Dvaravati

Dvaravati
6th–11th century
[800] SIND UYGHUR KHAGANATE GURJARA- PRATIHARAS RASHTRA- KUTAS PALA EMPIRE CHAM- PA NAN- ZHAO TURK SHAHIS TANG DYNASTY SILLA Khitans Jurchens Tungus KARLUK YABGHU Tatars CHENLA DVARA- VATI SRIVIJAYA Kyrgyzs Paleo-Siberians Samoyeds Kimeks Tanguts Shatuos ABBASID CALIPHATE KHAZAR KHAGANATE BYZANTINE EMPIRE OGHUZ YABGUS TIBETAN EMPIRE Dvaravati Kingdom/culture and contemporary Asian polities, 800 CE
Spread of Dvaravati culture and Mon Dvaravati sites Mon wheel of the law (Dharmacakra), art of Dvaravati period, c. 8th century CE Buddha, art of Dvaravati period, c. 8th-9th century CE Bronze double denarius of the Gallic Roman emperor Victorinus (269-271 AD) found at U Thong, Thailand Khao Khlang Nai was a Buddhist sanctuary. The central stupa, rectangular in shape and oriented toward the east, is characteristic of dvaravati architectural style, dated back around 6th-7th century CE. Khao Khlang Nok, was an ancient Dvaravati-style stupa in Si Thep, dated back around 8th-9th century CE, at present, it is large laterite base.
Capital	Si Thep[1] Ayojjhapura[2] Nakhon Pathom[3] Mueang Uthong[4]: 18
Common languages	Old Mon
Religion	Buddhism Hinduism
Historical era	Post-classical era
• Established	6th century
• Disestablished	11th century
Preceded by Succeeded by Mon city-states Qiān Tanling Tun Sun Tou Yuan Kamalanka Chin Lin Duō Miè Xiān Suvarnapura Hariphunchai Lopburi Suphanburi Chaliang

Proposed locations of ancient polities in the Menam and Mekong Valleys in the 7th century based on the details provided in the Chinese leishu, Cefu Yuangui, and others. Six ancient kingdoms in Mainland Southeast Asia in the late 7th century mentioned by Xuanzang. Thailand (now), Ku Bua, (Dvaravati Mon culture), 650-700 C.E.. Three musicians in right are playing (from center) a 5-stringed lute, cymbals, a tube zither or bar zither with a gourd resonator. Dvaravati bas-relief at the rear base of Phra Sri Sakyamuni, the main Buddha image in the Wihan Luang of Wat Suthat, Bangkok. White stone Buddha image, attributed to the Dvaravati period, now in Bangkok National Museum. Detail of Wat Camadevi [th] (Wat Ku Kut), a Dvaravati-style brick chedi traditionally attributed to Queen Camadevi, dating to the 7th century, located in modern Lamphun. Dvaravati-style Chedi at Wat Phra Rub [th], Suphan Buri province, now completely destroyed. Dvaravati period stone buddha, now in Phra Pathom Chedi National Museum

Dvaravati[a] refers to a group of Mon political principalities that flourished in the region of present-day central Thailand from approximately the 6th to the 11th century.[5][6]: 234  It is tentatively regarded as a successor to the polity known in Chinese sources as Lang-chia or Lang-ya-hsiu.[7]: 268–270, 281  Chinese Buddhist accounts from the mid-7th century describe a Buddhist kingdom called To-lo-po-ti, located west of Isanapura (Cambodia), east of Sri Ksetra (Burma),[8]: 76 [9]: 37  and north of Pan Pan.[7]: 267, 269  Its northern frontier bordered Jiā Luó Shě Fú (迦逻舍佛), identified with Canasapura, which covered the upper Mun-Chi basin in present-day northeastern Thailand[10] and Si Thep in the Pa Sak basin in central Thailand.[11]: 38–9  Dvaravati is recorded to have sent embassies to the Chinese court in 583,[12] around 605–616,[7]: 264  in 638, 640, 643, 647, and 649.[13]: 132 

The term Dvaravati also denotes a broader cultural and artistic sphere associated with a loose conglomeration of Mon principalities rather than a centralized state.[3] Archaeological and historical evidence suggests that Mon communities, possibly involved in maritime trade, contributed to the emergence of Dvaravati culture in the Chao Phraya valley by the early centuries CE.[14]: 32  This development appears to have followed a transitional “Proto-Dvaravati” phase during the 4th–5th centuries, associated with early principalities such as Chin Lin in the western plains and Tou Yuan to the east.[3]

The location of Dvaravati’s early political center remains debated. Proposed centers include Ayojjhapura (Si Thep),[2] Sambuka (Nakhon Pathom),[15]: 10–1  and Avadhyapura (Si Mahosot [th]).[16] By the mid-7th century, political prominence appears to have shifted toward Lavo's Lavapura, following the incorporation of Tou Yuan in 647. Some scholars place this transition later, in the 10th–11th centuries, after the decline of Si Thep,[2] while others regard Lavapura as a distinct polity—later known as the Lavo Kingdom—that nevertheless lay within the Dvaravati cultural and political sphere.[15]: 10–1, 43  

