Javan & Archipelago South East Asia

Chapter VII

Javan is the fourth son of Japheth and his sons are the second and last, recorded grandsons of Japheth in the Bible.

Genesis 10:4-5

Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition

4 And the sons of Javan: Elisa and Tharsis, Cetthim and Dodanim. 5 By these were divided the islands [isles]in their lands… and their families in their nations.

Living Bible

The sons of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, Dodanim. Their descendants became the maritime nations in various lands, each with a separate language.

1 Chronicles 1:7

English Standard Version

The sons of Javan: Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Rodanim.

The sons of Javan are associated with Islands – and the sea. Dodan is called Rodan in 1 Chronicles. Recall, a similar situation with Gomer’s son Riphath [and Diphath] – regarding the reverse transliteration of the first letters R and D. Either, another scribal error has occurred, with a different reference to the same Dodanim who once lived on the Greek Island of Rhodes… or there is an additional son of Javan, [or even a grandson, via Javan’s son Dodan].

I paused, wondering which word to use to describe the situation and checked transcription, which had come to mind, though I did not know what it meant. I then found the following definition, much to my surprise.

‘Transcription is the first of several steps of DNA based gene expression in which a particular segment of DNA is copied into RNA (especially mRNA) by the enzyme RNA polymerase. A molecule that allows the genetic material to be realized as a protein was first hypothesized by Francois Jacob and Jacques Monod. Severo Ochoa won a Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1959 for developing a process for synthesizing RNA in vitro with polynucleotide phosphorylase, which was useful for cracking the genetic code.’

I was struck by the coincidence of the letters D and R for DNA and RNA, with the first letters for Dodan and Rodan. [I found this coincidence interesting, but had no reason to pursue the mRNA aspect in 2020, when I began writing this series of articles. It did attract my attention though, when I first heard the term: Covid 19 mRNA vaccine. Please see related article on website, Covid 19 Injection.]

The Book of Jubilees provides the location of Javan some time after the flood when Japheth’s children lived in southern Central Asia, Asia Minor and Southeastern Europe.

Book of Jubilees 9:10-11

And for Javan came forth the fourth portion every island and the islands which are towards the border of Lud.

This is a reference to when Javan lived throughout the Greek Islands and Lud [son of Shem] was located in the west of Asia Minor.

Book of Jasher 7:6 and 10:13

And the sons of Javan were Elisha, Tarshish, Chittim and Dudonim… And the children of Javan are the Javanim who dwell in the land of Makdonia [Macedonia].

We will study Javan, his eldest son Elishah and his youngest son Dodan. Javan’s other two sons, the Kittim [Kitti] and Tarshish, we will discuss separately.

Israel A History Of – emphasis theirs: 

‘The name Javan is the original form of the name Ionia. Ionia is synonymous with Greece. The same Hebrew word is translated “Javan” in some passages, and “Greece” in others. It is recognized and agreed upon by scholars that of the sons of Noah, Japheth, and his son Javan, were the initiators of the Greeks. Hellas, as in Hellespont and Hellenists, is a form of the name Elishah [Javan’s firstborn son], and came to be applied to Greece as a whole. The Tell el Amarna and Ugaritic documents, dating from the 1400’s to the 1300’s B.C., make mention of the Alasians. It appears that the Alasians were from Cyprus, yet another Greek connection to the sons of Noah and their descendants. [Dodan] are apparently the same as the Rodanim, mentioned in I Chronicles 1:7. The influence of Dodanim can be seen in the geographical names of Dardanelles, and Rhodes.’

Ancient Civilisation: 

‘The name of the next grandson, Javan, is the Hebrew word for Greece. Greece, Grecia, or Grecians appears five times in the Old Testament, and is always the Hebrew word Javan. Daniel refers to ‘the king of Grecia’ (Daniel 8:21), literally ‘the king of Javan’. Javan’s sons were Elishah, Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim (Genesis 10:4), all of whom have connections with the Greek people. The Elysians (an ancient Greek people) obviously received their name from Elishah. Tarshish or Tarsus was located in the region of Cilicia (modern Turkey). Encyclopaedia Britannica says that Kittim is the biblical name for Cyprus… Dodonaeus, possibly a reference to the fourth son of Javan… His oracle was at Dodena.’ 

At the time of Daniel [circa 500’s BCE], the Greeks mentioned are the forerunners of the Greco-Macedonian Empire that would supplant the Medo-Persian Empire. These Greeks are a very different proposition to the original founders of the Greek isles and coasts after the Flood. The sons of Javan dispersed from the Middle East at the time of Peleg and the Tower of Babel circa 6755 BCE and into the Aegean. The later inhabitants of Greece, long after Javan’s descendants had begun their eastward arc towards the Far East [and after the Minoans and Mycenaeans had arrived beginning circa 3500 BCE], began populating Greece from circa 1700 BCE. Please refer to point number two in the introduction.

A H Sayce, page 46-47: 

‘Cyprus was called the island of the lonians by the Assyrians… Tarshish is usually identified with Tartessos in Spain, not far from the modern Gibraltar. It was the furthest point reached in the western basin of the Mediterranean by the Phoenician and Greek traders. The ships which made the voyage were consequently known as the ships which traded to Tarshish, or more briefly, ships of Tarshish. The phrase gradually came to be applied to any kind of merchant vessel, even to those which had never visited Tarshish at all. Kittim was Kition in Cyprus… It was, however, a Phoenician and not a Greek settlement… Dodanim, on the other hand, may represent a Greek colony…. Rodanim is an alternative reading of Dodanim… In this case, it will denote the natives of the island of Rhodes.’

The sons of Javan as the original ‘Greeks’ founded civilisations on the islands of Cyprus, Crete, Rhodes, Sicily, Malta and beyond all the way to Spain – its islands and coastal regions. Much later, the Phoenicians [a maritime people descended from Shem] occupied the Island of Cyprus and many of the other isles located in the Mediterranean Sea.

Dr Hoeh adds the following – emphasis mine:

‘… where are the Greeks, South Italians, Spaniards and Portuguese mentioned in prophecy? Turn to Genesis 10:2, 4. Here is the answer. You find Javan, a son of Japheth, listed. Javan had four sons… In I Chronicles 1:7 the last name is spelled Rodanim. The Bible itself proves how often names were changing in ancient times.

Where are the sons of Javan today? The Bible makes the answer very plain. No need to look for any evidence outside of the Bible this time. Look in either STRONG’s or YOUNG’s CONCORDANCE. There you will find that in the Old Testament, wherever the words “Greece” or “Grecia” are used in English, the word “Javan” is used in Hebrew! Javan is the father of the Greeks, and of the other Latins. His son Elishah spread into “Hellas” —the Greek Isles in the Aegaean Sea and to Cyprus, anciently called “Alisha”. His son Dodanim or Rodanim spread through the Dodecanes, and the Isle of Rhodes and parts of the French Mediterranean coast along the Rhone.’

It is a common assumption interpreting Javan as the Latins of Italy and the Iberian peninsula – due to the apparent Greek-Greece connection. Remembering points one and two in the introduction, the original sons of Javan [from Japheth] travelled throughout the Mediterranean leaving their presence behind them through names of cities. 

Peoples descended from Shem, followed and settled. They may have assumed the original names, for instance ‘Greece’, though todays Greeks are not the sons of Javan, nor are they the remnants of the mighty Greco-Macedonian Empire, as we shall learn. As the constant reader will already know or is beginning to see, it is inaccurate to assume otherwise, merely based on place names.

Javan in Hebrew means: ‘Mire’ from the noun yawen and translated as Ionia, Grecia  or Greece. It has a similar meaning to the root word H3196 effervescing, as in hot and active [like the amazing four hundred Volcanoes in Indonesia, of which one hundred and thirty are active]. In Persian it means ‘young.’ 

Abarim Publications:

‘The name Javan comes from yawen… which is wet [swampy, boggy ground] or soft mud and represents the transitional state between water… and dry land… water (seas and rivers) denote liquidity, growth and potential… in the Bible the great cultures are always associated with their respective great rivers. For a meaning of the name Javan, Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names reads Supple, Clay. NOBSE Study Bible Name List simply reads Greece.’

An appropriate name when considering Javan’s relationship with water and where his sons are dwelling today. The descendants of Javan are located [adjacent to their cousins from Gomer] in the principal archipelago nations of South East Asia – Malaysia [Singapore], the Philippines, the Pacific Islands… and Indonesia, to be discussed in the next chapter. 

Elishah in Hebrew means: ‘God supports’, ‘God is my salvation’, also ‘to set upright, to stand.’ Abarim Publications adds that the verb, Sasha means ‘to be unrestricted’ and thus to be free, to be saved from oppression and ultimate demise. The adjective Shoa means: ‘(financially) independent’ or ‘freed in an economic sense’. This definition is indicative of modern Malaysia.

Ezekiel 27:7

New English Translation

Fine linen from Egypt, woven with patterns, was used for your sail to serve as your banner;

blue and purple from the coastlands of Elishah were used for your deck’s awning.

Footnote: This is probably a reference to Cyprus.

The word translated as coastlands is H339 ‘iy meaning: coast, island, shore, region and a desirable, habitable spot. Translated in the KJV as mainly isles [30] or islands [5]. Many translations translate Elishah as Cyprus, which can also mean Kitti the third son of Javan. This is a fascinating connection as Elishah and Kitti both lived on Cyprus, before it became associated mainly with the Kittim. Kitti does work as an identity, for the simple reason they too are a maritime nation sharing territory with Elishah today. Anciently, Elishah lived on islands as well as the Grecian mainland. 

Today, Malaysia is the only nation from Javan that is not entirely comprised of islands. It is divided as West Malaysia on the peninsula and East Malaysia on the island of Borneo [the world’s third largest island]. Malaysia has a long history of maritime activities, whether it be trade through shipping and its practical location for ports or its many shipyards.

Located In the Malay Peninsula, the first inhabitants were Negritos. Traders and settlers from India and China arrived as early as the first century CE and established ports and coastal towns in the second and third centuries. Between the seventh and thirteenth centuries, most of the southern Malay Peninsula was part of the maritime Srivijayan Empire. In the early fifteenth century, Parameswara, a runaway king of the former Kingdom of Singapura [linked to the old Srivijayan court], founded the Malacca Sultanate. Malacca was an important commercial centre attracting trade from all around the region.

Malacca was conquered by Portugal in 1511, after which it was controlled by the Dutch  from 1641. In 1786, the British Empire established a presence in Malaya, when the Sultan of Kedah leased Penang Island to the British East India Company. The British later acquired the town of Singapore in 1819and in 1824 took control of Malacca following the Anglo-Dutch Treaty. By 1826 the British controlled Penang, Malacca and Singapore. Under British rule, the immigration of Chinese and Indians to serve as labourers was encouraged. 

Peninsular Malaysia was unified as the Malayan Union in 1946 and restructured as the Federation of Malaya in 1948, achieving independence in 1957. Malaya united with North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore in 1963 to become Malaysia, though in 1965, Singapore was expelled from the federation. Half the population of Malaysia is ethnically Malay with the additional minorities including Chinese, Indians and indigenous peoples. The population of Malaysia is 32,855,036 people. The Malays account for 13% of the total population in Singapore of 5,903,392 people.

The mtDNA Haplogroup E [2% in the Malay Archipelago] is found throughout Maritime Southeast Asia. It has been detected in populations of the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia [including Sabah of Borneo] as well as Taiwan. It is nearly absent from mainland East Asia, where its sister group M9a [a sub-clade of E also found in Japan] is common. The references to Japan and Taiwan, we will study further. Even though Taiwan is predominantly Han Chinese, there is a residue of haplogroup E because the Malayo-Polynesian [Austronesian] peoples originally entered Taiwan from the Chinese mainland. 

The main mtDNA haplogroups for Malayans include Ma [39%], B5 [11%] and F1a [17%], compared with Thailand that we looked at earlier, of B5a [9.4%], F1a1a [8.9%] and M [8.9%]. Though these are shared Southeast Asian mtDNA haplogroups and Thailand and Malaysia are neighbours, the dividing line between Gomer and Javan is evident in the significant difference in percentage [excepting F1a]. Other key haplogroups for the Malays include: M21a [6%], B4 [8%], N9a [3%] and R [8%].

Dodan in Hebrew means: ‘Leaders’ from the verb dada, ‘to move or lead slowly’

Abarim Publications:

‘In the parallel text of 1 Chronicles 1:7, the Dodanim are called Rodanim. Some scholars believe that the Chronicler made an error and read a Hebrew (resh) for the somewhat similar (daleth — which would be comparable to a professional writer today speaking of Oatar instead of Qatar; rather unlikely), and threw an additional waw) in for good measure. Another possibility is that the Dodanim of old were known as Rodanim in the Chronicler’s days. It’s even possible that by speaking of Rodanim, the Chronicler indicates that his text is not a copy of but rather a commentary on the established text…

The name Dodanim appears to be a plural form of a name similar to Dedan, and is closely similar to the name [Dedan]. The Dedanim, however, are either descendants of Japheth’s brother Ham (Genesis 10:7) or else Jokshan, a son of Abraham and a distant descendant of Japheth’s other brother Shem (Genesis 25:3).’

Two Dedans are mentioned in the Bible: one a grandson of Cush, son of Ham and the other a grandson of Abraham, descended from Shem. Two different Dedans, though commentators have invariably tried to equate them as one and the same person. Dodan’s name is very similar, though he is a separate person, resulting in a total of three people – two Dedans and one Dodan.

‘It’s not immediately clear where the name Dodanim may have come from, but to a Hebrew audience it would have looked related to the following root group: The root (yadad ) has to do with love… in the affectionate, physical sense. Adjective (yadid) means beloved or lovely… an identical verb (yadad II) means to cast a lot… originally meant to cast but which evolved to praise… our root has to do with physical fondling… [and]… to move slowly.’ 

The Filipinos represent the descendants of Dodan today. The writing of Dodan in the plural as Dodanim in the Bible may be linked to the diversity of the Filipino people over such a large volume of island territory. The same maybe true of the Rodanim and Kittim.

The Republic of the Philippines incredibly consists of approximately 7,641 islands that are categorized under three main geographical divisions from north to south: Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao. The capital city is Manilla and the most populous city is Quezon City, both within the single urban area of Metro Manilla. The Philippines has a population of 111,265,058 people. It is the 13th most populated country in the world. Multiple ethnicities and cultures are found throughout the islands, with Negritos, some of the archipelago’s earliest inhabitants and they were followed by successive waves of Austronesian peoples [Malayo-Polynesian].

In 1521, Portuguese explorer Ferdinand Magellan arrived and claimed the islands for Spain. In 1543, Spanish explorer Ruy Lopez de Villalobos named the archipelago Las Islas Filipinas in honor of Philip II of Spain. Colonisation began when Spanish explorer Miguel Lopez de Legazpi arrived from Mexico in 1565.In 1571, Spanish Manilla became the capital of the Spanish East Indies which encompassed Spanish territories in Asia and the Pacific.The Spanish considered their war with the Muslims in Southeast Asia an extension of the Reconquista. From 1565 to 1821 the Philippines was governed as part of the Mexico based Viceroyalty of new Spain. Later it was administered from Madrid following the Mexican War of Independence. Manilla was the western hub of the trans-Pacific trade and Catholicism became the dominant religion. 

In 1896 the Philippine Revolution began, which then became entwined with the 1898 Spanish-American War. Spain ceded the territory to the United States and Filipino rebels declared the First Philippine Republic. The ensuing Philippine-American War ended with the United States establishing control over the territory, maintained until the Japanese invasion of the islands during World War II. The Philippines gained independence in 1946.

Oxford Business Group – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘Over the last 50 years, the Philippines has grown to become a leading provider of maritime professionals and is subsequently considered by many to be the seafaring capital of the world.  At present there are over 10.5m Filipinos living and working abroad, and in 2013 they sent total remittances of around $23 [billion] back home to the Philippines. The maritime industry is a major contributor to this: nearly 400,000 Filipino seafarers were working overseas in 2013, contributing a total of more than $5.2 [billion] in remittances. “Seafaring is the Philippines’ biggest strength, currently supplying roughly 30% of the world’s seafarers, which is miles away from the second-largest source country.”’ 

Pommie Travels, Victoria Brewood – emphasis mine:

‘Asia is the last place you’d expect to find an English-speaking nation. A lengthy occupation by the United States introduced Filipinos to English. Today, most Filipinos [5th biggest English speaking nation in the world] speak the world’s most-spoken language… Filipino culture – it stands out noticeably from the rest of Asia. Thanks to 500 years of Spanish and American colonization, you could be forgiven for thinking you’ve arrived in Latin America rather than Asia.’

Philippine Mitochondrial DNA Diversity: A Populated Viaduct between Taiwan and Indonesia? Multiple Authors, 2010 – emphasis & bold mine:

Comparison of the mtDNA haplogroup frequency distributions in the three major island groups of the Philippines showed similar haplogroup profiles. Southeast Asian populations cluster closely together in an MDS plot including groups from Near Oceania and Polynesia. However, an MDS plot of Asians and Southeast Asians reveals genetic differentiation between these groups.’ 

