Association Of Myanmar Archaeologists

Myanmar Archaeology Students Blog

Preliminary Report on the Discovery of Mesolithic Tools in Shinma-daung Area, Central Myanmar

BY : U WIN KYAING

Abstract

First and new discovery of pure Mesolithic site has ever been found in southeastern area of Shinma-daung, it is located in the heart o f dry zone of Middle Myanmar. Although systematic investigation on the site and its cultural materials are still to be necessarily proceeded, the author urgently attempt to nominate the site and its tools belong to “pure Mesolithic culture” comparing with neighbouring occurrences.

Introduction

During January, 2007, an exploration by the author and a staff of Pakhangyi Archaeological Museum has made to record Megalithic site near Kyauk-htet Village in Yesagyo Township, Pakokku District. Kyauk-htet Village lies on the west 3 miles from Pakokku-Mandalay Road near the mile-post 9/1. Unfortunately it was known that that Megalithic site made up of fossilized wood (Ingyin-kyauk) had been destroyed by the hunters of wood-fossils when the illegal markets of such fossil-woods were taken place in Upper Myanmar during this decade. But two more items of archaeological interest was fortunately investigated in this area;

Discovery Mesolithics_ 2007-10

Discovery Mesolithics_ 2007-10

(i) an big old mound of iron-slag near by the western side of the village, it shows that in the past there was traditional iron smelting and production, villagers call this mound as “thangyi-daung (the hill of iron-ore waste)”, it has about 3-4 meters high and 1 acre wide, as the surface-finds on its there can be collected some pieces of terracotta tubes used for air-blowing in furnaces and

(ii) discovery of microlithic tools while searching for a location, from where once found the so-called chin beads according to the local information. The bead-site had not been recovered although tried to find with the help of villagers. For two hours searching on the ground there could be noticed the chipped stone pieces in white colour are spread in the area of sandstone bed-plain. Owing to different colours of the tools from the brownish of ground, white chipped stone pieces can be easily found on the surface. Supposed tools of almost are sized in about thumb and finger-tips, so these are suggested micro or mesolithics. Numerous chipped or discards are also identified along with true tool-types. They are mostly made up of quartzite, therefore almost colour in white. This area is locally called “myauk-kangyi kon” (higher plain near northern lake called as Hton-moat-kan) hence there is a big annual lake, situated 1 mile far from the north of Kyauk-htet village. Another following exploration to the same site had been done in April 2007, and it could have been collected more numerous Mesolithic tools.

Geographical Background

Kyauk-htet Mesolithic stone tool site locates on the plain, which is to say belonging to the Kyauk-htet Taung hill-range area. Its bed soil Shinma-daung Sandstone Bed is overlaid by Nyaung Oo Red Earth and Magwe Sand of Pleistocene and Post Pleistocene Aeolian deposit. These are major soil types for the agriculture of Central Dry Zone. Shinma-daung sandstone is locally known as The’daw-kyauk in connection with the production of sandstone construction-materials near by the village named The’daw in the area. The’daw-kyauk is generally look-liked light pinkish colour with the forming of more fine sand percentage. In the surrounding areas of Shinma-daung, there were existed the sandstone mines viz; in the northeastern site_ Taung-U sandstone mine and southeastern_ The’daw mine, since the ancient time. These sandstones have being exploited for construction purposes of religious buildings, worshipping statues, ornamental stone-carvings and multiple traditional artifacts, which cultural materials could be visible plentifully throughout Ancient Pakhangyi region. Even nowadays local people still uses these sandstones in road-paving, foundation, floor of house building, retaining well, pot, caskets, quern, pillar of ordination hall, and etc. Shinma-daung area belongs to a part of the Shwezetaw Sandstones Stage considering the lithological and palaeontological agreement. Shwezetaw Sandstones stage is the first group among the six stages of Pegu Series, estimated occurrence during the Oligocene- Miocene Era (circa.25 million years). The Pegu Series is generally understood to embrace the Post-Eocene and pre-Ayeyarwaddian deposits of Myanmar. There represented the fine –grained, soft and pinkish colored sandstones which tend to form a very steep scarp slope conspicuous in local topography(Chibber,1934).

