Myanmar history: who are the Pyus and where are they now?

Myanmar history: who are the Pyus and where are they now?

This question is one that still has no officially approved answer because of the incompleteness of the historical facts and the political implications underlying it. Although I believe there are many historians and archeologists who have the view I hold, they have not put it on record because of its sensitivity.

There are 2 sources of facts we have regarding the Pyu: the archeological findings and the Myanmar (Bamar and Rakhine) history on one side and the contemporary detailed Chinese records on the other.

The Pyus built brick walled cities around nearly the whole of present day Myanmar and established the first Myanmar Empire which was both civilized and strong and they had relations with neighbouring countries and this is attested by contemporary Chinese chronicles and now proved by the findings of the finger marked bricks in archeological findings in the Tenessarim and elsewhere.

Recent findings of Bronze Age culture in Myanmar, and the early Iron Age settlements in the Chindwin and Samon valleys bring out more evidence of Myanmar prehistory.

Below are extracts of articles by Bob Hudson and Elizabeth Moore, to whom I owe much of my knowledge about the Pyus as their articles are available on the web whereas most Myanmar data are unavailable to me except the Glass Palace Chronicle / Hman Nann YarZaWin, U Ba Than’s Kyaung Thone YarZaWin and books by Dr. Than Tun, U Than Tun (Shwebo) and Dr. Kyaw Win. I owe much to the late Dr. Than Tun whose many books about early Myanmar history gave me much knowledge and encouragement.

After you read them, you will also come to the same conclusion I have: that the Pyus are the ruling minority class who ruled over the Bamars, Mons and other ethnic groups because of their higher civilization. They began with the AbiYarZar and his entourage as stated in Myanmar chronicles (which are disregarded as myths by the English historians) and later reinforced by the DazaYarzar and his entourage who also are of TharKiWins from the Mizzimadesh in modern day northern India. These 2 main groups mixed with locals in later years but with continuous connection with India, had and maintained a high civilization and were a minority so that when the Nan-chaos took away the remaining over 3000 of the Pyus, not much were left behind and they remaining Pyus intermarried with the Bamars and became Myanmars. The situation is similar to the English who ruled us but are no more, and the Pyu language might be analogous to the pidgin that developed in some British colonies which is derived from English yet unintelligible even to the English.

Myanmar Chronicles

The memory of Pyu culture has long been preserved in Myanmar chronicles and epigraphy,

and in the case of Beikthano, Halin and Sriksetra that memory adds further support to the

epigraphic and artefactual record .

Pyu sites are mentioned in many but not all of the standard chronicles that bring together traditions of various dynasties and also in a range of local histories or thamaing. Pe Maung Tin and Luce note that while the founding of Sriksetra is detailed that Tagaung is already established in chronicle descriptions (1960:xviii).

In an early Inwa chronicle, the Zabu Koncha, the main point of interest is the indication of the

Pyu at some twenty different sites spread north and south of the Chindwin-Ayeyarwaddy

confluence. It is notable in this account that Halin, the first settlement cited, falls three times.

The first fall is to Yakhine, the second to peoples of Lower Myanmar, and the third to the

Dawei (Tavoy), also in the south. Tagaung is also settled three times, and Inwa (Ava) is twice

mentioned as a Pyu site (Win Maung (Tampawaddy), pers.comm.1998).

Of the Pyu sites, the focus in the royal chronicles is Sriksetra. The founding of the city is recorded in a number of accounts, including the Glass Palace Chronicle (Hman Nan Yazawin). This source, compiled for King Bagyidaw from 1829-32, drew mainly on U Kala’s 18th century chronicle (Tet Htoot 1963: 53). It was translated in part by Pe Maung Tin and G.H. Luce in 1923, and reprinted in 1960.

The Taungdwingyi Thamaing, compiled in the 19th century, has one chapter on Beikthano or

‘Peikthano’, Vishnu. This records the triumph of Sriksetra over Beikthano, a memory

preserved in a hillock at Sriksetra whose name translates as the ‘Cemetery of the Queen of Beikthano’.

