buddhism and thai art

© 2009 The AuthorJournal Compilation © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Religion Compass 3/4 (2009): 566–579, 10.1111/j. 1749-8171.2009.00148.x

Blackwell Publishing LtdOxford, UKRECOReligion Compass1749-81711749-8171© 2009 The AuthorJournal Compilation © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd14810.1111/j. 1749-8171.2009.00148.xApril 200900566???579???Review ArticleBuddhism and Thai ArtPattaratorn Chirapravati

Buddhism and Thai Art

Pattaratorn Chirapravati*California State University, Sacramento

AbstractThe last few years have been exciting for the field of Thai art history because ofnew archaeological discoveries and publications that have shed new light onseveral periods and subjects. New art history books range from highly technicalbooks written for specialists like Hiram Woodward to less technical books, writtenby specialists, but for general readers, such as Betty Gosling’s book The Origins ofThai Art, guidebooks written by specialists for a wide audience that includesscholars and educated tourists such as Dawn Rooney’s book, Ancient Sukhothai:Thailand’s Cultural Heritage, and art exhibition catalogues written by specialists formuseum goers and scholars such as Forrest McGill’s catalogue, The Kingdom ofSiam: The Art of Central Thailand, 1350–1800. New light has also been shed onthe field of Buddhism in Thailand, scholars such as Peter Skilling, Steve Collions,Donald Swearer, Justin McDaniel, Leedom Lefferts, and Bonnie Brereton publishednew translations of texts, compiled dictionaries, and studied ritual practices inrelations to texts and objects. At the same time, Buddhist scholars and anthropologistshave incorporated Buddhist art and architecture in their studies of texts andrituals. This article will offer a critical overview of the relation between the studyof art and Buddhism in Thailand.

Introduction

The last few years have been exciting for the field of Thai art historybecause of recent publications that have shed new light on several periodsand subjects. These new art history books range from highly technicalbooks written for specialists such as The Art and Architecture of Thailand byHiram Woodward, Jr. (E. J. Brill, 2003), to less technical books writtenby specialists for general readers such as Betty Gosling’s book The Originsof Thai Art (River Books, 2006), guidebooks written by specialists for awide audience that includes scholars and educated tourists such as DawnRooney’s book Ancient Sukhothai: Thailand’s Cultural Heritage (RiverBooks, 2007), and art exhibition catalogues written by specialists formuseum goers and scholars such as Forrest McGill’s catalogue The Kingdomof Siam: The Art of Central Thailand, 1350–1800 (Snoeck Publishers,Buppha Press, Art Media Resources Inc., and The Asian Art Museum ofSan Francisco, 2005). In addition, scholars have participated and contributed

© 2009 The Author Religion Compass 3/4 (2009): 566–579, 10.1111/j. 1749-8171.2009.00148.xJournal Compilation © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Buddhism and Thai Art 567

to online journals, such as the Buddhism Compass, that are aimed atcollege-level readers and educated audiences.

New light has also been shed on the field of Buddhism in Thailand, asscholars such as Peter Skilling, Steve Collins, Donald Swearer, JustinMcDaniel, Leedom Lefferts, and Bonnie Brereton have published newtranslations of texts, compiled dictionaries, and studied ritual practices inrelation to texts and objects. At the same time, Buddhist scholars andanthropologists have incorporated Buddhist art and architecture into theirstudies of texts and rituals.

The first section of this article is a review of major publications in ThaiBuddhist art history from the early nineteenth century to the present. Thesecond presents the writer’s opinions on the new directions, approaches,questions, and methods that are gradually changing the field of ThaiBuddhist art history.

The Study of Thai Buddhist Art

From the second half of the nineteenth century, information regardingThai archaeology, art history, and architecture was mainly derived fromtravelling account records of both Thai and Western scholars and officials.These valuable accounts were used by the first generation of historians ofThai art. Among the most important Thai accounts are those of PrinceMongkut during his monkhood (King Rama IV),1 Crown Prince Vajiravudh(Rama VI),2 Prince Damrong Rajanubhab,3 Prince Narisranuvattiwong,Phraya Samosorn Sapphakan, and Phraya Boranratcha. Western accountsfrom this same period provide similar information and, in addition, offermeasurements of the structures and drawings and photographs of the sitesand objects when they were still in situ. These accounts remain absolutelyessential for the study of Thai art history. They provide valuable informationabout the sites and the history of the region and the objects in situ beforeboth the sites and the objects were damaged by looters, antique dealers,and restorations by the Fine Arts Department of Thailand. Among themost significant accounts are Etienne Aymonier (1901), Sir Ernest Satow(2000), Lucien Fournereau,4 and George Cœdès (1922, 1928, 1926, 1968,1990).5

History of Thai Art: 1940–1980

The most active groups of scholars researching Thai art history between1940 and 1980 were of four nationalities: Thai, French, English, andAmerican. During this period the field of art history in general focusedon iconography, chronology, development of styles, and connoisseurship.Thus, the basic questions mainly concerned the objects and sites and theirvisual beauty. Typical questions were: What is this object? Is it a Buddhaor a bodhisattva? What is the style and how old is it? How does it fit in

568 Pattaratorn Chirapravati


the chronology of its site or period? Is it a ‘masterpiece’? Observations inminute detail regarding the production of the objects and how variouselements (e.g., forms and motifs) stylistically influenced each otherbecame the norm. During this time, scholars had the advantage of firsthand information about the objects and the sites they worked on. Some-times the locations were not easily accessible so they were the pioneerinvestigators. This generation of scholars mainly linked both the iconographyand styles of Buddhist elements to India and Sri Lanka. Several gave nocredit to or ignored the Southeast Asian development of local styles aswell as religious and ritual practices. Among this group of scholars areGeorge Cœdès, in particular his classic book The Indianized States of SoutheastAsia, and Reginald Le May, Buddhist Art in South-East Asia: The IndianInfluence on the Art of Thailand.

