A study on the possible construction order of the temples in Mahendraparvata on the summit of Kulen Mountain, Cambodia, based on brick and sandstone materials
Source abstract
Abstract
The Angkor monument is a group of temples built between the 9th and 15th centuries. Mahendraparvata, the first capital of the Angkor Empire, was built by King Jayavarman II on the summit of Kulen Mountain, ~35 km northeast of Siem Reap, Cambodia. In this study, we investigated the building materials of the 18 temples that make up Mahendraparvata and found that mainly bricks were used in the construction of temples in Mahendraparvata. Gray sandstone, derived from the Phu Kradung Formation (the Red Terrain Formation) of the late Jurassic to early Cretaceous age (distributed in the southeastern foothills of Kulen Mountain and widely used throughout the Angkor monument), was used in small quantities at the door frames, stairs, and lintels of the temples. Chemical composition measured with a portable X-ray fluorescence analyzer and magnetic susceptibility measured with a portable magnetic susceptibility meter were conducted on the brick and sandstone materials, and the thickness of the bricks was also measured. On the basis of the magnetic susceptibility and Rb content of the bricks, the 18 investigated temples were categorized into three groups: Groups A, B, and C. The Rb content of the gray sandstone revealed that Group A differs from Groups B and C. Temples in Group A, namely Prasat O Phaong, Prasat Khmum, and Prasat Kraham (I & II), are aligned in a straight line, and Prasat O Phaong, Prasat Rong Chen, and Prasat O Top are also aligned in a straight line. The intersection of these two lines is at Prasat O Phaong. This suggests a possible relationship among the temples in Group A. Temples in Group A tend to be in better condition than those in other groups. The thickness of the bricks used in the temples of Mahendraparvata is between the thickness of bricks used in the Sambor Prei Kuk monument from the pre-Angkorian period and those of the temples of Hariharalaya, the next capital after Mahendraparvata. During these periods, there was an overall trend of decreasing brick thickness over time, suggesting a technical connection among these monuments.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Archaeological Research and Protection · Building materials and conservation · Cultural Heritage Materials Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (26)
Show source-provided references
1. Evans, D. et al. Comprehensive archaeological map of the world’s largest preindustrial settlement complex at Angkor, Cambodia. PNAS 104, 14277–14282 (2007).10.1073/pnas.0702525104 ↗
2. Chevance, J. B. Inscriptions du Phnom Kulen: corpus existant et inscriptions incrédites, une mise encontexte. Bull. de l’École française d’Extrême-Orient 100, 201–230 (2014).10.3406/befeo.2014.6173 ↗
3. Penny, D., Chevance, B. P., Tang, D. & De Greef, S. The environmental impact of Cambodia’s ancient city of Mahendraparvata (Phnom Kulen). PLoS ONE 9, e84252 (2014).10.1371/journal.pone.0084252 ↗
4. Chevance, B. P. Banteay, palais royal de Mahendraparvata. Asèanie 33, 279–330 (2015).
5. Evans, D. et al. Uncovering archaeological landscapes at Angkor using lidar. PNAS 110, 12595–12600 (2013).10.1073/pnas.1306539110 ↗
6. Evans, D. Airbone laser scanning as a method for exploring long-term socio-ecological dynamics in Cambodia. J. Archaeol. Sci. 74, 164–175 (2016).10.1016/j.jas.2016.05.009 ↗
7. Chevance, J. B., Evans, D., Hofer, N., Sakhoeun, S. & Chhean, R. Mahendraparvata: an early Angkor-period capital defined through airborne laser scanning at Phnom Kulen. Antiquity 93, 1303–1321 (2019).10.15184/aqy.2019.133 ↗
8. Uchida, E., Cunin, O., Shimoda, I., Suda, C. & Nakagawa, T. The construction process of the Angkor monuments elucidated by the magnetic susceptibility of sandstone. Archaeometry 45, 221–232 (2003).10.1111/1475-4754.00105 ↗
9. Uchida, E., Cunin, O., Suda, C., Ueno, A. & Nakagawa, T. Consideration on the construction process and the sandstone quarries during Angkor period based on the magnetic susceptibility. J. Archaeol. Sci. 34, 924–935 (2007).10.1016/j.jas.2006.09.015 ↗
10. Uchida, E., Tsuda, K. & Shimoda, I. Construction sequence of the Koh Ker monuments in Cambodia deduced from the chemical composition and magnetic susceptibility of its laterites. Herit. Sci. 2, 1–11 (2014).10.1186/2050-7445-2-10 ↗
11. Uchida, E., Mizoguchi, A., Sato, H., Shimoda, I. & Watanabe, R. Determining the construction sequence of the Preah Vihear monument in Cambodia from its sandstone block characteristics. Herit. Sci. 5, 1–15 (2017).10.1186/s40494-017-0155-0 ↗
12. Uchida, E., Sakurai, Y., Cheng, R., Shimoda, I. & Saito, Y. Supply ranges of stone blocks used in masonry bridges and their construction period along the East Royal Road in the Khmer Empire, Cambodia. Herit. Sci. 8, 1–16 (2020).10.1186/s40494-019-0345-z ↗
13. Imai, N., Terashima, S., Itoh, S. & Ando, A. 1994 compilation values for GSJ reference samples, “Igneous rock series. Geochem. J. 29, 91–95 (1995).10.2343/geochemj.29.91 ↗
14. Potts P. J., West M. Portable X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry. Capabilities for In-situ Analysis (RSC Publishing, 2008).10.1039/9781847558640 ↗
15. Mendoza Cuevas, A., Bernardini, F., Gianoncelli, A. & Tuniz, C. Energy dispersive X-ray diffraction and fluorescence portable system for cultural heritage applications. X-ray Spectrom. 44, 105–115 (2015).10.1002/xrs.2585 ↗
16. Tykot, R. H. Using nondestructive portable X-ray fluorescence spectrometers on stone, ceramics, metals, and other materials in museums: advantages and limitations. Appl. Spectrosc. 70, 42–56 (2016).10.1177/0003702815616745 ↗
17. Williams-Thorpe, O. & Thorpe, R. S. Magnetic susceptibility used in non-destructive provenancing of Roman granite columns. Archaeometry 35, 185–195 (1993).10.1111/j.1475-4754.1993.tb01034.x ↗
18. Williams-Thorpe, O., Jones, M. C., Tindle, A. G. & Thorpe, R. S. Magnetic susceptibility variations at Mons Claudianus and in Roman columns: a method of provenancing to within a single quarry. Archaeometry 38, 15–41 (1996).10.1111/j.1475-4754.1996.tb00758.x ↗
19. Williams-Thorpe, O., Jones, M. C., Webb, P. C. & Rigby, I. J. Magnetic susceptibility thickness corrections for small artefacts and comments on the effects of background materials. Archaeometry 42, 101–108 (2000).10.1111/j.1475-4754.2000.tb00868.x ↗
20. Alva-Valdivia, L. M., Agarwal, A. & Cruz-Y-Cruz, T. Magnetic Susceptibility. in Encyclopedia of Archaeological Science (eds Lόpez Varela, S. L.) 1–4, (Wiley, 2018).10.1002/9781119188230.saseas0353 ↗
21. Tanikawa, W. et al. Provenance of granitic gravestones in graveyard of feudal lords evaluated by multiple non-destructive rock analyses. J. Cult. Herit. 56, 183–192 (2022).10.1016/j.culher.2022.07.001 ↗
22. Uchida, E., Ito, K. & Shimizu, N. Provenance of the sandstone used in the construction of the Khmer monuments in Thailand. Archaeometry 52, 550–574 (2010).10.1111/j.1475-4754.2009.00505.x ↗
23. Uchida, E., Watanabe, R., Cheng, R., Nakamura, Y. & Takeyama, T. Non-destructive in-situ classification of sandstones used in the Angkor monuments of Cambodia using a portable X-ray fluorescence analyzer and magnetic susceptibility meter. J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep. 39, 103137 (2021).
24. Meesook, A. et al. Mesozoic rocks of Thailand: a summary. In: Proc. Symposium on Geology of Thailand. 82–94 (2002).
25. Shimoda, I., Uchida, E. & Tsuda, K. Estimated construction order of the major shrines of Sambor Prei Kuk based on an analysis of bricks. Heritage 2, 1941–1959 (2019).10.3390/heritage2030118 ↗
26. Uchida, E., Maeda, N. Petrology. In: Annual Report on the technical Survey of Angkor Monument 1999, Japanese Government Team for Safeguarding Angkor. 247–291, (JSA, 1999).