Another weapon in art from the AMNH

[Mark]

This find was very exciting, because it shows a dagger almost exactly like those found in Pyu sites in Burma (third & fourth photos). The Pyu were a Tibeto-Burman people related to the Bama, but preceding them in Burma by several centuries. The statue is identified as being possibly of Shiva, from Bihar in India (which is in the northeast of the country), and from the Gupta Period, 6th century.

The fifth photo is a detail of another statue of Shiva, but from Kashmir and a later period (end ot the 8th century). In it we see a more typical bichwa or chilanum.

While it is unwise to read too much into a single sample, I'm intrigued by this Bihar knife that so closely resembles the Pyu dagger. Is the 6th century Bihar knife the forerunner of the Pyu dagger? Or is it rather the precoursor to the one shown in the Kashmiri statue? Or both?

[~Alaung_Hpaya~]

Hi Mark ,

Are the pictures from Bob Hudson of the handles from Pyu sites predating Bagan or from his Bagan excavations ? I did have some .pdf files of his work but currently can't find them .

I think the whole pre Anawrahta history of Burma is in somewhat under review at the moment with controversy regarding the Mon paradigm and focus on whether too much is attributed to waves of immigration rather than on indigenous development by existing populations .

Certainly it would be interesting if the handles predate the 6th century Gupta Shiva . ( this by no means implies that the influence went the other way as it can be taken as fact that the Pyu were heavily Indianised ) .

[Mark]

As I recall (its been a few years), they are from Elizabeth Moore's excavations at Halin. I know that the first couple times I posted about them I described them as being from Bagan, because Bob Hudson sent them to me, but I'm pretty sure they are from Halin. I might be able to go back to my e-mails and check that.

By the way, I did not post a second photo showing the backs of the handles, where it is seen that they are formed by wrapping a sheet of bronze rather than being cast. You can clearly see the seem where the ends join.

[Mark]

I've confirmed from my notes that the rusty dagger with the bronze handle is from Halin, a Pyu/Mon site.

[~Alaung_Hpaya~]

Halin or Halingyi was a 7th - 9th century Pyu site which was thought to be that sacked by Nan Zhao in the 9th century . Speculation is that it may have been the same or related to Tagaung from whence the Pagan kings claim their lineage .

The Mon at the time were thought to be based much further south at Pegu and Thaton although archaelogical evidence does not support this . ( current evidence only supports Mon sites from 11th century supporting the theory that the Mon shifted their polities from the Chao Phraya basin west to present day Lower Burma and Tenasserim only after the fall of Dvaravati to the Khmer in the 11th century .

This is completely out of step with the Mon and Bama received and accepted thinking ( based on chronicles written much later ) that the Mon brought "civilisation" to Bagan after the sacking of Thaton in 1057 and that Thaton and Pegu were already established in the 6th - 7th centuries : hence the much controversial Mon paradigm .

So the handles shown are contemporary to the Gupta and Kashir ones shown showing much Indic influence . ( the assumption is that only in the classical periods of Bagan and Angkor did SE Asians move away and develop indigenous variations on Indic culture whereas prior to this the cultural influence was more pronounced )

[Mark]

I thought it a little odd that my notes termed Halin a "Pyu/Mon" site, but they did. It must have been something Bob mentioned, or my misunderstanding of its location as being further south than it is.

Its hard for me to figure the influences here. Indic influence in much of SEA was what I think can be called social rather than material - in other words, ideas (religious and political), art & architectural styles (as cultural expressions rather than functional constructs), literature, ritual, and such, rather than more basic material things such as tools, weapons, boats, wagons, everyday clothing, etc. There was never a direct invasion or domination by an Indian polity. On the other hand, with regard to the western parts, i.e., Burma & Arrakan, there was actual migration from the Indian cultural sphere. I wonder whether these leaf-bladed daggers with the hourglass handles were brought along by the migrating people, so to speak, and thus "native" to Pyu culture, or emulated, and thus derived from Indic culture. I don't have a copy of Elgood's "Hindu Arms & Ritual," but maybe someone who does will find more evidence to clarify the connection.

[~Alaung_Hpaya~]

As far as I'm aware there has always been a distinction between the paraphenalia of the elite , which were more likely to emulate Indic models , and that of the general population . I wonder if it's possible that these decorated handles were the exclusive possessions the nobility.

The Pyu were thought to have migrated into Upper Burma in the 1st century CE from the Tibetan plateau via north-east India . I don't think it's known when the Indic influence was acquired but evidence suggests that they were Theravada Buddhists by the 6th-7th century and prior to that Hindu .

It's possible that they did bring along that style of handle rather than it coming later through cultural conact . Are you aware of that style having an earlier provenance than the 6th century ?


( PS are you familiar with the Than Lyet the four edged dagger which is part of the royal regalia ? It looks to be of similar proportion to the blades depicted on the statues and although I've always assumed Indic influence for its form , I've come across pictures of a not dissimilar looking dagger from Tibet )