Austronesian peoples
Total population | |
---|---|
c. 400 million | |
Regions with significant populations | |
Indonesia | c. 270 million (2020)[1][2] |
Philippines | c. 109.3 million (2020)[3] |
Madagascar | c. 24 million (2016)[4] |
Malaysia | c. 19.2 million (2017)[5] |
United States | c. 4.7 million[6] |
Thailand | c. 1.9 million[7] |
Papua New Guinea | c. 1.3 million[citation needed] |
East Timor | c. 1.2 million (2015)[8] |
Vietnam | c. 1.2 million (2019)[9] |
Fiji | c. 936,375 (2023)[10] |
New Zealand | c. 855,000 (2006)[11][12] |
Singapore | c. 576,300[13] |
Taiwan | c. 575,067 (2020)[14] |
Solomon Islands | c. 478,000 (2005)[citation needed] |
Brunei | c. 450,000 (2006)[15] |
Vanuatu | c. 272,000 [16][17] |
Cambodia | c. 249,000 (2011)[18] |
French Polynesia | c. 230,000 (2017)[19][20] |
Samoa | c. 195,000 (2016)[21] |
Guam | c. 150,000 (2010)[22] |
Hawaii | c. 157,445 (2020)[23] |
Kiribati | c. 119,940 (2020)[24] |
New Caledonia | c. 106,000 (2019)[25][26] |
Federated States of Micronesia | c. 102,000[16][17][27] |
Tonga | c. 100,000 (2016)[28] |
Suriname | c. 93,000 (2017)[29] |
Marshall Islands | c. 72,000 (2015)[30] |
American Samoa | c. 55,000 (2010)[31] |
Sri Lanka | c. 40,189 (2012)[32] |
Australia (Torres Strait Islands) | c. 38,700 (2016)[33] |
Myanmar | c. 31,600 (2019)[34][35] |
Northern Mariana Islands | c. 19,000[36] |
Palau | c. 16,500 (2011)[16][17][37] |
Wallis and Futuna | c. 11,600 (2018)[38] |
Nauru | c. 11,200 (2011)[39] |
Tuvalu | c. 11,200 (2012)[40][41] |
Cook Islands | c. 9,300 (2010)[42] |
Easter Island (Rapa Nui) | c. 2,290 (2002)[43] |
Niue | c. 1,937[16][17] |
Languages | |
Austronesian languages | |
Religion | |
Various religions |
The Austronesian peoples, sometimes referred to as Austronesian-speaking peoples,[44] are a large group of peoples in Taiwan, Maritime Southeast Asia, parts of Mainland Southeast Asia, Micronesia, coastal New Guinea, Island Melanesia, Polynesia, and Madagascar that speak Austronesian languages.[45][46] They also include indigenous ethnic minorities in Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar, Thailand, Hainan, the Comoros, and the Torres Strait Islands.[45][47][48] The nations and territories predominantly populated by Austronesian-speaking peoples are sometimes known collectively as Austronesia.[49]
They originated from a prehistoric seaborne migration, known as the Austronesian expansion, from pre-Han Taiwan, circa 3000 to 1500 BCE. Austronesians reached the northernmost Philippines, specifically the Batanes Islands, by around 2200 BCE. They used sails some time before 2000 BCE.[50]: 144 In conjunction with their use of other maritime technologies (notably catamarans, outrigger boats, lashed-lug boats, and the crab claw sail), this enabled their rapid dispersal into the islands of the Indo-Pacific, culminating in the settlement of New Zealand c. 1250 CE.[51] During the initial part of the migrations, they encountered and assimilated (or were assimilated by) the Paleolithic populations that had migrated earlier into Maritime Southeast Asia and New Guinea. They reached as far as Easter Island to the east, Madagascar to the west,[52] and New Zealand to the south. At the furthest extent, they might have also reached the Americas.[53][54]
Aside from language, Austronesian peoples widely share cultural characteristics, including such traditions and technologies as
History of research
The linguistic connections between
The Spanish
Malay variety. Tawny-coloured; hair black, soft, curly, thick and plentiful; head moderately narrowed; forehead slightly swelling; nose full, rather wide, as it were diffuse, end thick; mouth large, upper jaw somewhat prominent with parts of the face when seen in profile, sufficiently prominent and distinct from each other. This last variety includes the islanders of the Pacific Ocean, together with the inhabitants of the Marianas, the Philippine, the Molucca and the Sunda Islands, and of the Malayan peninsula. I wish to call it the Malay, because the majority of the men of this variety, especially those who inhabit the Indian islands close to the Malacca peninsula, as well as the Sandwich, the Society, and the Friendly Islanders, and also the Malambi of Madagascar down to the inhabitants of Easter Island, use the Malay idiom.
— Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, The anthropological treatises of Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, translated by Thomas Bendyshe, 1865.[61]
By the 19th century, however, a classification of Austronesians as being a subset of the "Mongolian" race was favoured, as was polygenism. The Australo-Melanesian populations of Southeast Asia and Melanesia (whom Blumenbach initially classified as a "subrace" of the "Malay" race) were also now being treated as a separate "Ethiopian" race by authors like Georges Cuvier, Conrad Malte-Brun (who first coined the term "Oceania" as Océanique), Julien-Joseph Virey, and René Lesson.[58][62]
The British naturalist
In linguistics, the Malayo-Polynesian language family also initially excluded Melanesia and Micronesia, due to the perceived physical differences between the inhabitants of these regions from Malayo-Polynesian speakers. However, there was growing evidence of their linguistic relationship to Malayo-Polynesian languages, notably from studies on the Melanesian languages by Georg von der Gabelentz, Robert Henry Codrington, and Sidney Herbert Ray. Codrington coined and used the term "Ocean" language family rather than "Malayo-Polynesian" in 1891, in opposition to the exclusion of Melanesian and Micronesian languages. This was adopted by Ray, who defined the "Oceanic" language family as encompassing the languages of Southeast Asia and Madagascar, Micronesia, Melanesia, and Polynesia.[47][63][64][65]
In 1899, the Austrian linguist and ethnologist Wilhelm Schmidt coined the term "Austronesian" (German: austronesisch, from Latin auster, "south wind"; and Greek νῆσος, "island") to refer to the language family.[66] Schmidt had the same motivations as Codrington: he proposed the term as a replacement to "Malayo-Polynesian", because he also opposed the implied exclusion of the languages of Melanesia and Micronesia in the latter name.[55][57] It became the accepted name for the language family, with Oceanic and Malayo-Polynesian languages being retained as names for subgroups.[47]
The term "Austronesian", or more accurately "Austronesian-speaking peoples", came to refer to people who speak the languages of the Austronesian language family. Some authors, however, object to the use of the term to refer to people, as they question whether there really is any biological or cultural shared ancestry between all Austronesian-speaking groups.[44][68] This is especially true for authors who reject the prevailing "Out of Taiwan" hypothesis and instead offer scenarios where the Austronesian languages spread among preexisting static populations through borrowing or convergence, with little or no population movements.[45][69]
Despite these objections, the general consensus is that the archeological, cultural, genetic, and especially linguistic evidence all separately indicate varying degrees of shared ancestry among Austronesian-speaking peoples that justifies their treatment as a "
Some Austronesian-speaking groups are not direct descendants of Austronesians and acquired their languages through language shift, but this is believed to have happened only in a few instances, since the Austronesian expansion was too rapid for language shifts to have occurred fast enough.[75] In parts of Island Melanesia, migrations and paternal admixture from Papuan groups after the Austronesian expansion (estimated to have started at around 500 BCE) also resulted in gradual population turnover. These secondary migrations were incremental and happened gradually enough that the culture and language of these groups remained Austronesian, even though in modern times, they are genetically more Papuan.[76] In the vast majority of cases, the language and material culture of Austronesian-speaking groups descend directly through generational continuity, especially in islands that were previously uninhabited.[75]
Serious research into the Austronesian languages and its speakers has been ongoing since the 19th century. Modern scholarship on Austronesian dispersion models is generally credited to two influential papers in the late 20th century: The Colonisation of the Pacific: A Genetic Trail (Hill & Serjeantson, eds., 1989) and The Austronesian Dispersal and the Origin of Languages (Bellwood, 1991).[77][78] The topic is particularly interesting to scientists for the remarkably unique characteristics of the Austronesian speakers: their extent, diversity, and rapid dispersal.[79][80]
Regardless, certain disagreements still exist among researchers with regards to chronology, origin, dispersal, adaptations to the island environments, interactions with preexisting populations in areas they settled, and cultural developments over time. The mainstream accepted hypothesis is the "Out of Taiwan" model first proposed by Peter Bellwood. But there are multiple rival models that create a sort of "pseudo-competition" among their supporters due to narrow focus on data from limited geographic areas or disciplines.[79][80][81] The most notable of which is the "Out of Sundaland" (or "Out of Island Southeast Asia") model.
