QUOTE (ocrapdm @ Jan 13 2012, 08:09 PM)
Well, don't forget that Indonesians are also partly Daics. Some Daics also have O3, and that's where Indonesians probably got their O3. But see, Indonesians have much lesser O3 than do Filipinos. And in fact, I think it's safe to deduce that those with O3 are the ones in Indonesia with the lighter skin, while those who have darker skin (and look kinda Veddoid) are O2 or O1.
Amis are majority O1 not O3. As per the various studies done, MAJORITY OF Indonesians do have a lot of O2 and O3 but only a few have O1. That's why studies have presented that the Indonesians are much closer to the Tai people or generally speaking to people of INDOCHINA than they are to the Amis or the Taiwan aborigenes and so put an axe on the Taiwan origin of majority of Austronesians.
But whether Indonesians have fewer O1 or O3, that's not the point, where in fact, majority are O3's and O2's. The point of the crux is O1s, O2s and O3 subclades from Indonesians are definitely OLDER PHYLOGENETICALLY
than those from China or even Taiwan. AND THUS POINTING THE SOUTHERN ORIGINS OF O HAPLOGROUP in general. Which is basically what the various studies presented by the likes of Chu et al and Su et al.
Likewise, the Ming Annals and other Hokkien commercial documents refer to Luzon as "liu-sung", considering it as part of the "liu-chiu" (Ryukyu) group of islands. Considering both Chinese and Indonesian, I think the word "liu-sung" has a meaning in Chinese. I guess it's just a place name in Indonesian. And in Chinese, it allegedly means :"backbone of the Song", being bastion for the overthrown Song rulers of China.[/b]
Backbone of the Song doesn't mean being the last bastion of the overthrown Song rulers. It could mean also the foundation of Song rulers. just kidding
But come to think of it, there are some evidence that some rulers or dynasties of China having southern DongYi roots much the same way as Japanese imperial had accepted their southern roots as well. Shang dynasty or is it the Xia had southern roots. Anyways, genetic evidence pointed to southern origins of the majority of the Chinese anyways.
Liusung as being backbone of the Song is just that an allegiation. But the more likely would be Liu-sung was more than anything else was just the way the early Chinese would try to speak the placename in the same how the Native Luzonians called their own land, which is LUSUNG OR LUSONG meaning mortar or crater to describe the shape of MANILA BAY, where the majority of the population centers are/were located.
Very much like Palembang in Sumatra was named Palin-fong by the Chinese not because of the meaning of Palin and fong but because it sounded near to how the natives called the native name Palembang.
Majapahit rulers? More like Majapahit envoys. The ONLY direct connection that the Filipinos have to the "other Malays" is through Borneans, specifically Bruneians. Never to Majapahit rulers from Java. And anyway, the endpoint is this: that Luzon's rulers were still foreign.
Envoys? Majapahit Prince Balagtas marrying the daughter of Sultan Bolkeiah and Emperor Angka Widjaya marrying the daughter of the NATIVE King of Sapa were mere envoys.
Kapampangan researchers including the source of your theory have in fact aknowledged Prince Balagtas of Madjapahit as an actual historical person basing on the historical document found by Luther Parker in 1911, called the Will of Pansonum, which is written circa 17th century by a former Lakandula, Don Fernando Malang Balagtas, grandson of Prince Balagtas.
Don Fernando Malang Balagtas aka Pansonum would refer to his cousin Banau as Lakandula menor then christened as Don Carlos Lacandola. The former was usurped by the elder brother of Banau, Raha Matanda or Raja Ache who passed on his rulership to the last ruler of Manila, Raja Soliman.
Well, it's true. Kapampangans are the direct descendants of Taiwanese aboriginals from Taiwan and are not mixed with Daic (through Indonesian) blood. That's why the Northern Filipino peoples' languages such as Ilocano, Cordillera languages, Kapampangan, Gaddang, Ibaloi, and Ivatan are VERY MUCH SIMILAR to Formosan languages, whereas all the Central and Southern Filipino languages are grouped together and are similar to Bornean languages.
We don't agree on that of course for the longest time. The Taiwanese aboriginals came from the Philippines. Both Y-dna and mtdna studies pointed to the southern origins.
Sambalic languages which Kapampangan belongs too are very different from the Northern Languages. We can say it's transitional between the Northern languages like Pangasinan and Southern languages like Tagalog.
Yeah, Luzon people had a colony in Melaka. But Tome Pires, in his accounts, as well said that the Luzon (Lucoes) people had NO king but were governed by a group of elders. Perhaps he was referring to some islands near Luzon, or to some barangays in Luzon which were relatively independent of the Luzon Kingdom (Liu-sung-kuo).
Yes, he was correct. In fact, during those times, various datus had achieved autonomy and more like the decisions were given by the council of elders. And the titles Raja and Lakandula just prior to the coming of the Spaniards had become just like a figurehead or SYMBOLICAL ONLY unless he merited to be given the actual powers and authority inherent mostly important during times of war for e.g.
In fact during the time of the Spaniards, Datu Tarik Soliman of Macabebe chastised Don Carlos Lacandola, the Lakandula or supposed PARAMOUNT RULER OF LUZON KINGDOM for being coward and friendly to the Puting Mukha. Then Raja Soliman III explained to the Spaniards, that he had no real authority and thus despite the peace process or the blood compact, an invasion by the Macabebes and the Hagonoy people pushed through. For accdg to him, the people were quite independent and free to do any action they deemed necessary. Despite all these, the sons of Lakandula, joined Tarik Soliman of Macabebe and the Hagonoy warriors, some of whom died during that fateful Battle of Bangkusay, which sealed the future of the Philippines as a colony of Spain.
Another point would be that since the invasion of the Bruneians, the native Luzonians didn't actually accept the latter's dominion despite the intermarriages between the bloodlines of the native nobilities with the foreign ones. Plus there were contending factions, the Majapahit faction, the clan of Prince Balagtas with the former Lakandula, Pansonum aka Don Fernando Malang Balagtas and the faction of the Bruneians, the usurping Lakandula, Banau aka Don Carlos Lacandola together with his brother Raja Ache and his nephew Raja Soliman III.
Or as you have said, this is the way Austronesians go about dealing with political actions having to be a collective decision or CONSENSUS. That's how ORIENTALS do it since the dawn of mankind and that's how it would be for a very long time. That's REAL DEMOCRACY. MALAYA TALAGA ANG MGA KATULAD NATING MALAY NUON PA MAN. Being an archipelago, an empire to the truest sense of the word like the landbased ones is impossible. Majapahit and Srivijayan as I have said is more of a SYMBOLICAL EMPIRE and more of A THALOSOCRACY OR A COLLECTIVE ALLIANCE OR NETWORK POLITICALLY AND TRADEWISE.
Old Malay was understood throughout the "Malay" Archipelago because it was the primary language of the colonizers who styled themselves as rulers of the Philippine locals. The "native" royalty intermarried with the royalty of Brunei because firstand foremost, these "native rulers" were in fact migrants from Brunei. Seeing that the Filipino peoples were not united, chose to capitulate them and make them subordinates.
The Bruneians only came during the 14th century. Obviously, the native subjects have their own native rulers even before that. The Laguna copperplate inscription proved the eminence of the Ruler of Tondo. Even the Bruneian annals stated that Sultan Bolkeiah married the daughter of the vanquished Raja.
The back drop of invasion of the Bruneians was the Mount Pinatubo eruption in the 14th century, with the waning influence of Madyapahit and the rising influence of Islam, which could have weakened the Luzon kingdom to many substates or citystates ruled by petty rulers. Plus the fact that Zheng He invaded thrice but failed. It took twice for the Bruneians to succeed.
Brunei is also "east" of the Champa kingdom.
No, it isn't, Brunei is not exactly East but South east. And Mas'udi specifically stated that the King of Khmer or Cambodia would face the east for morning prayers at the direction of the Maharaja of Zabag or Mihraj of Zabaj. The Arab's Zabag being synonymous to the chinese' Sanfotsi or Shih-li-fo-shih whom Coedes termed as SRIVIJAYAN EMPIRE. The Sun rises to the East and not to Southeast and so we have temples in Cambodia facing THE EAST WEST AXIS EXACTLY. The Khmer King wouldn't pray Southeast to the direction of Brunei as the Arab Mas'udi said. The Khmer King would do exactly the same facing that east west axis facing the MORNING SUN TO PRAY. And that is also THE DIRECTION OF THE MAJARAJA'S CAPITAL. And that's the Clue, Coedes got it wrong as to the location of Srivijaya's capital.The location was described as rich in alluvial gold. During the mid-10th century, Akbar al-Sin states that:
"near Zabaj is a mountain called the Mountain of Fire, which it is not possible to approach. Smoke escapes from it by day and a flame by night, and from its foot comes forth a spring of cold fresh water and a spring of hot water."
The palace of the king of Zabag, again the Arab name for Sanfotsi, was described in Muslim texts as located at the water's edge of an estuary close enough to the "bay of Zabag" that saltwater flowed during high tide and freshwater during ebb. Such an estuary, it's been suggested earlier, was known in the local language as sapa, sabang or sapang from which the Arab place-name "Zabag" would be derived.
Abu Zayd said that the kingdom of Zabag faced China, probably referring to the southern port of Canton, which would have been directly across the Nanhai (South Sea) to the northwest.
This geographical description is confirmed by Mas'udi who states that the kings of the Khmer kingdom (Cambodia) face toward the kingdom of Zabag during their morning prayers i.e., toward the East, the sunrise.
I don't see why the Laguna Copperplate Inscription must be held in high esteem. It just talks about the AFFAIRS of foreign Bruneian rulers. Since it was a ROYAL document, it is therefore logical that it would use Old Malay and Kawi script with Sanskrit terminologies. Most likely, these Bruneian rulers are descended from Indianized rulers as well, so they just brought the Indian influence to their new colonies in the Philippines.
In fact, there are three other artifacts with undecipherable inscriptions: the Butuan silver strip (14th century), the Butuan ivory seal (10th century), and the Calatagan jar (15th century).
Again the invasion of the BRUNEIAN RULERS and the advent of Islam to Luzon came only the 14th century.
LAGUNA COPPERPLATE INSCRIPTION was not made by BRUNEIANS during the 10th century
No, the choice for Malay could have been the decision or the consensus of all the subjects of the Mihraj or the Maharaja of Zabaj whose reign span a lot of seas and isles with many different kings and kingdoms speaking a multitude of languages under his rule.
Much like the Indonesians chose Bahasa Malay as their lingua franca despite the Javanese dominate politics to unify the people of various languages.
So if one argues for the "MALAYAN/SRIVIJAYAN" colonization of the Philippines using the Laguna Copperplate Inscription, I might as well use the hundreds of Chinese artifacts and coins also dating back 10th century that are found throughout Philippine seas, especially in Luzon. Their numerical superiority versus Indo-Malayan artifacts of Hindu/Buddhist design shows that the Chinese did settle in Luzon, a fact now being acknowledged by many historians.
The Maharaja of Srivijaya or Mihraj's of Zabaj's capital was in the Philippines and so Srivijayan colonization? Anyways, there was no COLONIZATION...
It's more of INDIAN influence and alliances and intermarriages between the native rulers of the various Indianized independent states comprising the so called SRIVIJAYAN AND MAJAPAHIT THALOSOCRACIES which is not exactly synonymous to the western concept of EMPIRES. You can't have a cohesive empire which spans various isles spread wide apart by the seas as compared to LAND BASED EMPIRES. It's more like a political alliances and trading networks between various independent kingdoms or states, SYMBOLICALLY RULED BY A SINGLE MAHARAJA or Mihraj. Obviously a Maharaja in Luzon could not control the day to day activities of his subjects in Medang in Java for example.
Well yeah, if those Chinese artifacts can talk and say the Chinese ruled the natives.
No, I am just kidding. There is no discounting the numerical superiority. The various wrecks containing the majorty of those artifacts were loaded from NATIVE SHIPS and not from Chinese junks or even Bruneian type of ships. So, the NATIVE TRADERS carried the trading the most.
But this fact would gladden a sinophile like you. That the Luzon people were often confused in Jakarta or Batavia as Chinamen because of the Chinese style clothing. Luzon traders actually had the monopoly of the China trade bringing chinese porcelain to those areas.
That's the reason, the Bruneians tried to break the monopoly of the Luzonians and invaded SELURUNG or Lusung. And so Manila under Srilela or Salalila aka Raja Soliman I was established c/o his father Sultan Bolkeiah aka singing captain Nakhoda Ragam to countercheck the primacy of TONDO in the china trade.