DS UC-NRLF B 4 305 055 ^<^$S$^?gS^v"^^!>■?'j^yv^^-•^y^^o FH ®HINA E H PARKER >^ — ^' x>- -v" -%.<- -^<- ^-» "«*">&*~xpr-r ^ BURMA WTPTT CIJ-CT'T * T 7>t:.t,ix..i ERRATA, OMISSA, CORRIGENDA. Page 42, last line, for '' 13th " read " 14th." „ 48, second line, for '' Thodo " rear! " Thado." „ 80, last line but two, for *'his letters" read '' their letters." „ 82, tenth line, for " protect in " read " protec- tion." „ 83, first line, for " Meng-ken," read " Kiang- tung i.e. Meng-ken." „ 91, fourth line, for " tribute " read " "tr ibute"." i'RIXTED AND PUBLISHED AT THE '' RAXGOOX GAZETTE » PRESS. 1893. BURMA ^VITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO HER RELATIONS WITH BY Edward Harper Parker, H. M. CONSUL, KIUNGCHOW, OFFICIATING ADVISER ON CHINESE AFFAIRS IN BURMA. PRINTED AND PUBLISHED AT THE " RANGOON GAZETTE " PRESS. 1893. CARPPNTIER i ^ TO THE READER. It will be at once patent to the shrewd critic that there is nothing new in this little book, which is merely a compilation from published literature. That a few of the publications here analysed are in the Chinese language, and tEerefore in a measure new to the reader by reason of their comparative in- accessibility, is no fault of the undersigned, who can only recommend the sceptical and the curious to fur- bish up their lagging Chinese and study the elegant originals themselves. E. H. Parker. Bangoon, March 1893. M72027 INTRODUCTION. It is a remarkable thing that a political history of Burma, at once short, popular, and intelligible, can hardly be said to exist, notwithstanding our long occupation of the southern parts and our recent taking over of the remainder of the country. San- germano's "Burmese Empire" is both unintelligible for want of proper and consistent dates, and incomplete, leaving out, as it does, almost entirely all account of the Chinese relations with Burma. Colonel Phayre's "History of Burma" is certainly the best hand-book on the subject, but the reader loses himself in a maz» of unfamiliar proper names, often descriptive rather than personal, and the meaning of which is only in« telligible to a very Kmited extent even to Anglo- Indians, most of whom have at least some smatter- ing of Pali or Sanskrit to eke out their more or less perfect knowledge of this or that peninsular tongue : but even Colonel Phayre's book is not very clear as to the record of Chinese events, though these have always been amongst the most important in Burma's political history; whilst, on the other hand, the dreary and oft-repeated accounts of incessant struggles with Aracan, Tena^serim, Pegu, Manipnr, and the Shan »States,are;,ii;'expressibly wearisome from their same- ness, and leaye no ver}^ definite impression on the mind. Anderson's " Mandalay to Momein," Colonel Fytche's book of personal recollections, and Mr. James Scott's little work on Burma hardly touch upon the general political history, though Ander- son's accounts, both in the popular and in the official form, are admirable so far as they go. The " British Burma Gazetteer " gives a terribly hazy and man- gled account of the rise and progress of Burma : its re- lations with China especially are hopelessly confused. The same thing may be said of Gray's " History of Burma." A new edition of the "Gazetteer" is, however, now being prepared by Mr. James Scott, Superinten- dent of the Northern Shan States, and the work cer- tainly could not have been placed in more competent hands. Bishop Bigandet's book on Gautama and his pamphlet on the "History of the Church in Burma," both of them contain some valuable historical passa- ges. I have only just been able to get hold of Colonel Yule's "Mission to Ava", which is an academical rather than a historical work, and I have not yet had time or opportunity to read one or two old English books treating of our earlier Missions. I was given to understand by the representative of the Missions Etrangeres at Penang that no work on Biii*maexistedin their library there. Doubtless there must be other works of which I am ignorant, and per- haps I have inadvertently omitted to mention a few publications which I have m3^self read. However that ma}^ be, I never obtained anything like a clear view of Burmese political history until I began to read what the Chinese had to say upon the subject. I have now read everything Chinese that I can get hold of, and have attempted to draw up therefrom a short and, I hope, fairly clear history of Burma from the begin- ning, avoiding as far as possible the interlarding of all uncouth and unintelligible names, Chinese or other- wise. In the event of intelligent enquirers doubting the facts cited, I refer them to the originals, which can be purchased in Momein or Shanghai under the following not very euphonious names : — T'eng-yueh T^ing-chi, Yiian ShT, T^ang Shu, Tung-hwa Luh, Ying-hwan Chi-lioh, &c., &c. CHAPTER I. HISTORY PRIOR TO A.D. 639. It seems to have been quite a matter of chance that Burma should have fallen under Indian literary influence rather than Chinese, and the same may be said of Cambodgia and Siam. In any case, the chance has been unfortunate in one respect, namely, in that the Chinese aptitude for compiling careful local annals and general history has never been cultivated by any one of these three peoples. I gather from writers on Indian subjects that nearly all Indian kingdoms have also been lamentably defective in this regard, even so far as touches their own affairs, not to speak of the affairs of other states. On the other hand Annam, which from the first fell exclusively under Chinese political and literary influence, and gradually absorb- ed several of those Indo-Chinese states(suchas Ciampa) which had been originally politically directed by Hindoo colonists, possesses almost as scrupulously exact histories as does China herseK. Nothing very certain can be collected from Indian histories upon 2 BURMA, Ijurma, (if I understand Colonel Pliayre correctly) ; and Burma's osvn groat history, the Mahardzd Wen or "Chronicle of Kings/' is, as to its earlier portions, almost as valueless as the Kojiki or "Early History" of Japan. To add to tlie embarrassments of the situation, the r>urniese work has not yet been fully translated into English as has been the correspond- ing Japanese work by Mr. Basil Hall Chamberlain ; and such translated portions or digests of it as exist fail to inspire much confidence in either the sound judgment or the good faith of the compilers. It must on a moment's reflection be evident that no history in the proper sense can possibly ex- ist without the art of writing. There is no instance in the world of a faithful record of events, unless cither the state whose events are recorded itself re- corded them in writing, or unless some neighbouring state recorded the events for it. All the nations of East Asia were later than either India or China in the discovery or the borrowed use of letters, and therefore the earliest history of all such nations as Tibet, Burma, Siam, the Ailaos, Cambodgians, (who formed theii* alphabets on Sanski'it or Pali models) ; Annam, Japan, Korea, Lewchew, (who formed their script on Chinese models, with, in the case of Korea, a da^h of Sanskrit) ; ^klanchuria, and MongoKa, (^which BURMA. 3 formed their script first on Chinese and then on Syriac modek), must be sought in the literature of either India, Turkestan, or China. Ju.st as the Japanese "history^' can be, and has conclusively been shown to be, totally untrustworthy previous to the date of the adoption or introduction of Chinese letters, so all Bunnese " histoiy '' anterior to the in- troduction of Pali or other letters must be totally untrustworthy too. That is to say, all "history " in the one case which is not found in Chinese history, and all ''history'"' in the other case which is not found ia Indian or Chinese history belongs to the category of myth or popular tradition. In the two cases of Japan and Burma, the Chinese history of those countries is throughly sound so far as it goes. With the case of Japan, Indian history had no concern whatever ; but as the BUndoo kingdoms were neglect- ful of their own history, it follows as of course that they would be still more neglectful of that of border- ing and less civilized nations such as Burma. We learn nothing whatever from Chinese his- tory of any nation which can possibly be identified with the Burmese for certain until the sixth century A. D. But we have the distinctest possible state- ments in (TiiQese history that emigrants from India founded kingdoms m Sumatra, Java, Borneo, Cam- 4 BURMA, bodgia, and Ciampa. Therefore we may at once ac- cejDt as more than probable what tradition says of the Takings or Peguans; namely, that at a very early date they were organized into a state by missionaries and merchants from the Madras coast. Another tradition is that the Burmese, as distinct / from the Peguans, who were probably a much earlier i stream pouring down from the same direction, are a Mongoloid tribe emanating from the region of \ Tibet. The aspect and character of the modern \ Burmese amply supports this conjectural view, whilst the construction of their language from the point of view of etymology positively groups them with the Chinese, Kachin, Shan, Annamese branch of the hu- man race, the chief characteristics of which are beard- less faces, monosyllabic words, and tones in lieu of grammatical inflection. I know of no existing generic name for this Indo-Chinese sub-branch, which is akin to the Corean, Japanese, Manchu, and Mongolian sub- branch of the same yellow-skinned stock. Indeed the construction of Burmese from the point of view of syntax is almost identical with that of this latter sub-branch. Of Tibetan I know nothing, but I take it from inspection of the leading dictionary that there are no tones in the language, and that it savours rather of the Mongolian than of the Chinese sub-branch of BURMA. 