A Note on the Ancient Towns and Cities of Northeastern Thailand

KURENAI : Kyoto University Research Information Repository Title Author(s) Citation Issue Date URL <Notes>A Note on the Ancient Towns and Cities of Northeastern Thailand Keyes, Charles F. 東南アジア研究 (1974), 11(4): 497-506 1974-03 http://hdl.handle.net/2433/55753 Right Type Textversion Journal Article publisher Kyoto University Southeast Asian Studies, Vol. 11, No.4, March 1974 A Note on the Ancient Towns and Cities of Northeastern Thailand by Charles F. KEYES* In a recent article published in Tonan Ajia Kenkyu, Professors Thi va Supajanya and Srisakra Vallibhotama have put forth a well-argued plea that the antiquities of the northeastern region of Thailand be given attention beyond that which they have attracted from art historians (Thiva Supajanya and Srisakra Vallibhotama, 1972). Recent researches by prehistorians have established a sequence of independent developments in the region which includes a ceramic tradition dating from ca. 5,000 B. c., domesticated rice from ca. 4,000 B. C., full-scale agriculture associated wi th bronzeworking by ca. 2,500 B. C., and the beginnings of iron technology from ca. 900 B. C. (Bayard, 1971; Chin Yudi, 1972; Solheim, 1972). Given that this developmental sequence is unbroken, it would seem a logical step to expect and to look for the emergence of urban life in the region in the next phase of development. That such urban (or, at least, town) life did follow is strongly suggested by the existence of about 300 sites in the region which are characterized by earthen ramparts and moats. It is these sites to which Professors Thiva and Srisakra draw our attention. While these remains of ancient towns in the northeastern region of Thailand have attracted some attention from time to time, they have been almost totally eclipsed by the much greater attention given to the antiquities of the region which are associated While the importance and interest of these Angkorean wi th the Angkorean empire. monuments, most of which seem to date from the lith and 12th centuries, cannot be gainsaid, the plea made by Professors Thi va and Srisakra strongly deserves to be heeded. The Khorat Plateau may well hold some of the most important clues regarding the emergence of civilization in mainland Southeast Asia. In this note, I wish to call attention to some evidence in the indigenous literature of the people of the Khorat Plateau which might throw some addi tional light on the ancient towns and cities known archaeologically. While I do consider some specific evidence from two legends from the region, I do so only to indicate what information might be derived from legendary sources rather than to present the distillation of a long period of research. * I should like to conclude this note with a few suggestions, Associate Professor of Anthropology and Asian Studies, University of Washington and Visiting Lecturer in Anthropology, Faculty of the Social Sciences, Chiang Mai University. 497 In keeping wi th those offered by Professors Thi va and Srisakra, regarding the possible interpretation of the evidence on the ancient sites of northeastern Thailand. I Names of Ancient Towns and Principalities in Legends of Northeastern Thailand The Thai-Lao people of northeastern Thailand D have a well-developed tradition of 'legends' (nithiin) which has been perpetuated in past through the media of folk opera which locally is known as m(5 lam mil. While some of these legends can be traced to Indian sources and others belong to traditions found in neighboring areas, no small number record events which happened "long ago" on the Khorat Plateau itself. While such 'legends' are not historical accounts, they are not totally lacking in historical value. A number of the northeastern legends make reference to places which can be identified as being the sites of the ancient towns of which Professors Thi va and Srisakra have spoken. Here, I wish to discuss only very briefly two legends which concern these ancient towns in order to suggest what might possibly be gleaned from legendary sources about this important period in the region's history. As with the archaeological study of the ancient towns of northeastern Thailand, the literature of the region has yet to be fully inventoried, much less analyzed. 