The United Royal Houses of the Philippines created this website to consolidate the researches of the historians that relates to Lakan Dula.

The House of Dula: Lakan Dula, the King of Tondo

Chapter 67: The Principalia Intermigration Theory on the Origin of the Austronesians all Over the World ...the Austronesian Homeland

A Proposed Theory of Migration.pptx

The Power Point Presentation of the Principalia Intermigration Theory as originally presented by Prof. Sofronio Dulay, Patriarch of the House of Dula and Grand Patriarch of the United Royal Houses of the Philippines through its ruling council, the Principalia Hereditay Council where the theory was named after.

Principalia Theory and Philippine History

What is the significance of the Principalia Intermigration Theory to the history of the Philippines?, according to AI.

"The Principalia Intermigration Theory is a relatively newer and less widely accepted theory regarding the peopling of the Philippines, especially when compared to the dominant "Out-of-Taiwan" model. It's important to clarify that this theory primarily focuses on the origins and movements of Austronesian peoples in relation to the Philippines, rather than the broader concept of the "Principalia" class during the Spanish colonial period.

Here's a breakdown of its significance and how it relates to Philippine history:

What is the Principalia Intermigration Theory?

Proposed by the Principalia Hereditary Council of the Philippines, this theory attempts to reconcile aspects of the "Out-of-Taiwan" model (championed by Robert Blust and Peter Bellwood) and Wilhelm Solheim II's "Nusantao Maritime Trading and Communication Network" or "Island Origin Theory."

In essence, it suggests a more reciprocal and complex pattern of migration:

Philippines as a Potential Homeland/Central Hub: Unlike the "Out-of-Taiwan" model which posits a unidirectional migration from Taiwan to the Philippines and beyond, the Principalia Intermigration Theory suggests that some native inhabitants of the Philippine islands might have settled in Taiwan as early as 5000 BC (as hypothesized by Solheim).
Back-and-Forth Movement: It then incorporates Bellwood's idea that around 3000 BC, some residents of Taiwan settled back into the Philippines. Similarly, it proposes movements from the Philippines to other areas like Sarawak, and back-migrations from other islands in the Celebes Sea to the Philippines, over thousands of years.
"Lawan Homeland" Concept: It emphasizes the concept of a "Lawan homeland" from which the "Lequios (Waray)" tribe spread to various Asian, Polynesian, and Austronesian settlements, as well as other parts of the Visayas, Luzon, and Mindanao.

Significance to the History of the Philippines:

Challenges Dominant Theories: Its primary significance lies in its attempt to challenge or at least nuance the prevailing "Out-of-Taiwan" model. While the "Out-of-Taiwan" theory is largely supported by linguistic, genetic, archaeological, and cultural evidence, the Principalia Intermigration Theory offers an alternative perspective that emphasizes the Philippines' potential role as a source or central hub for some of these migrations, rather than just a recipient.
Re-evaluates Pre-Colonial Connectivity: By proposing intermigration, it highlights the long-standing and complex trade and communication networks that existed in the Asia-Pacific region during the Neolithic age. It suggests a more dynamic interaction between different island groups, with people moving in multiple directions, rather than a simple linear expansion.
Emphasis on Indigenous Roots: For some, it reinforces the idea of the Philippines having deep indigenous roots and potentially being a point of origin for certain population movements, fostering a sense of pride in the archipelago's ancient history and its role in regional development.
Debate and Research: While not widely accepted by mainstream academia, the theory contributes to ongoing debates and encourages further research into the complex patterns of prehistoric migration in Southeast Asia. It prompts scholars to look for more nuanced evidence that might support or refute bidirectional movements.

Important Distinction: "Principalia" (Spanish Colonial Era)

It's crucial not to confuse the Principalia Intermigration Theory with the Principalia class during the Spanish colonial period.

Principalia (Spanish Colonial Era): This refers to the ruling and educated upper class in the Spanish Philippines. They were the descendants of the pre-colonial datus and nobility, who were co-opted by the Spanish to administer local communities. They served as gobernadorcillos (mayors) and cabezas de barangay (barangay heads), enjoyed certain privileges (like tax exemption), and played a crucial role as intermediaries between the Spanish colonial government and the native population. This class was instrumental in shaping the political and social landscape of the Philippines during over 300 years of Spanish rule, often forming the basis of modern political dynasties.

In summary, the Principalia Intermigration Theory is significant for offering an alternative, albeit debated, perspective on the prehistoric peopling of the Philippines, emphasizing the archipelago's potential role as a central point in Austronesian migrations. This is distinct from the Principalia as a social class during the Spanish colonial era, who were crucial in the administration and societal structure of the colonial Philippines." (Source: https://g.co/gemini/share/c846bd0f03f3 Created with 2.5 Flash May 28, 2025 at 11:51 AM Published May 28, 2025 at 11:55 AM )

Who are the Austronesians?

