The Journal of the Siam Society Vol. LXXI, Part 1-2, 1983 - Khamkoo

REVIEWS 223
archaeological data have become available. But perhaps because of Mr. Griswold's
expertise, his eminent knowledge, and his highly respected reputation in the field of
Southeast Asian art and culture, many of his early opinions have continued to be
repeated without qualification or critical analysis. (Also, as is inevitable in such cases,
it seems, some of Mr. Griswold's opinions just as vigorously have been attacked.)
Authors Stratton and Scott, in relating, generally, the most familiar and oftrepeated
views- well-known secondary sources and primary sources as interpreted by
other writers- provide a palatable survey of Sukhothai art and history for those readers
who do not want to be troubled by controversial issues. For those who do not much
care about the extent of Ram Khamhaeng's kingdom in the late thirteenth century, the
most recent identification of his monuments, the matter of Sukhothai-Chinese relations,
and the probable dates of pottery production (and a certain amount of dedication and
perseverance is required to wade through discussion of these matters), then this book is
the best available. Many of the arguments and theories that must be taken into
account if a true picture of the Sukhothai period is to be attained have appeared in
recent issues of the JSS.6
The Art of Sukhothai includes chapters on history, architecture, sculpture,
painting and drawing, and ceramics. Works from Si Satchanalai and Kamphaeng Phet
are inCluded. All sources are carefully cited, and the text is well-organized and
clearly written. There are well over one hundred color and black-and-white photographs
that illustrate many (but not all) of the works under consideration, and there is
a glossary for readers unfamiliar with art terminology and Asian culture.
The authors are at their best when they venture somewhat off the beaten track
and express some new ideas of their own. The visual similarity between Sukhothai's
"lotus-bud" dome and similar architectural elements at Pagan is worth a follow-up; and
their attempts to distinguish prototypes for Sukhothai's renowned "walking Buddha"
figures are reasonable.
It is hoped that the authors, in their future books (the entire art history of
Thailand is projected), will bring more of their expertise as art historians into play. A
more judicious and critical approach, combined with their obvious enthusiasm and
dedication, should result in some books on Thai art well worth waiting for.
Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies,
University of Michigan
Betty Gosling
6. See, for instance, Michael Vickery, "A Guide through Some Recent Sukhothai Historiography,"
JSS 66.2 (1978): 182-246; Hiram W. Woodward, Jr., "The Dating of Sukhothai and Sawankhalok
Ceramics: Some Considerations," JSS 66.1 (1978): 1-7; Betty Goslin~, "OP.c~ More 1
J11scriptioP. ~:An 1\rt Histori~n's V~ew 1 " ISS ~9.l-~ (1981): P-4?.