2) II The Legend of "Phiidaeng Nang Ai" The Legend of "Phadaeng Nang Ai" is one of the most well-known legends in the region since it tells the story of how the first 'rocket' festival (bun bi)ng fai) occurred. 1) 3) The characteristics of this ceremony are relevant to our interests since I use the term "Thai-Lao" to refer to the majority of the population of northeastern Thailand who are ethnically Lao and who are Thai citizens. The population of Northeastern Thailand also includes a sizeable Khmer-speaking minority, a number or other Mon-Khmer speaking groups, and representatives of several other Tai-speaking groups such as the Y() and Phil Thai. 2) Much of the literature of northeastern Thailand still exists only on palm leaf manuscripts. However, a sizeable corpus has been published by Khlang Nana Witthaya, a supplier of religious goods in the town of Kh(>nkaen. Unfortunately, most of these publications have had little circulation outside of the folk opera troupes for which they were intended. Moreover, few titles have been reprinted once the original supply was exhausted and few new titles have been added in the last two or three years. The author has made two partial collections of this body of northeastern literature, one of which has been placed in the library of Cornell University. Recently, Phra Ariyanuwat Khemacarf, the abbot of Wat Maha Chai in the town of Mahasarakham has established a center for the conservation of northeastern literature and culture. At this center he has collected both manuscripts and artefacts from sites mainly in the Chi River Valley He has also himself been responsible for the editing, translit· of central northeastern Thailand. erating into modern Thai script, and publishing of a number of northeastern texts, including several legends. Again, unfortunately, these books have yet to receive the wide attention they deserve. Given the limited support for his work, these publications of Phra Ariyanuwat Khemacarf have tended to be somewhat ephemeral. 3) A published version of this legend in Thai script exists in the collection printed by Khlang Nana Witthaya. Tambiah (1970 : 294-298) give two versions of the myth from the oral tradition of villagers in UdOn province. In my interpretation of the myth, I have followed Phra Ariyanuwat's commentary in Tamwln Mitang p{l Ddet Song Yang (Phra Ariyanuwat Khemacarf, 1971: 100-101). 498 C. F. Keyes: A Note on the Ancient Towns and Cities of Northeastern Thailand the ceremony, regardless of present-day interpretation and associated practices, is not a Buddhist ceremony. Rather, it is supremely a 'fertili ty' ceremony whose supernatural audience are benevolent local spiri ts and deities. While in parts of Laos the bun b{)ng jai is held in association with the major Buddhist holiday, Visakha-puja, on the day of the full moon of the 6th lunar month, in other parts of Laos and in northeastern Thailand it has been reported to be held variously throughout the period from the day of the full moon of the 5th lunar month to the day of the full moon of the 8th lunar month. 4,) In other words, the ceremony is held at the end of the dry season or at the beginning of the rainy season. According to my informants in the province of Mahasarakham in northeastern region of Thailand, the purpose of the ceremony was to request rain and fertility of the crops from the deities (thewadii; Skt., deviita). This is, in essence, the same purpose ascribed to the ceremony by Pierre Nginn who says that the Lord of Heaven, Phragna Then (Phraya Thaen), is involved in order to obtain "the fecundity of the rice and the abundance of the monsoonal rains" (Nginn, 1961 : 9). The symbolism of the ceremony is highly sexual, the b{)ng fai themselves representing phalluses. The concern with fertility in this ceremony, together with the attention to deities and some relatively benevolent spirits (phi),5) point to a type of religious system which antedated Buddhism. That Buddhist elements in the ceremony are so obviously grafted supports this thesis. And the myth of "Phadaeng Nang Ai", which tells of 4) Faure (1959 : 272) has reported the association of 'the bun bi)ng fai and Visakha-puja at Wat Kang in Vientiane. The bun b()ng jai with which I am most familiar from my own field researches-namely one held at an old Khmer temple in Tambon Khwao, AmphOe Ml,lang Mahasarakham, is held annually on the