The decline of Dvaravati was likely the result of overlapping regional pressures rather than a single event.[7]: 283 [17]: 41  These included the expansion of Angkor from the lower Mekong basin between the 11th and 13th centuries,[18] northward campaigns by Tambralinga under King Sujita in the mid-10th century, which reportedly included the seizure of Lavo,[7]: 283 [17]: 16  political instability and warfare within Angkor in the early 11th century that affected the Menam valley,[19] and Pagan incursions into central Thailand during the 11th–12th centuries.[17]: 41 [20]: 4  According to Jean Boisselier, although Dvaravati lost influence over eastern centers such as Lavo by the 10th–11th centuries, Mon principalities in the western plains likely persisted into the early 12th century, before coming under brief Angkorian influence during the reign of Jayavarman VII (r. 1181–1218).[15]: 262–3  Thereafter, the region entered the Xiān period, marked by the emergence of Suphannabhum, Phrip Phri, and Ayodhya, the latter reasserting control over Lavo by the 14th century.

Dvaravati culture was characterized by the presence of moated urban settlements, among which U Thong, located in present-day Suphan Buri Province, is generally regarded as the earliest. Other major sites include Nakhon Pathom, Pong Tuek [de], Si Thep, Khu Bua, and Si Mahosot [th], among others.[3] The term "Dvaravati" derives from coins bearing the Sanskrit inscription śrī dvāravatī. In Sanskrit, dvāravatī literally means "that which has gates".[21]: 301 Further evidence for the political and geographical significance of Dvaravati is provided by the Wat Phra Ngam Inscription N.Th. 21, discovered in 2019 at Wat Phra Ngam in Nakhon Pathom province and dated to the 6th century CE. This inscription refers to three regional cities—Śrīyānaṁdimiriṅga or Śrīyānaṁdimiriṅgapratipura, Hastināpurī, and Dvāravatī—suggesting that Nakhon Pathom, where the inscription was found, likely functioned as the central place of Dvāravatī.[22]: 281 [23]

The traditional chronology of Dvaravati is mainly based on the Chinese textual account and stylistic comparison by art historians. However, the results from excavations in Chan Sen and Tha Muang mound at U-Thong raise questions about the traditional dating. Newly dated typical Dvaravati cultural items from the site of U-Thong indicate that the starting point of the tradition of Dvaravati culture possibly dates as far back as 200 CE.[24][3] Archaeological, art historical, and epigraphic (inscriptions) evidence all indicate, however, that the main period of Dvaravati spanned the seventh to ninth centuries.[3] Dvaravati culture and influence also spread into Isan and parts of lowland Laos from the sixth century onward. Key sites include Mueang Fa Daet in Kalasin Province, Sema [th] in Nakhon Ratchasima Province, and many others.[25][26]

The earliest known epigraphic reference to "Dvaravati" occurs in the Wat Chanthuek Inscription (K.1009), discovered in Pak Chong, Nakhon Ratchasima Province. The text is composed in Sanskrit and inscribed in the Pallava script, and is conventionally dated to the 5th century CE. It records a queen of Dvaravati who instructed her daughter to sponsor the dedication of a Buddha image.[27]

This period predates the 6th century CE,[28]: 4  and is generally placed between the 1st and 5th centuries CE,[28]: 1, 9  although some scholars argue for a narrower chronological range, extending only from the 4th to the 5th centuries.[3] Archaeological sites associated with this phase are primarily concentrated in the western Menam valleys. These include the unmoated settlement of Pong Tuek [de] (พงตึก),[29]: 23 [30]: 46  which has been suggested as one of the five capitals of Tun Sun;[31]: 52  the moated city of Mueang Uthong, which has sometimes been identified as the center of Chin Lin;[28]: 2  and the site of Ban Don Ta Phet [th].

Archaeological evidence indicates human occupation in the region from at least c. 1000 BCE, during the Neolithic period. From approximately 900 BCE to 200 BCE, material remains suggest increasing participation in maritime exchange networks, possibly linking the area with communities in present-day Taiwan, the Philippines, and Vietnam. Settlements continuity and expansion are observable during the Bronze and Iron Ages,[28]: 2–4  and by the 1st to 2nd centuries CE, contacts appear to have extended further, including interactions with South Asia, China, and countries to the west.[28]: 3, 4 [29]: 23  Artifacts recovered from several sites have been interpreted as indicating participation in exchange networks associated with Funan,[28]: 3, 4  although the nature and extent of their political relationship remain debated.[28]: 3 

In the eastern plain, the Sup Champa site (เมืองโบราณซับจำปา) in present-day Lopburi Province has yielded evidence suggesting the emergence of a complex society by around 500 BCE,[30]: 49–50  although the site remains insufficiently excavated, and its broader regional role has yet to be clearly established. By the 5th to 6th centuries CE, Mueang Uthong appears to have retained its central role, while Nakhon Pathom shows evidence of concurrent growth and increasing regional significance.[15]: 39–40  From approximately the 6th to the 10th centuries CE, Nakhon Pathom is widely regarded as a supra-regional center of the Dvaravati cultural sphere,[32]: 4, 9 [33]: 55  alongside other major centers such as Si Thep in the eastern plain.[34]: 151–2 

The pre-Dvaravati communities appear to have become increasingly dense,[28]: 3, 9  undergoing continuous development until the construction of major religious monuments in the early to middle Dvaravati period, dated approximately from the first half of the 7th century to the first half of the 9th century.[28]: 9  This phase is often characterized as one of regional political competition, particularly between two supra-regional centers: Nakhon Pathom in the western valley and Si Thep in the eastern plain.[35] However, following reported Chenla incursions during the 7th century, several Dvaravati polities are thought to have become involved in wider regional conflicts.[11]: 54–5 

