『東南アジア考古学』39 号 (2019) Journal of Southeast Asian Archaeology 39(2019)

Ceramics found in Segaran of Site トロウラン遺跡スガラン出土の陶磁器

Takashi Sakai (National Taiwan University), Koji Ohashi (Kyushu Ceramic Museum) & Naniek H. Wibisono (Indonesia National Archaeology Research Center)

要旨：インドネシア、東部ジャワのトロウラン遺跡のスガラン地区は、 1989 年以来継続的に発掘調査がなされている。個別地 区の出土傾向の確認を目的として、我々はこの地区出土遺物についての国際ワークショップをトロウラン遺跡博物館で 2018 年 4 月に行った。 主要な舶載陶磁片はすでに分離されていたが、微量の残存陶磁片は遺跡の全体傾向と大きな差がなかった。ただここでは 14 世紀の上質陶磁が未確認に対し、 16 世紀初頭前後のトロウラン終末期陶磁片を複数確認できた。圧倒的多数を占める在地土器 は基本的にミニチュアなどを含める装飾的な調度品類が主体をなし、また瓦類には赤色塗彩が含まれていた。以上によりこの地 区のあり方を具体的に考えることができた。

Keywords: Trowulan Site, Segaran, Imported ceramics, local earthenware, miniature

1. Preface The Trowulan Site in East , Indonesia, is the ruin of the capital the Kingdom (1293-c.1527), the last and largest Hindu Java kingdom. This kingdom was formed as a political and economic strong power in the archipelago of Southeast Asia around from the 14th to the 15th centuries, and functioned as an important hub in the long distant trade network between India and China to show much meaningful evidences of cultural exchange on this connection. Because of this function, the arrival of several famous foreign visitors such as the Chinese admiral Zheng He or the diplomats of the Ryukyu Kingdom were recorded. By this reason, after the early investigation by H. Maclaine Pont and A.A. Kromodjojo Adinegoro around the 1920s, numerous numbers of foreign glazed ceramic shards were unearthed by several times of excavations or surface surveys. Among them fine quality Zhizheng style Yuan under-glaze cobalt blue by the 14th century or various kinds of Vietnamese under-glaze cobalt blue, including glazed tiles, by the first half of the 15th century have been well known as like as exhibits in the National Museum, Jakarta, that were chosen by E. W. van Orsoy de Flines. For understanding of basic import condition of glazed ceramics into Trowulan, we have held the analysis works on glazed ceramic shards, kept in the open-air storage of the Trowulan Museum (former the Majapahit Information Center) in 2012, 2013 and 2015. By these works, we could confirm basic chronological tendency of foreign glazed ceramics from before the th9 century to the 17 and 18th centuries, and it shows that fine grade Chinese porcelains were imported by the 14th century and a variety of Vietnamese stoneware was carried by the 15th century. However, the majority of glazed ceramic shards in this open-air storage, which composed findings from the early investigation of the 1920s until the establishment of the museum in 1992, have no labeling of excavation condition, such as place, date and layer etc. Therefore, we could not get detailed information of foreign glazed ceramics in each district of the Trowulan archaeological site, which covers a very wide area, about 9 by 6 km (Map.1). In such condition, newly we were known the existence of the other ceramic shards in the storage of this museum, and these new shards, stored in about 50 plastic bags, which are the result of the excavation activity in the Segaran District around 2009. We considered, that the analysis of these artifacts should allow us to get new information on the foreign ceramic tendency in this district. For this purpose, we held a workshop in Trowulan for the findings of the Segaran District in collaboration with the Trowulan Museum during April 1-5th, 2018.

2. Segaran District and finding artifacts The Segaran District of Trowulan Site is well-known as the ruins of a rectangular plan brick-made reservoir which measures 376 by 172 m. The city of Trowulan was formed by a gridded canals system, and this district is positioned just inside of the northeastern corner, or almost the center among 7 major districts of this wide site (A of Map.1). Then, the Trowulan Museum was constructed west of this reservoir ruins in 1992. In July and November 2009(1), the University of Indonesia held an excavation investigation on the south end of museum’s area (center of Map.2), and they found a large residential structure (more than 90 by 75 m), which was constructed by bricks on earth ground and natural stone paved courtyard with large buried terracotta jars. This structure is positioned the widest residential ruins after the Kedaton District, constructed by bricks in several different times(2). Due to significant characteristics, the Cultural Property Preservation Office built large-scale roofs for protection of the structures covered on five wide excavated holes. This