day of the full moon of the 5th lunar month. While traditionally this day was also the main day of the New Year's celebration, it no longer is since the Thai government has fixed the days of the New Year's ceremony as 13, 14, and 15 April. Tambiah, who carried field work in the village of Ban Phran Muan, Tambon Ban Khao, AmphOe M~lang, UdQn, reports that in that area the rocket festival "is held at any time between the 6th and 8th lunar months, in theory on the 15th day of the waxing of the moon, but in act on any convenient day in the waxing period" (Tambiah, 1970 : 288). Condominas (1968 : 126) reports that for villages on the Vientiane Plain in Laos, the ceremony can take place on various dates over a month and half period in May and June. 5) The supernatural beings for whom the ceremony is intended appears to vary according to the social entity performing the ceremony. When that entity is a village, as in the case of the ceremony described by Tambiah (1970 : 2850, the superntural beings in question are local tutelary spirits. Condominas reports the same situation for villages on the Vientiane Plain (Condominas 1968 : 126). When the entity is larger, as with the congeries of villages which gather at the Khmer shrine in Mahasarakham, the deities are higher, in this case being thewadii. Finally, when the whole of a M1}ang is involved, as in Vientiane, the deity in question is the Lord of Heaven himself. The fact that indigenous 'spirits' (Phi) as well as Indian-derived 'deities' (theu'adii) are involved in this ceremony should not be allowed to disguise the fact that the ritual is quite different from those associated with warding off or counteracting the malfeasance of most other types of 'spirits'. 499 the first bun bi)ng jai, at least for the Thai-Lao of northeastern Thailand,6) strongly connects the ceremony with the protohistoric past of northeastern Thailand. Briefly, the myth concerns Nang Ai, the beautiful daughter of Phaya KhOm, the ruler of Ml,lang NOng Han (or Ml,lang NOng Han NOi), and her lover Prince Phadaeng. Phaya KhOm also had two sons by his wife, Nang Pathumathewi (Skt., Paduma devi). each of whom ruled their own mllang (principalities): Chiang Hian (or Chiang Hian Ban lat) and Ml,lang Si Kaeo Phak Waen. In addition, two grandsons Chin) ruled two more mliang: Ml,lang Hong-Ml,lang ThOng and Ml,lang Pheng. Phaya KhOm decided to sponsor a rocket competition Cthat is, the first bun bijng jai). Both he and Prince Phadaeng entered rockets, but their rockets failed. rocket of the ruler of Chiang Hian won. The The son of the Naga ruler, who had been married to Nang Ai in a former existence, had been attracted to the competition. There he saw Nang Ai and fell in love with her. himself into a squirrel. To be close to her, he transformed Nang Ai saw the squirrel and had a hunter shoot it. meat of the squirrel fed thousands, but the price was very high. The The capital of Phaya KhOm sank into a swamp and much of the surrounding area was turned into mud. Phadaeng and Nang Ai tried to escape by horse, taking with them the royal drum, the royal gong, and the royal ring. These proved to be too heavy in their efforts to get through the mud and so Nang Ai cast them away, one by one. These three things, at least according to one version of the myth (Tambiah, 1970: 296, 297-8) provided the names for places in UdOn province. Some versions say that Nang Ai herself died in the attempt to escape ;and only Phadaeng survived. While this myth can be analyzed structurally (see Tambiah 1970: 298-304), our interest here is in what the myth tells us historically. First, there are several toponyms mentioned in the story: Ml,lang Nc)ng Han CNQi), Chiang Hian, Ml,lang Si Kaeo Phak 'vVaen, Mvang Hong-Ml,lang ThOng, and Ml,lang Pheng. (In this paper, I will ignore the more localized place names given in the UdQn version of the myth.) Secondly, the myth makes use of the term, Khijm, in the title for the ruler of NOng Han, which has apparent ethnic connotations. Thirdly, the name of the wife of the ruler of NOng Han is clearly of Indian origin. We shall reserve our interpretation of these data until we have examined our second indigenous legend. III The "Accounts of Fa Daet-Song Yang" The "Tamnan Fa Daet Song Yang" is far less well-known than is "Phadaeng Nang Ai". Indeed, Phra Ariyanuwat who recently published this legend has said that the manuscript copy on which he based his text is the only extant version he knows of. 6) The "Tamnan Fa Daet Song Yang" is associated with no ceremony, but its story Faure (1959 : 281) provides a brief passage from a myth linked with bun bi)ng fai in Vientiane which appears to be quite different from that of "Phadaeng Nang Ai". 