Geographic distribution
Austronesians were the first humans with seafaring vessels that could cross large distances on the open ocean, which allowed them to colonize a large part of the Indo-Pacific region.[82][83][84][85] Prior to the 16th-century Colonial Era, the Austronesian language family was the most widespread in the world, spanning half the planet from Easter Island in the eastern Pacific Ocean to Madagascar in the western Indian Ocean.[45]
Languages from the family are today spoken by about 386 million people (4.9% of the global population), making it the fifth-largest language family by number of speakers. Major Austronesian languages are Malay (around 250–270 million in Indonesia alone in its own literary standard, named Indonesian), Javanese, and Filipino (Tagalog). The family contains 1,257 languages, the second most of any language family.[89]
The geographic region that encompasses native Austronesian-speaking populations is sometimes referred to as Austronesia.
Austronesian regions are almost exclusively islands in the Pacific and Indian oceans, with predominantly
Inhabitants of these regions include
Additionally, modern-era migration has brought Austronesian-speaking people to the United States, Canada, Australia, the UK,
Some authors also propose further settlements and contacts in the past in areas that are not inhabited by Austronesian speakers today. These range from likely hypotheses to very controversial claims with minimal evidence. In 2009, Roger Blench compiled an expanded map of Austronesia that encompassed these claims based on a variety of evidence, such as historical accounts, loanwords, introduced plants and animals, genetics, archeological sites, and material culture. They include areas like the Pacific coast of the Americas, Japan, the Yaeyama Islands, the Australian coast, Sri Lanka and coastal South Asia, the Persian Gulf, some Indian Ocean islands, East Africa, South Africa, and West Africa.[91]
List of Austronesian peoples
Austronesian peoples include the following groupings by name and geographic location (incomplete):
- )
- Malayo-Polynesian:
- Borneo groups (e.g., Kadazan-Dusun, Murut, Iban, Bidayuh, Dayak, Lun Bawang/Lundayeh)
- )
- Central Luzon group: (e.g., Kapampangan, Sambal)
- )
- T'boli)
- Merina, Sihanaka, Bezanozano)
- Melanesians: Melanesia (e.g., Fijians, Kanak, Ni-Vanuatu, Solomon Islands)
- Palauans)
- Burma, Thailand
- Sama-Bajau)
- Northern Luzon lowlanders (e.g., Ilocano, Pangasinan, Ibanag, Itawes)
- Tongans)
- Southern Luzon lowlanders (e.g., Tagalog, Bicolano)
- Batak (geographically includes Malaysia, Brunei, Pattani, Singapore, Cocos (Keeling) Islands, parts of Sri Lanka, southern Myanmar, and much of western and central Indonesia)
- Visayans: Visayas and neighbouring islands (e.g., Aklanon, Boholano, Cebuano, Hiligaynon, Masbateño, Waray)
Prehistory
The broad consensus on Austronesian origins is the "two-layer model", where an original
Paleolithic
Island Southeast Asia was settled by modern humans in the Paleolithic following coastal migration routes, presumably starting before 70,000 BP from Africa, long before the development of Austronesian cultures.[100][101][102] These populations are typified by having dark skin, curly hair, and short statures, leading Europeans to believe, in the 19th century, that they were related to African Pygmies. However, despite these physical similarities, genetic studies have shown that they are more closely related to other Eurasian populations than to Africans.[103][102]
The lowered sea levels of the
These early settlers are generally historically referred to as "
In modern literature, descendants of these groups, located in Island Southeast Asia west of
Mahdi (2017) also uses the term "Qata" (from
These populations are genetically distinct from later Austronesians, but through fairly extensive population admixture, most modern Austronesians have varying levels of ancestry from these groups. The same is true for some populations historically considered "non-Austronesians", due to physical differences—like Philippine Negritos, Orang Asli, and Austronesian-speaking Melanesians, all of whom have Austronesian admixture.[45][99] In Polynesians in Remote Oceania, for example, the admixture is around 20 to 30% Papuan and 70 to 80% Austronesian. The Melanesians in Near Oceania are roughly around 20% Austronesian and 80% Papuan, while in the natives of the Lesser Sunda Islands, the admixture is around 50% Austronesian and 50% Papuan. Similarly, in the Philippines, the groups traditionally considered to be "Negrito" vary between 30 and 50% Austronesian.[45][99][102]
The high degree of assimilation among Austronesian, Negrito, and Papuan groups indicates that the Austronesian expansion was largely peaceful. Rather than violent displacement, the settlers and the indigenous groups absorbed each other.[109] It is believed that in some cases, like in the Toalean culture of Sulawesi (c. 8,000–1,500 BP), it is even more accurate to say that the densely populated indigenous hunter-gatherer groups absorbed the incoming Austronesian farmers, rather than the other way around.[110] Mahdi (2016) further asserts that Proto-Malayo-Polynesian *tau-mata ("person")[note 2] is derived from a composite protoform *Cau ma-qata, combining "Tau" and "Qata" and indicative of the mixing of the two ancestral population types in these regions.[111]
Neolithic China
The broad consensus on the
These Neolithic pre-Austronesians from the coast of southeastern China are believed to have migrated to Taiwan between approximately 10,000 and 6000 BCE.[118][67] Other research has suggested that, according to radiocarbon dates, Austronesians may have migrated from mainland China to Taiwan as late as 4000 BCE (Dapenkeng culture).[119] They continued to maintain regular contact with the mainland until 1500 BCE.[120][121]
The identity of the Neolithic pre-Austronesian cultures in China is contentious. Tracing Austronesian prehistory in Fujian and Taiwan has been difficult due to the southward expansion of the Han dynasty (2nd century BCE) and the recent Qing dynasty annexation of Taiwan (1683 CE).[112][122][123][124] Today, the only Austronesian language in southern China is Tsat, spoken in Hainan. The politicization of archaeology is also problematic, particularly erroneous reconstructions among some Chinese archaeologists of non-Sinitic sites as Han.[125] Some authors, favoring the "Out of Sundaland" model, like William Meacham, reject the southern Chinese mainland origin of pre-Austronesians entirely.[126]
Nevertheless, based on linguistic, archaeological, and genetic evidence, Austronesians are most strongly associated with the early farming
Relations with other groups
Based on linguistic evidence, there have been proposals linking Austronesians with other linguistic families into
In support of both the Austric and Austro-Tai hypothesis,
While the Austric hypothesis remains contentious, there is genetic evidence that at least in western Island Southeast Asia, there had been earlier Neolithic overland migrations (pre-4,000 BP) by Austroasiatic-speaking peoples into what is now the Greater Sunda Islands when the sea levels were lower, in the early Holocene. These peoples were assimilated linguistically and culturally by incoming Austronesian peoples in what is now modern-day Indonesia and Malaysia.[95]
Several authors have also proposed that Kra-Dai speakers may actually be an ancient daughter subgroup of Austronesians that migrated back to the
According to Juha Janhunen and Ann Kumar, Austronesians may have also settled parts of southern Japan, especially on the islands of Kyushu and Shikoku, and influenced or created the Japanese hierarchical society. It is suggested that Japanese tribes like the Hayato people, the Kumaso, and the Azumi were of Austronesian origin. Until today, local traditions and festivals show similarities to Malayo-Polynesian culture.[141][142][143][144][145]
The
In relation to Sino-Austronesian models and the Longshan interaction sphere, Roger Blench (2014) suggests that the single migration model for the spread of the Neolithic into Taiwan is problematic, pointing out the genetic and linguistic inconsistencies between different Taiwanese Austronesian groups.[149]: 1–17 The surviving Austronesian populations in Taiwan should rather be considered as the result of various Neolithic migration waves from the mainland and back-migration from the Philippines.[149]: 1–17 These incoming migrants almost certainly spoke languages related to Austronesian or pre-Austronesian, although their phonology and grammar would have been quite diverse.[149]
Blench considers the Austronesians in Taiwan to have been a
Migration from Taiwan
The Austronesian expansion (also called the "Out of Taiwan" model) is a large-scale migration of Austronesians from Taiwan, occurring around 3000 to 1500 BCE. Population growth primarily fueled this migration. These first settlers settled in northern Luzon, in the archipelago of the Philippines, intermingling with the earlier Australo-Melanesian population who had inhabited the islands since about 23,000 years earlier. Over the next thousand years, Austronesian peoples migrated southeast to the rest of the Philippines, and into the islands of the Celebes Sea and Borneo.[118][150] From southwestern Borneo, Austronesians spread further west in a single migration event to both Sumatra and the coastal regions of southern Vietnam, becoming the ancestors of the speakers of the Malayic and Chamic branches of the Austronesian language family.[51]
Soon after reaching the Philippines, Austronesians colonized the Northern Mariana Islands by 1500 BCE or even earlier, becoming the first humans to reach Remote Oceania. The Chamorro migration was also unique in that it was the only Austronesian migration to the Pacific Islands to successfully retain rice cultivation. Palau and Yap were settled by separate voyages by 1000 BCE.[51][118][150]
Another important migration branch was by the
In the Indian Ocean, Austronesians in Maritime Southeast Asia
Alternative views
A competing hypothesis to the "Out of Taiwan" model is the "Out of Sundaland" hypothesis, favored by a minority of authors. Notable proponents include William Meacham, Stephen Oppenheimer, and Wilhelm Solheim. For various reasons, they have proposed that the homelands of Austronesians were within Island Southeast Asia (ISEA), particularly in the Sundaland landmass drowned during the end of the Last Glacial Period by rising sea levels. Proponents of these hypotheses point to the ancient origins of mtDNA in Southeast Asian populations, pre-dating the Austronesian expansion, as proof that Austronesians originated from within Island Southeast Asia.[157][158][159]
However, these have been repudiated by studies using
Historical period
This section needs additional citations for verification. (February 2024) |
By the beginning of the first millennium CE, most of the Austronesian inhabitants in
The
Western Europeans in search of spices and gold later colonized most of the Austronesian-speaking countries of the Asia-Pacific region, beginning in the 16th century, with the Portuguese and Spanish colonization of the Philippines, Palau, Guam, the Mariana Islands, and some parts of Indonesia (present-day East Timor); the Dutch colonization of the Indonesian archipelago; the British colonization of Malaysia and Oceania; the French colonization of French Polynesia; and later, the American governance of the Pacific.
Meanwhile, the British, Germans, French, Americans, and Japanese began establishing spheres of influence within the Pacific islands during the 19th and early 20th centuries. The Japanese later invaded most of Southeast Asia and some parts of the Pacific during World War II. The latter half of the 20th century initiated independence of modern-day Indonesia, Malaysia, East Timor, and many of the Pacific island nations, as well as the re-independence of the Philippines.
Culture
The native culture of Austronesia varies from region to region. The early Austronesian peoples considered the sea as the basic feature of their life.[citation needed] Following their diaspora to Southeast Asia and Oceania, they migrated by boat to other islands. Boats of different sizes and shapes have been found in every Austronesian culture, from Madagascar, Maritime Southeast Asia, to Polynesia, and have different names. In Southeast Asia, head-hunting was restricted to the highlands as a result of warfare. Mummification is only found among the highland Austronesian Filipinos and in some Indonesian groups in Celebes and Borneo.[citation needed]
Ships and sailing
Seagoing
Early researchers like Heine-Geldern (1932) and Hornell (1943) once believed that catamarans evolved from outrigger canoes, but modern authors specializing in Austronesian cultures, like Doran (1981) and Mahdi (1988), now believe it to be the opposite.[164][70][165]
Two canoes bound together developed directly from minimal raft technologies of two logs tied together. Over time, the double-hulled canoe form developed into the asymmetric double canoe, where one hull is smaller than the other. Eventually the smaller hull became the prototype outrigger, giving way to the single outrigger canoe, then to the reversible single outrigger canoe. Finally, the single outrigger types developed into the double outrigger canoe (or trimarans).[164][70][165]
This would also explain why older Austronesian populations in
The simplest form of all ancestral Austronesian boats had five parts. The bottom consisted of a single piece of hollowed-out log. At the sides were two planks, and two horseshoe-shaped wood pieces formed the
The ancestral rig was the mastless triangular crab claw sail, which had two booms that could be tilted to the wind. These were built in the double-canoe configuration or had a single outrigger on the windward side. In Island Southeast Asia, these developed into double outriggers on each side, which provided greater stability. The triangular crab claw sails also later developed into square or rectangular
The ancient Champa of Vietnam also uniquely developed basket-hulled boats whose hulls were composed of woven and resin-caulked bamboo, either entirely or in conjunction with plank strakes. They ranged from small coracles (o thúng) to large oceangoing trading ships like the ghe mành.[175][176]
The acquisition of catamaran and outrigger technology by non-Austronesian peoples in
Architecture
Austronesian architecture is diverse but often shares certain characteristics that indicate a common origin. The
The most ubiquitous common feature of Austronesian structures is the raised floor. The structures are raised on
Building structures on pilings is believed to be derived from the design of raised
Another common feature are
Austronesian buildings have spiritual significance, often containing what is coined by anthropologist James J. Fox as a "ritual attractor." These are specific posts, beams, platforms, altars, and so on that embody the house as a whole, usually consecrated at the time of building.[177]
The Austronesian house itself also often symbolizes various aspects of indigenous Austronesian cosmology and animism. In the majority of cases, the loft of the house (usually placed above the hearth), is considered to be the domain of deities and spirits. It is essentially a raised granary built into the structure of the house itself and functioned as a second floor. It is usually used to store sacred objects (like effigies of granary idols or deceased ancestors), heirlooms, and other important objects. These areas are usually not part of the regular living space, and may only be accessible to certain members of the family or after performing a specific ritual. Other parts of the house may also be associated with certain deities, and thus certain activities like receiving guests or conducting marriage ceremonies can only be performed in specific areas.[179]
While rice cultivation wasn't among the technologies carried into Remote Oceania, raised storehouses still survived. The pataka of the Māori people is an example. The largest pataka are elaborately adorned with carvings and are often the tallest buildings in the Māori pā. These were used to store implements, weapons, ships, and other valuables; while smaller patakas were used to store provisions. A special type of pataka supported by a single tall post also had ritual importance and were used to isolate high-born children during their training for leadership.[179]
The majority of Austronesian structures are not permanent. They are made from perishable materials like wood, bamboo, plant fibre, and leaves. Similar to traditional Austronesian boats, they do not use nails but are traditionally constructed solely by joints, weaving, ties, and dowels. Elements of the structures are repaired and replaced regularly or as they get damaged. Because of this, archaeological records of prehistoric Austronesian structures are usually limited to traces of house posts, with no way of determining the original building plans.[183]
Indirect evidence of traditional Austronesian architecture, however, can be gleaned from their contemporary representations in art, like in
In modern Indonesia, varying styles are collectively known as Rumah adat.
Arbi et al. (2013) have also noted the striking similarities between Austronesian architecture and Japanese traditional raised architecture (
-
Aboriginal Taiwanese Architecture
-
Sama-Bajauvillages are typically built directly on shallow water
-
The raised bale houses of the Ifugao people with capped house posts[179]
-
Toraja people with the distinctive saddleback roofs reminiscent of boats[180]
-
Bai meeting house of thePalauan peoplewith colourfully decorated gables
-
Besakana of the Merina people
-
Bahay kubo of the Tagalog people
-
Māori pataka storehouses
-
Fijian people
-
Uma mbatangu of the Sumba people
-
Jabu of the Toba Batak people
-
Rumoh of the Acehnese people
-
Rumah gadang of the Minangkabau people
-
prows (panolong)[185]
Pottery
Right: Capped burial jar from the Sa Huỳnh culture of central Vietnam
Outside of Taiwan, assemblages of red-slipped pottery, plainware, and incised and stamped pottery associated with the Austronesian migrations are first documented from around 2000 to 1800 BCE in the northern
This type of pottery dispersed south and southwest to the rest of Island Southeast Asia. The eastward and the southward branches of the migrations converged in Island Melanesia resulting in what is now known as the Lapita culture centered around the Bismarck Archipelago.[188][189][84]
The oldest known pottery assemblages in
Winter et al. (2012), on the other hand, dismissed the similarities as being generic rather than specific to the region. This is from both analysis of the microscopic structure of the shards (indicating manufacturing techniques) and the impossibility of drift voyaging from Luzon due to the prevailing wind and currents. Instead of a voyage directly from Luzon, they instead proposed an origin either from a direct single voyage from Mindanao (southern Philippines) or Morotai (Maluku Islands) to Guam; or two voyages, with way-stations in Palau or Yap.[192]
Hung et al. (2012) has pointed out in response that no pottery assemblages older than 2000 years old have been found in Morotai, which also has a Papuan-speaking population. They also pointed out that present-day data on wind and currents is not a reliable way of ascertaining migration routes, and that the voyages settling Remote Oceania would have been deliberate, not uncontrolled drifting. Similar presumptions by Thor Heyerdahl led to his erroneous conclusion that Polynesia was settled from the Americas. Pottery manufacturing techniques are also diverse, even within a single community. Thus analysis of manufacturing methods is less significant than comparison of decorative systems. Nevertheless, Hung et al. (2012) emphasized that they also did not discount other sources (yet undiscovered) from the southern Philippines. They also propose the Eastern Visayas as a likely point-of-origin. Sources south of the Philippines remain unlikely without further archaeological findings due to their related pottery assemblages being younger than 1500 BCE.[193]
The dentate-stamped pottery of the Lapita culture (c. 1350 to 1300 BCE) also retained elements also found in the Nagsabaran pottery in the Philippines, including stamped circles as well as the cross-in-circle motif.
