Metropolitan Museum Studies in Art, Science, and Technology ◆ Volume 2 / 2014

THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART, NEW YORK

DISTRIBUTED BY YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS, NEW HAVEN AND LONDON Editorial Board Photographs of works in the Metropolitan Museum’s Silvia A. Centeno collection are by The Photograph Studio, The Metro­ politan Museum of Art, unless otherwise noted. Research Scientist, Department of Scientific Research Additional picture credits appear at the end of each Nora W. Kennedy article. Sherman Fairchild Conservator of Photographs, Department of Photographs Typeset in Warnock Pro Printed on 150 gsm Galaxi Matte Marijn Manuels Separations by Professional Graphics, Inc., Conservator, Sherman Fairchild Center for Rockford, Illinois Objects Conservation Printed and bound by Verona Libri, Verona, Italy Deborah Schorsch ◆ Conservator, Sherman Fairchild Center for Objects Conservation Cover illustrations: Saint Michael, lower right panel of the Richard E. Stone retable of Saint Anne with the Virgin and Child (1938.141d; Conservator Emeritus, Sherman Fairchild Center for Figure 5, page 74): (left), detail, photograph by Andrew Objects Conservation Winslow; (right) infrared reflectogram (Figure 19, page 80) Zhixin Jason Sun Frontispiece: Detail of Suzanne de Court, Mirror: Venus Curator, Department of Asian Art Mourning the Dead Adonis (1975.1.1236; Figure 3a, page 159)

Mark T. Wypyski The Metropolitan Museum of Art endeavors to Research Scientist, Department of Scientific Research respect copyright in a manner consistent with its nonprofit educational mission. If you believe any material has been included in this publication This publication is made possible by gifts from improperly, please contact the Editorial Department. Ludmila Schwarzenberg Bidwell and her late husband Copyright © 2014 by The Metropolitan Museum of Carl B. Hess. Further support was provided by the Art, New York members of the Visiting Committees of the Sherman First printing Fairchild Center for Objects Conservation, the All rights reserved. No part of this publication may Sherman Fairchild Center for Paintings Conservation, be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any the Sherman Fairchild Center for Works on Paper means, electronic or mechanical, including photo­ and Photograph Conservation, and the Department copying, recording, or any information storage and of Scientific Research. retrieval system, without permission in writing from ◆ the publishers. The Metropolitan Museum of Art Published by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1000 Fifth Avenue New York New York, New York 10028 Mark Polizzotti, Publisher and Editor in Chief metmuseum.org Gwen Roginsky, Associate Publisher and General Distributed by Manager of Publications Yale University Press, New Haven and London Peter Antony, Chief Production Manager yalebooks.com/art Michael Sittenfeld, Managing Editor yalebooks.co.uk Robert Weisberg, Senior Project Manager Cataloguing-in-Publication Data is available from Edited by Ann Hofstra Grogg the Library of Congress. Designed by Nancy Sylbert based on original design ISBN 978-1-58839-527-6 (The Metropolitan Museum by Tony Drobinski of Art) Production by Paul Booth ISBN 978-0-300-20439-1 (Yale University Press) Proofread by Sylvia Tidwell Inquiries and other correspondence may be sent to: [email protected]. Contents

6 Director’s Foreword 7 Acknowledgments 11 Conservation in Context: The Examination and Treatment of Medieval Polychrome Wood Sculpture in the United States Lucretia Kargère and Michele D. Marincola 1 5 Stone Materials Used for Lintels and Decorative Elements of Khmer Temples Federico Carò, Martin Polkinghorne, and Janet G. Douglas 9 6 The Retable of Saint Anne with the Virgin and Child at The Cloisters: Insights into Fifteenth-Century Working Practices in the Kingdom of Aragon Karen E. Thomas and Silvia A. Centeno 3 9 Petrography of Stone Used for Sculpture from the Buddhist Cave Temples of Xiangtangshan Dating to the Northern Qi Dynasty Janet G. Douglas and John T. Haynes  115 Lebanese Mountain Figures: Advances in the Study of Levantine Anthropomorphic Metal Statuary Deborah Schorsch

Research Notes 157 Silver Surface Decoration on Limoges Painted Enamels Gregory H. Bailey and Robyn E. Hodgkins 167 A Closer Look at Red Pictorialist Photographs by René Le Bègue and Robert Demachy Anna Vila, Silvia A. Centeno, and Nora W. Kennedy 173 Tracing the Origins of Japanese Export Lacquer on an Eighteenth-Century French Side Table Christina Hagelskamp 181 A Technical Examination of Lake Como by Thomas Moran Sarah Kleiner 189 A Technical Examination of the Lion Helmet Edward A. Hunter 197 An Investigation of Tool Marks on Ancient Egyptian Hard Stone Sculpture: Preliminary Report Anna Serotta Stone Materials Used for Lintels and Decorative Elements of Khmer Temples ◆ Federico Carò, Martin Polkinghorne, and Janet G. Douglas

abstract he Metropolitan Museum of Art holds Intricately carved lintels occupy a privileged Tseveral stone decorative lintels produced and symbolic position in Khmer temples. Their during the time of the Khmer Empire (sixth – production was commissioned to highly special- fifteenth centuries). These objects belong to a ized craftsmen with specific material and carv- special variety of Khmer sculptural arts that ing traditions. The stone of seven decorative differ in several ways from free­standing sculp­ lintels in The Metropolitan Museum of Art has ture. A true lintel is the upper horizontal com­ been characterized by means of petrographic ponent in the framework of a doorway, which is and textural analyses, together with the stone usually formed of four independent stone blocks of twenty-nine other lintels and ornamental held together by mortise and tenon fittings. A elements dating from the seventh to the thir- decorative lintel, on the contrary, is rarely load teenth century now in the National Museum of bearing and is located above the true lintel, sup­ Cambodia, Phnom Penh; the Musée National ported by two similarly decorated colonnettes. des Arts Asiatiques – Guimet, Paris; and the Decorative lintels occupy privileged positions Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Smithsonian above the entryways of Khmer temples, watch­ Institution, Washington, D.C. Results suggest ing over all those who pass through from the that particular stone types were selected by secular to the divine realms. In this role they Khmer carvers for certain elements in the temple define an important boundary. The forms and structure. Whereas blocks of sandstone from icon­ographies of the decorative lintels sought the Terrain Rouge Formation of Cambodia to maintain the temple in a permanent state of were used to build and clad the Angkor temples festival. Often they represent ephemeral deco­ and for decorative lintels and other ornaments, rations of garlands and rinceaux that gave the quartz-rich sandstone was reserved exclusively impression of a building alive with celebrations.1 for these decorated elements. This sandstone The lintels are thought to have been carved in may originate from the Grès Supérieures situ by specialized craftsmen employing a par­ Formation, a sedimentary sequence that ticularly time-consuming and expensive pro­ extends into Thailand, Laos, and Vietnam. cess, following established artistic conventions.2

50 ◆ Metropolitan Museum Studies in Art, Science, and Technology 2 ◆ 51 Table 1 ◆ Key Compositional and Textural Parameters of the Lintels and Carved Architectural Elements. The samples are listed in order of accession number and stone type (Type 1, white to light brown quartz arenite; Type 2, reddish quartz arenite; Type 3 and 3b, greenish- gray feldspathic arenite). Q = quartz; F = feldspar; L = rock fragments. Sorting (σ): see note 28.

Accession Q F L Mean Median Sorting Stone Number Collection Description Provenience Date (%) (%) (%) (mm) (mm) (σ) Type

1972.214 The Metropolitan Lintel Thailand, exact 1st half 11th c. 85.7 13.1 1.2 0.16 0.16 0.46 1 Museum of Art provenience unknown 1985.390.1 The Metropolitan Lintel Cambodia or Vietnam, 7th c. 91.6 7.7 0.7 0.26 0.27 0.67 1 Museum of Art (see Figure 1) exact provenience unknown 1992.192 The Metropolitan Lintel Cambodia or Thailand, 1st half 11th c. 96.2 3.1 0.8 0.26 0.27 0.60 1 Museum of Art exact provenience unknown 1994.94 The Metropolitan Lintel Cambodia or Thailand, 1st quarter 11th c. 83.9 13.3 2.8 0.21 0.21 0.56 1 Museum of Art (see Figure 5) exact provenience unknown Ka1791 National Museum Lintel Wat Ang Kh 7th c. 78.7 14.8 6.6 0.20 0.20 0.51 1 of Cambodia Ka2096 National Museum Lintel Exact provenience unknown 7th c. 88.9 8.6 2.5 0.18 0.18 0.69 1 of Cambodia Ka3175 National Museum Lintel Wat Preah Theat 7th c. 94.7 3.1 2.3 0.32 0.34 0.46 1 of Cambodia (see Figure 9) MG17860 Musée Guimet Lintel Phnom Da beginning 12th c. 95.9 2.3 1.8 0.26 0.27 0.57 1

