4. ENVIRONMENTAL RECONSTRUCTION AT AYUTTHAYA, THAILAND.
Bernard Maloney, The Queen's University, Belfast BT7 1NN, Northern Ireland.

The aim of this project was to determine what the vegetation of Ayutthaya was like at the time of its destruction by the Burmese in 1767 A.D. To this end 32 samples, supplied by Prof. Keith Branigan, Department of Archaeology, University of Sheffield, and derived from two cores extracted from a pond in the Royal Palace Gardens, labelled Core 2 and Core 3, were subjected to pollen analysis and counts of microfossil charcoal. Ayutthaya was founded in 1351 A.D. but the ponds are of much later age, dating to the times of King Narai.

Both pollen diagrams were dominated by large (above 30 microns in diameter) and small grass grains, Amaranthaceae, Urticaceae/Moraceae and a Cyperus species. Pollen concentrations increased in the more recent samples, which appear to post-date the destruction of the city, suggesting that weeds became more abundant. The grasses, amaranths, Urticaceae, Moraceae, and the sedges include plants which are grown as ornamentals but do not seem to be deliberately planted nearby today. The main interest of the diagrams lies with some of the minor plant taxa (both pollen diagrams contain over 150 pollen types). Almost every sample had some mangrove or back mangrove pollen in it. The Rhizophoraceae pollen (Rhizophora, Bruguiera/Ceriops and Carallia) was usually fresh and could have been brought in by wet season flooding or by the wind. It was commonest near the base of Core 2. The Avicennia, Sonneratia and Barringtonia pollen was battered and corroded was more certainly brought in by floods but the mangrove and back-mangrove pollen types are an insignificant component of the total pollen flora. The other tree pollen types are mainly a mixture of indigenous lowland monsoon forest species, and fruit tree taxa, with some pine. The amount of pine pollen is so low that it is unlikely that pine was growing anywhere near Ayutthaya

A number of the pollen types are not yet certainly identified, but there seem to have been east Asiatic tree species present, some of which are no longer recorded from Thailand. The elm pollen includes grains which are probably from the native species and those from an introduced species. Alder pollen also occurred once, so did hornbeam (Carpinus). One species of Carpinus has been recorded from Thailand. It is part of the Himalayan element in the Thai flora. However, these grains could be laboratory contaminants. The other interesting types are the American elements: Annona and Carica papaya. The Carica papaya pollen is present in one sample from the lower level of both cores. Pollen grains likely to be from indigenous fruit trees and those introduced in early times from elsewhere in Asia are also present, for instance those of jujube (Zizyphus), the mango (Mangifera) and the coconut palm (Cocos nucifera).

Turning to the shrubs and herbs: we have the occasional grain of Ixora, which is commonly planted today, and Randia (a shrub/small tree) and the trees/climbers include the fig. There is one common pollen type in Apocynaceae, the frangipani family, which I do not have reference material to identify more closely. This is probably from a planted ornamental. There is also some Agavaceae pollen which is possibly from the Aloe or some other ornamental, and some pollen from something in the buttercup family, Ranunculaceae. One core has a few Cannabis sativa pollen grains. Cannabis is wind pollinated and was not necessarily growing nearby. It is likely that rope was being made at Ayutthaya and cannabis fibre is used for that, other uses can be neither proven nor disproved from the pollen record [the historical literature, e.g. Turpin (1771) says that no hemp was grown, but it was present in earlier times at Angkor according to an early Chinese account (of 1296 A.D.), the source would be China].

The water plants included pondweed, lilies and various kinds of ornamental, such as the water lotus. The sort of plants that are commonly grown in ornamental ponds in Bangkok today [No reference has been found to there ever having been ornamental ponds. Kaempfer mentions ponds for washing the horses and elephants].

One Eucalyptus pollen grain was present in the upper sample from Core 2, so that probably post-dates about 1880. I have fairly precise dates for most recent introductions from the botanical literature. This brings us to what the written record says, and how it ties in with the pollen record. Eucalyptus globulus (blue gum) was said (Wanandorn 1934) to have been first seen in Bangkok about 1880 and was introduced to the Dusit Palace grounds when the palace was being built (about 1897-1898).

References
Turpin 1771. History of Siam, from General Collection of Voyages and Travels, John
Pinkerton, London 1811, IX, 573-655 (xerox in Siam Society Library). Accuracy in doubt, gives a very dubious account of the destruction of Ayutthaya in 1767 A.D....a Dutch eye witness account has been published elsewhere
Phya Winit Wanandorn 1934. Further notes on introduced plants in Siam. Journal of the Siam Society (Natural History Supplement) IX (3): 265-285.