500 C. F. Keyes: A Note on the Ancient Towns and Cities of Northeastern Thailand links it in time with the story of "Phadaeng Ai". Long, long ago, the people known as the Mm:~n Fa or Thaen Fa moved to the banks of the Maha Nathi (Skt., Maha Nadi) River which was then a great lake. Two countries were created in the north and south respectively of the lake. On the north, was the country of Mvang Chiang S6m and on the south was the country of Fa DaetjSong Yang (as we shall see in a moment, these two are separate, but closely related places). Mvang Chiang S6m was ruled by Phaya Cantharat (Skt., Candaraja) and his younger brother, Tham (Skt., Dharma), was the Upparat or Viceroy. The vassal states of Chiang S6m included Chiang Song, Chiang Sa, Chiang Khva, Chiang Chgi (or Tha Ngam Nam DQk Mai) and Sabut (or Sabut Kutk<)k). Also connected with Chiang S6m, but apparently as an ally and not as a vassal, was Chiang Y(in. M\lang Fa Daet, whose ruler was known as Phaya Fa DITet or the Sanskri tic equivalent, Aditayaraja, was linked with Mvang Song Yang whose ruler was the younger brother of Phaya Fa Daet. The ruler of Song Yang also had a Sanskritic name, Isiiraya. In this area south of the Maha Nathi, there were a number of other mjiang: Chiang Hian or Chiang Hian Ban lat, Mvang Si Kaeo Phak Waen. Mvang Hong-M1,lang ThQng, and Mvang Pheng. While Chiang Hian and Fa Daet appear to have been allies, none of these southern mjiang were vassals of Mvang Fa Daet. in the picture, but rather aloof from the events, was Mvang NQng Han. Phaya Fa Daet had a beautiful daughter, called Nang Fa yat. Also Phaya Cantharat, the ruler of M\lang Chiang S6m, fell in love with the daugther and was able to become her lover, although at the price of abusing the hospitality of Phaya Fa Daet. For this reason, Phaya Fa Daet declared war on Phaya Cantharat. Cantharat was killed in battle and when the news of his death reached Nang Fa Yat, she fell into a faint from which she never recovered. Phaya Fa Daet was heartbroken at the outcome of this war and ordered that two cetiya, one to hold the remains of Phaya Cantharat and the other the remains of Nang Fa Yat, be constructed at Chiang S6m and Fa Dart respectively. Having lost the war, Chiang S6m was forced to send annual tribute to Fa Daet. However, Phaya Tham, who had succeeded his brother as ruler of Chiang S6m, did not like this state of affairs and started a new war. This time Chiang S6m was victorious, and M\lang Fa Daet became the dependency of Chiang S6m. From this legend, we are provided another list of place names, a number of which are the same as those in the legend of "Phadaeng Nang Ai". Those which are different include the Maha Nathi River or Lake and the M\lang of Chiang S6m, Chiang Song, Chiang Sa, Chiang Kh1,la, Chiang ChQi or Mvang Tha Ngam Nam Dgk Mai, Mvang Sabut (Skt., Saputra) or Sarabut (Skt., Saraputra) KutkQk, Chiang Y\in, and Ml)ang Fa Dact Song Yang. The use of terms which appear to have an ethnic connotation--i.e.. 1\tlaen Fa or Thaen Fa, also occur in this legend. Finally, there is 501 considerable u~e of names of Indian origin (Maha Nadi River, M1)ang Saputra or Saraputra, Phaya Cantharaja, Phaya Dharma, Phaya Aditiyaraja, Phaya Isuraya). IV Legends and the Old Towns of N. E. Thailand While we cannot push the data from these legends too far, it does seem permissible to use them to suggest something about the ancient towns and cities which existed on the northeastern plateau. The basis of this claim lies in the fact that some of the toponyms mentioned in the two legends can be tied to the archaeological si tes discussed by Professors Thi va and Srisakra; none of these, however, can be connected to either Khmer sites or to more recent centers established after Tai-speaking people came to dominate the region politically. Of the places mentioned in the two legends, the following can be definitely connected with existing places on the Khorat Plateau: M1)ang NQng Han or M1)ang NQng Ha n NQi In