MG18218 Musée Guimet Lintel Wat Baset end 11th – 90.1 3.5 6.4 0.17 0.17 0.53 1 beginning 12th c. MG18324 Musée Guimet Colonnette Phnom Da beginning 12th c. 97.5 0.6 1.9 0.25 0.24 0.70 1

S1987.953 Arthur M. Sackler Lintel Cambodia or Thailand, mid-11th c. 97.0 2.0 1.0 0.17 0.17 0.86 1 Gallery exact provenience unknown 36.96.6 The Metropolitan Lintel Kôk Sla Ket mid-10th c. 93.4 4.7 1.9 0.12 0.12 0.60 2 Museum of Art (see Figure 2) 1994.111 The Metropolitan Lintel Cambodia or Thailand, mid-10th c. 88.2 7.5 4.3 0.11 0.11 0.63 2 Museum of Art exact provenience unknown 1996.473 The Metropolitan Lintel Cambodia, exact 2nd half 10th c. 80.1 18.2 1.7 0.11 0.10 0.52 2 Museum of Art (see Figure 4) provenience unknown 1997.434.2 The Metropolitan Colonnette Cambodia, exact mid-10th c. 88.5 9.9 1.6 0.10 0.09 0.58 2 Museum of Art provenience unknown 2003.142 The Metropolitan Antefix Cambodia, exact 3rd quarter 10th c. 87.6 12.0 0.4 0.11 0.10 0.63 2 Museum of Art provenience unknown MG17488 Musée Guimet Lintel Wat Kralanh mid-11th c. 82.9 12.8 4.3 0.11 0.11 0.67 2 (see Figure 6) MG18913 Musée Guimet Pediment Banteay Srei late 10th c. 87.8 7.7 4.4 0.12 0.13 0.68 2

Ka1748 National Museum Lintel Sambor Prei Kuk 7th c. 47.1 44.6 8.3 0.19 0.19 0.55 3 of Cambodia Ka1802 National Museum Lintel Preah Kô 9th c. 51.7 39.7 8.6 0.15 0.16 0.61 3 of Cambodia Ka2712 National Museum Lintel Kompong Cham Province, mid-10th c. 43.0 49.0 8.0 0.16 0.17 0.50 3 of Cambodia (see Figure 3) exact provenience unknown Ka2763 National Museum Lintel Preah Vihear Province, exact late 10th c. 37.6 52.6 9.8 0.16 0.17 0.53 3 of Cambodia provenience unknown Ka2844 National Museum Lintel Preah Khan of Kompong end 12th – 51.7 38.3 10.0 0.18 0.18 0.53 3 of Cambodia Svay / Bakan beginning 13th c. MG14898 Musée Guimet Frieze Exact provenience unknown last quarter 10th – 66.5 29.4 4.0 0.17 0.17 0.44 3b beginning 11th c. MG18120 Musée Guimet Pilaster Beng Mealea mid-12th c. 53.7 40.3 6.0 0.12 0.13 0.70 3

MG18121 Musée Guimet Colonnette Beng Mealea mid-12th c. 52.4 42.1 5.6 0.18 0.18 0.56 3

MG18197 Musée Guimet Pediment Preah Khan of Kompong 3rd quarter 12th c. 40.9 50.7 8.4 0.18 0.19 0.82 3 Svay / Bakan MG18219 Musée Guimet Lintel Bayon end 12th – 46.0 45.5 8.5 0.18 0.18 0.64 3 beginning 13th c. MG18220 Musée Guimet Lintel Kapilapura last quarter 9th c. 50.2 41.4 8.4 0.13 0.15 0.70 3

MG18853 Musée Guimet Lintel Sambor Prei Kuk 1st half 7th c. 55.8 38.7 5.5 0.10 0.10 0.73 3

MG18854 Musée Guimet Lintel Prasat Prei Khmeng 2nd half 7th c. 67.3 29.4 3.3 0.10 0.10 0.58 3b

MG18855 Musée Guimet Lintel Prasat Koki early 9th c. 59.1 34.3 6.5 0.10 0.10 0.62 3

MG18857 Musée Guimet Colonnette Prasat Prei Khmeng 2nd half 7th c. 66.5 29.2 4.2 0.10 0.10 0.60 3b

MG18858 Musée Guimet Colonnette Kulen early 9th c. 54.0 38.1 7.9 0.11 0.11 0.59 3

MG18879 Musée Guimet Pediment Prasat Sok Kraup end 9th – 54.7 38.9 6.4 0.16 0.17 0.58 3 beginning 10th c. MG18890 Musée Guimet Colonnette Wat Choeng Ek 1st half 7th c. 52.6 39.9 7.5 0.16 0.17 0.74 3

52 ◆ Carò, Polkinghorne, and Douglas ◆ 53 In support of this hypothesis, previous tech­ lintels are particularly respected chronological nical studies suggest that specific stone materials markers for Khmer art historians and were purposefully chosen for the production of archaeologists.5 these architectural elements, which are char­ The studied lintels and decorative elements acterized by deeply carved, intricate details.3 originate from various locations in Cambodia, However, given the complex history of Khmer Thailand, and Vietnam. Those in the Musée temples and the vast production of decorative Guimet and National Museum of Cambodia elements,4 it is difficult to draw any conclusion come with certain provenience, and most can about patterns of stone choice and usage be associated with specific sites (Table 1). From without considering a comprehensive and rep­ a stylistic perspective alone it is difficult to be resentative database of provenienced objects. precise about the origins of the lintels and dec­ Toward this end, this study aims to character­ orative elements in The Metropolitan Museum ize by means of scientific analyses the stone of Art and the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, but materials used in the production of a selection they are logically associated with temple sites of decorative lintels and other architectural north of the Tonlé Sap (Great Lake) and may ornamental elements, and ultimately to help even have come from what today is Thailand. unveil connections between Khmer artistic production and the geological sources of con­ Iconography and struction materials. Decorative Motifs The twenty-four lintels and twelve decora­ Five lintels from The Metropolitan Museum of tive elements (colonnettes, friezes, and pedi­ Art have been selected for discussion, as they ments, as well as one antifix and one pilaster) illustrate the iconography and decorative examined for this study are in the collections motifs common to classical Khmer sculptures. of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New They range in dates from the seventh century Figure 1 ◆ Lintel with a York; the National Museum of Cambodia, to the early eleventh century. mask of Kāla. Cambodia or Vietnam, exact provenience Phnom Penh; the Musée National des Arts Asi­ The lintel with a mask of Kāla (1985.390.1; unknown, 7th century. atiques – Guimet, Paris; and the Arthur M. Figure 1) is of exceptional interest; its motifs White to light brown quartz Sackler Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, indicate that it likely dates to the seventh cen­ arenite (Type 1 sandstone), H. 47.0 cm (18 ½ in.), Washington, D.C. They were produced over a tury, making it the earliest included in this L. 142.2 cm (56 in.), range of dates consistent with the pre-Angkor study.6 Its central and dominating motif is D. 25.4 cm (10 in.). The (sixth – eighth centuries) and Angkor (ninth – fif­ the Kāla or Kīrtimukha (face of glory), an Metropolitan Museum of Art, Gift of Margery and teenth centuries) periods. Although rarely dated extremely common central motif on decorative Harry Kahn, 1985 on the basis of epigraphic evidence, decorative lintels thought to represent an aspect of Shiva (1985.390.1)

52 ◆ Stone Materials Used for Lintels and Decorative Elements of Khmer Temples ◆ 53 Figure 2 ◆ Lintel with as time, who devours himself and destroys all Javanese inspiration and cites seventeen exam­ carved figures. Kôk Sla things.7 Kāla in this role is known by the Khmer ples that predate the Javanese examples,12 par­ Ket, mid-10th century. Reddish quartz arenite as Rahu.8 Rahu is associated with funerary and ticularly those at Borobudur mentioned by (Type 2 sandstone), cremation rites and also possesses a bivalent Gilberte de Coral-Rémusat.13 The Metropolitan H. 51.4 cm (20 ¼ in.), nature as the first step toward new life. In this Museum’s Kāla lintel corroborates the theory L. 124.5 cm (49 in.). The Metropolitan Museum of manifestation, Rahu is regarded as the demon that the motif as it developed in both Cambodia Art, Fletcher Fund, 1936 of the eclipse, causing the darkness to make and Java most likely derives from a common (36.96.6) new light appear.9 source of influence in India.14 In 1930, Victor Goloubew of the École The Kāla motif on the Metropolitan Muse­ Française d’Extrême-Orient (EFEO) proposed um’s lintel is distinctive in that it dominates that the Kāla motif was adopted by the Khmer the entire surface. Although different in repre­ from Java.10 Subsequent scholars have com­ sentation, this Kāla is analogous in size to that mented on this possible connection11 but point on a lintel from Sala Prambei Lveng, in Thala to many examples of Khmer architectural Borivat, Stung Treng Province.15 Between the decoration that predate those from Java. Kāla’s eyes is a fleuron emblem common to Mireille Bénisti argues that the indigenous central motifs in other pre-Angkorian lintels.16 influence from early Khmer art on the appear­ The conscious transformation of motifs from ance and composition of the Kāla has been simple to complex, or vice versa, may be defined underestimated at the willing acceptance of a as a form of stylization and was part of the

