|
|
|
Landscape
Here we have to state that the initial shape of the landscape over and in immediate vicinity of structure B3 is insufficiently documented. We questioned especially Mr. Baumgartner and Mr. Pradhan for all possible indications that could shed some light on the immediate geomorphologic context in which B3 was found. According to those informants, a marked hill or mound was visible in the landscape at about the same location as the discovered structure. An early photograph shot by Mr. Baumgartner show the area before any terracing was done; a mound is clearly visible in the landscape (Fig. 30). A second photograph shows the same location when the terracing work began (Fig. 31). According to the pictures, the
initial mound appears to be about 7‑9m in diameter. Its height can be
estimated to be about 1 m, but exact figures are difficult to infer. The
vegetation covering the mound is identical to the surrounding, consisting
mainly of grasses. At least two blue pines were growing on the mound surface.
The roots of the tree located to the western side of the mound (left on Fig.
30) were observed in the excavated area, on the stone surface near the western
corner of the structure. In the early course of the building
work, the RNR-RC team made measurements of the slope running approximately
through the mound. The nearest transect is reported in the following figure (Fig.
32). The mound can be distinguished at the base of the natural slope running
in northeastern direction. Its base seems to show a slope of approximately 15
degrees. Based on this oral information and
data, we can suppose that a fair important amount of sediment and overburden
recovered the discovered stone structure B3. This sediment was partly taken
away during the terracing process, and then a less important part of it has
been removed during the first cleaning of the surface by the RNR-RC team. Excavating structure B3
As we found the spot in April, we were glad to see the surface of B3 protected by a layer of sediment and by a square fence. The first task we undertook was to remove the protective layer and to proceed to the cleaning of the surface, thus repeating the job made by the RNR-RC team previously (excavation layer d0). This step was achieved rapidly and we could already distinguish the exact shape of the stone structure, which was not really square, but rather trapezoid, with the longer edge toward the southwest. The exact dimensions of the upper surface of the structure are the following:
In average, the surface was almost
perfectly flat, with a central part somewhat lower than the periphery. We
continued to clean the surface until there was almost no sediment left around
the stones. The surface did not look as a pavement, and many more stones could
be distinguished between and underneath the stones of the upper layer. During
the cleaning process, we were not able to discover any sign of substructure
that could eventually have existed on the top of the stone surface, such as
postholes for example. Since the structure seemed to be
thicker than expected, we engaged the second step, which consisted in the
excavation of the sediment around it (Fig.
33). We chose the shorter
northeastern edge as a starting line and excavated a surface about 4x1m along
it. During the scraping process, we observed the sediment composition, which
was identical to the sediment found between the stones of the structure during
the last superficial cleaning. The silt predominated, and the high compactness
of the deposit impeded somewhat the speed at which we could work. The deposit
contained almost no stone at all, excepting a few boulders near the edge of the
stone structure. Those appear to have fallen down from the edge itself. Later, we extended the excavation
surface along both northwestern and southeastern sides of the structure (Fig.
33). This step would ultimately give us two views of the vertical development
of the sides of the structure, and two stratigraphic profiles oriented
perpendicularly to the structure flanks would help us understand the
relationship between construction and surrounding sediment deposits. On the
eastern side, this extension took the form of a rectangular excavation surface
about 4x1.2m located between squares B1 and B-C/4. About 2/3 of the eastern
side of the structure were thus visible at full height. On the western flank,
the surface did not exceed 3x0.8m between squares F0 and G-H/3. Approximately
half of the length of this side was visible at full height. During the excavation process, we
decided to deepen the cuts in some parts of the opened surface, especially to
check if there were any substructures below the stone layer forming the base of
the structure. The result of these tests revealed to be negative; the stone
structure was built directly on a sediment layer. After we reached the base of the
structure on both the eastern and western flanks, one of the most interesting
feature observed was the height of the structure compared to the height in
square E1 where it was about 35-40cm. In square C4, the altitudinal difference
between summit of stones and basic contact to sediment is 72cm. On the other
side of the structure, in the square G3, this difference is 77cm. These results
indicated that the structure should be even thicker along its southern flank.