51 preserved facility became the widest visible excavated structure among the many districts in Trowulan. On the same time with such preservation works, the artifacts in about 50 plastic bags by the investigation of 2009 were stored into the storage corner of the Trowulan Museum, and we targeted it as analysis of the workshop. In this workshop by 2018 under permission of the Trowulan Museum, we analyzed glazed ceramic shards among such artifacts, which had already been controlled by the Trowulan Museum. However, after opening all bags we found out that number of glazed ceramic shards was very small among the total volume, therefore in large possibility such shards had already been separated and entered into the open-air storage of glazed shards, which was searched by us in above mentioned years. Finally, we could get minimum knowledge of imported glazed shards, still remained in bags due to very small size, and much non-glazed shards such as earthenware included roof tiles. Besides such artifacts, we also confirmed very small yellow glass, a Northern Sung coin of Yuan-Feng-Tong-Bao 元豐通寶 (3) with an unknown coin and beads in little number.

3. Previous studies Even though no complete excavation reports in any districts of Trowulan have been published by National Archaeological Research Center or the University of Indonesia, the outline of this site was ever explained in the catalogue of the special exhibition in Singapore (Miksic & Endang 1995) and a semi-official catalogue of Trowulan by the Department of Archaeology, Ministry of Culture and Tourism (Direktrat Peninggalan Purbakala 2006). Especially, related with finding residential structure in the Segaran District a hypothetical reconstruction was explained in the latter. As the result of classification analysis on the imported ceramics during 2012-15, we have published a report book included summarized similar classifications works of 4 archaeological sites in Indonesia since 1994 (Sakai & Ohashi 2018). Our target glazed ceramic shards in this report book were originally kept in the open-air storage of the Trowulan Museum, and in fact those one found in Segaran was involved into these shards of this book. Typical decorative earthenware was also introduced in above mentioned two catalogues, however, Hilda Soemantri firstly explained basic knowledge for findings in Trowulan (Hilda 1997), while Soedarmadji J.H. Damais have published his collection, estimated found in Trowulan area (Damais 2012). Their publications form as good catalogues of decorative earthenware of Trowulan.

4. Imported glazed ceramics The majority is Chinese ceramics and includes small number of Vietnamese and Thailand wares. We will explain them by each origins and dates, except European ceramics by the 19th century, which were not targeted by us for this research.

4-1 Chinese ceramics We could confirm 33 Chinese ceramic shards, of which is occupied 17 Longquan kiln (Zhejiang Province) celadons as the largest, composed of 2 shards by the 14th century and 15 shards by from the late half of 14th to the mid. of 15th centuries. Celadon Fig.1 is a body shard of a Longquan celadon bowl or dish. The rim widens to outer and 2 lines were incised at the outside (from the 14th to the beginning of 15th centuries). Fig.14 is a small shard of a Longquan celadon bowl or dish (estimated around the 14th century). Fig.15 is estimated as a small shard of a Longquan celadon bowl. At the outside a motif was carved by pallet (from the late of 14th to the mid. of 15th centuries). Fig.16 is a body shard of a Longquan celadon bowl. At the outside lotus petal motif was carved by pallet (from the late of 14th to the mid. of 15th centuries). Fig.17 is estimated as a body shard of a Longquan celadon bowl (from the late of 14th to the early of 15th centuries). Fig.18 is estimated as a body shard of a Longquan celadon bowl (from the late of 14th to the early of 15th centuries). Fig.2 is a rim shard of a Longquan celadon dish. The rim was expanded to outwards, which has similar rim to a deep dish among the Sinan Cargo, Korea (from the late of 14th to the mid. of 15th centuries). Fig.19 is estimated as a small shard of a Longquan celadon dish (from the late of 14th to the mid. of 15th centuries). Fig.3 is a body shard of a Longquan celadon small dish. The waist winds strongly (from the end of 14th to the early of 15th centuries). Fig.4 is a rim shard of a Longquan celadon large dish. The rim winds to outwards and again to upwards. The outside has a trace of secondly fire (from the late of 14th to the beginning of 15th centuries). Fig.20 is a rim shard of a Longquan celadon dish, similar with Fig.4. The rim winds to outwards and again to upwards (from the late of 14th to the mid. of 15th centuries). Fig.21 is a body shard of a Longquan celadon dish. Carved chrysanthemum petal motif by pallet vertically (from the late of 14th to the early of 15th centuries).