Figure 3 ◆ Lintel depicting Indra riding Airāvata. Kompong Cham Province, exact provenience unknown, mid-10th century. Greenish-gray feldspathic arenite (Type 3 sandstone), H. 49.0 cm (19 ¼ in.), L. 180.0 cm (70 ⅞ in.), D. 11.0 cm (4 ⅜ in.). National Museum of Cambodia (Ka2712)

54 ◆ Carò, Polkinghorne, and Douglas ◆ 55 repertoire of classical Khmer artists.17 The northeast of Angkor.23 The top frieze captures interplay between the Kāla and fleuron sug­ seven r. s.i or ascetics in prayer. Lintels from the gests that the motifs were interchangeable and mid-tenth century display a consistency in the perhaps share a similar or double meaning. division of decoration on their surface. Arched Below the Kāla mask are series of motifs com­ foliage branches terminating in leafy curls, a mon to pre-Angkorian lintels, including colon­ regular and symmetrical number of offshoots nette capitals with fleuron medallions, lotuses above and below the branches, and the distinc­ of the species Nelumbo nucifera, and hanging tive frieze are components also observed on a pendants that establish a seventh-century date lintel from the National Museum of Cambodia for this work.18 (Ka2712; Figure 3). The Khmer collection of The Metropolitan A second lintel (1996.473; Figure 4) from the Museum of Art includes three examples of second half of the tenth century in the Metro­ decorative lintels dating to the second half of politan Museum is in the style of Banteay Srei. the tenth century. One of these (36.96.6; The fine carving and complexity of decorative Figure 2) comes from the Angkorian site of motifs from this period have led numerous Kôk Sla Ket, located 4 kilometers south of the scholars to consider the period between approx­ West Baray. The sculpture is dated stylistically imately 940 and 990 as among the pinnacles of to the mid-tenth century, which is consistent Khmer art.24 The central motif depicts Yama, with an inscription found at the site.19 Accord­ the god of death, atop his Vāhana, the buffalo, ing to photographs taken by the EFEO in 1933, holding a danda, or club. In this context Yama the lintel is from the east facade of the north is designated as a Lokapāla or Dikpāla, both tower.20 After being removed to the Conserva­ directional deities. This identification confirms tion d’Angkor,21 the lintel was acquired by The that the lintel originally faced south in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in February 1936 configuration of the temple tower. with six additional Khmer sculptures, includ­ A third tenth-century lintel in the Metro­ ing a bust of Hevajra (36.96.4) found outside politan Museum collection (1994.111) depicts a the Gate of the Dead at Angkor Thom.22 Kāla face ridden by Indra holding a vajra This lintel’s central motif of a caryatid lion (thunderbolt).25 Of particular interest are the flanked by additional lions issuing foliage motifs of celestial beings praying in fleurons branches from their mouths is reminiscent of forming the lintel frieze. Each of these small the early tenth century, and it is possible that representations depicts the torso of a crowned the lintel was carved by artists who had also figure with hands together in a gesture of pray­ worked at the early tenth-century capital ing, positioned within a triangular vegetal

Figure 4 ◆ Lintel with Yama on buffalo. Cambodia, exact provenience unknown, second half of the 10th century. Reddish quartz arenite (Type 2 sandstone), H. 59.7 cm (23 ½ in.), L. 137.2 cm (54 in.). The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Gift of The Kronos Collections, 1996 (1996.473)

54 ◆ Stone Materials Used for Lintels and Decorative Elements of Khmer Temples ◆ 55 Figure 5 ◆ Lintel with a frame. Nearly identical celestial beings praying with lintels from the Khleangs and the Royal mask of Kāla and Dikpāla. in fleurons make their first appearance in lin­ Palace of Angkor Thom. The principal motif is Cambodia or Thailand, exact provenience tels from Koh Ker, the Khmer capital from again the Kāla, which issues from its mouth unknown, first quarter of about 921 to 944, approximately 85 kilometers two garlands that terminate in curls of foliage. the 11th century. White to northeast of Angkor. These motifs recur for The monster supports a seated brahmanic light brown quartz arenite (Type 1 sandstone), the next fifty years, continuing even after the divinity, perhaps the most common motif on H. 58.4 cm (23 in.), court returned to Angkor (Yaśodharapura) decorative lintels but whose details are often L. 170.2 cm (67 in.). The from Koh Ker. The same artistic workshop that confused and indistinct and therefore difficult Metropolitan Museum of Art, Gift of R. Hatfield contributed to the foundations of the king to identify. From their seated position known Ellsworth, in honor of Jayavarman IV at Koh Ker followed the new as rājalilāsansa (Sanskrit, meaning “pose of Florence and Herbert sovereign back to Angkor, suggesting that royal ease”), the figures are usually associated Irving, 1994 (1994.94) despite political change or instability, the arti­ with Dikpāla and are identified with a mon­ sans shadowed the center of power and were arch, as can be seen on the lintel in Figure 5. not tied to a particular administration.26 Iconographically, this lintel is similar to a lintel The last decorative lintel at The Metropoli­ from the Musée Guimet (MG17488; Figure 6), tan Museum of Art under consideration here especially in the Kāla face with extended arms (1994.94; Figure 5) dates to the first decades of and the frieze of pendants and fleurons. Varia­ the eleventh century and can be associated tion of the central motif (Umāheśvara) and

Figure 6 ◆ Lintel depicting Umāheśvara on Kāla. Wat Kralanh, mid-11th century. Reddish quartz arenite (Type 2 sandstone), H. 79.0 cm (31 ⅛ in.), L. 174.0 cm (68 ½ in.), D. 52.0 cm (20 ½ in.). Musée National des Arts Asiatiques – Guimet (MG17488)

56 ◆ Carò, Polkinghorne, and Douglas ◆ 57 a b c

additional depth of carving suggest an affinity objects studied were carved from three main Figure 7 ◆ Micrographs of to the Baphuon style and a slightly later date in types of sandstone, designated herein as Types the three main identified lithotypes (crossed Nicols): the mid-eleventh century. 1, 2, and 3 (Figures 7, 8; see also Table 1). (a) medium-grained, white to light brown quartz Petrography of the Stone White to Light Brown Quartz arenite (Type 1 sandstone); Arenite (b) very fine-grained, red- Materials dish quartz arenite (Type 2 The addition of petrographic analysis to the Type 1 sandstone varies in color from white to sandstone); (c) very fine- suite of interpretive tools applied to Khmer light brown, depending on the amount of iron to fine-grained, greenish- gray feldspathic arenite sandstone sculpture has considerable potential oxides present, and has a crisp appearance. (Type 3 sandstone) to answer questions raised by art-historical Using petrography, this sandstone is classified studies. Petrographic analysis requires that a as a fine- to medium-grained, moderately well- small fragment of stone be removed for thin- sorted to well-sorted quartz arenite. Grains are section preparation, that is, mounted on a glass subrounded to subangular in shape and are slide and polished to a thickness of 30 microns. cemented by abundant authigenic quartz. For this study fragments were removed from Kaolinite cement arranged in coarse stacks of already damaged areas, generally located at the pseudohexagonal plates is also abundant and bottom edges of the lintels. postdates the quartz overgrowth. The shapes For each thin section, the nature, dimen­ of the original grains are often revealed by a sions, and abundance of the various constitu­ thin hematite coating on their surfaces. ent grains were assessed using a polarized light Monocrystalline undulose quartz grains are microscope.27 The number of grains analyzed the most abundant constituent. The quartz varied with each sample according to its size often appears cloudy from inclusions. Poly­ and also depended on grain size and sorting,28 crystalline quartz is subordinate and mostly but usually at least 300 points were counted. strained and foliated, with sutured contacts. The classification scheme adopted is that pro­ Also present but rare are grains of crypto­ posed by Paolo Gazzi and by William R. Dick­ crystalline quartz. Feldspar content is gener­ inson, which uses the relative abundance of ally low but can reach 15 percent of the total quartz (Q), feldspar (F), and rock fragments (L) grains. Feldspars are often weathered or to assign specific names to different species of kaolinized. sandstone.29 Further information regarding the Rock fragments do not exceed 7 percent texture of the rock was recorded, including the of the framework grains. Among them, most size, sorting, shape, and arrangement of the characteristic are aphanitic volcanic rock constituent elements. With few exceptions, the fragments, low-grade metamorphic rocks

56 ◆ Stone Materials Used for Lintels and Decorative Elements of Khmer Temples ◆ 57 a b

