Before the late 6th and the early 7th century, the Chinese memoir did not raise the city Dvaravati of Mon located in the Southwest. Naturally, the name of Dvaravati or Tomou city was noted by Chinese people in the early 7th century while Nokor Phnom, Linyi or Champa in the East was being illustrated in details by Chinese historians since the early 3rd century.

Khmer Bronze Buddhist Sculture, The 6-7th Century, Siem Reap Angkor, The Phnom Penh National Museum

Khmer Bronze Buddhist Sculpture,

Mon Influence, the late 7th- early 8th Century, The Plateau Nokor Reach, Thailand

Therefore, the presence of Dvaravati city in the Chinese memoir does not surprise us because it has not been constructed yet. In this case, we could not have studied about the ancient archaeological remainders, Mon’s proof. Furthermore, all social achievements are regarded as the Nokor Phnom or pre-Mon culture so that the appropriate science would be applied.






On top of this, no proof certifies that this region has been developed in that period, but it has been developed after Induisation, the 1st century. The feature of Buddhist iconography, as well as the utilized objects created is similar to the Angkor Borei or Okeo sculpture, being able to connect to Nokor Phnom art. Seeing back the ancient objects from the late 6th to the early 7th century, especially the iconology, we noticed that the culture in the plains of the Chao Praya river are divided into two regionsçthe West river bank and the East river bank. It is the Nokor Dvaravati in the west river bank that the human communities followed Theravada more than Mahayana, whereas most human communities in the East Mekong river followed the Brahmanism rather than Buddhism (M. Tranet).

Generally speaking, most Thai historians regarded the Angkorean Khmer art in Thailand’s provinces as Mon art. In the case of the iconography and ancient objects in Muang Sema city’s surroundings in the present-day



upland Nokor Reach, causing a big confusion. One more thing, like Mr. Bun Keur and Leur Bunoir’s illustration of Mahayana iconography discovered in Thnout village (Ban Thnout), Nokor Reach Sema, and Phnom Khao Blai Bat temple in Yeay Yem’s region, Lahan Sai district, Burirum provinces confusingly called Preah Samret Preah Kon Chey is the pre-Angkorean art in Prei Kmeng artistic style or Kompong Preah from the 7th to 8th century in Chenla period before getting the Mon-artistic influenced from the 8th to 10th century, for instance.

The Khmer Buddha Statue, 120cm In Height, Mon Influence, Burirum (Piriya KRAIRIKSH, 1977. Art Styles In Thailand , Thai Fine Art Dpt).

Fig. 1-3 The Jataka Sculptures in the Pagoda’s Stone pole, The 8-9th Century, The Artistic Style in The Interval Period Between Chenla and Angkor(Koh Ker).

In fact, those 7-9th centuries Buddha statues are Khmer Mahayana and Hinayana art, but not in Vijayana Buddhism, in addition, they have been made in some workshops in the Northeast of the South upland Nokor Reach, the former Khmer territory before the 17th century. It was because of the excellently unique iconography, Thai historians named the Khorat plateau artistic style. It was added that, through our opinion, the plateau Nokor Reach artistic style referred to the pre-Angkorean Buddhist iconography in the first step, before the 8-10th centuries when Khmer had not gotten the Mon artistic influence yet. It meant that the pre-Angkorean art was not the Mon art in Dvaravati, most of which were Hinayana art. On the other hand, Phiriyak Krairuk and Uk Raisi Varaksarin proved that the pre-Angkorean art was the Dvaravati Mon art. In other words, although this region has been in the period’s autonomous territory called Srey Chanasbura, it is located in the border of the Kingdom of Chenla where Khmer people have been living both in the past and in the present.

Fig. 1-3 Buddhism Jataka, Representing The Buddha’s lifetime, carved on the Pagoda Border Pole, Mon Art In The 8-10th Century (NO NA PAKNAM, 1981, The Buddhist Boundary Markers Of Thailand, Bangkok).

short, according to the analysis of iconography sector, we can conclude that the Khmer cultural influence has not covered Mon’s basic origin culture, but Mon culture itself has affected Khmer culture in the second progress from the 8th to 10th centuries, resulting in the combined culture similar to Mon art (M. Tranet).

<< Home