[This article is a development of pages 142-47 in Gustaaf Houtman's
MENTAL CULTURE IN BURMESE CRISIS POLITICS: AUNG SAN SUU KYI AND THE
NATIONAL LEAGUE FOR DEMOCRACY, which was published in March 1999 as
monograph no. 33 of the Institute for the Study of Languages and
Cultures of Asia and Africa, Tokyo University of Foreign Studies. In
the book, full references are given. The book is - as is common with
publications from Japanese university presses - distributed free of
charge to selected libraries, journals and scholars. It is also
available for free downloading from the Internet
http://homepages.tesco.net/~ghoutman/index.htm. Bibliographic
references have been omitted from this article as they can easily be
found on the Internet site.
Dr Houtman was the first Leach/RAI Fellow in Social Anthropology at
the University of Manchester, 1991-92, and has been closely involved
with ANTHROPOLOGY TODAY since its foundation in 1985, with occasional
absences to concentrate on his own research.]

In 1988, the Burma Socialist Programme Party, built up after General Ne Win's 1962 coup, unravelled under popular protest. General Ne Win resigned and the experiment with military socialism lasting over a quarter century was over. In May 1990 democratic elections were held, in which the National League for Democracy, co-founded by Aung San Suu Kyi, overwhelmingly won the elections. However, by early 1991 it became clear that the military was in no hurry to hand over the instruments of government, for they gradually routinized themselves from a temporary committee running the country into a 'government'. Indeed, the generals, initially temporarily 'caring' for ministries until a legitimate government would be in place, today call themselves 'Ministers', and General Than Shwe, Chairman of the State Peace and Development Council and Minister of Defence, calls himself today 'Prime Minister'.

The regime systematically intimidates what it considers 'the opposition' with house arrest and imprisonment and has closed down for the best part of the last decade the entire educational system, including even primary schools, for fear of protests. This combined with forced labour on a large scale and a severe refugee problem with its neighbours, resulted in the regime's international reputation sinking until its infamy triggered the European and American economic and political boycotts around 1994. The 1997-98 Asian financial crisis scared many of its Asian backers. Though it was drawn within the orbit of ASEAN in 1997, the Indonesian democratic elections has deprived it of its greatest supporter within ASEAN. Furthermore, the Nigerian democratic elections deprived it of one of its principal role models. It retains a powerful ally in China, but internationally Burma is today regarded as a pariah regime sometimes compared to Iraq.

Here I examine two notable features of this regime. Desperate for national and international recognition, it began the large-scale renovation and construction of pagodas, on the one hand, and museums, palaces and ancient monasteries on the other. These constructions have taken place on a scale and with a rapidity never before witnessed in the history of Southeast Asia. It has decided to renovate and rebuild all the thousands of pagodas in the 11th century capital Pagan. It is furthermore committing enormous funds to pagodas all over the country. At least two dozen new museums have been built. These house ancient heritage, but also the history of the army and the Pondaung fossils, that it claims represent the oldest humanoids of the world. The latter, it hopes, places the Myanmar people on the world's map as the oldest civilization. It also has rebuilt all ancient palaces in the ancient capitals. As I hope to show, these are vital elements at the heart of the regime's 'new' ideology I have dubbed 'Myanmafication', after their decision to rename the country Myanmar in 1989.

Building a house

One of the regime's journalists explained that 'Myanmar resembled a house that tumbled down. The Tatmadaw [army] had to pick up the pieces and build a new one.' Indeed, General Saw Maung himself asserted that during the 1988 unrest 'the State Machinery had stopped functioning' and in the aftermath 'it is just like building a country from scratch'. A new house had to be built, and since 1989 museum building and the museumification of pagodas have become indispensable activities for the regime.

However, there is much evidence that, given their Buddhist tradition, freethinking people in Burma have no desire to live in this national house. As the Buddha said,

I have passed in ignorance through a cycle of many rebirths, seeking the builder of the house. Continuous rebirth is a painful thing. But now, housebuilder, I have found you out. You will not build me a house again. ... All your rafters are broken, your ridge-pole shattered. My mind is free from active thought, and has made an end of craving.