Figure 8 ◆ Petrographic (phyllite), and fragments of argillaceous mud­ kaolinite and authigenic quartz in variable pro­ and textural characteris- stone. Some of the sedimentary rock frag­ portions. Characteristic is the abundant hema­ tics of the lintels studied: (a) framework grain ments, such as the argillaceous component, tite cementation that occurs as grain-coating composition grouped have been squeezed to form pseudomatrix. and pore-filling and accounts for the color of according to the relative Heavy minerals30 are rare and include grains this sandstone. abundance of quartz (Q), feldspar (F), and rock of rutile, tourmaline, zircon, and epidote. A Undulose and nonundulose monocrystal­ fragments (L) following fine-grained matrix, often pigmented by the line quartz grains dominate the framework, Gazzi 1966 and Dickinson abundant iron oxides, is present in variable while feldspar is subordinate and usually 1970; (b) classification of the sandstone types amounts between the framework grains. weathered. Polycrystalline strained quartz and according to sorting and When the sandstone is extremely quartz- cryptocrystalline quartz are also present. Rock grain size of the constitu- rich and devoid of iron oxides, opaque miner­ fragments are sparse and include aphanitic ent grains following Folk and Ward 1957. als, and matrix, it is white to light gray, as in volcanics, phyllite, siltstone, and mudstone. WS = well sorted; the lintel from the National Museum of Cam­ Fragments of igneous rock with micrographic MWS = moderately bodia depicting Indra riding Airāvata (Ka3175; texture are present but very rare. Accessory well sorted; MS = moderately sorted Figure 9). With the increase of the above- muscovite is often bent between the grains. mentioned accessory minerals, the sandstone Heavy minerals are rare and include ilmenite, attains a reddish-brown color, like the Metro­ rutile, tourmaline, and zircon. A fine, brown politan Museum’s lintel with a mask of Kāla matrix of clay-size particles rich in iron oxides and Dikpāla (1994.94; see Figure 5) and the is occasionally deposited between the grains, Musée Guimet’s lintel depicting scenes from possibly as a result of mechanical compaction the Rāmāyana (MG18218). of preexisting rock fragments.

Reddish Quartz Arenite Greenish-Gray Feldspathic Arenite Type 2 sandstone has a characteristic reddish Type 3 sandstone is a greenish-gray feldspathic color. Petrographically, this rock is classified as arenite; it constitutes almost half of the sam­ very fine-grained, moderately well-sorted quartz ples. This sandstone is composed of very fine arenite. Grains are subrounded to rounded in to fine, moderately well-sorted to well-sorted, shape and are cemented by fine-grained subangular to rounded grains, cemented

58 ◆ Carò, Polkinghorne, and Douglas ◆ 59 predominantly by chlorite. Calcite and authi­ Geological Provenience Figure 9 ◆ Lintel depicting genic quartz and feldspar can be also present This study of the mineral composition and Indra riding Airāvata. Wat Preah Theat, 7th century. in variable amounts. The degree of compaction texture of the sandstones used for lintels and White to light brown and cementation varies. other decorative architectural elements helps quartz arenite (Type 1 Mono-, poly- and microcrystalline quartz to correlate the lithotypes identified to specific sandstone), H. 68.0 cm (26 ¾ in.), L. 154.0 cm grains, both undulose and nonundulose, are geological formations32 and, in turn, to more (60 ⅝ in.). National the most abundant framework constituents. narrowly defined geographic regions within Museum of Cambodia Feldspar makes up about 40 percent of the the territory of the Khmer Empire. (Ka3175) framework grains and is dominated by plagio­ All three lithotypes have strong affinities clase, with minor alkali feldspar. Both fresh with sedimentary rocks constituting part of the and altered feldspars are present. Khorat Group,33 a nonmarine Mesozoic sedi­ The abundance of rock fragments is typically mentary sequence that outcrops in the Khorat about 4 percent and only rarely exceeds 10 per­ Plateau of Thailand and extends into Cambodia cent. Characteristic lithic fragments are volcanic and Laos. In Cambodia the sandstones are well (andesite), metamorphic (phyllite, quartzite, represented by the Dangrek Range in the north, micaceous schist), and sedimentary (argillite, where its steep flanks form a natural border shale, siltstone) in origin. The heavy minerals with Thailand; in the central region by Phnom assemblage consists mostly of hematite, mag­ Kulen and Phnom Tabeng (in Khmer, phnom netite, ilmenite, rutile, titanite, garnet, epidote, means “mountain” or “hill”), in Siem Reap and zircon, apatite, monazite, and tourmaline, in Preah Vihear Provinces respectively; and in the varying proportions. This assemblage reflects a southwest by the Cardamom Mountains mixed provenience with strong metamorphic (Figure 10). Numerous scattered outcrops of and felsic igneous influence, as other authors sandstones and conglomerates with similar have pointed out.31 Within the Type 3 group it characteristics are exposed in subhorizontal is possible to distinguish a small subset (Type beds in isolated hills of low altitude and limited 3b) of very fine-grained, quartz-rich feldspathic extension in central and eastern Cambodia. This arenite characterized by abundant biotite. sequence was described in detail by various

58 ◆ Stone Materials Used for Lintels and Decorative Elements of Khmer Temples ◆ 59 Figure 10 ◆ Simplified geologists in the late 1960s during early attempts Thailand from the Late Triassic to the Middle geological map of to complete a systematic geological mapping of Cretaceous are Nam Phong, Phu Kradung, Cambodia based on Cambodia. The overall stratigraphy has been Phra Wihan, Sao Khua, Phu Phan, and Khok United Nations 1993, with locations of major Khmer variously interpreted, but the most often cited Kruat (Figure 11).34 In Cambodia, the last four archaeological sites Mesozoic formations of the Khorat Group in formations of the Khorat Group are known as

60 ◆ Carò, Polkinghorne, and Douglas ◆ 61 Figure 11 ◆ Mesozoic stratig- raphy of Cambodia (based on Sotham 1997) correlated to the Khorat Group forma- tions of Thailand. Two pub- lished interpretations of the stratigraphy in Thailand are presented (Workman 1977; DMR 1992), with the most representative lithologies for each formation. Modi- fied after Racey et al. 1996, p. 8. A wavy line indicates an unconformity; a dashed line indicates an uncertain sedimentary boundary.

the Grès Supérieures Formation, a designation lintel production cannot be identified with pre­ introduced by French geologists to indicate the cision. However, geological and petrographic subhorizontal continental sediments occupy­ data confine the source of these litho­types to ing the highlands of western and northern the upper members of the Khorat Group, cor­ Cambodia.35 These rocks, mostly quartz-rich responding to the Grès Supérieures Formation sandstones and conglomerates, are considered of Cambodia. The medium-grained, white to separately from the Lower – Middle Jurassic light brown quartz arenite (Type 1 sandstone) fluvial and lacustrine sequence known as the may originate from the Phra Wihan and the Terrain Rouge Formation, roughly correspond­ Phu Phan Formations. These formations are ing to the Phu Kradung Formation, and from known to include white to light-buff, very fine- the Indosinian Triassic sequence that occupies to coarse-grained sandstones, tightly cemented the lowermost unit of the Khorat Group and is by authigenic quartz and characterized by known in Thailand as the Nam Phong Forma­ extensive kaolinitization.37 Furthermore, these tion. In this framework, the well-known quar­ sandstones are often iron stained and differ­ ries at the foot of Phnom Kulen are located at ently colored, as can be seen in modern quar­ the upper portion of the Terrain Rouge Forma­ ries in Banteay Meanchey Province, as well as tion, close to the contact with the Grès Supéri­ in the ancient quarries of Ban Khao Luk eures Formation, which is in turn quarried on Chang, Ta Phraya, and Preah Vihear, scattered top of Phnom Kulen, close to Prasat Rong Chen.36 along the Dangrek Range. At the present time, a geological provenience The mineralogy of Phra Wihan sandstones of the quartz arenite (Types 1 and 2) used for is dominated by monocrystalline, mostly