5 the "Yellow Languages." There now remains one more radition, that Kshatriya princes from India came over via Manipiir and founded the earliest Burmese state, welding into one political unit all or parts of three kindred tribes, the Pyii, the Kanran, and the Sek. This tradition is also supported by Chinese history, which first seriously mentions the Burmese (under the name Piao or Pyu) as being more or less under the influence of the Ailaos or Shans of Western Yunnan. It is added that theii' ancient name was Chu-po, a word still pronounced in some parts of China Tilpo, and which may without violence be com- pared with the T^upo or T'ufan (/. e. the Tibetans) of a later date. But there is nothing to prove that the Chupo were the same people as the Piao, even though found in the same region, nor did the Chinese know anything accurate about the Chupo. As to the tra- dition that the word Burma is derived from Brah- ma because the Indian state thus founded adopted that proud designation, which is supposed to be the parent of the native word Mramma or Myamma (now usually pronounced Bamma), I see nothing but pleasant fancy here, and this fancy is rudely shaken by the fact that the Kachin word for "Burmese " is "Mien" pure and simple, and that the Chinese only began to know the Burmese by the name of Mien in 6 BURMA. or about the year A. D. 1,000. All the learning in the world at present available, therefore, cannot sub- stantiate more than this ; — that the Burmese are al- most certainty a Mongoloid race of immigrants from the north-west'; like all other nations, welded into one from a mass of kindred tribes, one of which at least is certainly historically identified as having been called Pyii. Burmese early "history" is almost a total blank; but it can hardly be doubted that these tribes were first civilized by Hindoo immigrants ; and it seems that they were first heard of in China as a nation more or less subordinate to^the Ailaos or Shans, as indeed the}^ have continued to be at various periods of their later history. Certain Shan chronicles, notably one found in recent years at Manipur, may possibly throw some small light upon the kaleidoscopic tribal shiftings between, say, B. C. 500 and A. D. 500 ; but, judging from those I have seen, I imagine they are all of too vague a character to be of any real historical value ; and such events as seem to be in a measure capable of identification are hoj)elessly distorted and Avrongly dated, even if they are to a limited extent true. An example is given below in connection with the State of Luh-chVan or Pong. The Chinese had clearly defined relations with the Shan or Ailao Empire of (modern) Tali Fu in the first JBURMA. 7 century of our era, and in A. D. 90 one Yung Yu, King of T'an, sent tribute to China through the good offices of the Ailao, receiving an official seal from China. The Chinese seem to take it for granted that Yung Yu of T'an was of the same race as a later Pyii king named Yung K'ianc?. In A. D. 220-230 the cele- brated Chinese warrior K'ung Ming or Chu-koh Liang undoubtedly carried his arms as far as Yung- ch'ang, if not up to T'eng-yiieh or Momein, but China was then split up into three kingdoms, and Chu-koh Liang's master's kingdom in modern Sz-chSvan can hardly be called "China," nor is there any complete, history of it and its foreign relations such as there is of the other two, both of which were much more con- siderable as political factors in the Eastern world. The Ailaos were next called Nanchao when they re-appeared upon the Chinese political stage. There can be no question of identification, for the Annamese still call the Laos of Upper Siam by the name Ailao, and the Chinese tell us that Nanchao was the ''south- ern" or nan of the six cliao or ''princes," adding that chao was a barbarian word for "prince," which it still is in Shan, Laos, and Siamese. Nanchao we are told bordered on Magadha, which quite explains how the Kshatriya princes could find their way by at least one route to Burma. To the south-west of the Nanchao BURMA. were tiie Piao (still pronounced Vy\x. in Cantonese, which is the best Chinese representative dialect). During the 8th century the T'upo (usually now called T'ufan) or Tibetans struggled with China for mastery over Nanchao, and the Nanchao king Ivolof ung an- nexed both the Pyu and also part of Assam. It is from this time only that trustworthy Burmese his- tory can be said to begin, just as genuine Japanese history begins in the 4th or 5th century, when rela- tions with China had become constant. From this period India may be said to disappear as a political factor from Burmese history. On the whole I am disposed to think that the visits of King Yung Yu's envoys between the years A.D. 97 and A.D. 120 may be left out of consideration so far as touches the history of Burma. It is known from the (/hinese annals that merchants or envoys from some part of the Eoman Empire came to China during the second century of our era by way of Indo-China, and from the account given in the Chinese histories of T'an State, it seems not unlikely that this State really lay much further west than Burma, and was only originally known to China because its envoys approached China through Burma and Yunnan. The only connecting link between King Yung Yu of T'an and the kings of Pyu is that BURMA. 9 both bore what the Chinese call the " family name " of Yung ; and Alompra, whose name was Yung Tsih-ya or Aungzeya, in 1,750 is stated to have claimed descent from the kings of T'an and Pyii in a letter which he wrote to China ; or, what is much more likety, the Chinese translators concocted the genealogy for him. It is altogether absurd to sup- pose that an illiterate villager like Alompra could have been accurately versed in a 1,700 j^ears' course of Burmo-Chinese history, when we see now that the most erudite Burmans have the merest smattering of comparative or general historical knowledge, and that their own history utterly disfigures the few Chinese names which tradition has handed down. Besides, the later Chinese have always imaoinedthat the Burmese word Maiing ("brother" or "Mr.") is the family name of most Burmans, and the same thing mutatis niutandis with other " barbarous " nations.* The utmost that can possibly be extracted from Colonel Phayre's history is that a chief of the Pyu named Thamuddarit, not directly descended from the legendary Kshatriya kings of Tagaung, in the ■■ Ireriicmbev being once much puzzled by the followinfr poem (here of C'.nr.-=e translated) by a Chinese Minister to England. '• Mi-sz, hcrsmaU name was Anna ; one of the beauties of all ages, Ta-ma-sun." It was simply a "Miss Anna Thompson" who bad c:iptivated his excellency, and had her " family name " of Mi-sz and her other names thus trayestiod. iO BUBMA. second century A. D. founded a new dynasty at Pagan. The vaguely mentioned Chu-po and T'an of early Chinese history may or may not be remotely connected with the equally vague Kshatriya kings : there is no advantage in pushing the speculation failing further evidence. All that < olonel Phayre really has to say for certain of Burmese history up to the date of the establishment of the "common era" in A. D. 639 may be compressed into one line : — during this period Buddhism, introduced from some place or other, more or less successfully struggled with the previously existing superstition, character uncertain. ( 11 ) CHAPTER 11. THE DAWN OF TRUE HISTORY. We are now on safe ground, and have reached a point where Chinese and Indo-Burmese histories meet. The Javanese (i.e. the emissaries of Hindu kingdoms in Java) who visited China said that the Piao or Pyii called themselves Dulichu (or some such word), and that their territory was bounded by Cam- bodgia, East India, Yiinnan, and the sea. Evidently therefore the Burmese or Pyii State must have been nearly as extensive then as it was first found in our own days. The names of 18 dependent States, nine walled cities, and 32 out of 298 districts are given, but it is not possible to identify a single one with any cer- tainty. Perhaps Moh-Yin and Alikih may be identifi- ed with the modern Mo-hnyin (or Meng-yang as the Chinese call it) and Aracan. The king's title was Mo-lo-je, which the well-known rules of phonetic interchange enable us to say for almost a certainty is intended to represent the sound Ma-rd-jd. This is all the more likely in that the king's minister was called Mo-ho-si-no, the first part of the double word evidently also being Mahd. I now proceed to trans- late from the Chinese : — 12 BURMA, 'When tlie king of the Piao goes out in his palankeen, he reposes on a couch of golden cord ; but for lono- distances he rides an elephant. He has several hundred female attendants. The circular wall of his city is built of greenish glazed tiles, and is 160 li (over 50 miles) in circuit.lt has twelve gates, and there are pagodas at each of the four corners. The people all live inside it. Their house tiles are of lead and zinc, and they use the wood of the Nephe- litem lie hi as timber. They dislike taking life. They greet each other by embracincr the arm with the hand. They know how to make astronomical calcu- lations, and are devotees of Buddhism. They have a hundred monasteries, with bricks of vitreous ware, embellished with pold and silver vermilion, gay colours, and red kino. The floor is painted and covered with ornamented carpets. The king's resi- dence is in like style. The people cut their hair at seven years of age, and enter a monaster)^ If at the age of twenty they have not grasped the doctrine, they become lay people again. For clothes they use a cotton sarang, holding that, as silk cloth involves the taking of life, it ought not to be worn. On the head they w^ear golden-flowered hats with a blue net or bag set with pearls. In the king's palace there are placed two bells, one of gold and one of BURMA. 1^ silver ; when an enemy comes they burn incense and beat the bells, in order to divine their good or evil for- tune. There is a huge white elephant a hundred feet high : litigants burn incense and kneel before the elephant, reflectino- within themselves whether they are right or wrong, after which they retire. When there is any disaster or plague, the king also kneels down in front of the elephant and blames himself.* "They have no manacles, and criminals are flog- ged on the back with five bamboos bound together, re- ceiving five blows for heavy, and three for light offen- ces. Homicide is punished with death. The land is suit- able for p;ilse, rice, and the millet-like grains. Sugar- cane grows as thick as a man's shin. There is no hemp or wheat. Gold and silver are used as money, the shape of which is crescent-like : it is called teng- Ji'a-t'o and also tsuh-t'coi-t'o. They have no grease or oil, and they use wax and various scents instead for lighting. In trading with the neighbouring states of their class, they use porpoise [? skin], cotton, and glass jars as barter. The women twist their hair high up on the crown of the head, and ornament it with strings of pearls ; they wear a natural-tinted female petticoat, and throw pieces of delicate silk * Some accounts say '' image " instead of " elephant," the two words being identical i' S'.iund. 14 BURMA. over themselves. When walking, they hold a fan, and the wives of exalted persons have four or five individuals at each side holding fans. Near the city there are hills of sand and a barren waste which also borders on Po-sz and P^o-lo-men, and is twenty days from the city of Si-she-li. The Si-she-li of the Buddhist classics is Central India. " Nan-chao used to exercise a suzerainty over it on account of its contiguity and by reason of the mili- tary strength of Nan-chao. Towards the close of the eighth century A. D., the King Yung K'iang, hearing that ISTan-chao hadbecome part of the T^ang* Empire, had a desire to join China too, and Imousiin sent an envoy named Yang Kia-ming to Kien-nan. The Yiceroj^ of Si-chSvan, Wei Kao, begged permission to offer the emperor some barbarian songs, and more- over told the Piao State to send up some musicians. For specimens of their music see the Gfeneral Annals. His Majesty Divus Teh made Shu-nan-do President of the Imperial Mews, and sent him back. The Gro- vernor of K'ai Chou submitted a panegyric upon the Piao music. " In the year 832 the