The rivalries between Nakhon Pathom, Si Thep, and other centers are sporadically reflected in local traditions and are commonly interpreted as forms of regional competition, although scholarly interpretations vary. The earliest narratives of conflict are preserved in several versions of the Legend of Nakhon Chai Si and the Legend of Phra Praton Chedi. These traditions recount that Siddhijaya, originating from Manohana[36]: 11–2 [37]: 3–4 —a toponym identified with Ayojjhapura in the Pali chronicles Ratanabimbavaṃsa and Jinakalamali;[37]: 4  this city has in turn been equated with Si Thep[2]—relocated to the Nakhon Pathom region and established his authority around 590 CE.[36]: 11–2  According to these accounts, Siddhijaya came into conflict with a pre-existing ruler, Kakabhadra, a struggle said to have ended in Siddhijaya’s military victory.[37]: 2  Siddhijaya’s authority is speculated to have extended into the early 7th century, based on a record of a Dvaravati tributary mission to the Chinese court in 616 CE, listed under the name Tou-he (投和國; Dvaravati), whose ruler is recorded as Pu-xie-qi-yao (脯邪乞遙), a name that has been phonetically compared with Siddhijaya.[15]: 130  In contrast, Kakabhadra is described in traditional account as having retained authority in parts of the region until 641 CE, when he was succeeded by his elder son, Kalavarnadisharaja.[36]: 12  It has therefore been suggested that Kakabhadra and Siddhijaya may represent the same historical figure under different names.[37]: 4 

Later tradition holds that around 629 CE,[b] a group of Brahmins from Nakhon Pathom received an order to establish a new urban settlement in what is now Lopburi, south of Si Thep.[36]: 11–4  The city is said to have been completed in 648 CE, with Kalavarnadisharaja, son of Kakabhadra, enthroned as its inaugural ruler—an event regarded in these sources as marking the establishment of the Lavo Kingdom.[38][39] Kalavarnadisharaja’s reign is characterized in the Northern Chronicle as a period of territorial expansion,[38]: 25  extending inland as far as Chiang Saen in northern Thailand, where he is said to have exercised political influence and established dynastic relations with Tai Yuan monarchs.[37]: 4  Notably, however, these traditions contain no explicit account of his relations with Si Thep,[38]: 25  which, during the 6th to 7th centuries, was ruled by a line of monarchs attested in the Ban Wang Pai inscription (K.978)[40]: 17–9  and is later linked in the Jinakalamali to Rajadhiraj,[2] who is described there as a king of Ayojjhapura.[41]: 97, 125–6  This founder narrative, however, is irreconcilable with the account preserved in the Cāmadevivaṃsa, which states that in 647 CE[42]: 19 —one year prior to Kalavarnadisharaja’s supposed accession—Lavo was already ruled by Navaratna (นพรัตน์),[42]: 23  a king without a biological heir who adopted Camadevi as his daughter, and who subsequently married her to Ramaraj,[42]: 17  a prince of Ramburi identified by some Thai scholars with Kalavarnadisharaja. The existence of an established polity at Lavo is further corroborated by Xuanzang’s account, which refers to Lavo as Luó-wō-guó (罗涡国) as early as 629.[43]: 83 

On the basis of Chinese sources, Tatsuo Hoshino interprets that political power had already shifted significantly around 665 CE, when Pú jiā yuè mó,[13]: 133  associated with Si Thep, is said to have consolidated authority over both the Si Thep and Nakhon Pathom regions.[11]: 54  The Jinakalamali later recounts a narrative concerning Anuruddha, a 7th-century ruler of Arimaddanapura (often associated with Nakhon Pathom), who is said to have launched a military campaign against Ayojjhapura/Si Thep and successfully captured its ruler, Manohanaraj, bringing him to Nakhon Pathom.[37]: 4  Toward the late 7th century, the Legend of the Arhat (ตำนานนิทานพระอรหันต์) records that Balidhiraja, eldest son of Kalavarnadisharaja of Lavo and ruler of Sukhothai, marched south into the western valley, overthrew the incumbent ruler, and installed his youngest son, Sai Thong Som—said to be of mixed Mon–Tai ancestry—as the new monarch, while his elder son, Balipatijaya, succeeded Kalavarnadisharaja at Lavo around 700 CE.[37]: 3–5  Following this account, no further rulers of Lavo are mentioned in the extant narrative sources until 861 CE, when a group of Tai Yuan nobles led by Vasudeva is said to have established authority in Lavapura.[44]: 39  The Jinakalamali and Cāmadevivaṃsa later introduce Uchitthaka, a cakravartin who is described as having lost the capital of Lavapura to Sujita of Tambralinga in 927 CE during a campaign associated with conflicts involving Haripuñjaya. Uchitthaka is further said, in these accounts, to have marched on Haripuñjaya, seized its throne, and ruled there until 930 CE.[45]

