austroasiatic languages and rice cultivation
TRANSCRIPT
8/3/2019 Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/austroasiatic-languages-and-rice-cultivation 1/10
Chapter 18
Languages and Farming Dispersals:
Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
Charles Higham
There were two major transitions to agriculture in
the Old World. One took place in the Levant and
involved wheat, barley, cattle and sheep. The otherwas centred in the Yangtze and Yellow River basins
of China, where rice and millet were brought under
cultivation in association with cattle and pig domes
tication. Both took place at about the same time and
under parallel climatic changes. In the western cen
tre, much research has been devoted to exploring
possible links between the expansion of agricultural
communities from the Near East and the present
distribution of Indo-European languages. Archaeo
genetic research has been deployed as a testing
mechanism for the broad models generated. East
and Southeast Asia lag well behind this move, but
the region is important not only on its own terms,
but also as a means of seeking possible similarities
with the spread of Indo-European languages.
This paper identifies first a series of cognates
for rice cultivation which link the Austroasiatic lan
guages of Southeast Asia and eastern India. It then
seeks archaeological evidence for the expansion of
rice farmers south and west from the centre of do
mestication in the Yangtze Valley, and finds an en
couraging conformity between the distribution of
Austroasiatic (AA) languages and the spread ofNeolithic settlement based on rice, and the raising of
domestic cattle, pigs and the dog. I t then considers
the possible adoption of Austroasiatic languages by
indigenous hunter-gatherer s. The concluding model
is proposed and means of testing it are explored.
AA languages fall into two major divisions,
Munda and Mon-Khmer, and are found from east
ern India to Vietnam, south to peninsular Malaysia
and the Nicobar Islands. The Kurku are the western
most group of AA speakers, living south of the
Narmada River in Maharashtra. Norman & Mei
(1976) have identified a possible AA substrate in
223
southern China which suggests that this language
family once had an even wider distribution. The
most northerly known AA language is P'u-man, recognized in 1899 in the village of Xiao Qin in Yunnan.
This is a particularly vital location, for it lies on the
strategic Mekong about 100 km south of lake Dali.
Apart from Vietnamese and Khmer, the national lan
guages of Vietnam and Cambodia, the distribution
of AA speakers consistently takes the form of iso
lated enclaves. This is, at least in part, due to more
recent, historically-documented intrusions. The Thai,
for example, have taken up much of the Chao Phraya
Valley, thus isolating the speakers of Mon (an AA
language) to remote, usually upland enclaves. The
Kuay people of the lower Thai provinces of the
Khorat Plateau are islands surrounded by speakers
of Lao. The Burmese have marginalized the Mon,
while Munda languages persist as enclaves sur
rounded by Indo-European languages. No AA speak
ers survive in Lingnan (southern China) in the face
of the expansion of Sino-Tibetan.
AA languages have, for almost a century, been
linked in various ways with other language families.
Schmidt (1906) was foremost in suggesting that AA
and Austronesian (AN) languages belong to a phy
lum he named Austric. This linkage was not widelysupported until Reid (1994) found evidence in the
Nancowry language of the Nicobar Islands for a link
based not so much on cognates, but on morphemes
in which conservative AN structures survived in AA
languages due probably to the remote island loca
tion. The notion that the Munda languages were
intrusive to India was suggested by Heine-Geldern
(1932), who further linked their arrival from South
east Asia with the distribution of the polished shoul
dered adze and the spread of agriculture. Wheeler
(1959) joined him in identifying an eastern source for
the Neolithic of eastern India.
8/3/2019 Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/austroasiatic-languages-and-rice-cultivation 2/10
o
• Palaungic
• Aslian NorthAslian
The word for dog, for
example, is likely to be im
portant. There is, in Southeast
Asia, no native wolf from
which to derive the domesti
cated dog. Yet the cranial
characteristics of the prehis
toric dog reveal, beyond
doubt, a lupine ancestry. The
nearest possible sources for
the wolf are Canis lUpus chanco
in China, and c.l. pallipes in
India. Figure 18.1 shows the
word for dog in a variety of
AA languages. I t is clear that
cognates are present over the
entire area of AA language
distribution, even into Central
India. The word for child (Fig.