The Austronesian peoples, or more accurately Austronesian-speaking peoples, are a large group of various peoples in Maritime Southeast Asia, Taiwan (collectively known as Taiwanese indigenous peoples), Oceania and Madagascar, that speak the Austronesian languages. The nations and territories predominantly populated by Austronesian-speaking peoples are sometimes known collectively as Austronesia. Austronesians were the first people to invent maritime sailing technology (most notably catamarans, outrigger boats, lashed-lug boat building, and the crab claw sail) which enabled their rapid dispersal into the islands of the Indo-Pacific. They assimilated the earlier Paleolithic Negrito, Orang Asli, and the Australo-Melanesian Papuan populations in the islands at varying levels of admixture. They also reached Rapa Nui (Easter Island), Japan, Madagascar, New Zealand and Hawaii at their furthest extent, possibly also reaching the Americas. A.G. Ioannidis et al. published in 2020 a genome analysis showing an Austronesian contact to South America around 1150–1200, the earliest one between Fatu Hiva from the Marquesas Islands, and Colombia. Austronesians were the most widespread group of peoples with shared linguistic ancestry prior to the colonial era. Aside from language, Austronesian peoples also share—to a varying degree—common cultural characteristics including widespread traditions and technologies like tattooing, stilt houses, jade carving, wetland agriculture, and various rock art motifs. They also share a common set of domesticated plants and animals that were carried along with the migrations, including rice, bananas, coconuts, breadfruit, Dioscorea yams, taro, paper mulberry, chickens, pigs, and dogs.

List of Austronesian People

Austronesian peoples include the following groupings by name and geographic location (incomplete):

- Borneo groups (e.g., Kadazan-Dusun, Murut, Iban, Bidayuh, Dayak, Lun Bawang/Lundayeh)
- Chamic group: Cambodia, Hainan, Cham areas of Vietnam (remnants of the Champa kingdom which covered central and southern Vietnam) as well as Aceh in northern Sumatra (e.g., Acehnese, Chams, Jarai, Utsuls).
- Central Luzon group: (e.g., Kapampangan, Pangasinan, Sambal.)
- Igorot (Cordillerans): Cordilleras (e.g., Balangao, Ibaloi, Ifugao, Itneg, Kankanaey).
- Lumad: Mindanao (e.g., Kamayo, Manobo, Tasaday, T'boli).
- Malagasy: Madagascar (e.g., Betsileo, Merina, Sihanaka, Bezanozano).
- Melanesians: Melanesia (e.g., Fijians, Kanak, Ni-Vanuatu, Solomon Islands).
- Micronesians: Micronesia (e.g., Carolinian, Chamorro, Palauan).
- Moken: Burma, Thailand.
- Moro: Bangsamoro (Mindanao & Sulu Archipelago, e.g., Maguindanao, Maranao, Tausug, Sama-Bajau).
- Northern Luzon lowlanders (e.g., Ilocano, Ibanag, Itawes).
- Polynesians: Polynesia (e.g., Māori, Native Hawaiians, Samoans, Tongans).
- Southern Luzon lowlanders (e.g., Tagalog, Bicolano)
- Sunda–Sulawesi language and ethnic groups including Malay, Sundanese, Javanese, Balinese, Batak (geographically includes Malaysia, Brunei, Pattani, Singapore, Cocos (Keeling) Islands, parts of Sri Lanka, southern Myanmar, and much of western and central Indonesia).
- Taiwan / Formosan Group (e.g., Amis, Atayal, Bunun, Paiwan)
- Visayans: Visayas and neighbouring islands (e.g., Aklanon, Boholano, Cebuano, Hiligaynon, Masbateño, Waray).