By 757 CE,[c] a ruler named Padumasuriyavamsa is said to have emerged at Indaprasthanagara in the central Menam valley.[d] His authority is described in later tradition as encompassing Lavo and Sukhothai, and extending eastward into the Korat Plateau as far as Mueang Talung (เมืองตลุง or ตะลุมดอ) in present-day Prakhon Chai district;[49]: 8  several later Siamese monarchs subsequently claimed descent from him.[47][48]: 11, 38, 43–4 [50]: 127, 133  However, the Ratanabimbavaṃsa also records that in the early 9th century Indaprasthanagara was besieged by Adītaraj of Ayojjhapura (Si Thep) after the demise of its great ruler.[2][51]: 51  The Si Thep line is further attested by Bhagadatta, whose reign is dated from 859 CE by the Śrī Canāśa Inscription (K.949)[52]: 122  and his dynasty is said to have ended in 949 CE following incursions from Angkor.[53]: 3546  Meanwhile, in the central and western regions, local ruling lineages appear to have persisted until the late 10th–11th centuries,[15]: 262–3  when they increasingly faced external pressures and invasions from the Pagan,[17]: 41 [20]: 4  Tambralinga,[54]: 70  Angkor,[55] and Chola.[8]: 143 

During the reign of Isanavarman I (r. 616–637) of Chenla, efforts were undertaken to annex polities in the Menam Basin, particularly the Tou Yuan Kingdom,[56][57] whose principal center has been proposed to correspond to modern Lopburi[11]: 36, 54  or Si Mahosot [th].[58] Concurrently, Chenla maintained relations with other Dvaravati-influenced polities—such as Zhu Jiang and Can Ban—through royal intermarriage.[59] These confrontations continued into the reign of Bhavavarman II (r. 639–657), who is recorded as engaging in military conflict with Dvaravati Sambuka, commonly identified with modern Nakhon Pathom.[60]: 24–25, 30 [61] Tatsuo Hoshino has argued that these conflicts involved multiple polities, including the three brother kingdoms of Qiān Zhī Fú (later known as Gē Luó Shě Fēn), Xiū Luó Fēn, and Gān Bì, which together are said to have mobilized approximately 50,000 elite troops.[11]: 54–5 

In the conflicts, Tou Yuan—previously the target of Chenla’s annexation efforts—was instead recorded in 647 as a vassal of Dvaravati,[7]: 269  while in the following year the Kingdom of Lavo was established by Kalavarnadisharaja (r. 641–700) of Dvaravati Nakhon Pathom.[11]: 54  Bhavavarman II was in turn succeeded by Jayavarman I (r. 657–681), who is described as the son of Chandravarman (旃陀越摩),[62]: 58  identified in Chinese sources as the ruler of Gān Bì,[63][64] a polity that maintained dynastic relations with Dvaravati's Xiū Luó Fēn and Gē Luó Shě Fēn, the latter of which has been proposed to represent an expanded polity extending from Si Thep to Nakhon Pathom[11]: 54  and was ruled by Pú jiā yuè mó in 665.[13]: 133  Jayavarman I was then succeeded by his daughter Jayadevi (r. 681–713), whose reign was marked by the disintegration of Chenla.[65]

Dvaravati influence in the Tonlé Sap basin, particularly in its northern region prior to the Angkorian period, is evidenced by Buddhist boundary stones (Bai sema) discovered on Mount Kulen, dated to the 8th century,[66]: 88  as well as by other pre-Angkorian structures displaying Wen Dan–related features.[66]: 93  On this basis, Woodward has suggested that during this period the northern Tonlé Sap region was not under the lower Chenla but rather formed part of the sphere of Wen Dan,[66]: 87–8, 91  which expanded its authority into the area following the fragmentation of Chenla and maintained close relations with,[66]: 91–2  or exercised direct control over, Si Thep.[66]: 94  Population movements from this region to Si Thep in the early 8th century are likewise described as having taken place under Wen Dan auspices.[66]: 91  Similarly, during the 7th and 8th centuries, Chenla and the Cham exerted influence on artistic traditions in the Menam Basin, particularly in the western valley, through royal and diplomatic connections.[29]: 49–53 

Following the aforementioned fragmentation, the Tonlé Sap polities were reunified and, in the early 9th century, established their principal center further north in the Angkor region.[67] Jayavarman II (r. 780–850), ruler of Lower Chenla and later regarded as the founder of the Angkorian monarchy, is recorded as having re-established relations with polities in the Mun–Chi basins, where the former ally Zhu Jiang was located, and as having encountered Dvaravati Si Thep in the Menam–Pa Sak valleys. Woodward has further proposed that Jayavarman II defeated Wen Dan during this period, after which the former Dvaravati-associated Wen Dan region in the Chi valley entered the Javā era.[66]: 93  Archaeological and textual data suggest that by the early 8th century, the political predominance of Dvaravati had entered a phase of decline.[36]: 60  Subsequently, Angkor, under the reign of Rajendravarman II (r. 944–968) successfully conquered Si Thep in 946.[e][68] Thereafter, Si Thep declined and was abandoned by approximately the 13th century, contemporaneously with the rise of the Sukhothai and Ayutthaya kingdoms.[69] Another Dvaravati center, Lavapura of Lavo, is also recorded as having fallen under Angkorian authority in 1005 during the reign of Suryavarman I (r. 1002-1050).[19]

Costumes of a man and a woman in the Dvaravati period, reconstructed from terracotta figures found at Khu Bua, Ratchaburi Province.[70]: 9 