These two quotations sum up two contrasting approaches to the institutionalization of tradition; the one compartmentalizes and the other does not, since compartments are seen as merely a product of ignorance. The latter view is essentially expounded by Aung San Suu Kyi in her concept of the 'spiritual revolution'. Taking the mind as its centrepoint, it contrasts universalist mental culture with the bounded material cultural stance of the military.

History and archaeology

The Burmese term for history is literally 'pagoda history' (thamaing). Museums and pagodas both deal with history. Indeed, they embody history. However, though surrounding often similar objects (e.g. bones), the radically different circumstances and reasons for finding and displaying these mean that they are conceived very differently (fossils vs. relics). In short, they tell very different kinds of history.

Burma's military regime attaches much importance to history. The State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), or, as they were formerly called (until 1997), the State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC), sees itself playing a vital and honourable role in the history of the country. The late General Saw Maung, one of the current regime's founders, commented in 1990 that if American culture is 'very recent . only 200 years old', Myanmar history 'shows our culture has been here for tens of thousands of years'. There was a great 'difference' between Burma and the rest of the world, and Burma had rubies and real jade that no one else had, and the Burmese did not need air conditioning or winter coats. Such radically different and unique ancient culture could not permit itself to be enslaved by foreigners yet again. SLORC inevitably had to show some spectacular reason that it was a legitimate government based on 'old' culture. It could only render this believable, of course, with proof.

In the opinion of SPDC Chairman General Than Shwe the creation of Myanmar represents not so much fostering respect for the diversity of cultures within the union, but 'revitalization of a civilization'. Civilization, as we know the concept from evolutionary anthropologists at the turn of this century, meant human beings historically emanating from a single family, hierarchically ordered depending on their ability to shake off nature through their cultural advances. This is a convenient singular concept, a shorthand for a unified people all related to a single source, but some of whom are in greater need for civilization, and therefore 'development', than others. Today's military rhetoric of 'development' and 'modernization' goes hand in hand with this institutionalisation of the past and with archaeology as the instrument for recovering the past. The military aims to be at the forefront at recovering the past in all these ways.

Burmese politicians sometimes express the origins of their political system, and of political, social and religious order, in terms of the Buddhist genesis myth. In this myth the Brahmas, the entirely spiritual and meditating celestial deities came to earth only to be transformed into the first material human beings of flesh and blood as the result of partaking of earthly material food. Evacuation of human waste brought about gender differentiation and the ideas of shame and property. Having lost their radiance, society deteriorated due to greed to the extent that the first president and the first judge had to be elected to keep order.

In the origin myth, political and legal office is thus devised to compensate for a lack of meditation. However, ethnic and national identity are also bound up with this misty view of the past. The popular etymology of both Burma and Myanmar is sometimes brought back to Brahma. Furthermore, political philosophy is closely bound up with it. For example, U Nu defined his socialism this way, and the social meditation practices that transcend embodiment and return to the spiritual disembodied Brahma (byama-so taya, brahma-vihara) have been held up as ideal Burmese behaviour.

Hitherto, entertaining such remote origins at only the level of myth and exhortation to practice social meditation (of loving-kindness and compassion) used to satisfy demands for an ethnic identity. The regime, however, concerned with Myanmar as a physical, strictly bounded, unity rather than a product of the mind, is beginning to formulate the origination of humanity along a very different track based on physical archaeological evidence. It is impatient with mere 'ideas' about spiritual origination in the texts over which it feels it has insufficient control. It seeks to found the Myanmar State not on the transformation of human beings through mental culture and spiritual attainment, as Aung San and early nationalists conceived it, and as even General Ne Win expounded in his socialist ideology, but is beginning to take an interest in transforming the status of Myanmar visibly in the eyes of the world, by locating, no less, actual proof of the origins of all mankind in Burma itself. If successful, it would, of course, represent a coup de grâce for the generals. Not only would their censorship have succeeded in extending 'Myanmar' as the preferred mode of self-identification right across the English speaking world (the country was renamed Myanmar in languages other than Burmese in May 1989), but they would be able to claim that the rest of the world (including its severest critics) is inferior and less civilized in the family of man.