Ancient Philippines (Ophir) is the Homeland of the Austronesians

The Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration: a reconciliation of Bellwood and Solheim Hypotheses was put together by the Principalia Hereditary Council of the Philippines headed by Prof. Sofronio Dulay. The theory basically says that some natives of the Philippine islands might have settled in Taiwan as early as 5000 BC as hypothesized by Solheim and the Sundaland (Mu) Theory. Then, around 3000 BC, some residents of Taiwan settled back into the Philippines according to Bellwood. In almost the same era, some natives of the Philippines settled in Sarawak, based on Bellwood hypothesis, and later, some residents of islands in the Celebes Sea went back into the Philippines, based on Solheim hypothesis.Slowly through thousand years, from the Lawan homeland, the Lequios (waray) tribe spread in the asian, polynesian and Austronesian settlements and in other parts of Visayas, Luzon and Mindanao. Dr. Borrinaga mentioned lequios (waray) settlements in Biliran, Mactan and Bohol. He also thinks that the Pi She Ye pirates who are regularly attacking mainland China are the pintados from Samar because of a legend of Sumaga. Dr. Boni Comandante mentioned an ancient map in Quezon Province with the name Lequios River. He also mentioned a place in Masbate whose local history says that their ancestors were lequios (waray). He intends to lecture about it in the eBaybayin Buhayin Lecture Series. The Lequios settlement slowly expanded over thousand years into Luzon. In the book of Tome Pires, he said that it was also the Lequios tribe who built the Luzon empire in the ancient Philippines. With all of these historical citations, it can be said that based on history, the modern Filipinos came from the lineage of the Lequios (ancient Hebrew) blood who intermarried with native indigenous ancient Filipinos known as Lumads that resulted from thousand years interbreeding among Rhinoceros man (700,000 years old, French study, ), Dawn man (250,000 years old, Otley Beyer study), Callao man (60,000 years old, University of the Philippines study) and Tabon man (30,000 years old, Philippine study). These intermarriages among the native aborigines with the Lequios resulted in a Waray hadlok (no fear) civilization of the Lakanate of Lawan headed by a Lequios Datu Iberein, whose ancestral homeland is ancient Samaria. He named his kingdom as Samar ( the place is still called this way even today).

As time goes by, with a very prosperous civilization, the ancient Philippines (Ophir) attracted ancient refugees and inter migration through settlements, marriage and trades of different people and races from all over the world: sanskrit, arabs, chinese, majapajits, sri vijayans, spaniards, americans, etc making the Philippines a virtual melting pot of races saturating further its original lequios and lumads blood mix. This theory emphasizes inter migration rather than the one directional migration pattern of both Bellwood and Solheim hypotheses. This theory recognizes both Bellwood and Solheim hypotheses as valid. It says that if we factor in the 700,000 year old rhinoceros man excavated in the Philippines by the French archaeologists, the 250,000 dawn man of Otley Beyer and the 65,000 year old Callao man discovered by the University of the Philippines archaeologists, plus the Australian DNA studies on chicken that say that Philippines is the homeland of the Polynesians, and another Australian study that shows DNA mapping showing the Philippines having the most diverse DNA base -- it can be concluded that the Philippines is perhaps the true homeland of Austronesian.

Meanwhile, some historians are becoming interested about Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration: a reconciliation of Bellwood and Solheim Hypotheses. This was presented by the Principalia Hereditary Council of the Philippines through Prof. Sofronio Dulay. The theory basically says that some natives of the Philippine islands might have settled in Taiwan as early as 5000 BC as hypothesized by Solheim. Then, around 3000 BC, some residents of Taiwan settled back into the Philippines according to Bellwood. In almost the same era, some natives of the Philippines settled in Sarawak, based on Bellwood hypothesis, and later, some residents of islands in the Celebes Sea went back into the Philippines, based on Solheim hypothesis.This theory emphasizes inter migration rather than the one directional migration pattern of both Bellwood and Solheim hypotheses. This theory recognizes both Bellwood and Solheim hypotheses as valid. It says that if we factor in the 700,000 year old rhinoceros man excavated in the Philippines by the French archaeologists, the 250,000 dawn man of Otley Beyer and the 65,000 year old Callao man discovered by the University of the Philippines archaeologists, plus the Australian DNA studies on chicken that say that Philippines is the homeland of the Polynesians, and another Australian study that shows DNA mapping showing the Philippines having the most diverse DNA base -- it can be concluded that the Philippines is perhaps the true homeland of Austronesian. One of those who evaluated closely the theory was Dr. Narag, but unlike Dr. Narag's Philippines is Ophir Theory which uses historical data and scriptures, the Principalia Theory uses strictly historical data, DNA studies, scientific studies such as modern dating and excavations; Out of Africa Theory, Darwin's Evolution Theory and the current Bellwood and Solheim Hypotheses of migration. At present if one will go to Google to search for the "homeland of the Austronesians", the Principalia Theory is the first entry. Although the Narag Ophir Theory and the Principalia Theory used two different approaches, both theories somewhat academically triangulated that the Philippines is the ancient homeland of the Austronesians, basically. There are other hypotheses that can come out in these two theories -- one of them is that this might add to the narrative of those who are contesting the Out of Africa Theory, and might even compel historians to rewrite some portions regarding the histories of their countries specially on the area of inter migration.In the Philippines, a lot of groups are coming out in support of this theory, some of them call themselves Ophirian Generation, or Havilah, etc..Some are even proposing to change the name of the Philippines to Ophir because it is the ancient name of the country before the Muslims, Spaniards, Americans and the Japanese invaded the archipelago one after the other. The Ophir era was the golden age of a free people and prosperous ancient civilization that is slowly being uncovered in recent times by patriotic historians. The lecture of Dr. Narag that were presented through Zoom and FB Live and uploaded in You Tube is worth reviewing. Meantime, here is the original lecture of Professor Dulay on the Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter migration. In the next video below is the lecture of Dr. Narag:

The Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration, a detailed Scientific Presentation

1. A Proposed Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration: a reconciliation of Bellwood and Solheim Hypotheses by Prof. Sofronio Dulay, Far Eastern University Grand Patriarch, Principalia Hereditary Council of the Philippines
2. Bellwood Hypothesis
3. Solheim Hypothesis He theorizes that approximately 5,000 years ago, the “Nusantao,” seafarers, through trade, expanded its migration northward from Celebes Sea to Taiwan and to elsewhere in Southeast Asia. Source: https://geekgirlcon.tumblr.com/post/162013171505/indiohistorian- we-are-descended-from-voyagers 5/23/20
4. Migration According to Bellwood and Solheim
5. The proposed Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration Some natives of the Philippine islands might have settled in Taiwan as early as 5000 BC as hypothesized by Solheim. Then, around 3000 BC, some residents of Taiwan settled back into the Philippines according to Bellwood. In almost the same era, some natives of the Philippines settled in Sarawak, based on the Bellwood hypothesis, and later, some residents of islands in the Celebes Sea went back into the Philippines, based on the Solheim hypothesis. This theory emphasizes inter migration rather than the one directional migration pattern of both Bellwood and Solheim hypotheses. This theory recognizes both Bellwood and Solheim hypotheses as valid.
6. Scientific Bases of the Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration 1. Darwin Theory of Evolution Life started from the ocean in the tropics and moved to the shores, into a pond of life, to evolve into increase degree of life form. “Scientists have reproduced in the lab how the ingredients for life could have formed deep in the ocean 4 billion years ago. The results of the new study offer clues to how life started on Earth and where else in the cosmos we might find it.” Source: https://scitechdaily.com/scientists-reproduce-origins-of-life-on-ocean-floor/ 5/28/20
7. Scientific Bases of the Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration 2. Out of Africa Theory
8. Scientific Bases of the Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration 2. Out of Africa Theory
9. Scientific Bases of the Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration 3. Callao Man H. luzonensis descended from an early H. erectus dispersal across Southeast Asia. It is also possible that these two insular archaic humans descend from an entirely different Homo species possibly earlier than H. erectus.[5][6] The bones were dated to before 50,000 years ago,[1] and there is evidence of hominin activity on the island as early as 771,000 – 631,000 years ago.[7] Source: Ingicco, T.; van den Bergh, G. D.; Jago-on, C.; Bahain, J.-J.; Chacón, M. G.; Amano, N.; Forestier, H.; King, C.; Manalo, K.; Nomade, S.; Pereira, A.; Reyes, M. C.; Sémah, A.-M.; Shao, Q.; Voinchet, P.; Falguères, C.; Albers, P. C. H.; Lising, M.; Lyras, G.; Yurnaldi, D.; Rochette, P.; Bautista, A. & de Vos, J. (2018). "Earliest known hominid activity in the Philippines by 709 thousand years ago". Nature. 557 (7704): 233–237. doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0072-8. PMID 29720661.
10. Scientific Bases of the Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration 4. Australian DNA Study on Chicken "We can show [from chicken DNA] that the trail heads back into the Philippines," Cooper said. "We're currently working on tracing it farther northward from there. However, we're following a proxy, rather than the actual humans themselves." Source: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/3/140318- polynesian-chickens-pacific-migration-america-science/
11. Scientific Bases of the Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration 5. DNA Map of Interbreeding Events “Island Southeast Asia was already a crowded place when what we call modern humans first reached the region just before 50,000 years ago,” says co-author João Teixeira, Ph.D. “At least three other archaic human groups appear to have occupied the area, and the ancestors of modern humans mixed with them before the archaic humans became extinct.” Source: https://www.inverse.com/article/58180-ancient-human-sex-death- babies?fbclid=IwAR3bzgjXJLg2EfyiPC6ROS0y0XJyEjoL7gFBUOEy5zyEMfXZBRnt6Xk9VL0
12. Scientific Bases of the Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration 5. DNA Map of Interbreeding Events
13. Scientific Bases of the Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration 6. The Rhinoceros Man 6. The Rhinoceros Man Source: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2018/05/stone-tools-rhinoceros-luzon-philippines-ancient-hominins-science/
14. The Ancient Philippine Civilization That Moved People to Different Settlements The Lakanate of Lawan
15. The Ancient Philippine Civilization That Moved People to Different Settlements The Lakanate of Lawan