Amphoe NQng Han, UdQn Province M1)ang Fa Daet Song Yang (or Sling Yang) Ban Sema in Amphoe Komalasai, Kalasin Province Chiang Hian (Chiang Hian Ban Iat) Ban Chiang Hian and Ban Iat, Amphoe Mvang, Mahasarakham Province M1)ang Si Kaeo Phak \Vaen In Amphoe Mvang, RQi Et Province Mvang Hong M1)ang ThQng In Amphoe Caturaphakphiman, R(>i Et Province M1)ang Pheng In Amphoe Chiang Yun, Mahasarakham Province Chiang Y\1I1 In Amphoe Chiang Y\In, Mahasarakham Province 7> Of these, Mvang Fa Daet is by far the best known of the ancient sites of northeastern Thailand, having been the first site recognized as being 'Dvaravati'.8) 7) Except for the first of these identifications, all are taken from Phra Ariyanuwat's listing in the "Tamnan Fa Daet Song Yang" (Phra Ariyanuwat Khemacari 1971 : 101-2). While N<)ng Han is also the name for old Sakon Nakh<)n, geographical considerations suggest that the identification given here is more approriate. Sakon NakhQn is separated by mountains from the Chi River Basin, while N<)ng Han in Ud<)n Province is not. Regarding the last identification, Phra Ariya:nuwat suggests that the site was not that of present day Chiang Y('ll but was at Ban Can in the same district. He says that the ancient name for Chiang Y(m may have been Pattanagara or Sayapatra, but provides no source for this supposition. 8) Ml,lang Fa Daet was one of the ancient sites noted first by Williams-Hunt (1950) on the basis of aerial photographs of northeastern Thailand. It then became the subject of a site visit by Major Seidenfaden (1954) who, for some strange reason, called the ancient town, 'Kanak Nakhon'. Seidenfaden was followed shortly thereafter by reports of site visits by Prince Subhadradis Diskul (1956) and Quaritch Wales (1957). Wales was the main person responsible for connecting the site with 'DvaravaU' civilization (see Wales, 1969 : 98-113). Recently, the Fine Arts Department has undertaken some excavations at the site, although only a few details have as yet been reported from the research (PrayiJn PhabiJnsuwan, 1972 : 25-7). 502 C. F. Keyes: A Note on the Ancient Towns and Cities of Northeastern Thailand For the moment, at least, the other toponyms must remain unidentified. The key would seem to lie in identifying the Maha Nathi River Lake. Perhaps it was the Maekhang, perhaps it was N<)ng Han, the largest body of water 011 the Khorat Plateau, or perhaps it was some lesser body or stream which is gi ven more signi ficance ill the legend than its geographical characteristics would actually permit. My own suspicion is that both Ban Chiang, in Ud<)n province, which is now famous for its prehistoric remains, and Kantharawichai (a relatively modern name for an ancient site) which is the seat of a district in Mahasarakham province should probably be connected with one or the other of the unidentified names in the set derived from the two legends. There is an interesting feature of some of these names which is worthy of notenamely that they refer to two places which are paired: Fa Daet-Song Yang (or Sung Yang), Chiang Hian-Ban lat, Si Kaeo-Phak Waen, Ml)ang Hong-Ml)ang Th<)ng. It appears that the first of these names referred to the main capital of a mJlang while the second referred to the seat of the viceroy-cum-successor (a person who is sometimes identified as the younger brother of the ruler). In this pairing of names we would, thus, seem to have some evidence regardi ng the poli tical system of these ancient towns and principalities. We can say something further about the political system as well. Chiang Sam and N<)ng Han were obviously major centers with associated vassal states, Fa Daet Song Yang appears to have been a middling place with allies from time to time but with no vassals and the rest appear to be small principalities which were semi-independent or vassals of the major entities. In any event, it would be hardly correct to speak of there being a single kingdom or single dominant political entity on the Khorat Plateau in this early period. It is tempting to interpret the terms khi)m and maen fii/thaen fii as indicating the ethnic identity of the people who ruled these early cities. However, the term khgm, which might perhaps be said to designate Mon-Khmer speaking people, is used in two qui te different ways among northeasterners. On the one hand, it is used to indicate the