Kayley &Zander's report on Cambodian and Indian architecture

All different countries have different materials and different ways of displaying them in buildings. Angkor Wat in Cambodia was built over 1,000 years ago during the Khmer Empire. It was built because the Emperor wanted to be remembered after he died. Shahjahan built the Taj Mahal in India around the 1331 and used weight marble for the facing. Akbar built the Agra Fort in 1565. He used cobbled stones inside the walls of his great fort. India and Cambodia used a lot of the same materials and methods when India and Cambodia built their great structures like the Taj Mahal and Angkor Wat.

Angkor Wat over 1,000 years old

Cambodian and Indian temples are made of stone that is found around the building site. In Cambodia, they used volcanic stones and gray sandstone. On the other hand India used sand stone, bricks and cobles, and white marble. Cambodian builders used the volcanic stones for the filler in Cambodians walls of their temples.  They used sandstone for the outer layer on the wall because it is easy to carve. In India, they used bricks, mortar, and cobles on the inside of the walls.  For the facing, the Indians use marble or sandstone. India and Cambodia used sand stone, volcanic stone, and white marble to build their great structures, but they still need something to decorate them with.

Angkor Wat in Siam Reap

Cambodia and India used a lot of valuable jewels to show their respect to their gods and for people that have died. Cambodian emperors made lots of statues of Buddha in there temples and important places. The Buddha have a ruby or and sapphire in there head. In Cambodia most of the Buddha statues have their head cut off, because they got the precious stone stolen. The ruby is located on a statue of a Buddha in the Palace at Phnom Pen. In India they panted special places with pants made from precious stones. They also imbed semiprecious stones into the walls.  I think that India did that because they wanted to make their paintings worth a lot, but India didn’t want anyone to be able to steal the precious materials. I think that putting the voluble jewels in pant is safe r because it would be impossible to steel.

an old city in Deli in ruins

Indian and Cambodian built most of their building with the same key baselines. They made the outside look nice. The Indians put bricks and cobbles on the inside of the wall. In the Cambodian Temples like Angkor Wat, they used volcanic stones as filler behind the carved sand stones. The Cambodians carved their volcanic stones to perfection, so they didn’t have to use mortar to fill in the gaps.  The reasons that they used volcanic stones are because they are really light and because there are a lot of volcanoes in Cambodia. In India, they put bricks or cobbles on the inside of their walls, so they don’t have to carve out blocks. The Indians method of using bricks and cobbles was much more efficient then caving out each individual stone like the Cambodians.

entrance to the ruins of the city

India and Cambodia use arches and domes in a lot of their structures, but there is one thing that keep them apart. In Cambodia, the most famous temple, Angkor Wat, uses fake arches on the entrance. They built them by cantilevering blocks of stone until they meet in the center. It is not a very safe and lasting way of building a doorway.  If Cambodia had built real domes then their structures wouldn’t have collapse.  Arches and domes carry their loads through compression around an opening in a parabolic shape.  The Cambodians way was of making doorways was simply using large stones cantilevered over an opening using their self-weight to span the opening. India, on the other hand, uses real domes and arches. Indians made the walls around the dome really thick so that it will balance the outward thrust. Arches and Domes require temporary shoring while they are constructed. When you build a structure using proper methods and strong materials, then it could last forever without much work done.

The Indians inlayed semi-presiuos stones into white or black marble.

            The difference between the Cambodian temples and palaces and the Indian palaces, monuments, and forts are very apparent. India’s and Cambodia’s buildings are always filled with beautiful carvings and art. On the Taj Mahal there were carvings of flowers and inlayed stone flowers, but in Cambodian temples the carvings are usually of wars, dancers, and gods; but no flowers. In the Amber (sky) palace in India there was a mixture of Muslim and Hindi carvings on the pillars and usually there’s only one religion (Hinduism or Buddhism) in the Cambodian buildings. India’s and Cambodia’s carvings are both very beautiful. In most of the Cambodian temple there used to be beautiful paintings that are now just a couple splotches of paint as opposed to India’s powdered precious stone paint(or frescos) that has stayed on the wall for centuries and are still in very good condition.  

Some times the indians ground up preaciuos stones and made paints and the paints made paintings called frescos.

            India’s and Cambodia’s building are usually filled with beautiful carvings and art. On the Taj Mahal there were carvings of flowers and inlayed stone flowers and Arabic writing.  In the Amber (sky) palace in India there was a mixture of Muslim and Hindi carvings on the pillars. Usually there’s only one religion (Hinduism or Buddhism) or the temples started out as Hindu temples but were converted into a Buddhist temple later on.  In Cambodian temples, the carvings are usually of wars, dancers and gods but not really flowers. The Cambodians also did some inlaying. They inlayed rubies and other precious gems and jewels on the statues’ faces but the rubies and the other gems are not there anymore. India’s and Cambodia’s carvings and art are both very beautiful.

            The Indians were more into their gardens in their forts and palaces than the Khmer. The Indian buildings had beautiful gardens with fountains. The gardens were divided in to geometric shapes or puzzle pieces. Sometimes the gardens were in the middle of a moat or lake. The Agra fort has some nice gardens that were probably built for Akbar in 1565.  Also there are usually iron rings on the Indian forts and palaces for awnings and curtains. It would be really cool to see the awnings all set up with Indian royalty sitting around underneath.  The Cambodian buildings had sandstone courtyards and ponds with lotus flowers with statues of gods. The Khmer temples had four big reflection pools for the sunset. But there probably used to be lots of really pretty gardens. The gardens in both countries are or used to be really pretty gardens.   

The fountains at Taj Mahal were really symmetricalT. 

            The Indian buildings and the Cambodian buildings both had symmetry but in different places. The whole Taj Mahal is all symmetrical inside and out. For example, in the Taj Mahal the line of fountains, the main gate and the grave of the queen are all lined up. There is a mosque on one side then there’s a mosque on the other side. The symmetry went beyond function and beyond awesomeness. The Angkor wat  Angkor Wat was just symmetrical on the outside wall but it was obviously built for function, unlike the Taj Mahal which is just a really big and fancy tomb. The Hindu temples have four corners with towers and three doors for the people to go through. The middle door is for the gods to go through for the offerings. 

            All the famous and infamous building or ruins we saw in India and Cambodia were beautiful and unique in there ways. The art work and architecture we saw in both countries was just plain amazing.  The Khmer temples have lasted about 4times longer than the Taj Mahal. The Angkor W was built in 1100b.c.and the Taj Mahal was built 1631-1653 by Shahjahan.  For the most part, the Khmer sandstone temples have held strong through wars, genocide and various theft of stone heads, faces and arms of the statues and carvings.  The methods of construction, the materials and the special features that the Khmer and the Indians used on their special buildings were unique, decorative or just necessary.    

By Kayley Rolph & Zander Rolph