Finger-Marked Bricks: a Mysterious Archaeological Evidence of Pyu Period
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Finger-Marked Bricks: A Mysterious Archaeological Evidence of Pyu Period Kyaw Myo Satt Department of Archaeology, University of Yangon The ancient Pyu founded the city states in Myanmar since 2nd century BCE. They founded their cities along the Ayeyarwady Valley and the famous Pyu cities are Beikthano, Halin, Sri Ksetra and Pinle (Maing-maw). During the founding of their cities brick was a most important material for their structures; city wall, palace and religious (or) ritual buildings. But, they might be used wood and bamboo for the residential buildings of commoners. It was existed that an unusual fact _ the ancient Pyu used finger-marked bricks for their structures abundantly. These bricks were found during the Pyu period in Myanmar abundantly. Therefore, former archaeologists of Myanmar expressed finger-marked bricks were a characteristic of Pyu culture. During the Pyu period the making of brick technology was derived from ancient India. Myanmar archaeologist, Major Ba Shin mentioned his suggestion on advancing of making of brick such as ‘the practice of making of brick might be reached to Southeast Asia with the diffusion of religion from India’. Moreover, he also going expressed that the history of name of brick such as ‘in Myanmar, the word ‘Oak (brick)’ was derived from Pali language “ithakạ̄ (£|um)” (Pyinnyarpadathar Booklet 1966, p.196). The ancient Pyu drew the lines on a surface of bricks by their fingers before dried under the sunshine. But some signs were portrayed with stamps. In size, the length, width and thickness of the larger bricks is 43-50 cm x 19-25 cm x 6-9 cm (17-20" x 7 1/2-10" x 2 1/2-3 1/2"). The smaller bricks are 41-43 cm x 18-19 cm x 6-7 cm (Aung Myint & Moore 1991, p.83). The ancient Pyu not only made finger-marked bricks but also other bricks with numbers, symbols, letters, emblems and figures etc. Moreover, it could be found the accidental marks on the bricks’ surface. These kinds of marks are footprints of man and animals and prints of leaf. These might be appeared on the surface of brick as marks before dried under the sunshine accidentally. The brick makers usually used middle three fingers while drawing the lines on the surface of brick without thumb and little finger. Figure 1. Drawings of finger-marked bricks. Taken from: Aung Myint & Moore 1991 In Myanmar, the finger-marked bricks were found all over the country. The sites which were found the finger-marked brick are; Beikthano, Halin, Sri Ksetra, Maingmaw (Pinle), Beinnaka, Thaton, Kyaikkatha, Waddi, Thegon, Dhannyawadi, Vesali, Alakappa, Bagan, Hmawbi (Sanpannago), Tagaung, Taungdwingyi, Thagara (Tavoy/Dawai), Pinle, Zothok, Winka, Taikkala, Paan, Waw (Kyontu), Mudon (Kawparan), Muthin, Kawtgun (cave), Pawrisat (Kosambi) and Hlegu(Aung Myint & Moore 1991. Win Yee Hla 2017,p.5. Thu Thu Aung 2015). Finger-marked bricks, unless re-used, are not found at sites dating beyond the 12th or early 13th century AD (Moore 2004,p.3). Moreover, finger-marked bricks were also found at India and Thailand. Although ancient India may be a primary source for finger-marked bricks of Southeast Asia countries including Myanmar, it did not have elaborated records of those archaeological materials. Indian archaeologists ignored these bricks as an unimportant material to record for their cultural history. In India, the earliest usual bricks were discovered from site number 19 of Bhita ancient city and it was a residential building. These bricks were uncovered at the depth of 17 feet and the date is 4th or 5th BCE. The average size of these bricks is 17"×16"× 4¾" (Annual Report of Archaeological Survey of India 1915, p. 36) and that is not very different in brick size of ancient Myanmar Pyu sites. But, U Win Maung (Tampawady) (a keen observer of history and archaeology) took a preliminary survey of sites in India and Nepal recorded finger-marked bricks in Bihar (Varanasi (Sarnath), Kosambi, Rajagriha, Vaishali), Uttar Pradesh (Kusinara, Saravasti) and at Kapilavastu (Moore, Interpreting, 2004,p.3). In 1994, Myanmar researcher U San Win took a field trip to India. Fortunately, he found a part of finger-marked brick at the site museum of a palace site of Maurya period. The three lines were portrayed on the surface of that brick and the size is 12"×10"×5". Moreover, he also knew that the finger-marked bricks were also found at other ancient sites of Maurya period by the informed of an Indian archaeologist from that site museum (San Win 2010,p.20). Another country which discovered the finger-marked bricks was Thailand situated on the east of Myanmar. In 1996, Japanese professor Toshikats Ito took a