52 Fig.22 is a lower half of a Longquan celadon dish. It has an incised motif at the inner bottom (from the late of 14th to the mid. of 15th century). Fig.23 is a body shard of a Longquan celadon jar or censor etc. (from the late of 14th to the mid. of 15th centuries). Fig.24 is estimated as a rim shard of Chinese or Vietnamese wares (estimated around from the 14th to the 15th centuries). White porcelain Fig.5 is the bottom of a Chinese white porcelain dish. Except the outer bottom with roughly shaved foot, it was glazed, and at the inner bottom glaze was stripped in annular (around the 14th century). Fig.25 is a shard of a Jingdezhen white porcelain dish. The outer bottom has no glaze and was burnt in red (around the 14th century) Fig.26 is a rim shard of a Chinese white porcelain basin or dish (estimated from the 14th to the 15th centuries). Fig.27 is estimated as a Chinese white porcelain jar or censor etc. (around the 14th century). Fig.28 is a small shard of a Chinese white porcelain dish or basin (from the 14th to the 15th centuries). Yingqing porcelain Fig.29 is estimated as a part of decoration of Jingdezhen Yingqing figure. Roughly covered by Yingqing glaze (Yuan period, probably the 14th century). Underglaze cobalt blue Fig.30 is a bottom shard of a Jingdezhen underglaze cobalt blue bowl or dish (from the 14th to the 15th centuries). Fig.7 is a bottom shard of a Jingdezhen underglaze cobalt blue bowl, and the lower half of foot is lost. The motif at the inner bottom is similar to the cross flower, and estimated lotus petal motif is confirmed the waist of the outside (from the end of 15th to the beginning of 16th centuries)(4). Fig.8 is a rim shard of a Jingdezhen underglaze cobalt blue dish. Motifs of both sides are unclear due to run condition of cobalt. By shape the dating is highly possibility as the 16th century. Fig.31 is estimated as a small shard of Jingdezhen underglaze cobalt blue bowl (estimated the 16th century). Iron glaze stoneware Fig.9 is a rim shard of a Chinese brown glaze stoneware jar. On the outer covered thickly brown iron glaze, while painted thinly iron glaze on the inner. This shard is estimated as the product of kilns around Guangdong or Fujian, Southern China (around the 14th century). Fig.32 is a rim/shoulder shard of thin glazed short neck jar. Brown glaze covered till the inside of rim, and the other inner has no glaze. The raw material is a rough earth included much small stone. This shard is estimated as a Chinese product (estimated from the 14th to the 16th centuries). Fig.33 is a shard of a brown glaze jar similar with Fig.32, even though different raw material by more close orange-brown earth. The inner side has no glaze. This shard is estimated as a Chinese product (estimated from the 14th to the 16th centuries). Fig.34 is a small shard of a Chinese black glaze jar. On the outer side is covered in black glaze thickly, while painted by liquid iron on the inner side thinly (from the 14th to the 15th centuries). Fig.35 is a small shard of a Chinese black glaze jar. The outer side is covered with black glaze thickly, while painted by liquid iron on the inner side thinly (from the 14th to the 15th centuries). Fig.36 is estimated as a shard of Chinese stoneware (estimated from the 14th to the 15th centuries). Fig.37 is estimated as a bottom shard of a Chinese stoneware jar. The raw material is a little roughly light brown earth, and the section shows stripe. At the edge of outer bottom there is a trace of melt during firing production inside of the kiln, and shows red burnt part (from the 14th to the 15th centuries).

