Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T11:45:11.159Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Devarāja

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

I. W. Mabbett
Get access

Extract

The ideas of the ancient Khmers about the connection between kings and gods, as known from sources bearing on the Angkorian kingdom, have received considerable attention from modern scholars. As early as 1904, Aymonier in the third volume of his history described the cult of the Devarāja as “une sorte de déification aux divinités brahmaniques, des rois et même des personnages de distinction, hommes ou femmes, qui érigent des temples ou contribuent d'une façon quelconque à rehausser le culte de ces divinités.” The stele of Sdok Kak Thom, edited by E. F. Aymonier in 1901, by L. Finot in 1915, and again by G. Coedès and P. Dupont in 1946, is particularly important in yielding fragmentary information about the history of the devarāja cult, and the introduction to the last-named of these editions contains a discussion of the cult, which appears to link the person of a king to the god Siva, or some other. G. Coedès has discussed aspects of royal divinity in several places, his most general and best-known account of the subject, originally presented as “Cultes Personnels à l'Epoque du Bayon” appearing as the third chapter of Pour mieux comprendre Angkor. The scholarly literature describing the statuary and architecture of the Angkor monuments abounds in references to the apparent deification of kings and their relatives, as represented in statues and in titles attributed to them. J. Filliozat's notable study of the symbolism of the Bakheng may be mentioned as an example of the attention which has been devoted to Khmer architecture as a reflection of ideas associating a king with a god. Among other relevant discussions, J. Przyluski's views on the nature. of the Angkorian monuments and B. P. Groslier's analysis of the kings' religious functions in the light of their social, political and economic rôles may be mentioned here. The representation of kings as gods is a theme commonly recognized in Angkorian studies, and even in other periods of Khmer history. A comparatively recent article suggests the existence of the “god-king” in pre-Angkorian times.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian History , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , May 1969 , pp. 202 - 223
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1969

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Aymonier, E. F., Le Cambodge Vol. III (Paris, 1904) p. 582.Google Scholar

2. Aymonier, E. F., J.A. 1901, pp. 5 ff.Google Scholar

3. Finot, L., B.E.F.E.O. Vol. XV (1915) pp 277 ffGoogle Scholar

4. G. Coedès and P Dupont, ibid. Vol. XLIII (1943–46) pp. 57–134.

5. Goedès, G., “The Cult of Deified Royalty, Source of Inspiration of the Great Monuments of Angkor” in Art and Letters Vol. XXVI, pt. I. (1952) pp. 51–53Google Scholar; “Note sur l'apothéose au Cambodge” in B.C.A.I. 1911, pp. 38–49Google Scholar; “La Divinisation de la Royanté dans l'Ancien Royaume Khmer à l'Epoque d'Angkor” in Proceedings of the Seventh Congress of the History of Religions) (Amsterdam, 1951), pp. 141–142Google Scholar; “La Destination Funéraire des Grands Monuments Khmèrs” (Etudes Cambodgiennes, XXXIII) in B.E.F.E.O. Vol. XL (1940) pp. 315–343Google Scholar, “Angkor Vat, Temple ou Tombeau” in B.E.F.E.O. Vol. XXXIII (1933) pp. 303–309.Google Scholar

6. idemPour Mieux Comprendre Angkor (Paris, 1947).Google Scholar

7. Filliozat, J, “Le Symbolisme du Monument de Phnom Bakheng” in B.E.F.E.O. Vol. XLIV, pt. 2 (1954) pp. 527–54Google Scholar

8. Przyluski, J., “Pradakṣina et Prasavya en Indochine,” in Festschrift für M. Winternitz zum 70 ten Geburtstag, 1933, pp. 326–332Google Scholar; “Is Angkor Vat a Temple or a Tomb?” in Journal of the Indian Society of Oriental Art, Coomaraswamy volume (1937) pp. 131–34.Google Scholar

9. Groslier, B. P., Angkor et le Cambodge au 16e Siècle d'après les Sources Portuguaises et Espagnoles (Paris, 1958) pp. 107–21.Google Scholar

10. Bhattacharya, K., “Hari Kambujendra” in Artibus Asiae, Vol. XXVII (1964–1965) pp. 72–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11. Aymonier, E. F., op.cit. pp. 581 f.Google Scholar

12. Coedès, G. and Dupont, P., op.cit. p. 103, n. 3.Google Scholar

13. Sdok Kak Thom Stele verse LXXV.

14. Coedès, G. and Dupont, P., op. cit. p. 87 (line 56)Google Scholar

15. ibid. p. 103, n. 3.

