The process of
population formation in East Asia
Ha Van Thuy
Exploring Eastern history is of great scientific interest.
But unfortunately, up to now, the path of eastern population formation is still
unclear: “Three different models have been emphasized by different researchers.
The first model assumes that northern East Asian populations migrated south and
mixed with Australoid ancestors who had settled in Southeast Asia. The second
model holds that the northern populations of East Asia evolved from southern
settlers. The third model assumes that the populations of northern and southern
East Asia have evolved independently since the late Pleistocene more than
10,000 years ago.” Still not over, the other challenge is that people out of
Africa before or after the Toba incident still have no final say. By default,
humanity's elite becomes a Babel people when solving a problem with five
unknowns!
In 2006, in the book Finding Vietnamese cultural roots, (1)
we presented the history of East Asian population formation with the following
points:
i. About 85,000 years ago, humans came out of Africa, into
the Arabian Peninsula. Then from here along the Indian Ocean to Southeast Asia.
70,000 years ago, during the Ice Age, the sea level was 130 meters lower than
today, two great strains of Australoid (haplogroup M) and Mongoloid (haplogroup
N) migrated to Vietnam. Here they met and mixed blood to give birth to four
ancient Vietnamese strains: Indonesian (haplogroup O), Melanesian (haplogroup
C), Vedoid and Negritoid (haplogroup D) belonging to the Australoid group.
Meanwhile, there are small groups of Mongoloid (haplogroup N) going to the
Northwest of Vietnam and then because they could not overcome the ice wall
blocking the road, they stopped walking and lived as hunter-gatherers.
ii. 50,000 years ago, people from Vietnam migrated to the
Sundaland continent, went to the South Pacific islands and occupied Australia.
An influx of people through Laos, Thailand, and Myanmar entered India, becoming
the Dravidians, the first owners of the subcontinent, which is in a state of
derelict after the atomic winter of the eruption of Toba volcano.
iii.40,000 years ago, due to the warming climate, people
from Vietnam occupied China, went to Siberia and then 30,000 years ago crossed
the Bering Strait to America. From the west of China, an influx of people
traveled to Central Asia and then into Europe, contributing to the ancestry of
the European people. From Southwest China, an influx of people entered Tibet,
Burma and then into Northeast India, becoming the Dravidians, the first owners
of the area. Meanwhile, the small Mongoloid community from Northwest Vietnam
followed the western corridor to Mongolia. They were hunter-gatherers in the
frozen regions. When the Ice Age ended, they domesticated livestock and became
nomadic in the grasslands of the Northern Yellow River.
iv- In the North of China due to the cold climate, people
live sparsely. Meanwhile, the south is warm, so the population is dense. The
Hoa Binh people created Neolithic products, cultivated millet and dried rice,
domesticated chickens, dogs, and pigs and brought them to Nam Duong Tu. 9000
years ago, the Viet people went up to build Jiahu agricultural culture. 7000
years ago millet was grown in the Yangshao culture. Here, the Australoid
Vietnamese met and mixed blood with the nomadic Mongols, giving birth to the
modern Vietnamese of the Southern Mongoloid race. The modern Vietnamese people
increased in number, becoming subjects of the Yellow River basin.
v- In the Bronze Age, the Southern Mongoloid people
descended to South China and Vietnam, genetically transforming the populations
of South China, Vietnam and Southeast Asia to the Southern Mongoloid strain.
Since 2000 BC, the entire population of Vietnam belongs to the Southern
Mongoloid race.
As an independent researcher, in the context of limited
data, I can only give a few outlines. Hopefully, when there are more documents,
the picture will be added and edited. At the same time, I also hope that
readers and critics will help me complete my ideas. Up to now, after more than
15 years, thanks to rich archaeological and genetic data, science has been able
to map East Asia's population at the molecular level. However, determining the
origin as well as the path of population formation in the area is still at an
impasse. This is a pity because it is only when the matter is cleared up that a
true history of the East can be written.
In many published studies, the article Inferring the history
of East Asian population from the Y chromosome by two famous Chinese scholars
Wang Chuanchao and Li Hui (2) represents this trend. On the basis of the
article, we try to evaluate the results and limitations of international
scholars to draw lessons for further research.
It is true that three different models for East Asian
population history have been proposed. However, there is only one correct model
anyway. In a summative treatise, the author needs to give his opinion, confirm
the model that he considers the most reliable, and then act on that model. The
failure to give an opinion shows that the author is not really confident in his
point of view.