4-2 Vietnamese ceramics Underglaze iron Fig.10 is an upper shard of a Vietnamese underglaze iron bowl. On the outside a deformed arabesque motif is drawn(5) (estimated the 14th century). Fig.38 is a shard of an underglaze iron bowl or dish (around the 14th century). Green glaze Fig.39 is a green glazed dish. On the inside a positive motif was made by mold, and covered by green glaze on both side (the 14th century). Underglaze cobalt blue Fig.40 is an underglaze cobalt blue bowl. On the outside body lotus motif is drawn by cobalt, and double circle lines are made around inner bottom. By the style of the lotus motif, dating of this shard is considered as from the 15th century. Fig.11 is a shard of bottom of a Vietnamese underglaze cobalt blue bowl. On the inner bottom a motif is drawn by cobalt, while

53 the outer bottom shows condition of ‘chocolate bottom’, painted by liquid iron (around the 15th century). Fig.12 is an underglaze cobalt blue small jar. On the outside a motif, looking like as treasure motif between two horizontal lines and arabesque motif as the main is drawn. The inner part of foot and the inside have no glaze (estimated late of the 15th century)(6). Ash glaze Fig.41 & 42 are small shards of estimated Vietnamese ash glaze ceramic (estimated from the late of 14th to the 15th centuries). Stoneware Fig.43 is a shoulder shard of possible Vietnamese stoneware handled jar. The raw material section shows reddish brown hard stone characteristics. The upper part from the handle was piled another ceramic inside of the kiln, and the lower part appears trace of ash powdering (considered from the 15th to the 16th centuries).

4-3 Thailand ceramics Celadon Fig.6 is an upper shard of a celadon small bottle without double handles. On shoulder vertical stripe motif is made by pallet, and the inside has no glaze. Si Satchanalai kiln (around the 14th century). Fig.44 is a body shard of celadon basin. On the inside wave like motif is carved by a comb-shaped tool, while a vertical petal is made by pallet on the outside (the 15th century). Underglaze iron Fig.13 is an underglaze iron basin. The rim winds to outer and again to upper. On white slipped raw material horizontal lines are drawn by iron on the upper part of rim and outside. This shard is in large possibility as a type of fish motif on the inner bottom(7) (estimated from the late to mid of the 15th century). Black/brown glaze Fig.45 is a shoulder shard of black/brown glaze jar. Only the upper inside is covered by black/brown glaze. The section shows purple brown hard stone characteristic of the raw material (from the 14th to the 15th centuries). Fig.46 is a small shard of a black/brown glaze large jar. The section shows purple brown hard stone characteristic of raw material. Iron glazed small part can be seen (estimated from the 15th to the 16th centuries). Fig.47 is a small shard of a black/brown glaze large jar. Similar black/brown glaze large jars are seen after around the 15th century.

5. Earthenware After observation on all artifact bags, we learned that 99 percent of them are various kinds of earthenware, which was basically composed of categories of container, interior ornament and roof tiles. Also, all of earthenware is generally divided into 2 types, whether it was slipped red color or not. In this part, we would like to explain shortly every form of each category.

5-1 Container Container shapes are included following several forms such as basin, dish, cover, small ‘cup’, jar, ‘double jar’, kendi type pouring vessel and pot. Among them only a pot (Fig.48), shaped ball body and bottom, can be categorized as a practical daily cooking vessel, while all others were considered as having different function. A basin is formed wide opened rim with flat bottom, and only found red slipped type on both outside and inside by horizontal borders. A dish is formed both wide mouth (10-12 cm) and footed bottom (8-9 cm) with slipped on all surface (Fig.49). This was certainly made by copy of the form of imported glazed dish. A cover without slip is made hollow with a small ball shape knob, and a slipped cover has two kinds of knobs, both wide opened type with flat small ball shape. A small ‘cup’ is only found two different shapes without slip, a cylindrical hand made one (mouth & bottom in 3 cm) and a wide opened potter wheel made one (mouth in 4 cm). Although this shape is named as ‘cup’, but it has no function for drinking vessel due to thick body. Jars includes two types, an egg-shaped long body with wide and flat rim without neck type and an oval body connected long neck type. Both are decorated with incised curves and a shard of the latter has small hole on the body. The ‘double jar’ is manufactured in a very strange form, which is seen as an unification the latter type jar on a wide short basin (around 25 cm mouth with 20 cm bottom, Fig.50). Kendis also include two types, a whole slipped long narrow neck type and a partial horizontal slipped long and wide neck type. And the pouring mouth of both types is the same long cone shape. Besides such forms, we found small parts of unknown-shaped vessels, that is, a brim and handle. The brim has simple horizontal one and continually cut in triangle shapes on simple one, and both are attached on the shoulder part of some shape, while a small round handle with hole (width 2 cm, Fig.51) is estimated as a part of pot. Decoration technique is only limited to the incising of narrow lines, especially for jars, and the attachment of horizontal brims, mentioned above (Fig.52). All of this category shards were fired by low temperature of oxidation. Therefore, surface of the shards is soft and rough sandy. However, as remarkable characteristics we could

54 confirm that a large number of shards except pot remain traces of secondly firing or carbonization on surface or broken section.