The generals are subconsciously still in pursuit of the etymological conjunction between Burma-Myanmar and the superior Brahma deities at the beginning of the world. In Burma mental culture has fulfiled this association perfectly adequately so far, and the attainments of the four stages of sainthood (ariya) were attributed to mental culture in the here and now backed up by mental perfections attained over countless lives. Burmese ideas about political leadership continues to demand encounters with these saints, and their commemoration by building pagodas and praying for the attainment of nibbana. Today, however, the generals go beyond pagoda building in the belief that culture must be unearthed by collecting physical archaeological evidence that must be housed in museums (and to some extent pagodas) placed under their control. In short, the regime looks for a more substantive and tangible impersonal pillar than the mind to tie their Myanmar mandala to.

Through this archaeological quest it hopes to restore to Myanmar its most impressive achievements and to locate the oldest forms of human life within its boundaries. The regime sums up its 'culture and traditions' as follows:

Myanmar's existence dates back to many centuries where under the rule of Myanmar kings and its own culture and traditions, civilization flourished. As part of the restoration of the rich cultural heritage of Myanmar, palaces and related edifices of Myanmar kings have been carefully excavated and renovated or reconstructed to their original designs. These magnificent structures clearly depict the once rich and affluent civilization of the Myanmar people.

Moreover, in the Pon-Taung-Pon-Nyar region of central Myanmar, recent discoveries of some primate fossils dating back to some 40 million years may qualify Myanmar as the region where mankind originated. The findings, as recent as 13 April 1997, however, clearly indicate the existence of Myanmar culture and traditions since time immemorial. (Website, Myanmar Today, http://www.myanmar.com)

I have described the regime's 'Myanmafication' projects as the attempt, since 1989, to attain to national unity without appealing to martyr and national hero Aung San. The regime's 'Aung San amnesia' was hastened when Aung San was reclaimed for the democracy movement by his daughter, Aung San Suu Kyi. If Aung San and Aung San Suu Kyi followed Burmese tradition by advocating universal and boundless loving-kindness meditation (metta) as a crucial ingredient to national harmony, the current military aims for a very different kind of national unity known as 'national reconsolidation'. In this, archaeology has become an indispensable instrument to localise and regionalise a substantively superior form of national identity. By these means the regime hopes to conquer prehistory and unify the 135 ethnic groups under the family umbrella now referred to as 'Myanmar culture'. It is of such great importance that the more significant archaeological finds require nothing less than the Defence Services Intelligence Unit, namely the Office of Strategic Studies (OSS), which currently governs Burma under General Khin Nyunt, also Secretary 1 of the SPDC and de facto head of government. In this Myanmafication programme the archaeology and palaeoanthropology of Myanmar fall within the realms of national defence.

National archaeology teams

Though the story has earlier beginnings, the contemporary evaluation of the Pondaung fossils as a public national treasure began in January 1997 when General Khin Nyunt learnt about them after an announcement of a discovery of a French team of the earliest primate fossils extant in Southern Thailand. He learnt that Burma also had very rare fossils from Pondaung, north west of Mandalay, which had been discovered in 1978 by expeditions led by U Ba Maw and U Thaw Tint, members of the geology department of Mandalay University. The potential of Pondaung had first been discovered as early as 1914 by a team from the Geological Survey of India. Both teams referred to the discoveries as Pondaungia.

After national independence archaeology was not considered a great priority, and the 1978 discoveries had even been suppressed by the Ne Win military regime. However, theories had been floated that these included fossils of ancient higher primates and, with the regime's reputation at a low ebb, General Khin Nyunt decided that these studies should be followed up, and on 12 February 1997 a round table discussion was held on the fossils at the National Museum with six academics. Two days later, Khin Nyunt directed his Office of Strategic Studies [OSS] and geologists of the Ministry of Education to explore and search for fossilized remains in Pondaung. By the end of February, during meetings between the Ministries of Education and Defence at the OSS, the (Myanmar) Fossil Exploration Team was put together, including members of the OSS for 'full logistic support' and geologists from the Geology Department. Colonel Than Tun of the OSS was appointed leader of the Expedition.