Nan-chao monarch kid- napped 3,000 Burmans and colonised his newly ac- quired eastern dominions with them." * That is the empire cf the Chinese ruling house of T'aog. BURMA, 15 All the above is from the chapter on *' Southern Barbarians" in the T'ang historj^ Governor Sii Ki- yii's Geography adds that the Piao music brought to China was all in the fan{i.e. vam, ham, or hrahm) dialect ; that is, Sanskrit. It will be at once evident that a great deal of this descriptive account exactly corresponds with the Burma of our time : the golden couch, the elephants, the dislike of taking animal life, devotion toBuddhism, numerous temples, temporary embracing by all youths of the monastic discipline, use of the sarang or lun-dji, use of the denga (still the Burmese word for coined money, do being the Burmese sign of the plural), twisting up and ornamenting the hair, style of female dress, &c. &c., all point unmistakably to well known Burmese characteristics of to-day. Imousiin was the most in evidence if not the most distin- guished of the Nanchao kings. Kien-nan and K*ai- chou were both in Sz-ch Van, or Si-ch'wan, as part of it was then called. Shunando we are told elsewhere was the king's heir, and, as nandaw means "palace" in modern Burmese, it seems not improbable that there may be some attempt in the trisyllabic word to translate the Chinese words tung-kung or " eastern palace," meaning '' heir-apparent." Governor Sii Ki- 16 BURMA. yii's Geography states that the envoy on this occa- tion was one Sih-li-i, the king's younger brother, so that it is all the more likely that Shiimuido is not a personal name. Chinese history tells us that Imou- siln's father annexed the dominions of the Py u, and that his son styled himself Fiao-siji. This word sug- gests the Burmese PyCt-sheng or "King of theP^al," just as some of the modern kings styled themselves Hseng-hyu-sheng or "lords of the white elephant." Any way, it is abundantly clear that during the ninth century Burma, whatever its size may have been, was, at least so far as its northern portion was concerned, inferior in power to the Shan kingdom of modern Tali-Fu, which at one time came very nearly overthrowing the Chinese T'ang dynasty. The Burmese computation of time being essen- tially Hindu, we may at once accept Colonel Phayre's suggestion that the reformation of the calendar and installation of the common era was Hindu handiwork too. , Indeed at this time China herself was imder the influence of and was alternately accepting and persecuting Buddhist and Hindoo ideas. ( 17 ) CHAPTER III. THE DEVELOPMENT OF MEDIAEVAL BURMA. During the 5th century the Northern AVei Tar- tar dynasty of China both re-introduced Buddhism on a large scale, and also introduced a new calendar invented by a man of Northern Liang, a powerful semi- Chinese state bordering on Turkestan, which afterwards became a great artistic and religious centre. But still nothing tangible can be predicated of Burmese history, — at least nothing so tangible as what we find recorded of the Pyu in Chinese history,- until the rise of Anawrat'a, who was consecrated as king in A. D. 1,010. There is another significant work by a Chinese writer called Fan Cli 'oh on the subject of the southern barbarians. It differs but slightly so far as Burma is concerned from the T'ang historian's account, but it states explicitly that communication ^'with the Pyu state," which was 79 journeys south of Yung-ch'ang, were opened by the Nanchao King Kolof ung. When the Chinese speak thus, they invari- ably mean the "centre or capital" of a state. Colonel Yule alludes to this peculiarity when Marco Polo 18 BURMA. speaks of the '' City of Mien." The early history of Pegu is almost a complete blank, all records havin^^ disaiDpeared in the incessant wars with Burma ; but it may safely be assumed, especially in view of the Chinese statement that the Pyu territory extended to the sea, that the Takings or Peguans and the Vjm or Burmans alternately had the upperhand, as they continued to do indeed after the conquest of Pegu by Anawrat'a. As Colonel Yule remarks with his usual sagacity : — " One cannot but have some suspicion that '' the desire to carry back to a remoter epoch the exist- " ence of the empire as a great monarchy has led to '* the representation of what was really the history of *' various petty principalities, attaining probably an *' alternate prej)onderance of dominion, as the history *' of one dynasty of monarchs in various successive " seats." All that Colonel Phayre can infer is that Brahmins and Buddhists contended for mastery, and that the country during the 8th century was perpe- tually disturbed by religious troubles. From that time to the close of the 13th century the native an- nals of Pegu are, to use his own words, almost a blank. It seems rather a barren result, but it would ap- pear undoubtedly a fact that, traditions apart, (and BVRMA, 19 what savages have not traditions ?), Burmese history, Avhether of north or south Burma, up to the beginning of the eleventh century consists of what is given above, and ho more. Nor is there any thing existing in the country to suggest very much in addition. There is no accumulation of wealth, the re are no permanent buildings except the interminable useless bricked-up Buddhist pagodas : no royal tombs : no municipal tradi_ tions : no really ancient inscriptions, and what old reli- gious inscriptions there are seem generally to be utter- ly devoid of historical interes t : no literature worth the time involved in readi ng it (Gray considers that the Burmese obtained their letters from the Takings in the 10th century) : in short, the country is just as much a barren waste from a civilised and civilising point of view as the steppes of Mongolia : generation after generation of its aimless people have gone and come in the same listless way as the Tar- tar nomads, for all the world like so many butterflies or sheep, the death-rate being the highest known in any part of the of ^vorld, owing to the shiftless neglect of parental cares. I may here quote another of Colonel Yule's shrewd generalisations : — " There is a deep "element of barbarism in the Burmese character, but "looking to Pagan and other evidences,it maj^bedoubt- "ed whether their civilization, such as it is, was not 20 BURMA, " fully greater eight centuries ago than in later days." Anawarat'a, then, was the first definite king of Burmese history, and he reigned at Pagan, (spelt in Burmese Pugan). Accordingly we find one centurj'- later a statement in the Chinese Sung dynasty's history that in the year A. D. 1,106, the P'u-kan State brought tribute : this would be during the reign of Anawrat'a's grandson Alungsithu, and leaves a space of 100 years within which Burma may be presumed to have thoroughly made the acquaintance of China, which is reasonable enouoh. Two Bur- mese states sent tribute between the years 1,127 and 1,163, a fact which militates once more against the assumjition of unified dominion. Anawrat'a seems to have been an ardent Buddhist, and to have made raids "upon "the false Aris," much in the same way that China did upon the Taoists, Nestorians, and other rival sects. Whatever the competing state of Pegu may have once been, it was politically annihilated and incorporated, togeth- er with all its religious paraphernalia, by King Anawrat'a of Pagan. The fragmentary Taking chronicle still existing, which consists chiefly of a bare tale of half -fabulous kings, fifty-one in number, confirms this important event in a few vague sent- BURMA. n ences of lamentation. Anawrat'a, prompted no less by ambition than "by religious zeal," is now suj^pos- ed to have marched into Gandalarit (a name applied by the Burmese chronicle to a part of Yiinnan) in or- der to secure the holy tooth said to have been preserv- ed in China. There is nothing at all unlikely in this. Holy teeth were now a drug in the Chinese market, and during the 7th century a Brahman (or a native of the Indian state called Polomen or Brahman by the Chinese) arrived at the Chinese metropolis of Si-ngan Fu with a Buddha's tooth. The Nestorian priest Olopen arrived about the same time. Persecu- tion of both Buddliism and Taoism was now going on, but notwithstanding this, in the year A.D. 615 there were 100,000 Buddhist priests and nuns in China. During the 9th century the well-known Chinese statesman Han Yii got into trouble for protesting against the worship of Buddhist shari, sariri, or re- lics. All this about Anawrat'a is therefore very credi- ble. But when Colonel Phayre goes on to say : — "The "Emperor of China at first took no notice of the King. "At length they had a friendly meeting. Anawrat'a "failed to obtain the relic he sought, but brought away **a golden image which had been sanctified by direct "contact with the holy tooth," — we must protest. Indeed Colonel Phayre himself in a way points out 22 BURMA . that the independent state of Nanchao must really be meant, and not China. I say *' in a way " because he leaves us to infer that the Sung dyn asty had re- incorporated Nanchao after the decaying T'ang dy- nasty had let it slip. The fact is the first Emperor of the Sung dynasty in the middle of the 10th cen- tury " drew a line," beyond which he was determined to have no political concern, and the Nanchao state, now first called the Kingdom of Tali, was quite in- dependent up to the time of the Mongol inroad under Prince Kublai, afterwards Kublai Khan. Prince Hassan of Rangoon, son of the ill-fated Panthay "Sultan" Tu Wen-siu, informs me that the P'eh-tsz or F'u-tsz tribe in Yiinnan are the des- cendants of the ancient Nanchao people ; but though this may be the case, it seems that the Chinese histo- ries also give to them the same name {Peh-i or Pai-i) as is given to the Shans. Prince Hassan insists that the languages of the two stocks differ ; but as he is not very learned in Phinese literature, owing to his long absence from China, and as the wisest Chinese have no idea whatever of comparative philology, least of all of " barbarian " languages, I think we must ac- cept without demur the overwhelming existing evi- dence that the Ailaos a ad Nanchaos are the race pro- BVRMA. 23 genitors of the Slians, Laos, and Siamese of to-day, though possibly the P'eh-hz branch of that race may have once exclusively held the reins of political power. I also think the Shan " Kingdom of Pong '^ which Anawrat'a enumerated amongst his conquests must have been the native half of the Nanchao empire after its disintegration, as distinct from the Chinese half ruled over by the semi-Chinese Twan dynasty of Ta-li Fu. I also think that the '' Kingdom of Pong," as Pemberton's Manipur chronicle calls it, must have covered ever varying parts of the area now represented by the sawhwa^hv^ii of Mogaung (Meng- kung), Mo-hnyin (Meng-yang), and perhaps Momeit (Meng-mih) and North Theinni (Muh-pang), and also by several mediatised Shan states now forming- part of the Chinese dominions, such as Nan-tien, Kan-ngai, Lung-chSvan, Meng-mao, Man-mu or Man-moh, Hulasa, &c., &c., &c. The name Mien as signifying Burma only be- came knoAvn to the (. hinese about this time, and they themselves state so. Those who accept the Burman theory that this word is identical with the Burmese word Myan'ma, Mrdm-mct, or Brahm-ma do not seem to me to have a good case to defend. "When the modern Burmans want to say "Brahman," they 'ay Ponnna, and if they had desired to keep up the 24 BURMA. idea that they were Brahmans by origin, it is diffi- cult to see why they should go out of their way to coin a new word out of one and the same parent ori- ginal, and thus obscure their own aim. The Kachins, who seem to be a cognate race with the Burmans, call the Burmans 31ie)i ; but whether the Chinese got this name from the Kachins or the Kachins from the Chinese it is difficult to hazard an opinion, as the Kachin immigration has only in comparatively recent years displaced that of the older Shans. Yet there is nothing extraordinary about this uncertainty. Why and when were the Russians first called Buss ? Why do the Burmese call the Chinese Taroup or Tayouk ? At least one half of the world's national designations will perhaps be found to be inex]3licable except by vaaue tradition. What seems certain is that the lead- ing Burmese people were known to the Chinese by their old tribal name of Pyu until A. D. 1,000 at least, and that the Burmese claim to a great anti- quity for the name Mien or Myan is probably like many other things Burmese, a piece of empty, anachronous, and bombastic pride, and no more rea- sonable than would be the derivation of the word ^'English" from "angels." After the reign of Alaungsithu, Arakan was brought into closer relation with the Pagan monar- BURMA. 25 chy. It must not be forgotten that the Arakan branch of the Mramma race claims to be the elder, just as the Shans of Laos claim to be the elder branch of the Thai race. If there had been any truth in the Brahman theor}', it is pretty certain that the elder branch would also call themselves M arama (their form of Myamma or Bamma) instead of "na- tives of Eakhaing-pyi " or Rakhaing-land. I can- not discern any ground whatever for supposing* with Colonel Phayre, (quoted by Colonel Yule) that the Kam-an were the Aracanese. There are two places at least called Kan-Ian by the Chinese, so that if there is any justification for speculation at all, the evidence, such as it is, points east rather than west. Aracan has never had any relations with China. Neither has Pegu; that is Pegu considered as being a distinct state from Pyu, Pagan, and Mien ; nor has Manipur, though the Chinese have records of the existence of both Aracan- ese and Manipurese peoples under the name A-li-kih and Kieh-sie, this last name being an imitation of the word Casse or Cathay, meaning '' Manipur-peoplc." The Shans had possession of these two kingdoms at different times, and for several centuries incessant fiffhtino' seems to have o'one on between the rival Shan and Burmese kingdoms of Pong, as the Mani- pureans called the one, and Mien, as the Chinese call 26 BURMA. the other. Pong never seems to have had any rela- tions Avith imperial China until the arrival of the Mongols on the scene. In fact, China was complete- 1}^ shut out from all communication with Mauadha, Manipur, Aracan, and Burma by the semi-indepen- dent Chinese-Shan kingdom of Tali, which itself went by various names during this unsettled period. All these countries were consequently more or less subjected to Indian and Buddhist influences, and consequently we find that all without exception use alphabets based on Pali or Sanskrit, to the utter exclusion of the Chinese character. Bur- mese history during this period of transition is barren and wearisome, and very few promi- nent features can be laid hold of to indicate a steady development in the scale of civilization. Is^ot an invention, not an art, science, or book of wisdom ; no pubHc works, no improvements, a dead level of priestly mendicancy and totally useless but expensive pagodas, coupled with complete absence of material home refinement and social luxury. According to Gray the first poem written in the Burmese idiom was composed in A. D. 1,453, and it appears from Colonel Yule's account of the Pagan inscriptions that so recently as 200 years ago the square character was in use and not the round one us at present in vogue. 27 CHAPTER IV. THE MONGOLS AND BURMA. The Mongols knew nothing whatever of Mien except that parts of it were conterminous with Tali. In the year A. D. 1,242 they shewed signs of threa- tening the state of TaH, then still under the kings of the Twan family. Kuhlai himseK conquered the state in 1,254 and placed the king's minister in charge of it as the king's silan-fu-shl or "Conci- liator," leaving to him the duty also of conquering the neighbouring tribes. The above events took place during the reigns of Gayuk and ManguKhans. Kublai succeeded Manguin A. D. 1,260. Amongst the other '^ Conciliators " was that of Luh-chVan, probably the Chinese name for the Shan kingdom, of Pong, for many Pong events and names described in the Manipur chronicles tally, except as to date, with similar events and names described in the Chinese chronicles of Luh-chVan, which state then included the present Chinese saichwciM.^^ of Lmig-ch'wan and Meng-mao at least, if not more. The only other Chinese protected sawhwa^hi^ which dates from 1,2130 is that of Kan-ngai, or Kan-ngeh as the 28 BURMA. Mongol Histoiy writes it. Both these states were subordinate to the Mongol Military Governor of Kin-ch'i or "Golden Teeth," generally and probabty I'ightly considered to be the Zardandan of Marco Polo. The modern Furmese-protected Shan saw- i«Y/ship of North Theinni, called Meng-pang or ^■uh-pang by the Chinese, also submitted to the ]\^ongols, ^yho passed through it on their road to attack Annam. As Meng-pang is the Chinese form of the Shan 3Iuon(j-Fang or " the Pang State," it be- comes a question whether the " Pong State " of the Manipur chronicle did not rather refer to Theinni, which originally included Mcng-mih or Momeit. Be that as it may, during Kublai's reign the whole of the Shan sr//r&?rr/ ships included between Manipur and Annam were at least nominally subject to the Mongol dynasty of China. In the year 1,271 the suan-woi-sz or Mongol Comforter-in-chief of the Shan proyinces sent a raessenoer to Mien or Burma to demand tribute. This man is called '' IPi'h-tal T'oh-j'-in " in the Mongol Annals, and perhaps the first part of this name ma}^ be the latter part of Colonel Phayre's " Uriang Kadai " a man a ho is supposed to have compelled the recognition by Burma of Mongol power BURMA. 29 IS 1,256. Neither the Burmese nor the Chinese Annals say anything about any collision at this elate, but the Mongol messenger returned from his mission witli a Bunnan envoy named Kiai-poh in his charge. The Mongol history says nothing about the demand for tribute having been based on the precedent of Anawrat'a's having sent gold and silver vessels. As we have seen, Anawrat'a never could have reached China at all ; moreover the Chines e, who always carefully chronicle such facts, make absolutely no mention of Burma during the period of Anawrat'a's existence. Nor is there any need to suggest such a fi round for the demand, as the Mongol claim to the world's tribute was universal. In 1,273 Kublai Khan wrote a letter to Burma reminding the king that Kiai-poh had been to Peking, and had been allowed to inspect certain Buddhist relics ; also re- questing that some persons of the royal blood should be sent up to go through the usual tributary forms. War was hinted at in case of refusal. This allusion to the relics certainty suggests some kind of connec- tion, in the Burmese mind at least, between Anaw- rat'a's earlier demand on the state of Tali for such, and C hina's present exhibition of them in this case : but that has nothing to do with Avhat passed in the Chinese or ^longol mind, or with the suggestion that 30 BURMA. China based her demand on Anawrat'a's precedent. A report came in 1,275 from the Mongol or Chinese Governor in those parts to the effect that one of the Golden Teeth chiefs had been punished by the Bur- mese for shewing K'ih-tai T'oh-yin the way to Bur- ma. This chief also informed the Mongols that there were three roads to Burma, all uniting at Kiang-t'ou cVeng, or "River Head" city, a place which must have been near modern Bhamo. He offered the as- sistance of certain of the Burmese Shan sawbwas. Matters were hastened on to a crisis by the addition- al fact that some of the Mongol emissaries were being detained by the Burmese. Still, Kublai dec- lined to declare war just then. But in the year 1,277 the Burmese attacked Kan-ngeh (between Bhamo and Momein or T'eng- yiieh), and even threatened to establish a post bet- ween this last place and Yungch'ang Fu (Marco Polo's Yociam). The Mono^ol chiliarch of Tali, aided by one of the Twan family rulers, (who was now reduced to the status of military governor under the Mongols), travelled with all speed to meet the Bur- mans, who are said to have numbered between 40,000 and 50,000 men, having with them besides 10,000 horses and 100 elephants. The Mongol general had BURMA. 31 only 700 men, but witli this small force he completely routed the enemy in a series of encounters upon the Tapeng River, somewhere between Nantien and Kan-ngeh. Colonel Phayre, who follows the Bur- mese account, makes out that the latter were "over- powered by numbers :" this, hoAvever, is probably mere Burmese bluster, for, whatever the Chinese faults, it must be confessed that their histories are fair and accurate, whilst, whatever the Burmese virtues, it must be admitted that their histories are full of inaccuracies and braggadocio. Later on in the same year, Nah-su-lah-ting (Nas'reddin) marched with over 3,800 men, partly Mongols and partly men of the various Yunnan tribes, straight upon Burma. He reached Kiang-t'ou city, but was compelled to return to China on account of the excessive heat. Nothing seems to have been done from now until the year 1,283, when Nas'reddin undertook a campaign with 10,000 Sz-ch'wan Chinese troops and the few Mongols already on the spot. One column, taking 200 boats with them, marched by the ordinary Manwaing route, the other by way of Lung-ch'wan, the two meeting at Kiang-t'ou cit}^, which place they took by storm. There can be little doubt that Kiang-t'ou city must be Colonel Phayre's Ngat- 32 BURMA. shaimgyan, which he phices .south of Bhamo, for the fact of Burmese defeat and the dates agree in both histories. Neither the Chinese name nor the Bur- mese name seems to be now in use. Colonel Phayre says the inhabitants of Pagan were in confusion and terror, and that the king abandoned the city, which was entered and plunder- ed by the Mo ngols. That the Burmese should run away is quite in accordance with what w^e know of Burmese style of conducting war, but the more sober account of the Chinese is probably the true one, as the Chinese themselves are not sriven to minimising their victories. According to the Mongol Histor}^ the King of Burma sent an envoy craving for pardon, and a Mongol ambassador named K'ieh-lieh was sent to arrange terms. This was in 1,285. Colonel Phayre says that some arrangement seems to have been made, but that no details are recorded. Neither does the Mongol history explain why in the following year, 1,286, another army was ordered to march upon Bur- ma; but it may safely be assumed that certain of the Mongol emissaries were murdered at this time ; and, as the Mongol history makes no mention of previous murders, we may reject Colonel Phayre's version, taken from the Burmese historv, that it was the BURMA. 33 murder of Mongol envoys which had caused the war of 1,277-8, the true origin of which has been explain- ed above. The Mongol history tells us that ''in the *' year 1,287 the King was imprisoned by one of his *' concubine's sons, who murdered his three wife-born *' brothers, raised the standard of rebellion, and mas- " sacred the officers sent by the Prince of Yunnan '' [probably Kublai's son]." This would seem to ex- plain why the decision of 1,286 to send another ex- pedition was arrived at, and also explains the follow- ing from Colonel Phayre's book:— "In 1,285 Thihathu, ** Governor of Prome, forced the king his father to *' swallow poison. Three of the king's sons disputed *' the succession, and Kyoaswa succeeded. But the " empire had fallen to pieces. The tributary Eastern *' Shan States became independent. Kyoaswa, who " was only acknowledged king in the territory round "Pagan, maintained himself there for twelve years." The Mongol history goes on to say: — "The ''Yunnan Government therefore sent a punitory " expedition against Burma, and when the country " was settled, annual tribute of local articles was ar- " ranged for." It seems very much open to question if the Mongols ever reached the then capital of Pagan, 34 BURMA, which is as far south of Mandalay as Old Pagan or Tagaung is north of it. Still more is it doubtful whether they ever reached Taroup-mau, south of Prome. What is much more probable is that they advanced as far as Old Pagan, the ancient and earliest Burmese capital, half way bet- ween Bhamo and Mandalay. This place is practically -one and the same place with Tagaung, the pre-histori- cal capital* of the semi-mythical Sakya clans, which in the fifth century B. C. became a sort of branch metropolis under the new name of Pa- gan or Pugan. In fact this seems certain, for the Mongol annals tell us that after the defeat of 1,285, the " Burmese king sent the Salt Administrator Api- lisiangto T'ai-kung (Tagaung) with offers of submis- sion." The Mongols, unaccustomed to water in any form, were not a boating people, and the only boats they had were the above-mentioned 200 which had been 'constructed at Kan-ngeh. We may therefore reject the whole story of the Mongols ever having reached the then capital of New Pagan, though it is quite possible that Shan auxiliaries may have taken the opportu- nity to sack or loot it. At the same time it must be conceded that the local Momein annals make the * Maiiroya or the moderu Mueycn a little South of Bbanio is said by Colonel Yule to have been an older Sakya capital tl^an even lagaung. BURMA. 35 distinct statement that ^"the Prince of Yunnan " marched upon Pagan, losing over 7,000 men in do- " ing so ;" and Governor Sii Ki-yil's geography says that " Comforters of Pang-ya and other places were established at the Royal Burmese city of Pagan." On the other hand certain passages in Colonel Yule's book point to a like confusion in other matters between old and new Pagan. There is no such discrepancy of seven years as Colonel Phayre supposes to exist between the Chinese and the Burmese dates. Moreover, when Marco Polo says that Nas'reddin defeated the Burmese on the '' plain of Vociam," he is quite right, as the Golden Teeth territories, including Nantien and Kan-ngai, were and are still part of Yung-ch'ang Fu, for the T'eng- ylleh or Momein department or sub -prefecture was only removed to its present site 250 years ago. Colo- nel Phayre is mistaken when he says :—'' according '' to the histories of both countries there was only one '' great pitched battle," for we have seen that there were two, and we have also seen that Nas'reddin won the second and not the first, so that Marco Polo is the sole author of the supposed confusion in either case. Why the Burmese describe the Mongol armies as consisting of two races, the Tarouk (written Ta- 36 BURMA. roup) and Taret it is impossible to conjecture. Colo- nel Phayre says the Manchus are by the Burmese called Taret, and it is hardly necessary to tell Burmese students that the Chinese are now all called Taroup (pronounced Tayouk.) Colonel Phayre's suggestion that Tarouk is probably '' Turk" cannot be sustained. The very name of Tuh-hileh or Durko had disap- peared from the current Chinese language by this time, having only been in popular use from A.D. 500 to A.D. 1,000 ; and there is no reasonable simi- larity, to be accounted for on any etymological hypo- thesis, between the sounds T'uh-hileh and Taroup, both of which, again, are written in a way which leaves us to merely guess what the respective pronunciations might have been 600 years ago. Be- sides, what did the Burmese call the Chinese before the Mongols came ? There were certainly no Man- chus in the Mongol army, for none of the Tungusic races (of which the Manchus formed a small tribe) are anywhere supposed to have fought for their enemies the Mongols, who had only just crush- ed them; and the word Manchu, the meaning of which has never yet been satisfactorily explained,* was un- * I have since writing the abovn come iiprtn a partial explanation given by the M mcliu {i.e. Cbinesp) eninpvor K'ien-lung. but it is of no importance iu connection with the subject uu 'er criticistn. I also observed that Colo- nel Yule gives V.\a Ma lipur words for "six" and "seven" as tarv,k aud t .ret, which is really an extraordinary coincidence. BURMA. 37 known until the 17th century A. D. We may there- fore reject all these theories as being unsupported speculations, and say that the origin of the words Mien, Taroup, Taret, and Manchu belongs to the category of the quite unknown. On the other hand, the word Siam is a barbarous Anglicism derived from the Portuguese or Italian word Sciam, this last be- ing an attempt to represent in Italo-Portuguese fashion the Burmese imperfect nasal sound Shan (written Sham) applied by them to the whole Tai or Thai group of j)eople, and itself again of doubt- ful meaning. To sum up therefore. Chinese accounts of the Pyu begin long before the existence of any such state as Pong or of any other Shan principalities is alluded to in any history or chronicle, and always in connec- tion with the Shan empire of Nanchao. No other neighbourinsj states are mentioned except Magadha, Tibet, and Annam. The Nanchao empire splits up, and China proper is for many centuries entirely cut off from Magadha, Burma, and the Shans, the state (probably Chinese-Shan) of Tali standing between as an impenetrable obstacle. The various Shan tri- bes which once formed part of the Nanchao empire, evidently unable to stand against C hinese thrift and 38 BURMA. industry, are either absorbed and become Chinese subjects, or migrate and gradually form the states of Laos, Luang Prabang, Yienchan, Zimme, and Siam, as they have in our own day been called. Others nearer to their old home mix up in Assamese and Manipur politics, for a time even rule those states, and form the palatinates (ever changing) of Mogaung, Mamu, Meng-pang, and Luh-chVan. These Shan or Thai races struggle with Mien and with the Ta- king or Burmo-Peguan races, and the result is that after the events above recorded we find the Shans actually in possession of Burma. Kyoaswa, the last king of the Anawrat'a dynasty, was killed, and accord- ing to Colonel Phayre three Shan brothers, emigrant sons of the chief of a small Shan State called Binnaka, who had served Kyoaswa as provincial governors, divided the empire between them. I have no idea where Binnaka was. Pallegoix places the commence- ment of the Shan kingdom of Siam in A.D. 1,350. Meanwhile the Mongol dynasty of China had been ousted by the Chinese Mings, the first emperor of which line, an ex-priest, reigned from 1,368 to 1,399. Governor Sii Ki-yii' s official Gfeography in- forms us that it was during this period that the Bur- .mese first consented to form part of the Empire of BVRMA. 39 China, and in our own day many of us have seen im- pressions of the old Ming dynasty seals granted to the saicbwas of Northern Theinni, which is evidence in favour of the same kind of seals having also been issued as alleged to Burma. Moreover the Chinese tell us that during the imperial reign 1,403-1,425 a Chinese mission was sent to Burma. But the Burma of those days was only a petty state on a par with Pong, Assam, Pegu, Siam, and Laos, and this point is well illustrated in Colonel Yule's series of maps. At the same time that the three Shan usurpers were replacing the Anawrat^a dynasty of Pagan, ano- ther Shan adventurer from Zimme (Ts'ing-mai or Kingmai) named MAgadu established himself at Mar- taban as king Wareru of Pegu. This Wareru dynasty lasted from 1,287 to 1,540, and had no concern with China, but was at first tributary to Siam (i.e. to the Shan or Sciam Yodaya, meaning " the Shans of Ayuthia)." Meanwhile the Burmese Shan dynasty as distinguished from the Peguan Shan dynasty reig- ned at Panya near the modern Mandalay. But before the youngest of the three Shan brothers be- came sole king, Kyoaswa, the Pagan puppet, was deposed (1,298); one of the three Shan brothers died; and the third was poisoned by the survivor Thihathu. 46 BURMA. Colonel Phayre's account and the Mongol account may- be said to agree here. Colonel Phayre says : — '' The " deposed king Kyoaswa, or his son the titular king, " made complaint to the Emperor of C hina that he, " his tributary, had been deposed. A Mongol army " arrived at Myinsaing (near Panya) to restore the " king (A.D. 1,300;." The Mongol account says :— " In the year 1,297 the Burmese king sent his son " to the court fof Kublai's successor) with an offer to " pay annual tribute of silver, stuffs, elephants, and " grain. For this he received a patent as king of " Burma (Mien)." The names of the king and his son are unrecognisable in Chinese dress, but something like Sinhopadi seems to stand for the son's name, evidently, like tne shunando of earlier times, being a title rather than a name ; and most probably the cor- rupted Burmese form Thinapadi of the Sanskrit word Senapati or " general." The different versions of the Mongol history are a little confused about dates, but in either 1,298 or 1,300 " the king was murdered ** by his younger brother Asankoye, and the Em- " peror sent an army of over 12,000 men to demand " explanations." Probably, as Colonel Phayre's ac- " count would seem to suggest, one event took place " in 1,298 and the other in 1,300. The Mongol *' account continues : — " In the autumn, Asankoye's BVEMA. 