5-2 Interior ornaments Interior ornament shapes are composed of human figures, various building miniatures (candi and house) with standing ornaments and discs. Unfortunately, a large part of shards in this category cannot be identified to the original whole form easily, because the original was formed very unique style in relatively large size, and the found shards are only limited to a small part. A human figure (width 6 cm, Fig.53) is formed of a fat and bare body part of male with lifting a stick by left hand(8). Among a large number of building miniature shards, we could only estimate to identify as several parts of Hindu/Buddhist temples/candis (Fig.54) and roof of houses(9). The former is emphasized with horizontal and vertical lines, which is the important characteristics of stone or brick made temples, while deformed symbolical roof tiles shards and opened window like shards are considered as characteristics of the latter (Fig.55)(10). Moreover, it is found a relatively large figurative roof like shards with attached decoration on both edges (more 15*15 cm, Fig.56). Besides such examples, something parts of strange landscape ornament formed miniatures in the museum(11) could not be confirmed among targeted shards. As another type of significant interior ornaments, in exhibits of the museum there are several standing ornaments, which are basically formed as an egg-shaped jar like body with figurative parts of high bottom and mouth(12). Several figurative or decorated shards by methods of attachment, carving and incision or cone shaped projection can be estimated as a part of such standing ornaments. Also, two discs were found in small (2.5 cm) and large (6 cm) size. Both discs were manufactured secondly from broken shards of earthenware. As like as container, a certain part of shards with attachment, carving and incising, was decorated by horizontal red slip zone. Among them, a house miniature (more 22 cm, Fig.57) shows red slip on alternative blocks, divided by incised line and carving. In addition, we could confirm much number of secondly carbonized shards, and among them especially cone shape projections highly show such traces on surface or section (Fig.58).

5-3 Roof tiles Roof tiles are composed of two kinds of flat tiles, curved form with rectangular shape, and various ridge tiles. All roof tiles retain traces of sand on the rear part. The majority is rectangular flat tile (about 28*13 cm, Fig.59), which has a short side, folded vertically in 3-4 cm. Another flat tile has a formed curved corner, at least, and a large number of this type is decorated with incised parallel lines at 0.5-1.0 cm inside from edge (Fig.60). Besides such types, several shards of flat tile show straight incision lines, different with edge direction. On an edge, ridge tiles are usually attached projection, mainly formed in spiral shape (Fig.61). Moreover, even though it is not a large number, certain shards of flat tiles show red slip decoration of line or wide area (Fig.62). As with previous categories, roof tiles, both flat and ridge shapes, also have been confirmed traces of secondly firing (Fig.63).

6. Conclusive remarks 6-1 Imported glazed ceramics As mentioned in the 4th section, imported glazed ceramics among the subjects of this study, composed of Chinese, Vietnamese and Thailand wares, was not dissimilar to with the basic tendency of classification for the past findings (Sakai & Ohashi 2018). The dating is also almost the same period as mainly the 14-15th centuries. However, if compare with ceramics of the last study, which is included much fine quality porcelains such as Yuan underglaze cobalt blue, the basic quality of ceramics in this time is not so high, that resembles with the level of finding of ceramics in the Fort Wolio of Buton or the Fort Somba Opu of Makassar in East Indonesia. If this observation is right, we should consider that the past findings of fine quality porcelains is closely related with differences of districts among wide Trowulan Site. Moreover, although difficulty of conclusion by limited data on a small sample, the confirmation of multiple Chinese porcelains during the end of the 15th and the beginning of the 16th centuries, the fall period of the Majapahit, suggests a possibility of the basic dating of Segaran District (Fig.64) as the structures around the end period of the kingdom.