Some scholars date this period to the 9th to 10th centuries CE,[28]: 3   while other studies indicate that the Dvaravati cultural horizon extended into the 11th century.[28]: 6  During this time, changes in the economic conditions of communities in the western Menam valley are recorded,[28]: 9  and external trade connections with the Tang dynasty, conducted through routes associated with the Maritime Silk Road, are attested.[28]: 9  In the same period, the Menam valley polities are recorded as experiencing several external political incursions, events that are associated in the sources with the end of the Dvaravati period in the 11th century. Archaeological surveys in the area surrounding the former center at Mueang Uthong indicate low settlement density during this phase,[28]: 4  and the site is recorded as having been abandoned in the 12th century.[28]: 3  Evidence of trade between Uthong and Tang China during the 9th to 10th centuries CE is also documented.[28]: 5  Against this backdrop of contraction in earlier Dvaravati centers, the early 10th-century conquest of the lower Menam basin by Tambralinga marked a shift in regional dynamics: Nakhon Pathom—identified as Mevilimbangam—entered a period of maritime trade prosperity linked to the emergence of Srivijaya, albeit with limited political influence,[36]: 60  while Lavo simultaneously rose as a regional center under Angkorian control beginning in the 11th century.[15]: 262–3 [71]: 46 

Following the conquest of Lavo by Tambralinga in 927[45] and the annexation of Si Thep by Angkor in 949,[53]: 3546  political authority over the Sukhothai region, mentioned in the Northern Chronicle, appears to have passed to Haripuñjaya monarchs in the 950s.[72]: 6–10 [73]: 8–10  During this period, several Dvaravati polities experienced external incursions or displacement. According to the Yonok Chronicle [th], Suphannaphum, situated in the western Menam valley, is recorded as having suffered an assault that compelled its two princes to flee northward into Haripuñjaya territory in the 930s,[74]: 191  while a series of ultimately unsuccessful Tambralinga campaigns launched from Lavo attempted to advance toward Haripuñjaya.[75] These disruptions coincided with a northward relocation of the political center of the early Siamese polity led by Sudhammaraja from the central Menam valley to Phitsanulok in 937, as mentioned in the Ayutthaya Testimonies.[48]: 37 

By around 1001–1005, Lavo had fallen under Angkorian authority,[76][19] prompting the Siamese monarch, Visnuraja, at Phitsanulok to relocate southwestward to Phetchaburi.[48]: 38  In 1052, however, the Angkorian ruler at Lavo was defeated by a king of Haripuñjaya, who installed his younger brother, Chandrachota, as the new ruler;[77][78] shortly thereafter, the Siamese ruler at Phetchaburi returned to the central Menam valley.[48]: 40  In the same period, Nakhon Pathom—already weakened militarily by recurrent conflicts between Haripuñjaya and Lavo in the early 10th century[17]: 105 —was reportedly raided during the Southeast Asian campaign of the Chola ruler Rajendra I in the 1030s[f] and may have suffered further destruction in 1058 during the Pagan Anawrahta’s campaign toward the lower Menam basin,[17]: 95, 105  which culminated in the submission of Lavo.[81]: 18–9 [73]: 37–9  As a result of these successive disruptions, several cities were destroyed[20]: 4 [17]: 41  and Nakhon Pathom appears to have undergone severe depopulation between the 11th and 12th centuries.[17]: 63, 167–8 

The Northern Chronicle further records that the Pagan noble Kar Tayy exercised political authority over the Suphannaphum–Mueang Uthong region[73]: 60  from approximately 1081 to 1121,[64]: 43–4  after which Mueang Uthong was abandoned[28]: 3  and Suphannaphum to have lacked a ruler.[73]: 61  Another passage of the chronicle recounts a Pagan invasion of the newly founded Ayodhya in 1087; although Ayodhya is said to have prevailed, its ruler, Narai I, is recorded as having died in the same year.[73]: 40–2 [78] Around the same period, the Legend of Nakhon Si Thammarat [th] refers to a foreign ruler, Sri Dharmasokaraja I, said to have originated from Pagan's Hanthawaddy, who governed Indaprasthanagara–Lavo in the east–central Menam valley until around 1117 before moving southward to establish his rule at Nakhon Si Thammarat;[44]: 36–43  this interval also witnessed the relocation of the Siamese royal seat under Surindraraja northward to Chai Nat.[48]: 41  Taken together, these accounts suggest a prolonged phase—spanning roughly a century—of Pagan political penetration into the Menam valley, a reconstruction that is consistent with the early 13th-century Chinese text Zhu Fan Zhi, which notes that Chenla bordered Pagan to the west.[43]: 99  Following Sri Dharmasokaraja I’s departure, Angkor reasserted control over Lavo[44]: 39  and initiated a renewed phase of political and cultural expansion into the Menam basin.[36]: 170–88 

