When the War Was Over by Elizabeth Becker Page B

virtually no new modernized bureaucracy to challenge the French, and with the court firmly in support of French rule, Cambodia remained a docile colony. Finally, the Buddhist clergy—the one Cambodian institution strong enough to challenge the king and, hence, the French—rose to the occasion and began harboring anti-French sentiments. The Buddhist Institute of Suzanne Karpelès became the first home of anticolonialism in Phnom Penh.

    The Buddhists were eminently qualified for their part in bringing Cambodia into the modern political era. Under the tutelage of the French like Karpelès they had become some of the few Cambodians introduced to the ideas of the modern world. Importantly, this was said to be accomplished without sacrificing their identity as Khmers. Most of Cambodia’s small aristocracy were conversant in the ways of the French, but they were compromised by their acquiescence to colonial rule.
    This was the second time the Buddhists found themselves as agents of change in Cambodia. Seven hundred years earlier, during the demise of the Angkor Empire, their predecessors preached the new religion of Theravada Buddhism to Cambodians who were ripe for conversion. The political
integrity and morality of the kingdom were thrown into question at the time, and Cambodians converted en masse to this new faith that offered social tranquility without striving for material gain or power. The modest Buddhist bonzes were a welcome change from the arrogant and wealthy priests of the kings. The new Buddhists dressed in simple saffron robes. They possessed a sense of responsibility for all, not just the nobility. Eventually they became as revered as the deva-raj, who in turn became a Theravada Buddhist himself and patron of the faith.
    By the twentieth century the Buddhist monks had extraordinary power, despite their modest appearance. At dawn, the monks appeared with their heads bowed and begged for food outside village doorways; they helped broker marriages and otherwise dictated behavior in the profound and mundane affairs of village life. The bonzes taught the children, raised the orphans, and set the moral and social standards of the country. In return, the people built their pagodas and monasteries and followed their strictures. The bonzes, who pledged their lives to poverty, filled the pagoda coffers and became the most important source of charity in the country, dispensing food or funds to the poorest of peasants.
    Finally, the Buddhist monks were the only influential Cambodians in a position to question both the French and the king. The monks had attained an independent moral standing in the community not subject to the whims of royal beneficence. Unlike Vietnam and other countries of the Chinese tradition, Cambodia had no powerful mandarin class, only an aristocratic oligarchy that administered the government and whose fortunes were largely controlled by the king. The monks were recognized as a separate group protecting the country’s values and culture. When these holy men began questioning French rule, their doubts struck a deep chord in the country.
    Some monks had opposed the French from the start. Before the Uprising of 1885, two monks had preached against the French in the Cambodian countryside, calling upon Cambodians to defy colonialism in favor of what the French said was a wrong memory of Cambodia’s ancient past. A contemporary French report said: “These two adventurers belong to this category of prophets who, adorned with supernatural influence, dreamed of restoring the Kingdom of Cambodia to its ancient splendor.” Other anti-French monks followed. At one point the monks fielded an army of 5,000 peasants, but they were defeated as much by the royal family as by the French. In 1867 the last Buddhist rebel leader was captured by the French, who cut off his head, mounted it on slate, and brought it to Phnom Penh for public display.

    Monks quieted down but they never gave their