16. The Ancient Philippine Civilization That Moved People to Different Settlements Bingi of Lawan A bingi or bingil was a virgin or a woman who had been faithful to one man all her life. It must therefore have been bestowed on the heroine of this romance sometime after the Albay raid, the first step in an historic event’s becoming a legend. The quotation of her and her husband’s noble words indicates that the poetic process had already had its effect by the time Father Alcina heard the story. Perhaps with retelling over the centuries and the accumulation of apocryphal embellishments, the tale might have grown into a full-fledged kandu. Indeed, had ancient Visayan culture not succumbed to colonial acculturation, some Waray bard might now be singing the Epic of Bingi (William Henry Scott). Source:. https://archive.org/stream/BarangaySixteenthCenturyPhilippineCultureAndSociety/Barangay+- +Sixteenth+Century+Philippine+Culture+and+Society_djvu.txt. Retrieved April 4, 2018.
17. The Ancient Philippine Civilization That Moved People to Different Settlements Datu Iberein of Lawan (notice the Hebrewish name, from Lequios/Waray Tribe) Historian William Henry Scott describes the regality of a certain Datu Iberein and his entourage in 1543. Upon seeing a Spanish vessel anchored off the coast of Samar, the datu wearing golden earrings and chains rowed to the Spanish boat. His oarsmen wore gold necklaces. Iberein is merely an example of some of the wealthy and influential rulers of the Philippines in pre-colonial times. Among the most wealthy and powerful were Rajah Sulayman and Lakan Dula of Manila (circa 1570), and Sultan Kudarat of Maguindanao (circa 1619 to 1671). Source: https://www.esquiremag.ph/the-good-life/pursuits/datus-rajahs-and-sultans-how-wealthy-and- powerful-were-the-pre-colonial-filipino-nobility-a1957-20190121-lfrm
18. The Ancient Philippine Civilization That Moved People to Different Settlements Pi She ye Pirates “They showed a passion for iron vessels, spoons, and chopsticks. People would escape from their hands by shutting the door; then they would tear [these] off and take away the door knobs. When a spoon or a pair of chopsticks was thrown to them, they would stop to pick it up. When they saw an iron-clad cavalryman, they would rush forward to peel off his armor, showing no remorse even if their heads were lopped off left and right. In combat they employed javelins, to which was tied a rope more than a hundred feet long, for they valued the iron spearhead so highly that they could not let it be lost. They do not sail in a boat, but make a raft by tying bamboo canes together. When in danger they carry the raft on their shoulders down to the water and row away on it.These Visayan pirates are believed to have taken the sea route from the Philippines to China via Taiwan” Note: Dr. Borrinaga believes that that Pi She ye are the pintados from Samar because of the Legend of Sumaga Source: https://opinion.inquirer.net/27631/pirates-of-the-visayas-in-china
19. The Ancient Philippine Civilization That Moved People to Different Settlements Samar was named after Samaria, the ancestral homeland of Datu Iberein The poblacion of Lawan has the ancient name of Baybay, it is still called officially as Baybay today. Surat Waray, a crude form of Baybayin has versions of Palapag, Guian, and Leyte according to Spanish historians, a diversity that might indicate the ancient origin of Baybayin. Waray are lequios pintados known as the Vikings of the Philippines because of their love for the sea --adventurous, but extremely loyal to their homeland. Waray came from “waray hadlok”, or “walang takot”, as popularized in the song Waray Waray. Balangiga victory was achieved by Warays. Lapu Lapu is within the influence of the Lakanate of Lawan. Linguists believe that the Tagalog dialect came from the Waray dialect. Calatagan Jar is written in Waray. Palapag is the ancient shipping industry capital of the Galleon Trade. It is the home of the Sumuroy Revolt. Catubig is the old capital of Samar. The early settlers of Tondo, historians say, are from the boat coming from the Visayas.
20. Conclusion If we factor in the 700,000 year old rhinoceros man excavated in the Philippines by the French archaeologists, the 250,000 dawn man of Otley Beyer and the 65,000 year old Callao man discovered by the University of the Philippines archaeologists, plus the Australian DNA studies on chicken that say that Philippines is the homeland of the Polynesians, and another Australian study that shows DNA mapping showing the Philippines having the most diverse DNA base -- it can be concluded that the Philippines is perhaps the true homeland of Austronesian.
21. Thank you.
22. (This scientific lecture was presented last May 29, 2020 in the "e-BAYBAYIN ZOOM/FB/YouTube Live Lecture Series 2020" intended for global audience and people with Austronesian bloodline)