The 12th and 13th centuries mark a transitional phase following the decline of Dvaravati, characterized by political fragmentation and competition among several newly emergent centers in the Menam and Mae Klong River basins. Many of these polities later developed into historically attested Siamese states, including Phrip Phri, Suphannaphum, Suvarnapura, Sukhothai, and Ayutthaya. During this period, former Dvaravati supra-regional centers lost much of their earlier prominence. Of the two principal centers, Si Thep remained under Angkorian authority[21]: 303, 308–309  but experienced a gradual decline in political and economic significance[82] and is generally considered to have been abandoned by around the 13th century.[83] Nakhon Pathom, formerly a major center in the western plain, and its associated site of Khu Bua, appear to have experienced substantial depopulation,[36]: 190–3 [71]: 55–6  while local authority increasingly focused on the Mae Klong River basin, particularly at the sites of modern Ratchaburi and Mueang Sa Kosi Narai (เมืองสระโกสินารายณ์).[36]: 186–9  These two sites have respectively been identified with Jaya Rajapuri and Sambukapattana as mentioned in the Preah Khan Inscription (K.904),[71]: 53  both exhibit clear Angkorian cultural influence,[36]: 190–3 [71]: 47  as does the nearby site of Pong Tuek [de].[84] Within this shifting regional configuration, the principal power in the western Menam valleys appears to have been centred at Mueang Sing, located in the present-day Mueang Sing Historical Park, while authority in the eastern plain was based at Lopburi. The latter alternated between Angkorian control and periods of local autonomy.[85] Both centres are identified in the Preah Khan Inscription as Sri Jayasimhapuri and Lavodayapura, respectively.[71]: 53 

Ruins in Mueang Sing Historical Park, western Menam valley, dating to the late 12th–early 13th century and reflecting strong Angkorian Bayon–style architectural influence.

Following the southward relocation of Sri Dharmasokaraja I to establish his authority at Nakhon Si Thammarat in 1117, his successor Sri Dharmasokaraja II is recorded as having regained control over Lavo in 1157[44]: 47  and reasserted authority northward as far as the region of modern Nakhon Sawan province,[44]: 40  according to interpretations of the Dong Mè Nang Mưo’ng Inscription (K. 766),[86] dated to 1167/68 CE.[44]: 38  During the same period, Siamese rulers are described as relocating their political centers further north. Suryaraja moved to Kamphaeng Phet in 1156,[48]: 11  while Pra Poa Noome Thele Seri relocated in 1155 to the Nakhon Thai–Sukhothai area,[47][50]: 127  and his younger brother, Uthong I, established himself at Mueang Chaliang.[73]: 60–1  These two brothers are said to have subsequently shifted southward again, establishing authority in the lower western valleys of the Suphannaphum–Phrip Phri–Jayasimhapuri region[47][48]: 46  around the 1160s.[87]: 61  Within this lineage, Jatiraja (ชาติราชา) is identified as a later ruler,[48]: 46  preceded by a succession of 7 monarchs, and is noted as having exercised political authority at Jayasimhapuri,[48]: 45  where Pra Poa Noome Thele Seri later succeeded him around the 1170s.[48]: 46  In contrast, the line of Suryaraja continued to expand northward, ceased paying tribute to the southern Siamese line of Indaprasthanagara, and instead allied with the Tai chiefdoms; it later crystallized into the polity conventionally identified as the Sukhothai Kingdom.[48]: 11–29 

In 1180,[g] following the loss of control over Lavo in 1157, Angkorian authority is said to have been reasserted in the region,[44]: 39  while Sri Dharmasokaraja II reportedly returned to Nakhon Si Thammarat.[44]: 41  In the same year,[h] the central Menam valley is described in Chinese sources as having come under the control of its former ruling line led by Pra Poa Noome Thele Seri and being referred to as Chen Li Fu,[88]: 1  a polity corresponding broadly to Indaprasthanagara.[i] In the Ayutthaya Testimonies, Indaprasthanagara dynasty is described as belonging to the same lineage as the early Sukhothai monarchs,[48]: 16–7  while scholarly interpretations suggest that the ruling house of Chen Li Fu may have had connections with the Mahidharapura dynasty of the Phimai region and Angkor.[90]: 7–11 

In the lower western valley, the southern Siamese lineage claimed the throne of Ayodhya in 1205 under the rule of a Siamese–Mon–Chinese–Cham heritage Uthong II,[78] set it as new seat replacing Indaprasthanagara of Chen Li Fu.[87]: 21 [88]: 13  This dynasty established marital alliances with the Mon ruling house of Haripuñjaya at Mueang Chaliang,[73]: 69–71 [78] from which emerged the mixed Mon–Chinese princes Dhammaraja and Baramaraja later ruled Ayodhya during the early to mid-14th century.[78] On this basis, some scholar has argued that the Siamese seizure of power at Ayodhya was facilitated, at least in part, by Chinese support.[43]: 84  Reflecting its maritime orientation and external political connections, this polity was identified as Xiān in a number of Chinese and Đại Việt sources.[91] A prince of this lineage, Varashreṣṭhakumāra, who ruled at Phrip Phri, later ascended the Ayodhya throne under the regnal name Ramathibodi I (Uthong V) in 1341[78] and reinforced his position through marriage alliances with Angkorian Lavo to the east and the Tai–Siamese Suphannaphum to the west.[87]: 61  The unification of these four centers in the lower river valleys culminated in the traditional foundation of the Ayutthaya Kingdom in 1351.[92]

