The Reign of Suryavarman I and Royal Factionalism at Angkor

Was Suryavarman I (1002−49) (សូរ្យវរ្ម័នទី១, posthumously known as Nirvanapada) of Malay origin (from Tambranlinga), inclined to tie privileged relations with the Chola Kingdom (Tamilnadu, South India), or a legitimate heir to the founders of Angkor? In this fascinating essay, author Michael Vickery takes us back to the two first centuries of the Angkorean Kingdom, revisiting scriptuary and written sources, as well as assertions made by illustrious Khmerologists such as G. Coedès, L.P. Briggs or P. Stern.

The author brings up some important insights about the passation of power in early Angkor, noting: ​‘The succession of kings in the first two centuries of Angkor, rather than indicating parallel dynasties, or cases of simple usurpation, suggests such a rotation of kingship among lineage branches, marred by attempts at ​‘usurpation’ when Yasovarman and Jayavarman IV attempted to secure succession for their sons rather than allowing the throne to pass to brothers or cousins or nephews. In these cases, then, the definition of ​‘usurper’ and ​‘legitimate successor’ is the opposite of the conventional view. In particular, Jayavarman IV, long viewed by modem scholars as the Angkorean usurper par excellence, now appears as legitimate successor to Yasovarman, and the seemingly conflicting statements about his family position are only made coherent by the hypothesis that he was grandson of Indravarman via Mahendradevi.’

He goes on:​‘Thus in the factional conflicts of the early 11^th century, Suryavarman and his supporters were legitimate heirs of Indravarman’s branch of the extended royal family, Jayaviravarman represented another branch now lost from the records but possibly apparent in the earlier Jayaviravarman of Prasat Kravan, and the aristocratic families opposed to Suryavarman and claiming descent from Jayavarman II were of still another branch which had been relegated to non-royal bureaucratic status ever since the throne passed from Jayavarman III to Indravarman.’

The author also remarks that Suryavarman I more or less followed ​‘the rather cyclical pattern of development (recognized by Philippe Stern), a regular order of priorities in the construction activities of four of the great Angkor reigns — Indravarman (877−89), Yasovarman (889−900), Rajendravarman (944−68) and Jayavarman VII. Each of these reigns began with some kind of public works, usually large reservoirs (Indravarman, Yasovarman, Jayavarman), or the rehabilitation of the capital, including its waterworks (Rajendravarman). Then they built ancestral temples in honour of their immediate ancestors, and finally a temple mountain for the worship of the central state cult.’