The chronicles commemorate the early history of the Sriksetra in political and sacred contexs, linking it to the ancient capital of Tagaung. Also related in the Glass Palace Chronicle is the marking out of the circular site of Srikestra by Sakka (Indra, Thagyamin) in 544BC, the year of the Buddha’s bodily demise. Holding the tail of the Naga King, a circular perimeter of 3 yojana was marked out, the remains of which measure 81/2 miles in circumference. A yojana or yuzana is a measurement of Indian origin, varying from 4 1/2 to 9 or 12 miles. Even the smaller calculation is larger than the remains, although the Sriksetra walls encompass a larger area than any of the other known Pyu sites.The city had moats, ditches, barbicans, thirty-two main gates and thirty-two smaller ones and four-cornered towers. Many of these necessary elements of the city are in multiples of four, ensuring cosmological correctness for the site. Some of these, such as gates, may have been symbolic, depicted possibly by false doors or niches in the wall. (Wheatley 1983:176). This convention later became incorporated into the seven features necessary to consecrate a site as a new royal city: wall with gates, moat, pagoda library, monastery, ordination hall, and rest places (Moore 1993:335)

The founding of the Sriksetra is also preserved in the biographical inscriptions of the Bagan King Kyanzittha. One of these, written in Old Mon, was installed in 1093AD at the Shwesandaw pagoda in Pyay.

Beikthano

The Taungdwingyi Thamaing was does not recount the founding of Beikthano, but rather its

subjugation by Sriksetra. The episode centres on King Duttabaung and Princess Panthwa,

descendants of Mahathambawa and Sulathambawa from an earlier ruler of Tagaung. The

Glass Palace Chronicle also traces Queen Panthwa’s lineage to Tagaung. Here, her father,

heir to the kingdom of Tagaung in the fortieth year after the Buddha’s Parinirvana killed a

great boar threatening the kingdom. The heir became a hermit near to the later site of

Srikestra, at Yatheit-myo or ‘hermit city’, a name often given to Sriksetra. A young doe living

here gave birth to a daughter named Bedayi, after happening to lick up the hermit’s urine left

in a cup in the rocks (Luce and Pe Maung Tin 1960:8,13).

At around this time, two blind princes were born to the chief Queen of Tagaung. The two sons

were fathered by the queen’s lover, a Naga prince (Khin Myo Chit 1985:57). They were

banished from Tagaung to float down the Ayeyarwaddy and eventually regain their sight with

the help of an ogress, Candamukhi. The brothers meet Bedayi and her father on their journey,

bringing the two stories together. The elder brother marries Bedayi, and then dies, although

Bedayi bears his child. She is given to the younger prince, and bears a son, Duttabaung. In the

Taungdwingyi Thamaing, the ogress gives birth to a girl, taking her to live on the sacred Mt.

Popa near Bagan where a hermit cares her. In the Glass Palace Chronicle, the ogress builds a

village around Mt. Popa and lives there her son Peitthano, who had been fathered by one of

the princes (Luce and Pe Maung Tin 1960:14). Indra (Thagyarmin or Sakka) learns that the

girl had been the sister of Vishnu in a previous life, and requests that Vishnu build her a city.

This city is then called Panthwa (‘request’) or Vishnu (Chen Yi-Sein 1999:76). King

Duttabaung hears of the Beikthano’s wealth but fails to take the city due to Princess

Panthwa’s magic drum that she had received from Sakka. When beaten, the drum made the

waters of the Yan Pe stream to the south of Beikthano rise, drowning any invading troops.

King Duttabaung, ruling at Sriksetra, had a third, divine eye and is identified by some with the Hindu deity Siva. Beikthano, on the other hand, takes its name from Vishnu.

The archaeological landscape of Upper Burma to AD 1300.

Bob Hudson.

Chinese sources.

Chinese historians and geographers began to mention the territory that is now Myanmar as early as the second century BC, focusing on the Pyu kingdom(s) and people.

There are references to overland trade or pilgrimage routes linking China, Upper Burma and India from 128 BC, to Pyu migrants settling in Yunnan (before AD 76), to a Buddhist kingdom, Linyang (nominated by Luce as the first textual mention of Buddhism in association with Burma) in the first half of the 3rd century, to a route from Yunnan to the Pyu kingdom (before AD 290), to a “civilised people” called the P’iao (before AD 420) and again around AD 524, to Linyang (Beikthano, or Vishnu City).

During the Tang Dynasty (AD 618-907) a Pyu capital, Shilichadaulo (Sriksetra) was mentioned in AD 646, 648, around 675 (the latter two in relation to Chinese Buddhist pilgrims), and 691.

The overland trade route between Yunnan, Burma and India was described in detail in AD 810.

