Two layer hypothesis

Last updated

The 'Two Layer' Hypothesis, or immigration hypothesis, is an archaeological hypothese that suggests the human occupation of mainland Southeast Asia occurred over two distinct periods by two separate racial groups, hence the term 'layer'. [1] According to the Two Layer Hypothesis, early indigenous Australo-Melanesian peoples comprised the first population of Southeast Asia before their genetic integration with a second wave of inhabitants from East Asia, including Southern China, during the agricultural expansion of the Neolithic. [2] [3] The majority of evidence for the Two Layer Hypothesis consists of dental and morphometric analyses from archaeological sites throughout Southeast Asia, most prominently Thailand and Vietnam.

Contents

Recent genetic and archeologic evidence found that both Australo-Melanesian and East Asian-related populations migrated along a southern route, with the Australo-Melanesians using a coastal route along the coast of the Indian peninsula into Insular Southeast Asia and Oceania, while East Asian-related groups used a route south or through the Himalayan mountain range into Mainland Southeast Asia, from where Basal-East Asians than expanded northwards and southwards respectively at 50,000BC. East Asian-elated ancestry was far more widespread in Insular Southeast Asia than previously suggested, long predating the Austroasiatic and Austronesian expansions.

Early hypotheses

The first fossilized skeletal remains and indication of early 'Proto-Australian' Southeast Asian inhabitants surfaced in 1920 during an excavation by Dubois on the island of Java. [4] Despite this, a formal connection to mainland Southeast Asia and the suggestion of an initial population of Australomelanesoids was not suggested until 1952 by Koenigswald in his response to Hooijer, [5] who sharply criticized the attribution of 'big toothed' dental remains to early Australo-Melanesians. [6] The immigration hypothesis proposed by Koenigswald was formally termed the 'Two Layer' model by Jacob Teuku. In 1967, Teuku analyzed the cranial and dental proportions of 152 adult skeletal samples recovered from prehistoric sites in Malaysia and Indonesia, the majority displaying robust jaws and teeth, prominent glabellae, and slender, elongated limbs. Teuku argued these characteristics correspond to the Australo-Melanesian population proposed by Koenigswald that predated the East Asian immigrants of the Neolithic; also suggesting the initial inhabitants were likely forced south of Southeast Asia's mainland by the second wave of migrants, due to resource competition or conflict. [3] [7]

Modern debates and controversies

The main controversy concerning the 'Two Layer' hypothesis is whether or not the evolutionary process truly involved the Australo-Melanesians. Archaeologists such as Matsumura suggest Southern Chinese people comprised the initial population of Southeast Asia, rather than Australo-Melanesians [2] while researchers such as Turner argue that prehistoric Southeast Asians did not mix with either racial group. [8] Though the early prehistoric Vietnamese and Malaysians both resembled the Australo-Melanesian samples the most, the Mán Bạc people had a greater resemblance to the Đông Sơn samples dating back to the Iron Age. Analyzing cranial and dental remains, Matsumura concluded based on chronological differences that the Mán Bạc people were immigrants affiliated with peoples near the Yangtze River region in Southern China. [2] Molecular anthropologists[ who? ] have used classical genetic markers and mtDNA to analyze the similarities between early Chinese and Southeast Asians. Such genetic markers[ which? ] suggest the genetic layout of Southern Chinese peoples is quite similar to that of Southeast Asians.[ citation needed ]

Other controversies completely reject the 'Two Layer' hypothesis. Using dental evidence, Turner’s Sundadont/Sinodont hypothesis suggests the “Sundadont” trait seen in present-day Southeast Asians is a result of long-standing continuity. Turner created a cluster analysis of MMD values in order to test existing hypotheses of origins, [8] concluding that all Southeast Asians, Micronesians, Polynesians, and Jomonese form their own branch and descend from a common ancestor. The Australians and Melanesians, however, are scattered over the African and European branch along with a side branch of Tasmanians and Solomon Islanders. Howell analyzed crania of major racial branches worldwide, and linked Australian and Melanesian cranial morphology most closely with African cranials. Howell discovered, however, that the size and features of present-day Asian cranial morphology differed significantly from that of Australians, Melanesians, and Africans. [8]

Several studies in 2021 concluded that East Asian-related ancestry originated and expanded from Mainland Southeast Asia at about 50,000BC. East Asian-related ancestry was far more widespreaded in Southeast Asia than previously suggested. Ancient remains of hunter-gatherers in Maritime Southeast Asia, such as one Holocene hunter-gatherer from South Sulawesi, had ancestry from both the Papuan-related and East Asian-related branches of the Eastern non-African lineage. The hunter-gatherer individual had approximately ~50% "Basal-East Asian" ancestry, and was positioned in between modern East Asians and Papuans of Oceania. The authors concluded that East Asian-related ancestry expanded from Mainland Southeast Asia into Maritime Southeast Asia much earlier than previously suggested, as early as 25,000BC, long before the expansion of Austroasiatic and Austronesian groups.

