Vickery on Aung-Thwin's"contempt for truth in history"

Vickery, Michael (1998) Society, economics, and politics in pre-Angkor Cambodia : the 7th-8th centuries, Tokyo: Toyo Bunko.

Vickery in his in his magnum opus on 7th-8th Cambodian inscriptions can't help citing Aung-Thwin as embodying "contempt for truth in history."

"Obviously I disagree with the definition of history in Veyne 1978:9-10, that history is not a science and has no method, but rather "historians narrate true events in which man was the actor; history is a novel that is true."

At least Veyne showed respect for truth, in contrast, for example to Aung-Thwin 1988:359, who manifested contempt for truth in history,..."

A "contempt for truth in history" accompanied by a dishonest act that none of his colleagues called him on:

"...and with a dishonest comment about "scratch marks on eleventh-century Sanskrit inscriptions," a matter which had not figured at all in the work on which he was passing comment, and, peculiarly, not informing readers that he was reviewing the publication of a conference in which he had fully participated, even though his paper was not included in the publication." (Vickery, 1998, footnote 7, pp. 3-4)

References

Aung-Thwin, Michael (1988) Review of Southeast Asia in the 9th to 14th Centuries, edited by David G. Marr and A.C. Milner (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies; Canberra: Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University), Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 19, pt. 2:353-62.

Veyne, Paul (1978) Comment om ecrit l'histoire, suivi Foucault revolutionne l'histoire, Paris: Editions du Seuil

Comment: Makes one wonder what other infelicities he got away with during his career. He almost got away with erasing Mon history without even learning the Mon language, using the excuse over and over again, that his father was part Mon. His elementary school teacher wouldn't even have accepted such an excuse.