60 ◆ Stone Materials Used for Lintels and Decorative Elements of Khmer Temples ◆ 61 undulose quartz, while feldspars and rock frag­ follow the sandstone attitude and form a com­ ments are sparse. Heavy minerals, including plex system of stone exploitation. Stepped sur­ rutile, tourmaline, and zircon, are also rare. faces with clear chisel marks, wedge holes, and Similar medium- to coarse-grained, quartz- channels indicative of the removal of sand­ rich sandstone that is light in color is also stone blocks are evidence of quarrying activity abundant in the Phu Phan Formation and is that most likely relates to the construction of difficult to distinguish from Phra Wihan the Angkor temples.40 Several quarries of feld­ lithotypes even at the microscopic scale. spathic arenite are known also in Koh Ker41 and The very fine-grained, hematite-rich, reddish close to Prasat Kdak,42 and it is highly probable sandstone (Type 2) identified in this study could that others exist in locations still unknown. originate from either the Phra Wihan or the Sao Khua Formations. Similar lithotypes domi­ Khmer Production of Lintels nated by quartz grains, scarce feldspar, and and Decorative Elements rock fragments cemented by abundant hematite The current article reports results for a corpus and kaolinite occur in both these formations;38 of twenty-four lintels and twelve decorative they could potentially be found on top of elements of various dates and origins and pro­ Phnom Kulen, although there are currently no vides the basis for further research on Khmer petrographic data to confirm this possibility. practices of stone sourcing and usage. This Finally, petrographic analysis indicates that pilot study shows that the sandstones used the greenish-gray feldspathic arenite in this belong to Mesozoic sandstone formations study (Type 3 sandstone) belongs to the upper readily available in Cambodia, especially in portions of the Terrain Rouge Formation, con­ the northern part of the country. Half of the sidered equivalent to the Lower – Middle Juras­ analyzed objects are made with the same sand­ sic Phu Kradung Formation of Thailand. This stone (Type 3), a greenish-gray feldspathic subcontinental sequence is characterized in its arenite, extensively used in the construction upper section by very fine to fine, moderately of Angkor temples.43 The remaining objects well-sorted sandstone, intercalated with mud­ are carved from other lithotypes (Types 1 and stones and calcrete horizons. The sandstone is 2 sandstone) rarely employed in the temples mineralogically and texturally quite homo­ for structural purposes, suggesting that these geneous and comparable to sandstone found in stones were deliberately selected by Khmer the provinces of Siem Reap and Preah Vihear, carvers for the production of decorative lin­ where this formation constitutes extensive tels. The findings for the twelve ornamental portions of the foothills of Phnom Kulen and architectural elements included in the study crops out in isolated hills and numerous river­ are similar. beds of northern Cambodia.39 Numerous technical studies of Angkor Because Terrain Rouge sandstones with temples indicate that the majority of the stone similar petrographic characteristics are widely blocks were quarried from the Terrain Rouge distributed throughout the regions, it is almost Formation (Type 3 sandstone in this study).44 impossible to identify the geographic prove­ Conversely, the use of quartz-rich sandstones nience for any of the Type 3 lintels studied. One from the Grès Supérieures Formation (Types 1 of the possible sources of feldspathic arenite and 2 sandstones in this study) as the predomi­ (Type 3 sandstone) is the well-known and well- nant building material is reported for monu­ studied quarry district active in the Angkor ments situated in Thailand close to the Khorat period, located at the eastern foothills of Plateau, where the choice of stone seems to be Phnom Kulen, about 40 kilometers northeast influenced by the surrounding geology.45 of Angkor. This area is scattered with open The occurrence of quartz arenite (Types 1 quarries of variable size and geometry that and 2 sandstones) lintels in many temples in

62 ◆ Carò, Polkinghorne, and Douglas ◆ 63 present-day Cambodia, where other lithotypes and temples appear to have been produced only were more accessible and abundant or where when each city was the abode of the reigning no sandstone at all was available in the vicin­ monarch and the focus of the burgeoning ity, clearly demonstrates that the choice of a empire.48 During this period lintels show specific building material is not necessarily increased usage of the same repertoire of based on its local availability. Understanding motifs across the city and throughout Khmer- how and why specific lithotypes have been controlled territory. Two different sites in used in lintel production and whether the Hariharālaya even appear to have identical lintel selections differ from standard Khmer temple designs.49 Although there were developments building practices is a complex task that needs in iconography, the uniform lithotype (Type 3 to take into account a number of variables. sandstone) used for lintels from Mahendrapavarta One fruitful approach may be to investigate and Hariharālaya is suggestive of an ongoing the organization of stone workshops and arti­ workshop tradition using the same stone sans in charge of the ornamentation of the sources as Phnom Kulen. temples. Recognizing similarities and differ­ During the early to mid-tenth century the ences in large quantities of decorative material number of monuments constructed in durable might allow some of it to be attributed to indi­ materials (brick and sandstone) increased vidual sculptors or workshops. For instance, markedly,50 and a proliferation of homogeneous decorative lintels and colonnettes were usually lintel designs emerged that identified these fixed in place before being carved.46 The cor­ foundations. Uniformity of motifs and compo­ relation of these elements from specific temple sition are observed on the lintel friezes, which sites to a specific lithotype (e.g., Phnom Da: illustrate the implementation of a design rep­ MG17860, MG18324, Type 1 sandstone; Beng ertoire that had likely been committed to Mealea: MG18120, MG18121, Type 3 sandstone; memory in a workshop environment. From the Prasat Prei Khmeng: MG18854, MG18857, combination of three or four distinctive motifs Type 3b sandstone) suggests that both were that characterize the work of a particular sourced from the same quarry and supplied at workshop, one motif in particular — the celes­ the same time. By comparing stone type, carv­ tial being praying in a fleuron — was perhaps ing methods, and finishing techniques of deco­ the most idiosyncratic.51 This and associated rated elements from various sites, it is possible motifs of polylobe fleurons and romyuol flowers to infer some general trends of stone usage and appear on the friezes of three of the lintels in learn about frequent practices of stone the Metropolitan Museum (1994.111; 36.96.6, workshops. see Figure 2; 1996.473, see Figure 4).52 That Three lintels and a colonnette from the these lintels, likely originating from sites sepa­ Musée Guimet and the National Museum of rated by large geographical distances, share the Cambodia (MG18855, MG18220, MG18858, same lithotype (Type 2 sandstone) supports Ka1802) were created in close succession in the the suggestion that they are the product of a ninth century. These objects and others from tenth-century tradition characterized by a the period are demonstrative of a rise in artis­ preference for a specific type of stone. tic standardization at a time of continuity in Among the lintels that were studied, those stone provisioning. An increase in artistic from the early and mid-eleventh century pos­ standardization is evident in materials produced sibly originating in present-day Thailand and at the time when the administrative center of now in the Metropolitan Museum (1972.214; the region shifted from Mahendrapavarta 1992.192; 1994.94, see Figure 5) and the Arthur (Phnom Kulen) back to Hariharālaya (Roluos). M. Sackler Gallery (S1987.953) are rendered in There were concurrent settlements at Mahen­ white to light brown quartz arenite (Type 1 drapavarta and Hariharālaya,47 but the lintels sandstone). This sandstone is consistent with

62 ◆ Stone Materials Used for Lintels and Decorative Elements of Khmer Temples ◆ 63 sedimentary formations widely exposed in Federico Carò northern Cambodia, along the Dangrek Range, Associate Research Scientist and on the Khorat Plateau, which is the region Department of Scientific Research the lintels are thought to come from. In this The Metropolitan Museum of Art case, workshops may have been influenced by Martin Polkinghorne the surrounding geology in the choice of the Australian Research Council stone for their various commissions.53 Postdoctoral Fellow Undoubtedly, a large dataset on stone mate­ Department of Asian Studies rials from provenienced objects can offer valu­ University of Sydney able support to current studies on material usage and building practices during the Khmer Janet G. Douglas Empire. However, given the fragmentary infor­ Conservation Scientist mation available regarding the provenience of Department of Conservation and many of the lintels in museum collections, as Scientific Research Smithsonian Institution, Freer Gallery of Art / well as the large spatial distribution of the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery sandstone outcrops, conclusions for now remain speculative. It is clear that the three identified types of Acknowledgments sandstone were used simultaneously across the This research was supported by an Andrew W. Khmer Empire and within the same temple Mellon Fellowship at The Metropolitan complexes, and it is likely that their concur­ Museum of Art, by a Forbes Fellowship at the rence was determined by several concomitant Freer Gallery of Art and Arthur M. Sackler factors, including geography, geology, techni­ Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, and by an cal knowledge and skill, and, more generally, Australian Research Council Post Doctoral building traditions. A better understanding of Fellow­ship (DP110101968). The authors are building materials and traditions, as well as the grateful to their colleagues in Cambodia: HE specific organization of workshops, can best be Chuch Phoeurn, secretary of state, Ministry of achieved by focusing the investigation on indi­ Culture and Fine Arts; HE Bun Narith, direc­ vidual structures in situ for which building tor general of the Authority for the Protection phases and dates have been established. Such and Management of Angkor and the Region of an approach would reveal the distribution of Siem Reap (APSARA); HE Khuon Khun Neay the stone materials in the temple structure and and HE Seung Kong, deputy directors general help establish the relationship among stone of APSARA; Im Sokrithy, Ea Darith, and all the types, typology of surface finishing, functions APSARA staff who contributed directly to the within the temple, and building phases. fieldwork in Cambodia; HE Hab Touch, direc­ The study of the stone materials used for tor general for Museums, Antiquities and Mon­ sculpture has significant potential to enhance uments, Ministry of Culture and Fine Arts, understanding of the provisioning, production, and former director of the National Museum and distribution of classical Khmer art. Stone of Cambodia; Kong Vireak, director of the characterization is useful for addressing spe­ National Museum of Cambodia, and to the cific questions about the authenticity and prove­ museum for granting permission to use photo­ nience of carved architectural elements and graphs of works from the collection; Bertrand can complement archaeological studies that Porte, l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient, consider networks of control and acquisition which provided the samples from the National of resources, the relationships among the state, Museum of Cambodia; John Guy, Florence and temples, and artistic workshops, and aspects of Herbert Irving Curator of the Arts of South and the economy of the Khmer Empire. Southeast Asia, and Donna Strahan, Sherman