We decided to open a small test excavation centered in square E6 (Fig. 30)
to find out an exact figure of this thickness. After a few days, the height of
stone accumulation observed in this test pit was averaging 100cm. It seemed
quite obvious that the stone platform had been built on a rather important
slope; a simple calculation show that this slope should be about 8 degrees,
running in south-southwestern direction. Clues about the initial shape of
structure B3
The test pit of E/6-7 contained many bigger stones, which seemed not to be part of the platform construction. Those were crudely piled in square E7, thus not touching the wall of the platform. The best hypothesis we can find for this accumulation is that those stone are part of the material brought in this location to build an artificial mound. This mound, which was mostly constituted of sediment and alternatively of stones in its thickest southern part, covered the stone platform completely. The approximate morphology of the completed mound could have been estimated by careful observation and documentation of the mound visible on the photographic pictures (Fig. 30). Further detailed analyses of the stratigraphic profiles around B3 will certainly give more insight about the correlation between stone structure and artificial mound. What we know: the test pit and the
other peripheral excavations show that the platform B3 was a carefully built
stone monument, with a flat upper surface, subvertical walls, and nicely curved
vertical corners; it has been intentionally surrounded by sediment and stones
and then recovered with sediments to form a rounded mound (Fig.
34). Function of B3
The most striking question one can ask is "What was this monument meant for?" After this short initial campaign, we are not able to give any definite answer to this question, but some observations we made could give some basic indications. Surface shape
We found a first indication in the arrangement of the stones of the upper layers of the platform surface. Nine square meters of the central area (squares D-F/2-4) of the approximately flat surface were carefully documented with drawings at 1:10 scale, measurements of altitudes, and with vertical and oblique photographs. Fig. 35 already shows the complex arrangement of stones in this area. A general oblique view of the partly excavated platform B3 also gives an impression of the complicated stone arrangement. The observation and documentation
show that the stones that are located in the peripheral squares D/2-4, E2, E4,
and F/2-4, and which are not lying perfectly horizontally, show general sloping
vectors oriented toward the central square E3 (Fig.
36). The synthetic summary of the numbers
of vector in each square for each direction show a clear tendency of the stones
located in the eight peripheral squares to slope toward the central square (Fig.
37). The area near the central square E3 is also located lower than the
periphery of the stone platform. A central depression can be roughly delineated
and we can look at the altitude difference between the periphery and this
central depression. We can calculate that the altitude in this area is about
30-35cm below the average altitude of each corner of the structure B3. Although
this difference is not really big, we have to consider it as important enough
relatively to the overall thickness of the stone platform. If we consider the careful arrangement
of the stones in the periphery, we observed that they were regularly lying
horizontally. The differences observed in the central part (sloping stones and
altitude difference) clearly indicate that the stones are not in their exact
initial positions, but moved partly downward due to the reduction of some
hollow volume inside of the platform B3. The nature of this volume is yet
impossible to determine with absolute certainty. Nevertheless, we can suppose
that the platform contained a hollow volume, probably supported by a wooden
substructure or eventually by a rather unstable stone substructure. The
approximate size of such an internal substructure is unknown but could easily
reach 2x2m. Its height is certainly not exceeding the height of the superficial
depression observed (30-35cm). As well as its exact shape and
building technique, the content of an eventual hollow volume is impossible to
determine. There are no traditions for human burials in central Bhutan since
centuries, and the earth mound which recovered the platform leaves the function
as a reliquary stupa (or chorten) out. Only further excavation of
this central part could shed light on the exact function of the monument. At
the end of the field campaign, we already have started to document, number and
take away some of the superficial stones covering this area, but the task is
time consuming and the campaign was too short to bring us to the buried heart
of the stone platform. Activity remains
As for the complex B1-B2, we were eagerly looking for datable remains on and around the stone platform B3. Overall, we secured twelve samples. Among them, seven are charcoals, four contain charcoal mixed to sediment, and one was collected for nature determination. The charcoal samples were collected
in two main locations. One is a small fireplace situated at about 80cm from the
northern edge of the stone structure in square D1. Its size is about 45x35cm
and its thickness averages 10cm. The charcoal found here was not very well
preserved and was sticking to surrounding silty sediment without any particular
trace of local burning or of any built combustion structure. The altitude of
this "fireplace" is about 25cm below the average altitude of the
platform corners. It resulted probably from the accumulation of charcoal from
wood burnt at some other location nearby. The time setting of this event is
shortly before the building of the stone platform, during this building phase
(most probability), or during the building of the artificial mound covering the
platform. We decided not to date this sample due to the precarious
stratigraphic link to the platform itself, but further dating of this charcoal
could reveal the approximate age of the monument B3. The second location with high
charcoal presence was, surprisingly, the platform surface itself, and
especially the northern side of the central depression discussed above. Seven
samples could be retrieved from the squares F2 and D-F/3. Two samples with
bigger quantities of charcoal came from D-F/3. In this area, we excavated and
documented what can be called a real fireplace (Fig.