Professor Dulay, the main proponent of the Principalia Theory of Inter migration, is a management professor of the Far Eastern University, teaching several management subjects like principles of management, business policy/strategy and leadership. He attended La Salle, University of the Philippines and Asian Institute of Management taking varied interests in philosophy, military science, law, development management, business administration and public administration. As the eldest son of the 4th hereditary patriarch of the clan who has a lineage of David Dula y Goiti, Prof. Dulay is the heir and 5th hereditary patriarch of the Dulay Mendoza Clan of Marikina Valley. After receiving a letter from the King of Spain, the Sto. Nino de Tondo Church which is the ancient palace of Lakan Dula, confirmed Prof. Dulay the Patriarch of the House of Dula and was inducted as the Grand Patriarch of the Principalia Hereditary Council of the Philippines. Aside from management, he has shown interest in baybayin, arnis, kundiman and ancient native rituals. He has been featured in national television like I - Witness and I - Juander, several blogs and interviews, and was mentioned in different citations in scholarly works. He is called with several different titles by some sectors as a patriarch, lakan, rajah, grand patriarch, prince, awang, etc. but he prefers to be addressed simply as Professor Dulay.

Other Researches and Commentaries that Triangulate and Support the Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration

1. According to the US - based Hebrew scholar Dr. Rich Vince Narag

There are scriptures and historical evidences that Philippines is Ophir which include Hebrew names like Samar (from Samaria), Datu Iberein, Bingi of Lawan, Lequios, etc.who are cited in the Philippine history books, like those of Scott and Alcina. He also cited several Bible passages and historical accounts pointing that the Philippines is Ophir. His approach is both historical and Biblical.

2. Benjamin Goldstein has this to say on the Principalia Theory

"I think it's about time that a Filipino leader should emerge to lead the way to reinterpreting the Philippine history to make it favorable to the Philippines and to the Filipinos. By the way, this theory is also good for the Taiwanese nationalists who want to have independence from China...because this will show that their homeland is not China, but the Lequios/Waray tribe of the Lakanate of Lawan/Ophir (ancient Philippines). Then, they have more reason to declare independence. This theory is also good for the present day Israel. For one, they have found their long lost brothers, not only the Filipinos, but the whole austronesian people. The Jews will never be butchered again because their long lost brothers will care for them. Just like how Filipino President Manuel Quezon (of the pacific side of the Philippines/Lawan/Ophir) cared for them."

"Rejoice people of Israel of this historical breakthrough! One of the lost tribes of Israel seems to have been found. The lequios tribe whom the natives of the Philippine archipelago calls in their dialect as "waray hadlok" (English translation: no fear), in which in history books love to describe to have been sighted in several locations in the pacific rim has been finally ascertained to have been homed in the pacific district of the island of Samar (named after Samaria) in the Philippine archipelago. The Lequios (Waray) tribe was once ruled by Datu Hadi Iberein as mentioned by well known historian Henry Scott. The Lequios tribe was described as "waray hadlok'' because they have big karakoa cargo boats as big as Spanish Galleon transporting back and forth the pacific, bringing people and goods all over the polynesian and austronesian islands in exchange for gold. According to Hebrew scholar Dr. Rich Narag, using Biblical events, the gold is supposed to be sold by the Lequios to King Solomon of their Samarian homeland in Israel. This Narag Ophir Theory, although Biblical in approach, seem to be triangulated with the theory of the group of patriarch of the ancient native principalia or descendants of the rulers of the ancient kingdoms of the Philippines by using the the recent Australian DNA studies, French latest archaeological excavations in the Philippines and the recent studies of the University of the Philippines on Callao Cave. Further studies and excavations should be permitted by the Philippine government in the pacific district of Samar island to know more about this ancient civilization of the lequios tribe. Jewish and local excavation permits in the pacific district of Samar Island should be properly applied for from the National Historical Commission of the Philippines. Do you think the Sephardi Jewish Filipinos and the Jewish community that is based in Makati Philippines should be concerned about these important findings?"