18.2) is virtually identical be
tween Kurku in Central In
dia, and Bahnar on the eastern
seaboard of Vietnam, a dis
tance of almost 3000 km,
equivalent to that from the
Konya Plain in Turkey to
Skara Brae in Scotland. Fish
• Central Bahnaric m west Bahnaric is another key word for anyexpansionary group of farm
ers in Southeast and South
Asia. As can be seen in Figure
18.3, this too is clearly cog
nate across the area of AA lan
guages, linking small islands
of speakers.
But perhaps th e key
words in the vocabulary are those for rice in its
various forms. Luce (1985) has considered the word
for husked rice. In Old Mon it is sno', Old Khmerranko, Danaw ko, in the P'u-man language of Yunnan
it is 'n-k'u and in Khasi, it is khaw. The word for rice
plant (Fig. 18.4) in Sakai is ba'ba' or ba', in Stieng,
Biat, Gar and Bahnar it is ba, in Khasi is becomes kba
an d in Mundari, it is baba. Luce concluded with
these words: 'What can be the cause of this startling
diffusion? I can only think of one adequate explana
tion: wet rice cultivation' (Luce 1985, 3). At a time
when archaeological research had hardly begun, he
suggested that rice cultivation began in the Red River
Valley, whence agriculturalists moved up stream toYunnan, across to the headwaters of the Brahmaputra
and so into India. As will be seen, his first idea has
been largely sustained by further linguistic research,
ffiilij" .v......... Khmulc............'
'",
""
f i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : : ~ ~ ~ ' ......... , .
.......... . .;,.' " ...
...
.'
Munda• Monic
• Nlcobarese
• North Bannaric
"
o
KSEW
600
-
Pearic
[ill Khasian
D Soutn Bahnaric
!W!WiH Katuic
kilometres
200 400
- -
KSIA ~ ~
Austroasiatic words for dog
x Pu'man
KINSOR '?:>~
South Ashan
\:::::}::1 Khmaric
Chapter 18
Figure 18.1. Austroasiatic words for dog.
'-----'-----
224
Any consideration of this possible link between
AA languages and the spread of agriculture should
most logically commence by considering cognatewords for rice cultivation across the broad spectrum
of AA languages. As with all aspects of the South
east Asian past, such studies lag behind comparable
research in other parts of the world. However, in a
series of lectures delivered to the Ecole des Langues
Orientales Vivantes in Paris in 1966, Gordon Luce
provided a pioneering analysis of the implications
of the distribution of AA languages for the spread of
rice cultivation (Luce 1985). He began by considering a
number of key cognates linking the widely-scattered
speakers of AA. These form such a key platform forany further consideration of this issue that they need
to be briefly summarized. In doing so, I have chosen
certain words relevant to the spread of agriculturalists.
I I Vletic
8/3/2019 Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/austroasiatic-languages-and-rice-cultivation 3/10
- -
Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
bu t his archaeological corre
lates need drastic revision.
Thus, Zide & Zide (1976)
have considered the Proto
Munda vocabulary, and com
pared the reconstructed wordswith those found in other AA
languages in Southeast Asia.
Their results reveal that, on the
basis of the reconstructed
Proto-Munda word list, th e
Munda were more advanced
agriculturally than archaeolo
gists had previously thought.
Whereas it was widely
assumed that the more ad
vanced Munda, speaking Sora,Mundari or Santali, received
their knowledge of agriculture
from intrusive Indo-Aryan
speakers, the linguistic evi
dence revealed that they
would have been rice farmers
at the time of their arrival in
eastern India. Indeed, the re
construction of plant names
provides a dimension to
Munda prehistory not available so far from archaeology.
Bamboo and bamboo shoot
have cognates between Sora
and Gorum in Munda, and in
Old Mon.
There are Proto-Munda
names for rice and uncooked
husked rice which have cog
;;....;:;
KHUN
. .J;'i{~ . ; : : " . ~ W N HON%. '
- -K)N "" •
" : . : : : ~ • \.. ..KON
· , ; , ~ , , · , ~ ,........................
ON '$:-.gO
... ..; .' .. : : - ~ ~ . .>, ....
........ '.' .
' ~ ~ ~ : 2 ~ ' ~ ~ ... .•...
KON (Kurku) I,
. D o
'".KUSN,
oAustroasiatic words for child
200 400 600 "
kilometres [ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ 1 Katuic • North Bahnaric • Central Bahnaric .1m west Bahnaric0 Vietic
1::::::\1 Khmaric ,," . Pearic ............... Khmulc • Palaungic...............illMonic
Pu'man f:--::·:-::::·:-:..::·1 Khasian North Aslian • Aslian §§§§§ Munda
South Aslian t:::::I South Bahnanc• Nicobarese
Figure 18.2. Austroasiatic words for child.
nates in Mon-Khmer, Lawa, Rumai and Khmu. Lawa
is spoken in the Ping River valley of northern Thai
land, while Khmu speakers are found in upland Laos.The north Munda form has cognates in Kharia, Mon
Khmer, Khasi and Semang. The word for pestle might
be cognate in Kurku and Mon, Khmer and Proto
MK, while alcohol and inebriation have widespread
AA cognates. There is also a reconstructable word
for do g with cognate forms in Mon-Khmer. The
Munda word for bull seems to have been borrowed
from Indo-Aryan, whereas there is a possible cog
nate for cow with Proto-Munda and Mon-Khmer.
Zide & Zide have concluded that at least 3500 years
ago, at a conservative estimate, the Proto-Munda
speakers practised subsistence agriculture, cultivat
ing rice, millet and at least three legumes. They also
used husking pestles and mortars which go back to
Proto-AA. But they developed some cultigens or
plant resources in India, for there are no AA cog
nates for mango or turmeric.This situation is supported by Mahdi (1998),
who has found that the Proto-AA word for rice can
be reconstructed in Munda, Mon-Khmer, Palaung
Wa, Viet-Muong, Old Mon and Lamet. Pejros &
Shnirelman (1998) have also deployed linguistic evi
dence in suggesting that neither the Austroasiatic
nor Austronesian proto-languages reveal evidence
for a tropical origin, but rather point to inland begin
nings north of the tropical zone of eastern Eurasia.
They identify the middle Yangtze Valley as a likely
homeland, and feel that Proto-Austric began to di
vide in the ninth to eighth millennia Be. Within AA,
Munda and Mon-Khmer split from each other by the
end of the fifth millennium Be. By the end of the
225
8/3/2019 Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/austroasiatic-languages-and-rice-cultivation 4/10
o
m Aslian
• Palaungic
NorthAslian
tage of riverine routes of ex
pansion. From a source in the
upper Yangtze valley, he sug
gested that Proto-Munda
speakers followed the course
of the Brahmaputra River into
India, while speakers of Proto
Mon-Khmer followed the
Irrawaddy into Burma, the
Chao Phraya an d Mekong into
Thailand and Cambodia, an d
the Red River into Vietnam.
This proposal called upon pre
historians to review the ar
chaeological data available, to
see i f the evidence supported
such a model. This involves
consideration of the climatean d archaeological sequence
in the Yangtze Valley, based
on evidence only assembled
over the last few years.
The early Holocene cli
mate of the Yangtze Valley un
derwent a series of profound
changes incorporating the end
of the Pleistocene Ice Age an d
the oscillations in temperature
•
Central Bahnaric west Bahnaric
and rainfall. Recent evaluations of pollen spectra and
faunal assemblages there re
veal a climate 4-10°C cooler
and much drier than now be
tween 20,000 and 15,000 Be
(Higham & Lu 1998). Rainfall
was probably 1000 mm perannum below its present level of 1600 mm, account
ing for the predominance of drought-resistant plants
in the pollen spectra. From 15,000 to about 13,700
years BP the climate moderated, encouraging thespread of oak and pine, elm and willow. But thereaf
ter, and until 10,000 BP, there was a reversal to cold
conditions described across Eurasia as the Younger
Dryas period. Thereafter, it again became warmer
and moister. Broad-leaved trees colonized the Yang
tze Valley and the fauna became subtropical. In
creased rainfall fed rivers and lakes, and wild rice
spread out from refugia.
It is against this environmental kaleidoscope
that we can measure the significance of recent finds
from deep excavations in the caves which fringe the
lacustrine lowlands. The sequence at Diaotonghuan,
for example, spans the later Pleistocene into the early
• Monic Munda
• North Bahnaric
• Nicobarese
o
KHA .:;
600-t·:-::::·:-::::·:->1 Khasian
Pearic
I::::: :1 South Bahnaric
! ~ ~ m H ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 Kaluic
kilometres
200 400- -ustroasiatic words for fish
:It Pu'man
KAKU (Kurku)
South Aslian
Figure 18.3. Austroasiatic words for fish.
226
Chapter 18
DVielic
fourth millennium, Mon-Khmer began to divide into
Khmer, Bahnaric and Viet-Muong.
The linguistic evidence summarized above is
compatible with an original Austric homeland in themiddle Yangtze Valley, from which at least the an
cestors of the AA and AN languages originated and
spread, the former largely by land, an d the latter by
sea. Linguists seem to agree that a considerable time
depth is necessary to account for the differences be
tween the Munda and Mon-Khmer languages, and
rather less for the divergence between the individual
languages of the latter division.
Robert Blust (1996) followed Reid's conclusion
on the validity of Austric by proposing, purely on
linguistic evidence, that the distribution of AA lan
guages in South and Southeast Asia results from a
series of intrusive movements which took advan
1:::::::;:;::1 Khmaric
8/3/2019 Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/austroasiatic-languages-and-rice-cultivation 5/10
227
o
B west Bahnaric
Aslian
• Palaungic
NorthAslian
• Central Bahnaric
['''''1 Kh .............. mUle...............
I,
~ m ~ ~ : : L ! ' . '."" " .
.' ; ~ u ~ r F '•...
.'..
tI • \ . •.
•
Munda
• Monic
• North Bahnaric
• Nicobarese
,.,
KBA
o
marshes an d lakes, were also abundantly represented
in this settlement, together with hunted and prob
ably domestic animals, pottery vessels, wooden
spades and pestles, the foundations of pile dwellings and over 100 human burials. Bashidang is simi
la r in many respects to the settlement of Pengtoushan,
found only 20 km to the southwest. Here, we en
counter a cemetery in which the dead were interred
with complete pottery vessels and exotic stone orna
ments. The clay used for making pots was tempered
with rice chaff. Again, there are the remains of houses
and every sign of a successful adaptation to the rich
resources offered in the middle Yangtze Lakeland.
Two radiocarbon determinations obtained from the
rice used as a tempering agent are 6420-6990 BC and5780-6380 BC (calibrated: Crawford & Chen Shen
1998).
Katuic
60 0-
~
Pea ric
..»::··>::-I Khasian
):::::j South Bahnaric
kilometres
20 0 400
- -
' $:
.' ~ B A B A ~ ' "/
"'.
Austroasiatic words for rice plant
x Pu'man
!::::::;:;:j Khmaric
Figure 18.4. Austroasiatic words for rice plant.
period. This cavern
a small, swampy
in Jiangxi Province
The excavators
16 sequential
of occupation and resamples of rice phyto
the hard silica bodies
the rice plant. There
example, a surge in
e numbers of rice glume
in zone G, which
tentatively dated to the ter
Pleistocene. These are
evidence for the col
of wild rice during the
phase which character
that period. Rice
were extremely
during zone F, which cor
to the Younger
phase. However,
was again abundantly
during zone E,
is thought to date be
ween 10,000-8000 BP. About
th e sample conforms
a domestic variety of D Vietic
This context also pro
first evidence for
the form of very
sometimes cord
vessels which could SouthAslian
have been made in or
r to cook rice.
A lack of reliable radio
dates makes this a tentative framework,
ut it gains support from similar sequences in other
caves. Xianrendong is located only 800 m from
iaotonghuan, an d again has a Palaeolithic occupation under a Neolithic horizon containing rice
phytoliths. Yuchanyan also overlooks low-lying
etlands, an d has provided a sample of fish, turtle
an d mammalian bone as well as rice husks said to be
transitional to the domestic form. Potsherds from
this site are dated in the vicinity of 12,500 BP (Yuan &
Zhang 1999). Bashidang is a village site which cov
ers about three hectares. Its lower layers date to
about 8000 BP, and excavations in 1993-97 uncovered
waterlogged deposits which had preserved over
15,000 rice grains. These have been ascribed to acultivated variety (Pei 1998). Water caltrop and lo
tus, both of which can easily be propagated in
Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
8/3/2019 Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/austroasiatic-languages-and-rice-cultivation 6/10
Chapter 18
This accumulating body of evidence indicates ing distance of all three. It has a deep stratigraphic
that the Yangtze Valley was one of the very few sequence, involving over four metres of accumu
areas in Eurasia that witnessed a Neolithic Revolu lated cultural material. The initial settlement has been
tion, the transition from hunting and gathering to dated to between 2400-2100 BC, and excavations over
agriculture. Population growth is a recurrent charac an area of 225 square metres have revealed the re
teristic of sedentary agricultural communities.As
mains ofeleven
houses and acemetery.
Many of thesettlements grow, there is a strong incentive for a human remains were found with no cranium, an d
segment to move and found a new community. This grave goods were also absent, but the pottery from
appears to have followed the establishment of such this phase was decorated with a distinctive series of
sites as Pengtoushan and Bashidang. Fenshanbao, patterns, incorporating parallel incised lines infilled
which was occupied within the period 8000-7500 BP, with impressions (YPM 1981). The nearby site of
lies east of Lake Dongting, and excavations have Dadunzi is rather later, the single radiocarbon date
revealed 50 burials and pottery tempered with rice. suggesting a mid second-millennium BC occupation.
To the west, we find agriculture spreading upstream Again, house plans were noted, often superimposed
to Chengbeixi in the Three Gorges. In an easterly over earlier structures, and 27 burials were encoun
direction, the famous site of Hemudu in Zhejiang tered. Adults were buried in extended positions with
Province was a base for lakeside rice cultivation by no preferred orientation, and infants were interred
7000 BP. in mortuary jars. The style of pottery decoration
This sequence ha s a strong bearing on the matched that found earlier at Baiyangcun.
Neolithic settlement of Southeast Asia, because it is Archaeological research in the major river val
now possible to trace the expansion of agricultural leys of Southeast Asia has revealed a compelling
communities progressively further to the south. Sev pattern in which ne w agricultural villages were es
eral rivers provide access from the Yangtze Valley to tablished between 2500-2000 Be. In the Red River
the rich hot lowlands of Lingnan. The Gan and Xiang valley, this phase is seen in many sites of the Phung
flow north to Lakes Poyang and Dongting, while the Nguyen culture. In the Mekong catchment, we find
Bei flows south. The first evidence we have for the Neolithic phases of occupation at Ban Chiang, No n
establishment of rice farmers is, no t unexpectedly, in Kao Noi, Ban Non Wat and Ban Lum Khao. In the
the headwaters of this last river, where the sites valley of the Chao Phraya River, Ban Kao, Non Pa
Shixia, Xincun, Chuangbanling and Niling date from Wai and Ban Tha Kae indicate settlement towards
the early third millennium Be. Shixia in its earliest the en d of the third millennium Be. A common inhu
phase included a cemetery in which grave goods in mation burial ritual, the bones of domestic pigs, cat
cluded jade cang (tubes) of a type known to have been tle and dogs, and a similar technique of decorating
of deep ritual significance in the Liangzhu culture to pottery vessels link these sites. In eastern India, rice
the north, as well as bracelets, pendants and split rings. remains and rice-tempered po ttery have been found
The subsequent Nianyuzhuan culture sites reflect a at Chirand, dated probably to the third millennium BC,
further spread of agricultural settlement, but began while Allchin & Allchin (1982) have described sites
to encounter and interact with rich hunter-gatherer further east, such as Sarutaru and Daojali Hading,
groups commanding the delta of the Zhu River. which contain cord-marked pottery recalling wares
The Bei is just one of the rivers which ultimately from Southeast Asia and southern China. There is,
connects the Yangtze Valley with Southeast Asia. In therefore, a consistent horizon of third-millennium
general, these rivers flow south and radiate out from BC settlement sites incorporating evidence for rice
a hub in the eastern Himalayan foothills. From east cultivation, from southern China to Eastern India. It
to west, they include the Red, Mekong and Chao is difficult not to see this pattern as being similar to
Phraya systems. Further to the west, this configura the expansion of the Linearbandkeramik sites of the
tion is repeated in the form of th e Irrawaddy, European loess lands.
Chindwin and Brahmaputra Rivers. Given the dense There is, however, as in Europe, a need to con
canopied forests that would then have dominated sider the presence of established hunter-gatherer
the lowlands of Southeast Asia, the rivers were the communities long since settled in the area which
principal arteries for communication and movement. saw such proposed intrusive Neolithic peoples. There
Yunnan is a key area for documenting any ex are at least two aspects to the hunter-gatherer settle
pansionary movement of this nature, because it has ment of mainland Southeast Asia. The first involved
links with the Yangtze, the Mekong and the Red settlement in the interior, where the remains are
Rivers. Baiyangcun is a site which lies within strik- largely confined to rockshelters, such as Lang
228
8/3/2019 Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/austroasiatic-languages-and-rice-cultivation 7/10
Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
40°
35°
30°
25°
20°
15°
N
10°
o 95° 100° 105° 110°
Ii) Land above 180 m • Land above 2470 m
Figure 18.5. The distribution of sites mentioned in the text: 1) Diaotonghuan;2)
Xianrendong;3)
Yuchanyan;4) Bashidang; 5) Pengtoushan; 6) Fenshanbao; 7) Chengbeixi; 8) Hemudu; 9) area of the Tangjiagan culture; 10) Shixia; 11)
Xincun; 12) Chuangbanling; 13) Niling; 14) area of the Liangzhu culture; 15) Nianyuzhuan; 16) Balyancun;
17) Dadunzi; 18) Phung Nguyen; 19) Trang Kenh; 20) Lung Hoa, Xom Ren; 21) Ban Chiang; 22) Non Nok Tha;
23) Cu Lao Rua; 24) Cau Sat; 25) Ben Do; 26) XOIll Con; 27) Sanxingdui; 28) Erlitou.
229
115° 120°
8/3/2019 Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/austroasiatic-languages-and-rice-cultivation 8/10
Chapter 18
Rongrien in peninsular Thailand where the earliest working stone have been isolated. No evidence for
layers go back to about 38,000 BP. Recent investiga rice cultivation or animal domestication has been
tions, particularly in Vietnam, have identified nu found in this site, dated to about 2300 Be.
merous regional groups of hunter-gatherers, the earlier The form and decoration on the pottery vessels,
ones having considerable time depth. The Nguom in as well as the adze and bone industry at Nong Nor,
dustry is older than 23,000 BP, the Dieu sites date from are virtually identical with those from the base of a
30,000 BP and the Son Vi from 23,000-13,000 BP. Very much larger estuarine settlement known as Khok
few sites are found in interior river valleys, but this Phanom Di, 14 km to the north. This enigmatic site
could be the result of subsequent environmental modi was occupied from about 2000-1500 BC, and its pre
fication. The number of occupied inland rockshelters cise relationship to the intrusion of Neolithic groups
diminished markedly from the third millennium BC, into Central Thailand is no t yet finally resolved. The
but some sites continued in occupation, and forest material culture of the basal layers in all respects
hunter-gatherers continue to occupy small tracts of follows the local fisher-hunter-gatherer tradition.
peninsular Thailand and Malaysia. These hunter Over the ensuing five centuries, however, there were
gatherers present an interesting biological question, many developments. Burials followed the same pat
because in contrast to the agricultural population of tern as that seen in inland agricultural communities,
Southeast Asia they are short, dark and have a dis with extended inhumation replacing the former
tinctly Australo-Melanesian phenotype. seated, crouching position. Rice remains were found
The second hunter-gatherer adaptation was from fairly early in the sequence, but at a time when
coastal, and it has failed to survive into the present. local conditions would have either ruled ou t cultiva
However, the raised beaches which mark th e tion or made it highly marginal. A handful of sherds
Holocene high sea levels from southern China to the were tempered with rice chaff, bu t all were of exotic
Gulf of Siam harbour hundreds of former hunter origin. Initially, there were no dogs at the site, but
gatherer sites. The rich bio-productivity of the shore, these appeared after a century or so of occupation.
particularly where it forms an estuary, encourages Domestic dogs must have been derived from an ulti
permanent settlement, and some of these coastal sites mately exotic source that included native wolves.
are large an d deeply stratified. However, none ante The closest such source of wolves to Thailand is in
dates about 4000 BC, because prior to that period the China.
sea level was lower than today, but rising fast. The During the third an d fourth of the seven morarchaeological record is therefore confronted with tuary phases, local conditions saw a reduction in sea
coastal hunter gatherers who made pottery vessels level an d the formation of freshwater swamps. At
and polished adzes from the initial period of ar this juncture, the presence of hoes and reaping knives,
chaeological visibility. as well as changes in dental health, are compatible
Unfortunately, the situation has been confused with local rice cultivation. But a later rise in sea level
by the Vietnamese naming these groups 'coastal saw a return to marine conditions, and to the end of
Neolithic' on the basis of pottery making an d ground the reaping knives and hoes. While the potters of
stone tools rather than any biological evidence for Khok Phanom Di fashioned outstanding burnished
food production. What emerges from a considera mortuary vessels, and decorated them with incised
tion of the relevant sites is a series of regional hunter banded designs not totally dissimilar from the in
gatherer-fishers, some of whom lived long enough land repertoire, the forms of pot are quite differentat their base for a considerable depth of cultural from those of the inland farmers.
material to accumulate, who buried their dead by Again, parallels can be drawn with the situa
inhumation in a seated, crouched position, in asso tion in Northwest Europe, where expanding agricul
ciation with mortuary offerings. Very little is known tural groups met local hunter-gatherers. At present,
of the spatial organization within these sites, except Khok Phanom Di could be interpreted as a site where
for the site of Nong Nor, which has been almost there was a vigorous exchange in valued goods be
completely excavated (Higham & Thosarat 1998). tween coastal hunter-gatherers an d inland farmers,
This site was located on the shore of an extensive an exchange which certainly involved shell jewel
marine embayment of the Gulf of Siam. The faunal lery, stone adzes and ceramic vessels, bu t which
remains indicate deep-water fishing for large sharks could equally have incorporated people. The anvil,
and eagle rays, hunting marine mammals, as well as for example, associated with the richest female potfishing for smaller species and the collection of shell ter interred there, was made of an exotic clay and
fish. Specific areas for making pottery vessels and was inscribed with an owner's mark. Her presumed
230
8/3/2019 Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/austroasiatic-languages-and-rice-cultivation 9/10
Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
daughter buried in an adjacent grave, aged 18 months
at death, was accompanied by a miniature anvil made
of the local clay (Vincent pers. comm.). I t would be
unusual if there were not such interactions at the
contact between two such different groups of peo
ple. The intriguing question posed concerns thecourse of language change under such circumstances.
Geoffrey Benjamin (1976) has reported on a de
tailed study of the languages spoken by the Aslian
(AA-speaking) hunter-gatherers of Malaysia. The
Semang are a group of Negrito hunter-gatherers
adapted to the inland forested habitat. They speak
AA languages (Aslian subgroup), and in particular,
their vocabularies for domesticated plants and ani
mals are derived from AA. Benjamin has suggested
that their ancestors originally would have spoken a
language related to Andamanese, an d adopted theirAA languages from intrusive agriculturalists, with
whom they would have been in exchange contact.
He turned to archaeology for the dating evidence
that suggests a beginning in the third millennium Be.
Reid (1994) adopted a similar interpretation for the
Nicobarese AA languages when he identified Nan
cowry as a conservative relic language, into which
the original Negrito inhabitants contributed much of
the non AA lexical component before being com
pletelyassimilated.
Conclusions
Bellwood (1993) has proposed a characteristically
succinct interpretation of a complex issue by sug
gesting that the original hunter-gatherers of South
east Asia now survive as Negrito groups in the
Andaman Islands, the Philippines and peninsula
Thailand and Malaysia. They may even be descended
from Hoabinhian occupants of the very caves where
to this day, hunter-gatherers still gather seasonally.
Their ancestral language is no t known but possibly
related ones could be investigated on the Andamans.
The intrusive agriculturalists were of southern Mon
goloid biological stock and introduced AA languages.
Acculturation in much of Southeast Asia then saw
the Widespread adoption of AA. A broad swathe of
interacting groups of AA agriculturalists, whose set
tlements stretched from Lingnan to Orissa, and from
Yunnan to southern Thailand, were later themselves
overtaken by other intrusive groups, including the Thais
(Austro-Tai languages), the Chams (Austronesian), the
Burmese (Sino-Tibetan) and the speakers of Indo
Aryan languages in India. Thus developed the kaleidoscope of languages spoken in Southeast Asia today,
a mix first noted by Simon de la Loubere in 1693.
This model stands for testing. I t has brought
some opprobrium on the author of this paper, but it
results from a genuine attempt to seek a consistent
and logical pattern. Critics are invited to provide an
alternative. However, testing must proceed, an d the
most promising avenue is seen in the new subject ofarchaeogenetics. Already, the study of dog DNA
hints at links between the prehistoric Southeast Asian
and Chinese canids. A research initiative to study
ancient human DN A is being planned.
Acknowledgements
I wish to thank Colin Renfrew an d Peter Bellwood
for inviting me to attend this meeting.
References
Allchin, R & B. Allchin, 1982. The Rise of Civilization in
India and Pakistan. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer
sity Press.
Bellwood, P., 1993. Cultural and biological differentiation
in peninsular Malaysia: the last 10,000 years. Asian
Perspectives 32, 37-60.
Benjamin, G., 1976. Austroasiatic sUbgroupings and pre
history in the Malay Peninsula, in Jenner et al. (eds.),
37-128.
Blench, R & M. Spriggs (eds.), 1998. Archaeology and Lan
guage, vol. II: Correlating Archaeological and Lingu istic
Hypotheses. London: Routledge.
Blust, R, 1996. Beyond the Austronesian homeland: the
Austric hypothesis an d its implications for archae
ology, in Prehistoric Settlement of the Pacific, ed. W.H.
Goodenough. (Transactions of the American Philo
sophical Society 86.) Philadelphia (PA): American
Philosophical Society, 117-40.
Crawford, G.W. & Chen 5.,1998. The origins of rice agri
culture: recent progress in East Asia. Antiquity 72,
858-66.
De la Loubere, 5., 1693. A New Historical Relation of the
Kingdom of Siam. London: Tho. Horne.
Heine-Geldern, R von, 1932. Urheimat und fruhestewanderungen der Austronesier. Anthropos 27, 543
619.
Higham, CF.W. & T.L.-D. Lu, 1998. The origins an d dis
persal of rice cultivation. Antiquity 72, 867-77.
Higham, CF.W. & R Thosarat (eds.), 1998. The Excavation
of Nong Nor: a Prehistoric Site in Central Thailand.
Oxford: Otago University Anthropology Department
and Oxbow Books.
Jenner, P.N., L.C Thompson & S. Starosta (eds.), 1976.
Austroasiatic Studies, vol. II. (Oceanic Linguistics Spe
cial Publication 13.) Honolulu (HI): University Press
of Hawaii.Luce, G.H., 1985. Phases of Pre-Pagan Burma. Oxford: Ox
ford University Press.
Mahdi, W., 1998. Linguistic data on transmission of South
231
8/3/2019 Austroasiatic Languages and Rice Cultivation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/austroasiatic-languages-and-rice-cultivation 10/10
Chapter 18
east Asian cultigens to India and Sri Lanka, in Blench
& Spriggs (eds.), 390-415.
Norman, J. & T. Mei, 1976. The Austroasiatics in ancient
South China; some lexical evidence. Monumenta
Serica 32, 274-301.
Pei, A., 1998. Notes on ne w advancements and revelations
in the agricultural archaeology of early rice domes
tication in the Dongting Lake region. Antiquity 72,
878-85.
Pejros,1. & V. Schirelman, 1998. Rice in Southeast Asia: a
regional interdisciplinary approach, in Blench &
Spriggs (eds.), 379-89.
Reid, L.A., 1994. Morphological evidence for Austric. Oce
anic Linguistics 33,323-44.
Schmidt, W., 1906. Die Mon-Khmer Volker: ein Bindeglied
Zwischen V61kern Zentralasiens un d Austronesiens.
Archiv der Anthropologie (Braunschweig) n.s. 5, 59-109.
Wheeler, R.E.M., 1959. Early India and Pakistan to Asboka.
London: Thames & Hudson.
YPM (Yunnan Provincial Museum), 1981. The Baiyangcun
site at Binchuan County, Yunnan Province. Kaogu
Xuebuo 1981, 349-68. [In Chinese.]
Yuan, J. & C. Zhang, 1999: The origins of pottery and rice
cultivation in China. Newsletter of the Grant-in-Aid
Program for COE Research Foundation of the Ministry
of Education. Science, Sports and Culture in Japan 2(1),
3-4.
Zhao, Z., 1998. The middle Yangtze region in China is one
place where rice was domesticated: phytolith evi
dence from Diaotonghuan cave, northern Jiangxi.
Antiquity 72, 885-97.
Zide, A.R.K. & N.H. Zide, 1976. Proto-Munda cultural
vocabulary: evidence for early agriculture, in Jenner
et al. (eds.), 1295-334.
232