Poems of the early 9th century describe performances by Pyu artistes at Chang-an, the Tang capital, in AD 800 and 801-802.

Later historical compilations the Man shu, or Book of the Southern Barbarians (AD 863), the Jiu Tang shu or Old History of the Tang Dynasty (AD 945) and the Tang huiyao or Important Documents of the Tang (AD 961) all refer to the musicians’ visit of AD 801-802. The Xin Tang shu or New History of the Tang Dynasty contains a detailed description of the Pyu kingdom, even listing the songs performed by the Pyu on their visit to Chang-an.

During the Song Dynasty (AD 960-1279) missions to the Song court from the P’u-kan kingdom in AD 1004 and 1106 are recorded in the Zhu fan shi or Description of Foreign Peoples of AD 1225.

Interpreting Pyu material culture:

Royal chronologies and finger-marked bricks

Myanmar Historical Research Journal, No(13) June 2004, pp.1-57

Elizabeth Moore

http://www.ibiblio.org/obl/docs/Moore-bricks.pdf

Bricks were used to build walls around Pyu and Mon sites in Myanmar and Thailand during the early first millennium AD if not earlier. 1 Many of these bricks have lines on the ends or across the width, patterns made with the fingers while the bricks were still soft. Unlike many other diagnostic Pyu artefacts such as beads and coins, finger-marked bricks are not easily collected or traded. They are cumbersome to transport over great distances, and even when reused today tend to remain in the locality where they were first made.

The massive brick walls of Sriksetra, Beikthano and Halin are one of the principal features

used to identify these sites as Pyu, although it is now accepted that their occupation pre-dates

the construction of walls. Chinese emissaries in the 9th century AD described the city-wall of

the P’iao (Pyu) capital as being faced with glazed bricks, part of a general perception that

walls designate an area as urban. It has been suggested that the armies of the Nan-chao did not

think the newly founded kingdom of Bagan worthwhile to raid, as it had no fortified city

(Htin Aung 1967:31).

Finger-marked bricks and Pyu walls

Pyu walls were thick, commonly 2-5 metres wide, and were further reinforced with earthen embankments. Chinese emissaries noted that these walls, combined with the enclosed areas of rice fields, ensured the king’s ability to withstand a long siege (Htin Aung 1967:11).

In the central basin of Myanmar, finger-marked bricks are found at virtually all Pyu sites, and have been found at Tagaung, the earliest capital recorded in the Myanmar chronicles (Win Maung 1997). 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. In a number of cases the finger-marked bricks were kept as relics, and were believed to have protective power (Win Maung (Tampawaddy) 1991).

In the southern parts of the country, finger-marked bricks are found at most ‘Mon’ sites thought to date to the early centuries AD. Many of these are traditionally associated with the formation of Suvannabhumi, for example at lowland habitation sites and upland ritual centres around Mt. Kelasa in present day Bilin Township, Mon State (Moore 2003, forthcoming). The early significance of this southern area is recalled by a delegation headed by the chief monk of Mt. Kelasa’s monastic community said to have attended the consecration ceremony of a stupa built by Duttagamani of Sri Lanka in the 2nd century BC (Sao Saimong Mangrai 1976:160, Htin Aung 1967:6). Similar bricks are found at Mon Dvaravati sites in Thailand such as U Thong (San Win 2000). Thus while the use of fingermarked bricks is described here in a Pyu context, finds are associated with the adoption of Theravada practice at sites throughout Myanmar and in Thailand.

Finger-marked bricks, unless re-used, are not found at sites dating beyond the 12th or early 13th century AD (Moore and Aung Myint 1981). Nor are finger-marked bricks found at earlier or contemporaneous bronze-iron using sites of the Samon valley, described briefly below.

Nonetheless, the bronze artefacts associated with the Samon sites are increasingly being reported at Pyu locations, for instance Halin and Beinnaka (Moore 2003, Win Maung 2003).

In some instances, differences in the Pyu and Samon bronze-iron finds are difficult to distinguish. Beads of semi-precious stone, glass or fossil wood, are often labelled Pyu and are commonly found in association with finger-marked bricks. However, very similar beads are also found at the Samon sites, where ritual goods such as ‘mother-goddess’ figures indicate animist rather than Hindu-Buddhist practice (Nyunt Han, Win Maung and Moore 2002).

Chindwin and Samon bronze and iron using sites

A distribution of bronze-using sites is found around the Lower Chindwin region (21.20-22.30n 94.45-95.30e). The site of Nyaunggan is part of this group, one that spans the Chindwin River and stretches south around its confluence with the Ayeyarwaddy. The Bronze Age cemetery northwest of Monywa has been dated comparatively to c. 1500-1000 BC, the time period given for the establishment of a bronze-working tradition in Southeast Asia.

2 Attempts to date bone from both Hnaw Kan and Nyaunggan failed to give results due to lack of collagen in the samples. Charcoal was recovered Hnaw Kan, but the results are not available at the time of this writing (Patreau et al.2001: 100; Patreau 2002).

However, the start of bronze production in this area and the duration of cemetery use are not yet known.

To the east, along the Samon Valley south of Mandalay, bronze-iron cemetery sites are dispersed (19.40-22.00n x 95.30-96.15e)(see Moore and Pauk Pauk 2001; Nyunt Han, Win Maung and Moore 2002; Moore 2003). Absolute dating is not yet available for these and again an initial date for bronze and iron working there has not been formulated. They may fall within a period of fairly rapid change in Southeast Asia, from about c. 700-400BC, during a transition from unstratified agriculturalist economies using stone tools, to ranked metal-using communities (Glover 1999b: 104). The inception  localised iron production in Southeast Asia is generally placed around 500 BC (Glover 1999a: 87, Higham 2002: 158, 166). Also fitting within this timeframe are thermo-luminescence dates obtained from both pottery and iron excavated in 1982 at Taungthaman, Amarapura (21.53n x 96.05e) by U Sein Maung Oo. From this site, an iron fishhook found on the chest of a skeleton gave a date of 460 ±200 BC (Stargardt 1990: 15-6,29).

A number Pyu walled sites are found in, and peripheral to, the distribution of bronze-iron using sites in the Samon valley. The site of Taungthaman, and Kyaukse, whose ricefields supplied the 9-13C city of Bagan, are located here as well. Halin and Beikthano are on the north and south margins of the Samon bronze-iron distribution. Further south is Sriksetra, by far the largest of the enclosed Pyu sites. Its dating (4th or 5th to 9th C AD) is based on stylistic analysis although its location near the probable ancient shoreline suggests far earlier occupation. Traditional histories indicate habitation of the area long before the founding of the Pyu city (Moore. 2000: 172). Despite clear links to other Pyu sites such as brick walls, finger-marked bricks, and urns, Sriksetra presents a rather different profile in terms of the range of Pyu objects and the paucity of stone or bronze tools. This may well be dispelled with further research and excavation.

As discussed further below, the Pyu sites have been dated to about 200 BC – 900 AD, with charcoal samples from Beikthano yielding the earliest dates (Aung Thaw 1968, Aung Thwin 1982-3). The sequence of 1000+ years bracketed as ‘Pyu’ rests on more information than currently available for the Chindwin and Samon sites. Radiocarbon dates are available from Beikthano and Halin; there is palaeographic analysis of a limited number of inscriptions on stone and on gold plates, and stylistic analysis of bricks, beads, pottery, sculpture, monuments and walls. However, many aspects related to the Pyu remain uncertain. These include deciphering the language and, as discussed below, determining whether the Pyu were a distinct ethnic group that entered the central basin or were one of a number of groups already present. Also important is a clearer picture of developments during the early centuries AD. This was a period of expanding trade with both northern and southern parts South Asia and China, and there are indications that the changes indicated at sites such as Chansen in Central Thailand during the third century AD (Bronson 1976), were mirrored at Pyu settlements.

The chronological, cultural and ethnic relationship of the Samon valley bronze-iron cemeteries and the Pyu walled sites of Upper Myanmar remains a matter for future research.

Both groups, if indeed they prove to be distinct, settled in the arid zone, where irrigation was needed for wet rice cultivation. Both were capable of working in bronze and in iron. Although bronze and iron metallurgy and the firing of clay for pots and beads was already well established, this technology was used in new ways by the Pyu, most notably brick-making as discussed above, to define territory and erect ritual structures. The catalyst for these changes is traditionally attributed to contact with South Asia.

The ‘Pyu’ in Chinese records

The Pyu are referred to as the ‘P’iao’ in Chinese texts dated from the 3-9C AD, although they are thought to have called themselvesTircul’. Tircul is used, for example, in the 1102 AD palace inscription of Kyanzittha, where Tircul, Bamar and Mon dancing is described (Blagden and Duroiselle 1921). Variants of Tircul are also mentioned by Perso-Arab authors of the 9th and 10th centuries AD.

Early accounts

Other Chinese texts of about the 4th century AD describe troublesome groups living southwest of Yung-ch’ang. These peoples grew millet, hill-paddy, cotton trees and cinnamon, and produced saltwells, gold, silver, jade, amber, cowrie and tortoise shell. There were rhinoceros and elephant, and monkey hide was used to make armour. The peoples were alleged to be cannibals, who tattooed themselves and used bows and arrows. Further to the southwest, some 3000 li, were “a civilised people, the P’iao, where ‘prince and minister, father and son, elder and younger, have each their order of precedence” (Luce 1960:309). They made their knives and halberds from gold, and produced perfumes, cloves, cowries and a white cloth from the cotton-tree.

Later accounts

Over the next three hundred years, there is little mention of the P’iao.

However, in the 7th century, two monks, Hsüan Tsang and I Ching, travelled to India and in both records Sriksetra is mentioned. Neither monk visited the city, and although the P’iao are not specifically cited, they do refer to a capital called Sriksetra, or ‘field of glory’ located in a country that to the south, “borders on the sea” (Luce 1985: 48).

The later Chinese sources are linked to the fortunes of the kingdom of Nan-chao. As a result of an alliance forged with Tibet in 755AD to defeat the Chinese, the Nan-chao king Ko-lofeng initiated communications with the Pyu. By the end of the century, however, the Tibetan link was broken as Ko-lo-feng’s grandson strengthened ties to the Chinese court. An embassy from Nan-chao to the Chinese court was sent in 800, 802 and 807AD.

Due to these shifting alliances, information about the Pyu capital was included in records of the time such as the Old Tang History (Chiu-t’ang-shu) and the New Tang History (Hsint’ang-shu). Another document of this period is the Man Shu, compiled by Fan Ch’o after gathering information from Pyu soldiers during the 862AD siege of Hanoi (Luce 1960:318, 1985:77). All the sources contain details about the Pyu capital.

The king’s name is Maharaja. His chief minister is Mahasena. When he goes on a short journey, the king is borne in a litter of golden cord; when he journeys far, he rides an elephant. His wives and concubines are very numerous; the constant number is a hundred persons. The compass of the city-wall is faced with glazed bricks; it is 160 li in circumference.” (Luce 1960:318)

An account of Beikthano [Tharekhittra, not Beikthano] was recorded in the Tang Dynasty (618-907) Chinese chronicle Man Shu in the chapter ôThe Southern Barbarians as follows:

ôThe circular wall of his (the Pyu King╝s) city is built of greenish glazed titles (brick) and is 160 li. It has 12 gates and three pagodas at each four corners. . . Their house tiles are of lead and zinc. . . They have a hundred monasteries with bricks of vitreous ware, embellished with gold and silver, vermillion, gray colours and red kino.╜ [Taw Sein Kho (1895), The Pottery and Glasware of Burma 1894-95╜,Superintendent of Govt.Printing, Rangoon.]

The Man Shu, however, remarks that the time to march around the city was a day, generally taken to be about 50 li (Wheatley 1983: 193). The tiered form of the pyatthat appears to have been used to mark the four corners of the city gates. Inside the walls were more than a hundred Buddhist assembly halls (‘wats’), whose form was similar to the palace of the king.

Pagodas were roofed with tiles of lead and tin and furnished within with embroidered rugs, gold and silver and cinnabar and gum-lac (Wheatley 1983: 177). The population used a silver coinage, and all lived within the city walls. One source noted that there were several tens of thousands of families, a calculation implying up to a 100,000 people. Also recorded in the Man Shu is the respect paid to a white image over 100 feet high:

In front of the gate of the palace where the king of (this) kingdom dwells, there is a great image seated in the open air, over a hundred feet high, and white as snow. It is their wont to esteem honesty and decency. The people’s nature is friendly and good. They are men of few words. They reverence the Law of the Buddha. Within the city there is absolutely no taking of life. Also there are many astrologers who tell fortunes by the stars.

If two persons go to law with each other, the king at once orders them to burn incense in front of the great image and ponder on their faults: whereupon each of them withdraw. If a disaster should occur, or pestilence, or war, or disturbance, the king also burns incense facing the great image, repents of his transgressions, and takes the blame on himself.

The men mostly wear white tieh. The women on top of their heads make a high coiffure, adorned with gold, silver and real pearls. They wear for show blue skirts of p’o-lo (silk cotton) and throw about them pieces of gauze-silk. When walking, they always hold fans.

Women of noble family will have three persons, of five persons at their side, all holding fans.

When there are persons sent to take letters to the Ho-t’an of the Man borders, they take ‘river-pigs,’ white tieh, and glazed jars for barter or trade.” (Luce 1961:90-1)

The ‘river pigs’ were probably river porpoises, and the tieh a silkcotton cloth.

The New Tang History also mentions the image:

They wear gold-flowered hats and caps of kingfisher feathers strung with various jewels. The king’s palace has two bells, one of silver and one of gold; when enemies are at hand they burn incense and strike these bells, thus obtaining omens concerning their fate in the coming battle.

There is a great white image, 100 feet high. Those who are engaged in a lawsuit kneel in front of it, think for themselves whether they are right or wrong, and go away…”

The New Tang History and the Man Shu make it clear that Nan-chao held the upper hand in these relations with the ‘P’iao’. For example, Pyus were conscripted to fight with the Nanchao army in the capture of Hanoi in 863 AD. Fan Ch’o did not visit the Pyu cities but had been sent on a mission to Yunnan the previous year, and later wrote of Pyu exiled to this area:

In [AD 832] Man [sc.Nan-chao] rebels looted and plundered P’iao kingdom [sc. Halin]. They took prisoner over three thousand of their people. They banished them into servitude at Chê-tung [approx. Yünnan Fu], and told them to fend for themselves. At present their children and grandchildren are still there, subsisting on fish, insects, etc. Such is the end of their people (Luce 1985:66).

Luce goes on to note reference by the Chinese to the P’iao as “one of the tribes of the ‘Gold Teeth Comfortership’ (1985:66). The ‘Gold Teeth’ tribes perhaps find authentication in the 1999 finding at Shwegugyi Zeidi south of Halin, of an upper jawbone with eight teeth drilled with a pattern of 102 tiny holes filled with gold foil. The jawbone was from a skeleton found under a large stone slab and an associated pillar about 1.5m long, with gold and silver rings, pottery and iron tools (Hudson 2003:10, Win Maung (Tampawaddy) 1999).

The figure of thirty-two is also used in the New T’ang History, which lists thirty-two important settlements or tribes subject to the Pyu, eighteen dependencies, and eight or nine garrison towns.

The attack on Halin in 832 AD by the Nan-chao of Yunnan, China, appears to have been a devastating blow since according to the Chinese records the entire population was carried off into slavery and after this date mention of the Pyu is very rare.

Advertisements

Tags: , ,

6 Responses to “Myanmar history: who are the Pyus and where are they now?”

  1. My writings / blogs are on google search results! « Nyiwin's Blog Says:

    […] ·  Myanmar history: who are the Pyus and where are they now … […]

  2. Amanda Says:

    The info on Pyu city-states here has more substance than wikipedia version.

  3. Amanda Says:

    People who are interested in the history of Arakan should also read about the history of Magada empire, a time prior to Maurya. Arakan, in ancient time, was refered to be was a part of Bengal which was a part of Maurya Empire. In fact, Bengal was a part of Magada empire. Clearly, the arrival of Indo-Aryans to Arakan was a part of the arrival of Indo-Aryans to Bengal.

  4. Nyi Win Says:

    Recently, I read in a Myanmar journal, an article_ by a Doctor, a Ph. D. I presume, and maybe a historian, but do not know for certain_ which states that the coming of Burmese / Bamars into Myanmar in the 9th centuary A.D., which has been put forward by an English historian and taken on by all others, (including the late Dr. Than Tun), should be disregarded as it is not in conformation with the truth.
    Bamars have arrived and lived in Myanmar before the arrival of the Indo-Aryans and the establishment of the Pyu walled cities in Myanmar

  5. http://tinyurl.com/savrheney16062 Says:

    I actually intend to save this post, “Myanmar history: who are the Pyus and
    where are they now? Nyiwin’s Blog” on my very own page. Will you care in the event I reallydo it? Thanks -Forrest

    • nyiwin Says:

      Forrest (Lashonda Bruce),
      Please feel free to share this or any of my public posts. I only want my writings to be read by as many persons as possible.
      However, I must admit that I am not a historian, just a person who is interested in history.
      Thanks for your interest
      Nyi Win

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: