Home   l    The Authors   l    Forewords   l    Gallery   l    Reviews   l    Press   l    Order

This head represents Vishnu, the Hindu god of creation, identified by his tall cylindrical miter. One row of curls emerges from under the miter over his forehead, increasing in size down either side of his face. Three rows of long corkscrew curls hang down in back over the nape of his neck. Half-open eyes, curved eyebrows that run together to form a continuous line, and a sensual mouth with full lips define his face. Distended earlobes that are pierced may have once been adorned with real earrings.

This head is carved in what has traditionally been referred to as Phnom Da style A.1 It would have belonged to a torso similar to that of the Vishnu from Tuol Dai Buon, Prei Veng, in the National Museum of Cambodia.2 The head and Tuol Dai Buon torso date to the early seventh century in the revised dating scheme proposed by Dowling and Woodward.3 The remains of stone struts that would have been attached to the arms are visible on the back of the miter. The stone displays clear evidence of selective erosion that develops on the surface of ancient sculpture over a long period of time.4

1. Boisselier 1955, text vol., p. 101, pl. XXI:3.
2. Khun Samen 2002, p. 75; Dalsheimer 2001, pp. 82–83.
3. See discussion in chapter one and chapter four, in the present publication; Dowling 1999; and Woodward 2003, pp. 54, 58–59.
4. Stereomicroscopic examination has revealed an eroded surface and pronounced preferential erosion with large gray-green erosion-resistant mineral inclusions.

This graceful image of Lakshmi displays high rounded youthful breasts and wide hips that sway slightly to the right, giving her a pleasing naturalistic beauty. Her almond-shaped eyes are open with incised circular pupils and her full sensuous lips have an incised inner line. Her ornate chignon is formed by loops of hair that have been braided and looped both horizontally and vertically, an elaboration of earlier Pre-Angkor hair-styles. Her clothing consists of a long sampot that has a folded-over fan-shaped extension in front and a tapered triangular end on the right hip, a way of tying the sampot that anticipates the more complex drapery style of the late ninth century.1

The figure is broken off at the ankles and is missing the feet and rectangular stone base. There is no evidence of struts or an arch support for this figure, but the space between the legs below the sampot was not cut out and would have served as a support for the weight of the figure. The broken remains of this support device are still visible below the sampot.

Lakshmi is the consort of Vishnu and one of the major Hindu goddesses. The arms and half-closed hands of the Lakshmi here are each positioned to hold the stem of a lotus, the attribute by which she is often identified. A third eye marks her forehead, an indication of her spiritual perfection. The image is unadorned, but her pierced earlobes suggest that actual jewelry may have been used to adorn her during religious ceremonies.

The present Lakshmi image is reported to have come from the same site as the Vishnu figure (no. 24). It has been suggested that this pair may represent a royal couple in the guise of Vishnu and Lakshmi, a phenomenon known to have occurred in Khmer art, associated with an indigenous Khmer ancestor cult that was absorbed into Hinduism and Buddhism.2 The present image is the only existing Kulen-style female figure known. When first found, the head was broken off, revealing the original darker gray color of the stone, before polishing and ultimate weathering changed it to a lighter, softer gray (no. 25b).3

1. Boisselier 1966, p. 245, fig. 57:f.
2. We are very grateful to Hab Touch of the National Museum in Phnom Penh for this suggestion.
3. Stereomicroscopic examination has revealed considerable preferential erosion with large corrosion-resistant gray-green mineral inclusions. There are red-brown rootlets and fine root fragments embedded in the adhering soil. The lower part of the back shows more extensive weathering than the rest of the sculpture. The type of stone and its condition are indistinguishable from those of the Vishnu (no. 24).

This impressive seated Ganesha represents the best of the magnificent stone sculptures produced for Lingapura, Jayavarman IV’s famous capital at present-day Koh Ker. Ganesha, the elephant-headed son of Shiva and Parvati, was a major deity in the Hindu pantheon of India dating back to Vedic times. He was first represented in Cambodia in the seventh century, and became enormously popular.1 He is universally loved as the remover of obstacles and is worshipped throughout the population, even today, before the start of new ventures or a journey. As the son of Shiva, Ganesha may have had an additional importance for Jayavarman IV.

Ganesha is clothed in a short pleated sampot can kpin and adorned with lavishly carved jewelry consisting of a pectoral with pendants front and back, armlets, bracelets, body band, and a diadem tied in back with a square knot. Two jeweled bands adorn Ganesha’s trunk. An iron pin that must have held the left tusk in place remains, but the tusk is gone.

The present image is typical of Angkor-period Ganeshas that are portrayed with anthropomorphic features, wear Khmer male garments, and are adorned with jewelry.2 The sculptor who created this impressive image was extremely talented. He has ingeniously caught the spirit of an elephant by representing certain details, such as wrinkle lines suggesting rolls of skin, and yet has managed to present him in an anthropomorphic guise that is typically Khmer.

Another Koh Ker–style Ganesha shown seated on a tiered square base was found in the center of a sanctuary at Prasat Bak by Parmentier in 1939, but has since disappeared.3 The Prasat Bak Ganesha holds his broken-off tusk in the right hand and a sweet in the left. The present Ganesha may have held the same attributes.

1. Jessup et al. 1997, p. 180, no. 26.
2. Son 2000, p. 8.
3. Parmentier 1939, pl. XXIX, pp. 74–75, fig. 15.

This superb four-armed male image represents Vishnu, one of the most revered deities in the Hindu pantheon. The marvelous contrast here between the smooth bare surface of the skin and the richly decorated surfaces of the chignon-cover, diadem, nape cover, and pleated sampot is characteristic of the best Khmer sculpture. The deity is shown standing with the right foot positioned a little further forward than the left foot, a feature found on many Khmer male images. The arms are broken off and there are no hand-held attributes, but a broken stump on the base next to the left foot remains from the tip of the mace that would have rested there. The ankles have been left thickened behind to give support to the weight of the figure that would have been supplemented by the mace.

The deity is clothed in a sampot can kpin, the distinctive Khmer male garment, with a series of wide, scalloped pleats arranged on the left thigh. A scarf ends in two pleated fishtail-shaped panels in front, the upper one shorter than the lower one. A sampot can kpin arranged in a similar way is worn by the Hayagriva image from Sambor Prei Kuk in the Mus้e Guimet.1 The ornate three-tiered chignon-cover and the style of the nape-cover are also typical of the Pre Rup–style Sambor Prei Kuk Hayagriva image.2 The slightly arched eyebrows and sensual full lips anticipate certain features of the Khleang style dated to the first half of the eleventh century, as displayed by the Khleang–style Vishnu in the Mus้e Guimet.3 By comparison, eyebrows in the Pre Rup style are always represented by one continuous ridge, as they are on a Vishnu image in the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (no. 55). The nipples on the present Vishnu are each indicated by two indented concentric circles surrounded by numerous tiny indented dots, the same way as the nipples are described on the Khleang-style Vishnu in the Mus้e Guimet.4

The diadem is tied with what appears to be a square knot. An almost identical knot attaches the ends of the diadem worn by a female image dating to the third quarter of the tenth century (no. 62) and another Vishnu image dating to the early-eleventh-century Khleang style (no. 68).

The present Vishnu represents a style that is a continuation of the Pre Rup style combined with features that anticipate the Khleang style that developed early in the eleventh century. For these reasons, it would seem prudent to date this Vishnu image to the last quarter of the tenth century, and to recognize that stylistic terminology used in the past is not always adequate to explain the wide-ranging Khmer examples that have recently come to light. A male torso recently acquired by the National Museum in Phnom Penh has a sampot can kpin tied in almost the same way as that on the present sculpture and is tentatively dated to the late tenth century.5

The figure is superbly carved, and parts of it,  the sampot, may have been painted, since that surface has undergone less polishing. Markings, such as , on the base may represent sculptors’ marks, as they occur regularly on the corners and in the middle of the sides of the base.6

1. Le Bonheur 1974, pl. 4.
2. Ibid.
3. Jessup et al. 1997, p. 239, no. 57.
4. Ibid.
5. Porte 2002, no. 3057.
6. Stereomicroscopic examination has revealed a highly polished fine-grained sandstone. The surface shows slight but distinct weathering and preferential erosion. The surface of the sampot shows a less polished surface with more extensive preferential erosion. There is surface separation (“blistering”) on the outside of the proper right ankle.

This lovely standing female image represents the Buddhist deity Prajnaparamita, “Perfection of Wisdom” and “Mother of the Buddhas.” The deity is clothed in a long unpleated sampot with a folded panel in front and a cloth sash. According to an inscription,1 “the main divinity of the temple of Ta Prohm was a statue with a proper name [of] Sri Jayarajacudamani . . . the image was both a manifestation of the king’s mother and a manifestation of the mother of Buddhas”; in other words, she was the deity Prajnaparamita, who is identified by the tiny Amitabha Buddha on her chignon-cover.2

Numerous images of Prajnaparamita honoring Jayavarman VII’s mother exist in collections around the world, both in Phnom Penh and abroad, including a very similar example in the Denver Art Museum (fig. 11.6). Such images were apparently made and placed in sacred sites throughout the Empire, as were kneeling Prajnaparamita images (no. 103). None of these examples are as well finished and polished as some of the earlier Khmer sculptures, suggesting that the labor of producing numerous examples of one image precluded the superb craftsmanship found on images that were not mass-produced.3

It has long been thought that standing female images, such as the present one, represent Sri Jayarajadevi, the first wife of Jayavarman VII, but it is doubtful that Jayarajadevi would have been represented in two different ways, one humbly kneeling and one proudly standing. The kneeling Prajnaparamita (no. 103) is intended to commemorate the humility of Jayarajadevi, pious wife of Jayavarman VII, and the present standing image honors his mother, obviously a proud and regal woman. It is interesting to note that the present image that represents Jayavarman VII’s mother has pierced ears for statuary jewelry, and the kneeling Prajnaparamita, representing his pious wife, Jayarajadevi, does not have pierced ears in consideration of her ascetic nature (no. 103).

Both the present image and the kneeling Prajnaparamita are idealized portraits reflecting acceptable female images of the day, as well as representing a continuation of the pre-Indic cult of deified ancestors, a particular Khmer characteristic that has been almost obscured by Buddhist iconography. Numerous examples of standing Prajnaparamita images exist from the late twelfth century, including one found at Banteay Chmar in 1937.4 Even Lakshmi and Devi images from this period have the same physical appearance.

1. Woodward 2001, p. 251.
2. Stereomicroscopic examination has revealed a medium-grained sandstone covered with a thin surface deposit that is the cause of the brown color. There is some preferential mineral erosion on the upper half of the sculpture, more extensive preferential erosion on the bottom half. Root marks visible on the surface are the “shadows” of roots that once protected the stone surface from the fine brown soil that covers most of the sculpture. There are many small microbiological deposits, “manganese-oxide” spots, especially on top of clay accretions
3. The Illustrated London News, Sept. 18, 1937, p. 470.
4. Dalsheimer 2001, pp. 164–65

Home   l    The Authors   l    Forewords   l    Gallery   l    Reviews   l    Press   l    Order

For further information or inquiries please contact us directly at info@artmediaresources.com
Design by THIP