The CONTROVERSIAL Origins of Bayon Temple, Angkor Thom, Cambodia | Ancient Architects

Hello everybody and welcome to Ancient Architects. Please subscribe now to get the latest ancient history news and independent research from around the world. Often falling in the shadow of the fabulous Angkor Wat, the Bayon Temple of the neighbouring Angkor Thom in Cambodia is a breathtaking, richly decorated Khmer Buddhist temple built in the late 12th or early 13th century AD. It's original name was Jayagiri, meaning Victory Mountain, but was changed to the Banyan Temple by the French and has since been corrupted to Bayon. It was the state temple of the Mahayana Buddhist King Jayavarman VII, situated in the centre of his capital Angkor Thom. Now there is controversy about the origins of this temple, recently discussed by Praveen Mohan on his very successful channel. But before we get to that, let's take a look at Angkor Thom and it's central masterpiece. Angkor Thom is a huge site occupying 9 square kilometres and is actually much larger than the famous Angkor Wat to the south. It's oriented towards the east, with it's buildings set back to the west in side enclosures elongated along the east-west axis. The Bayon Temple is located in the exact centre of Angkor Thom and roads lead to it directly from the gates at each of the city's cardinal points. There are two galleried enclosures and an upper terrace, and it looks strange because all the elements of the temple are crowded together. Angkor Wat, as you may know, has impressive architecture but also a lot of open space. In comparison, the Bayon Temple appears as though all the architectural features are compressed into one space. The outer wall of the outer gallery features bas-reliefs showing historical events and scenes from everyday life of the Angkorian Khmer. These are beautifully made and highly decorated, but they are not accompanied by any text, and therefore which events they are portraying is open to debate. The inner gallery is raised above the ground level and it is described as once being a redented cross shape that was later filled out to a square. The bas-reliefs here are very different to what we've just seen and mostly decorated with scenes from Hindu mythology, with Shiva, Vishnu and Brahma all clearly visible. We see even more mythological scenes such as the freeing of a goddess from inside a mountain and the king fighting a gigantic serpent with his bare hands, iconography relating to the legend of the Leper King, who contracted leprosy from the venom of a serpent after a battle. We see other depictions such as those of the churning sea of milk and the construction of a Vishnuite temple. The reason for so much Hindu iconography will be discussed shortly. The upper terrace one level higher almost completely fills the area provided by the inner gallery, so much so that most historians conclude that the temple was not planned to look this way, that much of the architecture on the upper terrace was an addition to the original plan. It is thought that the Bayan temple was originally planned as a single level structure. The upper terrace is what includes the famous face towers of Bayan, each of which has two, three or four gigantic smiling faces. We also find the large central tower as well as smaller towers along the inner gallery situated at the corners and entrances, as well as on the chapels. Experts believe that the number of towers has not remained constant over time, but a number have been added and others lost. Once upon a time the temple had 49 towers, but now there are just 37, but there are still more than 200 faces to be seen on the monuments of the upper terrace. Since the structure's conception, the large central tower has also changed. It was originally cruciform in shape, but was later filled out and made circular. It stands 43 metres above the ground, an incredible sight that can be seen from all around, marking the very centre of Angkor Thom. So, that's a brief overview of this temple, so what's the controversy around it? Well, it relates to Praveen Mohan's video from December 2020. He calls it the Forbidden Documentary, and gives his reasons why no documentaries exist on this specific Cambodian temple. He states that the true history of Bayan is that this was originally a Hindu temple transformed into a Buddhist, a true history that is denied by authorities. So, what evidence does Praveen provide? Well, he explains that the four faced towers, the most striking feature of Bayan temple, are depicting the Hindu god Brahma, who is known as a god with four heads facing four different directions. He says they are clearly not depictions of Buddha or the king who built it. He also shows the statues that flank the causeway that lead to the temple, which are holding a huge snake in hand, and this symbolises the Hindu myth of the churning of the sea of milk. He also explains what we've already seen, the base reliefs of the inner gallery that are clearly showing Hindu mythological scenes and gods. The thing is, I can't argue with the clear, striking and obvious Hindu iconography at the Bayan temple, but the experts don't disagree as well. It really isn't a conspiracy that this temple shows both Buddhist and Hindu iconography, and that's because of the known history of Angkor Thom. Praveen says it's not a Buddhist temple dedicated to Buddha, but a Hindu temple dedicated to Brahma. But again, it was probably both at different times in history. And let's look at this known history. This is the last state temple to be built at Angkor, and it's clear that Hindu iconography is far more dominant than Buddhist. But why? Well, the founder of the temple is Jayavarman VII, and by all accounts he was a Buddhist. And this was a Buddhist temple first and foremost, because at the temple's foundation level, in the sanctuary at the very heart of the central tower, there was originally a 3.6m high statue of the Buddha, seated in a meditation, shielded from the elements by the flared hood of the serpent king Musa Linda. The simple reason for the dominant Hindu iconography is because of a later king Jayavarman VIII, who transformed this structure into a Hindu temple in the mid 13th century, and this is clear from studying the ancient architecture. At this time, Hinduism became the new Khmer Empire state religion, which was Buddhist during the reign of Jayavarman VII. At the time of Jayavarman VIII, the large Buddha statue was removed from the sanctuary and smashed to pieces. These pieces were found at the bottom of a well. They have been pieced back together and are now on display in a small pavilion at Angkor. The Hindu transformation of the site also explains why the upper terrace is overcrowded. It is likely that a number of towers were added to the original number and experts now think that many of the Hindu Brahma faces were originally the faces of the king that built it, Jayavarman VII, and when you compare them side by side, you can't deny the similarities. It's possible that the faces still depict the king, or possibly the Buddhist god Lokeshvara, or were possibly transformed into Brahma when it became a Hindu landmark. Scholars debate who the faces actually portray. We do know that when it became Hindu, the ground plan of the inner gallery in the central tower, which were once cruciform in shape, were filled out to form a square and circular base respectively. It's no conspiracy that this Buddhist temple was also a Hindu temple, and with the reading I've done, it's not denied by any scholars as well. But it is denied that this was a Hindu temple first and foremost, and the reasoning is sound when we look at the changes in the Khema empire between Jayavarman VII and VIII, and also by the crowded architectural detail, which clearly wasn't part of the initial plan, not to mention the large damaged Buddha statue of the central sanctuary. Centuries after becoming a Hindu temple, Theravada Buddhism became the new dominant religion of the region, and the temple underwent further changes, but was soon abandoned to the jungle. Experts who have mapped and analysed the temple state that the Hindu architecture was all from a secondary phase of work, yet it is clearly dominant as we can see. The incredible Bayan temple was restored in the 20th century, and the site is safeguarded by the Japanese government. I don't think there is any real controversy around its origins, but nobody can deny it really is a true masterpiece of the ancient world. Popular with locals and tourists alike, and it is another site that is often not spoken about, but should certainly be on your radar. Thank you very much for watching this episode of Ancient Architects. If you enjoyed the video, please subscribe to the channel, please like the video and please leave a comment below. Thank you very much.