‘Plot of first two dimensions produced by MDS analysis of mtDNA haplogroup frequencies in selected East, Southeast Asian, Near Oceanic, and Polynesian populations, including Borneo (BOR), Hakka (HAK), Hlai (HLA), Java (JAV), Maluku (MAL), Nusa Tenggara—Austronesian (NTA), Northern Han (NOH), Philippines (PHL), Southern Han (SOH), Sulawesi (SLW), Sumatra (SUM), Taiwanese Aborigines (TAB), Thailand (THL) and Vietnam (VTN). (A) Including Nusa Tenggara—Non-Austronesian (NTN), Polynesian (POL), and West Papuan (WEP); Borneo and Sumatra overlap. (B) East Asian and Southeast Asian groups only.’

The Philippines, Taiwanese Aborigines, and Sulawesi cannot be clearly separated in the first dimension of the MDS plot; these groups can only be distinguished in the second dimension. However, the MDS plot does enable us to differentiate between the latter populations and other Island Southeast Asians (Maluku, Java, Borneo, Sumatra, and Austronesian-speaking groups in the Nusa Tenggaras). Han Chinese populations from Taiwan (Hakka) and southern China group closely together, whereas mainland Southeast Asian populations from Vietnam and Thailand are interspersed with other East Asian groups. Genetic distances between these populations are most closely correlated with the distributions of haplogroups B5b, M7b3, and M7c3c (r ≥ 0.25); less so with other frequent haplogroups such as E1a1a and B4a1a. Lineages that comprise a significant proportion (≥5%) of the Philippine population and are generally shared with both Island and/or Mainland Southeast Asians include B4b1, B4c1b, B5b, E, and R9c. Among these mtDNA lineages, haplogroup E is unusual in that it is virtually absent in mainland Asia .’

Frequencies of major mtDNA haplogroups in East Asian, Southeast Asian, Papuan, and Polynesian groups.

‘Haplogroup B4a1a is highly diverse in Taiwan, but the subclade (B4a1a1) characterized by a mutation at np 14,022 is absent there. The identification of haplogroup B4a1a1 in the Philippines may indicate a stage of development of the Polynesian Motif along the north to south pathway proposed in the general Out of Taiwan model for the Austronesian population expansion. This apparently completes a series of genetic links from Taiwan (where the B4a1a motif may have originated), through the Philippines (where the np 14,022 mutation might have evolved) and finally to Indonesia (where the full Polynesian Motif first occurs). However, the observation of a B4a1a1 sample in the Philippine population is not necessarily incompatible with models that argue for an extended development period for the Polynesian Motif in ISEA, if the proposed area of development of the motif is expanded to include the Philippines. Another alternative explanation is that the B4a1a1 lineages might have been brought to the Philippines by a back migration from Indonesia.’

The cluster of island Southeast Asia and Polynesia mtDNA [maternal] haplogroups confirms the genetic link between Polynesia with the rest of southeast of Asia. The article also supports that migration from Taiwan to Indonesia and Polynesia went via the Philippine Islands. The most common Filipino haplogroups include: B4a1a [11%], B5b [8%], D6 [1%], E1a1a [11%], F1a4 [4%], R9c [5%], M7c3c [11%]  and Y2 [5%].

Other mtDNA haplogroups that the Filipinos possess in common with Taiwan include: M7b3 [3%], E1a1a, B4a1a, B4b1 [8%], M7c3c, and B4c1b [5%].

The most common mtDNA haplogroups for Filipinos and Malays compared to Thais and the Vietnamese.

Vietnamese:  M7  [10]%   B5   [7%]    F1    [19%] 

Thais:             M     [9%]    B5a [9%]    F1a  [9%]

Malays:          Ma   [39%]  B5   [11%]   F1a  [17%]

Filipinos:       M7c [11%]   B5b [8%]    F1a  [4%] 

The Filipinos possess more E1a [11%] and this accounts for less F1a, distinguishing them from the other three peoples; otherwise they have similar levels of M and B5 as the Vietnamese. The Vietnamese have a higher level of B4 [17%], with F1 that separates them from the others. The Malays are as high in these three haplogroups [M, B5, F1] as the Thais, their neighbours are low; highlighting their respective difference from each other as well as the Vietnamese and Filipinos. The Malays have a lower, yet still quite high level of B4 [8%], whereas the Filipinos are between the Malays and Vietnamese for B4 [11%].

Complete mtDNA Genomes of Filipino Ethnolinguistic Groups: a melting pot of recent and ancient lineages in the Asia-Pacific region, Multiple Authors, 2013 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Philippines is a strategic point in the Asia-Pacific region for the study of human diversity, history and origins, as it is a cross-road for human migrations and consequently exhibits enormous ethnolinguistic diversity. Although some mtDNA haplogroups can be associated with the Austronesian expansion, there are others that associate with South Asia, Near Oceania and Australia that are consistent with a southern migration route [from Taiwan] for ethnolinguistic group ancestors into the Asia-Pacific, with a timeline that overlaps with the initial colonization of the Asia-Pacific region, the initial colonization of the Philippines and a possible separate post-colonization migration into the Philippine archipelago.

Haplogroups B4b1a and B5b1c are of appreciable frequency (> 5%) in [Filipino Ethnolinguistic] groups. However, population comparison was limited to FE groups and Japan because Japan was the only population-based and geographically defined group in the reference data set that possessed B4b1 and B5b1 lineages.FE group and Japanese B4b1a and B5b1 coding sequences fall into distinct clades that diverged some 15–20 kya… suggesting an ancient link. But as macrohaplogroups B4 and B5 and their sublineages are generally associated with mainland East and Southeast Asia, more population-based samples of complete mtDNA genomes from these regions are required in order to verify the observed Filipino–Japanese association.’

We will refer back to this paragraph and the genetic link between the Filipinos and Japanese. It is as revealing and vital as the link we found and investigated between the Vietnamese and Koreans – Ashkenaz and Togarmah of Gomer.

‘In conclusion, this study has demonstrated various features of the mtDNA landscape of the Philippines… mtDNA showed that the Filipino population is heterogeneous and composed of diverse FE groups and Regional Centres groups, with no simple dichotomy between FENegrito and FEnon-Negrito groups… there are different trends in Ne changes that could suggest different demographic histories for the Filipino Ethnolinguistic groups included in the study… FE groups have genetic affinities primarily with northern East Asia and Southeast Asia…’

The most frequently occurring Y-DNA [Paternal] haplogroups among modern Filipinos are haplogroup O1-M119 [O1a] and haplogroup O2-M122 [O2a1], which is found with high frequency in many populations from East Asia, Southeast Asia, and Polynesia^. Haplogroup O1-M119 is shared especially with Taiwan, Western Indonesia and Madagascar.^ Filipinos also possess O1-M268 [O1b] the clade that Vietnam and Korea share. The main Y-DNA haplogroups for Malays and Filipinos:

Malaysia:       O1b – O2a1 – O1a – K – C – F – [R1a – D1 – H1a]

Philippines:  O2a1 – O1a – K – C – O1b 

The Malays and Filipinos share five main key haplogroups and are clearly siblings; though the difference between them is marked by the significant percentage of O1b Malaysia has [32%] – the same haplogroup that Vietnam and Korea share in equal measure of 33%. Certain lesser clades show influence of migration from Indo-China and Thailand in to Malaysia – R1a, D1 and H1a – plus the influence of the Vietnamese with the high percentage of O1b.

Malaysians [apart from the Philippines] are not closely aligned with the other nations mentioned and have a distant affinity with cousins, Vietnam; while the Filipinos [apart from Malaysia] have a distant affinity with cousins, Thailand.

Malaysia:       O1b – O2a1 – O1a – K – C – F – [R1a – D1 – H1a]

Vietnam:        O2a1 – O1b – Q1a – O1a – C – D1 – N 

Philippines:   O2a1 – O1a – K – C – O1b 

Thailand:       O2a1 – O1a – C – D1 – K 

The key Y-DNA East and Southeast Asian haplogroups of O, K and C represented in percentages.

Malaysia:        O1b  [32%]      O2a1 [28%]     O1a  [8%]     K [8%]       C   [6%] 

Philippines:    O1b  [3%]        O2a1 [39%]     O1a  [28%]   K [20%]     C  [5%] 

Vietnam:         O1b  [33%]      O2a1 [40%]     O1a  [6%]                        C  [4%] 

Korea:              O1b  [33%]     O2a1 [42%]     O1a [3%]  K [4%]        C  [13%]

Haplogroup K shows the affinity between brothers Elisha and Dodan – Malaysia and the Philippines – as distinct from their cousins from Gomer. The higher percentage of C, separates Korea. The higher percentage of O1a, coupled with the lesser of O1b distinguishes the Filipinos.  

Turning our attention to [the relationship of Dodan with], Rodan – the Polynesian [and Micronesian] Peoples of the Pacific [Oceania]. 

Their locations include such diverse regions as Madagascar to the west, Hawaii to the north, Easter Island to the eastand New Zealand to the south. 

Riphath and Diphath of Gomer [Cambodia and Laos] were not a scribal error but an indication of two peoples closely aligned, historically, culturally and ethnically, one possibly deriving from the other, or Diphath is a later son of Gomer. Javan’s youngest son Dodan[im] strangely mirrors, the same relationship with Rodan[im].

Herman Hoeh – emphasis & bold mine: 

‘The Mauri, Milyaes and Gasgars migrated from the Mediterranean via Asia Minor… The Gasgars live on the Island of Madagasgar. The word “Madagasgar” means “Gasgars of the land of Madai! “The Milyaes are the Malayas of Southeast Asia; the Mauri are the Maori of the South Pacific, The Maori claim to have come from the West by ship from the land of “Raiatea”(AN INTRODUCTION TO POLYNESIAN ANTHROPOLOGY, by Peter Buck, p.14). Where was Raiatea? Some lost continent? NO! Raiatea was a land familiar to the Romans. They called it Raetia. It was located south of the Danube River… (SMITH’s CLASSICAL DICTIONARY).’

A number of researchers maintain the Polynesians sailed from South America across the Pacific Ocean to the Pacific Islands. In 1947, the Kon Tiki voyage by Thor Heyerdahl using a a Polynesian balsa wood raft sailed across the Pacific, westward from South America, beyond Easter Island to prove it could be done. Polynesians did sail that same direction… only after they had first sailed eastward to South America circa 1100 CE. When they returned, they brought with them bottle gourds, the paper mulberry tree and sweet potatoes [Kumara]. All are found throughout the South Pacific, yet they are sourced from South American varieties. This transference of vegetation has confused some into thinking the Polynesians migrated originally from South America.

The Milyaes or Malays are linked to the Polynesians. Sayce comments on page 32 – bold mine:

‘It was the philologist, for example, who first suggested the common origin of the Malayo- Polynesian race. He found that the languages spoken by the race implied a common mother-speech at no very distant period, and thus made it possible that the speakers also were derived from a common stock.’

The Journal of the Polynesian Society Volume VII: The Malayo-Polynesian Theory III, John Fraser, 1898 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Scientists have also done much to spread the Malayo-Polynesian theory, chiefly Wilhelm von Humboldt, who, on the very first page of his great work (Über die Kawi Sprache auf der Insel Java), says, “Under this name—the Malayan race—I include the inhabitants of all the islands of the great Southern Ocean.”

The view which I take is a “new theory” so far as I am concerned, for I have never seen it stated by any other. It is shortly this: Whereas others maintain that a conspicuous portion of the Polynesian language has come from the Malays, I hold that these words were Polynesian before they became Malayan; that is, that the Malays, when they came into the Indian Archipelago, found a Polynesian language there from which they borrowed largely. And further, I hold that in Indonesia the first dwellers were of the Melanesian stock, that the ancestry of the present Polynesians was grafted on that, and that the Malays are the last and latest settlement there. Thus I account for the well-known fact that the ground-work of the purely Melanesian languages shows many root-words in common with the languages both of the brown Polynesians and the Malays. Others say that these words come through the Malays; I say that the Malays were the borrowers. “The truth,—the more it’s shook, it shines,” and every question as to the origin of our Polynesians and their speech ought to be worthy of a place in your Journal… for the Malay itself is a borrower from far earlier forms which came originally from India.”’

Ancient Origins, Caleb Strom – emphasis & bold mine:

Although it is plausible that Polynesia was settled by ancient South Americans; all the genetic, linguistic, and ethnographic evidence points toward a predominantly southeast Asian origin. The two main theories today are called the Express Train Hypothesis and the Slow Boat Hypothesis. The Express Train Hypothesis says that Polynesians originally come from Taiwan by way of the Philippines and Melanesia. According to this view, Polynesians are mainly a part of a migration wave that came out of Taiwan.

The western part of Polynesia was settled between 3000 and 1000 BC by people from Taiwan via the Philippines as well as parts of New Guinea. Eastern Polynesia was settled beginning around 900 AD as Polynesian voyagers began to set out from Tonga and Samoa and other islands of western Polynesia to settle the Hawaiian Islands, New Zealand, and Easter Island, among other islands of the region.

According to the Slow Boat Hypothesis, the ancestors of the Polynesians are of Austronesian descent and still have a connection to Taiwan, but the ancestors of modern Polynesians spent several centuries intermarrying with people of Papuan and Indonesian lineage before setting out to Polynesia.

The first view is supported by linguistic and ethnographic data, but there is genetic evidence for the second hypothesis.Genetic studies have shown, for example,that a significant percentage of the Polynesian population has y-chromosomal DNA [father] haplogroups coming from Papua New Guinea while most of the mtDNA [mother] comes from haplogroups in Taiwan and Southeast Asia.

This suggests some degree of intermarriage between Polynesians and other Austronesian groups as well as non-Austronesian groups [Melanesians]. Another possible line of evidence for this hypothesis comes from the fact that there is a gap in the language evolution of Polynesian Austronesian languages. 

Polynesian languages have features that no other Austronesian languages possess. This could be because of interaction with Papuan and Indonesian populations.

A study in 2020 has suggested that the date for Polynesians meeting South Americans should be pushed back even further, to around 1150 AD. The nature of those genetic links and the location for that first contact also differs from previous beliefs. As Ed Whelan writes: 

“Genetic evidence appears to prove that Polynesians are related to present-day Indigenous people, especially from the coast of Colombia and Ecuador. Interestingly, the DNA study concludes that the earliest contact was on Fatu Hiva, an island in the South Marquesas islands, sometime around 1150 AD, and not Rapa Nui which is much closer to the coast of South America.”

Is it possible that Amerindian cultures are partially responsible for the colonization of Polynesia, or at least part of it, after all? Although it is possible that South American voyagers sailed to Polynesia to meet the Rapa Nui or another group of Polynesians, the Polynesians are known to have been more skilled at seafaring at the time, so it is more likely that it was the Polynesians who came to the Americas. The Polynesians may have come to South America to trade with the natives, and as a result may have ended up also bringing home South American brides. Intriguingly, there is circumstantial evidence for pre-Columbian contact between Native Americans and Polynesians – chicken^^ bones that have been found at an archaeological site on a beach in Chile that appear to predate the coming of the Spaniards.

Regardless of where the Polynesians originally came from, their ancestry appears to be more complex than initially thought. The more we learn about historical genetics the more we realize just how convoluted the communication and intermarriage between different populations was in the past. If we go far back enough, current thinking is that we are all a mixture of many lineages of mankind which originally diverged from a single lineage that goes back to Africa, perhaps 200,000 years ago.’

All the way back to [mitochondrial] Eve, though both the time frame and the origin in Africa is gravely disputed.

Ancient Origins, April Holloway – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Research into the origins and dispersal of Polynesian chickens^^ has helped scientists reconstruct the early migrations of the Polynesians and the animals they carried with them. The results revealed that the Philippines is the most likely ancestral homeland of the Polynesians, whose forebears colonised the Pacific about 3,200 years ago.

Polynesian seafarers explored vast areas of the Pacific and settled nearly every inhabitable island in the Pacific Ocean well before European explorers arrived in the 16th century. However, the ancestral relationships of people living in the widely scattered islands of the Pacific Ocean have long puzzled anthropologists. 

The predominant theory is that the Polynesian people are a subset [Rodanim] of the sea-faring Austronesian people who have their origins in Taiwan, having arrived there through South China about 8000 years ago. From there it is believed that the spread out across the Pacific to Polynesia, a sub-region made up of over 1,000 islands scattered over the central and southern Pacific Ocean.’

Eight thousand years ago would be circa 7000-6000 BCE. This fits the time frame after the dispersal of all the nations at the time of Peleg and the Tower of Babel, about 6755 BCE.

‘It is thought that by roughly 1400 BC, the ‘Lapita People’, so-named after their pottery tradition, appeared in the Bismark Archipelago of northwest Melanesia. This culture is seen as having adapted and evolved through time and space since its emergence “Out of Taiwan”. Within a mere three or four centuries between about 1300 and 900 BC, the Lapita archaeological culture spread 6,000 km until it reached as far as Fiji, Tonga, and Samoa.’

It is now held that between 3000 and 1000 BCE speakers of Austronesian languages began spreading from Taiwan into Island Southeast Asia. There are three theories, regarding the spread of peoples across the Pacific to Polynesia. These are outlined by Kayser [2000]and are as follows:

  • Express Train model: ‘A recent (c. 3000–1000 BC) expansion out of Taiwan, via the Philippines and eastern Indonesia and from the northwest of New Guinea, on to Island Melanesia by roughly 1400 BC. Reaching western Polynesian islands around 900 BC. This theory is supported by the majority of current genetic, linguistic and archaeological data.’
  • Entangled Bank model: ‘Emphasizes the long history of Austronesian speakers’ cultural and genetic interactions with indigenous Island Southeast Asians and Melanesians along the way to becoming the first Polynesians.
  • Slow Boat model: ‘Similar to the express-train model but with a longer hiatus in Melanesia along with admixture — genetically, culturally and linguistically — with the local population. This is supported by the Y-chromosome data of Kayser, which shows that all three* haplotypes of Polynesian Y chromosomes can be traced back to Melanesia.’

Polynesians acquired a reputation as great navigators – their canoes reached the most remote corners of the Pacific, allowing the settlement of islands as far apart as Hawaii, Rapanui (Easter Island) and Aotearoa (New Zealand). The people of Polynesia accomplished this voyaging using ancient navigation skills of reading stars, currents, clouds and bird movements – skills passed to successive generations down to the present day.

Fast Trains, Slow Boats, and the Ancestry of the Polynesian Islanders, S Oppenheimer & M Richards, 2001 – emphasis & bold mine:

Our study provides evidence for a dual genetic origin of Pacific Islanders in Asia and Melanesia. This is in agreement with the Slow Boat hypothesis of Polynesian origins (Kayser, Brauer et al. 2000) according to which Polynesian ancestors originated in Asia, moved eastward, and mixed extensively with local Melanesians before colonizing the Pacific Islands. Although dating methods revealed somewhat similar entries of NRY/mtDNA haplogroups into Polynesia, haplotype sharing suggests that haplogroups of Melanesian origin may have appeared earlier in Polynesia than those of Asian origin, although more extensive sampling in Melanesia is needed to confirm this observation. The striking difference observed here between Asian and Melanesian contributions to the paternal and maternal gene pool of Polynesians suggests an admixture bias toward more Melanesian men, perhaps as result of uxorilocal (matrilocal) residence and matrilineal descent in ancestral Polynesian society (Have and Marck 2003)… Fiji played a pivotal role in the history of Polynesia: humans probably first migrated to Fiji, and subsequent settlement of Polynesia came from Fiji.’

After analysis of mitochondrial DNA [mtDNA, female] and Y Chromosome DNA [Y-DNA male], Atholl Anderson stated: ‘the ancestors of Polynesian women came from Taiwan while those of Polynesian men came from New Guinea. Subsequently, it was found that 96% of Polynesian mtDNA has an Asian origin, as does one-third of Polynesian Y chromosomes; the remaining two-thirds from New Guinea and nearby islands; this is consistent with matrilocal residence patterns.Polynesians existed from the intermixing of few ancient Austronesian-Melanesian founders, genetically they belong almost entirely to the Haplogroup B (mtDNA), which is the marker of Austronesian expansions.’ The high frequencies of mtDNA Haplogroup B within the Polynesians is the result of ‘founder effect’, representing the descendants of a few Austronesian females who had intermixed with Papuan men.

A 2010 study using meta-analysis of the most reliable radiocarbon dates available, suggested that ‘the colonisation of Eastern Polynesia [including Hawaii and New Zealand] proceeded in two short episodes: in the Society Islands from 1025 to 1120 AD and further afield from 1190 to 1290 AD,with Easter Island being settled around 1200.’More recent archeological models have projected dates between 300 to 800 CE for the settlement of Easter Island and a date of 500 CE has been suggested for Hawaii. Linguistically, there is a very distinct East Polynesian subgroup, sharing a number of innovations not seen in other Polynesian languages. Hawaiian and Maori oral histories support this, for the earliest varieties of New Zealand Maori speech have multiple sources from around central Eastern Polynesia.

Genetic History of Polynesians and New Zealand Maori… Edana Lord – emphasis and bold mine:

‘As people moved throughout the Pacific and into Polynesia, genetic interactions took place. 

The movement of mitochondrial haplogroups represent the migration of people from South East Asia through Near Oceania into Polynesia. B and Q are two such haplogroups which made it through to Polynesia. The B4 subclade arose… [and]… diverged into many more subclades including B4a1a which is restricted to Taiwan, Island Southeast Asia and the Pacific. The lineage B4a1a1 is prevalent in Near Oceania and has become almost fixed in Polynesia, making up more than 90% of all Polynesian mtDNA haplotypes. Haplotypes from the Q1 lineage have also been reported in Polynesia, in particular Gambier and the Cook Islands.

The majority of the haplotypes can be found within the B4 clade, which is well represented in South East Asian and Pacific regions. Within each of the three populations, haplotypes derived from the B4a1a1 haplogroup was the most common. This haplogroup is seen in high frequency throughout Polynesia, Micronesia, Coastal Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Philippines. As this is common to all of the populations investigated here, it shows that they have a shared ancestry.’ 

This is confirmation of a genetic link between the Filipinos and the Polynesians and Micronesians. One that we would expect for the Dodanim and Rodanim.

‘One haplotype common to all three populations is B4a1a1a…^ which is thought to have arisen in the Bismarck Archipelago11. The haplotypes can be separated into those from West Polynesia (Tokelau) and those from East Polynesia (French Polynesia and New Zealand). The haplotypes seen in West Polynesia are found deeper in the B4 clade than those from East Polynesia. This can be used as further evidence of population migration from West to East.

There are also haplotypes present in East Polynesia that are not seen throughout West Polynesia, such as the B4a1a1c haplotype… This can represent novel mutations in the expanding Polynesian populations or possibly genetic interactions with other groups of Polynesia and Micronesia.

The haplotypes present in the New Zealand population [Maori] are most similar to those from French Polynesia, for example haplotype B4a1a1m… This haplotype is restricted to the French Polynesian and New Zealand Maori populations. This contributes further to the hypothesis that New Zealand Maori are descended from Eastern Polynesians.’

Complete mitochondrial DNA sequences provide new insights into the Polynesian motif and the peopling of Madagascar, Multiple Authors, 2009 – emphasis & bold mime:

‘The ‘Polynesian motif’, popularly named for its high frequency among Polynesians, is characterized by a well known series of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) polymorphisms that now define haplogroup B4a1a1a…^

This lineage probably developed in eastern Island Southeast Asia or Near Oceania, during the mid- to late-Holocene, with recent dates suggesting an origin around 6,200 – 10,900 years before present (YBP)… The haplogroup’s immediate precursor… has been found in Taiwanese aboriginal groups with an estimated age of 13,200 YBP… This incremental series of dates are consistent with a model whereby Austronesian speaking populations expanded out of Taiwan during the mid-to-late-Holocene… Ultimately, the Austronesian expansion spread the immediate ancestor of the Polynesian motif, and later the motif itself, over a vast geographical area – from Taiwan in the north, New Zealand in the south, remote Polynesia in the east, and finally, Madagascar in the far west.’

These dates selected by scientists are closer to events recorded in the Bible than they realise. If we could marry scientific data with the Biblical record, then it would be difficult for either side to continue disbelieving the credentials of each other. The date of 10,900 – 6,200 years ago would be 8880 – 4180 BCE. The flood occurred circa 10,837 BCE. If we calculate enough time for the migrations of Japheth’s descendants and allow for the dispersion of peoples during the Tower of Babel incident [6755 BCE] then the movement of Javan’s grandchildren the Dodanim [Filipinos] and Rodanim [Polynesians] from Taiwan into the Philippines and beyond, was very likely during this time frame. 

The date of 13,200 years ago would equate to 11,180 BCE and this is interesting, as it falls between the birth of Japheth and the time of the flood. Japheth was born circa 11,837 BCE. Japheth as we have discussed, would have inherited and carried the [DNA genetic code] haplogroups that we now associate with the East and Southeast Asian peoples. This would have obviously included the mtDNA B haplogroup received from his mother and that would mutate into all the B clades; including B4a1a1^ that Rodan [the Polynesians] exhibit.

The Polynesian motif is currently found at highest frequency in Polynesia, where it approaches fixation in some populations. It is also common in Micronesia and parts of Near Oceania, where it is not necessarily restricted to Austronesian speaking populations, but also occurs in some rare Papuan speaking groups [proof of ancient admixture with Melanesians]. The motif is much less frequent in Island Southeast Asia, although it has been found sporadically in both central and eastern Indonesia. In Madagascar – the western edge of the Austronesian expansion – the Polynesian motif reaches a frequency of around 20%, thus leading to proposals that the island was settled by an Indonesian population, which later colonized the Pacific Islands, or even more speculatively, by direct migration from Polynesia itself.

Furthermore, these studies revealed that Indonesians have a major role in the colonization of Madagascar, and highlighted Borneo as a likely source of the Asian-derived Y chromosomes found in Malagasy today. This is consistent with linguistic evidence suggesting that the Malayo–Polynesian language spoken by Malagasy is related to the Barito language of southern Borneo. 

Currently, our best model for the settlement of Madagascar suggests that the first settlers reached the island [some] 1500–2000 years ago, when there is clear archeological and paleoecological evidence of their occupation. Ultimately, a complex – and largely unknown – genetic and linguistic admixture process between populations of African and Southeast Asian descent produced the Malagasy we recognize today.

We observed the Polynesian motif at relatively high frequency in all three Malagasy groups: 50.0% in Merina, 21.8% in Vezo, and 13.4% in Mikea… Indeed, the first and second phases of our analysis revealed that 58 of the 266 Malagasy shared a set of mutations… which assign them to haplogroup B4a1a1.^’

There is a genetic line through the mtDNA B4a1a1 haplotype, from the Polynesians [and Micronesians] from Rodan, to the Filipinos of Dodan and then to their ancient ancestral home of the Island of Formosa or Taiwan.

Polynesian regions with significant populations include: New Zealand 887,338, the United States 820,000, French Polynesia 215,000, Australia 210,843, Samoa 192,342 and Tonga 103,036.

Melanesian and Asian Origins of Polynesians: mtDNA and Y Chromosome Gradients Across the Pacific – Molecular Biology and Evolution, Kayser, 2006 – bold mine:

‘Y-DNA RESULTS (Males) These are reported as: HAWAIIAN PATERNAL – Direct paternal line reported as Native Hawaiian

According to researchers, Y-DNA (direct paternal lines) in Polynesia has more haplogroup variations than mtDNA (direct maternal lines); however, about 75% reporting their paternal line as Polynesian are in one of the below three* Y-DNA haplogroups:

1) Haplogroup [C1b3a* (M38)]

This is the haplogroup of about 34% who report their paternal line as Polynesian. C1b3a [formerly C2*] is found in Polynesia, Melanesia, New Guinea, and Indonesia.

2) Haplogroup O (M122)

This is the haplogroup of about 24% who report their paternal line as Polynesian. O2a1 is typical of populations of East Asia, Southeast Asia, and culturally Austronesian regions of Oceania [Polynesia and Micronesia], with a moderate distribution in Central Asia. 

3) Haplogroup K (M9)

This is the haplogroup of about 18% who report their paternal line as Polynesian. K is an old lineage presently found only at low frequencies in Africa, Asia, and in the South Pacific. One descendent line of this lineage is restricted to aboriginal Australians, while another is found at low frequency in southern Europe, Northern Africa, and the Middle East.’ 

A comparison of the main Y-DNA [paternal] haplogroups of the principal Polynesian centres of population, including their original homeland of Taiwan and the stopping off point the Philippines, before migrating into the Pacific proper. 

Taiwan:                         O1a – O2a1 – O1b – C – [K – B – E]

Philippines:                   O2a1 – O1a – K – C – O1b – [B – E]

Tonga:                           O – C – K – [M]

Samoa:                          C1 – O – K – M – S 

Maori:                            C1 – O – K – [B – M – H]

Tahiti:                             C1 – O – K

French Polynesia:         C – O – K

Micronesia:                    K – C – O

Australian Aborigine:   C1b2b – K2b – C – O2a – [F]

Negritos Philippines:    K – O2 – C – P 

Fiji:                                  M1 – K – C1 – O – C – [R2a – R1a  – H1a – J – S]

Papua New Guinea:      M1a – S – C1 – K – O – C2 

Madagascar:                 E1b1a1 – E2b – B – J – [O1a – O2a1 – R – L]

The original indigenous Taiwanese [as opposed to the later Han Chinese immigrants] and the Philippines share at least seven main key haplogroups, supporting the genetic link proposed via migration. The Polynesians, Micronesians and Melanesians share the key Asian Y-DNA haplogroups O, either C or C1, and K. The Melanesians, particularly with their darker skin are a bit of a mystery. The Fijians in part and especially the Papuan New Guineans and Australian Aborigines have facial features and skin tones more reminiscent of the Dravidian Indian of southern India and the Sri Lankans than the Polynesians. Their higher percentages of haplogroup K, plus M show they are different to a degree, but neither of these haplogroups are indicative of the Indian or Sri Lankan – M not all and K partially.

As scientists claim, it certainly seems that the Polynesians have intermarried with Melanesians [from Papua New Guinea and Fiji] while fanning out from Taiwan and the Philippines. The shared K and M haplogroups between the Polynesians and Melanesians, is highly likely to be the evidence of intermarriage. The haplogroups used for Papua New Guinea are an average between the haplogroups for Eastern and Western Papua New Guinea.

The Malagasy [and Malayo-Polynesian] population of Madagascar have a rather random sequence, though the reasonable percentage of haplogroups B [8.6%] and O of the Gascars, supports their including Polynesian haplogroups due to admixture.

The key Y-DNA East and Southeast Asian haplogroups of O, K and C represented in percentages – with the addition of M.

Taiwan:                         O1a  [66%]    O2a1 [11%]    O1b [10.6 %]   C [0.4%]

Philippines:                  O1a  [28%]    O2a1 [39%]   O1b [3%]         C [5%]       K [20%]

Tonga:                            O  [60%]   C  [23%]    K [1%] 

Samoa:                           O  [26%]  C1 [61%]     K [3.2%]   M [3.2%]  S [1.6%] 

Maori:                             O  [6%]     C1 [43%]     K [2%] 

Tahiti:                              O  [29%]   C1 [67%]     K [4%] 

French Polynesia:         O  [37%]    C  [53%]      K [8%] 

Micronesia:                    O   [9%]      C   [19%]      K [65%]

Australian Aborigines:   O   [1%]      C1  [60%]      K [22%]    C  [6%]

Negritos [Philippines] : O2 [14%]    C    [11%]       K [51%]     P  [5%] 

Fiji:                                   O   [13%]    C1  [22%]      K [25%]    M [35%]    C [1%] 

Papua New Guinea:       O   [4%]      C1  [15%]      K [9%]      M [54%]     S [18%]   C [2%] 

The Tongans have the highest ratio of haplogroup O, in common with Taiwan and French Polynesia is next and compares with the Philippines. The peoples of Melanesia, Micronesia and the New Zealand Maori have considerably less haplogroup O. The Aborigine of Australia virtually none. 

Haplogroup C and C1 is common amongst both Polynesia and Melanesia, though not in Micronesia. Haplogroups C1/C are high amongst the Aborigines. Haplogroup K is quite rare amongst the Polynesians; whereas the Melanesians have similar ratios to the Filipinos. This could well be influenced by the Negritos of the Philippines and their high lebel of Haplogroup K. Micronesia also has a high level of haplogroup K. Both Fiji and Papua New Guinea exhibit haplogroup M in larger quantities, supporting the hypothesis that Polynesia originated from Fiji and Papua New Guinea [chronologically after the Philippines] as well as the fact, that Y-DNA haplogroups can be traced to Melanesians, such as M, K and S .  

The branches of some of the principal Y-DNA haplogroups for the Southeast Asian and related peoples of the Pacific, of M, O and S.

Happy is the person who finds wisdom, the one who gets understanding. Wisdom is worth more than silver; it brings more profit than gold.

Proverbs 3:13-14 New Century Version

© Orion Gold 2020-2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Tarshish & Japan

Chapter IX

Javan’s second son Tarshish, figures prominently in the Bible. He lived the furthest of all his brothers; somewhat similar to Togarmah separating from Gomer. Tarshish grew wealthy through trade and is synonymous with shipping. Of all the eastern peoples, Tarshish had a strong orientation to the West and still does today. There is only one candidate left in East Asia who could fulfil Tarshish’s identity as a maritime island nation descended from Javan. That country, are the people of Japan.

Dr Hoeh comments:

‘Tarshish first settled in Asia Minor. The city of Tarsus was named after him. Here the apostle Paul was born. From Tarsus the tribe spread into Spain and northern Portugal, founding the famous port of Tartessus – the Tarshish of the Old Testament history of Solomon’s time…’

During Solomon’s reign [970-930 BCE], the people of Tartessus were Phoenicians and not the descendants of Tarshish who founded the city. The following regions are attributed too Tarshish and are all plausible cities and ports established during trading expeditions and migrations in the ancient past, as we have noted with Kittim in the Mediterranean. 

The Targum of Jonathan renders Tarshish as Carthage in north Africa, though a biblical commentator Samuel Bochart, read it as Tartessos in ancient Hispania [Iberian Peninsula], near Huelva and Sevilla today. Jewish scholar, Isaac Abarbanel, described Tarshish as ‘the city known in earlier times as Carthage and today called Tunis.’ An earlier identification had been with the inland town of Tarsus in Cilicia, [south-central Turkey]. American scholars William Albright and Frank Cross suggested Tarshish was Sardinia because of the discovery of the Nora Stone, whose Phoenician inscription mentions Tarshish.

Nineteenth century commentators proposed Tarshish was Britain, including Alfred Dunkin. This idea stemmed from the fact that Tarshish is recorded to have been a trader in tin, silver, gold and lead which had all been mined in Cornwall. Britain is still reputed to be the ‘Merchants of Tarshish’ today by some Christian believers. 

Much could be written on the fascinating similarities between Japan and Great Britain – Island nations on the periphery of continents, part of yet separate, from their neighbours geographically and ideologically, strong self-identity, cultural icons, empires, military and economic powers, sea-faring and maritime states, ship builders, inventors, traders… world influencers.

Steven M Collins in his book, The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel… Found! 1992, proposes two explanations on the Biblical Tarshish – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The King James Version of the Bible records in I Kings 10:22 that King Solomon “had at sea a navy of Tharshish” (other versions simply say “Tarshish”). One possibility is that Solomon had a fleet of ships based in Spain because Tartessus (in ancient Spain) is often identified as “Tarshish”… “ships of Tarshish” were recorded as having made voyages to the New World… It is also significant to note that I Kings 10:22 is the Bible’s first mention of “ships of Tarshish.” I Kings 10:22 may be a reference to a Phoenician/Israelite colony in Spain which became the homeport of a major… fleet during Solomon’s reign. If so, Tartessus (or Tarshish) was a jumping-­off point for voyages throughout the Atlantic… [and] that a reference to “ships of Tarshish” identified the fleet that Israel (together with Tyre and Sidon) had based in ancient Spain. 

The second explanation considers the possibility that the extra “h” in the word Tharshish identifies this navy with one of the clans of the Israelite tribe of Benjamin, which was named “Tharshish” (I Chronicles 7:10). Since “Tharshish” is an Israelite name, the Bible’s reference to “ships of Tharshish” could mean that this navy was primarily crewed by members of this branch of the tribe of Benjamin. It is also possible that the term “ships of Tarshish” later came to describe a particular class of sea­going vessels used by the Phoenicians. This possibility is supported by the reference in I Kings 22:48 that over a century later Judah’s King Jehoshaphat tried to “make” a fleet composed of “ships of Tarshish” for basing in the Red Sea port of Ezion­geber.’ 

This is an insightful observation, as we will learn that modern day Benjamin does indeed have a very strong ship building legacy.

‘Some readers might wonder whether the “ships of Tarshish” belonged to the Japhethic tribe of Tarshish mentioned in Genesis 10:4. While that would seem to be a possibility at first, the fact that the Tartessian “Tarshish” was located in the direction that Jonah sailed to Tarshish, and the fact that the Iberian “Tarshish” spoke a dialect of Phoenician (a Semitic language) argues for a Semitic origin for Solomon’s “ships of Tharshish” and the Iberian “Tarshish.” Further­more, there is no biblical evidence of any close cooperation between King Solomon’s Israelites and the Japhethic nation of Tarshish. Since Barry Fell’s book, America B.C. gives evidence of “the ships of Tarshish” being involved in ancient explorations of North America, this also argues that the biblical “Tarshish” was located proximate to the Atlantic Ocean (such as in ancient Spain).’

Tarshish may well be the city port, located in Spain. 

Recall, we learned with Kitti, in the preceding chapter, that the verse in Daniel detailing a naval fleet setting sail from Kittim is not a reference to the west, or Rome in Italy, but as the verse states, it is a direct reference to Kitti the son of Javan. Albeit, it is a future prophecy. The difference here, is that the ‘ships of Tarshish’ are detailing a current event; though it is the ships of Tarshish stated, not Tarshish the port. With that in mind, there are verses that state a round trip to Tarshish is considerably further than Palestine to Spain. 

Bochart suggested eastern localities for the ports of Ophir and Tarshish during King Solomon’s reign, specifically the Tamilakkam continent [present day Southern India and Northern Ceylon (Sri Lanka)] where the Dravidians were famous for their gold, pearls, ivory and peacock trade.

1 Kings 10:22

English Standard Version

For the king [Solomon] had a fleet of ships of Tarshish at sea with the fleet of Hiram. Once every three years the fleet of ships of Tarshish used to come bringing gold, silver, ivory, apes, and peacocks.

Contrary to Collins dismissing a relationship with Tarshish the nation, this verse may well be supporting an economic arrangement with the Tarshish of the East – rather than the city-port, of the western Mediterranean. If the visits were this infrequent, it supports Tarshish was all the way around the earth in Japan – some 5,656 miles from the Israelite Kingdom – and their ships were collecting exotic items throughout Southeast Asia and India en route. See 2 Chronicles 9:21, 1 Kings 22:48, and 2 Chronicles 20-36-37.

Psalm 72:10

New Century Version

Let the kings of Tarshish and the faraway lands bring him [King Solomon] gifts. Let the kings of Sheba and Seba [a grandson and a son of Cush] bring their presents to him.

Jeremiah 10:9

English Standard Version

Beaten silver is brought from Tarshish, and gold from Uphaz. They are the work of the craftsman and of the hands of the goldsmith; their clothing is violet and purple; they are all the work of skilled men.

The Japanese are a highly skilled people with an Economy reflecting their talent, work ethic, technological prowess and subsequent wealth. The reference to violet and particularly purple, lends itself to either the Phoenicians [refer Chapter XII Canaan], or it is exemplifying the quality of the workmanship, the products and the fitness for royalty, such as King Solomon himself.

Ezekiel 27:12,25

English Standard Version

Tarshish did business with you because of your great wealth of every kind; silver, iron, tin, and lead they exchanged for your wares…The ships of Tarshish traveled for you [Tyre] with your merchandise. So you were filled and heavily laden in the heart of the seas.

Isaiah 23:1, 6, 10, 14

English Standard Version

The oracle concerning [the fall of] Tyre.

Wail, O ships of Tarshish, for Tyre is laid waste, without house or harbor! From the land of [Kitti (Indonesia)] it is revealed to them… Cross over to Tarshish; wail, O inhabitants of the coast! Cross over your land like the Nile, O daughter of Tarshish; there is no restraint anymore… Wail, O ships of Tarshish, for your stronghold is laid waste.

The fall of Tyre – a key trading partner – impacts both East and Southeast Asia. Notice Tarshish and Kitti, two brothers in the far East, are linked together. This is not referring to a Phoenician port in the Mediterranean. 


Isaiah 66:19

English Standard Version

and I will set a sign among them. And from them I will send survivors to the nations, to Tarshish, Pul, and Lud [son of Shem], who draw the bow, to Tubal [son of Japheth] and Javan, to the coastlands far away [Archipelago southeast Asia – Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines],that have not heard my fame or seen my glory. And they shall declare my glory among the nations.

Ezekiel 38:13

New English Translation

Sheba and Dedan [grandsons of Cush] and the traders of Tarshish with all its young warriors [Hebrew: lions] will say to you, “Have you come to loot? Have you assembled your armies to plunder, to carry away silver and gold, to take away cattle and goods, to haul away a great amount of spoils?”’

Tarshish, an economic and military power [with Cush] stands against the great military alliance of Magog, Meshech, Tubal, Gomer [Continental Southeast Asia – Vietnam,  Thailand, Myanmar, Cambodia and Laos] and Togarmah [North (and possibly South) Korea] and does not join with them.

Jonah 1:1-3

New English Translation

1 The Lord’s message came to Jonah son of Amittai, 2 “Go immediately to Nineveh, that large [Hebrew – gadol, meaning: great, populous, mighty, powerful, fierce] capital city, and announce judgment against its people because their wickedness has come to my attention.” 3 Instead, Jonah immediately headed off to Tarshish to escape from the commission of the Lord. He traveled to Joppa and found a merchant ship heading to Tarshish. So he paid the fare and went aboard it to go with them to Tarshish, far away from the Lord.

Jonah understandably, was not keen to go to Nineveh [in Mesopotamia], the very capital of the mighty Assyrian Empire. The equivalent assignment today would be travelling to Russia and preaching a message of sin and repentance to the Russian people in Moscow – daunting indeed. There is a humorous element to Jonah boarding a vessel that would not just take him away, but take him to the furthest reaches possible logistically. That furthest destination was Tarshish. Similarly, for most people today, travelling to Japan would be going to the ends of the earth. Japan is so far east, it is in the west so-to-speak. It can even be seen to be far west, depending on which direction one is looking; for example viewed from the United States. [Isaiah 2:16, 60:9].

Psalm 48:7

Common English Bible

… or like the east wind [from the Pacific] when it smashes the ships of Tarshish [Japan].

Exodus 28:20

King James Version

And the fourth row a beryl [H8658 – tarshiysh, meaning a precious stone or gem], and an onyx, and a jasper: they shall be set in gold in their in closings.

The Hebrew term tarshish is a homonym, occurring seven times in the Bible and translated beryl in older English versions. It is also the name of a gem stone associated with the Tribe of Asher, that has been identified by the Septuagint and by Josephus as the ‘gold stone’ possibly linked to the chrysolite [gold, yellow colour] or yellow jasper.

Well known varieties of beryl include emerald and aquamarine. The meaning of Beryl in Sanskrit is light green semi-precious gemstone and in Italian, blue green from the sea. It is often colourless* [translucent], though impurities give it colours ranging from green to blue, yellow, red the rarest and even black. It is the first stone on the fourth row of the priestly breastplate [Exodus 28:20 – see also Ezekiel 1:16 and Daniel 10:6]. 

Tarshish in Hebrew means: ‘His Excellency’ and ‘breaking, subjection’. The connotation includes a ‘white dove’ or ‘dove-white’ and a ‘search for alabaster’. The verb rashash means to ‘beat down, shatter’, the noun shayish ‘white alabaster’, the noun tor, ‘dove’.

Tarshish has a similar definition as Riphath, Togarmah and Kitti in the element of either beating or breaking. This shows their familial ties and perhaps somewhat of a warning.

Abarim  Publications – emphasis and bold mine:

‘The name Tarshish (or Tharshish according to some translations) is assigned five times in the Bible: 

The first Tarshish is a son of Javan son of Japheth, son of Noah (Genesis 10:4). This name is spelled (Tarshishah) in 1 Chronicles 1:7, but the -ah ending may in fact stem from a locative suffix that means toward or unto, so that it could refer to the range of the sons of Javan: all the way to Tarshish. 

Most famous is Tarshish the city famed for its wealth and merchant fleet… but which location is unknown…

A Benjaminite (1 Chronicles 7:10).

One of seven Persian princes (Esther 1:14). Note that the name of one of two aspiring assassins of king Ahasuerus, namely or Teresh (Esther 2:21), seems like a truncated version of Tarshish. And both may have something to do with the Persian governmental title tirshatha, usually translated with “governor” (Ezra 2:63, Nehemiah 7:65).

The Hebrew name of a certain precious stone (perhaps yellow jasper, says BDB Theological Dictionary, but translated chrysolite by NIV and beryl by NAS) is also tarshish…

These names (and noun) Tarshish come from different languages and have different etymologies. The Persian prince was probably known as Tarshata, meaning His Excellency (says BDB Theological Dictionary). Another suggestion is a relation to the word tarsta, meaning the feared or revered (BDB Theological Dictionary). 

… Jones translates the name Tarshish with Breaking or Subjection, and the prefix taw would denote a thorough destruction or an ongoing one. But although Tarshish is mentioned here and there as subject of God’s wrath (Psalm 48:7, Isaiah 2:16, 23:1), it is mostly known for its great success in the economic arena. Isaiah even predicts that Tarshish is not going to be simply destroyed, as were Sodom and Gomorrah, but that its legacy will one day be employed to service God (Isaiah 60:9). It is unlikely that the name Tarshish is supposed to be linked to a verb that denotes defeat and destruction. Note that the shish-part of the name Tarshish looks a lot like the word (shayish), meaning alabaster a mostly translucent or white crystal:’

The beryl stone is transparent* in its purest form, though it can also amongst all the other colours stated, be white.

There’s an odd correlation between the color white and the number six. The nouns… shesh… and… shayish… mean alabaster, which is a whitish translucent material. The identical word… shesh… means six. The noun… shushan… describes the lily, which has six leaves and is… white. The adjective… yashesh… means old or white haired. The verb… tur… means to explore or survey and associates with a broad, circular or sweeping motion. Noun… tor… appears to describe a circular braid of hair.’ 

I am reminded of the Japanese symbol, the Cherry blossom. One of my vivid memories after being fortunate to visit the capital Tokyo in 1989, was all the beautiful white tree blossom. The braided hair is reminiscent of ancient Samurai warriors and modern Sumo wrestlers, with their long braided hair. The related Polynesians and also the Amerindians of Tiras, wore their hair similarly.

Japan comprises an archipelago of 6,852 islands covering 145,937 square miles. The country’s five main islands from north to south, are Hokkaido, Honshu, Shikoku, Kyushu and Okinawa. Tokyo is the capital and largest city. Other major cities include Yokohama,  Osaka, Nagoya, Sapporo, Fukuoka, Kobe and Kyoto. Japan is the 11th most populous country in the world, as well as one of the most densely populated and urbanised. About three quarters of the country’s terrain is mountainous, concentrating its population of 126,010,364 people on narrow coastal plains. The Greater Tokyo area has approximately thirty-six million residents – the most populous metropolitan area in the world.

The first mention of the archipelago appear in Chinese chronicles from the first century CE. Between the fourth and ninth centuries, the kingdoms of Japan were unified under an emperor and beginning in the twelfth century political power was held by a series of military dictators, the Shoguns and feudal lords, the Daimyo; enforced by a class of warrior nobility, the Samurai. A century long period of civil war ended in reunification in 1603 under the Tokugawa Shogunat. An isolationist foreign policy was then enacted until 1854, when a United States fleet forced Japan to open trade [the awakening of the great trading nation of Tarshish] to the West, which led to the end of the shogunate and the restoration of imperial power in 1868. Japan adopted a Western styled constitution and pursued a program of industrialisation and modernisation. In 1937 Japan invaded China and by 1941 it had entered World War II as an Axis power. After suffering defeat in the Pacific theatre of war, Japan surrendered in 1945.

Japan is a great power and maintains Self-Defence Forces that are ranked as the world’s 4th most powerful military. After World War II, Japan experienced impressive economic growth [boosted by American investment and loans], becoming the second largest economy in the world by 1990, before being surpassed by China in 2010. A leader in the automotive and electronics industries, Japan has made considerable contributions to science and technology.

During the 1980s, political pundits and economic analysts predicted Japan achieving superpower status; due to its population, GDP and economic growth. It was thought [as with China today] that Japan would eventually surpass the economy of the United States. Japan is considered a cultural superpower in terms of its large-scale influence in food, ‘electronics, automobiles, music, video games and anime.’ Japan has faced an ongoing period of stagnation since the 1990s, an ageing population since the early 2000s and serious population decline beginning in 2011, all of which has eroded its potential as a superpower.

‘The name for Japan in Japanese is written using the kanji 日本 and pronounced Nippon or Nihon. Before it was adopted in the early 8th century, the country was known in China as Wa (倭) and in Japan by the endonym Yamato.The characters 日本 mean “sun origin”, in reference to Japan’s relatively eastern location.It is the source of the popular Western epithet “Land of the Rising Sun.” The official name of the flag of Japan is (“nisshoki,” meaning “sun-mark flag”), but most people just call it (“hinomaru,” meaning “circle of the sun”)’ as the circle in the centre of the flag represents the sun. The flag of Japan isn’t white and red, [it is] white and crimson. The first documented use of the flag of Japan was in 701… mentioned in the “Shoku Nihongi,” a classical Japanese history text, which credited Emperor Mommu with the flag’s use.’

Japanese Flag

‘The name Japan is based on the Chinese pronunciation and was introduced to European languages through early trade. In the 13th century, Marco Polo recorded the early Mandarin or Wu Chinese pronunciation… as Cipangu. The old Malay name for Japan, Japang or Japun, was borrowed from a southern coastal Chinese dialect and encountered by Portuguese traders in Southeast Asia, who brought the word to Europe in the early 16th century. A coincidental similarity between the words: Jap-an and Jap-heth. The first version of the name in English appears in a book published in 1577, which spelled the name as Giapan in a translation of a 1565 Portuguese letter.’

Japanese Naval Ensign

Japan leads the world in robotics production and use; supplying approximately 55% of the world’s total. The Japanese consumer electronics industry once the strongest in the world, is facing stiff competition from South Korea, the United States and China. Japan remains a major leader in the video gaming industry.

On the index of most technological nations in the world, Japan is number one. Japanese scientists have made enormous contributions in fields such as automobiles, electronics, machinery, earthquake engineering, optics, industrial robotics, metals and semi-conductors. Japanese researchers have won numerous Noble Prizes in recognition for their superior contribution in technological pursuits.

Japan is the third largest economy in the world; it’s GDP over $5 trillion in 2019. Effective co-operation between government and industry, coupled with advanced technological know-how have built Japan’s manufacturing and export-oriented economy. Japan is low in natural resources and dependent on energy imports, particularly after the 2011 Fukushima disaster and a general shutdown of its nuclear power industry.

‘The following export product groups categorize the highest dollar value in Japanese global shipments during 2020.

  1. Vehicles: US$122.6 billion
  2. Machinery including computers: $121.8 billion 
  3. Electrical machinery, equipment: $102.6 billion 
  4. Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $37.5 billion 
  5. Plastics, plastic articles: $25.6 billion 
  6. Iron, steel: $22.8 billion 
  7. Organic chemicals: $14.9 billion 
  8. Gems, precious metals: $13.3 billion 
  9. Other chemical goods: $12.2 billion
  10. Ships, boats: $10.8 billion 

The gem and precious metals category was the fastest-grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 15.9% from 2019 to 2020.’ 

Japan is a member of the prestigious intergovernmental G7 Group of nations. These are the major industrialised nations, that drive the world economy, monetary issues and policy. Japan’s inclusion is significant as it is the only descendant of Japheth, the only nation from East Asia or outside the European and North American spheres. Major nations not included are Russia [11th] due to its expulsion from the G8 in 2014 because of its annexation of the Ukraine and the Crimea; as well as the less developed major economies of China [2nd], India [5th] and Brazil [9th]. The other nations of the G7 are the United States [1], Germany [4], the United Kingdom [6], France [7], Italy [8] and Canada [10].

Japan’s role in Biblical Prophecy, Steve M Collins, 2007 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘… Tarshish… A huge clue as to their modern identity is that Ezekiel 38:13 calls them “the merchants of Tarshish.” Their entire nation is so closely linked to merchandising goods to others that they are called a nation of “merchants”… Japan pioneered the export-driven model of mercantile sales to other nations as a national policy. This trait was so well-known that the nation was sometimes called “Japan, Inc.” in media articles… also prophesied [is] that there would be “young lions” that would be closely linked to the “merchants of Tarshish” in the latter days. There are a number of smaller Asian nations on the Pacific Rim which have copied the mercantile, export-driven success of the Japanese nation. These nations are even called the “young tiger” nations or “young tiger” economies of Asia. The “young tiger” nations include such nations as South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand…

Japan is an island nation and it lives at the doorstep of two powerful nations: Russia and China. Japan has fought wars with both nations, and China bears a vengeful grudge against Japan as a result of World War II. Russia seized Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands after World War II and its retention of these formerly Japanese islands is a bone of contention between Russia and Japan. Japan cannot hope to make allies of these nations. Therefore, Japan must side with the USA and the West by default. However, Japan and the USA have grown to be genuine allies in the period after World War II. The USA was not a harsh conqueror of Japan.

The USA (in Japan’s post-World War period of reconstruction) preserved Japan’s monarchy, treated the Japanese people and their culture with respect and laid the foundation for Japan’s mercantile success by blending Western, democratic institutions with Japan’s own unique culture Japan has become a trusted ally and friend and it becoming an ever-more important nation in the Western alliance.

An article… in… The Economist… stated that Japan [Tarshish]: “seeks closer ties with democratic India [Cush] and recently formalized a security alliance of sorts, only Japan’s second, with Australia… in addition to becoming an ally of Australia, Japan “sought a new partnership with India while building security ties with South east Asia,” and that “the main catalyst for the security pact (is) the rise of China.”’

A significant identification of Tarshish in the past was its interaction with the descendants of Shem through extensive trade and its western cultural leanings; considerably more so than any other descendant of Japheth. In modern times, Japan has repeated this assimilation of all things western to become technologically almost more western than the West. It is ironic that this began after centuries of self-imposed isolation beginning in 1624, when the Japanese government refused a Spanish trading delegation to step on Japanese land. Japan reluctantly came out of isolation due to American intervention and displays of its naval sea power from 1853 to 1864. 

March of the Titans, Arthur Kemp, 1999 & 2016, page 374-376 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘The Japanese government then began copying everything they saw in white European nations, a pattern for which their country later became famous. French army officers were paid to enter Japan to remodel the Japanese army while British naval officers were paid to reorganise the Japanese Navy. Dutch engineers were paid to supervise the construction of the first major Western style public works and infrastructure… and Japanese officials were sent abroad to study the… workings of [European] governments and to select their best features for duplication in Japan.

The new Japanese parliament open[ed] in 1891, modelled directly on [European] parliaments… The Japanese constitution was drawn up by a specially-appointed commission under a samurai nobleman, Ito Hirobumi, who in 1882 sent missions to the US, Britain, France, Spain and Germany to observe their democratic systems. Eventually, the German model (and the Prussian variant in particular) was selected and implemented…

A new penal code was modelled on that of France, and a ministry of education, based on that of the United States, was established in 1871 to develop a system of universal education. Rapid industrialisation, under government direction, accompanied… political development and by 1890, Japan had completely revised its criminal, civil, and commercial law codes to match the European and American models.

By the end of the twentieth century, both Japan and China had developed into industrial giants, responsible for the production (but not the invention) of the majority of day-to-day appliances and convenience goods used all over the world. Both nations… practice immigration policies designed to preserve their racial homogeneity… unlike the … Western nations. Japan… famously refused to take Vietnamese boat people refugees of the 1970s and 1980s unless they were racially compatible with the existing Japanese population. This strict, racially-based immigration policy is Japan[s]… formula for long-term survival and progress. If maintained, this policy will ensure that they escape the fate of Western nations who have abandoned such policies.’

Japanese society is linguistically, ethnically and culturally homogeneous, composed of 98.1%^^ ethnic Japanese. The most dominant native ethnic group is the Yamato people – primary minority groups include: the indigenous Ainu and Ryukyuan people and also  Brazilians, mostly of Japanese descent. We will return to the Brazilian connection. The Japanese population is rapidly ageing and predicted to drop to only ninety-five million people by 2050.

A study by Hideaki Kanzawa, showed that the Jomon people of Hokkaido and Honshu – the first of three peoples to have migrated into Japan – have a genome that is commonly found in Arctic populations but is rare in Yamato people – the 98%^^ majority of present day Japanese. According to Mitsuru Sakitani, the Jomon people are an admixture of two distinct ethnic groups: a more ancient group [carriers of Y chromosome D-M55] and a more recent group [carriers of Y chromosome C1a1] ‘that migrated to Japan about 13,000 years ago.’

Haplogroup D-M55 [D1b] originates in the Japanese archipelago and is distinct from other D-branches, with five unique mutations not found in the D haplogroups. Scientists also propose that haplogroup C1a1 originated about 12,000 years ago, which aligns with the start of the Jomon period. Haplogroup D1b is found in approximately 20% to 40% of the population and haplogroup C1a1 in about 6%of modern Japanese people. According to a 2011 study, all major East Asian mtDNA lineages expanded  prior to 8000 BCE, except for two Japanese lineages of D4b2b1 and M7a1a expanding circa 5000 BCE, again during the Jomon Period.

It is interesting that the timeline presented by scientists for the spreading and fanning out of the haplogroups and their subclades [haplotypes] in our racial genome, mirror the dates of key events in our ancient past. The ending of the last ice age with the Flood in 10,837 BCE and the birth of Tarshish circa 10,000 BCE – as well as the ‘time of Peleg’ circa 6755 BCE. We will look into Peleg and the Tower of Babel, when we study Nimrod and Shem’s son, Arphaxad.

Some readers will be aware that the main Haplogroups are often given as originating much further back than 13,000 years ago. The pre-flood world’s chronology and the vast difference in humans longevity is a missing key in understanding the time frames of the antediluvian world. It will be a shock for some and others will be incredulous, as I was too initially, in the knowledge that human ages lived before the flood were immense. A different method of counting was used [the sexagesimal system of the Sumerians (based on multiples of 60) as touched upon in the chapter on Noah], not the Metric decimal [based on multiples of 10] system we use today or the Imperial system based on multiples of 12 a descendant of the Sumerian counting system.

The Biblical ages of the pre-flood patriarchs appear to have been manipulated – making them easier to mentally digest – after the flood, resulting in our real pre-history being hidden. The king lists for ancient rulers length of reigns from Egypt, Babylon and Sumer are extraordinarily long. Many thousands of years for individual rulers. Historians have just dismissed them as fanciful and created a completely erroneous timeline of history more in accord with those who squeeze all creation and mankind’s history into a mere 6,000 years – based on a misguided interpretation of an edited biblical chronology.

The longevity of humans post-flood though considerable until the time of Abraham, were not nearly as lengthy as prior to the flood. A possible result of the flood and the changes in the earth’s atmosphere was to reduce human life-span [the alternative explanation, is genetic manipulation]. From Abraham’s birth [1977 BCE] we have had human longevity reduce dramatically again to a ‘maximum’ of what we are now familiar with, of approximately one hundred and twenty years. 

Genesis 6:3

New Century Version

The Lord said, My Spirit will not remain in human beings forever, because they are flesh. They will live only 120 years.”

It is one of the reasons – perhaps the principal argument – in which the Serpent in the Garden of Eden, was able to convince Eve in taking the ‘fruit’ from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil; deceiving her [and Adam] regarding the truth about life and death… subtly twisting what the Creator had taught. Adam and Eve didn’t die and in fact, lived for millennia’s. Thus the promise of dying was delayed considerably, to the point of them appearing to almost live forever; though death ultimately came, with the tragic lie of the Serpent being eventually exposed.

When scientists propose haplogroups divided and sub-divided between 20,000 – 60,000 thousand years ago for example, this may be accurate in part because Noah was born circa 16,837 BCE and possessed the entire genome for the races, which then diverged with his sons and then again with his grandsons and so on. Noah’s sons were born circa 11,837 BCE – Genesis 5.32, 9.28, 11.10-11. Adam and his wife [Mitochondrial] Eve, were created nearly thirty thousand years ago – circa 27,397 BCE – and the line from which Noah descended was from their son Seth, who was born circa 26,097 BCE. We will comprehensively study the antediluvian age in a separate chapter, as well as an unconventional chronology for the history of humankind. 

It is believed the Yayoi people – the second group of people to migrate into Japan – were migrants to the Japanese archipelago from Korea or China during the Yayoi period [1000–300 BCE]. They are seen as the direct ancestors of the modern Yamato people, the majority of Japanese, as well as the Ryukyuan people. It is estimated that modern Japanese share in average about 90% of their genome with the Yayoi. There was a third period of major migration, during the Kofun period [250–538 CE].

Ancient DNA rewrites early Japanese history – modern day populations have tripartite genetic origin, Trinity College Dublin, 2021: 

‘Ancient DNA extracted from human bones has rewritten early Japanese history by underlining that modern day populations in Japan have a tripartite genetic origin—a finding that refines previously accepted views of a dual genomic ancestry.

Twelve newly sequenced ancient Japanese genomes show that modern day populations do indeed show the genetic signatures of early indigenous Jomon hunter-gatherer-fishers and immigrant Yayoi farmers—but also add a third genetic component that is linked to the Kofun peoples, whose culture spread in Japan between the 3rd and 7th centuries.’

A 2007 study by Nonaka, reported that the frequencies of the D1b, [O1b2], and O2** lineages in Japan were 38.8%, 33.5%,* and 16.7% respectively, constituting approximately 90% of the Japanese population. It is thought that Yayoi people mainly belonged to Haplogroup O-M176 [O1b2] found in 32%* of present day Japanese males, Haplogroup O-M122 [O2, formerly O3], Haplogroup O-K18 [O1b1] and Haplogroup O-M119 [O1a] which are all typical for East and Southeast Asians. 

Mitsueu Sakitani, suggests that haplogroup O1b2, which is common in today’s Japanese, Koreans, and some Manchu, and O1a are one of the carriers of Yangtze civilisation. As the Yangtze civilisation declined, several tribes crossed westward and northerly, to the Shandong peninsula, the Korean peninsula and the Japanese archipelago. One study labels haplogroup O1b1, a major Austroasiatic paternal lineage and the haplogroup O1b2 of Koreans, the Japanese [and Vietnam] as a “para-Austroasiatic” paternal lineage.

A study in 2018, confirmed that the modern Japanese are predominantly descendants of the Yayoi and that they largely displaced the local Jomon. The mitochondrial chromosomes of modern Japanese are nearly identical with the Yayoi and differ significantly from the Jomon population. It is estimated that the majority of Japanese have about 12% Jomon ancestry or less^.  A more recent study by Gakihari [2019] estimates the gene-flow from the Jomon into modern Japanese people at only 3.3%.^

‘A 2011 SNP consortium study done by the Chinese Academy of Science and Max Planck Society consisting of 1719 DNA samples determined that Koreans and Japanese clustered near to each other, confirming the findings of an earlier study that Koreans and Japanese are related. However, the Japanese were found to be genetically closer to South Asian populations as evident by a genetic position that is significantly closer towards South Asian populations on the principal component analysis (PCA) chart. Some Japanese individuals are also genetically closer to Southeast Asian and Melanesian populations when compared to other East Asians such as Koreans and Han Chinese, indicating possible genetic interactions between Japanese and these populations. A 2008 study about genome-wide SNPs of East Asians by Chao Tian et al. reported that… the Japanese are relatively genetically distant from Han Chinese, compared to Koreans.Another study (2017) shows a relative strong relation between all East and Southeast Asians.’

We would expect to see the evidence of a link between Tarshish and his brothers located in archipelago Southeast Asia. Nor is it a surprise that the Japanese have DNA in common with Koreans and Chinese, for two reasons. 

First, they are blood brothers [first, then cousins] all stemming from Japheth and secondly, there would have been admixture if the Japanese migrated through China [and Taiwan] and then the Korean peninsula. Similar transference occurred when Koreans migrated through China and some travelled to the Japanese Islands; as well as Chinese traders who visited both Korea and Japan. 

Dual origins of the Japanese: common ground for hunter-gatherer and farmer Y chromosomes, multiple authors, 2006 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘This survey of Y chromosome SNPs in Asia reveals a set of 41 haplogroups, 19 of which are present in Japan. Three haplogroups are almost entirely restricted to the Japanese archipelago: haplogroup D-P37.1 and its descendants (D-P37.1*, D-M116.1*, D.M125*, and D-P42), O-47z, and C-M8. These lineages account for 34.7, 22.0, and 5.4% of Japanese Y chromosomes, respectively, and may have originated on the Japanese archipelago. The Japanese population also has high frequencies of other haplogroup O lineages that are shared mainly with Southeast Asian populations, and C lineages that are shared primarily with northern Asians. In this section, we make the case that these Y chromosome lineages descend from different ancestral populations that gave rise to the Jomon and Yayoi cultures.

We plotted the frequencies of haplogroups D, O-P31, and O-M122 in each of our six Japanese samples against the approximate geographic distances of each of these populations from Kyushu Island. Together, these haplogroups account for 86.9% of Japanese Y chromosomes. There is a U-shaped cline for haplogroup D, and inverted U-shaped patterns for haplogroups in clade O. Based on the frequencies of these two clades, we estimate the Jomon contribution to modern Japanese to be 40.3%,^ with the highest frequency in the Ainu (75%) and Ryukyuans (60%). On the other hand, Yayoi Y chromosomes account for 51.9% of Japanese paternal lineages, with the highest contribution in Kyushu (62.3%) and lower contributions in Okinawa (37.8%) and northern Honshu (46.2%). Interestingly, there is no evidence for Yayoi lineages in the Ainu [only Jomon].

The highest frequency of continental D lineages is found in central Asia (especially in Tibet (50.4%). Evidence for shared ancestry between Tibetans and Japanese is seen in the MDS plot. The survival of ancient lineages within haplogroup D in Tibetans and Japanese may well reflect long periods of isolation for both groups. Interestingly, a Y-SNP survey of Andaman Islanders found a very high frequency of haplogroup D-M174* chromosomes in this isolated population… The other postulated Japanese Paleolithic founding haplogroup, C-M8, is associated with Y-STR haplotypes that are related to Indian and central Asian C chromosomes. The presence of NO* chromosomes in Japan also may be an indication of a remnant Tibetan ancestry. A recent mtDNA study revealed direct connections of Japanese haplotypes with Tibet, parallel to those found for the Y chromosome. Haplogroup M12 is the mitochondrial counterpart of Y chromosome D lineage. This rare haplogroup was detected only in mainland Japanese, Koreans, and Tibetans, with the highest frequency and diversity in Tibet.

Our data also support the hypothesis that other Y haplogroups, such as lineages within haplogroup O-M122 (i.e., O-M134 and O-LINE), as well as the O-M95 lineage within O-P31, entered Japan with the Yayoi expansion. High frequencies of these lineages in southwestern Japan, Korea, and Southeast Asian populations likely explain the affinity of these populations in the MDS plot. The entire O haplogroup has been proposed to have a Southeast Asian origin (Su et al. 1999; Kayser et al. 2000; Capelli et al. 2001; Karafet et al. 2001). In fact, nearly all lineages within the O-M175 clade… except O-SRY465 and O-47z, are present at their highest frequencies (e.g., O-M95, O-P31*, M122*, O-LINE, O-M119) in southeastern Asia/Oceania, and have been proposed to have southern Chinese origins…’

Wa-pedia — emphasis and bold mine:

‘The origins of the Japanese people is not entirely clear yet. It is common for Japanese people to think that Japan is not part of Asia since it is an island, cut off from the continent. This tells a lot about how they see themselves in relation to their neighbours. But in spite of what the Japanese may think of themselves, they do not have extraterrestrial origins, and are indeed related to several peoples in Asia.

Kenichi Shinoda (2003) found Chinese-looking maternal lineages (haplogroups A, B, F, M8a and M10) in the Kanto region dating from the late Jōmon period mixed with typical Jōmon lineages (M7a, N9b)… this could indicate that farmers from mainland China colonised Japan several millennia before the Yayoi invasion, which would explain why the Japanese also possess typically South Chinese Y-haplogroups not found in Korea, such as O1a, O2a, O3a1c and O3a2.

Haplogroup C is another extremely old lineage that… spread over most of Eurasia. Two subclades of C are found in Japan: C1a1 (aka C-M8, formerly C1) and C2a (aka C-M93, formerly C3). Both are likely to have been in the Japanese archipelago since the first human beings reached the region… Haplogroup C1a seems to have split… in the middle of Eurasia, one group going west to Europe, and the other east to Japan. C1a2 is now nearly extinct in Europe. C1a1 is particularly common in Okinawa (7%), Shikoku (10%) and Tohoku (10%), but is apparently absent from Hokkaido and Kyushu.’

An explanation for this occurrence, would be that Tarshish migrated through Asia as the other sons of Japheth, though like their sea-faring, maritime bothers descended from Javan [for example the Maori (Rodanim)], a portion travelled via the Mediterranean, heading south past the eastern coast of Africa, beneath South Asia, around Southeast Asia and north past China to Japan.

‘Haplogroup C2a, representing also 3% of the population, is typically found among the Mongols, Manchus, Koreans and Siberians, which suggest a propagation by the Yayoi farmers. The last surviving tribes of ‘pure’ Ainu people, living on the island of Sakhalin in Russia, just north of Hokkaido, possess 15% of C2a (the remaining 85% being D1b). There is therefore a good chance that C2a could also have come to Japan from Siberia through Sakhalin and Hokkaido. C2a is indeed found at both extremities of the country, peaking in Kyushu (8%), Hokkaido (5%), but is rare in central Japan, which supports the theory of two separate points of entry.

Over 40% of Japanese men belong to haplogroup D, a paternal lineage… 

Its first carriers would have migrated along the coasts of the Indian Ocean, from the Arabian peninsula all the way to Indonesia, then following the chain of islands up through the Philippines and using the land bridge from Taiwan through the present-day Ryukyu islands to Japan.’ 

When studying the Bible verses regarding Tarshish, we contemplated that the outposts of Tarshish from the mediterranean via India and Southeast Asia could lead to Japan. Therefore, not only were the various locations given for Tarshish ports accurate, they also provide a trail of Tarshish’s descendants all the way to Japan over a period of about 5,500 years – leading to the entry of Japan by the Yayoi by at least circa 1000 BCE.

‘Haplogroup D1b (aka D-M55 or D-M64.1, formerly known as D2)… is found almost exclusively in Japan, with a small minority in places who have had historical ties with Japan, such as Korea. D1b is most common in Hokkaido (60-65%)… If D1b colonised Japan from the north, it would explain why its frequency is highest in northern Japan and, conversely also why pre-LGM [last glacial maximum] lineages like C1a1 survived better in southern Japan…

The only other variety of D identified among the Japanese is D1a1 (D-M15), which only makes up 0.5% of the Japanese male population. This haplogroup is particularly common among some ethnic groups from Southwest China and Indochina, such as the Hmong and Ksingmul in Laos… and the Yao people in Guanxi and Vietnam. Tibetans carry about 54% of haplogroup D.

Andaman Islanders belong to the basal D*. It means that their most recent common ancestors goes back tens of thousands of years. In other words the genetic gap between these ethnic groups is immense, despite false appearances of belonging to a common haplogroup. Haplogroup D1b was formed 45,000 years ago [perhaps 30,000 years ago instead, in mitochondrial Eve], but the most recent common ancestor of Japanese D1b members lived 23,000 years ago, [between the births of Seth and Noah] which means that other D1b branches may have become extinct outside Japan. Haplogroup D1b is found among the Ryukyuans as well as the Ainus, and is thought to have been the dominant paternal lineage of the Jōmon people.

Almost exactly half of Japanese men belong to haplogroup O, a paternal lineage of Paleolithic Sino-Korean origin that is now found all over East and Southeast Asia.

Haplogroup [O1b] (aka O-SRY465) is found especially in Manchuria, Korea and Japan, and very probably came to Japan with the Yayoi people. It reaches its highest frequency in western Japan (35%) and is least common in Hokkaido (12.5%) and Okinawa (22%). In the rest of the country its frequency is around 30%. Approximately two thirds of the Japanese [O1b] belong to the [O1b2] subclade, which is much less common in Korea and Manchuria… Haplogroup [O1b2] (SRY465, M176): Found almost exclusively among the Korean, Japanese, Thai, Vietnamese and Indonesian. Haplogroup [O1b2]-47z: Found frequently among Japanese and Ryukyuans, with a moderate distribution among Indonesians, Koreans, Manchus, Thais, and Vietnamese.

Haplogroup [O2] (aka O-M122) is the main Han Chinese paternal lineage. It is an extremely diverse lineage, with numerous subclades, including many associated with the expansion of agriculture from northern China. Most of them are found in Korea and would have been part of the Yayoi migration to Japan. Within Japan, it reaches a maximum frequency in Okinawa (16%),** a region with low Yayoi ancestry. Its frequency among non-Okinawan Japanese is of 10-15%, about twice higher than in Korea, a fact that cannot be explained by the Yayoi invasion. A negligible percentage of the Japanese belong to haplogroup O1a (aka O-M119), a lineage especially common in southern China, Taiwan, the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, and haplogroup O2a1 (aka O-M95), which is found in south-west China, Indochina, around Malaysia and in central-eastern India. Both of them might have also have come with South Chinese Neolithic farmers during the Jomon period.

Approximately 3% of Japanese men belong to haplogroup N, a lineage that is thought to have originated in China… but underwent a serious population bottleneck during the Last Glacial Maximum, and re-expanded after that. Japanese people belong to N1… Haplogroup N1 was found at high frequency (26 out of 70 samples, or 37%) in Neolithic and Bronze Age remains (4500-700 BCE) from the West Liao River valley in Northeast China (Manchuria) by Yinqui Cui et al. (2013). Among the Neolithic samples, haplogroup N1 represented two thirds of the samples from the Hongshan culture (4700-2900 BCE) and all the samples from the Xiaoheyan culture (3000-2200 BCE). Haplogroup N1c is found especially among Uralic and Turkic peoples…  including among the Finns, Estonians and Sami in Northeast Europe, and among the Turks in Central Asia and Turkey. It is found at low frequencies in Korea and could have arrived with the Yayoi people. 

A comparison of Malay (Bahasa Indonesia/Melayu) and Japanese languages reveals a few uncanny similarities. Apart from the very similar phonetics in both languages, the same hierarchical differences exist in personal pronouns. For example ‘you’ can be either anda or kamu in Malay, and anata and kimi in Japanese. Not only are the meaning and usage of each identical, but they also sound almost the same. Likewise, the Japanese verb suki (to like) translates suka in Malay. The chances that this is a pure coincidence is extremely low, and may reveal a common origin. Furthermore, in both languages the plural can be formed by simply doubling the word. For instance, in Japanese hito means ‘person’, while hitobito means ‘people’. Likewise ware means ‘I’ or ‘you’, whereas wareware means ‘we’. Doubling of words in Japanese is so common that there is a special character used only to mean the word is doubled (々) in written Japanese. In Malay, this way of forming the plural is almost systematic (person is orang, while people is orang-orang). Furthermore, expressions like ittekimasu, itteirashai, tadaima and okaeri, used to greet someone who leaves or enter a place, and which have no equivalent in Indo-European languages, have exact equivalents in Malay/Indonesian (selamat jalan, selamat tinggal…). One could wonder how Malay and Japanese ever came to share such basic vocabulary and grammatical features, considering that there is no known historical migration from one region to other.’

The preceding paragraph is truly incredible, if one did not suspect a common ancestor for Tarshish-Japan with Elisha-Malaysia. Though the constant reader will already know the obvious linguistic link between two such separate peoples geographically is easily, logically and reasonably explained, as they share the same father, Javan. As we have learned with Togarmah-Korea and Ashkenazi-Vietnam, both sons of Gomer, a genetic link proves beyond a shadow of a doubt the familial bond of brothers.

‘The Palaeolithic Jōmon people are thought to have arrived from Austronesia during the Ice Age. The original inhabitants of Indonesia and the Philippines might have been related to Dravidians of Southern India. Y-haplogroup C, which has been associated with the first migration of modern humans… towards Asia, is relatively frequent in Kerala (southern tip of India) and Borneo. These early Austronesians are thought to have been the ancestors of the Ice Age settlers of Japan (Y-haplogroups C1a1 and D1b). The common root of the two languages must be more recent, and indeed there is one migration that could explain the connection between the two groups: the Neolithic Austronesian expansion from southern China.’

Recall in the preceding chapter on Javan and the Polynesians descended from Rodan, we included the Melanesian [and Negritos] peoples. Yet my suspicion was that the physiognomy of these people, particularly the Australian Aborigine is similar to the Dravidian Indians. We will return to this question as the evidence indicates the Melanesians are not descended from Japheth, but rather from Ham.

‘From approximately 5,000 BCE, South Chinese farmers expanded southward to Taiwan and Southeast Asia, bringing Y-haplogroups O1, O2 and O3 to the region, which are still the dominant paternal lineages today. There is evidence of farming in Taiwan at least from 4000 BCE, but agriculturalists would probably have arrived earlier considering that the Neolithic reached the Philippines circa 5000 BCE, and Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia around 4,000 BCE… the same migration could have followed the Ryukyu archipelago until Kyushu, then colonised Honshu and Shikoku. In fact, there is no good reason why these seafaring farmers would travel as far as Indonesia and not to Japan, which is much closer.

Many more Japanese words could be of Austronesian origin. The linguist David B. Solnit estimates that among 111 common Japanese words he analysed, 28% had Austronesian cognates only, while 40% had Altaic cognates, 23% competing cognates, and 9% no cognate in either. Considering that the various branches of Proto-Austronesian split over 6,000 or 7,000 years ago, longer than Indo-European languages, it is not surprising that even languages that are undeniably classified as Austronesian today have evolved very diverging vocabularies today (except Polynesian languages, which only started to diversify with the Polynesian expansion 2,000 years ago).

It is generally more useful to look at the Proto-Autronesian root of words rather than to try to find direct matches between modern Japanese and modern Austronesian languages. For example, the Proto-Austronesian root for fish is *sikan, which gave sakana in Japanese (and maybe also ika, which means squid), ikan in Malay, ika in Fijian, and isda in Tagalog. 

Cases of high lexical-semantic retention over six millennia like kamu/kimi, anda/anata and suka/suki are extremely rare. The Austronesian connection with Japanese was first suggested in 1924 by the Dutch linguist Dirk van Hinloopen Labberton. Many linguists have since proposed the hypothesis that the Japonic language family evolved from an Austronesian substratum (Jōmon) onto which was added an Altaic superstratum (Yayoi).

However, if Austronesian speakers came to Japan with South Chinese Neolithic agriculturalists, the original Jomon people would have spoken another language, either one of Siberian origin, in light of the mtDNA ties between Jomon and Ainu people and eastern Siberians, or a language isolate, reflecting the uniqueness of the Jomon paternal D1b lineage. Therefore, Middle and Late Jomon people would already have spoken a hybrid language. Likewise, the Koguryoic Korean language of the Yayoi people would also be a hybrid incorporating Altaic elements of Mongolian origin into an older Korean substratum of Paleosiberian origin. Since the 6th century CE, the Japanese started incorporating words from Chinese after adopting Buddhism and Chinese characters, in the same way that English absorbed a huge amount of Norman French and Latin words in the late Middle Ages [another Japanese, Great Britain similarity]… approximately half of the Japanese vocabulary is of Chinese origin. This explains why Japanese does not neatly fit in one or even two linguistic families, but is a hybrid of at least five separate sources: aboriginal Jomon, Austronesian, Korean, Altaic and Chinese.

Cultural and religious similarities also exist between Japan and Austronesia… most ethnic Malays and Indonesians are Muslim, but traditional religion survives in some islands, including Bali, which practices a syncretic form of Hinduism and aninism. Basically, Balinese religion is a form of Hinduism that has incorporated the aboriginal animistic religion. The parallel with Japan is obvious for people familiar with this culture. Japanese Shintoism is also a form of animism, and is practised side-by-side with Buddhism, a religion derived from Hinduism, sometimes blending the two religions in a syncretism known as Shinbutso-shugo. The relation between Hinduism and Buddhism is irrelevant here, and both are relatively recent imports in historical times. Before that, however, Jomon people and Neolithic Austronesians would have practised a very similar form of animism.

Japanese matsuri (festivals) resemble so much Balinese ones that one could wonder if one was not copied from the other. During cremations in Bali, the dead body is carried on a portable shrine, very much in the way that the Japanese carry their mikoshi. Balinese funerals are joyful and people swinging the portable shrine in the streets and making loud noise to scare the evil spirits. There are lots of other cultural similarities between ancient cultures of Indonesia and Japan. For example, both Balinese temples and Japanese shrines, as well as traditional Japanese and Balinese houses have a wall surrounding them, originally meant to prevent evil spirits from penetrating the property. Despite the radical changes that Indonesian culture underwent after the introduction of Islam and Christianity, and the changes that Buddhism brought to Japan, it is still possible to observe clear similarities between the supposed original prehistoric cultures of the two archipelagoes.’

We would expect more similarities between Japan and Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines culturally, linguistically and ethnically, rather than with Korea or China. The Koreans and Chinese are cousins, whereas the language and cultural similarities with the Malay-Polynesian peoples supports the proposition that the Japanese as Tarshish, are the brother of Elishah [Malaysia], Kitti [Indonesia], Dodan [Philippines] and Rodan [Polynesia]. An earlier quote from the section on Togarmah:

‘The study…[of]… Jung et al. (2010) said…that Koreans are genetically homogenous. The study said that the affinity of Koreans is predominately Southeast Asian with an estimated admixture of 79% Southeast Asian and 21% Northeast Asian for Koreans… all of the Koreans which were analyzed uniformly displayed a dual pattern of Northeast Asian and Southeast Asian origins. The study said that Koreans and Japanese displayed no observable difference between each other in their proportion of Southeast Asian and Northeast Asian admixture.’

The main Japanese mtDNA haplogroups include: D4 [34%], M7 [12.5%], B4 [7.5%], G [7.5%],

A [7%], N9 [7%], F [5.5%] and B5 [4.5%]. 

A comparison of the mtDNA haplogroups common throughout Southeast Asia of M, B5 and F show that the percentages decrease in both estranged northern nations. Japan [Tarshish] and Korea [Togarmah] very similar, have the closest match with the Philippines [Dodan] that happens to be located between the northern two and the southern three nations [Ashkenaz, Minni, Elishah] sampled.

Vietnamese:  M7    [10]%    B5    [7%]      F1    [19%] 

Thais:              M     [9%]       B5a [9%]      F1a  [9%]

Malays:           M7a   [39%]    B5    [11%]     F1a  [17%]

Filipinos:        M7c  [11%]    B5b [8%]      F1a  [4%] 

Koreans:         M7   [11%]     B5    [5%]      F     [5%]

Japanese:       M7   [13%]     B5    [5%]     F      [6%]

The principal Y-DNA haplogroups for the minority peoples in Japan, the Ainus – descended from the Jomon – and the Ryukyuans, descended from the Yayoi.

Region / HaplogroupCD1bNO1aO1bO2QOthers
Ainus (n=20)15%85%0%0%0%0%0%0%
Ryukyuans (n=132)8.5%45.5%1.5%1.5%22%19%0%1%

The main Y-DNA haplogroups for the Yamato majority of Japan, the descendants of the Kofun period.

Japan:   D1b – O1b – O2 – C – K – N1a – O1a – D1a – Q – F

Japan:   D1b [ 39%] – O1b [33%] – O2 [19%] – C [11%] – K [1.5%] – N1a [1.3%]

– O1a [1.2%] – D1a [0.5%] – Q [0.4%] – F [0.2%]  

The Japanese possess the key Oriental haplogroups of O, C and K, also exhibiting the lesser haplogroups, N and Q. The high percentage of Y-DNA haplogroup D is unique amongst the descendants of Japheth with the only other peoples, being the Tibetans of Tibet and a lesser extent the Koreans.

Japan:           D1b – O1b – O2a1 – C –  K – N1a – O1a – D1a – Q – F

Malaysia:      O1b – O2a1 – O1a – K – C – F

Indonesia:    O1b – O2a1 – O1a – K – C – F 

Java:              O1b – O1a – O2a1 – C – K 

Korea:            O2a1 – O1b2 – C – N – O1a – D1b – Q 

Vietnam:       O2a1 – O1b2 – Q1a – O1a – C – D1 – N 

Sumatra:       O2a1 – O1a – O1b – F – C – K – D

Philippines:  O2a1 – O1a – K – C – O1b 

Thailand:      O2a1 – O1a – C – D1 – K 

Though Japan does have a similarity with Korea and by extension Vietnam, it is the Malay peoples of Malaysia and the Indonesian Island of Java, that are most closely aligned – with Sumatra and the Philippines being the least similar. 

Japan:           O1b  [33%]     O2a1  [19%]     O1a  [2%]      K  [2%]      C  [11%]

Malaysia:      O1b  [32%]     O2a1  [28%]    O1a  [8%]      K  [8%]      C  [6%] 

Java:              O1b  [42%]     O2a1  [23%]    O1a  [23%]    K  [2%]      C  [2%]   

Korea:           O1b  [33%]      O2a1  [42%]   O1a  [3%]      K  [4%]      C  [13%]

Vietnam:      O1b  [33%]      O2a1  [40%]    O1a  [6%]                        C  [4%] 

Sumatra:      O1b  [14%]      O2a1  [30%]   O1a   [18%]    K  [4%]      C  [5%]  

Philippines: O1b  [3%]        O2a1  [39%]  O1a   [28%]    K [20%]    C  [5%] 

As Vietnam is to Korea, so is Malaysia to Japan. Togarmah is estranged from his brothers in continental southeast Asia and of those brothers, Ararat, Minni, Riphath and Diphath, it is Ashkenaz that the closer genetic tie is shared. Similarly, Tarshish estranged from his brothers in archipelago southeast Asia and of those brothers, Kitti, Dodan and Rodan, it is Elishah that the closer genetic tie is exhibited. 

Someone might say, “Look, this is new,” but really it has always been here. It was here before we were.

Ecclesiastes 1:10 New Century Version

“The more obvious a discovery, the more obvious it seems afterwards.”

Arthur Koestler [1905-1983]

© Orion Gold 2020-2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com

Kitti & Indonesia

Chapter VIII

The third son born to Javan is Kitti translated solely in the plural, Kittim. There are a number of Bible verses attributed to him and his role in our civilisation is evolving as I write. A key player, growing in world affairs. A nation similar to China so-to-speak, in that it is awakening and beginning to flex its muscles.  

Israel A History of:

‘Kittim has been understood to refer to Cyprus. It is plausible that the Hebrew term “Ma-Kittim”, meaning “the land of Kittim”, perhaps developed into the term “Macedonia”.’

Herman Hoeh states:

‘The descendants of Kittim first settled on the island of Cyprus and then migrated into Southern Italy. This is simply proved by checking the historical fulfillment of Daniel 11:30. The “ships of Kittim” were Roman fleets sailing from Cyprus. In modern times many Spanish and Portugese people (as well as Italians and a few Greeks) have migrated to the New World. These are the lands of Javan today.’ 

We have learned that Javan descends from Japheth and is an Asian branch of the family tree, not European. The Latin peoples of southern Europe do not descend from Japheth. The Kittim travelled throughout the Mediterranean before their huge eastward arc towards Asia. It is not accurate to think that the Chinese were the Khitai, or called themselves by that name. The region to the west of China was known as Khitai [Cathay] by other peoples, as they could only migrate eastwards until they arrived upon the Khitan Empire, ruled by the Khitais. The real China was further east beyond Khitan lands. The peoples who dwelt around the Yellow River delta region would refer to themselves by the specific Dynasty during which time they lived.

Early after the flood, Kitti settled in present day Larnaca on the east coast of Cyprus, known in ancient times as Kition, [in Latin Citium]. The whole Island became known as Kittim in Hebrew. The name was employed loosely in Hebrew literature, so it was often applied to all the Aegean islands and even to the West in general – especially the seafaring West. 

Flavius Josephus [circa 100 CE] records in his Antiquities of the Jews that Cethimus [son of Javan] possessed the island Cethima: ‘it is now called Cyprus; and from that it is that all islands, and the greatest part of the sea coasts, are named Cethim by the Hebrews…’

The expression ‘isles of Kittim’, found in the Books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel indicates that some centuries prior to Josephus, this designation had become a broad description for the Mediterranean islands. As Dr Hoeh says, this designation was further extended to apply to the Romans, Macedonians* and Seleucid Greeks. The Septuagint translates the use of Kittim in the Book of Daniel 11:30 as Romans. 1 Maccabees 1:1 states that: Alexander the Great the Macedonian,* had originated from the ‘land of Kittim’ – in reality, the ancient and at one time home of the Kittim. By this later time, Hoeh describes the real Kitti had long left the Mediterranean. As they were a prominent people, their legacy of territory and influence lingered in southern Europe through use of their name. 

In the War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness from the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Kittim are referred to as being of Asshur. Eleazar Sukenik argued that this reference to Asshur, refers to the Seleucid Empire which controlled the territory of the former Assyrian Empire; though his son Yigael Yadin, interpreted this phrase as a veiled reference to the Romans. Some authors have speculated that Kittim comes from an Akkadian word meaning invaders. Others have identified Kittim with the land of Hatti (Khatti) and the Hittite Empire. We will learn that neither the Romans or the Hittites are descended from Japheth.

The mediaeval rabbinic compilation Yosippon, says the Kittim camped in Campania and built a city called Posomanga, while descendants of Tubal camped in neighbouring Tuscany and built Sabino, with the Tiber river as their frontier. They soon went to war following the rape of certain sabines by the Kittim, who are equated with the Romans. The war ended when the Kittim showed the descendants of Tubal their mutual progeny. They then built cities called Porto, Albano, and Aresah. Later, their territory is occupied by Agnias, King of Carthage. This may be an accurate account if it relates to between 8500 – 6000 BCE. If later than this, then these would be European peoples living where Kitti and Tubal once did and their names have been appropriated. Possibly, the people being described with former names, are the early Romans and Etruscans.

The name Kitti in Hebrew signifies: ‘Beaters, Pulverizers’ from the verb katat, ‘to beat or hammer.’ Recall the two sons of Gomer: Riphath [Cambodia] and Togarmah [North and South Korea]. Their names broadly mean respectively, ‘Crusher’ and ‘Bone Breaker.’

Abarim Publications:

‘The name Kittim is a plural form of Kitty, although this singular doesn’t occur in Scriptures. 

The alternative plural form Kittiyyiym, occurs in Isaiah 23:12 and Jeremiah 2:10. The verb… means to beat or hammer, either to forge swords and ploughs and such, or to fragment and disperse of whatever is beaten. Adjective (katit) literally means beaten, but occurs only to denote a costly oil from beaten fruits. Noun (mekitta) refers to anything crushed or pulverised… Jones’ Dictionary of Old Testament Proper Names… reads Subduers.’

The nation of Indonesia are the people of Kittim.

The Republic of Indonesia consists of an astounding 18,108 islands; which include Sumatra, Java, Borneo [Kalimantan], Bali, Sulawesi [Celebes], Flores, West Timor and New Guinea. Indonesia is the world’s largest island country and the fourteenth largest country by land area at 735,358 square miles. With 276,975,366 people, it is the world’s fourth most populated country as well as the most populous Muslim majority nation. Java is the world’s most populous island and home to over half of the country’s population. Notice the similarity between the main island of Indonesia, Java and Kitti’s father, Javan.

The country’s capital Jakarta, is the second highest urban populated area in the world. The country shares land borders with Papua New Guinea, East Timor and the eastern part of Malaysia and despite its large population and densely populated regions, Indonesia has enormous areas of wilderness that support one of the world’s highest levels of biodiversity. 

The Indonesian archipelago has been a valuable region for trade since the seventh century when Srivijaya and later Majapahit, traded with people from mainland China and the Indian subcontinent. Local rulers absorbed foreign influences and Hindu and Buddhist kingdoms flourished. Sunni traders and Sufi scholars introduced Islam, while Europeans brought Christianity through colonisation. 

The first Europeans arrived in 1512, when Portuguese traders sought to monopolise sources of nutmeg and cloves. Dutch and British traders followed and in 1602, the Dutch established the Dutch East India Company. The politically dominant Javanese, are the largest ethnic group, constituting 40.2% of the population.They are predominantly located in the central to eastern parts of Java. The country’s official language is Indonesian, a variant of Malay. Most Indonesians speak at least one of more than seven hundred local languages,often as their first language – Javanese is the most widely spoken.

Intermittently interrupted by the Portuguese, French and British, the Dutch were the foremost colonial power for much of their three hundred and fifty year presence in the archipelago. The country proclaimed its independence in 1945, though it was not until 1949 that the Dutch recognised Indonesia’s sovereignty following an armed and diplomatic conflict between the two nations.

In 1850, George Earl an English ethnologist, proposed the term Indunesians, though preferring Malayunesians, for the inhabitants of the Indian Archipelago. One of his students James Logan, used Indonesia as a synonym for the Indian Archipelago. Dutch writers in East Indies publications, preferred the Malay Archipelago. The name Indonesia derives from Greek Indos and the word nesos, meaning ‘Indian islands’.

The economy of Indonesia is the largest in Southeast Asia, one of the emerging market economies of the world and a member of the G20. It is the 16th largest economy in the world by nominal GDP [$1.12 trillion] and the 7th largest in terms of GDP. In 2012, Indonesia replaced India as the second fastest-growing G-20 economy, behind China.

‘The following export product groups represent the highest dollar value in Indonesian global shipments during 2020. 

  1. Mineral fuels including oil: US$25.6 billion 
  2. Animal/vegetable fats, oils, waxes: $20.7 billion 
  3. Iron, steel: $10.8 billion 
  4. Electrical machinery, equipment: $9.2 billion 
  5. Gems, precious metals: $8.2 billion 
  6. Vehicles: $6.6 billion 
  7. Rubber, rubber articles: $5.6 billion 
  8. Machinery including computers: $5.2 billion 
  9. Footwear: $4.8 billion 
  10. Paper, paper items: $4.2 billion 

Iron and steel was the fastest grower among the top 10 export categories, up by 46.8% from 2019 to 2020. In second place for improving export sales was gems and precious metals via a 24.2% gain. The leading decliner among Indonesia’s top 10 export categories was mineral fuels including oil [due] to a -25% drop year over year.’

Indonesia is a paradox as it has played a modest, back-seat role in the world economy since its independence. Its importance has been considerably less than its size, abundant natural resources, and geographic location would seem to warrant. Kittim has not yet gotten into full-swing and we will likely witness a transformation of its influence on the world stage. It is one of the top four [with South Korea] in the Next Eleven [economic potential] nations and as the world’s biggest Islamic Nation, a contender as the potential leader, or influencing nation of the Muslim world.

The prophet Balaam provides a future prophecy on specific nations, including Kitti.

Numbers 24:24

English Standard Version

But ships shall come from Kittim and shall afflict [H6031 – anah, meaning: to afflict, abase or humble (one self)]  Asshur and Eber; and he too shall come to utter destruction.”

Some have misleadingly translated Kittim as Cyprus or Italy. At some point, Indonesia’s military and naval power will either be formidable enough to fight Russia and Western Europe, or the verse is a veiled reference to a naval cavalcade of various nations travelling from a base in Kittim. A confederation of states linked to the King of the South, as written in the Book of Daniel^ is described. It also appears from the Hebrew word anah, that it could be the ships from Kittim that are humbled.

Isaiah gives a prophecy on Tyre and its demise in chapter 23:1, 12 NCV:

This is a message about Tyre: You trading ships [Tarshish], cry! The houses and harbor of Tyre are destroyed. This news came to the ships from the land of [Kittim].He said, “Sidon, you will not rejoice any longer, because you are destroyed. Even if you cross the sea to [Kittim], you will not find a place to rest.”

Jeremiah 2:10

King James Version

For pass over the isles of Chittim…

Ezekiel 27:6

Young’s Literal Translation

Of oaks of Bashan they made thine oars [ship building], Thy bench they have made of ivory, A branch [H1323 – bath, meaning: daughter, town, company, first] of Ashurim from isles of Chittim.

Ship building is a growing industry in Indonesia, presently in the shadow of Japan and Malaysia. Later, we will learn the significance of Bashan and ships. The second part of the verse links Kitti and seemingly a great grandson of Abraham. Most translations inaccurately translate as Asshur [Russia], possibly following the relationship shown in Numbers 24:24. See Genesis 25:3 and the personality of Ashurim [Ashurites]. We will discover that the descendants of Ashurim – also listed in the plural – have had an historical link with Indonesia [Kitti]. The Hebrew word used in Ezekiel is not the same as the one used for Abraham’s grandson in Genesis, though it is a closer match than the Hebrew word used for Jacob’s son Asher in Genesis chapter forty-nine; though, Asher the son of Jacob can not be ruled out of contention, as we will find that their close geographic location with Kittim, is uncanny.

Daniel chapter Eleven^ contains the single longest prophecy in the Bible that chronicles thousands of years and on into the future. The early part of the chapter references Greece [Javan] – somewhat confusingly – actually the Greco-Macedonian Empire and its confrontation with the existing, ruling Medo-Persian Empire. The players of north and south, subtly change over the centuries. Towards the end of the chapter the Kings of the North and South have shifted from a Mediterranean – Middle Eastern – orientation to a global power struggle. We read in Daniel 11: 15, 18, 29-30:

English Standard Version

Then the king of the north shall come… Afterward he shall turn his face to the coastlands [Javan]^and shall capture many of them… At the time appointed he shall return and come into the south, but it shall not be this time as it was before. 

For ships of Kittim shall come against him, and he shall be afraid and withdraw, and shall turn back and be enraged and take action against the holy covenant.

Sometimes translated unhelpfully, as ships from the west. The interlinear says: ‘For ships Chittim shall come…’ It does not include ‘of’ or ‘from’ in the Hebrew, though I consider the inference is from more than that of, Kittim. We learned in Numbers 24:24 that Kitti fights against Asshur and Eber – an alliance of Russia and Western Europe. Asshur [Assyria] is revealed as a future King of the North. The King of the North attacks the coastlands [Southeast Asia]. Kitti is either part of those nations amalgamated with the King of the South, or accommodates a military and naval presence within its strategically positioned borders in southeast Asian waters.

Theses verses in Daniel chapter Eleven, highlight a beginning point of a specific time period, that includes actions of magnitude performed by important and specific individuals in the future. The significance of this is considerable and we shall return to it in detail when we study Shem’s son, Asshur and also Nimrod.

Geneticist Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, claims there is a genetic division between Eastern Orientals and Southeast Asians and Zhou Jixu agrees, that there is a physical difference between these two populations. The complexity of the genetic data has led to serious doubt amongst scientists about the usefulness of the concept of an Asian race, as distinctive Asian features clearly represent separate lines… of the sons of Japheth.

After looking at all four of Javan’s sons, it can be understood that those sons of Japheth located in Asia, such as Madai, Gomer and Javan are all divergent and distinctive lines  of descent. As there are a number of lineages from Japheth’s sons, this does not discount an overall Asian identity. There is variety within the Asian genome, for Japheth had seven sons.

Austronesian Indonesians are genetically close to southeast Asians, while the further east one travels the more inhabitants of the Pacific Ocean region exhibit a Melanesian affinity. Prominent mt-DNA haplogroups – of which we are now quite familiar – include the prevalent southeastern Asian M, F, B and also Y2 in the western regions of Indonesia, the speakers of Austronesian languages and spoken in Southeast Asia, the Pacific islands and Madagascar. In the eastern island chains of Indonesia it is mainly haplogroups Q and P, found amongst non-Austronesian speakers. 

The Indonesian archipelago: an ancient genetic highway linking Asia and the Pacific, multiple authors, 2013 – emphasis & bold mine:

‘Indonesia, an island nation linking mainland Asia with the Pacific world, hosts a wide range of linguistic, ethnic and genetic diversity. Despite the complexity of this cultural environment, genetic studies in Indonesia remain surprisingly sparse. The haplotype diversity of communities ranged from 0.862–0.996, which indicates that most individuals within these groups carry unique mtDNA lineages. 

The most diverse communities are found in eastern parts of the archipelago (Sumba, Flores, Pantar and Alor), where both Asian and Papuan lineages occur side by side.

Haplogroup frequencies differ between western and eastern Indonesia… In the west, haplogroups B5a (12%), B4c1b3 (9%) and Y2 (10.5%) are carried by a third of individuals. These haplogroups, frequent in western Indonesia, are notable by their near absence in eastern Indonesia. In the east, haplogroups F1a4 (8.7%), Q including Q1 and Q2 (7.7%), P (2.8%) and B4a1a1a (2.3%) represent nearly a quarter of individuals. 

Correspondingly, these haplogroups are rare or absent in western Indonesia, which is expected for lineages with strong Papuan connections (P and Q), but more surprising for lineages like the Polynesian motif (B4a1a1a). The Polynesian motif is found as far west as Bali, albeit in just two individuals (0.4%). However, it was not detected in samples from the western Indonesian islands of Java, Sumatra, Nias and Mentawai, even though this region is thought to have contributed to the settlement of Madagascar where the Polynesian motif is carried by nearly a third of individuals. The prevalence of the Polynesian motif in Madagascar, and its absence from the island region where the inhabitants of Madagascar originated, has yet to be satisfactorily explained. [A subsequent article in 2015 answers the question].’** 

‘We compared the distribution of Indonesian mtDNA haplogroups with those of surrounding populations… Most haplogroups are shared. 

The deep maternal lineages M17a, M73, M47, N21, N22, R21, R22 and R23 have patchy distributions across mainland and island southeast Asia, likely reflecting ancient maternal lineages tracing back to the first settlers in this region. Four of these lineages (M17a, N21, R22 and R23) reach higher frequencies in western compared with eastern Indonesia… Owing to proposed population origins of Austronesian language speakers in Taiwan, Indonesian links to the Philippines and indigenous Taiwanese are of especial interest. These three locations share four haplogroups (E1a1a, M7b3, M7c3c and Y2), which have previously been suggested as candidates for a mid-Holocene dispersal out of Taiwan… lineages shared with Filipinos and indigenous Taiwanese are generally more common in the east than in the west of Indonesia. The exceptions are Y2 and M7c3c…

Alternative hypotheses, such as Austronesian groups originating in and dispersing from Indonesia, remain possible, with many genetic lineages in Indonesia showing old and local connections. Models combining these two extremes may ultimately be the best predictors. We envisage some genetic contributions from Taiwan, possibly including speakers of early Austronesian languages, with a substantial biological heritage from waves of ancestral populations arriving in island southeast Asia… ancestral-derived haplotype orders are consistent with a rapid expansion from Taiwan to the Philippines and Indonesia, but population dispersals in the opposite direction are equally likely. Although we provide haplogroup dates with some reluctance, we note that relative ages are inconsistent with a simple dispersal from Taiwan to the Philippines, and thence to Indonesia. Instead, they seem a better fit to widespread population movements within island southeast Asia during the Holocene.

The Polynesian motif is also generally associated with a Taiwanese dispersal, but actually possesses an unusual geographical distribution. The ancestral form occurs widely throughout mainland and island southeast Asia. However, the Polynesian motif itself is found only at low frequency in the Philippines (0.5%) and eastern Indonesia (2.3%). Although frequencies reach as high as 7.4% on Timor, the lineage is found no further west than Bali (0.4%, or just 2 of 457 individuals). This is consistent with a proposed origin in island Melanesia, but notably conflicts with the high frequency of the Polynesian motif in Madagascar… We suggest that an inclusive framework that describes the full distribution of this unusual mtDNA lineage is still lacking. Nevertheless, an unambiguous connection with population dispersals from Taiwan during the Neolithic seems increasingly unlikely.

In comparisons with neighboring populations, Indonesia’s closest genetic connections lie toward mainland [Elishah – Malaysia] and island southeast Asia [Dodanim – Philippines] rather than Oceania [Rodanim]…the only mtDNA lineage found across all Indonesian island groups is M7c3c, but this haplogroup, while also present in Taiwan and the Philippines, appears to be absent from other Austronesian-speaking populations in Oceania. Therefore, no single shared mtDNA lineage links all speakers of Austronesian languages, even if only at low frequency. Instead, Austronesian populations are characterized more by their diversity than by any shared genetic inheritance.’ 

Genetic Admixture History of Eastern Indonesia as Revealed by Y-Chromosome and Mitochondrial DNA Analysis, multiple authors, 2009:

‘Eastern Indonesia possesses more linguistic diversity than any other region in Southeast Asia, with both Austronesian (AN) languages that are of East Asian origin, as well as non-Austronesian (NAN) languages of likely Melanesian origin. Here, we investigated the genetic history of human populations from seven eastern Indonesian [EI] islands, including AN and NAN speakers, as well as the relationship between languages and genes, by means of nonrecombining Y-chromosomal (NRY) and mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) analysis. We found that the eastern Indonesian gene pool consists of East Asian as well as Melanesian components, as might be expected based on linguistic evidence… 

In addition, we noted a small fraction of the NRY and mtDNA data shared between eastern Indonesians and Australian Aborigines likely reflecting an ancient link between Asia and Australia.^^

All AN languages trace back to a common ancestral language (Proto-AN) and are thought to have spread by an expansion that started about 5,500–6,000 years ago in Taiwan with an assumed ultimate origin in East Asia… Furthermore, we identified at least two haplogroups (Q1 and Q2) that were previously suggested to be of Melanesian origin… whereas our new data suggest they might be of EI origin instead. Moreover, the mtDNA sequence diversity within haplogroup Q1 was very high in EI (0.967 ± 0.01) making it somewhat unlikely that this haplogroup exists in EI as a result of a recent migration from Melanesia… 

We found NRY haplogroup C-RPS4Y in surprisingly high frequency in EI, accounting for 14.2% of all EI Y-chromosomes… which is the highest frequency of any region in our current and previous data set… The RPS4YT mutation characterizing the major haplogroup C represents one of the two oldest branches of the NRY tree in Asia/Oceania (in addition to M9)… It most likely represents the oldest NRY haplogroup of Asian origin in EI. Haplogroup C-RPS4Y has not been reported in East Asia or Polynesia, is almost completely absent from Melanesia (reported so far from one male from coastal PNG and one Fijian), and is very rare in Southeast Asia (outside EI)… However, this NRY lineage was previously found at an appreciable frequency (10%) in northern Australian Aborigines… and also, albeit less frequently (1.3%), in central Australian Aborigines…^^ Extremely high frequencies of C-RPS4Y (xM38) (92%) were also previously found in males from Cibol on Flores… C-RPS4Y^ was also previously found in India, albeit in low frequency, and was used to support an ancient genetic link between India and Australia.’ [This writer considers it a possibility, that there is a historical and genetic link between the Indian Dravidian and the Australian Aborigine]. 

Mitochondrial DNA and the Y chromosome suggest the settlement of Madagascar by Indonesian sea nomad populations, multiple authors, 2015: 

‘Linguistic, cultural and genetic characteristics of the Malagasy suggest that both Africans and Island Southeast Asians were involved in the colonization of Madagascar. Populations from the Indonesian archipelago played an especially important role because linguistic evidence suggests that the Malagasy language branches from the Southeast Barito language family of southern Borneo, Indonesia, with the closest language spoken today by the Ma’anyan. A combination of phylogeographic analysis of genetic distances, haplotype comparisons and inference of parental populations by linear optimization, using both maternal and paternal DNA lineages, suggests that Malagasy derive from multiple regional sources in Indonesia, with a focus on eastern Borneo, southern Sulawesi and the Lesser Sunda islands.**

Prior to the European colonial period, Austronesian-speaking populations were the most widespread of any language family. While most groups speaking Austronesian languages moved eastward, settling the Pacific Ocean, others moved westward through the Indian Ocean, reaching eastern Africa and Madagascar. Dispersing halfway around the world within the past two millennia, the Austronesian expansion is often considered the last substantial wave of migration in human prehistory.

A recent study of genome-wide SNP data suggests that the western and central regions of Indonesia (Java/Borneo/Sulawesi) have the closest genetic connections with Malagasy. This is in agreement with previous studies of uniparental markers (mtDNA and the Y chromosome), which found genetic affinity between Malagasy and western Indonesian populations. A key lineage linking Indonesia and Madagascar is the Polynesian motif (a mitochondrial DNA haplogroup, B4a1a1, characterized by the polymorphisms A14022G, T16217C, A16247G and C16261T).

More recently, it has been recognized that Malagasy carry specific point mutation variants (mtDNA nucleotides 1473 and 3423), which together have been termed the Malagasy motif. This Malagasy version of the Polynesian motif is distributed throughout Madagascar with frequencies in specific ethnic groups ranging from 11-50%. While still debated, this relatively homogenous distribution has been interpreted as supporting the first arrival of the Polynesian motif during an early phase of Madagascar’s settlement. To date, the Malagasy motif has not been found in Indonesia, or anywhere else outside Madagascar. 

Based on analysis of 96 Y chromosome binary markers… the majority of men in the Ma’anyan, Lebbo’ and Bajo carry haplogroups previously found in Southeast Asia, particularly C, K, and O… Among the haplogroups shared between Malagasy and Indonesians… four originated in Island Southeast Asia (C, O1a, O1a2, O2a1), while six have western Eurasian origins (J1, J2, J2b, T, L and R1a). The Ma’anyan and five other Indonesian groups, all located around the Sulawesi sea (east Kalimantan Dayak, Java, Bali, Mandar and Sumba), share four of these Island Southeast Asian haplogroups. Importantly, Malagasy uniquely share just one subhaplogroup (O2a1a1-M88) with Ma’anyan, and this lineage has not been discovered in other regions of Indonesia. O2a1a1 may therefore be a marker of male genetic contributions from southern Borneo to Madagascar.

Malagasy and Indonesians share mitochondrial haplogroups B4a1a, B4a1a1 (Polynesian motif), E1a1a, F3b, M7c1a4a, M32c and Q1… Of these, B4a1a1, E1a1a and Q1 are found exclusively in eastern Indonesia. Conversely, F3b, B4a1a and M7c1a4a occur ubiquitously across both eastern and western Indonesia, and M32c has been observed in only one Javanese individual.

The Polynesian motif (B4a1a1) is considered strong evidence of Indonesian gene flow into Madagascar, where a variant is found at moderate frequency (11-50%). With the exception of Bali… B4a1a1 only occurs in eastern Indonesia. Considering the restricted geographic distribution of the Polynesian motif, it is most likely that this lineage from Madagascar traces back to eastern rather than western Indonesia.

Malagasy and Indonesians share ten haplotypes in seven haplogroups… two haplotypes each in B4a1a and B4a1a1; three haplotypes in M7c1a4a; and one haplotype in each of the other shared haplogroups… eastern Indonesian populations tend to share more haplotypes with Malagasy than western Indonesian groups. We propose that the settlement of Madagascar had an Indonesian source location around southern Sulawesi, the Lesser Sunda islands and eastern Borneo.’

What we have found thus far from Madai [less so due to the European admixture], though particularly with Gomer and Javan, is both the high percentage level and occurrence of Y-DNA haplogroups O, C, and K. The peoples of Indonesia are no different and expectedly assume a similar haplogroup pattern. Travelling from west to east, the major Islands of Indonesia exhibit the following major Austronesian Y-DNA haplogroups.

Sumatra:     O2 – O1a – O1b – F – C – K – D

Java:            O1b – O1a – O2 – C – K 

Borneo:       O2 – C – O1b – O1a – F

Bali:             O1b – O1a – O2 – C – K – Q 

Sulawesi:    C – O1a – O2 – O1b – K – F 

Sumatra has a population of nearly sixty million people and its haplogroup sequence contributes heavily to the Indonesian total. Sumatra is distinct from the other Indonesian islands and has the closest match with the Filipinos.

Sumatra:       O2 – O1a – O1b – F – C – K – D

Philippines:  O2a1 – O1a – K – C – O1b – [B – E]

Sumatra:       O1a  [18%]     O2a  [30%]   O1b [14%]   C [5%]    K [4%]   D [2%]  F [14%]

Philippines:  O1a  [28%]    O2a1 [39%]   O1b [3%]     C [5%]    K [20%]

Java has the highest number of people in Indonesia with nearly one hundred and fifty million people, over half the Indonesian total; dominating the Indonesian haplogroup pool. Java has a closer match to the people of Bali [0.7 million people] than any other island or nation. Borneo with approximately twenty-five million people and Sulawesi with twenty million people also share more in common genetically. 

Java:         O2  [23%]  O1a [23%]  O1b  [42%]  C  [2%]     K  [2%]   

Bali:          O2  [7%]     O1a [18%]  O1b  [59%]  C  [2%]     K  [1%]        

Borneo:    O2  [36%]  O1a [9%]    O1b  [21%]   C  [22%]                   F [2%]

Sulawesi: O2  [17%]   O1a [21%]  O1b   [13%]  C  [22%]   K  [7%]   F [ 6%]

The Melanesian Y-DNA haplogroups – again travelling west to east – show the following.

Bali:                 O -C – K – M – S

Sulawesi:        O – K – S – M

Flores:             C1 – C – S – K – O – M

East Timor:    C1 – K – O – S – C – M

West Papua:   C1 – M – K – O

Bali and Sulawesi are closer, whereas the Islands of Flores [two million people], East Timor – a separate sovereign state, outside Indonesia – [1.5 million people] and West Papua [one million people] share a closer haplogroup similarity. West Timor is part of Indonesia, with a population of two million people and shares the Island of Timor with East Timor. West Papua is part of Indonesian New Guinea with Papua, which has five million people and they both share the western half of New Guinea with Papua New Guinea in the eastern half, which has a population of nearly nine million people and is a separate, distinct nation. 

While the western half of New Guinea was a Dutch colony, the north-eastern region was once a German colony and the south-eastern territory a British colony. Papua New Guinea is a mineral power and the fifth biggest country in terms of natural mineral reserves; holding about $222 billion worth of reserves of bauxite, the commercial ore of Aluminum. The country is estimated to hold up to 24% of the total bauxite reserves in the world.

Bali:                O  [84%]   K   [1%]     S   [0.4%]   M  [0.7%]   C [2%]

Sulawesi         O  [64%]   K   [6%]    S   [5%]       M  [1%]

Flores:            O  [9%]     K    [11%]   S  [13%]      M  [3%]      C [39%]    C1 [24%] 

East Timor:   O  [18%]   K    [18%]   S  [13%]     M  [8%]      C [36%]    C1 [8%]

West Papua:  O  [3%]     K    [23%]                      M   [30%]   C [44%]   

A comparison of the Melanesian Y-DNA haplogroups shows the lessening of the primary Austronesian [and East and Southeast Asian] haplogroup of O and the increasing percentages of the typical Melanesian haplogroups of K, S, M as well as C, also an Austronesian, East and Southeast Asian key haplogroup. 

The specific haplogroups for East Timor include the following, which are in bold for typically Melanesian, italicised for typically South East Asian and both for those which reflect an indigenous Eastern Indonesian origin. 

Y-DNA:  C-M38, K-M9, S-M254, M-M4, M-P34, C-RPS4Y^, O-M119 [O1a]

mtDNA: P1, Q1, R14, B, B4a, F1a, R9c, E1a, E1b, E2, Polynesian motif.

Comparing the same Islands of Indonesia [and East Timor] with the ones we have looked at in Polynesia and Melanesia shows the same result. The haplogroup O, is higher in the Austronesian [Polynesian] peoples and the haplogroups K, M and S increase in percentage in the Melanesian populations.

Bali:                           O  [84%]   K   [1%]     S   [0.4%]   M  [0.7%]   C [2%]

Sulawesi                   O  [64%]   K    [6%]    S   [5%]      M  [1%]

Flores:                       O  [9%]     K    [11%]   S  [13%]    M  [3%]      C [39%]   C1 [24%] 

East Timor:               O  [18%]   K    [18%]   S  [13%]    M  [8%]      C [36%]   C1 [8%]

West Papua:             O  [3%]     K    [23%]                    M   [30%]   C [44%]   

Tonga:                       O  [60%]   K    [1%]                                           C [23%] 

Maori:                        O  [6%]     K    [2%]                                                         C1   [43%] 

Samoa:                      O  [26%]   K   [3%]    S  [2%]       M [3%]                     C1   [61%]

Tahiti:                         O  [29%]   K   [4%]                                                          C1   [67%] 

French Polynesia:     O  [37%]   K   [8%]                                          C  [53%]

Papua New Guinea:  O [4%]      K  [9%]   S  [18%]     M [54%] C  [2%]    C1   [15%]

Australian Aborigine:O [1%]      K  [22%]                                       C  [6%]    C1   [60%] 

Fiji:                               O [13%]    K   [25%]                      M [35%]  C  [1%]     C1   [22%]       

Philippine Negritos:   O [14%]    K   [51%]                                       C  [11%]      

Micronesia:                 O [9%]      K   [65%]                                      C  [19%]  

Y-DNA haplogroups O and K are shared amongst all the Polynesian, Micronesian and Melanesian peoples sampled and also included are either C or C1. This supports the common ancestry and descent from Japheth with the other peoples of Southeast Asia. Haplogroup M is indicative of the Melanesian peoples, with the highest percentages within the geographic area of the Papuan languages. Haplogroup S is mainly confined to the Melanesian peoples of Indonesia. The Polynesian Samoans exhibiting M and S haplogroups, reveal the intermixing with Melanesians. The Papuan New Guineans share a similar sequence to Fijians, also showing a common ancestry.

Malaysia:     O2a1  [28%]     O1a   [8%]      O1b [32%]   C [6%]   K   [8%] 

Java:            O2      [23%]     O1a   [23%]    O1b [42%]   C [2%]   K   [2%]   

Sumatra:      O2a    [30%]    O1a    [18%]    O1b [14%]   C [5%]    K   [4%] 

Philippines: O2a1  [28%]     O1a   [39%]    O1b [3%]     C [5%]    K   [20%]

Indonesian haplogroups are influenced by the majority of their population living on the Islands of Java and Sumatra. The closest affinity of the overall Indonesian [Kitti] haplogroup sequence is with Malaysia [Elishah]. The main contribution deriving from Java, which is more similar to the Malays and Sumatra, possessing more similarity with the Filipinos [Dodan].

Malaysia:      O1b – O2a1 – O1a – K – C – F – [R1a – D1 – H1a]

Indonesia:    O1b – O2a1 – O1a1 – K – C – F – [R1a1a – J2 – E – D1]

There is gold, and an abundance of rubies, but words of knowledge are like a precious jewel.

Proverbs 20:15 New English Translation

© Orion Gold 2020-2021 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com