3. Ancient Humans Settled in the Philippines 709,000 Ago

Author: Hashem Al-Ghaili (October 27, 2019)

Ancient humans were living in the Philippines around 709,000 years ago. Hundred of thousands of years earlier than previously thought. Stone tools with an almost complete rhinoceros skeleton were discovered at an excavation on the largest and most northerly island in the Philippines. The rhino skeleton showed clear signs of having been butchered. There are also stone artifacts in the excavation site. These stone artifacts consist of 49 sharp - edge flakes and two hammer stones. Several of the rhino bones, ribs and leg bones had cuts showing signs of being hit by the hammer stones to gain access to the marrow. Other fossils found at the site included stegodon ( a relative of the elephant ), Philippine brown deer, fresh turtle and monitor lizard remains. The fossils and stone tools dated to between 777,000 and 631,000 years ago. This conclusion was reached by combining several dating methods including electron spin resonance, argon dating, and uranium series dating confirming that the butchering of the rhinoceros took place around 700,000 years ago. The find radically changes the history of the hominin colonization of the Philippines. The earliest evidence of hominins in the area prior to this research was a small foot bone found in the nearby callao cave and dated to 67,000 years ago. It also calls for rethink of how early hominins spread throughout the region. It suggests that the dispersal of pre - modern hominids took place several times and the Philippines may have played a central role (as explained in the Principalia Theory of Austronesian Inter Migration). Researchers suggest that it was most likely that these early humans spread through the islands of the South East Asia following the ocean current south (through the Pacifc side of Northern Samar where a thriving settlement of hominins probably exists), and eventually reaching Flores, Indonesia to give rise to the ancestral population that led to Homo Floresiensis. We know very little of the people of butchered the rhino at Kalinga aside from the fact that they made stone tools. They were probably closely related to Homo erectus and most likely the ancestors of the human found in Callao Cave. Modern humans did not arrive in the Philippines until around 50,000 years ago. This discovery will lead to more efforts to find even earlier archeological evidence as well as to fill in the blanks between then and now.

Credits: Didier Descouens; University of Leicester; Harvard University; Vjdchauhan; Emory University; James St. John; Richard Mortel; Ryan Somma; Cheeni; Rama; Eric Gropp; Videohive; Yale CBIC; and Videvo.

Note about the Author:

It seemed that Hashem Al-Ghaili’s future was already mapped out for him when he was just six years old. After school he would go out into his father’s field in Yemen, working there until late in the evening. "My father always insisted that I should become a farmer", he was later recounted at his master’s degree ceremony. But even as a child he had other plans: "I wanted to pursue a career in science. A little over 20 years later, Hashem Al-Ghaili is one of the best-known science communicators in Germany and beyond. Almost 20 million Facebook users from all over the world subscribe to his Science Nature Page, which mainly features videos about new scientific findings and technologies. His films have already been viewed five billion times – showing that someone capable of translating even the most complex scientific topics into readily understandable language can reach huge numbers of people. This is reflected by the growing range of continuing education opportunities in science communication. Hashem Al-Ghaili is a Yemeni science communicator and a video producer. He is best known for his infographics and videos about scientific breakthroughs. Al-Ghaili's work in science communication gained the attention of science news sources and social media users alike. Born: 11 August 1990 (age 30 years), Hajjah, Yemen. Nationality: Yemeni .Education: Jacobs University Bremen (2015), University of Peshawar

https://fb.watch/2uYYk4TZza/

4. First Mariana Islanders Came from Philippines, New Study Shows

In new research, researchers from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Australian National University and the University of Guam analyzed ancient DNA from two humans who lived on Guam 2,200 years ago and found that their ancestry is linked to the Philippines. Moreover, they are closely related to ancient humans from Vanuatu and Tonga, suggesting that the early Mariana Islanders may have been involved in the colonization of Polynesia.

Tahitian warrior dugouts from ‘Le Costume Ancien et Moderne’ by Giulio Ferrario, Milan, between 1816 and 1827.