41 '* younger brother Chesu and others to the num- "ber of 90 sent local productions to court. A <' month later Asankiya and hi s brothers appeared ** at the frontier gate, and acknowledged the crime *' of having killed their lord. The troops marching "on Mien were then stopped." Colonel Phayre's account says that on the arrival of the Mongol army at Myinsaing, " the three Shan brothers determined " to end all disputes by putting the rightful king to " death. This they did, and, shewing his head to ' the Mongol general, said that no claimant to the " throne remained. They then made him valuable *' presents, in return for which the general withdrew <* from the country." The laconic Mongol account is strikingly similar : — " Now, the Civil Councillor with " the Pacificator Chagan Bukha had already surroun- " ded the city, and the food and fuel were exhaus- " ted. The Burmese were just on the point of capi- *'tulating when these two individuals accepted a ** heavy bribe to withdraw their troops, the pretext "being that the climate was hot and malarious. " Decree. ' Let them be executed'." Colonel Phayre again shews a preference for Marco Polo, and assumes that the date must be wrong because Polo left China in 1,292, and because he describes a march of "gleemen and jugglers," which (Colonel 42 BURMA. Phayre thinks) prohahly alludes to this second expe- dition. There is no real foundation for this assump- tion of error. The Chinese and Burmese accounts agree perfectly, and Colonel f hayre's surmise is su- perfluous. Now, who was Asankoye ? It is perfectly plain that this is Colonel Phayre's Athengkhara, the eld- est of the three Shan brothers. And who was Asan- kiya? Evidently Colonel Phayre's Athengkhara Tsau-Ywon, son of the third Shan brother Thihathu, who reigned at Sagaing contemporaneously with his father still reigning at Iranya. Both dynasties, or both branches of the same dynasty, were dethroned by their relative Thadomengbya, the founder of Ava in 1,364, and grandson of Athengkhay^ Tsau-ywon's wife. Chesu is of course Thihathu, or, as it would Bound to the Chinese, Chiasu, the Chinese character used being still pronounced chia, cha in some dialects, and the faint Burmese aspirate escaping the atten- tion of the Chinese, who only use a guttural aspirate as an initial letter. Thus we find that the whole story of Burma's doings in the 14th century is vouched for by the tallying of both histories in all the main details. The Shan or Thai race Was thus in the 13tH BURMA. ^3 century supreme in Siam, and nearly all over Bui-ma, except in Taungu, whither a large number of discontented Burmans took refuge. The north- ernmost Shan States were at the same time, at least nominally, under the overrule of the Mongols of China. A short paragraph in the History of the Chinese Ming dynasty (which succeeded the Mongol dynasty in 1,368) says that the Mongols " appointed " Comforters of Pangya and other places in 1,338 but ^^withdi-ewthemin 1,342." Doubtless this means that both the Panya and Sagaing houses accepted Mongol vassal titles for a short period. Meantime what Colonel Phayre calls the ^'Mao Shans from Mogaung " carried war into the Panya dominions, and^'carried off the king (1,364). Colonel Phayre also quotes from the " Shan Chronicle discovered by Pem- '' berton at Manipur in 1835" an event '' not noticed '' in Burmese history. About 1,332 a dispute arose bet- "ween the Kin,^ of Pong— so the chief of Mogaung is *' termed— and the Governor of Yunnan. A Chinese '' or Mongol army invaded the country, and, after a " struggle of two years, the capital of Mogaung was *' taken. The king Sungampha fled to Sagaing, and *'on demand was surrendered to the Emperor of *' China. The sons of Sungampha succeeded to <' their father's kingdom." Here, again, we shall be 44 BUFJIA. able to show that Colonel Phayre has been misled by placing too much faith in the Shan Chronicles. Not only does Burmese history not mention any such event at that date, but the Mongol history fails to mention it too : though as we have seen the Mongols had officers stationed in Burma between 1,338 and 1,342. The fac^. is the Manipur chronicle is exactly a century wrong, and the whole story belongs to the period 1432-1450. " Sungampha, King of Mogaung" was really Sz-jen-fah, satchca of Luh-chVan. The Chinese Annals of Momein give the whole story most intelligibly. He attacked the smcbwashi-ps of Nantien, Kan-ngai, Momein, and Lukiang in consequence of the Chinese Ming Emperor having first deprived him of his Chinese vassal title for improperly fight- ing with Muh-pang (North Theinni), and having next placed Luh-chVan under the chief of Meng- yang (to which probably Meng-kung or Mogaung then as afterwards formed an appendage). Sz-jen- fah (^. e. the Phra Sz-jen) thereupon took posses- sion of Meng-yang. He apologised in 1,442, but the Chinese declined to compromise, and demanded his extradition from Burma. This was granted, in ex- change for the promise that Meng-yang should be given to Burma. In 1,454 his son Sz-ki-fah, or the Phra Sz-ki, together with his family, was also surren- BUB3IA. 45 dered to the Chinese. Another son, the youngest, meanwhile ruled at Meng-yang, and a third son Sz« puh-^/a/i was good-naturedly allowed by the Chinese also to live there unmolested. The family came to an end politically with. Sz-ming-f a h,{Sz-jen'f a It's grand- son) in 1,468. He was interned in North China. A few pages back I have already shewn that the Pong State of the Manipur chronicle was more probably Luh-ch Van than Muh-pang although Muh- pang or Muong-pang is to the ear the more suggestive name. Luh-chVan, however, is a purely Chinese designation, and it is quite possible that it, as well as what the Chinese call Muh-pang, was included in the region called Pong by the Manipur Shans. At any rate the boundaries of the then Shan States were bewildering and kaleidoscopic in their changes. Su-ngam is plainly Sz-jen, the character y^/i having still the power nyeiyi or ngiang in certain Chinese dialects. That fah means phra is plain, firstly be- cause the Momein Annals speak elsewhere of a Shan saivbiva arrogating to himself the title of fah, and secondly because other Chinese books speak of Sz- jen, Sz-ki, and Sz-puh without adding the syllable fah at all. Finally, Colonel Phayre tells the same story over again from the Burmese history under 4« BURMA. date 1,444, where Sz-jen is called " Tho-ngan-bwa, Sawbwa of Mogaimg," and remarks in a note :— " The circumstances here recorded have some resem- blance to the events of A. D, 1332->33," To recapitulate, then, we have the following'posi- tion. Neither the Mongol, the Chinese, nor the Burmese Chronicles mention any such event in the 14th century. The Chinese and the Burmese chro- nicles both mention one and the same event in the 15th century, and both say that Sz-jen-A^A or Thon- ganbwa was, by conquest or otherwise, satchiva of Mogaung, which is therefore quite consistent with his being saivhiva of Pong too. The only authority for the event being in the 14th century is the Manipur chronicle, and even that says that Sungampha was saicbwa of Mogaung as well as of Pong. We may therefore safely reject the Manipur dates. Now the Chinese were at war with Sz-jen of Luh-chSvan because he was at war with Muh-pang ; consequently it follows that Luh-ch'wan and Muh-pang at that time were politically different states, and that Sz-jen was certainly not sawbwa of Muh-pang. Hence the Pong state must have been what the Chinese then called Luh-ch%an, which once included the modern Maingmaw or Mcng-mao j and the ^' Mao BURMA. 47 Shans " of which Colonel Phayre speaks are probably a racial rather than a political expression for the inhabitants of modern Maingmaw, whilst we can but conjecture that the descriptive word " Pong" was applied to those Shans of Luh-ch Van who were not Mao Shans, and that possibly the same Pong Shans gave their name to Theinni or Muh-pang, which may or may not have been at some time part of ont and the same Shan State with Mogaung and Luh- chVan, either or both, alone or with others. 48 ) CHAPTEE Y. THE KINGDOM OF AVA. Now we come to the kingdom of Ava. The new capital of Thodomengbya, Ava, and the quite modem Amarapura and Mandalay are all placed in a line along a bend of the river opposite Sagaing, and all four cities are within a few miles of old Fanya and Myinsaing. The best illustration of their res- pective positions can be obtained from Colonel Yule's map, where the future Mandalay figures as Made- ywa or ''Made village." The thirteenth king of this Ava line was, according to Colonel Phayre, "Tho-han-bwa son of Tsa-lun the Shan chief of *' Mo-hnyin," who reigned from 1,527 to 1,543, when he was succeeded by " Khun-mhaing-ngai, Shan *' chief of XJn-boung," a personage and a state I have not been able to identify in the least. NowMo-hnyin is Meng-yang, and the Chinese history of that state says that " about 1,522 Sz-lun of Mcng-yang, in " alliance with Muh-pang and Meng-mih, defeated ** the Burmese, killed the Comforter JVIang Ki-swei ;^ with his family, and divided up the land." Sz-lun^ BVRMA, 40 of course, is Tsa-lun or Salun, the superfluous t being a fancy of Anglo-Burmese scholars, who persist in seeing a t before every Burmese 5, aspirated or otherwise. Thus we see that the Shan rulers of Ava were now Chinese officials in a certain sense. In fact the Ming history tells us that " in 1,384 the appointment of T^omforter of Mien- " chung was made, and as complaints had been made " by the chieftain Pu-la-lang of attacks by Sz-lun- "A^/', a mission was sent to expostulate, and both " sides suspended arms." This Sz-lun-Z'rt/i was father of the Sz-jen-Z^/i of Luh-chSvan above mentioned, and not the same person as Sz-lun of Mo-hnyin. Pu-la-lang is suggestive of some such name as Phra Nang, but there is no evidence to shew who he was. It is interesting to note the name Mien-chung or " Central Burma," which shews that the Mien state of those times was, besides being vassal to C hina, a mere fragment of the old and independent Mien dominions of Anawrat'a. The Burmese king was then Meng-kyi-swa (according to Colonel Phayre), which is very singular, on account of the re- semblance of this name to that of the Chinese king Mang Ki-swei who was killed by the other Szlun more than a century later, and who cor- responds with Colonel Yule's king Shwe-nan-sheno-. 