Banteay Samré (Khmer: ប្រាសាទបន្ទាយសំរែ) is a temple at Angkor, Cambodia located east of the East Baray. Built under Suryavarman II and Yasovarman II in the early 12th century, it is a Hindu temple in the Angkor Wat style.
Named after the Samré, an ancient people of Indochina, the temple uses the same materials as the Banteay Srei.
The Samres are an indigenous people of uncertain origin - they populated the region at the foot of the Kulen hills, and the inhabitants of Pradak are considered as their descendants.
The monument itself has its own story, related with particular relish by Mr Baradat. It tells of the accession to the throne of a poor farmer of Samre origin named Pou, who specialised in the cultivation of sweet cucumbers - the seeds of which he had received in some supernatural manner. He made homage of his first harvest to the king, who found them so succulent that he quickly secured exclusive rights, ordering Pou to kill anybody, man or beast, who should enter his "chamcar" (field).
In the season of the rains when the cucumbers were scarce, the sovereign, impatient for their taste, went himself to visit his gardener - but, arriving after nightfall, was mortally wounded by the farmer with a blow from his lance, being mistaken for a thief and buried as such in the middle of the field.
The king had no direct descendants, and the dignitaries of the kingdom, unable to agree on the choice of his successor, resorted to divine intervention, calling for the "Victory Elephant" to designate the new king. Stopping just in front of the sweet cucumber farmer, it "saluted him, lowered its trunk between its feet, kneeled and, encircling him with its coiling trunk, placed him gently on its back".
So becoming king, the cucumber farmer exhumed the corpse of his predecessor to celebrate the funerary ceremony at the Mebon, followed by the rites of cremation at Pre Rup. The court dignitaries, humilified at being governed by a Samre, soon expressed their discontent by neglecting to show any respect. The king, unable to discipline them with either kindness or cruelty, left the Royal Palace and went to live at some distance from the city - at Banteay Samre - where he "remained shut away like a frightened tortoise with its head in its shell". There, he summoned his ministers who remained loyal to the attributes of the royalty and the regalia of the old king rather than to the Master himself and, when he could take no more, resolved to punish them. Calling for the commode of his predecessor, he decapitated all those who chose to humiliate him by rather showing their devotion to this miserable relic of the previous dynasty. His reign followed from thenceforth in harmony amongst his followers who, overcome by his compassion, became faithful to him.
Banteay Samre, overrun with vegetation and cluttered with fallen blocks from its upper parts, had all the usual charm of ruins lost in the forest, but was no more than an object without form or personality. Anastylosis has transformed it into one of the finest monuments of the Angkor group, and one of the most complete. Its ornamentation, exceptional in quality and very well preserved in its entirety, became thereafter presented in its unified integrity - it is a pure specimen of the classic art from the finest period where the decoration, shown to its best advantage on a clear background, is itself a function of the architecture.
Following the resurrection of Banteay Srei, this first attempt at the restoration of a monument of any considerable size proved that the new method of work was justified and the confidence placed in its success well founded. Although undated, since no inscription was found - unlike other monuments in the same style - Banteay Samre is without doubt very close in time to Angkor Wat, and perhaps a little later.
Its slender proportions - though not fully appreciated before the clearing works since the horizontal lines of the truncated buildings barely emerged from their verdant covering - are impeccable, with an internal layout similar to the central part of Beng Mealea or Chau Say Tevoda, with which it is approximately contemporaneous; - enclosed by galleries with four gopuras and a surrounding courtyard, its central sanctuary is preceded to the east by a long room flanked by two "libraries".