Despite the emergence of Ayutthaya as a new political entity, the legacy of Dvaravati continued to be preserved in nomenclature and historical memory. The full ceremonial name of the capital—Krung Thep Dvāravatī Śrī Ayutthayā (กรุงเทพทวารวดีศรีอยุธยา)—explicitly invoked Dvaravati as a former seat of royal authority.[93][94][95][96] Regional traditions likewise maintained this association. The Laotian Phra That Phanom Chronicle [th] refers to Ayodhya prior to 1351 as Dvāravatī and Śrī Ayodhiyā Dvāravatī Nakhon (ศรีอโยธิยาทวารวดีนคร),[97] while a Burmese inscription of Hsinbyushin of Ava (Serial No. 1128),[98] dated to 1768 and found on a bronze cannon at Shwezigon Pagoda—acquired by Burmese forces following the second fall of Ayutthaya in 1767 CE—records the “conquest of Dvāravatī” in reference to Ayutthaya.[99] By the late 14th and 15th centuries, all former Dvaravati principalities, including Lavo, Suphannaphum, and the northern cities of the former Sukhothai Kingdom, had been incorporated into Ayutthaya. This process was completed between 1388 and 1438.[100]: 274 

Little is known about the administrative structure of Dvaravati. It appears to have functioned not as a centralized state but as a loose aggregation of chiefdoms, extending from the coastal areas of the upper Malay Peninsula into the riverine plains of the Chao Phraya basin. Both Hinduism and Buddhism played significant roles in its religious landscape. Archaeological surveys have identified 107 Dvaravati-associated urban sites in present-day Thailand, the majority concentrated in the central plain.[101]: 66  The largest settlements were located at Nakhon Pathom, Suphanburi, and Phraek Si Racha, with secondary centers at U Thong, Chansen, Khu Bua, Pong Tuek [de], Mueang Phra Rot, Lopburi, Si Mahosot [th], Kamphaeng Saen, Dong Lakhon, U-Taphao, Ban Khu Mueang, and Si Thep.[21]: 303–312 

Chinese sources from the Tang dynasty describe Dvaravati as being divided into three administrative tiers, commonly rendered as prefectures, counties, and districts. Each city is described as having a citadel and enclosing city walls.[102]: 55  In the early 7th century, the Tongdian further notes that the polity had six markets or trading centres, which modern scholars commonly identify with Nakhon Pathom, Chansen, U Thong, Khu Bua, Si Mahosot [th], and Dong Lakhon,[15]: 221–2  while alternative identifications proposed by other scholars include Lopburi and Pong Tuek [de].[15]: 221  These records also indicate the presence of numerous officials, including military and civil administrators, overseeing state affairs.[102]: 55  Dvaravati is further described as having two vassal polities: Tou Yuan (陀垣), considered a predecessor of Lavo, and the island polity of Tanling (曇陵),[103]: 15–16 [104]: 27  whose precise location remains uncertain but has been tentatively situated on an island or small peninsula within the marshlands of the early historic Bay of Bangkok.[103]: 15–16 

Settlement-pattern studies of the upper Chi–Mun basins prior to the 14th century suggest that Dvaravati consisted of multiple interconnected kingdoms linked through trade networks and organized around supra-regional centers such as Dong Mueang Aem, Phimai, Mueang Fa Daet Song Yang, Mueang Sema [th], Non Mueang, and Si Thep;[34]: 151–152  a pattern comparable to that observed in the Menam Valley.[32] A 2015 analysis of pre-600 CE circular moated settlements in the Mun Valley identified five distinct settlement clusters: the westernmost and smallest centered on Mueang Sema [th]; the larger Phimai cluster to the east; the Phayakkhaphum Phisai–Nadun–Kaset Wisai group on the northern Mun watershed, including Champasri, identified with the Zhū Jiāng Kingdom or later Zhān Bó; the Buriram–Surin group to the south; and the easternmost cluster along the Mun–Chi watershed, with dense concentrations in Suwannaphum, Phon Sai, and Nong Hi in present-day Roi Et province.[105]: 8–9 

The following shows the polities under Dvaravati culture in the Menam and the Chi-Mun Valleys during the first millennium.

Dvaravati Gold plaque with Standing Buddha, dated 8th–9th century.

Dvaravati itself was heavily influenced by Indian culture, and played an important role in introducing Buddhism and particularly Buddhist art to the region. Stucco motifs on the religious monuments include garudas, makaras, and Nāgas. Additionally, groups of musicians have been portrayed with their instruments, prisoners, females with their attendants, soldiers indicative of social life. Votive tablets have also been found, also moulds for tin amulets, pottery, terracotta trays, and a bronze chandelier, earrings, bells and cymbals.[21]: 306–308 

Copper Plate Inscription of Mueang Uthong

Excavations at several sites have yielded silver coins dated to the 7th century bearing Sanskrit inscriptions in Pallava script that name both a king and a queen of the polity: śrīdvaravatīsvarapuṇya (“King Śrī Dvāravatīśvara, endowed with great merit”) and śrīdvaravatīsvaradevīpuṇya (“the goddess-consort of the meritorious king of Dvāravatī”).[108] In addition, a copper plate dated to the 6th–mid 7th centuries, discovered at Mueang Uthong, records a ruler named Harṣavarman, grandson of Isanavarman. Jean Boisselier regarded this figure as a king of Dvaravati, whereas George Cœdès suggested that the plate may have originated in the Khmer realm and that the name could refer to a Khmer ruler.[109] This latter interpretation, however, presents chronological and genealogical difficulties, as Harshavarman I of the Khmer Empire reigned much later, from 910 to 923 CE,[110][111] and his grandfather was Indravarman I,[112][113][114] rather than Īśānavarman, who is named in the inscription.[109] Michael Vickery proposed that this Harshavarman may have belonged to another lineage descending from Isanavarman I (r. 616–637), who also established royal intermarriage with the Cham to the east, from which his another grandson, Prakāśadharma, is recorded as having ascended the Cham throne at Mỹ Sơn in 658.[29]: 51–2  Vickery’s hypothesis has been taken to lend support to a local fable recounting that a king of Isanapura concluded a peace agreement with the ruler of Nakhon Pathom, Shridravya, and gave his daughter in marriage to the Nakhon Pathom king.[115]

Moreover, the Ban Wang Pai inscription from Phetchabun Province (K. 978), dated to 550 CE, records the enthronement of a Dvaravati ruler identified as a son of Prathivindravarman, the father of Bhavavarman I of Chenla, thereby indicating a dynastic connection between Dvaravati and Chenla. The personal name of this ruler, however, is not preserved in the inscription.[116] Some scholars have further argued that the Bhavavarman mentioned in the Ban Wang Pai inscription of Si Thep may not refer to Bhavavarman I of Chenla, on the basis of palaeographic and stylistic differences in the inscription.[40]: 17–19  Similarly, the Nern Phra Ngam inscription from Nakhon Pathom Province, dated to the mid-5th to mid-6th centuries CE, refers to another ruler whose name is likewise absent.[53]

The following enumeration presents the succession of Dvaravati monarchs from the early Dvaravati civilization to the Xiān period, encompassing the temporal span from the 5th to the 14th century. Their seats of power were constantly shifted over the period.

Color legend for the seat of the polity

PR Phraek Si Racha PS Phitsanulok PE Phetchaburi SI Si Thep

CN Chai Nat SB Sing Buri ST Sukhothai SM Si Mahosot [th]

UT Mueang Uthong JS Jayasiṃhapurī AY Ayodhya

LB Lopburi SH Suphan Buri NP Nakhon Pathom

• Robert L. Brown, The Dvaravati Wheels of the Law and the Indianization of South East Asia. Studies in Asian Art and Archaeology, Vol. 18, Fontein, Jan, ed. Leiden and New York: E. J. Brill, 1996.
• Elizabeth Lyons, "Dvaravati, a Consideration of its Formative Period", R. B. Smith and W. Watson (eds.), Early South East Asia: Essays in Archaeology, History and Historical Geography, Oxford University Press, New York, 1979, pp. 352–359.
• Dhida Saraya, (Sri) Dvaravati: the Initial Phase of Siam's History, Bangkok, Muang Boran, 1999, ISBN 974-7381-34-6
• Swearer, Donald K. and Sommai Premchit. The Legend of Queen Cama: Bodhiramsi's Camadevivamsa, a Translation and Commentary. New York: State University of New York Press, 1998. ISBN 0-7914-3776-0
• สุรพล ดำริห์กุล, ประวัติศาสตร์และศิลปะหริภุญไชย, กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักพิมพ์เมืองโบราณ, 2004, ISBN 974-7383-61-6.
• Pierre Dupont, The Archaeology of the Mons of Dvāravatī, translated from the French with updates and additional appendices, figures and plans by Joyanto K.Sen, Bangkok, White Lotus Press, 2006.
• Jean Boisselier, "Ū-Thòng et son importance pour l'histoire de Thaïlande [et] Nouvelles données sur l'histoire ancienne de Thaïlande", Bōrānwitthayā rư̄ang MỮang ʻŪ Thō̜ng, Bangkok, Krom Sinlapakon, 2509 [1966], pp. 161–176.
• Peter Skilling, "Dvaravati: Recent Revelations and Research", Dedications to Her Royal Highness Princess Galyani Vadhana Krom Luang Naradhiwas Rajanagarindra on her 80th birthday, Bangkok, The Siam Society, 2003, pp. 87–112.
• Natasha Eilenberg, M.C. Subhadradis Diskul, Robert L. Brown (editors), Living a Life in Accord with Dhamma: Papers in Honor of Professor Jean Boisselier on his Eightieth Birthday, Bangkok, Silpakorn University, 1997.
• C. Landes, "Pièce de l’époque romaine trouvé à U-Thong, Thaïlande", The Silpakorn Journal, vol.26, no.1, 1982, pp. 113–115.
• John Guy, Lost Kingdoms: Hindu Buddhist Sculpture of Early Southeast, New York and Bangkok, Metropolitan Museum of Art and River Books, 2014, p. 32.
• Wārunī ʻŌsathārom. Mư̄ang Suphan bon sēnthāng kan̄plīanplǣng thāng prawattisāt Phutthasattawat thī 8 – ton Phutthasattawat thī 25 (History, development, and geography of the ancient city of Suphan Buri Province, Central Thailand, 8th–25th B.E.), Samnakphim Mahāwitthayālai Thammasāt, Krung Thēp, 2547.
• Supitchar Jindawattanaphum (2020). "หลักฐานการมีอยู่ของผู้ปกครอง และชนชั้นสูงสัมยทวารวดี" [Evidences of Governors and Aristocrats’ Existences in Dvaravati Period] (PDF) (in Thai). Nakhon Pathom Rajabhat University. Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 April 2024.