<<
>>

Downfall of the Empire

The collapse of Angkorean civilization and the dismemberment of the Khmer Empire began in the fourteenth century, but this was a piecemeal process, with multiple causes. One of these was the arrival of the Thai from south China, one of a number of peoples pushed south in a ripple effect by the Mongol conquests.

We have already seen Thai mercenaries in the twelfth-century reliefs of Angkor Wat. Taking on many of the trappings of Khmer culture (such as writing, Hindu- Brahmanism and the Buddhist religion, art and architecture, music and dance, and the institutions of state power), they rapidly expanded into the Khorat Plateau and the basin of the Chao Praya River, where they established in succes­sion the cities of Sukhotaya and Ayutthaya. According to the Thai royal chron­icles, they took and sacked Angkor in 1341, although this date is questioned by some scholars.

To the northeast, the Lao, close kin to the Thai, overran Khmer territory, and built their capital, Luang Prabang, on the Mekong. Concurrently, Khmer and Cham lands in what is now Vietnam were absorbed by the Dai Viet state. Kambujadesa or Cambodia was now a very small state.

While these geopolitical changes were taking place, Thera vada Buddhism arrived in mainland Southeast Asia, and rapidly became the state religion of all its inhabitants except the Cham, the Vietnamese, and tribal peoples. The Khmer Empire had gone through a paroxysm of anti-Mahayana iconoclasm following the death of the great Jayavarman VII, but this Hindu extremism was not to last long. Compared to Mahayana (“Great Vehicle”) Buddhism, Theravada or Hinayana (“Lesser Vehicle”) Buddhism as developed in Sri Lanka is a conscious return to the sayings and precepts of the Founder, Siddharta Gautama Buddha. Unlike ei­ther Hinduism or Mahayana Buddhism, Theravada is strongly congregational in nature and is centered upon communities of mendicant monks.

With its advent in Angkor and other Khmer cities, there was no longer any need for stone temples, and these fell into ruin, to be replaced by monasteries and meeting halls of wood and tile.

Only the great, once-Hindu complex of Angkor Wat and its moat-surrounded “island” remained in use, now as a Theravada Buddhist temple right through the post-Angkorean period down to our own time, and while much of the city was progressively abandoned, it continued to receive the attention of devout Buddhist pilgrims from as far as China and Japan.

One further cause of the decline of the empire, and especially its capital, was partly cultural and partly climatic. During the height of the empire, Angkor was a vast dispersed-urban complex in which as many as 750,000 people were supported by the rice production of fields irrigated from an enormous system of reservoirs and canals.[1250] As archaeologists of the Greater Angkor Project have proved, in time the deforestation of the forest cover in the Kulen hills to the northeast, as they became densely urbanized, had led to extensive siltation and flooding, with which the king and his engineers were less and less able to cope.[1251] Concurrently with these failures of the water management system, mainland Southeast Asia suffered severe megadroughts in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries; tree ring records from the Vietnam highlands and a core taken in the West Baray of Angkor have demonstrated the occurrence of these ecological events.[1252]

As result, Angkor was largely abandoned, and the capital moved southeast to several successive sites on the Tonle Sap River, and finally to Phnom Penh on the Mekong. By the seventeenth century, due to its position with ready access to the trading ports of the South China Sea and Indonesia, Cambodia was tied in to what has been termed the “Age of Commerce.” The country had lost its empire and the glories of Angkor, but was reasonably prosperous. Unfortunately, how­ever, its area shrank even further as it became an unwilling pawn between the rival courts of Siam (Thailand) and Vietnam. Only the arrival of the French in the mid-nineteenth century saved it from being swallowed up altogether by its powerful neighbors.

<< | >>
Source: Bang Peter F., Bayly C.A., Scheidel Walter (eds.). The Oxford World History of Empire. Volume Two: The History of Empires. Oxford University Press,2020. — 1352 p.. 2020

More on the topic Downfall of the Empire:

  1. The Achaemenid Persian Empire was something new in history: a hyper-power without serious rival, a world empire on an unprecedented scale.
  2. An overseas empire gained is not necessarily an empire retained.
  3. Historians have traditionally regarded the Ottoman Empire's failed second siege of Vienna in 1683 as a turning point in the empire's long history, bringing to an end centuries of military success and expansion.
  4. Roman law entered medieval political reflection in the late elev­enth century as the law of the universal Roman empire, an organization foretold by Old Testament prophecy as the last empire to rule the world before Apocalypse and hallowed by Christ himself who had lived under the Caesars.
  5. The Qing Empire (1636-1912) was one of a set of very large, long-lived Eurasian empires ofthe early modern period, and like any ofits contemporaries the empire raises a number of questions regarding the sources of its stability, expansion, and durability.
  6. The Austrian Empire
  7. The Other(Secular) Empire
  8. Britain and empire
  9. Conclusion: A Christian Empire
  10. Ur III Empire
  11. Durability of Empire: The Self-Reinforcing Bundle
  12. THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF EMPIRE-BUILDING
  13. The Byzantine Empire and Its Attitude toward Kievan Rus'
  14. The Rise of the Ottoman Empire
  15. The Ottoman Empire and Its Dissolution
  16. Sargonic Empire
  17. Pax Britannica: from empire to peace
  18. 1900: The Dilemma of Empire