Archaeology Magazine - May/June 2001 - 66

published examples of early temples,
the ambulatory is enclosed by the walls
of the temple. At Piyang, it appears
that if an ambulatory is present, it is
not roofed; the exterior walls of the
cella serve as the interior of the ambulatory. This configuration is supported
by the discovery of wall painting at the
base of south exterior wall of the cella.
If this reconstruction is correct, and the
dating secure, it seems probable that
the Old Temple is indeed an example
of the a.D. 996 building program.
The location of the monastic community remains unclear, but it is likely to be
just to the north of the Old Temple,
where more than 80 small caves were
cut into the rock. The caves closest to
the Old Temple are little more than single chambers with few, if any, wall
niches. As one moves to the east, there
are larger, more elaborate multiroomed
caves with hearths, cooking areas, and
many wall niches. These resemble later
dwellings found at Piyang, and our
working hypothesis is that those near
the Old Temple are the earliest. How
early remains a question. Since monastic
life was very spartan, few material
remains exist that can be used to determine just when the monks arrived in
Piyang. Moreover, these communities
were probably not self-supporting; Vitali
notes that one of Ye-shes- os reforms
ordered farmers of the region to donate
to monasteries the production of a plot
of land and a specific weight of seed
(wheat or barley); herders were enjoined
to provide equivalents in butter and
other products. Thus, while it is unlikely
that early caves will have much in the
way of artifacts or features to help date
them, they do have carbon sooting in the
niches that probably held butter lamps
for worship or lighting. We took small
samples of carbon from both simple and
complex caves, and we hope that dates
from them will bear out our hypothesis.
One question that often arises in con66

versation with colleagues or those interested in Tibet is the matter of the Chinese presence there and the ways in
which this has affected the development
of archaeology in the region. Many
Tibetans, of course, see this presence as
an occupation of their formerly independent nation, and there are likely some
who feel that Chinese-sponsored
research is necessarily biased toward a
pro-Beijing position. Not surprisingly, it
is difficult to sample the opinions of
Tibetans living there, although it is clear
that those with whom I have had contact
are pleased with the excavations taking
place at Piyang and other sacred sites.
They reason that the preservation of the
tangible aspects of the Tibetan past is a
worthy effort, and that any work toward
that end is desirable, especially in the
light of the excesses of the Cultural Revolution. Indeed, they seem especially
pleased that a Westerner is part of the
effort, because they are certain my presence will help to diffuse more widely an
understanding of the Tibetan past.
There are signs that Tibetans are
being encouraged to participate at a
professional level in research into the
Tibetan past. Although there have long
been a number of Tibetan "paraprofessionals" with extensive archaeological
knowledge who have worked for the
Tibetan Bureau of Cultural Relics
(TBRC), none have advanced degrees.
Tibetans have now been enrolled in the
undergraduate program at Sichuan
Union University, with the goal that
they return to Tibet and develop new
research programs. And finally, the
University of California at Santa Barbara, Sichuan Union, and the TBCR
are currently engaged in negotiations
that will bring the first Tibetan to the
United States to obtain a Ph.D. in
archaeology. All parties agree that this
is a very worthwhile project.
Although our work at Piyang is just
beginning, we are reasonably certain we
have identified an a.D. 996 temple, and
possibly an early monastic complex.
Movies such as Kundun and Seven Years
in Tibet have promoted a sense that
Tibetan Buddhism is timeless and eternal. For those who practice its tenets,
this is true, but materially, Buddhism is
not eternal; projects like ours are among
the few that will preserve Tibetan Buddhist history for future generations.
Mark Aldenderfer
is professor of
at
the
anthropology
Universityof California , Santa Barbara.
Archaeology * May/June 2001

Archaeology Magazine - May/June 2001

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Archaeology Magazine - May/June 2001