Mapping the spread of Austronesian languages and its associated Neolithic culture forms the backbone of the orthodox model of the Island Southeast Asian Neolithic. The linguistic thrust of the narratives has tended to reduce the importance and independence of the archaeological record. In this paper we investigate how archaeological evidence has been used to support linguistic interpretations. Our own fieldwork and analysis suggest that reliance on the Austronesian linguistic 'tree' and the associated monolithic cultural categories may mask considerable complexity and diversity in the archaeological record.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 95 citations exist upstream.