64 ◆ Carò, Polkinghorne, and Douglas ◆ 65 Fairchild Center for Objects Conservation, The Archéologique Franco-Khmère sur l’Aménagement du Territoire Angkorien [MAFKATA],” Campagne Metropolitan Museum of Art; Anne Bouquil­ 2000 Rapport, EFEO, Siem Reap; Angkor National lon, Centre de Recherche et de Restauration Museum, N.526), Sambor (see National Museum of des Musées de France (C2RMF), and Pierre Cambodia, Ka1778; Boisselier 1968, fig. 23), Yeay Poan (S1, Sambor Prei Kuk, see Bénisti 1977, fig. 5). Baptiste, Musée National des Arts Asi­ 17 Polkinghorne 2007b, pp. 160 – 63. atiques – Guimet; and the Freer Gallery of Art 18 For example, at Ak Yum (see Boisselier 1968, figs. 18 – 22; Stern 1938a, pl. LVI), Ampil Rolum (see Parmentier and Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Smithsonian 1927, fig. 53), Kompong Preah (see Boisselier 1968, Institution. fig. 1), Kuk Roka (see CISARK, http://www.site- archeologique-khmer.org/core/showsite.php?id=1595 [accessed September 27, 2013]), Tuol Kuhear (see Notes Boisselier 1968, fig. 33), Yeay Poan (S1, Sambor Prei 1 Dagens 2002, p. 236. Kuk, see Bénisti 1977, fig. 5). 2 Polkinghorne 2007a; Polkinghorne 2007b, 19 Inscription K.522. See Cœdès 1953, p. 119. pp. 187 – 202; Polkinghorne 2008. 20 EFEO photo cliché fonds Cambodge INVLU12404. 3 Baptiste et al. 2001, pp. 137 – 38; Carò 2009; Douglas, 21 “Chronique” 1933, p. 1134; see also EFEO photo cliché Carò, and Fischer 2010. fonds Cambodge INVLU16242. 4 Polkinghorne 2007b, pp. 234 – 36. 22 Singaravélou 1999, pp. 251 – 56; see also Sharrock 5 Coral-Rémusat 1940; Stern 1927. 2007, pp. 277 – 81. 6 The lintel with a mask of Kāla is unique and warrants 23 Polkinghorne 2008. separate study for its relevance to issues relating to the 24 For example, Giteau 1965, pp. 79 – 84. dating of Khmer art and decorative lintels between the 25 Included in this study but not illustrated. For an seventh and ninth centuries, a subject of considerable image, see http://www.metmuseum.org. academic discourse. Presently, the principal issue is 26 Polkinghorne 2008. the chronology and duration of decorative elements 27 A Zeiss Axioplan 2 polarized light microscope was attributable to the Kompong Preah style (see especially used at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, and a Nikon Bénisti 2003; Boisselier 1968; Woodward 2010b). A Eclipse E600 polarized light microscope was used at new synthesis is required that critically appraises dec­ the Freer Gallery of Art and Arthur M. Sackler Gallery. orative material linked to epigraphic material, recent 28 The sorting (σ) of a sandstone refers to the distribu­ absolute dates from archaeological contexts (e.g., Pottier tion of the grain-size values around the mean grain and Bolle 2009), and analogous sculpture in the round. size. The higher the sorting (σ), the more dispersed Similarly it must consider archaism, innovation, and are the values around the mean. peripheral and parallel artistic developments. Though 29 Gazzi 1966; Dickinson 1970. the stylized fleuron emblem between the Kāla’s eyes 30 Heavy minerals are detrital minerals having a specific on the Metropolitan Museum lintel (1985.390.1) is gravity greater than about 2.9. associated with the central motif of Kompong Preah 31 Contri 1972, p. 7; Kučera et al. 2008, p. 305. style, the majority of motifs can be ascribed to the 32 A formation is a body of rock strata that can be distin­ Prei Khmeng style; therefore it is likely the lintel was guished from others by specific physical characteristics. produced in the first half of the seventh century. 33 A group includes two or more formations that are 7 Snodgrass 1985, pp. 307, 312 – 13. related to one another. 8 Marchal 1951, p. 32; Ang 2004, pp. 85 – 98. 34 Dating such sedimentary formations is problematic 9 Ang 2004, pp. 85 – 98. and has been the subject of much debate. It is impor­ 10 Coral-Rémusat 1951, p. 43. tant to bear in mind that evidence for their reported 11 Bosch 1960; Coral-Rémusat 1933, p. 190; Coral- ages is not conclusive. However, this study follows Rémusat 1936, pp. 427 – 35; Coral-Rémusat 1940, ages and stratigraphy reported in the available pp. 48 – 50; Marchal 1938; Stern 1934, p. 253; Stern 1:200000 geological map of Cambodia published by 1938b, p. 127. the Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières 12 Bénisti 1973, pp. 119 – 38. and later used by other authors (United Nations 1993; 13 Coral-Rémusat 1933, p. 190; Coral-Rémusat 1936, Sotham 1997). pp. 427 – 35; Coral-Rémusat 1940, pp. 48 – 50. 35 Contri 1972, pp. 10 – 11; Dottin 1972, p. 8; Alabouvette 14 More recently Woodward (2010a, pp. 44, 145 n. 20) 1973, p. 8. suggested decorative influences from China. 36 See CISARK, http://www.site-archeologique-khmer. 15 Thanks to Heng Piphal, student at the University of org/core/showsite.php?id=460 (accessed September 30, Hawai‘i at Manoa, for alerting the authors to 2013). Other quarries in the Grès Supérieures Forma­ this similarity. See Carte Interactive des Sites tion can be seen at Phnom Santuk (see CISARK, Archaéologiques Khmers (CISARK), http://www. http://www.site-archeologique-khmer.org/core/ site-archeologique-khmer.org/core/showsite. showsite.php?id=191 [accessed September 27, 2013]), php?id=637 (accessed September 27, 2013). and Phnom Batheay (see CISARK, http://www.site- 16 For example, at Kuk Roka (see CISARK, http://www. archeologique-khmer.org/core/showsite.php?id=1189 site-archeologique-khmer.org/core/showsite.php?id=1595 [accessed September 27, 2013]). [accessed September 27, 2013]), Olok (see Boisselier 37 Racey et al. 1996, pp. 20 – 24. 1968, figs. 11 – 13; Stern 1938a, pl. LVII), Prei Khmeng 38 Ibid., pp. 20 – 26; Uchida, Ito, and Shimizu 2010, p. 562. (see Christian Pottier, Alexandrine Guerin, Heng 39 Contri 1972, p. 9; Alabouvette 1973, p. 9. Than, Im Sokrithy, Koy Tchan, and Eric Llopis, “Mission 40 Delvert 1963, pp. 479 – 84.