A common practice among Austronesians in a large area of Island Southeast Asia is the use of
Music and dance
Gong ensembles are also a common musical heritage of Island Southeast Asia. The casting of gong instruments are believed to have originated from the Bronze Age cultures of Mainland Southeast Asia. It spread to Austronesian islands initially through trade as prestige goods. However, Mainland Asian gongs were never used in ensembles. The innovation of using gong sets is uniquely Austronesian. Gong ensembles are found in western Malayo-Polynesian groups, though they never penetrated much further east. There are roughly two gong ensemble traditions among Austronesians, which also produced gongs in ancient times.[139]
In western Island Southeast Asia, these traditions are collectively known as
In eastern Island Southeast Asia, these traditions are known as
-
Kubing jaw harps, flutes, and a kagul slit drum from the Philippines
-
jaw harps of the Sundanese people, Indonesia
-
Atingting kon, wooden slit drums from Vanuatu
-
An Indonesian gamelan ensemble
-
Ahula
-
Kapa haka of the Māori people
-
A
Jade carving
-
white jade double-headed pendant from Vietnam
The ancestral pre-Austronesian
The most notable jade products of these regions were the vast amounts of penannular and double-headed earrings and pendants known as
Polished and ground stone adzes, gouges, and other implements, some of which are made from jade-like stone, have also been recorded in areas of Island Melanesia and eastern New Guinea associated with the Lapita culture. These were considered valuable currency and were primarily used to trade for goods.[203][204] In 2012, a Lapita culture jadeite gouge used for wood carving was found in Emirau Island in the Bismarck Archipelago. It was dated to around 3,300 BP, but the origin of the jade material is unknown.[205][206] Similar prestige stone tools have also been found in New Caledonia.[207]
Jade was absent in most of Remote Oceania, due to the lack of jade deposits. However, there is putative evidence that Polynesians may have remained familiar with jade and may have acquired them through prehistoric trade contacts with New Caledonia, Island Melanesia, and/or New Zealand.[203][208]
Jade carving traditions reappeared among the Māori people of New Zealand. These were produced from locally sourced pounamu (greenstone) and were used to produce taonga (treasure). They include various tools and weapons like adzes, scrapers, fishing hooks, and mere, as well as ornaments like the hei-tiki and hei matau. Certain ornaments like the pekapeka (double-headed animal pendant) and the kākā pōria (bird leg ring) bear remarkably strong resemblances to the double-headed and ring-type lingling‑o.[202][209] Bellwood et al. (2011) has suggested that the reappearance of these motifs might be evidence of a preserved tradition of Southeast Asian jade motifs (perhaps carved in perishable wood, bone, or shell by Polynesians prior to the reacquisition of a jade source), or they might even be the result of a later Iron Age contact between eastern Polynesia and the Philippines.[202]
Rock art
There are around six hundred to seven hundred rock art sites discovered in Southeast Asia and Island Melanesia, as well as over eight hundred megalithic sites. The sites specifically associated with the Austronesian expansion contain examples of indigenous pictograms and petroglyphs. Within Southeast Asia, the sites associated with Austronesians can be divided into three general rock art traditions: the Megalithic Culture of Borneo, Sulawesi, and the Greater Sunda Islands; the Austronesian Painting Tradition of the Lesser Sunda Islands, coastal New Guinea, and Island Melanesia; and the Austronesian Engraving Style of Papua New Guinea and Island Melanesia.[210] Despite proximity, these traditions can be distinguished readily from the Australo-Melanesian rock art traditions of Australia (except the Torres Strait Islands) as well as the interior highlands of New Guinea, indicating the borders of the extent of the Austronesian expansion.[194]
Dating rock art is difficult, but some of the sites subjected to direct dating pre-date Austronesian arrival, like the Lene Hara paintings of East Timor which has an age range of 6,300 to 26,000 BP. Conversely, others are more recent and can be dated indirectly by their subjects. The depictions of pottery, ships, and metal objects, for example, put certain rock art sites at a range of 2,000 to 4,000 BP. Some hunter-gatherer groups have also continued to produce rock art well into the present period, as evidenced by their modern subjects.[210][211][212]
-
Watu Molindo ("the entertainer stone"), one of the megaliths in Bada Valley, Central Sulawesi, Indonesia, usually found near megalithic stone vats known as kalamba.[213]
-
Hand stencils in the "Tree of Life" cave painting in Gua Tewet, Kalimantan, Indonesia
-
Boats and human figures in a cave painting in the Niah National Park of Sarawak, Malaysia; an example of the Austronesian Painting Traditions (APT)
-
Petroglyphs in Vanuatu with the concentric circles and swirling designs characteristic of the Austronesian Engraving Style (AES)
-
Arai stone, large stone discs used as currency in Yap
The Megalithic Culture is mostly limited to western Island Southeast Asia, with the greatest concentration being western Indonesia. While most sites are not dated, the age ranges of dating sites are between the 2nd to 16th century CE. They are divided into two phases. The first is an older megalithic tradition associated with the Neolithic Austronesian rectangular axe culture (2,500 to 1,500 BCE); while the second is the 3rd or 4th century BCE megalithic tradition associated with the (non-Austronesian) Dong Son culture of Vietnam. Prasetyo (2006) suggests that the megalithic traditions are not originally Austronesian, but rather innovations acquired through trade with India and China, but this has little to no evidence in the intervening regions in Thailand, Vietnam, and the Philippines.[210][214]
The Austronesian Painting Traditions (APT) are the most common types of rock art in Island Southeast Asia. They consist of scenes and pictograms typically found in rock shelters and caves near coastal areas. They are characteristically rendered in red ochre pigments for the earlier forms, later sometimes superseded by paintings done in black charcoal pigments. Their sites are mostly clustered in Eastern Indonesia and Island Melanesia, although a few examples can be found in the rest of Island Southeast Asia. Their occurrence has a high correlation to Austronesian-speaking areas, further evidenced by the appearance of metal (bronze) artifacts in the paintings. They are mostly found near the coastlines. Their common motifs include hand stencils, "sun-ray" designs, boats, and active human figures with headdresses or weapons and other paraphernalia. They also feature geometric motifs similar to the motifs of the Austronesian Engraving Style.[210][215] Some paintings are also associated with traces of human burials and funerary rites, including ship burials. The representations of boats themselves are believed to be connected to the widespread "ship of the dead" Austronesian funerary practices.[215][216]
The earliest APT sites dated is from Vanuatu, which was found to be around 3,000 BP, corresponding to the initial migration wave of the Austronesians. These early sites are largely characterized by face motifs and hand stencils. Later sites from 1,500 BP onwards, however, begin to show regional divergence in their art styles. APT can be readily distinguished from older Pleistocene-era Australo-Melanesian cave paintings by their motifs, color, and composition, though they can often be found in the same locality. The most recognizable motifs of APT (like boats) do not occur in cave paintings (or engravings) that definitely pre-date the Austronesian arrival, the sole exception being the stencilled hand motif. Some APT examples are also characteristically found in relatively inaccessible locations like very high up in cliffsides overlooking the sea. No traces of APT has been found in Taiwan or the Philippines, though there is continuity in the motifs of spirals and concentric circles found in ancestral petroglyphs.[210][215]
The Austronesian Engraving Style (AES), consisting of petroglyphs carved into rock surfaces, is far less common than APT. The majority of these sites are in coastal New Guinea, and Island Melanesia. AES sites, which can be tentatively traced back to the similar Wanshan petroglyphs of Taiwan, are believed to be largely correlated to the prehistoric extent of the Lapita culture. The common motif of this tradition is curvilinear geometric engravings like spirals, concentric circles, and face-like forms. These resemble the geometric motifs in APT, though they are considered to be two separate artistic traditions.[210][215] AES is particularly dominant in the Solomon Islands and New Caledonia, where engravings are far more abundant than painted sites.[194]
O'Connor et al. (2015) proposes that APT developed during the initial rapid southward Austronesian expansion, and not before, possibly as a response to the communication challenges brought about by the new maritime mode of living. Along with AES, these material symbols and associated rituals and technologies may been the manifestations of "powerful ideologies" spread by Austronesian settlers that were central to the "Neolithization" and rapid assimilation of the various non-Austronesian indigenous populations of ISEA and Melanesia.[215]
The easternmost islands of Island Melanesia (Vanuatu, Fiji, and New Caledonia) are considered part of Remote Oceania as they are beyond the interisland visibility threshold. These island groups begin to show divergence from the APT and AES traditions of Near Oceania. While their art traditions show a clear continuation of the APT and AES traditions, they also feature innovations unique to each island group, like the increasing use of black charcoal, rectilinear motifs, and being found more inside sacred caves rather than in open cliffsides.[194]
In Micronesia, the rock art traditions can be divided into three general regions: western, central, and eastern Micronesia. The divisions reflect the various major migration waves from the Philippines into the Mariana Islands and Palau at 3,500 BP; a Lapita culture back-migration from Island Melanesia into central and eastern Micronesia at around 2,200 BP; and finally a back-migration from western Polynesia into eastern Micronesia at around 1,000 BP.[194]
In western Micronesia (Palau, Yap, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands), rock art primarily consist of paintings on high cave ceilings and sea-facing cliffs. They are very similar to APT in terms of their motifs as well as their relatively inaccessible locations. Common motifs include hand stencils, faces, turtles and fish, concentric circles, and characteristic four-pointed stars. Petroglyphs are rare, but mainly consist of human forms with triangular bodies without heads or arms. This is believed to be connected to the funerary rite of removing the heads from the bodies of deceased relatives.[194] A notable megalithic tradition in western Micronesia are the haligi stone pillars of the Chamorro people. These are capped stone pillars which are believed to have served as supports for raised buildings. They are associated with the Latte period (900 to 1700 CE), when a new wave of migrants from Southeast Asia reintroduced rice cultivation into the islands. Another megalithic tradition is also that of the rai stones, massive doughnut-shaped discs of rock which were used as currency in Yap.[217][218][219]
Rock art in central Micronesia (Chuuk, Pohnpei, and Kosrae), in contrast, are dominated by rock engravings with motifs tying it to the rock art traditions of Island Melanesia. They include curvilinear shapes like spirals and concentric circles, tree-like shapes, and the distinctive "enveloped cross" motif. The Pohnpaid petroglyphs are the largest assemblage of rock engravings in the region, with motifs dominated by footprints, enveloped crosses, and outlined "sword-paddles".[194] Central Micronesia also hosts the ruins of the stone cities of Nan Madol (1,180–1,200 CE) and Leluh (1,200–1,800 CE), in the islands of Pohnpei and Kosrae, respectively.[194][220][221]
In the low-lying atolls of eastern Micronesia, rock art is rare to nonexistent, due to the absence of suitable rock surfaces for painting or engraving.[194]
In
In Tonga and Samoa, the existing rock art sites consist mostly of engravings with motifs including curvilinear shapes, human figures, "jellyfish", turtles, birds, and footprints. These are typically carved in natural rock formations or marae sites.[194]
In the central-eastern Polynesian islands, which include the
In the Hawaiian islands, the abundant petroglyphs are remarkably all similar in execution. Their common subjects include stick-like human figures, dogs, boats, sails, paddles, footprints, and ceremonial headdresses. Depictions of marine life, however, is rare, unlike the rest of Polynesia. They are typically carved into boulders, lava rock formations, and cliffsides. Red paintings of dogs in cliffsides and caves can also be found in Kauʻai and Maui.[194] The megalithic traditions of Hawaii can be exemplified by the heiau sacred sites, which can range from simple earth terraces to standing stones.