General Khin Nyunt ordered his team to go out on 'mission' and to 'find evidence . since it would greatly enhance the stature of the country in the world' as follows:

Secretary 1, and Chief of the Office of Strategic Studies, Lieutenant General Khin Nyunt, met the members of the Expedition Team at the Dagon Yeiktha of the Ministry of Defence at 1000 hours on 8 March, 1997 to give necessary guidance and counsel. At the meeting, Lieutenant General Khin Nyunt stated that it was necessary to search for and uncover further incontrovertible evidence that the fossilized remains of higher primates found in Myanmar could be dated as being 40 million years old, in order to advance the studies into man's origins. The joint expedition team of the Ministry of Defence and the geologists of the Ministry of Education, he said, were being dispatched to search, explore and find such evidence. He emphasized the fact that the mission of this team about to embark on this venture was of vital importance since it would greatly enhance the stature of the country in the world. He therefore urged the scholars to make every endeavour for the success of the mission. ('The Pondaung Fossil Expedition'. Myanmar Perspectives, May 1998)

Between 9 March and 21 April 1997 numerous visits were made to a number of sites. Excitement mounted as finds were made including an elephant's tusk, about which it is said that 'it is very rare and an exception to find such a complete fossilized tusk. Few countries can claim that they have such a priceless exhibit for progeny. That is why it is a very proud occasion for those who have had the privilege to help the country acclaim such honour.'

On 11 May, the team's geologists collected a variety of fossils, including those of primates, namely the Pondaungia Amphipithecus Mogaungensis, the Amphipithecus Bahensis, and other valuable specimens. They were presented to a gathering of government officials, scholars and media personnel, at the Defence Forces Guest House in Rangoon. On this occasion General Khin Nyunt gave the keynote speech alluding to the discovery as proof that human life and civilization began in Burma. The report stated that the recent discoveries illustrated the origins of the great Burmese nationality and the superiority of Burmese culture. The report went on to say that should the academics be able to prove the claims, then Burmese people could definitely say that 'culture began in Myanmar.' It was reported that 'analyses reveal that the latest find belongs to the genus of the previously discovered remains of Amphipithecus primate . The new find may be classified as a new species and it is named Amphipithecus Bahensis by the exploration teams because it was discovered from a site near Bahin Village, Myaing Township'. It was also stressed in the reports that it was army officers who had heroically discovered some of the vital human remains in the fossil jigsaw, for 'the left lower jaw was discovered by Captain Bo Bo of the Office of Strategic Studies and Lance Corporal Ohn Hlaing of No. 252 Regiment.'

International validation

The military wished to be seen at the cutting edge of archaeology discovery. However, they had no clue how to interpret the evidence, and the next step was to invite foreign researchers to make sense of and legitimize these discoveries. At this stage, entered palaeontologist of Iowa University Dr Russell L. Ciochon, staff of the Museum of Paleontology of California University, and Dr Patricia Holroyd, who studied the fossil specimens at the National Museum, Rangoon, between 20 October and 1 November 1997. Dr Ciochon had joined the early 1978 Mandalay University team and was familiar with the debates. He had also made visits in 1982 and 1996, but he was ejected because his visit was unauthorized. The regime's change of mind meant that he was reported 'highly gratified' at the leaders' keen interest and their interest in facilitating the study of primate fossils. He was pleased at being invited to continue his studies. The American fossil exploration team then made a field trip to Pondaung with the Burmese team between 24 December 1997 and 14 January 1998. The Americans 'were much gratified at the briefing they were given, supported by such detailed records and were highly impressed at the interest shown, and the support and encouragement given by the Myanmar Government leaders.' Further archaeological discoveries were made after 30 January 1998.

A third field survey was undertaken by the Myanmar-France Pondaung Fossils Expedition, a team made up between the original Burmese team and a group of French palaeontologists, including Jean Jacques Jaeger (persistently misspelled in the Burmese media as Jacger) of France's Montpellier University, Stéphane Ducrocq, Rose Marie Ducrocq, Mouloud Bennami of Morocco, and Yaowalak Chaimanee (Department of Mineral Resources) of Thailand. The team arrived in Rangoon on 30 March, met the Burmese team on 31 March at the No. 2 Defence Services Guest House, and visited the National Museum to inspect the fossils. They then carried out an expedition between 1-20 April 1998. When they assessed the finds displayed in the National Museum they concluded that these 'may belong to higher anthropoid primate[s] and to the Eocene, which is about 40 million years back', but somewhat disappointingly, they also said that they would need further evidence 'to determine the origin of man and that further study need be made'. The Myanmar-France Pondaung Fossils Expedition Team held a press conference in conjunction with military intelligence sponsored by the OSS at the Defence Services Guesthouse.
Yet a fourth academic team - the Joint Myanmar-Japan Pondaung Fossil Expedition Team - involved Japanese scholars from the Primate Research Institute of Kyoto University. This team consisted of Professor Dr Nobuo Shigehara and Assistant Professor Masanaru Takai, who carried out studies on the primate and other fossils at the National Museum between 19-25 April 1998 but later returned for a field survey between 6-20 November 1998.