Arriving from the east, a 200 metre causeway paved in laterite and bordered by a naga-balustrade in the style of Angkor Wat - which unfortunately barely remains - passes between two "srahs" (pools), to end at one of the perrons embellished with lions and supported on colonnettes. On two levels and bordered by nagas - similar to those in front of the entrance to Prah Palilay - this was joined to another terrace that stretched in width to either side of the axis. Its retaining wall, with rich decoration of a quality rarely achieved even during this period, ends in two perrons. These have disappeared, and their absence - which no doubt results from some later use of the materials - detracts considerably from the majesty of the composition. They are followed by the beginnings of two right angle returns, evident by the remains of their laterite foundation walls.
To judge by the remains of a large number of tiles found during clearing works, this vast esplanade was topped with light-weight structures extending to the limit of the eastern enclosure wall, obscuring its 1m.20 high moulded substructure. Excavation carried out during the clearing works discovered some remains of the walls of an ancient terrace, though unclear in plan, which indicated that the arrangement of the immediate surroundings of the temple on the east side must have been altered. The external laterite enclosure wall in its imposing proportion of 6m overall height must have formed, as on the other sides, one of the walls of a tile-covered gallery joining a gopura that would have been far more impressive than the existing projecting entrance with portico. This meanly proportioned arrangement could not reasonably have constituted the principal entry to a temple as important as Banteay Samre - and its style is in any case of the Bayon, which is later than the monument.
Internally the impression is confirmed - the galleries and gopuras of the second enclosure must either have been demolished or remain incomplete on the eastern side - and a laterite terrace has also been identified just at the outcrop of the projection serving as the plinth for the first gopura. The gallery of the second enclosure, of 83m.00 by 77m.00, encloses a surrounding courtyard at a lower level with a border forming a continuous portico in elegant sandstone pillars. Its side-aisle was once covered in a double-curved tiled roof - the holes for locating the carpentry still being visible in the walls. The main gallery, also with its roof once tiled, has no openings to the exterior except on the south side where long horizontal windows are placed high, while to the courtyard it gains light through numerous windows, each with seven balusters. Those to the south are walled in.
The height of the walls forms a very effective enclosure, corresponding well to the defensive role given to it in the legend of "the King of the sweet cucumbers".
The three north, west and south gopuras are all similar - cruciform in plan with two wings that lead to galleries and two porticoed doors. They are in laterite and sandstone and far more imposing than those of the first enclosure, - the anastylosis has, apart from the tiled roof, enabled the complete restoration of their powerful masonry framework. The pictorial tympanums of the frontons and half frontons, in a composition that stands clearly apart from the usual pattern, are set in very high relief - the figures are larger in scale than those within the temple and differ in technique, showing a superior quality in their modelling. It would seem that, like Angkor Wat, the last enclosure with its gopuras was realised later than the rest of the monument, though maintaining an undeniable unity.
One should particularly note the large frontons on the porticoes, which have had to be supported by a reinforced concrete frame. Inspired by the Ramayana, they describe various episodes of the battle of Lanka where the monkeys play a primary role. The best preserved panel - and one of the finest specimens in Khmer art - is on the north gopura, northern side. It represents, in a high relief standing out from the confusion of monkeys and asuras, the fight between Rama and Ravana, each mounted on his war chariot.
All the others should also be seen:
On the north gopura, southern side, is the charge of the monkeys under the command of Rama, mounted on Hanuman, and Lakshmana, on Angada.
On the south gopura, northern side, the construction by the monkeys of the causeway in rocks that is to enable them to attack the island of Lanka, and, on the half fronton to the right, Vishnou holding an Asura by the hair.
On the south gopura, southern side, Hanuman carries the summit of mount Kailasa (whose magic plants will serve to revive them) to Rama and Lakshmana who have been wounded by Indrajit.
On the west gopura, western side, the ferocious battle between the monkeys and the rakshasas and, on the eastern side, Vishnou overcoming two asuras whom he is holding by the chignon, with, on the half-fronton to the right, a line of gods on their mounts; - Vishnou with four arms on a lion, - Skanda, the god of war, with ten arms and multiple heads, on a peacock, - and Yama, the god of the Dead, on a buffalo.