aboriginal, non-civilized, peoples of the region as in the term khii khi)m (see Phra Ariyanuwat Khemacari, 1971: 119). Secondly, it i~, used to indicate the people who dominated the region at the time of the Angkorean empire. For example, ancient Khmer ruins in the area are described by the people as having been built by the khgm. Maen fii/thaen f{L, on the other hand, means simply 'heavenly divinities', although some connection with Ml)ang Thaen (Dien Bien Phu), the putative homeland of the Tai-speaking peoples who moved into Laos, may also be suggested by the term. The use of names of Indian deri viation clearly suggests that these early towns were conceived of by those who composed the legends if not by peoples living in those early times as having adopted at least some elements of Indian civilization. The reference to thewadii in the bun bi)ng fai further supports the inference that 503 early civilization associated with towns in the area had an Indian flavoring. I have not attempted to derive all of the possible implications of these two northeastern legends, to say nothing of many other legends, for a study of early urban life on the Khorat Plateau. However, I do feel that what information has been here presented does strongly indicate that considerable profit could be gained by linking archaeological and literary studies in researching this early period of history. Conclusions In their article, Professor Thiva and Srisakra indicated that our understanding of early urban life in northeastern Thailand has been very limi ted since the ancient sites have been considered almost exclusively from the vantage of art history. This is most clearly seen in the work of Quaritch Wales. On the basis of similarity of artistic styles, Wales has spoken of a 'Dvaravati' civilization in the region which was 'Buddhist' in character and which was politically part of a kingdom centered on the lower Chao Phraya River Valley. Moreover, since the Dvaravati art of central Thailand is associated with some inscriptions in old Mon, the sites on the Khorat Plateau have become 'Mon' sites. 9) On the basis of the preliminary archaeological work presented by Professors Thi va and Srisakra together with the preliminary inquiry into legendary material discussed here, I would argue that the terms 'Dvaravati', 'Buddhist', and 'Mon', are misleading and inappropriate when applied to the society associated with the early towns of the Khorat Plateau. Beginning with the term 'Mon', there is nothing in either the legendary sources or in the archaeological evidence which would justify our identifying the people of the region in early protohistoric times as being ethnically 'Mon'. \Vhile some of the early inhabitants of the region most probably spoke Austroasiatic (Mon-Khmer) languages, the distinction between 'Mon' and 'Khmer' in cultural and political terms is really not justified before the 8th century and probably not until about the 10th century. Moreover, evidence from the Campasak region suggests that some of the early inhabitants of the region may have been speakers of Austronesian (MalayoPolynesian) languages (Coedes, 1954). And, I for one at least, would not be willing to rule out the possibility of there having been Tai-speaking people living on the Khorat Plateau earlier than the 13th-14th centuries when SukhMhai, Lan Chang, and Ayutthaya began extending their control over parts of the region. Both the legendary and archaeological evidence clearly indicates that in the early protohistoric period the Khorat Plateau contained a large number of principalities (M\lang) whose capitals were enclosed by earthen ramparts and moats (thus the use 9) Wales argument is developed in his recent book, entitled Dviiravatl, (Wales 1969). I would add that many of the caveats which I raise regarding Wales' interpretation of early history in northeastern Thailand could equally well be applied to his interpretation of the early history of northern Thailand as well. 504 C. F. Keyes: A Note on the Ancient Towns and Cities of Northeastern Thailand of the term chiang). The legends tell us further that these m/rlang were often independent of each other, some consisting of a capital and surrounding villages, others including a capital and subsidiary town together with their villages, and others having dependent vassals. Even in the case of those which were vassals, the title of the ruler, Phaya, was no different than that of their overlord. Politically, then, we appear to be dealing with a type of 'city-state' rather than with components of an 'empire' or a 'kingdom'. I would suggest that the society associated with these early towns represented something of a transitional type between tribal chiefdoms (perhaps not dissimilar to those of the Tai of northern Laos and northern Vietnam) and the fully-developed state system of Angkor. There is certainly no question but that Buddhist religious motifs are found in association with these early sites. However, the semtl stones, which in orthodox usage are used in sets of four or eight to mark off a sacred area within which ordinations and other Sangha activities take place, are often huge in size and are far more numerous than would be required even if there had been very sizeable monastic communi ties. These s3mii stones strongly suggest a kinship with 'megali thic' cultures associated with tribal peoples. Moreover, in addition to the Buddhist motifs found on the semii, non-Buddhist themes are also found. And, if it is permissible to extrapolate from the symbols found in the ritual of bun b(jng fai and the myth of "Phadaeng Nang Ai", it would appear that the religion of these towns also included a major concern with 'fertility' which drew on beliefs in both local spirits and Hindu deities. Even if this last piece of evidence be discounted, it is still clear that the religion of the people of early protohistoric northeastern Thailand was not 'Buddhist' III the sense that it became after the Bth century in Thailand. In brief, the term Dvaravati which has been applied to the ancient sites of the Khorat Plateau has disguised both the poli tical fragmentation which existed and the character of the religion. To obtain a fuller and more correct picture of the society and culture of the early urban life on the Khorat Plateau, we must, as Professors Thiva and Srisakra have argued, undertake considerably more archaeological research than has been done thus far. And, I would add, we can further increase our understanding of these societies through systematic research on a number of the indigenous legends of the Thai-Lao people of northeastern Thailand. References Cited Ariyanuwat Khemacari, Phra, ed. and tr. 1971. RJlang tamnan fa song yang ['The Fa Daet Song Yang Chronicle']. Mahasarakham: Published for the 100 Day Rites following the Cremation of Nang Rianthgng Nachai wiang. Bayard, D. T. 1971. Non Nok Thai: The 1968 Excavation. Otago, New Zealand: Uni versi ty of Otago. 505 Chin Ylidi, compo 1972. Watthanatham ban chiang nat samai k(Jn prawatsat ['Ban Chiang Culture in Prehistory'] Kh(>nkaen: Krom Sinlapak(>n. Coedes, G. 1954. "Nouvelles donnees sur les origines du royaume khmer," Bull. de l' Ecole Franr;aise d'Extreme Orient, 48: 209-300. Condominas, Georges. 1968. "Notes sur Ie boucldhisme populaire en milieu rural Lao," Archives de Sociologie de Religions, 25: 80-150, 1968. Faure, Marie-Daniel. 1959. "The 'Boun' Bang-Fay (Rockets Festival-6th Month)," in Kingdom of Laos, ed. by Rene de Berval, Saigon: France-Asie. Nginn, Pierre. 1961. Les Fetes profanes et religieuses au Laos. Vientiane: Centre Cultural Fran<;ais. Prayun PhaibllI1suwan. 1972. Boranwatthusathan nai cangwat khi)nkaen lae chngwat klaikhiang ['Antiquities in Kh(>nkaen and Neighboring Provinces']. Kh(>nkaen: Krom Si nlapak(>n. Seidenfaden, Erik. 1954. "Kanok Nakhon: An Ancient Mon Settlement in Northeast Siam (Thailand) and Its Treasures of Art," Bull. de 1'Ecole Franr;aise d'Extreme Orient, 44: 643-667. Solheim, Wilhelm G. II. 1972. "The 'New Look' of Southeast Asian Prehistory," J. Siam Society, 60: 1-20. Subhadradis Diskul, M. C. 1956. "Mueng Fa Daed: An Ancient Town in Northeast Thailand," Artibus Asia, 19: 362-367. Tambiah, S. J. 1970. Buddhism and Spirit Cults in North-East Thailand. Cambridge; Cambridge Uni versi ty Press. Thiva Supajanya and Srisakra Vallibhotama. 1972. "The Need for an Inventory of Ancient Sites for Anthropological Research in Northeastern Thailand," Tonan Ajia Kenkyu (Southeast Asian Studies), 10: 284-297. Wales, H. G. Quaritch. 1957. "An Early Buddhist Civilization in Eastern Siam," J. Siam Society, 45: 42-60. - - , 1969. Dvaravati: The Earliest Kingdom of Siam. London: Bernard Quaritch. 506