Pondaung revealed to the world

Subsequent to these initial explorations by the respective 'national' teams the military organised a seminar and an exhibition at the National Museum of Ethnology, Rangoon, between 1-2 June 1998 to which geologists, palaeontologists, anthropologists, historians and archaeologists nation-wide were invited. At this seminar General Khin Nyunt urged the following:

He noted that just as an individual's worth depended on his heritage and his achievements, so also a nation's prestige could be measured in terms of its lineage and historical and cultural background. A nation that can provide historical evidence of its ancient roots and the emergence and growth of its culture, traditions and national traits is a nation in which national fervour and patriotism thrives. It is also a nation whose people will try to perpetuate its identity, sovereignty and independence. He said this was especially true of a country such as ours that had once been enslaved under an imperialist power and had had our history distorted and misrepresented. To right this wrong, the Government of the Union of Myanmar had laid down social objectives which includes the uncovering of true historical records and the resolve to correct the warped and biased versions of Myanmar history as written by some foreign historians. He however acknowledged the fact that Myanmar historians, scientists and researchers had throughout the ages carried out research and study in their own capacity and had been custodians of authentic historical facts. Now however with full government support and sponsorship the results of isolated or individual research could be collated for a correct interpretation and presentation of a coherent authentic history of Myanmar.

Lieutenant General Khin Nyunt concluded by urging the participants to prove on the basis of the significant and substantial finds of the primate fossils, Amphipithecus Mogaungensis and the Amphipithecus Bahensis that 'The Myanmar people are not visitors who came from a faraway land and settled here. Life began here in this Myanmar environment of land, air and water. Their roots are here.' And that 'The Myanmar people are the true natives, born and bred here, who had matured and flourished as a people with their own culture, art, customs and traditions.'

A seminar on these discoveries at the Diamond Jubilee Hall, Yangon University, between 2-4 June 1998. This was attended by the Pondaung fossil expedition team and another team engaged in the study of ancient cultural evidence in Budalin Township, Sagaing. A number of historians, anthropologists and archaeologists were present at this event. It was co-sponsored by the OSS and the Higher Education Department of the Ministry of Education.

Pondaung's propaganda value

Evidently the Pondaung discoveries have implications well beyond the realms of science. They are portrayed in the regime's publicity as 'taken to indicate the origin of man in Pondaung Ponnyar area in the middle Myanmar', and are routinely introduced as a precursor to the political history of the Union and the regime's achievements. General Khin Nyunt wanted the Pondaungia fossils to take pride of place at the new five-floor National Museum at No. 66-74, Pyay Road, where the Pondaungia would become central to political propaganda. Construction of the National Museum commenced in June 1990, it was inaugurated on 18 September 1996 and by December 1997 General Khin Nyunt had decided two things deserved pride of place, namely the Pondaung discoveries and the last royal throne. In the official museum report it is said that 'arrangements are under way to exhibit ancient Myanmar attire, other cultural objects of national races and fossils including fossilized primates excavated as well as collected by a research team led by Colonel Than Tun, Head of Department, Office of Strategic Studies, from the Pondaung area and others donated by the locals.' The regime then made a grand claim:

Fossils are evidence . that Stone Age human beings lived in Myanmar and there also existed creatures in Myanmar prior to the period of humans. It can now be firmly said that there were living beings in Myanmar 40 million years ago and if Myanmar scholars can present with firm and full evidence to the world, it can be assumed that human civilization began in our motherland. The Ministry of Education is making arrangements to invite foreign experts to a conference to look into the facts related to the fossils and the Pondaung formation and finally ascertain them. (Information Sheet, 29.12.1997)