64 ◆ Stone Materials Used for Lintels and Decorative Elements of Khmer Temples ◆ 65 41 Evans 2009; Carò and Im 2012. National Centre for the Arts and Aryan Books 42 See CISARK, http://www.site-archeologique-khmer. International, 2003. org/core/showsite.php?id=1170 (accessed September 27, Boisselier 1968. Jean Boisselier. “Les linteaux khmers 2013). du VIIIe siècle nouvelles données sur le style de 43 Delvert 1963, pp. 469 – 76; Uchida, Ito, and Shimizu Kompong Prah. ” Artibus Asiae 30, no. 2 – 3 (1968), 2010, pp. 551 – 58. 44 For example, Saurin 1954, p. 621; Delvert 1963, pp. 101 – 44. pp. 453 – 54; Uchida et al. 2007, pp. 294 – 95; Kučera et Bosch 1960. Frederik David Kan Bosch. The Golden al. 2008, p. 299. Germ: An Introduction to Indian Symbolism. 45 Uchida, Ito, and Shimizu 2010, pp. 572 – 73. Indo-Iranian Monographs 2. New York: Humani­ 46 The many unfinished and partially finished lintels in ties Press, 1960. temples throughout the Khmer world suggest that this Carò 2009. Federico Carò. “Khmer Stone Sculptures: carving was one of the final tasks of temple decoration. A Collection Seen from a Material Point of View. ” See Polkinghorne 2007b, pp. 205 – 9; Polkinghorne Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 67, no. 1 2008, pp. 25 – 26. (2009), pp. 26 – 32. 47 Penny et al. 2006; C. Pottier, A. Bolle, E. Llopis, Carò and Im 2012. Federico Carò and Sokrithy Im. D. Soutif, C. Tan, J. B. Chevance, V. Kong, S. Chea, S. Sum, F. Demeter, A.-M. Bacon, N. Bouchet, “Khmer Sandstone Quarries of Kulen Mountain C. Souday, and M. Frelat, “Mission archéologique and Koh Ker: A Petrographic and Geochemical Franco-Khmère sur l’aménagement du territoire Study. ” Journal of Archaeological Science 39, no. 5 angkorien (MAFKATA),” Campagne 2005 Rapport, (2012), pp. 1455 – 66. EFEO, Siem Reap. “Chronique” 1933. Bulletin de l’École Française 48 Polkinghorne 2013. d’Extrême-Orient 33, no. 1 (1933), pp. 1045 – 46. 49 O Ka-aek (IK589.07) has a lintel design identical to Cœdès 1953. George Cœdès, ed. and trans. Les inscrip­ four examples from Preah Kô temple. It depicts Aśvin tions sanskrites estampées par . . . [Aymonier] (cavaliers) with weapons riding three-headed crowned mais non encore traduites . . . [et] les inscriptions Nāga (mythical serpents). The distinctiveness of this découvertes après 1900 par l’École française design indicates that the same artist, from the same workshop, who worked upon Preah Kô lintels also d’Extrême-Orient et restées inédites, vol. 5, Inscrip- fashioned the O Ka-aek lintel. See Polkinghorne 2007a. tions du Cambodge. École Française d’Extrême- 50 The increase in construction during this period is Orient, Collections de textes et documents sur marked by an increase in inscriptions, which are often l’Indochine 3. Paris: E. de Boccard, 1953. placed on doorjambs (see, e.g., Lustig 2009, esp. fig. 42). Contri 1972. Jean P. Contri. “Notice explicative sur 51 Polkinghorne 2007a. la feuille Tbeng-Meanchey. ” Carte Géologique de 52 Romyuol is a traditional Khmer floral decorative Reconnaissance à 1 / 20000. Paris: Editions du Bureau motif (Kbach) similar to a water lily (Nyphaea lotus) de Recherches Géologiques et Minières, 1972. or a hibiscus flower (Hibiscus sagittifolius). Coral-Rémusat 1933. Gilberte de Coral-Rémusat. 53 Uchida, Ito, and Shimizu 2010, p. 572. “Influences javanaises dans l’art de Rolûoh (IXe siècle) et influences de l’art de Rolûoh sur le temple de Banteay Srei (fin du Xe siècle). ” Journal References Asiatique 223 (1933), pp. 190 – 92. Alabouvette 1973. Bruno Alabouvette. “Notice Coral-Rémusat 1936. Gilberte de Coral-Rémusat. explicative sur la feuille Stung Treng. ” Carte “Animaux fantastiques de l’Indochine, de l’Insulinde Géologique de Reconnaissance à 1 / 200000. Paris: et de la Chine.” Bulletin de l’École Française Editions du Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et d’Extrême-Orient 36, no. 2 (1936), pp. 427 – 35. Minières, 1973. Coral-Rémusat 1940. Gilberte de Coral-Rémusat. Ang 2004. Chouléan Ang. “La mort: Renaissance en L’ art khmer: Les grandes étapes de son évolution. abstraction iconographique. ” Udaya: Journal of Études d’art et d’ethnologie asiatiques 1. Paris: Khmer Studies 5 (2004), pp. 85 – 98. Éditions d’Art et d’Histoire, 1940. Baptiste et al. 2001. Pierre Baptiste, Catherine Coral-Rémusat 1951. Gilberte de Coral-Rémusat. Chevillon, Clémence Raynaud, Anne Bouquillon, L’ art khmer: Les grandes étapes de son évolution. Sandrine Pagès, Alain Leclaire, and Philippe 2nd ed. Études d’art et d’ethnologie asiatiques 1. Recourt. “La restauration des sculptures khmères Paris: Vanoest, Éditions d’Art et d’Histoire, 1951. du musée Guimet. ” Technè 13 – 14 (2001), pp. 131 – 40. Dagens 2002. Bruno Dagens. Les Khmers. Guides Bénisti 1973. Mireille Bénisti. “Recherches sur le belles lettres des civilisations 10. Paris: Les Belles premier art khmer V: La face de monstre. ” Arts Lettres, 2002. Asiatiques 28 (1973), pp. 119 – 38. Delvert 1963. Jean Delvert. “Recherches sur l’érosion Bénisti 1977. Mireille Bénisti. “Recherches sur le des grès des monuments d’Angkor. ” Bulletin de premier art khmer VII: Le problème de Sambor l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient 51, no. 2 (1963), S. 1. ” Arts Asiatiques 33 (1977), pp. 25 – 56. pp. 453 – 534. Bénisti 2003. Mireille Bénisti. Stylistics of Early Dickinson 1970. William R. Dickinson. “Interpreting Khmer Art. 2 vols. New Delhi: Indira Gandhi Detrital Modes of Greywacke and Arkose. ” Journal

66 ◆ Carò, Polkinghorne, and Douglas ◆ 67 of Sedimentary Petrology 40, no. 2 (1970), Polkinghorne 2007a. Martin Polkinghorne. “Artists pp. 695 – 707. and Ateliers: Khmer Decorative Lintels of the DMR 1992. Department of Mineral Resources. Ninth and Tenth Centuries. ” Udaya: Journal of 1:2.500.000 Scale Geological Map of Thailand. Khmer Studies 8 (2007), pp. 219 – 41. Bangkok, Thailand: Department of Mineral Polkinghorne 2007b. Martin Polkinghorne. “Makers Resources, 1992. and Models: Decorative Lintels of Khmer Temples, Dottin 1972. Olivier Dottin. “Notice explicative sur 7th to 11th Centuries. ” PhD diss., Department of la feuille Siem Reap. ” Carte Géologique de Recon- Art History and Film Studies, Department of naissance à 1 / 200000. Paris: Editions du Bureau Archaeology, University of Sydney, 2007. de Recherches Géologiques et Minières, 1972. Polkinghorne 2008. Martin Polkinghorne. “Khmer Douglas, Carò, and Fischer 2010. Janet Douglas, Decorative Lintels and the Allocation of Artistic Federico Carò, and Christian Fischer. “Evidence Labour. ” Arts Asiatiques 63 (2008), pp. 21 – 35. of Sandstone Usage for Sculpture during the Polkinghorne 2013. Martin Polkinghorne. “Decora­ Khmer Empire in Cambodia through Petro­ tive Lintels and Ateliers at Mahendraparvata and graphic Analysis. ” Udaya: Journal of Khmer Hariharālaya. ” In Materializing Southeast Asia’s Studies 9 (2010), pp. 1 – 18. Past: Selected Papers from the 12th International Evans 2009. Damian H. Evans. “Towards a Land­ Conference of the European Association of South- scape Archaeology of Koh Ker: Methods, Issues east Asian Archaeologists, edited by Marijke J. and Recent Research. ” In Jaya Koh Ker Project: Klokke and Véronique Degroot, 2:205 – 17. Annual Report 2009, edited by János Jelen, Róbert Singapore: NUS Press, 2013. Kuszinger, and I. Farago, pp. 25 – 63. Budapest: Pottier and Bolle 2009. Christophe Pottier and Royal Angkor Foundation, 2009. Annie Bolle. “Le Prasat Trapeang Phong à Folk and Ward 1957. Robert L. Folk and William C. Hariharâlaya: Histoire d’un temple et archéologie Ward. “Brazos River Bar (Texas): A Study in the d’un site. ” Aséanie 24 (2009), pp. 61 – 90. Significance of Grain Size Parameters. ” Journal of Racey et al. 1996. A. Racey, M. A. Love, A. C. Canham, Sedimentary Research 27, no. 1 (1957), pp. 3 – 26. J.G.S. Goodall, S. Polachan, and P. D. Jones. “Stra­ Gazzi 1966. Paolo Gazzi. “Le arenarie del flysch tigraphy and Reservoir Potential of the Mesozoic sopracretaceo dell’Appennino modenese: Khorat Group, NE Thailand. ” Journal of Petro- Correlazioni con il Flysch di Monghidoro. ” leum Geology 19, no. 1 (1996), pp. 5 – 40. Mineralogica and Petrographica Acta 12 (1966), Saurin 1954. Edmond Saurin. “Quelques remarques pp. 69 – 97. sur le grès d’Angkor.” Bulletin de l’École Française Giteau 1965. Madeleine Giteau. Khmer Sculpture d’Extrême-Orient 46, no. 2 (1954), pp. 619 – 34. and the Angkor Civilisation. Translated by Diana Sharrock 2007. Peter. D. Sharrock. “The Mystery of Imber. London: Thames & Hudson, 1965. the Face Towers. ” In Bayon: New Perspectives, Kučera et al. 2008. J. Kučera, J. K. Novák, K. Kranda, edited by Joyce Clark, pp. 230 – 81. Bangkok: River J. Poncar, I. Krausová, L. Soukal, O. Cunin, and Books, 2007. M. Lang. “INAA and Petrological Study of Sand­ Singaravélou 1999. Pierre Singaravélou. L’École stones from the Angkor Monuments. ” Journal of française d’Extrême-Orient ou l’institution des Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 278, no. 2 marges (1898 – 1956): Essai d’histoire sociale et (2008), pp. 229 – 306. politique de la science coloniale. Paris: Éditions Lustig 2009. Eileen Lustig. “Power and Pragmatism L’Harmattan, 1999. in the Political Economy of Angkor. ” PhD diss., Snodgrass 1985. Adrian Snodgrass. The Symbolism Department of Archaeology, University of Sydney, of the Stupa. Ithaca, N.Y.: Southeast Asia Program, 2009. Cornell University, 1985. Marchal 1938. Henri Marchal. “The Head of the Sotham 1997. Sieng Sotham. “Geology of Cambo­ Monster. ” Journal of the Indian Society of Oriental dia. ” Coordinating Committee for GeoScience Pro- Art 6 (1938), pp. 97 – 104. grams in East and Southeast Asia Technical Marchal 1951. Henri Marchal. Le décor et la sculpture Bulletin 26 (1997), pp. 13 – 23. khmers. Études d’art et d’ethnologie asiatiques 3. Stern 1927. Philippe Stern. Le Bayon d’Angkor et Paris: Vanoest, 1951. l’évolution de l’art khmer: Étude et discussion de la Parmentier 1927. Henri Parmentier. L’ art khmer chronologie des monuments khymers. Annales du primitif. Publications de l’École Française Musée Guimet, Bibliothèque de vulgarisation 47. d’Extrême-Orient 21 – 22. Paris: EFEO, 1927. Paris: Paul Geuthner, 1927. Penny et al. 2006. Dan Penny, Christophe Pottier, Stern 1934. Philippe Stern. “Évolution du linteau Roland Fletcher, Mike Barbetti, David Fink, and khmer.” Revue des arts asiatiques 8, no. 4 (1934), Quan Hua. “Vegetation and Land-Use at Angkor, pp. 251 – 56. Cambodia: A Dated Pollen Sequence from the Stern 1938a. Philippe Stern. “Hariharalâya et Indra­ Bakong Temple Moat. ” Antiquity 80, no. 309 pura.” Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême- (2006), pp. 599 – 614. Orient 38, no. 1 (1938), pp. 175 – 98.

