or come up with your
own routes.
Start early. The heat of the day can get to you even by 09.00.
Fortunately there are well-shaded sections, especially around the
Bayon, and if you move along by bicycle or motorcycle you get some
breeze. It’s a good idea to take a siesta in a cool spot : find a
food stall selling noodles (the biggest collection of foodstalls is
opposite the main gates to Angkor) from 1100-1400, or just go back
to town and rest. Dawn and dusk add special magic to Angkor. Angkor
Wat at the break of dawn is awesome. A little later, at the Bayon,
it’s misty and mysterious, with the sun filtering through the forest
canopy, illuminating enigmatic smiling faces; the chirping of birds
breaks the silence. The last glows of the setting sun over Angkor
Wat are dramatic, viewed from either the causeway or the viewpoint
of Phnom Bakheng. Then sound the frogs and cicadas, the birds and
the bats.
Angkor Wat is overwhelming. The mind cannot take it in at one visit.
Neither will your camera-attempts to fit Angkor into a standard lens
viewfinder are frustrating. Angkor can monopolize your time,
consuming half a day or more. You’re better off making several
visits to Angkor Wat. Drop in and walk down the causeway to get
acquainted, then take off to smaller ruins up north like the Bayon,
and maybe return to Angkor Wat in the late afternoon to take in a
bit more.
Limiting factors on routes are available time, hot spells,
transportation, and road conditions. The best road conditions are
found going north from Angkor Wat to Preah Khan an the northern
axis, and east from Baphuon to Ta Prohm on an eastern axis. Other
roads are in bad shape and potholed, slowing progress. Some ideas
for routes follow, but you can chop, change, or add destinations to
suit.
In a car you can cover the Little Circuit in an hour of actual
travel time; by bicycle, you’ll need 2.5 hours for the same route.
From the Grand Hotel to the west entrance of Angkor Wat is seven km.
For the following routes, the start and finish point in Siem Reap is
the Grand Hotel.
Northern Axis :
Siem
Reap (Grand Hotel), Angkor Thom (South gate, Bayon, Baphuon, Leper
King Terrace), Preah Khan, back south to Angkor Wat west entrance,
Phnom Bakheng (sunset), Siem Reap. Distance : 29 km.
Little Circuit :
Siem
Reap, Angkor Wat west gate, Bayon, Victory Gate, Takeo, Ta Prohm,
Sra Srang, Angkor Wat east entrance, Siem Reap. Distance : 30 km.
North
and East Axis :
Siem
Reap, Angkor Wat west entrance, Bayon, Preah Khan, back to Leper
King Terrace, Victory Gate, Chau Say Tevoda, Takeo, Ta Prohm,
retrace route to Elephant Terrace, Angkor Wat again, Siem Reap. This
erratic route is designed to take advantage of the best road
conditions, especially if cycling. Distance : 38 km; if Preah Khan
is eliminated, 32 km.
Grand
Circuit :
Siem
Reap, Angkor Wat, Angkor Thom (South Gate, Bayon, Baphuon, Leper
King Terrace), Preah Khan, Neak Pean, Sra Srang, Angkor Wat east
entrance, Siem Reap. Distance : 40 km.Combination Circuit :
Siem
Reap, Angkor Thom (South gate, Bayon, Leper King Terrace), Preah
Khan, Neak Pean, Sra Srang, Ta Prohm, Victory Gate, Elephant
Terrace, Angkor Wat west entrance, Siem Reap. Distance : 45 km.
|
|