38) not only containing
burnt wood remains in well preserved shape, but also showing also burning
traces on the surrounding stones. In this location, at least one bigger fire of
wooden branches has been made in an irregular depression surrounded by stones,
about 50x50cm in size. The bottom of this depression is uneven, consisting
partly of protruding stones lying deeper in the platform, and partly of low
quantities of sediment accumulated between the stones. The thickness of the
accumulation of charcoal was about 5cm and silty sediment sealed the fireplace
from overlying deposits. The burning of wood occurred certainly ultimately
after the erection of the stone platform, but before the building of the
artificial mound. Thus, it represents an event directly related to the building
of the monument as a whole. We gave first priority to date charcoal from this
fireplace. The following table summarizes the type and location of the samples collected during the excavation of B3 (Tab. 6).
No other indication of activities
directly related to the monument have been found, excepting the artifacts that
we shall briefly describe in the next section. Archaeological material from B3
Prior to the investigation campaign, during the terracing works and subsequent cleaning of the B3 location, a worker of the RNR-RC found a bronze coin near the stone surface. Oral information indicates that the coin has been found at about 1m to the east of the stony area, apparently near the northeastern corner of the structure but lying at a higher altitude as the summit of the stones. Its diameter is 23.5mm. Its surface holds a verdigris patina covering partly the stamped decoration. The head side figure is representing a snow lion surrounded by letters and symbols (Fig. 39). The reverse side hold letters and symbols. Our colleague Singye Dorji, from the Special Commission for Cultural Affairs, identified the coin as Tibetan, dated around the 17th century AD. He could decipher a few words: "Zhi-gang" on the reverse side and "Gadenphodang […]" on the head side. A year is eventually to be read on the head side too, but it seems to be partly obliterated. According to Mr. Loten Dahortsang, a
young scholar of Tibetan history, the coin from B3 has the following features
(L. Dahortsang, personal communication). On the head side, the symbol of the
sun is in the center, accompanying the snow lion, the latter being the symbol
of the Tibetan government. Around the center, four words are written in
Tibetan: (a) “Pleasure”, (b) “Palace”, (c) “Directions”, and (d) “Victory”.
The meaning of the regrouped word is “Victorious over all directions”, which is
the way the Tibetan government is named. The reverse side holds a gem symbol
in its central part, along with the words “1
Sho”, which is the value of the coin. The periphery holds five lotus flower
symbols. In between them, five words are marked: (a) “Rab”, (b) “Dschung”, (c)
the number “21”, (d) “Year”, and (e) not preserved. The
meaning of the whole is that the coin has the value of 1 Sho, that the coin was
made during the 21st year of the reign of Rab Dschung 16 (monarchs reigned for
cycle of 60 years). According to the Tibetan chronology
and to the analysis of Mr. Dahortsang, this coin has been produced in the
foundry of “Gra ‘bshi ‘dngul par Khang”
in Tibet in 1932 of our era. Since the analysis of Mr. Dahortsang seems much
more detailed than the preliminary observation of our colleague in Bhutan, we
shall consider the latter origin as plausible and thus, we should not consider
the coin as an indication for the 17th century. This chronological marker will
not especially hamper the possibility that the monument near which it was found
is ancient, since the context of the discovery remains very imprecise. A very little number of artifacts
could be retrieved from the volumes we excavated over and around B3. In fact,
we could not locate a single artifact on the surface of the stone platform; all
objects found were situated in its immediate periphery. The most common raw material of the
B3 artifacts is pottery. Four sherds were found, most of them a about the same
altitude as the platform summit. The ware is relatively crude and rough,
apparently hand-modeled and well burnt. Three sherds found together near the
northwestern corner of the platform are of dark, almost black color. It seems
that the potters used sand with a high concentration of mica as temper
material. This results in a paste with a glittering surface. Unfortunately, the
sizes of the recovered sherds did not enable us to proceed to any morphologic
reconstruction of pots. In present days, pottery seems to be
rarely crafted in Bhumtang district. Oral informants indicated that pottery was
still made in recent times in one of the four valleys of the Bhumtang area
(probably Ura). Unfortunately, we could not visit this region to get more