Remote View of Shinma-daung Seen from Kyauk-htet Summit

Remote View of Shinma-daung Seen from Kyauk-htet Summit

Mesolithic Site, North of the Village and West of Kyauk-htet Hill

Mesolithic Site, North of the Village and West of Kyauk-htet Hill

Close up View of Mesolithic Site

Close up View of Mesolithic Site

Surface Finds of Mesolithic Tools Occurred on Upper Pleistocene Deposit

Surface Finds of Mesolithic Tools Occurred on Upper Pleistocene Deposit

Stratigraphy showing Upper Pleistocene Deposit in Reddish Colour, Below lies weathered Shinma-daung Sandstone Bed (Early Miocene Era) in Deep-pinkish Colour

Stratigraphy showing Upper Pleistocene Deposit in Reddish Colour, Below lies weathered Shinma-daung Sandstone Bed (Early Miocene Era) in Deep-pinkish Colour

Surface Finds of Mesolithic Tools

Surface Finds of Mesolithic Tools

In addition to the geographical point of view, the environment of Kyauk-htet Mesolithic tool site is surrounded by lower hill ranges known as Seikgyo-taung, Chin-taung, and Bagyi-taung also known as Kyauk-htet taung in northwest to east direction and Kyaukhpu taung and Taung-ni in the west. Among these hills Kyauk-htet taung is the highest (960 ft), due to its tallest the hill range is called as Kyauk-htet taungdan. This hill range is topographically slopes down from Shindaung (1723 ft) in the north and old river terraces to the east.

Shinma-daung is a series of elongated hills about thirty miles long, running north and south between the Yesagyo and Myaing Townships (Owens, 1913). This region is wellknown in Myanmar for the plant of sanakha (Limonia acidissima), a natural plant grown in the Dry Forest, a kind of tree the bark and root of which are used in making a fragrant paste for cosmetic purposes. The natural plant of sanakha grows in the weathering condition of tropical climate with the less rainfall, the growing soils approve red earth, sand bed mixing gravels. It is similarly survives in such type of acacious and thorny forest of tropical arid zone of Middle Myanmar. Shinma-daung area actually closed to the conflucence of Ayeyarwaddy and Chindwin river, dealing its wavy plains interrelated with old river terraces of west of these two mighty rivers.

These geographical settings are included and centered in the middle of Dry Zone. The Central Dry Zone extend 250 miles running north-south direction and 120 miles east west, total area has 26080 square-miles, it means 9.2% of the whole country area (U Kyi, 2002). In line with its geographical name, the weather in the Dry Zone plays in dry and drought condition. Even though the Middle Dry Zone embraces unpleasant weathering condition today, it was a worthy region for primitive man during the Pleistocene and Post Pleistocene Epoch, which co-incite four times of excessive rainfall and their interval periods in conformity with Ayeyarwaddy and its tributary valleys. According to a favour of palaeoclimate and fair eco-system there were occurred in this Dry Zone viz. the prehistoric

Anyathian Culture. The assemblages of cultural evidences such as Palaeolithic stone tools clustered along the major drainages of Dry Zone and its peripheries. Investigation and nomenclature by the American Southeast Asiatic Expedition during the 1937-38 season revealed such evidences of Palaeolithic and Neolithic materials with the sites of Magwe, Minbu, Yenangyaung, Chauk, Bagan-Nyaung U, Pakokku and Pauk of this region (Movius, 1943). Later there have being recorded several prehistoric sites in the Dry Zone as the additional cultural sequence evidences of Upper palaeolithic, Neolithic stone age sites and Chalcolithic, Bronze and early Iron age sites. The location of Dry Zone periphery is bounded by West Yoma in the west, North Highlands in the north, Shan Plateau in the east and Delta Region in the south. These areas out of Central Plain occurred more or less cultural remains of primitive man, especially human cultural remains of Pleistocene and Post-Pleistocene period, but not yet so far been found except some places of Shan Plateau and Upper Mu valley (Moore,2004). The prehistoric sites of Badahlin, Budhojino and Lwewin are geographically situated in Shan Plateau, they may be the most extreme western sites of Hoabinhian cultural zone. The stone implements of Mu valley ascribed as “Upper Palaeolithics” according to U Myint Aung, the founder, are able to be standardized to the next discoveries of Upper Palaeolithics studied from Kanni Township in Chindwin valley (Than Tun Aung, 2002) and Kyaw valley in Pondaung region.

Previous Mesolithic Finds

After De Terra and Movius, the smaller sized tools such as small flake tools, scrapers, disc-cores were known with the association of other larger flake tools and potsherds in the vicinities of Magwe, Minbu, Kyaukpadaung and Popa. In the vicinity of Popa, Sai Chaung Valley area Both of a few of crude larger tools like small hand-adze, large scraper and small sized tools consisted as scraper, point and blades were identified and associated with the alluvium soil. Movius seems to say that some varieties of scrapers are provably used for fashioning wooden or bone shafts (Movius, p-380), which is notable characteristic of exploiting smaller chipped tools in the typical Mesolithic culture. At Magwe as the smaller stone implements, a large series of scraper types made of flakes of silicified tuff as well as fossil wood fragments were collected in a locality in the eastern site of Magwe Myathalon Pagoda. Similar occurrences were extensively supported from Yenangyaung, Bagan-Nyaung U and Minbu. In additionally Movius stated his so called Neolithic stone tools successively replaced the former larger Anyathian tools that “the post Pleistocene development witnessed the introduction of a blade and flake technique, with the result that most of implements are small.” (p-386)

Before their time T.O. Morris previously discussed such considered smaller tools were assigned to Upper Palaeolithic Period on the basis of typological study. There was considerable controversy meanwhile T.O. Morris’s Upper Palaeolithic assignment, De Terra and Movius of American Expedition suggested the implements of similar types to Neolithic accordingly their positions of Post Pleistocene stratigraphy and representation of pottery (Movius, 1943, pp. 378_387).

Another controversy of identification on the excavated stone tools are known from Padahlin cave. U Aung Thaw, excavator and incharge of Department of Archaeology first stated the excavated finds in Padahlin cave belonged to the early Neolithic Culture while a few of ground and edged tools present along with hundreds of Palaeolithic tools such as pebble, flake and scraper (Aung Thaw, 1969). Later it was pointed out that Padahlin is

assigned Mesolithic tool factory site related to the typical Hoabinhian culture of Southeast Asia rather than the typical Neolithic (Myint Aung, 2000). Beyond these systematic archaeological investigations there followed prehistoric cultural reveals within recent two decades, but the latters are not in practical diggings they are surface reconnaissance and general typological analysis. Such studies made by Department of History of Monywa University are taken in Mogyobyin in Salingyi Township and Aingdaung in Kani Township of Monywa District, there are available in collecting of Lower Palaeolithic to Neolithic tools ( Ba Maw,1998 and Than Tun Aung, 2002).

The next is mentioned discovery of Late Anyathian tools from eastern slope area of Pondaung region. Such as small size of chopper-choppings and scrapper, blade, point, burin of Upper palaeolithic tools were collected while Myanmar-Japan Palaeontological research survey team got there in 2005 (Win Kyaing, 2005).

Understanding Mesolithic

Mesoliths very often ascribed as microliths normally range 1 cm to 6 cm in length and sometime 1.5 cm in breadth. These measurements are given only to form an idea about the general size of the tools found from so called Mesolithic period. The tools are basically fabricated by originally more or less flaking techniques and it followed fluting and retouching. In which manufacturing of blades, points, crescent or lunate, microburin, trapeze and triangle of geometric microliths are emphasized. These are tools which could not have been used simply by hand. According to the evidences known from the Southwest Asia and India, the tiny stone specimens were merely elements which in combination were hafted on wooden or bone handles to be finally used as implements (Bhattacharya, 2001). It can be demonstrated that, the chipped razor or blades are put in the grove of a long piece of wood. Then the small blades are stoke with resin or other glue in a grove in a row, with their cutting edges adjoining each other. Resin or other glue has hardened an excellent knife with cutting edge far longer than that of a single blade (Zeuner, 1951). The other weapons using the microlithis in several forms of combinations are spear heads, arrow heads, sickles, knives, daggers and etc.

Mesolithic culture is generally understood the earliest Holocene culture it occurs before agriculture was started in human cultural history. Thus there is no indication of a change in economy from the Palaeolithic period. Bows and arrows are attributed as the invention of in this phase. Fishing and fowling might be adopted and grass seeds in the wild must have been collected by the hunter and gatherer groups in their economy. It is briefly noted that microliths in terms of technomorphology are a logical derivative of the Upper Palaeolithic.

Collected Lithic Artefacts

All total number of 124 lithic artifacts are well represented as the Mesolithic tools with their distinctive shapes and sizes. Apart from these tools it is noted the chippings or sometime referred as industrial wastes scattered on the ground. A large quantity of those discards, none of them indicating transportation from elsewhere, came to light the tools and the wastes in-situ. Most of the tools are made up of quartz of igneous-originated gravels, chalcedony, flint and chalcedonic silica and chert. Additionally a few of raw material like jasper and fossilized wood are included as the variable rock types. No sign of these rock-supplies can be found in the closely surrounded area of the site. They might have been brought from somewhere old stream-bed situated surrounding areas (the most probable from the old river bed of Ayeyarwaddy, located east of the site). As the majority of the tools measure between 1.3 and 5.6 cm in width and between 1.7 and 5.5 cm in length. Utilization of rocks for stone tools is imagined at first either strike or percussion that for preparing core then flaking is succeeded, sometime chipped from a core. In this case the core of pebble used as raw material might be not much larger than a hand size. Then flaking and retouching are conducted. In rare case the technique of fluting is known which is after preparing of nodule as a prismatic core to be work out tools. The tools produced in this way have extreme sharp edges . The technique employed in their manufacturing marked in progress over the earlier tradition. The secondary retouching is the most typical manner in world-wide Mesolithic tools. Flaking, it is likely conducted by direct percussion follows secondary retouching to dress a finished tool. The remains of Mesolithic Culture of present site (Kyauk-htet : location, Shinma-daung area) are represented by tools like blades, scrapers, points, flakes, burins borers and micro-discs. The tools, collected from the surface, are comparatively smaller in size than those of earlier cultural phase viz. Upper Palaeolithic, and even though contemporary of Padahlin toolkit.

The geometric forms like triangles, trapezes, lunates and crescents did not overwhelm as a authorized tradition. Yet they coexisted with a larger quantity of blades, flakes, points, scrapers and of microlithics. The tradition was clearly dominated by the use of tiny tools, generally known as microliths.

Lithic Materials from Kyaukhtet Site, Shinmadaung Area

Identification                          Number                       Percentage

  1. 1. Blades                                 15                                12.09
  2. 2. Flakes                                  16                                12.90
  3. 3. Points                                  7                                  5.65
  4. 4. Scrapers                               12                                9.68
  5. 5. Borers                                  5                                  4.03
  6. 6. Burins                                  7                                  5.65
  7. 7. Backed blades                     12                                9.68
  8. 8. Obliquely trimmed blades   10                                8.06

9. Geometric microlithic

(i) lunate, crescent                   5                                  4.03

(ii) triangle                               7                                  5.65

(iii) trapeze                              14                                11.29

(iv) micro-disc                         8                                  6.45

  1. 10. Arrow head                       2                                  1.61
  2. 11. Edge ground tool              1                                  .81
  3. 12. Awl                                   3                                  2.42

Discussion

The collected stone tools as well as ascribed mesolithics are smaller in size than the earlier upper palaeolithics. For example the tools of Badhalin, made by percussion and flaking techniques are larger than those of Kyauk-htet. The carbon samples along with stone tools of Badahlin give a date 12000-8000 B.P, it coincides Mesolithic period or early Holocene time. Supposing we comparatively see Badahlin and Kyauk-htet (Shinma-daung), there both have different environment. Badahlin belongs to the tropical rain forest region that resembling with Hoabinhian of typical Southeast Asia. Shinma-daung occurred in tropical arid zone of centre of the country, hence the region behaved different ecology including flora and fauna. Successively, substantial economy based on the ecology forced the early Holocene men to adopt with the reliable implements. Particularly any form of sudden change in the climate can have a much magnified effect on these small population groups. Hence a transformation in hunting strategies can be triggered in some of them who would eventually emerge as Mesolithic in culture (Bhattacharya, 2006).

As above mentioned the collected tools identified in 12 kinds can be grouped in two i. e. (i) geometric microlithic and (ii) non-geometric microlithic. In collected numbers, nongeometrics are accounted in lesser than geometrics and a notable fact is that both of groups are altogether found in the same site. It is understandable in tool-making technique the geometric tradition did not completely overwhelm the non-geometric and they co-existed. These tool-types are indicating the subsistence pattern of hunting and gathering stage. The evidence of implements in the hunting game would be accompanied with the shaft and tipped wood and bamboo like spear, bow and arrow, pitfall, snare and trap. In the gathering of vegetal food materials such as fruits, roots and tubers, and wild grains_ sickle, knife and dagger are essential tools. During the Mesolithic times hunting activity was increasingly supplemented by vegetal food collection; as hunting is a high-risk, low-return subsistence activity, whereas gathering is a low-risk, high-return one (Pandey, 2006).

The site of Kyauk-htet, Shinma-daung is absent in finding of Neolithic evidence such as polished and ground tools of wood working implements, which prevailed in food-producing economies of domestication of plants and animals. But it is allocated surrounding peripheries of Neolithic sites; Kyeyoe-gon in the northeast_ 15 km, Lappanchebor in the south_ 20 km and Yaw valley in the west_50 km. These two different cultural sites of sequential Mesolithic and Neolithic stages slightly apart from environmental situations viz. stratigraphy, topography, soil-beds, water supply and micro level of flora and fauna.

Conclusion

Preliminary discovery of supposed Mesolithic tools of Shinma-daung area is considerable evidence to extent foregoing analysis as far as the wide scope of prehistoric archaeology. Hence the lack of cultural sequence in Stone Age of Myanmar, it is requirement of the evidences of Mesolithic are till existing as an important role to be documented. Here we could have mentioned merely site location and stone tool analysis. We hope a wide range of similar finds might have be distributed in Shinma-daung area beyond single spot what we have presented here.

As above mentioned the discovered Mesolithic tools are actually not the excavated revelation, only chance finds by explorations. Hence, we would like to express that most of Prehistoric sites in and out of the country are known by reports on explorations, meanwhile instead of practical excavations, we generally accepted the site information and surveying finds without any doubt. There the comprehensive studies on Stone Age of Myanmar are understood, viz; occurrence of prehistoric stone implements in Myanmar (1935, by T.O. Morris), Anyathian Stone tool Culture (1937-38, by de Terra and Movius), recent prehistoric explorations in Mogyo-byin in Chindwin valley and Pondaung region, then we used those finds in chronology of early cultural sequences.

Similarly, the present site is followed to propose as a true Mesolithic site owing for its obvious shapes and sizes of small tools occurrence. And these pieces of evidence would hopefully provide the life style of Mesolithic people who subsisted by hunting activity and vegetal food collection during the early Holocene time.

Acknowledgement

The author is thankful to U Thein Lwin (Principal of Field School of Archaeology, Pyay) for his encouragement on prehistoric research of Field School of Archaeology, U Than Zaw Oo (Lecturer), for his reference literary support and U Kyaw Myo Win (Assistant Lecturer), for his GIS mapping. U Htay Win Maung (Curator of Pakhangyi Archaeological Museum) and U Win Maung (Tampawaddy) are worthy to record their generous help and site information. Thanks are expressed for the collaboration on exploration by U Yan Aung , head of Kyauk-htet village, U Nyi Tin, village crier, the villagers and Ko Toe Toe Kyi ( Ywat Nu Restaurant, Pakhangyi) for his accompanying to the journey. Particularly U Myint Aung, an honorable archaeologist of Myanmar is presented by the author’s thanks and mentioned here for his correction of knowledgeable experience on this paper.

Bibliography

Aung Thaw “The Neolithic Culture of the Padah-lin caves” Asian Perspective, 1971

Aung Thwin, Michael A. “Origins and Development of the Field of Prehistory in Burma”, Asian Perspective, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2001.

Ba Maw and Others “The discovery in the Evolution of Anyathian Cultures from a Single Site in Myanmar”, Myanmar Historical Research Journal, Number (2), June 1998.

Bhattacharya, D.K. “Interpretation in Indian Stone Age Archaeology: A Reappraisal”, Puratattva, Bulletin of the Indian Archaeological Society, Number. 36, 2005-2006.

De Terra, Helmut, and “Rearch On Early Man in Burma”, I- Pleistocene of Burma by H. L Movius, Jr H. de de Terra, II- The Stone Age of Burma by H. L Movius, Jr. ,Transactions of the American Philosophical Society,1943.

Gorman, Chester F. “Excavations at Spirit Cave, North Thailand” Asian Perspective, Vol.XII, No. 1, 1972.

Ian Glover and “Southeast Asia from Prehistory to History” Routledge Curzon, Peter Bellwood London and Newyork, 2004.

Keates, Susan, G, “The Movius Line, Fact and fiction”, Bulletion of the Indo. Pacifis Prehistory Association, Vol.6, 2002.

Moore, E. Transitions in Myanmar Prehistory: looking closely at stone, 2004.

Morris, T.O. “A palaeolithic from Upper Burma”, Journal of the Burma Research Society, 1932.

Morris, T.O. “The Prehistoric Stone Implements of Burma”, Journal of the Burma Research Society, xxv, I, 1935.

Movius, H. L, Jr “Lower Palaeolithic Archaeology in Southern Asia and the Far East”, Transaction of the American Anthropological Association, 1946.

Myint Aung, U “A Bifacial Tool from the Mu Valley”, Working People’s Daily- News Paper,

Myint Aung “A Review of Padahlin Culture”, Myanmar Historical Research Journal, Number (6), December 2000.

Nay Naing Tun, U “Report on Excavation at Kyeyoe-gon of Pakhangyi Region, Yesagyo Township, Pakokku District, Magwe Division” (In Myanmar), Department of Archaeology (Bagan Branch), 2000.

Neelima Pandey “Subsistence Pattern in Mesolithic Communities of India”, PURATATTVA, Bulletin of The Indian Archaeological Society, No. 36, 2005-2006, New Delhi. Nyi Nyi, Prof. “Geological Calendar”, Working People’s Daily, March 15, 1964.

“New Stone Age of Burma”, Working People’s Daily, March 29, 1964.

Okley, Kenneth. P “Man the Tool Maker”, Trustees of British Museum, London, 1975.

Owens, Major F. C. “Burma Gazetteer, Pakokku District” Volume A, Government Printing, Rangoon, 1913.

Read, H.H. Rutley’s Elements of Mineralogy” 25th Edition, Thomas Murby & Co., London, 1962.

Reddy, V Rami Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Cultures” Mittal Publications, New Delhi (India), 1989.

Sankalia, H.D. “Stone Age Tools”, Deccan College, Poona, 1982.

Semenov, S.A. “Prehistoric Technology”, Translated and with the Preface by M.W. Thompson, London, 1964.

Soejono, R.P. “The Stakes of Prehistoric Research in Southeast Asia Over the Last Hundred Years”, Origin of Settlements and Chronology of the Palaeolithic Cultures in Southeast Asia, Semenanjung, Paris, 2001.

Solheim II, Wilhelm G. “Prehistoric Archaeology in Eastern Mainland Southeast Asia and the Philippines”, Asian Perspective, Vol.XII, No. 1, 1972.

“Northern Thailand, Southeast Asia, and World Prehistory”, Asian Perspective, Vol.XII, No. 1, 1972.

Than Tun Aung “Moegyo-byin Stone tools and Monywa Regional Study”(In Myanmar), National Centre for Human Resource Development, Ministry of Education, Yangon, 2001.

Tin Thein, Dr. “Evidence of Stone Age Dwellers in Waiponla Cave”, Myanmar Historical Research Journal, Number (8) December 2001.

Win Kyaing, U “Report on Discovery of Palaeolithic Tools from Pondaung Region”, Near Khaung-baung Village, Pauk Township, Pakokku District, Magwe Division (In Myanmar), Department of Archaeology, Yangon, 2005.

Scrapers Look-Liked Lunate or Crescent

Scrapers Look-Liked Lunate or Crescent

Trapeze

Trapeze

Blades

Blades

Flakes

Flakes

Points and Arrow-heads

Points and Arrow-heads

Discs and Cores

Discs and Cores

Triangles and Backed Blades

Triangles and Backed Blades

Borer cum Scrapers, Burins

Borer cum Scrapers, Burins

Scrapers

Scrapers

Ground Edge

Ground Edge

Varieties of Mesolithics and Minimum to Maximum Sizes (1)

Varieties of Mesolithics and Minimum to Maximum Sizes (1)

Varieties of Mesolithics and Minimum to Maximum Sizes (2)

Varieties of Mesolithics and Minimum to Maximum Sizes (2)

FIG-1

FIG-1

FIG-2

FIG-2

FIG-3

FIG-3

FIG-4

FIG-4

Advertisements

7 responses to “Preliminary Report on the Discovery of Mesolithic Tools in Shinma-daung Area, Central Myanmar

  1. Dr. Waldemar C. Sialer January 24, 2012 at 2:28 am

    My Great student. Win Kyaing, did well. Not Buddha Footprints, but work done well.

    Great.

    Sailer See The World of Buddha Footprints. cultureisfirst.sailer@gmail.com

  2. thuralwin 3ba 28 August 4, 2012 at 9:01 am

    က်ႊန္ေတာ္က geology နဲ.ေက်ာင္းၿပီးထားတာပါ မံုရႊာ ကပါ

    • Waldemar Sailer September 4, 2012 at 5:41 am

      My students do GREAT work, at some of them.

      I wanted a good print of the color map.

      I also want to see some other articles. I will try again.

      On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Association Of Myanmar Archaeologists wrote:

      > ** > thuralwin 3ba 28 commented: “က်ႊန္ေတာ္က geology နဲ.ေက်ာင္းၿပီးထားတာပါ > မံုရႊာ ကပါ”

  3. Daw Than Aye September 12, 2012 at 4:05 pm

    Thank sar

    • Dr. Sailer September 15, 2012 at 12:16 am

      Yes, I read it over again. I also met with hm. They lied to him and many others for over 20 years. i love N. Lwin. Be sure to read The World of Buddha Footprints. My other new work is NOT there.

    • Waldemar Sailer September 17, 2012 at 2:04 am

      455b Global again Bangkok. September 17, 2012 Word count: 978

      *Barbaric, heinous, persecution *

      *by the Elite of The Siam Society?*

      *Bestiality? ** Well, possible*

      *The Truth will come out!*

      *Dr. Piriya Kai-lert, The GREAT Monk Speaker of Wat Suthat, and all evil ones, please wake up. This is a global message, to people, to embassies, etc. What they will do I do not know, but the truth will come out. Evil has NO place.*

      *September 17, 2012* Kuti eight, Wat Suthat, is abnormal. The Great Monk Speaker walks past, not smiling, but erect. Not talking, only to his running driver. The drunk chap is NOT drunk. Mr. Peacock, well, he can’t smile either. Ven. Rom is up one half hour late. Ven. Khom still says that truth will come out. The very rich lady came at 6:16 AND WE walked a little. All have little or no English and I think social media is NOT in their world. Even the Game Shop owner is OUT of the city! Well, so goes.

      *Yangon, September, 2012* Changing. Price of food the same but the amount is less. I made it, but I have done this for two years.

      *When do I travel* When I have money.

      *What do I read?* I reread since all shops require one to pay for the paper. I have NO choice.

      *Myanmar* Changes galore. I have an ambassador and the President is visiting USA soon. Telephone was tapped everywhere. Nothing new. N. Lwin stole thousands (US) and NO one around him seemed to know at all. Same in Bangkok. Dr. Panth, Nalanda: Beside *nandiyavatta* is sex and drugs. Dr. Maheshweta: I hope you wrote more on your late father’s thoughts on the symbol.

      *Where is HELL, **niriya**?* Kuti /ka-nah/section eight, Wat Suthat, and it has been so for eight years.

      *Dr. Oskar von Hinuber* I think he wrote his omega symbol in 1974, in German. It was creativity at its best, I would guess.

      *My Huntington message:*

      Nothing is digitized. All digitals pictures I assume went to Brahma-loka. Wait and see. I am not 74, can’t see well, lost almost all I ever had, including the Buddha Footprint collection of over 500, at lest that is what I heard. I have NO home now and want to read the Ananda FP in Bagan, which is NOW lost but two drawings have surfaced. I suggest it is a Metteyya Pada. A king’s donation of c a.. D. 1090. All those boxes were my early work, in teak boxes, taken by Dr. Niyaa many years ago, because my place was not safe. Those days it was Kodak only, and that depended on donations from my parents – to the greater degree. As I recall, I put them in paper with rubber bands and they could hardly exist today. There were names attached. As long as I am alive, I an assist. This is a public media message too. Oh yes, all family members died too but I do have some good friends and good students. Only the bad ones went to prison, so I hear. Wait and see. Keep in touch. Adchan. *Hard disk holders* Put in: pany, phaitun, panya, berlin dhalem, Lokesh, They stole from so many…………….almost countless. There are now copies in several countries. Do you want one too?

      *The Great Monk speaker* in confinement? If so, he may learn something. Wait and see. All three cars are gone. Possibly they went out to look for 500 Buddha footprints, etc, but I heard from someone attached with the Grand Palace that they were sold. Well, even thieves can spread the word of PADA. Wait and see.

      *Mr. Peacock* He saw me in the AM and observed me for some time. Later he ran by and did not notice me. Even later he passed again, but his umbrella was low. I wonder why? I guess even peacocks learn.

      *Indian Visa* It is now a headache for me. Rules and regulations, galore.

      Sikri In 1996 I was interested in showed what Pali states for the Lahore Buddha Pada. At the time Dr. Rehmani, the Director asked What is Pali. The generous Dr. Gombrich printed out on page. He is so nice. Once president of the Pali Text Society. Oxford chap.

      *My visual Collections * There were three. *1.* The early set of c. 20 years Kodak slide, Mural, rare books, etc. * 2.* Digital. On two MAC computers. The first Dr. Niyada took some 10 years ago. She is Head of the Thai Depart. Kaset/Agriculture Un. Second was eight years ago in Kuti eight Wat Suthat. *3.* All pictures from two very small digital cameras. All in Htoo shop, Yangon. I already gave a set to my Burmese student. Does anyone else want them. I too will die, so why not?

      Thai Auspicious Royal Ceremony text I saw it years ago. I covered the sold gold Buddha Footprint. Now I can’t track it down. I tried a special library yesterday near Victory Monument, but NO luck.

      *Sikri* It is possible the first map, made by a then young French man, was drawn in 1905. A copy is near my temple but the paper is no good. It is folded in a huge text. Well, try again.

      *Ruling Phrases* *1*.The truth will come out! That first came at the temple of His Holiness by a so-called monk. I can tell the long term and short term monks. Long term monks know how to put on a robe. * **2. ** One can hide nothing on this earth. **3.* It comes around.

      *Three MAC computers* First one Dr. Niyada took some eight years ago. Second one was stolen in Kuti Eight Wat Suthat. Third one was taken near Cal. Un. A few years ago and my friend was found later with his head smashed. I also went to his Vajrayana funeral.

      On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Association Of Myanmar Archaeologists wrote:

      > ** > Daw Than Aye commented: “Thank sar” >

  4. Ma Nwe Nwe Moe September 12, 2012 at 4:09 pm

    ေက်းဇူးတင္ပါတယ္။ ျမန္မာမွာ ေက်ာက္ေခတ္စိတ္၀င္စားတဲ့သူရွားပါတယ္။ ဆရာက ၾကိဳးစားသုေတသနေတြလုပ္ေနလို႔ အရမ္းကို ေက်းဇူးတင္ပါတယ္။

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: