The Phnom Penh Post published an opinion article titled The Weight of Civilisational Antiquity: A Historical Response to Khaosod English on September 21, 2026.
The article responds to a Khaosod English report concerning vintage photographs presented as images of Khmer villagers, which the Thai side says actually depict people in Thailand.
It was written by guest contributor Tesh Chanthorn, who identifies himself as a Cambodian citizen seeking peace. A disclaimer states that the views and opinions expressed are his own.
Rather than directly challenging the provenance of the photographs, the writer focuses on the historical timeline of the Khmer civilisation and the subsequent emergence of the Sukhothai and Ayutthaya kingdoms.
Khmer Empire compared with Sukhothai and Ayutthaya
Chanthorn cites 802 CE, when King Jayavarman II was consecrated as chakravartin in a ceremony associated with the Phnom Kulen region. Historians commonly regard the event as marking the beginning of the Angkorian Khmer Empire.
He compares this date with the emergence of Sukhothai as an independent political entity around 1238 and the establishment of Ayutthaya in approximately 1350 or 1351.
According to this timeline, the Angkorian Khmer Empire predates Sukhothai by about 436 years and Ayutthaya by approximately 548 to 549 years.
The writer nevertheless warns against using those figures to claim that Cambodia is “550 years older than Thailand.” Ayutthaya was not the beginning of Thailand as a modern state, while the country officially adopted the name Thailand only in the 20th century.
He argues that the more historically accurate description is that the Angkorian Khmer Empire emerged several centuries before Sukhothai and roughly five and a half centuries before Ayutthaya.
Khmer history extends beyond the Angkorian period
The article also refers to earlier states, including Funan and Chenla, to explain that complex societies, political systems, religious traditions and regional trade existed in mainland Southeast Asia long before modern national borders were created.
Chanthorn points to Angkor Wat, the Bayon and Angkor’s extensive urban and water-management systems as evidence of the Khmer civilisation’s achievements in architecture, engineering, art and administration.
At the same time, he says recognising the antiquity of Khmer civilisation should not be used to dismiss the historical contributions of Thai communities or other Southeast Asian peoples.
Civilisations across the region interacted, competed and influenced one another over many centuries. Their shared history, he argues, should be studied through evidence rather than reduced to a contest over national superiority.
Article provides no new evidence about the photographs
Despite its detailed discussion of Khmer history, the opinion piece does not present new evidence establishing the origin of the photographs at the centre of the dispute.
It does not provide the photographer’s name, archive reference number, original caption, date or location of the photographs. Nor does it cite an assessment by specialists in historical clothing or photography.
The age of one kingdom compared with another cannot determine the nationality or ethnicity of the people shown in a particular photograph. That question requires an examination of the original images, their archival records and other contemporary documentation.
The debate therefore involves two separate issues: the historical chronology of the Khmer, Sukhothai and Ayutthaya kingdoms, and the documented provenance of the disputed photographs. Evidence supporting one issue does not automatically settle the other.
Chanthorn concludes by calling on Thais and Cambodians to use historical knowledge to understand their shared regional roots and preserve inherited cultural heritage, rather than turning history into a source of hostility between the two countries.
In similar news
- Cambodia blasts Thailand’s Buriram temple for copying Angkor Wat
- Cambodia temple photo spot compared to Wat Mahathat landmark
- Google accused of ‘fake maps’ in Thailand-Cambodia temple spat
Source:
The story Cambodian responds with Khmer Empire history but no new evidence on disputed photos as seen on Thaiger News.