information. In recent past, earthenware was often imported from adjacent
regions, especially from Tibet. The eventual affinities of our sherds with
foreign production are to be investigated. Another interesting finding brought
intense contentment to one of our local workers. It was made in the
northeastern corner of the platform and took the form of a small ground stone
bead situated at the base of the wall of the platform. It is made of a dark
transparent crystalline stone, almost black in color. It is about 1cm in
diameter and holds a very thin perforation, less than 1mm in diameter. Its
shape is almost perfectly spherical and its surface is finely polished. Oral
information given to us seems to indicate that traditional stone beads are
still made in Bhutan, or were at least made until recently. Further information
should be sought in reference to this subject. The tight schedule (and the
unfortunate illness of one of us) at the end of the campaign did not leave us
enough time to document graphically the archaeological material found during
the excavation of B3. Dating the monument B3
Based on all indications and documents at our disposal at the time of excavation, we thought monument B3 to be aged several centuries. The bronze coin found near the structure, presumably attributed to the 17th century AD, and thus eventually related to the Tibetan invasions of Bhumtang, represents a terminus post quem for the monument. This means that the monument cannot be younger than 1932, which is the age of this coin. Oral information and the local traditions eventually indicated a greater antiquity for B3. The quality and type of pottery found near B3, for example, could have indicated an old age. The fact that nobody had ever seen such a stone structure could be on more indication of antiquity. In order to gain an indication of
the time setting of monument B3 in the absolute calendar, we chose one charcoal
sample for which the correlation to the building of the monument was certain.
Sample number 9 (Tab. 6) met all criteria and was sent to Beta Analytic, Inc.
in Miami (Florida, USA) for conventional radiocarbon dating. The analysis
revealed that the sample contained plenty of carbon for dating and was
processed. It received the conventional laboratory code Beta-133584. The
following result was obtained from the laboratory: Beta-133584: 320 ± 60 years BP (before present = before 1950 AD) This result represent the date
obtained by the radiocarbon method. It is necessary to proceed to a
calibration to calendar years. The calibration result delivered by the
laboratory is the following: 2 Sigma calibrated result: 1445 – 1665 years AD cal (95% probability) 1 Sigma calibrated result: 1480 – 1650 years AD cal (68% probability) The 2 sigma result means nothing
else that there is a probability of 95% that the real calendar age of the
charred wood is in the year range 1445 to 1665 AD. The following figure shows
the age ranges before and after calibration (Fig.
40). The probability curve of the
calibrated result shows three probability peaks (illustrated by thick vertical
lines on Fig. 40), one at 1525 AD cal,
another at 1560 AD cal, and a last at 1630 AD cal. Those peaks are the
real centers of the probability distribution. The arithmetic center of the
range is 1555 AD cal. Overall, this radiometric dating result enables us
to state that the monument B3 was probably built at some time in the second
half of the 16th century AD cal. Importance of the old monument
conflicting with the new building
The master plan of the RNR-RC shows that the easternmost-planed building of the new complex is directly endangering the structure B3 (Fig. 7 and 33). The northwestern side of the building will consist in a wall against which a platform should be built on ten pillars separated by 2m gaps. According to the plans, this building façade will pass directly over the monument B3 (Fig. 33: the thick oblique dotted line represents the outer limit of the façade; the thin dotted line is the absolute minimal position to which the building should be shifted). Already at the end of the April
campaign, the investigated parts of the surface and of the immediate
surrounding of B3 had sufficient historical characteristics to predict the
immediate conflict between the old monument and the new building. We gave
extensive information about our investigation to all responsible groups engaged
in or concerned with the building of the research center. The ultimate
information step was the final meeting to inform the Deputy Minister for
Agriculture, Lyonpo Kinzang Dorji,
about the provisional conclusions of the investigation. During this event, we proposed
a shifting of the planed building in order to prevent damages during the
construction phase and to enable further archaeological and preservation tasks.