6-2 Earthenware Earthenware made up 99% of targeted classified artifacts in this time, and the majority are formed flat roof tiles. Except such roof tile and pots, the others in container and interior ornaments are clearly showed decorative function. Furthermore, several flat roof tile also show red slip decoration. This condition tells us that the purpose of earthenware in this district is mainly concentrated in decorative function for both interior and exterior of buildings. Findings of daily life function earthenware such as cooking or eating is found in very limited number among the category of container. With this fact and the category of interior ornament, the basic tendency of earthenware in this time is not so different with private collection of ‘Majapahit terracotta’ (13), and this condition certainly tells us basic functional characteristics of the Segaran District as outstanding ceremonial element. Moreover, we should remember that the remarkable existence of carbonized shards in each category is evidence of secondly firing, a large fire event.

55 6-3 Characteristics of the Segaran District By this short period workshop on the artifacts found in an excavation investigation by the University of Indonesia on the Segaran District of Trowulan Site, we could confirm several new facts, such as the basic condition of imported ceramics and earthenware related with own characteristics of this place. Based on such newly found facts from both artifacts, we can consider a suggestion of several unique elements of this district, as follows; a. This district is not the highest center of the capital at least in the second half of the 14th century (Fig.65) (14). b. However, the life of the people here was not common simple one but close to some ceremonial activities by decorative factor.

Also, we have to note that much number of earthenware shards retain secondly firing traces both surface and section, while only one imported porcelain by the late of 14th to the beginning of 15th century shows a similar condition, the same basic tendency overall of imported ceramics in our observation of the last time. This difference probably shows a material evidence of another large-scale fire in this place, around the end of 15th and the beginning of 16th century, the last stage of this capital site.

Share of writings: Ohashi for 4 & 6-1 sections, Sakai & Naniek for 1-3, 5, 6-2 & 6-3 sections Drawing by Hsie Ellen & Lee Chun, Tracing by Yamamoto Ayako for Figures 1-13

Acknowledgement: We would like to express large thanks to Dr. I Made Gerie (Fig.66), the Director of the Indonesia National Archaeology Research Center, and also Ms Nurika Retniyawati and all the staff of the East Java Cultural Property Preservation Office for realization of our meaningful workshop in Trowulan (Fig.67). Moreover, we would appreciate to the Ministry of Education, Taiwan Government, for support to this workshop as 強化與東協及南亞國家合作交流學術型領域聯盟（教育及人文領域）補助的《印尼 Trowulan 考古 遺址發現的陶瓷研究》．

Note 1. The excavation investigation in this district had been begun in 1989-90 at the northern part, ca.100 m south from building of the museum (Miksic & Endang 1995, pp.22-23 & Direktrat Peningglan Purbakala 2006 pp.88-91), and it was followed in the southern part, more ca.200 m south, after that time. 2. This district, composed of at least 3 residential structures, is located about 1 km south from the south end of Segaran. By similarity of pronounce with keraton, palace in Javanese, it is estimated as the political center. 3. Firstly, this coin was minted during 1078-85. 4. A similar example is seen in the Tominaga Collection fig.30 & 31, the Kyushu Ceramic Museum. 5. This shard resembles with Fig.9-88 in Trowulan (Sakai & Ohashi 2018). 6. This shard is similar to Fig.550 (Butterfield Auctioneers 2000) 7. The same type with Fig.16-140-142 of Sakai & Ohashi 2018. Also, a Sukhothai ware of the Longquan Shipwreck, Malaysia (Mukai 2012) is similar to this shard. 8. By such characteristics, probably this figure is estimated as a Dvarapala, a guardian in Buddhist and Hindu culture. However, a relatively similar male image is attached on a pillar base too (Damais 2012, p.57). 9. Several miniature buildings both religious and non-religious are shown in Miksic & Endang 1995, pp.191-193 and Damais 2012, pp.72-79. 10. A shard with short vertical incised lines is similar to a shrine roof miniature (Damais 2012, pp.112-113). 11. Two pieces of miniature were made in the form of a building with stone steps in a rock hill, and both are partially covered thin dark green glaze. Also, similar miniature is seen at Damais 2012, p.27 & pp.50-51, but almost the same formed ornament is used as pillar base cover such as Damais 2012, pp.120-121. 12. Complete examples can be seen in Damais 2012, pp.126-132. 13. Such as Damais 2012. 14. A reconstructed house in this place (Dierctrat Peninggalan Purbakala 2006, pp.88-91) is not stilt structure but brick foundation earth floor building. According to several stilt house relief stone panels found in Trowulan (Miksic & Endang 1995, p.133) and present condition of Javanese architecture as earth floor, such building certainly should be distinguished the dating as the late period of Trowulan.