60 ^ BURMA. But^ we must be on our guard, and not allow ourselves to be led astray by mere similarity of sound. Again, the Ming history teUs us that "in the year " 1,403 Nalot'ah was made Comforter of Mien, so " that now there were two Comforters in Mien, each " sending tribute. Since Pu-la-lang had divided up " his dominions, he had placed his eldest son Nalot'ah '' in possession of great Tien, and his second son '* Machesu [PMaha Thihathu] in command of Lesser * Tien. Nalot'ah afterwards took possession of the '* whole, but the brothers were admonished to re- '* main at peace with one another, so Nalot'ah sent " tribute and apologised." There are no names any- thing like these in Colonel Phayre's book, so I am driven to suppose that the Shan rulers of Ava had nothing whatever to do with China, and that the two Comforters were simply petty sawhwas of the Yiinnan frontier, where there are several places called Tietiy or perhaps Burmese "pre- tenders '^ such as we see now hovering about the northern frontier hoping with Chinese assist- ance to oust the rulers in possession. This is the more likely in that the Burmese king was incessantly engaged in warring with Pegu, and had certainly no time or opportunity to dally with China. The Ming history continues : — " In the year 1,409, a present of BUItMA. bt "embroidery was sent to Mien. In the year 1,425 *' an announcement of the new Emperor's accession " was sent to Mien. In 1,427 Mang-te-la was made " Comforter. Now the Comforter Sin-kia-sz had lost *' his life in a quarrel with M uh -pang (North Theinni) ; '' his following had broken up, and the Burmese had "proclaimed Mang-te-la as temporary Comforter * or unless it be on tour with the Emperor. Next year the Manchu generalissimo, Duke Fuheng, (probably the Burmese Thukhunre), a BURMA. 87 relative of the Empress, who had also distinguished himself in the Central Asian campaigns, marched from Momein via Kazu to Kacho, crossed the Irra- waddy at AYaingmaw, and advanced upon Bhamo by- way of Mogaung and Mo-hnyin with a combined force of Manchus and Chinese. The Mogaung saw- hwa was prevailed upon to join the Chinese. It is not very clear how Fuheng got from Mo-hnyin to Bhamo, or whether he came into contact with the Burmese force waiting for him at Mawla, but he seems to have turned off suddenly to the east at Mu-lah (? Myohla), somewhere between Mo-hnyin and the Irrawaddy, and to have then joined a column under General Ilet'u, who was sent down the left bank of the river to assist him, and who crossed the Irrawad- dy at Hak'an, somewhere near the gorge below Shwegu. A third column advanced upon Bhamo by way of Manwyne, and a combined naval and military attack was made by all these columns at once. Bhamo was taken by storm,but the advancing Chinese dashed themselves for weeks in vain against the obstinate stockades of Kaungton, though their artillery was fairly powerful. General Duke Alikun, the Akhunre of the Burmese, who had been sent to replace Ertenge after Erkinge's death, also lost his life in this second attack on Kaungton. The Mogaung march was m BURMA. admittedly a strategical blunder. The original idea had been to march upon Mozzobo (the present Shwebo) and Ava along the right bank, but the nu- merous rivers which had to be crossed soon shewed that this scheme would be nearly impossible ; so Fuheng, who seems to have been very ignorant of Burmese topography, wasted two months over a futile promenade through Mogaung and Mo-hnyin, the only advantage gained being that the sawbivas of those states and their soldiers were unavailable for Bur- ma's defence so long as the Chinese army was there. The Emperor, alarmed at the enormous losses of his troops through sickness, had already renounced the idea of taking Ava, and even Kaungton, when the Burmese King Hsengpyusheng (the Chinese Meng Poh) sent unexpected proposals for peace. This was after the Emperor had confidentially instructed Fuheng to to withdraw his army, and to inform the Burmese that *' out of sheer compassion the Emperor had "decided not to annihilate them as they deserved.'* Fuheng personally was inclined to go on to the bitter end, but he was overborne by the counsels of his fellow generals, headed by Akwei. He was suffering from dysentery at the time, and therefore perhaps unable to act with his usual vigour. He BURMA, 89 only reached Peking to die there. The Chinese retreat was so hasty that the negotiations seem to have fallen through out of downright care- lessness, and no attempt was made by Akwei to take advantage of the unlooked-for turn which affairs had taken. The Burmese appear to have verbally pro- mised to send a decennial mission of some sort, to res- tore prisoners, and to apologise for past offences provided that the Chinese would withdi'aw their armies at once and surrender those Burmese- Shan mwhwas (Mo^aung, North Theinni, and Man-mu or old Bhamo) who had joined in the C hinese attack. Momeit never actually joined the Chinese. Several months passed, but no tribute or prisoners came as ex- pected. The Emperor ordered the Yunnan authorities to remind Burma of her duty, but to his great disgust this letter crossed another from a Burmese general called by the Chinese Nawrat'a, demanding for the first time, so far as the Emperor and the Viceroy knew, the surrender of the sawhwas. Thus it was made accidentally to appear that C hina's demand was only put forward as a set-off to the Burmese demand, and was not original, and thus it came to pass that each side naturally accused the other of treachery. The only way for the Emperor to bring pressure to bear upon Burma without the trouble, loss, 90 BURMA. and expense of another campaign, was to strictly pro- hibit all trading at Bhamo, and especially the import of cotton, which by his express order was not even allowed to come into Canton by the sea route. De. sultory haggling went on at intervals for twenty years, the Burmese meanwhile writing insolent letters and retaining the Chinese prisoners, whilst the Chi- nese retaKated by launching arrogant and abusive f ulminations and imprisoning all Burmese messengers. Though the Emperor made the Yiceroy write in his own name, and say that he could not presume to re- present the Burmese proposals to the Emperor, as a matter of fact the drafts of all letters were prepared under the Emperor's own supervision. This was also the case with the letters addressed by the < anton and Yiinnan Viceroys to Annam, Siam, and Laos, all three which states the diplomatic Emperor was attempting to utilise for his own interests. This unsatisfactory state of affairs went on throughout the reigns of Ilsengpyusheng and Singgiisa (or Meng Poh and Chwei-kioh-ya as the Chinese call them). Several times the Chinese thought they had gaiiied their point, and made preparations to receive the Burmese tribute ; but it never came to anything, though the Emperor on one occasion admitted that his hand trembled with anxiety on receipt of des- BURMA. 91 patches from the Burmese frontier. At last, in the year 1,788 Alompra's fifth son, usually known asking Bodoapra (Maung Waing, the Chinese Meng Ydn) sent back some of the prisoners along with a tribute mission, which was very well received at Jeho on the Tartar steppes where the Emperor was staying for the summer. The Chinese annals, which are very minute in all other details, do not give the text of the king's letter, (the Burmese version of which is probably still at Peking, as the Emperor ordered up all original documents, and had his own staff of inter- preters there) ; but the imperial " commands " in reply, sent to king Bodoapra by his returning envoys unmistakably use the haughty language of a sove- reign to a vassal. Of course it is impossible to say now, the original " mandate " having- probably been destroyed with the Mandalay archives, how far the Burmese understood the Chinese claim to " duty " and " tribute" as exi3ressed in this Chinese letter. Up to this date, however, the voluminous Chinese records say not one word about decennial missions, though it is clear from other passages both Burmese and Ohinese that a verbal promise to that effect was made at Kaungton. The Manchu general who conducted these negotiations was one Hakwohing, or " General Ha." This is the Kyimintituha of the Burmese, tHtu 92 BURMA. being Chinese for " General," and kyimin probably- being a corruption of k'in-ming, ^' by imperial com- mand." Generals Balamenhten and San-blagyi, who were also present, figure in Chinese history as Pu-la Mangt'ang and Chanlaki. Inthejrear 1,791 the emperor sent some presents to king Bodoaprain acknowledgment of certain Chi- nese prisoners taken from the Siamese and returned to China, and in the year 1,793 a Manchu seal for the sawbtva of Man-mu was granted to the Bur- mese envoy at Peking in lieu of the old Ming seal, which had apparently been taken to China in 1,771 with the refugee satvbwa of Man-mu, and which must have been preserved by him as a mark of honour notwithstanding the conquest of Man-mu by Tabeng Shwe-hti or Bureng [fsTaung. The Burmese envoy, whose name was Meng Kan, would seem to have been himself the myo%a or titulary of Man-mu. At any rate he explains that he makes the appli- cation with the consent of the king of Burma, (who had himself received a seal of investiture as king from China in 1,790), and the Emperor says in reply that the king of Burma need enter- tain no suspicions, as Man-mu and Muh-pang (North Theinni) will of course continue to be subject BURMA. 03 to Burma, and that the granting of seals to those two states is but an additional feather in Burma's cap, or in their ca^DS. There is one point to be noted, which is that the Burmese did not return the most important of the Chinese prisoners until the Chinese had returned all the Burmese in captivity, and had accepted their embassy of 178«, and they only appli- ed for investiture in 1790 after the Chinese Viceroy, with the Emperor's approval, had promised them rich rewards if they would go and congratulate the Emperor on his 80th birthday. In other words Chinese '' rights " are not based on conquest, but on free will. In the year 1,795 the Burmese sent a mission to congratulate the emperor K'ienlung on the 60th anniversary of his reign. The Chinese state that tribute was brought, but as England figures as a tribute bearer too, both in 1793 and 1795, we may take it as likely that the Chinese wish was in some deforce father to the thought, and that more than one " tribute " nation little wot what a political figure it was supposed by the Manchu emperor to be cutting at Peking. In the year 1,796 the emperor Kiak'ing censured the Viceroy of Yunnan for refusing a Bur- mese tribute mission on the ground that it was not 94 BURMA. yet due, adding that, on an occasion like this, (the accession of a new emperor), it was unnecessary to adhere too strictly to the letter (from which we may again infer that at Kaungton an understanding of some sort about decennial missions had really been arrived at). The Emperor, however, sent the king some complimentary presents in acknowledgment of his civility. Colonel Burney, in the Bengal Asiatic Society's Journal for 18S7, gives a wonderfully accurate account of the various embassies to China between 1,787 and 1,833, from which it appears that in nearly every instance the Burmese embassies were preceded by bogus embassies purporting to be from the Emperor of China to the kingf of Burma but in reality got up to deceive both the Emperor and the king by the Yunnan officials. The king seems to have been total- ly unconscious that he was being: " invested " by the Emperor, and the Emperor himself wes evidently hocussed by his own officials in his old age. In 1,806 a Burmese chief complained to China that the Siamese had attacked Meng-lien [Maing- linp'yi], and that the sawhwa's seal had been lost. The Emperor declined to have anything to do with the ''squabbles of barbarians," but said he was prepared to issue another seal if the old one could not be found. ( 95 ) CHAPTER IX. CONCLUSION. We have seen that the Burma of the Pyu was at first under the tutelage of India, subject at times to the fitful military domination of the Shans. After a brief spurt of national glory under Anawrat'a (or Nawrat'a Menzau as he is also called) and his grand- son Alungsithu, the I'urma of the Mien fell under the tutelage of China, subject again at times to the occasional military domination of the Shans. A second spurt of patriotic life took place under Tabeng Shwe-t'i, the '' Brama king of Pegu", who, though of Burmese race, was a product of Taungu, and was not of the ancient royal Bur- mese lineage ; nor were his successors legitimately born to him. Then followed depopulating wars be- tween Peguans and Burmans, with Siam and the other Shan states, with Aracan, Manipur, etc., during which transition period civilization retrogaded, ard Europe- ans began to intervene. A third spurt was made by the Aiompra family: Chinese influence was gradually thrown off under the Emperor Tao-kwang, though it 96 BURMA. is true complimentary missions were sent in 1811, 1820, 1830, 1833, 1834, and 1843,* and British tutel- age took its turn, Like the Chinese, who, with inter- vals of national dynasties under the families of Han, T'ang, and Ming, have passed half their time under Tartar rule or concurrently with it, so the Burmese, with intervals of glory under the Anawrat'a, Tabeng Shwe-t'i, and Alompra houses, haA^e passed half their time under Shan rule or concurrently with it. The neighbouring Hindoos, Annamese, Cingalese, Cam- bodgians, etc., have been snuffed out of political ex- istence in common with Burma ; and the Shans or Thais,t though weakened by distribution over China, Tonquin, British Burma, etc., are the only one of the competing races in the peninsula which has maintain- ed, under the name we give them of Siamese, an in- dependent political existence to the last. The history of our own relations with Burma has been so often told that it is unnecessary for me to do more than give a rapid sketch of the Alompra dynas- ty, just to complete the story. Conquerors, like pugilists, by their mere presence *The last mission previous to 1374 seems to hnve beeu scut to China in 1856, but I cannot find tiny official record of it in the Chinese books. China •was than in the throes of rebellion, and this luissiun cunuot have reached Peking which was at last abandoned by the seventh Emperor Hien-fuug. t The Shan word Thai is prciununced (where it is not pronounced Tai) as beginning with an aspirated T. Ihe Burmese tk is always as in English, sorustimcs as iu this, sometimes as in thin. BURMA. 97 compel respectful recognition, however undesirable their company many seem to others : thus Alompra, though a " Scourge of God " of the Genghiz type, and a rather vulgar one at that, must be given a prominent place in the world's history, if only by reason of the countries which he devastated. Besides, he was a patriot, and almost annihilated the Pegu- ans ; in addition to which he patronised literature, discouraged gaming and drinking, and generally did his best for his own people. He ceded Negrais to us in 1,757 ; but in 1,759, owing to some to treachery or other, the British residing there were nearly all mas- sacred. The eldest son Dhamma Raza, usually called Naungdawgyi (1,760-3), continued his father's rava- gings and devastations in the Shan States. He ceded some land at Bassein to the British. The second son Maung Lauk, usually called Hsengbyusheng (1763 — 1776), was successful in his attacks upon Manipur or Kathe (called by the Chinese Kieh-se) and Siam, besides holding out to the last against Chinese pretensions, as already related. His own people thought him a good man and a good king, and the British gave him a wide berth. Maung Ye Hla, usually called Singu-za or 98 BURMA. Singu-min (1,776—81), set the example of those fa- mily murders which soon became " Burman custom," and was himself in turn murdered by Naungdawgyi's son, Maung Maung (variously called by the Chinese Meng Chiang and Meng Lu), who only reigned a few days. Neither of these kings seems to have had anything to do with the British. Maung Waing, fifth son of Alompra, usually called Bodoapra, (1,781—1,819), of monkish antece- dents, was the next king. He founded the new ca- pital of Amarapura or *' Immortopolis", and was suc- cessful against Aracan,but not against Siam. His poli- cy towards China was, as we have seen, conciliatory. Owing to complications in Aracan and Chittagong, the Viceroy of India sent three missions to him un- der Symes and Canning, but all were badly received. Assam and Manipur were both occupied during hi® reign by the Burmese, whose arrogance now began to sow the seeds of their future fall. For a Burman, Bodoapra seems to have been a very passable king, and like his father and brother he patronised litera- ture, most of which in Burma is either mythical or religious. Meng-Ki as the Chinese caU him, usually known as Bagyidaw (1,819-37), was the grandson of Bod- BURMA. 99 oapra. Not satisfied with Manipur and Assam, he invaded < achar. Modern Burma was at the very acme of her power when she had her first collision with our troops in 1,82-1:. "War was declared, Han- goon taken, and the Tenasserim coast ceded to the British, together with Manipur, Assam, and Cachar. As Governor Su Ki-yil puts it : — '* The king, to save "himself, consented to make a treaty, ceding the " waste land bordering on the sea as British trading "stations." The king notified his own subjects that he had compassionately allowed us to retire, even paying our expenses, — i. e. an indemnity. Bagyidaw, as duly reported by the Yunnan Viceroy to the watchful Emperor of China, became a raving maniac, and was succeeded by his brother Maung Khin, commonly called Tharawaddy (1,837-46). He affect- ed to ignore the treaty of Yandabu, and turned a deaf and obstinate ear to the pleadings of our residents Burney, ' 'enson, and McLeod, whom he treated very unworthily. His character seems to have been ruf- fianly from first to last, and like his brother he be- came a madman. Tharawaddy was succeeded by his son Maung T'aung or the Pagan Min( 1,846-53). China's interests in Burma were now so faint that no communications 100 BURMA. seem to have passed between two countries, unless it be the mission of 1,856, until the suppression of the Yunnan rebellion in 1,874. The king's tyrannical disposition was imitated by his viceroys, and the result was a second war with the British. Eangoon was taken a second time, on this occasion for good, and Pegu was transferred from the Burmese to the British crown by the novel process of a one-sided " notification." As the Chinese say : — " The English " filched the Delta from him, so his subjects deposed *' him and set up his brother Meng Tung (Mendoon) " who removed to Manteh-ye city (Mandalay)." Maung Lwin, or the Mendoon Min (1,853-78) is described by Colonel Yule as being the best king the Burmese ever had. Indeed it is quite impossible not to sympathise with him and his efforts to get back Pegu. The history of Phayre's mission is admirably related in the magnificent work of Colonel Sir Henry (then Captain) Yule, who was on the envoy's staff. It has been reproached him that he set up as a monopolist tra- der ; but if he did this, it was only in order to raise a re- venue and substitute paid officials in the provinces in place of ravening wolves. In 1,862 and 1,867 com- mercial treaties were negotiated by Colonels Phayre and Fytche. The account of Sladen's expedition to BURMA. '.••••'.:..::' •.•:\itfr. Momein in 1,868 is fully narrated by Anderson. In 1,872 the Italians appeared upon the scene.In 1,874-5 Mendoon offered to send a mission to China. The Yiin- nan Viceroy in reporting this said that "in consequence " of the late rebellion, no tribute had been sent from *' Burma for years past :" he added : — " As the king " does not describe himself in his letter to me by " name and surname, and has made use of much that *' is improper in the enumeration of his titles, I re- " quest that a form for his address to the throne may " be sent from Peking for his guidance." The Chi- nese account is published in the North China Hearld for 1,875 ; but as the correspondence is admittedly of Chinese manufacture, it of course does not agree with what the king actually wrote. Still it is evi- dent once more that there was an understanding between Burma and China that decennial missions should be exchanged. The murder of Mr. Margary took place whilst all this was going on, and no doubt contributed indirectly to the final denouement. Of poorThibaw (Maung Po gyi, 1,878-1,885) it will suffice to give the Chinese account : — " Licen- " tious, grasping, and cruel, his example was followed " by his lieutenants : he established gaming houses so " as to secure the people's substance, and the Bur- m BURMA, " mese were reduced to extreme misery. On the " 21st day of the 9th noon of the llth year of Kwang- " sli [the ninth and reigning Manchu Emperor] an " English army crept stealthily up into his dominions " and took away Si-poh with his wife and son ; and " thus the country was lost. Alas ! Burma from the " Han dynasty until our day has existed for over "1,700 years, and now, by reason of a few years of " tyranny and indiscretion on the part of its monarch, " the country has been obliterated in the twinkling " of an eye." And again : — '* In former times when " the chief Mang [Tabeng Shwe-t'i] was at the zenith " of his power, the military discipline was very strict ; " heavy rewards were given for victory ; death was " the punishment of defeat. But now, neither king " nor ministers know anything of war. On an alarm " given, the people are ordered off with three days' " rations, and as soon as these are eaten up, away " they go in all directions. A slight victory elates '• them like so many capering animals, while a defeat " scatters them to the winds like a thunderbolt, their "generals losing all control. Their character in "childish and suspicious. Whenever a new king " succeeds, all the descendants of the last king are " killed oif, so as to prevent competition for the throne." BURMA. 103 It might be thought that, in treating of Burma and her relations with China, I should have some- thing to say about the stipulated exchange of mis- sions and the disputed frontier questions. It wiU be at once evident, however, that this is neither the ap- propriate time nor the proper place for any such dis- cussion. THE END. /,//, 14 DAY USE RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED LOAN DEPT. This book is due on the last date stamped below, or on the date to which renewed. Renewals only: Tel. No. 642-3405 Renewals may be made 4 days prior to date due. Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. T^EC'D m mHjl^^H t^EGHl975 4 MAY 1 6 :m [NTEF?LIBRmRY LOAN JUH 1 1877 UNIV. OF CALIF.. BERK. OCT 2 5 2006 ( 7 ^^ ^-"') • , , > '-^ B fe f D ' JUN ieCi9^ '•> ?"06 LD21A-40™.8/71 Uoiii^Tif-Caii/or (P6572sl0)476-A-32 Berkeley r M72027 58gP^'; ^ ^ THE Ul^IVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY :^;^:^