In
The rock art in
Body art
Body art among Austronesian peoples is common, especially elaborate tattooing which is one of the most well-known pan-Austronesian traditions.[223]
Tattooing
In modern times, tattoos are usually associated with
Tattoos had various functions among Austronesian societies. Among men, they were strongly linked to the widespread practice of
Among the
One of the earliest descriptions of Austronesian tattoos by Europeans was during the 16th century
Among the Māori of New Zealand, tattoos (moko) were originally carved into the skin using bone chisels (uhi) rather than through puncturing as in usual practice.[234] In addition to being pigmented, the skin was also left raised into ridges of swirling patterns.[235][236]
Dental modification
Teeth blackening was the custom of dyeing one's teeth black with various tannin-rich plant dyes. It was practiced throughout almost the entire range of Austronesia, including Island Southeast Asia, Madagascar, Micronesia, and Island Melanesia, reaching as far east as Malaita. However, it was absent in Polynesia. It also existed in non-Austronesian populations in Mainland Southeast Asia and Japan. The practice was primarily preventative, as it reduced the chances of developing tooth decay similar to modern dental sealants. It also had cultural significance and was seen as beautiful. A common sentiment was that blackened teeth separated humans from animals.[237][238][239][240]
Teeth blackening was often done in conjunction with other modifications to the teeth associated with beauty standards, including
Religion
The religious traditions of the Austronesian people focus mostly on ancestral spirits, nature spirits and gods. It is basically a complex
Currently, many of these beliefs have gradually been replaced. Examples of native religions include:
-
Adu zatua ancestor carvings of the Nias people of western Indonesia
-
StoneMarquesas
-
Ki'i carving at Puʻuhonua o Hōnaunau, Hawaii
-
Rapa Nui
-
Writing
-
Tablet B ofRapa Nui
-
An example of the abundantRapa Nui associated with the tangata manu cult of Makemake. Rongorongo does not appear in any of these petroglyphs.
-
TheOld Malay written in a derivative of the Pallava script
-
Page fromBaybayin script alongside the Latin alphabet
With the possible exception of
Rongorongo, said to have originally been called kohau motu mo rongorongo ("lines of inscriptions for chanting out"), is the only pre-contact indigenous Austronesian system of glyphs that appear to be true writing or at least proto-writing. They consist of around 120 glyphs, ranging from representations of plants to animals, celestial objects, and geometric shapes. They were inscribed into wooden tablets about 12 to 20 in (30 to 51 cm) long using shark teeth and obsidian flakes. The wood allegedly came from toromiro and makoʻi trees, which is notable given that Rapa Nui was completely deforested at the time of European contact. Although of the surviving two dozen tablets, a few were made from trees introduced after European contact, as well as wood originating from European ships and driftwood.[246][245][247] Rapa Nui also has a very rich assemblage of petroglyphs largely associated with the tangata manu ("birdman") cult of Makemake. Although some rongorongo glyphs may have been derived from these petroglyphs, rongorongo does not appear in any of the abundant rock carvings in Rapa Nui and seems to be restricted to the wooden tablets.[248]
The tablets were first described by an outsider in 1864 by the Catholic missionary Eugène Eyraud who said they were found "in all the houses." However, he paid them little attention and they remained unnoticed by the outside world. It wasn't until 1869 that one of the tablets came into the possession of Florentin-Étienne Jaussen, the Bishop of Tahiti. He brought the tablets to the world's attention and instructed the Rapa Nui mission to gather more information about them. But by then, most of the tablets were allegedly already destroyed, presumed to have been used as fuel by the natives in the deforested island.[246]
At the time of discovery of the tablets, Rapa Nui had undergone severe depopulation. This was largely due to the loss of the island's last trees and the
Oral tradition holds that the ruling classes were the only ones who could read the tablets, and the ability to decipher the tablets was lost along with them. Numerous attempts have been made to read the tablets, starting from a few years after their discovery. But to this day, none have proven successful. Some authors have proposed that rongorongo may have been an attempt to imitate European script after the idea of writing was introduced during the "signing" of the
In Southeast Asia, the first true writing systems of pre-modern Austronesian cultures were all derived from the
In regions which converted to Islam,
.On Woleai and surrounding islands, a script was developed for the Woleaian language in the early 20th century. Approximately 20% of the script's letterforms were borrowed from Latin letters; the remaining characters seem to have been derived from indigenous iconography. Despite this heavy Latin influence, the script was a syllabary.
Genetic studies
Genetic studies have been done on the people and related groups.
An important breakthrough in studies in Austronesian genetics was the identification of the "Polynesian motif" (
Moodley et al. (2009) identified two distinct populations of the
On 16 January 2020, the personal genomics company 23andMe added the category "Filipino & Austronesian" after customers with no known Filipino ancestors were getting false positives for 5% or more "Filipino" ancestry in their Ancestry Composition report (the proportion was as high as 75% in Samoa, 71% in Tonga, 68% in Guam, 18% in Hawaii, and 34% in Madagascar). The company's scientists surmised that this was due to the shared Austronesian genetic heritage being incorrectly identified as Filipino ancestry.[259]
A study about the ancestral composition of modern
Evidence from agriculture
Genomic analysis of cultivated coconut (Cocos nucifera) has shed light on the movements of Austronesian peoples. By examining 10 microsatellite loci, researchers found that there are 2 genetically distinct subpopulations of coconut – one originating in the Indian Ocean, the other in the Pacific Ocean. However, there is evidence of admixture, the transfer of genetic material, between the two populations. Given that coconuts are ideally suited for ocean dispersal, it seems possible that individuals from one population could have floated to the other. However, the locations of the admixture events are limited to Madagascar and coastal east Africa and exclude the Seychelles and Mauritius. Sailing west from Maritime Southeast Asia in the Indian Ocean, the Austronesian peoples reached Madagascar by ca. 50–500 CE, and reached other parts thereafter. This forms a pattern that coincides with the known trade routes of Austronesian sailors. Additionally, there is a genetically distinct sub-population of coconuts on the eastern coast of South America which has undergone a genetic bottleneck resulting from a founder effect; however, its ancestral population is the pacific coconut, which suggests that Austronesian peoples may have sailed as far east as the Americas.[86][88][261]
Pre-Columbian contact with the Americas
A genome analysis in 2020 showed Austronesian contact to
See also
Notes
- ^ The absence of Denisovan admixture in western Southeast Asian populations seems to indicate that interbreeding between modern humans and Denisovans happened within Southeast Asia itself, possibly east of the Wallace Line, and not in mainland Eurasia (Reich et al., 2011; Cooper & Stringer, 2013)
- ^ Cognates include Sangir taumata, Molima tomotau, Kola tamata, Fijian tamata, Samoan tangata, and Hawaiian kanaka
- ^ Sometimes confusingly also as "early Austronesians" or "proto-Austronesians". The latter should not be confused with the reconstructed Proto-Austronesian language (PAN), which the pre-Austronesians did not speak. (Bellwood, 1988)
- sternand vice versa when sailing against the wind
- iimw.
- ^ Cognates include Tagalog báhay, Cebuano baláy, Malay balai, Balinese bale, Fijian vale, Hawaiian hale, and Māori whare.
- Sikalepo.
- Papitalaikamal.
- ^ Cognates include Cebuano banwá, Iban menoa, Banggai bonua, Selaru hnua, Sawai pnu, Fijian vanua, Samoan fanua, Hawaiian honua, and Māori whenua.
References
- ^ "Hasil Sensus Penduduk 2020" (PDF) (in Indonesian). Statistics Indonesia. 21 January 2021. p. 9. Retrieved 21 January 2021.
- ISBN 978-979-064-606-3, archived(PDF) from the original on 30 April 2020, retrieved 15 August 2016
- ^ "2020 Census of Population and Housing (2020 CPH) Population Counts Declared Official by the President". Philippine Statistics Authority.
- ^ "Population, total". Data. World Bank Group. 2017. Archived from the original on 25 December 2018. Retrieved 29 April 2018.
- ^ "Malaysia". The World Factbook. Central Intelligence Agency. Retrieved 29 April 2018.
- ^ "2020 Census Demographic Profile". Retrieved 5 September 2023.
- ^ "Population movement in the Pacific: A perspective on future prospects". Archived from the original on 7 February 2013. Retrieved 22 July 2013.
- ^ "2015 Census shows population growth moderating". Government of Timor-Leste. Archived from the original on 7 February 2016. Retrieved 24 July 2016.
- ISBN 978-604-75-1532-5.
- ^ "Fiji Today 2005 / 2006" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 April 2007. Retrieved 23 March 2007.
- ^ "Population movement in the Pacific: A perspective on future prospects". Archived from the original on 7 February 2013. Retrieved 22 July 2013.
- ^ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 27 November 2007. Retrieved 23 March 2007.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link) - ^ About 13.5% of Singapore Residents are of Malay descent. In addition to these, many Chinese Singaporeans are also of mixed Austronesian descent. See also "Key Indicators of the Resident Population" (PDF). Singapore Department of Statistics. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 July 2007. Retrieved 25 April 2007.
- ^ Ramzy, Austin (1 August 2016). "Taiwan's President Apologizes to Aborigines for Centuries of Injustice". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 5 June 2020. Retrieved 17 January 2020.
- ^ "Brunei". The World Factbook. Central Intelligence Agency. July 2018. Retrieved 10 April 2019.
- ^ a b c d "World Population Prospects 2022". United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. Retrieved 17 July 2022.
- ^ a b c d "World Population Prospects 2022: Demographic indicators by region, subregion and country, annually for 1950-2100" (XSLX) ("Total Population, as of 1 July (thousands)"). United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. Retrieved 17 July 2022.
- ^ Joshua Project. "Cham, Western in Cambodia". Joshua Project. Archived from the original on 22 March 2016. Retrieved 15 October 2019.
- ^ "La population légale au 17 août 2017: 275 918 habitants". ISPF. Archived from the original on 9 February 2018. Retrieved 16 February 2018.
- ^ Most recent ethnic census, in 1988. "Frontières ethniques et redéfinition du cadre politique à Tahiti" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 26 March 2009. Retrieved 31 May 2011. Approximately 87.7% of the total population (275,918) are of unmixed or mixed Polynesian descent.
- ^ "Population & Demography Indicator Summary". Samoa Bureau of Statistics. Archived from the original on 3 April 2019. Retrieved 25 June 2018.
- ^ "The Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander Population: 2010" (PDF). census.gov. US Census Bureau. Archived (PDF) from the original on 24 July 2017. Retrieved 11 August 2017.
- ^ "2020 United States Census Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics". Retrieved 31 December 2023.
- ^ "Kiribati Stats at a Glance". Kiribati National Statistics Office. Ministry of Finance & Economic Development, Government of Kiribati. Archived from the original on 8 January 2017. Retrieved 17 January 2020.
- ^ "La Nouvelle-Calédonie compte 271 407 habitants en 2019". Institut de la statistique et des études économiques. ISEE. Archived from the original on 13 November 2014. Retrieved 17 January 2020.
- ^ "Recensement de la population en Nouvelle-Calédonie en 2009". insee.fr. Archived from the original on 29 February 2020. Retrieved 17 January 202039.1% if the population are native Kanak
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: postscript (link) - ^ Approximately 90.4% of the total population (113,131) is native Pacific Islander.
- ^ [1] Archived 27 February 2018 at the Wayback Machine. Tonga 2016 Census Results (11 November 2016).
- ^ "Suriname". The World Factbook. Central Intelligence Agency. Retrieved 29 April 2018.
- ^ "Australia-Oceania: Marshall Islands". CIA The World Factbook. Retrieved 17 January 2020.
- 2010 United States Census. census.gov. Archived from the originalon 23 July 2012. Retrieved 1 October 2018.
- ^ "A2: Population by ethnic group according to districts, 2012". Census of Population& Housing, 2011. Department of Census& Statistics, Sri Lanka. Archived from the original on 10 March 2018. Retrieved 25 April 2017.
- ^ "3238.0.55.001 – Estimates of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, June 2016". Australian Bureau of Statistics. 31 August 2018. Archived from the original on 29 February 2020. Retrieved 27 December 2019.
- ^ Joshua Project. "Malay in Myanmar (Burma)". Joshua Project. Archived from the original on 16 October 2019. Retrieved 15 October 2019.
- ^ Joshua Project. "Moken, Salon in Myanmar (Burma)". Joshua Project. Archived from the original on 16 October 2019. Retrieved 15 October 2019.
- ^ Data Access and Dissemination Systems (DADS). "American FactFinder – Results". U.S. Census Bureau. Archived from the original on 12 February 2020. Retrieved 17 January 2020. Approximately 34.9% of the total population (53,883) are native Pacific Islander
- ^ Approximately 92.2% of the total population (18,024) is of Austronesian descent.
- ^ INSEE. "Les populations légales de Wallis et Futuna en 2018". Archived from the original on 14 April 2019. Retrieved 7 April 2019.
- ^ "National Report on Population ad Housing" (PDF). Nauru Bureau of Statistics. Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 9 June 2015.
- ^ "Population of communities in Tuvalu". world-statistics.org. 11 April 2012. Archived from the original on 23 March 2016. Retrieved 20 March 2016.
- ^ "Population of communities in Tuvalu". Thomas Brinkhoff. 11 April 2012. Archived from the original on 24 March 2016. Retrieved 20 March 2016.
- ^ "Australia-Oceania: Cook Islands". CIA The World Factbook. Retrieved 17 January 2020.
- ^ "Rapa Nui IW 2019". IWGIA. International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs. Archived from the original on 24 October 2019. Retrieved 17 January 2020. Approximately 60% of the population of total population of Rapa Nui (3,765) is of native descent.
- ^ Wilhelm Solheim II: "I emphasize again, as I have done in many other articles, that 'Austronesian' is a linguistic term and is the name of a super language family. It should never be used as a name for a people, genetically speaking, or a culture. To refer to people who speak an Austronesian language, the phrase 'Austronesian-speaking people' should be used." Origins of the Filipinos and Their Languages (January 2006)
- ^ ISBN 978-1-920942-85-4. Archivedfrom the original on 2 April 2020. Retrieved 23 March 2019.
- PMID 24395773.
- ^ ISBN 978-1-922185-07-5.
- ^ a b Cheke, Anthony (2010). "The timing of arrival of humans and their commensal animals on Western Indian Ocean oceanic islands". Phelsuma. 18 (2010): 38–69. Archived from the original on 21 April 2017. Retrieved 21 January 2019.
- S2CID 197705560.
- ISBN 978-0-7315-2132-6.)
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link - ^ .
- ^ PMID 28716916.
- ^ a b Van Tilburg, Jo Anne. 1994. Easter Island: Archaeology, Ecology and Culture. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press
- ^ a b Langdon, Robert. The Bamboo Raft as a Key to the Introduction of the Sweet Potato in Prehistoric Polynesia, The Journal of Pacific History, Vol. 36, No. 1, 2001
- ^ ISBN 978-1-136-74984-1. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ^ PMID 29379068.
- ^ JSTOR 3623036.
- ^ ISBN 978-1-921536-00-7.
- ^ PMID 18156242.
- ^ "Pseudo-theory on origins of the 'Malay race'". Aliran. 19 January 2014. Retrieved 30 November 2020.
- ^ "Five Principal Varieties of Mankind, One Species" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 September 2006. Retrieved 10 September 2006.
- ^ The Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences, and General Literature. Vol. 15 (9th ed.). Henry G. Allen and Company. 1888. pp. 323–326.
- ^ Codrington, Robert Henry (1891). The Melanesians: Studies in their Anthropology and Folklore. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- ^ Ray, Sidney H. (1896). "The common origin of Oceanic languages". The Journal of the Polynesian Society. 5 (1): 58–68. Archived from the original on 30 January 2019. Retrieved 23 March 2019.
- ^ Fox, Charles Elliot (1906). "The Comparison of the Oceanic Languages" (PDF). Transactions and Proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand. 39: 464–475. Archived (PDF) from the original on 3 April 2020. Retrieved 23 March 2019.
- Dictionary). Oxford University Press. p. 22000.
- ^ a b Blust, Robert A. (1999). "Subgrouping, circularity and extinction: some issues in Austronesian comparative linguistics". In Zeitoun, Elizabeth; Li, Paul Jen-kuei (eds.). Selected Papers from the Eighth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics. Institute of Linguistics (Preparatory Office), Academia Sinica. pp. 31–94.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-85773-357-3. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ^ ISBN 978-9971-69-642-9. Archived(PDF) from the original on 30 December 2019. Retrieved 23 March 2019.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-89096-107-0.
- ISBN 978-0-07-159456-1.
- JSTOR 25168892.
- ^ ISBN 978-90-8964-085-7. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ISBN 978-979-26-2436-6. Archivedfrom the original on 15 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ^ ISBN 978-1-4419-6970-5.
- PMID 29487365.
- ^ JSTOR 24936983.
- ISBN 978-0-19-857695-2.
- ^ ISBN 978-979-26-2436-6. Archivedfrom the original on 15 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ^ ISBN 978-602-386-202-3. Archived(PDF) from the original on 26 July 2018. Retrieved 23 March 2019.
- JSTOR 42928107.
- ^ a b Meacham, Steve (11 December 2008). "Austronesians were first to sail the seas". The Sydney Morning Herald. Archived from the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
- ^ ISBN 9781108334068.
- ^ .
- ^ a b Zotomayor, Alexie Villegas (12 March 2013). "Archaeologists say migration to Marianas longest ocean-crossing in human history". Marianas Variety News and Views: 2. Archived from the original on 21 October 2022. Retrieved 22 January 2024.
- ^ PMID 15288523.
- S2CID 14226647.
- ^ S2CID 21753825.
- ^ Blust R (2016). History of the Austronesian Languages. University of Hawaii at Manoa.
- ISSN 1877-0428.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-85883-605-1. Archived(PDF) from the original on 20 April 2020. Retrieved 23 March 2019.
- from the original on 24 September 2020. Retrieved 10 May 2019.
- (PDF) from the original on 14 August 2017. Retrieved 21 January 2019.
- S2CID 49377747.
- ^ JSTOR j.ctt1pwtd26.18. Retrieved 4 November 2021.
- ^ "Japanese Filipinos – Ethnic Groups of the Philippines". ethnicgroupsphilippines. Archived from the original on 2 January 2013.
- ^ Agnote, Dario (11 October 2017). "A glimmer of hope for castoffs". The Japan Times. Archived from the original on 7 June 2011. Retrieved 9 August 2016.
- ISBN 978-1-135-98723-7.
- ^ (PDF) from the original on 21 January 2019. Retrieved 21 January 2019.
- hdl:10072/43493.
- ISBN 9780817319397. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ^ S2CID 34661604.
- ^ ISBN 978-981-4762-75-5. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ^ ISBN 978-1-119-25155-2.
- .
- ISBN 978-1-62349-277-9.
- PMID 21944045.
- S2CID 206551893.
- ^ ISBN 978-90-04-25385-8. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- (PDF) from the original on 27 April 2019. Retrieved 27 April 2019.
- ISBN 978-3-319-33822-4.
- ^ (PDF) from the original on 24 January 2019. Retrieved 23 March 2019.
- PMID 24607387.
- ^ Fox, James J. (2004). Current Developments in Comparative Austronesian Studies. Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University. Archived from the original on 23 March 2019. Retrieved 23 March 2019.
- PMID 9837834.
- (PDF) from the original on 23 March 2019. Retrieved 23 March 2019.
- ^ Bellwood, Peter (1988). "A Hypothesis for Austronesian Origins" (PDF). Asian Perspectives. 26 (1): 107–117. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 May 2019. Retrieved 1 May 2019.
- ^ S2CID 29838345.
- ISBN 978-0-8248-3213-1.
- ^ Jiao, Tianlong. 2013. "The Neolithic Archaeology of Southeast China." In Underhill, Anne P., et al. A Companion to Chinese Archaeology, 599–611. Wiley-Blackwell.
- ^ Jiao, Tianlong. 2007. The Neolithic of Southeast China: Cultural Transformation and Regional Interaction on the Coast. Cambria Press.
- ^ Zhang C, Hung HC (2008). "The Neolithic of Southern China – Origin, Development, and Dispersal" (PDF). Asian Perspectives. 47 (2). Archived (PDF) from the original on 25 January 2019. Retrieved 23 March 2019.
- ISBN 978-0-521-64310-8.
- ISBN 978-1-317-50366-8.
- S2CID 43110674.
- (PDF) from the original on 27 February 2019. Retrieved 1 May 2019.
- ^ Bellwood P (2014). The Global Prehistory of Human Migration. p. 213.
- ^ a b Blench, Roger (2009). The Prehistory of the Daic (Tai-Kadai) Speaking Peoples and the Austronesian Connection (PDF). Presented at the 12th EURASEAA meeting Leiden, 1–5 September 2008. European Association of Southeast Asian Archaeologists. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 April 2019. Retrieved 23 March 2019.
- ^ Goodenough, Ward Hunt (1996). Prehistoric Settlement of the Pacific, Volume 86, Part 5. American Philosophical Society. pp. 127–128.
- ^ S2CID 2533393.
- ^ ISBN 978-1-134-14962-9.
- ^ S2CID 165587524.
- S2CID 140691699.
- from the original on 24 September 2020. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
- ISBN 978-1-85728-538-3.
- S2CID 18231757.
- PMID 26403857.
- ^ a b Blench, Roger (2018). Tai-Kadai and Austronesian are Related at Multiple Levels and their Archaeological Interpretation (draft).
- ^ ISBN 978-981-4762-75-5. Archived(PDF) from the original on 27 January 2019. Retrieved 24 September 2020.
- ^ Zumbroich, Thomas J. (2007–2008). "The origin and diffusion of betel chewing: a synthesis of evidence from South Asia, Southeast Asia and beyond". eJournal of Indian Medicine. 1: 87–140. Archived from the original on 23 March 2019. Retrieved 23 March 2019.
- ^ ユハ・ヤンフネン 「A Framework for the Study of Japanese Language Origins」『日本語系統論の現在』(pdf) 国際日本文化センター、京都、2003年、477–490頁。
- ^ Kumar, Ann (2009). Globalizing the Prehistory of Japan: Language, Genes and Civilization. Oxford: Routledge.
- ^ "The Azumi Basin in Japan and Its Ancient People – Yahoo Voices – voices.yahoo.com". 31 December 2013. Archived from the original on 31 December 2013. Retrieved 5 May 2019.
- ISSN 1341-7207
- ISSN 1341-7207
- ^ van Driem G (2005). "Sino-Austronesian vs. Sino-Caucasian, Sino-Bodic vs. Sino-Tibetan, and Tibeto-Burman as default theory". In Yadava YP, Bhattarai G, Lohani RR, Prasain B, Parajuli K (eds.). Contemporary Issues in Nepalese Linguistics. Linguistic Society of Nepal. pp. 285–338. Archived from the original on 24 September 2020. Retrieved 25 April 2019.
- ^ Vovin, Alexander (1997). "The comparative method and ventures beyond Sino-Tibetan". Journal of Chinese Linguistics. 25 (2): 308–336. Archived from the original on 24 September 2020. Retrieved 23 March 2019.
- ISBN 978-0-415-11761-6. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ^ a b c d Blench, Roger. 2014. Suppose we are wrong about the Austronesian settlement of Taiwan? Archived 9 December 2018 at the Wayback Machine m.s.
- ^ ISBN 978-1-902937-20-5.
- ^ Gibbons, Ann. "'Game-changing' study suggests first Polynesians voyaged all the way from East Asia". Science. Archived from the original on 13 April 2019. Retrieved 23 March 2019.
- ^ hdl:2440/104470.
- ^ .
- ^ hdl:11343/121829.
- PMC 3903192.
- .
- ^ Meacham, William (1984–1985). "On the improbability of Austronesian origins in South China" (PDF). Asian Perspective. 26: 89–106. Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 25 December 2018.
- ISBN 978-971-542-508-7.
- ISBN 978-0-297-81816-8.
- ^ S2CID 196651459.
- ^ Rochmyaningsih, Dyna (28 October 2014). "'Out of Sundaland' Assumption Disproved". Jakarta Globe. Archived from the original on 25 December 2018. Retrieved 24 December 2018.
- ^ Philippine History by Maria Christine N. Halili. "Chapter 3: Precolonial Philippines" (Published by Rex Bookstore; Manila, Sampaloc St. Year 2004)
- ^ Oktora S, Ama KK (3 April 2010). "Lima Abad Semana Santa Larantuka" (in Indonesian). Kompas. Archived from the original on 28 November 2018. Retrieved 19 August 2017.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-415-10054-0.
- ^ a b c Doran, Edwin Jr. (1974). "Outrigger Ages". The Journal of the Polynesian Society. 83 (2): 130–140. Archived from the original on 18 January 2020. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
- S2CID 6179955.
- ^ Hornell, James (1932). "Was the Double-Outrigger Known in Polynesia and Micronesia? A Critical Study". The Journal of the Polynesian Society. 41 (2 (162)): 131–143.
- ^ ISBN 978-1-4073-0289-8. Archived(PDF) from the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 22 October 2019.
- ^ a b Lacsina, Ligaya (2016). Examining pre-colonial Southeast Asian boatbuilding: An archaeological study of the Butuan Boats and the use of edge-joined planking in local and regional construction techniques (PhD). Flinders University.
- ISBN 978-0-19-027772-7.
- ^ Polachek, Tom. "Working Watercraft of Madagascar". WoodenBoat. Retrieved 10 January 2023.
- ISBN 978-0-520-95383-3. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ISBN 978-0-8248-4093-8.
- ISBN 978-3-319-33822-4. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- S2CID 110546116.
- ^ Sox, David G. Cham Maritime Technology: Basket-Hulled Boats. pp. 1–12.
- ^ ISBN 978-1-920942-84-7. Archivedfrom the original on 27 April 2019. Retrieved 27 April 2019.
- from the original on 27 April 2019. Retrieved 27 April 2019.
- ^ a b c d e Sato, Koji (1991). "Menghuni Lumbung: Beberapa Pertimbangan Mengenai Asal-Usul Konstruksi Rumah Panggung di Kepulauan Pasifik". Antropologi Indonesia. 49: 31–47. Archived from the original on 27 April 2019. Retrieved 27 April 2019.
- ^ S2CID 145591097.
- ^ ISBN 978-981-4762-76-2. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- JSTOR 43618621.
- ISBN 978-971-542-579-7.
- .
- ISBN 978-971-10-0049-3.
- ^ Phương, Trần Kỳ (2006). "Cultural Resource and Heritage Issues of Historic Champa States in Vietnam: Champa Origins, Reconfirmed Nomenclatures, and Preservation of Sites" (PDF). Asia Research Institute Working Paper (75): 1–28. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 November 2015. Retrieved 4 November 2019.
- ISBN 978-1-78042-964-9. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ^ ISBN 978-1-76046-095-2. Archivedfrom the original on 6 April 2018. Retrieved 26 April 2019.
- ^ S2CID 128641903.
- S2CID 170236058.
- ^ Reid, L. (2002). "Morphosyntactic evidence for the position of Chamorro in the Austronesian language family". In Bauer, R.S. (ed.). Collected papers on Southeast Asian and Pacific Languages. Pacific Linguistics 530. Pacific Linguistics. pp. 63–94.
- S2CID 161735451.
- S2CID 160158223.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-19-084495-0. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- S2CID 3956094.
- S2CID 160340278.
- ^ Wagelie, Jennifer (2002). "Lapita Pottery (ca. 1500–500 B.C.)". The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Archived from the original on 26 April 2019. Retrieved 26 April 2019.
- ISBN 978-1-76046-095-2. Archivedfrom the original on 6 April 2018. Retrieved 26 April 2019.
- ^ ISBN 978-9971-69-351-0.
- ^ PMID 18048347.
- S2CID 129020595.
- ^ ISBN 978-971-94292-0-3.
- ^ JSTOR 20701262.
- ISBN 978-956-353-131-2.
- .
- ^ Summerhayes G, Matisoo-Smith E, Mandui H, Allen J, Specht J, Hogg N, McPherson S (2010). "Tamuarawai (EQS): An Early Lapita Site on Emirau, New Ireland, PNG". Journal of Pacific Archaeology. 1 (1): 62–75.
- ^ Sand, Christophe (2016). "Prestige Stone Items in Island Melanesia: assessment of the enigmatic biconical picks, drilled plaques and stone clubs from New Caledonia". Journal of Pacific Archaeology. 7 (1): 30–40.
- ^ Best, Elsdon (1912). "Stone Implements of the Maori". Dominion Museum Bulletin (4). Archived from the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 29 April 2019.
- ^ Keane, Basil (12 June 2006). "Story: Pounamu – jade or greenstone". Te Ara – The Encyclopedia of New Zealand. New Zealand Government. Archived from the original on 23 January 2019. Retrieved 29 April 2019.
- ^ ISBN 978-602-386-202-3. Archivedfrom the original on 24 September 2020. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
- from the original on 24 September 2020. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
- S2CID 28293144.
- ISBN 978-1-78491-844-6.
- ISBN 978-979-26-2436-6. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ^ a b c d e O'Connor S, Louys J, Kealy S, Mahirta (2015). "First record of painted rock art near Kupang, West Timor, Indonesia, and the origins and distribution of the Austronesian Painting Tradition". Rock Art Research. 32 (2): 193–201. Archived from the original on 24 September 2020. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
- ISBN 978-1-4073-0304-8. Archivedfrom the original on 24 September 2020. Retrieved 30 April 2019.
- ^ Carson, Mike T. (2012). "An overview of latte period archaeology" (PDF). Micronesica. 42 (1/2): 1–79. Archived (PDF) from the original on 12 April 2019. Retrieved 30 April 2019.
- ^ Peterson, John A. (2012). "Latte villages in Guam and the Marianas: Monumentality or monumenterity?" (PDF). Micronesica. 42 (1/2): 183–08. Archived (PDF) from the original on 12 April 2019. Retrieved 30 April 2019.
- JSTOR 23044947.
- S2CID 14289693.
- S2CID 161654405.
- ^ Krutak, Lars (2005–2006). "Return of the Headhunters: The Philippine Tattoo Revival". The Vanishing Tattoo. Archived from the original on 6 June 2018. Retrieved 9 December 2013.
- ISBN 978-0-87169-865-0.
- ISBN 978-1-86189-823-4. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ISBN 978-1-921313-12-7.
- ISBN 978-0-231-51310-4. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ISBN 978-1-61069-076-8. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ISBN 978-0-295-74284-7. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- ISBN 978-1-74045-808-5. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 5 August 2016.
- ISBN 978-971-91712-0-1.
- ^ Salvador-Amores AI (2002). "Batek: Traditional Tattoos and Identities in Contemporary Kalinga, North Luzon Philippines". Humanities Diliman. 3 (1): 105–142. Archived from the original on 4 September 2012. Retrieved 9 December 2013.
- ISBN 978-90-6832-192-0.
- ^ Krutak, Lars (2009). "The Kalinga Batok (Tattoo) Festival". The Vanishing Tattoo. Archived from the original on 6 April 2018. Retrieved 9 December 2013.
- ^ Best E (1904). "The Uhi-Maori, or Native Tattooing Instruments". The Journal of the Polynesian Society. 13 (3): 166–172. Archived from the original on 21 April 2012. Retrieved 9 December 2013.
- ^ Major-General Robley (1896). "Moko and Mokamokai – Chapter I – How Moko First Became Knows to Europeans". Moko; or Maori Tattooing. Chapman and Hall Limited. p. 5. Archived from the original on 22 March 2009. Retrieved 26 September 2009.
- ISBN 978-0-226-46768-9. Archivedfrom the original on 5 November 2018. Retrieved 5 August 2016.
- .
- hdl:10125/21020.
- ^ Zumbroich, Thomas (2016). ""We blacken our teeth with oko to make them firm" - Teeth blackening in Oceania". Anthropologica. 57 (2): 539–555. Archived from the original on 24 September 2020. Retrieved 3 May 2019.
- ^ Zumbroich, Thomas J. (2012). ""Ny vazana tsy aseho vahiny" – "Don't show your molars to strangers" – Expressions of teeth blackening in Madagascar". Ethnobotany Research & Applications. 10: 523–540.
- ISBN 978-0-471-62882-8. Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2020. Retrieved 4 June 2020.
- S2CID 6469209.
- ^ Baldwick J (2013). Ancient Religions of the Austronesian World. London: I.B.Tauris.
- ^ Handoko W. "THE CONTINUITY OF AUSTRONESIAN TRADITION ON ISLAMIC AND EARLY COLONIAL PERIOD IN MALUKU 1". Archived from the original on 24 September 2020. Retrieved 18 April 2019.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-19-823710-5.
- ^ a b c McLaughlin, Shawn (2004). "Rongorongo and the Rock Art of Easter Island" (PDF). Rapa Nui Journal. 18 (2): 87–94. Archived (PDF) from the original on 11 July 2019. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
- .
- ISBN 978-0-917956-74-4.
- S2CID 22718446.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-7007-1286-1. Archivedfrom the original on 24 September 2020. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
- S2CID 162720504.
- ^ Osborne HS (2017). Indigenous Use of Scripts as a Response to Colonialism (BA). Robert D. Clark Honors College. Archived from the original on 1 May 2019. Retrieved 1 May 2019.
- .
- ^ "臺灣原住民族的Y 染色體多樣性與華南史前文化的關連性" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 25 February 2012. Retrieved 18 July 2010.
- ^ .
- ^ PMID 20029456.
- S2CID 128987362.
- PMID 19164753.
- ^ Esselmann, Samantha Ancona (16 January 2020). "What is Austronesian ancestry?". 23andMeBlog. 23andMe. Archived from the original on 16 February 2020. Retrieved 16 February 2020.
- PMID 33753512.
- S2CID 14226647.
- S2CID 220420232.
Books
- ISBN 978-0-19-520103-1.
- Bellwood, Peter (2007). Prehistory of the Indo-Malaysian Archipelago (3rd, revised ed.). ANU E Press. ISBN 978-1-921313-12-7.
- Bellwood, Peter; Fox, James J.; Tryon, Darrell, eds. (2006). The Austronesians: historical and comparative perspectives. Australian National University. ISBN 978-1-920942-85-4.
- Diamond, Jared M. (1998). Guns, Germs, and Steel. Vintage. ISBN 978-84-8306-667-6.
- Benitez-Johannot, Purissima, ed. (2009). Paths of Origins. ArtPostAsia Books. ISBN 978-971-94292-0-3. Archived from the originalon 16 October 2011. Retrieved 14 October 2011.
- James J. Fox (2006). Origins, Ancestry and Alliance: Explorations in Austronesian Ethnography. ANU E Press. ISBN 978-1-920942-87-8.
External links
- Capelli C, Wilson JF, Richards M, Stumpf MP, Gratrix F, Oppenheimer S, et al. (February 2001). "A predominantly indigenous paternal heritage for the Austronesian-speaking peoples of insular Southeast Asia and Oceania". American Journal of Human Genetics. 68 (2): 432–43. PMID 11170891.
- public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Mundās". Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 19 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. This article incorporates text from a publication now in the
- Books, some online, on Austronesian subjects by the Australian National University
- Encyclopædia Britannica: Austronesian Languages