field trip to ancient Dvarawadi sites of Thailand for the study of finger-marked bricks as a fulfill of wish of Myanmar historian U Mg Mg Tin who was a very enthusiastic person on finger-marked brick. The total number of Toshikats Ito visited sites was 26. The sites which were discovered the finger- marked bricks are Si Thep, Wangdeng, Si Maha Sok, Tha Kae, Ku Muang and Mok Kha Laan (Nakon Si Thammarat). These sites are situated at the central and southern parts of Thailand but those were not found at northern part. Later, finger-marked bricks were discovered from U Thong and Nakonpahton ancient cities (San Win 2010, p.19). There were four kinds of opinion on making of finger-marked bricks among the scholars; (a) made for attachment the cement during the lay of bricks (b) used for decoration (c) used for the marks of fulfilling quotas of bricks to be made in the context of large-scale constructions such as city walls and (d) to express the names of brick makers or places of brick production (Aung Myint 1994, p.52). The first suggestion on finger-marked brick is not reasonable one, because every bricks of Pyu period did not have the marks on the surface. If that suggestion is true every bricks should have finger-marks to attach the cement. But, this suggestion may be true for the bricks of Phayagyi stupa at Sri Ksetra. Because, it can easily realize that the lines of these bricks were made for the attachment of cement intentionally. Figures 2,3 Photos of Phayagyi Stupa and its surface lines to attach the cement. Taken from Man Thit Nyein (2018) The second opinion, for decoration was not also certain, because if laid finger-marked bricks one and other it could not be seen the surface designs. Therefore, the opinion for decoration was not also convenient for the answer of making of finger-marked bricks. The third fact: those were used as the mark of quota was not also authentic suggestion. Although this suggestion may be true for large-scale constructions such as city wall it may not be right for the small-scale buildings. It was no needs to produce large number of finger-marked bricks for the small-scale buildings. But, it could be found most of finger-marked bricks at the site number MM-13 of Pinle (Maingmaw) Old City and it was a very small building. Figure 4. A photo of small scale structure (site number MM-13) of Pinle (Maingmaw) Old City. Taken from: Report of Department of Archaeology, Ministry of Culture (2008) Among the opinions, the last one _ to express the names of brick makers or places of brick production is most reasonable suggestion for finger-marked bricks. Because, finger-marked bricks which expressed the names of brick producing places were discovered from ancient Bagan city. But, this suggestion could not be identified for the Pyu period to be true. Therefore, finger-marked bricks were being existed as mysterious archaeological evidences. U Aung Myint and Dr Elizabeth Moore also said that ‘this leaves the mystery of why they are so similar from one place to another, and in places such a distance apart’(Aung Myint and Moore 1991,p.101). However, it is need to consider the political situation of Pyu period for the suggestion of using of finger-marked bricks. The ancient Pyu usually set up their prominent cities not far from Ayeyarwady River but they could connect with that river by its tributaries for their trade. The reason of why they did not set up their cities beside the Ayeyarwady was to avoid the attacking with multitude enemies. Moreover, they selected the places which were rounded by natural barriers; ranges and streams for their cities’ security. It could also be seen brick walls at every Pyu cities and some were enclosed by double or triple walls. Myanmar chronicle usually expressed that most of Pyu cities were destroyed by enemies’ attacking. The battle of King Dwuttabaung (Sri Ksetra) and Princess Panhtwa (Beikthano) was a well-known legend. At the end of that legend, Princess Panhtwa was taken by King Dwuttabaung and she became a royal consort. Some archaeological evidences are being supported to above expression. A cemetery of queen Beikthano was discovered on the southeast of Sri Ksetra Old City. Janice Stargardt expressed in her “Ancient Pyu of Burma” the about of battle of Beikthano and Sri Ksetra (Stargardt 1990,p.170). During these time (early in the 3rd century AD) Fan Shih Wan(Man), king of Fu-nan on the Lower Mekong, great ships to be built and conquered more than ten kingdoms on the Malay Peninsula (G.H Luce & Pe Maung Tin 1939, P. 267). Some scholars certainly said that Fan Shih Wan (Man) attacked the Beikthano (Than Tun 2006, P.110). Therefore, it can be assume that the ancient Pyu had the danger of enemies not only from internality but also from abroad.