Product Code Database
Chenla or Zhenla (w=Chen-la; , ) is the Chinese designation for the vassal of the kingdom of Funan preceding the Khmer Empire that existed from around the late 6th to the early 9th century in Indochina. The name was still used in the 13th century by the Chinese envoy Zhou Daguan, author of The Customs of Cambodia. It appears on the Mao Kun map. However, modern historiography applies the name exclusively to the period from the late 6th to the early 9th century. This period of Cambodian history is known by historians as the Pre-Angkor period. It is doubted whether Chenla ever existed as a unitary kingdom, or if this is a misconception by Chinese chroniclers. Most modern historians assert that "Chenla" was in fact just a series of loose and temporary confederations of principalities in the pre-Angkor period.
Similar explanation however may apply to a later variant form Zhanla (占臘); according to author Peter Harris: "It very likely means 'Defeated Chams' since Zhan is the word in Chinese for Cham." He also noted the explanation given in Mingshi: "During the Emperor Ningzong (1195–1200) of the Song dynasty, Cambodia wiped out Champa and took over its land. Because of this, the country changed its name to Zhanla. But during the Yuan dynasty it went on being called Zhenla."
Chen La may have been known through several other names such as Wen Dan (文單 reconstructed as Muntal, maybe mandala) or according to Tatsuo Hoshino Po-Lou, Wen Dan being its capital.
Following Hindu god king (devaraja) tradition the king chose the Sanskrit name of a patron deity or an avatar, followed by the suffix –varman, meaning 'protected by', obeying the code of conduct Manusmṛti, the Laws of Manu for the Kshatriya warrior caste.
Like its superior Funan, Chenla occupied a strategic position where the maritime trade routes of the Indosphere and the East Asian cultural sphere converged, resulting in prolonged socio-economic and cultural influence and the adoption of the Epigraphy system of the south Indian Pallava dynasty and Chalukya dynasty.Some Aspects of Asian History and Culture by Upendra Thakur p.2
The origins of Chenla's aristocracy, whom author Michael Vickery called the "Dângrêk Chieftains", are obscure. These were local Principality north and south of the Dângrêk Mountains, who left behind the oldest known stone Epigraphy in the region, bearing genealogical records that suggest increasing political dominance. The first known princes are mentioned in some early inscriptions. The Sanskrit inscription of Vãl Kantél, Stung Treng province names a ruler Vīravarman, who as his name suggests (his father's name was Sārvabhauma) had adopted the idea of divine kingship and deployed the concept of Harihara, a Hindu "god that embodied multiple conceptions of power". His successors continued this tradition, thus conveying the idea of a correlation between political and religious authority.
The New Book of Tang asserts that shortly after 706, the country was split into and . The names signify a northern and a southern half, which may conveniently be referred to as Upper (northern) and Lower (southern) Chenla. By the late 8th century Water Chenla had become dependent on the thalassocracy Shailendra dynasty on Java and the Srivijaya city-state on Sumatra. The last of Water Chenla's kings seems to have been killed and the polity incorporated into the Javanese monarchy around the year 790. Land Chenla maintained its integrity under Jayavarman II, who proclaimed the Khmer Empire in 802.
Originally one of the regional centers of Funan with an unknown degree of sovereignty, Chenla was recognized by a foreign power as a separate political entity at the end of the sixth century, Bhavavarman I its independent ruler. Considerable scholarly discord prevails regarding the exact geographic origin, the extent, dynamic and chronology of territorial expansion and in particular, the religious and political center of Chenla and whether or not it consisted of a unified people under a single leader.
Late 20th century scholars "began cautiously to move away from the established historiography framework" which had been laid out mainly by George Cœdès, who relies on external sources, specifically the Chinese annals, for its reconstruction. Michael Vickery suggests that ancient authors allocated the name "Chenla" to numerous small principalities and bundled them up as one singular entity in order to classify a larger number of people under the same characteristics, omitting distinctions between individual states. This approach explains why there was a noticeable increase in stone inscriptions during the seventh century. Multiple independent territories would produce their own recordings and written regulations, whereas in one polity only a tiny elite would be allowed access to such tasks.
Before historians had begun to analyse and use epigraphic sources in great numbers, all available evidence supported the idea that the center of the Chenla principality must be located at Mount Phu Kao - Lingaparvata (the mountain of the linga) in Champasak Province, Laos once belonging to the Khmer civilization. The local Vat Phou stele mentions the name of King Devanika (Fan Chen-ch'eng), king of kings - yet researchers do not relate the monarch to the "Dangrek Chieftains". Contrary to the academic conclusions, Cambodian legend tells that "the origin of the kings of Cambodia goes back to the union of the hermit Kambu Svayambhuva, an eponymic ancestor of the Kambujas, with the celestial nymph Mera, who was given to him by Siva." The king Srutavarman was born of this couple, who was followed by his son, king Sreshthavarman. This king gave his name to Vat Phou - believed to be Vat Phou. At the end of the sixth century, Bhavavarman I and Chitrasena (royal title: Mahendravarman) attacked Funan together and subdued it around 627–649.
The obvious fact that Funan and Chenla are "vague concepts" that do not apply to a tribe, a nation or a people is at odds with the Cambodian legends of origin. Folklore follows an unflinching narrative like that of a single ruler such as King Devanika - the reconsecrated maharajadhiraja (king of kings) of Mount Phu Kao where "the people that lived in the region along with the people who came with Devanika, became the forerunners of the prosperous Khmer people".
Late in the 8th century AD, it faced war from Javanese pirates that ultimately took over the Mekong Delta and then later took over Chenla. However author Michael Vickery asserts that these categories of Water and Land Chenla created by the Chinese are misleading and meaningless because the best evidence shows that until 802 AD, there was no single, great state in the land of ancient Cambodia, but a number of smaller ones.
In the view of the historian Sujit Wongthes, Land Chenla is located in Isan (northeast Thailand), while Water Chenla is situated on the Tonlé Sap area in Cambodia.
Individually, historians reject a classical decline scenario, arguing there was no Chenla to begin with, rather a geographic region had been subject to prolonged periods of contested rule, with turbulent successions and an obvious incapability to establish a lasting centre of gravity. Historiography ends this era of nameless upheaval only in the year 802, when Jayavarman II established the appropriately named Khmer Empire.
Authors Claude Jacques and Michael Vickery question the identification of Phu Kao as Lingjiabopo/Lingaparvata because there are a number of hills in Cambodia that apply to the vague descriptions. Thus, the debate remains and the existence of Chenla as a unitary state or a capital at Vat Phou is questionable. Since there is not much evidence or writings from the time period, not much can be said about the region. The Chinese annals are one of the very few sources scholars can analyze and derive information from.
The people of Chenla, whose base was Champassak in about 550, established their capital city at Isanapura (Sambhupura) by about 600.
According to Paul Pelliot, Sambhupura (Isanapura) was the capital of (Upper Chenla) and Vyadhapura was the capital of (Lower Chenla), but, according to George Coedès, Baladityapura (Aninditapura) was the capital of Water Chenla and Wen Tan (Wen Dan) was Land Chenla.
All essential elements of Bhavavarman's life and most of his descendants are known only through epigraphy. Interpreted as to be Vīravarman's successor and after gaining independence ("he has conquered his throne at the tip of his sword") ruler of the eastern portions of his father's realm, he "built a temple in 598 during his reign in ... the center of the kingdom of Bhavapura". Mahendravarman is, according to epigraphy, also Vīravarman's son and attributed as to be the conqueror of Funan.
Succession is unclear, because "this at the same time eliminates his son Bhavavarman I of the royal function" Historian Michael Vickery resolves: "Bhavavarman and...Citrasena Mahendravarman's attacked Funan" together. Isanavarman is the founder of a new capital - Isanapura north of the Tonlé Sap (the archaeological site of Sambor Prei Kuk). His son Bhavavarman II - is mentioned only once in an inscription in the year 644. Jayavarman I is the last ruler of a united Chenla. He is the son and successor of the obscure Candravarman.
A sculpture called Harihara, a combined form of Vishnu and Shiva, is also frequently depicted in religious establishments. This could portray a Chenla belief that there is an equal balance between creation and destruction in the universe and that when one substance is terminated, another is produced to replace it. Other Hindu gods Brahma and Indra along with deities such as Krishna Govardhana, Lakshmi, etc. were also worshipped. An epigraph from Siem Reap Province testified that during the late 8th century, it was evidently that Buddhists in Cambodia worshipped bodhisattvas.
Also originating from India, Buddhism, although not as preeminent as Hinduism, peacefully coexisted with Hinduism in Chenla; two schools of Buddhism were identified from a sculpture found that depicted twelve images of Buddha. This shows that the kings did not seem to enforce their religious views on their people and that influences of all kinds were creating a diverse community in Chenla. According to the Indian historian Himanchu Prabha Ray, Buddhism was an effective motivating factor in the expansion of maritime trading networks from India to eastern lands while Brahmanic Hinduism revolved more around an agrarian economy.
However, these structures may also be factor that stabilized the kingdom and allowed the king to expand and attract more civilians who followed Hindu beliefs as Hinduism served as a reason for people to follow the king's rule. Also, incorporation of these establishments could appeal to foreigners who would bring their trade, business, and goods to the area, making it more economically efficient.
Cremation burials lined with bricks were also discovered. These structures are supposed to be devoted to the veneration of members of the Brahmin caste since the burials had been carried out according to Hindu practice.
This depicts the impact Hinduism had on early Cambodian societies. Sanskrit, the language associated with Hinduism, was considered more valuable than the native Khmer language. This may show that the society before Indianization occurred in early South East Asia was unstable and that people latched onto teachings from foreigners because they had no permanent religious or social structures themselves.
Although a social hierarchy existed, there was no discrimination between genders. Women were not considered second class citizens rather many women played central roles in rituals, specialized in crafts, and were given ranks as high officials. This may because until recently, families followed matrilineal heritages instead of a patriarchal society, thus some aspects of the earlier society were retained.
In the remains of the main port, Oc Eo, (now in Vietnam) materials from Rome, Greece and Persia have been found, as well as artifacts from India and neighboring states. Indian influences might have been so alluring because Indian merchants who traded with early Cambodians had wealth and were prosperous, qualities to strive for, therefore there was little to no hesitance in adopting the religion of another culture.
After Īśānavarman, who ceased to reign around 637, the inscriptions tell us of a king named Bhavavarman (II). The only dated inscriptions we have from him, are that of Tà Kev (K. 79), dated 5 January 644 and of Poñā Hòr south of Tà Kev (K. 21). dated Wednesday, 25 March 655. Then seemingly follows a certain king Candravarman, known from the undated inscription K. 1142 of unknown origin who hailed from the family of Īśānavarman. The son of Candravarman was the famous king Jayavarman I whose earliest inscriptions are from Tûol Kôk Práḥ, province Prei Vêṅ (K. 493) and from Bàsêt, province Bằttaṃbaṅ (K. 447), both dated 14 June 657.
Some 19 or 20 inscriptions dating from his reign have been found in an area extending from Vat Phu'u in the north to the Gulf of Siam in the south. According to the Xīn Táng shū the kingdom of Zhēnlà had conquered different principalities in Northwestern Cambodia after the end of the Chinese era name yǒnghuī (永徽) (i. e. after 31 January 656), which previously (in 638/39) paid tribute to China. The reign of Jayavarman I lasted about thirty years and ended perhaps after 690. It seems that after the death of Jayavarman I (his last known inscription K. 561 is dated 681/82), turmoil came upon the kingdom and at the start of the 8th century, the kingdom broke up into many principalities.
The region of Angkor was ruled by his daughter, Queen Jayadevi who complained in her Western Bàrày inscription K. 904, dated Wednesday, 5 April 713, of "bad times". The Táng histories tell us that after the end of the shénlóng (神龍) era (after 6 February 707) Zhēnlà came to be divided in two realms, Lùzhēnlà (陸真臘) ("Land Zhēnlà", also called Wèndān (文單) or Pólòu (婆鏤)) and Shuīzhēnlà (水真臘) ("Water Zhēnlà") and returned to the anarchic state that had existed before it was unified under the kings of Funan and the first kings of Zhēnlà.
Kings like Śrutavarman and Śreṣṭhavarman or Puṣkarākṣa are only attested very much later in Angkorian inscriptions; their historicity is doubtful. Land Zhēnlà sent an embassy to China in 717, aided Mai Thúc Loan's rebellion against the Chinese (722–723). Another embassy visiting China in 750 came probably from Water Zhēnlà. According to the Chinese Annals a son of the king of Wèndān had visited Chinas in 753 and joined a Chinese army during a campaign against Nanzhao (p=Nánzhāo) in the following year.
After the Wèndān embassy in the year 771 the heir-apparent Pómí (c=婆彌) came to the imperial court and, on 13 December 771, he received there the title "Kaifu Yitong Sansi" (p=Kāifǔ Yítóng Sānsī), one of the highest honorific titles. In 799 an envoy from Wèndān called Lītóují (c=李頭及) received a Chinese title, too. As rulers of Śambhupura are attested by the inscription K. 124, dated 803/04 a king Indraloka and three successive queens, Nṛpatendradevī, Jayendrabhā and Jyeṣṭhāryā. Two inscriptions refer to a ruler named Jayavarman: the first one, K. 103, hails from Práḥ Thãt Práḥ Srĕi south of Kompoṅ Čàṃ, dated 20 April 770, the second one from Lobŏ'k Srót in the vicinity of Kračèḥ near Śambhupura (K. 134), dated 781.
Cœdès called him Jayavarman Ibis, but probably he is identical with Jayavarman II, the founding father of the Angkorian kingdom, as Vickery has pointed out: "Not only was Jayavarman II from the South; more than any other known king, he had particularly close links with Vyādhapura. This place is recorded in only one pre-Angkor inscription, K. 109/655 exactly:, but in 16 Angkor-period texts, the last dated 1069 K. ... Two of them, K. 425/968 and K. 449/1069, are explicit records of Jayavarman II taking people from Vyādhapura to settle in Battambang."
All these inscriptions refer to a large territory ruled by these kings. It is recorded in the inscription from Robaṅ Romãs at Īśānapura (the archaeological site of Sambor Prei Kuk) that a certain Narasiṃhagupta, who was vassal ( samāntanṛpa) of the successive kings Bhavavarman, Mahendravarman (the ruling name of Citrasena) and Īśānavarman erected on 13 April 598 during the reign of Bhavavarman a figure of Kalpavāsudeva (Vishnu).
This coincides with the oldest Chinese text that mentions Chenla, the Suí shū (Annals of the Suí Dynasty), compiled by Wei Zheng (580–643) in AD 636, which gives the information that at the beginning of the 7th century Chenla was ruled by Citrasena and Īśānavarman. The capital of the latter was Īśānapura, while his predecessor Bhavavarman I still resided at Bhavapura, a place which probably is located in the vicinity of the modern town of Thala Barivat (13°33′ N, 105°57′ E). An inscription dating from the reign of Isanarvarman I asserts that he was "the King of Kings, who rules over Suvarnabhumi as far as the sea" ''Samudra-paryanta, thus identifying Chenla with Suvarnabhumi.
| Order | King | Reign | |
| 1 | Srutavarman | c. 550–555 | |
| 2 | Sreshthavarman | c. 555–560 | |
| 3 | Vīravarman | c. 560–575 | |
| 4 | Queen Kambuja-raja-lakshmi | c. 575–580 | |
| 5 | Bhavavarman I | c. 580–600 | |
| 6 | Mahendravarman | c. 600–616 | |
| 7 | Isanavarman I | c. 616–635 | |
| 8 | Bhavavarman II | c. 639–657 | |
| 9 | Jayavarman I | c. 657–681 | |
| 10 | Queen Jayadevi | c. 681–713 | |
| Separation into Land-Water | |||
| 11 | c. 713–730 | ||
| 12 | c. 730–760 | ||
| 13 | c. 760–770 | ||
| 14 | Mahipativarman | c. 770–780 | |
| 15 | Jayavarman II | c. 780–802 | |
|
|