[9]

Distinctive Basal-East Asian (East-Eurasian) ancestry was recently found to have originated in Mainland Southeast Asia at ~50,000BC, and expanded through multiple migration waves southwards and northwards respectively. Geneflow of East-Eurasian ancestry into Maritime Southeast Asia and Oceania could be estimated to ~25,000BC (possibly also earlier since 50,000BC). The pre-Neolithic Papuan-related populations of Maritime Southeast Asia were largely replaced by the expansion of various East Asian-related populations, beginning about 25,000BC from Mainland Southeast Asia. Southeast Asia was dominated by East Asian-related ancestry already in 15,000BC, predating the expansion of Austroasiatic and Austronesian peoples. [10]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Austroasiatic languages</span> Language family concentrated in Southeast Asia

The Austroasiatic languages are a large language family spoken throughout Mainland Southeast Asia, South Asia and East Asia. These languages are natively spoken by the majority of the population in Vietnam and Cambodia, and by minority populations scattered throughout parts of Thailand, Laos, India, Myanmar, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Nepal, and southern China. Approximately 117 million people speak an Austroasiatic language, of which more than two-thirds are Vietnamese speakers. Of the Austroasiatic languages, only Vietnamese, Khmer, and Mon have lengthy, established presences in the historical record. Only two are presently considered to be the national languages of sovereign states: Vietnamese in Vietnam, and Khmer in Cambodia. The Mon language is a recognized indigenous language in Myanmar and Thailand, while the Wa language is a "recognized national language" in the de facto autonomous Wa State within Myanmar. Santali is one of the 22 scheduled languages of India. The remainder of the family's languages are spoken by minority groups and have no official status.

Australo-Melanesians is an outdated historical grouping of various people indigenous to Melanesia and Australia. Controversially, some groups found in parts of Southeast Asia and South Asia were also sometimes included.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Negrito</span> Set of ethnic groups in Southeast Asia and Andaman islands

The term Negrito refers to several diverse ethnic groups who inhabit isolated parts of Southeast Asia and the Andaman Islands. Populations often described as Negrito include: the Andamanese peoples of the Andaman Islands, the Semang peoples of Peninsular Malaysia, the Maniq people of Southern Thailand, as well as the Aeta of Luzon, the Ati and Tumandok of Panay, the Mamanwa of Mindanao, and about 30 other officially recognized ethnic groups in the Philippines.

Polynesians are an ethnolinguistic group comprising closely related ethnic groups native to Polynesia, which encompasses the islands within the Polynesian Triangle in the Pacific Ocean. They trace their early prehistoric origins to Island Southeast Asia and are part of the larger Austronesian ethnolinguistic group, with an Urheimat in Taiwan. They speak the Polynesian languages, a branch of the Oceanic subfamily within the Austronesian language family. The Indigenous Māori people form the largest Polynesian population, followed by Samoans, Native Hawaiians, Tahitians, Tongans, and Cook Islands Māori.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indigenous people of New Guinea</span> Melanesian inhabitants of New Guinea

The indigenous peoples of Western New Guinea in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, commonly called Papuans, are Melanesians. There is genetic evidence for two major historical lineages in New Guinea and neighboring islands: a first wave from the Malay Archipelago perhaps 50,000 years ago when New Guinea and Australia were a single landmass called Sahul and, much later, a wave of Austronesian people from the north who introduced Austronesian languages and pigs about 3,500 years ago. They also left a small but significant genetic trace in many coastal Papuan peoples.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Melanesians</span> Indigenous inhabitants of Melanesia

Melanesians are the predominant and indigenous inhabitants of Melanesia, in an area stretching from New Guinea to the Fiji Islands. Most speak one of the many languages of the Austronesian language family or one of the many unrelated families of Papuan languages. There are several creoles of the region, such as Tok Pisin, Hiri Motu, Solomon Islands Pijin, Bislama, and Papuan Malay.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dawenkou culture</span> Chinese Neolithic culture