At Exhibition '98 to Revitalize and Foster Patriotic Spirit, held between 1-30 November 1998 at the Tatmadaw [Army] Convention Centre, General Khin Nyunt explained the aims of this exhibition: to promote dynamism of patriotic spirit and national pride; to strengthen the spirit of preserving traditions of origin, lineage and the national character; to contribute towards a correct way of thinking and firm lofty concepts; and to enable the younger generation to learn true historical events. His major pride was that 'primate fossils found in Myanmar are the evidence of the existence of manlike creatures in the nation 40 million years ago when man had not evolved yet and that this has been approved by international experts'. Furthermore, 'there are firm historical links that Myanmars have evolved through Stone Age, Bronze Age, Iron Age and different stages of civilization in their own nation'. The result of such an excellent history of biological and cultural, superior and independent development means that 'there are records that Myanmars have fine traditions, possessing a high-standard culture, and always repulsed the many foreign aggressions with unyielding spirit throughout various eras'. The essence of the exhibition, he is quoted as saying, is to 'promote dynamism of patriotism and national pride for the youths to possess the conviction to safeguard independence and sovereignty with correct knowledge and view and thoughts in their heart', while 'protecting youths from being deceived by internal traitors to put them under the colonialists' influence'.

Furthermore, under the central heading 'Myanmar Today' the regime's Internet site has a sub-section 'Culture and Traditions' in which the pride of royalty, with which the army identify, is linked to the Pondaung finds, indicating 'the existence of Myanmar culture and traditions since time immemorial'.

A critique of Pondaung politics

In the course of exhibiting their finds, the regime displayed what was supposedly a human fossil from the same region where U Thaw Tin and U Ba Maw had found fossils in 1978. Though these two Burmese academics had at the time tried to share their discoveries with the international community, they were arrested and the fossils were confiscated by the BSPP. Since that time, it was not known where these fossils were kept. General Khin Nyunt explained that at the time they had conserved the fossils in a secure place so they could be studied 'for the advancement of the people'.

However, it would appear that the two who had originally discovered the fossils did not hypothesize that the human race originated in Burma. Furthermore, In a paper delivered in November 1995, well before Khin Nyunt ordered his Pondaung missions into the field, Professor Than Tun, one of the most respected scholars in the field of Burma's historical research (not to be confused with OSS Colonel Than Tun who led the Pondaung Expedition), provided a serious critique of Ba Maw's early work on the Pondaung fossils during the BSPP era (1962-88) and urged that 'we shall have to wait for more discoveries'.

Professor Than Tun found archaeological speculations about the origination of mankind in Burma to be quite ill-informed and based on unsystematic research, causing unnecessary confusion in the archaeological world. He has furthermore criticized the general state of archaeological research in Burma. He says that, though the department of archaeology will celebrate its centenary in 1998, 'its operations are still being carried out in the early 19th century style'. Stronger still, 'like the looters of old, they take what they want and leave what they don't want'. He encourages the keeping of records, the central reporting of all finds, research on them, and accurate dating. Undoubtedly, were there a free press, such criticism would have been amplified and joined by others to temper some of the regime's spectacular cultural and archaeological visions.

If this casts doubt on the regime's archaeological methodology, Win Thein, benefiting from living abroad and the freedom to say what he thinks, has indicated the Pondaung project merely represents regime propaganda to instil patriotism in the people, saying that though General Khin Nyunt and his colleagues have been working very hard in Pondaung, their attempt represents 'a new evolutionary theory which no one can accept' and he points out that there is no academic freedom in Burma and that 'the regime has previously coerced academics into writing history as they want it recorded'.

The generals are probably less interested in these finds than in the many magical ('mundane knowledge') myths about Pondaung. In the tourist litereature it has been described as subject to 'tall tales and supernatural mysteries' where 'witches and sorcerers . molest visitors' and alchemists produced elixirs by powdering the strange fossils they gathered. The uniqueness of the archaeological finds, at a time when Burma is in such turmoil, may lift the spirits of some, but it demonstrates a questionable addiction to proving the unique superiority of the 'Myanmar' race. It reveals to us how determined the army are to waste public resources, including its top intelligence officers, to track down culture, to detect components that may be used to help construct a new Myanmar. It has furthermore attempted to build large museums to compete with pagodas. The resulting culture is a 'dead' culture, devised by the military for their own ends in which the people are denied agency.

A critique of Pondaung archaeology

The generals are striving for the mythological realization of 'Myanmar', and different national teams have clambered onto the bandwagon to attain privileged access to Burma's archaeological sites. As a result they provide the regime with the credibility it craves for in its archaeological and cultural propaganda.
Russell Ciochon was the only western scholar to have researched the original 1979 discoveries in any detail and to have retained a focus on Burma's palaeontology in the context of developments elsewhere in Asia, in particular in Southern China, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. He is thoroughly familiar with the evidence and the debates - indeed, to a large extent he contributed to constituting it.

Between 1977 and 1983 he received seven research grants specifically for work on Burma, mostly from the L.S.B. Leakey Foundation and had carried out fieldwork in Burma in 1975, 1977, 1979 and 1982, mainly in conjunction with Mandalay University. Between 1979 and 1981 he aired some theories about Burma through the mass media suggesting that Asia's earliest primates were to be found in Burma and that in this country was to be found the missing link in the evolution of primates in Asia, for Burma 'is the only place in the world that has yielded fossil evidence of an important link in the primate order'. By 1985 Ciochon openly argued, on the basis of the 1978 Mandalay University jaw bone discovery, that 'this fossil substantiates the view that southeast Asia was the center of anthropoid origins.' His conclusion was that 'extended correlations with radiometrically dated rocks indicate that the Pondaung fauna lived between 40 and 44 million years ago', and so 'the Pondaung primates of Burma pre-date the earliest known African anthropoids from the Fayum region of Egypt by at least 5 million years'. He concludes that 'therefore, when consideration is given to their morphology, geographic position, and 40-million-year-old age, Amphipithecus and Pondaungia document the earliest record of primates that were adaptively anthropoids, raising the possibility that the origin of the Anthropoidea could have been in southern Asia.'

His relationship with the Burmese regime seems to have lapsed after 1982. Nevertheless, Ciochon continued to theorize about the origins of man in Burma. On 10 January 1987 he gave two lectures at the Institute of Archaeology, Hanoi, Vietnam, that clearly set on record his view that earliest primates were to be found in Burma; he addressed the Asian perspective on Hominoid Evolution and on 'The origin of anthropoids in Burma'.
Apart from the earlier mentioned scholars from France and Japan, the regime is sustained in its quest by an array of scholars interested in ancient architecture and other subjects deemed important to the regime's propaganda machine.

It may well be true that the earliest anthropoids originated in Burma. However, true or not, the seriousness with which the military pursues Myanmafication means, of course, that archaeology and culture have been placed, like the economy and ethnicity, and virtually everything else, into the realm of national defence. When a concept enters the realm of national defence, it must then be 'defended' and 'protected', and it becomes classified as a national secret. The most important archaeological objects were hidden from view and from all forms of inspection during the BSPP era (1962-88) because they were classed as national secrets. Today, however, these 'secrets' have been turned into national assets behind glass in the National Museum, where they supposedly engender the pride of race in the Burmese peoples and help unify the country. Dozens of museums have been built in the last decade to commemorate the regime's attempt to draw Myanmar civilization within its own controlled orbit.

I am sure that the palaeoanthropologists and archaeologists involved are doing what they think is best for their discipline and their careers. It is well known that palaeoanthropologists who work in China have to tailor, to some degree, their public scientific opinions to the ideological and nationalist sensibilities of their hosts in order to retain access. However, what I would like to see is less emphasis on national teams in archaeological explorations, and a greater awareness by scholars from all disciplines of the ludicrous use to which their scientific discoveries are put. Archaeologists intent on interpreting archaeological finds from Burma should read The Politics of the Past (ed. P. Gathercole & D. Lowenthal, Unwin Hyman 1990) and Bruce Trigger's 'Alternative Archaeologies' (Man 19 1984). Above all, they should be careful not to mislead the inexperienced Burmese military officers hosting and accompanying them about the finds.