In 1938, Le May published another book on Thai art, A Concise Historyof Buddhist Art in Siam. This book traces the stylistic influences of Indian,Javanese, Fununese, Khmer, and Burmese art on the different schools ofthe pre-Thai and Thai periods.

The most important works written by French scholars during thesethree decades, which still stand as major sources of reference, are theworks of Jean Boisselier, La Sculpture en Thailand (1974)6 and La Peintureen Thailand (1975). At the invitation of the Fine Arts Department ofThailand in 1964, Boisselier visited various archaeological sites in Thailand.He carefully examined difficult-to-access sites, their structures, and decorativeornaments. His opinions on Wat Si Chum (in Sukhothai), unlike otherscholars of this generation, clearly reflected his first hand field work andinterest in local tradition and political history.7 He published numerousarticles on other aspects of Thai art.8

Among American scholars who led the Thai art history field during thisperiod are Alexander W. Griswold and Stanley J. O’Connor, Jr. Griswold’scontribution to Thai art history is immense. His major focus was on theBuddhist art and architecture of Sukhothai. Like other art historiansof this period, Griswold’s early work focused on stylistic analysis andchronology. He tried to relate the stylistic appearances of Thai Buddhaimages as well as to establish the sequence of architectural developments.Later, Griswold furthered his studies into the fields of epigraphy, historicalstudies, and Buddhism. While Griswold collaborated with Luang BoribalBuripan on art history projects,9 he published epigraphical studies withPrasert na Nagara.10 The latter works are still important sources for Thaiepigraphic and historical studies. Among his most important art historypublications, which remain essential references, are Towards a History ofSukhodaya Art (1967), Dated Buddha Images of Northern Siam (1957), and‘History of Art and Architecture in Siam’ (1960).

Stanley O’Connor’s worked specifically on the Peninsular region ofThailand. His focus was mainly on the stylistic analysis of early Hindu andBuddhist materials in comparison to the iconography and styles of Indian,



Cambodian, and Javanese arts. His book Hindu Gods of Peninsular Siam(1972), and an article on ‘Buddhist Votive Tablets and Caves in PeninsularThailand’, remain as essential sources regarding art of the Peninsula(1974). To date, only a handful of scholars, mainly Thai, has done furtherwork in Southern Thailand.

Thai Art Historians

Among the leading Thai scholars in the field are Prince SubhadradisDiskul, Piriya Krairiksh, and Santi Leksukhum. Each started off with aparticular specialization. Prince Subhadradis actively published between1960 to the end of 1990. He first published extensively on the Khmerand Dvaravati periods. Unlike many other Thai scholars, he reads manylanguages: English, French, and several from Southeast Asia. He traveledextensively in Thailand and other neighboring countries and had first-hand knowledge of new sites and objects. Like Western scholars of hisgeneration, he focused on chronology and stylistic and iconographicanalysis. However, his understanding of Thai culture and ritual practiceshelped further his insight on these topics. His works have been publishedin three languages: Thai, English, and French. His most important booksare Art in Thailand: A Brief history (1971),11 Silapa sukhothai/Sukhothai Art/L’Art de Sukhothai (1979), The Art of Srivijaya (1980), and Hindu Gods atSukhothai (1990).12 He also wrote more than 100 articles and introductionsto the art of Burma, Cambodia, Indonesia, India, and Sri Lanka. Hiscontribution to the field of Thai Buddhist art directly inspired PiriyaKrairiksh.

Piriya Krairiksh started his career in Thai art history around 1974 andcontinues to be active in the field. His works between 1980 and 1990 aremainly on stylistic analysis of the Central and Southern Thai regions. LikePrince Subhadradis, Piriya published his works in both Thai and Westernlanguages (e.g., English and German). His most important works from thisperiod are his books on Buddhist Folk Tales Depicted at Chula Praton Cedi(1974),13 Das heilige Bildnis: Skulpturen aus Thailand/The Sacred Image:Sculptures from Thailand (1979), and Art in Peninsular Thailand Prior to theFourteenth Century A.D. (1980).

Piriya stands out as one of the most radical historians of Thai art. Fromaround 1990, he has challenged the date and authenticity of Inscription I(also known as the Ramkhamhaeng inscription), which is dated to 1279.He dates it at around 1800. He thus has reattributed dates of Sukhothaiand Ayutthaya temples and objects, leading to great debate among scholars.Although most others do not accept his new dating, his work is stillconsidered very valuable. He published ‘A Revised Dating of AyutthayaArchitecture’ (1992) and ‘A Reassessment of Thai Art of the AyutthayaPeriod’ (1997/1998). It is interesting that since 2000 Piriya has publishedhis works solely in Thai. Among his work from this period are Prawatsat



sinlapa lae borankhadi nai prathet thai (1990) and Sinlapa sukhothai lae Ayutthaya:phap laksana thi tong plian plaeng (2002).

Santi Leksukhum, another faculty member of Silpakorn University,trained in Thailand (by Prince Subhadradis) and in France. He is knownfor his work on the development of architectural elements, structures, andornaments. He has published a large number of books and articles withbeautiful drawings and details of ornaments. He fails, however, to includeany intellectual analyses or any interpretations of sites. He has publishedmainly in Thai. For those who are interested in traditional art historyanalysis and can read Thai, see Wiwatthanakan khong chan pradap luat lai laeluat lai samai Ayutthaya ton ton/The Evolution of Stucco Decorative Motifs ofEarly Ayudhya Period (1979) and Chedi phoem mum chedi yo mum samaiAyutthaya/The Redented Added-angled Chedis and the Rabbeted-angledChedis of the Ayutthaya Period (1986). A summary version of the latter ispublished in English (‘The Evolution of the Memorial Towers of SiameseTemples’, 2005).