References Butterfield Auctioneers Corp. 2000 “Treasures from The Hoi An Hoard: Important Vietnamese Ceramics from a Late 15th/Early 16th Century Cargo”. Damais, Soedarmadji J.H. 2012 “Majapahit Terracotta, the Soedarmadji Jean Henrry Damais Collection”, Jakarta: BAB Publishing Indonesia.

56 Direktrat Peninggalan Purbakala 2006 “Majapahit Trowulan”, Jakarta: Indonesian Heritage Society. Hilda Soemantri 1997 “Majapahit Terracotta Art”, Jakarta: Ceramic Society of Indonesia. Miksic, John & Endang Sri Hardiati Soekatno ed. 1995 “The Legacy of Majapahit”, Singapore: National Heritage Board. Mukai Kou 2012 ‘A study of Thailand ceramics chronology’ in “Kanazawa University Cultural Resource Studies” no.5, Kanazawa University, Center for Cultural Resource Studies. Sakai Takashi & Ohashi Koji 2018 “Hizen wares excavated royal capital sites in Indonesia, Trowulan and other sites”, Tokyo: Yuzankaku Pub.

Source of maps: Indonesian National Archaeology Research Center

57 Map.1 Trowulan Site (Indonesian National Archaeology Research Center)

Map.2 Segaran District with the Trowulan Museum (Indonesian National Archaeology Research Center)

58 3 4 1 2

6

7

５

8

9

11

10

12 13

Fig.1-13 Important Chinese/Vietnamese/Thailand glazed ceramic shards (our drawing and pictures)

59 Fig.14 a Chinese celadon Fig.15 a Chinese celadon

Fig.16 a Chinese celadon Fig.17 a Chinese celadon

Fig.18 a Chinese celadon Fig.19 a Chinese celadon

Fig.20 a Chinese celadon Fig.21 a Chinese celadon

Fig.22 a Chinese celadon Fig.23 a Chinese celadon

60 Fig.24 a Chinese celadon Fig.25 a Chinese white porcelain

Fig.26 Fig.25 a Chinese white porcelain Fig.27 Fig.25 a Chinese white porcelain

Fig.28 Fig.25 a Chinese white porcelain Fig.29 a Chinese Yingqing porcelain

Fig.30 a Chinese underglaze cobalt blue Fig.31 a Chinese underglaze cobalt blue

Fig.32 a Chinese iron glaze stoneware Fig.33 a Chinese iron glaze stoneware

61 Fig.34 a Chinese iron glaze stoneware Fig.35 a Chinese iron glaze stoneware

Fig.36 a Chinese iron glaze stoneware Fig.37 a Chinese iron glaze stoneware

Fig.38 a Vietnamese underglaze iron Fig.39 a Vietnamese green glaze

Fig.40 a Vietnamese underglaze cobalt blue Fig.41 & 42 Vietnamese ash glaze shards

Fig.43 a Vietnamese stoneware Fig.44 a Thailand celadon

62 Fig.45 a Thailand black/brown glaze Fig.46 a Thailand black/brown glaze

Fig.47 a Thailand black/brown glaze Fig.48 an earthenware pot Fig.49 an earthenware dish

Fig.50 an earthenware‘double jar’ Fig.51 an earthenware brim Fig.52 decorated earthenware shards

Fig.53 an earthenware figure Fig.54 earthenware building miniatures Fig.55 an earthenware miniature

63 Fig.56 an earthenware decorated shard Fig.57 an earthenware house miniature Fig.58 an earthenware projection

Fig.59 a flat roof tile Fig.60 incised roof tile shards Fig.61 a ridge roof tile

Fig.62 red slipped roof tiles Fig.63 a secondly firing traced roof tile

64 Fig.64 preserved excavated parts of Segaran District Fig.65 a part of excavated residential structure in Segaran District

Fig.66 Dr. I Made Gerie (right) with us Fig.67 Nurika Retniyawati (L1), Lee Chun (L2) & Hsie Ellen (R1)

65