66 ◆ Stone Materials Used for Lintels and Decorative Elements of Khmer Temples ◆ 67 Stern 1938b. Philippe Stern. “Le style du Kulên.” Bulletin de l’École Française d’Extrême-Orient 38, ថ䮘ដែលយកមកប្រើប殶ស់សម殶ប់ no. 1 (1938), pp. 111 – 50. Uchida et al. 2007. Etsuo Uchida, Olivier Cunin, ធ្វើផ្㿂រ និង សម殶ប់តុបតែង Chiyuki Suda, Akyio Ueno, and Takeshi Kakagawa. “Consideration on the Construction Process and លំអក្ងន ប殶羶ទខ្មរ the Sandstone Quarries during the Angkor Period Based on the Magnetic Susceptibility. ” Journal of សង្߁ប Archaeological Science 34, no. 6 (2007), pp. 927 – 35. Uchida, Ito, and Shimizu 2010. Etsuo Uchida, K. Ito, and N. Shimizu. “Provenance of the Sandstone ច插澶 ក់​ផ្㿂រ​ដ​ល䮢​ឥត​ខ្ចᏇ​៏ ដែល​ᾶ​បុព䮜​សិទ្ធិ​និង​ᾶ​និមិត្​របស់​ Used in the Construction of the Khmer Monuments 叒殶羶ទ​ខ្揂រ។ ​ច插澶ក់​ផ្⯂រ​សម្ប់​叒殶羶ទ​នីមួយៗ​ត្殼វ​បន​ in Thailand. ” Archaeometry 52, no. 4 (2010), គណៈ​កម្ζរ​ជ្រើស​រ�ស​ើ នូវ​ᾶង​䯒澶ក់​ដ​៏ជ侶ញំ ​ដែល​មន​ pp. 550 – 74. United Nations 1993. United Nations. Economic ឧបករណ៍​䯒澶ក់​ដ​ព៏ ិសេស ​និង​រប�ៀប​នៃ​ζរ​䯒澶ក់​ᾶ​លក䮁ណៈ​ and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific: ប្រពណី ។ ​ក厶ច់​ច插澶ក់​ផ្⯂រ​ភក់​䞶ំង​叒殶ំ​ពីរ​នៅ​羶រ​មន្ទរ​ Atlas of Mineral Resources of the Escap Region, សល្បៈ​Metropolitan ដែល​ត្殼វ​បន​គេ​បᏒ莶ញ​នូវ​ទេព​ vol. 10, Cambodia, Explanatory Brochure. New ិ York: United Nations, 1993. កោសល䮙 ​និង​徶ព​ប៉ិនប្សប់ ​㾶ម​រយៈ​អត䮐ន័យ​នៃ​ζរ​ Woodward 2010a. Hiram Woodward. “Bronze សិក羶​សិ澶​ារកិ ​និង​ស侶 ដៃ​ᾶ​មួយ​នឹង​ផ្⯂រ​ម្心​叒殶ំ​បួន​ផ្翁ង​ Sculptures of Ancient Cambodia.” In Gods of Angkor: Bronzes from the National Museum of ទ�ៀត ​ហ�យ​ើ និង​ភសដ㾶ង​មួយ​ចំនួន​​្ ទ�ៀត ​ដែល​មន​㾶ំង​ Cambodia, edited by Louise A. Cort and Paul Jett, ពី​សតវត្​ទី​៧ ​ដល់​សតវត្​ទី​១៣។ ​បចនប្ ្ន្​នេះ ​ផ្⯂រ​䞶ំង​ pp. 29 – 75. Washington, D.C.: Arthur M. Sackler នោះ​គឺ​នៅ​羶រ​មន្ទរ​ᾶតិ​កម្ពᾶ ​សថ្ត​នៅ​ទី​ក្殻ង​ភពេ្ន​ ញ ​羶រ​ Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, 2010. Woodward 2010b. Hiram Woodward. “Dvaravati, មន្ទរ ​ Musée National des Arts Asiatiques–Guimet ​ Si Thep, and Wendan. ” Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific សថ្ត​នៅ​ទី​ក្殻ង​ប➶ រសី ​និង​羶រ​មន្ទរ ​ Arthur M. Sackler Prehistory Association 30 (2010), pp. 87 – 97. Gallery, Smithsonian Institution សថ្ត​នៅ​ទី​ក្殻ង ​ Workman 1977. David Richard Workman. Geology of Laos, Cambodia, South Vietnam and the East- Washington, D.C. ​សហរដ䮋​讶មេរក។ិ ern Part of Thailand. Overseas Geology and 㾶ម​លទ្ធល​ស្វ​ជ្វ​បᏒ莶ញ​䎶 ប្រភ​ ទ​ថ្​សម្ប់​䯒澶ក់​ Mineral Resources 50. London: Institute of ក្ង​叒殶羶ទ ​គ​បន​ជ្រើស​រ�ស​ដោយ​ᾶង​ច插澶ក់​ខ្揂រ។ ​ᾶ​ Geological Sciences, 1977. ន ឺ ើ ζរ​ពិត​㮶ស់​ប្រភទ​ថ្​ភត់​ដែល​ប្រើ​叒殶ស់​កន្ង​ζរ​羶ង​ សង​叒殶羶ទ​គ់ ឺ​មន​លក䮁ណៈ ​ᾶ​埒ទ ំងៗ ​ដែល​កក�ើត​ឡ�ង​ើ Picture Credits ពី​ដី​ក្រម ​(from the Terrain Rouge Formation) កន្ង​ Unless otherwise indicated, photographs of works in the ប្រទស​កម្ᾶ​ ហ�យ​ើ ថ្​ភក់​ ដែល​មន​ល厶យ​ម៉ដ្ដត្​ 殼វ​ប្រើ​ Metropolitan Museum’s collection are by the Photograph ព Studio, The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 叒殶ស់​សម្ប់​䯒澶ក់​លំអ ​ដូច​ᾶ​សម្ប់​䯒澶ក់​ផ្⯂រ​叒殶羶ទ ​ Department of Scientific Research, The Metropolitan និង​គ្រឿង​លំអ​ផ្翁ងៗ។ ​ថ្​ភក់​ប្រភទ​នេះ​ប្រហល​ក�ើត​ Museum of Art: Figures 7, 8, 10, 11 ឡ�ង​ើ ពី ​ Grès Supérieures Formation និង​កំណក​ដី​ Musée National des Arts Asiatiques – Guimet, Paris: Figure 6 ដែល​澶ត​សន្ធង​ដល់​ប្រទស​ថៃ​ ប្រទស​螶វ ​និង​ប្រទស​ National Museum of Cambodia, Phnom Penh: Figures 3, 9 វ�ៀត​㮶ម។

federico carò The Metropolitan Museum of Art

martin Polkinghorne University of Sydney

Janet G. Douglas Smithsonian Institution, Freer Gallery of Art / Arthur M. Sackler Gallery

abstract Translated by So Malay and Tho Thon

68 ◆ Carò, Polkinghorne, and Douglas ◆ 69

View publication stats