THE FORGOTTEN RUINS OF INDO-CHINA 
271 
usea as an instrument of torture. That 
is convincing. This must be history. 
The bas-rehefs on the front of the 
building are by far the best. They are 
detailed and developed quite conscien- 
tiously as they understood things, and 
are marked by considerable animation. 
In two respects they are notably defi- 
cient, namely, in the treatment of the 
eyes and the feet. Whole rows and hun- 
dreds of rows of men with eyes just 
alike — not a particle of expression. And 
then the feet — was there ever a race 
of sculptors that didn't have trouble 
with the feet? In this case everything 
seems to have been tried by turns, by 
different workmen, no doubt, and you 
will see a yard or two of procession 
where the bottoms of the feet are turned 
outward toward the spectator, though 
the artist meant you should regard them 
as the tops instead ; then again a front 
view of the men and side view of their 
feet. Yes, the feet are as ancient as 
primitive Greek or Egyptian. 
The processional relief of Paradise 
and Purgatory is, in fact, a triple pro- 
cessional extending along the wall in 
parallel order. In the lower, human in- 
genuity is taxed to invent punishments 
terrible enough to satisfy ; and it is inter- 
esting to note that a great many of these 
were rubbed smooth and shining by the 
hands of the present day. The paradise 
relief is really double, with the moder- 
ately happy people in the lower and the 
superlatively blessed sitting up above in 
little alcoves, which look for all the world 
like proscenium boxes at a theater. 
One very interesting feature of the 
hunting processional is that the kings 
and other great ones are each honored 
with an inscription, doubtless his name 
and rank. So absolutely new and un- 
known is all this that not a word has 
been deciphered. Many of the columns 
of the inner temple are covered with in- 
scriptions, all awaiting the translator. 
Angkor Tom is three and one-half by 
four kilometers, or five and four-tenths 
square miles, in extent ; that is to say, 
over 19 times the size of Angkor Wat. 
It is likewise surrounded by a wall, 
which is pierced by imposing gateways. 
Its principal ruins are the Bayon, the 
Bapuon, and the Pimean Acas, with nu- 
merous indistinguishable ruins within its 
inclosures. 
The bayon alone — with its 53 towers, 
each with four Buddha faces looking 
toward the four cardinal points of the 
compass — was probably as large as the 
wat. Conjecture says that this was the 
royal treasury, and already cupidity has 
been busy in a vain search for the sup- 
posed treasures. Lofty trees reach high 
in the air above these ruins, and the 
monkeys and squirrels gambol in their 
tops undisturbed. Pimean Acas is a 
quadrilateral pyramid of colossal propor- 
tions, but of forbidding appearance in 
its present state ; though, like all the 
others, it yields beautiful works in stone. 
Who built these ruins, and when did 
they build them? 
We have already said that the Khmers 
built them ; but who they were, where 
they came from, when and why they 
built, and, finally, why they disappeared, 
nobody is yet able to answer with cer- 
tainty. Tradition in the person of an 
alleged Chinese historian says that a 
powerful ruler once emigrated from 
India with all his followers to escape a 
still more powerful ruler ; that he subju- 
gated the people he found here and put 
them to work erecting these enormous 
edifices of stone. 
But there are inscriptions to be mas- 
tered, which will be done some day, and 
then we shall know more about the 
subject. The letters closely resemble 
those of the Siamese and the modern 
Cambodian, and the work of decipher- 
ing may not be difficult. 
Incidentally it may be remarked that 
the features of the men in the bas-reliefs 
resemble in some respects those of the 
Cambodians of the present day, and it 
is not improbable that the key to the past 
lies hidden in their monasteries. At 
present the safest guess as to the date 
of building is as follows : 
For Angkor Tom, the 9th century 
A. D., or during the reign of Alfred the 
Great in England. For Angkor Wat, the 
I2th century, or 100 years after the 
Norman Conquest. 
There are those who venture to par- 
ticularize far enough to say that in the 
