His son, Jayavarman III, came to the throne young, was an elephant hunter, and died after ruling “wisely,” in A.D. 877. The writer who provided this information had a special interest in continuity, after all, with regard to the devaraja cut, for the Sdok Kak Thom inscription presumes, perhaps mistakenly that the ruler who patronized the devaraja cult was the legitimate and unique ruler of Cambodia. This may have become the case, especially after the middle of thetenth century, but it is interesting that Jayavarman III’s successor, the first to embark on a systematic program of temples and inscriptions at Hariharalay, made only on muted reference to this predecessor, tracing his own legitimacy to relatives of a wife of Jayavarman II (not Jayavarman III’s mother) and to a pair of “king” about whom nothing else has come to light. Presumably, this was a way of casting his genealogy back beyond Jayavarman’s usurpation, thus connecting himself with the pre-Angkorean rulers to enhance his own legitimacy.
In fact this very king, Indravarman (r. A.D 877-889), was himself a usurper, which may account for his muddled genealogy. His reign is important because it was the first of may to be marked by a triadic patter of royal behavior described in the 1930s by the art historian Phillppe Stern.
The first phase was to sponsor irrigation works in honor of his subjects and the watery divinities of the soil. During Indravarman’s reign, a large reservoir was constructed at Hariharalaya to trap rainwater. It was know as the Indratataka and covered 300 hectares (650 acres). Aninscription tells us that as soon as Indravarman became king, he made this promise:”In five days, I will begin to dig.” Another purpose of such reservoirs was to indicate the extent of a king’s power and of his alliances with the gods, by re-creating on earth geographical features associated in people’s mind with the mythical home of the gods, Mt. Meru, where lake surround the central mountain. This north Indian fantasy, translated to waterlogged Cambodia, is not devoid of irony;byt neither are Gothic towers in U.S. college towns.
The second phase was for a monarch to honor his parents and his other ancestors by installing statues of these people, usually in the guise of gods. Indravaman sponsored statues of his parents (as well as of other, including his mother’s parents and Jayavarman II and his wife, depicted as embodiments of Siva and his consort) in the stuccoed brick temple complex known today as preah Ko (Sacred Cow).
This charming temple, completed in 879, inaugurated what is now called the Rouos style of Cambodian architecture. Inthis style, several features that were to become important later-including the custom of enclosing temples in a series of concentric moats and walls-appeared for the first time. The sophistication of carving and the predominance of floral motifs suggest that these skills had been developed earlier by carving wood. Although of modest size in comparison with later temples, Indravarman’s monuments of Preah Ko and Bakong-his”temple-mountain”-were far more grandiose, in comception and appearance, than anything that had preceded them and hint at developments in religious ideplogy and social mobilization for which other evidence is lacking.
An inscription from Preah Ko indicates that Indravarman had become a universal monarch by subduing unspecified contenders: “In battle, which is like a difficult ocean to cross, he raised a pathway, made up to the heads of his arrogant enemies; his own troops passed over on it .”The inscription also tells us:” It seems that the creator [Indra] tired of making so many kings, had fashioned this king named Indravarman[literally]