Art History from 1980 to Present

The field of Thai art history in the last two to three decades has beenrelatively active, with major contributions from both Thai and Westernscholars. Among scholars whose works have focused more on traditionalart history during this period are Hiram Woodward, Jr., Henry Ginsburg,Betty Gosling, and Carol Stratton. However, besides the traditional arthistorical topics of chronology and stylistic and iconographic analysis, newsets of questions have been incorporated into work that has come outsince around the end of the 1990s. These new sets of questions are: Whatis the textual source of this subject? Was there a Thai version of this textduring the time that the temple was built or the object was made? Wasthis object used in a specific part of temple or in a ritual? What are thegoals of the practitioners? Thus, Thai objects are placed in their ownreligious and cultural context rather than seen mainly as objects for displayin museums or galleries, or studied only for how they relate to Indian orSri Lankan styles. Among the scholars whose work reflects this new trendare Robert Brown, Forrest McGill, John Listopad, and PattaratornChirapravati. Although they continue to work on topics like chronology,they also raise broader cultural and religious issues.

Religious texts were significant sources of inspiration that influencedthe subjects chosen for mural paintings, manuscripts, and cloth banners(pha phrabot). Rituals are obviously essential for the understanding thespatial context and function of objects. In addition, rituals dictate thelayout of religious architecture for purposes such as ordination, sermons,merit making, and funeral ceremonies.

Hiram Woodward published over 12 articles and 15 book reviewsbetween 1966 and 1979. His articles on Thai art during this period range



from a guide to the U-Thong National Museum, Suphanburi (1966) toa study of Thai ceramics. From 1980 to the present, he has published 35more articles and book reviews. He has published three books: Asian Artin the Walters Art Gallery (1991), The Sacred Sculpture of Thailand: TheAlexander B. Griswold Collection (1997), and The Art and Architecture ofThailand from Prehistoric Times through the Thirteenth Century (2003). Thethird book is a chronological study of Thai art from Prehistoric periodsthrough the thirteenth century; it is based on his PhD dissertation written28 years earlier (1975). Woodward is a master of stylistic analysis andchronology. He is also interested in texts and has worked extensively onmajor Southeast Buddhist monuments. His works are highly technical andusually require background knowledge. Woodward often reconsiders,rethinks, and rewrites topics he wrote about previously (e.g., his works onBorobudur ( Java, Indonesia) and Angkor Thom (Cambodia)). Thus, hiswork is often in a state of flux. Even though his most recent works areon visual cultures and texts, the foci are still on the tracing of influencesof styles from various regions to the researched sites.

The first two books concentrate on art objects in the collection of theWalters Art Museum in Baltimore. In my opinion, The Sacred Sculpture ofThailand stands as one of the most important Thai art history books todate. The Art and Architecture of Thailand is a unique because Woodwardemploys both stylistic and metal analyses to reconstruct the chronologyand history of Thai art from the Dvaravati period (seventh century) to theend of the Ayutthaya period (eighteenth century). Each object in theGriswold Collection is placed in its own cultural, historical, stylistic, andeven metal analysis context. The book reflects years of careful research,and he sometimes challenges his own previous writings. Woodward filledthe book with many interesting issues and topics that had not beenaddressed by other scholars. It provides up-to-date references to works inEnglish, French, and Thai. In The Art and Architecture of Thailand fromPrehistoric Times through the Thirteenth Century, Woodward attempts toanalyze and connect the misty pictures of many different regions and ancientkingdoms in the region that became present-day Thailand and Cambodia.Its content concerns the ‘pre-Thai’ periods, starting from prehistoric timesand concluding before the Thais founded their first kingdoms in theCentral and Northern regions in the fourteenth century. Woodward usesstylistic and iconographic analysis and archeological remains (e.g., archi-tecture, sculptures, and votive tablets) as tools to connect and reestablishthe missing written records and religious practices of these regions. As aresult, significant links from various sites in India and Sri Lanka to Cambodiaand Thailand are carefully and symmetrically identified and classified.Because of its highly technical nature, The Art and Architecture of Thailandis beneficial mostly for specialists of Thailand and Cambodia.

Betty Gosling, Carol Stratton and Miriam McNair Scott (Stratton andScott 1981) have published extensively on the art of Sukhothai, using



Griswold’s work on Sukhothai as their starting block. Thus, their arthistorical analyses and date attributions are closely related to Griswold.Having studied under the guidance of Woodward, Gosling’s works focuson chronology and styles (1983). She published many books and articleson the development and chronology of Sukhothai architecture (1991, 1996).Gosling debated with historians and linguists over the origin of Wat SiChum’s Jataka slabs. As a result, they published over 20 articles on severalaspects of the site and language used on the inscriptions.14 Gosling publishedfive articles on this subject between 1991 and 1998 (1981, 1984, 1986, 1988,1998). Her works have been important references for the art of Sukhothai.

Among the handful of scholars who have worked on Thai painting andmanuscripts, Henry Ginsburg was the leader. His two books, Thai ManuscriptPainting (1989 and Thai Art and Culture: Historic Manuscripts from WesternCollections (2000) on stylistic analysis and chronology, stand as the manualsof these topics. The former book includes major Buddhist themescommonly portrayed in paintings such as life scenes of the Buddha, Jataka,and Phra Malai. Ginsburg points out that for Thai manuscripts, the textand illustrations have no direct correspondence: the text was chantedduring Buddhist ceremonies such as funerals and weddings, while theillustrations depict Buddhist themes.

As an art historian of Indian and Southeast Asian art, Robert L. Brownhas published a large number of articles in both fields and on comparativestudies of India and the regions of Southeast Asia. At the beginning of hiscareer, Brown worked extensively on the Dvaravati period. His excellentbook, The Dvaravati Wheels of the Law and the Indianization of South EastAsia (1996), is a ground-breaking study of the free-standing stones,dharmacakra (1996). Even though the methodology employed in this projectwas stylistic analysis, Brown took another step to further his reading. Hecompared the inscriptions found on the dharmacakra to other Moninscriptions discovered in Thailand. He concludes that these dharmacakras‘are neither Indian nor pre-Indian, but products of a specific culture andperiod that transforms constantly’. That reflects a breakthrough fromtraditional Thai art history, especially regarding the history of ‘Indianinfluence’, or ‘Indianized art’. He also posed questions regarding ritualsand the function of the dharmacakras.

Brown published over 60 articles and book reviews that cover a widerange of topics on the Buddhist and Hindu arts of India and SoutheastAsia. He has also presented at least 40 papers at major conferences. Fromlate 1990, Brown’s readings clearly reflect his interest in Buddhist texts andrituals. Two very interesting articles on Thai Buddhist materials are ‘Godon Earth: The Walking Buddha in the Art of South and Southeast Asia’(1990), and ‘Narrative as Icon: The Jataka Stories in Ancient Indian andSoutheast Asian Architecture’ (1997a).

Robert Brown has edited two books and one catalogue on Thai Art:Living a Life in Accord with Dhamma: Papers in Honor of Professor Jean



Boisselier (1997b), Art from Thailand (1999),15 and Light of Asia: BuddhaSakyamuni in Asian Art (1984). In each book he edited, he wrote theintroduction to the volume. For the catalogue, he wrote an article onSoutheast Asian art and the Southeast Asian catalog entries. These threevolumes highlight interesting topics that reflect trends of scholarship andtopics not included elsewhere. He also includes junior scholars’ worksin his volumes (e.g., John A. Listopad, 1995, 1999; and PattaratornChirapravati, 1994, 1997, 1999, 2000, 2005, 2007, 2008) that not onlyintroduced their work to the field but also revealed material from theirunpublished dissertations.

Forrest McGill also studied under the guidance of Hiram Woodwardand works exclusively on late Thai materials of the Ayutthaya and Bangkokperiods (1997, 2005). He is interested in the subjects of hair relics,Maitreya, and the Chulamani chedi. His interesting articles, incorporatingThai religious contexts for the understanding of these materials, are ‘Jata-kas, Universal Monarchs, and the year 2000’ (1993), and ‘Painting theGreat Life’ (1997). McGill works on stylistic analysis, chronology, andBuddhist texts.

Collaboration

Because the ‘new questions’ have become the concentration of recent arthistory books, some art historians have tried to relate images andarchitectural structures to specific schools of Buddhism, which they claimare reflected in the architectural forms and motifs of these regions. Theyhave often tried to pinpoint Buddhist sects for which they think art workswere produced. Thus, various sects, schools, and lineages (e.g., Sravastivada,Sthaviravada, Theravada, Ariya Buddhism,16 Tantrism, and MahayanaBuddhism), with or without written records, have been employed indifferentiating art works.17 In my opinion, more often than not theseattempts have been misguided. Buddhist studies, like other fields, iscontinually changing, so it is critical for art historians who deal withBuddhist themes to keep up with current research. The fields of religiousstudies and art history have not been closely linked in the past. However,present scholars of religious studies, anthropology, and art history collaborateon book projects, conference panels, and art exhibitions. These types ofcollaborations have shed new light on several aspects of Buddhist artobjects that in the past would have been limited solely to chronology andstylistic analysis. An example of a collaboration project is the book project,The Past Lives of the Buddha: Wat Si Chum – Art, Architecture, and Inscriptions.It is a collaboration among four fields (i.e., art history, architecturalhistory, Buddhology, and linguistics) to present the latest evidence andnew analyses of the site. In this case, the architecture and art historianscontributed analyses of the structure, its decoration, and the attribution ofdate; the Buddhologist supplied the knowledge of texts and religious



context; and the linguists read and analyzed the inscriptions. The majorproblem of this site regards the location of the jataka slabs (approximately100 slabs) which were installed in an unusual location – on the ceiling ofa narrow stairs of the unfinished structure of Wat Si Chum. In addition,Sukhothai Inscription II (also known as the Wat Si Chum inscription),the largest and longest ancient inscription found in Thailand, was discoveredin situ at the entrance of the stairs of Wat Si Chum. Never having visitedthe site, Cœdès interpreted a passage from Inscription II and associatedthe jataka slabs mentioned in Inscription II with those of Wat Si Chum.He suggested that these slabs were removed from Wat Mahathat(Sukhothai) and then reinstalled on the ceiling of Wat Si Chum.18 Thisbecame the hypothesis that many historians of Thai art such as Woodward,Stratton, and Gosling repeated for the next three decades. Gosling tookCœdès’ hypothesis to the extreme. While Gosling visited Sukhothai manytimes and wrote books and articles on the development of Sukhothaiarchitecture, it is surprising that she did not consider architecturaltechniques in her study of the installation of the slabs. She used Founereau’searly measurements of the slabs at face value and argued that the slabswere originally located on the base of the lotus-bud stupa at Wat Mahathat.It is puzzling why she did not remeasure the slabs in situ. If she had, shemight have recognized that Founereau’s measurements did not includethose parts of the slabs that had to be covered to support them from theceiling: the full-size slabs could not fit at the location proposed for themat Wat Mahathat. Pattaratorn Chirapravati and Pierre Pichard have beenrecently disproved Cœdès and Gosling theories on the basis of detailedstudy of the structure of Wat Si Chum, the slabs, and the Inscription II.19

They suggest that the slabs were indeed made for Wat Si Chum andthe jataka plaques referred to in Inscription II are not related to the WatSi Chum slabs. Without collaborative work from various fields, theunderstanding of Wat Si Chum would still clearly suffer from problemsstemming from the unquestioned use of secondary sources.

Collaborative work is increasing in popularity as can be seen fromseveral panels at the XVth conference of the International Association ofBuddhist Studies.20 A good example is the collaborative panel organizedby Justin McDaniel and Pattaratorn Chirapravati, ‘Buddhist FuneralCultures: Art, Texts, and Ritual Performance’.21 The panel consisted of twoart historians, two anthropologists, four Buddhologists, and two scholarsof Thai Buddhist literature.22 Many times during the panel discussion,scholars furthered understanding of their own topics from the comments,questions, and comparisons to the other cultures, rituals, texts, andimages. This type of collaboration exploits the similarities and differencesamong fields, which in this case helped to further investigate the topic offuneral culture and art.

Art historians of the present and future generations and will hardly everhave the opportunity to work on material from new archeological sites



that have not been disturbed. In addition, they have to deal with the seriousproblems of forgery and mixed-marriage objects; thus, connoisseurship isstill important, requiring the use of techniques such as stylistic analysis andmetal and stone analysis as tools to determine provenance and date.Furthermore, it is essential that art historians treat Buddhist objects withintheir religious, ritualistic, and cultural contexts, as new approaches aretried, new questions are asked, and new methods are employed. Aninterdisciplinary approach seems to yield the greatest benefit to the fieldof Buddhist art history.

Short Biography

M.L. Pattaratorn Chirapravati is a professor of Asian Art and director ofthe Asian Studies Program at California State University, Sacramento. Sheis the author of Votive Tablets in Thailand: Origin, Styles and Uses (KualaLumpur, Malaysia: Oxford University Press, 1997). Her most recentresearch has been on Wat Ratchaburana (Ayutthaya, Thailand), Wat SiChum (Sukhothai, Thailand), and funeral scenes in Thai art. She is co-curator of the international Thai art exhibitions The Kingdom of Siam: Artfrom Central Thailand (1350–1800) and Emerald Cities: Arts of Thai andBurma, 1775–1950.

Notes

* Correspondence address: Prof. Pattaratorn Chirapravati, Department of Art History, CaliforniaState University, Sacramento, 6000 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95819-6061, USA. E-mail:[email protected].

1 Prince Mongkut visited the northern region during his monkhood in 1833. From Sukhothaihe sent back to Bangkok three objects: a stone throne and two inscriptions (Inscription I ofRamkhamhaeng and Inscription IV). Chomkao Chaoyuhua, King 2525 [1972], PhrachumPhraratchaniphon phasabali nai ratchakanthisi phaksong (Bangkok: Mahamakut Ratchawithayalai).2 Crown Prince Vajiravudh, the future King Rama IV (r. 1910–1925), traveled to the northernregion in 1908 and published an account of his trip entitled, ‘An Excursion to the Cities ofPhra Ruang.’ Mongkutklau Chauyuhua (2496 [1953]), Ruang thieo muang phraruang [Account ofan Excursion to the Cities of Phra Ruang] (Bangkok: Ongkankha Khong Khurusapha).3 Damrong Rajanubhab, Prince, Monuments of the Buddha in Siam. Trans. Sulak Sivaraksa andA.B. Griswold (Bangkok: Siam Society, 1973). Prince Damrong and Prince Narisranuvattiwongexchanged letters that addressed various topics regarding art and architecture. The letters werepublished in a series of book entitled Sansomdet [Princes’ Letters].4 Fournereau (1895) remains the most important account of the archeological sites inSukhothai.5 Cœdès was in Thailand between 1918 and 1946. He read inscriptions and wrote severalarticles on them and other objects discovered in Thailand and Cambodia. He wrote numerousarticles on Thai and Khmer Buddhist objects. Among the most important articles on Thai artare ‘Les Collections archéologiques du Musée National de Bangkok (1928), ‘Note sur unestatue de princess Siamoise de l’époque d’Ayudhya’ (1922), and ‘Siamese Votive Tablets’ (1926).His most important history books are The Indianized States of Southeast Asia (1968) and TheMaking of South East Asia (1990).6 In 1987, Boisselier’s La Sculpture en Thailand (1974) was translated into English, The Heritageof Thai Sculpture, with Commentaries by Jean-Michel Beurdeley and photographs by Hans



Hinz. (Bangkok: Asia Books). Besides Thai art, Boisselier also wrote extensively on Khmer andCham art. 7 His preliminary report on Wat Si Chum was published in Arts Asiatiques in 1965.8 For references of Boisselier’s publications, see Brown et al. (1997).9 The collaboration was between 1951 and 1952.10 The collaboration was between 1968 and 1979. They published a total of 24 articles, whichappeared in the Journal of the Siam Society. The articles were reprinted in a volume by Na Nagaraand Griswold (1992).11 Subhadradis Diskul (1971) was used as a textbook at Silpakorn University where he was therector of the university and on the faculty of the Archaeology Department until his retirementin 1998.12 This book received very negative reviews by scholars but it is still valuable for the materialsincluded in the volume (Subhadradis Diskul 1990).13 Piriya Krairiksh’s 1974 book Buddhist Folk Tales Depicted at Chula Praton Cedi is based on hisPhD dissertation, ‘The Chula Pathon Cedi: Architecture and Sculpture of Dvaravati.’ HarvardUniversity, May 1975.14 Gosling followed Cœdès’ hypothesis that the slabs were moved from Wat Mahathat(Sukhothai) to the passage at Wat Si Chum. She claimed that they originally decorated the baseof Wat Mahathat’s Lotus-bud stupa.15 He wrote an introductory essay in this volume (Brown 1999).16 This term is used by Hiram Woodward in The Art and Architecture of Thailand from PrehistoricTimes through the Thirteenth Century. There are no textual sources except remains of images of theBuddha accompanied by two figures. I have objected to this term because it was used much earlierthan the Kalyani inscription dated to the 15th century (see Pattaratorn Chirapravati 2005).17 Peter Skilling points out the most up-to-date approach to the topic of Buddhist schools inThailand in his interesting paper ‘Ubiquitous and Elusive: In Quest of Theravada’. The paperwas presented at the conference ‘Exploring Theravada Studies: Intellectual Trends and theFuture of a Field of Study’ (National University of Singapore).18 For further information on Cœdès, see ‘L’art siamois de l’épogue de Sukhodaya (13e–14esiécles): Circonstances de son éclosion’ (1955) and Recueil des Inscriptions du Siam. Première partie:Inscriptions de Sukhodaya (1924).19 For further information, see Peter Skilling (2007, chapters 1 and 2). 20 The conference was at Emory University in Atlanta, GA, 22–28 June 2008.21 The abstract of the panel was written by Justin McDaniel: ‘The panel explores various aspectsof funerary culture in Buddhism worldwide. Participants will offer papers on topics suchilluminated manuscripts produced for funerals, murals depicting death and the afterlife, Buddhistmilitary funerals, stupa and reliquary construction, the creation of full-body relics instead ofcremation, ghost protection rituals, and the creation of ephemeral fetuses at the time of death.’22 The following papers were presented: Justin McDaniel, ‘You Can’t Keep the Dead Down inBangkok: Re-Funerals and Repertoires in Modern Thai Buddhism’; Suchitra Chongstitvatana,‘Contemplation on Human Body And Death in Thai Chanting Texts’; Patrice Ladwig, ‘Caringfor the Dead, Caring for the Self: Two Festivals for the Deceased in Vientiane Buddhism’;Arthid Sheravanichkul, ‘Funeral for the Living: Buddhist Teaching in Lanna Funerary Texts’;Nicola Tannenbaum, ‘Continuity and Transformation: Rebirth, Power-Protection, andCommunity’; Daniel Kent, ‘Shelter For You, NirvAna for Our Sons: Remembering the WarDead in Contemporary Sri Lanka’; Erik Davis, ‘Mourning and Memory in ContemporaryCambodian Buddhism’; Leedom Lefferts, ‘Gifts to The Buddha, the Sangha, Spirits, and Laity:The Courses of Things in Northeast Thai-Lao TheravAda Buddhist Funerals’; Robert DeCaroli,‘Shedding Skins: NAga Imagery and Layers of Meaning in South Asian Funerary Contexts’; andPattaratorn Chirapravati, ‘Funeral of the Buddha in Thai Art: Texts and Interpretation ofMaha Kasappa and Dona Brahmana’s Roles’.

References

Aymonier, E, 1901, Khmer Heritage in Thailand (reprinted 1999). White Lotus, Bangkok,Thailand.



Boisselier, J, 1974, La Sculpture en Thailand. Office du Livre, Fribourg, Switzerland.Boisselier, J, 1975, La Peinture en Thailand. Office du Livre, Fribourg, Switzerland.Brown, RL, 1984, Light of Asia: Buddha Sakyamuni in Asian Art. Los Angeles County Museum

of Art, Los Angeles, CA.Brown, RL, 1990, ‘God on Earth: The Walking Buddha in the Art of South and Southeast

Asia’, Artibus Asiae, vol. 50, no. 1/2, pp. 73–107.Brown, RL, 1996, The Dvaravati Wheels of the Law and the Indianization of South East Asia. E.

J. Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands.Brown, RL, 1997a, ‘Narrative as Icon: The Jataka Stories in Ancient Indian and Southeast

Asian Architecture’, in J Schober (ed.), Sacred Biography in the Buddhist Traditions of South andSoutheast Asia, pp. 87–92. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, HI.

Brown, RL, (ed.), 1999, Art from Thailand. Marg, Mumbai, India.Brown, RL, Eilenberg N, & Subhadradis Diskul MC, 1997b, Living a Life in Accord with

Dhamma: Papers in Honor of Professor Jean Boisselier. Silpakorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.Chirapravati, Pattaratorn ML, 1994, The Cult of Votive Tablets in Thailand (seventh to thirteenth

centuries). PhD dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.Chirapravati, Pattaratorn ML, 1997, Votive Tablets in Thailand: Origin, Styles, and Uses. Oxford

University Press, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.Chirapravati, Pattaratorn ML, 1999, ‘Buddhist Votive Tablets and Amulets from Thailand’, in

RL Brown (ed.), Art from Thailand, pp. 49–64. Marg, Mumbai, India.Chirapravati, Pattaratorn ML, 2000, ‘Development of Buddhist Traditions in Peninsular Thai-

land: Studies of Votive Tablets (Eighth to Thirteenth Centuries)’, in N Taylor (ed.), Festschriftin Honor of the Seventieth Birthday of Stanley O’Connor, pp. 172–193. Southeast Asia ProgramPublication, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.

Chirapravati, Pattaratorn ML, 2005, ‘Wat Ratchaburana: Deposits of History, Art, and Cultureof the Early Ayutthaya Period’, in F McGill (ed.), Kingdom of Siam: Art from Central Thailand(1350–1800 C.E.), pp. xx–xx. Snoeck Publishers, Ghent, Belgium; Buppha Press, Bangkok,Thailand; Art Media Resources Inc., Chicago, IL; and The Asian Art Museum of SanFrancisco, CA.

Chirapravati, Pattaratorn ML, 2007, ‘Illustrating the Lives of the Bodhisattva: Art of Wat SiChum’, in P Skilling (ed.), Past Lives of the Buddha: Wat Si Chum-Art, Architecture and Inscrip-tions, pp. 13–40. River Books, Bangkok, Thailand.

Chirapravati, Pattaratorn ML, 2008, “From Text to Image: Copying as Buddhist Practice inLate Fourteenth Century Sukhothai’, in S Berkwitz, J Schober and C Brown (eds), BuddhistManuscript Cultures, pp. 172–188. Routledge, New York, NY.

Chomkao Chaoyuhua, King 2525, 1972, Phrachum Phraratchaniphon phasabali nai ratchakanthisiphaksong. G. van Oest, Paris and Brussels.

Cœdès, G, 1922, ‘Note sur une statue de princess Siamoise de l’époque d’Ayudhya’, Journal ofthe Siam Society, vol. 16, no. I, pp. 36–38.

Cœdès, G, 1924, Recueil des Inscriptions du Siam. Première partie: Inscriptions de Sukhodaya.Bangkok Times Press, Bangkok, Thailand.

Cœdès, G, 1926, ‘Siamese Votive Tablets’, Journal of Siam Society, vol. 20, pt. I. Reprinted byCœdès, G, 1954, ‘Selected articles’, Siam Society Journal, vol. 1, pp. 150–87.

Cœdès, G, 1928, ‘Les collections archéologiques du Musée National de Bangkok’, Ars Asiatica,no. 12. G. van Oest, Paris, France; and Brussels, Belgium.

Cœdès, G, 1955, ‘L’art siamois de l’épogue de Sukhodaya (13e-14e siécles): Circonstances deson éclosion’, Art Asiatiques, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 281–302.

Cœdès, G, 1968, The Making of South East Asia. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.Cœdès, G, 1990, The Indianized States of Southeast Asia. Ed. by Walter F. Vella and trans. by Sue

Brown Crowning. University of Hawai’i Press, Honolulu.Damrong Rajanubhab, P, 1973, Monuments of the Buddha in Siam. Trans. Sulak Sivaraksa and

AB Griswold. Siam Society, Bangkok, Thailand.Diskul, Subhadradis MC, 1971, Art in Thailand: A Brief History, 2nd rev. edn. Faculty of

Archaeology, Silpakorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.Diskul, Subhadradis MC, 1979, Silapa sukhothai/Sukhothai Art/L’Art de Sukhothai. Cultural

Committee of the Thailand National Commission for UNESCO, Bagkok, Thailand.



Diskul, Subhadradis MC, (ed.), 1980, The Art of Srivijaya. Oxford University Press, KualaLumpur, Malaysia; and UNESCO, Paris, France.

Fournereau, L, 1895, Le Siam Ancien: Archeologie-Epigraphie_Geographie. Premiere partie. ErnestLeroux, Editeur (Annales du Musee Guimet, tome 27), Paris, France.

Ginsburg, H, 1989, Thai Manuscript Painting. British Library, London, UK.Ginsburg, H, 2000, Thai Art and Culture: Historic Manuscripts from Western. Collections. British

Library, London, UK; University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, HI; and Silkworm Books,Chiang Mai, Thailand.

Gosling, B, 1981, ‘Once More, Inscription 2: An Art Historian’s View’, Journal of Siam Societyvol. 69, no. 1–2, pp. 13–42.

Gosling, B, 1983, The History of Sukhothai as a Ceremonial Center: A Study of Early SiameseArchitecture and Society. PhD dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.

Gosling, B, 1984, ‘Why Were the jatakas “Hidden Away” at Wat Sri Chum?’ Journal of SiamSociety vol. 72, no. 1–2, pp. 14–18.

Gosling, B, 1986, ‘Reply to Michael Wright’s Note on Betty Gosling’s “Why were the Jatakas‘Hidden Away’ at Wat Si Chum?”’ Journal of Siam Society vol. 74, pp. 199–206.

Gosling, B, 1991, Sukhothai: Its History, Culture, and Art. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.Gosling, B, 1996, A Chronology of Religious Architecture at Sukhothai (Late Thirteenth to Early

Fifteenth Century). Silkworm Books, Chaing Mai, Thailand.Gosling, B, 1998, ‘Comments on Christian Bauer’s “The Wat Sri Chum Jataka Glosses

Reconsidered”’ Journal of Siam Society, vol. 86, no. 1–2, pp. 239–240.Gosling, B, 1998, ‘On Michael Vickery’s “From Lamphun to Inscription No. 2”’, Journal of

Siam Society, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 5–7.Gosling, B, 2006, The Origins of Thai Art. River Books, Bangkok, Thailand.Griswold, AB, 1957, Dated Buddha Images of Northern Siam, Artibus Asiae (Supplementum 16).

Ascona, Switerland (2nd printing 1959).Griswold, AB, 1960, ‘History of Art and Architecture in Siam’, in T Bowie (ed.), The Arts of

Thailand, pp. 25–165. Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.Griswold, AB, 1967, Towards a History of Sukhodaya Art. Fine Arts Department of Thailand,

Bangkok, Thailand (2nd edition 1968).Krairiksh, P, 1974, Buddhist Folk Tales Depicted at Chula Praton Cedi. Bangkok (Based on

Krairiksh, Piriya, 1975, The Chula Pathon Cedi: Architecture and Sculpture of Dvaravati. PhDdissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.)

Krairiksh, P, 1979, Das heilige Bildnis: Skulpturen aus Thailand/The Sacred Image: Sculptures fromThailand. Museen fur Ostasiatische Kunst, Museen der Stadt, Cologne, Germany.

Krairiksh, P, 1980, Art in Peninsular Thailand Prior to the Fourteenth Century A.D. The Fine ArtsDepartment of Thailand, Bagkok, Thailand.

Krairiksh, P, 1990, Prawatsat sinlapa lae borankhadi nai prathet thai [History of Art and Archeologyin Thailand]. Amarin Printing, Bangkok, Thailand.

Krairiksh, P, 1992, ‘A Revised Dating of Ayutthaya Architecture’, Journal of Siam Society,vol. 80, pt. I, pp. 36–55; pt. II, pp. 11–26.

Krairiksh, P, 1997/1998, ‘A Reassessment of Thai Art of the Ayutthaya Period’, Oriental Art,vol. 53, no. 4 (winter), pp. 14–22.

Krairiksh, P, 2002, Sinlapa sukhothai lae Ayutthaya: phap laksana thi tong plian plaeng [Towards arevised History of Sukhothai and Ayutthaya Art: A Reaccessessment]. Amarin Printing, Bangkok,Thailand.

Le May, R, 1938, Buddhist Art in South-East Asia: The Indian Influence on the Art of Thailand.Reprinted by Aryan Books International, 2004.

Leksukhum, S, 1979, Wiwatthanakan khong chan pradap luat lai lae luat lai samai Ayutthaya ton ton[The Evolution of Stucco Decorative Motifs of Early Ayudhya Period]. Bangkok, Thailand.

Leksukhum, S, 1986, Chedi phoem mum chedi yo mum samai Ayutthaya [The Redented Added-angled Chedis and the Rabbeted-angled Chedis of the Ayutthaya Period]. Bangkok, Thailand.

Listopad, J, 1999, ‘Early Thai Sculpture Reappraised: Thirteenth-Sixteenth century’, in RLBrown (ed.), Art from Thailand, pp. 49–64. Marg, Mumbai, India.

Listopad, JA, 1995, The Art and Architecture of the Reign of Somdet Phra Narai. 2 vols. UniversityMicrofilms, Ann Arbor, MI.



McGill, F, 1993, ‘Jatakas, Universal Monarchs, and the year 2000’, Artibus Asiae, vol. 53,pp. 412–448.

McGill, F, 1997,‘Painting the “Great Life”’, in J Schober (ed.), Sacred Biography in the BuddhistTraditions of South and Southeast Asia, pp. 195–217. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, HI.

McGill, F, 2005, The Kingdom of Siam: The Art of Central Thailand, 1350–1800. SnoeckPublishers, Ghent, Belgium; Buppha Press, Bangkok, Thailand; Art Media Resources Inc.,Chicago, IL; and The Asian Art Museum of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.

Mongkutklau Chauyuhua, 2496, 1953, Ruang thieo muang phraruang [Account of an Excursion tothe Cities of Phra Ruang], third printing, published on the occasion of the royally sponsoredcremation of Nai Kamthon Thephasdin Na Ayutthaya at the cremation of Wat MakutKasatriyaram, 17 August 2496. Rongphim Thanakhan Omsin, Bangkok, Thailand.

Na Nagara, P & Griswold, AB 1992, Epigraphic and Historical Studies. The Historical SocietyUnder the Royal Patronage of HRH Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn, Bangkok, Thailand.

O’Connor, SJ, Jr., 1972, Hindu Gods of Peninsular Siam. Artibus Asiae (Supplementum 28).Ascona, Switzerland.

O’Connor, SJ, Jr., 1974, ‘Buddhist Votive Tablets and Caves in Peninsular Thailand’, Sinlapalae borankhadi nai Prathet Thai [Art and Archaeology in Thailand] Bangkok, Thailand: Divisionof Literature, The Fine Arts Department, pp. 67–84.

Rooney, D, 2007, Ancient Sukhothai: Thailand’s Cultural Heritage. River Books, Bangkok,Thailand.

Satow, E, 2000, A Diplomat in Siam. Orchid Press, Bangkok, Thailand.Skilling, P, (ed.), 2007, Past Lives of the Buddha: Wat Si Chum-Art, Architecture and Inscriptions.

River Books, Bangkok, Thailand.Stratton, C & McNair Scott, M 1981, The Art of Sukhothai: Thailand’s Golden Age: From the Mid-

Thirteenth to the Mid-Fifteenth Centuries. Oxford University Press, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.Subhadradis Diskul, MC, 1990, Hindu Gods at Sukhothai. White Lotus, Bagkok, Thailand.Woodward, HW, Jr., 1975, Studies in the Art of Central Siam, 950–1350 A.D., 3 vols. PhD

dissertation, Yale University, New Havne, CT.Woodward, HW, Jr., 1991, Asian Art in the Walters Art Gallery: A Selection. The Trustees of the

Walters Art Gallery, Baltimore, MD.Woodward, HW, Jr., 1997, The Sacred Sculpture of Thailand: The Alexander B. Griswold Collection,

The Walters Art Gallery. With contributions by Donna K. Strahan, Terry Drayman-Weisser, JulieA. Lauffenburger, Chandra L. Reedy, and Richard Newman. Walters Art Gallery, Baltimore,MD; River Books, Bangkok, Thailand.

Woodward, HW, Jr., 2003, The Art and Architecture of Thailand from Prehistoric Times through theThirteenth Century. Handbook of Oriental Studies, sec. 3, vol. 14. E. J. Brill, Leiden, TheNetherlands.

buddhism and thai art

Documents