16. ibid. p. 87, 11.73 f

17. ibid. p. 88, 11.80–82

18. Coedès, G., Inscriptions du Cambodge (Paris, 1937/1966), pp. 47–71 at p 48 (k. 188, 1.1).Google Scholar

19. ibid. (k. 189).

20. Coedès, G “Le Site de Janapada d'après une Inscription de Prasat Khna” in B.E.F.E.O. Vol. XLIII (1943–1946) pp. 8–11 at p. 10 (1. 9).Google Scholar

21. idem.Inscriptions du Cambodge Vol. I (Hanoi, 1937), pp. 17–31.Google Scholar

22. Coedès, G. and Dupont, P., op. cit. p. 87 (11.71–73).Google Scholar

23. Mus, P., “Cultes Indiens et Indigènes au Champa” in B.E.F.E.O. Vol. XXXIII (1933), pp. 367–410.Google Scholar

24. Groslier, B. P., op. cit. p. 116Google Scholar. “De même, croyons-nous, la religion fondamentale de la société Khmère, sous son brillant manteau indien, rut le culte des eaux et du sol: Et, au moins à l'origine, le rôle du roi-dieu était d'ordonner ce culte en tant que maître du sol.”

25. Coedès, G., “The Cult of Deified Royalty, Source of inspiration of the Great Monuments of Angkor”, in Art and Letters, vol. XXVI, pt. 1 (1952) pp. 51–53.Google Scholar

26. idem. “La Date du Bayon” (Etudes Cambodgiennes, XIX) in B.E.F.E.O. Vol XXVIII (1928) pp. 81–112 at p. 105.Google Scholar

27. ibid. p. 100.

28. Groslier, B. P., loc.cit.Google Scholar

29. Filliozat, J., op. cit. pp. 532–37.Google Scholar

30. von Heine-Geldern, R., Conceptions of State and Kingship in Southeast AsiaGoogle Scholar, Southeast Asia Program Data Paper No. 18, Ithaca, 1956.

31. Filliozat, J., op. cit.Google Scholar

32. ibid. p. 549.

33. Groslier, B. P., op cit. p. 115.Google Scholar

34. Cedès, G., “La Destination Funéraire des Grands Monuments Khmèrs” in B.E.F.E.O. Vol. XL (1940) pp. 315–543 at p. 343.Google Scholar

35. See Bhattacharya, K., op. cit.Google Scholar, Coedès, G., “The Cult of Deified Royalty, Source of Inspiration of the Great Monuments of Angkor” in Art and Letters Vol. XXVI. pt. 1 (1952) pp. 51–53 at p. 52.Google Scholar

36. Coedès, G. and Dupont, P., op. cit. p. 64.Google Scholar

37. See Briggs, I. P., The Ancient Khmer Empire (Philadephia, 1951) p. 90.Google Scholar

38. Barth, A, Inscriptions Sanscrites du Cambodge. No. 18: (Práh Nôk) D. 27, p. 157.Google Scholar

39. Coedès, G., “La Destination Funéraire des Grands Monuments Khmèrs” in B.E.F.E.O. Vol. XL (1940), pp. 315–343 at p: 326, n. 4;Google Scholar

40. Coedès, G. and Dupont, P., op. cit. p: 87 (1, 69).Google Scholar

41. ibid, p. 86 (vv. CXX-CXXII).

42. Aymonier, E.F., op. cit. Vol. III, p. 584.Google Scholar

43. Coedès, G., Pour Mieux Comprendre Angkor (Paris, 1947) pp. 46ff.Google Scholar

44. idem., Inscriptions du Cambodge (Paris, 1937/1966) Vol. II, pp. 161–181.Google Scholar

45. Goedès, G., “Etudes Cambodgiennes, XIX La Date du Bayon”, Appendix, in B.E.F.E.O, Vol. XXVIII (1928), pp. 104–112.Google Scholar

46. Coedès, G., Inscriptions du Cambodge (Paris 1937/1966) Vol. II, pp. 161–181, v.LXXIX.Google Scholar

47. idem., “La Destination Funéraire des Grands Monuments Khmès' in B.E.F.E.O. Vol. XL (1940), pp. 315–343 at pp. 324ff.Google Scholar

48. ibid. pp. 325f.

49. ibid. p. 325.

50. Coedès, G. and Dupont, P., op. cit. p: 78 (v.XXI).Google Scholar

51. Filliozat, J., op. cit. p. 553.Google Scholar

52. ibid. pp. 549f.

53. Groslier, B. P., op. cit., p. 115:Google Scholar

54. ibid..

55. On the prosaieness of divinity in India see Spellman, J. W., Political Theory of Ancient India (Oxford, 1964) pp. 40–42.Google Scholar