IN THE MALAY PENINSULA. ai 



practised certain customs which the Chinese chroniclers describe 

 and, among'st other things, worshipped the Hindu deicies. It 

 has been variously identified with Pegu, Siam^*^ and Camboja, 

 and perhaps the most probable solution is that at one time it 

 included all three. But if its centre was in the country now 

 known as Siam, it is at any rate certain that its inhabitants 

 were not Siamese. It must not be forgotten that the Siamese 

 are comparatively recent intruders in the southern parts of 

 the land that now bears their name, and that the whole 

 southern seaboard of Siam was formerly in the hands of the 

 Cambojans, at a time when the germ of the Siamese monarchy 

 was a little inland state on the upper Menam owning the supre- 

 macy of the Cambojan Government*^ The Siamese themselves 

 have not forgotten the fact and they admit that their old capital 

 Ayuthia*^ was founded about the year 1350 on the site of an old 

 Cambojan town named Lawek or Lovec which they had taken 

 and destroyed in a series of wars with Camboja, These w^ars 

 ended in the crippling of the latter power and thus laid the 

 foundation of the greatness of Siam. It is clear therefore that 

 the lower Menam Valley was at one period included in the King- 

 dom of Camboja and according to Garnier that kingdom extend- 

 ed westwards to the river Sittang in Pegu; this kingdom there- 

 fore he identifies wilh Fu-nan, and hazards the opinion"^^ that for 

 some time between the 3rd and 10th centuries of our era Camboja 

 had supremacy over the Peninsula generally, as well as over a 

 a very large portion of Southern Indo- China. 



Logan** on the other hand speaks of a Peguau colony in 

 Kedah, as attested by inscriptions in the Mon character found 

 in Province Wellesley ; but it may be doubted whether any 



JtO. Garnier op. cit. pp. 103 (note), 108, 113. 127, (note). 



I^l. We sometimes hear of the " venerable claims " of Siam to suprem- 

 acy in the Malay Peninsula : as well might one speak of the "immemorial 

 antiquity " of the Ottoman dominion in Europe. Still no doubt, the King- 

 dom of Siam is in a manner the modern representatiA-e of the old Cambojan 

 Kingdom, just as the " Sultan of Efim '" claims to be a successor of the 

 Byzantine Caesars ; but that is all. v. Forbes op. cit. p. 23. Garnier op. 

 cit. vol. 1. p. 105 (note). 



Ji.2. Crawfurd Embassy to Siam, vol. ii, p. 141. Forbes op. cit. p. 84 

 but see Garnier 1. c. p. 137 note. 



JiS. Op. cit. vol. I, pp. 116, 125, 135. 



U. J. S. B. E. A. S, no. 7. p. 85. 