In the article, the author makes the following observations:
a. Haplogroup C is the earliest settled group in East Asia.
“Haplogroup
C-M130 may represent one of the earliest settlements in East Asia. Haplogroup C
has a high to moderate frequency in the Far East and Oceania, and a lower
frequency in Europe and America, but not in Africa (Figure 1). Several
geographically specific subclasses of haplogroup C have been identified, namely
C1-M8, C2-M38, C3-M217, C4-M347, C5-M356 and C6-P55 [25]. Haplogroup C3-M217 is
the most common and highest frequency subclass in the populations of Mongolia
and Siberia. Haplogroup C1-M8 is strictly restricted to Japan and
Ryukyuan, occurring with a low frequency of about 5% or less. Haplogroup C2-M38
is found in certain local populations on the Pacific islands from eastern
Indonesia to Polynesia. Haplogroup C4-M347 is the most common haplogroup among
Aboriginal Australians, and has not been found outside of mainland Australia.
Haplogroup C5-M356 has been detected with low frequency in India and in East
Asia and neighboring regions of Pakistan and Nepal [27,28]. C6-P55 is
geographically restricted to the highlands of New Guinea (P55 has been
translocated in the latest Y-chromosome tree) [29]. This wide distribution
pattern of C-M130 suggests that C-M130 may have arisen somewhere in mainland
Asia before modern humans arrived in Southeast Asia. To give a clear picture of
the origin and migration of haplogroup C, Zhong et al. imported 12 Y-SNPs and 8
Y-STRs out of 465 haplogroup C individuals from 140 East and Southeast Asian
populations. C6-P55 is geographically restricted to the highlands of New
Guinea (P55 has been translocated in the latest Y-chromosome tree) [29]. This
wide distribution pattern of C-M130 suggests that C-M130 may have arisen
somewhere in mainland Asia before modern humans arrived in Southeast Asia. To
give a clear picture of the origin and migration of haplogroup C, Zhong et al.
imported 12 Y-SNPs and 8 Y-STRs out of 465 haplogroup C individuals from 140
East and Southeast Asian populations.”
Comment.
The excerpt shows that the authors succeeded in determining the distribution of group C according to the Y chromosome in East Asia, but were inadequate when talking about the origin and migration route of this haplogroup. Although known: “Overall south-to-north and east-to-west declines of C3 Y-STR diversity were observed with the highest levels of diversity in Southeast Asia, supporting an open route northward coastal extension of haplogroup C3 in China about 32 to 42 thousand years ago (Figure 2A)” but the authors contradict themselves when they write: "This wide distribution pattern of C-M130 suggests that C-M130 may have arisen somewhere in mainland Asia before modern humans arrived in Southeast Asia." Does that mean there was another migration to Asia before modern humans arrived in Southeast Asia? Is there any evidence for that exodus? Absolutely not! An unfounded speculation shows that the author's research direction is problematic!
Figure 1: Distribution of East Asian population according to
the Y. chromosome
Haplogroup C = Melanesian strain
Haplogroup D = Negritos strain
Halogroup N = Mongoloid strain
Halogruop O = Indonesian strain
b. Haplogroup O is the largest population group.
The article wrote:
“Haplogroup O-M175 is the largest haplogroup in East
Asia, comprising about 75% of the Chinese population and more than half of the
Japanese population and is therefore related to Neolithic migrants (Fig.
first). O-M175 generated three downstream haplogroups - O1a-M119, O2-M268, and
O3-M122 - accounting for a total of 60% of Y chromosomes in East Asian
populations [17,18]. Haplogroup O1a-M119 is common along the Southeast
coast of China, occurring with high frequency among Daic speakers and Taiwanese
aboriginal people [19]. O2-M268 accounts for about 5% of Chinese [17]. O2a1-M95
is the most frequent subclass of O2, which is the main haplogroup in the
Indochinese peninsula, and is also found in many populations in Southern China
and Eastern India (such as Munda) [19]. 20]. Another subclass of O2,
O2b-M176, is most common in Koreans and Japanese, and also occurs with very
little frequency in Vietnamese and Chinese [21,22]. The O3-M122 is the most
common haplogroup in China and is widespread throughout East and Southeast
Asia, comprising about 50 to 60% of Han people. O3a1c-002611, O3a2c1-M134, and
O3a2c1a-M117 are the three main subclasses of O3, each accounting for 12 to 17%
of Han people. O3a2c1a-M117 also exhibits high frequencies in
Tibetan-Burma populations. Another subclass, O3a2b-M7, has the highest
frequency among the Hmong-Mien and Mon-Khmer speaking populations, but makes up
less than 5% of the Han population [17,18]. Su et al examined 19 Y-SNPs
(including M119, M95 and M122) and three Y-chromosome STRs in a large
collection of population samples from a large region of Asia. They concluded
that northern populations originated from southern populations following the
early Paleolithic formation of East Asia. They also estimated the age of
O3-M122 to be 18 to 60 thousand years, which may reflect the age of the
blockage event that led to the early settlement of East Asia [4]. In
2005, Shi et al. [18] presented a systematic sampling and genetic screening of
haplogroup O3-M122 in more than 2,000 individuals from diverse East Asian
populations. Their data show that the O3-M122 haplogroup in southern East Asia
is more diverse than the one in northern East Asia, supporting the southern
origin of O3-M122. The timing of the early northward migration of the O3-M122
lines in East Asia is estimated at 25 to 30 thousand years... The age of
haplogroup O in East Asia is not more than 30 thousand years when estimated
from sufficient numbers (>7) of STR markers. Therefore, type O blood is not
the earliest Y chromosome brought into East Asia by modern humans.”
Comment:
In addition to showing the
distribution of haplogroup O in East Asia, the lead paragraph also shows a
consensus with the view that people from Southeast Asia moved to East Asia.
However, it is argued that: "The time of the early northward migration of
the O3-M122 streams in East Asia is estimated at 25 to 30,000 years" needs
to be discussed. From archaeological and genetic findings, haplogroup O came to
China together 40,000 years ago (Chu et al., 1998; Stephen Oppenheimer 2003).
But perhaps, due to the cold climate, most of them stopped in the southern Yangtze,
only massively going up the Yellow River basin when the Ice Age ended. Perhaps
the Nanyang Zi bottleneck at the end of the Ice Age reflected in the genes that
led to this conclusion.
c. On the genetic heritage of Paleolithic Black Asians.
The article wrote:
“The migratory history of haplogroup D-M174 is the most
enigmatic. So far, little is known about the origin and distribution of this
haplogroup. This haplogroup is derived from the African haplogroup DE-M1 (YAP
insertion) and is related to the short black Asian physical style. Groups E and
D are brothers. While haplogroup E was carried westward by tall blacks to
Africa, haplogroup D may have been carried eastward by short blacks to East
Asia (Figure 3). Haplogroup D-M174 has a high frequency in the Andaman
Negritos, northern Tibeto-Burmese populations, and the Japanese Ainu, and also
occurs with low frequency in other East and Southeast Asian and Central Asian
populations. Figure 1) [20,22,30, 31]. A northern Tibet-Burma population, the
Baima-Dee, comprises almost 100% of the D halog group. There are three main
subgroups of the D halog group, namely, D1-M15, D2-M55 and D3-P99, and many
unclassified halog subgroups. Haplogroup D1-M15 is common in Tibetans, Tangut
Chiang and Lolo, and is also found with very low frequency in mainland East
Asian populations [32,33]. Haplogroup D2-M55 is restricted to different
populations of the Japanese Islands. Haplogroup D3-P99 is found with high
frequency in Tibetans and some Tibeto-Burmese minorities in Sichuan and Yunnan
provinces residing in close proximity to Tibetans, such as the Pumi and Naxi
[32]. Paragroup D* is limited to the Andaman Islands [31], which have been
isolated for at least 20 thousand years. Several other small halog groups, also
included in D*, can be found around Tibet. Most populations with blood type D
have very dark skin, including the Andaman, Tibetan-Burmese, and Mon-Khmer. The
Ainu may have pale skin to absorb more ultraviolet rays in high latitude
regions. On the origin of haplogroup D, Chandrasekar et al. suggested that
CT-M168 induced ionic mutant YAP insertion and D-M174 in South Asia based on
their findings of YAP insertion in northeastern Indian tribes and D-M174 in
Andaman island residents. 34]. In that case, haplogroup E with YAP insertion
may also be of Asian origin. However, this hypothesis is rarely supported by
any evidence. If haplogroup D originated in Africa, what is most mysterious is
how it moved through populations with haplogroup CF to East Asia. Another
mystery is how haplogroup D migrated from Southwest Asia to Japan. It may have
passed through mainland East Asia or over Sundaland (Figure 2B). The land route
seems to be shorter than the Sundaland line. Shi et al. suggest that the
northward expansion of D-M174 into western China may have preceded the
migration of other large East Asian clans around 60,000 years ago. These border
populations may then have traveled eastward via the northern route through
Korea or via the southern route through Taiwan and the Ryukyu land bridge to
Japan, where they may have encountered the earlier Australian settlers. The
current site of D-M174 in East Asia was probably displaced from eastern China
by the later northward migration of haplogroup O and the expansion of the Han
Chinese during the Neolithic [32]. However, there has never been any evidence
from genetics or archeology that haplogroup D2 or Negritos migrated to eastern
China… However, due to lack of data, the history of haplogroup D, as a genetic
legacy of the Paleolithic in East Asia, remains a mystery."
Comment
What does the passage say? First, it says, thanks to genetic
engineering, the authors discovered the distribution of Haplogroup D in East
Asia. But it also shows that they are confused in determining the origin as
well as the migration route of this haplogroup. Hypothesis put forward: “This
haplogroup is descended from the African haplogroup DE-M1 (YAP insertion) and
is related to the short black Asian physical style. Groups E and D are
brothers. While haplogroup E was carried westward by tall blacks to Africa,
haplogroup D may have been carried eastward by short blacks to East Asia."
Does this mean that there has been a departure of haplogroup D from Africa? In
fact, this migration did not occur because the escape from Africa of modern
people was only successful once in history. Meanwhile, the suggestion of
Chandrasekar et al. that: “haplogroup E with YAP insertion may also be of Asian
origin,” is not noted! Unfortunately, the authors do not know that, from the
morphological survey of ancient Vietnamese skulls and anthropology, haplogroup
D was born in Vietnam 70,000 years ago. (3)
d.Recent immigrants to and from the Northwest: N-M231
“Haplogroup O has a sibling haplogroup, N-M231, which is most frequent in northern Eurasia, especially among most of the Uralic ethnic groups, including Finnic, Ugric, Samoyedic and Yukaghir peoples, as well as some Altaic and Eskimo populations to the north. It also occurs with low frequency in East Asia (Figure 1) [30,37]. Detailed analysis of haplogroup N shows a more recent expansion on a counterclockwise route from interior East Asia or southern Siberia about 12 to 14 thousand years ago, which explains the high frequency of haplogroups N in northeastern Europe [37]. Subclass N1a-M128 is found with low frequency in populations of northern China, such as Manchuria, Xibe, Evenk, Korea, and also in some Central Asian Turkic populations. Haplogroup N1b-P43 is about six to eight thousand years old and may have originated in Siberia. N1b is common in the Northern Samoyeds, and also occurs with low to moderate frequency in some other Uralic and Altaic peoples [38,39]. The N1c-Tat subclass most frequently appeared probably in China about 14 thousand years ago and then experienced a series of strong founder or bottleneck effects in Siberia and secondary expansion in Eastern Europe. 37]. These studies traced the origin of haplogroup N in Southwest China and Southeast Asia. So it was a long journey for the first people of haplogroup N to cross the continent from Southeast Asia to Northern Europe. Haplogroup N migration is another piece of evidence for the southern origin of East Asians.”
Mongoloid skull cap at the Salkhit site in Northeastern
Mongolia about 34,000 years ago
Comment.
The status of Haplogroup N is a complicated but interesting
story. In common view, the author of the paper also "traced the origin of
haplogroup N in Southwest China and Southeast Asia." Ask: did you find it?
No, the Stone Age the area was completely devoid of Mongoloid people! (3)
Mongoloid people only appeared here about 2000 BC but are South Mongoloid. So
where do Mongoloid people in Southeast Asia go to East Asia? To answer this
question, 15 years ago, was based on three facts: i. There is only one migration
route to the South. ii. Suggestion by Chu et al.: Mongoloid also came from the
south (4) and iii. The 68,000-year-old North Mongoloid remains in Liujiang in
Guangxi, close to the Vietnamese border, help us hypothesize: 70,000 years ago,
there were separate Mongoloid groups that went to Northwest Vietnam and lived
in isolation here. The North Mongoloid skeleton of Liujiang is evidence. About
40,000 years ago, the Mongoloid community from here followed the Bashu-Sichuan
corridor to Mongolia. Hunting here until the end of the Ice Age, they
domesticated livestock and then became nomadic in the grasslands of the
Northern Yellow River. (5) Due to the preservation of the pure genome, they is
called the North Mongoloid. The North Mongoloid skullcap fragment 34,000 years
ago found in Salkhit Northeastern Mongolia is evidence of this event. (6)
Because they left Vietnam 40,000 years ago, there are no remains of them in the
stone age on Vietnamese soil. However, the blood of Mongoloid people in
Mongolia still bears the imprint of 30,000 years of living on Vietnamese land.
The second key issue is the status of the South Mongoloid:
Where did they come from and why did they become the subject of the Asian
population? Perhaps the first person to be interested in this was Zhou Jixu
(7). He believes that the Southern Mongoloid people at the Bonpo site in
Shaanxi province came up from Southeast Asia. The truth is not: in the Stone
Age, Southeast Asia did not have Mongoloid people! Based on the location of the
Bonpo site and the South Mongoloid genetic code, we believe that when the
millet was planted here, the Australoid ancient Viet met and mixed blood with
the North Mongoloid, giving birth to the South Mongoloid. The Bonpo site is the
birth place of the Southern Mongols. The question why was born later, but the
Southern Mongoloid strain became the largest population in Asia? The following
can be answered. 70,000 years ago, in Vietnam, two big strains of Australoid
and Mongoloid mixed blood, giving birth to the ancient Vietnamese. According to
the principle of genetics, the marriage inevitably produces a number of
Mongoloid people. But because the number of Australoid people was too large,
the next generations were fused, and finally the Mongoloid gene was recessive,
leaving only the Australoid strain. However, every Australoid person's blood
contains the Mongoloid gene. Therefore, when receiving more genes from the
nomad, the amount of Mongoloid blood in the hybrid's body surpassed the limit
of the Australoid strain to become a new Southern Mongoloid strain. When adult
hybrids mate with their compatriots, they also pass on the Mongoloid genes to
their children, making their children also become Southern Mongoloid. Just like
that, like in a domino game, with the initial push, all the ancient Viet people
will automatically change into South Mongoloid. Anthropologists call it the
Mongoloidization of Southeast Asian populations. That is the reason why the
Southern Mongoloid people, although born later, became the subject of the East
Asian population.
In the past, when we proposed "The Mongoloid people also came from Vietnam", we only had indirect evidence of archeology and vague hints of genetics. Now thanks to many genetic studies, the evidence for this has become extremely solid. In the article The sign of dichotomous monads in the genetic structure of Baiyue (百越遗传结构的一元二分迹象)(8) Hui Li builds a tree of blood relations of East Asian ethnic groups from the Y chromosome:
From that, the author concludes:
“It is of particular significance that some peoples of the
Altai system of the East also harbor a small amount of the M119 mutation. The
highest are Buryat with 35%, Nivkh people 6%, Manchu people 5.6%, Mongols 4.2%,
Ulchi people 3.8%, Japanese 3.4%, Ewenki people in Yenisey region is 3.2%. In
terms of genetics and culture, whether the Baiyue group and the Tungus ethnic
group of the Altai system have a relationship of origin or are just ethnic groups
that have an exchange relationship and influence each other still needs to be
studied clarify.”
Hui Li's announcement refuted the theory "Northern road
leads people to East Asia." When applying the theory "The Mongoloid
people also came from Vietnam," we easily dispel the doubt of scholar Hui
Li: 70,000 years ago, in Vietnam, the Mongoloid community contributed a part of
the blood to give birth to the ancient Vietnamese Australoid, the ancestors of
the Austronesian population. The rest were brought North, becoming the
ancestors of the Altaic, Evenki, Tungusic… As a result, these two distant
communities are of the same origin.
We map the process of population formation in East Asia as follows.
Conclude.
The above analysis shows that two scholars Chuan-Chao Wang
and Hui Li have succeeded in mapping the East Asian population at the molecular
level, but are still powerless in determining the origin and route of the
Eastern population. This is also the situation of most other scholars. It seems
that we are used to hearing the chorus at the end of each article:
"Hopefully when sequence gene more, we will have an answer..." In
fact, it is not a lack of gene sequencing publication but the lack of the
exactly answer to the way out of Africa by man! Not only that, there is a
danger that most authors lean towards the scenario "A large number of
Chinese peasants went down, replacing the Australoid natives who made up the
population of Southeast Asia today." (8) Most Chinese authors support the
above option because it leads to "scientific conclusions":
"Vietnamese people are descendants of Chinese people." From this
idea, there is a Chinese politician who "admonished stray child Vietnam to
back home" (!) Not understanding because they forgot or didn't know that,
if that is true, the biodiversity of Vietnamese people must be low than the
Chinese! However, most genetic studies confirm: “Vietnamese people have the
highest diversity in Asia.” This affirms that there is absolutely nothing that
"a large number of Chinese farmers have come down to replace the indigenous
people, making up the population of Southeast Asia."
Until the end of the twentieth century, the peoples of East
Asia still believed that their ancestor was the Peking Man Homo pekinensis. But
in the new era, molecular genetics turned everything upside down when declaring
that all mankind had a common ancestor Homo sapiens appeared in Africa 300,000
years ago. From Africa, prehistoric people came out to make up the world
population. Therefore, the history of the Eastern people needs to be rewritten.
But how to write when anthropologists are still arguing about the human way out
of Africa?!
Whereas 15 years ago, in our pamphlet, we presented the
basic picture of East Asian prehistoric. In the following years, thanks to
updating valuable archaeological and genetic materials, we published many of
articles and books, including Rewriting Chinese
history, The Formation Process of The Origin, And Culture Of The Viet People,
Out of Vietnam Explore In The World,(9) printed in USA, released on
amazon, presents a more complete East Asian history. We also have academic
exchanges in seminars, debates with leading historians in the country… Our
discovery has reached millions of Vietnamese at home and abroad. Unfortunately,
as an independent researcher and our views are too different from mainstream
academia, we are not supported by the Vietnamese government. We also do not
have the conditions to publish in international journals, so foreign scholars
do not know about our work. Only associate professor Liam C. Kelly, after many
years of opposing us, in 2020 in the text 'THE CENTRALITY OF “FRINGE HISTORY”:
DIASPORA, THE INTERNET AND A NEW VERSION OF VIETNAMESE PREHISTORY'' admitted: “
In Vietnam, there exists a “history of the fringes,” writing a new version of
Vietnamese history.”(10)
There exists the paradox that, while the fundamental
problems of East Asian history have been solved for many years, world scholars
are wasting time and effort pushing the opened doors. Therefore, we are forced
to write this article, clearly stating the inadequacies of the current world
academics and suggest that scientists read and then criticize our ideas. We
will be very grateful if you point out your mistake so that we can learn.
Thanks to the articles of two scholars Wang and Li for
valuable materials.
Saigon, January 2021
Tài liệu tham khảo
1.
Hà Văn Thùy. Tìm lại cội nguồn văn hóa Việt.
NXB Văn học, H. 2006
2.
Chuan-Chao Wang and Hui Li. Inferring human
history in East Asia from Y chromosomes
https://investigativegenetics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2041-2223-4-11
3.
Nguyễn Đình Khoa. Nhân chủng học Đông Nam Á. NXB
DH&THCN. H,1083
4.
Chu et al. Genetic Relationship of Population in
China. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC21714/
5.
Hà Văn Thùy. Out Of Vietnam Explore Into
The World. August 1, 2021
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09BL6NBGD?ref_=pe_3052080_397514860
6. Thibaut Devièse at al. Compound-specific
radiocarbon dating and mitochondrial DNA analysis of the Pleistocene hominin
from Salkhit Mongolia. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-08018-8 )
7. Zhou Jixu. The Rise of Agricultural
Civilization in China: The Disparity between Archeological Discovery and the
Documentary Record and Its Explanation.
https://books.google.com.vn/books/about/Sino_Platonic_Papers.html?id=PmQqnQEACAAJ&redir_esc=y
8.
S. Pischedda et al. Phylogeographic and
genome-wide investigations of Vietnam ethnic groups reveal signatures of
complex historical demographic movements.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-12813-6
9.
Rewriting Chinese history
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1989993680/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=rewriting+chinese+history&qid=1615764050&sr=8-1
The
Formation Process of The Origin, And Culture of The Viet People
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1989993303
Out of Vietnam Explore in The World
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09BL6NBGD?ref_=pe_3052080_397514860
10.
Kelley, L. C. The centrality of “fringe
history”: Diaspora, the Internet and a new version of Vietnamese prehistory.
International Journal of Asia Pacific Studies
16 (1): 71–104, https://doi.org/10.21315/ijaps2020.16.1.3