The Dawenkou culture was a Chinese Neolithic culture primarily located in the eastern province of Shandong, but also appearing in Anhui, Henan and Jiangsu. The culture existed from 4300 to 2600 BC, and co-existed with the Yangshao culture. Turquoise, jade and ivory artefacts are commonly found at Dawenkou sites. The earliest examples of alligator drums appear at Dawenkou sites. Neolithic signs, perhaps related to subsequent scripts, such as those of the Shang dynasty, have been found on Dawenkou pottery. Additionally, the Dawenkou practiced dental ablation and cranial deformation, practices that disappeared in China by the Chinese Bronze Age.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jōmon people</span> Early inhabitants of prehistoric Japan

Jōmon people is the generic name of the indigenous hunter-gatherer population that lived in the Japanese archipelago during the Jōmon period. They were united through a common Jōmon culture, which reached a considerable degree of sedentism and cultural complexity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Prehistoric Malaysia</span> Prehistoric human occupation of Malaysia

The earliest anatomically modern human skeleton in Peninsular Malaysia, Perak Man, dates back 11,000 years and Perak Woman dating back 8,000 years, were both discovered in Lenggong. The site has an undisturbed stone tool production area, created using equipment such as anvils and hammer stones. The Tambun rock art is also situated in Ipoh, Perak. From East Malaysia, Sarawak's Niah Caves, there is evidence of the oldest human remains in Malaysia, dating back 40,000 years.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Austronesian peoples</span> Speakers of Austronesian languages

The Austronesian peoples, sometimes referred to as Austronesian-speaking peoples, 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. They also include indigenous ethnic minorities in Vietnam, Cambodia, Myanmar, Thailand, Hainan, the Comoros, and the Torres Strait Islands. The nations and territories predominantly populated by Austronesian-speaking peoples are sometimes known collectively as Austronesia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Peopling of China</span> History of ancient China

In the course of the peopling of the World by Homo sapiens, East Asia was reached about 50,000 years ago. The "recent African origin" lineage of 70 kya diverged into identifiable East Eurasian and West Eurasian lineages by about 50 kya. The East Eurasian ancestors of East Asians used a southern route to reach South and Southeast Asia, along which they rapidly diverged into the ancestors of Indigenous South Asians (AASI), Papuans, East Asians and Andamanese peoples. This early East Asian lineage diverged further during the Last Glacial Maximum, contributing outgoing from Mainland Southeast Asia significantly to the peopling of the Americas via Beringia about 25 kya. After the last ice age China became cut off from neighboring island groups. The previous phenotypes of early East Asians became either replaced or prevailed among more geographically distant groups.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Models of migration to the Philippines</span>

Since H. Otley Beyer first proposed his wave migration theory, numerous scholars have approached the question of how, when and why humans first came to the Philippines. The current scientific consensus favors the "Out of Taiwan" model, which broadly match linguistic, genetic, archaeological, and cultural evidence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Prehistoric Indonesia</span>

Prehistoric Indonesia is a prehistoric period in the Indonesian archipelago that spanned from the Pleistocene period to about the 4th century CE when the Kutai people produced the earliest known stone inscriptions in Indonesia. Unlike the clear distinction between prehistoric and historical periods in Europe and the Middle East, the division is muddled in Indonesia. This is mostly because Indonesia's geographical conditions as a vast archipelago caused some parts — especially the interiors of distant islands — to be virtually isolated from the rest of the world. West Java and coastal Eastern Borneo, for example, began their historical periods in the early 4th century, but megalithic culture still flourished and script was unknown in the rest of Indonesia, including in Nias and Toraja. The Papuans on the Indonesian part of New Guinea island lived virtually in the Stone Age until their first contacts with modern world in the early 20th century. Even today living megalithic traditions still can be found on the island of Sumba and Nias.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Peopling of India</span> Immigration patterns of different lineages of people of India

The peopling of India refers to the migration of Homo sapiens into the Indian subcontinent. Anatomically modern humans settled India in multiple waves of early migrations, over tens of millennia. The first migrants came with the Coastal Migration/Southern Dispersal 65,000 years ago, whereafter complex migrations within South and Southeast Asia took place. West Asian (Iranian) hunter-gatherers migrated to South Asia after the Last Glacial Period but before the onset of farming. Together with ancient South Asian hunter-gatherers they formed the population of the Indus Valley Civilisation (IVC).

There have been various classification schemes for Southeast Asian languages.

The East Asian languages are a language family proposed by Stanley Starosta in 2001. The proposal has since been adopted by George van Driem and others.

Southeast Asia was first reached by anatomically modern humans possibly before 70,000 years ago. Anatomically modern humans are suggested to have reached Southeast Asia twice in the course of the Southern Dispersal migrations during and after the formation of a distinct East Asian clade from 70,000 to 50,000 years ago.

This article summarizes the genetic makeup and population history of East Asian peoples and their connection to genetically related populations such as Southeast Asians and North Asians, as well as Oceanians, and partly, Central Asians, South Asians, and Native Americans. They are collectively referred to as "East Eurasians" in population genomics.

The farming/language dispersal hypothesis proposes that many of the largest language families in the world dispersed along with the expansion of agriculture. This hypothesis was proposed by archaeologists Peter Bellwood and Colin Renfrew. It has been widely debated and archaeologists, linguists, and geneticists often disagree with all or only parts of the hypothesis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ancient Southern East Asian</span> Archaeogenetic name for an ancestral genetic component

In archaeogenetics, Ancient Southern East Asian (ASEA), also known as Southern East Asian (sEA), is an ancestral lineage that is represented by individuals from Qihe Cave in Fujian and Liangdao Island in the Taiwan Strait as well as Guangxi. Ancient Southern East Asian ancestry significantly contributed to the genetic makeup of modern populations in East Asia, Mainland Southeast Asia, Insular Southeast Asia, and Oceania, and is commonly associated with the Neolithic expansion of early Austronesian and Austroasiatic speakers that occurred more than 4,000 years ago.

References

  1. Reich, D., Patterson, N., Kircher, M., Delfin, F., Nandineni, M.R., Pugach, I.,... Stoneking, M. (2011). Denisova admixture and the first modern human dispersals into Southeast Asia and Oceania. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 89(4), 516-528.
  2. 1 2 3 Matsumura, H., Oxenham, M.F., Dodo, Y., Domett, K. Thuy, N.K., Cuong, N.L.,... Yamagata, M. (2008). Morphometric affinity of the late Neolithic human remains from Man Bac, Ninh Binh Province, Vietnam: key skeletons with which to debate the 'two layer' hypothesis. Anthropological Science, 116(2), 135-148
  3. 1 2 Matsumura, H., Hudson, M.J. (2005). Dental perspectives on the population history of Southeast Asia. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 127(2), 182-209.
  4. Dubois, E. (1921). The proto-Australian fossil man of Wadjak, Java. Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Weteschappen Proceedings Series B Physical Sciences, 23, 1013-1051.
  5. Koenigswald, G.H.R. (1952). Evidence of a prehistoric Australomelanesoid population in Malaya and Indonesia. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 8(1), 92-96.
  6. Hooijer, D.A. (1950). Fossil Evidence of Austromelanesian Migrations in Malaysia? Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 6(4), 416-422.
  7. Jacob, T. (1967). Some problems pertaining to the racial history of the Indonesian region: a study of human skeletal and dental remains from several prehistoric sites in Indonesia and Malaysia. Drukkerij Neerlandia.
  8. 1 2 3 Turner, C. (1992). The Dental Bridge between Australia and Asia: Following Macintosh into the East Asian Hearth of Humanity. Archaeology in Oceania, 27(3), 143-152.
  9. Carlhoff, Selina; Duli, Akin; Nägele, Kathrin; Nur, Muhammad; Skov, Laurits; Sumantri, Iwan; Oktaviana, Adhi Agus; Hakim, Budianto; Burhan, Basran; Syahdar, Fardi Ali; McGahan, David P. (August 2021). "Genome of a middle Holocene hunter-gatherer from Wallacea". Nature. 596 (7873): 543–547. Bibcode:2021Natur.596..543C. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03823-6. hdl: 10072/407535 . ISSN   1476-4687. PMC   8387238 . PMID   34433944. The qpGraph analysis confirmed this branching pattern, with the Leang Panninge individual branching off from the Near Oceanian clade after the Denisovan gene flow, although with the most supported topology indicating around 50% of a basal East Asian component contributing to the Leang Panninge genome (Fig. 3c, Supplementary Figs. 7–11).
  10. Larena, Maximilian; Sanchez-Quinto, Federico; Sjödin, Per; McKenna, James; Ebeo, Carlo; Reyes, Rebecca; Casel, Ophelia; Huang, Jin-Yuan; Hagada, Kim Pullupul; Guilay, Dennis; Reyes, Jennelyn (2021-03-30). "Multiple migrations to the Philippines during the last 50,000 years". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 118 (13): e2026132118. Bibcode:2021PNAS..11826132L. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2026132118 . ISSN   0027-8424. PMC   8020671 . PMID   33753512.

Further reading