The minimal distance at which the building should be shifted is 2.5m to the
southeast of the initial position; this would leave a minimal gap of 1m between
the southeastern corner of the monument B3 and the line of pillars supporting
the terrace of the planed façade. A greater distance (5m) would be more
convenient to work extensively on the remains of the artificial mound of B3, to
document it and to reconstruct it partially in a final step. The importance of monument B3 is not
only shown by its antiquity, but especially by its uncommon shape and building
style. The fact that monument B3 puzzled most of the people visiting the
excavation is not astonishing in our mind. No local tradition can be related to
artificially buried stone platforms. Even the most knowledgeable scholar among
the historians of Bhutan's traditions, Lam
Perma Tserang (Abbot of Nimalung Gompa and previous Director of the National
Library), who visited the excavation (Fig. 41), could not give a definite clue
about the function of the monument. The absence of any relevant references to
which we could compare B3 is representative of the lack of archaeological
research in the region and in Bhutan in general. An easy approach would be to
characterize this monument as an incomparable "curio" in the
historical and architectural landscape of Bhutan. A better way would be to use
the knowledge we gained from this unusual monument as a keystone for further
archaeological and historical research about the buried past of Bhutan. Summary for monument B3
The dimensions of the monument B3 are at least 400 by 480cm, considering only the well preserved stone platform. The shape of the monument is trapezoidal and has been built on a sloping ground. The construction technique is the so-called dry stone masonry (no remains of mortar could be found). The type of the stones used are varying from rounded crystalline boulders, mostly granites, certainly gained in the nearby fluvial terrace on which the monument is located, to angular shaped metamorphic rocks presumably coming from yet undetermined outcrops lying at higher altitudes above the site. The module of the stones is varying from a few centimeters to almost 100cm maximal length. The biggest modules are generally flat metamorphic stone slabs. The positions of the stones are generally horizontal, with a clear tendency to show sloping in direction of the monument center, thus indicating the presence of a collapsed inner volume inside of the monument. Abundant traces of fire could be
found on the surface of the platform. The underlying stones on which this fire
had been made do not indicate important burning traces; this indicates that the
fire was probably a single event, and not a repeated one, very probably
occurring just after the achievement of the stone platform. A radiometric
dating made on charred twigs found in this fireplace gave a chronological interval
centered near 1550 AD (calendar years). Indications given by local
informants show that a earthen mound existed at the location of the monument. A
few photographs, shot before the beginning of the recent terracing works, and a
few transect measurements, represent the only morphologic documentation left
for this mound, which is destroyed today. Further stratigraphical observations
and analyses will probably bring some more information about the bottom part of
this mound. Excavation work showed that the mound had been accumulated
artificially my the people who have built the monument. The mound was certainly
intended to protect the stone platform and to hide it from the view of others. Since the short campaign did not
enable us to investigate the central inner part of the platform, it is yet
impossible to give precise clues about the function of the complex structure,
and further archaeological work is thus needed. The stone monument by itself could
resemble to a simple form of chorten (or
stupa), those sacred Buddhist
structures intended to contain relicts. But the fact that it was covered with a
mound makes it quite uncertain. The scarce presence of artifacts near the walls
could indicate small and simple offerings made in a spiritual context, for example
just before the platform had been hidden under the sediment. The hypothetical function as a grave can be eliminated because of the chronological setting: Buddhism was widespread in the Bhumtang area during the 16th century AD, and corpses were certainly cremated and not interred. Nevertheless, the sepulchral function should not be forgotten too soon. In western and central Europe, cremation remains of high ranked people were placed in so-called tumuli resembling in some points with our monument B3. The parallel is certainly improbable, but we should keep in mind that the peoples of the steppes, and among them the Mongolian, have a rich monumental grave tradition. They placed their dead dignitaries and leaders in wooden chambers built in a deep dugout, covered the chamber with a big stone heap, and finally accumulated a mound of earth above the grave. And the historical sources tell us that the Tibetan invaders of the first half of the 17th century were assisted by Mongolian troops!
|
|
Copyright 2000 by Blumer R. and Vial F.
|