Humans reached the Mariana Islands in the western Pacific by 3,500 years ago, contemporaneous with or even earlier than the initial peopling of Polynesia.They crossed more than 2,000 km (1,243 miles) of open ocean to get there, whereas voyages of similar length did not occur anywhere else until more than 2,000 years later.There is debate over where people came from to get to the Marianas, with various lines of evidence pointing to the Philippines, Indonesia, New Guinea, or the Bismarck Archipelago.“We know more about the settlement of Polynesia than we do about the settlement of the Mariana Islands,” said Dr. Irina Pugach, a researcher in the Department of Evolutionary Genetics at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.Dr. Pugach and her colleagues from Germany, Australia and Guam wanted to find out where people came from to get to the Marianas and how the ancestors of the present Mariana Islanders, the Chamorro, might be related to Polynesians.To address these questions, the researchers obtained ancient DNA from two skeletons from the Ritidian Beach Cave site in northern Guam, dating to around 2,200 years ago.“We found that the ancestry of these ancient skeletons is linked to the Philippines,” Dr. Pugach said. “These findings strengthen the picture that has emerged from linguistic and archaeological studies, pointing to an Island Southeast Asia origin for the first settlers of the Marianas,” said co-author Dr. Mike Carson, an archaeologist in the Micronesian Area Research Center at the University of Guam.“We also find a close link between the ancient Guam skeletons and early Lapita individuals from Vanuatu and Tonga in the Western Pacific region,” Dr. Pugach said.“This suggests that the Marianas and Polynesia may have been colonized from the same source population, and raises the possibility that the Marianas played a role in the eventual settlement of Polynesia.”While the new results provide interesting new insights, they are based on only two skeletons that date from around 1,400 years after the first human settlement in Guam.“The peopling of Guam and the settlement of such remote archipelagos in Oceania needs further investigation,” said senior author Dr. Mark Stoneking, a researcher in the Department of Evolutionary Genetics at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. The results appear in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. Source:http://www.sci-news.com/genetics/first-mariana-islanders-09185.html?fbclid=IwAR1bci7ByzqnuiMS_6-svkCTSBAypEUKZqNXDyQBq-1mrBs6XVIV2U91Nlg#.X-Z88S51vnl.facebook. Date retrieved: Dec 23, 2020

5. Philippine Dogs are the Ancestors of Dogs in Different Countries.

Who brought these dogs to these countries? It could be the ancient lumads of the Philippines. These lumads could be the ancestors too of these current people of these countries.

Ancient Askals Could Be the Ancestors of Modern Dogs: Studies

By MARIO ALVARO LIMOS | May 10, 2020

Village dogs—that’s how scientists called askals in their study: unpedigreed, indigenous dogs living with humans in the Philippines and Southeast Asia. Askal, short for asong kalye or street dog, is the term for native dogs in the Philippines. But in recent years, animal rights groups have pushed for the use of the word aspin (short for asong Pinoy) instead of askal.

Whatever they are called, ancient dogs from the Philippines and Southeast Asia were among the ancestors of modern dogs, according to an international study published in Nature in 2015 by scientists from China, Canada, Finland, Singapore, Sweden, and the United State.

The scientists wanted to trace the geographical origin of the species, and their findings homed in on Southeast Asia. According to the study, a split occurred in the genetic makeup between gray wolves and Southeast Asian dogs 33,000 years ago.

Askals migrated from Southeast Asia to the Middle East.

Based on genetic codes taken from dogs from Southeast Asia, scientists were able to trace the global dispersal of askals or village dogs. Approximately 15,000 years ago, a subgroup of dog ancestors from Southeast Asia found their way to the Middle East, and then spread to Africa and Europe. Then, 5,000 years later, another subgroup from the original dogs traveled to China and the Americas.

According to the study, the original dogs that traveled from Southeast Asia had a “founder population” of 4,600. The paths of this ancient dog diaspora was traced by studying the degrees of genetic diversity of dogs around the world.

The scientists were surprised to see varying levels of genetic diversity among dog breeds. They found that European dogs had “considerably reduced genetic diversity,” which they think is the result of domestication. It means that humans only domesticated dogs after the canines migrated out of Southeast Asia.

Earlier study finds European and American dogs have askal genes.

In an earlier study conducted by the University of California-Davis School of Veterinary Medicine (UCDSVM) in 2011, it was found that American and European dogs have genes originating from askals or village dogs from the Philippines, Taiwan, Brunei, Indonesia, and Thailand.

“The two most hotly debated theories propose that dogs originated in Southeast Asia or the Middle East,” said Ben Sacks, co-author of the study.

“In contrast to those theories, our findings suggest that modern European and American dogs are overwhelmingly derived from dogs that were imported from Asia since the silk trade, rather than having descended directly from ancient dogs native to Europe,” added Sacks.

Sacks said that previous arguments that point to Europe as the place where modern dogs originated should be revisited.

Sacks and his team of researchers selected askals or village dogs from Southeast Asia and the Middle East were chosen for the study because of their historical development that was independent from modern dog breeds and that their genes are likely to reflect the genetics of ancient dogs of their regions.

Reference:

Esquire Magazine.

https://www.esquiremag.ph/long-reads/features/askals-ancestors-modern-dogs-a00293-20200510?utm_source=Facebook-Esquire&utm_medium=Ownshare&utm_campaign=20211022-fbnp-long-reads-askals-ancestors-modern-dogs-a00293-20200510-fbold&fbclid=IwAR3SUMu73DJXczeJhm-Nx-zykhbqrz0TgNx2MFjpi1f1DZH39Aol4nYp7Ro. Retrieved date: November 20, 2021

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse