Routledge Handbook of Heritage in Asia by Daly Patrick; Winter Tim;

Author:Daly, Patrick; Winter, Tim;
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Taylor and Francis

The Strategic Appropriation of Khmer Antiquity and the Tyranny of Northern Khmer Identity

For many of Thailand’s ethnic Khmer, the revival movement offered an unprecedented opportunity to openly express their ethnic identity by embracing the revisionist historiography of the Northeast and the highly valorised imagery of Khmer antiquity. Inasmuch as the revival encouraged the Khmer to assert their rights as heirs to a rich cultural legacy dating back to as early as the seventh century, one might be inclined to regard it as a vehicle of empowerment. Yet, as I learned through my field research, the revival was also giving rise to new ‘tyrannies of identity’ (Appiah 2004). According to Appiah (ibid.), the danger of collective identities in the contemporary era – whether based on ethnicity, religion, or gender – is that they frequently demand adherence to a fixed typology of culture and essentialised representations of identity. Apart from precluding the possibility of multiple identities, collective identities today are fundamentally constituted through the exclusion of other groups. Indeed, as I discovered in Surin, the revival was being appropriated by some Northern Khmer to promote a narrative of ethnic Khmer cultural superiority vis-à-vis another minority ethnic group in the region called the Kui, of whom there are approximately 400,000 in Thailand’s northeast (Lewis 2009).

One illustration of this narrative of Khmer ethnic superiority came from a monk and former army colonel named Phra Phantri Amporn, who authored a short history of Surin entitled History of Isaanpura (Muang Surin) (2002). Phra Phantri explained that his primary motivation for writing this booklet was to challenge Surin’s official historiography. Briefly, according to the official provincial narrative, Surin was founded by an ethnic Kui elephant keeper named Chiang Pum, who is credited with recapturing an escaped white elephant belonging to last reigning monarch of Ayutthaya, King Ekathat, in 1757. In recognition of this loyal deed, Chiang Pum was bestowed a royal title and granted the authority to govern Surin as a tributary principality of the Siamese court. Phra Phantri insisted that the biggest error of this official history was the notion that Surin had been founded by an ethnic Kui.

Disputing this narrative, Phra Phantri told me that the real founders of Surin were Khmer, not Kui. He argued that the ancient edifices and artefacts found throughout the region were unmistakable proof that Surin was originally settled and dominated by Khmer. First, there was the ancient wall around the capital city, which was known by the Khmer name Banteay Chmar before the capital was renamed Muang Surin in 1786. The second clue was the Khmer sanctuaries, which were a testament to the Khmer’s cultural superiority and longstanding presence in the region. Phra Phantri offered several additional pieces of evidence to substantiate Khmer cultural dominance in the region, including the fact that the Khmer had an alphabet and elaborate marriage rituals, unlike the Kui who were illiterate and uncultured. For all of these reasons, Phra Phantri maintained that it was impossible that a Kui would have been a former chieftain of Surin.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.