Abstract
The Greater Angkor region, in northwestern Cambodia, was home to several successive capitals of the Khmer Empire (9th to 15th centuries CE). During this time, the Khmer developed an extensive agricultural and water management system characterized by top-down state-sponsored hydraulic infrastructure. Archaeological evidence now shows that the well-documented state temples and water management features formed the core of an extended settlement complex consisting of many thousands of ponds, habitation mounds, and community temples. These community temples are difficult to date, and so far, the lack of chronological resolution in surface archaeological data has been the most significant challenge to understanding the trajectory of Angkor’s growth and decline. In this paper, we combine heterogeneous archaeological datasets and create diachronic models of the landscape as it was developed for agricultural production. We trace the foundation of new temple communities as they emerge on the landscape in relation to the construction of extensive state-sponsored hydraulic infrastructure. Together, these two forms of water management transformed over 1000 km2 of the Greater Angkor Region into an elaborate engineered landscape. Our results indicate that, over time, autonomous temple communities are replaced by large, state-sponsored agricultural units in an attempt by the state to centralize production.
Highlights
Most societies with water management systems have an institutional locus that acts authoritatively to regulate and ensure proper operation (Hunt, 1988; Hunt et al, 1976, p. 391; O'Connor, 1995, p. 971)
The results indicate that temple production units cluster around contemporary epicenters and hydraulic features, which suggest that top-down and bottom-up water management strategies operated in unison at Angkor
In contrast to the dichotomy presented in the literature, our analysis indicates that the system at Angkor was a hybrid one, combining elements of top-down and bottomup water management
Summary
Most societies with water management systems have an institutional locus that acts authoritatively to regulate and ensure proper operation (Hunt, 1988; Hunt et al, 1976, p. 391; O'Connor, 1995, p. 971). Most societies with water management systems have an institutional locus that acts authoritatively to regulate and ensure proper operation Some have argued that state-level societies often have top-down organization and are associated with larger and more complex water management systems Archaeological and ethnographic studies show that many large irrigation systems are managed through self-organized cooperatives with bottom-up administration (Hauser-Schäublin, 2005; Hunt, 1988; Hunt et al, 2005, 1976; Lansing, 2007; Lansing and Kremer, 1993; Leach, 1959; Ostrom, 1990; Scarborough and Burnside, 2010) or a combination of the two (Chase, 2019). On the island of Bali, Indonesia, water is managed through a self-organized, bottom-up system of cooperatives associated with a network of water temples (Hauser-Schäublin, 2005; Lansing, 2007; Scarborough and Burnside, 2010)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