Archaeology as an academic discipline is by and large a western invention. The regime, in emphasizing archaeology as the military instrument of conquering the past, has exceeded its self-acclaimed prerogative to govern by means of indigenous values alone (exponents of the democracy movements are invariably characterized as 'foreign'). Yet Burmese claims to civilization and to national unity have historically been strongly rooted in and are legitimized by mental culture; it is the instrument of mind (byama-so taya) that uproots the hard-edged selfish concepts of identity. The paradox is that the instruments of both enlightenment (mental culture) and archaeology (culture) negotiate the limits of civilization, reach out beyond the boundaries of human existence, relativize existence in time and space, and are also productive of super-beings (arya). They do so ultimately through the discovery and representation of human remains.

However, that is where in my view their similarity ends, for byama-so taya and Myanmar civilization address these limits through the intermediary of Brahma in very different ways. Mental culture has its own archaeology. Ariya, rather than referring to Aryan, the Indo-European race that invaded India, in Buddhism came to mean 'the noble ones', namely those of whatever cultural or racial background who, by ridding themselves of mental impurity through spiritual practices (mental culture) will soon no longer be reborn in the cycle of life. Four stages are recognized, ranging from stream-winner, for whom there are still seven lives left, to arahant, for whom no rebirths remain. These are celebrated in the erection of pagodas built as part of the duty of charity, the first royal duty, in which saintly relics are housed and commemorated. In this pre-modern model of the polity, ariya are counter-evolutionary for their centrepoint is not culture, nation or museum, and they cannot be confined by secular powers of the military. They continuously evade capture and are beyond the grasp of the generals. The regime needs the Pondaung fossils within their grasp to become the corner-stone of a conservative nationalism that centralizes and draws firm boundaries around ethnic identity from which no one can escape. The fossils are today housed behind glass and are guarded by soldiers at the museum entrance. Mental culture unbounded has given way to archaeology imprisoned. Liberating hermit practice is giving way, once again, to insular Hermit State. The regime hopes to silence its reflexive critics by pointing at the threat of the foreign Trojan horse that only the military, as guardians of 'traditional civilization' can fight. In the process it is turning pagodas with their complex live histories into museums controlled by the military alone. This happened to the national Shwedagon Pagoda, where Aung San Suu Kyi launched her political career on 26 August 1988 when she gave her first major political speech at which she characterised the democracy struggle as 'the second national independence struggle'. Her father, too, gave his most inflammatory speeches against foreign colonial occupation at the Shwedagon. It is ironic that, with the aid of foreign archaeology, this commemoration of the Buddha's enlightenment and vibrant icon of Burmese ideas of political and personal freedom should today be turned into a museum, a representation of Burma's status as 'a prison without walls'.

From temple relics to museum fossils

The Burmese people are still deeply religious, and religious commemoration matters to them more than museums, which have in the West become such dominant institutions, absorbing palaces and churches. The museum is a new concept in Burma introduced by the regime to enhance its national and international prestige. It has built exceedingly large museums to compete with pagodas. In Pagan one of the largest structures is the new archaeological museum and Pagan is now commonly referred to as a 'veritable museum'. However, the museums seek almost exclusively to represent Burmese tradition for tourists in the hope of collecting dollars. These museums, for whatever public they are organized, local or tourist, are sheer propaganda. They do not respond to the intellectual sensibilities of the Burmese peoples and do not open their eyes to what is happening worldwide just in case they see how backward Burma is under military leadership.

In Burma pagodas are vibrant and alive in local and national folklore. The regime wishes to control these places of independent worship. What better excuse than occupying and overshadowing these in the name of heritage conservation? Though it attempts to museumify the pagoda environment, it is unwilling to concede that it cannot control all aspirations of all people all of the time; people need independent institutions and practices that positively and independently stimulate their intellectual curiosity and religious sensibilities.

Today, regrettably the only culture untainted by the regime's grasp is therefore mental culture, the culture produced in personal meditation that uproots the walls and partitions of the house, 'all your rafters are shattered - my mind is free from active thought.'. Behind prison bars these practices today are yielding new martyrs (azani) with fresh relics - such is the resilient politics of enlightenment. Fossils are no comfort and reproduce themselves differently in very different spheres of exchange. Meditation traditions are flourishing in Burma today, as never before.

Return to museums and museum studies